American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. M I N U T E S RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Hyatt Regency Hotel Albuquerque, New Mexico JUNE 25, 26 & 30, 2010 Note: These draft minutes have not been approved and not the official, approved record until approved by the Research Administration Committee.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
M I N U T E S
RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Hyatt Regency Hotel
Albuquerque, New Mexico
JUNE 25, 26 & 30, 2010
Note: These draft minutes have not been approved and not the official, approved record until approved by the Research Administration Committee.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
JUNE 25, 26 & 30, 2010
PRINCIAL MOTIONS ................................................................................................................................... iii
ACTION ITEMS – JUNE 2010 MEETING ............................................................................................. v
RECURRING ACTION ITEMS ................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS ........................................................................................................................... vii
A. CALL TO ORDER ..................................................................................................................................... 1
B. REVIEW OF AGENDA ........................................................................................................................... 1
C. REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS FROM JANUARY 2010 MEETING ............................................ 2
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES .................................................................................................................... 3
E. CHAIRS REPORT...................................................................................................................................... 3
F. BOD EX-OFFICIO REPORT .................................................................................................................. 4
MEETING OF THE WHOLE: G-PROPOSED MOP, ROB OR RESEARCH MANUAL CHANGES ....................................... 4 H- RTAR REVIEW ............................................................................................................................. 7 I-WORK STATEMENT REVIEW .................................................................................................. 8 J- RESERCH ADVISORY PANEL UPDATE ................................................................................ 9 K- CONSULTANTS REPORT ......................................................................................................... 9 L- RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR BREAKFAST ....................................................... 9 M- PLANS FOR FY 10-11 SOCIETY YEAR ............................................................................... 10 N- MORTS REPORT ......................................................................................................................... 10 O- TENTATIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS TO POTENTIALLY BID FALL ......................... 10 P- TENTATIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS ..................................................................................... 11 Q- UNSOLICITED RESEARCH PROJECTS ................................................................................ 12 R- RESEARCH LIAISON SECTION REPORTS ......................................................................... 12
S. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ....................................................................................................................... 13 T. NEW BUSINESS ........................................................................................................................................ 13 U. NEXT MEETING ....................................................................................................................................... 13 ADJOURN ......................................................................................................................................................... 13
iii
PRINCIPAL MOTIONS RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
JUNE 25, 26 & 30, 2010
NO. PAGE MOTION 1 3 the draft minutes of the RAC 2010 Winter Meeting in Orlando, Florida and the spring
teleconference be approved as drafted.
2 3 proposed research project 1515-TRP, “Thermal and Air Quality Acceptability in Buildings that Reduce Energy by Reducing Minimum Airflow from Overhead Diffusers,” be reconsidered for funding by Technology Council based upon new information provided by single bidder.
3 4 That Section 3.930 – Model Research Agreement of Volume 3: Standing Rules – Manuals and Procedures of the Rules of the Board be modified as indicated
4 6 the Research Manual changes be approved
5 7 1614-RTAR, Evaluation of Effectiveness of UV Systems, sponsored by TC 5.10, Kitchen Ventilation, be returned.
6 7 1615-RTAR, Fault Detection and Diagnostic (FDD) Methods for Supermarkets, sponsored by TC 7.5, Smart Building Systems, be accepted.
7 7 1616-RTAR, Revise Load Calculation Applications Manual (2009), sponsored by TC 4.1, Load Calculation Data and Procedures, be returned.
8 7 1618-RTAR, Literature Search and Risk Assessment for Establishing a Low Limit of Relative Humidity Levels in Health Care Spaces, sponsored by TC 9.6, Healthcare Facilities, be conditionally accepted.
9 7 1619-RTAR, Data Center Gaseous Contamination Limits and Means of Monitoring, sponsored by TC 9.9, Mission Critical Facilities, Technology Spaces and Electronic Equipment, be returned.
10 7 1621-RTAR, CHP Driving Rain: Impact on Durability, Indoor Humidity and Energy Efficiency, sponsored by TC 4.4, Building Materials and Building Envelope Performance, be rejected.
11 8 1434-WS, Refrigerated Facilities Doorway Infiltration Air Energy Reduction, sponsored by 10.5, Refrigerated Distribution and Storage Facilities, be returned.
12 8 1561-WS, Procedures to Adjust Observed Climatic Data for Regional or Mesoscale climatic Variations, sponsored by TC 4.2, Climatic Information, be returned.
iv
13 8 1566-WS, Equations to Estimate Evaporation Rates from Wetted Surfaces in Natatoriums and Commercial/Industrial Buildings, sponsored by TC 8.10, Mechanical Dehumidification Equipment and Heat Pipes, be returned.
14 8 1581-WS, Develop Alternate Setup Guidelines for Unitary Air Conditioner Test Configurations Which Cannot Adhere to ASHRAE 37/ASHRAE 116 Specified Duct Dimensions and External Pressure Tap Locations, sponsored by TC 8.11, Unitary and Room Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, be conditionally accepted.
15 8 1587-WS, Improved Tools for Control Loop Performance Measurement and Evaluation, sponsored by TC 7.9, Building Commissioning, be returned.
16 9 1588-WS, Representative Layer-by-Layer Descriptions for Fenestration Systems with Specified Bulk Properties such as U factor and SHGC, sponsored by TC 4.7, Energy Calculations, be conditionally returned.
17 9 1592-WS, CHP Design Guide – Update to the 1996 Cogeneration Design Guide, sponsored by TC 1.10, Cogeneration Systems, be conditionally accepted.
18 9 1608-WS, Develop Comprehensive Performance Rating (CPR) for Unitary HVAC, Phase 1, sponsored by TC 8.11, Unitary and Room Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, be returned.
19 11 1493-TRP, “CFD Shootout Contest – Prediction of Duct Fitting Losses,” be awarded to Zhiqlang Zhai and the University of North Carolina - Charlotte for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $20,000 each or ($40,000 total).
20 11 1517-TRP, “Validation of a Low-order Acoustic Model of Boilers and its Application for Diagnosing Combustion Driven Oscillations,” be awarded to Secat, Inc. for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $107,000.
21 11 1547-TRP, “CO2-based Demand Controlled Ventilation for Multiple Zone HVAC Systems,” be awarded to the University of Nebraska Lincoln for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $112,829.
22 12 1583-TRP, “Assessment of Burning Velocity Test Methods,” to the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $80,000.
23 12 1596-TRP, “Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in Retail Stores,” be awarded to University of Texas-Austin for a period of 30 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $1,408,356.
v
ACTION ITEMS RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE (RAC)
JUNE 25, 26 & 30, 2010
Action #
Responsibility Summary of Action Page/ status
1 Staff Add Iain Walker to the PMS roster for ASHRAE Research Project 1515-RP.
3 complete
2 Somasundaram MORTS
Respond to South India request for feedback on natural ventilation/cooling study. Provide the URP procedures.
4 complete
3 Braun Draft revision text for consideration at Tech Weekend meeting on proposed move of Model Research Agreement from ROB to MOP.
6
4 Braun MORTS
Prioritize TRPs to bid fall 2010 11
5 MORTS Implement the RAC roster changes for 2010-2011 13
RECURRING ACTION ITEMS (EACH MEETING)
Responsibility Summary of Action Chair Report to Technology Council on RAC’s MBO Status. Research Liaisons Remind all TC chairs and research subcommittee chairs in section that a
draft of all Work Statement and RTARs, and all later versions should be sent to their Research Liaison for review before information is passed on to the Manager of Research.
RPS (Primary) Review RTARs RAS (Secondary) RAS (Primary) Review Work Statements RPS (Secondary) RAS (Primary) Review TRPs and URPs RPS (Secondary) RPS (Primary) Review and revise the Society’s Research Implementation Plan based upon (Secondary) accepted RTARs. Subcommittee Report Status of assigned MBOs.
vi
Chairs Staff Distribute copies of Technology Council's Action Items and Motions affecting
RAC. BOD ExO Report to the RAC Chair BOD's Actions and Motions affecting RAC. Staff Forward international URPs to RAS Chair in addition to the cognizant TC and
Research Liaison. RECURRING ACTION ITEMS (ANNUAL MEETING) Responsibility Summary of Action Chair Invite new RAC members to meeting and any training sessions at meeting. Incoming Chair Finalize MBOs and roster assignments. Set date for fall meeting.
RECURRING ACTION ITEMS (WINTER MEETING)
Responsibility Summary of Action RPS Plan workshop for new RAC members at the Annual meeting. RPS Review Grant-In-Aid Applications RPS Review New Investigator Award Nominations RPS Review Homer Addams Award Nominations MORTS Prepare semi-annual report to RAC by May 15. RECURRING ACTION ITEMS (FALL MEETING) Responsibility Summary of Action RAS Plan Research Workshop for Winter Meeting RAC Decide if Spring meeting is needed and set date for Spring meeting. RLs Review “Service to ASHRAE Research Award” nominations submitted TC
chairs and select best nomination for RAC consideration.
MORTS Prepare semi-annual report to RAC by December 15.
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
M I N U T E S
RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
JUNE 25, 26 & 30, 2010
MEMBERS PRESENT: GUESTS: Lawrence Markel, Chair Carl Huber, Incoming Member James Braun, Vice-chair Piotr Domanski, Incoming Member Hakim Elmahdy, Chair RAS Hugh Henderson, Chair RPS – 6/30 only Sriram Somasundaram, RL Section 1.0 Iain Walker, RL Section 2.0 Raymond Cohen, RL Section 3.0 John House, RL Section 4.0 Jaap Hogeling, RL Section 6.0 ASHRAE STAFF: George Jackins, RL Section 7.0 Claire Ramspeck, DOT Richard Hermans, RL Section 8.0 Bruce Hunn, DSP Carl Lawson, RL Section 9.0 Mike Vaughn, MORTS Roberto Aguilo, RL Section 10.0 Donna Daniel, COOR Stephen Szymurski, Consultant ARTI Michael Brandemuehl, BOD Ex-Offcio Tom Watson, Coordinating Officer MEMBER ABSENT: Danny Castellan, RL Section 5.0 Chris Scruton, CEC-PIER Hywel Davies, Consultant CIBSE A. CALL TO ORDER Chair Markel called the meeting of the committee to order at 3:00 PM, Friday, June 25th. B. REVIEW OF AGENDA No changes to the agenda.
2
C. ACTION ITEM TRACKING AND PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS
Action Items
RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE January 22, 23 & 27, 2010
Action
# Responsibility Summary of Action Status
1 Braun Convey RAC’s input/feedback on concept of continuous maintenance ASHRAE Strategic Plan and update timeline to Planning Subcommittee of Tech. Council
Complete
2 Braun Convey RAC’s feedback on Strategic Planning Gap Analysis document to Planning Subcommittee of Tech. Council
Complete
3 Henderson, Staff
Incorporate the new design guide and special pub. guideline into the Research Manual
Complete
4 Braun, Markel Draft changes to the ROB Model Research agreement and Research Manual for consideration in Albuquerque to account for new conference paper deliverable; Announce these pending changes to TC research subcommittee chairs in Orlando.
Complete
5 Braun, Markel Draft plan for including 2010-2015 Research Strategic Plan goals within RTARs and WSs before Albuquerque.
Complete
6 Henderson, Braun, Staff
Add RTAR and WS evaluation forms to Research Manual Complete
7 Elmahdy, Henderson
Develop draft duties checklist for PES/PMS for consideration in Albuquerque. Appropriate checklist will be sent by MORTS with proposals or progress reports.
Complete
8 Cohen, House Develop template for letter sent to TCs in response to RTAR and WS decisions by RAC - point by point rebuttal, reference to and inclusion of RTAR/WS evaluation sheets.
Complete
9 Henderson Aguilo
Refine procedures and criteria for the Homer Addams Award for consideration in Albuquerque.
Complete
10 Henderson Send thank you letters to all non-winning Homer Addams applicants
Complete
3
11 MORTS, Markel, Braun,
Elmahdy, Henderson
Develop process for ranking projects to go out for bid before March conference call.
Complete
12 Staff Add Ex-Officio members of PMS (Co-funders, and Research Liaison) to PMS roster for e-mail distribution of progress reports and other contract documentation
Complete
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved and seconded that, (1) the draft minutes of the RAC 2010 January meeting in Orlando, Florida and the Spring
teleconference meeting be approved as drafted. MOTION PASSED: 11-0-0 CNV (Unanimous voice vote) E. CHAIR’S REPORT
A. Disposition of Motions from Last Meeting – all motions from Winter meeting that required Tech Council or BOD approval passed except the funding motion for 1515-TRP.
It is moved and seconded that, (2) proposed research project 1515-TRP, “Thermal and Air Quality Acceptability in Buildings
that Reduce Energy by Reducing Minimum Airflow from Overhead Diffusers,” be reconsidered for funding.
MOTION PASSED: 9-0-21 CNV Action #1 <Staff>: Add Iain Walker to the PMS for 1515-RP. Background: A motion to fund this project failed to pass Technology Council in Orlando by a vote of 6-6-0 CV. Since the proposal was written, University of California has obtained $250,000 in co-funding to support the energy-conservation side of the RP-1515 study. The additional funding adds detailed energy measurements to the ASHRAE project. It uses a set of existing buildings whose controls are being modified to toggle low-minimum flows at the researcher’s volition. Funding has been awarded from the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the work has already started. Low-minimum operation is especially suitable for retrofits, and retrofitting existing buildings is a priority for energy efficiency policy makers and the CEC. The project will determine energy savings and payback rates. This CEC project does not, however, examine the interior airflow circulation and occupant comfort issues that are addressed by the ASHRAE project.
B. New Action Items Assigned by Tech. Council:
1. AI#1 OR’10 – Update Committee MBOs and send to Watson prior to spring
1 Iain Walker abstained due to conflict and Roberto Aguilo abstained because he was out of the room for the
discussion.
4
meeting – Complete 2. AI#2 OR’10 – Review procedures with regard to 1515-TRP – Complete 3. AI#5 OR’10 – Provide Committee Input for Members’ First Newsletter -
Complete 4. RAC Input to ASHRAE Strategic Plan? – Tech C. Agenda Item for RAC – RAC AI #1
& 2.- Complete, 2010-2015 Research Strategic Plan is RAC current input 5. Policy needs for research that tests commercial products (1579-WS, 1361-RP)? –
Tech C. Agenda Item for RAC – Discussed complete.
C. New Members Council Referrals: Members Council Motion 41 (10/25/09 – South India Chapter) – ASHRAE to study ancient buildings for unwritten concepts of sustainability such as passive cooling, and natural ventilation – Assignment: RAC. Sriram Somasundaram will work with the chapter.
Action #2 <Somasundaran, MORTS>: Respond to South India chapter request for a research
project to study on natural ventilation/cooling methods in historical buildings by provifing the URP procedures.
D. New Information Items
1. Status on TechC Steering Committees (BIM, Bldg. Performance Metrics) 2. Proposed Environmental Health and Green Buildings Position Document 3. New Home Depot Filter Rating System 4. ASHRAE Energy Targets
E. MBOs 2009-2010
F. BOD EX-OFFICIO & COORD. OFFICER – BRANDEMUEHL & WATSON Michael Brandemuehl addressed RAC and thanked them for their work, leadership, and commitment to ASHRAE research. He also gave a Power Point presentation and it is included as Attachment #1. G. PROPOSED & POSSIBLE ROB, MOP, REFERENCE MANUAL, OR RESEARCH MANUAL
CHANGES It is moved and seconded that, (3) That Section 3.930 – Model Research Agreement of Volume 3: Standing Rules – Manuals
and Procedures of the Rules of the Board be modified as indicated below. 3.930 Model Research Agreement
ARTICLE IV - PAYMENTS
During the period of performance, the Society agrees to pay the sum of $ to the Institution in [(A)] equal installments of $[B]. The first installment shall be paid on or within thirty days after the execution of the Agreement. Subsequent payments shall be made within thirty days of the Society’s acceptance of Progress and Financial Reports described in GENERAL CONDITION IV, DELIVERABLES, during the term of the Agreement. In addition, a payment of $XX shall be made contingent upon submission of the Final Report described in GENERAL CONDITION IV, and the final payment of $XX shall be made contingent upon completion of all Services, the acceptance of the Final Report and the receipt of the Research or Technical Paper described in GENERAL CONDITION IV.
5
GENERAL CONDITION IV - DELIVERABLES Progress, Financial and Final Reports, Research or Technical Paper(s), and Data shall constitute the only deliverables (“Deliverables”) under this Agreement and shall be provided as follows: a. Progress and Financial Reports Progress and Financial Reports, in a form approved by the Society, shall be made to the Society through its Manager of Research and Technical Services at quarterly intervals; specifically on or before each January 1, April 1, June 10, and October 1 of the contract period. Furthermore, the Institution’s Principal Investigator, subject to the Society’s approval, shall, during the period of performance and after the Final Report has been submitted, report in person to the sponsoring Technical Committee/Task Group (TC/TG) at the annual and winter meetings, and be available to answer such questions regarding the research as may arise. b. Final Report A written report, design guide, or manual, (collectively, “Final Report”), in a form approved by the Society, shall be prepared by the Institution and submitted to the Society’s Manager of Research and Technical Services by the end of the Agreement term, containing complete details of all research carried out under this Agreement. Unless otherwise specified, six copies of the final report shall be furnished for review by the Society’s Project Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS).
Following approval by the PMS and the TC/TG, in their sole discretion, final copies of the Final Report will be furnished by the Institution as follows:
- An executive summary in a form suitable for wide distribution to the industry and to the public.
- Two bound copies - One unbound copy, printed on one side only, suitable for reproduction. - Two copies on CD-ROM; one in PDF format and one in Microsoft Word. c. HVAC&R Research or ASHRAE Transactions Technical Papers One or more papers shall be submitted first to the ASHRAE Manager of Research and Technical Services (MORTS) and then to the “ASHRAE Manuscript Central” website-based manuscript review system in a form and containing such information as designated by the Society suitable for publication. Papers specified as deliverables should be submitted as either Research Papers for HVAC&R Research or Technical Paper(s) for ASHRAE Transactions. Research papers contain generalized results of long-term archival value, whereas technical papers are appropriate for applied research of shorter-term value, ASHRAE Conference papers are not acceptable as deliverables from ASHRAE research projects. presentation at a Society meeting. The Technical Ppaper(s) shall conform to the instructions posted in “Manuscript Central” for an ASHRAE Transactions Technical or HVAC&R Research papers technical paper. The technical paper title shall contain the research project number (XXXX-RP) at the end of the title in parentheses, e.g., (XXXX-RP).
6
All papers or articles prepared in connection with an ASHRAE research project, which are being submitted for inclusion in any ASHRAE publication, shall be submitted through the Manager of Research and Technical Services first and not to the publication's editor or Conferences and Expositions Program Committee. GENERAL CONDITION VII - PUBLICATION The intent of the parties is to make the results of the Services available to, and for the benefit of, the public. In view of their financial support of the Services, the Society shall own the exclusive rights to publication of all Data, Research or Technical Papers, Progress, Financial and Final Reports resulting from the project for the shortest of the following periods: a. Until the Society gives the Institution written permission to publish the results, or b. Until the Research or Technical Paper described in GENERAL CONDITION IV,
DELIVERABLES, is presented at a Society meeting published, at which time the Technical Ppaper or derivative paper based on data resulting from the Services, may be published by the Institution with acknowledgement to the Society, or
c. Until the period of one year has passed from the submission of said Technical Paper to the
Society at which time the Research or Technical Paper or derivative paper based on data resulting from the Services, may be published by the Institution with acknowledgement to the Society,
BACKGROUND: The above changes to the Model Research Agreement are required to account for the new ASHRAE conference paper format, which only requires a single blind review and would not be suitable as a deliverable for an ASHRAE sponsored research project. MOTION PASSED: 11-0-0, CNV It is moved and seconded that,
(4) the Research Manual also, be revised to account for following changes and as detailed in
Attachment #2.
Changes to the ROB Model Research agreement to account for new conference paper format.
A plan has been drafted to include the 2010-2015 Research Strategic Plan goals within RTARs and Work Statements.
A checklist for PES/PMS committee members have been developed and circulated. The appropriate checklist will be sent by MORTS with proposals or progress reports.
A return letter had been developed by RAC that will be sent to TCs in response to RTAR and Work Statement decisions- point by point rebuttal, reference to and inclusion of RTAR/WS evaluation sheets.
The procedures and criteria for the Homer Addams Award haves been refined. Guidelines for the development of special publications as ASHRAE research projects.
MOTION PASSED: 11-0-0, CNV Action #3 <Braun>: Draft revision text for consideration at Tech Weekend meeting on
proposed move of Model Research Agreement from ROB to MOP.
7
H. RTAR REVIEW RAC reviewed six RTARs submitted by TC/TGs for addition to the Society’s Research Implementation Plan. One was accepted, one conditionally accepted, three returned and one was rejected. The status of the RTARS after RAC review is provided below.
It is moved and seconded that, (5) 1614-RTAR, Evaluation of Effectiveness of UV Systems, sponsored by TC 5.10, Kitchen
Ventilation, be returned. MOTION PASSED RPS: 4-0-0, CNV It is moved and seconded that, (6) 1615-RTAR, Fault Detection and Diagnostic (FDD) Methods for Supermarkets, sponsored
by TC 7.5, Smart Building Systems, be accepted.
MOTION PASSED: 8-22-0, CNV It is moved and seconded that,
Load Calculation Data and Procedures, be returned.
MOTION PASSED RPS: 4-13-0, CNV
It is moved and seconded that,
(8) 1618-RTAR, Literature Search and Risk Assessment for Establishing a Low Limit of Relative Humidity Levels in Health Care Spaces, sponsored by TC 9.6, Healthcare Facilities, be conditionally accepted.
MOTION PASSED: 10-14-0, CNV
It is moved and seconded that,
(9) 1619-RTAR, Data Center Gaseous Contamination Limits and Means of Monitoring,
sponsored by TC 9.9, Mission Critical Facilities, Technology Spaces and Electronic Equipment, be returned.
