RAC2009 + IES VE-Ware

[ejburrell67787]

Has anyone installed and used the free VE-Ware (http://www.iesve.com/content/default.asp?page=s133) from IES?

So far I get an "unrecoverable error" when I select the Set Model Properties button...:shock: Not sure if it is the file size or complexity or the software itself...

EDIT - having tried a very very simple model (2 rooms) it seems to work fine... and has a very nice clear output. It doesn't look very detailed but I haven't really played with it much.

(a bit frustrating that all the wall type etc are in imperial units for some reason... wonder who it is really aimed at...! ;))

[vennix]

I installed it and it seems to work oke.
Too bad you cant set the units
Even worde the toolkits are no longer free.
I tried installing the toolkits but something went wrong.
Now I get an error when I try to uninstall the toolkit :-(

Geert

[ejburrell67787]

It seems to dump a load of files on the desktop also... which I can't see where you can set the default file save locations or anything...

[ejburrell67787]

I found a units setting - although it doesn't seem to change the material definitions from a mixture of imperial and metric...

It is under the menu IES <VE> --> about

[ejburrell67787]

Has anyone installed and used the free VE-Ware (http://www.iesve.com/content/default.asp?page=s133) from IES?

I guess not then huh?

[dbaldacchino]

Just installed and am playing around with it. Will post findings later.

[dbaldacchino]

Ok I'm back :)

I tried running it on an Elementary School project and it crashes before I can even review the model or set settings. So I decided to build a simple model and test on that. It seems to work fine, although I managed to crash several times even on a small tiny model (about 6 exterior walls, some interior walls, 4 rooms and a shape-edited planar roof.

Going through the white paper is valuable to figure out some of the settings and make sure your analytical model is correct. Things such as turning on volume calculations for your project and raising your room upper limits and offsets so they intersect other room bounding elements such as ceilings and roofs. When you check the model, it will tell you if there are "holes" in the surfaces and you can isolate each room surface model to investigate. In most cases it seemed to mess up at changes of direction of the roof when walls had the top attached. So some model tweaking might be necessary. The analyitical model is made up of flat 2D planes and that's why it might have difficulty at times to resolve complex shapes.

One thing I'm a bit disappointed about is that you have to manually select the type of roof, walls etc. Isn't that why we're modeling in Revit? Why do I have to go tell it again what my assembly is? The program should be taking my roof element in Revit and figuring out what the R value is. Obviously right now Revit doesn't keep track of that information so it's understandable, but hopefully this gets resolved soon or it'll be too time consuming. Revit either needs to store that information or there should be some mapping feature to tell VE-Ware that this specific wall has this U value, etc.

My building didn't pass the 2030 challenge :Oops: It would be nice to get some sort of feedback as to where the major hit was taken; what type of improvements could I do to get it to pass? Obviously it could be there and I missed it as I haven't combed through the resulting report. I'll continue testing today and see what else I can find out.

EDIT: Also, why am I forced to select a mechanical system? Why cannot I select "Natural Ventilation" for example?

[Graeme Padgham]

I have installed and used the VE Toolkit, I have run it on a large airport with a very complicated curved roof system (lots of 'waves). I takes about 5 minutes to enter the VE Modeler but so far has never crashed.

it is well worth (as said above) downloading and reading all the PDF files on the website, this will help no end with modelling correctly for analysis with the VE toolkit, you really cant use it without following the strict guildlines.

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks for your feedback. I can't tell what's wrong with my test project, but I know I tried it on a model that's not perfectly complete, so some checking would be in order before I try it again.

Are we talking about the same plugin though? You're mentioning the "toolkit" and in RAC2009, those options all require a license. Anyway, for the VE-Ware part, I was very surprised not to find an option to run calculations on a building without using a mechanical system for heating and cooling. Unless I'm missing something, there's no option to do this. What if I want to see how a building performs in a certain location and climate just by naturally ventilating it? Why should I be forced to select a mechanical system? Anyone else find this peculiar?

[kyle.bernhardt]

All,
I know the folks at IES well as very capable developers, and certainly a brilliant bunch. It sounds like you folks have found some situations that aren't jiving well with their initial release of the VE-Ware capability.

I'll pull them into this thread to address some of the issues you've found, as well as some of the questions.

Cheers,
Kyle B

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks a lot Kyle. I'm in no way insinuating that these guys aren't brilliant :D I'm no engineer and am using what little logic I have in my head to figure out how it works and why certain things are happening. The packaged pdf whitepaper is very valuable, even though it is not directly related to this plugin (the paper addresses the VE toolkit in Revit MEP 2008 but the modeling concepts of how shading/interior/exterior surfaces work, are still relevant). I'll also post a simple test model I was working on, which did not translate properly in terms of surfaces (some surfaces were even missing).

Since this tool is mainly intended for use by architects and designers (non-engineers), I would expect some sort of feedback when a building doesn't meet the 2030 challenge for example. Is the mechanical system consuming too much energy? Is it lack of daylighting? Is it too much cooling/heating? Is it that the walls or roofs don't have a high enough R value? Is it orientation?

[kyle.bernhardt]

Dave,
I didn't take it that way, just pointing out my previous experience with the IES folks. I'm glad you found the White Paper helpful, we on the Revit MEP Product Team developed that in conjunction with the IES Product Teams last year. We've got an updated version in the works for the 2009 release.

I'm sure your feedback is appreciated from the IES folks, and hopefully they can get these things sorted with their VE-Ware tool.

Cheers,
Kyle B

[IES Technical Support]

Hi All,

Apologies for the late reply to this thread – we have had some issues logging into AUGI.

Thanks for the feedback – it is all appreciated. Any suggestions for improvement will be reviewed in time.


I’ll attempt to answer the queries raised in this thread.

1. Unrecoverable errors – please, if you are able to, attach models to this thread or alternatively send them to support@iesve.com for the attention of the Revit team.

2. Dumping files on the desktop – the toolbar needs to store some files to transfer the model to the toolkits – these are stored in the location of the rvt file. If the rvt file is placed on the desktop then the toolbar will store these additional files there.

3. Modelling natural ventilation – does the 'Split Systems with Natural ventilation' do what you require?

4. Changing units does not change the descriptions for the constructions - yes, the units only affect the calculations, any imperial or metric units shown in the descriptions for the constructions remain unchanged. This will be reviewed.

5. Having to reselect constructions in the interface - the link to Revit has not been developed to the extent that construction information in the Revit model can be passed to IES. Adding this feature would involve considerable effort from both companies but this will be reviewed.

6. More feedback on 2030 challenge failures - this will be reviewed.



Thanks again for the feedback,
Kind Regards
IES

[greg.mcdowell]

I've got one for you to take a look at.. big file so I'll send it to you directly.

It's very hit or miss. Sometimes it errors out right away, other times it gets right up to where it should be showing the converted file in the model viewer before it quits. And sometimes, though not yet on the file I'll be sending you, it actually makes it all the way through!

I don't really know what I'm talking about but could it be a memory leak? I know that, when I've been the most successful is when after I start the process I do nothing else with my computer (not even moving the mouse) and just let it work - though even then it's not a guarantee of success.

One other general thing I’d like to some help with is figuring out where the holes are in the model. I know my way around the software a bit and I’m not sure what I could be doing incorrectly. When I take the gbXML file into Ecotect, as an example, and examine the zones I see that some of the errors look to be in the translation of the geometry – particularly in small narrow spaces that are sometimes created.

And a tip for anyone else working on this. Roofs need to go beyond the mid-line of the walls they are attached to even if this is not correct structurally. If not the space that is created travels from the middle of the wall up to the parapet and back down to the roof. Unfortunate and hopefully something that can be addressed.

--

Sadly, I was unable to send this file from my office email. Not sure if the problem's on my end or not so I'll try sending it from YouSendIt.com.

[dbaldacchino]

I apologize for not having responded. Don't think I forgot about you....I have it on my to do list but I was out of the office last week. I'll get my feedback to you ASAP.

[iandidesign]

Kyle, et al,
I look forward to the updated whitepaper. As important as this type of analysis has become I think the process needs to be much easier. The workflow the 2008 whitepaper details could hardly be described as straightforward.

So here are some questions for you as someone who is intimate with both R-MEP and Revit development in general:
Upon reading the 2008 whitepaper my first impression was that Revit needed a thermal zone object since Rooms were being mangled to fulfill a role they are not suited for. Well in 2009 the Space tool is introduced. But only for R-MEP. Why? Do architects not need thermal zones (obviously they do)? Does the R-MEP to IES workflow use Spaces instead of Rooms?

Can you please explain the logic behind this development decision. Thanks.

[kyle.bernhardt]

Geoff,
Spaces were created for a few reasons, which are highlighted in my series of videos on my blog. But here's the short answer.


To decouple the concept of a Volume for BPA from a Room, which is primarily a volume for programming and occupiable area. With this analytical Volume we then attach the necessary information for our Peak Heating and Cooling Load analysis.

To free Engineers from being dependent on the way that Rooms were defined in the Architectural model (often wrong).

To allow for Engineers to define multiple Volumes inside of the boundary of a Room.
We use Spaces and HVAC Zones (aggregations of Spaces) as the basis of our integration with IES for the 2009 release.

As for your question on their potential existence in Revit Architecture, I wouldn't want to put words in the mouths of my counterparts on the Revit Architecture Product Management team, so I'll defer to them if they want to jump into this thread.

For my own interest, assuming you have looked at the Space and HVAC Zone Elements, what aspects of those features would you use in Revit Architecture?

Everything, including the Parameters for environmental conditions like air setpoint, heat gains for People, Constructions, Occupancy Type, etc.
Spaces and Zones, but metadata appropriate for Architects like Constructions and Occupancy Types.
Space and Zone for defining the Analytical Model seperate from Rooms, but not the same level of metadata.I of course have an idea what I would choose here, but as a good PM it's not what I think, but what you think.

Cheers,
Kyle

*Crosses fingers that a rant storm is not unleashed*

[kyle.bernhardt]

I guess this is a less controversial subject than I anticipated.

Kyle B

[dbaldacchino]

Ok, here are some more comments.

a) The report should probably show what kind of heating/ventilating system was used in the simulation.

b) The roof geometry in one area seems to be overly triangulated in my example. The roof is not warped but it's being interpreted as such (this is a planar roof). The geometry also has holes in it, as the Check Model report reveals in three rooms. Please see image below and also the attached RVT example file.

c) I made some observations in the attached doc file regarding Equipment energy consumption, which seems to be independent of building orientation or building materials, and changes only with the type of mechanical system. This doesn't seem right to me. If I use lower U-factors in my envelope which cause my heating loads to be reduced (in my example the cooling load is zero since I'm using natural ventilation, which simplifies things for the purpose of understanding this), shouldn't my heating equipment energy consumption be lower? Similarly, shouldn't orientation matter when it comes to energy usage and thus affect equipment energy consumption? I think it would be more valuable to show the MMBtu for each section and put the percentages in brackets. I had to calculate the values from these percentages to get a clear picture of what was going on.

d) How can we control how much artificial lighting is inside our model and what type is that lighting? There seems to be no control so I don't know what else to do to my building to lower energy consumption! Probably adding triple glazing might do the trick, but in my test model I chose materials with a pretty low U-factor already (except the slab, which in Houston we never insulate). Natural light seems to have no bearing on Lighting energy consumption. I changed all my curtainwalls to brick walls and re-ran the simulation and Lighting energy consumption did not change. That doesn't seem right. At least there needs to be SOME change when glazing areas are changed.

e) It would probably be helpful to alert the desiger that thermal comfort is not being met. For example in my test, I used a split system with natural ventilation (no cooling equipment) and my building is in Houston TX. There's no way thermal comfort is achieved in half of the year! Most of the time, we're in cooling mode.

f) It would still be beneficial for comparisons and educational purposes to be able to use no system for both heating and cooling. This is not currently possible.

g) Obviously, it's up to the designer's knowledge and creativity to solve the building and energy consumption problem, but somehow we need something to help steer the designer in the right direction. With no form of feedback/suggestion, it's hard to understand at an early schematic stage what one needs to do for a particular design to perform better. Does my building have too much glazing? Is the U-factor possibly too high? Is my insulation not sufficient? This is the kind of feedback that a designer would need to receive when running these simulations in early schematic design. Without this, we'll never see much change to our current design practices, where energy simulations are left to our engineering consultants, which in most cases just serve to validate that we don't have an energy efficient solution, and it's typically too late to do anything to the building configuration by that time.

