[TRNSYS-users] Total heating demand

[王洋]

Dear all,

 Happy new year!

 I have a question about calculating total heating demand:

There is one same room to keep indoor temperature as 20°C one day 24 hours,
the initial indoor temperature is 20°C, there is no infiltration no other
internal gains in the room. I used 3 different methods to calculate total
heating demand of one day, separately.

1.First is heating in TRNBuild: after using the INTEGRATOR TYPE 46, the
QHEAT is about 34314 kJ.

2.Second is floor heating(active layer): after using the INTEGRATOR TYPE 46,
the QALFL_Inlet is about 33680.7kJ.

3.Third is still floor heating(active layer): after using the INTEGRATOR
TYPE 46, but I used Q=CwaterMwater(Tinlet-Toutlet), the result of Q is
144639kJ.

My question is: 1) To 2 and 3: Why is the difference is so large? 3 is
almost 4 times than 3? I will get the total heating demand, which one is
right? Why? What's different of both of them?

2) If 3 is right. Generally, the floor heating should be more energy-saving
than common heating. But here result is absolutely opposite. The common
heating is more energy-heating. Why? Here what difference of common heating
and floor heating?

Many thanks!

Br.

wang
在 2011年1月5日 下午7:55，王洋 <wanghongyang1767 at gmail.com>写道：

> Dear all,
>
>  Happy new year!
>
>  I have a question about calculating total heating demand:
>
> There is one same room to keep indoor temperature as 20°C one day 24 hours,
> the initial indoor temperature is 20°C, there is no infiltration no other
> internal gains in the room. I used 3 different methods to calculate total
> heating demand of one day, separately.
>
> 1.First is heating in TRNBuild: after using the INTEGRATOR TYPE 46, the
> QHEAT is about 34314 kJ.
>
> 2.Second is floor heating(active layer): after using the INTEGRATOR TYPE
> 46, the QALFL_Inlet is about 33680.7kJ.
>
> 3.Third is still floor heating(active layer): after using the INTEGRATOR
> TYPE 46, but I used Q=CwaterMwater(Tinlet-Toutlet), the result of Q is
> 144639kJ.
>
> My question is: 1) To 2 and 3: Why is the difference is so large? 3 is
> almost 4 times than 3? I will get the total heating demand, which one is
> right? Why? What's different of both of them?
>
> 2) If 3 is right. Generally, the floor heating should be more energy-saving
> than common heating. But here result is absolutely opposite. The common
> heating is more energy-heating. Why? Here what difference of common heating
> and floor heating?
>
> Many thanks!
>
> Br.
>
> wang
>
>
> 在 2011年1月5日 下午2:38，王洋 <wanghongyang1767 at gmail.com>写道：
>
> Dear all,
>>
>>  Happy new year!
>>
>>  I have a question about calculating total heating demand:
>>
>> There is one same room to keep indoor temperature as 20°C one day 24
>> hours, the initial indoor temperature is 20°C, there is no infiltration no
>> other internal gains in the room. I used 3 different methods to calculate
>> total heating demand of one day, separately.
>>
>> 1.First is heating in TRNBuild: after using the INTEGRATOR TYPE 46, the
>> QHEAT is about 34314 kJ.
>>
>> 2.Second is floor heating(active layer): after using the INTEGRATOR TYPE
>> 46, the QALFL_Inlet is about 33680.7kJ.
>>
>> 3.Third is still floor heating(active layer): after using the INTEGRATOR
>> TYPE 46, but I used Q=CwaterMwater(Tinlet-Toutlet), the result of Q is
>> 144639kJ.
>>
>> My question is: 1) To 2 and 3: Why is the difference is so large? 3 is
>> almost 4 times than 3? I will get the total heating demand, which one is
>> right? Why? What's different of both of them?
>>
>> 2) If 3 is right. Generally, the floor heating should be more
>> energy-saving than common heating. But here result is absolutely opposite.
>> The common heating is more energy-heating. Why? Here what difference of
>> common heating and floor heating?
>>
>> Many thanks!
>>
>> Br.
>>
>> wang
>>
>>
>>
>> 2011/1/4 <trnsys-users-request at cae.wisc.edu>
>>
>>> Send TRNSYS-users mailing list submissions to
>>>        trnsys-users at cae.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>        https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/trnsys-users
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>        trnsys-users-request at cae.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>        trnsys-users-owner at cae.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of TRNSYS-users digest..."
>>>
>>> Today's Topics:
>>>
>>>   1. optimization problems using trnopt in Windows 7 OS (Dapeng Li)
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- 已转发邮件 ----------
>>> From: Dapeng Li <jiap1120 at gmail.com>
>>> To: TRNSYS-users at cae.wisc.edu
>>> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 18:00:38 +0100
>>> Subject: [TRNSYS-users] optimization problems using trnopt in Windows 7
>>> OS
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I want to do optimization using trnsys, trnopt and genopt in* Windows 7
>>> OS. *But when I run the example in the directory of "C:\Program
>>> Files\Trnsys16_1\Optimization", I got a error message in Genopt interface
>>> that is enclosed in the attachment.
>>>
>>> The version I use is listed below: TRNSYS version 16.01.0003, trnopt
>>> version 2.1.0.52, genopt version 2.1.0 June 18, 2008.
>>>
>>> PS: I ever did optimization in XP OS, and it work well.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> With kind regards,
>>>
>>> Dapeng Li
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TRNSYS-users mailing list
>>> TRNSYS-users at cae.wisc.edu
>>> https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/trnsys-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/trnsys-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110106/a25d59b1/attachment-0001.htm>