Optimisation and control of energy lighting consumption in offices

Transcription

1 Optimisation and control of energy lighting consumption in offices Benoit Roisin Annex AIE 45 Energy Efficient Electric Lighting for Buildings Limelette, 19 April 2007 Open Session organised by BBRI in the framework of the IEA 45 Annex Energy Conservation In Buildings And Community Systems Architecture et Climat Université Catholique de Louvain

2 Introduction Work done during a master thesis at UCL in collaboration with BBRI and continued at the architecture and climate unit of the UCL Reducing the energetic consumption of office would surely pass through a reduction of lighting consumption This need a good knowledge of what is achievable Objectives of this work : Identify the comportment of different lighting equipments and different lighting control systems Use these results to predict and to optimise the consumption of lighting 2

3 Contents First part : measurement of the consumption of several lighting systems Second part : prediction and optimisation of lighting consumption in a single office Conclusions 3

4 Contents First part : measurement of the consumption of several lighting systems Second part : prediction and optimisation of lighting consumption in a single office Conclusions 4

5 First part : Equipment Analysed Fluorescent lamps : T8 tubes 2 kinds of tubes : classical 133 or high efficient tri-phosphor kinds of control gear : ferromagnetics or electronics 2 ranges of power : 58 or 36 W 2 kinds of controls : single captors or centralised controllers controlling presence and/or daylight 2 kinds of command : digital (DALI) or analog (1-10V) 5

6 First part : Results Example : Analog System (58W Philips TLD super 80 with Philips HFR 1-10 DIM) Linear relation between P and Φ: P = 0.46Φ Ballast Power quite constant whatever the flux Power [W] 60,0 50,0 40,0 30,0 20,0 Total Power [W] Ballast Power Tube Power Linear (Total Power [W]) y = 0,46Φ + 9,02 For Φ = 0, P > 0 10,0 0,0 0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0 Luminous Flux [%] 6

7 First part : Results Example : Analog System (58W Philips TLD super 80 with Philips HFR 1-10 DIM) Maximum luminous efficiency for a maximum flux Very small luminous efficiency at small flux (due to ballast power) Luminous efficiency [%] 110,0 100,0 90,0 80,0 70,0 60,0 50,0 40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0 Luminous efficiency 0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0 Luminous Flux [%] 7

8 Results : Comparison Better efficiency for electronic ballasts (~10%) Better efficiency for highefficient tubes (~12%) Same efficiency (at maximal flux) for dimmable ballasts Same efficiency (at same relative flux) for 36W and 58W Luminous Efficiency [lm/w] 100,0 90,0 80,0 70,0 60,0 50,0 40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0 OSRAM QTP 36W + TL 840 OSRAM QTP 36W + TL 133 OSRAM QTP 58W + TL840 OSRAM QTP 58W + TL 133 Phillips HFR DIM 1-10V + TL 840 Phillips HFR DIM DALI + TL 840 OSRAM DIM 36W + TL840 OSRAM DIM 36W + TL 133 OSRAM DIM 58W + TL840 OSRAM DIM 58W + TL 133 VS LN (FM) + TL840 VS LN (FM) + TL 133 VS LN (FM) + TL840 VS LN (FM) + TL 133 VS I (FM) + TL840 VS I (FM) + TL 133 Electronic + High efficient tubes Electronic FM + High + std efficient tubes tubes FM + std tubes 0,0 1000,0 2000,0 3000,0 4000,0 5000,0 Luminous Flux [lm] 8

9 Results : Power factor Phillips HFR V (Etap) Phillips HFR 158 DALI (Etap) Decrease of the power factor when dimming 1,00 0,90 0,80 Osram 36W (HF 1x36 DIM) Osram 58W (HF 1x58 DIM) In large buildings, difficulty to forecast and to balance with capacitors Power Factor [-] 0,70 0,60 0,50 0,40 0,30 0,20 0,10 0,00 0,00 20,00 40,00 60,00 80,00 100,00 Luminous Flux [%] 9

10 Contents First part : measurement of the consumption of several lighting systems Second part : prediction and optimisation of lighting consumption in a single office Conclusions 10

11 Second part : Simulations 1.01m One room of arbitrary dimensions 1.01m 6.55m 3.05m Three locations : Athens, Brussels, Stockholm Four orientations : N, S, W, E Four luminaires in two rows 11

12 Second part : Control Systems IDDS (ELS) : Daylight Regulation (closed loop sensor) MDD : Presence Regulation (dimming at 3% of full flux) MDS : Presence Regulation (switching) IDDS+MDD or IDDS+MDS : Daylight Regulation while presence. Dimming or Switching while absence Night time switch 12

13 Second part : Modelling (IDDS) Iterative process : Under each sensor : Daylight (DAYSIM) + Artificial light (DIALux) = set point E dl,i ( t) + n j= 1 τ (t)e j j,i = SP For each luminaire, we can calculate the dimming rate in function of daylight and the state of the others luminaires () t n dl, i j= 1 () t δ τ () t We make an iteration for each luminaire τ i SP E = E i, i i, j j E j, i τ i, k () t = SP E dl, i n () t δ τ () t j= 1 E i, i i, j j, k 1 E j, i The power can be found with results of first part : P = 0.46x

14 Second part : Modelling (Presence) Dimming rate depends on the presence τ i ( t) = P( t). τ on, i ( t) + (1 P( t)). τ off, i ( t) Presence (P(t)) following a probabilistic reasoning 14

15 Second part : Results (IDDS) Better gains in low latitudes countries due to daylight availability (~5-10%) Better gains for South orientations (~7-12%) Even in the worth cases, important gains (more than 45%) Annual consumption proportional to the desired workplace illuminance More sensors leads to better comfort and less consumption If one sensor : centre of the room 15

16 Second part : Results (MDD/MDS) Linear relation between consumption and switch-off delay Not a linear curve between gains and presence (due to delay before switching/dimming) Gains 100% when presence = 0 (due to parasitic consumption) MDS better for consumption MDD interesting in landscape offices (visual reasons) Gains [%] 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% MDD MDS 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Presence rate [%] 16

17 Second part : Results MDD better than IDDS when presence is less than 15 to 30% MDS better than IDDS when presence is less than 25 to 40% Centralised control (Analog or Digital (DALI)) energetically profitable when only one controller can replace single presence detectors of at least four luminaires. So avoid embedded DALI controllers. Importance to install a scheduler to switch off the installation during the night 17

18 Contents First part : measurement of the consumption of several lighting systems Second part : prediction and optimisation of lighting consumption in a single office Conclusions 18

19 Conclusions Summary of achievable gains : Install Electronic ballast in place of ferromagnetics Choose High efficient tri-phosphor tubes 10 % 12 % Choose for daylight regulation 45 to 60% Presence control Variable TOTAL Min 60%-70% 19

20 Thank you For more Information : B. Roisin, M. Bodart, A. Deneyer, P. D Herdt, Lighting energy savings in offices using different control systems and their real consumption, accepted for publication in Energy and Building. benoit.roisin@uclouvain.be