Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Effects of arrangement geometry and number of boreholes on thermal T

interaction coefficient of multi-borehole heat exchangers
⁎
Ahmet Gultekina, Murat Aydinb, Altug Sismanc,a,
a
Istanbul Technical University, Energy Institute, 34469 Istanbul, Turkey
b
International Geothermal Center, Bochum University of Applied Sciences, Bochum 44801, Germany
c
Uppsala University, Depart. Physics & Astronomy, Regementsvägen 1, SE-752 37 Uppsala, Sweden

H I GH L IG H T S

• Thermal interaction coefficient depends on aspect ratio of borehole arrangement.

• Total heat transfer strongly changes with aspect ratio for shorter borehole spacing.
• Performance losses decrease with the decrease of the aspect ratio.
• Interaction coefficient strongly depends on small number of boreholes.
• Number of boreholes and aspect ratio dependencies are empirically given.

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In large-scale ground-source heat pump applications, a large number of borehole heat exchangers are used and
Ground source heat pumps performance losses become an important issue due to thermal interactions. Dependency of total performance
Ground heat exchangers losses on borehole spacing can analytically be expressed by using thermal interaction coefficient. For a given
Thermal interaction coefficient application field, interaction coefficient depends on number of boreholes (N), aspect ratio of borehole’s ar-
Borehole field configuration
rangement geometry and operation time. In this study, functional dependencies of interaction coefficient on N
and aspect ratio are investigated by considering different rectangular borehole arrangements. Dependencies of
both thermal interaction coefficient and total heat transfer rate on aspect ratio are computationally examined.
Also, the effects of number of boreholes and operation time on interaction coefficient are studied. The results
showed that the values of both interaction coefficient and performance losses decrease with the decrease of
aspect ratio of a borehole field. Aspect ratio dependency of total unit heat transfer rate becomes more evident in
case of shorter borehole spacing. Furthermore, a strong dependency of interaction coefficient on N is observed
when N is much smaller than a critical value, Nc, although an asymptotic behavior appears and dependency on N
becomes negligible for N > Nc. Some empiric expressions are proposed for aspect ratio and N dependency of
interaction coefficient as well as Nc. The results and the proposed expressions can be used to make an energy
efficient and optimal design of a BHE field by maximizing the total performance while minimizing the field
allocation and the thermal losses.

1. Introduction indoor heating/cooling units. GHE are installed either horizontally in

In order to reduce energy costs, energy storage technologies are
important for the efficient utilization of energy. In the last years, using
the ground as a thermal energy storage is becoming more and more
popular for heat pump systems owing to its high efficiency [1], en-
vironmentally friendly [2] and low running cost for heating and cooling
applications [3]. A ground-source heat pump (GSHP) system consists of
three main parts: heat pump unit, ground heat exchangers (GHE), and
trenches or vertically in boreholes. [4]. Vertical GHE, commonly named
borehole heat exchangers (BHE), are generally constructed by installing
a single or multiple polyethylene U-tubes into boreholes. Designing of a
BHE field is mainly based on sizing, spacing and allocating of BHE
[5–7]. In literature, several analytical models have been developed and
used to examine heat exchange between a borehole and ground. An
extensive review of these models have been given in a review article
[8]. There are lots of parameters which effect thermal performance of a

⁎
Corresponding author at: Uppsala University, Depart. Physics & Astronomy, Regementsvägen 1, SE-752 37 Uppsala, Sweden.
E-mail address: altug.sisman@physics.uu.se (A. Sisman).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.027
Received 29 August 2018; Received in revised form 11 December 2018; Accepted 2 January 2019
Available online 08 January 2019
0306-2619/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Gultekin et al.
Nomenclature
B borehole spacing (m)
cp specific heat capacity at constant pressure (J/(kg K))
K number of BHE in transverse direction
M number of BHE in longitudinal direction
l length (m)
N number of BHE
q̇′ unit heat transfer rate (W/m)
R relative change
T temperature (°C)
t time (s or h)
Greek letters
λ thermal conductivity (W/(m K))
ρ density (kg/m3)
δ thermal interaction coefficient (m)
Subscripts
AR aspect ratio
BHE such as; depth of BHE, shank spaces between U-pipes, flow rate of
working fluid, operation time and thermal properties of ground and
grout [9–12].
Usually, more than one BHE are needed for large GSHP systems
because of the high energy demand. In this situation, thermal interac-
tion between BHE causes performance losses in a BHE field [13,14].
This adverse effect will become more important in case of longer op-
eration time [15]. As a result, arrangement geometry of multiple BHE in
an application field and their spacing become important issues [16–18].
Different methods are available to design of a BHE field and the well-
known one is ASHRAE’s analytical method by Kavanaugh and Rafferty
[19]. The sizing equation for the total BHE length is simply based on
steady state heat transfer equation with artificially time-dependent
thermal resistance of ground. The ASHRAE method includes an im-
portant parameter called as Temperature Penalty (TP) which is ac-
counted for considering the thermal interactions between boreholes for
a given operating time [20,21]. Fossa and Rolando [22] have improved
the ASHRAE method and examined the improved method for extensive
set of 240 BHE configurations (including square, rectangular, in-line, L-
shaped, U and O-shaped arrangements). Extensive reviews about the
latest works on research difficulties in modeling and suitable BHE de-
sign have been given in Refs. [23,24]. Zhang et al. [25] have reviewed
the most typical numerical methods for ground dynamic thermal re-
sponse and thermal interaction of multiple BHEs.
By considering a constant heat flux extraction from boreholes,
Koohi-Fayegh et al. [26,27] have developed both analytical and nu-
merical models to examine thermal interaction between two boreholes.
They showed that thermal interaction between boreholes BHE is af-
fected by borehole spacing, heat flux from boreholes and operation
time. The long-term thermal performance and life-time of a BHE field
for different heating loads have been examined by Priarone et al. [28]
and by Lazzari et al. [29] in case of insignificant groundwater flow. The
same problem has been examined in case of groundwater flow by Fujii
et al. [16], Zanchini et al. [30] and Choi et al. [31] by considering the
minimum acceptable temperature of working fluid. The effects of BHE’s
arrangement on their long-term performance have been investigated for
a regular arrangement by Zanchini et al. [32], and for irregular one by
Teza et al. [33]. Li et al. [34] have studied the effects of load optimi-
zation and geometric arrangement on a BHE field. They applied dif-
ferent optimization strategies to examine the performance of a BHE
field. Their results indicate that thermal interaction in a BHE field is
164
Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170
b borehole
C critical
f fluid
gr ground
gt grout
L length
P penalty
PE polyethylene
SB single borehole
W width
∞ undisturbed, far field
tot total
Abbreviations
AR Aspect Ratio
BHE Borehole Heat Exchangers
GSHP Ground Source Heat Pump
HTR Heat Transfer Rate
obvious when the borehole spacing is limited and the seasonal building
load is unbalanced. Also, improving the middle BHE’s heat load is
useful in increasing the efficiency of the system. Yuan et al. have de-
veloped a combined numerical/analytical method to investigate
thermal interaction and its effect on thermal performance of a multiple
BHE [35]. They have considered a square 4x4 BHE field, and classified
BHEs into three types: side, center and corner boreholes based on their
locations. Then, the time dependencies of thermal performance loss and
ground temperature regeneration are investigated for numerous inter-
mittent operation ratios and borehole spacing. Their showed that
thermal performance decreases with the increment of continuous op-
eration and intermittent ratio while it increases for longer borehole
spacing. Bayer et al. have studied strategic optimization of BHE field for
periodic heating and cooling loads [36,37]. They numerically indicated
that eliminating the critical borehole one by one in a BHE field de-
creases the cost of investment while its effect on total performance is
restricted. This method may not be reasonable in case of limited BHE
field. Cui et al. have analyzed the borehole temperatures and their
averages in a large BHE field and they proposed the mean square error
coefficient to analyze the imbalance between BHE [38]. Their results
show that the thermal imbalance between the boreholes become more
important in case of high number of boreholes. They suggested taking a
representative borehole into account instead of the critical one during
the design process. Consequently, in comparison with the critical
borehole approach, the best representative borehole can meaningfully
increase the accuracy of the design, as a result, reducing the total
drilling length and the capital cost. Law et al. have numerically in-
vestigated the effects of borehole configuration and thermal interaction
with long-term ground temperature modeling of GSHP [39]. The results
show that a 2 × 8 configuration is more proper in comparison with a
4 × 4 one in terms of design based on thermal performance because
there is a larger perimeter in the geometry, which makes available more
area for heat to dissipate to surrounding ground.
Total HTR value of a BHE field is one of the most important quan-
tities needs to be predicted for an engineering design process of a large-
scale GSHP system. Therefore, determination of the optimal allocation
