Specifying for sustainability: performance specifying

One of the cores of LEED v4 or any sustainable design standard is specifying performance. Here's how to do it properly.


Performance specifying is one of the four ways to specify products, systems, or assemblies. (Descriptive, reference standard, and proprietary are the other three types or classes of specifying.) When used properly, performance specifications allow the user to specify complete systems, assemblies, components, products, final performance, and even nonstandard or emerging technologies. It is a great way to specify many—but not all—items as there are limitations, and works best when combined with other types of specifying.


Instead of identifying products or product types, stating compliance with a standard, or naming a manufacturer, performance specifying indicates specific characteristics and performance requirements of the product, system or assembly, and indicates a level of measurable performance of the finished result.


This is a great way to specify a product or system that may not yet be standardized in the industry, something that happened often in earlier versions of LEED and ASHRAE Standard 189.1. This is especially true when dealing with U.S. Green Building Council LEED v4 that awards points for innovation; click here to download a PDF of some of the innovative strategies used in LEED 2009 projects.


Solar carports are a great example: no one standard governing these structures exists, so engineers have to specify minimum electrical and structural characteristics the carports have to meet to justify the cost, energy generated, and structural integrity. This allows multiple carport manufacturers to bid on the project and ensure that all manufacturers meet the performance criteria (to exclude a certain manufacturer, provide a list of approved manufacturers) while allowing for innovation or nonstandard design.


As long as the performance of the solar carport is properly defined, such as output of the solar panels, microinverters, opacity, fittings for luminaires, drainage, etc., the engineer can be assured of a product that meets the owner’s criteria. A performance specification for the carport could range from a very broad description of a carport down to a specific description of the desired operating characteristics.


There are some drawbacks to performance specifying. The first is defining the performance. Performance goals need to measureable or quantitative. Defining these goals, especially for a product that isn’t quite defined, is difficult and it’s easy to make a mistake when determining the desired benchmarks—either setting them too low or too high. The second drawback is that you don’t know exactly what you are going to get. Going back to the carport—you could define all of the performance characteristics, but not the aesthetic characteristics, and end up with a product that doesn’t mesh with the client’s vision. Another challenge is choosing the level of specificity of the performance specification.


Often the level of or nature of the length of the specification will depend on the project delivery type: design-bid-build will have more detailed performance descriptions while a design-build performance description may not have more than watts per square foot (W/sq ft). How the contract is structured, the engineer’s fee, the owner’s requirements, and the level of control the owner has or wants over the project drives the level of description. Going back to the carport, this could be a basic description of a carport, or a carport with exposed structural steel with a specific coating and translucent glass solar panels.


One final point—if you are designing these carports in California, they need to be designed to a seismic standard, which means, that like most specifying, the product was specified using both performance and reference standard specifying methods.


LEED v4 relies on the engineer choosing a level of performance, be it Certified, Silver, Gold, or Platinum, and determining what and how the appropriate reference standards will be met (notice the mix of specification types). Similarly, the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) mandates a certain level of performance. The reference standards, for instance ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-2010 or a 50% Advanced Energy Design Guide, provide the engineer with a means to set measureable performance goals, whether they be W/sq ft, dimming levels, or number of air changes per hour. Tying these standards into project documents is the engineer’s job and a good justification for earning our fees. Merely naming the reference standard is easy. Translating the standard into performance characteristics and measureable, quantitative levels of acceptable performance—well, that’s what we do. Next up: reference standard specifications.


What are you experiences with specifying for sustainable design projects?

Michael Heinsdorf, PE, LEED AP, CDT is an Engineering Specification Writer at ARCOMMasterSpec. He has more than 10 years' experience in consulting engineering, and is the lead author of MasterSpec Electrical, Communications, and Electronic Safety and Security guide specifications. He holds a BSEE from Drexel University and is currently pursuing a Masters in Engineering Management, also at Drexel University.

No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Engineering Leaders Under 40 program identifies and gives recognition to young engineers who...
A cool solution: Collaboration, chemistry leads to foundry coat product development; See the 2015 Product of the Year Finalists
Raising the standard: What's new with NFPA 70E; A global view of manufacturing; Maintenance data; Fit bearings properly
Sister act: Building on their father's legacy, a new generation moves Bales Metal Surface Solutions forward; Meet the 2015 Engineering Leaders Under 40
Cyber security cost-efficient for industrial control systems; Extracting full value from operational data; Managing cyber security risks
Drilling for Big Data: Managing the flow of information; Big data drilldown series: Challenge and opportunity; OT to IT: Creating a circle of improvement; Industry loses best workers, again
Pipeline vulnerabilities? Securing hydrocarbon transit; Predictive analytics hit the mainstream; Dirty pipelines decrease flow, production—pig your line; Ensuring pipeline physical and cyber security
Upgrading secondary control systems; Keeping enclosures conditioned; Diagnostics increase equipment uptime; Mechatronics simplifies machine design
Designing positive-energy buildings; Ensuring power quality; Complying with NFPA 110; Minimizing arc flash hazards
Building high availability into industrial computers; Of key metrics and myth busting; The truth about five common VFD myths

Annual Salary Survey

After almost a decade of uncertainty, the confidence of plant floor managers is soaring. Even with a number of challenges and while implementing new technologies, there is a renewed sense of optimism among plant managers about their business and their future.

The respondents to the 2014 Plant Engineering Salary Survey come from throughout the U.S. and serve a variety of industries, but they are uniform in their optimism about manufacturing. This year’s survey found 79% consider manufacturing a secure career. That’s up from 75% in 2013 and significantly higher than the 63% figure when Plant Engineering first started asking that question a decade ago.

Read more: 2014 Salary Survey: Confidence rises amid the challenges

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.