[Bldg-sim] A critical juncture for Modelica/FMI next week

[Pavel Dybskiy]

Per,

It is impressive ... but it sounds too abstract to me to digest.
Can you help me to think about FMI in terms of a BEM (building energy
modeling) task.

For example:
1) There is a  system of ODEs (2 o3 equations), which represents a
simple (say 3R2C or 3R3C) thermal network (TN), which in turn models a
thermal zone.

2) There is another set of equations and inequalities that specifies HVAC
system.

3) There is a given weather file (temps, radiation, etc) which provides
some set of time series variables (1hour sample time) for those ODEs.

4) There are 2-3-4 schedule files, which  specifies other sets of
variables/parameters  ( 1hour - 1day - 1month sample time ) for those
thermal zones and HVAC.

Today I am using Matlab/Simulink to simulate this (1-4) problem.

In case if I need more complex building and HVAC models I may think about
BCVTB(LBNL) (people already do this) to co-simulate various combinations of
E+ and Matlab models.

What role and how can FMI/FMU play in such a game?

Thank you

Pavel



On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Per Sahlin <per.sahlin at equa.se> wrote:

> Dear all,****
>
> ** **
>
> There is a meeting of the FMI (www.functional-mockup-interface.org) design
> group Monday and Tuesday next week where most likely the level of ambition
> of FMI 2.0 will be settled. Different application areas have different
> needs and priorities and I think it would be wise to provide some input
> from the building simulation community to this meeting. Let me first give
> some background.****
>
> ** **
>
> The ultimate purpose of equation based simulation and Modelica (
> www.modelica.org) is to enable model exchange between users and tools.
> However, the Modelica language is by necessity a very complex and rapidly
> evolving “beast.” It is essentially impossible to keep tools in good sync
> with each other in their interpretation of Modelica. In practice, this
> means that porting complex model libraries, such as the MSL Fluid and Media
> libraries and derivatives, from one tool to another often involves man
> years of work, if possible at all. This is where FMI comes in. FMI provides
> a means to exchange pre-compiled model units and this can be radically
> simpler than to achieve a common understanding and interpretation of the
> underlying Modelica code. FMI 1.0 has proven this since a number of years.
> However, for our application FMI 1.0 is severely limited.****
>
> ** **
>
> There are three key areas where FMI 2.0 has previously been planned to be
> enhanced in ways that in my opinion are essential to the building
> simulation community:****
>
> ** **
>
> **-          **Introduction of physical connectors (now only direct
> variable-to-variable connections are supported)****
>
> **-          **Support for arrays, the size of which is determined by
> parameters that can be changed after compilation (only scalars in FMI 1.0)
> ****
>
> **-          **Support for sparse analytical Jacobians****
>
> ** **
>
> In the building simulation world of multiple-port tanks and zones, where
> many components are built around  discretized PDE:s, FMI without these
> features is unlikely to become very useful. At the same time the FMI design
> group is facing some seriously conflicting goals:****
>
> ** **
>
> **-          **FMI must not be too rapidly evolving – otherwise much of
> the purpose is lost****
>
> **-          **The standard must not be too complex for vendors to support
> ****
>
> **-          **There is an urgent need to upgrade v. 1.0 to something
> more powerful****
>
> ** **
>
> Therefore, there is a distinct risk that some of the planned enhancements
> of 2.0 are postponed. For reasons of stability, it could take a very long
> time before the next major release.****
>
> ** **
>
> If you share my concern about these issues, please write a few lines to
> underline why we need these features to me.  I will compile for the FMI
> design committee.****
>
> ** **
>
> Best regards,****
>
> ** **
>
> Per Sahlin****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> -----------------------------------------****
>
> Per Sahlin****
>
> EQUA Simulation AB   ****
>
> per.sahlin at equa.se ****
>
> +46   8 546 20 111****
>
> +46 70 422 03 02   (mobile)****
>
> +46   8 546 20 101 (fax)****
>
> plurresahlin (skype)****
>
> Råsundavägen 100****
>
> 169 57 SOLNA, Sweden****
>
> http://www.equa.se     ****
>
> -----------------------------------------****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Michael Wetter [mailto:mwetter at lbl.gov]
> *Sent:* den 29 februari 2012 01:59
> *To:* j.hensen at tue.nl; r.c.g.m.loonen at tue.nl; p.hoes at tue.nl;
> Christoph.van.Treeck at ibp.fraunhofer.de; marlen.schurig at ibp.fraunhofer.de;
> sebastian.burhenne at ise.fraunhofer.de; sebastian.herkel at ise.fraunhofer.de;
> john.grunewald at gmx.de; bryane at engr.ucsb.edu; jbraun at purdue.edu;
> wyan at tamu.edu; ibeausol at mae.carleton.ca; spitler at okstate.edu;
> house.john.m at gmail.com; vincent.lemort at ulg.ac.be; nytsch at udk-berlin.de;
> wischhusen at xrg-simulation.de; ONeillZ at utrc.utc.com; dongb at utrc.utc.com;
> bonvini at elet.polimi.it; gyalistras at env.ethz.ch; Vladimir.Vukovic at ait.ac.at;
> Dirk.Saelens at bwk.kuleuven.be; Lieve.Helsen at mech.kuleuven.be;
> Roel.DeConinck at mech.kuleuven.be; Ruben.Baetens at bwk.kuleuven.be; Per
> Sahlin; etienne.wurtz at univ-savoie.fr; laurent.mora at u-bordeaux1.fr;
> marcus.keane at nuigalway.ie; tsnouidui at lbl.gov; wzuo at lbl.gov;
> dietrich.schmidt at ibp.fraunhofer.de; andreas.nicolai at tu-dresden.de;
> p.raftery at gmail.com; andre.costa.phd at gmail.com; Hilding.ELMQVIST at 3ds.com;
> manuel at udk-berlin.de; jhuber at udk-berlin.de; rene.unger at ea-gmbh.de;
> cecile.goffaux at cenaero.be; sophia.buckingham at cenaero.be;
> sebastien.pecceu at cenaero.be; Daniele Basciotti; gyalistras at synergy.ch
> *Cc:* Schindler at itisim.com; jonas.eborn at modelon.se;
> johan.akesson at control.lth.se; kja at control.lth.se; michael.tiller at gmail.com;
> peter.fritzson at liu.se; Martin.Otter at dlr.de; dietmar.winkler at hit.no
> *Subject:* Re: teleconference about IEA proposal "Modelica-based
> next-generation tools for new and existing buildings and communities"****
>
> ** **
>
> All,****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks to those who contributed to today's conference call. Attached
> please find the meeting minutes. Please let me know any important omissions
> or corrections.****
>
> ** **
>
> As discussed, I also added a google doc where each of you can add your
> interest in participation and in leading a particular subtask. There is
> also a column in which you can specify your funding situation for the
> respective work, and a column in which you can add demonstration objects
> that could be included in the revised proposal. The link to this
> spreadsheet is****
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AnSvCGCOHhzXdHBOSDRuLXJOd2tvSlBzUXBHaU93NVE
> ****
>
> Anyone with the link can edit and view the document. So don't add
> sensitive information or proprietary information. You are free to share
> this document, as well as the proposal, at****
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/a/lbl.gov/document/d/1ia1jyXrvf1jUynN_1-3QBx0quYdXlOdYgPTacpE6lLU/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1
> ****
>
> with your ExCo delegate and/or your potential funding agency.
>
> Depending on how many people work on the respective subtasks, some
> subtasks might be combined in future revision. For now I kept the structure
> that resulted from the Sydney meeting.****
>
> ** **
>
> All the best,****
>
> ** **
>
> Michael****
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Michael Wetter <mwetter at lbl.gov> wrote:***
> *
>
> All,****
>
> ** **
>
> We would like to schedule a teleconference with those of you who are
> interested in participating in the IEA proposal "Modelica-based
> next-generation tools for new and existing buildings and communities" that
> was discussed in Sydney last November.****
>
> ** **
>
> To schedule the call, please respond by Wednesday February 8 to the poll
> at  http://www.doodle.com/c5fvhz5uuzuq7ykr. ****
>
> If you like to be removed from future emails, please respond to me.****
>
> ** **
>
> The proposal is at
> https://docs.google.com/a/lbl.gov/document/d/1ia1jyXrvf1jUynN_1-3QBx0quYdXlOdYgPTacpE6lLU/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1 and
> attached to this email. This version addresses the feedback from the Sydney
> meeting, as well as feedback received from the Fraunhofer Institute in
> Kassel.****
>
> ** **
>
> The items to be discussed at the phone call are below. ****
>
> ** **
>
>    1. *Outline of next steps.*
>    Proposal due April 16, presentation to IEA ExCo meeting on June 14.
>    If approved, there will be a 1 year planning period (we will check
>    whether this can be accelerated), followed by 3 years of research and 1
>    year of reporting.****
>    2. *Expression of interest of research groups to work on the proposed
>    research.*
>    Individual research groups should express what tasks they like to
>    contribute to, and are likely to get funded from their respective country.
>    ****
>    3. *Indication of subtask leaders.*
>    Note: Subtask leaders need *not* be finalized by June, but an
>    indication of what country will lead what task is recommended. The subtask
>    leaders can be finalized during the planning period.
>    Subtask leaders need a minimum commitment of 3 months/year.****
>    4. *Inform your ExCo delegate.*
>    The ExCo delegates will need to verbally confirm at the June meeting
>    that funding will be available in their country and that the proposal is in
>    the interest of their country. For the proposal to be accepted, around five
>    (minimum 3) countries need to commit to participate. It therefore is
>    essential that you discuss the proposal and your interest to participate
>    with your ExCo delegate prior to the June meeting. See
>    http://www.ecbcs.org/contacts.htm for a list of ExCo delegates.****
>    5. *Other points of discussion.*****
>
> ** **
>
> Please let me know if there is anything else you would like to add to the
> agenda.****
>
> ** **
>
> All the best,****
>
> ** **
>
> Michael Wetter & Jan Hensen****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,

Pavel Dybskiy
M.A.Sc. Candidate, Department of Architectural Science
Faculty of Engineering, Architecture and Science, Ryerson University
E-mail: pdybskiy at ryerson.ca;
telephone: 647-984-4940
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20120309/85f9b24c/attachment-0002.htm>