Fix #7136 - Clarify which peak the outputs of the coil sizing details are referring to

[jmarrec]

Pull request overview

Fix #7136 - Clarify which peak the outputs of the coil sizing details are referring to

Work Checklist

Add to this list or remove from it as applicable. This is a simple templated set of guidelines.

• Title of PR should be user-synopsis style (clearly understandable in a standalone changelog context)
• At least one of the following appropriate labels must be added to this PR to be consumed into the changelog:
  • Defect: This pull request repairs a github defect issue. The github issue should be referenced in the PR description
  • Refactoring: This pull request includes code changes that don't change the functionality of the program, just perform refactoring
  • NewFeature: This pull request includes code to add a new feature to EnergyPlus
  • Performance: This pull request includes code changes that are directed at improving the runtime performance of EnergyPlus
  • DoNoPublish: This pull request includes changes that shouldn't be included in the changelog

Review Checklist

This will not be exhaustively relevant to every PR.

• Functional code review (it has to work!)
• If defect, results of running current develop vs this branch should exhibit the fix
• CI status: all green or justified
• Performance: CI Linux results include performance check
• Unit Test(s)
• C++ checks:
  • Argument types
  • If any virtual classes, ensure virtual destructor included, other things
• IDD changes:
  • Verify naming conventions and styles, memos and notes and defaults
  • Open windows IDF Editor with modified IDD to check for errors
  • If transition, add to input rules file for interfaces
  • If transition, add transition source
  • If transition, update idfs
• If new idf included, locally check the err file and other outputs
• Required documentation updates?
• ExpandObjects changes?
• If output changes, including tabular output structure, add to output rules file for interfaces

[rraustad]

@mjwitte I have reviewed this and see a new column in the Coil Sizing Details table as Peak Load Type to Size On. Either total or sensible is reported based on the user selection for:

  Sizing:System,
    VAV Sys 1,               !- AirLoop Name
    sensible,                !- Type of Load to Size On

The only question I would have is if we want to report total or sensible based on DataSizing::FinalSysSizing(curSysNum).CoolingPeakLoadType

            // assign CoolingPeakLoadType based on LoadSizeType for now
            if (SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).LoadSizeType == Sensible) {
                SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).CoolingPeakLoadType = SensibleCoolingLoad;
            } else if (SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).LoadSizeType == Total) {
                SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).CoolingPeakLoadType = TotalCoolingLoad;
            } else {
                SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).CoolingPeakLoadType = SensibleCoolingLoad;
            }

or if we want to report sensible, total or ventilationrequirement based on the actual Sizing:System user input for Type of Load to Size On via SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).LoadSizeType.

                auto const loadSizeType(cAlphaArgs(iLoadTypeSizeAlphaNum));
                if (loadSizeType == "SENSIBLE") {
                    SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).LoadSizeType = Sensible;
                    // } else if ( loadSizeType == "LATENT" ) {
                    // SysSizInput( SysSizIndex ).LoadSizeType = Latent;
                } else if (loadSizeType == "TOTAL") {
                    SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).LoadSizeType = Total;
                } else if (loadSizeType == "VENTILATIONREQUIREMENT") {
                    SysSizInput(SysSizIndex).LoadSizeType = Ventilation;

Example file 5ZoneAutoDXVAV.idf

Other than that I have no issues with the changes here (other than maybe the location of the new column and if this report should also be included in Coil Sizing Summary).

[mjwitte]

The one referenced at the top of Sizing:System is for the airflow rates, so, I would think that DataSizing::FinalSysSizing(curSysNum).CoolingPeakLoadType is the correct one to use.
This is still a draft PR, and if it's adding a column to an output table, it's not going to get in for v9.2 I/O freeze.

[mjwitte]

@jmarrec Because this changes the structure of an output table, it should have an entry in
src/Transition/OutputRulesFiles/OutputChanges9-2-0-to-9-3-0.md (which would be a new file here in this PR - just copy the prior one and clean out old stuff)

[jmarrec]

@mjwitte done in e94d988