Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “code compliance”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Best practices for building energy codes compliance

Building energy codes are a proven policy mechanism to achieve economy-wide energy savings in buildings. In 2021, the International Energy Agency Energy in Buildings and Communities Programme (IEA EBC) Building Energy Codes Working Group (BECWG) set out to survey the diverse codes compliance practices across BECWG member countries. While codes vary in format and approach, attaining the energy reduction potential of building energy codes requires effective implementation and compliance. This is a large undertaking for countries, as effective compliance checking requires adequate resources, technical knowledge, capacity, and strong institutions. Many nations face the same compliance issues, such as requiring faster and easier methods to verify codes and coordinating among numerous stakeholders and levels of government. This paper explores the need for stronger institutional approaches to enforce building energy codes that will lead to code compliance. Specifically, this report sets out to address the question of what practices result in effective building energy code compliance in selected BECWG member countries.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Review of the Evaluation of Building Energy Code Compliance in the United States

Building energy codes are essential tools for achieving energy efficiency in buildings. However, the full energy savings potential of these codes can only be realized if buildings are constructed in compliance with them. Therefore, evaluating building energy code compliance is crucial in bridging the gap between the energy efficiency requirements set by energy codes and the actualized energy savings achieved. An energy code compliance evaluation serves as a mechanism to assess construction practices, evaluate the effectiveness of code enforcement, identify gaps in compliance, and guide strategies for improvement through training and education. Conducting code compliance evaluation activities involves field studies that require careful design and significant resources. Historically, more emphasis has been placed on developing and adopting building energy codes, while efforts to evaluate compliance have been relatively limited and lacking consistent approaches. The passage of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which mandated that states create plans for achieving 90% compliance within eight years, stimulated the need for an energy code compliance evaluation. As a result, federal, state, and local governments, and utilities have invested in the development of methodologies and tools for code compliance evaluation studies. This paper reviews the code compliance evaluation studies conducted in the United States over the past three decades. It describes and compares the methodologies and metrics used to assess building energy code compliance, summarizes the general elements and steps involved in the evaluation process, and discusses common issues in these studies. Over time, code compliance evaluation methodologies have evolved from isolated development within individual states, regions, and utilities, to widely accepted protocols applicable across different states and local jurisdictions. There has been a transition in compliance metrics, shifting from historical compliance rates to energy-consumption-oriented approaches.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Modular Multi-family Construction: A Field Study of Energy Code Compliance and Performance through Offsite Prefabrication

Prefabrication in a controlled, factory setting may improve the energy code compliance and energy performance of modular buildings compared to traditional site-built buildings. To test this premise, the work detailed in this DOE-funded commercial field study (EE0009082) compares the energy code compliance of 25 modular and 30 site-built multifamily buildings under construction in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Seattle representing climate zones 3B, 3C, 4A and 4C respectively. This dataset includes full data on 20 modular and site-built buildings and partial data on 35 modular and site-built buildings that had started prior to or were completed after the 18-month data collection period. This study also compares the post-occupancy energy performance or energy use intensity (EUI) of an additional 23 modular multifamily buildings and 128 site-built multifamily buildings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

A new database of building-space-specific internal loads and load schedules for performance based code compliance modeling of commercial buildings

Building-level loads and load profiles prescribed by current modeling rules save modelers time and avoid gaming during whole building performance modeling. However, recent studies show that they sometimes insufficiently capture the entire building performance due to the varied loads and load profiles for different space types. As a solution to this issue, this paper develops a database of building-space-specific loads and load profiles used in code compliance modeling. The existing sets of loads and load profiles are reviewed and the challenges behind using them for specific research topics are discussed. Then, the proposed method to develop the building-space-specific loads and load profiles is introduced. After that, the database for these building-space-specific loads and load profiles is presented. In addition, one case is studied to demonstrate the applications of these loads and load profiles. In this case study, three methods are used to develop building energy models: space-specific (using knowledge of the distribution and location of space types and applying the space-specific data in the developed database), building-level (assuming a lack of knowledge of the space types and using the building-level data in the developed database), and calculated-ratio (assuming knowledge of the distribution of space types but not their locations and calculating weighted average values based on the space-specific data in the developed database). Finally, the energy results simulated by using these three methods are compared, which show building-level methods can produce energy results up to 20% different than the space-specific methods. Finally, this paper discusses the application scope and maintenance of this new database.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Data Analysis of Energy Code Compliance in Commercial Buildings

What percent of newly constructed commercial buildings comply with the energy code? How much energy and cost could be saved if the compliance increased? Which code requirements have both low compliance rates and high savings potential? These are the questions U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is trying to answer through its Commercial Energy Code Field Study. Previous commercial studies have been very limited and did not result in a widely accepted and tested methodology. DOE’s goal is to create a standardized methodology that can produce actionable results at a reasonable study cost, that can be used by state and local governments and utilities and provides valuable information to policy makers. The field study team implemented the pilot methodology, compiling a data set of 230 office and retail buildings in two climate zones. The approach is based on identifying lost savings on a total energy cost basis rather than simply counting the quantity of measures that do not meet code. This report is focused on the analysis of the collected data. The primary goal was to analyze the data collected during the field study and determine the actual energy cost impact of each measure in a non-compliance situation. The energy impact results allowed for ranking the measures to identify which have the highest potential for lost savings. These results combined with the time required to verify each measure will allow future compliance verification to focus on measures that had a large impact on energy use over the life of the building and those that have the greatest savings recovery potential per verification hour.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Data Analysis of Energy Code Compliance in Commercial Buildings (Rev. 1)

What percent of newly constructed commercial buildings comply with the energy code? How much energy and cost could be saved if the compliance increased? Which code requirements have both low compliance rates and high savings potential? These are the questions U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is trying to answer through its Commercial Energy Code Field Study. Previous commercial studies have been very limited and did not result in a widely accepted and tested methodology. DOE’s goal is to create a standardized methodology that can produce actionable results at a reasonable study cost, that can be used by state and local governments and utilities and provides valuable information to policy makers. The field study team implemented the pilot methodology, compiling a data set of 230 office and retail buildings in two climate zones. The approach is based on identifying lost savings on a total energy cost basis rather than simply counting the quantity of measures that do not meet code. This report is focused on the analysis of the collected data. The primary goal was to analyze the data collected during the field study and determine the actual energy cost impact of each measure in a non-compliance situation. The energy impact results allowed for ranking the measures to identify which have the highest potential for lost savings. These results combined with the time required to verify each measure will allow future compliance verification to focus on measures that had a large impact on energy use over the life of the building and those that have the greatest savings recovery potential per verification hour.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data Driven Commercial Building Energy Code Compliance and Technology Inventory for New York City

Building Performance Standards (BPS) are gaining national traction. A BPS will require new processes in the design, construction, and operation of buildings that take the occupants into account and enable predictive analysis to ensure compliance with current and future GHG emissions caps. In New York City, most buildings over 25,000 square feet will be regulated by a BPS starting in 2024, regardless of whether it is new construction permitted under current energy codes or an existing building. This research is one of the first to begin the evaluation of a long-term series of building policies in the context of an open data ecosystem, in cooperation with city agencies. Existing building policies enacted in NYC have ranged from building energy benchmarking and labeling to energy audits to the regulation of GHG emission in buildings. Through the development of a dataset related to building technologies and energy consumption, this project can help to evaluate if meaningful conclusions can be drawn for the data that has been largely self-reported in compliance with city regulations. This project will also provide lessons learned from a deep dive into these types of datasets to provide best practices for municipalities or states seeking to embark on policies like those enacted in NYC. In addition, a Building Automation System (BAS) Stretch Standard of Care (SSOC) for owners, designers, and building operators will enable the measurement and predictive analysis of energy consumption and GHG emissions at the plant, system, or component level, in anticipation of regulated GHG limits on buildings based on energy use. The SSOC is expected to be suitable for use on a national level. The primary feature of an SSOC is a standardized format for a set of BAS points that can be used to control and to gather data from individual plants, systems, or components that are related to building energy consumption. This project examined how measurements compare to prescriptive or simulation-based energy code targets, finding little correlation between predictive 8760-hour energy modeling and actual energy consumption for a small sample (n=27) of buildings constructed after 2015. Other analysis found that, while large multifamily housing (MFH) buildings showed a general trend similar to predicted reductions in energy use from the implementation of model commercial energy codes, this trend was not evident in the office, K-12 school, and hotel use groups in NYC. No upward or downward trends in energy consumption were found when buildings were grouped by size. Energy audit data were analyzed and it appears that there is bias by audit company on measures recommended to clients. Further research should be performed to cross-analyze this with other attributes, such as building size, vintage, and number of stories. Analysis found that for 281 buildings that were permitted and completed after 2015 and had submitted benchmarking data in 2022, between 81% and 96% (by use group) were found to be in compliance with the 2024 to 2029 NYC BPS emission caps, and between 55% and 89% were in compliance with the 2030-2034 caps. This work is beneficial to the public in helping policymakers and building stakeholders better understand the wide-ranging implications of a BPS.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Market Driven Residential Energy Codes: Comparing Performance in a Changing Technological Environment

