Table of Contents

Table of Contents 1
EnergyPlus 8.3.0-b45b06b780 Testing with Building Thermal Envelope and
Fabric Load Tests from ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 2
1 Test Objectives and Overview 3
1.1 Introduction 3
1.2 Test Type: Comparative - Loads 3
1.3 Test Suite: ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 3
1.3.1 Case 600 – Base Case Low Mass Building 3
1.3.2 Case 610 – South Shading Test for Low Mass Building 6
1.3.3 Case 620 – East/West Window Orientation Test for Low Mass Building 7
1.3.4 Case 630 – East/West Shading Test for Low Mass Building 7
1.3.5 Case 640 – Thermostat Setback Test for Low Mass Building 8
1.3.6 Case 650 – Night Ventilation Test for Low Mass Building 8
1.3.7 Case 900 –Base Case High Mass Building 8
1.3.8 Case 910 –South Shading Test for High Mass Building 9
1.3.9 Case 920 – East/West Window Orientation Test for High Mass Building 9
1.3.10 Case 930 – East/West Shading Test for High Mass Building 9
1.3.11 Case 940 – Thermostat Setback Test for High Mass Building 9
1.3.12 Case 950 – Night Ventilation Test for High Mass Building 9
1.3.13 Case 960 – Sunspace Test 9
1.3.14 Case 600FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case Low Mass Building 10
1.3.15 Case 650FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case Low Mass Building with Night Ventilation 10
1.3.16 Case 900FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case High Mass Building 10
1.3.17 Case 950FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case High Mass Building with Night Ventilation 11
1.3.18 Case 195 – Indepth Test of Solid Conduction Problem for Low Mass Building 11
1.4 Modeling Notes 11
2 Results and Discussion 13
2.1 Comparison of Changes that Occurred Between Versions of EnergyPlus 15
3 Conclusions 18
4 References 19
5 Appendix A 20
6 Appendix B 26
7 Appendix C 33
8 Appendix D 41
9 Appendix E 56

1
EnergyPlus 8.3.0-b45b06b780 Testing with Building
Thermal Envelope and Fabric Load Tests from
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011

EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780

Automatically Generated May 2015

Prepared for:

U.S. Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office of Building Technologies Washington, D.C.

Originally Prepared by:

Robert H. Henninger and Michael J. Witte GARD Analytics, Inc.

115 S. Wilke Road, Suite 105 Arlington Heights, IL 60005-1500 USA www.gard.com

This report was developed based upon funding from the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, Managing and Operating Contractor for the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsor. Earlier work was supported by the
Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and by the National Energy Technology Laboratory and the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory by subcontract through the University of Central Florida/Florida Solar Energy Center.

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its
use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or services by trade name,
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United
States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the
United States Government or any agency thereof.

2
1 Test Objectives and Overview
1.1 Introduction
This report describes the modeling methodology and results for testing done of building thermal envelope and fabric tests designated as Cases
195 through 960 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 titled Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer
Programs with the EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780. The results of EnergyPlus are also compared with results from several other whole
building energy analysis programs that simulated the same test cases.

1.2 Test Type: Comparative - Loads

Comparative tests compare a program to itself or to other simulation programs. This type of testing accomplishes results on two different levels,
both validation and debugging.

From a validation perspective, comparative tests will show that EnergyPlus is computing solutions that are reasonable compared to other energy
simulation programs. This is a very powerful method of assessment, but it is no substitute for determining if the program is absolutely correct
since it may be just as equally incorrect as the benchmark program or programs. The biggest strength of comparative testing is the ability to
compare any cases that two or more programs can model. This is much more flexible than analytical tests when only specific solutions exist for
simple models, and much more flexible than empirical tests when only specific data sets have been collected for usually a very narrow band of
operation. The ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 procedures discussed below take advantage of the comparative test method and have the
added advantage that for the specific tests included in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 have already been run by experts of the other
simulation tools.

Comparative testing is also useful for field-by-field input debugging. Energy simulation programs have so many inputs and outputs that the
results are often difficult to interpret. To ascertain if a given test passes or fails, engineering judgment or hand calculations are often needed.
Field by field comparative testing eliminates any calculational requirements for the subset of fields that are equivalent in two or more simulation
programs. The equivalent fields are exercised using equivalent inputs and relevant outputs are directly compared.

1.3 Test Suite: ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011

The tests described in Section 5.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011, Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy
Analysis Computer Programs (ANSI/ASHRAE 2011), were performed. This suite of tests is based on work previously performed under an earlier
project sponsored by the International Energy Agency (IEA) titled Building Energy Simulation Test (BESTEST) and Diagnostic Method (IEA
1995). As stated in its Foreword, Standard 140-2011 is a standard method of test that “can be used for identifying and diagnosing predictive
differences from whole building energy simulation software that may possibly be caused by algorithmic differences, modeling limitations, input
differences, or coding errors.”

The following tests were performed as specified with modeling notes and other reports generated as shown in the Standard:

BASE Case (Case 600, Section 5.2.1 of Standard)

BASIC Tests (Section 5.2.2 of Standard)

Low mass tests (Cases 610 to 650),
High mass tests (Cases 900 to 960)
Free float tests (Cases 600FF, 650FF, 900FF and 950FF)
IN-DEPTH tests (Section 5.2.3 of Standard)
Cases 195 to 320
Cases 395 to 440
Cases 800 and 810

The EnergyPlus test results are compared to the results of all programs that completed and reported test results, including ESP, BLAST-3-193,
DOE2.1D, SRES/SUN, SERIRES, S3PAS, TRNSYS and TASE. Although not part of the original set of results, results for later versions of
BLAST and DOE2 have also been added for completeness -- BLAST-3.0-334 and DOE2.1E.

A brief description of the BASE Case, BASIC Test Cases and Case 195 are presented in the following sections. For details of the other test
cases refer to Standard 140.

1.3.1 Case 600 – Base Case Low Mass Building

The basic test building (Figure 1) is a rectangular single zone (8 m wide x 6 m long x 2.7 m high) with no interior partitions and 12 m2 of
windows on the south exposure. The building is of lightweight construction with characteristics as described below. For further details refer to

3
Section 5.2.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011.

Figure 1 Base Building (Case 600) - Isometric View of Southeast Corner with Windows on South Wall

Wall Construction (light weight mass)

W W 2 kg J
Element k( ) Thickness (m) U ( 2 ) R ( m K ) Density ( 3 ) Cp ( kgK )
mK m K W m

Int. Surface Coeff. 8.290 0.121

Plasterboard 0.160 0.012 13.333 0.075 950 840

Fiberglass Quilt 0.040 0.066 0.606 1.650 12 840

Wood Siding 0.140 0.009 15.556 0.064 530 900

Ext. Surface Coeff. 29.300 0.034

Overall, air-to-air 0.514 1.944

Roof Construction (light weight mass)

W W 2 kg J
Element k( ) Thickness (m) U ( 2 ) R ( m K ) Density ( 3 ) Cp ( kgK )
mK m K W m

Int. Surface Coeff. 8.290 0.121

Plasterboard 0.160 0.010 16.000 0.063 950 840

Fiberglass Quilt 0.040 0.1118 0.358 2.794 12 840

Roof Deck 0.140 0.019 7.368 0.136 530 900

Ext. Surface Coeff. 29.300 0.034

Overall, air-to-air 0.318 3.147

Floor Construction (light weight mass)

4
 W W 2 kg J
Element k( ) Thickness (m) U ( 2 ) R ( m K ) Density ( 3 ) Cp ( kgK )
mK m K W m

Int. Surface Coeff. 8.290 0.121

Timber Flooring 0.140 0.025 5.600 0.179 650 1200

Insulation 0.040 1.003 0.040 25.374

Overall, air-to-air 0.039 25.374

Window Properties

Extinction coefficient 0.0196/mm

Number of panes 2

Pane thickness 3.175mm

Air-gap thickness 13mm

Index of refraction 1.526

Normal direct-beam transmittance through one pane 0.86156

Thermal Conductivity of glass 1.06 W

mK
W
Conductance of each glass pane 333
m2 K
W
Combined radiative and convective coefficient of air gap 6.297
m2 K
W
Exterior combined surface coefficient 21.00
m2 K
W
Interior combined surface coefficient 8.29
m2 K
W
U-value from interior air to ambient air 3.0
m2 K

Hemispherical infrared emittance of ordinary uncoated glass 0.9

kg
Density of glass 2500
m3
J
Specific heat of glass 750
kgK

Interior shade devices None

Double-pane shading coefficient at normal incidence 0.907

Double-pane solar heat gain coefficient at normal incidence 0.789

There is 0.2 m of wall below the window and 0.5 m of wall above the window.

Windows are described in EnergyPlus using the Windows 5 format. Additional glass properties are required for the front side and back side. In
consultation with F. Winkelmann of LBNL, it was recommended that the window described above for the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 test
be modeled as follows in EnergyPlus:

5
 WindowMaterial:Glazing,
Glass Type 1, !- Name
SpectralAverage, !- Optical Data Type
, !- Window Glass Spectral Data Set Name
0.003175, !- Thickness {m}
0.86156, !- Solar Transmittance at Normal Incidence
0.07846, !- Front Side Solar Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.07846, !- Back Side Solar Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.91325, !- Visible Transmittance at Normal Incidence
0.08200, !- Front Side Visible Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.08200, !- Back Side Visible Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.0, !- Infrared Transmittance at Normal Incidence
0.84, !- Front Side Infrared Hemispherical Emissivity
0.84, !- Back Side Infrared Hemispherical Emissivity
1.06; !- Conductivity {W/m-K}

WindowMaterial:Gas,
Air Space Resistance, !- Name
AIR, !- Gas Type
0.013 !- Thickness {m}

Construction,
Double Pane Window, !- Name
Glass Type 1, !- Outside Layer
Air Space Resistance, !- Layer 2
Glass Type 1; !- Layer 3

Infiltration: 0.5 air change/hour

Internal Load: 200 W continuous, 60% radiative, 40% convective, 100% sensible

Mechanical System: 100% convective air system, 100% efficient with no duct losses and no capacity limitation, no latent heat extraction, non-
proportional-type dual setpoint thermostat with deadband, heating <20°C, cooling >27°C

Soil Temperature: 10C continuous

1.3.2 Case 610 – South Shading Test for Low Mass Building
Case 610 uses the Base Building modeled in Case 600 and adds a 1 m horizontal overhang across the entire length of south wall over the south
facing windows at the roof level. See Figure 2. All other characteristics of the building were identical to the Base Case building. This case tests
the ability of a program to treat shading of a south exposed window.

6
Figure 2 Base Building with South Shading (Case 610) - Isometric View of Southeast Corner

1.3.3 Case 620 – East/West Window Orientation Test for Low Mass Building
Case 620 uses the Base Building modeled in Case 600 with the following changes:

The window orientation was modified as shown in Figure 3 such that 6 m2 of window area was added to both the east and west walls.
The window properties are exactly the same as in Case 600

The south windows were eliminated and replaced with the wall construction used throughout the building

Figure 3 Building with East/West Window Orientation (Case 620) -Isometric View of Southeast Corner

1.3.4 Case 630 – East/West Shading Test for Low Mass Building
Case 630 is exactly the same as Case 620 except that a shade overhang and shade fins were added around the east and west window. See
Figure 4. A 1 m horizontal overhang is located at the roof level and extends across the 3 m width of each window. The 1 m wide right and left
vertical shade fins are located a edge of each window and extend from the roof down to the ground.

7
Figure 4 Building with East/West Window Orientation and Shade Overhang and Shade Fins added (Case 630) - Isometric View of
Southeast Corner

1.3.5 Case 640 – Thermostat Setback Test for Low Mass Building
Case 640 is identical to the Base Case building of Case 600 except the following heating and cooling temperature setback schedule with a non-
proportional thermostat was used:

From 2300 hours to 0700 hours, heat = on if zone temperature <10°C

From 0700 hours to 2300 hours, heat = on if zone temperature <20°C
All hours, cool = on if zone temperature >27°C
Otherwise, mechanical equipment is off.

See Figure 1 for schematic of building.

1.3.6 Case 650 – Night Ventilation Test for Low Mass Building
Case 650 is identical to the Base Case building of Case 600 except the following scheduled night time ventilation and heating and cooling
temperature control was used:

From 1800 hours to 0700 hours, vent fan = on

From 0700 hours to 1800 hours, vent fan = off
Heating is always off
From 0700 hours to 1800 hours, cool = on if zone temperature >27°C, otherwise cool = off
From 1800 hours to 0700 hours, cool = off
3
Vent fan capacity = 1703.16 standard m (in addition to specified infiltration rate)
h
Waste heat from fan = 0.

See Figure 1 for schematic of building.

1.3.7 Case 900 –Base Case High Mass Building

The 900 series of tests use the same building model as was used for the series 600 tests except that the wall and floor construction were
changed to use heavier materials. Everything else with the building remained the same. The characteristics of the heavier mass wall and floor
are as follows:

Wall Construction (heavy weight mass)

8
 2 kg J
Element k ( W ) Thickness (m) U ( W
) R ( m K ) Density ( 3 ) Cp ( kgK )
mK m2 K W m

Int. Surface Coeff. 8.290 0.121

Concrete Block 0.510 0.100 5.100 0.196 1400 1000

Foam Insulation 0.040 0.0615 0.651 1.537 10 1400

Wood Siding 0.140 0.009 15.556 0.064 530 900

Ext. Surface Coeff. 29.300 0.034

Overall, air-to-air 0.512 1.952

Floor Construction (heavy weight mass)

2 kg J
Element k ( W ) Thickness (m) U ( W
) R ( m K ) Density ( 3 ) Cp ( kgK )
mK m2 K W m

Int. Surface Coeff. 8.290 0.121

Concrete Slab 1.130 0.080 14.125 0.071 1400 1000

Insulation 0.040 1.007 0.040 25.175

Overall, air-to-air 0.039 25.366

See Figure 1 for schematic of building for Case 900.