MOTION PASSED RPS: 5-0-0, CNV
It is moved and seconded that,
2 Iain Walker and Hakim Elmahdy’s negative votes are because they believe there is no need for this research.
3 Sriram Somasundaram’s negative vote is because he feels this is not a research project.
4 Roberto Aguilo’s negative vote is because he does not feel there is a need for this research.
8
(10) 1621-RTAR, CHP Driving Rain: Impact on Durability, Indoor Humidity and Energy Efficiency, sponsored by TC 4.4, Building Materials and Building Envelope Performance, be rejected.
MOTION PASSED RPS: 4-1-0, CNV I. WORK STATEMENT REVIEW Eight work statements were submitted by the TCs for review. Two were conditionally accepted, four were conditionally accepted, and six were returned. It is moved and seconded that, (11) 1434-WS, Refrigerated Facilities Doorway Infiltration Air Energy Reduction, sponsored by
10.5, Refrigerated Distribution and Storage Facilities, be returned. MOTION PASSED RAS: 4-0-15 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (12) 1561-WS, Procedures to Adjust Observed Climatic Data for Regional or Mesoscale climatic
Variations, sponsored by TC 4.2, Climatic Information, be returned. MOTION PASSED RAS: 4-16-0 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (13) 1566-WS, Equations to Estimate Evaporation Rates from Wetted Surfaces in Natatoriums
and Commercial/Industrial Buildings, sponsored by TC 8.10, Mechanical Dehumidification Equipment and Heat Pipes, be returned.
MOTION PASSED RAS: 5-0-0 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (14) 1581-WS, Develop Alternate Setup Guidelines for Unitary Air Conditioner Test
Configurations Which Cannot Adhere to ASHRAE 37/ASHRAE 116 Specified Duct Dimensions and External Pressure Tap Locations, sponsored by TC 8.11, Unitary and Room Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, be conditionally accepted.
MOTION PASSED: 8-0-0 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (15) 1587-WS, Improved Tools for Control Loop Performance Measurement and Evaluation,
sponsored by TC 7.9, Building Commissioning, be returned.
5 Roberto Aguillo abstained because he was not in the room during the discussion.
6 Richard Hermans voted against because he feels there should be more recommended bidders who are not work
statement authors.
9
MOTION PASSED RAS: 3-17-0 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (16) 1588-WS, Representative Layer-by-Layer Descriptions for Fenestration Systems with
Specified Bulk Properties such as U factor and SHGC, sponsored by TC 4.7, Energy Calculations, be returned.
MOTION PASSED RAS: 4-0-0 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (17) 1592-WS, CHP Design Guide – Update to the 1996 Cogeneration Design Guide, sponsored
by TC 1.10, Cogeneration Systems, be conditionally accepted. MOTION PASSED: 8-0-0 CNV (18) 1608-WS, Develop Comprehensive Performance Rating (CPR) for Unitary HVAC, Phase 1,
sponsored by TC 8.11, Unitary and Room Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, be returned.
MOTION PASSED RAS: 4-0-0 CNV J. RESEARCH ADVISORY PANEL UPDATE Jeffrey Spitler gave a brief presentation on the near final draft of the 2010-2015 Research Strategic Plan and what will be presented to the TCs at the Research Subcommittee Chair’s breakfast. K. CONSULTANTS REPORT
1. AHRTI- see AHRTI report submitted by Steve Szymurski – Attachment #3.
L. RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR’S BREAKFAST
a) Proposed Announcements 1. 2010-2015Research Strategic Plan – Near final draft 2. Opportunities for Collaboration & Knowledge Transfer (ARTI, CEC-PIER, CIBSE,
USGBC, others?) 3. 2010-2011 Service to ASHRAE Research Award nomination deadline
b) RL Reminders for TCs See Meeting CD & FTP site for list of specific TC reminders.
7 John House voted against because in his opinion, the proposed research is not pre-competitive research. A great
deal of work has been done in this area and some of this work has been patented.
10
M. PLANS FOR FY 10-11 SOCIETY YEAR
a) Introduce new members of RAC 1. Piotr Domanski, Section 5 2. Carl Huber, Section 9 3. Chris Pyke, USGBC Consultant 4. Review SY 10-11 RAC MBOs (Attachment #4)
N. MORTS REPORT
MORTS Semi Annual Report - Highlights from the report were discussed and is included as Attachment # 5.
O. TENTATIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS TO POTENTIALLY BID FALL 2010 At this point, we have 22 TRPs and probably additional WSs that we are reviewing in Albuquerque and Tech Weekend (?) that are or may be ready for bid in fall 2010 or spring 2011. If just the 22 projects that are approved and ready now for bid in spring 2011 and all are awarded in Montreal, they would add more than $2.0 million in additional funding commitments to FY11-12. As a result, RAC will need to continue to prioritize the list of TRPs to bid on a regular basis. We also may need to forgo or greatly constrain a fall bid solicitation in 2010 because we only have about $100k in uncommitted funding for FY 10-11 if all six TRPs being considered at this meeting are funded.
1399-TRP, “Survey of Particle Production Rates from Process Activities in Pharmaceutical and Biological Clean Rooms;” Responsible Committee: TC 9.11 (Clean Spaces)
1410-TRP, “Effect of System Chemicals Towards the Breakdown of Lubricants and Refrigerants;” Responsible Committee: TC 3.02 (Refrigerant System Chemistry)
1413-TRP-R, “Developing Standard Procedures for Filling Climatic Data-Gaps for Use in Building Performance Monitoring and Analysis;” Responsible Committee: TC 4.02 (Climatic Information)
1447-TRP, “Performance of Pressurized Stairwells with Open Doors;” Responsible Committee: TC 5.06 (Control of Fire and Smoke)
1458-TRP, “Modeling Person-to-Person Contaminant Transport in a Mechanical Ventilation Space;” Responsible Committee: TC 4.10 (Indoor Environmental Modeling)
1462-TRP, “Active Mechanisms for Enhancing Heat and Mass Transfer in Sorption Fluids;” Responsible Committee: TC 8.03 (Absorption and Heat Operated Machines)
1495-TRP, “Effect of Lubricant on the Distribution of Moisture between the Vapor and Liquid Phases of Refrigerants (Phase 1);” Responsible Committee: TC 3.03 (Refrigerant Contaminant Control)
1499-TRP, “The Effect of Humidity on the Reliability of ICT Equipment in Data Centers;” Responsible Committee: TC 9.9 (Mission Critical Facilities, Technology Spaces and Electronic Equipment); Co-Sponsor: SSPC 90.1
1502-TRP, “User Interface Design for Advanced System Operation;” Responsible Committee: TC, 1.4 (Control Theory and Application)
1529-TRP, “Full-Frequency Numerical Modeling of Sound Transmission in and Radiation from Lined Ducts;” Responsible Committee: TC 2.6, Sound and Vibration Control
1550-TRP, “Thermal Performance of Insulating Coating;” Responsible Committee: TC 1.08 (Mechanical System Insulation)
1556-TRP, “Characterization of Liquid Refrigerant Flow Emerging from a Flooded Evaporator Tube Bundle;” Responsible Committee: TC 1.03 (Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow)
11
1557-TRP, “Lab Comparison of Relative Performance of Gas Phase Filtration Media at High and Low Challenge Concentrations;” Responsible Committee: TC 2.03 (Gaseous Air Contaminants and Gas Contaminant Removal Equipment)
1564-TRP, “Measurement of Oil Retention in the Micro-channel Heat Exchangers;” Responsible Committee: TC 8.04 (Air-to-Refrigerant Heat Transfer Equipment
1565-TRP, “Development of the ASHRAE Design Guide for Dedicated Outdoor-Air Systems;” Responsible Committee: TC 8.10 (Mechanical Dehumidification Equipment and Heat Pipes)
1580-TRP, “Study of Input Parameters for Risk Assessment of 2L Flammable Refrigerants in Residential Air Conditioning and Commercial Refrigeration Applications;” Responsible Committee: TC 3.01 (Refrigerants and Secondary Coolants)
1581-TRP, “Develop Alternate Set-up Guidelines for Unitary Air Conditioner Test Configurations Which Cannot Adhere to ASHRAE 37 / ASHRAE 116 Specified Duct Dimensions and External Pressure Tap Locations;” Responsible Committee: TC 8.11 (Unitary and Room Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps)
1584-TRP, “Assessment of Alternative Approaches to Predicting the Burning Velocity of a Refrigerant;” Responsible Committee: TC 3.01 (Refrigerants and Secondary Coolants)
1592-TRP, “CHP Design Guide – Update to the 1996 Cogeneration Design Guide; ” Responsible Committee: TC 1.10 (Cogeneration Systems)
1603-TRP, “Role of HVAC Systems in the Transmission of Infectious Agents in Buildings and Intermodal Transportation;” Responsible Committee: TC 9.03 (Transportation Air Conditioning)
1606-TRP, “Laboratory Testing of Flat Oval Transitions to Determine Loss Coefficients;” Responsible Committee: TC 5.02 (Duct Design)
1613-TRP, “Update Climatic Design Data in Chapter 14 of the 2013 Handbook of Fundamentals;” Responsible Committee: TC 4.2 Climatic Information
Action #4 <Braun, MORTS>: Prioritize TRPs to bid fall 2010. P. TENTATIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS
It is moved and seconded that, (19) tentative research project 1493-TRP, “CFD Shootout Contest – Prediction of Duct Fitting
Losses,” be awarded to Zhiqlang Zhai and the University of North Carolina - Charlotte for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $20,000 each or ($40,000 total). (Attachment #6 )
MOTION PASSED: 11-0-0 CNV
It is moved and seconded that, (20) tentative research project 1517-TRP, “Validation of a Low-order Acoustic Model of Boilers
and its Application for Diagnosing Combustion Driven Oscillations,” be awarded to Secat, Inc. for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $107,000. (Attachment #7)
MOTION PASSED: 12-0-0 CNV
12
It is moved and seconded that, (21) tentative research project 1547-TRP, “CO2-based Demand Controlled Ventilation for
Multiple Zone HVAC Systems,” be awarded to the University of Nebraska Lincoln for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $112,829. (Attachment #8)
MOTION PASSED: 12-0-0 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (22) tentative research project 1583-TRP, “Assessment of Burning Velocity Test Methods,” to
the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) for a period of 18 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $80,000. (Attachment #9)
MOTION PASSED: 11-0-1 CNV It is moved and seconded that, (23) tentative research project 1596-TRP, “Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in Retail Stores,”
be awarded to University of Texas-Austin for a period of 30 months at a total cost to ASHRAE of $1,408,356. (Attachment #10)
MOTION PASSED: 10-0-2 CV No action was taken on the following TRP for the reason listed or until more information was obtained from the sponsoring TCs:
1. 1502-TRP, User Interface Design for Advanced System Operation Status: Zero bids received. Sponsoring TC, 1.4, Control Theory and Application
Q. UNSOLICITED RESEARCH PROJECTS No action was taken on the following URPs for the reason listed or until more information was obtained from the evaluating TCs:
1. 1611-URP, “On the Association of Low Indoor Humidity in Schools with Children Absenteeism,” Responsible Committee: TC 2.1 (Physiology and Human Comfort); Co-Reviewers: None. Status: TC 2.1 recommended that ASHRAE not fund this project.
2. 1612-URP, “Environmental Analysis and Predicted Thermal Comfort in a Compressed Earth
Block (CEB) Structure: Compliance to ASHRAE ET* and Comparison with Conventional Built Structures,” Responsible Committee: RAC (Research Administration Committee); Co-Reviewers: None. Status: RAC declined fund after review.
Reviewers: None. Status: TC 5.1 recommended that ASHRAE not fund this project.
13
4. 1620-URP, “Buoyant Plume Models for Displacement Ventilation,” Responsible Committee: TC 5.3 (Room Air Distribution); Co-Reviewers: None. Status: TC 5.3 recommended that ASHRAE not fund this project.
5. 1622-URP, “Comparative Case Study of Energy Use Utilizing BIM for HVAC Design for Small
Commercial Buildings,” Responsible Committee: RAC (Research Administration Committee); Co-Reviewers: None. Status: RAC declined fund after review.
R. RESEARCH LIAISON SECTION REPORTS
RL section reports are included as Attachment #11.
Action #5 < MORTS>: Implement the RAC roster changes for 2010-2011. S. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Certificates were given to Chair Larry Markel and Carl Lawson T. NEW BUSINESS None U. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Research Administration Committee will be one or two Teleconference call in late September and/or early October. ADJOURNED The meeting of the Research Administration Committee adjourned at 9:05 AM, Wednesday, June 30, 2010.
ASHRAEEngineering the World We Live In
Presenter’s Name, ASHRAE position,
Attachment #1
Green Building Standard
• Developed by ASHRAE, IES and USGBC
• Jurisdictional compliance option for International Green Construction Code – developed by ICC, ASTM International and AIA
• Attempts being made to align with Calif. green buildings standards code
• SPC working on interim addenda
• Membership call ended March 31; transition to SSPC effective July 1
• www.ashrae.org/greenstandard
Attachment #1
What’s Your Building EQ?
• Operation pilot underway
• 25 buildings from 10 owners/operators
• 17 provisional assessors
• Operational assessments to be completed by May 30
• Assessments include– Building characteristics
– Buildng energy quotient
– System energy breakdown
www.buildingeq.com
Attachment #1
What’s Your Building EQ?
• Asset rating development being finalized
• Asset rating pilot to begin in summer 2010
• Seven buildings identified for pilot
• Full program launch scheduled for early 2011
www.buildingeq.com
Attachment #1
35 Years of Energy Efficiency
Standard 90.1• 14 face-to-face meetings
• 5 webinars since fall 2009
• 5 subcommittees: conference calls average one/month
– 150 conference calls total
• 118 addenda processed
– 70 approved through March 15
• On target for approval shortly after this conference
Attachment #1
Technology Council
• Special Projects completed
– Energy Efficiency Guide for Existing Buildings: The Business Case for Building Owners & Managers
– Indoor Air Quality Guide: Best Practices for Design, Construction Commissioning
– Performance Measurements Protocols (June 2010)
• Special Project Underway
– $1.5 million NIST grant for ventilation and IAQ in retail stores research
– Performance Measurements Best Practices
Attachment #1
Technology Council
• Refrigeration Committee compiled list of speakers for chapter programs
GLOSSARY OF ASHRAE RESEARCH ACRONYMS ..................................................................................... iviii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................... viv
1. RESEARCH STRATEGIC PLANNING AND OVERALL APPROVAL PROCESS ....................................... 11
2. GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS AS ASHRAE RESEARCH
RTAR Lead Author Expected Work Statement Lead Author (Name, e-mail address) (Name, e-mail address)
Co-sponsoring TC/TG/SSPCs and votes:
(List only those committees that have reviewed this RTAR and voted to support it)
Possible Co-funding Organizations:
(List only those organizations (name, contact information) that have reviewed this RTAR and expressed support)
Application of Results:
(Handbook chapters, special publications etc. to be affected by results of this project)
State-of-the-Art (Background):
(Briefly describe the amount and quality of past research, and quantify existing gaps)
Advancement to the State-of-the-Art:
(Provide an estimate – as quantitative as possible – of the improvement expected from this research [i.e. x% energy
reduction in product y or building type z, x% increase in heat transfer coefficient between y and z, or x% reduction
in design time to do y, etc.])
Justification and Value to ASHRAE:
(Identify by number, profession, or industry the ASHRAE members affected. State the likelihood and how the
improvement would be adopted by industry. Estimate the timeframe over which x% of society in total would be
affected. Indicate the likelihood of ASHRAE’s obtaining any intellectual property rights from this project.)
Objectives:
(List the project goals and succinctly state how this project will accomplish its intended advancement to the state-of-
Attachment #2
8
the-art [i.e. a computer simulation will be used to do x, a computer simulation will be developed for x and verified
using laboratory data from tests y and z, field test data will be obtained from x and used to do y])
Key References:
(List references cited in the state-of-the art section.)
Attachment #2
9
3.4 Example RTAR Review Ballot Form used by RAC
RAC members use the form below to record their review comments and initial disposition decision on the RTAR
prior to the RAC meeting to discuss the RTAR. The completed form is submitted to ASHRAE staff, who in turn
incorporates this information into the RTAR Review Summary form.
Attachment #2
1
Example RTAR Review Ballot Used by Individual RAC Members Prior to Meeting
Project ID 0007
Project Title Design on A Dime
Sponsoring TC TC 12.5
Cost / Duration $250,000/24M
Submission History 1st Submission
Classifications: Research or Technology Transfer Basic/Applied Research
Tech Weekend 2010 Meeting Review Reviewer’s Name: AB
Check List Criteria Satisfied?
Comments & Suggestions
Is there a well-established need? The RTAR should include some level of literature review that
documents the importance/magnitude of a problem. If not, then the RTAR should be returned for
revision.
N
This project would greatly benefit the handbook chapter
noted but there is no mention of the related standard XXX in
development.
Is this appropriate for ASHRAE funding? If not, then the RTAR should be rejected. Examples of
projects that are not appropriate for ASHRAE funding would include: 1) research that is more
appropriately performed by industry, 2) topics outside the scope of ASHRAE activities.
Y
Is there an adequate description of the approach in order for RAC to be able to evaluate the
appropriateness of the budget? If not, then the RTAR should be returned for revision.
Y
Is the budget reasonable for the project scope? If not, then RTAR could be returned for revision
or conditionally accepted with a note that the budget should be revised for the WS.
Y
Have the proper administrative procedures been followed? This includes recording of the TC
vote, coordination with other TCs, proper citing of the Research Strategic Plan, etc. If not, then the
RTAR could be returned for revision or possibly conditionally accepted based on adequately
resolving these issues.
Y
Decision Options Initial
Decision?
Additional Comments or Approval Conditions
ACCEPT
COND. ACCEPT X
RETURN
REJECT
ACCEPT - Topic is ready for development into a work statement (WS). CONDITIONAL ACCEPT Vote - Minor Revision Required - RL can approve RTAR for development into WS without going back to RAC once TC satisfies RAC's approval condition(s)
RETURN- Topic is probably acceptable for ASHRAE research, but RTAR is not quite ready.
REJECT Vote - Topic is not acceptable for the ASHRAE Research Program.
Attachment #2
1
3.5 Example RTAR Review Summary from RAC
When RAC meets, they use the RTAR Review Summary form below to help guide their discussion of the RTAR.
In many cases, a RAC member’s initial disposition decision on a particular RTAR may change after reading other
member’s comments on the summary form and after participating to the meeting discussion of the RTAR.
A final version of the review summary form, which reflects the discussion and final decision that was made by RAC
on the RTAR during the meeting, is developed and used as the basis for the return letter to the TC/TG/SSPC or
EHC.
Attachment #2
1
Example RTAR Review Summary Used by RAC during Meeting and for Return Letter to TC
Project ID 0007
Project Title Design on A Dime
Sponsoring TC TC 12.5
Cost / Duration $250,000/24M
Submission History 1st submission as RTAR
Classifications: Research or Technology Transfer Basic/Applied Research
Is there a well-established need? The RTAR should include some level of literature review that
documents the importance/magnitude of a problem. If not, then the RTAR should be returned for
revision.
AB, CD, EF AB - This project would greatly benefit the handbook chapter
noted but there is no mention of the related standard XXX in
development. CD – Needs more references such as these that
were found online…
Is this appropriate for ASHRAE funding? If not, then the RTAR should be rejected. Examples of
projects that are not appropriate for ASHRAE funding would include: 1) research that is more
appropriately performed by industry, 2) topics outside the scope of ASHRAE activities.
Is there an adequate description of the approach in order for RAC to be able to evaluate the
appropriateness of the budget? If not, then the RTAR should be returned for revision.
Is the budget reasonable for the project scope? If not, then RTAR could be returned for revision
or conditionally accepted with a note that the budget should be revised for the WS.
Have the proper administrative procedures been followed? This includes recording of the TC
vote, coordination with other TCs, proper citing of the Research Strategic Plan, etc. If not, then the
RTAR could be returned for revision or possibly conditionally accepted based on adequately
resolving these issues.
Decision Options Initial
Decision?
Additional Comments or Approval Conditions
ACCEPT DD, GB, RS,
KL, MJ, CZ,
COND. ACCEPT CK Must reference work from RP-1010 and RP- 656
RETURN AB, CD, EF,
REJECT
ACCEPT - Topic is ready for development into a work statement (WS).
CONDITIONAL ACCEPT Vote - Minor Revision Required - RL can approve RTAR for development into WS without going back to RAC once TC satisfies RAC's approval condition(s) RETURN- Topic is probably acceptable for ASHRAE research, but RTAR is not quite ready.
REJECT Vote - Topic is not acceptable for the ASHRAE Research Program
Attachment #2
1
4. WORK STATEMENTS
4.1 Work Statement Development and Approval Process
The Work Statement (WS) is normally the responsibility of the Research Subcommittee of a TC (or TG, SSPC, and
other committees sponsoring research projects), which should prepare Work Statements for each approved RTAR.
The RTARs are developed into Work Statements and are sent to the ASHRAE MORTS. These work statements will
be reviewed by RAC to determine if they define a clear and obtainable research result, propose a viable technical
approach, and are likely to interest several competitive bidders. A biddable Work Statement clearly explains the
objectives, scope, and deliverables. A WS derived from a RAC-approved RTAR has already been determined to be
an appropriate research project for ASHRAE. This means that it will advance the state of the art, provide value to
ASHRAE membership, and support the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan. The ASHRAE Research
Implementation Plan (RIP) lists all approved RTARs and all pending and approved for bid work statements
submitted to RAC. The RIP is posted on the ASHRAE Web-site for reference.
A Work Statement should be prepared immediately after the RTAR is approved by RAC. A Work Statement may
be prepared and submitted without a preliminary RTAR approval if, for example, there is an extremely time-critical
need for results. There should be a strong justification for this. However, the TC risks having its basic research goal
not approved or needing to rewrite the WS extensively. The RTAR approval is designed:
To ensure that the topic is suitable for ASHRAE research and the TC addresses the goals of the ASHRAE
Research Strategic Plan.
To allow RAC and Tech Council to review the approach and suggest additional references, identify other
TCs that should be consulted, and/or suggest enhancements or refinements to the suggested technical
approach.
Submission of the RTAR is designed to speed the overall process – reducing the time to go from research idea to
release of the Request for Bids.
When preparing a WS, the TC may ask specialists in the area of the Work Statement to assist, even potential
bidders. Care must be taken to avoid actual or perceived conflicts of interest. To do this, the principal authors of the
Work Statement will be identified on the Work Statement Cover Sheet. Subsequently, bidders who assisted in Work
Statement preparation will identify themselves as such in their proposal, and evaluators will satisfy themselves that
these preparers did not gain an unfair advantage. The TC should also consider other TCs, which have direct or
related interest in the subject project and invite them to participate in the Work Statement preparation, to vote to
endorse the WS, and to have representatives on the Proposal Evaluation Subcommittee (PES) and the Project
Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS).
In preparing a Work Statement for a project dealing with the monitoring of buildings in the field, the
"Recommendations for the Design of ASHRAE Sponsored Field Monitoring Projects" contained in Appendix 2
should be considered. In preparing a Work Statement associated with Computational Fluid Dynamics, the
“Guidelines for the Selection and Use of Computational Fluid Dynamics,” in Appendix 3 should be reviewed and
considered.
The TC Research Subcommittee members shall forward a draft of the Work Statement to their Research Liaison
who will provide suggestions for improvement or compliance with ASHRAE practices. They then present the Work
Statement to the full TC at one of the semi-annual meetings, or by letter or e-mail ballot, for a vote of approval. The
TC members should have received the Work Statement sufficiently prior to the meeting so that each member can
review it in depth and comment and vote intelligently. Any negative votes or abstentions from the TC members
should be explained. Any dissenting member or corresponding member should be invited to submit comments that
will be conveyed to RAC with the WS and cover letter.
After approval by the TC, a copy of the Work Statement and a completed Work Statement Cover Sheet shall be sent
to the ASHRAE Manager of Research and Technical Services (MORTS) and to the TC's Research Liaison by May
15, August 15, or December 15. The submittals should be in electronic format, preferably in Microsoft Word and
Excel. The MORTS distributes the Work Statements to the members of RAC.
Attachment #2
2
RAC’s evaluation of a Work Statement may result in one of four possible outcomes:
- RAC approves the WS.
- RAC approves the WS conditionally with comments.
The Research Liaison then has the authority to approve the WS after RAC’s comments have been
implemented. The Research Liaison also has the discretion to decide whether the modified WS needs a full
TC re-vote, based on the extent of modifications.
- RAC returns the WS with comments.
TC needs to implement the RAC comments and approve the modified WS by a vote. A cover letter
explaining how the RAC comments were implemented should accompany the WS sent back to MORTS
and RAC. If the TC disagrees with the RAC on any of the comments, the cover letter should also explain
the reasons for not implementing the RAC comment.
- RAC rejects the WS with comments.
RAC-approved Work Statements are designated as Tentative Research Projects (TRPs). When deciding which TRPs
will be sent out for bid, RAC considers the pool of all TRPs (currently approved Work Statements and previously
approved Work Statements that were not released for bid due to insufficient funding), and RAC-approved
Unsolicited Research Proposals. Table-A is the RAC prioritization criteria for Work Statements when funding is
limited and not all approved WS can be put out for bid.
Attachment #2
3
Table A. Factors for Prioritization of Work Statements for Funding
4.2 Work Statement Preparation
The Work Statement submitted by a TC (TG, SSPC or other committee sponsoring a research project) expands the
RTAR and is the only technical document that potential bidders will receive. The WS must contain all of the
following fourteen elements, eight of which are either imported directly or expanded from RTAR elements.
1. Title: (from RTAR)
2. Executive Summary:
3. Applicability to ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan: (from RTAR)
4. Application of Results: (from RTAR)
5. State-of-the-Art (Background): (from RTAR)
6. Advancement to the State-of-the-Art: (from RTAR)
The TC needs to put enough information into the Work Statement to explain to people not familiar with the TC’s
deliberations what the problem is, why this research is needed, what types of results are expected and how they will
be used, and indicate what methods and scope of research the TC expects from the contractor.
The Work Statement should be accompanied by a Cover Sheet as shown in Section 3.3. Section 3.4 contains a
Work Statement outline, which explains each element in detail. Appendix 4 is an example of a Cover Sheet and
well-written Work Statement.
4.3 Work Statement Cover Sheet
The purpose of the Work Statement Cover Sheet is to ensure that all WS items are complete. Also, the Cover Sheet:
• records the votes of the sponsoring and all co-sponsoring TCs on the Work Statement
• lists the members of the subcommittees which will evaluate the proposals and monitor the project,
• recommends suggested bidders,
• denotes which Handbook chapters or other ASHRAE publications will be affected by the results of the
research,
• lists the Work Statement’s authors,
• lists at least three prospective bidders in addition to any Work Statement authors who may bid.
It is preferable, but not required, that the authors of the Work Statement also serve on the Proposal Evaluation
Subcommittee (PES) and Project Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS). Any persons who bid on the WS, or who are
members of organizations who bid on the WS, cannot serve on the PES or PMS. While desirable, it is not necessary
that the PES and PMS be comprised of the same people. The PES/PMS should be composed of 3 to 5 sponsoring or
co-sponsoring TC members with particular knowledge and experience in the subject of the project, but who do not
plan to submit a proposal on the work. In special cases, persons other than TC members may be appointed as
PES/PMS members if their particular expertise is not available within the TC or if a co-funding agency is also
supporting the project. They are named by the TC Chairman and approved by the Research Liaison or MORTS.
The Research Liaison and MORTS are ex-officio non-voting members of the PES and PMS.
Status of TRP
Is this a project rebid? Newly approved TRPs?
Age of Project – Based on date of work statement approval
Co-Sponsorship
Multiple TC sponsors/Co-sponsors
Single TC Sponsor
Co-funding – is there a firm co-funding commitment (e.g., from
AHRI)?
Cost of Project
Should we fund more and smaller projects or fewer and larger ones?
Does it require RAC Level Approval, Tech Council approval, Board approval?
Overall value of the project and the research, as well as contribution
to ASHRAE’s Research Plan(s), to ASHRAE and Society
Note: the above factors are not listed in any particular order or level or importance
Attachment #2
4
If interest by other organizations in co-sponsoring the project is known, suspected, or even considered a possibility,
the name, address, and phone number of the proper contact should be furnished on the Work Statement Cover Sheet
as a “potential” sponsor. Once a written letter of support is obtained by a TC from a potential co-sponsor, the
ASHRAE MORTS will finalize a co-sponsorship agreement with that organization or individual for the project.
Normally about 60 days is allowed for proposal preparation by potential bidders. Certain projects by their nature
may require longer proposal preparation time. This may be due to the need to establish relationships with co-
investigators, subcontractors, material or equipment suppliers or owners of test sites. If this is anticipated, the TC
should request an extended bidding period. This will delay the start of the project but will result in better proposals
and better results. Where needed, TC should request this on the Work Statement Cover Sheet.
To minimize the occurrence of single bidders, the TC shall provide on the Cover Sheet the names of at least three
qualified potential bidders who were not involved in development of the WS. If a WS is not accompanied by the
names of at least three such individuals, it shall not be approved by RAC but sent back to the TC for this
information. In addition to the usual process of posting the WS to solicit bids, these recommended bidders shall be
individually notified by the MORTS when the project is put out for bid.
.
Attachment #2
5
Attachment #2
6
4.4 Work Statement Outline
WORK STATEMENT# (Same as RTAR#)
SPONSORING TC/TG/SSPC:# & NAME
CO-SPONSORING TC/TG/SSPCs (List only TC/TG/SSPC s that have voted formal support)
Title: (Same as RTAR)
Executive Summary:
(100 word statement that could be used at the BOD level to succinctly summarize the current state-of-the-art, the
advancement this project is expected to accomplish, and its value to ASHRAE and society in general.)
Applicability to the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan: (Import RTAR list of specific goals of the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan this project will support by name and
number. State how the proposed project will help achieve the goals. If the RTAR was submitted before July, 2010,
the goals from the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan 2005-2010 (Navigation for a Sustainable Future) may be
addressed if the TC desires. For RTAR (or WS) submitted after July 2010, please indicate whether the proposed
project supports any of the 11 strategic goals of the latest ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan 2010-2015. Projects are
not required to contribute directly to the 11 strategic goals, but those that do will more likely be given a higher
priority for funding when research funds are limited.)
Application of Results:
(Import RTAR list of handbook chapters/special publications etc. to be affected by results of this project. Explain
how the results of the proposed project will be disseminated by the TC in practical terms to general ASHRAE
membership and society in general. What are the practical benefits expected from this research? Is this project one
piece of a larger plan of action developed by the TC?)
State-of-the-Art (Background):
(Import RTAR description of the amount and quality of past research, and quantify existing gaps.)
Advancement to the State-of-the-Art:
(Import RTAR description or quantitative estimate of the improvement expected from this research [i.e. x% energy
reduction in product y or building type z, x% increase in heat transfer coefficient between y and z, or x% reduction
in design time to do y, etc.], and explain why this information is needed by the public or by industry.)
Justification and Value to ASHRAE:
(Import RTAR identification by number, profession, or industry the ASHRAE members who will benefit. State the
likelihood and how the improvement would be adopted by industry.)
Objectives:
(Import RTAR explanation of project’s goals and how this project will accomplish its intended advancement to the
state-of-the-art [i.e. a computer simulation will be used to do x, a computer simulation will be developed for x and
verified using laboratory data from tests y and z, field test data will be obtained from x and used to do y].)
Scope/Technical Approach:
(Provide a complete description of technical approach and task statement. Describe the parameters of the research
project, including such items as: subject matter to be explored; materials, equipment, literature or other variables to
be researched; materials, equipment, etc to be excluded from the project; outline the research methods to be used;
description of the standards to be followed; discussion of how the data is to be reduced, analyzed and presented;
description of the format for the reported results; if appropriate, describe project phases.
It is important for the scope of a research project to be broken down into tasks or phases, where a task will yield
results of interest to the TC and the PMS, or where the results of a task will significantly define how subsequent
tasks will be carried out. Make sure that the project objectives are reflected in the tasks. The Work Statement should
Attachment #2
7
specify deliverables corresponding to these tasks in the “Deliverables” section to facilitate project monitoring by the
PMS.)
Deliverables/Where Results Will Be Published:
Insert generic ASHRAE requirements (listed below) as well as and any project-specific requirements defined in the
“Scope” section. Each major task or phase of the research method outlined in the Scope should be linked to a
deliverable report, memorandum, or summary.
Items a through e below are generic ASHRAE requirements a contractor is required to provide on every ASHRAE
research project. These cover:
Quarterly progress and financial reports to MORTS (to be reviewed by the Project Monitoring
Subcommittee (PMS)).
A final report.
A research or technical paper, submitted for peer review and publication in the ASHRAE Transactions or
HVAC&R Research.
Any data obtained from the research.
A project summary.
Progress, Financial and Final Reports, Research or Technical Paper(s), and Data shall constitute required deliverables
(“Deliverables”) under this Agreement and shall be provided as follows:
a. Progress and Financial Reports
Progress and Financial Reports, in a form approved by the Society, shall be made to the Society through its
Manager of Research and Technical Services at quarterly intervals; specifically on or before each January 1,
April 1, June 10, and October 1 of the contract period.
Furthermore, the Institution’s Principal Investigator, subject to the Society’s approval, shall, during the period
of performance and after the Final Report has been submitted, report in person to the sponsoring Technical
Committee/Task Group (TC/TG) at the annual and winter meetings, and be available to answer such questions
regarding the research as may arise.
b. Final Report
A written report, design guide, or manual, (collectively, “Final Report”), in a form approved by the Society,
shall be prepared by the Institution and submitted to the Society’s Manager of Research and Technical
Services by the end of the Agreement term, containing complete details of all research carried out under this
Agreement. Unless otherwise specified, six copies of the final report shall be furnished for review by the
Society’s Project Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS).
Following approval by the PMS and the TC/TG, in their sole discretion, final copies of the Final Report will
be furnished by the Institution as follows:
- An executive summary in a form suitable for wide distribution to the industry and to the public.
- Two bound copies
- One unbound copy, printed on one side only, suitable for reproduction.
- Two copies on CD-ROM; one in PDF format and one in Microsoft Word.
c. HVAC&R Research or ASHRAE Transactions Technical Paper
One or more papers shall be submitted first to the ASHRAE Manager of Research and Technical Services
(MORTS) and then to the “ASHRAE Manuscript Central” website-based manuscript review system in a form
and containing such information as designated by the Society suitable for publication. Papers specified as
Attachment #2
8
deliverables should be submitted as either Research Papers for HVAC&R Research or Technical Paper(s) for
ASHRAE Transactions. Research papers contain generalized results of long-term archival value, whereas
technical papers are appropriate for applied research of shorter-term value, ASHRAE Conference papers are
not acceptable as deliverables from ASHRAE research projects. The paper(s) shall conform to the
instructions posted in “Manuscript Central” for an ASHRAE Transactions Technical or HVAC&R Research
paper. The paper title shall contain the research project number (XXXX-RP) at the end of the title in
parentheses, e.g., (XXXX-RP).
Note: A research or technical paper describing the research project must be submitted after the TC has
approved the Final Report. Research or technical papers may also be prepared before the project’s
completion, if it is desired to disseminate interim results of the project. Contractor shall submit any interim
papers to MORTS and the PMS for review and approval before the papers are submitted to ASHRAE
Manuscript Central for review.
d. Data
The Institution agrees to maintain true and complete books and records, including but not limited to notebooks, reports, charts, graphs, analyses, computer programs, visual representations etc., (collectively, the “Data”), generated in connection with the Services. Society representatives shall have access to all such Data for examination and review at reasonable times. The Data shall be held in strict confidence by the Institution and shall not be released to third parties without prior authorization from the Society, except as provided by GENERAL CONDITION VII, PUBLICATION. The original Data shall be kept on file by the Institution for a period of two years after receipt of the final payment and upon request the Institution will make a copy available to the Society upon the Society’s request.
e. Project Synopsis
A written synopsis totaling approximately 100 words in length and written for a broad technical audience, which documents 1. Main findings of research project, 2. Why findings are significant, and 3. How the findings benefit ASHRAE membership and/or society in general shall be submitted to the Manager of Research and Technical Services by the end of the Agreement term for publication in ASHRAE Insights
The Society may request the Institution submit a technical article suitable for publication in the Society’s ASHRAE JOURNAL. This is considered a voluntary submission and not a Deliverable. All Deliverables under this Agreement and voluntary technical articles shall be prepared using dual units; e.g., rational inch-pound with equivalent SI units shown parenthetically. SI usage shall be in accordance with IEEE/ASTM Standard SI-10.
The above deliverables are necessary, but not sufficient, to monitor a research project. The PMS and the sponsoring
TC have the responsibility to review the contractor’s on-going activities and intermediate results, to ensure that the
methods used and results obtained will be valid and well-enough substantiated to be labeled as “ASHRAE-approved
findings.” Proper oversight cannot wait until the final report, when most of the budget has already been expended.
Therefore, each major task or phase of the research method outlined in the Scope should also be linked to a
deliverable report, memorandum, or summary. These in-progress deliverables should not add to the cost of the
project, as they will most likely become chapters of the final report. However, they should help the TC avoid
unpleasant surprises due to the research not being conducted according to the TC’s expectations. Examples of
deliverables that could be required during the project include:
If one task is a literature review, then the deliverable could be an annotated list of references and
conclusions/summary of the current state of the art.
If the contractor must propose specific sites (e.g., buildings), experiment topologies (e.g., duct
configurations), materials (e.g., refrigerants, appliances, insulation or building materials), experiment
Attachment #2
9
protocols, and/or instrumentation, then short memos describing those proposed methods, materials, etc.
should be deliverables to be reviewed and approved by the PMS before moving on to the next research
task.
If analysis of preliminary data or results will decide how to proceed (e.g., CFD models of 12 duct
configurations will be used to select 2 duct configurations to be built and subjected to wind tunnel tests),
then the contractor should write up the results of the initial analysis, recommend the areas for further more
detailed investigation, and justify those recommendations.
If data from the research are expected to modify or update a Handbook table, then the procedure for
developing the updated table from the data should be specified and provided to the PMS as a deliverable.
(The final report may also require the contractor to prepare a proposed updated table based on the observed
data.)
In short, the technical approach for a research project should be broken down into tasks or phases, and where a task
will yield results of interest to the TC and the PMS, or where the results of a task will significantly define how
subsequent tasks will be carried out. The Work Statement should specify such deliverables for the PMS to review.
This approach will make it easier for the PMS and MORTS to gauge progress and technical merit of on-going
ASHRAE research projects, and will provide a framework for the cognizant TCs to provide technical oversight and
assistance to identify and correct problems as they occur.)
Level of Effort:
(Include estimates of professional-months by category, calendar-months, and total dollars.
An example is:
The project anticipates 3 professional-months for the principal investigator and 8 professional-months for a
research technician. The estimated cost is $60,000 and the project is expected to take 12 months.)
Other Information for Bidders (Optional):
(This section should contain any other information that is not contained elsewhere. This could include information
about relationships with the monitoring subcommittee, reports other than the normal quarterly progress reports,
special personnel or facilities required by the proposer, special instructions regarding what the proposal should
contain, or information as to how the proposals will be evaluated. It is not necessary to include references to
quarterly progress reports, semi-annual reports in person to the TC final reports or papers.)
Proposal Evaluation Criteria:
(Include specific list of criteria and weighting factors that will be used to evaluate proposals.
This section should also include a list of the criteria the PES will use to evaluate proposals and select a contractor to
recommend. This must include Weighting Factors for the Evaluation Form. It may be the basic list or a subset of the
list in the Proposal Evaluation Form and can also include additional categories such as special experience,
credentials, equipment or facilities the WS authors think are necessary.)
The commonly used evaluation criteria include:
The commonly used evaluation criteria (and sample weighting factors) are listed below. The WS may include some
or all of these criteria, using whatever weighting factors the TC feels are appropriate. For example, a project
involving simulation models may not depend upon “facilities,” while experience of the PI in simulation modeling
may be crucial. For performance testing of appliances, however, the quality of the Contractor’s facilities may be
very important.
1. Contractor's understanding of Work Statement as revealed in proposal. 15%
a) Logistical problems associated
b) Technical problems associated
2. Quality of methodology proposed for conducting research. 25%
a) Organization of project
b) Management plan
3. Contractor's capability in terms of facilities. 15%
a) Managerial support
Attachment #2
10
b) Data collection
c) Technical expertise
4. Qualifications of personnel for this project. 20%
a) Project team 'well rounded' in terms of qualifications
and experience in related work
b) Project manager person directly responsible;
experience and corporate position
c) Team members' qualifications and experience
d) Time commitment of Principal Investigator
5. Student involvement 5%
a) Extent of student participation on contractor's team
b) Likelihood that involvement in project will encourage entry
into HVAC&R industry
6. Probability of contractor's research plan meeting the objectives of the Work Statement. 15%
a) Detailed and logical work plan with major tasks and key milestones
b) All technical and logistic factors considered
c) Reasonableness of project schedule
7. Performance of contractor on prior ASHRAE or other projects. 5%
(No penalty for new contractors.)
8. Other _________________________
References:
(Import or expand the RTAR list of references to any articles, papers, books, etc., that were used in preparing the
Work Statement and/or that would be of assistance to the bidders. All listed references should be readily available to
contractors.)
Authors:
(List those individuals who were principal authors of the Work Statement.)
If any of the Work Statement authors plan to bid on the project, care must be taken to avoid actual or perceived
conflict of interest. In particular, the requirements of the Work Statement should not be tailored to a unique Work
Statement author’s facility, equipment, or capability that is not reasonably available to other bidders. If WS authors
bid on the project, they must identify themselves as such in their proposals, and the evaluators must satisfy
themselves that these preparers did not gain an unfair advantage before their proposal may be considered. If it is
determined that a submitted proposal does exhibit a conflict of interest, then that proposal should be identified, not
evaluated, and written reasons given along with evaluations of the other proposals.
Attached are a sample Work Statement Cover Sheet and a sample Work Statement. They should be used as a guide
in completing, reviewing and submitting Work Statements. [NOTE: The actual WS and the TC votes on which this
is based have been edited to better illustrate some of the points made in this Research Manual.]
Attachment #2
11
4.5 Tips for Writing an Effective Work Statement
A Work Statement is a document that is utilized to convince ASHRAE to fund research projects and inform the
bidders what is expected to be in the final results. The Work Statement contains different items and is found in the
Work Statement outline in Section 3.4 of this manual. Incomplete (unclear) entries in these items will lead to delays
in approving the Work Statement.
Project Justification
Is the project included in the ASHRAE Research Implementation Plan (i.e., was an RTAR submitted and approved
by RAC), or is there a strong rationale provided for submitting the Work Statement without a prior RTAR
submittal?
The Executive Summary, Application of Results, State of the Art (background and advancement) sections shall be
brief and right to the point about how the project will be a benefit to ASHRAE Society and its members.
Are project benefits evident? Alternatively, are adverse impacts of not pursuing the project apparent? Will the
results still be useful when completed?
Do the project objectives fall within ASHRAE’s Scope? Involvement of outside professions in performing all or
part of the work does not necessarily negate pertinence.
Is the project consistent with the Society’s Research Strategic Plan? List specific goals in the Plan that are
addressed by the proposed research.
Is the project original (e.g., not an unnecessary duplication of other research completed or underway)? Repetition of
prior research may be desirable if pertinent facets have changed, the results are not publicly available, or
confirmation is justified. Projects resulting in products that compete with commercial offerings are generally not
approved. If previous projects need updating, has the sponsoring TC (original project) been contacted?
Project Definition
If there is more than one objective to the project, is the sequence defined?
Have all avenues been examined to determine a more economical alternate to achieving the objective?
Is there a contingency plan, in case the objectives are not met?
Subsequent phases or follow-on projects are not precluded, but specific projects should provide at least interim
results that are beneficial on their own (e.g., no half tunnels).
Would segmenting the project preclude useful interim results or degrade effective procurement of the research
needed?
Is the work or likely results free of potential legal problems and of prejudicial implications to a single manufacturer
or class of manufacturers?
Are the recommended bidders knowledgeable enough about subject matters of the project to insure success of the
project?
Are proposal options recommended for inclusion clearly justified?
Cost
Is the proposed level of effort and funding commensurate with work required? Is the proposed level of effort and
funding commensurate with the project’s expected benefits?
Attachment #2
12
Can the ASHRAE research budget afford the project for its duration? Consider whether the project can or should be
funded protracted for budgetary reasons.
Is there a commitment for co-funding? Did ASHRAE receive a letter (on company letterhead) with the amount of
co-funding?
Suitability
Is the background adequately presented?
Are the individual tasks understandable and achievable (e.g., not seeking impossible or improbable results)? Note
that high risk (with commensurate high benefits if successful) research is allowable, but it should be so noted in the
TC’s cover letter conveying the WS to MORTS.
Are the tasks likely to satisfy the project objectives?
Does the work statement foster fair competition?
Is sufficient detail provided to enable competitive pricing?
Are ambiguous tasks (e.g., scope determinations by the Project Monitoring Subcommittee) that could alter
contractor costs avoided? No implication is intended that the PMS cannot or should not review the work and
approve scheduled decisions or selections, provided that such alternatives entail similar effort and costs.
Is the justification adequate for required use of specified proprietary products or methods?
Are all of the tasks appropriate for ASHRAE research?
Are the products to be delivered clearly identified?
Are appropriate references adequately cited and available? Have copies of unpublished references been provided for
distribution with the request for proposals?
Are at least three prospective bidders that were not involved in preparation of work statement identified?
Is a realistic project duration indicated?
Has the Work Statement been reviewed by other related TCs for accuracy and determination whether other previous
projects were completed requesting similar results?
Has a Project Evaluation Subcommittee (PES) been proposed for approval? If other TCs co-authored the Work
Statement, are they included in this Subcommittee?
Has a Project Monitoring Subcommittee been proposed for approval? If other TCs co-authored the Work Statement,
are they included in this Subcommittee?
Has the work statement been coordinated with other organizations’ committees? Have they been asked for co-
funding?
Other Considerations
Are there other reasons to support the project (e.g., Presidential goals, emerging societal issues, requests from
ASHRAE affiliates or other organizations)?
Is the project likely to contribute to a Handbook update, a proposed ASHRAE or industry standard, or a ASHRAE
Journal article of broad interest?
Attachment #2
13
For projects involving Special Publications, is/are the sponsoring committee(s) qualified and prepared to provide
adequate review of the work to imply endorsement of the resulting document by ASHRAE as an accepted reference?
Is the project likely to provide an educational opportunity for HVAC&R students?
Is the project likely to enhance the Society's image (e.g., will ASHRAE gain recognition for pursuing it or,
alternately, incur censure if ASHRAE ignores it?)
Additional Tips
RAC provides training at the Society’s meetings for individuals involved in initiating research projects. RAC
welcomes suggestions on topics to be covered.
Each TC has a Research Liaison that is a member of RAC. The Work Statement should be reviewed by the liaison
prior to submitting the Work Statement to headquarters. This person will provide assistance in making sure that the
Work Statement contains the required information for review.
RAC encourages TCs to prepare and submit Work Statements responsive to “Possible Research Projects” listed in
the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan. Work Statements for projects not listed in the Plan may be prepared and
submitted, but a strong justification for approval should be included. RAC is obligated to meet the funding
guidelines set by the Board and reflected in the annual Research Budget. If considerably more Work Statements
have been approved for bid than the research funding available, bidding on those Work Statements that are less
responsive to the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan may be delayed.
Below is a list of common reasons for returning a Work Statement.
• Need for Coordination
• Cost Problems
• Weak Justification
• Scope Lacks Clarity
• Unable to Bid
• Missing Information
• Does not Conform to ASHRAE Policy
The need for coordination among pertinent TCs, TGs, TRGs, SSPCs, and standing committees. Authors must realize
that many projects have a rather broad technical base. For instance, a project by a TC concerned with equipment
design may cover the development of computer algorithms for operating energy calculations. The project could
benefit from coordination with a TC that is expert on energy calculations and may have already developed
standardized algorithm formats on other projects. If a TC proposes work in a technical area that falls partly or totally
under the scope of another TC, both TCs should review the work statement before it is submitted to RAC. This
would help assure RAC that the work had not already been done, the plan is technically correct, and there is a need
for research. It would also be an advantage to have a technical expert from the other TC on the project monitoring
subcommittee.
The cost caused return of work statements. ASHRAE expects to get a good value from the approved projects. The
sponsoring committee should conduct a critical review of the estimated cost before the work statement is submitted.
Sometimes the scope is too broad and can be reduced to those items that are of immediate need to the TC.
Also, unnecessary travel or equipment expenses should be omitted. ASHRAE expects contractors to provide test
facilities and equipment in most cases. If the level can't be reduced, it would be advantageous to either suggest
additional sources of funding or to segment the project into two or more individually funded phases. RAC Research
Liaisons can be a good source of advice on this subject.
Weak justification and value to ASHRAE, industry and society. It is extremely important to state your case for the
proposed work clearly and completely. RAC members who review work statements normally are not as
Attachment #2
14
knowledgeable in the proposed area of technology as are the authors. RAC members depend on information
provided in the background and justification sections of the work statement to understand the need for the research
and the benefits to ASHRAE, the public or the industry.
If RAC is not convinced by the work statement that there is a need commensurate with the proposed level of effort
and cost, the committee may reject a work statement outright or return it for clarification. Typically, the authors of a
returned work statement and TC discuss new arguments justifying their revised work statement to carefully resolve
issues raised by RAC. RAC requests that these new arguments be added to the revised justification so there is a
good written record to benefit all parties who will be using the work statement in the future.
The scopes lack clarity. Many times the tasks do not satisfy the stated objectives of the research, nor are they related
to the objectives. The scope is the heart of the work statement and contains key information the contractor needs to
prepare a bid. It should describe in some detail the parameters of the research, including items such as:
• The subject matter to be explored;
• Materials, equipment literature or other variables to be researched;
• An outline of the research method(s) to be used;
• A discussion of any standards to be followed in conducting the research;
• Consideration of how the data obtained might be reduced, analyzed and presented;
• A description of the form in which the results will be reported; and,
• A description of each task and each distinct phase of the project.
The work statements were not biddable. Authors should put themselves in the bidder's position and ask, "Can I bid
this project? Is there enough information? Are the tasks clear and logical or are they ambiguous?" If one task
depends on the results of another, it would be very difficult for the contractor to estimate the second task. It might be
better, under the circumstances, to write the work statement to do the earlier task as the first phase. Then, after the
results are known, write a follow-on work statement for a second phase.
The work statements were not complete. To help solve this problem, RAC implemented a Work Statement Cover
Sheet that must be completed and submitted with the work statement. It has a checklist for outline items and
provides a good place for recording other required information such as the TC vote record, the work statement
authors and the proposed project monitoring committee members.
The work statements didn't conform to ASHRAE policy. For instance, work statements to develop computer
algorithms must comply with ASHRAE's policy on algorithms.
In other instances, work statements have had the objective of developing computer software. If the authors had
recognized in the beginning that it is ASHRAE policy not to develop and market software, the work statement could
have been written to develop only the basic computational techniques, which would have satisfied the research need.
Another example is the work statement that proposes to develop a product, such as a sensor. Understanding that it is
against ASHRAE policy to do research for product development, the authors could have directed the proposal
toward developing the basic principles of an expanded sensing capability.
The work statement proposes to evaluate products or proprietary technologies. Again, this is against ASHRAE's
policy on commercialism, and should be avoided. Research Liaisons should be able to help with policy questions
before work statements are approved by the TC.
Attachment #2
15
4.6 Example WS Review Ballot used by RAC
RAC members use the form below to record their review comments and initial disposition decision on the WS prior
to the RAC meeting to discuss the WS. The completed form is submitted to ASHRAE staff, which in turn
incorporates this information into the WS Review Summary form
Attachment #2
1
4.6 Example WS Review Ballot used by Individual RAC Members Prior to Meeting
Project ID 0007
Project Title Design on a Dime
Sponsoring TC TC 12.5 – The Example Commission
Cost $250,000/24M
Submission History 1st Submission as WS, RTAR Accepted 10.06
Classifications: Research or Technology Transfer Basic/Applied Research
Winter 2010 Meeting Review Reviewer’s Name: AB
Check List Criteria Satisfied?
Additional Comments & Suggestions
Adequate Intermediate Deliverables? The project should include the review of intermediate results by
the PMS at logical milestone points during the project. Before project work continues, the PMS must
approve the intermediate results. N
Specify results and deliverables from each task that will be reviewed
and approved by the PMS before proceeding to the next task.
Time and Cost Estimate Reasonable? The time duration and total cost of the project should be
reasonable so that the project can be as it is described in the WS. Y
Detailed Bidders List Provided? The contact information in the bidder list should be complete so that
each potential bidder can be contacted without difficulty. Y
Proposed Project Doable? Can the project as described in the WS be accomplished? If difficulties exist
in the project's WS that prevent a successful conclusion of the project, then the project is not doable. In
this situation, major revision of the WS is needed to resolve the issues that cause the difficulty.
Y
Proposed Project Description Correct? Are there technical errors and/or technical omissions that the
WS has that prevents it from correctly describing the project? If there are, than the WS needs major
revision.
Y
Task Breakdown Reasonable? Is the project divided into tasks that make technical and practical sense?
Are the results of each task such that the results of the former naturally flow into the latter? If not, then
major revisions are needed to the WS that would include: adding tasks, removing tasks, and re-structuring
tasks among others.
Y
Proposed Project Biddable? Examining the WS as a whole, is the project described in the WS of
sufficient clarity and detail such a potential bidder can actually understand and develop a proposal for the
project? This criterion combines the previous three criteria into an overall question concerning the
usefulness of the WS. If the WS is considered to not be biddable, then either major revisions are in order
or the WS should be rejected.
Y
Decision Options Decision? Additional Comments or Approval Conditions
ACCEPT
COND. ACCEPT X Specify results and deliverables from each task that will be reviewed
and approved by the PMS before proceeding to the next task.
RETURN
REJECT ACCEPT - Work statement(WS) ready to bid as-is
CONDITIONAL ACCEPT Vote - Minor Revision Required - RL can approve WS for bid without going back to RAC once TC satisfies RAC's approval condition(s) to his/her satisfaction RETURN - WS requires major revision before it can bid
REJECT- Topic is no longer considered acceptable for the ASHRAE Research Program due to duplication of work by another project or because the work statement has a fatal flaw(s) that makes it unbiddable.
Attachment #2
1
4.7 Example WS Review Summary form from RAC
When RAC meets, they use the WS Review Summary form below to help guide their discussion of the WS. In
many cases, a RAC member’s initial disposition decision on a particular WS may change after reading other
member’s comments on the summary form and after participating to the meeting discussion of the WS.
A final version of the review summary form, which reflects the discussion and final decision that was made by RAC
on the WS during the meeting, is developed and used as the basis for the return letter to the TC/TG/SSPC or EHC.
Attachment #2
1
4.7 Example WS Review Summary Form
Project ID 0007
Project Title Design on a Dime
Sponsoring TC TC 12.5 – The Example Commission
Cost $250,000/24M
Submission History 1st Submission as WS, RTAR Accepted 10.06
Classifications: Research or Technology Transfer Basic/Applied Research
Winter 2010 Meeting Review WORK STATEMENT SUMMARY SCORE & COMMENTS
Check List Criteria Voted NO Additional Comments & Suggestions
Adequate Intermediate Deliverables? The project should include the review of intermediate results by
the PMS at logical milestone points during the project. Before project work continues, the PMS must
approve the intermediate results. AB
AB - Specify results and deliverables from each task that will be
reviewed and approved by the PMS before proceeding to the next
task.
Time and Cost Estimate Reasonable? The time duration and total cost of the project should be
reasonable so that the project can be as it is described in the WS.
Detailed Bidders List Provided? The contact information in the bidder list should be complete so that
each potential bidder can be contacted without difficulty.
Proposed Project Doable? Can the project as described in the WS be accomplished? If difficulties exist
in the project's WS that prevent a successful conclusion of the project, then the project is not doable. In
this situation, major revision of the WS is needed to resolve the issues that cause the difficulty.
Proposed Project Description Correct? Are there technical errors and/or technical omissions that the
WS has that prevents it from correctly describing the project? If there are, than the WS needs major
revision.
Task Breakdown Reasonable? Is the project divided into tasks that make technical and practical sense?
Are the results of each task such that the results of the former naturally flow into the latter? If not, then
major revisions are needed to the WS that would include: adding tasks, removing tasks, and re-structuring
tasks among others.
Proposed Project Biddable? Examining the WS as a whole, is the project described in the WS of
sufficient clarity and detail such a potential bidder can actually understand and develop a proposal for the
project? This criterion combines the previous three criteria into an overall question concerning the
usefulness of the WS. If the WS is considered to not be biddable, then either major revisions are in order
or the WS should be rejected.
Decision Options Initial
Decision?
Additional Comments or Approval Conditions
ACCEPT DD, GB,
RS, KL
COND. ACCEPT AB Specify results and deliverables from each task that will be reviewed
and approved by the PMS before proceeding to the next task.
RETURN
REJECT ACCEPT - Work statement(WS) ready to bid as-is
CONDITIONAL ACCEPT Vote - Minor Revision Required - RL can approve WS for bid without going back to RAC once TC satisfies RAC's approval condition(s) to his/her satisfaction
RETURN - WS requires major revision before it can bid
REJECT- Topic is no longer considered acceptable for the ASHRAE Research Program due to duplication of work by another project or because the work statement has a fatal flaw(s) that makes it unbiddable
Attachment #2
1
5. PROJECTS APPROVED FOR BIDDING
Following approval by RAC, the Work Statement, now designated a Tentative Research Project (TRP), is edited by
the Manager of Research and Technical Services, incorporated into a request-for-proposal (RFP) and made available
to potential contractors. A sample of the other material, which normally is distributed with the TRP, is shown on the
following pages.
The Manager of Research and Technical Services maintains a listserv of research project potential contractors who
have expressed interest and expertise in various fields of research interest to ASHRAE
(http://www.ashrae.org/technology/page/39) These contractors are informed by an e-mail as to the availability of
new RFPs posted for bid by ASHRAE. The TC/TG is encouraged to designate other qualified contractors who may
wish to receive the RFP.
When the schedule permits, a notice is placed in the ASHRAE JOURNAL/INSIGHTS, and a release made to the
trade press, to advertise the RFP to a larger audience who may not be on the list of potential contractors.
The RFPs are also listed on the “Research” Page of the ASHRAE website
(http://www.ashrae.org/technology/page/39 ) and may be downloaded by interested bidders.
At the time the RFP is sent to potential contractors, a copy is sent to the Chairman of the sponsoring TC/TG. He/she
is asked to confirm that the Technical Contact for bidder’s technical questions and the Proposal Evaluation
Subcommittee (PES) membership has not changed and that they will evaluate the proposals received in response to
the RFP.
The Technical Contact is usually a member of the TC and he or she is available and qualified to answer technical
questions regarding the RFP from potential bidders during the bid period (60 days typically). The ideal candidate
for this position is a WS author who also serves on the PES. In addition to answering technical questions, the
Technical Contact must also record all questions and responses so that this information can be relayed to all
registered bidders one week prior to the due date for bids. The MORTS will obtain this information from the
Technical Contact approximately one week prior to the bid due date and distribute it to all potential bidders that
TC/TG/SSPC VOTE: For: Against: Abstain: Not voting: Total:
Reason for each negative vote or abstention(4)
:
Justification for not selecting lower-cost responsive bids (scoring 70 or more points) (3)
:
Submitted by: Date:
NOTE: (1) These Evaluation Criteria are examples. Evaluation Criteria and Weighting Factors must be those specified in the Work Statement.
(2) The minimum score for considering the award of a contract is 70 points. Justification for not selecting lower-cost responsive bids must include specific reasons. (3) No penalty for new contractors. (4) Attach a separate sheet if necessary.
Attachment #2
14
7. UNSOLICITED RESEARCH PROPOSALS
An unsolicited research proposal (URP) is a research proposal initiated by a proposer seeking funding from ASHRAE. In order
to be considered for funding, URPs should fall within the general research goals of the Society but not overlap significantly
with ongoing or planned research activities of individual TC (or TG, SSPC or other committee sponsoring research projects).
Unique and innovative projects that cut across research activities within different TCs are especially welcomed.
Unsolicited proposals should be submitted in electronic format to the Manager of Research and Technical Services (MORTS)
at [email protected], who assigns the URP a number and logs it into the project control system. Enclosed with the
unsolicited research proposal (URP) submission should be copies of three ASHRAE forms, Application for Grant of Funds,
Procedure Statement Regarding Unsolicited Research Proposals (URPs) and Additional Information for Potential Contractors.
These forms must be completed and signed by an individual having the authority to commit the institution contractually.
Electronic signature is sufficient. Since the ASHRAE review process cannot guarantee the confidentiality of any material
contained in a URP and since ideas, processes and/or techniques described may already be under consideration by a TC, the
author of any URP is requested to sign the Procedure Statement Regarding Unsolicited Research Proposals (URPs) form
releasing ASHRAE from responsibility for proprietary or confidential material in the URP. (See Guidelines for Unsolicited
Research Proposals)
7.1 Evaluation of Unsolicited Research Proposal
The MORTS will work with the Chair of Research Activities Subcommittee (RAS) of Research Administration Committee
(RAC) to identify an appropriate liaison from RAC, who will have responsibility for guiding the URP through the evaluation
process. In most cases, the URP liaison will be the Research Liaison for the section of TCs that best aligns with the focus of
the URP. However, in some cases, the MORTS and RAS Chair may choose a URP liaison from RAC who has unique
expertise for evaluating the URP. The following process will be followed in evaluating URPs:
1) The URP liaison will perform an initial evaluation of the URP to determine whether it should be considered for funding by
ASHRAE. If the liaison determines that the URP addresses a topic already contained in the ASHRAE Research
Implementation Plan or an RTAR under development within a TC, then the liaison should recommend to RAC that the
proposal be rejected and returned to the proposer unless the interests of the Society are better served by its consideration.
In very exceptional cases, work that is a follow-on to a previously sponsored project may be considered for a URP when
the proposed research offers ASHRAE convincing benefits in budget and schedule, where the original sponsoring TC is
supportive, where the previous contractor has a competitive advantage with respect to experience and facilities.
2) If the URP liaison determines that the URP should be considered for funding, then the liaison should identify an
appropriate TC and ask the TC chair to form a Proposal Evaluation Subcommittee (PES) headed by the TC Research
Subcommittee Chair to evaluate the URP. If a PES is appointed, then the URP liaison will follow up with the TC Chair
and Research Subcommittee Chair to monitor the timeliness of their evaluation.
3) The TC’s PES should use many of the same criteria used in evaluating solicited proposals, but must also consider whether
the unsolicited work is of equal or greater importance than that already planned by the TC. The TC must consider the cost
and benefit of the URP to the TC, the Society and the public to establish the advisability of recommending funding.
4) Should the PES recommend that the project be funded, the subsequent approval steps are identical to those of a solicited
proposal. If the TC rejects the URP, it shall provide a brief explanation to the MORTS. In some cases, the PES may be
empowered by the TC to work with the author of the URP proposal to make modifications to the scope and deliverables to
better meet the TC needs. The proposed budget can also be adjusted to accommodate these changes. The TC must vote to
authorize the PES to negotiate with the proposal author and then must approve any revised URP.
5) If disapproved at any level, the MORTS returns the URP to the proposer with a brief explanation for the reason for the
rejection. A copy of this communication is sent to the TC.
Following approval and contract finalization, the sponsoring TC will establish a Project Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS) to
oversee the progress of the project and to approve the final report.
ASHRAE UNSOLICITED RESEARCH PROPOSAL EVALUATION FORM
Criteria 1 through 10 should be rated from `0' to `10' with the higher numbers favoring funding
The ratings for individual criteria are to provide guidance for evaluation; they are not meant to be additive. Some criteria may not apply (e.g., student involvement, literature review, performance on previous ASHRAE research projects.)
Project # URP Principal Investigator:
URP Title:
Evaluation criteria
Is this appropriate ASHRAE research? (If not, state reasons. If so, proceed to evaluation criteria.)
1. Applicability to ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan (0-10): ________________________ Give names names & numbers of goals: ________________________
2. Application of Results (0-10) ________________________
a) Theoretical work clearly addressed (0-10) ________________________ b) Experimental work clearly addressed (0-10) ________________________
c) Technical value of the proposed work (0-10) ________________________
d) Detailed and logical work plan with major tasks and key milestones (0-10) ________________________ e) Deliverables clearly defined (including intermediate deliverables (0-10) _______________________
for project monitoring)
7. Contractor's capability in terms of facilities (0-10) ________________________
a) Managerial support b) Data collection
c) Technical expertise
8. Qualifications of personnel for this project (0-10) ________________________
a) Project team 'well rounded' in terms of qualifications and experience in related work
b) Project manager person directly responsible;
experience and corporate position c) Team members' qualifications and experience
a) Extent of student participation on contractor's team
b) Likelihood that involvement in project will encourage entry into HVAC&R industry
10. Performance of contractor on prior ASHRAE projects or (0-10) ________________________
other research projects
11. Other considerations: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
12. Recommendation and Justification: 1) Approve Funding; 2) Return for Revised Submission (PES/TC to provide suggested modification to scope or
technical aspects of project.); or 3) Reject. Justifications should be provided.
Attachment #2
16
7.2 Guidelines For Unsolicited Research Proposals
One of the ways in which ASHRAE research projects are initiated is through the Unsolicited Research Proposal
(URP). These are proposals, which are developed and planned by a researcher and then presented to ASHRAE with
a request for full or partial funding. The URP should include the following information.
1. Title
2. Executive Summary
(100 word statement that could be used at the BOD level to succinctly summarize the current state-of-the-art, the
advancement this project is expected to accomplish, and its value to ASHRAE and society in general.)
3. Applicability to ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan
(List specific goals of the ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan this project will support by name and number (e.g., A2,
C3) State how the proposed project will help achieve the goals. The ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan can be found
on the ASHRAE.org Web site under the Research page.)
4. Application of Results
(List handbook chapters/special publications etc. to be affected by results of this project, if known. Explain how the
results of the proposed project will be disseminated to HVAC&R industry and society in general. What are the
practical benefits expected from this research?)
5. State-of-the-Art (Background)
(Description of the amount and quality of past research, and quantify existing gaps.)
6. Advancement of the State-of-the-Art
(Quantitative estimate of the improvement expected from this research [i.e. x% energy reduction in product y or
building type z, x% increase in heat transfer coefficient between y and z, or x% reduction in design time to do y,
etc.], and explain why this information is needed by the public or by industry.)
7. Justification and Value to ASHRAE
(Identification by number, profession, or industry the ASHRAE members who will benefit. State the likelihood and
how the improvement would be adopted by industry.)
8. Objectives - A paragraph describing what this URP intends to accomplish.
(Explanation of project’s goals and how this project will accomplish its intended advancement to the state-of-the-art
[i.e. a computer simulation will be used to do x, a computer simulation will be developed for x and verified using
laboratory data from tests y and z, field test data will be obtained from x and used to do y].)
9. Scope/Technical Approach
(Provide a complete description of technical approach and task statement. Describe the parameters of the research
project, including such items as: subject matter to be explored; materials, equipment, literature or other variables to
be researched; materials, equipment, etc to be excluded from the project; outline the research methods to be used;
description of the standards to be followed; discussion of how the data is to be reduced, analyzed and presented;
description of the format for the reported results; if appropriate, describe project phases.
It is important for the scope of a research project to be broken down into tasks or phases, where a task will yield
results of interest to the TC/TG/SSPC and the Project Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS), or where the results of a
task will significantly define how subsequent tasks will be carried out. Make sure that the project objectives are
reflected in the tasks. The URP should specify deliverables corresponding to these tasks in the “Deliverables”
section to facilitate project monitoring by the PMS.)
10. Deliverables
(Insert generic ASHRAE requirements listed below plus any project specific requirements.)
Attachment #2
17
Progress, Financial and Final Reports, Research or Technical Paper(s), and Data shall constitute the only deliverables
(“Deliverables”) under this Agreement and shall be provided as follows:
a. Progress and Financial Reports
Progress and Financial Reports, in a form approved by the Society, shall be made to the Society through its
Manager of Research and Technical Services at quarterly intervals; specifically on or before each January 1, April
1, June 10, and October 1 of the contract period.
Furthermore, the Institution’s Principal Investigator, subject to the Society’s approval, shall, during the period
of performance and after the Final Report has been submitted, report in person to the most applicable Technical
Committee/Task Group (TC/TG or Committee) at the annual and winter meetings, and be available to answer
such questions regarding the research as may arise.
b. Final Report
A written report, design guide, or manual, (collectively, “Final Report”), in a form approved by the Society,
shall be prepared by the Institution and submitted to the Society’s Manager of Research and Technical Services
by the end of the Agreement term, containing complete details of all research carried out under this Agreement.
Unless otherwise specified, six copies of the final report shall be furnished for review by the Society’s Project
Monitoring Subcommittee (PMS).
The Final Report shall include an Executive Summary of approximately 800 words that includes the need that
initiated the project, a brief description of the technical approach, the results and how the results will benefit the
industry and/or the public.
Following approval by the PMS and the TC/TG/SSPC, in their sole discretion, final copies of the Final Report will
be furnished by the Institution as follows:
- An executive summary in a form suitable for wide distribution to the industry and to the public.
- Two bound copies
- One unbound copy, printed on one side only, suitable for reproduction.
- Two copies on disk or CD-ROM; one in PDF format and one in Microsoft Word.
c. HVAC&R Research of AHSRAE Transactions Technical Paper
One or more papers shall be submitted first to the ASHRAE Manager of Research and Technical Services
(MORTS) and then to the “ASHRAE Manuscript Central” Website-based manuscript review system in a form
and containing such information as designated by the Society suitable for publication. The papers should be
submitted as either Research Papers for HVAC&R Research or Technical Paper(s) for ASHRAE Transactions.
Research papers contain generalized results of long-term archival value, whereas technical papers are
appropriate for applied research of shorter-term value, ASHRAE Conference papers are not acceptable as
deliverables from ASHRAE research projects.. The paper(s) shall conform to the instructions posted in
“Manuscript Central” for an ASHRAE Transactions Technical or HVAC&R Research pape.. The paper title
shall contain the research project number at the end of the title in parentheses, e.g., (xxxx-RP).
Note: A research or technical paper describing the research project must be submitted after the TC has approved
the Final Report. Research papers may also be prepared before the project’s completion, if it is desired to
disseminate interim results of the project. Contractor shall submit any interim papers to MORTS and the PMS for
review and approval before the papers are submitted to ASHRAE Manuscript Central for review.
d. Data The Institution agrees to maintain true and complete books and records, including but not limited to notebooks, reports, charts, graphs, analyses, computer programs, visual representations etc., (collectively, the “Data”), generated in connection with the Services. Society representatives shall have access to all such Data for examination and review at reasonable times. The Data shall be held in strict confidence by the Institution and shall not be released to third parties without prior authorization from the Society, except as provided by GENERAL CONDITION VII, PUBLICATION. The original Data shall be kept on file by the Institution for a period of two years after receipt of the final payment and upon request the Institution will make a copy
Attachment #2
18
available to the Society upon the Society’s request.
e. Project Synopsis
In addition to the approximately 800 word summary in the final report, Contractor will prepare a written
synopsis totaling approximately 100 words in length and written for a broad technical audience. The synopsis
shall document 1. Main findings of research project, 2. Why findings are significant, and 3. How the findings
benefit ASHRAE membership and/or society in general. The synopsis shall be submitted to the MORTS by the
end of the Agreement term for publication in ASHRAE Insights and on the Research Page of the ASHRAE
Website ( for keyword searches but Internet users) .
The Society may also request the Institution submit a technical article suitable for publication in the Society’s
ASHRAE Journal. This is considered a voluntary submission and not a Deliverable. Technical articles shall be
prepared using dual units; e.g., rational inch-pound with equivalent SI units shown parenthetically. SI usage shall be
in accordance with IEEE/ASTM Standard SI-10.
(The above deliverables are necessary, but not sufficient, to monitor a research project. The PMS and the sponsoring
TC have the responsibility to review the contractor’s on-going activities and intermediate results, to ensure that the
methods used and results obtained will be valid and well-enough substantiated to be labeled as “ASHRAE-approved
findings.” Proper oversight cannot wait until the final report, when most of the budget has already been expended.
Therefore, each major task or phase of the research method outlined in the Scope should also be linked to a
deliverable report, memorandum, or summary. These in-progress deliverables should not add to the cost of the
project, as they will most likely become chapters of the final report. However, they should help the TC avoid
unpleasant surprises due to the research not being conducted according to the TC’s expectations. Examples of
deliverables that could be required during the project include:
If one task is a literature review, then the deliverable could be an annotated list of references and
conclusions/summary of the current state of the art.
If the contractor must propose specific sites (e.g., buildings), experiment topologies (e.g., duct
configurations), materials (e.g., refrigerants, appliances, insulation or building materials), experiment
protocols, and/or instrumentation, then short memos describing those proposed methods, materials, etc.
should be deliverables to be reviewed and approved by the PMS before moving on to the next research
task.
If analysis of preliminary data or results will decide how to proceed (e.g., CFD models of 12 duct
configurations will be used to select 2 duct configurations to be built and subjected to wind tunnel tests),
then the contractor should write up the results of the initial analysis, recommend the areas for further more
detailed investigation, and justify those recommendations.
If data from the research are expected to modify or update a Handbook table, then the procedure for
developing the updated table from the data should be specified and provided to the PMS as a deliverable.
(The final report may also require the contractor to prepare a proposed updated table based on the observed
data.)
In short, the technical approach for a research project should be broken down into tasks or phases, and where a task
will yield results of interest to the TC and the PMS, or where the results of a task will significantly define how
subsequent tasks will be carried out. The URP should specify such intermediate deliverables for the PMS to review.
This approach will make it easier for the PMS and MORTS to gauge progress and technical merit of on-going
ASHRAE research projects, and will provide a framework for the cognizant TCs to provide technical oversight and
assistance to identify and correct problems as they occur.)
11. Schedule
Description of project milestones and duration.
12. Costs
Detail breakdown of expenses into categories and itemized list of equipment, travel, subcontracts, and other direct
Attachment #2
19
expenses; Timing of expenditures; Description of cost sharing of proposing organization or others.
13. Personnel
Education, experience and expertise of researchers that qualifies them to perform the work.
14. References
List references cited in the proposal.
A copy of the URP, containing a completed "Application for Grant of Funds" form, should be submitted to the
Manager of Research & Technical Services (MORTS), who will then distribute it to the appropriate research liaison
for review and evaluation.
The Research Administration Committee (RAC) normally meets in late June and late January of each year, so URP's
should be submitted by mid-May or by mid-December to be considered for the next meeting. The results of the
reviewing committees' actions will be made known to the proposer by mid-February or mid-July.
Variability of Natural Gas Composition in Select Major Metropolitan Areas of the United States, report GRI-
92/0123 [Wobbe numbers], Gas Research Institute (now the Gas Institute of Technolgy), 8600 Bryn Mawr
Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60631 (now 1700 South Mount Prospect Road, Des Plaines, IL 60018), March 1992.
Standard Atmospheric Data for Altitudes to 60,000 Feet, Table 1, Chapter 6, 2001 or 2005 Fundamentals
Handbook, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 1791 Tullie
Circle, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30329
Attachment #2
AHRI Consultant Report to ASHRAE Research Advisory Committee
June 2010
ASHRAE Co-funding for ASHRAE Research Projects from: Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and
Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Technology Institute (AHRTI) Since 1999 AHRI and AHRTI have contributed ASHRAE $421,512 in co-funding for ASHRAE research project. (This includes balance of $161,306 payable upon receipt of deliverables of 9 ongoing projects). Additional maximum contributions of $132,500 have been approved for three TRPs; and $25,000 from AHRI for project 1581 pending work statement approval. In additions to cash contributions AHRI staff and member company staff activity participate in ASHRAE TC activities including service on TC Research Subcommittees, Project monitoring subcommittees providing technical expertise in developing work statements and monitoring ASHRAE research projects. Current ARTI Co-funded ASHRAE Projects
1345-RP, Waterside Fouling Performance of Brazed-Plate Type Condensers in Cooling Tower Applications
1402-RP, Comparison of Vertical Display Cases: Energy and Productivity Impacts of Glass Doors vs. Open Vertical Display Cases *
1449-RP, Energy Efficiency and Cost Assessment of Humidity Control Options for Residential Buildings
1456-RP, Assess and Implement Natural and Hybrid Ventilation Models in Whole-Building Energy Simulations *
1466-RP, Development of a Calibrated Reference Device for Use with Test Standards ANSI/ASHRAE 52.2-2007
1467-RP, Balancing the Latent Heat Load between Display Cases and Store Comfort Cooling 1484-RP, Energy and Performance of Secondary Coolant Low-Temperature Refrigeration* 1507-RP, Binary Refrigerant Flame Boundary Concentrations 1509-RP, Study the Degradation of Typical HVAC Materials, Filter and Components Irradiated by
UVC Energy
* Projects completed awaiting deliverables for payment of project co-funding balances. TRPs
1583-WS, Assessment of Burning Velocity Test Methods o RAC conditionally approved the work statement on 21 September 2009. o ARTI co-funding is at 25% of project cost up to a maximum of $30,000. o Contractor selection scheduled for Albuquerque meeting
1580-WS, Study of input Parameters for Risk Assessment of 2L Flammable Refrigerants in Residential Air-Conditioning and Commercial Refrigeration Applications o RAC conditionally approved the work statement on 21 September 2009. o ARTI co-funding is at 25% of project cost up to a maximum of $87,500.
Attachment #3
1584-WS, Assessment of Alternative approaches to Predicting the Burning Velocity of a Refrigerant o RAC conditionally approved the work statement on 21 September 2009. o ARTI co-funding is at 25% of project costs up to a maximum of $15,000.
Other ASHRAE Projects Under Consideration for AHRI or ARTI Co-funding ARTI co-funding interest in eleven other projects in development:
1535-WS, A Hest Transfer and Friction Factor Correlation for Low Air-side Reynolds Number Applications of Compact Heat Exchangers
o RAC returned the work statement to TC 8.4 in March 2009. o ARTI co-funding is at 25% of project cost up to a maximum of $50K.
1549-RTAR, A Study of Flow Capacity and Leakage Characteristics in 4-way Reversing Valves o RAC returned the work statement to TC 8.8 in March 2008. o ARTI is interested in co-funding provided that the scope is expanded to include
characteristics of heat losses. Amount of co-funding is TBD. 1581-WS, Develop Alternative Setup Guidelines for Unitary Air Conditioner Test Configurations
which cannot Adhere to ASHRAE Specified Duct Dimensions and External Pressure Tap Location o RAC returned the work statement to TC 8.11 in September 2009. o AHRI Unitary Small Equipment Section approved $25,000 co-funding
Attachment #3
Primary
Committee
Objective Planned
Completion
Date
Fiscal
Impact
Responsibility
RAC Develop procedures for
incorporating the new
research strategic plan into
the RTAR and WS
evaluation process
Jun-11 None RPS, others TBD
RAC Develop a process/plan for
allocating funds/awards for
high-risk research
Jun-11 None RPS, others TBD
RAC Work with the RAP chair to
recommend a process/plan
for revising the research
strategic plan (during the
next 5 year cycle required by
BOD) or develop another
method for keeping the plan
up to date
Jun-11 None RAC ExCom, others TBD
RAC Keep RAC MOP, Research
Manual, and Reference
Manual up to date
Jun-11 None RPS, others TBD
RAC Develop procedure for
reporting applications of
ASHRAE research
(updated handbook tables,
revised standards
requirements, etc.)
Jun-11 None RAS, others TBD
Attachment #4
ASHRAE
Technology for a Better Environment
1791 Tullie Circle, NE Atlanta, GA 30329-2305 USA Tel 404.636.840, Ext. 1211 Fax 678.539.2211
CAT. REGION PROJECT CONT. COMM. YEARS START F.Y. EXPENSES YEARS EXPENSES FROM 04-05 FROM 05-06 FROM 06-07 FROM 07-08 FROM 08-09 1st QTR 2nd QTR 3rd QTR. 4th QTR. JULY Y. T. D. TO DATE REMAIN. PAYMENTS EXPENSES EXPENSES EXPENSES TC#
5 2008 NI Miami U. 45,000 21,350 23,650 21,813 21,813 21,813 43,163 1,837
CAT. REGION PROJECT CONT. COMM. YEARS START F.Y. EXPENSES YEARS EXPENSES FROM 04-05 FROM 05-06 FROM 06-07 FROM 07-08 FROM 08-09 1st QTR 2nd QTR 3rd QTR. 4th QTR. JULY Y. T. D. TO DATE REMAIN. PAYMENTS EXPENSES EXPENSES EXPENSES TC#
ASHRAE RESEARCH PROJECT ANALYSIS (Completed by Staff June 2010)
Project Number & Title: 1493-TRP, CFD Shootout Contest - Prediction of Duct Fitting Losses Sponsored by TC/TG: TC 5.2 - Duct Design
Justification of Need: To date, $402k has been spent by ASHRAE to test various duct fittings. We are nowhere near finished. There are a number of round, rectangular, and flat oval fittings that are yet to be tested. Flat oval duct tests have recently started. The cost of testing continues to rise. The quality of testing is sometimes questionable, if not unacceptable. If this project is successful, then we can begin to consider using CFD as our source of fitting losses, and test them virtually, rather than test actual fittings. Once the models have been validated, we can test all of our future fittings computationally. Not only will the fittings currently not tested or validated be available to the members much sooner, but at a considerably lower cost. The ASHRAE Duct Fitting Database can then be reasonably “complete” one day.
Work Statement Authors: Herman Behls, Steve Idem Research Strategic Plan Goals Applicable to this Research: C6 RTAR Submitted: May 2007
Position on Implementation Plan: Accepted April 2008
Coordinated with TC: None Relates to Previous Project: None
Vote of TC/TG: 7-0-0
Vote of RAC: 11-0-0 CNV
Vote of RAS: 5-0-0 CV Vote of Tech Council: TBD
Allocation of ASHRAE Funds Per Fiscal Year
2010-2011 $ 24,000
2011-2012 $ 16,000
2012-2013
Best Value for ASHRAE: Lowest cost responsive bid selected? YES If no,
Did 2/3 of the PES score the selected bid the highest of all responsive bids? n/a Was the average score of the PES 5 or more points higher than the lowest priced responsive
bid? n/a Was the $/point ratio of selected bid less than all lower priced responsive bids? n/a
Actual or Perceived Conflicts of Interest: The contractor selected was not a WS author? YES If no,
The selected bid was not chosen for unique reason not outlined in WS? N/A
ESTIMATED 15M $ 85,000 SCORE $/POINT Zhiqiang Zhai 15M $20,000 95 210.5 University of North Carolina Charlotte 15M $20,000 85 235.3 University of Texas Austin 15M $20,000 65 307.6 Jacobs Engineering 15M $20,000 80 250.0 University of North Texas 15M $20,000 65 307.6 Note: Two proposals are selected for this project. RAC/Tech Council Conflicts-of-Interest: Brandemuehl - TechC
Attachment #6
1493-TRP, CFD Shootout Contest - Prediction of Duct Fitting Losses MORTS NOTES: Reasons Why Other Recommended or Registered Bidders Did Not Bid: 1. Pennsylvania State University – Too busy with already funded projects. I also do not work on duct CFD
simulations, so I cannot bid for this project. Jelena Srebric Potential Bidders: Tennessee Technological University, University of Tennessee, Texas University, Pennsylvania State University, Amoeba Technologies, University Colorado, Carleton University Bids Due: May 17, 2010 Total Number of Bids: 5 Bidders: Zhejiang Zhai, University of North Carolina Charlotte, University of Texas Austin, Jacobs Engineering, University of North Texas PES: Steve Idem, Bass Abushakra, Vernon Peppers, Yan Chen TC Recommended Contractor: Zhiqiang Zhai & University of North Carolina Charlotte P.I. & Track Record(s): 1. ****Zhiqiang Zhai:
Dr. John Zhai is the P.I. or Co-P.I. for active ASHRAE research projects 1397-RP (TC 9.6), 1418-RP (TC 4.10), 1456-RP (TC 4.7), 1467-RP (TC 10.7) and 1487-RP (TC 4.10). Prof. Zhai has been working on CFD technique development and application for about 15 years. Dr. Zhai has a very unique and integrative background in Mechanical and Architectural Engineering. He received his first Ph.D. degree in Fluid Mechanics with focus on CFD and turbulence from Tsinghua University and his second Ph.D. degree in Building Technology with focus on integrated CFD and energy simulation from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Dr. Zhai has been actively engaged in various research activities in the field of fluid/thermal science and building/energy/environment technology since 1994. His particular research interest and expertise include: computational fluid dynamics techniques and applications in building and environment, experimental and numerical study of indoor environment quality, building HVAC system design and evaluation, sustainable and immune building technologies. Dr. Zhai has solid education background and rich research experience in fluid mechanics and heat transfer related environment and ventilation study. As a primary researcher, Dr. Zhai has completed a number of notable research and consulting projects and published over 60 technical papers in reputed journals and conferences. Dr. Zhai is an active member of ASHRAE. He was Voting Member of TC 4.10, “Indoor Environmental Modeling,” Corresponding Member of TC 5.6, “Control of Fire and Smoke,” and a PMS Member for Project 1321-RP, “Modeling VOC Sorption of Building Materials and Its Impact on Indoor Air Quality”. Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractor: None noted
2. ****University of North Carolina-Charlotte:
Dr. Ahmad Sleiti has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Sleiti holds a PhD, Master and BS degree in mechanical Engineering/thermo fluids/heat transfer/ventilation and air conditioning. He has more than 19 years of experience. Dr. Sleiti is a member of ASHRAE, but no record of prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractor: None noted
3. University of Texas-Austin:
Dr. Donghyun Rim has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Donghyun Rim is a Research Associate in the Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering (CAEE) at the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin). He received his Ph.D. degree from UT Austin in the CAEE Department in May 2009. His research involves computer simulations and experimental measurements of air and energy flows in buildings. He has significant experience with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to investigate air and pollutant flows in building environments, including in the vicinity of a human body and occupied spaces. Dr. Rim is a Student member of ASHRAE, but no record of prior or current TC participation. 2007-2008 ASHRAE Graduate Student Grant-in-Aid recipient. Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractor: None noted
Attachment #6
4. Jacobs Engineering: Dr. Kai Kang P.E. has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Kang is a Mechanical Engineer by education. His interest in CFD and numerical simulation was motivated from his graduate research projects, which included extensive use and development of CFD techniques either as a research tool or for a specific application. Such interest translated directly to his consulting practice, primarily in ventilation, and fire/smoke management, in which CFD is being used in many projects. Kai obtained his Doctoral degree from the Department of Mechanical Engineering of Columbia University. His relevant coursework includes: Fluid Mechanics (Turbulence), Numerical Methods for Fluid Flow and Heat
Transfer, Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations (PDEs), and Analytical Methods for PDEs. Since graduation, he has been actively teaching in the field of Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics. Dr. Kang is a member of ASHRAE, and active on TCs 4.10, 5.6, and 5.9. Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractor: None noted
5. University of North Texas:
Dr. Sandra Boetcher, has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Boetcher is an assistant professor in UNT’s MEE Department. Dr. Boetcher received her PhD in mechanical engineering under the guidance of Dr. Ephraim Sparrow. During her career, she taught multiple classes on thermal modeling and computational fluid dynamics. In addition, she wrote radiation code for her MS project and used commercial software to solve natural convection problems for her PhD thesis. She has over 1 years of experience writing modifying and using various computational fluid dynamics codes for a variety of problems in academia and industry. Se was a student member of ASHRAE from 2002 to 2005, but no record of prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractor: None noted
Proposal Evaluation Criteria Used:
Proposal evaluation criteria and weighting factors will be per Table 2.
