[Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces

[Carol Gardner]

Boy, I guess it's been a long week for many of us. Since my name was brought
up I thought I'd chime in. Thanks for the shout out, John

I was reading this email chain and thanking my lucky stars that I learned
how to do this stuff back before dirt was invented and you had to enter your
input deck line by line using BDL. It gave me a pretty solid background as
it turns out.

It seems to me that some of you guys are spending entirely too much time in
the Wizard doing things that might be able to be done easier in the DDedit.
I know I've said this before. For instance if you think of an unconditioned
zone for awhile you realize that it really doesn't matter what system it
gets attached to, its unconditioned. You will see on your SV-A report that
there isn't any cfm for it or any load. If there is you are doing something
wrong. I always makesure that the space and the thermal zone are both
labeled "unconditioned" because I don't trust eQUEST for a minute if there
are inconsistencies.

So back the the utility of having a "reliable authority" dedicated to
answering questions on this site. While I can't claim entire reliability, I
ran across something last week that really had me trembling with
trepidation, sorry it's Friday night after all, related to eQUEST.

If you'll remember I asked a question about EIR curve fits last week to
which I received a resounding non response. I'm pretty sure I know why and
it's probably bad news for the results we are giving people. I don't think
people really know how to do curve fits properly. I know I learned something
new as I researched and researched every where I could think of to find the
answer. And even then I had to make a desperation call to one of the few
real experts.

Some background on the problem: all curves using raw data need to be
normalized around ARI data points except for refrigeration compressors, see
Volume 2r written in 2008. So if you are entering a curve, say the cooling
capacity as a function of the entering wet bulb and the outdoor dry bulb,
you would have three lines of data: 2 independent and 1 dependent. The
independents would be your selected wet bulb temperatures and your selected
dry bulb temperatures. You are allowed to enter up to 20. The tricky part is
when you specify the dependent value: the capacity. The person who I am
helping with this model had simply entered the capacities as they varied
based on the temps: 307 kBtu, 299 kBtu, and 292 kBtu (the ARI capacity),
etc. [Note: I'm just making these numbers up.], and didn't normalize them
around the ARI data point capacity. If they had the numbers would have been:
1.051, 1.024, 1.0, etc. And the file ran with no indication of an error
anywhere. I've seen this over the years in some surprising places. It scares
me because I don't know how the results are being effected. I guess no one
else does either because I haven't heard anyone saying anything like "hey I
entered bad data into eQUEST and it ran" or hey the LEED reviewer said XX,
fill in the blank.

Anyway, back to the EIR curve-fit. With further research I found the actual
equation that is being used in eQUEST which are EIRt = Cooling EIR *
Cool-EIR-FT (EWB,ODB) * Cool-EIR-FPLR (PLR). That's when I asked my question
to you all: what equation type do I use when there are three independents as
there seem to be here - EWB, ODB & PLR. No answer. So I placed the call and
was told that eQUEST solves the equation using 2 curves: the EIR varying
based on the EWB and ODB, normalized around the ARI EIR as discussed above,
and the EIR varying based on the part load conditions. I didn't know that
before because I usually can avoid curve fits. In this case, however, I was
modeling a VRF system so it's pretty much required since they are not like
the current systems that are accessible to us. Luckily I had really good
data from Daikin, although it took awhile to get it. I was modeling European
units, too, just to further complicate things.

Anyway, lesson learned. Sorry to be so long winded, I kind of reminded
myself of Nick here. Sorry, Nick, just kidding! Your answers do lean towards
being thorough, though, but that's good. You have a great knowledge of how
to use the Wizards as well as the DDedit. I think that in this case, though,
my past experience of entering the line by line BDL really helped me. When
we had to do that we had more time to think about how and why we were doing
things and generally more access to the engineering formulas behind it all.
With the friendly front ends we have now, and make no mistake I love them,
modeling has become more of an art and less of a science. This is both good
and bad. It's why I think that there is room for having a dedicated,
experienced resources person for eQUEST as well as the users of this
listserv. There's a lot to know and it takes time to learn it.

