Introduction
The Ed Roberts Campus
Berkeley, CA
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau
Mechanical Option
Penn State A.E. Senior Thesis
April 14, 2015
Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects, Photo by Tim Griffith
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
ASHRAE Climate Zone 3C
Existing Systems
99.6% Heating DB: 37°F
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
0.4% Cooling DB: 81.8°F
MCWB: 65°F
Conclusion
Google Maps
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Water Source Heat Pump System
With 100% Outdoor Air
2 Gas-fired Boilers Provide Hot
Water
• 900 MBH (Each)
• 98% Efficiency
2 Cooling Towers Provide Chilled
Water
• 100 Ton Capacity (Each)
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Water Source Heat Pump System
With 100% Outdoor Air
2 Gas-fired Boilers Provide Hot
Water
• 900 MBH (Each)
• 98% Efficiency
2 Cooling Towers Provide Chilled
Water
• 100 Ton Capacity (Each)
5 Air Handling Units
• 3 Constant Air Volume Units
• 2 Variable Air Volume Units
• Paired with Exhaust Fans
Water Source Heat Pumps
• Total of 63 Units
Range of Capacity: 0.75 – 3.25 tons
• COP: 4.1 – 4.4
• EER: 13.7 - 16.0
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Water Source Heat Pump System
With 100% Outdoor Air
2 Gas-fired Boilers Provide Hot
Water
• 900 MBH (Each)
• 98% Efficiency
2 Cooling Towers Provide Chilled
Water
• 100 Ton Capacity (Each)
5 Air Handling Units
• 3 Constant Air Volume Units
• 2 Variable Air Volume Units
Radiant Floor
• Paired with Exhaust Fans
Water Source Heat Pumps
• Total of 63 Units
Range of Capacity: 0.75 – 3.25 tons
• COP: 4.1 – 4.4
• EER: 13.7 - 16.0
Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Water Source Heat Pump System
With 100% Outdoor Air
2 Gas-fired Boilers Provide Hot
Water
• 900 MBH (Each)
• 98% Efficiency
2 Cooling Towers Provide Chilled
Water
• 100 Ton Capacity (Each)
5 Air Handling Units
• 3 Constant Air Volume Units
• 2 Variable Air Volume Units
• Paired with Exhaust Fans
Radiant Floor
• Heating and Cooling Capacity
• Serves Lobby and Courtyard
Areas – 7,150 sq. ft.
Water Source Heat Pumps
• Total of 63 Units
Range of Capacity: 0.75 – 3.25 tons
• COP: 4.1 – 4.4
• EER: 13.7 - 16.0
Coverage
Area Served
Area (sqft)
Cooling
Cap.
(MBH)
Heating
Cap.
(MBH)
Zone 1
Courtyard
North
1800
27
18
Zone 2
Courtyard
South
2000
30
20
Zone 3
Lobby
3350
58
30
The Ed Roberts Campus
Trace 700 Model vs. Real Building
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Modeled
Building
Capacity
Cooling
146 Tons
200 Tons
Heating
2,200 MBH
1800 MBH
Energy Use
• ~30% Less Electricity Use
• ~30% More Gas Use
The Ed Roberts Campus
Energy Use by HVAC Equipment Type
60000
Trace 700 Model vs. Real Building
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Modeled
Cooling
146 Tons
kWh
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
40000
Building
Capacity
30000
20000
10000
200 Tons
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Cooling Tower
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Heating
2,200 MBH
1800 MBH
May
Jun
Tower Fans
Jul
Aug
Sep
Ceiling Pumps
Oct
Nov
Dec
Fans
Boiler - Natural Gas Use
2,500.0
Energy Use
• ~30% Less Electricity Use
• ~30% More Gas Use
2,000.0
Therms
Introduction
50000
1,500.0
1,000.0
500.0
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
The Ed Roberts Campus
Energy Use by HVAC Equipment Type
60000
Trace 700 Model vs. Real Building
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Modeled
Cooling
146 Tons
kWh
Building
Capacity
30000
80,000
20000
70,000
10000
200 Tons
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Cooling Tower
• Energy Use
Conclusion
Heating
2,200 MBH
1800 MBH
May
Jun
Tower Fans
Jul
Aug
Sep
Ceiling Pumps
Oct
Nov
Dec
Fans
Boiler - Natural Gas Use
2,500.0
Energy Use
• ~30% Less Electricity Use
• ~30% More Gas Use
2,000.0
60,000
50,000
