ISSN 1848-9257

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water Journal of Sustainable Development

of Energy, Water and Environment
Systems

and Environment Systems

http://www.sdewes.org/jsdewes
http://www.sdewes.org/jsdewes

Year 2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144

Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with District Cooling Chiller in

Tropical Environment

Hilal Al Quabeh1, Roba Saab2, Mohamed I. H. Ali*3

1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Masdar City,
P.O. Box 54224, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
e-mail: [email protected]
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Masdar City,
P.O. Box 54224, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
e-mail: [email protected]
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Masdar City,
P.O. Box 54224, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
e-mail: [email protected]

Cite as: Al Quabeh, H., Saab, R., Ali, M. I. H., Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with District Cooling Chiller in
Tropical Environment, J. sustain. dev. energy water environ. syst., 8(1), pp 132-144, 2020,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.13044/j.sdewes.d7.0259

ABSTRACT
The difficulties of efficiently operating a chiller cooling system are manifest in the
high-energy consumption under partial-cooling loads. The performance of a chiller
cooling system declines when operating away from the optimal design conditions, which
is typically 75% of chiller capacity. One pathway has been found to overcome this
problem using multiple smaller chillers within the same chiller plant, accompanied by a
smart control system that is designed and constructed based on the cooling demand
profile. Thermal energy storage integration with chiller cooling system is proposed to
shave the cooling peak demand. This can be achieved by storing chilled water during the
lower electricity-tariff period by the thermal energy storage system, which will then be
discharged during the higher tariff-rate, thus, aiming for sustainable operating cost.
The present paper studies the feasibility of sensible thermal energy storage to be
integrated with two chillers, of 30-ton capacity each, under hot-and-humid climates.
A computational model validated with experimental results is developed for three chiller
cooling system case scenarios. The smart control scenario, as well as the thermal energy
storage scenario results, showed great potential for energy and electricity cost saving.
In addition, the carbon dioxide emissions reduction is calculated based on the amount of
energy saving.

KEYWORDS
Chilled water storage, Tropical cooling, Thermal energy storage, District cooling chillers,
Chiller control, Chillers cooling system.

INTRODUCTION
The demand for space cooling has increased dramatically in the past few decades,
which significantly affects the electrical energy usage. In Abu Dhabi city, located in the
western part of the United Arab Emirates between latitudes 22°40’ and about 25° north

*
Corresponding author

132
 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
and longitudes 51° and about 56° east, the cooling demand consumption has increased in
2016 to reach approximately 70-75% of the total energy consumption, particularly during
the summertime [1]. In general, the increase in energy consumption in buildings has been
addressed as a major concern towards global warming all over the world. The Abu Dhabi
Statistical yearbook [2] highlighted the climate as well as the water and electricity
concerns. Despite the advanced development of air-conditioning systems, the use of
energy by this sector is nearly uncontrolled and rapidly increases as a direct impact of
global warming. Accordingly seeking a real solution to this dilemma is crucial and
critical.

Problem background
Figure 1 shows the electrical power loads at the peak time between 1999 and 2016 in
Abu Dhabi averaged on weekly basis. The inflation of peak loads in the power sector
burdens the generation authorities. In addition to the inflation in the peak loads, the part
loads on both sides of the curves represent the winter and spring seasons. This duration of
part load (less than 75% of full capacity) in 2016 was measured to be approximately more
than 60% of the total year duration as shown in Figure 2.
Load forecasting model is employed to determine the size of power generation plants
that are needed to satisfy the power demands. However, the instability in the power
demand profile inversely affects the load forecasting accuracy.

Figure 1. Load curve of Abu Dhabi on 1999-2016 on weekly basis [1]

Figure 2. Percent duration of electrical load levels in 2016 [1]

The present study is addressing the feasibility of two control methods that can be
implemented in a Chiller Cooling System (CCS) plant installed and commissioned
recently in Masdar city in Abu Dhabi. The first method is adopting a control algorithm,
which distributes the cooling load among multi-chillers that are initially connected in

133 Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
parallel inside the CCS plant. The second method is by using Thermal Energy Storage
(TES) that stores chilled water for meeting the load during the demand peak hours.
The thermal storage tank stores the chilled water during the off-peak hours and supplies it
to the consumer-cooling load during the peak hours. Therefore, creating a possibility of
lowering the chiller capacity, in addition to saving the cost resulting from the higher
electrical power tariff during peak time.
Controlling a chiller cooling system plant is not a trivial task, where chillers, primary
pumps, secondary pumps and cooling tower fans are involved, besides the instabilities in
the cooling demand and the surrounding conditions. This complexity dramatically
increases when the Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) technology is implemented in the
electric motors driving pumps, fans, or compressors. Therefore, it enlarges the feasible
region of the chiller loading optimization. In the literature, hundreds of optimization
algorithms and techniques are proposed for optimum CCS operation. Some of these
optimizations are uniquely feasible for only a particular cooling load profile whereas
others are generally feasible for a wider range.

