|
Albuquerque Meeting
(June, 2010)
Future Meetings
Orlando Meeting
(January, 2010)
Louisville Meeting (June, 2009)
Chicago Meeting (January, 2009)
Salt Lake City Meeting (June, 2008)
New York Meeting (January, 2008)
Long Beach Meeting (June, 2007)
Dallas Meeting (January, 2007)
Quebec City Meeting (June, 2006)
Chicago Meeting (January, 2006)
Denver Meeting (June, 2005)
Orlando Meeting (January, 2005)
Nashville Meeting (June, 2004)
Anaheim Meeting (January, 2004)
Kansas City Meeting (June/July, 2003)
Chicago Meeting (January, 2003)
Honolulu Meeting (June, 2002)
Atlanta Meeting (January, 2001)
Minneapolis Meeting (June, 2000)
Dallas Meeting (February, 2000)
Seattle Meeting (June, 1999)
Chicago Meeting (January, 1999)
Toronto Meeting (June, 1998)
San Francisco Meeting (January, 1998)
Boston Meeting (June, 1997)
Philadelphia Meeting (January, 1997)
Programs for the Albuquerque Meeting
(June, 2010):
|
Seminar 7 (Intermediate)
Sunday, June 27, 8:00 - 9:30 AM
Commissioning Mission Critical Data Centers
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning,
9.9 Mission Critical Facilities, Technology Spaces
and Electronic Equipment
Track: Data Center and High Density
Cooling
Chair: Roger Lautz, P.E., Member, Affiliated
Engineers, Brookfield, WI
Reliability-centered commissioning service is
crucial to avoid down-time and to maintain energy
efficiency for mission critical data center facilities.
The unique challenges of commissioning, re-commissioning
and retro-commissioning data centers and other
mission critical facilities are addressed.
1. Reliability-Centered Commissioning Service
for Mission Critical Data Center Facilities
Yanzheng (Don) Guan, Ph.D., P.E., Reliatech, Reston,
VA
Even though a not frequently discussed topic,
reliability-centered commissioning service is
crucial to avoid down-time and to maintain energy
efficiency for mission critical data center facilities.
The unique challenges of commissioning, re-commissioning
and retro-commissioning data centers and other
mission critical facilities will be addressed
in the seminar. Additionally, in an effort to
incorporate commissioning as part of the sustainable
project delivery process, we are developing an
innovative “paperless” commissioning technology,
which could eliminate much of the paper-intensive
process and integrate commissioning with data
center facility service and management.
2. Data vs. Dorm: Mission Critical Data Centers
and Residential Hall LEED Gold Case Studies
James Vallort, P.E., Member, Environmental Systems
Design, Chicago, IL
In our experience, the commissioning process
for a residential hall that is pursuing LEED Gold
status presents a set of issues that are surprisingly
similar to the issues raised in the process of
commissioning a mission critical data center.
While implementation is customized to each application,
a solid commissioning process can be applied to
both. A case study of commissioning for a data
center and a residence hall will be presented
highlighting the common process steps and resulting
benefits for each facilities unique use.
|
|
Seminar 36 (Intermediate)
Tuesday, June 29, 9:45 - 10:45 AM
Retro-Commissioning: The Process and the Benefits
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Living with HVAC&R Systems
Chair: Sarah E. Maston, P.E., Member, RDK
Engineers, Andover, MA
The implementation of a retro-commissioning process
will provide lasting positive results for your
facility. Retro-Cx capitalizes on new technologies
and strives for improved occupant comfort and
indoor environmental quality while evaluating
changes based on life-cycle cost.
1. Important Measures Identified After the
Existing Building Commissioning Assessment
David E. Claridge, Ph.D., P.E., Fellow ASHRAE,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Building operators and owners are accustomed
to energy audits that provide a list of potential
retrofits accompanied by the expected cost and
savings for each measure. They then select the
measures they wish to have implemented based on
this listing. Our experience indicates that the
initial EBCx assessment can effectively identify
the overall savings expected from a existing building
commissioning project, but may not effectively
provide a good estimate of the savings from individual
measures. In fact, some effective measures emerge
only during the EBCx process.
2.Retro-Commissioning: Real Life Benefits
and Experiences
James Vallort, P.E., Member, Environmental Systems
Design, Chicago, IL
The implementation of a retro-commissioning process
will provide lasting positive results for your
facility. Retro-Cx capitalizes on new technologies
and strives for improved occupant comfort and
indoor environmental quality while evaluating
changes based on life-cycle cost. Case studies
of retro-commissioning multiple buildings will
also be reviewed to show some common opportunities
for energy savings and IEQ improvements.
|
|
Seminar 43 (Intermediate)
Wednesday, June 30, 8:00 - 9:30 AM
Commissioning Certifications: Which Is Which?
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Living with HVAC&R Systems
Chair:Sarah E. Maston, P.E., Member, RDK Engineers,
Andover, MA
The commissioning industry has developed several
commissioning provider certifications sponsored
by many different organizations, including ASHRAE,
the University of WI, NEBB, ACG and BCA. Join
us as these organizations highlight the benefits
and requirements of each certification program.
1. Commissioning Certifications Sponsored
by the University of WI
Joy E. Altweis, P.E., University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI
The University of Wisconsin—Madison, Department
of Engineering Professional Development offers
individuals the opportunity to gain a marketable,
independently recognized certification as a professional
knowledgeable in the commissioning process. Three
unique certifications offer applicants recognition
for their skills, through a combination of training,
examination, and proof of professional experience.
This presentation will explain the available certifications
and qualification requirements.
2. Commissioning Certification Sponsored by
AABC Commissioning Group (ACG)
Jim Magee, Associate Member, Facility Commissioning
Group, Nicholasville, KY
Jim will be presenting on the qualifications
and benefits of the commissioning certification
sponsored by AABC Commissioning Group (ACG), the
Certified Commissioning Authority (CxA) Requirements
to take the exam include technical experience
(professional engineer, registered architect,
or certified test and balance engineer, or a minimum
of 8 years); commissioning experience (3 projects
serving as a commissioning provider, with specific
roles and responsibilities and client contact
information); and independent role in the process.
The applicants then take the CxA Exam.
3. Commissioning Certification Sponsored by
BCA
Bryan Welsh, P.E., Welsh Commissioning Group,
Auburn, WA
The Certified Commissioning Professional (CCP)
certification is the premier certification for
commissioning providers. CCPs don't just understand
the process, they've performed the process. To
qualify for the CCP exam, the applicant must meet
requirements that include a minimum number of
years as a Cx professional and provide three projects
with client references that total at least 150,000
square feet and $30 million in construction value.
Certification is good for a period of three years
and is nm2010able. The test is offered online
in more than 200 locations.
4. Commissioning Certification Sponsored by
NEBB
Stephen Wiggins , Newcomb & Boyd, Atlanta,
GA
NEBB Certification is a detailed and demanding
process. Individuals cannot apply for NEBB certification,
only firms are eligible for NEBB certification
which must designate a professional, a NEBB Certified
Professional, within their firm to supervise all
NEBB related work. NEBB Certified Professionals
must have extensive experience, plus they must
pass appropriate, college-level written examinations.
In certain disciplines, NEBB Certified Professionals
must demonstrate practical working knowledge and
proficiency in the use of instruments.
5. ASHRAE's Commissioning Certification
Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Life Member, AIR Engineering
and Testing, Dallas, TX
The ASHRAE commissioning certification is called
the Commissioning Process Management Professional
or CPMP. The purpose of the ASHRAE certification
program is to assist building owners, developers,
standards writing agencies, and others in assessing
the capability of individuals to manage the whole
building commissioning process with the owner.
The certification is obtained by completing an
application, having the proper experience, and
completing a 115 question examination to demonstrate
a comprehensive knowledge of the commissioning
process and its deliverables.
|
Programs for the Orlando Meeting
(January, 2010):
|
Seminar 12 (Intermediate)
Sunday, January 24, 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
Writing and Executing Functional Performance Tests
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Commissioning
Chair: Mike Eardley, P.E., Member, Cannon Design, Boston, MA
Functional performance testing is a major activity of the commissioning process
and is required to ensure that high performance design leads to a high performance
building. Commissioning and functional testing typically focuses on the HVAC system
because this system is one of the most complex and highest energy using in the
building, often requires fine tuning to achieve the objectives of the designer,
and the sequences or intent is often misunderstood by the installer or operator.
Functional performance testing begins by ensuring that the equipment, components,
and accessories specified and submitted for a project are installed in a building
and operating correctly. Seemingly straightforward concepts such as heating,
cooling, and air-side economizer can have a series of associated complex tests
to verify the system reacts in the correct manner and with the proper sequence of
events to achieve the intended energy efficient operation.
1. Functional Performance Testing for Energy Efficiency
Mike Eardley, P.E., Member, Cannon Design, Boston, MA
2. Functional Testing: From Basics to Critical Facilities
Reinhard Seidl, P.E., Member, Taylor Engineering, Alameda, CA
|
|
Forum 4 (Intermediate)
Monday, January 25, 11:00 AM - 12:00 Noon
Systems Manuals: What should be included in ASHRAE Guideline 1.4 on
Developing Systems Manuals for the Commissioning Process?
Sponsor: GPC 1.4, TC 7.09 Building Commissioning
Track: Commissioning
Moderator:Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Life Member, AIR Engineering and Testing, Dallas, TX
ASHRAE Guidelines 0-2005 and 1.1-2007 require the preparation of a systems manual
during the commissioning process. An outline of the systems manual process is
included in each publication but few details. This forum is intended to gather
information for the development of a guideline on Systems Manuals to strengthen
the Commissioning documentation process and information transfer to the operation
and maintenance staff.
|
|
Seminar 66 (Intermediate)
Wednesday, January 27, 9:45 - 10:45 AM
LEED Pre-requisite vs. LEED Enhanced: Is it Really Enough?
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Commissioning
Chair:Sarah E. Maston, P.E., Member, RDK Engineers, Andover, MA
Different case studies that utilized both LEED Pre-requisite and LEED Enhanced
processes are presented.
