Development of a numerical model to predict heat exchange rates

for a ground-source heat pump system

Yujin Nam*, Ryozo Ooka, Suckho Hwang
Cw403 Institute of Industry Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8505, Japan
1. Introduction
Ground-source (geothermal) heat pump (GSHP) systems can
achieve a higher coefcient of performance than conventional air-
source heat pump (ASHP) systems by utilizing the relatively stable
subterranean temperature. The market for these systems in Japan
has grown remarkably over the past few years due to efforts to
improve the drilling method and reduce the installation cost of
ground heat exchanger (for example, utilizing the building pile as
ground heat exchanger, Nagano et al. [1] and Sekine et al. [2]). In
order to use these GSHP systems, it is necessary to accurately
predict the heat extraction and injection rates of the heat
exchanger before its introduction and to design an optimum
system based on these results. Many analytical methods to predict
the heat exchange rate have been proposed and used since the
introduction of cylindrical heat source theory by Carslaw and
Jaeger [3]. This theory, which was developed for a long isolated
pipe surrounded by an innite solid of constant properties, is
relatively simple to program and easy to understand. It has been
used for numerical models for vertical ground heat exchangers
reported by Mei and Emerson [4], Yavuzturk et al. [5], and used for
analytical approach by Ochifuji and Kim [6] and Bernier [7]. Cui
et al. [8] Nagano et al. [9] have conducted numerical, analytical and
experimental data comparisons on simulations of ground heat
exchangers. Deerman and Kavanaugh [10] described the applica-
tion of cylindrical heat source model by comparing simulation
results with experimental data from test sites.
However, most of these models are based on a heat conduction
model with cylindrical coordinates, in which the effect of the
ground water ow is incorporated into the effective heat
conductivities. There is a possibility that models which are not
sufciently represented are inaccurate in their predictions for long
periods. Furthermore, most of the proposed models utilize a
cylindrical-shaped heat exchanger under the concept of an
equivalent diameter and do not consider the effect of the exact
shape of the heat exchanger. These models might induce numerical
errors in the prediction. Recently, the effect of groundwater owon
the heat transfer rate for vertical ground heat exchanger has been
represented in numerical model by many researchers. A nite-
element numerical groundwater ow and heat transport model
was used to simulate and estimate the effects of heat advection by
moving groundwater and heat conduction in the ground (Chiasson
et al. [11]). Barcenilla et al. [12] have also studied the effective
thermal conductivity correlation to analyze vertical heat exchan-
gers with groundwater ow. Although, these models estimate the
Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140
A R T I C L E I N F O
Article history:
Received 12 October 2007
Received in revised form 28 April 2008
Accepted 2 June 2008
Keywords:
Ground-source heat pump
Ground heat exchanger
Numerical simulation
A B S T R A C T
Ground-source heat pump (GSHP) systems can achieve a higher coefcient of performance than
conventional air-source heat pump (ASHP) systems. For the design of a GSHP system, it is necessary to
accurately predict the heat extraction and injection rates of the heat exchanger. Many models that
combine ground heat conduction and heat exchangers have been proposed to predict heat extraction/
injection rates from/into the ground in the research eld of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning
systems. However, most analysis models are inaccurate in their predictions for long periods because they
are based on a thermal conduction model using a cylindrical coordinate model or an equivalent diameter
model. In this paper, a numerical model that combines a heat transport model with ground water ow
and a heat exchanger model with an exact shape is developed. Furthermore, a method for estimating soil
properties based on ground investigations is proposed. Comparison between experimental results and
numerical analysis based on the model developed above was conducted under the conditions of an
experiment from 2004. The analytical results agreed well with the experimental results. Finally, the
proposed model was used to predict the heat exchange rate for an actual ofce building in Japan.
2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 3 5452 6434; fax: +81 3 5452 6432.
E-mail addresses: namyujin@iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Y. Nam), ooka@iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp
(R. Ooka), shhwang@iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp (S. Hwang).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Energy and Buildings
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ enbui l d
0378-7788/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.06.004
heat exchange performance for various soil and rock conditions,
they can not sufciently represent complicated geological strata,
such as that found in Japan, which has multiple layers with various
soil properties and hydraulic conductivities.
On the other hand, the elds of hydrology, geology, and
geotechnical engineering have developed simulation models of
groundwater ow, and mass and heat transfer for complicated soil
conditions and properties. However, the purpose of these models
has been to analyze macroscopic groundwater ow, mass and heat
transfer in the soil; modeling of a ground heat exchanger has not
been proposed or considered.
In this paper, a numerical model that combines a heat transport
model with groundwater owand a heat exchanger model with an
exact shape is developed. Furthermore, the authors also propose a
method for estimating soil properties based on ground investiga-
tions to obtain accurate simulation results. Moreover, the validity
of these methods is conrmed by comparing simulations with
experimental results. Finally, the proposed model was used to
predict the heat extraction and injection rate for an actual ofce
building in Japan.
2. Numerical model for heat extraction and injection rates
2.1. Simulation code for heat and water transport in the ground
In this research, FEFLOW [13] is adopted in order to calculate
heat exchange rate between ground heat exchanger and its
surrounding ground and to estimate the distribution of sub-
terranean temperature. This is an analysis code using a nite-
element method for the simulation of heat and material transport
in the ground, which is widely used for the analysis of groundwater
ow or ground pollution. Fujii et al. [14] has used this to study
design tools for ground-coupled heat pump systems. FEFLOW is
based on the following three preservation equations (mass
conservation Eq. (1), momentum conservation Eq. (2), and energy
conservation Eq. (3)) for the combination of soil particles, liquid
water, and gas:
@
@t
e
a
r
a

@
@x
i
e
a
r
a
v
a
i
e
a
r
a
Q
a
r
(1)
v
a
i

k
a
ij
e
a
m
a
@p
a
@x
j
r
a
g
j
_ _
0 (2)
@
@t
e
a
r
a
E
a

@
@x
i
e
a
r
a
v
a
i
E
a

@
@x
i
j
a
iT
e
a
r
a
Q
a
T
(3)
Here, j
a
iT
is the heat ux and is described as follows:
j
a
iT
j
a
iT
e
a
; r
a
; v
a
i
; T
a
l
conda
i j
l
disp
a
i j

@T
a
@x
j
e
a
l
a
c
a
r
a
a
T
V
a
d
i j
c
a
r
a
a
L
a
T

v
a
i
v
a
j
V
a
_ _
@T
a
@x
j
(4)
Here, l
conda
i j
and l
disp
a
i j
are conduction and dispersion components,
respectively, of the heat diffusivity tensor of phase a. a
L
and a
T
are
horizontal and lateral heat dispersion rates, respectively. Here,
dispersion is one of the diffusion phenomena that are caused by
spatial non-uniformity.
2.2. Incorporating a heat exchanger model with a ground surface heat
balance model
To calculate boundary conditions on the surfaces of the heat
exchanger and the ground for FEFLOWanalysis, the heat exchanger
and the ground surface heat balance models are incorporated into a
user-subroutine.
(1) Ground heat exchanger model
Here, paired U-tubes (outer diameter: 38 mm, inner
diameter: 28.8 mm) are assumed as the ground heat exchan-
ger, as shown in Fig. 1. The ground heat exchanger model
consists of the circulatory water model with a 1-dimensional
advection-diffusion equation in the ground heat exchanger,
and convective heat transfer between the inner surface of the
heat exchanger pipe and the circulatory water. The tempera-
ture of the circulatory water is given by the following equation:
@T
w
@t

l
w
r
w
C
w
@
2
T
w
@z
2
U
w
@T
w
@z

hP
w
r
w
C
w
A
w
T
1
T
w
(5)
The heat transfer between the inner surface of the heat
exchanger pipe and the circulation water is
Q
T
s
T
w;i
1=hA
(6)
h Nu
l
w
r
(7)
Nu 0:023Re
0:8
Pr
n
(8)
Here, n is 0.3 and 0.4 for cooling and heating, respectively.
(2) Ground surface heat balance model
Nomenclature
c specic heat (J/kg K)
k
ij
permeability tensor (m
2
)
Pr Prandtl number
Q
r
mass generation term
Q
T
energy generation term
Re Reynolds number
v
i
velocity vector (m/s)
V
a
absolute value of the velocity vector (

v
a
i
v
a
i
_
)
$
ij
Kronecker tensor
Greek letters
a each phase (liquid water, water vapor, and solid
soil particles)
e
a
volume ratio of each phase a (0 e
a
1)
l heat conductivity (W/mK)
m viscosity (kg/ms)
r
a
density of phase a (kg/m
3
)
Fig. 1. Heat ux on the surface of heat exchanger.
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2134
Heat ux Q from the ground surface to ground is given by
the following heat balance equation (Fig. 2):
Q R
sol
R
sky
R
surf
H
surf
L
surf
(9)
(1) Total solar radiation (R
sol
)
R
sol
1 a
s
J
dn
sinh J
sh
(10)
Here, J
dn
is the direct solar radiation on the ground surface,
sin(h) is solar altitude, J
sh
is sky radiation, and a
s
is albedo
(reectivity of solar radiation on the ground).
(2) Downward atmospheric radiation (R
sky
)
R
sky
s273:16 T
a

4
0:526 0:076

f
_
1 0:062 c
(11)
Here, s is the StephenBoltzmann constant (5.67 10
8
(W/m
2
K
4
)), f is the water vapor pressure near the ground
surface (mmHg), c is the degree of cloudiness, T
a
is air
temperature.
(3) Upward long wave radiation from the ground surface (R
surf
)
R
surf
s273:16 T
s

4
1 0:062 c (12)
Here, T
s
is the ground surface temperature.
(4) Sensible heat ux (H
surf
)
H
surf
a
c
T
s
T
a
(13)
Here, the convective heat transfer ratio on the ground surface
(a
c
) is given by the experimental equation of Ju rges with
respect to wind velocity near the ground surface (v).
a
c
5:8 3:9vv 5m=s; a
c
7:1v
0:78
v >5m=s (14)
(5) Latent heat ux (L
surf
)
L
surf
b 7
133:15
1000
a
c
f
sat
T
s
T
a
(15)
Here, b is moisture availability of the ground surface, and
f
sat
(T
s
) is the saturate water vapor ux of T
s
.
3. Estimation method for soil properties based on a ground
investigation
As most numerical models for ground-source heat pump are
based on principal heat conduction, it is important to determine
the thermal properties of ground such as ground thermal
conductivity and volumetric specic heat. Recently, methods
have been proposed by Austin et al. [15] and Gehlin et al. [16].
They have described portable testing equipments and the
method of determination from in situ eld test, called the
thermal response test, which is to measure the temperature
response of a circulatory uid in a single U-tube given a constant
heat ux. However, introducing the experimental equipment
and conducting these eld tests is expensive, which may be a
burden to introducing the entire system. In Japan, items to be
examined in a ground investigation before construction of a
building are dened by the Japanese Industrial Standards and
Japanese Geotechnical Society Standards: for example, the
ground water level, void and saturation ratios of soil, mechanical
analysis of soil, etc. If these investigations are conducted in three
locations, the underground water gradient can be assumed. A
method of assuming the soil physical properties is proposed by
using the measurement results of these investigations in this
section.
3.1. Fundamental soil parameters
Soil is composed of three elements: soil particles, water, and air.
The fundamental physical properties of soil can be estimated from
the relationship between each of their volume, mass, specic heat,
thermal conductivity, and thermal capacity. Fundamentally, the
soil contents are determined from the results of the ground
investigation, and the density, void ratio, and water content ratio of
the soil are calculated using the three-phase model for soil
(Kasubuchi [17]).
3.2. Thermal soil parameters
The heat conductivity and heat capacity of soil are required to
calculate heat conductionin soil. Heat conductivity of the solid part
of soil is estimated from the following geometric average of each
solid component:
l
s
l
m=mn
A
l
n=mn
B
(16)
Here, l
A
and l
B
are heat conductivities (W/mK) of solid
components A and B, respectively; m and n are volume ratios of
A and B, respectively. Comprehensive heat conductivity l
epar
and
heat capacity C are given by the following parallel models of solid
soil, gas, and liquid water.
l
epar

n
i1
V
i
l
i
(17)
C

n
i1
r
i
c
i
V
i
(18)
Here, V
i
is the volume ratio of each component i, respectively.
3.3. Hydraulic conductivity
Hydraulic conductivity (permeability) is a very important
parameter, and inuences heat transport in the soil. There are
several experimental formulations that estimate hydraulic con-
ductivity (k) in saturated soil.
Hazens formula
k C
h
0:7 0:03tD
2
10
(19)
Fig. 2. Thermal balance on ground surface.
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2135
Terzaghis formula
k
C
t
m
n 0:13

1 n
3
p
_ _
2
D
2
10
(20)
Zunkers formula
k
C
z
m
n
1 n
_ _
2
D
2
w
(21)
Kozenys formula
k
C
k
m
n
3
1 n
2
D
2
w
(22)
Here, t is soil temperature, n is the porosity of soil, mis viscosity,
and D
10
is a 10% effective diameter in a particle size summation
curve, and D
w
is the average particle diameter.
4. Comparison between experimental and numerical analyses
4.1. Outline of the experiment
In this section, the prediction accuracy of the numerical
simulation techniques described above is examined by compar-
ison with the experimental results. The experiment was
conducted in the ground-source air-conditioning system labora-
tory constructed at the Chiba Experimental Station of the
University of Tokyos Institute of Industrial Science in 2003 and
2004 [2]. Two cast-in-place concrete piles, with a diameter of
1.5 m and a length of 20 m, were installed. Eight pairs of U-tubes
(45 mm outer and 35 mm inner diameters) were positioned
around the surface of each pile. In this experiment, typical ofce
building conditions were assumed, and heating and cooling were
operated from 09:00 to 18:00, Monday to Friday. Heating and
cooling were conducted over 3-month periods, fromDecember to
February and from June to August, respectively. Heat extraction
and injection rates in the cooling and heating periods were
calculatedby the temperature andowrate of circulatory water in
the ground heat exchangers. Inthis experiment, soil temperatures
at 10-mand19-mdepths at measurement points I andII, as shown
in Fig. 3, were measured. Furthermore, underground water
gradients were deduced from ve underground water levels at
ve observation wells around the experimental site. The ground
investigation and boring tests were conducted at the experi-
mental site. The results of the boring tests and soil properties
obtained from the results are shown in Fig. 3.
4.2. Analysis conditions
The model for the comparison analysis adopted a variation on
the heating and cooling loads, in the same manner as the
experimental results. Table 1 shows the values of the physical
parameters of the soil for numerical simulation based on Section 3.
The groundwater level is at a depth of 12 m. The analysis domain is
26 m 20 m 20 m and is shown in Fig. 4. Two cast-in-place
concrete piles (1.5 m in diameter and 20 m in depth) are installed
in the analysis domain and eight pairs of meshes which imitate U-
tubes are positioned around the surface of each pile in the same
way as in the experiment. The heat ux, which corresponds to the
heat extraction and injection rates in the experiment results, is set
at the surface of each mesh modeled as a U-tube. The underground
water gradient is deduced to be 2.05 10
3
(m/m) from
observations. This corresponds to a groundwater ow velocity
of 13.6 m/year. The direction of the groundwater ow is also
shown in Fig. 3. The calculation period was from1st January to 31st
December 2004. Initial and boundary values of the ground
temperatures are set to 18.1 8C at a depth of 10 m and 17.3 8C
at a depth of 19 m, as measured. The boundary value of the
underground water temperature is also assumed to be constant at
16.5 8C from the experimental results.
4.3. Results
Fig. 5 shows the annual variations in the ground surface heat
ux, and in the outdoor and ground surface temperatures, which
are calculated using the ground surface heat balance model. The
model has employed standard annual meteorological data
for Tokyo in the calculation. This is hourly data for every day,
which records the air temperature, air humidity, direct solar
radiation, sky solar radiation, wind velocity, wind direction, degree
of cloud cover, and nocturnal radiation, as provided by the Society
Fig. 3. Soil properties calculated from boring test results.
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2136
of Heating, Air-Conditioning and Sanitary Engineers of Japan.
Furthermore, the temperature distribution around the piles at a
depth of 12 m at 5:00 p.m. on 18th August is shown in Fig. 6, in
which the effect of the groundwater ow is evident.
Comparisons of the soil temperatures at a depth of 10 m at
measurement points I and II (Fig. 4 references) between the
analysis and the experimental results are shown in Fig. 7. The
measurement points I and II are 1.25 m and 2.75 m apart,
respectively, from the center of pile A. Though the analysis results
are slightly higher than the experimental ones about 1 8C at most
they correspond well with the experimental ones.
5. Application to a real building in Tokyo
5.1. Analysis summary
In this section, the proposed model was used to predict the
heat extraction and injection rate for an actual ofce building in
Tokyo, Japan. The building plans to introduce a ground-source
heat pump system utilizing 20 cast-in-place piles
(1600 mm 35 m) as ground heat exchangers. In this analysis,
one span (8.8 m 8.8 m) area, which contains four piles, is
considered as the analysis model (Fig. 8). Table 2 shows the
ground properties of the analysis conditions estimated from
the ground investigation data at the site, which was calculated
using samples from the boring tests and the estimation
method in Section 3. The initial temperature of the ground
and circulatory water is set at 16 8C, initial ground water level
is G.L.1.02 m, and the temperature of the circulatory water at
the U-tube inlet (heat pump outlet) is assigned by the
temperature difference (DT) from that of the circulatory
water at the U-tube outlet (heat pump inlet). The heat extrac-
tion and injection rate is calculated by DT and the water
ow rate. However, the ground temperature around the
ground heat exchanger increases by injecting the heat into
the ground during cooling operation, and decreases gradually
Table 1
Calculation conditions
Fig. 4. Simulation model.
Fig. 5. Annual variations of the ground surface heat ux, outdoor and ground surface
temperature. Fig. 6. Distribution of temperature around piles.
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2137
by extracting the heat during heating operation. In these
conditions, the coefcient of performance (COP) of the heat
pump decreases. Therefore, in this calculation, the temperature
of the circulatory water is controlled below 35 8C for cooling
and above 5 8C at least for heating to avoid a decrease in COP.
When the temperature exceeds this limit, DT is reduced. In these
calculations, the initial DT is input as 4 8C. The analysis period is
set at 365 days and heating and cooling were performed in
December to February and June to August, respectively, from
09:00 to 18:00, Monday to Friday. In this paper, ve calculation
scenarios are performed, which are shown in Table 3 and Fig. 9.
The base case (Case 2) assumes eight pairs of U-tubes around a
pile, Cases 1 and 4 have four pairs, and Cases 3 and 5 have 12
pairs, respectively. In Cases 1, 2 and 3, the heat exchange rate
using the same ow rate for circulatory water per pile is
considered, while Cases 2, 4 and 5 use the same ow rate per U-
tube, 3.04 L/min.
5.2. Analysis results
Table 4 presents the analysis results for all calculation
conditions. When the ow rate for the circulatory water was
the same, Case 3, which had 12 pairs of U-tubes installed,
achieved better heat exchange rates per pile, 184.7 W/m in
cooling and 180.0 W/m in heating than Cases 1 and 2. This
was due to the increase in contact surface between the pipes
and the ground. Moreover, the average temperature for the
water entering the heat pump in Cases 1 and 2 is lower during
cooling and higher during heating than that in Case 3. The
temperature of water entering the heat pump (the tempera-
ture at the U-tube outlet) is important as the COP of the
heat pump signicantly depends on this temperature.
Fig. 10 shows the performance curve for the heat pump
used in this research, which is calculated when the outlet
temperature from the heat pump to the room is 7 8C (return
temperature 12 8C) in cooling mode and 45 8C (return tempera-
ture 40 8C) in heating mode (Shiba et al. [18]). The COP of the
heat pump was calculated using these curves and Case 3
showed the highest value, 6.72 for cooling and 4.39 for heating.
On the other hand, when the ow rate per U-tube is set the
same, Case 4, which had four pairs installed, achieved
the highest heat exchange rate per pair of U-tubes, 22.7 W/
m for cooling and 23.0 W/m for heating. The distance
between adjacent pipes in Case 5 was less than that of the
other cases, 0.41 m, and the results were reduced to 20.8 W/
m due to thermal interference. Among these ve cases, Case
5 achieved the highest heat exchange rate per pile, 272.4 W/
m for cooling and 227.7 W/m for heating. However, Cases 3
and 5 are more expensive to install. In particular, Case 5 needs
a larger capacity circulation pump and is more expensive to
run than the other cases. For the optimum design and
operation, it is necessary to consider the heat exchange rate,
initial cost and running costs, comprehensively.
Fig. 7. Comparison of ground temperature variations between the numerical analysis and the experiment.
Fig. 8. Analysis model (ground plan, cross-section).
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2138
6. Conclusions
For the optimum design of GSHP system, it is necessary to
estimate its performance and economic feasibility before the
introduction of the system. In this paper, a numerical model was
developed to predict heat extraction and injection rates of a ground
heat exchanger.
It is based on simulation code for the analysis of underground