Literature review
Huang et al. [3] have proposed three new approaches to Cooling Load-based Control
(CLC) methods to optimize a CCS by investigating the pre-defined thermodynamic
stages of chiller and condenser. Salari et al. [4] have also used CLC method for achieving
an Optimal Chiller Loading (OCL) using a General Algebraic Modelling System
(GAMS). Their results were in good agreement with other optimization techniques.
Wei et al. [5] optimized a CCS consisting of four chillers and two chilled water tanks,
using a two-level algorithm to find the OCL. The tanks were charged and discharged at
each time step based on the cooling load demand, and the electricity tariff. However, the
optimization did not account for the tank losses during the time between charging and
discharging. Moreover, Cuckoo optimization algorithm was used to optimize
chillers-based plant only, where the algorithm was based on chiller consumption
polynomial as a function of the Part Load Ratio (PLR) [6].
On the other hand, the temperature of the coolant into the condenser was considered
in Chung optimization problem, where simulated annealing was implemented to find the
optimal loading schedule for multi-chillers plant [7]. Others studied the supply chilled
water temperature to find the OCL using Hopfield neural network in order to avoid any
convexity in the feasible region [8].
Employing thermodynamic parameters of the vapour-compression-cycle has
asignificant impact on the overall energy usage of the chiller. However, it is challenging
to operate the chiller at optimal conditions due to the mechanical limitations of the
components, environmental conditions, as well as, the load demand. A modified genetic
algorithm was employed to determine the minimum energy consumption by the
compressor, the condenser fan and the evaporator fan, and the results were compared to
the normal on-off control strategy [9]. The simulation results showed about 8.45%
energy saving achieved for a typical day. Determining the optimal operating conditions
should also cover the superheated degree inside the evaporator, and the sub-cooled
degree in the condenser. For this reason, Exergy-based optimization was developed to
find the optimal areas for superheated and sub-cooled degrees [10].
Similar to CCS without TES, CCS plant that consists of multiple chillers and TES
system does not work at constant loads all the time. Thus, it becomes necessary to
determine an optimal loading scheme for not only the chillers but also for the CCS-TES
system. Armstrong [11] performed a component-based optimization because the CCS
components are coherent and work all together simultaneously. Different energy-saving
approaches are investigated including a TES that is evaluated by annual cooling system
energy consumption.

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 134

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
Recently, Model Predictive Control (MPC) optimization in CCS-TES system has
been more widely used, in fact, the main challenge in this optimization method is to find
a robust and optimal solution in the presence of integer and nonlinear constraints.
Ma et al. [12] have proposed a simple model of CCS that is connected to a sensible TES
storage unit. The model solves for the optimal chilled water return temperature and the
water level inside the TES at each time-step using MPC. The Branch and Bound (BB)
algorithm with moving window-blocking strategy is used to solve the Mixed Integer
Nonlinear Program (MINLP) optimization problem.
Deng et al. [13] modelled an integrated CCS-TES system dynamically using a
bilinear model, where MPC aimed to reduce the system electricity consumption without
violating the cooling load’s constraints and the physical limitations. The MINLP
optimization problem was solved by initiating an arbitrary loading profile for the TES
alone in order to linearize the problem, then applying a dynamic programming method to
solve for the MILP. Lu et al. [14] added a penalty on the chiller’s on/off sequence in the
objective function, in which energy saving was confirmed using MINLP optimization.
TES technology modification was investigated by many researchers, where some
investigate the stratification of the sensible TES by adding a phase change material
capsulate to the tank [15], while others studied the impact of the TES location on the
overall performance of the system [16]. Peak load shaving is also investigated to capture
the cost saving when using time of use tariff [17]. However, as of our knowledge, none of
the researchers has uniquely investigated the energy-saving potential of TES technology
when integrated with a CCS.