1. LEED Pre-Requisite vs. Enhanced Cx: Is this Really Enough? Library Case Studies
Raj Setty, P.E., Member, Setty and Associates International, Washington, DC
2. Differences between Fundamental and Enhanced Commissioning
Harry J. Enck, Member, Commissioning & Green Building Solutions, Buford, GA
|
Programs for the Louisville Meeting
(June, 2009):
|
Seminar 13 (Intermediate)
Sunday, June 21, 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
Guideline 1.1: What’s New with this New Commissioning Guideline?
Sponsor: SGPC-0, 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Applications
Chair: Sarah E. Maston, P.E., Member, RDK Engineers, Andover, MA
Four presenters provide an overview of what recently-published ASHRAE Guideline 1.1-2008,
HVAC & R Technical Requirements for the Commis-sioning Process, has to say about
activities to support the HVAC&R commissioning process during each phase of the
building acquisition process -- namely pre-design, design, construction, and occupancy
and operations. Emphasis will be placed on what’s new in Guideline 1.1 and how it
relates to ASHRAE Guideline 0, The Commissioning Process.
1. Highlights of Guideline 1.1: Pre-Design Phase
Gerald Kettler, P.E., Member, AIR Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
2. Highlights of Guideline 1.1: Design Phase
Joseph R. Anderson, P.E., Member, Anderson Engineering, Germantown, TN
3. Highlights of Guideline 1.1: Construction Phase
Thomas Cappellin, P.E., Member, Hanson Professional Services Inc., West Palm Beach, FL
4. Highlights of Guideline 1.1: Occupancy and Operations Phase
Tim Corbett, P.E., Member, Social Security Administration, Baltimore, MD
|
|
Seminar 53 (Intermediate)
Wednesday, June 24, 9:45 - 10:45 AM
Sustainable Large Office Building Design and Commissioning
Sponsor: 9.8 Large Building Air-Conditioning Applications, 7.6 Systems Energy Utilization, 7.9 Building Commissioning, 9.1 Large Building Air-Conditioning Systems
Track: Large Building Systems
Chair:John Harrod, P.E., Member, Benham Companies, Oklahoma City, OK
This program focuses on sustainable design concepts and commissioning of a large
office building constructed and occupied by a large health insur-ance company. The
building is anticipated to achieve LEED Gold certification and achieve 30% less
energy consumption than ASHRAE Standard 90.1. The owner has also incorporated a
continuous commissioning program into BAS and CMMS systems to assure the building
maintains its low energy consumption status through its lifetime.
1. Design and Commissioning of a LEED Gold Large Office Building
Robert L. Cox, P.E., Member, Jacobs Engineering, Cary, NC
2. Development and Implementation of a Continuous Commissioning Program for a Large LEED Gold Office Building
Michael Patrick, P.E., Member, Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
|
|
Seminar 59 (Intermediate)
Wednesday, June 24, 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
Using Cx to Improve Sustainability and IAQ of Existing Buildings
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Operational Topics
Chair:Sarah E. Maston, P.E., Member, RDK Engineers, Andover, MA
In these case studies, the importance of commissioning and the role it plays in the
increasing of sustainability and IAQ in existing buildings is investi-gated.
1. Using Cx to Manage IAQ and ATC for Two Existing Building Renovations on their Way to LEED
Joseph R. Anderson, P.E., Member, Anderson Engineering, LLC, Germantown, TN
2. Factors that Affect IAQ and the Lifespan of New and Existing Buildings
Harry J. Enck, Associate Member, Commissioning & Green Building Solutions, Inc., Buford, GA
3. Cx and the Three Builders: Bob the Builder, Joe Bob the Builder, and Robert Builders Inc.
Charles R. Snowden, P.E., Associate Member, Bureau of Building, Grounds, and Real Estate Property Management, Jackson, MS
|
Programs for the Chicago Meeting
(January, 2009):
|
Seminar 69 (Intermediate)
Wednesday, January 28, 12:00 - 1:30 PM
Commissioning for Different Programs to Support
Sustainable Urban Environments
Sponsor: 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Sustainability
Chair: Roger Lautz, BSME, P.E., Member, Henneman
Engineering, Brookfield, WI
Different sustainability programs (LEED, Energy
Star, IPMVP) have different requirements for commissioning.
This seminar discusses the differences among these
programs and how to properly commission facilities
in sustainable urban environments.
1. Commissioning High Performance Buildings
Harry Enck, Commissioning & Green Build Solutions
Inc, Buford, GA
2. Energy Star and the Commissioning Process
Gerald Kettler, Associate Member, Air Engineering
and Testing Inc, Dallas, TX
3. M&V for Commissioning Projects
David Claridge, Member, Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX
|
Programs for the Salt Lake City Meeting
(June, 2008):
|
Forum 13 (Intermediate)
Monday, June 23, 11 AM - 12 PM
What Changes Are Needed to Chapter 42 on
HVAC Commissioning in the 2007 Applications Handbook?
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Track: Fundamentals
Moderator: John P. Castelvecchi, P.E., Member,
Shultz and James, Inc., Richmond, VA
The Handbook subcommittee of TC7.9 is seeking
member input on changes or additional information
needed in the Handbook chapter on HVAC Commissioning.
|
|
Seminar 41 (Intermediate)
Tuesday, June 24, 8:00 - 9:30 AM
Systems Manuals: Will They Be Used and Sustained?
Sponsor: 7.3 Operation and Maintenance
Management; 7.9 Building Commissioning
Track: Operational Topics
Chair: Thomas E. Cappellin, P.E., Member,
Hanson Professional Services Inc., West Palm Beach,
FL
When construction work on new or existing buildings
is finished, it is customary for the owners
operations staff to be provided with a systems
manual to be used during their training in successful
operation and maintenance procedures needed for
installed HVAC&R equipment and as-semblies.
The O&M staff needs to retain the systems
manual as a resource in their ongoing operation
and maintenance activities during building occupancy.
There is concern that the systems manual will
not be properly utilized and maintained to ensure
successful system performance.
1. A Commissioning Authoritys Experience
William J. McCartney, P.Eng., Member, Isotherm
Engineering Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
2. An Owners View
Davidge Warfield, Member, URI Environmental, Inc.,
Pottstown, PA
3. An Operators View
Shailen Verma, P.Eng., Member, Regional Municipality
of Durham., Whitby, Ontario, Canada
|
Programs for the New York Meeting
(January, 2008):
|
Seminar 30
Monday, January 21, 9:45 - 10:45 AM.
Commissioning of Large Buildings
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Elia Sterling, Member, TD Sterling
Inc, Vancouver, BC, Canada
With commissioning becoming business as usual
and more and more owners are requesting and requiring
commissioning, this seminar discusses the commissioning
of larger building and also how not to commission
large buildings.
1. Issues in Commissioning of Multi-Use Facilities
Jeff Traylor, Member, Emcor Governmental Services,
Arlington, VA
2. Case Study of Commissioning a Large Building
Carl Lawson, Member, Hanson Professional Services,
West Palm Beach, FL
3. How Not to Commission Large Buildings or
Small Ones Either
Rick Casault, Member, Casault Engineering, Seattle,
WA
|
|
Seminar 52 Javits
Tuesday, January 22, 10:30 AM - 12PM.
Cases Studies for Commissioning Large Buildings:
Part 2, New York Times Building
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning;
TRG7 Underfloor Air Distribution
Chair: Fred S. Bauman, P.E., Member, P. Eng,
University of California, Berkeley, CA
The new corporate headquarters building for the
New York Times Company incorporates numerous energy
efficient systems and sustainable ideas aimed
at providing a high quality and comfortable work
environment. The 1.6 million square-foot 52-story
high rise has been commissioned in 2007. This
seminar presents an overview of the design and
construction process leading to unique commissioning
procedures driven by an educational dynamic, and
describes the commissioning of the following advanced
building technology features: the underfloor air
distribution system and the innovative daylighting
control system, including the automated shade
system and a digital addressable dimmable lighting
control system.
1. The New York Times Building: Commissioning
Advanced Technologies
Glenn D. Hughes, The New York Times, New York,
NY
2. Commissioning the Underfloor Air Distribution
(UFAD) System in the New York Times Building
Tom Webster, P.E., Member, University of California,
Berkeley, CA
3. Commissioning an Innovative Shading and
Daylighting System in the New York Times Building
Eleanor Lee, P.E., Member, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
|
|
Forum 20
Wednesday, January 23, 11 AM - 12 PM
Commissioning Certification: How to Use It
to Unite the Commissioning Industry
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Moderator: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member,
AIR Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
ASHRAE is developing a certification process
for commissioning. This development has the potential
of providing increased uniformity in both the
understanding and use of the commissioning process.
This forum explores the use of commissioning,
the providers of this science, and hopefully the
better quality resulting in a unified industry.
|
Programs for the Long Beach Meeting
(June, 2007):
|
Seminar 63
Wednesday, June 27, 9:15 - 10:45 AM .
Commissioning Sustainable Buildings
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, AIR
Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, Texas
Commissioning is a quality process that ensures
that buildings perform to owners project
requirements. Much attention has recently been
focused on sustainable buildings, which often
include new technologies and integrated design
features. This seminar discusses several aspects
of sustainable buildings and how important that
commissioning is in ensuring maximum performance.
Topics include planning and design phase goals,
getting full value, and achieving optimum indoor
environmental quality.
1. Planning and Design Phase Commissioning
to Achieve Sustainability Goals
Jeff J. Traylor, Member, Emcor, Durham, NC
2. Getting Full Value from Your Green Building
Investment
Henry J. Enck, Member, Commissioning and Green
Building Services, LLC, Buford, GA
3. Commissioning for Indoor Environmental
Quality
Elia M. Sterling, Member, Theadore D. Sterling
& Assoc. Ltd, Vancouver, BC, Canada
|
|
Forum 18
Wednesday, June 27, 11 AM - 12 PM
What Topics Should be Included in the Credentialing
Program on Commissioning?
