[Equest-users] eQuest Project Methodology

[Pasha Korber-Gonzalez]

Nick-(who asked the question),

In-short, I have over 10 yrs simulation experience.  Started using DOE2.1e
in code form before there was a user interface--thank god for user
interfaces, and especially ones that are free--such as eQuest.  I've been
using eQuest since 2004.

My responses are inserted as follows:
Pasha Korber
PK Consulting

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Bruce Easterbrook <bruce5 at bellnet.ca> wrote:

> Hi Nick and Nick,
> I have spent a year or so using E-Quest and a decade using different forms
> of the DOE engine and other various modelling programs.   I also have 20
> years with ASHRAE.  I'm not an expert with E-quest but have spent some crazy
> hours on it.  I only recent discovered this forum and for a year toiled in
> darkness.  I will insert my comments below.
>
> Nick Caton wrote:
>
>  Hi Nick (I like your name!),
>
>
>
> I’m an intermediate learner and user of eQuest (not an expert/developer),
> so your perspective may match mine some months down the road.  Here’s my
> short/sweet answers – obviously different for others but here we go:
>
>
>
> … I only use the schematic wizard or DD wizard for monthly energy
> estimates, because I do not understand the detailed inputs and how it works,
> but I would like to.
>
> I always start with the SD and an Autocad drawing.  Get the basics in
> (geometry and basic construction) and let the program size everything.  Size
> windows and doors on percentages, standard everything.  The initial key is
> to get the program running and not freezing.  Look at the error reports and
> fix them, or at least the one which matter.  Some of the errors are not
> really errors.  Once that is looking good do a save as and start a new
> branch.  Get into the DD and start tweaking.  One at a time, save and start
> a new branch each time.
>
> I always start with the DD Wizard and then switch to DDedit mode.  I
> suppose there isn't much difference in which wizard you start with the
> primary reason for using a wizard to start is to (on a basic level)
> establish: 1) the building type & applicable building schedules (i.e. MFHR
> vs. Office.), 2) Custom building footprint & zoning (always import a CAD
> file if you can, I have done the xy-coordinate input and it is not fun., 3)
> input your overall basic parameters from a 'one-input to all-zones' approach
> including LPD's, Zonal controls, occupancy/sqft, etc.  The wizards are great
> for your basic level-all applicable inputs for the whole building.--In
> DDedit mode you do this zone by zone--large/complex buildings can have 100's
> of zones.  You'll need to learn and get comfortable with DDedit mode, good
> simulations are performed in this mode.  Results of the wizard inputs are
> too broad especially for compliance simulations.
>




>
>
> I use eQuest primarily as an energy modeling tool, and only rarely as a
> design (loads calculation) tool.  eQuest is great for making energy-concious
> design decisions (i.e. will option A or B save me more $$/yr?), and powerful
> with regards to modeling for LEED and such, but it’s a big clunker if all
> you need are loads to size equipment.  I started with the same thoughts as
> you, but now regard the wizards as a tremendous time-saver to set yourself
> up for “real” work in the detailed mode.
>
>
>
> Are most people using these wizards and then get into the detailed
>
> modeling or do you go straight into detailed parametric modeling?
>
> I use it initially to size systems, basic heat loss for the building, and
> then start dealing with ASHRAE 62.1.  It will dominate all loads.  Still let
> the program size everything.  Start your zoning.  Everything in incremental
> steps, save and branch before each new step.  I do not recommend going
> straight to detailed modelling. The program is quirky and doesn't like
> certain things or methods.  If it crashes your error messages are limited
> and cryptic.  You could easily get 20 to 40 hours into a building detail and
> the program won't run.  You can then spend half that trying to figure out
> what is wrong.  If you can't, you go back to square one.  Been there done
> that.  It is smarter to have a saved tail, you only have to go back a step
> or two and work out the difficulty.  Preserve the file, start a new branch.
> Remember this program is huge and complex and very picky.  It produces 500+
> pages of data.  One major error and it freezes.  Keep it running!
>
>  See answer above, and parametric modeling is used primarily for
> ECM's--this is how you compare "different models" in the same file--for LEED
> complaince, technically you would build the proposed model in the file and
> then use the parametric runs to run your baseline parameters for the
> baseline model.  The approach here is to build your proposed building design
> model and then "back off" the design values to the ASHRAE (or other)
> baseline values, thus creating your baseline simulation.
>
> For a complex model, I use the DD or SD wizards to the fullest extent, then
> spend most of my time tweaking things within the detailed mode for most
> projects.  I occasionally spend a small amount of time delving into typing
> stuff up in the .inp file to account for specific things, but I didn’t begin
> picking that up until I had a number of projects under my belt.
>
>
>
> …do you get into detail modeling of the building with all spaces
>
> and zones…
>
> You go as complex as the job requires.  I so far have managed to stay out
> of tweaking the .inp file.  I prefer to tweak/trick the program using the
> DD.  There are many ways to skin a cat, you just have to find the way the
> program accepts your input to get your tweak.  There are many run arounds
> mentioned in the forum to accomplish different tasks.  Remember this program
> is evolving.  It is state of the art but that is changing fast.
>
>   I had a project about a year ago that was an ice rink.  DOE2.2 can do
> this simulation, but eQuest has not developed a formal module to make ice
> rink inputs easy for the user.  In this case I had no choice but to go into
> the .inp file in order to get out what I needed.  (This is where the
> flashbacks come from the programming classes back in engineering school.)
>    If I don't have to do it, then everythings is better for it--it's just
> another complex level of this already complex software--isn't it amazing
> though that there are software programs that are doing these types of
> simulations?  Just wait until dynamic system simulation becomes
> available--just think of the modeling problems we will have then?  lol
>
> I try to model as much of the geometries as I can in the wizards.  I have
> edited/created geometries/rooms/zones/etc… after the fact (it’s not as hard
> as it seems).  It is unquestionably faster and less prone to error within
> the wizards however.
>
>
>
> …or do you generalize the building zones as the tutorial recommends…
>
> Yes, start simple, go to complex.
>
>   Simplify as much as possible, but be sure not to over simplify--when
> this happens you delete the file you were working on and start all over.
> Modeling is like chess-you have to plan your moves before you execute them.
>
>
> Yes.  Same overriding concept as any loads calc program (like HAP).
>
>
>
> and is it worthwhile to import autoCAD files to help model
>
> the building?
>
>
>
> Absolutely.
>
> The only way to go.  Input points anti-clock wise.
>
>   yep.
>
> Can you compare several different building models in the
>
> same file and show comparison reports?
>
> Yes, by way of using the parametric runs to establish your ECM's.  In the
parametric runs you have a lot of flexibility of what you change.  I also
learned last year, when I took a training class from Marlin Addison, that we
can use Global Parameters to set up simplified inputs to the model and then
use these inputs to quickly and easily change the inputs to run our
ECM's--with this approach however, it is changing the whole model file and
outputs which doesn't allow you to look at more than one model in the same
file.  The global parameters thing is a really cool feature, but I haven't
had the chance & time to really use it--besides the inputs are based on
if-then type programming, and like I said earlier-programming languages
really make my head spin.  I can never get the programming right in the
global parameters when I try it.  Some people are really good with it and
use this input approach all the time.  For the comparison reports, when
using the parametric runs option eQuest has programmed in some great reports
and graphs that show the annual & monthly energy savings for your ECMs.  If
this is what you want from eQuest, then use the parametric runs option.


