Vertical Sky Component - Great Job

Hello Mostapha,

Amazing work!

I believe Ladybug is one of the most important extensions GH so far.

Are you considering to include a Vertical Sky Component analysis?

Keep up the good work and waiting for updated versions!

doompop

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Abraham Yezioro on February 17, 2015 at 6:13am

Amedeo,

Just be sure the type of sky you are using. See: http://www.waterslade.com/services/daylight_sunlight/vertical_sky_c...

-A.

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on February 18, 2015 at 4:23am

Abrahm,

Thanks for your reply, the problem as I found in this discussion is that radiance does not take into account azimuth, which is fundamental to create a Waldram diagram https://radiance-online.lbl.gov:447/pipermail/radiance-general/2014...

Permalink Reply by Abraham Yezioro on February 18, 2015 at 5:00am

Hi Amedeo,

As i've found when Mostapha developed the component and i tested it (and after that), cloudy sky indeed gives results up to 40% and uniform sky up to 49% (or so). Both cases Radiance is used. That's why iasked you about the sky you picked for the simulation.

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on February 18, 2015 at 7:25am

Hi Abram that is Correct, I used a cloudy sky.

I am gonna do further tests and compare with other softwares, I'll keep you updated

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on February 18, 2015 at 8:30am

Hi Amedeo!

Let us know the result. I second Abraham. You will get very close results to BRE if you use uniform sky for calculation. If that is not the case I can add an alternate method to component. It will be very similar to how we calculate sunlight hours/radiation or shading benefits.

-Mostapha

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on February 19, 2015 at 5:11am

I will let you know when I will have some final test! thanks!

Amedeo

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on March 24, 2015 at 9:22am

Mostapha I finally did some comparison, and I think that the VSC calculated with radiance does not do the job as its best, you can check results in the .zip attached.

It would be great to have a tool similar to shadow mask or sunlight hours.

I am planning to use it to calculate Sky component and create a safe envelope for Right of light, which is one of the crucial planning issue here in the UK.

Here you can find some examples of what I am talking about.

http://www.waterslade.com/services/dev_potential.htm

http://www.right-of-light.co.uk/maximum-envelopes.php

I am happy to help in any way

bye!

Attachments:

VSC Radiance.zip, 509 KB

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on June 16, 2015 at 7:13am

Hi Mostapha, did you have a look at the comparison I did? Let me know if I can help somehow in developing this

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on July 9, 2015 at 4:22am

Finally checking it now. I will update this thread soon.

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on July 9, 2015 at 5:39am

Hi Amedeo, I checked your file and the results are in a very good agreement. Except one test point where Ecotect results seems to be off the difference is less than %1 which is negligible.

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on January 28, 2016 at 2:50am

Mostapha I lost this reply ! sorry if I remeber correctly I was on leave! best

Permalink Reply by Theodoros Galanos on February 19, 2015 at 3:32am

Hi,

I am doing some vertical sky tests on a sample geometry. I am getting funky visualization results. I realize that it probably has to do with my geometry being NURBS, but is there a way around it?

I'd love to visualize it like Dimitris's picture.

Thanks in advance.

Kind regards,

Theodore.

Attachments: