Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Part load ratio characteristics and energy saving performance of

standing column well geothermal heat pump system assisted with
storage tank in an apartment
Da Young Lee a, 1, Byeong Mo Seo b, 1, Sung Hyup Hong a, Jong Min Choi c, Kwang Ho Lee d, *

a
Graduate School, Hanbat National University, San 16-1, Dukmyung-Dong, Yuseong-Gu, Daejeon, 305-719, Republic of Korea
b
College of Design, North Carolina State University, 50 Pullen Rd., Campus Box 7701, NC, 27695-7701, USA
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hanbat National University, San 16-1, Dukmyung-Dong, Yuseong-Gu, Daejeon, 305-719, Republic of Korea
d
Department of Architecture, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Sungbuk-ku, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A geothermal heat pump (GSHP) system has improved energy efficiency compared to conventional air-
Received 20 August 2018 source heat pumps due to a more stable underground temperatures through the year. Among various
Received in revised form types of GSHP systems, standing column well (SCW) system is a specialized type of open loop system,
25 January 2019
where water is drawn from the bottom of a deep rock well, passed through a heat pump, and returned to
Accepted 6 March 2019
the top of the well, during which it exchanges heat with the surrounding bedrock. In this research a SCW
Available online 11 March 2019
system integrated with heat storage tank was assessed through dynamic energy simulation technique
after comprehensive validation process of heat pump performance curves. For this purpose, the detailed
Keywords:
EnergyPlus
analysis on the operational characteristics of SCW heat pump and its energy performance enhancement
Standing column well due to the connection with heat storage tank was performed, such as variations of part load ratios (PLRs),
Storage tank COP and the corresponding energy requirements, compared to window air-conditioner and boiler based
Part load ratio conventional system. The results of this study showed that the SCW heat pump system connected with
COP heat storage tank showed an annual energy saving of approximately 62% and 14% compared to the
Cooling and heating efficiency conventional system and the SCW system without heat storage tank, respectively. This indicates that
Residential cluster homes energy efficiency can be significantly improved when SCW heat pump can be properly operated in
combination with heat storage tank in residential buildings.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Economics Institute, most of the fossil fuels used in buildings in

Today, the entire world is faced with environmental issues such
as global warming due to greenhouse gases and El Nin ~ o resulting
from the indiscriminate use of fossil fuels. Despite the severity of
the problems caused by fossil fuels, the IEA's ‘World Energy Outlook
2017’ predicted that the energy demand will increase by about 30%
compared to the current usage by 2040 [1]. Approximately 95.8% of
the total energy used in Korea is dependent upon imports and ac-
cording to the 2014 general energy report, about 35% of domestic
energy is consumed in buildings [2]. According to the Korea Energy
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kwhlee@korea.ac.kr (K.H. Lee).
1 18.3 GW in the next five years [4]. Such GSHP system can be
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Korea are consumed for heating, cooling and hot water in the
household and commercial sectors [31]. Thus, in order to lower the
dependency on fossil fuels, there are needs to reduce energy used
in such buildings [3]. Therefore, efforts have been made for the
development of technologies using renewable energy that could
improve the efficiency of cooling and heating heat source equip-
ment and replace fossil fuels supplied to heat source equipment in
order to cut down on fossil fuels consumed for cooling, heating and
hot water production. With the growth of such renewable energy
industries, it is forecasted that by 2040, renewable energy gener-
ation facilities will account for 46% of the entire world's generator
facilities. Among them, in the case of geothermal heat pump (GSHP)
system, 13.3 GW was supplied in 2016 and it is expected that dis-
tribution will grow from minimum of 14.8 GW to maximum of

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.029
0360-5442/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078
Nomenclature
GSHP Geothermal heat pump
COP Coefficient of performance
HVAC Heating, ventilating and air-conditioning
EIRFPLR Energy consumption change curve according to
part load ratio
EIRFT Energy consumption change curve according to
the entering cold/hot water and the entering heat
source fluid temperature
wb Wet-bulb temperature of air entering the cooling
coil
T_CW Heat pump entering chilled water temperature
SCW Standing column well
PLR Part load ratio
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-conditioning Engineers
CapFT Capacity curve change according to the entering
cold/hot water and the entering heat source fluid
temperature
edb Dry-bulb temperature of the air entering the air-
cooled condenser
T_GW Heat pump entering heat source fluid temperature
classified into open system (Open Loop System) and closed system
(Closed Loop System). Particularly in the case of standing column
well (SCW), which is an open system, subsurface water and surface
water are used directly, thereby improving efficiency, and its
installation area is smaller than other geothermal heat exchangers,
and thus it is applied in many places with small drilling areas like
cities. Furthermore, SCW uses geothermal by burying a geothermal
exchanger by drilling approximately 350 m into the ground and
bringing up subsurface water with a column well for heat exchange
with the heat pump and returning it underground. The initial in-
vestment cost of the SCW system is slightly higher than other
geothermal systems, but it is relatively less likely to break down
and its COP (Coefficient of Performance) is higher. Due to such
advantages, it is commonly used and in particular, because its
efficiency-to-area of land use being superior, it is widely used in
large buildings in urban areas with smaller drilling sites [5].
2. Literature review
Due to the imperative need to reduce the fossil fuel usage, the
proportion of the SCW GSHP system, among the geothermal heat
pump systems applied to buildings, is significantly increasing.
Related studies are actively performed, focusing on the thermal
conductivity efficiency of ground heat exchangers and performance
improvement. Vasile Minea determined the reliability of residential
SCW heat pumps without bleed operating in extreme cold climate
conditions, i.e. running in the heating mode continuously or
intermittently over indefinite periods of time. The results indicate
that SCWs are not appropriate for use with GSHPs in extreme cold
climates unless some groundwater bleed is employed [8]. In the
study performed by Nguyen et al., a coupled model of SCW that
integrates a three level bleed control and an off-loading sequence
to evaluate the Entering Water Temperature (EWT) was developed
by the means of COMSOL 4.2a with MATLAB. The results show that
this numerical model can successfully evaluate the EWT over time
and that both bleed and off-loading sequence played a key role in
maintaining the EWT within the heat pump’ operational range [10].
Eppner et al. presents a coupled thermo-hydro-geochemical model
1061
that allows for predicting reaction rate of calcite. Once applied to a
case study representative of a typical configuration, simulations
indicate that precipitation, strongly dependent on temperature,
mainly occurs at the inlet of the well in summer. Moreover, when
the well is not perfectly sealed, degassing may enhance precipita-
tion rate up to 33%. Finally, fracture clogging is avoided when a
constant bleed of 10% is applied [11]. In the study performed by
Song et al., a series of tests for bleeding feature have been carried
out by a sandbox experimental table, including designing bleeding
rate from 0 to 30% in SCW and forced external circulation standing
column well (FECSCW). The results of experimental research show
that in the heating mode bleeding can improve the outlet water
temperature (OWT) and heat absorption quantities of the thermal
well, especially the effect on improving the OWT of SCW. With the
bleeding rate increasing from 5% to 32.1%, the HAQ of FECSCW in-
creases only 7.4% [12]. In the study of Nguyen et al., a fully coupled
multi-physics model involving heat transfer and groundwater flow
within a SCW and its surrounding ground was modeled by means of
a thermal resistance and capacity network coupled to an analytical
solution. To increase the flexibility of the approach, a three-level
bleed control and an on-off sequence is included in the model, in
order to allow the simulation of the dynamics of a system opera-
tion. The results show that the model developed in this paper is
consistent with numerical reference solutions [14]. Al-Sarkhi et al.
investigated numerical simulation of the heat and fluid flows for
SCW and porous medium around the borehole of the GSHP. One-
dimensional parametric study for the performance of the SCW
has been performed numerically using a finite difference method.
The heating mode (cold seasons) study was simulated. The bleed
ratio and the far away temperature increase the outlet water
temperature from the SCW going back to the heat pump. Increasing
porosity and the Nusselt and Reynolds numbers decrease the outlet
water temperature [15]. Cho et al. performed a feasibility assess-
ment of a SCW system using a deep geothermal well, based on a
real-scale experiment in Korea. The results showed that the tem-
perature of the heat source increased up to 42.04
C in the borehole
after the heating experiment, which is about 30
C higher than that
of normal shallow geothermal wells. Furthermore, the COP of the
heat pump during 3 months of operation was 5.8, but the system
COP was only 3.6 due to the relatively high electric consumption of
the pump [16].
In addition, regarding the applications of SCW system in small-
scale residential and commercial buildings, Yang et al. investigated
the characteristics of underground water as heating and cooling
source of the standing column well system that is applied in a small
building in accordance with operation methods during heating and
cooling. For this research, the thermocouples were installed at 10
spots in the well, and the data on temperature of underground
water were collected through the data logger all the year round.
And temperature changes of the underground water were analyzed
by shifting the operation methods of the SCW system [18]. In the
study performed by Deng et al., the performance of SCW systems
has been examined and compared to the performance of closed-
loop GSHP systems using simulation technique. Compared with
single U-tube vertical closed-loop systems, without bleed, borehole
depth reductions between 25% and 65% were possible. With bleed,
reductions in the range of 49%e78% can be achieved [19]. Nguyen
et al. developed a coupled model of a SCW to evaluate the influence
of groundwater flow in fractured aquifers. The work demonstrates
that the presence of a single fracture zone embedded within the
bedrock has a significant beneficial effect on the performance of
SCWs. Temperature differences between the homogeneous and
fractured aquifer were particularly important when the well was
operated at typical bleed ratios. Results from annual hourly simu-
lations indicate that a reduction of energy consumption of 8% was
1062 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

achieved when a highly conductive fracture zone was considered
[20].
Although a variety of research have been conducted on SCW
GSHP systems, most of them focus on the performance enhance-
ment of SCW itself optimal design, ground heat exchanger sizing
and material, bleeding control and heat source fluid control.
However, detailed analysis on SCW performance connected with
heat storage tank and energy performance of SCW applied in actual
buildings have not been investigated thus far. This is due to the fact
that the performance of the heat storage tank and SCW heat pump
system changes depending on a variety of factors such as the
ground temperature, heat pump leaving water temperature, cool-
ing and heating capacity, and the power consumption, and thus it is
difficult to accurately predict the performance of SCW heat pump
considering those dynamic operating parameters.
Therefore, the objectives of this study are to assess the energy
performance of SCW heat pump connected with heat storage tank,
considering those operational parameters. Performance curves of
SCW heat pump are developed based on the heating/cooling
measurement data from heat pump manufacturers, which consider
capacity and power consumption variations affected by entering
and leaving water temperatures and part load ratios. The accuracy
of those performance curves were comprehensively validated and
calibrated to reduce the error rate between simulated and
measured data. After implementing those validated performance
curves into the simulation model, SCW heat pump energy perfor-
mance integrated with heat storage tank was comparatively
analyzed in detail against the conventional HVAC system and SCW
heat pump without heat storage tank operation. Based on those
detailed analysis, the eventual purpose is to provide the guideline
to maximize the performance of SCW system installed in large-
scale residential buildings.
residential spaces are considered in this study. In case of HVAC
system, each household is equipped with window air-conditioner
for the cooling and six boilers are installed to handle the heating
load of the whole building with the sequential control. The repre-
sentative days selected for the analysis was July 11 and January 24,
which have the typical cooling and heating loads during summer
and winter, respectively. Table 1 shows the input conditions used in
this study. The internal heat gain and input schedule of the building
are based on ASHRAE Standard 90.2 as illustrated in Fig. 2 [23], and
the internal heat gain was set to people (32.0 m2/person), lighting
(3.9 W/m2), and electric equipment (5.4 W/m2). In addition, this
study used the weather data of Busan provided by the Korean Solar
Energy Society.
3.1.2. Radiant floor heating system
The simulated building applies radiant floor heating in accor-
dance with the characteristics of common residential buildings in
Korea. Radiant floor heating circulates fluids using a hot water pipe
embedded in the floor and delivers heat using surface radiation.
Furthermore, not only does it procure appropriate indoor temper-
ature, but also lowers the need for equipment to improve indoor air
quality as it has little impact on air quality such as indoor humidity.
In order to replicate radiant floor heating having such advantages,
ZoneHVAC:LowTemperatureRadiant:VariableFlow Object was
used. The low temperature radiant system can change the flow of
hot water in the system up to the maximum flow rate prescribed by
the user. Therefore, it is equipped with functions that can change
the flux according to the heating load in a state where the hot water
Table 1
Simulation condition.

Input elements
3. Methods and scope
Site/Weather location Busan (South Korea)

3.1. Simulation overview Cooling and heating set point Cooling PM 18:00~AM 07:00 26
C
AM 08:00~PM 17:00 28
C
Heating PM 18:00~AM 07:00 20
C
3.1.1. Description of the simulation model AM 08:00~PM 17:00 17
C
In this study, a 20-story residential cluster building in Busan city Analysis period Cooling April ~ September
was selected as the subject building. Fig. 1 shows the exterior view Heating November ~ March
and elevational section of the simulated building. Each floor is Representative day 11th July, 24th January
Residential area 512 m2
composed of one office zones and two residential zones. Only

(a) Exterior view (b) Elevational section

Fig. 1. Simulation model.

 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078
Occupancy
100%
90%
80%
70%
Fraction [%]
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6
Fig. 3. Variable flow low temperature radiant system controls [24].
temperature is fixed among the radiant heating systems offered by
EnergyPlus and that is why ZoneHVAC:LowTemperatureR-
adiant:VariableFlow Object was used in this study (see Fig. 3). Also,
while indoor temperature is turned on based on the low temper-
ature point of the throttling range, the radiant floor heating system
supplies 100% flow regardless of how far it is apart from the set-
point temperature. At this time, the hot water produced from the
boiler is supplied through the loop inlet node as exhibited in Fig. 4
and after supplying energy through the floor in each room, it exits
through the loop outlet node, while some of it is recirculated [24].
3.2. Simulation cases
In order to evaluate the quantitative energy performance of the
SCW GSHP system used for producing heating, cooling and do-
mestic hot water, this study replicated the following three systems
in simulation for analysis. Case 1 is the conventional system that
uses window air-conditioner for the cooling and uses hot water
from the boiler to the radiant floor heating for the heating. In the
case of the window air-conditioners, they were installed separately
in 38 residential units. Case 2 is the SCW geothermal heat pump
1063
Equipment Lighting
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour
Fig. 2. Internal heat gain schedule.
system that is not connected with a heat storage tank and Case 3 is
the SCW geothermal heat pump system that is operated together
with the heat storage tank. Furthermore, window air-conditioners
are installed separately in each unit and six boilers handle the
heating load of the entire building with the sequential control in
Case 1. In Case 2 and Case 3, six heat pumps are controlled
sequentially according to the heating and cooling load conditions.
Table 2 shows the major operating conditions of heat source de-
vices used in this study. Details on the major operating conditions
and features of each heat source device are summarized in Table 2
[29]. The capacity of window air-conditioner in Table 3 shows the
total capacity applied to all units.
3.2.1. Conventional HVAC system (Case_1)
In order to replicate the conventional HVAC system, window air-
conditioners were installed in each unit and for heating, six boilers
were applied and were controlled sequentially. To replicate the
window air-conditioner, Fan:OnOff, Coil:Cooling:DX:SingleSpeed
objects of EnergyPlus were used. Each object displays the fan and
cooling coils that make up the window air-conditioner and the
cooling load of the room was controlled based on air-cooled. For
heating, radiant floor heating explained in 3.1.3 was used and the
hot water needed for this was supplied through the heating coils of
the six boilers. The window air-conditioner and boiler are turned on
every hour to control the cooling and heating load generated every
hour and even when small load compared to capacity occurs, the
device turns on exhibiting low part load operation [25].
3.2.2. SCW heat pump system without heat storage tank (Csae_2)
The SCW system has the highest efficiency among GSHPs and it
draws subsurface water through the column well buried in the
ground for direct heat exchange with the heat pump and it releases
or absorbs heat depending on its use. Afterwards, the used sub-
surface water is returned to the SCW and the drawn subsurface
water maintains a constant temperature using the geothermal heat
[5]. Because of this, the SCW heat pump supplies cold and hot water
at a constant temperature to the air conditioning system and unlike
conventional systems that use outdoor air, it can conserve energy
needed for entering chilled and hot water temperature. Accord-
ingly, an FCU was installed through the EnergyPlus simulation and
1064 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

Heat
pump
Heating
or
Coil
Storage
tank

Fig. 4. Variable temperature low temperature radiant system component details [24].

Table 2 3.2.3. SCW heat pump system with heat storage tank (Case_3)
System operation condition and capacity. The activation method of the SCW geothermal heat pump
Cooling and heating system operation schedule From 00:00 Until 24:00 (All operated together with the heat storage tank can be explained as
days) follows. The heat storage tank-based SCW system circulates the
Storage tank temperature for cooling 7e12
C cold and hot water heat source fluid at a constant temperature
Storage tank temperature for heating 50e60
C produced by the six heat pumps to exchange with geothermal heat.
Chiller design COP 3.3 Then it uses sensible heat stored in the heat storage tank to supply
Boiler design efficiency 78.0%
cold and hot water to the FCU to control the indoor heating and
Storage tank capacity 600m3
Heat pump reference cooling capacity without 1380 kW (400RT) cooling load [29]. When cooling, once the cold-water temperature
storage tank supplied to the FCU reaches approximately 12
C, the heat pump is
Heat pump reference heating capacity without 1500 kW (430RT) turned on and the cold-water temperature discharged from the
storage tank
heat storage tank is lowered to 7
C and then the heat pump is
Heat pump reference cooling capacity with 960 kW (275RT)
storage tank
turned off. For heating, on the other hand, once the hot water
Heat pump reference heating capacity with 1000 kW (300RT) temperature discharged from the heat storage tank drops below
storage tank 50
C, the heat pump is activated to raise the hot water temperature
Heat pump reference cooling COP 4.9 to 60
C and then the heat pump is turned off. So for the heat
Heat pump reference heating COP 4.2
storage tank, cold water temperature was set at 7
C-12
C and the
hot water temperature was set to stay between 50
C and 60
C.
Accordingly, the heat pump is turned on intermittently only during
the cold and hot water supplied to the FCU is supplied from the heat a specific time and it goes in full load operation during most of the
pump [25]. Also, as mentioned above, six heat pumps are being time when it is turned on in order to store high quantities of sen-
controlled sequentially according to the load change for heating sible heat in the heat storage tank in a short period of time. To
and cooling. At this time, the heat pump without a heat storage recreate this, the heat storage tank objects of EnergyPlus such as
tank installed turns on every hour and it directly handles the load ThermalStorage:ChilledWater:Mixed and WaterHeater:Mixed Ob-
generated every hour, and it showed hourly energy consumption jects were used. Details on this are exhibited in a system diagram as
equivalent to the conventional system, Case_1. Hence, it displays shown in Fig. 5 [25].
low partial load operation as it is activated even at low loads like
the aforementioned system.

