USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

An integrated building water management model for green building

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
An integrated building water management model for green building
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
Joustra, Caryssa
Publisher:
University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Dynamic systems modeling
STELLA
Water budget
LEED
Recycling and reuse
Dissertations, Academic -- Civil & Environmental Engineering -- Masters -- USF   ( lcsh )
Genre:
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
ABSTRACT: The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is the developer of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED™) green building scoring system. On first inspection of LEED points, few address water efficiency. However, water management encompasses other points beyond the Water Efficiency (WE) category. In general, the industry is apt to take a somewhat compartmentalized approach to water management. The use of alternative water sources or the reuse of wastewater significantly complicates the water budget picture. A total water management systems approach, taking into consideration water from various sources, both inside and outside the building, should be implemented in order to devise a strategy for optimal reduction of potable water consumption and wastewater generation. Using the STELLA software to create an integrated building water management (IBWM) model provides stakeholders with a tool to evaluate potential water savings under dynamic conditions for a specific project site. Data collection for IBWM model calibration also shows that water consumption trends are unique to each project, and using LEED assumptions about water usage can overestimate or underestimate potential water savings.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.E.E.)--University of South Florida, 2010.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System Details:
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Caryssa Joustra.
General Note:
Title from PDF of title page.
General Note:
Document formatted into pages; contains 165 pages.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - E14-SFE0004640
usfldc handle - e14.4640
System ID:
SFS0027955:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

An Integrated Building Water Management Model for Green Building by Caryssa Joustra A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Engineering Department of Civil and Envi ronmental Engineering College of Engineering University of South Florida Major Professor: Daniel Yeh, Ph.D. Abdul Pinjari, Ph.D. Robert Brinkmann, Ph.D. Date of Approval: July 1, 2010 Keywords: dynamic systems modeling, STELLA, water budget, LEED, recycling and reuse Copyright 2010, Caryssa Joustra

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Daniel Yeh for encouraging me to seek new learning opportunities and for his support throughout my collegiate journey. His guidance was instrumen tal in the fulfillment of this project. Additionally, I acknowledge the members of ment support, and enthusiasm over the years. I would also like to thank the teacher s staff, and s tudents at Learning Gate Com munity School, in particular Mr. Charles Girard for technical support and Ms. Patti Girard for her overall support of the project. Furthermore, I acknowledge the USGBC Green Building Research Fund for financial support of this project, as well as the tech nical advisory group for their helpful comments. I thank Dr. Pinjari and Dr. Brinkmann for their time and expertise used to improve this thesis. I would also like to thank my family, most notably my mother for her willingness to assist me at any and all times, and my sister Stefany for her long hours spent sifting through months of data. In addition, I would like to recognize Neal Hallstrom who has provided graphical support throughout this project.

PAGE 3

i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... iii LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... v ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ...................... 1 CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND ................................ ................................ ........................ 3 Green Building and L EED ................................ ................................ ................... 3 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) ................................ ... 5 Water Dimensions in LEED Certification ................................ ............................. 5 Water Management Options ................................ ................................ ............... 9 Conservation ................................ ................................ .......................... 11 Recycling/Reuse ................................ ................................ .................... 12 Membrane Bioreactor ................................ ................................ ............. 13 Reclaimed Water ................................ ................................ .................... 15 Green Roof ................................ ................................ ............................. 16 Low Impact Development ................................ ................................ ....... 17 Native Landscaping ................................ ................................ ................ 19 Water Modeling ................................ ................................ ...................... 20 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH MOTIVATION ................................ ................................ ...... 23 CHAPTER 4: INTEGRATED BUILDING WATER MANAGEMENT MODELING ............ 25 Ov erview ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 25 Full Time Occupant Equivalent ................................ ................................ .......... 28 Irrigation ................................ ................................ ................................ 28 Bathroo m Sinks ................................ ................................ ...................... 36 Kitchen Sinks ................................ ................................ ......................... 38 Showers ................................ ................................ ................................ 41 Toilets ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 43 Urinals ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 48 Cooling Tower ................................ ................................ ........................ 52 Green Roof ................................ ................................ ............................. 54 Rainwater Collection ................................ ................................ .............. 55 Stormwater Collection ................................ ................................ ............ 57 CHAPTER 5: MODEL SIMULATIONS ................................ ................................ ........... 60 Assumptions ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 60 FTE ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 60

PAGE 4

ii Irrigation ................................ ................................ ................................ 60 Fixtures ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 61 Rainfall Collection ................................ ................................ ................... 61 Wastewater Treatment ................................ ................................ ........... 62 Model Runs ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 62 Resolution ................................ ................................ .............................. 65 July Baseline Case ................................ ................................ ................. 67 CHAPTER 6: LEARNING GATE COMMUNITY SCHOOL ................................ ............. 70 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 70 Rainwater Collection System ................................ ................................ ............. 74 Data Collection Equipment ................................ ................................ ................. 75 Learning Gate Data ................................ ................................ ............................ 78 Resolution of Data ................................ ................................ .................. 78 Fixture Data ................................ ................................ ............................ 82 Interpretation of Data ................................ ................................ .............. 84 LG STELLA Model ................................ ................................ ............................. 88 Calibration ................................ ................................ .............................. 91 Education ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 96 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ....................... 102 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 102 Future Work ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 103 CHAPTER 8: REFERENCES CITED ................................ ................................ ........... 105 APPENDICES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 109 Appendix A: STELLA IBWM Model Variables by Sector ................................ ... 110 Appendix B: STELLA IBWM Model Equations ................................ ................. 129 Appendix C: HOBOLink Website ................................ ................................ ...... 149 Appendix D: Data Output Logged by HOBO Data Logger and HOBOlink ....... 150 Appendix E: Filtered Event Data from Bathrooms A and B (3/17/10) ............... 151 Appendix F: Student Worksheet on Rainfall Collection at Learning Gate ......... 152 Appendix G: Student Worksheet on Learning Gate School Model ................... 154

PAGE 5

iii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: Percent of r esources used and waste produced from the building sector. ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 3 TABLE 2: Growth of USGBC membership and LEED projects. ................................ ...... 4 TABLE 3: Breakdown of LEED 2009 credits by category in the New Construction (NC) and Existing Building: Operations and Maintenance (EBOM) rating systems ................................ ................................ ................................ 5 TABLE 4: LEED 2009 NC credits that are directly related to water management. .......... 7 TABLE 5: Maximum requirements for plumbing fixtures defined by the EPAct of 1992. ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 11 TABLE 6: Landscape factor values for calculating the landscape coefficient. ................ 31 TABLE 7: Irrigation efficiency (IE) values. ................................ ................................ ...... 33 TABLE 8: Flow rate, duration, and uses per day for bathroom sinks. ............................. 37 TABLE 9: Flow rate, duration, and uses per day for kitchen sinks. ................................ 40 TABLE 10: Flow rate, duration, and uses per day for showers. ................................ ..... 42 TABLE 11: Volume per event and uses per day for toilets. ................................ ............ 47 TABLE 12: Volume per event and uses per day for urinals. ................................ ........... 51 TABLE 13: FTE calculations for sample model simulation. ................................ ............ 60 TABLE 14: Irrigation parameters for sample model simulation. ................................ ...... 61 TABLE 15: Baseline fixture parameters for sample model simulation. ........................... 61 TABLE 16: Percent savings in total water consumption for each wate r sector. .............. 63 TABLE 17: Percent savings in potable water consumption for each water sector. ......... 63 TABLE 18: Percent of total water going to each sector for simulation. ........................... 65 TABLE 19: Rainfall and reference evapotranspiration (ET 0 ) used for Figure 18. ............ 67

PAGE 6

iv TABL E 20: Irrigation demand, rainwater supply, and ratio of supply to demand. ........... 69 TABLE 21: Parameters for installed sensors. ................................ ................................ 77 TA BLE 22: Statistical values for the number of times each fixture is used per event. ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 80 TABLE 23: Statistical values for sink flow rate and duration per event. .......................... 80 TABLE 24: Fixture uses per day from 2/17/10 through 5/10/10 for weekdays only. ....... 84 TABLE 25: Fixture use per student per day for weekdays (2/17/10 5/1 0/10). .............. 84 TABLE 26: Parameters used in the STELLA runs for water demand in study building. ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 88 TABLE 27: Annual rainfall for Lu tz, Florida. ................................ ................................ ... 89 TABLE 28: IBWM model parameters for the LG classroom study using LEED assumptions. ................................ ................................ .............................. 92 TABLE 29: IBWM model par ameters for the LG study using measured values. ............. 93 TABLE A 1 : Variables in the irrigation section of the IBWM model. ............................... 110 TABLE A 2 : Variables in the bathroom sink section of the IBWM model. ...................... 112 TABLE A 3 : Variables in the kitchen sink section of the IBWM model. .......................... 114 TABLE A 4 : Variables in the shower section of the IBWM model. ................................ 116 TABLE A 5 : Variables in the toilet section of the IBWM model. ................................ ..... 119 TABLE A 6 : Variables in the urinal section of the IBWM model. ................................ ... 122 TABLE A 7 : Variables in the cooling section of the IBWM model. ................................ 124 TABLE A 8 : Variables in the rainwater collection section of the IBWM model. .............. 126 TABLE A 9 : Variables in the stormwater collection section of the IBWM model. ........... 128 T ABLE D1 : Raw data from sensors in mA. ................................ ................................ .. 150 T ABLE E1 : Events for bathrooms A and B on 3/17/10. ................................ ................ 151

PAGE 7

v LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: The effect of water management on LEED categories. ................................ 6 FIGURE 2: Water flow in a conventional structure (lef t) vs. a green building (right). ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 9 FIGURE 3: IBWM modeling framework using STELLA. ................................ ................. 27 FIGURE 4: Detail model framework for the irrigation sector. ................................ .......... 29 FIGURE 5: Water sources for irrigation in the IBWM model. ................................ .......... 34 FIGURE 6: Detail model framework for the b athroom sink sector. ................................ 36 FIGURE 7: Detail model framework for the kitchen sink sector. ................................ ..... 39 FIGURE 8: Detail model framework for the showers sector. ................................ .......... 41 FIGURE 9: Detail model framework for the toilets sector. ................................ .............. 45 FIGURE 10: Detail model framework for the u rinals sector. ................................ ........... 49 FIGURE 11: Detail model framework for rainwater collection. ................................ ....... 53 FIGURE 12: Sources and sinks for green roof. ................................ .............................. 55 FIGURE 13: Detail model framework for r ainwater collection. ................................ ....... 56 FIGURE 14: Detail model framework for stormwater collection ................................ ..... 58 FIGURE 15: Overall total water and potable water savings for each simulation scenario. ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 64 FIGURE 16: Potable water reduct ion for scenario 7 plotted annually, monthly, and daily. ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 65 FIGURE 17: Daily water consumption breakdown for scenario 7. ................................ .. 66 FI GURE 18: Monthly comparison of available rainfall to irrigation demand. ................... 68 FIGURE 19: Aerial view of Learning Gate campus. ................................ ....................... 71

PAGE 8

vi F IGURE 20: Pictures of Learning Gate campus. ................................ ........................... 72 FIGURE 21: Pictures of Learning Gate campus (cont.). ................................ ................ 73 FIGURE 22: Photos of ba throom fixtures: (a) 1.28 gpf toilet, (b) detail view of sensor and manual button, (c) lavatory, and (d) detail view of faucet sensor. ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 74 FIGURE 23: Overview of the rainwater collection syste m at Learning Gate. .................. 75 FIGURE 24: Photos of the rainwater collection system at Learning Gate: (a) gutter piping, (b) storage bladder beneath building, (c) equalization tank, and (d) overflow pipe. ................................ ................................ ....... 75 FIGURE 25: Aerial view of classrooms and sensor equipment location. ........................ 76 FIGURE 26: Installed water sensors under decki ng. ................................ ...................... 77 FIGURE 27: HOBO data logger: (a) location in classroom closet, (b) sensor connections, and (c) detail inside view. ................................ ..................... 78 F IGURE 28: Event volume and time of event for bathroom B (3/17/10). ........................ 79 FIGURE 29: Distribution curve for bathroom sink flow rates (3/17/10). .......................... 81 FIGURE 30: Distribution curve for bathroom sink duration (3/17/10). ............................ 81 FIGURE 31: Distribution curve for toilet event volumes from 2/18/10 to 5/10/10. ........... 82 FIGURE 32: Distribution curve for sink event volumes from 2/18/10 to 5/10/10. ............ 83 FIGURE 33: Effect of using the manual flush button impacts on toi let flush volumes. ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 86 FIGURE 34: Bathroom procedures posted on bathroom door. ................................ ...... 87 FIGURE 35: Distribution curve for the annual water demand for the Learning Gate classroom study. ................................ ................................ ............... 89 FIGURE 36: Distribution curve for the annual water supply for the Learning Gate classroom study. ................................ ................................ ....................... 90 FIGURE 37: Distribution curves for both the annual water demand and supply for the Learning Gate classroom study. ................................ .......................... 91 FIGURE 38: Cumulative water demand volume for LG study using LEED assumptions vs. measured values. ................................ ............................ 93 FIGURE 39: Cumulative water demand volume for LG study using calibrated assumptions vs. measured values. ................................ ............................ 94

PAGE 9

vii FIGURE 40: Water savings based on IBWM model runs using LEED assumptions and calibrated values. ................................ ........................... 95 FIGURE 41: STELLA rainfall model interface. ................................ ............................... 98 FIGURE 42: Output graph from STELLA rainwater model. ................................ ............ 99 FIGURE 43: Students during the STELLA lessons at Learning Gate: (a) drawing a rainwater collection system, and (b d) using models to analyze water saving scenarios. ................................ ................................ ........... 101 FIGURE A1: Detail view of the IBWM model irrigation section. ................................ .... 110 FIGURE A2: Detail view of the IBWM model bathroom sink section. ........................... 111 FIGURE A3: Baseline (top) and design (bottom) components for bathroom sinks in the IBWM mod el. ................................ ................................ ................. 112 FIGURE A4: Detail view of the IBWM model kitchen sink section. ............................... 113 FIGURE A5: Baseline (top) and design (bottom) compo nents for kitchen sinks in the IBWM model. ................................ ................................ ..................... 114 FIGURE A6: Detail view of the IBWM model shower section. ................................ ...... 115 FIGURE A7: Baselin e (top) and design (bottom) components for showers in the IBWM model. ................................ ................................ ........................... 116 FIGURE A8: Detail view of the IBWM model toilets section. ................................ ........ 118 FIGURE A9: Baseline (top) and design (bottom) components for toilets in the IBWM model. ................................ ................................ ........................... 119 FIGURE A10: Detail view of the IBWM model urinals section. ................................ ..... 121 FIGURE A11: Baseline (top) and design (bottom) components for urinals in the IBWM model. ................................ ................................ ........................ 122 FIGURE A12: Detail view of the IBWM model cooling section. ................................ .... 124 FIGURE A13: Detail view of the IBWM model rainwater collection section. ................. 126 FIGURE A14: Detail view of the IBWM model stor mwater collection section. .............. 127 FIGURE C1 : HOBOLink website for Learning Gate. ................................ .................... 149

PAGE 10

viii An Integrated Building Water Management Model for Green Building Caryssa Joustra ABSTRACT The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is the developer of the Leadership in green building scoring system. On first inspection of LEED points, few address w ater e fficiency. However, water manage ment encompasses other points beyond the Water Efficiency (WE) category. In general, the industry is apt to take a somewhat compartmentalized approach to water management. The use of alternative water sources or the reuse of wastewater significantly comp licates the water budget picture. A total water management systems approach, taking into consideration water from various sources, both inside and outside the building, should be implemented in order to devise a strategy for optimal reduction of potable w ater consumption and wastewater generation. Using the STELLA software to create an integrated building water management (IBWM) model provides stakeholders with a tool to evaluate potential water savings under dynamic conditions for a specific project site Data collection for IBWM model calibration also shows that water consumption trends are unique to each project, and using LEED assumptions about water usage can overestimate or underestimate potential water savings.

PAGE 11

1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Incre ased population accompanied by other water stressors is putting stress on the world water supply. In the United States, buildings utilize large amounts of potable water, as well as discharge wastewater and contribute to pollutant loadings through stormw ater runoff. As our population increases and spreads out, our demand for water also increases and our infrastructure also spreads. Increased stress on water resources, both in terms of decreasing quantity and quality, leads to growing interest in more ef ficient water uses. Through the implementation of water management strategies, such as water reclamation, conservation, or decentralized water reuse, the issues associated with increased water demand may be alleviated. Similarly, water cannot be infinitel y pumped from potable sources to meet community demands. Sustainable solutions are required that meet current and projected demand as well as preserve natural and human cycles. One way to determine impacts from possible solutions that aim to alleviate th e disparity between supply and demand is the creation and implementation of a systems model. Models are currently used by planning and regulatory agencies to predict future water demand and decision making outcomes. The objective of this study is to deve lop a dynamic systems model capable of analyzing the interaction among different water supplies and demands in the building environment. Current models rely on static assumptions about individual usage and water supply; but occupancy, climate, and fixture usage are all fluctuating variables that

PAGE 12

2 vary over time. A model capable of evaluating water changes over time will better predict the overall impacts of preferred water management strategies.

PAGE 13

3 CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND Green Building and LEED The bui lding industry significantly impacts the human and natural environment s Buildings account for a substantial portion of electricity consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, material use, waste output, and potable water consumption. Forty percent of the ext racted materials in the United States are consum ed by the construction industry; and poor reuse and recycling processes result in 145 million tons of waste, the majority being from demolition (Kibert, 2005). The planning and development of building sites individually and in relationship to each other also puts a strain on resources and the environment. Transportation within the built environment consumes energy and increases air pollution (Kibert, 2005). Further effects of buildings in the United States are outlined in Table 1 TABLE 1 : Percent of resources used and waste produced from the building sector. Building usage Percent of total Total energy 36% Electricity consumption 65% Greenhouse gas emissions 30% Raw materials 30 % Waste output 65% Potable water consumption 12% *Percentages taken from the USGBC, 2007.

PAGE 14

4 In response to impacts from the building industry, a green building movement integrated design. These concepts are quintessential in the planning of a green building and are also necessary when designing any project. Sustainability requires developers to examine the entire lifetime of the project. The same is true of an integrat ed design construction and leading to savings in water, energy, and costs. Savings occur in all sectors when building green. The initial building costs can be no more than those of a conventional structure; but because a green building is more efficient, savings continue throughout the entire lifetime of the structure. In addition to environmental and economic benefits, green buildings also enhance the comfort and health o f occupants by improving air quality thermal conditions and the overall work environment. In the United States there are nonprofit organizations that promote sustainability and green design such as the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). The USGBC cons ists of more than 9,000 organizations and 75 regional chapters including a chapter for the Florida Gulf Coast (USGBC, 2007). All sectors share a common goal to transform the building market. T ABLE 2 : Growth of USGBC membership and LEED projects Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 LEED projects (millions of square feet) 80 141 180 500 642 USGBC membership 2370 3532 4970 5882 7600 *Data taken from the USGBC, 2007.

PAGE 15

5 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) In order to define and promote green buildings, the USGBC created the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating and certification system. Participation in LEED is completely voluntary, and programs are available for all building types including new commer cial construction, existing building operations, homes, neighborhood development, schools, and retail structures (USGBC, 2007). LEED rating systems set a standard that defines green building based on building type. Points are awarded in seven major categ ories inherent in green building. The point breakdown for LEED 2009 for New Construction and LEED 2009 for Existing Building: Operations and Maintenance is given in Table 3 T ABLE 3 : Breakdown of LEED 2009 credits by category in t he New Construction (NC) and Existing Building: Operations and Maintenance (EBOM) rating systems. LEED Category Possible Points out of 110 NC 2009 EBOM 2009 Sustainable Sites 26 26 Water Efficiency 10 14 Energy and Atmosphere 35 35 Materials and Res ources 14 10 Indoor Environmental Quality 15 15 Innovation and Design Process 6 6 Regional Priority Credits 4 4 *Information compiled from LEED 2009 checklists. Water Dimensions in LEED Certification On first inspection of LEED NC 2009 points and cate gories, only 10 of the 110 points pertain to water. Although Water Efficiency is one of the smallest categories in terms of points, water management affects each of the seven categories in the LEED system Figure 1 shows how water is linked to LEED categ ories through environmental quality, energy, and materials.

PAGE 16

6 F IGURE 1 : The effect of water management on LEED categories. Both indoor and outdoor environments benefit from integrated water management. Efficient water practices take into account stormwater management that preserves local hydrology and protects the natural cycle. Preserving green space within a building site is one way to accomplish responsible stormwater management. Responsible water management increases water efficiency while maintaining an agreeable aesthetic to the building site (Peretti and La Rocca, 2000). Sustainable water reuse is a central theme in green building; water is a finite resource intrinsically linked to energy. Energy is required to pump and move water throughout the building system. Additional energy is consumed by treatment processes that result in water which meets acceptable quality standards. Various water strategies can be implemented to increase water use efficiency. Technologies su ch as water cisterns or membrane bioreactors (MBRs) require initial manufacturing and replacement parts throughout the operational lifetime of the system. Appropriate materials for use in water applications are chosen for the technology to be successful. However, there is also an intrinsic energy and water cost in the

PAGE 17

7 transportation and manufacturing of these products. In the end, water is a universal connector, and all related aspects must be considered in green building. Specific points directly relate d to water are outlined in Table 4 The goal of Water Efficiency is to reduce the inflow of water through the system, and the goal of Sustainable Sites is to control the outflow. LEED outlines the points attainable through conservative water practices in these two categories, as well as the Innovation in Design sector. T ABLE 4 : LEED 2009 NC credits that are directly related to water management. LEED Credit Possible Points Sustainable Sites SS Credit 5.1: Site Development Protec t or Restore Habitat SS Credit 5.2: Site Development Maximize Open Space SS Credit 6.1: Stormwater Design Quantity Control SS Credit 6.2: Stormwater Design Quality Control SS Credit 7.1: Heat Island Effect Non Roof SS Credit 7.2: Heat Island Effect Roof 6 Points 1 Point 1 Point 1 Point 1 Point 1 Point 1 Point Water Efficiency WE Prerequisite 1: Water Use Reduction 20% Reduction WE Credit 1: Water Efficient Landscaping Reduce potable water use by 50% Reduce potable water use by 100% WE Credit 2: Innovative Wastewater Technologies Reduce potable water use by 50% or treat 50% of wastewater WE Credit 3: Water Use Reduction Reduce potable water use by 30% Reduce potable water use by 35% Reduce potable water use by 40% 10 Points Required 2 to 4 Points 2 Points 4 Points 2 Points 2 to 4 Points 2 Points 3 Points 4 Points Energy and Atmosphere EA Credit 3: Enhanced Commissioning 2 Points 2 Poi nts Innovation in Design ID Credit 1: Innovation in Design 5 Points 1 to 5 Points Regional Priority WE Credit 2: Innovative Wastewater Technologies 1 Point The Sustainable Sites category stresses the importance of protecting or maximizing gre en space in order to protect habitat for local plants and wildlife and decrease the heat island effect (USGBC, 2006). Increased green space on a building

PAGE 18

8 site can also provide economic incentives in the form of increased property values and reduced resour ce use from a more compact structure design (USGBC, 2006). Both the quantity and quality control of stormwater address runoff limitations. Restricting the amount of stormwater runoff from urban development prevents erosion of stream channels and disrupti on of the hydrologic cycle. Further protection of the natural hydrologic cycle is maintained through pollution control. Stormwater treatment methods include constructed wetlands and natural filters. Although heat island effect points are not directly li nked to water management, the strategies used to control stormwater runoff coincide with the strategies that decrease the urban heat island effect. By using vegetation or permeable materials, the heat absorption caused by impervious surfaces, such as pave ment and rooftops, can be reduced. All points in the Water Efficiency category are achieved through water management strategies By using conservation measure s or technologies to treat and reuse wastewater within the building (whether greywater, blackwate r, or both), overall potable water use is reduced. Treated effluent from systems is often used in flushing toilets or offsetting irrigation demands because these sources do not need high quality potable water. Enhanced commissioning is affected in the Ene rgy and Atmosphere category because installation of systems, such as the MBR, can be considered major mechanical system. As such, its performance should be verified and submetered to ensure proper operation. Additional points are available in the Innovati on in Design and Regional Priority categories Projects that exceed the basic requirements set by LEED or incorporate additional innovative technologies can receive additional points toward certification. Building scale MBR plants represent an innovative technology used for water reuse. It is possible to treat and reuse all wastewater within the building, thereby closing the water

PAGE 19

9 loop and creating a structure that is closer to attaining independence from municipal potable supply. The newly formed Regio nal Priority category adds an additional achievable point to credits that are important to the geographical reg ion of the project. For Tampa, an additional credit is available for achieving Water Efficiency credit 2. Water Management Options As populatio n increases, so does the consumption of water resources. Water demand is further altered by additional stressors such as land use, urbanization, and climate change (Zimmerman et al. 2008). How each stressor relates to another form a complex web, and it is not clear how a change in one stressor will ultimately affect the others (Zimmerman et al. 2008). When designing a system, certain stressors such as population and urbanization projections are included in the preliminary evaluation However, other s tressors, most notably climate change, are often overlooked. An integrated systems approach to building water management allows for the best allocation of potable water drawn from the municipal supply. These options include practices that regulate the inf low of water and recycling of water throughout the building system, but also decrease the outflow of water through efficient wastewater and infiltration processes. Management encompasses all aspects of the water cycle, from start to finish. Conventional water allocation is compared to the appropriation of water in a green building in Figure. 2 F IGURE 2 : Water flow in a conventional structure (left) vs. a green building (right).

PAGE 20

10 In addition to engineering, a technol ogy must also overcome issues such as social acceptance, education, cost, and ease of use (Lazarova et al ., 2001) The preceding considerations can be categorized as sustainability indicators. All sustainable water projects must overcome the same obstacl es in order to succeed. The slow push towards alternative water supplies has caused an increase in the use technologies; for example, the membrane bioreactor (MBR), rainwater cistern, and reclaimed water distribution. Although each techn ology is proven to decrease potable water demand, the sustainability of each option depends on the aforementioned indicators. Integrating cultural and social aspects into water management is also crucial in large scale management projects. An integrated a pproach needs to take all tradeoffs, such as the social, cultural, and technical into account in order to be successful (Pahl Wostl et al., 2008). Doing so encompasses all stakeholders, whether managers or residents, into the larger water management proce ss (Pahl Wostl et al., 2008). Often order for a strategy to succeed (Pahl Wostl et al., 2008). For example, water conservation efforts are achieved when human behavior i s modified through education and participation. A study conducted in Jordan evaluated the affects of implementing greywater reuse in residences (Al Jayyousi, 2004). The results showed that the low income families saved money and gained awareness about th e importance of water conservation and water quality from a hands on perspective. It is not enough to solve problems through the sole use of technology. Forgetting the human side of water management can result in local water disputes that are socio cultu rally based or lead to water projects that succeed on paper, but fail in practice.

