<div dir="ltr">I guess the better, more direct answer, from my perspective is:<div>No, I don't think this is that important compared to some of the other modeling problems out there in the world. </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Joe Huang <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
The responses so far are not what I expected and, in my view, miss
the point. <br>
I was not talking about workarounds or ignoring the missing day in
DOE-2, which is what I presume everyone has been doing up until
now. I'm frankly tired of that, because adding the fixes to DOE-2
seems to be quite easy to do.<br>
<br>
I also find the responses of "just use EnergyPlus" to be
disingenuous and condescending. It's like trying to fix a scratch
on your car, and then somebody comes by and says, "oh, just go and
buy this new better one". <br><span class="">
<br>
Joe<br>
<pre cols="90">Joe Huang
White Box Technologies, Inc.
346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 205A
Moraga CA 94556
<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>
<a href="http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com</a> for simulation-ready weather data
(o) <a href="tel:%28925%29388-0265" value="+19253880265" target="_blank">(925)388-0265</a>
(c) <a href="tel:%28510%29928-2683" value="+15109282683" target="_blank">(510)928-2683</a>
"building energy simulations at your fingertips"
</pre>
</span><div><div class="h5"><div>On 6/23/2015 1:21 PM, Justin Spencer
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I think the cleanest is you just pretend every day
is off by one. Ignore all of the month garbage (yes you'll be
off by a day at times). Just think about it as days 1-365, with
the right day of the week assigned. You can reassign your
holidays if you want. You wind up dropping the real 12/31.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But I like the "just use EnergyPlus" option. </div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jim
Dirkes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jim@buildingperformanceteam.com" target="_blank">jim@buildingperformanceteam.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default">
<ol>
<li>Use EnergyPlus :), which allows >365 days.
This is also helpful when the combined two-fuel
billing cycle is 13-14 months.</li>
<li>Ignore the 1/365 difference. Do you really think
it will matter much?</li>
</ol>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:48
PM, Joe Huang <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div> This is a little off-topic, but something
I've pondered for some time...<br>
<br>
The question is when people are using
eQUEST/DOE-2 with historical year weather, what
do you do when it's a leap year? Since DOE-2<br>
always simulates a 365-day year, do you just
ignore the missing leap day, but then don't the
Days of Week also get screwed up starting in
March?<br>
<br>
Since a quarter of the years are leap years,
I've never understood why accounting for them
has been considered an insignificant detail. <br>
I mean, if I told you that a quarter of the time
your simulation results would be a little wrong,
isn't that a pretty high frequency?<br>
<br>
Many eQUEST/DOE-2 users also have the mistaken
impression that the fault lies in the DOE-2
weather files, which is not true. <br>
Believe it or not, but the packed DOE-2 weather
file format actually contains 384 days (32 days
per month), and all the DOE-2 weather files I
produce always contains Feb. 29 for the leap
years (as well as other enhancements like
greater precision in the data).<br>
<br>
So, where does the problem lie? It's in the
clock within DOE-2 that always sets February to
be 28 days. In other words, DOE-2 will read the
weather file and do the simulation only through
February 28th, even though the weather file
contains data through February 32nd (:-)),
although everything beyond the 28th would be
blank on non-leap years, and beyond the 29th on
leap years. <br>
<br>
When I've looked through the DOE-2.1E code,
there are even flags setting the leap years but
these are never used. I've thought many times of
toying around with the code to see how difficult
it would be to implement leap years, but just
haven't gotten around to it. As far as I can
see, the biggest difficulty might might have to
do not with the simulation itself, but with the
reporting.<br>
<br>
I'd like to know if others think this is
something of sufficient importance to merit
further investigation.<br>
<br>
Joe<br>
<br>
<pre cols="90">Joe Huang
White Box Technologies, Inc.
346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 205A
Moraga CA 94556
<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>
<a href="http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com</a> for simulation-ready weather data
(o) <a href="tel:%28925%29388-0265" value="+19253880265" target="_blank">(925)388-0265</a>
(c) <a href="tel:%28510%29928-2683" value="+15109282683" target="_blank">(510)928-2683</a>
"building energy simulations at your fingertips"
</pre>
<div>On 6/23/2015 10:27 AM, Collinge, William
Overton wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>All,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>This is a
fantastic thread, and I am wondering if
it could be taken one step further to
query if anyone has experience with
methods to attempt calibrating models of
energy savings attributable to retrofits
of multiple systems simultaneously
(plant, envelope, HVAC etc. – as most
real-world retrofits likely are), going
past the 4- or 5-parameter breakpoint
regression models to incorporate inverse
modeling of specific load types and
their space- or time-variable
characteristics. This would fit under
multivariate methods in the last line of
Table 2 in the older version of ASHRAE
Guideline 14 that Jeff Haberl has posted
on his website, and would attempt to
standardize Maria’s Step 5 below without
(possibly) the need to conduct as much
in-depth field verification as might
otherwise be required. I’ve dabbled in
this a little bit…without extensive
discussions with others…</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Example: changing
the OA ventilation rate is going to have
a specific load profile versus some
retrofit that affects the solar gain
rate. Of course, much easier in theory
to do calibrations of this sort with
hourly meter data versus monthly utility
bills…</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Bill Collinge</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Postdoctoral
Scholar</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>University of
Pittsburgh</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>From:</span></b><span>
Bldg-sim [<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Maria Karpman<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 23, 2015
12:02 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Jeff Haberl'; 'Joe
Huang'; <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Bldg-sim]
Energy model calibration -
normalizing the utility bills to
month start-end</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Hello all,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>We usually do the
following to calibrate model to monthly
utility bills:</span></p>
<p><span><span>1)<span> </span></span></span><span>Create
or purchase weather file corresponding
to pre-retrofit period for which we have
billing data. Lately we’ve been using
WeatherAnalytics files, which we found
to be more cost effective than creating
our own (they charge $40 for an annual
file).</span></p>
<p><span><span>2)<span> </span></span></span><span>Run
simulation using this weather file
instead of TMY.</span></p>
<p><span><span>3)<span> </span></span></span><span>Standard
simulation reports (we typically use
eQUEST) show usage by calendar month
(e.g. January, February, etc.) which is
usually not aligned with dates of
utility bills, as noted in the question
that started this thread. As Brian
mentioned in one of the earlier posts,
this may be circumvented by entering the
actual meter read dates into eQUEST as
shown in the screenshot below. This will
align usages shown in eQUEST’s “E*”
reports such as ES-E with the actual
utility bills. The approach does not
allow entering more than one read date
per month (e.g. we can’t capture April 3
– 28 bill). For projects where this
limitation is an issue we generate
hourly reports that show consumption by
end use for each meter in the project,
and aggregate it into periods that are
aligned with utility bills. </span></p>
<p><span><img src="cid:part9.04070200.04050103@whiteboxtechnologies.com" height="330" width="444"></span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span><span>4)<span> </span></span></span><span>We
then copy simulation outputs (either
from ES-E or hourly reports, depending
on the method used) into a standard
spreadsheet with utility data. The
spreadsheet is set up to plot side by
side monthly utility bills and simulated
usage, and also calculates normalized
mean bias error (NMBE) and variance
CV(RMSE). </span></p>
<p><span><span>5)<span> </span></span></span><span>If
we did not to where we want to be with
NMBE and CV(RMSE) we adjust and re-run
the model, and re-paste results into the
same spreadsheet. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>In my
experience regression analysis using
weather as independent variable (i.e.
running model with TMY file and
normalizing for difference in weather)
or relying on HDD to allocate usage to
billing periods can be very
misleading, mainly because on many
projects weather is not the main
driver of consumption. For example
energy usage of a school during a
given time period depends much more on
vacation schedule than outdoor dry
bulb temperatures. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>-- </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>Maria
Karpman </span></b><span>LEED AP,
BEMP, CEM</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>________________</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Karpman
Consulting</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://www.karpmanconsulting.net/" target="_blank">www.karpmanconsulting.net</a>
</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Phone </span><span><a href="tel:860.430.1909" value="+18604301909" target="_blank">860.430.1909</a> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>41C New London
Turnpike</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Glastonbury, CT
06033</span><span></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>From:</span></b><span>
