Renewable Energy 49 (2013) 193e196

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Passive ground cooling system for low energy buildings in Malaysia (hot and
humid climates)
Aliyah N.Z. Sanusi a, b, *, Li Shao a, Najib Ibrahim b
a
b

Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom
Kulliyyah of Architecture and Environmental Design, International Islamic University, Gombak, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Available online 10 February 2012

This paper presents an investigation of Earth Pipe Cooling Technology, conducted in a university campus
in Malaysia. It was intended to seek for a passive cooling alternative to air-conditioning. The technology,
where the ground was used as a heat sink to produce cooler air, has not been investigated systematically
in hot and humid countries. In this work, air and soil temperatures were measured. At 1 m underground,
the result is most signicant, where the soil temperature is 6  C and 9  C lower than the maximum
ambient temperature during wet and hot and dry season, respectively. Polyethylene pipes were buried
around 1.0 m underground and temperature drop between pipe inlet and outlet were compared. A
signicant temperature drop was found in these pipes: up to 6.4  C and 6.9  C depending on the season
of the year. The result shows the potential of Earth Pipe in providing low energy cooling in Malaysia.
Crown Copyright 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Earth pipe cooling
Hot and humid climate
Malaysia
Passive cooling

1. Introduction
An ongoing investigation of passive earth pipe cooling technology has been carried out at an experimental site in Malaysia.
The rationale behind this investigation is to nd a better cooling
system in terms of sustainability than air-conditioning, which
has contributed signicantly to the vast increment in energy
consumption in Malaysia [1].
This earth pipe cooling technology has been explored by many
researchers and used by building designers as cooling means for
various building types in temperate countries as well as hot and
arid countries, where the results have been signicant and positive
[2e5]. However, there has been no record of this technology being
used in Malaysia and information on its performance in hot humid
climates is also scarce. The earth pipe cooling technology consists of
ambient air being channelled through pipes buried underground. It
uses the soil as a heat sink, where heat from the ambient is dissipated to, through conduction via the buried pipe. Its efciency is
largely inuenced by temperature difference between ambient and
soil temperature and thermal conductivity, followed by air ow
inside the pipe, pipe length and diameter. Previous investigations
found the optimum depth to bury the pipe is rather great, at 4 m

* Corresponding author. Kulliyyah of Architecture and Environmental Design,

International Islamic University, Gombak, Malaysia.
E-mail address: aliyahsanusi@gmail.com (A.N.Z. Sanusi).

underground in many cases. However, for Malaysia climate, this

optimum depth needs to be investigated again.
1.1. Malaysia climate
Malaysia has a warm and humid climate throughout the year.
However, it consists of wet and dry seasons, caused by Southwest
and Northeast monsoon. Figs. 1 and 2 illustrates monthly distribution of maximum dry bulb temperature and rainfall from year
2002e2006. The hot and dry season usually falls in May and June
whereas the wet season with low maximum dry bulb
temperature usually falls in November.
1.2. Objective
There are two initial interrelated aims in this ongoing investigation. The rst aim is to nd the optimum depth where the pipes
should be buried to get effective result. The second aim is to obtain
temperature reductions between the inlet and outlet temperature
of each buried pipe.
2. Methodology
The experimental work can be divided into two parts, corresponding to the two interrelated objectives. The rst part of
experiment measures the ambient, ground surface and underground soil temperature. This is followed by the second eld

0960-1481/$ e see front matter Crown Copyright 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.033

A.N.Z. Sanusi et al. / Renewable Energy 49 (2013) 193e196

Dry Bulb Temperature ( C)

194

40.0
39.0
38.0
37.0
36.0
35.0
34.0
33.0
32.0
31.0
30.0
1

2002

5
2003

6 7
Month

2004

10 11 12

2005

2006

Fig. 1. Monthly absolute maximum dry bulb temperature from year 2002e2006.
Fig. 3. The experimental site during construction of experimental shed that houses the
outlets of the buried pipes.

experiment, which extended over a much longer period. Both tests

were carried out at a site within the International Islamic University
campus in Malaysia. The site is at and its soil is sandy and covered
with short sand (Fig. 3).
2.1. Soil temperature measurement
The rst soil temperature investigation was carried out during
the wet season when the weather is cooler. Sets of data were
collected from October to November 2007 and it comprises of
outdoor dry bulb temperature, ground surface temperature, and
underground soil temperature at 1 m, 2 m, 3 m, 4 m and 5 m depth.
Another set of soil temperature data was collected alongside the
earth pipe cooling experiment. This was carried out from April to
May 2009, which is during the hot and dry season. The data
measured comprises of outdoor dry bulb temperature and underground soil temperature at depths of 0.3 m, 0.5 m, 0.8 m and 1.0 m.
After two months of data analysis, the soil temperature data
collection was resumed, recording from August to December 2009.
Only this time, the data measured comprises of outdoor dry bulb
temperature and soil temperature at 0.5 m, 1.0 m and 1.5 m
underground.
2.2. Earth pipe cooling experiment
Three 3 polyethylene pipes were buried separately, at 0.5 m,
1.0 m and 1.5 m deep underground. All the pipes are 30 m long.
There is a fan blower connected to all pipe inlets, which provides air
ow into the buried pipes at 5.6 m/s. The fan was switched on daily

