Application and Design for The Charles E. and Mary Parente Life Sciences Building Kings College...

Application and Design for

The Charles E. and Mary Parente

Life Sciences Building

Kings College

Wilkes-Barre PA

Ryan James Wanko

Building Mechanical and Energy Systems

Charles E. and Mary Parente Life Sciences BuildingCharles E. and Mary Parente Life Sciences Building

OverviewOverview

• General Information

•Existing Mechanical Conditions

•Dedicated Outdoor air Design

•Smoke Control Units

•Plant Reductions

•Cost Savings and Emission Reductions

•Indoor Air Quality Issues

•Payback Period

•Acoustical Analysis

•Final Comments


General InformationGeneral Information

• Construction Start Date: December 1997

•Date of Completion: August 1998

•46,000 Square Foot Addition

•4 stories above grade

•1 story partially below grade

•Final Cost of $6,056,190

•Budget of $6,100,000

Occupancy TypesOccupancy Types

•Storage

•Laboratories

•Lecture Halls

•Offices


Project Team InformationProject Team Information

Quad 3 Group:Joel Sims, AIA, Project AdministratorJohn Cowder, RA, Project ArchitectBrendan Mayer, PE, Mechanical EngineerWalter Bevilacqua, Electrical DesignerBernard Ostrosky, PE, PlumbingLee Eckert, PE, Structural EngineerSharon Lehman, Interiors

Prime Contractors:General: Sordoni ConstructionElectric: Brennan ElectricHVAC: Penn State MechanicalConstruction Manager: Sordoni Construction Services


Existing Mechanical ConditionsExisting Mechanical Conditions

•100% Outdoor Air Units

•Delivery of approximately 35,000 CFM

•One of the 4 units is CAV

•Remaining four are VAV in conjunction with Phoenix Air Valves

•2 110 Ton air cooled chilling units

•2 3753 MBH input natural gas boilers


100% Outdoor Air Applications and Ventilation Standards100% Outdoor Air Applications and Ventilation Standards

•100% Outdoor Air Units will assure there to be no inter-space sharing of air

•This is done through the absence of a mix box

•Mixing is not allowed in lab spaces if it will transfer contaminants from space to space.

•100% OA units use outdoor air to satisfy ventilation load and all of the thermal load

•In most cases the air required to relieve the entire thermal load on a space will surpass the amount of OA required for proper ventilation

•ASHRAE 62-2001 will list minimum suggested OA rates for a given occupancy

•Any amount of OA over the ASHRAE Std. is considered unvitiated or wasted in most cases

•Exception……


100% Outdoor Air Applications and Ventilation Standards100% Outdoor Air Applications and Ventilation Standards

Inter-space Recirculation Intra-space Recirculation

BadGood


Dedicated Outdoor Air Can Deliver!Dedicated Outdoor Air Can Deliver!

BadGood

•DOAS can bring in the minimal amount of outdoor air required (either by ASHRAE or for specific contaminant control) and pick up the rest of the thermal load with a parallel system.

•The use of a parallel system allows DOAS to supply at higher temperatures (in some cases) thus further reducing ventilation load and over all chiller size


Redesign ConceptRedesign Concept

•Apply Dedicated Outdoor Air with parallel radiant cooling and heating to all labs, offices and classrooms

•Conventional constant air volume air handler for corridors and basement storage spaces

•Packaged units for stairwells as a method of smoke control

•Use of parallel radiant cooling and heating will reduce mixing contaminants within the room

•High induction low temp discharge for humidity control

•If we want to reduce the contaminant mixing throughout the air, why use high induction?

•Air mixes sooner, leaves contaminant buoyant in the breathable zone

CommentsComments


Optimal Design Situation (Hybrid of Dilution Ventilation and Local ExhaustOptimal Design Situation (Hybrid of Dilution Ventilation and Local Exhaust

Hatching indicates negative pressure zones created by exhaust. Each exhaust would be located directly over the work station. Short circuiting could be a problem.


Design Considerations and Procedures for Dedicated Outdoor AirDesign Considerations and Procedures for Dedicated Outdoor Air

•For this analysis the ventilator units will be sized to meet ASHRAE 62-2001 Standard. Heat recovery will be used.

•Radiant cooling panel surface temperature will be taken as 55°F

•Ventilator unit will be designed to maintain space dewpoint less than 55°F

•Indoor air quality assessment


Hr

Btu

Design Procedures for Dedicated Outdoor Air (Classroom 101)Design Procedures for Dedicated Outdoor Air (Classroom 101)

•Space requires 600CFM OA by ASHRAE

•Space set point of 72°F

•Space sensible load = 22,588 Btu/hr

•Space latent load = 4,800 Btu/hr

•DOAS supply point = 45°F DB and sat.

Given the above information we can determine three key pieces of information:

DOAS sensible Capacity = 17,496 Btu/hr

Radiant Panel Capacity = 5,029 Btu/hr

Resulting Dewpoint = 52°F

Cooling



•Panels rated for 55btu/(hr*ft2)

•Results in a panel area of 91ft2

• Ceiling coverage percentage of about 11%

The resulting dewpoint was derived by calculating a humidity rise due to latent load. That humidity rise is the same regardless of supply air point. Supplying at 52 °F and saturated will result in a dewpoint above 55°F.

Why not supply at 52°F and saturated?



Heating

•Heating season is calculated in similar manner

•DOAS supply temperature of 80°F was chosen

•Condensation control is not an issue with radiant heat

•Determine DOAS sensible capacity

•Determine radiant floor required capacity



Radiant floor heating on step down (secondary hydronic loop)


Design Conclusions for Dedicated Outdoor AirDesign Conclusions for Dedicated Outdoor Air

•Overall thermally efficient

•A few instances of over cooling and over heating

•Those instances took place in storage (interior) areas

•Over cooling could be eliminated with the use of a sensible reheat wheel.

•By cooling the air to 45°F and saturated and then sensibly reheating, we will maintain proper humidity ratio

•Over heating could be solved with the use of terminal reheat boxes. No over heating occurred in critical spaces (classrooms labs offices etc.)


Use of Heat Recovery (Enthalpy Type Only)Use of Heat Recovery (Enthalpy Type Only)

•By adding an enthalpy wheel we can further reduce cooling and heating loads

•Counter flow type wheel

•Cross contamination percent of .04

•Self purging for particulate matter

•Free pre-heating


Smoke Control Units for Stairwells (Creating a Safe Haven)Smoke Control Units for Stairwells (Creating a Safe Haven)

•Positive pressure in stairwells

•Pressure difference of .5”wg


Redesigned Plant SizesRedesigned Plant Sizes

•116 Tons of Cooling

•677.6 MBH of heating

•300GPM Cooling Plant

•70 GPM Heating Plant

Existing Plant SizesExisting Plant Sizes

•210 Tons of Cooling

•2,609 MBH of heating

•517GPM Cooling Plant

•240 GPM Heating Plant


Overall Reductions and SavingsOverall Reductions and Savings

Fan Reduction: 23,336 CFM or 61.5% (.133$/(cfm*yr))

Cooling Plant Reduction: 104 Tons or 47.3% (217.8$/(ton*yr))

Heating Plant Reductions: 1,931.3 MBH or 74% (54$/(MBH*yr))

Pumping Reductions: 405 GPM or 52% (3.4$/(Gpm*yr))

At the rates given above (from HAP) we are effectively making $130,960.05 per year with DOAS-Radiant for our tested condition.

OR…….


Overall Reductions and SavingsOverall Reductions and Savings

A brand new Porsche 911 Turbo every year and walk home with $2760.05 change!


Reduction in on and off-site emissionsReduction in on and off-site emissions

Existing

CO2: 222,743 lb/yr

SO2: 1379.12 lb/yr

Nox: 2681.83 lb/yr

CO: 1683 lb/yr

Particulate: 493.144 lb/yr

Redesigned

CO2: 79,300 lb/yr

SO2: 486 lb/yr

Nox: 710 lb/yr

CO: 381 lb/yr

Particulate: 111 lb/yr


Reduction in on and off-site emissionsReduction in on and off-site emissions

% Reduction

CO2: 64.3%

SO2: 64.7%

Nox: 73.5%

CO: 77.3%

Particulate: 77.3%

This building cleaned up quite nice


Indoor Air Quality ConsiderationsIndoor Air Quality Considerations

In lab type occupancies there is a good chance of the presence of contamination sources



Dilution Ventilation

•DOAS can be designed to bring in minimum outside air for IAQ

•Internal emissions need to be known

•Air testing required



Local Exhaust Ventilation

•High level contaminants

•Contaminants are immediately evacuated

•No mixing



Local Exhaust Ventilation

•DOAS may not supply enough make up air for exhaust units

•Short circuit hoods would work in conjunction with stair units

•Dampers would redirect all flow to stairwell when smoke detector trips


Redesign ConclusionsRedesign Conclusions

•DOAS with enthalpy wheel (as proposed)

•Correct with Sensible wheel

•Mild over heating

•Could work for IAQ if given proper information

•Large plant reductions

•Large Emission reductions

•Large cost savings (as compared with 100% OA application)


Payback Analysis (Breadth Work) Payback Analysis (Breadth Work)

Pay Back Characteristic

PBP = -6E-13(ic)2 + 7E-06(ic) - 0.7048

0.00

2.004.00

6.00

8.00

10.0012.00

14.00

16.00

0.00 1,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 4,000,000.00

Total Savings

Yea

rs

DOAS-Radiant initial cost = $667,584

Pays Back in 3.7 Years (Under 25% of a 15 yr mechanical life time)

Payback period is taking into account 6% interest


Acoustical Analysis for Classroom 212 (Breadth Work) Acoustical Analysis for Classroom 212 (Breadth Work)


Acoustical Analysis for Classroom 212 (Breadth Work) Acoustical Analysis for Classroom 212 (Breadth Work)

Existing Conditions

•Resulting RC value = 38

•Recommended RC 35-40

•Possible Vibrations

Corrections

•Acoustical Insulation

•2” thick fiberglass (3lb/ft3)

•40% coverage of common wall

Redesigned

•Resulting RC value = 33

•Recommended RC 35-40

•Possible Vibrations

Corrections

•Acoustical Insulation

•2” thick fiberglass (3lb/ft3)

•5% coverage of common wall


Final Comments Final Comments

• Switching 100% OA applications to DOAS

•If a space requires large amounts of OA DOAS can supply at higher temperatures and further reduce plant size

•Use of parallel system

•Global impact

•Cleaner Buildings

•Cleaner Environment


Acknowledgments Acknowledgments

Tony Shebelock P.E.(Quad 3 Group)John Cowder R.A. (Quad 3 Group)

Joseph Ballz, Facilites Manager (Kings College)Dr. William Groves Ph.D, C.I.H. (Penn State University)

Dr. Jae-Weon Jeong PH.D, Advisor (Penn State University)AE Mechanical Faculty

Kyle Pepperman (Graphic Design)Family and Friends


QuestionsQuestions

Application and Design for The Charles E. and Mary Parente Life Sciences Building Kings College...

Documents

Transcript of Application and Design for The Charles E. and Mary Parente Life Sciences Building Kings College...