new final thesis booklet toc - pennsylvania state university · 2005. 4. 6. · project team owner:...

Amy E. Pastor Florida Institute of Technology Mechanical Option F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory

Olin Science Laboratory Title Page Thesis Advisor – Dr. Jim Freihaut April 8, 2005

Florida Institute of Technology

F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory

The Effects and Benefits of Desiccant Technology on a

Laboratory Application

Amy E. Pastor

Mechanical Option

Senior Thesis – Spring 2005

The Pennsylvania State University

Department of Architectural Engineering

Amy E. Pastor Florida Institute of Technology Mechanical Option 150 W. University Blvd. Melbourne, FL

F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory

Project Team Owner: Florida Institute of Technology

Architect: Schwab, Twitty & Hansen Architectural Group Contractor: The Weitz Company, Inc.

Structural Engineers: O’Donnell, Naccarato, Mignogna & Jackson, Inc. MEP Engineers: Tilden, Lobnitz Cooper Engineering for Architecture

Civil/Surveyor Engineers: Baskerville Donovan, Inc.

Architectural Features 3 floors of laboratory and classroom space Observatory Level with pre-engineered domed telescope Total Square Footage: 80000 sq. ft Total Cost: $14 Million

Structural Cast-in place concrete structure One-way concrete slab CMU exterior walls with cement plaster Brick Veneer

Mechanical Equipment in Chiller Building includes: (2) - 1200 GPM, roof-mounted Marley cooling towers (2) - 400 ton, water-cooled chillers (2) Primary chilled water pumps (2) Secondary chilled water pumps (2) Condenser water pumps (1) Gas-fired, hot water boiler at 4500 MBH (2) Hot water pumps (2) Secondary hot water pumps Equipment in Main Laboratory Building includes: (8) Modular Climate Changers (MCC) Air Handling Units manufactured by Trane Total CFM: 97885 CFM Outdoor Air CFM: 67545 CFM

Construction Design-Build Predicted Completion Date: Fall 2004

Electrical Primary: 675 kW, 2500 A, 277/480V, 3Φ, 4W Step-down Transformers: 480∆-120/208Y Emergency System: 400 kW Diesel Generator

www.arche.psu.edu/thesis/2005/aep132


Olin Science Laboratory Pastor 2 Thesis Advisor – Dr. Jim Freihaut April 8, 2005

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary__________________________________________________ 3

2.0 Introduction _______________________________________________________ 5

2.1 Outline of Booklet ________________________________________________________ 7

2.2 History of Olin Science Lab ________________________________________________ 9

2.3 Building Statistics _______________________________________________________ 10

3.0 Building Analysis___________________________________________________ 13

3.1 ASHRAE Standard 62 – 2004______________________________________________ 13

3.2 ASHRAE Standard 90.1 – Envelope Compliance _______________________________ 13

3.3 ASHRAE Standard 90.1 – Lighting Compliance _______________________________ 15

3.4 Conclusions of Building Analyses __________________________________________ 17

4.0 Mechanical Redesign _______________________________________________ 18

4.1 Introduction of Desiccant Wheels to All the Air Handling Units __________________ 19

4.2 Construction and Structural Issues _________________________________________ 23

4.3 Ductwork Layout and Changes ____________________________________________ 25

4.4 VOC Sensors and Cross Contamination______________________________________ 25

4.5 Conclusions of Mechanical Depth__________________________________________ 28

5.0 Breadth Work – Electrical Redesign____________________________________ 29

6.0 Breadth Work – Acoustics ___________________________________________ 31

7.0 Conclusions _______________________________________________________ 32

8.0 Acknowledgements _________________________________________________ 34

9.0 Appendices _______________________________________________________ 35



1.0 Executive Summary

The F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory in Melbourne, Florida is the building that I

chose to perform my senior thesis. Throughout the past year, I have researched and

redesigned the mechanical system of the building and touched upon the redesign and

compliance of the electrical and acoustical portions of the building with their respective

codes.

For my Mechanical Depth, I added eight SEMCO Energy Recovery Packaged Units to the

eight Modular Climate Changer (MCC) air handling units throughout the building.

This proved to have saved an estimated cost of $168,000.00 for the cooling of the

building, which equates to 416.97 tons per year.

Although many professionals do not agree with the installation of Desiccant Wheels in

laboratory applications, I have proven that with special attention to detail, cross

contamination from the exhaust stream poses no threat to the supply air in the

occupied spaces.

As for my breadth topics, I have proven that the addition of the Desiccant Wheel

packages to the electrical panels would allow for 4 of the 6 panel boards supplying

electricity to the air handling units to remain the same. The addition two would have to

be either sized up or made into a dual panel board because of the slight increase in

kVA. For the acoustical portion of my thesis, using the Trane Acoustics Program (TAP),

I have shown that the addition of the Desiccant Packages into the air handling units

would not affect the transmittance of noise through the walls to the classroom spaces to

the point of having to change the insulation levels or STC ratings of the walls.



Overall, I feel that I have a successfully completed thesis which proves that the

installation of Desiccant Wheels into the Florida Institute of Technology’s Olin Lab

would be beneficial both in energy and cost savings.



2.0 Introduction

In compliance with the Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural

Engineering in the College of Engineering, I have completed a one-year thesis on the

F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory in Melbourne, Florida. The following booklet

outlines and completely describes all the research, calculations, CAD drawings,

building models and conclusions that have been drawn and recreated from the past

year of work.

The Florida Institute of Technology is an institution with a strong emphasis on

engineering and the sciences. Along with the Olin Physical Science Laboratory, two

other building have been built in the name of F.W. Olin and funded by the F.W. Olin

Foundation. These two buildings are the F.W Olin Engineering Complex and the F.W.

Olin Life Sciences Building.

A $25 million grant was given to FIT for the completion of both the Physical Science

Laboratory and the Engineering Complex; however a majority of the fund ($14 million)

went to the design effort and construction of the Olin Science Laboratory. This 69,348

square foot facility houses 14 teaching and 21 research laboratories along with faculty

offices and classroom space. The building is also equipped with two large multi-

use/demonstration classrooms.

As a mechanical option, the depth of my thesis work included a redesign of the air

handling units with the addition of desiccant technology. Through initial research, my

hope was that the addition of these wheels would both lower the cooling load on the

cooling coil and lower the cost of energy used by the cooling system in the Olin



Laboratory. Stemming from my depth work and related to the installation of new

mechanical equipment, I decided to complete an electrical analysis on the panels that

include the air handlers in the Olin Laboratory. My hope was that lowering the load on

the cooling coils would reduce the amount of electricity needed to run the machine.

Along with an electrical analysis, I performed an acoustical analysis on the mechanical

rooms located in the corners of the three floors of the Lab. With the addition of more

equipment, rechecking the transmittance of noise through the mechanical room walls

was important due to the fact that classrooms spaces could be found on the other side.

These two analyses were my two breadth areas of study.



2.1 Outline of Booklet

My thesis booklet was designed to take you step by step in my redesign process of the

Olin Science Laboratory starting with my research on day one. In the Introduction part

of my booklet, I have given an overview of my depth and breadth topics and some

background history on the F.W. Olin Foundation. Following this section, I will continue

to give a brief history of the Olin Foundation and F.W. Olin himself. Upon conclusion

of that, I will include the research of the construction of the Lab with project players,

construction dates, materials used and so forth.

Section Three of my booklet begins the building analyses of the Olin Laboratory with

data proving its compliance with ASHRAE Standards 90.1 and 62-2004. Along with

the ASHRAE Standards, compliance checks with Florida Emissions Codes will also be

proven.

Section Four is my depth analysis of the Olin Science Lab with strict attention to the

addition of desiccant technology. Since Carrier’s Hourly Analysis Program (HAP) has

no way of modeling desiccant wheels in its program, I have put together a detailed

spreadsheet of the calculations as outlined by SEMCO. This allowed me to select the

desiccant wheel that would best suit the needs of each individual air handling unit.

Section Five begins my breadth areas of study, with its main focus on my electrical

redesign. After resizing my coils due to the lowering of the coil load, a redesign of the

amount of electricity needed to run the eight air handlers was completed. Following

the National Electric Code (NEC), full load ampacity (FLA), minimum current ampacity



(MCA) and maximum overcurrent protection (MCOP) was determined so that panel

board resizing could be an option.

Section Six is the second area of my thesis breadth, Acoustics. With the addition of a

new piece of equipment into the mechanical room, an acoustical problem may arise.

Furthermore, the mechanical room spaces are located next to classroom and office

spaces. For this reason, I have performed an acoustical analysis using the Trane

Acoustical Program (TAP). Included in this section will be my findings, along with a

reference to my printouts in the Appendix part of my report.

Finally, Sections Seven, Eight and Nine are my conclusions, acknowledgements and

appendices, respectively. In Section Seven, I have summarized and concluded all of my

findings and redesigns to the Olin Science Lab over the past year. In Section Nine, all of

the resources and calculations that were used and performed can be found.



2.2 History of Olin Science Lab

In 1938, Franklin W. Olin established the F. W. Olin Foundation. A man of many

trades, his titles included engineer, entrepreneur, philanthropist and professional

basketball player. More than $300 million has been given to 57 independent colleges

to construct and fully equip 72 buildings on their campuses. This has all taken place in

the past 60 years. Although a dabbler in the sciences, most, but not all of the buildings

Olin has funded, are science and engineering facilities. A few of the grant recipients

include Bucknell, Johns Hopkins, Marquette, Tufts, the University of Southern

California and the Florida Institute of Technology.

The Florida Institute of Technology (FIT) is a small, independent university with strong

engineering and science programs. Located in Melbourne, Florida, the campus houses

three buildings dedicated to and fully funded by the F.W. Olin Foundation. Granting

$25 million to FIT, the Olin Foundation decided to put $14 million of that into the

construction and equipping of the F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory.



2.3 Building Statistics

The F.W. Olin Physical Science Laboratory is a 69,348 square foot facility that houses

14 learning and 21 research laboratories along with faculty offices and classroom

spaces. The building is also equipped with 2 large multi-use/demonstration

classrooms.

A design-build delivery method was used. Design of this project began in 2002 when

Tilden Lobnitz Cooper (TLC) in Cocoa, Florida was approached to create the

mechanical, electrical and plumbing portion of the building. Along with Schwab

Twitty Hanser (STH), who was the main architect on the job, the two companies

compiled a construction team. Figure 2.1 is a list of the companies and their roll in the

project:

Construction began in June 2003 and was predicted to be completed by Fall 2004. Due

to some construction delays and the untimely hurricanes, the final completion of the

project was pushed back and is still undergoing some final touchups.

The four-story laboratory is a cast-in place concrete structure with CMU exterior walls

with cement plaster. A brick veneer was used for final decorative touches. A one-way

concrete slab was also used for this structure’s base.

Figure 2.1: Primary Project Team & Their Roles



There are some unique aspects to this building. The fourth floor houses a large

observatory deck with several small telescopes. There is also a large domed, one-meter

telescope that was pre-engineered before putting it in place. With room for twelve

additional telescopes, this lab is state of the art.

Of the 35 laboratories that were mentioned above, 25 of them are equipped with fume

hoods. These fume hoods are controlled by Phoenix Valves, each with an individual set

point to control the emissions from the hood to the ambient air.

Adjacent to the Olin Science Lab is the central mechanical building for the space. The

mechanical equipment in the building is consistent of two – 1200 GPM roof-mounted

Marley Cooling Towers, two – 400 ton water-cooled chillers, two – primary chilled

water pumps, two – secondary chilled water pumps, two – condenser water pumps,

two – hot water pumps, two – secondary hot water pumps and finally, one gas-fired,

hot water boiler rated at 4500 MBH.

The electrical power in the building is rated at 675 kW and 2500 A. It is consistently

277/480V, 3 Ф, 4–wire throughout the building, with step-down transformers to

480∆ – 120/208Y. Emergency power would be generated through a 400 kW Diesel

Generator.

In the classroom, lab and office spaces, fluorescent lighting with high power factor

ballasts are used. HID lamps with minimum 90% power factor ballasts can be found in

the mechanical building.



Finally, the fire protection specified for the Olin Laboratory is quick-response action

upright, horizontal sidewall and pendant sprinkler heads with integral chrome-plated

escutcheon plates. The chilled water piping is designated for 175 psig and has a

Corrosion Resistance Rating (CRR) of 1.0 or greater. A horizontal split-case fire pump

designed to deliver greater than 150% of rated capacity at a pressure not less than 65%

of rated head developed is present.



3.0 Building Analysis

As a mechanical option, my first goal was to check the compliance of the F.W. Olin

Physical Science Lab with two very important ASHRAE Standards: 90.1 and 62-2004.

As mentioned in my schedule drawings that were obtained by TLC – Cocoa, the

standards are met and do comply with both. Through work experience at the firm, I

know that their compliance checks are legitimate; however, I decided to recheck the

compliances for my own thesis defense.

ASHRAE Standard 62 – 2004 was designed to check the levels of ventilation supply

needed based on room type, area and occupancy. A Z-critical, or critical space value is

determined and used in these calculations.

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 was designed as a tool for engineers to show requirements for

the construction of a building based on heat transfer materials and lighting. It also

contains guidelines for glass to wall ratios.

3.1 ASHRAE Standard 62 – 2004

In Appendix A, calculations for the Ventilation Rate Procedure can be found. This is the

compliance check for Standard 62–2004 , taken from a Standard 62-2001 Addendum

n. In these excel spreadsheets, you will find that the Olin Physical Science Lab is indeed

compliant with Standard 62–2004.

3.2 ASHRAE Standard 90.1 – Envelope Compliance

The wall structure of the FIT Lab Building is typical throughout the entire laboratory.

This construction consists of face brick, 8” light weight concrete block and gypsum



board. The overall U-value for this type of construction is 0.124 from Normative

Appendix B in Standard 90.1 (Figure 3.1).

In order for the building envelope to comply with Standard 90.1, a few criteria must be

met. Those include, but are not limited to:

Climate shall be determined based on the cooling degree-days base 50oF, CDD50, and heating degree-days base 65oF, HDD65

Mandatory Provisions (e.g. Insulation General and Air Leakage)

Vertical Fenestration does not exceed 50% of the total gross wall area of the building

As mentioned above in the introduction to this section, my overall U-value for building

envelope material is 0.124. The U – value for my fenestration is 1.02 with my windows

being operable. The total amount of glass throughout my building is approximately

14.13% of the total gross wall area. Because of these three reasons, it is safe to say that

Figure 3.1: Normative Appendix B – Standard 90.1



the FIT Lab complies with Standard 90.1 in regards to building envelope. Detailed

spreadsheets can be found in Appendix B at the end of this report.

3.3 ASHRAE Standard 90.1 – Lighting Compliance

As per Standard 90.1 – Table 9.6.1, Lighting Power Densities Using the Space–by–Space

Method (Figure 3.2), selection of a specific building type allows you to determine the

maximum wattage per square foot depending on the spaces in the building. For the FIT

Olin Lab, I chose education facilities.



Looking at the different spaces for an education facility, the wattage per square foot

ranges from 1.3 – 1.8 W/ft2 for typically occupied spaces. After a detailed calculation

was completed, the results were that the FIT Lab Building does comply with Standard

Figure 3.2: Table 9.6.1 from Standard 90.1 – Lighting Power Densities Using the Space–by–Space Method



90.1. A set of detailed calculations can be found in Appendix C at the end of this

report.

3.4 Conclusions of Building Analyses

Appendix A – C, inclusive, are the calculations and compliance check for ASHRAE

Standards 62 – 2004 and 90.1. These calculations acknowledge that the Florida

Institute of Technology’s Olin Science Lab is in compliance with these two very

important ASHRAE Standards.



4.0 Mechanical Redesign

As my depth area of research, I have performed a detailed analysis of the existing air

handling units and the existing conditions of the FIT Science Lab. After one semester of

breaking down the building piece by piece (Fall 2004 – AE 481W), I chose to conduct

my thesis research on the addition of desiccant technology.

A desiccant wheel is used to

remove moisture from the air. As

shown in the desiccant diagram

(Figure 4.1), supply air (process

inlet) passes through the desiccant

wheel. On the desiccant wheel is a

special desiccant coating with a rating for the size of the openings in the wheel. The

wheel is to act as a sieve for the moisture. Typical opening sizes range from 3 – 4

angstroms.

After leaving the wheel, the supply air continues to provide air to the space (process

outlet). In the return or exhaust duct, the air returning to the unit or leaving the

building passed through a heat source (reaction inlet to reaction heat source). This

warmed air then passes back through the desiccant wheel, evaporating the moisture off

of the wheel and then continuing to the ambient air if it is exhaust or to the air

handling unit if it is return air (reaction outlet).

At first glance, the state of the FIT Lab and its air system is perfect. Designed by TLC

Engineering for Architecture in Cocoa, Florida, the standards and rules of thumb were

Figure 4.1: Desiccant Wheel Diagram



followed to a tee. However, with the climate of a coastal city in Florida, humidity can

pose as a huge problem to those who inhabit the area. Along with the stickiness you

feel due to humidity comes water vapor which has the ability to produce mold and

mildew on items throughout the building system. Ductwork insulation can grow mold

on it and when the air is passing through to classrooms and laboratories, the air

particles carry those spores with them, causing sick building syndrome.

I have always been interested in Desiccant Technology although it is not typically seen

in normal building applications. It is known that most people do not choose desiccant

wheels for their mechanical system because it is more costly for the equipment and

perhaps in the long run for maintenance. As will be shown through my research of this

depth area, the cost of the air handler and wheel will be lower and the energy savings is

enormous.

Another issue that seems to arise about desiccant wheels in laboratory applications is

the fact that cross contamination could occur and harmful gases can leak through the

exhaust stream back into the supply air stream. This also will be proven false for my

application to the Olin Lab, therefore proving the addition of the wheels to be beneficial

to the Florida Institute of Technology.

4.1 Introduction of Desiccant Wheels to All the Air Handling Units

My first task was to find a desiccant wheel that would be capable to fit into my existing

air handling units. Since I have eight M – Series Trane Air Handling Units, my first

option was to look at their manufacturing catalogs to see if a wheel was available for

purchase or if it was even an option for the Modular Climate Changers (MCC).



After a brief chat with a Trane representative, it was determined that they do not offer

that type of product for their MCC units. He did, however, lead me to SEMCO,

manufacturer of desiccant wheels and the Pinnacle Unit with a wheel built into it.

Due to the fact that the existing units in the FIT Olin Lab are brand new, I decided that I

would not replace the whole unit, but just look for a desiccant wheel with casing to add

into the 8 MCC units. SEMCO offers a packaged

energy recovery system that has a desiccant wheel in

casing with optional heating and cooling coils. The

technical guide on SEMCO’s website,

www.semcoinc.com, provided a detailed, step-by-step

way to calculate the size of the Packaged Energy

Recovery System (Figure 4.2) that I would need for

each of the individual MCC units.

Along with a calculation to size the

desiccant wheel, SEMCO offered a way to

calculate the size of the heating and

cooling coil that you would need to

produce the air temperature to remove the

moisture from the air. This was important

to me because I theorized that adding a

desiccant wheel would lower the load on the

heating and cooling coils and therefore, downsize them. This would produce a huge

savings on first cost and on energy.

Figure 4.2: SEMCO Packaged Energy Recovery System

Figure 4.3: SEMCO EP Series, No Coils



Since the Trane Units were already equipped with cooling and reheat coils, I chose to

use the described selection process from SEMCO and apply it to the Trane coils. I then

would double check my answers based on Trane’s selection standards for cooling and

heating coils. Also, since the Trane Units were equipped with coils, I was able to select

the EP Series of the Energy Recovery System because it offered the most flexibility and

lowest cost. Figure 4.3 shows the diagram for the SEMCO EP Series without coils.

After selecting the size of the Energy Recovery System that I would need for each air

handler, the problem arose as to how I was going to insert these into the existing Trane

Units. Compatibility was not a problem; a Trane representative sent me to the SEMCO

site for the desiccant wheels. Since the Modular Climate Changer Units are built–up air

handlers, each section is attached to each other with nuts and bolts. The build–up of

my specific units is as follows:

Fan Mixing Box (FMB) Cartridge Filter (CF) Cooling Coil (CC) Small Access (SAC) Reheat Coil (RHC) Fan (FAN)

Since the desiccant wheel requires both cooling and heating coils for proper moisture

removal, I decided to split the system between the cartridge filter and the cooling coil.

This would allow me to insert the EP Series Energy Recovery System and allow for the

heating and cooling coils to be used.

Figure 4.4a and 4.4b are typical air handling unit as they currently existing in the FIT

Olin Lab. The room shown in 4.4a is the First Floor Mechanical Room on the left side of

the building, Room 134. Figure 4.4b is the second mechanical room on the First Floor,

Room 116.



As you can clearly see, the spaces allotted for the mechanical rooms are big enough to

house the existing equipment only. Therefore, upon insertion of the Desiccant System

into the existing Air Handling Units, I came across a space problem. The Energy

Recovery System package did not fit in the room. Even with the downsizing of the

cooling and heating coils, the space cleared up by the removal of a few rows of coils did

not equate to the space I would need for the ER Package. This problem could be

resolved by moving the exterior wall out by several feet. The extension of the wall

would allow for the exterior door to be moved and the Desiccant Wheel and necessary

equipment to be placed in without problem.

Appendix D contains all of my detailed excel spreadsheets for my process of selecting

the desiccant wheels for each of the Trane MCCs. It also contains the charts and graphs

from the SEMCO cutsheets that were actually used in these calculations. As can be seen

in Appendix E, a total of 416.97 tons of cooling can be saved by adding a desiccant

wheel in the form of the SEMCO EP Series Energy Recovery System Unit. As for cost, a

total of $166,787.00 (based on $400/ton of cooling) can be saved on coil load alone.

This reduction will be found in the first cost.

Figure 4.4a: First Floor Mechanical Room 134 Figure 4.4b: First Floor Mechanical Room 116



4.2 Construction and Structural Issues

Since the FIT Olin Lab is currently in construction and almost 100% complete, a

renovation would need to be done for the mechanical rooms. The sizes of the desiccant

wheel packages that are to be inserted into the mechanical rooms range from 16’ – 10”

to 19’ – 3”. This posed as a problem because there was no room in the existing space to

put in these units. Along with the lost space from the insertion of the units comes the

addition of several thousand pounds. For this reason, I would need to look at the

structural system of the building and the first cost associated with a renovation. I had

not chosen to do structural or construction management as breadth options; however,

since these issues needed to be addressed, I have touched upon them briefly in this

section.

The first floor mechanical rooms are on the back corners of the building, Room 134 on

the back left of the building and Room 116 on the back right of the building. The

extension of the second mechanical room wall, Room 116 (Figure 4.4b), would pose no

issue because there is enough space on the exterior of the building for the exterior wall

to be moved. This concurrently would then allow the mechanical room above it on the

second and third floors (Rooms 214 and 319) to be extended too. The length of the

desiccant wheel packages that need to be inserted can be found in Figure 4.5 below. As

you can see, the longest unit of the three stacked mechanical rooms would be 19’ – 3”.

Therefore, for safety purposes and for margins of error, I would ask that the exterior

wall for Mechanical Rooms 116, 214 and 319 be extended 20’ – 6”.



For Mechanical Room 249, which lies in the middle of the very back of the FIT Olin

Lab, an extension of the exterior wall would need to be completed by approximately

18’ – 6”.

My real problem lies in the mechanical rooms that are on the bottom left corner of the

FIT Lab. As you can see from the site plan in Figure 4.6, the Chiller Building that

supplies the chilled water to the air

handling units in the Lab Building

lies only 16’ away from that exterior

wall. Mechanical Room 134 holds

AHU 1–1 and AHU 1–2. The

minimum amount of space that the

exterior wall would need to move

out would be 18’ – 0”. This could not

happen because of the Chiller Building. Since the first floor mechanical room could not

be moved, the two other mechanical rooms stacked above it, Rooms 230 and 344,

would not be able to provide the necessary room. Another alternative setup would need

to be devised so that the desiccant systems can fit on that half of the building.

Figure 4.5: Length of Desiccant Packaged Units

Figure 4.6: Site Plan Showing Mechanical Room in relation to Chiller Building



The only costs associated with the extension of a wall would be the first cost of

materials, demolition, removal of materials from the site and labor. Since these are only

first costs, the payback associated with these compared to the amount of energy cost

savings predicted as above ($166,787.00) would be minimal.

4.3 Ductwork Layout and Changes

Due to the fact that I have not changed the sizes of any of the laboratory or classroom

spaces, the amount of supply air that is provided by the air handling units would not

change. My fan size and the amount of air supplied by it would not be affected by the

addition of a desiccant wheel.

Because I would be breaking apart the existing unit and adding the ER System into it,

some transition ductwork would be necessary for connection of the two pieces of

equipment. The amount of ductwork needed was very minimal and would not have an

adverse affect on the cost of the building’s mechanical system.

4.4 VOC Sensors and Cross Contamination

As with any laboratory, issues will arise with the amount of chemical fumes that are

being released by the building and the equipment inside of it. 25 of the 35 laboratory

spaces are equipped with fume hoods. These fume hoods, used for chemical and

physical science lab tests, are controlled by Phoenix Valves that modulate the amount of

exhaust needed based on position of the fume hood’s sash. When a sash is in use, a

scientist typically has the sash in the fully opened or 80% open position. The control

valve will read this positioning. The valve then varies the amount of exhaust needed.

As a room becomes unoccupied, it is hoped that the scientists would fully close the sash



or close it to a 20% open position. The process of closing or partially closing the fume

hoods makes for a huge energy savings on the FIT Olin Lab and helps to keep the

exhaust gases from leaking back into the space.

With the addition of a desiccant system, the exhaust or return air line must be used so

that a reheating process can occur and the moisture collected on the wheel by the

supply air can be evaporated. If the exhaust line is contaminated with chemical fumes,

this can cause a potential cross contamination problem. Cross contamination is the

leaking of harmful chemical gases into the supply air stream that is used to condition

occupied spaces.

There are many pieces of literature regarding the issues of cross contamination and

desiccant systems with the use of exhaust from a laboratory space. However, all the

literature does not choose one side or the other. It is all dependent on the application

and the specific building type. A cross contamination issue will only occur if the

equipment installed is put in improperly.

For this reason, I have paid close attention to how my desiccant system was set up.

Using many resources, including the expertise of one particular engineer at Hammel,

Green and Abrahamson (HGA), I learned that there are three or four ways for cross

contamination to occur, each of which must be individually addressed.

The first way for cross contamination to occur is for exhaust air to leak into the supply

air by way of the seals in the wheel. The leakage problem, which occurs at the

perimeter of the wheel as it rotates, can be solved by controlling the relative air

pressures such that the air leaks in the opposite way you are concerned. For example,



in this application, I would cause the supply air to leak into the exhaust air by making

the pressure greater on the exhaust side.

Another way for cross contamination to occur is for chemicals to stick to the wheel on

the exhaust side and get thrown off into the supply air side as it rotates around. This

will not happen because of the purge section where the air blows backwards across the

wheel as it transitions between the dirty and clean side. Most of the harmful particles

will get purged off. SEMCO guarantees that no more than 0.0005% will be stuck on

the wheel.

One other way for cross contamination to occur is for the bad chemicals to get

absorbed into the desiccant and then release on the other side. Most of the chemicals

used in laboratories have a large chemical structure and are not an issue; they will stay

in the exhaust stream and not get stuck in the desiccant. I have solved this problem by

choosing a wheel that has a desiccant coating with only 3–angstrom sized openings.

The chemicals physically do not fit in these size openings.

There are times when other chemicals with smaller structures will be used and these

structures will fit into the 3–angstrom sized openings. Although the list of chemicals is

much smaller, radon and ammonia are included on it. These will pass through very

easily. However, if you look at the system as a whole, with all the exhaust streams

coming together, with the chemical needing to pass through a fume hood and with all

the ductwork that the chemical will actually be going through, the exhaust air stream is

very safe. SEMCO can guarantee only 0.005% crossover. The system can be tested

every five years to make sure it is still within that range.



Finally, regarding corrosion, it was found that the dilution level of laboratory exhaust is

so great that the exhaust air stream is relatively harmless.

4.5 Conclusions of Mechanical Depth

My final conclusions for my mechanical depth work is that the addition of a desiccant

wheel into the 8 existing Modular Climate Changers is a cost–saving and energy saving

decision. 416.97 tons of cooling, or $166,787.00, will be saved on this addition. With

space being an issue, renovations would need to be conducted as well as structural

studies for the additional weight added to the building.

Secondly, there will not need to be any ductwork sizing or layout changes because all of

the work was done in the mechanical room. The size or usage of the rooms throughout

the FIT Lab has not changed, therefore, not changing their air flow requirements. The

slight alteration that I have made to the units requires a minimal amount of ductwork

and would not be a huge factor in the overall cost.

Lastly, the addition of a desiccant wheel to a laboratory application and the continuing

debate on cross contamination is resolved by taking a few simple steps. The selection of

my wheel was based on size of the desiccant coating, i.e. the size of the opening on the

wheel. A change in relative air pressure to cause the supply air to leak into the exhaust

stream and not vice versa will prevent leakage into the supply air stream. The purge

section of the wheel prevents the dirty side of the desiccant wheel to become “clean”

before rotating to the supply air side.



5.0 Breadth Work – Electrical Redesign

As one of the breadth portions of my Senior Thesis, I have chosen to perform an

electrical redesign of the panel boards supplying power to my 8 air handling units.

With the addition of new equipment and the downsizing of the cooling and heating

coils in the existing air handlers, I wanted to make sure that the panel boards complied

with the National Electric Code (NEC).

My first step was to find out what portion of the electrical load for the 8 air handling

units was contributed by the coils. With this information, I would be able to neglect

that part of the load and add in the new load for the smaller coils. Appendix F is the

existing 6 panel boards that contain all eight air handlers. For reference now, I have

included the load information for each of the air handlers in Figure 5.1 below.

The only electrical pieces of equipment in my air handlers are the heating and cooling

coils and the fan. It was suggested that an assumption of 35% of the total electrical load

found on the panel boards would be dedicated to the coils.

The next step taken was to calculate the electrical load from the new cooling and

heating coils due to the insertion of a Desiccant Wheel. Referring back to Appendix D,

which is the Desiccant Wheel Selection spreadsheets, the new coil sizes can be found.

Figure 5.1: Electrical Load from Air Handling Units



With this information, I was able to determine the new electrical load that would be on

the panel board due to the coils themselves.

Figure 5.1 is a summary of the calculations done so far for my electrical breadth.

Included in the figure is the information for the total electrical load currently on the

panel, the coil electrical load, the new electrical load from the downsized coils and the

new total load from the air handling units.

Appendix G concludes my Electrical Breadth with the newly sized panels as they would

be in the FIT Olin Lab. Figure 5.2 is a summary of the panel boards with proof that they

are compliant with the NEC or a suggestion to make them compliant. Issues arose with

the two panel boards that contained two air handling units (OSB1 and OSB2).

Resolving this issue would be as easy as using two panel boards conjoined to supply the

need load to the units.

Figure 5.2: Panel Board Summary



6.0 Breadth Work – Acoustics

When designing a mechanical room, special attention must be paid to the design of the

walls and their transmittance. When a critical space is located on the other side of a

mechanical room, such as a classroom or lecture hall, the noise level that is produced

by the machine and how much of that can be heard from the adjoining spaces is very

important. Since I will be introducing a new piece of equipment into an existing

mechanical room, an acoustical analysis was done to see that the transmittance through

the wall is still below the necessary level.

Using the Trane Acoustics Program (TAP), I have performed this analysis. I feel that

this is a very accurate analysis due to the fact that one of the options for air handling

units was specifically the Modular Climate Changer. This, along with the acoustical

data for the air handlers from a Trane representative, proved to complete the necessary

parts of the critical acoustics path used to determine the transmittance level.

In Appendix H at the end of this report, a full set of Sound Transmittance Class (STC)

and Room Criteria (RC) curves can be found. These curves, along with the data printed

out for each newly redesigned mechanical room, show that the transmittance level

through the walls does not exceed the necessary levels for a classroom. This is mainly

due to the fact that the added Desiccant Wheel Package does not have any critically

loud pieces of equipment. Another main reason is that the existing units were designed

specifically to a lower decibel level for each octave band. The engineers at TLC already

took into account that the mechanical rooms would be next to a teaching space.



7.0 Conclusions

With my thesis finished and all of my calculations compiled, I was able to step back and

look as this project as a whole. I was extremely pleased with myself, with the faculty in

the Architectural Engineering Department and with the courses offered by the

Architectural Engineering Department. It is unusual to have such a successful program

and it was all thanks to the faculty and the students, past, present and future, that make

up the AE Department.

With the strength of mechanical department and its faculty, I was able to go through

five years of intense courses teaching me every aspect of the mechanical building

systems. With the uniqueness of the architectural engineering department at Penn

State, I was able to understand and complete redesigns and analyses on my building

from other options besides mechanical. Finally, with my own strengths and the

strengths of the other AE students, I was able to complete a full year thesis because of

the uniqueness and strengths of this program.

My final conclusions for the F.W. Olin Science Lab are that the addition of Desiccant

Wheels into each of the air handling units would be a cost and energy savings option.

416.97 tons of cooling are saved from the air handlers because of the addition of a

desiccant wheel and almost $168,000.00 was saved by this reduction in tonnage. With

careful installation and precise steps, the insertion of the Desiccant System proves to be

safe against cross contamination from the harmful chemical gases removed by the

exhaust stream. Pressurizing one side of the wheel to have the air leak from the supply

side to the exhaust side, including a purge section in the system and sizing the desiccant



coating for 3–angstroms will satisfy the requirements to keep the supply air to the

occupied spaces clean.

The electrical panel boards containing the air handling units were redesigned to

include the Desiccant Wheel Systems. Four of the six existing panel boards were

capable of holding the newly installed systems. The remaining two will need to be

resized or changed to a dual panel board.

The acoustical properties of the Energy Recovery Systems are so slight that the

transmittance of sound from the mechanical rooms to the classroom spaces adjacent to

the mechanical rooms does not increase enough to redesign the walls and their

insulation values. This was mainly due to the careful attention to detail by the

engineers at TLC – Cocoa. Their initial design of the air handling units took the

adjoining classroom and lecture hall spaces into account. The existing air handlers

were sized and options were selected so that the equipment would be extremely quiet.



8.0 Acknowledgements

Thesis Sponsor AE Students TLC Engineering for Architecture Jess Baker Pat Hopple Luke Klock Thesis Advisor Katie McGimpsey Dr. James Freihaut Friends Thesis Professors Maureen Casey Dr. M. Kevin Parfitt Krista Greer Jonathan Dougherty Julie Martinet Katie McKeever Mandy Ott Mechanical Professors Lauren Scott Dr. William Bahnfleth Meshall Thomas Dr. Moses Ling Nicole Tilley Dr. Stanley Mumma Jess Wolford Dr. Jelena Srebric Chief Dr. DeFrank Professionals GRG, Inc. Greg Romancyzk, E.I.T. Family Kathy Pastor, Mom HGA Engineering Matthew Pastor, Brother Kermit Olson, P.E. Debbye Sweeney, Aunt Robert Sweeney, Uncle TLC Engineering for Architecture Stasia Wyszinski, Aunt

James McTavish, P.E. Phyllis Leonard, Aunt Jim Wamsley, P.E. Bob Sweeney, Cousin

Paul Sweeney, Cousin Trane Representative Texas von Weiner, Family Puppy

Todd Moore, P.E., LEED – AP Champ, Texas’s Brother

In Loving Memory, Scruffy (June 10, 1989 – January 20, 2005) Beloved Pet, Friend and Companion

To my family, I want to thank you for supporting me throughout this past year and most importantly, all my life. I would not have been where I am today were it not for your constant urging and words of wisdom, advice and encouragement. My future is bright because of the person you have all shaped me to be. To my friends, I want to thank you for your support throughout college, for keeping me sane this past year, for making me take much needed breaks and for always being there through thick and thin. I love you all and the times we’ve had. Penn State would never have been the same without you.

“I live for the times I’ll never remember with the friends I’ll never forget.”


Olin Science Laboratory Appendix Thesis Advisor – Dr. Jim Freihaut April 8, 2005

9.0 Appendices

Appendix A: Standard 62 – 2004 Calculations (Ventilation Rate Procedure)

Appendix B: Standard 90.1 – Glass Area and Envelope Compliance

Appendix C: Standard 90.1 – Lighting Density Compliance

Appendix D: Selection of Desiccant Wheel Calculations

Appendix E: Energy and Cost Savings for Desiccant Wheel Selection

Appendix F: Existing Panel Boards

Appendix G: New Panel Boards with Desiccant Wheel (Electrical Redesign)

Appendix H: Acoustical Calculations and Graphs (Acoustical Analysis)



Appendix A: Standard 62 – 2004 Calculations

(Ventilation Rate Procedure)

Zones served by system Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12Space type (select from pull-down list) Science labScience labOffice spacScience labLecture ClaCorridors Lecture ClaOffice spacOffice spacLobbies Reception Office space

Az Floor area of zone, ft2 1211 1071 120 185 1188 656 770 500 198 1736 354 198Pz Zone population, largest # of people expected to occupy

zone20 20 3 6 32 0 20 6 3 34 6 3

Rp Area outdoor air rate from Table 6.1, cfm/ft2 10 10 5 10 7.5 0 7.5 5 5 5 5 5Ra People outdoor air rate from Table 6.1, cfm/person 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06Pz*Rp 200 200 15 60 240 0 150 30 15 170 30 15Az*Ra 217.98 192.78 7.2 33.3 71.28 39.36 46.2 30 11.88 104.16 21.24 11.88

Voz Outdoor airflow to the zone corrected for zone air distribution effectiveness, (Pz*Rp + Az*Ra)/Ez, cfm

417.98 392.78 22.2 93.3 311.28 39.36 196.2 60 26.88 274.16 51.24 26.88

Vpz Primary airflow to zone from air handler (intake plus recirculated air, but not local recirculation such as at mixing boxes), cfm. In VAV systems, use the design

1550 1420 320 400 1600 535 1000 310 280 1700 300 280

Vdz Supply/discharge to zone including primary air Vpz and locally recirculated air, cfm. In VAV systems, use the design value.

1550 1420 320 400 1600 535 1000 310 280 1700 300 280

Vdzm Minimum supply/discharge to zone used to calculate Ev, cfm. In CAV systems, Vdzm = Vdz. In VAV systems, Vdzm is the minimum expected value of Vdz.

465 425 100 120 480 160 300 90 85 510 90 85

Zd Outdoor air fraction required in air discharged to zone,= Voz/Vdzm

0.90 0.92 0.22 0.78 0.65 0.25 0.65 0.67 0.32 0.54 0.57 0.32

Ep Primary air fraction to zone, = Vpz/Vdz (=1 for single duct and single zone systems)

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Er Fraction of secondary recirc to zone representative of system average, only applies if Ep<1. For plenum return =0. For duct return with local secondary recirc =1.

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Ez Zone air distribution effectiveness, Table 6.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Fa Fraction of supply air to zone from sources outside zone, = Ep + (1-Ep)*Er

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Fb Fraction of supply air to zone from full mixed primary air, = Ep = Vpz/Vdz

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Fc Fraction of outdoor air to zone from sources outside zone, = 1 - (1-Ez) * (1-Er) * (1-Ep)

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

SYSTEM LEVELPs System population, maximum simultaneous # of

occupants of space served by system110

D Occupant diversity, ratio of system peak occupancy to sum of space peak occupancies, = Ps/ΣPz

0.72

Vou Uncorrected outdoor air intake, = D*ΣRp*Pz +ΣRa*Az, cfm 1596Vps Total system primary flow to all zones, Σ Vpz, cfm 9695

Xs Mixing ratio at primary air handler of uncorrected outdoor air intake to system primary flow, = Vou/Vps

0.16

SYSTEM EFFICIENCYEvs Zone ventilation efficiency, (Fa +Xs*Fb - Z*Fc)/Fa 0.27 0.24 0.94 0.39 0.52 0.92 0.51 0.50 0.85 0.63 0.60 0.85Ev System ventilation efficiency, min(Evs) 0.24

Percent outdoor air intakeVot Minimum outdoor air intake, Vou/Ev, cfm 6638 68% = Vot/Vps

ZONE LEVEL: AHU 1-1

Note: In VAV systems, Vps is equal to the fan airflow, and the formula in cell c40 needs to be replaced by this value.

Zones served by system Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 Zone 17Space type (select from pull-down list) Science la Science la Science la Science la Office spacOffice spacScience la Science la Office spacConferenceOffice spacOffice spacAuditorium Auditorium Office spacOffice spacOffice space

Az Floor area of zone, ft2 630 780 872 730 525 450 750 680 855 900 490 500 1866 1866 215 132 150Pz Zone population, largest # of people expected to occupy

zone10 14 16 10 5 5 14 13 10 14 3 3 35 35 1 1 1

Rp Area outdoor air rate from Table 6.1, cfm/ft2 10 10 10 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5Ra People outdoor air rate from Table 6.1, cfm/person 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06Pz*Rp 100 140 160 100 25 25 140 130 50 70 15 15 175 175 5 5 5Az*Ra 113.4 140.4 156.96 131.4 31.5 27 135 122.4 51.3 54 29.4 30 111.96 111.96 12.9 7.92 9


213.4 280.4 316.96 231.4 56.5 52 275 252.4 101.3 124 44.4 45 286.96 286.96 17.9 12.92 14


750 1000 1470 840 720 720 1150 1000 510 2400 510 350 1500 1500 820 550 300


750 1000 1470 840 720 720 1150 1000 510 2400 510 350 1500 1500 820 550 300


225 300 440 250 220 220 345 300 150 720 150 105 525 525 330 220 85


0.95 0.93 0.72 0.93 0.26 0.24 0.80 0.84 0.68 0.17 0.30 0.43 0.55 0.55 0.05 0.06 0.16


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Ez Zone air distribution effectiveness, Table 6.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00




0.53

Vou Uncorrected outdoor air intake, = D*ΣRp*Pz +ΣRa*Az, 1979Vps Total system primary flow to all zones, Σ Vpz, cfm 16270


0.12

SYSTEM EFFICIENCYEvs Zone ventilation efficiency, (Fa +Xs*Fb - Z*Fc)/Fa 0.17 0.19 0.40 0.20 0.86 0.89 0.32 0.28 0.45 0.95 0.83 0.69 0.58 0.58 1.07 1.06 0.96Ev System ventilation efficiency, min(Evs) 0.17


ZONE LEVEL: AHU 2-1


Zones served by system Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 Zone 17 Zone 18Space type (select from pull-down list) Science la Office spacScience la Science la Office spacOffice spacOffice spacOffice spacScience la Office spacScience la Office spacScience la Reception Office spacOffice spacLobbies Office space

Az Floor area of zone, ft2 685 240 850 1110 300 240 530 576 486 487 961 408 140 486 635 530 590 120Pz Zone population, largest # of people expected to occupy

zone6 3 22 14 3 3 6 12 10 3 30 2 6 6 12 3 15 1

Rp Area outdoor air rate from Table 6.1, cfm/ft2 10 5 10 10 5 5 5 5 10 5 10 5 10 5 5 5 5 5Ra People outdoor air rate from Table 6.1, cfm/person 0.18 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.18 0.06 0.18 0.06 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06Pz*Rp 60 15 220 140 15 15 30 60 100 15 300 10 60 30 60 15 75 5Az*Ra 123.3 14.4 153 199.8 18 14.4 31.8 34.56 87.48 29.22 172.98 24.48 25.2 29.16 38.1 31.8 35.4 7.2


183.3 29.4 373 339.8 33 29.4 61.8 94.56 187.48 44.22 472.98 34.48 85.2 59.16 98.1 46.8 110.4 12.2


700 440 1510 1300 440 400 410 610 740 780 1880 600 350 400 450 450 610 100


700 440 1510 1300 440 400 410 610 740 780 1880 600 350 400 450 450 610 100


210 130 450 390 130 120 120 180 220 230 560 180 105 120 180 180 245 40


0.87 0.23 0.83 0.87 0.25 0.25 0.52 0.53 0.85 0.19 0.84 0.19 0.81 0.49 0.55 0.26 0.45 0.31


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Ez Zone air distribution effectiveness, Table 6.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00




0.38

Vou Uncorrected outdoor air intake, = D*ΣRp*Pz +ΣRa*Az, 1538Vps Total system primary flow to all zones, Σ Vpz, cfm 12130


0.13

SYSTEM EFFICIENCYEvs Zone ventilation efficiency, (Fa +Xs*Fb - Z*Fc)/Fa 0.25 0.90 0.30 0.26 0.87 0.88 0.61 0.60 0.27 0.93 0.28 0.94 0.32 0.63 0.58 0.87 0.68 0.82Ev System ventilation efficiency, min(Evs) 0.25


ZONE LEVEL: AHU 3-1




Appendix B: Standard 90.1 – Glass Area and

Envelope Compliance

HDD65 490 Width 3.33 ft Width of Building 125.00 ftCDD50 8448 Height 7.58 ft Length of Building 160.00 ft Assembly Maximum Insulation Min. R-Value

Number of Windows 18 Height of Building 10 ftTotal Area of 1st Fl. Windows 455.00 sq. ft Total Wall Area of 1st Floor 5700.00 sq. ft Insulation Entirely above Deck U-0.063 R-15.0 ci

Fenestration Area 2980.56 sq. ft Metal Building U-0.065 R-19.0Total Wall Area 21100.00 sq. ft Attic and Other U-0.034 R-30.0

Width 3.33 ft Width of Building 125.00 ftHeight 4.67 ft Length of Building 160.00 ft Mass U-0.580 NR

<50% of Wall Area Number of Windows 32 Height of Building 10 ft Metal Building U-0.113 R-13.0Total Area of 2nd Fl. Windows 497.78 sq. ft Total Wall Area of 2nd Floor 5700.00 sq. ft Steel Framed U-0.124 R-13.0

Wood Framed and Other U-0.089 R-13.0

Width 3.33 ft Width of Building 125.00 ft Below Grade Wall C-1.140 NRHeight 4.67 ft Length of Building 160.00 ftNumber of Windows 72 Height of Building 10 ft Mass U-0.322 NRTotal Area of 3rd Fl. Windows 1120.00 sq. ft Total Wall Area of 3rd Floor 5700.00 sq. ft Steel Joist U-0.350 NR

Wood Framed and Other U-0.282 NR

Width of Windows 3.17 ft Width of Building 125.00 ft Unheated F-0.730 NRHeight of Windows 8.33 ft Length of Building 75.00 ft Heated F-1.020 R-7.5 for 12 in.Number of Windows 2 Height of Building 10 ftWidth of Glass Doors 15.83 ft Total Wall Area of 4th Floor 4000.00 sq. ft Swinging U-0.700Height of Glass Doors 8.33 ft Non-Swinging U-1.450Number of Entrances 1 TOTAL WALL AREA 21100.00 sq. ftTotal Area of Entrance Glass 184.72 sq. ft

Width of Middle Window 6.33 ft 0 - 10.0% Ufixed-1.22 SHGCall-0.40Height of Middle Window 22.83 ft Uoper-1.27 SHGCnorth-0.61Number of Middle Windows 2 10.1 - 20.0% Ufixed-1.22 SHGCall-0.25Width of Side Windows 19.00 ft Uoper-1.27 SHGCnorth-0.61Height of Side Windows 22.83 ft 20.1 - 30.0% Ufixed-1.22 SHGCall-0.25Number of Side Windows 1 Uoper-1.27 SHGCnorth-0.61Total Area of Atrium Glass 723.06 sq. ft 30.1 - 40.0% Ufixed-1.22 SHGCall-0.25

Uoper-1.27 SHGCnorth-0.61TOTAL AREA OF GLASS 2980.56 sq. ft 40.1 - 50.0% Ufixed-1.22 SHGCall-0.19

Uoper-1.27 SHGCnorth-0.47

0 - 2.0% Uall-1.98 SHGCall-0.362.1 - 5.0% Uall-1.98 SHGCall-0.19



Third Floor Windows

Entrance Windows and Glass Doors

Atrium Windows - Middle and Sides

Percentage of Gross Wall Area

Wall Area of Third Floor

Wall Area of Fourth Floor

Climate in Florida

* Use Table B-3 in Normative App. B

14.13%

YES

First Floor Windows

Second Floor Windows

Wall Area for First Floor

Wall Area for Second Floor

Skylight with Curb, All, % of Roof

Table B-3: Building Envelope Requirements (HDD65: 0 - 900, CDD50: 7201 - 9000)NonresidentialOpaque Elements

Skylight with Curb, Glass, % of Roof

Fenestration

Vertical Glazing, % of Wall

Skylight with Curb, Plastic, % of Roof

Assembly Max. U (Fixed/Operable)

Assembly Max. SHGC (All Orientations/North-Oriented)

