Ramaraj, Sugirdhalakshmi

DOE OSTI2024

Decarbonizing Building Thermal Systems: A How-to Guide for Heat Pump Systems and Beyond

Buildings account for a substantial portion of carbon emissions, primarily due to the widespread use of fossil fuels in heating systems. Decarbonization of heating is essential to meet climate targets and reduce the environmental impact of buildings. Heat pumps are capable of leveraging renewable energy sources and can provide heating and cooling in an energy-efficient manner. By leveraging heat pump technology, buildings can significantly reduce their carbon footprint, minimize energy consumption, and decrease their reliance on fossil fuels. The design and construction community plays a pivotal role in facilitating the transition to heat pump systems for heating and cooling. However, this transition requires specialized knowledge and expertise. This resource was developed for architects, engineers, and contractors in response to an industry need for a comprehensive technical resource that guides them through the intricacies of heat pump system design, installation, and maintenance. This resource provides detailed information on system sizing, selection of appropriate heat systems, heat sources, and integration with existing building systems. Moreover, it emphasizes best practices for ensuring operational efficiency, system longevity, and reliability. The development of this recourse was a collaborative effort between NREL/DOE Better Buildings Design and Construction Allies and ASHRAE Task Force for Building Decarbonization. This resource is composed of two complimentary portions that will be completed and released on separate time frames. The first portion will be completed and released in 2023, while the second portion will be released in 2024.

building thermal systems↗

DOE OSTI2024

BENEFIT with Northeastern University: HVAC Hardware-in-the-Loop Experimental Testing of a Heat Pump and Air Conditioner

This dataset includes HVAC Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) experimental results for a single stage, SEER 16, HSPF 9.5, 3-ton single-speed air source heat pump with 15 kW of backup auxiliary heating tested in both cooling and heating mode, and a two stage, SEER 21, 2-ton central air conditioner tested in cooling mode for a set of outdoor temperatures and indoor setpoint temperatures. In addition to these tests, experimental tests focused on the operation of auxiliary heating for the heat pump for winter condition were also conducted. The laboratory experiments for transient testing of the heat pump and air conditioner were conducted using the two HIL systems in the Systems Performance Laboratory (SPL) at NREL’s Energy Systems Integration Facility (ESIF). Further information on laboratory design and capabilities of the SPL along with the architecture of HVAC HIL system can be found in: Sparn, B. F. 2018. Laboratory Resources and Techniques to Evaluate Smart Home Technology (No. NREL/CP-5500-71696). National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States). https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy18osti/71696.pdf and the experimental setup and validation of HVAC HIL platform can be found in: Ramaraj, S. and Sparn, B. 2022. Validation of HVAC Hardware-In-the-Loop Simulation for Advanced Control Strategies in Smart Homes (No. NREL/CP-5500-82562). National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL), Golden, CO (United States). https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/82562.pdf. These experimental results can be used to validate how we currently model the cycling behavior of heat pumps and air conditioners. Additionally, many demand response programs implement heat pump and air conditioner control by changing the thermostat set point – these data may also be used to verify our models for heat pump and air conditioner demand response control are implemented correctly. The Test_Matrix file describes all the indoor and outdoor test conditions for heat pump and air conditioner and the file names of data sets include information about the test conditions. A wide range of outdoor air temperatures were chosen to accommodate summer and winter conditions. In addition to operating the HVAC equipment with different outdoor temperatures, we also operate the system with different indoor temperature set points to represent different grid signals or different operating conditions. For cooling conditions, the baseline set point is 72°F. To represent Load Up signals, the setpoint is changed to 68°F. The Load Shed set point is 76°F. For heating conditions, the baseline set point was assumed to be 68°F. The Load add set point is 72°F and the Load shed set point is 64°F. The starting indoor temperature for cooling conditions was set ~2°F above the indoor setpoint temperature so that the equipment turned on quickly. Similarly, the initial indoor temperature was set ~2°F lower than setpoint for heating mode tests to ensure that heating began quickly. The return air temperature was assumed to be equal to the indoor setpoint temperature in all cases. The experimental data are sampled at 1-second intervals. The data from ecobee thermostat at 5-minute interval are resampled and added to the corresponding file. The content of each data set is as follows: • T_Return (C): Measured return air temperature [C] • T_Return_SP (C): Return air temperature setpoint from E+ model, sent to HIL [C] • T_Supply (C): Measured supply air temperature at evaporator outlet [C] • T_Outdoor (C): Measured outdoor air temperature [C] • T_Outdoor_SP (C): Outdoor air temperature setpoint from weather file, sent to HIL [C] • T_Indoor (C): Measured indoor air temperature [C] • T_Indoor_SP (C): Indoor air temperature setpoint from E+ model, sent to HIL [C] • Outdoor Unit Power (W): Measured power of the outdoor unit [W] • Indoor Unit Power (W): Measured power of the indoor unit [W] • Evaporator Airflow Rate (CFM): Measured evaporator or indoor unit airflow rate sent to E+ model [CFM] • Cooling/Heating Capacity (kW): Calculated cooling/heating capacity sent to E+ model [kW] • T_SP_Thermostat (C): Thermostat cooling/heating setpoint temperature [C] • T_Indoor_Thermostat (C): Thermostat indoor air temperature [C]

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Sensitivity analysis of an automated fault detection algorithm for residential air-conditioning systems

The state of the art of fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) for residential air-conditioning systems is expensive and not yet amenable to widespread implementation. FDD for homes can significantly reduce utility costs, and increase the lifespan of the equipment. The cost barriers currently, however, make FDD for homes economically unviable for large scale implementation. In prior work, we offered a solution to reduce FDD costs by proposing an automated fault detection algorithm to serve as a screening step before more expensive FDD tests can be conducted. The algorithm uses only the home thermostat and local weather information to identify thermodynamic parameters and detect high-impact air-conditioning faults, including those that occur during equipment installation. We had tested the algorithm on a single EnergyPlus™ model of a home in Orlando, Florida. The thermodynamic parameter identification process is highly nonconvex involving several local optimal solutions. In this paper we propose a novel method to select the best model for fault detection from among the list of local optimal solutions to make the algorithm more robust to homes of different construction, without which the fault detection process would be infeasible. Another unique contribution of the paper is implementing the solution on real-world data. We also bring the algorithm closer to market by testing it on real-world data. We implement the algorithm on data obtained from experiments conducted by the Florida Solar Energy Center (FSEC) on a laboratory home equipped with a heat pump where faults were intentionally added for a period of seven months. The algorithm successfully detected an undercharge fault with 70.6% accuracy, concurrent duct leakage and undercharge faults with 85.2% accuracy, and duct leakage faults with 69.1% accuracy. A sensitivity analysis is also performed on EnergyPlus models of nine types of homes that vary in construction to demonstrate the robustness of the algorithm. Finally, the algorithm achieves an average accuracy of 71% for no-fault condition, 77% for 40% undercharge fault, and 76% for duct-leak fault.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