Pergamon

PII:

Solar Energy Vol. 64, Nos 46, pp. 163178, 1998

1998 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd
S 0 0 3 8 0 9 2 X ( 9 8 ) 0 0 1 0 1 7 All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain
0038-092X / 98 / $ - see front matter

SIMULATION OF A CENTRAL SOLAR HEATING SYSTEM WITH

SEASONAL STORAGE IN KOREA
MO CHUNG*,, JUN-UN PARK* and HYUNG-KEE YOON**
*Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yeungnam University, Kyungsan 712749, Korea
**Department of Building Energy, Korea Institute of Energy Research, P.O. Box 103, Yusong, Deajon 305343, Korea
Received 18 September 1997; revised version accepted 4 August 1998
Communicated by ERICH HAHNE

AbstractA Central Solar Heating Plant with Seasonal Storage (CSHPSS), which is under construction in
Korea, is simulated using TRNSYS to predict thermal performances and economic aspects. The system is
located in Cheju Island, a far southern part of Korea, and consists of two arrays of collectors, a medium-sized
storage tank, and two thermal loads. The loads are an office building and a greenhouse for agricultural
research. Simulation results clearly reveal that Cheju Island is climatically best suited for solar heating in
Korea showing 50 to 80% more solar fractions than other inland areas. The main reason for the better thermal
performance for Cheju is its warmer winter climate. The system under construction has a 184 m 2 collector area
(A) and 600 m 3 of storage volume (V ). TRNSYS prediction for the system is that about 39% of the total
heating load of 885 000 MJ / year can be provided from the sun. The estimated Return Of Investment (ROI)
range from 25 to 30 years. The validity of the design is checked through a what-if test around the design
point of A 5 184 m 2 and V 5 600 m 3 . The solar fraction for different system sizes and the virtual solar
self-sufficiency conditions are also calculated even though the actual system is not economically viable with
the designed small size. Our calculation reveals that low-cost CSHPSS systems could be constructed anywhere
in Korea, provided only that the system size is sufficiently large. 1998 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
All rights reserved.

Many European countries such as Sweden, Germany, France, Switzerland, and the Netherlands
devoted their efforts to the development of
CSHPSS systems for many years. Important
findings and general guidelines for the construction of a CSPHSS are well explained in Hadorns
report (Hadorn, 1990). Bankston provided a review of worldwide CSHPSS systems in his IEA
reports. Led by Sweden, the most active country
in CSHPSS with more than 20 important projects,
a great deal of experimental and theoretical
research has been performed throughout the
world.
Locally, there are many good reasons for Korea
to actively utilize solar energy. First of all, Korea
imports all its petroleum and natural gas, and it is
the fourth in the world in oil import. Geographically, its latitude ranges from 33 to 38 degrees
north. This range is fairly close to the equator and
gives a good foundation for solar energy utilization. Climatically, it has many sunny days all year
around. Environmental pollution from fossil fuels
exceeded a dangerous limit long time ago. There
is an exploding increase in electrical energy
consumption for space cooling during summer, a
part of which can be replaced by solar energy
with the aid of absorptive refrigeration systems. A
concentrated apartment complex, suitable for a

1. INTRODUCTION

The basic idea of seasonal storage of solar energy

is to compensate the seasonal discrepancy between solar energy supply and heating load. The
solar irradiation is high during summer and low in
winter. There is about a 6 month phase shift
between energy supply and demand. The best cure
for the discrepancy is the utilization of thermal
storage. Since the storage period is relatively long
compared with the conventional small-sized daily
storage systems, a large volume of thermal storage is generally recommended. The large volume
of storage is meaningful only when it is accompanied by a large area of collector. This is the
reason why large systems are generally used in
CSHPSS. The idea of seasonal storage is not
new. A very good literature survey can be found
in reports by Hadorn (1990) and Bankston (1988)
among many authors. Hadorn divided the historical development in CSHPSS system into four
phases: the age of pioneers led by Brun (1964) in
1960s, the age of patents in 1970s, and the age of
projects in 1980s, and the future. He summarized
important progresses made during each period.
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: mchung@ynucc.yeungnam.ac.kr.
163

