one, when its one trunk divide the isocurve into 30 parts, then divide each of the 3 branches should be divided into 10, and then the main trunk after they merge back together should be divided into 30.…
Added by Eli Meltzer at 4:05pm on February 9, 2012
FROM DISCONTINUITY.
BUT AS I EXPECTED THERE IS A BROKEN LIST O POINTS.
FOR EXAMPLE IT CONNECT POINT 25 WITH 29, 29 WITH 30, 30 WITH 26 AND SO ON...
IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY TO MAKE A LIST OF POINTS INTO THE RIGHT ORDER?…
NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS". I'm not sure of where to start in troubleshooting this. I've attached the file.
Thank you,
See the errors and warnings below:
{0;0;0}
0. Current document units is in Meters
1. Conversion to Meters will be applied = 1.000
2. [1 of 8] Writing simulation parameters...
3. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
4. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
5. [3 of 8] Writing geometry...
6. [4 of 8] Writing Electric Load Center - Generator specifications ...
7. [5 of 8] Writing materials and constructions...
8. [6 of 8] Writing schedules...
9. [7 of 8] Writing loads and ideal air system...
10. [8 of 8] Writing outputs...
11. ...
... idf file is successfully written to : R:\Green\SuRG\Building_Performance_Analysis\2016_analysis_studies\Energy_Analysis_Comparison\Honeybee_+_Ladybug\tutorial01\EnergyPlus\tutorial01.idf
12.
13. Analysis is running!...
14. ...
...
Done! Read below for errors and warnings:
15.
16. Program Version,EnergyPlus, Version 8.5.0-c87e61b44b, YMD=2016.10.31 11:39,IDD_Version 8.5.0
17.
18. ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message:
19.
20. ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary...
21.
22. ************* 24 Sizing:Parameters,
23.
24. ************* Only last 1 lines before error line shown.....
25.
26. ************* 25 None, !- Heating Sizing Factor
27.
28. ** Severe ** IP: IDF line~25 Invalid Number in Numeric Field#1 (Heating Sizing Factor), value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
29.
30. ** Warning ** IP: Note -- Some missing fields have been filled with defaults. See the audit output file for details.
31.
32. ** ~~~ ** Possible Invalid Numerics or other problems
33.
34. ** Fatal ** IP: Errors occurred on processing IDF file. Preceding condition(s) cause termination.
35.
36. ...Summary of Errors that led to program termination:
37.
38. ..... Reference severe error count=1
39.
40. ..... Last severe error=IP: IDF line~
, value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
41.
42. ************* Warning: Node connection errors not checked - most system input has not been read (see previous warning).
43.
44. ************* Fatal error -- final processing. Program exited before simulations began. See previous error messages.
45.
46. ************* EnergyPlus Warmup Error Summary. During Warmup: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
47.
48. ************* EnergyPlus Sizing Error Summary. During Sizing: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
49.
50. ************* EnergyPlus Terminated--Fatal Error Detected. 1 Warning; 1 Severe Errors; Elapsed Time=00hr 00min 9.34sec
51.…
run the simulation I get this in the command line:
An error occured in the display pipeline @ 10:35:29(856ms)An error occured in the display pipeline @ 10:35:29(856ms)An error occured in the display pipeline @ 10:35:30(387ms)An error occured in the display pipeline @ 10:35:30(387ms)
etc
etc
I have tried changing between Windows and Open GL in 'Pipeline and Conduits' settings in Options> Appearance> Advanced Settings> Other Settings - doesn't solve the problem.
