Stay Informed
Follow us on social media accounts to stay up to date with REHVA actualities
Ivanko DmytroNorwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Trondheim, Norwayemail: dmytro.ivanko@ntnu.no | Natasa NordNorwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Trondheim, Norwayemail: natasa.nord@ntnu.no | Andrea TartaglinoPolitecnico Di Torino, Department of Energy
Management, Turin, ItalyDENSO Thermal Systems S.p.A., Poirino, Italyemail: andrea.tartaglino@unito.it |
Domestic
hot water (DHW) system is significant energy consumer in hotels. For this
reason, energy modeling and simulations in hotels should provide an accurate
and representative assessment of the energy performance of domestic hot water
systems. The majority of dynamic simulation tools use DHW energy use profiles
as the basic for estimating DHW energy needs. In this article, energy
simulations in EnergyPlus software for a large hotel were carried out. All
inputs in the EnergyPlus simulation model were adjusted according to Norwegian
national regulations. Application of different DHW energy use profiles in the
simulation model was explored. The profiles given in the national and
international standards were compared with profiles obtained from measurements
in the hotel located in Oslo, Norway. Simulations in EnergyPlus showed that
application of profiles from measured data have higher accuracy then simulations
based on standards. The results of the study may give indication for sizing and
planning of DHW systems.
Domestic
hot water (DHW) systems make a substantial contribution to the energy balance
in hotels in Norway [1]. They are responsible for approximately 20–35% of the
total energy use in these buildings [2]. Michopoulos, Ziogou [3] estimate that
CO2 emissions for hot-water use in the hotels
remains quite high, 2.87–3.2 kg-CO2/(person⋅night). Hot water usage is the
second largest energy consumer in hotels after heating [4]. Recent studies
emphasise that a large potential for increasing energy efficiency in buildings
can be achieved by improving operation and design of DHW systems [4]. One of
the aims of the simulation approach of DHW system performance is to estimate
and predict the DHW volume and the energy use for hot water production in
existing building, or in building at the design phase. This information is
essential for sizing and optimising of DHW system and its components [5].
The DHW
profiles are the basis for simulation of DHW systems performance in buildings,
as well as useful instrument for understanding the process of DHW energy use in
the buildings [6]. The profiles of DHW energy use show how the energy for DHW
is used most of the time.
Building
simulation tools may require diverse input data for DHW energy use simulation.
In many simulation tools, average yearly DHW energy use profiles per m² of
building area are applied as input for modelling. Other tools require three
types of input data: average DHW use in l/(person⋅day), occupant number, and DHW usage
profile. In addition, the default values for DHW supply temperature and
cold-water temperature are considered for energy estimation. The so-called
bottom-up approach requires a detailed information of occupant presence,
profiles of occupant activities, available domestic appliance, corresponding
technical details, etc. [7]. The methods based on detailed information about DHW
use activities and DHW system, usually require extensive input data, which
increases the complexity of obtaining this information and process of energy
use estimation.
A
comparative analysis of five different software calculation tools based on
technical standards for predicting monthly and daily DHW consumption profiles
in residential buildings are investigated in [5]. The deviation in results from
measured data are −30% to +40%. Better estimations are obtained with
methods based on standards specific to the country where measurements were
done.
A better
understanding of DHW energy use profiles and their application in simulation
tools is a crucial factor in achieving energy savings in hotel buildings.
Therefore, in this article DHW profiles based on measured energy use in the
hotel in Oslo, Norway, were developed. The data comprises five years of hourly
measurements of energy use for DHW. The obtained profiles, as well as profiles
from national and international standards for heat demand calculation, were applied
in simulation model of a representative hotel. The model was developed in
EnergyPlus [8]. The possible benefits from using more accurate energy profiles
were explained.
For
modelling of the hotel, EnergyPlus model from the Department of Energy (DOE)
Large Hotel model [9] was used. The model was adjusted according to Norwegian
regulations and requirements.
For the
analysis of DHW energy use in the hotel, it was considered few different
scenarios:
1) DHW energy use was derived from profiles
obtained based on measurements in the real hotel, located in Oslo.
2) DHW energy use was derived from profiles in ISO 18523-1
[10].
3) DHW energy use were derived profiles
obtained from the technical specification SN/TS 3031:2016 [11].
The results
of simulations based on different DHW energy use profiles were compered.
The
parameters of the hotel are typical for Norway. The hotel reflects well the
trends of DHW energy use in similar types of buildings. The building was
renovated in 2007. The area of the hotel is 4 939 m². The building
has eight floors with 164 guest rooms. All the guest rooms have bathrooms with
toilet facilities and shower. According to the hotel management, employees use
hot water for cleaning, and guests use hot water for personal hygiene.
In the DHW
system, the hot water is circulated all the time to ensure fast delivery at
each tap all the time. The hotel uses electric water heaters for DHW
preparation. Data on energy use for DHW were collected during several years
from an energy meter installed by the hotel owner. The meters measure
electricity delivered to the DHW tanks. This means that both DHW needs and heat
losses in the DHW system were included in the presented DHW energy use.
It is
supposed that a reference building simulation model represents the average
building stock in a Norwegian geographical area in terms of building
characteristics and functionality [8]. The model for the reference hotel was
selected from the U.S. DOE database. The building in EnergyPlus present 7 floors:
6 floors above the ground level and 1 basement, see Figure 1.
The total building area is 11 348 m². Based on the geometry and shape
of the real hotel in Oslo, it was estimated that the model in Figure 1
would fit well for the analysis. The weather data for Oslo, Norway, were used
as input in this study.
Figure 1.
Reference hotel.
The
modifications were done to conform the model to Norwegian national limits on building
thermal properties, indoor comfort, and annual energy use. To initialise, the
building parameters and schedules for human occupancy were used from the
following national and international standards: ISO 18532-1, EN 15232,
and NS 3031:2007 [10-12].
Statistical
data of energy use in the hotel show that DHW tap systems have significant
impact on energy use in buildings. More specifically, in the observed hotel,
DHW energy use constituted more than 20% of total energy use.
Since the
simulation model and actual hotel have different area, energy use profiles from
measurements were calculated per m² of building area. As discussed above, both
DHW needs and self-use in the DHW system were included in the presented
measurements. Self-use includes water leakages in the pipes, circulation
losses, energy use for maintaining the required temperature of DHW in the
system and other consumer-independent losses in the system. Due to these
losses, a DHW system is constantly using a certain amount of heat, even if
there are no visitors in a hotel. Reducing self-use is an essential task in
achieving efficient energy use in the buildings. Statistical data for the hotel
showed that information about self-use could be obtained based on profiles of
the DHW energy use in public holidays. From Figure 2,
we can see that hourly average and variation of DHW energy use during the
holidays is very small. This phenomenon could be explained by the fact that on
holidays, the hotel was closed for visitors. Consequently, the DHW energy use
in the hotel in these days mostly caused by self-use in the system.
Figure 2.
Profiles of hourly DHW energy use on holidays and all days in the year in the
hotel.
Accordingly,
it was proposed to consider the average profiles of DHW energy use during the
public holidays as a way to assess self-use in DHW system of the hotel. Average
profiles of energy use on holidays evaluate the share of energy use for
self-use of DHW system. The identified percentage of the energy use for
self-use in the hotel constituted 39.15% of the average DHW annual energy use.
“ISO 18523-1:2016:
Energy performance of buildings” provides reference domestic hot water usage
for different types of rooms. Based on ISO 18523 and EnergyPlus model, DHW
energy use profiles for the typical hotel were obtained. “SN/TS 3031:2016:
Energy performance of buildings. Calculation of energy needs and energy supply”
is a national standard in Norway. Calculation of energy needs and energy supply
gives recommendation on DHW profiles that should be used as input for energy
demand calculation [11].
In this
study, the profiles of the actual DHW energy use in the real hotel, see Figure 2,
and the profile for the same type of building based on the standards ISO 18523,
see Figure 3, and SN/TS 3031, see Figure 4,
were compared. The analysis indicates the big difference between these tree
types of profiles.
Figure 3.
Hourly profile of DHW energy use of the hotel obtained based on “ISO 18523-1:2016:
Energyperformance of buildings”.
Compered to
profiles in real hotel, Figure 2, the profile
based on ISO 18523, see Figure 3, significantly
overestimates the DHW energy use in the hotel. ISO 18523 shows morning and
evening peaks of the DHW energy use, which occur from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m.
and from 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. The peak energy use modelled based on ISO 18523
are about three times higher than those measured in the real hotel. Besides,
evening peak of DHW energy use in a real hotel is not expressed as obvious as
in the ISO 18523.
Figure 4.
Hourly profile of DHW energy use according to the standard “SN/TS 3031:2016:
Energy performance of buildings. Calculation of energy needs and energy supply”.
As shown in
Figure 4, the DHW energy use from 1 a.m.
to 5 a.m. in the standard SN/TS 3031 is equal to zero. This fact
means that the standard does not take in account the so-called self-use of the
system. On the contrary, the actual data obtained with the help of energy
meters usually contain both the system's self-use and DHW energy use by visitors.
It should be noticed, that self-use of the system is responsible for the
significant share of energy use in DHW tap systems (up to 40% during the year)
and therefore cannot be neglected.
From the
standard SN/TS 3031 profile (see Figure 4),
we can assume that morning peak of energy use occurs from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.,
and evening peak from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. The maximum heat demand during
the day is approximately 8 W/m². Meantime, from the profiles of energy use
obtained from the statistical data, it was possible to notice that morning peak
usually occurs from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m., and a small increase in energy
use can be observed from 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. The maximum energy use
during the day was approximately 12 W/m². The difference in the values of
maximum energy use in considered profiles was 6 W/m², which was 30% of the
total DHW use. This difference could be explained by self-use of DHW system
that the standard SN/TS 3031 does not take into account. However, it could
be noticed from Figure 4, the timing of actual
peaks of energy use also does not match the information presented in the
standards.
The
simulation results from EnergyPlus with different DHW profiles as inputs were
compared with the actual energy use in the hotel. Monthly energy use is given
in Figure 5 and annual energy use is given in Figure 6.
The simulation results for the DHW energy use revealed the drawbacks of the
considered standards. For example, the difference between the annual DHW energy
use simulated by profiles obtained from the measurements and the real total DHW
energy use was approximately 10%. Meantime, the national standard, SN/TS 3031:2016,
underestimated annual DHW energy use for 32% and ISO 18523-1:2016
overestimated for 2.3 times.
Figure 5.
Simulated and actual monthly DHW energy use in the hotel.
Figure 6.
Simulated and real yearly DHW energy use in the hotel.
Simulation
results indicated that the DHW energy use was responsible for significant share
of the total energy use of the hotel see Figure 7.
Figure 7.
Percentage of DHW energy use in total energy use of the hotel.
Comparison
with the DHW energy use in the real hotel revealed that simulations based on
profiles obtained by measurements gave better explanation of the DHW energy use
than the standards. The standard ISO 18523-1:2016 significantly
overestimated the DHW energy use in the hotel in Norway. Meantime, for annual
and monthly simulations of the DHW energy use, the technical specification SN/TS 3031:2016
demonstrated quite reasonable result. However, in addition to using the
technical specification SN/TS 3031:2016, the assumption about self-use in
DHW system should be included in calculations. Making this assumption for a
real building can be problematic.
The factors
that introduce uncertainty to simulations are number and types of DHW use
facilities in the hotels. The presence of a restaurant, swimming pool, sauna,
and gym increase DHW energy use at the hotel. The profiles given in the
standards are usually too simplified. These profiles were created for certain
categories of buildings such as hotel, offices, school, etc. However, even
within one type of buildings, DHW energy use can behave differently. For
example, studies showed that specific DHW use in large and luxury hotels is
much higher than in a regular one [4]. Therefore, there is a need to develop
more aggregated profiles, which will take into account the main factors that
influence DHW energy use. It should be emphasized that these profiles should be
based on accurate and up-date statistical data from real buildings and reliable
methods of processing available information.
