Design Project - SIE 2014 - ENAC · Design Project - SIE 2014 Favre Adrien, Martinasso Mélanie!...
1
Design Project - SIE 2014 Favre Adrien, Martinasso Mélanie Comparative eco-assessment : double-flux ventilation / hybrid ventilation Persons in charge Vahid Nik (LESO-PB) Romain Kilchherr (Perenzia SA) The society edms SA (Petit-Lancy, GE) is a civil and environmental engineering firm. They are in charge of a construction site at Céligny (GE) and are interested by the comparison of two ventilation systems. Context This study’s objectives are to realize a financial assessment and a comparative life cycle analysis between two ventilation systems : a mechanical double-flux ventilation and a hybrid ventilation. Objectives Technical analysis • Mechanical & hybrid system description • Advantages & drawbacks Financial analysis • Investment • Maintenance • Electricity cons. • Heat cons. Life cycle analysis • Goal and scope definition • Life cycle inventory • Life cycle impact analysis • Sensitivity analysis Hybrid ventilation Hybrid ventilation = natural + mechanical ventilation Electrical turbine works if T in -T out ≤ 4°C Advantages • Low electric consumption • Low cost and easy maintenance • Robust system • Inexpensive installation • No sanitary risk on incoming air • Low rooop obstruction Drawbacks • No heat recovery • More heating needed • Not the best system for large surfaces • Important architectural constraints • Noise problems II. Financial analysis Cost overview considering an increasing electricity cost and the heating: Total cost of the two ventilations over 20 years: III. Life cycle analysis + : important impact - : minor impact Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans. 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 Human health [DALY] DALY Hybrid vent. Mechanical vent. Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans. 0 5 10 15 x 10 4 Ecosystem quality [PDF*m2*yr] PDF*m 2 *yr Hybrid vent. Mechanical vent. Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans. 0 5000 10000 15000 Climate change [kg CO2,eq.] kg CO2,eq. Hybrid vent. Mechanical vent. Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans. 0 2 4 6 x 10 5 Ressources [MJ primary] MJ primary Hybrid vent. Mechanical vent. Mechanical double-flux ventilation Advantages • Airflow entirely controled • Easily regulated • Heat recovery • Homogeneous distribution of fresh air • Filtration of incoming air Drawbacks • Significant electric consumption • Significant investment & maintenance • Takes a lot of space • Pipe system is embedded in slabs (more concrete used) • Unpleasant noise Fresh air is pumped in from the outside and old air is pumped out from the inside. Heat recovery system pre-heats air before injection reduced heating. Does not work in summer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 Year Cost [CHF] Cumulative cost of the two ventilation system for different scenarios Hybrid : Qmin, 24h Hybrid : Qmin, 12h Hybrid : Qmax, 24h Hybrid : Qmax, 12h VMC : Qmin, 265d VMC : Qmin, 365d VMC : Qmax, 265d VMC : Qmax, 365d [CHF] Without heating With heating Hybrid 43’000 83’000 Mechanical 120’000 145’000 Hybrid Mechanical Investment - ++ Maintenance -- + Electricity cons. -- ++ Heating needs + - Human health ++ - Ecosystem qual. ++ - Climate change + ++ Resources - ++ When both financial and environmental factors are taken into account, the hybrid ventilation appears to be the best alternative. Results Conclusion Contact : adrien.favre@epfl.ch | melanie.martinasso@epfl.ch Const. : construction Elec. : electricity EoL : End of Life Trans. : transport Methodology Study site : building A Surface : 1’608 m 2 Volume : 3’765.5 m 3 Ventilation flows : • Q min : 934 m 3 / h • Q max : 1’380 m 3 / h I. Technical analysis
Transcript of Design Project - SIE 2014 - ENAC · Design Project - SIE 2014 Favre Adrien, Martinasso Mélanie!...
Design Project - SIE 2014 Favre Adrien, Martinasso Mélanie!
Comparative eco-assessment : double-flux ventilation / hybrid ventilation
Persons in charge Vahid Nik (LESO-PB)
Romain Kilchherr (Perenzia SA)
The society edms SA (Petit-Lancy, GE) is a civil and environmental engineering firm. They are in charge of a construction site at Céligny (GE) and are interested by the comparison of two ventilation systems.
Context! This study’s objectives are to realize a financial assessment and a comparative life cycle analysis between two ventilation systems : a mechanical double-flux ventilation and a hybrid ventilation.
Objectives!
Technical analysis
• Mechanical & hybrid system description
• Advantages & drawbacks
Financial analysis
• Investment • Maintenance • Electricity cons. • Heat cons.
Life cycle analysis
• Goal and scope
definition • Life cycle
inventory • Life cycle impact
analysis • Sensitivity
analysis
Hybrid ventilation!
Hybrid ventilation = natural + mechanical ventilation Electrical turbine works if Tin-Tout ≤ 4°C
Advantages • Low electric consumption • Low cost and easy
maintenance • Robust system • Inexpensive installation • No sanitary risk on incoming
air • Low roo!op obstruction
Drawbacks • No heat recovery • More heating needed • Not the best system for large
surfaces • Important architectural
constraints • Noise problems
! ! II. Financial analysis!!!
Cost overview considering an increasing electricity cost and the heating:
Total cost of the two ventilations over 20 years:
! ! III. Life cycle analysis!
+ : important impact - : minor impact
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2Human health [DALY]
DA
LY
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
5
10
15x 104Ecosystem quality [PDF*m2*yr]
PD
F*m
2 *yr
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
5000
10000
15000Climate change [kg CO2,eq.]
kg C
O2,
eq.
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
2
4
6x 105 Ressources [MJ primary]
MJ
prim
ary
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Mechanical double-flux ventilation!
Advantages • Airflow entirely controled • Easily regulated • Heat recovery • Homogeneous distribution of
fresh air • Filtration of incoming air
Drawbacks • Significant electric
consumption • Significant investment &
maintenance • Takes a lot of space • Pipe system is embedded in
slabs (more concrete used) • Unpleasant noise
Fresh air is pumped in from the outside and old air is pumped out from the inside. Heat recovery system pre-heats air before injection è reduced heating. Does not work in summer
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
Year
Cos
t [C
HF]
Cumulative cost of the two ventilation system for different scenarios
Hybrid : Qmin, 24hHybrid : Qmin, 12hHybrid : Qmax, 24hHybrid : Qmax, 12hVMC : Qmin, 265dVMC : Qmin, 365dVMC : Qmax, 265dVMC : Qmax, 365d
[CHF] Without heating With heating
Hybrid 43’000 83’000 Mechanical 120’000 145’000
Hybrid Mechanical Investment - ++ Maintenance -- + Electricity cons. -- ++ Heating needs + - Human health ++ - Ecosystem qual. ++ - Climate change + ++ Resources - ++
When both financial and environmental factors are taken into account, the hybrid ventilation appears to be the best alternative.
Results!
Conclusion!
Contact : [email protected] | [email protected]!
Const. : construction Elec. : electricity EoL : End of Life Trans. : transport
Methodology!
Study site : building A Surface : 1’608 m2
Volume : 3’765.5 m3
Ventilation flows : • Qmin : 934 m3 / h • Qmax : 1’380 m3 / h
! ! I. Technical analysis!
