2014 KA Minutes of the Workshop: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
>>> J. Benner: There is no semantic or low-level semantic overlap between them. | >>> J. Benner: There is no semantic or low-level semantic overlap between them. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| <b> | | <b> Material module for ADE Energy - Joachim Benner</b> | ||
* Specific Window Object | * Specific Window Object | ||
K.H. Haefele: Window may be considered as a generic construction. Is an additional window model required? | K.H. Haefele: Window may be considered as a generic construction. Is an additional window model required? | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
* Consideration of costs | * Consideration of costs | ||
K.H. Haefele: Should be “cost” taken into account in UML? How it should be integrated? (All costs are here considering, including financial costs, grey energy, emission cost needed etc.) | K.H. Haefele: Should be “cost” taken into account in UML? How it should be integrated? (All costs are here considering, including financial costs, grey energy, emission cost needed etc.) | ||
<br/> | |||
>>> R. Nouvel: Cost information is not specific to materials. Therefore it should not be part of the material ADE. Maybe later a Costs ADE could be developed | >>> R. Nouvel: Cost information is not specific to materials. Therefore it should not be part of the material ADE. Maybe later a Costs ADE could be developed | ||
| Line 72: | Line 73: | ||
* Material Thickness | * Material Thickness | ||
R Nouvel: In the current ADE Materials version of KIT (like in gbXML), Thickness is part of the material parameters. In most simulation models and some international formats (ifc), thickness is associated with layers while materials contain only parameters proper to it (conductivity, volumetric capacity etc.). Could we rather consider this modelling way. | R Nouvel: In the current ADE Materials version of KIT (like in gbXML), Thickness is part of the material parameters. In most simulation models and some international formats (ifc), thickness is associated with layers while materials contain only parameters proper to it (conductivity, volumetric capacity etc.). Could we rather consider this modelling way. | ||
|- | |||
| <b>Occupancy module for ADE Energy - Jean-Marie Bahu</b> | |||
* Schedules | |||
L. Giovanni: What represent the occupancy schedules? | |||
<br/> | |||
>>> J-M.Bahu: occupancy schedule is a normalized schedule (0 to 1: 1 corresponding to the maximal indicated person number) representing the presence of the occupant in a zone/building. It is important in particular to calculate the intern gains | |||
<br/> | |||
P. Riederer: What is the purpose to integrate occupancy and indoor climate set-point schedules in the CityGML file? This file is going to be very heavy? | |||
<br/> | |||
>>> R. Nouvel: Hourly schedules are necessary inputs for the dynamic simulation. A possibility would be to use external links in order to connect CityGML file with an external database with hourly values. | |||
|- | |||
| <b>Energy System module for ADE Energy - Romain Nouvel</b> | |||
* Standard parameters of Energy Systems | |||
Someone: Which energy system parameters should be standardized in the ADE Energy? | |||
<br/> | |||
>>> R. Nouvel: This is a trade-off between restrictive general information data and very detailed (and less used) information data. Each ADE Energy participants should specify which parameters, among those they use to model energy system, could be of interest for another model of the same energy system. | |||
|- | |||
| <b>Metadata module for ADE Energy - Volker Kraut</b> | |||
* Required Metadata | |||
Volker Kraut: All participants of the other Working groups should supply a list of required metadata for specific parameters. | |||