Rds/kjw/rule 6 10 #1538
Rds/kjw/rule 6 10 #1538
Conversation
KarenWGard
requested review from
JasonGlazer,
supriyagoel,
weilixu,
claperle and
JacksonJ-KC
docs/section6/Rule6-10.md
Outdated
| **Rule ID:** 6-10 | ||
| **Rule Description:** Where retail display lighting is included in the proposed building design in accordance with Section 9.5.2.2(b), the baseline building design retail display lighting additional power shall be equal to the limits established by Section 9.5.2.2(b) or same as proposed, whichever is less. | ||
| **Rule Assertion:** Baseline RMD = expected value | ||
| **Appendix G Section:** G3.1 6 Baseline |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Recommend changing to Table G3.1 #6 Baseline column
| - look at each space: `for space in building_segment...spaces:` | ||
| - set a boolean called applicable to false: `applicable = false` | ||
| - set lighting_space_type equal to the space.lighting_space_type: `lighting_space_type = space.lighting_space_type` | ||
| - if the lighting_space_type is NULL, set the lighting_space_type equal to the building_segment_lighting_type: `if lighting_space_type == NULL: lighting_space_type = building_segment_lighting_type` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note to self, the building area types differ from space types, maybe this does not matter
| - set a boolean called applicable to false: `applicable = false` | ||
| - set lighting_space_type equal to the space.lighting_space_type: `lighting_space_type = space.lighting_space_type` | ||
| - if the lighting_space_type is NULL, set the lighting_space_type equal to the building_segment_lighting_type: `if lighting_space_type == NULL: lighting_space_type = building_segment_lighting_type` | ||
| - if the lighting space type is one of the retail space types, look at each InteriorLighting object in the model: `if lighting_space_type == "SALES AREA":` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- if lighting_building_area_type if used then it will never equal SALES AREAS are so this would never be true. Is that the intent?
- Is the reason this is confined to sales area for applicability because of the language in Section 9.5.2.2 b where it says "For lighting equipment installed in sales areas"?
| - look at each interior lighting: `for interior_lighting in space.interior_lighting:` | ||
| - if the interior lighting purpose_type is RETAIL_DISPLAY, set applicable to true - we don't go to the rule logic for each interior lighting because the evaluation context is at the space level: `if interior_lighting.purpose_type == "RETAIL_DISPLAY": applicable = true` | ||
| - if the boolean applicable is true, continue to rule logic: `if applicable: CONTINUE TO RULE LOGIC` | ||
| - otherwise, rule is not applicable: `else: RULE NOT APPLICABLE` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe I have not got there yet, but I think this rule should also make sure that inapplicable space types are not modeling an extra allowance for retail_display lighting, or do you think this would be picked up as an issue in another rule?
OK, after reading through this and 6-11 I think the way this is being handled is that in the RDS that checks for compliance with general lighting allowances it includes retail display under general for all space types other than Sales Area. If you agree then I think this comment is closed.
| - if the boolean applicable is true, continue to rule logic: `if applicable: CONTINUE TO RULE LOGIC` | ||
| - otherwise, rule is not applicable: `else: RULE NOT APPLICABLE` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Rule Logic: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The formatting on this section does not appear to follow the typical markdown conventions we have been using. I am not sure of the reason exactly but for some reason this entire section shows in blue. View file to see what I mean more clearly.
| - if the interior lighting purpose_type is RETAIL_DISPLAY, add the lighting wattage to baseline_interior_display_W: `if interior_lighting.purpose_type == "RETAIL_DISPLAY": baseline_interior_display_W = baseline_interior_display_W + interior_lighting.power_per_area * space_b.floor_area` | ||
|
|
||
| **Rule Assertion:** | ||
| - Case 1: If the proposed_interior_display_W is less than the minimum AND the baseline_interior_display_W is equal to the proposed, then PASS: `if((proposed_interior_display_W < minimum_retail_display_W) and (baseline_interior_display_W == proposed_interior_display_W)): PASS` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should it be less than or equal to instead of just <? I think if it was equal to the minmum that would still be okay, right?
|
|
||
| **Rule Assertion:** | ||
| - Case 1: If the proposed_interior_display_W is less than the minimum AND the baseline_interior_display_W is equal to the proposed, then PASS: `if((proposed_interior_display_W < minimum_retail_display_W) and (baseline_interior_display_W == proposed_interior_display_W)): PASS` | ||
| - Case 2: Otherwise, if the baseline_interior_display_W is greater than the maximum of proposed_interior_display_W and maximum_retail_display_W, then FAIL: `elif baseline_interior_display_W > max(proposed_interior_display_W,maximum_retail_display_W): FAIL` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should it be min instead of max? Language in App G: "the baseline building design retail display lighting additional power shall be equal to the limits established by Section 9.5.2.2(b) or same as proposed, whichever is less.". The baseline can theerefore never exceed the proposed for retail display lighting even if the maximum allowed is greater.
| **Rule Assertion:** | ||
| - Case 1: If the proposed_interior_display_W is less than the minimum AND the baseline_interior_display_W is equal to the proposed, then PASS: `if((proposed_interior_display_W < minimum_retail_display_W) and (baseline_interior_display_W == proposed_interior_display_W)): PASS` | ||
| - Case 2: Otherwise, if the baseline_interior_display_W is greater than the maximum of proposed_interior_display_W and maximum_retail_display_W, then FAIL: `elif baseline_interior_display_W > max(proposed_interior_display_W,maximum_retail_display_W): FAIL` | ||
| - Case 3: All other cases UNDETERMINED and provide note: `else: UNDETERMINED; note = "The RCT could not determine whether the baseline retail display lighting power is correctly the minimum of the proposed retail display lighting power and the result of the formula given by ASRAE 90.1 9.5.2.2(b)."` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested note : "It could not be determined whether the baseline retail display lighting power is modeled correctly as the minimum of the proposed retail display lighting power and the allowance calculated according to the formulas in ASHRAE 90.1 Section 9.5.2.2(b)."
|
|
||
|
|
||
| **Notes:** | ||
| 1. Is the lighting space type check necessary because we are checking the interior_lighting.purpose_type to be RETAIL_DISPLAY? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is based on the language in Section 9.5.2.2 b where it says "For lighting equipment installed in sales areas" but I think we also need to make sure that this allowance is not being taken for inapplicable space types.
Per above, I think this is being handled in 6-4 by including retail display in the calculation of general lighting for all space types other than Sales Areas. So if that is correct then I think this comment is closed.
No description provided.