# Different results with nearly the same daylight analyses

**URL:** <https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/different-results-with-nearly-the-same-daylight-analyses/181218>\
**Category:** Grasshopper\
**Tags:** windows, ladybug, honeybee, rhinoinsiderevit\
**Created:** [May 1, 2024, 7:30am UTC](https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/different-results-with-nearly-the-same-daylight-analyses/181218 "2024-05-01T07:30:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![H\_Kramer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/mcneel/user_avatar/discourse.mcneel.com/h_kramer/32/564339_2.png) [@H\_Kramer](https://discourse.mcneel.com/u/H_Kramer)\
**Post date:** [May 1, 2024, 7:30am UTC](https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/different-results-with-nearly-the-same-daylight-analyses/181218/1 "2024-05-01T07:30:54Z")

</div>

I am experiencing an issue with my daylight analysis tool in Grasshopper. The script I am using is nearly identical. The primary distinction is that for the first one, I am creating the sensor grid with a tool that generates it parametrically. For the other, I am utilizing the Honeybee ‘Sensor Grid from Rooms’ component. Upon initiating the calculations, these are the results:  
 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/mcneel/uploads/default/original/4X/c/d/f/cdf3a539e61cf2840e177f17ba044b063d4f6eb3.png) ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/mcneel/uploads/default/original/4X/9/0/3/90387a0fe8f68e839e39d7c998e6b04743e8623c.png)

The first result is with the parametric tool, while the second one is with the HB component. I am unable to identify the difference in the Grasshopper script. I hope someone could assist in resolving this issue.

The Grasshopper script and the Revit model, which form the basis of the calculations, can be found below:  
[2024418\_ModelToSurfaces\_V11.gh](https://discourse.mcneel.com/uploads/short-url/w9Ih40xuxbrhJGGsOICSyuhyFsy.gh) (326.9 KB)  
[20240425\_ModelV6\_V01.rvt](https://discourse.mcneel.com/uploads/short-url/Aoi2xhRMRip353oeiPam0kGttiF.rvt) (5.9 MB)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![wim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/mcneel/user_avatar/discourse.mcneel.com/wim/32/747482_2.png) [@wim](https://discourse.mcneel.com/u/wim)\
**Post date:** [May 2, 2024, 8:16am UTC](https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/different-results-with-nearly-the-same-daylight-analyses/181218/2 "2024-05-02T08:16:20Z")

</div>

Hi -

> [@H\_Kramer](#):
>
> [2024418\_ModelToSurfaces\_V11.gh](https://discourse.mcneel.com/uploads/short-url/w9Ih40xuxbrhJGGsOICSyuhyFsy.gh) (326.9 KB)

Just a few notes…

I tried opening that file but it crashes Rhino after warning about unknown objects.  
 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/mcneel/uploads/default/original/4X/a/c/e/ace2a295d9c128bb37729dc1b2349c8d44ef03ad.png)

> [@H\_Kramer](#):
>
> Upon initiating the calculations, these are the results:

I can’t tell from the description (and since Rhino crashes before the graph comes up, I can’t tell from the gh file either) if the calculations are performed by Ladybug Tools components in both cases. Either way, your question is likely to be better off posted in the Ladybug Tools forum → [https://discourse.ladybug.tools/](https://discourse.ladybug.tools/)

As always, you might want to remove references to Rhino / Revit geometry and remove all components that are not directly involved in the question.  
-wim

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/mcneel/user_avatar/discourse.mcneel.com/dan/32/481637_2.png) [@dan](https://discourse.mcneel.com/u/dan)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2024, 4:48pm UTC](https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/different-results-with-nearly-the-same-daylight-analyses/181218/3 "2024-05-16T16:48:12Z")

</div>

This ought to be fixed in is fixed in [Rhino 8 Service Release 8 Release Candidate 2](https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/rhino-8-service-release-candidate-available/168233/9999/). Please give it a try.