10% difference in results of annual daylight analysis with Diva-Rhino and Diva-Grasshopper

Hello guys,

I am trying to understand a difference of around 10% in results for a climate-based daylighting simulationbetween Diva-for-Rhino and Diva-Grasshopper, for the same geometry in Rhino.

The model is an open plan office building with a central glazed atrium and external shading devices (static). It has 5 floors and the analysis is for the 1st floor, for Sao Paulo, Brazil.

I have adjusted the Radiance parameters -aa, -ab, -ad, -ar and -as; the grid spacing (0.75); and the occupation period for both Diva-for-Rhino and Diva-Grasshopper simulations.

Additionally, I have changed the punctuation configuration of my computer from “,” to “.”.

 

Does anyone know what other parameter I should adjust in grasshopper in order to have compatible simulations and results??

Am I missing something or there are significant differences in the algorithms used by Diva-for-Rhino and Diva-Grasshopper and thus it is expected a difference of this magnitude in the results?

Many thanks!

Monica

TesteAtrioBase.gh

AtrioNSLObriseFixAjustesAb4.3dm

Views: 42

Reply to This

© 2019   Created by jeff niemasz.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service