What exactly do each of these mean?
Import XML: Buildings created by architects can quickly be imported into energy modeling programs. Traditionally ¾ of the energy modeling budget is chewed up by re-creating the model in a new program, making it impossible in our current project timelines and billing structures for energy analysis to be used iteratively or comparatively. Both IFC and XML formats can be used to exchange rooms/zones for energy analysis purposes, and while many experts agree that the IFC format is richer and more versatile the XML language has become the dominant export format used by the major BIM authoring tools. Importing XML is really the first step.
Visualize the Model: Several energy modeling programs have had the capability to import XML files for several years now, but this functionality is not being used. In particular, MEP programs such as HAP and Trane Trace do a fairly good job importing XML files, but because their GUI (graphical user interface) doesn’t allow users to visualize the model, the quality of imported files has not really been trusted. Being able to visualizing the model is extremely important, but we really need visualization and ease of editing, the latter of which isn’t yet found in Hevacomp or most other programs.
ASHRAE 90.1: Many future projects pursuing high performance standards will be doing so as a direct response to the shifting priorities towards energy found in LEED V3.0. One might think that there are obvious reasons other than LEED to pursue energy efficient design, particularly now that it has become such an important politic topic. The sad reality is that energy has been treated as little more than a buzzword in the building industry, with a majority of even LEED projects performing disproportionately poor in energy. “Next time we’ll do it right,” were the famous last words of the pre-recession building boomers.
Clap clap clap! Bentley Hevacomp really deserves half of a medal for being the first to achieve the all three of these Benchmarks, with the other half delivered once they work through the hiccups and streamline their design/analysis integrated process.
So what works and what doesn’t?
Doesn’t work: first of all, when you import into Hevacomp from non-Bentley BIM authoring tools, the success of the import is not guaranteed (part of the larger BIM interoperability headache). Second, the way that Bentley automatically generates an energy model is quick and painless, but the process produces a model which is potentially too complex, and correct me if I’m wrong but there isn’t much flexibility here.
Does work: once you have a robust energy model Hevacomp provides an incredible amount of simulation and analysis types, focused on meeting the requirements of building codes. While originally based in England and designed for British and European markets, Hevacomp has changed considerably since they were acquired by Bentley in 2008. The most noticeable improvements to Hevacomp are the integration of Energy Plus, ASHRAE 90.1, and BIM interoperability through xml.
Where to Go?
Well I’m not sure that the success of Hevacomp will gain much market share for Bentley BIM, though it would help. For Hevacomp to successfully charge ahead of its competitors it needs to focus on the development and/or adoption of international standards for XML and IFC file exchange requirements. Hevacomp is targeting a wider audience than Bentley users, but until information exchange is standardized Hevacomp users will have difficulties importing from other BIM applications.
