DEAP/BER Issues (Merged)

mantoreilly

Calm down.Dont be sooo padantic.

muffler

mantoreilly wrote: »

Calm down.Dont be sooo padantic.

No calming needed at all. You either post in a civilised manner and post something thats sensible or you wont post here at all.

You have got an infraction for your outburst above and if there's any more you will be history.

Now take that as a final warning and its not up for debate on this thread.

No6

mantoreilly wrote: »

>Is it true that the SEI definition of an independent assessor allows for an
>architect to provide a certificate on his own design

Being one providing certs for my own designs I don't see a problem with it as I am certifying compliance for the building anyway, dont forget the engineers and surveyors they certify their own designs too!! What was your issue with it? In generaly though you wen't too far off on the issues you raised even if it was two years ago, I think its become more of a money making racket for the training providers etc,I think there's some training providers out there who would train my dog if I paid them or got FAS to fund him!!!, I nearly sent him to the bank for a loan last year :rolleyes:

SEI in slight (very slight) fairness to them have reduced the annual registration fee from the original annual 500 to 100, (Initial registration is still to be 1000)

ardara1

sydthebeat wrote: »

I dont know if ive posted this before but...

With the introduction of the 'new dwellings' regulation last 1st july, there came a requirement for a

DEAP assessment to be done on a dwelling in order for a certifier to certify that the build is in compliance with building regs, namely Part L.

As far as I can see from Part L is that the calculated energy & carbon are 'limited' and proven by CALCULATING - not CERTIFYING by DEAP

Now i can see a situation where either the certifer or his/her office will be/have a registered BER assessor on hand to do these calculations.

I think ANYONE can complete a DEAP calculation for design purposes - a 'registered BER Assessor' is not a requirement.

Thus when the BER cert is required the certifier will be the one requested to publish it. This will push out the 'yellow-pack' assessors and also some independant assessor, unless somehow 'tied' with certifiers. the reason for this is simple, why would a client pay twice for the same service???

This is the crux of the issue - A BER CERTIFICATE WILL BE REQUIRED - and is being thought about - after the event. I would say that most architectural practices have sent at least one member of staff on a BER course - but has the been qualified - are the able enough to produce a competent certificate?

The argument may be made that the BER assessors report will show compliance or non-compliance, but i, for one, cannot see why certifiers, who would have visited the dwelling during the build, would accept a statement of compliance from an assessor who wouldnt have visited the build and may not be educted from a construction background. Also, many offices would like to be able to offer the client a 'one-stop shop' service.

This stands for the production of a BER - not for a compliance calculation - a compliance CERT does not have to be produced. The question is - would a BER assessor take written/statement of build PERFORMANCE from a builder - thermal bridging/permeability for instance without evidence being produced?

I think to be honest that the BER's lot will not be an easy one - they will be seen by architects and builders as the bad-guy - the one who's putting the pressure on for evidence - unless of course that evidence has been collated during the design & build process. It is evident that this is the most practical way of issuing an accurate BER. The question is - can you get paid for that work. IF NOT - WILL ANY/ENOUGH EVIDENCE BE FORWARDED TO YOU? and in the form of what?

This will push independent assessors into either the non-dwelling sector, which is HIGHLY restrictive as regards initial education competencies, or the 'existing dwellings' sector..... which i can see becoming dog-eat-dog, with estate agents creating a nice little cartel between themselves because of the apparent lack of necessity to declare independence.

Therefore, i see the future of BER assessments for new builds in a positive light, with assessments being prepared by competant construction professionals. However the 'existing dwelling' BER may fall into disrepute unless SEI can stamp authoruty over the independence of assessors.

YOu have to remember that when doing the existing sector that the standard of insulation/build/technologies were so basic that difference in any of them whilst inputting will make practically no difference to a bad label any way. 2 inches of fibre in a roof space will get the same label as 3" and probably 4" - the same with the walls - and a wide margin of boiler efficiencies also.

They're also the jobs that you'll make the biggest impact on in the label - and the homeowner by throwing insulation in the loft/insulating pipework and putting a cylinder jacket on and putting draught strip around the door - NOW - there's where you'll get teh feel good factor in you task as a BER assessor - and perhaps the odd hug - I'm not expecting to get any from building contractors!!!

baguio

No6 wrote: »

SEI in slight (very slight) fairness to them have reduced the annual registration fee from the original annual 500 to 100, (Initial registration is still to be 1000)

So if already registered for New build, renewal will only be 100? Will they be looking for another additional registration fee of 1k for existing build when that comes on stream - for those of us already reg'ed for existing??

sydthebeat

baguio wrote: »

So if already registered for New build, renewal will only be 100? Will they be looking for another additional registration fee of 1k for existing build when that comes on stream - for those of us already reg'ed for existing??

as far ive been told, no is the answer.

sydthebeat

ardara1 wrote: »

As far as I can see from Part L is that the calculated energy & carbon are 'limited' and proven by CALCULATING - not CERTIFYING by DEAP

yes, the calculation is done with DEAP but the certification is doneby teh certifier. The certifier will use the results in DEAP to see whether it passes or not. DEAP has the facility (or will have when its upgraded) to show compliance or non compliance.

ardara1 wrote: »

I think ANYONE can complete a DEAP calculation for design purposes - a 'registered BER Assessor' is not a requirement.

again, technicially correct, but my point is that, in my view, these assessments will be done by the assessor, because the client wouldnt/shouldnt have to pay twice for the same service. It would actually result in a much more exact and proper assessment if the assessment is done by a trained construction professional in an architectural or engineering office (who understands what BR 443 is!!), who has been on site at various stages to inspect the build, thus confirming or not the issues you raised such as thermal bridging factors etc. It would actually lead to a more continuity of the project as the DEAP calculation can be done initially from design plans, something which architectural offices should be doing anyway!!.

ardara1 wrote: »

This is the crux of the issue - A BER CERTIFICATE WILL BE REQUIRED - and is being thought about - after the event. I would say that most architectural practices have sent at least one member of staff on a BER course - but has the been qualified - are the able enough to produce a competent certificate?

I would have more faith in a member of an architectural office being able to product a competent cert, that someone coming from a non-construction background ie estate agents, farmers, soldiers etc.
I agree that its somewhat counterproductive that the BER is only officially required after the 'event'. Most information thats required to complete the assessment is to be provided by a non-construction person.

ardara1 wrote: »

1. I think to be honest that the BER's lot will not be an easy one - they will be seen by architects and builders as the bad-guy - the one who's putting the pressure on for evidence -

2. unless of course that evidence has been collated during the design & build process. It is evident that this is the most practical way of issuing an accurate BER.

3. The question is - can you get paid for that work. IF NOT - WILL ANY/ENOUGH EVIDENCE BE FORWARDED TO YOU? and in the form of what?

1. Not if the BER assessor is the architect or a member of the office, and theres a co-relation between ensuring the builders best practises before issuing of stage payments.
2. yes, completely. unfortunately theres no legal / practical requirement for this.
3. Yes, if you can absorb it into a joint inspection / BER engagement. No, if solely a BER engagement....

No6

baguio wrote: »

So if already registered for New build, renewal will only be 100? Will they be looking for another additional registration fee of 1k for existing build when that comes on stream - for those of us already reg'ed for existing??

No definately only 100 annual renewal, of course you do have to pass the SEI exam, perhaps the SEI have found significant differences in the training and competencies of the various people who have done the trainins, there should have been an independant exam from the very start.

There is also now 3144 people trained as assessors (SEI's August Report) with 722 registered assessors. A lot of people who have done the training are not registereing as they are realising there is not a new career here and at best it will be an add on service for the marority of people.

They only give percentages of ratings achieved so far not numbers, I'd love to know how many BER's are now published on the register as in April it was only around 500.