1.3.8 Case 910 –South Shading Test for High Mass Building
Case 910 uses the high mass Base Building modeled in Case 900 except that a 1 m horizontal overhang was added to the entire length of south
wall over the south facing windows at the roof level. See Figure 2. All other characteristics of the building were identical to the high mass Base
Building of Case 900. This case tests the ability of a program to treat shading of a south exposed window. This case is identical to Case 610
except for high mass walls and floor.

1.3.9 Case 920 – East/West Window Orientation Test for High Mass Building
Case 920 is identical to Case 620 except for high mass walls and floor.

1.3.10 Case 930 – East/West Shading Test for High Mass Building
Case 930 is identical to Case 630 except for high mass walls and floor.

1.3.11 Case 940 – Thermostat Setback Test for High Mass Building
Case 940 is identical to Case 640 except for high mass walls and floor.

1.3.12 Case 950 – Night Ventilation Test for High Mass Building
Case 950 is identical to case 650 except for high mass walls and floor.

1.3.13 Case 960 – Sunspace Test

Case 960 simulates a passive solar building consisting of two zones (a back-zone and a sun-zone) separated by a common interior wall (Figure
5).

9
Figure 5 Sunspace Building with Back-Zone and Sun-Zone (Case 960) - Isometric View of Southeast Corner

Back Zone: The geometric and thermal properties of the back-zone are exactly the same as for Case 600 except that the south wall and
windows are replaced with the common wall. Infiltration and internal load in the back-zone is also the same as in Case 600.

Common Wall: Material properties of the common wall are as follows:

2 kg J
Element k ( W ) Thickness (m) U ( W
) R ( m K ) Density ( 3 ) Cp ( kgK )
mK m2 K W m

Common Wall 0.510 0.200 2.55 0.392 1400 1000

Sun-Zone: The sun-zone is 2 m deep by 8 m wide by 2.7 m high. The back (north) wall of the sun-zone is the common wall. The south wall of
the sun-zone contains two 6 m2 windows that are identical to the windows in Case 900 except that they are raised to a level of 0.5 m above the
ground. The thermal and physical properties of the sun-zone are the same as case 900 with the following exceptions:

Zone depth is 2 meters.

The north wall has been replaced with the common wall.
The east and west walls (end-walls) are 5.4 m2 each.
The volume of the sun-zone is 43.2 m3
Infiltration rate is 0.5 air changes per hour.
Internal heat gain = 0 W.
Heating and cooling control strategy as follows:
Sun-zone has no space conditioning system (free floating).
Back-zone is controlled the same as for case 600.

1.3.14 Case 600FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case Low Mass
Building
Case 600FF is the same as Case 600 except that there is no mechanical heating or cooling system.

1.3.15 Case 650FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case Low Mass
Building with Night Ventilation
Case 650FF is the same as Case 650 except that there is no mechanical heating or cooling system.

1.3.16 Case 900FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case High Mass
Building
Case 900FF is the same as Case 900 except that there is no mechanical heating or cooling system.

10
1.3.17 Case 950FF – Free Floating Temperature Test for Base Case High Mass
Building with Night Ventilation
Case 950FF is the same as Case 950 except that there is no mechanical heating or cooling system.

1.3.18 Case 195 – Indepth Test of Solid Conduction Problem for Low Mass Building
Case 195 is the same as case 600 with the following exceptions:

South wall contains no windows and is entirely constructed of the Lightweight mass exterior wall construction described in Section 1.2.1.
Infiltration Rate = 0
Internal Gains = 0
Thermostat control is “20,20 bang-bang”
Heat = on if temperature < 20C
Cool = on if temperature > 20C
Interior and exterior surface emissivitiy and absorptance set = 0.1

1.4 Modeling Notes

The specifications as presented in Section 5 - Test Procedures of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 were followed to prepare the EnergyPlus
models for the test cases described above. In some cases the specification provided redundant input values for a particular element of the
building due to the fact different programs require different inputs. The following notes are presented regarding preparation of EnergyPlus IDF
files:

The weather file used for all simulations was taken from a CD that was provided along with Standard 140-2011. The weather file is
labeled DRYCOLD.TMY and contains hourly weather for an entire year which is characterized as “cold clear winters/hot dry summers.”
Although the Standard spelled out in detail the exterior and interior radiative and convective surface properties, these were not used. The
Standard indicated that if your program automatically calculates the exterior and interior film coefficients, then these radiative and
convective input values were to be disregarded.
The material layers for walls, floors and roofs were specified using the Material object except for the floor insulation which was described
using the Material:NoMass object. The opaque surface radiative properties listed in the Material object were defined in the Standard and
were set as follows:

Thermal Emissivity = 0.90

Solar Absorptance = 0.60
Visible Absorptance = 0.60

The glass for windows was specified using the Window:MaterialGlazing and Window:MaterialGas objects. Certain input variables listed in
the Window:MaterialGlazing object were not defined in the Standard and were set as follows:

Visible Transmittance = 0.91325

The convergence variables in the Building object were set as follows:

Loads Convergence Tolerance Value 3.9999999E-02

Temperature Convergence Tolerance Value 4.0000002E-03

To get the shade calculations to work for the window overhang test cases, the following variables in the Building object had to be set:

Solar Distribution = FullInteriorAndExterior

Same was true for cases with window fins.

The following objects were set to:

Surface Convection Algorithm:Inside = Detailed (v5.0.0 and earlier)

11
 Surface Convection Algorithm:Inside = TARP (v6.0.0 and later)
Surface Convection Algorithm:Outside = DOE-2

To get the dual setpoint with deadband thermostat (Type=4) to work, the following object had to be specified:

ZoneCapacitanceMultiplier = 1 (v5.0.0 and earlier)

Not included and left to default (v6.0.0 and later)

The ZoneHVAC:IdealLoadsAirSystem (called PURCHASED AIR system in earlier versions) was used to model the mechanical system.

All simulations were done using a Timestep = 4; output results were reported hourly.

12
2 Results and Discussion
The results of the EnergyPlus Loads comparison with other whole building energy analysis programs that participated in the comparison are
summarized on a set of charts presented in Appendix A. The nomenclature for the various programs referred to on these charts along with the
program author and modeler responsible for using the program as part of the BESTEST project are presented on the previous page. Results for
later versions of BLAST (3.0 level 334) and DOE2 (2.1E) which were not part of the original BESTEST exercise have also been added.

Code Name Computer Program Developer Implemented By

NREL, U.S.
BLAST BLAST-3.0 level 193 v.1 CERL, U.S.
Politecnico, Torino, Italy

DOE2.1D DOE2.1D 14 LANL/LBL, U.S. NREL, U.S.

Strathclyde
ESP ESP-RV8 De Montfort University, U.K.
University, U.K.

SRES/SUN SERIRES/SUNCODE 5.7 NREL/Ecotope, U.S. NREL, U.S.

NREL, U.S.
SERIRES SERIRES 1.2 BRE, U.K.
BRE, U.K.

University of Sevilla,
S3PAS S3PAS University of Sevilla, Spain
Spain

Tampere University,
TASE TASE Tampere University, Finland
FInland

BRE, U.K.
University of
TRNSYS TRNSYS 13.1 Vrije Universiteit (VUB),
Wisconsin, U.S.
Brussels, Belgium

DOE2.1E DOE2.1E LANL/LBL, U.S. GARD Analytics, U.S.using NREL input files

DOE2.1E- GARD Analytics, U.S.Uses Window 4 data file which more closely
DOE2.1E-RevWindow LANL/LBL, U.S.
RevWindow matches specification

BLAST3.0-334 BLAST-3.0 level 334 CERL, U.S. GARD Analytics, U.S.using NREL input files

EnergyPlus ver. 8.3.0-

ENERGYPLUS U.S. Dept. of Energy GARD Analytics, U.S.
b45b06b780

Appendix A contains a series of charts that compare the results of EnergyPlus with other programs. The results for other programs have been
updated to reflect the results reported in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011. The charts are presented in the following order:

Low Mass Building, Annual Heating, Cases 600, 610, 620, 630, 640, 650
Low Mass Building, Annual Cooling, Cases 600, 610, 620, 630, 640, 650
Low Mass Building, Peak Heating, Cases 600, 610, 620, 630, 640, 650
Low Mass Building, Peak Cooling, Cases 600, 610, 620, 630, 640, 650
High Mass Building, Annual Heating, Cases 900, 910, 920, 930, 940, 950, 960
High Mass Building, Annual Cooling, Cases 900, 910, 920, 930, 940, 950, 960
High Mass Building, Peak Heating, Cases 900, 910, 920, 930, 940, 950, 960
High Mass Building, Peak Cooling, Cases 900, 910, 920, 930, 940, 950, 960
Free Floating Zone Temperature, Maximum Temperature, Cases 600FF, 900FF, 650FF, 950FF, 960 Sunspace
Free Floating Zone Temperature, Minimum Temperature, Cases 600FF, 900FF, 650FF, 950FF, 960 Sunspace
Low Mass Building, Low Absorptances, No Windows, Case 195.

Results are also summarized in tabular format in Appendix B.

With EnergyPlus version 1.3.0.018 a new SITE ATMOSPHERIC VARIATION input object became available (beginning with EnergyPlus 3.0.0 the
name of this object changed to Site:HeightVariation) to simulate changes in outside air temperature and wind speed that typically occur vertically
across building surfaces versus the outdoor air temperature and wind speed that are obtained each hour from the weather file. Typically the
meteorological wind speed is measured in an open field at 10m above the ground and meteorological air temperature is measured at 1.5m
above ground level. To accommodate atmospheric variation EnergyPlus now automatically calculates the local outdoor air temperature and wind
speed separately for each zone and surface exposed to the outdoor environment. The zone centroid or surface centroid are used to determine

13
the height above ground. Only local outdoor air temperature and wind speed are currently calculated because they are important factors for the
exterior convection calculation for surfaces and can also be factors in the zone infiltration and ventilation calculations.

Since the Standard 140 instructions indicate that if the program being tested automatically calculates exterior surface convection coefficients
then this is the method that should be used to model the various test cases, the SITE ATMOSPHERIC VARIATION object was allowed to be
active for all of the test cases simulated with EnergyPlus 1.3.0.018 and later versions with the following default inputs for a country terrain:

SITE ATMOSPHERIC VARIATION,

0.14, !- Wind Speed Profile Exponent
270, !- Wind Speed Profile Boundary Layer Thickness {m}
0.0065; !- Air Temperature Gradient Coefficient {K/m}

The result was that there were small changes in the EnergyPlus 1.3.0.018 results compared to results from previous EnergyPlus releases.

The methodology for handling solar diffuse through a window was completely reworked in EnergyPlus 2.1.0.012 and was changed from uniform
interior distribution of transmitted diffuse solar to distribution based on approximate view factors between transmitting windows and zone heat
transfer surfaces. All tests showed varying degrees of change compared to the previous EnergyPlus 2.0.0.025 release. See further discussion in
Section 2.1 below.

One measure of comparison as to how well EnergyPlus predicted thermal loads compared to the other programs is to see if the results fall within
the range of spread of results for other programs. This can be seen visually with the charts included in Appendix A where the annual heating,
annual cooling, peak heating and peak cooling are displayed as a series of bars for the series 600 and series 900 cases that were analyzed by
all programs. Appendix B shows the same results but in tabular format and also includes a row for each comparison indicating a YES or NO if
EnergyPlus was within range. For the 62 individual comparisons that were performed, the EnergyPlus results were within the range of spread of
results for the other programs for all cases except the following:

Test Building Type Feature Being Tested Output Parameter Range of Other Programs EnergyPlus

620 Low Mass East/West Windows Annual Heating 4.61 to 5.94 MWh 4.55 MWh

630 Low Mass East/West Windows with Shading Annual Heating 5.05 to 6.47 MWh 4.88 MWh

640 Low Mass Thermostat Setback Annual Heating 2.75 to 3.80 MWh 2.68 MWh

910 High Mass South Windows with Shading Annual Heating 1.512 to 2.28 MWh 1.506 MWh

920 High Mass East/West Windows Annual Heating 3.26 to 4.30 MWh 3.19 MWh

930 High Mass East/West Windows with Shading Annual Heating 4.14 to 5.34 MWh 3.91 MWh

940 High Mass Thermostat Setback Annual Heating 0.79 to 1.41 MWh 0.77 MWh

For the free floating cases where 10 additional comparisons were made, the maximum and minimum zone temperatures predicted by
EnergyPlus were within the range of spread for all the programs except for:

Test Building Type Feature Being Tested Output Parameter Range of Other Programs EnergyPlus

650FF Low Mass Night Ventilation Minimum Zone Temp. -23.00 to –21.0 C -23.04 C

950FF High Mass Night Ventilation Minimum Zone Temp. -20.2 to –17.8 C -20.3 C

For the solid conduction problem (case 195) it was not possible to make a broad comparison since there was only one program recognized by
ASHRAE as having a valid result.

A series of “Delta Charts” were also generated which compare the difference in results between certain cases in order to isolate the sensitivity of
each program to changes in building features such as mass construction, addition of windows with and without shading, thermostat setback,
ventilation cooling, etc. The “Delta Charts” comparing EnergyPlus results with other programs are presented in Appendix C. A visual comparison
of EnergyPlus results compared to other programs indicates significant difference for:

14
 Building Output
Test Feature Being Tested Range of Other Programs EnergyPlus
Type Parameter

(620 –
Low Mass E/W Window vs. S Window Peak Cooling -2.56 to –1.72 KW -2.65 KW
600)

(650 –
Low Mass Vent Cooling vs. No Vent Cooling Annual Cooling -1.42 to –1.24 MWh -1.44 MWh
600)

(650 –
Low Mass Vent Cooling vs. No Vent Cooling Peak Cooling -0.163 to –0.085 KW -0.193 KW
600)

(920 –
High Mass East/West Windows Annual Heating 1.99 to 2.50 MWh 1.97 MWh
900)

(940 – Setback (High Mass) vs. Setback (Low

Peak Heating -1.252 to –-0.230 KW -1.461 KW
640) Mass)

Additional BASIC and IN-DEPTH test charts comparing EnergyPlus results to those of other programs are presented in Appendix D. These
almost 100 additional comparisons are designed to isolate the effects of specific algorithms and a program’s ability to model building envelope
loads for a non-deadband on/off thermostat control configuration with the following variations among cases: no windows, opaque windows,
exterior infrared emittance, interior infrared emittance, infiltration, internal gains, exterior shortwave absorptance, south solar gains, interior
shortwave absorptance, window orientation, shading devices, and thermostat setpoints. In EnergyPlus version 1.4.0.004 a correction was made
to the sunlit area calculation for DOORS which affected the results for Cases 200, 210, 215, 220, 230, 240, 250, 395, 400, 410, 420 and 430
where the windows were replaced with opaque surfaces that had been modeled in EnergyPlus as DOORS. This brought the results for most of
these cases back within the range of other programs but still left EnergyPlus results for annual heating in Cases 300 and 310 and the results for
peak cooling for Cases 395 and 400 out of range.