Table 2 Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Category Maximum
Score
1. Education of CFD expert. 25
2. Publications by CFD expert. 50
3. Other accomplishments by CFD expert related to CFD.
25
TOTAL SCORE …………………………… 100
Attachment #6
1493-TRP
ASHRAE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF FUNDS
(to be completed by Applicant)
1.0 Title: CFD Shootout Contest – Prediction of Duct Fitting Losses 2.0 Principal Investigator (P.I.): Zhiqiang (John) Zhai 3.0 Name of Contracting Institution: Zhiqiang (John) Zhai Mailing Address of P.I.: 1554 Turin Drive, Longmont, CO, 80503 E-mail address of P.I.: [email protected] Phone No. of P.I.: 303-492-4699 Fax No. of P.I.: 303-492-7317 Other Key Personnel: n/a 4.0 Any subcontractors: n/a 5.0 Objective & Scope:*
The primary objective of the project is to organize international competition to encourage the CFD community to devise solutions to the problems that the duct design industry is trying to solve. This contest will gain confidence in the use of CFD to determine the loss coefficients for duct fittings and further eliminate laboratory fitting tests in compliance with ASHRAE Standard 120.
6.0 Project Start Date: September 1, 2010 Total Project Length: 15 months 7.0 Total Cost: US$20,000 ASHRAE Funding Requested: US$20,000 8.0 Details of Financial Support: a) Professional Salaries $18,000 Person Months 3 b) Research Assistants c) Fringe Benefits ( %) d) Equipment e) Supplies & Materials f) Computer Costs g) Travel & Communications $2,000 h) i) Total Direct Costs $20,000 j) Indirect Costs ( %) k) TOTAL $20,000 9.0 Qualifications of Principal Investigator:*
Dr. John Zhai has been working on CFD technique development and application for more than 15 years. Dr. Zhai has a very unique and integrative background in Mechanical and Architectural Engineering. He received his first Doctor degree in Fluid Mechanics with focus on CFD and turbulence from Tsinghua University and his second Ph.D. degree in Building Technology with focus on integrated CFD and energy simulation from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Dr. Zhai has been actively engaged in various research activities in the field of fluid/thermal science and building/energy/environment technology since 1994. His particular research interest and expertise include: computational fluid
dynamics techniques and applications in building and environment, experimental and
numerical study of indoor environment quality, building HVAC system design and evaluation,
sustainable and immune building technologies.
Attachment #6
1493-TRP
Dr. Zhai has solid education background and rich research experience in fluid mechanics and heat transfer related environment and ventilation study. As a primary researcher, Dr. Zhai has completed a number of notable research and consulting projects and published over 70 technical papers in reputed journals and conferences. Dr. Zhai is an active member of ASHRAE. He is Voting Member of T.C. 4.10 “Indoor Environmental Modeling”, Corresponding Member of T.C. 5.6 “Control of Fire and Smoke”, and a PMS Member for Project 1321-RP “Modeling VOC Sorption of Building Materials and Its Impact on Indoor Air Quality”. Dr. Zhai is a PI and Co-PI for a few ASHRAE research projects, including “The Development of Simplified Rack Boundary Conditions for Numerical Data Center Models” (1487-TRP), “Optimizing the Trade Off between Grid Resolution and Simulation Accuracy: Coarse Grid CFD Modeling” (1418-TRP), “Assess and Implement Natural and Hybrid Ventilation Models in Whole-Building Energy Simulations” (1456-TRP), “Experimental Investigation of Hospital Operating Room (OR) Air Distribution” (1397-TRP), “Identification, Classification and Correlation of Ultrafine Indoor Airborne Particulate Matter with Outdoor Values” (1281-TRP). Dr. Zhai’s integrative training and experience in Mechanical and Architectural Engineering (particularly in CFD and turbulence) place him in a superb position to coordinate and conduct this project as a CFD expert.
10.0 Signature of Project Manager or P.I.: Title: Associate Professor Date: May 11th, 2010 Signature of Executive Officer of Institution: n/a Title: Date: Key personnel were ( ) were not ( X ) involved in writing the ASHRAE request for proposal for this project.
* All sections must be completed. Use of terms such as “See Attached Proposal” may result in rejection of proposal.
Attachment #6
Attachment #6
ASHRAE RESEARCH PROJECT ANALYSIS (Completed by Staff June 2010)
Project Number & Title: 1517-TRP, “Validation of a Low-order Acoustic Model of Boilers and its Application for Diagnosing Combustion Driven Oscillations “ Sponsored by TC/TG: TC 6.10 - Fuels and Combustion Justification of Need: During the development of higher efficiency, lower emission boilers, tonal noise can be an
unacceptable problem. This is caused by oscillations of the flame which result in pressure oscillations in the combustion
chamber that are radiated as noise. This occurs whenever the pressure oscillations feed back on the flame, via the mixture
supply system, in such a manner that the flame oscillations increase. The interaction of the boiler, burner, and flame is so
complex that breaking the circle is best accomplished with the help of a computer model.
The objective of this research is to develop a procedure for quickly and efficiently modeling the acoustic behavior of gas
fired heating boilers as a tool for diagnosing the cause of combustion oscillations.
ASHRAE members who would benefit immediately from the proposed research are engineers engaged in the development
of high efficiency, low NOx gas fired boilers for residential and small commercial applications. It is expected that the
results will also benefit engineers involved in the development of gas fired furnaces and liquid fueled boilers as the
demand for lower NOx emissions from those products spreads in the near future. Together, gas and oil burning boilers
and furnaces are used to heat the vast majority of homes and small commercial buildings. The ultimate beneficiaries are
the owners of buildings in which better heating appliances are to be installed and sustainable low emission solutions are to
be provided.
Work Statement Authors: Bill Roy, Tom Butcher, Peter Baade Research Strategic Plan Goals Applicable to this Research: C1
RTAR Submitted: August 2007
Position on Implementation Plan: Accepted October 2007
Coordinated with TC: None Relates to Previous Project: None
Vote of TC/TG: 5-0-0
Vote of RAC: 12-0-0 CNV
Vote of RAS: 6-0-0 CV Vote of Tech Council: TBD
Allocation of ASHRAE Funds Per Fiscal Year
2010-2011 $ 53,500
2011-2012 $ 53,500
2012-2013
Best Value for ASHRAE: Lowest cost responsive bid selected? YES If no,
Did 2/3 of the PES score the selected bid the highest of all responsive bids? n/a Was the average score of the PES 5 or more points higher than the lowest priced responsive bid? n/a Was the $/point ratio of selected bid less than all lower priced responsive bids? n/a
Actual or Perceived Conflicts of Interest: The contractor selected was not a WS author? YES If no,
The selected bid was not chosen for unique reason not outlined in WS? n/a
ESTIMATED 18M $120,000 SCORE $/POINT Georgia Tech Research 18M $139,682 74.4 1,878 Wayne State University 18M $128,675 73.8 1,745 Pennsylvania State University 18M $120,000 86.3 1,391 Tennessee Tech University 18M $119,743 65.9 1,817 University of Nebraska-Lincoln 18M $108,091 69.7 1,551 Secat, Inc. 18M $107,000 91.9 1,164 RAC/Tech Council Conflicts-of-Interest: Bahnfleth - TechC
Attachment #7
1517-TRP, “Validation of a Low-order Acoustic Model of Boilers and its Application for Diagnosing Combustion Driven Oscillations “ MORTS NOTES: Reasons Why Other Recommended or Registered Bidders Did Not Bid: 1. Technische Universitaet München Lehrstuhl für Thermodynamik: The research proposed is very
challenging and ambitious. The funds allocated and the time frame set for the project are in my opinion not adequate. I don't think there is a fair chance of achieving the project goals. Therefore I do not plan to submit a bid. Wolfgang Polifke
2. LMS International: I have left LMS International on the 30th of November 2009, to join the faculty of the von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, not bidding. Christophe Schram
3. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven: We are not ready with our research to submit a proposal. Maybe in two years. Eric VandenBulck.
4. University Twente: I am not sure if I will be able to prepare a proposal. I am still waiting for shipping quotations, and the project budget is very tight, certainly at the Euro to US$ rate we had. Jim Kok
Potential Bidders: University of Kentucky, Wayne State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Tennessee Technological University, Technische Universitaet München Lehrstuhl für Thermodynamik , Stevene Institute of Technology, University Twente, The University of Adelaide, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, LMS International Bids Due: May 17, 2010 Total Number of Bids: 6 Bidders: Georgia Tech Research, Wayne State University, Pennsylvania State University, Tennessee Tech University, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Secat, Inc., PES: Bill Roy, Tom Butcher, Earl Rightmeir, Peter Baade TC Recommended Contractor: Secat, Inc. P.I. & Track Record(s):
1. Georgia Tech Research Corporation: Dr. Timothy Lieuwen Ph.D., P.E. has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Professor Lieuwen is an internationally recognized expert in combustion instabilities, and has put together a book, book chapters, numerous papers that have made important contributions to current understanding of the topic. He is involved in a number of related projects with a variety of company and very familiar with the modeling and experiments required to successfully complete this project. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: David Scarborough Ph.D., Senior Research Engineer. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. He was a student member of ASHRAE up until 2004. No record of prior or current TC participation.
Subcontractor: None noted 2. Wayne State University:
Dr. Wenlong Li has no record of previous history on an ASHRAE research project. Dr. Li is an associate professor of Mechanical Engineering at Wayne State University. He has many years of work and research experience in acoustic analysis and testing, and vibrations of complex structures. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Dr. Marcis Jansons Ph.D. is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Wayne State University. He has extensive research experience with experimental studies of various combustions phenomena. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation.
Subcontractor: None noted
Attachment #7
3. Tennessee Tech University: Dr. Jon Peddieson, has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Peddieson began working on the modeling of combustion oscillations approximately thirty years ago. His work in this area has been supported by NASA and AEDC and has produced several publications. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Dr. Stephen Idem, Co-PI: ME professor at Tennessee Tech Univ. and proposed co-PI. PI for completed ASHRAE research projects 1132-RP (TC 5.2), 1319-RP (TC 5.2), and active project 1488-RP (TC 5.2). He is an ASHRAE member active on TCs 1.2, 5.1, and 5.2.
Subcontractor: Dr. Mahesh Panchagnula: Faculty member in ME department at TTU. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation.
1. Pennsylvania State University:
Dr. Jong Guen Lee has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Lee’s research focuses on combustion dynamics problems in air-breathing gas turbine combustors. He has 16 years of experience in both academia and industry on a number of joint government and industry projects to develop the next-generation, ultra-low emissions, high-efficiency gas turbine combustors for both land-based power generation and aircraft propulsion applications. His work also includes active combustion control and sensor development for monitoring combustion process in combustors. He has published more than 60 technical papers in those areas. He has been a member of the Combustion Institute and AIAA and has served as a paper reviewer of Journal of Propulsion and Power, Combustion and Flame, International Journal of Transport Phenomena, Combustion Science and Technology, American Society of Mechanical Engineers-International Gas Turbine Institute and Society of Automotive Engineers. Dr. Lee is the main person who will conduct the most part of design of test-apparatus, test and data analysis. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Prof. Domenic A. Santavicca: Dr. Santavicca is a Professor in the Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering Department and serves as the director for Center for Advanced Power Generation at Penn State. He has over 30 years of experience in gas turbine combustion related research. Over the past 16 years the main focus of his research has been combustion dynamics, active combustion control and optical probes and sensors. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Subcontractor: None noted.
2. University of Nebraska-Lincoln: Siu-Kit Lau, has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Siu-Kit Lau received his Ph.D. in Acoustics and B.Eng. (1st Hons) in Building Services Engineering from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University in 2003 and 1997, respectively. Prior to joining the University of Nebraska in 2009, he was an Assistant Professor in the Department of Building Services Engineering at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. His primary research interest is in noise control, particularly active passive control methods. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Grenville Yuill, Co-PI: Dr. Yuill was the Director of the Architectural Engineering Program at the University of Nebraska from 1998 to 2005 and the Director of the Durham School of Architectural Engineering and Construction from 2005 to 2009.ASHRAE Fellow/Life member. PI for completed ASHRAE projects 530-RP (TC 4.7), 618-RP (TC 5.6), 763-RP (TC 4.3), 865-RP (TC 4.7), 903-RP (TC 4.10), 935-RP (TC 9.12). He is an active member of TCs 2.5, 4.3, 4.7, 5.11, 6.8, 8.10, and 8.11 plus multiple SPCs and SSPCS.
Subcontractor?: Professor Chung K. (Ed) Law: Faculty member at Princeton University. His research interests are in combustion, propulsion, heat and mass transfer, energy, alternate fuels, and the environment. He has published over 340 journal-class articles in these areas. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation.
Attachment #7
3. ****Secat, Inc.: David Herrin, has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Mr. Herrin received his BS in Mechanical Engineering and MS in Engineering Mechanics from the University of Cincinnati. He received his PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Kentucky in 2000. He served as a post doctoral scholar since that time and is currently a research professor. He has published over 50 journal and conference papers in the vibro-acoustics area. He is a registered P.E. in the state of Kentucky. David is also the director of the Vibro-Acoustics Consortium in Lexington, KY. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Mohamed I. Ali (Co-PI): Mohamed Ali received his B.S. and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Helwan. He received his Ph.D. in Aerospace/Mechanical Engineering from the University of Michigan (joint with the University of Helwan, Egypt) in 1997. He served as an assistant professor at Helwan University and then moved to the University of Kentucky as a sabbatical research faculty meeting. He is currently a senior lecturer at the University of Kentucky. He has published over 45 journal and conference papers in the combustion and thermal. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation fluid area. Limin Zhou, Research Assistant: Ph.D. student Limin Zhou is majoring in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Kentucky. This project will form the bulk of his Ph.D. dissertation if awarded. Jinghao Liu: Ph.D. Student Jinghao Liu will be completing his Ph.D. over the next 18 months. He is an accomplished experimentalist and he will assist in advising the Team’s experimental efforts.
Subcontractor: None noted Proposal Evaluation Criteria Used: 1. Technical Approach – degree to which the proposal communicates understanding of the technical area
and the degree to which the basic technical approach is expected to advance the state-of-the-art in this area. (25%)
2. Proposing Team Members – Prior experience of the Principal Investigator and supporting team members. Degree to which their experience and accomplishments support the expectation of a very high quality project and publication of results. (25%)
3. Equipment and Facilities – The facilities and measurement equipment currently available to the proposing team and their plans to add additional equipment as needed. It is expected that this will be specified in some detail in the proposal. (25%)
4. Work Plan – The degree to which the proposed detailed steps, their relationship, and proposed schedule are reasonable and will support the completion of the project without delays. (25%)
Attachment #7
Attachment #7
Attachment #7
ASHRAE RESEARCH PROJECT ANALYSIS (Completed by Staff June 2010)
Project Number & Title: 1547-TRP, “CO2-based Demand Controlled Ventilation for Multiple Zone HVAC Systems” Sponsored by TC/TG: TC 4.3 – Ventilation Requirements and Infiltration
Justification of Need: ASHRAE Standard 90.1 defines demand controlled ventilation (DCV) as a system
that provides “automatic reduction of outdoor air intake below design rates when the actual occupancy of
spaces served by the system is less than design occupancy.” Standard 90.1 has required DCV, with some
exceptions, for densely occupied spaces since the 1999 version, which also required that the DCV system be
in compliance with ASHRAE Standard 62.1. The Standard 62.1 User’s Manual includes an appendix
showing the underlying theory and a control scheme for using carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration for DCV
in accordance with the Ventilation Rate Procedure (VRP) of ASHRAE Standard 62.1. The 2007 version of
the Manual only addresses CO2 DCV for single zone systems. The 2004 version of the Manual also included
an approach for multiple zone recirculation HVAC systems (MZS) but errors were found in the approach so
it was removed. The authors of the Manual and the SSPC 62.1 subcommittee monitoring the Manual’s
development felt that before any MZS DCV control logic could be included in the manual, research had to
be done to ensure that the many complexities of the subject were properly addressed. Until questions are
answered concerning MZS DCV, CO2 DCV cannot be properly implemented in MZS with any assurance
that it will be Standard 62.1 compliant and provide significantly improved energy performance. This research will ensure that it is possible to fully comply with both Standard 90.1 and Standard 62.1 with respect to multiple zone DCV systems. Work Statement Authors: Steve Taylor Research Strategic Plan Goals Applicable to this Research: A1, A2, A5 RTAR Submitted: April 2008
Position on Implementation Plan: Accepted June 2008
Coordinated with TC: None Relates to Previous Project: None
Vote of TC/TG: 7-0-0 CNV
Vote of RAC: 12-0-0 CNV
Vote of RAS: 6-0-0 CV Vote of Tech Council: TBD
Allocation of ASHRAE Funds Per Fiscal Year
2010-2011 $ 56,416
2011-2012 $ 56,413
2012-2013
Best Value for ASHRAE: Lowest cost responsive bid selected? NO If no,
Did 2/3 of the PES score the selected bid the highest of all responsive bids? YES Was the average score of the PES 5 or more points higher than the lowest priced responsive
bid? YES Was the $/point ratio of selected bid less than all lower priced responsive bids? YES
Actual or Perceived Conflicts of Interest: The contractor selected was not a WS author? YES If no,
The selected bid was not chosen for unique reason not outlined in WS? n/a
ESTIMATED 18M $130,000 SCORE $/POINT Mississippi State University 18M $130,439 51.5 2553 Univesco, LLC 18M $124,800 41.3 3032 University of Nebraska Lincoln 18M $112,829 88.1 1280 University of Central Florida 18M $109,556 82.8 1323 RAC/Tech Council Conflicts-of-Interest:
Attachment #8
1547-TRP, “CO2-based Demand Controlled Ventilation for Multiple Zone HVAC Systems” MORTS NOTES: Potential Bidders: University of Nebraska, Colorado University, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Pennsylvania State University, University of Strathclyde Bids Due: May 17, 2010 Total Number of Bids: 4 Bidders: Mississippi State University, Univesco, LLC, University of Nebraska Lincoln, University of Central Florida PES: Steve Taylor, Dennis Stanke, Stuart Dols TC Recommended Contractor: University of Nebraska Lincoln P.I. & Track Record(s): 1. Mississippi State University:
Dr. Nelson Fumo is PI for active ASHRE research project 1339-RP sponsored by TC 8.12. He is an Assistant Research Professor at Mississippi State University. Dr. Fumo has taught courses of thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, experimental orientation, solar energy management. Dr. Fumo’s research thrusts include energy systems designs, HVAC, and renewable energies. Recent research has been focused on simulation of combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) systems. Dr. Fumo Master’s Thesis was “Performance of a packed tower absorber/regenerator for an aqueous lithium chloride desiccant dehumidification system.” Use of desiccant system as a thermally activated component for CCHP systems is of great interest for the research group. He is an Associate Member of ASHRAE. No record of prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Dr. Pedro Mago: Assoc. Professor of ME at Mississippi State University. He is an S.B.A member of ASHRAE and a member of TCs 1.1, 1.10, and 8.4. Dr. Rogelio Luck: Professor of ME at Mississippi State University. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Subcontractor: None noted.
2. Univesco, LLC: Dr. Tom Poerio Ph.D., P.E., No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. The education,
research experience, and engineering design experience of the Principal Investigator (P.I.), Dr. Poerio, Ph.D.,
P.E., LEED AP, are both unique and well suited for this research project. Indeed, the P.I. has both mathematical
research experience (Ph.D. Mathematics; Thesis: Topological Algebraic Structure in the Density Topology and
on Souslin Lines) and physics research experience (M.S. Physics; Researched grid-generated turbulence in a
water tunnel using laser Doppler velocimetry) that enable him to successfully analyze demand controlled multi-
zone ventilation systems and describe the resulting equations in the simplest mathematical terms possible. More
importantly, however, the P.I. has both an engineering degree (B.S. Mechanical Engineering) and significant
experience designing multi-zone (VAV) systems including multi-zone systems with CO2-based demand
controlled ventilation. In addition, the P.I. has extensive experience with building energy models. He is a Member of ASHRAE. No record of prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: None noted. Subcontractor: None noted.
3. ****University of Nebraska Lincoln: Dr. Josephine Lau, No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Josephine Lau (PI) has expertise in energy analysis and indoor air quality measurement and modeling for various mechanical ventilation systems and different building types. She has written more than 10 peer‐reviewed publications related to Indoor air quality and energy efficiency of ventilation systems. She graduated with a Ph.D. of Architectural Engineering at The Pennsylvania State University, PA. She received her MS of Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University, IN; and MEng(Hons) & BEng(Hons) of Building Services Engineering from The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong. She is a Member of ASHRAE and has been active on TCs 2.3, 2.9 and 4.3.
Attachment #8
Other Key Personnel: Grenville Yuill, Co-PI: Dr. Yuill was the Director of the Architectural Engineering Program at the University of Nebraska from 1998 to 2005 and the Director of the Durham School of Architectural Engineering and Construction from 2005 to 2009.ASHRAE Fellow/Life member. PI for completed ASHRAE projects 530-RP (TC 4.7), 618-RP (TC 5.6), 763-RP (TC 4.3), 865-RP (TC 4.7), 903-RP (TC 4.10), 935-RP (TC 9.12). He is an active member of TCs 2.5, 4.3, 4.7, 5.11, 6.8, 8.10, and 8.11 plus multiple SPCs and SSPCS. Subcontractor: None noted.
