A field study on the application of distributed temperature sensing technology in thermal response tests for borehole heat exchangers

  • Dingfeng Cao
  • Bin ShiEmail author
  • Hong-Hu ZhuEmail author
  • Guangqing Wei
  • Hainar Bektursen
  • Mengya Sun
Original Paper


Although the enhanced thermal response test (ETRT) method has been used to determine the distribution of ground temperatures and effective thermal conductivities, there are a number of obstacles which limit the wide application of this technology in the discipline of geoengineering. In this literature, four aspects of ETRT technology were investigated: (a) acquisition of ground temperature, (b) installation of the heat exchange tubes, (c) optimization of the monitoring positions, and (d) the difference in thermal conductivity obtained by the ETRT and numerical simulation. To investigate these issues, a field trial was carried out in Heze, Shandong Province, China, and the corresponding numerical models were built. The results demonstrate that: (i) the conventional methods that infer undisturbed ground temperature using water in tubes have large errors, whereas the distributed temperature sensing (DTS) technique enables the measurement of precise temperature profiles; (ii) the thermal conductivity measured using double U-tubes reflects the soil thermal property more accurately than that for a single U-tube; (iii) it is more reasonable to install optical fibers outside the U-tube sidewall than inside the observation tube; and (iv) it is essential to quantitatively consider various interface thermal impedance when estimating ground thermal conductivities using numerical simulation.


Distributed temperature sensing (DTS) Thermal response test (TRT) Ground-coupled heat pump (GCHP) Thermal conductivity Fiber optic sensor 



The authors would like to thank all the participants of the experimental studies. The financial support provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 41230636, 41427801, and 41722209), Research Funds for the Central Universities (grant no. 020614380050), the Key Laboratory of Earth Fissures Geological Disaster, Ministry of Land and Resources, and Geological Survey of Jiangsu Province (grant no. 201401) are gratefully acknowledged. The first author is grateful for the scholarship provided by the China Scholarship Council.


  1. Acuña J (2010) Improvements of U-pipe borehole heat exchangers. Doctoral dissertation, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  2. Acuña J, Palm B (2013) Distributed thermal response tests on pipe-in-pipe borehole heat exchangers. Appl Energy 109:312–320. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austin WA III (1998) Development of an in situ system for measuring ground thermal properties. Master’s dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OklahomaGoogle Scholar
  4. Bandos TV, Campos-Celador Á, López-González LM, Sala-Lizarraga JM (2016) Finite cylinder-source model for energy pile heat exchangers: effect of buried depth and heat load cyclic variations. Appl Therm Eng 96:130–136. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belzile P, Lamarche L, Rousse DR (2016) Semi-analytical model for geothermal borefields with independent inlet conditions. Geothermics 60:144–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biglarian H, Abbaspour M, Saidi MH (2017) A numerical model for transient simulation of borehole heat exchangers. Renew Energy 104:224–237. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borinaga-Treviño R, Pascual-Muñoz P, Castro-Fresno D, Blanco-Fernandez E (2013) Borehole thermal response and thermal resistance of four different grouting materials measured with a TRT. Appl Therm Eng 53(1):13–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chang KS, Kim MJ (2016) Thermal performance evaluation of vertical U-loop ground heat exchanger using in-situ thermal response test. Renew Energy 87:585–591. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coleman TI, Parker BL, Maldaner CH, Mondanos MJ (2015) Groundwater flow characterization in a fractured bedrock aquifer using active DTS tests in sealed boreholes. J Hydrol 528:449–462. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dai LH, Shang Y, Li XL, Li SF (2016) Analysis on the transient heat transfer process inside and outside the borehole for a vertical U-tube ground heat exchanger under short-term heat storage. Renew Energy 87:1121–1129. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dehkordi SE, Olofsson B, Schincariol RA (2015a) Effect of groundwater flow in vertical and horizontal fractures on borehole heat exchanger temperatures. Bull Eng Geol Environ 74(2):479–491. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dehkordi SE, Schincariol RA, Reitsma S (2015b) Thermal performance of a tight borehole heat exchanger. Renew Energy 83:698–704. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fujii H, Itoi R, Fujii J, Uchida Y (2005) Optimizing the design of large-scale ground-coupled heat pump systems using groundwater and heat transport modeling. Geothermics 34(3):347–364. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fujii H, Okubo H, Nishi K, Itoi R, Ohyama K, Shibata K (2009a) An improved thermal response test for U-tube ground heat exchanger based on optical fiber thermometers. Geothermics 38(4):399–406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fujii H, Okubo H, Chono M, Sasada M, Takasugi S, Tateno M (2009b) Application of optical fiber thermometers in thermal response tests for detailed geological descriptions. In: Proceedings of Effstock 2009 11th international conference on thermal energy storage for efficiency and sustainability, Stockholm, Sweden, June 2009Google Scholar
  16. Gehlin S, Nordell B (2003) Determining undisturbed ground temperature for thermal response test. ASHRAE Trans 109:151–156Google Scholar
  17. Grattan KTV, Sun T (2000) Fiber optic sensor technology: an overview. Sens Actuators A Phys 82(1–3):40–61. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guo M, Diao N, Man Y, Fang Z (2016) Research and development of the hybrid ground-coupled heat pump technology in China. Renew Energy 87:1033–1044. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Homuth S, Hamm K, Sass I (2013) BHE logging and cement hydration heat analyses for the determination of thermo-physical parameters. Bull Eng Geol Environ 72(1):93–100. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hwang S, Ooka R, Nam Y (2010) Evaluation of estimation method of ground properties for the ground source heat pump system. Renew Energy 35(9):2123–2130. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jha MK, Verma AK, Maheshwar S, Chauhan A (2016) Study of temperature effect on thermal conductivity of Jhiri shale from upper Vindhyan, India. Bull Eng Geol Environ 75(4):1657–1668. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee CK (2016) A modified three-dimensional numerical model for predicting the short-time-step performance of borehole ground heat exchangers. Renew Energy 87:618–627. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee C, Kim R, Lee JS, Lee W (2013a) Quantitative assessment of temperature effect on cone resistance. Bull Eng Geol Environ 72:3–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee C, Park M, Park S, Won J, Choi H (2013b) Back-analyses of in-situ thermal response test (TRT) for evaluating ground thermal conductivity. Int J Energy Res 37(11):1397–1404. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lhendup T, Aye L, Fuller RJ (2014) In-situ measurement of borehole thermal properties in Melbourne. Appl Therm Eng 73(1):287–295. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liebel HT, Huber K, Frengstad BS, Ramstad RK, Brattli B (2012a) Thermal response testing of a fractured hard rock aquifer with and without induced groundwater flow. Bull Eng Geol Environ 71(3):435–445. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liebel HT, Stølen MS, Frengstad BS, Ramstad RK, Brattli B (2012b) Insights into the reliability of different thermal conductivity measurement techniques: a thermo-geological study in Mære (Norway). Bull Eng Geol Environ 71(2):235–243. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lim K, Lee S, Lee C (2007) An experimental study on the thermal performance of ground heat exchanger. Experimental Therm Fluid Sci 31(8):985–990. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liuzzo-Scorpo A, Nordell B, Gehlin S (2015) Influence of regional groundwater flow on ground temperature around heat extraction boreholes. Geothermics 56:119–127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Luo J, Rohn J, Xiang W, Bayer M, Priess A, Wilkmann L, Steger H, Zorn R (2015) Experimental investigation of a borehole field by enhanced geothermal response test and numerical analysis of performance of the borehole heat exchangers. Energy 84:473–484. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Luo J, Rohn J, Xiang W, Bertermann D, Blum P (2016) A review of ground investigations for ground source heat pump (GSHP) systems. Energy Build 117:160–175. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miyara A (2015) Thermal performance and pressure drop of spiral-tube ground heat exchangers for ground-source heat pump. Appl Therm Eng 90:630–637. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nguyen A, Pasquier P, Marcotte D (2017) Borehole thermal energy storage systems under the influence of groundwater flow and time-varying surface temperature. Geothermics 66:110–118. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nusier O, Abu-Hamdeh N (2003) Laboratory techniques to evaluate thermal conductivity for some soils. Heat Mass Transf 39(2):119–123. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oppelt T, Riehl I, Gross U (2010) Modelling of the borehole filling of double U-pipe heat exchangers. Geothermics 39(3):270–276. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Platts AB, Cameron DA, Ward J (2015) Improving the performance of ground coupled heat exchangers in unsaturated soils. Energy Build 104:323–335. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Poulsen SE, Alberdi-Pagola M (2015) Interpretation of ongoing thermal response tests of vertical (BHE) borehole heat exchangers with predictive uncertainty based stopping criterion. Energy 88:157–167. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Priarone A, Fossa M (2015) Modelling the ground volume for numerically generating single borehole heat exchanger response factors according to the cylindrical source approach. Geothermics 58:32–38. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Radioti G, Delvoie S, Charlier R, Dumont G, Nguyen F (2016) Heterogeneous bedrock investigation for a closed-loop geothermal system: a case study. Geothermics 62:79–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ramstad RK, Hilmo BO, Brattli B, Skarphagen H (2007) Ground source energy in crystalline bedrock-increased energy extraction using hydraulic fracturing in boreholes. Bull Eng Geol Environ 66(4):493–503. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ramstad RK, Midttømme K, Liebel HT, Frengstad BS, Willemoes-Wissing B (2015) Thermal conductivity map of the Oslo region based on thermal diffusivity measurements of rock core samples. Bull Eng Geol Environ 74(4):1275–1286. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rees SJ (2015) An extended two-dimensional borehole heat exchanger model for simulation of short and medium timescale thermal response. Renew Energy 83:518–526. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sandler S, Zajaczkowski B, Bialko B, Malecha ZM (2017) Evaluation of the impact of the thermal shunt effect on the U-pipe ground borehole heat exchanger performance. Geothermics 65:244–254. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shim BO, Song Y, Fujii H, Okubo H (2009) Interpretation of thermal response tests using the fiber optic distributed temperature sensing method. In: Proceedings of Effstock 2009 11th international conference on thermal energy storage for efficiency and sustainability, Stockholm, Sweden, June 2009Google Scholar
  45. Soriano G, Espinoza T, Villanueva R, Gonzalez I, Montero A, Cornejo M, Lopez K (2017) Thermal geological model of the city of Guayaquil, Ecuador. Geothermics 66:101–109. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sourbeer JJ, Loheide SP (2016) Obstacles to long-term soil moisture monitoring with heated distributed temperature sensing. Hydrol Process 30:1017–1035. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spitler JD, Gehlin SE (2015) Thermal response testing for ground source heat pump systems—an historical review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 50:1125–1137. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tang Y, Zhou J, Zhang M, Liu Y (2015) Research on the thermal conductivity and moisture migration characteristics of Shanghai mucky clay. I: experimental modeling. Bull Eng Geol Environ 74(2):577–593. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tordrup KW, Poulsen SE, Bjørn H (2017) An improved method for upscaling borehole thermal energy storage using inverse finite element modelling. Renew Energy 105:13–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tyler SW, Selker JS, Hausner MB, Hatch CE, Torgersen T, Thodal CE, Schladow SG (2009) Environmental temperature sensing using Raman spectra DTS fiber-optic methods. Water Resour Res 45(4):1010–1029. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wagner V, Blum P, Kübert M, Bayer P (2013) Analytical approach to groundwater-influenced thermal response tests of grouted borehole heat exchangers. Geothermics 46:22–31. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang Z, Wang F, Ma Z, Wang X, Wu X (2016) Research of heat and moisture transfer influence on the characteristics of the ground heat pump exchangers in unsaturated soil. Energy Build 130:140–149. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wołoszyn J, Gołaś A (2016) Experimental verification and programming development of a new MDF borehole heat exchanger numerical model. Geothermics 59:67–76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. You T, Shi W, Wang B, Wang H, Li X (2017) A fast distributed parameter model of ground heat exchanger based on response factor. Build Simul 10:183–192. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yu X, Zhang Y, Deng N, Ma H, Dong S (2016) Thermal response test for ground source heat pump based on constant temperature and heat-flux methods. Appl Therm Eng 93:678–682. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhang C, Guo Z, Liu Y, Cong X, Peng D (2014) A review on thermal response test of ground-coupled heat pump systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 40:851–867. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhang W, Yang H, Diao N, Lu L, Fang Z (2016) Exploration on the reverse calculation method of groundwater velocity by means of the moving line heat source. Int J Therm Sci 99:52–63. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Earth Sciences and EngineeringNanjing UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Engineering CollegeUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Suzhou NanZee Sensing Technology Co., Ltd.SuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations