Design Concepts in Air Management Systems at

https://www.cemag.us/article/2008/09/design-concepts-air-management-systems

Mon, 09/01/2008 - 12:00am

by Nejat Babr, P.E.

A comparison between biotech facilities and semiconductor facilities in HVAC

system applications and components

Designers and owners of semiconductor facilities focus on air management issues and
operational savings opportunities to stay competitive in a world economy.1 The same
concerns apply to biotech facilities. While process equipment represents about half of
total project cost, mechanical systems comprise the second biggest share, about 25
percent of the total project cost.2 At the same time, one needs to keep in mind that
building utility and HVAC system operationalexpenditures have a great impact on the
final product cost.

Getting the product out to market in time to catch the window of opportunity is the
first priority for any advanced technology facility owner; therefore, the building
operational costs are usually overlooked or given little attention. However, it is the
engineers responsibility to evaluate the mechanical systems to provide reliable and
cost-effective system alternatives and present them to facility owners during initial
phases of the project. Yet, often the cGMP and FDA regulations, coupled with the risk
of not receiving approval for the facility, prevents engineers from being innovative
and looking into different design alternatives.

Both semiconductor and biotech facilities are designed from the inside out. The
buildings are programmed and designed to answer process needs. Therefore, building
systems are provided to support process requirements. For example, the HVAC
systems are designed to meet space cleanliness, temperature,humidity, and noise level
requirements forthe process. Pressure hierarchy between spaces forcontamination
control and containment also plays animportant role in HVAC system design
decisions. Themain goal of any good design, while maintaining theaforementioned
parameters, is to provide reasonableinstallation and operational costs.

The major systems that make up the building mechanical systems are as follows:

Chilled water generation

Steam and heating water generation
Make-up air (outside air) moving and conditioning
 Cleanroom air moving and conditioning This article will evaluate the
mechanical systems, with a focus on air management variations. In general,
cleanroom air systems consist of two major components:
Recirculation air to provide required cleanliness level and temperature control
Outside air to provide fresh air for indoor air quality, replenish the general and
process exhaust, provide building pressurization, and establish cascading
pressure control.

We recognize that the potential variations in design of different cleanroom HVAC

systems are as many as there are cleanroom designers. To simplify the comparison of
the air management systems for both semiconductor and biotech facilities, we will use
two airmanagement concepts that are common in both semiconductorand biotech
facilities.

Case 1: This design utilizes one airflow loop with all make-up air and cleanroom
return air mixture conditioned in one unit. This case results in a more complex air
balancing process.

Case 2: This design utilizes 100 percent outside air combined with multiple
cleanroom recirculation units (secondary air) to provide filtration and space air
conditioning. This case is somewhat easier to provide differential pressure between
spaces.

The air handling unit setup used in Case 1 is shown in Figure 1. The unit can
incorporate a return fan or a relief fan depending on the return duct pressure drop.
Wash down, or purge cycles can be provided as well. (The advantages and
disadvantages of a return fan versus a relief fan require a separate study and are not in
the scope of this article.) After the return fan section, a pre-filter section follows the
relief, return, and outside air mixing section. Due to the outside air component,
typically a 30 percent pre-filter, 85 or 95 percent after filter, and sometimes a carbon
filter are provided with the air handling unit. Dependingon the outside air quantity and
humidificationrequirements, a preheating coil may be provided. The preheatingcoil
can be eliminated if the outside air ratio is lessthan 15 percent of the recirculation air.
However, if an outsideair economizer is used, or the purge cycle is provided,a
preheating coil needs to be provided.
Air handling unit schematic; Primary/secondary air handling system
There are debates among designers regarding the locationof the humidifier. When
there are high internal loads,the leaving air temperature can be as low as the dew
point.Hence, it is not practical to add moisture into the air streamto maintain space
dew point at these temperatures (thepsychometric process is shown in Figure 2).
Therefore, thisarticle recommends using a humidifier upstream of thecooling coil. A
good control system design will avoid theunnecessary humidifying and consequent
dehumidifyingthe moist air in the cooling coil after the humidificationprocess. One
can also argue that the cooling coil will providebetter dew point control by wringing
out the excessmoisture added by the humidifier. However, this is not anenergy-
efficient way to control the space conditions.

After the humidifier section, a cooling coil is provided. The cooling coil has to be
sized to dehumidify the total recirculation air and maintain the supply dew point set
point. It is a good practice to size the cooling coil carefully so that the air will be two
or three degrees lower than the dew point temperature than the space requires. This
design practice will provide the extra capacity that might be required for future
flexibility or any moisture migration into the space. However, the designer should
evaluate the higher and lower end operation points for controllability of the coil for
the whole span.