Sponsor: Certification Committee;
TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Moderator: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member,
AIR Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
This forum discusses the focus of an ASHRAE initiative
to develop a certification program for building
commissioning professionals. The certification
program is being developed as part of the ASHRAE
Strategic Plan. Attendees discuss the specific
body of knowledge needed by commissioning professionals
to ensure that the building systems will operate
as intended by owners.
|
|
Seminar 78
Wednesday, June 27, 12:15 - 1:45 PM
Measurement and Verification for Retro-commissioning
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Kristin H. Heinemeier, Ph.D., P.E.,
Member, Portland Energy Conservation, Inc., Davis,
CA
Measurement and verification, which has been
a cornerstone of energy efficiency for some years,
is a more difficult proposition for retrocommissioning
projects and programs. The broad number of possible
interventions and vague definition of the impact
of those interventions provides significant challenges.
On the other hand, retro-commissioning is a data-rich
endeavor, and it is possible to assess the impacts
of retro-commissioning interventions in ways that
are not possible for some other measures. This
seminar explores experience with measurement and
verification for retro-commissioning in several
types of programs, and identifies activities underway
to develop better methods.
1. Measurement and Verification Methods Applied
to Retrocommisisoning Projects
Mark Stetz, P.E., Member, Nexant, Boulder, COC
2. The Retrocommissioning Process with an
Emphasis on Measurement and Verification
Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, AIR Engineering
and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
3. Benefits of Integrating M&V in RCx
Projects
David A. Jump, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Quantum Energy
Services and Technologies, Inc., Berkeley, CA
4. M&V for Determining ESCO Payments:
A Case Study
Tarek Bou-Saada, Member, Texas - Human Health
Services Commission, Richmond, TX
|
Programs for the Dallas Meeting
(January, 2007):
|
Seminar 26
Monday, January 29, 7:45-9:15 AM
Persistence of Commissioning Savings
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Kenneth C. Peet, P.E., Member, LSE
Engineering, Inc., Louisville, KY
Savings obtained with a variety of energy efficiency
measures have been found to lose persistence and
degrade due to multiple causes. Equipment degradation
and failure, lack of maintenance, facility use
changes and overriding the programmed settings
remain the primary mechanisms for losing savings
persistence. The degradation time can be a few
months to several years and, in many cases, can
exceed 50+ percent. Also, certain energy efficiency
measures have a higher susceptibility to savings
loss. Measurement and verification, automated
tools and other savings persistence methods can
help sustain savings.
1. M and V for Persistence of Commissioning
Savings
Charlie Culp, Ph.D., P.E., Fellow, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX
2. Automated Commissioning Tools for Persistence
of Commissioning Savings
Daniel Choiniere, Member, Natural Resources Canada,
Varennes, PQ, Canada
3. Persistence: Keeping Your Savings
David Claridge, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX
|
|
TRANSACTIONS 15 (Intermediate)
Tuesday, January 30, 9:30 - 10:30 AM
Software Tools and Methodologies for Enhanced
Building Operation
Track: Operational Topics
Sponsor: TC 7.05 Smart Building
Systems; TC 1.04 Control Theory and Application,
TC 7.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: John M. House, Ph.D., Member, Natural
Resources Canada, Varennes, PQ, Canada
This symposium presents two papers describing
software tools and methodologies for identifying
and correcting, operational problems with mechanical
equipment that can lead to energy waste, excessive
equipment wear and occupant discomfort. The approaches
use data collected during open-loop tests that
could be performed as part of the commissioning
process. One paper presents a semi-automated software
tool for identifying operational problems in VAV
air handling units through the assessment of functional
test data. The second paper presents a generalized
methodology for identifying and canceling static
nonlinearities in a controlled process that can
lead to unstable feedback control.
1. A Semi-automated Commissioning Tool for
VAV Air Handling Units: Functional Test Analyzer
(DA-07-040)
Philip Haves, Ph.D., Fellow, Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA; Moosung Kim
and Massieh Najafi, University of California,
Berkeley, CA; Peng Xu, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
2. Characterization and Cancellation of Static
Nonlinearity in HVAC Systems (DA-07-041)
Ashish Singhal, Ph.D., Member and Timothy Salsbury,
Ph.D., Member, Johnson Controls, Inc., Milwaukee,
WI
|
|
Forum 9
Wednesday, January 31, 9:30 - 10:30 AM
Training Commissioning Providers
Track: Business Management
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Moderator: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member,
AIR Engineering and Testing, Dallas, TX
The commissioning process is expanding in both
scope and the frequency of use. This expansion
is exceeding the capabilities of existing trained
providers of commissioning. Several organizations
and universities provide training in the commissioning
process. Some also provide certifications. As
the leader in the commissioning movement ASHRAE
should provide not only guidelines but also training
requirements for commissioning providers. This
forum discusses the development of standard commissioning
training requirements and possible resultant certifications.
|
Programs for the Quebec City Meeting
(June, 2006):
|
Seminar 6
Sunday, June 25, 7:45-9:15 AM
Small Building System Commissioning
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Richard M. Rose, Member, Mechanical
Technology Inc., Billings, MT
Concepts regarding the commissioning process
differ and can vary from project to project depending
on the budget. This seminar addresses approaches
to smaller buildings commissioning and solutions
to problems that may be encountered.
1. How to Turn a Mess into a Big Success
Jeff J. Traylor, Member, EMCOR Facilities Services,
Durham, NC
2. Applying the Building Cx Process to Higher
Education Renovation Projects
Richard B. Casault, P.E., Member, Casault Engineering,
Seattle, WA
3. Applying the Building Cx Process to New
Small Facilities
H. Jay Enck, Member, Commissioning & Green Building
Services LLC, Commerce, GA
|
|
Seminar 39
Monday, June 26, 10:45 AM - 12:15 PM
Issues Update: Integrated Building Design
to Performance
Sponsor: TC 07.01 Integrated Building
Design; TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: James W. Gartner, Member, Four Seasons
Environmental, Inc., Monroe, OH
The integration of all parties involved in completing
a successful building project is becoming critical.
From the preliminary phases of design, through
the bidding process, then equipment supply and
construction, all the way to the final acceptance
and warranty period, potential gaps and lack of
coordination wreak havoc on performance. As HVAC
industry professionals and engineers, our resulting
systems are most vulnerable to these shortcomings.
This seminar addresses these issues, and helps
provide greater success in bottom line facility
performance.
1. Addressing the Totality: From Initial Design
to Sustainable Building Performance
Gail Ann Lindsey, Design Harmony, Inc., Wake Forest,
NC
2. Commissioning: Assuring Integrated Design
Performance
Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, AIR Engineering
and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
3. IBD in Canada: Is Actual Building Performance
Delivering the Goods?
Roland Charneux, P.E., Fellow, Pageau Morel and
Assoc., Montreal, QB, Canada
|
Programs for the Chicago Meeting
(January, 2006):
|
Seminar 6
Sunday, January 22, 8:00-10:00 AM
Preventing Train Wrecks in Under Floor Air
Distribution Systems through Commissioning
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Karl Stum, P.E., Member, SBE, Vancouver,
WA
SPC Liaison: Jitendra B. Singh, P.E., Member,
J & P Engineers, Linwood, NJ
Too often, under-floor air distribution projects
have unclear requirements for contractors, resulting
in coordination and scheduling problems, as well
as maintaining specified floor pressure problems.
This session addresses how commissioning during
design, construction, balance and functional testing
can mitigate these issues.
1. Design Review and Specification Issues
for UFAD
Carl N. Lawson, Member, Systems Solutions Consultants,
Zephyrhills, FL
2. Trade Coordination and Field Observation
Issues for UFAD
Scott Nelson, P.E., Member, CH2MHILL, Portland,
OR
3. Air and Water Balancing Issues for UFAD
Gaylon Richardson, Member, Engineered Air Balance,
Houston, TX
4. Functional
Testing of UFAD
Larry Luskay, P.E., Member, PECI, Portland, OR
|
Programs for the Denver Meeting
(June, 2005):
|
Forum 6
Sunday,June 26, 10:15-11:05 AM
The Commissioning Handbook Chapter: Last
Chance for Input
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Moderator: Charles Culp, P.E., Member, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX
This forum seeks input before revising the commissioning
chapter in the ASHRAE Handbook.
|
|
Symposium DE-05-08
Monday, June 27, 10:15 AM - 12:15PM
High-Tech Facility Commissioning
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning;
TC 09.09 Mission Critical Facilities, Technology
Spaces and Electronic Equipment
Chair: Richard M. Rose, Member, Mechanical
Technology Inc., Billings, MT
Commissioning has become an important contribution
for the success of buildings. This symposium shows
its importance in complicated high-tech buildings
that may have special needs and severe consequences
if those needs are not met. Four scenarios showing
the importance and processes used in commissioning
high-tech buildings are shared.
1. CX of Bio-Containment Facilities
Charles D. Kieffer, P.E., Member, University of
Texas System, Austin, TX
2. Electronic Test Room Commissioning
William McCartney, Member, Isotherm Engineering
Ltd, Mississauga, ON, CanadaY
3. An Owners Perspective on the CX of
Mission Critical Facilities
Terry L. Rodgers, Member, Fannie Mae, Washington,
D.C.
4. CX Combined with CFD for Datacom Performance,
Adaptability and Reliability
Donald L. Beaty, P.E., Member, DLB Associates
Consulting Engineers. P.C., Ocean, NJ
|
|
Seminar 32
Tuesday, June 28, 8:00-10:00 AM
ASHRAE 62.1-2004: The Building Component
Feature
Sponsor: SSPC 62.1; TC 05.12 Ventilation
Requirements and Infiltration; TC 07.09 Building
Commissioning
Chair: Hoy Bohanon, P.E., Member, Bohanon
Engineering PLLC, Clemmons, NC
ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004 will contain a new
methodology for calculating ventilation rates.
The procedure has two components: one based on
the number of occupants in the space and the other
based on the size of the space. This session focuses
on the second of these: the building component.
The session explores the history of this development,
the underlying science and practical implications
to HVAC designers.
