Michael
Yes, I did.
I was impressed with my sales presentation potential.
Not a bunch of raw boring statistics and lists of numbers.
There are interesting displays and some color graphs, and a "carbon footprint calc." (which prints over the image of a foot),(how cute) calculation which most residential customers will think is "cool" and informative (and for such little effort). What a deal!
Change the model, get a new "carbon footprint" readout, (and more of course).
Engineers will want more raw data for sure.
And as they claim this is not a substitution for title 24 or full analysis.
Like Dave implied, there is lots and lots of additional liability with energy
claims. So adding strong disclaimers in multiply ways to your standard design disclaimers is a first step before showing any client the results, especially if your going to print them out and hand it over. (bad idea anyway).
No matter what percentage errors you claim, make it clear there are no "guarantees what so ever"on and on and bla, bla bla.
You don't want to have to pay clients "excess" energy bill for twenty years!

EcoDesigner is made for the Architect to make several decision concerning his design process from early stage to final. He often does not have that knowledge about MEP etc to make a final energy simulation.
Before EcoDesigner this was often made by some outside specialist when the design was finished and therefore hard to change.
EcoDesigner is a well investigated compromise between fast and accurate enough design tests or more complex data handling for final analysis. EcoDesigner simplifies all aspects outside the Architects design like MEP and user behavior tremendously and these factors are also affecting final energy usage.

VIP-Energy have a finer granularity of data (except the building) and therefor better accuracy.

We are in the process of building up a dealer network with Graphisoft partners so I think the best way is to contact your local graphisoft sales office and if you are a distributor or reseller contact lars.bergqvist@strusoft.com for more information.

Mats Ola

Hi Karl!

I think that you can expect different design proposal to show their relative difference. Personally I expect the error margin in EcoDesigner to consist of "only" differences in real user behavior, internal heat gain, operating hours etc .

Mats Ola

Hi Erika!

Margin of error is the possible deviation for different calculation methods compared to the reality.
Simple calculation methods can sometimes work for some buildings but they never work for all buildings.

Pure square meter method about 300%
European standard en-13790 about 40% for one family house.
Degree day method about 60% for one family house etc
Normal year correction about 40%
etc
compared to
VIP-Energy about 3%

Mats Ola

Al,

We looked at the software (my manager and myself) and this software doesn't appear to have the same capabilities as TRACE. They don't have a load design component and their systems look very simplistic. Looking through the documentation, it would appear it is not built on any larger platforms (EnergyPlus or DOE) either. Therefore, it must be a proprietary engine (like TRACE). It would appear the program does not support IP units either. TRACE supports both IP and SI. The program isn't very impressive, in our opinion.

Eric Sturm
CDS Marketing Engineer
Trane Commercial Systems
Ingersoll Rand
3600 Pammel Creek Rd
La Crosse, WI 54601

Office: +1.608.787.3926
Fax: +1.608.787.3005
Email: cdshelp@trane.com
Website: www.tranecds.com

I have sent the VIP-Energy info to Tane CDS group which supports the Trace 700 Load Design program. Above is his comment.

For all to know the Trace 700 is very easy to learn, there are many pre-made buildings all one has to do change the data ito reflect the new design.

Newer the less I am interested to learn how ED could save extrapolating data from the model. Q: is this process automated in any way, Is AC capable of using standard ASHRE components.

I think the issues here in the intermediate stage; this is where you associate the load of the building the cooling gain and heating loss which must be compensated for by any given system which you select.

Is it a reference to “a larger platform” I believe like Hughes data base Trane has in the systems. It is through this data based on system and equipment that one can handle a cooling again and heating loss and then develop the energy required per component to handle these gains and losses. I feel that it is too quick to be doing all the things that need to be done to reflect a actual building operating cost....

Personally I'm not sure it needs to be totally accurate to be useful. The architects wouldn't typically design the HVAC systems, or even need to pass the env data on to the env engineers. They would do it themselves with their own specialist software.

It sounds perfect for an architect who would like to know how various design options effect the energy efficiency, and be able to easily quantify each change. I suppose it makes no difference the exact number of units of energy a scheme uses, just knowing that one design uses 30% more energy than another is a more useful figure to be able to make a design decision with.

Also, asking the opinion of a rival software company is hardly going to get you an unbiased opinion! What else are they going to say! I suspect Mats is equally unimpressed with their software!