PAGE 21

11 Conservation The leading option for water management is conservation. Common tactics include the implementation of water conserving fixtures such as low flow water closets and waterless urinals to reduce the demand for potable water. Although the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 1992 already sets maximum values allowable by water fixtures (Table 5 ), green buildings often implement hardware that goes beyond the set requirements For example, water closets are mandated to use no more than 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf); however, there exists high efficiency toilets (HETs) that use less than 1.3 gpf. Low flow options are also available for other fixtures such as showerheads and fauc ets. Sensors and aerators installed in faucets can further reduce water use. T ABLE 5 : Maximum requi rements for plumbing fixtures defined by the EPAct of 1992. Plumbing fixture Maximum requirement Water closets 1.6 gallons (6 lit ers) per flush Urinals 1.0 gallon (3.8 liters) per flush Showerheads 2.5 gallons (9.5 liters) per minute at 80 psi (550 kPa) 2.2 gallons (8.5 liters) per minute at 60 psi (410 kPa) Faucets 2.5 gallons (9.5 liters) per minute at 80 psi (550 kPa) 2.0 gall ons (7.8 liters) per minute at 60 psi (410 kPa) Replacement aerators 2.5 gallons (9.8 liters) per minute Metering faucets 0.25 gallons (0.98 liters) per cycle *Unless otherwise noted, flow rates are at a pressure of 80 psi. Fixture requirements compiled from Kibert, 2005. Conservation requires knowledge about current water use patterns, and resolution is critical when applied to water monitoring. Water companies and utilities keep track of water pulled from wells and additional sources, but they also m easure water used by individual residences and buildings to better evaluate where water is going. Water use can be assessed further through submetering. Submetering provides better resolution regarding water usage. Often buildings only meter water enter ing the building system, but water submetering can aid water conservation measures by

PAGE 22

12 providing information on the amount of water used and when water is used for various fixtures and applications (Tamaki et al ., 2001). The routes of water must be known f irst before conservation measures can be taken. The University of So Paulo in Brazil utilized submetering to reduce water consumption (Tamaki et al ., 2001). With this information, water reduction amounts can be estimated based on various possible water management strategies such as low flow fixtures, water reuse technologies, or irrigation sensors. Anomalies in water usage on campus can be isolated and addressed with greater speed because of increased resolution due to added meters (Tamaki et al ., 2001) Education is a major component of conservation, and submetering provides detailed information about water usage that can be used to educate users about the importance of proper water management. The University of South Florida campus in Tampa meters w ater usage for the entire campus and has submeters on many campus buildings. The impact education has on water conservation was made evident by a student initiative that monitored fourteen residence halls over a time period of two months. Student residen ts were educated about energy and water conservation, as well as given incentives to decrease their usage. The result was a 20% decrease in overall energy usage based on decreased usage of cold and hot water (Cox and Joustra, 2008 ) Submetering allowed u sage by individual residence halls to be measured and evaluated. Like the University of So Paulo, the University of South Florida is also capable of pinpointing abnormalities in campus water usage and fixing the issue. Recycling/Reuse The quality of wat er is of great importance when determining where it will be discharged or reused In a sense, all water is reused. Water discharged upstream is used as a drinking water source for populations downstream, and water discharged into

PAGE 23

13 larger water bodies is r ecycled in the aquatic system. Wastewater is often defined as water that has been contaminated or polluted, but the definition of contamination is up for interpretation. All water c ontains some form of impurities but regulations set contaminant levels t hat label water as polluted. While w ate r remains a pure substance, it is the impurities within it that need to be removed in order to improve the level of quality. All w astewater can potentially be recycled within a building system (Boehler et al ., 2007) Wastewater exiting the building generally falls under one of two streams: greywater or blackwater. Greywater consists of water from sinks, showers, and other low strength sources. Blackwater contains higher amounts of organic material and exits from to ilets and urinals. Toilet flushing can make up 35% of overall water consumption but utilizing alternative sources such as rainwater can help offset the potable cost (Cheng, 2003). Kitchen wastewater can be grouped into either category; it does not come into direct contact with human excrement, but does have a high organic loading. Greywater reuse systems have been shown to be economically feasible and offset potable water consumption (Ghisi and Ferreira, 2007). Because water recycling has associated hu man and ecological risks, political regions often have unique sets of guidelines that outline appropriate approaches to ensure safety (Anderson et al ., 2001). Water can be treated for reuse on site using technologies such as the membrane bioreactor or off site at municipal wastewater treatment facilities. Membrane Bioreactor Membrane bioreactors (MBRs) operate using both biological treatment methods as well as permeable membranes which provide an absolute barrier and prevent solids within the influent wat er from passing to the effluent. MBRs differ from traditional wastew ater treatment systems in that secondary clarification and tertiary treatment

PAGE 24

14 solutions are replaced by the membrane, providing an opportunity to decrease the overall area as well as res ources required for treatment. Several var iations of the MBR exist; namely aerobic and anaerobic MBRs, and those which may utilize the membranes in submerged or external applications. MBRs are assumed to be suitable for use in a sustainable water manageme nt plan because they allo w production of high quality effluent which can be used for greywater and blackwater reuse applications. Since t hey are compact MBRs can then be implemented in proportionally smaller systems while still maintaining effluent quali ty. However, pitfalls also exist ; the most significant of which is the issue of fouling which reduces and may eventually prevent flow through the membrane. Fouling significantly affects the sustainability of membranes because it not only requires increas ed energy consumption associated with necessary increases in pressure over time, but it also shortens the useful life of a membrane, requiring premature replacement and thus an added cost. MBRs occupy less space than other conventional treatment processes and have been utilized in structures such as the Solaire Apartments (General Electric, 2007) and the Helena Building (Dynatec, 2006) in New York City where the system provides recycled water for toilet flushing, irrigation, and cooling. The appeal of impl ementing MBRs in green buildings is the ability to produce high quality water which can be reused on site, thereby reducing the demand and cost for municipal potable water (GE, 2010). Atasoy et al (2007) investigated the performance of MBR technology trea ting separate greywater and blackwater streams from campus lodgings. Treated effluent from both sources of wastewater proved to be adequate for re use applications such as toilet flushing or irrigation. Neither effluent detected total coliforms. Permeat e from treated greywater contained lower pollutant concentrations due to the lower beginning concentrations in the feed water. Greywater is often targeted for reuse over blackwater

PAGE 25

15 because it is easier to treat and has a high generation rate within buildi ngs (Atasoy et al ., 2007). The emergence of the MBR package plant has made it easier to integrate this technology in high performance urban buildings where time, installation, and limited footprint are crucial (Sorgini, 2004). The systems are shipped wire piped, and tested ready to go; they are inclusive systems containing everything from backwater tanks and air supply systems to instrumentation and controls (Sorgini, 2004). High quality effluent produced by the packaged MBR meets agency standards for re use and treated wastewater (Sorgini, 2004). MBR operations can be computer controlled, minimizing the need for an operator to always be present (GE, 2010). Reclaimed Water An important resource from wastewater treatment is the water itself. Reclaimed w ater is an example of recycling and reuse, techniques also implemented toward solid waste management. Through the treatment process, water is removed from the waste stream, and the use of reclaimed water offsets demand for finite potable water resources. Highly treated reclaimed water can be delivered to the building site from a regional or satellite wastewater treatment facility. Although normally associated with irrigation, the applications of reclaimed water extend to other nonpotable uses such as cool ing towers and toilet flushing, similar to the uses for greywater. Florida contains an extensive reclaimed water program, and the cost for reclaimed water is generally less than that for potable water.

PAGE 26

16 Green Roof Another technology available for offsetti ng stormwater runoff is the green roof. A green roof consists of a water proof root containment system, drainage, and a plant growing medium (Green Roofs, 2005). The green roof is often used as an example of integrated design in sustainable construction because of how it affects the building system. Benefits are seen in water management, energy efficiency, and air quality. A green roof mitigates runoff quantities through water re tention by plants and substrate (VanWoert et al ., 2005). This method also increases the quality of water leaving the green roof, protecting the environment from high pollutant loads. Insulation and evaporation allow a green roof to even out building temperatures over time. In addition to reducing heat outdoors, vegetative roof s may also have positive impacts on the indoor conditions of the building while providing an aesthetically pleasing environment for workers and guests. Although these and other benefits exist, there is hesitation to install green roofs. Policy changes an d incentives could help increase the prevalence of this technology (Carter and Fowler 2008). Green roofs are included in best management practices (BMPs) defined by the Clean Water Act (CWA) that meet stormwater management guidelines; Section 319 of the C WA has funded at least twelve green roof projects to treat nonpoint pollution sources (Carter and Fowler 2008). In general, green roofs are encouraged according to local and federal policy, but the extent of encouragement varies. Certain areas like Toron to mandate that green roofs be implemented when feasible, whereas other cities do not mention the option in local codes and regulations. Green roof subsidies dependent on unit area are offered in other parts of the world, but not in the United States; how ever, grants awarded to green roof construction projects are found in Chicago (Carter and Fowler 2008) and other governed areas. The creation of incentives based on roof size or expansion of existing grants

PAGE 27

17 could increase green roof area and have a benefi cial effect on urban stormwater management. In addition to water management, green roofs can also achieve LEED points in other non water related categories. A green roof has the ability to reduce the energy demand building by maintaining a reasonable temp erature within a building (Oberndorfer et al ., 2007) Points for energy reduction are awarded in the Energy and Atmosphere category of the LEED system. Points may also be awarded to green roofs in the Materials and Resources category. Green roofs often extend the lifetime of the roof. Using local plants and materials gains LEED NC points for Regional Materials (MR Credits 5.1 and 5.2) and Rapidly Renewable Materials (MR Credit 6). Low Impact Development Undeveloped green spaces perform important functi ons in both the natural and built environment, such as stormwater mitigation, local temperature control, and air quality modification. Often human development and implementation of green space work against one another; increased human development often re sults in a decrease in green areas due to the land demanded for an increased built environment. Established urban green spaces are also threatened by local growing populations. Drivers of human development such as demographics, economics, scientific inno vation, and socio cultural processes affect urban development, and therefore also affect the green spaces associated with development (James et al ., 2009). In the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building certification system est ablished by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), protection of green space is an integral part of sustainable design. LEED provides multiple credits related to green space. The Sustainable Sites category stresses the importance of protecting or maxim izing green space in order to protect habitat for local plants and

PAGE 28

18 wildlife and decrease the heat island effect (USGBC, 2006). Increased green space on a building site can also provide economic incentives in the form of increased property values and reduc ed resource use from a more compact structure design (USGBC, 2006). Utilization of green space plays a major role in water management due to its positive effects on stormwater retention, treatment, and possibility of reuse. Although green space func tion m ay be well recognized, integration of green spaces into the planning, design, and management processes is lacking (James et al ., 2009). Local development requirements contain ordinances for building projects. These include required green areas and planti ngs in parking lots or specified green perimeters around buildings to be incorporated during the planning and design stage. However, best management strategies for green areas are generally unknown. The Florida Parks Department has a more detailed manage ment plan which was implemented to preserve their parks. Those m anagement strategies include the removal of invasive plant species, habitat restoration, prescribed burning, and constant monitoring and inventory. Although these strategies exist to keep pa perfect. For example, the chosen original state used as the park benchmark depends on many factors and cannot be definitively determined. For instance prescribed burning is often actually performed during unnatural fire seasons in order to protect nearby human developments. James et al (2009) acknowledges the holes in green space research and suggests an integrated framework with special focus placed on green space management and green space behavior as a result of social, demographic, and environmental change. Management, whether focused on water, green space, or another entity, requires integration of the possible effects due to changes in social, cultural, environmental, and additional factors in order to be successful and sustainable. One method to decrease stress on the sewer system is to decrease runoff

PAGE 29

19 comprehensive land planning and engineering design approach with a goal of m aintaining and enhancing the pre development hydrologic regime of urban and attained by limiting the impervious surfaces on site, a LID strategy. More green space allows more water to infiltrate, reducing excessive stormwater flows and pollution that can travel within these flows. LID practices not only created aesthetically pleasing green areas, but also increase local property values which resulted in an increase in pr operty taxes collected by the local government. In the end the LID projects can make more money than they cost to execute, strengthening the business case for environmentally sustainable practices. A cost benefit analysis can determine economic gains. N ative Landscaping Choosing the most appropriate vegetation beforehand results in less maintenance, water, and energy needed in the long run. In drought prone regions such as Florida, utilizing native plants and vegetation for outdoor landscaping (xerisca ping) is an advantageous practice. Choosing the proper plants and implementing other drought management techniques, such as soil and water management, provides resiliency to changes over time (Rockstrm, 2003). The application of wireless or wired sensors can also aid in reducing the water requirement for landscaping. In an Australian study wireless sensors were used to measure soil moisture, temperature, and humidity so that irrigation efficiency could be improved (McCulloch et al. 2008). Soil moistur e sensors were placed at three different soil depths to best model moisture patterns in both time and space around plant root structures. Previous studies used moisture, temperature, and humidity data to predict plant disease outbreaks.

PAGE 30

20 Water Modeling Mo dels allow individuals to better predict future needs and how to achieve those goals Benefits of utilizing a model include analyzing solutions that can waste less energy, such as reduced energy from pumping less potable or wastewater to and from building s. Model analysis can also result in economical benefits due to the decrease in energy used for improved management practices. However, in order for model analysis and management practices based on that analysis to be successful, education of stakeholder s is necessary. Dynamic modeling of a system should be built at the proper scale, whether individual or community based, with all stakeholders in mind. An integral part of utilizing a model for policy changes or decision making is education and public inv olvement (Stave 2003). A model cannot be successful if the information it provides is not explained to and understood by planners, policymakers, and members of the community. Models can easily become complex in order to accurately simulate programmed con ditions. The challenge is to simplify inputs and outputs so that anyone can understand the underlying concepts and reasoning behind the results. In a Las Vegas water management case, public forums allowed participants to suggest possible ways to meet inc reasing water demand and to witness how their proposed policies affected the point where demand exceeded supply (Stave 2003). Some participants believed restricting hotel water usage would lower demand substantially, but the model showed the audience that reducing residential demand would have a higher impact With policies such as conservation, successful results occur when the community is actively involved and understands the consequences of their choices. A life cycle assessment performed on Australi included considerations, such as operations and maintenance of the system (Lundie et al ., 2004). Energy and chemical usage were prevalent throughout the water processes.

PAGE 31

21 Different scenarios utilizing different technolog ies were evaluated based on how resource utilization and environmental impact differed from a baseline case. Strategic planning was used for determining improvement options in the Australian water system. The same life cycle analysis steps are included w ater use and reuse modeling. Building owners need to choose appropriate technologies if successful water reuse is going to be achieved. They must also consider the materials involved in implementing the chosen t echnology. The financial cost due to maint enance and level of education needed by operators are two additional factors to contemplate. An important, but often overlooked step is what happens to the technology when its usable life ends. Conventional management discards and replaces old technology but if end of life is considered before implementing a system, a technology that can be reuse d recycled, or deconstructed in a sustainable manner can be chosen from the start Available urban water use models include Aquacycle (Mitchell, 2005) and Hous e Water Expert (Maheepala, 2007). Both models originate in Australia and evaluate the water balance of both the interior and exterior of the urban environment. Rainwater and wastewater are considered alternative water sources for reuse within the system. House Water Expert (HWE) focuses on residential water consumption (Maheepala, 2007). Users build their home in the program interface by specifying the home area, green space, paved spaces, home features (swimming pool, spa, shed, etc.), water fixtures b oth indoors and out, and the frequency that each fixture is used by household members. The choice of collecting rainwater in a storage unit or treating wastewater for reuse is available. Each action changes the amount of total water consumed, wastewater generated, and stormwater generated listed at the top of the interface. Users are also provided with a results tab where a breakdown of water use is provided including sources of incoming water, water disposal values, usage for the household, usage per in dividual, usage per appliance, and outdoor water usage (Maheepala, 2007).

PAGE 32

22 Climate data is built into the program; users choose from a set of weather stations available in Australia to mimic the climate of their region. HWE is a good educational tool beca use the intuitive nature of the program is applicable to a wide audience (Mitchell et al ., 2004) However, calculations are static. End results are given as an average use per day or over the year. In addition to a single residence, Aquacycle also conta ins the ability to expand the water balance up to a community or regional level and has specific files for climate data that can be altered by the user (Mitchell, 2005). The total area included in the model is called the catchment and can be divided into no more than 50 clusters, where each cluster is divided into uniformly spaced blocks (Last and Mackay, 2007). Outputs of the program include daily, monthly, and annual water usage. The outdoor water parameters are more detailed in Aquacycle than in HWE; they include inflow and infiltration, leakage in pipes, and groundwater recharge. However, evaluation of the program found that Aquacycle contained discrepancies with runoff calculations (Last and Mackay, 2007).

PAGE 33

23 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH MOTIVATION The LEE D rating system clearly states the objective for each point, and there are numerous technologies and methods available to utilize in order to reach each goal. However, the process is abstract. Analysis of water use requires knowledge of both initial and final water values, but those values are dependent on the water management option that has been implemented. Everything is relative; an integrated building water management (IBWM) is needed to provide measurable value to each alternative The challenge is to give meaning to LEED requirements and evaluate the impact of different water management alternatives. There are many techniques that affect water flows in a building system, but the magnitude of impact is also of great importance. For example, the use of potable water can be lowered by installing toilets that use fewer gallons per flush (gpf) or by installing sinks that use fewer gallons per minute (gpm). The effect of each option is already given: the demand for potable water will decrease; however, the magnitude of that decrease is unknown in each case. A quantitative decision making tool, taking into account various options for water conservation and reuse, is needed. By assigning values to the unique options, the impact of different methods can b e measured with respect to the system and to each other. The movement of water throughout a system is an observable event; flows and volumes are measurable and verifiable. Hence, a model was chosen as the best medium by which to sort the information and serve as a decision making tool. Adaptability to numerous flow setups, such as low flow fixtures and various water

PAGE 34

24 sources, allows for each option affecting water use to be considered. All conceptualized aspects are networked using the Systems Thinking Experimental Learning Laboratory with Animation ( STELLA) visual modeling software (ISEE Systems) to form a coherent system. STELLA was chosen as the development tool for the model due to its visual mapping, simulation features, and user friendly interface Utilizing STELLA provides a built in dynamic aspect to the IBWM model, allowing trends in water demand and supply to be simultaneously plotted. The objectives of this study are: Develop a dynamic integrated building water management (IBWM) model for th e building water cycle. The model must be customizable and able to track water quantities and flows over time. Check assumptions and calculations defined by Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building rating systems. LEED outlines assumptions about water consumption to use when calculating water savings in green buildings. This project will measure water consumption at a local school and compare measured values with LEED values. Calibrate and test the IBWM model to verify performa nce. Using a local school as a test site, measured consumption will be used to calibrate the IBWM model. Determine whether STELLA can be used as a teaching tool about the building water cycle.

PAGE 35

25 CHAPTER 4 : INTEGRATED BUILDING WATER MANAGEMENT MODELING Overview Development of the first version of the IBWM was based on a generic commercial building, but with the Patel Center for Global Solutions at the University of South Florida in mind. The initial version of the IBWM model (Version 1) was developed fr om the conceptual volumes and flows of water in a building system. The control volume includes the building and adjacent landscaping. Runoff was considered a major area within the framework; and as such, a green roof option and low impact development (LI D) strategies, such as limited impervious surfaces, were included for analysis. Equations and assumptions were developed intuitively. Because of this, the validity of the numerical results may be questioned; however, the model succeeded at tracking the v arious flows and maintaining a mass balance, as well as providing comparable outcomes for different water management options. Equations and assumptions are estimated values with the exception of mandated flows given in the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The second and current version of the model was developed to accommodate borrowed heavily from Version 1 because the water mapping is essentially the same; water is still taken fr om the same sources (potable water, recycled water) and delivered to the same sinks (toilets, irrigation). New equations and assumptions were taken directly from the LEED NC Reference Manual so that attainable LEED points for the

PAGE 36

26 project could be determin ed from the improved model. Although the assumptions may not accurately represent the water usage for a specific building, this model allows users to alter the assumptions to values they feel more accurately portray water usage for their particular site. Sectors of the model not included in the Reference Manual, such as green roofs or cooling, are generally turned off in the Version 2 framework because 1) they do not contribute to attainable LEED credits and 2) acceptable equations and assumptions for the se sectors have not been developed. However, these sectors are built in and prepared to be linked when proper assumptions can be established. The current IBWM model consists of various flows and volumes that can be separated into individual sectors.

PAGE 37

27 F IGURE 3 : IBWM modeling framework using STELLA.

PAGE 38

28 Full Time Occupant Equivalent For water fixtures within a building, water demand is directly linked to hours of occupancy. In order to account for the various time periods each ind ividual spends in the building, each time period is normalized to an 8 hour workday. This results in a full time occupant equivalent (FTE) value that describes building occupancy and can be used to determine the water fixture demand by the occupants. A f ull time employee working an 8 hour workday is given a value of 1.0. The value given to an individual working for a different period of time is determined by dividing the hours worked by the 8 hour average workday. Students carry an FTE value of 1.0 in t he LEED for Schools rating system. The total FTE calculation is as follows: (1) N i = Number of employees working i hours t i = Average daily number of hours worked t full = Full time average daily number of hours worked (8 hours) The FTE value is used to calculate baseline and demand water flows for toilets, urinals, bathroom sinks, kitchen sinks, and showers. Irrigation Irrigation around a building can create the single largest water demand for the site. Choosing native or adaptive plants through xe riscaping practices greatly reduces or eliminates the demand for water sources in addition to natural rainfall. Rainwater harvesting from either a conventional or green roof provides additional support for irrigation. Water caught via low impact developm ent (LID) design practices can be stored in a retention pond and pumped as demand dictates, although filtration may be

PAGE 39

29 necessary to prevent possible clogging of the piping system. In addition to cooling and toilet flushing, both reclaimed water and greywa ter are applicable for irrigational purposes. The sum of all inflows for irrigation is the total flow for irrigation. F IGURE 4 : Detail model framework for the irrigation sector. The stock in the center of the irrigation porti on of the model represents the landscaping within the building site. There is no accumulation of volume in this stock; all water sources are applied to irrigation and then are either used by the plants or exit as runoff.

PAGE 40

30 Therefore, the sum of all inflows must equal the sum of all outflows. This balance is represented as: Q P I + Q Y I + Q W I + Q R I + Q G I Q run I Q plants I (2) (3) Q P I = Flow of potable water to irrigation (gal/day) Q Y I = Flow of treated greywater to irrigation (gal/day) Q W I = Flow of reclaimed water to irrigation (gal/day) Q R I = Flow of colle cted rainwater to irrigation (gal/day) Q G I = Flow of collected stormwater to irrigation (gal/day) Q Run I = Flow leaving irrigation as runoff (gal/day) Q plants I = Flow of water used by irrigated plants (gal/day) Calculations for irrigation are applied to mo nth of July according to the LEED Reference Manual. The underlying assumption is that the amount of water demanded in July is the highest value of the year and will represent the greatest gap in water availability and water need. However, summer months c an also be times of plentiful rainfall, reducing the irrigation demand for other water sources. The IBWM model has the capability of running water calculations over a year long period to better estimate water requirements and determine whether the July sc enario provides the worst case irrigation water demand scenario. The water demand for irrigation depends on landscape factors specific to individual plantings, the evapotranspiration rates for the region, the efficiency of the irrigation system, and imple mentation of alternative water sources. The Landscape Coeeficient (K L ) is used to calculate the amount of water lost through evapotranspiration. This value depends on 1) the landscape species, 2) the

PAGE 41

31 microclimate, and 3) the planting density. Values for each factor are given in Table 6 The formula is given as: K L, i = k s, i k d, i k mc, i (4) k s, i = Species factor for vegetation type i (%) k d, i = Density factor for vegetation type i (%) k mc, i = Microclimate factor for vegetation type i (%) The specie s factor (k s ) accounts for the species of plants being used. The factor can be high, average, or low depending on the plants chosen. The average k s value is 0.5 (50%). If a plant does not require irrigation, the k s is 0, and the resulting K L is 0. The density factor (k d ) accounts for the number of plants and total leaf area in a given landscape. An average k d is given to areas where trees shade 60% to 100% (or groundcover shades 90% to 100%) of the landscaped area. Where shading is less than these per centages, the k d value is lower. Higher densities have higher k d values. The microclimate factor (k mc ) accounts for temperature, wind, and humidity. The average k mc value is 1.0 and is given to areas where landscape evapotranspiration is unaffected by b uildings and pavements. Landscaped areas near reflective surfaces or exposed to windy conditions have higher k mc values. Low k mc values are given to shaded areas and those protected from wind. TABLE 6 : Landscape factor values for calculating the landscape coefficient. Vegetation Type, i Species Factor (k s ) Density Factor (k d ) Microclimate Factor (k mc ) Low Avg High Low Avg High Low Avg High Trees 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.5 1.0 1.3 0.5 1.0 1.4 Shrubs 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.5 1.0 1.1 0.5 1.0 1.3 Gr oundcover 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.5 1.0 1.1 0.5 1.0 1.2 Mixed: trees, shrubs, groundcover 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.6 1.1 1.3 0.5 1.0 1.4 Turfgrass 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.2 Coefficients compiled from the LEED NC Reference Guide (USGBC, 2009).

PAGE 42

32 After the landscape coefficient has been calculated, the water requirement can be determined from this value and the evapot ranspiration rate for the area. ET L, i = ET 0 K L, i (5) ET L, i = specific evapotranspiration rate for vegetation type i (in/day) ET 0 = reference evapot ranspiration rate (in/day) K L, i = landscape coefficient for vegetation type i (%) The reference evapotranspiration rate (ET 0 ) is the amount of water required to grow a reference plant in inches per time. This value can be found in regional agricultural data. However, extensive values could only be found for areas in Texas. This model uses these values as assumptions. Summing the reference evapotranspiration rate for all plant types on the building site (turfgrass, groundcover, shrubs, trees, and mixed ) results in the total reference evapotranspiration rate for all landscaping: ET L A Tot L, i A i ) = ET L,Tre A Tre + ET L,Shr A Shr + ET L,Grd A Grd + ET L,Mix A Mix + ET L,Trf A Trf (6) (7) ET L A Tot = specific evapotranspiration rate for all irrigation multiplied by the total area (in ft 2 /day) ET L,Tre = evapotranspiration rate for trees ( in/day) A Tre = Area taken up by trees (ft 2 ) ET L,Shr = evapotranspiration rate for shrubs (in/day) A Shr = Area taken up by shrubs (ft 2 ) ET L,Grd = evapotranspiration rate for groundcover (in/day) A Grd = Area taken up by groundcover (ft 2 ) ET L,Mix = evapo transpirtation rate for mixed areas of trees, shrubs, and groundcover (in/day)

PAGE 43

33 A Mix = Area taken up by mixture of trees, shrubs, and groundcover (ft 2 ) ET L,Trf = evapotranspiration rate for turfgrass (in/day) A Trf = Area taken up by turfgrass (ft 2 ) The above value (ET L A Tot ) represents the total water demanded by the vegetation as a volume, but does not include the efficiencies of the installed irrigation system. The total irrigation water demand that incorporates these efficiencies is calculated as: Q B ase I = (ET L A Tot / IE) CE CF (8) Q Base I = Baseline case water flow demanded for irrigation (gal/day) ET L A Tot = Site specific water demand (in ft 2 /day) IE = Irrigation efficiency (%) CE = Controller efficiency (%) CF = Conversion factor (0.6223 gal/ft 2 / in) The irrigation efficiency (IE) depends on the t ype of irrigation system used for each landscaped area. Values are given in Table 7 The controller efficiency (CE) is only applicable if there is a percent reduction in water use from weather based co ntrollers or moisture sensor based systems. Documentation must support this number if used. In this model, controller efficiency is not included and is therefore assumed to be 1. T ABLE 7 : Irrigation efficiency (IE) values. Irriga tion Type IE Sprinkler 0.625 Drip 0.90 *Irrigation efficiencies taken from the LEED NC Reference Manual (USGBC, 2009).

PAGE 44

34 The above calculated value is considered as the baseline case when sprinklers are used for irrigation and there are no alternative wa ter sources. In the baseline case, the total water allocated (TWA) for irrigation is the same as the total potable water allocated (TPWA) because all water used is from a potable source. The design case water demand for irrigation is calculated in the sam e manner as the baseline case. However, the design case allows to alternative water sources to be included in the equation so that the potable water demand may be reduced. Q Dsgn I = [(ET L A Tot / IE) CE CF] Q Y I + Q W I + Q R I + Q G I (9 ) Q Dsgn I = Design c ase water flow demanded for irrigation (gal/day) Q Y I = Flow of treated greywater to irrigation (gal/day) Q W I = Flow of reclaimed water to irrigation (gal/day) Q R I = Flow of collected rainwater to irrigation (gal/day) Q G I = Flow of collected stormwater to i rrigation (gal/day) Values for alternative water depend on the water management options chosen for a project. Figure 5 shows the possible water sources for irrigation in the IBWM model. The chosen sources in the model represent common alternative water methods and may be altered to fit additional sources not specifically represented. F IGURE 5 : Water sources for irrigation in the IBWM model.