1. Standard 62s New Ventilation Rate
Procedure and Ventilation Requirement Based on
Floor Area
Andrew K. Persily, Ph.D., Fellow, National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD
2. Summary of Data for Building Related Pollution
Load and Addition of Sensory Pollution Loads for
the Calculation of Required Ventilation Rates
Pawel Wargocki, Ph.D.,Technical University of
Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
3. How to Apply New 62.1 Default Ventilation
Requirements for Low-Emitting Buildings to Typical
Buildings
Elia M. Sterling, Member, Theodor Sterling Associates
Ltd., Vancouver, BC, Canada
4. The Role of Chemicals Used in Commercial
and High-Rise Residential Buildings
John DiFazio, Member, Consumer Specialty Products
Association, Washington, D.C.
5. Required Ventilation Rates and Emission
from Building Materials
Bjarne W. Olesen, Ph.D., Fellow, Technical University
of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
|
|
Seminar 46
Wednesday, June 29, 8:00-10:00 AM
Factors in Commissioning DDC Control Systems
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Rodney H. Lewis, P.E., Fellow, Rodney
H. Lewis Associates, Inc., Houston, TX
Verification of the performance of DDC systems
is vital to the performance of HVAC systems. Attendees
will gain insight into their problem projects
from the experience of presenters.
1. Functional Testing of Control Components
Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, Air Engineering
& Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
2. Tuning DDC Systems
Robert L Towell, P.E., Member, CXE Group LLC Engineers
and Architects, St. Louis, MO
3. DDC Commissioning from the Consulting Engineers
Perspective
Kenneth C. Peet, P.E., Member, LSE Engineering,
Inc., Louisville, KY
4. Importance of More Prescriptive Sequences
Jay Santos, P.E., Member, Facility Dynamics Engineering,
Columbia, MD
5. Reviewing Program Code Prior to Testing
Karl Stum, P.E., Member, CH2M Hill, Portland,
OR
|
Programs for the Orlando Meeting
(January, 2005):
|
Seminar 6
Sunday, February 6, 8:00-10:00 AM
Training of Commissioning Authorities
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, Air
Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
APC Liaison: Jeff J. Traylor, Member, PWI
Consulting Engineering, Durham, NC
The emergence and rapid growth of the commissioning
process has strained available practitioners and
caused a need for training programs for both new
commissioning authorities and users of commissioning.
This seminar discusses programs and options for
this training.
1. Training for Commissioning Practitioners
Richard B. Casault, P.E., Member, Casault Engineering,
Seattle, WA
2. Retro-Commissioning
Training
Charles H. Culp III, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX
3. Training for Field Operations for Commissioning
Andrew P. Nolfo, P.E., Member, National Environmental
Balance Bureau, Sun City West, AZ
4. Owners Expectations for Commissioning
Training
Jeff J. Traylor, Member, PWI Consulting Engineers,
Durham, NC
|
|
Seminar 54
Wednesday, February 9, 10:15 AM - 12:15PM
How to Comply With ASHRAE 62.1-2004
Sponsor: SSPC 62.1; TC 07.09 Building
Commissioning
Chair: Eli Howard, Member, SMACNA, Chantilly,
VA
APC Liaison: Mohammad H. Hosni, Ph.D.,
Fellow, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
ASHRAE 62.1-2004, Ventilation for Acceptable
Indoor Air Quality, contains many changes from
the 2001 standard. The new standard incorporates
more than 15 approved addenda. The methodology
for calculating ventilation rates for buildings
is fundamentally changed for the first time in
15 years. The standard also contains new requirements
for building components and building systems.
This session gives an overview of the requirements
of the 2004 standard with emphasis on the new
requirements.
1. Introduction
and Overview
Andy Persily, Ph.D., Fellow, National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD
2. Ventilation
Rate Procedure
Lynn G. Bellenger, P.E., Fellow, Pathfinder Engineers
LLP, Pittsford, NY
3. Multiple-Zone
Systems and Other Adjustments
Dennis A. Stanke, Member, Trane, La Crosse, WI
4. Equipment and Building Requirements
Hoy R. Bohanon, P.E., Member, Bohanon Engineering,
PLLC, Clemmons, NC
|
|
Seminar 21
Monday, February 7, 8:00-10:00 AM
Best Water Treatment Practices in Commissioning
Buildings: What Should Happen Between Installation
and Building Occupation
Sponsor: TC 03.06 Water Treatment
Chair: Ron Wood, P.E., Member, U.S. General
Services Administration, Washington, D.C.
APC Liaison: David W. Reid, Life Member,
Retired, Berwyn, PA
In completing HVAC projects, there often is a
delay between installation and building occupancy
during which water systems and capital equipment
can degrade, resulting in unbudgeted costs such
as start-up delays, system cleaning, repairs and
reduced energy efficiency. Improper commissioning
is one of the most common root causes for Legionnaires
disease outbreaks. Implementation of a sound commissioning
program for the water systems is vital to ensure
systems are delivered on time and in good condition.
This seminar presents case studies and examines
approaches to prevent these problems.
1. Flushing and Filtration of New Piping Systems
Ryan Caves, Claude Laval Corp., Fresno, CA
2. Cleaning, Passivation and Water Treatment
During Lay-up
Mike Adams, Associate, Garratt Callahan, Atlanta,
GA
3. Steps to Minimize the Risk of Legionella
Infection
Tim Keane, Member, Legionella Risk Management,
Chalfont, PA
4. Legionnaires Disease Outbreaks at
Commissioning of Cooling Water Systems: Australian
Case Studies
Clive Broadbent, Member, Clive Broadbent &
Associates Pty Ltd, Australia
|
|
Symposium OR-05-13
Tuesday, February 8, 8:00-10:00 AM
Automated Functional Testing: Methodologies
and Air-Handling Unit Applications
Sponsor: TC 07.05 Smart Building
Systems
Chair: John M. House, Ph.D., Member, Iowa
Energy Center, Ankeny, IA
APC Liaison: C. Brian Wandling, P.E., Member,
Control Specialists, Inc., Evansville, IN
Building commissioning is a labor intensive and
costly process that requires specialized expertise.
Tools that automate parts of the commissioning
process, such as functional testing of HVAC systems
and analysis of data resulting from these tests,
have the potential to reduce initial commissioning
costs and ensure persistence of proper operation
throughout the life of the building. This symposium
consists of four papers describing model-based
methods and automated analyses of functional test
data from air-handling units. The papers demonstrate
how the methods can be used to determine nearoptimal
operating conditions and operational faults in
the systems under test.
1. Detecting Critical Supply Duct Pressure
Clifford C. Federspiel, Ph.D., Associate Member,
Federspiel Controls, El Cerrito, CA
2. Application of Fault Detection and Diagnosis
Techniques to Automated Functional Testing
Richard M. Kelso, Ph.D., P.E., Fellow, The University
of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN; Jonathan A. Wright,
Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicstershire,
United Kingdom
3. Developing Component Models for Automated
Functional Testing
Richard M. Kelso, Ph.D., P.E., Fellow, The University
of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN; Jonathan A. Wright,
Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicstershire,
United Kingdom
4. Model-Based Automated Functional Testing:
Methodology and Application to Air Handling Units
Peng Xu, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Philip Haves, Ph.D.,
Member and Moosung Kim, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
|
|
Seminar 53
Wednesday, February 9, 10:15 AM - 12:15PM
How ASHRAEs Guideline on Commissioning
Is Changing
Sponsor: GPCO
Chair: Walter T. Grondzik, P.E., Member, Florida
A&M University, Tallahassee, FL
APC Liaison: Frank H. Schambach, Member,
Total Building Concepts, Metaire, LA
Major changes to ASHRAEs approach to commissioning
are underway. ASHRAE Guideline 1 has been split
into two guidelines: Guideline 0P: The Commissioning
Process, and Guideline 1: HVAC&R Technical
Requirements for the Commissioning Process. Guideline
0P will provide a common structure for building
commissioning efforts, both for HVAC&R and
for other disciplines (such as exterior envelopes
and lighting). This seminar provides an overview
of the key features of proposed Guideline 0, which
is working its way toward publication.
1. Getting it Right from the Start: Commissioning
During Pre-Design
Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, Air Engineering
and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
2. Designing for Commissioning: Commissioning
and Design Professionals
John P. Castelvecchi, P.E., Member, Shultz and
James, Inc., Richmond, VA
3. Building Quality: Commissioning During
Construction
J.R. (Joseph R.) Anderson, Member, Anderson Engineering,
Germantown, TN
4. Continuing to Get it Right: Commissioning
During Occupancy
Tim F. Corbett, Member, Social Security Administration,
Baltimore, MD
5. Its in the Details: Commissioning
Specifications
Michael J. King, Associate, ARCOM Master Systems,
Alexandria, VA
|
Programs for the Nashville Meeting
(June, 2004):
|
Seminar 22
Monday, June 28, 8:00-10:00 AM
Impact of Commissioning on Todays Systems
Sponsor: GPC 1; TC 07.09 Building
Commissioning
Chair: Carl N. Lawson, Member, PWI Commissioning
Services, Durham, NC
Now that commissioning has taken on a new look
as business as usual, and with some
people still saying that it adds cost to the building,
speakers show how commissioning has impacted systems
and facilities with better systems, from an operational
and maintenance perspectives and given owners
what they had envisioned.
1. Impact of Commissioning from a Providers
Viewpoint
Paul Tseng, P.E., Member, Advanced Buildings Performance,
Potomac, MD
2. Impact of Commissioning from an Engineering
Viewpoint
Robert Cox, P.E., Member, Farnsworth Group, St.
Louis, MO
3. Impact on Commissioning from Construction
Manager Viewpoint
Thomas Killian, Bovis Lend Lease, Durham, NC
4. Impact of Commissioning from an Owners
Viewpoint
Kimball Ferguson, P.E., Duke University Health
Systems, Durham, NC
|
|
Seminar 55
Wednesday, June 30, 10:15 AM - 12:15PM
Retro Commissioning
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Andrew P. Nolfo, P.E., Member, National
Environmental Balancing Bureau, Sun City West,
AZ
The requirements for retro-commissioning differ
from commissioning a new facility. Speakers discuss
the differences involved and present case studies
that identify these requirements.