Bldg-sim [<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jeff Haberl<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 23, 2015
10:16 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Joe Huang; <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Bldg-sim]
Energy model calibration -
normalizing the utility bills to
month start-end</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p><span>Hello Joe,</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>Yes, you can count the degree
days and regress against that to show
a correlation. However, one will get a
better "fit" to the weather data if
you regress to the degree day that is
calculated for the balance point
temperature of the building -- hence
the inverse model toolkit or the
variable based degree day method.</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>PRISM actually calculates the
degree days to a variety of change
points and actually provides a table
for each location that you use as a
look up. The IMT will actually perform
a variable based degree day
calculation that agrees well with
PRISM. IMT will also provide you with
the average daily temperature for the
billing period.</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>When using DOE-2 for actual
billing periods, one will have to
extract the appropriate hourly
variable, sum it to daily and then
regroup to align with the billing
periods. Here's a chunk of code that
will create a dummy plant, display
PV-A, PS-A, PS-E and BEPS, and extract
the relevant hourly variables to
normalize the BEPS to the utility
bills:</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>INPUT PLANT ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>PLANT-REPORT VERIFICATION =
(PV-A)</span></p>
<p><span>$ PV-A, EQUIPMENT SIZES</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>SUMMARY = (PS-A,PS-E,BEPS)</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>$ PS-A, PLANT ENERGY UTILIZATION
SUMMARY</span></p>
<p><span>$ PS-E, MONTHLY ENERGY END USE
SUMMARY</span></p>
<p><span>$ BEPS, BUILDING ENERGY
PERFORMANCE SUMMARY</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>HVAC=PLANT-ASSIGNMENT ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>$ EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION</span></p>
<p><span>$ ELECTRIC DOMESTIC WATER HEATER</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>BOIL-1 =PLANT-EQUIPMENT
TYPE=ELEC-DHW-HEATER SIZE=-999 ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>$ ELECTRIC HOT-WATER BOILER</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>BOIL-2 =PLANT-EQUIPMENT
TYPE=ELEC-HW-BOILER SIZE=-999 ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>$ HERMETICALLY SEALED CENT
CHILLER</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>CHIL-1 =PLANT-EQUIPMENT
TYPE=HERM-CENT-CHLR SIZE=-999 ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>$ Graphics block for Data
Processing ***</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>RP-3 = SCHEDULE THRU DEC 31 (ALL)
(1,24) (1) ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>$ 8 = Total PLANT heating load
(Btu/h)</span></p>
<p><span>$ 9 = Total PLANT cooling load
(Btu/h)</span></p>
<p><span>$ 10 = Total PLANT electric load
(Btu/h)</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>BLOCK-3-1 = REPORT-BLOCK</span></p>
<p><span>VARIABLE-TYPE = PLANT</span></p>
<p><span>VARIABLE-LIST = (8,9,10) ..</span></p>
<p><span>BLOCK-3-2 = REPORT-BLOCK</span></p>
<p><span>VARIABLE-TYPE = GLOBAL</span></p>
<p><span>VARIABLE-LIST = (1) ..</span></p>
<p><span>HR-3 = HOURLY-REPORT</span></p>
<p><span>REPORT-SCHEDULE = RP-3</span></p>
<p><span>REPORT-BLOCK =
(BLOCK-3-1,BLOCK-3-2) ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>END ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>COMPUTE PLANT ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<p><span>STOP ..</span></p>
<p><span> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>8=! 8=)
:=) 8=) ;=) 8=) 8=( 8=)
8=() 8=) 8=| 8=) :=') 8=)
8=?<br>
Jeff S. Haberl,
Ph.D.,P.E.inactive,FASHRAE,FIBPSA,......<a href="mailto:........jhaberl@tamu.edu" target="_blank">jhaberl@tamu.edu</a><br>
Professor........................................................................Office
Ph: <a href="tel:979-845-6507" value="+19798456507" target="_blank">979-845-6507</a><br>
Department of
Architecture............................................Lab
Ph:<a href="tel:979-845-6065" value="+19798456065" target="_blank">979-845-6065</a><br>
Energy Systems
Laboratory...........................................FAX:
<a href="tel:979-862-2457" value="+19798622457" target="_blank">979-862-2457</a><br>
Texas A&M
University...................................................77843-3581<br>
College Station, Texas, USA,
77843.............................<a href="http://esl.tamu.edu" target="_blank">http://esl.tamu.edu</a><br>
8=/ 8=) :=) 8=) ;=) 8=)
8=() 8=) :=) 8=) 8=! 8=)
8=? 8=) 8=0</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<hr width="100%"> </div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>From:</span></b><span>
Bldg-sim [<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
on behalf of Joe Huang [<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, June 22, 2015
9:17 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Bldg-sim]
Energy model calibration -
normalizing the utility bills to
month start-end</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Maybe I'm missing
something here, but why can't you
just count up the degree days for
the utility period?<br>
I hope you're not working with
average or "typical year" degree
days, but the degree days from the
same time period.<br>
<br>
I also recall that the old Princeton
Scorekeeping Method (PRISM) back in
the 1980's allows the user to enter
the degree days for that time
period, so it's not a new problem.<br>
<br>
Joe<br>
<br>
</p>
<pre>Joe Huang</pre>
<pre>White Box Technologies, Inc.</pre>
<pre>346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 205A</pre>
<pre>Moraga CA 94556</pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a></pre>
<pre><a href="http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com</a> for simulation-ready weather data</pre>
