[Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces

[Nick Caton]

Carol - wow!  Your verbosity makes me so proud...  I managed to learn
something darn useful to boot, thanks!

 

John, 

 

I fully agree that there's a fluid line of professionalism and expertise
in this body of respondents, and I suppose that's likely inherent to any
resource without a paid staff.  In some ways, it's a real benefit as you
can get feedback from so many perspectives.  Many of us are
"self-taught" in the sense that we've had to come up with our own way of
getting various things done - and it's always a benefit to the group
when we compare notes... Just as the seasoned veterans will share "tried
and true" means and methods, so do the less-experienced
discover/stumble-into innovative ways to approach a problem that may
save those veterans time and frustration.

 

As someone on this list once advised me, sometimes the best way to ask a
question is to deliberately give a wrong (!) answer.  I haven't
exercised any intentional mis-information, but I do respond with partial
answers as I can, and make clear what I don't know.  This approach often
elicits responses from otherwise apprehensive individuals containing
their own experiences and insights. People are more prone to provide a
partial response once the ball is rolling, so to speak.  

 

The "quality of queries" on the lists ebbs and flows over time with
regard to the degree of sophistication and effort on the part of the
poster.  Every once in a while, new subscribers need to be reminded of
the implications this voluntary list entails...  In order to get the
best response, they must recognize a degree of courtesy,
professionalism, and background knowledge as prerequisite to others
being inclined to volunteer their time to help out a total stranger.
People sometimes don't realize this is an international body of
subscribers, and an email spell-check/proofread can be very helpful when
asking a complicated question - sometimes attaching a representative
cutsheet or your project files is the fastest way to begin discussing a
topic... stuff like that.

 

The "quality of responses" on the other hand is something that is
terribly easy to take for granted.  Any response to a query on this list
is ultimately one individual lending their time and experience to help
another.  Personally, I choose to contribute partial answers where I
don't have the time to address an otherwise broader question.  Sometimes
it's impossible for the asker to know that a question is actually very
broad, and it's most helpful in the short term to point this out so they
may "narrow" their question.  Other times, it's most helpful, even if it
appears blunt/rude, to direct a questioner to "read this" or "look the
answer up here" ("teach a man to fish..." as the saying goes).  

 

Also, it's a common situation to see one big email with a series of
questions (of varying breadth/complexity).  When listed or bulleted out,
it becomes easier to respond to the whole post, but ultimately such
posters should anticipate they may receive partial answers to the
posting.  For example: Perhaps I feel I have the time to respond, but
only know a complete answer to 4 out of 5 questions... should I not
respond at all?  Extrapolating that line of thinking to the everyone -
perhaps nobody would respond to that post.  I'd rather encourage anyone
willing to contribute to definitely share what you know, and don't feel
pressured to know everything - others on the list can "fill in the gaps"
as may be necessary.

 

This branches into an elephant in the room - questions are certainly
posed that nobody knows the answer to, indeed with no solution!  As long
as it has been around, the science/art of building energy modeling still
seems (to my young eyes) a fairly bleeding-edge field of study and
practice.  Students and other end-users getting their feet wet in this
skillset should recognize coming in that it's not unheard of to run into
a question nobody has explicitly asked before!  This is where the
partial answers, experiences and open suggestions available through a
'meeting-of-the-minds' in venues like the onebuilding.org lists can be a
key resource for one's own search for a solution (delving into google,
DOE2 docs, digging in the archives, etc).  Such queries are where a
community like this really shines over the potential for any support
department/hotline.  

 

That said, an expert staff of compensated, full-time eQuest/DOE2
answer-givers would certainly be a welcome thing, but it would be a
complement to (not a replacement of) the function of this existing
community at-large.

 

In light of the context, I'd like to avoid saying that's my two cents,
but there you have it =)!

 

~Nick

 

 

 

NICK CATON, E.I.T.