With the switch to the DOE-2 outside convection coefficient algorithm in EnergyPlus version 3.1.0.027 annual heating decreased overall and
Cases 270 to 320 were now out of range along with peak heating for Cases 300 and 310. The peak cooling results for Cases 395 and 400 were
now brought back within the range of other programs.

In EnergyPlus version 4.0.0.024 the algorithms for window convection coefficients changed and as a result, in addition to the changes discussed
above for the BASIC and IN-DEPTH tests, the annual heating results for Case 300 moved outside of the range of other programs.

In EnergyPlus version 7.2.0.006 the model coefficients for the DOE-2 outside face convection correlations were changed which resulted in small
increases in the annual heating for Cases 600 through 960 which in turn brought the annual heating for Case 900 within the range of results of
other programs. This change also resulted in the delta peak cooling for (Case 950 – Case 650) moving within the range of other program results.

2.1 Comparison of Changes that Occurred Between Versions of

EnergyPlus
This section documents the comparative changes that took place in results as modifications were made to the EnergyPlus code or changes were
made in the modeling approach. Since the first reporting of EnergyPlus results for BESTEST with version 1.0.0.023 back in August 2001, further
capabilities and improvements have been added to EnergyPlus with new releases beginning in June 2002 (version 1.0.1) and continuing through
the current release (version 8.3.0-b45b06b780). The table below summarizes pertinent input file and code changes that were made as the testing
progressed with each new public release of EnergyPlus.

Summary of Pertinent EnergyPlus Changes that were Implemented Since Original Testing with Version 1.0.0.023

Version Input-File-Changes Code-Changes

1.0.1.001 Change in weather processing file

1.0.1.008 Change in solar position calculation

1.0.1.037

Set monthly ground reflectance to 0.20. Previously

1.0.1.040
defaulted to 0.2 – 0.6 depending on month

Set SHADOW CALCULATIONS = 1; previously

1.0.1.026
defaulted to 20

1.0.3.006 Changed weather interpolation to previous hour

15
 1.0.3.015 Changed to “half” interpolation for solar radiation

1.1.1.004 Changed surface convection coefficient algorithms

1.2.0 More changes to exterior convection coefficient algorithms

Included new SITE ATMOSPHERIC VARIATION object

1.3.0.018 to allow calculation of local outdoor air temperature and
wind speed for each exterior surface

For Case 960, changed solar distribution option from

FullExterior to FullInteriorAndExterior; also for case
1.3.0.018
960, corrected the order of coordinates for the common
wall

For all cases, began using a new Drycold weather file

converted directly from TMY to EPW format with
1.3.0.018 EnergyPlus weather converter; previously used a
weather file that was first converted to BLAST format
and then to EPW format.

The sunlit area calculation for DOORS was corrected. This affected
the results for Cases 200, 210, 215, 220, 230, 240, 250, 395, 400,
1.4.0.004
410, 420 and 430 where windows were replaced with an opaque
surface which had been modeled as a DOOR. (CR6989)

The methodology for handling solar diffuse through a window was

completely reworked and was changed from uniform interior
2.1.0.023 distribution of transmitted diffuse solar to distribution based on
approximate view factors between transmitting windows and zone
heat transfer surfaces. (CR7237)

The algorithm for variable system timestep was revised. Changes

3.0.0.028 include uniform system timestep length across zone timestep and
stricter management of history terms for zone air conditions.

Changed SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside from The default for SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside was changed

3.1.0.027
Detailed to DOE-2 method. from Detailed to DOE-2 method. (CR7703)

Algorithms for window convection coefficients were changed

4.0.0.013
(CR7820)

For Case 960 the Common Wall (wall between

4.0.0.024 conditioned zone and sunspace) solar absorptance was
changed from 0.75 to 0.60 to conform to specification.

Changed SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Inside from

6.0.0.012 Detailed to TARP which gives same results; eliminated
the ZoneCapacitanceMultiplier object to let it default

The interpolation of rain and snow flags in the weather data was
7.1.0.007 revised to better match how the other weather data are interpolated.
(CR8800)

7.1.0.012

The model coefficients for the DOE-2 outside face convection

7.2.0.006
correlations were changed

Corrected error in Case 800, changed floor construction

8.2.0 EnergyPlus code was converted to C++
from LTFLOOR to HWFLOOR

Charts presented in Appendix E show graphically how results changed for the various BESTEST cases with each public release version of
EnergyPlus and changes discussed in the above table. Changes in results between the first two releases were sometimes significant (as high as
10%). Some significant changes also occurred with version 1.1.1.004 where surface convection coefficient algorithms were changed.

16
The results for Case 960 with EnergyPlus version 1.3.0.018 input file changes produced only small changes compared to previous versions.

Changing the weather file conversion procedure produced significant changes. Previously, for all results through version 1.3.0.018, the
BESTEST analyses had been done using a BLAST weather file which had been converted into EnergyPlus EPW format using the EnergyPlus
weather converter. Since then, the DRYCOLD.TMY weather file provided with Standard 140 has been directly converted into EPW format using
the EnergyPlus weather converter. This produced significant changes in results for some test cases as can be seen from the charts in Appendix
E where results are shown using EnergyPlus version 1.3.0.018 with both the originally converted weather file (shown on charts as Ver 1.3.018)
and results with the new weather file (shown on charts as Ver 1.3.0.018 NewWeather). A comparison of the two weather files shows several
differences. First, the BLAST version of the BESTEST weather file has Daylight Savings Time option turned on while the EnergyPlus version of
the BESTEST weather file has the Daylight Savings Time option turned off. This created differences in results for those test cases which have
schedules which change throughout the day, i.e. thermostat setback and nighttime ventilation cases (Cases 640, 650, 650FF, 940, 950 and
950FF). Secondly, there were differences in the hourly outdoor wet-bulb temperature (which produces corresponding changes in outdoor
humidity ratio, relative humidity, enthalpy and density), sky temperature and diffuse and direct solar as indicated below.

Change in E-Plus Max Difference (C) Change in E-Plus Average Difference (C)

Outdoor Wet-Bulb Temp 0.33 0.05

Sky Temperature 10.6 3.5

Change in E-Plus Annual Difference (%)

Annual Direct Solar 0.11

Annual Diffuse Solar 4.2

These changes are undoubtedly due to differences in the psychrometric and solar routines used by the BLAST and EnergyPlus weather
conversion programs.

Significant changes also occurred in EnergyPlus version 2.1.0.023 where the methodology for treating window diffuse solar radiation within a
zone was changed. The annual and peak heating results were less than those reported with version 2.0.0.025 and annual and peak cooling
results were greater than those reported previously. Annual heating changed by as much as -2.7% and annual cooling changed by as much as
+7% depending on the test case. Peak heating changed by as much as -0.3% and peak cooling changed by as much as +2.1% depending on
the test case.

The change highlighted above for version 3.0.0.028 had only a small impact on results (usually <0.5% change) compared to results obtained
with version 2.2.0.023 except for the heating/cooling temperature setback cases 640 and 940. For both cases the annual heating decreased by
about 5% while the peak heating decreased by 12-15%. In the case of 640 peak heating, the impact was to move EnergyPlus to within the
bounds of the other programs. In the case of 940 annual heating it moved EnergyPlus just outside the range of other programs.

For EnergyPlus version 3.1.0.027, the default value for SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside was changed from Detailed to DOE-2 method. This
change was made because the Detailed method was flawed when applied to small surfaces or subsurfaces which are part of a larger overall
building facade. The input files for the test suite were modified to use this new default method. The change to the DOE-2 outside convection
coefficient algorithm in EnergyPlus version 3.1.0.027 had the overall result of reducing annual heating results and consequently for 3 additional
cases the EnergyPlus annual heating results moved outside the range of the other programs.

For EnergyPlus 4.0.0.013, the window convection coefficient algorithms were changed due to errors which occurred when temperatures were out
of range and with one routine where the temperature being passed was in K rather than C.

For EnergyPlus version 4.0.0.024, the solar absorptance for the Common Wall separating the conditioned zone and the sunspace in Case 960
was changed from 0.75 to 0.60, correcting an input error. As a result the annual heating increased by 3.7% and the annual cooling decreased by
4.0% bringing both results closer to the middle of the range of results for the other programs.

For EnergyPlus version 7.1.0.012, the interpolation of the rain and snow flags in the weather data was revised to better match how other weather
data are interpolated. This had a small impact on exterior surface heat transfer due to changes in the surface exterior film coefficient and
temperature difference across the surface. Changes on the order of 0.5% or less occurred in annual zone heating or zone annual sensible
cooling for many test cases.

In version 7.2.0.006 the model coefficients for the DOE-2 outside face convection correlations were changed which resulted in annual heating
loads increasing by as much as 5.5% and annual cooling loads decreasing by as much as 12.2%.

In version 8.2.0 an error was found with the input for Case 800 and corrected. The floor construction had been previously specified as light
weight construction (LWFLOOR) and should be heavy weight construction (HWFLOOR). The result was a reduction of 1% in annual heating and
peak heating and a reduction of 17% in annual cooling and peak cooling. Results remained within the bounds of the other test program results.

For EnergyPlus version 8.2.0, the source code was converted from FORTRAN to C++. This produced negligible differences in results.

17
3 Conclusions
EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780 was used to model a range of building specifications as specified in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 -
Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs and in the Building Energy Simulation Test
(BESTEST) and Diagnostic Method. The ability of EnergyPlus to predict thermal loads was tested using a test suite of 18 cases which included
buildings with both low mass and high mass construction, without windows and with windows on various exposures, with and without exterior
window shading, with and without temperature setback, with and without night ventilation, and with and without free floating space temperatures.
The annual heating and cooling and peak heating and cooling results predicted by EnergyPlus for 13 different cases were compared to results
from 8 other whole building energy simulation programs that participated in an International Energy Agency (IEA) project conducted in February
1995. Maximum and minimum free-floating temperatures were compared for 4 different cases. A solid conduction case was compared to only
one other program due to modeling limitations in the other programs. A range of over 100 BASIC and IN-DEPTH test cases were also modeled.
When comparing EnergyPlus’ results for the BASIC and IN-DEPTH test cases, EnergyPlus was within the range of spread of results for the other
8 programs for all but seven cases. The seven cases outside of range were all less than 5.5% out of bounds.

18
4 References
ANSI/ASHRAE 2011. Standard 140-2011, Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs,
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA.

EnergyPlus 2014. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Building Technologies. www.energyplus.gov

IEA 1995. Building Energy Simulation Test(BESTEST) and Diagnostic Method, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado,
February 1995.

19
5 Appendix A
Charts Comparing EnergyPlus Results with Other Whole Building Energy Simulation Programs

Notes:TASE Case 630 disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors
For Case 650, heating always off

Notes:TASE Case 630 disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors

20
Notes:All SERIRES results and TASE Case 630 results disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors. EnergyPlus is out of
range for Case 640.
For Case 650, heating always off

Notes:All SERIRES results and TASE Case 630 results disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors.

21
Notes:TASE Case 930 disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors.
For Case 950, heating always off

Notes:TASE Case 930 disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors

22
Notes:All SERIRES results and TASE Case 930 results disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors.
For Case 950, heating always off

Notes:All SERIRES results and TASE Case 930 results disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors.

23
Notes:All SERIRES results disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors.

Notes:All SERIRES results disregarded by ASHRAE Standard 140P due to known errors. EnergyPlus Cases 650FF and 950FF out of range.

24
Notes:Only ESP is recognized by ASHRAE Standard 140 as having valid result; other programs are not capable of modeling spec for interior
and/or exterior shortwave absorptance = 0.1
EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780

25
6 Appendix B
Tables Comparing EnergyPlus Results with Other Whole Building Energy Simulation Programs

Comparison Of EnergyPlus Results with Standard 140-2011

Using EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780 with Standard 140-2011 weather file

BESTEST Min, Max, Average values conform with ASHRAE Standard 140
and also include results for DOE-2.1E and BLAST 3.0-334

26
 Low Mass Building

BESTEST Case 195

Description Solid Conduction Problem

Rectangular box of low mass construction

No windows, internal load or infiltration

Constant 20C setpoint

Annual Heating (MWh)

BESTEST Minimum 4.1670

BESTEST Maximum 4.1670

BESTEST Average 4.1670

E-Plus 4.3574

Difference, % 4.6%

EnergyPlus Within Range NO

Annual Cooling (MWh)

BESTEST Minimum 0.4140

BESTEST Maximum 0.4140

BESTEST Average 0.4140

E-Plus 0.4122

Difference, % -0.4%

EnergyPlus Within Range NO

Peak Heating (KW)

BESTEST Minimum 2.0040

BESTEST Maximum 2.0040

BESTEST Average 2.0040

E-Plus 2.0902

Difference, % 4.3%

EnergyPlus Within Range NO

Peak Cooling (KW)

BESTEST Minimum 0.651000

BESTEST Maximum 0.651000

BESTEST Average 0.651

E-Plus 0.7293

Difference, % 12.0%

EnergyPlus Within Range NO

Comparison Of EnergyPlus Results with Standard 140-2011

Using EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780 with Standard 140-2011 weather file

BESTEST Min, Max, Average values conform with ASHRAE Standard 140
and also include results for DOE-2.1E and BLAST 3.0-334

27
Low Mass
Building

BESTEST
Case 600 610 620 630 640 650

Basic Heat East/West East/West Night

Transfer South Shade Incid./Trans. Shade Setback Ventilation
Description Problem Problem Problem Problem Problem Problem

Windows on Same as 600 Windows on Same as 620 Same as

South wall with East & West wall with Same as 600 600

1.0M 1.0M Vent air

200 w internal overhang on 200 w internal overhang & Setback 1800-700
load South Wall load fins on Thermostat hrs

Cooling
0.5 ACH 0.5 ACH windows Cooling 27C, 27C, 700-
infiltration infiltration from roof to all hours 1800 hrs

H/C Setpoint H/C Setpoint Heating 10C, Heating,

20C/27C 20C/27C ground 2300 to 0700 always off

Heating 20C,
0700 to 2300

Annual
Heating
(MWh)

BESTEST
Minimum 4.296 4.355000 4.613000 5.050 2.751000 0.000000

BESTEST
Maximum 5.709 5.786000 5.944000 6.469000 3.803000 0.000

BESTEST
Average 5.046 5.098 5.328 5.686 3.135 0.000

E-Plus 4.378 4.422 4.550 4.881 2.684 0.000

Difference, % -13.2% -13.3% -14.6% -14.2% -14.4% -100.0%

EnergyPlus
Within Range YES YES NO NO NO YES

Annual
Cooling
(MWh)

BESTEST
Minimum 6.137 3.915000 3.417000 2.129000 5.952000 4.816000

BESTEST
Maximum 8.448 6.139000 5.482000 3.701000 8.097000 7.064000

BESTEST
Average 7.053 5.144 4.416 2.951 6.790 5.708

E-Plus 6.740 4.746 4.168 2.780 6.454 5.304

Difference, % -4.4% -7.7% -5.6% -5.8% -5.0% -7.1%

EnergyPlus
Within Range YES YES YES YES YES YES

28
 Peak
Heating
(KW)

BESTEST
Minimum 3.437 3.437000 3.591000 3.592000 5.232000 0.000000

BESTEST
Maximum 4.354 4.354000 4.379000 4.280000 6.954000 0.000000

BESTEST
Average 3.952 3.947 3.998 3.949 5.903 0.000

E-Plus 3.750 3.740 3.741 3.721 6.277 0.000

Difference, % -5.1% -5.3% -6.4% -5.8% 6.3% 0.0%

EnergyPlus
Within Range YES YES YES YES YES YES

Peak
Cooling
(KW)

BESTEST
Minimum 5.965 5.669000 3.634000 3.072000 5.884000 5.831000

BESTEST
Maximum 7.188 6.673000 5.096000 4.116000 7.126000 7.068000

BESTEST
Average 6.535 6.090 4.393 3.688 6.478 6.404

E-Plus 6.565 6.164 3.921 3.376 6.501 6.373

Difference, % 0.5% 1.2% -10.8% -8.5% 0.4% -0.5%

EnergyPlus
Within Range YES YES YES YES YES YES

Comparison Of EnergyPlus Results with Standard 140-2011

Using EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780 with Standard 140-2011 weather file

BESTEST Min, Max, Average values conform with ASHRAE Standard 140
and also include results for DOE-2.1E and BLAST 3.0-334

High Mass
Building

BESTEST
Case 900 910 920 930 940 960 950

Basic
Heat South East/West East/West Passive Night
Transfer Shade Incid./Trans. Shade Setback Solar Ventilation
Description Problem Problem Problem Problem Problem Problem Problem

Windows Windows on
on South Same as East & West Same as Same as Same as Same as
wall 900 with wall 920 with 900 900 but with 900

1.0M
200 w overhang 1.0M sunspace Vent air
internal on South 200 w overhang Setback and interior 1800-700
load Wall internal load & fins on Thermostat wall hrs

29
 windows Cooling Cooling
0.5 ACH 0.5 ACH from roof 27C, all Sunspace is 27C, 700-
infiltration infiltration to hours uncontrolled 1800 hrs

H/C Heating
Setpoint H/C Setpoint 10C, 2300 and has two Heating,
20C/27C 20C/27C ground to 0700 windows always off

Heating
20C, 0700
to 2300

Annual
Heating
(MWh)

BESTEST
Minimum 1.170 1.512000 3.261000 4.143000 0.793000 2.144000 0.000000

BESTEST
Maximum 2.041 2.282000 4.300 5.335000 1.411000 3.373000 0.000008

BESTEST
Average 1.649 1.951 3.828 4.603 1.086 2.709 0.000

E-Plus 1.224 1.506 3.193 3.906 0.768 2.408 0.000

Difference,
% -25.8% -22.8% -16.6% -15.1% -29.3% -11.1% -100.0%

EnergyPlus
Within
Range YES NO NO NO NO YES YES

Annual
Cooling
(MWh)

BESTEST
Minimum 2.132 0.821000 1.840 1.039000 2.079000 0.411300 0.387000

BESTEST
Maximum 3.669 1.883000 3.313000 2.238000 3.546000 0.895000 0.921000

BESTEST
Average 2.826 1.521 2.684 1.715 2.725 0.669 0.635

E-Plus 2.508 1.235 2.548 1.638 2.433 0.640 0.530

Difference,
% -11.3% -18.8% -5.0% -4.5% -10.7% -4.4% -16.5%

EnergyPlus
Within
Range YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

Peak
Heating
(KW)

BESTEST
Minimum 2.850 2.858000 3.308000 3.355000 3.980 2.410 0.000

BESTEST
Maximum 3.797 3.801000 4.061000 4.064000 6.428000 2.863000 0.000000

30
 BESTEST
Average 3.452 3.459 3.738 3.733 5.414 2.686 0.000

E-Plus 3.172 3.172 3.483 3.506 4.815 2.693 0.000

Difference,
% -8.1% -8.3% -6.8% -6.1% -11.1% 0.2% 0.0%

EnergyPlus
Within
Range YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

Peak
Cooling
(KW)

BESTEST
Minimum 2.888 1.896000 2.385000 1.873000 2.888000 0.953000 2.033000

BESTEST
Maximum 3.932 3.277000 3.505000 3.080 3.932000 1.422000 3.170000

BESTEST
Average 3.460 2.676 3.123 2.526 3.460 1.210 2.724

E-Plus 3.250 2.573 2.777 2.275 3.250 1.143 2.388

Difference,
% -6.1% -3.8% -11.1% -10.0% -6.1% -5.5% -12.3%

EnergyPlus
Within
Range YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

Comparison Of EnergyPlus Results with Standard 140-2011

Using EnergyPlus Version 8.3.0-b45b06b780 with Standard 140-2011 weather file

BESTEST Min, Max, Average values conform with ASHRAE Standard 140
and also include results for DOE-2.1E and BLAST 3.0-334

Free Floating Zone

Temperature

BESTEST Case 600FF 900FF 650FF 950FF 960

Basic Heat Basic Heat Passive

Transfer Transfer Basic Heat Basic Heat Solar
Description Problem Problem Transfer Problem Transfer Problem Problem

