Author Archives: mike@standardsmichigan.com

Loading
loading...

Energy Standard for Sites & Buildings: Metering

Section 8 Key points:

Metering for New Buildings: New buildings larger than 25,000 square feet must be equipped with metering to measure the electrical energy usage of the entire building.

Tenant Spaces: In buildings with tenant spaces, individual tenant spaces larger than 10,000 square feet must also be separately metered.

Subsystem Metering: Buildings with electrical loads exceeding specified thresholds must have additional metering to measure energy use for various subsystems, including:

HVAC systems
Lighting systems
Plug loads
Process loads

These metering requirements are intended to help building owners and operators monitor energy consumption, identify opportunities for energy savings, and comply with building energy codes and standards.

Despite best intentions a fair question to ask: What does over metering look like? (University of Alberta Research)

University of Michigan

The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) is an ANSI-accredited continuous-maintenance standards developer (a major contributor to what we call a regulatory product development “stream”).   Continuous maintenance means that changes to titles in its catalog can change in as little as 30-45 days.  This is meaningful to jurisdictions that require conformance to the “latest” version of ASHRAE 90.1

Among the leading titles in its catalog is ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Standard for Sites and Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.  Standard 90.1 has been a benchmark for commercial building energy codes in the United States and a key basis for codes and standards around the world for more than 35 years.  Free access to ASHRAE 90.1 version is available at the link below:

READ ONLY Version of 2022 ASHRAE 90.1

If you cannot access it with the link above, try the link below and select 90.1 from the title list:

Current Popular ASHRAE Standards and Guidelines

Chapter 9: Lighting, begins on Page 148, and therein lie the tables that are the most widely used metrics (lighting power densities) by electrical and illumination engineers for specifying luminaires and getting them wired and controlled “per code”.   Many jurisdictions provide access to this Chapter without charge.  Respecting ASHRAE’s copyright, we will not do so here but will use them during today’s Illumination Colloquium, 16:00 UTC.

Keep in mind that recently ASHRAE expanded the scope of 90.1 to include energy usage in the spaces between buildings:

25 January 2023: Newly Released ASHRAE 90.1-2022 Includes Expanded Scope For Building Sites

At this time, there are no redlines open for public comment

Online Standards Actions & Public Review Drafts

Education industry facility managers, energy conservation workgroups, sustainability officers, electric shop foreman, electricians and front-line maintenance professionals who change lighting fixtures, maintain environmental air systems are encouraged to participate directly in the ASHRAE consensus standard development process.

Univerzita Karlova

We also maintain ASHRAE best practice titles as standing items on our Mechanical, Water, Energy and Illumination colloquia.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Issue: [Various]

Category: Mechanical, Electrical, Energy Conservation, Facility Asset Management, US Department of Energy, #SmartCampus

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Larry Spielvogel, Richard Robben

Under Construction:  ASHRAE WORKSPACE

More:

US Department of Energy Codes Program: Power and Lighting

Rightsizing Electrical Power Systems

Hegemon Cuyahoga & County Dublin

Financial Presentations & Webcasts

Here we shift our perspective 120 degrees to understand the point of view of the Producer interest in the American national standards system (See ANSI Essential Requirements).  The title of this post draws from the location of US and European headquarters.  We list proposals by a successful electrical manufacturer for discussion during today’s colloquium:

2026 National Electrical Code

CMP-1: short circuit current ratings, connections with copper cladded aluminum conductors, maintenance to be provided by OEM, field markings

CMP-2: reconditioned equipment, receptacles in accessory buildings, GFCI & AFCI protection, outlet placement generally, outlets for outdoor HVAC equipment(1)

(1) Here we would argue that if a pad mount HVAC unit needs service with tools that need AC power once every 5-10 years then the dedicated branch circuit is not needed.  Many campuses have on-site, full-time staff that can service outdoor pad mounted HVAC equipment without needing a nearby outlet.  One crew — two electricians — will run about $2500 per day to do anything on campus.

CMP-3: No proposals

CMP-4: solar voltaic systems (1)

(1) Seems reasonable – spillover outdoor night time lighting effect upon solar panel charging should be identified.

CMP-5: Administrative changes only

CMP-6: No proposals

CMP-7: Distinction between “repair” and “servicing”

CMP-8: Reconditioned equipment

CMP-9: Reconditioned equipment

CMP-10: Short circuit ratings, service disconnect, disconnect for meters, transformer secondary conductor, secondary conductor taps, surge protective devices, disconnecting means generally, spliced and tap conductors, more metering safety, 1200 ampere threshold for arc reduction technology, reconditioned surge equipment shall not be permitted, switchboard short circuit ratings

CMP-11: Lorem

CMP-12: Lorem

CMP-13: Lorem

Lorem ipsum

General Conditions of the Construction Contract

International Code Council: Current Code Development Cycle 2024-2026

International Building Code: Chapter 1 Scope and Administration

There are five key components needed to address in each construction contract as a protection against litigation in an industry that is rich in possibilities.
  • Scope of the project. …
  • Total cost and payment requirements. …
  • Project timeline. …
  • Lien law protection. …
  • Dispute resolution.

Today at the usual hour we examine a few representative contracts:

List of all current AIA Contract Documents

University of Michigan Standard General Conditions

Wayne State University Supplementary Conditions of Construction

Princeton University: General Terms & Conditions for Construction Contracts

Universities Wisconsin: General Conditions of the Contract for Construction

The cost of compliance with general conditions in a typical construction project can vary widely depending on factors like project size, complexity, location, and specific requirements. General conditions refer to the indirect costs that support the project—things like project management, temporary facilities, safety measures, and administrative expenses—not the direct costs of labor, materials, or equipment tied to physical construction.

In percentage terms, general conditions typically account for 5% to 15% of the total project cost, with most projects falling in the 5% to 10% range for standard residential or commercial builds. Smaller projects might see percentages closer to or exceeding 10% because fixed costs (like a site trailer or a project manager’s time) don’t scale down as much as direct costs. Larger, more complex projects—like industrial or infrastructure work—might trend toward the lower end (5% or less) since direct costs dominate, diluting the relative impact of general conditions. For example, a $300,000 residential project might allocate $15,000 to $30,000 (5% to 10%) for general conditions, while a $10 million commercial project could see $500,000 or less (5%) if efficiencies kick in.

Related:

Methods of Building Measurement

Global Consistency in Presenting Construction & Life Cycle Costs

Higher Education Estates Management Report 2023

Modular Classrooms

Planning, Design & Construction Team

Architecture and Aesthetic Education

How Blockchain Will Change Construction

Carnegie Classifications

Design Age Institute

Design Standard Readability

Fry readability formula

How Consistent Are the Best-Known Readability Equations in Estimating the Readability of Design Standards?

Shixiang Zhou & Heejin Jeong
Industrial and Operations Engineering Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Transportation Research Institute Driver Interface Group
Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

 

Abstract.  Research problem: Readability equations are widely used to compute how well readers will be able to understand written materials. Those equations were usually developed for nontechnical materials, namely, textbooks for elementary, middle, and high schools. This study examines to what extent computerized readability predictions are consistent for highly technical material – selected Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and International Standards Organization (ISO) Recommended Practices and Standards relating to driver interfaces. Literature review: A review of original sources of readability equations revealed a lack of specific criteria in counting various punctuation and text elements, leading to inconsistent readability scores. Few studies on the reliability of readability equations have identified this problem, and even fewer have systematically investigated the extent of the problem and the reasons why it occurs.  Research questions:

(1) Do the most commonly used equations give identical readability scores?
(2) How do the scores for each readability equation vary with readability tools?
(3) If there are differences between readability tools, why do they occur?
(4) How does the score vary with the length of passage examined?

Method: Passages of varying lengths from 12 selected SAE and ISO Recommended Practices and Standards were examined using five readability equations (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, SMOG Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and Automated Readability Index) implemented five ways (four online readability tools and Microsoft Word 2013 for Windows). In addition, short test passages of text were used to understand how different readability tools counted text elements, such as words and sentences. Results and conclusions: The mean readability scores of the passages from those 12 SAE and ISO Recommended Practices and Standards ranged from the 10th grade reading level to about 15th. The mean grade reading levels computed across the websites were: Flesch-Kincaid 12.8, Gunning Fog 15.1 SMOG 12.6, Coleman-Liau 13.7, and Automated Readability Index 12.3. Readability score estimates became more consistent as the length of the passage examined increased, with no noteworthy improvements beyond 900 words. Among the five readability tools, scores typically differed by two grade levels, but the scores should have been the same. These differences were due to how compound and hyphenated words, slashes, numbers, abbreviations and acronyms, and URLs were counted, as well other punctuation and text elements. These differences occurred because the sources for these equations often did not specify how to score various punctuation and text elements. Of the tools examined, the authors recommend Microsoft Word 2013 for Windows if the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is required.

 

Graduation, Dating, Engagements, Weddings, Births & Obituaries

Weddings

 



Nine years later and first day as husband and wife they got to finally sneak a kiss in one of the first places they ever passed notes

Hun School Of Princeton

“…I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.” –W.B. Yeats | ‘He Wishes for the Cloths of Heaven’

“Nature’s Masterpiece”

Several colleges and universities have “kissing benches” or similar traditions tied to romance on campus.

Michigan State University Beaumont Tower: Nick and Myra Kanillopoulos

Syracuse University. Kissing Bench: This bench on the Quad is steeped in tradition. Legend has it that if a couple kisses on the bench, they will eventually marry. Conversely, if a single person sits there alone, they risk staying single forever.

University of Idaho.  Hello Walk and Kissing Rock: While not a bench, this area on campus features a large rock where students have historically kissed. It’s a romantic tradition for couples at the university.

Florida State University Kissing Bench

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Clemson University Lover’s Lane

Illinois State University

University of Cambridge: St. John’s College Bridge of Sighs

University of Oxford: The Bridge of Sighs

University of Bath Somerset County: Sham Castle

Weddings

Sport News


Michigan Girl, Our Michigan Girl….

Sport Standards

 

 

Mixed Gender Sport by Design

Engineering in Sport



 

Winter Sport

Strawberry Shortcake

Standards IndianaStrawberry Shortcake Balloon 2014

Indiana University Net Position 2024:  $5.448B (Page 28)

“Summer Suns Are Glowing”

Ruth 1 | King James Version

Written by William Walsham How in 1871 for the Church Hymns collection, this Christian standard is a celebration of God’s creation and love, set to the tune “Ruth” by Samuel Smith (1865). How, an Anglican bishop known for his pastoral work, crafted the hymn to reflect the joy of summer, with its vibrant imagery of glowing suns, flowing light, and nature’s voices uniting in praise.

The hymn’s four stanzas emphasize God’s mercy, eternal love, and guidance through life’s challenges, urging steadfast faith even in dark times. Its meaning centers on gratitude for divine providence, the beauty of creation, and trust in God’s presence, with the final stanza affirming hope in eternal light.

Published in over 239 hymnals, it remains a cherished expression of summer’s warmth and spiritual reassurance.

Akua Akyere Memorial Youth Choir


Christ the King Chapel

Standards Virginia

Best Week Ever 2023: Christendom College Summer Program


Reflections / John Nash

“Non-Cooperative Games” 1951 | John Nash

Brian Keating: Cosmology, Astrophysics, Aliens & Losing the Nobel Prize

 

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content