Thanks for listening!

[kyle.bernhardt]

Dave,
I kicked the tires on that model quickly and found a couple of things.


The "faceting" effect seen on the Roof isn't causing the holes, as far as I can tell. That's just an artifact to how Revit handles some situations with multiple slopes. Shouldn't effect the analysis results here, although it might take longer to calculate due to the increased number of heat transfer surfaces.
There's a hole in Room 1 that can be seen at the junction with Room 5. You can see that in my attached image. This is something I'm referring to our Product Team, as that doesn't appear to be "pilot error".
The junction between Rooms 2,3, and 5 seems to be a bit messed up, and is generating another hole, as far as I can tell. Remember that the centerline of the Wall is where the Volume boundary is defined for analysis.
I tried to adjust the Walls so they would join properly, but Revit got angry with me. I expect that's user error, as I have not mastered the finer points of Architectural modeling beyond modeling my apartment.I'll leave the rest to the IES folks.

Cheers,
Kyle B

[Andre Carvalho]

What I have to add to this thread regarding the IES, is that we used it a while ago in one project being redesigned to meet LEED certification. We worked with phases to be able to calculate the current status of the building and later on the new construction phase, to be able to calculate the new status and see the difference between them. It turned out that IES couldn't deal with phases. Adding rooms to the existing phase and adding rooms to the new phase will make IES to report wrong calculations. That said, to be able to have the exact calculations, we had to create the existing building in one file and the new in another one. Not a Revit way of work, though...

If working with design options, it will do the job for the design option set to "Primary".

Anyone else tested IES with phases and rooms so far?

Andre Carvalho

[kyle.bernhardt]

What I have to add to this thread regarding the IES, is that we used it a while ago in one project being redesigned to meet LEED certification. We worked with phases to be able to calculate the current status of the building and later on the new construction phase, to be able to calculate the new status and see the difference between them. It turned out that IES couldn't deal with phases. Adding rooms to the existing phase and adding rooms to the new phase will make IES to report wrong calculations. That said, to be able to have the exact calculations, we had to create the existing building in one file and the new in another one. Not a Revit way of work, though...

If working with design options, it will do the job for the design option set to "Primary".

Anyone else tested IES with phases and rooms so far?

Andre Carvalho

Andre,
We have changed the behavior for our Analytical Model output for the 2009 release. You now have the ability to choose the Phase of the Volumes that are used during the Analytical Model generation. See the attached image.

That should resolve the difficulties you had earlier regarding Phases.

Cheers,
Kyle B

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks Kyle. Will adjusting the Sliver Space Tolerance parameter "seal" those holes? I haven't tried to make any changes to fix those holes but I'll try and re-run the simulations as I'm guessing that it could affect the predicted energy use since one of the holes is almost 1SF. And thanks for the tip about the Phasing, that's really goot to know.

[Andre Carvalho]

That should resolve the difficulties you had earlier regarding Phases.

Thanks for letting me know, Kyle!

Andre Carvalho

[kyle.bernhardt]

Will adjusting the Sliver Space Tolerance parameter "seal" those holes?

No. The Sliver Space tolerance only defines the tolerance for when we automatically create a Volume where there does not exist one in the Analytical Model, like a plumbing chase. It doesn't "patch" holes that might show up.

Our developer that handles our Analytical Model code (an much of our MEP analysis functionality) is on the case. I'll let you know if we find anything of note.

Cheers,
Kyle B

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks Kyle.

I did find what is potentially causing the holes in the analytical model: The shaft tool. I removed the shaft and use a dormer opening instead and now the holes are gone. Hopefully this info will help narrow down the modeling issue.

However this caused another problem. The top of the room (Room 5) is still bound by the lower roof. It seems that a dormer opening does not let the room "flow through". I would not think that's intended behaviour. I also tried an in-place roof family (void) to cut the roof and it resulted in the same behavior. The model is not being interpreted correctly as you can see in the attached image. For kicks, I tried an opening by face. This results in the room flowing through, but the resulting holes are even bigger than before :banghead:

A couple more observations: There are 2, seemingly identical "Wooden Door" elements (one with title case and one with lower case). Are these the same?

