eQuesters,

The geometry of my project is pretty complicated (and architecturally
ever-changing), so I'm looking for an easy-way-out regarding a small wall
bordering two spaces (thermal zones), one of which is much larger than the
other. (Unfortunately, the two zones in question have different
temperatures, so an adiabatic wall is not a good simplification.)
Suppose that I do the following: Cover the entire border of the large
space with an adiabatic wall, which I will define as "external", but give
the smallest U-value that eQuest will accept. (The portions of this wall
not bordering the small space actually border other spaces that are at the
same temperature as the large space, thereby justifying this adiabatic
assumption.) Then, define an internal wall in the smaller space that is
"next-to" the larger space and has an appropriate realistic construction.
My questions are these:
1. The resulting total wall area of the larger space exceeds that of
physical reality. However, the amount of heat-conducting area is correct.
Does this somehow mess up eQuest's calculations?
2. Is this going to be a problem for the LEED evaluation people?
3. I admit that this shortcut causes the effect of the specific heat of
the artificially adiabatic walls to be ignored. Realistically, does this
matter for an office building with metal studs and gypsum drywall -
especially when my model ignores the specific heats of the various unknown
office furniture, etc.?

Thank you in advance for any thoughts.
Thanks also to the several of you who have helped me with your replies
to previous questions. (It is appreciated!)

Lars Fetzek, EI