Quido Server Solutions

400 Falconer St.

Pulaski, VA 24301
September 24, 2013
To:

Tea Elisabeth, Engineer for Environmental Compliance

From:

Ali Alhamaly

Subject:

Investigation and Recommendation of Placing Inlet Guide Vanes on the

Z100 Server Room Ventilation Fan to Decrease the Power Consumption

Summary and Introduction

As requested by the memo sent to us on August 27, 2013, we performed several
tests to investigate the effectiveness of placing inlet guide vanes (IGV) on the ventilation
fan to reduce the power consumption in order to satisfy the requirement of Environmental
Impact Reduction Association (EIRA). Based on our test results, placing IGV on the fan
is an effective way to reduce the fan power consumption and results in satisfying EIRA
certification levels. The experimental results indicate that setting the IGV at 35 degrees
results in power reduction of 21.6% from the current power consumption. The reduction
of power necessitates a decrease in number of servers currently installed in the room by
two servers which makes the total number of servers that the fan can support after
making the recommend changes be 16 servers.
This report presents the detailed experimental approach that was used to analyze
the performance of the fan with IGV. The report starts by describing the experimental
setup that was used to simulate the fan operation including the test apparatus and the
general test procedures. Next, the report discusses the data processing techniques that
were used to calculate the flow rate from the direct measurements that were made at the
test location. The next section presents a qualitative description of how the IGV change
the operating conditions of the fan. Next, the actual test results are presented in the form
of performance curves of the fan. The results show quantitatively how the IGV change
the power level consumption and static pressure rise characteristic of the fan. Based on
the results shown in this section, the report presents our recommendations of the range of
IGVsettings that yields the power reduction required by EIRA. As requested by the
memo, the report discusses the repeatability of the measured values of the flow rate and
discusses the random uncertainty in the measurement. Finally the report concludes with
some suggestions to improve the quality of the flow rate measurements in the current test
setup.

Experimental Setup
This section presents the experimental apparatus that was used to simulate the
server room ventilation fan along with the test procedures.
Experiment Apparatus. The experiment investigate the relations between the fan

power consumption and the air flow rate through the fan duct and how these two
parameters vary as the IGV settings are changed. The experiment was done on test fan rig
in which a centrifugal fan supply air through 18 circular duct that contains the measuring
instruments and the flow control valve. The supplied air discharges to the outside
atmosphere at the end of the duct. The instruments in the fan duct includes radial
traversing Pitot static probe and static pressure tap both located at about four diameters
downstream of the fan(71inches to be exact). They are both connected through tubing to
inclined water manometers that are set to measure the dynamic pressure for the case of
the Pitot probe and the gage static pressure for the case of the static pressure tap. At the
end of the straight portion of the duct a back pressure valve is located about eight
diameters downstream of the fan. A wattmeter is connected to the fan circuit to measure
the power consumption directly. The test room ambient pressure and temperature are
monitored by electronic barometer and temperature sensor respectively. The variable
IGV are installed at the inlet of the centrifugal fan. The angle setting for the IGV is
controlled by a manual handle located at the side of the fan. Figure 1a shows a photo of
the actual test set-up showing the fan casing with instrumented circular duct. Figure 1b
shows a schematic diagram of the test setup with the main instruments indicated as well.

Static pressure tap

Figure 1b. Schematic diagram of the test rig

showing the main instruments and their location
on the fan duct

Figure 1a. Photo of the test rig showing the fan

and the downstream circular duct

General Test Procedures. The main goal of the experiment is to assess the
effectiveness of the IGV in reducing the fan power consumption. In order to achieve this
goal, the performance and the operating characteristics of the fan with different IGV
setting are needed to be determined. This means that the dependence of the power
consumption and the static pressure rise on the air flow rate through the fan need to be
investigated for wide range of the IGV setting. From this rationale, the test procedure was