The existing dwellings will be a messy market for a while, landlords and sellers will have to get certs done to sell or rent their house and will be only interersted in getting them done as cheaply as possible, householders who don't actually need them (unless they're going for a grant) will want them done in conjunction with improvement works they're think about but they definately need an assessor who is not a renewable eneregy installer!! It will probably be quite busy next year with all existing dwellings on the market being done in a short time but then it will level off again, of course knowing most people they wouldnt actually get the BER cert done untill someone has actually made an offer on the property which could be a while in the current climate.

topcatcbr

ardara1 wrote: »

YOu have to remember that when doing the existing sector that the standard of insulation/build/technologies were so basic that difference in any of them whilst inputting will make practically no difference to a bad label any way. 2 inches of fibre in a roof space will get the same label as 3" and probably 4" - the same with the walls - and a wide margin of boiler efficiencies also.

They're also the jobs that you'll make the biggest impact on in the label - and the homeowner by throwing insulation in the loft/insulating pipework and putting a cylinder jacket on and putting draught strip around the door - NOW - there's where you'll get teh feel good factor in you task as a BER assessor - and perhaps the odd hug - I'm not expecting to get any from building contractors!!!

I have done a good few as part of the HESS Pilot and the impression i got from a lot of people is that this is only hassle they dont need. I felt that some were under the impression that as an assessor i would have some magic formula that wouldnt involve adding any insulation in attic or walls (predominantly drylining stone). The homes which most need the work done are also the ones who can least afford it in my experience so far.


PS. I didnt get any hugs as yet

baguio

No6 wrote: »

No definately only 100 annual renewal, of course you do have to pass the SEI exam

And no seperate registration fee for 'Existing Build', correct??

No6

baguio wrote: »

And no seperate registration fee for 'Existing Build', correct??

No, but you must have passed the exam.

baguio

No6 wrote: »

No, but you must have passed the exam.

Ok, good. At least theres some reason coming in to play then.

mantoreilly

No6 wrote: »

Being one providing certs for my own designs I don't see a problem with it as I am certifying compliance for the building anyway, dont forget the engineers and surveyors they certify their own designs too!! What was your issue with it? In generaly though you wen't too far off on the issues you raised even if it was two years ago, I think its become more of a money making racket for the training providers etc,I think there's some training providers out there who would train my dog if I paid them or got FAS to fund him!!!, I nearly sent him to the bank for a loan last year :rolleyes:

SEI in slight (very slight) fairness to them have reduced the annual registration fee from the original annual 500 to 100, (Initial registration is still to be 1000)

My issue at time was with the term independent. You cannot be independent if you have a vested interest in somthing.It goes against the definition of the word.

No6

mantoreilly wrote: »

My issue at time was with the term independent. You cannot be independent if you have a vested interest in somthing.It goes against the definition of the word.

As a professional who is signing off on the building we are supposed to be independant already, other than our professional fees (which we would get irrespective of an A or a G rating) we wouldn't have a financial interest in a building and are therefore independant with no vested interest in to building. On the other hand if you are an auctioneer whos fees are based on a % of the sale price or a renewable energy supplier who sell nice expensive kit to improve your rating then you would have a vested interet in the building. Thats not to say that there wouldnd't be a few in the professions who would have an interst a development and abuse the system, there's a few bad eggs in every basket, just look at the legal profession this year.

topcatcbr

mantoreilly wrote: »

My issue at time was with the term independent. You cannot be independent if you have a vested interest in somthing.It goes against the definition of the word.

