Revision history [back]

Hi all,

I've been playing with 3 of the 4 tools mentioned above (Epro, CBECCs, IES) and was interested in getting opinions from others who have used these tools.

I've run a simple 5 story office building and the results were fairly similar in all three models. Now of course all 3 of these tools rely on the CBECC engine for title 24 compliance, so this should be expected. However, I was curious if there is ever a reason to prefer one tool over the other, other than having the capability to model 3D geometry in open studio / IES.

Is there a dramatic benefit to using open studio? I've heard of people doing interesting things that involves running python scripts on open studio's energy plus outputs (or I may be getting this mixed up), but I don't really have an understanding of the reason or need to do so when energy pro or IES gets the same result.

Personally, I like IES more, although I'm worried about their ability to keep up with CBECC's updates. We normally do LEED modeling in IES and it would be great to have it as our one stop shop for loads, Title 24, and LEED.

Would be interested to here other people's thoughts regarding these different tools.

Thanks everyone!

Hi all,

I've been playing with 3 of the 4 tools mentioned above (Epro, CBECCs, IES) and was interested in getting opinions from others who have used these tools.

I've run a simple 5 story office building and the results were fairly similar in all three models. Now of course all 3 of these tools rely on the CBECC engine for title 24 compliance, so this should be expected. However, I was curious if there is ever a reason to prefer one tool over the other, other than having the capability to model 3D geometry in open studio / IES.

Is there a dramatic benefit to using open studio? I've heard of people doing interesting things that involves running python scripts on open studio's energy plus outputs (or I may be getting this mixed up), but I don't really have an understanding of the reason or need to do so when energy pro or IES gets the same result.

Personally, I like IES more, although I'm worried about their ability to keep up with CBECC's updates. We normally do LEED modeling in IES and it would be great to have it as our one stop shop for loads, Title 24, and LEED.

Would be interested to here other people's thoughts regarding these different tools.

Thanks everyone!

Hi all,

I've been playing with 3 of the 4 tools mentioned above (Epro, CBECCs, IES) and was interested in getting opinions from others who have used these tools.

I've run a simple 5 story office building and the results were fairly similar in across the 3. Now of course they all three models. Now of course all 3 of these tools rely on the CBECC engine for title 24 compliance, so this should be expected. However, I was curious if there is ever a reason to prefer one tool over the other, other than having the capability to model 3D geometry in open studio / IES.

Is there a dramatic benefit to using open studio? I've heard of people doing interesting things that involves running python scripts on open studio's energy plus outputs (or I may be getting this mixed up), but I don't really have an understanding of the reason or need to do so when energy pro or IES gets the same result.

Personally, I like IES more, although I'm worried about their ability to keep up with CBECC's updates. We normally do LEED modeling in IES and it would be great to have it as our one stop shop for loads, Title 24, and LEED.

Would be interested to here other people's thoughts regarding these different tools.

Thanks everyone!

Hi all,

I've been playing with 3 of the 4 tools mentioned above (Epro, CBECCs, IES) and was interested in getting opinions from others who have used these tools.

I've run a simple 5 story office building and the results were fairly across the 3. Now of course they all rely on the CBECC engine for title 24 compliance, so this should be expected. However, I was curious if there is ever a reason to prefer one tool over the other, other than having the capability to model 3D geometry in open studio / IES.

Is there a dramatic benefit to using open studio? I've heard of people doing interesting things that involves running python scripts on open studio's energy plus outputs (or I may be getting this mixed up), but I don't really have an understanding of the reason or need to do so when energy pro or IES gets the same result.

Personally, I like IES more, although I'm worried about their ability to keep up with CBECC's updates. We normally do LEED modeling in IES and it would be great to have it as our one stop shop for loads, Title 24, and LEED.

Would be interested to here other people's thoughts regarding these different tools.

Thanks everyone!