From laboratory to on-site operation: Reevaluation of empirically based electric water chiller models

Building Simulation(2021)Cite this article

Abstract

Chiller model is a key factor to building energy simulation and chiller performance prediction. With spread of new types of electric water chillers that have higher performance and wider operating range, new challenges have been faced by building energy simulation tools and their chiller models. This work takes a new type of electric water chiller as a case study and reevaluates eight typical empirically based models for predicting the energy performance of electric water chiller to verify whether they are suitable for the new type of chiller, using both laboratory test data from chiller manufacturer and online monitoring data from on-site operation of a central cooling plant with chillers of the same type. The prediction ability of the chiller models (including model prediction accuracy and generation ability) in laboratory test and on-site operation situations are examined. The results show that the existing models can well describe the chiller performance in the laboratory test situation but perform poorly in the on-site operation situation. As the best two models in the laboratory dataset, the overall prediction errors of DOE-2 and GN model increase more than 250% and 75% respectively in the field dataset. The big discrepancy of model prediction accuracy in the two situations is mainly due to the differences of evaporator and condenser water flow rates between the laboratory and on-site operation datasets, which indicates the limitations of the empirical chiller models and implies further research in future in order to improve the suitability and reliability of chiller model.

This is a preview of subscription content,access via your institution.

访问options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Abbreviations

cw:

water specific heat (= 4.2 kJ/(kg·K))

CAPFT:

cooling capacity factor of chiller, equal to 1 at reference conditions

COP:

coefficient of performance of chiller

CV:

coefficient of variation

EIRFPLR:

energy input to cooling output factor of chiller at part-load conditions, i.e., part-load efficiency

EIRFT:

energy input to cooling output factor of chiller at full-load conditions, i.e., full-load efficiency

Mc:

condenser water flow rate of chiller (L/s)

Me:

冷水机组的蒸发器水流速(L / s)

Mc,total:

cooling water flow of main pipe (L/s)

Me,total:

chilled water flow of main pipe (L/s)

P:

compressor work input of chiller (kW)

Pref:

compressor work input of chiller at reference conditions (kW)

PLR:

part-load ratio of chiller, equal to cooling load divided by the available chiller capacity adjusted for current fluid temperatures

Qc:

condenser cooling capacity of chiller (kW)

Qe:

cvaporator cooling capacity of chiller (kW)

Qe,ref:

evaporator cooling capacity of chiller at reference conditions (kW)

R2:

coefficient of determination

Tci:

condenser inlet water temperature of chiller (K or °C)

Tco:

condenser outlet water temperature of chiller (K or °C)

Tei:

evaporator inlet water temperature of chiller (K or °C)

Teo:

evaporator outlet water temperature of chiller (K or °C)

Tcr:

茵莱t water temperature of cooling towers (K or °C)

Tcs:

outlet water temperature of cooling towers (K or °C)

Tr:

return temperature of chilled water (K or °C)

Ts:

supply temperature of chilled water (K or °C)

ρw:

water density (=1.0 kg/L)

Õ:

相对误差指标

lab:

laboratory test data

field:

on-site monitoring data

p:

predicted value by an empirical chiller model

m:

measured value

References

  1. Alonso S, Morán A, Pérez D, et al. (2020). Estimating cooling production and monitoring efficiency in chillers using a soft sensor.Neural Computing and Applications, 32: 17291–17308.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  2. ASHRAE (2002). ASHRAE Guideline 14–2002. Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings. Atlanta, GA, USA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers

    Google Scholar

  3. Chen CL, Chang YC, Chan TS (2014). Applying smart models for energy saving in optimal chiller loading.能源和建筑, 68: 364–371.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  4. Chen J, Chen H, Zeng Y, et al. (2020). The energy consumption prediction method of chillers based on gradient boosting regression tree.Refrigeration and Airconditioning, 20(11): 78–82. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar

  5. Cui J, Wang S (2005). A model-based online fault detection and diagnosis strategy for centrifugal chiller systems.International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 44: 986–999.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  6. Gordon JM, Ng KC (1994). Thermodynamic modeling of reciprocating chillers.Journal of Applied Physics, 75: 2769–2774.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  7. Harrington P (2012). Machine Learning in Action. Shelter Island, NY, USA: Manning Publications.

    Google Scholar

  8. Hydeman M, Gillespie KL Dexter AL (2002a). Tools and techniques to calibrate electric chiller component models.ASHRAE Transactions, 108(1): 733–741.

    Google Scholar

  9. Hydeman M, Webb N, Sreedharan P, et al. (2002b). Development and testing of a reformulated regression-based electric chiller model.ASHRAE Transactions, 108(2): 1118–1127.

    Google Scholar

  10. Jiang W, Reddy TA (2003). Reevaluation of the gor-don-ng performance models for water-cooled chillers.ASHRAE Transactions, 109(2): 272–287.

