Você está na página 1de 63

HVAC Talk

By Lee Eng Lock

Date

Psychometric Chart for Weather Data from:


Chong Qing, Hang Zhou, Shen Zhen

in China

Insert Footer

Location Map of the 3 cities

Insert Footer

Chong Qing Weather Data


2004 - 2006
2004 2006

Insert Footer

Hang Zhou Weather Data


2004 - 2006
2004 2006

Insert Footer

Shen Zhen Weather Data


2004 - 2006
2004 2006

Insert Footer

AHU ENERGY RETROFIT

CASE STUDY 1. ST Microelectronics Pte Ltd New AHU Design Criteria 1. Low air velocity across filter and cooling coil 2. Air pre-cool by 15 degC chilled water 3. High efficiency Airfoil direct driven fan 4. Super-E electric motor 5. Variable speed drive 6. Digital temperature Control 7. Non flammable AHU panel 8. High resistance of coil to corrosion (powder coating)
7 Insert Footer

AHU ENERGY RETROFIT

CASE STUDY 1. ST Microelectronics Pte Ltd


New AHU Plan View

Insert Footer

AHU ENERGY RETROFIT

CASE STUDY 1. ST Microelectronics Pte Ltd


New AHU Section

Insert Footer

AHU ENERGY RETROFIT

CASE STUDY 1. ST Microelectronics Pte Ltd Executive Summary


OLD and NEW AHU PERFORMANCE
# AHU Parameter (100% fresh air): 1 Total cooling capacity 2 Chilled water supply temperature 3 Chilled water temperature rise 4 Fan power consumption 5 Chiller power consumption 6 AHU efficiency Unit Ton refrigerant Degree C Degree C KW KW KW/Ton OLD AHU NEW AHU

340 6 5.5 35 212 0.1 % 80 20

354 15-pre-cool, 6-final cooling 11 7 170 0.02 $Sin/Year 72,800 109,200 182,000

SAVINGS kW 1 Fan power consumption 56 2 Chiller power consumption 84 3 Total 140 10 Insert Footer Payback period of investments 1.9 years
# Savings (for 2 units):

Existing Ultrasonic Flow Meter

11

Insert Footer

Newly Installed Ultrasonic Flow Meter

Header MF?

12

Insert Footer

Magnetic flow meter on condenser flow

13

Insert Footer

Magnetic flow meter on chilled water flow

14

Insert Footer

Three MFs on condenser side

Three MFs on chilled side


15 Insert Footer

New USF Old USF on the vertical pipe

UF installation

16

Insert Footer

MF installation

From OMEGA Engineering 17 Insert Footer

Flow measure comparison


Flow measurement comparison (GPM) 18Nov08
2000.00 1900.00 1800.00 1700.00

gpm

1600.00 1500.00 1400.00 1300.00 1200.00 1100.00 1000.00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 7:00 8:00 9:00

USFnew(header) USFold(header) MF existing(header)

time
1) 2) Correctly mounted ultrasonic flow meter reading matches the existing magnetic flow reading Improperly mounted ultrasonic flow meter reading is 15% lower than correctly mounted ultrasonic flow meter and the existing magnetic flow meter

18

Insert Footer

Cooling load comparison


Cooling load comparison (tons) 18Nov08
1100

1000

900

800

700

Cooling load (USF new) Cooling load (USF old) Cooling load (MF existing)

600

500

400 7:00

8:00

9:00

10:00

11:00

12:00

13:00

14:00

15:00

16:00

17:00

18:00

1) 2)

Equipment switched on at 7.30am, switched off at 6:pm There is a cooling load spike in the early morning due to the heat accumulation during the night.

19

Insert Footer

Efficiency comparison
Efficiency comparison (kw/ton) (18Nov08)
1.20 1.10 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60
7: 00 7: 30 8: 00 8: 30 9: 00 9: 3 10 0 :0 0 10 :3 11 0 :0 0 11 :3 0 12 :0 12 0 :3 13 0 :0 13 0 :3 14 0 :0 0 14 :3 15 0 :0 0 15 :3 0 16 :0 16 0 :3 0 17 :0 0 17 :3 18 0 :0 0 18 :3 0

Efficiency (USF new) Efficiency (USF old) Efficiency (MF existing)

20

Insert Footer

Efficiency comparison
Efficiency comparison (kw/ton) (18Nov08)
1.20 1.00 0.80 Efficiency (USF new) 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00
7: 00 7: 30 8: 00 8: 30 9: 00 9: 3 10 0 :0 10 0 :3 11 0 :0 11 0 :3 12 0 :0 12 0 :3 13 0 :0 13 0 :3 14 0 :0 14 0 :3 15 0 :0 15 0 :3 16 0 :0 16 0 :3 17 0 :0 17 0 :3 18 0 :0 18 0 :3 0

Efficiency (USF old) Efficiency (MF existing)

21

Insert Footer

Spot measurement
Chill plant power: 421.8 kw Chiller plant flow rate: 2441gpm Chiller Chw temp in: 52.34F (11.3 C) Chiller Chw temp out: 46.22F(7.9C)

The resultant plant efficiency: 0.6776 kw/ton The measurement time is around 9:30am to 10:30am Comparing with the logging graph, the spot measured efficiency is lower than logging data which is 0.71-0.88kw/ton based on UF new and MF existing flow measurement, but acceptable
22 Insert Footer