164

M. Chung et al.

large-scale CSHPSS system, is the most popular

residential pattern in Korea. Despite all these
situational advantages for solar energy utilization,
no actual CHSPSS system exists in Korea yet.
The main reason for the absence of large-scale
solar systems is the lack of political support and
social acceptance, not a lack of technological
advancement. Chung and Yoon (1996) already
emphasized that the application of CSHPSS systems in Korea is a problem of policy and social
awareness rather than technological feasibility.
Some researchers sporadically studied the possibility of the application of CSHPSS systems in
Korea with MINSUN and TRNSYS, without
actually building any CSHPSS systems in Korea.
In this study, a small-sized retrofitted CSHPSS
system that is under construction in Cheju Island
is simulated with TRNSYS (Klein et al., 1997) to
investigate the thermal performance and solar
economics of the system. Since the construction
of the system was originally planned independently of this study, the detailed design has already
been completed and the system is already under
construction. Therefore, it is too late for us to
change the basic design of the system even if the
design is not optimized. Nevertheless, we consider this study as meaningful in the sense that it
is a very interesting blind test for TRNSYS
simulation since the actual data from the system
will be available soon. We are planning to reevaluate the project in the future based on the
measured data and predictions of this study. After
we adjust various simulation parameters to match
the measured data we will be able to safely extend
the fine-tuned methodology to a broader classes of
problems with confidence.
The system is retrofitted a new building already
constructed and to a greenhouse in full operation
for various agricultural research. The CSHPSS
system is located in Cheju Island, a world class
tourist attraction. There are several good reasons
to choose Cheju as the construction site for the
first CSHPSS system in Korea. Some of the
reasons are:
1. A spontaneous cooperation is offered by a
public agency. Cheju Provincial Rural Development Administration is a government
agency and volunteered to offer its facility as a
test site for CSHPSS with a support from the
local government.
2. Cheju has the warmest winter climate in
Korea, which will help the solar system operate at a higher efficiency with a lower heating
load.
3. Cheju is a famous tourist attraction. We expect

that the system can draw public attention to

solar energy utilization. This will give us an
added benefit for public education of solar
energy.

2. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

The schematic diagram for the system (we will

call it the Cheju System in this paper) is shown
in Fig. 1. It is a typical solar energy system and
consists of two collector arrays, a storage tank,
two heating loads, and pumps and controllers.
One collector array is made of evacuated-tube
collectors imported from Germany and the other
array consists of flat-plate collectors domestically
fabricated. The heating loads are composed of two
parts, a greenhouse (Load 1) and a newly constructed office building (Load 2). Both loads were
originally built without solar utilization plans.
Hence, the CSHPSS is retrofitted to the existing
facilities. Table 1 shows an overview of the
system and the following information is available
about each component of the system. The location
is Sangkwi-ri, North Cheju Province, Cheju,
Korea 690170, which is at latitude 338319 North,
and longitude 1268329 East. The administration
performs various research on crops and flowers in
a test greenhouse and spreads newest information
on agricultural development to farmers.

2.1. Collector arrays

As mentioned above, two separate sets of
collectors are in the system. The main purpose is
to use different sets of collectors for research
purpose. We take this opportunity to assess the
thermal performances of domestic collectors in
the actual field application. The evacuated-tube
collector has a total surface area of 1.1 m 2 among
which 0.7 m 2 is the actual absorber surface. The
glass material is high-quality borosilicate glass
and the glass tube diameter is 100 mm. The
absorber material is aluminum with aluminum
nitride coating whose absorption coefficient is
92% or higher. The flat plate collector is a lowprice common single glazed collector. Table 2
summarizes some details of the collector arrays.
The manufacturer (Daimler-Benz Aerospace) supplied collector efficiency for the evacuated tube
collector is

hvac 5 0.8131 2 2.16x 2 0.001x 2

(1)

The efficiency for the flat plate (HG Solar) is

measured in Korea Institute of Energy Research

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

165

Fig. 1. Overview of the solar energy system.

Table 1. An overview of the CSHPSS system
Load

Greenhouse (Load 1)
Office Building (Load 2)
Total Heating Load

324 150 (MJ / year)

560 815 (MJ / year)
884 965 (MJ / year)

184 m 2 (flat plate 92 m 2 , evacuated 92 m 2 )

600 m 3 tank type

Collector
Storage

according to standard procedures. The curve-fitted

efficiency is found to be

hflat 5 0.7486 2 3.7465x

(2)

with the non-dimensional factor x5(T col 2T a ) /It .

In Fig. 2, efficiency curves for the evacuated-tube
and the flat-plate are plotted together. More than
10% difference in efficiency is observed between
the two curves. The evacuated collector performs
much better for large values of x as shown in the
figure.

2.2. Storage tank

The selection of a storage type is an important
part of a system design. An artificial tank is
Table 2. A summary of collector arrays
Type
Glazing
Area (m 2 )
No. in series
Manufacturer
Model

Collector Array 1

Collector Array 2

Flat Plate
Single Glazing
92.4
1
HG Solar (Korea)

Vacuum Tube
Single Glazing
92.4
1
Daimler-Benz Aerospace
SEIDO 2

selected as a storage medium because retrofitting

does not give many alternatives for the given
environmental setup. The tank is 13 m in diameter
and 4.5 m in height and is placed on the ground to
minimize excavation and construction costs. Fig.
3 shows the schematic diagram of the storage
tank. The tank material is stainless steel and
insulation is glass wool. The heat loss from the
tank is calculated by
Q~ 5 UA(T col 2 T a )

(3)

The loss coefficient UA for the tanks, which is

the most important parameter in a simulation of
tank using TRNSYS, is calculated using the
following relation.
A1
UA 5 ]]]] 1 (UA) gnd
k
k
1
]1 1 ]2 1 ]
d1 d2 hc

(4)

where k 1 , d 1 are the thermal conductivity and

thickness of the tank wall and k 2 , d 2 , are those for
insulation. A, A 1 , A gnd represent the total, exposed, and ground contact area respectively. The
parameter h c is the convective heat transfer
coefficient. The top of the tank is assumed to be a
flat plate and the side wall is assumed to be a
cylinder for the purpose of the convective heat
transfer coefficient evaluation. We used correla-

166

M. Chung et al.

Fig. 2. Manufacturer supplied collector efficiency curves.

tions given by Mills (1995) to evaluate h c , based

on the average wind velocity of 4.3 m / s for Cheju
area. The final h c is found by averaging the local
values over the exposed surfaces. The second
term on the right hand side of Eq. (4), (UA) gnd ,
represents heat loss through ground from a tank of

radius R. Claessons formula (Claesson et al.,

1987) is used to calculate this.
A gnd
(UA) gnd 5 ]]]]
d
4R
]3 1 ]]]
k 3 3p Rk gnd

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram for the storage tank.

k3
if t 3 . 0.2R ]]
k gnd

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

167

Table 3. Specifications of the storage tank

Type

Cylindrical steel tank on the ground

Dimension
Volume
Maximum Temperature (8C)
Convective heat transfer coefficient, h c
Ground Loss Coefficient, Ugrd
Loss Coefficient, U
Insulation
Material
Thickness
Thermal Conductivity
Bottom Finish

13 m in diameter, 4.5 m in height

600 m 3
908C
23.6 (W/ m 2 .K)
0.0393 (W/ m.K)
0.0416 (W/ m.K)
Glass wool
0.5 m
0.026 (W/ m.K)
0.5 m Glass wool

where k 3 , d 3 are the thermal conductivity and

thickness of the tank bottom and k gnd is the
thermal conductivity of the ground. The required
condition for the application of the formula is met
since the value 0.2Rk 3 /k gnd 50.0135m is less than
d 3 50.5m in our study. The additional insulation
effect by the ground is equivalent to the addition
of 0.288 m bottom insulation to the original one.
Table 3 summarizes specifications of the storage
tank.

2.3. Heating loads

In the TRNSYS simulation, energy / degreehour models for the building energy loads are
selected for simplicity. In this case, the single
most important parameter is the loss coefficient
(UA) of the heating loads for heat loss or gain.

The loss coefficient for the office building is

obtained following the procedure described in the
ASHRAE standard (ASHRAE, 1993). Fig. 4
shows the plan view of the ground floor of the
office building (Load 2) needed to evaluate the
UA value. Upper floors have the similar partitioning. The loss coefficient for the greenhouse
imposes some difficulties due to uncertainties
involved in all-glass wall construction. More
importantly, solar gain through transparent walls
is the main contribution from the sun. A multizone building, TRNSYS Type 56, is used to
properly model the thermal behavior of the greenhouse, including the solar gain. A separate preprocessing program, PREBID 3.0, was executed
to generate files required by the Type 56. The
plan view of the greenhouse (Load 1) is shown in
Fig. 5.

Fig. 4. Plan view of the office building (Load 2).

168

M. Chung et al.

Fig. 5. Plan view of the greenhouse (Load 1).

Aside from this simulation using Type 56,

actual field data directly relevant to the thermal
energy consumption of the greenhouse is available. The administration has been collecting the
actual fuel consumption data for the greenhouse
for many years. The actual heating load for the
greenhouse is evaluated with the data using the
following equation
| 27 345m
~ fuel 5
~ fuel
Q~ 5 hB r Hl m

(5)

where hB is the boiler efficiency, r is the density

of the fuel, Hl is the lower heating value of the
fuel.
The fuel is kerosene and the boiler efficiency is
assumed to be 76%. The density of the fuel is
0.839 kg / m 3 and the lower heating value is
42 886 kJ / kg. The monthly fuel consumption and
heating load calculated from Eq. (5) is summarized in Table 4. Fig. 6 compares the heating load
calculated from Eq. (5) and TRNSYS predicted
value. The agreement is reasonable all year
around. TRNSYS predicted 8% higher annual
heating load for the greenhouse.
Another important parameter to describe the
thermal behavior of the load, the building thermal

capacitance (CAP), is determined following the

procedure in a standard textbook (Duffie and
Beckman, 1991). Physically, CAP represents the
thermal inertia for the load. Table 5 shows a
summary of the building energy loads for the
system.

2.4. Hydraulic scheme

Controlling the mass flow rate in each loop
properly is very important for system performances. Mass flow rate in the collector loop is
related to the collector efficiency and industrial
guidance is available by the manufacturers. The
mass flow rate in the collectorstorage tank loop
and the storage tankload loop are the primary
parameters that determine the temperature of the
collector outlet and return temperature from the
Table 4. Monthly fuel consumption and heating load
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Oct
Nov
Dec

Fuel consumption
(m 3 / month)

Measured Heating
Load (MJ)

4.011
3.585
2.348
2.501
2.727
3.609

109 680
98 031
64 206
68 362
74 569
98 688

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

169

Fig. 6. Comparison of heating loads for greenhouse.

load. A total mass flow rate of 6000 kg / h is

evenly distributed among the collectors according
to the manufacturer guidance. Mass flow rate in
the tankload loop is related to the performance
of heat exchangers and supplying temperature.
Generally, higher mass flow rates enhance heat
transfer rates in heat exchangers at the expense of
increased pumping power. A flow rate distribution
problem occurs in our system because we have
two separate loads in this study. Flow distribution
in the load side is 58% to the greenhouse and
42% to the office building. The total mass flow
rate for the loads is 9300 kg / h and all the fluids
are water.
Four pumps are used in the system, two for
collector loops and two for load loops. A pressure
relief valve that opens when the fluid temperature
exceeds the boiling point is attached to the flat

plate collector. Two flow diverter are employed to

control the flow rates depending on operation
conditions and schedules. The following section
describes detailed control schemes for various
parts of the system.

2.5. Control schemes

Intelligent control of a system is very important
to ensure a good thermal performance of a
CSHPSS system. A rule of thumb is that only the
surplus of supply over demand is to be stored
(Hadorn, 1990). This can be achieved by utilizing
solar energy first, whenever possible. The switching schedules for the pumps in those loops are
complicated because there are two separate collector arrays and two separate loads in our system.
The following section gives rules imposed on the
pump operation.

Table 5. Heating load profile

Type
Floor Area (m 2 )
Annual Heating Load (MJ)
Heating Energy Index (MJ / m 2 .year)
Thermal Capacitance (CAP, MJ / K)
Required Temperature Range (8C)

Load 1

Load 2

Greenhouse
651
560 815
861
30
17198C

Office Building
1444
324 147
225
220
17198C

170

M. Chung et al.

Fig. 7. Monthly weather data for Cheju, Seoul and Daejon.

2.5.1. Collectorstorage tank loop pump control. The pump is on when

1. The ambient temperature is above 58C (to
prevent freezing of the working fluid);
2. The horizontal solar irradiance is above 10
W/ m 2 for daytime only operation.
The pump is turned off if
1. The collector output temperature is above
1008C (for safe tank operations);
2. The collector outlet temperature is less than
18C above the inlet temperature.
2.5.2. Storage-loads loop pump control. A
three-stage room thermostat (TRNSYS Type 8) is
used in conjunction with temperature level
controlled heating loads. The minimum storage
tank temperature for solar utilization is set to
308C taking heat exchanger operation into account. If the source temperature is too low, the
heat transfer rate will drop significantly, and this
will prevent the heat exchangers from operating
properly. The stored solar energy is drawn to the
loads when the room temperature drops below
198C. When the room temperature drops below
178C, the auxiliary heat is supplied whether heat
is supplied from the tank or not. It is well known
that the storing period for a storage tank should be
kept as short as possible to minimize heat loss
from the tank. Therefore, it is best to use stored
solar energy whenever it is available to increase
the overall solar energy utilization efficiency. The

switching scheme for the loads is based on this

simple philosophy.

2.6. Weather data

The TMY (Typical Meteorological Year) type
weather data are always preferred whenever they
are available for a specific location. Unfortunately, the TMY type weather data for Cheju is not
available. We decided to use the TRNSYS weather data generation utility (TYPE 54). This utility
produces hourly weather data for a location
(similar to the TMY) from the monthly average
values of solar radiation, dry bulb temperature,
humidity ratio, and wind speed for that location.
Weather data for Seoul and Daejon (Korean
Meteorological Administration, 1990) whose
TMY data are generated by the same manner for a
consistent comparison. Fig. 7 shows the monthlyaverage weather data for those areas.
3. SIMULATION

The solar system, is assumed to be operated

only for space heating because the buildings
involved are a public office and a greenhouse
wherein hot water consumption is negligible.
During the month of April to September, all the
solar energy is stored in the tank. The heating
season starts in October and ends in March. Three
sources of energy are available during the heating

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

season. They are seasonally stored solar energy

from the tank, concurrent solar energy from the
collector and the auxiliary heat. A time dependent
forcing function that specifies a time-dependent
value of signal is used in conjunction with various
controllers for a proper operation of the system as
desired. Simulation is performed using IISiBat
version of TRNSYS 14.2 with the aid of PREBID
3.0 for building description for Type 56. Thermal
performance of the system is predicted for the
following cases.
(i) The Cheju System (A5184 m 2 , V5600
m3 )
(ii) A system of same size located in three
different sites; Cheju, Seoul, Daejon
(iii) A hypothetical system with various collector areastorage volume combination located in
the Cheju area.
The purpose of the first case is to predict the
thermal performance of the Cheju system and
compare with measured data in the future. The
second case is to investigate how solar systems
perform differently from location to location in
Korea. Investigation on local dependence of solar
performance is justifiable because Korea has
diverse weather patterns even if it is a small
country and Cheju is climatically singular. The

171

last case is for the assessment of Cheju system

from a point of optimization. As we missed the
opportunity for a optimal design due to late start
of our project, results of our calculation can not
be reflected in the actual system design. Nevertheless, it is still worth seeking a better possible
design points for our future projects.
Fig. 8 shows a typical temperature variation for
storage tank, load, ambient air for 3 years of
period. The tank temperature varies between 308C
to 1008C in accordance with the control scheme.
The minimum temperature for solar energy utilization is set to 508C for the office building (Load
2) and 308C for the greenhouse (Load 1) where
underground heating accompanies space heating.
The ceiling temperature of 1008C is set by the
collector cut-off temperature to prevent boiling of
water. The load temperature is floating between
178C to 198C according to the three-stage thermostat settings. Room temperatures floating
above the setting range is observable during the
period of May to September. This period corresponds to no heating season. Temperature profile
settles its periodic pattern almost in the first year.
This is possible in our system because the system
size is small and the storage acts like a tank
storage without an impact on the surrounding
ground. For larger systems, the settling period
would be much longer due to heavier thermal
inertia of both store and load.

Fig. 8. Temperature variation during a simulation.

172

M. Chung et al.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Comparison of Cheju with other locations

Fig. 9 shows solar fractions for a hypothetical
CSHPSS system of same size located in Seoul, in
Cheju and in Daejon respectively. The collector
area is increased from 100 to 500 m 2 holding
storage volume-collector area ratio (V /A) at 1 in
the figure. Solar fraction means the fraction of
total heating load that is supplied from the sun.
Cheju has about 50 to 80% higher solar fraction
values than Seoul and Daejon. The latitudes of
Seoul, Daejon and Cheju are 37.348N, 36.168N,
33.318N respectively. Considering the small differences in latitudes among those locations, solar
fraction differences are rather significant. The
main difference is the average ambient temperature as seen in Fig. 7. Solar irradiation for the
locations does not show remarkable differences
whereas a noticeable difference exists in winter
ambient temperature. Cheju has much higher
winter temperature than the others. Higher ambient temperature in winter contributes to higher
solar fraction in two ways. One is that the annual
heating load is directly proportional to the temperature difference between the load and ambient.

Higher ambient temperature means less heating

load. Another reason is the fact that the heat loss
from the tank is reduced when ambient temperature is high. Results in Fig. 9 strongly suggests
that Cheju is best-suited for solar heating in Korea
and if we have freedom to choose system site, the
first choice should be Cheju.

4.2. Thermal performance of the Cheju System

Solar fraction is the most important parameter
to represent how much solar energy is actually
utilized. Separate plots for each load are provided.
Fig. 10 shows the monthly energy supply for the
greenhouse (Load 1). The lower portion of the
bars represents energy supplied by the solar
system and the upper portion represents the
auxiliary energy. The total energy (upper and
lower bars added) represents the monthly heating
load. Solar thermal energy is evenly distributed at
near 40% all year around. The minimum tank
supply temperature for the greenhouse is set at
308C. The annual solar fraction for the greenhouse
is 41.2%.
Fig. 11 shows the load profile and solar gain for
the greenhouse. The heating load for the green
house is defined as the required amount of

Fig. 9. Comparison of solar fractions for Cheju, Seoul, Daejon.

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

Fig. 10. Monthly energy supply profile for the greenhouse (Load 1).

Fig. 11. Comparison of measured and predicted heating loads for greenhouse.

173

174

M. Chung et al.

thermal energy to maintain the room temperature

in the prescribed temperature range counting in
solar gain. A total of 650 000 MJ / year of thermal
energy is gained in the greenhouse leaving
561 000 MJ / year as heating load. From a point of
efficiency, 23% of total incident energy, which is
estimated to be 2 839 000 MJ / year by multiplying annual solar radiation in Cheju by greenhouse
area, is directly gained in the greenhouse. Monthly solar gain pattern is roughly coincides with
monthly radiation pattern in Fig. 7 as expected.
Fig. 12 shows the monthly energy supply
profile for the office building (Load 2). One
interesting fact is, that more solar energy is
supplied during the early stage of heating season
(October for example). The minimum supply
temperature for the office building is set to 508C
considering reasonable operation of radiators.
Setting this temperature higher gives smaller solar
fraction since available energy temperature band
is narrow. The result also agrees with the stored
energy first control scheme to minimize the heat
loss from the tank. A very similar pattern in
heating load to the greenhouse is observable.
About 34% of the total heating load for the office
building is supplied from the sun. The system
solar fraction for the combined loads of the
greenhouse and the office is 38.5%.