Slab-on-Grade Floors

Opaque Doors

Roofs

Walls, Above Grade

Wall, Below Grade

Floors



Appendix C: Standard 90.1 – Lighting Density

Compliance

Lobby 0.63 201 1.16 301 1.1102 0.46 202 1.59 307 0.65103 0.73 203 0.81 310 0.71107 0.62 204 0.81 311 0.6109 1.17 205 0.94 312 0.36110 1.03 206 0.91 314 0.71112 0.5 209 0.65 315 0.69115 1.01 210 0.69 316 0.66117 1.64 211 0.94 320 0.85118 0.51 212 0.67 321 0.58119 1.2 216 0.6 325 0.58120 0.8 217 0.65 326 0.85126 0.51 218 0.66 327 0.58127 0.6 219 0.6 330 0.82129 0.49 220 0.66 331 1.09131 0.86 221 0.6 332 1.16133 1.38 222 0.62 333 0.61

135 & 132 2.04 223 0.59 334 1.09138 0.8 225 0.66 335 0.82139 0.52 226 1.03 336 0.82

140 & 144 0.71 227 0.69 337 0.82145 0.73 228 0.83 338 0.53146 0.45 229 0.58 339 0.59

232 0.79 340 0.82233 0.79 341 0.56234 0.79 342 0.8235 0.79 343 0.8236 0.8 346 0.79237 0.8 347 0.79240 0.75 348 0.79241 0.84 349 0.79242 0.61 350 0.79243 0.57 351 0.79248 1.2 353 0.76

354 0.74355 0.6356 0.76358 1.24

Second Floor Lighting Densities (W/ft2) Third Floor Lighting Densities (W/ft2)First Floor Lighting Densities (W/ft2)



Appendix D: Selection of Desiccant Wheel

Calculations

Supply Air 9695 CFM OA Opening 0.06 in. wg EA Opening 0.13 in. wgOutdoor Air 2550 CFM SA Opening 0.06 in. wg RA Opening 0.13 in. wg RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPReturn Air 7145 CFM Filter 0.28 in. wg Enthalpy Wheel 0.51 in. wg 11000 2398 10.09 2487 12.04

Enthalpy Wheel 0.51 in. wg Casing 0.3 in. wg 11135 2420.95 10.33 2476.51 11.57 2509.14 12.30Unit Size (from Table 1) EP-18 Cooling Coil 0.36 in. wg Total 1.07 in. wg 11500 2483 10.97 2569 13Choose Model EP Heating Coil 0.06 in. wg

Casing 0.3 in. wgInternal Static Pressure SA Side 1.63 in. wg Total 1.63 in. wg RA Fan Horse Power (5 HP) 7.6 ampsInternal Static Pressure RA Side 1.07 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 3.63 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps 8500 1757 3.5 1877 4.96Total Static Pressure RA Side (+ 0.5") 1.57 in. wg OADBT 93 F Total FLA 18.55 amps 8585 1772.13 3.58 1840.05 4.42 1891.28 5.05

Eff. SA 66.30% 9000 1846 3.97 1961 5.51Purge/Seal Air Volume - Added to SA & RA Sides (Table 4) 1440 CFM RADBT 75 F

FLA 18.55 ampsTotal SA Fan Flow 11135 CFM 25% of largest motor amps 1.9 amps 85.00%Total RA Fan Flow 8585 CFM OAgr 0.0182 gr Total MCA 20.45 amps 1.25 72.00%

Eff. SA 66.30% 1.36 66.30%Rotations Per Minute 2476.51 RPM RAgr 0.0093 gr 1.4 64.00%Brake Horse Power 11.57 BHP FLA 18.55 ampsActual HP: BHP x 1.1 (for safety factor) 12.7266788 HP 75% of largest motor amps 5.7 ampsMinimum HP 15 HP OAh 42.62 BTU/lb Total MCOP 24.25 amps

Eff. SA (%) 66.30%Rotations Per Minute 1840.05 RPM RAh 28.14 BTU/lbBrake Horse Power 4.42 BHPActual HP: BHP x 1.1 (for safety factor) 4.8618372 HPMinimum HP 5 HP

Base Efficiency based on RA CFM (Table 1) 85.00%

SA/RA Ratio 1.36SA Efficiency (Table 2) 66.30%

SA (DBT) 81.07 FSA (grains) 86.10 grSA (h) 33.02 BTU/lb

Finned Height 78 in.Finned Width 54 in.Feet Per Minute 342 fpmModel Number 5WS1008BWater Pressure Drop 8.1 ft.Gallons Per Minute 174 gpmLeaving Air Temp DB 51.4 FLeaving Air Temp WB 51.3 FConnection Size 2.5 in.

Finned Height 78 in.Finned Width 54 in.Feet Per Minute 342 fpmModel Number 5MH0702BWater Pressure Drop 2.4 ft.Gallons Per Minute 72 gpmLeaving Air Temp DB 74.8 FLeaving Air Temp WB 74.8 FConnection Size 2 in.

Full Load Amps 18.55 ampsMinimum Circuit Ampacity (MCA) 20.45 ampsMaximum Overcurrent Protection (MOCP) 24.25 amps

Internal Static Pressure RA Side RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for SA Side

1 1.57 2

3 3.63 4

RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for RA SideFull Load Amps (FLA)

Unit Sizing Information

Static Pressure

General Air Flow Data: AHU 1-1 Internal Static Pressure SA Side

Base Efficiency

Supply Air Efficiency

SA (DBT) = OADBT - [Eff SA*(OADBT - RADBT)]

SA (h) = OAh - [Eff SA*(OAh - RAh)]

SA (gr) = OAgr - [Eff SA*(OAgr - RAgr)]

Fan Data Tables - SA Fan: SIZE 9, 5XX (Max. HP = 20 HP)

Purge Section

Total Fan Flow

Cooling Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity EP Chilled Water Coils

Heating Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity EP Hot Water Coils

Electrical Sizing Data

Equation 1 from SEMCO Technical Paper

Minimum Current Ampacity (MCA)

Maximum Overcurrent Protection (MCOP)

Fan Data Tables - RA Fan: SIZE 9, 5XX (Max. HP = 20 HP)

Supply Air Base Efficiency Calculations

Supply Air 7100 CFM OA Opening 0.04 in. wg EA Opening 0.09 in. wgOutdoor Air 7100 CFM SA Opening 0.04 in. wg Enthalpy Wheel 0.41 in. wg RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPExhaust Air 5325 CFM Filter 0.19 in. wg Casing 0.3 in. wg 8450 2620 7.53 2722 9.04

Enthalpy Wheel 0.41 in. wg Total 0.8 in. wg 8540 2641.34 7.68 2666.65 8.06 2742.57 9.20Unit Size (from Table 1) EP-18 Cooling Coil 0.23 in. wg 8800 2703 8.12 2802 9.67Choose Model EP Heating Coil 0.04 in. wg

Casing 0.3 in. wg EA Fan Horse Power (5 HP) 7.6 ampsInternal Static Pressure SA Side 1.25 in. wg Total 1.25 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 ampsInternal Static Pressure RA Side 0.8 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 3.25 in. wg Total FLA 18.55 amps 6700 1956 2.73 2092 3.89Total Static Pressure EA Side (+ 0.5") 1.3 in. wg OADBT 93 F 6765 1972.34 2.79 2012.86 3.14 2107.41 3.96

Eff. SA 67.56% 7050 2044 3.06 2175 4.27Purge/Seal Air Volume - Added to SA & RA Sides (Table 4) 1440 CFM RADBT 75 F FLA 18.55 amps

25% of largest motor amps 1.9 ampsTotal SA Fan Flow 8540 CFM Total MCA 20.45 amps 85.00%Total EA Fan Flow 6765 CFM OAgr 0.0182 gr 1.25 72.00%

Eff. SA 67.56% 1.33 67.56%Rotations Per Minute 2666.65 RPM RAgr 0.0093 gr FLA 18.55 amps 1.4 64.00%Brake Horse Power 8.06 BHP 75% of largest motor amps 5.7 ampsActual HP: BHP x 1.1 (for safety factor) 8.8679643 HP Total MCOP 24.25 ampsMinimum HP 10 HP OAh 42.62 BTU/lb


Base Efficiency based on EA CFM (Table 1) 85.00%

SA/EA Ratio 1.33SA Efficiency (Table 2) 67.56%



Finned Height 78 in.Finned Width 54 in.Feet Per Minute 274 fpmModel Number 5MH0702BWater Pressure Drop 1.6 ft.Gallons Per Minute 58 gpmLeaving Air Temp DB 81 FLeaving Air Temp WB 81 FConnection Size 2 in.



Full Load Amps (FLA)



RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for EA Side1 1.3 2

Fan Data Tables - EA Fan: SIZE 5X (Max. HP = 10 HP)

Purge Section

Total Fan Flow

Base Efficiency

Cooling Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity EP Chilled Water Coils

Heating Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity EP Hot Water Coils



General Air Flow Data: AHU 1-2 Internal Static Pressure SA Side Internal Static Pressure EA Side


Fan Data Tables - SA Fan: SIZE 5X (Max. HP = 10 HP)


Static Pressure




RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for SA Side3 3.25 4



Casing 0.3 in. wg EA Fan Horse Power (10 HP) 14 ampsInternal Static Pressure SA Side 1.46 in. wg Total 1.46 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 ampsInternal Static Pressure RA Side 0.88 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 3.46 in. wg Total FLA 24.95 amps 9600 1420 3.48 1536 5.16Total Static Pressure EA Side (+ 0.5") 1.38 in. wg OADBT 93 F 10030 1472.32 3.82 1515.31 4.48 1585.45 5.57

Eff. SA 67.06% 10200 1493 3.95 1605 5.73Purge/Seal Air Volume - Added to SA & EA Sides (Table 4) 1735 CFM RADBT 75 F FLA 24.95 amps

25% of largest motor amps 3.5 ampsTotal SA Fan Flow 12795 CFM Total MCA 28.45 amps 83.00% 84.00% 85.00%Total EA Fan Flow 10030 CFM OAgr 0.0182 gr 1.25 71.00% 72.00%

Eff. SA 67.06% 1.33 66.56% 67.06% 67.56%Rotations Per Minute 2039.71 RPM RAgr 0.0093 gr FLA 24.95 amps 1.4 63.00% 64.00%Brake Horse Power 11.95 BHP 75% of largest motor amps 10.5 ampsActual HP: BHP x 1.1 (for safety factor) 13.141112 HP Total MCOP 35.45 ampsMinimum HP 15 HP OAh 42.62 BTU/lb





Finned Height 90 in.Finned Width 54 in.Feet Per Minute 415 fpmModel Number 5WS1008BWater Pressure Drop 10.7 ft.Gallons Per Minute 244 gpmLeaving Air Temp DB 52.4 FLeaving Air Temp WB 52.2 FConnection Size 3 in.






Fan Data Tables - EA Fan: SIZE 13, 9X, 5XX (Max. HP = 20 HP)

Purge Section

Total Fan Flow

Base Efficiency

Cooling Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity Chilled Water Coil

Heating Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity Hot Water Coil





Fan Data Tables - SA Fan: SIZE 13, 9X, 5XX (Max. HP = 20 HP)


Static Pressure






RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation forEA Side1 1.38 2


Enthalpy Wheel 0.47 in. wg Casing 0.3 in. wg 18567 1349.52 14.07 1400.19 16.36 1429.95 17.71Unit Size (from Table 1) EP-35 Cooling Coil 0.38 in. wg Total 0.99 in. wg 19000 1369 14.53 1449 18.27Choose Model EP Heating Coil 0.06 in. wg

Casing 0.3 in. wgInternal Static Pressure SA Side 1.63 in. wg Total 1.63 in. wg RA Fan Horse Power (10 HP) 14 ampsInternal Static Pressure RA Side 0.99 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 3.63 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps 15000 987 4.83 1095 7.56Total Static Pressure RA Side (+ 0.5") 1.49 in. wg OADBT 93 F Total FLA 24.95 amps 15717 1023.57 5.30 1074.73 6.68 1127.98 8.12








Finned Height 111 in.Finned Width 66 in.Feet Per Minute 442 fpmModel Number 5WS1008BWater Pressure Drop 10 ft.Gallons Per Minute 392 gpmLeaving Air Temp DB 53.4 FLeaving Air Temp WB 53.2 FConnection Size 2.5 in.



4RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for SA Side

RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for RA Side1 1.49 2

Heating Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity EP Hot Water Coil






Fan Data Tables - RA Fan: SIZE 24, 18X, 13XX (Max. HP = 50 HP)

Purge Section

Total Fan Flow



Base Efficiency

Cooling Coil Sizing Data- Increased Capacity EP Chilled Water Coil




Static Pressure


General Air Flow Data: AHU 2-1 Internal Static Pressure SA Side Internal Static Pressure RA Side


3 3.63



Casing 0.3 in. wg EA Fan Horse Power (10 HP) 14 ampsInternal Static Pressure SA Side 2.04 in. wg Total 2.04 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 ampsInternal Static Pressure RA Side 1.09 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 4.04 in. wg Total FLA 24.95 amps 11800 1111 3.79 1233 5.94Total Static Pressure EA Side (+ 0.5") 1.59 in. wg OADBT 93 F 12033 1128.18 3.94 1199.13 5.23 1248.44 6.12















Static Pressure




Base Efficiency

Cooling Coil Sizing Data - Increased Capacity EP Chilled Water Coil








Purge Section

Total Fan Flow





Enthalpy Wheel 0.55 in. wg Casing 0.3 in. wg 13865 2205.48 15.14 2208.58 15.24 2283.15 17.68Unit Size (from Table 1) EP-24 Cooling Coil 0.53 in. wg Total 1.33 in. wg 14400 2267 16.15 2342 18.76Choose Model EP Heating Coil 0.09 in. wg

Casing 0.3 in. wgInternal Static Pressure SA Side 2.04 in. wg Total 2.04 in. wg RA Fan Horse Power (10 HP) 14 ampsInternal Static Pressure RA Side 1.33 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 4.04 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps 11400 1643 5.04 1745 6.99Total Static Pressure RA Side (+ 0.5") 1.83 in. wg OADBT 93 F Total FLA 24.95 amps 11510 1656.75 5.15 1740.95 6.79 1758.20 7.12











General Air Flow Data: AHU 3-1 Internal Static Pressure SA Side Internal Static Pressure RA Side


Fan Data Tables - SA Fan: SIZE 13, 9X, 13XXX (Max. HP = 20 HP)


Static Pressure




Base Efficiency








Fan Data Tables - RA Fan: SIZE 13, 9X, 13XXX (Max. HP = 20 HP)

Purge Section

Total Fan Flow

4 4.04 5RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for SA Side


RPM & BHP Calculation from Charts - Interpolation for RA Side1 1.83 2



Casing 0.3 in. wg EA Fan Horse Power (10 HP) 14 ampsInternal Static Pressure SA Side 1.63 in. wg Total 1.63 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 ampsInternal Static Pressure EA Side 0.88 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 3.63 in. wg Total FLA 24.95 amps 14000 936 4.83 1095 7.56Total Static Pressure EA Side (+ 0.5") 1.38 in. wg OADBT 93 F 14822 1019.84 5.36 1062.77 6.44 1132.81 8.20















Static Pressure




Base Efficiency









Purge Section

Total Fan Flow






Casing 0.3 in. wg EA Fan Horse Power (5 HP) 7.6 ampsInternal Static Pressure SA Side 2.04 in. wg Total 2.04 in. wg Wheel VFD (Yaskawa Model CIMR - V7AM20P4) 4.7 ampsInternal Static Pressure EA Side 1.09 in. wg Control Power 6.25 amps RPM BHP RPM BHP RPM BHPTotal Static Pressure SA Side (+ 2") 4.04 in. wg Total FLA 18.55 amps 9400 942 2.53 1083 4.36Total Static Pressure EA Side (+ 0.5") 1.59 in. wg OADBT 93 F 10135 992.53 2.87 1071.93 4.01 1127.10 4.80


25% of largest motor amps 1.9 ampsTotal SA Fan Flow 12935 CFM Total MCA 20.45 amps 83.00% 84.00% 85.00%Total EA Fan Flow 10135 CFM OAgr 0.0182 gr 1.25 71.00% 72.00%

Eff. SA 67.06% 1.33 66.56% 67.06% 67.56%Rotations Per Minute 1515.08 RPM RAgr 0.0093 gr FLA 18.55 amps 1.4 63.00% 64.00%Brake Horse Power 12.05 BHP 75% of largest motor amps 5.7 ampsActual HP: BHP x 1.1 (for safety factor) 13.254164 HP Total MCOP 24.25 ampsMinimum HP 15 HP OAh 42.62 BTU/lb













Fan Data Tables - RA Fan: SIZE 18, 13X, 9XX (Max. HP = 30 HP)

Purge Section

Total Fan Flow

Base Efficiency









Static Pressure







Charts and Graphs from SEMCO Cutsheets

8 • Packaged Energy Recovery Systems Technical Guide

RA @ 6000 cfmEA opening .15 in.wg.RA opening .15 in.wg.Damper .08 in.wg.RA filter .49 in.wg.Wheel .67 in.wg.Casing .30 in.wg.ISP 1.84 in.wg.

SA @ 7000 cfmOA opening .11 in.wg.SA opening .11 in.wg.Damper .11 in.wg.OA filter .42 in.wg.Wheel .82 in.wg.CHW coil .61 in.wg.HW Coil .10 in.wg.Casing .30 in.wg.ISP 2.58 in.wg.

Determine fan total static pressure (TSP) by adding the ISP to therequired external static pressure.

ex. SA side TSP is 2.58" + 1" = 3.58" RA side TSP is 1.84" + .5" = 2.34"

Select unit size from Table 1 based on the larger supply air (SA) orreturn air (RA) cfm required. Then select the smallest unit which meetsthe required task, since it will provide the most cost-effective selection.

ex. If 7000 cfm SA at 1-inch external static pressure and 6000 cfm RA at.5-inch external static pressure is required, then select size 9 based on7000 cfm.

EP Detailed Selection Procedure

Select unit configuration(EP, EPH, EPC, EPCH or EPHC) basedon project requirements (see page 6 and 7 for guidance).

ex. Select EPHC if a year-round controlled SA condition is desired.

Use Table 4 (page 24) to determine the internal static pressures(ISP) for both the SA and RA sides of the unit.

ex. In an indoor unit, the ISP for the SA side of the EPCH-9 at 7000 cfmis 2.54 inches. The ISP for the RA side of the EP-9 at 6000 cfm is 1.81inches.

TTTTTable 1. able 1. able 1. able 1. able 1. System Capacities andBase Effectiveness

ledoM yticapaCesaB%-evitceffE

ssen

3-PE000,2woL005,2diM000,3hgiH

875747


187767


288757

31-PE000,6woL000,8diM000,01hgiH

480877

81-PE000,8woL000,01diM000,51hgiH

582867

42-PE000,11woL000,41diM000,81hgiH

481877

82-PE000,51woL000,81diM000,32hgiH

289767

53-PE000,81woL000,22diM000,72hgiH

380877

34-PE000,62woL000,03diM000,04hgiH

088757

2

1

3

Use Table 4 again to determine purge/seal air volume to be addedto each designed airflow to determine total fan airflow.

ex. EP-9 purge/seal volume is 906 cfm.

Total SA fan flow = 7906 cfmTotal RA fan flow = 6906 cfm

5

4

Packaged Energy Recovery Systems Technical Guide • 9

Determine motor horsepower based on the unit’s basic fan size,total fan airflow and TSP from the fan data table on pages 26-31.The minimum motor horsepower is the fan brake horsepower plus10 percent to allow for drive loss and safety factors. An optionalextended range fan (shown as size X or XX) is offered for most modelsizes. This fan offers horsepower savings depending on exactperformance required. However, an increase in unit size is possible.

ex. Using a size 9 fan, the SA fan brake horsepower is 6.9 based on 7900cfm at 3.58 in.wg. static pressure. This would require a minimum 10 hpmotor. The RA fan brake horsepower is 4.0 based on 6900 cfm at 2.34in.wg. static pressure. This would require a minimum of 5.0 hp motor.

Find the base wheel effectiveness percentage from Table 1 based onthe model selected and the smaller SA or RA cfm.

ex. Base effectiveness for EP-9 based on 6000 cfm is 78 percent.

Determine summer and winter SA conditions, based on designtemperatures and SA efficiency by using Equation 1 from Figure 1.(See page 6 for EP configuration.)

TTTTTable 2. able 2. able 2. able 2. able 2. Supply Air Efficiency Chart Figure 1:

Equation 1:XSA

= XOA - ESA(XOA - XRA)

Equation 2:XEA = XRA + ESA(XOA - XRA)

X = dry bulb temperature (°F) or moisture content (gr/lb) orenthalpy (BTU/lb).

Notes:For SA efficiency use SA cfm/RA cfm.For RA efficiency use RA cfm/SA cfm.

ex. The following design condition example and a 70 percent SA efficiencyare determined below:

Equation 1 for summer dry bulb:SA(DB TEMP) = 95° - .70 (95°-75°) = 81°F

Equation 1 for summer humidity:SA(GRAINS) = 117 gr - .70 (117gr - 63 gr) = 79 gr

Example 1Example 1Example 1Example 1Example 1

Determine SA efficiency from Table 2 and their cfm ratio.

ex. SA efficiency would be approximately 70 percent interpolating fromTable 2 for a base wheel effectiveness of 78 percent and a SA/RA ratio of7000 cfm/6000 cfm = 1.17.

noitidnoC.pmeT

yrDbluB

.pmeTteWbluB

.sbAytidimuH

bl/rg

remmuSAO

°59 °87 711

remmuSAR

°57 °9.16 36

remmuSAS

°18 °7.26 97

retniWAO

°0 °1- 4

retniWAR

°07 °4.15 72

retniWAS

°94 °2.93 02

maertsriAwolFoitaR

%nissenevitceffEesaB

57 77 97 18 38 58

07.0 18 38 68 88 09 29

08.0 97 18 38 58 78 09

09.0 77 97 18 38 58 78

00.1 57 77 97 18 38 58

01.1 96 17 37 57 77 87

52.1 36 56 76 96 17 27

04.1 75 85 06 16 36 46

6

7

8

9


ex. For the EPCH-9, use a 10-hp SA fan, a 7.5-hp RA fan, a variablespeed wheel and 240 volt/3 phase/60-cycle power.

From Electrical Data Table:

Full Load Ampacity10-hp SA fan 28.0 amps5-hp RA fan 15.2 ampsWheel VFD 4.4 ampsControl power 0.8 ampsTotal FLA’s 48.4 amps

Minimum Circuit AmpacityFLA from above 48.4 amps25% of largest motor 7.0 ampsTotal MCA 55.4 amps

Maximum Overcurrent Protection(MOCP)FLA from above 48.4 amps75% of largest motor 14.0 ampsMOCP* 62.4 amps

*Select the next larger sized time delay fuse.

Estimate unit SA conditions using the cooling coil table (page33) and the heating coil tables (page 35).

Select unit voltage and determine power requirements from theElectrical Data Table on page 38.

Determine the need for variable speed option on the wheel.

ex. If the 7000 cfm EP unit supplies preconditioned outdoor air directly toan air-conditioned space, the unit's full capacity will be required in thecooling season. On cool days, the unit may have the capacity to provideSA conditions above the desired setpoint design, such as 65°F, with a desired55°F SA setpoint. To provide better control of the unit’s SA conditions,the variable speed option should be selected. This option can also be usedto provide frost protection for the wheel. (See also the SEMCO EnergyRecovery Wheel Technical Guide for a complete discussion of wheelperformance and controls.)

10

11

12


Unit Weights and Dimensions

EP

EPD

Notes :No tes :No tes :No tes :No tes :1. Electric heating coil will add 12” to unit length.2. 12” wider EA side available for increased capacity.3. 24” wider EA side available for increased capacity.4. Add 12” to width for X and XX size EA fan.

5. Add 18” to unit length for X and XX size SA or EA fan.6. Right handed units shown. For left hand unit, mirror downcenterline.