Table 3
Simulation cases.

Field Equipment List System

Cooling Heating(Radiant) Capacity (kW) Load Distribution Algorithm

Cooling Heating

Case_1 38 Window air-conditioners 6 Boilers 13.4 kW x 38 ¼ 509 kW 250.0 kW x 6 ¼ 1,500 kW Sequential

Case_2 6 Heat pumps 6 Heat pumps 230.0 kW x 6 ¼ 1380.0 kW 250.0 kW x 6 ¼ 1,500 kW Sequential
Case_3 6 Heat pumps 6 Heat pumps 160.0 kW x 6 ¼ 960.0 kW 166.7 kW x 6 ¼ 1000.0 kW Sequential
Heat storage tank Heat storage tank Storage tank (600m3)
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078 1065

Compressor

Storage Coil
tank
Fan : CAV fan Zone
Evaporator Condenser

Heat exchanger 6 Heat pump

Fig. 5. System modeling overview of SCW heat pump with thermal storage (Case_3).

3.3. Performance curve development
3.3.1. Overview of system performance curves
As explained above, the purpose of this study is to predict the
quantitative energy consumption of the conventional system
(Case_1), SCW GSHP without a heat storage tank (Case_2), and a
SCW GSHP with a heat storage tank (Case_3). For this, the heating
and cooling performance equation of the window air-conditioner,
boiler and SCW GSHP system must first be computed based on
the measured data of Company A in the USA and Company D in
Korea. At this time, the boiler has a fixed capacity regardless of the
operating conditions so it has constant heating capacities, but the
heating and cooling capacity of the SCW system becomes variable
depending on the entering temperatures of hot/chilled water and
condenser fluid. SCW systems can produce cold and hot water
through four-stage cooling/heating cycles of evaporation,
compression, condensation and expansion. In addition, the actual
electric energy consumption occurs from the compressor among
the components of the heat pump. Furthermore, energy consumed
in the compressor is affected by not only the load side cold and hot
water entering temperature and the heat source fluid entering
temperature, but also the PLR (part load ratio). Thus, with changes
of the total of three variables, energy consumed in the compressor
also changes in real time. Therefore, it is necessary to design the
heat pump model taking into consideration such variables to pro-
ceed with research through building energy simulations [29].
Accordingly, EnergyPlus requires the three performance curves
of EIRFPLR (energy consumption change curve according to part
load ratio), CapFT (capacity curve change according to the cold/hot
water and heat source fluid entering temperature), and EIRFT
(energy consumption change curve according to the cold/hot water
and heat source fluid entering temperature) to consider the heating
and cooling capacities affected by the three variables mentioned
above and for the change in power consumption [24]. In addition to
this, the mathematically expressed equations (1)e(7) were used to
replicate the heating and cooling capacities and change in
consumed power according to the three conditions explained
above for the performance curve. The performance curve of the
window air-conditioner is determined by the dry-bulb temperature
of outdoor air flowing in to the outdoor condenser and the wet-
bulb temperature of indoor air flowing in to the cooling coil of
the indoor unit. On the contrary, the SCW heat pump is affected by
subsurface water heat source temperature so the cold/hot water
entering temperature changes, thereby conserving energy con-
sumption at the compressor due to geothermal in comparison to
the existing air conditioning system. With regard to this, the co-
efficients of each performance curve entered in Equation (1) to
Equation (7) are expressed in detail in the following 3.3.2 and 3.3.3
[25,26,29].
Cooling Capacity Function of Temperature Curve (Window air-
conditioner)
Electric Input to Cooling Output Ratio Function of Temperature
Curve (Window air-conditioner)
Part load fraction correlation (function of part load ratio)
Boiler Efficiency Curve (Boiler)
Total Cooling Capacity Function of Temperature Curve (Heat
pump _ Cooling)
Energy Input Ratio function of Temperature Curve (Heat pump _
Cooling)
Energy Input Ratio function of Part Load Ratio Curve (Heat pump
_ Cooling)
Total Heating Capacity Function of Temperature Curve (Heat
pump _ Heating)
Energy Input Ratio function of Temperature Curve (Heat pump _
Heating)
Energy Input Ratio function of Part Load Ratio Curve (Heat pump
_ Heating)
Cooling Capacity Function of Temperature Performance Curve
(Window air-conditioner)
WindowACCapFTemp ¼ a þ bðwbÞ þ cðwbÞ2 þ dðedbÞ

2
þ e edbTcond;e þ f ðwbÞðedbÞ (1)
where, WindowACCapFTemp: Cooling Capacity factor, equal to 1 at
reference conditions.
ðwbÞ : Wet-bulb temperature of air entering the cooling coil,
C
1066 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

ðedbÞ : Dry-bulb temperature of the air entering the air-cooled Energy Input Ratio function of Part Load Ratio Curve (Heat
condenser,
C pump)
a  f : Performance curve coefficients
EIRFPLRCooling ¼ a þ bðPLRÞ þ cðPLRÞ2 þ dðPLRÞ3 (7)
Electric Input to Cooling Output Ratio Function of Temperature
Curve (Window air-conditioner) where,

WindowACEIRFTemp ¼ a þ bðwbÞ þ cðwbÞ2 þ dðedbÞ EIRFPLR ¼ Cooling energy input ratio correction factor (function
2 of part-load ratio)
þ eðedbÞ þ f ðwbÞðedbÞ (2) PLR ¼ Part-load ratio. %
a  d : Performance curve coefficients
where, WindowACEIRFTemp: Energy input to cooling output factor,
equal to 1 at reference conditions.

ðwbÞ : Wet-bulb temperature of air entering the cooling coil,
C
ðedbÞ : Dry-bulb temperature of the air entering the air-cooled
condenser,
C
a  f : Performance curve coefficients
Electric Input to Cooling Output Ratio Function of Part Load
Ratio Curve (Window air-conditioner)
WindowACPLFFPLR ¼ a þ bðPLRÞ þ cðPLRÞ2
where,
PLR ¼ Part-load ratio, %
a  c : Performance curve coefficients
Boiler Efficiency Curve Output (Boiler)
BoilerEfficiencyCurveOutput ¼ a þ bPLR þ cPLR2 þ dPLR3
where,
3.3.2. Conventional HVAC system (Case_1) performance curve
The coefficients used in the window air-conditioner and boiler
of the conventional systems were computed through a series of
processes using the catalog data drafted based on the measure-
ments of Company A in the USA. The coefficients computed for the
window air-conditioner are shown in Table 4 and the coefficient of
performance for the boiler is shown in Table 5. The coefficient of
performance for the window air-conditioner expresses the coeffi-
(3) cient computed for the cooling capacity ratio in the corresponding
temperature condition compared to the reference cooling capacity.
It is the coefficient of performance for the mean wet-bulb tem-
perature of indoor air brought in to the cooling coil (DX coil) and
the dry-bulb temperature of indoor air brought in to the outdoor
unit [30]. In addition, the boiler coefficient of performance was
applied to compute the boiler efficiency curve shown in Fig. 6. As
shown in Fig. 6, in the case of the boiler efficiency curve, the graph
shows that at a low PLR region of 0.0%e40.0%, efficiency rapidly
rises with the increase of PLR and when operating in a PLR region of
(4)
40.0% or more, the boiler efficiency rises softly from 70.0%.

PLR ¼ Boiler Part-load ratio, % 3.3.3. SCW heat pump system performance curve (Case_2 and
Case_3)
Total Cooling Capacity function of Temperature Curve (Heat For the SCW system without a heat storage tank and the SCW
pump) system operated together with a heat storage system, the same
coefficient of performance was used regardless of whether or not
CAPFTHP;Cooling ¼ a þ bðTCW Þ þ cðTCW Þ2 þ dðTGW Þ þ eðTGW Þ2 having a heat storage tank and the coefficient was computed based
þ f ðTCW ÞðTGW Þ on the TDB data provided by Company D in Korea mentioned
earlier. Accordingly, the performance curve coefficients used during
(5)
cooling and heating is as shown in Table 6. Fig. 7 is the COP applied
to the SCW heat pump cooling and Fig. 8 is the COP curve applied
where,

CapFTemp ¼ Cooling Capacity Factor, equal to 1 at reference Table 4

conditions Window air-conditioner performance curve coefficients.
TCW : Heat pump entering chilled water temperature,
C Coefficient Window air-conditioner Window air-conditioner
TGW : Heat pump entering heat source fluid temperature,
C entry Cooling Capacity Function Energy Input Ratio Function
a  f : Performance curve coefficients of Temperature of Temperature

a in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) 0.942587793 0.342414409

Energy Input Ratio function of Temperature Curve (Heat pump) b in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) 0.009543347 0.034885008
c in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) 0.000683770 0.00062370
d in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) 0.011042676 0.004977216
EIRFTempHP; Cooling ¼ a þ bðTCW Þ þ cðTCW Þ2 þ dðTGW Þ þ eðTGW Þ2
e in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) 0.000005249 0.000437951
þ f ðTCW ÞðTGW Þ f in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) 0.00000972 0.000728028

(6)
Table 5
where,
Boiler performance curve coefficients.

EIRFTemp ¼ Energy Input to cooling output factor, equal to 1 at Coefficient entry Values
reference conditions a in Eq. (4) 1.3021
TCW : Heat pump entering chilled water temperature,
C b in Eq. (4) 2.8237
TGW : Heat pump entering heat source fluid temperature,
C c in Eq. (4) 2.2013
d in Eq. (4) 0.3822
a  f : Performance curve coefficients
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078 1067

SCW heat pump cooling mode



COP



          
Part load ratio

Fig. 6. Boiler efficiency curve. Fig. 7. COP curve applied to SCW heat pump model for cooling.

for heating. First, the cooling COP shown in Fig. 7 has overall high
values, but in PLR regions under 40.0%, it drops rapidly. Also, its SCW heat pump heating mode

maximum values are found in the PLR region between 50.0% and
60.0% and then tends to drop gradually. 

3.4. Validation and calibration COP 


A series of compensations and verifications must be made to

procure reliability on the SCW heat pump cooling and heating ca-
pacity and energy consumption performance curves computed 
above. Therefore, this study aimed at verifying the performance 
curve based on the commonly used statistical method provided in

ASHRAE M&V Guideline 14, Cv(RMSE) (Coefficient of Variation of           
Root Mean Square Error). Regarding this, comparison and error Part load ratio
factors were verified based on the TDB data. Cv(RMSE) can be
mathematically expressed as shown in Equation (10) and lower Fig. 8. COP curve applied to SCW heat pump model for heating.
Cv(RMSE) value equates to higher reliability. Furthermore, ac-
cording to ASHRAE M&V Guideline 14, when Cv(RMSE) value is
Table 7
computed within the scope of Table 7, it is judged that the energy
Acceptable calibration tolerances [28].
simulation results are reliable [28].
This study used the following compensation and verification Calibration Type Index Acceptable Value

procedures. First, among the TDB data provided by Company D in Monthly MBE, Cv(RMSE) ± 5%, 15%
Korea, based on the variables needed for the cooling and heating Hourly MBE, Cv(RMSE) ±10%, 30%
capacity and consumed electricity performance curve mentioned
above, regression analysis was used to compute the performance
curve coefficients. Then, the building and system was replicated simulation for the performance curve of the SCW system computed
with the same conditions as that of measurements of the TDB data through the above procedures with that of the TDB data was found
to conduct EnergyPlus simulation to review the reliability of the to be less than 10%, thereby showing high reliability for the simu-
computed performance coefficients. Lastly, the computed simula- lation result values. Tables 8e10 show the four performance curves
tion result data and TDB data were compared according to the CV of the SCW system and the Cv (RMSE) data for final verification of
(RMSE) statistical method. The error rate of the results applied in

Table 6
SCW heat pump performance curve coefficients.

Coefficient entry SCW_Cooling SCW_Heating

Cooling Capacity Function Energy Input Ratio Function Heating Capacity Function Energy Input Ratio Function
of Temperature of Temperature of Temperature of Temperature

a in Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) 0.780772437 0.301954515 0.904910399 0.183987643

b in Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) 0.059844532 0.013352500 0.006968145 0.020165875
c in Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) 0.000009866 0.000000311 0.000000004 0.000085457
d in Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) 0.010123119 0.008725606 0.046700124 0.000257754
e in Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) 0.000000041 0.000671310 0.000096299 0.000965735
f in Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) 0.000479060 0.000728196 0.000009157 0.000096527
1068 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

Table 8 Table 10
Cooling performance calibration. Power input calibration.

CapFT Cv(RMSE) 5.400837652 EIRFT Cv(RMSE) 8.163694992 Cooling Cv(RMSE) (%) 8.07458963 Heating Cv(RMSE) (%) 8.330153314
(%) (%)
(TDB) (Simulation) (TDB) (Simulation)
CapFThp, CapFThp, Cooling EIRFThp, EIRFThp, Cooling
30.180 28.706 41.222 43.978
Cooling (TDB) (Simulation) Cooling (Simulation)
30.460 29.439 42.434 45.698
(TDB)
30.730 30.176 43.654 47.261
0.951 1.024 1.025 0.958 30.988 30.914 44.886 48.656
0.940 1.009 1.042 0.995 31.235 31.653 46.125 49.869
0.930 0.994 1.059 1.034 31.471 32.389 47.373 50.889
0.919 0.978 1.076 1.074 31.696 33.121 48.470 51.705
0.909 0.963 1.093 1.116 31.909 33.847 49.573 52.306
0.898 0.948 1.110 1.159 32.111 34.564 50.680 52.679
0.888 0.932 1.127 1.203 32.302 35.271 51.792 52.813
0.877 0.917 1.143 1.249 32.481 35.967 52.910 52.698
0.867 0.901 1.160 1.296 31.451 30.140 41.861 44.687
1.000 1.104 1.000 0.881 31.717 30.902 43.085 46.464
0.989 1.088 1.017 0.916 31.971 31.669 44.319 48.085
0.978 1.072 1.033 0.951 32.214 32.440 45.562 49.536
0.967 1.056 1.050 0.988 32.445 33.212 46.813 50.806
0.956 1.040 1.066 1.026 32.665 33.983 48.073 51.884
0.945 1.024 1.083 1.066 32.872 34.752 49.198 52.758
0.934 1.008 1.099 1.107 33.067 35.515 50.327 53.415
0.923 0.992 1.116 1.149 33.251 36.272 51.462 53.846
0.912 0.977 1.132 1.193
0.901 0.961 1.149 1.238
0.890 0.945 1.165 1.284
S ¼ Predicted energy consumption value by EnergyPlus
simulation
Table 9
M ¼ Measured value
Heating performance calibration. N Interval ¼ Number of measured value
APeriod ¼ Average during the measurement period
CapFT Cv(RMSE) 10.07458724 EIRFT Cv(RMSE) 8.450810121
(%) (%)

CapFThp, CapFThp, Heating EIRFThp, EIRFThp, Heating

4. Results analysis and discussions
Heating (Simulation) Heating (Simulation)
(TDB) (TDB) 4.1. Operational conditions and behavior characteristics
0.890 0.855 0.978 1.085
0.912 0.901 0.983 1.071 Figs. 9 and 10 are graphs that show SCW geothermal heat pump
0.934 0.946 0.987 1.055 on/off patterns of Case_2 and Case_3 during the representative days
0.956 0.991 0.991 1.037
for heating and cooling and the hot water temperature entering
0.978 1.035 0.996 1.017
1.000 1.080 1.000 0.995
heat pump, storage tank temperature and heat pump heating/
1.021 1.124 1.003 0.971 cooling rate. Four days were randomly selected during the heating
1.041 1.168 1.005 0.945 and cooling periods to conduct analyses. In Case_2, there was
1.062 1.212 1.008 0.917 similar operating patterns during the heating and cooling periods
1.082 1.256 1.010 0.888
and only the heating period was shown for the sake of readability of
1.103 1.300 1.013 0.856
0.886 0.848 0.997 1.112 the graph. Accordingly, it was operated for a total of 59 h during the
0.908 0.894 1.002 1.097 four representative days of heating for Case_2. Meanwhile, Case_3
0.930 0.939 1.006 1.081 showed intermittent operation patterns during the heating and
0.952 0.984 1.010 1.063
cooling periods and it was found that during the four representa-
0.974 1.028 1.015 1.043
0.996 1.073 1.019 1.021
tive days of cooling, it was operated for a total of 20 h, and was
1.016 1.117 1.022 0.997
1.037 1.161 1.024 0.971
1.058 1.205 1.027 0.943
*QV YCVGT VGORGTCVWTG *GCV RWOR JGCVKPI TCVG
*GCV
+HDW SXPS
RWOR
1RGTCVKPI
2SHUDWLQJ
1P
%QPFKVKQP
&RQGLWLRQ 1HH
electric consumption [25].  

 
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
]

P
Heat pump rate [W]

ðS  MÞInterval2
Water temperature [

 
RMSEPeriod ¼ (8)
N Interval  

 
P
 
Period M Interval
APeriod ¼ (9)
N Interval  

 
       
RMSE Period Hour
CvðRMSEPeriod Þ ¼  100 (10)
APeriod
where, Fig. 9. Heat pump heating rate and hot water temperature (Case_2).
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078 1069

%QQNKPI JGCV UVQTCIG VCPM VGORGTCVWTG *GCVKPI JGCV UVQTCIG VCPM VGORGTCVWTG
*GCV RWOR EQQNKPI TCVG *GCV RWOR JGCVKPI TCVG
*GCV RWOR
1RGTCVKPI
1P
%QPFKVKQP 1HH
 

 
Water temperature [ ]

Heat pump rate [W]









 

 
        
Hour

Fig. 10. Heat pump cooling/heating rate and storage tank water temperature (Case_3).

operated for a total of eight hours for the representative days for
heating. As shown in Figs. 9 and 10, the difference of Case_2 and
Case_3 was that the operating pattern of the system clearly
changed depending on whether there was a heat storage tank. In
the case of SCW heat pump systems in which heat storage tanks are
not installed, when there is a load in the room, the heat pump is
activated for direct control of the necessary load. In addition, even
when there is extremely low load per hour, they are turned on for
low load operation.
However, unlike the case of Fig. 9 where the heating load
occurred every day in Case 2, Case_3 activated the heat storage tank
instead of the heat pump and therefore, the cooling and heating
load that the heat pump would have to be directly in control of did
not occur every day. In other words, the heat storage tank uses
stored heat to handle the load occurring during a period of 24 h and
during cooling operation it supplies 7
C-12
C cold water and
during heating operation it supplies 50
C-60
C hot water to the
FCU. When heat pump is turned on, if the cold and hot water
temperature supplied by the heat storage tank does not meet the
settings temperature, then the heat pump turns on. Once it be-
comes cold and hot water temperature of 12
C during cooling and
50
C for heating, the heat pump activates and stores the sensible
heat in the heat storage tank until it becomes 7
C cold water and
60
C hot water temperature. Accordingly, the cooling load time of
the heat pump showed cooling loads being created from 23:00 on
September 27 to 08:00 on September 28 and between 00:00 and
09:00 on September 30. As the cold-water temperature produced
from the heat storage tank on the first and second days increased to
12
C, the heat pump was activated to lower the cold-water tem-
dropped to 50
C and then the heat pump was turned on to raise the
heat storage tank temperature to 60
C and then the heat pump
stopped. In addition, high load was handled during most of the
operation time, thus exhibiting high part load ratio operation [27].
4.2. Part load ratio variations
Figs. 12, 13 and 16 shows the PLR pattern on the representative
day of the summer season for Case_1, 2 and 3. As mentioned above,
Case_1 applied window air-conditioners for each residential unit
just like the actual building and in Case_2 and 3 installed six heat
pumps. Accordingly, in order to compare and analyze Case_1, 2 and
3, the mean PLR of the window air-conditioners installed in each
unit were computed and they were expressed to represent the PLR
patterns of 38 window air-conditioners. This was shown in Fig. 12.
In addition, Case_2 and 3 used six heat pumps to process the load
through sequential control. In order to enhance the readability of
Figs. 12 and 13 showing Case_2 and 3, the PLR behavior patterns of a
total of six heat source units numbered 1 to 6 were placed vertically
and these were classified with H.1e6 (Heat pump) for indication. In
addition, H.1e6 listed on each graph showed the priority of each
heat source unit. For example, H.1 shows the heat pump activated
%CUGA



 


2CTV NQCF TCVKQ =?

perature and after the cold-water temperature dropped to 7
C, it  

was found that the heat pump was turned off. Afterwards, as the  

heat storage tank activation time increased, the cold-water tem-  


 


perature from the heat storage tank again rose to 12
C and  

 
 




accordingly, on the fourth day the heat pump was reactivated to  






 
 

lower the cold-water temperature produced from the heat storage 


tank to 7
C. Similarly, in the case of the heating load of the heat  

pump, it occurred from 19:00 to 24:00 on January 4 and from 24:00 
 

to 02:00 on January 5. Among the four randomly selected repre-                        
sentative days for heating, the hot water temperature produced *QWT
from the heat storage tank until there was a heat pump load
Fig. 11. Part load ratio on cooling representative day (Case_1).
1070 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

%CUGA
* 

* 
2CTV NQCF TCVKQ =?
* 

* 


* 





*   



 


 

 
 

 


 

 

 
  
 
 
  
 


0   
 
 




                       
*QWT

Fig. 12. Part load ratio on cooling representative day (Case_2).

%CUGA %CUGA
*  * 










 
 
*  * 
2CTV NQCF TCVKQ =?
2CTV NQCF TCVKQ =?

 

*  * 

*  * 

*  * 



*  * 

0

                                               
*QWT *QWT

Fig. 13. Part load ratio on cooling representative day (Case_3). Fig. 15. Part load ratio on heating representative day (Case_3).

%CUGA CPF %CUGA %CUGA


' 


'  
 
   
   
    
  
 
 
 
 
   
   
 
 
 
   
  
2CTV NQCF TCVKQ =?

' 
%12


' 

' 

 

 
   



 

 
  
 
  


 
 
' 

 
0   
 
     
   
   
                       
                       
*QWT *QWT

Fig. 14. Part load ratio on heating representative day (Case_1, 2). Fig. 16. COP on cooling representative day (Case_1).

first when the cooling load is at its lowest point. similar load control methods as that of Case_1, it displayed similar
First, during the representative days of the summer, Case_1 PLR patterns at 0.2%e100%. In addition, Case_1 and 2 showed pe-
displayed PLR patterns of 0.8%e98.1% and in Case_2, which has culiarities in which PLR changes suddenly at 08:00 and 18:00 and it
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078
is judged that this is because the indoor settings temperature
changes at 08:00 and 18:00 according to the rate of people indoors
as mentioned in 4.1.1. Between 08:00 and 17:00 when the indoor
settings temperature is 28
C, the internal heating value decreases
due to the higher settings temperature and lower rate of people
indoors, but it was found that the PLR gradually rose with the
passing of time due to sunlight. Also, at 18:00 when the settings
temperature is lowered to 26
C and internal heating spikes, cool-
ing load rises significantly and it becomes full load operation where
most of the cooling devices are turned on. After time passes, the
outdoor air temperature drops as shown in Fig. 9, thereby lowering
cooling load and it shows that the PLR gradually decreases. Unlike
this, in Case_3 that is linked to the heat storage tank, the heat
storage tank activates every hour instead of the heat pump to
process the indoor load and therefore, the heat pump turns on only
after the temperature of the heat storage tank reaches 12
C.
Accordingly, it was found that the heat pump of Case_3 during the
representative day of the summer goes into full load operation in
five heat pumps for seven hours during the nine hours of operation
to lower the internal temperature of the heat storage tank from
12
C to 7
C. Therefore, it was found that there were different PLR
patterns due to the different load control methods between sys-
tems depending on whether there is a heat storage tank. Case_3
exhibited higher PLR during most of the operation time compared
to Case_1 and Case_2 and it was judged that the operating COP
would be higher because of this.
Figs. 14 and 15 show the PLR pattern of the representative day of
the winter season for Case_1, 2 and 3. As mentioned earlier, six
boilers are applied to Case_1 and six SCW heat pumps are applied
to Case_2 and 3. Furthermore, load is handled through sequential
control when load occurs in all of Case_1, 2 and 3. At this time, the
boiler of Case_1 and SCW heat pump of Case_2 have the same ca-
pacity, and therefore, it showed the same PLR by activating the
same number of devices during the heating load control on the
representative day of the winter season as shown in Fig. 9. In
accordance, the PLR patterns of six boilers and six heat pumps of
Case_1 and Case_2 were shown simultaneously and they were
classified as E.1e6 (Equipment) depending on its priority. Fig. 15 is a
graph that shows the heat pump PLR patterns of Case_3 and it was
classified as H.1e6 (heat pump). For example, E.1 and H.1 shows the
*
*
*
%12
*
*
* 
 
 
   
 
   
 

       
Fig. 17. COP on cooling representative day (Case_2).
1071
heating device that turns on first when the heating load is lowest.
First, during the representative days of the winter season,
Case_1 and 2 displayed PLR patterns of 15.0% and 100.0%. In addi-
tion, Case_1 and 2 showed peculiarities in which PLR changed
significantly at 08:00 and 18:00 and it is judged that this is because
the indoor settings temperature changes at 08:00 and 18:00 ac-
cording to the rate of people indoors as mentioned in 4.1.1. Between
08:00 and 17:00 when the indoor settings temperature is 17
C,
despite internal heating dropping rapidly due to Fig. 2, almost no
PLR occurs. It is judged that this is because the indoor settings
temperature is lowered from 20
C to 17
C and unlike the repre-
sentative day of the summer, there is a drop in heating load needed
to maintain indoor temperature due to heat storage caused by
sunlight. Afterwards, at 18:00 when the settings temperature rise
to 20
C, there is a spike in heating load and there was full load
operation for all six devices, and it was evident the PLR gradually
increased with time. Also, unlike the representative day of the
summer, PLR after 18:00 showed rising patterns and it is assumed
that this is because of the increasing heating load due to the drop in
outdoor air temperature as shown in Fig. 9. On the other hand, for
Case_3 that is operated together with a heat storage tank, the heat
storage tank is activated every hour instead of the heat pump to
handle the indoor load and therefore, the heat pump is turned on
only after the temperature of the heat storage tank drops to 50
C.
Accordingly, in order for the internal temperature of the heat
storage tank in the representative day of the winter to increase
from 50
C to 60
C, it was found that all six heat pumps went into
full load operation for six hours of the eight hours of operation
time. In short, like in the case of the aforementioned cooling, it was
found that there were different PLR patterns according to the dif-
ferences of system features depending on whether or not there are
heat storage tanks and compared to Case_1 and Case_2, Case_3
showed higher PLR during most of the operation time and there-
fore, it is judged that the operating COP will be higher.
4.3. COP variations
Figs. 16e18 show the change in COP of the representative day of
the summer for Case_1, 2 and 3, respectively. As mentioned earlier,
in order to compare and analyze Case_1, 2 and 3, the mean COP of
%CUGA




 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



               
*QWT
1072 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

applied in Case_2 was 5.4, showing significant difference, but the

%CUGA average COP in Case_2 was 5.2., thus being higher than Case_1.
*  
  
Case_2 showed a peculiarity in which COP changed significantly at
 
 

 

08:00 and 18:00 when PLR changed rapidly and exhibited a COP
*  
 
 
   
  pattern where COP rose from 08:00 to 17:00 and gradually dropped
 


after 18:00. On the other hand, Case_3 had a mean COP of 6.6, thus
*  
 
 
   
 
 
 being higher than all other cases. It is possible to explain Fig. 7
%12

where there is a change in COP with the change of PLR during

 
 
 
   
 
*  

cooling of the SCW heat pump applied to Case_2 and 3. According
 
to Fig. 7, in the PLR region above 0.0% and below 40.0%, when PLR
*  
  
   
   
 
increased, COP increased significantly and after hitting the
 
 
  
 
   
 
 
maximum COP during the PLR region of approximately 50.0%e
*
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 60.0%, distribution gradually dropped. Therefore, it is judged that
                        the change of COP for Case_2 with a larger PLR change was greater
*QWT than that of Case_3. On the other hand, in Case_3 the heat pumps
went into full load operation in most time frames because of the
Fig. 18. COP on cooling representative day (Case_3). heat storage tank and therefore, it exhibited higher COP patterns in
overall high PLR regions compared to Case_1 and 2.
Figs. 19 and 20 shows the efficiency of the boiler and COP
the window air-conditioners installed in each residential unit in
pattern of the SCW heat pump on the representative day of the
Case_1 was computed so that it could represent the COP pattern of
winter in Case_1 and 3. As mentioned earlier, Case_1 applies six
38 window air-conditioners and this is displayed in Fig. 16. In
boilers and Case_2 and 3 applies six SCW heat pumps. In addition,
addition, Case_2 and 3 use six heat pumps to handle cooling load
Case_1, 2 and 3 handles load through sequential control whenever
through sequential control. Accordingly, the six heat pump COP
heating load occurs. Therefore, in order to enhance readability of
distribution of Case_2 and 3 were aligned vertically in Figs. 17 and
the graph, the efficiency of six boilers and COP of SCW heat pump of
18 to improve readability of the graph and this was classified into
Case_1 and 3 were placed vertically in Figs. 19 and 20 and they were
H.1e6 (heat pump). Case_1 displayed COP distribution of 3.2e3.4
classified as B.1e6 (boiler) and H.1e6 (heat pump). In addition,
and Case_2, which exhibited similar PLR patterns as Case_1 had
Case_2 exhibits the same PLR as Case_1 as shown in Fig. 14 on the
COP distribution of 0.1e5.5. Case_3 exhibited distribution of
summer PLR distribution of Case_1 and 2 and also has similar
0.9e7.3. The maximum COP change of window air-conditioners
patterns for COP. Therefore, in this chapter comparisons and ana-
applied to Case_1 was 0.2 and it was small compared to range of
lyses are made based on Case_1 and Case_3. Excluding Case_1,
change of the PLR pattern shown in Fig. 11, and it was found that the
which is the boiler-based conventional air conditioning system,
average COP was approximately 3.3. It is judged that there is a small
where the system was not activated at 08:00e09:00, it showed
difference in COP due to the characteristics of home air condi-
efficiency patterns of 34.4%e78.0% in the efficiency and COP dis-
tioners such as window air-conditioners having a fixed COP value in
tribution of each case shown on the representative day of the
which the change in PLR does not have a big impact on the change
winter season. Also, the maximum efficiency difference by hour for
of COP. Also, the max COP difference per time of the six heat pumps
Case_1 was found to be 43.6% and the mean efficiency was 66.2%.

%CUGA

$


$ 
$QKNGT GHHKEKGPE[ =?

$ 

$ 

$  

 
 

 

 
  
 
   

  


 

 

$ 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 
 
 
 

 

 

 
 

 
 
  
 
 
    
 
 


 

                       
*QWT
Fig. 19. Boiler efficiency on heating representative day (Case_1).
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078 1073

%CUGA

* 
 
 
 
 
 

* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

* 
 
 
 
 
 
%12

 
 

* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


                       
*QWT
Fig. 20. COP on heating representative day (Case_3).

The efficiency distribution of Case_1 changed at 08:00 and 18:00
and efficiency was almost constant from 08:00 to 17:00, while
exhibiting efficiency patterns that slightly increased after 18:00.
This can be explained by Fig. 6 that shows the efficiency curve ac-
cording to PLR during boiler heating. According to Fig. 6, PLR
increased in the PLR region from approximately 0.0%e40.0% and
therefore, the boiler efficiency spiked, while showing soft increase
in the PLR region of approximately 50.0%e100.0%. Accordingly, in
Case_1, it is judged to have a maximum 43.3% efficiency change.
Contrary to this, Case_3 had full load operation for six heat pumps
in six of the eight hours of operation and the mean COP was found
to be 4.0. Unlike Case_1, the change of COP was small at about 0.5
and this can be explained by Fig. 8 that shows the COP curve
according to PLR during heat pump heating. According to Fig. 8, PLR
increased in the PLR region of approximately 0.0%e40.0% and
therefore, COP spiked and there was a slight increasing distribution
in the PLR region from about 50.0% to 100.0%. Therefore, Case_1 and
2 showed relatively large differences in PLR changes compared to
Case_3 and the scope of change for COP was also significant. In
Case_3, as the heat pumps were in full load operation in most time
frames due to the heat storage tank, it was found that it had an
overall higher PLR and COP distribution compared to Case_1 and 2.
4.4. Energy consumption
Fig. 21 shows the electric consumption on the representative

%CUGA %CUGA %CUGA


Energy consumption [kWh]














                       
Hour

Fig. 21. Hourly energy consumption on July 11th.

1074 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

days of the summer for Case_1, 2 and 3. First, when examining the found to consume 22.7% more electric energy. The reason for this is
electric consumption patterns of each case, Case_1, which is a that the features of the cooling equipment are different as
window air-conditioner-based conventional air conditioning sys- explained in 3.3 and it is judged that there was a difference in
tem, consumed a minimum of 1.3 kWh at 08:00 as shown in the PLR energy consumption due to the temperature differences of the heat
and COP pattern analysis of the 4.3 sub-chapter and it was found to source fluid flowing into the heat source unit. In other words,
consumer up to 145.5 kWh of electricity at 18:00. In addition, Case_1 showed changes in capacity and COP according to the in-
Case_2, which exhibited similar load control methods as Case_1, door air wet-bulb temperature and outdoor air dry-bulb tempera-
consumed a minimum of 9.9 kWh of electricity at 08:00 and ture entering condenser of the window air-conditioner. Meanwhile,
consumed up to 320.2 kWh of electricity at 18:00. Case_1 and 2 Case_2, which applied the SCW geothermal heat pump system,
displayed the trait of rapidly changing electric consumption at showed changes in capacity and COP due to geothermal tempera-
08:00 and 18:00. Electric consumption rose between 08:00 and ture and cold-water temperature flowing into the heat pump.
17:00 and after 18:00, energy consumption was found to be smaller Therefore, compared to Case_1 that is based on outdoor air tem-
than Case_2. This is because Case_1 was found to have small energy perature, Case_2, which receives constant year-round geothermal
consumption due to the impact of computing the capacity of win- temperature, had lower electric consumption distribution. Mean-
dow air-conditioners applied in actual buildings smaller. However, while, in Case_3 that was explained in sub-chapter 4.3, the heat
as evident in Table 11 that shows the indoor temperature of the pump went into full load operation for most of the time of opera-
middle and uppermost floor of the building on the representative tion due to the heat storage tank, thus showing high COP patterns.
day in the summer for each case, Case_1 could not control all of the In result, Case_1 consumed 1667.8 kWh, Case_2 1288.9 kWh, and
indoor cooling load and could maintain indoor temperature at Case_3 1047.6 kWh of energy, thus showing that Case_3 consumed
26
C after one to four hours after 18:00. In Case_2 and 3 on the the lowest amount of energy. In other words, Case_3, which is
other hand, the indoor temperature after 18:00 was for the most operated together with the heat storage tank, conserved cooling
part maintained at 26
C and therefore, it was judged that Case_2 energy at 37.2% and 18.7% compared to Case_1 and Case_2,
consumed more energy for a specific period of time compared to respectively.
Case_1 at 18:00 and 19:00. For the overall energy consumption, it Fig. 22 displays the energy consumption on the representative
was found that Case_1 had higher energy consumption patterns days of the winter season for Case_1, 2 and 3. First, when examining
than Case_2 according to the PLR patterns and COP patterns of the the energy consumption patterns of each case, Case_1, which is the
representative day of Case_1 and 2. Compared to Case_2, it was boiler-based conventional air conditioning system, was not turned
on from 08:00 to 09:00 as shown in the PLR and efficiency pattern
analysis on the representative day and it consumed a minimum of
Table 11 9.8 kWh of gas at 10:00 and a maximum of 1289.0 kWh of gas at
Indoor air temperature (Cooling, July 11th).
18:00. Also, in Case_2, which demonstrated similar load control
Hour 10 Floor temperature 20 Floor temperature methods as that of Case_1, it consumed a minimum electricity of
Case_1 Case_2 Case_3 Case_1 Case_2 Case_3 12.4 kWh at 08:00 and a maximum of 322.2 kWh at 18:00. In
Case_1, and 2, there was a drastic change in energy consumption at
17 28.0 28.0 28.0 29.3 28.0 28.0
18 26.6 26.2 26.3 29.3 26.3 26.6
08:00 and 18:00 and there was almost no consumption between
19 26.1 26.0 26.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 08:00 and 17:00, and then energy consumption once again grad-
20 26.0 26.0 26.0 28.3 26.0 26.0 ually grew after 18:00. Furthermore, despite Case_1 and 2 having
21 26.0 26.0 26.0 27.4 26.0 26.0 the same heating load conditions, Case_1 had 73.4% more energy
22 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.4 26.0 26.0
consumption compared to Case_2. The reason for this is that the
23 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0
24 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 features of the heating units are different as explained in 3.3 and

Fig. 22. Energy consumption on January 24th.


because of the difference of temperature of heat source fluid
flowing into the heat source unit as described in 4.4.1. Compared to
Case_1 that directly produces hot water through the boiler, Case_2
used constant year-round geothermal temperature and therefore,
Case_2 demonstrated lower energy consumption distribution.
Meanwhile, in Case_3, the heat pump went into full load operation
while being turned on due to the heat storage tank behavior
pattern and therefore displayed high COP patterns. Upon summing
up the daily energy consumption of the representative day in the
winter according to this, Case_1 consumed 5861.6 kWh of energy,
Case_2 1561.0 kWh, and Case_3 1842.0 kWh. This shows that
Case_3 conserved approximately 68.6% energy compared to Case_1
and that due to the differences in behavioral features, it saved
approximately 15.3% electricity compared to Case_2. However, as
shown in Figs. 9 and 10 that shows the behavior pattern of the SCW
geothermal heat pump according to the existence of a heat storage
tank, SCW heat pump in Case_2 operated for four days and 59 h and
in Case_3, it operated for four days and eight hours. Thus, when
looking only at the energy consumption of one representative day,
energy consumption of Case_3 was higher than that for Case_2. But
when comparing the annual energy consumption, the results are
different and this was analyzed in detail in the sub-chapters of 4.5.
4.5. Detailed analysis on annual data
4.5.1. Electricity consumption distribution in each PLR region
(cooling)
Fig. 23 is a graph showing the cumulative annual heating energy
consumption per PLR regions for Case_1, 2 and 3. The cumulative
annual operation time, operation time ratio, and cumulative annual
heating energy consumption per PLR region for each case were
summarized in Table 12. As explained in 4.2 and the sub-chapters of
4.3, in order to compare and analyze Case_1, 2 and 3, the mean
operation time of window air-conditioners entered in each resi-
dential unit were computed to represent the behavior pattern of 38
window air-conditioners, while in the case of Case_2 and 3, it
shows the operation time of six heat pumps. The total operation

%QQNKPI GPGTI[ EQPUWORVKQP =/9J?









 2.4  
D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078 1075
time per PLR region for Case_1 was found to be highest in the order
of 0.0%e10.0%, 10.0%e20.0% at 29.0% and 18.0%. The cumulative
annual electric consumption per sector was found to be highest at
40.0%e50.0% and 50.0%e60.0% in the order of 29.2 MWh and
28.4 MWh. The total operation time ratio per PLR region of Case_2
was found to be highest at 90.0%e100.0% and 0.0%e10.0% PLR re-
gion in the order of 28.3% and 20.5%. The cumulative annual electric
consumption per sector was found to be highest in the order of
90.0%e100.0% and 0.0%e10.0% PLR regions. Accordingly, in the low
cooling load region of 0.0%e40.0%, Case_1 displayed 72.0% opera-
tion hour ratios and Case_2 had 48.5% operation time ratios, which
are lower than that of Case_1. In addition, as mentioned in the sub-
chapters of 4.3, Case_1 did not exhibit rapid changes of COP ac-
cording to changes in PLR in the 0.0%e40.0% region unlike Case_2,
and it demonstrated constant performance. Therefore, in the 0.0%e
10.0% region, it had smaller electric consumption compared to
higher operation times than Case_2. Unlike this, Case_2 demon-
strated higher electric consumption during operation time than
Case_1 in the same PLR region due to its characteristics in which
COP dropped in low PLR regions. Meanwhile, Case_3 exhibited full
load operation in most of the time that the heat pump was turned
on. In result, it showed low operation at approximately 1.1% in low
PLR regions of 0.0%e40.0% among the total operation time and in
the PLR region between 90.0% and 100.0%, it showed high operation
ratios at approximately 96.4%. Accordingly, Case_3 maintained high
PLR during its overall operation time and therefore, it demon-
strated higher energy efficiency compared to other cases. More
importantly, for annual summertime cooling energy consumption,
Case_3 had high COP during operation time and was able to
conserve approximately 17.4% and 10.1% cooling energy compared
to Case_1 and 2, respectively.
4.5.2. Energy consumption distribution in each PLR region (heating)
Fig. 24 is a graph showing the total heating energy consumption
per PLR region for Case_1, 2 and 3 and the cumulative annual
operating time, operating time ratio and cumulative annual heating
energy consumption per PLR region were summarized in Table 13.
%CUGA %CUGA %CUGA
2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4 
Part load ratio [%]
Fig. 23. Cooling electricity consumption in each PLR.
1076 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

Table 12
Annual PLR data (Cooling).

Part Load Ratio [%] Case_1 Case_2 Case_3

(h) % MWh (h) % MWh (h) % MWh

0  PLR  10 1350 29.0 8.0 1287 20.5 13.8 12 0.2 0.1

10  PLR < 20 841 18.0 19.0 732 11.7 10.2 18 0.3 0.1
20  PLR < 30 655 14.0 24.7 572 9.1 10.0 27 0.4 0.2
30  PLR < 40 539 11.0 28.3 453 7.2 9.9 14 0.2 0.1
40  PLR < 50 432 9.0 29.2 411 6.5 10.8 17 0.3 0.2
50  PLR < 60 340 7.0 28.4 334 5.3 10.5 35 0.5 0.5
60  PLR < 70 229 5.0 22.6 277 4.4 10.1 21 0.3 0.3
70  PLR < 80 150 3.0 16.9 236 3.8 9.8 44 0.7 0.8
80  PLR < 90 91 2.0 11.5 200 3.2 9.3 57 0.8 1.1
90  PLR  100 113 2.0 16.4 1774 28.3 94.1 6471 96.4 166.0
Total 4740 100.0 205.0 6276 100.0 188.5 6716 100.0 169.4

%CUGA %CUGA %CUGA


*GCVKPI GPGTI[ EQPUWORVKQP =/9J?


















 2.4   2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4    2.4 

2CTV NQCF TCVKQ =?

Fig. 24. Heating energy consumption in each PLR.

As shown in the sub-chapters of 4.3, Case_1, which is a boiler-based
conventional air conditioning system, and Case_2, which is an SCW
system that did not install a heat storage tank, had very similar
efficiency/COP patterns per PLR region. Therefore, only Case_1 and
Case_3 were compared in this chapter. The cumulative operation
time ratio per PLR region in Case_1 was found to be highest in the
PLR regions of 0.0%e10.0% and 90.0%e100.0% at 34.5% and 17.4%,
respectively. Furthermore, the cumulative annual electric con-
sumption per region was found to be highest in the 90.0%e100.0%
and 50.0%e60.0% regions in the order of 161.1 MWh and 44.2 MWh,
respectively. On the contrary, Case_3 displayed full load operation
in most of the heat pump operation times, thus having high PLR
distribution. In accordance, the cumulative operating time ratio and
the cumulative annual electric consumption per PLR region was
found to be highest in the 90.0%e100.0% region at 96.3% and
72.3 MWh. In Case_1, the operating time in the low cooling load
region from PLR 0%e40.0% accounted for about 53.4% of the total,
but in Case_3, the operation time in the same PLR region as Case_1
took up only a small amount compared to Case_1 at approximately
1.6% of the total. In result, from the total operating time, in the low
PLR region from 0.0% to 40.0%, it showed little operation at only
about 1.6% and in the PLR regions between 90% and 100%, it showed
operation ratios of approximately 96.3%. Therefore, it can be said
that Case_3 maintained high PLR during the total operation time,
thus having higher energy efficiency. More importantly, for annual
heating energy consumption in the winter, Case_3 had approxi-
mately 82.8% and 20.8% heating energy reduction effects compared
to Case_1 and 2 due to the high COP during the operation time.
 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078 1077

Table 13
Annual PLR data (Heating).

Part Load Ratio [%] Case_1 Case_2 Case_3

(h) % MWh (h) % MWh (h) % MWh

0  PLR  10 1059 34.5 27.1 1059 34.5 13.1 11 0.6 0.1

10  PLR < 20 177 5.8 12.7 177 5.8 2.8 9 0.5 0.1
20  PLR < 30 184 6.0 19.0 184 6.0 3.7 3 0.2 0.0
30  PLR < 40 220 7.1 28.7 220 7.1 5.5 5 0.3 0.1
40  PLR < 50 230 7.5 36.2 230 7.5 7.0 4 0.2 0.1
50  PLR < 60 241 7.8 44.2 241 7.8 8.6 7 0.4 0.2
60  PLR < 70 175 5.7 37.1 175 5.7 7.3 11 0.6 0.3
70  PLR < 80 159 5.2 38.4 159 5.2 7.6 6 0.3 0.2
80  PLR < 90 91 3.0 24.4 91 3.0 4.9 11 0.6 0.4
90  PLR  100 536 17.4 161.1 536 17.4 32.7 1772 96.3 72.3
Total 3072 100 428.9 3072 100 93.2 1839 100 73.8

