2006, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (www.ashrae.org). Published in ASHRAE Journal Vol.

48, Dec. 2006. For personal use only. Additional reproduction, distribution, or transmission in either print or digital form is not permitted without ASHRAEs prior written permission.

HVAC Power Density

An Alternate Path to Efficiency
By Stephen P Kavanaugh, Ph.D., Fellow ASHRAE; Steven Lambert, P and Nickless Devin, Student Member ASHRAE . .E.;

o improve building energy efficiency, the development and building type listed in Standard 90.1 for use of HVAC power density (HvacPD) allowances could be a

powerful tool for improving building efficiency. In a format similar to the lighting power density (LPD) values that appear in ANSI/ ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, HvacPDs would be set in terms of electrical power input per unit area (We /ft2 [We /m2]) for the entire HVAC system.
The HvacPD development process begins by computing the required specific design cooling and heating loads for energy-efficient buildings (Btu/h ft2 [Wt/m2]). These values are divided by the
40 ASHRAE Journal

LPDs. Each building type will have efficiency targets that are easily identified, consider the impact of all HVAC system components, and offer an alternative to building energy simulations. However, this concept and the values resulting from the procedures described in this article are not proposed as a replacement for the building envelope and HVAC sections of Standard 90.1. Modern HVAC systems may contain a multitude of subsystems that impact
About the Authors Stephen P Kavanaugh, Ph.D., is a professor . of mechanical engineering at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, Ala. Steven Lambert, P is a graduate research assistant, and Nickless .E., Devin is an undergraduate research assistant at the University of Alabama.

system energy-efficiency ratio (EER Btu/Wh or COP Wt/We) for cooling and the thermal efficiency (ht) for heating to arrive at HvacPD values. HvacPDs can be developed for each climate zone and
ashrae.org

December 2006

In a format similar to the lighting power density (LPD) values that appear in ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, HvacPDs would be set in terms of electrical power input per unit area (We /ft2 [We /m2]) for the entire HVAC system.
building energy use and demand. Standard 90.1 provides minimum eff iciency prescriptions on a component-bycomponent basis and contains no parallel to the LPD allowances that also appear in the standard. Limits of LPD in allowable input power per unit area (We /ft2 [We /m2]) are listed for 32 building types. Designers can choose to comply with the value for the entire building or use a spaceby-space method. Higher LPD levels are permitted for spaces that require higher illumination levels. Designers can minimize LPD in these spaces with more efficient luminaries or higher illumination in critical areas only (task ambient lighting). While LPD allowances focus on demand reduction, the standard also mandates lighting control strategies to ensure energy consumption also is minimized. The entire lighting section of the standard consists of only three pages of text and four tables compared to 10 pages of text and 20 tables for the HVAC equipment section and five pages of text and more than 25 tables for the building envelope section. HvacPD allowances must be based on building type because envelope requirements, internal loads, and ventilation requirements vary widely. The development of HvacPD allowances is further complicated by climate variations and need for both heating and cooling values. However, these complications merely increase the number of tables required. Once the building type and climate type are identified, HvacPD allowances can be applied either as a preliminary to more complex building energy simulation or as an alternative efficiency indicator if building design budgets do not support detailed simulations used with the Standard 90.1 energy cost budget method. The parallels of HvacPD to LPD guidelines are evident. Just as some building types inherently require high illumination levels, some buildings require much higher cooling and heating
December 2006

capacity (tons, MBtu/h or kWt ) due to ventilation requirements, internal loads, high occupant densities, and severe climates. Values for approximate thermal cooling (qc) or heating (qh) load per unit area (Btu/hft2 [Wt /m2]) or the inverse, area per unit thermal capacity (ft2/ton [m2/kWt ]), have been used as indicators for the building requirements.1,2 Just as buildings with stringent LPD requirements can be equipped with high efficiency lighting systems, buildings with high thermal loads can be fitted with high efficiency HVAC systems. Useful figures of merit for cooling equipment performance in this application are system electrical power (kWe) requirement per unit capacity (kWe /ton [kWe /kWt]), energy efficiency ratio (EER Btu/Wh), or coefficient of performance (COP kWt /kWe). The electrical demand requirement (kWe) includes input for all HVAC system components (chillers, compressors, distribution fans, pumps, ventilation fans, etc.). Heating allowances are more typically expressed in capacity per unit floor area (Btu/h ft2 [Wt /m2]). The building cooling mode thermal requirements are combined with the HVAC system efficiency indicators to arrive at the cooling power density (CPD) at design conditions. CPD (We /ft2) = qc /A (Btu/h ft2) EER (Btu/Wh) (1)

