Using a geometry creation tool like Autodesk Vasari can ease the pain of creating shades one at a time in Equest. It helps to have some Revit experience as Vasari uses a push-pull method parametrically tied to dimension annotation. Once you create the geometry, run the Vasari energy analysis, disregard the results, and export results to .INP. Now you can extract the geometry under the building shade heading from the Vasari INP and paste into your Equest INP.
This means creating a building shade for each horizontal louvre, I
guess? With 5 louvres on each window and 859 windows, this would mean
4295 building shades. Is this possible in eQuest? Isn't this overkill
and wouldn't it considerably slow the simulation run?
I'm certain you are not thinking through the building shade approach in a time-efficient fashion. The quantity will almost certainly be less than 5x859 when you consider a single shade can span multiple windows.
That said, an alternative may be to instead determine an effective shading coefficient for the exterior shading system using something like eQuest(!) to compare a single window of your actual glazing materials & with defined exterior shades against a base case of 1/8" float glass. The resultant SC (which should account for values through the year as solar angle varies) could then be applied to all your windows defining no shades. Check out the following presentation which follows this course in detail using ecotect: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fisites.harvard.edu%2Ffs%2Fdocs%2Ficb.topic831443.files%2FWK4-Salhia_Shading%2520Coeffficient.pdf&ei=xDmHUIusH4jq8wTAlIDgCg&usg=AFQjCNHp_ef-knFVuaP_x8eV3fXyMDZ3KA&sig2=OJ4FmDXoBXWiNunMI0XBDw&cad=rja
Thanks a lot. I have followed the Building Shades approach and the
results are impressive. First time I am using this. I created the shades
by taking coordinates from CAD drawings in which I had fixed the
building origin to a setpoint. Having created a shade for each facade, I
then populated them in the INP file and changed their Z values in
spreadsheet mode. Attached you will find a screenshot.
I think it is worthwhile noting, that the actual-shading-geometry-modeling
I mentioned earlier may make more sense for non-linear complex geometric
elements, though there is a trade-off between whether you want to spend
modeler time deriving an equiv. SC or spend more modeling tool time,
extending run-times. This may be different for each project based on how
confident you are about accounting for all solar conditions in your
simplification approach.
The other side of the argument is that using a simplification method like a
projection-factor which is documented in the 90.1 User's Manual, is very
useful for early studies, and actual geometry is not important. I like this
method because it provides designer's with flexibility and you are not
pinning them down to a certain geometric design, you are providing
performance based recommendations, and helping them benchmark different
designs against a project factor you have optimized to meet your project
load targets.
Not particularly with its application in this case.
Omer Moltay
Omer,
The "building shade" method is definitely the way to go.
There is no particular difficulty.
Regards,
Demba.
Using a geometry creation tool like Autodesk Vasari can ease the pain of creating shades one at a time in Equest. It helps to have some Revit experience as Vasari uses a push-pull method parametrically tied to dimension annotation. Once you create the geometry, run the Vasari energy analysis, disregard the results, and export results to .INP. Now you can extract the geometry under the building shade heading from the Vasari INP and paste into your Equest INP.
Arpan Bakshi, BD+C, PQP
...
Hi,
This means creating a building shade for each horizontal louvre, I
guess? With 5 louvres on each window and 859 windows, this would mean
4295 building shades. Is this possible in eQuest? Isn't this overkill
and wouldn't it considerably slow the simulation run?
Thanks,
Omer Moltay
Omer,
I'm certain you are not thinking through the building shade approach in a time-efficient fashion. The quantity will almost certainly be less than 5x859 when you consider a single shade can span multiple windows.
That said, an alternative may be to instead determine an effective shading coefficient for the exterior shading system using something like eQuest(!) to compare a single window of your actual glazing materials & with defined exterior shades against a base case of 1/8" float glass. The resultant SC (which should account for values through the year as solar angle varies) could then be applied to all your windows defining no shades. Check out the following presentation which follows this course in detail using ecotect: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fisites.harvard.edu%2Ffs%2Fdocs%2Ficb.topic831443.files%2FWK4-Salhia_Shading%2520Coeffficient.pdf&ei=xDmHUIusH4jq8wTAlIDgCg&usg=AFQjCNHp_ef-knFVuaP_x8eV3fXyMDZ3KA&sig2=OJ4FmDXoBXWiNunMI0XBDw&cad=rja
Then there's always space multipliers =)...
Best regards,
~Nick
NICK CATON, P.E.
Dear Nick, Arpan, Demba,
Thanks a lot. I have followed the Building Shades approach and the
results are impressive. First time I am using this. I created the shades
by taking coordinates from CAD drawings in which I had fixed the
building origin to a setpoint. Having created a shade for each facade, I
then populated them in the INP file and changed their Z values in
spreadsheet mode. Attached you will find a screenshot.
Thank you again!
Omer Moltay
I think it is worthwhile noting, that the actual-shading-geometry-modeling
I mentioned earlier may make more sense for non-linear complex geometric
elements, though there is a trade-off between whether you want to spend
modeler time deriving an equiv. SC or spend more modeling tool time,
extending run-times. This may be different for each project based on how
confident you are about accounting for all solar conditions in your
simplification approach.
The other side of the argument is that using a simplification method like a
projection-factor which is documented in the 90.1 User's Manual, is very
useful for early studies, and actual geometry is not important. I like this
method because it provides designer's with flexibility and you are not
pinning them down to a certain geometric design, you are providing
performance based recommendations, and helping them benchmark different
designs against a project factor you have optimized to meet your project
load targets.
*Arpan Bakshi** *LEED AP BD+C, ESTIDAMA PQP