Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
FOUNDATIONS
ABSTRACT
Incorporation of heat exchangers into pile foundations is a relatively novel sustainable technology for the intermittent
storage of energy in soils with a view of utilising it for space heating and cooling of buildings by means of suitable
systems integrated into buildings. This innovative technology can provide not only substantial long-term cost savings in
relation to conventional energy systems but also can make an important contribution to environmental protection by
reducing fossil energy use and minimising the carbon footprint of built structures. This paper reports on an ongoing
project on heat exchanger pile foundations taking place at Monash University. It discusses the basic concept of an
energy pile and governing design parameters such as thermo-mechanical loading and soil thermal properties and
presents the field test set up currently running.
Keywords: environmental geotechnics, foundation design, instrumentation
1 INTRODUCTION
The adverse effects of greenhouse gas emissions and rapidly depleting natural energy resources has prompted
governments across the world to identify ways of reducing carbon footprints and increasing the utilisation of
alternative, renewable energy sources. To facilitate this approach, legislations, internationally recognised and locally
introduced, are being passed through governments to ensure that carbon reductions can be achieved in the near future.
Examples of such procedures are the Kyoto protocol, the Climate Change Act 2008 in the UK (Defra, 2008) and
numerous Australian policies such as the Target 2020, the green paper and the white paper. Australian legislations
include alternative energy sources as a key tool in reducing carbon emissions and have specific targets such as the
Mandatory Renewable Energy Target (MRET) (Australian Government, 2008a, Australian Government, 2008b). With
new technologies in the field of alternative energy sources being continually developed and the recognition of their
important contribution earned by government organizations and the general public, implementation has recently become
more feasible. It is not surprising that the demand for renewable forms of energy such as geothermal energy is steadily
increasing and is receiving at the same time a considerable amount of interest.
Traditional geothermal energy systems require interaction with kilometre-deep strata of rock, where thermal energy is
much greater and can produce hot fluids to drive turbines for electricity (Preene and Powrie, 2009). Its use is however
weighed down by cost and practicality, a technology that is more suited for larger scale applications. More recently,
encouraging developments are being achieved in the applications of direct use geothermal via ground-source heat pump
systems. These systems show great potential, compared to conventional energy systems, in terms of long-term
sustainability, access, flexibility and economics. Direct use geothermal energy is based on the principle that the subsoil
can be employed as a thermal energy source by using its natural potential and thermal storage capabilities. The benefits
of this environmentally sustainable technology makes it an attractive alternative to conventional heating/cooling
systems, which require larger amounts of input energy and thus lead to increased greenhouse gas production.
Traditionally these systems relied on the use of deep borehole heat exchangers (referred to as closed loop systems),
~100 m or lower, in which a heat transfer fluid is recirculated between the built structure and the boreholes via a heat
pump (Figure 1a) or a horizontal closed loop run in trenches averaging 1.5 m to 2 m deep (Figure 1b). The length and
the width of the trenches are dependent on the size of area requiring heating or cooling. Examples of the application of
the borehole heat exchanger systems include, among many others, The Geoscience Australia building in Canberra
where 352 boreholes were drilled to 104 m depth, the Wangaratta High School in Wangaratta, Vic. (42 boreholes, 93 m
deep), Northland Secondary School in Preston, Vic. (40 boreholes, 65 m deep), and Garden East Apartment in Adelaide
(boreholes 100 m deep).
Figure 1a. Vertical borehole heat exchanger Figure 1b. Horizontal borehole heat
system exchanger systems
Another variation of the closed ground loop is the closed water loop where a water body (pond, etc.) can be used as a
collector by installing coils of pipe into the water. The coils of pipe are attached to a frame and sunk to the bottom of
the water body. Fluid circulates underwater in a closed system, just as it does through ground loops. The amount of pipe
is dependent on the size of area requiring heating or cooling. Such a system has been installed at the Wooloomollo
Wharves, Sydney Harbour (Figure 2a, 2b) where 88 coils of HDPE pipe, each 100 m long, have been used for space
heating and cooling of a block of 20 residences relying on seawater as a heat source. A similar system has also been
installed in the Docklands precinct in Melbourne, for space heating and cooling of commercial and residential
buildings.
Figure 2a: Closed water loop cage being installed at Wooloomollo wharves.
A subset of the direct use geothermal via ground-source heat pump systems and the focus of this paper is the use of
buried geotechnical structures such as pile foundations to achieve energy efficient space heating and cooling (i.e. heat
exchanger piles) for built structures of various sizes while satisfying load bearing requirements of the underlying
foundation. This paper gives a review of the concept of heat exchanger piles, their applications in various parts of the
world and presents the ongoing field test study carried out at Monash University.
2 BACKGROUND
The IPCC report (2007) indicated that in 2004, emissions from the building sector worldwide including through
electricity use were about 8.6 GtCO2, representing almost a quarter of the global total carbon dioxide emissions. The
situation is not much different in Australia where the building sector was found to be a major contributor to GHG
emissions. It accounted for nearly 25% of national GHG emissions, according to the CIE report (CIE, 2007).
Commercial buildings alone are responsible for approximately 10% of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions and those
emissions have grown by 87% between 1990 and 2006 (climatechange.gov.au). The CIE report also indicated that the
building sectors contribution to GHG emissions was mainly driven by its use of electricity. Electricity accounted for
about 51% of residential building sector energy demand and the commercial building sector accounted for almost 25%
of total electricity consumption in 2004-2005. The study by CIE also indicated that heating, ventilation and air
conditioning (HVAC) was the major contributor to GHG emissions through its larger use of electricity confirming the
observations made by both the Australian Greenhouse Office (1999) and by consultants GWA (2005, 2008).
The HVAC contribution to GHG emissions is bound to increase in the light of the Garnaut climate change review
which indicated that the main impact of climate change with implications for Australian buildings will be increased
energy consumption due to higher temperature (Garnaut, 2008). The Garnaut review also highlighted the importance of
new technologies in lowering the cost of adapting to climate impacts. One of the areas that the Garnaut Review
identified as an area that will play a direct and significant role in Australias adaptation challenge is the built
environment in the form of climate appropriate building design and more efficient HVAC systems. Ground source heat
pump (GSHP) applications to heating and cooling of buildings have been used successfully for the past two decades
providing both lower energy usage and corresponding carbon emissions than conventional systems (Brettman and
Amis, 2011). However, there has been also a significant increase in the use of building elements such as piles already
required for structural reasons to absorb and transfer thermal energy from and to the ground to improve the thermal
efficiency of buildings (Brandl, 2006, DeMoel et al., 2010)
HDPE
pipes
Table 1- Number of energy piles built per year in UK (from Knelwolff et al., 2011).
Year 2005 2006 2007 2008
Energy piles per year 150 440 1495 1596
The implementation of the thermo active pile technology in the USA is very limited by comparison to Europe.
Traditionally, reliance was on the use of ground source heat pumps (GSHPs) to reduce building energy consumption for
heating and cooling (McCartney et al., 2010). The only well documented case involving energy pile foundations is
reported by Henderson et al. (1999) for 149 room hotel located in New York, USA. It included 198 piles, 26 m deep,
combined with 120 borehole heat exchangers, 42 m deep, located in the car park of the hotel. Henderson et al. (1999)
reported that the piles had a better heat transfer performance than the borehole heat exchangers due to the shielding
effect of the building. A decade later, the USA is experiencing a renewed interest in the use of energy piles as they
have been identified as being a more cost effective solution compared to the use of GSPHs systems (McCartney et al.,
2010).
Countries such as China, Ireland and Japan are also experiencing an increased interest in the use of thermo-active piles
(Hamada et al., 2007, Gao et al., 2008, Hemmingway and Long, 2011, Jalaluddin et al., 2011)
5.1 MOTIVATION
The geotechnical design of conventional piles is well established and standardised to a certain extent. However using
piles as heat exchangers introduces a new set of parameters, which need to be taken into account in the geotechnical
design of energy piles. Such design requires consideration of temperature-induced changes to soil stiffness and
settlements and an understanding of the interaction between the cyclic thermal loading and the induced stresses and
strains in the pile. In particular, the possible changes in the pile shaft friction (i.e. pile capacity) due to the contraction or
expansion of the pile during cooling or heating. To consider the implications of all of the above factors on the piles
ultimate capacity there is a tendency to increase the design factor safety (by double in some cases) (Bonnec 2009,
Bourne-Webb et al., 2009) resulting in highly conservative designs.
