The National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies
  Login    Register   Search
Home  
 
Building Sciences Database
 

To use the Building Sciences Database we ask you to register with us and create a Preferred User account.  Once registered you will be able to download various building data sets.  The registration is necessary to protect the integrity of these data sets.  We ask for your understanding in this matter and hope you will make use of the wealth of information offered here.

 

 

The Building Sciences Database contains the collected data as part of our various Building Characterization Tasks. Theses Tasks were designed to develop protocols for the measurement of integrated building performance and to measure a comprehensive set of environmental parameters in non-problematic buildings throughout the United States . It resulted in the development of integrated building protocols and normative baseline data to assess the relationships of building performance and energy consumption and how they contribute to problems in solving IEQ and other building performance concerns.

The Building Sciences Database currently holds data on ten office buildings located throughout the United States . For each building you will find data on

  • its physical characteristics
  • thermal comfort (i.e., temperature, operative temperature, vertical temperature gradient, relative humidity, and draft), carbon dioxide, surface and airborne mold, and volatile organic compounds
  • lighting
  • sound
  • energy consumption

You can download the data files of each of the listed parameters as an Excel file. If you are a researcher and interested in conducting your own analyses on the data, please connect with us.

Over the next twelve months, the database will be expanded with data from ten schools; ten high-performance (LEED rated) buildings; a direct comparison of two public buildings, one LEED rated, one not; quantitative duct leakage measurements of ten residences; and field test of closed crawl space systems at two U.S. location each with ten residences.

^Back to top of page 
 
What's New

November 11, 2008

The NCEMBT released an interim report entitled Development of Assessment Protocols for Security Measures - A Scoping Study: Identification And Evaluation Of Existing Tools authored by William Bahnfleth, his colleagues at Pennsylvania State University and T. Agami Reddy of Drexel University. 

This report summarizes the evaluation of  tools and protocols available in the open literature whereby building owners can evaluate the current state of their buildings vis-a-vis airborne vulnerability, and determine its reduction were specific countermeasures to be implemented. The approach was to first select a smaller set of tools from the ones identified in the previous report (NCEMBT-081105)  which are deemed to be developed or targeted towards practical and pragmatic use by building security professionals, by consulting engineers and by owners and maintenance personnel. Subsequently, these tools are applied to a few carefully selected buildings so that their responses can be evaluated both in terms of the risk assessment aspect as well as the one involving advocating resiliency measures. The ease in using the tools, the quantity and specificity of the suggestions they provide, the extent to which the responses differ between tools will be issues which will be evaluated and reported in this document.

 

 

 

November 5, 2008

The NCEMBT released an interim report entitled Development of Assessment Protocols for Security Measures - A Scoping Study - Literature Review authored by William Bahnfleth, his colleagues at Pennsylvania State University and t. Agami Reddy of Drexel University. 

This report summarizes existing knowledge in terms of available documents, guidance, and tools as applicable to non-critical buildings targeted towards, (i) risk assessment procedures, (ii) airborne CB agents and building attack scenarios, (iii) metrics used to quantify building security, (iv) design methods, available technology and existing guidance to enhance resiliency of new buildings as well as existing buildings, (v) an overall classification of the various analysis methods, (vi) published guidance, procedures and protocols and on risk reduction, (vi) identifying the multiple related impacts of security design, and (iv) the economics of building resiliency for “non-critical” facilities. The literature examined is specific to securing the building’s HVAC system as well as other metrics that affect airborne contaminant distribution. Gaps in the available open literature are also discussed.

 

 

October 10, 2008

The NCEMBT released the report NCEMBT-081010 entitled Impact Of Air Return Strategy On Building Energy Consumption And Indoor Air Quality - Literature Review authored by William Bahnfleth and Dylan McWhirter of   the Pennsylvania State University and Davor Novosel of NCEMBT. 