PROJECT ENGINEER

25501 west valley parkway

olathe ks 66061

direct 913 344.0036

fax 913 345.0617

Check out our new web-site @ www.smithboucher.com 

 

From: Carol Gardner [mailto:cmg750 at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 11:01 PM
To: John Waller
Cc: Nick Caton; <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>; Dakota Kelley
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces

 

Boy, I guess it's been a long week for many of us. Since my name was
brought up I thought I'd chime in. Thanks for the shout out, John

I was reading this email chain and thanking my lucky stars that I
learned how to do this stuff back before dirt was invented and you had
to enter your input deck line by line using BDL. It gave me a pretty
solid background as it turns out. 

It seems to me that some of you guys are spending entirely too much time
in the Wizard doing things that might be able to be done easier in the
DDedit. I know I've said this before. For instance if you think of an
unconditioned zone for awhile you realize that it really doesn't matter
what system it gets attached to, its unconditioned. You will see on your
SV-A report that there isn't any cfm for it or any load. If there is you
are doing something wrong. I always makesure that the space and the
thermal zone are both labeled "unconditioned" because I don't trust
eQUEST for a minute if there are inconsistencies. 

So back the the utility of having a "reliable authority" dedicated to
answering questions on this site. While I can't claim entire
reliability, I ran across something last week that really had me
trembling with trepidation, sorry it's Friday night after all, related
to eQUEST.

If you'll remember I asked a question about EIR curve fits last week to
which I received a resounding non response. I'm pretty sure I know why
and it's probably bad news for the results we are giving people. I don't
think people really know how to do curve fits properly. I know I learned
something new as I researched and researched every where I could think
of to find the answer. And even then I had to make a desperation call to
one of the few real experts. 

Some background on the problem: all curves using raw data need to be
normalized around ARI data points except for refrigeration compressors,
see Volume 2r written in 2008. So if you are entering a curve, say the
cooling capacity as a function of the entering wet bulb and the outdoor
dry bulb, you would have three lines of data: 2 independent and 1
dependent. The independents would be your selected wet bulb temperatures
and your selected dry bulb temperatures. You are allowed to enter up to
20. The tricky part is when you specify the dependent value: the
capacity. The person who I am helping with this model had simply entered
the capacities as they varied based on the temps: 307 kBtu, 299 kBtu,
and 292 kBtu (the ARI capacity), etc. [Note: I'm just making these
numbers up.], and didn't normalize them around the ARI data point
capacity. If they had the numbers would have been: 1.051, 1.024, 1.0,
etc. And the file ran with no indication of an error anywhere. I've seen
this over the years in some surprising places. It scares me because I
don't know how the results are being effected. I guess no one else does
either because I haven't heard anyone saying anything like "hey I
entered bad data into eQUEST and it ran" or hey the LEED reviewer said
XX, fill in the blank. 

Anyway, back to the EIR curve-fit. With further research I found the
actual equation that is being used in eQUEST which are EIRt = Cooling
EIR * Cool-EIR-FT (EWB,ODB) * Cool-EIR-FPLR (PLR). That's when I asked
my question to you all: what equation type do I use when there are three
independents as there seem to be here - EWB, ODB & PLR. No answer. So I
placed the call and was told that eQUEST solves the equation using 2
curves: the EIR varying based on the EWB and ODB, normalized around the
ARI EIR as discussed above, and the EIR varying based on the part load
conditions. I didn't know that before because I usually can avoid curve
fits. In this case, however, I was modeling a VRF system so it's pretty
much required since they are not like the current systems that are
accessible to us. Luckily I had really good data from Daikin, although
it took awhile to get it. I was modeling European units, too, just to
further complicate things.

Anyway, lesson learned. Sorry to be so long winded, I kind of reminded
myself of Nick here. Sorry, Nick, just kidding! Your answers do lean
towards being thorough, though, but that's good. You have a great
knowledge of how to use the Wizards as well as the DDedit. I think that
in this case, though, my past experience of entering the line by line
BDL really helped me. When we had to do that we had more time to think
about how and why we were doing things and generally more access to the
engineering formulas behind it all. With the friendly front ends we have
now, and make no mistake I love them, modeling has become more of an art
and less of a science. This is both good and bad. It's why I think that
there is room for having a dedicated, experienced resources person for
eQUEST as well as the users of this listserv. There's a lot to know and
it takes time to learn it.

