<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16525" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>I agree with Paul's statement that the extent of zoning often falls between the two scenarios previously mentioned. My experience modeling complex buildings has shown that more extensive zoning is often required, especially if we desire to produce more "honest" and "useful" results. Paul suggests studying the issue of granularity. Is anyone aware of work that has been done on this topic? Has anyone made a comparison of three zoning approaches for the same building (i.e. coarse granularity in the SD phase modeling; coarse granularity in the detailed phase modeling; and fine/medium granularity in the detailed phase modeling)? What sort of results are seen? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>With LEED, EPACT, and code-compliance modeling on the rise, it seems that the energy modeling community would want to affirm or reaffirm the approach to zoning granularity that would best provide a balance of credibility (usefulness), consistency (i.e. % savings) and value (time/budget), seeing as many clients in the marketplace are skeptical of energy modeling. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Paul Erickson</DIV>
<DIV>Affiliated Engineers, Inc.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>>>> "Paul Riemer" <PaulR@TWGI.com> 8/23/2007 10:45 am >>><BR>Thank you Kevin & Jeff for showing everyone the extreme range of<BR>modeling approaches in our profession. I happen to think the answer is<BR>somewhere in the middle for most buildings types and analysis goals. <BR><BR>Given the rise of LEED & EPACT, our industry needs more published best<BR>practices addressing things like zoning granularity but before we can<BR>write those we probably need to study them. <BR><BR>Would anyone like to work together to find money and/or time to study<BR>how sensitive energy and savings predictions are to zoning granularity<BR>or other basic modeling practices?<BR><BR>Paul Riemer<BR>THE WEIDT GROUP<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: BLDG-SIM@gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] On Behalf Of Jeff<BR>Haberl<BR>Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 1:56 PM<BR>To: BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR>Subject: [BLDG-SIM] max number of tracked modifications exceeded<BR><BR>Why do you need so many zones? Five per floor is the usual, two can also<BR>suffice. <BR><BR>Jeff<BR>BB 8=! 8=) :=) 8=) ;=) 8=) 8=( 8=) :=') 8=) 8=) 8=? BB<BR><BR>Jeff S. Haberl, Ph.D.,<BR>P.E.............................jhaberl@esl.tamu.edu<BR><BR>Professor......................................................Office<BR>Ph: 979-845-6507<BR><BR>Department of Architecture.......................Lab Ph: 979-845-6065 <BR><BR>Energy Systems Laboratory.......................FAX: 979-862-2457 <BR><BR>Texas A&M University..............................77843-3581<BR><BR>College Station, Texas, USA.......................URL: www-esl.tamu.edu<BR><BR>BB 8=/ 8=) :=) 8=) ;=) 8=) 8=() 8=) 8=? 8=) 8=) 8= BB<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: BLDG-SIM@gard.com <BLDG-SIM@gard.com><BR>To: BLDG-SIM@gard.com <BLDG-SIM@gard.com><BR>Sent: Wed Aug 22 12:29:23 2007<BR>Subject: [BLDG-SIM] max number of tracked modifications exceeded<BR><BR>Ok, this could be embarrassing, but I got to know.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Could anyone shed some light on this error message I keep getting? As<BR>it turns out, I ended up with 405 zones. I heard Doe-2.1 was limited to<BR>99zones, is there a new limit for Doe 2.2. <BR><BR><BR><BR>I was under the assumption that when modeling for LEED certification<BR>each space in the architectural design should be modeled as a separate<BR>space for building simulation, is this thought right or completely<BR>wrong? Thanks for the help.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Kevin<BR><BR><BR>=====================================================You received this e-mail because you are subscribed<BR>to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe<BR>from this mailing list send a blank message to<BR>BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM<BR><BR></DIV><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>