DHW systems
play essential role in achieving efficient energy use in buildings. For this
reason, evaluation of DHW energy during simulations should be representative
and corresponds to real energy use in buildings. The DHW profiles are the basis
for simulation of DHW systems performance. Moreover, analysis of DHW energy use
profiles is a powerful instrument for gaining knowledge about DHW system
operation.
In this
article, the EnergyPlus model from the DOE Large Hotel model was adjusted
according to Norwegian regulations and requirements. For analysis of the DHW
energy use in the hotel, it was considered few different scenarios with various
profiles used as input. Profiles obtained based on measured DHW energy use in
the real hotel, profiles derived from international standard ISO 18523-1,
and the national standard SN/TS 3031:2016 were used in this study. The
comparison of the standards revealed the significant difference between hourly
DHW energy use obtained by measurement and standards. Besides, the timing of
actual peaks of energy use does not match the information presented in the
standards. Implementation of the EnergyPlus model indicated that simulations
based on profiles obtained by measurements gave better explanation of the DHW
energy use than using the standards. Simulations based on ISO 18523-1:2016
overestimated the annual DHW energy use approximately two time and peak energy
use three times. Meantime, the national standard SN/TS 3031:2016 showed
better result. However, the standard SN/TS 3031:2016 does not take in
account self-use of DHW system. Therefore, information given in this standard
should be supplemented by estimation of self-use of DHW system in the building.
At the same time, profiles which are based on actual measurements, allowed us
to obtain the most reliable results. The difference between yearly DHW energy
use simulated by profiles obtained from measurements was approximately 10%.
This
article has been written within the research project "Energy for domestic
hot water in the Norwegian low emission society". The authors gratefully
acknowledge the support from the Research Council of Norway
(ENERGIX-programme), SINTEF Community, Department of Energy and Process
Engineering at NTNU, Drammen Eiendom, Omsorgsbygg, Boligbygg, OBOS, Olav Thon
Gruppen, Armaturjonsson, Høiax, Geberit, Uponor and FM Mattsson.
[1]Bohdanowicz P, Martinac IJE, buildings.
Determinants and benchmarking of resource consumption in hotels—Case study of
Hilton International and Scandic in Europe. 2007;39(1):82-95.
[2]Bøhm B. Production and distribution of domestic
hot water in selected Danish apartment buildings and institutions. Analysis of
consumption, energy efficiency and the significance for energy design requirements
of buildings. Energy conversion and management. 2013;67:152-9.
[3]Michopoulos A, Ziogou I, Kerimis M, Zachariadis
T. A study on hot-water production of hotels in Cyprus: Energy and
environmental considerations. Energy and Buildings. 2017;150:1-12.
[4]Fuentes E, Arce L, Salom J. A review of
domestic hot water consumption profiles for application in systems and
buildings energy performance analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 2018;81:1530-47.
[5]Marini D, Buswell RA, Hopfe CJ. A critical
software review-how is hot water modelled in current building simulation? 2015.
[6]Yao R, Steemers K. A method of formulating
energy load profile for domestic buildings in the UK. Energy and buildings.
2005;37(6):663-71.
[7]Widén J, Lundh M, Vassileva I, Dahlquist E,
Ellegård K, Wäckelgård E. Constructing load profiles for household electricity
and hot water from time-use data – Modelling approach and validation. Energy
and Buildings. 2009;41(7):753-68.
[8]Tartaglino A. Master thesis. Energy evaluation
of a large hotel located in Italy and Norway. Investigation of various energy
supply systems' behaviour under different boundary conditions. Politecnico Di
Torino, Italy. 2017.
[9]energy USDo. 90.1 Prototype Building Models
Large Hotel.
[10]ISO 18523-1:2016. Energy performance of
buildings -- Schedule and condition of building, zone and space usage for
energy calculation – Part 1: Non-residential buildings.
[11]"Standard Norge, SN/TS 3031:2016, in:
Energy performance of buildings. Calculation of energy needs and energy
supply.", 2016.
[12]EN 15232-1: May 2017 Energy Performance of
Buildings - Energy performance of buildings – Part 1: Impact of Building
Automation, Controls and Building Management - Modules M10-4,5,6,7,8,9,10.
Follow us on social media accounts to stay up to date with REHVA actualities
0