Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Stanley A
A. Mumma
Mumma, PhPh.D.,
D PP.E.
E
Prof. Emeritus, Architectural Engineering
Penn State University, Univ. Park, PA
sam11@psu.edu
Web: http://doas-radiant.psu.edu 1
Copyright Materials
4
Current HVAC system of choice:
VAV
OA
VAV
Space 1,
VAV w/ single air
delivery path
. ventn performance.
Poor & unpredictable
OAB=3,600 cfm
OA=?
% OAB=?60
AHU
6,000 cfm 1,500 cfm 4,500 cfm
20%-70% High
less OA, Cool/Dry Induction
DOAS Unit
than VAV Supply Diffuser
w/ Energy
Recovery
Building with
P ll l
Parallel Sensible
Sensible and Latent
Cooling System Cooling
Decoupled
10
Key DOAS Points
1. 100% OA delivered to each zone via its
own ductwork
2. Flow
l rate generally
ll as spec. b
by Std.
d 62.1-
2007 or greater (LEED, Latent. Ctl)
3. Employ TER, per Std. 90.1-2007
4. Generally CV
5 Use
5. U to decouple
d l space S/L loadsDry
l d D
6. Rarely supply at a neutral temperature
7. Use HID, particularly where parallel
system does not use air 11
Total
Energy
Recovery
(TER)
Wheel
12
High Induction Diffuser
Provides complete
p air mixingg
Evens temperature gradients in the space
Eliminates short-circuiting between supply & return
Increases ventilation effectiveness
13
Unitary ACs
Air Handling Units VRV i.e., WSHPs
CV or VAV Multi-Splits 14
DOAS with Parallel VAV
Std. VAV AHU
OA
Economizer
OA
Space 2,
DOAS in
parallel w/
VAV
15
Space 3,
DOAS in
parallel w/
FCU
17
OA
EA
OA OA
SA RA RA SA
19
OA
EA
SA OA OA SA
RA RA
20
Reasons given by series camp for using
series arrangement of FCU with DOAS over
the false paradigm parallel arrangement
Superior thermal comfort
S
Superior
i IAQ
Superior energy efficiency and performance
Simpler arrangement
Reduced 1st $, labor and materials
Ideal for constant volume systems
Best for low occupancy density spaces
Simpler controls
Eliminates the need for DOAS terminal reheat
Simplifies the selection, performance and placement of
diffusers
Eliminates the distribution of cold DOAS air to perimeter
spaces in the winter.
21
OA
EA
OA
SA SA
RA RA
22
Advantages of the correct paradigm
parallel FCU-DOAS arrangement
At low sensible cooling load conditions, the terminal
equipment may be shut offsaving fan energy
The terminal device fans may be down sized since they are
not handling any of the ventilation air, reducing first cost
The smaller terminal fans result in fan energy savings
The cooling coils in the terminal FCUs are not derated since
they are handling only warm return air, resulting in smaller
coils and further reducing first cost.
Opportunity for plenum condensation is reduced since the
ventilation air is not introduced into the plenum near the
terminal equipment, for better IAQ
Is not inferior to the series arrangement in any of the 11
categories sited above as advantages by the series camp,
when configured with the correct parallel paradigm
23
OA
Radiant
Panel
Space 3,
DOAS in
parallel w/
CRCP
25
28
DOAS & Energy Recovery
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 in section 6.5.6.1
Exhaust Air Energy Recovery requires the
f ll i
following:
Individual fan systems that have both a design
supply air capacity of 5000 cfm or greater
and have a minimum outside air supply of
70% or greater of the design supply air
quantity
tit shall
h ll have
h an energy recovery
system with at least 50% total energy
recovery effectiveness.
Std 62.1-2007 allows its use with class 1-3 air.
29
90
h=27.6 Btu/lb
80
70 h=17.1 Btu/lb
60
50
40
Conditions after
30
the TER
20 equipment &
10 entering the CC
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
DBT, F
31
32
Air side economizer lost:
implications!
