[Equest-users] Advanced Level Equest Classes

[Chris Jones]

Are there other less expensive alternatives to AutoCAD?

At 02:53 PM 17/01/2011, Otto Schwieterman wrote:
>Send the PDF to your background in AutoCAD (This 
>step depends on what software your computer has 
>installed), correctly scale the pdf and trace the floor plan in AutoCAD.
>
>From: Chris Jones [mailto:cj at enersave.ca]
>Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 1:53 PM
>To: Nick Caton; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Advanced Level Equest Classes
>
>Thanks Nick!
>Re the catwalk - they are open to the 
>atrium.  The one reason to model them is because 
>they have light fixtures associated.  Including 
>the floor areas of the catwalks increases the 
>baseline lighting to capture the lighting of the catwalks.
>
>The atrium is not open to the rest of the 
>building except by door.  Between the perimeter 
>spaces and the atrium is glazing.
>
>The other question I have is what do you do when 
>the floor plans are submitted in PDF - how do 
>you import the floor plans into equest?  Or do 
>you have to enter all the vertices manually?
>
>Thanks again for taking time to respond.
>
>
>
>At 04:04 PM 14/01/2011, Nick Caton wrote:
>
>Hi Chris,
>
>Some running thoughts you might consider – all 
>this in concert might get the job done, in any case it’s what I’d try first:
>-          Varying “floorplates”/zoning for each 
>floor means you need unique shells per floor, 
>which means you can’t use any of the 
>“open-to-above/below” approaches to making an 
>atrium with the wizards.  That simplifies the 
>discussion somewhat: you’ll need to define this atrium somehow “manually.”
>-          I would draw out the “catwalk 
>corridors” (assuming they’re covered and 
>separately conditioned) on their respective 
>shell-floors.  If they’re open to the atrium I’d ignore them entirely.
>-          I would finish everything up in the 
>wizards, and upon entering detailed mode delete 
>every created space/zone that’s part of the 
>“atrium,” excepting the top level’s, which 
>should include any roof/skylight surfaces and be 
>retained.  Delete any child surfaces associated 
>with these atrium zones excepting any interior 
>partitions to the perimeter zones – if those 
>exist, move the interior partitions to be a 
>child component of the appropriate perimeter 
>zone first before deleting the atrium zone.  You 
>might be above to avoid this scenario in the 
>wizards by defining the atrium zones LAST at the 
>custom zone definition dialogs for each shell
 not sure but worth a shot.
>-          I would modify the space geometries 
>(volume) and its internal loads (# of people 
>should account for the catwalks if they’re open) 
>to match the full volume of the atrium
>-          Assign a SUM system as a placeholder 
>to the atrium – goal being to have all its loads 
>handled by the systems serving the perimeter spaces
>-          I would use the 2D view of each shell 
>to modify all internal walls “open” to the 
>atrium  in the actual design to be of type 
>“AIR,” and to simultaneously ensure their parent 
>space is associated to the large, common atrium 
>space.  I think this will correctly tie the 
>atrium’s internal loads to the others thermally
 
