| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|15||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
|Hardcopy (shipping and handling)||15||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
Significance and Use
Each facility rating scale in this classification (see Figs. 1-8) provides a means to estimate the level of serviceability of a building or facility for one topic of serviceability, and to compare that level against the level of any other building or facility.
This classification can be used for comparing how well different buildings or facilities meet a particular requirement for serviceability. It is applicable despite differences such aslocation, structure, mechanical systems, age, and building shape.
This classification can be used to estimate the amount of variance of serviceability from target or from requirement, for a single office facility, or within a group of office facilities.
This classification can be used to estimate the following:
Serviceability of an existing facility for uses other than its present use.
Serviceability (potential) of a facility that has been planned but not yet built.
Serviceability (potential) of a facility for which a remodeling has been planned.
Use of this classification does not result in building evaluation or diagnosis. Building evaluation or diagnosis generally requires a special expertise in building engineering or technology, and the use of instruments, tools, or measurements.
This classification applies only to facilities that are building constructions, or parts thereof. (While this classification may be useful in rating the serviceability of facilities that are not building constructions, such facilities are outside the scope of this classification.)
This classification is not intended for, and is not suitable for, use for regulatory purposes, nor for fire hazard assessment nor fire risk assessment.
1.1 This classification covers pairs of scales (see Figs. 1-8) for classifying an aspect of the serviceability of an office facility, that is, the capability of an office facility to meet certain possible requirements for manageability.
1.2 Within that aspect of serviceability, each pair of scales (see Figs. 1-8) are for classifying one topic of serviceability. Each paragraph in an Occupant Requirement Scale summarizes one level of serviceability on that topic, which occupants might require. The matching entry in the facility rating scale is a translation of the requirement into a description of certain features of a facility which, taken in combination, indicate that the facility is likely to meet that level of required serviceability.
1.3 The entries in the Facility Rating Scale (see Figs. 1-8) are indicative and not comprehensive. They are for quick scanning, to estimate approximately, quickly, and economically, how well an office facility is likely to meet the needs of one or another type of occupant group, over time. The entries are not for measuring, knowing, or evaluating how an office facility is performing.
1.4 This classification can be used to estimate the level of serviceability of an existing facility. It can also be used to estimate the serviceability of a facility that has been planned but not yet built, such as one for which single-line drawings and outline specifications have been prepared.
1.5 This classification indicates what would cause a facility to be rated at a certain level of serviceability, but does not state how to conduct a serviceability rating nor how to assign a serviceability score. That information is found in Practice E1334. The scales in Figs. 1-8 are complimentary to and compatible with Practice E1334. Each requires the other.
|CountB||Remaining Useful Life at Least: Equal to|
|3 =||Building envelope: seals, joints = 10 years or more|
|4 =||Roofing and flashing = 15 years or more|
|5 =||HVAC prime movers and main systems = 20 years or more|
|3 =||HVAC secondary distrib., for example, small fans = 10 years or more|
|4 =||HVAC controls = 10 years or more|
|3 =||Elevators and escalators = 20 years or more|
|4 =||Ceiling systems, including fixtures = 15 years or more|
|3 =||Interior finishes, for example, coverings = 10 years or more|
|3 =||Operable items, for example, doors, windows = 20 years or more|
|2 =||Other systems, for example, plumbing = 20 years or more|
|2 =||Site, for example, paving, sidewalks, etc. = 15 years or more|
|2 =||Electrical system = 15 years or more|
|2 =||Life safety system = 20 years or more|
A The anticipated remaining service life on the items listed in this table should be on file, likely in an asset management plan for the facility. Otherwise, rating on this aspect of serviceability requires expert judgement on each item, and cannot be completed within a normal half-day site visit. If information is not available, then omit this item from the rating, and note that on the rating form.
B Do not add pro rata counts for any remaining life that is estimated to be less than the threshold years given in the legend. The count in this table is not a sliding scale, for example, give all points or no points.
|Causes of Excessive Energy|
|Evidence on Energy Consumption|
|Air leakage around windows and doors||Expert opinion such as building operator, engineering|
|Inadequate roof insulation||technical expert|
|Inadequate wall and window insulation,|
|Occupants' verbal reports, based on direct experience|
|Defective vapor retarder, or none||Observable defects, for example, stains, icicles,|
|Inappropriate orientation of building||moisture/condensation, drafts|
|No solar control, or not effective||Specifications and drawings for the facility|
|Inefficient systems or equipment for|
|Technical reports based on field measurements|
|Improperly sized HVAC equipment||Operating records|
|Poor energy management and controls|
(see Table 3).
|Energy bills, compared with similar facilities|
|3 =||Occupant participation in energy conservation program|
|4 =||Automatic response to user-control, for example, if windows are opened|
|2 =||Flushing program adjusted in extreme weather conditions|
|5 =||Computerized direct digital control of building systems,|
|or 4 =||Only monitoring and control are computerized.|
|or 2 =||Only time clocks (automatic shutdown).|
|1 =||Heat recovery or heat pump system.|
|2 =||Night setback.|
|1 =||Renewable energy source (for example, solar).|
|2 =||On-site or “district” power generation or cogeneration.|
|3 =||Energy use data is collected, targets set and met.|
|Water supply system|
|Sewage or drainage system|
|Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning system|
|Elevators and escalators|
FIG. 1 Scale B.2.1 for Reliability of External Supply
FIG. 1Scale B.2.1 for Reliability of External Supply (continued)
FIG. 2 Scale B.2.2 for Anticipated Remaining Service Life
FIG. 3 Scale B.2.3 for Ease of Operation
FIG. 4 Scale B.2.4 Ease of Maintenance
FIG. 4Scale B.2.4 Ease of Maintenance (continued)
FIG. 5 Scale B.2.5 for Ease of Cleaning
FIG. 5Scale B.2.5 for Ease of Cleaning (continued)
FIG. 6 Scale B.2.6 for Janitorial Facilities
FIG. 6Scale B.2.6 for Janitorial Facilities (continued)
FIG. 7 Scale B.2.7 for Energy Consumption
FIG. 8 Scale B.2.8 for Energy Management and Controls
2. Referenced Documents (purchase separately) The documents listed below are referenced within the subject standard but are not provided as part of the standard.
E631 Terminology of Building Constructions
E1334 Practice for Rating the Serviceability of a Building or Building-Related Facility
E1679 Practice for Setting the Requirements for the Serviceability of a Building or Building-Related Facility
ISO DocumentsISO/DIS 7164 Draft International Standard, Performance Standards in BuildingDefinitions and Means of Expression for the Performance of a Whole Building
ICS Number Code 35.260 (Office machines)
UNSPSC Code 72101500(Building maintenance and repair services)
ASTM E1701-95(2012), Standard Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Manageability , ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, www.astm.orgBack to Top