Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Davor Novosel National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies
NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES TASK 3: COMPARING VAV DUCT DESIGNS
MARCH 2007
Prepared By:
Brian J. Landsberger, Ph.D. Liangcai (Tom) Tan, Ph.D. University Of Nevada, Las Vegas Davor Novosel National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies
Prepared For:
U.S. Department of Energy William Haslebacher Project Officer / Manager
This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Under Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-03GO13072
NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
ii
NCEMBT-070315
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................................................... ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................................1 1 PROJECT OBJECTIVE.............................................................................................................................................2 2 BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................................................3 2.1 Duct Design Issues .......................................................................................................................................3 2.2 Performance Issues ......................................................................................................................................4 2.3 Installation Problems....................................................................................................................................5 3 METHODOLGY......................................................................................................................................................6 3.1 General Approach.........................................................................................................................................6 3.1.1 Identifying the Knowledge Gap ..............................................................................................................6 3.1.2 Design of the Experiment (DoE)..............................................................................................................6 3.1.3 Development of Laboratory and Test Procedures ....................................................................................7 3.1.4 Testing and Industry Guidance ...............................................................................................................7 3.2 Aligning project scope with the knowledge gap ..............................................................................................8 3.2.1 Installation Variations Identified From Literature Review.........................................................................8 3.2.2 Expert Committee Recommendations ....................................................................................................8 3.2.3 DOE Peer Review of the VAV Duct Design Variations Test Plan ...............................................................11 3.3 System performance characterization and measurement .............................................................................12 3.4 Design of the Experiment ............................................................................................................................14 3.4.1 Parameter Selection............................................................................................................................14 3.4.2 Test Matrix Selection and Modification ................................................................................................16 3.5 Laboratory Design and Instrumentation ......................................................................................................20 3.5.1 Laboratory System Modifications And Capabilities ...............................................................................20 3.5.2 Laboratory Instrument Modifications and Capabilities..........................................................................23 3.5.3 Test Conditions, Measurement Setup and Procedures ..........................................................................27 3.5.4 Experimental Error...............................................................................................................................28 3.6 Analysis Procedures...................................................................................................................................29 3.6.1 Parameter Effects On Performance ......................................................................................................30 3.6.2 Airflow Distribution Performance .........................................................................................................30 4 RESULTS ...........................................................................................................................................................31 4.1 Energy Efficiency For Square and Slot Diffusers ...........................................................................................31 4.2 Noise Generation For Square Diffusers ........................................................................................................32 4.3 Air Distribution Variations Resulting From Installation Variations For Square and Slot Diffusers ....................33
NCEMBT-070315
iii
5 DISCUSSION .....................................................................................................................................................34 5.1 Energy Efficiency.........................................................................................................................................34 5.1.1 Square Diffusers .................................................................................................................................34 5.1.2 Slot Diffusers ......................................................................................................................................35 5.2 Sound Levels ..............................................................................................................................................36 5.3 Air Distribution ...........................................................................................................................................36 6 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................................38 7 REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................................................39 APPENDIX A - ENERGY EFFICIENCY TEST RESULTS .................................................................................................40 A1. Test Conditions and Results ........................................................................................................................41 A2. Parameter Main Effects Analysis .................................................................................................................45 APPENDIX B - NOISE GENERATION TEST RESULTS.................................................................................................47 B1. Test conditions and Results ........................................................................................................................48 B2. Parameter Main Effects Analysis .................................................................................................................50 APPENDIX C - AIR DISTRIBUTION VARIATION TEST RESULTS ..................................................................................52 C1. Airflow Around Diffusers:Square Diffusers...................................................................................................53 C2. Airflow Around Diffusers:Slot Diffusers ........................................................................................................62 C3. Room Airflow Between Diffusers: Square Diffusers.......................................................................................71 C4. Room Airflow Between Diffusers: Slot Diffusers ...........................................................................................89
iv
NCEMBT-070315
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Schematic of typical branch installation variations ....................................................................................9 Figure 2. Different types of diffusers that are used in terminal duct installations. Top: two 4-foot slot diffusers, one with a 8 inch round adaptor and one with a 10-inch oval adaptor. Bottom right: typical 2 by 2-foot louvered square diffuser. Bottom right: Plaque type 2 by 2-foot square diffuser. ..............................................................................10 Figure 3. Schematic of non-ideal energy transformation in the target system ..........................................................12 Figure 4. Schematic of air distribution modifications for VAV system.......................................................................21 Figure 5. Picture of duct showing a hard turn in the duct and a 3-foot vertical entry into the diffuser (low state of Parameter 4) ........................................................................................................................................................22 Figure 6. Picture of duct showing a 3-foot vertical duct section attached to the diffuser (high state of Parameter 3) .22 Figure 7. Picture of duct showing the duct running horizontal right before attachment to the diffuser (low state of Parameter 3) ........................................................................................................................................................23 Figure 8. Test room diffuser locations and measurement scan pattern for square diffusers (left) and slot diffusers (right). ..................................................................................................................................................................24 Figure 9. Measurement scan patterns for slot (upper) and square (lower) diffusers..................................................25 Figure 10. Directional sensitivity for the HT-412 velocity probe. For = 0 o , flow is at a right angle to the direction of the probe shaft. ....................................................................................................................................................26 Figure 11.Traversing mechanism sensor ................................................................................................................27 Figure 12. Main effects plots for square (left) and slot (right) diffusers for the five test parameters and where the performance measure is airflow rate ratio ..............................................................................................................31 Figure 13. Noise criteria means for square diffusers when noise criteria levels have been adjusted to that estimated for a standard airflow rate .....................................................................................................................................32 Figure 14. Airflow distribution from the test diffuser for condition 1 and 4 for square diffusers at 100% design airflow ............................................................................................................................................................................33 Figure 15. Airflow rate ratio means for square diffusers. .........................................................................................45 Figure 16. Signal to noise ratio for airflow rate ratio for square diffusers. ................................................................45 Figure 17. Airflow rate ratio means for slot diffusers...............................................................................................46 Figure 18. Signal to noise ratio for airflow rate ratio for slot diffusers .....................................................................46 Figure 19. Noise criteria means for square diffusers without adjustment to a standard airflow rate .........................50 Figure 20. Noise criteria means for square diffusers when noise criteria levels have been adjusted to that estimated for a standard airflow rate .....................................................................................................................................51 Figure 21. Signal to noise ratio for noise criteria for square diffusers when noise criteria levels have been adjusted to that estimated for a standard airflow rate ..............................................................................................................51 Figure 22. Test condition 0 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................53 Figure 23. Test condition 1 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................54 Figure 24. Test condition 2 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................55
NCEMBT-070315 v
Figure 25. Test condition 3 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................56 Figure 26. Test condition 4 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................57 Figure 27. Test condition 5 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................58 Figure 28. Test condition 6 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................59 Figure 29. Test condition 7 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................60 Figure 30. Test condition 8 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser. ............................................................................................................................................................................61 Figure 31. Test condition 0 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................62 Figure 32. Test condition 1 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................63 Figure 33. Test condition 2 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................64 Figure 34. Test condition 3 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................65 Figure 35. Test condition 4 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................66 Figure 36. Test condition 5 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................67 Figure 37. Test condition 6 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................68 Figure 38. Test condition 7 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................69 Figure 39. Test condition 8 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.................................................................................................................................................................70 Figure 40. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 0, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....71 Figure 41. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 0, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. ......72 Figure 42. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 1, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....73 Figure 43. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 1, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......74 Figure 44. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 2, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....75 Figure 45. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 2, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......76 Figure 46. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 3, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....77 Figure 47. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 3, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......78 Figure 48. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 4, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. ....79 Figure 49. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 4, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......80
