Brewery lighting calculations

[knowingthis]

This may seem like a silly question but I'm prone to overthinking things on occasion. I'm working on the drawings for a small brewery that will include space that will be treated as a restaurant and I'm calculating that portion as such. The thing I'm unsure of is how to treat the actual brewhouse under 220.12. Any opinions on the subject?

Seems even sillier now that I've typed it out but it's eating at me.

 

[Fitzdrew516]

This may seem like a silly question but I'm prone to overthinking things on occasion. I'm working on the drawings for a small brewery that will include space that will be treated as a restaurant and I'm calculating that portion as such. The thing I'm unsure of is how to treat the actual brewhouse under 220.12. Any opinions on the subject?

Seems even sillier now that I've typed it out but it's eating at me.

I always calculate out all my loads based on actual kw draw and apply continuous factors as needed instead of a blanket statement of kw per sq. foot, so I can't quite help you on that one. However, I will warn you that if you're doing a brewery, food processing facility, etc. that you need to know the applicable food safety codes that your jurisdiction uses to determine what the light levels need to be. Most of the time in "inspection areas" or "production areas" I'm designing to 50 foot candles. Just a heads up.

- Drew

 

[GoldDigger]

And yet those same areas may be covered by energy codes striving in the opposite direction.

 

[Fitzdrew516]

And yet those same areas may be covered by energy codes striving in the opposite direction.

Very true, but it's do-able with LED's and newer efficient control and other technology. It just becomes more tricky. I just finished a job out in California and that's always fun

 

[knowingthis]

And yet those same areas may be covered by energy codes striving in the opposite direction.

Hooray for better living through regulation. :happyno:

Thanks for the response, Drew. I was curious to know because I show an actual vs. calculated lighting load comparison on plans submitted to the city.

 

[steve66]

Right or wrong, I'd treat the entire area as a Restaurant under 220.12. My theory being that's the closest thing in the table, and the brewing area probably isn't that much different from a kitchen area (in terms of lighting wattage).

 

[knowingthis]

Right or wrong, I'd treat the entire area as a Restaurant under 220.12. My theory being that's the closest thing in the table, and the brewing area probably isn't that much different from a kitchen area (in terms of lighting wattage).

I've considered this one. I think it is what I will go ahead and do. Thanks again, guys.

 

[kwired]

First sentence of 220.12 says "A unit load of not less than that specified in Table 220.12 for occupancies specified therein shall constitute the minimum lighting load."

IMO that translates to: not less then means your service or feeder load calculation should include at least the value determined by that table, but could be more if actual connected load is more.

 

[KD4315]

Very true, but it's do-able with LED's and newer efficient control and other technology. It just becomes more tricky. I just finished a job out in California and that's always fun

Our Title 24 for lighting is so stupid it makes my head hurt. I understand the spirit of it but for small commercial remodels it's almost doubled the price. I feel guilty giving pricing sometimes to long term clients.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Smart $]

... The thing I'm unsure of is how to treat the actual brewhouse under 220.12. ...

Industrial commercial (loft) buildings .... 2VA/ft²

Don't ask me to explain what this category covers exactly, but using the process of elimination, it is the closest there is to a brewery out of the options available.

 

[knowingthis]

Industrial commercial (loft) buildings .... 2VA/ft²

Don't ask me to explain what this category covers exactly, but using the process of elimination, it is the closest there is to a brewery out of the options available.

The (loft) indicates to me that it is a commercial/industrial space that has been converted to living space. I may be wrong about that, but it is not uncommon here in Houston to see banners advertising commercial loft spaces for rent.

 

[Fitzdrew516]

Our Title 24 for lighting is so stupid it makes my head hurt. I understand the spirit of it but for small commercial remodels it's almost doubled the price. I feel guilty giving pricing sometimes to long term clients.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep. Ever since they implemented the new code over the summer it's gotten way out of hand. Makes you wonder what's next.

 

[kwired]

The (loft) indicates to me that it is a commercial/industrial space that has been converted to living space. I may be wrong about that, but it is not uncommon here in Houston to see banners advertising commercial loft spaces for rent.

I can see that being interpreted, but if it is living space then it should fall under the dwelling units category.

 

[Smart $]

I can see that being interpreted, but if it is living space then it should fall under the dwelling units category.

That was my thought on the issue. There has to be something in Table 220.12 that covers industrial environments. There is no "all others" category listed.

@knowingthis: I do know what loft apartments are, but I agree with kwired.

 

[steve66]

That was my thought on the issue. There has to be something in Table 220.12 that covers industrial environments. There is no "all others" category listed.

That's the way I've always looked at this section. I always thought every building or occupancy has to fit into one of the categories, and you use the most similar category even if it isn't an exact match. A brewery could be considered part of a restaurant, similar to the way a kitchen would be part of a restaurant. Or you might consider it more like an industrial-commercial building. Either way, it gets 2VA/SF for lighting (both just happen to be the same).

