If you have difficulty in submitting comments on draft standards you can use a commenting template and email it to admin.start@bsigroup.com. The commenting template can be found here.
Standards Development
This document describes the building commissioning process for the quality management system, paying special attention to the added value of a BACS during implementation and operation.
The Commissioning Process (Cx) is a quality-oriented process for achieving, verifying and documenting whether the performance of a building’s systems and assemblies meet defined objectives and criteria. (Definition by IEA ECBCS Annex 40 and Annex 47)
New buildings and extensive renovations with their sophisticated heating, cooling and air conditioning systems are quite complicated technical systems. Building automation and control systems, with their new communication protocols and technical requirements, have added complexity to building projects.
The Commissioning Process’ scope can vary but is applicable on all types of building. Whether the building is for office, hotel, hospital, science, manufacturing or living, a Cx-process will proactively enhance the quality of especially the technical installations through review, testing and so forth. The Cx-process’ scope will also adjust to the complexity of the building. There is a major challenge for designers, engineers, construction companies and facility managers. Consequently, a performance gap1 has emerged: buildings do not function as intended and do not meet their original performance targets in operation. This applies to requirements for energy efficiency and emissions to the environment, whether in accordance with requirements from laws and regulations or whether they are owner requirements.
This incorrect operation of buildings is costly:
1. Design and construction incur additional costs, and then operating costs are also higher than expected. The timeline will also be extended as the owner will not accept the handover if the requirements are not met.
2. The building does not perform according to requirements whether it is sustainability requirements, comfort or technology requirements.
3. The investor is not satisfied with the revenue from the investment
But neither REHVA/ASHRAE/ISO speaks into the European Green Transition. We intent a standard that is fit for the European Marked and the Green Transition.
It’s not green, if it’s not working.
The value of a well performed quality process is well documented in research, and is mostly a demand in sustainability certifications, such as BREEAM, LEED and the Danish DGNB. The European Horisont initiative, documented it in the QUEST project, which showed that a QMprocess (e.g. Cx-process) lowers significantly the operations cost. (https://project-quest.eu/ ) Note: in case the WI is based on documents from other organizations than ISO/IEC, please specify it here
The Commissioning Process is a well-known process, with national standards in multiple countries. There’s a Danish Standard (DS3090). REHVA has a guidebook (Guidebook 27). ASHRAE has Standard 202. ISO only describes the planning process in ISO 24359-1, not the full process throughout the construction.
1 “A facilities manager’s typology of performance gaps in new buildings” Rasmussen, Helle Lohmann & Jensen, Per Anker, 2019
Required form fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) character.
You are now following this standard. Weekly digest emails will be sent to update you on the following activities:
You can manage your follow preferences from your Account. Please check your mailbox junk folder if you don't receive the weekly email.
You have successfully unsubscribed from weekly updates for this standard.
Comment by: