i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

w w w . i i fi i r . o r g

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrefrig

Exergy and energy analysis of a ground-source

heat pump for domestic water heating under
simulated occupancy conditions5

Moonis R. Ally*, Jeffrey D. Munk, Van D. Baxter, Anthony C. Gehl

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA

article info abstract

Article history: This paper presents analysis of a 5.275 kW (1.5-ton) water-to-water ground source heat
Received 2 November 2012 pump (WW-GSHP) satisfying hot water needs in a 345 m2 research house operated under
Received in revised form simulated occupancy conditions. The hot water use protocol from the Building America
5 March 2013 Research Benchmark Definition claims to capture the living habits of the average American
Accepted 6 March 2013 household and its impact on energy consumption.
Available online 28 March 2013 Energy and exergy analyses provide insight on system efficiency and sources of irre-
versibility, the main cause of wasted energy. The WW-GSHP shared the ground loop with a
Keywords: 7.56 kW water to air ground source heat pump (WA-GSHP) to space condition the same
Exergy house. Understanding the performance of GSHPs is vital if the ground is to be used as a
Heat pump viable renewable energy resource.
Thermodynamics Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Renewable energy
Water heating
Ground-source
Geothermal

Analyse exergétique et énergétique d’une pompe à chaleur

sol-eau utilisée pour le chauffage d’eau sanitaire domestique
sous des conditions simulant l’occupation
Mots clés : exergie ; pompe à chaleur ; thermodynamique ; énergie renouvelable ; chauffage d’eau ; sol-eau ; géothermique

5
This manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy.
The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States
Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this
manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.
* Corresponding author. Energy and Transportation Sciences Div., Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA. Tel.: þ1 865 576
8003; fax: þ1 865 574 8884.
E-mail address: allymr@ornl.gov (M.R. Ally).
0140-7007/$ e see front matter Published by Elsevier Ltd.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2013.03.006
1418 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
Nomenclature
Quantities
ACH air changes per hour measured at differential
pressure of 50 Pa
COP coefficient of performance (dimensionless)
DOE United States Department of Energy
DHW domestic hot water
EWT entering water temperature (K)
GSHP ground source heat pump
GWP global warming potential
g gravitational acceleration (m s2)
h enthalpy (kJ kg1)
I_ rate of thermodynamic irreversibility (W)
LWT leaving water temperature (K)
m _ mass flow rate (kg s1)
P pressure (kPa)
Q_ thermal energy flow (W)
RSI R-value, a measure of thermal resistance
(m2 K W1)
RUS R-value, a measure of thermal resistance
(ft2  F h Btu1)
s entropy (kJ kg1 K1)
1. Introduction
A rigorous examination of domestic water heating using the
ground as a resource of renewable energy is examined in this
paper. Energy from the ground is freely available but its
economical exploitation is the subject of technical research
and development. In a preceding paper (Ally et al., 2012), the
authors discussed the use of a ground-source heat pump for
space conditioning. This paper complements that work by
focusing on using ground coupled heat pumps for water
heating connected to the same horizontal loop.
Although water heating loads are less than space condi-
tioning loads, reducing primary energy consumption is
imperative to addressing the energy, environmental, and
health concerns associated with the burning of fossil fuels. In
typical US residential applications, water heating loads are
30% of space conditioning loads, whereas in commercial
buildings, they are 26% (DOE, 2010). Buildings account for 40%
of the primary energy use in the United States (DOE, 2009), and
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from energy use in buildings
exceed those from the transportation and industrial sectors,
combined (IPCC, 2007). Approximately 40% of the European
Union’s energy consumption and carbon dioxide production
come from buildings (Baden et al., 2006). It is axiomatic that
reducing energy consumption in buildings is an opportunity
that should not be overemphasized.
In this research, the water-to-water ground-source heat
pump (WW-GSHP) shared the same ground loop with a water-
to-air ground-source heat pump (WA-GSHP) used for space
conditioning. The main advantage of WW-GSHPs is that the
earth provides a vast reserve of thermal energy at a relatively
season-wise constant temperature, enabling stable energy
T temperature (K)
U internal energy in control volume (kJ)
V velocity (m s1)
W _ rate of work (W)
WA-GSHP water-to-air ground source heat pump
WW-GSHP water-to-water ground source heat pump
%D percent deviation
h efficiency (dimensionless)
s_ rate of entropy generation (W K1)
Subscripts
b brine
Brine-HXbrine heat exchanger
comp. pertaining to the compressor
comp. meas. compressor quantity measured (actual)
CV control volume
EWT entering water temperature
i inlet location
e exit location or electrical energy
j thermal reservoir other than the dead state or
surroundings
o dead state or surroundings
map pertaining to the compressor map
Ref-Air HX refrigerant-to-air heat exchanger
supplies to meet energy demands. To reduce the cost of the
ground loop, a new approach was used in which the ground
loop was placed within the foundation and utility trenches
during the construction of the house. The total horizontal loop
length was 559 m (1834 ft) made of 1.9 cm (0.75 in.) high
density polyethylene (HDPE) tubing arranged in three parallel
circuits. The total conditioned space floor area of the house is
345 m2 (3714 ft2). Details of the house and the ground loop may
be found elsewhere (Miller et al., 2010; Ally et al., 2011; Ally et
al., 2012; Hughes and Im, 2012).
Recent research (Neksa et al., 1998; Cecchinato et al., 2005;
Nanxi et al., 2005; Stene, 2005; Hjerkinn, 2007; Stene and
Hjerkinn, 2008; Minetto, 2011) on water source heat pumps
for domestic hot water (DHW) involves various refrigerants
including a ternary mixture of R124/R142A/R600B (named
HTR01), carbon dioxide, R410A, R134a and propane. A seem-
ingly greater emphasis has been placed on carbon dioxide
relative to the other refrigerants presumably because of its
low global warming potential (GWP), low cost, ease of
handling, and ability to produce DHW up to 80  C, a necessary
requirement for certain markets. With CO2 as a refrigerant,
Fernandez et al. (2010) and Minetto (2011) state that water
stratification is “almost mandatory” to attain a high COP and
that the overall COP is much higher for heating a full tank of
cold water than it is for reheating (presumably the same vol-
ume) warm water, a characteristic of cycles whose high-side
pressure is above the critical pressure of the working fluid.
While recent research on heat pumps for domestic hot
water has addressed refrigerant issues, this paper is focused
on identifying the sources of systemic inefficiencies of the
different parts and components of the heat pump cycle. Field
data collected over an 11-month period (JanuaryeNovember
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
2010) at the research house serviced by a 5.275 kW (1.5-Ton)
WW-GSHP charged with 1.587 kg (56.0 oz. avoirdupois) R410A,
providing approximately 227 L day1 (60 gal day1) of hot water
at 49  C (120  F) is analyzed. The ground-loop antifreeze solu-
tion (“brine”) was a mixture of 20% (v/v) propylene glycol and
water maintained at approximately 275.8 kPa gauge (40 psi
gauge) pressure. Thermodynamic analysis is focused around
the refrigerant loop identified by the control volume (dashed
line) in Fig. 1 as it exchanges energy with the ground and with
the hot water tank via their respective heat exchangers.
2. Ground-loop and water use
The ground loop of the WW-GSHP consists of 1.9 cm (0.75 in.)
internal diameter high density polyethylene (HDPE) tubing
with a total length of 559 m (1834 ft.), arranged in three parallel
circuits (6 pipes) shared with the WA-GSHP equipment for
space conditioning (Hughes and Im, 2012). The installed
equipment is shown in Fig. 1. Note the small physical size of
the WW-GSHP compared to the hot water tank and the WA-
GSHP.
Water use schedules for the shower, clothes washer, and
dishwasher are shown in Table 1. Hot water use is approxi-
mately 227 L day1 (60 gal day1) with the water temperature in
the shower maintained close to 40.6  C (105  F). The dishwasher
averages 15.3 L (4.04 gal) of hot water per cycle, running four
cycles per week. The clothes washer averages 13.9 L (3.68 gal) of
hot water per cycle, running 6 cycles per week.
3. Equipment, sensors, data collection, and
analysis methodology
A 5.275 kW (1.5 ton) WW-GSHP rated at a COP of 3.1 based on a
source entering water temperature (EWT) of 0  C (32  F) and
load EWT of 37.8  C (100  F) provided hot water needs of the
house. The WW-GSHP was connected to a 303 L (80 gal)
seamless, blow-molded, polybutylene hot water tank, imper-
vious to rust and corrosion. The tank came with 4.5 kW upper
Fig. 1 e Equipment for water heating and for space
conditioning installed in the basement of the 345 m2
(3714 ft2) house. The WW-GSHP and the WA-GSHP are both
connected to the same ground loop.
1419
and lower heating elements for backup energy needed in case
the WW-GSHP was inoperable due to an equipment fault. The
tank’s rated energy factor (EF) for conventional electric resis-
tance operation was 0.92.
A schematic of the equipment and the state points at which
measurements are recorded every 30 s and averaged over
15 min periods for subsequent analysis, is shown in Fig. 2. The
compressor discharge and suction pressures are measured by
pressure transducers with 0.25% full scale (FS) accuracy. Fluid
temperatures entering the heat pump (EWT) and leaving the
heat pump (LWT) from the ground loop and DHW tank were
measured using thermistors with conductive paste in appro-
priate temperature wells on the brine and hot water piping,
respectively. Refrigerant temperatures at the indicated state
points were measured with surface mounted thermistors
liberally coated with conductive paste, tightly attached to the
connecting lines with electrical tape and wrapped with three
rounds of insulated tape. The thermistors had a 15 s time
constant and a 0.2  C tolerance. The brine loop flow was
measured with a turbine flow meter having an accuracy of 2%
or better over the experienced range of flow. The DHW flow
through the unit was determined by measuring the pressure
drop of the water across the water-to-refrigerant HX (HX3 in
Fig. 1) with a differential pressure transducer having 0.25% FS
accuracy. Compressor, brine, and DHW pump power were
measured with instrumentation-grade W-W1h1 transducers,
with split-core current transformers (CTs) having a minimum
accuracy of 0.45% of reading plus 0.05% of FS. Pressure drops
in connecting lines were taken as 1e1.5% of the upstream
pressure, based on data supplied by the manufacturer.
A data logger was programmed to collect data every 30 s,
average the 30 s data collected over a 15 min period and save it
for further analysis. The data analysis procedure is based on
the assumption of quasi steady-state operation, which for
small heat pumps like the one studied herein is typically
reached within 5 min after the compressor switches on. Quasi
steady-state is earmarked by stable thermodynamic state
points within the control volume and at locations 9 and 10 for
water flows from and to the DHW tank via HX3. The time to
reach quasi steady-state conditions at locations 9 and 10 varied
from 1 to 4.5 min depending on the temperature of the water in
the tank at the start of the water flow to the heat pump via HX3.
When T9 was at its lowest value 30.3  C (86.5  F) (December) it
took 4 min of compressor run time before T10 reached its
quasi steady-state value of 48.3  C (119  F). Since compressor
run times for water heating were generally longer than 5 min,
the assumption of quasi steady-state is valid. The expansion
valve is assumed to be adiabatic. Thermodynamic properties at
the respective state points are calculated using Reference
Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport Properties Database
(REFPROP) (Lemmon et al., 2010) as a Microsoft Excel add-in
program in the data reduction and analysis spreadsheet. En-
ergy and Exergy balances and measures of performances are
tabulated for each month to provide a comprehensive set of
data on system performance.
The monthly COPs reported are the weighted average
values for the month based on the compressor run time. The
uncertainty of the COP values is estimated to be no greater
than 0.254. For the benefit of design engineers, exergy
analysis is used to identify sources of systemic inefficiencies.
1420 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0

Table 1 e Schedule and duration of water use under simulated occupancy conditions.a
Shower schedule Clothes washer schedule Dishwasher schedule

Start times Daily water use Start times Days Daily water use Start times Days Daily water use
(24 h basis) (24 h basis) (24 h basis)
Gallons Liters (L) Gallons Liters (L) Gallons Liters (L)

7:00:00 20 76 7:30:00 Th 3.68 13.9 19:30:00 Mon 4.04 15.3

8:30:00 5 19 17:15:00 Th 3.68 13.9 19:30:00 Tues 4.04 15.3
12:00:00 5 19 8:00:00 Tues/Wed 3.68/3.68 13.9/13.9 19:30:00 Wed 4.04 15.3
17:00:00 10 38 10:00:00 Tues/Wed 3.68/3.68 13.9/13.9 19:30:00 Th 4.04 15.3
21:00:00 20 76

a Shower used mixed hot and cold water at approximately 40.6  C (105  F); clothes washer and dishwasher used hot water at approximately
49  C (120  F).

There is one segment of the loop where data is slightly erro- around the refrigerant-to-DHW heat exchanger (HX3); or
neous but this does not materially alter the overall analysis using compressor maps.
and conclusions. Nevertheless, the authors consider mention The general energy balance equation applied between
of this error as being important to the discussions, analysis, various state points (Warke Jr., 1995) is given by:
and conclusions.
X X V2
 X V2

dE
Q_ o þ Q_ j þ W
_ þ h þ þ gz m_  h þ þ gz m_ ¼ CV
j in
2 out
2 dt
4. Mass and energy balances (2)

The general mass balance equation is given by:
X X
_
dm
¼ _ 
m _ ¼0
m (1)
dt e i
Applying Eqn. (1) to the brine (ground) loop between state
points 7 and 8 under steady state conditions yields the brine
mass flow rate, ðm _ b Þe ¼ ðm
_ b Þi ¼ m
_ b . Similarly, application of
Eqn. (1) between any two state points on the refrigerant loop,
under the assumption of quasi steady-state gives the refrig-
erant mass flow rate in the heat pump. Since there is no direct
measurement of the refrigerant mass flow rate in the system,
three different approaches were used to ascertain its value;
through mass and energy balances around the brine-to-
refrigerant heat exchanger (HX2); mass and energy balances
where Q_ o is the thermal energy exchanged with the sur-
roundings at To. The thermal energies represented by Q_ j are
energy exchanges with additional reservoirs at temperatures
T1,T2,T3.Tj; W _ is the rate of work (mechanical and/or elec-
trical) input; h, V2/g, gz represent enthalpy, kinetic, and po-
tential energy terms, respectively; and m _ is the mass flow rate
of refrigerant or of brine, as the case may be. The unsteady
term, dECV/dt representing the rate of accumulation of energy
within the control volume of interest is zero under the
assumption of quasi steady-state invoked in the analysis;
ECV ¼ U þ (1/2)V2 þ gz and U is the internal energy of the mass
within the control volume. Both, work ðWÞ _ and heat ðQ_ o ; Q_ j Þ
terms are defined as positive in Eqn. (2) (Warke Jr., 1995; Myers,
2007) for energy transfer into the CV.

Fig. 2 e Schematic of WW-GSHP with connections to the ground loop and the domestic hot water tank (DHW). The state
points where measurements are taken are numbered. Control volume demarcates the system of interest from the
surroundings.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0 1421

4.1. Mass and energy balances around HX2 and HX3 GSHP to the water tank. The compressor energy consumption
is highest in the winter (132.88 kWh) and lowest during the
Applying Eqns. (1) and (2) to the refrigerant side in HX2 be- summer (67.47 kWh). More heat is extracted from the ground
tween state points 5 and 6 and once again to the brine side during winter (314.12 kWh) than during summer (226.25 kWh)
between points 7 and 8 yields the refrigerant mass flow rate for water heating.
_ r;b based on mass and energy balances around
estimate, m The ratio of compressor energy, We,Compressor to the total
HX2. Thus, energy input, Ein varied from 0.216 (September) to the highest
value of 0.295 in February. Both pumps combined used a
_ b ðh7  h8 Þ
m
_ r;b ¼
m (3) maximum of 3.3% of the total monthly energy input (in
ðh6  h5 Þ
February). Although the brine and DHW pumps did not oper-
Similarly, applying Eqns. (1) and (2) to the refrigerant side ate near their optimum efficiency, these data suggest that
between state points 3 and 4 on the refrigerant loop, and once pump efficiency is unlikely to be a dominant factor in
again between points 9 and 10 on the DHW side yields the improving WW-GSHP performance, at least for the size range,
_ r;DHW based on the mass
refrigerant mass flow rate estimate, m climate, and use patterns prevalent in this study.
and energy balances around HX3. Thus, To improve performance, an investigation of the sources of
systemic inefficiencies is identified in the following section.
_ DHW ðh10  h9 Þ
m
_ r;DHW ¼
m (4)
ðh3  h4 Þ

The refrigerant mass flow rates from Eqns. (3) and (4) as well as 5. Exergy analysis
that obtained from the compressor map, m _ map are found to be
in good agreement as shown in Table 2. The percentage error The general entropy balance equation applied between
between m _ map and m _ r;DHW ð%D1 ¼ ðm _ r;DHW  m_ map Þ  100=m
_ map Þ various state points in Fig. 2 is:
is less than the percentage error between m _ map and m _
ð%D2 ¼ ðm_ r;b  m
_ map Þ  100=m _ map Þ because the relative errors in
X X Q_ o X Q_ j
s_ total ¼ _ s
m _ s
m ¼ 0 (7)
temperature measurement are larger when the temperature out in
To j
Tj
differences are small (as on the brine side) than they are for the
where s_ total is the sum of the entropy generation rates due to
DHW side where the temperature differences are larger.
internal irreversibilities and those due to irreversible heat
Further analysis is based on the refrigerant mass flow rates
transfer between the particular control volume encompassing
obtained from the compressor map.
the state points, and the surroundings.
The irreversibility, or equivalently, the availability
4.2. Energy analysis and COP destruction, which are both equal measures of the loss op-
portunity of doing useful work for a control volume whose
The averaged monthly energy balances for the WW-GSHP are boundary is taken at the temperature To (or Tj) of the sur-
presented in Table 3. The total energy input is given by: roundings, is given by:

Ein ¼ We;Brine Pump þ We;Comp: þ We;DHW Pump þ We;Aux: þ We;Controls I_ ¼ To s_ or; I_ ¼ Tj s_ (8)
þ Q0;ground
Eqns. (1), (2), (7) and (8), when applied to the control volumes
(5)
encompassing the particular initial and final states, yield the
The total energy output is given by: necessary mass, energy, and entropy balances and quantifies
the extent of irreversibility or availability destruction. The
Eout ¼ QDHW þ Q0;Comp: þ losses (6) sum of all the availability destructions constitutes the sys-
The percent difference between energy input and output, (% temic inefficiency of the closed refrigerant cycle.
D ¼ (Ein  jEoutj)100/Ein) is less than 4%, demonstrating good-
ness of data. Also note that the energy input (Ein) is greater 5.1. Compressor
than the absolute value of the energy output (jEoutj), with the
difference attributed to energy losses. The water heating COP Extending the control volume of the compressor to the sur-
(Table 3), defined as the ratio of the energy delivered to the roundings and noting that no heat reservoirs other than the
water tank via HX3 to the total electrical energy used by the surrounding atmosphere are in contact with this control vol-
heat pump, shows improvement from January to July as the ume essentially implies that (Q_ j ¼ 0 but Q_ o s0). This control
EWT from the brine (ground) loop gradually increases. In volume includes the initial and final state points 1 and 2,
August, there was an equipment malfunction and hence the respectively. Applying Eqns. (1), (2), (7) and (8) to the control
resistance heater in the water tank was relied on for water volume encompassing these two state points gives:
heating until the problem was rectified. Except in November
Q_ o ¼ m _e
_ map ðh2  h1 Þ  W (9)
when only 0.155 kWh resistance heat was used when the
WW-GSHP was replaced with the next generation unit, the
Q_ o
remaining months (excluding August during equipment _ map ðs2  s1 Þ 
s_ ¼ m (10)
malfunction), required no resistance heat. The tank resistance To
heaters are turned on only during a “lockout” fault at the WW-
GSHP, otherwise all the necessary heat is supplied by the WW- I_ ¼ sT
_ o (11)
 1422
Table 2 e Energy transfer and irreversibility rates calculated from averaged monthly measured thermodynamic properties at the given state points for the WW-GSHP.
Compressor

Discharge (final state:(2)) Suction (initial state: (1)) Q_ o W_e m_ map m_ r;DHW %D1 _ r;b
m %D2 s_ I_ (W) To Run
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (K) time (h)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Jan 80.0 3189.5 328.69 1.07326 2.2 714.3 282.91 1.05594 400.7 1350.7 0.020753 0.020685 0.33% 0.01984 4.39% 1.723 507 294.20 98.383
Feb 79.1 2957.7 327.39 1.06942 0.4 617.7 282.18 1.05870 433.2 1315.5 0.019517 0.019335 0.93% 0.01831 6.19% 1.684 495 294.10 86.950
Mar 78.1 3003.2 325.31 1.06222 2.2 654.6 283.02 1.05689 465.8 1336.3 0.020581 0.020185 1.92% 0.01933 6.09% 1.695 499 294.19 91.938
Apr 75.9 3147.8 319.73 1.04251 9.2 819.0 285.76 1.04757 552.5 1415.0 0.025387 0.024476 3.59% 0.02353 7.31% 1.751 516 294.31 63.033

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
May 76.3 3248.8 318.66 1.03710 15.6 952.5 289.30 1.04727 650.9 1499.5 0.028911 0.027870 3.60% 0.02729 5.60% 1.914 564 295.04 58.204
Jun 78.6 3286.8 321.31 1.04387 22.6 1053.4 294.67 1.05696 698.6 1526.9 0.031088 0.030083 3.23% 0.02971 4.43% 1.954 575 296.18 50.600
Jul 80.8 3342.2 323.41 1.04819 26.9 1086.5 298.66 1.06779 755.5 1529.7 0.031279 0.030167 3.55% 0.02959 5.41% 1.935 570 296.78 44.104
Aug 83.2 3385.6 328.78 1.06675 29.4 1076.9 302.36 1.08420 689.3 1468.3 0.029487 0.029329 0.53% 0.02797 5.15% 1.810 533 296.85 57.846
Sept 78.5 3314.5 321.30 1.04424 27.0 1137.3 298.12 1.06351 768.8 1518.8 0.032351 0.032469 0.36% 0.03078 4.84% 1.969 580 296.83 56.183
Oct 76.5 3354.8 318.46 1.03607 22.4 1120.5 293.69 1.05104 726.7 1525.4 0.032253 0.032195 0.18% 0.03059 5.16% 1.971 580 296.40 62.171
Nov 74.3 3238.2 316.87 1.03373 16.1 999.4 289.30 1.04499 652.4 1473.2 0.029772 0.029523 0.84% 0.02783 6.54% 1.883 554 294.37 64.883

Compressor discharge line to HX3

Final state point: (3) Initial state point: (2) Q_ o a W_e m_ map _ r;DHW
m %D1 m_ r;b %D2 Rectified s_ Rectified I_ To
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (W) (K)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Jan 80.5 2956.8 329.32 1.07521 80.0 3189.5 328.69 1.07326 13.0 0.0 0.020753 0.020685 0.33% 0.01984 4.39% 0.04044 11.90 294.20
Feb 80.3 2951.2 329.11 1.07452 79.1 2957.7 327.39 1.06942 33.7 0.0 0.019517 0.019335 0.93% 0.01831 6.19% 0.09964 29.30 294.10
Mar 79.4 2997.7 327.21 1.06780 78.1 3003.2 325.31 1.06222 39.2 0.0 0.020581 0.020185 1.92% 0.01933 6.09% 0.11472 33.75 294.19
Apr 77.5 3143.9 322.22 1.04977 75.9 3147.8 319.73 1.04251 63.0 0.0 0.025387 0.024476 3.59% 0.02353 7.31% 0.18428 54.24 294.31
May 78.2 3240.3 321.49 1.04534 76.3 3248.8 318.66 1.03710 81.8 0.0 0.028911 0.027870 3.60% 0.02729 5.60% 0.23803 70.23 295.04
Jun 80.6 3280.8 324.30 1.05253 78.6 3286.8 321.31 1.04387 93.0 0.0 0.031088 0.030083 3.23% 0.02971 4.43% 0.26897 79.67 296.18
Jul 83.0 3333.6 326.65 1.05751 80.8 3342.2 323.41 1.04819 101.5 0.0 0.031279 0.030167 3.55% 0.02959 5.41% 0.29148 86.51 296.78
Aug 85.6 3189.2 332.15 1.07639 83.2 3385.6 328.78 1.06675 99.2 0.0 0.029487 0.029329 0.53% 0.02797 5.15% 0.28419 84.36 296.85
Sept 81.3 3252.6 325.40 1.05606 78.5 3314.5 321.30 1.04424 132.5 0.0 0.032351 0.032469 0.36% 0.03078 4.84% 0.38216 113.44 296.83
Oct 79.2 3258.7 322.46 1.04766 76.5 3354.8 318.46 1.03607 129.2 0.0 0.032253 0.032195 0.18% 0.03059 5.16% 0.37363 110.74 296.40
Nov 76.7 3170.1 320.48 1.04425 74.3 3238.2 316.87 1.03373 107.5 0.0 0.029772 0.029523 0.84% 0.02783 6.54% 0.31309 92.16 294.37

Refrigerant-DHW heat exchanger (HX3)

Final state point: (4) Initial state point: (3) Q_ o W_e m_ map _ r;DHW
m %D1 _ r;b
m %D2 s_ I_ To
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (W) (K)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Jan 42.1 2936.1 128.28 0.45812 80.5 2956.8 329.32 1.07521 4172.1 0.0 0.020753 0.020685 0.33% 0.01984 4.39% 0.324 103 317.72
Feb 42.3 2930.5 128.69 0.45948 80.3 2951.2 329.11 1.07452 3911.7 0.0 0.019517 0.019335 0.93% 0.01831 6.19% 0.303 96 317.85
Mar 42.8 2976.7 129.60 0.46225 79.4 2997.7 327.21 1.06780 4067.1 0.0 0.020581 0.020185 1.92% 0.01933 6.09% 0.313 100 318.35
Apr 44.3 3121.9 132.30 0.47032 77.5 3143.9 322.22 1.04977 4821.6 0.0 0.025387 0.024476 3.59% 0.02353 7.31% 0.370 118 319.70
May 45.1 3217.6 133.80 0.47475 78.2 3240.3 321.49 1.04534 5426.3 0.0 0.028911 0.027870 3.60% 0.02729 5.60% 0.435 139 320.48
Jun 44.7 3257.8 132.90 0.47173 80.6 3280.8 324.30 1.05253 5950.2 0.0 0.031088 0.030083 3.23% 0.02971 4.43% 0.511 164 320.48
Jul 45.5 3310.3 134.38 0.47630 83.0 3333.6 326.65 1.05751 6014.2 0.0 0.031279 0.030167 3.55% 0.02959 5.41% 0.537 173 321.32
Aug 45.3 3166.9 134.16 0.47611 85.6 3189.2 332.15 1.07639 5838.1 0.0 0.029487 0.029329 0.53% 0.02797 5.15% 0.526 169 320.30
Sept 44.8 3229.8 132.96 0.47219 81.3 3252.6 325.40 1.05606 6225.5 0.0 0.032351 0.032469 0.36% 0.03078 4.84% 0.528 169 320.61
Oct 44.9 3235.9 133.16 0.47276 79.2 3258.7 322.46 1.04766 6105.7 0.0 0.032253 0.032195 0.18% 0.03059 5.16% 0.497 159 320.69
Nov 44.2 3147.9 132.05 0.46952 76.7 3170.1 320.48 1.04425 5609.7 0.0 0.029772 0.029523 0.84% 0.02783 6.54% 0.426 136 319.87

Expansion valve and connecting lines

Final state: (5) Initial state: (4) Q_ o W_e m_ map m_ r;DHW %D1 m_ r;b %D2 s_ I_ To
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (W) (K)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Jan 1.5 662.6 128.28 0.48602 42.1 2936.1 128.28 0.45812 0.0 0.0 0.020753 0.020685 0.33% 0.01984 4.39% 0.579 170 294.20

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
Feb 3.2 621.6 128.69 0.48942 42.3 2930.5 128.69 0.45948 0.0 0.0 0.019517 0.019335 0.93% 0.01831 6.19% 0.584 172 294.10
Mar 1.7 659.0 129.60 0.49110 42.8 2976.7 129.60 0.46225 0.0 0.0 0.020581 0.020185 1.92% 0.01933 6.09% 0.593 175 294.19
Apr 4.6 825.4 132.30 0.49444 44.3 3121.9 132.30 0.47032 0.0 0.0 0.025387 0.024476 3.59% 0.02353 7.31% 0.612 180 294.31
May 9.0 958.5 133.80 0.49565 45.1 3217.6 133.80 0.47475 0.0 0.0 0.028911 0.027870 3.60% 0.02729 5.60% 0.604 178 295.04
Jun 12.2 1061.0 132.90 0.48979 44.7 3257.8 132.90 0.47173 0.0 0.0 0.031088 0.030083 3.23% 0.02971 4.43% 0.561 166 296.18
Jul 13.1 1093.5 134.38 0.49422 45.5 3310.3 134.38 0.47630 0.0 0.0 0.031279 0.030167 3.55% 0.02959 5.41% 0.560 166 296.78
Aug 11.7 1046.7 134.16 0.49486 45.3 3166.9 134.16 0.47611 0.0 0.0 0.029487 0.029329 0.53% 0.02797 5.15% 0.553 164 296.85
Sept 14.0 1122.2 132.96 0.48871 44.8 3229.8 132.96 0.47219 0.0 0.0 0.032351 0.032469 0.36% 0.03078 4.84% 0.534 159 296.83
Oct 13.1 1091.5 133.16 0.49008 44.9 3235.9 133.16 0.47276 0.0 0.0 0.032253 0.032195 0.18% 0.03059 5.16% 0.558 165 296.40
Nov 9.8 982.5 132.05 0.48890 44.2 3147.9 132.05 0.46952 0.0 0.0 0.029772 0.029523 0.84% 0.02783 6.54% 0.576 170 294.37

Refrigerant-brine heat exchanger (HX2)

Final state point: (6) Initial state point: (5) Q_ o W_e m_ map _ r;DHW
m %D1 _ r;b
m %D2 s_ I_ To
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (W) (K)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Jan 1.5 657.9 282.13 1.05301 1.5 662.6 128.28 0.48602 3192.8 0.0 0.020753 0.020685 0.33% 0.01984 4.39% 0.191 53 275.81
Feb 0.5 617.3 281.17 1.05491 3.2 621.6 128.69 0.48942 2976.0 0.0 0.019517 0.019335 0.93% 0.01831 6.19% 0.178 49 274.06
Mar 1.4 654.4 282.09 1.05342 1.7 659.0 129.60 0.49110 3138.3 0.0 0.020581 0.020185 1.92% 0.01933 6.09% 0.181 50 275.50
Apr 8.7 819.6 285.18 1.04541 4.6 825.4 132.30 0.49444 3881.2 0.0 0.025387 0.024476 3.59% 0.02353 7.31% 0.227 64 282.05
May 15.2 951.8 288.86 1.04563 9.0 958.5 133.80 0.49565 4482.9 0.0 0.028911 0.027870 3.60% 0.02729 5.60% 0.319 92 287.72
Jun 22.3 1053.6 294.32 1.05571 12.2 1061.0 132.90 0.48979 5018.2 0.0 0.031088 0.030083 3.23% 0.02971 4.43% 0.497 146 293.53
Jul 26.7 1085.8 298.39 1.06680 13.1 1093.5 134.38 0.49422 5130.0 0.0 0.031279 0.030167 3.55% 0.02959 5.41% 0.608 180 296.51
Aug 29.2 1039.4 302.13 1.08334 11.7 1046.7 134.16 0.49486 4953.0 0.0 0.029487 0.029329 0.53% 0.02797 5.15% 0.735 219 298.08
Sept 26.8 1114.4 297.91 1.06275 14.0 1122.2 132.96 0.48871 5336.4 0.0 0.032351 0.032469 0.36% 0.03078 4.84% 0.601 179 296.97
Oct 22.2 1083.9 293.38 1.04988 13.1 1091.5 133.16 0.49008 5167.6 0.0 0.032253 0.032195 0.18% 0.03059 5.16% 0.454 133 293.59
Nov 15.8 975.6 288.90 1.04354 9.8 982.5 132.05 0.48890 4669.7 0.0 0.029772 0.029523 0.84% 0.02783 6.54% 0.320 92 288.38

Refrigerant-brine heat exchanger to compressor suction

Final state point: (1) Initial state point: (6) Q_ o W_e m_ map _ r;DHW
m %D1 m_ r;b %D2 s_ I_ To
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (W) (K)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Jan 2.2 714.3 282.91 1.05594 1.5 657.9 282.13 1.05301 16.2 0.0 0.020753 0.020685 0.33% 0.01984 4.39% 0.006 1.65 294.20
Feb 0.4 617.7 282.18 1.05870 0.5 617.3 281.17 1.05491 19.7 0.0 0.019517 0.019335 0.93% 0.01831 6.19% 0.007 2.01 294.10
1.92% 6.09%

1423
Mar 2.2 654.6 283.02 1.05689 1.4 654.4 282.09 1.05342 19.2 0.0 0.020581 0.020185 0.01933 0.006 1.86 294.19

(continued on next page)

 1424
Table 2 e (continued )
Refrigerant-brine heat exchanger to compressor suction

Final state point: (1) Initial state point: (6) Q_ o W_e m_ map m_ r;DHW %D1 _ r;b
m %D2 s_ I_ To
(W) (W) (kg s1) (kg s1) (kg s1) (W K1) (W) (K)
T P h s T P h s
( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) ( C) (kPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1)

Apr 9.2 819.0 285.76 1.04757 8.7 819.6 285.18 1.04541 14.8 0.0 0.025387 0.024476 3.59% 0.02353 7.31% 0.004 1.28 294.31
May 15.6 952.5 289.30 1.04727 15.2 951.8 288.86 1.04563 12.9 0.0 0.028911 0.027870 3.60% 0.02729 5.60% 0.003 1.02 295.04
Jun 22.6 1053.4 294.67 1.05696 22.3 1053.6 294.32 1.05571 10.7 0.0 0.031088 0.030083 3.23% 0.02971 4.43% 0.003 0.82 296.18
Jul 26.9 1086.5 298.66 1.06779 26.7 1085.8 298.39 1.06680 8.5 0.0 0.031279 0.030167 3.55% 0.02959 5.41% 0.002 0.72 296.78

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
Aug 29.4 1076.9 302.36 1.08420 29.2 1039.4 302.13 1.08334 6.9 0.0 0.029487 0.029329 0.53% 0.02797 5.15% 0.002 0.63 296.85
Sept 27.0 1137.3 298.12 1.06351 26.8 1114.4 297.91 1.06275 6.6 0.0 0.032351 0.032469 0.36% 0.03078 4.84% 0.003 0.77 296.83
Oct 22.4 1120.5 293.69 1.05104 22.2 1083.9 293.38 1.04988 10.2 0.0 0.032253 0.032195 0.18% 0.03059 5.16% 0.003 0.86 296.40
Nov 16.1 999.4 289.30 1.04499 15.8 975.6 288.90 1.04354 11.7 0.0 0.029772 0.029523 0.84% 0.02783 6.54% 0.003 0.96 294.37

a Q_ o should be zero. Positive values reflect errors in temperature measurement. The rectified entropy production and irreversibility are calculated assuming adiabatic conditions. See text for
explanations.

Table 3 e Monthly energy balances and coefficient of performance of the WW-GSHP.

Yr. 2010 We,Brine Pump We,Compressor We,DHW Pump We,Aux We,Controls Total Qo,ground QDHW Qo,Comp. Total Total %D ¼ 100 LWT EWT COP
(kWh) (kWh) (kWh) (kWh) (kWh) electrical (kWh) (kWh) (kWh) energy energy out [(Ein  jEoutj)/Ein] (K) (K)
energy in (Ein) (Eout) (kWh)
in (kWh) (kWh)

Jan 12.20 132.88 2.899 0 1.294 149.27 314.12 410.43 36.31 463.39 446.74 3.59% 273.94 277.68 2.75
Feb 10.19 114.38 2.5 0 1.942 129.01 258.77 340.10 37.66 387.78 377.76 2.58% 272.23 275.89 2.64
Mar 10.95 122.85 2.637 0 1.856 138.30 288.53 373.88 43.01 426.83 416.89 2.33% 273.83 277.16 2.70
Apr 7.64 89.19 1.811 0 1.235 99.88 244.65 303.90 34.53 344.53 338.43 1.77% 280.40 283.71 3.04
May 6.96 87.28 1.738 0 1.261 97.23 260.92 315.81 36.87 358.16 352.67 1.53% 285.73 289.71 3.25
Jun 5.77 77.26 1.522 0 1.016 85.57 253.92 301.06 33.99 339.49 335.05 1.31% 290.69 296.37 3.52
Jul 4.59 67.47 1.308 0 0.996 74.36 226.25 265.23 31.80 300.62 297.02 1.19% 291.83 301.20 3.57
Aug 5.86 84.94 2.861 10.184 1.214 105.05 286.51 337.68 37.65 391.57 375.34 4.14% 292.12 304.04 3.21
Sept 5.94 85.33 2.865 0 1.248 95.38 299.81 349.74 41.51 395.20 391.25 1.00% 291.92 302.02 3.67
Oct 7.34 94.83 3.2 0 1.319 106.69 321.27 379.57 43.21 427.97 422.77 1.21% 290.92 296.25 3.56
Nov 7.97 95.59 3.282 0.155 1.144 107.98 302.99 363.95 41.13 411.12 405.08 1.47% 286.36 290.40 3.37
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
The compressor energy transfer and irreversibility rates
between the discharge (final state 2) and suction (initial state
1) ports, and the compressor run times are shown in Table 2.
The compressor irreversibility remains fairly constant
throughout the months, but the compressor heat rejection
rates to the surrounding varies from a minimum of 400.7 W in
January to a maximum of 768.8 W in September. Since
compressor heat is rejected to conditioned space, it is a benefit
during the winter, but a disadvantage during the summer,
especially since more heat is rejected to conditioned space in
summer than in winter. The ratio, I= _ W
_ e remains fairly con-
stant, just below 0.4 throughout the year, whereas the ratio,
Q_ o =W
_ e is low during the winter and increases slightly during
the hot summer months (JulyeSeptember) as shown in Fig. 3.
During these hot summer months, the EWT from the ground
loop is the highest for the year as shown in Fig. 3 where the
ratio EWT/EWTmax. nears 1.0 in September, the month of
highest EWT (perhaps an artifact of the same ground loop
used for space conditioning, as well). If heat rejected by the
compressor Q_ o can be reduced during summer months, it
would reduce the cooling load. One way might be to increase
the size of the ground loop, but the total compressor heat
rejected to the conditioned space, given by the product of Q_ o
and the compressor run time, is of the order of 40e45 kWh per
month, and not sufficient to warrant the cost and possibly
lower COPs due to lower brine EWTs on account of loop
extension.
5.2. Compressor discharge line to HX3
The control volume for the compressor discharge line (insu-
lated) to HX3 encompasses state points 2 and 3 in Fig. 2. The
general mass, energy and exergy balance equations (1), (2), (7)
and (8) for this line reduce to:
Q_ o þ m
_ map ðh2  h3 Þ ¼ 0 (12)
Q_ o
_ map ðs3  s2 Þ 
s_ ¼ m (13)
To
I_ ¼ sT
_ o (14)
Fig. 3 e Ratios of compressor irreversibility and
compressor heat rejection rates to its electrical
consumption.
1425
Since insulation is not perfect, some heat loss to the sur-
roundings is expected, yielding Q_ o slightly negative and
h2 z h3 with h2 slightly larger than h3. However, Table 2 shows
that although h2 is very close in value to h3, it is slightly lower
(rather than higher) in value than h3. Also, Q_ o is positive
indicating that heat flows from the surroundings to the con-
necting line which is not possible because the discharge line is
always hotter than the surroundings when the compressor is
operating. The problem here lies in a slightly incorrect tem-
perature measurement indicating that the temperature at
state point 3 is slightly higher than at state point 2 which again
cannot be the case. Although the differences in temperature
measurements are small, they remain within the manufac-
turer’s specified accuracy (0.2  C) for the thermistors used.
When differences in state properties are expectedly very
close, as in these cases, the errors in measurement tend to be
significant.
Since the connecting line is short, and the magnitude of the
energy transfers and entropy production rates are small
compared to the entire cycle, they do not materially impact
the overall analysis or conclusions. An attempt was made to
alleviate the impact of this minor error by assuming that the
line is adiabatic, thus implying that Q_ o is zero. Then, using
Eqns. (12)e(14), the values of entropy production and irre-
versibility were rectified on this basis, and these values are
reported in Table 2.
5.3. Refrigerant-DHW heat exchanger (HX3)
The control volume of the refrigerant line in HX3 encom-
passes the segment between initial and final state points 3 and
4, respectively. Applying the general mass, energy, and en-
tropy balances, Eqns. (1), (2) (7) and (8) gives the necessary
equations for this segment:
Q_ o þ m
_ map ðh3  h4 Þ ¼ 0 (15)
Q_ o
_ map ðs4  s3 Þ 
s_ ¼ m (16)
1
ðT9 þ T10 Þ
2
1
I_ ¼ sT
_ o; To ¼ ðT9 þ T10 Þ (17)
2
where Q_ o is <0 because heat is transferred from the refrig-
erant to the DHW tank. The entropy generation, irreversibility
and heat transferred to make hot water are tabulated in Table
2. The values for T9 and T10 are given in Table 4.
5.4. Expansion valves and connecting lines
The control volume for the expansion valve and connecting
lines encompass state points 4 and 5. The expansion valve is
assumed to be adiabatic. The general mass, energy and en-
tropy balance equations applied to this segment yield:
Q_ o ¼ m
_ map ðh5  h4 Þ; Q_ o ¼ 0 ðadiabaticÞ (18)
_ map ðs5  s4 Þ
s_ ¼ m (19)
I_ ¼ sT
_ o (20)
1426 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0

Table 4 e Monthly compressor run times and Q_ o ¼ m

_ map ðh1  h6 Þ (24)
temperatures required to calculate the monthly
irreversibility and the energy and entropy balances Q_ o
around HX2 and HX3. _ map ðs1  s6 Þ 
s_ ¼ m (25)
To
T9 (K) T10 (K) LWT (K) EWT (K) Comp. run
time (h)
I_ ¼ sT
_ o (26)
Jan 313.6 321.9 273.9 277.7 98.383
For this segment, the thermal exchange with the sur-
Feb 313.9 321.8 272.2 275.9 86.950
Mar 314.2 322.5 273.8 277.2 91.938
roundings, Q_ o is small, of the order of 10 W on average per
Apr 314.9 324.5 280.4 283.7 63.033 month and the rate of entropy generation, s_ is also small, of
May 315.2 325.7 285.7 289.7 58.204 the order of 103 W K1 on average resulting in a total monthly
Jun 314.7 326.2 290.7 296.4 50.600 irreversibility of the order of 1e2 W. The compressor
Jul 315.5 327.1 291.8 301.2 44.104 discharge to DHW heat exchanger (HX3) line segment dis-
Aug 316.5 324.1 292.1 304.0 57.846
cussed above should also have had similar values of Q_ o , s_ and
Sept 316.6 324.6 291.9 302.0 56.183 _ if the temperature measurement were as accurate as they
I,
Oct 316.8 324.6 290.9 296.3 62.171
Nov 316.3 323.5 286.4 290.4 64.883 were for this line.

As shown in Table 2, valve irreversibility is high because the

6. Entropy production and irreversibility
refrigerant pressure drop across the valve produces no useful
analysis
work.

The sources of inefficiencies as measured by entropy gener-

5.5. Refrigerant-Brine HX2
The control volume of the refrigerant to brine heat exchanger
(HX2) is on the refrigerant line encompassing initial and final
state points 5 and 6, respectively. The general mass, energy
and entropy balances Eqns. (1), (2), (7) and (8) applied to this
control volume yield:
Q_ o ¼ m
_ map ðh6  h5 Þ
Q_ o
_ map ðs6  s5 Þ 
s_ ¼ m
1
ðTEWT þ TLWT Þ
2
1
I_ ¼ sT
_ o; To ¼ ðTEWT þ TLWT Þ
2
where Q_ o is positive because heat is transferred from the
ground to the refrigerant. The rates of entropy generation,
irreversibility and heat transfer are tabulated in Table 2. To is
the average of the EWT and LWT where, EWT ¼ T7 and
LWT ¼ T8. The values for EWT and for LWT are shown in Table
4. The highest and lowest rates of energy transfers with the
ground occur in September (5.336 kW) and in February
(2.976 kW), respectively. The irreversibility rate is highest
during summer (JulyeSept) and least during winter (JaneMar),
with summer time irreversibility about four times greater than
in winter. With highest heat uptake from the ground during the
cooling season and high irreversibility, there appears to be an
opportunity to improve the heat exchanger design.
5.6. Refrigerant-brine heat exchanger (HX2) to
compressor suction line
The control volume for the refrigerant line from HX2 to the
compressor suction line (insulated) encompasses initial and
final state points 6 and 1, respectively, in Fig. 2. The general
mass, energy, and exergy balance equations (1), (2), (7) and (8)
for this line reduce to:
ation and irreversibility in the refrigeration loop are quantified
and summarized in Table 5. For any given month, the main
sources of systemic inefficiency, listed in order of decreasing
significance, are the compressor, the expansion valve, the
domestic hot water heat exchanger (HX3), the ground loop
heat exchanger (HX2) and the connecting lines. The magni-
tude of entropy and irreversibility rates between state points
2 / 3 should have been similar to those for state points 6 / 1,
(21)
were it not for the errors in temperature measurement already
discussed in detail, above (see, compressor discharge line to
HX3). Notwithstanding this error, estimates of the total
(22)
monthly irreversibility rates I_ are tabulated in the last column
of Table 5. The main source of irreversibility is the
compressor, varying slightly from a high of 580 W in October
(23) to its lowest value of 495 W in February.
The total irreversibility representing the actual amount of
lost work is the product of the irreversibility rate and the
compressor run time, tabulated in Table 6. Although irre-
_ are lowest during winter than in summer,
versibility rates, I,
the total lost work ðI_  tComp: Þ is highest during the winter
months and lowest during the summer months because of
higher compressor run times in winter than in summer.
Longer compressor run times in winter as compared to
summer is understandable because both the supply water
temperatures as well as the EWT are lower in winter and the
compressor needs to run longer to provide the necessary hot
water at 49  C. However, higher irreversibility rates I, _ in
summer shown in Table 6 appears prima facie, counterintuitive
because higher summer EWTs result in higher COPs as
distinctly shown in Table 3. So why is irreversibility higher in
summer when the WW-GSHP COP is also high? The clue in
resolving this apparent contradiction lies in the values of the
Carnot efficiency (Table 7) which is highest in summer and
lowest in winter as should be expected because the difference
between summer time EWTs and the hot water set point
temperature is smaller than they are in winter. Although the
WW-GSHP COP is higher in summer than it is in winter due to
higher EWTs, respectively, the COP relative to an ideal Carnot
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0 1427

Table 5 e Sources and rates of entropy production and irreversibility for state points in the refrigeration closed cycle.
Compressor Compressor DHW (HX3) Expansion valve & Refrig.-brine Ref.-brine HX to Total
discharge connecting lines HX (HX2) compressor suction
to DHW (HX3)
State points/ [1 / 2] s_ [2 / 3] s_ [3 / 4] s_ [4 / 5] s_ [5 / 6] s_ [6 / 1] s_ (W K1) s_ (W K1)
(W K1) 1
(W K ) 1
(W K ) 1
(W K ) 1
(W K )

Jan 1.7233 0.0404 0.3244 0.5788 0.1907 0.0056 2.8632

Feb 1.6841 0.0996 0.3026 0.5839 0.1777 0.0068 2.8547
Mar 1.6950 0.1147 0.3126 0.5934 0.1812 0.0063 2.9032
Apr 1.7510 0.1843 0.3704 0.6118 0.2269 0.0044 3.1488
May 1.9143 0.2380 0.4351 0.6038 0.3194 0.0035 3.5142
Jun 1.9537 0.2690 0.5106 0.5610 0.4968 0.0028 3.7938
Jul 1.9346 0.2915 0.5371 0.5603 0.6083 0.0024 3.9341
Aug 1.8096 0.2842 0.5263 0.5526 0.7350 0.0021 3.9098
Sept 1.9685 0.3822 0.5283 0.5341 0.6011 0.0026 4.0169
Oct 1.9710 0.3736 0.4966 0.5580 0.4538 0.0029 3.8558
Nov 1.8832 0.3131 0.4263 0.5764 0.3198 0.0033 3.5220

State points/ [1 / 2] [2 / 3] [3 / 4] [4 / 5] [5 / 6] [6 / 1] I_ (W)

I_ (W) I_ (W) I_ (W) I_ (W) I_ (W) I_ (W)

Jan 507 12 103 170 53 1.65 846

Feb 495 29 96 172 49 2.01 843
Mar 499 34 100 175 50 1.86 859
Apr 516 54 118 180 64 1.28 934
May 564 70 139 178 92 1.02 1044
Jun 575 80 164 166 146 0.82 1131
Jul 570 87 173 166 180 0.72 1176
Aug 533 84 169 164 219 0.63 1170
Sept 580 113 169 159 179 0.77 1200
Oct 580 111 159 165 133 0.86 1150
Nov 554 92 136 170 92 0.96 1046

machine is the poorest in summer than in winter as given by
the parameter, h (Table 7). This poorer performance is re-
flected in the irreversibility rates given in Table 6 e higher
irreversibility in summer than in winter.
The sum of the rate of work input of an ideal compressor
(Carnot engine power consumption) plus the rate of lost work
due to irreversibility within the control volume of the
compressor must equal the rate of electrical work consumed
by the actual compressor. The Carnot engine power is calcu-
lated on the basis of a two temperature (2-T) Carnot engine
operating between the brine to refrigerant heat exchanger
(HX2) and the refrigerant to DHW heat exchanger (HX3). Since
a 2-T Carnot engine is being considered and the temperatures
in both HX2 and HX3 vary, the average of the EWT and LWT is
taken as the temperature at which heat is extracted from the
ground, and the average of temperatures T9 and T10 to which
heat is rejected in HX3 to generate hot water. If the irrevers-
ibilities are calculated correctly, then Eq. (27) must be satisfied
within reasonable experimental error:
W _ Carnot þ s_ Total To ¼ W
_ Comp: ¼ W _ Carnot þ I_Total (27)
_ Carnot is calculated as follows:
where W

Table 6 e Monthly total irreversibility, or lost work, given _

_ Comp:
by I3t _ Carnot ¼ Q Brine HX2
W (28)
COPCarnot
Yr. 2010 Comp. run I_ (W) I_  ðtComp: Þ
time, (kWh) The Carnot COP is calculated in the usual manner:
tComp. (h)
ðT9 þ T10 Þ=2
COPCarnot ¼   (29)
Jan 98.38 846.5 83.3 ðT9 þ T10 Þ ðLWT þ EWTÞ

Feb 86.95 843.2 73.3 2 2
Mar 91.94 858.7 78.9
Apr 63.03 933.6 58.8 If the irreversibilities calculated between the various state
May 58.20 1044.4 60.8 points are correct, then there should be good agreement,
Jun 50.60 1131.4 57.2 within experimental error, between the actual (measured)
Jul 44.10 1176.1 51.9 compressor power consumption, W _ Comp: meas: and that calcu-
Aug 57.85 1169.5 67.7 lated using Eq. (27). The goodness in agreement is given by the
Sept 56.18 1200.3 67.4 _ Comp:  W _ Comp: meas: Þ=
relative percent difference %D ¼ ½ðW
Oct 62.17 1149.8 71.5
_ _
WComp:   100. The Carnot work, WCarnot is the minimum work
Nov 64.88 1045.9 67.9
required by the compressor whereas, W _ Comp: meas: is the actual
1428 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0

Table 7 e Validity of irreversibility (lost work) calculations.

s_ Total I_Total Q_ Brine HX2 COPCarnot _ Carnot
W _ Carnot þ I_Total
W _ Comp:meas:
W _ Carnot =W
h¼W _ Comp: meas: %D
(W K1) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W)

Jan 2.863 833 3192.8 7.581 421.2 1254.6 1350.7 0.312 7.66
Feb 2.855 810 2976.0 7.259 410.0 1219.5 1315.5 0.312 7.87
Mar 2.903 820 3138.3 7.428 422.5 1242.0 1336.3 0.316 7.59
Apr 3.149 871 3881.2 8.492 457.1 1327.7 1415.0 0.323 6.58
May 3.514 963 4482.9 9.783 458.2 1420.9 1499.5 0.306 5.53
Jun 3.794 1038 5018.2 11.891 422.0 1460.4 1526.9 0.276 4.55
Jul 3.934 1075 5130.0 12.954 396.0 1470.7 1529.7 0.259 4.02
Aug 3.910 1070 4953.0 14.411 343.7 1414.1 1468.3 0.234 3.84
Sept 4.017 1068 5336.4 13.562 393.5 1461.3 1518.8 0.259 3.93
Oct 3.856 1021 5167.6 11.832 436.7 1457.4 1525.4 0.286 4.66
Nov 3.522 938 4669.7 10.157 459.8 1398.2 1473.2 0.312 5.37

work consumed by the compressor. The compressor efficiency
relative to the Carnot work is determined by h ¼ ½W _ Carnot =
W_ Comp: meas: .
Monthly data in Table 7 displays the agreement between
measured compressor power and that computed from Eq. (27),
validating that the irreversibility calculations are within
acceptable experimental errors. The averaged compressor
efficiency is 29% (2.94%) of an ideal Carnot reverse engine
operating between the same temperatures, and remains
rather consistent over the 11-month period.
7. Discussion
The entire hot water demand specified by the Building
America Benchmark Definition (Hendron and Engebrecht,
2010) which attempts to capture the living habits of the
average American (United States) household and how they
impact energy consumption was met with a 5.275 kW (1.5-ton)
WW-GSHP in DOE climate region 4 (mixed-humid). The daily
hot water needs are approximately 227 L day1 (60 gal day1)
at a temperature of 49  C (120  F). The WW-GSHP serviced a
303 L (80 gal) capacity hot water tank with two 4.5 kW heating
elements for backup.
The highest averaged monthly COP achieved was 3.67 in
September with an EWT of 28.9  C. The lowest COP of 2.64 was
in February with an EWT of 2.74  C. The COPs are calculated on
the basis of total energy input because that is what the con-
sumer ultimately pays for in utility bills. Although the rate of
energy extracted from the ground is higher in the summer
than in the winter, the least amount of energy (226 kWh) was
extracted from the ground in July and the most energy
(314 kWh) extracted in January to make hot water because of
two reasons: (a) the incoming city supply water temperature is
higher during the summer and therefore requires less energy
to heat up to 49  C than in the winter and, (b) the compressor
run times are less in summer than in the winter.
The energy balance equation was verified within 2.01%
(0.01%) on average. The largest discrepancy (4.14%) in the
energy balance occurred in August during equipment down-
time. Generally, the energy balances showed higher discrep-
ancies during winter months, January, February and March of
3.59%, 2.58% and 2.33%, respectively due to the larger errors in
the smaller temperature differences between the EWT and the
LWT.
The ground is unequivocally a useful source of renewable
energy for water heating e providing 68e76% of the total water
heating energy in January and in September, respectively.
The heat rejected by the compressor within the condi-
tioned space is a benefit during the heating season, but a
penalty during the cooling season. The monthly compressor
heat rejection was found to be between 32 kWh and 43 kWh
(see Table 3) with negligible net benefit or loss to conditioned
space.
Although 88e91% (11-month average) of the total electrical
energy input is consumed by the compressor, it represents
only about 22e29% of the total energy input of the WW-GHSP
for water heating; (w2e3% of total energy input is for pumps
and controls) e the balance is extracted from the ground. This
technology enables judicious use of the ground as a renewable
energy resource.
The WW-GSHP operates at approximately 0.26e0.31 of the
efficiency of a 2-T Carnot heat pump (Table 7), which was
surprisingly larger than expected. This level of performance
remained fairly consistent from January to November. Exergy
analysis shows the distribution of inefficiencies within the
vapor compression cycle. The greatest source of systemic in-
efficiency from the standpoint of the Second Law is the
compressor. Although the rate of heat transfer from the
ground to the brine is lower in winter than in the summer,
more heat is extracted from the ground during winter
(314 kWh) than in summer (226 kWh) because of the lower
temperature of the cold water supply which requires more
heat to reach the desired temperature. Compressor energy
consumption was highest in January (132.9 kWh) and lowest
in July (67.47 kWh) because of lower COP due to lower EWT
and a greater temperature difference between supply and set
point water temperatures in winter than in summer. Since
total lost work is highest in winter than it is in summer, the
consumer pays more for systemic inefficiency during winter
than in summer.
8. Conclusions
A 5.275 kW (1.5-ton) WW-GSHP is shown to supply 227 L day1
(60 gal day1) of hot water at 49  C (120  F) meeting the protocol
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0
for hot water use based on the Building America Research
Benchmark Definition which aims to capture the living habits
of the average American household. The coefficient of per-
formance of this heat pump varied from a low value of 2.64 in
February when the entering water temperature from the
ground loop was 2.74  C, to a high value of 3.67 in September
when the entering water temperature was 28.87  C. Reason-
ably high efficiencies may be obtained even from a shallow
horizontal ground loop using 20% (v/v) polypropyleneewater
mixtures. The maximum efficiency of the WW-GSHP was 32%
of the Carnot efficiency (Table 7). Depending on the season,
between 33% and 47% of the total electrical energy input to the
compressor is rejected as heat to the surroundings (Table 3).
The compressor heat rejected to the conditioned space is ad-
vantageous in winter but disadvantageous during summer.
The measurements indicated that the quantity of heat
extracted from the ground during the summer is almost twice
that in the winter, reflective of the higher summer entering
water temperatures. The main sources of systemic in-
efficiency, listed in order of decreasing significance, are the
compressor, the expansion valve, the domestic hot water heat
exchanger (HX3), the ground loop heat exchanger (HX2) and
the connecting lines.
Although the irreversibility rate, I_ (W) is lowest in the
winter and highest during the summer, the total irreversibility
or lost work, I_  tComp (kWh) is higher in winter than in sum-
mer because of the longer compressor run times in the former
versus the latter season (see Table 6).
Approximately 68e76% of the total energy input for water
heating comes from the ground, estimated by the ratio,
Q_ o;ground =Ein readily calculated from Table 3. The electrical en-
ergy input to the compressor is about 22e29% of the total energy
input and is 88e91% of the total electrical energy input, whereas
the electrical energy consumption of the two pumps and the
control system account for less than 3% of the total energy input
and less than 10% of the total electrical energy input.
Since more than two-third (68e76%) of the energy needed
to produce domestic hot water can be extracted from the
ground, this technology enables practical use of ground
thermal energy as a renewable energy resource.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dr. Brian Fricke, Dr. Bo Shen,
and Mr. Vishaldeep Sharma for reviewing this paper and
suggesting changes. The authors also appreciate support by
the U.S. Department of Energy’s Buildings Technology pro-
gram that provided funding for this project.
references
Ally, M.R., Munk, J.D., Baxter, V.D., 2011. Field test of high
efficiency residential buildings with ground-source and air-
source heat pump systems. In: 10th IEA Heat Pump
Conference, May 16e19, 2011, Tokyo, Japan.
1429
Ally, M.R., Munk, J.D., Baxter, V.D., Gehl, A.C., 2012. Exergy
analysis and operational efficiency of a horizontal ground
source heat pump system operated in a low-energy test house
under simulated occupancy conditions. Int. J. Refrigeration 35
(4), 1092e1103.
Baden, S.P., Fairey, P., Waide, P., de T’serclaes, P., Laustsen, J.,
August 2006. Hurdling financial barriers to low energy
buildings: experiences from the USA and Europe on financial
incentives and monetizing building energy savings in private
investment decisions. In: Proc. of 2006 ACEEE Summer Study
on Energy Efficiency in Buildings. American Council for an
Energy Efficient Economy, Washington, D.C.. Publication No.
FSEC-PF-396-06. http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/publications/pdf/
FSEC-PF-396-06.pdf
Cecchinato, L., Corradi, M., Fornasieri, E., Zamboni, L., 2005.
Carbon dioxide as refrigerant for tap water heat pumps: a
comparison with the traditional solution. Int. J. Refrigeration
28 (8), 1250e1258.
U.S. DOE, 2009. Buildings Energy Data Book, Table1.1. US
Department of Energy, Buildings Technology Program, Office
of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Washington, D.C..
http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/docs/xls_pdf/1.1.3.pdf.
http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/docs/xls_pdf/1.1.9.pdf.
U.S. DOE, October 2010. Multi-year Program Plan-building
Regulatory Programs. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Washington, D.C..
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/
corporate/regulatory_programs_mypp.pdf
Fernandez, N., Hwang, Y., Radermacher, R., 2010. Comparison of
CO2 heat pump water heater performance with baseline cycle
and two high COP cycles. Int. J. Refrigeration 33 (8), 635e644.
Hendron, R., Engebrecht, C., January 2010. Building America
Research Benchmark Definition. National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. Report No. NREL/TP-550-47246.
Hjerkinn, T., 2007. Analysis of heat pump water heater systems
for low-energy block of flats. Doctoral dissertation, Master
thesis at the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology (NTNU), Dept. of Energy and Process
Engineering, EPT-M-2007-24.
Hughes, P., Im, P., January 2012. Foundation Heat Exchanger Final
Report: Demonstration, Measured Performance, and Validated
Model and Design Tool. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ORNL/
TM-2012/27.
IPCC, 2007. Summary for policymakers. In: Metz, B., Davidson, O.R.,
Bosch, P.R., Dave, R., Meyer, L.A. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007:
Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/
assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-spm.pdf.
Lemmon, E.W., Huber, M.L., McLinden, M.O., 2010. NIST Standard
Reference Database 23: Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and
Transport Properties-REFPROP. Version 9.0. National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Standard Reference Data
Program, Gaithersburg.
Miller, W.A., Kosny, J., Shrestha, S., Kohler, C., 2010.
Demonstration of four different residential envelopes.
American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE)
Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Asilomar
Conference Center in Pacific Grove, CA, August, 2010.
Minetto, S., 2011. Theoretical and experimental analysis of a CO2
heat pump for domestic hot water. Int. J. Refrigeration 34 (3),
742e751.
Myers, G.E., 2007. Engineering Thermodynamics, second ed. AMCHT
Publication, Madison, Wisconsin, ISBN 978-0-9666065-2-2.
Nanxi, L., Shi, L., Lizhong, H., Mingshan, Z., 2005. Moderately high
temperature water source heat-pumps using a near-
azeotropic refrigerant mixture. Appl. Energy 80 (4), 435e447.
1430 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 3 6 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 4 1 7 e1 4 3 0

Neksa, P., Rekstad, H., Zakeri, G.R., Schiefloe, P.A., 1998. CO2-
heat pump water heater: characteristics, system design
and experimental results. Int. J. Refrigeration 21 (3),
172e179.
Stene, J., 2005. Residential CO2 heat pump system for combined
space heating and hot water heating. Int. J. Refrigeration 28 (8),
1259e1265.
Stene, J., Hjerkinn, T., 2008. High-efficiency Heat Pump Water
Heater System for Apartment Buildings of Passive House
Standard. Passivhus NORDEN 2008, Trondheim, April 2e3, 2008.
http://www.annex32.net/pdf/articles/STENE_CO2HPWH_
PassiveH_paper.pdf.
Warke Jr., K., 1995. Advanced Thermodynamics for Engineers.
McGraw-Hill, New York, ISBN 0-07-068292-5.