What an underrated thread!
My thoughts on it:
1.
Lighting analysis: currently I'm trying to implement Ladybug and Honeybee into my workflow. The above mentioned ones (Velux Daylight, DIALux, or Relux for that matter) are for lighting purposes. Some of them read IFC, others prefer gbXML, and those formats strip different parts of the model. On the other hand, I love the opensource concept, how LB+HB links your (easily parametricized) model to different engines: Radiance + Daysim for lighting, or Energy+ (OpenStudio) + Therm for energy simulation (more info:
https://www.ladybug.tools).
My problem is the learning curve. I'm already getting a (kind of) grasp on Grasshopper, and the AC-GH live connection could be a workable solution: deconstructing zones, analyzing the model, getting physical values from the building materials, assembling the analysis model in LB+HB, and reading back the results in an alphanumerical fashion to properties in ARCHICAD. But it took even a few lines to write down what I would like to achieve, and without a decent community it is very hard for me to find the time to progress at an acceptable rate.
2.
EcoDesigner *: I agree, it is quite closed, there isn't even an education version to it, and the pricing is quite steep. I don't know anyone who uses it, as it cannot be accessed at the university. I don't really get the point of it.
As a user, I see the problem in a greater context: ARCHICAD out of the box is a great design software, but it has very limited analysis capabilities, which e.g. Revit has attached to it (the precision and algorithmic correctness are beyond my current knowledge, but it gives you a lot of reports and shiny diagrams, let it be energy analysis or daylight analysis). The Ladybug Tools ecosystem linked to ARCHICAD could serve as a solution to this. I personally could use some help in this: automatically obtaining weather data based on the AC project location, automatically determining project north, deconstructing AC building materials/composites and reconstructing E+ ones from them, etc. Assigning other surface-related properties to building materials should be possible (e.g. reflectance, roughness, etc.), or these values could be stored in a "Surface" and linked to the "Building Material", as a lot of time is spent maintaining separate databases in different software.
As there is a section for "BIM content packages" on the GS website, I can see an "Analysis packages" section too, where Grasshopper scripts would be maintained with descriptions, what it does, and which parts you need to modify for your needs, or e.g. XMLs could store predefined values for different standards.
(I may have mixed the energy analysis with daylighting, and sorry for that, but I see no significant difference workflow-wise not to mention it here.)
odv.hu | actively using: AC25-27 INT | Rhino6-8 | macOS @ apple silicon / win10 x64