PAGE 45

35 The previous calculations provide daily water flow rates. The IBWM model sums flows o ver a specified time period (default time period set to 365 days or one year). Cumulative volumes are tracked during the time period and final values are displayed at the end according to the following equations: (10 ) (1 1 ) V Base I = Baseline case water volume for irrigation (gal) V Dsgn I = Design case water volume for irrigation (gal) t = time period (days) Q Base I = Baseline case water flow demand for irrigation (gal/day) Q Dsgn I = Design case water flow demand for irrigat ion (gal/day) The percent reduction in overall water for irrigation depends on the total water allocated for both the baseline and design cases. The percent reduction in potable water depends only on the potable water used for the baseline and design ca ses. As mentioned before, the potable water used in the design case is the same as the total water used for the design case. The equations are: (1 2 ) (13 ) P Tot I = Percent reduction in total water use for irrigation (%) P P (Tot) I = Percent reduction in potable water use for irrigation (%) V P(Dsgn) I = Volume of potable water used for irrigation (gal)

PAGE 46

36 Bathroom Sinks A detailed view of the portion of the model involving bathroom sinks is shown below in Figure 6 The bathroom sinks stock does not accumulate volume; therefore, the volume within the stock is 0. The only inflow is assumed to be potable water because of the possibility of human consumption. Water exiting from bathroom sinks is sent directly to the sewer in the ba seline case. The model provides the opportunity for greywater exiting the fixtures to be routed to treatment before being reused within the building. F IGURE 6 : Detail model framework for the bathroom sink sector. Because there is no accumulation in the bathroom sink stock, the difference between all inflows and all outflows must be 0: Q P Sb Q S Sb Q Y Sb (1 4 ) (15 ) Q P Sb = Flow of potable water to bathroom sinks (gal/day) Q S Sb = Flow to sewer from bathroom sinks (gal/day) Q Y Sb = Flow of greywater from bathroom sinks to treatment (gal/day)

PAGE 47

37 The baseline and design case tot al water demand for bathroom sinks depends on the FTE defined by the building occupants, number of times each occupant uses the fixture, the flow rate of the fixture, and the duration of the usage application: Q Base Sb = FTE N A Sb Q A Sb(Base) t A Sb(Base) Q Dsgn Sb = FTE N A Sb Q A Sb(Dsgn) t A Sb(Base) (1 6 ) (17 ) Q Base Sb = Baseline case water flow for bathroom sinks (gal/day) Q Dsgn Sb = Design case water flow for bathroom sinks (gal/day) N A Sb = Number of bathroom sink applications (uses/person/day) Q A Sb(Base) = Baseline case flow rate of ba throom sink application (gpm) Q A Sb(Dsgn) = Design case flow rate of each bathroom sink application (gpm) t A Sb(Base) = Baseline case duration for each bathroom sink application (sec) t A Sb(Base) = Design case durati on for each bathroom sink application (sec) The only variables that change between the baseline and design cases are the flow rate of the fixture and the duration of the event. In order to reduce the water demand, water saving fixtures must be implemente d. Possible values for the previous equations are given in Table 8 T ABLE 8 : Flow rate, duration, and uses per day for bathroom sinks. Bathroom Sink Fixture Type Flow Rate (gpm) Duration (sec) Uses/Day Non residential Resid ential FTE Transient Retail Customer Residential Conventional 2.5 15 1 60 3 0.5 0.2 5 Low flow 1.8 15 1 60 3 0.5 0.2 5 Ultra low flow 0.5 15 1 60 3 0.5 0.2 5 1 If an autocontrol system is used, the duration is 12 seconds. Summing the daily flows over a de fined time period (in number of days) results in overall baseline case and design case volumes:

PAGE 48

38 (1 8 ) ( 19 ) V Base Sb = Baseline case water volume for bathroom sinks (gal) V Dsgn Sb = Design case water volume for bathroom sinks (gal) t = time period (days) Q Base Sb = Baseline case water flow demand for bathroom sinks (gal/day) Q Dsgn Sb = Design case water flow demand for bathroom sinks (gal/day) Water demand for both the baseline case and design case comes only from a potable s ource. Therefore, the percent reduction in overall water use and percent reduction in potable water use are equal: (2 0 ) P Tot Sb = Percent reduction in total water use for bathroom sinks (%) P P(Tot) Sb = Percent reduction in potable water u se for bathroom sinks (%) Kitchen Sinks A detailed view of the portion of the model involving bathroom sinks is shown below in Figure 7 Like the bathroom sinks, the kitchen sinks stock does not accumulate volume; therefore, the volume within the stock i s 0. The only inflow is assumed to be potable water because of the possibility of human consumption. Water exiting from bathroom sinks is sent directly to the sewer in the baseline case. The model provides the opportunity for greywater exiting the fixtu res to be routed to treatment before being reused within the building.

PAGE 49

39 F IGURE 7 : Detail model framework for the kitchen sink sector. Because there is no accumulation in the kitchen sink stock, the difference between all inflows and all outflows must be 0: Q P Sk Q S Sk Q Y Sk (21 ) (22 ) Q P Sk = Flow of potable water to kitchen sinks (gal/day) Q S Sk = Flow to sewer from kitchen sinks (gal/day) Q Y Sk = Flow of greywater from kitchen sinks to treatment (gal/day) The b aseline and design case total water demand for kitchen sinks depends on the FTE defined by the building occupants, number of times each occupant uses the fixture, a nd the flow rate of the fixture. The duration in both cases is the same. Q Base Sk = FTE N A Sk Q A Sk(Base) t A Sk Q Dsgn Sk = FTE N A Sk Q A Sk(Dsgn) t A Sk (2 3 ) (24 ) Q Base Sk = Baseline case water flow for kitchen sinks (gal/day) Q Dsgn Sk = Design case water flow for kitchen sinks (gal/day) N A Sk = Number of kitchen sink applications (uses/pe rson/day)

PAGE 50

40 Q A Sk(Base) = Baseline case flow rate of each kitchen sink application (gpm) Q A Sk(Dsgn) = Design case flow rate of each kitchen sink application (gpm) t A Sk = Duration for each kitchen sink application (sec) The only variable that changes betwe en the baseline and design cases is the flow rate of the fixture. In order to reduce the water demand, water saving fixtures must be implemented. Possible values for the previous equations are given in Table 9 T ABLE 9 : Flow r ate, duration, and uses per day for kitchen sinks. Kitchen Sink Fixture Type Flow Rate (gpm) Duration (sec) Uses/Day Non Residential Residential FTE Transient Retail Customer Residential Conventional 2.5 15 60 1 0 0 4 Low flow 1.8 15 60 1 0 0 4 Summ ing the daily flows over a defined time period (in number of days) results in overall baseline case and design case volumes: (25 ) (26 ) V Base Sk = Baseline case water volume for kitchen sinks (gal) V Dsgn Sk = Design case wate r volume for kitchen sinks (gal) t = time period (days) Q Base Sk = Baseline case water flow demand for kitchen sinks (gal/day) Q Dsgn Sk = Design case water flow demand for kitchen sinks (gal/day) Water demand for both the baseline case and design case co mes only from a potable source. Therefore, the percent reduction in overall water use and percent reduction in potable water use are equal:

PAGE 51

41 (2 7 ) P Tot Sk = Percent reduction in total water use for kitchen sinks (%) P P(Tot) Sk = Percent redu ction in potable water use for kitchen sinks (%) Showers A detailed view of the portion of the model involving showers is shown below in Figure 8 Th e center shower stock does not accumulate volume; therefore, the volume within the stock is 0. The only inflow is assumed to be potable water. Water exiting from bathroom sinks is sent directly to the sewer in the baseline case. The model provides the opportunity for greywater exiting the fixtures to be routed to treatment before being reused within the bu ilding. F IGURE 8 : Detail model framework for the showers sector. Because there is no accumulation in the shower stock, the difference between all inflows and all outflows must be 0:

PAGE 52

42 Q P H Q S H Q Y H (2 8 ) (29 ) Q P H = Flow of potable water to showers (gal/day) Q S H = Flow to sewer from showers (gal/day) Q Y H = Flow of greywater from showers to treatment (gal/day) The baseline and design case total water demand for showers depends on the FTE defined by the building occupants, number of times each occupant uses the fixture, and the flow rate of the fixture. The duration in both cases is the same. Q Base H = FTE N A H Q A H(Base) t A H Q Dsgn H = FTE N A H Q A H(Dsgn) t A H (30 ) (31 ) Q Base H = Baseline case water flow for showers (gal/day) Q Dsgn H = Design case water flow for showers (gal/day) N A H = Number of shower applications (uses/person/day) Q A H(Base) = Baseline case flow rate of each shower application (gpm) Q A H(Dsgn) = Design case flow rate of each shower appl ication (gpm) t A H(Base) = Duration for each shower application (sec) The only variable that changes between the baseline and design cases is the flow rate of the fixture. In order to reduce the water demand, water saving fixtures must be implemented. P ossible values for the previous equations are given in Table 10 T ABLE 10 : Flow rate, duration, and uses per day for showers. Shower Fixture Type Flow Rate (gpm) Duration (sec) Uses/Day Non Residential Residential FTE Transie nt Retail Customer Residential Conventional 2.5 300 480 0.1 0 0 1 Low flow 1.8 300 480 0.1 0 0 1

PAGE 53

43 Summing the daily flows over a defined time period (in number of days) results in overall baseline case and design case volumes: (32 ) (3 3) V Base H = Baseline case water volume for showers (gal) V Dsgn H = Design case water volume for showers (gal) t = time period (days) Q Base H = Baseline case water flow demand for showers (gal/day) Q Dsgn H = Design case water flow demand for sho wers (gal/day) Water demand for both the baseline case and design case comes only from a potable source. Therefore, the percent reduction in overall water use and percent reduction in potable water use are equal: (3 4 ) P Tot H = Percent reduction in tot al water use for showers (%) P P(Tot) H = Percent reduction in potable water use for showers (%) Toilets There are numerous alternative water sources that can be applied to flushing toilets because water for sewage conveyance does not need to be of high qu ality (potable water). The source flows and sink flows from toilet fixtures for the IBWM model are shown in Figure 9 Alternative sources of water include recycled greywater from sinks and showers, collected rainwater, collected stormwater, or reclaimed water. Water used for flushing is sent directly to the sewer in the baseline scenario. For the design case, blackwater exiting the fixtures can be sent to treatment for use as a separate

PAGE 54

44 possible recyclable source within the building. The toilets are sp lit into two sections for male and female. The separation is necessary because the number of applications for a male and female toilet differ if urinals are present in the building. The number of applications for a male toilet will be less due to utiliza tion of urinals.

PAGE 55

45 F IGURE 9 : Detail model framework for the toilets sector.

PAGE 56

46 There is no accumulation in the toilet stocks. As a result, the difference between all inflows and all outflows must be 0: Q P T + Q Y T + Q W T + Q R T + Q G T Q S T Q B T (3 5 ) (36 ) Q P T = Flow of potable water to toilets (gal/day) Q Y T = Flow of treated greywater to toilets (gal/day) Q W T = Flow of reclaimed water to toilets (gal/day) Q R T = Flow of collected rainwater to toilets (gal/day) Q G T = Flo w of collected stormwater to toilets (gal/day) Q S T = Flow to sewer from toilets (gal/day) Q Y T = Flow of blackwater from toilets to treatment (gal/day) Water demanded for the flushing of toilets depends on the number of occupants in the building (FTE), the usage of each occupant, and the gallons required for each toilet application. Water demand can be decreased by installing toilet fixtures that use fewer gallons per flush. Q Base T = FTE N A T V A T(Base) Q Dsgn T = FTE N A T V A T(Dsgn) Q Y T Q W T Q R T Q G T (3 7 ) (38 ) Q Base T = Baseline case water flow for all toilets (gal/day) Q Dsgn T = Design case water flow for all toilets (gal/day) N A T = Number of toilet applications (uses/person/day) V A T(Base) = Baseline case volume of each toilet application (gp f) V A T(Dsgn) = Design case volume of each toilet application (gpf) The only variable that changes between the baseline and design cases is the flow rate of the fixture. In order to reduce the water demand, water saving fixtures must

PAGE 57

47 be implemented or al ternative water sources must be used to offset the potable supply. Possible values for the previous equations are given in Table 11 T ABLE 11 : Volume per event and uses per day for toilets. Toilet Fixture Type Flow Rate (gpf ) U ses/Day FTE Transient Retail Customer Residential M F M F M F M F Low flow 1.6 1 3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 5 5 High efficiency 1. 28 1 3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 5 5 Ultra low flow 0.8 1 3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 5 5 Composting 0 1 3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 5 5 M = Male; F = Fem ale Summing the daily flows over a defined time period (in number of days) results in overall baseline case and design case volumes: (39 ) (40) V Base T = Baseline case water volume for toilets (gal) V Dsgn T = Design case wat er volume for toilets (gal) t = time period (days) Q Base T = Baseline case water flow demand for toilets (gal/day) Q Dsgn T = Design case water flow demand for toilets (gal/day) The percent reduction in overall water for toilet flushing depends on the tot al water allocated for both the baseline and design cases. The percent reduction in potable water depends only on the potable water used for the baseline and design cases. The equations are: (41 )

PAGE 58

48 (4 2 ) P Tot T = Percent reduction in total water use for toilets (%) P P(Tot) T = Percent reduction in potable water use for toilets (%) V P(Dsgn) T = Volume of potable water used for toilets (gal) Urinals The same framework used for toilets holds true for that of urinals within the model. The alt ernative water sources available are the same: recycled greywater from sinks and showers, collected rainwater, collected stormwater, or reclaimed water. In the baseline case, flushed water is sent to the sewer. The design case allows blackwater leaving t he urinals to be reused for other applications. The urinals are split into male and female sections. If urinals are installed in the building, there will be a water demand in the male section. There will not be a demand in the female section.

PAGE 59

49 F IGURE 10 : Detail model framework for the urinals sector.

PAGE 60

50 There is no accumulation in the urinals stocks. As a result, the difference between all inflows and all outflows must be 0: Q P U + Q Y U + Q W U + Q R U + Q G U Q S U Q B U (43 ) (44 ) Q P U = Flow of potable water to urinals (gal/day) Q Y U = Flow of treated greywater to urinals (gal/day) Q W U = Flow of reclaimed water to urinals (gal/day) Q R U = Flow of collected rainwater t o urinals (gal/day) Q G U = Flow of collected stormwater to urinals (gal/day) Q S U = Flow to sewer from urinals (gal/day) Q Y U = Flow of blackwater from urinals to treatment (gal/day) Water demanded for the flushing of urinals depends on the number of occupan ts in the building (FTE), the usage of each occupant, and the gallons required for each urinal application. Water demand can be decreased by installing urinal fixtures that use fewer gallons per flush. Q Base U = FTE N A U V A U(Base) Q Dsgn U = FTE N A U V A U(Dsgn) Q Y U Q W U Q R U Q G U (44 ) (46 ) Q Base U = Baseline case water flow for all urinals (gal/day) Q Dsgn U = Design case water flow for all urinals (gal/day) N A U = Number of urinal applications (uses/person/day) V A U(Base) = Baseline case volume o f each urinal application (gpf) V A U(Dsgn) = Design case volume of each urinal application (gpf) The only variable that changes between the baseline and design cases is the flow rate of the fixture. In order to reduce the water demand, water saving fixtu res must

PAGE 61

51 be implemented or alternative water sources must be used to offset the potable supply. Possible values for the previous equations are given in Table 12 T ABLE 12 : Volume per event and uses per day for urinals. Urinal Fi xture Type Flow Rate (gpm) Uses/Day FTE Transient Retail Customer M F M F M F Conventional 1.0 2 0 0.4 0 0.1 0 Low flow 0.5 2 0 0.4 0 0.1 0 Waterless 0 2 0 0.4 0 0.1 0 M = Male; F = Female Summing the daily flows over a defined time period (in n umber of days) results in overall baseline case and design case volumes: (4 7 ) ( 48 ) V Base U = Baseline case water volume for urinals (gal) V Dsgn U = Design case water volume for urinals (gal) t = time period (days) Q Base U = Baseline case water flow demand for urinals (gal/day) Q Dsgn U = Design case water flow demand for urinals (gal/day) The percent reduction in overall water for urinal flushing depends on the total water allocated for both the baseline and design cases. T he percent reduction in potable water depends only on the potable water used for the baseline and design cases. The equations are: (49 )

PAGE 62

52 (50 ) P Tot U = Percent reduction in total water use for urinals (%) P P(Tot) U = Percent reduction in potable water use for urinals (%) V P(Dsgn) U = Volume of potable water used for urinals (gal) Cooling Tower There are five possible water sources for a cooling tower. It is assumed that recycled water sources are sought f irst, such as recycled greywater and reclaimed water. Rainwater stored in a cistern and stormwater collected in a pond provide two additional water sources. Potable water is only extracted as needed. The cooling volume requires replenishment due to evap oration, drift, and bleed off. Drift occurs when water droplets exit the tower by air flow and represents from 0.05 to 0.2 percent of the concentration of dissolved s olids; therefore, water from the tower is drained, or bled off, to return the concentration to a safe and reasonable value.

PAGE 63

53 F IGURE 11 : Detail model framework for rainwater collection. Water lost in the cooling volume through ev aporation and bleed out must be made up from other sources. As a result, the difference between all inflows and outflows is 0. (5 1 ) Q P C + Q Y C + Q W C + Q R C + Q G C Q S C Q E C (52 ) Q P C = Flow of potable water to cooling tower (gal/day) Q Y C = Flow of treated greywater to cooling tower (gal/day) Q W C = Flow of reclaimed water to cooling tower (gal/d ay)

PAGE 64

54 Q R C = Flow of collected rainwater to cooling tower (gal/day) Q G C = Flow of collected stormwater to cooling tower (gal/day) Q S C = Flow to sewer from cooling tower as blowdown (gal/day) Q E C = Flow of evaporation lost from cooling tower (gal/day) The perc ent reduction in overall water needed for cooling is calculated using both the baseline and design cases. The percent reduction in potable water depends only on the potable water used for the baseline and design cases. The equations are: (53 ) (54 ) P Tot C = Percent reduction in total water use for cooling (%) P P(Tot) C = Percent reduction in potable water use for cooling (%) V P(Dsgn) C = Volume of potable water used for cooling (gal) Green Roof A green r oof, containing native and drought tolerant landscaping, should only require natural rainfall for sustainable maintenance. Of this rainfall, between 70% and 90% is lost through evapotranspiration (ET) in the summer, 25% to 40% in the winter. The remainde r can exit the subsystem as runoff which can be collected in a cistern for irrigation use. If the maximum volume of the cistern is exceeded, the excess flow is directed to the storm sewer.

PAGE 65

55 F IGURE 12 : Sources and sinks for gre en roof. If a green roof is implemented on the building and required irrigation, the demand can be included in the irrigation section of the IBWM with the other landscaping. Potential rainwater capture can be added to the rainwater collection sector of t he model by implementing override values in the interface section. Rainwater Collection A rainwater collection system typically consists of a rain barrel or cistern to store water, a first flush system to prevent debris from entering the storage container and piping to both collect and distribute the stored water. Systems often utilize roof areas and gutters for collection. Rainwater enters the storage unit from the collection area, and a portion of the rainwater volume is rejected in the first flush sy stem prior to entering collection. If the maximum storage volume is exceeded, an overflow pipe directs excess water out of the collection system.

PAGE 66

56 F IGURE 13 : Detail model framework for r ainwater collection. For the rainwater c ollection system, the central collection volume can carry a storage volume. Therefore, the difference between all inflows and outflows is not necessarily 0. In this case, the difference in flows results in an accumulation of volume in the stock. (5 5 ) V R Cis = Volume of rainwater in the cistern (gal) t = time period (days) Q R Cis = Flow of rainwater into the cistern (gal/day) Q out Cis = Flow of water out of the cistern to meet water demands (gal/day) Q over Cis = Overflow from cistern (gal/ day)

PAGE 67

57 The amount of rainwater collected by the cistern depends on the rainfall, collection area, amount of water in the first flush, and the efficiency of the overall system: Q R Cis = A Cis R CE Cis CF V flush (56 ) Q R Cis = Flow of rainfall into the cistern (gal/day) A Cis = Collection area for rainfall collection into the cistern (ft 2 ) R = Rainfall (in) CE Cis = Collection efficiency of the cistern system (%) CF = Conversion factor (0.6223 gal/ft 2 /in) V flush = Volume of the first flush (gal) Rain water in the cistern can be used for cooling tower makeup water, toilet flushing, urinal flushing, or irrigation in the IBWM model. Stormwater Collection The stormwater collection system in the IBWM model has a similar setup as the rainwater collection sy stem. Collected stormwater is directed to a storage pond and used to offset potable water use in the building system. Additional losses from the pond include evaporation and infiltration of stored water. If water entering the pond exceeds the maximum st orage volume, excess water is directed to an overflow.

PAGE 68

58 F IGURE 14 : Detail model framework for stormwater collection. The central collection volume in the stormwater sector can carry a storage volume. In this case, the differenc e in flows result s in an accumulation of volume (57 ) V W Pnd = Volume of stormwater in the pond (gal) t = time period (days) Q W Pnd = Flow of stormwater into the pond (gal/day) Q out Pnd = Flow of water out of the pond to meet water demands (gal/day) Q over Pnd = Overflow from pond (gal/day) Q E Pnd = Evaporation loss from the pond (gal/day) Q Inf Pnd = Infiltration loss from the pond (gal/day)

PAGE 69

59 The amount of rainwater collected by the pond depends on the rainfall, collection area, and the effic iency of the overall system: Q W Pnd = A Pnd R CE Pnd CF (58 ) Q W Pnd = Flow of stormwater into the pond (gal/day) A Pnd = Collection area for stormwater collection into the pond (ft 2 ) R = Rainfall (in) CE Pnd = Collection efficiency of the pond syste m (%) CF = Conversion factor (0.6223 gal/ft 2 /in) Stormwater in the cistern can be used for cooling tower makeup water, toilet flushing, urinal flushing, or irrigation in the IBWM model.

PAGE 70

60 CHAPTER 5 : MODEL SIMULATIONS Assumptions A sample run of the I BWM model for a hypothetical green office building in Tampa, FL was conducted using the following assumptions. FTE The full time occupant equivalent (FTE) is calculated assuming that the office building employs 85 full time workers and 30 part time worke rs. The total FTE is calculated as 100. T ABLE 13 : FTE calculations for sample model simulation. Occupant Type Number Average Hours Worked per Day Weight FTE Full time 85 8 1.0 85 Part time 30 4 0.5 15 Total 115 100 Irrigati on The assumptions for landscaping around the office building are given in Table 14 below. All landscape factors are assumed to be average values. Sprinklers are used to provide water to the plants, yielding an irrigation efficiency (IE) of 0.625. The water consumption required to irrigation incorporates the average evapotranspiration rate av eraged from data collected for Odessa, FL from 2004 to 2006 (USGS, 2010).

PAGE 71

61 T ABLE 14 : Irrigation parameters for sample model simulation. Veget ation Type Area (ft 2 ) Landscape Factors IE k s k d k mc Trees 200 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.625 Shrubs 0 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.625 Groundcover 200 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.625 Mixed 150 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.625 Turfgrass 5000 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.625 Fixtures The green office building contai ns toilets, urinals, bathroom sinks, kitchen sinks, and showers for employees. The baseline parameters for these fixtures are based on the LEED values and are provided in Table 15. T ABLE 15 : Baseline fixture parameters for sample model simulation. Fixture Volume or Flow Rate Duration Uses per Day Male Female Conventional toilet 1.6 gpf n/a 1 3 Conventional urinal 1.0 gpf n/a 2 0 Bathroom sink 2.5 gpm 15 sec 3 3 Kitchen sinks 2.5 gpm 15 sec 1 1 Shower 2.5 gpm 300 sec 0.05 0 .05 Rainfall Collection In this scenario, the feasibility of a rainwater collection system is being evaluated. The building has a total roof collection area of 10,000 square feet. The collection efficiency of the system is 90%, and the first flush vol ume is 5 gallons for every 500 square feet of catchment area. If all 10,000 square feet of catchment are utilized, the first flush volume is 100 gallons. The cistern volume can be varied. Daily rainfall values collected by a personal weather station in Lutz, FL (KFLLUTZ5) for 2009 were used for the simulations (Ferguson, 2010).

PAGE 72

62 Wastewater Treatment Another option available for the building is wastewater treatment and reuse. The wastewater reuse technology can store up to 5,000 gallons of water for use in the building. Water can be collected from sinks, showers, toilets, and urinals, and be used for irrigation or sewage conveyance. Model Runs The IBWM model was run using different scenarios. Each model run lasted a full year from June 1 to May 31. Percent reductions in both total water and potable water were determined from the LEED baseline case. The scenarios analyzed by this IBWM simulation are: Scenario 1 : Conservation measures are in place. The building installs toilets that use 1.28 gpf, urin als that use 0.5 gpf, and sinks with 1.8 gpm flow rates. Scenario 2 : The same conservation measures mentioned in Scenario 1 are in place, as well as low flow showerheads that use 1.8 gpm. Aerators are installed on bathroom sinks to reduce the duration from 15 seconds to 12 seconds. Drip irrigation is installed for all landscaping, changing the irrigation efficiency from 0.625 to 0.90. Scenario 3 : All conservation measures mentioned above are in place. Greywater from kitchen sinks, bathroom sinks, and show ers are used to flush toilets. Scenario 4 : All conservation measures are still in place. Greywater from kitchen sinks, bathroom sinks, and showers is used for flushing urinals first and then toilet flushing. Scenario 5 : All conservation measures are in pl ace. Greywater from kitchen sinks, bathroom sinks, and showers is used for irrigation.

PAGE 73

63 Scenario 6: All conservation measures are in place. Greywater from kitchen sinks, bathroom sinks, and showers is used for flushing urinals and toilets. Rainwater is c ollected in a 5000 gallon cistern for irrigation use. Scenario 7 : Same as Scenario 6, but the cistern size is 1000 gallons. The percent savings in total water consumption and percent savings in potable water consumption for each water sector are give in Ta bles 16 and 17, respectively. The overall total water savings and potable water savings for each scenario is presented in Figure 15. T ABLE 16 : Percent savings in total water consumption for each water sector. Toilet s Urinal s Bath room Sink s Kitchen Sink s Shower s Irrigation All Baseline 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scenario 1 20 50 28 28 0 0 16 Scenario 2 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 Scenario 3 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 Scenario 4 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 Scenario 5 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 Scenario 6 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 Scenario 7 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 T ABLE 17 : Percent savings in potable water consumption for each water sector. Toilets Urinals Bathroom Sinks Kitchen Sinks Showers Irrigation All Baseline 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scenario 1 20 50 28 28 0 0 16 Scenario 2 20 50 42 28 28 31 31 Scenario 3 82 50 42 28 28 31 48 Scenario 4 20 100 42 28 28 31 48 Scenario 5 20 50 42 28 28 83 4 8 Scenario 6 66 100 42 28 28 99 7 4 Scenario 7 66 100 42 28 28 88 6 9

PAGE 74

64 F IGURE 15 : Overall total water and potable water savings for each simulation scenario. The total water savings only depends on conservation measures taken in the building. The conservation measures in the form of low flow fixtures are the same for scenarios 2 th rough 7, and these scenarios have the same percent savings in total water consumption. However, the implementation of alternative water sources changes the amount of potable water saved in each scenario. Simply changing the source of water to meet demand will not affect the overall amount of water savings; changing the water source substitutes potable water with an alternative point of supply. The IBWM model differentiates between total water reduction and potable reduction and presents these values to t he user. LEED currently awards points for reducing the use of potable water; however, future editions will address the reduction of total water demand. The IBWM model also provides users with a breakdown of where water is being used for the building site This provides users with the ability to see which fixtures or 18 shows the p ercent of total water used by each fixture or irrigation output by the model. Again, scenarios 2 through 7 have the same values because water to meet

PAGE 75

65 demand is only being substituted; the amount of water still needed for each fixture does not change. T ABLE 18 : Percent of total water going to each sector for simulation. Toile t s Urinal s Bath room Sink s Kit chen Sink s Shower s Irrigation Baseline 27.27 8.52 15.98 5.33 5.33 37.59 Scenario 1 2 5 87 5.05 13.64 4.55 6.32 44.58 Scenario 2 3 1.59 6. 17 13.33 5.55 5.55 3 7.80 Scenario 3 31.59 6. 17 13.33 5.55 5.55 3 7.80 Scenario 4 3 1.59 6 17 13.33 5.55 5.55 3 7.80 Scenario 5 3 1.59 6. 17 13.33 5.55 5.55 3 7.80 Scenario 6 3 1.59 6. 17 13.33 5.55 5.55 3 7.80 Scenario 7 3 1.59 6. 17 13.33 5.55 5.55 3 7.80 Resolution The IBWM model can show trends on an annual, monthly, or daily scale. Figure 16 plots the percent reduction in potable water consumption for the para meters set in scenario 7. The percent reductions shown are calculated as an annual average, monthly average, and daily average. F IGURE 16 : Potable water reduc tion for scenario 7 plotted annually, monthly, and daily.

