CDCV Webinar Feb 191
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

CDCV Webinar Feb 191

  • 593 views
Uploaded on

Centralized Demand Controlled Ventilation - Webinar given 2/2009

Centralized Demand Controlled Ventilation - Webinar given 2/2009

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
593
On Slideshare
589
From Embeds
4
Number of Embeds
2

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 4

http://www.linkedin.com 3
https://www.linkedin.com 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Leave slide on for 90 minutes prior to webinar beginning
  • Welcome to our webinar MG D EH&S UCI Thanks for letting us share our experience with…
  • UC Irvine is a growing…
  • This study asks the question…
  • As you know, lab ventilation rates are often set at a constant rate between 4 to 12 ach These rates are frequently excessive during low level process activity and non occupancy This study explores the possibility of a set back based on lab pollutant concentration
  • The following diagram summarizes the …
  • This CDCV system begins with: room sensors to measure the quality of the air in many locations of a building An air router pulls the air sample to the Sensor suite that analyzes the air sample for… An information management server tells the VAV controller to increase or decrease air flow All this data is logged into a computer for analysis
  • The result is by monitoring air contaminants, we can make decisions about reducing or increasing ventilation rates in the building
  • Our goal is to find the sweet spot where we maximize energy savings without compromising safety.
  • Our recipe for taking on an ambitious project like this is to have a multi-disciplinary team of professionals focused on a common goal. At this time, Rebecca Lally will tell you about our study
  • This slide demonstrates air samples being taken from various locations.
  • If there’s a delay in the activation of the ventilation system, higher concentrations will result. Therefore , data did not prove that CDCV provides for a safer lab, slower response in ramping up, higher peak concentration. Pick another lab that can reach stable ACH.
  • If there’s a delay in the activation of the ventilation system, higher concentrations will result. Therefore , data did not prove that CDCV provides for a safer lab, slower response in ramping up, higher peak concentration. Pick another lab that can reach stable ACH.
  • 1 st bullet - Current sensor suite does not detect all chemicals