<pre>(o) <a href="tel:%28925%29388-0265" value="+19253880265" target="_blank">(925)388-0265</a></pre>
<pre>(c) <a href="tel:%28510%29928-2683" value="+15109282683" target="_blank">(510)928-2683</a></pre>
<pre>"building energy simulations at your fingertips"</pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 6/22/2015
6:09 AM, Jones, Christopher wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">When
calibrating an energy model to
utility bills the utility bills
often don’t align with the month
start and end. I have reviewed
a couple methods to calendar
normalize the utility bills but
find them somewhat
unsatisfactory.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">For example
the method I am looking at does
the following:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The April gas
bill runs from March 25 – April
24. The algorithm takes the
average number of m3 per day
from that bill, applies it to
the days in April. Then it
takes the average number of days
from the May bill which runs
from April 24 – May 25 and
applies that average to the
remaining days in April. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The issue is
that the March-April period has
much higher HDD than the
April-May period and the
“normalized” gas usage is
significantly lower than the
simulation data for April.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I am
wondering if there are any
papers or other sources of
information as to how others
approach this problem.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><img src="cid:part26.08010101.09040205@whiteboxtechnologies.com" alt="cid:image003.png@01D09C46.E75BA0D0" height="43" width="108"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>Christopher
Jones,</span></b><span>P.Eng.<i>
<br>
</i></span><span lang="EN-CA">Senior Engineer</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-CA">WSP Canada
Inc.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">2300 Yonge
Street, Suite 2300</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">Toronto, ON M4P
1E4</span><span lang="EN-CA"><br>
</span><span lang="EN-CA">T <a href="tel:%2B1%20416-644-4226" value="+14166444226" target="_blank">+1
416-644-4226</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">F <a href="tel:%2B1%20416-487-9766" value="+14164879766" target="_blank">+1
416-487-9766</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">C <a href="tel:%2B1%20416-697-0065" value="+14166970065" target="_blank">+1
416-697-0065</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA"><a href="http://www.wspgroup.com/" target="_blank">www.wspgroup.com</a>
</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<hr width="100%"> </div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><br>
You are receiving this
communication because you are
listed as a current WSP
contact. Should you have any
questions regarding WSP’s
electronic communications
policy, please consult our
Anti-Spam Commitment <a href="https://teesmail.tees.tamus.edu/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx" target="_blank">
www.wspgroup.com/casl</a>.
For any concern or if you
believe you should not be
receiving this message, please
forward this message to us at
<a href="mailto:caslcompliance@wspgroup.com" target="_blank">caslcompliance@wspgroup.com</a>
so that we can promptly
address your request. This
message is intended only for
the use of the individual or
entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain
information which is
privileged, confidential,
proprietary or exempt from
disclosure under applicable
law. If you are not the
intended recipient or the
person responsible for
delivering the message to the
intended recipient, you are
strictly prohibited from
disclosing, distributing,
copying or in any way using
this message. If you have
received this communication in
error, please notify the
sender, and destroy and delete
any copies you may have
received. <br>
<br>
WSP provides professional land
surveying services through the
following entities: WSP
Surveys (AB) Limited
Partnership and WSP Surveys
(BC) Limited Partnership </span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<pre>_______________________________________________</pre>
<pre>Bldg-sim mailing list</pre>
<pre><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></pre>
<pre>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><span>
<hr width="100%"> </span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>No virus found in
this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a><br>
Version: 2014.0.4800 / Virus Database:
4365/10055 - Release Date: 06/19/15</span></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Bldg-sim mailing list
<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>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bldg-sim mailing list<br>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org" rel="noreferrer" 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 <a href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
-- <br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<p><span></span></p>
James V Dirkes II, PE, BEMP,
LEED AP<br>
CEO/President<br>
The Building Performance Team
Inc.<br>
1631 Acacia Dr, GR, Mi 49504<br>
<br>
Direct: <a href="tel:616.450.8653" value="+16164508653" target="_blank">616.450.8653</a><br>
<a href="mailto:jim@buildingperformanceteam.com" target="_blank">jim@buildingperformanceteam.com</a><br>
<br>
<a href="http://buildingperformanceteamcom" target="_blank">Website </a>l
<a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pub/jim-dirkes/7/444/413" target="_blank">LinkedIn</a>
<p><b><i><span> </span></i></b><span></span></p>
<p>
</p>
<p><span>Studies show that
four out of every three
people have a hard time
with math.<span></span></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bldg-sim mailing list<br>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org" rel="noreferrer" 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 <a href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>