DEAP/BER Issues (Merged)

topcatcbr wrote: »

Where did you see this as i have not been told it.

Check the BER FAQ, I think its there somewhere, its a what we think it will cost kind of answer!!

I have just seen this

How Much Will a BER Certificate Cost?
The amount of the BER fee will be determined by competition among BER assessors and is currently expected:

generally not to exceed €300 for a new dwelling; and
to be less than €300 for a standard dwelling in a housing estate or a standard apartment in an apartment block.
For non-domestic buildings, BER fees will vary according to whether new or existing, and according to building size and complexity, and so will be expected to range widely.

Assessors are charged a fee of €25 to submit a BER assessment to SEI for publication on the National BER Register.

This is not a reasonable amount for a one off dormer type dwelling.

I am not impressed:mad:

I agree however thats what we are facing, there is a company not too far from me that is doing the cert for 280 (plus VAT & Publication fee) However they are offering a specification improvement service for a mere 500!!! Airtightness testing & Thermal imaging for 500, (there goes the 700 suggested by one training company!!) I asked the SEI are they intending to issue a reccomended cost for a BER of existing houses and they told me they didn't intend too, perhaps they are starting to realise that we don't all live in a typical semi!!

muffler

I see in the local papers here that Donegal Co. Council have advertised for suitably qualified assessors to tender for certifying their existing housing stock and an ongoing yearly stock (new) of approx 120 houses. Nice little earner and guaranteed money.

I'd imagine that a lot of the Councils throughout the country will do the same but it begs the question - what the hell do they pay their own staff for? Maybe its a case of having it done independently but then again every large project is designed by private consultants so I suppose they don't want to break with tradition.

Supertech

generally not to exceed €300 for a new dwelling;

I knew I'd read that somewhere and I've been trying for months to find it.
I think this figure was in an older version of the relevant section of the Building Control Act.

It's a joke alright, but I've heard rumours of people charging at least double that for preliminary BER Assessments, and that scheme hasn't really kicked in as yet.

On the preliminary certs, the guy that gave our course reckoned 45 minutes to complete - so if you could do them that quick it wouldn't be bad money. But thats with all the information at your finger tips and assuming reasonably straightforward house design. When it comes to actual certs for completed dwellings, by the time you take travel time to and from the site, verification of measurements and of construction methods, calculations and inputting values, it doesn't seem like much. Particularly considering that its then valid for 10 years.

No6 wrote: »

I agree however thats what we are facing, there is a company not too far from me that is doing the cert for 280 (plus VAT & Publication fee) However they are offering a specification improvement service for a mere 500!!! Airtightness testing & Thermal imaging for 500, (there goes the 700 suggested by one training company!!) I asked the SEI are they intending to issue a reccomended cost for a BER of existing houses and they told me they didn't intend too, perhaps they are starting to realise that we don't all live in a typical semi!!

I asked them some months ago were they going to issue a suggested cost for new dwellings and was told they had no intention at that time so obviously things change.

Supertech why are you going to the site for assessments of new dwellings, You're supposed to do he certs in splendid isolation relying totally on what the client and contractor tells you they have put in!!! Spot any problems there??

No6 wrote: »

Supertech why are you going to the site for assessments of new dwellings, You're supposed to do he certs in splendid isolation relying totally on what the client and contractor tells you they have put in!!! Spot any problems there??

I have just got a contract from a large firm and plan to get the engineer who did the site supervision to sign off on spec. hopfully this will be suffecient.

Get the engineer, Contractor, Plumber, electrician & Client to sign off on it, that should do, remember SEI are auditing nearly every cert submitted currently. (they arn't that busy!!)

Chimpster

topcatcbr wrote: »

I have just got a contract from a large firm and plan to get the engineer who did the site supervision to sign off on spec. hopfully this will be suffecient.

Loads of potential issues alright.

I've got a few contracts myself in the last few months and have done plenty head scratching on it. Because of the current climate you have plenty of time to get your spec implemented successfully.

Who are you going to blame of the right level of air tightness isn't reached?

Are you looking to try and thermal bridge factor below 0.11? How can this be achieved?

Low Energy Lighting %?

Window U Values, defaults or manafacturers data?

With regard to heating systems, getting the proper effeciency of Non HARP units can be fun.

Supertech

....remember SEI are auditing nearly every cert submitted currently. (they arn't that busy!!)

Too busy to look below Level 8 though No.6

I know supertech what can you do!! I'd humbly suggest that you do a schedule of everything that has been input to DEAP and get the Client & Builder to sign off on it. I wouldn't be to happy if I was certifying generally to be asked to sign off on a BER cert, as I wouldn't have watched everything that went into it.

Has anybody tried to do a DEAP test where the 10kwh/m2/yr renewable requirement under the new regs was achieve through solar gains alone??

Im trying to show this but im not sure how to convert from kwhr/day to kwhr/m2/yr......

say an average of 40kwh/day in a 250 sq m dwelling.

sydthebeat wrote: »

Has anybody tried to do a DEAP test where the 10kwh/m2/yr renewable requirement under the new regs was achieve through solar gains alone??

Im trying to show this but im not sure how to convert from kwhr/day to kwhr/m2/yr......

say an average of 40kwh/day in a 250 sq m dwelling.

40kwh x 365 (1 year) / 250 sq m. = 58kwh/m2/yr
I could be wrong

topcatcbr wrote: »

40kwh x 365 (1 year) / 250 sq m. = 58kwh/m2/yr
I could be wrong

I had looked at that way but i though it couldnt possible be correct. because if it was, the 10kwh/m2/yr would be easily met by even minimum insulation.