> Not sure, haven't tried that feature yet.  I have lately been taking my
> data to a spread sheet to compare various models.  Each model in my branches
> represents a different concept or trial.  This will be my next ordeal by
> fire.  Basically you just have to work with the program and experiment.  It
> is a great tool!  Lots of back-ups so you don't have to back track too far
> when things crash.--I do this too like Bruce, I keep file copies for all
> the "milestones" I reach in my model, or all the trials I'm doing--this is
> especially helpful when you have complex HVAC system inputs and then the
> program crashes and you can't remember which step in your inputs made it
> crash--with no solution.  So in this case I can back-track a few steps,
> instead of loosing the whole project because the file became corrupt or
> unfixable from crash errors.
> Bruce Easterbrook P.Eng.
> Abode Engineering
>
>    I haven’t fully grasped yet the potential/limitations of the parametric
> reports feature, but for comparing different systems and such I generally
> create two different files (preserving the effort put into the geometries by
> saving a copy and going backwards in the second file).
>
>  In support of Nick's approach--I use the parametric runs for my basic
> ECM's (i.e. daylighting-no daylighting, increased insulation, improved
> glazing, etc.)  For more complex ECM's like simulating complex HVAC systems
> including (geothermal, radiant cooling, etc.), I do the "save as" thing like
> Nick and create a new file.  For situations like this the HVAC system is so
> complex (in terms of eQuest capabilities) the baseline plant equipment is
> always way different then the plant equipment I need to input for the
> proposed high-tech HVAC system.  In every case though, I assume we all do it
> by trial-and-error, every time we do a model...
>
> Hope this helps,
>
>
>
> ~Nick
>
> [image: cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB]**
>
> * *
>
> *NICK CATON, E.I.T.***
>
> PROJECT ENGINEER
>
> 25501 west valley parkway
>
> olathe ks 66061
>
> direct 913 344.0036
>
> fax 913 345.0617
>
> *Check out our new web-site @ *www.smithboucher.com* *
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [
> mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org<equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org>]
> On Behalf Of Nicholas Couture, LEED AP
> Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 2:40 PM
> To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: [Equest-users] eQuest Project Methodology
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Good Afternoon eQuest users,
>
>
>
> I have a general question that I am wondering what is the method that
>
> people are using to model with eQuest.  For example I have done a couple
>
> projects in it (always with a backup in HAP), and I only use the
>
> schematic wizard or DD wizard for monthly energy estimates, because I do
>
> not understand the detailed inputs and how it works, but I would like
>
> to.  Are most people using these wizards and then get into the detailed
>
> modeling or do you go straight into detailed parametric modeling?  Can
>
> you and do you get into detail modeling of the building with all spaces
>
> and zones, or do you generalize the building zones as the tutorial
>
> recommends, and is it worthwhile to import autoCAD files to help model
>
> the building?  Can you compare several different building models in the
>
> same file and show comparison reports?  I have found that the EEM wizard
>
> is limited to modifying one system.
>
>
>
> Any responses on all facets of the program are welcome.
>
>
>
>
>
> Nick Couture, LEED AP
>
> Jr. Mechanical Engineer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 3555 Veteran's Memorial Highway, Suite M
>
> Ronkonkoma, NY 11779
>
> Tel:  631.981.3990 ext. 230
>
> Fax: 631.981.3971
>
> ncouture at emtec-engineers.com
>
>
>
>
>
> www.emtec-engineers.com
>
>
>
> This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
>
> the designated recipient(s) named above. This is not in anyway an
>
> official statement of Emtec Consultants or solicitation to buy our
>
> services. Emtec Consultants does not guarantee this Email transmission
>
> to be secure or error-free. Any reproduction or changes to our drawings
>
> and files without the consent of Emtec Consultants is strictly
>
> prohibited.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Equest-users mailing list
>
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Equest-users mailing listhttp://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Equest-users mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20091104/3c340c15/attachment-0001.htm>