1. Retro-Commissioning Training
Charles H. Culp, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX
2. Airport Terminal Retro-Commissioning
David Claridge, Ph.D., P.E., Member, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX
3. Lessons Learned from Retro Commissioning
Federal Building
Timothy Corbett, Member, Social Security Administration,
Baltimore, MD
4. Just How Good Is Our Best Building?
Stephens R. Wiggins, Member, Newcomb & Boyd,
Atlanta, GA
|
|
Seminar 9
Sunday, June 27, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Green Buildings: Practical Experiences with
Commissioning
Sponsor: TC 02.08 Building Environmental
Impacts and Sustainability
Chair: Stephen C. Turner, P.E., Member, P.
Eng, CIAQP, Brown University, Providence, RI
Speakers experiences with commissioning
LEED buildings ranging from certified to platinum
are discussed, including a review of systems used
in buildings and issues raised in their commissioning.
Lessons learned are summarized, and conclusions
drawn on the impact of the LEED rating process
on the successful commissioning of each project.
Practical benefits of integrating the management
of LEED certification with the commissioning process
are presented. All speakers
were contributors to the recently published ASHRAE
GreenGuide.
1. Six LEED Buildings: Certification and Commissioning
Experiences
Malcolm Lewis, P.E., Member, CTG Energetics, Inc.,
Irvine, CA
2. Making High- Performance Buildings Work
Paul A. Torcellini, Ph.D., P.E., Member, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO
3. Integrating LEED Certification with Commissioning
H. Jay Enck, Member, Commissioning and Green Building
Services, Commerce, GA
|
|
Forum 16
Monday, June 28, 11:15 AM - 12:05 PM
How Do We Compile a Statistical Sampling
for the Commissioning Process?
Sponsor: Guideline Project Committee
0 The Commissioning Process
Moderator: Walter T. Grondzik, Member, Florida
A&M University, Tallahassee, FL
Co-Moderator: Charles E. Dorgan, Ph.D.,
P.E., Fellow, Life Member, University of Wisconsin
- Madison, Madison, WI
This forum addresses the requirement for effective
verification during all phases of the commissioning
process from pre-design through occupancy using
random and statistically based sampling of the
total population. The goal is a discussion of
how commissioning authorities and owners are achieving
statistical based sampling and whether there are
any requirements for research.
|
|
Forum 20
Tuesday, June 29, 11:15 AM - 12:05 PM
Test and Balance and Commissioning: Can Both
Be Done by the Same Agency?
Sponsor: TC 07.07 Testing and Balancing
Moderator: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member,
AIR Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
Testing, adjusting and balancing is a prerequisite
for commissioning. Some agencies provide both
test and balance and commissioning services. Others
believe that the services must be provided separately
due to potential conflicts of
interest. This forum discusses both options with
the intent of providing guidance to the technical
and project committees on future programs and
publications.
|
Programs for the Anaheim Meeting
(January, 2004):
|
Seminar 13
Sunday, January 25, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Commissioning Is More than Functional Performance
Testing
Sponsor: TC 07.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Richard M. Rose, Member, Mechanical
Technology Inc., Billings, MT
APC Liaison: Jeff J. Traylor, PWI Consulting
Engineers, Durham, NC
While successful commissioning requires many
steps, there is an industry misconception that
the only step necessary for a successfully commissioned
project is to perform the functional performance
test (FPT). In reality, there are additional prior
critical steps. This seminar addresses these forgotten
steps and their significance.
1. Commissioning for Project Value
Tim Corbett, Member, Social Security Administration,
Baltimore, MD
2. FPT: The Big Easy
William J. McCartney, Member, Isotherm Engineering
Ltd, Mississauga, ON, Canada
3. Functional Performance Testing Starts With Owner's
Project Requirements
Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, Air Engineering
& Testing, Dallas, TX
4. Commissioning Is More Than FPT
Jeff J. Traylor, Member, PWI Consulting Engineering,
Durham, NC
|
|
Seminar 21
Sunday, January 25, 1-3 PM
Commissioning 20 Years Later
Sponsor: Standards Committee GPC-1
Chair: Carl N. Lawson, Member, PWI Consulting
Engineers, Durham, NC
APC Liaison: Jeff J. Traylor, PWI Consulting
Engineers, Durham, NC
The ASHRAE commissioning process started in 1984 addressing
only HVAC systems. Over time, the process has
expanded into the total building and other systems.
Future use may include commissioning with special
tools and electronic processes. This seminar looks
at the process' past and future applications.
1. Commissioning the Beginning
Carl N. Lawson, Member, PWI Engineering, Durham,
NC
2. How 20 Years of Commissioning Affected Systems
Operation and Maintenance
T. David Underwood, Member, Isotherm Engineering,
LTD, Mississauga, ON, Canada
3. The Tools and Electronics for Future Commissioning
Chad Grindle, Member, Farnsworth Group Inc., Madison,
WI
4. Why Electrical Systems Commissioning
Jeff Traylor, Member, PWI Engineering, Durham,
NC
5. Total Building Commissioning
Paul Tseng, P.E., CH2M Hill, Herndon, VA
|
|
Seminar 44
Tuesday, January 27, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Interoperable Computer Applications
Sponsor: TC 01.07 Business, Management
& General Legal Education
Chair: Michael C. Connor, P.E., Member, P.
Eng, Connor Engineering Solutions, Alpharetta,
GA
APC Liaison: Joy Altwies, Farnsworth Group
Inc., Madison, WI
This seminar offers information about commissioning,
including marketing, attracting clients, negotiating
contracts, meeting client expectations, and identifying
common pitfalls and avoidance strategies. It focuses
on what commissioning authorities believe should
be incorporated in design-intent documents and
identifies common technical disagreements between
designers, contractors and commissioning authorities
as well as suggestions to resolve them. It also
addresses the legal risks and liabilities of commissioning
authorities and people who deal with them and
offers tips on how parties involved in the commissioning
process can protect themselves.
1. Business Issues Relating to the Commissioning
Process
Carl N. Lawson, Member, PWI Consulting Engineers
Inc., Durham, NC
2. Management Issues Relating to the Commissioning
Process
Michael C. Connor, P.E., Member, Connor Engineering
Solutions, Alpharetta, GA
3. Technical Issues Relating to Commissioning
W. David Bevirt, P.E., Fellow, National Environmental
Balancing Bureau, Tuscon, AZ
4. Legal Issues Relating to Commissioning:
Relationships, Risks and Potential Liabilities
William G. Frey, Wolf Block Schorr & Solis-Cohen,
L.L.P., Philadelphia, PA
|
|
Seminar 58
Wednesday, January 28, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Automated Commissioning Tools
Sponsor: TC 07.05 Smart Building
Systems; TC 07.03 Operations and Maintenance Management
Chair: Maria Corsi, Associate Member, Iowa
Energy Center, Ankeny, IA
APC Liaison: Michael R. Brambley, Ph.D.,
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland,
WA
Building commissioning is a labor intensive and
costly process that requires specialized expertise.
Tools that automate parts of the commissioning
process, such as verification of design, functional
testing of HVAC systems, data analysis and reporting,
have the potential to reduce initial commissioning
costs and ensure persistence of proper operation
throughout the life of the building. This seminar
describes international efforts to develop and
implement automated commissioning tools. Tools
that use the energy management and control system
to assist in commissioning HVAC systems are described
and examples of their application in real buildings
are presented.
1. Commissioning HVAC Systems for Improved
Energy Performance: An International Research
and Development Project
Hossein Vaezi Nejad, Ph.D., Centre Scientifique
et Technique du Bâtiment, Marne la Vallée, France
2. Using the Building Control System in Commissioning:
Needs and Examples from Japan
Harunori Yoshida, Ph.D., Member, Kyoto University,
Kyoto, Japan
3. Commissioning Constant Volume Air Handling
Units using Automated Tools
Natascha S. Castro, Member, National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD
4. EMCS Assisted Commissioning Tool for Variable
Air Volume Systems
Daniel Choinière, P.E., Associate, Natural Resources
Canada, Varennes, QC, Canada
|
Programs for the Kansas City
Meeting (June/July, 2003):
|
Seminar 7
Sunday, June 29, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM, Room: Atlanta
(BR)
Commissioning Safety Systems
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Moderator: Carl N. Lawson, Member, PWI
Consulting Engineers, Durham, NC
APC Liaison: Jeff J. Traylor, PWI Consulting Engineers,
Durham, NC
Safety systems in facilities today are
taking on an extremely high priority and the commissioning
of these particular systems has become an even larger
chore. In commissioning safety systems, we are advising
the owner that all of these systems are safe and designed
to meeting the owner’s requirements for his facility,
as well as being user friendly.
1. Commissioning Fire Alarm Systems
Rodney Lewis, P.E., Fellow, Rodney H. Lewis Associates,
Houston, TX
2. Commissioning of Smoke Exhaust and Pressurization
Systems
Gerald Kettler, P.E., Member, Air Engineering and
Testing, Dallas, TX
3. Commissioning Emergency Power Systems
Jeff Traylor, Member, PWI Consulting Engineers,
Durham, NC
|
Programs for the Chicago Meeting
(January, 2003):
|
Seminar 3
Sunday, January 26, 8-10 AM
Impact of Commissioning on Commercial Construction
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Andrew P. Nolfo, P.E., Member, National Environmental
Balancing Bureau, Manchester, MO
APC Liaison: Kelley P. Cramm, P.E., IDEA, Kansas
City, MO
Commissioning of building systems is becoming more
common for institutional projects. The benefits of commissioning
have been confirmed by many institutional owners and
builders. This seminar discusses how the commissioning
process can be applied to the commercial construction
marketplace. It addresses some of the similarities and
differences when applying commissioning to commercial
versus institutional projects. The presentations discuss
how a structured approach, starting early in the project,
helps establish and deliver value to the overall project,
including commercial projects.
1. CM/GC Commissioning Buy-In: What’s In It for
Them?
Jack Wolpert, Ph.D., ECUBE, Boulder, CO
2. Can Commissioning Help the Commercial Building
Owner?