NCEMBT-070315
vi
Figure 50. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 5, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....81 Figure 51. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 5, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......82 Figure 52. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 6, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....83 Figure 53. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 6, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......84 Figure 54. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 7, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow. .....85 Figure 55. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 7, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......86 Figure 56. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 8, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......87 Figure 57. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 8, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow. .......88 Figure 58. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 0, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow..................89 Figure 59. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 0, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow....................90 Figure 60. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 1, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow. ................91 Figure 61. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 1, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow....................92 Figure 62. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 2, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow..................93 Figure 63. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 2, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow....................94 Figure 64. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 3, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow..................95 Figure 65. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 3, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow....................96 Figure 66. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 4, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow..................97 Figure 67. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 4, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow....................98 Figure 68. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 5, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow..................99 Figure 69. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 5, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow..................100 Figure 70. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 6, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow................101 Figure 71. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 6, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow..................102 Figure 72. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 7, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow................103 Figure 73. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 7, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow..................104 Figure 74. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 8, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow................105 Figure 75. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 8, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow..................106
NCEMBT-070315
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Possible Standardized Input Conditions ...................................................................................................11 Table 2. Parameter list for the experimental design following Department of Energy review .....................................15 Table 3. Taguchi Orthogonal L8 Array....................................................................................................................16 Table 4. Parameter List for Test Array ....................................................................................................................16 Table 5. Test Array with One 4-Level Parameter, Four 2-Level Parameters And One Noise Parameter........................17 Table 6. Expected effect of parameter variation on output ......................................................................................19 Table 7. Vertical locations of the traversing mechanism sensors .............................................................................25 Table 8. Airflow Rate Ratio predictions with parameter levels set at levels for high and low performance for square diffusers ...............................................................................................................................................................35 Table 9. Airflow Rate Ratio predictions with parameter levels set at levels for high and low performance for slot diffusers ...............................................................................................................................................................35 Table 10. Test conditions and results for square diffuser tests ...............................................................................41 Table 11. Test conditions and results for square diffuser tests (continued) .............................................................42 Table 12. Test conditions and results for slot diffuser tests.....................................................................................43 Table 13. Test conditions and results for slot diffuser tests (continued) ..................................................................44 Table 14. Test conditions and sound results for square diffuser tests......................................................................48 Table 15. Test conditions and sound results for slot diffuser tests...........................................................................49
viii
NCEMBT-070315
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors obtained help and guidance from many outside sources during the course of this project. The collaboration of those people steered this project in the productive direction toward filling essential industry knowledge gaps and keeping the project focused on those goals. They also were very helpful in applying practical knowledge on experimental techniques that are particular to ductwork and room airflow testing. The expert committee members: Ted Carnes, Steve Kimmel, Richard John, Robert Browning, and Michael Mamayek, contributed their expertise and guided the project team. Also, Dan Int-Hout contributed multiple times to the success of the experiment testing.
NCEMBT-070315
ix
NCEMBT-070315
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This task compared the performance of conventional air distribution (CAD) systems, built according to current design specifications and workmanship standards, with CAD systems that have been built with common variations in construction and workmanship seen in typical field installations. Variations examined in this task are those found in the ducted air distribution system from the variable air volume (VAV) unit to the diffuser. The results of this project testing revealed the quantitative differences in energy use, sound generation and room air distribution due to variations in the installation of ductwork and diffusers after the VAV unit. Specifically, for a constant supply air pressure: Increasing flex-duct length from 6 to 35 feet decreased airflow by 11 percent Decreasing diameter of the flex duct from 10 to 8 inches decreased airflow by 25 percent One hard turn or a kink in the flex-duct near the diffuser decreased airflow by 11 percent and noticeably increased noise level (5 dB) The two standard types of diffuser tested had a 9 percent difference in airflow rate For square diffusers, the absence of a vertical section in the flex-duct right above the diffuser (no substantial length of vertical duct) actually resulted in a slight increase in airflow compared to an installation with a 40 inch vertical section but was accompanied by a significant (6 dB) increase in flow generated noise and significant asymmetric diffuser discharge airflow. A branch duct installed immediately after the VAV unit, compared to at least four duct diameters after the VAV unit, in the square diffuser tests caused a slight decrease in airflow. The same effect could not be determined from the slot diffuser tests. Room air diffusion symmetry was affected primarily by the type of diffuser and the approach of the flex duct immediately before the diffuser. For square diffusers, the two levels of the flex duct elbow near the diffuser condition, (1) three feet of vertical duct before the diffuser and (2) three feet of horizontal duct with only 5 inches of vertical duct before the diffuser, gave significantly different room air distribution patterns. Apparently the horizontal momentum of the airflow carried through the diffuser creating an asymmetric airflow discharge pattern. For slot diffusers, which have an internal air plenum, the two levels of the flex duct elbow near the diffuser condition did not result in significant differences in airflow discharge symmetry. The net effect on room draft and air distribution performance index (ADPI) was not determined. These effects were consistent for both the 100 percent design and 50 percent design airflow conditions tested
The tests were conducted in the new environmental systems room at UNLV under repeatable conditions that replicated expected field installation variations. The test parameters and their test conditions were determined with the help of the literature review, the advise of an expert panel and the advise of a Department of Energy review panel. Quantitative effects were determined through the use of an orthogonal test array. The orthogonal test array gives the main effect of parameter level variation under both flow conditions in the fewest possible number of tests. The results confirm many standard held beliefs and results of some previous testing by others, but the results also show some standard held beliefs are not accurate. The main contribution of this research is that it provides quantitative results that can be used to make energy efficiency and noise generation design and installation decisions, and to predict the efficiency and noise levels of an installation.
NCEMBT-070315
1 PROJECT OBJECTIVE
1 PROJECT OBJECTIVE
This task compared the performance of conventional air distribution (CAD) systems, built according to current design specifications and workmanship standards, with CAD systems that have been built with common variations in construction and workmanship seen in typical field installations. Variations examined in this task are those found in the ducted air distribution system from the variable air volume (VAV) unit to the diffuser. A test protocol was developed and implemented in the UNLV Building Technologies Laboratory (BTLab) to measure performance of CAD VAV systems with respect to energy use, air distribution and acoustics. Test data were collected and analyzed to identify the sensitivity of CAD systems to the typical variations. The specific task objectives were: Identify typical (with potential faults) field installations of ducted CAD VAV systems. Conduct laboratory airflow, energy, and sound tests on selected typical installations of ducted VAV systems to develop a body of valid engineering design data for these systems. Upgrade and modify the laboratory facilities at UNLV/CMEST to conduct airflow, energy, and sound tests on ducted CAD VAV systems.
Information gathered by the project team including guidance from the Department of Energy motivated this research and guided formation of the specific project objectives. Those objectives cover gathering information on past research that could be used to refine the project objectives and methodology, identifying industry needs that will be used to define the project scope, design the experiment to fit the project scope, develop a measurement protocol to meet the experimental design, develop analysis methods used to determine the effects of installation variation on performance and disseminate this information to the industry.
NCEMBT-070315
2 BACKGROUND
2 BACKGROUND
ASHRAE has sponsored several research projects for the purpose of updating friction loss coefficients for duct fittings in rectangular, round, and flat oval ducts and for improving design methodologies for HVAC air distribution systems in buildings. That research has helped to significantly improve the design of that part of HVAC air distribution systems up to the point where branch ducts supply air to variable volume terminal units and room air terminal devices (grills, registers, and diffusers). Design information on duct design from variable volume terminal units to room air terminal devices is primarily anecdotal in nature, and it is predicated on ideal system installations, which seldom if ever occur in field installations. There are very little measured data concerning the effects on building air distribution, energy, and sound due to variations in duct installations between air terminal units and room diffusers. The installation of supply duct and VAV systems raises a number of issues that impact overall air distribution system efficiency and performance. Although research information on specific details is limited, there are established guidelines addressing common installation issues. The primary information sources for VAV duct design are SMACNAs HVAC Systems Duct Design Manual (SMACNA 1990), California Energy Commissions (CEC) Advanced Variable Air Volume Design Guide (Hydeman 2003), and the ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals (ASHRAE 2001). An additional important source is Mr. Dan Int-Hout, Chief Engineer for Krueger. The purpose of this literature review was to extract published information on the effect on the performance of the HVAC system of VAV terminal unit-to-diffuser duct design and installation variations. Specific information sought included duct design issues, performance issues, and installation problems.
