A S H RA E

JOURNAL

The following article was published in ASHRAE Journal, February 1998. Copyright 1998 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. It is presented for educational purposes only. This article may not be copied and/or distributed electronically or in paper form without permission of ASHRAE.

Solving Noise Control Problems

By Frank Guenther, P . Eng.
any mechanical engineers are not familiar with silencer developments beyond standard dissipative silencers for air-handling systems in the form of rectangular (straight and elbow) and circular (cylindrical and cone) that are common in the HVAC industry. These relatively simple, limited silencers are described in the ASHRAE Handbook Applications. Learning about other available silencer solutions could solve many common problems, including space congestion with resulting system effects, high velocities and excessive energy consumption, low frequency noise, indoor air contamination and total cost. Many silencer product solutions described in engineering papers and journals focus primarily on the disciplines of aerodynamics, acoustics and noise control. This article proposes to inform those in the HVAC industry of the progress being made in silencer designs and applications and to explore practical solutions available to solve todays noise control problems. Inadequate Space The most common factor that compromises noise control design is lack of adequate space, including insufficient straight duct, insufficient cross-sectional area or insufficient duct length. Space constraints will often: force the noise source to be located very near, or even in, the occupied space. eliminate the possibility of long straight runs of duct and introduce short runs with multiple bends. force smaller duct sizes to carry the same airflow volumes, yielding duct velocities higher than the recommended levels. ASHRAE guidelines for proper acoustical and aerodynamic designs are sometimes impossible or too costly to achieve. The mechanical engineer must find more practical, innovative solutions that fulfill project criteria maintain system performance
34 ASHRAE Journal

An aero-acoustic laboratory designed for ultra-low frequency measurements.

and meet the projects budget. Rather than re-designing a system to fit the silencer, the system designer needs to evaluate the available alternatives that will fit the system. Insufficient Straight Duct Recommendations for straight duct lengths between components are usually not achievable. Various configurations of silencers are available, including standard elbow silencers, and the design of T-silencers (two 90 degree elbows back-to-back), Y-silencers (two greater than 90 degree elbows back-to-back), T-Shirt (two less than 90 degree elbows back-to-back), Zsilencers (two elbows of any angle), transitional silencers and combinations of all these. In these designs, system ductwork configurations minimize aerodynamic system effects (see Figure 1). These special silencers have aerodynamically designed splitters, or baffles of varying quantity and thickness, as well as air passages of varying sizes to turn the air efficiently and minimize pressure drop. Insufficient Duct Length Silencers should be located as close to the fan (noise source) as possible. However, there is often very little or no duct length, About the Author
Frank Guenther, P. Eng., is the founder and now consultant to Vibro-Acoustics of Toronto, Ontario, and Nashville, Tenn. He has specialized in noise control of fans and mechanical systems for 37 years. He has also been a member of ASHRAE TC 2.6, Sound and Vibration Control.
February 1998

NOISE
such as at supply fan inlets in plenums. As another example, axial fans are frequently used in return systems where duct length is minimal or non-existent, leaving little room to incorporate silencers. Fan silencers are standard in heavy industry and have been easily and successfully adapted to HVAC applications where duct construction is much lighter. Using sheet metal for low pressure and heavier gauges for higher pressure applications, fan silencers are aerodynamically and structurally designed to fit directly onto centrifugal or axial fans (see Figure 2). Inlet box silencers can be configured to reduce swirl effects into the centrifugal fans inlet and collect more than one return duct. Discharge silencers accommodate the high outlet velocities and unique flow profiles of centrifugal fans to minimize pressure drop. Both require structural design to withstand the higher turbulent forces close to the fan. Additional solutions to provide better aerodynamic flow and to minimize energy consumption include incorporating special bell-mouth fittings onto silencer inlets or cone silencers on axial fan outlets. Fans that consume less horsepower usually generate less noise and need less silencing. In some cases, silencers are designed to actually improve aerodynamic conditions in close proximity to fans. High Velocity Airflow Space restrictions limit the cross-sectional areas of ducts, which often forces velocities above ASHRAE-recommended levels. High duct velocities (>2000 fpm) limit the use of standard splitter silencers because of increased pressure drops, including system effects. ASHRAE recommends keeping a silencers Total Pressure Drop (TPD) to less than 0.35" (TPD = Catalog Silencer PD, per ASTM E-477, + System Effects). By utilizing silencers with absorptive materials positioned partially on the outside of the duct cross-section dimension, the silencers air passage area can be increased. Space restrictions often result from duct and beam crossovers, which leaves space in between for silencer body enlargement. This lowers the pressure drop without significantly reducing the acoustic performance (see farthest left elbow silencer in Figure 1). It may be practical to consider silencers with glass fiber and/or expansion chambers completely outside the airstream in higher duct velocity systems with relaFebruary 1998