When the supply fan is selected, the total system efficiency needs to be considered.
Designers should strive for the highest fan efficiencies. The total static pressure for the
supply fan can vary between 7 and 10 inches WC. The types of fans that can deliver
high static pressure are limited to centrifugal or vane axial types. For cleanroom
applications, direct drive fans are recommended due to less particulate generation
from the vee belts. The direct drive application necessarily limits the designers choice
to plug or vane axial fans. However, for high static pressure, the designer may have to
use belt-driven centrifugal fans for the high system pressure applications. Belt-driven
fans create a potential for prematurely loading up the final HEPA filters with
particulates shedding from the belts. If plug fans are used, the total mechanical
efficiency might be lower than for vane axial or centrifugal fans. However, the
pressure drop coming from the air blenders and sound attenuators that might be
required when using vane axial or centrifugal fans should be considered as part of the
evaluation since the pressure drop introduced by these components might offset the
energy benefits.4 It should be noted, however that several manufacturers are providing
designs that include shaping of the fan entry and dischargeusing computational fluid
dynamics. The result has beenin some cases a very significant reduction in fan
powerenergy. Finally, HEPA filters, depending on the area cleanlinessclassification,
can be installed either inside the unitsor in the ceilings. If the area is ISOClass 7 or
better, filters are installedin the ceiling; otherwise, they can beinstalled inside the air
handling unit.

The air management system for Case 2 consists of two sets of air handling units as
shown in Figure 2. A primary unit is used for preconditioning and introducing outside
air into the cleanroom recirculation units. The air handling unit that is used as the
make-up air unit consists of outside air intake louver or section, 30 percent efficient
pre-filter, 85 or 95 percent after filter, preheating coil, humidifier, cooling and
dehumidification coil, the fan of choiceeither centrifugal, vane axial, or plug fan
and discharge HEPA filter at 99.97 percent efficiency. The secondary unit consists of
a pre-filter section (designers choice) at 30 percent, sensible cooling coil using
chilled water, makeup air mixing section, a direct drive fan (vane axial or plug fan),
and discharge HEPA section. The primary unit construction can be a double wall,
either custom built or industrial grade. Since the cleanroom air is not directly in touch
with the make-up air unit, wipe down and cleanability requirements can be relaxed.
The secondary units have to be constructed to allow cleaning with aggressive cleaning
agents. They should be of double wall construction with aluminum or stainless steel
inner walls. Coves (concave metal trim) should be used on a wholesale basis to make
it much easier to maintain and clean the interior of the air handling units.

The concept described in Case 1 was used previously in semiconductor facilities;

however, designers and owners have moved on to the system described in Case 2 to
take advantage of the operational savings offered with this design. It is uncommon to
see Case 1 systems in the latest state-of-the-art semiconductor facilities.
Pharmaceutical facilities(smaller cleanrooms) use either 100 percent outside air
units(once-through systems) or Case 1 systems, due to flexibility,simplicity,
containment requirements, and the physicalconditions of the facilities.

Biotech facilities, with respect to the layout of the buildings, are similar to
semiconductor facilities. A bay and chase type of semiconductor facility greatly
resembles a biotech facility with process and technical spaces housingsupport
equipment.

The difference is that in semiconductor facilities there is less concern with bio burden
than there is in biotech facilities. In semiconductor facilities, service chases are
commonly used for return plenum. However, in biotech facilities, the ducted return air
system is used for contamination control and for segregation purposes. Mechanical
equipment rooms are usually unclassified spaces, and wash down or wipe down is not
required.Using ducted return, in addition to using HEPA filters onreturns (if required),
increases the return system pressuredrop.
Biotech facilities are designed to be mostly ISO Class- 8 and ISO Class-7 process
areas and isolated ISO Class-5 filling areas. Cleanliness classifications are assigned to
areas according to process needs; however, the recirculation airflow rate for the
classification is determined for the activity level and recovery time desired within
regulatory limits and client requirements. The airflow required to provide the space
temperature is usually lower than the airflow required to maintain the cleanliness
classification. In other words, the internal loads will not drive the recirculation airflow
rate for cleanroom applications. Therefore, the supply air temperature is higher than
the space dew point temperature.