2 BACKGROUND
results suggest that dust accumulation and/or high humidity should be properly controlled in any HVAC duct to prevent the growth of P. chrysogenum (a species of fungus) (Foarde 1996).
NCEMBT-070315
2 BACKGROUND
3 METHODOLGY
3 METHODOLGY
To meet the project objectives, a detailed investigation methodology was developed and followed. To determine scope and design of the experiment, and develop test procedures, the investigation used information gathered from published literature, advise from an industry expert committee, and review comments from a Department of Energy peer review panel. The test laboratory was designed and developed and test protocols were developed and followed to conduct experiments called for in the experimental design.
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
6. What is the most economical test matrix that can be used to capture the main effects of parameter variation and achieve the objective of the experiment.
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
For slot diffuser systems: 1. First branch too close to VAV terminal discharge 2. Short duct length to diffuser 3. Flex duct offset 4. Small radius turn in flex duct 5. Flex duct too long 6. Round or oval, side or end plenum inlet. A sketch of a duct layout showing a normal branch and six variations is shown in Figure 1. Two typical slot diffusers and two square diffusers are shown in Figure 2.
VAV Unit
Side View
Proper installation
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
Figure 2. Different types of diffusers that are used in terminal duct installations. Top: two 4-foot slot diffusers, one with a 8 inch round adaptor and one with a 10-inch oval adaptor. Bottom right: typical 2 by 2-foot louvered square diffuser. Bottom right: Plaque type 2 by 2-foot square diffuser.
The expert panel suggested a separate series of tests for square diffusers and slot diffusers due to the different fundamental air distribution characteristics of the two types of diffusers. Two-foot and fourfoot slot diffusers were discussed for the testing. Originally, when the test plan called for four square diffusers in the test room, using four two-foot end slot diffusers in the test room would give the best comparison to the square diffusers and are a common size of slot diffusers used in that size of room. Later, after a series of preliminary tests, a room configuration with only two diffusers, either square or slot, was determined to be the best for room air distribution and for testing. The panel initially worked out a series of tests that were based on having one condition at the extreme or bad setting while holding the other conditions at nominal or the good setting. This testing sequence was modified in favor of a more efficient orthogonal array test sequence, which is discussed in detail in section 3.4 Design of the Experiment.
10
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
A summary of a preliminary test plan was submitted back to the expert committee for their review and comment. Changes suggested by several members of the committee were subsequently incorporated into the test plan. A focus of discussion between the panel members and the team was determination of the VAV unit input parameters. Debate centered around maintaining constant airflow, pressure or energy into the VAV unit. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are shown in Table 1. Normally, as many units do not have airflow sensing, airflow through the VAV unit is controlled by predetermined positioning of the inline damper. Therefore, the team decided to use two fixed damper positions for the two noise conditions. Only two of the three parameters: pressure, airflow and damper position, are independent. Thus, for each damper position, only pressure or airflow, but not both, can be held constant for different variations in the ductwork. Alternately, energy can be held constant by adjusting airflow until the airflow and pressure condition results in the same energy. The team decided to hold pressure constant and allow airflow to vary. This is more representative of field conditions where several VAV units are attached to a main air supply. In such cases, supply pressure is held constant and flow requirements are met by use of in-line dampers, such as in a VAV unit. By holding the supply pressure constant while varying installation conditions, the airflow will vary off target. This airflow variation is expected to be small compared to the airflow difference caused by the two damper positions.
Table 1. Possible Standardized Input Conditions
Advantage
Constant Airflow Constant VAV Inlet Pressure Easy to control Easy to control Similar to actual building system operating conditions Similar to actual operating conditions in some small systems
Disadvantage
May be inconsistent with actual building system operating conditions Will require airflow scaling to determine noise effects of parameter variation May be difficult to determine root cause of output variation
High and low value of the test parameters were provided by the industry expert panel.
3.2.3 DOE Peer Review of the VAV Duct Design Variations Test Plan
A Department of Energy sponsored peer review panel was presented with the details of the test plan. The panel made a few recommendations in the test parameters. Following the DOE peer review panel recommendations, a test parameter of closed and open center face design diffuser was added, while perforated face diffuser and end slot diffuser testing was dropped. These changes are based on the types of diffusers most commonly used in the commercial building HVAC industry. From the original seven parameters, short length to diffuser and flex duct too long were combined into one four level parameter, flex duct length to result in six parameters for both square and slot diffusers. The DOE panel also concurred with the test plan to measure isothermal throw from the diffusers. Estimating ADPI from isothermal throw measurements is an industry accepted method. The different
NCEMBT-070315 11
3 METHODOLGY
installations used in this project are expected to result in changes in total airflow and flow pattern from the effected diffuser.
Energy Transformation
For this experiment, the supply air pressure was held constant. For a given VAV damper setting, airflow decreased due to increased airflow resistance in the ductwork including diffuser. Thus, changes in airflow were a good measure of the efficiency of the energy transformation. Before reaching the VAV unit, the supply air passed through several silencer like plenums, nearly 15 feet of lined metal duct with perforated inner surface and about 30 feet of large diameter flex duct. At the VAV unit the flow had no significant noise content. All noise created in the room was noise that was generated from the VAV unit to the diffuser. Thus, noise measured in the room was a good indicator of unintended energy transformation in the target system. Airflow entered the VAV unit through a 4-foot straight metal duct and was presumed to be uniform. The distribution of the air into the room, uniform or otherwise was a
12 NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
combination of the intended and unintended consequence of the installation from the VAV unit to the diffuser. Airflow distribution was a good measure of part of the energy transformation in the target system. For this experiment, airflow rate, airflow pattern and room noise levels were measured as performance parameters. Airflow rates were measured at each diffuser before and after each test run. The performance parameter used was the ratio of test diffuser airflow to the airflow measured during the nominal case run. This gave a direct measure of the relative efficiency of the installation. Room noise level was measured at two elevations for all test points during all test runs. An average of the readings from the microphone at mid level during a scan around the diffuser was used for the performance measurement. The measurement was converted to the Noise Criteria (NC). Noise Criteria is designed for measuring HVAC related noise and is commonly used by the industry. Because of intermittent extraneous noise in the test room at the two lowest octave bands used for calculating NC, the measurements at those bands were omitted. Therefore, the reported levels were modified NC levels. Those omitted bands covered the low frequencies typically associated with rumble. Rumble is a characteristic of large fan noise or unstable flow in large ducts and the generation of such noise was not expected from the ductwork in this experiment. The modified NC was expected to be a good representation of the actual NC due to the ductwork installation. For nearly all measurements, they were in fact the same. Room diffuser airflow pattern and throw characteristics were measured to determine air distribution changes due to variations in ductwork installation. If a room air distribution system is designed with the assumption of directionally symmetric diffuser performance, then any significant deviation from that symmetry could be detrimental to the room ADPI. However, most room designs, including the test room for this task, have inherent compromises in the diffuser design. Most notably, the characteristic length used to select diffuser location may not be symmetrical in every direction. In the test room used in this experiment, the square diffuser characteristic length varied from eight to eleven feet. It is possible that matching asymmetry in diffuser throw with asymmetry in characteristic length could be beneficial. On the other hand, random anti-symmetrical throw is likely to be especially detrimental to ADPI. Clearly, APDI has dual dependency on both diffuser throw and room air distribution design. The Task goals were to produce data that could be used for different room designs, and in a sense, be room independent. Therefore, diffuser throw variation were deemed to be a better indicator of the effect of variations in the test parameters than ADPI measurements. Some parameter variations may not affect throw symmetry, but may affect the system balance and, as a result, the overall efficiency with or without system rebalancing.
NCEMBT-070315
13
3 METHODOLGY
3 METHODOLGY
The type definitions are: Test Parameter. A parameter that is a cause of variation and is tested a several levels. Control Parameter. A parameter that can be controlled and eliminated as a source of variation. May be tested to evaluate different design option. Noise Parameter. A parameter that cannot be controlled, or is preferred not to be controlled, in actual system use. Therefore a good system should be robust to changes in the noise parameter. This parameter may be varied in the experiment to test for system robustness.
Table 2. Parameter list for the experimental design following Department of Energy review Condition Duct branch close to VAV terminal or previous branch Duct very short or very long Short vertical section above diffuser Small radius turn in flex duct Closed or open face diffuser (square diffuser only) Round / oval diffuser plenum inlet (slot diffuser only) VAV airflow volume Parameter Distance from branch to VAV unit or previous branch Distance from branch to diffuser Distance from elbow to diffuser Size of radius Closed / open Round / oval Flow rate Energy Form Flow disturbance Type of Parameter Test Parameter (x)
Flow disturbance Flow disturbance Flow resistance / noise Flow resistance, disturbance Flow disturbance Flow resistance / noise /disturbance
Test Parameter (x) Test Parameter (x) Test Parameter (x) Control Parameter (C) Control Parameter (C) Noise Parameter (N)
Note that the type of parameter classification (test, control or noise) is dependent on where in the whole process of HVAC system creation the evaluation is performed. For example, a system designer may not specify the exact diffuser or duct but instead just the source of air for each diffuser and the expected flow for the anticipated room load. To that designer, some of the control parameters listed in Table 2 become noise parameters such as diffuser choices, and variations in duct installation and room conditions. Alternately, to the installer that chooses the diffuser and duct products, and directs the installation, many of the test parameters in Table 2 become control parameters. Possible noise parameters for the installer would be parameters such as flow rate, room load, room furniture and partition arrangement, variations within the products, and variations from the designated installation. For this experiment, it was assumed that diffuser choices are controlled but that exact installation conditions are subject to variation. The seven parameters in Table 2 were determined to be acceptable parameters for the DoE. One practical consideration was that, based on the available time for testing and how the design sequence affected ease of changing between tests, the total number of tests would not exceed 35. To the maximum extent possible, test parameters that were expected to have a strong interaction or were essentially the same parameter at different levels were combined and varied together
NCEMBT-070315
15
3 METHODOLGY
as one parameter. It was decided to include the control parameter, diffuser inlet or face type, as a test parameter to capture the effects of changing the diffuser type.
TEST CONDITION
Test No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Branch to elbow distance 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 Branch to VAV unit distance 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
PARAMETERS
Elbow to diffuser distance 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 Bend in duct radius 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 Diffuser/duct type 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2
The list of the five parameters for the two diffuser cases is shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Parameter List for Test Array Parameter 1. Branch to diffuser distance 2. Branch to VAV unit distance 3. Elbow to diffuser distance 4. Bend in duct radius 5. Diffuser design (square) 5. Duct size and connection (slot)
Low State 6 (square), 9 (slot) feet 6 inches 5 inches 5 inch radius, 120 degree turn Louvered 8-inch, round
High State 35 feet 54 inches 40 inches 30 inch radius, less than 90 degree turn Plaque 10-inch, oval
16
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
Table 3 is referred to as the inner array. The one noise test condition, airflow rate, still needed to be added to the experiment. Noise conditions are added at the right of the matrix in what is called the outer array. With only one noise condition, the outer array is just a one-row, two-column array. The complete test array, inner and outer, for both diffuser types is shown in Table 5. One nominal test condition, listed as test condition 0, was added to the array. Test parameters for this test condition were set at what are considered standard installation practice levels and the more common diffuser was chosen. Test condition 0 was not used in the calculations for main effects and signal to noise levels. It was included to give comparative information on the performance of a standard installation. The measured output for each test is entered under each Noise Test Condition column. Thus, for each type of diffuser (square or slot) there are eight test numbers, each done once for each noise condition. Because we have two diffuser types, a total of 32 tests were required. The results of the experiment were used to determine the main effects of the test parameters. The main effects were the average effects for that test parameter with the other parameters at equal instances of all possible test levels and while exposed to the different noise condition levels. Using the main effects, it was possible to predict the results for all possible cases of parameter levels, most of which were not tested. Also, for any given performance measure or combination of measures, optimum settings of the test parameters can be determined. Parameters that can have continuous levels (not just either/or) can be set at values between the extremes. Results for the 4-level parameter can show non-linearity in the output and can show an optimum value between extremes. Because a noise parameter is evaluated, robustness of the design to that noise condition can be evaluated. These results also can be used to help with tolerance design.
Table 5. Test Array with One 4-Level Parameter, Four 2-Level Parameters And One Noise Parameter
TEST CONDITION
Test No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 Nominal 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2
PARAMETERS
3 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 4 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1
NCEMBT-070315
17
3 METHODOLGY
Because the arrays are balanced and orthogonal, analysis of the results of the test is greatly simplified. Analysis of the results produces values for the main effects (change in output when a parameter is changed from one level to the other), and the signal-to-noise ratios (S/N), (the effect of noise and other parameter variation on the output with the parameter at a given level). Those values are plotted for easy parameter at all test levels. The main effects are calculated using the equation:
j= n j =1
Al ,i =
Y
n
l , i, j
(1)
where Al ,i is the mean performance when parameter i is at level l, and Yl ,i, j is the result for the j test when parameter i is at level l. For example, for the mean when parameter 2 is at level 1, the results from the four tests (numbered 1, 3, 5, and 7 in Table 5) are averaged. The S/N calculation depends on the type of performance characteristic. The performance characteristic of airflow is a larger the better characteristic and noise level is a smaller the better characteristic. The signal-to-noise calculation uses the equation:
S / N = 10log10 MSD
where MSD is the mean square deviation. For smaller the better:
j= n j =1
(2)
MSDl ,i =
l , i, j
(3)
MSDl ,i =
1/Y
j =1
l , i, j
(4)
for level l of parameter i. The mean gives the average performance when a test condition is at a specific level. Because the other test parameters are equally balanced at all of their levels, this mean is the best indicator of expected performance at that level. S/N, on the other hand, also measures the variation of performance when a test condition is at a specific level. Because of the way S/N is calculated, the highest value of S/N is always desirable in both larger and smaller the better performance measures. For the larger and smaller the better performance measures, the mean and the S/N level normally indicate the same level as the best for any given parameter. However, if performance has high variation at a specific parameter level, the S/N value
18 NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
may be lower than a level with a less desirable mean but lower variability. A designer then needs to decide if the low variation is more desirable than the better mean. In many cases, low variation is chosen and a different parameter is used to obtain a desirable mean. In the case of energy efficiency in ductwork, the optimum mean may be chosen to maximize potential energy savings, while the lower variation may be chosen so that performance can be better predicted. Based on principals of physics and engineering experience, certain changes in performance were expected from changes in the different parameters. Table 6 lists the expected change in different performance characteristics with changes in the test parameter. This list was compiled before the experiment was run to help build the design and measurement scheme so as to not miss those performance changes.
Table 6. Expected effect of parameter variation on output Parameter Duct branch to diffuser distance Duct branch to VAV unit distance Duct hard elbow to diffuser distance Bend in duct radius Diffuser design (square diffuser) Duct connection (slot diffuser) Expected effect at variation Unstable flow Unstable flow Flow velocity direction Flow restriction Throw pattern variation, flow resistance Flow resistance and direction Effect on diffuser throw symmetry Small to none Possible asymmetry Significant asymmetry none Different throw pattern Different throw pattern Effect on system performance Airflow balance change Airflow balance change Flow noise generation Flow resistance Possible resistance change Possible resistance change Energy efficiency related effect Resistance added by balancing Resistance added by balancing Unknown Resistance added to balance Possible resistance change, different balancing Possible resistance change, different balancing
NCEMBT-070315
19
3 METHODOLGY
20
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
To UFAD
flex duct flex duct
VAV unit
rigid duct
Supply
flex duct
The VAV unit is depicted in a typical position and not a permanent position. The VAV unit could be moved to any location in the room that its size and duct connections allowed. This flexibility was necessary to accommodate the various diffuser branch duct lengths required in the experiment. The ductwork downstream of the VAV unit was configured as required by the respective experiment. The rigid duct section between the VAV unit transition and the first branches was a 48-inch section that could be removed, allowing to place the branches immediately after the transition. The 24-inch rigid duct between the first two branches and the last two branches was removable. The rigid duct sections after the VAV unit were held together by Duct-Mate connectors. All 4 branches had an internal damper that could be used to balance airflow between diffusers. From the branches, flex duct of the designated diameter and length was run to the diffuser. The characteristics of the duct run, such as the existence of any hard turns or the distance of the last 90 degree turn to the diffuser were set according to the requirements of the experimental run. Hard duct turns of 180-degree 5-inch radius were held in place by wrapping duct tape around the duct as shown in Figure 5. The distance of the last 90-degree in the duct before entering the diffuser is shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7 where the distance is 36 inches and 5 inches respectively.
