ASHRAE Student Design Competition

1. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design THE FRASER CENTER Kaylee Damico Permanent Address: 2607 Lauren Hill Court kmd5100@psu.edu Finksburg, MD 21048 443-789-0188 3rd Year Architectural Engineer School Address: 121 W. Fairmount Ave Apt. #7 Anticipated Graduation – May 2011 State College, PA 16801 Calvin Douglass, LEED® AP Permanent Address: 1003 W. Aaron Drive Apt. 10B cgd5003@psu.edu State College, PA 16803 610-717-73564th Year Architectural Engineer School Address: 1003 W. Aaron Drive Apt. 10B Anticipated Graduation – May 2010 State College, PA 16803 Nicole Dubowski Permanent Address: 20A Columbine Ave N nld148@psu.edu Hampton Bays, NY 11946 631-804-91564th Year Architectural Engineer School Address: 130 McKee Hall Anticipated Graduation – May 2010 University Park, PA 16802 Justin Herzing Permanent Address: 428 Banbury Crossing jmh5093@psu.eduGibsonia, PA 15044 412-334-15094th Year Architectural Engineer School Address:1 1003 W. Aaron Drive Apt. 10B Anticipated Graduation – May 2010 State College, PA 16803 Pavel Likhonin Permanent Address: 109 Tamara Circle pvl104@psu.edu Pleasant Gap, PA 16823 814-441-31524th Year Architectural Engineer School Address: 109 Tamara Circle Anticipated Graduation – May 2010 Pleasant Gap, PA 16823 George Slavik Permanent Address: 8 Hawthorne Road gjs5017@psu.edu Binghamton, NY 13903 607-222-34234th Year Architectural Engineer School Address: 343 East Prospect Ave. Anticipated Graduation – May 2010 State College, PA 16801 Faculty Advisor: William P. Bahnfleth Ph.D., P.E. University Address: The Pennsylvania State University Wbahnfleth@psu.edu 207 Engineering Unit A 814-863-2076 University Park, PA 16802 The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

2. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Signatures: Kaylee Damico _________________________ __________ Calvin Douglass, LEED® AP _________________________ __________ Nicole Dubowski _________________________ __________ Justin Herzing _________________________ __________ PavelLikhonin _________________________ __________ George Slavik _________________________ __________ William P. Bahnfleth Ph.D., P.E. _________________________ __________ The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

3. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Table of Contents 1 PHASE 1: DESIGN BRIEFING TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT SCOPE PROJECT BUDGET APPLICABLE GUIDELINES/STANDARDS PHASE 2: SITE AND ANALYSIS ENERGY AVAILABILITY CLIMATE CONDITIONS PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION CODE ANALYSIS PHASE 3: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN BUILDING DESCRIPTION HVAC SYSTEM/TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION SUSTAINABILITY CONSIDERATIONS ENERGY CALCULATIONS PHASE 4: DESIGN REFORMATION DESIGN DECISION REASONING DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES PHASE 5: SUSTAINABILITY EVALUATION LEED® EVALUATION REFERNECES 2 3 4 2009 Student Design Competition;Integrated Sustainable Design: The fundamental goal of the Integrated Sustainable Design portion of the 2009 Student Design Competition is to encourage students to work and become familiar with the integrated design process. Being said, our main objective as a team was to show the integration of architecture and engineering throughout the process of making robust sustainable design decisions. 5 The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

5. Be connected to the site

6. Minimize its impact on its surroundings

7. Incorporate all spaces listed in the program.

8. Demonstrate the result of well designed building shape, orientation, and glazing

9. Incorporate adequate mechanical and electrical spaces (including consideration for future growth)

10. Incorporate natural lighting where appropriate, utilizing proper glare and illumination controls

11. Parking - 34 spaces

12. Two 9 ft X 24 ft storage areas

13. 3,000 sq² Retail area with:

14. three 100 sq² offices

15. 100 sq² conference room

16. 360 sq² drafting area

17. 200 sq² kitchen

18. 50 sq² reception area

19. Janitor closet

20. lobby

21. two handicap accessible toilets

22. Office and conference area with:

23. thirteen offices from 81 sq² to 160 sq²

24. two 300 sq² conference rooms

25. open office space

26. 100 sq² break room

27. 50 sq² reception area

28. janitor closet

29. lobby

31. Be designed to take advantage of natural daylighting

32. Take advantage of energy efficient fixtures

34. take advantage of building features to create energy efficient HVAC systems

35. be minimized in physical size and initial cost due to architectural considerationsThe Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

36. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Project Scope/Site The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

37. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Project Budget The overall project budget is $20 million. With a maximum total area of 15,650 square feet, this budget allots a minimum budget of about $1,278 per square foot of building space. This budget per square foot increases linearly as the total building area is decreased below the maximum allowable 15,650 square feet. Final Budget: The final building square footage was 13,231 square feet. This led to an overall project budget of $1,511.60 per square foot. We were able to design well within this budget. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

39. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 – Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality.

41. ASHRAE Guideline 16-2003 – Selecting Outdoor, Return, and Relief Dampers for Air-Side Economizer Systems

42. ASHRAE Guideline 1.1-2007 – HVAC&R Technical Requirements for the Commissioning Process

43. ASHRAE GreenGuide – The Design, Construction, and Operation of Sustainable Buildings

44. LEED ® 2009 Green Building Design and Construction Reference Guide

45. LEED® for New Construction – Handbook

46. German Passivhaus (Passive House) GuidelineThis thermogram of a Passive house (right) show how little heat is escaping compared to a traditional building (left). Obtained from the Passivhaus Institut (http://www.passiv.de/) The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

47. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Energy Availability Energy Rates were taken from local utility Alleghany Power. They include power produced from coal, nuclear, and hydro. MONTHLY RATE DISTRIBUTION CHARGES Demand Charge (kW) Minimum kilowatts.................................................. $1.07 per kW First Block kilowatts (0 to 100) ................................ $0.98 per kW Second Block kilowatts (Over 100) ...................... $0.82 per kW Voltage discount (kW) 1,000 to 15,000 volts................................................ $0.20 per kW Over 15,000 volts .................................................... $0.40 per kW TRANSMISSION CHARGES Demand Charge (kW) Minimum kilowatts.................................................. $0.54 per kW First Block kilowatts (0 to 100) ................................ $0.09 per kW Second Block kilowatts (Over 100) ...................... $0.16 per kW Ancillary Services: Scheduling, System Control & Dispatch............... $0.00 per kW Reactive & Voltage Control ................................. $0.08 per kW Regulation & Frequency Response...................... $0.08 per kW Spinning Reserve .................................................... $0.22 per kW Supplemental Reserve .......................................... $0.20 per kW Energy Charges (kWh) First Block (0 to 40,000) ........................................... $0.00356 per kWh Second Block (over 40,000)................................... $0.00318 per kWh INTANGIBLE TRANSITION CHARGES Demand Charge (kW) Minimum kilowatts.................................................. $0.36 per kW First Block kilowatts (0 to 100) ................................ $0.45 per kW Second Block kilowatts (Over 100) ...................... $0.38 per kW Energy Charges (kWh) First Block (0 to 40,000)............................................ $0.00319 per kWh Second Block (over 40,000)................................... $0.00288 per kWh GENERATION CHARGES Demand Charge (kW) Minimum kilowatts.................................................. $4.76 per kW First Block kilowatts (0 to 100) ................................ $5.75 per kW Second Block kilowatts (Over 100) ...................... $4.95 per kW Energy Charges (kWh) First Block (0 to 40,000) ........................................... $0.04183 per kWh Second Block (over 40,000)................................... $0.03774 per kWh The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

48. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Natural Energy There are many opportunities available to harvest natural energy: Solar Collection Feasibility: The first step to the solar collection feasibility process was to determine how much energy was available in this region. For this, we used a solar irradiance map obtained from www.3tier.com. In this region (40.813 latitude, -77.864 longitude), there is an average yearly irradiance of 152 W/m2 (this number is an 11 year average of State College, PA). This irradiance map can be seen to the right. Taking the yearly average of 152 W/m2 and multiplying it by 365.25 (days in a year) and then by 24(hours in a day), we get a total yearly energy quantity of 1,332.43 kWh/m2. This number may seem low at first glance, but considering that every hour of the year (including nights and cloudy days) is taken into consideration, it is quite high. Using an 80% efficient energy collection method (such as evacuated tubes over compound parabolic concentrators), and assuming an 80% area efficiency, we would be able to harvest 496 million BTU’s every year. 496 million BTU’s harvested from the sun goes a long way towards decreasing a buildings dependence on the grid. 496 million BTU’s represents 68% of our total energy consumption of the entire year. It can be concluded that 100% of our domestic hot water and heating load can be met over the entire year. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

49. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Climate Analysis Graphics based on TMY data reported for State College, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

50. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Transportation State college has a very tightly nit community with a large number of citizens walking, carpooling, or riding a bus to school or work. Public transportation in State College is served by the Centre Area Transportation Authority (CATA) under a multitude of different riding arrangements. Typically, citizens can purchase a one year unlimited use bus pass for a specific bus route at a non discriminatory cost; these arrangements are perfect for cross town commuters. CATA also offers a “LOOP/LINK” service, which provides free in-town transportation. Other great service of the Centre Area Transportation Authority is the rideshare program. CATA is able to provide program participants with a free, custom “match list” that matches participants up with others who share a similar commute. This increases the amount of citizens that carpool/vanpool to work, and decreases the total carbon footprint of each individuals commute to work. For an annual charge of $10, participants can be enrolled in the “guaranteed ride home” program. Under this program, members can be guaranteed a free ride home (less than 50 miles total) at any time of the day in the case of an emergency. Mode of transportation to work in State College, PA Drove a car alone Carpooled Bus Other Worked at home Bicycle Walked The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

52. A minimum setback of 10’ in the alleyways.

55. Spaces with 50 or more occupants for Business group B occupancy must have at least 2 doors

56. No more than 300’ to the nearest exit for exit access

57. Dead ends no more than 50’ in length

58. Need 30” x 48” area of refuge per 200 occupants/ floor

59. Egress width = 0.15” per occupant and with a minimum of 44”

60. Corridors no more than 100’ in length for common path of egress

62. Nonbearing Interior partitions do not have to be ratedThe Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

63. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Building Plans SECOND FLOOR 1.RECEPTION 2.PRIVATE OFFICE 3.LIFT 4.WOMEN’S WC 5.MEN’S WC 6.CONFERENCE 7.OPEN OFFICE PLAN 8. GREEN ROOF 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 5 5 5 1 6 7 10 2 5 11 2 2 5 2 9 3 8 4 FIRST FLOOR 1.RETAIL 1 2.MEN’S WC 3.WOMEN’S WC 4.RECEPTION 5.PRIVATE OFFICE 6.BREAK ROOM 7.RETAIL 2 8.KITCHEN 9.STORAGE 1 10.STORAGE 2 11.CONFERENCE 3 1 2 4 NORTH 8 7 5 2 2 2 6 Our building interiors take advantage of local materials and recycled materials, including certified wood furniture and locally recycled railings for stairwells. Much of the office floor space is outfitted with bamboo floors, which is a rapidly renewable resource. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

64. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Building Section The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

66. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Community Connectivity Surrounding Buildings: The Corner Room Beaver Parking Garage Fraser Parking Garage The Fraser Center closely relates to State College Architecture. The majority of State College buildings use locally made building material such as brick and stone. The Fraser Center will combine anolder more massive architecture with new sustainable design strategies. White brick with black accents for overhangs and mullions will be used for the building architectural form. The white brick will pay tribute to the Corner Room while the black trim will compliment the Fraser street parking garage. State College Library/ CATABus Drop off Looking Down Fraser The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

67. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Fire Safety The final building is fully sprinkled, and is outfitted with emergency alarms and strobes in every room and hallway. Exits are illuminated via high output LEDs which have emergency power provided by generators located on the third floor. Conforming to Fire Code: Fire safety to building occupants is a building owners foremost concern. Conforming to local rules and regulations during the design phase ensures a safe work environment, and makes occupants of a building feel secure and happy. When occupants are happy, owners are happy. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

