Data centers in colleges and universities are crucial for supporting the extensive technological infrastructure required for modern education and research. These centers house critical servers and storage systems that manage vast amounts of data, ensuring reliable access to academic resources, administrative applications, and communication networks. They enable the secure storage and processing of sensitive information, including student records, faculty research, and institutional data.
Moreover, data centers facilitate advanced research by providing the computational power needed for data-intensive studies in fields like bioinformatics, climate science, and artificial intelligence. They support virtual learning environments and online course management systems, essential for the increasingly prevalent hybrid and online education models. Efficient data centers also contribute to campus sustainability goals by optimizing energy use through modern, eco-friendly technologies.
Additionally, robust data center infrastructure enhances the university’s ability to attract top-tier faculty and students by demonstrating a commitment to cutting-edge technology and resources. They also play a vital role in disaster recovery and business continuity, ensuring that educational and administrative functions can resume quickly after disruptions. Overall, data centers are integral to the academic mission, operational efficiency, and strategic growth of colleges and universities.
We have followed development of the technical standards that govern the success of these “installations” since 1993; sometimes nudging technical committees — NFPA, IEEE, ASHRAE, BICSI and UL. The topic is vast and runs fast so today we will review, and perhaps respond to, the public consultations that are posted on a near-daily basis. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
ASHRAE 90.4 defines an alternate compliance path, specific to data centers, while the compliance requirements for “non-data center” components are contained in ASHRAE 90.1 . The 90.4 structure also streamlines the ongoing maintenance process as well ensures that Standards 90.1 and 90.4 stay in their respective lanes to avoid any overlap and redundancies relating to the technical and administrative boundaries. Updates to ASHRAE 90.1 will still include the alternate compliance path defined in ASHRAE 90.4. Conversely the 2022 Edition of 90.4-2022 refers to ASHRAE 90.1-2022; cross-referencing one another synchronously
Links to noteworthy coverage from expert agencies on the 2022 revisions:
This title resides on the standing agenda of our Infotech 400 colloquium; hosted several times per year and as close coupled with the annual meetings of ASHRAE International as possible. Technical committees generally meet during these meetings make decisions about the ASHRAE catalog. The next all committee conference will be hostedJanuary 20-24, 2024 in Chicago. As always we encourage education industry facility managers, energy conservation workgroups and sustainability professionals to participate directly in the ASHRAE consensus standard development process. It is one of the better facilities out there.
Proposed Addendum g makes changes to definitions were modified in section 3 and mandatory language in Section 6 to support the regulation of process heat and process ventilation was moved in the section for clarity. Other changes are added based on comments from the first public review including changes to informative notes.
Consultation closes June 4th
Update: February 10, 2023
The most actively managed consensus standard for data center energy supply operating in education communities (and most others) is not published by the IEEE but rather by ASHRAE International — ASHRAE 90.4 Energy Standard for Data Centers (2019). It is not required to be a free access title although anyone may participate in its development. It is copyrighted and ready for purchase but, for our purpose here, we need only examine its scope and purpose. A superceded version of 90.4 is available in the link below:
It is likely that the technical committee charged with updating this standard are already at work preparing an updated version that will supercede the 2019 Edition. CLICK HERE for a listing of Project Committee Interim Meetings.
We maintain many titles from the ASHRAE catalog on the standing agenda of our Mechanical, Energy 200/400, Data and Cloud teleconferences. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Originally posted Summer 2020.
ASHRAE International has released four new addenda to its energy conservation consensus document ASHRAE 90.4-2016 Energy Standard for Data Centers. This document establishes the minimum energy efficiency requirements of data centers for design and construction, for the creation of a plan for operation and maintenance and for utilization of on-site or off-site renewable energy resources.
It is a relatively new document more fully explained in an article published by ASHRAE in 2016 (Click here). The addenda described briefly:
Addendum a – clarifies existing requirements in Section 6.5 as well as introduce new provisions to encourage heat recovery within data centers.
Addendum b – clarifies existing requirements in Sections 6 and 11 and to provide guidance for taking credit for renewable energy systems.
Addendum d – a response to a Request for Interpretation on the 90.4 consideration of DieselRotary UPS Systems (DRUPS) and the corresponding accounting of these systems in the Electrical Loss Component (ELC). In crafting the IC, the committee also identified several marginal changes to 90.4 definitions and passages in Section 8 that would add further clarity to the issue. This addendum contains the proposed changes for that aim as well as other minor changes to correct spelling or text errors, incorporate the latest ELC values into Section 11, and to refresh information in the Normative Reference.
Addendum e adds language to Section 11 intended to clarify how compliance with Standard 90.4 can be achieved through the use of shared systems.
Comments are due September 6th. Until this deadline you may review the changes and comment upon them by by CLICKING HERE
Education facility managers, energy conservation workgroups and sustainability professionals are encouraged to participate directly in the ASHRAE standard development process. Start at ASHRAE’s public commenting facility:
The ASHRAE catalog is a priority title in our practice. This title appears on the standing agenda of our Infotech sessions. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
The bookwheel, also known as a revolving bookcase, was invented by an Italian scholar and polymath named Agostino Ramelli. Ramelli was born in 1531 in Ponte Tresa, a town in present-day Italy, and he lived during the Renaissance period.
Ramelli’s invention, described in his work titled “Le diverse et artificiose machine del capitano Agostino Ramelli” (The Various and Ingenious Machines of Captain Agostino Ramelli), was published in 1588. This book showcased a collection of 195 mechanical devices.
Ramelli’s work contributed to the growing interest in mechanical inventions during the Renaissance period. His bookwheel design remains a fascinating example of early engineering and ingenuity, highlighting the desire for knowledge and practical solutions in the pursuit of learning and scholarly endeavors.
The standard of care for wiring safety for data centers — a continually expanding presence in education communities even before the pandemic — is established in National Electrical Code Articles 645 (Information Technology Equipment), Article 646 (Modular Data Centers) and Article 647 (Sensitive Electronic Equipment). You will notice that these articles cover the topic comprehensively and bear the imprint of competing Producer-Interest groups. There are no User-Interest representatives on Code-Making Panel 12 that represent the final fiduciary in education communities even though education communities are one of the largest markets for information and communication technology systems.
Transcripts of technical committee action during the 2026 revision (CMP-16) are linked below because they will inform our recommendations for the 2026 National Electrical Code. Keep in mind that the Technical Correlating Committee is moving content around the Code in order to make the NEC easier to use by experts.
The transcripts of technical committee action during the 2023 revision are linked below because they will inform our recommendations for the 2026 National Electrical Code.
The issues that have been in play in these articles of the NEC are familiar to veterans of the “food fight” – occupancy classification, cable specifications, fire protection, ventilation, energy consumption, surge protection, licensing of engineers. etc. We look for market-making excesses by opposing stakeholders that seek to limit their risk while raising the (financial) risk to education communities.
We encourage our colleagues to participate in the NFPA code development process directly. We also encourage stakeholders in education communities — students, faculty and staff to join us during any of the teleconferences we co-host with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee 4 times monthly in both European and American time zones. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting.
Abstract: This paper presents a broad view of management of design and implementation of power systems for Data Centers. The paper outlines many challenges that are present because of the demanding requirements of Data Centers both in design and management, then introduces opportunities that recent technological advances have made possible. This paper presents several new approaches of ownership and responsibilities that directly affect financial viability of the Data Center.
Disagree with someone and cannot persuade them? Do you need to hide your intransigence or ulterior motive? Then change the basis of discussion by changing the subject with a different definition.
This happens routinely in political discourse and rather frequently in best practice discovery and promulgation in building construction and settlement infrastructure standards[1]. Assuming all parties are negotiating in good faith resolution may lie in agreement on a common understanding of what a satisfying agreement might look like.