The research project is undertaken to better understand the changing relationship between the two basic methods of building energy code compliance – prescriptive and performance – and how those methods relate to each other with respect to advancements in building energy computer simulation standards and capabilities. The International Energy Efficiency Code (IECC) is a model code adopted by many jurisdictions across the United States. Historically, the prescriptive compliance methodology has been preferred in most jurisdictions. The prescriptive methodology requires meeting or exceeding specific efficiency minimums for each envelope component. This tends to be a simple method to teach and verify. A more involved prescriptive alternative called the Total UA alternative is sometimes used. This method requires some multiplication, summing, and comparison to compute, so it is done with a fairly simple computer program. However, advances in computer and building energy simulation technology have resulted in increased use of more detailed performance compliance methods. The performance compliance method establishes the annual energy cost threshold via hourly simulation models. The compliance threshold is determined with a comparison building model simulation with geometry similar to the proposed home and with energy feature parameters and efficiencies as specified in the IECC. This project examines relationships between the two methods of building energy code compliance, including: • Overall annual energy use based on utility bill analysis by compliance method • Code official work processes with respect to compliance methods • Gaps and issues associated with building code compliance methods • Simulated energy use difference between compliance methods • Code compliance cost as a function of compliance method • Code compliance labeling effectiveness for high performance residences • Getting to net zero energy use and net zero greenhouse gas emissions through high performance code alternatives • Electronic code permitting and compliance alternatives

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Methodology to Establish Performance Targets for Building Energy Codes

This report explains the underlying development of the U.S. NZE building sector performance targets reported in Federal Register Notice XX. This document also includes NZE performance targets for U.S. states, which were developed following the same procedures used to develop the national values. These national and state targets are intended to support the establishment and attainment of NZE goals over time. Where residential and commercial building energy code compliance mechanisms apply to new buildings and major renovations and dictate performance requirements, these targets reflect the recommended, minimum levels of performance. Appendix A provides the performance values and targets by U.S. state for residential and commercial buildings. These include each state’s adopted energy code performance, current published MEC performance value, and a nominal NZE code compliance performance target. The current code and NZE values can be compared to the state adopted code value to indicate the level of advancement needed to move towards recommended NZE building performance levels. Additional supplemental resources are available to support states and local governments ready to move from setting NZE policy goals to adopting NZE codes. More information about these resources and the actions states can take to achieve NZE buildings with energy codes are provided in the body of this document.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Pennsylvania and Delaware Energy Code Field Studies (Final Technical Report (FTR)

Led by Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP) in partnership with Performance Systems Development (PSD), the project aimed to conduct energy code compliance field studies for single-family residential buildings in Pennsylvania and Delaware, as well as multifamily and commercial buildings in Pennsylvania. Using U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) approved methodologies, trained field teams conducted on-site observations and testing to document compliance with key energy efficiency measures, including building envelope insulation, air sealing, duct leakage, windows, and mechanical systems. Data from these studies would then be analyzed to identify construction trends and compliance gaps. The goals included published baseline data for each study, and a training roadmap tailored to each state’s needs. This roadmap would have guided outreach and training for builders, code officials, and other stakeholders on the specific code requirements that offered the greatest opportunity for improvement.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

SolarAPP+ Performance Review (2022 Data)

The Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+) platform is an online portal to facilitate and expedite rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) permitting processes. SolarAPP+ allows PV contractors to upload system specifications, have those specifications automatically reviewed for code compliance, and receive instant approval for code-compliant systems. SolarAPP+ also provides inspection checklists to verify installation practices and adherence to approved designs. SolarAPP+ is available to authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) at no cost. This report is part of an ongoing series of reviews of SolarAPP+ performance. Consistent with previous performance reviews, we summarize SolarAPP+ adoption trends to date and compare various metrics for PV systems permitted through SolarAPP+ versus systems permitted through conventional AHJ permitting processes. As of the end of 2022, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) had contacted over 1,500 AHJs with significant solar permitting volume regarding SolarAPP+. Of those, 607 AHJs had at least expressed interest in the platform. 16 AHJs had begun piloting the platform and 15 of these had publicly launched the platform by the end of 2022. In 2022, 206 installers submitted 11,092 permits through the SolarAPP+ platform, including 708 permits for solar+storage systems. SolarAPP+ permits accounted for around 37% of all permits issued in participating AHJs. We compare permitting timelines through SolarAPP+ to traditional AHJ permitting processes to assess the platform's performance. Consistent with previous SolarAPP+ performance reviews, we find that permitting timelines are significantly shorter for SolarAPP+ projects. Based on median timelines, a typical SolarAPP+ project is permitted and inspected 8 business days sooner than traditional projects. We estimate that automatic SolarAPP+ permitting saved between 3,500 and 13,900 hours of AHJ staff time in 2022. Finally, we find evidence that SolarAPP+ may improve inspection outcomes, with SolarAPP+ projects failing inspections about 28% less frequently than traditional projects.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

SolarAPP+ Performance Review (2023 Data)

The Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+) platform is an online portal to facilitate and expedite rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage permitting processes. SolarAPP+ allows PV contractors to upload system specifications, have that information automatically reviewed for code compliance, and receive instant approval for code-compliant systems, reducing authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) staff time needed for review. SolarAPP+ also provides inspection checklists to verify installation practices and adherence to approved designs. SolarAPP+ is available to AHJs at no cost. This report is part of an ongoing series of reviews of SolarAPP+ performance. Consistent with previous performance reviews, we summarize SolarAPP+ adoption trends to date and compare various metrics for PV systems permitted through SolarAPP+ versus systems permitted through traditional AHJ permitting processes. As of the end of 2023, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) had contacted over 1,700 AHJs with significant solar permitting volume regarding SolarAPP+. Of those, 793 AHJs had expressed interest in the platform as of the end of 2023. 161 AHJs had begun piloting the platform and 97 of these had publicly launched the platform by the end of 2023. In 2023, 668 installers submitted 18,906 permits through the SolarAPP+ platform, including 4,834 permits submitted as part of a solar plus storage program. SolarAPP+ permits accounted for around 43% of all permits issued in participating AHJs. We compare permitting timelines through SolarAPP+ to traditional AHJ permitting processes to assess the platform's performance. Consistent with previous SolarAPP+ performance reviews, we find that permitting timelines are significantly shorter for SolarAPP+ projects. Based on median timelines, a typical SolarAPP+ project is permitted and inspected 14.5 business days sooner than traditional projects. We estimate that automatic SolarAPP+ permitting saved around 7,200 hours of AHJ staff time in 2023. Finally, we estimate that SolarAPP+ eliminated over 150,000 business days in permitting-related delays in 2023.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

SolarAPP+ Performance Review (2024 Data)

The Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+) platform is an online portal to facilitate and expedite rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage permitting processes. SolarAPP+ allows PV contractors to upload system specifications, have that information automatically reviewed for code compliance, and receive instant approval for code-compliant systems, reducing authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) staff time needed for review. SolarAPP+ also provides inspection checklists to verify installation practices and adherence to approved designs. This report is part of an ongoing series of reviews of SolarAPP+ performance. Consistent with previous performance reviews, we summarize SolarAPP+ adoption trends to date and compare various metrics for PV systems permitted through SolarAPP+ versus systems permitted through traditional AHJ permitting processes. As of the end of 2024, 799 AHJs had expressed interest in the platform, with 264 fully adopting (215) or piloting (49) the platform. In 2024, 861 installers submitted 37,393 permits through the SolarAPP+ platform, including 27,375 permits for PV+storage systems. SolarAPP+ permits accounted for around 43% of all permits issued in all participating AHJs, and more than 60% of all permits in several participating AHJs. We compare permitting timelines through SolarAPP+ to traditional AHJ permitting processes to assess the platform's performance. Consistent with previous SolarAPP+ performance reviews, we find that permitting timelines are significantly shorter for SolarAPP+ projects. Based on median timelines, a typical SolarAPP+ project is permitted and inspected 12 business days sooner than traditional projects. We estimate that automatic SolarAPP+ permitting saved around 18,400 hours of AHJ staff time in 2024. Finally, we estimate that SolarAPP+ eliminated over 100,000 business days in permitting-related delays in 2024.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Commercial Building Prototypes Based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 Appendix G PRM: Technical Support Document

