being pretty excited with the new features introduced with LBT 1.3.0, I tried to run a comparative assessment of cumulative and average radiation using 3 methods:
- LB Incident Radiation
- HB Cumulative Radiation
- HB Annual Irradiance.
I have run a simple test, with an external courtyard surrounded by basic building massing.
Similar results could be observed between LB and HB for cumulative radiation, whereas the 2 Radiance/based assessment (options 2 and 3) differ substantially. Summary as follows:
Method | Cum Radiation | Avg Irradiance
1 LB | 745 kWh/m2 | n/a
2 HB Cum | 793 kWh/m2 | 90.6 W/m2
3 HB Irr | 1191 kWh/m2 | 136 W/m2
Should this be interpreted as a notable underestimation by 1 and 2, and if so why?
radiation__comparative_test__ANB.gh (734.3 KB)
Simulation settings were:
- Reinhart (high density sky)
- rfluxmtx - medium detail level - default shade rad modifier
- same as 2)