[BLDG-SIM] hornets nest?

Mark Case mcase at etcgrp.com
Fri Jan 28 09:33:38 PST 2000


I agree completly with your rant. Buildings and their M&E systems are
inherently very complex, much more so than most people believe. My comment
addresses helping non-modelers understand what's happening and training new
modelers - not necessarily making it `easier' for inexperienced people to do
ES work.

-----Original Message-----
From: John P. Karasaki, P.E. [mailto:jpkarasa at cbg-engrs.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 11:37 AM
To: 'mcase at etcgrp.com'; BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: RE: [BLDG-SIM] hornets nest?


Mark,

You've struck a nerve of sorts with your comment of non-modelers or new
modelers using PowerDOE or other graphical interface to do ES work.  These
packages allow for gross error in system simulation when used by the
inexperienced modeler or the office "computer guy" who doesn't have any HVAC
experience.  I get called in to review projects frequently when our clients
are doubting savings that have been submitted.  You would not believe the
mistakes that are made!

Sorry for the rant, but I'm also getting tired the people who think they can
purchase Power or Visual DOE and be a DOE2 expert in a week with no prior
experience -- simulation, HVAC design or otherwise.  I get calls like this
at least once a month on average.  As deregulation looms, the frequency of
this seems to be going up.

My comment on the usefulness of PD was only based on its speed due to the
computation demand the software places on the hardware.  Where we want to
use PD the most is with the 500+ space buildings we need to simulate in 3-D,
with all surfaces defined.  Unfortunately, our current operating budget has
not allowed us to purchase the fastest hardware out there.  This is a
company issue and not a true problem with PD.

Historically, DOE-2 market penetration in Oregon has been excellent.  Most
M/E design firms in Portland have had at one time someone on their staff who
could at least put together a rudimentary model using DOE-2.  This was due
to the $$$ that BPA, PacifiCorp and PGE had available on projects.

Today however, market penetration is weak.  There are really only three
names that come up seriously in the Oregon DOE-2 commercial market: Curtis
Clark, Mike Hatten, and John Karasaki (me).  I don't mean to offend or
forget anyone else in Oregon that may be doing DOE-2 modeling.  I am saying,
however, that if someone wants hard core analysis of complicated mechanical
systems, complex architectural buildings, or analysis of innovative
electrical systems, the three people I mentioned are usually on the top of
the selection list.

Our firm has a high % of using ES in new design.  ES is usually used to help
make major equipment purchasing decisions.  I can't speak about other design
firms, but I'd guess Mike Hatten incorporates ES into his projects since
they do design as well.

Eley and associates market the fact that Visual DOE has the CAD interface
you ask about.  I haven't used it, but others in our firm have with very
limited success.  We have stopped trying to do this and are waiting until
Eley jumps on the DOE-2.2 bandwagon (not that I've heard that they ever
will, though).

P.S.  My understanding is that in Utah, there are really only 2 firms,
including yours, that are doing real ES work.  And that the work done by the
Utah ES people is top drawer.

Best Regards,

John P. Karasaki, P.E.

Energy Services Manager
CBG Consulting Engineers
6650 SW Redwood Lane Suite 355
Portland, OR 97224
(503) 620-3232


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Case [mailto:mcase at etcgrp.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 9:27 AM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] hornets nest?


We've had good luck using both PD and 2.2, often in conjunction. PD can bog
down but with many of our projects it is very useful for showing
non-modelers or new modelers what is happening. Once a PD model is 95-100%
complete we'll start using 2.2 if necessary.


Question: Does anyone know what the `market penetration' energy simulation
(ES)is? What % of design firms use it some of their projects? Most of their
projects? In what % of total new design is ES used? (In Utah it is a very
small fraction indeed!)

Question: Does anyone have much experience with CAD to energy simulation
software? I've heard it exists but frankly have never seen it. Would this
type of interface - say DXF to DOE2.2 or EnergyPlus - have much impact on
market penetration?

Can anyone from DOE or one of the research institutions associated with the
EnergyPlus program explain what their thinking is regarding high quality
user interfaces for the EP simulation code? Is there a plan, beyond hoping
the private market will see enough potential for an interface that they will
create one?

-----Original Message-----
From: Postman at gard.com [mailto:Postman at gard.com]On Behalf Of John P.
Karasaki, P.E.
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 5:09 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] hornets nest?


Mark,

I brought this issue up earlier last year and didn't see much dust fly.
Jeff Hirsch was kind enough to post what was going on.

PowerDoe hasn't been very useful for us.  Our buildings tend to be fairly
large with alot of detail, so it is easy to bring PowerDoe to a crawl on
both the P-pro 200 and PIII 300 machines we have.

I'm very happy with what Jeff has done with DOE 2.2 and am even happier that
he is supporting and advancing it.  I don't think DOE would be able to do as
good a job as Jeff has done.  They tend to take on too large chunks at a
time and complicate things.

It would be nice if DOE provided grants or other funding for private
developers to continue work on DOE 2.2.  However, I don't see this is
plausible since they have spent thousands (millions?) on EnergyPlus already.
I don't think it's likely that anything which competes with EnergyPlus will
see any government funding.  And even though I'm typically an optimist, I
don't think that even a letter from everyone on this list, or every DOE2
user in the world would change their minds and direction.  Hopefully, I'll
be proven wrong.



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Case [mailto:mcase at etcgrp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 2:09 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] hornets nest?


Most of you are undoubtedly aware of the recent controversy over DOE2.2
PowerDoe and EnergyPlus. I know that many people on this list are actively
involved in one or more of these programs.
I think this list is as good a place as any to start a serious discussion
about where things are going, why, and how we (users of the tools) feel
about these things.

I'll start by boldly stating that I don't believe EnergyPlus will provide a
truly useful (on-the-ground useful) tool for many years to come. The history
of DOE and the national labs in creating and releasing such software is not
very good.
Are the labs and developers trying to create a product useable in a
competitive design consulting world? The last thing we need is another
arcane simulation package with no front end or post processor - been there,
done that. Perhaps new algorithyms and advanced coding are needed but
without the interface they won't help me at all. I'd rather use the `older'
ones and keep the ability to show designers what I'm doing.

One more comment and question - the DOE is spending our money to create new
code and have arguably abandoned the multi-million dollar investment in
previous DOE2.x developent. Is this the best use of taxpayer money?

Come on everybody - don't be afraid to weigh-in on this - let's hear your
thoughts!


=====================================================You received this
e-mail because you are subscribed

to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe

from this mailing list send a blank message to

BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM


======================================================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM


======================================================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM



======================================================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM



More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list