John P. Castelvecchi, Member, Dominion Evantage, Mechanicsville,
VA
3. Retrocommissioning of Commercial Buildings
Janice Peterson, Member, Portland General Electric,
Portland, OR
4. Reliability and Commissioning
Wayne A. Dunn, P.E., Member, Sunbelt Engineering Inc.,
Jacksonville, FL
|
|
Seminar 46
Wednesday, January 29, 8-10 AM
Commissioning of Specialty Systems
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Carl N. Lawson, Member, Duke University Health
System, Durham, NC
APC Liaison: Carl N. Lawson, Member, Duke University
Health System, Durham, NC
Commissioning is fast becoming business as usual in
the building industry. Specialty systems are an even
bigger concern. With the vast changing of technology
encompassing the building industry, the commissioning
of specialty systems has brought on different technology
and a more refined commissioning authority. This seminar
discusses some of those systems and the difference in
technicians who are actually doing the commissioning
of these systems.
1. Commissioning Emergency Power Systems
Jeff Traylor, Member, PWI Consulting Engineers, Durham,
NC
2. Commissioning Fire Alarm Systems
Richard Rose, Member, Mechanical Technology Inc., Billings,
MT
3. Auditing the Commissioning Process
J.R. Anderson, P.E., Member, Anderson Engineering LLC,
Germantown, TN
4. Developing a Quality Intent Document for Laboratory
Animal Facilities
Dan Frasier, P.E., Member, Cornerstone Commissioning,
North Andover, MA
5. Commissioning Control Systems
Larry Fisher, Member, ECT Building Automation, Louisville,
KY
|
|
Symposium CH-03-12
Wednesday, January 29, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Interoperable Computer Applications
Sponsor: TC 01.05 Computer Applications;
TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: David J. Branson, P.E., Member, Compliance
Services Group, Inc., Lubbock, TX
APC Liaison: Jeff J. Traylor, PWI Consulting
Engineers, Durham, NC
Collaborative efforts are well underway to define the
structure of flexible methods for exchanging HVAC &
R data among computer tools. Standardized collection
and preservation of pertinent data will greatly facilitate
the development of comprehensive, computer-based methods
for managing design, commissioning and operations information.
This session presents some of those efforts. Particular
focus is given to the topics of HVAC & R design, building
commissioning and energy simulation.
1. Identifying Building Design Information Necessary
for Commissioning and Proper System Operation
Larry Luskay, P.E., Member, Portland Energy Conservation
Inc., Portland, OR
2. A Data Model for Capturing Life-Cycle Data for
Reuse During Building Commissioning
James Forester, P.E., Member, Marinsoft, San Rafael,
CA
3. Software Interoperability for Energy Simulation
Robert J. Hitchcock, Ph.D., Member, Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, Washington, DC
|
Programs for the Honolulu Meeting
(June, 2002):
|
Seminar 4
Sunday, June 23, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
New Commissioning Guidelines
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Carl N. Lawson, Member, Duke University Medical
Center, Durham, NC
With commissioning becoming more business-as-usual,
this seminar discusses the new commissioning guidelines
and how they will pertain to the entire building process.
It also discusses in-depth the marriage with NIBS and
their role in assisting the total building commissioning
process.
1. Guideline 0 from the Commissioning Provider’s
Perspective
Jeff Traylor, Member, PWI Consulting Engineering Inc.,
Morrisville, NC
2. Following the Owner’s Role in the Commissioning
Process Guidelines Development
Tim Corbett, Member, Social Security Administration,
Baltimore, MD
3. ASHRAE Commissioning Guidelines 0 and 1 Status
and Prospects
Walter Grondzik, Member, Florida A & M University, Tallahassee,
FL
4. Coordination with the National Institute of Building
Science
Michael J. King, Member, ArcoM, Alexandria, VA
|
|
Symposium HI-02-20
Wednesday, June 26, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Building Commissioning Begins with Design Intent
Sponsor:TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Walter
Grondzik, P.E., Member, Florida A&M University,
Tallahassee, Florida
Recent efforts to update and revise ASHRAE Guideline
1, HVAC Commissioning Process, have underscored the
critical and fundamental role that clearly defined and
documented des ign intent plays in a successful commissioning
outcome. This symposium presents several views on how
design intent may be obtained, documented, used and
connected to other aspects of the design and commissioning
process. The relationship of design intent to terms
such as "program," "project requirements" and "basis
of design" is explored. Building commissioning truly
begins with design intent.
1. Design Intent and Basis of Design: Clarification
of Terms, Structure and Use
Karl Stum, P.E., Member, CH2M HILL, Portland, OR
2. Developing
Owner's Project Requirements During Pre-Design
Chad B. Dorgan, P.E., Member, Farnsworth Group Inc.,
Madison, WI
3. The Responsibilities
of the Owner in Defining Design Intent
Tim Corbett, P.E., Member, Social Security Administration,
Baltimore, MD
4. Design
Intent from the Design Team's Perspective
John P. Castelvecchi, Member, Shultz and James, Inc.,
Mechanicsville, VA
5. Early
Energy Performance for a Green Academic Building
John Scofield,
Associate Member, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH
|
Programs for the Atlanta Meeting
(January, 2001):
|
Seminar 13
Monday, January 29, 2001, 8-10 AM
Commissioning of Laboratories
Sponsor: TC 9.9 Building Commissioning;
TC 9.10 Laboratory Systems
APC Liaison: Charles E. Henck, P.E., Henry Adams,
Inc., Baltimore, MD
Chair: Carl Lawson, Member, Duke University Medical
Center, Durham, NC
With the complexity of laboratories today, it is imperative
that commissioning be part of the process of completing
and turning over facilities to owners. This seminar
looks at different types of laboratories and how the
commissioning process allows owners to have functioning
systems that maintain energy and remain within budget.
1. Lessons Learned from Commissioning a College
Chemistry Lab Renovation
Rodney H. Lewis, P.E., Fellow, Rodney H. Lewis & Associates,
Houston, TX
2. Commissioning Ventilation Systems in Rodent Holding
Rooms
Daniel Frasier, Member, Phoenix Controls, Newton, MA
3. Laboratory Ventilation Standards and the Commissioning
Process
Gregory F. DeLuga, P.E., Member, Siemens Building Technology,
Buffalo Grove, IL
4. Commissioning of a Pediatric Medical Research
Laboratory Facility
Robert L. Cox, P.E., Member, Avanti Technologies, St.
Louis, MO
|
Programs for the Minneapolis
Meeting (June, 2000):
|
Forum 5
Sunday, June 25, 2000, 10:15-11:05 AM
Experiences and Results of One-Pass, Re-Commissioning
and Continuous Commissioning With and Without Monitoring
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Ira G. Poston, Duke Power Company
Moderator: Charles Culp, Ph.D., Member, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX
Commissioning is the engineering activity of assuring
the complete system performs to provide efficient comfort
to occupants. Some experience indicates that the efficiency
reduces over a couple of years if the building is not
properly monitored. This forum discusses real experiences
and looks to establish potential program and research
areas.
|
|
Forum 34
Wednesday, June 28, 2000, 8:00-8:50 AM
What Constitutes Design Intent?
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Robert J. Linder, Owens Services
Corp.
Moderator: Karl Stum, P.E., Member, PECI, Portland,
OR
Design intent is becoming a standard requirement in
many commissioning projects. However, what constitutes
design intent is not well understood by the design community.
Level of needed detail, components and issues included,
when it should be developed or updated, who should write
it, who should approve it and whether it should be included
in contract documents are issues that need clarification
among practitioners.
|
Programs for the Dallas Meeting
(February, 2000):
|
Seminar 9
Sunday, February 6, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Practical Experience Using DDC Systems
for HVAC Commissioning and Continuing Evaluation
Sponsor: TC 1.4 Control Theory and Application;
TC 1.7 Operation and Maintenance Management, TC 4.11
Smart Building Systems, TC 9.9 Building Commissioning
Chair: Barry B Bridges, P.E., Member,
University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN
APC Liaison: Sally McInerny, P.E., The University
of Alabama
The practical experience of HVAC professional
provides a real world understanding of the difficulties,
challenges, and benefits which become possible using
DDC for more than just control. In ten years DDC fault
detection and diagnostics may range from whole campus
smart building systems to chip based smart actuators.
The acceptance and application of what is possible will
depend on the pragmatic value now being understood and
developed in detail.
1. Statistically Sound FDD Methodologies
Robert Dodier, Student Member, and Jan Kreider, Ph.D.,
P.E., Member, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
2. Smart Building Operation
Paul Ehrlich, P.E., Member, The Trane Co., St. Paul,
MN
3. Experience with Portable Data Acquisition
and Analysis Tools for Rooftop Package Equipment Service
and Maintenance
Todd M. Rossi, Ph.D., Member, Field Diagnostic Services,
Inc., Langhorne, PA
4. On-Line Monitoring and Fault Detection
of Control System Performance
John E. Seem, Ph.D., Member, Johnson Controls, Inc.,
Milwaukee, WI
5. EMS Diagnostics for Continuous Commissioning
Jeffrey Rutt, Member, NSA/DOD, Ft. Meade, MD
|
|
Forum 5
Sunday, February 6, 2000, 10:15-11:05 AM
Commissioning Documentation: How Should O&M Manuals
Be Produced?
Sponsor: TC 9.9 Building Commissioning;
TC 1.7 Operation and Maintenance Management
APC Liaison: Charles G. Arnold, P.E., HDR Architecture,
Inc.
Moderator: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, AIR
Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
One of the important products of commissioning is the
documentation on the facility from design through operations.
ASHRAE Guideline 1 in Chapter 12 lists some of the information
that should be included but does not detail formats,
arrangements, or storage methods. As ASHRAE progresses
to the next levels of commissioning, a discussion is
needed with providers and users to facilitate and standardize
the assembly, presentation, storage, and use of the
operations and maintenance data.
|
|
Seminar 18
Monday, February 7, 8-10 AM
Designing and Commissioning the Modern
Hospital: Part 1
Sponsor: TC 9.8 Large Building Air-Conditioning
Applications; TC 9.9 Building Commissioning
Chair: Joseph F. Scolaro, P.E., Life Member,
Scolaro Engineering Consultants, Dallas, TX
APC Liaison: Sally McInerny, P.E., The University
of Alabama
With new rules and regulations being adopted
and imposed on the hospitals by the federal government,
insurance companies and state and local governments,
it has become a difficult task to operate, maintain,
and design hospitals. The financial strain placed on
the hospital creates an additional concern for what
was contracted for from design to occupancy. This seminar
allows designers and owners to address achieving a successful
project on time and within budget. Part 2 is scheduled
Sunday at 10:15 a.m.
