[Equest-users] GSHP Simulation Results

[Anthony Hardman]

Two quick things to check would be the supplemental electric heat (for the air-source system) as well as your loop field design parameters.  Your numbers could be correct if it’s in an extremely cold climate, you’ve oversized the loop field or your loop field ground thermal properties are unrealistic for the area in question.  

 

Anthony Hardman

Mechancial Engineer

LEED AP

 

Geo-Energy Services

14250 E Easter Pl, STE C

Centennial, CO 80112

303-531-5292 v

303-805-3563 f

720-273-9973 c

 <http://www.geoenergyservices.com> www.GeoEnergyServices.com

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Parker
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 3:03 AM
To: equest-users
Subject: [Equest-users] GSHP Simulation Results

 

Hello everyone,

I have modeled a ground source heat pump within the building I have designed and have been getting results that seem almost too good to be true.  I decided to compare my results with a typical high efficiency air side heat pump and discovered that the geothermal system is operating about 65-75% better than the air side heat pump in terms of cost.  The results from the air side heat pump appear to be correct and are reasonable for my design.

Has anybody else ever gotten results for a geothermal system design that were much better than expected?  If so, was there something incorrect within your model or have you deemed it as an internal flaw of eQUEST?  This project is for my masters thesis, so I am trying to justify my results as much as possible.  For my system I am using two 3.5 ton GSHPs with an EER of 21.8 and a COP of 4.4, which is rather efficient. 

Thanks,

Stephen Parker
Bucknell University

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090424/d2e87154/attachment.htm>