This article was published in ASHRAE Journal, November 2012. Copyright 2012 ASHRAE. Posted at www.ashrae.org.

This article may not be

copied and/or distributed electronically or in paper form without permission of ASHRAE. For more information about ASHRAE Journal, visit
www.ashrae.org.

Methods for Effective

Room Air Distribution
Part One
By Dan Int-Hout, Fellow ASHRAE

rchitects and owners desiring LEED certification for their buildings

are challenging engineers to design HVAC systems that are at

least 30% better than the base system in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.12010, Energy Standard for New Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings. There is talk of raising the bar to 40% or even 50%.

In addition, Standard 90.1-2010 lowered the maximum energy use of the

base system, which is overhead delivery of VAV controlled air. Improving
on this base system is a real challenge.
The requirements in ASHRAE/USGBC/
IES Standard 189-2011, Standard for
the Design of High-Performance Green
Buildings Except Low Rise Residential
Buildings, are similarly challenging for
designers.
As a result, some architects are considering alternate means of air delivery
as they assume one cannot meet the requirements with a variable air volume
(VAV) system. These alternates include
underfloor air distribution, displacement ventilation and chilled beams
18

ASHRAE Journal

(low inlet pressure ceiling induction

devices).
However, the energy calculation programs used to predict the energy use
of these systems are largely unverified,
at least in the form of available published data. Overhead VAV (which includes fan-powered terminals) has been
in widespread use in North America
for more than 40 years, and the energy
use calculations have been well vetted.
(Note that ASHRAE Research Project
1292 suggests the leakage of parallel
fan-powered terminals has likely been
underestimated in the effect on energy
use.) The validation has to account for
long-term weather variations involving the continually updated bin data for

most of North America, as well as many

locations worldwide.
The newer systems havent been in use
long enough (at least in North America)
to have a robust volume of data to measure the accuracy of energy use (or savings) predictions. Engineers, therefore,
use best known data. The result is that a
great deal of creativity is possible in establishing performance parameters, and
no one can prove them wrong.
Moreover, while we have been designing with overhead VAV for more than 40
years, BOMA reports that a big reason
tenants fail to renew a lease is occupant
dissatisfaction with the thermal environment. So we are moving into new territories of air distribution, but we apparently still dont know how to properly
design or apply the method with which
we have the most experience.
Part One of this article discusses essential requirements (in standards,
guidelines and rating systems) that cover thermal comfort, acoustics and ventiAbout the Author
Dan Int-Hout is a chief engineer at Krueger in
Richardson, Texas.

a s h r a e . o r g

November 2012

lation, and whats involved in properly applying

them to the typical main delivery systems.
Part Two will deal with the air delivery systems.
Overhead fully mixed forced air systems are by far
the most prevalent HVAC system in North America,
and include air supplied from almost every imaginable source, including central station air handlers,
water source heat pumps, variable refrigerant volume, variable air volume, ducted fan coils and unit
ventilators, and chilled beams. Partially and fully
stratified systems, including displacement ventilation and underfloor air distribution systems, are becoming more popular, and have different considerations for proper air delivery and occupant comfort.

