<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Stylus BT";
panose-1:2 14 4 2 2 2 6 2 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="2050" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Paul,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I would like to console/assure you of something, just because any
given energy model doesn’t show specific behavior doesn’t mean it’s
not real, and it doesn’t mean the person who put that model together
doesn’t “believe” in it. More often than not, the
program simply can’t handle what we’re trying to model explicitly/cleanly,
if at all! The science of building energy modeling is ever-developing.
Every month new software and methods are developed that allow us to grow and
accurately model more things.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Speaking specifically to eQuest, I can’t purport to be an
expert – as I’ve yet to be tasked to model thermal massing options
comparatively, but I’m aware explicitly modeling the thermal massing
qualities of any given zone’s contents/floor constructions is a
possibility (see attached screengrab – rightmost inputs). The
constructions you define for your envelope walls/floors/roofs and interior
walls also defines the mass properties that, by default, will account for the
storage and transfer of heat over time – though users can and often do
choose to model such elements without heat storage/transfer if necessary for
tangent reasons. That said, my general impression from reading others’
discussions on the topic (in the eQuest mailing list), is that when it comes to
comparative modeling of specific constructions (i.e. carpeted SOG vs. bare
slabs), it does become fuzzy as to how to accurately model both cases.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>John,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>If I can venture a guess for Shaun… I think it has
something to do with long hours, caffeine overdosage, deadlines, model
reviewers, and the quirky but pleasant company/support available through these mailing
lists... Also, what was the question? =)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>~Nick<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><img width=119 height=37 id="Picture_x0020_1"
src="cid:image001.jpg@01CACF24.0A9464B0" alt="cid:489575314@22072009-0ABB"></span><b><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'>NICK CATON, E.I.T.</span></b><b><span style='font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#CC9900'>PROJECT ENGINEER</span><span style='font-size:7.5pt;color:#CC9900'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'>25501 west valley parkway<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'>olathe ks 66061<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'>direct 913 344.0036<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'>fax 913 345.0617<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#2D4D5E'>Check out our new web-site @ </span></i><span style='font-size:
11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a
href="www.smithboucher.com" title="blocked::www.smithboucher.com"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'>www.smithboucher.com</span></a></span><u><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:blue'> </span></u><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>John
Aulbach<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, March 28, 2010 12:37 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Shaun Martin; Paul Grahovac; Clark Denson; Eurek, John S NWO;
Peterson, John (EYP/HP CFS); bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Bldg-sim] differences between energy simulations programs<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I would like to know the meaning of modelers getting
sidetracked easily....<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
<hr size=1 width="100%" align=center>
</span></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Shaun Martin
<smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com><br>
<b>To:</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>Sent:</b> Wed, March 24, 2010 2:39:49 PM<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Bldg-sim] differences between energy simulations programs<br>
</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><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">smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com</a><br>
member CAGBC, ASHRAE <br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="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">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">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">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">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">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">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">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
[mailto:<a href="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">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">john.s.eurek@usace.army.mil</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="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">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">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">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">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>