As I mentioned in the comments, I performed a similar analysis with variable transmittance schedule and noticed the same issue, so I posted this question. Within the question, I referred to 2 GitHub posts on the same issue but I am not sure if the issue is resolved!
One work around that I can think of is to avoid using EMS since, it seems, is not working properly with transmittance schedules.
- Instead, you can post-process your
results by running the simulation
once and reporting the corresponding
output variables for the parameters
used in the EMS control ruleset
(i.e., solar radiation and operative
temp in your case) and then come up
with a transmittance schedule for
every time-step of your simulation based on your
control logic (assuming hourly
analysis, you will have 8760 values
for the transmittance schedule). Then
you can use this schedule as an input
for your model. Just in case you are
running your simulation on hourly
bases, you can use
Schedule:File
object
to easily import your schedule from a
.CSV file. - A simpler approach: since you mentioned
that you were able to see that EMS is
modifying your transmittance schedule
then you can use this modified
schedule directly as an input.
So Basically, the
idea is to use the transmittance
schedule directly considering the control logic rather than relying
on EMS to do the job!