tively long duct runs, where the fan system cannot tolerate too much pressure drop and long-term energy cost is more important than initial silencing cost. By allowing the silencer outboard dimensions to exceed the duct cross-section dimensions and maintaining internal dimensions equal to the connecting duct dimensions, high velocity silencers will have a pressure drop very close to that of an empty Fig.1: Various special silencer configurations, developed out of the standard elbow silencer (upper left silencer duct (Curve C in Fig- shown), are designed to fit-the-duct. ure 3). High velocity silencers can be straight or include bends and transitions. The most common thickness of silencer acoustic treatment is 4 in. (100 mm) for fan noise control applied to all four duct walls, but 6 in. (150 mm) or 8 in. (200 mm) is more effective in the low frequency range. For higher duct aspect ratios, application to the larger two walls is the most economic and effective silencing technique. Excessive Pressure Drop/Energy Consumption Standard silencing systems can create airflow restrictions that cause the fan to use more energy and create more noise. This is particularly an issue in facilities such as hospitals, where the HVAC systems continuously operate at capacity. Also, the type of fans that have been selected may be very sensitive to added pressure, so that the addition of silencers reduces flow capacity. Examples include retrofit noise control projects and silencing added to packaged equipment (such as cooling towers and air-cooled condensers). Silencer product solutions described under the section on high velocity would also apply in these situations. Solutions include silencers with absorptive materials positioned partially or completely outside the airstream, with few or no splitters or centerbodies. Pressure drops can be reduced to almost that of bare duct. Low Frequency Noise Centrifugal fans and packaged equip-

Fig. 2: Retrofit heavy-duty fan silencer is squeezed into position on a boiler room FD fan. Note that the outside body dimension is much greater than fan connection size to reduce pressure drop and energy consumption.

ment close to occupied space commonly generate low frequency noise problems that are difficult to attenuate using common silencing techniques. Another common source of low frequency noise are Forward Curve (FC) fans operating at high cfms and static pressures. Since
ASHRAE Journal 35

