Why the heating energy consumption in the south oriented room is higher than the north oriented one?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris Mackey on August 15, 2015 at 4:07pm

Yao,

I am happy to help debug issues with code but your GH file is enormous and contains way more stuff than the issue you are posting.  You also have materials referenced in your definition that are not included in the GH file, making it impossible for anyone else to run.  If you want help with you are issue, you are going to have to be more specific about it and simplify your GH file.

-Chris

Permalink Reply by Yao Lv on August 15, 2015 at 9:29pm

Hello Chris,

Thank you for the reply!

I am sorry for my mess model. I simplified it and hope you can help me to have a look. I built all the surfaces in Grasshopper one buy one instead of explode them from a box, I think this might be one suspect of this error.
The issue I posted can be find without using any materials that I created, and I can not change the orientation bu entering numbers in "runEnergysimulation". That's why I built two zones.

About the materials that I created myself, in my compute, it seems that the new materials can not be saved to the library for a long term, each time I open the file, I have to save the materials again and apply them again, then the file can work. But if I use your sample file from youtube, I don't need to do this. I don't know why.

Thank you in advance!

Best regards,

Yao

Attachments:

• 11nobalconyaddlayer2zonesnew.gh, 554 KB

Permalink Reply by Chris Mackey on August 22, 2015 at 12:22pm

Yao,

I apologize for getting back so late.  The work week was very busy for me.

There were 2 things that were weird about your model (and were blowing the heating load out of proportion) and there was one bug on our end.

First, you set the natural ventilation setpoint to be only one degree greater than the heating setpoint.  This frequently causes the building to expend heating energy reaching the setpoint only to throw away this heat a few minutes later when the indoor temperature rises by one degree.  Generally, I would leave at least 3 degrees between these two setpoints unless you are using some special types of schedules that ensure this conflict does not happen.

Second, I do not know what you were trying to do with so many solve adjacency components but, when you hook up only one zone to this component and set "removeAdjacencies" to true, you will over-write all of the previous boundary conditions that you set in the surface-by surface method.  These were the boundary conditions that you were sending into EnergyPlus in the file you uploaded:

As you can see, you were blowing your heating load out of proportion by getting rid of your originally-set adiabatic walls.  In the attached GH file, I use just one solve adjacencies component and these are your resulting boundary conditions:

Finally, there was a bug in the function that checks the normal direction of surfaces input to the energy model and Mostapha just fixed this one this past week (https://github.com/mostaphaRoudsari/Honeybee/issues/365).  This was causing the solar gain calculation to be incorrect in your model, which, admittedly, is the major reason why the heating loads between the north and south facades were not different.  As you see in the attached GH file, you now get very different heating loads for the north and south facades:

I hope that all of this helped and, again, sorry for the delay.

-Chris

Attachments:

• 11nobalconyaddlayer2zonesnew_CWM2.gh, 595 KB