As a component, the evacuated-tube type collector has much higher collector efficiency than
the flat plate collector (Fig. 2). What effect will
this big difference have on the overall system
efficiency, for example on solar fraction? Separate
accounting for the thermal performance of the flat
plate collector and the evacuated collector is
complicated in our system because the hot water
from the two collector arrays mix in the storage
tank. Once mixed, it is impossible to distinguish
which energy is from which tank. We constructed
two hypothetical systems with same area, each of
which has just one type of collector array to make
a direct comparison possible. Fig. 13 shows a
summary of the comparison calculation. There is
3.7% difference in solar fraction. This is rather
small considering the big difference in collector
efficiencies. It is true that the above absolute
difference is misleading because more than 10%
differences still persist when it is stated relatively
as we did in the collector efficiency. Another
issue related to a component is how seasonal is
the tank. There is no direct index that can tell the
long term storage ability of a tank quantitatively.
As a qualitative way, duration of stagnation
periods for the tank is plotted in Fig. 14. We can
roughly say that out tank is reasonably seasonal
because its temperature stays high for a relatively

Fig. 12. Monthly energy supply profile for the office building (Load 2).

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

175

Fig. 13. Effect of collector efficiency on solar fraction.

long period time (higher than 908C for about 4000

h a year).

4.3. What-if scenarios for the Cheju System

The TRNSYS simulation of this study is performed independently of the original design of the

Cheju System. Hence, we lost the opportunity

for an optimal system design. It is still meaningful
to validate the adequacy of the system design. The
most important parameters for a CSHPSS system
are collector area and storage volume. A rule of
thumb for the storage volumecollector area

Fig. 14. Duration of the stagnation periods for the tank.

176

M. Chung et al.

Fig. 15. Predicted solar fraction variation as a function of storage volume.

selection is to make the volumearea ratio (V /A)

2 to 3. However, an important point is that the
V /A value is not universal. It should be adjusted
to a specific system characteristics and the environment where the system is operated. The ratio
for the Cheju System is more than little above 3
and we investigated solar fraction variations

around the design point (600 m 3 storage volume, 184 m 2 collector area).
Fig. 15 shows the solar fraction for a given
collector area as a function of storage volume.
One salient feature we can observe from the
figure is that there exists a saturation point
beyond which increasing storage volume is mean-

Fig. 16. Self-sufficiency for the Cheju System.

Simulation of a central solar heating system with seasonal storage in Korea

177

Table 6. Parameter values for economic analysis

Item
Area dependent cost
Fixed cost
Solar system performance degrade
Down payment
Assumed Annual interest rate on mortgage
Term of mortgage
Period of economic analysis

Value
1200 $ / m 2
4000$
1% efficiency reduction / year
5%
12%
50 years
50 years

ingless. The saturation line is marked with a

dotted line in the figure. It is evident from the
figure that the design point for the Cheju System
is beyond the saturation point. This means that the
storage tank is oversized in relation to collector
area. From the design point of view, this situation
should be avoided because concurrent solar
energy during heating season is generally meager
and lot of collectable solar energy is lost due to
undersized collector. The saturation limit line also
suggests that the optimal V /A ratio would be near
3 / 2 as seen in the figure. We recommend to add
more collector area to the Cheju system in the
future to make the system thermally more efficient. In practice, the design point should be
selected considering other factors such as economic merits or environmental constraint imposed
on the construction of the system.

4.4. The virtual solar self-sufficiency for the

Cheju System
As an extension of what if test for the system,
the virtual solar self-sufficiency is calculated. The
self sufficiency is defined as a state where more
than 95% of total heating load is provided by the
solar system. Fig. 16 shows collector areastorage
volume combination that would give virtual selfsufficiency for the Cheju System. Roughly
speaking, the storage volume is inversely proportional to the collector area in the self-sufficiency
curve.

4.5. Economic assessment for the Cheju

System
Two modes of economic analysis (Type 29) are
available in TRNSYS. Mode 1 calculates life

Fig. 17. Results of economic assessment.