from 10 am until 6 pm to allow night ventilation. The pipe inlets

and outlets are sheltered by an experimental shed (Fig. 3), which
has 2 m  2 m dimensions. Data of each buried pipes were recorded
for 48 h at 10 min interval. The tests were carried out in sequence
rather than in parallel to avoid thermal interference between the
pipes.
3. Results
3.1. Soil temperature measurement
The result from the rst data collection of soil and ambient
temperature investigation, carried out during the wet season, has
shown that soil temperature at 1 m depth underground has the
lowest temperature distribution. It ranges between 27  C and 28  C
(Fig. 4).
The result above has shown the potential optimum depth to
bury the cooling pipe is at 1 m depth. Therefore, the next soil
temperature investigation measures from 0.3 m to 1 m deep
underground.
In this second soil temperature investigation, the soil temperatures at 1 m depth vary the least among the shallow depths.
However, the temperature range is higher than in previous result. It
ranges from 29.6  C to 30.0  C (Fig. 5). This could be the effect of
high ambient temperature during the hot and dry season in May
2009.
The soil temperature investigation resumed in August 2009 and
carried on until December 2009. The data trends show that among

34

500.0
Temperature, C

400.0

32

Total Rainfall (mm)

600.0

300.0
200.0
100.0

30
28
26
24

0.0
1

3
2002

5
2003

6 7
Month
2004

10 11 12

22
29-Oct 30-Oct 31-Oct

5m

2005

4m

3m

1-Nov

2-Nov

3-Nov

2m

1m

Ground

4-Nov
Outdoor

2006

Fig. 2. Monthly total rainfall from year 2002e2006.

Fig. 4. Data of outdoor ambient, ground surface and underground soil temperature in
2007.

Dry Bulb Temperature ( C)

A.N.Z. Sanusi et al. / Renewable Energy 49 (2013) 193e196

39
Temperature, oC

37
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
4-May

5-May

Outdoor

6-May
0.3m

7-May

8-May

0.5m

9-May 10-May
0.8m

1.0m

Temperature (oC)

Fig. 5. Data of outdoor ambient and underground soil temperature in May 2009.

6:00 12:00 18:00

Time (Hour)

0:00

6:00

0.5m Outlet

1.0m Outlet

1.5m Outlet

0.5m Inlet

1.0m Inlet

1.5m Inlet

12:00

Fig. 8. Temperature data collected at the inlet and outlet of buried pipes in May 2009.

29

Buried pipes

Wet season
(December 2008)

Hot season
(May 2009)

27

0.5 m depth
1.0 m depth
1.5 m depth

28.3  C
28.5  C
28.6  C

30.3  C
30.1  C
30.1  C

2- 17- 1- 16- 1- 16- 31- 15- 30- 15Aug Aug Sep Sep Oct Oct Oct Nov Nov Dec
0.5m Date
1.0m 1.5m
Fig. 6. Data of underground soil temperature collected from August to December
2009.

the three depths, the temperature varies the least at 1.5 m deep
underground, which ranges between 28.5  C and 29.3  C (Fig. 6).
The uctuation of temperature at 0.5 m depth remains signicant,
which ranges between 27.7  C and 29.8  C. Soil temperature at
1.0 m depth ranges between 28.2  C and 29.4  C.
3.2. Temperature reductions between earth pipe cooling inlets and
outlets
Earth pipe cooling experiment was carried out after the analysis
of soil temperature data, which was conducted in November 2007.
Since the soil result in 2007 shows the pipe burial depth of 1 m
being the potentially optimum value, earth pipes were buried at
0.5 m, 1.0 m and 1.5 m underground, respectively. The eld
experiment was carried out twice. It was conducted initially

between November and December 2008, when the weather was

wet and cooler. Then, the experiment resumed in May 2009, when
the weather was hot and dry most of the time.
As mentioned above, the tests on various pipes were carried out
in sequence. However, the curves are presented together to allow
an overall view of the test results. One should bear in mind that the
operating conditions (e.g., ambient air temperatures) were not
identical for these measurements. In the wet season, maximum
temperature reduction between the buried pipe inlet and outlet
occurred at 1 m depth, which was 6.5  C (Fig. 7). Meanwhile, at
0.5 m depth, temperature was reduced as much as 5.9  C and at
1.5 m depth, as much as 3.7  C.
In the hot and dry season data, there are slight differences in
temperature reduction between the pipe inlet and outlet. In this
season, maximum temperature reduction between the pipe inlet
and outlet occurred at 1 m depth, which was 6.9  C (Fig. 8).
Meanwhile, at 0.5 m depth, the temperature reduction was 4.9  C
and at 1.5 m depth, it was 5.6  C.
The maximum temperatures found at each buried pipe outlet in
December 2008 and May 2009 are presented in Table 1. Fluctuation
of maximum temperatures is greatest at the outlet of the pipe

36
34

Relative Humidity (%)

0:00

Table 1
Maximum temperatures found at each buried pipe outlet in December 2008 and
May 2009.