NCEMBT-070315
21
3 METHODOLGY
Figure 5. Picture of duct showing a hard turn in the duct and a 3-foot vertical entry into the diffuser (low state of Parameter 4)
Figure 6. Picture of duct showing a 3-foot vertical duct section attached to the diffuser (high state of Parameter 3)
NCEMBT-070315
22
3 METHODOLGY
Figure 7. Picture of duct showing the duct running horizontal right before attachment to the diffuser (low state of Parameter 3)
Only two diffusers were used for this project so two of the branches were blocked after the damper with a duct cap and sealed with tape. All rigid ductwork attached to the VAV unit, and the unit itself were insulated to approximately R-6 by exterior wrapping with aluminum backed foam sheets. The flex duct came with an R-6 insulation between the inner and outer liner.
NCEMBT-070315
23
3 METHODOLGY
The diffuser locations and the test scan pattern for square diffusers and slot diffusers are shown in Figure 8. Square diffuser locations were determined using standard installation guidance to achieve the proper ratio of diffuser throw to characteristic length for good ADPI. This configuration was tested and had an ADPI over 90 percent. The slot diffuser were placed to obtain good room air distribution and allow for scanning with the movable instruments. Due to instrument scanning limitations, the configuration had the slot diffusers further from the wall than would be expected in a normal installation. However, the flow between the diffusers and not near the wall was of interest in this Task, and those results were not likely to be significantly changed by the small decrease in the separation distance of the slot diffuses.
20 ft 8 ft
5 ft 20 ft
9 ft 10 ft
#2
9 ft
4 ft #3 2x2 ft diffuser 8 ft 30 ft 4 ft
Figure 8. Test room diffuser locations and measurement scan pattern for square diffusers (left) and slot diffusers (right).
The scan patterns used to capture diffuser throw and interaction between the two diffusers are shown in Figure 8. They consist of one centerline scan and one scan on each side two feet from centerline. Point spacing along each scan was six inches. It was anticipated that flow changes would occur more rapidly in the predominant flow direction than transverse to the flow. The scan pattern used to capture flow velocity and asymmetry of the flow in the immediately diffuser discharge was a four or three-sided scan around the square or slot diffuser respectively as shown in Figure 9.
24
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
60" 9"
flow direction
point 1
24"
scan direction
24"
Figure 9. Measurement scan patterns for slot (upper) and square (lower) diffusers
The vertical locations of the draft and temperature sensors are shown in Table 7. During the scans of the square diffusers sensor TV17 was in the diffuser throw while the next sensor down, TV16, was for the most part out of the throw.
Table 7. Vertical locations of the traversing mechanism sensors Sensor TV17 TV16 TV15 Mic 2 TV14 TV13 TV12 TV11 TV10 TV9 TV8 TV7 Mic 1 TV6 TV5 TV4 TV3 TV2 TV1 Height from the floor (in) 106.5 104 101 100 98 95 92 89 86 83 77 72 68 67 54 43 30 23 6 Height from the ceiling (in) 1.25 4.75 7 8 10 13 16 19 22 25 31 36 40 41 53 65 78 85 102
NCEMBT-070315
25
3 METHODOLGY
The airflow speed measured by the draft sensors was slightly dependent on the orientation of the flow to the sensor as show in Figure 10. During the measurement scanning, the orientation of the sensors relative to the room remained the same which resulted in the presumed horizontal orientation relative to the flow that was different for all four cardinal directions (front, left, right, and behind).
Figure 10. Directional sensitivity for the HT-412 velocity probe. For shaft.
The sensors were mounted to the traversing mechanism as shown in Figure 11. The top sensor, TV17, was also oriented 20 degrees up so that the presumed flow orientation, using the convention of Figure 10, varied from +70 to -70 degrees yaw. A correction to the flow measurement was applied based on the information in Figure 10. For +70 degrees yaw the measurement was divided by 0.95, for 0 degrees yaw, 1.0, for -70 degrees yaw, 0.8. Measurements made at orientations between those values were scaled appropriately based on assumed flow direction along a radial from the center of the diffuser.
26
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
An outline of the protocol is below: Once at start of testing and once after completing all tests: 1. Determine the supply pressure to maintain 800 cfm total with all diffusers in the nominal condition and the VAV damper at 100%. This is test condition 0 at noise condition 1.
NCEMBT-070315 27
3 METHODOLGY
2. Determine the VAV damper position to maintain 400 cfm total with all diffusers in the nominal condition and the supply air pressure at the value determined in 1 above. This is test condition 0 at noise condition 2. For each test: 1. Install the appropriate duct, diffuser, post-VAV unit branches called for in the DOE test condition. Install the duct as called for in the DOE (bends, straight sections). 2. Inspect all other diffusers to ensure they are in the nominal condition. 3. Set the VAV damper at 100% (open) for a 100% airflow test and at the proper percentage for a 50% airflow test. 4. Set the supply air pressure to the value determined at the beginning of testing that maintained 800 cfm total airflow in the nominal condition. 5. Stabilize the test room at the test condition for at least 30 minutes. 6. Manually measure both diffusers air volume flow. Record the fan motor amperage. 7. Perform the two scan patterns for that test condition. 8. After scans are complete, again manually measure the flow volume on both diffusers and record the fan motor amperage. The eight experiments in the test array in Table 5 were performed in random order. The two noise conditions were performed in order 1 first then 2 second. Scans around the diffuser and the raster scans were performed in the most convenient order. The two sets of experiments for the square diffusers and slot diffusers were in that order.
Airflow control was accomplished by manually setting the frequency of the fan drive to maintain the designated supply air static pressure. Airflow rate measurement varied less than 20 cfm during the tests.
28
NCEMBT-070315
3 METHODOLGY
Supply air temperature was automatically controlled through a proportional integral controller running a five-stage compressor. The supply air was conditioned after the supply fan so that the fan air was at the return air temperature. Physical ductwork installation had a significant potential for adding to the experimental error. Every test condition required changing one to five of the test parameters. Because of the post VAV unit rigid duct changes and different lengths of flex duct, test setup often required moving the VAV unit. This resulted in changes in the bending of the main supply flex duct. Efforts were made to avoid any sharp turns in the duct. Also, because the test conditions were set based on supply pressure after the main supply flex duct, any changes in duct flow resistance were assumed not to affect the test setup. The different configurations required four different lengths of flex duct. Actual duct length varied depending on how much force was used to stretch the duct. Duct sections were measured in their extended condition. Between configurations an inch or two of length may have been lost during removing and reattaching. Lengths were within 6 inches of that specified. Many configurations required several turns in the flex duct to the test diffuser. Special efforts were made to minimize the number of turns and maximize the turn radiuses. All turns that were not a test parameter had a radius larger than 30 inches. Flex duct was stretched to its design length to avoid compression of the duct wire and the consequential varying duct inner diameter. However, some compression may have occurred along with some turns adding to the duct flow resistance. Hard turns in the ducts required for some configurations were performed in a consistent manner but probably had some variation in the amount of resulting flow restriction. The procedures followed should have kept the airflow resistance installation variation significantly lower than the airflow resistance change caused by changes in the levels of the test conditions. Experimental setup had several manual operations that could have resulted in an experimental error. Before each experimental run, the VAV damper was manually set to the desired position and the fan control frequency was manually adjusted to achieve the required supply static pressure. The VAV damper control was analog and was difficult to read closer than .5% of damper. Coupled with the clock drive variation, the experimental error was estimated at 1%. Supply static pressure instantaneous readout varied by .05 in w.c. requiring that a 2-minute average or longer be taken to determine the steady state pressure. Fan frequency was adjusted until the average supply static pressure was .025 in. w.c. of the target pressure. Together, these two setup variations probably resulted in an experimental error of 2% in the resulting airflow rate. A flow hood was used to measure the diffuser flow rates. Considerable effort was made to teach all team members a standard method to use the hood. The test procedures called for multiple measurements when possible. Flow hood measurement variation due to instrument error and operator use variation was estimated to be 10% of actual airflow and 4% for repeatability and comparison. Overall measurement variation due to instrument error and operator use variation for the 95% confidence level was estimated to be 11% of actual airflow and 5% for repeatability and comparison.
NCEMBT-070315
29
3 METHODOLGY
minutes of stationary measurements for each test scan grid point. Before and after each test diffuser flow measurements, when available, were averaged. Sound data was recorded as 10 second averages of all the third octave bands from 10 Hz to 10000 Hz and the A-Weighted sound level. That data was supplemented with calculated octave band levels. Modified Noise Criteria (NC), using the octave bands from 63 Hz to 4000 Hz, was calculated for sound measurements made during the 3 and 4 sided scans around the diffusers. Because the upper microphone was at times exposed to airflow velocities greater than .1 m/s, which can result in microphone generated flow noise, analysis was performed using the lower microphone data.
NC corrected = NC 10log10 ( r 8 )
where r is the airflow ratio.
(5)
Equation 5 was used to adjust the square diffuser noise levels. The slot diffuser tests had too high a variation in airflow rate to allow for accurate noise level adjustment. Airflow ratio and adjusted NC noise level were entered as the performance results in the Taguchi test array. The mean and signal to noise ratio for each parameter level were calculated in Minitab, a commercial statistical analysis program.
30
NCEMBT-070315
4 RESULTS
4 RESULTS
The complete test results of all the individual tests are presented in table form and graphically in Appendices A, B and C respectively. Significant findings in the test results are presented in this section.
Figure 12. Main effects plots for square (left) and slot (right) diffusers for the five test parameters and where the performance measure is airflow rate ratio
NCEMBT-070315
31
4 RESULTS
Figure 13. Noise criteria means for square diffusers when noise criteria levels have been adjusted to that estimated for a standard airflow rate
32
NCEMBT-070315
4 RESULTS
4.3 AIR DISTRIBUTION VARIATIONS RESULTING FROM INSTALLATION VARIATIONS FOR SQUARE AND SLOT DIFFUSERS
The test results are shown in Appendix C, Figure 22 thru Figure 75. The variations in air distribution attributable to the different configurations fall in two general categories. First, as expected, if the overall airflow rate out of the test diffuser increased or deceased due to the test configuration, a corresponding change in the air distribution can be seen. These air distribution changes consisted of a few percent change in flow velocity along the ceiling and a shift in the airflow interaction zone between the two diffusers. The second and more striking variation in air distribution appearing in the square diffuser results was a change in the symmetry of the airflow out of the diffuser due exclusively to the 5-inch level of the elbow to diffuser parameter. The results from condition 1 (5-inch elbow to diffuser) and condition 4 (40-inch elbow to diffuser) are repeated here in Figure 14 for square diffusers. For condition 1, the flex duct approached the diffuser from right (East). Similar results were not seen for slot diffusers.
333
346
0 6 5 4 3
14
27 37
333
346
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
297 284 270 256 243 233 225 217 207 194
velocity [m/s]
velocity [m/s]
2 1 0
180
Figure 14. Airflow distribution from the test diffuser for condition 1 and 4 for square diffusers at 100% design airflow
NCEMBT-070315
33
5 DISCUSSION
5 DISCUSSION
5.1 ENERGY EFFICIENCY
The data in Table 10 thru Table 13in Appendix A show significant changes in the airflow of the test diffuser for the six different test conditions. Those differences are reflected in the mean of the results for each level of each parameter shown in Figure 12. The difference in airflow rate ratio between the levels of each parameter shows the strength of that parameter in influencing the performance and the direction of change in performance with the corresponding change in the parameter level. The possibility that experimental error could cause up to a five percent change in the performance measure means that parameter level variation resulting in a performance changes lower than five percent do not indicate with high confidence a significant effect caused by changes in the levels of that parameter.
34
NCEMBT-070315
5 DISCUSSION
Table 8. Airflow Rate Ratio predictions with parameter levels set at levels for high and low performance for square diffusers Case A B Duct Length 6 36 Distance to Branch 54 6 Elbow to Diffuser 5 40 Bend in Duct 30 5 Type of Diffuser 1 2 Predicted Airflow Rate Ratio 1.15 0.75 Predicted Energy Efficiency Ratio 1.32 0.56
NCEMBT-070315
35
5 DISCUSSION
5 DISCUSSION
that this asymmetry in airflow distribution is likely to persist in some form in a normal room with 55 F supply air and 75 F air temperature in the occupied zone. Absent other installation problems, in a room with an installation reflecting the asymmetrical flow from the short elbow to diffuser condition, the detectable differences would likely be asymmetric room cooling and ventilation.
NCEMBT-070315
37
6 CONCLUSIONS
6 CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions present in this report may be used by planners and installers of ductwork to maximize the performance of the installation within the existing constraints of each particular installation. The performance considered includes energy efficiency, noise generation and air distribution. The comparisons in Section 4 show the magnitude of energy consumption that hangs in the balance when installing duct work. Other considerations and physical constraints may prevent using the most energy or noise efficient type installation. In fact, the sections on noise and air distribution show that normally an installation performs better for noise and air distribution if the elbow to diffuser distance of 40 inches (or greater) is used. For square diffusers, that change from the most energy efficient results in an airflow rate ratio of 1.12 vs. 1.15, and an energy efficiency ratio of 1.25 vs. 1.32. The data presented here gives the designer the information needed to determine the contribution to the overall energy efficiency ratio of the entire air distribution system due to the ratio of the post VAV unit duct work. For example, examine a case where the desired flow rate is 800 cfm pre VAV unit, the design overall pressure of the system is 2.0 in water, the duct and the average diffuser configuration has a predicted energy efficiency ratio of 1.2. The square diffuser nominal case has a supply pressure of 0.224 0.012 in. w.c. at the VAV unit. Thus the pressure loss for the rest of the system is about 1.78 in. w.c.. For the chosen configuration, the airflow can be maintained with .224/1.2 = 0.19 in. w.c. or a .034 reduction. The total required pressure would now by 1.97 in. w.c. or a 1.5 percent energy reduction. A more dramatic, and unwanted, change in energy use would result if the average installed post VAV unit configuration had a 0.6 energy efficiency ratio. The overall energy usage to maintain flow would then be a 7.5 percent increase. An unfortunate case results if one VAV unit has a particularly low energy efficiency ratio. To maintain airflow at that unit the pressure of the entire system must be increased resulting in balancing losses at the other more efficient installations and an overall efficiency reflecting the worst VAV unit installation. Overall noise levels can be influenced by many factors such as other noise producing devices in or out of the room, and the sound reflective properties of the room walls and furniture. However, the contribution due to the air distribution system can be estimated using the diffuser manufacturer supplied noise data and the incremental noise level changes given in this report for installation variations. Manufacturer data is normally for an ideal installation where there is no noise prior to the duct, and the duct approaches the diffuser in a long vertical section. This installation presents the diffuser with uniform horizontally symmetric flow. The noise levels from those installations are comparable to noise from the case with the 15-foot duct, the 40-inch elbow to diffuser, the 54-inch VAV to branch length, and the 30-inch radius bend in duct parameter levels. That is very close to the nominal case used here. Therefore, the noise increase or decrease from any variation from that case can be estimated from the data presented in this report. Finally, the resulting air distribution symmetry from a given installation can be estimated from the data presented here. Although it is unlikely an installation would be planned with asymmetric diffuser discharge, plenum height and other limitations can result in directing flow to a diffuser without sufficient vertical length to eliminate airflow horizontal momentum at the diffuser inlet. Tests in this report only cover the two extremes of installation. Thus, an installer will have the limits of the effect of an installation with a minimum vertical section and can then estimate what fraction of that effect is expected from the actual installation.
