NFP-Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Improvement #8460

Nigusse · 2021-01-11T15:30:58Z

Pull request overview

New Feature - Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Improvement
Adds alternative zone air mass flow balancing methods
This branch also includes the fix for issue Report variable Zone Air Mass Balance Supply Mass Flow Rate is always zero #8497

NOTE: ENHANCEMENTS MUST FOLLOW A SUBMISSION PROCESS INCLUDING A FEATURE PROPOSAL AND DESIGN DOCUMENT PRIOR TO SUBMITTING CODE

Pull Request Author

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

Reviewer

This will not be exhaustively relevant to every PR.

Nigusse · 2021-01-20T15:54:25Z

This NFP is ready for review.

rraustad · 2021-01-20T18:21:24Z

design/FY2020/NFP-ZoneAirTransferModel.md

+         The zone is under negative pressure and requires additional supply air flow to balance the zone air flow. In this case the return air mass flow rate will be reset to zero and the supply air flow rate is increased proportionally.
+		 [m_{ret} = 0.0;]
+		 [m_{sup} += m_{ret};]
+


How are constant volume HVAC systems going to respond to these 2 cases? I assume OA will make up the difference between supply and return flow rates. What happens when there is no OA system? In that case the supply and return flows should match.

I am assuming that the two cases should work for constant volume and VAV systems and have to confirmed through testing.

Regarding "What happens when there is no OA system?", I have not thought enough if it needs a special treatment. One issue is that supply and return flows may not match for zones that has exhaust fan flow, ZoneMixing and Infiltration flows. You have to adjust either the supply, infiltration, or the return flows as needed.

For systems with no outdoor air, the existing return flow calculations force the return to match the corresponding supply flow for a given zone. This balance must be maintained.

For constant volume systems, are you suggesting that the system flow could be increased by this? That's going to run up against the terminal unit max flow rate.

For VAV systems, increasing the supply flow could cause temperature control problems.

I suspected I may run into control problem when the supply air flow rates is altered. In some cases return air can be zero and we may not have other variable to change unless infiltration air flow rate is adjusted instead of supply air. In fact my original NFP draft was to adjust return air and infiltration to balance the flow while keeping the ZoneMixing object flow as specified and letting the control system deal with supply air flow rate.

I would rather adjust return and infiltration air flow rates only to balance the system and let the control system determine the supply air flow rate. What do you think? @mjwitte

That seems safer, but that question should be answered by those who are requesting this feature and the specific use cases that it will be applied to.

OK, I will seek input from those requested the feature.

Regarding Case II here.
For VAV terminals, it does seem possible to consider exhaust fan flows when determining damper position, but that is beyond scope I think.

I think when return air wants to go negative there is a sizing or input consistency problem. The user should have set the ventilation requirement in DesignSpecification:OutdoorAir object high enough to supply make up air for exhaust fan and mixed air transfers. For Case II, I would say don't do anything beyond setting return air to zero. The existing unbalanced flow warning should catch this okay.

mjwitte · 2021-01-21T21:17:04Z

design/FY2020/NFP-ZoneAirTransferModel.md

+Case I:  [m_{ret} >= 0.0]
+
+         The zone is under positive pressure and requires return air mass flow rate to balance the zone air flow. The return air flow rate will be adjusted within the bounds of 0 and maximum return air flow rate to balance the zone air mass flow.


What determines "maximum return air flow rate"?
How will this work when there are multiple return nodes (more than one AHU serving a zone)?

I am thinking the maximum will be determined based on the the Node's maximum Mass Flow Rate.

I am thinking to use the same logic for all return nodes connected to the same zone. Not sure if this causes any problem.

I don't think return nodes have a defined maximum mass flow rate, but I may be wrong. The only value that might be used would be the overall airloop design flow rate, which will defeat the purpose of this feature when it wants to set return flow > supply.

