<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>I would like to know the meaning of modelers getting sidetracked easily....<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 13px"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Shaun Martin <smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Paul Grahovac <paul.grahovac@prosoco.com>; Clark Denson <cdenson@ssr-inc.com>; "Eurek, John S NWO" <John.S.Eurek@usace.army.mil>; "Peterson, John (EYP/HP CFS)" <jpeterson@hp.com>; bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Wed, March 24, 2010 2:39:49 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Bldg-sim] differences between energy simulations programs<BR></FONT><BR><BR>Paul, back to your original question, this document may help. There is also<BR>a document with a side-by-side comparison table, somewhere. I'll see if I<BR>can find it and send it to you.<BR><BR>If you've been reading through bldg-sim, you'll find modellers tend to get<BR>sidetracked easily. <BR><BR><BR>Shaun Martin LEED
AP<BR>Principal<BR>Shaun Martin Consulting<BR>Suite 200 - 420 West Hastings Street<BR>Vancouver, BC V6B 1L1<BR>c: 604-789-1095<BR>e:<A href="mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com" ymailto="mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com">smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com</A><BR>member CAGBC, ASHRAE <BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>[mailto:<A href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A>] On Behalf Of Paul Grahovac<BR>Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 1:06 PM<BR>To: Clark Denson; Eurek, John S NWO; Peterson, John (EYP/HP CFS);<BR><A href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>Subject: Re:
[Bldg-sim] differences between energy simulations programs<BR><BR>I don't know what methodology my people used. I appreciate everyone's<BR>input. I am concerned I should remain a viewer and not a participant on this<BR>listserv since I am not a modeler -- only a consumer of modeling services.<BR>One data point that is not data, but confirmed to me that thermal mass is<BR>real: I brought an energy auditor to an minimally-heated greenhouse at<BR>night and asked him to point his thermographic gun at everything --including<BR>the concrete blocks holding up the planting platforms. Everything was blue<BR>and cold except the concrete blocks which were yellow-red warm.<BR><BR>Paul Grahovac, LEED AP<BR>PROSOCO, Inc.<BR>785-393-1816 cell<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Clark Denson [mailto:<A href="mailto:cdenson@ssr-inc.com" ymailto="mailto:cdenson@ssr-inc.com">cdenson@ssr-inc.com</A>]<BR>Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 2:40
PM<BR>To: Paul Grahovac; Eurek, John S NWO; Peterson, John (EYP/HP CFS);<BR><A href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>Subject: RE: [Bldg-sim] differences between energy simulations programs<BR><BR>The way I understand it, the effect of thermal mass is all in how the<BR>heating/cooling loads are calculated. TRACE is unique from many other<BR>programs in that the user can choose the heating/cooling load methodology<BR>that will be used. Depending on your choice, thermal mass will be<BR>calculated differently. Most incorporate some kind of Transfer Function<BR>Method (TFM), and each method is based on calculations and algorithms from<BR>ASHRAE publications such as the 1972, 1985, and 2001 ASHRAE Fundamentals<BR>Handbooks, ASHRAE Research Project #359, and the ASHRAE Toolkit for Building<BR>Load Calculations.<BR><BR>So the question of "What are the
differences between TRACE and Energy<BR>Simulation program 'X'?" is complicated by the additional question, "Which<BR>Load Calculation Methodology in TRACE did you select?"<BR><BR>Clark Denson, PE<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Paul Grahovac [mailto:<A href="mailto:paul.grahovac@prosoco.com" ymailto="mailto:paul.grahovac@prosoco.com">paul.grahovac@prosoco.com</A>]<BR>Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 10:36 AM<BR>To: Eurek, John S NWO; Peterson, John (EYP/HP CFS);<BR><A href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] differences between energy simulations programs<BR><BR>FYI, another comment on TRANE Trace 700: the modeling engineers I hired<BR>told me, after consultation with TRANE, that exposed interior concrete<BR>floors, when modeled against the ASHRAE baseline of carpeted floors, showed<BR>a reduction in the cooling load,
but an increase in the heating load. An<BR>increase in the heating load was contrary to my reading in passive solar<BR>books. I used a simplified simulator for lay people, and it showed exposed<BR>interior concrete floors improved cold-weather performance over carpeted<BR>concrete (HEED, <A href="http://www2.aud.ucla.edu/heed" target=_blank>www2.aud.ucla.edu/heed</A>).<BR><BR>I have since heard that TRANE does not model thermal mass well. I have also<BR>not been able to find anyone with experience modeling the thermal mass of<BR>interior exposed concrete floors using any simulation tool.<BR><BR>Paul Grahovac, LEED AP<BR>PROSOCO, Inc.<BR>785-830-7355<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>[mailto:<A href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org"
ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A>] On Behalf Of Eurek, John S<BR>NWO<BR>Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 3:32 PM<BR>To: Peterson, John (EYP/HP CFS); <A href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Discrepancy between Equest & Trace 6.2<BR><BR>John,<BR><BR>It is like buying a car. Do you want a truck, manual/automatic, something<BR>fast....... You are asking for information overload. If you know exactly<BR>what you want it may be easier for us (in this list) to help guide you to<BR>the best option.<BR><BR>I also was once curious and found the link below. The end of the paper has<BR>charts comparing different
features.<BR>http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/tools_directory/pdfs/contrasting_<BR>the_c<BR>apabilities_of_building_energy_performance_simulation_programs_v1.0.pdf <BR><BR>Another sight.<BR>http://www.wbdg.org/resources/energyanalysis.php<BR><BR><BR>I use Trace 700 (v6.2.4). Why? Because the first, second and third company<BR>I worked for used it. It is good for running loads, but so-so for energy<BR>modeling. Also I have never used anything else. I have looked at equest<BR>and DOE, they both look like learning a completely new programming language.<BR><BR><BR>I wouldn't mind hearing other people's brief views of the programs they use.<BR>Equest, DOE, HAP, ect.<BR><BR><BR><BR>John Eurek LEED AP<BR>Mechanical Engineer,<BR>US Army Corps of Engineers<BR>Omaha District CENWO-ED-DA<BR>1616 Capitol Avenue<BR>Omaha, NE 68102<BR>Phone: (402) 995-2134<BR>email: <A href="mailto:john.s.eurek@usace.army.mil"
ymailto="mailto:john.s.eurek@usace.army.mil">john.s.eurek@usace.army.mil</A><BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>[mailto:<A href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A>] On Behalf Of Peterson,<BR>John<BR>(EYP/HP CFS)<BR>Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 2:03 PM<BR>To: <A href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" ymailto="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR>Subject: [Bldg-sim] Discrepancy between Equest & Trace 6.2<BR><BR><BR><BR>Has there been any information released on the differences between<BR>energy<BR>simulation programs? We have a bid requirement with a certain<BR>percentage<BR>listed and we have been asked to address the
differences between the bid<BR>model and the newly proposed model. <BR><BR><BR><BR>Thanks in advance -<BR><BR>John<BR><BR><BR><BR>John Peterson, PE, LEED AP<BR><BR>HP Critical Facilities Services delivered by EYP<BR><BR>6600 Rockledge Drive, 4th Floor<BR><BR>Bethesda, MD 20817<BR><BR>cell: 202-731-5835 <BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Bldg-sim mailing list<BR>http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org<BR>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to<BR><A href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" ymailto="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</A><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Bldg-sim mailing list<BR><A href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org" target=_blank>http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org</A><BR>To unsubscribe from
this mailing list send a blank message to<BR><A href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" ymailto="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</A><BR></DIV></DIV></div><br>
</body></html>