Question-and-Answer Resource for the Building Energy Modeling Community
 | 1 | initial version |
I'm somewhat disappointed to see SurfaceProperty:ConvectionCoefficients in the 'not planned' section. Per this issue, EnergyPlus seems to not be getting these quite right for radiant ceiling panels. The ability to apply these coefficients to, e.g., surfaces with internal source constructions (as opposed to SurfaceProperty:ConvectionCoefficients:MultipleSurface, which is only by surface type), seems like a good input hierarchy level.
Out of curiosity, to what extend are UserVoice suggestions making it into your new features planning? There doesn't seem to be a lot of activity when it comes to updates of the 'status' of suggestions. We're making suggestions and voting; is anyone listening!?
| | 2 | No.2 Revision |
I'm somewhat disappointed to see SurfaceProperty:ConvectionCoefficients in the 'not planned' section. Per this issue, EnergyPlus seems to not be getting these quite right for radiant ceiling panels. The ability to apply these coefficients to, e.g., surfaces with internal source constructions (as opposed to SurfaceProperty:ConvectionCoefficients:MultipleSurface, which is only by surface type), seems like a good input hierarchy level.
Out of curiosity, to what extend are UserVoice suggestions making it into your new features planning? There doesn't seem to be a lot of activity when it comes to updates of the 'status' of suggestions. We're making suggestions and voting; voting on suggestions; is anyone listening!?
| | 3 | No.3 Revision |
I'm somewhat disappointed to see SurfaceProperty:ConvectionCoefficients in the 'not planned' section. Per this issue, EnergyPlus seems to not be getting these quite right for radiant ceiling panels. The ability to apply these coefficients to, e.g., surfaces with internal source constructions (as opposed to SurfaceProperty:ConvectionCoefficients:MultipleSurface, which is only by surface type), seems like a good input hierarchy level.
Out of curiosity, to what extend extent are UserVoice suggestions making it into your new features planning? There doesn't seem to be a lot of activity when it comes to updates of the 'status' of suggestions. We're making and voting on suggestions; is anyone listening!?
