Testing of combined heating systems for small houses: Improved procedures for whole system test methods : Deliverable 2.3

Dynamic system test methods for heating systems were developed and applied by the institutes SERC and SP from Sweden, INES from France and SPF from Switzerland already before the MacSheep project started. These test methods followed the same principle: a complete heating system – including heat generators, storage, control etc., is installed on the test rig; the test rig software and hardware simulates and emulates the heat load for space heating and domestic hot water of a single family house, while the unit under test has to act autonomously to cover the heat demand during a representative test cycle. Within the work package 2 of the MacSheep project these similar – but different – test methods were harmonized and improved. The work undertaken includes:  • Harmonization of the physical boundaries of the unit under test. • Harmonization of the boundary conditions of climate and load. • Definition of an approach to reach identical space heat load in combination with an autonomous control of the space heat distribution by the unit under test. • Derivation and validation of new six day and a twelve day test profiles for direct extrapolation of test results.   The new harmonized test method combines the advantages of the different methods that existed before the MacSheep project. The new method is a benchmark test, which means that the load for space heating and domestic hot water preparation will be identical for all tested systems, and that the result is representative for the performance of the system over a whole year. Thus, no modelling and simulation of the tested system is needed in order to obtain the benchmark results for a yearly cycle. The method is thus also applicable to products for which simulation models are not available yet. Some of the advantages of the new whole system test method and performance rating compared to the testing and energy rating of single components are:  • Interaction between the different components of a heating system, e.g. storage, solar collector circuit, heat pump, control, etc. are included and evaluated in this test. • Dynamic effects are included and influence the result just as they influence the annual performance in the field. • Heat losses are influencing the results in a more realistic way, since they are evaluated under "real installed" and representative part-load conditions rather than under single component steady state conditions.   The described method is also suited for the development process of new systems, where it replaces time-consuming and costly field testing with the advantage of a higher accuracy of the measured data (compared to the typically used measurement equipment in field tests) and identical, thus comparable boundary conditions. Thus, the method can be used for system optimization in the test bench under realistic operative conditions, i.e. under relevant operating environment in the lab.   This report describes the physical boundaries of the tested systems, as well as the test procedures and the requirements for both the unit under test and the test facility. The new six day and twelve day test profiles are also described as are the validation results.

Techno-economic analysis of three HVAC retrofitting options

Accounting for around 40% of the total final energy consumption, the building stock is an important area of focus on the way to reaching the energy goals set for the European Union. The relatively small share of new buildings makes renovation of existing buildings possibly the most feasible way of improving the overall energy performance of the building stock. This of course involves improvements on the climate shell, for example by additional insulation or change of window glazing, but also installation of new heating systems, to increase the energy efficiency and to fit the new heat load after renovation. In the choice of systems for heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), it is important to consider their performance for space heating as well as for domestic hot water (DHW), especially for a renovated house where the DHW share of the total heating consumption is larger. The present study treats the retrofitting of a generic single family house, which was defined as a reference building in a European energy renovation project. Three HVAC retrofitting options were compared from a techno-economic point of view: A) Air-to-water heat pump (AWHP) and mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR), B) Exhaust air heat pump (EAHP) with low-temperature ventilation radiators, and C) Gas boiler and ventilation with MVHR. The systems were simulated for houses with two levels of heating demand and four different locations: Stockholm, Gdansk, Stuttgart and London. They were then evaluated by means of life cycle cost (LCC) and primary energy consumption. Dynamic simulations were done in TRNSYS 17. In most cases, system C with gas boiler and MVHR was found to be the cheapest retrofitting option from a life cycle perspective. The advantage over the heat pump systems was particularly clear for a house in Germany, due to the large discrepancy between national prices of natural gas and electricity. In Sweden, where the price difference is much smaller, the heat pump systems had almost as low or even lower life cycle costs than the gas boiler system. Considering the limited availability of natural gas in Sweden, systems A and B would be the better options. From a primary energy point of view system A was the best option throughout, while system B often had the highest primary energy consumption. The limited capacity of the EAHP forced it to use more auxiliary heating than the other systems did, which lowered its COP. The AWHP managed the DHW load better due to a higher capacity, but had a lower COP than the EAHP in space heating mode. Systems A and C were notably favoured by the air heat recovery, which significantly reduced the heating demand. It was also seen that the DHW share of the total heating consumption was, as expected, larger for the house with the lower space heating demand. This confirms the supposition that it is important to include DHW in the study of HVAC systems for retrofitting.