>this is why we took care to keep those and not 
>delete them along with the wizard-generated atrium spaces.
>-          I would use the “DIRECT” option for 
>the HVAC systems’ return air path, rather than 
>the plenum/duct options – I think this will 
>indirectly ensure the heat gains/losses of any 
>atrium skylights/roofs and the collective 
>internal heat gains in the atrium find their way into the return air stream
>
>I can’t say 100% whether this is all you’d need 
>to do, but it’s a game plan I would start 
>with.  To make a comment regarding 
>accuracy:  It’s probably fair to say eQuest, 
>which doesn’t model complex CFD on an hourly 
>basis, may not be as accurate in any end-case as 
>some more costly software options may be for a 
>large atrium as you’re describing.  This 
>approach should be sufficient however for 
>getting into the right ballpark, provided those 
>“think” items above hold true (you might want to hold off for others’ input).
>
>
>Best of luck – sounds like an interesting project to say the least =)!
>
>~Nick
>
>
>PS:  I’ve never been compensated for my advice 
>on these lists, and I’m not about to start 
>asking, but neither have I taken on any 
>liability or promise of availability as a formal 
>instructor...  That said, I wouldn’t go home and 
>cry myself to sleep if someone found anything 
>valuable enough to compensate ^_^.
>
>cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB
>
>
>NICK CATON, E.I.T.
>PROJECT ENGINEER
>Smith & Boucher Engineers
>25501 west valley parkway
>olathe ks 66061
>direct 913 344.0036
>fax 913 345.0617
><www.smithboucher.htm>www.smithboucher.com
>
>From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
>[ mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Chris Jones
>Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 1:21 PM
>To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Advanced Level Equest Classes
>
>The topic I consider advanced is modelling 
>different floor plate shapes on each floor - 
>with a multi-storey atrium in the middle.  The 
>atrium has corridor catwalks for crossing from 
>one side of the building to another.  Supply air 
>is transferred into the atrium from the 
>surrounding spaces - the atrium is a return air 
>plenum for multiple air handlers.
>
>I would gladly pay for a step by step tutorial 
>on setting up the geometry for such a building.
>
>
>
>
>I’ve been in discussions with those who make a 
>business of eQuest/DOE2 instruction regarding 
>this issue
 I think a major reason we don’t see 
>many ‘advanced’ classes is: it would be very 
>hard to develop a rubric/syllabus for an 
>‘advanced’ group of learners as it would seem 
>there aren’t many ‘advanced’ topics that aren’t 
>extremely system/project-specific (therefore 
>seemingly of little interest to a group of learners at large).
>
>One exception that comes to mind that would 
>probably be of common interest might be the 
>evaluation and creation of chiller & heatpump 
>performance curves – that skillset is frankly 
>tough to self-learn (it took me a long while and multiple projects)

>
>As an aside:  I might also cite a real-world 
>experience where a local rep for Carrier hosted 
>an event that included discussion/instruction 
>for a single, narrow ‘advanced’ eQuest topic: 
>geothermal well-field design using 
>eQuest/DOE2.  The room was packed*!  I hope more 
>equipment reps in time will recognize the value 
>and potential draw when advanced eQuest topic 
>instruction is offered, even if only for a very narrow sort of system/topic.
>
>If you really would like formal, ‘advanced’ 
>instruction, you might be best-advised to come 
>up with a list of topics you want 
>instruction/guidance on (make your own personal 
>rubric), and share that list either publicly on 
>the lists or directly with those who offer 
>training services – you may be able to then 
>filter out who is able and is willing to teach 
>you some or all of your desired instruction individually, and at what cost.
>
>~Nick
>
>* I would be remiss to not mention Anthony 
>Hardman (frequent contributor to these lists) 
>provided that instruction, and it was excellent.
>
>
>
>Chris Jones
>14 Oneida Avenue
>Toronto, ON M5J 2E3.
>Tel.  416-203-7465
>Fax. 416-946-1005
>
>
>Chris Jones
>14 Oneida Avenue
>Toronto, ON M5J 2E3.
>Tel.  416-203-7465
>Fax. 416-946-1005
>
>________________________________________________________________________________________
>Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. intends to send 
>this transmission (including any attachments) only to the
>designated individual or entity.   If you 
>received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying
>to the electronic mail (if electronic) or by 
>telephone at the number indicated on this document.
>Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. has taken 
>reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in the
>electronic mail.  Fanning/Howey Associates, 
>Inc., will not accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising
>from the use of this electronic mail or 
>attachments. Use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction
>of this message by unintended recipients is not 
>authorized and maybe unlawful.   Any information included in
>this transmission that is not related to 
>contracts with our authorization, verbal or written, by Fanning/Howey
>Associates, Inc. may not be covered by our professional liability insurance.
>
>
>
>
>
>




Chris Jones
14 Oneida Avenue
Toronto, ON M5J 2E3.
Tel.  416-203-7465
Fax. 416-946-1005


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110117/6181a4d2/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 10a5a9dc.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4439 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110117/6181a4d2/attachment-0002.obj>