I agree with No6 on this. As a designer one already has an objective of designing the best performance. Doing the BER dosnt change this it just makes the designer more aware of what is required.

sydthebeat

question for those who have completed a training course....

does a kitchen diner account for the living area fraction if its the largest public room??

when i did my training it was explained that it was to be included... however, a collegue who recently completed a course was taught NOT to include it if there is another room marked 'living' or 'lounge' etc even if itis larger.....

what are others experience of this??

topcatcbr

my understanding is that the living room does not include the dining room unless they are both in the one space eg open plan. The kitchen/ Dining is not the living room even if it is the largest room. The living room will be kept at 21'C the rest of home is kept at 18'C.

sinnerboy

From The manual - I think you count the kitchen/diner ( as the relevant area ) so Syd

7.2 Living area fraction
The living area is the room marked on a plan as the lounge or living room, or the largest public room (irrespective of usage by particular occupants), together with any rooms not separated from the lounge or living room by doors, and including any cupboards directly accessed from the lounge or living room. Living area does not, however, extend over more than one storey, even when stairs enter the living area directly.

topcatcbr

SB I disagree with your interpetation of the words "largest public room". When you take into account the reason for calc the area of the living room (Mean internal temp) it becomes apparent that they mean the room which would normally be kept at a higher temp than the rest of the dwelling. This would not be a Kitchen/Dining.

I think what they mean by "largest public room" is when you have a choice of two or more living/ Lounge/ Tv/ Games/Play/ room you then take the largest.

sydthebeat

the reason i ask is because i did one of the first courses and was taught that the kitchen diner could be included......

also, why would the kitchen diner not be heated at 20-21 deg?? its a public room probably used more often than a living room.

Ill email SEI for clarification

sinnerboy

topcatcbr wrote: »

SB I disagree with your interpetation of the words "largest public room". When you take into account the reason for calc the area of the living room (Mean internal temp) it becomes apparent that they mean the room which would normally be kept at a higher temp than the rest of the dwelling. This would not be a Kitchen/Dining.

I think what they mean by "largest public room" is when you have a choice of two or more living/ Lounge/ Tv/ Games/Play/ room you then take the largest.

Clear as mud TC - ( not a criticism of YOU , TC ) . The largest public room could be be a seldom used Formal Dining Room - 18 degrees for 360 days of the year . Only used at Christmas etc . Some "live" in the Kitchen Diner - so it would be kept at 21 degrees . ( Assisted by cooking activities ) . Oh my head hurts :pac::pac::pac::pac:

Do-more

What's the current situation regarding labelling for existing buildings?

I see training companies are running courses, but has SEI made the new software available yet? Has SEI started running exams yet?

Do you think that this will go ahead as planned on Jan. 1st. 2009 or will they need to defer for 3 or 6 months?

As I understand it the home owner will be responsible for providing a detailed spec of their house for the BER assessor to provide the label from, who do you see carrying out the survey? And what is the likely cost of a survey?

Sorry for all the noob questions, but I'm just trying to get a handle on how this will effect somone selling a house next year.

Thanks

D-M.

topcatcbr

The test for existing dwellings is not published yet. The new software has not been released yet. Both were planned for the end of sept but this is now to be november as far as i know.

See link below for SEI page
http://www.sei.ie/index.asp?locID=1574&docID=-1

No6

topcatcbr wrote: »

The test for existing dwellings is not published yet. The new software has not been released yet. Both were planned for the end of sept but this is now to be november as far as i know.

See link below for SEI page
http://www.sei.ie/index.asp?locID=1574&docID=-1

I know there's not much moving on the property market but if it takes as long to do the course, get the results, do the sei exam, get the results and register as an assesor for existing dwellings it will be june before anybody cal sell or rent an exisitng dwelling with a BER at this rate!!!

sinnerboy

topcatcbr wrote: »

The test for existing dwellings is not published yet. The new software has not been released yet. Both were planned for the end of sept but this is now to be november as far as i know.

See link below for SEI page
http://www.sei.ie/index.asp?locID=1574&docID=-1

See here

http://www.constructireland.ie/vb/showthread.php?t=545

Do-more

I was looking at a show house recently in a development which is advertised as having an A3 energy label unfortunately there was no one on site who I could query about it.

I'm very dubious about the claim, the houses are heated by air to water heat pumps with UFH. There are also solar panels for DHW. But there's no MHRV just trickle vents in the PVC windows. As I say there was no one to ask about the other construction details but the wall construction appeared to be a standard block construction as there was natural stonework on the front. Inside it was possible to see at some unfinished sockets that insulated slabs had been used OK.

