Cymap Vrs Hevacomp

Following our 2day training course for Cymap I would like to let you know some thoughts on what I learnt. Whilst I am no advocate of Hevacomp with its clunky interface and its baffling choice of units and procedures I feel that it has several advantages to Cymap however if you are concidering it as a direct replacement for Hevacomp my main concern is as follows.

Cymap has no native SBEM calculation software. Cymap is unable to produce the SBEM calculations itself and therefore each time you wish to run a calculation you must export the data and import into iSBEM. This adds additional steps and will take much longer as during the early stages of design we may do multiple calculation iterations to help determine the minimum Uvalues for the building fabric to assist the design team. It should also be noted that the Part L portion of Hevacomp comes in very handy as a design tool ensuring that the scheme is developing in line with aspirations of the Brief, Breeam and the building control officer. Heavcomp's Part L package can also be used to run simulated EPCs so that the client is confident in the solutions. Therefore if Cymap is being considered as a direct replacement for Hevacomp I do not feel it has the ability to undertake all the tasks we are currently able to perform and would leave some gaps in the services we are able to offer our clients.

Cymap is unable to model sloping ceilings which accounts for the majority of our projects. The trainer was also unsure if Cymap could cope with these being imported via a TAS/revit model. If this is the case then this it is a huge failure in their understanding of how modern buildings are constructed. The inability to do this adds in further issues in that you will be unable to add clearstory windows. Therefore any model created in Cymap is unsuitable for anything apart from basic sizing as SBEM and overheating would not be accurate.

When it comes to sizing one small difference which will have a huge impact to some is that you cannot size services in a schematic format. You must therefore create a building and rooms first. For simple systems I would be tempted to resort to manual calculations to avoid having to create a model which is clearly not an ideal situation.

That being said as a basic design package for sizing, it is more than suitable if it is being considered as part of a line up with REVIT & TAS. However in this scenario I would strongly suggest that TAS is used for the SBEM calculations and as an early stage design tool with CYMAP being used solely for sizing.

In essence Hevacomp is a design tool, and Cymap is a sizing tool. I would actually go so far as to say they Cymap is more suited to a contractor environment whereas Hevacomp fits into the way a design team operates. In conclusion therefore ther are many things wrong with both but as it stands Hevacomp is the more complete offering.