Gert, 0.5 Tstat initially is a smart move! On the issue of Autosize to minimize modelers effort on monitoing the HVAC system is sensitive issue to simulate for overall 120 zones.
In practice, one would prefer manual Tstat in the initial stages of radiant cooling. I believe, user inputs will impact autosizing the system and there will be always high peak demand scenario. This brings to a conclusion that e+ will have to model from Deman Side Management perspective.
You may consider to >0.5 option or you may recheck the zone sizing. There got to be reason for fast radiant cooling. Autosizing for 120 zones could lead to misjudgment on various processes including zoning.
Best, Arun
Sent from my iPhone
Gert,
Richard makes a great an very valid point about averaging those values. You should try doing that.
Another way could be to set the thermostat value with a gradient/slope for morning boost (same for cooling) instead of a discrete change in Tstat value (I haven't tried it in E+ but it makes physical sense and is being used in actual building controls)
In real life, building controls have the same problem during sudden change of setpoints. PID logic addresses (only) part of it because it limits overshooting, but you'll still experience a system that goes full-on when the setpoint is changed (which could potentially have highly unwanted effects such as high peak demand and resulting charges). It is often addressed with a gradual change as well as phasing when different systems will experience this change of setpoint.
Best, Julien
Envoyé de mon iPhone
Yes I'm using a radiant
system. I have 126 zones so I'll have to do it with the model as
it is now, No more changes :)
But I think you're right, the autosize is not that accurate. By
changing the water rate and temperature, I've been able to meet
the demand temperature in all the zones.
The peak demand at startup is caused by choosing a throttling
range which is to low (0.5°C) as I have noticed now, this makes
the radiant system to fast, which is not realistic as it is
supposed to be a slow system.
Thank you for thinking with me.
HJ wanghaojie630@xxxxxxxxx [EnergyPlus_Support] schreef op
25/08/2014 21:33:
Are you using radiant system? I found hard time to meet
the demand using radiant system, maybe thats why you see
demand increases with your capacity. You can check your
room temperature, I am pretty confident your room
temperature cannot meet thermostat setpoint during design
day. In theory, if your system can meet the demand, no
matter what capacity you use, your demand should stay the
same. Demand is basically the room load, which is
separated from system side.
So back to your question, the way EnergyPlus size radiant
system is not robust and it cannot meet the room load if
weather is too cold. My sugestion is to use a conventional
air system to calculate the demand and use that as your
radiant system sizing parameter and do the radiant system
sizing by the manufacture software.
HJ
I do know
the difference between demand, capacity and
consumption. That's not the question. I do have to
improve my English :)
The question is rather: how to prevent peaks in the
demand, especially when you don't use autosizing.
Increasing the manually set capacity, makes the the
peaks increase also.
After playing a little with the parameters of the
floor heating, I've seen that changing the
throttling range has a high impact on these peaks.
Changing the default setting of 2°C (which appeared
to me as high) to 0.5°C, does makes a big
difference. The peak demand is very high...
Geert
HJ wanghaojie630@xxxxxxxxx
[EnergyPlus_Support] schreef op 25/08/2014 21:08:
By default, the demand IS capacity. This is not
the power it consumed, but how much cooling or
heating the device can output. You dont need to
use 100% as efficiency to get this value since it
is reported in the HTML summary report. I think
you mixed the concept of capacity with the energy
consumption.
HJ
Richard,
Thank you for the response, but I've
expressed myself in a wrong way I think.
I don't want to calculate the consumption,
but the 'demand', so efficiency is put at
100%
I've noticed that using autosize, sometimes
gives me a total heating capacity which is
to low.
If I manually set a higher capacity, the
heating load is met.
However, raising the boiler capacity again
and again, raises the heat demand at
startups, getting higher (but smaller)
peaks.
These peaks seems to be to high and not
realistic.
I also see that at startup (in the morning)
the floor heating, asks a HVAC heating rate
which is sometimes twice as high as
expected....
Are these peaks for real? I really can't
decide to take these short peaks (neither at
zone level or building level) as design
load....
Geert
Richard Raustad RRaustad@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[EnergyPlus_Support] schreef op 25/08/2014
18:08:
How
can I determine what the real power
demand is ? Enter the real
equipment efficiency.
Regarding sizing, you can use the sizing
parameters object to set an averaging
window for sizing. This will average out
the startup peaks you see yet still meet
the load. In the example below, try using
4, 8, and 12 timesteps for the averaging
window (1, 2, and 3 hours) to see what
impact that has on sizing and hours set
point not met.
Timestep,4;
Sizing:Parameters,
1.0, !- Heating
Sizing Factor
1.0, !- Cooling
Sizing Factor
; !- Timesteps
in Averaging Window
I usually simulate a building
with a 100% efficient boiler and
chiller.
If I use autosize for the
capacity of the boiler or chiller, the
capacity is sometimes to low.
If I fill in the capacity
manually, .... I can fill in what I
want.
How
can I determine what the real power
demand is ?
Especially for capacity peaks at
startup (morning for heating, afternoon
for cooling) the manually choosen
capacity, will influence the duration of
the startup peak.
This leads to discussion with my client
ofcourse. the software is intended to
determine the peak load, but I can
choose it myself....
Sometimes these peaks are also
extremely high and short in duration. Is
there a limiting aspect I maybe have
forgotten ? (pump , or other part of the
heating/cooling loop)
Geert
--
Richard Raustad
Senior Research Engineer
Florida Solar Energy Center
1679 Clearlake Road
Cocoa, FL 32922
Ph: (321)638-1454
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/
Electric Vehicle Transportation Center
http://evtc.fsec.ucf.edu/
__._,_.___
Posted by: Arun <arynum@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Primary EnergyPlus support is found at:
http://energyplus.helpserve.com or send a message to energyplus-support@xxxxxxxx
The primary EnergyPlus web site is found at:
http://www.energyplus.gov
The group web site is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EnergyPlus_Support/
Attachments are currently allowed but be mindful that not everyone has a high speed connection. Limit attachments to small files.
EnergyPlus Documentation is searchable. Open EPlusMainMenu.pdf under the Documentation link and press the "search" button.
__,_._,___
|