1,500.0
30,000
20,000
-
1,000.0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Trace
Model
40,000
10,000
500.0
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Electricity Consumption [kWh]
Existing Systems
Existing Systems
• Equipment
• Cooling and Heating
• 100% OA System
• Radiant Floor
90,000
40000
Therms
Introduction
Electricity Use
50000
Existing
Building
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Ceiling-Mounted, Ducted Indoor
Units
• 6,000-48,000 Btu/h Capacities
• .32 in wg Static Pressure
c
VRF Heat Recovery System
• Air-cooled Condenser
(Outdoor) Unit
• Variable-Speed Scroll
Compressor
• Simultaneous Cooling And
Heating
• Heat Recovery Between
Indoor Units
Johnson Controls
c
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
c
Johnson Controls
The Ed Roberts Campus
VRF Mechanical Zoning Plan
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
First Floor
Second Floor
Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects
Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects
Nominal Size of
Outdoor Unit
[tons]
IEER
COP
VRF Zone 1
26 (10+10+6)
18.8
3.56
VRF Zone 2
22 (10+6+6)
18.8
3.61
VRF Zone 3
18 (6+6+6)
19.2
3.49
VRF Zone 4
28 (8+8+6+6)
21.2
3.87
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Dedicated Outside Air System
(DOAS)
• Supplies Filtered, Dehumidified
Ventilation Air
• Variable-Speed Fan Operation
• DX Cooling, Electric Heating
Required
Airflow
[cfm]
Model
DOAS Unit
Nominal Airflow
[cfm]
VRF Zone 1
4,426.47
JDHA-210
2250-5500
VRF Zone 2
5,480.2
JDHA-300
3750-8700
VRF Zone 3
3,808.54
JDHA-210
2250-5500
VRF Zone 4
5,867.72
JDHA-300
3750-8700
Lobby/Reception
2,503.64
JDHA-120
1500-3550
The Ed Roberts Campus
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Utility Costs: WSHP vs. VRF
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Jan
20,000
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
18,000
8.86%
16,000
5.55% -2.40% -13.90% -17.26% -26.34% -30.78% -26.67% -28.40% -18.22% -5.59% 6.78%
14,000
Utility Cost [$]
Introduction
% Change in Utility Cost - WSHP vs. VRF
12,000
WSHP
10,000
VRF
8,000
6,000
Yearly Utility Cost Change: 14.3%
4,000
2,000
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Yearly Savings: $23,200
The Ed Roberts Campus
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
• 2014 Supplement to NIST Manual
135
Existing System
Energy Costs
VRF Energy
Costs
Net Savings
$4,336,036.32
$3,718,476.30
$617,560.02
Discounted
Investment
Payback
Period
• Discount Rate: 3%
$364,300.00
20 Years
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Solar Thermal Water Heating System
• Domestic Water Heating
• Radiant Floor Space Heating
Analysis: CombiSys
• Solar Thermal Water Heating
Simulation
Solar Thermal Schematic
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Solar Thermal Water Heating System
• Domestic Water Heating
• Radiant Floor Space Heating
Model Inputs:
Analysis: CombiSys
• Solar Thermal Water Heating
Simulation
• Collector Performance
Characteristics: η0=0.687, a1=1.505
[W/m2-K], a2=0.011 [W/m2-K]
• Collector Area: 90 m2 (970 ft2)
• Dom. Hot Water Load: 3 gal/d per
occupant, 50 occupants
• Space Loss Coefficient: 500 W/K
(~1700 Btu/h/°F)
The Ed Roberts Campus
Comparison of Collector Angles
100.00
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Solar Thermal Water Heating System
• Domestic Water Heating
• Radiant Floor Space Heating
Analysis: CombiSys
• Solar Thermal Water Heating
Simulation
Model Inputs:
• Collector Area: 90
m2 (970
ft2)
• Collector Performance
Characteristics: η0=0.687, a1=1.505
[W/m2-K], a2=0.011 [W/m2-K]
Solar Fraction (%)
95.00
90.00
85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
Month
47 Degree
• Dom. Hot Water Load: 3 gal/d per
occupant, 50 occupants
• Space Loss Coefficient: 500 W/K
(~1700 Btu/h/°F)
5.00
37 Degree
27 Degree
Gross Roof Area:
~2,500 sq. ft.