Recommended Airflow Levels

Even though the cleanliness level for a biotech process area varies from ISO Class-7
to Class-8, the total recirculation airflow for the area may require a dedicated air
handling unit due to the size of the process suite. On the other hand, the
semiconductor process area is smaller in comparison to a biotech facility because of
process tool requirements, and the cleanliness levels vary between ISO Class-3 and
Class-5. Typically, each bay is serviced by dedicated air handling units. In biotech
facilities, high ceiling heights require the airflow rate to be calculated by using air
changes per hour (ACH) criteria. For semiconductor facilities, usually CFM per ft2
criteria is used. Refer to Table 1 for airflow criteria seen in both semiconductor and
biotech facilities. ISO 14644-4, AnnexB was used to prepare this comparative table.
The ratio of the outside air quantity for a biotech facility can vary from 10 to 30
percent of the recirculationair. A semiconductor facility might require 3.5to 6 CFM
per ft2 make-up air. Even though the outside airquantity is quite high for a
semiconductor facility, the ratioof outside air to recirculation air is similar to that of
abiotech facility.
ENERGY COMPARISON
A biotech facility of 200,000 ft2 and a semiconductor facility of 100,000 ft2 are used
for comparison. A typical semiconductor process bay of 480 ft2 at ISO Class-
4requires 36,000 CFM. On the other hand, a biotech processsuite of 3,200 ft2 with 16-
ft ceiling height requires 43,000CFM. If we compare the outside air quantities for
both,a semiconductor facility would need 2,100 to 2,750 CFMoutside air; the biotech
suite would require 2,250 to 4,300CFM outside air for pressure control and adequate
airchange to replace the entire air volume of the space toavoid any contamination
buildup. The total outside airquantity for the aforementioned biotech facility would be
around 50,000 to 75,000 CFM. The outside airto cleanroom air recirculation ratio is
almost equal for bothtypes of facilities.

The hypothetical facility is assumed to be located in Baltimore, MD. The design

conditions for the outside and inside air are given in Table 2.

Facility Design Conditions

To maintain a process suite cleanliness level of ISO Class-7, a total of 43,000 CFM
recirculation air is required. For space pressure and indoor air quality control, 4,300
CFM of outside air is required. For simplicity, one process bay is included in the
energy calculations.

In Case 1, due to the outside air component of mixed air, the total recirculation air has
to be cooled down to dehumidify the air to achieve the supply air dew point required
for the space conditions given. At the design conditions, the supply air temperature
will be 46.9F (dew point temperature), which is colder than required to maintain
space temperature. The reheat coil will raise the supply air temperature to maintain
space temperature. In real life, the reheat coil control valves are usually at 50 to 70
percent open position depending on the internal load. This indicates that the
recirculation air is cooled down for dehumidification purposes only. Most likely, a
supply air temperature of 55 to 60F would be adequate to maintain spacetemperature.

During winter, the return air is mixed with the outside air. Even during winter, the
process suites require cooling due to high internal loads. The cold outside air provides
free cooling of the return air and reduces the winter chilled water load. Mixed air is
humidified to provide dew point control. The air brought to the space dew point line
passes through the cooling coil to reject the internal heat. The reheat coil provided in
the unit, or for each temperature control zone, maintains space temperature.

See Figure 4 for the psychometric process of the Case 1 air handling unit for winter
and summer operations.

Psychometric Analysis of Case 1 Air Handling Unit

In Case 2, the outside air component is centrally conditioned to space dew point
temperature in a primary air handling unit. The space air is not dehumidified and
reheated; only outside air components are dehumidified and humidified to maintain
space dew point. The moisture migration into the space can be offset by resetting the
make-up air supply dew point up or down to compensate for the changes.
The conditioned outside air is introduced to the recirculation unit after the cooling
coil. Since the space air is controlled to a constant dew point temperature, the
secondary unit cooling coil performs only sensible cooling. The worst-case space
temperature controls the supply air temperature; therefore, the reheat of the
recirculation air can be minimized. The process is shown in Figure 5.

Psychometric Analysis for Primary/Secondary Air Handling System

Energy calculations for both cases are performed to compare the energy use of each
component. The bin data for Baltimore is used to calculate annual energy
consumption. The energy usage summary is shown in Table 3.
 System Energy Usage Summary

Even though the Case 1 air handling unit uses outside air during winter months for
free cooling, the energy use for humidification, dehumidification and reheat surpasses
the savings. Also, the difficulty of space pressure control and filter loading should be
considered if an outside air economizer is used.

For both cases, the humidification load does not change if an outside air economizer is
not used. The Case 2 air handling system requires preheat for humidification;
however, only the outside air component is conditioned to meet the space dew point
conditions. That results in 396,000 MBH heating load and almost 228,000 ton-hr
cooling load reductions. Thisequates to $23,000 annual savings for the system used
forthis analysis.

The calculations indicate that the total energy usage can be reduced by at least 34
percent with the primary/ secondary air handling scheme. Also, the separation of the
dew point control from the space temperature control will simplify the control systems

The other savings come from the fan horsepower. The Case 1 unitas a result of
high-pressure drops in the air stream, created by the elements such as after filters,
dehumidification coils, and preheats coilsconsumes higher energy to move the air in
the system. The total pressure in the system can be around 8 to 10 inches WC. In Case
2, the higher-pressure drop components are located in the make-up air unit, which has
lower airflow and, therefore, consumes less energy. The higher airflow that comes
from the cleanroom air recirculation passes only through a sensible cooling coil and
pre-filters. The total static pressure is typically around 2.5 to 4.5 inches WC;
therefore, the fan energy is far less than in the Case 1 system. The Case 2 system
requires 45 BHP vs. 85 BHP for Case 1.
The boiler and chiller sizes used for the Case 2 system will be smaller since the peak
load for the heating and cooling is less than in the Case 1 system. This will reduce
both capital expenditures and operational costs.

Advantages and Disadvantages

The recirculation units used for Case 2 are shorter in length than the Case 1
units.
The mechanical room space requirement for the Case 2 system is less than the
Case 1 system, even though 100 percent outside air units need to be provided
for the Case 2 system. Redundant outside air units are recommended for system
reliability.
Centralized outside air units will enable the outside air intakes to be located to
avoid exhaust air re-entrainment and will also provide the opportunity for heat
recovery from the general space exhaust.
The louver sizes will be smaller in comparison to the Case 1 units.
The outside air will be ducted to each cleanroom recirculation unit. Since the
outside air will be pressurized, the duct size will be smaller than the individual
ducted outside air intakes.
The total system initial cost is lower, since fewer unit components are
purchased chased with the recirculation units.
In Case 1, the air handling unit is dedicated to a process suite or similar
functional areas. The outside air is provided via this unit. If the unit fails, the
space temperature and pressure control go outside the specifications. However,
a centralized outside air unit with complete redundancy will provide the
required outside air for space pressure control even if the cleanroom
recirculation unit fails.
The space dew point and space pressure stay in the specified range. Separating
dew point controls from space temperature controls will simplify the controls.
In Case 2, the engineer needs to design the 100 percent outside air units with
extra capacity for future flexibility and unknowns. If the outside air units are
undersized, increasing the pre-conditioned outside air will be costly. The Case 1
units have an advantage over the Case 2 system in this scenario, since it would
be easier to increase the capacity of a single unit.
The Case 1 units have the capability to dehumidify all of the recirculation air.
The coils are usually oversized; therefore, it will be easier to recover any
temperature humidity upsets.
Smoke purge, wash down, or fumigation cycle control is easier with Case 1
systems. Also, the Case 1 system can recover the space faster than Case 2
during initial startup or after shutdowns. Since the Case 1 units are dedicated to
 a space, they can be isolated, or make-up airflow can be increased without
impacting adjacent space pressure.
In Case 2 systems, the outside air ductwork is the short link between different
spaces. In this case, the amount of outside air needs to be increased to achieve
quicker recovery for the spaces going through one of the scenarios mentioned
above.
The make-up air unit needs to be selected and designed to increase the amount
of outside air to any space without impacting adjacent spaces. However, the
space temperature and humidity recovery will be much slower.

CONCLUSION
Dedicated outside air units with cleanroom recirculation units using sensible cooling
only are not the common system design for biotech facilities. However, this design
concept has been widely used in semiconductor facilities for along time due to its
lower operating cost.

Similarities between biotech and semiconductor facilities and experience gained from
other industries suggest that this concept should at least be carefully investigated and
considered in biotech-pharmaceutical facility design. This simple comparison suggests
that air management systems used for semiconductor facilities can be adapted to
biotech facilities instead of carrying out traditional pharmaceutical facility HVAC
design concepts. However, the designer should weigh total system advantages and
disadvantages.

Bibliography

1. Naughton, P. HVAC systems for Semiconductor Clean Rooms Part 1 System

Components, pp 620-625, ASHRAE Transactions, SL-90-5-3
2. Naughton, P. HVAC systems for Semiconductor Clean Rooms Part 2 Total
System Dynamics, pp 626-633, ASHRAE Transactions, SL-90-5-4
3. Blanchard, Joseph A. Pharmaceutical Facility Costs: Variance, Categories, and
Causes, pp 50-55, Pharmaceutical Engineering, May/June 2000
4. Naismith, R. Clean Dry HVAC Air for GMP Laboratories, pp 24-32,
Pharmaceutical Engineering, January/ February 1999
5. Brown, W. K. Make-up Air Systems Energy-Saving Opportunities, pp 609-
615, ASHRAE Transactions, SL 90-5-1
6. Taylor, Steven T. Comparing Economizer Relief Systems, pp 33-42,
ASHRAE Journal, September 2000
7. Hunt, E., Benson, D.E., Hopkins, L.G. Fan Efficiency Vs. Unit Efficiency for
Clean Room Applications, pp 616-619, ASHRAE Transaction SL-90-2
 8. ISO Standard 14644-4

Nejat Babr, P.E. manages the Mechanical Engineering Department of CH2M

HILLs Somerset, NJ Office. He has more than 19 years of experience in facility
design, from advanced technology facilities to educational facilities design. He is an
active member of ASHRAE and registered in NY, NJ, PA, MD, DE, CA, and AZ.