Yes, I understand how the Matrix of wind pressures works as an entry to EnergyPlus. I had a PhD student do this with Butterfly a few years back. My question was related to ensuring the process calculated as fast as possible, so I was asking whether there were any settings you knew of for this.
Now, in testing mode with your base file, I am working on a couple of issues:
I can sync the LadyBugTools version on the LBT components - and I hope the sync happens inside the components. However, when I find an input that is legitimate, and an output that is in error for a cluster component, I have no means of debugging. I respect your desire to control the contents of these clusters, but am interested in your suggestion of how to address these issues (more than one component at present)
The right hand numbers are enhanced by the Wind Pressure Coefficients - why the heating EUI is lower there is a puzzle, but they ran! So now for the excitement of design exploration to explore this.
I attach the WIP of the updated file.
NOTE: I have here used your more complex building model in the gh file you distributed. I had in my original post incorporated a copy of what I had developed as the test of the Eddy3D template - trying to take baby steps from their simple blocks to what seemed your more complex demonstration.
Next step is my own geometry / model. I do like the fact that - if the data is generated by CFD, it remains available for all subsequent E+ runs
SECOND
I cannot reconcile in my head the disparity in the results between your two models - each with an AirFlow Network implemented, but one having the wind pressures added as a supplementary text.
First, kudos for having both in the workflow you shared.
Second, with improved modelling of external airflow, why is the heating energy use /m2 reduced so drastically? Is there some other difference between the models built into the workflow that I am missing?
I had assumed that to model the shadows etc from the surroundings, I did not need to cap the volume of the context - but I take the point if that context is part of the CFD, then it should be solid?
Since Morpho supports only Rhino 7 for now and my PhD extensively needs it, I am still using the older version.
In less than a year, with Gods grace, I am in a process of accomplishing my PhD.
This workflow is one of the very small test pieces in development of 3rd generation urban microclimate-integrated building energy modeling.
Once I reach the finish line, with permission of my Supervisor, I wish to make the components in this and future workflows as LB components with the help of Chris, Mostapha and other experts in LB community.
This can enable us to be resilient with version upgrade issues from Rhino.
What you are working on will make an excellent addition to the LBT toolset.
In the meantime, I appreciate your generosity in sharing the workflow. Can you explain a little more the connection to the European COST Action on Positive Energy Districts (CA 19126) ? Is that part of the Quality Assurance / Calibration of the approach?
Finally, sorry to be such a pain, but I am still puzzled by the energy picture.
I feel almost apologetic about repeating my inquiry. However, I have just tried another option: plotting the internal temperatures and the amount of deviation above or below a couple of set points. Plotted on the following graph, the difference is striking. The graphs on the left are for the model with an Air Flow Network, but no wind driven ventilation using your Eddy3D results. The graphs on the right are for the exact same model, but with your additional text fed in from the Eddy3D calculations. Wind true wind driven ventilation the building is a lot warmer:
