Question-and-Answer Resource for the Building Energy Modeling Community
Get started with the Help page
Ask Your Question

Availability Managers

asked 2015-07-01 15:07:32 -0500

updated 2015-07-12 14:11:18 -0500

@macumber seemed to have good luck posting the ZoneMixing design doc on here so I'd like to join the action and ask some questions about availability managers. Is this a good pattern or are we abusing the system? Should it be tagged meta?

We are working on more support for availability mangers in OpenStudio. Here is the design document. I would appreciate comments.

Questions I am trying to work through...

Are these the right managers to support?

AvailabilityManager:Scheduled <-- Already supported
AvailabilityManager:NightCycle <-- Already supported

Do we need to support layering multiple managers like energyplus allows? I'm leaning one manager at a time. It gets a little confusing when you stack them up. I'm inclined to promote EMS if your logic gets so complicated that you need to stack managers.

Does the proposed API feel comfortable?

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete


I have no problem with you guys opening up development questions to the community (actually, I think it's great), but perhaps you can start a dedicated tag for this purpose, which in my mind is distinct from 'meta'. Perhaps something like 'developer request' or 'new feature comment'?

ericringold's avatar ericringold  ( 2015-07-01 15:18:24 -0500 )edit

I think there might be an ulterior motive here...karma bumping so maybe that's a good tag. More seriously, I'm fine with the dev team posting here as long as it's within the UH policies. I think it could be a good alternative to GitHub and suggest a discussion tag for posts like these.

MatthewSteen's avatar MatthewSteen  ( 2015-07-01 17:36:50 -0500 )edit

Busted.... But hey you can get in on this too. Give an answer and I'll mod you up! We need the input. You can also comment in the doc, it is open to everyone for comments.

Kyle Benne's avatar Kyle Benne  ( 2015-07-01 19:59:18 -0500 )edit

Kind of related but maybe worth another thread...What about PlantEquipmentOperationSchemes? OS currently does an OK job guessing at which combination of schemes is most appropriate but I would really like to see the ability to customize this in the controls tab for PlantLoops. I find myself writing scripts for this often.

Lincoln's avatar Lincoln  ( 2015-07-10 11:31:59 -0500 )edit

Yep those are next. I'm wrapping up on the availability managers now and will start on PlantOperationSchemes in the next week or so.

Kyle Benne's avatar Kyle Benne  ( 2015-07-10 11:49:16 -0500 )edit

1 Answer

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted

answered 2015-08-14 21:14:31 -0500

There is good argument for having at least 2 levels of control. There are many commercial applications configured for either of these scenarios (one could easily include all 3):

  • AvailabilityManager:Scheduled
  • AvailabilityManager:OptimumStart


  • AvailabilityManager:Scheduled
  • AvailabilityManager:NightCycle

How often these are used in combination is a great question for the community.

edit flag offensive delete link more


Thanks for the input @rraustad. I moved ahead with a single AVM, but following the pattern I recently worked up for plant operation schemes, I think I can add "secondary" AVMs later and not overly complicate the API.

Kyle Benne's avatar Kyle Benne  ( 2015-08-17 08:14:54 -0500 )edit

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer


Question Tools



Asked: 2015-07-01 15:07:32 -0500

Seen: 599 times

Last updated: Aug 14 '15