69. Meets ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007

70. Meets ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2004

71. CFC free system

72. System Within BudgetAir Side Schematic: Dedicated Outdoor Air System with a total enthalpy wheel will serve the building. DOAS: DOAS uses 100% outside air for supply air to the building occupants. Some of the biggest advantages of this system are reduced duct sizes, better indoor air quality, cheap cooling during the winter, fan energy reduction, and chilled water energy consumption reduction. Using DOAS is will decrease energy consumption as well as improve indoor air quality. Economizers: Outdoor, return and relief dampers for the air-side economizer system were designed in accordance with ASHRAE Guideline 16-2003 The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

73. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Schematic Design of Mechanical Systems Water Side Mechanical Schematic: The mechanical system is served by ground source heat pumps through a four-pipe system including a reverse return for load balancing. The offices will be conditioned using Active Chilled Beams and Fin Tube Baseboard Heaters. The retail areas will use VAV to meet higher loads. Ground-Source heat pumps work by taking advantage of the constant year round ground temperature of about 50°F. A glycol/water solution is pumped into the ground loop to be pre-treated. In the summer, the solution is cooled by the cooler ground, and in the winter the solution is pre-heated by the ground. The energy in the solution coming from the ground is then exchanged through a plate frame heat exchanger and delivered to a heat pump. The heat pump then either raises or lowers the temperature depending on conditions of the space. Solar collectors will provide domestic hot water. No CFC-based refrigerants or HCFC-based refrigerants will be used in the building mechanical systems. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

74. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Mechanical Systems Advance Heat Recovery: A total enthalpy wheel is will be used in our building. It is a necessary component in Dedicated Outdoor Air Systems. The total enthalpy wheel serves the function of recovering energy by exchanging latent and sensible heat from exhaust air. This greatly reduces the load on the mechanical system. Lifecycle Analysis: Implementing DOAS, Chilled Beams, Evacuated Solar Tubes, and a Ground Source Heat Pump system will certainly increase first-cost of the building. However, this option will have lower annual operating energy cost. RS Means 2009 was used for construction costs which were modified to include super tight building construction, curtain wall, and other related building materials. The construction cost was $5,304,400 . The mechanical system was priced out based on equipment and installation cost. The total cost of the mechanical system was $710,600. Including the mechanical systems in the estimate brings the construction cost to a grand total of $6,0150,000. The estimate for the Fraser Center is still well under our given budget of $20,000,000. With this in mind, the team used IES VE to do energy modeling for the building to determine the building load and fine tune the selected systems. A 61.1% reduction in building energy usage was the overall energy savings. Discounted life cycle cost analysis was done for the mechanical system using a discount rate of 7.0%. NIST LLC 2008 data for Pennsylvania was used for the predicted future energy cost. The final payback period was 17 years with a 20 year NPV operation cost of $1.06 Million. A less efficient system could have been implemented with a much faster payback, but the goal of this project was to be as energy efficient as possible. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

76. Thermal Comfort

77. Ease of operability

78. Monitoring/TrendingBuilding Controls: Direct Digital Controls will be used throughout the building to meet the design criteria. We plan to use a system protocol that will adhere to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 135‐2004 BACNet; a Data Communication Protocol for Building Automation and Control Networks. DDC has many advantages such as the ability to handle sophisticated scheduling for natural ventilation, economizers, and demand ventilation. Digital controls have a high level of accuracy, and can be used for remote monitoring as well as trending. Trending can aid in the commissioning process as well as show an owner where he or she could save money and improve efficiency. DDC is also very useful for other building automation controls, such as daylight sensors and occupancy sensors. Many DDC systems have easily understood graphical displays which allow for easy trouble shooting and preventative maintenance. Demand Ventilation will be used in the retail, offices and related function spaces. CO2 sensors will provide input to the DDC controller which will read the return concentration of CO2and determine the sufficient amount of ventilation based on STD 62.1-2007. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

79. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Natural Ventilation Natural Ventilation: Natural ventilation systems can have many positive and negative aspects with respect to indoor air quality and space conditioning energy savings. The Environmental Protection Agency outlines many pros of using a natural ventilation system, but warns that these systems are location specific. “In some parts of the country, where temperature and humidity levels permit, natural ventilation through operable windows can be an effective and energy-efficient way to supplement HVAC systems to provide outside air ventilation, cooling, and thermal comfort when conditions permit (e.g., temperature, humidity, outdoor air pollution levels, precipitation). Windows that open and close can enhance an occupant’s sense of well-being and feeling of control over their environment. Operable windows can also provide supplemental exhaust ventilation during renovation activities that may introduce pollutants into the space.” (http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schooldesign/hvac.html) Because of the apparent benefits of natural ventilation outlined by the EPA (above), our team thoroughly investigated using natural ventilation as a reliable source of clean, comfortable supply air for our building. With the temperate climate conditions in climate zone 5 (Centre County), natural ventilation is able to supply air between 50 and 60 degrees Fahrenheit 19.86 percent of the time (TMY data used). While this supply air would be cooler than desired indoor room air, we could use a building automation network to automatically modulate the supply vents (windows) and thus supply an appropriate amount of outdoor air such that when mixed with existing room air would be within ASHRAE comfort standards for naturally ventilated spaces (below). To ensure minimum ventilation air, a mechanical ventilation system could remain on standby for times when wind cannot properly ventilate the space. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

80. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Natural Ventilation Even with the apparent benefits of using a building design that takes advantage of natural ventilation, we wanted to find the negatives of a natural ventilation system to fully assess whether or not our site would be a good natural ventilation candidate. Along with showing the pros of natural ventilation, the EPA does not shy away from discussing the cons: “...sealed buildings with appropriately designed and operated HVAC systems can often provide better indoor air quality than buildings with operable windows. Uncontrolled ventilation with outdoor air can allow outdoor air contaminants to bypass filters, potentially disrupt the balance of the mechanical ventilation equipment, and permit the introduction of excess moisture if access is not controlled.” –EPA Because our site is not located in a densely populated urban area, outdoor air contaminants will not pose a significant problem to the indoor air quality of the building. Our mechanical ventilation equipment could be integrated with multiple indoor and outdoor temperature, humidity, and wind speed sensors to ensure that proper ventilation is always available. This system would also ensure that excess moisture is not permitted into the space. Another negative aspect of using a natural ventilation system is that operable windows contribute to added infiltration loads in a space when compared to a building with inoperable windows. A UK based blower door manufacturer called Infiltec stated that on average, buildings with operable windows are twice as leaky as buildings with inoperable windows. Leakiness leads to excessive infiltration and exfiltration, which translates to higher building loads, worse HVAC performance, and ultimately a more energy intensive building. (http://www.infiltec.com/inf-larg.htm) Because of this statistic, we decided to use high performance, tight shutting operable windows. These windows have the ability to significantly reduce infiltration and exfiltration when compared to average rates. To quote Joseph Lstiburek in his Building Sciences article in the November 2008 ASHRAE Journal, “Build tight, ventilate right. Tight is 2.0 L/s/m2 at 75Pa (0.39 cfm/ft2 at 0.3 in. w.c.). Right is Standard 62” Assuming proper construction techniques, our building could utilize natural ventilation as well as meet both the tight and right criteria. After analyzing all of our results, we concluded that our site proved to be a good candidate for a natural ventilation system. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

81. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Natural Ventilation & Solar Harvesting Natural Ventilation: Air flow diagram through operable windows. Optimization of fenestration geometry for natural ventilation Solar Harvesting: Our solar harvesting technologies are placed on the tallest roof (above the mechanical room), which has been sloped to have more surface area normal to the suns path. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

82. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Solar Collectors The sun has been providing the earth with energy for approximately 5 billion years. Best of all: the suns energy is free and clean. The only question is, “how do we harvest that energy?” convection heat transfer to and from the medium, and the compound parabolic concentrators greatly increase the effective surface area of the collector. These systems achieve harvesting efficiencies of around 80%, and can be used year round to either heat domestic hot water or condition a buildings air. Cooling can be achieved by combining solar collectors with an absorption chiller, which uses heat as an energy source to provide a cooling effect. Photovoltaic Panels: Photovoltaic technology has seen vast improvement since it was first brought to the building sector. Efficiencies have moved from 4% (1954 – first silicon photovoltaic panels) to around 30% (1994 NREL’s gallium indium phosphide and gallium arsenide panels). However, the life span of these more efficient panels is rather short, and all photovoltaic panels are relatively expensive Solar Collectors: Another option for harvesting the suns energy is to collect heat energy without converting it to electricity. The most efficient solar collectors are evacuated tube arrays placed over compound parabolic concentrators. The evacuated tube virtually eliminates conduction and The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

84. Indian Grass

85. Side Oats Gramma

87. Yarrow

88. Wild Indigo

89. Bush Clover

90. Silver RodEfficient Water Fixtures: By combining low/no flow fixtures with grey water collection and reuse, the Fraser Center is able to achieve a very low demand from sanitary water supply provided by the State College borough. Stormwater runoff from the non-collecting area of the building roof and the site lawn will be held in a topographic indent in the center of the garden. An overflow drain will be concealed by taller vegetation, and will prevent the area from flooding during heavy precipitation. This garden collection method will significantly reduce site runoff, and will help filter and pre-treat water before it enters the local aquifer. By minimizing site runoff, we will be minimizing erosion of sedimentation, leading to a lower maintenance site. Low-flow washbasin water closet combination reuses water from the sink to flush the toilet. Low flow fixtures used in kitchens and bathrooms can significantly reduce potable water usage for a building. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

92. Reduction of storm water runoff

93. Improved air quality

94. Reduction of the urban heat island effectUrban Heat Island: An urban heat island (UHI) is a metropolitan area which is significantly warmer than its surrounding rural areas. The city of New York determined that the cooling potential per area was highest for street trees, followed by living roofs, light covered surface, and open space planting. THIRD FLOOR MECHANICAL SPACE The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

96. Natural Light to 95% occupied space

97. Southern glazing shading

98. A good compromise between the percentage of glass and thermal mass

99. Larger windows on the northern side to take advantage of diffuse north light

100. Shading of direct south light during the summer and taking advantage of the southern exposure during the winter for solar gain by designing optimal overhangs

101. Reduced solar glare on working surfaces by careful placement of work tables and areas

102. Daylight sensors will be installed to keep excess lights off during satisfactory lighting levels

103. Minimal windows on West and East walls of the building to minimize low angle light

104. Operational windows with plenty of viewsThe Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

106. White frosted glass

108. Energy Star LED Lighting

109. Limit to 0.75 Watts/ft2

110. Provide the required lighting as specified by the US Department of Energy’s Building Energy Codes

111. Comply with STD 90.1

112. Task lighting installed in offices

114. Etched opal glass

116. (1) 13 watt fluorescent bulb

117. Photocell sensor

119. Brushed nickel finish

121. ENERGY STAR® certified

122. Sand-blasted opal glassThe Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

123. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Energy Calculations A baseline building was created to minimally comply with design points specified in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. The following are calculations completed by Integrated Environmental Solutions VE: Energy Consumption of Similar Buildings: According to the Energy Information Administration commercial building energy consumption survey (2003), a typical office building in the United States with between 10,000 and 100,000 ft2 of floor area uses 26.23 kWh/(ft2*year). A typical mercantile building of the same size uses 27.14 kWh/(ft2*year). Using a weighted average of these two statistics, we can conclude that a nominal 34% retail and 66% office mixed use building in 2003 would have consumed approximately 26.54 kWh/(ft2*year). IES VE Results: After running energy analysis in IES VE the most efficient mechanical system was selected. Several different systems such as VAV, Chilled Ceiling, Chilled Beam, Boiler/Chiller Combination, Ground Source Heat Pumps, and DOAS were evaluated in the energy modeling software using TMY analysis. The system described earlier was 31kBTU/(ft2*year) which is about 9.09kWh/(ft2*year). IES also provided us with our building’s carbon footprint. The Fraser Center’s carbon footprint was about 32.1 tons of CO2. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

124. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Design Philosophy Prelude to Design: As a design team we took several different approaches to come up with our final design. Our final building had sustainability in mind throughout the entire design phase, not just at the middle or the end of the project as is typically done in American design. By starting out with sustainability as a priority, we had the ability to design a building that is truly both beautiful and sustainable. Our building shows signs of integrated design in virtually every detail; it would be a fantastic candidate in reality because all of the pieces of the puzzle were designed with the same goal in mind. Daylighting, structure, envelope/façade, function, maintenance, energy loads, constructability, mechanical systems, lifecycle cost, etcetera all have bold signs of progressive sustainable design. There has been a recent surge of integrated design in the United State, following the success of foreign sustainable design. Integrated Design: Our first attempt at a building design was focused on being the most sustainable building that we could possibly design. It turned out to be a very bland building architecturally. It was in the shape of a cube, and lacked the types of extrusions and offsets that make a building aesthetically pleasing. As an iteration, we designed a building that focused on progressive architecture. This building came out to be very expensive, and it did not take advantage of many sustainable opportunities. After seeing the major negatives associated with using a strictly architectural or strictly engineered design, we developed a clear understanding of how integrated design can mitigate negatives and let a successful overall design shine through. The building has to be designed with a philosophy that function, beauty, engineering, sustainability, and constructability all contribute significantly to the final design. These facets must be taken into consideration from the very beginning of the design, and must remain pertinent throughout the design phase and even into project completion. The greatest portion of our time as a design team was finding the right ratios of these building aspects. Each specific characteristic must have a give and take, and must compromise in order to contribute. We tried a long and skinny building, a short and wide building, a skewed building, a rounded building, etcetera. Finally, we came up with a design that satisfied function, beauty, engineering, sustainability, and constructability. The design also satisfied both the inner architect and engineer of each member of the design team; everyone was happy, and “the ball was rolling” on the final design. We as a design team now had a goal in mind to prove that architecture, engineering, and sustainability could successfully co-exist. We thoroughly researched integrated design using texts and guidelines, and we were able to discover many strategies that we wanted to incorporate into our building. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

125. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design Design Philosophy Integrated Design (continued): One of the main guidelines that we followed is the German Passivhaus (Passive House) Guideline. The most pertinent recommendation of the Passive House Standard is to create a thermal shield around the exterior of the building using continuous insulation, and also to minimize or eliminate any thermal bridges between the interior and exterior of the building. Another significant recommendation from the guide is to couple positive building pressure with a very tightly constructed shell. This minimizes infiltration and exfiltration, and increases the benefit of a total enthalpy wheel system by having the enthalpy wheel condition virtually all of the air entering the building. The Passivhaus Standard was derived from the German Niedrigenergiehaus (Low-Energy House) Standard, and was written to increase efficiency and decrease energy use for residential buildings in central Europe. Once we established that we were going to have a tight, well insulated building that took advantage of a total enthalpy wheel system and natural daylighting, we started looking into the site. We wanted to investigate exactly how our building would impact the site, and we wanted to minimize any negative environmental effects while keeping the building’s function and purpose in mind. We discovered that a green roof could increase roof insulation, as well as minimize storm water runoff and delay peak site runoff. As far as orientation goes, our final design was positioned in a north/south direction, and fenestrations were minimized on the east and west sides of the building. The retail area of the building was positioned on the north side to keep the solar gain to a minimum through storefront curtain wall, and the southern façade was fitted with a naturally ventilated double skin facade. Interior layouts were designed to best take advantage of natural light at perimeter spaces. Restrooms and storage areas were brought to the interior zone of the building, while offices, conference rooms, etcetera were placed on the exterior. The interior layout of the building continuously evolved through multiple design iterations, and pedestrian flow and space access continued to improve throughout the design process. The first floor was dedicated retail space and the associated required programs. The second floor was designed to accommodate the office and conference room section of the design parameter. In the end, we were able to take advantage of natural daylighting in every space on the second floor. We were also able to cut down on excessive floor area on the second floor well by stepping back the southwest corner and adding a green roof. The setback also contributed to the overall sustainability of the building by allowing more southern exposure of the second floor. This exposure is shaded such that the sun’s rays penetrate the façade in the winter months but are blocked in the summer months. This is achieved by calculating where the sun will be at each time of the year, and taking advantage of the high summer sun angles and the lower winter sun angles. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

126. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design LEED® V3 Evaluation Through integrated sustainable design, our team was able to create a building that meets LEED® V3 Platinum standards. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering

127. ASHRAE 2009 Integrated Sustainable Design References Information References: Badenhorst. 2002. Chilled ceilings and chilled beams. IRHACE Technical Conference 2002. Christchurch, New Zealand: Institute of Refrigeration, Heating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. CIBSE Applications Manual AM10: “Natural ventilation in non-domestic buildings”, London, The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, 1997. Coad, W.J. 1999. Conditioning ventilation air for improved performance and air quality. Heating/Piping/Air-conditioning Sept.: 49-56. Denardo, J 2003, Green roof mitigation of stormwater and energy usage, M.S. Thesis, Dept.of Horticulture, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA. Khattar, M.K., and M.J. Brandemuehl. 2002. Separating the V in HVAC: A dual-path approach. ASHRAE Journal May: 37-42. Liu, KKY, 2004, ‘Sustainable building envelope - garden roof system performance’, 2004 RCI Building Envelope Symposium. New Orleans, Louisiana, 2004 pp. 1-14 (NRCC-47354). Mumma, S.A. 2001a. “Designing dedicated outdoor air systems.” ASHRAE Journal. 43(5):28–31. Mumma, S.A. 2001b. Condensation issues with radiant cooling panels. IAQ Applications/Fall 2001:16-18. P.R. Warren and L.M. Parkens, “Window opening behavior in office buildings”, Building Services Engineering Research Technology, Vol. 5(3), 89-101, 1984. Schmidtl, M, 2005, ‘The evaporation of green roof and Facades’, Fifth Annual International Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities, Conference, Awards & Trade Show, April 30-May 1, Minneapolis, MN. Tabares-Velasco, PC and Srebric, J, 2009a ‘The Role of Plants in the Reduction of Heat Flux through Green Roofs: Laboratory Experiments’, ASHRAE Transactions, 2009 Yuguo Li, “Buoyancy-driven natural ventilation in a thermally stratified one-zone building”,Building and Environment, Vol. 35, 207-214, 2000. Image References: http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/71/3/4803 http://farm1.static.flickr.com/35/72175589_f660af1625.jpg?v=0 http://live.psu.edu/image/409 http://maps.ask.com/maps http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Glass_exit_si gn.jpg http://www.3tier.com http://www.atwork.ca/resources/fire-fighters.jpg http://www.city-data.com/city/State-College-Pennsylvania.html http://www.dadanco.com.au/images/acb50_usa.jpg http://www.donotfire.com/hornstrobe.jpg http://www.furniturestoreblog.com/2009/03/23/ww_by_roca_the_toil et_and_sink_combination.html http://www.hurckman.com/firesprinkler.htm http://www.lampsplus.com/products/Bathroom-Lighting/Type_ ENERGY-STAR/ http://www.paradigma.de/3617237-Jmw9ZW4mZG9tPWRvbTE- ~en~Produkte~Solaranlagen~index.html http://www.price-hvac.com/ http://www.semcoinc.com/ http://www.solarpanelsplus.com/images/180w-solar-panel.png http://www.tonyboon.co.uk/imgs/pages/powerlines.htm http://www.totousa.com/ProductSearchResults/tabid/37/Default.as px?SearchId=128c65a9-2811-4bdd-b099-70ff7f3ac9f3 Information References: ASHRAE. (2000). Guideline 13-2000, Specifying Direct Digital Control Systems . Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc. ASHRAE. (2003). Guideline 16-2003, Selecting Outdoor, Return and Relief Dampers for Air-Side Economizer Systems. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc. ANSI/ASHRAE. (2007). Standard 55-2007, Thermal Environment Conditions for Human Occupancy. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc. ANSI/ASHRAE. (2007). Standard 62.1 - 2007, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc. ANSI/ASHRAE. (2007). Standard 90.1 - 2007, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings . Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc. The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering