Hi Jim,
Thanks for posting this! I reviewed the workbook and had a few comments/questions:
1) Description of capacity in rows 14 and 18 seem to indicate that the cooling capacity reported in AHRI ratings and by E+ are the same values, however, it is my understanding that the AHRI Standard 210/240 Ratings for cooling/heating are net values.
2) It appears that the E+ fan sizing assumptions used result in a fan-to-gross cooling capacity ratio of 300 CFM/ton. The assumption I've seen used in other calculations for converting AHRI EERs to EIR/COP for simulation is 400 CFM/ton. It appears that AHRI doesn't dictates this ratio except to say it can't be higher than 450 CFM/ton. Do you have any insight as to whether it is more appropriate to use the E+ autosized fan capacity, or a standardized fan-to-gross cooling capacity ratio? Using a standard assumption for both W/cfm and cfm/ton does have the advantage of removing the actual fan/cooling capacities from the equation, but this highlights the need for a standardized assumptions used between projects/simulation engines...
David
--
David Reddy
360 AnalyticsBuilding Energy Analysis Consultants
mail: 9750 3rd Ave NE, Suite 405, Seattle, WA 98115
office: 206.557.4732 x 201
cell: 206.406.9856
web: www.360-Analytics.com
Dear forum,
Not too long ago, there was a thread of conversation regarding a simple way to calculate the COP needed for a DX coil so that a desired EER would result in EnergyPlus output. For example, if you want your DX system to have an EER of 11.0 so as to meet minimum ASHRAE 90.1 efficiency, what coil COP should be used?
I posted something on this topic a week or two ago, but can’t find it, so I’m posting a new message after some very helpful discussions with Bereket Nigusse of the Help Desk and updating the spreadsheet I use for these calculations.
I hope that it is helpful to many of you!
In short:
· Make a successful auto-sizing run and determine “nominal” coil capacity and airflow
(when manually defining a coil, the procedure varies slightly and is described in the attached spreadsheet)· Enter the nominal capacity, airflow and desired system EER in the spreadsheet to have it calculate the “Req’d COPe+”
· Use the “Req’d COPe+” as the DX coil COP in your IDF.
· Expect perfect EER calculation without trial and error!
James V Dirkes II, PE, BEMP, LEED AP
www.buildingperformanceteam.com
Energy Analysis, Commissioning & Training Services
1631 Acacia Drive, Grand Rapids, MI 49504 USA
616 450 8653
From: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sungmo Seo
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 3:08 AM
To: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [EnergyPlus_Support] Warning explanation needed
I can't understand well about bean shape roof. is it mean circle?
I recommend you that check a BuildingSurface:Detailed in IDF file.
That's a list of surfaces and surface's detail.
And that consist with Vertices coordination. These mean points of each surface.
for example, rectangle made by for point.
Than if you make circle shape surface, that consist with a lot of point.
Then it will make some warning or error.
If you want a making of bean-shape roof(if it means half circle roof) you should change to triangle shape or polygon shape.
I want a it will be help for you work.
2013/9/4 jeannieboef@xxxxxxxxx <jeannieboef@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks. Would a bean-shaped roof without skylight also have this warning?
It is hard to mentally picture the "shadow clipping". I believe the warning is saying that non-convex receiving surfaces may result in inaccurate shading, but as shadow clipping is not the same as ray tracing, it is hard to visualize. Does the .shd file post a geometry of the shadow which I can then import with OpenStudio to better visualize where the program is placing shadows? That would be an interesting implementation.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen- Sent from my iPhone (excuse the brevity)
i. A.
Jean Marais
b.i.g. bechtold
Tel. +49 30 6706662-23
On 04.09.2013, at 08:07, Sungmo Seo <ddims123@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think this warning made by modeling of skylight.
because of skylight, your roof has a hole.
If you want remove this warning, you must cut roof as rectangles
Same like
____________________
l l roof l l
l l_____________l l
l r l l r l
l o l Skylight l o l
l o l____________ l o l
l f l roof l f l
l___l_____________l___l
2013/9/3 Linda Lawrie <linda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Well, it is a warning, not a severe.
Your roof is a receiving surface but it is non-convex. If you have shading surfaces shading it, it is warning you that the shadowing values could be inaccurate (but may not be)
At 01:42 AM 9/3/2013, jeannieboef@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
** Warning ** DetermineShadowingCombinations: Surface="118434_ROOF_0_0_0" is a receiving surface and is non-convex.
** ~~~ ** ...Shadowing values may be inaccurate.
The surface is plannar. The zone is non-convex. Surely this only has an effect if a skylight (roof window) had to have light fall downwards, it would also fall "around the corner" and in that way be inaccurate. But this model uses FullExterior, i.e. this warning is moot, right?
__._,_.___
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.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___