JasonGlazer
commented
1 month ago Currently, the output schema approach is very specific for each ruleset, and only 90.1-2019 Appendix G has been developed. The RulesetProjectDescription.output_format_type is an enumeration that would have the selection OUTPUT_SCHEMA_ASHRAE901_2019.
The RulesetModelDescription.output then references Output2019ASHRAE901, defined in Output2019ASHRAE901.schema.yaml. That defines a number of project-level results, such as:
- performance_cost_index
- baseline_building_unregulated_energy_cost
- baseline_building_regulated_energy_cost
- baseline_building_performance_energy_cost
- total_area_weighted_building_performance_factor
- total_area_weighted_building_performance_factor
- performance_cost_index_target
- total_proposed_building_energy_cost_including_renewable_energy
- total_proposed_building_energy_cost_excluding_renewable_energy
- percent_renewable_energy_savings
which each contains a note: "This output is appropriate for the overall project, not a specific instance of a model."
The OutputInstance, which is really simulation-specific, is also defined at this level.
The suggested change (thanks @JacksonJ-KC) is to have RulesetProjectDescription data group contain the output: ({Output2019ASHRAE901}) and each RulesetModelDescription have an output_instance: {OutputInstance} so that outputs appropriate for the overall project do not need to be repeated for each RMD.
Another approach suggested (thanks @weilixu) is to move the output: ({Output2019ASHRAE901}) to RulesetProjectDescription and change the “output_instance” to “output_instances” and set the type to Array.
Based on email discussion with Jarboe and @weilixu