Hypothesis
TES technology is proposed to eliminate the effects of the two previously mentioned
problems, namely: increasing the peak-load and working apart from the optimum
operation point. This technology is coupled to a conventional chiller system that shaves
the peak load and smooths the overall load simultaneously, seeking to eliminate part of
the operating cost through working at lower electricity cost during off-peak hours
(time-of-use tariff) in some countries. In countries where the electricity time-of-use
tariffs are not employed, TES is rarely used, however, this paper aims to compare both
technologies commonly adopted to CCS namely, the TES and CLC in a two-chillers
plant. An experiment-based model is proposed to investigate the viability of adopting
both technologies on CCS subjected to a hot and humid climate at a typical cooling load.
The models are validated by experimental data from the Masdar CCS plant in order to
accurately investigate the chiller operation performance, under both scenarios (CLC
algorithm and TES tank). The TES operating strategy can be one of two known strategies,
partial in which the tank is charged to meet the only portion of the load in a specific time
(peak), or full in which the tank is charged to meet the total load in the specific time
(peak). However, the partial load strategy is chosen here for its simplicity, and based on
that, the size of the tank is calculated [18].
Chiller manufacturers usually design the chiller to be capable of meeting the
maximum expected load, however, this maximum load is only required for specific days
over the year, and selected hours during these days. Thus, chillers operate at a fraction of
their own capacity most of the time, lowering their average Coefficient of Performance
(COP), and increasing their energy consumption when operating without VFD
technology. Although some designers try to overcome this problem by distributing the
load on multiple small-capacity chillers, this gives rise to an increase in the chiller plant’s
capital cost.
TES integration with a chiller cooling system can be useful in two situations. First,
where electricity is available in different tariffs such that TES can be implemented to
save the operating cost. Second, where the load is varying frequently with time so the

135 Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
TES can smooth the peak load subjected to the chillers, resulting in higher average COP
and lower energy consumption, which is the focus of this paper.

METHODS
Two identical chillers in parallel forming a district cooling plant of a total capacity of
3,300 tons (11,600 kW) supply of chilled water at 7 °C are modelled using realistic data
from the current operation. The data is utilized to determine the chillers’ electrical power
as a normalized function of the demand load to the design load, or simply the PLR.
The collected data is processed, after which the chiller COP is plotted against the PLR as
shown in Figure 3. The COP plots for both chillers are curve-fitted and modelled by a
fifth-order polynomial as illustrated in eq. (1), where chiller A and B have the same part
load performance:

COP = 129.33 PLR − 406.83 PLR + 489.47 PLR − 281.14 PLR + 77.04 PLR − 1.7235 (1)

Figure 3. Chiller COP with PLR

In order to assess the true contribution of integrating the TES with CCS, three
different scenarios are studied. First, scenario-I, involves chillers A (6,000 kW) and B
(5,600 kW) without TES, functioning on equal load-control strategy whenever the
system requires two chillers to meet the demand. Second, scenario-II, involves chiller A
and B without TES. In this scenario, chiller A operates first to meet the cooling load, and
chiller B operates only when cooling load exceeds the chiller A capacity. Thus, the
remaining load will be taken care of by chiller B. Third, scenario-III, proposes an
integration of a chilled water TES with the two chillers CCS plant aiming to operate the
integrated system at the highest COP regardless of the cooling load.
CLC algorithm as illustrated in Figure 4 is implemented in the first two scenarios for
chiller loading controls. In this analysis, pumps, cooling tower fans, and air handling
units are eliminated. The algorithm is applied to control the first two scenarios, where
first the magnitude of cooling load would be used to calculate the PLR. Then if the PLR is
in the range 0 to 0.51 (6,000/11,600), the load will be met by running chiller A only
(in both scenarios). On the other hand, if PLR is in range of 0.51 to 1, the load will either
be divided equally between A and B (scenario-I), or chiller A will run on full load and B
on the remaining partial load (scenario-II) in order to satisfy the total demand.
The chiller’s needed power is obtained from eq. (2) for chiller A and eq. (3) for
chiller B. The required energy in kWh for the cooling system is also obtained for one
storage cycle (24 hours) using eq. (4):

Power = Load /COP (2)

Power! = Load! /COP! (3)

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 136

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144

Energy & 'Power Power! ( *+ (4)

)

where LoadA and LoadB are the cooling loads [kW], for chillers A and B respectively.
PowerA and PowerB represent the electrical power [kW], of the two chiller’s compressors,
respectively, and t is the storage cycle time measured in hours. In the third scenario, the
method for the TES integration tank following partial strategy control is initiated by
defining the demand peak and off-peak hours. Algorithm 1 is developed and
implemented by assuming an initial guess for the off-peak period based on the cooling
load profile, as shown in Figure 4. Then, an optimization framework is performed to
deduce the optimal off-peak period. The TES tank is charged during the off-peak and is
discharged during the peak period. Finally, the actual volume of the stratified chilled
water tank is obtained using eq. (5).