The sampling rate is 1 minute The readings from correctly mounted ultrasonic flow meter matches well those from magnetic flow meter mounted on the header Due to the improper mounting of the old ultrasonic ( air accumulation), the readings from old UF is 15% lower than new correctly mounted UF, which causes the higher efficiency deviation During the equipment switching on and off period, unsteady operating condition affects the flow meter reading greatly Chiller plant average efficiency from 8:am to 6pm on Nov.18, 2008 is 0.79kw/ton, which is meet the GreenMark baseline minimum efficiency requirement 0.85kw/ton There is big room to improve chiller plant efficiency:

23

Insert Footer

24

Insert Footer

Figure 3a

25

Insert Footer

Figure 3b

26

Insert Footer

Figure 3c

27

Insert Footer

28

Insert Footer

29

Insert Footer

Figure 5a
Insert subtitle here

30

Insert Footer

Figure 5b

31

Insert Footer

Figure 5c

32

Insert Footer

Figure 5d

33

Insert Footer

34

Insert Footer

35

Insert Footer

Figure 6a

36

Insert Footer

Figure 6b

37

Insert Footer

Figure 6c

38

Insert Footer

Figure 6d

39

Insert Footer

40

Insert Footer

Figure 7a

41

Insert Footer

Figure 7b

42

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity


An Energy Conservation Option for Make-Up Air Units
Presented by: Greg Owen, PE
503-624-3230 greg.owen@jacobs.com

October 4, 2000
43 Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

FACT:

Cleanroom facility design decisions must be economically justified.

44

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

Make-Up Unit Design Conditions

Unit CFM
CFM

43,500 1500 Ft 96oF / 65oF -20oF 39oF / 51oF 180oF / 55oF /

Site Elevation Summer Conditions Winter Conditions Chilled Water Hot oWater
150 F

Supply Air Conditions o


48.6 F
45 Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

Elements That Affect Make-up Air Unit Energy Consumption

oF

& RH% of OA

Filter Size

Coil Size

Fan CFM, Motor Hp

oF

& RH%

Under the control of the Design Engineer


46 Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

FACE VELOCITIES CONSIDERED

Unit CFM
Face Area
500 FPM 350 FPM

425 FPM

300 FPM

47

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

PREMISE #1

Low face velocities reduce air handling unit coil and filter static pressure and result in lower energy consumption by the unit.

48

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

FILTER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE


2.5 2 1.5 (INWG) 1 0.5 0 500 425 (FPM) Pre Filters
49 Insert Footer

350

300

Carbon Filters

95% Filters

HEPA Filters

Low Face Velocity

COIL DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE


1.4 1.2 1 0.8 (INWG) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 500 425 (FPM) Preheat Cooling Dehum Reheat 350 300

50

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

PREMISE #2

Energy savings from low face velocity systems reduce the operating costs of the units.

51

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR LOW FACE VELOCITY COMPONENTS

Component Larger Casing Larger Coils Increased Filter Count Smaller Fan Motors Reduced Infrastructure

Cost Impact Increase Capital Cost Increase Capital Cost Constant Life Cycle Cost Decreased Capital Cost Decreased Capital Cost

52

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

MAKE-UP AIR UNIT MOTOR SELECTION

Static Hp

RPM 801 757 709 687

Brake 65.0 55.6 46.0 41.8

500 FPM 425 FPM 350 FPM 300 FPM


53 Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

MAKE-UP AIR UNIT COST ESTIMATE

Includes

Fan, Motor & Drives Coils Filter Racks Humidifier Housing & Inlet EE Infrastructure Impact

Excludes
Filter Media Installation Cost Building Space

54

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

Make-up Air Unit (MAU) Capital Cost Differential

500 FPM 425 FPM 350 FPM 300 FPM


55 Insert Footer

Base Cost +$4,820 -$1,610 +$9,450

Low Face Velocity

Energy Cost

High Average
Industrial / Commercial Rate Boston Edison $0.097/kWHr

Low Average
Industrial / Commercial Rate Portland General Electric $0.0382/kWHr

56

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

MAU Electrical Operating Cost (High Rate)

Unit Size

Cost/Yr.

Pay Back Period

500 FPM Unit

$44,959 $38,187 $31,964 $28,764

Base Condition +37 Weeks Immediate + 29 Weeks


(7.25 months) (9.5 months)

425 FPM Unit 350 FPM Unit 300 FPM Unit

57

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

MAU Electrical Operating Cost (Low Rate)

Unit Size

Cost/Yr.

Pay Back Period

500 FPM Unit

$17,705 $15,039 $12,588 $11,328

Base Condition +94 Weeks Immediate + 77 Weeks


(19.2 months) (23.5 months)

425 FPM Unit 350 FPM Unit 300 FPM Unit

58

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity


CONCLUSION

Low face velocities do save energy & money. Return on Investment (ROI) is dependent on local energy rates. High tech companies generally require ROIs of 12 months or less.

59

Insert Footer

Low Face Velocity

Questions??

Low Face Velocity

Questions??

Questions??

61

Insert Footer

Insert subtitle here

62

Insert Footer

Você também pode gostar