I rest my case.

Carol 




On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:21 PM, John Waller <jwaller at email.arizona.edu>
wrote:

Nick,

 

You are absolutely right!  My (so-called) feathers get ruffled way too
easily, which is why I make a conscieous effort not to comment in here
unless I'm 'mostly' confident that my contributions could even
potentially benefit someone encountering a problem similar to one I've
encountered in the past. Such constraint on behalf of all contributors
would do wonders for such an environment. The quality of query in which
I witness here for the most part is astonishing. (i.e. 'how do spell
equest'?). Rather than doing the research on their own, or at the very
least, exploring the 'onebuilding' query history, this platform makes it
all too easy to ask the infamous 'stupid question', though I realize
there exists no such thing. 

 

I am beginning to believe that Carol is right in suggesting a more
professional and reliable authority to more acurately respond to user
querries. And someone else who suggested an eQUEST-wiki might just be
spot on. Thought I will admit, in an age where electronic response has
become the norm, there is certainly something something quite a bit more
'personal' about receiving a reply from a beating heart. 

 

As such, it is my feeling, that any 'responder', should not respond so
specifically so as to ignore the larger question an inquiry might be
addressing, particularly when a prior responder has already replied and
explicitly requests additional input on his offered solution.

 

In the spirit of community (as you have suggested) I would challange
anyone who posits a potential solution to address the formal issue at
large, rather than simply offering his(her) two-cents in contrast simply
for the purpose of seeming 'right'.

 

To do so, I am sure, would more likely benefit the group as a whole.  

 

John Waller 

 



Sent from my iPhone


On Jul 16, 2010, at 2:55 PM, "Nick Caton" <ncaton at smithboucher.com>
wrote:

	Hi John,

	 

	My perceptive powers are not the greatest, as my wife will
assure you, but I'm failing to see the reason to get any feathers need
to be hackled here (I did miss your reply, perhaps it wasn't copied to
the list?)....

	 

	The reality that DOE2 has a "no child-zone left behind act" of
sorts is just the nature of the beast, and nobody is arguing that's
unintuitive - it's simply something we have to learn as we become
familiar with the engine.  I don't know that I'd expect this issue to be
resolved in the next major update as it's something a user can work
around (unlike some other more pertinent issues), as Dakota is plainly
demonstrating with his (typically) thorough response.

	 

	Everyone is here to help each other, rest assured (^_^)b, those
who aren't don't stick around long, and Dakota's certainly been around
for awhile!  If you have a "more correct" or otherwise better solution
to handling unconditioned zones before or after the wizards, I would
personally like to know also - I do the same as Dakota.  I understand
others simply ignore the zone grouping wizard screens altogether (though
I find them to be quite a time-saver), so his inclusion of "simply do
this" in detailed is very appropriate to the group at large...

	 

	Wishing everyone a safe and happy weekend,

	 

	~Nick

	 

	<image001.jpg>

	 

	NICK CATON, E.I.T.

	PROJECT ENGINEER

	25501 west valley parkway

	olathe ks 66061

	direct 913 344.0036

	fax 913 345.0617

	Check out our new web-site @ www.smithboucher.com
<http://www.smithboucher.com>  

	 

	From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of John David
Waller
	Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 3:16 PM
	To: Dakota Kelley
	Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
	Subject: Re: [Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces

	 

	Maybe I was too vague in my reply.

	 

	I, too, was hoping for some insight into this particular issue.

	 

	While I do believe this to be a software (developer) oversight,
I also believe that any offered solution(s) to such a 'problem' could be
handled with slightly more dignity; perhaps even some humility!

