NATL INST OF STANDARDS & TECH

^

A1 11 0099301

NBS BUILDING SCIENCE SERIES 78

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE / National Bureau of Standards

Pre-Dei

of Energy Conserva

for a Multi-Story D(

Off
The Building Science Series

The Building Sciciur Series disseminates ' technical information developed at the National Bureau of Standards on

buildinf; materials, components, systems, and whole strufctures. The Series presents research results, test methods, and [jerformancc criteria related to the structural and environmental functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems. These publications, similar in style and content to the NBS Building Materials and Structures Reports Q938-59),

arc directed tov^ard the manufacturing, design, construction, and research segments of the building industry, standards organizations, and officials responsible for building cades. The material for this Series originates principally in the Center for Building Technology of the NBS Institute

for Applied Technology. The publications are divided into three general groups: Building Systems and Processes;

Health, Safety and Comfort; and Structures and Materials. For further information regarding these publications

please contact the Scientific and Professional Liaison Section, Center for Building Technology, Institute for Applied Technology, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234.

[See mailing list announcement on lust page J
OF STANDABDa

I-inHART

NOV ^ 6 1975

Pre-Design Analysis of Energy Conservation Just^^

Options for a Multi-Story Demonstration ']7;

Office Building

'

Tamami Kiisuda, James E. Hill,

Stanley T. Liu, James P. Barnett,

and John W. Bean

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Sponsored by

General Services Administration

18th and F Streets. N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20405

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary

James A. Baker, III, Under Secretary

Dr. Betsy Ancker-Johnson, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Acting Director

Issued November 1975
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Main entry under title

:

Pre-Design Analysis of Energy Conservation Options for a Multi- Story Demonstration Office Building.

(NBS Building Science series; 78) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs. No.: C 13.29:2/78

1 Office Buildings. 2. Tall Buildings. 3. Energy Conservation. 4 Environmental Engineering (Buildings) I. Kusuda, Tamami.

II United States. General Services Administration. III. Series: United States. National Bureau of Standards. Building Science

Series * 78 TA435.U58 No. 78 [TH4311] 690'.08s [696] 75-619306

National Bureau of Standards Building Science Series 78

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Bldg. Sci. Ser. 78, 64 pages (Nov. 1975) CODEN: BSSNBV

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1975

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, B.C. 20402 (Order by SD Catalog No. C13.29/2:78). Price $1.25 (Add 25 percent additional for other than U.S. mailing).*
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction 1

2. Weather and Geographical Data for Manchester, New Hampshire 2

3. NBSLD - A Computer Program for Design Analysis .... 3

4. Preliminary Design Analysis 3

5. Building Zone Calculations 8

6. Miscellaneous Design Day Calculations 11

7. Analysis of the Final Building Design 12

8. Summary 15

9. References 15

Figures 16

Tables 48

iii

Pre-Design Analysis of Energy Conservation Options

for a Multi-Story Demonstration Office Building

Tamami Kusuda, James E. Hill, Stanley T. Liu,

James P. Barnett, and John W, Bean

Thermal Engineering Section, Building Environment Division

Center for Building Technology

ABSTRACT

The design phase of the GSA-Manchester Building included extensive analysis of the

building design and operation to determine the potential for energy conservation. D'escribed

in this report are highlights and a summary of the calculations performed during the design

phase. The analysis included a study of the effect of the exterior shell, ventilation rate,

lighting and occupancy levels, room temperature controls, and nighttime flushing of the

building using outdoor air on the predicted yearly energy consumption of the building.

Keywords: Building design; building energy analysis; energy conservation options;

heating and cooling load calculation; energy design optimization.

1, Introduction

During the latter part of 1972, Commissioner Arthur Sampson of the General Services Administration (GSA) designated a Federal Office Building to be built in Manchester, New Hampshire, as an energy conservation demonstration project. The purpose of this project is to

(a) dramatize the firm commitment of the Federal Government to the conservation of energy in

the design, construction and operation of government buildings; (b) provide a laboratory for

the installation of both recognized and innovative energy conservation technologies (with a goal toward obtaining at least 20% energy saving as compared to other comparable buildings)

;

and (c) inspire others in the building industry to pursue energy conservation as a goal.

In January of 1973, the firm of Dubin, Mindell, Bloome, and Associates, consulting en- gineers of New York City, was awarded a contract to develop a set of recommendations for the

design and construction of the Manchester Building. The National Bureau of Standards (NBS)

,

at the request of the General Services Administration, collaborated with the Dubin firm in

evaluating the effect of various building parameters on the building's annual energy consumption. The building energy analyses described in this report were performed by the use of the

National Bureau of Standards heating and cooling load calculation program, KBSLD.

Based upon the resulting recommendations, the firm of Isaak and Isaak, architects of

Manchester, New Hampshire, was awarded a contract to prepare working drawings and specifications for the building. The mechanical/electrical design, which includes the design of the

heating, ventilating and air-conditioning systems, was in turn subcontracted to the R. D. Kimball Company of Cambridge, Massachusetts. The National Bureau of Standards assisted the

R. D. Kimball Company in sizing various components of the heating and cooling system. GSA

also designated NBS to be responsible for designing and operating the instrumentation system

which will allow the determination of energy consumption as well as other pertinent performance characteristics of the building and its systems. In this connection, NBS drafted specifications to be used for purchasing and installing a computerized data acquisition system.

This latter task will be covered in a separate report.

1
2. Weather and Geographical Data for Manchester, New Hampshire

Martchester, New Hampshire is located along the Merrimack River, 97 km (60 miles)

north of Boston, Massachusetts at an altitude of 89 m (290 ft) above sea level. As shown in

Figure 1, it is situated approximately at the geographical center of New England. At one time it was one of the largest mill and shoe manufacturing towns in New England. Its population, although less now than in the heyday of the textile mill activities, still exceeds half

a million. The surrounding countryside is hilly and dotted with many lakes and woods. Mount

Washington is approximately 140 km (90 miles) north of the town. The building site for

the particular government building under study is the center of the downtown section and

surrounded by several buildings of 2 to 3 stories, as well as an 8 story "high-rise" directly

to the south.

Because hour-by-hour weather data were not available for Manchester, climatological data

for a nearby town. Concord (32 km (20 miles) north of Manchester) were used for the

building energy analysis. The exact location of Concord is 43 degrees north latitude, 71 degrees, 30 minutes longitude, and at an elevation of 104 m (342 ft), which is not significantly different from Manchester. Local climatological data from the Environmental Data

Services (NCAA) [1]* were used to plot the 30 year (1931-1960) norm values for monthly average temperature as well ,as the extremes (highest and lowest) of the monthly averages for the

30 years (See Figure 2). Other annual normal values of interest were:

Average Rainfall 0.986 m (38.3 in.)

Average Snowfall 1.63 m (64.1 in.)

Average Wind Speed, Yearly 3.4 m/s (7.6 mph)

Average Wind Speed, Summer 2.9 m/s (6.5 mph)

Average Wind Speed, Winter 3.7 m/s (8.3 mph)

Prevailing Wind Direction, Summer NW

Prevailing Wind Direction, Winter NW

Average % of Possible Sunshine 54%

Average Sky Cover 6.1**

The ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals [2] lists the following percentile values used for

equipment design for both Manchester and Concord, New Hampshire

Winter

99% 97 1/2%

Concord -25 °C (-13 °F) -22 °C (-7 °F)

Manchester -21 °C (-5 "F) -17 °C (1 °F)

Summer

1% 2 1/2% 5%

Concord 33 °C (91 °F) 31 °C (88 °F) 29 °C (85 °F)

Manchester 33 °C (92 °F) 32 °C (89 °F) 30 °C (86 °F)

* Figures in brackets indicate the literature References listed in Section 10. ** 0 if a completely clear sky and 10 is completely cloudy.

Z
99% and 97 1/2% winter percentile values mean that approximately 30 and 72 hourly temperatures, respectively, during the winter were lower than these values. Similarly, the 1%,

2 1/2%, and 5% summer percentile values mean that approximately 30, 72, and 144 hourly tem- peratures, respectively, during the summer were higher than the specified values. It is

rather surprising that the ASHRAE 99% and 97 1/2% percentile data for Concord are 4 °C (8 °F)

lower than for Manchester.

By using the proposed procedure for the ASHRAE Task Group on Energy Requirements [3],

the year chosen for the hour-by-hour building energy analysis was 1962. Figure 2 shows that

the monthly average temperatures for this particular year were very close to the thirty year norm values given in the local climatological data. Several other methods presently being

considered by the ASHRAE Task Group for selecting TYWD (Test Year Weather Data) were used

and all the methods yielded the same year.

Figure 3 is a hourly plot of dry-bulb temperature and humidity ratio for 1962 from the

Concord weather tape. Coincident frequency of temperature and humidity for this year is

presented on the psychrometric chart in Figure 4 in the form of a three-dimensional isometric

plot. A two-dimensional equal frequency contour map of the same data is shown in Figure 5. By observing Figure 4, one can see where the majority of the peaks on the psychrometric

plots lie. The higher peaks are predominant at temperatures lower than 10 °C (50 °F) . The

ASHRAE 99%, 97.5%, 5%, and 1% design values are indicated in the figure and as can be seen, they bracket the higher and lower ends of the dry and wet-bulb conditions that occur.

3. NBSLD - A Computer Program for Design Analysis

In order to determine heating and cooling loads as well as the temperature and humidity

in non-air-conditioned spaces responding to randomly fluctuating outdoor climatic conditions,

a computer program to calculate hourly building heat gain and heat loss has been developed

at the National Bureau of Standards [4, 5, 6]. The program is called "NBSLD" and consists

of various subroutines for calculating heat gains , which are similar to those recommended by

the ASHRAE Task Group on Energy Requirements [7]. One major extension of the program beyond

that recommended by the ASHRAE Task Group is a routine called RMTMP, which solves for room

air temperature or the load felt by the room air through the use of a series of simultaneous

heat balance equations. The details of this routine are given in reference [6],

This particular computer simulation has been verified by experimental work on two separate research projects at NBS [8, 9]. In the first study [8], a small 6.1 m (20 ft) by 6.1 m

(20 ft) by 3.1 m (10 ft) masonry building was built within a large environmental chamber

where the temperatures could be adjusted and controlled from -46 °C (-50 °F) to +66 °C (+150 °F). The building was subjected to typical diurnal temperature fluctuations and the

indoor temperature and/or heating load was both measured and predicted by NBSLD. In the

latter study [9] , a more realistic living unit was used; a four-bedroom, lightweight house

that was completely furnished and had the activity of a six member family simulated within.

This house was also tested inside the environmental chamber where the outdoor conditions were controlled and precisely known.

4. Preliminary Design Analysis

The first series of energy calculations on the Manchester Building began by considering

a building that would be built according to "Typical Design Practice", in the New England

area. The building data for this building were provided by Dubin, Mindell, Bloome, and

Associates and was as follows

Gross floor area - 11,000 m^ (126,000 ft^) office

3900 m^ (42,000 ft^) underground garage

6 stories - 1,950 m^ (21,000 ft^) /floor

3
Aspect ratio - 2:1, long axis running N-S

Floor to ceiling height - 2.7 m (9 ft)

Floor to floor distance -4m (13 ft)

Roof - 0.1 m (4 in.) of H.W. concrete* with insulation on the top, U . = 1. 13 W/

(m^ • °K) (0.20 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F))**

winter

Walls - 0.15 m (6 in.) of H.W. concrete* with insulation on the inside, U . = 1.70 W/(ra^ • °K) (0.30 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F) )**, absorptivity to sola¥^ra§xation = 0,9

Floor above garage - 0.15 m (6 in.) of H.W. concrete* with insulation on the bottom,

U . = 1.42 W/(m^ • °K) (0.25 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F))** winter

Windows - single pane, shading coefficient = 0.50 (inside shading), no outdoor shading,

U . =6.41 W/(m2 • °K) (1.13 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F))** winter

Glass area 50% of the exposed room wall area on all sides. (This corresponds to approximately 1/3 of the total exterior wall area).

Garage temperature equal to outdoor air temperature at all times

Lighting on 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekdays (except holidays), 38 W/m^ (3.5 W/ft^) of

floor area for 75% of the floor, 11.8 W/m^ (1 W/ft^) of floor area for 25% of the

floor area

Occupancy 600 people, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekdays (except for holidays)

Office equipment 5.4 W/m^ (1/2 W/ft^) of floor area for 75% of the floor area, 8:00 a.m.

to 6:00 p.m. weekdays (except holidays)

Ventilation air - 7.1 m^/s (15,000 cfm) of outdoor air, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (except

holidays)

Infiltration air - 1/4 air change per hour, constant

Calculations based on the following indoor conditions

70 °F, 30% RH - October through May, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. during weekdays (except

holidays)

60 °F, 42% RH - (humidity ratio the same as during the occupied period) - October

through May, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. during weekdays (except holidays)

and 24 hours on weekends and holidays

75 °F, 50% RH - June through September, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. during weekdays (except

holidays)

No cooling allowed (and hence no cooling load was calculated) during non-occupancy

hours for the entire year

No heating allowed (and hence no heating load was calculated) for the months of June

through September

* Concrete having a density of approximately 2200 kg/m^ (140 Ib/ft^)

* These values were adjusted for actual wind velocity every hour

4
All calculations based on a 1 room, 1 zone model/for the building

For purposes of reporting the energy requirements for the building, the following ad- ditional assumptions were made:

Office ventilation fans require 37,000 W during occupancy hours.

Garage ventilation fans require 27,000 W during occupancy hours.

Building hot water requirements are 29,000 W (100.000 Btu/h) during occupancy hours.

Chilled and hot water pumps consume 27,000 W during occupancy hours, June through

September, and require 27,000 W for all 24 hours, October through May.

Cooling tower and miscellaneous electrical equipment required 45,000 W (60 hp) during

occupancy hours.

(Energy requirements for heating and supplying hot water) = {krv^) 0. oO

(Energy requirements for cooling) = ( ^°^^ )

(Energy requirements for lights, fans, pumps, office equipment, miscellaneous equipment, and cooling tower) = (Load)

The above equations imply a seasonal heating efficiency of 60% and a seasonal COP* for

cooling of 2.5.

Once this "Design Practice Building" was defined, its yearly energy consumption for

the year 1962 was predicted. A summary plot of the data is shown in Figure 7. One should

note the relatively large percentage of the total energy consumed that goes for lighting

as well as for driving the pumps and fans for the heating and cooling systems.

A special routine was written and added to NBSLD to enable the results to be printed

out in a special format. For each month of the year and for the year as a whole, two tables of data were obtained, one for details of the heating and cooling loads and one for energy requirements.

Table 1 is a sample of the heating and cooling load print out. The table is divided

into three parts. The upper part gives the total heating load and total cooling load

(maximum, average, total for the month per ft^ of gross floor area, and total for the

month). The middle part gives all components of heat gain that occur during the month

and consequently contribute to the cooling load. The column giving the monthly total of

each component per ft^ is per ft^ of area for that component. For example, the monthly

total per ft^ of heat gain through the south windows is in Btu/ft^ of south-facing glass.

A monthly percentage is given for each parameter.

monthly percentage _ total monthly gain for each component ^

for each component total monthly gain for the building

The hourly maximum and hourly average values of each parameter were based on every hour in

the month (i.e., the hourly maximum dry-bulb temperature is the maximum value that occurred

any time during the month). The lower part of the table shows a similar result for all

heat loss components that contribute to the heating load.

Table 2 is a sample of the energy requirements print out. All quantities are ex- pressed in terms of Btu of energy at the building and various efficiencies or conversion

factors were assumed as noted on the previous pages.

* COP is defined as quantity of cooling output from the machine divided by the energy input to the machine.

5
Following the analysis on the "Design Practice Building", individual design changes

were made and the calculations repeated to determine the change in the predicted annual

energy consumption and peak heating and cooling loads.' Taking the initial computer run

as Run No. 1, the following list describes the subsequent calculations:

Run 2 The same as Run 1 except that U-values for the wall were 0.57 W/(m^ • "K). (0.1 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F))..

Run 3 The same as Run 1 except that U-values for the walls were 0.34 W/(m^ • "K)

(0,06 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)),

Run 4 The same as Run 1 except that the U-value for the floor was 0.57 W/(m^ • °K)

(0.1 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)).

Run 5 The same as Run 1 except that the U-value for the floor was 0.34 W/ (m^ • °K)

(0.06 Btu/(h • ft^ • T)).

Run 6 The same as Run 1 except that the U-value for the roof was 0.57 W/(m^ • °K)

(0.1 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)).

Run 7 The same as Run 1 except that the U-value for the roof was 0.34 W/(m^ • °K)

(0.06 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)).

Run 8 The same as Run i except that the windows were double glazed.

Run 9 The same as Run 1 except that the windows were triple glazed.

Run 10 The same as Run 1 except that a shading coefficient of 0.75 was used instead of

0.5.

Run 11 The same as Run 1 except that a shading coefficient of 1.0 was used instead of

0.5.

Run 12 The same as Run 1 except that the window to wall area ratio was reduced from

50% to 30%.

Run 13 The same as Run 1 except that the window to wall area ratio was reduced from

50% to 10%.

Run 14 The same as Run 1 except that the number of floors was changed from 6 to 8 while

keeping the total floor area constant.

Run 15 The same as Run 1 except that the number of floors was changed from 6 to 10

while keeping the total floor area constant.

Run 16 The same as Run 1 except that the aspect ratio was changed from 2:1 to 1:1 while

keeping the total floor area constant.

Run 17 The same as Run 16 except that the building was rotated by 45 degrees.

Run 18 The same as Run 1 except that the building was rotated by 90 degrees.

Run 19 The same as Run 1 except that the insulation position in the roof and floor was

reversed (placed outside of the concrete-masonry unit)

.

Run 20 The same as Run 1 except the following:

a. Double glazed windows

b. Glass to wall area: 10%

c. Aspect ratio: 1:1

d. All U-values were 0.34 W/(m^ • °K) (0.06 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F))

Run 21 The same as Run 20 except that the aspect ratio was 2:1.

6
Run 22 The same as Run 21 except that "TWINBOW"* (U = 2.3 W/(m^ • °K) (0.41 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)) and shading coefficient = 0.22) was used.

Run 23 The same as Run 22 except as follows:

a. Glass to wall area ratio: 33 1/3%

b. U of glass = 0.57 W/(m^ • °K) (0.1 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)) during the unoccupied hours.

c. No direct solar radiation was allowed to fall on the windows at any time

during the year.

Run 24 The same as Run 22 except that the glass to wall area ratio was increased to 33 1/3% and a window overhang was included to exclude 100% of the direct solar

radiation during August.

Run 25 The same as Run 24 except that the August direct solar radiation exclusion was

only 80%.

Table 3 summarizes the results of these 25 computer runs.

Although this series of calculations showed that it was possible to design a building

with a 33 percent reduction in yearly energy requirements compared to the initial building

one should not conclude that the savings that GSA originally announced as a goal can now automatically be realized. Throughout this analysis, constant efficiencies for the installed

equipment was assumed as noted previously. Depending on the type of system and controls

that are installed, the above figures could be drastically altered.

In addition to these 25 runs using NBSLD, three separate calculations were made to determine the natural air change of the building by using a special computer program developed

by the National Research Council of Canada [10]. This program solves many simultaneous equations that describe the pressure differences across the exterior walls, floors, doors, and interior separation of a given building. The program essentially models the building in one dimension and requires assumed air velocity and temperature profiles on the outside of the

building as input. Calculations were done on the building of Run 1 using this program and

the assumptions in the calculations are identified as follows:

Floors : 6

Floor/Floor Height: 4 m (13 ft)

Glass: 50% of wall area, 1.8 m x 1.8 m (6 ft x 6 ft)

Entry Doors: One revolving 1.8 m dia. (6 ft), two swinging 0.9 m x 2.1 m (3 ft x 7 ft)

Elevators: 3; 1.8 m x 2.1 m door (6 ft x 7 ft), 0.15 m x 0.23 m vent on top (6 in. by 9 in.)

Staircases: 2; 0.9 m x 2.1 m door (3 ft x 7 ft)

Crack Areas: Exterior wall, window, and door; 0.19 m^ (2.05 ft^) 1st floor, 0.14 m^

(1.50 ft^) 2nd and up

Elevator (each): 0.09 m^ (1.0 ft^)

Staircase (each): 0.046 m^ (0.50 ft^)

Between Floors: 0.57 m^ (6.0 ft^) (1,950 m^ (21,000 ft^) of floor area)

Elevator Vent (each): 0.348 m^ (0.375 ft^)

* Identification of commercial products does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the

National Bureau of Standards.

7
Wind Speed: 6.7 m/s (15 mph)

Outside Temperature: -18 °C (0 °F)

Inside Temperature: 21 °C (70 °F)

The results of the calculations were as follows

Assumption

1 Assumption2 Assumption

3

Pressurization Flow 0 mVs (0 cfm) 0.12 mVs (250

cfm) / floor

0.24 mVs (500

cfm) / floor

Total Infiltration,

m^/s (cfm)

1.44/bldg.

(3,050)

1.14/bldg,

(2,420)

0.774/bldg.

(1,640)

Air Change /Hr .16 = 1/6 .128 = 1/8 .087 = 1/12

Figure 8 depicts the hourly air change rate of the building plotted against the difference between the supply air rate and the exhaust air rate in the mechanical ventilation

system (here called the net air loss). The figure shows that as the net air loss increases,

the natural air infiltration decreases because of the increased pressurization of the building. The infiltration becomes zero, or the building becomes completely pressurized, when

the supply air rate exceeds the exhaust air rate by approximately 2.03 m /s (43,000 cfm).

Following the preliminary analysis above, the building was modeled in more detail by

breaking each floor into five zones, 4.6 m (15 ft) deep zones on the north, west, south,

and east sides of the building with the remaining area on each floor in a core zone. The

energy consumption in each zone could then be predicted and the results for all zones summed

to get the energy consumption for the total building. The results of this second phase of

analysis is given in Figure 9.

The major changes in base assumptions from the first phase of the analysis were:

a. The building was 8 stories high with an aspect ratio of approximately 1.2:1 while

the gross floor area remained the same,

b. as mentioned above, the building was modeled in zones, and

c. 100% of calculated heat gains or losses were assumed converted to loads.

Except for the changes above, computer Run 36 was a duplicate of Run 1. As can be

seen from Figure 9, the predicted energy consumption was 16,8 x 10^ (15.9 x 10^ Btu)

,

(approximately 20% higher than predicted in Run 1) . Although the change in modeling technique and building aspect ratio undoubtly had some effect, the majority of the change re- sulted from c. above. In the first phase of the analysis, modeling the building as one

large room approximately 24 m (80 ft) high coupled with the "transfer function" technique

of converting heat gains or losses to loads [2] resulted in only about 80% of the gains or losses being converted to loads. Forcing this to be 100% thus caused the approximate 20%

increase in predicted energy consumption.

Run 37 here corresponds to Run 20 in the first phase of the analysis. The percent decrease in predicted energy consumption between Runs 36 and 37 as shown in Figure 9 is 36%

5. Building Zone Calculations

8
which is in good agreement with the decrease between Runs 1 and 20 in the first phase of 35%.

Runs 26, 28, and 29 represent minor additional design changes beyond those of Run 37 as follows

Run 26 4.6 m (15 ft) wide solid panels (with no windows provided for the full building height) at the following locations

North face - N.E. and N.W. corners

East face - S.E. corner West face - S.W. corner

Run 28 The same as Run 26 except for movable shading on the south windows to auto- matically exclude solar gains that result in an increased cooling load and

allow those solar gains which can be used to counteract heat losses.

Run 29 The same as Run 26 except that the east and west walls were designed as shown

in Figure 10.

Even though these "modifications resulted in little change in the predicted yearly

energy consumption, a significant change (10% decrease below that of Run 26) resulted in

Run 30 from changing the interior lighting intensity from an effective 31 W/m^ (2.9 W/ft^)

to 23 W/m^ (2.1 W/ft^).

Runs 31, 32, and 33 represent other modifications to Run 26 as follows:

Run 31 The same as Run 26 except that the absorptivity of the east and west walls to solar radiation was assumed to be 0.45.

Run 32 The same as Run 26 except that the window U-values were reduced to 0.57 W/

(m^ • °C) (0.1 Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)) during unoccupied hours.

Run 33 The same as Run 26 except the mass of the walls was reduced to approximately

160 kg/m^ (10 Ib/ft^) while maintaining a U-value of 0.34 W/(m^ • °C) (0.06

Btu/(h • ft^ • °F)).

As can be seen, the change in predicted yearly energy consumption for these cases was small.

A significant additional decrease in predicted yearly energy consumption was obtained

in Run 35 from the following changes:

(a) Occupancy schedule was changed from 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. to 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.

,

(b) lighting intensity was reduced to an effective 16.2 W/m^ (1.5 W/ft^)

,

(c) ventilation rate was reduced from 3.35 m^/s (15,000 cfm) to 1.34 m^/s (6,000 cfm)

,

and

(d) north wall had no windows

As can be seen, this represents a total decrease in predicted yearly energy consumption of

almost 60% compared with the "typical design practice" building of Run 36.

Throughout these calculations the heat storage process in the building was accounted

for by using approximate "weighting factors" as presented in the 1972 ASHRAE Handbook of

Fundamentals [2]. This technique considerably shortens the calculation sequence required

and hence the computer time to analyze a large number of design changes as in this study.

9
As mentioned in Section 3. of this report, the normally used subroutine of NBSLD, called

RMTMP, converts the various heat gains or losses into corresponding cooling or heating loads

by solving a large number of heat balance equations simultaneously. With the weighting factor method, RMTMP is bypassed and the gains or losses are assumed to be converted into loads

using a predetermined time-series equation. This technique has been shown to give results

which substantially agree with the RMTMP calculation [11].

In order to evaluate the effect of insulation position in the walls, the more exact and

time consuming calculation was performed using the optional subroutine. Although the results

of this latter calculation could not be directly compared to the results of Runs 26 - 37, the

following statements can be made:

1. A west zone on one of the mid-floors was simula'ted for an entire year using all the

data applicable to Run 26 and the insulation position on the outside wall was varied.

When the insulation was moved from inside to outside, the maximum heating load increased ]!3%, the yearly heating load remained practically the same, the maximum

cooling load decreased 5%, and the yearly cooling load decreased 8%. These results were as expected. When the insulation is placed on outside of the wall, the additional mass of the wall itself must be heated up in the early morning hours during

the heating season thus requiring a larger than normal capacity heating plant. This

additional mass facing the interior is of benefit during the cooling season though

since it absorbs a fraction of the heat gain during the day which would normally be

felt as a cooling load and gives it up later in the evening when it is of little

consequence.

2. NBSLD is presently on a time-sharing computer system [5] and some additional information was obtained using this version of the program. Most of the parameters of

Run 26 were used (exceptions noted in Table 4) to obtain the results in Table 4. The heating results were obtained by using the actual weather data for the month of

January 1962 and the cooling results were obtained by using a steady periodic cooling

design day cycle for the New Hampshire region.

If one compares the output of the three zones of Run 33 with those of Run 26, the conclusion is that a lightweight wall is just as effective as a heavy weight wall is affecting

heating and cooling provided that the U-value is kept the same (0.34 W/m^ • °K (.06 Btu/

(h • ft^ • °F)) in this case) . One should be cautioned that the insulation position was on

the inside in both cases and the true benefit of the heavyweight wall comes when the insulation is placed to the outside. In support of this, the more exact calculation method was

used in conjimction with the data of Runs 26 and 33 and it was found that when the insulation was on the outside, going from a heavy to a lightweight wall resulted in a decrease in

the maximum heating load by 7%, and increase in yearly heating consumption by 2%, an increase

in maximum cooling by 5%, and an increase in yearly cooling load by 4%. In addition, it

should be stated that the weight of the floor and interior mass is probably more important

than the weight of the external walls as far as its contribution to the thermal storage ca- pacity of the structure.