In DEAP we are given solar gains as kWh/d and as W

Should i be looking at useful gains i wonder?

The 10kwh/m2/year requirement is as follows ( extracts from TGD L 2007 )

"10 kWh/m2/annum contributing to energy use for domestic hot water heating, space heating or cooling ........

For the purposes of this Section, “renewable energy technologies” means technology, products or equipment that supplies energy derived from
renewable energy sources, e.g. solar thermal systems, solar photo-voltaic systems, biomass systems, systems using biofuels, heat pumps,
aerogenerators and other small scale renewable systems."

Solar gains per se don't count .

I did an assessment on house recently , (TGD 2007 does not have to applied - still in transition period )

House 312 m2
6m2 flat solar thermal panels - DEAP calculated DHW input is 1974 kwh/year
( FYI Gd floor 0.13 , Walls 0.18 , windows ( default ) 2.1 , roof 0.13 )

So they alone wont meet 312 x 10 = 3120 kwh/year requirement . Yikes .
Client would also need to use wood pellet stove for secondary heat source .

At 10% heat supplied DEAP calculates heat required for secondary heat source as 4432 kwh/year . That alone would comply .

Client is informed and is happy not to comply with TGD L 2007 . Wants open fire . Can't blame him really all Wood stove i have seen are awful looking - in my opinion - i don't seek or expect agreement on that .

Syd i hope this helps , or am I missing the point of / mis understanding your query ?

MickLimk

My understanding of this particular reg is that you must show a contribution towards the energy that the building needs to import after the design has been completed. I think that this is independent of any reduction in what the actual import requirement is by passive means/good & proper design.

As I said that's my interpretation but I'm wide open to correction on it!

Sinnerboy:
How does the DEAP calculate the input level? In my experience, that 1974 kWh/yr for 6m2 is on the low side...

No . We have spend on technologies . Reason why SEI cut back on grants .

Chimpster

Syd,

I doubt that using solar gain to facilitate the requirements will suffice. Good thinking though.

Sinner, would tubes have made much difference I wonder? Had you direct south orientation?

Chimpster wrote: »

Sinner, would tubes have made much difference I wonder? Had you direct south orientation?

Yes . When i get a mo ( not today) i'll input values and report back

SE orientation 35 degree roof slope

.

MickLimk wrote: »

Sinnerboy:
How does the DEAP calculate the input level? In my experience, that 1974 kWh/yr for 6m2 is on the low side...

Input manufacturers data into 6 or 7 cells + read DEAP manual for orientation - DEAP does the rest . Don't mean to sound smart alec - best answer I got

thanks SB, you havent misread what i was asking.

its basically a follow on question that came into my head after reading about the 2 passive houses in tullow, carlow.

These houses are passively heated with a small plug and play heat pump in the HRV system as backup. The HRV system all accounts for all hot water needs as well.

So my reading is these passive standard houses wouldnt comply with TGD L as proposed, assuming their small heat pump doesnt meet the 1710 kwhr/m2/yr requirement (the dwellings are 171 m2 each). Fairly hard if the space heating load is only 10kwhr/m2/yr.

What issues will that throw up for certifiers, should it be evidently so??

Imagine the scenario, the client possess a passive cert from the phpp institute...... but muggins the certifier tells him that his dwelling doesnt meet energy conservation regulations....

is this really a possibility? or am i reading things completely wrong.

sydthebeat wrote: »

is this really a possibility? or am i reading things completely wrong.

yes . no .

sinnerboy wrote: »

yes . no .

madness..!

Unless we take possession of a situation where the state abrogates it's responsibility for building control . It's shoved onto the professions .

So , taking advantage of caveats ( substantial compliance) common sense dictates such passive houses are meeting the essential requirements of the regulations . Cert on that basis . Would make a good test case if cert was challenged .

( I confess , not terribly keen to play Oliver Twist myself however )

sydthebeat wrote: »

So my reading is these passive standard houses wouldnt comply with TGD L as proposed, assuming their small heat pump doesnt meet the 1710 kwhr/m2/yr requirement (the dwellings are 171 m2 each). Fairly hard if the space heating load is only 10kwhr/m2/yr.

is this really a possibility? or am i reading things completely wrong.

Without actually checking (which i havn't) I think you could be reading things slightly wrongly government policy is to move towards passive houses by 2016 heard that from Envornment Minister Gormley at the SAN conference last tuesday so I think passive houses will comply. I think his address is probably on the DOLEG website. Passive is the way forward ditch the heating systems now!!! speaking of which has anyone used the Pasive house calculation package.

I may also be reading things slightly wrongly here too but 10KwHr/m²/yr for a 200m² house is 2000KwHr per year so if a secondary heat source gives more than that why not use a multi fuel stove (as opposed to wood pellet only) which can burn wood (or anything else like coal and turf) It complies in spirit but maybe not in practice but then again the price of coal and turf may dictate what is burned in them!! Compliance with Part L will be part of the BER / DEAP report as carried out by a BER assessor so if you have that then don't worry, get a copy of the Cert & report and put it on your compliance file then you're covered (unless you're the assessor too :eek:)

badolepuddytat

yes i used the PPHP tool (passive house tool). It's like DEAP, except much much more detailed. DEAP has circa 70 entries, many of which are default, PPHP has many many more, thermal bridging is more detailed... There are not defaults... it's not about defaulting if you are not sure, it's more about design tool. The graphs are much much better in terms of figuring out if you need more thermal mass, or smaller windows etc.

what DEAP should be? not if you want it done for less than 000's.

Anyone doing the existing homes? what's it like?