4. University of Central Florida:
Dr. Lixing Gu, P.I. active ASHRAE research project 1390-RP sponsored by TC 7.4. He successfully completed ASHRAE research projects 852-RP, entitled "Comparison of Duct System Computer Models that Could Provide Input to the Thermal Distribution Standard Method of Test (SPC-152P)", for TC 6.3 and 1165-RP, entitled "System Interactions in Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems," also for TC 6.3. Both ASHRAE projects provided technical support for Standard 152 development. Dr. Gu holds a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering and is a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Florida. He also has in-depth knowledge of mathematical models and numerical analysis in the areas of heat, air and mass transfer and strong background in the finite element method and computational fluid dynamics. Dr. Gu is also a member of the team that is developing the EnergyPlus™ building energy simulation program for the U.S. DOE. He is an ASHRAE member and a voting member of ASHRAE TC 4.4 and SPC 160P. Other Key Personnel: Mangesh BasarkarI: Research Engineer in the buildings research team at the Florida Solar Energy Center. Mr. Mangesh has a Masters degree in Mechanical Engineering from Syracuse University with a
concentration in building simulation tools and techniques. He is an Associate Member of ASHRAE. No record of prior or current TC participation. Dr. Muthusamy Swami: holds a doctoral degree in Mechanical (Thermal) Engineering with over 25 years experience and demonstrated track record in attracting funding, proven research program development and successful management of individual and team projects. He has published in the area of energy analysis and led analytic teams. For the last several years, he has independently led the continued full-cycle development of EnergyGauge® Summit, FSEC’s software which performs calculations for code compliance, energy rating and energy analysis. He is an ASHRAE member and a member of ASHRAE TCs 2.5 and 4.3. Subcontractor: None noted.
Proposal Evaluation Criteria Used: Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria: 1. Contractor’s understanding of Work Statement as revealed in the proposal. (25%) 2. Qualification of personnel for this project. (30%)
a. Experience of Principal Investigator with fundamental ventilation principles b. Breadth and quality of contractor team experience with HVAC design, energy modeling, and airflow
modeling 3. Quality of methodology proposed for conducting research. (20%)
a. Modeling software and procedures b. Organization and management plan
4. Probability of contractor’s proposal meeting objectives. (20%) a. Detailed work plan with major tasks and key milestones b. All technical and logistic factors considered c. Reasonableness of project schedule
5. Performance of contractor on prior ASHRAE projects (no penalty for new contractors). (5%)
Attachment #8
1547-TRP
ASHRAE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF FUNDS (to be completed by Applicant)
1.0 Title: CO2‐based Demand Control Ventilation for Multiple Zone HVAC Systems 2.0 Principal Investigator (P.I.): Josephine Lau, Ph.D. 3.0 Name of Contracting Institution: Board of Regents, University of Nebraska‐Lincoln 312 N 14th Street, Alex Bldg West, Lincoln, NE 68588‐0430
Mailing Address of P.I.: Architectural Engineering Program 203D PDI, University of Nebraska‐Lincoln
Omaha, NE 68182‐0681
E‐mail address of P.I.: [email protected] Phone No. of P.I.: (402)554‐2079 Fax No. of P.I.: (402)554‐2080 Other Key Personnel: (Co‐PI) Grenville Yuill, Ph.D. 4.0 Any subcontractors: No 5.0 Objective & Scope:* The objective of this proposed ASHRAE 1547-TRP project is to
develop reliable, verifiable control logic for multizone recirculating air handling systems with CO2-based demand controlled ventilation. Simulations of energy models and CO-2 concentration with airflow models will verify the effectiveness of the control logic options.
6.0 Project Start Date: 9/1/2010 Total Project Length: 18 months 7.0 Total Cost: US$ 112,829 ASHRAE Funding Requested: US$ 112,829 8.0 Details of Financial Support: a) Professional Salaries $ 23,584 Person Months 2 b) Research Assistants 27,270 c) Fringe Benefits (28 or 36+%) 18,906 d) Equipment e) Supplies & Materials 300 f) Computer Costs g) Travel & Communications 9,125 h) i) Total Direct Costs 79,185 j) Indirect Costs (48.5% ) 33,644 k) TOTAL $ 112,829 9.0 Qualifications of Principal Investigator:* Dr. Josephine Lau (PI) has expertise in energy analysis and indoor air quality measurement and modeling for various mechanical ventilation systems and different building types. She has written more than 10 peer‐reviewed publications related to Indoor air quality and energy efficiency of ventilation systems. She graduated with a Ph.D. of Architectural Engineering at The Pennsylvania State University, PA. She received her MS of Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University, IN; and MEng(Hons) & BEng(Hons) of Building Services Engineering from The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Attachment #8
Attachment #8
SUMMARY SHEET FOR REPORTING EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS (Project # same as RTAR & WS, assigned by MORTS) 1547-TRP RECOMMENDED BIDDER University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Evaluation Criteria (1) Weight Factor
Miss St Univesco UNeb UCF Bidder 5 Bidder 6 Bidder 7
Contractor's understanding of Work Statement
25% 10.8 6.2 23.3 22.3
Qualifications of personnel for this project
30% 15 17.2 26.5 24.5
Quality of methodology proposed for conducting research.
20% 10 5.7 16.3 16.7
Probability of proposal meeting objectives
25% 11 7.7 17 16.3
Prior performance of contractor 5% 4.7 4.5 5 5
TOTAL SCORE (3) (0-100)
% 51.5 41.3 88.1 82.8
COST TO ASHRAE / SCORED POINTS ($/pt)
2553 3032 1280 1323
TC/TG/SSPC VOTE: For: 7 Against: 0 Abstain: 0 Not voting: 1 Total: 8 Reason for each negative vote or abstention(4): Chair not voting Justification for not selecting lower-cost responsive bids (scoring 70 or more points) (3): UCF had several statements in their proposal that did not show a thorough understanding of multiple zone VAV systems. They discussed fan cycling during occupied hours (not practical when ventilation must be maintained per Standard 62) controlling outdoor airflow with the supply fan (VAV boxes control the airflow to the space and an independent control system controls outdoor airflow; the supply fan does control either directly), and coil control logic that was simply not understandable. The selected contractor (Nebraska) showed an extremely thorough understanding of the “multiple spaces” requirements of Standard 62.1 and of VAV systems. Submitted by: Steve Taylor Date: June 28, 2010 NOTE: (1) These Evaluation Criteria are examples. Evaluation Criteria and Weighting Factors must be those specified in the Work Statement.
Attachment #8
(2) The minimum score for considering the award of a contract is 70 points. Justification for not selecting lower-cost responsive bids must include specific reasons. (3) No penalty for new contractors. (4) Attach a separate sheet if necessary.
Attachment #8
ASHRAE RESEARCH PROJECT ANALYSIS (Completed by Staff June 2010)
Project Number & Title: 1583-TRP, “Assessment of Burning Velocity Test Methods”
Sponsored by TC/TG: TC 3.1 - Refrigerants and Secondary Coolants
Justification of Need: Regulations for the phase-out of R-134a in the automotive industry from 2011-2017 in the EU are already in place and anticipated to spread to other regions and applications (e.g. Waxman-Markey bill in the US Congress). By obtaining accurate values for burning velocity of mildly flammable low GWP refrigerants, the likelihood of adoption of these refrigerants will significantly increase and the long term environmental impact on climate change will be very significant. Substantial quantities of these new refrigerants could be in use in the 2012-2020 timeframe. Also, rules for refrigerant toxicity and safety classification under ISO 817 will probably be adopted by ASHRAE in the future in order to harmonize both systems and prevent confusion in the marketplace. Therefore, this is an important program for ASHRAE as well as ISO. The objective of this project is to critically evaluate two different burning velocity test methods (vertical
tube and spherical/cylindrical) to determine their precision and accuracy and potential for test method
simplification and cost reduction without sacrificing quality. This should allow more widespread use of
burning velocity measurement to support the new refrigerant flammability classification standard ISO 817
and ASHRAE Standard 34. The plan is to have one ASHRAE project, but potentially two separate budgets
and contracts if two contractors with expertise with one specific method are chosen. Work Statement Authors: Barbara Minor, Robert Richard, Kenji Takizawa Research Strategic Plan Goals Applicable to this Research: D2, D3 RTAR Submitted: February 2009
Position on Implementation Plan: Accepted June 2009
Coordinated with TC: None Relates to Previous Project: None
Vote of TC/TG: 7-0-0 CNV
Vote of RAC: 11-0-1 CNV
Vote of RAS: 5-0-0 CNV Vote of Tech Council: TBD
Allocation of ASHRAE Funds Per Fiscal Year
2010-2011 $ 40,000
2011-2012 $ 40,000
2012-2013
Best Value for ASHRAE: Lowest cost responsive bid selected? YES If no,
Did 2/3 of the PES score the selected bid the highest of all responsive bids? n/a Was the average score of the PES 5 or more points higher than the lowest priced responsive
bid? n/a Was the $/point ratio of selected bid less than all lower priced responsive bids? n/a
Actual or Perceived Conflicts of Interest: The contractor selected was not a WS author? NO If no,
The selected bid was not chosen for unique reason not outlined in WS? YES
ESTIMATED 12M $80,000 SCORE $/POINT Nat’l Inst. of Advanced Industrial Science Technology 18M $80,000 94.5 847 National Research Council Canada 15M $80,000 67.9 1178 Northeastern University 12M $51,976 67.6 769* University of Manitoba 12M $40,000 63.4 631* * Northeastern University and University of Manitoba only bid half of project RAC/Tech Council Conflicts-of-Interest: Elmahdy - RAC
Attachment #9
1583-TRP, “Assessment of Burning Velocity Test Methods” MORTS NOTES: Reasons Why Other Recommended or Registered Bidders Did Not Bid: 1. NIST: I will not be submitting a proposal. The reason is that without a parallel internal project to study a
similar thing, this is not enough money to complete the work. There is not internal support for the work because it does not show up on our roadmap or show up in any of our current programs. Gregory Linteris
Potential Bidders: Armines, National Institute of Advanced Science and Technology, Northeastern University, National Institute of Standards and Technology Bids Due: May 17, 2010 Total Number of Bids: 4 Bidders: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science Technology (AIST), National Research Council Canada, Northeastern University, University of Manitoba PES: Barbara Minor, Debra Kennoy, Bob Richard, Bill Walter TC Recommended Contractor: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science Technology (AIST) P.I. & Track Record(s): 1. ******National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science Technology (AIST):
Dr. Kenji Takizawa (WS Author), has no previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. Doctor of Engineering, Research scientist (P-member of ISO TC86 SC8 and voting member of ASHRAE SSPC34 Flammability Subcommittee. He is not a member of ASHRAE. Other Key Personnel: Dr. Masanori Tamura: Group Leader. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Mr. Kazuaki Tokuhashi: Senior researcher. No record of previous involvement with ASHRAE at any level. Dr. Shigeo Kondo: Research Scientist. No record of previous involvement with ASHRAE at any level. Dr. Hideaki Nagai: Senior Researcher (expert on microgravity experiment). No record of previous involvement with ASHRAE at any level. Dr. Mikito Mamiya: Research Scientist (expert on microgravity experiment) No record of previous involvement with ASHRAE at any level. Subcontractor: None noted
Contract issues and payment exchange rate risks for ASHRAE noted by proposer. 2. National Research Council Canada:
Cameron McCartney, No record as a PI on any previous ASHRAE research projects. Mr. McCartney has more than 13 years of experience at NTC carrying out research projects related to smoke movement and fire growth in built environments using a combination of full scale experiments and numerical modeling. His expertise is in the development and evaluation of atrium smoke management techniques and has included investigations of balcony spill plume, smoke layer plug holing and the behavior of smoke cooled by sprinklers. He has managed several research projects including studies of smoke detector response in residential dwellings and the burning characteristics of building insulation. He has extensive experience in designing and conducting full scale fire experiments involving smoke movement, plume dynamics, sprinkled mercantile fires, duct smoke detectors and communication cable fires in HVAC plenums. Other Key Personnel: Mr. Martin Bijloos; Research Assistant Mr. Pier-Simon Lafrance: Research Assistant Subcontractor: None noted
3. Northeastern University:
Mohamed Metghalchi, No record as a PI on any previous ASHRAE research projects. Principal investigator has been involved in combustion research and laminar burning velocity measurement for the last 35 years. He as been PI for projects sponsored by Army Research Office and Office of Naval Research. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation.
Attachment #9
Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractor: None noted
4. University of Manitoba:
Madjid Birouk, No record as a PI on any previous ASHRAE research projects. Dr. Birouk is full Professor in the department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Manitoba, Canada. His expertise is fundamental combustion and turbulence. Since Joining the University of Manitoba, Dr. Birouk has established a laboratory for research on combustion and underlying flow phenomena such turbulence and its effect on combustion, gasification, spray formation. One of the test rigs developed by Dr. Birouk is a spherical vessel (combustion chamber) capable of generating ambient conditions of pressure, temperature, and flow comparable to those encountered in power systems such as gas turbine and diesel engines. Dr. Birouk has published over 30 peer‐reviewed journal contributions and over 40 conference papers dealing with fundamental combustion and related phenomena. Dr. Birouk has also supervised a dozen of graduate students (6 completed and 6 in progress) and over 20 projects (mainly final year thesis) at the undergraduate level. Dr. Birouk has interest and expertise, as well as the required facility, to lead this project to completion. Professor Birouk will work closely with his graduate student, Stephen Toth, to accomplish the objective of this project. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Other Key Personnel: Mr. Stephen Toth, Graduate Student Subcontractor: None noted
Proposal Evaluation Criteria Used: 1. Contractor's understanding of Work Statement as revealed in proposal. 15%
a. Logistical problems associated b. Technical problems associated
2. Quality of methodology proposed for conducting research. 20%
a. Organization of project b. Management plan
3. Contractor's capability in terms of facilities. 25%
a. Managerial support b. Data collection c. Technical expertise
4. Qualifications of personnel for this project. 20%
a. Project team 'well rounded' in terms of qualifications and experience in related work b. Project manager person directly responsible c. Team members' qualifications and experience d. Time commitment of Principal Investigator
5. Probability of contractor's research plan meeting the objectives of the Work Statement. 20%
a. Detailed and logical work plan with major tasks and key milestones b. All technical and logistic factors considered c. Reasonableness of project schedule
Attachment #9
Attachment #9
ASHRAE RESEARCH PROJECT ANALYSIS (Completed by Staff June 2010)
Project Number & Title: 1596-TRP, “Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in Retail Stores” Sponsored by TC/TG: TC 4.3 -Ventilation Requirements and Infiltration
Justification of Need: Interest in this area has developed due to ASHRAE’s role in organizing and leading the Retailer Energy Alliance with support from the US Department of Energy. This study will establish the process for benchmarking important retail building classes and will coordinate potential changes in standards that affect their energy use and air quality. The primary user of these results within ASHRAE will be ASHRAE SSPC 62.1 and TC 4.3. Building designers will also be provided with data that will allow improved application of the Standard 62.1 IAQ Procedure. Retail buildings in the United States account for approximately 20 percent of commercial sector energy consumption and represent the fastest growing commercial subsector (DOE, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, 2009). The potential for impact from this project on both indoor air quality and energy efficiency is significant. Funding for the project and ASHRAE administrative costs is provided through a $1.5 million dollar grant from the NIST Measurement Science and Engineering Research Grants program. Work Statement Authors: Michael Apte, Gemma Kerr, Scott Williams, Leon Alevantis, Steve Taylor, Zied Driss, Dennis Stanke Research Strategic Plan Goals Applicable to this Research: A5, A7, B2
RTAR Submitted: May 2009
Position on Implementation Plan: Accepted June 2009
Coordinated with TC: None Relates to Previous Project: None
Vote of TC/TG: 6-0-11
Vote of RAC: 10-0-2 CV
Vote of RAS: 4-0-0 Vote of Tech Council: TBD
Allocation of ASHRAE Funds per Fiscal Year
2010-2011 $ 422,507
2011-2012 $ 422,507
2012-2013 $ 563,342
Best Value for ASHRAE: Lowest cost responsive bid selected? YES If no,
Did 2/3 of the PES score the selected bid the highest of all responsive bids? n/a Was the average score of the PES 5 or more points higher than the lowest priced responsive bid? n/a Was the $/point ratio of selected bid less than all lower priced responsive bids? n/a
Actual or Perceived Conflicts of Interest: The contractor selected was not a WS author? YES If no,
The selected bid was not chosen for unique reason not outlined in WS? n/a
ESTIMATED 30M $1,440,000 SCORE $/POINT Battelle 30M $1,439,993 77.1 18,675 Indoor Environmental Engineering 29M $1,439,256 81.4 17,671 University of Colorado 30M $1,437,578 75.4 19,071 University of Nebraska-Lincoln 30M $1,432,231 80.7 17,742 University of Texas-Austin 30M $1,408,356 88.6 15,894
MORTS NOTES: Reasons Why Other Recommended or Registered Bidders Did Not Bid: 1. Sebesta Blomberg: has terrific expertise in building systems and energy evaluation, and fair expertise in
questionnaires and survey analysis, the critical element of air quality measurements put too much of the project into transportation, logistics with several volunteer companies allowing access to facility and personnel, and sub contracts for IAQ measurement equipment and analysis. Barry Bridges
2. Georgia Technology Institute: I will not bid for the following reasons: 1) Once the first task is completed, there is a need for approval of the method prior to moving onto the next task. This will make it very difficult to meet the time schedule due to the length time approval takes with ASHRAE. 2) Although the first task required the method to be developed, in reality to develop an effective method, task 2 should be done before task 1. 3) In sufficient funded allowed for the tasks requested. Dr. Charlene W. Bayer
3. United Technologies Research Center: We do not intend to bid. UTRC was interested in being a
subcontractor due to our interest in certain aspects of the project, but did not want to manage the entire program. Greg Dobbs.
4. Sensus: We will be participating, but not as PRIME. We will team with the University of Nebraska team.
Brian Thompson
5. AMCA: AMCA will not bid on this project due to the fact that the project is outside our scope and we do not have the resources to expand our scope at this time. Mark Stevens
6. Syracuse University: decided not to bid due to other commitments. Jensen Zhang
7. Air Innovation Resources: We will not be bidding after all. Felicia Festa Potential Bidders: Georgia Technology Institute, Indoor Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University, Sebesta Blomberg, University of Nebraska, Sensus, Architectural Energy, United Technologies Research Center, Air Innovation Resources, Air Movement and Control Association Bids Due: May 17, 2010 Total Number of Bids: 5 Bidders: Battelle, Indoor Environmental Engineering, University of Colorado, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Texas Austin PES: Steve Taylor, Dennis Stanke, Leon Alevantis, Scott Williams, Michael Apte TC Recommended Contractor: University of Texas at Austin P.I. & Track Record(s): 1. Battelle
Dr. Ann Louise Sumner: Active P.I. on ASHRAE research project 1262-RP (TC 9.3), Part 2. Dr. Ann Louise Sumner has a Ph.D. in chemistry and extensive experience in air quality research, complex field studies, and study protocols and surveys. She is serving as P.1. of ASHRAE 1262 (Part 2) - Relate Air Quality and Other Factors to Comfort and Health Related Symptoms Reported by Passengers and Crew on Commercial Transport Aircraft, Scope, size, and complexity of ASHRAE 1262 (Part 2) is very similar to that of the proposed project, hence Dr. Sumner has the proven management experience and knowledge of ASHRAE contractor requirements to successfully manage 1596-TRP. She is an ASHRAE member with no previous or current record of participation with an ASHRAE TC or SPC. Other Key Personnel: Mr. Zachary Willenberg, QA/QC Manager. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Ms. Dawn Dampier, Co-Technical lead for Occupant Outcomes. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Mr. Bradley Goodwin, Technical Lead for Recruitment & Logistics. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Mr. Richard Hecker, PE, Co-Technical Lead for Ventilation. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation.
Attachment #10
Mr. Ian MacGregor, Technical Lead for Indoor Air Quality. He is currently helping to support active research project 1262-RP. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Dr. Michael Murphy, Ph.D., PE, Co-Technical Lead for Ventilation. He is currently helping to support active research project 1262-RP. He is an ASHRAE member with no previous or current record of participation with an ASHRAE TC or SPC noted. Mr. Fred Ray, PE, Team Lead for Building Characterization. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Dr. Diana Echeverria, Co-Technical lead for Occupant Outcomes. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Mr. Robert Rudolph, No indication of his role on project team. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. ASHRAE member Dr. Robert Lordo, Technical Lead for Statistical Analysis. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Subcontractor: None noted
2. Indoor Environmental Engineering Mr. Francis Offerman, P.I on completed ASHRAE research project 891-RP (TC 5.3). Mr. Offermann has 28 years experience as an IAQ researcher, sick building investigator, mitigation planner, healthy building design consultant, and expert witness. He is president of Indoor Environmental Engineering, a San Francisco based IAQ consulting firm. Mr. Offermann directs an interdisciplinary team of environmental scientists, chemists, and mechanical engineers in indoor air quality building investigations and healthy building design projects. Under Mr. Offermann's supervision IEE has developed both pro-active and reactive IAQ measurement methods and diagnostic protocols. He has supervised over 2,000 IAQ investigations in commercial, residential, and institutional buildings and conducted numerous forensic investigations related to IAQ. He has been a recipient of State and Federal research grants regarding building air quality and ventilation field studies, tracer gas techniques, in situ contaminant emission rate measurements, and the development of indoor air quality measurement instrumentation. He graduated from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering in 1976 and graduated from Stanford University with a M.S. in Mechanical Engineering in 1985. He is an ASHRAE member who has served on EHC, TCs 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.7, and 4.10, SSPC 62.1 and other SPCs, and various position document committees in the past. Other Key Personnel: None noted Subcontractors: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Dr. Phil Price, Statistician. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Davis Energy Group, Mr. David Springer, Ventilation Expert. He is an ASHRAE member who has served on TCs 5.7, and 6.5, and SPC 152P. AMEC Geomatrix, Dr. Jim Embree, Toxicologist. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Technical University of Denmark, Dr. Pawel Wargocki, Perceived Air Quality Expert. He is currently serving as a member of EHC. He was PI for completed ASHRAE research project 1257-RP, Indoor Environmental Effects on Performance of School Work by Children, for TC 2.1. No record of ASHRAE membership. UC San Diego, Bill Cain, Perceived Air Quality Expert. He is an ASHRAE fellow member, who in the past was active on SSPC 62 and TCs 2.3 and 4.3. He was PI for completed ASHRAE research projects 108-RP and 695-RP, both for TC 2.1. Berkeley Analytical Associates, Mr. Al Hodgson, Laboratory Analysis and VOC Expert. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation.