Run 34 was the same as Run 26 except that the ventilation rate was changed to 5.1 m^/

s • m^ (1 cfm/ft^) of floor area* during unoccupied hours and under the following conditions:

a. Building temperature > 24 °C (75 °F)

b. Outdoor air had a lower temperature than the indoor air, and

c. Use of the outdoor air did not impose a heating load.

The run was completed on a version of the heating and cooling load program that has the

capability to study the effect of nighttime flushing. Results of the computations were:

* This would correspond to 60 m^/s (126,000 cfm) for the total building.

10
a. Nighttime flushing in a mid-floor, west zone resulted in a reduction of the maximum

cooling load by 38% and in total yearly cooling load by 15%.

b. Nighttime flushing in a mid-floor, center zone resulted in no change in either maxi- mum cooling load or total yearly cooling load. This is not unreasonable since the center zone was cooled continuously during the occupied hours so that the structure

had already stored the cooling effect.

6. Miscellaneous Design Day Calculations

Run 26 building data and specifications were used to investigate detailed hourly profiles

of room temperature and heating and cooling load as affected by various types of temperature

control.

Figure 11 shows the results of a standard design day calculation based upon the following

assumptions

1. Outdoor temperature profile shown was repeated on a steady periodic basis. This is

to simulate a hot spell lasting more than 5 days.

2. The outdoor humidity was such that the dewpoint temperature remained constant at

16 °C (60 °F).

3. Solar radiation was for a clear sky at a latitude of 43 degrees.

4. Indoor temperature was maintained at 24 °C (75 °F) throughout the day and relative

humidity of 50%.

5. Lighting, equipment, and occupancy were for 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. only with the

maximum values being

Lighting: 21.5 W/m^ (2 W/ft^)

Equipment: 5.4 W/m^ (0.5 W/ft^)

People: 9

Ventilation: 0.25 air change/hr

Air Leakage: 0.25 air change/hr

Subsequent calculations illustrated in Figures 12 through 18 were for different types

of indoor temperature control, each step of which was directed toward decreasing the reduction of the total daily cooling load, but not necessarily to the reduction of the daily

maximum cooling load.

In Figure 12, it is shown that the total daily cooling load was reduced from 3.346 x 10®

J/day (317,400 Btu/day) to 3.076 x 10® J/day (291,700 Btu/day) by setting the nighttime tem- perature at 27 °C (80 °F). However, the maximum cooling load increased from 7,470 W (25,500

Btu/h) to slightly above 8,780 W (30,000 Btu/h)

.

In Figure 13, the nighttime flushing of 6 air changes per hour of the zone was incorporated as long as the zone temperature was above 24 °C (75 °F) and the outdoor temperature

was less than 21 °C (70 °F) . The oscillating pattern of the zone temperature shown in the

11
early morning hours is due to the night-flushing control. The actual indoor temperature profile as indicated on a continuous pen would probably not be the same as shown in this figure.

The daily total load was reduced to 2.535 x 10® J/day (240,400 Btu/day) and the daily maximum

was 8,200 W (28,000 Btu/h)

.

In Figure 14, it was assumed further that the cooling load could not exceed 5,270 W

(18,000 Btu/h) because of the maximum capacity of the cooling equipment. As a result of this

constraint, it was no longer possible to maintain the zone temperature at 24 °C (75 °F) , as shown in this figure. The daily total load was, however, reduced to 2.294 x 10® J/day

(217,600 Btu/day),

The operating condition assumed for the calculations of Figure 14 was again used for

the calculations whose results are depicted in Figure 15. In addition to the cooling equipment being restricted to a maximum capacity of 5,270 W (18,000 Btu/h), it was assumed shut

down during the unoccupied hours. The daily cooling load for the operation was then 1.9 x

10® J/day (180,000 Btu/day) (occupied period was 10 hours).

In Figure 16, the air conditioning system was assumed completely shut down throughout the

day to determine what would happen to the zone temperature. The zone temperature rose to

34 °C (94 °F) during the latter part of the occupied hours, which is obviously unacceptable

from the standpoint of human comfort.

Figures 17 and 18 show summer hourly load profiles for the west facing zone on the top

floor where the assumptions were: 50% glass in exterior walls, a constant indoor temperature

of 24 °C (75 °F) , and a nighttime temperature setting of 27 °C (80 °F) including flushing.

Also shown in these figures are the effect of changing the position of insulation in the wall.

As can be seen, placing the insulation outside does show a decrease in the maximum cooling

load, but the decreases are not significant.

Shown in Figure 19 are the results of calculations that were carried out for the west

facing zone of the top floor by using hour by hour weather data for January 29, 1962. The

figure shows the effect of window size (10% and 50% of exterior wall) and of position of insulation (inside or outside of the concrete masonry unit) on the heating load. The indoor

temperature was assumed to follow the nighttime setback pattern as indicated. It was a characteristic of this zone that there existed an exceptionally large maximum heating load

at the time when the temperature set point was changed from nighttime 16 °C (60 °F) to 21 °C (70 °F) for the occupied period. Moreover, the maximum heating load was larger when the insulation was placed outside of the concrete masonry unit as compared to when it was placed

inside.

In order to examine whether a gradual temperature increase from 16 °C (60 °F) to 21 °C

(70 "F) would decrease the maximum hourly load as compared to the sudden step change shown in

the previous figure, calculations were done for a linear temperature change from 16 °C (60 °F) to 21 °C (70 °F) over a five hour period between 2:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. The results are shown in Figure 20. The maximum heating load^ was unaffected by the gradual temperature

change. The reason for this ineffectiveness by this preheating is that tire heating during

the preoccupied period was done without the assistance of occupgnts, electric lights, or equipment.

7. Analysis of the Final Building Design

Based upon pre-design analysis and recommendations, the architects prepared the final

drawings of the building. A rendering of the building is shown in Figure 21 and a schematic

showing the floor area on each of seven floors, basement and subbasement is shown in Figure

22. Table 5 provides the final construction details of the roof, walls, floor/ceiling and

Tables 6 and 7 specify other pertinent data that was required to simulate, with NBSLD, this

final building design.

12
The design heating and cooling loads were first calculated for the following climatic

conditions on a steady-state and steady-periodic basis respectively:

Heating - Average Outdoor Temperature -15.0 °C (5 °F)

iiVCi-dgt: A'^rfi T*?l OlltrlfNOt" U U nf^T.moTnf" T'omr^oyo f*ii"K*ta Ll U U i, L/CW^UXLIL. J. clllUc L d LUl. C

J-IiUU(JI- J. CIIL^ i. d L LIL c iil. u

XIIUUUL ixcJ-dL-LVe tiuiTixaxEy /U^

Max3.inuin Dry—Bulb Temperature 32 °C (90 0 T-.\ F)

Minimum Dry-Bulb Temperature 19 °C (66 °F)

Dewpoint Temperature 16 °C (60 °F)

Sky Clear

Indoor Temperature 24 °C (75 °F)

Indoor Relative Humidity 50%

The calculations were performed on four zones; west, south, east, and core on the 1st,

2nd, 3rd, and 7th floor. The north zone that was previously used in the zone simulations

was included in the core zone here because it has no windows. The 4th, 5th, and 6th floors

are identical with the 3rd floor for the purposes of this simulation.

Table 8 lists the results of hourly heating and cooling load calculations. Computations were carried out using a 1962 weather tape. Each of the sixteen zones were simulated and the

data were used to determine the hourly loads for each of the four different floors. This

information will be used subsequently for system simulation analysis.

Hourly heating and cooling loads are shown in Figures 23, 24, and 25 on the basis of

Btu/(h • ft^) of floor area for the ground floor, middle floors, and the top floor respectively. All of these figures show distinctive gaps in the load pattern during the weekends

and national holidays. The load per unit floor area was the highest for the ground floor and

lowest for the middle floors. The monthly and annual heating and cooling loads which resulted

from the calculations are given in Table 9. Using similar assumptions for the energy

consumption estimates in the building design of Run 1, the annual energy consumption for the

final design is approximated to be only 40% of that based upon the building of "Typical De- sign Practice". The monthly profiles of predicted energy expenditures for the final design

building is depicted in Figure 26.

Some results of the system simulation for this final building design are shown in

Figures 27 through 31. Figure 27 depicts the hourly outdoor temperature as well as heating

and cooling load for the four different zones in the top floor. It shows a very high heating requirement during the early hours of the occupancy period when the themostat was set from 16 °C (60 °F) to 21.1 °C (70 °F). The central zone, however, soon required cooling

as the lights were turned on and the heat from the occupants began to be released. The

heating and cooling requirements became zero immediately after the building was vacated but

the exterior zones required heating in order to maintain 16 °C (60 °F) due to the low outdoor temperature.

Figure 29 shows the total hourly thermal load for the top floor which was obtained by sunmiing up the hourly heating load and load due to ventilation air of all the zones on the floor.

13
The lower line in this figure represents the net heating load based on the assumption that

the heat gain in the central zone was converted into useful heat for the perimeter zones by

a heat reclaim system. Whereas Figures 27 and 28 were for a typical winter weekday. Figure

29 shows a plot for' January 19 and 20 or the same year in order to show the change in heating load pattern for a weekend.

