[Equest-users] Chiller curves for ASHRAE 90.1 2010

Mon May 8 16:06:16 PDT 2017

Indeed,
The source of most everything in Comnet is earlier versions of the California Title 24 Alternative Calculation Manual (ACM).
The source of most everything in earlier versions of the California Title 24 Alternative Calculation Manual (ACM) is legacy DOE-2.1E.
DOE-2.2/eQUEST diverged from some of the performance curve families in DOE-2.1e, but not all.

More recent versions (2016) of the ACM include some updated curves for chiller performance, DX performance and VSD fan part load performance. Sometimes with sources for the new items. The coefficients are even helpfully listed in a companion spreadsheet, available at http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2016standards/ACM_Supporting_Content/. Where applicable, coefficients are provided for both eQ and E+ correlations.

For water-cooled chillers, there are path A and path B chiller curve sets by capacity/type. Path B is for chillers with better part load performance, that is with lower IPLV/ARI-design kW/ton ratios. The target ratings are listed in the tab Chiller Curves – Ref Only.  I think one can get reasonably close to actual performance by picking curve sets where that ratio is as close as possible to that ratio for the chiller (real or baseline requirement), you want to represent. Note you can take any set of chiller curves, and evaluate them in a spreadsheet at the IPLV conditions, and weight the resulting ratios to get the simulated IPLV. There is no definitive or “recognized,” way to go the other way, though there really should be some spreadsheet from some authority that takes chiller type, # of compressors, IPLV (or performance at the 4 points), ARI rating, and spits out reasonable curves.

For air-cooled chillers, the ACM has just a few very similar sets of curves. None appear to represent current advanced A-C chillers with much better low temp/low load performance now available. Also note that the eQ chiller “Min Cond Temp” should be adjusted down to 50F or so to represent modern A-C chillers. But AC chillers are never in a PRM “baseline” model anyway, if that is the issue.

Fred
Fred Porter, BEMP, LEED© AP
Principal Engineer
Sustainability Services
NORESCO

From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Daric Adair via Equest-users
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 1:53 PM
To: Nicholas Caton; Harshul Singhal; Rathna Shree
Cc: equest-users at onebuilding.org
Subject: [External] Re: [Equest-users] Chiller curves for ASHRAE 90.1 2010

Nick;

I believe the curves in the PNNL guide are a copy/match to those in COMnet. I’ve found & avoid these for a couple reasons:

•         The source of COMnet data is not explicitly clear. They’re any (great) citations in the document. And the ‘Acknowledgements’ section at the front leaves much to be desired if this is to serve as the references /citations/bibliography section.

•         The curves are 2 bi-quadratics and a single quadratic. In eQuest the default for a water cooled centrifugal chiller is 3 bi-quadratics. From real chiller selections and curve data from equipment manufacturers 3 bi-quadratics  is what is needed. Describing the relationship of EIR-F(PLR) is complex…

•         I don’t love the eQuest defaults either. It would appear as though they unload unrealistically well compared to ‘real’ chillers.

•         Semi-related is that EnergyPlus comes with a bunch of Chiller Data performance curves in its DataSet File. Come of the chillers use the 2 bi-quadratic + 1 quadratic; others use 3 bi-quadratics, with the 3rd bi-quadrates referring to a ‘ReformEIRChiller’ as the curve…would be interested to know what this exactly means…

Any resources anyone has & can share are appreciated (ex: HVAC Simulation Guidebook) , but chillers are tricky…I mean ‘fun’…

Thanks,
DARIC R. ADAIR  PE, C.E.M.
Henderson Engineers, Inc. | Mechanical Engineer, Energy Analyst
dir 913 742 5530  tel 913 742 5000  fax 913 742 5001  tx id #F-001236  email daric.adair at hei-eng.com  www.hei-eng.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.hei-2Deng.com_&d=DwMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=MIJR4AZFH5vnzyeqXOI-Ma_m4rrD1HFsn7e0HTqIoSY&s=5XBa50hqdJjlI4geFPo8-hLOJF_Cy8Uznh89EtNIBOU&e=>
Licensed in KS. 

From: Nicholas Caton via Equest-users [mailto:equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org]
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 5:30 PM
To: Harshul Singhal <hsinghal at psdconsulting.com>; Rathna Shree <rathnashreep at yahoo.in>
Cc: equest-users at onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Chiller curves for ASHRAE 90.1 2010

IPLV is a functional metric for a consistent, “binary” pass/fail requirement for something resembling part-load performance between manufacturers.  IPLV cannot be translated into a part load performance curve for an energy simulation, however.

Here’s a technical recap for those curious/interested:

IPLV (or NPLV) = 0.01A+0.42B+0.45C+0.12D
Where:
A = COP or EER @ 100% Load
B = COP or EER @ 75% Load
C = COP or EER @ 50% Load
D = COP or EER @ 25% Load

A, B, C, and D are determined at various operating conditions stipulated by AHRI 550/590<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.google.com_url-3Fsa-3Dt-26rct-3Dj-26q-3D-26esrc-3Ds-26source-3Dweb-26cd-3D2-26ved-3D0ahUKEwj1oNi-2D3tjTAhVIxCYKHWlbBjwQFggrMAE-26url-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Fwww.ahrinet.org-252FApp-5FContent-252Fahri-252Ffiles-252Fstandards-252520pdfs-252FANSI-252520standards-252520pdfs-252FANSI.AHRI-252520Standard-252520550-2D590-252520-28I-2DP-29-252520with-252520Addendum-2525203.pdf-26usg-3DAFQjCNEwFDy4kJpL3HbxK4uiL8otyG9RoQ-26sig2-3Dyg-2DKUv7ja0SuR1v-5Fkn-5F21g&d=DwMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=MIJR4AZFH5vnzyeqXOI-Ma_m4rrD1HFsn7e0HTqIoSY&s=ZAyq1jmtk5yEPiAToiQVaZ4MhR9LOzZv64EJYr0fw3A&e=>, Section 5.4, Table 3 (page 41 of the linked PDF):
[cid:image001.png at 01D2C814.71DF0CB0]

You can’t take a prescribed IPLV of, say, 13.0 and turn that into knowledge of what efficiency your chiller should reflect at 100% or 75% loading conditions.  Even if an ASHRAE standard or a manufacturer publishes those part load factors, you still are going to have conditions in reality (and your simulations) where it isn’t always 65 degrees outside while you’re 50% loaded (for example)… the major message/takeaway here is that IPLV was made to marry manufacturers and laboratory conditions, to the general benefit of specifiers and prescriptive standards, not for us in the simulation world.

That’s not to say IPLV can’t be made useful...  Someone could (if so inclined) built a “AHRI chiller test bed” model to try and replicate AHRI lab conditions for your simulated chiller.  Custom hourly reports alongside a weather file coving the full range of AHRI conditions to “backtrack” the effective IPLV of a simulated chiller to see how closely the selected library or your own custom curves come to replicating the IPLV prescribed/tested.  If I had such a “test bed” model on-hand I’d share it with the community here, but I haven’t invested time to pursue that concept to completion yet.

After some spot checking I observe the baseline curves in the cited PNNL reference link below do NOT match up with at least one set of library curves in eQUEST (the one that came with v3.65 b7163 anyway)… they might match exactly elsewhere… has anyone done the legwork to assess what equipment/research was used to develop those curves in relation to the eQUEST curve library?  They might be generally preferable as a default if they’re built from trustable and better/more current sources, and if so I’d be inclined to transpose into a custom library file (and possibly share with the community thereafter)…

~Nick
[cid:image002.png at 01D2C814.71DF0CB0]
Nick Caton, P.E., BEMP
  Senior Energy Engineer
  Regional Energy Engineering Manager
  Energy and Sustainability Services
  Schneider Electric

D  913.564.6361
M  785.410.3317
F  913.564.6380
E  nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com<mailto:nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com>

15200 Santa Fe Trail Drive
Suite 204
Lenexa, KS 66219
United States

[cid:image003.png at 01D2C814.71DF0CB0]

From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Harshul Singhal via Equest-users
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 8:17 AM
To: Rathna Shree <rathnashreep at yahoo.in<mailto:rathnashreep at yahoo.in>>; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Chiller curves for ASHRAE 90.1 2010

I would suggest to use the values from the given reference manual: http://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-25130.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.pnnl.gov_main_publications_external_technical-5Freports_PNNL-2D25130.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=MIJR4AZFH5vnzyeqXOI-Ma_m4rrD1HFsn7e0HTqIoSY&s=2CFWzI_n4AMcyr7qqR2IVwLv2Iyrd7HmAfJqVk03hIY&e=>

I don’t use eQuest these days but a cross-check will be helpful to generate the correct energy consumption figures.

Harshul Singhal LEED AP BD+C, CMVP
Building Energy Modeling Analyst
psdconsulting.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__psdconsulting.com_&d=DwMGaQ&c=ilBQI1lupc9Y65XwNblLtw&r=3xdcdPfNRiIRbdcNOFLTvgBFEa2F6BAz_UMLqgqXn6k&m=MIJR4AZFH5vnzyeqXOI-Ma_m4rrD1HFsn7e0HTqIoSY&s=cGGWVf7yFN21qfEL1ppbdUmy57J4dMuT9JMp-tYaLzk&e=>

From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Rathna Shree via Equest-users
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 6:28 AM
To: Equest-users <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>>
Subject: [Equest-users] Chiller curves for ASHRAE 90.1 2010

Dear All,

Can we use the default chiller curves available in Equest while constructing the baseline case using ASHRAE 90.1 2010?

Since the IPLV changes from previous ASHRAE standard, is it required to change the part load curve?

Regards,
Rathnashree

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
______________________________________________________________________

________________________________

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This communication represents the originator's personal views and opinions, which do not necessarily reflect those of Henderson Engineers, Inc. If you are not the original recipient or the person responsible for delivering the email to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please immediately notify administrator at hei-eng.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170508/ec5bde4a/attachment-0004.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 25076 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170508/ec5bde4a/attachment-0015.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 255 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170508/ec5bde4a/attachment-0016.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8477 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170508/ec5bde4a/attachment-0017.png>