At the risk of repeating myself regarding EcoDesigner calculation issues and errors, have the following items been addressed in any updates to EcoDesigner in ArchiCAD 18?
1) When selecting higher performing window frames, the R value drops (not good)
2) Adding physical shading elements over windows doesn't seem to make any difference to the energy consumption calculations but selecting a "shade type" from a list within EcoDesigner does. If we are building physical models of buildings, EcoDesiger should account for the effect of shading devices located on the building. Otherwise the shading devices, while they do indeed throw shadows, become far less useful and more in line with arbitrary applied "aesthetics" - something we avoid at all costs.
3) Placing trees near a building can bring EcoDesigner Star to its knees as it calculates the shading effect of leaves on the building - yet actual shading devices seem to have no bearing on EcoDesigner's energy assessment
4) Are we ever going to get the range of typical HVAC equipment in used in the US? For example, will EcoDesigner ever link HVAC objects such as ductless split air distribution units or specific heat pumps for ductless interior devices so as to account for the actual power loadings and the actual cooling (or air-heating) efficiency of these systems?
It is CRITICAL to professional credibility to have accurate calculations come out of EcoDesigner and EcoDesigner Star (why have two variants by the way when only one of them does the job?). Thus far as a firm using ArchiCAD 18 and Ecodesigner in the US, our requests seem to have fallen on deaf ears. At least that's how it feels as a firm whose primary focus in using ArchiCAD is to create accurate and complete physical models of structures, and not as a quasi drawing system for supplementing the typical architect's design office processes.
If we knew what the status was of these fixes and where they can be downloaded - e.g. new HotFixes for ArchiCAD 18 - it would let us know how to proceed - use EcoDesigner Star or just return to a completely unlinked, standalone "guestimate" system not connected to the BIM model, the latter of which is very unsatisfactory.
Any light you can shed on these issues would be very much appreciated.
Phil Allsopp, D.Arch, M.S.(Public Health) RIBA, FRSA
Transpolis Global: USA, Inc.
Phil Allsopp, RIBA, FRSA
Principal and Trustee
Smart Pad Living, LLC
ASU Global Institute of Sustainability
OS X (Yosemite Beta + OS X 10.9.4)
iMac (3.4 GHz Intel Core i7; 16GB RAM)
This is good news.
But one question: are you referring to AC18? Because that is at build 3006 at the moment. However the latest in AC17 is build 6004.
Miklos wrote:I agree it should be modelled in specialized CFD-fem Multiphysics software
Naturally ventilated/partially open parking garages should be excluded from the building energy model and only viewed as a shading object. Mechanically ventilated/underground parking garages are modelled as Unconditioned Spaces.
Treebranch wrote:Pitty, you could have easily simulated the underground carpark air flow and contaminant flow in a fea- multiphysics programs like comsol, ansys, etc.
Thank You Miklos Sved and DesignEngineerBIM!
We have returned our license for EcoDesigner Star. Part of the reason was that as architects we do not have the MEP expertise to utilize the software. We are looking to IES for our next projects.