0
Research Papers

Solar Heat Underground Storage Based Air Conditioning Vis-à-Vis Conventional HVAC Experimental Validation

[+] Author and Article Information
Carlos R. de Nardin

Center of Excellence in Energy and
Power Systems,
Federal University of Santa Maria,
Avenida Roraima, 1000, CT 7—Sala 490,
Santa Maria 97105-900, Brazil
e-mail: denardin@gmail.com

Felipe T. Fernandes

Center of Excellence in Energy and
Power Systems,
Federal University of Santa Maria,
Avenida Roraima, 1000, CT 7—Sala 490,
Santa Maria 97105-900, Brazil
e-mail: felipetfernandes83@gmail.com

Adriano J. Longo

Center of Excellence in Energy and
Power Systems,
Federal University of Santa Maria,
Avenida Roraima, 1000, CT 7—Sala 490,
Santa Maria 97105-900, Brazil
e-mail: longoaj@hotmail.com

Luciano P. Lima

Federal Institute Sul-Rio-Grandense,
Avenida das Indústrias, 1865,
Venâncio Aires-RS 95800-000, Brazil
e-mail: lporto23@gmail.com

Felix A. Farret

Center of Excellence in Energy and
Power Systems,
Federal University of Santa Maria,
Avenida Roraima, 1000, CT 7—Sala 490,
Santa Maria 97105-900, Brazil
e-mail: fafarret@gmail.com

Marcelo G. Simões

Electrical Engineering Department,
Colorado School of Mines,
Golden, CO 80401
e-mail: msimoes@mines.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Solar Energy Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF SOLAR ENERGY ENGINEERING. Manuscript received June 6, 2017; final manuscript received September 19, 2017; published online October 17, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Jorge Gonzalez.

J. Sol. Energy Eng 140(1), 011004 (Oct 17, 2017) (11 pages) Paper No: SOL-17-1216; doi: 10.1115/1.4038051 History: Received June 06, 2017; Revised September 19, 2017

This paper presents a comparison of air conditioners using the conventional heating, ventilation, and air conditioning heat pumps and the one using solar heat stored underground, also known as shallow geothermal air conditioning. The proposed air conditioner with solar heat stored underground reunites practical data from an implementation of the heuristic perturb-and-observe (P&O) control and a heat management technique. The aim is to find out the best possible heat exchange between the room ambient and the underground soil heat to reduce its overall consumption without any heat pump. Comparative tests were conducted in two similar rooms, each one equipped with one of the two types of air conditioning. The room temperature with the conventional air conditioning was maintained as close as possible to the temperature of the test room with shallow geothermal conditioning to allow an acceptable data validation. The experiments made both in the winter of 2014 and in the summer of 2015 in Santa Maria, South Brazil, demonstrated that the conventional air conditioner consumed 19.08 kWh and the shallow geothermal conditioner (SGC) consumed only 4.65 kWh, therefore, representing a reduction of energy consumption of approximately 75%.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Top view of the reference and test rooms showing the heat exchangers conditioner and the location of temperature sensors

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Seasonal range of temperatures depending on the soil depth

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Annual distribution of temperatures according the hose depths

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Heat flux in the soil and thermal resistances association

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Perturb and observe search for a surface geothermal conditioning

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Block diagram of the conventional air conditioner control and data acquisition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Flowchart of the conventional air conditioner control

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Temperatures on June 19, 2014

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of power consumption on June 19, 2014 between: (a) surface geothermal conditioning and (b) conventional air conditioner

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Winter temperatures from June 18 to 30, 2014

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Daily energy consumption from June 18 to 30, 2014

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Summer temperatures on Dec. 7, 2014

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of power consumption on Dec. 7, 2014 between: (a) surface geothermal conditioning and (b) conventional air conditioner

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Summer temperatures from Dec. 1 to 15, 2014

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Daily energy consumption from Dec. 1 to 15, 2014

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Summer temperatures from Jan. 16 to 31, 2015

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In