<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2014.210" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>"Pictures are nice, but pretty pictures of airplanes doesn't get the
airplanes built or off the ground."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I believe that the 3D and 2D rendering of the building geometry is
essential in producing an accurate model of a complex building. Do you
think they built better airplanes without any renderings or visual models?
Think again. Until Joe Huang's DrawBDL came out, even models produced
by the national lab responsible for DOE2 development had some incorrect
geometry. Misplaced a wall or window? .... impossible to tell just by
looking at BDL code.<BR></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:jaulbach@sna.sempra-esco.com"
title=jaulbach@sna.sempra-esco.com>John Aulbach</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A href="mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com"
title=BLDG-SIM@gard.com>BLDG-SIM@gard.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, January 27, 2000 3:09
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] hornets nest? Stay
the course !!</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>I used the Meriwether ESAS hourly analysis program from 1977
through 1984<BR>and the DOE-2.1 A through E since 1984 to date. The problem
with all the<BR>DOE-2 interfaces is that the user STILL has to understand
DOE-2, what it's<BR>keywords are, and what is actually trying to be modeled.
Real engineering<BR>and energy dynamics insite must accompany any model
effort, to truly<BR>represent what the building is, and what it can become
(ECMs).<BR> <BR>I have been exposed to PowerDOE but don't yet have time
to learn the<BR>geometry games it requires up front. PowerDOE will be nice to
show a client<BR>the building geometry reproduce from the model input, but I
am not in the<BR>pictoral rendering game. Rather, I need to demonstrate to the
client the<BR>results of PS-E, how they change per ECM, and the correct
dynamics of the<BR>utitliy rates as each ECM changes. Pictures are nice, but
pretty pictures of<BR>airplanes doesn't get the airplanes built or off the
ground.<BR> <BR>Another mistake production DOE-2 using companies use is
trying to use DOE-2<BR>as a DESIGN program, rathher than an ENERGY ANALYSIS
program. A TRACE or<BR>Carrier E-20 is still far better at assessing
exact coil sizes and airflows.<BR>There is not enought SYSTEMS information
coming out to make me feel<BR>comfortable in ever using it accurately for
design.<BR> <BR>It really took me 5 - 6 years to REALLY learn what DOE-2
does and doesn't do<BR>(and I STILL forget). And now another program is to be
placed upon us<BR>(EnergyPlus) that we will have to learn the idiosyncrasies
of.<BR> <BR>And for the retrofit industry, I STILL gotta match the
utitliy
meters....<BR><BR>======================================================<BR>You
received this e-mail because you are subscribed <BR>to the <A
href="mailto:BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM">BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM</A> mailing list. To
unsubscribe <BR>from this mailing list send a blank message to <BR><A
href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE>
===========================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM
</PRE></BODY></HTML>