I am running:
- Rhino 4 SR 8
- Grasshopper 0.80004
- Kangaroo 0.044
rhino model and grasshopper definition attached....
any help would be really appreciated!!
thanks,
Jeg…
EC
1. Between hours 1:00 to 24:002. Current document units is in Meters3. Conversion to Meters will be applied = 1.0004. [1 of 7] Writing simulation parameters...5. [2 of 6] No context surfaces...6. [3 of 6] Writing geometry...7. [4 of 6] Writing materials and constructions...8. [5 of 7] Writing schedules...9. [6 of 7] Writing loads and ideal air system...10. [7 of 7] Writing outputs...11. ...... idf file is successfully written to : c:\ladybug\Freeformtower_IDF\EnergyPlus\Freeformtower_IDF.idf12. 13. Analysis is running!...14. ......
Done! Read below for errors and warnings:
15. 16. Program Version,EnergyPlus-Windows-64 8.1.0.009, YMD=2015.04.04 23:39,IDD_Version 8.1.0.00917. 18. ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message:19. 20. ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary...21. 22. ************* 577 Zone,23. 24. ************* Only last 1 lines before error line shown.....25. 26. ************* 578 Freeformbuilding27. 28. ** Warning ** IP: IDF line~578 Comma being inserted after:" Freeformbuilding" in Object=ZONE29. 30. ** Severe ** Out of range value Numeric Field#5 (Type), value=0.00000, range={>=1 and <=1}, in ZONE=FREEFORMBUILDING31. 32. ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message:33. 34. ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary...35. 36. ************* 586 BuildingSurface:Detailed,7341.
…
Not overly analogue at all - do whichever is a more interesting option for you. The 3 pieces/ 30 piece minimums are guidelines at best - just come to class with something physical.
onent are experiential or location specific. For example: humidex has been derived and widely used in Canada.Also both humidex and discomfort index should be used in in-shade conditions.For universal applications and locations, you should concentrate on either PET or UTCI (this is what "Outdoor Comfort Calculator" component is based on).
I have found out, that for instance - OutdoorComfortCalculator - which considers temperatures of 9-26 and other factors, gives the % of comfortable time outdoor for instance in Kenya in Africa (high temperatures and humidity) 55%, whereas within the same .epw data and some additional factors added to the Thermal Indices component, the "humidex" or "Discomfort index" give a result drastically lower, I think it was even 1-5% comfortable.How is that?
Yes, this is one of the issues that I have with UTCI index: the authors wanted to make it as an index applicable in any type of climate. To create the UTCI comfort categories a number of data has been collected from different locations (for hot humid climate, it was the data from Madagascar. I may be wrong on this). This resulted in universal comfortable range of 9 to 26 C which you mentioned. How would the people in Madagascar perceive the feel like temperature of 9 degrees as comfortable is beyond my understanding.Thermophysiology of a human in Madagascar, and in Poland is the same. However their acclimatization is quite different, which raises the issue with the upper universal comfortable range. In general people who live in hotter climates have a bit higher tolerance to high temperature than those living in continental climates. And vice-versa: their tolerance to lower temperatures is lower than the tolerance of the people from the continental climates. Here is a comparison of the UTCI - PET stress categories:
UTCI
all climates stress category
above +46 extreme heat stress+38 to +46 very strong heat stress+32 to +38 strong heat stress+26 to +32 moderate heat stress+9 to +26 no thermal stress+9 to 0 slight cold stress0 to -13 moderate cold stress-13 to -27 strong cold stress-27 to -40 very strong cold stressbelow -40 extreme cold stress
PET
(sub)tropical humid climate temperate climate stress categoryabove +42 above +41 extreme heat stress+38 to +42 +35 to +41 strong heat stress+34 to +38 +29 to +35 moderate heat stress+30 to +34 +23 to +29 slight heat stress+26 to +30 +18 to +23 no thermal stress+22 to +26 +13 to +18 slight cold stress+18 to +22 +8 to +13 moderate cold stress+14 to +18 +4 to +8 strong cold stressbelow +14 below +4 extreme cold stress
I attached below an example of PET humid climate comparison with UTCI, for in-shade and out-shade conditions.As it can be seen UTCI shows the percent of time comfortable: two times higher than PET.
Thank you Pin, for the useful comment, on usage of "Analysis period" component.…