Question-and-Answer Resource for the Building Energy Modeling Community
 | 1 | initial version |
Good question. This sounded familiar to me, and looking back we did have an old issue filed about it https://github.com/NREL/OpenStudio/issues/171
Currently we do have half the exposed area we should for the internal mass, but if we just double the area then we will have too much mass. Sounds like the best solution would be to double the area while at the same time altering the construction to cut down the mass. Maybe can just cut thickness of materials in half. A more complex solution would split the construction down the middle (or at least conductive layer) into two constructions.
| | 2 | No.2 Revision |
Good question. This sounded familiar to me, and looking back we did have an old issue filed about it https://github.com/NREL/OpenStudio/issues/171
Currently we do have only model half o the exposed area we should for the internal mass, but if we just double the area then we will have too much mass. Sounds like the best solution would be to double the area while at the same time altering the construction to cut down the mass. Maybe can just cut thickness of materials in half. A more complex solution would split the construction down the middle (or at least conductive layer) into two constructions.
| | 3 | No.3 Revision |
Good question. This sounded familiar to me, and looking back we did have an old issue filed about it https://github.com/NREL/OpenStudio/issues/171
Currently we do only model half o the exposed area we should for the internal mass, but if we just double the area then we will have too much mass. Sounds like the best solution would be to double the area while at the same time altering the construction to cut down the mass. Maybe can just cut thickness of materials in half. A more complex solution would split the construction down the middle (or at least conductive layer) into two constructions.