PAGE 76

66 The average annual potable water reduction for scenario 7 is 69%. The figure above shows that the percent savings by month and day varies due to the change in rainfall and evapotranspiration, the m ain variables affecting irrigation. The plot supports the LEED suggestion of analyzing water consumption over the entire year. However, providing resolution down to the monthly or daily level allows users to evaluate how the effects of water management a re dynamic with respect to time. This also shows model users when an assumed water reduction is not being met. Plotting daily water consumption captures trends such as workday consumption vs. weekday consumption, and seasonal changes for irrigation. Fig ure 17 presents the daily water consumption for irrigation, sewage conveyance, water fixtures, and the total building over the simulation year for scenario 7. F IGURE 17 : Daily water consumption breakdown for scenario 7.

PAGE 77

67 The tre nds in interior versus exterior water consumption for the building are seen in the above figure. The colored bars represent interior water usage by building fixtures. Water consumption by all fixtures is around 504 gal/day (306 gal/day for toilets and ur inals) when the building is occupied during the weekdays; interior consumption goes to zero during the weekends when the building is not occupied. Total water consumption for the site is the sum of the demand by all water fixtures and irrigation. The gra ph shows that irrigation drives the changes in overall demand; more water is consumed in the summer when irrigation demand is high, while less water is consumed in the winter when irrigation demand is low. July Baseline Case LEED calculations for water f ixtures use an annual average; however, the landscaping portion of LEED NC allows projects to calculate potable water savings by using the month of July as the baseline. The underlying assumption is that evapotranspiration is highest in July; and therefor e, the water required for irrigation will be the highest and will be harder to meet with alternative water sources. Figure 18 plots the amount of water required for irrigation based on the irrigation parameters given earlier in Table 14 Also graphed is the available rainwater for collection each month assuming a collection area of 2000 square feet. The rainwater and evapotranspiration values are average values for the Lutz, Florida area and are provided in Table 19 T ABLE 19 : Ra infall and reference evapotranspiration (ET 0 ) used for Figure 18 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Rain 2.92 2.08 1.80 3.59 3.36 5.40 8.59 5.98 4.98 2.34 1.02 1.82 ET 0 0.86 1.00 1.77 2.88 3.66 4.21 4.52 4.14 3.66 2.91 1.74 1.01 Rainfall values are an average of KFLLUTZ5 data (2007 2009) and NWS normal values *Reference ET values are an average of USGS data (2004 2006) for Odessa, FL

PAGE 78

68 F IGURE 18 : Monthly comparison of available rainfall to irrigation demand. The triangles define the ratio of available rainwater to the irrigation demand for each month; higher ratios indicate that rainwater can meet more of the demand. If all rainwater is applied for irrigation, the ratio becomes the percent potable water savings. November actually provides the worst case month to offset potable water for landscaping because it has the lowest ratio of 0.17. Although July has the highest demand for irrigation, there is also a fair amount of rainfall available to offset potable wat er. The ratio for July is 0.56; if all rainwater is collected and applied to irrigation, 56% of potable water would be saved. However, the annual average ratio is 0.40 or 40% possible potable water savings. In this scenario, the July baseline assumption overestimates the potential potable water reduction by 16 percentage points.

PAGE 79

69 T ABLE 20 : I rrigation demand, rainwater supply, and ratio of supply to demand. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year Demand (gal/day) 104 135 215 362 445 528 549 503 460 353 218 123 333 Supply (gal/day) 105 83 65 134 121 202 310 216 186 84 38 66 134 Ratio (%) 100 61 30 37 27 38 56 43 40 24 17 54 40 The difference in this scenario affects Water Efficiency credit 1: Water Efficient Landsc aping. The July baseline calculates a 56% potable water reduction, which would earn the project two points for exceeding the 50% reduction threshold. However, measuring the reduction over the year would show that the average savings of 40% does not meet the 50% goal. The end result is that the building is perceived as more water efficient than it really is. Doing so not only overestimates water savings, but also the potential economic savings and payback associated with it.

PAGE 80

70 CHAPTER 6 : LEARNING GATE COMMUNITY SCHOOL Overview Part of the Hillsborough County School District, Learning Gate Community School is an environmentally themed K 8 charter school. The school began as a private institution in 1983 and was charted in 2000 with an approximate stud ent body of 500. Their educational programs integrate the natural world into teaching activities and subjects. Learning Gate Community School is registered for LEED Platinum certification. Newly constructed modular buildings on the campus have achieved platinum certification in the LEED for Schools rating system. Learning Gate provides an optimal test site for water budget analysis because of the extensive planning and technologic implementation exercised in order to preserve water on campus. To collect rainwater, there are two cisterns for the new buildings, totaling 10,000 gallons. Collected water from cisterns is used to flush toilets in the new buildings which are already plumbed for this purpose. The school is also investigating whether it is feas ible to collect additional rainwater in two retention ponds located on the north side of the campus. Currently the ponds collect stormwater runoff for the school which quickly infiltrates and recharges the groundwater supply. Therefore, any retention att empt would require that the ponds be lined to halt the high infiltration that occurs naturally. Learning Gate intends to implement an on site natural wastewater treatment system (Eco Machine) where all wastewater generated on campus will be sent for treat ment and reused to supplement the toilet flushing need. Recycled water can also

PAGE 81

71 be used to supplement the campus demand or to sustain a fish or plant crop within the Eco Machine. All the aforementioned technologies provide excellent educational opportuni ties for students to learn and be a part of the water treatment and reuse process. The study area for this project consists of one newly constructed modular classroom building that contains a mix of fourth and fifth grade students. Each class has approxim ately 22 occupants, and the building contains two classrooms. FIGURE 19 : Aerial view of Learning Gate campus. N

PAGE 82

72 Wetlands area behind campus Northwest stormwater pond Decking made of recycled plastic Munters air c onditioning unit for green classrooms Interior of green classroom Vegetable garden on campus F IGURE 20 : Pictures of Learning Gate campus.

PAGE 83

73 Rain barrels collecting condensate Recycling bins Compost bin on campus P ervious parking outside the main building F IGURE 21 : Pictures of Learning Gate campus (cont.)

PAGE 84

74 Rainwater Collection System The newly constructed modular classrooms on the south side of the campus have low flow toilets and sink s installed with automatic sensors. The automatic sensors are manufactured by Zurn and are battery powered. Faucets can only be operated by tripping the sensor; however, toilets have a manual button in addition to the sensor. F IGURE 22 : Photos of bathroom fixtures: (a) 1.28 gpf toilet, (b) detail view of sensor and manual button, (c) lavatory, and (d) detail view of faucet sensor. Toilets utilize stored rainwater for flushing. Rainwater is directed to the gutter syste m by the angled roofs of the two smaller classroom buildings. Downspout pipes are covered with angled screens to keep debris from entering the storage bladders (10,000 gallon capacity) located under the classroom buildings and water passing by chlorine t ablets provides disinfection. A 600 gallon equalization tank provides rainwater to the toilets. In the event of decreased rainwater storage, potable water is added to the system from the school well. An overflow pipe releases excess water during high in tensity rainfall events. a b c d

PAGE 85

75 F IGURE 23 : Overview of the rainwater collection system at Learning Gate. F IGURE 24 : Photos of the r ainwater collection system at Learning Gate: (a) gutter piping, (b) storage bladder beneath building, (c) equalization tank, and (d) overflow pipe. Data Collection Equipment In order to acquire data on water usage for model calibration, sensors were installed on water lines in two of the LEED certified modular buildings Each building is a b c d

PAGE 86

76 bathrooms in between them. Each bathroom con tains one toilet and one sink. F IGURE 25 : Aerial view of classrooms and sensor eq uipment location. The water line to each toilet diameter. Each pipe was fitted for a paddlewheel flow sensor (FPB151 series 4 20 mA polypropylene sensor from Omega Engineering, Inc.). Each sens or was calibrated and programmed to the conditions listed in Table 21

PAGE 87

77 T ABLE 21 : Parameters for installed sensors. Sensor Location Pipe Diameter Flow Units K Factor Output Signal Avg. Sens. 4 mA 20 mA Toilet line gpm 352 .44 0 gpm 15 gpm 0 0 Sink line gpm 545.14 0 gpm 10 gpm 0 0 All sensors are programmed so that output amperage values are related to water flow in gallons per minute (gpm). An output of 4 mA corresponds to a flow rate of 0 gpm. For toilets, an outpu t of 20 mA corresponds to a flow rate of 15 gpm. For sinks, an output of 20 mA corresponds to a flow rate of 10 gpm. The relationship between output amperage and flow rate is linear. The K factor defines the number of pulses per volume unit. The K fact ors are 352.44 pulses per gallon for the toilet sensors and 545.14 pulses per gallons for the sink sensors as defined by tables supplied by the sensor manufacturer. Both averaging and sensitivity values are set to 0 so that data is collected as it happens and without bias. F IGURE 26 : Installed water sensors under decking. Sensors are hardwired to the HOBO U30 ETH Ethernet communications data logger (from the Onset Computer Corporation). Four 24 V direct current (DC) power sup plies provide power to all eight sensors; two se nsors share each power supply.

PAGE 88

78 F IGURE 27 : HOBO data logger: (a) location in classroom closet, (b) sensor connections, and (c) detail inside view. Data is logged at an interval of once every second through an ethernet connection at Learning Gate and saved to the Onset hosted webserver HOBOlink.com. The public link for this project can be found at: https://www.hobolink.com/p/d2199c59fe86b5f1e570197760be4b5e Learning Gate Data Resolution of Data Raw data from the HOBO data logger is given as a flow rate logged at each second. From this data, the volume of each fixture usage event and the time at which it occurred can be determined. The resolution provides insight into indivi dual usage patterns for students within the classrooms. a b c

PAGE 89

79 F IGURE 28 : Event volume and time of event for bathroom B (3/17/10). The figure above shows the compiled data for one bathroom during one day. Each square represents the v olume for each toilet use at a specific time, and each diamond represents the volume for each bathroom sink use. Bathroom sink applications generally occur right after toilet uses. Bathroom activity can be split into morning, midday, and afternoon sectio ns. Morning use is clustered around the beginning of the school day as students arrive to class. The highest period of usage is between 10:00 AM and 1:30 PM and coincides with the period before, during, and right after lunch. The third cluster of activi ty is seen at the end of the school day when students are released from class. Utilizing the detailed data for both bathrooms on the same day provides an estimation of the number of fixture uses per event. The assumption is that one toilet flush and one sink use occurs for each trip to the bathroom or event. However, in reality the number of times a fixture is used during one event can be greater than once, as seen in the data compiled in Table 22.

PAGE 90

80 T ABLE 22 : Statistical values f or the number of times each fixture is used per event. Mean Median Minimum Maximum Std. Dev. Events Toilet Uses 1.1 1 1 2 0.27 78 Sink Uses 1.6 1 1 6 1.05 81 *Data is from both bathroom A and bathroom B on 3/17/10. Clustered uses were assumed to be pa rt of a larger event. Toilets were generally flushed once per visit, although some events contained two separate flush events. Multiple sink uses per visit were more common due to the automated faucet sensor. Removing hands from under the faucet causes the water flow to cease until tripped again. Since the beginning and end date for each event is logged, the duration and flow rate for the sinks can be estimated. Table 23 includes the average event duration and flow rate for bathroom sinks from 163 even ts. Distribution curves are provided in Figures 29 and 30 T ABLE 23 : Statistical values for sink flow rate and duration per event. Mean Median Minimum Maximum Std. Dev. Events Flow rate (gpm) 1.07 1.08 0.443 1.75 0.333 163 Dura tion (sec) 12 10 4.0 51 7.74 163 *Data is from both bathroom A and bathroom B on 3/17/10.

PAGE 91

81 F IGURE 29 : Distribution curve for bathroom sink flow rates (3/17/10). F IGURE 30 : Distribution curve for bathr oom sink duration (3/17/10). Without the high resolution from the sensors and logger, information on usage within the individual event context would not be possible.

PAGE 92

82 Fixture Data Data collected over multiple days provides an improved picture of water us age in the classrooms. The distribution of event volumes for both toilets and bathroom sinks is shown in Figures 31 and 32 Both figures include fixture events from February 18, 2010 through May 10, 2010. Events less than 0.05 gallons assumed to be a re sult of interference from the sensors and were omitted from the data set. F IGURE 31 : Distribution curve for toilet event volumes from 2/18/10 to 5/10/10.

PAGE 93

83 F IGURE 32 : Distribution curve for sink event v olumes from 2/18/10 to 5/10/10. Event volumes for each toilet use follow a normal distribution curve. The average volume per flush of 1.12 gpf is less than the rated 1.28 gpf of the toilet fixtures, but within the 0.61 gpf standard deviation. The avera ge volume for each sink use is 0.23 gallons with a standard deviation of 0.24 gallons. The resulting curve does not follow a normal distribution. However, previous distribution curves for sink duration and flow rate have trends closer to that of a normal ized curve. From the same data set, the number of times each fixture is used can be calculated. Table 24 shows the average number of uses per day for toilets and sinks.

PAGE 94

84 T ABLE 24 : Fixture uses per day from 2/17/10 through 5/1 0/10 for weekdays only. Toilets Sinks A B All A B All Mean 25.8 33.2 29.5 55.3 30.8 43.1 Median 24.0 33.5 29.0 48.5 29 38.5 Minimum 5.0 17 5.0 23 5.0 5.0 Maximum 57 60 60 147 96 147 Std. Dev. 9.6 7.4 9.3 26.6 15.3 24.9 Count 52 52 104 52 52 104 Data on fixture uses per day changed dramatically from day to day. During the 52 weekdays evaluated, uses for toilets ranged from 5 to 60 per day, and uses for sinks ranged from 5 to 147 per day. No trend between number of fixture uses and day of the wee k was observed for weekdays. Table 25 shows the average number of uses per day per person for each fixture assuming that the study building has 44 occupants. T ABLE 25 : Fixture use per student per day for weekdays (2/17/10 5/ 10/10 ). Fixture Mean Median Minimum Maximum Std. Dev. Count Toilets 1.34 1.32 0.73 2.66 0.349 52 Sinks 1.96 1.76 0.86 4.36 0.738 52 Like the overall uses per day, the number of uses per student per day contained a relative range of values. The LEED as sumption that students use each fixture (toilet and bathroom sink) three times per day is higher than the values calculated in this study. Interpretation of Data The data on fixture water use from the Learning Gate ba throoms shows a range of values as se en in the distribution curves. Factors such as equipment calibration,

PAGE 95

85 programmed time steps for data collection, and how each fixture is activated result in a series of observed numbers that do not match up to the expected values. The calculated flow rat e for the bathroom sinks is calculated by dividing the total volume for each sink event by the duration. The HOBO data logger is able to take a reading once every second; however, a sink may be activated or deactivated anywhere within that second. For an average duration length of 12 seconds, this provides decent room for error, as the duration may be underestimated by up to one second or overestimated up to one second, causing the flow rate to follow the same trend. The flow rate should be standard for each sink because they are automated, and individuals do not have control of the faucet. On the other hand, duration is expected to vary because it depends on how long an individual holds their hand over the sensor to prolong activation. The data collect ed on the volume per flush for toilets was unexpected. The expected value from the toilet manufacturer is 1.28 gpf. Although the average is slightly less at 1.12 gpf, events were observed from 0.1 gpf up to 14.8 gpf. Like the sinks, it is possible that the data logger does not capture the entire event with a resolution of one data point per second. However, this would not cause the drastic range of values. Also like the sinks, the toilets contain an automated feature; and it was assumed that this would result in a more uniform flush volume. The culprit behind the erratic flush volume can be traced back to the manual button provided on each toilet. By overriding the automatic flush mechanism by utilizing the manual button, various flush volumes occur. Figure 33 shows the effect of the manual button on flush volumes when different forces are applied to the button.

PAGE 96

86 F IGURE 33 : Effect of using the manual flush button on toilet flush volumes. The test shows that using the manua l flush button can create a flush volume of nearly any value. Pushing the button lightly resulted in some flushes being near the lower end threshold of 0.05 gallons, whereas holding the manual button down can result in an infinite flush volume as water co ntinues to flow until the button is released. This can explain the 14.8 gpf event observed in the data. The test also showed that there is a delay between the time the automatic sensor is tripped and the time the toilet is flushed, which makes it possibl e for a user to press the manual button thinking the sensor has not been activated. Doing this can cause a double flush; the sensor activates a new flush while the one activated by the manual button is still occurring. The resulting value is higher than that of a normal automated flush volume. Evidence that students are using the manual button over the automated flush system was found on one of the bathroom doors (Figure 34 ). Students are encouraged to hold the button down to clear the toilet.

PAGE 97

87 F IGURE 34 : Bathroom procedures posted on bathroom door.

PAGE 98

88 LG STELLA Model The IBWM model utilizing the STELLA software is set up to represent the study classroom building. Toilets and bathroom sinks are the only fixtures included in the water budget. Sources of water used to meet these demands come from collected rainwater or potable water from the on site well. The duration of each model run is for an entire year starting July 1 and ending June 30. The STELLA model has a built in Mon te Carlo Simulation function that allows users to input average values and their corresponding standard deviations to create random runs. Using the parameters listed in Table 26 the Learning Gate IBWM model was run 4000 times to produce the distribution of annual water demand values plotted in Figure 35 T ABLE 26 : Parameters used in the STELLA runs for water demand in study building. Toilets Sinks Volume per Event (gpf) Uses per Student per Day Flow Rate (gpm) Uses per Student per Day Duration (sec) Mean 1.12 1.34 1.07 1.96 12 Std. dev. 0.611 0.349 0.333 0.738 7.74 The large standard deviation values for the bathroom sink duration per event, number of sink uses per student per day, and toilet volume per flush caused some val ues chosen in the random STELLA drawing to be negative. As a result, the annual water demand was calculated as zero for 70 out of 4000 runs. This indicates that the additional data on the variables in Table 26 should be analyzed to evaluate whether the r ange of values for each parameter can be minimized.

PAGE 99

89 F IGURE 35 : Distribution curve for the annual water demand for the Learning Gate classroom study. For the distribution curve above, the average annual water demand is approximat ely 69,600 gallons for the classroom building. The average annual water demand is approximately 70,800 gallons if the 70 events with no demand listed are omitted. The STELLA software also has the ability to create a distribution for the possible water su pply. For the Learning Gate classroom scenario, the total rainfall available for collection was determined from 4000 runs. The average rainfall value was calculated from three years of measured data ( KFLLUTZ 2007 2009) for Lutz, FL and the normal values from the National Weather Service. These values are shown in Table 27 T ABLE 27 : Annual rainfall for Lutz, Florida. 2007 1 2008 1 2009 1 Weather 2 Mean Rainfall (in) 36.67 42.64 51.39 44.77 43.87 1 Annual rainfall compiled from KFLL UTZ5 2 Annual average rainfall from NWS

PAGE 100

90 The mean value for the data in the previous table is 43.87 inches with a standard deviation of 6.07 inches. These values were used to create the distribution curve in Figure 36 for the rainfall available for collec tion from the classroom building, assuming a 90% collection efficiency and roof collection area of 1910 square feet. F IGURE 36 : Distribution curve for the annual water supply for the Learning Gate classroom study. The average v olume of rainfall available for collection from the STELLA runs is 46,700 gallons. The standard deviation is 6600 gallons. The probability of meeting annual water demand with a selected water supply can be evaluated by compiling both the demand and suppl y distributions.

PAGE 101

91 F IGURE 37 : Distribution curves for both the annual water demand and supply for the Learning Gate classroom study. The range of values for the annual rainfall supply is much smaller than that of the annual water demand. Water demand depends on multiple variables that contain a range of possible values. The end result is a broadly distribution of annual water demand. From the distribution plots, it is unlikely that collected rainfall can meet all of the water d emand. Calibration LEED reference manuals outline assumptions on individual water usage in order to estimate water savings; however, the question remains about whether these assumptions provide accurate results. Answering this question also provides the

PAGE 102

92 opportunity for model calibration and defends calibration as an important step in determining potential and accurate water savings. Table 28 below describes the baseline and design parameters used to evaluate water savings for the Learning Gate classroom study. These values will be used in the STELLA IBWM model. T ABLE 28 : IBWM model parameters for the LG classroom study using LEED assumptions. Fixture Volume or Flow Rate Duration Uses per Day Base Design Base Design Base Design Toilet 1.6 gpf 1.28 n/a n/a 3 3 Sink 2.5 gpm 1.0 15 sec 12 sec 3 3 LEED assumes baseline fixture ratings of 1.6 gpf for toilets and 2.5 gpm for sinks, as well as usage rates of three uses per day per person for each. The baseline duration of each sin k event is set at 15 seconds. For this run, the design fixture ratings are set at 1.28 gpf for toilets and 1.0 gpm for sinks in order to represent the expected water use for each fixture in the building bathrooms. The duration for each bathroom sink even t is set to 12 seconds because LEED assumes this set duration if automatic sensors are used, as is the case in the Learning Gate classrooms. The IBWM model was run from February 18, 2010 to May 10, 2010, and the cumulative design water demand for this per iod is plotted against the measured actual water use in the classrooms in Figure 38

PAGE 103

93 F IGURE 38 : Cumulative water demand volume for LG study using LEED assumptions vs. measured values. The above figure shows that the LEED assump tions used for the design water demand have overestimated the measured water usage of the building. This is expected because the LEED assumptions for fixture uses per person per day are much higher than the rates observed at the study site. A second IBWM model run was conducted using the parameters in Table 29 These values use the same LEED assumptions for baseline fixture use, but replace design and personal fixture usage per day values with those calculated from the sensor data. T ABLE 29 : IBWM model parameters for the LG study using measured values. Fixture Volume or Flow Rate Duration Uses per Day Base Design Base Design Base Design Toilet 1.6 gpf 1.12 n/a n/a 1.34 1.34 Sink 2.5 gpm 1.07 15 sec 12 sec 1.96 1.96

PAGE 104

94 For this r un, the fixture design volume for each toilet flush is slightly less than what the fixture is rated for and the flow rate of the bathroom sinks is slightly more. The number of times each person uses each fixture per day is less than the LEED assumed value of three times per day. The results of the IBWM model run are shown in Figure 39 The cumulative design water demand volume using calibrated values is compared to measured water use in the classroom building during the defined time period. F IGURE 39 : Cumulative water demand volume for LG study using calibrated assumptions vs. measured values. Using the calibrated values, the IBWM model run closely followed the measured water usage in the classroom building. Flat areas on the graph show times where volume is not accumulating and represent weekends or vacation time when the classrooms were not occupied. The classroom building used for these IBWM model runs contains a rainwater collection system to offset the potable water deman d of the toilet and was included in the

PAGE 105

95 model runs. The collection area was set to the roof area of 1910 square feet with a collection efficiency of 90%. The storage area was 5000 gallons. (The rainwater collection system at Learning Gate has a total of 10,000 gallons split between two buildings.) Daily rainfall amounts were input from documented values. The resulting water reduction percentages are plotted in Figure 40 for the model run using LEED assumptions and the model run using calibrated values. The percent reduction in total water demand and percent reduction in potable water demand are included. F IGURE 40 : Water savings based on IBWM model runs using LEED assumptions and calibrated values. The percent reduction in total water is constant throughout the model runs for both scenarios. This is because the amount of total water saved depends on conservation.

PAGE 106

96 Substituting some of the overall water needed with rainwater does not change the total amount of water still re quired for the fixtures. Reduction values for total water are a result of the low flow toilets and sinks installed in the bathrooms. Potable water reduction is dependent on the rainwater used. As a result, the percent reduction changes as available rain water changes. The figure above shows that the LEED assumptions underestimate the total water savings, but overestimate the potable water reduction. The pairs of values each differ by about 10 percentage points. The LEED assumptions underestimate the to tal water reduction in this case because of the decreased gallons per flush value (1.28 gpf vs. 1.12 gpf). Another reason is the assumption that each fixture is used three times per occupant, when data shows they are used fewer times. Having fewer event s causes the water savings per event to hold more weight. The difference in events per occupant per day also affects the potable water savings. Now the LEED assumption overestimates the savings because the ratio of water demand for toilets to water deman d for sinks has decreased. Using the LEED assumptions, water needed for toilets is heavily weighted; but if the volume per flush and number of flushes is decreased, the weight of the toilet sector also decreases compared to the sink sector which has not c hanged as much between the two scenarios. Education Part of the project objectives is to develop an IBWM model that is a user friendly tool for evaluating water management. In order to determine whether STELLA is an appropriate platform for the IBWM mod el, students at Learning Gate were introduced to the program and given the opportunity to play with different model scenarios over a three day period from May 24 through May 26, 2010. Lessons took place during four 7 th grade computer classes held daily. Approximately 75 students in the 7 th grade took part.

PAGE 107

97 An overall introduction to modeling was conducted on the first day, focusing on how the STELLA program can build relationships in a thought experiment. Students followed the sample model pr ovided onli ne through NetSim (isee s ystems 2010 ) entitled plague, falling roof beams, and dying fish may be linked on the island. Users are able to follow the creation of a STELLA mode l that shows the relationships between each of the three unexplained mysteries and the thought process behind the answer. The program teaches students how one question leads to a chain of questions that eventually trace back to the answer and how everythi ng is interconnected. This exercise also linked back to a book the students had read Who Killed Cock Robin? Both the book and STELLA model pose a question with the answer l inked to DDT in the environment. On the second day, students were asked to defin e words related to rainwater catchment: rain barrel, cistern, first flush system, rainwater, potable water, greywater, and blackwater. Although the computer room is located in the new classroom complex where rainwater collection is implemented, most stude nts were unfamiliar with the system. After explaining the components of a typical system, the students were provided with a worksheet showing a classroom and asked to draw a rainwater collection system used to flush the toilet within the building. The fo llowing components were to be included: cistern, overflow pipe, first flush system, piping for rainwater to toilets, and potable make up water for toilets. From the picture, students mapped out the same rainwater collection system as a STELLA model schema tic. The goal of the exercise was to have students follow the thought process for building a STELLA model by turning a tangible system into a computer model. Once complete, the students were given time to play with a STELLA model of the rainwater collect ion system. Students were asked a series of questions that required them to change the collection area, cistern size, and monthly rainfall in the model interface.

PAGE 108

98 F IGURE 41 : STELLA rainfall model interface. Students enjoyed pla ying with the STELLA model and creating the output graph. In the end, students could: Easily change the input parameters of the model and run the model.

PAGE 109

99 Evaluate the effects of changing collection area and cistern size. Increasing the collection area pro vides more rainwater capture, but the cistern must be large enough to store the water. View the effect that changing rainfall has on rainwater collection. Students were given drought year monthly rainfall totals and asked to determine the new parameters t hey would need to use to still meet the toilet flushing water demand. Understand the meaning of the different plots on the graphical output device. When the rainfall collection line is beneath the water demand line, there is not enough rainwater to meet d emand, and the cistern is not storing water because it is all being used. When the rainfall collection line exceeds the water demand line, there is more water available than demanded; and storage in the cistern occurs. F IGURE 42 : Output graph from STELLA rainwater model. On the third day of STELLA lessons, the students were given extra time to answer questions from the rainwater model. Once completed, they were given an Rainwater available exceeds the water demand. Excess wat er is stored in the cistern

PAGE 110

100 additional worksheet that asked questions about the I BWM model created for the entire campus. The objective of the worksheet was to evaluate how well the students could maneuver through the IBWM model developed for this project. Not all students were able to complete the assignment, but beneficial feedback was collected from those who had time to work through the overall model. The version provided to the students would consistently freeze during model runs; this information resulted in the creation of the current IBWM model that is not plagued by the same problem. Additional comments about the preliminary model interface include: Busy interface with too many variable inputs on each page. Lack of run button in an easily accessible area. Insufficient explanation of input variables and associated terms. Addi tional instructions required. Additional work on aesthetics. Worked well and good layout. Useful program that is easy to work. Comments were used to create the current version of the IBWM model tha t eliminates most of the negative aspects regarding model runs and framework. Feedback about the user interface will be used to construct an appealing and user friendly design for the final model product. The education session undertaken at Learning Gate showed that students can understand the concepts behind STELLA modeling and water management. Although problems were faced with the previous version of the IBWM model used for the lessons, all students had a good grasp of the rainwater collection model. The future use of the STELLA IBWM model as both an educational and decision making tool is affirmed by

PAGE 111

101 the actions of the 7 th grade students over the three day evaluation period. If the students can actively comprehend the processes of the model, then it follows that an IBWM model using STELLA can be utilized by a wide audience. F IGURE 43 : Students during the STELLA lessons at Learning Gate: (a) drawing a rainwater collection system, and (b d) using models to analyze wat er saving scenarios. a b c d

PAGE 112

102 CHAPTER 7 : CONCLUSION Overview Water conservation and reuse are often compartmentalized; each water saving technique is advised in place of another. However, an integrated approach evaluates the outcomes of different water mana gement techniques or more importantly a combination of techniques. This information is crucial to making decisions based on water use, and these decisions are made by individuals involved in the construction of both green and conventional buildings. Sust ainable design calls for a change in thinking methods; it requires an integrated approach. As such, the STELLA integrated water budget management (IBWM) model incorporates the integration of creative and innovative water management techniques with common methods for conservation to better educate its users. The research and discoveries made in the green building industry affect the builders and users of building projects. The STELLA model provides users with the ability to analyze the effects that differe nt water management options have on a values that can then be tracked using tables and graphs. Results estimate the best courses of action to take in order to gain LEED p oints toward accreditation However, closed systems; e.g., a space station. Therefore, the model has as many applications as can be imagined by its users. The model als o serves as a teaching tool. Educators

PAGE 113

103 can utilize the model to teach students about the importance of water as a natural resource, cause and effect, and mass balance. Future Work With the model, users can track changes in water consumption due to variat ions in seasonal demand, building occupancy, and occupant behavior. Model parameters are derived from literature review, historical data of university water usage and consultation with building superintendents. However, smart sustainable design requires the fusion of related dimensions in order to perform a more complete system analysis. Mapped water flow represents only one dimension within the system. A second dimension is defined by energy ( E ) usage. Water and energy share a close bond, referred to as watergy Heating and treating water requires energy values that can be defined and integrated into the IBWM QEC model. Treating water to higher quality standards requires more energy; and more energy has a higher associated cost. Therefore, water qua lity ( Q ) and costs ( C ) construct a third and fourth dimension to the model. Integrating all four dimensions establishes a sustainable and unique approach to overall building hydraulic design, and an IBWM QEC model provides a single platform where each asp ect is defined and allowed to interact. The advanced IBWM QEC model can be a powerful tool for designers and managers to examine scenarios for reducing water consumption and wastewater output, while providing users with an understanding of building water i ntegration. The finished product is anticipated to be adopted for use by the USGBC as a tool to be used with future versions of LEED. The STELLA modeling software is widely available and can therefore be used by other planning agencies and researchers to determine feasible water reuse and efficiency projects. Additionally, the model can be further developed for use in real time applications. For example, if sensors are incorporated within a building,

PAGE 114

104 the model can run simulations from the web using the real time data. By inputting collected data, the model can help make future predictions regarding the water budget. Also, it should be noted that although the IBWM QEC model is intended for tracking water in individual buildings, the model can be modified and adapted for multiple building or community level modeling, thereby expanding the applications to other sectors such as neighborhood development. The ease of use of STELLA also makes it a great educational tool for teaching water conservation and reus e. The water budget model and the water usage data can be made available on the internet so that students and the public can learn about and appreciate water conservation and reuse in a sustainable framework such as a green building.

PAGE 115

105 CHAPTER 8 : REFERE NCES CITED Al Jayyousi, O. 2004. Greywater reuse: knowledge management for sustainability. Desalination 167(15): 27 37. Anderson, J., A. Adin, J. Crook, C. Davis, R. Hultquist, B. Jimenez Cisneros, W. Kennedy, B. Sheikh, and B. van der Merwe. 2001. Wa ter Science and Technology 43(10): 1 8. Atasoy, E., S. Murat, A. Baban and M. Tiris. 2007. "Membrane bioreactor (MBR) treatment of segregated household wastewater for reuse." CLEAN Soil, Air, Water 35 (5): 465 472. Boehler, M., A. Joss, S. Buetzer, M. Holzapel, H. Mooser, and H. Siengrist. 2007. Treatment of toilet wastewater for reuse in a membrane bioreactor. Water Science and Technology 56(5): 63 70. Bracciano, David. Cooling Tower Evaluation/Implementation (unpublished). Carter, T and L Fowl er. 2008. Establishing green roof infrastructure through environmental policy instruments. Environmental Management 42: 151 164. Cheng, C. 2003. Evaluating water conservation measures for green building in Taiwan. Building and Environment 38(2): 369 3 79. Cox, E.C. and C. Joustra. 2008. ConservaBull Report Fall 2008 Emerging Green Builders at USF 9, 2006. History for KFLLUTZ5 Weather Underground http://www.wunderground.com. G E (G eneral Electric Company ) r_reuse.

PAGE 116

106 GE (General Electric Company). 2010. Wastewater reuse and water conservation solutions for green building. GE Power & Water: Water & Process Technologies . Ghisi, E. and D. F. Ferreir a. 2007. Potential for potable water savings by using rainwater and greywater in a multi storey residential building in southern Brazil. Building and Environment 42(7): 2512 2522. isee systems. 2010. isee NETSIM sample models. isee systems http://www. iseesystems.com/community/downloads/NetsimModels.aspx#6. James, P, K Tzoulas, MD Adams, A Barber, J Box, J Breuste, T Elmqvist, M Frith, C Gordon, KL Greening, J Handl ey, S Haworth, AE Kazmierczak, M Johnston, K Korpela, M Moretti, J Niemel, S Pauleit, MH Roe, JP Sadler, and CW Thompson. 2009. Towards an integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 8: 66 75 Kibert, Charles J. 2005. Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery Last, E. and R. Mackay. 2007. Developing a new scoping model for urban water sustainability. 2 nd SWITCH Scientific Meeting 25 27 November 2007 Lazarova, V., B. Le vine, J. Sack, G. Cirelli, P. Jeffrey, H. Muntau, M. Saglot, and F.Brissaud. 2001. Role of water reuse for enhancing integrated water management in Europe and Mediterranean countries. Water Science and Technology 43(10): 25 33. Low Impact Development Ce http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org. Lundie, S, GM Peters and PC Beavis. 2004. Life cycle assessment for sustainable metropolitan water systems planning. Environmental Science & Technology 38: 3465 34 73. Maheepala, S. 2007. House water expert software. The Commonwealth Scientific and Indsutrial Research Organization (CSIRO) http://www.csiro.au/products/House Water Expert.html. McCulloch, J, P McCarthy, SM Guru, W Peng, D Hugo and A Terhorst. 2008. Wireless sensor network deployment for water use efficiency in irrigation. European conference on computer systems proceedings of the workshop on real world wireless sensor networks 46 50. Mitchell, G. 2005. Aquacycle: a daily urban water balance model user guide www.toolkit.net.au/aquacycle.

PAGE 117

107 Mitchell, V. G., E. Bui, H.Cleugh, C. Diaper, A. Grant, S.R. Gray, A. Sharma, and S. Toze. 2004. Delivering planning and performance assessment tools for integrated urban water management. CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country Flagship National Weather Service (NWS). 2008. Tampa Bay, FL. Tampa Bay Area Weather Forecast Office http://www.nws.noaa.gov/climate/index.php?wfo=tbw Oberndorfer, E., J. Lundholm, B. Bass, R.R. Coffman, H. Doshi, N., Dunnett, S. Gaf fin, M Khler, K.K. Liu, and B. Rowe. 2007. Green roofs as urban ecosystems: ecological structures, functions, and services. Bioscience 57(10): 823 833. Pahl Wostl, C., D Tbara, R Bouwen, M Craps, A Dewulf, E Mostert, D Ridder and T Taillieu. 2008. Th e importance of social learning and culture for sustainable water management. Ecological Economics. 64: 484 495. integration between bioclimatic, water savings, and aestheti c aspects. Renewable Energy 19(1 2): 1 5. Rockstrm, J. 2003. Resilience building and water demand management for drought mitigation. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28(20 27): 869 877. Sorgini, L. 2004. Packages membrane systems offer cost effecti ve solutions. American Water Works Association Journal 96(11): 48 50. Stave, KA. 2003. A systems dynamics model to facilitate public understanding of water management options in Las Vegas, Nevada. Journal of Environmental Management 67: 303 313. Tamak i, H, G Silva, and O Goncalves. 2001. Submetering as an element of water demand management in water conservation programs. 27 th International Symposium CIBW62 2001 Water Supply and Drainage for Buildings September 17 20, 2001 Portoroz, Slovenia Unit ed States Green Building Council (USGBC). 2006. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New Construction Version 2.2 Reference Guide United States Green Building Council (USGBC). 2009. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Reference G uide for Building Design and Construction U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2010. Data Available for 281331082333301 S tarkey A ddition P asture C limate S ta N r O dessa FL Hydrologic Data Web Portal http://hdwp.er.usgs.gov/Download.asp?t=DV&s=2813310823333 01&p=99900

PAGE 118

108 VanWoert, N.D., D.B. Rowe, J.A. Andersen, C.L. Rught, R.T. Fernandez, and L. Xiao. 2005. Green roof stormwater retention: effect s of roof surface, slope, and media depth. Journal of Environmental Quality 34: 1036 1044. Zimmerman, JB, JR Mihelcic and J Smith. 2008. Global stressors on water quality and quantity. Environmental Science & Technology 42(12): 4247 4254.

PAGE 119

109 APPENDICES

PAGE 120

110 Appendix A: STELLA IBWM Model Variables by Sector Irrigation FIGURE A 1 : Detail view of the IBWM model irrigation section. TABLE A 1 : Variables in the irrigation section of the IBWM model. Notation in Model Variable Description Uni ts or Value Q:Dsgn \ C Q Dsgn C Design demand flow for cooling gal/day Q:Dsgn \ I Q Dsgn I Design demand flow for irrigation gal/day Q:Dsgn \ T Q Dsgn T Design demand flow for toilets gal/day Q:Dsgn \ U Q Dsgn U Design demand flow for urinals gal/day Q:G \ T Q G T Flow o f stormwater to toilets gal/day Q:G \ U Q G U Flow of stormwater to urinals gal/day Q:I \ Total Q Total I Total water flow allocated for irrigation gal/day Q:Irrigation \ Plants Q Plants I Flow of water utilized by plants gal/day

PAGE 121

111 A ppendix A (Continued) TABLE A 1 ( Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Q:Pond \ Irrigation QGI Stormwater flow for irrigation gal/day Q:R QW Total available flow of reclaimed water gal/day Q:R \ T QRT Flow of rainwater for toilets gal/day Q:R \ U Q R U Flow of rain water for urinals gal/day Q:Rain \ Irrigation Q R I Flow of rainwater for irrigation gal/day Q:Reclaim \ Irrigation Q W I Flow of reclaimed water for irrigation gal/day Q:Runoff \ Irrigation Q Run I Flow of runoff water from irrigation gal/day Q:W \ T Q W T Flow of re claimed water for toilets gal/day Q:W \ U Q W U Flow of reclaimed water for urinals gal/day Q:Y \ I Q Y I Flow of greywater to irrigation gal/day S:Pond for Irrigation Switch to turn on stormwater source flow for irrigation 1 S:Rain for Irrigation Switch t o turn on rainwater source flow for irrigation 1 S:Reclaim \ Irrigation Switch to turn on reclaimed water flow for irrigation 1 S:Y for Irrigation Switch to turn on greywater flow for irrigation 1 V:G \ Pond V G Pond Volume of stormwater in the storage po nd gal V:R \ Cis V R Cis Volume of rainwater in the cistern gal V:Runoff \ Irrigation V Run I Volume of runoff from irrigation gal V:Treat V Treat Volume of treated greywater available for reuse gal V to plants V Plants I Volume of water going to plants gal Bat hroom Sinks FIGURE A 2 : Detail view of the IBWM model bathroom sink section.

PAGE 122

112 A ppendix A (Continued) FIGURE A 3 : Baseline (top) and design (bottom) components for bathroom sinks in the IBWM model. TABLE A 2 : Variables in the bathroom sink section of the IBWM model. Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Q:Dsgn \ Sb Q Dsgn Sb Design demand flow for bathroom sinks gal/day Q:P \ Sb Q P Sb Design potable water demand for bathroom sinks gal/day Q:S \ Sb Q S Sb Flow to sewer from bathroom sinks gal/d ay Q:Y \ Sb Q Y Sb Greywater flow from bathroom sinks to treatment for reuse gal/day S:S \ Sb S S Sb Switch to turn on sewer flow from bathroom sinks 1 S:Y \ Sb S Y Sb Switch to turn on greywater reuse flow from bathroom sinks 1 V:S \ Sb V S Sb Volume of water enterin g sewer from bathroom sinks gal V:Sb V Sb Volume of water in bathroom sinks gal V:Treat V Treat Volume of water in treatment for reuse gal Baseline Bathroom Sink Demand Override Value Q Base Sb Override value for baseline water demand for bathroom sinks if imbedded model calculations are not used gal/day N:A \ Sb N A Sb Number of applications of bathroom sinks uses/person/day Q:A \ Sb Base Q A Sb(Base) Baseline flow rate for each bathroom sink application gpm Q:Base \ Sb Q Base Sb Baseline water demand for bathroom s inks gal/day S:Baseline Bathroom Sink Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for baseline water demand for bathroom sinks 1

PAGE 123

113 A ppendix A (Continued) TABLE A 2 (Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value S:Baselin e Bathroom Sink Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for baseline water demand for bathroom sinks 1 T:Base \ Sb t Base Sb sec Total FTE FTE Full time occupant equivalent people Design Bathroom Sink Demand Override Value Q Dsgn Sb Override value for design water demand for bathroom sinks if imbedded model calculations are not used gal/day N:A \ Sb N A Sb Number of applications of bathroom sinks uses/person/day Q:A \ Sb Dsgn Q A Sb(Dsgn) Design flow rate for each bathroom sink application gpm Q:D sgn \ Sb Q Dsgn Sb Design water demand for bathroom sinks gal/day S:Design Bathroom Sink Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for design water demand for bathroom sinks 1 S:Design Bathroom Sink Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for design water demand for bathroom sinks 1 T:Dsgn \ Sb t Dsgn Sb sec Total FTE FTE Full time occupant equivalent people Kitchen Sinks FIGURE A 4 : Detail view of the IBWM model kitchen sink section.

PAGE 124

114 A ppendix A (Continued) FIG URE A 5 : Baseline (top) and design (bottom) components for kitchen sinks in the IBWM model. TABLE A 3 : Variables in the kitchen sink section of the IBWM model. Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Baseline Kitchen Sink Demand Override Valu e Q Base Sk Override value for baseline water demand for kitchen sinks if imbedded model calculations are not used gal/day Design Kitchen Sink Demand Override Value Q Dsgn Sk Override value for design water demand for kitchen sinks if imbedded model calculati ons are not used gal/day N:A \ Sk N A Sk Number of kitchen sink applications uses/person/day Q:A \ Sk Base Q: A Sk(Base ) Baseline kitchen sink flow rate gpm Q:A \ Sk Dsgn Q A Sk(Dsgn) Design kitchen sink flow rate gpm Q:Base \ Sk Q Base Sk Baseline demand flow for kit chen sinks gal/day Q:Dsgn \ Sk Q Dsgn Sk Design demand flow for kitchen sinks gal/day Q:P \ Sk Q P Sk Flow of potable water to kitchen sinks gal/day Q:S \ Sk Q S Sk Flow of water to the sewer from kitchen sinks gal/day Q:Y \ Sk Q Y Sk Flow of greywater collected from kitchen sinks gal/day S:Baseline Kitchen Sink Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for baseline water demand for kitchen sinks 1 S:Baseline Kitchen Sink Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for baseline water dem and for kitchen sinks 1 S:Design Kitchen Sink Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for design water demand for kitchen sinks 1 S:Design Kitchen Sink Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for design water demand fo r kitchen sinks 1

PAGE 125

115 A ppendix A (Continued) TABLE A3 (Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value S:S \ Sk Switch to direct water from kitchen sinks to sewer 1 S:Y \ Sk Switch to collect greywater from kitchen sinks for reuse 1 T:Sk \ Base t Base Sk Baseline duration for kitchen sink application sec T:Sk \ Dsgn t Dsgn Sk Design duration for kitchen sink application sec Total FTE FTE Full time occupant equivalent people V:S \ Sk V S Sk Volume of water directed to sewer from kitchen sinks gal V:Sk V Sk Volume of water in kitchen sinks 0 V:Treat V Treat Volume in water for treatment for reuse gal Showers FIGURE A 6 : Detail view of the IBWM model shower section.

PAGE 126

116 A ppendix A (Continued) FIGURE A 7 : Baseline (top) and design (bott om) components for showers in the IBWM model. TABLE A 4 : Variables in the shower section of the IBWM model. Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Baseline Shower Demand Override Value Q Base H Override value for baseline water demand for sho wers if imbedded model calculations are not used gal/day Design Shower Demand Override Value Q Dsgn H Override value for design water demand for showers if imbedded model calculations are not used gal/day N:A \ H N A H Number of shower applications uses/person /day Q:A \ H Base Q: A H(Base) Baseline shower flow rate gpm Q:A \ H Dsgn Q A H(Dsgn) Design shower flow rate gpm Q:Base \ H Q Base H Baseline demand flow for showers gal/day Q:Dsgn \ H Q Dsgn H Design demand flow for showers gal/day Q:P \ H Q P H Flow of potable water t o showers gal/day Q:S \ H Q S H Flow of water to the sewer from showers gal/day Q:Y \ H Q Y H Flow of greywater collected from showers gal/day S:Baseline Shower Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for baseline water demand for showers 1 S:Baseline Shower Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for baseline water demand for showers 1 S:Design Shower Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for design water demand for showers 1 S:Design Shower Demand Ove rride Value Switch to use the override value for design water demand for showers 1

PAGE 127

117 A ppendix A (Continued) TABLE A 4 (Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value S:S \ H Switch to direct water from showers to sewer 1 S:Y \ H Swi tch to collect greywater from showers for reuse 1 T:H \ Base t Base H Baseline duration for shower application sec T:H \ Dsgn t Dsgn H Design duration for shower application sec Total FTE FTE Full time occupant equivalent people V:S \ H V S H Volume of water direc ted to sewer from showers gal V:H V H Volume of water in showers 0 V:Treat V Treat Volume of water in treatment available for reuse gal

PAGE 128

118 A ppendix A (Continued) Toilets FIGURE A 8 : Detail view of the IBWM model toilets section.

PAGE 129

119 A ppendix A (Continued) FIGURE A 9 : Baseline (top) and design (bottom) components for toilets in the IBWM model. TABLE A 5 : Variables in the toilet section of the IBWM model Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Baseline Toilet Demand Override Value Q Base T B aseline demand flow for all toilets gal/day Design Toilet Demand Override Value Q Dsgn T Design demand flow for all toilets gal/day N:A \ T Female N A T(F) Daily applications of female toilets uses/person/day N:A \ T Male N A T(M) Daily applications of male toile ts uses/person/day Pct:M P M Percent of occupants that are male Q:Base \ T Q Base T Baseline demand flow for all toilets gal/day Q:Base \ T Female Q Base T(F) Baseline demand flow for female toilets gal/day Q:Base \ T Male Q Base T(M) Baseline demand flow for mal e toilets gal/day Q:Dsgn \ C Q Dsgn C Design demand flow for cooling gal/day Q:Dsgn \ T Q Dsgn T Design demand flow for all toilets gal/day Q:Dsgn \ T Female Q Dsgn T(F) Design demand flow for female toilets gal/day Q:Dsgn \ T Male Q Dsgn T(M) Design demand flow for m ale toilets gal/day Q:Dsgn \ U Q Dsgn U Design demand flow for all urinals gal/day Q:G \ T Female Q G T(F) Flow of stormwater to female toilets gal/day Q:G \ T Male Q G T(M) Flow of stormwater to male toilets gal/day Q:G \ U Q G U Flow of stormwater to all urinals gal /day Q:P \ T Female Q P T(F) Flow of potable water to female toilets gal/day Q:P \ T Male Q P T(M) Flow of potable water for male toilets gal/day

PAGE 130

120 A ppendix A (Continued) TABLE A5 (Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Q:R \ T Female Q R T(F) Flow of rainwater to female toilets gal/day Q:R \ T Male Q R T(M) Flow of rainwater to male toilets gal/day Q:R \ U Q R U Flow of rainwater to all urinals gal/day Q:S \ T Female Q S T Flow of water to the sewer from female toilets gal/day Q:S \ T Male Q S T(M) F low of water to the sewer from male toilets gal/day Q:W Q W Total flow of available reclaimed water gal/day Q:W \ T Female Q W T(F) Flow of reclaimed water to female toilets gal/day Q:W \ T Male Q W T(M) Flow of reclaimed water to male toilets gal/day Q:W \ U Q W U Flow of reclaimed water to all urinals gal/day Q:Y \ T Female Q Y T(F) Flow of greywater for female toilets gal/day Q:Y \ T Male Q Y T(M) Flow of greywater for male toilets gal/day S:Baseline Toilet Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for baseline water demand for toilets 1 S:Design Toilet Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for design water demand for toilets 1 S:Design Toilet Demand Override Value Switch to use the override value for design water demand for toil ets 1 S:Pond for Toilets Female Switch to direct stormwater to female toilets 1 S:Pond for Toilets Male Switch to direct stormwater to male toilets 1 S:Rain for Toilets Female Switch to direct rainwater to female toilets 1 S:Rain for Toilets Male Switch to direct rainwater to male toilets 1 S:Reclaim for Toilets Female Switch to direct reclaimed water to female toilets 1 S:Reclaim for Toilets Male Switch to direct reclaimed water to male toilets 1 S:T \ Black Female Switch to direct water from female toilets to treatment for reuse S:T|Black Male Switch to direct water from male toilets to treatment for reuse 1 S:T \ Sewer Female Switch to direct water from female toilets to sewer 1 S:T \ Sewer Male Switch to direct water from male t oilets to sewer 1 S:Y for Toilets Female Switch to reuse greywater for female toilets 1 S:Y for Toilets Male Switch to reuse greywater for male toilets 1 Total FTE FTE Full time occupant equivalent people V:A \ T Base V A T(Base) Baseline volume per to ilet application gpf V:AT Dsgn V A T(Dsgn) Design volume per toilet application gpf V:B \ T V B T Volume of blackwater for reuse from all toilets gal V:G \ Pnd V G Pnd Volume of stormwater in the collection pond gal V:R \ Cis V R Cis Volume of rainwater in the ciste rn gal V:T \ Sewer Female V S T(F) Volume of water into sewer from female toilets gal V:T \ Sewer Male V S T(M) Volume of water into sewer from male toilets gal V:T Toilets Female V T(F) Volume of water in female toilets 0 V:T Toilets Male V T(M) Volume of water in male toilets 0 V:Treat V Treat Volume of water in treatment available for reuse gal

PAGE 131

121 A ppendix A (Continued) Urinals FIGURE A 10 : Detail view of the IBWM model urinals section.

PAGE 132

122 A ppendix A (Continued) FIGURE A 11 : Baseline (top) and design (bot tom) components for urinals in the IBWM model. TABLE A 6 : Variables in the urinal section of the IBWM model. Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Baseline Urinal Demand Override Value Q Base U Baseline demand flow for all urinals gal/day D esign Urinal Demand Override Value Q Dsgn U Design demand flow for all urinals gal/day N:A \ U Female N A U(F) Daily applications of female urinals uses/person/day N:A \ U Male N A U(M) Daily applications of male urinals uses/person/day Pct:M P M Percent of occupa nts that are male Q:Base \ U Q Base U Baseline demand flow for all urinals gal/day Q:Base \ U Female Q Base T(F) Baseline demand flow for female urinals gal/day Q:Base \ U Male Q Base T(M) Baseline demand flow for male urinals gal/day Q:Dsgn \ C Q Dsgn C Design dema nd flow for cooling gal/day Q:Dsgn \ U Female Q Dsgn U(F) Design demand flow for female urinals gal/day Q:Dsgn \ U Male Q Dsgn U(M) Design demand flow for male urinals gal/day Q:G \ U Female Q G T(F) Flow of stormwater to female urinals gal/day Q:G \ U Male Q G T(M) F low of stormwater to male urinals gal/day Q:G \ U Q G U Flow of stormwater to all urinals gal/day Q:P \ U Female Q P T(F) Flow of potable water to female urinals gal/day Q:P \ U Male Q P T(M) Flow of potable water for male urinals gal/day Q:R \ U Female Q R T(F) Flow of rainwater to female urinals gal/day

PAGE 133

123 A ppendix A ( C ontinued) TABLE A 6 (Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Q:R \ U Male Q R T(M) Flow of rainwater to male urinals gal/day Q:R \ U Q R U Flow of rainwater to all urinals gal/day Q: S \ U Female Q S T Flow of water to the sewer from female urinals gal/day Q:S \ U Male Q S T(M) Flow of water to the sewer from male urinals gal/day Q:W Q W Total flow of available reclaimed water gal/day Q:W \ U Female Q W T(F) Flow of reclaimed water to female uri nals gal/day Q:W \ U Male Q W T(M) Flow of reclaimed water to male urinals gal/day Q:W \ U Q W U Flow of reclaimed water to all urinals gal/day Q:Y \ U Female Q Y T(F) Flow of greywater for female urinals gal/day Q:Y \ U Male Q Y T(M) Flow of greywater for male urinal s gal/day S:Baseline Urinal Demand Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations for baseline water demand for urinals 1

PAGE 134

124 A ppendix A ( C ontinued) Cooling Tower FIGURE A 12 : Detail view of the IBWM model cooling section. TABLE A 7 : Variables in the cooling section of the IBWM model Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value Q:Dsgn \ C Q Dsgn C Design demand flow for cooling gal/day Q:E \ C Q E C Flow lost through evaporation from cooling gal/day Q:G \ C Q G C Flow of stormwater for cooling ga l/day Q:G \ T Q G T Flow of stormwater for toilets gal/day Q:G \ U Q G U Flow of stormwater for urinals gal/day Q:P \ C Q P C Flow of potable water for cooling gal/day

PAGE 135

125 A ppendix A ( C ontinued) TABLE A 7 (Continued). Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Va lue Q:Pond \ Irrigation Q G I Flow of stormwater for irrigation gal/day Q:R \ C Q R C Flow of rainwater for cooling gal/day Q:R \ C reclaim in Q W C Flow of reclaimed water for cooling gal/day Q:S \ C Q S C Flow of water bled out to sewer from cooling gal/day Q:W Q W Total available flow of reclaimed water gal/day Q:Y \ C Q Y C Flow of greywater for cooling gal/day S:R \ C Switch to direct rainwater to cooling 1 S:Reclaimfor cooling Switch to direct reclaimed water to cooling 1 S:W \ C Switch to direct collected stor mwater to cooling 1 V:C \ sewer V S C Volume of water directed to sewer from cooling gal V:Cooling V C Volume of water in the cooling tower gal V:E \ C V E C Volume of water lost through evaporation from cooling gal V:G \ Pnd V G Pnd Volume of stormwater available in the pond gal V:R \ Cis V R Cis Volume of rainwater available in the cistern gal

PAGE 136

126 A ppendix A (Continued) Rainwater Collection FIGURE A 13 : Detail view of the IBWM model rainwater collection section. TABLE A 8 : Variables in the rainwater collection sec tion of the IBWM model Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value A:Cis A Cis Collection area for the cistern ft 2 CE:Cis CE Cis Collection efficiency of the cistern collection system Conversion Factor CF Conversion factor 0.6223 gal/ft 2 /in Q:Out \ Cis Q Tot Cis Total outflow to all fixtures from cistern gal/day Q:Over \ Pnd Q O Pnd Overflow from cistern gal/day Q:R \ Cis Q R Cis Flow of rainwater into the cistern gal/day Q:R \ T Q R T Flow of rainwater to toilets gal/day Q:R \ U Q R U Flow of rainwater to u rinals gal/day Q:Rain \ Irrigation Q R I Flow of rainwater to irrigation gal/day R R Rainfall in/day Rainfall Flow into Cistern Override Value Q R Cis Flow of rainwater into the cistern gal/day

PAGE 137

127 A ppendix A ( C ontinued) TABLE A 8 (Continued) Notation in Model V ariable Description Units or Value S:Rainfall Flow into Cistern Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations to determine rainwater flow into cistern 1 S:Rainfall Flow into Cistern Override Value Switch to use override value to determine rainwat er flow into cistern 1 V:flush V flush Volume of the first flush gal V:Max \ Cis V Max Cis Maximum cistern volume gal V:R \ Cis V R Cis Volume of rainwater in the cistern gal V:Rain \ Cistern V R Cis Volume of rainwater in the cistern gal Stormwater Collection FIGURE A 14 : Detail view of the IBWM model stormwater collection section.