I rest my case.

Carol



On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:21 PM, John Waller <jwaller at email.arizona.edu>wrote:

> Nick,
>
> You are absolutely right!  My (so-called) feathers get ruffled way too
> easily, which is why I make a conscieous effort not to comment in here
> unless I'm 'mostly' confident that my contributions could even potentially
> benefit someone encountering a problem similar to one I've encountered in
> the past. Such constraint on behalf of all contributors would do wonders for
> such an environment. The quality of query in which I witness here for the
> most part is astonishing. (i.e. 'how do spell equest'?). Rather than doing
> the research on their own, or at the very least, exploring the 'onebuilding'
> query history, this platform makes it all too easy to ask the infamous
> 'stupid question', though I realize there exists no such thing.
>
> I am beginning to believe that Carol is right in suggesting a more
> professional and reliable authority to more acurately respond to user
> querries. And someone else who suggested an eQUEST-wiki might just be spot
> on. Thought I will admit, in an age where electronic response has become the
> norm, there is certainly something something quite a bit more 'personal'
> about receiving a reply from a beating heart.
>
> As such, it is my feeling, that any 'responder', should not respond so
> specifically so as to ignore the larger question an inquiry might be
> addressing, particularly when a prior responder has already replied and
> explicitly requests additional input on his offered solution.
>
> In the spirit of community (as you have suggested) I would challange anyone
> who posits a potential solution to address the formal issue at large, rather
> than simply offering his(her) two-cents in contrast simply for the purpose
> of seeming 'right'.
>
> To do so, I am sure, would more likely benefit the group as a whole.
>
> John Waller
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 16, 2010, at 2:55 PM, "Nick Caton" <ncaton at smithboucher.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi John,
>
>
>
> My perceptive powers are not the greatest, as my wife will assure you, but
> I’m failing to see the reason to get any feathers need to be hackled here (I
> did miss your reply, perhaps it wasn’t copied to the list?)….
>
>
>
> The reality that DOE2 has a “no child-zone left behind act” of sorts is
> just the nature of the beast, and nobody is arguing that’s unintuitive –
> it’s simply something we have to learn as we become familiar with the
> engine.  I don’t know that I’d expect this issue to be resolved in the next
> major update as it’s something a user can work around (unlike some other
> more pertinent issues), as Dakota is plainly demonstrating with his
> (typically) thorough response.
>
>
>
> Everyone is here to help each other, rest assured (^_^)b, those who aren’t
> don’t stick around long, and Dakota’s certainly been around for awhile!  If
> you have a “more correct” or otherwise better solution to handling
> unconditioned zones before or after the wizards, I would personally like to
> know also – I do the same as Dakota.  I understand others simply ignore the
> zone grouping wizard screens altogether (though I find them to be quite a
> time-saver), so his inclusion of “simply do this” in detailed is very
> appropriate to the group at large…
>
>
>
> Wishing everyone a safe and happy weekend,
>
>
>
> ~Nick
>
>
>
> <image001.jpg>**
>
> * *
>
> *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* *
>
>
>
> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *John David
> Waller
> *Sent:* Friday, July 16, 2010 3:16 PM
> *To:* Dakota Kelley
> *Cc:* <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces
>
>
>
> Maybe I was too vague in my reply.
>
>
>
> I, too, was hoping for some insight into this particular issue.
>
>
>
> While I do believe this to be a software (developer) oversight, I also
> believe that any offered solution(s) to such a 'problem' could be handled
> with slightly more dignity; perhaps even some humility!
>
>
>
> It is more likely that 'this' is a software issue more than anything else.
>  Hopefully this, and many other issues, will have been addressed in '3.6.4'!
>
>
>
> It makes absolutely no sense to me to assign a system to 'unconditioned
> space' that is being used to 'condition', condition space. Since every
> 'space', or zone requires the assignment of a specific mechanical system,
> then wouldn't it be likely [as in the 'real world' vs. our 'virtual' one, be
> equipped with 'NO" system since it is 'NOT' conditioned, versus an
> 'operable' system that supplies conditioning to a space that requires such?
>
>
>
>
> While it agreed that all zone 'must belong to a system', I'm not convinced
> that your [emphatic] solution employs the ideal method for addressing such
> an issue.  It seems to me that you're placing her back to the same point in
> which she came to discover such a unique condition.
>
>
>
> Looking forward to a legitimate response!
>
>
>
> Sincerely--
>
> John
>
>  On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Dakota Kelley < <dakotak at teliospc.com>
> dakotak at teliospc.com> wrote:
>
> Amber,
>
>
>
> If I’m following your description, you must be specifying the unconditioned
> zone in Shell Wizard/Screen 2/Zone Characteristics button.  Then you’re
> obviously specifying system-per-floor in the HVAC wizard.  This sounds like
> it should work, but what is happening is Shell Wizard/Screen 14 settings are
> trumping Shell Wizard/Screen 2.  There are two solutions:
>
>
>
> 1)      Simply change the zones to unconditioned in the detailed
> interface.
>
> 2)      Create a new zone group in Shell Wizard/Screen 14.  Assign the
> unconditioned zones to this group, and then make sure the “Conditioned”
> check box is *not* checked.  Assign the group to whatever system makes
> sense and move on (making sure that at least one conditioned zone group is
> also assigned to that system).  All zones have to belong to a system, but if
> they’re unconditioned their parent system is irrelevant.  This method is
> only slightly longer than the one above, but it lets you stay in the wizard.
>
>
>
> If you try to leave an unconditioned “on its own”, which I interpret as
> being assigned to its own single-zone system, you’ll get an error saying
> every system has to have at least one conditioned zone.  Let me know if I
> have misunderstood you.
>
>
>
> *Error! Filename not specified.*
>
>
>
>
>
> *DAKOTA KELLEY *
>
> Project Designer | Energy Analyst
>
>
>
>                               Office: 214.744.6199
>
>                               Cell: 214.280.3825
>
>                               Fax: 214.744.0770
>
>
>
> <http://www.teliospc.com/>http://www.teliospc.com          3535 Travis St.
> Suite 115
>
> <dakotak at teliospc.com>dakotak at teliospc.com            Dallas, TX 75204
>
>
>
>
> | MEP ENGINEERING · ENERGY MODELING · LEED CONSULTATION · COMMISSIONING |
>
> * *
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended only for the use of the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed,
>
> And may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt
> from disclosure under applicable law. If you
>
> are not the intended recipient, please email the sender immediately, and
> delete this email from all computers.  Any
>
> distribution or other use is strictly prohibited.  Copyright © 2009 Telios
> Corporation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Amber Welsh [mailto: <amber at timmonsdesigneng.com>
> amber at timmonsdesigneng.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:23 PM
> *To:* <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* [Equest-users] eQUEST unconditioned spaces
>
>
>
> What is the best way to handle unconditioned spaces in eQUEST?  Right now,
> I am zoning it separate and calling it unconditioned in the WIZARD.  Then,
> when I assign systems, I am putting the unconditioned zone in a system with
> a conditioned space and saying “ one system per floor”.  Is this the proper
> way to do it?
>
>
>
> I have tried just leaving the zone as unconditioned and on its own, but
> then when I do the “permit submittal” calculation it still asks for the fan
> flow and cooling capacity for that zone.
>
>
>
> *Amber Welsh, P.E. **|** **Associate**
> **LEED® Accredited Professional*
>
>
> 397 5th Street NE,
>
> Atlanta, GA 30308
> (v) 404.810.9020
> (c) 678.488.1967
> timmonsdesigneng.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Equest-users mailing list
>  <http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org>
> 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-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
>
>


-- 
Carol Gardner PE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100716/4ae3d3b7/attachment-0001.htm>