mid and high frequency noise is often naturally attenuated by the duct system, the primary need is low frequency insertion loss. In these situations, traditional standard silencers may over-attenuate at mid frequencies and under perform in the low frequency range. Special low frequency silencers are an extension of standard silencers and are used with very large modules that have very thick splitters. Enlarging the silencer body enhances acoustic performance further (Curve B in Figure 3). In the extreme case, acoustic plenums with 4 in. (100 mm), 6 in. (150 mm) or 8 in. (200 mm) thick acoustic media used as silencers are also effective low-frequency attenuators (Curve D in Figure 3). Ultra Low Frequency Noise Silencers are ineffective for typical HVAC air-handling systems in the ultra low frequency range of 12 to 40 Hz. Ultra low frequency noise problems must be prevented by good system design, particularly in regards to fan selections and duct design. Corrections after installation usually are inconvenient and expensive or impossible to achieve. Silencing is possible in the 63 Hz octave band if extra space is available. More length is required for traditional silencing, and more volume is needed for increased silencer body sizes or acoustic plenum noise control. A third possibility is active noise control (ANC), which is the only silencer method promoted based on its potential ultra low frequency capabilities. ANC is a highly specialized solution to certain ultra low frequency and pure tone problems. Lost in the excitement surrounding ANC are practical application limitations, including low airflow velocity and minimal turbulence. For example, the maximum recommended ANC silencer velocity is 1500 fpm (8 m/s), which is exceeded in most fan room ducts. As stated earlier, low frequency noise problems usually coexist with space constraints. While a vast array of HVAC system designs exist, few limit the airflow turbulence to acceptable levels for ANC. In addition, because it is ineffective in duct systems in the mid to high frequency ranges, ANC must be applied together with passive silencing as a hybrid design. Breakout Noise Breakout noise is the greatest low frequency and ultra low frequency noise problem challenging engineers today. Many designers of HVAC systems consider only the most obvious noise path: from the fan down the duct to the diffusers or return openings. Other noise paths are often overlooked. It is estimated that in 50% of HVAC supply systems, the most problematic path is noise breakout from the duct into the occupied space. Rooftop unit duct configurations are typical examples. Low frequency noise breaks out of the duct feeding the space below. This is a greater problem than the noise that travels further down the duct and out the diffusers. Ducts penetrating MER walls adjacent to occupied spaces are other sources of breakout or break-in noise. Location of the silencer is critical when trying to minimize breakout noise. It should be positioned close enough to the noise source to ensure that the noise is attenuated before it has a chance to break out of the duct (see Figure 4). In mechanical rooms, silencers are often located at the MER wall to attenuate duct break-in noise from high noise level equipment. If a silencer needs to be located over a critical space, the addition of mass/stiffness to the silencers outer walls is highly
36 ASHRAE Journal Fig. 3: Performance comparison of four silencer designs having identical length (five feet), connection size (12 in. x 12 in. [305 mm x 305 mm] and airflow (1,000 cfm [472 L/ s]). Reference Vibro-Acoustics Report No. 3476. Curve A Standard medium velocity silencer; included for reference. Curve B Medium velocity silencer with enlarged outside body (12 in. x 20 in. [305 mm x 508 mm]). Curve C High velocity silencer with no internal splitters obstructing airflow and enlarged outside body (12 in. x 20 in. [305 mm x 508 mm]). Curve D Low frequency plenum silencer with outside body dimensions of 54 in. x 48 in. (1372 mm x 1219 mm).

PD=0.12"

PD=0.13"

PD=0.02"

PD=0.02"

effective at reducing breakout noise. This will minimize the noise breaking out of the silencer before it has a chance to be attenuated. If the silencer cannot be installed at the noise barrier (MER wall), high transmission loss (HTL) ductwork installed between the barrier and the silencer is also effective. Packaged rooftop AHUs are a common source of low frequency noise problems and require special treatment. Often situated over occupied space, there is minimal length for the noise to be naturally attenuated by the duct system. Breakout through the duct just below the unit is usually the primary noise path. Elbow silencers with HTL casings provide a good solution. The elbow silencer helps turn the air efficiently, reducing aerodynamic system effects and providing insertion loss for the noise travelling down the duct paths. The HTL casing reduces the noise breaking out of the silencer before it is attenuated. Exposed Glass Fiber in Ducts The use of glass fiber in duct systems is causing increasing concern. While most of the myths have been dispelled about glass fiber as a health hazard, some real concerns remain. These include coil blockage, microbial growth, duct cleaning, erosion and out-gassing. Many building owners are demanding the reduction or elimination of glass fiber liners from duct and AHU systems. If the proper silencers are selected, this can be achieved without violating the noise criteria.
See Guenther, Page 38
February 1998

Advertisement in the print edition formerly in this space.