This a frequent question, coupled with the
realization that without full air side
economizer, the chiller may run many
more hours in the winter than owners and
operators would expect based on their
prior experiences.
The following slides will address this
issue.
For more details, please check the link:
http://doas-radiant.psu.edu/IAQ_Econ_Pt1_Pt2.pdf
33
34
Air Side VAV Econ. Performance Vs. DOAS
An example, assuming:
Internally dominated cooling load building. Fully
occupied
i d 6 days
d per week,
k from
f 6 am tot 7 pm (13
hours per day, 4,056 hours per year).
100,000 cfm design supply air flow rate at 55F
Minimum ventilation air requirement: 20,000 cfm
In the economizer mode, the OA flow can
modulate between 20,000 cfm and 100,000 cfm.
Therefore, the only variability in chiller energy
consumption/demand is the economizer control
and the geographic location.
35
Objective
Assumes:
0.7 kW/ton cooling
Fan eff
eff. 70%: Motor eff.
eff 90%
Electricity: $0.08/kWh
AHU internal P=3, External P=4
36
Min OA Region if Enthalpy Ctl,
100% OA Region:
or 100% OA if DBT90 Ctl: 196
523 hrs, Miami, FL .028
691 hrs, Miami, FL
1058 hrs, Columbus OH.
419 hrs, Columbus OH.
886 hrs, Intl Falls, MN.
193 hrs, Intl Falls, MN. 168
.024
%
%
60
80
80
Modulating OA Region: OA Design:
76 hrs
hrs, Miami
Miami, FL Miami 311 T
Miami, 140
.020
020
%
40
Columbus, 290 T
50 56
.008
008
Min OA R
Mi Region:
i
40 2766 hrs, Miami, FL
28
685 hrs, Columbus, OH. .004
Th
The electric
l t i utilities
tiliti recommend, d iin order
d tto
place a lid on high demand, locking the
economizer in the minimum outside air
position if an economizer repeatedly fails,
and it is prohibitively expensive to repair it.
Although the potential benefits of the
economizers energy savings are lost, it is a
certain hedge against it becoming a
significant energy/demand waster. 39
60
80
80
DOAS fan energy: $8,000
DOAS F Fan SSavings:
i $33
$33,500,
500 Min OA Region: 140
.020
020
%
Economizer40does not
HUMIDITY RATIO (Lbv/Lba)
.012
60
0 vs. 266 kTH, Intl Falls, MN. 0%
2
50 56
.008
008
100% OA R Region
i vs. DOAS:
DOAS
40 59 vs. 88 kTH, Miami, FL
94 vs. 171 kTH, Columbus 28
.004
75 vs. 144 kTH, Intl Falls
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 120
DRY BULB TEMPERATURE (F)
Economizer Summary
Using water economizer with DOAS-hydronic
systems is a good idea, and can save
mechanical cooling energy.
energy
It is recommended for applications employing
water cooled chillers.
However the DOAS-hydronic systems should
not need WSFC to comply with the Energy
Cost Budget Method of StdStd. 90
90.1.
1
Thats good, because many projects are too small
for cooling towers, but are excellent candidates
for DOAS-hydronic.
41
48
50 gr
43
90
EW 196
.028
5
RA
2 4 Space
1 3
OA
PH CC
168
.024
%
%
60
80
80
2
Hot & humid
H h id 40
%
140
.020
020
HUMIDITY RATIO (Lbv/Lba)
OA condition )
(F 70 112
.016
lb
Bu
et
W
3
84
Humidity ratio (grains/lb)
.012
60
2 0%
5
4 50 56
.008
008
40
28
.004
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 120
DRY BULB TEMPERATURE (F)
44
Atlanta Data, 12 hr/day-6 day/wk
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
W, grains/lb
90
80
70
60
50
40
Conditions after
30
the TER
20 equipment &
10 entering the CC
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
DBT, F
45
7 6
1 2 3 4 5
46
90
196
.028
168
.024
%
%
60
80
80
1
140
.020
020
%
40
3 84
40 5
28
.004
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 120
DRY BULB TEMPERATURE (F)
47
48
Process on the Psych Chart
150
140
7 6 5 1
130
120 1 2 3 4 7
110
W, gr/lbm
100
90 2
80
6
70
3
60 5
50
4
40 Enthalpy 4 > 3 DOAS needs
30
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
DBT, F
49
EW See
EW. S DOAS74
98
& Desiccants
D
78
91
Hi t t78 article
Heater
91
ti l on the
84 F DBT
148 gr/lb
th
DOAS web site for more details.