Thermal Comfort
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2010, Thermal Figure 1: Graphical method, Standard 55.
Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy, establishes the thermal conditions most people will find ac- tends to fall, and hot air to rise, the system must be designed
ceptable. There is an understanding that thermal acceptability to keep this naturally occurring temperature gradient within
is defined by a bell-shaped curve, and not everyone will find a limits.
given set of conditions acceptable.
When heating with air from the ceiling, it is important to
There are ranges of temperatures and air speeds predicted keep room-to-discharge temperature differentials (DT) under
to keep dissatisfaction levels under 20%. These typically are control. 2009 ASHRAE HandbookFundamentals suggests
based on a predicted mean vote/predicted percentage dissatisfied that when the DT exceeds 15F (9C), complying with the
(PMV/PPD) calculation developed in the early 1970s (sometimes vertical stratification limit of Standard 55 is unlikely. Techniwith other calculations) that account for occupant metabolic rate cal papers from several manufacturers presented in the late
and clothing ensemble, as well as environmental variables of air 1970s are the basis of this conclusion. A similar overhead
and radiant temperatures, local air speed and humidity levels.
heating limitation is included in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
An ASHRAE Standard 55-2010 appendix includes the PMV 62.1, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. This issue
calculation algorithm in BASIC programming language. The was discussed in detail in an earlier article.1
ASHRAE Thermal Comfort Tool CD, Version 2, is available
Also overlooked are the economics of comfort. It is estimatto do these calculations. An older graphical version is also ed that the typical office building in the U.S. uses about $2/ft2/
available from several sources, which has the same graphical yr ($2153/m2/yr) for heating and cooling (http://tinyurl.com/2limits as the current standard (Figure 1).
20-200). I have heard of buildings that use as much as $5/ft2/
A potential limitation on the use of either the PMV or year ($54/m2/yr), but few use less than $1/ft2/yr ($11/m2/yr)
graphical methods is that the standard states that they both are except in a couple locations where energy costs are very low.
limited to airspeeds no greater than 40 fpm (0.2 m/s). With Building occupants, however, are often paid the equivalent of
any of the four systems we will be discussing, when properly $200/ft2/yr ($2153/m2/yr), or more (http://tinyurl.com/2-20applied, room airspeeds should be expected to be less than 200). Therefore, in most buildings, a 25% reduction in build40 fpm (0.2 m/s) at any occupant location. Should a means ing energy, which would be considered quite significant, would
be provided of elevating airspeeds to account for or to allow be overcome by a less than 1% reduction in productivity.
higher temperatures, there is an appendix in Standard 55One can easily see that making energy use decisions that neg2010 to perform those calculations. Chapter 9 of the ASHRAE atively affect occupant comfort pale in comparison to the potenHandbookFundamentals provides additional calculations tial loss in productivity. In most cases, the ratio between producand tables to assist the designer in developing systems.
tivity and effective energy reduction strategies is on the order of
Meeting the temperature ramping, drift and humidity re- 2000/1. The real impact of any energy-saving strategies has to
quirements of Standard 55-2010 is a control and mechanical be carefully weighed against the potential occupant response.
system issue, but several areas are primarily dependent on
the air delivery system design. Often overlooked by design Acoustics
engineers who are claiming compliance to the standard, is a
Building acoustics are a major source of building comrequirement that the space temperature shall not have more plaints, especially the lack of speech privacy. Often, this results
than 5.4F (3C) vertical temperature stratification within the from a combination of poor acoustical treatment and lack of
comfort zone, which ranges from 6 in. to 6 ft (152 mm to uniform background sound, often known as sound masking. In
2 m) (lower for seated occupants) from the floor. As cold air the past, tower computers on desktops often provided a source
November 2012

ASHRAE Journal

19

of white noise. However, new low energy laptops and flat panel monitors seldom make noise. They also significantly
People
(Salaries)
lower internal heat loads, which would
Original
Original
seem beneficial, until the load becomes
Construction
Construction
Energy
less than the designed minimum. Many
Maintenance
systems perform poorly outside of designed ranges.
The design mechanical engineer
Taxes
should predict the noise introduced into
Energy
Maintenance
Taxes
the space from the HVAC system being designed. VAV boxes and air outlets,
which are likely the most noise sensitive
part of the acoustical picture, have had
acoustical rating systems for many years. Figure 2: (left) Life-cycle building costs breakdown; (right) life-cycle building costs
The Air Diffusion Council test code was breakdown with people (salaries).
first developed in the 1960s, and has
morphed into the present AHRI 880-2011, Performance Rat- AHRI-certified sound levels as part of their product rating.
ing of Air Terminals, and ANSI/ASHRAE 70-2006 (RA 2011), AHRI 260-2011, Sound Rating of Ducted Air Moving and
Conditioning Equipment, now rates acoustical performance
Method of Testing the Performance of Air Outlets and Air.
These test methods have continuously provided accurate of any other ducted HVAC component. Several other AHRI
baseline data for predicting the resultant room sound mea- product certification groups are considering certification of
surements from the rated unit sound power as measured in a their sound data.
reverberant sound chamber. VAV products tested under AHRI
The output of all these acoustical programs is octave band
Standard 880-2011 are presently the only products that have sound power, or sound as a function of a set of frequency rang-

Advertisement formerly in this space.

20

A S H R A E J o u r n a l

November 2012

es. Most engineering specifications, however, are

single number ratings, most typically a maximum
noise criteria (NC) requirement at the occupant location (not in a reverberant chamber where AHRI
Standards 880 and 260 are measured). The specified NC value is an estimate of how much sound energy will enter the space after passing through several duct connections and other building elements,
and represents the maximum sound level expected
by occupants in that space.
Because the manufacturer of an HVAC component cannot control all the other building elements
that contribute to attenuation and amplification of
sound, it cannot guarantee the actual noise level
that will occur in the space.
NC estimates include a number of calculated
sound attenuation factors. AHRI 885-2008 with
Addendum 1: Procedure for Estimating Occupied
Space Sound Levels in the Application of Air Termi- Figure 3: Preferred background sound level.
nals and Air Outlets was developed to standardize
the methodology of sound calculations, and to provide some AHRI Standard 885 includes a spreadsheet for easy calculaattenuation element data that is not available elsewhere. An im- tion of estimated room sound levels from octave bands of sound
portant sound element included in AHRI Standard 885 is ceiling power generated by either AHRI Standards 880 or 260.
plenum/room reduction and is based on a joint ASHRAE/AHRI
AHRI Standard 885 also provides a table of recommended
research project (RP 755) conducted at the Canadian NRC lab. default space reductions for both radiated and discharge sound

Advertisement formerly in this space.