As a future enhancement, it would make it more "design-friendly" if the assemblies were displayed graphically, with filtering mechanisms. Say I was to pick by R value greater than 26...then it would only show me those assemblies. Or all walls with face brick and then I can graphically pick an assembly that would show me a section through it, tell me what the layers are and the R value or U factor of that assembly. A custom assembly would also be very valuable, where the user would type in the desired R-value or U-factor, with possibly a thermal mass value.

[ejburrell67787]

Dave, did you try adding the opening by simply editing the roof sketch?

[still.james]

i thought i would post here, i was wondering with the check model properties - can i define my own construction type for walls etc?

[dbaldacchino]

Elrond, the roof is shape-edited, so sketching the opening warps the roof and you have to calculate the elevation at each point, which results in even more triangulation. I'm sure I could get it to work that way, but an opening shouldn't be room bounding and I suppose that could be considered a bug?

[iandidesign]

Sorry for the delay, I've been gone for a few days.


what aspects of those features would you use in Revit Architecture?
•Everything, including the Parameters for environmental conditions like air setpoint, heat gains for People, Constructions, Occupancy Type, etc.
•Spaces and Zones, but metadata appropriate for Architects like Constructions and Occupancy Types.
•Space and Zone for defining the Analytical Model seperate from Rooms, but not the same level of metadata.

I was thinking only of your third option. I presume Rooms are better suited for scheduling construction and occupancy types. But I'm a noob so the input of more experienced users is welcome.


*Crosses fingers that a rant storm is not unleashed*

No rant storm. This is serious business. As Dave's testing clearly shows the workflow is not there yet. Whether it be IES, Ecotect, GBS, or some other, the process needs to be simple enough that it is employed during the early stages of every project, but still deliver reliable results.

[dbaldacchino]

The immediate use of Spaces for Architecture would be for occupancy calculations. It's almost a no brainer. In some space types, we just take the room Area and divide it by an Occupancy Load Factor that we get from a table in the applicable Code, and we find the Occupancy of that room (Net calculations). But for example in a Business area, we have to take the Gross area and divide that by the Occupancy Load factor. So currently, we have to use Area Plans by sketching boundaries to calculate those spaces, and it just gets messy...overlaying of views on sheets, etc. If we had Spaces, I could designate which rooms belong to that Space and perhaps designate whether to calculate the area to the inside finish face, the wall centerline or the outside/"exterior" finish face.

So Spaces could act as our "Area Boundaries" (which we have to sketch in manually) to calculate Gross occupancy calculations. The upside is that the Space would flex as the model matures, while boundary lines have to be moved around as in most cases, it's not worth locking them to walls. Makes sense?

[ejburrell67787]

Elrond, the roof is shape-edited, so sketching the opening warps the roof and you have to calculate the elevation at each point, which results in even more triangulation. I'm sure I could get it to work that way, but an opening shouldn't be room bounding and I suppose that could be considered a bug?OK makes sense. I agree, it's a bug or non-working aspect...

[iandidesign]

Question regarding Spaces (I don't have RMEP), can there be multiple sets of Spaces that overlap? It makes sense that Rooms cannot overlap, but if Spaces are employed for a multitude of analytical purposes (occupancy, thermal, daylighting, acoustic) then a distinct set of spaces is needed for each. And clearly this is functionality that belongs in both Arch and MEP disciplines.

[Wagurto]

What kind of input are necesary from the user on the space properties in order to gut IES load calculations?

[dbaldacchino]

I received notification of a new version of VE-Ware but it keeps telling me I have already downloaded the application. I uninstalled my current version and tried again...same result. Anyone been able to download it?

[still.james]

i just tried, same thing

Already downloaded

You have already downloaded Ve-Ware.

[sfaust]

same problem...

[BMcCallum]

Same here, is anyone from IES watching this thread?

[still.james]

i read in a support PDF file that you can only download ve-ware once and you need to make a new account to download again.(another trial account)

i did this, and got the same problem!

[still.james]

i tried again this morning and it has let me download so it be worth you peeps trying again.

[sfaust]

still gives me the same message...

[still.james]

ok i have uploaded to my webspace i will pm you a link to download the free-ware version.

[dbaldacchino]

Same here...still won't download. Is there a document that outlines what the improvements are?

[still.james]

i have a feeling my uploaded file didnt fully upload.

i will re-upload tomorrow as i cannot download again as it says i already have!

[dbaldacchino]

Tried your link...won't work either :( I sent a message through their website yesterday stating the issue so perhaps they'll get it fixed soon or we won't be able to test :banghead:

[sfaust]

Yeah, I was able to get the file you sent me to, but it says it's not a valid installer. I sent them (IES) a message as well, so hopefully someone will hear something soon...

[still.james]

re-pm'd :)

[dbaldacchino]

Wohoo, James is the man :) Thanks, your download works now.

I gave it a quick run and didn't notice anything new right off the bat, except that the 2030 challenge report now has a reference to ASHRAE 140 and a clickable link.

Has anyone taken a look at the doc file I attached in a previous post and some observations I made? Anyone agree/disagree, especially with observations on equipment energy consumption and controlling lighting energy consumption?

[still.james]

in the free-ware version, doing the VE-Ware calculation is it possible to add my own construction for the walls/roofs etc - i only seem able to use pre-defined ones which are miles off from what i am using.

[dbaldacchino]

I believe they're just built in at this time. It would be nice to have a way to define our own constructions or assembly U factors/R values.

[still.james]

pants, makes it kind of useless really then :S

what about the full version (5.9) can you make your own walls?

[dbaldacchino]

Not sure about that. We're also looking at Ecotect. I think it might be more desiger-friendly.

[david.geddes]

Hi Guys,

I'm David from the IES tech team. Sorry I've not posted on here before - to be honest I didn't know about he forum.... whoops!

I'll try to hit the questions you chaps have had quickly here:

Create own walls - yeah of course you can create your own walls (indeed all constructions used in the project) with the full VE... wouldn't be much use if you only had a dozen or so standard constructions! I think there might be a facility coming within Revit to add custom constructions as well but I can't swear to that as it might have just been a rumour I heard - the Revit guys would know more about that than me.

Download fails... I had a few (maybe a dozen) reports of this since launch and I'm pretty sure it's just time-out issues on either the host or the client side. Using a download manager completely negates this and saves having to restart all the time.
I downloaded Microsoft's Visual Studio Express edition yesterday (about 750MB) and it timed out around 8 times but fortunately I was using a lovely free download manager plug-in for Firefox and I just had to hit resume rather than restarting the download each time.

Only lets you download once? I found out that our web provider put this restriction on for some reason - we got them to remove it.

Default file location - Once you start a project it uses the last directory as the default.

Files on desktop - I'll assume we are talking about when you save a file to your desktop? The VE has many project files that it stores in sub-folders to the main project directory. I'd advise storing your projects in an actual projects directory rather that on the desktop. In fact the full VE doesn't like desktop locations because of the dot in most people's desktop file path C:\Documents and Settings\David.Geddes\blah blah.... because the Thermal engine's not best pleased about them.

General Enhancements - feel free to ask us to look at introducing features that you'd like to see. We might say no but if you don't ask you don't get!

I've created a forum to deal with all VE-Ware issues so if you want to post any questions then please feel free to post there as I'll not be monitoring this forum particularly regularly.
http://forums.iesve.com.

Again... sorry about the delay in getting a post here and if you've got questions go to our own forum on VE-Ware.

[still.james]

Hi Guys,

I'm David from the IES tech team. Sorry I've not posted on here before - to be honest I didn't know about he forum.... whoops!

I'll try to hit the questions you chaps have had quickly here:

Create own walls - yeah of course you can create your own walls (indeed all constructions used in the project) with the full VE... wouldn't be much use if you only had a dozen or so standard constructions! I think there might be a facility coming within Revit to add custom constructions as well but I can't swear to that as it might have just been a rumour I heard - the Revit guys would know more about that than me.

Download fails... I had a few (maybe a dozen) reports of this since launch and I'm pretty sure it's just time-out issues on either the host or the client side. Using a download manager completely negates this and saves having to restart all the time.
I downloaded Microsoft's Visual Studio Express edition yesterday (about 750MB) and it timed out around 8 times but fortunately I was using a lovely free download manager plug-in for Firefox and I just had to hit resume rather than restarting the download each time.