My thought is it can set zone return flow > zone supply flow but the AirLoop overall return cannot be set > the overall airloop design flow rate.

mjwitte · 2021-01-21T21:25:26Z

design/FY2020/NFP-ZoneAirTransferModel.md

+         The zone is under negative pressure and requires additional supply air flow to balance the zone air flow. In this case the return air mass flow rate will be reset to zero and the supply air flow rate is increased proportionally.
+		 [m_{ret} = 0.0;]
+		 [m_{sup} += m_{ret};]
+


For systems with no outdoor air, the existing return flow calculations force the return to match the corresponding supply flow for a given zone. This balance must be maintained.

For constant volume systems, are you suggesting that the system flow could be increased by this? That's going to run up against the terminal unit max flow rate.

For VAV systems, increasing the supply flow could cause temperature control problems.

mjwitte · 2021-01-21T21:27:19Z

design/FY2020/NFP-ZoneAirTransferModel.md

+
+## Justification for New Feature ##
+
+ZoneAirMassFlowConservation is intended to balance airflows but current design is that the procedure adjusts zone mixing and/or infiltration rates. User that have complex air transfer models like grocery stores, restaurants, and some big box retailers need the ability to model actual air transfer and account for ventilation movement between spaces. In these cases, users want the infiltration, zone mixing, and exhaust fan flow rates to stay fixed at user specified flows, instead adjust the system return air to balance zone air flow. 


How does the proposed method model or give user control over transfer air?

Users will specify transfer air using ZoneMixing objects and these flow rates remain the same.

OK, but with this method, the ZoneMixing flows will occur no matter what the system flows are. It will be up to the user to schedule the ZoneMixing flows to match the HVAC system operation.

Yes, that is my plan.

I will update the NFP based on the feedback and seek input from those requested the feature. @mjwitte and @rraustad Thank you for your review and feedback.

EnergyArchmage · 2021-01-27T21:06:26Z

design/FY2020/NFP-ZoneAirTransferModel.md

+m_{zmreceiving} = Zone Mixing Receiving Air Mass Flow Rate, [kg/s]
+m_{zmsource} = Zone Mixing Source Air Mass Flow Rate, [kg/s]
+m_{inf} = Zone Infiltration Air Mass Flow Rate, [kg/s]
+


My view is that zone Infiltration is modeled as balanced infiltration and exfiltration and it does not necessarily always add mass to the zone balance. (Exfiltration is ignored in zone heat balance because it doesn't affect the energy balance since leaving the control volume.) But when needed for air balancing it can add mass by zeroing out the exfiltration. So the term m_{inf} needs a logic modifier, if in Case I (below), term doesn't count (x 0.0), but if needed to stay out of Case II (below) then some part [0.0 ..1.0] of the infiltration term can add mass thru exfiltration balancing.

Infiltration is assumed self-balanced only if the "ZoneAirMassFlowConservation" is not active. If the ZoneAirMassFlowConservation is ON, current zone mass flow balance calculation assumes exfiltration is always zero.

EnergyArchmage · 2021-01-28T15:43:39Z

design/FY2020/NFP-ZoneAirTransferModel.md

+OK, but with this method, the ZoneMixing flows will occur no matter what the system flows are. It will be up to the user to schedule the ZoneMixing flows to match the HVAC system operation.
+@Nigusse, Response:
+Yes, that is my plan.
+


Maybe an entirely different way to go would be to add a new version of ZoneMixing that works as system air with input for two air system nodes. one inlet from the exhaust node of the source zone, and one outlet which is a zone inlet node for the receiving zone. Users that have 90.1 air transfers that need to be balanced with system use the new approach. Legacy ZoneMixing can still be used for load calcs with no HVAC.

Myoldmopar · 2021-01-29T14:38:17Z

Let me know if you'd still like a meeting organized on this.

@EnergyArchmage @mjwitte @EnergyArchmage @rraustad @nagappanchidambaram

…EnergyPlus into 176230951_AirTransferModel

mjwitte · 2021-02-05T17:02:36Z

@Nigusse This has no milestone. Is it intended for v9.5?

