To eQuest Expert,
?
I have a question to beg your answer. For an equest model, after I input some data and then run simulation, the report showed "baseline". What does this "baseline" mean? Is it meaning min requirement by Ashrae 90.1, T24,? based on what I just input data or something else? In other words, how to run baseline model by using eQuest?
I appreciate your time very much! Thanks Lot!!!
Best regards,
?
James Le
Simulation with Baseline model, Thanks for Your Advice. I am unable to figure it out.
Jul 21, 2010
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the baseline run is based on
the info you input and is the sort of built-in automatic run. You can use
the EEM wizard to set up additional simulation runs where you can change
certain aspects of the model through the run details dialog, but getting
your actual proposed system to run against the true baseline in one model is
a bit tricky.
I managed to do it on a simple project by modeling the proposed system
(which included one zone with a PSZ per 90.1G) and a geothermal. I then
created 2 simulation runs in the EEM wizard and named one proposed and the
other baseline. In the new baseline run I created, I deleted the geothermal
and applied the PSZ to all zones to get my baseline run. Then, after I hit
simulate, I unchecked the automatic baseline run and it ran just the 2 that
I made.
Equest is set up for the title 24 compliance, so I think the built-in
baseline run is to those standards, but to get a true 90.1G baseline, you
must manually make sure all aspects meet the 90.1G standard.
The results will display whatever you name the run in the EEM wizard so if
you don't set any new runs up, your reports will automatically display the
"title of the project" - baseline.
Tim
eQuest uses "Baseline" to refer to your base model, with EEMs in mind. The word has actually nothing to do with either 90.1 or T24.
For example, if you are doing a LEED model and create two models: one proposed and one LEED baseline. Both will be called "Baseline" by eQuest.
_______________
Demba NDIAYE
Yes, and my experiment didn't work by the way - must be why no comments were
made. I thought it was working but alas the GSHP plant equipment button is
greyed after going back into the wizard. so I suppose there is no way to
compare LEED baseline with proposed in one eQuest model?
It did "appear" to work. The geothermal had a higher electric usage and way
lower gas consumption - this made sense to me since the geothermal would
have pumps & more intricate controls and the PSZ would eat up the gas in
winter.
Anyway, now I am planning to have 2 model files and use the EEM wizard to
rename the runs appropriately. I will then have to generate my own
comparison reports if I want them I suppose. Had to find percent
improvement on my own anyway. Attached is a simple spreadsheet showing the
comparison. There may be a template for this, I'm just wandering through
the energy simulation forest for the first time so any thoughts/feedback
would be appreciated.
Maybe I need some training.
Tim
The problem is that the difference between the baseline and the proposed
isn't just a difference in system types, there are other factors
involved such as minimum flow rates, pump power, fan power, etc. Read
appendix G, all of those criteria need to be implemented in the
baseline. The proposed model should match your own design. I don't think
all of these changes could be done within the same model.
My approach (when doing LEED/ASHRAE 90.1 compliance models) varies with
using one model file (one .pd2 file only) or using 2 model files (two .pd2
files) depending on what my proposed and baseline HVAC systems are.
For example, if the Appendix G baseline HVAC system is #7 (VAV with chilled
water) and my proposed design systems are VAV with geothermal I choose to
set up two different model files (two different .pd2 files.) My actual
approach would be this:
1. create my proposed design model file in the wizard to nail down
specific building footprint shape, custom zoning, custom windows, (and a few
more specified inputs that are applied across the whole model.) Then
I "SAVE AS" a copy with the key word "Wiz" somewhere in the title.
2. With my new "SAVE AS" copy of my wizard file I rename it with "ddedit"
somewhere in the file name. I then switch to ddedit mode and continue -
until I'm finished creating my entire *proposed design model file*. I
run the simulation a few times to at least make sure that I have a clean sim
file (i.e. no errors.)
3. I now do a "SAVE AS" again on my ddedit file and name the new copy
"xxx-projectname-ddedit BASELINE" so that this new file is reflected as my
ASHRAE 90.1 equivalent sim file. I go in and 'turn down' my proposed
performance numbers to be equal to Appendix G baseline requirements. Keep
in mind that in this example I have set up a VAV with geothermal system in
the proposed, therefore; I now have to change the plant & air-side inputs to
reflect the requirements for the App G baseline system 7 thus removing the
geothermal system components and setting up a standard chiller & boiler
plant system to serve a standard VAV air-side systems in my baseline model
file.
4. Sim note: this is Pasha's approach because it is easiest for me to
manage my inputs most efficiently. Other simulators will have thier own
style and the key is in how you manage your input data and many variables to
produce the correct simulations. The system changes can be made in the
Parametric Tool within your first .pd2 file, but for Pasha this type of
variable management can get confusing sometimes and I choose to take a few
extra input steps in order for me to manage my inputs best.
5. After I have two .pd2 files (proposed & ASHRAE baseline) and I know
that both files are clean (free of errors) I can now continue with my
engineering analysis of the sim results. Once the baseline file results are
normalized close to realistic expectations from reference data for the
building type I am working on, then I can finish tweaking anything in my
proposed file to ensure that I am showing a realistic amount of energy
savings (given the ECM's that are applied against the baseline model.)
6. Final quality checks are then performed (i.e. reduced hours outside of
throttling range, etc.) until I am to a point where I am satisfied with the
sim results of both files. Now I can report my sim results to the client,
design team, and/or LEED documentation if we are ready for submittal
documents to be completed.
This is just my personal approach, I think its in line with how many other
simulators approach thier projects. Just note that if for some reason I
'get lucky' on a project where the proposed design HVAC systems are exactly
the same as the App G baseline HVAC system then I don't really have to work
in 2 different .pd2 files because it is the case that my HVAC
systems components are already setup correctly I can just work within one
.pd2 file and make ECM adjustments via the parametric tool only.
Every simulator will develop thier own style of modeling and as long as you
can manage your inputs and verify your outputs, then let your own style
work for you.
pkg
Oh---in some cases (when my inner-enginerd really comes out) I have actually
set up two laptops side by side, labeled with sticky notes on each one to
remind me which computer is running the baseline file and which one is
running the proposed file. This way I can run both models side by
side---again, as long as I can manage my inputs appropriately without
'cross-inputing' data in the wrong file.
pkg
Thanks to?all who participat the forum and to this forum itself. How great it is. It?gethers such smart and hard working people in one place. I appreciate your time.
I will practice this weekend. I am sure that I will?make great progress.
?
Best regards,
?
James
This is not a personal reflection on me, I'm sure, but I have never "got
lucky, WRT App G systems, of course.
My process is just like yours, Pasha, but I have never even been tempted to
have the Baseline and Proposed buildings in one model. Too much opportunity
to screw up. To add to what you do, I try to remember to rename - Save As -
my file each morning when I get started, that's providing I haven't been up
all night modeling away and there's an actual morning start. I Save As
"ModelName Proposed 7-23-10" or something like that. I find it really
helpful not only in the short term but in the long term. Eventually, should
I ever complete the dam model, I will get rid of the interim versions and
just save the FinalProposed and FinalBaseline. If I'm working on a real
complex son-of -a-gun, I may even do a SaveAs with another cue to let me
know what it is Just In Case. I especially do this when I'm editing in the
.inp file, which you all should learn to do sometime. It's really rough to
lose a whole nights work because the new version of eQUEST mysteriously
stripped out all of your data leaving only the headings of each section.
Much better to only lose 5 hours worth of work. You can do it much faster
the second time, right?
I have never run 2 models on 2 machines in my career. I am totally certain
I'd screw up.....
Not bitter,
Carol