The two paths for documenting compliance with ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 are the prescriptive path and the performance path. Beyond code programs and rating systems (for example, USGBC-LEED ) are primarily known to use a third path – the Appendix G Performance Rating Method. An update in the 2016 edition of Standard 90.1 approved the Appendix G Performance Rating System for code compliance, extending its application and allowing for greater consistency of modeling rules for code and beyond code building energy modeling. The Appendix G PRM provides rules for the development of whole building energy models of baseline and proposed models for calculating the “performance cost index target” value using the simulated energy results of the baseline and proposed models and the building performance factors published in Table 4.2.1.1 of the Standard. This report documents (1) the methodology used for development of the baseline and proposed energy models of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and U.S. Department of Energy commercial building prototypes using the Appendix G Performance Rating Method; and (2) the building performance factors that were calculated using those models.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

A High-Granularity Approach to Modeling Energy Consumption and Savings Potential in the U.S. Residential Building Stock: Preprint

Building simulations are increasingly used in various applications related to energy efficient buildings. For individual buildings, applications include: design of new buildings, prediction of retrofit savings, ratings, performance path code compliance and qualification for incentives. Beyond individual building applications, larger scale applications (across the stock of buildings at various scales: national, regional and state) include: codes and standards development, utility program design, regional/state planning, and technology assessments. For these sorts of applications, a set of representative buildings are typically simulated to predict performance of the entire population of buildings. Focusing on the U.S. single-family residential building stock, this paper will describe how multiple data sources for building characteristics are combined into a highly-granular database that preserves the important interdependencies of the characteristics. We will present the sampling technique used to generate a representative set of thousands (up to hundreds of thousands) of building models. We will also present results of detailed calibrations against building stock consumption data.

building stock↗
DOE OSTI2021

Total System Performance Ratio—A Systems Based Approach for Evaluating HVAC System Efficiency

The prescriptive path is the most widely used approach for commercial code compliance in the United States. Though easy to implement, prescriptive approaches do not typically discriminate between minimally compliant, high-performing and poorly performing HVAC system configurations. Hence, to meet aggressive energy and carbon reduction goals, it is clear that energy codes will need to transition from prescriptive to performance-based approaches, a transition that is riddled with several challenges. This paper discusses a new HVAC system-based performance approach (HVAC System Performance) which provides a simpler solution to HVAV system evaluation compared to whole building performance, while keeping tradeoffs limited to specific building systems. The Total System Performance Ratio (TSPR) is a metric for evaluation of overall system efficiency instead of individual component efficiency, a solution which could also eventually facilitate the transition to a 100% performance-based code structure. TSPR is a ratio that compares the annual heating and cooling load of a building to the annual energy consumed by the building’s HVAC system. A calculation software tool has been developed for determining a building’s TSPR. Already incorporated into the 2018 Washington State Energy Code, this approach is also being evaluated by ASHRAE Standard 90.l Project Committee and has the potential to provide a comprehensive performance-based approach for HVAC system evaluation and analysis.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

HVAC System Performance for Energy Codes (Technical Brief)

The prescriptive path is likely the most widely used approach for commercial code compliance in the United States. Though easy to implement, the prescriptive approach does not discriminate between high-performing and poorly performing heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) system configurations that are both minimally compliant. To meet aggressive energy and carbon reduction goals, energy codes will need to transition from prescriptive to performance-based approaches, a transition that is riddled with several challenges. HVAC System Performance is a discipline performance path and provides a simpler solution to HVAC system evaluation compared to whole building performance, while keeping tradeoffs limited to specific building systems. The Total System Performance Ratio (TSPR) is a metric for evaluation of overall system efficiency instead of individual component efficiency, a solution that could also eventually facilitate the transition to a 100% performance-based code structure. TSPR is a ratio that compares the annual heating and cooling load of a building to the annual energy consumed by the building’s HVAC system. A web-based calculation tool has been developed for determining a building’s TSPR. Already incorporated into the 2018 Washington State Energy Code, this approach has also been evaluated by the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Project Committee and has the potential to provide a comprehensive performance-based approach for HVAC system evaluation and analysis

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