The Ed Roberts Campus
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Solar Gains vs. Building Loads
20,000,000
18,000,000
Model Inputs:
• Collector Area: 90
m2 (970
ft2)
• Collector Performance
Characteristics: η0=0.687, a1=1.505
[W/m2-K], a2=0.011 [W/m2-K]
16,000,000
Avg. Solar Fraction
• 91%
Avg. Collector
Efficiency
• 24%
14,000,000
12,000,000
Btu
Introduction
CombiSys Solar Thermal
Simulation
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
• Dom. Hot Water Load: 3 gal/d per
occupant, 50 occupants
• Space Loss Coefficient: 500 W/K
(~1700 Btu/h/°F)
-
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
DHW
May
Jun
Space Load
Jul
Aug
Useful Gain
Sep
Oct
Aux Heat
Nov
Dec
The Ed Roberts Campus
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
100,000.00
90,000.00
80,000.00
70,000.00
Model Inputs:
60,000.00
• Collector Area: 90 m2 (970 ft2)
Btu
Introduction
CombiSys Solar Thermal
Simulation
Solar Gains vs. Building Loads
50,000.00
• Collector Performance
Characteristics: η0=0.687, a1=1.505
[W/m2-K], a2=0.011 [W/m2-K]
40,000.00
• Dom. Hot Water Load: 3 gal/d per
occupant, 50 occupants
• Space Loss Coefficient: 500 W/K
(~1700 Btu/h/°F)
10,000.00
30,000.00
20,000.00
1
2
DHW
3
Space Load
Useful Gains
4
Aux Heat
5
The Ed Roberts Campus
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Introduction
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Yearly Cost
Savings
Net Savings
$3,058.63
$80,074.93
Discounted
Investment
Payback
Period
~$75,000
25+ Years
The Ed Roberts Campus
Mechanical Depth
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
• Solar Thermal
• Radiant Floor and
DHW
• System Sizing
• Energy Use
• Peak 1-Hour Demand of 150 gal
• Constant, Year-Round Load
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
Solar
Fraction
Collector
Efficiency
96%
23%
Yearly Cost
Investment
Savings
Payback
Period
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
-
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
DHW Load vs.Useful Gains
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
-
Solar Fraction (%)
Existing Systems
Mechanical Depth
• Variable Refrigerant
Flow System
• Equipment
• Unit Sizing
• Energy Use
Btu
Introduction
Alternative Application:
Domestic Hot Water Only
DHW
Load
Solar
Gains
Solar
Fraction
$2,016
~$25,000
18 Years
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
• Roof Structure Redesign
• Current Structure
• New Design Criteria
• Results
Current Roof Structure
• Structural Steel Framing
• 18 Gage Verco W3 Metal Decking
• 3-1/2” LW Concrete Topping
Current Roof Structure
• Max Unshored Clear Span: 15’-7” @3-Span
• Allowable Superimposed Load for 11’-0”
Span Condition: 207 psf
Mechanical Depth
Typical Framing Plan for South East Roof:
Structural Breadth
3 Spans @10’-8”
Conclusion
Verco Decking, Inc.
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
• Roof Structure Redesign
• Current Structure
• New Design Criteria
• Results
Current Roof Structure
• Structural Steel Framing
• 18 Gage Verco W3 Metal Decking
• 3-1/2” LW Concrete Topping
Mechanical Depth
Solar Panel Array for DHW and Space Heating
Structural Breadth
• 30 Panels at 225 lb/panel
• Vertical Pull Force Due To Wind: ~610 lb
• Panel Area on Roof: 1,100 sq ft.
Conclusion
• Total Additional Load: ~55 psf
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Vulcraft Deck Manuals
3VLI Composite Deck, LW Concrete Topping
• 19 Gage, 2” Topping
• Self-Weight: 35 psf
• Maximum SLL @10’-8” Spans: 105 psf
Arup, San Francisco
The Ed Roberts Campus
Introduction
Existing Systems
Variable Refrigerant Flow System
Solar Thermal Water Heating System
• First Cost: $364,300
• Yearly Energy Savings: $23,200
• Payback Period: 20 Years
Two Options:
• Space Heating and DHW
• First Cost: $75,000
• Payback: 25+ Years
Mechanical Depth
• DHW Only
• First Cost: $25,000
• Payback: 18 Years
Structural Breadth
Conclusion
Anderson Clemenceau – Mechanical Option
Senior Thesis 2015
Conclusion:
• Not Recommended For A Complete
Renovation
• Could Be Considered For New Construction
Conclusion:
• Not Recommended
• Could More Economical In Different
Climate Conditions