of BHE to maximize the HTR value for a given application field or
prediction of total HTR value for a given BHE allocation are important
tasks. In our earlier work, variation of thermal performance loss with
borehole spacing has computationally been investigated by considering
1, 3, 5 and 9 BHE [40]. In that study, we examined the variation of total
A. Gultekin et al.
Heat Transfer Rate (HTR) with borehole spacing in a multi-boreholes
field. We proposed the following simple empiric analytical expression
'
to predict total HTR value of a BHE field q̇¯tot :
N
' N−1
q¯tot
̇ = ∑ q¯ii̇ ' = q¯SB
'
̇ N ⎡1 −
N
exp(−B / δ )⎤
i=1 ⎣ ⎦
where N is number of boreholes, B is borehole spacing, δ is thermal
'
interaction coefficient and q̇¯SB is the operation time averaged unit HTR
value (HTR per unit depth) of a single and stand-alone borehole.
Thermal interaction coefficient indicates the strength of the interac-
tions. It is in units of inverse length and ranges from zero to infinity.
When the interactions are negligible, δ goes to zero and each borehole
works stand alone. In the opposite case, in which the interactions be-
come completely dominant, it goes to infinity and the whole boreholes
behave like a single borehole. In other words, the contributions from
N − 1 boreholes are lost because of extremely strong interactions. Eq.
(1) is based on the assumption that a relative differential change in
' ' ' ' '
performance loss, (dq¯loss ̇ / q¯loss
̇ where q¯loss
̇ = q¯SB
̇ N − q¯tot
̇ ) is linearly pro-
portional to the differential change in borehole spacing B
' '
̇ / q¯loss
(dq¯loss ̇ = −dB / δ ). Therefore 1/ δ is the proportionality constant. In-
' '
tegration from q¯̇ (N − 1) to q̇¯ corresponds to the integration from 0
SB loss
to B and gives Eq. (1). It has been shown that the proposed expression
has a very good agreement with the results of numerical simulations
[40]. In comparison with the temperature penalty method, the pro-
posed simple expression considers thermal interactions and provides a
quick and overall prediction about total HTR value of a BHE field as
long as thermal interaction coefficient is known. In general, the inter-
action coefficient depends on arrangement geometry and number of
boreholes, operation time and thermal properties of ground. Therefore
it is important to analyze these functional dependencies of δ to un-
derstand the methods of an energy efficient engineering design of a BHE
field by minimizing δ and so the thermal losses.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate how both aspect ratio of
arrangement geometry and number of boreholes effect the thermal in-
teraction coefficient and thermal performance of a multiple BHE field.
The considered borehole field consists of 64 BHE with rectangular ar-
rangement geometries having different aspect ratios (AR). Four dif-
ferent aspect ratios, 8 × 8 (AR = 1), 4 × 16 (AR = 1/4), 2 × 32
(AR = 1/16), 1 × 64 (AR = 1/64), are computationally studied. 1800 h
and 2400 h are chosen for two different non-stop operation times in a
heating period to represent the worst case scenarios in a season [41].
Variations of time averaged thermal performance with aspect ratio and
borehole spacing are examined. The effect of aspect ratio on thermal
interaction coefficient (δ ) is analyzed. A saturation behavior is observed
Ground
Grout
PE U-pipe Borehole
Fig. 1. A single U-tube borehole cross section.
Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170
for the dependency of δ on AR. It is seen that performance loss of a BHE
field becomes minimum when the arrangement geometry is strongly
anisometric. In other words, for a given number of boreholes, N, a
rectangular arrangement of 1 × N provides the maximum total HTR
value whereas the square arrangement of √N × √N causes the minimum
(1) HTR value. Furthermore, the variation of δ with number of boreholes
(up to 400) for two asymptotic arrangements (AR = 1 and AR = 1/16),
as worst and best cases of arrangements, are studied for non-stop op-
eration times of 1800 h and 2400 h. A saturation is observed in the
value of δ for the values of N greater than a critical value. Empiric
expressions are given for AR and N dependencies of δ . To understand
the operation time dependency of the relation between interaction
coefficient and N, operation times of 600 h and 1200 h are also con-
sidered.
2. Computational model
A usual borehole with a single U-tube is illustrated in Fig. 1. In
general, boreholes consist of three domains; polyethylene (PE) pipes,
grout, and ground. In the computational model, the properties of grout
and ground are assumed to be isotropic and homogeneous. Initial and
undisturbed ground temperatures are taken as 17 °C. It is supposed that
there is no groundwater movement in the vicinity of the boreholes.
Therefore, only the conductive heat transfer is considered. Also, the
average of inward and outward water temperatures at each axial co-
ordinates of U-tube is assumed to be constant along the vertical direc-
tion. Because the axial variation of average water temperature is very
small in comparison with temperature difference between the mean
water temperature and unperturbed ground temperature, which is the
driving force for heat exchange between a borehole and ground. In
other words, the axial variation of radial heat flux and also a possible
axial heat flux are too small in comparison with the radial heat flux
itself. Both distributed and fiber-optic thermal response tests have
shown that the change in borehole temperature along the vertical axis is
very small in case of shallower borehole applications [42,43]. There-
fore, for long-term BHE performance calculations, the temperature
variation along the vertical direction is neglected here. By this as-
sumption, 3D heat conduction problem is reduced into 2D one.
Sizes, material parameters and the working conditions used in this
model are summarized in Table 1. These parameters are taken from the
experimental study of Ref. [5].
In most of the practical cases, GSHP systems work intermittently
and heat-exchange is not a continuous process. This allows ground to
thermally regenerate itself during zero heat-exchange periods. On the
other hand, when the real heating and cooling loads are higher than
Ground
PE Pipe
Grout
165
A. Gultekin et al. Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170