3. University of Colorado Dr. John Zhai: Active P.I. on ASHRAE research projects 1397-RP (TC 9.6), 1418-RP (TC 4.10), 1467-RP (TC
10.7) and 1487-RP (TC 4.10). Prof. John Zhai, the PI, has been working on CFD technique development and application for about 15 years. Dr. Zhai has a very unique and integrative background in Mechanical and Architectural Engineering. He received his first Ph.D. degree in Fluid Mechanics with focus on CFD and turbulence from Tsinghua University and his second Ph.D. degree in Building Technology with focus on integrated CFD and energy simulation from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Dr. Zhai has been actively engaged in various research activities in the field of fluid/thermal science and building/energy/environment technology since 1994. His particular research interest and expertise
Attachment #10
include: computational fluid dynamics techniques and applications in building and environment, experimental and numerical study of indoor environment quality, building HVAC system design and evaluation, sustainable and immune building technologies. Dr. Zhai has solid education background and rich research experience in fluid mechanics and heat transfer related environment and ventilation study. As a primary researcher, Dr. Zhai has completed a number of notable research and consulting projects and published over 60 technical papers in reputed journals and conferences. Dr. Zhai is an active member of ASHRAE. He was Voting Member of T.C. 4.10 “Indoor Environmental Modeling”, Corresponding Member of T.C. 5.6 “Control of Fire and Smoke”, and a PMS Member for Project 1321-RP “Modeling VOC Sorption of Building Materials and Its Impact on Indoor Air Quality,” for TC 4.10. Dr. Zhai’s integrative training and experience in Mechanical and Architectural Engineering (particularly in indoor environment modeling and experiment) place him in a superb position to coordinate and conduct this project. Other Key Personnel: Dr. Lupita Montoya, Proposed Co-PI. She is Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) at The University of Colorado at Boulder. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Subcontractor: University of Colorado at Denver – Dr. John Adgate, Proposed Co-PI. He is Professor and Chair of the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at the Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Denver. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Purdue University– Dr. Qingyan (Yan) Chen, Proposed Co-PI – He was PI for the following completed research projects: 927-RP (TC 6.4), 949-RP (TC 5.3), 1009-RP (TC 4.10, 1133-RP (TC 4.10), 1222-RP (TC 4.7), 1271-RP (TC 4.1), and is currently PI for active project 1522-RP (TC 5.3). He is an ASHRAE Fellow and has been active on the following TCs 2.5, 4.3, 4.10, 5.3, and 5.8.
4. University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Dr. Grenville Yuill, P.I. on completed ASHRAE research projects 530-RP and 865-RP for TC 4.7, 618-RP for TC 5.6, 763-RP for TC 4.3, 903-RP for TC 4.10, 935-RP for TC 9.12, 1276-RP for TC 5.12. Dr. Grenville K. Yuill has technical expertise in building energy and building air flow. He earned a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the University of Minnesota (1972), with a focus on heat transfer. Since that time he has focused on energy conservation and air quality in buildings. He received an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Manitoba in 1959 and an M.S. in reactor engineering from the University of Birmingham in 1961.Dr. Yuill has served for two years as the Interim Director of the Durham School of Architectural Engineering and Construction at the University of Nebraska. He started the Architectural Engineering (AE) program at the University of Nebraska – Lincoln in 1998. For six years he served as its Director. He has put into place a professional masters degree (the MAE), and a field of specialization within the College of Engineering and Technology Ph.D. Program. Dr. Yuill has been active in research both as a university faculty member, and as a consultant. His range of activities is indicated by his list of publications, below. His most recent research has been on the ventilation of large office buildings. Dr. Yuill is a Fellow and a life member of ASHRAE, and has been active on many technical and standard committees of ASHRAE for the past 34 years. He was a member of the National Research Council of Canada for six years. He was a member of the Council of Executives of the Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers Association of Canada. He was a founding member of the Solar Energy Society of Canada, Inc. and spent six years on its Board of Directors. He is an ASHRAE Fellow/ Life member active in TC 4.3 and 4.7 and SSPC 90.2 and 62.2. Other Key Personnel: Dr. Haorong Li, P.I. on active ASHRAE research project 1486-RP (TC 7.5). Dr. Li has been involved in research within the energy field for the past 10 years. His experience involves developing innovative HVAC&R. He is an ASHRAE member and has been active on TCs 7.4 and 7.5. He is an Associate Professor for the Department of Architectural Engineering at UN-L. Dr. Josephine Lau, Proposed Co-PI. She is an Assistant Professor for the Department of Architectural Engineering at UN-L She is an ASHRAE member and has been active on TCs 2.3, 2.9 and 4.3. Dr. Kevin Grosskopf, Proposed Co-PI. He is an Associate Professor for the Charles W. Durham School of Construction, at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska. He is an ASHRAE member, but no record of prior or current TC participation. Dr. Dale Tiller, Proposed Co-PI. He was P.I. on completed ASHRAE research project 1172-RP (TC 6.6). No record of ASHRAE membership, but he has been active on TC 2.1. Subcontractor:
Attachment #10
Dr. Jianshun Zhang, Proposed Co-PI. He will serve as a consultant on emission rates. He was P.I. on completed ASHRAE research project 1097 (TC 4.10) and is currently P.I. on active ASHRAE research project 1325-RP (TC 4.4). Dr. Jensen Zhang (Co-PI), Professor and Director of Energy and Indoor Environmental Systems Program - research leader with focus on indoor environmental quality and combined heat, air, moisture and pollutant transport through building envelopes. He has over 20 years of experience in ventilation and indoor air quality research. He has authored/co-authored over 100 technical papers, one book and is a primary author of two ASTM methods for testing organic emissions from building materials using small and full-scale environmental chambers. Dr. Zhang has developed computer databases and simulation tools for predicting the impact of material emissions and ventilation on indoor air quality. He is a Member of the Editorial Board of “The Intl. J. of Ventilation” and “J. of Thermal Insulation and Bldg. Sci.”. He teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in building environmental systems measurements and modeling, and heat and mass transfer. He has advised/co-advised 12 Ph.D. students, 16 M.S. students, and 7 Postdoctoral Fellows. He is an ASHRAE member and has served on RAC, EHC and is active on TC 2.3. The University of Nebraska Medical Center, (Dr. Chandran Achutan) will carry out the occupant surveys and odor panels. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Toyon Corporation (Mr. Ben Juricek) will assist in the selection and design of measurement installation, and with field installation in some locations, Sensus MI (Mr. Brian Thompson) will assist in the recruitment of retailers to participate, will share existing data on HVAC system operation, and will assist in the field installation of the data logging equipment.
5. ****University of Texas at Austin Jeffrey Siegel, P.I. on completed ASHRAE research project 1299-RP (TC 2.4). Dr. Jeffrey Siegel is internationally recognized for his research on indoor air quality, particle transport, filtration and control technologies, particle deposition in HVAC systems, energy use of residential air conditioning, and duct leakage and duct research. He has numerous publications and research in the area of this TRP. He is an ASHRAE member and active on TCs 2.4 and 6.3. He also supports SSPC 180 and SSPC 52.2 and was the ASHRAE New Investigator Award recipient in 2006-2007. Other Key Personnel: Richard Corsi, is the ECH Bantel Professor for Professional Practice in the Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin. He received his B.S. in Environmental Resources Engineering from Humboldt State University in 1983, and his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of California at Davis in Civil Engineering in 1985 and 1989, respectively. Dr. Corsi and his research team have ongoing research related to the use of zero energy air purification (ZEAP) materials, human exposure to p-dichlorobenzene from consumer products, human exposure to toxic chemicals emitted from cleaning agents, biological particle emissions from indoor water uses, remediation of methamphetamine labs, Texanol ester alcohol emissions from a wide range of materials coated with latex paint, and the effects of changes in relative humidity on chemical emissions from building materials. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Atila Novoselac, P.I. on active ASHRAE research projects 1416-RP (TC 4.7) and 1512-RP (TC 4.10). He has significant experimental and CFD modeling experience. Through his research related to development, validation, and application of coupled air-flow and energy-flow simulations, he gained considerable experience in CFD simulations and full scale laboratory experiments. Using various commercial and research CFD computational tools as well as laboratory facilities he worked on analyses of thermal comfort and air quality in rooms with displacement ventilation systems. He was an ASHRAE 2001 GIA recipient. His research involves building airflow analyses and human exposure studies. He has extensive experimental and CFD modeling experience. He works on the development, validation, and application of various CFD and Lagrangian particle modeling methods for particle transport and human exposure studies. He has worked on the development, validation, and application of computational fluid dynamics models for indoor air quality analyses, measurements and performance analysis of different residential and commercial building ventilation systems, and advancement of building design methods and procedures. Dr. Novoselac and his research team have several finished and ongoing research projects on human exposure to various indoor pollutants (sponsored by NIOSH, NIST, and ASHRAE). He is an ASHRAE Associate member and active on TCs 4.3, 4.10 5.3 and 9.12. He recently was selected the 2010-2011 ASHRAE New Investigator Award recipient. Kerry Kinney, is a Professor and holder of the Roberta Woods Ray Centennial Fellowship in
Attachment #10
Engineering in the Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin. Her cross-disciplinary research in environmental engineering and molecular biology centers on the investigation of microorganisms in natural and engineered systems. Over the last fifteen years, her research has evolved from an early focus on biological air treatment systems to include the development and implementation of molecular tools to monitor biological systems and the microbial characterization of indoor environments. Her research ranges from fundamental investigations of gene expression to pilot scale treatability tests and she has worked extensively with fungal systems beginning with her NSF Career award in 1999. She is a Co-Principal Investigator of the 2006-2011 NSF-funded IGERT interdisciplinary academic and research program in indoor environmental science and engineering at UT Austin. Her research team has published over 50 peer-reviewed papers and conference proceedings. Her recent experience that is most relevant to the proposed work includes an investigation of HVAC filters as passive sampling devices for assessing the fungal and bacterial flora present in residential environments and a study examining the susceptibility of green building materials to mold growth following moisture exposure. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Ying Xu, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin. She received her B.S. in Thermal Engineering in 2001 and M.S. in Civil Engineering in 2004 from Tsinghua University, China and her Ph.D. from Virginia Tech in Civil Engineering in 2009. Dr. Xu and her research team have ongoing research on measuring and characterizing emissions of semi-volatile organic pollutants from building materials and consumer products. She teaches courses on building environmental systems, sources of indoor air pollution, and renewable energy and environmental sustainability. She is a member of ASHRAE, International Society for Exposure Science, International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate, and Air and Waste Management Association. Dr. Xu has published 12 journal articles on measurements and modeling of fate and transport of indoor air pollutants and approximately 15 conference proceedings. She is an ASHRAE student member, but no record of prior or current TC participation.
Neil Crain is a Research Scientist at The Center for Energy and Environmental Research located on the JJ Pickle Research Campus of The University of Texas at Austin (UT). Dr. Crain earned a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from UT in 1983 and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering, from UT in 1994. Dr. Crain has extensive experience in the fate and transport of VOCs in the indoor environment. He has conducted field studies of VOCs in homes, assisted living facilities and office spaces. Recently he conducted a soil vapor intrusion study for the Texas Department of State Health Services of more than 40 private homes in North Texas. In addition to field studies, Dr. Crain has developed sampling techniques, analytical methods and experimental equipment for measuring VOC emissions from paint and architectural coatings and building materials. No record of ASHRAE membership or prior or current TC participation. Subcontractor: Pennsylvania State University (Jelena Srebric) is an Associate Professor of Architectural Engineering and an Adjunct Professor of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering at The Pennsylvania State University. She holds a Ph.D. degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and M.S. and B.S. degrees from the University of Belgrade. Dr. Srebric is directing the Building Science Initiative at the Pennsylvania State Institutes of Energy and the Environment. The Building Science Initiative focuses on research and technology transfer of hybrid optimization methods for reduced energy consumption, improved water management, and enhanced occupant environmental perception. These hybrid optimization methods include on-site measured data, numerical simulations, analytical models and occupant feedback. In addition, the development of new models sometimes requires experimentation in a laboratory environment that Dr. Srebric designed and built for energy and indoor air quality studies. Her work is sponsored by several grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). She is a recipient of both NSF and NIOSH’s career awards. She published extensively in the field, and received several research awards including ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Engineers) Poster Presentation Awards for 1999, 2001 and 2009 as well as ASHRAE Transaction Paper Awards for 2007 and 2009. Dr. Srebric participated in three ASHARE projects and received Homer Addams Award in 2001 for her research work. Dr. Srebric is an editorial board member of five international journals, and an associate editor of ASHRAE HVAC&R Research Journal. Her work in ASHRAE was recognized with an outstanding service award. Dr. Srebric has a consulting record with eight companies on projects that include development of new design practices and solutions for constructed buildings as well design competitions. No previous history as a P.I. on any ASHRAE research projects. She is an ASHRAE member and active on TCs 4.10 and 5.3.
Attachment #10
Proposal Evaluation Criteria Used: 1. Contractor's understanding of Work Statement as revealed in proposal. 15%
a) Logistical problems associated b) Technical problems associated
2. Quality of methodology proposed for conducting research. 35% a) Organization of project b) Management plan
c) Reasonableness of project schedule 3. Contractor's capability in terms of: 15%
a) Managerial support b) Data collection capability c) Technical expertise
4. Qualifications of personnel for this project. 25% a) Project team 'well rounded' in terms of qualifications and experience in related work b) Project manager person directly responsible; experience and corporate position c) Team members' qualifications and experience d) Time commitment of Principal Investigator
5. Student involvement 5% a) Extent of student participation on contractor's team b) Likelihood that involvement in project will encourage entry into HVAC&R industry
6. Performance of contractor on prior ASHRAE or other projects. 5% (No penalty for new contractors.)
Attachment #10
ASHRAE AI?LICATION !,OR GR'INT OF FI]NDS
1.0 Title: 1596'TRP. "Vefiilation and tndoor A; QualiE, in Rerait Stores,'
2.4 Principailnvestieator(P.I.)l Dr. Jeffiey A. Siegel
E-dail address ofP.L:PhoreNo. ofP.L:FaxNo. ofP.L:
Other Key Persolnel:
4.0 Any subcontracto$:
5.0 obtectrve & scope.
3.0 Naale ofcontrarting Institution: The Univerciry ofTexas atAusrinMailing Address of P.L: CAEE ECJ 5.2 C 1752, The Universiry of Texas at Austin
Measurc the indoor air qu2liq OOCS, SVOCS, padicles, ozone,microbial contalinEn6, CO, COr) and ocoupant lercepiior$ in U.S. rerail bdldilgs and conelale rhese findingswith vetrtilation measuremenis.
7.0 Total Cosr US$ $1.577.556 ASHR{! Fundirg Requested: US S1.408.j56
8.0 D" d:'s ol'rinancial S rppon Req-esr"o,tol! ASHR A r'a) Professjonal Salaries'b) Research Assistantsc) Fdnge Benefits (19'26 %)d) Equipnente) Supplies & Materials0 Computer Costsg) Travel & Communicationsh) o6er - Tuitjon and Fees
s 157 r34 Person Monthsl_75104.63650 044
8nn
96.240
2',7.504
52.885PSU Subcontuct (AppendixB) 660.506
i) Total Ln Diect Cosis
.j) Indirecr cosis ( 52% MTDC*)510.199
k) TOTAL $ 1.408.356lExcludes S 169,200 of in-kind cost-share for eighr addiriona6erson months offaculty support.*52% indiect cost rare €xcludes nrition and fees, equipmen! and off-sire portion ofwork (IDC -26%).
9.0 QualificarionsofPrhcipallnvestigatoJDr. leffrey Siegel is inremalionally ftcognizEd lor his research on hdoor air quali4,, panicle transpod, filtrarion andcontol techtrologies, parlicle depositiod in HVAC systems, ener$' use of irl ajr conditioning, and ductleakage 2nd duct research. He has numerous publications and lesearch in the dea ofthis TRP.
10 0 Signature of Proj ect Manager or P.L:
Siamture of L\ecrdve Ofiioer.of- counney Frazler
Key lersoinel were (x) were nol ( ) involved in rriting the ASHME reque$ for proposal for rhis projecr.
Attachment #10
ITEM TC/TG TITLE ACTION NEEDED RL Status Report in Albuquerque
1245-RP 1.02
DETERMINE THE EFFECTS OF DUCTS
FITTINGS ON AIR VELOCITY
MEASUREMENTS
PROVIDE NEW CONTRACT END DATE OR DRAFT FINAL REPORT TO MORTS. ORIGINAL CONTRACT END DATE
EXTENDED FROM JULY 2007 TO JULY 2009. P.I. CHANGED FROM BRUCE BABIN TO TERRY BECK IN OCTOBER
2008 AND END DATE EXTENDED TO JULY 2009 AND THEN TO JANUARY 2010.
PI has asked for a no-cost extension until June 2011.
Preliminary report will be made by January 2011 --
see e-mail from Frank Spevak on this subject
1352-RP 1.03
EVAPORATION IN FLOODED
CORRUGATED PLATE HEAT
EXCHANGERS WITH AMMONIA AND
AMMONIA/MISCIBLE OIL
PROVIDE NEW CONTRACT END DATE OR DRAFT FINAL REPORT TO MORTS. ORIGINAL CONTRACT END DATE
EXTENDED FROM SEP. 2008 TO SEP 2009 AND THEN TO AUG 2010.
PMS is reviewing final report now and will vote by
letter ballot. Final report will be delivered to ASHRAE
by December 2010. Hence, a no-cost extension until
Janury 2011 will be good.
1556-TRP 1.03
CHARACTERIZATION OF LIQUID
REFRIGERANT FLOW EMERGING FROM A
FLOODED EVAPORATOR TUBE BUNDLE
PROJECT RFP READY TO BID NOW. THIS PROJECT WILL BE RANKED IN FALL WITH 19 OR MORE OTHER
PROJECTS READY TO BID TO DETERMINE IF IT WILL BID IN FALL 2010 OR LATER.
May or may not go out for bids until Spring 2011
depending on the prioritized ranking with oter projects
1353-RP 1.04
STABILITY AND ACCURACY OF VAV BOX
CONTROL AT LOW FLOWS
PROVIDE NEW CONTRACT END DATE AND REGULAR QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS OR DRAFT FINAL
REPORT TO MORTS. ORIGINAL CONTRACT END DATE EXTENDED FROM FEB. 2009 TO FEB. 2010 AND THEN TO
JUNE 2010. LAST PROGRESS REPORT FROM JANUARY 2010.
Basically done except for a few field tests to be done
in July 2010. Final report in September/October 2010.
No-cost extension until February 2011 so PMS can
review final report and TC can approve completion at
Las Vegas meeting.
1502-TRP 1.04
USER INTERFACE DESIGN FOR
ADVANCED SYSTEM OPERATION
PROJECT RELEASED FOR BID SPRING 2010. ZERO BIDS RECEIVED . NO BID REASONS OBTAINED FROM 3 OF
THE 5 RECOMMENDED BIDDERS SO FAR. MOST INDICATED THEY WERE TOO BUSY TO BID.
TC is still interested in going out for bids wither in Fall
2010 or in Spring 2011 depending on the prioritized
ranking of this project relative to others.
1597-RP 1.04
STOCHASTIC CONTROL OPTIMIZATION OF
MIXED-MODE BUILDINGS FOR U.S. CITIES
CONTRACT FINALIZED & WORK STARTED - PMS FREE TO COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH PI NOW REGARDING
PROJECT. PMS met for the first time at Albuquerque meeting
1468-RP 1.05
DEVELOPMENT OF REFERENCE
BUILDING INFORMATIOIN MODEL (BIM)
FOR THERMAL MODEL COMPLIANCE
TRAINING NEED PROGRESS REPORTS FROM PI. NONE SUBMITTED SINCE CONTRACT AWARD IN SEP. 2009.
Didn't get any updates from the TC. Perhaps the PMS
met and got a report from the PI at the Albuquerque
meeting?!
1356-RP 1.08
METHODOLOGY TO MEASURE ACTUAL
THERMAL PERFORMANCE OF PIPE AND
DUCT INSULATION AT BELOW-AMBIENT
TEMPERATURES
NEED DRAFT FINAL REPORT OR NEW ESTIMATED END DATE IN ALBUQUERQUE - END DATE FOR PROJECT IS
JULY 2010 - PI UP-TO-DATE ON PROGRESS REPORTS THROUGH APRIL 2010 Request no-cost extesnion to July 2011.
1444-RP 1.08
EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF TWO-
PHASE PRESSURE DROPS AND FLOW
PATTERNS IN U-BENDS FOR R-134a, R-
410a AND AMMONIA
NEED DRAFT FINAL REPORT OR NEW ESTIMATED END DATE IN ALBUQUERQUE - LATEST END DATE FOR
PROJECT IS AUG 2010 - PI UP-TO-DATE ON PROGRESS REPORTS THROUGH APRIL 2010
I think this project belongs to another TC andnot TC
1.08.
1550-TRP 1.08
THERMAL PERFORMANCE OF
INSULATING COATINGS
PROJECT RFP READY TO BID NOW. THIS PROJECT WILL BE RANKED IN FALL WITH 19 OR MORE OTHER
PROJECTS READY TO BID TO DETERMINE IF IT WILL BID IN FALL 2010 OR LATER.
May or may not go out for bids until Spring 2011
depending on the prioritized ranking with oter projects
RESEARCH LIAISON REMINDERS - JUNE 2010 - RL STATUS REPORTS