Heating input densities (HID) would be the heating requirement (qh) per unit area (Btu/hft2 or Wt /m2) divided by thermal efficiency (ht) values for fossil fuel equipment. HID (Btu/hft2, Wt/m2) = qh/A ht
HvacPD Benefits and Limitations

(2)

Power density allowances encompass the entire system that includes the quality of the building envelope, the efficiency of HVAC equipment, and the attention to load minimization
ASHRAE Journal 41

Component Envelope (Walls, Roof, Windows, Floors) Lighting Internal Loads

Base Efficiency Std. 90.1-2004 Compliant LPDs Comply With Std. 90.1-2001 Medium for Building Type (i.e., 1.0 We /ft2 [11 We /m2] For Office) Std. 62.1-2004 Compliant 90% Vent. Efficiency (EV = 0.9) Std 90.1-2004 Compliant

High Efficiency U-factors/SHGC/C-factors 25% lower than Std. 90.1-2004 LPDs Comply With Std. 90.1-2004 Low for Building Type (i.e., 0.75 We /ft2 [8 We /m2] For Office) Std. 62.1-2004 Compliant With 70% HRU, 90% Vent. Efficiency 50% Thicker Insulation Than Std. 90.1-2004

Premier Efficiency U-factors/SHGC/C-factors 50% lower than Std. 90.1-2004 LPDs 20% Lower Than Std. 90.1-2004 Very Low for Type (i.e., 0.5 We /ft2 [5.4 We /m2] For Office) Std. 62.1-2004 Compliant With 70% HRU, And 100% Vent. Efficiency No LossesAll Duct In Conditioned Space

Ventilation Air

Ductwork Building Mass

Medium Mass for Building Type (i.e., Office: Heavy Weight Walls [HW Block, Rigid Insulation, Brick Veneer] and Lightweight [Metal] Roof)

Table 1: Characteristics of buildings used to determine cooling and heating requirements.

Building Loads, (Btu/h ft2 [Wt /m2]) Base Efficiency High Efficiency Cool 25 (80) 30 (95) 40 (125) 50 (160) 80 (250) 30 (95) 22 (70) 32 (100) 40 (125) Heat 22 (70) 24 (75) 35 (110) 35 (110) 60 (190) 22 (70) 32 (100) 28 (90) 35 (110) Cool 20 (65) 25 (80) 35 (110) 40 (125) 75 (235) 25 (80) 15 (50) 28 (90) 36 (115) Heat 17 (55) 22 (70) 30 (95) 30 (95) 50 (160) 18 (55) 25 (80) 25 (80) 30 (95)

Central U.S.Zone 4 (St. Louis Weather Data) Building Type Office, Medium Density Office, High Density School Classroom Computer Room Cafeteria/Kitchen Motel Multifamily Housing Retail, Medium Density Retail, High Density

Occupant Density People/1,000 ft2 < People/100 m2 6 12 30 30 70 10 5 15 25

Premier Efficiency Cool 17 (55) 20 (65) 32 (100) 37 (115) 70 (220) 20 (65) 10 (32) 24 (75) 32 (100) Heat 15 (50) 18 (60) 25 (80) 26 (82) 45 (140) 16 (50) 18 (60) 21 (65) 26 (82)

Table 2: Building cooling and heating allowances using Table 1 building characteristics.

(ventilation efficiency, internal equipment, and lighting). To meet the system targets, trade-offs for less than optimum practices must be made up with better than minimum enhancements in other components, so that detailed computations are not required. Additional computation beyond current design practice consists primarily of summing the demand of the HVAC system components (compressors, fans and pumps). The concept of HvacPD provides the following benefits. Building envelope quality must be high to minimize required equipment capacity. Internal loads must be optimized to lower required equipment capacity. HVAC system efficiency is used rather than multiple component efficiencies. The impact of all auxiliary equipment, a significant factor, is included. Oversizing (to ensure comfort if poor installation quality compromises performance) is minimized since larger
44 ASHRAE Journal

equipment increases power input (We /ft2 [We /m2]). If oversizing is minimized, proper system installation and operation is necessary to provide adequate comfort. As-built conditions are used rather than predesign simulation assumptions. The time and cost to compute the building HVAC power density are less than the time and cost to conduct hour-byhour building energy simulations. Limitations of the HvacPD concept include the following. The allowances are based on peak load demand. Provisions for part-load operation and scheduling for unoccupied periods similar to the lighting control provisions given in Standard 90.1 (Section 9.4.1) must be included to ensure energy efficiency reductions are more fully realized. Multiple tables are required since values are climate dependent and building types are many. In the heating mode, electric equipment input (heat pumps, auxiliary equipment, resistance boilers or furnaces) must be converted to equivalence with either an
December 2006

ashrae.org

System 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Air Cooled Screw Chiller Supply Fan 4 in. w.c. (1.0 kPa) TP1 Return Fan 2 in. w.c. (0.5 kPa) TP2 No CW Pump CHW Pump 100 ft (30 m) Head4 Condenser Fan FPVAV Fan1 Net Demand/Capacity System kW/ton System EER (Btu/Wh) System COP (Wt /We)

kWe 1.1 0.30 0.15

Ton 1.0 0.09 0.03

kWt 3.5 0.3 0.11

System 2 Water Cooled Centrifugal Chiller Supply Fan 4 in. w.c. (1 kPa) TP1 No Return Fan CW Pump 50 ft (15 m) Head3

kWe 0.5

Ton 1.0

kWt 3.5

System 3 Scroll Compressor Supply Fan 1 in. w.c. (249 Pa) TP1 No Return Fan

kWe 0.62 0.10

Ton 1.0

kWt 3.5

0.30 0.09 0.3

0.03 0.1

0.04 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.07

CW Pump 30 ft (9 m) Head3 No CHW Pump No Fan No FPVAV

0.07

0.07 0.07 0.16 1.85

0.02

0.06

CHW Pump 70 ft (21 m) Head4 Cooling Tower Fan

0.05 0.81 2.27 5.3 1.55

0.16 2.9

No FPVAV 0.96 0.90 1.07 11.3 3.29 3.2

0.79

0.97 0.81 14.7 4.23

3.4

1. Supply fan airflow = 400 cfm/ton (54 L/s/kWt ); 2. Recirculated airflow = 320 cfm/ton (43 L/s/kWt); 3. Condenser water (CW) flow = 3 gpm/ton (3.2 L/s/ kWt ) and entering water temperature = 85F (29C); 4. Chilled water (CHW) flow = 2.4 gpm/ton (2.6 L/s/kWt ) and leaving liquid temperature = 44F (7C).

Table 3: Summary computation of HVAC system efficiency with auxiliary equipment demand and heating deductions included.

electrical system conversion efficiency (i.e., generation, transmission) or energy prices (electrical vs. fossil fuel costs).
Building Cooling and Heating Requirements