1. User Groups Design Request
David Prusha, HKS, Inc., Dallas, TX
2. Bringing a Modern Hospital On-Line:
The Challenges and Lessons Learned
Charles D. Kieffer, P.E., Member, University of Texas
Facilities Planning, Austin, TX
3. Surgical Suite Pressurization and
Air Flow
Milton S. Goldman, M.D., EIT, Member, Abrahamson Engineering,
Laramie, WY
4. Patient Room HVAC Systems
Anand Seth, Member, Massachusetts General Hospital,
Boston, MA
5. Investment in Technology
Frederick Gibson, Taylor and Partners, Boston, MA
|
|
Seminar 23
Monday, February 7, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Designing and Commissioning the Modern
Hospital: Part 2
Sponsor: TC 9.8 Large Building Air-Conditioning
Applications; TC 9.9 Building Commissioning
Chair: Joseph F. Scolaro, P.E., Life Member,
Scolaro Engineering Consultants, Dallas, TX
APC Liaison: Sally McInerny, P.E., The University
of Alabama
With new rules and regulations being adopted
and imposed on the hospitals by the federal government,
insurance companies and state and local governments,
it has become a difficult task to operate, maintain,
and design hospitals. The financial strain placed on
the hospital creates an additional concern for what
was contracted for from design to occupancy. This seminar
provide for designers and owners to address achieving
a successful project on time and within budget. Part
1 is scheduled Monday at 8:00 a.m.
1. Operation and Maintenance of Hospitals
Kimball Ferguson, Member, Duke University Medical Center,
Durham, NC
2. Hospital Room Pressurization: A
Parameter for Airborne Hazard Control
Andrew J. Streifel, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis,
MN
3. Trends in Hospital Ventilation
Richard D. Hermans, P.E., Member, Ellerbe Becket, Minneapolis,
MN
4. Indoor Air Quality Considerations
in Hospitals
Elia Sterling, Member, Theodor D. Sterling and Associates,
Ltd., Vancouver, BC, Canada
5. Commissioning the Modern Hospital
Carl Lawson, Member, Duke University Medical Center,
Durham, NC
|
|
Seminar 29
Tuesday, February 8, 8-10 AM
Existing Building Commissioning: Energy
Savings Opportunities
Sponsor: TC 9.6 Systems Energy Utilization;
TC 9.9 Building Commissioning
Chair: Adam W. Hinge, P.E., Member, Sustainable
Energy Partnerships, Tarrytown, NY
APC Liaison: Branislav B. Todorovic, Ph.D., University
Belgrade
Different approaches optimize the efficient
operation of buildings, including better operation and
maintenance practices and commissioning of existing
buildings. Recent studies have shown that tune-ups of
typical buildings can result in savings of 5% to 15%,
with paybacks generally under two years. Most savings
come from operational and behavioral changes, as opposed
to purchase and installation of new equipment or technology.
This seminar presents information on the existing building
commissioning process, and the savings opportunities
that can result.
1. Applying Commissioning to Existing
Buildings
J. Michael MacDonald, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, TN
2. Case Study of Continuous Commissioning
Mingsheng Liu, Ph.D., P.E., Member, University of Nebraska,
Omaha, NE
3. How to Have a Successful Retrocommissioning
Project
Karl Stum, P.E., Member, Portland Energy Conservation,
Inc., Portland, OR
4. Selecting Optimization Strategies
for Different Markets
Steven Nadel, Member, American Council for an Energy
Efficient Economy, Washington, DC
5. Motivating Facility Staff Toward
Improved Operational Efficiency
Peter Herzog, Member, Herzog/Wheeler & Associates, St.
Paul, MN
|
|
Seminar 45
Wednesday, February 9, 8-10 AM
What Constitutes Functional Performance
Testing?
Sponsor: TC 9.9 Building Commissioning
Chair: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member,
AIR Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
APC Liaison: Janet M. Lynch, Johnson Controls
Commissioning includes many important
functions from project inception, through design, construction,
testing and operation. Functional performance testing
is one critical part but is often misunderstood. Functional
performance testing is more than testing and balancing.
It involves verification of equipment operation to meet
the design intent under all normal modes of operation.
This seminar discusses the methods to specify proper
functional performance testing, testing methodologies
and alternatives, field application of testing along
with examples, deficiency resolution, and report forms,
formats and presentation.
1. Specifying Functional Performance
Tests
Richard B. Casault, P.E., Member, Casault Engineering,
Seattle, WA
2. Functional Performance Testing Methods
Karl Stum, Member, PECI, Vancouver, WA
3. Performing Functional Performance
Testing
Cedric Truman, Member, Truman Engineering Services,
Victoria, BC, Canada
4. Requirements for Preparing Functional
Performance Testing Reports
Andrew P. Nolfo, P.E., Member, Senco Services Corp.,
St. Louis, MO
|
Programs for the Seattle Meeting
(June, 1999):
|
Forum 5
Sunday, June 20, 1999, 10:15-11:05 AM
Commissioning Documentation: What Is Needed and
Why!
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Sally A. McInerny, P.E., The University
of Alabama
Moderator: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member, Air
Engineering and Testing, Dallas, TX
One of the important products of commissioning is
the documentation on the facility from design through
operations. ASHRAE Guideline 1, Chapter 12 lists some
of the information that should be included but does
not detail formats, arrangements, or storage methods.
As ASHRAE progresses to the next level of commissioning,
a discussion is needed with providers and users of the
information to facilitate and standardize the assembly,
presentation, storage, and use of the information. This
forum discusses what is needed and how it will be used.
|
|
Seminar 36
Wednesday, June 23, 8-10 AM
Existing Building Commissioning II:
Diagnostic Methods
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Karl Stum, P.E., Member, PECI,
Portland, OR
APC Liaison: Ira G. Poston, Duke Power Co.
Commissioning is a systematic process
applied to existing buildings for identifying and implementing
operational and maintenance improvements, to optimize
system performance and to ensure continued performance
over time. There are a number of methods of identifying
operational improvements and for ensuring their continued
correct operation. Presentations about diagnostic methods
range from more manual methods to the fully automated.
The seminar provides engineers with technical information
on methods they can apply to their general troubleshooting
work and can assist them in developing their own existing
building commissioning program.
1. Data Visualization Methods for the
HVAC Diagnostics
Kris Kinney, Associate Member, Supersymmetry U.S.A.,
Oakland, CA
2. Using Dataloggers for Improving
HVAC System Operation
W. Mark Arney, P.E., Architectural Energy Corp., Boulder,
CO
3. Automated Diagnostic for Continuous
Commissioning of Outside-Air Control
Michael R. Brambley, Ph.D., Member, Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory, Richland, WA
4. Automated Diagnostic Using Energy
Management and Control System Data
Lon Brightbill, P.E., Member, Facility Dynamics, Columbia,
MD Jeffrey P. Rutt, Member
|
|
Seminar 42
Wednesday, June 23, 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM
Does Commissioning Actually Reduce
Overall Cost of Projects?
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Gerald J. Kettler, P.E., Member,
Air Engineering and Testing, Inc., Dallas, TX
APC Liaison: Ismena V. Deacon, C.Eng., Ove Arup
& Partners
Commissioning has proven to be very effective
in delivering a properly functioning facility. There
are costs associated with providing the commissioning
services and savings in both construction and operational
functions. This seminar addresses both ends of this
cost-benefits equation with examples of how commissioning
results in a net benefit to building owners.
1. Commissioning Is Cost Effective
and Beneficial to Owners
Carl N. Lawson, Member, EMR, Inc., Arlington, VA
2. A Sustainable Commissioning Process
Will Lower Total Cost
Charles Dorgan, Ph.D., P.E., Fellow, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI
3. Project Costs with Commissioning:
Some Examples
Cedric S. Trueman, P.E., Member, Trueman Engineering
Services, Victoria, BC, Canada
4. Costs and Benefits of Building Commissioning
for Public Sector Owners: Experience Case Review
Paul Tseng, P.E., Member, Montgomery County Govt., Rockville,
MD
|
Programs for the Chicago Meeting
(January, 1999):
|
Forum 18
Monday, January 25, 1999, 11:15 AM - 12:05 PM
How Should GPC-1 (The HVAC Commissioning Process)
Be Modified to Fit a Total Building Commissioning Guide?
Sponsor: TC 09.09, Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Janet M. Lynch, Johnson Controls,
Inc.
Moderator: Karl Stum, P.E., Member, PECI, Portland,
OR
In addition to HVAC systems, owners are now asking
to have other building systems commissioned. A total
building commissioning guide is currently being developed
under which each of the respective disciplines will
be responsible to develop their own guide. ASHRAE will
be providing the submission for HVAC commissioning.
How should GPC-1 be modified? Should the scope or process
change to allow players for other fields? Who coordinates
it all? What shouldn't we allow to change to fit into
the uniform format?
|
|
Public Session
Monday, January 25, 3-5 PM
Designing, Installing or Operating Engineers --
Who Will Most Impact New Millennium Facilities?
Sponsor: TC 01.07, Operation and Maintenance
Management; TC 01.04, Control Theory and Application;
TC 04.11, Smart Building Systems, TC 9.9 Building Commissioning,
ASHRAE Program Committee
Moderator: Jim Gartner, Member, Shaw ALMEX Fusion
Systems, Cincinnati, OH
How will engineers, contractors and owners respond
to environmental challenges and productivity issues
in the new millennium? Panelists from ASHRAE, AIA, BOMA,
ARI, IFMA, NIBS, AFE and NAIMA share their opinions
on who most will determine the economics, comfort, IAQ,
energy use and productivity in facilities.