Admittedly, a subtle and challenging topic outside our wheelhouse[2] hence the need to improve our organization of this topic starting with today’s colloquium; with follow on sessions every month.
Starting 2025 we will organize our approach to this topic, thus:
Language 100. Survey of linguistic basics for developing codes, standards and regulations. Many vertical incumbents have developed their own style manuals
Language 200. Electrotechnical vocabulary
Language 300. Architectural and Allied trade vocabulary
Language 400. The language of government regulations; the euphemisms of politicians with influence over the built environment
Language 500. Advanced topics such as large language models or spoken dialects such as “High Michigan” — arguably, the standard American dialect where it applies to the standards listed above.
It may not be obvious how profound the choice of words and phrases have on leading practice discovery and promulgation. For example, “What is Gender” determines the number, placement and functionality of sanitary technologies in housing, hospitals and sporting. The United States has a Supreme Court justice that cannot define “woman”
As always, we will respond to public consultation opportunities wherever we can find them. Some organizations are better than this than others.
Today we limit our discussion to language changes in the catalogs of ANSI-accredited standards developers whose titles have the most influence over the interoperability of safety and sustainability technologies that create and sustain the built environment of educational settlements.
Every building construction discipline has its own parlance and terms of art.
This is enough for a one-hour session and, depending upon interest, we will schedule a breakout session outside of our normal “daily” office hours. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
ΒΙΒΛΙΟΘΗΚΕΣ
Starting 2024 and running into 2025 we will break down this topic further, starting with construction contract language — Lingua Franca 300:
Asset management applies to any organization. As such, understanding its terminology, principles, and outcomes is key to an organization’s success. ISO 55000:2024 provides an overview of #AssetManagement and its expected benefits. @isostandardshttps://t.co/XZsWvJJ8r4
(1) The United States government defines a “Green Building” as a building that has been designed, constructed, and operated in a way that reduces or eliminates negative impacts on the environment and occupants. The government has established various standards and certifications that buildings can achieve to be considered “green.”
The most widely recognized green building certification in the United States is the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification, which is administered by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). To achieve LEED certification, a building must meet certain standards related to sustainable site development, water efficiency, energy efficiency, materials selection, and indoor environmental quality.
In addition to the LEED certification, there are other programs and standards that can be used to measure and certify the sustainability of buildings, such as the Green Globes rating system and the Living Building Challenge.
Overall, the goal of green building is to create buildings that are not only environmentally sustainable but also healthier, more comfortable, and more efficient for occupants, while reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. By promoting green building practices, the U.S. government aims to reduce the environmental impact of the built environment and move towards a more sustainable future.
(2) The U.S. Green Building Council is a conformance organization. See the discussion our ABOUT for background on incumbent stakeholders.
Since so much of what we do in standards setting is built upon a foundation of a shared understanding and agreement of the meaning of words (no less so than in technical standard setting) that time is well spent reflecting upon the origin of the nouns and verbs of that we use every day. Best practice cannot be discovered, much less promulgated, without its understanding secured with common language.
Because electrotechnology changes continually, definitions (vocabulary) in its best practice literature changes continually; not unlike any language on earth that adapts to the moment and place.
The changes reflect changes in technology or changes in how the technology works in practice; even how the manufacturers create adaptations to field conditions by combining functions. Any smart electrical component has a digital language embedded in it, for example.
Consider the 2023 National Electrical Code. Apart from many others the NEC will contain a major change to Article 100 (Definitions); the subject of elevated debate over the past three years.
When we refer “language” we must distinguish between formal language, informal language, colloquial language and dialect which may differ the language spoken, language written at the office and language used on the job site. “Terms of art”
Are these terms (or, “terms of art”) best understood in context (upstream articles in Chapters 4 through 8) — or should they be adjudicated by the 14 Principals of Code Making Panel 1? The answer will arrive in the fullness of time. Many changes to the National Electrical Code require more than one cycle to stabilize.