Low Mass High Mass Low Mass High Mass Same as

Building Building Building Building 900 but with

sunspace
Windows on Windows on Windows on South Windows on South and interior
South wall South wall wall wall wall

200 w internal 200 w internal Sunspace is

load load 200 w internal load 200 w internal load uncontrolled

0.5 ACH 0.5 ACH and has two

infiltration infiltration 0.5 ACH infiltration 0.5 ACH infiltration windows

Free Float Free Float Vent Air 1703.16 Vent Air 1703.16
Temperature Temperature m3/h 1800-700 hrs m3/h 1800-700 hrs

Free Float Free Float

Temperature Temperature

31
Maximum Annual Hourly
Zone Temperature (C)

BESTEST Minimum 64.9 41.8 63.2 35.5 48.9

BESTEST Maximum 75.1 46.400000 73.500000 38.500000 55.340000

BESTEST Average 67.7 43.7 66.1 36.6 50.5

E-Plus 65.3 43.2 63.5 36.6 52.4

Difference, % -3.6% -1.2% -4.0% 0.0% 3.7%

EnergyPlus Within Range YES YES YES YES YES

Minimum Annual Hourly

Zone Temperature (C)

BESTEST Minimum -18.8 -6.4 -23.0 -20.2 -2.8

BESTEST Maximum -15.6 -1.6 -21.0 -17.8 6.0

BESTEST Average -17.6 -3.7 -22.4 -19.3 2.3

E-Plus -17.4 -2.6 -23.0 -20.3 2.2

Difference, % -1.1% -29.2% 3.0% 5.4% -3.4%

EnergyPlus Within Range YES YES NO NO YES

Average Annual Hourly

Zone Temperature (C)

BESTEST Minimum 24.2 24.4 18.0 14.0 26.4

BESTEST Maximum 27.4 27.5 20.8 15.3 30.5

BESTEST Average 25.3 25.5 18.9 14.5 28.2

E-Plus 25.8 26.0 18.6 14.5 29.1

Difference, % 1.9% 2.0% -1.4% 0.2% 3.3%

EnergyPlus Within Range YES YES YES YES YES

32
7 Appendix C
Delta Charts Comparing EnergyPlus Results with Other Whole Building Energy Simulation Programs

33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
8 Appendix D
Additional BASIC and IN-DEPTH Test Charts Comparing EnergyPlus Results with Other Whole Building Energy Simulation Programs

41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
9 Appendix E
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2011 Output Form – Modeling Notes

STANDARD 140 OUTPUT FORM – MODELING NOTES

SOFTWARE: EnergyPlus VERSION: 8.3.0-b45b06b780

Simulated Effect: Inside and outside convection algorithm

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Inside = Simple
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Inside = TARP
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Inside = Ceiling Diffuser
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Inside = AdaptiveConvectionAlgorithm
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside = SimpleCombined
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside = TARP
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside = MoWitt
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside = DOE-2
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside = AdaptiveConvectionAlgorithm

Setting or Capability Used:

SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Inside = TARP
SurfaceConvectionAlgorithm:Outside = DOE-2

Physical Meaning of Option Used: TARP uses variable natural convection based on temperature difference. DOE-2 is based on correlations from
measurements for rough surfaces.

Simulated Effect: Solar distribution effects for shade surfaces

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

SOLAR DISTRIBUTION = MinimalShadowing

SOLAR DISTRIBUTION = FullExterior
SOLAR DISTRIBUTION = FullInteriorAndExterior
SOLAR DISTRIBUTION = FullExteriorWithReflections
SOLAR DISTRIBUTION = FullInteriorAndExteriorWithReflections

Setting or Capability Used:

SOLAR DISTRIBUTION = FullInteriorAndExterior

Physical Meaning of Option Used: Full interior and exterior shadow calculations are performed each hour.

Simulated Effect: Calculating resulting zone temperature.

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

ZoneCapacitanceMultiplier:ResearchSpecial,
Temperature Capacity Multiplier > 0,
Humidity Capacity Multiplier > 0,
Carbon Dioxide Capacity Multiplier >0

Setting or Capability Used:

56
 Let default to
ZoneCapacitanceMultiplier:ResearchSpecial
Temperature capacity Multiplier =1,
Humidity Capacity Multiplier =1,
Carbon Dioxide Capacity Multiplier =1

Physical Meaning of Option Used: Used for stability in predictor corrector step by increasing reactive capacity of zone

Simulated Effect: Various variables used to describe properties of surfaces.

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

Visible Absorptance = 0.0 to 1.0

Setting or Capability Used:

Visible Absorptance = Solar Absorptance = 0.6

Physical Meaning of Option Used: Solar Absorptance – property of surface describing ability to absorb incident solar radiation

Simulated Effect:

Simulation time increment.

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

TimeStep = whole number between 1 and 60 evenly divisible into 60

Setting or Capability Used:

TimeStep = 4

Physical Meaning of Option Used: The simulation time increment is 15 minutes. Outputs were set to report hourly.

Simulated Effect:

Frequency of solar and shadow calculations.

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

ShadowCalculation
Calculation Method = AverageOverDaysInFrequency
Calculation Method = TimestepFrequency
Calculation Frequency >=1 (default = 20, every 20 days)

Setting or Capability Used:

Calculation Method = AverageOverDaysInFrequency

Calculation Frequency = 1

Physical Meaning of Option Used:

Solar and shadow calculations frequency done based on value set.

Simulated Effect:

Window properties for double pane glazing made of standard 1/8”(3mm) clear glass with ½” (13mm) air gap.

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

57
EnergyPlus requires window properties for front and back of window surface.

Setting or Capability Used:

Window properties were described as follows:

WindowMaterial:Glazing,
Glass Type 1, !- Name
SpectralAverage, !- Optical Data Type
, !- Window Glass Spectral Data Set Name
0.003175, !- Thickness {m}
0.86156, !- Solar Transmittance at Normal Incidence
0.07846, !- Front Side Solar Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.07846, !- Back Side Solar Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.91325, !- Visible Transmittance at Normal Incidence
0.08200, !- Front Side Visible Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.08200, !- Back Side Visible Reflectance at Normal Incidence
0.0, !- Infrared Transmittance at Normal Incidence
0.84, !- Front Side Infrared Hemispherical Emissivity
0.84, !- Back Side Infrared Hemispherical Emissivity
1.06; !- Conductivity {W/m-K}

WindowMaterial:Gas,
Air Space Resistance, !- Name
AIR, !- Gas Type
0.013; !- Thickness {m}

Construction,
Double Pane Window, !- Name
Glass Type 1, !- Outside Layer
Air Space Resistance, !- Layer 2
Glass Type 1; !- Layer 3

Physical Meaning of Option Used: Description of window properties for double pane clear glass window for determining solar and conduction
heat gain.

Simulated Effect:

Ground Reflectance.

Optional Settings or Modeling Capabilities:

Site:GroundReflectance = 0.0 to 1.0

Setting or Capability Used:

Site:GroundReflectance = 0.20

Physical Meaning of Option Used:

Property of ground surface describing amount of incident solar that is reflected.

58