AFE
John Blumenshine
AIA
Richard Hobbs
ARI
Dilip Vyavaharkar
ASHRAE
James Woods
BOMA
Larry Schoen
IFMA
Frank Gallo
N.I.B.S.
Carl Lawson
NAIMA
George Phelps
|
Programs for the Toronto Meeting
(June, 1998):
|
Seminar 4
Sunday, June 21, 8-10 AM
Owner Views of Building Commissioning
Sponsor: TC 9.9 Building Commissioning
Chair: Joseph Scolaro, P.E., Member, Scolaro
Engineering Consultants, Dallas, TX
APC Liaison: Chad Dorgan, P.E., Dorgan Associates
Inc.
Owners representative of distinctly different
building groups present their views of the commissioning
progress, what they like, dislike, and suggestions for
improvement. The general objectives that commissioning
can accomplish are discussed.
1. Which Construction Team Member Provides
the Best Commissioning? - Retail and Other Facilities
Thomas Bartlett, P.E., Member, JC Penney Co., Inc.,
Plano, TX
2. A Public Sector Owner's View of
Building Commissioning - Public and Governmental Facilities
Paul Tseng, P.E., Member, Montgomery County Division
of Facilities and Svcs., Rockville, MD
3. Owner View of Building Commissioning
- Commercial and Office Facilities
Harvey Brickman, P.E., Fellow, Tishman Realty & Construction,
New York, NY
4. Owner View of Building Commissioning
- Hotels
Jay Thompson, P.E., Member, Marriott Corp., Washington,
DC
|
Programs for the San Francisco
Meeting (January, 1998):
|
Seminar 26
Tuesday, January 20, 8:00-10:00 AM
Building Commissioning Guidelines
and Practices
Sponsor: TC 09.09 Building Commissioning
Chair: Wayne Dunn, P.E., Member, Bosek
Gibson & Associates, Jacksonville, Florida
APC Liaison: Larry Degelman, P.E., Texas A&M University
Achieving and defining building performance
is subject to significant interpretation. Building commissioning
outlines a process through which performance is verified.
Commissioning itself as a process, therefore, has a
number of definitions. This seminar offers insight into
applying commissioning and profiles several significant
building commissioning guidelines. Also featured is
a presentation of the impact of total building commissioning.
1. ASHRAE Guideline 1-1996: What's
In It? How Do I Use It?
Gerald Kettler, P.E., Member, Air Engineering and Testing
Inc., Dallas, TX
2. GSA Building Commissioning Guide
Naresh Khosla, Member, Enviro-Management and Research,
Springfield, VA
3. Development and Implementation of
a Commissioning Guidelines for a Utility ESCO
Christie R. Kjellman, Member, Edison ENVEST, Irwindale,
CA
4. Model Commission Plan and Guide
Specifications
Karl R. Stum, P.E., Member, Portland Energy Conservation,
Portland, OR
5. Public Works and Government Services
Canada Commissioning Guidelines
Randy Beauchamp, Public Works and Government Services
Canada, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
6. The Impact of Total Building Commissioning
Carl N. Lawson, Member, Wren-Janus Engineering, Chantilly,
VA
|
|
Seminar 40
Wednesday, January 21, 8-10 AM
The Hot Zone: Commissioning in Laboratories
that Handle Hazardous Materials
Sponsor: TC 09.10 Laboratory Systems; TC 9.09
Building Commissioning
Chair: Kathy Radke, Member, Honewell Technology
Center, Plymouth, MN
APC Liaison: Robert Suggs, P.E., R M Suggs Company
This seminar addresses the special needs
and consideration for the commissioning of HVAC systems
in laboratories that handle biological or chemical hazardous
materials. Special equipment is required to storage
and use these material within these facilities. Laboratory
designers, builders, owners and commissioning agents
must understand the importance of using applicable guidelines
and standards for performing commissioning of laboratory
systems.
1. Biological Safety Cabinets: What's
the Risk?
David M. Lupo, B&V Testing, Inc., Waltham, MA
2. Performance Testing of Hoods for
Use with High Level Hazards
Dale T. Hitchings, P.E., Member, Hitchings Associates,
P.C., Indianapolis, IN
3. Air Changes Per Hour in Laboratory
Ventilation Design
Gerhard Knutson, Ph.D., Member, Knutson Ventilation
Consulting, Inc., Edina, MN
4. Commissioning Laboratory Control
Systems
Wade Smith, Honeywell, Inc., Minneapolis, IN
5. Comparison of Through the Wall VAV
Position Sensors Versus Sash Position Sensors
Thomas C. Smith, Member, Exposure Control Technologies,
Inc., Cary, NC
|
Programs for the Boston Meeting
(June, 1997):
|
Forum 18
Monday, June 30, 1997, 9:00-9:50 AM
Should the ASHRAE Guideline on HVAC Commissioning
Become A Standard?
Sponsor: TC 9.09 Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Sally McInerny
Moderator: Carl Lawson, Member, Wren-Janus Engineering
Inc., Chantilly, Virginia
With many institutions, schools, governmental agencies,
consulting engineers and owners now using the commissioning
process, the questions are being asked why isn't this
a standard instead of a guideline. By having this guideline
published as a standard it would be a more effective
and enforceable tool along with allowing the users to
have a firmer grasp on the contract documents. This
forum addresses the question should the ASHRAE guideline
on HVAC commissioning be a standard.
|
|
Forum 28
Tuesday, July 1, 1997, 11-15 AM - 12:05 PM
When Will Owners and Engineers Accept Commissioning?
Sponsor: TC 9.09 Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Filza Hassan
Moderator: Joe Scaloro, P.E., Scolano Engineering
Consultings, Dallas, TX
With building systems technology continually increasing
and maintenance of these systems seeming to continually
deteriorate it seems as if engineers and owners would
initiate the acceptance of the commissioning process.
It seems as if engineers feel that their design and
practices will be infringed upon, and owners are still
thinking that they are receiving commissioning by hiring
a design engineer to design their systems. In both cases
neither is accurate. This forum addresses why engineers
should specify commissioning and owners should request
it and be ready to pay for it as an additional service.
|
Programs for the Philadelphia
Meeting (January, 1997):
|
Seminar 10
Sunday, January 26, 1997, 12:30-2:20 PM
HVAC Functional Test Criteria
Sponsor: 09.09, Building Commissioning
Chair: Wayne Dunn, P.E., Member, Sun Belt
Engineering, Jacksonville, Florida
APC Liaison: Chad Dorgan
Functional testing is the most important
test relating to the HVAC system in the facility. Functional
testing is the process in commissioning that determines
if the systems meet the design criteria and the operation
of the systems are feasible and workable. Functional
testing also allows the commissioning authority to determine
the complete functionality of the systems and will guarantee
that the systems have been installed and are operating
as designed. This seminar will address the functional
testing of the air distribution, hydronic systems and
thermal storage systems.
1. Thermal Energy Storage Functional
Test Criteria
Chad Dorgan, P.E., Member, Dorgan & Associates, Madison,
Wisconsin
2. Air Side Testing in the Real World
Gerald Kettler, P.E., Member, Air Engineering & Testing
Inc., Dallas, Texas
3. Functional Test Criteria of Hydronic
Systems
Carl N. Lawson, Member, Wren Janus Engineering, Chantilly,
Virginia
|
|
Forum 18
Monday, January 27, 1997, 10:15-11:05 AM
Should A Guideline on Total Building Commissioning
Be Developed?
Sponsor: 09.09, Building Commissioning
APC Liaison: Charles McDowell
Moderator: Carl Lawson, Member, Wren Janus Engineering
Inc., Chantilly, Virginia
With guidelines on commissioning HVAC Systems and
Fire and Smoke Control System already published, it
seems we may have left out the most important item of
the building - the Total Building itself. The total
building can and does affect the HVAC systems in the
building: the windows, the walls, the roof, the electrical
systems, etc., and it seem we are not currently addressing
these items and owners are asking why. In order to have
a total and complete functional building it appears
that the total building should be commissioned. This
forum will address the many reasons why a guideline
on Total Building Commissioning should be developed.
|
|
Seminar 39
Wednesday, January 29, 1997, 8-10 AM
The Commissioning of HVAC Systems for
Laboratories that Handle Bio-Hazardous or Chemical-Hazardous
Materials
Sponsor: 09.09, Building Commissioning; 9.10,
Laboratory Systems
Chair: Kathleen Radke, Member, Honeywell
Technology Center, Plymouth, Minnesota
APC Liaison: James Buckley
This seminar addresses the special needs
and considerations for the commissioning of HVAC systems
laboratories that involve the handling of biological
or chemical hazardous materials. Several case study
results for new construction and retrofit installations
are described. The seminar also reinforces the importance
of using applicable guidelines and standards for performing
commissioning of laboratory systems.
1. Commissioning of a BL-2 Vaccine
Production Facility
Peter B. Gardner, P.E., Member, Torcon, Westfield, New
Jersey
2. Commissioning a HVAC System for
a Pharmaceutical Potent Compound Suite
Henry J. Vance, P.E., Member, Vance Professional Services,
Wilmington, Delaware
3. Commissioning Laboratory Fume Hoods
Using the ASHRAE 110 Method
Dale Hitchings, P.E., Member, Hitchings Associates,
P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana
4. Lessons Learned from a Commissioning
Biomedical Research Laboratory
Rodney H. Lewis, P.E., Member, Rodney H. Lewis Associates,
Houston, Texas
5. Using Average Face Velocity as a
Criteria for the Commissioning of Fume Hoods - Part
I
Thomas C. Smith, Member, Exposure Control Technology
Inc., Cary, North Carolina
6. Using Average Face Velocity as a
Criteria for the Commissioning of Fume Hoods - Part
II
Ed Burt, Member, Honeywell, Inc., Westfield, New Jersey
|
Programs recommended for future
meetings include:
Do you have an idea for a future program?
Please send a note to the Program
Committee chair.
|
Program
Chair:
Sarah E Maston
Richard D Kimball Engineers
Contact Dave Shipley
eMail: Dave
Shipley (shipley@marbek.ca)
|