chosen to allow the investigation of the fan performance under wide range of air flow
rate.
The test procedures for all the tests that we have conducted are very similar and
only vary in terms of specific settings that we impose to control the operation regime of
the fan. The general idea of the test is to vary the air flow rate through the fan for each
IGV settings to investigate the change in operation and power consumption. The flow
controller in our system is the back pressure valve and it was used to regulate the flow
rate through the duct. The test was carried out as follows:
1. The IGV angle was set at the desired value for the test
2. The back pressure valve was set at certain value and held fixed
3. Using the Pitot static probe, the dynamic pressure was recorded for five
different radial plunge locations across the diameter of the duct. Exact
locations are (2,3,5,7,9) inches away from the duct wall
4. as the Pitot probe being traversed, the static pressure inside the duct was
recorded once from the static pressure tap manometer
5. the fan power consumption was monitored throughout the traversing time and
average value of the power during that time was recorded
6. ambient pressure and temperature were recorded once during the traversing
period of the Pitot probe
7. the test procedures 2-6 were repeated again but for different value of the back
pressure valve settings
8. Once all the desired back pressure valve settings are obtained, the procedures
1-7 were repeated for new IGV angle setting.
The eight steps mentioned above constitute the general procedure that was
followed in all the tests performed.
Test Matrix. Following the general test procedures, we performed two main tests.
The initial testing was over wide range of IGV and back pressure valve (BPV) settings.
Table 1 shows the test matrix for the initial testing with the specific setting values for
both IGV and BPV. Note that the BPV setting is given in percentage where 100% means
that the valve was fully open. The idea behind doing this initial testing with coarse
increments for the IGV and BPV settings was to establish the general trends in the fan
operation and to get an idea about the sensitivity of the IGV to both power consumption
and static pressure rise characteristic of the fan. In addition, the initial testing includes the
IGV of 90 degrees which corresponds to the fully open position. This setting replicates
the current server room fan operation since the current fan doesnt have IGV installed on
it. The 90 degrees IGV test is the most important test because it allows us to investigate
the current operating condition of the server room fan and hence enables us to determine
the current power consumption that need to be reduced.

Table1. Initial test matrix IGV and BPV settings

IGV
BPV (%)
(degrees)
90o
25,50,75,100
o
75
25,50,75,100
o
60
25,50,75,100
o
45
25,50,75,100
o
30
25,50,75,100
o
15
25,50,75,100
After processing the initial test data, we have decided to conduct another test that
investigates the fan operation in narrow range of IGV setting. Table 2 shows the test
matrix for this test. The specific values for the IGV and BPV settings were chosen based
on the results we obtained from the initial test. We believed that the second test condition
will be helpful in finding the optimum IGV setting that will minimize the fan power
consumption and still provide reasonable air flow rate. This observation will be revisited
in details in the results section of this report.
We have made a third short test with the purpose of assessing the precision and
repeatability of our measurements. The test was at IGV of 90 degrees and BPV of: 30,
35, 40 and 45 percent. The test was identically repeated for three times for the purpose of
finding the random uncertainty in the measured flow rate.
Sample calculation of the flow rate is included in appendix A.All the measured
data from the three tests is included in appendix B in which it contains all the direct
measured quantities that were recorded.
Table2. Second test matrix IGV and BPV settings

IGV
BPV (%)
(degrees)
55o
30,35,40,45
o
50
30,35,40,45
o
40
30,35,40,45
o
35
30,35,40,45

Data Processing and Calculations

This section presents all the necessarily calculations to obtain the air flow rate
from the direct measured quantity that were recorded during the tests. In addition, the
assumptions that are made to use the specific equations and to perform the analysis are
highlighted.

Calculation of Air Flow Rate. The air flow rate is one of the most important
parameters that we are concerned with in this investigation. The basic equation to find the
total air flow rate through the fan duct is given by:

(1)

(2)

Where is the volumetric flow rate, is the cross sectional area of the duct, is the air
velocity at the ith plunge location and is the associated weighting factor for the ith
velocity. From equation 1, it can be seen that the flow calculation requires knowing the
velocity distribution across the duct and hence the value of the air velocity is needed at
several location across the duct diameter. To calculate the air velocity from the measured
value in our experiment we need to use a basic fluid mechanics equation that relates
momentum to fluid pressure, mainly the Bernoulli equation. The use of Bernoulli
equation in our test condition is justified for two main reasons. First, the air velocity
inside the duct is very small compared to the local sonic velocity and hence Mach
number is extremely small which leads to the fact that we are dealing with
incompressible flow in our test condition. Second, our observations of the manometers
that are used to measure air pressure indicate that the flow was steady since the water
level in the manometer was not fluctuating with time at a given operating condition. The
above justification shows the applicability of Bernoulli equation to our test condition, and
from Bernoulli equation we can get that the air velocity is given by:
=

