Feng

PerformancePredictionandModeling
Radiant Cooling Design:

Performance Prediction and
Modeling Methods
JingjuanFeng,PhDCand.
Jingjuan (Dove) Feng, PhD Candidate

Center for the Built Environment
University of California Berkeley
Center for the Built Environment

CenterOctober
for the2013
Built Environment October 2013
Agenda
Background
Cooling load prediction methods and tools
Whats available and whats been used?

Cooling
load
analysis
Are they accurate?

Investigation by experiment and simulation
Design recommendations
Cooling load prediction method
Modeling
tools
Radiant
system
sizing
Modeling tool selection

Implications for sizing
Modeling for code compliance and LEED
Center for the Built Environment October 2013
GGASHRAERadiantEnergySeminar
Backgrounds: Air systems vs. Radiant systems

Air systems
Ventilation + space
conditioning
Design to meet a single peak

cooling load value
Remove heat using

convection
Radiant systems
Decoupled ventilation and

space conditioning
Allow pre-conditioning the

radiant layer
Remove heat using

convection + radiation
1. Is the cooling load the same for radiant

systems as for air systems?
2. Can we use the same method to size radiant
system as air system?
3. Which modeling tools can be used to assist
design?
What methods and tools are available and being used ?

Literature review
ASHRAE HOF (2013)

ISO 11855 (2012)
RHVEA Guidebook
Price Engineer's HVAC Handbook
(2011)
1)ASHRAEHOF;2)ISO11855(2012)
Case studies + Survey
5 case studies
11 responses from designers from
Europe and North America
Building names
applications
Load features
Bankok Airport
Lobby/atrium
solar + stratification
Rad system type

radiant floor
David Brower Center
office
Typical
radiant ceiling slab
Walmart at sacramento
radiant floor cooling
retail with skylight
Typical
Manitoba Hydro
office
Typical
TABS ceiling
NREL Research Support Facility
office
radiant slab ceiling
William Jefferson Clinton

Presidential Library
Lobby of Hearst headquarters
Lobby/atrium
Lobby/atrium
Typical
Typical
load+stratification
solar + stratification
radiant floor
radiant floor
SMUD building office area
office
Typical
radiant ceiling slab
St Meinrad Archabbey church
Church
Typical
load+stratification
radiant floor
Casestudybuildinglist
Available cooling load prediction methods/tools

Method
Tools
#1
Heat gain
Ignorethermalmasseffect
#2
Simplified
methods
RTS,CLTD/CLF/SCL,weighting TRACE,DOE2,
factormethod, etc.
eQUEST,etc.
(airsystemonly)
#3
HB method
Radiantsystemsimulated
EnergyPlus,IESVE,
with dynamicsimulationtool TRNSYS,etc.
#4
Non
traditional
Usedmostlyfor applications Solar simulation

withintensivesolarand
tools,CFD
stratification
#5
ISO11855
(2012)
Diagrambasedondesign
dayenergygain,operation
hour,andetc. (TABSonly)
Spreadsheet
Proprietarytools
Thermal load analysis method/tool in practice

13 out of 16 designers we interviewed assume the same cooling load
for radiant systems as air systems
Radiant cooled surfaces were not directly modeled
Typical design
ISO 11855
method
0%
Dynamic
simula on
tool
19%
Simplified
method (Trane
Trace)
38%
Nontradi onal
method (CFD,
etc)
6%
Directly use heat

gain
37%
N=16
Differences between Heat gain and cooling load
Thermalmasseffectforconvectionbased(air)system
(source:ASHRAEFundamental2013)
Space cooling load definition

What is the difference in cooling load for radiant vs. air systems?
All-air systems
Cooling load
Heat gain removed by convection only
Maintain fixed setpoint temperature
Radiant heat gain

Absorbed by non-active thermal mass
Released as convective heat gain after time delay
Radiant systems
Cooling load
Heat gain removed by radiation and convection at
active chilled surface
Maintain operative temperature within comfort
zone
Radiant heat gain

Becomes cooling load instantly
Are they the same?
Cooling loadRADIANT Cooling loadAIR

Laboratory testing and simulation study will compare the
following:
Instantaneous cooling rate
peak cooling rate
10
Laboratory testing: Cooling load comparison

Objectives
Verify that cooling loads for radiant system are different from air system
Experimental approach
Concrete blocks (thermal mass) on floor with heating mats on top

(internal heat gain)
Conduct 12-hour tests with heaters on for 6 hours and off for 6 hours
Radiant chilled ceiling panels
Overhead air system
Maintain the same operative temperature
11
Test chamber configurations
Feng,J.Bauman,F.andSchiavon,S.(2013)Experimentalcomparisonofzonecoolingloadbetweenradiant
andairsystems,TobesubmittedtoEnergyandBuilding.
12
Experimental results: Operative temperature