	 

	It is more likely that 'this' is a software issue more than
anything else.  Hopefully this, and many other issues, will have been
addressed in '3.6.4'!

	 

	It makes absolutely no sense to me to assign a system to
'unconditioned space' that is being used to 'condition', condition
space. Since every 'space', or zone requires the assignment of a
specific mechanical system, then wouldn't it be likely [as in the 'real
world' vs. our 'virtual' one, be equipped with 'NO" system since it is
'NOT' conditioned, versus an 'operable' system that supplies
conditioning to a space that requires such?  

	 

	While it agreed that all zone 'must belong to a system', I'm not
convinced that your [emphatic] solution employs the ideal method for
addressing such an issue.  It seems to me that you're placing her back
to the same point in which she came to discover such a unique condition.


	 

	Looking forward to a legitimate response!

	 

	Sincerely--

	John

	On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Dakota Kelley <
dakotak at teliospc.com> wrote:

	Amber,

	 

	If I'm following your description, you must be specifying the
unconditioned zone in Shell Wizard/Screen 2/Zone Characteristics button.
Then you're obviously specifying system-per-floor in the HVAC wizard.
This sounds like it should work, but what is happening is Shell
Wizard/Screen 14 settings are trumping Shell Wizard/Screen 2.  There are
two solutions:

	 

	1)      Simply change the zones to unconditioned in the detailed
interface.

	2)      Create a new zone group in Shell Wizard/Screen 14.
Assign the unconditioned zones to this group, and then make sure the
"Conditioned" check box is not checked.  Assign the group to whatever
system makes sense and move on (making sure that at least one
conditioned zone group is also assigned to that system).  All zones have
to belong to a system, but if they're unconditioned their parent system
is irrelevant.  This method is only slightly longer than the one above,
but it lets you stay in the wizard.

	 

	If you try to leave an unconditioned "on its own", which I
interpret as being assigned to its own single-zone system, you'll get an
error saying every system has to have at least one conditioned zone.
Let me know if I have misunderstood you.

	 

Error! Filename not specified.

 

	                                

	DAKOTA KELLEY 

	Project Designer | Energy Analyst

	                          

	                              Office: 214.744.6199


	                              Cell: 214.280.3825

	                              Fax: 214.744.0770    

	 

	http://www.teliospc.com          3535 Travis St. Suite 115

	dakotak at teliospc.com            Dallas, TX 75204


	                                

	| MEP ENGINEERING * ENERGY MODELING * LEED CONSULTATION *
COMMISSIONING |

	 

	CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended only for the use
of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, 

	And may contain information that is privileged, confidential and
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you

	are not the intended recipient, please email the sender
immediately, and delete this email from all computers.  Any 

	distribution or other use is strictly prohibited.  Copyright (c)
2009 Telios Corporation.

	 

	 

	 

	  

	 

	 

	 

	 

	 

	From: Amber Welsh [mailto:amber at timmonsdesigneng.com] 
	Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:23 PM
	To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
	Subject: [Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces

	 

	What is the best way to handle unconditioned spaces in eQUEST?
Right now, I am zoning it separate and calling it unconditioned in the
WIZARD.  Then, when I assign systems, I am putting the unconditioned
zone in a system with a conditioned space and saying " one system per
floor".  Is this the proper way to do it?

	 

	I have tried just leaving the zone as unconditioned and on its
own, but then when I do the "permit submittal" calculation it still asks
for the fan flow and cooling capacity for that zone.

	 

	Amber Welsh, P.E. | Associate
	LEED(r) Accredited Professional

	 
	397 5th Street NE,

	Atlanta, GA 30308 
	(v) 404.810.9020
	(c) 678.488.1967
	timmonsdesigneng.com <http://timmonsdesigneng.com/>  

	 

	
	_______________________________________________
	Equest-users mailing list
	
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
	To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to 
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG

	 


_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to 
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG




-- 
Carol Gardner PE

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100719/fe8501d3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1459 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100719/fe8501d3/attachment.jpeg>