Although there is a considerable body of knowledge in the area, further work to confirm the credibility of environmental simulation tools is still needed.
The abstract needs to explain the context of the case study.
The breakdown of the meter readings needs to be explained.
Paper review:
The paper adds to general intuition on the accuracy of modelling softwares.
The paper is a good effort but can be improved by addressing a few issues:
1-Consistency of the units used in expressing energy consumption. It is preferable to use the metric system. in fig 3&4 units are expressed in BTU then in KWH throughout the paper.
2- the breakdown of the metering is still not explained although it appears in Figure 16.
3-From table 2 and figures 14-17 there is something called (Penn) that needs to be explained further in the text.
4- Aligned concluions to findings, as table 2 indicates the difference between the metered data and ECOTECT as the least difference between metered and simulated energy consumption, but the conclusions seem to indicate that Energy plus is more accurate.