Jump to content

Luka Stefanovic

Vectorworks, Inc Employee
  • Posts

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Luka Stefanovic

  1. Hi @Samuel Derenboim let me try and answer this question:

     

    There are several prescribed methods to accurately determine a compound material R-value taking thermal bridging into account. One of those is called Isothermal Planes method, and uses lambda values of individual materials within the compound and applies percentages to obtain the lambda value of the compound material. This method is described by ASHRAE and is what Vectorworks uses to calculate compound material lambda values and it works well for timber studwork and masonry, bit less so for metal studwork which needs a complex modelling assessment to get accurate lambdas or R-values. If that's what you need and the Isothermal planes method is not precise enough, you have the option of doing manual calculations separately for those wall assemblies and inputing that R-value in the Insertion tab of the Wall settings instead of using the automatic calculation. 

     

    Interior and exterior surface resistance (air film layer) is automatically taken into account - you can actually see those if you go to Edit List under Object Boundary Type in Energos section of Walls, Slabs and Roofs. These are constants depending on building element position and whether the thermal flow is upward, downward or horizontal so you just need to choose a correct option for each element. 

     

    As a general comment on compound Materials, they provide you with a solution for multiple distinct materials within a single thickness component. Without them, there is no real way of handling something like insulated studwork. Using compound Materials allow accurate quantity take-offs for example, and embodied carbon assessments to include correct areas/volumes of each of these materials.

     

    Hopefully I've answered some of the queries, but as you said - it starts a productive discussion. 

     

    Thanks for asking these great questions!

    • Like 3
  2. Hi @Dan Ryder VECC won’t work in 2020 because it’s based on Materials and quantity take-offs that haven’t really been possible before we introduced Materials. Vectorworks 2021 version is available as a standalone file to download but it has limited functionality as a first iteration of the calculator. Full version has been included since 2022 and can be found in preformatted worksheets. 

  3. @sixfootzero I've had a look and I presume the reason for this is that your model is at a very early stage where it's essentially a really well insulated box form an energy point of view - if you create a label, it gives out A+ rating! 

    There are no windows in the model, so there is no solar gain and I think between good insulation and ventilation set to mechanical, that's probably more than enough to handle cooling. There is an actual cooling energy demand value, but it's very low, which means you need very little energy over a year to keep the set comfort parameters. Load is the cooling required at hottest period and I think it probably has a value, but it's smaller than two decimal places so it's not showing.

    Having said all that, if you go into advanced ventilation settings and into summer ventilation, then drop your overheating limit to say 73F, you'll start seeing cooling loads appear.

    Also, when the model starts developing further and you have glazing, then solar heat gains will also come into play and it will become a more realistic scenario with cooling loads becoming a much more prominent factor.

    Early stage assessment is useful for many reasons, but it's crude based on what information is provided to the model and should be taken with a good chunk of salt!

    • Like 1
  4. @sixfootzero It could be a number of things - it's hard to tell like this. Have you checked U-values/R-Values of the Building elements (Doors/Windows, Walls, Slabs, Roofs)? Are you using Spaces to give you areas and volumes? 

    Also under advanced set of parameters you should include the cooling system, and potentially check advanced ventilation settings to set overheating limit. Just a few things off the top of my head, let me know if it still doesn't work and it would be best if I have a look at the model in that case.

  5. @Tom W. I'm still not sure why some of the Windows won't show if the Space doesn't have the projection towards it - though if you set the boundary of the Space to Auto-boundary, it creates those automatically and the worksheet will display everything correctly. 

    The trick with the Door is to uncheck 'Show 3D open' as that only shows the Space the Door is opening into.

    • Like 1
  6. Hi All,

     

    Delighted to say that VECC is now available for download - you can find the link here:

    https://university.vectorworks.net/mod/page/view.php?id=2508

     

    Please let me know your thoughts and feedback, it would be very useful in the further development of the tool. A webinar on the topic is in plan, but I'm happy to schedule some time to go through how VECC works. 

     

    Happy Embodied Carbon calculations!

    • Like 1
  7. 14 hours ago, Asemblance said:

    Any chance of a seminar / video on this now that its all operational?

     

    There will be resources released in due course, for now I just wanted to share that it's out there and working! For now you can get in touch with me directly for more information and a demo before this is fully released.

    • Like 1
  8. 15 hours ago, E|FA said:

    Unfortunately, not all objects can receive Material attributes.  Is there a way to comprehensively assess the total embodied carbon in a project if only some of the modeled objects are assigned materials? 

    You're right - most importantly I think those objects would be Windows and Doors. They are accounted for in the calculator separately, based on few inputs added to Data pane in Door/Window settings, where you would input glazing and frame material.

    In short, any other object could be added in a similar fashion, but just off the top of my head I think ones used most often in architectural projects would be accounted for with Materials apart from those mentioned above. Also any free modelled geometry, such as Extrudes, Extrude Along Paths or Generic Solids will also have Materials. 

    • Like 2
  9. Hi everyone - apologies for the long silence but in short I wasn't too happy with what we had at the moment and wanted to have something more substantial before I emerge above the parapet.

     

    We’re happy to share that Vectorworks now has an integrated Embodied Carbon Calculator. Complementary with the Materials workflow introduced in 2021, it allows accurate reporting of quantities and assessment of Carbon Critical elements. 

    The calculator uses the most comprehensive and industry standard guidance available in the UK AEC sector, as the foundation for the assessment methodology (RICS: Whole Life Carbon Assessment for the Built Environment,2017 and RIBA: Embodied and Whole Life Carbon Assessment for Architects, 2018).  It also derives material Properties for Density and Embodied Carbon Coefficients from University of Bath Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) Database V3, 2019.

