<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)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Webdings;
panose-1:5 3 1 2 1 5 9 6 7 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@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="1026" />
</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>Hello all,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Has anybody successfully used eQuest to size systems? Having
used both eQuest and Trace, I have found that they tend to be in relative
agreement when it comes to load estimating. They differ, however, when it comes
to sizing systems. Up until now, I have been very reluctant to trust eQuest for
sizing equipment, and tend to revert back to Trace. I am wondering, however, if
anyone has ever sized equipment based on eQuest outputs. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>For example, I have a simple VAV project with terminal
reheat that I modeled both in Trace and eQuest. The SV-A report in eQuest gives
me heat capacity values for the terminal boxes that are all within 5% or so of
the values I get from Trace for the same zones. This gives me some confidence,
going forward, that I can make VAV box selections based on the SV-A output from
eQuest.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>When it comes to the central station air handler, however, I
find that when looking at the SS-A and SS-B reports, the peak loads reported for
the preheat and main cooling coils, are dramatically different that those
reported by Trace for the exact same project. In trying to size the main
Preheat and Cooling coils, I find that the eQuest values are nowhere near the
Trace values. My manual calculations, however, tend to be close to the Trace
results, but nowhere near the eQuest results. Am I looking at the right reports,
or is there a different report that gives me the peak load on my AHU main preheat
and cooling coils?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Ultimately, I would like to get to the point where I can
solely use eQuest for projects that I know will be submitted for LEED. Right
now, I have been using Trace for design, and eQuest for energy modeling. I
guess I'm curious to see if anyone has been able to do away with Trace
entirely, and rely only on eQuest for design and energy modeling. Any comments,
opinions, etc would be greatly appreciated.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>Seun Odukomaiya, LEED AP - </span></b><i><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:navy'>Mechanical
Engineer</span></i><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>L'Acquis Consulting Engineers</span><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>280 East 96th Street, Suite 280<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:3.0pt'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:navy'>Indianapolis, IN 46240<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>voice: (317) 706-2075<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>fax: (317) 706-2076<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>email: <a href="mailto:amaue@laceindy.com"><span
style='color:blue'>sodukomaiya@laceindy.com</span></a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:navy'>web: <a href="http://www.laceindy.com"><span
style='color:blue'>www.laceindy.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:18.0pt;font-family:Webdings;color:green'>P</span><b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:green'> </span></b><b><span
style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:green'>Please
consider the environment before printing this e-mail.</span></b><b><span
style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:green'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>