Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ROM simulation fails for a zone without windows #1545

Open
PGorzalka opened this issue Nov 17, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

ROM simulation fails for a zone without windows #1545

PGorzalka opened this issue Nov 17, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@PGorzalka
Copy link

If a TEASER model with no window area is exported to AixLib, simulation fails due eqAirTempWall.sunblind not being connected from the outside in ThermalZone. The reason is that eqAirTempWall is conditional to (sum(zoneParam.AExt) + sum(zoneParam.AWin)) > 0, but the input from simpleExternalShading is conditional to sum(zoneParam.ATransparent) > 0.

I suggest removing the conditionality of simpleExternalShading and corGMod in AixLib.ThermalZones.ReducedOrder.ThermalZone.ThermalZone.

@DaJansenGit
Copy link
Member

DaJansenGit commented Nov 25, 2024

Hey @PGorzalka, thanks for posting this issue.

Your approach would work, but wouldn't it be more elegant to make the input sunblind conditional based on sum(zoneParam.ATransparent) > 0 as well in AixLib.ThermalZones.ReducedOrder.EquivalentAirTemperature.BaseClasses.PartialVDI6007? In this case the following equation in the model also needs to be conditional:

TEqWin=TDryBul.+delTEqLWWin*(ones(n)-sunblind);

Maybe I'm missing something?

@PGorzalka
Copy link
Author

Hey @DaJansenGit , this could indeed be a more elegant solution, but AixLib.ThermalZones.ReducedOrder.EquivalentAirTemperature.BaseClasses.PartialVDI6007 is an IBPSA model, so I'm not sure if there is room for such changes there. Furthermore, the logic of the sunblinds in the model makes it needed for each orientation no matter the weight factors, so that wouldn't be in line with the current way of modelling.

So I'd rather go with the solution proposed in my first post.

@DaJansenGit
Copy link
Member

Yes, I agree that making those changes regarding the orientation and that it is an IBPSA model is not the best solution. Please go ahead with your proposed solution.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants