rehva supporters seminar, brussels,10.12 2009, jarek kurnitski establishing an annex for...
TRANSCRIPT
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Establishing an annex for EPBD-related CEN-standards for buildings with high energy efficiency and good indoor environment
LOW ENERGY COOLING and THERMAL COMFORT
Jarek Kurnitski, D.Sc., Adjunct ProfessorSitra, the Finnish Innovation Fund
Helsinki University of Technology, HVAC-Technology
http://www.thermco.org/
Participant name Short name
Fraunhofer ISE ISE
PSE GmbH PSE
University of Karlsruhe UniKarl
Technical University of Denmark DTU
Helsinki University of Technology TKK
University of La Rochelle ULR
University of Athens NKUA
Czech Technical University CTUP
Politecnico di Milano eERG
Technical University of Civil Engineering - Bucharest
TUCEB
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Objectives
Low energy cooling can mean limited capacity cooling (groundwater, earth to air, slab cooling, night ventilative cooling, etc passive) which is somewhere in between air conditioning and free running buildings not addressed in the standards (EN 15251, ASHRAE 55)
EN 15251 deals with buildings which either have mechanical cooling (full cooling capacity, PMV index) or buildings without mechanical cooling systems (adaptive approach)
ThermCo project:- evaluated how do people perceive “limited cooling capacity”
- assessed the applicability of adapted approach for such buildings
- formulated recommendations for revision of EN 15251 regarding thermal comfort criteria for buildings with low energy cooling in summer
- prepared REHVA guidebook on low energy cooling
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Background of the project
Large German study (Pfafferott et al. 2007) with 12 low-energy office buildings with ‘‘mixed-mode systems’’ such as hybrid day ventilation, enhanced night ventilation, earth-to-air heat exchanger and TABS with ground cooling
Such buildings can show low energy use, but they don’t keep temperature (especially with earth-to-air) due to limited cooling/ventilation capacity and control
Can adaptive thermal comfort model used in such buildings?
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
PMV modelEN 15251, ISO 7730, CR 1752, ASHRAE 55
a cornerstone of thermal comfort theory leading to target values to be achieved with heating/ cooling season design temperatures depending on indoor climate category (activity & clothing)
Includes behavioral adaptation through clothing value (1.0 clo in winter/0.5 clo in summer)
Summer WinterCategory (cooling) (heating)
I (A) 24.5 ± 1 C 22 ± 1 CII (B) 24.5 ± 1.5 C 22 ± 2 CIII (C) 24.5 ± 2.5 C 22 ± 3 C
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Op
era
tiv
e t
em
pe
ratu
re,
°C
Outdoor running mean temperature, °C
I
II
III
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Adaptive modelEN 15251, ASHRAE 55
For free running buildings with openable windows
Arguably people have lower expectations in such buildings and adapt to accept higher temperatures (productivity data is not available from the adaption studies)
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Op
era
tiv
e t
em
pe
ratu
re,
°C
Outdoor running mean temperature, °C
I
II
III
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
11 %
2 %
12 %
5 %
28 %
12 %
50 %
81 %
100 %
Thermal environment, heating season
Thermal environment, cooling season
Indoor air quality
IV III II I
PMV vs. adaptive
16,016,517,017,518,018,519,019,520,020,521,021,522,022,523,023,524,024,525,025,526,026,527,027,528,028,529,029,530,030,531,0
-22 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
indo
or te
mpe
ratu
re, °
C
outdoor temperature running mean, °C
Category I, II and III limits and indoor temperature from column C
1 3
11 %
14 %
12 %
14 %
28 %
14 %
50 %
58 %
100 %
Thermal environment, heating season
Thermal environment, cooling season
Indoor air quality
IV III II I
PMV Adaptive
16,016,517,017,518,018,519,019,520,020,521,021,522,022,523,023,524,024,525,025,526,026,527,027,528,028,529,029,530,030,531,0
-22 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
indo
or te
mpe
ratu
re, °
C
outdoor temperature running mean, °C
Category I, II and III limits and indoor temperature from column C
1 3
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Use of the adaptive approach
ThermCo project did not established any conclusive evidence on the use of adaptive approach in buildings with limited cooling capacity/control
It was concluded that the same expectancy can be expected as in mechanically cooled buildings, i.e. PMV-model shall be used
It was also proposed that the PMV model has to be used for sizing of the room conditioning units, but the system capacity may be undersized according to adaptive model, but there was no scientific evidence available supporting this (also no evidence against that exists)
It can be expected that some (minor) adaptation to outdoor temperature can be seen in every building with room controllers (non-centrally controlled, non-overcooled buildings), but no evidence exists
As no evidence exists one shall use PMV-model.
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Energy saving doesn’t always mean energy performance increment
Relative performance as a function of temperature REHVA Guidebook 6 (2006)
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Recommendations for revision of EN 15251
The recommendation is to write a guideline in the standard saying that:
- some cooling is better than no cooling and if a system with limited cooling capacity is installed the designer must shown how often the room temperatures is expected to exceed the temperature limits specified for mechanical cooled buildings in EN15251and also show this for the adaptive approach.
- This will provide the client with data for the expected performance.
It is stressed that the intention of the standard should not be that a building must be in one category the whole year; but rather use the categories to provide a footprint of the performance by showing the % of occupied time in each category. This should also be made clearer in the standard
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Limited cooling/ventilation capacity/control
Report % of occupied time in each category to the client …
11 %
18 %
31 %
12 %
34 %
42 %
28 %
16 %
18 %
50 %
32 %
9 %
Thermal environment, heating season
Thermal environment, cooling season
Indoor air quality
IV III II I
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Revision of EN 15251/ the season change
The season change from cooling to heating season should be clearly addressed
15C outdoor temperature should be used for season change independently of direction from heating to cooling or cooling to heating
In many offices there may be significant long periods with cooling demand in winter, but the clothing level chosen by people may be winter levels as the outside temperature is low. So the criteria is an upper limit for the heating room temperature of 23-25 C depending of the category chosen
It is also addressed that the present formulation of adaptive model may result in some climatic zones lower room temperatures required for the buildings without mechanical cooling. (As the criteria for buildings without mechanical cooling vary with outside temperatures in summer, but criteria for mechanical cooled buildings stay the same for the summer.
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Lower temperatures required for free-running
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Op
era
tiv
e t
em
pe
ratu
re,
°C
Outdoor running mean temperature, °C
The problem disappears when the season change limit is corrected to 15C
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Low energy cooling REHVA-guidebook
As there are many low energy cooling solutions (including passive and mechanical cooling) not compromising air quality and thermal comfort if properly implemented it was decided to prepare REHVA-guidebook
Guidebook will include
- Definitions of seasonal performance
- Guidance on thermal comfort criteria
- Description and examples of technical solutions
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Seasonal performance system boundaries
Example of Aachen (Germany) office building: Whereas the heat pump itself has a COP of 4.8 the system efficiency over the whole heating period, expressed here as a "seasonal performance factor (SPF)", varies between 12 and 2.6 depending on the system boundaries (and the corresponding auxiliary energy for pumps) – same applies for the cooling
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Energy efficiency of cooling
Seasonal COSP (called also SEER, SCOP or SPF) should be estimated by energy simulation calculation. Seasonal COSP is a weighted average COSP for a year.
Manufactures give performance data at full load according to EN 14511-2:2007 and at part load according to prEN 14825:2008 (ESEER, the seasonal value SEER for Europe)
EER values include the compressor unit (effective power input definition of EN 14511-1:2007). The values do not include the condenser fans (despite of integral condenser in the liquid chilling package) and the distribution system, so the application seasonal ESEER value has to be recalculated for the distribution system used in the real building.
systemon distributi andplant auxiliary s,compressor allby usedenergy electrical Annual
system coolingby achievedenergy cooling Annual Seasonal COSP
An example of the manufactures performance data format and example EER-values (with Italic) for 600 kW air cooled liquid chilling package. Load Outdoor air temperature Energy efficiency ratio Operation time% °C kW/kW %100 35 EER1 = 2.73 3
75 30 EER2 = 3.67 33
50 25 EER3 = 4.21 41
25 20 EER4 = 4.52 23
ESEER = EER1 x 3% + EER2 x 33% + EER3 x 41% + EER4 x 23% = 4.09
Note: Constant leaving water temperature = 7°C
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Calculated example
Simulation example for the building with conventional cooling (COP=2.7):
Delivered cooling energy by plant is 42.8 kWh/(m2 a) consisting of:- 29.7 kWh/(m2 a) to chilled beams (with central water distribution system)
- and 13.1 kWh/(m2 a) to cooling coils of air handling units.
Electrical energy use of cooling system is 9.5 kWh/(m2 a), consisting of:- 8.6 kWh/(m2 a) electricity use of compressor unit
- 0.6 kWh/(m2 a) electricity use of condenser fans
- 0.3 electricity use of circulation pumps.
the application seasonal SEER is 42.8/9.5 = 4.5
Compressor cooling COP values for conventional and high temperature cooling systems at two condensing temperatures. Conventional condenser
(air-cooled, Tcond =40°C) Borehole condenser (ground water-cooled, Tcond =20°C)
Conventional cooling, 7°C (Tevap=2°C)
2.7 6.3
High temperature cooling, 17°C (Tevap=12°C)
4.0 15
REHVA Supporters Seminar, Brussels,10.12 2009, Jarek Kurnitski
Read also ThermCo article on high temperature room conditioning solutions: REHVA Journal, August 2009 1. Chilled beams
(water radiators for heating)
3. Floor cooling and heating (pipes in the slab)
2. Ceiling panels
Additional features (not included in basic cases): demand controlled ventilation night ventilation shorter chiller operation time / operative temperature control