38
NCEMBT-070315
7 REFERENCES
7 REFERENCES
ASHRAE. 2001. Handbook of Fundamentals: American Society of Heating Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc. Foarde, K.K., D.W. VanOsdell, and J.C.S. Chang. 1996. Evaluation of fungal growth on fiberglass duct materials for various moisture, soil use and temperature conditions. Indoor Air 6 (2):83-92. Hydeman, M., S. Taylor, J. Stein., Taylor Engineering, E. Kolderup, T. Hong, and Eley Associates. 2003. Advanced Variable Air Volume System Design Guide: Design Guidelines, edited by C. E. Commission. Int-Hout, D. 2001. Those Who Forget the Past. ASHRAE Journal Forum. . 2003. VAV Box Airflow Measurement. In Krueger White Paper: www.krueger-hvac.com. . 2004. Best Practices for Selecting Diffusers. ASHRAE Journal Int-Hout, D. and R. Ratz. 1996. Cold air distribution design manual: Electric Power Research Institute. Kim, T., J.D. Spitler, and R.D. Delahoussaye. 2002. Optimum duct design for variable air volume systems, Part 1: Problem domain analysis of VAV duct systems. ASHRAE Transactions 108 (1):96-104. . 2002b. Optimum duct design for variable air volume systems, Part 2: Optimization of VAV duct systems. ASHRAE Transactions 108 (1):105-127. Linder, R., and C.B. Dorgan. 1997. VAV systems work despite some design and application problems. ASHRAE Transactions 103 (2):807-813. Modera, M.P., O. Brzozowski, F.R. Carrie, D.J. Dickerhoff, W.W. Delp, W.J. Fisk, R. Levinson, and D. Wang. 2001. Sealing ducts in large commercial buildings with aerosolized sealant particles. Energy and Buildings 34:705-714. Simon, C. 2002. One persons opinion: A VAV box dilemma. www.esmagazine.com, Posted November 30, 2002, 41-43. SMACNA. 1990. HVAC Systems Duct Design: SMACNA. Taylor, S.T., and J. Stein. 2004. Sizing VAV Boxes. ASHRAE Journal. Xu, T.T., F. Carrie, D. Dickerhoff, W. Fisk, J. McWilliams, D. Wang, and M. Modera. 2002. Performance of thermal distribution systems in large commercial buildings. Energy and Buildings 34 (3):215-226.
NCEMBT-070315
39
40
NCEMBT-070315
NCEMBT-070315
41
Test Cond. 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 0 0
1.000 1.000 1.068 1.035 0.915 0.978 0.997 0.902 0.787 0.743 0.934 0.996 0.950 0.932 0.778 0.918 1.164 1.165 1.116
1.000 1.000 0.985 0.990 0.988 1.100 1.046 1.062 1.019 1.137 1.042 1.101 1.013 1.112 0.970 1.163 1.053 1.051 1.018
42
NCEMBT-070315
Test Cond. 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2
Date 6/14/06 6/14/06 6/15/06 6/15/06 6/15/06 6/16/06 6/16/06 6/19/06 6/19/06 6/19/06 6/20/06 6/20/06 6/21/06 6/21/06 6/21/06 6/21/06 6/22/06 6/22/06 6/22/06 6/23/06 6/23/06 6/23/06 6/23/06 6/23/06 6/27/06 6/27/06 6/27/06 6/28/06 7/6/06 7/6/06 7/6/06 7/7/06 7/7/06 7/7/06 7/7/06 7/7/06 7/10/06 7/10/06 7/10/06 7/11/06 7/11/06
Scan type 3 Side 3 Side Raster 3 Side 3 Side Raster Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side 3 Side Raster Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side 3 Side Raster 3 Side Raster Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side 3 Side Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side Raster Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side Raster 3 Side 3 Side
Flow cond. % 100 100 100 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 50 50 100 100 100 100 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 50 50 100 100 50 50 100 100 50 50 100 100 50 50 50
VAV damper % 100 100 100 36 36 36 36 36 100 100 100 100 36 36 100 100 100 100 36 36 36 36 100 100 100 100 36 36 100 100 36 36 100 100 36 36 100 100 36 36 36
Fan Speed Hz 27.8 27.8 27.8 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 27.8 27.8 27.8 27.8 15.7 15.7 24.6 24.6 24.5 24.5 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 23.5 23.5 27.5 27.5 15.8 15.8 29.7 29.7 17.5 17.5 23.4 23.4 16.8 16.8 26.6 26.6 16.9 16.9 16.9
Supply air, Pre test, cfm 808 808 806 401 399 404 405 401 806 804 811 804 406 404 776 767 712 715 412 404 404 404 683 688 798 795 406 407 856 846 456 455 669 672 432 426 771 765 446 449 449
Diffuser #2 Pre test cfm 376 370 380 171 171 177 158 166 350 350 350 350 163 166 338 330 236 236 145 148 124 129 232 232 346 342 154 156 396 187 184 172 180 119 282 278 139 149 149
NCEMBT-070315
Diffuser #3 Pre test cfm 358 360 350 171 177 164 156 165 355 355 355 355 181 180 350 380 361 372 210 202 222 222 365 380 370 368 193 185 396 204 216 382 386 234 348 334 183 190 190
43
Test Cond. 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2
178
169
1.000
0.948
165 350 350 165 331 239 144 127 227 314 155 398 186 177 117 278 148
164 355 355 180 366 369 208 222 380 370 187 393 211 382 228 340 188
0.929 0.930 0.930 0.929 0.878 0.634 0.807 0.714 0.603 0.835 0.869 1.058 1.043 0.470 0.655 0.737 0.829
0.921 0.943 0.943 1.012 0.973 0.980 1.167 1.246 1.009 0.982 1.050 1.044 1.188 1.016 1.282 0.902 1.056
44
NCEMBT-070315
Figure 16. Signal to noise ratio for airflow rate ratio for square diffusers.