31

25

Dry Bulb Temperature ( C)

39
37
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
12:00 18:00

195

32
30
28
26
24
22
9:00

15:00 21:00 3:00 9:00

Time (Hour)

0.5m Inlet
0.5m Outlet

1.0m Inlet
1.0m Outlet

15:00 21:00

3:00

1.5m Inlet
1.5m Outlet

Fig. 7. Temperature data collected at the inlet and outlet of buried pipes in December
2008.

90
80
70
60
50
40
12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00
Time (Hour)
0.5m PE Inlet
0.5m PE Outlet

1.0m PE Inlet
1.0m PE Outlet

1.5m PE Inlet
1.5m PE Outlet

Fig. 9. Relative humidity in buried pipe inlet and outlet in May 2009.

A.N.Z. Sanusi et al. / Renewable Energy 49 (2013) 193e196

buried at 1 m depth, against the results from eld measurement in

May 2009. Noting the operating period between 10:00 and 18:00,
the agreement is good.

Pipe Outlet Temperature ( C)

196

34
32
30

5. Conclusion

28
26
24
05/09
12:00:00

05/09
24:00:00

05/10
12:00:00
Time and Date

Energy Plus

05/10
24:00:00

05/11
12:00:0

Field Data

Fig. 10. Energy plus data plotted against eld experiment data of the outlet of earth
pipe buried at 1.0 m depth underground.

buried at 0.5 m depth. This is mainly caused by its shallow depth

and therefore, it is inuenced by the ambient air temperature.
Meanwhile, the maximum temperature uctuate the least at the
outlet pipe that was buried at 1.5 m depth. The maximum
temperature during the wet weather gets as high as 28.5  C, which
lies within the comfort range in Khedaris Chart, showing it
provides comfortable air [6].
3.3. Relative humidity at the buried pipe inlets and outlets
Relative humidity in each pipe inlet and outlet was recorded
alongside the temperatures in May 2009. At times of fan operation,
which is from 10:00am to 6:00 pm, the humidity increased (Fig. 9).
As can be seen during this dry season, the moisture level in the air
ow remained well below saturation and no condensations were
found in any of the pipes.
4. Computer simulation using energy plus
Apart from eld experiment, this study also involves computer
simulation program to further the investigation beyond the limit of
eld work. Parametric studies can be carried out to assess the effect
of a number of weather, soil and pipe construction factors. In this
study Energy Plus was used for the simulation work and the initial
work so far involved validating the suitability of software for this
task. Fig. 10 shows the simulation results for a Polyethylene pipe,

Soil temperature in Malaysia is found to change little beyond the

depth of 4 m, where temperature ranges from 29.3  C to 30.2  C.
The soil temperature at 1 m depth ranges from 26.9  C to 30.0  C.
Although the temperature ranges at 1 m depth of soil is greater
than at 4 or 5 m depth, the maximum soil temperature at 1 m depth
is below 30.2  C. Therefore, Earth pipe cooling systems buried in
soil at 1 m depth underground could give a better performance. Soil
at 1 m depth is sheltered from the high midday ambient temperature, compared with soil at shallower depths. In the experiment
results, the maximum air temperature found in the outlet of pipes
buried at 1 m depth was 30.1  C. Furthermore, the greatest
temperature reduction in both wet and hot and dry seasons
occurred within the pipe buried at 1 m depth underground. During
the wet season, it was 6.4  C and during the hot and dry season, it
was 6.9  C.
Energy Plus simulation results correlate well with the eld work
data. Therefore, analysis will be extended using this simulation tool
with wider range of variables relating to air ow, pipe geometry
and soil surrounding the buried pipes.

References
[1] Chan SA. (Ar.). 2004. Energy Efciency e Designing Low Energy Buildings Using
Energy 10. CPD Seminar, Pertubuhan Arkitek Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. Pertubuhan Arkitek Malaysia. 7th August. Malaysia.
[2] Ghosal MK, Thiwari GN. Modelling and parametric studies for thermal
performance of an earth to air heat exchanger integrated with a greenhouse.
Energy Conversion and Management 2006;47:1779e98.
[3] Santamouris M, Mihalakalou G, Balaras CA, Argiriou A, Asimakopoulos D,
Vallindra M. Use of buried pipes for energy conservation in cooling of agricultural greenhouses. Solar Energy 1995;55:111e24.
[4] Solaini G, DallO G, Scansani S. Simultaneous application of different natural
cooling technologies to an experimental building. Renewable Energy 1998;15:
277e82.
[5] Thanu NM, Sawhney RL, Khare RN, Buddhi D. An experimental study of the
thermal performance of an earth-air-pipe system in single pass mode. Solar
Energy 2001;71:353e64.
[6] Khedari J, Yamtraipat N, Pratintong N, Hirunlabh J. Thailand ventilation comfort
chart. Energy Building 2000;23(3):245e9.