|
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home
Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy Magazine Online September/October 1997
Energy-10
by Rick Clyne and Steven Bodzin
Rick Clyne is a freelance technical writer
living in Denver, Colorado. Steven Bodzin is Home Energy's associate
editor.
There are many software packages available
to evaluate residential energy conservation measures. Energy-10 is among
the new generation of easy-to-use programs that have been helping architects
and engineers evaluate the details of building energy use at every step
in the design process.
 |
| Energy-10 provides the user with a variety of graphic
displays to help quickly analyze alternative designs. |
In the past two decades, many energy analysis
software packages have appeared on the market. Most of these have been
time-consuming, complicated to use, or unable to handle a sufficient number
of variables. Consequently, these packages have seen little use in the
design field. Their applications have been mostly limited to the latter
stages of the design process, when design details are being finalized and
modifications are increasingly expensive to incorporate.
Recent improvements in energy analysis software
have brought about significant increases in their speed and comprehensiveness,
while also making them much more user friendly. Energy-10 is one such new
software package developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Developed as a simulation-based design tool for
architects and designers, Energy-10 has a fairly good track record in the
world of small commercial construction. Although it can also handle residential
buildings, it has not yet seen widespread use in that sector. Doug Balcomb,
the leader of the Energy-10 design team based at the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colorado, says, "there are few restrictions.
[The system] is fully capable of dealing with the issues that are important
in residential applications."
Energy-10 helps designers assess how a building
will use energy and identify which energy-efficient strategies are the
most effective. It simulates a year of building energy use to determine
heating and cooling loads, and ranks the most cost-effective efficiency
improvements. With Energy-10, energy analyses can be accomplished in just
half a day at the beginning of the design process. Before the first elevation
is sketched, a designer using Energy-10 can simulate many of the energy
performance characteristics of the building and determine how to maximize
energy efficiency.
Energy-10 gets its name from its ability to analyze
buildings with up to 10,000 ft2 of floor area. Seventy percent
of the commercial structures built today are under 10,000 ft2,
and they consume 25% of the total energy used in the commercial building
sector. Energy-10 was specifically developed to analyze these small, commercial
building designs.
Quick Analysis
In the earliest stages of the design process, Energy-10
requires only five preliminary design descriptors. The program uses these
descriptors to create a simple "shoebox" version of the building. Using
the shoebox, users can begin running simulations to evaluate energy performance.
Balcomb says he wanted to make the program quick
and easy to use. "In the design process, time is essential. Say a designer
has an idea, and they sketch it out. They need to know the energy implications
of that design idea right away--in ten minutes, not ten days. Our goal
was to compress all of the energy analysis, which includes dozens of calculations,
into an afternoon's worth of time. It has to happen that quickly if it
is going to be done at all."
After the shoebox analysis, the simulation evolves
with the building design. From the predesign to the final building plan,
the user can set or modify hundreds of building descriptors, allowing the
simulated building to reflect the growing level of detail. In this way,
the user can gain an in-depth understanding of how each change in the design
affects energy use.
The program evaluates building energy use through
a year of simulated performance in one-hour increments, relying on detailed
weather data for all climatic regions in the United States. The simulation
speed depends heavily on the computer being used. The program is available
only for a PC Windows-based operating system, and the minimum hardware
requirements are a 66-MHz 486 processor with 16 megabytes of RAM. Simulations
run on this configuration take about 12 minutes. As usual, bigger is better--simulations
run on a 200-megahertz Pentium Pro take only 18 seconds.
Energy-10 can evaluate the effect of a specific
energy efficiency strategy or a set of strategies on the building's overall
efficiency. Version 1.2, the current release, can evaluate a wide range
of components, including insulation, passive solar heating, air leakage
control, shading, high-efficiency HVAC, energy-efficient lighting, glazings,
thermal mass, daylighting, economizer cycles, and HVAC controls.
The user selects one or more strategies and uses
the program's Apply function to modify the design with those strategies.
As part of this process, the user can specify strategy characteristics.
For example, before selecting the insulation strategy, the user can define
the R-values for the walls, ceiling, perimeter, and doors. Within a few
minutes, Energy-10 simulates a year of energy use in the house. It then
displays graphics that quantify the effect of the selected strategy on
energy use.
Heat and Light--Finding the Balance
One key to a comfortable, energy-efficient building
is balance among heating, cooling, and lighting systems. Finding this balance
for a specific design in a specific location accounts for much of the complexity
in the design process. For example, a house that has overdesigned passive
solar features may save on heating bills, but may not be particularly comfortable,
even in winter. Also, the characteristics of a well-balanced, energy-efficient
home designed for New Orleans will differ considerably from those in Salt
Lake City.