The current study conducted at Monash University is part of an international research effort aimed at obtaining a much
better understanding of the thermo-mechanical effect on piles with the view of reducing the conservative approach
taken so far in the design of energy piles. The study involves evaluation of the thermo-mechanical behaviour of soils,
the thermal capacity of the pile, the built structure heat balance, soil thermal properties and influence of heat transfer on
pile load capacity and shaft resistance. This paper reports on the pile field test currently taking place at Clayton,
Monash University.
emanate heat, thus can possibly increase the background temperatures of the surrounding soil mass (Katzenbach et al.,
2008 and Bourne-Webb et al., 2009).
Cells can be loaded open and closed and a resulting shaft resistance obtained, whilst closing the upper O-Cell and
loading the lower O-Cell will result in the base resistance being determined.
The Monash test pile uses two levels of Oesterberg Cells placed in the bottom 6 m of the pile. By using two O-Cell
levels, an accurate independent measurement can be taken for the material within the intermediate section of the pile.
This is done by cycling the loads within the O-Cells to push the central section up and down and observing the reaction
of the relevant strain and displacement gauges with or without thermal loading.
The field energy test pile was installed in December 2010. It is a 600mm diameter bored pile drilled to a depth of 16.1
m in Brighton Group materials. Groundwater was not observed during the installation process. Two levels of O-cells
were installed at 10 m and 14 m depth, thus providing a 4 m long section of the shaft pile (between the two levels of O-
cells), which can be subjected to cyclic loading with or without thermal loading.
The testing and monitoring equipment installed within the pile consists of the following:
Three loops of HDPE pipe (25mm diameter) attached to the pile cage to transfer heating fluid.
10 vibrating wire strain gauges installed between the two O-cells levels and 6 vibrating wire strain gauges
installed above the upper O-cell level.
12 vibrating wire displacement transducers installed within the pile to measure O-cell and pile movement.
All vibrating wire instrumentations were fitted with a thermistor and temperature of the concrete monitored at
various levels.
Two boreholes were also installed at a distance of 0.5 m and 2.0 m from the outer surface of the energy test pile,
thermocouples were installed at 2 m intervals in each borehole to profile the temperature changes with depth (see
Section 3.2) and measure ground temperature during thermal loading. Figure 6 shows the energy test pile setup. Figure
7 shows the pile being installed and the top of the pile after construction was completed.
As part of the project, it was also aimed to reduce the projects footprint of greenhouse gas emissions. For this purpose,
an environmental friendly concrete mix was used to construct the energy pile. This concrete mix contains a 30%
replacement of the GP cement content with Flyash, which can reduce generated CO2 emissions by over 20% compared
to a straight GP cement mix.
Tubing carrying
Heat Pump
thermal fluid
Data
logging
system
Shed/Bunker ~20m
to pile and boreholes
- Ground
Level
Boreholes to
HDPE pipe and measuring ground
vibrating wire temperature during
instrumentation thermal loading
attached to
steel cage
600mm dia.
Bored pile
Figure 7. Heat exchanger pile being installed (left), top of installed pile with HDPE loops and sensors mounts
protruding (right).
The loading sequence schedule included the following: Stage 1: Open upper O-Cell, increase load in lower O-cell
(LOC), hold period to measure time dependent performance (i.e. residual load), follow by several unload/reload cycles.
Stage 2: Open lower O-Cell increase load in upper O-cell (UOC), hold period to measure time dependent performance
(i.e. residual load), follow by several unload/reload cycles, stage 3: alternate loading and unloading of the UOC and
LOC resulting in shear stress reversal in the pile shaft between the two O-Cells. This can be undertaken by pressurising,
for example the UOC, while allowing the LOC to bleed off any pressure caused by the shaft between the UOC and
LOC moving downwards. Once the nominated downward displacement had been achieved, the process can be reversed
by depressurising the UOC then pressurising the LOC while allowing the UOC to bleed off any pressure caused by the
upwards movement of the shaft between the UOC and LOC. This process will be repeated a number of times to
investigate the cyclic loading behaviour of the shaft. The first test was conducted in late July 2011 and results will be
reported at a later stage.
6 SUMMARY
Heat exchanger piles have great potential as an aid in tackling climate challenges and meeting legislation requirements.
They are increasingly used in various part of the world and the benefits and opportunities gained from these experiences
can be adapted and applied to the Australian environment. Further work is needed to shed more light on the
mechanisms controlling the behaviour of energy piles when subjected to cycling heating and cooling. In particular
there is a need to have a better understanding of the thermo-mechanical effects on the deformations and capacity of the
piles. This in turn will lead to the development of proper design guidelines and alleviate the conservative approach
adopted so far. The ongoing project reported in this paper is a step in this direction.
7 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project is funded by the Victorian Government Sustainability Fund, Golder Associates Pty. Ltd., Vibropile Pty.
Ltd., Geoexchange Australia Pty. Ltd. and Genesis Now. Their support is gratefully acknowledged.
8 REFERENCES
Abuel-Naga, H.M., Bergado, D.T. and Bouazza, A., (2008). Thermal conductivity evolution of saturated clay under
consolidation process. International Journal of Geomechanics, Vol.8, No2, pp. 114-122.
Abuel-Naga, H. M., Bergado, D. T., Bouazza, A. and Pender, M. J. (2009). Thermal conductivity of soft Bangkok clay
from laboratory and field measurements. Engineering Geology, Vol. 105, pp. 211-219.
Adam, D. and Markiewicz, R. (2009) Energy from earth-coupled structures, foundations, tunnels and sewers.
Gotechnique, Vol. 59, No3, pp.229-236.
Amis, T., Bourne-Webb, P., Davidson, C., Amatya, B. and Soga, K. (2008). An investigation into the effects of heating
and cooling energy piles whilst under working load at Lambeth College, Clapham Common, U.K. Proceedings
11th Int. Conf. Deep Foundations, Deep Foundation Institute, CD Rom.
ASHRAE 1118-TRP. Methods for determining soil and rock formation thermal properties from field tests.
Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO) (1999). Australian commercial building sector greenhouse gas emissions 1990-
2010, Canberra, Australia.
Australian Government (2008a) Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Green Paper). In Change, D. O. C. (Ed.).
Canberra, Australian Government.
Australian Government (2008b) Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, Australia's Low Pollution Future (White Paper).
In Change, D. O. C. (Ed.). Canberra, Australian Government.
Barry-Macaulay, D., Bouazza, A. and Singh, R.M. (2011). Study of thermal properties of a basaltic clay. Proceedings
GeoFrontiers 2011, Dallas, USA, pp. 480-487.
Bonnec, O. (2009). Piling on the energy. Geodrilling International, pp. 25-28.
Bourne-Webb, P. J., Amatya, B., Soga, K., Amis, T., Davidson, C. And Payne, P. (2009). Energy pile test at Lambeth
College, London: geotechnical and thermodynamic aspects of pile response to heat cycles. Gotechnique, Vol.
59, No. 3, pp. 237-248.
Brandl, H. (2006) Energy foundations and other thermo-active ground structures. Gotechnique, 56, No2, pp.81-122.
Brettman, T. and Amis, T. (2011). Thermal conductivity evaluation of a pile group using geothermal energy piles.
Proceedings Geo-Frontiers 2011, Dallas , USA, pp. 499-508.
Cull, J. (2009). Ground temperature profiles in Victoria (Personnal comminication).
Centre for International Economics (CIE) (2007). Capitalising on the building sectors potential to lessen the costs of a broad
based GHG emissions cuts. Report prepared for ASBEC Climate Change Task Group, 39 pp.
(www.TheCIE.com.au)
DEFRA (2008) Climate Change Act 2008, London, The Stationary Office.
DeMoel, M., Bach, P., Bouazza, A., Singh, R.M. and Sun, O. (2010). Technological advances and applications of
geothermal energy pile foundations and their feasibility in Australia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, Vol.14, No 9, pp. 2683-2696
Florides, G. and Kalogirou, S. (2007) Ground heat exchangers--A review of systems, models and applications.
Renewable Energy, 32, 2461-2478.
