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

Fix (Probable) Fan Coil Sizing Issue #10461

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 9, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion src/EnergyPlus/FanCoilUnits.cc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ namespace FanCoilUnits {
if (!Util::SameString(fanCoil.FanType, "Fan:SystemModel")) {
Fans::GetFanType(state, fanCoil.FanName, fanCoil.FanType_Num, errFlag, CurrentModuleObject, fanCoil.Name);
// need to grab fan index here
// Fans::GetFanIndex(state, fanCoil.FanName, fanCoil.FanIndex, errFlag, fanCoil.FanType);
Fans::GetFanIndex(state, fanCoil.FanName, fanCoil.FanIndex, errFlag, fanCoil.FanType);
fanCoil.fanAvailSchIndex = Fans::GetFanAvailSchPtr(state, fanCoil.FanType, fanCoil.FanName, errFlag);
if (errFlag) {
ShowContinueError(state, format("Occurs in {} = {}", CurrentModuleObject, fanCoil.Name));
Expand Down
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions tst/EnergyPlus/unit/AirTerminalSingleDuctMixer.unit.cc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -7896,14 +7896,14 @@ TEST_F(EnergyPlusFixture, AirTerminalSingleDuctMixer_SimFCU_ATMInletSideTest)
SecondaryAirMassFlowRate = state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.AirInNode).MassFlowRate - PrimaryAirMassFlowRate;
// check results in cooling mode operation
EXPECT_NEAR(QZnReq, QUnitOut, 5.0);
EXPECT_NEAR(thisFanCoil.PLR, 0.78843, 0.00001);
EXPECT_NEAR(thisFanCoil.PLR, 0.76235, 0.00001); // Was 0.78843
// check mass flow rates
EXPECT_NEAR(PrimaryAirMassFlowRate, 0.2, 0.000001);
EXPECT_NEAR(SecondaryAirMassFlowRate, 0.369714, 0.000001);
EXPECT_NEAR(SecondaryAirMassFlowRate, 0.350865, 0.000001);
EXPECT_NEAR(state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.AirInNode).MassFlowRate, thisFan.InletAirMassFlowRate, 0.000001);
EXPECT_NEAR(state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.ATMixerPriNode).MassFlowRate, 0.2, 0.0001);
EXPECT_NEAR(state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.ATMixerSecNode).MassFlowRate, 0.369714, 0.000001);
EXPECT_NEAR(state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.ATMixerOutNode).MassFlowRate, 0.569714, 0.000001);
EXPECT_NEAR(state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.ATMixerSecNode).MassFlowRate, 0.350865, 0.000001); // Was 0.369714
EXPECT_NEAR(state->dataLoopNodes->Node(thisFanCoil.ATMixerOutNode).MassFlowRate, 0.550865, 0.000001); // Was 0.569714
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, this is the same thing I see. I still can't figure out why this unit test fails now and not last year when that 1 line (line 515 in FanCoilUnits) was commented out (#9932 on Apr 3, 2023). It makes sense that the cooling coil is now larger (by 496.3 W of fan power) and the PLR is lower which changes the air flow numbers. The example file FanCoilAutoSize skips sizing the first time through but calls the fan (also skips sizing), which sets the fanIndex so there is no change in results when sizing finally does occur. That explains the example files but not this unit test.

}

TEST_F(EnergyPlusFixture, AirTerminalSingleDuctMixer_FCU_NightCycleTest)
Expand Down
Loading