Mechanical System Redesign Dedicated Outdoor Air System ... · Figure 7 displays the coil selection...
Transcript of Mechanical System Redesign Dedicated Outdoor Air System ... · Figure 7 displays the coil selection...
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
17
Mechanical System Redesign
Dedicated Outdoor Air System
Design Criteria
The outdoor air conditions used were for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania IAP at a
0.4% occurrence. The supply air conditions were developed using an exhaustive search
method that optimized the cooling capacity of the ventilation air and the capacity of the
cooling panels at the same time. With these supply air conditions, the room air
conditions provide a high level of thermal comfort. Because the cooling panels transfer
heat through radiation and convection, the room feels comfortable even at a higher dry
bulb temperature.
Table 3-Outdoor and Space Conditions
Dry Bulb (° F) Humidity Ratio (gr/lbm)
Dew Point (° F) (for supply air)
Outdoor Air Conditions 92 104 - Supply Air Conditions 58 55.9 51 Room Air Conditions 78 57.3 -
Because the building originally had four AHUs, each serving one quadrant of the
building, four new AHUs will each serve the same quadrants. The design criteria for the
Pinnacle units, described in the next section, are as follows:
Table-4-AHU Criteria
Unit Name Pinnacle Unit Designation
Quadrant Served Airflow rate (cfm)
AHU-1 PVS-09 Northwest 4,000 AHU-2 PVS-09 Southwest 5,600 AHU-3 PVS-18 Northeast 9,700 AHU-4 PVS-09 Southeast 6,650
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
18
The specific size of AHU is based on air flow rate. Refer to appendix for the
Pinnacle Unit Selection Table used to determine the size of each AHU.
Refer to appendix for calculations of ventilation air. The amount of ventilation air
is calculated using ASHRAE Standard 62-2001 minimum outdoor air requirement. The
airflows are different from the original design because the multiple spaces equation of
Standard 62 is not used in this design. Table 3 summarizes these requirements:
Table 5-Ventilation Rates
Space Occupancy Load Ventilation
People /1000 ft2 CFM/Person
Conference room 50 20
Office space 7 20
Cafeteria Seating Area 100 20
Reception Area 60 20
The airflow rate of AHU-3 is higher than the other units because it serves the
servery/dining room. Additionally, a flat maximum occupancy of 120 people is used in
the dining room in modeling the building.
Pinnacle Ventilation System
The SEMCO Pinnacle Ventilation System AHU (PVS) was used to replace the existing
AHUs. This is because the Pinnacle System can produce low dew point space
temperatures economically regardless of the temperature of the chilled water suuplied to
the cooling coils. The PVS is comprised of a total energy wheel, a cooling coil, a passive
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
19
dehumidification wheel, a post-cooling coil, a supply fan, and a return fan. Because the
PVS has two energy recovery wheels, it is advantageous to use in this
application. The AHU components are described below, but the actual design was
performed by selection software provided by SEMCO.
The passive dehumidification wheel removes moisture more effectively than
dessicant-based cooling or even a dual-wheel energy recovery system. Thus, it can
produce the low dew point space temperature that is needed to decouple the space
sensible and latent loads. Figure 5 demonstrates its dehumidification capacity as a
function of wheel speed. This shows that the amount of dehumidification can be altered
by controlling the speed at which the wheel rotates.
Figure 5
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
20
The cooling coil, though part of the overall system, was selected using the USA
Coil software. The conditioning of the air in the PVS is not dependent on the chilled
water temperature. This makes it ideal for this particular application because the chilled
water system serves two buildings. The controls are much simpler if the chilled water
temperature is uniform throughout the system. Figure 6 displays the cooling coil
selection for AHU-1. Refer to the appendix for the cooling coils of the other three
AHUs.
Normally, a sensible wheel is used to recover sensible heat from the return air to
increase the supply air temperature. The supply air temperature needs to be increased
because overcooling can occur if the space loads are too small. This can happen when
the space is unoccupied. When a space is unoccupied, the humidity can be controlled by
reheating the air after it leaves the cooling coil. However, the PVS passive
Figure 6
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
21
dehumidification wheel must raise the temperature of the supply air to achieve the
desired humidity ratio. Consequently, the system needs a sensible cooling coil to post-
cool the supply air. The post-cooling coil was also selected using the USA Coil software.
Figure 7 displays the coil selection for the post-cooling coil for AHU 1. Refer to
the appendix for the post-cooling coils of the other three AHUs.
Air System Modeling
Cooling loads for the building are modeled using Carrier’s Hourly Analysis
Program (HAP). The air system is modeled as a two-pipe fan coil unit with common
ventilation. The ventilation rates were those calculated in the appendix. This HAP
model provided the total sensible load for each space. This information was used to
design the radiant panel system discussed in the next section. The program also
calculated the cooling load on the chillers in the central plant. Refer to the energy
comparison section for a discussion on the reduction of cooling load on the chillers.
Figure 7
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
22
The most important HAP output is the breakdown of the total cooling load into
sensible and latent components. Refer to the appendix for the DOAS air system output.
This shows that the air system can adequately handle the entire modeled latent load using
the specified supply air conditions.
There are several ways that the AHU could be modeled using the SEMCO
modeling software, but because the space latent load is handled entirely by the DOAS,
the air system is modeled to determine the performance data for peak space latent loads.
Figure 8 shows the model of AHU-1. Refer to appendix for the models of AHU-2, AHU-
3, and AHU-4. It is clear that the PVS is capable of producing the required supply air
and room conditions. Figure 8 also shows the energy savings that are achieved using the
PVS. While this shows that the PVS saves energy, it compares the DOAS system to a
conventional system with the same supply air and room conditions. The current system
uses a supply air condition of saturated 55° F air, and a room condition of 75° F and 55%
RH. Because of the difference in conditions, more accurate energy savings are predicted
using HAP. Refer to the energy comparison section.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
23
Refer to appendix for AHU-1 schematic.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
24
Radiant Cooling Panel System
Radiant cooling panels are used in every space in the building to remove sensible
space loads that the DOAS cannot handle. Invensys Building System panels are selected
using their Magic 6 product selection software. Because the reflected ceiling plan of the
building is already set up in a 2’×4’ grid, 2’×4’ panels are selected. To maximize the
panels’ cooling capacity, the panels are free-hanging at 8’-0”, or 1’-6” below the original
ceiling line. The radiant panel system is also designed to take up at most 50% of the total
ceiling area to allow for other ceiling fixtures, such as lights, diffusers, and sprinkler
heads. For each quadrant, a pump delivers water to the radiant panel control closets on
each floor. In the control closets, one control valve for each zone controls the inlet
temperature of the water in one of the spaces.
Design
The total space sensible load is calculated using the HAP model. A Microsoft
Excel spreadsheet (see appendix) is used to determine how much of the space sensible
load could be handled by the DOAS system. The remainder of the sensible load is met
by the radiant panels.
The radiant panel inlet water temperature is chosen somewhat arbitrarily, but the
mean temperature difference is chosen to provide maximum capacity for each panel.
Table 4 summarizes the radiant panel design choices. Refer to appendix for Magic 6
software selection outputs.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
25
Table 6-Radiant Panel Design Criteria
Room Dry Bulb Temperature ( ° F) 78 Panel Inlet Temperature (° F) 52 Panel Outlet Temperature (° F) 60 Mean Panel Temperature Difference (° F) 22 Total Capacity (Btu/ft2) 33.6 Pressure Drop (psi) 2.8 Water Velocity (fpm) 85
The air side temperature difference (∆T) is only 20° F, compared to a normal
DOAS ∆T of about 30° F. This means that the DOAS cooling capacity is relatively
small, because the cooling load is directly proportional to the ∆T of the standard air by
the equation Q=1.08×scfm×∆T. Consequently, the radiant panels have to remove more
of the space latent load. The way that the building envelope is currently designed allows
more sensible solar and envelope load into the space than can be handled by the DOAS
system and an appropriate amount of radiant panel area (<50% of the total floor area).
To overcome this problem, half of the windows in the exterior private and open offices
were replaced with spandrel panels that were modeled as equal in performance with the
wall construction. This exchange is discussed in the cost comparison section.
This envelope alteration did not completely solve the problem in the exterior
offices. In the perimeter spaces, more panel area, about 60% of the ceiling area, was able
to completely handle the sensible load. In corner offices and some of the perimeter
offices, the amount of air supplied to the space was increased slightly to overcome the
sensible load. Refer to the appendix for the complete design of every space.
To demonstrate that the radiant panel system can work in every space, figures 9
through 13 show sample radiant panel layouts for each type of space. These select spaces
are on the second floor and are served by either AHU-1 or AHU-2. In each figure, the
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
26
blue 2’×4’ panels are the radiant panels.
The radiant panels in the interior offices are able to handle the sensible load,
utilizing less than 50% of the ceiling area.
Figure 9
Figure 10
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
27
The percentage of ceiling area that the radiant panels cover is about 55%, but
there is still adequate room for other ceiling fixtures. The ventilation air is increased to
30 cfm.
The radiant panel area in the corner office is about 60% of the ceiling area, but
there is still adequate room for other ceiling fixtures. The ventilation air in this room is
increased to 60 cfm. This is a large increase, but the office is oriented to the southwest,
has a large envelope area, and thus receives a higher solar load.
Figure 11
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
28
The radiant panels in the conference room are able to handle the space sensible load. The
panels take up less than 50% of the ceiling area. This is very important in the conference
room, because there are extra ceiling fixtures, such as dimmable lights and a projector.
Figure 12
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
29
The radiant panels in the open office area are able to handle the space sensible
load, utilizing less than 50% of the ceiling area.
Panel Piping
For modeling purposes, the building is split into four main zones that correspond
to the areas that each AHU serves. These zones are divided into “mini-zones” that
correspond to a particular use group, such as perimeter enclosed offices with south-facing
exposure. The purpose of this grouping is to separately control the radiant panel water
flow to each mini-zone. Each mini-zone has its own control valve in a control closet that
Figure 13
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
30
can easily be manually adjusted and maintained. The location of the control valves is not
only advantageous to maintenance. If the control valves were located above the ceiling
in the space, a leak could drip into the space. Locating the control valves in a central
closet, however, reduces the risk of a leak developing above the space. Figure 14 on
page 32 shows the location of the control closet for AHU-2 on the second floor. The
valves are shown outside of the closet for clarity. One pump serves the control closets of
each AHU, and these pumps are located in the basement. It would be optimal to place
them in the same quadrant on one of the floors to be closer to the control closets, but the
pumps take up floor space and have the potential to leak.
While detailed controls for the piping system are out of the scope of this report, it
is necessary to discuss the basic control sequence. The water for the panels comes from
the chilled water system, which supplies chilled water at 44° F. A three-way valve is
used to mix returning 60° F water with the chilled water supply to maintain the required
52° F inlet water temperature.
One concern about locating chilled water piping in a space is what happens when
the air system that normally controls condensation is turned off at night and humidity is
allowed to build up. In this case, condensation would occur when 52° F water was
initially pumped back into the system in the morning. To prevent this, the three-way
valve can control the water temperature to ensure that is above the dew point of the
space.
Another control valve is placed farther down the supply line and is controlled by a
temperature sensor located at the inlet of the panel system of a typical space. Condensate
sensors in each room sense any condensation from the panels in the room. The
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
31
condensate sensors are located at the inlet of the piping, near the ceiling, to prevent
tampering. If the condensate sensor is tripped, the control valve in the control closet for
that mini-zone shuts down the flow to that mini-zone. Figure 15 on page 33 gives an
example of how one mini-zone could be controlled.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
32
Figu
re 1
4
Pi
ctur
e no
t ava
ilabl
e du
e to
secu
rity
reas
ons.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
33
Figu
re 1
5 Pi
ctur
e no
t ava
ilabl
e du
e to
secu
rity
reas
ons.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
34
Mechanical System Energy Analysis
The new DOAS/Radiant system was compared to the current VAV system in
terms of monthly electrical energy usage and chiller plant load. The load breakdown of
each system was also compared. Table 7 summarizes the chiller plant load of each
system from the Phase 2 building only. The “original VAV” system serves the original
building.
Table 7-Chiller Plant Loads System Chiller Plant Load (tons) Original VAV System 541 DOAS/Radiant Parallel System 122
Figure 16 shows the cooling load breakdown of the original VAV system. Note how
small the envelope load is in comparison to the Outdoor Air Load. Figure 17 shows the
cooling load breakdown of the DOAS/Radiant System. Here, the envelope load
(including solar load) is a much higher percentage of the overall load because the OA
load does not factor in to the cooling load estimate. This also demonstrates why
eliminating one-half of the office windows contributes so strongly to the overall load on
the panels.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
35
VAV System Cooling Load BreakdownEnvelope 3%
Occupant 9.74%
Electric 32%
OA Load 55%
DOAS/Radiant Cooling Load Breakdown
Total Electric67%
Occupant13%
Envelope20%
Figure 17
Figure 16
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
36
Mechanical System Cost Comparison
The first cost and monthly operating costs of the original VAV and DOAS system
were compared. These estimates do not take into account parts of the mechanical system
that did not change with the DOAS/Radiant system redesign. Because the chiller plant
serves both Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildings, the central plant configuration cannot be
altered. However, because the DOAS/Radiant system reduces the Phase 2 building
cooling load by so much, one of the water cooled electric chillers can be downsized from
650 tons to 350 tons. This also means that one of the cooling towers can be downsized to
match the condenser water flow from the smaller chiller.
The main first cost savings, however, come from the reduction in ductwork.
Table 8 shows a summary of the first costs of each system and the amount of savings that
the DOAS/Radiant system produces.
Table 8-First Cost Comparison
Item Unit Cost-VAV Units-VAV VAV Unit Cost-Parallel Units-Parallel Parallel Savings650 tonAbs Chiller $321,000 1 $353,100 $321,000 1 $353,100 $0650 ton WC Chiller $229,500 3 $757,350 $229,500 2 $504,900 $252,450350 ton WC Chiller N/A N/A $132,000 1 $145,200 -$145,200650 ton CT $26,796 4 $117,902 $26,796 3 $88,427 $29,476350 ton CT N/A N/A $16,433 1 $18,076 -$18,076Ductwork1 $4/ft2 186000 $744,000 $1/ft2 186000 $186,000 $558,000AHU-1 $77,808 1 $85,589 $24,378 1 $26,816 $58,773AHU-2 $77,808 1 $85,589 $26,366 1 $29,003 $56,586AHU-3 $77,808 1 $85,589 $35,903 1 $39,493 $46,096AHU-4 $77,808 1 $85,589 $28,372 1 $31,209 $54,380Radiant Panels1 N/A N/A N/A $13/ft2 44528 ft2 $636,750 -$636,750
$255,733All cost estimates are from RS Means, 2003, unless noted otherwise
1: Cost estimate from Mumma. "Ceiling Panel Cooling Systems," ASHRAE Journal: ASHRAE, November 2001.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
37
The DOAS/Radiant system also saves operating costs. An energy analysis is
performed for both VAV and DOAS/Radiant systems using the HAP which shows that
the DOAS/Radiant system also has a lower operating cost. Table 9 summarizes these
figures, while Figure 18 compares each system visually. Table 9 also compares the
energy usage for each system.
Table 9-Monthly Electric Operating Costs
Month DOAS VAV Month DOAS VAVJan $37,569 $45,143 Jan 540,757 606,443Feb $36,159 $41,649 Feb 517,403 579,503Mar $41,326 $49,954 Mar 609,632 687,669Apr $42,668 $52,720 Apr 616,664 714,326May $45,969 $56,471 May 654,107 764,653Jun $52,421 $64,663 Jun 768,431 911,262Jul $56,219 $68,312 Jul 839,679 952,718
Aug $54,478 $67,740 Aug 805,920 935,599Sep $51,367 $63,633 Sep 744,782 886,787Oct $44,134 $53,844 Oct 630,335 734,301Nov $42,248 $51,454 Nov 599,605 683,471Dec $40,651 $48,280 Dec 596,817 670,487
Total $545,207 $663,860 Total 7,924,132 9,127,219$118,653 Savings 1,203,087
Electric Cost
Savings
Electric Usage (kWh)
The spandrel panels that take the pace on about one-half the windows in the office
spaces could present a higher first cost. However, a comparison of costs from Means
2003 Facilities Construction Cost Data shows that the cost of an insulated spandrel panel
is about the same as a tinted, doubled glazed window.
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
38
Electric Operating Cost Comparison
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
$50,000
$55,000
$60,000
$65,000
$70,000
$75,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Dol
lars
DOAS/Radiant System
VAV System
Figure 18
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
39
Conclusions
Because the mechanical system for this building cannot adequately meet the
intent of ASHRAE Standard 62-2001, a DOAS system, coupled with radiant cooling
panels was implemented in the building. This new system reduces the cooling load on
the chiller plant, reduces first cost and reduces electric operating cost. Because of these
savings, this new system should be implemented.
The DOAS system provides the correct amount of fresh air to each space to meet
the intent of ASHRAE Standard 62-2001 and provide a comfortable indoor air
environment. Four SEMCO PVS AHUs are used to condition the outdoor air using the
common chilled water temperature so that the central chiller plant does not have to be
altered. The DOAS system is able to completely handle the space latent load and some
of the space sensible load, so that the radiant ceiling panels only have to take care of the
excess sensible load.
Radiant panels in every space of the building take care of the excess sensible load
while usually taking up less than one-half of the ceiling area, leaving the rest of the
ceiling for other ceiling fixtures such as lights, diffusers, and A/V equipment. The
radiant panel chilled water flow is controlled at control closets on each floor of the
building in every quadrant. Each control closets contain valves for “mini-zones” that the
closet maintains. These control closets utilize space that was formerly vertical duct space
and provide a maintenance friendly area for control.
Though the DOAS/Radiant system saves money in both first and operating costs,
there are a few reservations with the system. First of all, in some spaces, namely the
Rebecca Rubert NWI EnterprisesMechanical Option Frazer, PA
40
corner offices, the radiant panels take up so much of the ceiling that the ceiling height
should be lowered to the panel height of 8’-0” so that the ceiling has a more uniform
height. This is a workable solution, but the occupants of the corner offices may feel that
their offices are smaller because of the lower ceiling height. Additionally, in these areas
it may be difficult to locate a ceiling position for the sprinkler heads because the lights,
diffusers, and panels take up most of the ceiling space. Integrating the fire suppression
system with the radiant panel piping system may solve this problem, but that is out of the
scope of this redesign.
Overall, this DOAS/Radiant system provides a thermally comfortable, cost
effective mechanical system.