Figure 4. Control algorithm for the two chillers cooling system without energy storage

Algorithm 1: Determination method for optimal partial storage tank (sensible) capacity
Input: Hourly cooling load for an extreme day for K = {1, …, 24} and peak hours P⊂K
Output: Minimum tank capacity, chiller capacity
1: Find the maximum load: max [Q(k)]
2: Find the integrated cooling load: Energy ∑/01 -'.(
3: Calculate chiller capacity: CC = Energy/24
4: Initialize tank-capacity TC = 0
5: for I = 1:24
6: while i ∉ P
7: if CC > Q(i)
8: TC = TC + [CC − Q(i)]
9: end if
10: end while
11: end for
12: return tank capacity, chiller capacity

After determining the tank and the chiller capacities needed to integrate a chilled
water TES tank into the CCS cooling system for the predefined cooling load, the physical
tank size can be found by eq. (6) [19]:

45
2 36 3 10 (5)
56 78Δ4

where V [m3] is the tank volume, TC [kWh] is the tank capacity obtained from algorithm
1, Cp is the water specific heat (4,184 J/kgC), ρ is the water density (998 kg/m3), ɛ is the
storage tank effectiveness (assumed as 0.9) and ∆T is the temperature difference between
supply and return (9 °C).

137 Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144

Scheduling of the integrated system

The TES-chiller integrated plant is proposed to operate at the partial load strategy,
where chillers are running on a load that is sufficient to charge the TES tank during the
off-peak demand period. The cold TES will be discharged on the peak demand period
together with the capacity of the chiller to satisfy the peak load demand. The charging
and discharging process are illustrated by eqs. (6a) and (6b), respectively:

-:;<=>>?@ − -:;AA>=BC D?EFBD > 0; Charging (6a)

-:;<=>>?@ − -:;AA>=BC D?EFBD < 0; Discharging (6b)

Taking the cooling demand and ambient conditions as constraints, an optimization

framework is needed to achieve the highest possible energy saving. In the case of variable
electricity tariffs (e.g., peak and off-peak), peak demand shaving could be a favourable
measure towards energy saving. The optimization framework requires a good prediction
of the cooling load and ambient conditions along the optimization time horizon, in order
to achieve the optimal control sets that would schedule both of the chiller and the TES
operation along a particular control horizon.
A schedule of 24-hours for the two chillers CCS integrated to TES system is the aim
of optimization problem under the following assumptions:
• Constant supply and return chilled water temperatures;
• Perfect prediction of the cooling load and wet-bulb temperature along the
optimization horizon;
• Defined chiller performance as a function of only the wet-bulb temperature;
• No constraints on the tank capacity;
• Two chillers in parallel;
• Time-step of one hour;
• Invariant tariff.
The optimization framework starts by determining the system COP as a function of
the predicted ambient wet-bulb temperature, after which the decision variables are
identified to be the chillers loading in each time-step of the 24 hours horizon
[Q(j,i) = chiller j loading at time-step i]. A penalty is assigned on running each of the
chillers, where Y(j) is a binary variable that indicates whether the chiller j is on [Y(j) = 1]
or off [Y(j) = 0].
The optimization objective function illustrated by eq. (7) is subjected to the two
following constraints:
• Meeting the predicted cooling load along the 24 hours [eq. (8a)];
• Chiller capacities [eq. (8b)].