Is it possible for a house without MHRV to reach an A3 rating?

sinnerboy

I would be sceptical . Trickle vents would seriously devalue a whole window U value - the window typically being the biggest heat losing enclosing element to start with . Strict adherence to accredited details would also be essential to claim the max 0.8 "Y" value . Was there a chimney / open fire ?

I have a 300m2 house here -
U Values
floor 0.13
walls 0.18
roof 0.13
windows 2.1 ( default - expect to get evidence of average 1.8 )
6m2 flat solar
UFH
no air tight test yet but expecting Q50 = 7
not expecting sign off accredited details so Y = 0.11
hole in wall vents
Result B1 101 kwhr/m2/year

IF

Q 50 = 5
HRV ( 0.5 / 90 % )

Result would be B1 79 kwhr/m2/year

If on top of that
sign off accredited details and Y = 0.08

Result would be B1 75 kwhr/m2/year

Need 74 kwhr/m2/year to creep into A3 .......

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

See here

http://www.constructireland.ie/vb/showthread.php?t=545

Any sign of the new DEAP or manual. there is nothing about it on the sei website.

sinnerboy

don't make me :pac::pac::pac::pac:

No6

topcatcbr wrote: »

Any sign of the new DEAP or manual. there is nothing about it on the sei website.

I saw somewhere around here that it will now be november, but there's no rush, nothing will be selling!!!

No6

Do-more wrote: »

I was looking at a show house recently in a development which is advertised as having an A3 energy label unfortunately there was no one on site who I could query about it.

I'm very dubious about the claim, the houses are heated by air to water heat pumps with UFH. There are also solar panels for DHW. But there's no MHRV just trickle vents in the PVC windows. As I say there was no one to ask about the other construction details but the wall construction appeared to be a standard block construction as there was natural stonework on the front. Inside it was possible to see at some unfinished sockets that insulated slabs had been used OK.

Is it possible for a house without MHRV to reach an A3 rating?

I've done a preliminary assessment for a house and got it to A3 without MHRV, strangely enough when I put in MHRV it dropped back considerably to a B1 rating due to electricty usage.

sydthebeat

No6 wrote: »

I've done a preliminary assessment for a house and got it to A3 without MHRV, strangely enough when I put in MHRV it dropped back considerably to a B1 rating due to electricty usage.

single storey house by any chance???

No6

sydthebeat wrote: »

single storey house by any chance???

No it a two story house with a large single story portion.

sydthebeat

HRVs get a raw deal in DEAP.....

the more i use it the less useful it becomes....

i think ill have to figure out how to use the phpp to calculate specific energy demands.... rather than an assumed generic one.

No6

sydthebeat wrote: »

the more i use it the less useful it becomes....

I know what you mean syd for example why spend thoudsands on insulation specification improvements to gain a few points on DEAP when you can just convert to 100% low energy lighting and gain more. You should also try expalining why a wood pellet boiler is only given a 60% efficiency in DEAP and makes a rating rubbish!!!

DOCARCH

I see a certain training provider is still saying:

In excess of 150,000 buildings will require a BER certificate each year. The BER assessment market is worth an estimated €72 million per year. In the present economic downturn, BER assessments provide construction professionals with an excellent business opportunity. The HES Scheme (expected to launch in January 09) will require a further 40,000-50,000 houses to be assessed as part of a government grant to improve the energy efficiency of homes.

If I was a betting man........I wouldn't! Ha :rolleyes:

sydthebeat

No6 wrote: »

sydthebeat wrote: »

the more i use it the less useful it becomes....

I know what you mean syd for example why spend thoudsands on insulation specification improvements to gain a few points on DEAP when you can just convert to 100% low energy lighting and gain more. You should also try expalining why a wood pellet boiler is only given a 60% efficiency in DEAP and makes a rating rubbish!!!

those are only two of a litany of issues i have with it... most of the others have been well addressed in this thread.
DEAP doesnt understand the see-saw relationship between increased insulation and air tightness to heating system and control. This can be easily shown in low energy and passive builds. With new part l requirements this is going to cause serious problems when house A can be certified passive but get a b1 rating because its heating source is an electrical element, whereas house B which isnt passive gets an A3 because the 'theoretical' u values are low and theres a 30K geothermal UFH system.

The requirement to divide the q50 result by 20 is daft. They should simply have let the software use the air permiability figure and do whatever mathematical augmentations it needs to do in the background to provide an more specific figure. They ask for an 'air permeability per m2' test to be carried out yet DEAP requires an 'air change per hour' figure to be inputted....

sydthebeat

DOCARCH wrote: »

I see a certain training provider is still saying:

In excess of 150,000 buildings will require a BER certificate each year. The BER assessment market is worth an estimated €72 million per year. In the present economic downturn, BER assessments provide construction professionals with an excellent business opportunity. The HES Scheme (expected to launch in January 09) will require a further 40,000-50,000 houses to be assessed as part of a government grant to improve the energy efficiency of homes.

If I was a betting man........I wouldn't! Ha :rolleyes:

best laugh ive had in ages.....

No6

DOCARCH wrote: »

The BER assessment market is worth an estimated €72 million per year.

To the training providers, advertising providers, thermal imaging camers & blower door equipment suppliers!!! Currently worth sweet F all to the poor BER assessors!!! :eek: Its a bit like a dead carcass being over run by maggots !!!

sinnerboy

No6 wrote: »

I've done a preliminary assessment for a house and got it to A3 without MHRV, strangely enough when I put in MHRV it dropped back considerably to a B1 rating due to electricty usage.

No 6 - did you input Appendix Q values - or leave at DEAP default ? In my earlier example HRV helped a lot

No6

No sinnerboy just used DEAP defaults, I was only experimenting, I'll have to look at inputting appendix Q values

topcatcbr

Good news from Brian Lenihan. Maybee those who missed out last time can get included. (If they would like to).

sinnerboy

No6 wrote: »

No sinnerboy just used DEAP defaults, I was only experimenting, I'll have to look at inputting appendix Q values

Dis you re look No 6 ? - try 90% / 0.5 settings

sinnerboy

topcatcbr wrote: »

Good news from Brian Lenihan. Maybee those who missed out last time can get included. (If they would like to).

Any details TC ?

topcatcbr

an additional 15 million for 2009. SEI had plans all along to make the scheme nation wide but this depended on the state funds being available. This year was a pilot scheme which included Parts of Tipperary, Limerick, Clare & Dundalk town. Im not sure but i think this was valued at 5 million. This was increased in todays budget to 20m.

sinnerboy

Any word on the Greener Homes scheme budget ? ( subsidies for wood pellet boilers / heat pumps / solar panels )

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

Any word on the Greener Homes scheme budget ? ( subsidies for wood pellet boilers / heat pumps / solar panels )

I didnt hear anything on this apart from the HESS complementing the Greener Homes scheme.

sinnerboy

http://www.budget.gov.ie/2009/downloads/CombinedBudgetEstimates2009&SPCP.pdf

page 30 here ( adobe page 65 ) item D2 . It looks like the SEI budget has swollen to meet the insulation schemes . But the expensive "renewables" grant aid remains in place . Shame . The lions share should go to aleiviating fuel poverty , upgrading the existing housing stock .

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

Any word on the Greener Homes scheme budget ? ( subsidies for wood pellet boilers / heat pumps / solar panels )

Got paper today I. I. Greener homes scheme = 5 million.

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

Dis you re look No 6 ? - try 90% / 0.5 settings

I have played around with this and have only found gains from imputting rediculous figures for energy usage and effeciencies. therefore for the purposes of DEAP i think HRV is not a good idea. (the software must be calculating it wrong)