Maintain the same thermal comfort level
Control to the same operative temperature at 24C (75.2 F )
13
Experimental results: Instantaneous cooling rate

Radiant system has a higher cooling rate than the air system
18% higher during hour 6 (peak cooling load)
14
Experimental results: Total energy removal

Radiant system removes heat faster during heater-on period
Heateronperiod
Radiant system removes 82%

of total heat gain
Air system removes 63.3%

of total heat gain
15
Simulation study of different design cases

Radiant system types
Radiant panel/Lightweight radiant
slab/Heavyweight radiant slab
G1: insulation
G2: building mass
Parameters studied
Thermal insulation
Building mass
hw_r2: heavyweight
hw_r2: R=2.20 (m2-K/W)

hw_r1: R=1.20 (m2-K/W)
Wall: L1: Concrete block

L2: Foam insulation
L3: Wood siding
Flr:
L1: Concrete slab

L2: Insulation
Lw_r2: lightweight
BC: environment
Wall: L1: Plaster board

L2: Fiberglass quilt
L3: Wood siding
Flr:
L1: Timber flooring

L2: Insulation
BC: adiabatic
BC: adiabatic
G3 :Int. heat gain
G4 :ceiling with solar

BC: adiabatic
Radiative/convective
split of internal load
Solar heat gain
Active ceiling/floor
Cooling design day simulation
rad0: 0% radiant
rad0.3: 30% radiant
rad0.6: 60% radiant
Window
rad1.0: 100% radiant
cl_noshade: No shade
BC: adiabatic
G5 :floor with solar
Window
flr_noshade: No shade
G6 :typical
Window
Window
cl_shade:Exterior shade
BC: adiabatic
Real Window
flr_shade:Exterior shade
BC: adiabatic
cl_shade_rad0.6
BC: adiabatic
Feng,J., Schiavon,S.andBauman,F.(2013)Coolingloaddifferencesbetweenradiantandairsystems,
EnergyandBuildings,65,310321.
16
Results: Peak cooling load

Higher peak cooling load for studied cases:
Interior space: 7-27%

Perimeter space without solar: 12-35%
Perimeter space with solar: 48-85%
Implications
Minimize solar load for design

Especially effective for removing solar load
High peak load high energy consumption!
17
Why are they different?
Power
Level (W/m2)
Power Level (W/m2)
AirSystem
1010
10
10
88
88
66
66
44
Coolingloadfrom
convectiveheatgain
22
00
6:00
6:00
18:00
18:00
6:00
10
RadiantSystem
Power Level (W/m2)
6:00
6:00
6:00
18:00
18:00
6:00
6:00
18:00
6:00
10
0
6:00
18:00
6:00
6:00
18
Comparison of cooling load profiles

Caseexample:Internalloadonly_radiative fraction=0.6
AirSystem
RadiantSystem
19
What about cooling load

prediction methods and
modeling tools?
20
10
ASHRAE cooling load prediction methods

Heat balance (HB) method
Based on first principles

EnergyPlus 8.0
Radiant time series (RTS) method/weighting factor method
Convective heat gain

Radiative heat gain
instantaneous cooling load

convective cooling load with delay
CTF/RTF Generator and excel (or TRACE )

10
8
6
4
2
0
6:00
18:00
6:00
21
Quote: ASHRAE HOF chapter 19
22
11
Measured vs. Prediction based on HB method

EnergyPlus v8.0 model was developed to apply the HB method
Match well with air system cooling load
Radiant system cooling load: heat removed by the radiant ceiling panels
23
Measured vs. Prediction based on RTS method

RTS method cannot predict cooling load correctly for the test
chamber configuration
24
12
Modeling tool selection

Tools
Modeling method
IES (VE)
HBmethod
TRNSYS
HBmethod
EnergyPlus
HB method
ESPr
HBmethod
DOE2
Weighting factormethod
eQUEST
Weighting factormethod
TRACE
RTSmethod orTFmethod
Capabilityto capturethe
radiantdynamic
Makesureto:1)Modeltheradiantsourceasaroomsurface;
2)Definecoolingloadcorrectly
25
Design radiant floor cooling systems with solar load

Applications
Spaces with large glazed surfaces,

such as atria, perimeter areas, etc.
Guidance is limited with solar
Maximum cooling capacity in
Akronartmuseum,OH
standard: 42 W/m2 (13 Btu/h.ft2)
With solar: 100 W/m2 (32 Btu/h.ft2)
B.Olesen,ASHRAEJournal(2008).
26
13
Simulated capacity vs. standard without solar

Simulated capacity matches well with standard capacity curve
without solar
27
Simulated capacity vs. standard with solar

