Stakeholder Work Session Uniform Lighting and Performance of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

California Statewide Utility Codes and Standards Program

10/18/2010

1

Stakeholder Work Session Uniform Lighting and Performance of Occupancy Sensors in Open Offices

Heschong Mahone Group, Inc. Integrated Lighting Concepts, Inc. October 20, 2010

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Uniformity and Occ Sensor Performance Agenda

2

• Review the assumptions involved in how designers will

meet the revised LPDs for open office lighting:

• Use of task-ambient lighting
• Use of fine-grained occupancy controls
• Use of highly efficient fixtures
• Review proposed language to replace the “uniformity”

requirement in section 131(b) (Multi-level switching).

• How should a requirement for uniform lighting apply in

photocontrolled areas?

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Agenda (continued)

3

• Discuss the effectiveness of fine-grained control based
• n occupancy in open offices:
• Equipment and commissioning required to exclude false

triggering

• Availability and price of equipment
• Non-energy effects, acceptability to end users

Uniformity and Occ Sensor Performance

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

Uniformity and Occupancy Sensor Performance

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Meeting Revised Office LPDs

• Proposed Open Office LPD, Overhead + Task = 0.8 +

0.3 W/ft²

• Methods of meeting proposed LPD (without daylighting

controls or manual controls)

4

Option 1 Task/Ambient Recessed: Overhead + Task 0.51 + 0.13 W/ft² Option 2 Task/Ambient Suspended: Overhead + Task 0.75 + 0.13 W/ft² Option 3 2 Workstations per Occupancy Sensor: 0.45 W/ft²+(0.45x (1 – 0.25 PAF)) 0.79 W/ft² Option 4 High Efficiency Recessed 0.52 W/ft² Option 5 High Efficiency Suspended 0.68 W/ft²

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

Uniformity and Occupancy Sensor Performance

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Current Proposed Language for Uniformity

• 131(b)

Multi-Level Lighting Controls.

“The general lighting of any space 100 square feet or larger… Multi-level lighting controls shall also comply with uniformity requirements of Table 131-A”.

• Note that there is no requirement for “uniformity” in the sense

used by IESNA (Emin/Emax)

• Checkerboard and alternate rows are proposed to be eliminated

as options, so this is a more stringent requirement for uniformity than in 2008

5

Luminaire Type Minimum Required Multi- Level Control Steps: Uniform level of illuminance shall be achieved by: Incandescent, halogen, and LED lamps Continuous dimming - 10- 100% of Full Power Continuous dimming Fluorescent linear (including U-bent) lamps > 13 watts; induction lamps >25 watts Full1, High2, Medium3, Low4 Stepped dimming, continuous dimming, switching alternate lamps in a luminaire5

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

Uniformity and Occupancy Sensor Performance

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Concerns Regarding Uniformity

• The effect of fine-grained occupancy sensor control
• This will reduce light levels in unoccupied work areas
• It should not significantly affect the amount or uniformity of light

available in occupied areas

• No requirement for uniformity is proposed. Is this adequate?
• The effect of photocontrols
• Photocontrols reduce electric light uniformity,

but optimize total uniformity

• There is no proposed uniformity requirement for photocontrols.

Is this adequate?

• We believe that this requirement allows switching controls for
• daylighting. Is this appropriate?

6

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

Uniformity and Occupancy Sensor Performance

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Occupancy Sensor Performance

• Standard ceiling-mounted occupancy sensors give slightly too large an area of

coverage—they would require a shield or lens for smaller control groups.

• What equipment is available to achieve this?
• Does it add cost to the sensor?
• Does this approach work reliably and achieve acceptance?
• How could an acceptance test be worded?

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

Uniformity and Occupancy Sensor Performance

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Occupancy Sensor Performance

• In speculative offices, the occupancy sensor grid

may not match the cubicle layout

• This will compromise savings
• HMG will attempt to quantify the loss of savings and

modify the allowed PAF

• How could the PAF language distinguish between

aligned and non-aligned grids?

• Should an acceptance test be required?

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

Uniformity and Occupancy Sensor Performance

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

9

Data Requests

• Need model numbers, cut sheets and pricing for
• ccupancy sensors that can cover small areas:
• Single cubicle
• Two cubicles
• Four cubicles
• If these products are not available off the shelf

we need an estimate of price increment and of production volume capability from several manufacturers (independently)

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

10/20/2010 CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

10

QUESTIONS & COMMENTS