Where is the air dynamic pressure at the ith plunge location and is the air density
inside the duct. The dynamic pressure is measured directly in our experiment by using the
Pitot static probe, so what is left for the calculation of the air velocity is the determination
of the air density. The calculation of air density uses three main assumptions. First, the air
is assumed to be an ideal gas and hence the ideal gas equation is used. Second, it is
assumed that the variation of the static pressure of the air flowing through duct in the
radial direction is negligible. This is important because we measured the static pressure of
the air at one location only which was at the wall, so we assumed that the value of static
pressure at the wall resemble the whole value at the measuring plane. Lastly, we made
the assumption that the air temperature inside duct doesnt vary from the ambient air
temperature and hence we can use the ambient temperature sensor to obtain the air
temperature inside the duct. This assumption is reasonable since the fan power is
relatively low and hence the energy delivered to the air is low enough that the change in
its temperature is very negligible. Using the ideal gas equation with the assumption above
the air density is given by:
=

(3)

Where is the static pressure in the duct measured by the wall static tap, is the air

ambient temperature and is the air gas constant equals to 287

. Note here that the

static pressure tap manometer measures the gage pressure relative to ambient static
pressure, and hence the value of in equation is corrected by adding the ambient
pressure to the measured pressure given by the static tap manometer. From equation 1, 2
and 3 we can calculate the air flow rate using the measured quantity that we recorded in
our tests. The last thing that we havent discussed yet is the weighting factor in
equation 1. This factor is dependent on the number of measurement point that is made
with the Pitot probe and on the specific plunge location across the fan duct. For our
experimental setup, we didnt use any standard plunge location and for this reason we
believe that the best representative value of the weighting factor that wont yield to
biased value of the flow rate is 1/n where n is the total number of plunge location. So, our
weighting factor reduces to 1/5.

Effects of IGV on the Fan Operation

This section presents main results of the investigation of the effects of the IGV on
the fan operation. The section starts with simple explanation of how IGV can alter the fan
operation and change the power and pressure rise characteristics. Additionally, the
experimental results of the effects of IGV on the fan performance are shown graphically.
The section concludes with a discussion on the possible operating conditions of the fan in
the server room after installing the IGV and the possible power reduction levels.
Qualitative Description of IGV Effects on the Fan Performance. The
centrifugal fan has the ability to pull air from the ambient environment by creating a
pressure differential between the ambient air and the air close to the fan blades. In any
fan, the flow rate of the air is dependent upon the static pressure rise that the fan produces
under constant rotation speed. In a fan system (fan connected to a flow restriction) the air
static pressure rise created by the fan depends on the flow restriction pressure loss
requirements and hence the flow rate is ultimately determined by satisfying the
requirement of the flow restriction device. The fan system resistance to air flow can be
represented analytically by the equation:

= 2

(4)

Where is the total static pressure drop throughout the fan system, is the air flow rate
through the system and is a constant represent the impedance of the system to air flow.
for a given system need to be either measured or can be estimated based on the
knowledge of the system type.
IGV are mechanism that redirect the airflow through the fan and add a co-swirl
(with the direction of fan rotation) velocity component to the incident air into the fan
blades. Changing the air incident angle on the fan blades will change the fan performance
regime by changing the dependency of the static pressure rise with the flow rate.
Basically, the fan with IGV will operate at different rotation speed from the fan with no
IGV and this change in the speed will change the performance of the fan and its power

consumption. From this it follows that for each different setting of the IGV, the fan will
operate at different speed and hence at different operating conditions and this yields to
wide variations in the supplied airflow and in the power consumption of the fan. Its the
goal of this experimental investigation to quantitatively describe this variation in the fan
performance and assess the potential benefits from this variation in reducing the fan
power.
Experimental Results of Changing IGV Settings on the Fan Operation. The