However, I think I just changed my mind. If an occupancy doesn't match anything in 220.12, then I would say 220.12 doesn't apply at all. In that case, you just move on to the load calculations in 220.14.

After all, 220.12 specifically says "for occupancies specified therein", meaning only occupancies specifically listed in the table. In contrast, 220.14 states "In all occupancies". Big difference.

So if the Brewery just had some fluorescent lights, I would just add the connected load of these, and maybe apply a continuous load demand factor of 125%, and call it good.

 

[Fulthrotl]

Hooray for better living through regulation. :happyno:

Thanks for the response, Drew. I was curious to know because I show an actual vs. calculated lighting load comparison on plans submitted to the city.

i do a lot of lighting certifications of restaurants in in the PRC (peoples republic of california)
and this is how it plays there:

health code trumps title 24.

50 foot candles in all food prep areas.
dimming is NOT permitted in food prep areas.
daylight harvesting, therefore, doesn't apply there.

neither does demand response, unless it involves A/B switching,
so the lights are not dimmed, and in the load shed mode, footcandles
do not fall below 50 fc. i've yet to see such an installation, so it's theoretical
at this point for me. if your facility is over 10,000 sq. ft. and is in calif. you
may have to address that. you only need to shed 15% of the wattage, and
it is an aggregate, so you can dim more in non food prep areas to get you there.

off on a tangent, as usual, with outdoor lighting, homeland security also trumps title 24.
the 100/20% occupancy dimming on light poles doesn't count in secured areas under design
of homeland security.

for that matter, the panel feeding the lights in the secure area must also be in
the same secure area. don't even bring up dimming the lights. be grateful if you don't
have to move the panel.

 

[Smart $]

...
However, I think I just changed my mind. If an occupancy doesn't match anything in 220.12, then I would say 220.12 doesn't apply at all. In that case, you just move on to the load calculations in 220.14.

After all, 220.12 specifically says "for occupancies specified therein", meaning only occupancies specifically listed in the table. In contrast, 220.14 states "In all occupancies". Big difference.
...

You may have to change your mind again... :happyyes:

General statement of 220.14 says, "In all occupancies, the minimum load for each outlet for general-use receptacles and outlets not used for general illumination shall not be less than that calculated in 220.14(A) through (L), the loads shown being based on nominal branch-circuit voltages."

From there, it seems 220.16 and 220.18(A) and (C) do not apply either... so we are stuck with 220.12 or 220.18(B).

 

[Fulthrotl]

Our Title 24 for lighting is so stupid it makes my head hurt. I understand the spirit of it but for small commercial remodels it's almost doubled the price. I feel guilty giving pricing sometimes to long term clients.

hush your mouth. that sort of talk will get you assigned to building
a high speed railroad from your house to bakersfield.

and that is pointless, as anyone who has been to both places will
know instinctively. nobody is in a hurry to go to bakersfield, so
the train only needs to run one way, twice as fast.

 

[steve66]

You may have to change your mind again... :happyyes:

General statement of 220.14 says, "In all occupancies, the minimum load for each outlet for general-use receptacles and outlets not used for general illumination shall not be less than that calculated in 220.14(A) through (L), the loads shown being based on nominal branch-circuit voltages."

From there, it seems 220.16 and 220.18(A) and (C) do not apply either... so we are stuck with 220.12 or 220.18(B).

Actually, "outlets for general illumination" would include dwelling unit receptacles, and any other general lighting covered by 220.12 and its table. (Notice that the title of the table is "General Lighting Loads by Occupancy". And notice that 220.12 is referred to as "general lighting load calculations" in 220.14J.)

So that's just telling us we don't have to double count any loads. If we have used table 220.12 to calculate a lighting load, we don't have to add more load for each specific fixture that is installed.

However, if we don't use table 220.12, then we calculate loads for specific fixtures using 220.14(A), using the actual wattage.

 

[Smart $]

Actually, "outlets for general illumination" would include dwelling unit receptacles, and any other general lighting covered by 220.12 and its table. (Notice that the title of the table is "General Lighting Loads by Occupancy". And notice that 220.12 is referred to as "general lighting load calculations" in 220.14J.)

So that's just telling us we don't have to double count any loads. If we have used table 220.12 to calculate a lighting load, we don't have to add more load for each specific fixture that is installed.

However, if we don't use table 220.12, then we calculate loads for specific fixtures using 220.14(A), using the actual wattage.

You can twist it any way you want, but according to the general statement, no general illumination can be calculated under 220.14. What receptacle outlets are included with 220.12 has no bearing on that. I still say you must use 220.12 and its table for general illumination.