Evaluating the impact sequences of operation have on the implementation of occupant-centric controls.

• Measured data quantifies savings from OCC and sequence of operations improvements. • Energy model used to parse out savings contributions of each control intervention. • Occupancy-based ventilation ineffective without supply air temperature reset. • Use of an economizer high limit returns marginal cooling savings with little effort. • Use of OCC magnifies savings from the changes to control sequences considered. Partial occupancy of commercial offices has become the norm in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given this, occupant-centric control (OCC), which adapt building systems based on occupants' presence or preferences, offer an alternative to traditional control that assumes full occupancy. However, poor sequences of operation can degrade the benefits of OCC. This paper explores this interaction by examining energy data from two buildings – one with two control logic faults corrected and an occupancy-based ventilation OCC implemented in 2020, and one with traditional ventilation – from 2019 to 2020. Sequences that impacted implementation in the first building are discussed. Then, a calibrated energy model of the second building is developed to evaluate how occupancy-based ventilation alongside changes to the sequences of operation – namely supply air temperature (SAT) reset and economizer high limits – impacted energy use. The inclusion of OCC and improved sequences in the second building saved 30.6% and 9.6% of annual heating and cooling energy, respectively. Without an SAT reset, OCC saved 4.4% and 3.9% of heating and cooling, respectively, compared to 15.7% and 5.7% when an SAT was present. These results begin to characterize the relationship sequences of operation and OCC implementations have with one another in commercial offices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]