Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy and Buildings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild

Annual performances of reversible air-to-water heat pumps in small

residential buildings
Francesco Madonna ∗ , Francesca Bazzocchi
RSE S.p.A., Power System Development Department, via Rubattino 54, 20134 Milano, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Heat pumps are considered one of the most efficient heating and cooling systems and, according to the
Received 8 May 2012 Directive 28/2009/EC, the aerothermal, geothermal or hydrothermal energy captured by these appliances
Received in revised form 15 April 2013 is considered energy from renewable sources. For these reasons, they will play a key role in reducing
Accepted 9 June 2013
greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to reach the target of nearly zero energy buildings.
However, there is still a great deal of uncertainty on the actual performances of heat pumps in real
Keywords:
life: indeed, the same unit can have very different consumptions depending on local climate, settings and
Air source heat pumps
building characteristics. The aim of this article is to investigate these effects, focusing on the application
Reversible heat pumps
Systems simulation
in residential buildings where a single device provides both space heating and cooling.
Field trial A model that simulates the hourly efficiency of air-to-water heat pumps is developed based on ther-
Modelling modynamic considerations and on data coming from a field trial monitoring campaign. The model is
Energy efficiency used to predict the behaviour of air source heat pumps installed in a set of residential buildings located
Residential buildings in different Italian cities, in both heating and cooling mode. The obtained results show that the climate
Weather compensation strategy plays the leading role on annual performance. The ratio between heating and cooling peak load is equally
important because in buildings where heating load is very different from cooling load, or vice versa, the
unit has recourse to excessive cycling in the less severe season, causing a seasonal efficiency reduction up
to 25%. Moreover, the benefits coming from a weather compensation strategy are investigated, showing
an annual performance improvement up to 19%.
© 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction the efficiency of systems such as heating, cooling, ventilation and

Energy efficiency is at the heart of the European Union’s strat-
egy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth [1]. Last year, the
Commission declared that energy efficiency can be considered as
Europe’s greatest energy resource and it is the key element to
combat climate change reducing greenhouse gas emissions while
contributing to energy security [2]. Nevertheless, the ambitious tar-
get of 20% primary energy savings in 2020 is a clear indication of
the track that must be followed.
Buildings account for 40% of total energy consumption in the
European Union [3] and there is a huge potential for cost-effective
energy savings in this sector. In order to achieve these savings,
especially after the adoption of the Directive 2002/91/EC [4], local
authorities have introduced new and more stringent requirements
in building regulations. Particularly, the focus consists in reduc-
ing the thermal energy need working on the building envelope
and using passive techniques and, at the same time, in improving
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 02 3992 5787; fax: +39 02 3992 5597.
E-mail address: francesco.madonna@rse-web.it (F. Madonna).
lighting.
Within heating and cooling systems, heat pumps are one of the
most interesting solutions and they can represent a valid alterna-
tive to conventional systems, because they use less primary energy.
In fact, in the last decades, continuous technical developments have
contributed in improving their seasonal performances and reliabil-
ity, even in extreme conditions. However, there is still a great deal of
uncertainty on their consumptions and, as matter of fact, on field
measurements of real installations often show efficiencies lower
than expected [5].
Heat pumps performance is strongly influenced by boundary
and operating conditions, namely heat source temperature, outlet
fluid temperature and thermal load. For this reason the European
Committee for Standardization developed a standard [6] specifying
test conditions and methods to allow for a fair comparison of differ-
ent units. However, rating performance is obtained in steady state
conditions (in laboratories) and so it could be very different from
that obtained in a real installation. Furthermore, seasonal perfor-
mance is influenced by climate and the specific application where
the unit is installed.
When evaluating annual performances of a reversible heat
pump, all these aspects should be taken into account, but data

0378-7788/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.06.016
300 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309

are illustrated, highlighting the aspects that mostly influence both

Nomenclature seasonal and annual performances.

APF annual performance factor

cd degradation coefficient due to cycling 2. Field trial data collection
cp specific heat capacity (kJ/kg/K)
CDD cooling degree days with base 20 ◦ C (◦ C/days) RSE1 is conducting several field trials of heat pump systems
COP coefficient of performance [7–9] in order to investigate their overall efficiency when operating
CSF climatic severity factor in real buildings. The results of a field trial data collection concern-
DOF defrost operations factor ing a reversible heat pump are presented in this article. The machine
E electric energy (kWh) is an air source hydronic heat pump with a rated capacity of 7.2 kW
EER energy efficiency ratio in heating mode and 5.8 kW in cooling mode. The compressor is a
f objective function variable speed twin rotary which allows to modulate the capacity
HDD heating degree days with base 20 ◦ C (◦ C/days) supplied, the refrigerant is the R410A and the defrost method is the
ndef number of defrost events per hour reverse-cycle defrost.
P capacity, thermal power (kW) The unit is installed in a laboratory consisting of a prefabricated
PLF part load factor house with a heated floor area of 60 m2 divided in four rooms sim-
PLR part load ratio ulating a living room, a kitchen, a bedroom and a bathroom. The
Q thermal energy (kWh) house is located in Milan and is equipped with five fan coils used
rh relative humidity for space heating and cooling. The opaque walls are of glass wool
SPF seasonal performance factor and wood with an U-value of 0.59 W/m2 K. The U-values of the floor
T temperature (K or ◦ C) and of the ceiling are of 0.58 W/m2 K and 0.54 W/m2 K, respectively.
t time (h) The windows are double glazing with metal frames and covers a
v̇ volumetric flow rate (l/h) total surface of 5 m2 .
A schematic representation of the system is shown in Fig. 1;
Greek symbols it refers to the heating mode where the heat pump supplies the
˛ parameter related to full load performance building with the heat taken from the outdoor air. The switch from
ˇ parameter related to part load performance heating mode to cooling mode is made by reversing the machine
 parameter related to defrost operations internal cycle, so that the condenser becomes evaporator and vice
 density (kg/l) versa.
The recorded quantities and the measuring instruments are
Subscripts listed in Table 1. Data were acquired every three seconds and
c cooling recorded at 1 min interval.
cold cold reservoir In addition to the measurements reported in Table 1, also com-
def defrost operations pressor frequency was acquired at 1 min interval.
fl full load Starting from these quantities, it is possible to obtain the deliv-
h heating ered thermal energy (Q) and the efficiency (COP in heating or EER
hot hot reservoir in cooling) as:
m mean
Q =  · v̇ · cp · (Tw,out − Tw,in ) · t (1)
max maximum
min minimum Q
COP (EER) = (2)
out outdoor air E
s seasonal
where  and cp are the density and the specific heat capacity of
th threshold
water, v̇ is the volumetric flow rate, Tw,out and Tw,in are inlet and out-
w,in inlet water
let water temperatures, t is the time interval, and E is the electric
w,out outlet water
energy consumption.
wm weighted mean
This article reports the results of a monitoring campaign subdi-
vided into three sessions: the first lasted from the 14th of January
2010 until the 15th of April 2010 (heating mode), the second from
the 12th of June 2010 until the 15th of September 2010 (cooling
reported on catalogues do not allow to make this kind of con- mode) and the third from the 15th of October 2010 until the 31st
siderations. For this purpose, using data collected in a field trial of January 2011 (heating mode).
monitoring campaign, a mathematical model that simulates hourly The operation set point was 22 ◦ C, both in heating and cool-
performances of a small size air-to-water unit is developed. The ing mode, automatically controlled via a wall-mounted thermostat.
model is coupled with a spreadsheet which calculates, through The outlet water temperature was set:
a simple hourly dynamic method, the building’s thermal energy
need. The resulting tool simulates the behaviour, in both heating • from the 14th of January 2010 till the 23rd of March 2010 at 42 ◦ C;
and cooling, of air-source heat pumps installed in a set of residential • from the 24th of March 2010 till the 14th of April 2010 at 35 ◦ C;
buildings, both new and old, located in different Italian cities. • from the 12th of June 2010 till the 7th of July 2010 at 7.5 ◦ C;
This work is undertaken with the aim of highlighting the • from the 8th of July 2010 till the 15th of September 2010 at 8.5 ◦ C;
relationship between heat pumps’ performances and the build-
ing where they are installed, thanks to the integrated approach
building-heating/cooling system. 1
RSE carries out research into the field of electrical energy with special focus
In the following paragraphs, firstly the monitoring campaign is on national strategic projects funded through the Fund for Research into Electrical
summarized, then the mathematical model is described in detail Systems. The activity covers the entire supply system with an application-oriented,
and reference buildings are presented. Finally, simulation results experimental and system-based approach.
 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309 301

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the system (heating mode).

• from the 15th of October 2010 till the 31st of January 2011 a
weather compensation strategy was employed. It means that a
controller measures the temperature outside the building and
varies the temperature of the water supplied to the heating sys-
tems accordingly. The water temperature was set at 45 ◦ C if
outdoor air temperature was below −2 ◦ C, while if the outdoor
air temperature increased, the outlet water temperature was
reduced by 0.625 ◦ C per each degree.
When not explicitly stated, the heat pump consumptions
include also the circulating pump (80 W): it was always on during
the heating period, while in cooling mode it worked only concur-
rently with the compressor. The system worked with a constant
water flow rate of 1000 l/h during heating, and of 800 l/h during
cooling. The consumption of the circulation pump was 12% of the
total energy consumption during the first winter, 11% during the
summer and 10% during the second winter. The results of the three
monitoring campaigns are shown in Table 2.
In this article the model is applied to reversible air source
hydronic heat pumps (air-to-water units) that have one small size
variable speed compressor.
3.1. Full load efficiency
Usually, models built on a general thermodynamic approach are
based on correlations between the real refrigeration cycle and a
Carnot refrigeration cycle (ideal cycle) operating at the same tem-
peratures [10]. The assumption of constant exergy efficiency, i.e.
the ratio between real performance and Carnot cycle performance,
is very common. The proposed model, instead, uses a linear rela-
tionship adding the condition that COPfl should be greater then one,
as it happens for ideal COP. So:
COPfl = 1 + ˛h · (COPCarnot − 1) (4)

Thot Tw,out
3. Mathematical model COPCarnot = ≈ (5)
Thot − Tcold Tw,out − Tout

The model expresses the COP as a product of three terms: the

full load efficiency (COPfl ), the part load factor (PLF) which takes
into account the influence of thermal load and the degradation
coefficient due to defrost operations (DOF):
COP = COPfl · PLF · DOF
In Sections 3.1–3.3 these three terms are described, while the
overall picture of heating mode is provided in Section 3.4, which
describes the model calibration and validation. The extension to
cooling mode is dealt in Section 3.5. Finally, the maximum thermal
energy that the unit can provide in a hour is evaluated in Section
3.6.
where ˛h is a parameter that resumes the performance decrease
consequent to irreversibilities and, to express COPCarnot as a
function of known quantities, outdoor air temperature (Tout )
approximates cold reservoir temperature (Tcold ) and outlet water
(3) temperature (Tw,out ) approximates hot reservoir temperature (Thot )
(temperatures are expressed in Kelvin).
Fig. 2 shows how the model simulates the experimental data.
The fitting is good (R2 = 0.855), and, particularly, it is better than
what it would be obtained with a proportional relation between full
load and ideal COP (R2 = 0.781). Besides, Ertesvag [11] also showed
that exergy efficiency has a slight negative gradient with outdoor
air temperature, confirmed by our on field measurements (Fig. 3).

Table 1
Recorded quantities, measuring instruments and uncertainties.

Quantity Type Uncertainties

Outlet water flow temperature (Tw,out ) RTD Pt100 (1/5DIN) ± 0.06 ◦ C (at 0 ◦ C)
Inlet water flow temperature (Tw,in ). RTD Pt100 (1/5DIN) ± 0.06 ◦ C (at 0 ◦ C)
Water volumetric flow rate (v̇) Electromagnetic flow meter ± 0.5% r.v.

Electrical consumption of the heat Multifunction power and energy meter ± 0.2%
pump and power Transducer ± 0.5%

Outdoor air temperature RTD Pt100 (Class A) ± 0.15 ◦ C (at 0 ◦ C)

Outdoor relative air humidity Humidity transmitter ± 1% r.h.
Indoor air temperature RTD Pt100 (1/5DIN) ± 0.06 ◦ C (at 0 ◦ C)
302 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309

Table 2
Field trial data and comparison with simulation results.

Tout (◦ C) Days Average hourly load (kW) Experimental COP/EER Simulated COP/EER

1st session
January 1.1 18 3.0 2.81 2.80
February 4.5 28 2.4 2.99 3.01
March 8.9 29 1.6 3.03 3.05
April 11.9 15 1.0 3.49 3.44
Total 6.5 90 2.0 2.98 2.99

2nd session
June 22.6 16 0.9 2.58 2.63
July 27.7 31 1.8 2.68 2.68
August 24.0 31 1.1 2.92 2.86
September 20.1 15 0.5 2.62 2.93
Total 24.3 93 1.2 2.73 2.74

3rd session
October 9.8 13 1.3 3.22 3.29
November 8.7 30 1.7 3.26 3.31
December 1.7 31 3.1 2.71 2.69
January 2.4 30 2.9 2.87 2.86
Total 5.0 104 2.4 2.90 2.90

Test at high load (heating) 18.0 18 2.2 5.65 5.49

experimental data proposed model proporonal relaon The proposed model expresses part load performance multi-
5.0 plying full load performance for a part load factor (PLF) defined
as:
4.5

4.0 PLR
PLF = (6)
ˇh · PLR + 1 − ˇh
COPfl

3.5

3.0
Qh
PLR = (7)
2.5 Qh,max
2.0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
where ˇh is a parameter linked to the ratio between off-cycle and
COPCarnot
on-cycle power (some authors use b = 1 − ˇh instead of ˇh ) and PLR
Fig. 2. COPfl as a function of COPCarnot . Experimental data (only points corresponding
(part load ratio) is the ratio between the thermal energy supplied
to hours without defrost cycles and with a delivered energy of at least 2 kWh have in 1 h (Qh ) and maximum thermal energy which could be supplied
been shown), proposed model and proportional relation. in the same time step (Qh,max ). To be noted that if PLR = 1 then
PLF = 1.The same approach is found in several authors [13–15] and
3.2. Part load factor standards [16,17].
Currently, especially for small size heat pumps, variable speed
Partial load operation strongly affects heat pump performance. compressors with inverter are used in order to reduce cycling and
The simplest way to adapt unit capacity to the required ther- thus to improve efficiency. An inverter works varying the speed
mal load is to cycle on/off. Cycling causes an efficiency decrease of the compressor, reducing its load, thermal output and power
because, when the unit restarts, the compressor has to re-establish requirement. In such a way it is possible to avoid on/off cycling till
the pressures. Moreover, energy is used during the off-cycle for the minimum speed is attained. Accordingly, if the unit is provided
crankcase heaters, controls, pumps or other parasitic uses. Hender- with a variable speed compressor, Eq. (7) is substituted with Eq.
son et al. [12] showed that even a small amount of off-cycle power (8):
has a dramatic impact on efficiency at low load conditions.
⎧
⎨ 1 if Qh ≥ Qh,min
0.50 PLR = (8)
⎩ Qh if Qh < Qh,min
0.45 Qh,min
Exergy efficiency

0.40
where Qh,min is the thermal energy which could be supplied with the
0.35
compressor continuously running at the minimum speed. Qh,min is a
0.30 parameter that depends on condensation and evaporation temper-
atures. For the sake of simplicity, the proposed model neglects these
0.25
dependences and assumes that Qh,min corresponds to the energy
0.20 delivered in 1 h with the unit running at one third of the rated
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 capacity (2.33 kWh for the monitored unit).
Outdoor air temperature [°C] In Fig. 4 the proposed model is compared with test data (the
case of a unit with inverter). Experimental PLF is obtained as the
Fig. 3. Exergy efficiency as a function of outdoor temperature (only points corre-
sponding to hours without defrost cycles and with a delivered energy of at least
average of the ratio between measured COP and full load COP (only
2 kWh have been shown). hours without defrost operations are considered).
 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309 303

Test data Model 1.6

1.2 1.4

Defrost cycles per hour

1.2
1
1.0
0.8
0.8
PLF

0.6 0.6

0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Outdoor air temperature [°C]
Load [kW]
Fig. 6. Defrost cycles per hour as a function of outdoor air temperature.
Fig. 4. PLF as a function of thermal load.

where  h is a parameter that depends on the unit characteristics,

no defrost cycles 1 defrost cycle 2 defrost cycles particularly on the heat exchanger design and on the defrost sys-
3.6 tem performance. CSF is a number between 0 and 1 that reports how
3.4 frost accumulation is affected by outdoor air temperature and rel-
3.2 ative humidity. So, indirectly, CSF is related to the event of defrost
3.0 operations. It means that, if CSF = 0 no defrost cycles are expected
COP [-]

2.8 in the hour, while if CSF = 1 the maximum number of defrost cycles
2.6 are expected to occur. Particularly, for the monitored unit, it is pos-
2.4 sible to express the number of expected defrost cycles in the hour
2.2 (ndef ) as a function of CSF:
2.0
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 ndef = 2 · CSF (10)
Outdoor air temperature [°C]
The proposed formulation of CSF is the following:
Fig. 5. COP as a function of outdoor air temperature and number of defrost cycles.
CSF(T, rh) = CSF(T ) · CSF(rh) (11)
⎧
⎪ 1 if Tout ≤ Tdef
3.3. Defrost cycles ⎪
⎨
Tth − Tout
CSF(T ) = if Tdef < Tout < Tth (12)
When an air source heat pump operates in heating mode, frost ⎪
⎪ T −T
can be formed on the outdoor heat exchanger (evaporator) coil ⎩ th def
0 if Tout ≥ Tth
surfaces. This phenomenon occurs when the surface temperature
⎧
is both below the freezing point of water and the dew point of ⎨0 if rhout ≤ rhth
the moist air. Acting as a thermal insulator and reducing air-
CSF(rh) = (13)
flow passage area, the accumulated frost leads to a performance ⎩ rhout − rhth if rhout > rhth
degradation and, particularly, to a lower evaporation tempera- 100 − rhth
ture that could damage the compressor: so, a periodic defrosting where Tth and rhth are the thresholds at which frost accumulation
is necessary. Nowadays, the most widespread defrost method is starts and Tdef is the temperature corresponding to the maximum
reverse-cycle defrost [18]: the refrigerant flow is reversed and hot level of frost accumulation. For the sake of simplicity, the influence
gas from compressor flows through the outdoor coil melting the of temperature and relative humidity is decoupled. This formula-
frost.2 It implies a drop of hourly COP because of compressor con- tion follows the results of the field test showed in Figs. 6 and 7. It can
sumptions while no space heating is provided. This behaviour is be observed that: (1) frost accumulation is unlikely with low rela-
reported in Fig. 5 referring to the monitored unit: the hourly COP tive humidity or with high outdoor air temperature; (2) the number
is shown as a function of outdoor air temperature and the number of defrost events per hour grows with raising relative humidity; (3)
of defrost cycles during the hour is specified. Note that the maxi- the number of defrost events per hour increases with decreasing
mum number of defrost cycles per hour is 2 and COP decreases by temperature, reaches a maximum and then remains quite constant.
13% and 23% in case of 1 or 2 defrost cycles per hour respectively
(these percentages are calculated comparing the average values at
the temperature of 0 ◦ C). Field trials also show that all the defrost
0.7

cycles are quite similar: the average duration is 0.075 h (i.e. 269 s) 0.6
and during each cycle the unit absorbs 0.03 kWh from the grid and
Defrost cycles per hour