EW
76 50 75 82
98 51 58 129
54 RA when unoccupied,
43
44 DPT EA when occupied 50
51
100 3 4
90 2
80
70
60
7
50 5
40 6
30
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
DBT, F 52
Type III Desiccant Wheel
Heating
53
76.5 F
50 gr/lb
54
Psychrometric Process
2
150
140 1 4
2 3
130
120
110
100
W, gr/lbm
90
1
80
2
70
60
4
50
40
30 3
20
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
DBT, F
55
57
Qlatent=0.68*scfm*w (grains)
If all latent load from people @ 205
Btu/person, then,
w=15 gr/lb with 20 scfm/person, requires
48 F DPT if space 75
48F 75F
F 50% RH
or w=10 gr/lb with 30 scfm/person, requires
51F DPT if space 75F 50% RH
60
EW 90
5 196
.028
RA
2 4 Space
1 3
OA
PH CC 168
.024
%
%
60
80
80
w=15 grains,
grains with 20 140
.020
020
cfm/person 40
%
50 56
.008
008
40
4, 48F DPT, 50 grains 28
.004
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 120
DRY BULB TEMPERATURE (F)
61
65
VAV DOAS/Radiant
OA, scfm 9,916 7,921
OAload, Tons 55.6 7
38,
CCload, Tons 164
(7 OA, 31 Internal)
Terminal load,
0 78, rad. panels
Tons
Total Chiller
164 116 (70%)
load, tons
67
68
IE Q Prerequisite 1: Minimum Indoor Air Quality
Performance Required
Intent
To establish minimum indoor air q quality
y ((IAQ)
Q) p
performance to
enhance indoor air quality in buildings, thus contributing to
the comfort and well-being of the occupants.
Requirements
CASE 1. Mechanically Ventilated Spaces
Meet the minimum requirements of Sections 4 through 7 of
ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007, Ventilation for Acceptable
Indoor Air Quality (with errata but without addenda1).
Mechanical ventilation systems must be designed using the
ventilation rate procedure or the applicable local code,
whichever is more stringent.
69
Sustainable
IE Q Credit 2: Increased site
Ventilation: 26
1 Point 24%
Intent H2O 10 9%
To provide additional outdoor air ventilation to
Energy
improve indoor air quality (IAQ)& Atmos. 35
and promote occupant 32%
comfort, well-being and productivity.
Matls & Resource 14 13%
Wellbeing: the state of being
IEQ
happy, healthy, or15 14%
prosperous
Requirements Innovation 6 5%
CASE 1. Mechanically Ventilated Spaces
Increase breathing zoneRegional Priority
outdoor air 4 to 4
ventilation rates
occupied spaces by at least 30% above the minimum
Max points 110
rates required by ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 (with
errata but without addenda1) as determined by IEQ
Gold:
Gold
Prerequisite 1: Minimum 60-79
Indoor Airpoints
Quality
Performance.
70
30% surplus air questioned!
71
hOA hSA
AHU
mOA mSA= mOA
900 cfm 1,350 cfm
1: QOA1=mOA*(hOA-hSA)
75F 75F
2: QOA2=mOA*(hOA -hrelief) 50% RH
50% RH
QBldg=mSA*(hrelief-hSA)=QOA1-QOA2
hRelief
73
Fan
Economizer RH Allowed
by std 90.1?
