[esp-r] Re: QA reporting of thermophysical properties

[Geissler Achim]

Jon,

 

don't put words in my mouth! The then faulty QA report was - of course -
from a "non hacked" model (the term "hacked the files" is a bit overboard,
isn't it? There are quite a few occasions where nothing else works ... as an
example the too long whatever line if you have more than whatever number of
zones ...).

 

When we stumble across it again, we will be sure to mention it.

 

Anyway, the more annoying part is the option to enter an emissivity at
places in the data bases where it has no effect! That is what caused our
problems back then.

 

Achim

 

 

 

Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Best regards

 

Achim Geissler

  _____  

From: Jon Hand (clcv10) [mailto:jon at esru.strath.ac.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:03 AM
To: Geissler Achim
Cc: Ery Djunaedy; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk; 
Subject: Re: QA reporting of thermophysical properties

 

What I do certainly remember (and what we hopefully wrote to you at some
point and what has been fixed in the mean time?) is that the QA report *did
not* correctly report the emissivity values actually used. We hat quite a
mixup due to this at the time.

 

The QA report reports what is in the databases for entities that

matche a surface construction attribute e.g.

   *the optical property

   *the thicknesses of each layer

   *the thermophysical properties from the materials db entry 

     for each layer.

 

If someone has manually edited the raw data in the zone constructions

file or the optical properties in a zone tmc file that is not reported in
the

multi-layer constructions used section of the QA report  (it is 

assumed that you knew you hacked the files).

 

The section in the QA report begins with the phrase 'Multi-layer
constructions used'

and perhaps this is not clear enough. Anyone have a suggestion for an
alternative

phrase?

 

In terms of bugs - we have had reports that sometimes the QA report

does not contain an entry for the first construction. Other than that

if someone can supply us with models/reports where incorrect data

was reported that would help us track down glitches.

 

-ESRU

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.strath.ac.uk/archives/esp-r/attachments/20061212/68dad03d/attachment.html