Current symptom detection methods for energy diagnosis in heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems are not standardised and not consistent with HVAC process and instrumentation diagrams (P&IDs) as used by engineers to design and operate these systems, leading to a very limited application of energy performance diagnosis systems in practice. This paper proposes detection methods to overcome these issues, based on the 4S3F (four types of symptom and three types of faults) framework. A set of generic symptoms divided into three categories (balance, energy performance and operational state symptoms) is discussed and related performance indicators are developed, using efficiencies, seasonal performance factors, capacities, and control and design-based operational indicators. The symptom detection method was applied successfully to the HVAC system of the building of The Hague University of Applied Sciences. Detection results on an annual, monthly and daily basis are discussed and compared. Link to the formail publication via its DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103344
In practice, faults in building installations are seldom noticed because automated systems to diagnose such faults are not common use, despite many proposed methods: they are cumbersome to apply and not matching the way of thinking of HVAC engineers. Additionally, fault diagnosis and energy performance diagnosis are seldom combined, while energy wastage is mostly a consequence of component, sensors or control faults. In this paper new advances on the 4S3F diagnose framework for automated diagnostic of energy waste in HVAC systems are presented. The architecture of HVAC systems can be derived from a process and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) usually set up by HVAC designers. The paper demonstrates how all possible faults and symptoms can be extracted on a very structured way from the P&ID, and classified in 4 types of symptoms (deviations from balance equations, operational states, energy performances or additional information) and 3 types of faults (component, control and model faults). Symptoms and faults are related to each other through Diagnostic Bayesian Networks (DBNs) which work as an expert system. During operation of the HVAC system the data from the BMS is converted to symptoms, which are fed to the DBN. The DBN analyses the symptoms and determines the probability of faults. Generic indicators are proposed for the 4 types of symptoms. Standard DBN models for common components, controls and models are developed and it is demonstrated how to combine them in order to represent the complete HVAC system. Both the symptom and the fault identification parts are tested on historical BMS data of an ATES system including heat pump, boiler, solar panels, and hydronic systems. The energy savings resulting from fault corrections are estimated and amount 25%. Finally, the 4S3F method is extended to hard and soft sensor faults. Sensors are the core of any FDD system and any control system. Automated diagnostic of sensor faults is therefore essential. By considering hard sensors as components and soft sensors as models, they can be integrated into the 4S3F method.
Current methods for energy diagnosis in heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems are not consistent with process and instrumentation diagrams (P&IDs) as used by engineers to design and operate these systems, leading to very limited application of energy performance diagnosis in practice. In a previous paper, a generic reference architecture – hereafter referred to as the 4S3F (four symptoms and three faults) framework – was developed. Because it is closely related to the way HVAC experts diagnose problems in HVAC installations, 4S3F largely overcomes the problem of limited application. The present article addresses the fault diagnosis process using automated fault identification (AFI) based on symptoms detected with a diagnostic Bayesian network (DBN). It demonstrates that possible faults can be extracted from P&IDs at different levels and that P&IDs form the basis for setting up effective DBNs. The process was applied to real sensor data for a whole year. In a case study for a thermal energy plant, control faults were successfully isolated using balance, energy performance and operational state symptoms. Correction of the isolated faults led to annual primary energy savings of 25%. An analysis showed that the values of set probabilities in the DBN model are not outcome-sensitive. Link to the formal publication via its DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110289
