[Equest-users] equest and energy plus outputs

Paul Diglio paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net
Thu Apr 28 04:54:41 PDT 2011


I thought E+ is a free program?  I would be interested to hear from anyone who 
has used Google SketchUp and the Open Studio Plug-in to generate a 3D view in 
E+.

I would like to hear more about the discrepancies between eQuest and E+ from 
those who use both programs.

Paul Diglio





________________________________
From: Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com>
To: deepika khowal <deepika.khowal at gmail.com>
Cc: energyplus_support <EnergyPlus_Support at yahoogroups.com>; 
equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Sent: Thu, April 28, 2011 1:27:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] equest and energy plus outputs


Hmmm- an energy plus model showed 50% less energy use (EUI) than eQuest?   Did 
you use the same weather files?  (i.e. convert the EPW you used in E+ to .bin 
and use the same weather file in eQuest?)
 
If this is truly the case, this is unsettling as a simulator.   Wouldn't it be 
safer for our clients to error on the conservative side and give the eQuest 
results instead of the E+ results?
 
Also--if this is the case, then what is the market advantage to spending 
thousands of dollars on E+ software rather than use the FREE-ware eQuest 
program??
 
I'd appreciate any commentary to help me "see the light" of this topic.  And if 
Deepika is willing to share a visual of his energy results output, I'm super 
curious to see what it is showing...
 
Good question/good info...thanks,
Pasha
 
Korber Energy Consultants


 
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:11 PM, deepika khowal <deepika.khowal at gmail.com> 
wrote:

Thanks Joe 
>Even I realized the same thing. the total energy use in Energy plus was almost 
>50% less than equest.
>If this is the case, who would you know that you model is working fine? 
>
>
>
>On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Joe Huang <yjhuang at whiteboxtechnologies.com> 
>wrote:
>
>I was involved in a two year project 2005-2007 to convert the Calif. Energy 
>Commission's Title-24 certification suite of building tests from DOE-2.1E to 
>EnergyPlus.  There are some areas where it's difficult to get comparable inputs 
>due to differences or limitations in the models. The differences between the two 
>programs varied a lot depending on the building, weather, and HVAC system. For 
>the CEC certification suite of 160 runs, cooling results were more consistent, 
>within 10% in most cases, with EnergyPlus almost always on the high side; for 
>heating, the differences were much greater, sometimes with EnergyPlus being 
>40-60% lower than DOE-2.1E.  I have a 120-page report on this comparison, but 
>haven't bothered to put it on the Web.
>>
>>Joe
>>
>>Joe Huang
>>White Box Technologies, Inc.
>>346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 108D
>>Moraga CA 94556
>>yjhuang at whiteboxtechnologies.com
>>www.whiteboxtechnologies.com
>>(o) (925)388-0265
>>(c) (510)928-2683
>>"building energy simulations at your fingertips"
>>
>>
>>
>>deepika khowal wrote:
>>
>>HI All
>>>I am trying to create same model in equest and energy plus to see whether i see 
>>>same results and just to validate my simulation files.
>>>has anyone done this before?
>>>I would like to know what is the % difference in both software outputs?
>>>Thanks
>>>Deepika
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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 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/20110428/aff241ab/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the Equest-users mailing list