When importing weather data from the Meteonorm Database into ecotect, the values for direct solar radiation are false.
I've tried importing the TMY2 and Trnsys format. Additionally I've done the CSV import by hand as explained in the Wiki.
But in all cases the hourly data displayed for direct solar cannot be correct. Attached is an image of the output for Munich.
As you can see in the images, the distribution is incorrect.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Graph of Meteonorm input according to WIKI.jpg | 109.04 KB |
| Weather Data ecotect.jpg | 95.46 KB |
importing weather data...
Hi Oliver,
I think I understand the nature of your problem - you have imported weather data for Munich from Meteonorm into WeatherTool/Weather Manager, however the direct solar radiation results you get are significantly different to those contained in the Germany-Munich.WEA file included with WeatherTool/Weather Manager.
Assuming the original .WEA file has reasonably correct direct radiation data, I'm not sure what has happened (if anything) to the radiation data imported from Meteonorm. Interestingly enough, if I import an EnergyPlus EPW file for Munich into WeatherTool, the direct radiation results are similar to those you got with Meteonorm data.
Is it possible for you to post the Meteonorm file for me to have a look at?
Regards,
sid thoo architect
Hi Sid, I have also found
Hi Sid,
I have also found the same happening with EPW files.
I have attached the Meteonorm file in 3 different formats TMY2, TRNSYS and the standard Meteonorm DAT.
Regards,
Oliver
Hmmm...
Hi Oliver,
Yep - same thing happens to me too.
I have a list of questions regarding WeatherTool to discuss with Andrew. I'll bring this matter to his attention when I next speak to him.
Kind regards,
sid thoo architect
any news on this issue
any news on this issue (bug)?
can aggree that in weathertools the direct radiation of imported meteonorm files is much to high.
found this:
1) import (beam, direct and diffuse) from meteonorm
2) exprort (beam, direct and diffuse) as .csv
3) compare the two files
4) beam and diffuse are the same, the direct component of the weathertools file is much higher than the original meteonorm. (see attachment)
what multiplier is applied and why?
-rpict
Follow up...
Hi Oliver,
Sorry I have been absent from this discussion for a while.
I have been wondering if there some kind of inconsistency with the solar radiation data we are dealing with. If it were strictly a bug in WeatherTool, one would expect the error to occur in other climate data files as well. I have done similar experiments with other climates data files, and these seem to produce solar radiation graphs that are comparable with the .WEA files supplied with WeatherTool.
Nonetheless, I have posted a formal bug report with Square One. Will let you know when I receive a response.
Kind regards,
sid thoo architect