Table 1 By using the following fundamental equation for each BHE, time
Geometrical parameters, material properties and working conditions [5]. dependent 2D heat conduction problem in multi-BHE field is numeri-
Symbol Value Quantity cally solved by considering conductive heat transfer in PE pipes, grout,
and ground for all BHE in COMSOL environment [44],
Geometrical data of U-tube
∂T
ri 13.3 Internal radius of PE tube [mm] ρcp = λ∇2 T
re 16 External radius of PE tube [mm] ∂t (2)
rb 88 Radius of borehole [mm]
where λ , ρ and cp are thermal conductivity, mass density and specific
Geometrical data of BHE field heat capacity of the domains respectively. Once the time-dependent
B 1, 2…10 Distance between boreholes [m]
lW 30 + K * B/2 Domain width [m]
temperature field is obtained from Eq. (2), time-dependent unit HTR
lL 30 + M * B/2 Domain length [m] value of each BHE s calculated by
Thermal properties of PE ∂T
λPE 0.38 Thermal conductivity [W m−1 K−1] q′̇ = −2πrb λ greff
∂r r = rb (3)
cPE 1900 Specific heat capacity [J kg−1 K−1]
ρPE 958 Density [kg m−3] where rb is borehole radius and λ greff
is the effective thermal conductivity
Thermal properties of grout of ground. Different from PE pipes and grout, which are the composi-
λgt 0.85 Thermal conductivity [W m−1 K−1] tion of different homogenous materials, ground is a heterogeneous
cgt 900 Specific heat capacity [J kg−1 K−1]
mixture of different materials as well as possibly large or small cavities.
ρgt 1500 Density [kg m−3]
Thus, the effective quantities should be considered to represent the
Thermal properties of ground properties of this heterogeneous mixture.
λgr,eff. 3.1 Thermal conductivity [W m−1 K−1]
cgr 800 Specific heat capacity [J kg−1 K−1]
By considering K × M number of BHE in a rectangular arrangement,
ρgr 2130 Density [kg m−3] time-dependent unit HTR values of each BHE is computationally cal-
culated for a given spacing and aspect ratio, K/M. K and M represent
Working conditions
T̄f 2 Average fluid temperature [°C] the numbers of boreholes in each direction of the rectangular BHE field.
T∞ 17 Undisturbed ground temperature [°C] The computational model considers total performance losses due to
thermal interactions of BHE since the whole BHE are considered si-
multaneously during the time-dependent heat transfer calculations.
their design values, GSHP systems necessarily start to work con- Time-dependent unit HTR value of a single BHE is also calculated for
tinuously. This happens when either the heating/cooling loads are the same conditions without existence of other BHE. For given values of
under estimated during the design process to minimize the initial in- operation time and aspect ratio, the time averaged total unit HTR va-
vestment or weather conditions move beyond the seasonal averages. lues are calculated for different values of spacing. Eq. (1) is then fitted
Therefore the worst case scenario is the non-stop operation of GHE. to this data to obtain thermal interaction coefficient for that config-
Here mainly two different non-stop operation scenarios of 1800 h and uration (aspect ratio) and operation time. The same calculations are
2400 h are considered. Heating mode is chosen to study. During the repeated for different values of aspect ratio and operation time as well
examination of the relation between number of BHE and thermal in- as number of BHE.
teraction coefficient, 600 h and 1200 h operation times are also con- In order to reduce the simulation work and calculation time, sym-
sidered to understand the effect of operation time on this relation. metric nature of the problem is considered and symmetry boundary
Constant mean fluid temperature (T̄f = 2 °C) for the inner surface of PE conditions are used. As shown in Fig. 2, for 8 × 8, 4 × 16, 2 × 32
pipes and constant undisturbed ground temperature (T∞ = 1 °C) for far configurations, a quarter of the borehole field is chosen for the model.
field are applied as boundary conditions. The radial size of the domain Symmetry boundary conditions are applied on both bottom and left
for ground is chosen as large enough in each simulation to keep the sides while it is applied only on left side for 1 × 64 configuration.
results independent from the domain size. The grid independency and element quality are important issues in
computational modelling. A mesh structure for 8 × 8 borehole

