[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[EnergyPlus_Support] base surfaces not surrounding subsurfaces
- To: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [EnergyPlus_Support] base surfaces not surrounding subsurfaces
- From: Cody Rose <cmrose@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:59:47 -0700
- Delivered-to: mailing list EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 22 May 2012 13:00:22 -0600
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=lima; t=1337713220; bh=a99VJvoKe5JN5aBE2kZH8bPkfxMMwtGiTWQ/rA6D+RU=; h=Received:Received:X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Sender:X-Apparently-To:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-Ironport-SBRS:X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered:X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result:X-IronPort-AV:X-Received:X-Received:X-Google-DKIM-Signature:X-Received:X-Received:Message-ID:User-Agent:To:X-Gm-Message-State:X-Originating-IP:X-eGroups-Msg-Info:From:X-Yahoo-Profile:Sender:MIME-Version:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:List-Id:Precedence:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=cJbi1d9CsGtvEkD0NMwOedYlHNPBaEsmPh1I5E/uihi+i6W73Ar7jVyLqH1N7cSFW8fzLXr2JvRxlyoUZ2K6X4CNF4qaPBOYRLCPZDZXqsggGpNtWkCvh3H6+2RE4UK5
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=U5mCmCt8Cct6abHKFtSWRxIY5J7+RQeAdlkc6+R+uUypvYbGdSkGVso1C01qDrmRQOCSGpK2022WO0SaN/E/qEoQcOS2oQS2de9xLlajF4R/vK7Am/ZTzdauR5bOJ0Qe;
- Envelope-to: linda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- List-id: <EnergyPlus_Support.yahoogroups.com>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:EnergyPlus_Support-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
- Mailing-list: list EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; contact EnergyPlus_Support-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Reply-to: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0
Hello,
I have some questions about the base surface/subsurface checks that
EnergyPlus does. I am running a file that is causing EnergyPlus to emit
a number of warnings such as the following:
** Warning ** Base surface does not surround subsurface (CHKSBS),
Overlap Status=No-Overlap
** ~~~ ** The base surround errors occurred 1 times.
** ~~~ ** Surface "23MOKFWDHBQPZTLW_UTH2C" misses SubSurface
"35HJWEAZV5JBDTHJ9GX2FE"
Here are the definitions for those two objects:
BuildingSurface:Detailed,
23MokFwDHBQPztlW_uTh2C, !- Name
Wall, !- Surface Type
Lightweight Concrete (0.305), !- Construction Name
2ovrstChnFOPqUxPukQgTH, !- Zone Name
Outdoors, !- Outside Boundary Condition
, !- Outside Boundary Condition Object
SunExposed, !- Sun Exposure
WindExposed, !- Wind Exposure
Autocalculate, !- View Factor to Ground
Autocalculate, !- Number of Vertices
-7.14,49.056,3.2, !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 1 {m}
5.613,49.056,3.2, !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 2 {m}
5.613,49.056,0, !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 3 {m}
-7.14,49.056,0; !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 4 {m}
FenestrationSurface:Detailed,
35hJWEaZv5JBDthj9GX2FE, !- Name
Door, !- Surface Type
generic door material, !- Construction Name
23MokFwDHBQPztlW_uTh2C, !- Building Surface Name
1MqeXrB4932AEy8p8y6InH, !- Outside Boundary Condition Object
Autocalculate, !- View Factor to Ground
, !- Shading Control Name
, !- Frame and Divider Name
1, !- Multiplier
Autocalculate, !- Number of Vertices
-6.248,49.056,2.1, !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 1 {m}
-4.978,49.056,2.1, !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 2 {m}
-4.978,49.056,0, !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 3 {m} !
-6.248,49.056,0; !- X,Y,Z ==> Vertex 4 {m} !
I noticed that one edge of the subsurface and one edge of the containing
surface are collinear, and altering the subsurface to remove this
condition caused the warning to go away.
My questions are the following:
1) Was my diagnosis correct? Does the occurrence of collinear base
surface/subsurface edges cause this warning to be emitted?
2) Some of the warnings were "Overlap Status=No-Overlap" and some were
"Overlap Status=Partial-Overlap". I gave the offending objects a cursory
inspection but couldn't distinguish between the two cases (all of them
had the collinear edge thing going on). Is the distinction between these
two conditions essentially undefined when there are collinear edges, or
did I miss something?
3) If my diagnosis is correct, is this actually going to cause
simulation problems, or is E+ just being wary?
Thanks,
Cody Rose
------------------------------------
Primary EnergyPlus support is found at:
http://energyplus.helpserve.com or send a message to energyplus-support@xxxxxxxx
The primary EnergyPlus web site is found at:
http://www.energyplus.gov
The group web site is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EnergyPlus_Support/
Attachments are currently allowed but be mindful that not everyone has a high speed connection. Limit attachments to small files.
EnergyPlus Documentation is searchable. Open EPlusMainMenu.pdf under the Documentation link and press the "search" button.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EnergyPlus_Support/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EnergyPlus_Support/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
EnergyPlus_Support-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
EnergyPlus_Support-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
EnergyPlus_Support-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/