Question-and-Answer Resource for the Building Energy Modeling Community
Get started with the Help page
Ask Your Question

Revision history [back]

click to hide/show revision 1
initial version

Problem with OpenStudio results

Hi everyone, I have a serious problem to understand how I got these results. I want to show you 2 cases of the same building, just with different construction sets, and the final results that are not reliable in my opinion. Case1 is composed by construction set made by me, and Case2 is the default case OfficeCZ1 189.1 2009 in OpenStudio.

CASE 1 (the better one) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,14 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0,08 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 0,9 W/mK (3 glasses)

CASE 2 (Construction Set Office CZ1 189.1 2009) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,96 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0, 28 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 2,10 W/mk (theoretical glass)

It seems that the case1 has better thermal parameters than the 2nd case. Anyway these are the temperature and RH results for one room of the building (but result are quite the same for every room), called by me Room1

CASE1 : Mean Temp 111 (F) and RH 33%

CASE 2 Mean Temp 71 (F) and RH 63%

How is this possible? Why Case1, that is more isolated than Case2, has in the end a higher mean temperature? I want to post here also the comparison of temperature during the year shown with ResultsViewer. Has anyone any suggestion about why I got these results? Furthermore, looking at the temperature tab, I see that in Case1 are analysed only 836 hours, and in Case2 are analysed 8760 hours. Why in the 1st case only 836 hours are taken into account?

image description

Problem with OpenStudio results

Hi everyone, I have a serious problem to understand how I got these results. I want to show you 2 cases of the same building, just with different construction sets, and the final results that are not reliable in my opinion. Case1 is composed by construction set made by me, and Case2 is has the default case construction set " OfficeCZ1 189.1 2009 2009" in OpenStudio.

CASE 1 (the better one) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,14 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0,08 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 0,9 W/mK (3 glasses)

CASE 2 (Construction Set Office CZ1 189.1 2009) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,96 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0, 28 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 2,10 W/mk (theoretical glass)

It seems that the case1 has better thermal parameters than the 2nd case. Anyway these are the temperature and RH results for one room of the building (but result are quite the same for every room), called by me Room1

CASE1 : Mean Temp 111 (F) and RH 33%

CASE 2 Mean Temp 71 (F) and RH 63%

How is this possible? Why Case1, that is more isolated than Case2, has in the end a higher mean temperature? I want to post here also the comparison of temperature during the year shown with ResultsViewer. Has anyone any suggestion about why I got these results? Furthermore, looking at the temperature tab, I see that in Case1 are analysed only 836 hours, and in Case2 are analysed 8760 hours. Why in the 1st case only 836 hours are taken into account?

image description

Problem with OpenStudio results

Hi everyone, I have a serious problem to understand how I got these results. I want to show you 2 cases of the same building, just with different construction sets, and the final results that are not reliable in my opinion. Case1 is composed by construction set made by me, and Case2 has the default construction set " OfficeCZ1 189.1 2009" in OpenStudio.

CASE 1 (the better one) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,14 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0,08 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 0,9 W/mK (3 glasses) (triple glass low emissivity downloaded from BCL)

CASE 2 (Construction Set Office CZ1 189.1 2009) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,96 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0, 28 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 2,10 W/mk (theoretical glass)

It seems that the case1 has better thermal parameters than the 2nd case. Anyway these are the temperature and RH results for one room of the building (but result are quite the same for every room), called by me Room1

CASE1 : Mean Temp 111 (F) and RH 33%

CASE 2 Mean Temp 71 (F) and RH 63%

How is this possible? Why Case1, that is more isolated than Case2, has in the end a higher mean temperature? temperature? Is it possible that this result is caused mostly by the windows? I want to post here also the comparison of temperature during the year shown with ResultsViewer. Has anyone any suggestion about why I got these results? Furthermore, looking at the temperature tab, I see that in Case1 are analysed only 836 hours, and in Case2 are analysed 8760 hours. Why in the 1st case only 836 hours are taken into account?

image description

Problem with OpenStudio results

Hi everyone, I have a serious problem to understand how I got these results. I want to show you 2 cases of the same building, just with different construction sets, and the final results that are not reliable in my opinion. Case1 is composed by construction set made by me, and Case2 has the default construction set " OfficeCZ1 189.1 2009" in OpenStudio.

CASE 1 (the better one) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,14 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0,08 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 0,9 W/mK (triple glass low emissivity downloaded from BCL)

CASE 2 (Construction Set Office CZ1 189.1 2009) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,96 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0, 28 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 2,10 W/mk (theoretical glass)

It seems that the case1 has better thermal parameters than the 2nd case. Anyway these are the temperature and RH results for one room of the building (but result are quite the same for every room), called by me Room1

CASE1 : Mean Temp 111 (F) and RH 33%

CASE 2 Mean Temp 71 (F) and RH 63%

How is this possible? Why Case1, that is more isolated than Case2, has in the end a higher mean temperature? Is it possible that this result is caused mostly by the windows? I want to post here also the comparison of temperature during the year shown with ResultsViewer. Has anyone any suggestion about why I got these results? Furthermore, looking at the temperature tab, I see that in Case1 are analysed only 836 hours, and in Case2 are analysed 8760 hours. Why in the 1st case only 836 hours are taken into account?

image description

Problem with OpenStudio results

Hi everyone, I have a serious problem to understand how I got these results. I want to show you 2 cases of the same building, just with different construction sets, and the final results that are not reliable in my opinion. Case1 is composed by construction set made by me, and Case2 has the default construction set " OfficeCZ1 189.1 2009" in OpenStudio.

CASE 1 (the better one) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,14 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0,08 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 0,9 W/mK (triple glass low emissivity downloaded from BCL)

CASE 2 (Construction Set Office CZ1 189.1 2009) : U-value Ext.Walls 0,96 W/m2K , U-value Roof : 0, 28 W/m2K , Window conductivity: 2,10 W/mk (theoretical glass)

It seems that the case1 has better thermal parameters than the 2nd case. Anyway these are the temperature and RH results for one room of the building (but result are quite the same for every room), called by me Room1

CASE1 : Mean Temp 111 (F) and RH 33%

CASE 2 Mean Temp 71 (F) and RH 63%

How is this possible? Why Case1, that is more isolated than Case2, has in the end a higher mean temperature? Is it possible that this result is caused mostly by the windows? I want to post here also the comparison of temperature during the year shown with ResultsViewer. Has anyone any suggestion about why I got these results? Furthermore, looking at the temperature tab, I see that in Case1 are analysed only 836 hours, and in Case2 are analysed 8760 hours. Why in the 1st case only 836 hours are taken into account?

image description