To balance these systems properly for a given
climate, Energy-10 has a weather database containing a full year of hourly
meteorological data for 239 locations in the United States. These data
are used in conjunction with the program's thermal and lighting simulation
engines. The software uses the California Nonresidential Engine (CNE),
which calculates a multizone, thermal network solution that lets Energy-10
simulate two HVAC zones. When the user runs a simulation, Energy-10 transfers
the building description to the CNE, where it is transformed into a thermal
network model. The CNE iterates to find a consistent solution to the loads
and systems calculations, using 15-minute time steps (for numerical accuracy);
finding an energy balance at every step; and taking into account heat storage
in each material layer. This energy balance is crucial, especially for
the highly interactive energy efficiency strategies used in a balanced
passive-solar design. CNE reports results hourly, monthly, or annually.
The daylighting simulation engine was written
at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and incorporates the split-flux
routine used in the DOE-2 computer program. During a simulation, the analysis
routine first calculates daylighting illuminance at a control sensor location
for each of 20 sun angles for each aperture. Illuminance values are then
calculated for each lighting zone. For buildings wider than 30 ft, Energy-10
creates five lighting zones within each thermal zone.
Energy-10 integrates the hour-by-hour daylighting
calculations into the thermal analyses run by the CNE, accounting for the
heating effects of both natural and artificial lighting.
 |
| Figure 1. The input screen for the basic building
descriptors: our Salt Lake City home is a one-story, 2,700-square-foot
structure that has central air conditioning and a gas furnace. |
Establishing Performance Goals with AutoBuild
Let's say we are designing a 2,700 ft2
home in Salt Lake City. The initial input screen requests the five basic
building descriptors--geographic location, building function, HVAC system,
floor area, and number of stories (see Figure 1). With
the basic information, the program's AutoBuild feature creates two simple
shoebox buildings in the computer. One is a reference case that uses standard
construction and incorporates few, if any, energy-efficient strategies.
The other is a low-energy version of the same building that incorporates
a range of energy-efficient features and construction techniques. Although
these simplified shoebox buildings bear little stylistic resemblance to
the actual building, they provide a representative initial picture of how
the design will use energy.
When building descriptors are not initially specified
by the user, the software defaults to user-definable standard construction
practices based on the specified building use. For example, in our Salt
Lake home, we specified "residential" as the building use, 2,700 ft2
as the floor area, a conventional heating and cooling system, and one-story
construction. The program defaulted to standard 2 x 4 external wall framing,
R-19 ceiling insulation, uninsulated foundation walls, and 12% of the floor
area in wall glazing. If standard construction in the designer's area is
different, the defaults can be changed. As the design evolves, the user
can replace these and other default values with actual values and specifications.
The defaults simplify initial input requirements to produce energy use
comparisons quickly. The default reference case reflects widespread building
practice, rather than best practice. For example, the default case has
supply and return ducts in the attic, resulting in combined conduction
and air loss leakage of 18%. After defining the reference case description,
the program defines an alternative low-energy case using another set of
defaults for the strategies selected and simulates both buildings.
The lack of initial detail might seem like a
fatal problem, but Balcomb maintains that the simulations are accurate.
"Many people believe that the detail of the building layout is the vital
factor influencing energy use," he says. "In reality, it is not vital to
many energy-efficient strategies. User experience has shown the energy
performance of the shoebox version is quite similar to that of the detailed
building layout that eventually takes shape. However, for some strategies,
such as shading, window placement, and daylighting, design detail does
affect performance, and so the user should adjust the building description
in the computer to more and more accurately characterize the actual building
as the design evolves."
Once the reference case and low-energy buildings
are created, the software runs a climate-specific simulation of energy
use for each hour of the year. It then prints out side-by-side comparisons
of how both structures use energy. It is possible to change assumptions
about either the reference case or the low-energy case. By specifying almost
identical buildings, the user can simulate the incremental savings from
one or a few design changes.
 |
| Figure 2. Energy-10 can automatically rank individual
energy improvements by their potential energy savings. These bars represent
possible savings for the Salt Lake home. Note that these savings are not
additive-the ranking considers each improvement individually, but in reality
some strategies will affect the savings from others. |
Entering the initial data and running this simulation
takes 10 to 15 minutes. The output produced by this simulation for the
Salt Lake City house is shown in Figure 2. Note how
energy performance changes dramatically when nine energy efficiency strategies
are applied to the design, as reflected in the performance of the low-energy
case. Daylighting with dimmers and an economizer cycle were not applied
because these are not typically used in residential applications.
This initial analysis gives the designer a realistic
set of energy performance targets to shoot for as the design process moves
forward. If the right mix of energy-efficient strategies is incorporated,
the performance of the actual building should approach the performance
of the low-energy AutoBuild simulation. Unfortunately, there are few controlled
comparisons to validate how close the simulation comes to reality. The
most comprehensive test for simulations is BESTEST, which has been approved
by the U.S. Department of Energy and is being used by home energy rating
systems. It compares various simulation programs to ensure that they are
consistent with one another. There is no comprehensive test suite based
on measured data, partly because of the inherent variability introduced
by occupants (see "Home Energy Rating Systems: Actual
Usage May Vary").
As the user provides more detail, the computer
keeps two simulated buildings in memory at all times to facilitate comparisons.
Originally, these are the reference case building and the low-energy case
building. Thus as the user updates the building description he or she has
an accurate, up-to-date indication of the combined effect of design improvements.
It is also possible to examine the effect of a single change by changing
only one feature, such as wall insulation, in one of the buildings.
Ranking Energy-Efficient Strategies
One of Energy-10's most powerful features is its
ability to estimate which measures will result in the lowest operating
costs. (This is not yet an evaluation based on life cycle costs. A life
cycle cost analysis would require estimating first costs, a feature not
available in the current version of Energy-10.) A user who knows how much
a measure will cost to install can use the simulation's estimate of operating
cost savings to evaluate cost-effectiveness. Assumptions about thermostat
setpoints and other occupant variables are easy to change within the program,
providing a customized estimate of operating cost savings.
Early on in the design process--shortly after
the initial AutoBuild comparison is run--the user can select the Rank function.
This function identifies which energy-efficient strategies have the greatest
effect on reducing energy use. The user can then ensure that the most effective
strategies are incorporated into the building design.
When the Rank function is run, Energy-10 applies
a single strategy to the reference building, puts it through a year of
simulated performance, and saves the results. It then removes that strategy,
applies the next strategy, and reruns the simulation. This automated process
continues until simulations have been run on all desired strategies. The
user can specify the ranking criterion used to compare the strategies,
such as lowest annual energy use or lowest annual operating cost.
 |
| Figure 3. The program automatically analyzes the difference
between a reference case and a low-energy case, and provides this graph
showing differences in energy use. For the building shown in Figure
1, the improvements for the low-energy case include bringing ductwork
from the attic into the conditioned envelope, improving furnace efficiency
from 80% to 90%, and increasing cooling EER from 8.9 to 13. The improved
walls are 2 inch x 6 inch with 1-inch foam sheathing (R-23.1) instead of
2 inch x 4 inch (R-12.6); the ceiling is R-38 instead of R-19; and the
foundation perimeter is insulated with 2-inch foam. Effective leakage area
is reduced from 254 in2 to 97 in2. Glazing is changed
from double (U-0.49) to double low-e (U-0.26), and frames are changed from
aluminum to wood. According to the Energy-10 simulation, these energy efficiency
measures would reduce total energy use from 256 million Btu to 79 million
Btu annually, which would reduce annual energy costs from $3,470 to $1,564
at 11¢/kWh electricity and 80¢/therm for heat. |
Figure 2 shows an example of
output from the Rank function for the Salt Lake home. In this example,
the strategies were ranked by annual energy cost savings. Clearly, the
designer hoping to maximize energy efficiency would want to integrate improved
insulation, high-efficiency equipment, air leakage control, and improved
windows into the building design. With these four strategies integrated
into the basic design, the simulation is rerun. The results are quite similar
to those in Figure 3--total annual energy use is 84
million Btu and annual utility cost is $1,704.
The reduced heating and cooling loads also make
it possible to scale down the home's mechanical systems. The heating system
in the improved home requires only 29,000 Btu/h output, rather than the
97,000 Btu/h before scaling down; the cooling system is reduced from 5
1/2 tons to 2 1/2 tons; and fan flow is reduced from 2,600 CFM to 1,400
CFM. In many cases--especially in commercial buildings, where mechanical
systems represent a significant portion of the total construction cost--the
monetary savings realized from the scaled-down mechanical systems is sufficient
to pay for the costs of incorporating the energy-efficient strategies.
Thus energy efficiency is achieved without increasing construction costs.
Energy-10 can present data output in 27 graphic
formats, all of which compare the two cases in the computer's memory. Bar
graphs compare energy loads, operating costs, and cost breakdown by end
use. Line graphs show monthly loads, average daily profiles, daylighting
effectiveness, and actual hourly results for any selected periods.
An Energy-Efficient Future
Energy-10, version 1.0, was released in June 1996.
Software owners can upgrade to the current version, 1.2, for free at the
Energy-10 Web site at http://www.nrel.gov/buildings/energy10/.
The site also contains detailed information on obtaining and using Energy-10
and general information on passive solar technology and energy efficiency.
The Energy-10 project brought together building
expertise from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, the Berkeley Solar Group, and the Passive Solar Industries
Council (PSIC). The project was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy.
Energy-10 is bundled in a package called Designing Low-Energy Buildings,
which also includes a user manual and a guideline book called Passive Solar
Strategies. The package is available from PSIC to professionals for $250
and to students for $50. Training programs based on the theory discussed
in Passive Solar Strategies and the practical application provided in Energy-10
are available throughout the United States. To learn more about the workshops
or to obtain a copy of the package, contact Doug Schroeder at (202) 628-7400
Ext. 210, through e-mail at PSICouncil@aol.com,
or by writing PSIC, 1511 K St. NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20005.
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home
Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy can be reached at: contact@homeenergy.org
Home Energy magazine -- Please read our Copyright
Notice
|