RDS/JDJ/Rule 12-1 #1348
RDS/JDJ/Rule 12-1 #1348
Conversation
JacksonJ-KC
requested review from
JasonGlazer,
supriyagoel,
weilixu,
claperle and
KarenWGard
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@JacksonJ-KC since this check is a straight up comparison of P and B, could we make this part of the umbrella check?
|
also, should P not equal to B result in fail outcome, in case of this scenario- equipment, shall be estimated based on the building area type or space type category and shall be assumed to be identical in the proposed design and baseline building design, except as specifically approved by the rating authority only when quantifying performance that exceeds the requirements of Standard 90.1 but not when the Performance Rating. Method is used as an alternative path for minimum standard compliance in accordance with Section 4.2.1.1. |
|
"except as specifically approved by the rating authority only when quantifying performance that exceeds the requirements of Standard 90.1 but not when the Performance Rating. Method is used as an alternative path for minimum standard compliance in accordance with Section 4.2.1.1." Supriya, how would you like to handle this part? I agree if it is a straightforward comparison of B == P then we could use the rule in Section 1 and change the associated Boolean in the extra schema to TRUE. If we want an undetermined case or another way of handling the above scenario then it should stay as its own rule. |
Maybe we can keep this as a separate RDS and in the case with P is less than B, we could provide an undetermined outcome and provide a outcome message which informs the reviewer than the proposed building equipment load is less than the baseline, which is only permitted when the model is being used to quantify performance that exceeds the requirements of Standard 90.1. I believe we could safely provide a Fail outcome if P > B. Does that sound like a good approach? |
I agree with Supriya's suggestion. |
| - If the miscellaneous equipment power in the baseline RMD is less than the miscellaneous equipment power in the proposed RMD: `elif misc_equipment_power_b < misc_equipment_power_p:` | ||
| - Append the miscellaneous equipment info for reporting: `unexpected_misc_equipment_power.append({"id": misc_equipment_b.id, "baseline_power": misc_equipment_power_b, "proposed_power": misc_equipment_power_p})` | ||
| **Rule Assertion:** | ||
| - Case 1: If all equipment power was modeled identically: PASS `if len(unexpected_misc_equipment_power) == 0 and len(reduced_misc_equipment_power) == 0: PASS` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding is Rule 1-7 will check and highlight these outcome so this rule essentially, provides more detail messages about the failures?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
MiscellaneousEquipment.power is set to FALSE for the AppG B_RMD Equals P_RMD column in the extra schema so 1-6 will not check this (1-7 is for proposed vs. user). False is appropriate for 1-6 and we check in this rule instead because when the project is for a beyond-code program the proposed is allowed to be less than the baseline, but we are unable to tell if the reduction was correctly applied for the beyond code program so outcome is UNDETERMINED.
If proposed is greater than the baseline, FAIL. Also, as Christina pointed out, if RPD.compliance_path == CODE_COMPLIANT, any difference between proposed and baseline is a FAIL.
… into RDS/JDJ/12-1
No description provided.