IEQ
AHU 1st cost VAV
Conclusion? Energy/Env
75
Economizer RA
1 2
5
4 Space
3
OA
IEQ PH CC
Lec. cl 40 16%
B E
38 Increasing the latent load
C Elem. cl 36 B (200 to 250 Btu/hr-p) for a
34 A given SA flow rate,
D Office
32 req ires a lo
requires lower
er SA DPT
DPT.
E Museum 30 40% E
Std 62.1 flow
28
1.3* Std 62.1 flow
26 more cfm/person
24 A
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
CFM/person 78
S.S. CO2 PPM vs. cfm/person
52 2,240
50 2,130
Assumes an 48 2,020
OA CO2 conc.
conc 46 1,910
of 400 PPM & 44
Knee of curves 1,800
an occupant ~18 cfm/p
42 1,690
38 1,470
minimal returns
Note: CO2 36 1,360
IEQ 28 920
26 810
24 700
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
CFM/person 79
Ref: http://doas-radiant.psu.edu/mumma_Journal_30_PC_OA_6_09.pdf
81
Operating cost 90
196
.028
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
OP Lowest
TH OP
Flow TH, Ton COST Hours Hrs Temp
168
.024
w/ COST
%
60
80
80% w/o 80
w/o 80% Free Free EW
Eff EW 140
.020
EW Eff clg% clg Coldst
EW $ 40
HUMIDITY RATIO (Lbv/Lba)
EW-$ day
)
Atlanta,
(F 70 GA simulation data 112
.016
lb u
B
4,600 14,826 2,965et $1,038 $208 1,561
W
$63 84
Humidity ratio (grains/lb)
84
30% surplus Conclusion #1:
The veracity of the Journal article claim
concerning the cooling energy waste
madness of garnering a LEED point in the
IEQ category has
h been
b di
disproved d w/ / DOAS.
DOAS
Even Atlanta and New Orleans, locations
not required by Standard 90.1 to have
economizers, used less cooling energy with
30% surplus OA.
Significantly more energy savings were
demonstrated for Columbus and
International Falls, where economizers are
required.
85
50 2,130
48 2,020
46 1,910
44 1,800
42 1 690
1,690
38 1,470
36 1,360
26 810
24 700
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
CFM/person
89
90
#3
#2
#1
#3
91
censored
94
DX (400 cfm/ton) with Desiccant
Outdoor
Exhaust
Outdoor Supply
95
350 cfm/ton
400 cfm/ton
96
DOAS w/ EW +DX
350 cfm/ton
CC
400 cfm/ton
CC
97
DX w/ Desiccant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DOAS w/ Des. +DX 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DOAS w/ EW +DX 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Annual Op Cost vs. Base DX
DX w/ Desiccant 52% 23 18 12 9 1 -2 1 -8 -1
DOAS w/ Des. +DX
DX 48% 18 14 8 8 -3
3 -5
5 -6
6 -14
14 -8
8
DOAS w/ EW +DX -18% -21 -20 -19 -19 -23 -26 -19 -26 -14
LCC: Equipment 1st + 15 yr Gas and Electric $, 1,000s 2004 dollars
DX w/ Desiccant 51 45 43 45 40 44 41 59 41 38
DOAS w/ Des. +DX 54 48 46 48 44 47 45 63 45 42
98
DOAS w/ EW +DX 35 35 33 37 33 37 35 52 37 36
Performance for retail, based
upon 62.1-2007 ventilation reqd
Humidity Control (Occ. Hours >65% RH)
Location Miami Hous Shrev Ft. Wor Atlant DC St. Lo NY Chic Port
DX w/ Desiccant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DOAS w/ Des. +DX 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DOAS w/ EW +DX 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Annual Op Cost vs. Base DX (%)
DX w/ Desiccant 169 79 75 47 61 18 14 6 -11 -2
DOAS w/ Des. +DX
DX 137 53 44 20 20 -9
9 -11
11 -14
14 -30
30 -15
15
DOAS w/ EW +DX -39 -42 -41 -42 -41 -51 -54 -44 -55 -28
LCC: Equipment 1st + 15 yr Gas and Electric $, 1,000s 2004 dollars
DX w/ Desiccant 322 250 235 226 210 209 189 247 174 148
DOAS w/ Des. +DX 313 245 228 220 203 205 189 242 174 153
99
DOAS w/ EW +DX 88 91 90 104 92 100 90 138 100 106
Do Other
h DOAS-Radiantd Systems
Currently Existin the US?
100
Municipal Building, Denver 101
FCU w/ DOAS 5/25 7/35 1/4 1/3 6/30 8/8 1/4 1/3 6/12 1/2 126
VAV, HW RH 4/20 5/25 3/12 5/15 2/12 4/4 5/20 7/21 2/4 7/14 145
LT VAV, HW RH 4/20 6/30 4/16 6/18 3/30 4/4 6/24 7/21 3/6 7/14 183
FPVAV, HW RH 2/10 4/20 5/20 4/12 4/20 8/8 3/12 3/9 4/8 2/4 123
FPVAV, Chw recool 1/5 3/15 6/24 3/9 5/25 8/8 4/16 2/6 7/14 3/6 128
LT DDVAV 3/15 2/10 2/8 2/6 1/5 4/4 2/8 4/12 1/2 5/10 80
UFAD 6/30 1/5 7/28 8/24 8/40 4/4 8/32 5/15 8/16 4/8 202
CRCP-DOAS 8/40 8/40 8/32 7/21 7/35 8/8 7/28 8/24 5/10 8/16 254
103
DOAS
104
ASHRAE HDQ DOAS
105
106
Middle School w/ DOAS
107
108
109
Chiller serving
2-pipe FCUs
110
Mumma Preferred Equipment Choices
Always consider dual path DOAS to the spaces,
and use where it makes sense.
I have yet to find a DOAS application where
EWs should not be used, when controlled
properly.
In most situations, use mechanical refrigeration
to dehumidify, even if it means increasing the
ventilation rate above the Std. 62.1 minimums.
Choice
h is supportedd by
b the
h ASHRAE research. h
To achieve the low temperature chilled water
economically, use OPAC where cost effective.
111
Conclusion
112
113
75F DBT,
56F DPT,
52% RH
117
Academic Building, PA
118
80% - 85% of OA
cooling load could be Reheat adds significant
saved if wheel on: in cooling load, beside
this case almost 50% wasting heating energy.
of coil load
119
120
Caution, If using CRCPs be sure
to either tie panel inlet water temp.
to actual leaving DPT, or provide
other condensate control.
124
125
126
EW operation when OA below 54F
70
No duty Cycle, EW
68
on below 54F OAT
66
SA Temperature, F
64
62
60
EW Duty cycle
58 between 54 and
40F to hold SAT,
56
then EW on.
54
52
EW speed modulated between 54
and -18F to hold the desired SAT
50
-18 -14 -10 -6 -2 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 54 58
OA Temperature, F
127
128
What are the common pitfalls to be
avoided when applying DOAS?
Controls not tunedtherefore much hunting
Old attitudes
ttit d when
h system t ffound
d tto b
be
functioning improperly: The building is quite
comfortable while operating at these
conditions. There is little concern over not
operating at the ideal design conditions.
Reminds me of the time I drove across country y
with the air pressure in my tires at 10 psig. The
ride was quite comfortable, but the gas mileage
was pathetic and the tire wear unacceptable.
For more details, visit:
http://doas-radiant.psu.edu/IAQ_Pitfalls_sum_06.pdf
129
75F, 50% RH
AHU DOAS cooling:
OA, 83.9F CC: 26.9 ton (T): 48F, Sat. 20.1 T Total
127.5 Gr/lb 6.8 T OA Load 6,000
, cfm 14 9 T Sen
14.9 Sen.
5.2 T Latent
Wheel
Enthalpy W
75F, 50% RH
AHU DOAS cooling:
OA, 83.9F CC: 22.3 ton (T): 46F, Sat. 17.1 T Total
127.5 Gr/lb 5.2 T OA Load 4,600 cfm 11.9 T Sen.
5.2 T Latent
132
Questions?
133
134