Back to studies

Project performance verification

The Issue

Even though the building implemented an Air Handling Unit optimized start algorithm, which uses machine learning to automatically “figure out” when to optimally turn the system on in the morning, the building engineer continued to manually override the sequence because he didn’t trust it would work in what he perceived as “extreme” weather scenarios.

Project performance verification
SPACES AT SETPOINT

270

AVERAGE FLOOR TEMPS

70°F

DECREASED START TIME

1.5 HOURS

ENERGY SAVINGS

14.3%

What Did We Do

Ongoing simulations revealed the building’s actual savings trajectory deviating from its predicted levels. Through notifications and dashboards, it was clear the building engineer was overriding the scheduled optimized start for his AHUs up to 3 to 4 hours before the programming would bring them on. Data analytics performed on the Bractlet Intelligence Platform verified that using the automated sequence would not sacrifice thermal comfort.

Daily Average AHU Schedule Plot - Baseline vs Post-Implementation

Results

Through data analysis, further education, and quantification of the lost savings, the building engineer came to trust the automated programming. In addition, the Bractlet platform’s capabilities to detect and trigger notifications of thermal comfort issues allowed the building engineer to have confidence in building operations and ultimately run a more efficient building.

Having a dynamic simulation model normalized the effects of weather, occupancy, and changes to operations allowed for the building engineer and property manager to visualize and quantify the impact of the issue. Supplementary performance graphs and reporting generated in Bractlet’s software influenced decision-makers to reinforce leaning more heavily on automation.

1.5

DECREASED START TIME (HOURS)

270

NUMBER SPACES AT SETPOINT

14.3%

ENERGY SAVINGS

“Having a tool and platform to help me better understand the building gives me more confidence in making operational decisions that I may have second-guessed before.”

Chief Engineer

Private Equity Owner

Chief Engineer

Private Equity Owner
Chief Engineer