Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Low Energy Building Design Group B Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Embedded Generation.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Low Energy Building Design Group B Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Embedded Generation."— Presentation transcript:

1 Low Energy Building Design Group B Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Embedded Generation

2 Presentation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson 1.Introduction: Project and Building 2.Base Case Results: i.Demand ii.Supply 3.Initial Matching Procedure 4.Initial Conclusions 5.Demand Minimisation 6.Power and Energy Storage 7.Final Conclusions 8.Questions

3 Introduction: The Aim Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson  To establish if demand side management can facilitate the embedding of renewable technologies in buildings, Our project:  We have focused on a residential building type similar to perhaps a hostel or student accommodation,  The building scenario is unconstrained as regards renewable potential,  We will utilise the simulation programme ESP-r to establish our demand profiles and then quantify how design changes affect those profiles.

4 Introduction: Building  The building accommodates 16 people in Winter and 52 in the summer, it consists of 16 bedrooms with en-suite and has a communal Lounge, Library and Kitchen,  As it is a residential building it will be predominantly occupied between 5pm and 9am, with some residents returning during the day. Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson

5 Base Case Results  The base case results are simulated using standard building constructions and utilising Scottish climate data Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Initial Demand Profiles:  Heating loads  Hot water  Lighting  Small power

6 Base Case Results: Initial demand Heating Loads: Winter Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Average Load = 3.61 kW/h

7 Base Case Results: Initial demand Heating Loads: Summer Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Average Load = 0.83kW

8 Base Case Results: Initial demand Hot Water Loads Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Average Load Summer = 0.105kW Winter = 0.03 kW Volume of Hot Water Required (m 3 ) Summer31.72 Winter9.76

9 Base Case Results: Initial Demand Lighting Loads Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Winter Average Load = 0.73 kW Summer Average Load = 0.68 kW

10 Base Case Results: Initial Demand Small Power Loads Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Winter Average Demand = 0.65 kW Summer Average Demand = 1.28 kW

11 Base Case Results: Initial supply Solar thermal Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Heat (kW)Average Supply (kW/hr) Duration of Day June Oct/Feb December Based on a Collector Area of 200m 2

12 Base Case Results: Initial supply Photovoltaics Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Using Data from the CIBSE Guide Peak Power (kW) Average Power (kW/hr) Duration of Day June Oct/Feb December Based on a Collector Area of 200m 2

13 Base Case Results: Initial supply Wind daily analysis Ducted wind turbines: m diameter turbines 20 1m diameter turbines Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Winter Summer Avg supply 0.5m diameter0.10 1m diameter0.20 Avg supply 0.5m diameter0.21 1m diameter0.41

14 Base Case Results: Initial supply Wind daily analysis Stand alone wind turbines Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson WinterSummer Avg supply 2m diameter0.04 4m diameter0.22 6m diameter0.32 Avg supply 2m diameter0.07 4m diameter0.29 6m diameter0.66

15 Base Case Results: Initial supply Wind monthly analysis For a 6m diameter turbine operating at 20m height For a 4m diameter turbine operating at 13m height For a 2m diameter turbine operating at 10m height Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Avg supply 2m diameter0.15 4m diameter3.42 6m diameter16.26

16 Base Case Results: Initial supply Ground source heating Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson A 12 kW ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) is embedded in our building. (Coefficient of Performance COP= 3) Advantages of this technology for our building: Reliable (temperature of the ground is constant) Constant supply profiles for space heating Suitable for heating and for cooling Main disadvantage of this technology for our building: Heat pump needs to be powered with electrical energy and therefore this increases the electrical power load during utilisation.

17 Initial Matching Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Summer Average Demand (kW) Average Supply (kW) Hot water0.105Solar thermal13.08 Heating0.83Ground source heatingas required Lighting0.68Photovoltaic6.35 Small Power1.28Wind ducted 0.2 stand alone 0.32 Winter Average Demand (kW) Average Supply (kW) Hot water0.03Solar thermal0.61 Heating3.61Ground source heatingas required Lighting0.73Photovoltaic0.3 Small Power0.65Wind ducted 0.41 stand alone 0.66

18 Initial Matching Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Mismatched graph

19 Initial Matching Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Mismatched graph

20 Initial Matching Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Mismatched graph

21 Initial conclusions Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson  From our initial profiles, supply and demands, there is no one suitable technology for our scenario, i.e. some technologies are out of phase completely and others are not reliable power sources,  We feel that the best way to move forward is:  to reduce the building demands by altering the construction and introducing more control, for example,  to identify demands which can be potentially moved to more appropriate times to match supply,  to establish efficient methods of storing heat and power.

22 Matching Procedure Our matching Criteria:  When does the load occur?  Does the load have to occur at this time or at all?  Will shifting/removing the load reduce the peaks?  When can we shift the load to? Will this create another Peak?  Does this make the demand profiles match the supply profile better? Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson

23 Demand minimisation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Which demand can be reduced?  Heating loads by altering the design of the model  Lighting by adding a control system taking into account the natural daylight and room occupancy Moving demands?  Because the building is residential, the potential for displacing loads is quite limited,  Some possibilities are:  Limiting times when laundry can be done,  Staggering cooking times.

24 Demand minimisation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Design changes: Heating

25 Demand minimisation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Construction design changes: Heating

26 Demand minimisation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Control design changes for Heating

27 Demand minimisation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Control design changes for Heating

28 Demand minimisation Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Lighting To make maximum use of daylight, light is now controlled No change for winter – significant reduction for summer

29 Supply Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Matching Supply Sources to Demand Profiles Required (kWh) Ground Source Heating (kWh) Weekdays

30 Power and Energy Storage Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson In order to use the Ground Source Heat Pump at the most suitable time during the day (9am to 5pm) we decided to store thermal energy in a sensible heat storage: a water tank. Due to a high specific heat (4180 J/kg.K, Rock is 794 J/kg.K), water is easy to use for heat exchanges and is able to store heat for some hours with a good heat-storage-to-volume ratio (10 kWh/m3, Rock is 4kWh/m3). Water tank with external heat exchanger: efficiency is up to 80 % Volumetric Specific Heat Capacity (kJ/Km 3 ) Energy Stored in 1m^3, ΔT 60 °C (kWh) Rock Water SummerWinter Total Power Demands kW15.5 kW Total lighting demands 16.4 kW17.5 kW TOTAL kW33 kW We embedded a lead acid battery of 50kWh capacity to store energy at least for 1 day

31 Final Conclusions Group B : Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson The use of energy from renewable sources for our model is limited:  Combination of ground source heating and solar thermal is the most appropriate combinations,  Wind may meet our power demands, however it is not a reliable supply, The use of embedded generation in our case would make sense only if this use is combined with effective and efficient storage means. By using demand side management throughout our project we feel that we have been able to minimise demands where possible, however due to the nature of our building it has not been possible to establish a definitive match with any of the supply profiles.


Download ppt "Low Energy Building Design Group B Romain Jauffres, Karen Kennedy, Pedro Ros Zuazua, Ulrich Sanson Embedded Generation."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google