Helping others, engage in discussions, share your experiences and knowledge with other users.


Tony 2021-02-03 15:48:07

Do you mean you have compared the calculated value with a different method and got two diverse results?
Could you please explain?



Tony 2021-02-11 09:16:55

Hi and sorry for the delay.
I've just checked with R&D and they're trying to get hold of the same software in order to reproduce the calculations.
This isn't normal practice seeing as the TerMus Bridge internal FEM solver is also certified according to EN ISO 10211:2008, EN ISO 14683:2008 and EN ISO 13788:2013 technical standards.
Do you know which kind of reference standards the other software is based upon?

I'll try to get this issue to move forward and apologize for the delay.
Have a nice day.


Tony 2021-02-18 17:13:36

Well with regard to the U value case, I'm afraid we can't check out any inconsistencies and can only confirm that the results returned are always in line with the FEM calculation algorythm.
As for a diagnostics error, you'll have to send me you file so we can try to replicate the error and see where it's being caused.



Tony 2021-02-19 10:45:16

Hi, thanks for sending the file over.
I see that the Ground section is little too large. You don't need to model 20m of terrain beneath the TB. Seeing as its boundary is set to Adiabatic, this automatically considers the heat exchange with ground and therefore a smaller section is enough calculation-wise.
The Calcualtion is completed, and report is also generated but you need to check the entire characteristics of the thermal bridge materials and their layer thicknesses as the overall performance doesn't see compliant.



Tony 2021-02-19 13:00:24

I Perfectly understand your requirement. All I can say is that with these boundary conditions, we need a lot of memory to perform the calculation.
Can you try freeing up as much memory closing down unnecessary applications running in background?
I've passed on your case to developers.



Tony 2021-02-22 09:49:27

I've managed to run the Report Calculation for your file although there's an incredible need for memory while performing the calculations for a large layer of ground such as in your case.



User_1176156 2021-02-22 13:39:36

Hi, can you check and resend that word doc report, no content 'corrupted' error message.


Tony 2021-02-22 14:07:41

Ok, here's a PDF too...


madoniaivan 2021-02-22 17:49:57

Hello Sir
Sorry but it seems that the issue with the last file we sent you is also due to the performance of our machine, which are actually good but not enough powerful to carry out the complete calculation.
Unfortunately this issue, at the moment, cannot be solved having this terrain thickness. Again we already escalate this ticket to the Dev-team end they will work on a solution which will be implemented at some point in a further version of the software


madoniaivan 2021-02-25 16:47:38

Hi there,
Just received a feedback from the Dev-team:
it does not seem necessary to consider those terrain thickness in the calculation because at a certain distance the side effects of the thermal bridge will fade out becoming insignificant. in order to make this work, you need to correct the boundary conditions, by defining a boundary temperature (and not an adiabatic boundary), like the one in the example that is of 13 ° C.

In the same example you can see how, at a certain depth and lateral distance, the temperature curves are no longer affected by the plinth, becoming constant and/or mono-dimensional. Therefore it becomes useless to employ the calculation in larger


Tony 2021-03-08 12:58:55

is this appearing while opening a file?
Can you please try launching TerMus BRIDge as Admin?
Right mouse button click on the Program Icon -> "Run as Administrator".

Try that and let me know.


Tony 2021-03-08 14:20:40

Please allow me to connect remotely - Download the app here:

Please let me know when you are available within the next half-hour.