Gao, J., Zhang, X., Liu, J., Li, K.S. and Yang, J. (2008). Thermal performance and ground temperature of vertical pile-
foundation heat exchangers: A case study. Applied Thermal Engineering, 28, 2295-2304.
Garnaut, R. (2008). The Garnaut Climate change review. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne, Australia, 634 pp.
George Wilkenfeld and Associates (GWA) (2005). Guide to preparing regulation impact statements for the national appliance
and equipment energy efficiency program (NAEEP), prepared for the Australian Greenhouse Office, May, Sydney
(from CIE).
George Wilkenfeld and Associates (GWA) (2008). Victorias Greenhouse gas emissions 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2005: End use
allocation of emissions. Report to Department of Sustainability and Environment.
Hamada, Y., Saitoh, H., Nakamura, M., Kubota, H. and Ochifuji, K. (2007). Filed performance of an energy pile system
for space heating. Energy and Building, Vol. 39, pp. 517-54.
Henderson, H.I., Carlson, S.W. and Walburger, A.C. (1999). North American monitoring of a hotel with room size GSHPs.
Hemmingway, P. and Long, M. (2011). Energy foundations-potential for Ireland. Proceedings Geo-Frontiers 2011, Dallas,
USA, pp. 460469.
IPCC (2007). Climate change 2007: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the 4th Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Metz,B., Davidson, O.R., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R. and Meyer,
L.A. (eds). Cambridge University Press, U.K., 851 pp.
Jalaluddin, Miyara, A., Tsubaki, K., Inoue, S. and Yoshida, K. (2011). Experimental study of several types of ground
heat exchanger using a steel pile foundation. Renewable Energy, vol. 36, pp.764-771
Katzenbach, R., Clauss, F., Waberseck., T. and Wagner, I. (2008). Coupled numerical simulation of geothermal energy
systems. Proceedings 12th Int. Conf. Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Goa, India, pp. 1170-
1179
Katzenbach, R., Ramm, H. and Wabersecke, T. (2009). Recent developments in foundation and geothermal
engineering. Proceedings 2nd Int. Conf. on New Developments in Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering, Nicosia, Cyprus, pp.464-471.
Knellwolf, C., Peron, H. and Laloui, L. (2011). Geotechncial analysis of heat exchanger piles. Journal of Geotechnical
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000513
Laloui, L., Nuth, M. and Vulliet, L. (2006). Experimental and numerical investigations of the behaviour of a heat
exchanger pile. International Journal of Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, vol. 30, No8, pp.
763-781.
McCartney, J.S., Rosenberg, J.E. and Sultanova, A. (2010). Engineering performance of thermo-active foundations.
Proceedings GeoTrends 2010, West Palm Beach, Florida, USA, pp.27-42.
Michoupoulos, A., Bozis, D., Kikidis, P., Papakostas, K. and Kyriakis, N. A. (2007) Three-years operation experience
of a ground source heat pump system in Northern Greece. Energy and buildings, 39, 328-334.
Pahud, D. and Hubbuch, M. (2007) Measured Thermal Performance of the Energy Pile System of the Dock Midfield at
Zurich Airport. Proceedings European Geothermal Congress, Unterhaching, Germany., pp. 1-7
Preene, M. and Powrie, W. (2009) Ground energy systems: from analysis to geotechnical design. Gotechnique, Vol.59,
No3, pp. 261-271.
Reese, L. C. (1978). Design and Construction of Drilled Shafts. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol.
104, No. GT1, pp.91-116.
Schroder, B. and Hanschke, T. (2003). Energy piles - environmentally friendly heating and cooling with geothermally
active prefabricated reinforced concrete piles. Bautechnik. Vol. 80, no. 12, pp. 925-927.
Singh, R.M. and Bouazza, A. (2010a). Comparison of soil thermal conductivity measurements based on laboratory
method. Proc. 11th International Association of Engineering Geology Congress, Auckland, Sept. 2010
Singh, R.M. and Bouazza, A. (2010b). Thermal conductivity of kaolin using steady state method. Proc. 6th International
Congress on Environmental Geotechnics, New Delhi, Nov. 2010.
Thomas, H. R. and Rees, S. W. (2009) Measured and simulated heat transfer to foundation soils. Gotechnique, Vol.59,
No3, pp. 365-375