Nigusse · 2021-02-09T13:41:32Z

The two example files that have the ZoneAirMassFlowConservation object throw the following EIO warning error message:

- Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Simulation, Yes,Yes,AddInfiltrationFlow,MixingSourceZonesOnly
+ Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Simulation, Yes,AdjustZoneMixingFlow,AddInfiltrationFlow,MixingSourceZonesOnly

This is because of change in the IDD and is expected.

Nigusse

Provided a walk throug of the code changes.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:04:28Z

idd/Energy+.idd.in

+       \key AdjustMixingThenReturn
+       \key AdjustReturnThenMixing
+       \key None
+       \default None


This is modified ZoneAirMassFlowConservation object that allows to a different options of enforcing zone air flow balance. Please check the PR for details of comments. We have added three new options now.

Tab characters that I will fix right before merging.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:09:30Z

src/EnergyPlus/DataHeatBalance.cc

+    int const AdjustReturnOnly(2);
+    int const AdjustMixingThenReturn(3);
+    int const AdjustReturnThenMixing(4);
+    int const NoAdjustReturnAndMixing(5);


Defined five parameters for the different zone air flow balancing enforcing options. The default is NoAdjustReturnAndMixing and will be initialized to "0" instead of "5". I have corrected it and will push the branch later.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:10:33Z

src/EnergyPlus/DataHeatBalance.hh

@@ -1358,13 +1365,14 @@ namespace DataHeatBalance {
    {
        // Members
        bool EnforceZoneMassBalance; // flag to enforce zone air mass conservation
-        bool BalanceMixing;          // flag to allow mixing to be adjusted for zone mass balance
+        int ZoneFlowAdjustment;      // specifies how zone air flow balance is determined (AdjustMixingOnly, AdjustReturnOnly, AdjustMixingThenReturn, AdjustReturnThenMixing, None)
        int InfiltrationTreatment;   // determines how infiltration is treated for zone mass balance


Added integer member variable that the maps to the different enforcing options. The existing method "BalanceMixing" is replaced with "AdjustMixingOnly".

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:13:14Z

src/EnergyPlus/DataHeatBalance.hh

        int InfiltrationTreatment;   // determines how infiltration is treated for zone mass balance
        int InfiltrationZoneType;    // specifies which types of zones allow infiltration to be changed
                                     // Note, unique global object

        // Default Constructor
-        ZoneAirMassFlowConservation() : EnforceZoneMassBalance(false), BalanceMixing(false), InfiltrationTreatment(0), InfiltrationZoneType(0)
+        ZoneAirMassFlowConservation()
+            : EnforceZoneMassBalance(false), ZoneFlowAdjustment(1), InfiltrationTreatment(0), InfiltrationZoneType(0)


Updated the struct using the new member variable that maps to the different options and deleted the existing method. The default method initialization will be corrected to "0".

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:14:15Z

src/EnergyPlus/HeatBalanceAirManager.cc

@@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ namespace HeatBalanceAirManager {

        // flow

-        if (ZoneAirMassFlow.EnforceZoneMassBalance && ZoneAirMassFlow.BalanceMixing) {
+        if (ZoneAirMassFlow.EnforceZoneMassBalance && ZoneAirMassFlow.ZoneFlowAdjustment != DataHeatBalance::NoAdjustReturnAndMixing) {


This initialization now applies to all four methods except the "None" option.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:32:36Z

tst/EnergyPlus/unit/HeatBalanceManager.unit.cc

@@ -604,7 +604,7 @@ TEST_F(EnergyPlusFixture, HeatBalanceManager_ZoneAirMassFlowConservationData3)
    GetProjectControlData(*state, ErrorsFound); // returns ErrorsFound false, ZoneAirMassFlowConservation never sets it
    EXPECT_FALSE(ErrorsFound);
    EXPECT_FALSE(ZoneAirMassFlow.EnforceZoneMassBalance);
-    EXPECT_FALSE(ZoneAirMassFlow.BalanceMixing);
+    EXPECT_EQ(ZoneAirMassFlow.ZoneFlowAdjustment, NoAdjustReturnAndMixing);


transitioned a unit test.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:32:40Z

