Capital or Capitol; Re or Retro-Commissioning(A Rose by any other Name….)
Wayne A. Dunn PE, PEng, LEED AP
AIA Quality Assurance
The Building Commissioning Association is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of the Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request.
This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product.
Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.
2
Learning Objectives
3
1. Understand True Costs or Value of Commissioning2. Defining Owner’s Role when Re or Retro-Commissioning3. Recognizing Owner’s team bias during project.4. Identify ROI in terms of:
• Direct Savings (utility, maintenance)• Life Cycle Cost (replace, refurbish, right size)• Occupant Satisfaction (comfort, reliability)
5. Utilize Results to identify scope for Future Projects
4
Commissioning Definitions:
• Building Commissioning: design though 1st year warranty QA process
– QA (quality assurance or performance definition & verification)
– May include some form of technology transfer & warranty support
• Re-Commissioning: tune-up or qualitied repeat of original commissioning
– Resolve reduction in performance relative to original or technology
• Retro-Commissioning: existing building but a commissioning virgin
– Achieve performance improvement based on capabiility
• Continuous Commissioning: persistent (time based) QA process
– Proverbial tune-up, prescripted actions (check list)
• Monitor Based Commissioning: persistent (event based) QA process
– Analysis or alarm based actions utilizing Facility Automation as driver
Cx EBCx ReCx RetroCx ContCx MBCx
ASHRAE BCxA NEBB LBNL CACx
Lots of Definitions: Cx, ReCx, RetroCx, etc.
5
• This is a sampling, other organizations have Cx fingerprints too• For example: AABC (ACG), AEE, TAMU, UofW• Many offer Cx Professional Certification Program
• For an explanation of Acronyms, use Google
6
Important Related Definitions(by any other name)
• Rose: Commissioning Authority (Kool-Aid determines shade)– Stem: Client necessary to hold up and feed Rose– Thorn: Critical part of Stem; longer Stem, more thorns
• Great Expectations: A Tale of Two Projects– Both Existing Campuses– One Re-Commissioning– One Retro-Commissioning– Contradictions that would make Dickens proud
• Capital: Many definitions from money to punctuation to execution– Florida State Capitol is in State Capital City of Tallahassee– “Capital” is derived from “capitalis,” an adjectival form of “caput,”
• Capitol: Capitolium, temple of Jupiter at Rome on the Capitoline hill
• Never end• Cx Plan
• Scope• Expectations• Authority• Stages• Schedule
• Assess• Act• Revise• Report• Propose
Scope Control Key in Existing Building Commissioning
7
Owner’s Bias: Not Single Entity, Not Welcomed By All
RetroCx: Capitol Center
• 13 Bldgs, 2.8M SF• Supposed to have a year
• Got 6 months• Included during session
• $1 M project• Payback 2.7 years• 896 Issues (635 addressed)• 9 Capital Funded ECM’s• Entertainment free
• Yes, we do need to run 24/7
ReCx: Capital Complex (East)
• 15 Bldgs, 1.3M SF• 10 months• Energy Star
• Was good (avg’s over 90)• Made better (just a little)
• $250 K project• Payback 1.24 years• 180 Issues (122 addressed)• Pre-Packaged Solutions
• Not always worth the wrapper
Retro or Re-Commissioning: A Capitol/ Capital Idea
8
9
10
Building Size (SF)Capitol* 585,145House* 97,116Senate* 97,416Knott* 111,212H. Capitol* 46,501Carlton 231,616Collins 249,612Elliot 13,888Fletcher 220,000Gray 307,884Larson 226,648Pepper 211,158Turlington 439,942Total Area 2,838,138*complex (937,390)
Project Summary
• 2.7 M SF ($400M@150)• Varying occupancy
• 112 floors• 181 AHUs (all types)
• Blow, Draw, CRAC, DOA
• 25 Chillers• Water cooled• Air cooled
• 12 Boilers• Steam plant• Hot water (heat & reheat)
• Controls• DDC, almost all one platform• Pneumatic still in some areas
17.1%
13.1%
10.6%
10.2%9.7%
9.5%
9.0%
6.8%
7.0%
5.6%
1.2% 0.1%
Capitol
Turlington
Gray
Fletcher
Senate
Pepper
Larson
Carlton
Collins
House
Hist Cap
Elliot
Capitol Center Energy Cost Distribution (July 2012‐ June 2013)
• $1.0M over 12 months• Based on Detailed Commissioning Plan• ½ Budget for Commissioning Services• ½ Budget for Construction ECMs
• Identify and Design ECMs• Self-Performed Improvements to Automation System
• Programming• Scheduling• Set-Point• Graphics
• 10% Savings or 3-4 Year Payback• Actual 2.7 Year Payback• Actual Project Completed in 6 Months
Contract with anticipated value statement
Issues Type Qty (Approx.)
Component failure 29
Dampers – Including actuators 36
Valve – Including actuators 40
Component Missing 31
Dirty – Filters, coils, internal casing 17
Component Broken 5
Variable Frequency Drives (VFD) 7
Insulation - Piping and ductwork 6
Coil – Chilled and heating hot water 16
Rust/ Corrosion 24
Bearings 7
Noisy/ Unusual Noise 26
Excessive Vibration – Fans and pumps 9
Belts – Fans 42
Leakage – Piping and ductwork 51
Component not connected 9
Capitol Conundrum: perception of need to run always
13
Building AgeCapitol* ~1978House* ~1978Senate* ~1978Knott* ~1978H. Capitol* 1982 (1902)Carlton ~1956Collins ~1962Elliot ~1962Fletcher ~1977Gray ~1976Larson ~1968Pepper ~1989Turlington ~1989
No. 1 Issue: Schedule
• Small Data Centers Force 24/7 Chiller Plant Operation;• Low (Overridden) Space Temperature Set-Points• Inadequate Control Capitol Chiller Plant (Largest)• Manually Controlled Chiller Plants• Ventilation not Separated from Fan Control• Lighting On 24/7• Graphics Issues or Errors Misleading Plant Operators• Ground Water System Heating and Re-circulating• Museum/ Archive Spaces overcooling and overheating• Outdoor Air Control Systems failing and pushed to over-ventilating• Local Pneumatic Controls causing DDC System Control Issues
Findings
Issue Type DescriptionSelf-Perform An issue that is anticipated to be resolved during
commissioning by the commissioning agent.These issues will not require any additional capitalimprovements or significant cost-benefit analysis.
Maintenance An issue that is anticipated to be resolved by theowner’s maintenance personnel.
CapitalImprovement
An issue that is anticipated to require significantanalysis, engineering or an improvement tocurrently installed equipment. The resolution tothese types of issues may also require newequipment installations.
Owner’s Role: Define & Manage Through Issues
15
Learning Objectives• Direct Savings
• Self Perform Issues• Maintenance Issues
• Life Cycle Cost• Capital Improvement Issues
• Occupant Satisfaction• Scheduling & Setpoints• Sometimes Balancing• Sometimes Configuration
9 ECM’s (Bueller, Bueller)• Turlington Lighting (4.9)
• Holland Well Pump VFD (7.3)
• Collins IT Room Splits (1.6)
• Capitol A/V Room Splits (17.8)
• Senate Plant Controls (1.1)
• Knott OA Control Repairs (2.0)
• H. Capitol Humidity Controls (1.4)
• Gray Humidity Controls (0.4)
• Well Pump Study (4.4)
What about all that ROI Arithmetic?
16
This Sucks
17
Use the Right Tool for the Right Job
18
19
$3,709,680$3,464,871
$244,809
$200,000
$220,000
$240,000
$260,000
$280,000
$300,000
$320,000
$340,000
$360,000
$380,000
Ener
gy C
osts
($)
Capitol Center Annual Energy Cost(* Baseline normalized for weather, rate, facility usage, etc.)
2013-2014Performance
2012-2013Baseline*
* This is the principal value statement used to justify Cx
CCOC ReCx: déjà vu all over again
20
CCOC ReCx: déjà vu all over again
21
Building Name Square Feet TypeCentral Energy Plant (CEP) Unknown Utility Plant
Gunter Building 119,084 OfficeBetty Easley Conf. Center 57,742 Conference Center
Building 4030 104,128 OfficeBuilding 4040 119,084 OfficeBuilding 4050 104,128 Office
Sadowski Building 119,084 OfficeRudd Building 22,395 Emergency Op.sBuilding 4070 119,084 Office
DOH Building 2585 121,212 OfficeDOH Building 4025 104,128 OfficeDOH Building 4042 121,212 OfficeDOH Building 4052 121,212 Office
SSRC 29,763 Data CenterEatz Café 16,744 Cafeteria
Total ~1.2M SF Prototype(s)
• $250,000 over 12 months• Mostly “Soft Costs”, $50K spent on capital (fixes)• Self-Performed Improvements to Automation System
• Programming• Scheduling• Setpoints• Graphics
• Projected 3-5 Year Payback• Achieved 1.25-1.5 Year Payback
Contract with anticipated value statement
Findings
Plant dropped to 1.0+kW/ton
Cool/ ReHeat
Demand Control Ventilation
-way too demanding
Programming Errors
-scheduling
-coding & logic & graphic
-disabled off-hours controls
Broken toys (sensors, valves)
Work
Re-Programmed Chiller Plant
Resolved programming issues
Fixed Failed Control Elements
Brought DCV back online
Field Inspections
-Drove fixing little stuff
-Thermometer, Pressure Gauges
Measurement & Verification
Key CCOC Project Elements
• Recent 12-Month Baseline – Normalized for Weather, Use, Rates• Base Period Representative of Ongoing Performance• Potential Savings Assumed from Ongoing Performance Issues
Assumptions regarding baseline and potential
6,381,677
88,310,621
81,928,944
6,000,000
6,200,000
6,400,000
6,600,000
6,800,000
7,000,000
7,200,000
7,400,000
7,600,000
7,800,000
8,000,000
8,200,000
8,400,000
Ener
gy C
onsu
mpt
ion
(kB
TU)
2010-2011Baseline*
2011-2012Performance
Building Energy Star Rating
EUI (kBTU/Sq. Ft)
Building Energy Star Rating
EUI (kBTU/Sq. Ft)
CCOC 4030 93 115 DOH 2585 93 120
CCOC 4040 93 118 DOH 4025 95 106
CCOC 4050 98 93 DOH 4042 97 97
Gunter Building 98 88 DOH 4052 89 135
CCOC 4070 97 94 DOR Building 1 96 114
Sadowski Bldg 95 107 DOR Building 2 96 113
Resource Center 64 2856 DOR Building 3 87 138
Energy Star
25
Energy Star 85 to 87 Can be Worthwhile Investment
Real Energy Savings Can be Achieved without Hard Costs
- Went from $2.24M to $2.08M saving $160K with $200K soft cost
- UPOD (Jim Cramer); promised 3-5 yr., delivered 1.25-1.5 yr.
Evaluate Opportunities for Financially Smart Energy Investments
Baseline and Potential Savings
- Difficult to Assess Costs & Benefits
- Evaluation against Anticipated Performance
- Industry Standards are only Reference
Continuously Monitor and Evaluate Systems for Optimization & Tuning
- Data Center 25% of electric bill; got it’s own ReCx project (EOC*!?).
Lessons Learned & Path Forward
Future Existing Building Work (various contract vehicles)
• Owner’s money• Bank’s money• My money