Characterization of the Effects of Borehole Configuration and Interference with Long Term Ground Temperature Modelling of Ground Source Heat Pumps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground source heat pumps (GSHPs) are an environmentally friendly alternative to conventional heating and cooling systems because of their high efficiency and low greenhouse gas emissions. The ground acts as a heat sink/source for the excess/required heat inside a building for cooling and heating modes, respectively. However, imbalance in heating and cooling needs can change ground temperature over the operating duration. This increase/decrease in ground temperature lowers system efficiency and causes the ground to foul—failing to accept or provide more heat. In order to ensure that GSHPs can operate to their designed conditions, thermal modelling is required to simulate the ground temperature during system operation. In addition, the borehole field layout can have a major impact on ground temperature. In this study, four buildings were studied—a hospital, fast-food restaurant, residence, and school, each with varying borehole configurations. Boreholes were modeled in a soil volume using finite-element methods and heating and cooling fluxes were applied to the borehole walls to simulate the GSHP operation. 20 years of operation were modelled for each building for 2x2, 4x4, and 2x8 borehole configurations. Results indicate that the borehole separation distance of 6 m, recommended by ASHRAE, is not always sufficient to prevent borehole thermal interactions. Benefits of using a 2x8 configuration as opposed to a 4x4 configuration, which can be observed because of the larger perimeter it provides for heat to dissipate to surrounding soil were quantified. This study indicates that it is important to carefully consider ground temperature during the operation of a GSHP. Borehole separation distances, layout, and hybridization should be studied to alleviate ground fouling problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".