According to the docs, there are several equipRef constraints on equips. For example, a heatExchanger equip can only reference a chillerPlant. Why?
There's several places heatExchangers can be used. Secondary > secondary, secondary > tertiary, primary -> secondary, hot water -> domestic hot water, etc. etc. etc.
Can we get the constraints removed from these items that have specific equipRefs specified? This would help greatly in using Haystack as a means to model a facilities systems layout.
Brian FrankThu 11 Jun 2015
Remove the constrain in the context of a chiller plant or outside of it? I think within the context of a chiller plant we need a formal model for the containment relationship - not to say that has to be via equipRef, but that is the standard currently for equipment containment.
Todd KnapekThu 11 Jun 2015
From outside of it. Making components outside of a plant only reference a plant component is very limiting, and not very accurate when it comes to describing relationships in a facility.
I'm not saying get rid of the plant concept, I'm saying we shouldn't be constrained when it comes to referencing equipment to other equipment. i.e. it's safe to say that all central plants have a heat exchanger of some sort, be it a chiller, cooling tower, plate and frame, whatever, but not all heat exchangers are related to a central plant. Per the documentation for a heat exchanger, it says : equipRef must reference parent chillerPlant. Heat exchangers can have a variety of parent components, and limiting it to just a chillerPlant seems like an unneeded constraint. There's several components in the documentation like that.
Brian FrankFri 12 Jun 2015
Makes sense, I don't think the intention was ever to say you can't use those equip models outside of a chiller plant, only that if it was in a plant then that is the required semantics of equipRef. I updated the docs to qualify that more clearly.
Todd Knapek Thu 11 Jun 2015
According to the docs, there are several equipRef constraints on equips. For example, a heatExchanger equip can only reference a chillerPlant. Why?
There's several places heatExchangers can be used. Secondary > secondary, secondary > tertiary, primary -> secondary, hot water -> domestic hot water, etc. etc. etc.
Can we get the constraints removed from these items that have specific equipRefs specified? This would help greatly in using Haystack as a means to model a facilities systems layout.
Brian Frank Thu 11 Jun 2015
Remove the constrain in the context of a chiller plant or outside of it? I think within the context of a chiller plant we need a formal model for the containment relationship - not to say that has to be via equipRef, but that is the standard currently for equipment containment.
Todd Knapek Thu 11 Jun 2015
From outside of it. Making components outside of a plant only reference a plant component is very limiting, and not very accurate when it comes to describing relationships in a facility.
I'm not saying get rid of the plant concept, I'm saying we shouldn't be constrained when it comes to referencing equipment to other equipment. i.e. it's safe to say that all central plants have a heat exchanger of some sort, be it a chiller, cooling tower, plate and frame, whatever, but not all heat exchangers are related to a central plant. Per the documentation for a heat exchanger, it says : equipRef must reference parent chillerPlant. Heat exchangers can have a variety of parent components, and limiting it to just a chillerPlant seems like an unneeded constraint. There's several components in the documentation like that.
Brian Frank Fri 12 Jun 2015
Makes sense, I don't think the intention was ever to say you can't use those equip models outside of a chiller plant, only that if it was in a plant then that is the required semantics of equipRef. I updated the docs to qualify that more clearly.
changeset