tst/EnergyPlus/unit/HeatBalanceManager.unit.cc

@@ -624,7 +624,7 @@ TEST_F(EnergyPlusFixture, HeatBalanceManager_ZoneAirMassFlowConservationReportVa
        "25, !- Maximum Number of Warmup Days",
        "6;                       !- Minimum Number of Warmup Days",
        "ZoneAirMassFlowConservation,",
-        "Yes, !- Adjust Zone Mixing For Zone Air Mass Flow Balance",
+        "AdjustMixingOnly, !- Adjust Zone Mixing and Return For Air Mass Flow Balance",
        "AdjustInfiltrationFlow, !- Infiltration Balancing Method",


transitioned a unit test.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:32:54Z

tst/EnergyPlus/unit/HeatBalanceManager.unit.cc

@@ -1938,7 +1938,7 @@ TEST_F(EnergyPlusFixture, HeatBalanceManager_HVACSystemRootFindingAlgorithmBisec
        "25, !- Maximum Number of Warmup Days",
        "6;                       !- Minimum Number of Warmup Days",
        "ZoneAirMassFlowConservation,",
-        "No, !- Adjust Zone Mixing For Zone Air Mass Flow Balance",
+        "None, !- Adjust Zone Mixing and Return For Air Mass Flow Balance",


transitioned a unit tests.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:35:05Z

doc/engineering-reference/src/integrated-solution-manager/zone-air-mass-flow-conservation.tex

+\textbf{AdjustMixingThenReturn:} first adjusts the zone mixing air mass flow rates, then adjusts the zone total return air mass flow rate to enforce zone air mass flow balance. Infiltration air flow can also adjusted if required depending on user preference as specified in section \textit{Infiltration Flow rates Adjustments}. For adjusting the mixing mass flow rates the set of equations for \textit{AdjustMixingOnly} method described above are used and for adjusting the zone total return air mass flow rate the equation for \textit{AdjustReturnOnly} method is used. 
+
+\textbf{AdjustReturnThenMixing:} first adjusts the zone total return air mass flow rate, then adjusts the zone mixing mass flow rates to enforce zone air mass flow balance. Infiltration air flow can also adjusted if required depending on user preference as specified in section \textit{Infiltration Flow rates Adjustments}. For adjusting the zone total return air mass flow rates the equations for \textit{AdjustReturnOnly} method described above is used and for adjusting the zone mixing mass flow rates the set of equations for \textit{AdjustMixingOnly} method are used.
+


Updated the engineering reference to reflect the changes as applicable for each of the zone air flow conservation enforcing methods.

Nigusse · 2021-02-15T15:37:51Z

doc/engineering-reference/src/integrated-solution-manager/zone-air-mass-flow-conservation.tex

@@ -175,7 +229,7 @@ \subsection{Infiltration Flow Rate Adjustments}\label{infiltration-flow-rate-adj
 If a zone is included in the infiltration adjustment, the infiltration air mass flow rate required to balance the zone is determined as follows:

 \begin{equation}
-{\dot m_{Inf-required}} = MAX\left( {0.0,\,{{\dot m}_{XS}} + {{\dot m}_{EX}} + {{\dot m}_{R}} - {{\dot m}_S}} \right)
+{\dot m_{Inf-required}} = MAX\left( {0.0,\,{{\dot m}_{XS}} + {{\dot m}_{EX}} + {{\dot m}_{R}} - {{\dot m}_S}  - {\dot m_{XR,\,new}}} \right)


Added a missing terms in the air air infiltration adjusting or adding calculation option. This correction allows infiltration treatment for receiving zone as well.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-18T17:45:07Z

This has conflicts now from the merge of #8498. I don't have the bandwidth to address them right now, so please take care of that. @Nigusse

Nigusse · 2021-02-18T19:59:19Z

OK. I am going to start resolving the conflict now.

Nigusse · 2021-02-18T21:46:30Z

Merged in develop, resolved conflicts, and ran unit tests and all passed.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T00:46:57Z

Thanks for getting this all fixed up @Nigusse ! Pulling this and testing it now.