Undisturbed, T∞
Undisturbed, T∞
Symmetry

Array : 1 x 64 AR : 1 / 64
Axes

Undisturbed, T∞

Undisturbed, T∞
Undisturbed,
Symmetry

Array : 2 x 32 AR : 1 / 16
T∞
Axes

Undisturbed, T∞
Symmetry Axes
Array : 8 x 8
Undisturbed, T∞

AR : 1
Symmetry Axes

Undisturbed, T∞
Undisturbed,
Symmetry

Array : 4 x 16 AR : 1 / 4
Axes

T∞

Symmetry Axes Symmetry Axes

Fig. 2. The boundary conditions for different arrangements of 64 BHE with different aspect ratios.

166
A. Gultekin et al. Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170

arrangement is seen in Fig. 3 for 6 m borehole spacing as an example. Table 2

To keep the number of total mesh elements in a reasonable level, an A comparison of unit HTR values (q'̇ ) calculated for 8x8 BHE arrangement with
adaptive mesh option is used. In other words, the fields around the 6 m borehole spacing by using different number of mesh elements for different
boreholes are finely meshed while the far fields are coarsely meshed. time steps.
Since there was no memory problem in computational infra structure, 1.8 × 104 mesh 3.4 × 104 mesh 4.8 × 104 mesh
triangular mesh elements are preferred because of their better element elements elements elements
quality for convergence and precision. Time [h] q'̇ [W/m] q'̇ [W/m] q'̇ [W/m]
Since thermal interactions and losses reach their maximum for the
600 42.05 42.16 42.15
arrangement of 8 × 8 BHE, it is chosen as an example for the grid in- 1200 38.03 38.13 38.11
dependence test here. For 6 m borehole spacing, a comparison of unit 1800 34.75 34.82 34.82
HTR values (q'̇) calculated by using different number of mesh elements 2400 31.84 31.90 31.91
is given in Table 2 for different time steps. It is seen that 34,000 mesh
elements are quite enough to get sufficiently accurate and grid in-
dependent results. The number of optimal mesh elements changes in 3.1. Effect of BHE arrangement’s aspect ratio on thermal interaction
between 2500 and 130000 for different spacing and arrangements of coefficient
BHE. The model is experimentally validated by considering the time
variation of unit HTR value of a single BHE. It is seen that mean ab- Since δ represents the thermal interactions between boreholes, it
solute percentage error value of the model predictions is less than 1%. depends on AR of the BHE arrangement in the field. The computational
The detailed discussion on the model validation has been given in our results for the variation of δ with aspect ratio are shown in Fig. 6 for
previous work [40]. different operation times. It is seen that thermal interaction coefficient
increases with increasing aspect ratio. The arrangement of N × N
causes maximum thermal interaction while the minimum interaction
3. Results and discussion occurs for 1 × N. For the relation between AR and δ , the following
empiric expression, which is represented by the solid curves in Fig. 6, is
For the different arrangements (aspect ratios) of 64 boreholes, proposed
temperature distributions of the field after 2400 h non-stop operation
AR − 1
are shown in Fig. 4 for 3 m borehole spacing. The figures show that δ (AR) = δ0 + [δ1 − δ0] exp ⎛CAR ⎞
⎝ AR ⎠ (4)
thermal interactions and temperature changes around BHE decrease
when anisometry of the arrangement increases. It is seen that the lowest where δ0 and δ1 are the values of δ when AR → 0 and AR → 1 respec-
thermal interaction occurs for a rectangular arrangement of 1x64 while tively and CAR is a coefficient which does not depend on AR and op-
the highest one occurs for the square one of 8x8. eration time but only on N. CAR can be determined either by fitting the
The operation time averaged unit HTR value of a single borehole is computational results to Eq. (4) or, in a more simple way, just by cal-
41.8 W/m for 2400 h non-stop operation when the average fluid tem- culating the value of δ for AR = 1/2 (δ1/2 ) in the environment of
perature is 2 °C in case of thermal properties and working conditions computational model and then using the following equality
given in Table 1. For different aspect ratios of arrangement geometry,
total unit HTR values versus borehole spacing are shown in Fig. 5. The CAR = ln[(δ1 − δ0)/(δ1/2 − δ0)] (5)
solid lines symbolize the results of Eq. (1) while the marks symbolize
One of the important factors which affect the values of thermal
the computational results. It is clear that analytical and computational
interaction coefficient is the operation time. For AR = 1, for example, δ
results are in good agreement and total unit HTR takes the smallest
is 2.30 m and 2.65 m for 1800 h and 2400 h non-stop operations re-
values when AR equals to unity while the values rise for smaller AR.
spectively in Fig. 6. On the other hand, the profiles of δ curves are
Total unit HTR value increase when borehole spacing increases because
nearly the same except their magnitudes. By doing the similar calcu-
of weaker thermal interactions.
lations also for 600 h and 1200 h, it is seen that δ increases with the
square root of operation time. In other words, the curve for 2400 h can
be obtained from the curve for 1800 h just by multiplying it with
2400/1800 ≈ 1.155 . It should be noted that the value of CAR does not

Fig. 3. Mesh structure of 8 × 8 BHE arrangement for 6 m borehole spacing.

167
A. Gultekin et al.
Fig. 4. Temperature distributions around the boreholes for different aspect ratios after 2400 h non-stop operation for 3 m borehole spacing.
Fig. 5. For 2400 h non-stop operation time, total unit HTR value (W/m) versus
borehole spacing.
Fig. 6. Dependency of thermal interaction coefficient on aspect ratio for non-
stop operation times of 1800 h and 2400 h. Symbols represent the computa-
tional results while the solid curves represents Eq. (4). MAPE values represent
the mean absolute percentage error of Eq. (4).
168
Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170
depend on operation time since the square root of operational times
ratio multiply all δ values in Eq. (5).
The minimum and maximum values of δ are obtained when AR goes
to zero and unity respectively. Therefore the relative change in δ can be
expressed as
δ (AR) − δ0
R δ (AR) =
δ1 − δ0 (6)
For a given relative change value R δ , the value of AR is simply
obtained from Eq. (4) as
1
AR = ln R δ
1− CAR (7)
By using the value of CAR in Fig. 6, it is possible to say that 90% of
the total change in δ is completed when AR reaches to 1/3. In other
words, the effect of AR on δ is almost negligible for AR > 1/3 under
the conditions of Fig. 6. The similar analyses can be made for different
conditions by using Eqs. (4)–(7). The functional form in Eq. (4) suc-
cessfully predicts the AR dependency of δ .
Fig. 7 shows the dependency of dimensionless total HTR value,
q¯'̇ tot / Nq¯'̇ SB , on AR, for different borehole spacing. It is seen that AR de-
pendency becomes more significant in case of shorter BHE spacing. In
other words, the smaller aspect ratio gives much better performance if
BHE spacing is small. On the other hand, in case of a large application
field, the longer spacing opportunity in the field makes the aspect ratio
dependency negligible. Fig. 7 also shows that thermal interaction in-
creases with increasing aspect ratio and causes lower total unit HTR
values. This behavior becomes more evident for shorter borehole spa-
cing.
3.2. Effect of number of boreholes on thermal interaction coefficient
In case of isometric arrangement geometry (AR = 1), performance
loss of a BHE field reaches to its maximum value due to the highest
value of thermal interaction coefficient. For that case (AR = 1),
A. Gultekin et al.
Fig. 7. Variation of dimensionless total HTR value with aspect ratio for dif-
ferent borehole spacing.
variations of thermal interaction coefficient with number of BHE are
given in Fig. 8 for non-stop operation times of 600 h, 1200 h, 1800 h
and 2400 h. An asymptotic behavior of δ appears for high values of N
because thermal interaction between distant BHE become weaker. De-
pendency of δ on number of BHE for a given operation time can be
approximated by the following proposed empiric expression
D
δ (N ) = CN exp ⎛− ⎞ boreholes is much less than Nc, the dependency of δ on number of
⎝ N − 1⎠ (8)
where CN and D are the coefficients which do not depend on N but
depend on operation time, aspect ratio and thermal properties of
ground. While D represents the strength of N dependency of δ , CN re-
presents the value of δ in case of infinite number of BHE for which the
exponential function goes to unity.
In Fig. 8, it is seen that there is a saturation of δ for larger numbers
of BHE and this saturation region shifts to the higher N values for longer
operation times. This is an expected behavior since the more number of
BHE considerably interacts with each other when the operation time
becomes longer and longer. Therefore D values increases with in-
creasing operation time. Similarly, the saturation values of δ (CN va-
lues) increases with increasing operation time. The functional de-
pendency of CN on operation time is a square root function of time as
mentioned in the previous section. In Fig. 8, this functional dependency
is clearly seen by comparing the ratio of different CN values and the
square root of their corresponding operation times ratio,
CN (t2)/ CN (t1) ≃ t2/ t1 .
The minimum and maximum values of δ are obtained when N goes
to unity and infinity respectively. Therefore a relative change in δ can
be expressed as
δ (N ) − δ (N = 1) D
Rδ = = exp ⎛− ⎞
δ (N → ∞) − δ (N = 1) ⎝ N − 1⎠ (9)
The critical number of BHE for a given value of saturation (relative
change in δ , R δ ) can easily be obtained from Eq. (9) as
D
NC = 1 −
ln(R δ ) (10)
In case of 1800 h operation time, Nc is approximately 56 and 140 for
95% and 98% saturation values respectively. As long as the number of
BHE is greater than Nc , thermal interaction coefficient can be ap-
proximated by δ ≃ CN and its dependency on N is negligible. On the
other hand, in case of N ≪ Nc , a strong dependence of δ on N is ob-
served. For long term operations, Nc seems to be nearly independent
from operation time since it is 56 and 141 in case of 2400 h for the same
saturation values respectively given for 1800 h. For short term opera-
tions, however, operation time dependency of Nc becomes considerable.
For example, the above values of Nc become 35 and 95 respectively for
600 h. This situation can also be easily seen from the values of D
169
Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170
coefficient.
The similar results are given for AR = 1/16 in Fig. 9. The ar-
rangement of small AR causes lower thermal interactions and so lower
C values. On the other hand, D values increases for small AR and
considerable dependency of thermal interaction coefficient on number
BHE is observed until very high number of BHE. When the de-
pendencies of C and D values on thermal properties of ground are
considered, it is simply possible to say that both coefficients increase
with increasing thermal diffusion coefficient of ground.
4. Conclusion
If the functional dependencies of thermal interaction coefficient (δ )
on aspect ratio, number of boreholes and operation time are known, Eq.
(1), proposed in Ref. [40], provides a quick, reliable and true predic-
tions for total thermal performance of a BHE field. The functional de-
pendencies of δ are analyzed here. The results show that aspect ratio
dependency of δ becomes important for small AR values while it is
negligible in case of large aspect ratios (approximately greater than 1/
3). Similar behavior is observed for the number of borehole dependency
of δ .
• It is seen that when the number of boreholes is greater than a critical
value Nc, the variation of number of boreholes does not cause a
considerable change in δ . In the opposite case, when the number of
boreholes becomes very important.
• Variations of total unit HTR value with aspect ratio of arrangement
geometry and spacing are also examined. The analysis showed that
the values of δ and performance losses decrease with the decrease of
the aspect ratio.
• It is also seen that the aspect ratio dependency of total unit HTR
value become more evident in case of shorter BHE spacing because
of strong thermal interaction.
• The values of δ increases with square root of operation time.
• Nc takes the higher values for lower AR and longer operation times.
• In case of BHE are intermittently in operation, thermal interaction
coefficient takes the values lower than those obtained here for
continuous operation.
• Therefore Eq. (1) together with Eqs. (4)–(10) can guide thermal
engineers to find the optimal arrangement of boreholes in a given
field. The methodology used here can be repeated by engineers
during a real application once the thermal properties of ground is
determined by a thermal response test in the field.
• The expressions and the results here are obtained for constant fluid
Fig. 8. Thermal interaction coefficient versus number of boreholes when
AR = 1 for non-stop operation times of 600 h, 1200 h, 1800 h and 2400 h. The
symbols represent computationally calculated values while the solid curves
represent the fitted exponential expressions, Eq. (8), for these data. MAPE va-
lues represent the mean absolute percentage error of Eq. (8).
A. Gultekin et al.
Fig. 9. Thermal interaction coefficient versus number of boreholes when
AR = 1/16 for non-stop operation times of 600 h, 1200 h, 1800 h and 2400 h.
The symbols represent computationally calculated values while the solid curves
represent the fitted exponential expressions, Eq. (8), for these data. MAPE va-
lues represent the mean absolute percentage error of Eq. (8).
temperature operations. In case of constant heat flux operations,
where the fluid temperature is not constant, the similar behaviors
are expected since the nature of thermal interactions remains the
same although the operation time dependencies of CAR, CN and D
coefficients may change.
The proposed formulas and the results can be used to make an en-
ergy efficient and optimal design of a BHE field by maximizing the total
performance while minimizing the field allocation and thermal losses.
Investigation of the functional relations between the thermal properties
of ground and the coefficients of CAR, CN and D can be a possible and
further extension of the work.
References
[1] Ikeda S, Choi W, Ooka R. Optimization method for multiple heat source operation
including ground source heat pump considering dynamic variation in ground
temperature. Appl Energy 2017;193:466–78.
[2] Mensah K, Jang YS, Choi JM. Assessment of design strategies in a ground source
heat pump system. Energy Build 2017;138:301–8.
[3] Noorollahi Y, Saeidi R, Mohammadi M, Amiri A, Hosseinzadeh M. The effects of
ground heat exchanger parameters changes on geothermal heat pump performance
– a review. Appl Therm Eng 2018;129:1645–58.
[4] Banks D. An introduction to thermogeology: ground source heating and cooling.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2008.
[5] Aydin M, Sisman A. Experimental and computational investigation of multi U-tube
boreholes. Appl Energy 2015;145:163–71.
[6] Esen H, Inalli M, Esen Y. Temperature distributions in boreholes of a vertical
ground-coupled heat pump system. Renew Energy 2009;34:2672–9.
[7] Zeng H, Diao N, Fang Z. Heat transfer analysis of boreholes in vertical ground heat
exchangers. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2003;46:4467–81.
[8] Li M, Lai ACK. Review of analytical models for heat transfer by vertical ground heat
exchangers (GHEs): a perspective of time and space scales. Appl Energy
2015;151:178–91.
[9] Makasis N, Narsilio GA, Bidarmaghz A, Johnston IW. Ground-source heat pump
systems: the effect of variable pipe separation in ground heat exchangers. Comput
Geotech 2018;100:97–109.
[10] Hua P, Yu Z, Zhu N, Lei F, Yuan X. Performance study of a ground heat exchanger
based on the multipole theory heat transfer model. Energy Build 2013;65:231–41.
[11] Cai Y, Xu H, Chen S. Testing and analysis of the influence factors for the ground
thermal parameters. Appl Therm Eng 2016;107:662–71.