0.5
takes 0.31 kWh of thermal energy from inside the building.
The proposed model expresses performance degradation due to 0.4

defrost operations (DOF) as a function of a climatic severity factor 0.3

(CSF):
0.2
DOF = 1 − h · CSF (9) 0.1

0
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
2
During a defrost cycle heat is taken from the inside of the building to defrost Outdoor air relave humidity [%]
the outdoor coil, as a consequence, when defrost cycles occurs, the hourly thermal
energy that a unit can provide is reduced. This aspect is analysed in Section 3.6. Fig. 7. Defrost cycles per hour as a function of relative humidity.
304 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309

simulaon experimental data simulaon experimental data

4.5 4.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.5 3.0

COP [-]
COP [-]

2.5
3.0
2.0
2.5 1.5
1.0
2.0
0.5
1.5 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time [days] Time [hours]

Fig. 8. Comparison of experimental COP (daily average) with simulation results. 1st Fig. 9. Comparison of experimental COP (hourly average) with simulation results.
monitoring campaign session. One day of 1st monitoring campaign session.

This behaviour is completely explained theoretically. Firstly,
moisture condenses on coil surfaces only if relative humidity is high
enough and then there can be frost formation only when outdoor
coil temperature is below zero: usually, cycle reversing starts at
an evaporation temperature of about −3 ◦ C [14] and so, depend-
ing on the heat exchanger characteristics and operating conditions
(particularly the thermal load), cycle reversing does not occur until
outdoor air temperature drops below the range 3–7 ◦ C [19]. Fur-
thermore, the humidity ratio is also important and, as it can be
deduced from a psychrometric chart [20], the lower the outdoor
air temperature, the less the condensate. These considerations are
coherent with Vio et al. [21], who stated that, at full load, the
most critical operating conditions correspond to relative humidity
greater than 80% and air temperature above 0 ◦ C. Lastly, outdoor air
temperature is strongly coupled with thermal load in such a way
that the higher the outdoor air temperature, the lower the thermal
load, the higher the coil temperature, the lower the probability of
frost formation. In the formulation of CSF the influence of thermal
load is considered indirectly via outdoor air temperature.
3.4. Model calibration and validation
comparison between measured and simulated performances: the
model estimates a seasonal COP equal to 2.90, equivalent to the
value measured in the field trial. This is undoubtedly an excellent
result, confirmed by the fact that the objective function reaches the
same value (0.96) of the previous year.
Note that, during the second winter, the outlet water tempera-
ture was controlled according to a weather compensation strategy,
i.e. it varied as a function of outdoor air temperature. Therefore
the unit worked at different temperature levels from those of the
previous year. In addition, because of bad weather conditions, the
thermal load was higher than the previous year, and, consequently,
the compressor operated at high frequencies for longer times. This
allows us to test the model out of the range of operations on which
it was built. Furthermore, another field trial was performed: in a
warm period the unit was forced to work with a high thermal load.
Also this test gives good results as shown in the last line of Table 2.
A problem apart is the calibration of CSF. The parameters Tth ,
Tdef and rhth are determined comparing the real defrost events with
the expected ones (this analysis is conducted using test data with
a time resolution of 1 min). The resulting values are: Tth = 2.8 ◦ C,
Tdef = −0.5 ◦ C and rhth = 72%.

Summing up, Eq. (3) could be rewritten as: 3.5. Cooling season
COP=COPfl · PLF · DOF
The model is extended to the cooling season eliminating the
PLR degradation coefficient due to defrost operation and slightly modi-
=[1+˛h · (COPCarnot − 1)] · · (1 − h · CSF) (14)
ˇh · PLR + 1 − ˇh fying the term related to full load performance. So Eq. (14) is revised
in this way:
The unit is characterized by its rated capacity and by the three
PLR
parameters ˛h , ˇh and  h and, as boundary conditions, the model EER = EERfl · PLF = ˛c · EERCarnot · (16)
ˇc · PLR + 1 − ˇc
needs the outdoor air temperature (Tout ), the outdoor air rela-
tive humidity (rhout ), the outlet water temperature (Tw,out ) and the Tcold Tw,out
EERCarnot = ≈ (17)
hourly thermal energy need (Qh ). Thot − Tcold Tout − Tw,out
The calibration of the model is performed using the data of
the first session of the monitoring campaign and it consists of the
numerical determination of three parameters through the opti- simulaon experimental data

mization of an objective function defined as: 4.5


  (COPi − COP  i )
2 4.0
f ˛h , ˇh , h = 1 − i 2
(15)
i (COPi
− COPm ) 3.5
COP [-]

where COPi is the measured daily COP, COPi is the daily average of 3.0

the simulated hourly COP, COPm is the mean of the measured COP. 2.5
The set of parameters ˛h = 0.31, ˇh = 0.73 and  h = 0.22 gives the
2.0
maximum value of the objective function (f = 0.96). In Figs. 8 and 9
and Table 2 the application of the model is compared with mea- 1.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
sured data.
Time [days]
The model validation is performed on the third session of the
measurement campaign (winter 2011) using the same values of Fig. 10. Comparison of experimental COP (daily average) with simulation results.
˛h , ˇh and  h previously obtained. Fig. 10 and Table 2 show the 3rd monitoring campaign session.
 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309 305

simulaon experimental data where tdef is the average duration of a defrost cycle (h). Qdef is the
4.5
average heat subtracted from the building during a defrost cycle
4.0 (kWh).
3.5 As shown in Section 3.3, for the monitored unit, the expected
3.0 number of defrost cycles in the hour (ndef ) is equal to 2CSF, tdef is
0.075 h and Qdef is 0.31 kWh. Note that Ph,max and CSF are function
EER [-]

2.5
2.0 of outdoor air temperature and humidity.
1.5 In cooling mode, unfortunately, field data are not helpful since
1.0 high compressor speed never occurred. On the basis of catalogue
0.5
data, the maximum hourly thermal energy that the unit can provide
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
is assumed equal to the energy delivered in 1 h with the unit run-
Time [days]
ning at 105% of the rated capacity.