PAGE 138

128 A ppendix A (Continued) TABLE A 9 : Variables in the stormwater collection section of the IBWM model Notation in Model Variable Description Units or Value A:Pnd A Pnd Collection are a for the pond ft 2 CE:Pnd CE Pnd Collection efficiency of the stormwater collection system Conversion Factor CF Conversion factor 0.6223 gal/ft 2 /in Q:Evap \ Pond Q E Pnd Flow lost through evaporation from the pond gal/day Q:G \ Pond Q G Pnd Flow of stormwater into the pond gal/day Q:G \ T Q G T Flow of stormwater for toilets gal/day Q:G \ U Q G U Flow of stormwater for urinals gal/day Q:inf \ Pnd Q Inf Pnd Flow lost through infiltration from the pond gal/day Q:Out \ Pnd Q Tot Pnd Total flow to all fixtures from pond gal/d ay Q:Over \ Pnd Q O Pnd Overflow from stormwater pond gal/day Q:Pond \ Irrigation Q W I Flow of stormwater for irrigation gal/day R R Rainfall in/day S:Stormwater Flow into Pond Calculated Value Switch to use model calculations to determine flow of stormwate r into pond 1 S:Stormwater Flow into Pond Override Value Switch to use override value for flow of stormwater into pond 1 Stormwater Flow into Pond Override Value Q G Pnd Flow of stormwater into the pond gal/day V:G \ Pnd V G Pnd Volume of stormwater in the pond gal V:Max \ Pnd V Max Pnd Maximum volume of the stormwater pond gal V:Storm \ Pond V G Pnd Volume of stormwater in the pond gal

PAGE 139

129 A ppendix B: STELLA IBWM Model Equations Design_TWA(t) = Design_TWA(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TW A) dt INIT Design_TWA = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA = (S:Design_Irrigation_Demand_Calculated_Vlaue*(TWA \ Groundcover+TWA \ Mixed+TWA \ Shrubs+TWA \ Trees+TWA \ Turfgr ass)) + (S:Design_Irrigation_Demand_Override_Value*Design_Irrigat ion_Demand_Override_Value) Total_Rainfall(t) = Total_Rainfall(t dt) + (Rainfall_Flow_In) dt INIT Total_Rainfall = 0 INFLOWS: Rainfall_Flow_In = Q:R \ Cis_Rainfall_flow_into_Cistern V:Baseline_TPWA_2(t) = V:Baseline_TPWA_2(t dt) + (Q:Base \ I_Baseline_Dem and_for_Irrigation_TPWA__and_TWA) dt INIT V:Baseline_TPWA_2 = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ I_Baseline_Demand_for_Irrigation_TPWA__and_TWA = (S:Base_Irrigation_Demand_Calculated_Vlaue*(TPWA \ Groundcover_2+TPWA \ Mixed_2+TPWA \ Shrubs_2+TPWA \ Trees_ 2+TPWA \ Turfgrass_2)) + (S:Base_Irrigation_Demand_Override_Value*Baseline_Irrigation_Demand_Override_Value) V:BaseTotal(t) = V:BaseTotal(t dt) + (Q:Base \ Total) dt INIT V:BaseTotal = 0.0000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ Total = Q:Base \ Total_Baseline_Total_Water_Use_ All_Potable_Water V:Base \ H(t) = V:Base \ H(t dt) + (Q:Base \ H) dt INIT V:Base \ H = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ H = Q:Dsgn \ H_Design_Demand_for_Showers V:Base \ I(t) = V:Base \ I(t dt) + (Q:Base \ I) dt INIT V:Base \ I = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ I = Q:Base \ I_Baseline_Demand_for_Irrigation_TPWA__and_TWA V:Base \ Sb(t) = V:Base \ Sb(t dt) + (Q:Base \ Sb) dt INIT V:Base \ Sb = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ Sb = Q:Base \ Sb_Baseline_Demand_for_Bathroom_Sinks V:Base \ Sk(t) = V:Base \ Sk(t dt) + (Q:Base \ Sk) dt INIT V:Base \ Sk = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ Sk = Q:Base \ Sk_Baseline_Demand_for_Kitchen_Sinks V:Base \ Swge(t) = V:Base \ Swge(t dt) + (Q:Base \ Swge) dt INIT V:Base \ Swge = 0.0000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ Swge = Q:Base \ Swge_Basline_Sewage_Con veyance V:Base \ T(t) = V:Base \ T(t dt) + (Q:Base \ T) dt INIT V:Base \ T = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ T = Q:Base \ T__Baseline_Demand_for_All_Toilets V:Base \ U(t) = V:Base \ U(t dt) + (Q:Base \ U) dt INIT V:Base \ U = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ U = Q:Base \ U_Baseline_Demand_for_All_Urinals V:Base \ Wter(t) = V:Base \ Wter(t dt) + (Q:Base \ Wter) dt INIT V:Base \ Wter = 0.0000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Base \ Wter = Q:Base \ Wter_Baseline_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_All_Potable_Water V:B \ T_Blackwater(t) = V:B \ T_Blackwa ter(t dt) + (Q:B \ T_Male_black_in + Q:B \ T_Female_black_in) dt INIT V:B \ T_Blackwater = 0 INFLOWS: Q:B \ T_Male_black_in = S:T \ Black_Male*Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:B \ T_Female_black_in = S:T \ Black_Female*Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate _for_Female_Toilets V:B \ U_Blackwater(t) = V:B \ U_Blackwater(t dt) + (Q:B \ U_Male_black_in + Q:B \ U_Female_black_in) dt INIT V:B \ U_Blackwater = 0

PAGE 140

130 A ppendix B (Continued) INFLOWS: Q:B \ U_Male_black_in = S:U \ Black_Male*Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_U rinals Q:B \ U_Female_black_in = S:U \ black_Female*Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals V:Cooling(t) = V:Cooling(t dt) + (Q:Y \ C_grey_out + Q:P \ C_potable_in + Q:R \ C_reclaim_in + Q:G \ C_Stormwater_from_Pond_to_Cooling + Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Ciste rn_to_Cooling Q:S \ C_Flow_to_Sewer_from_Cooling_Bleed_Out Q:E \ C_out) dt INIT V:Cooling = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Y \ C_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling > Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Wat er_for_Reuse ) > Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling )*S:Y_for_Cooling ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_fo r_Reuse)*S:Y_for_Cooling ELSE 0 Q:P \ C_potable_in = Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Y \ C_grey_out Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling Q:G \ C_Stormwater_from_Pond_to_Cooling Q:R \ C_reclaim_in Q:R \ C_reclaim_in = IF (Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Co oling > ( Q:Y \ C_grey_out + Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling + Q:G \ C_Stormwater_from_Pond_to_Cooling ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Y \ C_grey_out Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling Q:G \ C_Stormwater_from_Pon d_to_Cooling ) > Q:W_reclaimed_water ) THEN (Q:W_reclaimed_water*S:Reclaim_for_cooling) ELSE ( (Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Y \ C_grey_out Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling Q:G \ C_Stormwater_from_Pond_to_Cooling )*S:Re claim_for_cooling ) ELSE 0 Q:G \ C_Stormwater_from_Pond_to_Cooling = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling > ( Q:Y \ C_grey_out + Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Y \ C_grey_out Q:R \ C _Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling ) > ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in ) ) THEN ( ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_ All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in )*S:W \ C_Stormwater_for_Cooling ) ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Y \ C_grey_out Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in )*S:W \ C_Stormwater_for_Cooling ) ELSE 0 Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling = IF ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern > Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling ) THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Deman d_for_Cooling*S:R \ C_Rainwater_for_Cooling ) ELSE ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern*S:R \ C_Rainwater_for_Cooling ) OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ C_Flow_to_Sewer_from_Cooling_Bleed_Out = 0 Q:E \ C_out = 0 V:C \ sewer(t) = V:C \ sewer(t dt) + (Q:S \ C_Flow_to_Sewer_from_Cooling _Bleed_Out) dt INIT V:C \ sewer = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ C_Flow_to_Sewer_from_Cooling_Bleed_Out = 0 V:Dsgn \ H(t) = V:Dsgn \ H(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ H) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ H = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ H = Q:Dsgn \ H_Design_Demand_for_Showers V:Dsgn \ I(t) = V:Dsgn \ I(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ I) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ I = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ I = Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA V:Dsgn \ Sb(t) = V:Dsgn \ Sb(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ Sb) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ Sb = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ Sb = Q:Dsgn \ Sb_Design_De mand_for_Bathroom_Sinks V:Dsgn \ Sk(t) = V:Dsgn \ Sk(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ Sk) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ Sk = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS:

PAGE 141

131 A ppendix B (Continued) Q:Dsgn \ Sk = Q:Dsgn \ Sk_Design_Demand_for_Kitchen_Sinks V:Dsgn \ Swge(t) = V:Dsgn \ Swge(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ Swge) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ Swge = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ Swge = Q:Dsgn \ Swge_Design_Sewage_Conveyance V:Dsgn \ T(t) = V:Dsgn \ T(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ T) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ T = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ T = Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets V:Dsgn \ Total(t) = V:Dsgn \ Total (t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ Total) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ Total = 0.0000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ Total = Q:Dsgn \ Total_Design_Total_Water_Use_All_Water V:Dsgn \ U(t) = V:Dsgn \ U(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ U) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ U = 0.0000000000000001 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ U = Q:Dsgn \ U_Design _Flowrate_for_All_Urinals V:Dsgn \ Wter(t) = V:Dsgn \ Wter(t dt) + (Q:Dsgn \ Wter) dt INIT V:Dsgn \ Wter = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Dsgn \ Wter = Q:Dsgn \ Wter_Design_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_All_Water V:E \ C_Evap(t) = V:E \ C_Evap(t dt) + (Q:E \ C_out) dt INIT V:E \ C_Evap = 0 IN FLOWS: Q:E \ C_out = 0 V:H_Showers(t) = V:H_Showers(t dt) + (Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers Q:S \ H_from_Showers_to_Sewer Q:Y \ H_Greywater_to_Treatment) dt INIT V:H_Showers = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers = Q:Dsgn \ H_Design_Demand_for_Showers OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ H_from_Showers_to_Sewer = Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers*S:S \ H_to_Sewer Q:Y \ H_Greywater_to_Treatment = Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers*S:Y \ H_to_Treatment V:I_Irrigation(t) = V:I_Irrigation(t dt) + (Q:Y \ I_grey_out + Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in + Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in + Q:Reclaim \ Irrigation_reclaimed_in + Q:P \ I_Potable_water_for_Irrigation Q:Runoff \ Irrigation Q:Irrigation \ Plants) dt INIT V:I_Irrigation = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Y \ I_grey_out = IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling (Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals) ) > Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA*S:Y_for_Irrigation ) ELSE ( ( V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling (Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals) )*S:Y_for_Irrigation ) Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigati on_Design_TWA > Q:Y \ I_grey_out ) THEN IF ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out ) > ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals Q:R \ T_Rainwater_for_All_Toilets ) THEN ( ( V :R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals Q:R \ T_Rainwater_for_All_Toilets )*S:Rain_for_Irrigation ) ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out )*S:Rain_for_Irrigation ) ELSE 0 Q:Pond \ Irr igation_pond_in = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA > ( Q:Y \ I_grey_out + Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in ) > ( V:G \ Pnd _Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets ) ) THEN ( ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets )*S:Pond_for_Irrigation ) ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets )*S:Pond_for_Irrigation ) ELSE 0 Q:Reclaim \ Irrigation_reclaimed_in = IF ( Q:Ds gn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA > ( Q:Y \ I_grey_out + Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in + Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in ) ) THEN

PAGE 142

132 A ppendix B (Continued) IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out Q:Rain \ Irrigati on_rain_in Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in ) > ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W \ T_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Toilets) ) THEN ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W \ T_Reclaimed_water_for_ All_Toilets )*S:Reclaim \ Irrigation ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W \ T_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Toilets )* S:Reclaim \ Irrigation ) ELSE 0 Q:P \ I_Potable_water_for_Irrigation = Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA Q:Y \ I_grey_out Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in Q:Reclaim \ Irrigation_reclaimed_in OUTFLOWS: Q:Runoff \ Irrigation = 0 Q:Irr igation \ Plants = Q:I \ Total V:P_Dsgn \ H(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ H(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ H) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ H = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ H = Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers V:P_Dsgn \ I(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ I(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ I) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ I = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ I = Q:P \ I_Potable_water_for_Irrigation V:P_Dsgn \ Sb(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ Sb(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ Sb) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ Sb = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ Sb = Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks V:P_Dsgn \ Sk(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ Sk(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ Sk) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ Sk = 0 INFLO WS: Q:P_Dsgn \ Sk = Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks V:P_Dsgn \ Swge(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ Swge(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ Swge) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ Swge = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ Swge = Q:P_Dsgn \ Swge_Sewage_Conveyance_from_Potable_Water V:P_Dsgn \ T(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ T(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ T) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ T = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ T = Q:P \ T_Potable_water_for_All_Toilets V:P_Dsgn \ Total(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ Total(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ Total) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ Total = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ Total = Q:P_Dsgn \ Total_Design_Total_Water_Use_Potab le_Water V:P_Dsgn \ U(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ U(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ U) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ U = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ U = Q:P \ U_Potable_water_for_All_Urinals V:P_Dsgn \ Wter(t) = V:P_Dsgn \ Wter(t dt) + (Q:P_Dsgn \ Wter) dt INIT V:P_Dsgn \ Wter = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P_Dsgn \ Wter = Q: P_Dsgn \ Wter_Design_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_Potable_Water V:Rain \ Cistern(t) = V:Rain \ Cistern(t dt) + (Q:R \ Cis_Rainfall_flow_into_Cistern Q:Out \ Cis_Outflow_from_Cistern Q:Over \ Cis_Overflow_from_Cistern) dt INIT V:Rain \ Cistern = 0 INFLOWS: Q:R \ Cis_Rain fall_flow_into_Cistern = (S:Rainfall_Flow_into_Cistern_Calculated_Value*(R_Rainfall*A:Cis_Collection_Area_for_Cistern*CE:Cis_Collection_Effici ency_of_Cistern*Conversion_Factor_gal \ sf \ in V:flush_First_flush_volume)) + (S:Rainfall_Flow_into_Cistern_Overrid e_Value*Rainfall_Flow_into_Cistern_Override_Value) OUTFLOWS: Q:Out \ Cis_Outflow_from_Cistern = Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in+Q:R \ T_Rainwater_for_All_Toilets+Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals Q:Over \ Cis_Overflow_from_Cistern = IF ( V:Rain \ Cistern < V:Max \ Cis_Maxim um_Cistern_Volume ) THEN ( 0 )

PAGE 143

133 A ppendix B (Continued) ELSE ( Q:R \ Cis_Rainfall_flow_into_Cistern ) V:Runoff \ Irrigation(t) = V:Runoff \ Irrigation(t dt) + (Q:Runoff \ Irrigation) dt INIT V:Runoff \ Irrigation = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Runoff \ Irrigation = 0 V:Sb_Bath room_Sinks(t) = V:Sb_Bathroom_Sinks(t dt) + (Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks Q:S \ Sb_from_Bathroom_Sinks_to_Sewer Q:Y \ Sb_Greywater_to_Treatment) dt INIT V:Sb_Bathroom_Sinks = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks = Q:Dsgn \ Sb_Desig n_Demand_for_Bathroom_Sinks OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ Sb_from_Bathroom_Sinks_to_Sewer = Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks*S:S \ Sb_to_Sewer Q:Y \ Sb_Greywater_to_Treatment = Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks*S:Y \ Sb_to_Treatment V:Sk_Kitchen_Sinks(t) = V:Sk_Kitch en_Sinks(t dt) + (Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks Q:Y \ Sk_Greywater_to_Treatment Q:S \ Sk_from_Kitchen_Sinks_to_Sewer) dt INIT V:Sk_Kitchen_Sinks = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks = Q:Dsgn \ Sk_Design_Demand_for_Kitchen_Sinks OUTF LOWS: Q:Y \ Sk_Greywater_to_Treatment = Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks*S:Y \ Sk_to_Treatment Q:S \ Sk_from_Kitchen_Sinks_to_Sewer = Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks*S:S \ Sk_to_Sewer V:Storm \ Pond(t) = V:Storm \ Pond(t dt) + (Q:G \ Pond_Stormwater_Flow_in to_Pond Q:Out \ Pnd_Outflow_from_Pond Q:Over \ Pnd_Overflow_from_Pond Q:Evap \ Pond_Evaporation_Loss_from_Pond Q:Inf \ Pnd_Infiltration_Loss_from_Pond) dt INIT V:Storm \ Pond = 0 INFLOWS: Q:G \ Pond_Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond = (S:Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond_Ca lculated_Value*(R_Rainfall*A:Pnd_Collection_Area_for_Pond*CE:Pnd_Collection_Effi ciency_for_Pond*Conversion_Factor_gal \ sf \ in)) + (S:Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond_Override_Value*Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond_Override_Value) OUTFLOWS: Q:Out \ Pnd_Outflow_from_Pond = Q: G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets+Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals+Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in Q:Over \ Pnd_Overflow_from_Pond = IF ( V:Storm \ Pond < V:Max \ Pnd_Maximum_Pond_Volume ) THEN ( 0 ) ELSE ( Q:G \ Pond_Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond ) Q:Evap \ Pond_Evaporation _Loss_from_Pond = 0 Q:Inf \ Pnd_Infiltration_Loss_from_Pond = 0 V:S \ H_Sewer(t) = V:S \ H_Sewer(t dt) + (Q:S \ H_from_Showers_to_Sewer) dt INIT V:S \ H_Sewer = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ H_from_Showers_to_Sewer = Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers*S:S \ H_to_Sewer V:S \ Sb_Sewer(t ) = V:S \ Sb_Sewer(t dt) + (Q:S \ Sb_from_Bathroom_Sinks_to_Sewer) dt INIT V:S \ Sb_Sewer = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ Sb_from_Bathroom_Sinks_to_Sewer = Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks*S:S \ Sb_to_Sewer V:S \ Sk_Sewer(t) = V:S \ Sk_Sewer(t dt) + (Q:S \ Sk_from_Kitchen_ Sinks_to_Sewer) dt INIT V:S \ Sk_Sewer = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ Sk_from_Kitchen_Sinks_to_Sewer = Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks*S:S \ Sk_to_Sewer V:Treat_Treatment(t) = V:Treat_Treatment(t dt) + (Q:Y \ Sb_Greywater_to_Treatment + Q:Y \ H_Greywater_to_Treatment + Q:Y \ Sk_Greywater_to_Treatment Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out Q:Y \ C_grey_out Q:Y \ I_grey_out Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out) dt INIT V:Treat_Treatment = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Y \ Sb_Greywater_to_Treatment = Q:P \ Sb_Potable_water_to_ Bathroom_Sinks*S:Y \ Sb_to_Treatment Q:Y \ H_Greywater_to_Treatment = Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers*S:Y \ H_to_Treatment Q:Y \ Sk_Greywater_to_Treatment = Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sinks*S:Y \ Sk_to_Treatment OUTFLOWS: Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male _Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets > Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in ) THEN

PAGE 144

134 A ppendix B (Continued) IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals ) > Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowra te_for_Male_Toilets Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in )*S:Y_for_Toilets_Male ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_D esign_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals)*S:Y_for_Toilets_Male ELSE 0 Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets > Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_ Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets ) > Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:R \ T_ Female_rain_in )*S:Y_for_Toilets_Female ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets)*S:Y_for_Toilets_Female ELSE 0 Q:Y \ C_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling > Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse ) > Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:R \ C_Rainwater_from_Cistern_to_Cooling )*S:Y_for_Cooling ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse)*S:Y_for_Cooling ELSE 0 Q:Y \ I_grey_out = IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C _Design_Demand_for_Cooling (Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals) ) > Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA*S:Y_for_Irrigation ) ELSE ( ( V :Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling (Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals) )*S:Y_for_Irrigation ) Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urin als > Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals ) > Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in )*S:Y_for_urinals_Male ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals)*S:Y _for_urinals_Male ELSE 0 Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals > Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling) > Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_ Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in )*S:Y_for_urinals_Female ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Co oling)*S:Y_for_urinals_Female ELSE 0 V:T \ Sewer_Female(t) = V:T \ Sewer_Female(t dt) + (Q:S \ T_Female_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_F) dt INIT V:T \ Sewer_Female = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ T_Female_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_F = S:T \ Sewer_Female*Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for _Female_Toilets V:T \ sewer_Male(t) = V:T \ sewer_Male(t dt) + (Q:S \ T_Male_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_M) dt INIT V:T \ sewer_Male = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ T_Male_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_M = S:T \ Sewer_Male*Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets V:T_All_Toilets(t) = V:T_All_Toilets(t dt) + (Q:W \ T_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Toilets + Q:Y \ T_Greyater_for_All_Toilets + Q:P \ T_Potable_water_for_All_Toilets + Q:R \ T_Rainwater_for_All_Toilets + Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets Q:B \ T_Blackwater_for_Reuse_from_All_Toilets Q:S \ T_Water_to_Sewer_from_All_Toilets) dt INIT V:T_All_Toilets = 0 INFLOWS: Q:W \ T_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Toilets = Q:W \ T_Female_reclaimed_in+Q:W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in Q:Y \ T_Greyater_for_All_Toilets = Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out+Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out

PAGE 145

135 A ppendix B (Cont inued) Q:P \ T_Potable_water_for_All_Toilets = Q:P \ T_Female_potable_in+Q:P \ T_Male_potable_in Q:R \ T_Rainwater_for_All_Toilets = Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in+Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in Q:G \ T_Stormwater_for_All_Toilets = Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in+Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in OUTFLOWS: Q:B \ T _Blackwater_for_Reuse_from_All_Toilets = Q:B \ T_Female_black_in+Q:B \ T_Male_black_in Q:S \ T_Water_to_Sewer_from_All_Toilets = Q:S \ T_Female_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_F+Q:S \ T_Male_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_M V:T_Toilets_Female(t) = V:T_Toilets_Female(t dt) + (Q:Y \ T_F emale_grey_out + Q:P \ T_Female_potable_in + Q:W \ T_Female_reclaimed_in + Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in + Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in Q:S \ T_Female_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_F Q:B \ T_Female_black_in) dt INIT V:T_Toilets_Female = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets > Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toi lets ) > Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in )*S:Y_for_Toilets_Female ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets)*S:Y_for_Toilets_Female ELSE 0 Q:P \ T_Female_potable_in = Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Female_gre y_out Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in Q:W \ T_Female_reclaimed_in Q:W \ T_Female_reclaimed_in = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets > ( Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out + Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in + Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in ) > ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in ) ) THEN ( Q:W_reclai med_water Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in )*S:Reclaim_for_Toilets_Female ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in Q:W \ U_Rec laimed_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in )*S:Reclaim_for_Toilets_Female ) ELSE 0 Q:G \ T_Female_pond_in = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets > ( Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out + Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:D sgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in ) > ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in ) ) THEN ( ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in )*S:Pond_for_Toilets_Female) ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Female_grey_out Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in )*S:P ond_for_Toilets_Female ) ELSE 0 Q:R \ T_Female_rain_in = IF ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in > Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets ) THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Fe male_Toilets*S:Rain_for_Toilets_Female ) ELSE ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in )*S:Rain_for_Toilets_Female OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ T_Female_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_F = S:T \ Sewer_Female*Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_ Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets Q:B \ T_Female_black_in = S:T \ Black_Female*Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets V:T_Toilets_Male(t) = V:T_Toilets_Male(t dt) + (Q:P \ T_Male_potable_in + Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in + Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out + Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in + Q:W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in Q:B \ T_Male_black_in Q:S \ T_Male_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_M) dt INIT V:T_Toilets_Male = 0 INFLOWS: Q:P \ T_Male_potable_in = Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in Q :W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in = IF ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals > Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets )

PAGE 146

136 A ppendix B (Continued) THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets*S:R ain_for_Toilets_Male ) ELSE ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals )*S:Rain_for_Toilets_Male Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets > Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volu me_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals ) > Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:R \ T_ Male_rain_in )*S:Y_for_Toilets_Male ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals)*S:Y_for_Toilets_Male ELSE 0 Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate _for_Male_Toilets > ( Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out + Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in ) > ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinal s ) ) THEN ( ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals )*S:Pond_for_Toilets_Male) ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_Al l_Urinals )*S:Pond_for_Toilets_Male ) ELSE 0 Q:W \ T_Male_reclaimed_in = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets > ( Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out + Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in + Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male _Toilets Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in ) > ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals ) ) THEN ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals )*S:Reclaim_for_Toilets_Male ELSE ( ( Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:Y \ T_Male_grey_out Q:R \ T_Male_rain_in Q:G \ T_Male_pond_in Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals )*S:Reclaim_for_Toilets_Male ) ELSE 0 OUTFLOWS: Q:B \ T_Male_black_in = S:T \ Black_Male*Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets Q:S \ T_Male_to_Sewer_from_Toilets_M = S:T \ Sewer_Male*Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets V:U \ Sewer_Female(t) = V:U \ Sewer_Female(t dt) + (Q:S \ U_Female_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_F) dt INIT V:U \ Sewer_Female = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ U_Female_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_F = S:U \ Sewer_Female*Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals V:U \ Sewer_Male(t) = V:U \ Sewer_Male(t dt) + (Q:S \ U_Male_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_M) dt INIT V:U \ Sewer_Male = 0 INFLOWS: Q:S \ U_Male_to_Sewe r_from_Urinals_M = S:U \ Sewer_Male*Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals V:U_All_Urinals(t) = V:U_All_Urinals(t dt) + (Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals + Q:P \ U_Potable_water_for_All_Urinals + Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals + Q:G \ U_Stormwate r_for_All_Urinals + Q:Y \ U_Greywater_for_All_Urinals Q:S \ U_Water_to_Sewer_from_All_Urinals Q:B \ U_Blackwater_for_Reuse_from_All_Urinals) dt INIT V:U_All_Urinals = 0 INFLOWS: Q:W \ U_Reclaimed_water_for_All_Urinals = Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in+Q:W \ U_Male_r eclaimed_in Q:P \ U_Potable_water_for_All_Urinals = Q:P \ U_Female_potable_in+Q:P \ U_Male_potable_in Q:R \ U_Rainwater_for_All_Urinals = Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in+Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in Q:G \ U_Stormwater_for_All_Urinals = Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in+Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in Q:Y \ U_Greyw ater_for_All_Urinals = Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out+Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ U_Water_to_Sewer_from_All_Urinals = Q:S \ U_Female_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_F+Q:S \ U_Male_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_M Q:B \ U_Blackwater_for_Reuse_from_All_Urinals = Q:B \ U_Female_black_in+Q :B \ U_Male_black_in V:U_Urinals_Female(t) = V:U_Urinals_Female(t dt) + (Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in + Q:P \ U_Female_potable_in + Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in + Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in + Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out Q:S \ U_Female_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_F Q:B \ U_Female_black_i n) dt INIT V:U_Urinals_Female = 0 INFLOWS: Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in = IF (Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals > ( Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out + Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in + Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in ) )