NCEMBT-070315
45
Figure 18. Signal to noise ratio for airflow rate ratio for slot diffusers
46
NCEMBT-070315
NCEMBT-070315
47
Test Cond. 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 0 0
48
Scan type Raster Square Square Raster Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square Square Raster Raster Square none none
NCEMBT-070315
1.000 1.000 1.068 1.035 0.915 0.978 0.997 0.902 0.787 0.743 0.934 0.996 0.950 0.932 0.778 0.918 1.164 1.165 1.116
1.000 1.000
42.1 0.985 0.990 31.3 0.988 1.100 44.0 1.046 1.062 35.7 1.019 1.137 44.5 1.042 1.101 35.0 1.013 1.112 41.2 0.970 1.163 43.5 1.053 1.051 1.018
37.4
39.9
35.1
28.0
34.4
31.1
37.6
44.1
37.7
30.2
44.0
38.5
39.5
46.9
41.9
32.0
36.8
33.7
35.1
49.9
43.9
37.0
38.2
31.7
Table 15. Test conditions and sound results for slot diffuser tests Flow Diffuser Difffuser cond. #2 avg #3 avg Test Cond. Scan type % cfm cfm 0 3 Side 100 376 357 0 3 Side 100 0 Raster 100 0 3 Side 50 178 169 0 3 Side 50 0 Raster 50 6 Raster 50 165 164 6 3 Side 50 6 Raster 100 350 355 6 3 Side 100 6 Raster 100 350 355 6 3 Side 100 4 Raster 50 165 180 4 3 Side 50 4 3 Side 100 331 366 4 Raster 100 3 Raster 100 239 369 3 3 Side 100 3 Raster 50 144 208 3 3 Side 50 5 3 Side 50 127 222 5 Raster 50 5 3 Side 100 227 380 5 Raster 100 7 Raster 100 314 370 7 3 Side 100 7 Raster 50 155 187 7 3 Side 50 1 3 Side 100 398 393 1 Raster 100 1 3 Side 50 186 211 1 Raster 50 8 3 Side 100 177 382 8 Raster 100 8 Raster 50 117 228 8 3 Side 50 2 Raster 100 278 340 2 3 Side 100 2 Raster 50 148 188 2 3 Side 50 2 3 Side 50
1.000
0.929 0.930 0.930 0.929 0.878 0.634 0.807 0.714 0.603 0.835 0.869 1.058 1.043 0.470 0.655 0.737 0.829
0.921 35.3 0.943 41.6 0.943 42.6 1.012 35.6 0.973 40.9 0.980 39.4 1.167 1.246 1.009 36.3 0.982 41.8 1.050 34.2 1.044 44.7 1.188 28.9 1.016 37.7 1.282 37 0.902 40.6 1.056 37.5 34.5 35 25.1 41.8 31.6 39.6 33.5 32.8 Not avail 32.4 Not avail 36.8 39.8 35.4 41 39.5 35
NCEMBT-070315
49
Figure 19. Noise criteria means for square diffusers without adjustment to a standard airflow rate
50
NCEMBT-070315
Figure 20. Noise criteria means for square diffusers when noise criteria levels have been adjusted to that estimated for a standard airflow rate
Figure 21. Signal to noise ratio for noise criteria for square diffusers when noise criteria levels have been adjusted to that estimated for a standard airflow rate
NCEMBT-070315
51
52
NCEMBT-070315
0 333 346 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 90 104 117 127 135 143 166 153 14 27 37
velocity [m/s]
angle [deg]
45 53 63 76
Figure 22. Test condition 0 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
53
333
346
0 6 5 4 3
14
27 37
angle [deg]
45 53
297 284 270 256 243 233 225 217 207 194
velocity [m/s]
2 1 0
180
333
14
27 37
angle [deg]
45 53
velocity [m/s]
180
Figure 23. Test condition 1 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
54
NCEMBT-070315
333
14
27 37
angle [deg]
45
velocity [m/s]
180
333
14
27 37
angle [deg]
45
velocity [m/s]
207
194
180
166
153
Figure 24. Test condition 2 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
55
333
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
333
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
Figure 25. Test condition 3 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
56
NCEMBT-070315
333
346
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
333
346
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
Figure 26. Test condition 4 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
57
333
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
333
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
Figure 27. Test condition 5 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
58
NCEMBT-070315
333
346
0 6 5 4 3
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
297 284 270 256 243 233 225 217 207 194
velocity [m/s]
2 1 0
333
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
Figure 28. Test condition 6 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
59
333
346
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
333
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
Figure 29. Test condition 7 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
60
NCEMBT-070315
333
346
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
333
346
14
27 37 45
angle [deg]
53
velocity [m/s]
Figure 30. Test condition 8 airflow velocity from diffuser measured in a 2 by 2 foot square pattern around the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
61
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 31. Test condition 0 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
62
NCEMBT-070315
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 32. Test condition 1 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
63
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
1.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 33. Test condition 2 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
64
NCEMBT-070315
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
1.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 34. Test condition 3 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
65
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 35. Test condition 4 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
66
NCEMBT-070315
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
1.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 36. Test condition 5 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
67
6
TV15 TV16 TV17
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 37. Test condition 6 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
68
NCEMBT-070315
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
1.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 38. Test condition 7 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
NCEMBT-070315
69
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
2.5
0.5
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
138
144
0 150
Figure 39. Test condition 8 airflow velocity from diffuser measured across the face from 6 inches away from the diffuser.
70
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 40. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 0, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
71
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
Velocity m/s 1 0.9625 0.925 0.8875 0.85 0.8125 0.775 0.7375 0.7 0.6625 0.625 0.5875 0.55 0.5125 0.475 0.4375 0.4 0.3625 0.325 0.2875 0.25
x=96 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 41. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 0, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
72
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 42. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 1, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
73
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 43. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 1, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
74
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
1.5 1.4375 1.375 1.3125 1.25 1.1875 1.125 1.0625 1 0.9375 0.875 0.8125 0.75 0.6875 0.625 0.5625 0.5 0.4375 0.375 0.3125 0.25
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 44. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 2, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
75
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
Velocity m/s 1 0.9625 0.925 0.8875 0.85 0.8125 0.775 0.7375 0.7 0.6625 0.625 0.5875 0.55 0.5125 0.475 0.4375 0.4 0.3625 0.325 0.2875 0.25
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 45. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 2, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
76
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 46. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 3, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
77
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
Velocity m/s 1 0.9625 0.925 0.8875 0.85 0.8125 0.775 0.7375 0.7 0.6625 0.625 0.5875 0.55 0.5125 0.475 0.4375 0.4 0.3625 0.325 0.2875 0.25
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 47. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 3, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
78
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 48. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 4, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
79
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 49. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 4, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
80
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 50. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 5, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
81
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
Velocity m/s 1 0.9625 0.925 0.8875 0.85 0.8125 0.775 0.7375 0.7 0.6625 0.625 0.5875 0.55 0.5125 0.475 0.4375 0.4 0.3625 0.325 0.2875 0.25
x=96 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 51. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 5, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
82
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 52. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 6, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
83
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
Velocity m/s 1 0.9625 0.925 0.8875 0.85 0.8125 0.775 0.7375 0.7 0.6625 0.625 0.5875 0.55 0.5125 0.475 0.4375 0.4 0.3625 0.325 0.2875 0.25
x=96 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 53. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 6, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
84
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 54. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 7, Square diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
85
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
Velocity m/s 1 0.9625 0.925 0.8875 0.85 0.8125 0.775 0.7375 0.7 0.6625 0.625 0.5875 0.55 0.5125 0.475 0.4375 0.4 0.3625 0.325 0.2875 0.25
x=96 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
80
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 55. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 7, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
86
NCEMBT-070315
Velocity m/s 3.25 3.1 2.95 2.8 2.65 2.5 2.35 2.2 2.05 1.9 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.3 1.15 1 0.85 0.7 0.55 0.4 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 56. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 8, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
87
Velocity m/s 2 1.9125 1.825 1.7375 1.65 1.5625 1.475 1.3875 1.3 1.2125 1.125 1.0375 0.95 0.8625 0.775 0.6875 0.6 0.5125 0.425 0.3375 0.25
220
220
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
140
100
x=96 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=120 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120 100
x=144 in.
90 80 70
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
Figure 57. Airflow distribution between diffusers for test condition 8, Square diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
88
NCEMBT-070315
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 58. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 0, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315 89
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 59. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 0, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
90
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 North-South distance [in]
Figure 60. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 1, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
91
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 61. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 1, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
92
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 North-South distance [in]
Figure 62. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 2, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
93
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in]
Figure 63. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 2, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
94
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 64. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 3, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
95
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in]
Figure 65. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 3, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
96
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 66. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 4, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
97
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 67. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 4, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
98
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in]
Figure 68. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 5, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
99
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 69. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 5, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
100
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in]
Figure 70. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 6, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
101
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in]
Figure 71. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 6, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
102
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in]
Figure 72. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 7, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
103
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 73. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 7, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
104
NCEMBT-070315
100
120
140
100 80 x=96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 2.50 2.38 2.25 2.13 2.00 1.88 1.75 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.25 1.13 1.00 0.88 0.75 0.63 0.50 0.38 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 74. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 8, Slot diffusers, at 100% design airflow.
NCEMBT-070315
105
100
120
140
100 80 x= 96 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Velocity m/s 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25
100 80 x=120 in. 80 100 80 x=144 in. 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 South-North distance [in] 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 75. Airflow velocity between diffusers for test condition 8, Slot diffusers, at 50% design airflow.
106
NCEMBT-070315
NCEMBT-070315
107
NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES 601 NORTH FAIRFAX STREET, SUITE 250 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 WWW.NCEMBT.ORG