22

A S H R A E J o u r n a l

November 2012

paths, and members of the AHRI Air Control and Distribution

Devices certification program for VAV terminals are required
to use these default values when publishing NC values along
with certified sound power values. This ensures all manufacturers claimed NC values are using the same assumptions, at
least in posted catalog data.
The current USGBC LEED for Schools rating system
awards a point for achieving a sound level of 45 dBA and a
reverberant time requirement in the classroom, but the method
of compliance requires an acoustician to make an evaluation
of a number of factors including ambient outdoor noise.
Proposed for the next LEED rating system (LEED v4 in 2013)
requires the HVAC system not exceed 40 dBA using the ASHRAE
Handbook (which is not sufficiently complete to perform a full
path analysis) or AHRI Standard 885. This requirement is a prerequisite in the upcoming LEED for Schools, but doesnt require
an acoustician to evaluate system noise. However, it may require
an acoustician to estimate outdoor noise. Instead of reverberant
time, the LEED requirement will be based on construction details. Both are significant improvements in the approval process.
Many times acoustical specifications are vague or sufficiently faulty as to be meaningless. In fact, producing a level of
sound meeting an NC requirement may not provide the desired
level of speech privacy. Studies continue to show what occupants desire in terms of background noise in offices. Note that

Advertisement formerly in this space.

24

an NC = 35 does not match most occupants preferred background sound, as shown in the shaded band in the figure below.
I suggest that an acoustical specification should limit sound
power levels based on conducting an AHRI Standard 885
evaluation starting with the room requirement and working
backward to calculate the maximum allowed sound power in
any frequency band.
In the past, the resulting sound level in the space was best analyzed using a real-time sound analyzer, which was often a $4,000
device. Today, however, mobile phones now have sound analysis
apps that seldom cost more than $10, and anyone can see the
NC, NR or dBA present in a space. This accessibility likely will
result in more attention to acoustical issues in the future.

Ventilation
The ventilation rate procedure (VRP) of ASHRAE Standard
62.1-2007 (current version is Standard 62.1-2010) has been
adopted by the 2009 International Mechanical Code, which
is the most widely used mechanical code in the United States.
The VRP is also a prerequisite for LEED v3. It has one item
that is particularly important in air-distribution design.
The requirements of Table 6.2, Air Change Effectiveness,
affect the minimum ventilation rate, and are divided into the
calculated minimum rate. While overhead air distribution in
cooling has a factor of 1, heating may result in a value of 0.8

Advertisement formerly in this space.

A S H R A E J o u r n a l

November 2012

if the discharge temperature is more than 15F (8C) above

room temperature, or the discharge air doesnt make it half
way down the window, and will require an increase in the minimum ventilation rate. As mentioned previously, it should also
negate compliance to ASHRAE Standard 55-2010.
Per Table 6.2, displacement and underfloor air delivery systems often have an air change effectiveness of 1.2. This reduces the required minimum ventilation rate by about 16%. These
systems typically are designed to discharge air at about 63F
(17C). The challenge to the HVAC designer is to maintain the
space at the ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010 maximum relative
humidity of 65%, while delivering air with a dew point sufficiently lower than the discharge temperature to control the
latent load, without using reheat at the air handler or the zone,
using energy recovery, side-stream bypass, or other methods.
Standard 62.1 requires that each device supplying a zone
shall have a direct (or otherwise engineered) ventilation connection. Continuous measurement (and management) of ventilation air quantity is also becoming mandatory. Dedicated
outdoor air systems (DOAS) measurement and regulation
at the zone level is preferred, and may well be mandated in
the future. Should the ventilation requirements in one zone
change, all others, of course, need to adjust appropriately, and
true pressure-independent ventilation air management seems
a logical and energy saving development.

As space loads continue to drop, we are discovering that

many spaces, when operating per code, are at 100% outdoor
air much of the day. In some cases, spaces need either to have a
bit of reheat or supply air temperatures need to be adjusted upward. Conflicts between the need to dehumidify a space (to stay
within the 65% maximum RH requirement of Standard 62.1)
and the problem with subcooling a space require careful management of the zone supply system, no matter the method used.

Summary
Now that we know the essential requirements, we can discuss
the primary methods of supplying air to spaces. The ASHRAE
HandbookFundamentals has been updated to include overhead fully mixed, as well as fully stratified and partially mixed
systems from below, and even task/ambient personal air delivery systems. All have advantages and disadvantages, which
must be understood by the design engineer and architect. In
the second installment we will discuss issues associated with
both well mixed and stratified air delivery systems.

References
1. Int-Hout, D. 2007. Overhead heating: revisiting a lost art.
ASHRAE Journal 49(3):5663.
2. Tom, S. 2008. Managing energy and comfort. 50(6):1826.
3. Egan, M.D. 1988. Architectural Acoustics. N.Y.: McGraw Hill.

Advertisement formerly in this space.

26

A S H R A E J o u r n a l

November 2012