This review summarizes the state of knowledge regarding the impact of return air strategy on building energy consumption, indoor air quality, and building resiliency in the event of a chemical, biological, or radiological (CBR) attack as documented in open literature and supplemented with information provided by designers; heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) contractors; and facility owner/operators.  The scope of the review is limited to overhead ducted and plenum return systems; under-floor systems are not considered.  Over 50 references were reviewed. A one-page summary was produced for each reference that concisely describes its scope and content, relevance to return systems, significant findings, and limitations.

 

 

October 3, 2008

The NCEMBT released the final report Nigro P, Chojnowski D, Kosar D and Novosel D.  2008.  National Center For Energy Management And Building Technologies Task 7: Reduced Energy Use Through Reduced Indoor Contamination In Commercial Buildings - Volume 1.  Final Report NCEMBT-080930.1  Alexandria, Virginia: National Center For Energy Management And Building Technologies.

The report documents the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) design, construction and instrumentation of its particulate filter test loop, which is compliant with requirements as set forth by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2-1999 and compatible with pending ASHRAE Standard 145.2P mandates for gas phase filter testing.   The facility underwent shakedown, qualification, and benchmark operation.  An inaugural series of benchmark particulate filter tests following the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2-1999 method of testing was conducted on particulate filters with manufacturers’ MERV ratings of 7, 11 and 15.  The benchmark testing results could only confirm the MERV 15 rating, whereas the other filter samples achieved only MERV ratings of 6 and 10.
 
A companion test loop was set up at Pennsylvania State University (PSU) which also too meets the requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2-1999.  The PSU test facility has been designed to meet the emerging ASHRAE Standard 185.1P mandates for ultraviolet (UV) lamp testing for ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) of microorganisms – viruses, bacteria, and spores.  The final report on the PennState loop will be published in the near term.

 

 

September 22, 2008

The NCEMBT has just released the Final Report NCEMBT-080801 entitled Underfloor Air Distribution - An Experimental Comparison Of Air Diffusion Performance Between Underfloor Air Distribution And Conventional Overhead Air Distribution Systems.  

This project covered the laboratory investigation where the performance and cost-effectiveness of UFAD and conventional air distribution (CAD) systems were compared.  To perform the testing, it was necessary to modify and upgrade the current UNLV Building Technologies Laboratory (BTLab) to obtain experimental data related to energy, performance and comfort issues associated with CAD and UFAD systems. The major test findings are: 

  • The null hypothesis that “There are no significant differences in air velocity and thermal distribution in interior office zones between CAD and UFAD systems that are designed to perform at an ADPI greater than 80%” is rejected for both full and partial load conditions.
  • UFAD systems, based solely on ADPI results, the indoor environment is thermally not acceptable under partial load conditions (ADPI lower than 80%) but thermally acceptable (ADPI higher than 80%) under full load conditions, while it is thermally acceptable for both full and partial load conditions in CAD systems.
  • Statistically there are significant differences in air velocity and thermal distribution in interior office zones between CAD and UFAD systems that are designed to perform at an ADPI greater than 80%. However the vertical temperature gradients in both CAD and UFAD systems are below the sensible threshold of most occupants, so from a thermal sensation perspective, they have no significant differences.
  • When subjected to high plenum subfloor or slab temperatures and/or significant plenum air leakage, UFAD systems may consume more energy than CAD systems to achieve the same average occupied zone temperature of 75 °F with the supply diffuser air temperatures set at the industry standard, i.e., 55 °F for CAD systems and 65 °F for UFAD systems, due to increased supply airflow rates and cooling requirements to keep plenum supply air temperatures significantly below 65 °F.


 ^Back to top of page
 
What We Do

The National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies (NCEMBT) is a non-profit (§501(c)(3)) institution.  Our mission is to 

  • Transform the built environment by delivering applied research and education that results in sustainable building systems which are efficient, productive, secure, and healthy.
  • Coordinate the application of research with partners and sponsors to get the research to market.

 

We accomplish this by supporting research, participating in standard setting, advancing technical training and professional education and serving as a repository of information on economic, technical and public policy issues.       

Please read our 2006-2007 Annual Review (pdf, 2.0 MB) for more information about our organization and our work.
 
© 2008 University of Nevada Las Vegas and NCEMBT. All rights reserved. Terms of Use   Privacy Statement