Cooling capacity can reach 130 W/m2 (42 Btu/h.ft2)
28
14
Impact on air system sizing

Air system size: Simulated: 20 W/m2 (6.4 Btu/h.ft2)
Guideline: 86 W/m2 (27.5 Btu/h.ft2)
peakcoolingload:128W/m2 (41Btu/h.ft2)
Radiantcoolingcapacity:108W/m2 (34.5Btu/h.ft2)
Coolingcapacityhighlimitwithoutsolar42W/m2
29
Modeling for code compliance

and beyond code program
30
15
Title 24 (2013): Radiant floor cooling system

Modeling requirements for compliance evaluation
Items
ModelingInputRestrictions
Temperaturecontrol
Meanairtemperature
Hydronic TubingInsideDiameter
Betweenaminimumof1/2anda
maximumof
TemperatureControl
FixedatMeanAirTemperaturefor
compliancecalculations
CondensationControlDewpoint
Offset
Minimumcoldwatersupply
Temperaturefixedat2Fabovedewpoint
CoolingLowWaterTemperature
55F
EnergyPlus will be available for code compliance (CBECC-Com) , Jan 2014,

http://www.bees.archenergy.com
31
LEED
LEED topics
Possible
points
Energy& Atmosphere
Credit1:Optimizeenergyperformance
Credit 3:Enhancedcommissioning
Credit4:Enhancedrefrigerantmanagement
Credit5:Measurement&verification
26
IndoorEnvironmentalQuality
Credit1:Outdoorairdeliveringmonitoring
Credit2:Increasedventilation
Credit3:ConstructionIAQplan
Credit6.2:Controllabilityofsystems thermalcomfort
Credit7:Thermalcomfort Design&Verification
Innovationindesign
32
16
Key takeaway
Cooling load prediction and modeling method for radiant systems
Use design tools based on heat balance approach
Define cooling load as heat removed by actively cooled surface(s),i.e. , radiant
source should be modeled
RTS or weighting factor method, may lead to incorrect results
Peak cooling loads may be higher than air systems, but

Radiant systems are known to be more energy efficient
Under some operating strategies radiant systems will have lower peak
cooling loads (e.g., nighttime pre-cooling).
33
Acknowledgments
California Energy Commission (CEC) Public Interest Energy
Research (PIER) Buildings Program.
Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley

(www.cbe.berkeley.edu).
Julian Rimmer, Brad Tully, and Tom Epp of Price Industries for the
use of their Hydronic Test Chamber in Winnipeg.
34
17
Radiant system building project

Link to the map: http://bit.ly/RadiantBuildingsCBE
Link to the form: http://bit.ly/RadiantFormCBE
Contact:
Caroline Karmann, ckarmann@berkeley.edu

Fred Baumann, fbauman@berkeley.edu
35
Questions?
Jingjuan (Dove) Feng
jjfeng@berkeley.edu
Fred Bauman
fbauman@berkeley.edu
Stefano Schiavon
sschiavon@berkeley.edu
36
18

Feng

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Feng

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PerformancePredictionandModeling

Radiant Cooling Design:

Jingjuan (Dove) Feng, PhD Candidate

Center for the Built Environment

Whats available and whats been used?

Are they accurate?

Cooling load prediction method

Modeling tool selection

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Backgrounds: Air systems vs. Radiant systems

Design to meet a single peak

Remove heat using

Decoupled ventilation and

Allow pre-conditioning the

Remove heat using

1. Is the cooling load the same for radiant

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

What methods and tools are available and being used ?

ASHRAE HOF (2013)

Case studies + Survey

Rad system type

David Brower Center

radiant ceiling slab

radiant floor cooling

retail with skylight

NREL Research Support Facility

radiant slab ceiling

William Jefferson Clinton

SMUD building office area

radiant ceiling slab

St Meinrad Archabbey church

Available cooling load prediction methods/tools

Usedmostlyfor applications Solar simulation

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Thermal load analysis method/tool in practice

Directly use heat

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Differences between Heat gain and cooling load

Space cooling load definition

Radiant heat gain

Radiant heat gain

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Are they the same?

Cooling loadRADIANT Cooling loadAIR

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Laboratory testing: Cooling load comparison

Concrete blocks (thermal mass) on floor with heating mats on top

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Test chamber configurations

Experimental results: Operative temperature

Control to the same operative temperature at 24C (75.2 F )

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Experimental results: Instantaneous cooling rate

18% higher during hour 6 (peak cooling load)

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Experimental results: Total energy removal

Radiant system removes 82%

Air system removes 63.3%

Center for the Built Environment October 2013

Simulation study of different design cases

G2: building mass

hw_r2: R=2.20 (m2-K/W)

Wall: L1: Concrete block

L1: Concrete slab