results from the two main tests are presented here. The main results are the variation of
fan power and static pressure rise with air flow rate for several IGV settings. Figure 2
shows a plot of the fan power versus flow rate for the initial test data. The figure shows
two main key points. The first is that the fan power increases with the flow rate for a
given IGV setting. This result is expected because the fan needs to do work on larger
amount of air and hence the total power will increase. The second and the most important
key is the variation of the fan power with different IGV settings. It can be seen looking at
figure 2 that the fan power consumption can be reduced with IGV settings. All the IGV
settings indicate lower fan power consumption compared to the case with no IGV
(IGV=90) which indicates that placing IGV at the inlet of the fan is a successful approach
to decrease the power consumption. Another aspect that figure 2 shows is the power
sensitivity with IGV settings. It can be seen that there is a large power reduction between
IGV=90 and IGV= 75 and between IGV=60 and IGV=45. Between IGV=75 and
IGV=60, the power stays relatively constant which indicates low sensitivity in the fan
operating conditions for this IGV range. In order to fully describe the change in the
performance of the fan with IGV settings, we need also to consider the static pressure rise
characteristic. Static pressure rise characteristic or fan pressure map for simplicity is a
useful graphical representation of the fan-system possible operating conditions. The fan
pressure map contains the fan pressure curves along with the fan system load line curve
or the fan system resistance curve. The possible steady state operating conditions for the
whole fan system occurs where the fan pressure curve intersects the load line curve.

Figure 2. Varation of the fan power versus flow rate with IGV settings for the initial test

Figure 3 shows the fan pressure map for the initial test data. The load line in the figure is
represented by equation 4 and it describes the actual server room flow resistance. The
constant in equation 4 for the server room is found to be 8.23 10 5 /2 . The
value of the constant was obtained from the information provided to us in the request
memo.

Figure 3. Fan pressure map with the server room load line for the initial test

Figure 3 shows the effects of the IGV on the pressure rise characteristic of the fan.
Comparing Figures 2 and 3, it can be seen that the reduction in power comes as a
compromise of the static pressure rise capability of the fan. This means that in order to
reduce the power consumption for a given flow restriction system (like the server room
load) the flow rate must be reduced as well. This can be seen from figure 3 in which the
load line intersection points with the fan curves for all the IGV settings occurs at flow
rate lower than that of the IGV=90 case.
From figure 3, we can get the server room operating flow rate and this is done by
finding the intersection point of the server room load curve with the fan curve at IGV
=90. The intersection point occurs at flow rate of 2257 CFM. From the value of the
operating flow rate the power consumption of the server room fan can be obtained from
figure 2 by finding the power consumption at flow rate of 2257 CFM for the IGV=90
case. From figure 2 we can see that this value is 355 W. the 355 W is the power level that
we are trying to reduce by at least 15% in order to meet the EIRA requirement. 15%
power reduction from the current 355 W means that the fan power needs to be 302 W or
lower. Examining figure 2 shows that IGV of 15, 30 and 45 satisfy this requirement and
hence these settings are strong candidate solution.
Based on the initial data results, we have decided that the IGV between 35 and
55 needs to be tested to seek more solutions. Figure 4 shows a plot similar to figure 2 of
the fan power map for the second test.

Figure 4 shows similar trends as figure 2. What is important here to notice is the power
level for each IGV. IGV settings of 55 and 50 have similar power levels and they exceed
the minimum power reduction. IGV settings of 35 and 40 both satisfy the minimum
power reduction level and can be added to the possible solutions. But to see whether the
fan in the server room can operate with IGV settings of 35 and 40, we need to look again
at the pressure map plot. Figure 5 shows the pressure map for the second test with the
server room load curve. From figure 5 it can be seen that the fan pressure curves for IGV
of 35 and 40 do intersect the server room load curve and hence the fan can operate in the
server room with IGV settings of 35 and 40 and achieve the power reduction level
showing in figure 4.