PAGE 147

137 A ppendix B (Continued) THEN IF ( ( Q:Ds gn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in ) > Q:W_reclaimed_water ) THEN (Q:W_reclaimed_water*S:Reclaim_for_urinals_Female) ELSE ( (Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowra te_for_Female_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in )*S:Reclaim_for_urinals_Female ) ELSE 0 Q:P \ U_Female_potable_in = Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in = IF (Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals > ( Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out + Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in ) ) THEN ( ( IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female _Urinals Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in ) > V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond ) THEN (V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond*S:Pond_for_urinals_Female) ELSE ( (Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q: Y \ U_Female_grey_out Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in )*S:Pond_for_urinals_Female ) ) ) ELSE 0 Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in = IF ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern > Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals ) THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_ Female_Urinals*S:Rain_for_urinals_Female ) ELSE ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern*S:Rain_for_urinals_Female ) Q:Y \ U_Female_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals > Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_o f_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling) > Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in )*S:Y_for_urinals_Femal e ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling)*S:Y_for_urinals_Female ELSE 0 OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ U_Female_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_F = S:U \ Sewer_Female*Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals Q:B \ U_Female_ black_in = S:U \ black_Female*Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals V:U_Urinals_Male(t) = V:U_Urinals_Male(t dt) + (Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out + Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in + Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in + Q:W \ U_Male_reclaimed_in + Q:P \ U_Male_potable_in Q:S \ U_Male_to _Sewer_from_Urinals_M Q:B \ U_Male_black_in) dt INIT V:U_Urinals_Male = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out = IF ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals > Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in ) THEN IF (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_ Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals ) > Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in )*S:Y_for_urinals_ Male ELSE (V:Treat_Volume_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals)*S:Y_for_urinals_Male ELSE 0 Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in = IF (Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals > ( Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out + Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in ) ) THEN IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in ) > ( V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in ) ) THEN ( ( V:G \ Pn d_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in )*S:Pond_for_Urinals_Male) ELSE ( (Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in Q:G \ U_Female_pond_in )*S:Pond_for_Urinals_Male ) ELSE 0 Q:R \ U_Male_rai n_in = IF ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in > Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals ) THEN ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals*S:Rain_for_urinals_Male ) ELSE ( V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern Q:R \ U_Female_rain_in )*S:Rain_for_urinals_Male Q:W \ U_Male_reclaimed_in = IF (Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals > ( Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out + Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in + Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in ) ) THEN

PAGE 148

138 A ppendix B (Continued) IF ( ( Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Des ign_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in ) > ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in ) ) THEN ( Q:W_reclaimed_water Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in )*S:Reclaim_for_Urinals_Male ELSE ( (Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in Q:W \ U_Female_reclaimed_in )*S:Reclaim_for_Urinals_Male ) ELSE 0 Q:P \ U_Male_potable_in = Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinal s Q:Y \ U_Male_grey_out Q:R \ U_Male_rain_in Q:G \ U_Male_pond_in Q:W \ U_Male_reclaimed_in OUTFLOWS: Q:S \ U_Male_to_Sewer_from_Urinals_M = S:U \ Sewer_Male*Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals Q:B \ U_Male_black_in = S:U \ Black_Male*Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Desi gn_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals V_to_plants(t) = V_to_plants(t dt) + (Q:Irrigation \ Plants) dt INIT V_to_plants = 0 INFLOWS: Q:Irrigation \ Plants = Q:I \ Total UNATTACHED: Cooling_Demand_Flow = 0 UNATTACHED: Q:W = Q:W_reclaimed_water A:Cis_Collection_Area_for _Cistern = 2000 A:Pnd_Collection_Area_for_Pond = 0 Area \ Groundcover = 20000 Area \ Groundcover_2 = 20000 Area \ Mixed = 60000 Area \ Mixed_2 = 60000 Area \ Shrubs = 0 Area \ Shrubs_2 = 0 Area \ Trees = 40000 Area \ Trees_2 = 40000 Area \ Turfgrass = 80000 Area \ Turfgrass_2 = 80000 Baseline_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Baseline_Irrigation_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Baseline_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Baseline_Shower_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Baseline_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Baseline_Urinal _Demand_Override_Value = 50 CE:Cis_Collection_Efficiency_of_Cistern = 0.9 CE:Pnd_Collection_Efficiency_for_Pond = 0.9 Conversion_Factor_gal \ sf \ in = 0.6223 Conversion_gal \ sf \ in = 0.6223 DAYS = TIME Design_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Design_Irri gation_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Design_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Design_Shower_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Design_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value = 50 Design_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value = 50 FTE:Full_FTE_Value_for_Full_time_Occupants = Ocp:Ful l_Full_time_Occupants*Percent_FTE_for_Full_time_Occupants FTE:Other_1_FTE_Value_for_Occupants = Ocp:Other_1_Number_of_occupants*Percent_FTE_for_Other_Occupants_1 FTE:Other_2_FTE_Value_for_Occupants = Ocp:Other_2_Number_of_occupants*Percent_FTE_for_Other_Oc cupants_2 FTE:Part_FTE_Value_for_Part_time_Occupants = Ocp:Part_Part_time_Occupants*Percent_FTE_for_Part_time_Occupants FTE:_Constant = FTE:Full_FTE_Value_for_Full_time_Occupants+FTE:Other_1_FTE_Value_for_Occupants+FTE:Other_2_FTE_Value_for _Occupants+FTE:P art_FTE_Value_for_Part_time_Occupants IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover = 0.625*S:IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover_2 = 0.625*S:IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover_2 IE_Drip \ Groundcover = 0.9*S:IE_Drip \ Groundcover IE_Drip \ Groundcover_2 = 0.9*S:IE_Drip \ Groundco ver_2 IE_Drip \ Mixed = 0.9*S:IE_Drip \ Mixed IE_Drip \ Mixed_2 = 0.9*S:IE_Drip \ Mixed_2 IE_Drip \ Shrubs = 0.90*S:IE_Drip \ Shrubs IE_Drip \ Shrubs_2 = 0.90*S:IE_Drip \ Shrubs_2

PAGE 149

139 A ppendix B (Continued) IE_Drip \ Trees = 0.90*S:IE_Drip \ Trees IE_Drip \ Trees_2 = 0.90*S:IE_Dri p \ Trees_2 IE_Drip \ Turfgrass = 0.9*S:IE_Drip \ Turfgrass IE_Drip \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.9*S:IE_Drip \ Turfgrass_2 IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed_2 = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed_2 IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs IE_S prinkler \ Shrubs_2 = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs_2 IE_Sprinkler \ Trees = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Trees IE_Sprinkler \ Trees_2 = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Trees_2 IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.625*S:IE_Sprinkler \ Tu rfgrass_2 k \ d_average \ Groundcover = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Groundcover k \ d_average \ Groundcover_2 = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Groundcover_2 k \ d_average \ Mixed = 1.1*S:k \ d_average \ Mixed k \ d_average \ Mixed_2 = 1.1*S:k \ d_average \ Mixed_2 k \ d_average \ Shrubs = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Shrubs k \ d_average \ Shrubs_2 = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Shrubs_2 k \ d_average \ Trees = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Trees k \ d_average \ Trees_2 = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Trees_2 k \ d_average \ Turfgrass = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Turfgrass k \ d_average \ Turfgrass_2 = 1.0*S:k \ d_average \ Turfgrass_ 2 k \ d_high \ Groundcover = 1.1*S:k \ d_high \ Groundcover k \ d_high \ Groundcover_2 = 1.1*S:k \ d_high \ Groundcover_2 k \ d_high \ Mixed = 1.3*S:k \ d_high \ Mixed k \ d_high \ Mixed_2 = 1.3*S:k \ d_high \ Mixed_2 k \ d_high \ Shrubs = 1.1*S:k \ d_high \ Shrubs k \ d_high \ Shrubs_2 = 1.1*S:k \ d_ high \ Shrubs_2 k \ d_high \ Trees = 1.3*S:k \ d_high \ Trees k \ d_high \ Trees_2 = 1.3*S:k \ d_high \ Trees_2 k \ d_high \ Turfgrass = 1.0*S:k \ d_high \ Turfgrass k \ d_high \ Turfgrass_2 = 1.0*S:k \ d_high \ Turfgrass_2 k \ d_low \ Groundcover = 0.5*S:k \ d_low \ Groundcover k \ d_low \ Groundcove r_2 = 0.5*S:k \ d_low \ Groundcover_2 k \ d_low \ Mixed = 0.6*S:k \ d_low \ Mixed k \ d_low \ Mixed_2 = 0.6*S:k \ d_low \ Mixed_2 k \ d_low \ Shrubs = 0.5*S:k \ d_low \ Shrubs k \ d_low \ Shrubs_2 = 0.5*S:k \ d_low \ Shrubs_2 k \ d_low \ Trees = 0.5*S:k \ d_low \ Trees k \ d_low \ Trees_2 = 0.5*S:k \ d_lo w \ Trees_2 k \ d_low \ Turfgrass = 0.6*S:k \ d_low \ Turfgrass k \ d_low \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.6*S:k \ d_low \ Turfgrass_2 k \ L_Groundcover = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Groundcover+k \ s_average \ Groundcover+k \ s_high \ Groundcover)*(k \ d_low \ Groundcover+k \ d_average \ Grou ndcover+k \ d_high \ Groundcove r)*(k \ mc_low \ Groundcover+k \ mc_average \ Groundcover+k \ mc_high \ Groundcover) k \ L_Groundcover_2 = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Groundcover_2+k \ s_average \ Groundcover_2+k \ s_high \ Groundcover_2)*(k \ d_low \ Groundcover_2+k \ d_ave rage \ Groundcover_2+k \ d_high \ Groundcover_2)*(k \ mc_low \ Gr oundcover_2+k \ mc_average \ Groundcover_2+k \ mc_high \ Gr oundcover_2) k \ L_Mixed = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Mixed+k \ s_average \ Mixed+k \ s_high \ Mixed)*(k \ d_low \ Mixed+k \ d_average \ Mixed+k \ d_high \ Mixed)*(k \ mc_lo w \ Mixed+k \ mc_average \ Mixed+k \ mc_high \ Mixed) k \ L_Mixed_2 = ET \ 0*(k \ s_l ow \ Mixed_2+k \ s_average \ Mixed_2+k \ s_high \ Mixed_2)*(k \ d_low \ Mixed_2+k \ d_average \ Mixed_2+k \ d_high \ Mix ed_2)*(k \ mc_low \ Mixed_2+k \ mc_average \ Mixed_2+k \ mc_high \ Mixed_2) k \ L_Shrubs = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Shrubs+k \ s_average \ Shrubs+k \ s_high \ Shrubs)*(k \ d_low \ Shrubs+k \ d_aver age \ Shrubs+k \ d_high \ Shrubs)*(k \ mc_low \ Shrubs+k \ mc_average \ Shrubs+k \ mc_high \ Shrubs) k \ L_Shrubs_2 = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Shrubs_2+k \ s_average \ Shrubs_2+k \ s_high \ Shrubs_2)*(k \ d_low \ Shrubs_2+k \ d_average \ Shrubs_2+k \ d_hig h \ Shrubs_2)*(k \ mc_low \ Shrubs_2+k \ mc_average \ Shrub s_2+k \ mc_high \ Shrubs_2) k \ L_Trees = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Trees+k \ s_average \ Trees+k \ s_high \ Trees)*(k \ d_low \ Trees+k \ d_average \ Trees+k \ d_high \ Trees)*(k \ mc_low \ Trees+k \ mc_average \ Trees+k \ mc_high \ Trees)

PAGE 150

140 A ppendix B (Continued) k \ L_Trees_2 = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Trees_2+k \ s_a verage \ Trees_2+k \ s_high \ Trees_2)*(k \ d_low \ Trees_2+k \ d_average \ Trees_2+k \ d_high \ Trees _2)*(k \ mc_low \ Trees_2+k \ mc_average \ Trees_2+k \ mc_high \ Trees_2) k \ L_Turfgrass = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Turfgrass+k \ s_average \ Turfgrass+k \ s_high \ Turfgrass)*(k \ d_low \ Turfgrass+k \ d_avera ge \ Turfgrass+k \ d_high \ Turfgrass)*(k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass+k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass+k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass) k \ L_Turfgrass_2 = ET \ 0*(k \ s_low \ Turfgrass_2+k \ s_average \ Turfgrass_2+k \ s_high \ Turfgrass_2)*(k \ d_low \ Turfgrass_2+k \ d_average \ Turfgrass _2+k \ d_high \ Turfgrass_2)*(k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass_2+k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass_2+k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass_2) k \ mc_average \ Groundcover = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Groundcover k \ mc_average \ Groundcover_2 = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Groundcover_2 k \ mc_average \ Mixed = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Mixed k \ mc_average \ Mixed_2 = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Mixed_2 k \ mc_average \ Shrubs = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Shrubs k \ mc_average \ Shrubs_2 = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Shrubs_2 k \ mc_average \ Trees = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Trees k \ mc_average \ Trees_2 = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Trees_2 k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass_2 = 1.0*S:k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass_2 k \ mc_high \ Groundcover = 1.2*S:k \ mc_high \ Groundcover k \ mc_high \ Groundcover_2 = 1.2*S:k \ mc_high \ Groundcover_2 k \ mc_high \ Mixed = 1.4*S:k \ mc_high \ Mixed k \ mc_high \ Mixed_2 = 1.4*S:k \ mc_high \ Mixed_2 k \ mc_high \ Shrubs = 1.3*S:k \ mc_high \ Shrubs k \ mc_high \ Shrubs_2 = 1.3*S:k \ mc_high \ Shrubs_2 k \ mc_high \ Trees = 1.4*S:k \ mc_high \ Trees k \ mc_high \ Trees_2 = 1.4*S:k \ mc_high \ Trees_2 k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass = 1.2*S:k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass_ 2 = 1.2*S:k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass_2 k \ mc_low \ Groundcover = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Groundcover k \ mc_low \ Groundcover_2 = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Groundcover_2 k \ mc_low \ Mixed = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Mixed k \ mc_low \ Mixed_2 = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Mixed_2 k \ mc_low \ Shrubs = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Shrubs k \ mc_low \ Shrubs_2 = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Shrubs_2 k \ mc_low \ Trees = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Trees k \ mc_low \ Trees_2 = 0.5*S:k \ mc_low \ Trees_2 k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass = 0.8*S:k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.8*S:k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass_2 k \ s_average \ Groundcover = 0.5*S:k \ s_ average \ Groundcover k \ s_average \ Groundcover_2 = 0.5*S:k \ s_average \ Groundcover_2 k \ s_average \ Mixed = 0.5*S:k \ s_average \ Mixed k \ s_average \ Mixed_2 = 0.5*S:k \ s_average \ Mixed_2 k \ s_average \ Shrubs = 0.5*S:k \ s_average \ Shrubs k \ s_average \ Shrubs_2 = 0.5*S:k \ s_avera ge \ Shrubs_2 k \ s_average \ Trees = 0.5*S:k \ s_average \ Trees k \ s_average \ Trees_2 = 0.5*S:k \ s_average \ Trees_2 k \ s_average \ Turfgrass = 0.7*S:k \ s_average \ Turfgrass k \ s_average \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.7*S:k \ s_average \ Turfgrass_2 k \ s_high \ Groundcover = 0.7*S:k \ s_high \ Ground cover k \ s_high \ Groundcover_2 = 0.7*S:k \ s_high \ Groundcover_2 k \ s_high \ Mixed = 0.9*S:k \ s_high \ Mixed k \ s_high \ Mixed_2 = 0.9*S:k \ s_high \ Mixed_2 k \ s_high \ Shrubs = 0.7*S:k \ s_high \ Shrubs k \ s_high \ Shrubs_2 = 0.7*S:k \ s_high \ Shrubs_2 k \ s_high \ Trees = 0.9*S:k \ s_high \ Trees k \ s_high \ Trees_2 = 0.9*S:k \ s_high \ Trees_2 k \ s_high \ Turfgrass = 0.8*S:k \ s_high \ Turfgrass k \ s_high \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.8*S:k \ s_high \ Turfgrass_2 k \ s_low \ Groundcover = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Groundcover k \ s_low \ Groundcover_2 = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Groundcover_2 k \ s_low \ Mixe d = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Mixed k \ s_low \ Mixed_2 = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Mixed_2 k \ s_low \ Shrubs = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Shrubs

PAGE 151

141 A ppendix B (Continued) k \ s_low \ Shrubs_2 = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Shrubs_2 k \ s_low \ Trees = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Trees k \ s_low \ Trees_2 = 0.2*S:k \ s_low \ Trees_2 k \ s_low \ Turf grass = 0.6*S:k \ s_low \ Turfgrass k \ s_low \ Turfgrass_2 = 0.6*S:k \ s_low \ Turfgrass_2 N:A \ H_Daily_Uses_for_Showers = 0.05 N:A \ Sb_Daily_Uses_for_Bathroom_Sinks = 3 N:A \ Sk_Daily_Uses_for_Kitchen_Sinks = 1 N:A \ T_Female_Daily_Uses_for_Toilets_used_byFemales = 3 N:A \ T_Male_Daily_Uses_for_Toilets_used_by_Males = 1 N:A \ U_Female_Daily_Uses_for_Urinals_used_byFemales = 0 N:A \ U_Male_Daily_Uses_for_Urinals_used_by_Males = 2 Ocp:Full_Full_time_Occupants = 50 Ocp:Other_1_Number_of_occupants = 0 Ocp:Other_2_Number_of_occupants = 0 Ocp:Part_Part_time_Occupants = 20 P:Base \ H_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Showers = (V:Base \ H/V:BaseTotal)*100 P:Base \ I_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Irrigation = (V:Base \ I/V:BaseTotal)*100 P:Base \ Sb_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Bathroom_Sinks = (V:Base \ Sb/V:BaseTotal)*100 P:Base \ Sk_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks = (V:Base \ Sk/V:BaseTotal)*100 P:Base \ Total = P:Base \ H_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Showers+P:Base \ I_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Irrigation+P:Base \ Sb_Vol_ Percent_of_All_Water_for_Bath room_Sinks+P:Base \ Sk_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks+P:Base \ T_Vol_Pe rcent_of_All_Water_for_Toilets+P:Base \ U_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Urinals P:Base \ T_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Toilets = (V:Base \ T/V:BaseTotal)*100 P:Base \ U_Vol_Percent_of_A ll_Water_for_Urinals = (V:Base \ U/V:BaseTotal)*100 P:Dsgn \ H_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Showers = (V:Dsgn \ H/V:Dsgn \ Total)*100 P:Dsgn \ I_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Irrigation = (V:Dsgn \ I/V:Dsgn \ Total)*100 P:Dsgn \ Sb_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Bathroom_Sin ks = (V:Dsgn \ Sb/V:Dsgn \ Total)*100 P:Dsgn \ Sk_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks = (V:Dsgn \ Sk/V:Dsgn \ Total)*100 P:Dsgn \ Total = P:Dsgn \ H_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Showers+P:Dsgn \ I_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Irrigation+P:Dsgn \ Sb_Vol_ Percent_of_All _Water_for_Bathroom_Sinks+P:Dsgn \ Sk_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks+P:Dsgn \ T_Vol_P ercent_of_All_Water_for_Toilets+P:Dsgn \ U_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Urinals P:Dsgn \ T_Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Toilets = (V:Dsgn \ T/V:Dsgn \ Total)*100 P:Dsgn \ U_ Vol_Percent_of_All_Water_for_Urinals = (V:Dsgn \ U/V:Dsgn \ Total)*100 P:Pot \ All_Water_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_All_Sectors = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ Total/V:BaseTotal) P:Pot \ H_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Showers = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ H/V:Base \ H) P:Pot \ I_Flow _Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Irrigation = IF (Q:Base \ I=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:P_Dsgn \ I/Q:Base \ I)) P:Pot \ I_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Irrigation = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ I/V:Base \ I) P:Pot \ Sb_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Bathroom_Sinks = IF ( Q:Base \ Sb=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:P_Dsgn \ Sb/Q:Base \ Sb)) P:Pot \ Sb_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Bathroom_Sinks = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ Sb/V:Base \ Sb) P:Pot \ Sk_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ Sk/V:Base \ Sk) P:Pot \ Swge_Vol_Percen t_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Swge_Conveyance = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ Swge/V:Base \ Swge) P:Pot \ T_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Toilets = IF (Q:Base \ T=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:P_Dsgn \ T/Q:Base \ T)) P:Pot \ T_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Toilets = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ T/V:Base \ T) P:Pot \ U_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Urinals = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ U/V:Base \ U) P:Pot \ Wter_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Potable_Water_for_Water_Fixtures = IF (Q:Base \ Wter=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:P_Dsgn \ Wter/Q:Base \ Wter)) P:Pot \ Wter_Vo_Percent_Red_in_P otable_Water_for_All_Water_Fixtures = 1 (V:P_Dsgn \ Wter/V:Base \ Wter) P:Total \ All_Water_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_All_Sectors = 1 (V:Dsgn \ Total/V:BaseTotal) P:Total \ All_Watr_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_All_Sectors = IF (Q:Base \ Total=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ Total/Q:Base \ Total)) P:Total \ H_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Showers = IF (Q:Base \ H=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ H/Q:Base \ H))

PAGE 152

142 A ppendix B (Continued) P:Total \ H_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Showers = 1 (V:Dsgn \ H/V:Base \ H ) P:Total \ I_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Irrigation = IF (Q:Base \ I=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ I/Q:Base \ I)) P:Total \ I_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Irrigation = 1 (V:Dsgn \ I/V:Base \ I) P:Total \ Sb_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Bathroom_Si nks = IF (Q:Base \ Sb=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ Sb/Q:Base \ Sb)) P:Total \ Sb_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Bathroom_Sinks = 1 (V:Dsgn \ Sb/V:Base \ Sb) P:Total \ Sk_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks = IF (Q:Base \ Sk=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q: Dsgn \ Sk/Q:Base \ Sk)) P:Total \ Sk_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Kitchen_Sinks = 1 (V:Dsgn \ Sk/V:Base \ Sk) P:Total \ Swge_Flo_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Sewage_Conveyance = IF Q:Base \ Swge=0 THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ Swge/Q:Base \ Swge)) P:Total \ Swge_Vol_P ercent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Swge_Conveyance = 1 (V:Dsgn \ Swge/V:Base \ Swge) P:Total \ T_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Toilets = IF (Q:Base \ T=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ T/Q:Base \ T)) P:Total \ T_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Toilets = 1 (V:Dsgn \ T/V :Base \ T) P:Total \ U_Flow_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Urinals = IF (Q:Base \ U=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ U/Q:Base \ U)) P:Total \ U_Vol_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_Urinals = 1 (V:Dsgn \ U/V:Base \ U) P:Total \ Wter_Fl_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_All_Water_ Fixtures = IF (Q:Base \ Wter=0) THEN 0 ELSE (1 (Q:Dsgn \ Wter/Q:Base \ Wter)) P:Total \ Wter_Vo_Percent_Red_in_Total_Water_for_All_Water_Fixtures = 1 (V:Dsgn \ Wter/V:Base \ Wter) Pct:M_Percent_Male_Occupants = 0.5 Percent_FTE_for_Full_time_Occupants = T:Full_Ave rage_hours_per_day/8 Percent_FTE_for_Other_Occupants_1 = T:Other_1_Average_hours_per_day/8 Percent_FTE_for_Other_Occupants_2 = T:Other_2_Average_hours_per_day/8 Percent_FTE_for_Part_time_Occupants = T:Part_Average_hours_per_day/8 Q:A \ H_Base_Baseline_Shower _Flowrate = 2.5 Q:A \ H_Dsgn_Design_Shower_Flowrate = 2.5 Q:A \ Sb_Base_Baseline_Bathroom_SinkFlowrate = 2.5 Q:A \ Sb_Dsgn_Design_Bathroom_SinkFlowrate = 2.5 Q:A \ Sk_Base_Baseline_Kitchen_SinkFlowrate = 2.5 Q:A \ Sk_Dsgn_Design_Kitchen_SinkFlowrate = 2.5 Q:Base \ H_B aseline_Demand_for_Showers = ((Total_FTE*N:A \ H_Daily_Uses_for_Showers*(T:H \ Base_Baseline_Duration_of_Shower_Event/60)*Q:A \ H_Base_Baselin e_Shower_Flowrate)*S:Baseline_Shower_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Baseline_Shower_Demand_Override_Value*S:Baseline_Shower _Demand_Override_Value) Q:Base \ Sb_Baseline_Demand_for_Bathroom_Sinks = ((Total_FTE*N:A \ Sb_Daily_Uses_for_Bathroom_Sinks*(T:Base \ Sb_Baseline_Duration_of_Bathroom_Sink_Event/60)*Q:A \ Sb_Base_Baseline_Bathroom_SinkFlowrate)*S:Baseline_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Calc ulated_Value) + (Baseline_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value*S:Baseline_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Base \ Sk_Baseline_Demand_for_Kitchen_Sinks = ((Total_FTE*N:A \ Sk_Daily_Uses_for_Kitchen_Sinks*(T:Sk \ Base_Baseline_Duration_of_Kitchen_Sink_Event/6 0)*Q:A \ Sk_ Base_Baseline_Kitchen_SinkFlowrate)*S:Baseline_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Baseline_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value*S:Baseline_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Base \ Swge_Basline_Sewage_Conveyance = Q:Base \ T__Baseline_Demand_f or_All_Toilets+Q:Base \ U_Baseline_Demand_for_All_Urinals Q:Base \ Total_Baseline_Total_Water_Use_All_Potable_Water = Q:Base \ I_Baseline_Demand_for_Irrigation_TPWA__and_TWA+Q:Base \ Wter_Baseline_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_All_Pot able_Water Q:Base \ T_Female_Baseline_F lowrate_for_Female_Toilets = Total_FTE*N:A \ T_Female_Daily_Uses_for_Toilets_used_byFemales*V:A \ T_Base_Baseline_Toilet_Application_Volume*( 1 Pct:M_Percent_Male_Occupants)

PAGE 153

143 A ppendix B (Continued) Q:Base \ T_Male_Baseline_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets = Total_FTE*N :A \ T_Male_Daily_Uses_for_Toilets_used_by_Males*V:A \ T_Base_Baseline_Toilet_Application_Volume*Pct: M_Percent_Male_Occupants Q:Base \ T__Baseline_Demand_for_All_Toilets = ((Q:Base \ T_Female_Baseline_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets+Q:Base \ T_Male_Baseline_Flowrate_for _Male_Toilets)*S:Ba seline_Toilet_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Baseline_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value*S:Baseline_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Base \ U_Baseline_Demand_for_All_Urinals = ((Q:Base \ U_Female_Baseline_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals+Q:Base \ U_Male_Base line_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals)*S:B aseline_Urinal_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Baseline_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value*S:Baseline_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Base \ U_Female_Baseline_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals = Total_FTE*N:A \ U_Female_Daily_Uses_for_Urinal s_used_byFemales*V:A \ U_Base_Baseline_Urinal_Application_Volume* (1 Pct:M_Percent_Male_Occupants) Q:Base \ U_Male_Baseline_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals = Total_FTE*N:A \ U_Male_Daily_Uses_for_Urinals_used_by_Males*V:A \ U_Base_Baseline_Urinal_Application_Volume*Pct: M _Percent_Male_Occupants Q:Base \ Wter_Baseline_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_All_Potable_Water = Q:Base \ Sb_Baseline_Demand_for_Bathroom_Sinks+Q:Base \ Sk_Baseline_Demand_for_Kitchen_Sinks+Q:Base \ T__Bas eline_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Base \ U_Baseline_Demand_for_All_Urin als+Q:Dsgn \ H_Design_Demand_for_Showers Q:Dsgn \ C_Design_Demand_for_Cooling = 0 Q:Dsgn \ H_Design_Demand_for_Showers = ((Total_FTE*N:A \ H_Daily_Uses_for_Showers*(T:H \ Dsgn_Design_Duration_of_Shower_Event/60)*Q:A \ H_Dsgn_Design_ Shower_Flowrate)*S:Design_Shower_Dem and_Calculated_Value) + (Design_Shower_Demand_Override_Value*S:Design_Shower_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Dsgn \ Sb_Design_Demand_for_Bathroom_Sinks = ((Total_FTE*N:A \ Sb_Daily_Uses_for_Bathroom_Sinks*(T:Dsgn \ Sb_Design_Duration_of_Bathroom_Sink_Event/60)*Q:A \ Sb_D sgn_Design_Bathroom_SinkFlowrate)*S:Design_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Design_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value*S:Design_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Dsgn \ Sk_Design_Demand_for_Kitchen_Sinks = ((Total_FTE*N:A \ Sk_Daily_Uses_for_Kitc hen_Sinks*(T:Sk \ Dsgn_Design_Duration_of_Kitchen_Sink_Event/60)*Q:A \ Sk_D sgn_Design_Kitchen_SinkFlowrate)*S:Design_KItchen_Sink_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Design_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value*S:Design_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Dsgn \ Swge_Des ign_Sewage_Conveyance = Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals Q:Dsgn \ Total_Design_Total_Water_Use_All_Water = Q:Dsgn \ I_Design_Demand_for_Irrigation_Design_TWA+Q:Dsgn \ Wter_Design_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_All_Water Q: Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets = Total_FTE*N:A \ T_Female_Daily_Uses_for_Toilets_used_byFemales*V:A \ T_Dsgn_Design_Toilet_Application_Volume*(1 Pct:M_Percent_Male_Occupants) Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets = Total_FTE*N:A \ T_Ma le_Daily_Uses_for_Toilets_used_by_Males*V:A \ T_Dsgn_Design_Toilet_Application_Volume*Pct:M _Percent_Male_Occupants Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets = ((Q:Dsgn \ T_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ T_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Toilets)* S:Desig n_Toilet_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Design_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value*S:Design_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_Urinals = ((Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals+Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Ur inals)*S:Desi gn_Urinal_Demand_Calculated_Value) + (Design_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value*S:Design_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value) Q:Dsgn \ U_Female_Design_Flowrate_for_Female_Urinals = Total_FTE*N:A \ U_Female_Daily_Uses_for_Urinals_used_byFemales*V:A \ U_Dsgn_Desig n_Urinal_Application_Volume*( 1 Pct:M_Percent_Male_Occupants) Q:Dsgn \ U_Male_Design_Flowrate_for_Male_Urinals = Total_FTE*N:A \ U_Male_Daily_Uses_for_Urinals_used_by_Males*V:A \ U_Dsgn_Design_Urinal_Application_Volume*Pct: M_Percent_Male_Occupants

PAGE 154

144 A ppendix B (Con tinued) Q:Dsgn \ Wter_Design_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_All_Water = Q:Dsgn \ H_Design_Demand_for_Showers+Q:Dsgn \ Sb_Design_Demand_for_Bathroom_Sinks+Q:Dsgn \ Sk_Design_Dema nd_for_Kitchen_Sinks+Q:Dsgn \ T__Design_Demand_for_All_Toilets+Q:Dsgn \ U_Design_Flowrate_for_All_ Urinals Q:I \ Total = Q:Pond \ Irrigation_pond_in+Q:P \ I_Potable_water_for_Irrigation+Q:Rain \ Irrigation_rain_in+Q:Reclaim \ Irrigation_reclaimed_ in Q:P_Dsgn \ Swge_Sewage_Conveyance_from_Potable_Water = Q:P \ T_Potable_water_for_All_Toilets+Q:P \ U_Potable_water_for_Al l_Urinals Q:P_Dsgn \ Total_Design_Total_Water_Use_Potable_Water = Q:P \ I_Potable_water_for_Irrigation+Q:P_Dsgn \ Wter_Design_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_Potable_Water Q:P_Dsgn \ Wter_Design_Water_Use_for_Fixtures_Potable_Water = Q:P \ H_Potable_water_to_Showers+Q:P \ Sb_P otable_water_to_Bathroom_Sinks+Q:P \ Sk_Potable_water_to_Kitchen_Sin ks+Q:P \ T_Potable_water_for_All_Toilets+Q:P \ U_Potable_water_for_All_Urinals Q:W_reclaimed_water = 0 Rainfall_Flow_into_Cistern_Override_Value = 50 S:Baseline_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Calculated_V alue = 1 S:Baseline_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Shower_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Shower_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Ba seline_Toilet_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Urinal_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Baseline_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Base_Irrigation_Demand_Calculated_Vlaue = 1 S:Base_Irrigation_Demand_Override_ Value = 1 S:Design_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Design_Bathroom_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Design_Irrigation_Demand_Calculated_Vlaue = 1 S:Design_Irrigation_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Design_KItchen_Sink_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S: Design_Kitchen_Sink_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Design_Shower_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Design_Shower_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Design_Toilet_Demand_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Design_Toilet_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:Design_Urinal_Demand_Calculated_Valu e = 1 S:Design_Urinal_Demand_Override_Value = 1 S:FTE:Constant = 1 S:FTE:Varying = 1 S:IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover = 1 S:IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Groundcover = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Mixed = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:IE_Drip \ S hrubs = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Trees = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Trees_2 = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Turfgrass = 1 S:IE_Drip \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Trees = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Trees_2 = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass = 1 S:IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Mixed = 1

PAGE 155

145 A ppendix B (Continued) S:k \ d_average \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ d_av erage \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Trees = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ d_average \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ d_h igh \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Trees = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ d_high \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Trees = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ d_low \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Trees = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ mc_average \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Sh rubs_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Trees = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ mc_high \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Trees = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ mc_low \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Trees = 1

PAGE 156

146 A ppendix B (Continued) S:k \ s_average \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ s_average \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Shrubs_2 = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Trees = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ s_high \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Groundcover = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Groundcover_2 = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Mixed = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Mixed_2 = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Shrubs = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Shrubs _2 = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Trees = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Trees_2 = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Turfgrass = 1 S:k \ s_low \ Turfgrass_2 = 1 S:Pond_for_Irrigation = 1 S:Pond_for_Toilets_Female = 1 S:Pond_for_Toilets_Male = 1 S:Pond_for_urinals_Female = 1 S:Pond_for_Urinals_Male = 1 S:Rainfall_Flow _into_Cistern_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Rainfall_Flow_into_Cistern_Override_Value = 1 S:Rain_for_Irrigation = 1 S:Rain_for_Toilets_Female = 1 S:Rain_for_Toilets_Male = 1 S:Rain_for_urinals_Female = 1 S:Rain_for_urinals_Male = 1 S:Reclaim \ Irrigation = 1 S:Recl aim_for_cooling = 1 S:Reclaim_for_Toilets_Female = 1 S:Reclaim_for_Toilets_Male = 1 S:Reclaim_for_urinals_Female = 1 S:Reclaim_for_Urinals_Male = 1 S:R \ C_Rainwater_for_Cooling = 1 S:Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond_Calculated_Value = 1 S:Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond _Override_Value = 1 S:S \ H_to_Sewer = 1 S:S \ Sb_to_Sewer = 1 S:S \ Sk_to_Sewer = 1 S:T \ Black_Female = 1 S:T \ Black_Male = 1 S:T \ Sewer_Female = 1 S:T \ Sewer_Male = 1 S:U \ black_Female = 1 S:U \ Black_Male = 1 S:U \ Sewer_Female = 1 S:U \ Sewer_Male = 1 S:W \ C_Stormwater_ for_Cooling = 1 S:Y \ H_to_Treatment = 1 S:Y \ Sb_to_Treatment = 1 S:Y \ Sk_to_Treatment = 1 S:Y_for_Cooling = 1 S:Y_for_Irrigation = 1 S:Y_for_Toilets_Female = 1 S:Y_for_Toilets_Male = 1 S:Y_for_urinals_Female = 1

PAGE 157

147 A ppendix B (Continued) S:Y_for_urinals_Male = 1 Stormwater_Flow_into_Pond_Override_Value = 50 T:Base \ Sb_Baseline_Duration_of_Bathroom_Sink_Event = 15 T:Dsgn \ Sb_Design_Duration_of_Bathroom_Sink_Event = 15 T:Full_Average_hours_per_day = 8 T:H \ Base_Baseline_Duration_of_Shower_Event = 300 T:H \ Dsgn_Design_ Duration_of_Shower_Event = 300 T:Other_1_Average_hours_per_day = 0 T:Other_2_Average_hours_per_day = 0 T:Part_Average_hours_per_day = 4 T:Sk \ Base_Baseline_Duration_of_Kitchen_Sink_Event = 15 T:Sk \ Dsgn_Design_Duration_of_Kitchen_Sink_Event = 15 Total_FTE = FTE:_Constant*S:FTE:Constant+FTE_Varying*S:FTE:Varying TPWA \ Groundcover_2 = k \ L_Groundcover_2*Area \ Groundcover_2*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Drip \ Groundcover_2+IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover_2) TPWA \ Mixed_2 = k \ L_Mixed_2*Area \ Mixed_2*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Sprink ler \ Mixed_2+IE_Drip \ Mixed_2) TPWA \ Shrubs_2 = k \ L_Shrubs_2*Area \ Shrubs_2*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Drip \ Shrubs_2+IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs_2) TPWA \ Trees_2 = k \ L_Trees_2*Area \ Trees_2*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Drip \ Trees_2+IE_Sprinkler \ Trees_2) TPWA \ Turfgrass_2 = k \ L _Turfgrass_2*Area \ Turfgrass_2*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass_2+IE_Drip \ Turfgrass_2) TWA \ Groundcover = k \ L_Groundcover*Area \ Groundcover*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Drip \ Groundcover+IE \ Sprinkler \ Groundcover) TWA \ Mixed = k \ L_Mixed*Area \ Mixed*Conver sion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Sprinkler \ Mixed+IE_Drip \ Mixed) TWA \ Shrubs = k \ L_Shrubs*Area \ Shrubs*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Drip \ Shrubs+IE_Sprinkler \ Shrubs) TWA \ Trees = k \ L_Trees*Area \ Trees*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Drip \ Trees+IE_Sprinkler \ Trees) TWA \ Turfgrass = k \ L_Tur fgrass*Area \ Turfgrass*Conversion_gal \ sf \ in/(IE_Sprinkler \ Turfgrass+IE_Drip \ Turfgrass) V:A \ T_Base_Baseline_Toilet_Application_Volume = 1.6 V:A \ T_Dsgn_Design_Toilet_Application_Volume = 1.6 V:A \ U_Base_Baseline_Urinal_Application_Volume = 1 V:A \ U_Dsgn_Design_ Urinal_Application_Volume = 1 V:flush_First_flush_volume = 0 V:G \ Pnd_Stormwater_Volume_in_Pond = V:Storm \ Pond V:Max \ Cis_Maximum_Cistern_Volume = 1000000 V:Max \ Pnd_Maximum_Pond_Volume = 1000 V:R \ Cis_Rainwater_Volume_in_Cistern = V:Rain \ Cistern V:Treat_Volum e_of_Treated_Water_for_Reuse = V:Treat_Treatment ET \ 0 = GRAPH(TIME) (0.00, 0.00), (3.10, 0.00), (6.20, 0.00), (9.30, 0.00), (12.4, 0.00), (15.5, 0.00), (18.6, 0.00), (21.7, 0.00), (24.8, 0.00), (27.9, 0.00), (31.0, 0.00) FTE_Varying = GRAPH(DAYS) (0.00, 10 0), (1.00, 100), (2.00, 100), (3.00, 100), (4.00, 100), (5.00, 0.00), (6.00, 0.00), (7.00, 100), (8.00, 100), (9.00, 100), (10.0, 100), (11.0, 100), (12.0, 0.00), (13.0, 0.00), (14.0, 100), (15.0, 100), (16.0, 0.00), (17.0, 0.00), (18.0, 0.00 ), (19.0, 0.00 ), (20.0, 0.00), (21.0, 0.00), (22.0, 0.00), (23.0, 0.00), (24.0, 0.00), (25.0, 0.00), (26.0, 0.00), (27.0, 0.00), (28.0, 0.00), (29.0, 0.00), (30.0, 0.00), (31.0, 0.00), (32.0, 0.00), (33.0, 0.00), (34.0, 0.00), (35.0, 0.00), (36.0, 0.00), (37.0, 0.00), ( 38.0, 0.00), (39.0, 0.00), (40.0, 0.00), (41.0, 0.00), (42.0, 0.00), (43.0, 0.00), (44.0, 0.00), (45.0, 0.00), (46.0, 0.00), (47.0, 0.00), (48.0, 0.00), (49.0, 0.00), (50.0, 0.00), (51.0, 0.00), (52.0, 0.00), (53.0, 0.00), (54.0, 0.00), (55.0, 0.00), (56.0 0.00), (57.0, 0.00), (58.0, 0.00), (59.0, 0.00), (60.0, 0.00), (61.0, 0.00), (62.0, 0.00), (63.0, 0.00), (64.0, 0.00), (65.0, 0.00), (66.0, 0.00), (67.0, 0.00), (68.0, 0.00), (69.0, 0.00), (70.0, 0.00), (71.0, 0.00), (72.0, 0.00), (73.0, 0.00), (74.0, 0. 00), (75.0, 0.00), (76.0, 0.00), (77.0, 0.00), (78.0, 0.00), (79.0, 0.00), (80.0, 0.00), (81.0, 0.00), (82.0, 0.00), (83.0, 0.00), (84.0, 0.00), (85.0, 0.00), (86.0, 0.00), (87.0, 0.00), (88.0, 0.00), (89.0, 0.00), (90.0, 0.00), (91.0, 0.00), (92.0, 0.00), (93.0, 0.00), (94.0, 0.00), (95.0, 0.00), (96.0, 0.00), (97.0, 0.00), (98.0, 0.00), (99.0, 0.00), (100, 0.00), (101, 0.00), (102, 0.00), (103, 0.00), (10 4, 0.00), (105, 0.00), (106, 0.00), (107, 0.00), (108, 0.00), (109, 0.00), (110, 0.00), (111, 0.00), ( 112, 0.00), (113, 0.00), (114, 0.00), (115, 0.00), (116, 0.00), (117, 0.00), (118, 0.00), (119, 0.00), (120, 0.00), (121, 0.00), (122, 0.00), (123, 0.00), ( 124, 0.00), (125, 0.00), (126, 0.00), (127, 0.00), (128, 0.00), (129, 0.00), (130, 0.00), (131, 0.00 ), (132, 0.00), (133, 0.00), (134, 0.00), (135, 0.00), (136, 0.00), (137, 0.00), (138, 0.00), (139, 0.00), (140, 0.00), (141, 0.00), (142, 0.00), (143, 0.00), ( 144, 0.00), (145, 0.00), (146, 0.00), (147, 0.00), (148, 0.00), (149, 0.00), (150, 0.00), (151, 0.00), (152, 0.00), (153, 0.00), (154, 0.00), (155, 0.00), (156, 0.00), (157, 0.00), (158, 0.00), (159, 0.00), (160, 0.00), (161, 0.00), (162, 0.00), (163, 0.00), ( 164, 0.00), (165, 0.00), (166, 0.00), (167, 0.00), (168, 0.00), (169, 0.00), (170, 0.00), (1 71, 0.00), (172, 0.00), (173, 0.00), (174, 0.00), (175, 0.00), (176, 0.00), (177, 0.00), (178, 0.00), (179, 0.00), (180, 0.00), (181, 0.00), (182, 0.00), (183, 0.00), ( 184, 0.00), (185, 0.00), (186, 0.00), (187, 0.00), (188, 0.00), (189, 0.00), (190, 0.00) (191, 0.00), (192, 0.00), (193, 0.00), (194, 0.00), (195, 0.00), (196, 0.00), (197, 0.00), (198, 0.00), (199, 0.00), (200, 0.00), (201, 0.00), (202, 0.00), (203, 0.00), ( 204,

PAGE 158

148 Appendix B ( Continued ) 0.00), (205, 0.00), (206, 0.00), (207, 0.00), (208, 0. 00), (209, 0.00), (210, 0.00), (211, 0.00), (212, 0.00), (213, 0.00), (214, 0.00), (215, 0.00), (216, 0.00), (217, 0.00), (218, 0.00), (219, 0.00), (220, 0.00), (221, 0.00), (222, 0.00), (223, 0.00), ( 224, 0.00), (225, 0.00), (226, 0.00), (227, 0.00), (228 0.00), (229, 0.00), (230, 0.00), (231, 0.00), (232, 0.00), (233, 0.00), (234, 0.00), (235, 0.00), (236, 0.00), (237, 0.00), (238, 0.00), (239, 0.00), (240, 0.00), (241, 0.00), (242, 0.00), (243, 0.00), ( 244, 0.00), (245, 0.00), (246, 0.00), (247, 0.00), (248, 0.00), (249, 0.00), (250, 0.00), (251, 0.00), (252, 0.00), (253, 0.00), (254, 0.00), (255, 0.00), (256, 0.00), (257, 0.00), (258, 0.00), (259, 0.00), (260, 0.00), (261, 0.00), (262, 0.00), (263, 0.00), ( 264, 0.00), (265, 0.00), (266, 0.00), (267, 0. 00), (268, 0.00), (269, 0.00), (270, 0.00), (271, 0.00), (272, 0.00), (273, 0.00), (274, 0.00), (275, 0.00), (276, 0.00), (277, 0.00), (278, 0.00), (279, 0.00), (280, 0.00), (281, 0.00), (282, 0.00), (283, 0.00), ( 284, 0.00), (285, 0.00), (286, 0.00), (287 0.00), (288, 0.00), (289, 0.00), (290, 0.00), (291, 0.00), (292, 0.00), (293, 0.00), (294, 0.00), (295, 0.00), (296, 0.00), (297, 0.00), (298, 0.00), (299, 0.00), (300, 0.00), (301, 0.00), (302, 0.00), (303, 0.00), ( 304, 0.00), (305, 0.00), (306, 0.00), (307, 0.00), (308, 0.00), (309, 0.00), (310, 0.00), (311, 0.00), (312, 0.00), (313, 0.00), (314, 0.00), (315, 0.00), (316, 0.00), (317, 0.00), (318, 0.00), (319, 0.00), (320, 0.00), (321, 0.00), (322, 0.00), (323, 0.00), ( 324, 0.00), (325, 0.00), (326, 0.0 0), (327, 0.00), (328, 0.00), (329, 0.00), (330, 0.00), (331, 0.00), (332, 0.00), (333, 0.00), (334, 0.00), (335, 0.00), (336, 0.00), (337, 0.00), (338, 0.00), (339, 0.00), (340, 0.00), (341, 0.00), (342, 0.00), (343, 0.00), ( 344, 0.00), (345, 0.00), (346, 0.00), (347, 0.00), (348, 0.00), (349, 0.00), (350, 0.00), (351, 0.00), (352, 0.00), (353, 0.00), (354, 0.00), (355, 0.00), (356, 0.00), (357, 0.00), (358, 0.00), (359, 0.00), (360, 0.00), (361, 0.00), (362, 0.00), (363, 0.00), ( 364, 0.00), (365, 0.00) R_ Rainfall = GRAPH(TIME) (0.00, 0.00), (8.10, 0.00), (16.2, 0.00), (24.3, 0.00), (32.4, 0.00), (40.5, 0.00), (48.6, 0.00), (56.7, 0.00), (64.8, 0.00), (72.9, 0.00), (81.0, 0.00)

PAGE 159

1 49 Appendix C: HOBOLink Website FIGURE C 1 : HOBOLink website for Learning Gate.

PAGE 160

150 Appendix D : Data Output Logged by HOBO Data Logger and HOBOlink Table D1 : Raw data from sensors in mA. Time, Eastern Daylight Time Current, mA Current, mA Current, mA Current, mA Current, mA Current, mA Current, mA Current, mA Toilet A Toilet B Sin k A Toilet C Sink B Sink C Toilet D Sink D 3/15/2010 9:08:41 3.995 4.01 3.995 3.971 3.99 3.995 0.909 4 3/15/2010 9:08:42 3.995 4.005 3.985 3.98 3.976 3.99 0.85 3.985 3/15/2010 9:08:43 4.015 3.98 3.98 3.98 3.98 3.98 0.786 4.015 3/15/2010 9:08:44 4.02 3. 976 3.971 3.995 3.99 3.985 0.821 3.995 3/15/2010 9:08:45 3.995 4 4.005 4 4 3.995 0.771 3.99 3/15/2010 9:08:46 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.995 3.995 3.99 0.87 3.971 3/15/2010 9:08:47 3.995 3.99 3.985 3.98 3.985 4 0.796 4.005 3/15/2010 9:08:48 4.005 3.995 3.971 4 3 .976 3.99 0.791 3.99 3/15/2010 9:08:49 3.985 4.01 3.99 4.005 3.98 3.99 0.816 3.971 3/15/2010 9:08:50 3.99 3.985 3.99 3.976 3.976 3.99 0.747 4 3/15/2010 9:08:51 3.995 4 4 3.976 3.985 3.99 0.791 3.976 3/15/2010 9:08:52 3.99 4 3.995 4 3.976 3.985 0.806 4. 005 3/15/2010 9:08:53 3.995 3.99 4 3.99 3.976 3.985 0.811 3.99 3/15/2010 9:08:54 4 3.98 4.015 3.99 3.976 3.98 0.826 3.971 3/15/2010 9:08:55 3.985 3.99 3.99 3.976 3.99 3.99 0.801 4.01 3/15/2010 9:08:56 3.985 4.01 4.01 3.985 3.976 3.99 0.821 3.98 3/15/2 010 9:08:57 3.985 3.985 3.99 3.985 4.01 3.99 0.836 3.985 3/15/2010 9:08:58 3.985 3.995 3.976 3.971 3.995 3.99 0.776 3.99 3/15/2010 9:08:59 3.985 3.99 3.985 3.99 3.98 3.98 0.776 3.985 3/15/2010 9:09:00 3.99 4.015 4.005 4.005 3.971 3.966 0.816 3.99 3/15/ 2010 9:09:01 3.985 3.995 3.976 3.985 3.985 3.995 0.806 4.01 3/15/2010 9:09:02 3.99 4.01 3.98 3.985 3.985 3.99 0.796 3.99 3/15/2010 9:09:03 3.99 3.995 3.98 3.985 3.99 3.98 0.826 4 3/15/2010 9:09:04 3.995 3.98 3.99 3.985 3.99 4 0.757 3.985 3/15/2010 9:09 :05 4.005 3.99 3.995 3.971 3.966 3.995 0.836 4 3/15/2010 9:09:06 3.995 3.995 4.01 3.98 3.995 3.99 0.762 3.98 3/15/2010 9:09:07 3.98 4.005 4 3.976 3.995 3.995 0.796 3.985 3/15/2010 9:09:08 3.98 4 3.99 4.005 3.976 3.98 0.786 3.99 3/15/2010 9:09:09 3.995 4.005 3.976 3.99 3.995 4.005 0.836 4.02 3/15/2010 9:09:10 4.005 3.99 3.98 3.985 3.985 3.995 0.836 4.005 3/15/2010 9:09:11 3.98 3.995 4.015 4 3.976 3.98 0.786 4 3/15/2010 9:09:12 4.005 4.025 3.985 3.99 3.995 3.98 0.796 3.995 3/15/2010 9:09:13 3.995 4.01 5 3.99 3.99 3.966 3.99 0.845 3.99 3/15/2010 9:09:14 3.99 4.005 3.976 3.995 3.98 3.995 0.781 3.99 3/15/2010 9:09:15 3.985 4 3.995 3.99 3.985 4 0.84 3.966 3/15/2010 9:09:16 3.99 3.995 3.985 3.98 3.985 3.985 0.86 3.985 3/15/2010 9:09:17 3.976 4.01 3.985 3 .99 3.99 3.98 0.821 4.01 3/15/2010 9:09:18 3.995 3.99 3.976 3.976 4 3.98 0.776 3.985 3/15/2010 9:09:19 4 4.005 3.985 3.98 3.976 3.976 0.821 4.005 3/15/2010 9:09:20 3.985 3.985 3.961 3.976 3.98 3.99 0.855 3.99 3/15/2010 9:09:21 3.971 3.995 4 4.005 3.995 3.99 0.845 3.985

PAGE 161

151 Appendix E : Filtered Event Data from Bathrooms A and B (3/17/10) Table E1 : Events for bathrooms A and B on 3/17/10. Start Time End Time Duration Volume 2:37:25 AM 2:37:35 AM 10 1.027 Toilet A 6:57:49 AM 6:58:01 AM 12 1.016 Toilet B 8:06:11 AM 8:06:24 AM 13 0.919 Toilet B 8:06:42 AM 8:06:58 AM 16 0.297 Sink B 8:15:31 AM 8:15:43 AM 12 1.209 Toilet B 8:32:00 AM 8:32:08 AM 8 0.128 Sink B 9:01:44 AM 9:01:51 AM 7 0.443 Toilet A 9:08:45 AM 9:08:51 AM 6 0.070 Sink A 10:41:43 AM 10:4 1:55 AM 12 1.103 Toilet B 11:20:07 AM 11:20:16 AM 9 0.605 Toilet B 11:20:20 AM 11:20:30 AM 10 0.164 Sink B 11:31:45 AM 11:31:56 AM 11 1.042 Toilet B 11:52:38 AM 11:52:54 AM 16 1.417 Toilet B 12:08:13 PM 12:08:27 PM 14 1.120 Toilet B 12:09:10 PM 12:09 :21 PM 11 0.176 Sink B 12:17:35 PM 12:17:46 PM 11 0.998 Toilet B 12:32:11 PM 12:32:23 PM 12 1.089 Toilet B 12:38:14 PM 12:38:28 PM 14 1.205 Toilet B 12:54:17 PM 12:54:30 PM 13 1.021 Toilet B 1:19:15 PM 1:19:27 PM 12 0.991 Toilet B 1:21:52 PM 1:22:07 PM 15 1.234 Toilet B 1:29:54 PM 1:29:59 PM 5 0.073 Sink B 1:30:49 PM 1:30:54 PM 5 0.061 Sink B 1:39:08 PM 1:39:59 PM 51 0.941 Sink B 1:41:13 PM 1:41:17 PM 4 0.059 Sink B 2:20:18 PM 2:20:26 PM 8 0.094 Sink B 2:27:15 PM 2:27:26 PM 11 1.168 Toilet A 2: 30:26 PM 2:30:39 PM 13 1.130 Toilet A 2:36:38 PM 2:36:54 PM 16 1.371 Toilet A 2:39:44 PM 2:39:56 PM 12 1.234 Toilet A 2:40:45 PM 2:40:58 PM 13 1.463 Toilet A 3:14:05 PM 3:14:16 PM 11 0.970 Toilet A 3:32:18 PM 3:32:23 PM 5 0.057 Sink B 3:41:15 PM 3:41 :27 PM 12 0.714 Toilet A 4:02:00 PM 4:02:28 PM 28 3.300 Toilet A 4:43:54 PM 4:44:08 PM 14 1.065 Toilet A 5:05:52 PM 5:06:04 PM 12 1.017 Toilet A

PAGE 162

152 Appendix F: Student Worksheet on Rainfall Collection at Learning Gate

PAGE 163

153 Appendix F (Continued)

PAGE 164

154 Append ix G: Student Worksheet on Learning Gate School Model

PAGE 165

155 Appendix G (Continued)


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 007 cr-bnu---uuuuu
008 s2010 flu s 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0004640
035
(OCoLC)
040
FHM
c FHM
049
FHMM
090
XX9999 (Online)
1 100
Joustra, Caryssa.
0 245
An integrated building water management model for green building
h [electronic resource] /
by Caryssa Joustra.
260
[Tampa, Fla] :
b University of South Florida,
2010.
500
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains 165 pages.
502
Thesis (M.S.E.E.)--University of South Florida, 2010.
504
Includes bibliographical references.
516
Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.
538
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
3 520
ABSTRACT: The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is the developer of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building scoring system. On first inspection of LEED points, few address water efficiency. However, water management encompasses other points beyond the Water Efficiency (WE) category. In general, the industry is apt to take a somewhat compartmentalized approach to water management. The use of alternative water sources or the reuse of wastewater significantly complicates the water budget picture. A total water management systems approach, taking into consideration water from various sources, both inside and outside the building, should be implemented in order to devise a strategy for optimal reduction of potable water consumption and wastewater generation. Using the STELLA software to create an integrated building water management (IBWM) model provides stakeholders with a tool to evaluate potential water savings under dynamic conditions for a specific project site. Data collection for IBWM model calibration also shows that water consumption trends are unique to each project, and using LEED assumptions about water usage can overestimate or underestimate potential water savings.
590
Advisor: Daniel Yeh, Ph.D.
653
Dynamic systems modeling
STELLA
Water budget
LEED
Recycling and reuse
690
Dissertations, Academic
z USF
x Civil & Environmental Engineering
Masters.
773
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?e14.4640