Code Making Panel 1 has always been the heaviest of all NEC panels. As explained n our ABOUT, the University of Michigan held a vote in CMP-1 for 20+ years (11 revision cycles) before moving to the healthcare facilities committee for the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee. Standards Michigan continues its involvement on behalf of the US education facility industry — the second largest building construction market. There is no other pure user-interest voice on any technical committee; although in some cases consulting companies are retained for special purposes.
To serve the purpose of making NFPA 70 more “useable” we respect the Standards Council decision to make this change if it contributes to the viability of the NFPA business model. We get to say this because no other trade association comes close to having as enduring and as strong a voice: NFPA stands above all other US-based SDO’s in fairness and consideration of its constituency. The electrical safety community in the United States is a mighty tough crowd.
If the change does not work, or work well enough, nothing should prohibit reversing the trend toward “re-centralizing” — or “de-centralizing” the definitions.
Public comment on the First Draft of the 2026 Edition will be received until August 28, 2024.
Technical Committees meet during the last half of October to respond to public comment on the First Draft of the 2026 National Electrical Code.
Julia is a programming language that has gained popularity in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and scientific computing for several reasons.
High Performance: Julia is designed to be a high-performance language, often compared to languages like C and Fortran. It achieves this performance through just-in-time (JIT) compilation, allowing it to execute code at speeds close to statically compiled languages. This makes Julia well-suited for computationally intensive AI tasks such as numerical simulations and deep learning.
Ease of Use: Julia is designed with a clean and expressive syntax that is easy to read and write. It feels similar to other high-level languages like Python, making it accessible to developers with a background in Python or other scripting languages.
Multiple Dispatch: Julia’s multiple dispatch system allows functions to be specialized on the types of all their arguments, leading to more generic and efficient code. This feature is particularly useful when dealing with complex data types and polymorphic behavior, which is common in AI and scientific computing.
Rich Ecosystem: Julia has a growing ecosystem of packages and libraries for AI and scientific computing. Libraries like Flux.jl for deep learning, MLJ.jl for machine learning, and DifferentialEquations.jl for solving differential equations make it a powerful choice for AI researchers and practitioners.
Interoperability: Julia offers excellent interoperability with other languages, such as Python, C, and Fortran. This means you can leverage existing code written in these languages and seamlessly integrate it into your Julia AI projects.
Open Source: Julia is an open-source language, which means it is freely available and has an active community of developers and users. This makes it easy to find resources, documentation, and community support for your AI projects.
Parallel and Distributed Computing: Julia has built-in support for parallel and distributed computing, making it well-suited for tasks that require scaling across multiple cores or distributed computing clusters. This is beneficial for large-scale AI projects and simulations.
Interactive Development: Julia’s REPL (Read-Eval-Print Loop) and notebook support make it an excellent choice for interactive data analysis and experimentation, which are common in AI research and development.
While Julia has many advantages for AI applications, it’s important to note that its popularity and ecosystem continue to grow, so some specialized AI libraries or tools may still be more mature in other languages like Python. Therefore, the choice of programming language should also consider the specific requirements and constraints of your AI project, as well as the availability of libraries and expertise in your development team.
ABSTRACT. Many optimization problems in power transmission networks can be formulated as polynomial problems with complex variables. A polynomial optimization problem with complex variables consists in optimizing a real-valued polynomial whose variables and coefficients are complex numbers subject to some complex polynomial equality or inequality constraints. These problems are usually directly expressed with real variables. In this work, we propose a Julia module allowing the representation of polynomial problems in their original complex formulation. This module is applied to power system optimization and its generic design enables the description of several variants of power system problems. Results for the Optimal Power Flow in Alternating Current problem and for the Preventive-Security Constrained Optimal Power Flow problem are presented.
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?
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