Figure 4. Varation of the fan power versus flow rate with IGV settings for the second test

Figure 5. Fan pressure map with the server room load line for the second test

Recommendation of the IGV Settings to Reduce the Power Consumption

This section presents the possible IGV settings that will reduce the power
requirement of the server room. The section also discusses the maximum possible
number of servers that can be installed in the server room after using the recommended
IGV settings.
Criteria for Choosing IGV Settings. The main criteria for choosing an IGV
setting is the resulting power reduction from using that IGV compared with the case with
no IGV. From the previous section we saw that the fan currently consumes power at a
rate of 355 W and power consumption of 302 W or less is needed. Hence, the IGV
settings that yield to power consumption of less than 302 W are all possible solutions. In
order to determine the number of servers that can be installed in the server room for each
IGV settings, the acceptable range of flow rate per server is needed. From the request
memo that was sent to us, the rule of thumb for the acceptable range of flow rate is 110
140 CFM per server. Once the range of the IGV settings that reduce the power
consumption is established, the intersection point of the server room load curve with the
particular IGV pressure curve will give the total flow rate that the fan will supply at that
specific condition and from the total flow rate we can determine the number of servers
based on the rule of thumb mentioned above.
Recommended IGV Settings. Based on the criteria mentioned in the last section,
the IGV settings that meet the power requirement are gathered in one plot. Figure 6
shows a plot of the server room load curve with the intersection point of the fan curve of
the IGV settings that satisfy the power requirement.

10

Figure 6 shows all possible IGV settings that reduce the fan power by at least
15% and the corresponding fan-system flow rate. These results are obtained by combing
the results in figures 3 and 5. Figure 6 shows also the current operating condition of the
fan with no IGV which is represented by IGV=90 in the figure. It can be seen that all the
possible solutions yields a reduction in the flow rate from the current existing conditions
in the server room.

Figure 6. Server room load curve with intersection locations of the fan curve for the
IGV that satisfy the power reduction requirement

Figure 7 shows a plot of the fan power for the IGV settings in the figure 6. The
figure shows each IGV settings and its corresponding fan power consumption. Clearly all
these IGV settings achieve power reduction of more than the 15% requirement and hence
the choice of the specific IGV settings will be based on maximizing the total number of
servers that the fan can serve under the new conditions.
From figure 7, we can see that IGV of 35 and 40 yields the highest flow rate among all
other possible solutions. We can see also that the power consumption is lower for the
case of the IGV of 35. IGV of 35 has fan power of 278 W which corresponds to a 21.6%
power reduction from the base case (IGV=90) and operate at flow rate of 1794 CFM. On
the other hand, IGV of 40 has fan power of 295 W which corresponds to a 16.9% power
reduction from the base case (IGV=90) and operate at flow rate of 1807 CFM.
Since the flow rate for the IGV 35 and 40 are very similar, both settings allows
the fan to support the same number of servers. However, the power reduction for the two
cases is different and IGV of 35 achieve less power consumption. For this reason, we
believe that the IGV setting of 35 is the best possible solution and hence we recommend
the insulation of IGV at the inlet of the fan and set the angle at 35 degrees. The number of

11

servers that can be installed in the server room with this modification is 16 servers. This
was calculated based on 110 CFM per server given that the fan with IGV set at 35 will
provide a total of 1794 CFM.

15% power
reduction

Figure 7. Fan power at the intersection locations of the server room load curve with
the fan curve

Uncertainty Analysis
This section presents the results of the sensitivity study that was done to assess the
precision of the measurement of the air flow rate.
Random Uncertainty of the Measured Flow Rate. As mentioned in the
experimental setup section, a sensitivity test was performed to assess the precision of the
flow rate measurement. The test was done at IGV of 90 and was repeated for three times.
The results of the three trials are shown in figure 8 in which it shows the static pressure
rise versus the flow rate for each of the trials.

