[Equest-users] Internal Wall Problems with Wizard

[Robby Oylear]

Nick,

It's the "might" that makes it worthwhile to define your vertices exactly
in the same location if you want an interior partition created between the
two.  eQUEST does have some capability for approximating your intent of two
vertices being adjacent, however I have not been able to determine where
the tipping point is between "close enough" and "ADIABATIC".

As mentioned above, the same can go for exterior walls where sometimes
eQUEST does pick up on the fact that your single vertex on an exterior
floor line should result in an exterior wall, however I've witnessed plenty
of cases where an interior wall gets created on an exterior exposure.

-Robby

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Nick Caton <ncaton at smithboucher.com>wrote:

>  Sorry my reply is coming late to the party…****
>
> ** **
>
> Robby’s illustration is helpful and the point is well taken as a ‘best
> practice’ to avoid user-errors during geometry defnition, but I think I can
> dispel the “next-to” concerns here and show this is simpler than it may
> seem…****
>
> ** **
>
> I recreated your illustration with a quick dummy model and confirmed the
> quantity of vertices (4 vs. 6) for “zone 1” has zero effect on the quantity
> of internal partitions created/assigned.  In any case I try to define it,
> the model is generated with all appropriate partitions and next-to inputs
> (I cannot recreate Omer’s issue as described with spaces not being tied
> together or adiabatic partitions being created).****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> The only thing I can think of for Omer’s situation is that (1) it’s worth
> noting the model should be making only *one* partition for any two
> adjacent spaces (it will be a child component of one or the other), and (2)
> partitions might go missing/adiabatic if the spaces’ vertices aren’t being
> defined accurately enough and there’s actually a small gap between the
> spaces.  To that end maybe Robby’s suggestion to define each vertex
> possible is a good housekeeping approach to avoid such issues of
> definition.  The only remaining ways you will end up with adiabatic
> internal partitions is if you actually define them as such in the footprint
> map where you define zoning patterns and/or in the subsequent wizard shell
> screens.****
>
> ** **
>
> [image: cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB]**
>
> * *
>
> *NICK CATON, P.E.***
>
> SENIOR ENGINEER****
>
> ** **
>
> Smith & Boucher Engineers****
>
> 25501 west valley parkway, suite 200****
>
> olathe, ks 66061****
>
> direct 913.344.0036****
>
> fax 913.345.0617****
>
> www.smithboucher.com* *****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Robby Oylear
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM
>
> *To:* omoltay at mimtarch.com
> *Cc:* eQUEST Users List
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] Internal Wall Problems with Wizard****
>
>  ** **
>
> I should probably clarify that the vertices shown in the sketch belong to
> Zone 1.  It is not enough to just define those vertices in Zones 2-4.****
>
> ** **
>
> -Robby****
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Robby Oylear <robbyoylear at gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Omer,****
>
> ** **
>
> The simplest way to ensure that eQUEST defines the NEXT-TO property
> correctly is to make sure that each interior wall only interfaces with one
> other interior wall.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> In the situation you describe where you have an interior wall that is
> adjacent to more than one zone, I would typically split that interior wall
> into two or three walls by adding vertices at each of the intersections
> between the zones and the interior wall that spans them.****
>
> ** **
>
> Here's a sketch of what I'm describing:****
>
> [image: Inline image 1]****
>
> ** **
>
> Hope that helps.****
>
> ** **
>
> Robby Oylear, PE, LEED AP****
>
> *Mechanical Engineer*****
>
> *Senior Energy Analyst*****
>
> * *****
>
> *D* 206-788-4571****
>
> *www.rushingco.com* <http://www.rushingco.com/>****
>
> ** **
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Ömer Moltay <omoltay at mimtarch.com> wrote:
> ****
>
> Dear All,
>
> I have realized that while creating the model after Wizard entries, eQuest
> will fail to determine the NEXT-TO property for interior walls that are
> adjacent to more than one zone and all those interior walls will be defined
> as ADIABATIC.
>
> Also, I see that interior walls are missing from zones where another zone
> has an ADIABATIC wall in the same place.
>
> I see no way of having a model with all interior walls correctly defined
> without fixing all these problems after the Wizard. Does everybody have the
> same experience or am I missing something?
>
> Ömer Moltay, LEED AP BD+C, ASHRAE BEMP, CPMP, BREEAM Assessor
> Mimta EcoYapi
> Hekimsuyu Cad. 559. Sk. No:39
> 34255 Kucukkoy Istanbul Turkey
> Tel: 90-212-617-2296
> Fax: 90-212-617-2297
> www.ekoyapi.net
> www.mimtasolar.com
> www.mimtarch.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120710/3484d07b/attachment-0001.htm>