HoursPerDay PoolPump element intended to be a child of PumpSpeed?

[andybardwell]

Was the HoursPerDay PoolPump element intended to be a child of PumpSpeed? Pump calculations use time at different speeds. The current configuration seems to support only single speed pumps sinc it only allows time-of-use for one speed. What is the intent of the single SpeedSetting (low, high, most efficient, other, unknown, none) and and HoursPerDay for PoolPump, versus the multiple PumpSpeed elements without a time of use? The HoursPerDay annotation is "Number of hours per day a pool pump operates at a particular speed setting."

[nmerket]

For reference, here's the diagram of what Andy's talking about.

[nmerket]

@andybardwell This change makes sense to me with my very limited knowledge of pool pumps. I have questions about how this information could possibly be gathered in an audit. I'm hopeful someone with more domain knowledge will have something to say.

However, most importantly, I just want to note that this will be a breaking change, which has implications usually requiring this to be done on a major release.

[kmwoley]

EnergySavvy is okay with this particular breaking change since we are not
actively using PoolPumps in our HPXML.

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014, 11:17 AM Noel Merket notifications@github.com wrote:

@andybardwell https://github.com/andybardwell This change makes sense
to me with my very limited knowledge of pool pumps. I have questions about
how this information could possibly be gathered in an audit. I'm hopeful
someone with more domain knowledge will have something to say.

However, most importantly, I just want to note that this will be a
breaking change, which has implications usually requiring this to be done
on a major release.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#11 (comment).

[andrulis]

I agree that this change makes sense. PSD is just now addressing supporting Pool Pumps, so we are also okay with this breaking change.

[nmerket]

Does anybody remember who in California designed this? I'd like to drag them into the conversation.

@juliecaracino?

[juliecaracino]

Yes, I worked with Jeff Farlow (jeff.farlow@pentair.com) and others from PG&E to develop this sub-tree. I emailed Jeff last week to comment. He said he was speaking with Andy about this.

[andybardwell]

Jeff and I reviewed the HTML HPXML tree view, and he agreed with the
proposed change.

---

OptiMiser LLC
Andy Bardwell, Ph.D., CEO
Cell: 720-219-3627
Fax: 888-228-4751
andy@optimiserenergy.com
www.OptiMiserEnergy.com http://www.optimiserenergy.com/
Introductory Video Online https://vimeo.com/49039973

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 8:49 AM, juliecaracino notifications@github.com
wrote:

Yes, I worked with Jeff Farlow (jeff.farlow@pentair.com) and others from
PG&E to develop this sub-tree. I emailed Jeff last week to comment. He said
he was speaking with Andy about this.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#11 (comment).

[nmerket]

So, my understanding of this is that we'd like to move the HoursPerDay element to be under PumpSpeed. Is that correct? Is there any other change being requested here?

Also, one idea I had to address the backwards compatibility issue would be to add an HoursPerDay element to PumpSpeed while also leaving it under PoolPump. I could then mark in the annotation that it has been deprecated in favor of the newer one. Then when we release 3.0, we can remove it. Does that sound like a reasonable solution or just potentially problematic because we're leaving that extra element hanging around asking to be used when it probably shouldn't.

[andybardwell]

That is correct. Your suggestion of adding an element and removing the
deprecated one later sounds clever and should avoid any consternation.

---

OptiMiser LLC
Andy Bardwell, Ph.D., CEO
Cell: 720-219-3627
Fax: 888-228-4751
andy@optimiserenergy.com
www.OptiMiserEnergy.com http://www.optimiserenergy.com/
Introductory Video Online https://vimeo.com/49039973

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Noel Merket notifications@github.com
wrote:

So, my understanding of this is that we'd like to move the HoursPerDay
element to be under PumpSpeed. Is that correct? Is there any other change
being requested here?

Also, one idea I had to address the backwards compatibility issue would be
to add an HoursPerDay element to PumpSpeed while also leaving it under
PoolPump. I could then mark in the annotation that it has been deprecated
in favor of the newer one. Then when we release 3.0, we can remove it. Does
that sound like a reasonable solution or just potentially problematic
because we're leaving that extra element hanging around asking to be used
when it probably shouldn't.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#11 (comment).

[nmerket]

This is what it looks like now:

[nmerket]

If nobody has any objections, I'll close this tomorrow.

[andybardwell]

Thanks, Noel!

---

OptiMiser LLC
Andy Bardwell, Ph.D., CEO
Cell: 720-219-3627
Fax: 888-228-4751
andy@optimiserenergy.com
www.OptiMiserEnergy.com http://www.optimiserenergy.com/
Introductory Video Online https://vimeo.com/49039973

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Noel Merket notifications@github.com
wrote:

If nobody has any objections, I'll close this tomorrow.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#11 (comment).

[jefffarlow]

I too agree with the change, Thanks.
Please feel free to reach out to me directly regarding any pool related issues.
(jeff.farlow@pentair.com)