How much variance between an OpenStudio model versus an eQuest model?
We're working on a small residence for a private school, and used eQuest for an initial model, with the intent to use OpenStudio for the final model submission in a few months. We have not submitted a model using OpenStudio before (and I'm really the only who has done any E+ work at our company).
The building has a number of features in it (VRF, DOAS, indirect water heating, external enclosure for VRF compressors) which aren't well modeled in eQuest, and required a number of workarounds which to me seem at best, grossly inaccurate.
My question is how much variance should be expected between the two models? Does anyone have experience with comparing the two engines and have an idea about where differences should be expected?
Currently, the lighting, equipment, and DHW are fairly well in line, with some variances due to how the buildings were specified within each software. These are fairly easily explainable. Where the problems are arising are with the fan and pump energy, as well as heating and cooling energy.
Any insights anyone has with comparing these two software packages would be very helpful.
This link has a comparison spreadsheet between the two proposed models, eQuest versus E+ (click on the Graphs tab to view the comparisons between the various end uses). I can explain away the differences in everything except fan energy and cooling (where the largest variances exist).
I'm actually inclined to favour the E+ results over the eQuest results in this case.
@Benjamin Your Dropbox link is dead. Was that intentional?
Are there any updates to this question? I would love to see the resulting comparison, if it was completed.