Question-and-Answer Resource for the Building Energy Modeling Community
 | 1 | initial version |
Good question!
You are correct that current absorption chillers (Chiller:Absorption and Chiller:Absorption:Indirect) in EnergyPlus are steam driven. As the process is so different between the absorption and adsorption chillers, stretching the current E+ absorption chiller models to simulate adsorption chillers should be a last solution which needs verification of the simulated results against the measured data. We will add this modeling feature to the E+ wish list. If you have data or ideas to model adsorption chillers, please let us know.
Thanks,
| | 2 | No.2 Revision |
Good question!
You are correct that This is a correction to my previous post.
The current absorption chillers (Chiller:Absorption and Chiller:Absorption:Indirect) in EnergyPlus are does support both steam driven. As and hot-water, where you can set the process is so different between option for the absorption and field "The Generator Heat Source Type". The "steam" word in some field names causes some confusion.
So you may want to use the performance curves for hot-water adsorption chillers, stretching the current E+ absorption chiller models to simulate adsorption chillers should be a last solution which needs verification of its performance, but it is recommended to verify the simulated results against the measured data. We will add this modeling feature to the E+ wish list. If you have data or ideas to model adsorption chillers, please let us know.
Thanks,
