International sales & support  DesignBuilder USA website  DesignBuilder Italy website  DesignBuilder Australia website  DesignBuilder France website  DesignBuilder Mexico website  DesignBuilder Portugal website  DesignBuilder South Africa website
Home

Login

Username

Password

Remember me
Lost Password or Username?
No account yet? Register
  FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages    UsergroupsUsergroups 

simulation results

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    DesignBuilder Forum Index -> EnergyPlus Simulation
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
katerina



Posts: 11
PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:32 am    Post subject: simulation results Reply with quote

Hi,
I have a problem with my simulation results.Specifically,when i install shading devices to the building,i noticed that there is an increment of the energy which the computers consume.Is there any explanation about this?
thank you in advance,
Katerina
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Laurent_Support



Posts: 292
Location: Vincennes
PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

I don't think there is a link between shading and computer consumptions.

Could you post your dsb file and tell us where you notice this and how you get it so we can reproduce your problem?

Thanks,

_________________
Laurent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
lklawrie



Posts: 76
PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is true, many shading devices (as will many building surfaces) will cause the simulation to be slower. Simplifying the model can help.
_________________
Linda
EnergyPlus Development Team
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
katerina



Posts: 11
PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 8:58 am    Post subject: simulation results Reply with quote

Hi,
I have a problem with my simulation results.Specifically,when i install shading devices to the building,i noticed that there is an increment of the energy which the computers consume.Is there any explanation about this?

You can download the file from

panoramix.softnet.tuc.gr/~username/katerina.rar

thank you in advance,
Katerina
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Laurent_Support



Posts: 292
Location: Vincennes
PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Katerina,

I ran your models (Simulation for a summer week).
Your computers gains are scheduled to work from 9:00 to 15:00 (with occupancy). The shading devices are also scheduled to be closed from 9:00 to 15:00.

In my opinion your settings behaves as intended.
Could you explain what are you expecting?

Regards,

_________________
Laurent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
katerina



Posts: 11
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:08 am    Post subject: simulation results Reply with quote

Hi,
how does the sunlight affect the gain of the computers?
Do you mean that the brightness of computers screen change according to the sunlight coming into the building?

thank you,
Katerina
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Laurent_Support



Posts: 292
Location: Vincennes
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katerina,

I fear I don't understand you. Why do you think there is any effect of sunlight on computers?

Could you tell me precisely in your model (a curve, hours) where you see some effect of daylighting on computers?

Because in DesignBuilder and EnergyPlus daylighting and computers have nothing to do with each other.

_________________
Laurent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
katerina



Posts: 11
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 9:24 am    Post subject: Re: Simulation results Reply with quote

Hi,

thanks for your prompt response. For the building simulation I have two models that are identical except that: one has the shading installed and the other is without any shading. Apart from this everything else is exactly the same (e.g. the working schedule). What I am getting is that the addition of the shading devices in the second scenario leads, among other things, to an increase in the energy consumed by the computers/equipment. This seems to be counterintuitive as it would seem that energy consumption attributed to the computers/equipment should remain the same in both scenarios. The attached (see my previous post) dsb files illustrate this. Any ideas on why this is happening would be welcome.

Thanks,
Katerina
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Laurent_Support



Posts: 292
Location: Vincennes
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katerina,

I compare both models you put in your rar file. It seems there are some difference in Occupancy schedule for corridors (and may be in other zones).

In Initial_building occupancy is set from 7 AM to 7 PM, in Glazinggg from 9 AM to 3 PM.

Because you ask that internal gains work with occupancy computers gain you set are running few hours more ... increasing your electricity consumption.
I suggest you to use the data inheritance mechanism to avoid setting for each zone (you can also reset specific data for zone to inherit from building level).

Mystery solved!
Regards,

_________________
Laurent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    DesignBuilder Forum Index -> EnergyPlus Simulation All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by p h p B B


DesignBuilder Software Ltd    +44  (0) 1453 755500      sales@designbuilder.co.uk      Terms and Conditions         

Copyright © DesignBuilder Software Ltd 2005-6.