Radiant Heating HVAC

Special Feature Article

Rick Fedrizzi

Rick Fedrizzi is a principal with the Global Environment & Technology Foundation, the Center for Energy & Climate Solutions and president of Green-Think Inc., an environmentally focused marketing and communications consulting firm providing services for the residential and commercial built environments. He also serves as president and CEO of the U.S. Green Building Council, of which he also is founding chairman, and president of the World Green Building Council. Contact by e-mail.

Click here for Bio

"Operation and maintenance manuals were painstakingly prepared, in very basic and specific language, and delivered to the owner along with a very accurate set of as-built prints."

"we could certainly use an SPVC – that’s a ‘Systems Performance Verification Contractor.’ This would make him [or her] the most important contractor on the job..."

"My point through all of this is that commissioning is a basic need in building construction. When systems don’t function properly or as they’re designed, how can we expect greater energy efficiency or improved indoor environmental quality? "

"...HVAC system manufacturers build millions of systems, each one like the one that came off the line before it. It’s what the industry – engineers, contractors, installers, owner/operators, service technicians, and building occupants – does with them in the field that more often than not makes the difference."

Putting Pride Back in the Process

By Rick Fedrizzi

As we reflect on the 4th of July, who among us in the United States doesn’t think of fireworks, barbecues, and apple pie? And, of course, there’s that feeling of pride – in our country, our heritage, and our future. And while being overly prideful surely is a vice worth checking, pride seems to be the theme with which we close our discussion of building commissioning.

I offer first an interesting commentary from Jack Ellinghaus, director of facilities, The Maryland Zoo, Baltimore:

If you go back 30 or 40 years and more, the design team (architects, MEP engineers, site and structural engineers, etc.) took great pride in delivering a complete and properly operating product to the end-user. Specifications called for provision and installation of equipment that would deliver a designed purpose. Specifications further declared that all equipment and systems would be tested and their operation demonstrated to the owner, whose employees would be trained in their proper operation and maintenance upon completion. Operation and maintenance manuals were painstakingly prepared, in very basic and specific language, and delivered to the owner along with a very accurate set of as-built prints.

Since the ’60s, however, this process has gradually deteriorated to the point where owners are now lucky to receive even a copy of the manufacturer’s promotional literature. On-site testing has declined to merely bumping the motor (if power is available), and the demonstration is a joke.

I once had the opportunity to attend, as a guest, the demonstration of a complex filtration system for an aquatic mammal display. The filtration system consisted of sand filters, bio-media filters, ozonation, and UV radiation. [Because of] manufacturing and shipping delays, the UV equipment was not yet on-site, but the design engineer proceeded with the demonstration; and with a wave of his hands, [he] asked the crowd to imagine that it was there while he described what it was supposed to do! That was the full extent of the demonstration and O&M instruction that was provided to that owner.

This last instance is an example of why your campaign is so important. Commissioning of equipment and systems used to be part of the standard package, and we’ve let it get away.

Ben Kincaid (from Fluid and Thermal Systems in Indianapolis and a frequent contributor to this column) also writes of the “pride” factor.

“The basic idea of commissioning begins with ‘Let’s assume that everyone has no pride in [his or her] part of the system,’” Ben writes. “It is either this thought, or ‘Let’s assume that everyone individually is proud of [his or her] part of the system but will never be capable of coordinating and/or communicating with all other parts of the system.’ In the history of HVAC engineering that I’ve witnessed, 1969 to 2005, little has made me swell up with American or any other kind of pride.”

Ben creatively offers as a solution to building commissioning woes, a change in job title and function for balancing contractors – or “BCs,” as he calls them.

“BC implies [something] out of date to begin with,” he writes. “Maybe the air side [of a system] can use a bit of balancing, but the hydronic side … if properly designed, installed, and commissioned … will never need a balancing contractor. However, we could certainly use an SPVC – that’s a ‘Systems Performance Verification Contractor.’ This would make him [or her] the most important contractor on the job by number of initials, if nothing else.”

Ben goes on to talk about a problem he often sees in the field: a supply line connected to a heating or cooling coil that is mistaken for a return line, which ultimately results in water flowing backward through coils further downstream.

“There is no column in the BCs form to indicate water going the wrong way!” he writes. “If the form was an SPVC form, it would. Then no one would have to commission the system, and we could then think about controlling it.”

David Lewis of Clayco Construction in St. Louis likewise writes about “balancing reports on fans not wired (or even installed), reports of flushing and cleaning or piping systems and changing of roughing strainers only to find later [that] ‘straw’ in the piping has clogged the system and caused failures. The list goes on. What they all have in common is someone not doing [his or her] job.”

My point through all of this is that commissioning is a basic need in building construction. When systems don’t function properly or as they’re designed, how can we expect greater energy efficiency or improved indoor environmental quality?

In much of this discussion over the last few months, there’s been a lot of finger-pointing over who’s to blame for poorly operated buildings – owners, engineers, and/or contractors? Perhaps we need to elevate the discussion and focus on the bigger picture of how to make the process better. Maybe it is as simple as taking pride in a job well done.

With that said, thank you to all who have made this a lively discussion over the past 6 months. In closing, I offer voice to one reader who took exception to my high-performance car analogy.

“A high-performance car, or any car, is not one-of-a-kind,” he writes. “They (auto manufacturers) have built thousands of exactly the same cars. Every HVAC system designed and installed, [however], is unique, and all of the variables are different on every project. There is no one cure-all HVAC system or set-up; each system has to be fine-tuned.”

My Catholic school upbringing allows me to humbly accept correction. But I am compelled to add that the HVAC system manufacturers build millions of systems, each one like the one that came off the line before it. It’s what the industry – engineers, contractors, installers, owner/operators, service technicians, and building occupants – does with them in the field that more often than not makes the difference.

Enjoy a safe and pleasant start to summer!

This newsletter sponsored by Dupont

RBc: Thanks for the words Rick!

THIS DOCUMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO THIS PROGRAM ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. The information type should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Stamats Communications and Stamats Communications cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information presented after the date of publication. INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED 'AS IS' WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. The user assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use of this document. Buildings.com newsletter e-mail may be copied and distributed subject to the following conditions:
1. All text must be copied without modification and all pages must be included.
2. All copies must contain Stamats Communications' copyright notice and any other notices provided therein.
3. This document may not be distributed for profit