<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007>Sangeetha</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007>As someone who spent a man month or so last July and
August working with a complex multi-use facility, detailing it up in Autodesk
Building Systems 2006 using the espace feature, exporting to gbXML and running
the output through Greenbuilding studio (GBS), I can tell you the resulting
model did not meet my expectations for simplicity of analysis. Many of the
most fundamental issues were in the AutoCAD to gbXML export process, however
there are other issues related to the differences between the model created
by GBS and a comparable one resulting from the eQuest design development wizard.
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007>Models prepared by the alternate paths are not
interchangeable; </SPAN></FONT><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff
size=2><SPAN class=327271523-21032007>the GBS model can only be edited going
forward by the detailed editor. If you're an expert at the detailed editor and
manipulating .inp and other files with a text editor, you may not find this
disadvantageous. However we found that going back over the model and
establishing </SPAN></FONT><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff
size=2><SPAN class=327271523-21032007>all of the shell, space, polygon, zone,
system, schedule and many other relationships that would otherwise have been set
up by the eQuest wizard cost more time going forward than was saved up-front --
for example, using the eQuest DD wizard to add windows, doors, or
skylights and set up daylighting is more efficient than doing it in
detailed edit mode, but wizard editing is unavailable to the GBS
model. And I might add that adding windows and doors in the eQuest DD
wizard is also much easier than doing it in ABS.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007>Perhaps GBS interoperability improvements have been
made in the interim; John Kennedy at Greenbuilding studio may be able provide
current status, There may also have been improvements to the gbXML
export in ABS/ADT 2007 and Revit or the soon-to-be released ABS 2008,
however I haven't been keeping up since we're standardized on ABS 2006 for at
least a couple of years. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007>I think the gbXML interoperability process shows great
progress and promise, and I hope the implementation kinks we observed last
summer either have been or are the process of being worked out soon.
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007>Brandon Nichols</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=327271523-21032007><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></SPAN></FONT><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com
[mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Sangeetha Divakar<BR><B>Sent:</B>
Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:36 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] Green Building
Studio<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Hi,</DIV>
<DIV>Has anybody had experience using Green Building Studio for energy analysis.
Can you please clarify on the reliability of a GBXML translation of a BIM model.
Is the process as easy as it seems? It is a huge leap forward to have a BIM
model coverted into an input file for energy analysis in literally minutes.
Although, there must be some advantages in having an energy analyst
do take offs from a design instead of depending entirely on a program that
translates the BIM model. Any inputs that will help me understand GBXML better
will be greatly appreciated.</DIV>
<DIV>Thanks a lot</DIV>
<DIV>Sangeetha Divakar</DIV>
<P>
<HR SIZE=1>
Be a PS3 game guru.<BR>Get your game face on with <A
href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49936/*http://videogames.yahoo.com">the latest
PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.</A> <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>