heat and water movement, in which circulatory water model in
the heat exchanger and the ground surface heat ux model are
incorporated.
An estimation method for the soil thermal properties based on a
ground investigation and theoretical formulas was proposed.
Simulation results using the developed prediction model and the
soil heat physical property values estimated here were compared
with the experimental results, and the validity of the prediction
model developed here was conrmed.
This simulation tool was applied to an ofce building in Tokyo,
Japan, and the optimum design of system was examined as case
study.
In the future, various other considerations for optimum design
and operation systemwill be conducted by coupling the developed
model with a building load model.
Table 2
Calculation conditions
Fig. 9. Cases of calculation.
Fig. 10. Performance curve of heat pump.
Table 3
Analysis cases
Case Number of U-tube Distance from
adjacent pipe (M)
Flow rate of
circulation water
(L/(min pile))
1 4 pairs 1.13 24.32
2 8 pairs 0.61 24.32
3 12 pairs 0.41 24.32
4 4 pairs 1.13 12.16
5 12 pairs 0.41 36.48
Table 4
Analysis results
Case Heat exchange rate per
a U-tube (W/m)
Heat exchange rate per
a pile (W/m)
Average outlet temperature
(8C)
COP of heat pump
Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating
1 44.8 32.3 179.2 129.2 25.9 8.6 5.90 4.21
2 22.7 20.9 181.6 167.2 23.1 9.4 6.57 4.29
3 15.4 15.0 184.7 180.0 22.6 10.5 6.72 4.39
4 22.7 23.0 90.8 92.0 22.7 10.4 6.70 4.38
5 22.7 19.0 272.4 227.7 25.3 9.3 6.05 4.27
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2139
References
[1] K. Nagano, et al., Thermal characteristics of steel foundation piles as ground heat
exchangers, in: Proceedings of the 8th IEA Heat Pump Conference, 2005, pp. 411.
[2] K. Sekine, et al., Development of a ground source heat pump system with ground
heat exchanger utilizing the cast-in-place concrete pile foundations of buildings,
ASHRAE Transactions 113 (Part 1) (2007) 19.
[3] H.S. Carslaw, J.C. Jaeger, Conduction of heat in solids, Claremore Press, Oxford,
1946.
[4] V.C. Mei, C.J. Emerson, Newapproach for analysis of ground-coil design for applied
heat pump systems, ASHRAE Transactions 91 (2B) (1985) 12161224.
[5] C. Yavuzturk, et al., A transient two-dimensional nite volume model for the
simulation of vertical U-tube ground heat exchangers, ASHRAE Transactions 105
(2) (1999) 465474.
[6] K. Ochifuji, N.C. Kim, Theoretical analysis of heat conduction of long term heat
storage and extraction by buried vertical pipe system, transactions of the society
of heating, Air-Conditioning and Sanitary Engineers of Japan (36) (1988) 19.
[7] M. Bernier, Ground-coupled heat pump system simulation, ASHRAE Transactions
106 (1) (2001) 605616.
[8] P. Cui, et al., Numerical analysis and experimental validation of heat transfer in
ground heat exchangers in alternative operation modes, Energy and Buildings 40
(2008) 10601066.
[9] K. Nagano, K. Ochifuji, A study on the ground heat pump system part1 a simula-
tion model and experiments of heat extraction during soil freezing in unsaturated
soil, transactions of the society of heating, Air-Conditioning and Sanitary Engi-
neers of Japan (54) (1994) 5566.
[10] J.D. Deerman, S.P. Kavanaugh, Simulation of vertical U-tube ground coupled heat
pump systems using the cylindrical heat source solution, ASHRAE Transactions 97
(1) (1991) 287295.
[11] A.D. Chiasson, et al., A preliminary assessment of the effects of groundwater ow
on closed-loop ground-source heat pump systems, ASHRAE Transactions 106 (1)
(2000) 380393.
[12] J.R. Barcenilla, et al., The thermal conductivity for single-bore vertical heat
exchangers with groundwater ow, ASHRAE Transaction 111 (2) (2005) 16.
[13] H.J.G. Diersch, FEFLOWReference Manual, Institute for Water Resources Planning
and Systems Research Ltd., 2002, pp. 278.
[14] H. Fujii, et al., Optimizing the design of large-scale ground-coupled heat pump
systems using groundwater and heat transport modeling, Geothermics 34 (2005)
347364.
[15] W.A. Austin, et al., Development of an in-situ system for measuring ground
thermal properties, ASHRAE Transaction 106 (1) (2000) 365379.
[16] S. Gehlin, Thermal Response TestMethod Development and Evaluation, Doctoral
Thesis, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, 2002.
[17] T. Kasubuchi, Heat conduction model of saturated soil and estimation of thermal
conductivity of soil solid phase, Journal of Soil Science (1984) 240247.
[18] Y. Shiba, Development of high performance water-to-water heat pump for
ground-source application, in: Proceedings of the 8th IEA Heat Pump Conference,
2005.
Y. Nam et al. / Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 21332140 2140