Yes, something looks wrong with the way this is being mapped to the buildings, if we’re assuming all other energy parameters are equivalent. I think something is wrong in the post-processing of the results and zone area. Are you running all these models at the same time? As a quick gut check, I would isolate one of your large buildings, and run the simulation on just those zones, to see if you’re still getting the same kWh. I expect your larger buildings to be more efficient (per unit area), but not this much more efficient.
Because this concerns energy modelling in an urban scale, I figured modelling the HBzones quick & dirty- meaning 1 HBzone = 1 floor of a building. Could that be an issue?
Your energy demand will likely be a lower then the actual building because you’re essentially averaging out extreme conditions by not splitting your floors into thermal zones – but this shouldn’t effect the kWh/m2 error you’re having.
Maybe asking the very basic questiontoo helps: The heating values coming from the Energy+ simulation component are purely the kWh’s needed to keep the zone warm for the set period, right? It is not automatically converting the value into (E)/m2 or somehow taking into account the area of the HBzones, or?
Yes that’s right. You can use the Normalize Data by Floor Area to divide your energy by area. If you aren’t using this component (doesn’t look like it based on your screenshots) I think that’s what’s causing the problem. I wouldn’t trust the order of the energy values that come out of the GH components to necessarily sync with the order of the zones.
S