Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
energies
Article
Detailed Comparison of the Operational
Characteristics of Energy-Conserving HVAC Systems
during the Cooling Season
Chul-Ho Kim 1, Seung-Eon Lee 2, Kwang-Ho Lee 1and Kang-Soo Kim 1, *
1Department of Architecture, College of Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-Ro, Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul
02841, Korea; kchcd@korea.ac.kr (C.-H.K.); kwhlee@korea.ac.kr (K.-H.L.)
2Department of Living and Built Environment Research, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building
Technology, 283 Goyangdae-Ro, Ilsanseo-Gu, Goyang-Si, Gyeonggi-Do 10223, Korea; selee2@kict.re.kr
*Correspondence: kskim@korea.ac.kr; Tel.: +82-2-3290-3744
Received: 7 October 2019; Accepted: 27 October 2019; Published: 31 October 2019
Abstract:
To provide useful information concerning energy-conserving heating, ventilation, and
air-conditioning (HVAC) systems, this study used EnergyPlus to analyze in detail their operational
characteristics and energy performance. This study also aimed to understand the features of the
systems under consideration by investigating the dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, and airflow
rate at major nodes in each system’s schematic. Furthermore, we analyzed the indoor environment
created by each HVAC system, as well as examining the cooling energy consumptions and CO
2
emissions. The HVAC systems selected for this study are the variable air volume (VAV) commonly
used in office buildings (base-case model), constant air volume (CAV), under-floor air distribution
(UFAD), and active chilled beam (ACB) with dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS). For the same
indoor set-point temperature, the CAV’s supply airflow was the highest, and VAV and UFAD were
operated by varying the airflow rate according to the change of the space thermal load. ACB with
DOAS was analyzed as being able to perform air conditioning only with the supply airflow constantly
fixed at a minimum outdoor air volume. The primary cooling energy was increased by about 23.3%
by applying CAV, compared to VAV. When using the UFAD and ACB with DOAS, cooling energy
was reduced by 11.3% and 23.1% compared with VAV, respectively.
Keywords:
energy-conserving HVAC systems; variable air volume (VAV); underfloor air distribution
(UFAD); active chilled beam (ACB) with dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS); EnergyPlus; primary
energy consumption; CO2emissions
1. Introduction
1.1. Background and Purpose
Due to global warming, average global temperatures have broken records each year, and abnormal
weather phenomena have become more frequent. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) predicts that the average global temperature will rise by 1.4–5.8
◦
C between 1990 and 2100 [
1
,
2
].
In addition, the IPCC has predicted that the frequency and duration of hot and cold periods (heat
waves and cold waves) in each region will increase. Also, as temperatures continue to increase due
to climate change, heat waves are expected to increase in intensity (e.g., hotter days and nights) and
frequency (more frequent heat and cold waves) [
3
–
6
]. The 2015 United Nations Climate Change
Conference adopted the Paris Agreement as a response to climate change to conserve energy and reduce
greenhouse gases, implementing a plan for a new climate regime post-2020 [
7
–
10
]. In South Korea
(henceforth Korea), building energy consumption accounts for 24.8% of the total energy consumption
Energies 2019,12, 4160; doi:10.3390/en12214160 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2019,12, 4160 2 of 29
which, when considering current trends for developed countries, has the potential to increase to
40% [
11
,
12
]. The key to conserving energy associated with buildings lies in the planning of heating,
ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems. The energy uses in these systems accounts for a
considerable portion approximately 40%–50% of a building’s total energy consumption [13].
An HVAC system is a component that unavoidably consumes energy with the purpose of
providing a comfortable human living space. Energy-conserving HVAC systems continue to be
studied and installed and can replace conventional HVAC systems to significantly reduce greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions [
14
,
15
]. To effectively reduce the energy used in an air-conditioning system,
we should understand the characteristics of each system, and analyze each element that consumes
energy. In the initial planning stage, an engineer’s experience usually determines the most suitable
air conditioning method. However, due to the introduction of various systems, there is a need to
develop design alternatives that are based on a more objective evaluation method. Therefore, to obtain
useful information for designing and selecting energy-conserving HVAC systems, this study uses the
EnergyPlus dynamic simulation program [
16
] to analyze the operational characteristics and energy
performance, and to understand the features of the systems under consideration, by investigating the
dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, and airflow rate of major node points [
17
] in each system
diagram. Furthermore, this study aims to examine the indoor space environment (i.e., zone dry-bulb
temperature, relative humidity, and thermal comfort) that is conditioned by each system, as well as the
cooling energy consumption, energy conservation contribution, and CO2emissions of each system.
1.2. Literature Review
The first works that were investigated for the literature review in this study were framework
studies that outlined HVAC systems and evaluated their energy consumption.
P
é
rez-Lombard et al. [
13
] analyzed the available information concerning building energy
consumption, in particular, that related to HVAC systems. They found that office and retail buildings
were the most energy-intensive typologies, and typically accounted for over 50% of the total energy
consumption for non-domestic buildings. Therefore, they suggest that conservation of the energy
consumed by HVAC systems is crucial. P
é
rez-Lombard et al. [
17
] also emphasized the complexity
and variety of HVAC systems, and presented a consistent framework for energy efficiency analysis.
To conduct an energy-efficiency analysis, HVAC systems were analyzed as energy conversion
equipment, in which energy carriers are converted into heating and cooling, with a discussion of the
HVAC energy consumption process principles. Trˇcka et al. [
18
] provided an overview of HVAC system
modeling and simulation. They introduced the categorization of tools for HVAC system design and
analysis with respect to the problems that require a solution. Furthermore, Trˇcka et al. [
18
] summarized
the current approaches used for modeling, i.e., (A) HVAC components, (B) HVAC control, and (C)
HVAC systems in general. After providing an overview of solution techniques for HVAC system
simulation, they made suggestions for the selection of an appropriate HVAC modeling approach that
was relative to the simulation objective.
Terrill and Rasmussen [
19
] presented an in-depth analysis of HVAC systems, and the occupant
comfort in two religious facilities. The analysis revealed that the most significant opportunities for
energy use reduction occur during the proper maintenance and operation of HVAC equipment and
schedules. Temperature setbacks were shown to be an important operational setting that reduced
energy use. An accompanying analysis of thermal comfort revealed that temperature setbacks must be
coupled with sufficient preconditioning of the space to ensure occupant comfort during intermittent
building occupancy. Bellia et al. [
20
] modeled a modern museum building, and performed simulations
to find an HVAC system that was suitable for the Italian climate. Using the dynamic simulation
code, and hourly climatic data (TRY), the operating costs of different all-air systems (also with
dehumidification by adsorption) were evaluated for exhibition areas and storage spaces, as well as
system performance, with respect to controlling the thermal-hygrometric ambient parameters.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 3 of 29
Secondly, several previous studies have performed EnergyPlus simulations, which can properly
model HVAC operating behavior. Crawley et al. [
21
,
22
] have introduced EnergyPlus, a new building
energy simulation tool that combines two existing programs, the United States DOE-2 and BLAST.
They have also explained that it is possible for EnergyPlus to perform an organic analysis of the thermal
behavior that occurs between systems and buildings while properly modeling the organic connections
between system components. Therefore, EnergyPlus can perform realistic modeling of HVAC systems
by taking interactions between buildings and system into account.
Third, previous studies have also compared the characteristics and energy performance of
various HVAC systems. Gustafsson et al. [
23
] performed dynamic simulations to compare the energy
performance of four innovative HVAC systems: (A) mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR)
and a micro heat pump, (B) exhaust ventilation with an exhaust air-to-water heat pump and ventilation
radiators, (C) exhaust ventilation with an air-to-water heat pump and ventilation radiators, and (D)
exhaust ventilation with an air-to-water heat pump and panel radiators. All systems were tested using
a model of a renovated single family house that varied the U-values, climate, and infiltration and
ventilation rates. Korolija et al. [
24
] examined the relationship between the heating and cooling loads
of buildings, and the subsequent energy consumption with different HVAC systems. Two common
HVAC systems in use throughout UK office buildings, the variable air volume (VAV) system and the
fan coil (FC) with a dedicated outdoor air system, were coupled with a typical office building with
and without daylight control for both a cellular and open plan. For the two investigated systems, the
difference between system demand and building demand varied from over
−
40% to almost +30% for
cooling and from
−
20% to +15% for heating. Storle et al. [
25
] compared the cooling and dehumidifying
capacities of two-liquid desiccant membrane air-conditioning (M-LDAC) systems installed in an office
building in a hot-humid climate (Miami, Florida). The building HVAC system consisted of a radiant
cooling system to cover the sensible load and either a 2- or 3-fluid M-LDAC system to meet the
latent load. The systems were simulated during the warmest week of the year using the TRNSYS
simulation software.
Kim et al. [
26
] analyzed the energy saving potential of passive chilled beams in various climatic
zones. A passive chilled beam model, developed based on full-scale experiments, was used as a system
module in an entire building simulation tool to account for the convective and radiative effects from
the passive chilled beams. The model was validated with measurements from a field study in an
open-plan office equipped with multiple passive chilled beams. Furthermore, in an adjacent identical
office space equipped with an air (VAV) system, a parallel field study was conducted to compare the
resulting energy consumption between the two systems.
Yu et al. [
27
] investigated both the VAV and variable refrigerant flow (VRF) systems in five typical
office buildings in China, to compare their cooling energy use. Site surveys and field measurements
were performed to collect building characteristics and operational data. Measurements of electricity
used for cooling were collected based on sub-metering in the five buildings. Ho et al. [
28
] compared
the thermal environment of two air distribution systems in an office setting. Airflow, as well as heat
and mass (i.e., water vapor and contaminant gas) transfer at a steady-state condition, were modeled
for underfloor air distribution (UFAD) and overhead air distribution (OHAD) systems. The results
provided a detailed understanding of air transport and its consequence on thermal comfort and indoor
air quality that are beneficial to office building air conditioner design.
Based on these previous studies, we identified the necessity for a realistic simulation of
energy-conserving HVAC systems in the Korean climate and performed a detailed analysis of
dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, and airflow rate at node points in HVAC system schematics.
Although many studies have been conducted in the United States, Europe, and other parts of the
world, studies that reflect the Korean climate and characteristics of Korean buildings are insufficient.
Although findings of previous studies in other climate regions of the world can be indirectly applied to
the situation in Korea, direct applicability of foreign studies is limited. In addition, although previous
studies have been carried out for each system, studies comparing all four systems (constant air volume
Energies 2019,12, 4160 4 of 29
(CAV), VAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam with dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS)) are rare.
Furthermore, it is difficult to find studies analyzing data of primary consumption and CO
2
emissions,
indoor environment (thermal comfort, zone dry-bulb temperature, zone humidity), and HVAC systems
in detail by using a dynamic analysis program. Due to these reasons, we carried out this study.
2. Methods and Theoretical Framework
2.1. Methods and Overall Procedures of the Study
This study aims to evaluate the cooling operation characteristics and energy performance for
understanding the characteristics of the HVAC systems, and for properly selecting an energy-conserving
HVAC system. Figure 1summarizes the methods and procedures used to achieve the goals of this study.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 29
four systems (constant air volume (CAV), VAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam with dedicated
outdoor air system (DOAS)) are rare. Furthermore, it is difficult to find studies analyzing data of
primary consumption and CO2 emissions, indoor environment (thermal comfort, zone dry-bulb
temperature, zone humidity), and HVAC systems in detail by using a dynamic analysis program.
Due to these reasons, we carried out this study.
2. Methods and Theoretical Framework
2.1. Methods and Overall Procedures of the Study
This study aims to evaluate the cooling operation characteristics and energy performance for
understanding the characteristics of the HVAC systems, and for properly selecting an
energy-conserving HVAC system. Figure 1 summarizes the methods and procedures used to
achieve the goals of this study.
Figure 1. Diagram of the methods and procedures used in this study.
First, the dynamic simulation tool EnergyPlus v9.1.0 [16] was used to analyze the characteristics
and detailed operating modes of each air-conditioning method, and examine their energy
performance. Second, the input class lists of the models were reviewed to examine differences in the
models, which reflect each system’s characteristics in the EnergyPlus simulations. Third, the loop,
supply side, demand side, and node modeling concepts in EnergyPlus were used to analyze the
major nodes (i.e., the dry-bulb temperatures, relative humidity, and airflow rates), and to
understand the characteristics of each system in detail. Fourth, the indoor environments (i.e., the
zone dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, and thermal comfort) conditioned by each system
were examined; and finally, we performed calculations of the cooling energy consumption (site and
primary energy), energy conservation contribution, and CO2 emissions.
2.2. EnergyPlus: An Introduction and Modeling Concepts (Loop and Node)
EnergyPlus is a simulation program that combines the advantages of the DOE-2 and BLAST
models, and is used in the US as an authorized simulation program to design new buildings and
estimate energy performance [16]. EnergyPlus consists of three basic modules (i.e., the Heat and
Mass Balance Simulation Module, Building System Simulation Module, and Simulation Manager
Module), and is based on an integrated simulation analysis technique. EnergyPlus is advantageous,
because it performs an organic analysis of the thermal behavior that occurs between a system and
building, and can properly model the organic connections between system components. Therefore,
Figure 1. Diagram of the methods and procedures used in this study.
First, the dynamic simulation tool EnergyPlus v9.1.0 [
16
] was used to analyze the characteristics
and detailed operating modes of each air-conditioning method, and examine their energy performance.