12

Figure 8. Static pressure rise versus flow rate at IGV=90

Figure 8 indicates that in general the measured flow rate values for the three trials are
very close from each especially where load curve intersects the fan curves. The load
curve intersects the three fan curves at 2220, 2236 and 2243 CFM respectively. So the
maximum difference in the measured flow rate is about 23 CFM. This shows that the
precision in the flow rate measurements at the location of the intersection between the
load curve and the fan curve is very high.
In order to assess the precision of the measured data more formally, the mean
value of the measured flow rate at each trial should be compared with the standard
deviation of the mean from the three trials to find a confidence interval that the measured
flow rate lie in. the mean value of the measured flow rate will be given by:
=

(5)

Where Q is the flow rate given within confidence interval, is the mean value of the
flow rate for the three trials, t is the factor from the student t test table that is determined
by the desired confidence interval and the number of trials and is the standard
deviation of the mean calculated from the measured three trials of the flow rate. The
desired confidence interval that we want to use is 90% two sided so this will give a t
value of 2.353. The random uncertainty in the measured flow rate will simply be at
each given mean flow rate. Figure 9 shows the random uncertainty in the measured flow
rate in percentage of the calculated mean value for each mean value of the flow rate. The
figure shows that the uncertainty gets smaller for the higher value of the mean flow rates.
This means that we have more confidence in knowing the high value of the flow rates
than knowing it for the low value flow rates. What is important here is that the
uncertainty of the flow rate where the load and fan curves intersect (last point in the plot)
is very low about 1.6% of the mean value which corresponds to 37 . Sample
calculation of the uncertainty is included in appendix A.

13

Figure 9. Uncertainty of the measured flow rate at 90% confidence interval

Suggestions to Improve the Quality of the Measured Data

This section presents some suggestions that aim to increase the quality of the
measured flow rate.
Test Setup Improvements. The flow rate measurements in this test were made
by pressure measurements downstream of the fan. The flow profile downstream of a
centrifugal fan tends to be non-uniform and possibly has a swirl component. The effect of
non-uniform swirling flow field on the flow rate measurements is to make it highly
sensitive to the plunge locations of the Pitot probe. This means that more measuring
points inside the fan duct are needed to capture the non-uniformity in the velocity profile
in order to get an unbiased flux calculation of the flow rate. This being said, our choice of
the measurement locations inside the duct didnt take into account the need of finer
spacing between plunge locations and hence the values of the flow rate we calculated will
be slightly overestimated or underestimated depending on the operating condition of the
fan and the specific velocity profile at the measuring plane. In order to eliminate this
source of uncertainty, we suggest using a flow straightener downstream of the fan and
upstream of the measuring location. The flow straightener will help establish a velocity
profile that resembles the fully develop turbulent velocity profile which is very uniform
for most part of the duct. In addition, the flow straightener will remove any residual swirl
component in the flow. Another way to achieve a steady uniform velocity profile for

14

purpose of flow measurement by velocity traversing is to change the location of the

measuring station from downstream of the fan to upstream of the fan in suction duct,
because the flow in the suction side of the fan is much uniform and more steady that the
flow downstream of fan.
The last recommendation we have is motivated by the ASME Flow
Measurements Standard. The standard highly suggests that the flow measurement by
velocity traversing should be done across the whole diameter of the duct to assess the
symmetry of the velocity profile. In addition, the plunge locations of the Pitot probe
should be chosen to be at the center of equal area in order to weight the velocity
contribution to the total flow rate in an unbiased fashion. The current test setup that we
have does not allow us to apply this specific standard because the Pitot probe is short and
cannot traverse through the whole diameter. Also, due to the L-shaped geometry of the
probe, we were limited by a minimum distance of 2 inches from the duct wall and hence
we were not able measure centers of equal area.

Conclusions
The main focus of this experimental work was to investigate the effectiveness of
installing IGV on a ventilation server room fan for the purpose of reducing the power
consumption. Several testing has been conducted to investigate the performance
characteristics of the fan operation with wide range IGV settings. The relationships
between the power and static pressure rise with fan flow rate have been investigated and
determined experimentally for each IGV settings.
Based on the testing that has been conducted, its believed that the IGV is an
effective mechanism to reduce the power consumption of the fan to the limit that satisfies
the EIRA requirement. Our testing shows that using IGV of 35 degrees yields a power
reduction of 21.6% from the current operating condition. Our testing shows also that at
this IGV setting the fan can support a total of 16 servers in the sever room. The
sensitivity study that we conducted shows that our measurements of the flow rate are
repeatable especially at the conditions that replicate the server room system. Our random
uncertainty in the measured flow rate at conditions very similar to the server room
operating condition indicated a value of less than 2% from the mean value with a
confidence interval of 90%.

Attachments:
Appendix A: Sample calculations
Appendix B: Measured and Calculated Data

15

Appendix A: Sample Calculations

This appendix presents sample calculations for the flow rate. The calculations
include all the necessarily steps to get the flow rate from the measured raw data. In
addition, the appendix presents a sample calculation for the uncertainty analysis.
A-1: Calculating the Flow Rate
The sample calculations presented here are taken from the conditions presented in
table B-1 in appendix B for IGV of 90 and BPV of 100%. first, we need to calculate the
air density inside the fan duct, and to do that, we need the values of the static pressure in
the duct, the ambient temperature and the ambient atmospheric pressure. The density is
given by equation 3 which is
=

(A-1)

The pressure is given by the sum of the ambient pressure and the gage static pressure
form the wall static tap measurement
( ) = ( ) + ( ) = .94 (2)

249.176 ( )
3386 ( )
+ 27.7912 (.)
= 94335()
1 (2)
1 ()

(A-2)

The temperature in the equation A-1 need to be given in absolute units. the conversion is
given by
( ) = ( ( ) + 459.67)

1( )
1.8( )

= (74( ) + 459.67)

1( )
1.8( )

= 296.48()

(A-3)

Given that air has gas constant of 287 (J/kg K) the density becomes form equation A-1
=

94355()

296.48()

287

= 1.109(

(A-4)

The air velocity in the fan duct is given by equation 2 which is

2

249.176 ( )

2.15 ( 2) ( )
1 2

1 =

1.109 ( 3)

249.176 ( )

2.165 ( 2) ( )
1 2

2 =

1.109 ( 3)

16

(A-5)

= 8.21( )

= 8.61( )

249.176 ( )

2.16 (2) ( )
1 2

3 =
4 =

1.109 ( 3)

= 8.48( )

249.176 ( )

2.135 ( 2) ( )
1 2
1.109

249.176 ( )

2.13 (2) ( )
1 2

5 =

= 7.79( )

( 3)

1.109 ( 3)

= 7.64( )

Form these veloctiy we can use equation 1 to calcualte the total flow rate.
=

(A-5)

(8.21 + 8.61 + 8.48 + 7.79 + 7.64) 2118.9()

18()

=

= 2834 ()
39.3701()
3
5
4
1 ( )
1()

A-2: Uncertainty Calculations

The sample calculations presented here are taken from the data in table B-11 and
B-12 of appendix B that corresponds to BPV of 40%. The random uncertainty is given
by equation
=

(A-6)

Where the uncertainty is given by . t was chosen to be 2.353 which is the t student
value for three measurements with confidence interval of 90%.
1
=
( ) 2
(1)

=
=

(A-7)

(2188.9 + 2200 .5 + 2050.1) ()

= 2146.5 ()
3

1
[(2188 .9 2146.5) 2 + (2200.5 2146.5) 2 + (2050.1 2146 .5)^2
3 2
17

 = 48.3 ()

= 2.353 48.3() = 113.6 ()

Uncertainty is: 113.6 () 90% confidence interval

18

Appendix B: Measured and Calculated Data

Table B-1. Initial test data (BPV =100%)

IGV
Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan
Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

90

100

376

0.94

75

100

348

0.88

60

100

337

0.82

45

100

278

0.5

30

100

265

0.42

15

100

249

0.24

Pitot Tube
Plunge
height (in.)
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

19

Dynamic
Pressure
(in.
H2O)
0.15
0.165
0.16
0.135
0.13
0.12
0.13
0.14
0.145
0.145
0.12
0.13
0.16
0.17
0.17
0.057
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.065
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.05

Table B-2. Initial test data (BPV =75%)

IGV
Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan
Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

90

75

376

1.1

75

75

348

0.94

60

75

336

0.9

45

75

277

0.58

30

75

262

0.42

15

75

248

0.28

Pitot Tube
Plunge height
(in.)