Tables for building cooling and heating requirements for the primary climate zones can be developed by conducting heat gain and heat loss calculations for buildings with energyefficient envelopes, lighting, HVAC System EER COP Specific Demand Heating equipment, and ventilation HVAC System Efficiency Efficiency Level (Btu/Wh) (We/Net Ton) AFUE practices. Table 3 provides a sumBase 10 2.9 1.2 80% Occupant densities (and, mary of three examples that therefore, ventilation rates) demonstrate options for deHigh Efficiency 11.5 3.4 1.04 90% have dramatic impact on termining equipment system Premier Efficency 13 3.9 0.9 95% results and values used are efficiency (or the inverse systypical for each building Table 4: Suggested HVAC system cooling and heating efficiencies. tem demand per unit capactype. Results are expressed ity). System 1 is an air-cooled in three levels to reflect a range of building energy efficiency chiller with variable air volume (VAV) system that includes that is possible using technology commercially available in supply, return and series terminal fans. System 2 is a waterthe HVAC industry. The base efficiency level results when a cooled centrifugal chiller with only supply fans. System 3 is building is compliant with practices prescribed by Standard a ground-coupled heat pump system with unitary equipment 90.1. Two levels of improvement (high efficiency and premier and low head individual loop pumps. efficiency) are provided above the base level when more strinThe table subdivides the HVAC system components into gent building practices are followed. Table1 provides a listing seven categories. The first category is the demand (kW) of of the specifications for the primary building components that the primary chilling device per ton (3.51 kW) of capacity. The influence required cooling and heating loads. auxiliary equipment demand (fans and pumps) is included Table 2 presents values for thermal cooling and heating along with the cooling capacity deduction (heat penalty) of loads per unit area (Btu/h ft2 [Wt /m2]) for several different those components in the cooling loop (supply fans, the recirbuilding types. Results were generated by conducting a series culated air fraction of the return fans, chilled water pump, of heating and cooling load calculations3 for buildings with and terminal fans). The heat penalty is also done on a per the characteristics listed in Table1. Values for all three build- ton basis but is noted as a negative value in the computation.
December 2006 ASHRAE Journal

ing efficiency levels are given for Climate Zone 4, which is the middle region of the continental United States. Occupant densities in commercial applications are consistent with values used in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004, Ventilation forAcceptableIndoorAirQuality, to compute default minimum breathing zone ventilation rates. Two sets of values are provided for two of the building types (office and retail) to represent average and high occupant densities.

45

Central U.S.Zone 4 (St. Louis Weather Data) Building Type Office, Medium Density Office, High Density School Classroom Computer Room Cafeteria/Kitchen Motel Multifamily Housing Retail, Medium Density Retail, High Density

Occupant Density People/1,000 ft2 < People/100 m2 6 12 30 30 70 10 5 15 25

Cooling Power Density, We /ft2 (We/m2) and Heat Input Density, Btu/h ft2 (Wt/m2) Base Efficiency High Efficiency Premier Efficiency CPD 2.5 (27) 3.0 (32) 4.0 (43) 5.0 (54) 8.0 (86) 3.0 (32) 2.2 (24) 3.2 (34) 4.0 (43) HID 28 (87) 30 (95) 44 (138) 44 (138) 75 (236) 28 (87) 40 (126) 35 (110) 44 (138) CPD 1.7 (18) 2.2 (24) 3.0 (32) 3.5 (38) 6.5 (70) 2.2 (24) 1.3 (14) 2.4 (26) 3.1 (33) HID 19 (60) 24 (77) 33 (105) 33 (105) 56 (175) 20 (63) 28 (88) 28 (88) 33 (105) CPD 1.3 (14) 1.5 (16) 2.5 (27) 2.8 (30) 5.4 (58) 1.5 (16) 0.8 (9) 1.8 (19) 2.5 (27) HID 16 (50) 19 (60) 26 (83) 27 (86) 47 (149) 17 (53) 19 (60) 22 (70) 27 (86)

Table 5: Resulting cooling power density and heating input density allowances. (Building cooling and heating allowances [Table 2] HVAC system efficiencies [Table 4].)

Note that not all systems contain equipment in all seven categories. The electrical input to fans on a per ton (kWe /ton) basis can be computed with Equation 3 using the airflow rate (Qa), total pressure (TP), fan efficiency (hfan), and fan motor efficiency (hmotor). As demonstrated in Equation 4, the water flow (Qw) and pump efficiency (hpump) are used to find the pump power input.4 kWe ton = 0.746 kW Q (cfm/ton) TP(in. w.c.) a ; hp 6,350 hfan hmotor

This is converted to system efficiency and COP by inverting this value and applying the appropriate conversion factors as shown in Equations 6 and 7. EER = (Btu/Wh) = 12,000 Btu/ton hour 12 = kW 1000 W kW ton kW ton (6) EER (Btu/Wh) 3.412 Btu/Wh (7)

( (

kWe kWe = 0.284 kWt ton

COP (kWt /kWe) =

(3)

kWe kW Qw(gpm/ton) Dh(ft of water) = 0.746 ; ton hp 3,960 hpump hmotor kWe kWt = 0.284 kWe ton

(4) The heat penalty for fans (qFanpenalty) with the motors inside the air-handling unit is found using Equation 5. qFanpenalty(tons) = 0.284 kWe; [qFanpenalty(kWt ) =1.0 kWe] (5) Equation 5 also can be used for the return fans heat penalty by multiplying the equation by the recirculated air fraction [(QSupplyQExhaust)/QSupply] to recognize that some of the return fan heat is exhausted. The heat penalty for the chilled water pump also can be computed with Equation 5, but the motor heat is not typically included. This can be corrected by multiplying Equation 5 by the pump motor efficiency (hmotor). No heat penalty exists for condenser pumps or fans. For each of the three systems shown in Table3, the summarized value of demand in the kW column is divided by the summarized value of net capacity (ton = 3.51 kW) to arrive at the system demand per unit of net cooling capacity (kW/ton).
December 2006

Table 3 is a departure from the traditional componentby-component method of expressing HVAC equipment performance. Systems with low efficiencies that are possible using the traditional approach (System 1, Table 3) can be identified and avoided. Although the net efficiency is low (EER = 5.3, COP = 1.55), this system complies with Standard 90.1-2004. Table4 provides suggested metrics for HVAC system performance for base efficiency, high efficiency, and premier efficiency that are compatible with current state-of-the-art technology as demonstrated by the examples in Table3. The base efficiency level is set slightly above the minimum EER of 9.7 Btu/Wh listed in Standard 90.1-2004 for room air conditioners (Table 6.8.1d). The room air conditioner value is a system EER since the reported capacity includes the heat penalty deduction and power input is for the compressor, condenser fan and indoor fan. The medium and premier levels were set based on system computations using the procedures demonstrated in the development of Table3. Central systems with very efficient chillers will have difficulty attaining high efficiency designation. So, the values were not set outside the limits of conventional state-of-the-art systems. Heating efficiencies are set slightly above the minimum annual fuel utilization efficiency (78%) for the base efficiency. Medium and premier values are near the minimum and maximum values for condensing fossil fuel furnaces.5
ASHRAE Journal 47

HVAC Power Density

The desired result of this HVAC system efficiency computation is the generation of a set of power density allowances similar to Table 5. The building cooling and heating load values in Table 2 are divided by the HVAC system efficiencies from Table4 to generate a set of tables for various building types. Table5 demonstrates the results for nine building types and subtypes for Standard 90.1 Climate Zone 4. Three levels of efficiency are generated by applying the corresponding values from Tables2and4. For example, the premier levels of power densities are generated using the premier building load values and the premier HVAC system efficiency. These tables can be expanded to include all the 32 building types in all eight climate zones identified in Standard 90.1-2004.
Summary

that does not require much beyond the level of effort required for conventional design. It also directly identifies the impact of all system components upon the net efficiency of the building HVAC system. The concept is not proposed as a replacement for Standard 90.1, which is frequently used for code compliance. HVAC power densities are intended to provide a set of indicators to identify good, better, best building efficiency levels for a variety of building types and climates.
Acknowledgments

This work discussed in this paper is supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAR/OAP/Climate Protection Partnerships Division.
References
1. 2005ASHRAEHandbookFundamentals, Chapter 17, Energy Resources. 2. Means, R. S. 2004. Mechanical Cost Data. Kingston, Mass.: Reed Construction Data. 3. Kavanaugh, S.P. 2006. HVACSimplified. Atlanta: ASHRAE. 4. Kavanaugh, S.P. 2003. Estimating demand and efficiency. ASHRAEJournal45(7):36 40. 5. 2004ASHRAE HandbookHVAC Systems and Equipment, Chapter 28, Furnaces.

Identifying the impact of energy-efficient building envelopes, internal equipment, lighting and HVAC systems is difficult given the complexity of modern installations. The recommended practice of conducting a building energy simulation may not be an affordable option for many projects. The use of HVAC system power density guidelines is an alternative

Advertisementformerlyinthisspace.

48

ASHRAE Journal

ashrae.org

December 2006