    Google Scholar

  11. Kamar HM, Ahmad R, Kamsah NB, et al. (2013). Artificial neural networks for automotive air-conditioning systems performance prediction.Applied Thermal Engineering, 50: 63–70.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  12. Lee TS (2004). Thermodynamic modeling and experimental validation of screw liquid chillers.ASHRAE Transactions, 110(1): 206–216.

    Google Scholar

  13. Lee TS, Liao K, Lu W (2012). Evaluation of the suitability of empirically-based models for predicting energy performance of centrifugal water chillers with variable chilled water flow.Applied Energy, 93: 583–595.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  14. Ng KC, Chua HT, Ong W, et al. (1997). Diagnostics and optimization of reciprocating chillers: theory and experiment.Applied Thermal Engineering, 17: 263–276.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  15. Pan Y, Tian B, Mao J, et al. (2015). Development and online tuning of an empirically-based model for centrifugal chillers. In: Proceedings of the 14th International IBPSA Building Simulation Conference, Hyderabad, India.

  16. Reddy TA, Andersen K (2002). An evaluation of classical steady-state off-line linear parameter estimation methods applied to chiller performance data.HVAC&R Research, 8: 101–124.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  17. Sreedharan P (2001). Evaluation of chiller modeling approaches and their usability for fault detection. Master Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, USA.

    BookGoogle Scholar

  18. Sreedharan P, Haves P (2001). Comparison of chiller models for use in model-based fault detection. In: Proceedings of Comparison of chiller models for use in model-based fault detection, Austin, TX, USA.

  19. Swider DJ, Browne MW, Bansal PK, et al. (2001). Modelling of vapour-compression liquid chillers with neural networks.Applied Thermal Engineering, 21: 311–329.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  20. Swider DJ (2003). A comparison of empirically based steady-state models for vapor-compression liquid chillers.Applied Thermal Engineering, 23: 539–556.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  21. Tian B, Pan Y, Huang Z (2014). Analysis and evaluation of empirically based steady-state models for centrifugal chillers.Building Energy Efficiency, 42(2): 15–20. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar

  22. Tian C, Xing Z, Pan X, et al. (2019). A method for COP prediction of an on-site screw chiller applied in cinema.International Journal of Refrigeration, 98: 459–467.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  23. Wang B, Zou Y, Song Y, et al. (2013). Research on calculation methods of chiller’s energy-saving amount based on mathematical models.Building Science, 29(4): 79–84. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar

  24. Wei Z, Wang B (2018). Characteristic analysis and case study of energy saving uncertainty model for heating system retrofit projects.Building Science, 34(6): 115–122, 2018. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar

  25. Wu F, Yang X, Shi B, (2020). Energy consumption prediction model of chiller based on empirical mode decomposition.Refrigeration and Airconditioning, 20(10): 27–33. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar

  26. Yik FWH, Lam VCK (1998). Chiller models for plant design studies.Buildng Services Engineering Research and Technology, 19: 233–241.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

  27. Zhu X, Zhang S, Jin X, et al. (2020). Deep learning based reference model for operational risk evaluation of screw chillers for energy efficiency.Energy, 213: 118833.

    ArticleGoogle Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the State Key Laboratory of Air-Conditioning Equipment and System Energy Conservation (No. ACSKL2019KT13), National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51608297 and No. 51678024), Scientific Research Project of Beijing Municipal Education Commission (No. KM201910016009 and No. KZ202110016022), Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Future Urban Design (No. UDC2019011121) and Fundamental Research Funds for Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture (No. X18301).

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin, 300072, China

    Bin Zhang & Shijun You

  2. State Key Laboratory of Air-Conditioning Equipment and System Energy Conservation, Zhuhai, 519070, China

    Sheng Wang

  3. Guangdong Key Laboratory of Refrigeration Equipment and Energy Conservation Technology, Zhuhai, 519070, China

    Sheng Wang

  4. Beijing Key Laboratory of Heating, Gas Supply, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Engineering, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing, 100044, China

    Xiaoxiao Ding, Chuang Wang & Yan Gao

  5. 北京未来(先进的创新中心n Design, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing, 100044, China

    Xiaoxiao Ding, Chuang Wang & Yan Gao

Authors
  1. Bin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar

  2. Shijun You
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar

  3. Sheng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar

  4. Xiaoxiao Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar

  5. Chuang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar

  6. Yan Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence toSheng WangorChuang Wang.

Electronic supplementary material (ESM)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, B., You, S., Wang, S.et al.From laboratory to on-site operation: Reevaluation of empirically based electric water chiller models.Build. Simul.(2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-021-0797-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • electric water chiller
  • performance model
  • model validation
  • model prediction ability
  • variable water flow rates