Second, the input class lists of the models were reviewed to examine differences in the models, which
reflect each system’s characteristics in the EnergyPlus simulations. Third, the loop, supply side,
demand side, and node modeling concepts in EnergyPlus were used to analyze the major nodes (i.e.,
the dry-bulb temperatures, relative humidity, and airflow rates), and to understand the characteristics
of each system in detail. Fourth, the indoor environments (i.e., the zone dry-bulb temperature,
relative humidity, and thermal comfort) conditioned by each system were examined; and finally,
we performed calculations of the cooling energy consumption (site and primary energy), energy
conservation contribution, and CO2emissions.
2.2. EnergyPlus: An Introduction and Modeling Concepts (Loop and Node)
EnergyPlus is a simulation program that combines the advantages of the DOE-2 and BLAST
models, and is used in the US as an authorized simulation program to design new buildings and
estimate energy performance [
16
]. EnergyPlus consists of three basic modules (i.e., the Heat and
Mass Balance Simulation Module, Building System Simulation Module, and Simulation Manager
Module), and is based on an integrated simulation analysis technique. EnergyPlus is advantageous,
because it performs an organic analysis of the thermal behavior that occurs between a system and
building, and can properly model the organic connections between system components. Therefore,
EnergyPlus is a suitable program for modeling the energy-conserving HVAC systems analyzed in
Energies 2019,12, 4160 5 of 29
this study. Pérez-Lombard et al. [17] used the energy flow chain concept to understand energy flows,
illustrated in Figure 2, which assumes that the HVAC system contains energy-converting equipment
that moves useful energy to the space being air-conditioned.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 29
EnergyPlus is a suitable program for modeling the energy-conserving HVAC systems analyzed in
this study. Pérez-Lombard et al. [17] used the energy flow chain concept to understand energy flows,
illustrated in Figure 2, which assumes that the HVAC system contains energy-converting equipment
that moves useful energy to the space being air-conditioned.
Figure 2. Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system thermal chain in the cooling and
heating mode [17].
In other words, the energy analysis method assumes that energy-converting equipment moves
energy until the moment that cooling or heating is transferred to the indoor space of the building,
which is expressed as a chain. HVAC system can be modeled in EnergyPlus as the movement of a
heating medium, similar to an energy flow chain. The main point to modeling in EnergyPlus is the
loop concept, which refers to the repeated circulation of the heating medium within the loop
structure. Air loops are those in which the heating medium repeatedly circulates between a zone’s
terminal unit and the air handling unit (AHU). In plant cooling loops (chilled water), the heating
medium repeatedly circulates between the chiller and the AHU cooling coil, whereas in plant
heating loops (hot water), it circulates between the boiler and the AHU heating coil. In condenser
loops, the heating medium repeatedly circulates between the cooling towers and the heat source
system.
Figure 3 shows that nodes are the connection points between elements (i.e., the AHU, fans,
chillers, boilers, and cooling towers) in the HVAC network which consists of loops [16]. These are the
points at which the supply and demand sides are connected in the air, plant, and condenser loops.
EnergyPlus can generate and store status data such as the temperature, relative humidity, and airflow
rate for the node locations specified in the simulation. Such data can help us understand the
characteristics of the energy-conserving HVAC systems used in this study (Figure 9a–d in Section 4).
Figure 3. The EnergyPlus node point concept.
Figure 2.
Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system thermal chain in the cooling and
heating mode [17].
In other words, the energy analysis method assumes that energy-converting equipment moves
energy until the moment that cooling or heating is transferred to the indoor space of the building,
which is expressed as a chain. HVAC system can be modeled in EnergyPlus as the movement of a
heating medium, similar to an energy flow chain. The main point to modeling in EnergyPlus is the
loop concept, which refers to the repeated circulation of the heating medium within the loop structure.
Air loops are those in which the heating medium repeatedly circulates between a zone’s terminal unit
and the air handling unit (AHU). In plant cooling loops (chilled water), the heating medium repeatedly
circulates between the chiller and the AHU cooling coil, whereas in plant heating loops (hot water),
it circulates between the boiler and the AHU heating coil. In condenser loops, the heating medium
repeatedly circulates between the cooling towers and the heat source system.
Figure 3shows that nodes are the connection points between elements (i.e., the AHU, fans, chillers,
boilers, and cooling towers) in the HVAC network which consists of loops [
16
]. These are the points at
which the supply and demand sides are connected in the air, plant, and condenser loops. EnergyPlus
can generate and store status data such as the temperature, relative humidity, and airflow rate for the
node locations specified in the simulation. Such data can help us understand the characteristics of the
energy-conserving HVAC systems used in this study (Figure 9a–d in Section 4).
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 29
EnergyPlus is a suitable program for modeling the energy-conserving HVAC systems analyzed in
this study. Pérez-Lombard et al. [17] used the energy flow chain concept to understand energy flows,
illustrated in Figure 2, which assumes that the HVAC system contains energy-converting equipment
that moves useful energy to the space being air-conditioned.
Figure 2. Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system thermal chain in the cooling and
heating mode [17].
In other words, the energy analysis method assumes that energy-converting equipment moves
energy until the moment that cooling or heating is transferred to the indoor space of the building,
which is expressed as a chain. HVAC system can be modeled in EnergyPlus as the movement of a
heating medium, similar to an energy flow chain. The main point to modeling in EnergyPlus is the
loop concept, which refers to the repeated circulation of the heating medium within the loop
structure. Air loops are those in which the heating medium repeatedly circulates between a zone’s
terminal unit and the air handling unit (AHU). In plant cooling loops (chilled water), the heating
medium repeatedly circulates between the chiller and the AHU cooling coil, whereas in plant
heating loops (hot water), it circulates between the boiler and the AHU heating coil. In condenser
loops, the heating medium repeatedly circulates between the cooling towers and the heat source
system.
Figure 3 shows that nodes are the connection points between elements (i.e., the AHU, fans,
chillers, boilers, and cooling towers) in the HVAC network which consists of loops [16]. These are the
points at which the supply and demand sides are connected in the air, plant, and condenser loops.
EnergyPlus can generate and store status data such as the temperature, relative humidity, and airflow
rate for the node locations specified in the simulation. Such data can help us understand the
characteristics of the energy-conserving HVAC systems used in this study (Figure 9a–d in Section 4).
Figure 3. The EnergyPlus node point concept.
Figure 3. The EnergyPlus node point concept.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 6 of 29
2.3. Site Energy, Primary Energy Consumption, and CO2Emissions
Figure 4shows that the “building energy” concept can be divided into energy demand (Figure 4A)
and site energy consumption (Figure 4B).
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 29
2.3. Site Energy, Primary Energy Consumption, and CO2 Emissions
Figure 4 shows that the “building energy” concept can be divided into energy demand (Figure
4A) and site energy consumption (Figure 4B).
Figure 4. Site, primary energy consumption, and building CO2 emissions.
The energy demand (Figure 4A) is the amount of energy required by a building based only on
its architectural conditions, such as the building envelope, and does not include its HVAC systems.
In other words, the energy demand component is the energy performance of the building itself. On
the other hand, site energy consumption (Figure 4B) is calculated by adding the energy demand
(Figure 4A) to the energy loss caused by facility systems. Therefore, to reduce site energy
consumption (Figure 4B), we should increase the efficiency to reduce energy loss within the
high-performance passive and HVAC systems.
The primary energy consumption and CO2 emissions can be calculated by multiplying the site
energy consumption (Figure 4B) by the primary energy and CO2 emissions factors, respectively [29].
The term “primary energy consumption” is defined as the primary energy from fossil fuels that a
country must provide to meet a building’s energy demand. The primary energy is determined by
multiplying the site energy by the primary energy factor, which includes energy losses due to
electricity production and fuel transportation [30–32]. The Building Energy Efficiency Certification
System (BEECS) [29] in Korea uses different primary energy conversion factors that depend on the
energy supply sector, as listed in Table 1 [29]. Therefore, in this study, we calculated the primary
energy by multiplying the electric power (2.75) and fuel (e.g., coal, gas, and oil) conversion factors
(1.1) with the final energy consumption.
Table 1. Primary energy factors in Korea.
Energy Supply Sector Primary Energy Factors in Korea
Fuel (Coal, Gas, and Oil) 1.1
Electricity power 2.75
District heating 0.728
District cooling 0.937
Table 2 lists the Korean CO2 emission factor for each energy supply sector. CO2 emissions, the
most important contributor to global warming, can be calculated by multiplying the site energy
consumption by the CO2 emissions factor of each energy supply sector. Therefore, this study
calculated the CO2 emissions and reduction rates by multiplying the site energy consumption by the
electric power CO2 and natural gas (LNG) CO2 emission factors reported by the Korea Energy
Agency (KEA) [33] and the IPCC guidelines [34].
Figure 4. Site, primary energy consumption, and building CO2emissions.
The energy demand (Figure 4A) is the amount of energy required by a building based only on its
architectural conditions, such as the building envelope, and does not include its HVAC systems. In
other words, the energy demand component is the energy performance of the building itself. On the
other hand, site energy consumption (Figure 4B) is calculated by adding the energy demand (Figure 4A)
to the energy loss caused by facility systems. Therefore, to reduce site energy consumption (Figure 4B),
we should increase the efficiency to reduce energy loss within the high-performance passive and
HVAC systems.
The primary energy consumption and CO
2
emissions can be calculated by multiplying the site
energy consumption (Figure 4B) by the primary energy and CO
2
emissions factors, respectively [
29
].
The term “primary energy consumption” is defined as the primary energy from fossil fuels that a
country must provide to meet a building’s energy demand. The primary energy is determined by
multiplying the site energy by the primary energy factor, which includes energy losses due to electricity
production and fuel transportation [
30
–
32
]. The Building Energy Efficiency Certification System
(BEECS) [
29
] in Korea uses different primary energy conversion factors that depend on the energy
supply sector, as listed in Table 1[
29
]. Therefore, in this study, we calculated the primary energy by
multiplying the electric power (2.75) and fuel (e.g., coal, gas, and oil) conversion factors (1.1) with the
final energy consumption.
Table 1. Primary energy factors in Korea.
Energy Supply Sector Primary Energy Factors in Korea
Fuel (Coal, Gas, and Oil) 1.1
Electricity power 2.75
District heating 0.728
District cooling 0.937
Table 2lists the Korean CO
2
emission factor for each energy supply sector. CO
2
emissions, the most
important contributor to global warming, can be calculated by multiplying the site energy consumption
by the CO
2
emissions factor of each energy supply sector. Therefore, this study calculated the CO
2
emissions and reduction rates by multiplying the site energy consumption by the electric power CO
2
and natural gas (LNG) CO
2
emission factors reported by the Korea Energy Agency (KEA) [
33
] and the
IPCC guidelines [34].
Energies 2019,12, 4160 7 of 29
Table 2. CO2emission factors according to the energy supply sector.
Energy Supply Sector CO2Emission Factors
(kg CO2/TJ)
CO2Emission Factors
(kg CO2/kWh)
Electric power 129,631 0.4663
LNG (liquefied natural gas) 56,467 0.2031
Gas/diesel oil 72,600 0.2612
Kerosene 71,500 0.2572
District heating 34,277 0.1233
3. Simulation Condition for Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) Analysis
3.1. EnergyPlus Simulation Model and Input Conditions
To improve the reliability of the simulation, a reference building representing the office buildings
in Korea is necessary. The United States Department of Energy (DOE) and the European Union’s
Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) use the reference building concept for simulations.
In other words, each country’s standards, climate conditions, standards for the thermal performance of
each building part, and the efficiency of building facility elements are presented in a standard model,
such that the user can flexibly apply them.
The DOE developed a prototype building and the DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory
reports [
35
] that these models serve as a baseline for comparing and improving the accuracy of energy
simulation software. Therefore, this study used the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1 prototype building model (medium office) [
36
] as the base
model because it contributes to simulation accuracy and convenience. This model reflects current
Korean building standards, codes, and the Incheon (Seoul metropolitan area) climate [
37
,
38
]. Figure 5
shows the base simulation model.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 29
Table 2. CO2 emission factors according to the energy supply sector.
Energy Supply Sector CO2 Emission Factors
(kg CO2/TJ)
CO2 Emission Factors
(kg CO2/kWh)
Electric power 129,631 0.4663
LNG (liquefied natural gas) 56,467 0.2031
Gas/diesel oil 72,600 0.2612
Kerosene 71,500 0.2572
District heating 34,277 0.1233
3. Simulation Condition for Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) Analysis
3.1. EnergyPlus Simulation Model and Input Conditions
To improve the reliability of the simulation, a reference building representing the office
buildings in Korea is necessary. The United States Department of Energy (DOE) and the European
Union’s Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) use the reference building concept for
simulations. In other words, each country’s standards, climate conditions, standards for the thermal
performance of each building part, and the efficiency of building facility elements are presented in a
standard model, such that the user can flexibly apply them.
The DOE developed a prototype building and the DOE’s National Renewable Energy
Laboratory reports [35] that these models serve as a baseline for comparing and improving the
accuracy of energy simulation software. Therefore, this study used the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1 prototype building model (medium
office) [36] as the base model because it contributes to simulation accuracy and convenience. This
model reflects current Korean building standards, codes, and the Incheon (Seoul metropolitan area)
climate [37,38]. Figure 5 shows the base simulation model.
Figure 5. The EnergyPlus simulation model.
Table 3 lists the EnergyPlus simulation base model’s building envelope performance
conditions, an outline of the air-conditioning and plant system, and detailed input conditions.
Figure 5. The EnergyPlus simulation model.
Table 3lists the EnergyPlus simulation base model’s building envelope performance conditions,
an outline of the air-conditioning and plant system, and detailed input conditions.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 8 of 29
Table 3. Properties of the base simulation model.
Division Specifications of Base Model
Usage Office Building
Floor Area and Direction 1650 m2(50 m ×33 m ×11.7 m) & South
Simulation Program EnergyPlus v9.1.0 (dynamic simulation tool)
Base Model Envelope
U-Value of Wall and Doors Incheon 0.26 W/m2·K and 1.5 W/m2·K
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
U-Value of Floor Incheon 0.22 W/m2·K
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
U-Value of Roof Incheon 0.15 W/m2·K
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
Glazing Type
(Low–E 6T +12A +6◦CL)
Double Low–E Pane Glazing (U-value =1.5
W/m2·K,
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) =0.458,
VLT =0.698)
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
Base Model System
Terminal Unit VAV Unit
AHU Fan type Variable Speed Fan
Set point Temp and Relative Humidity
Cooling Temp. 20 ◦C, Relative Humidity
40–60%
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
Cooling Operation Schedule Cooling Operation (June–August):
07:00–18:00 (26.0 ◦C)
Plant System Absorption Chiller (Cooling COP 1.0)
Pump Type & Efficiency Variable Speed Pump, 0.6 (Design)
Lighting & Equipment Occupancy
density
12 W/m2, 11 W/m2, 0.1–0.2 person/m2
(The Korean energy–saving design standards,
The MOTIE and KICT report)
Infiltration 3.0 ACH50
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
Schedule Weekday: 08:00–18:00, Weekend: Off
(The Korean energy-saving design standards)
People Metabolic 117 W/person, 1.1 met (Office Work: Typing)
(ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals (2009))
Clothing Value 0.5 (Summer)
(ASHRAE Standard 55–2004)
Air Velocity 0.1 m/s
(ASHRAE Standard 55–2004)
Weather Data Incheon (4A, Dwa), Korea
For the building envelope conditions, which include the base model’s walls, roof, floor, and
windows/doors, this study used the energy-saving design standards [
39
], which specify the Korean
region’s legal standards. For the equipment, lighting load, and occupancy density, we used a report
from a survey of existing buildings in Korea conducted by the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy
(MOTIE) and the Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology (KICT) [
40
]. For the base
air-conditioning system, we used a VAV system, which is commonly used in Korea, and adopted an
absorption chiller (cooling coefficient of performance (COP) =1.0) as the plant system [
41
]. The region
selected for the simulation was the Incheon (Seoul metropolitan area) region in central Korea.
3.2. Validation of the Model
As a final step in the development of the simulation model to be used in the study, a validation
process was briefly carried out to ensure that the model could properly predict the thermal load and
energy performance. Data by Kim et al. [
17
] were used for the validation process in this study since their
study provides both conditions and results. Similar conditions of internal heat gain, diffuser conditions,
and properties of the raised access floor were used in both Kim’s study and this study. Kim et al. [
17
]
and our group have simulated that the primary energy consumption (CAV system model) of Incheon
is 464.1 kWh/m
2
, which corresponds to level 5 in the BEECS [
29
]. The KEA and Korea Appraisal Board
(KAB) [
42
] database indicates that the average actual primary energy consumptions of general office
buildings in Incheon and Jeju is 457–489 kWh/m
2
a. Thus, in this study, the simulation results (CAV
Energies 2019,12, 4160 9 of 29
system model) confirmed that the base model’s primary energy consumption (464.1 kWh/m
2
a) met the
457–489 kWh/m
2
a range requirement of the KEA and KAB database for primary energy consumption
of general office buildings. Primary energy consumption for each system (VAV, UFAD, and active
chilled beam) is also the same.
3.3. Climate Analysis of Incheon, Korea
To reflect the effects of global warming on Korea over the past five years, we applied EnergyPlus
with the outdoor temperature, humidity, wind velocity, atmospheric pressure, solar radiation, cloud
cover, and precipitation data provided by the KMA [
37
]. We converted the KMA data into an
EnergyPlus weather file (EPW) format data [
38
] for use in the EnergyPlus model. Figure 6and Table 4
show Incheon’s ASHRAE [
43
] and Köppen [
44
] climate zone and location information, as well as the
average heating degree days (HDD), cooling degree days (CDD), dry-bulb temperature, and relative
humidity [37] over the last five years (2014–2018).
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 29
database for primary energy consumption of general office buildings. Primary energy consumption
for each system (VAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam) is also the same.
3.3. Climate Analysis of Incheon, Korea
To reflect the effects of global warming on Korea over the past five years, we applied
EnergyPlus with the outdoor temperature, humidity, wind velocity, atmospheric pressure, solar
radiation, cloud cover, and precipitation data provided by the KMA [37]. We converted the KMA
data into an EnergyPlus weather file (EPW) format data [38] for use in the EnergyPlus model. Figure
6 and Table 4 show Incheon’s ASHRAE [43] and Köppen [44] climate zone and location information,
as well as the average heating degree days (HDD), cooling degree days (CDD), dry-bulb
temperature, and relative humidity [37] over the last five years (2014–2018).
Figure 6. Average monthly outdoor air temperature and relative humidity of Incheon, Korea.
Incheon’s average HDD (18 °C) and CDD (10 °C) over the last five years are 2749 and 2327,
respectively. In the ASHRAE climate classifications, Incheon is classified as a 4A (Mixed–Moist)
climate zone. Based on the Köppen climate zones, Incheon is classified as Dwa (subarctic climate,
cold and dry winter, and hot summer). Its maximum average monthly temperature is 27.7 °C, with
an average maximum monthly humidity of 88.1%, which indicates that Incheon has hot and humid
summers. The average minimum monthly temperature is −2.4°C, with an average minimum
monthly humidity of 46.1%, which indicates that Incheon’s winters are cold and arid.
Table 4. Detailed climate characteristics of Incheon, Korea.
Regions
ASHRAE
Climate
Köppen
Climate
Latitude
N(°)
/
Longitude
E(°)
Outdoor Air Temperature
(Average Monthly)
Min./Avg./Max (°C)
Relative Humidity
(Average Monthly)
Min./Avg./Max (%)
HDD
(
18
°C)
CDD
(
10
°C)
Incheon 4A
(Mixed–Moist) Dwa 37.45/126.70 −2.4/12.8/27.7 46.1/69.1/88.1 2749 2327
Due to global warming, global temperatures are steadily increasing. Extreme weather events, such
as heat waves, occur frequently throughout the world, and Korea is no exception [8,9,37,45]. Therefore,
as a preliminary task, we should accurately analyze average yearly temperature changes during the
Korean summer. The average temperatures in the summer for Incheon were analyzed using the Korea
Figure 6. Average monthly outdoor air temperature and relative humidity of Incheon, Korea.
Table 4. Detailed climate characteristics of Incheon, Korea.
Regions ASHRAE
Climate
Köppen
Climate
Latitude N(◦)
/Longitude
E(◦)
Outdoor Air
Temperature (Average
Monthly)
Min./Avg./Max (◦C)
Relative Humidity
(Average Monthly)
Min./Avg./Max (%)
HDD
(18 ◦C)
CDD
(10 ◦C)
Incheon 4A
(Mixed–Moist)
Dwa 37.45/126.70 −2.4/12.8/27.7 46.1/69.1/88.1 2749 2327
Incheon’s average HDD (18
◦
C) and CDD (10
◦
C) over the last five years are 2749 and 2327,
respectively. In the ASHRAE climate classifications, Incheon is classified as a 4A (Mixed–Moist) climate
zone. Based on the Köppen climate zones, Incheon is classified as Dwa (subarctic climate, cold and
dry winter, and hot summer). Its maximum average monthly temperature is 27.7
◦
C, with an average
maximum monthly humidity of 88.1%, which indicates that Incheon has hot and humid summers.
The average minimum monthly temperature is
−
2.4
◦
C, with an average minimum monthly humidity
of 46.1%, which indicates that Incheon’s winters are cold and arid.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 10 of 29
Due to global warming, global temperatures are steadily increasing. Extreme weather events,
such as heat waves, occur frequently throughout the world, and Korea is no exception [
8
,
9
,
37
,
45
].
Therefore, as a preliminary task, we should accurately analyze average yearly temperature changes
during the Korean summer. The average temperatures in the summer for Incheon were analyzed using
the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) weather data [
37
] from the 1970 until 2018. Figure 7
shows Incheon’s average temperatures during the summer season (June–August) from 1970 until 2018.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 29
Meteorological Administration (KMA) weather data [37] from the 1970 until 2018. Figure 7 shows
Incheon’s average temperatures during the summer season (June–August) from 1970 until 2018.
Figure 7. Changes in Incheon’s average summer temperatures (1970–2018).
The average summer temperature increased from 23.0 °C between 1970 and 1999 to 23.4 °C
between 1980 and 2009, and to 23.7 °C between 1988 and 2018. The average summer temperature
also steadily increased to 24.3 °C during the last 10 years (2009–2018) and 24.7 °C in the last 5 years
(2014–2018). These characteristics give rise to circumstances during which it is necessary to use
energy-conserving HVAC systems in Korea.
3.4. Selection of HVAC System and Simulation Input Conditions
In this study, we selected the energy-conserving HVAC systems based on the results of Kim et
al. [15] and Li et al. [46] that investigated trends in building technology through an analysis of
current high-performance buildings throughout the world. The VAV system was selected as the
base system, which is commonly used in office buildings. The CAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam
with DOAS, which have different characteristics and are quite recent technologies, were selected as
the conventional HVAC and energy-conserving HVAC systems. Figure 8 shows a schematic layout
and the mechanisms of the four HVAC systems.
Figure 8(a-d). Schematic layout of the HVAC systems: (A) variable air volume (VAV) system, (B)
constant air volume (CAV) system, (C) underfloor air distribution (UFAD) system, and (D) active
chilled beam with dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS).
Figure 7. Changes in Incheon’s average summer temperatures (1970–2018).
The average summer temperature increased from 23.0
◦
C between 1970 and 1999 to 23.4
◦
C
between 1980 and 2009, and to 23.7
◦
C between 1988 and 2018. The average summer temperature
also steadily increased to 24.3
◦
C during the last 10 years (2009–2018) and 24.7
◦
C in the last 5 years
(2014–2018). These characteristics give rise to circumstances during which it is necessary to use
energy-conserving HVAC systems in Korea.
3.4. Selection of HVAC System and Simulation Input Conditions
In this study, we selected the energy-conserving HVAC systems based on the results of
Kim et al. [15]
and Li et al. [
46
] that investigated trends in building technology through an analysis
of current high-performance buildings throughout the world. The VAV system was selected as the
base system, which is commonly used in office buildings. The CAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam
with DOAS, which have different characteristics and are quite recent technologies, were selected as the
conventional HVAC and energy-conserving HVAC systems. Figure 8shows a schematic layout and
the mechanisms of the four HVAC systems.
The VAV system (Figure 8A) changes the airflow based on increases and decreases in the load to
control the indoor temperature [
47
,
48
]. In other words, the VAV compares the indoor temperature
and set-point temperature while controlling the amount of air according to changes in the indoor load.
In the VAV system, VAV terminal boxes are installed in each zone, where the amount of airflow is
controlled according to a thermal load that matches the set-point temperature.
The CAV system (Figure 8B) is the most basic system of the four air conditioning systems. The
CAV system was analyzed for purposes of comparison with the energy-conserving system and the
conventional VAV system. The CAV always supplies a fixed amount of air to the indoors and adjusts
the temperature via heat exchange in the coils within the air conditioner [
49
,
50
]. The UFAD system
(Figure 8C) is an air-conditioning method that cools by focusing on the occupied zone, which is the
space between the floor surface and a height of approximately 2 m [
51
,
52
]. Typical air-conditioning
systems, such as the CAV and VAV, are overhead air distribution (OHAD) systems, where the air
produced by the AHU is supplied to a room via ceiling ducts and also has exhaust ports located in the
ceiling. However, the UFAD system uses the space of an access floor rather than the ceiling as a space
to diffuse conditioned air, which is supplied to the room via floor diffusers. The active chilled beam
with DOAS (Figure 8D) was proposed in response to problems with existing forced-air conditioning
Energies 2019,12, 4160 11 of 29
systems, such as large amounts of conditioned airflow, conveyance power, comfort, and hygiene. In
this system, the DOAS introduces the minimum airflow required for ventilation, where interior air is
used to heat and cool, which is induced through an active chilled beam. When an active chilled beam
is combined with the DOAS, the DOAS handles the latent heat load [
53
,
54
]. Table 5lists the simulation
input conditions of HVAC systems selected in this study.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 29
Meteorological Administration (KMA) weather data [37] from the 1970 until 2018. Figure 7 shows
Incheon’s average temperatures during the summer season (June–August) from 1970 until 2018.
Figure 7. Changes in Incheon’s average summer temperatures (1970–2018).
The average summer temperature increased from 23.0 °C between 1970 and 1999 to 23.4 °C
between 1980 and 2009, and to 23.7 °C between 1988 and 2018. The average summer temperature
also steadily increased to 24.3 °C during the last 10 years (2009–2018) and 24.7 °C in the last 5 years
(2014–2018). These characteristics give rise to circumstances during which it is necessary to use
energy-conserving HVAC systems in Korea.
3.4. Selection of HVAC System and Simulation Input Conditions
In this study, we selected the energy-conserving HVAC systems based on the results of Kim et
al. [15] and Li et al. [46] that investigated trends in building technology through an analysis of
current high-performance buildings throughout the world. The VAV system was selected as the
base system, which is commonly used in office buildings. The CAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam
with DOAS, which have different characteristics and are quite recent technologies, were selected as
the conventional HVAC and energy-conserving HVAC systems. Figure 8 shows a schematic layout
and the mechanisms of the four HVAC systems.
Figure 8(a-d). Schematic layout of the HVAC systems: (A) variable air volume (VAV) system, (B)
constant air volume (CAV) system, (C) underfloor air distribution (UFAD) system, and (D) active
chilled beam with dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS).
Figure 8.
Schematic layout of the HVAC systems: (
A
) variable air volume (VAV) system, (
B
) constant
air volume (CAV) system, (
C
) underfloor air distribution (UFAD) system, and (
D
) active chilled beam
with dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS).
Recently constructed office buildings in advanced nations use the UFAD, in which unoccupied
zones are not air conditioned and only occupied zones are air conditioned using the access floor [
55
].
The cooling supply temperature was set with reference to several previous studies, which analyzed the
conservational effects of the UFAD system in the Korean climate [
56
–
58
]. Pressurized diffusers (interior
zone: swirl type; perimeter zone: linear bar grille type) were selected as the diffusers, after which
we performed the simulations. The active chilled beam system with a DOAS cools and dehumidifies
outdoor air. In Korea, there are no clear regulations regarding the operation of active chilled beam
systems. Therefore, the heating and cooling water inlet temperature and temperature difference were
set with reference to previous studies that verified the conservational effects of active chilled beam
systems in a Korean climate [
59
–
61
], as well as Federation of European Heating, Ventilation and
Air-conditioning Associations’ (REHVA) standards [
62
]. For the active chilled beam with DOAS, we
installed the most basic form of a bidirectional diffusion chilled beam. The outdoor air cooled and
dehumidified by the DOAS was used as the primary air for the chilled beam [
62
]. Table S1a–c in the
Supplementary Material provide comparison of four HVAC system modeling in the EnergyPlus class
list. Table S2a–d in the Supplementary Material provide diagram of four HVAC system layout in the
EnergyPlus simulation.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 12 of 29
Table 5. Set of simulation variables.
Item Passive Systems (Envelope) Active Systems (HVAC)
Wall, Floor,
and Roof
(U–Value)
Glazing and
Solar Shading
Systems
Envelope
Infiltration Air Conditioning Systems Plant Systems
VAV System
VAV System
(Base)
Incheon
Standard
Wall 0.26
W/m2·K
Floor 0.22
W/m2·K
Roof 0.15
W/m2·K
Double Low–E
(No Blind)
(U–Value 1.5
W/m2·K,
SHGC 0.458,
VLT 0.698)
3.0 ACH50
Terminal Unit: VAV
AHU fan type
: Variable air volume
Control logic
: Dual maximum control logic
Fan efficiency: 75%
(Motor efficiency: 90%)
Damper heating
action: Reverse
Fan pressure
: 1100 (SA), 700 Pa(RA)
Maximum air flow (Heating)
: 50% of max cooling air flow /
Minimum air flow: 20% of max
cooling air flow
Absorption
Chiller
(Cooling COP
1.0)
CAV
System
Incheon
Standard
Wall 0.26
W/m2·K
Floor 0.22
W/m2·K
Roof 0.15
W/m2·K
Double Low–E
(No Blind)
(U–Value 1.5
W/m2·K,
SHGC 0.458,
VLT 0.698)
3.0 ACH50
CAV System
Absorption
Chiller
(Cooling COP
1.0)
Terminal Unit: CAV
AHU fan type
: Constant air volume
Fan efficiency: 75%
(Motor efficiency: 90%)
Fan Pressure
: 1100 (SA), 700 Pa(RA)
Constant minimum
airflow fraction: 1.0
UFAD
System
Incheon
Standard
Wall 0.26
W/m2·K
Floor 0.22
W/m2·K
Roof 0.15
W/m2·K
Double Low–E
(No Blind)
(U–Value 1.5
W/m2·K,
SHGC 0.458,
VLT 0.698)
3.0 ACH50
UFAD System
Absorption
Chiller
(Cooling COP
1.0)
Cooling SAT: 16–18◦C
Diffuser: Swirl type
(Core zone, n=242)
Linear bar grille type (Perimeter
zone, n=21–24)
Fan pressure
: 1100 (SA), 700 Pa(RA)
Transition height: 1.7m
Thermal comfort height: 1.2m
Constant minimum
airflow fraction: 0.3
Active Chilled
Beam with
DOAS
Active Chilled Beam
with DOAS
Chilled beam type: Active
Entering water temperature
Cooling: 15–17◦C
Mean coil temperature to room
design temperature
difference: 2–4◦C,
Coil surface area per coil length:
5.422m2/m
Chilled beam tube
inside and outside diameter:
0.0114, 0.0159
Leaving pipe inside
diameter: 0.0145m
4. EnergyPlus Simulation Results
4.1. System Schematic Diagram of Node Temperature, Humidity, and Airflow Comparison
In Figure 9a–d, the zone’s indoor temperature was set to 26
◦
C (cooling operation) and we
compared in detail the dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, and airflow rate at the major node
points of the system schematics for each HVAC system (8.1 at 2:00 PM). The analysis date was selected
as August 1 because it is representative of the general characteristics of summer in Incheon. Due to
both the temperature and the humidity being high at 14:00 on August 1, it was selected as the analysis
time (32.3 ◦C, 70.5%). Figure 9a shows the cooling operation in the VAV.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 13 of 29
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 29
(a)
(b)
Figure 9. Cont.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 14 of 29
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 29
(c)
(d)
Figure 9(a-d). (a) Analysis of node conditions in the VAV system network (1 August). (b) Analysis of
node conditions in the CAV system network (1 August). (c) Analysis of node conditions in the UFAD
system network (1 August). (d) Analysis of node conditions in the ACB with DOAS network (1
August).
State 1 (Environment: Site Outdoor Air) is the point where outdoor air was introduced, and
depicts the status of the outdoor air temperature, humidity, and airflow. Air at a temperature of 32.3
°C and relative humidity of 70.5% was introduced at 1.587kg/s airflow. Here, to calculate the
minimum airflow for the standard floor’s ventilation, we used the office building minimum
ventilation standard (29 m3/person·h or more) from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and
Transport (MOLIT) Building Act [63]. The minimum outdoor air inflow amount was calculated as
1.587 kg/s (1600 m2 × 29m3/ person·h × 0.1 person/m2 = 4640 CMH = 1.587 kg/s). State 2 (Air Loop
Figure 9.
(
a
) Analysis of node conditions in the VAV system network (1 August). (
b
) Analysis of node
conditions in the CAV system network (1 August). (
c
) Analysis of node conditions in the UFAD system
network (1 August). (d) Analysis of node conditions in the ACB with DOAS network (1 August).
State 1 (Environment: Site Outdoor Air) is the point where outdoor air was introduced, and
depicts the status of the outdoor air temperature, humidity, and airflow. Air at a temperature of 32.3
◦
C
and relative humidity of 70.5% was introduced at 1.587kg/s airflow. Here, to calculate the minimum
airflow for the standard floor’s ventilation, we used the office building minimum ventilation standard
(29 m
3
/person
·
h or more) from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) Building
Act [
63
]. The minimum outdoor air inflow amount was calculated as 1.587 kg/s (1600 m
2×
29m
3
/
person
·
h
×
0.1 person/m
2
=4640 CMH =1.587 kg/s). State 2 (Air Loop AHU Mixed Air Outlet) was the
point where the return air from State 7 (Air Loop AHU Extract Fan Air Outlet) mixed with outdoor air
at State 1.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 15 of 29
The air of State 2 had a temperature of 28.6
◦
C, and relative humidity of 59.4%. In the VAV, the
airflow changed based on the indoor load and, therefore, the air was supplied at a rate of 3.081kg/s.
State 3 (Air Loop Cooling Coil Outlet) was the point at which air passed the cooling coil in the AHU.
Here, the air temperature was cooled to 13.7
◦
C by the cold water in the chiller, with an airflow of
3.081 kg/s, which was identical to the airflow at State 2. State 4 (Air Loop Supply Side Outlet) was
the point where the air passed the supply fan, and was discharged. This was the stage before air was
supplied to the zone, which had an AHU air discharge temperature of 13.9
◦
C which is identical to
the AHU discharge air temperature set-point. The dehumidified air passed at a relative humidity of
56.1%, and the airflow was 3.081 kg/s. State 5 was air conditioned in the zone, with a conditioned
air temperature set to the indoor temperature of 26
◦
C. At this time, the humidity was 47.7–53.8%.
VAV adjusted the airflow and conditions the air to the set-point temperature of 26
◦
C. The total
supplied airflow in the zones was maintained at 3.081 kg/s, which was identical to States 2, 3, and 4.
State 6 (Air Loop AHU Extract Fan Air Inlet) was the air that was exhausted outside of the zone, just
before the exhaust fan. Air was exhausted at a temperature of 26.0
◦
C, relative humidity of 52.5%, and
airflow rate of 3.081 kg/s.
State 7 (Air Loop AHU Extract Fan Air Outlet) was the state of the air that had passed through
the exhaust fan. Due to heat generation associated with the fan, its temperature slightly increased to
26.2
◦
C, with a relative humidity of 53.5% and airflow of 3.081 kg/s, identical to States 2–6. Finally,
State 8 (Air Loop AHU Relief Air Outlet) was the state of the air that was exhausted to the exterior.
The exhausted airflow rate had a rate of 1.587 kg/s, which was identical to the airflow rate at
which air was taken in from the exterior at State 1. The temperature was 26.2
◦
C and humidity was
53.5%, which was identical to State 7. State 9 (CHW Loop: Plant Supply Side Inlet-Outlet) showed the
supply and return water temperatures of the chilled water supplied by the absorption chiller to the
cooling coil, whose temperatures were 6
◦
C and 9.8
◦
C, respectively. Finally, State 10 (Condenser Loop:
Plant Supply Side Inlet-Outlet) showed the supply and return water temperatures of the condenser
water supplied by the cooling tower to the absorption chiller, whose temperatures were 29
◦
C and
32.3 ◦C, respectively.
Figure 9b shows the CAV during cooling operations. State 1 was the outside air conditions.
At State 2, the return air temperature was 2.1
◦
C lower than the VAV system and, therefore, even though
the outdoor air had an identical state with the air that was mixed in, the exterior had a temperature of
26.8
◦
C, which was 1.8
◦
C lower than in the VAV. The humidity was 61.7%, which was 2.3% higher
than in the VAV. In the CAV, the airflow rate maintained a maximum airflow and, therefore, the air was
supplied at a rate of 5.072 kg/s, that is, more than the VAV.
State 3, which passes the cooling coil, had a temperature of 13.5
◦
C and an airflow of 5.072 kg/s.
State 4, which passes the supply fan, had a temperature of 14
◦
C, humidity of 57.8%, and an
identical airflow of 5.072 kg/s. Since the indoor discharge temperature was set to 14
◦
C, similar to the
VAV in EnergyPlus, the temperature was maintained at approximately 14
◦
C and the humidity was
dehumidified to 57.8%. State 5 (Zone) shows the condition of the air-conditioned zone. The temperature
was conditioned to 23.4–24.5
◦
C, which was 1.5–2.6
◦
C below the set indoor temperature of 26
◦
C.
At this time, the humidity was 51.2%–55.4%. Unlike the VAV adjusting the airflow and conditioning
the air to the set-point temperature of 26
◦
C, the CAV conditions the air to a temperature that is
lower than the indoor set-point indoor temperature. The air that had an identical condition to the
indoor conditioned air was released as exhaust, and passed the return fan, which slightly increased the
temperature to 24.1
◦
C. Since the conditioned indoor air was lower than in the VAV, State 7 was 2.1
◦
C
lower. The airflow at State 8 was exhausted at an identical rate as the minimum outdoor air inflow of
1.587 kg/s, as well as the fact that both the temperature and humidity were identical to State 7.
Figure 9c shows the UFAD system during cooling operations. As State 1’s outdoor air passed
State 2’s mixing box, the air changed to a temperature of 29.3
◦
C, humidity of 58.5%, and airflow of
2.752 kg/s. Since the temperature of State 7’s return air was high, State 2’s temperature was higher than
in both the VAV and CAV.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 16 of 29
This is because air that had a higher temperature than the set indoor temperature was exhausted
to the ceiling plenum due to thermal stratification, which is a typical characteristic of the UFAD. In the
UFAD, it is possible to perform air conditioning at higher temperatures than typical air-conditioning
systems, which supply air from the ceiling [
56
–
58
]. Therefore, the AHU discharge air temperature was
set to 15
◦
C, which was higher than both the VAV and CAV. The floor diffuser’s discharge temperature
was 17.2
◦
C, which was approximately 3
◦
C higher than both the VAV and CAV. This affected reductions
in chiller energy, which is discussed in Chapter 5. Since airflow was only conditioned in the occupied
zone, airflow was supplied at a rate of 2.752 kg/s, which is 0.329 kg/s lower than the VAV and 2.320 kg/s
lower than the CAV. State 5, which was indoor air, was maintained at 26
◦
C via a lower airflow rate than
that used in both the VAV and CAV, with the humidity regulated at a comfortable range of 40%–60%.
Through the implementation of thermal stratification via the “room air model” in EnergyPlus, the
temperature in the unoccupied zone increased, and the air at State 6 was exhausted at 28.1
◦
C. Based on
this, the temperature of the ventilation/exhaust after passing through the occupied zone was higher
in the UFAD than in both the VAV and CAV. If the set cooling temperature was 26
◦
C, a typical
air-conditioning system, which supplies air from the ceiling, must maintain the entire indoor space at
26 ◦C but the UFAD only maintains the occupied zone at 26 ◦C, whereas the unoccupied zone can be
maintained at above 26
◦
C. Thus, the UFAD system was able to conserve cooling energy. The air that
was exhausted at State 7 passed the return fan, and was divided into a mixing box and relief air at 28.3
◦
C and 49.6% humidity. At State 8, the air was exhausted at an identical rate to the minimum exterior
air inflow (1.587 kg/s).
Figure 9d shows the active chilled beam with DOAS during cooling operations. Normally, an
active chilled beam is combined with a DOAS, which cools and dehumidifies outdoor air. The indoor
sensible heat load was removed using the chilled beam and the latent heat load was handled by the
DOAS. In other words, a conventional air-conditioning system moves a mixture of outdoor air (OA)
and return air (RA) through an AHU to perform air conditioning. An active chilled beam with DOAS
separates the OA from the air ventilated in the RA, and handles them independently.
Since only OA is introduced and conditioned via the DOAS, State 1 introduced a minimum rate
of OA at 1.587 kg/s. At State 2, the air passed through the DOAS heat exchanger, where heat exchange
changed the temperature and humidity to 28.5
◦
C and 57.3%, respectively. The airflow was identical at
1.587 kg/s, which is the minimum OA inflow. The air that passed through State 3’s cooling coil was
discharged at 14
◦
C and 50.6% humidity at State 4. In the zone (State 5), air conditioning occurred at a
temperature of 26 ◦C and relative humidity of 49.6%–51.8%.
Since indoor air was induced in the chilled beam system, the indoor zone can only be conditioned
at a lower airflow than in the VAV, CAV, and UFAD, that is, with a minimum OA inflow of 1.587 kg/s.
This air was released through the exhaust diffuser and passed the exhaust fan while the air at State
7 (26.1
◦
C, 51.5%, and 1.587 kg/s) exchanged heat in the heat exchanger. At State 8, unlike the VAV,
CAV, and UFAD, the heat exchanged air that was at 29.7
◦
C and 68.9% was released as exhaust to the
outdoor. In addition, the chilled beam increased the cooling effect by moving the primary air, which
experienced heat exchange in the DOAS, through the chilled water coil installed in the beam [
62
].
Since water, which has a higher heat capacity than air, was used to perform heat exchange with indoor
air through the water pipe within the chilled beam, it can reduce the conveyance energy produced by
the heating medium. State 9–2 was the supply and return water temperatures of the secondary side
cold water that supplied the chilled beam through the water pipe, whose temperatures were 15.5
◦
C
and 17.5
◦
C, respectively. The supply and return water temperatures (State 10) of the condenser water
supplied from the cooling tower to the absorption chiller were 29 ◦C and 30.8 ◦C, respectively.
4.2. Analysis of the Indoor Temperature and Humidity
Figure 10 shows the outdoor temperature and humidity from 1 to 4 August in Incheon, which
was used as a typical cooling period. It is evident that the climate of the cooling season in Incheon,
Korea has both high temperatures and humidity. During these four days, the minimum and maximum
Energies 2019,12, 4160 17 of 29
outdoor temperatures were 24.7
◦
C and 33.6
◦
C, respectively, with an average temperature of 28.3
◦
C.
The minimum and maximum relative humidity were 59% and 86%, respectively, with an average
relative humidity of 79.9%.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 29
Figure 10 shows the outdoor temperature and humidity from 1 to 4 August in Incheon, which
was used as a typical cooling period. It is evident that the climate of the cooling season in Incheon,
Korea has both high temperatures and humidity. During these four days, the minimum and
maximum outdoor temperatures were 24.7 °C and 33.6 °C, respectively, with an average
temperature of 28.3 °C. The minimum and maximum relative humidity were 59% and 86%,
respectively, with an average relative humidity of 79.9%.
Figure 10. Outdoor temperature and relative humidity in Incheon (1–4 August).
Figure 11 shows the indoor temperature distributions from August 1 to 4 when using the four
HVAC systems. The AHU was set to operate from 7 AM to 6 PM, during which the CAV
conditioned the air to approximately 2–3 °C lower than the cooling set-point temperature of 26 °C. It
is considered that the CAV conditioned the air to this lower temperature than in the other systems
because it had the highest airflow supply, as mentioned in Chapter 4.1. The VAV conditioned the air
to 23.5–24 °C from 7 AM to 9 AM and then to 26 °C until 6 PM. Unlike the CAV, the VAV changed
the airflow based on the interior load as it conditioned the air, which yielded a lower airflow than
the CAV. The VAV maintained a set indoor temperature of 26 °C. The UFAD conditioned the air to
24.5–25.5 °C from 7 AM to 9 AM, and then to 26 °C until 6 PM. Since the UFAD basically adopts the
VAV to control the airflow, it adjusts the airflow based on the indoor load, and conditions the air at a
lower airflow than the CAV system. In addition, since the UFAD only conditions the occupied zone,
it conditions the air at a lower airflow than even the VAV. During initial cooling operations, the
temperature in the UFAD was higher than in the VAV. Among the three systems, the active chilled
beam conditioned the air closest to 26 °C, even during initial operations, with few periods during
which the air was conditioned to lower than the cooling set-point temperature, indicating that the
indoor set-point temperature was met with the least temperature loss and airflow.
Figure 10. Outdoor temperature and relative humidity in Incheon (1–4 August).
Figure 11 shows the indoor temperature distributions from August 1 to 4 when using the four
HVAC systems. The AHU was set to operate from 7 AM to 6 PM, during which the CAV conditioned
the air to approximately 2–3
◦
C lower than the cooling set-point temperature of 26
◦
C. It is considered
that the CAV conditioned the air to this lower temperature than in the other systems because it had
the highest airflow supply, as mentioned in Chapter 4.1. The VAV conditioned the air to 23.5–24
◦
C
from 7 AM to 9 AM and then to 26
◦
C until 6 PM. Unlike the CAV, the VAV changed the airflow based
on the interior load as it conditioned the air, which yielded a lower airflow than the CAV. The VAV
maintained a set indoor temperature of 26
◦
C. The UFAD conditioned the air to 24.5–25.5
◦
C from 7
AM to 9 AM, and then to 26
◦
C until 6 PM. Since the UFAD basically adopts the VAV to control the
airflow, it adjusts the airflow based on the indoor load, and conditions the air at a lower airflow than
the CAV system. In addition, since the UFAD only conditions the occupied zone, it conditions the air at
a lower airflow than even the VAV. During initial cooling operations, the temperature in the UFAD was
higher than in the VAV. Among the three systems, the active chilled beam conditioned the air closest to
26
◦
C, even during initial operations, with few periods during which the air was conditioned to lower
than the cooling set-point temperature, indicating that the indoor set-point temperature was met with
the least temperature loss and airflow.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 18 of 29
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 29
Figure 11. Analysis of mean zone air temperature when applying the four HVAC systems (1–4 August).
Figure 12 shows the indoor relative humidity distribution from 1 to 4 August when using the
four HVAC systems. All four systems satisfied the Korean HVAC thermal comfort standard of
40–70% [64] and ASHRAE’s thermal comfort standard of 30%–60% [65]. During the air-conditioning
analysis period, the average relative humidity of the conditioned interior air was 50.9, 54.7, 49.9, and
53.4% for the VAV, CAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam with DOAS, respectively. Each HVAC
system had dehumidifying functions within its respective AHU. The active chilled beam with DOAS
system maintained a comfortable indoor environment even in Incheon’s high-humidity climate
because it processed latent heat and dehumidified it through the heat exchangers.
Figure 12. Analysis of zone air relative humidity when applying the four HVAC systems (1–4 August).
4.3. Analysis of Airflow Supply
Figure 13a shows the indoor airflow supply (sum of 5 zones) from 1 to 4 August during the
operation of the four HVAC systems. Figure 13b shows the airflow divided into the five zones when
each system was used during the day on 1 August.
Figure 11.
Analysis of mean zone air temperature when applying the four HVAC systems (1–4 August).
Figure 12 shows the indoor relative humidity distribution from 1 to 4 August when using the four
HVAC systems. All four systems satisfied the Korean HVAC thermal comfort standard of 40–70% [
64
]
and ASHRAE’s thermal comfort standard of 30%–60% [
65
]. During the air-conditioning analysis
period, the average relative humidity of the conditioned interior air was 50.9, 54.7, 49.9, and 53.4%
for the VAV, CAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam with DOAS, respectively. Each HVAC system had
dehumidifying functions within its respective AHU. The active chilled beam with DOAS system
maintained a comfortable indoor environment even in Incheon’s high-humidity climate because it
processed latent heat and dehumidified it through the heat exchangers.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 29
Figure 11. Analysis of mean zone air temperature when applying the four HVAC systems (1–4 August).
Figure 12 shows the indoor relative humidity distribution from 1 to 4 August when using the
four HVAC systems. All four systems satisfied the Korean HVAC thermal comfort standard of
40–70% [64] and ASHRAE’s thermal comfort standard of 30%–60% [65]. During the air-conditioning
analysis period, the average relative humidity of the conditioned interior air was 50.9, 54.7, 49.9, and
53.4% for the VAV, CAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam with DOAS, respectively. Each HVAC
system had dehumidifying functions within its respective AHU. The active chilled beam with DOAS
system maintained a comfortable indoor environment even in Incheon’s high-humidity climate
because it processed latent heat and dehumidified it through the heat exchangers.
Figure 12. Analysis of zone air relative humidity when applying the four HVAC systems (1–4 August).
4.3. Analysis of Airflow Supply
Figure 13a shows the indoor airflow supply (sum of 5 zones) from 1 to 4 August during the
operation of the four HVAC systems. Figure 13b shows the airflow divided into the five zones when
each system was used during the day on 1 August.
Figure 12.
Analysis of zone air relative humidity when applying the four HVAC systems (1–4 August).
4.3. Analysis of Airflow Supply
Figure 13a shows the indoor airflow supply (sum of 5 zones) from 1 to 4 August during the
operation of the four HVAC systems. Figure 13b shows the airflow divided into the five zones when
each system was used during the day on 1 August.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 19 of 29
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 29
(a)
(b)
Figure 13(a-b). (a) Analysis of the total supply airflow rate (1–4 August). (b) Analysis of the supply
airflow rate in the five zones (1 August).
In Figure 13a, the VAV is a method that maintains a constant discharge temperature and
controls the airflow according to increases and decrease in the load, which results in airflow
variations over time. The airflow changed from a minimum of 1.311 kg/s to a maximum of 3.480
kg/s, exhibiting an increasing airflow pattern after sunrise. In Figure 13b, by analyzing the 5 zones
over the course of the day, we observed that the interior and south perimeter zones experienced a
high airflow rate, while the north zone experienced a low airflow rate. On the east perimeter zone,
where the sun rises in the morning, the airflow increased in the morning based on changes in the
solar radiation. In the west perimeter zone, where the sun sets, the airflow increased in the
afternoon. On the other hand, the CAV constantly supplied air at a maximum airflow of 5.072 kg/s
from 7 AM to 6 PM, without accounting for the space thermal load. The supply airflow during CAV
operation was divided into five zones, which indicates that the airflow supply was 1.279, 1.198,
1.070, 0.870, and 0.656 kg/s in the interior, south, east, west, and north perimeter zones, respectively.
In the interior and south perimeter zones, the airflow was high, while the north zone had the lowest
Figure 13.
(
a
) Analysis of the total supply airflow rate (1–4 August). (
b
) Analysis of the supply airflow
rate in the five zones (1 August).
In Figure 13a, the VAV is a method that maintains a constant discharge temperature and controls
the airflow according to increases and decrease in the load, which results in airflow variations over
time. The airflow changed from a minimum of 1.311 kg/s to a maximum of 3.480 kg/s, exhibiting an
increasing airflow pattern after sunrise. In Figure 13b, by analyzing the 5 zones over the course of the
day, we observed that the interior and south perimeter zones experienced a high airflow rate, while
the north zone experienced a low airflow rate. On the east perimeter zone, where the sun rises in the
morning, the airflow increased in the morning based on changes in the solar radiation. In the west
perimeter zone, where the sun sets, the airflow increased in the afternoon. On the other hand, the CAV
constantly supplied air at a maximum airflow of 5.072 kg/s from 7 AM to 6 PM, without accounting for
the space thermal load. The supply airflow during CAV operation was divided into five zones, which
indicates that the airflow supply was 1.279, 1.198, 1.070, 0.870, and 0.656 kg/s in the interior, south, east,
Energies 2019,12, 4160 20 of 29
west, and north perimeter zones, respectively. In the interior and south perimeter zones, the airflow
was high, while the north zone had the lowest airflow. The UFAD system also controls the airflow to
maintain temperature and, therefore, exhibited the same pattern of changes in the airflow as the VAV.
However, since the UFAD only conditions the occupied zone below a height of 2 m from the floor, it
conditioned the air with less airflow than the VAV. The airflow changed from a minimum of 1.114 kg/s
to a maximum of 2.987 kg/s, resulting in a trend of air conditioning that had the same airflow pattern
as the VAV in each of the 5 zones. The active chilled beam with DOAS operates at a constant airflow,
and uses indoor induced air, such that by controlling the flow in the beam’s cold water coil, it meets
the thermal load. Therefore, the active chilled beam was able to provide conditioned air and maintain
the indoor set-point temperature and humidity, despite only conditioning the air with the minimum
outside air inflow (1.587 kg/s), using the DOAS. The minimum outside air inflow was 0.460, 0.382,
0.312, 0.259, and 0.174 kg/s in the interior, south, east, west, and north zones, respectively.
4.4. Analysis of Indoor Thermal Comfort
Figure 14 shows the distribution of the predicted mean vote (PMV), which is the thermal comfort
index for the cooling period between August 1 and 4 when using the four HVAC systems.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 29
airflow. The UFAD system also controls the airflow to maintain temperature and, therefore,
exhibited the same pattern of changes in the airflow as the VAV. However, since the UFAD only
conditions the occupied zone below a height of 2 m from the floor, it conditioned the air with less
airflow than the VAV. The airflow changed from a minimum of 1.114 kg/s to a maximum of 2.987
kg/s, resulting in a trend of air conditioning that had the same airflow pattern as the VAV in each of
the 5 zones. The active chilled beam with DOAS operates at a constant airflow, and uses indoor
induced air, such that by controlling the flow in the beam’s cold water coil, it meets the thermal load.
Therefore, the active chilled beam was able to provide conditioned air and maintain the indoor
set-point temperature and humidity, despite only conditioning the air with the minimum outside air
inflow (1.587 kg/s), using the DOAS. The minimum outside air inflow was 0.460, 0.382, 0.312, 0.259,
and 0.174 kg/s in the interior, south, east, west, and north zones, respectively.
4.4. Analysis of Indoor Thermal Comfort
Figure 14 shows the distribution of the predicted mean vote (PMV), which is the thermal
comfort index for the cooling period between August 1 and 4 when using the four HVAC systems.
Figure 14. Analysis of the thermal comfort during the operation of the four HVAC systems.
The PMV comfort range is between −0.5 and 0.5, based on ISO Standard 7730 [65–68]. The PMV
during CAV air conditioning from 7 AM to 6 PM had a distribution between −1.27 and −0.90 on
August 1, −1.13 and −0.79 on August 2, −1.21 and −0.84 on 3 August, and −1.28 and −0.90 on August
4. Since the CAV conditions the air with the highest airflow of all the systems used in this study, as
well as yielding a temperature that was 2–3 °C below the set-point temperature of 26 °C due to the
overcooling of the space, the PMV was slightly lower than the other systems and was not within the
comfort range between −0.5 and 0.5. During VAV air conditioning, the PMV was within the thermal
comfort range between −0.5 and 0.5. The PMV values for the VAV had a distribution between −0.41
and 0.03 on August 1, −0.18 and 0.17 on August 2, −0.39 and 0.17 on August 3, and −0.41 and 0.03 on
August 4. These values were higher and lower than the PMV distribution of the CAV and UFAD,
respectively. During UFAD air conditioning, the PMV had a distribution between −0.36 and 0.28 on
August 1, −0.06 and 0.42 on August 2, −0.28 and 0.42 on August 3, and −0.27 and 0.28 on August 4,
which was within the comfort range. Finally, during air conditioning with the active chilled beam
with DOAS, the PMV had a distribution between −0.16 and 0.34 on August 1, 0.01 and 0.51 on
August 2, −0.24 and 0.51 on August 3, and −0.17 and 0.39 on August 4. Among the four HVAC systems,
these PMV values for the active chilled beam were a little high, but were within the comfort range.
Figure 14. Analysis of the thermal comfort during the operation of the four HVAC systems.
The PMV comfort range is between
−
0.5 and 0.5, based on ISO Standard 7730 [
65
–
68
]. The PMV
during CAV air conditioning from 7 AM to 6 PM had a distribution between
−
1.27 and
−
0.90 on
August 1,
−
1.13 and
−
0.79 on August 2,
−
1.21 and
−
0.84 on 3 August, and
−
1.28 and
−
0.90 on August
4. Since the CAV conditions the air with the highest airflow of all the systems used in this study, as
well as yielding a temperature that was 2–3
◦
C below the set-point temperature of 26
◦
C due to the
overcooling of the space, the PMV was slightly lower than the other systems and was not within the
comfort range between
−
0.5 and 0.5. During VAV air conditioning, the PMV was within the thermal
comfort range between
−
0.5 and 0.5. The PMV values for the VAV had a distribution between
−
0.41
and 0.03 on August 1,
−
0.18 and 0.17 on August 2,
−
0.39 and 0.17 on August 3, and
−
0.41 and 0.03
on August 4. These values were higher and lower than the PMV distribution of the CAV and UFAD,
respectively. During UFAD air conditioning, the PMV had a distribution between
−
0.36 and 0.28 on
August 1,
−
0.06 and 0.42 on August 2,
−
0.28 and 0.42 on August 3, and
−
0.27 and 0.28 on August 4,
which was within the comfort range. Finally, during air conditioning with the active chilled beam with
DOAS, the PMV had a distribution between
−
0.16 and 0.34 on August 1, 0.01 and 0.51 on August 2,
Energies 2019,12, 4160 21 of 29
−
0.24 and 0.51 on August 3, and
−
0.17 and 0.39 on August 4. Among the four HVAC systems, these
PMV values for the active chilled beam were a little high, but were within the comfort range.
5. Analysis of Cooling Energy Consumption and CO2Emissions
5.1. Cumulative Zone Sensible Cooling
Figure 15 shows the cumulative amount of heat that was removed by each system to cool the
indoor to an identical set-point temperature (26 ◦C) during June, July, and August.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 29
5. Analysis of Cooling Energy Consumption and CO2 Emissions
5.1. Cumulative Zone Sensible Cooling
Figure 15 shows the cumulative amount of heat that was removed by each system to cool the
indoor to an identical set-point temperature (26 °C) during June, July, and August.
Figure 15. Analysis of the cumulative zone sensible cooling when operating the four HVAC systems.
When using the VAV, changes in the airflow, based on increases and decreases in the load,
controlled the room temperature, which only removed 29,646 kWh. When using the CAV, the
amount of heat removed from the five zones was 37,030 kWh of the heat, i.e., a 24.9% increase. When
using the UFAD, the cooling load was reduced because only the occupied zone was maintained at 26
°C while maintaining the unoccupied zone at a higher temperature. In other words, since only the
occupied zone was air-conditioned, air conditioning was performed at a lower airflow rate than in
the VAV, which reduced the amount of heat removed (27,082 kWh) by 8.7% compared to the VAV.
When using the active chilled beam with DOAS, air conditioning was performed using indoor
induced air at the DOAS minimum outdoor air inflow, which reduced the amount of heat removed
(24,502 kWh) by 17.3%, compared to the VAV. Even though they were set to the same temperature,
the amount of indoor heat removed by each system was different, because the systems had different
airflow and temperature control methods based on their own characteristics.
5.2. Site and Primary Cooling Energy Consumptions
Figure 16 shows the site and primary cooling energy for each system in June, July, and August.
The cooling energy consists of the absorption chiller energy, cooling tower energy, AHU supply and
exhaust fan energy, and pump energy (absorption chiller and cooling tower) consumptions.
Figure 15. Analysis of the cumulative zone sensible cooling when operating the four HVAC systems.
When using the VAV, changes in the airflow, based on increases and decreases in the load,
controlled the room temperature, which only removed 29,646 kWh. When using the CAV, the amount
of heat removed from the five zones was 37,030 kWh of the heat, i.e., a 24.9% increase. When using the
UFAD, the cooling load was reduced because only the occupied zone was maintained at 26
◦
C while
maintaining the unoccupied zone at a higher temperature. In other words, since only the occupied
zone was air-conditioned, air conditioning was performed at a lower airflow rate than in the VAV,
which reduced the amount of heat removed (27,082 kWh) by 8.7% compared to the VAV. When using
the active chilled beam with DOAS, air conditioning was performed using indoor induced air at the
DOAS minimum outdoor air inflow, which reduced the amount of heat removed (24,502 kWh) by
17.3%, compared to the VAV. Even though they were set to the same temperature, the amount of indoor
heat removed by each system was different, because the systems had different airflow and temperature
control methods based on their own characteristics.
5.2. Site and Primary Cooling Energy Consumptions
Figure 16 shows the site and primary cooling energy for each system in June, July, and August.
The cooling energy consists of the absorption chiller energy, cooling tower energy, AHU supply and
exhaust fan energy, and pump energy (absorption chiller and cooling tower) consumptions.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 22 of 29
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 29
Figure 16. Site-cooling energy, primary-cooling energy, and energy-saving potential in each HVAC
system.
The energy required for the absorption chiller accounts for most of the site energy, followed
sequentially by the fan energy, cooling tower energy, and pump energy. When using the CAV, site
cooling energy consumption was increased by 27.6%, compared to the VAV. When using the UFAD,
cooling energy was reduced by 10.6%, compared to the VAV, with a 15.4% reduction in the
absorption chiller energy, and a 24.4% reduction in fan energy. Since the UFAD supplies air from the
floor (task and ambient HVAC), only the occupied zone was air-conditioned, without consideration
of the ceiling height. Therefore, the discharge temperature was approximately 3 °C higher than in
the VAV. This resulted in a reduction of chiller use and conservation of fan power. However, in
buildings that use the UFAD, systems should be designed by taking into account the fact that the
energy conservation effect can vary according to the type and installation conditions of the lighting
fixtures. When using the active chilled beam with DOAS, cooling energy was reduced by
approximately 22.3% compared with the VAV, with 26.6% and 66.7% reductions in the absorption
chiller and fan energies, respectively. The active chilled beam with DOAS decouples sensible cooling
and ventilation, while cool air conditioning occurred with only the minimum outdoor inflow
required for ventilation, which reduced the fan energy. The load that must be handled by the cooling
coil was also reduced due to the low airflow rate. Additionally, the cooling energy saving rate was
high compared with the other HVAC systems, via the effects of radiation and convection that
induced air mixing in the zone. Water, which has a greater heat capacity than air, was also used via
the water pipes within the chilled beam to exchange heat with the indoor air. Therefore, the
conveyance power could be conserved, due to the heating medium. However, with exposure to the
high-temperature and high-humidity climate of Korea, we should consider a control strategy that
responds to the latent heat load and condensation, which is necessary in order to carefully review
performance in the design and operation stages.
To the right of the site cooling energy in Figure 16, we compare the primary cooling energy. The
primary energy is calculated by multiplying by a conversion factor (Table 1) [29] for each nation
according to its external energy sources (delivered energy), to apply both power generation and fuel
transportation losses to the energy consumption value. As a conversion standard, the electric power
(2.75) and fuel (1.1) (i.e., coal, gas, oil, etc.) conversion factors, proposed by the BEECS (Table 1), were
used to calculate the primary energy consumption. The fans, pumps, and cooling towers have a
higher electrical energy ratio (2.75) than the absorption chiller (1.1), which uses gas. The CAV
Figure 16.
Site-cooling energy, primary-cooling energy, and energy-saving potential in each
HVAC system.
The energy required for the absorption chiller accounts for most of the site energy, followed
sequentially by the fan energy, cooling tower energy, and pump energy. When using the CAV, site
cooling energy consumption was increased by 27.6%, compared to the VAV. When using the UFAD,
cooling energy was reduced by 10.6%, compared to the VAV, with a 15.4% reduction in the absorption
chiller energy, and a 24.4% reduction in fan energy. Since the UFAD supplies air from the floor
(task and ambient HVAC), only the occupied zone was air-conditioned, without consideration of
the ceiling height. Therefore, the discharge temperature was approximately 3
◦
C higher than in
the VAV. This resulted in a reduction of chiller use and conservation of fan power. However, in
buildings that use the UFAD, systems should be designed by taking into account the fact that the energy
conservation effect can vary according to the type and installation conditions of the lighting fixtures.
When using the active chilled beam with DOAS, cooling energy was reduced by approximately 22.3%
compared with the VAV, with 26.6% and 66.7% reductions in the absorption chiller and fan energies,
respectively. The active chilled beam with DOAS decouples sensible cooling and ventilation, while
cool air conditioning occurred with only the minimum outdoor inflow required for ventilation, which
reduced the fan energy. The load that must be handled by the cooling coil was also reduced due to
the low airflow rate. Additionally, the cooling energy saving rate was high compared with the other
HVAC systems, via the effects of radiation and convection that induced air mixing in the zone. Water,
which has a greater heat capacity than air, was also used via the water pipes within the chilled beam
to exchange heat with the indoor air. Therefore, the conveyance power could be conserved, due to
the heating medium. However, with exposure to the high-temperature and high-humidity climate of
Korea, we should consider a control strategy that responds to the latent heat load and condensation,
which is necessary in order to carefully review performance in the design and operation stages.
To the right of the site cooling energy in Figure 16, we compare the primary cooling energy.
The primary energy is calculated by multiplying by a conversion factor (Table 1) [
29
] for each nation
according to its external energy sources (delivered energy), to apply both power generation and fuel
transportation losses to the energy consumption value. As a conversion standard, the electric power
(2.75) and fuel (1.1) (i.e., coal, gas, oil, etc.) conversion factors, proposed by the BEECS (Table 1), were
used to calculate the primary energy consumption. The fans, pumps, and cooling towers have a higher
Energies 2019,12, 4160 23 of 29
electrical energy ratio (2.75) than the absorption chiller (1.1), which uses gas. The CAV increased
primary cooling energy by 23.3% compared to the CAV, while the UFAD reduced energy consumption
by 11.3%, and the active chilled beam with DOAS by 23.1%.
5.3. CO2Emissions
Figure 17 shows the CO
2
emissions and the percent reduction in the CO
2
emissions of each
system in June, July, and August. The amount of CO
2
emissions for each system can be calculated
by multiplying the site energy by the CO
2
emission factor for each energy source. Therefore, the site
energy was multiplied by the electric power CO
2
emission factor of 0.4663 kg CO
2
/kWh and the natural
gas (LNG) CO2emission factor of 0.2031 kg CO2/kWh, as listed in Table 2of Section 2.3.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 29
increased primary cooling energy by 23.3% compared to the CAV, while the UFAD reduced energy
consumption by 11.3%, and the active chilled beam with DOAS by 23.1%.
5.3. CO2 Emissions
Figure 17 shows the CO2 emissions and the percent reduction in the CO2 emissions of each
system in June, July, and August. The amount of CO2 emissions for each system can be calculated by
multiplying the site energy by the CO2 emission factor for each energy source. Therefore, the site
energy was multiplied by the electric power CO2 emission factor of 0.4663 kg CO2/kWh and the
natural gas (LNG) CO2 emission factor of 0.2031 kg CO2/kWh, as listed in Table 2 of Section 2.3.
Figure 17. CO2 emissions and the reduction potential of each HVAC system.
When analyzing the CO2 emissions, the CO2 emissions associated with the VAV system were
34,679 kgCO2 while for the CAV system the emissions were 42,400 kgCO2, that is, an increase of
22.3% compared with the VAV. When using the UFAD system, the CO2 emissions were
approximately 31,185 kgCO2, i.e., a reduction of 10.1% compared with the VAV. Finally, when using
the active chilled beam with DOAS, the CO2 emissions were 27,124 kgCO2, which is a reduction of
21.8% compared to the VAV.
6. Conclusions and Discussions
6.1. Summary and Conclusions
This study used the EnergyPlus dynamic simulation program to analyze in detail the
operational characteristics and energy performance, and to understand the features of the HVAC
systems under consideration, by investigating the dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, thermal
comfort, and airflow rate at major nodes. Furthermore, we analyzed the cooling energy
consumption, energy reduction contribution, and CO2 emissions. The conclusions that can be drawn
from this study are as follows:
1) We analyzed the changes in the average annual summer temperature in Incheon (Seoul
metropolitan area), Korea. The results indicated that the temperature is increasing and
abnormal climate events, such as heat waves, are occurring more frequently. These
characteristics give rise to circumstances during which it is necessary to use energy-conserving
HVAC systems in Korea.
2) Each energy-conserving HVAC system has a different modeling configuration in EnergyPlus,
according to its air-conditioning concept. In the VAV, the terminal unit was modeled as an “Air
Figure 17. CO2emissions and the reduction potential of each HVAC system.
When analyzing the CO
2
emissions, the CO
2
emissions associated with the VAV system were
34,679 kgCO
2
while for the CAV system the emissions were 42,400 kgCO
2
, that is, an increase of 22.3%
compared with the VAV. When using the UFAD system, the CO
2
emissions were approximately 31,185
kgCO
2
, i.e., a reduction of 10.1% compared with the VAV. Finally, when using the active chilled beam
with DOAS, the CO
2
emissions were 27,124 kgCO
2
, which is a reduction of 21.8% compared to the VAV.
6. Conclusions and Discussions
6.1. Summary and Conclusions
This study used the EnergyPlus dynamic simulation program to analyze in detail the operational
characteristics and energy performance, and to understand the features of the HVAC systems under
consideration, by investigating the dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, thermal comfort, and
airflow rate at major nodes. Furthermore, we analyzed the cooling energy consumption, energy
reduction contribution, and CO
2
emissions. The conclusions that can be drawn from this study are as
follows:
(1)
We analyzed the changes in the average annual summer temperature in Incheon (Seoul
metropolitan area), Korea. The results indicated that the temperature is increasing and abnormal
climate events, such as heat waves, are occurring more frequently. These characteristics give rise
to circumstances during which it is necessary to use energy-conserving HVAC systems in Korea.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 24 of 29
(2)
Each energy-conserving HVAC system has a different modeling configuration in EnergyPlus,
according to its air-conditioning concept. In the VAV, the terminal unit was modeled as an “Air
Terminal Single Duct: VAV Reheat”. In the CAV, the air loop terminal unit was modeled as an
“Air Terminal Single Duct: Constant Volume: Reheat”. In the VAV, the fans were modeled as
“Fan: Variable Volume”. In the CAV, they were modeled as “Fan: Constant Volume”. The UFAD
was modeled as “Room air model Type” and “Room Air Setting: Underfloor Air Distribution” to
implement floor diffusion and thermal stratification. For the active chilled beam with DOAS,
“Air Terminal Single Duct: Cooled Beam” and “Heat Exchanger Air to Air: Sensible and Latent”
were used to implement the beam’s induced air condition features, as well as the features of the
DOAS, which entails the introduction of only outdoor air.
(3) The dry-bulb temperature, relative humidity, and airflow rates were compared at the major nodes
(10 node points) in the schematic of each HVAC system (8.1 at 2:00 PM). Even though the indoor
temperature was set to be identical among each HVAC system, the node status analysis results
show that the airflow supply rates were different according to each air-conditioning concept, as
well as showing changes in the air temperature and humidity based on the airflow rates.
(4) When the HVAC systems were used in the summer with high temperature and humidity, although
the VAV, UFAD, and active chilled beam with DOAS matched the cooling set-point temperature
of 26
◦
C, their initial indoor temperature distributions were slightly different. The CAV used a
maximum airflow and conditioned the air to approximately 2–3
◦
C below the cooling set-point of
26
◦
C. All four systems have dehumidification functions in their AHUs. Since the active chilled
beam with the DOAS handles latent heat and performs dehumidification via heat exchangers, this
system conforms to the Korean and the ASHRAE thermal comfort standard. When we analyzed
the indoor thermal comfort, the CAV had a slightly lower PMV than other systems at
−
1.27 to
−
0.90 due to the overcooling by excessive air flow and, accordingly, a lower indoor temperature
than 26
◦
C. Therefore, the CAV was unable to conform to the thermal comfort range from
−
0.5 to
0.5.
(5)
The VAV maintained a constant indoor temperature, and controlled the airflow rate at
1.311–3.480 kg/s, according to the space thermal load. On the other hand, the CAV supplied air
constantly at a maximum airflow of 5.072 kg/s during the air-conditioning period. The UFAD also
controlled the airflow to maintain set-point temperature and, therefore, showed the same changes
in airflow pattern as the VAV. However, since the UFAD only conditions air in the occupied zone,
it used a lower airflow rate of 1.114–2.987 kg/s than the VAV. The active chilled beam with the
DOAS operates using a constant airflow method, whose load response is achieved by controlling
the flow in the beam’s chilled water coil. Therefore, the active chilled beam with DOAS was able
to maintain the cooling set-point temperature and humidity, despite only conditioning air with a
minimum outdoor air inflow of 1.587 kg/s.
(6)
Even though the same set-point temperatures were set, the amount of indoor heat removed by
each system was different, because each system had different airflow and temperature control
methods, based on their specific characteristics. The CAV constantly supplied air at a maximum
airflow, which was capable of increasing the amount of removed heat by 24.9%, compared to the
VAV. When using the UFAD, the amount of heat removed was reduced by 8.7%, compared with
the VAV. When using the active chilled beam with DOAS, the beam’s indoor induced air at the
DOAS minimum outdoor air inflow initiated air conditioning, which was capable of reducing the
amount of heat removed by 17.3%, compared with the VAV.
(7)
Primary cooling energy, which takes into account electric power and fuel conversion factors,
was increased by 23.3% when using CAV, compared to VAV. When using UFAD, the energy was
reduced by 11.3%, whereas the active chilled beam with DOAS reduced the energy by 23.1%,
compared to VAV. CO
2
emission reduction rates were similar to the cooling energy saving rates;
CO
2
emissions when using CAV increased by 22.3%, compared to VAV. When using UFAD and
active chilled beam, emissions were reduced by 10.1% and 21.8%, respectively, compared to VAV.
Energies 2019,12, 4160 25 of 29
6.2. Limitation of Research and Future Work
Implementing the cooling mechanisms and understanding the energy conservation principles
of each HVAC system in certain climate conditions is important for energy efficiency in future
high-performance buildings. This study selected a reference model and performed evaluations of each
energy-conserving HVAC system by focusing on its cooling mechanism, indoor environment, energy
consumption, and CO2emissions.
However, future studies must also analyze energy reduction rates that occur when these systems
are combined with other plant systems or renewable energy technology. Future studies will also
need to analyze cooling seasons and heating mechanisms within each system. In addition, economic
analyses that consider energy costs needed to be performed in the future.
There are only simulation results through EnergyPlus in this study. Experimental study was not
performed when four systems were applied in the actual building. Therefore, we need to discuss the
results of the actual system operation through experimental study along with simulation data in a
future study. Since there is no study that compares all four systems in various climates, we need to
review the simulation data by applying it in different climates. However, data analyzed in this study
showed similar results as those of Cho et al. [
69
] and Kim et al. [
14
] who studied various energy-saving
systems in the Korean climate.
Supplementary Materials:
The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/21/4160/s1:
Figure S1a. Comparison of CAV and VAV modeling in the EnergyPlus class list, Figure S1b. Comparison of CAV
and UFAD modeling in the EnergyPlus class list, Figure S1c. Comparison of CAV and active chilled beam with
DOAS modeling in the EnergyPlus class list, Figure S2a. Diagram of the CAV system layout in the EnergyPlus
simulation (scalable vector graphics (SVG) of the CAV system), Figure S2b. Diagram of the VAV system layout in
the EnergyPlus simulation (scalable vector graphics (SVG) of the VAV system), Figure S2c. Diagram of the UFAD
system layout in the EnergyPlus simulation (scalable vector graphics (SVG) of the UFAD system), and Figure S2d.
Diagram of the ACB with DOAS layout in the EnergyPlus simulation (scalable vector graphics (SVG) of the ACB
with DOAS).
Author Contributions:
C.-H.K. performed the simulation and data analysis and wrote this paper based on the
obtained results with the help of S.-E.L. and K.-H.L. K.-S.K. led and supervised this study. All of the authors have
contributed for collecting ideas and concepts presented in the paper.
Funding:
This research was supported by a grant (19AUDP-B079104-06) from Architecture and Urban Development
Research Program funded by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of Korean government.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
ACB Active Chilled Beam
ACH Air Change per Hour
AHU Air Handling Unit
ALT Altitude
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
BEECS Building Energy Efficiency Certification System
CAV Constant Air Volume
CDD Cooling Degree Day
DOAS Dedicated Outdoor Air System
DOE U.S. Department of Energy
EPBD Energy Performance of Buildings Directive
EPW EnergyPlus Weather File
FC Fan Coil
GHG Greenhouse Gas
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning
HDD Heating Degree Day
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Energies 2019,12, 4160 26 of 29
KEA Korea Energy Agency
KICT Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology
KMA Korea Meteorological Administration
LDAC Liquid Desiccant Membrane Air-conditioning
LNG Natural Gas
MOTIE Korea Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy
MVHR Mechanical Ventilation with Heat Recovery
OHAD Overhead Air Distribution
PMV Predicted Mean Vote
REHVA
Federation of European Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Associations
SHGC Solar Heat Gain Coefficient
TRY Test Reference Year
UFAD Underfloor Air Distribution
VAV Variable Air Volume
VLT Visible Light Transmittance
VRF Variable Refrigerant Flow
References
1.
Edenhofer, O.R.; Pichs-Madruga, Y.; Sokona, E.; Farahani, S.; Kadner, K.; Seyboth, A.; Adler, I.; Baum, S.;
Brunner, P.; Eickemeier, B.; et al. Climate Change 2014 Mitigation of Climate Change; Working Group
III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of IPCC; UNEP: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN
978-92-9169-142-5.
2.
The Core Writing Team of IPCC; Pachauri, R.K.; Meyer, L. Synthesis Report IPCC Climate Change 2014
Synthesis Report; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Geneva, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN
978-92-9169-143-2.
3.
Oleson, K.W.; Anderson, G.B.; Jones, B.; McGinnis, S.A.; Sanderson, B. Avoided climate impacts of urban
and rural heat and cold waves over the US using large climate model ensembles for RCP 8.5 and RCP 4.5.
Clim. Chang. 2018,146, 377–392. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4.
Lhotka, O.; Kysel
ý
, J.; Farda, A. Climate change scenarios of heat waves in Central Europe and their
uncertainties. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2017,131, 1043–1054. [CrossRef]
5.
Ceccherini, G.; Russo, S.; Ameztoy, I.; Romero, C.P.; Carmona-Moreno, C. Magnitude and frequency of heat
and cold waves in recent decades: The case of South America. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
2016
,16, 821–831.
[CrossRef]
6.
Luo, X.; Zhang, Y. The linkage between upper-level jet streams over East Asia and East Asian winter monsoon
variability. J. Clim. 2015,28, 9013–9028. [CrossRef]
7.
International Energy Agency (IEA). Key World Energy Statistics; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris,
France, 2017; ISBN 978-92-64-27807-3.
8.
Briner, G.; Prag, A. Establishing and Understanding Post-2020 Climate Change Mitigation Commitments;
International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2013. [CrossRef]
9.
Tavoni, M.; Kriegler, E.; Riahi, K.; Van Vuuren, D.P.; Aboumahboub, T.; Bowen, A.; Campiglio, E.; Kober, T.;
Jewell, J.; Luderer, G.; et al. Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of
global models. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2015,5, 119. [CrossRef]
10.
Höhne, N.; Fekete, H.; den Elzen, M.G.; Hof, A.F.; Kuramochi, T. Assessing the ambition of post-2020 climate
targets: A comprehensive framework. Clim. Policy 2018,18, 425–441. [CrossRef]
11.
Zhao, H.X.; Magoul
è
s, F. A review on the prediction of building energy consumption. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 2012,16, 3586–3592. [CrossRef]
12.
The International Energy Agency (IEA). Modernising Building Energy Codes to Secure Our Global Energy Future;
IEA: Paris, France, 2013.
13.
P
é
rez-Lombard, L.; Ortiz, J.; Pout, C. A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy Build.
2008,40, 394–398. [CrossRef]
14.
Kim, C.H.; Lee, S.E.; Kim, K.S. Analysis of Energy Saving Potential in High-Performance Building Technologies
under Korean Climatic Conditions. Energies 2018,11, 884. [CrossRef]
Energies 2019,12, 4160 27 of 29
15.
Kim, C.H.; Lee, S.E.; Kim, K.S. Comprehensive Analysis of Energy Consumption Rate and New Technology Trend in
High-Performance Buildings related with Different Climatic Zones; Architectural Institute of Korea: Seoul, Korea,
2018; Volume 34. [CrossRef]
16.
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). EnergyPlus Engineering Reference (Version 9.1.0 Documentation; Building
Technologies Program); U.S. Department of Energy: Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
17.
Perez-Lombard, L.; Ortiz, J.; Maestre, I.R. The map of energy flow in HVAC systems. Appl. Energy
2011
,88,
5020–5031. [CrossRef]
18. Trˇcka, M.; Hensen, J.L. Overview of HVAC system simulation. Autom. Constr. 2010,19, 93–99. [CrossRef]
19.
Terrill, T.J.; Rasmussen, B.P. An evaluation of HVAC energy usage and occupant comfort in religious facilities.
Energy Build. 2016,128, 224–235. [CrossRef]
20.
Bellia, L.; Capozzoli, A.; Mazzei, P.; Minichiello, F. A comparison of HVAC systems for artwork conservation.
Int. J. Refrig. 2007,30, 1439–1451. [CrossRef]
21.
Crawley, D.B.; Lawrie, L.K.; Winkelmann, F.C.; Buhl, W.F.; Huang, Y.J.; Pedersen, C.O.; Glazer, J. EnergyPlus:
Creating a new-generation building energy simulation program. Energy Build.
2001
,33, 319–331. [CrossRef]
22.
Crawley, D.B.; Lawrie, L.K.; Pedersen, C.O.; Winkelmann, F.C. Energy plus: Energy simulation program.
ASHRAE J. 2000,42, 49–56.
23.
Gustafsson, M.; Dermentzis, G.; Myhren, J.A.; Bales, C.; Ochs, F.; Holmberg, S.; Feist, W. Energy performance
comparison of three innovative HVAC systems for renovation through dynamic simulation. Energy Build.
2014,82, 512–519. [CrossRef]
24.
Korolija, I.; Marjanovic-Halburd, L.; Zhang, Y.; Hanby, V.I. Influence of building parameters and HVAC
systems coupling on building energy performance. Energy Build. 2011,43, 1247–1253. [CrossRef]
25.
Storle, D.; Abdel-Salam, M.R.; Simonson, C.J. Energy performance comparison of a 3-fluid and 2-fluid liquid
desiccant membrane air-conditioning systems in an office building. Energy 2019,176, 437–456. [CrossRef]
26.
Kim, J.; Tzempelikos, A.; Braun, J.E. Energy savings potential of passive chilled beams vs air systems in
various US climatic zones with different system configurations. Energy Build.
2019
,186, 244–260. [CrossRef]
27.
Yu, X.; Yan, D.; Sun, K.; Hong, T.; Zhu, D. Comparative study of the cooling energy performance of variable
refrigerant flow systems and variable air volume systems in office buildings. Appl. Energy
2016
,183, 725–736.
[CrossRef]
28.
Ho, S.H.; Rosario, L.; Rahman, M.M. Comparison of underfloor and overhead air distribution systems in an
office environment. Build. Environ. 2011,46, 1415–1427. [CrossRef]
29.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Building Energy Efficiency Certification System of Korea.
2017. Available online: http://www.molit.go.kr/USR/I0204/m_45/dtl.jsp?idx=14790 (accessed on 25 October
2019).
30.
Schicktanz, M.D.; Wapler, J.; Henning, H.M. Primary energy and economic analysis of combined heating,
cooling and power systems. Energy 2011,36, 575–585. [CrossRef]
31.
Gustafsson, M.; Thygesen, R.; Karlsson, B.; Ödlund, L. Rev-Changes in Primary Energy Use and CO
2
Emissions—An Impact Assessment for a Building with Focus on the Swedish Proposal for Nearly Zero
Energy Buildings. Energies 2017,10, 978. [CrossRef]
32.
International Energy Agency (IEA). CO
2
Emissions from Fuel Combustion Highlights, 2017th ed.; IEA: Paris,
France, 2017; ISBN 978-92-64-27818-9.
33. Korea Energy Agency (KEA). Carbon Neutral Program Guideline; KEA: Gyeonggi-Do, Korea, 2017.
34.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Volume 2 Energy; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
35.
Deru, M.; Field, K.; Studer, D.; Benne, K.; Griffith, B.; Torcellini, P.; Liu, B.; Halverson, M.; Winiarski, D.;
Rosenberg, M.; et al. U.S. Department of Energy Commercial Reference Building Models of the National Building
Stock; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Denver, CO, USA, 2011.
36.
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). DOE Reference Commercial Buildings Report; Prototype Building Model
Package. Available online: https://www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/prototype_models
(accessed on 25 October 2019).
37.
Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA). National Climate Data Center, Weather Data Release Portal.
Available online: https://data.kma.go.kr/cmmn/main.do (accessed on 25 October 2019).
38.
EnergyPlus. EnergyPlusWeather Data. Available online: https://energyplus.net/weather/(accessed on 25
October 2019).
Energies 2019,12, 4160 28 of 29
39.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT); Korea Energy Agency (KEA). Building Energy
Saving Design Standards of Korea; KEA: Gyeonggi-Do, Korea, 2017.
40.
Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE); Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building
Technology (KICT). The Study of the Development of Energy Performance Assessment Method and Policy in
Buildings; KICT: Gyeonggi-Do, Korea, 2017.
41.
Korea Energy Agency (KEA); Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology (KICT).
Establishing Data Base of Building Energy Design Situation and Developing High Efficiency Building Design
Guideline; KEA: Gyeonggi-Do, Korea, 2017.
42.
Korea Energy Agency (KEA); Korea Appraisal Board (KAB). Development of Building Energy Integrated Support
System for the Spread of Low-Energy Building Workshop; Korea Energy Agency and Korea Appraisal Board DB:
Gyeonggi-Do, Korea, 2016.
43.
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). ASHRAE 90.1-2010
International Climate Zone Definitions; ASHRAE: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2012; Available online: http://www.
builtenvironments.com/International_Climate_Zones.pdf (accessed on 25 October 2019).
44.
Kottek, M.; Grieser, J.; Beck, C.; Rudolf, B.; Rubel, F. World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification
updated. Meteorol. Z. 2006,15, 259–263. [CrossRef]
45.
Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA). 2017 Abnormal Climate Report; KMA: Seoul, Korea, 2017; ISBN
11-1360000-000705-01. Available online: http://www.climate.go.kr/home/bbs/list.php?code=93&bname=
abnormal (accessed on 25 October 2019).
46.
Li, C.; Hong, T.; Yan, D. An insight into actual energy use and its drivers in high-performance buildings.
Appl. Energy 2014,131, 394–410. [CrossRef]
47.
Aynur, T.N.; Hwang, Y.; Radermacher, R. Simulation of a VAV air conditioning system in an existing building
for the cooling mode. Energy Build. 2009,41, 922–929. [CrossRef]
48.
Yang, X.B.; Jin, X.Q.; Du, Z.M.; Fan, B.; Chai, X.F. Evaluation of four control strategies for building VAV
air-conditioning systems. Energy Build. 2011,43, 414–422. [CrossRef]
49.
Ma, H.; Du, N.; Yu, S.; Lu, W.; Zhang, Z.; Deng, N.; Li, C. Analysis of typical public building energy
consumption in northern China. Energy Build. 2017,136, 139–150. [CrossRef]
50.
Chen, H.; Lee, W.L.; Wang, X. Energy assessment of office buildings in China using China building energy
codes and LEED 2.2. Energy Build. 2015,86, 514–524. [CrossRef]
51.
Schiavon, S.; Lee, K.H.; Bauman, F.; Webster, T. Simplified calculation method for design cooling loads in
underfloor air distribution (UFAD) systems. Energy Build. 2011,43, 517–528. [CrossRef]
52.
Lee, K.H.; Schiavon, S.; Bauman, F.; Webster, T. Thermal decay in underfloor air distribution (UFAD) systems:
Fundamentals and influence on system performance. Appl. Energy 2012,91, 197–207. [CrossRef]
53.
Ahmed, K.; Kurnitski, J.; Sormunen, P. Demand controlled ventilation indoor climate and energy performance
in a high performance building with air flow rate controlled chilled beams. Energy Build.
2015
,109, 115–126.
[CrossRef]
54.
Chen, C.; Cai, W.; Wang, Y.; Lin, C. Performance comparison of heat exchangers with different circuitry
arrangements for active chilled beam applications. Energy Build. 2014,79, 164–172. [CrossRef]
55.
Pasut, W.; Bauman, F.; De Carli, M. The use of ducts to improve the control of supply air temperature rise in
UFAD systems: CFD and lab study. Appl. Energy 2014,134, 490–498. [CrossRef]
56.
Lee, K.H.; Kim, S.M.; Yoon, J.H. Supply air temperature impact in underfloor air distribution systems under
Korean climatic conditions: Energy, humidity and comfort. Energy Build. 2013,58, 363–371. [CrossRef]
57.
Yu, K.H.; Yoon, S.H.; Jung, H.K.; Kim, K.H.; Song, K.D. Influence of lighting loads upon thermal comfort
under CBAD and UFAD systems. Energies 2015,8, 6079–6097. [CrossRef]
58.
Korea Hanmi Publishing Company. Monthly Journal of Equipment Technology; Korea Hanmi Publishing
Company: Seoul, Korea, 2013.
59.
Rhee, K.N.; Shin, M.S.; Choi, S.H. Thermal uniformity in an open plan room with an active chilled beam
system and conventional air distribution systems. Energy Build. 2015,93, 236–248. [CrossRef]
60. Rhee, K.N.; Choi, S.H.; Kim, C.H. Comparative evaluation of the thermal uniformity in a space with active
chilled beam and conventional air conditioning systems. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Plan. Des.
2014
,30, 199–206.
[CrossRef]
Energies 2019,12, 4160 29 of 29
61.
Kim, C.H.; Lee, S.E.; Yu, K.H.; Kim, K.S. An analysis of the energy performance and thermal comfort in an
office building with active chilled beam system. In Proceedings of the SAREK 2016 Summer Annual Conference,
Pyeongchang, Korea, 22–24 June 2016; The Society of Air-Conditioning and Refrigerating Engineers of Korea
(SAREK): Seoul, Korea, 2016.
62.
Virta, M.; Butler, D.; Graslund, J.; Hogeling, J.; Kristiansen, E.L.; Reinikainen, M.; Svensson, G. Chilled
Beam Application Guidebook; Federation of European Heating, Ventilation and Air-conditioning Associations
(REHVA): Brussels, Belgium, 2006; ISBN 978-2960046830.
63.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Building Act. Indoor Air Quality Control in Public-Use Facilities,
etc. Act; Wholly Amended by Act No. 6911; Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport: Sejong, Korea,
2016.
64.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Building Act. Facilities of Buildings; Wholly Amended by Act
Act No.14792, 18; Partial Amendment; Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport: Sejong, Korea, 2017.
65.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 7730:2005, Ergonomics of the Thermal
Environment—Analytical Determination and Interpretation of Thermal Comfort using Calculation of the PMV and
PPD Indices and Local Thermal Comfort Criteria; International Organization for Standardization (ISO): Geneva,
Switzerland, 2005.
66.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2010. Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy; MASHRAE:
Atlanta, GA, USA, 2011.
67.
Djongyang, N.; Tchinda, R.; Njomo, D. Thermal comfort: A review paper. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2010
,
14, 2626–2640. [CrossRef]
68.
Kim, C.H.; Kim, K.S. Evaluation of thermal and visual environment for the glazing and shading device in an
office building with installed of venetian blind. Korea Inst. Ecol. Archit. Environ.
2015
,15, 101–109. [CrossRef]
69.
Cho, J.K.; Shin, S.H.; Kim, J.H.; Hong, H.K. Development of an energy evaluation methodology to make
multiple predictions of the HVAC&R system energy demand for office buildings. Energy Build.
2014
,80,
169–183. [CrossRef]
©
2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