-Q< 'R, .(∆+

min O=P + VW'R(; R = 1,2
K'L,/(,N'L( 5TU'R, .(
(7)
/0)

subject to:

P YZP -Q< 'R, .(\ − -;>,/ ] > 0 (8a)

/0) L0)

Min. capacity < -Q<, 'R, .( < Max. capacity ∀. R = 1,2 (8b)

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 138

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
where ∆t is the time step, c is a penalty’s vector of operating the chiller j, and QCl is the
predicted cooling load. The optimization problem is modelled by GAMS software [20]
for finding the optimal solution.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

CCS performance in the first two scenarios is shown in Figure 5, where the COP of
the system (y-axis) is plotted against the system PLR (x-axis from 0 to 1). When
“PLR > 0.51” (ratio of chiller A capacity to the total CCS capacity), one can observe that
the system’s COP has distinguishable trends between the two scenarios. In the first
scenario where both chillers are loaded equally when “PLR > 0.51”, the average COP is
higher than second scenario because both chillers are operating at relatively high PLR as
illustrated in the green line in Figure 4. Meanwhile, in the second scenario in which
chiller A operates at full load and chiller B on partial load, the COP starts to decrease
from PLR = 0.51 to PLR = 0.56. At this point, the COP starts to increase simultaneously
with PLR as illustrated in the red line in Figure 4. This is mainly because the COP of
chiller B is relatively low when PLRB < 0.5 as shown earlier in Figure 2.

Figure 5. System COP for the studied chillers scenarios without TES

A typical cooling load of local tropical climate is applied to the CCS for both
scenarios (I & II) in order to calculate the daily energy consumption by the CCS.
The simulation results of the system’s COP, compression power and cooling load are
shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7, for both scenarios respectively (partial & equal).

Figure 6. COP, chiller power and cooling load over 24 hours when chillers are operated on
equal-loads (scenario-I)

139 Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144

Figure 7. COP, chiller power and cooling load over 24 hours, when chiller A is operated on full load
and chiller B on part load (scenario-II)

The system’s average-COP in the equally loaded (scenario-I) system is higher than
the fully loaded (scenario-II), which results in lower power consumption while satisfying
the same given cooling load. Therefore, in scenario-II where one chiller is operated at
low PLR, the system’s average-COP is less and results in higher power consumption
while meeting the same given cooling load.
The system’s COP reaches the maximum at 95% of the full load in the equal load
(scenario-I), and exactly at the full load in the fully loaded (scenario-II). The illustration
of this is revealed by the fact that the two chillers could not have identical optimal
operating conditions. On the other hand, the minimum system’s COP in both scenarios
(I & II) happens at the peak demand load as shown in Figures 6 and 7. The reason for this
low COP is due to of the high Dry-Bulb Temperature (DBT) in this time of day,
afternoon as demonstrated in Figure 8.
The results found in scenarios (I & II) are utilized in scenario-III (TES integration) by
operating the CCS plant, both chillers, on the ultimate COP conditions in order to have
the minimum energy consumption of the system.
The optimization framework that determines the optimal schedule scheme of the
integrated CCS-TES system assumes a predicted COP as a function of the ambient
Wet-Bulb Temperature (WBT). The optimal solution is represented by the loading
schedule of both chillers, as well as, the charging and discharging of the TES tank along
the optimization horizon (24 hours) as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 8. Determined chillers COP along the 24 hours

The optimization reveals that the two chillers tend to operate on full time during the
first and last hours of the day because both of them have better COP at these timings.

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 140

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
During the periods where only one chiller is required to run, such as between 12-19 h, the
chiller B is operated since it has higher COP than chiller A at this particular period.

14000
12000 Chiller 1 Chiller 2 TES
10000 TES, charging

Cooling load [kW]

8000
TES, discharging
6000
4000
2000
0
-2000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
-4000
-6000
Time [hr]

Figure 9. Preliminary results of the TES-chiller schedule optimization

At 11.00 h, where the COP of the two chillers is lower as shown in Figure 8, the
system starts to discharge the TES tank to meet the cooling demand while operating the
two chillers at partial load. At 12.00 h, the chiller with a lower COP (chiller A) is set to
off and both chiller B and the TES tank are expected to meet the cooling load demand.
This situation takes place for four hours until the TES tank is relatively insufficient, at
which case chiller A will be set to on again and the cycle repeats again.
The volume and surface area for the proposed cylindrical storage tank is 3,620 m3 and
1,306 m2, respectively. These specifications will result in losses of approximately
2,645 kWh, however, this value is subject to change depending on the insulation material
of the TES tank.
It is worthy to notice that both chillers A and B have not exceeded 3,000 and
5,000 kW loadings respectively, which are significantly below their corresponding
maximum capacities. This implies that there is a high potential to lower the capital cost of
the CCS.
To summarize, the energy comparison for the three scenarios while satisfying the
same demand is shown in Figure 10. Scenarios-I and -II are for CCS equal load and full
load strategies, respectively. Scenario-III is for the CCS-TES integrated system. It can be
clearly seen that the energy saving is the highest for scenario-I, however, the load must be
equally divided between two chillers. On the other hand, scenario-III energy saving is
less than scenario-I, however, it does not need two chillers. In addition, scenario-III
energy saving can be improved by improving the TES tank design and/or its
insulation material.