    Further improvements are expected in the oncoming months as we add further automation. 

    For more information and a demonstration of the calculator, please get in touch with me at lstefanovic@vectorworks.net 

    • Like 2
  10. For structural framing I'd recommend using Structural Member tool. =LENGTH will give you the length of the member and you can use =CONCAT('StructuralMember'.'ProfileShape', ' ', 'StructuralMember'.'ProfileSeries', ' ', 'StructuralMember'.'ProfileSize') type of formula to concatenate the profile shape to show 'Wide Flange BSI (Universal Beams) 203 x 102 x 23' for steel profiles for example. 

  11. To be perfectly honest @jmanganelli, I'm not sure. I'm not very familiar with either of the two standards, only PassivHaus. I don't know the requirements of LEED reports, it may be that there is no such value like the ones Energos results produce to compare against in those standards. We have set about to find out this with a case study one of my colleagues at Vectorworks is doing and will share those findings.

  12. I think you are spot on there @gester 

    On 7/1/2020 at 8:05 PM, gester said:

    use the energos tool as 'designed energy calculations'

    Energos really is a designed energy evaluation tool that taps into the architectural design process. It's not intended for energy certification and there are other software, often mandated, doing that job. Benefit of something like Energos is that you know where you stand before that certification process because you can check the building performance and how design changes affect overall results.

    Thanks for sharing the energy certificate document, very interesting to see the format.

  13. @line-weight you can see and edit the parameters such as SHGC, Thermal Bridge for glazing edges, Air leakage etc in Frame and Glazing settings list under Energos tab of Door and Window Styles. This is what the U-Value calculations are based on

    • Like 1
  14. Hi @line-weight 

    On the subject of workflows, I'd echo Mark and say it's up to you to work however you feel is best for your projects, there is no perfect one. 

    You can add custom modelled geometry to Energos calculations - have a look at this thread :

    You can also use Symbol as Window object definition, add custom modelled geometry to Walls using Wall Projection etc...

     

    Q1 - Energos does take that into account in the calculation. You can test that by adding muntins or mullions to a Window and seeing the U-Value change. Multiple muntins/mullions are not necessarily poorer, it depends on the performance of the frame. Try choosing from defaults a Passivhaus frame and metal with no thermal break and see the difference.

    Q2 - Spaces don't need to have cuboidal shape. Under AEC/Space Planning there is a command to Fit Top/Bottom of Space to Objects and it will take the shape of a Slab, 3D poly or a NURBS curve. It will then report a correct volume based on what you modelled

    Q3 - That depends on how you build your model - Energos won't assume anything you don't tell it. You can model an insulated ceiling that is included in the calculations and assign Boundary Type as Slab at Unheated Attic Space Above.

     

    Have a look at the webinar I did recently, there are some explanations in there too:

    https://university.vectorworks.net/mod/scorm/player.php?a=351&currentorg=articulate_rise&scoid=702

     

    Finally, for Building Regulation, I agree with Mark -Energos is not intended as a replacement for SAP or other paid for tools that do Energy Performance Certification (certification being the key word here). I think if accepted for what it is, a very useful and in-depth energy performance evaluation tool to accompany your architectural design process from the very beginning, then it has a real value to Architects and gives them power to make informed design decisions at every step in that process do they can create truly sustainable and energy efficient architecture. 

    • Like 1
  15. Thanks @Mark Stephens for pitching in on the thread and sharing your thoughts on Energos.

     

    It's a very good seminar, I would definitely recommend taking some time out to watch it, there is much to learn on Passivhaus design and Energos.

     

    Luka

     

  16. @Mitchell (the other one) I would recommend using Door Styles as they would represent a type of Door with exact same parameters that would be used throughout the project - ie bathroom door, bedroom door etc. 

    In my opinion, symbols come in handy in case of bespoke/custom Door geometry that can't be achieved with the Door tool (ie doors on a church with intricate detailing and gothic arches). In that case, you would model it, save as a Symbol and use that instead. You would lose parametric control over things like Use Wall Depth like you say, but that's why I would only resort to Symbols if I can't achieve what I want with the Door tool.

  17. @matteoluigi When you go to export IFC project you can choose the file format with a choice between .ifc, .ifc (zipped) or .ifcxml and when you click Export button it will automatically add .ifc (or other as chosen) extension to the file name in the Save As... field. Just make sure you don't delete the extension if you are changing the file name and it should be OK.

  18. ThermalTransmittance is the way to go with this - you can map the Style U-Value in Data Manager. Have a look at default settings for Walls under ifcWallStandardCase Pset_WallCommon as Pat mentioned. You can use the same analogy and map U-Values for Slabs, Doors, Windows - any object that has a Style and a U-Value. 

    You can then use this data as display criteria for Data Visualisation, but remember you can only display one criteria per viewport, so Slabs would need to be separate from Walls for example. Perhaps you can overlap viewports but not sure how that would look like.

    See attached an example showing Data visualisation of Slabs by U-Value

    Screenshot 2020-06-04 at 12.56.12.png

    • Like 1
  19. Depending on your requirements, if you want some more detailed calculations you can attach Energos Window Record Format to the Rooflight Symbol, and you can use the Window object before converting to group to extract the values to populate the Record Format so the Energos calculations will be more precise in that respect

  20. Hi @drelARCH 

     

    Good to see the issue being solved, thanks @Nikolay Zhelyazkov Can I just suggest a workflow to this - I would create the Rooflight using Window tool (as close as you can get to what you're trying to achieve), then Convert to Group and create 3D Symbol. You can then access this Symbol through Resource Manager and attach a Record to the Symbol definition, and Edit Values so you can actually input U-Value and other fields in that Record Format so when you insert the Symbol they will be populated automatically. 

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...