[TRNSYS-users] Fwd: Error creating the wall transfer function coeffients

Mon Nov 19 00:50:13 PST 2012

Wang,

a time base of 9 hours indicates that there is something wrong with your
wall/ layer definition.

Check the values and units of your layer properties as well the
thickness.

Please note, that the transfer functions should not be used for
modelling the soil underneath the building.

Marion

Dipl.-Ing. Marion Hiller 
TRANSSOLAR: KlimaEngineering - Technologien für energieeffizientes Bauen
und Nutzerkomfort in Gebäude 
Munich - New York - Stuttgart + 49.711.67976.0 

Transsolar Energietechnik GmbH, Curiestrasse 2, 70563 Stuttgart 
Amtsgericht Stuttgart - HRB 23347, Steuernummer 99073/00911, USt-IdNr.:
DE152272639

Geschäftsführer: Dipl.Ing. Matthias Schuler, Dipl.Ing. Thomas Auer,
Dipl.Phys. Stefan Holst, Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Bleicher 

  _____  

Von: 王洋 [mailto:wanghongyang1767 at gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Samstag, 17. November 2012 18:28
An: leen peeters
Cc: trnsys-users
Betreff: Re: [TRNSYS-users] Fwd: Error creating the wall transfer
function coeffients

Dear leen,

Thanks for your email!
I tried till 9 hours as the TIMEBASE which can work. But could you
please tell me the detailed reasons for that? i.e. why we need so large
TIMEBASE 9 hours to meet its Stability Criteria? 

Thanks in advance!
Br.
wang

2012/11/16 王洋 <wanghongyang1767 at gmail.com>

Dear leen,

Thanks for your email!
I tried till 9 hours as the TIMEBASE which can work. But could you
please tell me the detailed reasons for that? i.e. why we need so large
TIMEBASE 9 hours to meet its Stability Criteria? 

Thanks in advance!
Br.
wang

2012/11/15 leen peeters <l.f.r.peeters at gmail.com>

Can you open in TRNBUILD the 'project' window, and consequently the
'outputs', change the timebase for calculation of your transfer function
to something higher. I think it is standard on 2 hour, change it into 5,
check. If it works, then try 4, ..... until you reach the lowest
possible number 

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:28 PM, 王洋 <wanghongyang1767 at gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear all,

I have a question about *.BUI file. I create a project with about 30
zones using TRNSYS 16.
Before I created the seventeenth zone using the same exterior wall and
floor as well as interior wall etc for the project, it worked well. But
when the seventeenth zone created, it appeared an ERROR in TRNBuild:
Error creating the wall transfer function coeffients. Please see the
attached figure. The second file is its INF file.

If you had some relative experience, PLEASE tell me how to solve with
this problem.

Thanks in advance!
Br.
wang

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: 王洋 <wanghongyang1767 at gmail.com>
Date: 2012/11/15
Subject: Error creating the wall transfer function coeffients
To: trnsys-users at cae.wisc.edu

Dear all,

I have a question about *.BUI file. I create a project with about 30
zones using TRNSYS 16.
Before I created the seventeenth zone using the same exterior wall and
floor as well as interior wall etc for the project, it worked well. But
when the seventeenth zone created, it appeared an ERROR in TRNBuild:
Error creating the wall transfer function coeffients. Please see the
attached figure. The second file is its INF file.

If you had some relative experience, PLEASE tell me how to solve with
this problem.

Thanks in advance!
Br.

wang

2012/11/12 <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. Re: Type 15-2: Relationship between data arrangements,
      simulation times and convergence (David BRADLEY)
   2. simulation trend opposite to reality (validation)
      (Karol Bandurski)

---------- 已转发邮件 ----------
From: David BRADLEY <d.bradley at tess-inc.com>
To: Flynn Ciaran <ciaran.flynn at aalto.fi>
Cc: "trnsys-users at cae.wisc.edu" <trnsys-users at cae.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:09:38 -0600
Subject: Re: [TRNSYS-users] Type 15-2: Relationship between data
arrangements, simulation times and convergence

Ciarán,
  Option 1) is incorrect. Type15 is intended to be used with year-long
weather files that have a 1-hour data interval. The component knows from
the simulation start and stop time what day of the year it is, so if you
trick it by setting the simulation start time to hour zero and rearrange
the weather file to start in the middle of the year, what the Type
calculates about the sunup and sundown times and what the data file says
is happening are not going to match at all. Option 2 is the only correct
one.
Best,
 David

On 11/12/2012 06:32, Flynn Ciaran wrote:

   Hello,

   I have a couple of questions concerning the relationship between the
   arrangement of data in TMY2 weather files, TRNSYS simulation times
   and convergence errors. I tried looking at the source code but I
   could not figure out the answer..
   I am running a simulation for one year, using Type 15-2 for weather,
   starting at 1h on July 1st and ending at 24h on June 30th. This
   leaves me with two options: 
   1) Either I rearrange the tm2 file to start at 1h on the 1st of July
   and end at 24h on June 30th, and set the simulation start and stop
   times to 0 and 8760h respectively, or 
   2) Either I leave the weather file as it is and set the simulation
   start and stop times at 4344h and 13104h respectively.

   When I use a provided weather file (e.g. CA-BC-Vancouver-718920.tm2)
   and set the simulation time step at 0.1h, I get the following:

Failed convergence time steps

                           Time steps where: 
  calculated total horizontal radiation > horizontal extraterrestrial
                               radiation

                           Time steps where: 
                direct normal radiation > solar constant

                           Time steps where: 
   calculated horizontal beam radiation > total horizontal radiation

1)

7719

10664

124

3498

2)

6424

-

-

13

   So my question are:

   -          Why is TRNSYS giving different error messages if the same
   weather data are used ? (I believe that there are no other types in
   my file that could explain the reason for this)

   -          What parameters do the radiation values calculated by
   TRNSYS depend on and how are they calculated? 

   -          What is the best approach in this situation (minimal
   radiation errors)?

   Thanks a lot,

   Ciarán

   _______________________________________________
   TRNSYS-users mailing list
   TRNSYS-users at cae.wisc.edu
   https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/trnsys-users

-- 
***************************
David BRADLEY
Principal
Thermal Energy Systems Specialists, LLC
22 North Carroll Street - suite 370
Madison, WI  53703 USA

P:+1.608.274.2577
F:+1.608.278.1475
d.bradley at tess-inc.com

http://www.tess-inc.com
http://www.trnsys.com

---------- 已转发邮件 ----------
From: "Karol Bandurski" <karol.bandurski at put.poznan.pl>
To: <trnsys-users at cae.wisc.edu>, <bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org>
Cc: 
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 18:22:45 +0100
Subject: [TRNSYS-users] simulation trend opposite to reality
(validation)

Dear All,

I simulate the dwelling in TRNSYS. Last time a try to validate my model
and I compare simulation results with measurements.

Heat consumption has been measured in dwelling every week (the same day
of week and the same hour).

Trnsys simulation generate results for dwelling’s model with ideal
heating assumptions (set temperature 20/21) –NTYPE2 (sensible energy
demand).

Total heat consumption (measurements) of dwelling and energy demand
(simulation) of simulated model are quite similar (36 weeks from
September to June), but if we look on weekly results there are bigger
difference with interesting regularity:

if heat consumption decreases from one week to the next, then energy
demand increase, and vice versa (I enclose graph).

Could you tell me what can cause this lack of coincidence?

I will be grateful for any hints!

Regards,

Karol

------------------------------------------------

Karol Bandurski MSc.

Institute of Environmental Engineering

Poznan University of Technology

www.ee.put.poznan.pl

www.put.poznan.pl

_______________________________________________
TRNSYS-users mailing list
TRNSYS-users at cae.wisc.edu
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/trnsys-users

_______________________________________________
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/20121119/9f2ffe2e/attachment-0001.htm>