[esp-r] Re: boundary conditions for nonsymmetric constructions

[Achim.geissler]

    Dear Daisy     assuming you have an external blind outside of your
single skin facade, the single skin facade is thermally equivalent to your
thermal envelope (the inner skin of the double skin facade) and the blind is
the same, you will still have higher temperatures in the air gap than the
ambient air temperature. Therefore, as written, I would expect higher
cooling loads.     However, the double skin facade allows you to have the
blind lowered in high rise buildings for more hours of the year, usually.
Therefore, taking this aspect into account, the double skin facade may prove
beneficial. Also, if you can close the air gap in the winter, you will have
improved U-value. Again, the double skin facade may prove beneficial.    
Best  Achim     

--------- Original-Nachricht --------
 Von: "Íõ¾Õ»¨" 
 An: "achim.geissler at intergga.ch" , "esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk" 
 Betreff: RE: [esp-r]  boundary conditions for nonsymmetric constructions
 Datum: 29/04/10 04:31
 
     Dear Achim,
  
    I  accept that  higher cooling loads for a double skin facade as opposed
to a single skin facade with external blind is normal.But I  compared
cooling load in summer with external respiration double skin facade as
opposed to a single skin facade for the south wall.Because of natural
ventilation by thermal pressure between the airgap and environment,it is
expected that cooling load with external respiration double skin facade is
smaller,Assuming they have equivalent shading effect.Right?Thank you for
your answers.Daisy.
  
  
  
  
   
 CC: esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
From: achim.geissler at intergga.ch
To: luckygrass100 at hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [esp-r] boundary conditions for nonsymmetric constructions
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:28:10 +0200

Dear Daisy
 
 higher cooling loads for a double skin facade as opposed to a single skin
facade with external blind is to be expected. The facade air gap will
usually have higher temperatures than ambient. Thus, conduction is
increased. 
 Best Achim 
  On Apr 28, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Íõ¾Õ»¨ wrote:
  When I define the boundary conditions which apply to each surface in the
model by selecting check via vertex contiguity facility.It scans the
polygons of a model looking for surfaces in
various zones which are close matches
in terms of shape and position.After that,I began to take the
action simulation.It warned that Surface X has a nonsymmetric construction
interior.It faces Y  which is composed of interior (which may not
match).Here,X and Y are surfaces matching in terms of shape and
position.They are the same surface actually separating two adjacent
zones.They just have opposite directions for the two zones.And interioris
the name of construction defined by myself.I wonder whether the warnings
affect simulation results?
I am simulating thermal performance of external respiration double skin
facade.I built zones for airgap between the two curtain walls.But it turned
out that cooling load in summer with double skin facade for south wall is
bigger than cooling load with single skin facade for south wall.I can't
explain this.I am thinking whether It is caused by the wrong surface
connections &boundary conditions described above?
I am expecting your kind answers.Thank you in advance!Daisy.

  ¸ü¶àÈÈÀ±×ÊѶ¾¡ÔÚаæMSNÊ×Ò³£¡ Á¢¿Ì·ÃÎÊ£¡
(http://cn.msn.com/) _______________________________________________
esp-r mailing list
esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk (mailto:esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk)
http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r
(http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r)
   achim.geissler at intergga.ch (mailto:achim.geissler at intergga.ch) 
 


 		 	   		  
ÁÄÌì+ËÑË÷+ÓÊÏä ÏëÒªÇáËɳöÓÎ,ÊÖ»úMSN°ïÄã¸ã¶¨! Á¢¿ÌÏÂÔØ£¡ (http://3g.msn.cn/"
target="_new)

________________________________________________________________
Diese Mitteilung wurde von http://www.breitband.ch uebermittelt.
Einer der schnellsten Kabel-Internet Zugaenge!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.strath.ac.uk/archives/esp-r/attachments/20100429/40f23de3/attachment-0001.html