178

M. Chung et al.

cycle costs and savings of a solar system using

the simplified P1 and P2 method. Mode 2, which
we adopted in this study, performs a detailed
economic analysis of the solar system. Table 6
summarizes parameter values used in the economic analysis. Some of the parameters assumed
are our best guess values since they are not
currently available. Fig. 17 shows the result of the
economic assessment based on the thermal performance analyses. There are several definitions
for the ROI (return of investment). The ROI
periods for the Cheju System are estimated to be
20 to 30 years depending on the choice of ROI.
Detailed meanings of each curve in Fig. 17 can be
found in standard textbooks (for example Chapter
11 of Duffie and Beckman, 1991)
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The first actual CSHPSS system in Korea (the

Cheju System) is simulated with TRNSYS. We
can draw the following conclusions through the
TRNSYS simulation:
1. Cheju Island is best suited in Korea for solar
energy utilization showing 5080% higher
solar fraction than any other inland locations
such as Seoul or Daejon.
2. The Cheju System will supply about 38.5%
of the total heat energy demanded by the
combined load of the greenhouse and the office
building.
3. Even though the imported evacuated tube type
collector has 1015% higher collector efficiency than the domestic flat plate collector in
most of the operating ranges, the absolute solar
fraction difference is only 3.7% and relative
difference is about 10%.
4. The storage tank volume is oversized for the
Cheju System. If the system is expanded in
the future, enlarging collector area is recommended.
5. The self-sufficiency level for the system is
1000 m 2 collector area plus 1728 m 3 storage
volume for the combined load of the office
building and the greenhouse.
6. Based on the economic analysis, the ROI for
the actual system is predicted about 2030
years depending on the definition of the ROI.
7. The Cheju System will serve as a landmark
for technological advancement for solar energy
utilization and remain as a tourist attraction in
Cheju Island for public education of solar
energy.
8. CSHPSS system in Korea is promising both
technologically and economically. Strong

political support through aggressive energy

policy and social awareness for clean energy
should accompany research efforts for a solar
boom in Korea.

NOMENCLATURE
A
collector area (m 2 )
CAP
building thermal capacity (J / K)
d
wall thickness (m)
Hl
lower heating value of a fuel (J / kg)
It
hourly radiation on horizontal plane
hc
conavective heat transfer coefficient (W/ m 2 K)
k
thermal conductivity (W/ m K)
~ fuel
m
fuel consumption rate (kg / s)
Q~
heat flow rate (W)
R
tank radius (m)
Ta
ambient temperature (?)
T cal
collector temperature (?)
UA
building loss coefficient (W/ K)
V
storage volume (m 3 )
x
(T col 2T a ) /It
Greek Letters
hB
boiler efficiency
hflat
flat plate collector efficiency
hvac
evacuated tube type collector efficiency
r
Density (kg / m 3 )
Subscripts
1
tank material
2
insulation material
3
bottom insulation material
gnd
ground material

AcknowledgementThe Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry

and Energy supported this study through Alternative Energy
Promotion Program.

REFERENCES
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers Inc (1993) Fundamentals, ASHRAE Handbook.
Bankston C. A. (1988) The Status and Potential of Central
Solar Heating Plants with Seasonal Storage: an International
Report, Advances in Solar Energy 4 (Boer K. W. ed.).

Brun G. (1964) La regularisation

de lennergie
soliaire par

stockage thermique dans le sol, Revue Generale
de Thermique, 44.
Chung M. and Yoon H. K. (1996) On Applicability of
CSHPSS System in Korea, Proceedings of the IASTED
International Conference, Banff, Canada.
Claesson J., Eftring B., Eskilson P. and Hellstroem G. (1987)

Markvarme
, En Handbok Om Termiska Analyser, Swedish
Council for Building Research, Stockholm.
Duffie J. A. and Beckman W. A. (1991) Solar Engineering of
Thermal Processes, 2 nd edition, Wiley.
Hadorn J.-C. (1990) Guide to Seasonal Heat Storage, Swiss
Association of Engineering and Architects.
Klein S. A. et al. (1997) TRNSYS A Transient System
Simulation Program, Ver 14.2 IISiBat, Solar Energy Laboratory, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Korea Meteorological Administration (1990) Climatological
Standard Normals of Korea.
Mills A. F. (1995) Heat and Mass Transfer, p. 345 (Table
4.10, Items 5, 6) Irwin.