Nigusse · 2021-02-19T01:57:16Z

@Myoldmopar The EIO and tabular column heading differences are expected and are due to IDD changes.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T02:17:09Z

Yeah, this looks good and tests well locally. This will merge now. Thanks @Nigusse, please open a follow-up issue if needed and we can still chat about this on the technical call next week.

Myoldmopar

OK, well I assumed it was all ready but it looks like it still needs transition rules to be written. I won't be doing that tonight. I can tomorrow.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T02:17:58Z

idd/Energy+.idd.in

+       \key AdjustMixingThenReturn
+       \key AdjustReturnThenMixing
+       \key None
+       \default None


Tab characters that I will fix right before merging.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T02:18:29Z

src/EnergyPlus/DataHeatBalance.hh

+    extern int const AdjustReturnOnly;
+    extern int const AdjustMixingThenReturn;
+    extern int const AdjustReturnThenMixing;
+    extern int const NoAdjustReturnAndMixing;


Hmmmm I wish this had been an enumeration rather than more global integers hanging out. Oh well.

I will change to enumeration along with other follow up changes.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T02:19:30Z

src/Transition/InputRulesFiles/Rules9-4-0-to-9-5-0.md

+      - Now there are five choice keys. 
+Fields 2-3 remain the same.
+
+See [pull request 8460] (https://github.com/NREL/EnergyPlus/pull/8460)


Wait, this doesn't have the Fortran transition implemented yet?!

No, I have not done the transition rule FORTRAN code change.

Added the FORTRAN transition rules, tested locally and pushed the updated branch.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T18:26:44Z

@Nigusse thanks! I was just going to sit down and write the transition rules. I'll build them and get it tested out.

Myoldmopar · 2021-02-19T19:07:39Z

CI diffs are OK. Locally with latest develop, unit tests are running fine. Transitioned up a 9.4 file with no problem, and ran it with a fully clean error file. This is great. I'm calling this done. Thanks @Nigusse !

NFP-Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Improvement

017038c

Nigusse added the NewFeature Includes code to add a new feature to EnergyPlus label Jan 11, 2021

nigusse added 2 commits January 19, 2021 14:06

Updated NFP

939de31

Merge branch 'develop' into 176230951_AirTransferModel

7db82f6

Nigusse added the IDDChange Code changes impact the IDD file (cannot be merged after IO freeze) label Jan 19, 2021

Updated Input Description

9b4fbce

rraustad reviewed Jan 20, 2021

View reviewed changes

mjwitte reviewed Jan 21, 2021

View reviewed changes

Updated NFP based on review feedback.

