Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

interzonal air flow modelling #1066

Closed
11 of 20 tasks
Mathadon opened this issue Oct 2, 2019 · 10 comments
Closed
11 of 20 tasks

interzonal air flow modelling #1066

Mathadon opened this issue Oct 2, 2019 · 10 comments

Comments

@Mathadon
Copy link
Member

Mathadon commented Oct 2, 2019

This issue is for implementing detailed interzonal air flow modeling in IDEAS. It supersedes #769 .

Requirements:

  • integrate components into IDEAS
  • default disabled
  • easy to enable: preferably using a single parameter in SimInfoManager
  • default leakage area computation based on n50, which is set in SimInfoManager in a separate tab
  • advanced option for overrides
  • assert for checking zone height consistency based on user input
  • default window/wall crack ratio
  • default crack exponent of 0.65
  • cracks split in two heights
  • cracks split from doors, edit: drop doors for now
  • default door in internalwalls? no
  • add vector of ports to zone?
  • stack effect components in surfaces (partial), edit: in zones since need zone height?
  • external pressure boundary based on piecewise curve/spline based on wind direction (WIP by @kldjonge in IBPSA)

Follow up points:

  • less equations in door model in internal wall
  • set appropriate default door cavity size of internal wall and hasCavity=true?
  • revise crack parameters: replace A_crack? default based on A? split A over two resistors when TwoPorts
  • parameter groups; uniform for all components
  • replace OutsideAir by spline based component
  • from_dp=false implementation for orifice
@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Dec 2, 2019

@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Jul 29, 2020

Todo:

  • figure out how the implementation can be made conditional. Default tight interzonal air flow? Does it even have to be conditional when using a fixed pressure boundary? Then pressure differences and hence flow rates are constant. Although the fixed=false trick is used, which may spoil things.
  • 0/1/2 cracks as option in SimInfoManager?
  • figure out how zone height consistency can be implemented

Plan of attack:

  • ports in each propsbus with m_flow=0
  • pressure drop/cracks in surfaces
  • computing dp_nominal from n50
  • add orientation-dependent pressure
  • add height-dependent pressure, conditional implementation

@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Aug 3, 2020

Brainstorm:

  • Choose between 0/1/2 cracks and choose between tight/fixed pressure, use asserts to disallow combinations that would cause singularities.
  • Default 0 cracks and n50tight
  • buoyancy optional with absolute height in each zone, default height of 0

Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 10, 2020
added interzonalAirflowType and added two ports in propsubs
@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Aug 13, 2020

Annoying side-effect: if the propsbus contains fluid ports, it should also contain a Medium declaration, meaning that walls should also contain a Medium declaration. @damienpicard @kldjonge That's quite a buzz-kill. Any bright ideas? Users would have to (consistently) define a Medium in each building component regardless of whether the interzonal air flow implementation is used or not.
edit: what seems to work is to define the medium in each component, but flag it as 'optional' in annotation(Dialog(group=..)). Even if the medium is not defined, the ZoneExample seems to work so that might be an option.

@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Sep 8, 2020

Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2020
when combined with series connections of propsBusses
@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

ee653a0 solves a pretty big bug where the new models worked for normal zones but not for the RectangularZoneTemplate. The problem seems to be related to the propsbus series connections. This causes a fluid port to have no external connections, causing that connection to have m_flow=0 and default inStream(h_outflow)=h_outflow to be used. The BoundaryWall however also injects m_flow=0. Simplifications due to m_flow=0 end up causing a cyclic dependency where equations a=b and b=a are generated, causing a singularity. This is overcome by injecting a very small mass flow rate instead of 0 mass flow rate.

Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2020
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 28, 2020
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 1, 2020
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 2, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 2, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2021
fixed interzonal airflow impelmentation bug with nWin in windows
added unit tests
for #1066
@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Jun 3, 2021

This implementation has progressed a lot but a second PR will be required for buoyancy related aspects.

@Mathadon Mathadon modified the milestones: Release 2.2, Release 2.x Jun 3, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 4, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 6, 2021
Mathadon added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 7, 2021
@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Jun 8, 2021

First merge request merged through #1215

@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Mathadon commented Jun 8, 2021

Simulation time for VentilationRBC increased from 15 to 29s.

@Mathadon
Copy link
Member Author

Continued within #1244

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant