[Equest-users] Voodoo (Enlightenment)

[James Hess]

Very well put.

It's late on a Friday night, and watching TV is boring, so here are my thoughts on this topic/thread.  I hope they are useful to somebody.

Way back in the email chain, somebody said that what they did in energy modeling had no effect on the construction drawings.  That is a realistic result for some projects, but unfortunate.  I share the frustration because I have worked on projects like that in the past.  However, if we energy modelers are doing our jobs, we should be pushing the designers, and giving them feedback early on in the design process.  But we have to step up and do that.  We can't be a mouse and cannot just complain about the architect and engineering design team members not paying attention to the energy.   Go educate them, & insert yourself in the design process.  Give them the feedback that Karen has described.  Measure your success not by how many LEED points the project earns, but by the fact that you helped the design team change something about the building so that it is more efficient in the real world (i.e. better wall insulation, better glass selection, better light fixtures, higher efficiency HVAC equipment, etc.).  I like how somebody put it earlier in that energy modeling is for making decisions.  If you helped the design team make some decisions, consider your effort a success.  If your energy modeling resulted in nothing different in the construction documents, figure out why and fast because you are not adding value to the design process, which could be detrimental to your employment status.  My personal opinion is that I do not think an energy modeling profession will survive solely to estimate LEED point for completed designs.  If that is all we are doing, I think the building owners will figure out a way to eliminate us and our corresponding fees.

I think all energy modelers should read the document available from Energy Design Resources, called "Advanced Simulation Guidebook Volume II - The High Performance Building Process"

This document has some good thoughts regarding energy modeling and the design process.

This document correctly relays the fact that some kind of feedback early on in the design phase is a lot better than detailed modeling late in the game when the CD's are near 100% & little can be changed.

Don't get focused on making everything perfect or more detailed than it needs to be, especially if that is holding up getting decision making information to the design team.  The thing about design teams is that they will make the decisions with or without you and move on to meet the deadline.

Finally, real buildings can and usually will operate far differently than our energy models suggest.  If you really care about buildings using less energy, focus more on going into real buildings and helping the operators and owners figure out the best way to operate them to reduce energy.  This gets into the M&V area, which I think all energy modelers should be focused on going forward because it can add real value.  To that end, I will leave the group with one final bit of advice.  Check out the Universal Translator freeware program available from the following website:  http://utonline.org/cms/

I was very excited to find that this program existed because, in a nutshell, this program allows you to very easily work with real data from real building automation systems to figure out what the heck is going on in the buildings that are using too much energy.  The UT program is developed by the Pacific Energy Center of PG&E.

Lots of good programs come out of California (which I'm very grateful for), like eQuest & now the Universal Translator.  Add the UT to your toolkit.  I think you will find the program to be very valuable.

That's my two cents! :)

Thanks!

Regards,

JAH

James A.  Hess, PE, CEM
Energy Engineer
TME, Inc.
Little Rock, AR

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Karen Walkerman
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 2:04 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Voodoo (Enlightenment)

One of my favorite approaches when things aren't designed yet is to make a responsible assumption and use it in the model.  With the model results, my clients get a list of assumptions and inputs.  This way you can use the model to push the designers to create a responsible design.  The lighting designer hasn't finished designing yet? OK, enter 0.6 w/sf in your model push them to get their power density down while still providing enough light!  You can do the same with the building envelope, mechanical systems, etc.  If things are not finished, this also opens the opportunity for you to get involved and help the design team create the design.  Show them the difference with model results between x and y.  Show them how good their building can be, if they want it to.  This does mean that the model has to be re-worked when it's time to submit LEED documentation to reflect what is actually provided, but it's a small price to pay.

--
Karen
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Carol Gardner <cmg750 at gmail.com<mailto:cmg750 at gmail.com>> wrote:
Go with god, son. If you want a double check on whether you made a reasonable change vs gamed the system, hire one of us peer reviewers.
Carol

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Eurek, John S NWO <John.S.Eurek at usace.army.mil<mailto:John.S.Eurek at usace.army.mil>> wrote:
As the one who started this post, I must say I have learned a lot.

Thank you very much.

What I have learned.

1. I have been misusing energy modeling.  I have been trying to use energy
modeling for the sole purpose of earning LEED points.

2. I use it late in the design.  Late in the design I have found it easier to
tweak my model instead of my design. (in order to get the desired number of
points)
       (I do have integrity, so it kills me to "game" the system. But with
so few rules it wasn't hard to rationalize inputs. I go home not feeling
proud.)

3. When the goal is a realistic energy modeling, a very good model can be
created.  When you are simply trying to reach compliance with some code, the
system can be gamed. This misuse and gaming of energy modeling is a waste of
time, but this is the users (MY) fault.

4. I need to get the other departments to realize that this isn't MY
(mechanical engineer) energy model, but OUR energy model.  (I'm trying to get
my model done and the electrical engineer still doesn't have his light loads
and the Architect hasn't have a final roof design.)

I'm like a monkey hammering with a wrench.  The frustration was a
misunderstanding of the tool.

I hope I can get the other departments on-board and maybe start using the
model as a design tool as it was intended.
To those who are being asked to misuse modeling, it is rough.

Once again, my frustration and stress with energy modeling was growing to the
point it disturbed my sleep.  Having this discussion helped.  The most
helpful was all the responses I received about the benefits of the proper use
of energy modeling, and empathy from others who know the pain of trying to
create a model just to earn points.


Thank you all,

John Eurek
_______________________________________________
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<mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>


--
Carol Gardner PE

_______________________________________________
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<mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100521/f5d39694/attachment-0002.htm>