The high maximum heating requirement for the early hours shown in these last three figures are very typical of thermostat setback operation during the heating season. In reality,

however, the actual heating capacity of a system may not match the high peak demand, resulting

in the room temperature falling somewhere between 16 °C (60 °F) and 21 °C (70 °F) until such

time as the heating load balances the heating capacity of the system.

Figure 30 shows the outdoor air temperature and the cooling load for four different zones in the top floor during July 20, 1962. The cooling load for all the four zones fell to zero after the zone was vacated and thermostat setback to 27 °C (80 °F). Since no zone required

heating during this particular day, the floor thermal load was exactly equal to the summation

hourly cooling load of these four zones

.

Assuming that each zone is to be fed by a variable volume system with the air handling

unit supplying the cooled and saturated air at 13 °C (55 °F) , air supply to each zone was calculated to satisfy the cooling load. This was done by a special routine written for this

phase of the study. A part- of the return air from all four zones on the same floor (which was assumed to be at 27 °C (80 °F) and 50% RH) was assumed mixed with the outdoor ventilation air

to form the entering condition to the air handling system. The amount of recirculated air was determined by subtracting the quantity of outdoor air needed for ventilation purposes from

the return air*. The cooling load imposed upon the coil was the heat contained in the air en- tering the air handling unit plus the heat given off from the fan. The computer routine com- puted the enthalpy of the air entering and leaving' the coil by the use of psychrometric

calculations which in turn gave the total air load. The results for July 20, 1962 are shown

in Figure 31.

During the period when the space required heating, the air supply rate was always equal

to a minimum ventilation rate. In addition, in the air system simulation, it was assumed that

1. Ventilation rate was zero during the unoccupied hours.

2. Toilet exhaust air exchanged heat with the ventilation air during the heating season

for the purpose of preheating the ventilation air.

3. An economizer cycle was employed as long as the supply air temperature could be

brought down to 16 °C (60 °F) by the increased use of outdoor air and as long as the

outdoor air did not cause a load exceeding the maximum design capacity.

4. The heat rejected from the chiller that provided chilled water to the core zone was calculated and used to supplement the perimeter heating requirement . If the heat

rejected from the chiller was more than that required for perimeter heating, it was assumed stored until the storage capacity exceeded 8.81 x 10® J (836,000 Btu) . The

excess was considered discharged to the atmosphere by way of a cooling tower. The

amount of heat rejected at the chiller was estimated by an assumed chiller perfor- mance characteristic as follows:

Cooling Load, % Power, %

100 100

(continued)

* In many cases, the supply air requirement necessary to satisfy the cooling load to all of

the zones was less than what was required for ventilation. In that event, recirculation of

return air was discontinued and 100% outdoor air was used as the entering condition to the

air handling unit.

14
90

70

40

40

40

to be 35,145 W (120,000 Btu/h) and 12,000, respec8. SummaryEnergy analysis based upon comprehensive hourly heating and cooling load calculations

have been conducted for a Manchester, New Hampshire office building designed according ac- cording to "Typical Design Practice". Summary results for predicted yearly energy consumption as well as cooling and heating loads for typical summer and winter days have been

presented for a variety of alternate building designs and kinds of operation.

9. References

1. "Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary With Comparative Data, Concord, New Hampshire",

U. S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data Service, 1971.

2. ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals , American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, 345 East 47th Street, New York, New York 10017.

3. "Proposed Procedure for Test Year Weather Data", ASHRAE Task Group on Energy Requirements

for Heating and Cooling, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning

Engineers, 345 East 47th Street, New York, New York 10017, January 29, 1973.

4. T. Kusuda, and F. J. Powell, "Use of Modern Computer Programs to Evaluate Dynamic Heat Transfer and Energy Use Processes in Buildings", National Bureau of Standards Special

Publication 361 , Volume 1^: Performance Concept in Buildings ; Proceedings of the Joint

RILEM-ASTM-CIB Symposium, held May 2-5, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (issued March, 1972),

5. T. Kusuda, "NBSLD", Heating and Cooling Load Calculation Program", APEC Journal , Vol.

VIII, No. 6, Winter 1973/74.

6. T. Kusuda, "NBSLD, Computer Program for Heating and Cooling Loads in Buildings", NBS

Report NBSIR 74-574, November, 1974.

7. "Procedures for Determining Heating and Cooling Loads for Computerized Energy Calculations", ASHRAE Task Group on Energy Requirements for Heating and Cooling, American

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, 345 East 47th Street,

New York, New York 10017, 1971.

8. B. A. Peavy, F. J. Powell, and D. M. Burch, "Thermal Performance of an Experimental

Masonry Building", NBS Building Science Series 45 , 1973.

9. B. A. Peavy, D. M. Burch, and F. J. Powell, "Comparison of Measured and ComputerPredicted Thermal Performance of a Four Bedroom Wood- Frame Townhouse", NBS Building

Science Series 57 , 1975.

10. D. M. Sanders, and G. T. Tamura, "A Fortran IV Program to Simulate Air Movement in

Multi-Story Buildings", DBR Computer Prograih No. 35, National Research Council of

Canada, Ottawa, March, 1973.

80

60

40

20

0

The 100% load and power were assumed

tively.

11. J. E. Hill, and R. R. Furlong, "ASHRAE Cooling Load Calculation", ASHRAE Journal , pp. 61-66, May, 1973.

15
1 mile = 1.609 km

Figure 1. Relative Location of Manchester, New Hampshire,

16
OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE

y/A I EXTREMES

MIN MAX

NORMAL

(1931-1960)

Normal 1962

ANNUAL AVG. TEMP 45.6 44.8 '*C = (°F-32) x 5/9

HEATING DEGREE 7383 7586

DAYS

I25t- -il25

100

75

50

25

-25

-50*^

X= 1962 MONTHLY AVG.

I

X

I I

I

2

I

I

i

100

"5r

2

1

"X"

75

Z

i

50

25

-25

JFMAMJ JASOND

MONTH

Figure Z. Monthly Average Temperature of Concord, New Hampshire.

-50

17
91/91 OllUy AilQIWnH

18
19
20
0>

o

X

ffl g

Q.

W

z

o

o

>

a:

LlI z

UJ

GSA/MANCHESTER

BASE BUILDING DESIGN

MANCHESTER, N.H.

Btu = 1054.35 J

I kwh/ft^38.8xl0

23456789

MONTH

K) II 12

Figure 7. Predicted Monthly Profile of Annual Energy Consumption

for the "Typical Design Practice" Building.

21
building cycle

room cycle

day cycle

hour cycle

INTERNAL LOAD AND OPERATING SCHEDULE

WALLS, ROOF AND FLOOR DATA

CONDUCTION TRANSFER FUNCTIONS

INTERIOR SURFACE HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS

INTERIOR SURFACE RADIATION EXCHANGE FACTORS

j HOLIDAY, WEEKENDS DETERMINATION

DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME INDICATOR

CLOUDLESS SKY SOLAR RADIATION

SUN-LIT AREA DETERMINATION

^4- CLOUD COVER MODIFICATION

ON SOLAR HEAT GAIN AND SOLAR INTENSITY

AIR INFILTRATION

OUTSIDE SURFACE HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT

OUTSIDE SURFACE TEMPERATURE AND HEAT FLOW

ATTIC TEMPERATURE

INSIDE SURFACE TEMPERATURE AND HEAT FLOW

COOLING LOAD OR THE ROOM TEMPERATURE

\ OUTPUT TABLE

Figure 6, Calculation Sequence of NBSLD.

22
0.28

0.26

0.24

0.22

O20

0.18

§ 0.16

O

X

W 0.14

liJ CDZ

< 0.12-

o

< 0.10

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

JGSA BUILDING

MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE

1 cfm = 4.719 X lO"^ u?/s

-4500 -3000 -1500 0 1500

NET AIR LOSS, CFM

3000 4500

Figure 8, Air Inflitration Rate Versus Net Air Flow Loss

from the Manchester Building.

23
GSA MANCHESTER BUILDING

RUN

I6r-

^

14

10

8

35

Btu= 1054.35 J

kwh/ft^= 38.8x10 Vm^

30

25

^3^ RUN

rn 26

0

RUN

RUN 29

28

RUN RUN

31 RUN 33

32

RUN

30 20

CMX

RUN

35 FINAL

BUILDING DESIGN

10

Figure 9. Predicted Annual Energy Consumption Results for Various

Simulation Calculations,

24

aH/nia 'avon oniiooo
•dH/nig *avon onhooo

o o o o o o

O 0^ 00 N U> «f>

Jo *3aniva3diM3i

27
•dH/nia 'avon onhooo

oN

c; "o

oH

0)

J s

O CD u^ £^

O 0

Q a

05 M

P 2

00

28

dH/nia *avon onhooo

do '3aniva3diM3i

Jo *3aniva3diM3i
33
do *3dniVd3dlM31
do'3anivy3di/\i3i

o o o

to cvj —

JM/n*a£OI *aVOn 9NI1V3H 3iaiSN3S

35

ELEVATOR

PENTHOUSE

444 FT2

PENTHOUSE 5191 FT^ |5'

(EQUIPMENT)

7th FLOOR 12,444 FT^

BASEMENT 33,632FT2

1 ft^ = 0.092 9

1' = 0.3048 m

1" = 0.02 54 m

I- '1

I J

SUB-BASEMENT 35,I44Ft2 IO'-6"

GSA/MANCHESTER FEDERAL OFFICE BUILDING

GROSS FLOOR AREA =170,327 ft^

Figure 22. Schematic of the Floor Areas for the Final Design of

the Manchester Building,

37
C\] OLOOLDO-LDOLDO ^ — I ^ C\J ij Ds/H nia 'QbQi AiynoH

38
cDincDincDincDincD (Si ^ ^ I ^ ^ (S] IJ OS/H niG ' Qb01 AiynoH

39
40
1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2 O

X I.I m 1.0

—

y

o 0.9

1-

Q.