CCS-TES (III) 954

Energy Energy saving

Full Load (II)

Equal Load (I) 1510

28000 28500 29000 29500 30000 30500 31000

Energy [kWh]

Figure 10. Energy comparison for the three scenarios

141 Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144

Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are estimated for each scenario using the
0.51 kg CO2/kWh emission factor for electricity production in the UAE [21] as shown in
Figure 11. In the base scenario, CO2 emission is 15,653 kg CO2. Scenario-I has 4.9% less
CO2 emissions and scenario-III has 3.1% less CO2 emissions.

Figure 11. CO2 emissions and saving of the three simulated scenarios

CONCLUSIONS
This paper investigated the potential benefits of integrating a thermal energy storage
with a chiller cooling system as well as implemented optimal operation control between
two chillers in parallel operation. Three scenarios were considered: I- conventional; two
chillers cooling system with equal load, II- conventional; two chillers cooling system
with one chiller on full load and the other chiller on partial load, III- conventional; two
chillers cooling system with a thermal storage tank (chilled water). The two chillers are
installed in Abu Dhabi, under hot and humid weather conditions, and therefore, the
algorithm is developed for cooling load-based control. The chillers loading problem is
not a straightforward task since every control response to any load variation would have a
significant impact on the total system energy consumption.
The energy comparison between the considered scenarios showed that implementing
two chillers with the equal load will save around 5% of the energy consumption and a
corresponding percentage of CO2 emissions, however, it needs two chillers which may
increase both initial and capital costs, whereas, the implementation of TES into the base
CCS will save about 3% of the total energy consumption and a corresponding percentage
of CO2 emissions. However, scenario-III has shaved about 30% of the peak load demand
for 10 hours, giving the decision makers the option to eliminate more than 30% of the
plant’s initial capacity that is designed to operate over 24-hours a day on a relatively
constant load.
Moreover, the TES may improve the life cycle of the chillers since they are running
relatively steadily regardless of the cooling load. In addition, it will reduce the initial and
operation costs by reducing the chillers’ capacity and the number that are required to
carry the cooling load. On the other hand, the exergy destruction resulting from
continuously turning the chillers on and off will significantly drop.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Masdar city and Masdar Institute of Science and Technology support this study.
This support is thankfully acknowledged.

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 142

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144

NOMENCLATURE
Cp specific heat [kJ/kgk]
DBT dry bulb temperature [°C]
Ρ water density [kg/m3]
TC tank capacity [kWh]
V tank volume [m3]
WBT wet bulb temperature [°C]
Q̇ heat transfer rate [kW]

Greek letters
ρ density [kg/m3]
ɛ effectiveness [-]
ΔT temperature difference [K]

Abbreviations
CCS Chiller Cooling System
CLC Cooling Load Control
COP Coefficient of Performance
PLR Part Load Ratio
TES Thermal Energy Storage
VFD Variable Frequency Drive

REFERENCES
1. ADWEC, Statistical Report, 2016, http://www.adwec.ae/documents/report/2016/
statistical%20report%201999-2016.pdf, [Accessed: 16-December-2018]
2. Statistics Centre, Environment Statistical Report, 2014, https://www.scad.ae/release%20
documents/statistical%20yearbook_%202009.pdf, [Accessed: 16-December-2018]
3. Huang, S., Zuo, W. and Sohn, M. D., Amelioration of the Cooling Load Based Chiller
Sequencing Control, Appl. Energy, Vol. 168, pp 204-215, 2016,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.01.035
4. Salari, E. and Askarzadeh, A., A New Solution for Loading Optimization of
Multi-Chiller Systems by General Algebraic Modeling System, Appl. Therm. Eng.,
Vol. 84, pp 429-436, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.03.057
5. Wei, X., Xu, G. and Kusiak, A., Modeling and Optimization of a Chiller Plant, Energy,
Vol. 73, pp 898-907, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.06.102
6. Coelho, L. dos S., Klein, C. E., Sabat, S. L. and Mariani, V. C., Optimal Chiller Loading
for Energy Conservation Using a New Differential Cuckoo Search Approach, Energy,
Vol. 75, pp 237-243, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.07.060
7. Chang, Y. C., An Innovative Approach for Demand Side Management-Optimal Chiller
Loading by Simulated Annealing, Energy, Vol. 31, No. 12, pp 1547-1560, 2006,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2005.10.018
8. Chang, Y. C. and Chen, W. H., Optimal Chilled Water Temperature Calculation of
Multiple Chiller Systems Using Hopfield Neural Network for Saving Energy, Energy,
Vol. 34, No. 4, pp 448-456, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2008.12.010
9. Zhao, L., Cai, W., Ding, X. and Chang, W., Model-Based Optimization for Vapor
Compression Refrigeration Cycle, Energy, Vol. 55, pp 392-402, 2013,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.02.071
10.Selbaş, R., Kizilkan, Ö. and Şencan, A., Thermoeconomic Optimization of Subcooled
and Superheated Vapor Compression Refrigeration Cycle, Energy, Vol. 31, No. 12,
pp 1772-1792, 2006, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2005.10.015
11.Armstrong, P. R., Katipamula, S., Jiang, W., Norford, L. K., Winiarski, D. and
Willingham, R. A., Efficient Low-Lift Cooling with Radiant Distribution, Thermal

143 Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems

 Al Quabeh, H., et al. Year 2020
Chilled Water Storage Feasibility with ... Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 132-144
Storage, and Variable-Speed Chiller Controls ‒ Part I: Component and Subsystem
Models, HVAC&R Res., Vol. 15, No. 2, pp 366-400, 2009,
https://doi.org/10.1080/10789669.2009.10390842
12.Ma, Y., Borrelli, F., Hencey, B., Packard, A. and Bortoff, S., Model Predictive Control
of Thermal Energy Storage in Building Cooling Systems, Proceedings of the 48th IEEE
Conf. Decis. Control Held Jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Conf., pp 392-397,
Shanghai, China, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2009.5400677
13.Deng, K., Sun, Y., Li, S., Lu, Y., Brouwer, J., Mehta, P. G., Zhou, M. C. and
Chakraborty, A., Model Predictive Control of Central Chiller Plant with Thermal Energy
Storage via Dynamic Programming and Mixed-Integer Linear Programming,
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., Vol. 12, No. 2, pp 565-579, 2015,
https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2014.2352280
14.Lu, Y., Wang, S., Sun, Y. and Yan, C., Optimal Scheduling of Buildings with Energy
Generation and Thermal Energy Storage Under Dynamic Electricity Pricing Using
Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming, Appl. Energy, Vol. 147, pp 49-58, 2015,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.02.060
15.Beghi, A., Cecchinato, L., Rampazzo, M. and Simmini, F., Energy Efficient Control of
HVAC Systems with Ice Cold Thermal Energy Storage, J. Process Control, Vol. 24,
No. 6, pp 773-781, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2014.01.008
16.Kumar, G. S., Nagarajan, D., Chidambaram, L. A., Kumaresan, V., Ding, Y. and
Velraj, R., Role of PCM Addition on Stratification Behavior in a Thermal Storage Tank
– An Experimental Study, Energy, Vol. 115, Part 1, pp 1168-1178, 2016,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.09.014
17.Zhang, Y., Wang, X., Zhang, Y. and Zhuo, S., A Simplified Model to Study the Location
Impact of Latent Thermal Energy Storage in Building Cooling Heating and Power
System, Energy, Vol. 114, pp 885-894, 2016,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.062
18.Ban, M., Krajačić, G., Grozdek, M., Ćurko, T. and Duić, N., The Role of Cool Thermal
Energy Storage (CTES) in the Integration of Renewable Energy Sources (RES) and Peak
Load Reduction, Energy, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp 108-117, 2012,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.06.070
19.Mitchell, J. W. and Braun, J. E., Principles of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
in Buildings, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, USA, 2013.
20.G. D. Corporation., General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS) Release 24.2.1, 2013.
21.The Environment Agency, Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Abu Dhabi, UAE,
https://www.ead.ae/documents/PDF-files/AD-greenhouse-gas-inventory-eng.pdf,
[Accessed: 16-December-2018]

Paper submitted: 24.08.2018

Paper revised: 16.12.2018
Paper accepted: 22.12.2018

Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 144