Some of you probably got this. Improving what is defined by the
IDMs would be a good goal for BSP, but not the only goal.
tc
"When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so
long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which
has opened for us." -- Alexander Graham Bell
|
Toby Considine
Chair, OASIS oBIX TC
Facilities Technology Office
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC
|
|
Email: Toby.Considine@
unc.edu
Phone: (919)962-9073
http://www.oasis-open.org
blog: www.NewDaedalus.com
|
From: Louis Hecht, Jr.
[mailto:lhecht@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 12:27 PM
To: buildingSMART Alliance
Subject: AECOO-1: Draft Building Performance/Energy Analysis IDM for
Review and Comment
Below you will find a url for a document developed as part
of the AECOO-1 Testbed. The AECOO-1 Testbed Draft Information Delivery
Manual (IDM) for Building Performance and Energy Analysis concerns one of the
threads Sponsors and Participants are working in this initiative.
The joint buildingSMART alliance / Open Geospatial
Consortium’s (OGC) AECOO Testbed Interoperability Initiative is a global,
industry wide effort to move our building industry forward in meeting a number
of challenges. The Testbed is an international, hands-on, and
collaborative rapid prototyping program designed to develop and deliver working
commercial software that can frame candidate standards for OGC’s, the
National Building Information Modeling Standard’s (NBIMS,) and
buildingSMART International’s specification and other standards programs
where they may be formalized for release as open standards. The current phase
of the Testbed is focusing on developing information interoperability using
Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) in two primary areas: quantity take-off and
energy analysis.
During the June 30 to July 3, 2008 Testbed kick-off meeting,
participants identified several key use cases during early design that this
development work is meant to address. The use cases are focused on
evaluating the impact on energy consumption by the following design parameters:
•
Shading devices
•
Size of openings on daylighting, energy, and natural ventilation
•
Various window types
•
External constructions
•
Building Orientation
•
Site and surrounding buildings
•
Location
•
Building geometry –shape, dimensions, etc.
•
Interior spatial configurations
•
Various HVAC system types
For the energy thread it is our goal to create an IFC-based Model View
Definition (MVD), that is written to the right level of detail so that any
software vendor may implement that model view consistently. To do this we must
first establish a process map and exchange requirements (ER) that the MVD is
meant to support. The IDM requires input from industry
practitioners and users, and results in a document called an Information Delivery
Manual (IDM). Generally, a IDM sets out the key points where exchanges of
information occur, identifies the data that are encapsulated in those
exchanges, specifies how an application should share data in a transaction, and
what the response should entail.
We are very interested to receive broad community input about this
fundamental document. We ask that Industry reviewers focus their time on:
- Identifying missing or unclear Tasks
- Reviewing the Data Objects required to support
the tasks
- Identifying the potential sources of data for
those Data Objects
- Defining Exchange Requirements for the Data
Objects
- Identifying missing or unclear Coordination
Points.
We recognize that every firm and even individuals within a
firm have varying design processes and approaches for energy simulation, the
actual “sequence” of the tasks, exchange requirement utilization,
and coordination points. These are of less importance than the nature of
the Exchange Requirements themselves. Sections 2.2, 3.2, and 4.4 detail
the Exchange Requirements defined thus far. Exchange
Requirements are categorized as “required” and
“optional”. "Required" ER's are not necessarily
known with a high degree of certainty during early design , but they may be
specified by the user based on a set of assumptions, those assumptions being
based on experience or on an industry wide set of standard assumptions (as is
the case for the optional requirements).
In these instances feedback
- about the particular usefulness of the
assumptions based on your practice,
- recommendations you believe constitute best
practices for making those assumptions, and
- which ER should be “required” and
which ones should be “optional”
would be extremely helpful in enabling the long term
usefulness of the work being performed.
Optional requirements may be specified by the user or
defaulted to some predetermined values based on data input for required ER or
some other methodology. There may be input parameters that may be defined
in a detailed energy simulation that are deemed to be too specific to be
included as a formal exchange requirement in an early phase IDM/MVD for energy
simulation. These input parameters may be defaulted downstream of the MVD
compliant IFC file (as is the case with “optional” requirements not
specified by the user). It also may be the case that these parameters
need not be defined at all for a successful simulation (given the use case
being considered).
We provide detailed information and explanations about the type of review we
are asking for in the Cover Letter, which is on pages 1- 5 of the
document.
Comments may be sent as a word document with edits, in a general email, or
by any other electronic means that you wish to
bwelle@xxxxxxxxxxxx, with a
“CC” to Raj Singh (rsingh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx).
If you prefer to send a hard copy with comments, please send it to:
Benjamin Welle
CIFE, Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Environment and
Energy Building
473 Via Ortega, #291, MC: 4020
Stanford, CA 94305
The due date for comments is Monday, August 25th 2008. To access the
document go to: http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=29385
Thank you for your time and support of the AECOO
Testbed.
Louis Hecht, Jr.
Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.