[Equest-users] Boiler Curves in Library

Tue Jan 10 13:36:09 PST 2017

Thanks Fred, that is very helpful and gives almost a complete picture of boiler efficiency.

To confirm, regardless of whether the boiler modulates or is single stage, the DOE2 part load HIR curve is valid only down to the specified MIN-RATIO. For values less than that, it cycles between the consumption determined by the HIR at MIN-RATIO and the Standby consumption. So if Standby consumption is ignored, the MIN-RATIO variable should actually improve the apparent efficiency because it eliminates the low efficiencies at extremely low PLRs (e.g. from 0 to 5%). Is that your understanding?

I was thinking that Start-up Time, for an actual boiler, would only occur seasonally if the boiler is shut off. That seems to agree with my data in that there is some type of load every single hour, so the Start-up Time should be negligible. That leaves only the “Standby Time” variable as additional consumption during cycling. I am using the default value of 0.027 hours (which I understand means 2.7% of full-load consumption), which is resulting in a 1-2% drop in annual efficiency when compared to only using the PLR HIR curve. Does that seem reasonable?

From: Porter, Frederick NOR [mailto:fporter at noresco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:36 AM
To: Brad Painting <Bpainting at fstrategies.com>; Erik Kolderup <erik at kolderupconsulting.com>
Cc: equest-users at onebuilding.org; bldg-sim at lists. onebuilding. org (bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org) <bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org>
Subject: RE: [Equest-users] Boiler Curves in Library

First,
THANK YOU Erik for pointing out that study. I haven’t had time to look at it but it’s something that could be useful.

Brad,
You are spot on with your comment. Despite its name, I currently consider the “MIN-RATIO” for the DOE2/eQ boiler models to really be the minimum PLR value at which the HIR f(PLR) curve is valid, and simulated hourly efficiency is held steady below that value (w/some adjustments if using DOE-2.2). If “MIN-RATIO” was part of a mechanistic model of a boiler (instead of a curve fit model), it would certainly be set to 100% for a single stage boiler. Also note the eQUEST/DOE-2.2 standard boiler representation includes “Start-up Time” and “Standby Time” which affect hourly efficiency below the “MIN-RATIO” and attempt to account for losses and mass of the boiler when in cycling mode. See the Misc tab in the Boiler forms.

The “default” eQ curve, also cited in T24 ACM/COMNET, results in extremely low hourly efficiencies below 20% part load. The default curve for EnergyPlus (cited in the follow-on PNNL guide) uses a different representation Efficiency f(PLR) instead of HIR f(PLR) and it results in less degradation at very low loads. T24 ACM/COMNET/PNNL cites a 25% “default” for the baseline input for MIN-RATIO, but it’s not clear exactly why. In my limited experience with older, atmospheric commercial boilers, most stage 33%, 66%, 100% (small burner, large burner, both burners).

Note that real, in-place boiler efficiency at low loads will depend on a great number of factors, including the boiler water temperature (which is not considered in these representations) and whether the water is pumped through the boiler continuously or only when the boiler cycles on. FORTUNATELY, all the nasty “traditional” standby losses are minimized, but not eliminated, in decent modern lightweight forced-draft boiler and HW system design.

In the chart below, note the non-linear horizontal axis scale, for clarity of comparison below 30% PLR.
[cid:image001.png at 01D26B24.EA04E630]

Fred

From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Brad Painting via Equest-users
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 6:47 AM
To: Erik Kolderup; equest-users
Subject: [External] Re: [Equest-users] Boiler Curves in Library

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I am comparing some of the information in the PG&E study with the algorithms described in the DOE2 Engineer’s manual. I am confused about how the MIN-RATIO variable is used. It seems like the engineer’s manual states that the equipment only cycles on/off when the load drops below MIN-RATIO, but it also states that the part load performance curves account  for cycling (pg. v.10):

[cid:image002.jpg at 01D26B24.EA04E630]
For a single stage boiler then, what is the MIN-RATIO doing if all of the part load performance is already attributed to cycling?

The graph of “Unit 1” performance in the PG&E study (pg. 40) closely matches the performance curve from the Atmospheric-Blr-HIR-fPLR curve in the library. “Unit 1” is a single stage boiler, so all part load performance would occur from cycling. What would the best curve be to simulate the part load performance of a modulating non-condensing boiler?

[cid:image003.jpg at 01D26B24.EA04E630]

From: erik.kolderup at gmail.com<mailto:erik.kolderup at gmail.com> [mailto:erik.kolderup at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Erik Kolderup
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 1:15 PM
To: Brad Painting <Bpainting at fstrategies.com<mailto:Bpainting at fstrategies.com>>; equest-users <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>>
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Boiler Curves in Library

Doesn't directly answer your question, but this report by Taylor Engineering and PG&E discusses the DOE2.2 boiler curves and compares to measured boiler performance: http://www.etcc-ca.com/sites/default/files/OLD/images/boiler_research_project_-_ats-te_final_report_pcb_05092012.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.etcc-2Dca.com_sites_default_files_OLD_images_boiler-5Fresearch-5Fproject-5F-2D-5Fats-2Dte-5Ffinal-5Freport-5Fpcb-5F05092012.pdf&d=DQMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=UZ8deueZA0b51VLmk00yNncBZ-aefru2s-rOQKkp1UU&s=wnuekf1cBg-bgzfskKaOe8iPhoVmvvG83KG-J0vJYnY&e=>.

-Erik

Erik Kolderup, PE, LEED AP
erik at kolderupconsulting.com<mailto:erik at kolderupconsulting.com> | 415.531.5198 | www.kolderupconsulting.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.kolderupconsulting.com&d=DQMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=UZ8deueZA0b51VLmk00yNncBZ-aefru2s-rOQKkp1UU&s=EmNCvJaNXpCeTk8_Y4mQCDuBvlH4Dw3fhq3qO7VOnfY&e=>

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Bishop, Bill via Equest-users <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>> wrote:
Hi Brad,
I don’t know how the default boiler curves were developed, but…
It is easy enough to create custom curves based on manufacturer performance data, which is available for many boiler models.
There are other inputs that affect simulated fuel consumption in eQUEST besides the boiler HIR-FPLR curve and full-load HIR, including MIN-RATIO and STANDBY-TIME. If the boiler part-load ratio is below the MIN-RATIO, there are cycling losses based on the STANDBY-TIME. The MIN-RATIO is usually known based on the boiler model but I don’t think I’ve seen published numbers on cycling losses sufficient to calculate STANDBY-TIME. But I have adjusted the defaults when calibrating a model to known fuel consumption.
The ASHRAE Handbook has some reference material. S32.6 is on boiler efficiency and includes an efficiency curve for a modulating boiler, showing efficiency improving slightly at part loads (instead of degrading) “from the increase in the ratio of heat exchanger surface area to heat input as the firing rate is reduced”. F19.12 Boiler Model provides some fundamental research and lists references if you want to dig into it further.

Regards,
~Bill

William Bishop, PE, BEMP, BEAP, CEM, LEED AP | Pathfinder Engineers & Architects LLP
Senior Energy Engineer

[cid:image005.jpg at 01D26B24.EA04E630]  [cid:image015.jpg at 01D26B24.EA04E630]

134 South Fitzhugh Street                 Rochester, NY 14608

T: (585) 698-1956<tel:(585)%20698-1956>                        F: (585) 325-6005<tel:(585)%20325-6005>

bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com<mailto:wbishop at pathfinder-ea.com>             www.pathfinder-ea.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.pathfinder-2Dea.com_&d=DQMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=UZ8deueZA0b51VLmk00yNncBZ-aefru2s-rOQKkp1UU&s=m-HaWlpZvW4KBBvCb-p7ge8zxHKJzhCV2FE3JwrwElc&e=>

[http://png-5.findicons.com/files/icons/977/rrze/720/globe.png]Carbon Fee and Dividend - simple, effective, and market-based.

From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org>] On Behalf Of Brad Painting via Equest-users
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 9:02 AM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
Subject: [Equest-users] Boiler Curves in Library

Can someone direct me to where I can find an explanation of how the part-load boiler curves were developed? I can find the formula coefficients for the heat-input ratio in the BDLLIB.dat file and an explanation of how to apply them in the DOE2 Engineer’s Manual. But how were the formulas and coefficients developed? Are they based on some study results described somewhere in the documentation? I am seeing very little part-load degradation in performance using the forced draft curve and I was wondering why. Thanks.

Brad Painting
Facility Strategies Group, LLC
1012 Market Street, Suite 307
Fort Mill, SC 29708
Phone: (803) 493-9706<tel:(803)%20493-9706>

_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.onebuilding.org_listinfo.cgi_equest-2Dusers-2Donebuilding.org&d=DQMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=UZ8deueZA0b51VLmk00yNncBZ-aefru2s-rOQKkp1UU&s=FLwZyJo559ioU4LsOsspSRrbyjWkcme_sJbgcRUn-08&e=>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG<mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0005.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 87061 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0010.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 65883 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0020.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 26826 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0021.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1400 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0022.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1510 bytes
Desc: image006.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0023.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4178 bytes
Desc: image008.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170110/4a0c72cc/attachment-0011.png>