Only lets you download once? I found out that our web provider put this restriction on for some reason - we got them to remove it.

Default file location - Once you start a project it uses the last directory as the default.

Files on desktop - I'll assume we are talking about when you save a file to your desktop? The VE has many project files that it stores in sub-folders to the main project directory. I'd advise storing your projects in an actual projects directory rather that on the desktop. In fact the full VE doesn't like desktop locations because of the dot in most people's desktop file path C:\Documents and Settings\David.Geddes\blah blah.... because the Thermal engine's not best pleased about them.

General Enhancements - feel free to ask us to look at introducing features that you'd like to see. We might say no but if you don't ask you don't get!

I've created a forum to deal with all VE-Ware issues so if you want to post any questions then please feel free to post there as I'll not be monitoring this forum particularly regularly.
http://forums.iesve.com.

Again... sorry about the delay in getting a post here and if you've got questions go to our own forum on VE-Ware.

hi, its good to see some activity from IES here.

the idea of creating own custom walls sound very promising, as at present i only have the plugin and unless i use walls that resemble my u-value not the construction it isnt a great use unfortunately. (and some are miles off what im using for CSH)

[Ant]

I overcame the "already downloaded" problem by using Google Chrome instead of MS Internet Explorer.

Dave Baldacchino mentioned a white paper at the begining of this thread. Does anyone know where could I find it? Is it this document?
http://www.iesve.com/content/mediaassets/pdf/Building%20Performance%20Analysis%20Using%20Revit.pdf

One shortcoming I found is glazed doors are not measured as glazing, only WINDOW category objects get included.

Like others I find the output from the VE Ware plug-in not very useful.
However the area and volume data of the check model page may be useful as input to other analysis software or worksheets that do provide useful information.

That said, IES are to be congratulated for providing this free plug-in, and I hope they keep developing it till it does become useful.

[dbaldacchino]

Yes, that's the document I was referring to.

[Mike Sealander]

Dave:
We bought a seat of Ecotect (not to change the subject) and found it very easy to use. There are some internet postings out there questioning the veracity of the analysis algorithms (ASHRAE has a standard to test output), but in simulating some small test projects, we found Ecotect very compelling. The graphical output is impressive, especially for daylight factor analysis.
One drawback: the gbXML we bring in from Revit isn't good to go. It's actually easier to rebuild models within Ecotect.
Ecotect doesn't actually care about physical geometry like walls, except to the extent they are room-bounding elements with heat and light transfer properties. So an Ecotect model is a multi-dimensional spreadsheet of room-bounding heat transfer algorithms with a graphical front end.
I give it at least 1-1/2 thumbs up, and gladly recommend it.

[kyle.bernhardt]

One shortcoming I found is glazed doors are not measured as glazing, only WINDOW category objects get included.

That is correct. Unfortunately creations of Doors in the Family Editor is kind of like the wild west, there aren't a lot of easy ways to determine programatically what is glass and what is not, since people can be using arbitrarily named customer materials. We have explored using the Transparency property of the Material as the basis of the logic to identify glazing in doors, but it proved troublesome for a couple of reasons.

All that said, the the main limitation today is that the gbXML schema, as well as many thermal analysis engines, don't really handle the fact that Doors (which are considered Openings in gbXML) can have "Children" Openings, which would be essentially glazing.

In the grand scheme of an energy model, I would not expect glazing on doors to have a significant impact on annual energy consumption for a building, although obviously there would be some impact.

This does highlight the emerging needs for gbXML to better facilitate analyses beyond energy, as this particular example could have significant impacts to daylighting levels and artificial lighting requirements. I think the schema does a good job today, and gives us room to grow within Revit to better support it, but there's always room for improvements in the schema itself.



Like others I find the output from the VE Ware plug-in not very useful.

As I know the IES folks follow these forums as well, would you be willing to elaborate on why you did not find the output useful?

Was it concerns over the accuracy?

Was it the format of the results that were presented (report format)?
Was it concerns over limitations in the analytical model output of Revit?
Did the results not fit the needs of you project? (Code Compliance, early decision making, client proposal, etc)
Something else?
Cheers,
Kyle B