Energy Code Software

Robert O'Connor_12

Not being familiar with your state. I can only assume that the requirement for ResCheck would be located within your states administrative code. In the Great State of New Jersey this requirement can be found in N.J.A.C. 5:23-2.15(e)vi(1) Construction permits-application

I'll try and keep this short.

Energy calculations must show compliance with the energy subcode. The calculations shall be signed and sealed by the design professional except for class III structures, then they may be submitted by the mechanical contractor. If the structure is a detached one or two family house three stories in height or less. You must demonstrate by submitting Energy Star compliance documentation. The RES Check is one example, other submissions or prescriptive packages must follow guide lines set forth in Bulletin 03-2. It is far easier to use RES Check because for one, thats what the enforcing agency is familiar with and can be obtained for free through the DOE. www.energycodes.gov.

For all other buildings, compliance may be shown with the COM Check compliance software "or equivalent". You may also use ASHRAE 90.1 user's manual. The ASHRAE 90.1 is available from the American Society of Heating and Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers Inc., 1791 Tullie Circle, NE, Atlanta, GA 30329.

All the engineering details and specifications shall bear the seal and signature of the licensed engineer or architect. Plumbing plans for class III can be submitted by a master plumber and the same requirement for electrical.

The only portion of the regulations that waive these requirements would be for minor work or a single family owner occupied home and the home must be the primary residence. However, you can prepare these documents so long as you get the design professional to write a letter indicating conformance with the regulations.

I don't know if this helps but not knowing the class structure or being familiar with your state, its all I could produce.


Good Luck!


Robert O'Connor/NJ

Singh_5

ResCheck

Any one have experience with this software yet.
Seems like the local building inspector requires it.
The thing is it should be submitted with the plans by the architect, and stamped.

This particular slab on grade job, new construction has R38 walls, R50 ceiling and lots of glass, but is not passing. They , the guys with the letters behind their name is telling the owner its the radiant at fault.

I just downloaded the software, and I the results I get is that the building passes minimum energy codes by 20%. I don't have a stamp though so the owner can get his building permit. I did submit a heat loss, but he will only accept that for sizing the mechanicals, has nothing to do with the bare minimum energy codes of the building.

I guess its a good thing, but I see conflict between enginner/architect and HVAC contractors on who does what and who is right or wrong.

Devan

http://www.energycodes.gov/

Brad White_9

Devan- We use ComCheck

which is more for commercial compliance but ResCheck is in the same principle.

We use it as a courtesy to the architect (our principal clients). We offer to do this because while it is they who design and are responsible for the envelope design and construction, we have the take-offs for purposes of our calculations.

In the end, they the architects have to certify it and observe in the field. (It is state-specific and that is what MA requires; sign-off checklists are thoughtfully provided.)

Because you are not designing the envelope nor supervising it's assembly (I presume), I do not see how that puts you on the hook. The architect is the reponsible party in my view.

How the radiant can be at fault is a mystery to me. The Pass/Fail percentage often has at fault an input error or a lot of glass.

If heating and cooling is used, the glass can affect that; it may pass if heating alone and fail on cooling for example so it all fails. Also if lighting is taken into account as part of the total energy picture that can hurt you too.

If the envelope and heating is the key, make sure that they stand on their own. If your own inputs are defensible and the "letter guys" are being smug, I suspect an input error on their part. The greater the smuggness the greater the error sometimes

Not here though.

Singh_5

Brad

Thanks, I figured you may be familiar .
I just completed the res-check using the plans, and I get a pass of 18%
above code.
The only thing I noticed that seems an error to me was he indicated it was an
unheated slab on the software. He did get the 13 seer outdoor unit and the 95% AFUE on the wall hung right.

Emails are out, waiting for glass manufacture to give some numbers, plus if he can ok my results vs. his.

This is a kit home, built already in NY so how can this one fail? Other than heat / cool equipment being different.

Brad White_9

Unheated slab

Devan- you already grasp that aspect. A heated slab will increase your perimeter heat loss obviously but it really only matters if it is slab on grade. IOW: Heated slab and radiant floors are not necessarily the same thing.

Still, check the perimeter insulation.

As for the glass values, the manufacturers always give a "center of glass" measurement based on a standard 48 x 48 inch unit. This way the manufacturer's data is comparable to their competition. Beware though- this center of glass u-value, if given at say 0.29 to 0.32, will extrapolate to an overall average in the 0.40 to 0.42 range for low-E glass. This is because the edges, despite thermal breaks (right....) are more conductive so degrade the ideal.

I still suspect input error on the other's documentation. I rather doubt that they will submit their work for your scrutiny but does it hurt to ask?

Good Luck and keep me posted.

Brad

Singh_5

Thanks

Thanks Brad,

It is nice to have a friendly Engineer on the wall.

I should not be involve at this stage any way, the homeowner
mis-understood when I provided the heat loss, he then submitted those
for permit, instead of the ResCheck. After talking to the building inspector
it became clear he needed to have an engineer provide the Energy code compliance figures. Which he did, but today homeowner is telling me about it
failing, and being penalized for having radiant floors.
Boy Brad, it sure does sound that he is being penalized for it.

Still can't help to wonder how the other kit homes passed,in NY and this one does not. You'd think the architect would have been through this before, minus the HVAC equipment.

Take a look.

www.rocioromero.com

Brad White_9

You are welcome, Devan

Friendliness costs no more!

These are neat homes; a tad modern for my taste but a nice concept. I would assume as with most kit homes and stock plans from General Steel on down, they would provide such service to local codes.

There is no way I can possibly conceive that having radiant floors can possibly penalize you. There may be a fault in the program, that it is not accepting numbers for true value.

Heck, hook up a utility meter to a comparable house; yours HAS to use less energy, all other things being equal.

Remember that these compliance checking programs are very basic, assuming four-sided boxes and with not a lot of detail. Great for what they are but hardly the last word. It would be a shame to fail because of a program limitation.

What you might do is inquire about alternate or prescriptive means of compliance. For example a OTTV calculation (Overall Thermal Transfer Value- essentially an averaging of the entire envelope to a common u-value. Also demonstrate that the sizing and selection of equipment is appropriate to the application and that the SEER's meet or exceed code minimum.

Remember, the ComCheck and ResCheck programs may be sanctioned by your code but are they the ONLY means of demonstrating compliance?

Here in MA (not sure about NY), single and two family homes and buildings less than 30,000 CF do not need a PE stamp by law. This is not to say that the local AHJ's cannot add that requirement for their own absolution. Just a thought.