[12] Chen S, Mao J, Hou P, Li C. Numerical investigation of a thermal baffle design for
single ground heat exchanger. Appl Therm Eng 2016;103:391–8.
[13] Qian H, Wang Y. Modeling the interactions between the performance of ground
source heat pumps and soil temperature variations. Energy Sustain Dev
2014;23:115–21.
[14] Marcotte D, Pasquier P, Sheriff F, Bernier M. The importance of axial effects for
170
Applied Energy 237 (2019) 163–170
borehole design of geothermal heat-pump systems. Renew Energy 2010;35:763–70.
[15] Loveridge F, Powrie W. G-Functions for multiple interacting pile heat exchangers.
Energy 2014;64:747–57.
[16] Fujii H, Itoi R, Fujii J, Uchida Y. Optimizing the design of large-scale ground-cou-
pled heat pump systems using groundwater and heat transport modelling.
Geothermics 2005;34:347–64.
[17] Kurevija T, Vulin D, Krapec V. Effect of borehole array geometry and thermal in-
terferences on geothermal heat pump system. Energy Convers Manage
2012;60:134–42.
[18] Staitia M, Angelotti A. Design of borehole heat exchangers for ground source heat
pumps: a comparison between two methods. Energy Proc 2015;78:1147–52.
[19] Kavanaugh SP, Rafferty K. Ground source heat pumps. Design of geothermal sys-
tems for commercial and institutional buildings. USA: ASHRAE; 1997.
[20] Philippe M, Bernier MA, Marchio D. Sizing calculation spreadsheet for vertical
geothermal borefields. ASHRAE J 2010:20–8.
[21] Capozza A, De Carli M, Zarrella A. Design of borehole heat exchangers for ground-
source heat pumps—a literature review, methodology comparison and analysis on
the penalty temperature. Energy Build 2012;55:369–79.
[22] Fossa M, Rolando D. Improving the Ashrae method for vertical geothermal borefield
design. Energy Build 2015;93:315–23.
[23] Atam E, Helsen L. Ground-coupled heat pumps: Part 1–Literature review and re-
search challenges in modeling and optimal control. Renew Sust Energy Rev
2016;54:1653–67.
[24] Atam E, Helsen L. Ground-coupled heat pumps: Part2—Literature review and re-
search challenges in optimal design. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;54:1668–84.
[25] Zhang C, Wang Y, Liu Y, Kong X, Wang Q. Computational methods for ground
thermal response of multiple borehole heat exchangers: a review. Renew Energy
2018;127:461–73.
[26] Koohi-Fayegh S, Rosen MA. Examination of thermal interaction of multiple vertical
ground heat exchangers. Appl Energy 2012;97:962–9.
[27] Koohi-Fayegh S, Rosen MA. An analytical approach to evaluating the effect of
thermal interaction of geothermal heat exchangers on ground heat pump efficiency.
Energy Convers Manage 2014;78:184–92.
[28] Priarone A, Lazzari S, Zanchini E. Numerical evaluation of long-term performance
of borehole heat exchanger fields. Proceeding of the COMSOL conference, Milano,
Italy. 2009.
[29] Lazzari S, Priarone A, Zanchini E. Long-term performance of BHE (borehole heat
exchanger) fields with negligible groundwater movement. Energy
2010;35:4966–74.
[30] Zanchini E, Lazzari S, Priarone A. Long-term performance of large borehole heat
exchanger fields with unbalanced seasonal loads and groundwater flow. Energy
2012;38:66–77.
[31] Choi JC, Park J, Lee SR. Numerical evaluation of the effects of groundwater flow on
borehole heat exchanger arrays. Renew Energy 2013;52:230–40.
[32] Zanchini E, Lazzari S. Temperature distribution in a field of long Borehole Heat
Exchangers (BHEs) subjected to a monthly averaged heat flux. Energy
2013;59:570–80.
[33] Teza G, Galgaro A, De Carli M. Long-term performance of an irregular shaped
borehole heat exchanger system: analysis of real pattern and regular grid approx-
imation. Geothermics 2012;43:45–56.
[34] Li C, Mao J, Zhang H, Li Y, Xing Z, Zhu G. Effects of load optimization and geo-
metric arrangement on the thermal performance of borehole heat exchanger fields.
Sustain Cities Soc 2017;35:25–35.
[35] Yuan Y, Cao X, Wang J, Sun L. Thermal interaction of multiple ground heat ex-
changers under different intermittent ratio and separation distance. Appl Therm
Eng 2016;108:277–86.
[36] Bayer P, Beck M, de Paly M. Automatic Optimization of multiple borehole heat
exchanger fields. Proceedings world geothermal congress 2015, Melbourne,
Australia, 19–25 April 2015. 2015.
[37] Bayer P, de Paly M, Beck M. Strategic optimization of borehole heat exchanger field
for seasonal geothermal heating and cooling. Appl Energy 2014;136:445–53.
[38] Cui P, Lin Y, Fang Z, Sun L. Study on the representative borehole in ground heat
exchanger design. Procedia Eng 2016;146:579–85.
[39] Law YLE, Dworkin SB. Characterization of the effects of borehole configuration and
interference with long-term ground temperature modelling of ground source heat
pumps. Appl Energy 2016;179:1032–47.
[40] Gultekin A, Aydin M, Sisman A. Thermal performance analysis of multiple borehole
heat exchangers. Energy Convers Manage 2016;122:544–51.
[41] VDI-Richtlinie 4640. Thermal use of the underground, Blatt 2. Düsseldorf: Verain
Deutscher Ingenieure, VDI-Verlag; 2001.
[42] McDaniela A, Tinjumb J, Hartc DJ, Lind YF, Stumpfd A, Thomas L. Distributed
thermal response test to analyze thermal properties in heterogeneous lithology.
Geothermics 2018;76:116–24.
[43] Herrera C, Nellis G, Reindl D, Klein S, Tinjum JM, McDaniel A. Use of a fiber optic
distributed temperature sensing system for thermal response testing of ground-
coupled heat exchangers. Geothermics 2018;71:331–8.
[44] COMSOL AB. COMSOL version 4.2. Stockholm, Sweden: COMSOL AB; 2013.