Revision history [back]

Adiabatic walls in EnergyPlus are simulated by imposing the same boundary condition to both sides of the construction, an not by creating a zero-heat flux boundary condition as one might think. This allows heat to transfer in from both sides of the construction for thermal storage--although keep in mind that the thermal zone only sees the inside of the surface, heat transferred through the outside surface "disappears" into the ether. This is described also in the EnergyPlus Engineering Reference.

This is the same way the InternalMass object works.

If you want heat to be exchanged from both sides of an interior surface with the zone then you will have to create two mirror constructions and two surfaces with the other-side boundaries referencing each other.

I don't believe that any of these options will have the surface appear in the Envelope Summary, but I might be wrong about the two surface approach.

Adiabatic walls in EnergyPlus are simulated by imposing the same boundary condition to both sides of the construction, an not by creating a zero-heat flux boundary condition as one might think. This allows heat to transfer in from both sides of the construction for thermal storage--although keep in mind that the thermal zone only sees the inside of the surface, surface; heat transferred through the outside surface "disappears" into the ether. This is described also in the EnergyPlus Engineering Reference.

. This is the same way the InternalMass object works.

If you want heat to be exchanged from both sides of an interior surface with the zone then you will have to create two mirror constructions and two surfaces in the same zone with the other-side boundaries referencing each other.

At one point I created simulations using all three approaches (Adiabatic boundary, InternalMass, and a mirror surface boundary in the same zone.

I don't believe that any of these options will have the surface appear in the Envelope Summary, but I might be wrong about the two surface approach.

Adiabatic walls in EnergyPlus are simulated by imposing the same boundary condition to both sides of the construction, an not by creating a zero-heat flux boundary condition as one might think. This allows heat to transfer in from both sides of the construction for thermal storage--although keep in mind that the thermal zone only sees the inside of the surface; heat transferred through the outside surface "disappears" into the ether. This is described also in the EnergyPlus Engineering Reference. This is the same way the InternalMass object works.

If you want heat to be exchanged from both sides of an interior surface with the zone then you will have to create two mirror constructions and two surfaces in the same zone with the other-side boundaries referencing each other.

At one point I created simulations using all three approaches (Adiabatic boundary, InternalMass, and a mirror surface boundary in the same zone.zone) and confirmed that they all give the same result.

I don't believe that any of these options will have the surface appear in the Envelope Summary, but I might be wrong about the two surface approach.

Adiabatic walls in EnergyPlus are simulated by imposing the same boundary condition to both sides of the construction, an and not by creating a zero-heat flux boundary condition as one might think. This allows heat to transfer in from both sides of the construction for thermal storage--although keep in mind that the thermal zone only sees the inside of the surface; heat transferred through the outside surface "disappears" into the ether. This is described also in the EnergyPlus Engineering Reference. This is the same way the InternalMass object works.

If you want heat to be exchanged from both sides of an interior surface with the zone then you will have to create two mirror constructions and two surfaces in the same zone with the other-side boundaries referencing each other.

At one point I created simulations using all three approaches (Adiabatic boundary, InternalMass, and a mirror surface boundary in the same zone) and confirmed that they all give the same result.

I don't believe that any of these options will have the surface appear in the Envelope Summary, but I might be wrong about the two surface approach.