February 1998

ASHRAE Journal

37

Guenther, From Page 36

In many cases, silencers actually cost less than internal duct lining. Various types of silencers are available depending on the degree of concern over glass fiber usage. Glass fiber cloth lining can be applied between the dissipative silencers acoustic media and perforated metal facing to reduce particle erosion for high duct velocity applications (>2000 fpm). Silencers can be lined with a film facing over the acoustic media and beneath the perforated metal to further reduce the possibility of glass fiber erosion. The film also provides a moisture and dirt barrier that limits the potential for microbial growth. When no fibrous materials can be tolerated, no-media silencers can be designed to control the noise. These silencers do not contain glass fiber and do not produce out-gassing or promote microbial growth. Ease of Design The wide range of silencer styles and configurations available provides the mechanical engineer with practical and fast solutions to facilitate the design and installation of an HVAC system. In one example, a community center did not have any straight runs of duct for the installation of straight silencers. The duct runs were short between the fans and AHUs and the sports facilities surrounding the large mechanical room. There was no time to re-design the mechanical room and compromise the design to incorporate straight silencers. Also, energy conservation was important because the facility operated for long hours. To save space, energy and design time, fit-the-duct silencers were specified, including a round to rectangular transitional elbow silencer,
See Guenther, Page 40

Fig. 4: Straight silencers located in straight duct runs were not used because this placement allows noise to break out of the duct over occupied space. A T-elbow silencer with HTL casing located at the equipment room walls prevents breakout noise.

Advertisement in the print edition formerly in this space.

38

ASHRAE Journal

February 1998

Advertisement in the print edition formerly in this space.

February 1998

ASHRAE Journal

39

Guenther, From Page 38

Advertisement in the print edition formerly in this space.

connecting the axial fan to the rectangular duct at the MER wall. As a result, the optimum design for AHU access and the avoidance of stratification was preserved. To save on energy costs, low pressure drop silencing was used, including straight-through type without splitters and centerpods, where possible. Silencer parts are made using flexible, computerized machinery and assembled by standard processes. Molds and dies are not required. Therefore, the overall cost for special silencers to replace both straight silencers and duct fittings could be minimal or even generate savings. After considering the savings from energy consumption from system effects and optimized MER design, the total economic benefits could be substantial. Conclusion The ASHRAE Technical Committee on Sound and Vibration (TC 2.6) has been working diligently over the past years to help recognize and understand low frequency noise problems. At the same time, they have persistently warned of the dangers of aerodynamic and acoustic system effects that increase noise and energy consumption. Complaints may expose noise problems, but system effects and resulting energy losses are much more insidious. During more than 35 years of silencer application experience, the author has seen many misapplications, resulting in air systems not delivering design airflows and unreasonable energy consumption. In the authors opinion, striving for better aerodynamics and lower pressure drops provides the biggest opportunity for overall improvement. References
ASHRAE. 1995. HandbookHVAC Applications. Atlanta, Georgia. Chapter 43. Vanderburgh, R. 1993. How in-duct silencing can be changed to better match the acoustic and aerodynamic needs of HVAC systems. NOISE-93. St. Petersburg, Russia. Schaffer, M. 1992. A Practical Guide to Noise and Vibration Control for HVAC Systems. Atlanta, Georgia: ASHRAE. Schaffer, M. 1993. Controlling HVAC system noise and vibration. ASHRAE Journal. Atlanta, Georgia. June. Vanderburgh, R., Paulauskis, J. 1994. The causes and unwanted results of aerodynamic system effect. ASHRAE Journal. Atlanta, Georgia. February. Vanderburgh, R. Measured change in fan Lw and PD when using a cone silencer vs standard fan evase, and from predictions using on-duct silencer test data. Inter-noise 92. Toronto, Ontario. July. Ebbing, C., and Blazier, W. 1993. Avoiding low frequency noise in packaged HVAC equipment. ASHRAE Journal. Atlanta, Georgia. June. Guenther, F. 1996. IAQ and noise control working together. HPAC, Heating/Piping/Air-Conditioning. Cleveland, Ohio: Penton Publishing. January. Please circle the appropriate number on the Reader Service Card at the back of the publication. Extremely Helpful .......................................................450 Helpful ......................................................................451 Somewhat Helpful ......................................................452 Not Helpful................................................................453

Advertisement in the print edition formerly in this space.

40

ASHRAE Journal

February 1998