Fig. 11. Comparison of experimental EER (daily average) with simulation results.
4. Case study
2nd monitoring campaign session.

As a case study, the heat pump model is combined with a tool

where, to express EERCarnot as a function of known quantities,
outdoor air temperature (Tout ) approximates hot reservoir tem-
perature (Thot ) and outlet water temperature (Tw,out ) approximates
cold reservoir temperature (Tcold ) (temperatures are expressed in
Kelvin). To be noted that there is no dependence on outdoor air
relative humidity and there are only two parameters, ˛c and ˇc .
The calibration is performed with same approach of heating
mode: the resulting values of ˛c and ˇc are, respectively, 0.23 and
0.83. In Fig. 11 and in Table 2 a comparison between the model and
the test is shown.
that evaluates buildings thermal energy needs in order to simulate
the behaviour of air-source heat pumps installed in a set of small
residential buildings. This study allows to understand how system
performance is influenced by building characteristic and climate.
The focus is not only on seasonal performance but on annual per-
formance too. Actually, in small residential buildings it is likely, and
profitable too, that a single heat pump satisfies both space heating
and cooling; in fact, in 2011, 68% of small size air-to-water units sold
in Italy were reversible.3 So, an evaluation of annual performance
becomes interesting.

3.6. Maximum hourly thermal energy 4.1. Reference buildings

The aim of this study is to simulate, in different contexts, the
performance of a heat pump similar to the monitored unit. As
explained before, part load conditions have a strong influence on
the efficiency and for this reason system sizing is a crucial assess-
ment for which the knowledge of the maximum hourly thermal
energy that the unit can provide, both in heating and in cooling,
is necessary. Data collected from the monitoring campaign shows
(Fig. 12) that, in heating mode, unit capacity with the compressor
at maximum speed (Ph,max ) can be expressed as:
Ph,max = 6.45 + 0.17 · Tout
Furthermore, if defrost events occur, the thermal energy that
the unit can provide in a hour (Qh,max ) has to take into account that
during defrost operation the unit does not provide space heating
and heat is subtracted from the building. So:
 
Qh,max = Ph,max · 1 − ndef · tdef − ndef · Qdef
 
= Ph,max · 1 − 2 · CSF · tdef − 2 · CSF · Qdef
experimental data
8
7
Heang capacity [kW]
To simulate heat pump’s efficiency in different contexts, a set of
reference buildings is selected combining 2 building categories, 3
locations and 3 age classes. These buildings have to be suitable for
a small size heat pump, so only small building categories are taken
into account, namely single-family and two-flat buildings (having
at least two building categories allows us to test the role of com-
pactness ratio). Note that these categories are the most developed
market segment according to EHPA [22] and represent about the
82% of the Italian residential buildings stock [23]. Some character-
istics of the reference buildings are illustrated in Table 3.
(18) The location is the second criterion used to select reference
buildings, thus allowing to take into account the influence of differ-
ent climates. The climate strongly affects the energy performance
of buildings and technical systems and, as a consequence, building
techniques and materials are usually adapted to the local con-
ditions. Italy experiences a variety of climates and, especially in
winter, temperatures are very different between the North and the
South of the country. The local legislation reflects these differences,
(19) splits the country into six heating climate zones depending on heat-
ing degree days (HDD) and provides different requirements for each
zone. So, to adequately represent the building stock, the following
model locations are selected: Milan (climate zone E, 2404 HDD), Rome
(climate zone D, 1415 HDD) and Palermo (climate zone B, 751 HDD).
The age is another important parameter to classify the Ital-
ian building stock because a large amount of buildings has not

6
undergone refurbishment and the original age of a building still
5
constitutes a good proxy for its energy performance. Age classes
4 are defined according to the evolution of the national legislation,
3 so:
2
1 • Class 1: buildings representative of the ‘80s (complying with the
0 law 373/76 [24]).
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Outdoor air temperature [°C]

3
Fig. 12. Heating capacity at the maximum speed of the compressor as a function of Private communication from COAER (Italian heat pump manufacturers associ-
outdoor air temperature. ation).
306 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309

Table 3
Number of storeys, useful floor area and window area of reference buildings.

Building category Number of storeys Useful floor area (m2 ) Window area (m2 )

N S E W

Single family 1 90 1.8 3.6 3.6 3.6

Two-flat 2 180 3.6 7.2 7.2 7.2

Table 4
Thermal characteristics of reference buildings’ envelope.

Class of age Location External wall Floor thermal Window Glazing solar Shading device Infiltration rate
thermal insulation thermal transmittance solar
insulation insulation transmittance
U-value (W/m2 K) U-value (W/m2 K) U-value (W/m2 K) gn -value g-value Air change per
hour (h−1 )

1 Rome, Palermo 1.11 1.31 5.06 0.87 0.80 0.5

1 Milan 0.77 0.88 5.06 0.87 0.80 0.5
2 Palermo 1.11 1.31 2.98 0.77 0.80 0.3
2 Rome 0.77 0.88 2.98 0.77 0.80 0.3
2 Milan 0.57 0.66 2.98 0.77 0.80 0.3
3 Palermo 0.48 0.49 2.98 0.77 0.57 0.3
3 Rome 0.35 0.36 2.31 0.63 0.57 0.3
3 Milan 0.33 0.33 2.18 0.63 0.57 0.3

Table 5
Net thermal energy need, unit capacity (at rating conditions) and oversizing.

Location Building category Class of age Thermal energy need Unit capacity (kW) Oversizing
(kWh/m2 /year)

Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling

Milan Single family 1 181 11 20 16.1 0% 60%

2 117 11 15 12.1 0% 47%
3 58 13 11 8.9 0% 45%
Two-flat 3 43 15 17 13.7 0% 29%

Rome Single family 1 115 14 16 12.9 0% 63%

2 70 15 13 10.5 0% 54%
3 24 18 8 6.4 0% 25%
Two-flat 3 15 21 12 9.7 0% 8%

Palermo Single family 1 43 25 10 8.1 0% 0%

2 38 23 9 7.2 0% 0%
3 9 27 8 6.4 25% 0%
Two-flat 1 30 28 19 15.3 11% 0%
2 25 26 18 14.5 17% 0%
3 5 29 15 12.1 47% 0%

• Class 2: buildings representative of the ‘90s (complying with the
law 10/91 [25]).
• Class 3: new buildings (complying with the law 192/05 [26]).
In such a scheme, thermal insulation and materials used for
walls and windows vary according to the location and the age class;
some characteristics are resumed in Table 4.
temperatures are 20 ◦ C for heating and 26 ◦ C for cooling; during
the winter also a set-back temperature of 17 ◦ C is scheduled. The
lengths of the heating and cooling seasons are indicated in Table 6.
To be noted that the heating period is regulated by the Italian leg-
islation.
4.3. Heat pump sizing and setting

Each building is equipped with a single reversible heat pump

4.2. Buildings net thermal energy need
for space heating and cooling without any back-up system. Sizing
is based on peak load: for the selected buildings it occurs during the
The calculation of the buildings net thermal energy needs is per-
formed with the “three-node” hourly dynamic calculation method
described in International Standards [27]. Using an hourly model Table 6
requires weather data in the form of a typical year: for this purpose Length of heating and cooling seasons.

the IWEC files (International Weather for Energy Calculation) [28] Milan Rome Palermo
are used. However, these typical years seem cold: the number of
Heating season
HDD and CDD are, respectively, 2706 and 211 in Milan, 1711 and Beginning 15th of October 1st of November 1st of December
340 in Rome, 849 and 598 in Palermo. It means that these typical End 15th of April 15th of April 31st of March
years have between 13% and 21% more HDD then those indicated Hours per day 14 12 8
in the Italian legislation (mentioned above). Cooling season
Buildings net thermal energy needs for space heating and Beginning 1st of June 15th of May 1st of May
cooling are shown in Table 5. The calculation is performed assum- End 15th of September 30th of September 30th of September
Hours per day 10 10 10
ing that the buildings have a single thermal zone and set-point
 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309 307

Table 7
Seasonal and annual performances.

Location Building category Class of age Fixed outlet water temperature Weather compensation strategy

APF SPFh SPFc APF SPFh SPFc

Milan Single family 1 2.49 2.52 2.03 2.68 2.70 2.37

2 2.49 2.52 2.27 2.69 2.69 2.69
3 2.44 2.42 2.55 2.65 2.58 3.08
Two-flat 3 2.55 2.43 2.93 2.78 2.58 3.58

Rome Single family 1 2.87 2.96 2.30 3.25 3.33 2.72

2 2.80 2.89 2.44 3.18 3.24 2.92
3 2.81 2.71 2.94 3.24 3.02 3.59
Two-flat 3 2.99 2.70 3.23 3.47 2.96 3.96

Palermo Single family 1 3.18 3.39 2.87 3.74 4.03 3.33

2 3.19 3.41 2.89 3.76 4.06 3.35
3 2.98 2.84 3.03 3.53 3.35 3.59
Two-flat 1 3.16 3.39 2.95 3.72 4.03 3.44
2 3.13 3.36 2.94 3.69 4.00 3.44
3 3.03 2.52 3.12 3.60 2.94 3.73

heating period in Milan and Rome and during the cooling period in
Palermo. This aspect must not be overlooked because a heat pump
perfectly sized for the heating mode could result oversized for the
cooling mode, or vice versa, producing an efficiency deterioration
due to excessive cycling. In Table 5 the amount of this oversizing
is indicated for each building. Heat pumps with a rated capacity
up to 20 kW in heating are considered and, as a consequence, four
buildings are not suitable for such a system, namely the two-flat
buildings belonging to the age classes 1 and 2 and located in Milan
and Rome.
According to our experience, in Italy, when an air-source heat
pump is installed in a small residential building, storage tanks are
sometime used. To point out the effect of excessive cycling any
storage tank is considered in this article.
All the buildings are equipped with fan-coils and the global effi-
ciency of the distribution, emission and control systems is assumed
equal to 0.9. The assumption made is that when a reversible heat
pump is installed in an existing building the whole heating system
is renovated. Then, it is plausible to have the same heat distribution
and emission systems in all the buildings and thus the same water
temperatures. Terminal units capacities vary according to building
characteristics.
Outlet water temperatures are set according to two hypotheses.
In the former, temperatures are fixed to 45 ◦ C in heating and 7 ◦ C
in cooling. In the latter a weather compensation strategy is consid-
ered: during the heating season the minimum water temperature
is set at 35 ◦ C in correspondence of an outdoor air temperature of
15 ◦ C or more, and the maximum is set at 45 ◦ C in correspondence
of an outdoor air temperature equal to the design temperature (i.e.
−5 ◦ C for Milan, 0 ◦ C for Rome and 5 ◦ C for Palermo). Note that in
Milan there are 157 h with an outdoor air temperature lower than
the design temperature, in Rome only 28 h and no hours at all in
Palermo. During the cooling season the outlet water temperature
range is set between 7 ◦ C and 12 ◦ C, in correspondence, respectively,
of an outdoor air temperature of 35 ◦ C and of 20 ◦ C.
4.4. Results and discussion
Simulation results are summarized by seasonal performance
factors in heating and cooling mode (SPFh and SPFc ) and by annual
performance factors (APF) shown in Table 7 and defined as:
Qh,s
SPFh = (20)
Eh,s
Qh,s + Qc,s
APF = (22)
Eh,s + Ec,s
where Q is the delivered thermal energy, E is the electric energy
input4 and the subscripts h, c and s mean respectively heating,
cooling and seasonal.
Seasonal performances are strongly affected by climate, but also
the ratio between heating and cooling peak load plays an impor-
tant role, because during the less severe season the unit could result
oversized. This is evident in cooling mode: average temperatures in
the hottest months are quite similar in all the considered locations
and so SPFc s should be similar. But, because of the strong influence
of unit sizing, the real behaviour is completely different. In fact, in
Milan and in Rome, where the heat pump sizing is based on heating
load, SPFc s are depressed compared to Palermo’s ones because cool-
ing capacities are about the double of real needs. Considering more
recent and compact buildings, it can be noticed that performance
rise and oversizing decrease go hand in hand, mainly because heat-
ing peak load decreases. In Palermo, instead, unit sizing is based on
cooling peak load and so heat pumps could result oversized in heat-
ing. Actually, for buildings belonging to the age classes 1 and 2, the
oversizing is very small (between 0% and 17%) while for new build-
ings it is more pronounced (25% and 47%). Consequently, in heating
mode, except new buildings in Palermo, SPFh s are not affected by
oversizing and are mainly driven by climate. The highest SPFh is
recorded in Palermo that has the warmer winter; on the contrary,
Milan is the coldest location and efficiencies are about 25% less
of the Palermo’s one, while Rome has an intermediate situation
(−13%).
In order to quantify the efficiency reduction due to oversizing, a
set of simulations is run with heat pumps perfectly sized for cool-
ing in Milan and Rome and for heating in Palermo. In other words, a
dedicated unit for the less severe season is assumed. In such cases,
higher seasonal performance factors are obtained as it is illustrated
in Fig. 13. It follows that the use of a single heat pump for heat-
ing and cooling is unfavourable in case of a considerable difference
between winter and summer loads.
However, it is possible to exploit building thermal inertia in
order to improve performance, reducing heat pump cycling. The
control strategy consists in keeping the heating/cooling operat-
ing for an extended period before the system cycles off. In such
a way the system delivers more heat/cool than necessary, heat-
ing/cooling beyond the set point in order to be more efficient. Part
of the heat/cool stored by the building reduces the heating/cooling

Qc,s
SPFc = (21)
Ec,s 4
Heat pump consumption takes into account the circulation pump too.
308 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309

cooling heang Milan Rome Palermo

30%
25%
25%
Efficiency reducon

20%

SPFc enhancement
20%
15%
15%

10% 10%

5%
5%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0%
Oversizing 25.5 26 26.5 27 27.5 28
Twm [°C]
Fig. 13. Efficiency reduction during the less severe season due to oversizing.
Fig. 16. Effect of the weather compensation strategy on SPFc as a function of Twm .

Milan Rome Palermo

compactness ratio plays the same role of the thermal insulation and
3.60
the situation is symmetrical in cooling mode.
3.40 APFs mainly depend on climate, while variations among build-
3.20 ings of the same location are less than 10%. The best efficiencies
3.00 are obtained in Palermo while in Rome and Milan performance
SPFh

2.80 decreases of 8% and 20% respectively. So, although oversizing

2.60
2.40
2.20
2.00
0 2 4 6 8 10
Twm [°C]
Fig. 14. SPFh as a function of Twm . Only the cases with no oversizing are plotted.
need of the next hour. This strategy is tested in the most critical
case, i.e. single-family building belonging to class of age 1 in Milan.
The result is an improvement in SPFc of 15% but the energy con-
sumption is unchanged (−0.5%). It means that this strategy does
not fulfil the pursued goal of energy savings because it ultimately
consists in providing more thermal energy than necessary. So this
strategy is neglected.
Ceteris paribus, slightly lower SPFh s are registered in newer
buildings (up to 5% in Milan and up to 9% in Rome). This occurs
because the thermal energy need tends to zero in building with a
better thermal insulation, when outdoor air temperature is above
16 ◦ C, and so heat pumps work, on average, with lower outdoor air
temperatures. To point out this aspect, in Fig. 14 SPFh is plotted as
a function of the weighted mean of the hourly outdoor air temper-
ature (Twm ), the hourly thermal loads being the weights. Terminal
units with higher capacity are assumed for older buildings in order
to have the same supply flow temperature in all buildings. Other-
wise, an higher supply flow temperature would be necessary in old
buildings, implying a worsening in heat pumps performance. The
Milan Rome Palermo
20%
SPFh enhancement
strongly affects seasonal performances, it does not have the same
dramatic impact on annual performance; the reason is that elec-
tric consumptions during the oversized season are only a small
fraction of the annual ones. Furthermore there is a compensation
12 14 between the cooling and heating performances and this reduces
APF variations.
The adoption of a weather compensation strategy allows to
obtain better performances at least of 6% and up to 23%. In heat-
ing mode, the improvement varies a great deal according to the
location: it is about 7% in Milan, 11% in Rome and 18% in Palermo.
On the contrary, in cooling mode the differences among the loca-
tions are smaller: the advantage is, on average, 20% in Milan, 21%
in Rome and 17% in Palermo. Regardless of the locations, newer
buildings and two-flat ones have greater improvement in cooling
and smaller in heating. These trends are well explained by Twm , as
shown in Figs. 15 and 16; the reason is that the weather compen-
sation strategy enhances efficiency in favourable conditions (high
outdoor air temperature in winter and low outdoor air temperature
in summer). On the whole year, APF improves of, on average, 8% in
Milan, 15% in Rome and 18% in Palermo.
5. Conclusions
A mathematical model that simulates reversible air-to-water
heat pump hourly efficiency is developed analysing data from a
field trial monitoring campaign. The variables of the model are
outdoor air temperature and relative humidity, outlet water tem-
perature and building energy need. Besides, the specificity of the
heat pump unit is expressed by three parameters, determined using
data acquired during a session of the monitoring campaign. This
model relates unit full load performances to those of an ideal unit,
Carnot refrigeration cycle, and takes into account the influence of
part loads and defrost operations through two factors: PLF and DOF.
The model is then integrated into a building simulation tool

15%
in order to evaluate heat pump performance in different build-
10% ings and locations. Results presented in this article illustrate both
annual and seasonal performances in 14 cases allowing to evaluate
the influence of climate and building age and category. The main
5%
considerations are:

0%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
• Having a single reversible heat pump for space heating and cool-
Twm [°C]
ing is a spreading solution in small residential buildings in Italy.
System sizing has to be based on the most severe season, which
Fig. 15. Effect of the weather compensation strategy on SPFh as a function of Twm . consists, for the cases discussed, in winter for Milan and Rome,
 F. Madonna, F. Bazzocchi / Energy and Buildings 65 (2013) 299–309
and in summer for Palermo. This aspect is not negligible, because
a heat pump perfectly sized for a service can result very over-
sized for the other causing an excessive cycling and thus an
efficiency reduction despite the use of an inverter. This occurs
in old buildings in Rome and Milan, where unit cooling capacities
are more than the double than the building needs: for this reason
the seasonal efficiency results penalized (−25%). The situation
is the opposite in Palermo, where oversizing occurs in heating
mode and is relevant only for new buildings; in this case effi-
ciency reductions consist in 19% for two-flat building and in 9%
for single-family building.
• In case of no oversizing, seasonal performances are mainly
affected by the climate and, to a lesser extent, by buildings age
and category. The role of climate is obvious, see Eqs. (5) and (17),
while how the kind of building influences efficiency is subtler:
because of a lower “mean” temperature (Twm ), SPFh decreases
and SPFc increases in better insulated and more compact build-
ings. This observation is valid under the assumption of having
the same supply flow temperature in all buildings: it occurs if the
terminal units are of the same typology in all buildings, but with
higher capacity in older buildings.
• The annual performance is mainly driven by the climate. In fact,
the differences showed in seasonal performance for buildings in
the same locations are partially compensated among the seasons.
• [15] L. Cabrol, P. Rowley, Towards low carbon homes – a simulation analysis of
In newer buildings, energy need for space heating reduces up to
79% while energy need for space cooling is constant or increases
by less than 30%. As a consequence the weight of cooling perfor-
mance is enhanced in recent buildings, particularly in Palermo.
• The article shows that a weather compensation strategy allows to
improve the seasonal performance up to 23% and the annual per-
formance up to 19%. The enhancement is bigger where the winter
is mild and summer is cool. Other analysis on users behaviours
like continuous operation or night attenuation will be the heart
of future development of this study.
Acknowledgments
This work has been financed by the Research Fund for the Ital-
ian Electrical System under the Contract Agreement between RSE
S.p.A. and the Ministry of Economic Development – General Direc-
torate for Nuclear Energy, Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency
stipulated on July 29, 2009 in compliance with the Decree of March
19, 2009.
References
[1] Communication from the Commission, Europe 2020, A strategy for smart, sus-
tainable and inclusive growth, COM(2010)2020, Brussels, 2010.
[2] Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions,
Energy Efficiency Plan 2011, COM(2011)109, Brussels, 2011.
[3] Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May
2010 on the energy performance of buildings (recast).
[4] Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16
December 2002 on the energy performance of buildings.
309
[5] S. Caird, R. Roy, S. Potter, Domestic heat pump in the UK: use behaviour,
satisfaction and performance, submitted to Energy Efficiency, Digital Object
Identifier (January) (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12053-012-9146-x (in
press) http://oro.open.ac.uk/31521
[6] European Standard EN 14511, Air conditioners, liquid chilling packages and
heat pumps with electrically driven compressors for space heating and cooling,
2004.
[7] F. Bazzocchi, L. Croci, On field heat pumps’ energy performances, in: Proceeding
of AICARR National Conference, Padua, Italy, 2012.
[8] A. Capozza, F. Madonna, Experimental and simulation studies on the inter-
action between ground-source heat pumps and the surrounding ground, in:
Proceeding of 48th AICARR International Conference, Baveno, Italy, 2011.
[9] F. Pettorossi, R. Viadana, P. Marsan, The experimental results achieved from
winter and summer air conditioning systems created for residential buildings
and based on electric heat pumps, in: Proceeding of 43rd AICARR International
Conference, Milan, Italy, 2002.
[10] M. Scarpa, G. Emmi, M. De Carli, Validation of a numerical model aimed at the
estimation of performance of vapour compression based heat pumps, Energy
and Buildings 47 (2012) 411–420.
[11] I.S. Ertesvag, Uncertainties in heat-pump coefficient of performance (COP) and
exergy efficiency based on standardized testing, Energy and Buildings 43 (2011)
1937–1946.
[12] H.I. Henderson, D. Parker, Y.J. Huang, Improving DOE-2’s RESYS routine: user
defined functions to provide more accurate part load energy use and humidity
predictions, in: 2000 ACEEE Summer Study Proceedings, 2000.
[13] E. Bettanini, A. Gastaldello, L. Schibuola, Simplified models to simulate part load
performances of air conditioning equipments, in: Proceedings of IBPSA 8th Int.
Conf. Building Simulation ‘03, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2003, pp. 107–114.
[14] E. Kinab, D. Marchio, P. Rivière, A. Zoughaib, Reversible heat pump model
for seasonal performance optimization, Energy and Buildings 42 (2010)
2269–2280.
building-integrated air-source heat pump systems, Energy and Buildings 48
(2012) 127–136.
[16] Italian standard UNI 10963, Air conditioners, liquid chilling packages and heat
pumps – performance tests at part load, 2001.
[17] European standard EN 14825:2012, Air conditioners, liquid chilling packages
and heat pumps, with electrically driven compressors, for space heating and
cooling – testing and rating at part load conditions and calculation of seasonal
performance, 2012.
[18] H. Wenju, J. Yiqiang, Q. Minglu, N. Long, Y. Yang, D. Shiming, An experimental
study on the operating performance of a novel reverse-cycle hot gas defrosting
method for air source heat pumps, Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011)
363–369.
[19] P. Rivière, et al., Preparatory study on the environmental performance of res-
idential room conditioning appliances (airco and ventilation), Draft report of
Task 4, Technical analysis of existing products, March (2009) 37–38.
[20] ASHRAE Handbook, Fundamentals volume, Psychrometrics, Chapter 1, 1.11,
Atlanta, 2009.
[21] M. Vio, Ma. Vio, Applicabilità delle pompe di calore evaporanti ad aria in Italia
(Applicability of air source heat pumps in Italy), CDA 2 (1995) 151–163.
[22] EHPA, European Heat Pump Action Plan, version 1.1, 2008.
[23] ISTAT, 14th Population and Housing Census, 2001.
[24] Legge 30 Aprile 1976, n. 373. Norme per il contenimento del consumo ener-
getico per usi termici negli edifici (Regulation for reduction of thermal energy
consumption in buildings).
[25] Legge 10 Gennaio 1991, n.10. Norme per l‘attuazione del Piano energetico
nazionale in materia di uso razionale dell’energia, di risparmio energetico e
di sviluppo delle fonti rinnovabili di energia (Regulation in compliance with
the national energy plan for rational use of energy, energy savings and devel-
opment of energy from renewable sources).
[26] Decreto Legislativo 19 Agosto 2005, n. 192. Attuazione della Direttiva
2002/91/CE sulla prestazione energetica degli edifici (Transposition into law
of Directive 2000/91/EC on the energy performance of buildings).
[27] ISO standard 13790, Energy performance of buildings – calculation of energy
use for space heating and cooling, 2008.
[28] ASHRAE, International Weather for Energy Calculations (IWEC Weather Files),
Users Manual and CD-ROM, Atlanta, 2001.