5. Conclusions
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cooling and heating
energy performance of the SCW GSHP system depending on
whether a heat storage tank is installed in large-scale residential
facilities. The cooling and heating energy performance was
assessed for the SCW geothermal heat pump system without
installing a heat storage tank, SCW geothermal heat pump system
linked to a heat storage tank, and boiler-based conventional air
condition systems. In order to predict the heating/cooling energy
consumption of the SCW geothermal heat pump system, the input
variables were analyzed based on the TDB data, which are the
actually measured heating and cooling catalog data of Company A
in the USA and Company D in Korea, to compute the SCW heat
pump performance curve. Furthermore, the reliability of the per-
formance curve was reviewed based on Cv(RMSE), which is the
statistical method commonly used in ASHRAE M&V Guideline
14e2014. Also, this was implemented in the simulation to assess
energy annual energy performance SCW geothermal heat pump
systems depending on whether heat storage tanks are installed
compared to window air-conditioners and boiler-based conven-
tional air conditioning systems actually applied in large-scale group
residential facilities.
The major research results of this study can be summarized as
follows.
The Cv(RMSE) of the cooling and heating capacity performance
curve coefficient according to the operating temperature of the
SCW geothermal heat pump system found in this study was
approximately 5.4% during cooling and 10.1% during heating.
The heating/cooling power consumption curve Cv(RMSE) ac-
cording to the operating temperature was found to be approx-
imately 8.2% for cooling and 8.5% for heating. In addition, the
Cv(RMSE) of power consumption according to the simulation
data applying each performance curve and the actually
measured data was 8.1% for cooling and 8.3% for heating,
showing that it is within a reasonable margin of error. Through
this, it was found that it is possible to accurately predict the
quantitative energy of the SCW geothermal heat pump system
using the performance curve.
Upon analyzing the energy consumption of the representative
day of the summer and winter seasons, it was found that win-
dow air-conditioners and boiler-based conventional air condi-
tioning systems consumed approximately 1667.8 kWh for
cooling and 5861.6 kWh for heating. SCW geothermal heat
pump systems that did not install heat storage tanks consumed
about 1288.9 kWh for cooling and 1561.0 kWh for heating and
the SCW geothermal heat pump system linked to a heat storage
system was found to use 1047.6 kWh of energy when cooling
and about 1842.0 kWh for heating.
The cumulative annual operation time and energy consumption
in each PLR region were analyzed to evaluate the cooling and
heating energy performance of the window air-conditioner and
boiler-based air conditioning system (Case_1), SCW geothermal
heat pump system without heat storage tank (Case_2), and SCW
geothermal heat pump system linked to a heat storage tank
(Case_3), In result, Case_1 showed a 72.0% during cooling and
53.4% during heating for operation time ratio in the PLR region
between 0.0% and 40.0%, while exhibiting energy consumption
ratio of approximately 39.0% during cooling and 20.4% during
heating compared to the overall energy consumption in the
same region. In the case of the SCW geothermal heat pump
system without a heat storage tank (Case_2), 48.5% during
cooling and 53.4% during heating was shown for the operation
time ratio in the PLR region of 0.0%e40.0% and energy con-
sumption ratio was 23.3% for cooling and 26.9% for heating
compared to the total energy consumption in the same region.
Meanwhile, upon analyzing the cumulative annual operation
time and energy consumption in each PLR region for the SCW
geothermal heat pump system linked to a heat storage tank
(Case_3), it was found that due to the full load operation during
the time in which the heat pump operates, energy was
consumed at approximately 96.4% for cooling and 96.3% for
heating at 90.0%e100.0%, which is a high PLR region compared
to the total energy consumption.
Upon comparing the annual cooling and heating energy con-
sumption, it was found that the SCW geothermal heat pump
system linked to the heat storage tank conserved 17.4% energy
for cooling and about 83.0% for heating compared to the con-
ventional system. Also, compared to the SCW geothermal heat
pump system without a heat storage tank, it demonstrated en-
ergy conservation effects of 10.1% for cooling and 20.8% for
heating.
In conclusion, when applying SCW geothermal heat pump sys-
tems in large-scale residential facilities, it was found that SCW
geothermal heat pump systems that installed heat storage tanks
had higher efficiency than conventional systems based on
window air-conditioners and boilers, and SCW geothermal heat
pump systems that did not install heat storage tanks. Therefore,
it is judged that the installation of heat storage tanks is a good
option for improving efficiency.
Based on this study, plans are being made to further continue
research on reviewing installation efficacy of the heat storage tank-
based SCW geothermal heat pump system compared to existing air
conditioning systems through the assessments of LCC (Life Cycle
1078 D.Y. Lee et al. / Energy 174 (2019) 1060e1078

Cost) taking into consideration the initial investment costs, instal- [15] Al-Sarkhi A, Abu-Nada E, Nijmeh S, Akash B. Performance evaluation of
standing column well for potential application of ground source heat pump in
lation costs, and operating costs in future follow-up studies.
Jordan. Energy Convers Manag 2008;49:863e72. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.enconman.2007.06.028.
Acknowledgments [16] Cho JH, Nam YJ, Kim HC. Performance and feasibility study of a standing
column well (SCW) system using a deep geothermal well. Energies 2016;9(2).
https://doi.org/10.3390/en9020108.
This work was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy [18] Yang SJ, Kim JY, Hong WW, Ahn CW. An analysis of underground water
Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Ministry of temperature during heating and cooling by small-scale SCW type GWHP
Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea system in operation modes. J Archit Inst Korea Plan Des 2009;25:263e70.
Available online: www.dbpia.co.kr/Journal/ArticleDetail/NODE01211673.
(No.20163010111840). http://www.webcitation.org/6zs1YfhHc.
[19] Deng Z, Spitler JD, Rees SJ, Orio CD, Johnson CN. Performance analysis of
References standing column well ground heat exchanger systems. ASHRAE Transact
2006;112:633e43. Available online: www.ashrae.org.
[20] Nguyen A, Pasquier P, Marcotte D. Influence of groundwater flow in fractured
[1] World energy outlook 2017. Available online: www.iea.org/weo2017
aquifers on standing column wells performance. Geothermics 2015;58:
(accessed on 14 November 2017)
39e48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2015.08.005.
[2] Yearbook of regional energy statistics. Available online: www.keei.re.kr/
[23] ASHRAE Standard 90.2. Energy efficient design of low-rise residential build-
main.nsf/?open&p¼%2Fweb_keei%2Fd_results.nsf%2F0%
ings. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air- Conditioning Engi-
2F1E68BF6674AC24ED49258225000CB21B&s (accessed on 30 January 2018)
neers, Inc; 2004.
[3] Choi DY. Chapter 2 building energy regulations and consumption trends.
[24] The U.S. Department of energy. EnergyPlus engineering reference. 2018.
Detailed sample survey of building energy consumption. second ed. Ulsan,
Available online: https://energyplus.net/documentation.
South Korea: Korea Energy Economics Institute; 2015. p. 9e18. ISBN 978-89-
[25] Hyun IT. Development of performance curve coefficients and its verification
5504-552-9 93320.
method for variable refrigerant flow heat pump system EnergyPlus. Master’s
[4] 17th Major renewable energy market status. 2017. Available online: www.
Thesis. Hanbat National University; 2016.
kistep.re.kr/c3/sub6.jsp?brdType¼R&bbIdx¼11529. [Accessed 1 November
[26] The U.S. Department of energy. EnergyPlus testing with global energy balance
2017].
test. 2015. Available online: https://energyplus.net/testing.
[5] Kim JY. Geothermal source heat pump system and installation example, vol. 4.
[27] Lee DY, Seo BM, Choi JM, Lee KH. Comparative analysis of the heating energy
Korea society of geothermal energy engineers; 2008. p. 23e31. Available
performance of scw geothermal heat pump system with and without heat
online: www.dbpia.co.kr/Journal/ArticleDetail/NODE01387310.
storage tank. In: Proceedings of the summer conference of the society of air-
[8] Minea V. Experimental investigation of the reliability of residential standing
conditioning and refrigeration Engineers of Korea, Pyungchang, Republic of
column heat pump systems without bleed in cold climates. Appl Therm Eng
Korea; 20-22th June 2018.
2013;52:230e43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.11.031.
[28] ASHRAE Guideline 14-2014. Measurement of energy, demand and water
[10] Nguyen A, Pasquier P, Marcotte D. Multiphysics modelling of standing col-
savings. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air- Conditioning
umn well and implementation of heat pumps off-loading sequence. In:
Engineers, Inc; 2004.
Excerpt from the proceedings of the 2012 COMSOL conference in Boston.
[29] Kim M, Seo B, Lee J, Choi J, Lee K. Operational behavior characteristics and
Boston: United States of America; October 2012.
energy saving potential of vertical closed loop ground source heat pump
[11] Eppner F, Pasquier P, Baudron P. A coupled thermo-hydro-geochemical
system combined with storage tank in and office building. Energy Build
model for standing column well subject to CO2 degassing and installed in
2018;178:239e52.
fractured calcareous aquifers. Geomech Energy Environ 2017;11:14e27.
[30] Seo BM, Lee KH. Detailed analysis on part load ratio characteristics and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gete.2017.05.003.
cooling energy saving of chiller staging in an office building. Energy Build
[12] Song W, Ni L, Yao Y. Experimental research on bleeding performance of
2016;119:309e22.
single well ground-water heat pump. Procedia Eng 2017;205:3162e9.
[31] Son JE, Lee KH. Cooling energy performance analysis depending on the
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.10.145.
economizer cycle control methods in an office building. Energy Build
[14] Nguyen A, Pasquier P, Marcotte D. Thermal resistance and capacity model for
2016;120:45e57.
standing column wells operating under a bleed control. Renew Energy
2015;76:743e56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.11.080.