FOR ALL EP MODELSFOR ALL EP MODELSFOR ALL EP MODELSFOR ALL EP MODELSFOR ALL EP MODELS

W L 1L 2L H thgieW1#doM

thgieW2#doM

ledoM ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( )sbl( )sbl( setoN3-PE 68 361 - - 84 059,4 - 55-PE 68 761 - - 06 057,5 - 59-PE 89 171 - - 27 053,7 - 4,231-PE 89 281 - - 68 004,9 - 4,281-PE 221 091 - - 89 051,21 - 4,242-PE 221 402 - - 011 052,41 - 4,282-PE 641 512 911 69 221 001,01 057,7 4,253-PE 641 132 921 201 431 007,11 056,8 4,234-PE 281 542 731 801 641 001,51 005,01 3

ledoMW L 1L 2L 3L 4L H thgieW

1#doMthgieW2#doM

thgieW3#doM

thgieW4#doM setoN

).ni( ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( ).ni( )sbl( )sbl( )sbl( )sbl(3-DPE 68 362 - - - - 84 001,7 - - - 5,15-DPE 68 762 - - - - 06 003,8 - - - 5,19-DPE 89 172 - - - - 27 054,01 - - - 4,131-DPE 89 592 - - -- - 68 007,31 - - - 4,181-DPE 221 803 801 002 - - 89 051,7 000,01 - - 4,142-DPE 221 123 511 602 - - 011 054,8 054,11 - - 4,182-DPE 641 433 911 - 311 201 221 001,01 - 008,7 057,7 4,153-DPE 641 053 921 - 311 801 431 007,11 - 005,8 056,8 4,134-DPE 281 463 731 - 311 311 641 001,51 - 051,01 005,01 1

L1 L2

L

W

L1 L2

L

+ -

L3 L4

W


Component Pressure Drop Tables

TTTTTable 4: Single Wheel Unit Pressure Dropsable 4: Single Wheel Unit Pressure Dropsable 4: Single Wheel Unit Pressure Dropsable 4: Single Wheel Unit Pressure Dropsable 4: Single Wheel Unit Pressure Drops

Notes:1. Filter pressure drops based on 2 inches thick, 30% efficient Class II filters.2. Cooling coil pressure drops based on 6 row, 10 fins per inch single-circuited coil.3. Heating coil pressure drops based on 1 row, 6 fins per inch.4. Purge volumes based on 4 inches POA-PRA for wheel.5. Casing losses include fan inlet losses.

eziS 3-PE 5-PE 9-PE 31-PE 81-PEMFC 0002 0052 0003 0003 0004 0054 0054 0006 0008 0006 0008 00001 0008 00001

egrupleehw.htnE 315 345 315 596 596 596 609 609 609 8611 8611 8611 0441 0441mfcnaF 3152 3103 3153 5963 5964 5915 6045 6096 6098 8617 8619 86111 0449 04411

)dooh/w(gninepoAO 20.0 40.0 50.0 20.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 10.0 20.0 03.0 10.0 10.0)dooh/w(gninepoAE 40.0 50.0 70.0 80.0 21.0 51.0 70.0 21.0 02.0 80.0 21.0 81.0 70.0 11.0

gninepoAEroAR 01.0 41.0 91.0 90.0 51.0 91.0 90.0 51.0 42.0 90.0 51.0 22.0 90.0 31.0gninepoAOroAS 60.0 01.0 41.0 60.0 11.0 41.0 50.0 80.0 41.0 50.0 80.0 31.0 40.0 60.0

repmaD 70.0 01.0 41.0 50.0 80.0 90.0 50.0 80.0 31.0 60.0 90.0 41.0 40.0 70.0retlifAO 62.0 83.0 15.0 52.0 14.0 05.0 91.0 23.0 35.0 42.0 93.0 85.0 91.0 82.0retlifAR 71.0 62.0 73.0 71.0 03.0 73.0 72.0 94.0 78.0 03.0 25.0 28.0 22.0 43.0leehw.htnE 96.0 29.0 81.1 25.0 47.0 68.0 84.0 76.0 79.0 24.0 75.0 57.0 14.0 15.0liocgnilooC 62.0 04.0 85.0 13.0 65.0 07.0 52.0 44.0 97.0 03.0 35.0 28.0 32.0 63.0liocgnitaeH 40.0 70.0 90.0 50.0 90.0 11.0 40.0 70.0 31.0 50.0 90.0 31.0 40.0 60.0sessolgnisaC 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0erusserpcitats.tnIerusserpcitats.txEerusserpcitatslatoT

eziS 81-PE 42-PE 82-PE 53-PE 34-PEMFC 00051 00011 00041 00081 00051 00581 00032 00081 00522 00072 00062 00003 00004

egrupleehw.htnE 0441 5371 5371 5371 1691 1691 1691 7922 7922 7922 2662 2662 2662mfcnaF 04461 53721 53751 53791 16961 16402 16942 79202 79742 79292 26682 26623 26624

)dooh/w(gninepoAO 30.0 02.0 20.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 20.0 40.0)dooh/w(gninepoAE 22.0 90.0 41.0 12.0 01.0 51.0 22.0 11.0 61.0 32.0 11.0 41.0 32.0

gninepoAEroAR 62.0 61.0 42.0 83.0 11.0 71.0 52.0 11.0 71.0 42.0 21.0 51.0 62.0gninepoAOroAS 41.0 50.0 80.0 31.0 60.0 90.0 51.0 60.0 01.0 41.0 60.0 80.0 41.0

repmaD 41.0 60.0 90.0 31.0 70.0 01.0 41.0 60.0 01.0 31.0 90.0 11.0 91.0retlifAO 95.0 72.0 14.0 56.0 62.0 83.0 75.0 03.0 54.0 36.0 82.0 73.0 26.0retlifAR 67.0 13.0 5.0 48.0 03.0 54.0 96.0 43.0 45.0 77.0 14.0 55.0 89.0leehw.htnE 38.0 24.0 55.0 47.0 94.0 26.0 18.0 74.0 06.0 57.0 65.0 76.0 89.0liocgnilooC 08.0 23.0 35.0 78.0 33.0 15.0 87.0 83.0 06.0 68.0 53.0 74.0 38.0liocgnitaeH 31.0 50.0 90.0 41.0 50.0 80.0 31.0 60.0 01.0 41.0 60.0 80.0 31.0sessolgnisaC 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0 03.0erusserpcitats.tnIerusserpcitats.txEerusserpcitatslatoT


Increased Capacity EPC, EPCH, EPHC Chilled Water Coils

Increased Capacity EPC, EPCH, EPHC DX Coils

Design basis: Entering air temperature: 95°Fdb/78°Fwb; entering water temperature: 45°F; water temperature rise:11°±2°F. Dx coil suction temperature: 45°F; refrigerant: R-22. *(2) 2-5/8 & (1) 2-1/8

Design basis: Entering air temperature: 95°Fdb/78°Fwb; entering water temperature: 45°F; water temperature rise: 11°±2°F.

slioCretaWdellihCdradnatS

ledoMyticapaC)mfc(

denniFthgieH

denniFhtdiW

yticoleVecaF)mpf( ledoM

erusserPretaW.tf,porD MPG

.pmeTriAgnivaeLbw/bdF°

noitcennoCTPMeziS

3-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000200520003

ni33 ni03192463634

B8080HW51.97.318.81

534425

8.15/9.159.25/1.359.35/3.45

"5.1

5-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000300040054

ni54 ni03023724084

B8001HW56.9617.91

250787

7.05/8.052.25/3.258.25/35

"2

9-PEwoLdeMhgiH

005400060008

ni45 ni24682183805

B8001LW51.62.0171

87501931

3.05/4.056.15/7.152.35/4.35

"2

31-PEwoLdeMhgiH

0006000800001

ni66 ni24213614915

B8001LW577.114.71

501931471

7.05/8.051.25/2.253.35/5.35

"5.2

81-PEwoLdeMhgiH

00080000100051

ni87 ni45472243315

B8001SW54.51.89.61

931471162

3.05/4.053.15/4.154.35/6.35

"5.2

42-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000110004100081

ni09 ni45623514335

B8001SW59.67.019.61

291442413

1.15/2.152.25/4.256.35/8.35

"3

82-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000510058100032

ni99 ni66133804705

B8001MW53.58.77.11

162223104

7.15/8.157.25/9.259.35/1.45

"5.2

53-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000810052200072

ni111 ni66453244135

B8001MW56.6011.41

313293074

1.25/2.252.35/4.351.45/4.45

"5.2

34-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000620000300004

ni321 ni09833093025

B6001TW54.65.88.41

354325796

5.65/9.653.75/7.757.85/4.95

"3


ledoMyticapaC)mfc(

denniFthgieH

denniFhtdiW



-cennoCeniLnoitcuSTPMeziSnoit

-cennoCeniLdiuqiLTPMeziSnoit

3-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000200520003

ni33 ni03192463634

B8001NE55.15/5.152.25/2.253.45/3.45

8/5-1)1(8/1-2)1(8/1-2)1(

8/3-1)1(8/3-1)1(8/3-1)1(

5-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000300040054

ni54 ni03023724084

B8001NE51.25/1.252.45/2.45

55/55

8/1-2)1(8/1-2)1(8/5-2)1(

8/3-1)1(8/3-1)1(8/3-1)1(

9-PEwoLdeMhgiH

005400060008

ni45 ni24682183805

B8001NE53.15/3.154.35/4.353.65/3.65

8/1-2)2(8/1-2)2(8/1-2)2(

8/3-1)2(8/3-1)2(8/3-1)2(

31-PEwoLdeMhgiH

0006000800001

ni66 ni24213614915

B8001NE51.25/1.253.45/3.455.65/5.65

8/1-2)2(8/1-2)2(8/5-2)2(

8/3-1)2(8/3-1)2(8/3-1)2(

81-PEwoLdeMhgiH

00080000100051

ni87 ni45472243315

B8001NE56.15/6.159.25/9.258.55/8.55

8/1-2)2(8/5-2)2(8/5-2)2(

8/5-1)2(8/5-1)2(8/5-1)2(

42-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000110004100081

ni09 ni45623514335

B8001NE53.25/3.251.45/1.4565/1.65

8/5-2)2(8/5-2)2(8/1-2)2(

8/5-1)2(8/5-1)2(8/5-1)2(

82-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000510058100032

ni99 ni66133804705

B8001NE51.25/1.255.35/5.354.55/4.55

8/5-2)3(8/5-2)3(8/5-2)3(

8/5-1)3(8/5-1)3(8/5-1)3(

53-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000810052200072

ni111 ni66453244135

B8001NE55.25/5.252.45/2.458.55/8.55

8/5-2)3(8/5-2)3(8/5-2)3(

8/5-1)3(8/5-1)3(8/5-1)3(

34-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000620000300004

ni321 ni09833093025

B8001NE56.25/6.257.35/7.355.65/5.65

*8/5-2)3(8/5-2)3(

8/5-1)3(8/5-1)3(8/5-1)3(


Standard EPH, EPCH, EPHC Hot Water Coils

Increased Capacity EPH, EPCH, EPHC Hot Water Coils

Design Basis: Entering air temperature: 30°Fwb; entering water temperature: 180°F; leaving water temperature: 160±3°F.

Design Basis: Entering air temperature: 0°F; entering water temperature: 180°F; leaving water temperature: 160±3°F.


ledoMyticapaC)mfc(

denniFthgieH

denniFhtdiW




noitcennoCTPMeziS

3-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000205220052

ni33 ni03192723463

B1060HM52.02.03.0

8901

7.663.5646

"5.1

5-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000300040054

ni54 ni03023724084

B1060HM51.02.03.0

216171

6.561.2606

"2

9-PEwoLdeMhgiH

005400060008

ni45 ni24682183805

B1060HM53.05.09.0

713213

4.865616

"5.1

31-PEwoLdeMhgiH

0006000800001

ni66 ni24213614915

B1060HM54.07.01.1

321393

4.764616

"5.1

81-PEwoLdeMhgiH

00080000100051

ni87 ni45472243315

B1060HM56.012.2

139385

1.07765.16

"5.1

42-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000110004100081

ni09 ni45623514335

B1060HM55.08.03.1

344507

862.4616

"2

82-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000510058100032

ni99 ni66133804705

B1060HM53.19.19.2

852798

864.561.23

"5.1

53-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000810052200072

ni111 ni66453244135

B1060HM56.15.26.3

0778501

1.769.365.16

"5.1

34-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000620000300004

ni321 ni09833093025

B1060HM51.31.43.7

101611551

4.863.663.26

"5.1


ledoMyticapaC)mfc(

denniFthgieH

denniFhtdiW




noitcennoCTPMeziS

3-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000205220052

ni33 ni03192723463

B2070HM57.09.02.1

416181

6.676.3717

"5.1

5-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000300040054

ni54 ni03023724084

B2070HM56.013.1

229223

3.471.7646

"2

9-PEwoLdeMhgiH

005400060008

ni45 ni24682183805

B2070HM53.13.21.4

233485

7.871.1746

"5.1

31-PEwoLdeMhgiH

0006000800001

ni66 ni24213614915

B2070HM58.12.39.4

348527

4.67961.36

"5.1

81-PEwoLdeMhgiH

00080000100051

ni87 ni45472243315

B2070HM56.14.22.5

8527801

188.471.46

"2

42-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000110004100081

ni09 ni45623514335

B2070HM54.28.36

97101031

1.676.9636

"2

82-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000510058100032

ni99 ni66133804705

B2070HM55.53.87.21

801431661

3.676.078.46

"5.1

53-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000810052200072

ni111 ni66453244135

B2070HM58.59.87.21

031261591

5.474.8646

"2

34-PEwoLdeMhgiH

000620000300004

ni321 ni09833093025

B2080SM56.25.32.6

881612982

6.086.677.86

"5.2


Electrical Data

Note 1: To determine Minimum Circuit Ampacity, add the FLA’s for each fan motor, the FLA ofthe constant speed wheel motor or the Variable Frequency Drive. Then add the CPT amps and25 percent of the largest motor FLA.

