Design Builder Free Download

[Vernon]

Iused OpenStudio for several projects, but found specifying HVAC parameters in Open Studio time consuming and difficult (a lot of errors). To avoid many errors in HVAC, I would just create geometry and assign attributes in OpenStudio, and create all HVAC systems directly in IDF file by using E+. The building size I typically have to model is 150,000 sf to 200,000 sf.

If your goal is one-off models of single buildings, then DesignBuilder builder is an appropriate choice. It gives a friendlier feel to EnergyPlus objects which is nice for new modelers. There is a license fee.

If your goal is to do quick analysis on multiple buildings, and are comfortable with scripting, you will appreciate the utility of OpenStudio and the Building Component Library. The recent inclusion of the OpenStudio command-line-interface makes it a good choice for server-based applications. OpenStudio is free and opensource, which is why many 3rd-party developers use it. The Rhino/Grasshopper plugin Ladybug/Honeybee is particularly nice for thermal comfort analysis and recently CFD. There are still EnergyPlus objects, particularly HVAC systems, that are present in EnergyPlus but not yet OpenStudio.

Both DesignBuilder and OpenStudio are limited by the lack of controls detail in EnergyPlus, OpenStudio particularly so. I may do early modeling up through schematic or design development phases in Grasshopper/Honeybee/OpenStudio, and then import into IES if I know the controls are going to be really complicated (multiple timeclocks/setbacks, staged humidity controls, zonal and partial air-based system).

It would be better to leave cost out of this discussion. Cost isn't meaningless, but the real cost of modeling is modeler time, not the software. If software A costs 5,000 and B costs 0 but A is 2X more productive for what you do, you should go with software A every time. And twice on Sunday. The more useful part of this discussion is philosophy/orientation/workflow. Thanks.

For clarity - on the 3rd bullet @mdahlhausen you note that you have a script that uses a .csv to assign zones to systems. This is in OpenStudio? Can you briefly walk thru how this process works (export / assign / modify script / import)??

@mdahlhausen, thanks for sharing what you have found to be useful. Regarding geometry generation - do you prefer to do that in OS or in DB, and why?Regarding import to IES VE for complicated controls, are you importing via gbxml? And what are you preserving through the import process? Only geometry?

@__AmirRoth__ I agree the cost doesn't matter for private sector consulting. This is more of concern for educational licenses (there is a big discount, but big discount != free, and dealing with educational administration around licenses can be annoying), teaching one-off "what is modeling" classes to architects, and incorporating components of a modeling software into 3rd-party applications.

@dradair you can use the CSV class to read a CSV file into your measure. You just need to require 'csv' at the top. You can create a string argument that accepts the path to your csv file, and use, e.g., the foreach method to access the data in each row, and do whatever you want with it (e.g. create and assign sizes to HVAC by zone).

DesignBuilder includes Detailed HVAC templates for most complex HVAC systems so the basic system can be set up very quickly and then tailored to your requirements. You can set up the examples you list such as VAV w/boilers and chillers, chilled ceilings and heated floors with DOAS, and DB includes some very detailed ground source heat pump systems.

Ground loop heat exchanger tools such as GLHEPRO and GLD (which are not supplied by DesignBuilder or EnergyPlus) are able to carry out a more detailed and accurate sizing calculation taking into account specific borehole layouts and ground properties. These tools can export calculated G-function data in the form of IDF files which can be loaded automatically into DesignBuilder. If you search our online help you will find some information about modelling ground source heat pumps in DesignBuilder here:

If you want to find out more please contact DesignBuilder and we can answer any specific questions you have. If you'd prefer an unbiased/neutral perspective on the comparison then the guys at Big Ladder Software are well placed to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each tool (approved trainers for EnergyPlus, OS and DesignBuilder) and may be willing to offer guidance relevant to your needs if you contact them.

Dave, thanks for replying to my post. As soon as I can make some time in my schedule, I will download a free 30day trial of DesignBuilder. Would the 30day trial give me an access to Engineering Plus/Pro version that have Scripting included?

Both softwares can be used for your purpose, but I would prefer Design Builder. It is less time consuming. In OpenStudio default settings are much more complex than design builder which is more user friendly. Plus OpenStudio model visualization is not possible. In Designbuilder majority settings are already set by default to help simulate multiple times and then make changes according to your needs. Chances of errors are less so it saves your time. As for HVAC system I would suggest using Simple HVAC first, after it completes without errors you can then add the detailed HVAC. To complete a model with standard systems (for building your size) can take me 7-10 days while detailed might take a more than 2 weeks (for complete detailed HVAC). But again it depends how much time you are spending on it.Hope this helps.

Thanks for sharing your experience. From your response, it sounds like Design Builder is very similar to eQuest. With eQuest, simple HVAC is created in Wizard, and then more detailed input or additional HVAC systems are created in Detailed mode. I found that ability to visually see HVAC and respective zone is a huge time saver, especially when I have to go back to old models to make some quick changes. Can you share a few examples of the more complex HVAC when writings scripts in DB would be necessary? Thanks again!

Design Builder is a Nautobot application for easily populating data within Nautobot using standardized design files. These design files are just Jinja templates that describe the Nautobot objects to be created or updated.

If you need to view the fully-generated documentation site, you can build it with MkDocs. A container hosting the documentation can be started using the invoke commands (details in the Development Environment Guide) on :8001. Using this container, as your changes to the documentation are saved, they will be automatically rebuilt and any pages currently being viewed will be reloaded in your browser.

A single set of integrated contracts combining design and construction responsibilities, rather than two discrete contracts for each, acknowledges the interdependence of the architects' and construction trades' project responsibilities, and reduces the likelihood of disputes.[5]

The Canadian Design-Build Institute (CDBI) describes itself as "The recognized voice of Design-Build practitioners in Canada, promoting and enhancing the proper use of Design-Build method of procurement and contracting".[7]

The process and the knowledge it produces is recursive: Since subcontractors are engaged early and often in an architect-led design build project, to assess efficiencies, opportunity costs, payback rates and quality options. Their input informs overall design decisions from the outset. Cost-benefit is also a constant consideration that informs design decisions from the outset. Building performance is measured early too, so that trade offs between budget, schedule, functionality and usability can inform specification and continuous refinement of the design.

Architects engaged in this dynamic process understand and keep up to date with the potential of contemporary technology[19] and materials available to building professionals, and translate what they learn into their design work. This knowledge is fed back, not just to the specific project but can be shared to other project teams, throughout a studio, or more broadly to the profession, and can become an active source of insight in and of itself.

In all other project delivery methods, there are separate contracts for design and construction. The single contract for both design and construction is the fundamental difference between design-build and other project delivery systems.

But design-build is more than a sole-source contract. It is as much a mindset as it is a process. It is intended to be a highly collaborative, fully integrated undertaking that is built on trust, mutual respect, teamwork, innovation and creative problem solving. Design-build works best when everybody makes the mental shift to think and act as a single entity focused on achieving shared project goals.

Research over decades has consistently shown the innovation and collaboration inherent in design-build leads to faster project delivery, with more reliable performance and less cost and schedule growth.

The growth of design-build can be attributed in part to the flexibility of Owners to choose a procurement approach or variation best suited to their needs and culture. The most popular variations of design-build are:

The DBIA Projects Database is a unique place to browse hundreds of successful design-build projects. The Projects Database is searchable by project type, size and location and provides detailed information about cost/schedule, added value and innovative solutions that resulted from a collaborative design-build approach.

I think traditionally all of the validation logic that might fail is moved to the build method that actually constructs the new type from the builder. I wouldn't say there's necessarily anything wrong with returning a Result from a builder method though.

Having build() return a Result is not an option that occurred to me. While I can see the appeal, I don't really like the idea of the error occurring at a different point than where the invalid argument was given, as either the user wouldn't know which argument was bad or else I'd have to add a parameter identifier to the error struct.

3a8082e126