Re: [EnergyPlus_Support] Re: Swimming pool object: unrealistic result- volume of make-up water too big

I don't know if you are up to this, but instead of waiting around, you could hunt through the source code for a mistake. Sometimes we can also help the developers. It surely will make it faster for them if you can point them to exactly where to change the code. They will usually be happy to compile you a special pre-release so that you can get on with your work.

On 18 Nov 2015 11:59 pm, "jonathan duverge jduverge1979@xxxxxxxxxxxx [EnergyPlus_Support]" <EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Â

Hi German

Thanks for the response. You said in your response that you had a realistic result. How did you get the result if there was a mistake with the water input flow rate? Would this mistake apply to all the variables results including heating rate, evaporating rate
So what you saying is that i need to adjust the pool heating max heating flow rate. If so , do i need to adjust all the flow rate connecting to the pool?
I'm pretty sure that I have try various values for the pool heating max heating flow rate in the past. But what i don't understand is why the volume was still too so high. I have performed several water and energy audit on several aquatic centres and the max waterÂ per month that they use which include make-up water is around 4000 kL.
You said that there might be a bug with the indoor pool object, do you meanÂ that's why my results are unrealistic or do you think that I made some mistakes somewhere.
This is part of a research project at Uni and i need to provide some results inÂ two weeks. Do you have any suggestion?

Regards
Jonathan

On Wednesday, 18 November 2015, 23:40, "ecoeficiente@xxxxxxxxx [EnergyPlus_Support]" <EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Â

Hello Jonathan, I see that you have used DesignBuilder to develop the model and add the swimming pool afterwards. I have done this before with realistic results, but as you can see in the bug I reported (https://github.com/NREL/EnergyPlus/issues/4805) water flow input was asked in m3/s while it actually was used internally as kg/s.Â

It seems to be corrected in v8.4 but there may be still a bug there. It seems that they have not updated Energy+.idd file and still shows m3/s as unit in the IDFEditor. I will report that in Github.

Hope this clue is useful for you...

Cheers,

GermÃ¡n.