0.8

IDCOz 0.7

o

o 0.6

CD

trUJ 0.5

z

UJ 04

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

I6tu= I054.35J

Ikwh/ft^38.8xl0 ^J/m^

GSA/ MANCHESTER

NEW DESIGN BUILDING

MANCHESTER, N. H.

TOTAL ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION

e.lSxIO^BTU

17.8 KWH/FT^

LIGHTING

HEATING

COOLING

-FANS

-PUMPS

-HOT WATER

OFFICE/MISC.

-ELEC. EQUIP

2 3 4 5 6 7

MONTH

8 9 10 II 12

Figure Z6. Predicted Monthly Profiles of Annual EnergyConsumption for the Final Design Building,

41
42
JM/n*a£Oi 'a von oniivbh

43
44
JM/ntOgOi 'avon onhooo

45
CM

CM OJ

OJ

pq oOJ

00

CD

OJ tt

z

Q

_J

IDCD

cr

ijj

(/) Ld OJ o <J> 5^ —

00

CO o

o d

< CL ^ CO O =) CD H -:>

2

<

OJ

o

o00 o

00 o

CD o o

OJ

I I o

o

o

00

oCD o o

00

JM/n^a^OI 'aVOl SNHOOO 1100

46
Table 1 Sample Tabular Data for Heating and Cooling Load From the Computer Print Out

MANCHtSTE" ^"Nf^RGY COM. BLOi^.-f^'iM jn MO-^ITH = 1 YF'^^ = lPf^-> HOURLY MOUOLY '•"ONTHLY MONTHLY wtrfiTHi Y ENERGY P/i.?flMETER5 M/lyTMU^' AVEP^Gr TOTAL/SQFT TOTAL rfrcfnt

DRY-BULB TEviP'^RAT'lR'^ F .'^nno+oa .?oo'+n?

WET-BULB TEMPERAT'JRF F .uono+n? . I8'4n+n? TOTAL HEATTNR LOAD .I2li+n7 .7151 +nt» .goin+no

TOTAL COOLING LOAD , -^flon + nu , ?2Q(4 + r)? , 28cin+n7

HEAT GAIN FROM LIGHTING . 1 o:^(t+n7 . 36'sn + n6 .2"'1 5 + 0° 68. 19 OFFICE EOIIIP'^ENT .161 3+06 .n7f^o+ns .3'^4'^ + OP 8. PI OCCUPANTS SFNSIi^LE . J POO+ne .=;3?3+<T^ . 3^^60 + 00 P. 94 LATENT .6nno+o5 . 177U+0S . I32n+nn 3.31

TOTAL .70^7 + 0"^ .5280+0" 13.26

AIR LFAKAGF SENSIBLE .nnno . nonn .onno .nn LATENT , m p'^+n^ , 3nf,7+n<i . np TOTAL ,snq3+05 .i+l?7+n-« . 3nfs7 + n<^ .08

CONOUCTIOn ROOF .t^l 07 + 0'^ .7Uq7+n3 .?65?+n? , 5S7n+nf. .in

SOUTH WALL .1?66+n5 .6«'=ia + n? .«»8i3+ni .5in3+nE; .ni WEST WALL .nnno .nonn .onnn .on NORTH WALL .nono . nnnn .onnn .on EAST WALL .nnno .nnnn .onnn ,nn GROUNO FLOOR .nnno .nnnn .onnn .00 NET SOUTH wi^inows .un?2+06 .35'''^+n^ .071^2+01+ .^ft'^n + on 6.61

MET WEST WIMOOWS .3os7+n6 .Pl"^6+nu . 107'S+0« .6nP8+n7 1 .53 NET NORTH WINDOWS .nnno .nnnn .nnnn .nn NET EAST WINDOWS ,fSftu=^+nu .P9fti+n3 1 .28

VENTILATION Si^NSIRLE .nnno • nonn .onnn .on LATENT .nnno • nonn .onnn .no TOTAL .nnno .nonn .onnn .00 TOTAL HEAT GAIN .3160+nu . 398?+no inn.no HEAT LOSS BY AIR LFAKAGF SENSIBLE .TQoo+ne ,?l?n+o6 , 1577+no 11 .22 LATENT . 1 ni 5+n6 .ftq7t+0S .5189+np 3.6Q

TOTAL .?R1 R+n6 .2n<56-t-n" 14.92

CONOUCTION ROOF li ^ ft 1 A rt ^• i6??+n6 • ^748+ Oy- • 1 -? n f + 1'^' R » SOUTH WALL .1 n-^7+n6 .a67r>+n'^ .6684 + 0'* .3'*76+no 2.47

WEST WALL .2103+n6 . l^n^^+nft .8?i2+ni .8067+np 6.38

NORTH WALL , 1 na 7+06 , ftOft'^ + OR . 8675+0** . ttsi 1 4-no 3.21

EAST WALL .?1 P8+n6 . 1 ipp+n6 .8n96+n'* .8°fil +0° 6. 20

GROUNO FLOOR .R^Pl + rif, .?3<^'*+n6 .848?+nU .1781+00 If .67 NET SOUTH WINDOWS .lo-^R+nfi .706P+n^ .i9'*6+n5 .5om+ + no 3.74 NET WF5T WINDOWS .'M 33+n6 .5 55n+n5 , iau6+n" 1 n.2n

NET NORTH WINDOWS .1opn+06 . 10''"+n6 .?86i*+n5 .7''3? + no 5.50

NET EAST WINDOWS .3Of:,0 + n6 . iqn9+o6 .9t*Q6+n5 , 1U1 5+nQ 10.07

VENTILATION SrMSjPLE . 1 ?P7+n7 .?3i n+nft , i72?+no 12.25

l«ti^nt .68=i^+ns , 5nr>9+np 3.63

TOTAL . 1«^Q9+n7 . 30nn + n6 .2?3?+na 15.88

TOTAL HEAT LOSS . 1 iift+n*^ . iun6+l 100.00

1 Btu/h = 0.2929 W

1 Btu = 1,054.35 J

1 Btu/ft^ = 11, ^50 J/m2

47
_JL I O IT CK ^ K

K c

t~ <X ^ C ^ llJ ^ c a 5

4J3O

4Jc

•H

(U 4J3

04 vv a vT ou

(U jiue

ro II D

CO 4Jc >-

<au

•i-i 3

cr

(U

C£5 "

0)

Pi

II

CO

X

tS 4J c

Da s: u c

cd •-t

i-i3 z.

abH 1 (U •

I-Itxe Oc

_l

M 00• CM

(U c

t-l o

cd >- H CD

cc

Ll

U'

or

llJ 1-tn

UJTO

•2L <r

cr^&crccorc

_) + + + + + + + +

li. >- G

_J tn X V K _J ^ <: c I- 5 o

ID

<id:

LiJ >

ITO+

Or ^

Lu' CD s in c ^

»- • eccu 5

>- Xi _l r

ct »- X > C c X 5-

G

IT

ijj e <r e IT t- r ^ 2" <r ixj I-I S »- O _l

t- _J IT Q,

X 1-1 <: <C2 5l-crii.l- C cr r c »- u c XOU.CLX_IO»- 6

•-3 o

u-i ON m iri eg n 0^ —1

CNl <! —1 m O o II

II I-I

x: II 3 3 3

4-1 4J

w

PQ

m CQ

i-H I-I 1-1

>-

tr

in

Itr UJ

ijj 5

>- lij

ixi tr

5^ I-

<r

X

tr

a < LU

(X QL

ID ID

liJ LlJ

UJ UJ

48
U (U

>< PQ

C

0) >^ E

bO 0)

a> -1-4 o

C 3 --I

^^c^JOlO<^cxD^-^o^^no^oo<f^^oooocxDa^rnlrltnl^lln<}oooo

CnCN|CSJCslCS|CSlCN'-^'~*CNCNJCSI'-^CNCNCNJC\ICNC\|0O0OCO0OCX)0O

>,'0

J4 O

0) 4J

>-i 60 PQ C

nj r-l O

U O

o o

O Cr\ r-l ON ^

r~- 00 00 "^<I•C^^LOc^l<tcOO^OOa^cMOOOO^~-^oa^OOa^ooCTNCTNr-(v£)m<t'tN^^LnLrio^^<^'^oooo

-I ctf 5j O

>-i 00 PQ a

-I •i-(CT\

Cfl 4J O

w CO .—

I

(U

>-*<}• Csl (N

csi LO 00 rO"—'r^<j-oooOi—ir^<l-mmvD>x)00'^DvD^^ 0^<}•000000<J^O^OO^^OO^om^o^omL^l

<^cO<r)0O^^<)•ro^O(?-)<^•^Ocoro<)-<f<l<|cO^O'—

3 C

•r-) 1—I cd -U X O O PQ o

vOO^^^O^OrOcMl—lcy>v£)vOCTNioON<— I0000^a^^—ivo.—It—It—

I

OO^O^Ot—^OOO0^cM<^00r^C»00O0^<f'>C>°0'^°0'^^'^

cn(Ncsl(^cncocnrocsi<r)rO(N<N(NCNlco<N<rslcN'--''~''--''--''~''~i

u

E W) 3 C o

E -a 3 <t 00 <^

•H -U cd 4-1 ON 00 O

X Cd O CQ

cd <u <t- CO <1- <! o1—

1

C • r^c^^^o<flnvD^-^c30CJ^Or-^c^J^n<^L^v£5^~~ooa^O'—icNi<o<J-LO 30 1— 1.—Ii—).—!—(i—li—li—Ir-lcMCMCMCMCMCsl

49
Table 4 The Effect of Insulation Position Within the Wall on Predicted

Heating and Cooling Load*

Glass Area

Wall Area

Nighttime

Setback

Direct Solar

Radiation On

Windows - March

Through September

Percent Reduction When

Insulation is Moved

From Inside to Outside

Heating

Maximum

Heating

Total

Cooling

Maximum

50%

50%

50%

10%

10%

10%

yes

no

no

yes

no

no

yes

no

yes

yes

no

yes

-3.8 +1.5

-6.0 +3.1

+8.3

+1.5

+9.3

+4.6

+2.8

+7.5

West zone, top floor, 1/4 air change/hr based on the west zone volume only.

A sample cooling load calculation was done for each of the other three ex- terior zones and similar results were obtained.

50
Table 5 Construction Data for the Final Building Design

RES

Roof

Inside Surface

12 Inch C.M.U.

6 Inch Insulation

Composite Roofing

Exterior Wall

Inside Surface

1/2 Inch Gypsum Board

3/4 Inch Furring

12 Inch C.M.U.

3 Inch Insulation

Pre-Casting Facing

Ground Floor

Inside Surface

Concrete Fill

Insulation

Waffle Slab

Floor /Ce i 1 ing

Inside Surface

3 Inch Steel Deck

2-1/2 Inch Concrete

Inside Surface

1.0

0.5

.0313

0.047

1.0

0.25

0.0417

0.33

0.33

0.33

0.125

0.2 083

1.0

0.025

.67

0.47

1.0

0.025

0.24

1.0

0.025

1.0

26.0

1.0

140.0

5.7

70.0

50.0

140.0

2.0

78.0

140,0

2.0

140.0

490.0

140.0

0.2

0.2

0.35

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.26

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.11

0.20

1.74

0.685

1.02

0.74

0.74

0.74

51
Table 5 - Continued

L

Partition Wall

Inside Surface

1/2 Inch Gypsum Board 0.042

Air Space

1/2 Inch Gypsum Board 0.042

Inside Surface

L: Thickness, ft

K: Thermal Conductivity, Btu/ (h • ft ' °F)

3 P: Density, lb /ft

C: Specific Heat, Btu/ lb °F

2 R: Thermal Resistance, (h • ft • °F)/Btu

K P C RES

0.685

0.42 50.0 0.2

0.99

0.42 50.0 0.2

0.685

1 ft = 0.3048 m

1 Btu/(h • ft . °F) = 0.17296 W/(m • °C)

1 lb 'ft-^ = 16.02 kg/m^

1 Btu/ (lb °f = 4,186.8 J/kg °K

1 (h . ft^ . °F)/Btu = 0.176 (m^ • °C)/W

52
Table 6 Miscellaneous Operating Data Assumed for the Final Building Design

Floor Area

Ventilation Inf i Itration Lighting and No. < Floor Zones tt'^ CFM Air Change s/Hr CFM Air Changes/Hr Equipment Load Occup;