Dynamic Pressure
(in. H2O)

9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

0.15
0.165
0.16
0.15
0.115
0.12
0.13
0.141
0.15
0.14
0.12
0.13
0.15
0.165
0.17
0.057
0.057
0.056
0.056
0.055
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.048
0.05

20

Table B-3. Initial test data (BPV =50%)

IGV
Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan
Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

90

50

367

1.6

75

50

340

1.33

60

50

329

1.32

45

50

276

0.86

30

50

263

0.52

15

50

244

0.4

Pitot Tube
Plunge height
(in.)

Dynamic
Pressure (in.
H2O)

9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

0.08
0.095
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.1
0.105
0.12
0.132
0.149
0.085
0.1
0.12
0.13
0.14
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.055
0.055
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05

21

Table B-4. Initial test data (BPV =25%)

IGV
Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan
Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

90

25

322

1.9

75

25

301

1.86

60

25

300

1.84

45

25

269

1.4

30

25

257

1.24

15

25

241

0.82

Pitot Tube
Plunge height
(in.)
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

22

Dynamic
Pressure
(in.
H2O)
0.05
0.045
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.045
0.046
0.041
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.045
0.05
0.06

Table B-5. calculated flow rate values in CFM for initial test

IGV
BPV(%)
25
50
75
100

15

30

45

60

75

90

1516.4
1512.1
1540.5
1547.3

1390.7
1682.2
1744.8
1791.0

1447.8
1775.2
1749.2
1798.4

1508.0
2489.9
2821.6
2849.6

1550.9
2559.3
2719.9
2718.3

1525.8
2522.5
2831.3
2834.2

Table B-6. second test data (BPV =45%)

IGV
Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan
Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

55

45

329

1.36

50

45

320

1.3

40

45

292

1.14

35

45

279

1.08

Pitot
Tube
Plunge
height
(in.)
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

23

Dynamic
Pressure
(in.
H2O)
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05

Table B-7. second test data (BPV =40%)

IGV
Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

55

40

320

1.42

50

40

315

1.4

40

40

287

1.24

35

40

282

1.16

24

Pitot Tube
Plunge
height (in.)

Dynamic
Pressure
(in. H2O)

9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

0.07
0.07
0.075
0.09
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.075
0.075
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05

Table B-8. second test data (BPV =35%)

IGV Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

55

35

317

1.48

50

35

314

1.46

40

35

287

1.36

35

35

280

1.32

25

Pitot
Tube
Plunge
height
(in.)
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

Dynamic
Pressure
(in. H2O)
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.05

Table B-9. second test data (BPV =30%)

BPV (%)

Fan Power
(W)

Gage Static
Pressure (in
H20)

55

30

312

1.64

50

30

309

1.6

40

30

286

1.44

35

30

280

1.32

IGV Angle
(Deg.)

Pitot Tube
Plunge
height (in.)
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

Table B-10. calculated flow rate values in CFM form second test

IGV
BPV(%)
30
35
40
45

15
1532.4
1566.9
1601.8
1761.5

30
1549.9
1584.6
1601.6
1730.1

60
1636.9
1793.5
1935.8
2094.9

26

75
1793.1
1908.4
2054.7
2212.6

Dynamic
Pressure
(in. H2O)
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.05

Table B-11. Sensitivity test data

IGV Angle
(Deg.)

BPV (%)

Fan Power
(W)

Gage
Static
Pressure
(in H20)

90

30

333

1.98

90

30

347

1.86

90

30

346

1.88

90

35

337

1.94

90

35

343

1.88

90

35

346

1.9

90

40

353

1.74

90

40

354

1.7

27

Pitot Tube
Plunge
height (in.)

Dynamic
Pressure
(in. H2O)

9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0.11
0.07

90

40

353

1.8

90

45

356

1.66

90

45

359

1.62

90

45

360

1.64

7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2
9
7
5
3
2

Table B-12. calculated flow rate values in CFM for the sensitivity test

Trial
BPV(%)
30
35
40
45

1
1463.4
1698.7
2188.9
2211.8

2
1878.8
1926.1
2200.5
2260.8

3
1960.9
1878.7
2050.1
2275.3

28

0.08
0.09
0.105
0.11
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.095
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.07
0.09
0.1
0.11
0.11
0.08
0.085
0.1
0.11
0.11