You can use Daylight coefficient recipe, as well as 3-Phase and 5-Phase recipes for running annual simulation. Annual simulation is the most straight forward one and is the most memory friendly approach. If you are running the study to get the annual daylight metric then the annual recipe is the most efficient to use.
Yes!
[quote=“Xiufang, post:1, topic:4033”]
3. For dmtxPar, if comes from RADParGridBased, Complexity defines how accurate the result would be (?), [/quote]
Complexity is complexity of the scene. For a more complex scene you will need higher values to get an accurate result. This is probably a useful case-study to get you started. Try room 1 versus room 2.
It is the method. In your case (annual analysis) it is daylight coefficient. See here.
In any case you cannot apply BSDF materials to a nonplanar surface. It will give you inaccuracies. You have to break down the curved wall into smaller planar polygons.
If you want to test several BSDF files then use 3-Phase or 5-Phase otherwise Daylight Coefficient (2-Phase) method is a better choice. See page 8 of this tutorial: An advanced tutorial for daylighting simulations
Window groups are mostly useful if you want to isolate the results from that certain window group otherwise you can model them just as normal window surface with BSDF material. Any window group that is added to the model will add a separate calculation. See this post to understand how Honeybee[+] handles window groups.
Yes. You can see how you can use both components in sample files. I think that will also help you to understand how window groups work.
That shouldn’t be the case. blindStates is an optional input.
See here: How to load the results from a file into Grasshopper using Honeybee[+] API?
Yes. Just keep in mind that unlike the results from daysim every row represents a point and every column is a timestep.