0da1b8b

EnergyArchmage reviewed Jan 29, 2021

View reviewed changes

nigusse added 4 commits February 4, 2021 14:52

Merge branch 'develop' into 176230951_AirTransferModel

70888f0

Merge branch '176230951_AirTransferModel' of https://github.com/NREL/…

19b424b

…EnergyPlus into 176230951_AirTransferModel

Updated NFP and design document

20fe777

Merge branch 'develop' into 176230951_AirTransferModel

2b51e6d

nigusse added 3 commits February 8, 2021 08:33

Merge branch 'develop' into 176230951_AirTransferModel

353fd40

Modified IDD-ZoneAirMassFlowConservation Object

bc8baa1

Updated NFP and Design Document

ab73e7b

Nigusse added this to the EnergyPlus 9.5.0 milestone Feb 8, 2021

nigusse added 7 commits February 8, 2021 10:00

Modified ZoneAirMassFlowConservation get inputs

4e1b09b

Modified unit tests and cleanup

eca2ea5

Transitioned two example files

30cc50a

Removed unused variable and code section

5bf36ba

New variable for infiltration treatment calc

d1ed5b6

Refactor zone infiltration treatment

8a91adc

Zone Air Flow Balance Cleanup

c8d6359

mjwitte removed this from the EnergyPlus 9.5.0 milestone Feb 9, 2021

nigusse added 14 commits February 12, 2021 11:32

Added a unit test for AdjustReturnOnly

e412da5

Added a unit test for AdjustReturnThenMixing

fba32d3

Added a unit test for AdjustMixingThenReturn

b7c93ae

Updated Input Output Ref Document

7c05387

Updated Engineering Ref Document

ae89c7a

More Input Output Red Documentation Update

fd3b74e

Merge branch 'develop' into 176230951_AirTransferModel

633402b

Unused variable cleanup

b0ee458

ZoneAirMassFlowConservation object notes cleanup

2dcbdd1

One more update per issue #8497

02fd731

removed unused variable

9e0d64d

Added transition rules

301e97e

Updated the NFP and Design Documents

490dac6

Corrected the default method initialization

db27745

Nigusse commented Feb 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

mjwitte mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2021

Fixes Zone Air Mass Balance report variables reporting issues #8498

Merged

20 tasks

Merged in Develop; resolved Conflicts

fb96521

Myoldmopar requested changes Feb 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

nigusse added 2 commits February 19, 2021 11:58

Merge branch 'develop' into 176230951_AirTransferModel

c384022

Added FORTRAN transition rules

518be1d

Myoldmopar merged commit faa0a4b into develop Feb 19, 2021

Myoldmopar deleted the 176230951_AirTransferModel branch February 19, 2021 19:07

		Case I: [m_{ret} >= 0.0]

		The zone is under positive pressure and requires return air mass flow rate to balance the zone air flow. The return air flow rate will be adjusted within the bounds of 0 and maximum return air flow rate to balance the zone air mass flow.


		## Justification for New Feature ##

		ZoneAirMassFlowConservation is intended to balance airflows but current design is that the procedure adjusts zone mixing and/or infiltration rates. User that have complex air transfer models like grocery stores, restaurants, and some big box retailers need the ability to model actual air transfer and account for ventilation movement between spaces. In these cases, users want the infiltration, zone mixing, and exhaust fan flow rates to stay fixed at user specified flows, instead adjust the system return air to balance zone air flow.

		\textbf{AdjustMixingThenReturn:} first adjusts the zone mixing air mass flow rates, then adjusts the zone total return air mass flow rate to enforce zone air mass flow balance. Infiltration air flow can also adjusted if required depending on user preference as specified in section \textit{Infiltration Flow rates Adjustments}. For adjusting the mixing mass flow rates the set of equations for \textit{AdjustMixingOnly} method described above are used and for adjusting the zone total return air mass flow rate the equation for \textit{AdjustReturnOnly} method is used.

		\textbf{AdjustReturnThenMixing:} first adjusts the zone total return air mass flow rate, then adjusts the zone mixing mass flow rates to enforce zone air mass flow balance. Infiltration air flow can also adjusted if required depending on user preference as specified in section \textit{Infiltration Flow rates Adjustments}. For adjusting the zone total return air mass flow rates the equations for \textit{AdjustReturnOnly} method described above is used and for adjusting the zone mixing mass flow rates the set of equations for \textit{AdjustMixingOnly} method are used.

NFP-Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Improvement #8460

NFP-Zone Air Mass Flow Balance Improvement #8460

Conversation

Nigusse commented Jan 11, 2021 • edited Loading

Pull request overview

Pull Request Author

Reviewer

Nigusse commented Jan 20, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Nigusse Jan 21, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

EnergyArchmage Jan 28, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Myoldmopar commented Jan 29, 2021

mjwitte commented Feb 5, 2021

Nigusse commented Feb 9, 2021

Nigusse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Myoldmopar commented Feb 18, 2021

Nigusse commented Feb 18, 2021 • edited Loading

Nigusse commented Feb 18, 2021

Myoldmopar commented Feb 19, 2021

Nigusse commented Feb 19, 2021

Myoldmopar commented Feb 19, 2021

Myoldmopar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Myoldmopar commented Feb 19, 2021

Myoldmopar commented Feb 19, 2021

Nigusse commented Jan 11, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Nigusse Jan 21, 2021 •

edited

Loading

EnergyArchmage Jan 28, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Nigusse commented Feb 18, 2021 •

edited

Loading