Note 2: Fuse Recommendations: Size fuses at the unit FLA and 75% of the largest motor FLA,then select the next larger size Dual-Element, Time-Delay Fuses (LOW-PEAK©, FUSETRON©or equivalent). If the fuses don’t hold, consult N.E.C. for suitability of larger sized fuses.

Note 3: Use a 3KVA transformer for units with 120 volt lights. Otherwise use the 180 VAtransformer.

PH

spmAdaoLlluFesahP3 muminiMycneiciffEsrotoM.dtS

muminiMycneiciffE

hgiHsrotoM.ffEV802 V042 V084

6/1 6.0 6.0 3.0 - -

4/1 0.1 0.1 5.0 - -

2/1 4.2 2.2 1.1 - -

4/3 5.3 2.3 6.1 37 -

1 6.4 2.4 1.2 6.67 5.28

2/1-1 6.6 0.6 0.3 08 48

2 5.7 8.6 4.3 9.97 48

3 6.01 6.9 8.4 1.38 5.68

5 7.61 2.51 6.7 4.38 5.78

2/1-7 2.42 22 11 6.68 5.88

01 8.03 82 41 2.88 5.98

51 2.64 24 12 3.98 2.09

02 4.95 45 72 4.09 19

52 8.47 86 43 5.09 4.29

03 0.88 08 04 3.98 39

04 411 401 25 09 39

05 - 031 56 2.19 1.49

06 - - 77 29 6.39

57 - - 69 4.29 1.49

001 - - 421 5.29 1.49

PH )DFV(evirDycneuqerFelbairaVØ3 #ledoMawaksaY

2/1 9.3 9.3 - 4P02MA7V-RMIC

2/1 - - 6.1 2P04MA7V-RMIC

1 4.6 4.6 - 7P02MA7V-RMIC

1 - - 7.4 7P04MA7V-RMIC

)TPC(remrofsnarTrewoPlortnoC

AV051 7.0 6.0 4.0

AV005 4.2 0.2 0.1

AVK3 4.41 0.31 52.6


EP

Eq

uip

me

nt

Su

mm

ary

No

tes

:N

ote

s:

No

tes

:N

ote

s:

No

tes

:1.

Max

imum

airf

low

lim

itatio

ns v

ary.

Con

sult

SE

MC

O b

efor

e la

ying

out

uni

t with

vel

ociti

es g

reat

er th

an 5

25 fp

m o

n 2”

filte

rs, 5

25 fp

m o

n co

olin

g co

ils, a

nd 1

100

fpm

on

whe

els.

2. F

or o

ptio

nal w

ide

RA

sid

e, R

A s

ide

com

pone

nts

will

be

the

sam

e as

the

SA

sid

e co

mpo

nent

s.3.

Sin

gle

whe

el p

urge

vol

ume

base

d on

4”

PO

A-P

RA.

eziSledoM

35

931

8142

8253

34

htdiW

52.6852.68

52.8952.89

52.22152.221

52.64152.641

52.281

thgieH

52.0552.26

52.4752.68

52.8952.011

52.22152.431

52.641

egnaRMFC

riAylppuS

1

000,3-000,2005,4-000,3

000,8-005,4000,01-000,6

000,51-000,8000,81-000,11

000,32-000,51000,72-000,81

000,04-000,62egnaR

MFCriA

nruteR1

)dradnats(ezis

naF141

FPA181

FPA122

FPA152

FPA182

FPA123

FPA153

FPA193

FPA144

FPA

)Xnoitpo(

ezisnaF

-102

FPA152

FPA182

FPA123

FPA153

FPA193

FPA144

FPA194

FPA

)XXnoitpo(

ezisnaF

-122

FPA182

FPA123

FPA153

FPA193

FPA144

FPA194

FPA-

)leehw

elgnis(e

mulovegruP

3315

596609

86110441

53711691

79222662

thgiehniflatotlioclooc/tae

Hni

33ni

54ni

45ni

66ni

87ni

09ni

99ni

111ni

321

htgnelniflatotliocl ooc/tae

Hni

03ni

03ni

24ni

24ni

45ni

45ni

66ni

66ni

09

)thgieh(slioc

dekcatsforeb

muN

ni33

)1(ni

54)1(

ni72

)2(ni

33)2(

n93

)2(ni

54)2(

ni33

)3(ni

63)2(

ni24

)2(

--

--

--

-ni

93)1(

ni93

)1(

retlifylppuS

42x42)1(

42x42)2(

42x02)6(

42x42)6(

42x02)3(

42x02)21(

42x42)21(

42x42)51(

42x42)02(

42x21)2(

42x21)2(

--

02x02)9(

-42x21

)3(-

42x21)4(

retlifnruteR

42x42)1(

42x42)2(

42x42)2(

42x42)3(

42x42)6(

42x42)8(

42x02)6(

42x02)51(

42x42)51(

42x21)2(

42x21)2(

42x21)3(

42x21)3(

42x21)2(

-02x02

)9(-

42x21)3(

)sehcni(ezis

rooD13x31

34x3165x31

66x9166x91

66x9166x91

66x9166x91



Appendix E: Energy and Cost Savings for Desiccant

Wheel Selection

Label Air Flow, cfm Efficiency, %AHU #-# Rated Supply Air h(oa) h(ra) delta h cfm to lb/hr BTU/hr to tons Wheel Efficiency Q(cc,no) Q(cc, yes) Cooling Coil Load Savings Q(cc,no) Q(cc, yes) Cooling Coil Load SavingsAHU 1-1 9695 32.95 21.03 11.92 4.5 12000 66.30% 43.34 14.60 28.73 520.04 175.25 344.79AHU 1-2 7100 41.58 20.47 21.11 4.5 12000 67.56% 56.21 18.23 37.97 674.46 218.80 455.67AHU 1-3 11060 41.58 21.55 20.03 4.5 12000 67.06% 83.07 27.36 55.71 996.89 328.38 668.52AHU 2-1 16270 32.95 22.14 10.81 4.5 12000 72.60% 65.95 18.07 47.88 791.45 216.86 574.60AHU 2-2 13730 41.58 21.55 20.03 4.5 12000 64.56% 103.13 36.55 66.58 1237.55 438.59 798.96AHU 3-1 12130 32.95 21.55 11.4 4.5 12000 71.36% 51.86 14.85 37.00 622.27 178.22 444.05AHU 3-2 16700 41.58 21.49 20.09 4.5 12000 66.56% 125.81 42.07 83.74 1509.76 504.86 1004.90AHU 3-3 11200 42.62 21.55 21.07 4.5 12000 67.06% 88.49 29.15 59.34 1061.93 349.80 712.13

Label Air Flow, cfm Load, tons Load, MBHAHU #-# Rated Supply Air h(oa) h(ra) delta h cfm to lb/hr BTU/hr to tons Q(cc,no) Q(cc,no)AHU 1-1 9695 34.61 21.96 12.65 4.5 12000 45.99 551.89AHU 1-2 7100 41.58 21.96 19.62 4.5 12000 52.24 626.86AHU 1-3 11060 41.58 21.96 19.62 4.5 12000 81.37 976.49AHU 2-1 16270 31.86 21.96 9.9 4.5 12000 60.40 724.83AHU 2-2 13730 41.58 21.96 19.62 4.5 12000 101.02 1212.22AHU 3-1 12130 32.1 21.96 10.14 4.5 12000 46.12 553.49AHU 3-2 16700 41.58 21.96 19.62 4.5 12000 122.87 1474.44AHU 3-3 11200 41.58 21.96 19.62 4.5 12000 82.40 988.85

Label Cost, $ Total Savings, tonsAHU #-# $/ton Q(cc,no) Q(cc, yes) Q(cc, savings) Q(cc,no) Q(cc, yes) SavingsAHU 1-1 $400.00 43.34 14.60 28.73 $17,334.66 $5,841.78 $11,492.88AHU 1-2 $400.00 56.21 18.23 37.97 $22,482.15 $7,293.21 $15,188.94AHU 1-3 $400.00 83.07 27.36 55.71 $33,229.77 $10,945.89 $22,283.88AHU 2-1 $400.00 65.95 18.07 47.88 $26,381.81 $7,228.61 $19,153.19AHU 2-2 $400.00 103.13 36.55 66.58 $41,251.79 $14,619.63 $26,632.15AHU 3-1 $400.00 51.86 14.85 37.00 $20,742.30 $5,940.59 $14,801.71AHU 3-2 $400.00 125.81 42.07 83.74 $50,325.45 $16,828.83 $33,496.62AHU 3-3 $400.00 88.49 29.15 59.34 $35,397.60 $11,659.97 $23,737.63

617.86 200.90 416.97 $247,145.52 $80,358.52 $166,787.00TOTALS

CALCULATED COOLING COIL LOAD

ACTUAL COOLING COIL LOADEnthalpy, BTU/lb

Enthalpy, BTU/lb Load, tons Load, MBH

Load, tons

Conversion Factors

Conversion Factors

COST INFORMATIONCost, $



Appendix F: Existing Panel Boards



Appendix G: New Panel Boards with Desiccant

Wheel (Electrical Redesign)



Appendix H: Acoustical Calculations and Graphs

(Acoustical Analysis)



AHU 1-1: Main Duct Ratings and Curves

FIT Olin Physical Science LabMelbourne, FloridaFlorida Institute of Technology502075

Climate Changer 22 25 27 252017 23 AHU 1-1 Straight Duct(RU2) -1 0 0 0-1-2 0 Wall or Floor -4 -5 -5 -502 -5 Trans Loss Val -35 -37 -41 -46-34-32 -49 Rec Rm Corr -6 -7 -8 -8-7-7 -8 Junction (T,atten.) -4 -4 -4 -4-4-4 -4SubSum 5555555 55 50 43 366064 27 Regenerated sound from junction.SubSum 27364350556064 Straight Duct(RU2) -3 -1 -1 -1-5-8 -1

52 49 42 35 2656 55NC 45 RC 42(N) 49 dBARATINGS

Amy E. Pastor 04/04/05P:\THESIS\AHU11.PDT 1

THE TRANE ACOUSTICS PROGRAM

Project Name:Location:

Building Owner:Project Number:

Comments:

Octave Band DataLINE ELEMENT 250125 1k 2k 4k50063 COMMENTS

SUM

Run Date:Program User:Page Number:File Name:

Path Table View -- Path1:

Trane Acoustics Program Project Name: FIT Olin Physical Science Lab Location: Melbourne, Florida Building Owner: Florida Institute of Technology Program User: Amy E. Pastor File Name: P:\THESIS\AHU11.PDT Run Date: 04/04/05Project Number: 502075

Path View Graph--Path1

OC

TAV

E B

AN

D S

OU

ND

PR

ES

SU

RE

LEV

EL,dB

re 20 MIC

63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY, HZ

NC-65

NC-60

NC-55

NC-50

NC-45

NC-40

NC-35

NC-30

NC-25

NC-20

NC-15

NC = 45



OC

TAV

E B

AN

D S

OU

ND

PR

ES

SU

RE

LEV

EL,dB

re 20 MIC

63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


RC-50

RC-45

RC-40

RC-35

RC-30

RC-25

Decibel (dB) Levels

RC = 42(N)

Reference Line

Maximum Permitted Deviation



AHU 1-1: Branch Duct Ratings and Curves








Comments:


SUM


Path Table View -- Path1 Branch1 :



OC

TAV

E B

AN

D S

OU

ND

PR

ES

SU

RE

LEV

EL,dB

re 20 MIC

63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


NC-65

NC-60

NC-55

NC-50

NC-45

NC-40

NC-35

NC-30

NC-25

NC-20

NC-15

NC = 44