Load and Season Adapted Solar Collectors

In Sweden solar irradiation and space heating loads are unevenly distributed over the year. Domestic hot water loads may be nearly constant. Test results on solar collector performance are often reported as yearly output of a certain collector at fixed temperatures, e g 25, 50 and 75 C. These data are not suitable for dimensioning of solar systems, because the actual performance of the collector depends heavily on solar fraction and load distribution over the year.At higher latitudes it is difficult to attain high solar fractions for buildings, due to overheating in summer and small marginal output for added collector area. Solar collectors with internal reflectors offer possibilities to evade overheating problems and deliver more energy at seasons when the load is higher. There are methods for estimating the yearly angular irradiation distribution, but there is a lack of methods for describing the load and the storage in such a way as to enable optical design of season and load adapted collectors.This report describes two methods for estimation of solar system performance with relevance for season and load adaption. Results regarding attainable solar fractions as a function of collector features, load profiles, load levels and storage characteristics are reported. The first method uses monthly collector output data at fixed temperatures from the simulation program MINSUN for estimating solar fractions for different load profiles and load levels. The load level is defined as estimated yearly collector output at constant collector temperature divided be yearly load. This table may examplify the results:CollectorLoadLoadSolar Improvementtypeprofile levelfractionover flat plateFlat plateDHW 75 %59 %Load adaptedDHW 75 %66 %12 %Flat plateSpace heating 50 %22 %Load adaptedSpace heating 50 %28 %29 %The second method utilises simulations with one-hour timesteps for collectors connected to a simplified storage and a variable load. Collector output, optical and thermal losses, heat overproduction, load level and storage temperature are presented as functions of solar incidence angles. These data are suitable for optical design of load adapted solar collectors. Results for a Stockholm location indicate that a solar combisystem with a solar fraction around 30 % should have collectors that reduce heat production at solar heights above 30 degrees and have optimum efficiency for solar heights between 8 and 30 degrees.

ClimateWell TDC with District Heat

The PolySMART demonstration system SP1b has been modeled in TRNSYS and calibrated against monitored data. The system is an example of distributed cooling with centralized CHP, where the driving heat is delivered via the district heating network. The system pre-cools the cooling water for the head office of Borlänge municipality, for which the main cooling is supplied by a 200 kW compression chiller. The SP1b system thus provides pre-cooling. It consists of ClimateWell TDC with nominal capacity of 10 kW together with a dry cooler for recooling and heat exchangers in the cooling and driving circuits. The cooling system is only operated from 06:00 to 17:00 during working days, and the cooling season is generally from mid May to mid September. The nominal operating conditions of the main chiller are 12/15°C. The main aims of this simulation study were to: reduce the electricity consumption, and if possible to improve the thermal COP and capacity at the same time; and to study how the system would perform with different boundary conditions such as climate and load. The calibration of the system model was made in three stages: estimation of parameters based on manufacturer data and dimensions of the system; calibration of each circuit (pipes and heat exchangers) separately using steady state point; and finally calibration of the complete model in terms of thermal and electrical energy as well as running times, for a five day time series of data with one minute average data values. All the performance figures were with 3% of the measured values apart from the running time for the driving circuit that was 4% different. However, the performance figures for this base case system for the complete cooling season of mid-May to midSeptember were significantly better than those for the monitoring data. This was attributed to long periods when the monitored system was not in operation and due to a control parameter that hindered cold delivery at certain times.