Tobacco Documents Online

i Virginia Tech ® VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY Period 2 Project Report Evaluation of Displacement Ventilation and Conventional Variable Air Volume Systems for Indoor Air Quality Control 16 May 1992 to 31 August 1993 Sponsor: PHILIP MORRIS U.S.A. Indoor Environment Program College of Architecture and Urban Studies Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia

Period 2 Project Report EVALUATION OF DISPLACEMENT VENTILATION AND CONVENTIONAL VARIABLE AIR VOLUME SYSTEMS FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY CONTROL Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overall Objective 1.2 Summary of Work During Period 1 1.3 Objectives for Period 2 1.4 Overview of Work During Period 2 2 TASKS CONDUCTED PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF RDF II 2.1 Construction of RDF II 2.2 Science Advisory Committee Meetings 2.3 Progress Reports 2.4 Publications 2.5 Protocol Development 2.6 Development of Performance Criteria 2.7 Modeling of Systems 2.8 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 2.9 Database Development 2.10 Testing at Richmond 2.11 Acquisition and Development of Instrumentation 3. TASKS AFTER COMPLETION OF RDF II 3.1 Baseline Data on Systems in RDF II 3.2 Analysis of Data 4 FUTURE PLANS 1 3 15 APPENDICES

18 August 1993 Period 2 Project Report EVALUATION OF DISPLACEMENT VENTILATION AND CONVENTIONAL VARIABLE AIR VOLUME SYSTEMS FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY CONTROL 16 May 1992 to 31 August 1993 Sponsor: PHILIP MORRIS, U.S.A. Indoor Environment Program College of Architecture and Urban Studies Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia 1 INTRODUCTION This report is presented to Philip Morris U.S.A., sponsors of the project titled Evaluation of displacement ventilation and conventional variable air volume systems for Indoor air quality control, after completion of the second period - 16 May 1992 through 31 August 1993. The objectives and tasks to be performed by Indoor Environment Program, Virginia Polytechnic institute and State University, under this project were specified In the contract dated 2 November 1992 (Appendix Al) and modified through an addendum dated 23 November 1992 (Appendix A2). The procedures and tasks described In our proposal of 9 October 1992 (Appendix B) were incorporated into the contract by reference. ~ 1.1 Overall Objective ~ ~ The overall objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of displacement CA ventilation and other control technologies in providing acceptable indoor air quality (IAQ) when ~ intemai contaminants, including environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), are present. ~

Period 2 Project Report / Evaluation of Displacement Ventilation ..... Page 2 1.2 Summary of Work During Period 1 The first period of the research project (May 1991 - May 1992) focused on planning the overall study, induding the design of the new Research and Demonstration Facility (RDF II), literature review and the development of research protocols. Two test spaces served by different heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems were planned. One of these is a conventional variable air volume (VAV) system and the other a vertical displacement ventilation (VDV) system. It was originally intended that after initial systems tests, occupants would be selected and would work for extended periods in the two test spaces. During this period, procedures for measuring human response were developed, potential occupant groups for the long-term study were Identified, some of the instrumentation was acquired, and the Science Advisory Committee was formed. After detailed discussions at the meeting with the Science Advisory Committee on 25 March 1992, it was decided to modify the approach originally proposed. Rather than starting with studies involving long-term occupancy, the first series of studies would focus on system evaluation with simulated load and with short-term human occupancy loads. This change of focus was based on three reasons: 1) the difficulty encountered In selecting statistically balanced populations for long-term occupancy; 2) concern regarding the likelihood that statistically valid and reliable data would result from the small sample sizes for long-term occupancy tests, and 3) the higher likelihood for obtaining credible results with short-term loads. 1.3 Objectives for Period 2 As stated in the Proposal and Contract, three objectives for the second period were: o To complete construction of Phase II of RDF inciuding installation and commissioning of HVAC systems. o To develop models of system performance and collect data In the Richmond test facility (the FACT chamber) to be used for model validation and prediction of system performance.

Period 2 Project Report / Evaluation of Displacement Ventilation ..... Page 3 o After substantial completion of RDF II, obtain and compare baseline performance data of the HVAC systems as Influenced by simulated loads. 1.4 Overview of Work During Period 2 During this period, construction of RDF II was completed and commissioned. While construction was being completed, a revised research protocol was developed for tests involving simulated loads; modeling for prediction of VDV system performance was developed; and data were collected at the Philip Morris's Filtered Air Cleaning Technology (FACT) chamber for comparison with VDV system performance as installed at RDF. Also during this period, six papers were prepared and presented or accepted for presentation at national or international conferences. These papers described performance criteria, modeling techniques, experimental data, and RDF Ii. After construction was completed, Initial performance data were obtained and compared for the VAV and VDV systems under minimum and simulated load conditions. To assure objectivity, the External Science Advisory Committee continued to review and advise on the progress of this project. 2 TASKS CONDUCTED PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF RDF II Tasks 1 through 5 specified on page 2 of the Contract have been completed. They are discussed in this report by the specific tasks proposed in Attachment A of the Contract (i.e. Appendix B). Tasks Al through A4 and B1 through B7 of Appendix B are discussed In this section. 2.1 Construction of RDF 11 (Task Al) The proposed design for RDF II was intemal reviewed by IEP and the Facilities

Period 2 Project Report / Evaluadon of Displacement Ventilation ..... Page 4 Planning and Construction office of VPI&SU. The plans and specifications were then submitted to Rollins and Associates for an independent cost estimate. Because of the significant overrun detected, it was necessary to revise the design documents to comply with available budget. After re-design and further negotiations with the University, the final capital budget was approved by the University on 9 June 1992. After approval of the bid documents by the State on 13 August 1992, bids were requisitioned on 16 August 1992. Eight bids were received and a Contract for construction was awarded on 17 September 1992. The anticipated substantial completion date was 24 February 1993. A detailed report of the design and construction progress through October 1992 is endosed as Appendix C. Due to contractor delays, the actual substantial completion did not occur until 9 April 1993. As a result of the flooding in May 1993, commissioning was not conducted until 10 and 11 June 1993. During commissioning, several defects were detected In the mechanical systems and in the control systems. Although these defects have not yet been fully corrected, adequate control was obtained to allow acquisition of initial baseline data for comparison with results of data from the FACT chamber in Richmond. The costs and the effectiveness of the commissioning process have been analyzed for RDF II, and results are reported In a technical paper accepted for presentation for IAQ '93 in Philadelphia, PA, November 1993. The manuscript for this technical paper is enclosed as paper six in Appendix G. Highlights of this analysis include: o Total cost of commissioning was 2.5% of project budget, which may be considered an upper limit due to the complex nature of this small projectt o No Identifiable cost avoidances due to commissioning were detected during the construction phase. o Substantial cost avoidance, estimated for the first year of operation at up to 50% of the commissioning cost, was achieved due to defects detected by commissioning during the acceptance phase.

Period 2 Project Report / Evaluation of Displacement Ventilation ..... Page 5 2.2 Science Advisory Committee Meetings (Task A2) The IEP Science Advisory Committee met on 29 January 1993. The minutes are Included as Appendix D. The status report to the SAC induded, among other issues, update on construction of RDF II building and this research project. The membership of the SAC has changed. Dr. Demetrios Moschandreas has joined and Dr. Phil Morey has resigned. The current members of the SAC are: P. Ole Fanger, Ph.D. Professor and Director, Laboratory of Heating & Air Conditioning Technical University of Denmark, Bldg. 402-A, DK 2800 Lyngby Denmark Brian P. Leaderer, Ph.D. Professor of Epidemiology, Yale School of Medicine, John B. Pierce Laboratory, 290 Congress Avenue, New Haven, CT 06510 Demetrios Moschandreas Visiting Professor, Pritzker Department of Environmental Engg., Ph.D. Illinois Institute of Technology, Alumni Memorial Hall, Room 204, 3200 South State Street, Chicago, Illinois 60616-3793 Andrew K. Persily, Ph.D. Leader, Indoor Air Quality and Ventilation Group, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Bldg. 226, Rm. 13114, Gaithersburg, MD 20760 Richard Wright, P.E. Director of Technology, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1791 Tullie Circle, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30329 2.3 Progress Reports (Task A3) Two quarterly progress reports were submitted during this project period (Appendices E and F). The first of these was submitted 18 November 1992 and the second on 4 March 1993.

Period 2 Project Report / Evaluation of Displacement Ventiladon ..... Page 6 2.4 Publications (Task A4) During period two of this project, six technical papers have been published or accepted for publication. One of these (#4 below) was expanded at the request of Buildings and Environment journal for publication in a special Issue. Copies of these papers are enclosed as Appendix G. Titles and authors for the six papers are: 1. Schubert RP, J Seelen, JE Woods and S Arora. "Design and Construction of a Facility for Research and Demonstration of Healthy Building Concepts." Presented at the AIA Symposium: Designing Hea/thy Buildings. November 1992. 2. Woods JE, S Arora, NP Sensharma and BW Olesen. "Rational Building Performance and Prescriptive Criteria for Improved Indoor Environmental Quality." Proceedings of Indoor Air '93, vol. 3, pp. 471-476. 3. M. Koganei, GT Holbrook, BW Olesen and JE Woods. "Modeling the Thermal and Indoor Air Quality Performance of Vertical Displacement Ventilation Systems." Proceedings of indoor Air '93, vol. 5, pp. 241-246. 4. (a) Olesen BW, M Koganei, GT Holbrook, J Seelen and JE Woods. "Evaiuation of a Vertical Displacement Ventilation System". Proceedings of Indoor Air '93, vol. 5, pp. 265- 270. (b) expanded version of this paper has been submitted for publication in Buildings and Environment. 5. Sensharma NP, PK Edwards, JE Woods and J Seelen. "A Characterization of N Methodologies for Assessing Human Responses to the Indoor Environment". Proceedings~0 of Indoor Air '93, vol. 1, pp. 785-790. M+ Cli ~ 6. Seelen J, JE Woods and JJ Harmon. A Case Study: "Cost Implications for HVAC ~ Commissioning". To be presented at IAQ '93, Philadelphia, PA, November 1993. ~ N

Period 2 Project Report / Erreluation of Displacement VenblaGon ..... Page 7 Papers 3, 4 and 5 were presented in poster sessions. Copies of these posters are also endosed in Appendix G. 2.5 Protocol Development (Task 1911) The protocol for the tests conducted in the FACT Chamber during Period 2 Is described in Paper #4b, Appendix G. To the extent possible, the physical and environmental conditions for the Initial set of tests conducted in the VAV and VDV rooms of RDF Ii were consistent with those In the FACT Chamber at Richmond. For the initial tests in RDF II, both the VAV and VDV HVAC systems were adjusted to provide a"constant" 750 cfm (1275 m3/hr) outdoor air ventilation rate. Moreover, the supply air terminal boxes were adjusted to provide constant air volumes to the two test rooms. Both rooms were adjusted to maintain constant dry bulb and dew point temperatures of 75F (23.9C) and 54F (12.2C), respectively. A summary of the baseline physical and environmental test conditions in the FACT Chamber, together with comparable conditions for RDF II, is shown below: FACT Chamber RDF II Floor area, m2 18.6 63.4/room Volume, m3 59.6 173.8/room Minimum sensible load, W/m2 floor area (Lighting only) 13 11 Simulated sensible load, W/m2 floor area [Lighting, 5 (9 in RDF II) simulated occupants and 5(9 In RDF II) simulated computer loads)] 44 44 Outdoor Air Ventilation Rate, m3lhr.m2 fl area 27 20 Total Supply Air Flow Rate, m3/hr.m2 fl area VDV (i.e., FACT) System 27 53 VAV -- 20 Also to the extent possible, the methods of data acquisition from the VDV and VAV rooms at RDF II were the same as those used for data acquisition from the FACT Chamber and

PerioEi 2 Project Report / Evaluation of DisplacemenC Ventilaqon ..... Page 8 described in Paper #4b, Appendix G. The dosing and sampling locations in the VDV and VAV rooms are shown in Fig. )OC)C. The methods used to analyze the data acquired from the VDV and VAV rooms were the same as those for the FACT Chamber and described In Paper #4b, Appendix G. These inciuded vertical temperature differences (eT), the Air Diffusion Performance Index (ADPI), and percent dissatisfied (PD,, and PD<15%) for thermal performance evaluation, and Age of Air (ACE) and Contaminant Removal Effectiveness (CRE) for air quality evaluation. 2.6 Development of Performance Criteria (Task B2) A rational set of building performance and prescriptive criteria for Improved indoor environmental quality have been developed in this task. These criteria and their rationale have been described in Paper #2, Appendix G. The conceptual model for the development of these criteria is shown in Fig. XXX. It indicates that from a pragmatic perspective, the relationship between acceptable human response, exposure, systems and sources (i.e., loads) rests on a platform of economics. Two sets of values for performance criteria are proposed: the first set corresponds to the best quality of environment (i.e., exposure) that can be feasibly obtained; the second set represents minimum conditions at which clinical signs of disease or illness are not known to exist and which a predetermined percentage of occupants will find acceptable (e.g., 80%). Exposure criteria corresponding to the selected human response criteria within this range of occupant acceptability are then identified and selected based on the following three considerations: N o to assure the best practical association with the selected human response criteria, fl exposure criteria should be expressed in terms directly related to the relevant human &A sensory receptors (e.g., thermal, olfactory, visual, auditory); ~ ~ o to enable the transformation of exposure parameters to system performance ~ wP~