1 South 1,161 72 0.4 67 0.4 2 W/ft 12

West 2,699 162 0.4 128 0.3 2

2 W/ ft 27

East 2,050 126 0.4 100 0.3 2

2 IT/ Ct- W/ ft 21

Center 4,939 2 94 0.4 0 0 2

2 W/ft 49

2 South 1,259 78 0.4 27 0.14 2 W/ft^ 13

West 1,807 108 0.4 31 0.11 2 W/ft^ 18

East 1,807 108 0.4 31 0.11 2 W/ft^ 18

Center 5,100 306 0.4 0 0 2 W/ft^ 51

3-6 South 1,430 84 0.4 32 0.15 2 W/ft^ 14

West 1,980 120 0.4 45 0.15 2 W/ft^ 20

East 1,980 120 0.4 45 0.15 2 W/ft^ 20

Center 6,300 324 0.4 0 0 2 W/ft^ 63

7 South 1,259 78 0.4 32 0.17 2 W/ft^ 13

West 1,807 108 0.4 45 0.17 2 W/ft^ 18

East 1,807 108 0.4 45 0.17 2 W/ft^ 18

Center 5,100 306 0.4 0 0 2 W/ft^ 51

1 f6^ = 0.0929

1 cfm = 4.719 X lO''^ m^/s

2 2

1 W/ft = 10.76 W/m

53
Table 7 Zone Configuration Data for the Final Building Design

Surface Type

Area

ft2 Orientation

Shading

Coefficient

Absorption

Coefficient

Ground Floor, South Zone

Ceiling

Ext. Wall

Window

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Floor

1,161.0

1,060.0

130.0

255.0

935.0

360.0

1,161.0

SW

SW

N

NE

NE

0

0

0.56

0

0

0

0

0

0.9

0

0

0

0

0

Ground Floor, West Zone

12

3

4

5

6

78

Ceiling

Int. Wall

Ext. Wall

Window

Ext. Wall

Ext. Wall

Int. Wall

Floor

2 ,699.0

255.0

2 ,611.0

520.0

467.5

940,1

1,955.0

2 ,699.0

Sww

N

E

E

0

0

0

0.56

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.9

0

0.9

0.9

0

0

Ground Floor, East Zone

Ceiling

Into Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Exto Wall

Window

Floor

2 ,050.0

360.4

2 ,550.0

255.0

1,153.0

312 .0

2,050.0

SWw

N

E

E

0

0

0

0

0

0.56

0

0

0

0

0

0.9

0

0

Ground Floor, Center Zone

Ceiling

Into Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Floor

4,939.0

935.0

1,904.0

586.5

2,550.0

4,939.0

SW

W

N

E

54
Table 7 - Continued

Surface Type

Area

ft2 Orientation

Shading

Coefficient

Absorption

Coefficient

3rd-6th Floor, South Zone

12

3

4

5

6

7

Ceiling

Ext. Wall

Window

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Floor

1,430.0

1,420.0

49.0

275.6

1,079.0

275.6

1,430.0

S

SNW

N

NE

0

0

0.56

0

0

0

0

3rd-6th Floor, West Zone

Ceiling

Int. Wall

Ext. Wall

Window

Ext. Wall

Int. Wall

Floor

1,980.0

275.6

1,659.0

70.0

510.0

1,339.0

1,980.0

SE

W

W

N

E

0

0

0

0.56

0

0

0

0

0

0.9

0

0.9

0

0

3rd-6th Floor, East Zone

Ceiling

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Ext. Wall

Ext. Wall

Window

Floor

1,980.0

275.6

1,339.0

510.0

1,659.0

70.0

1,980.0

SW

W

N

E

E

0

0

0

0

0

0.56

0

0

0

0

0.9

0.9

0

0

3rd-6th Floor, Center Zone

12

3

4

5

6

Ceiling

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Int. Wall

Floor

6,300.0

1,079.0

1,339.0

1,079.0

1,339.0

6,300.0

SW

N

E

55
Table 7 - Continued

Area Shading Absorption

Surface Type ft^ Orientation Coefficient Coefficient

Top Floor, South Zone

1 Roof 1,259.0 - 0 0.9

2 Ext. Wall 1,231.0 S 0 0.9

3 Window 49.0 S 0.56 0

4 Int. Wall 275.6 NW 0 0

5 Int. Wall 890.0 N -0 0

6 Int. Wall 275.6 NE 0 0

7 Floor 1,259.0 - 0 0

Top Floor, West Zone

1 Roof 1,807.0 - 0 0.9

2 Int. Wall 275.6 SE 0 0

3 Ext. Wall 1,490.0 W 0 0.9

4 Window 70.0 W 0.56 0

5 Ext. Wall 340.0 N 0 0.9

6 Int. Wall 1,170.0 E 0 0

7 Floor 1,807.0 - 0 0

Top Floor, East Zone

1 Roof 1,807.0 - 0 0.9

2 Int. Wall 275.6 SW 0 0

3 Int. Wall 1,170.0 WO 0

4 Ext. Wall 340.0 N 0 0.9

.5 Ext. Wall 1,490.0 E 0 0.9

6 Window 70.0 E 0.56 0

7 Floor 1,807.0 - 0 0

Top Floor, Center Zone

1 Int. Wall 5,100.0 - 0 0

2 Int. Wall 890.0 SO 0

3 Int. Wall 1,170.0 W 0 0

4 Int. Wall 890.0 NO 0

5 Int. Wall 1,170.0 E 0 0

6 Floor 5,100.0 - 0 0

2 2 ft = 0.092 9 m

56
Table 7 Continued

Area Shading Absorption

Surface Type ft^ Orientation Coefficient Coefficient

Second Floor , South Zone

1 Ceiling 1,259.0

2 Ext. Wall 1,068.0

3 Window 232.0

4 Int. Wall 275.6

5 Int. Wall 910.0

6 Int. Wall 275.6

7 Floor 1,259.0

Second Floor, West Zone

1 Ceiling 1,807.0

2 Int. Wall 275.6

3 Ext. Wall 1,216.0

4 Window 344 .

5 Ext. Wall 340.0

6 Int. Wall 1,170.0

7 Floor 1,807.0

Second Floor, East Zone

1 Ceiling 1,807.0

2 Int. Wall 275.6

3 Int. Wall 1,170.0

4 Ext. Wall 340.0

5 Ext. Wall 1,216.0

6 Window 344 .

7 Floor 1,807.0

Second Floor, Center Zone

1 Ceiling 5,100.0

2 Int. Wall 910.0

3 Int. Wall 1,170.0

4 Int. Wall 910.0

5 Int. Wall 1,170.0

6 Floor 5,100.0

0 0

S 0 0.9

S 0.56 0 NONW 0 0

0

NE 0 0

0 0

0 0

SE 0 0

W 0 0.9

W 0.56 0

N 0 0.9

E 0 0

0 0

0 0 WOSW 0 0

0

N 0 0.9

E 0 0.9

E 0.56 0

0 0

SO0 0 WO 0 NO 0

0

E 0 0

0 0

57
Table 8 Design Calculation Results for the Final Building Design

Heating Load Cooling Load Floor

2 2 Area

Btu/h Btu/(h • ft ) Btu/h Btu/(h • ft ) Ton ft^

Ground Floor South 26,411 22.8 27,998 24.2 2 1,161

West 73,295 27.2 53,454 19.7 2,699

East 43,498 21.1 38,131 18.5 3 2,050

Core 45,511 9.1 58,520 11.8 5 4,939

Total 14 10,849

2nd Floor South 22 ,219 17.7 24,42 8 19.5 2 2,159

West 31,387 17.2 41,079 22.7 3 1,807

East 31,387 17.2 37,316 20.5 3 1,807

Core 25,424 5.0 61,581 12.0 5 5,100

Total

T 1 13

1 9,973

3rd-6th Floor South 18,222 12.7 21,068 14.6 1.5 1,430

West 26,612 13.4 30,717 15.5 2.5 1,980

East 26,612 13.4 30,812 15.5 2.5 1,980

Core 27,272 4.3 74,733 11.8 6 6,300

Total 12.5 11,690

7th Floor South 20,545 16.2 2 0,2 03 16.0 1.5 1,259

West 29,468 16.2 29,372 16.1 2.5 1,807

East 29,468 16.2 29,406 16.1 2.5 1,807

Core 40,212 7.8 58,613 11.5 5 5,100

Total 11.5 9,973

1 Btu/h = 0.2929 W

1 Btu/(h . ft^) = 3.152 W/m^

1 Ton = 3,516.8 W

1 ft^ = 0 . 0929

58
00

o

o o o

Oo .—

(

OJ c oo ON OO CM O <f in o <t o 00 <)• o X) H 4-1 cd CM -d- 00 in 00 oo

ctJ O O 00 00 in ON 00

<U t-J in m CN

00c

CD O

bOC

.-I nJ

ctf o

<U J

33

59
NBS-l 14A IRE V. 7-73)

U .S. DEPT. OF COMM. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. NBS-BSS 78

2. Gov't Accession

No.

3. Recipient'.s Acccs.sion No.

4 TITI !• AND SIIRTITI [" Pre-Design Analysis of Energy Conservation Options for a Multi-Story Demonstration Office Building

5. Publication Date November 1975

6« Performing Organization Code

7. AUTHOR(S)

T. Kusuda, J.E. Hill, S. To Liu, J. P. Barnett, J.W. Bean

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. 4626404

11. Contract/Grant No.

12, Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

General Services Administration

18th & F Streets, N, W.

Washington, D.C. 20405

13. Type of Report & Period C ov ere d Interim Report

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Library of Congress Catalog Card Nunber: 75^6l9306

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary almost significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.)

The design phase of the GSA -Manchester Building included extensive analysis

of the building design and operation to determine the potential for energy conservation. Described in this report are highlights and a summary of the calculations

performed during the design phase. The analysis included a study of the exterior

shell, ventilation rate, lighting and occupancy levels, room temperature controls,

and nighttime flushing of the building using outdoor air, on the predicted yearly

energy consumption of the building.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons)

Building design; building energy analysis; energy conservation options; heating

and cooling load calculation; energy design optimization.

18. AVAILABILITY gC" Unlimited

1

' For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

["X^ Order From Sup. of Doc, U.S. Government Pfirnipa O^l^ce Washinaton. D.C. 20402. SD Cat. No. CI? 2 <=> /'^ -78

'

1 1 Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGES

64

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

22. Price

?1 .25

USCOMM-DC 29042-P74
Announcement of New Publications in

Building Science Series

Superintendent of "Documents,

U.S. Grovemment Printing Office,

Washington, D.C. 20402

Dear Sir:

Please add my name to the announcement list of new publications to be

issued in the series : National Bureau of Standards Building Science Series.

Name

Company

Axldress .

City State Zip Code

(Notlflcatioa key N-S89)



NBS TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS

PERIODICALS JOURNAL OF RESEARCH reports National Bureau

of Standards research and development in physics,

mathematics, and chemistry. It is published in two sections, available separately-:

• Physics and Chemistry (Section A)

Papers of interest primarily to scientists working in these fields. This section covers a broad range of physical and chemical research, with major emphasis on

standards of physical measurement, fundamental constants, and properties of matter. Issued six times a

year. Annual subscription: Domestic, $17.00; Foreign,

$21.25.

• Mathematical Sciences (Section B)

Studies and compilations designed mainly for the mathematician and theoretical physicist. Topics in mathematical statistics, theory of experiment design, numerical analysis, theoretical physics and chemistry, logical design and programming of computers and computer

systems. Short numerical tables. Issued quarterly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.00; Foreign, $11.25. DIMENSIONS/NBS (formerly Technical News Bulletin) —This monthly magazine is published to inform

scientists, engineers, businessmen, industry, teachers,

students, and consumers of the latest advances in science and technology, with primary emphasis on the work at NBS. The magazine highlights and reviews such

issues as energy research, fire protection, building tech- nology, metric conversion, pollution abatement, health and safety, and consumer product performance. In addition, it reports the results of Bureau programs in measurement standards and techniques, properties of matter and materials, engineering standards and services, instrumentation, and automatic data processing. Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.45; Foreign, $11.85.

NONPERIODICALS

Monographs—Major contributions to the technical liter- ature on various subjects related to the Bureau's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and

industrial practice (including safety codes) developed

in cooperation with interested industries, professional

organizations, and regulatory bodies.

Special Publications—Include proceedings of confer- ences sponsored by NBS, NBS annual reports, and other

special publications appropriate to this grouping such

as wall charts, pocket cards, and bibliographies.

Applied Mathematics Series—Mathematical tables, manuals, and studies of special interest to physicists, engineers, chemists, biologists, mathematicians, computer programmers, and others engaged in scientific and technical work.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides

quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties of materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Developed under a world-wide'

program coordinated by NBS. Program under authority

of National Standard Data Act (Public Law 90-396). NOTE: At present the principal publication outlet for these data is the Journal of Physical and Chemical

Reference Data (JPCRD) published quarterly for NBS

by the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Subscriptions, reprints, and supplements available from ACS, 1155 Sixteenth

St. N. W., Wash. D. C. 20056.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical infor- mation developed at the Bureau on building materials, components, systems, and whole structures. The series presents research results, test methods, and performance criteria related to the structural and environmental functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems.

Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete

in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a

subject. Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject area. Often serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NBS under the sponsorship of other government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under pro- cedures published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations. The purpose of the standards is to establish nationally

recognized requirements for products, and to provide

all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the characteristics of the products. NBS

administers this program as a supplement to the activities of the private sector standardizing organizations. Federal Information Processing Standards Publicatiqns

(FIPS PUBS)—Publications in this series collectively constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register. Register serves as the official source of information in the Federal Government regarding stand- ards issued by NBS pursuant tfc the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended,

Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1127), and as implemented

by Executive Order 11717 (38 FR 12315, dated May 11, 1973) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal

Regulations). Consumer Information Series—Practical information, based on NBS research and experience, covering areas

of interest to the consumer. Easily understandable language and illustrations provide useful background

knowledge for shopping in today's technological

marketplace.

NBS Interagency Reports (NBSIR)—A special series of interim or final reports on work performed by NBS for

outside sponsors (both government and non-government). In general, initial distribution is handled by the sponsor; public distribution is by the National Technical Information Service (Springfield, Va. 22161) in paper

copy or microfiche form.

Order NBS publications (except NBSIR's and Biblio- graphic Subscription Services) from: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington,

D.C. 20402. BIBLIOGRAPHIC SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES

The following current-awareness and literature-survey

bibliographies are issued periodically by the Bureau:

Cryogenic Data Center Current Awareness Service A literature survey issued biweekly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $20.00; foreign, $25.00.

Liquefied Natural Gas. A literature survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00. Superconducting Devices and Materials. A literature

survey issued qiiarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00. Send subscription orders and remittances for the pre- ceding bibliographic services to National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161.

Electromagnetic Metrology Current Awareness Service Issued monthly. Annual subscription: $100.00 (Special rates for multi-subscriptions). Send subscription order and remittance to Electromagnetics Division, National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, Colo. 80302.
U.S. DEPARTMEWT OF COMMERCE

IViational Bureau of Standards

Washington. D.C. 20234

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use, S300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE COM-255

SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE BOOK

% ....