Transcript

  • 1. Welcome to the Webinar!
    • We hope you are logged in properly, if you are having trouble call 949-824-5828
    • We have your audio muted, so we cannot hear you
    • We can read your comments under the “chat tab” (conversation)
    • If you have a question for the panel, instead of using the “raising your hand” button, use the chat tab and preface your comment with “Question for Panel”
    • We will take questions during the Q&A session
  • 2. Lab Centralized Demand Controlled Ventilation (CDCV) Marc Gomez, EH&S Rebecca Lally, EH&S Chris Abbamonto, Facilities Management Matt Gudorf, Facilities Management Geoffrey Bell, LBNL Applying a New and Emerging Technology
  • 3. University of California, Irvine
    • Category one research university
    • $16M annual utilities budget
    • Lab buildings consume 2/3 of campus energy
    • Many energy initiatives to reduce carbon footprint
  • 4. Does Centralized Demand Controlled Ventilation (CDCV) Allow Us To Reduce Ventilation Rates & Save Energy Without Compromising Safety? This Initiative
  • 5. Lab Ventilation Rates
    • Often set at a “constant rate” 24/7
    • Recommended range 4 to 12 air changes per hour
    • Usually excessive during low-level process activity or non-occupancy
    • Explore possibility of “set back” based on lab pollutant concentration
  • 6. Components of Centralized Demand Controlled Ventilation (CDCV) “Creating a Smart Lab”
  • 7.  
  • 8. CDCV & Energy $avings Monitor Air Contaminants
    • Reduce air changes per hour (ACH)
    • if no contaminants detected
    • Increase air changes per hour (ACH)
    • when contaminants detected
  • 9. CDCV & Energy $avings Challenge
    • Balance energy savings & safety
    Maximize Energy Savings Without Compromising Safety
  • 10. CDCV & Energy $avings Recipe for Success Safety Management Visionary & Supportive Upper Management Engineers Facility Managers Patience Team Synergy Supportive Users / Researchers
  • 11. Is CDCV effective in reducing the contaminant concentration from a spill in a lab?
  • 12. Spill Locations Farthest point from the hood In front of the hood Benchtop
  • 13.
    • 500 ml of acetone
    • Baseline measurement and with CDCV activated
    • Photoionization detector - 10.6 eV lamp
      • MiniRae 2000 instrument
      • CDCV
    • CDCV ventilation activation level: 0.5 ppm
    • CDCV polling interval time: 14-17 minutes
    Spill Test Methodology
  • 14. Distributed, Multi-Point Air-Sampling Network Air Data Router Room Sensor
  • 15. Air Contaminant Monitoring Results Spill Farthest Point from Hood - Sash Closed 4 ACH 12 ACH CDCV on @ 5 min.
  • 16. Air Contaminant Monitoring Results Spill Farthest Point from Hood - Sash Closed 4 ACH 12 ACH CDCV on @ 17 min.
  • 17. Air Contaminant Monitoring Results Spill Farthest Point from Hood - Sash Closed
  • 18. Spill Results Summary * MiniRae 2000 76 227 17 12 4 Spill 2 w/CDCV 70 219 5 12 4 Spill 1 w/CDCV 73 339 n/a 6 6 Baseline Spill w/o CDCV Clearance Time (min.) *Peak Conc. (ppm) Minutes post- spill ventilation increased Post-spill ACH Pre-spill ACH Event
  • 19. Conclusions
    • CDCV
      • Effective at sensing acetone levels
      • Is responsive
      • When activated, lower peak concentration in open areas
    • Polling time could result in delay in detecting spill
    • No significant difference in clearance time
  • 20. Lessons Learned ~ Next Steps
    • Current sensor suite does not detect all chemicals
    • Sensor selection should be based on risk assessment
    • Calibration frequency needs validation
    • Confirm accurate performance of saturated sensor
    • Set polling interval frequency based on risk assessment
    • “ Fail safe” to 6 ACH needed
    • Additional spill testing needed
  • 21. Other Safety Considerations
    • Energy Mgmt System
      • Provides health & safety info
      • Not meant to be a life safety system
    • Elimination of small emissions
    • Emergency override exhaust ventilation “ red ” button
    • Provide visual display outside lab
    • Notification to EH&S staff of spill
    • Instant messaging to facility staff
    • of system problems
    • Preventative maintenance issues
  • 22. Energy Savings?
    • Goal: Reduce ACH rate by reducing CFM delivered to individual laboratory rooms by way of CDCV
    • Step 1 – Select Building/Labs
      • ACH Reduction Constraints (FH, Freezers, Solar Heat)
      • VAV Controls and EMS
    • Step 2 – Retro-Commissioning
      • Bad Cards
      • Bad Poppets
      • Poor Thermostat Location
      • Economizer (temp. reset 65 deg F)
      • Low Duct Static Pressure
      • CFM Adjustment for Actual Room Size
  • 23.  
  • 24.  
  • 25.  
  • 26.  
  • 27.  
  • 28. Energy Savings?
    • Step 3 – Installation
      • Hard wired approach vs. EMS control
      • Valve adjustment (clamps)
    • Step 4 – Trial and Error
      • Fail Safe Mode?? (no notification)
      • ACH verification (Room CF)
      • Spill Testing
      • CFM verification with EMS (same source!)
  • 29. Lessons Learned
    • Step 5 – Evaluation of the System
      • There is an inherent gain of useful information such as lab temperature, sensed data, and potential commissioning data (LEED).
      • Areas for improvement:
        • Front End with ACH would be helpful
        • Direct user notification of failure
        • Considerations: User training and service contract for sensor change-out in original contract.
  • 30. Croul Hall CFM Rate Change
  • 31. System Payback?
    • System Installation Cost approx. $125,000 not including deferred maintenance and retro-commissioning.
    • Observed CFM reduction in installed labs during a two week snapshot comparison ~6,100
    • Anticipated payback: 2-5 years
    • Still fine tuning the system
  • 32. Next Steps - 1
    • Croul Hall - CDCV
      • 4/2 ACH setback with occupancy sensing
      • Emergency exhaust red button
    • Croul Hall – Occupancy Based
      • 4/2 ACH setback with occupancy sensing
      • Visual and audible signal to occupant of AC’s
      • Emergency exhaust red button
      • EH&S lab oversight (additional)
  • 33. Next Steps - 2
    • Additional Testing (3 rd Party) of System Components
    • MBCx and Energy Savings Verification
    • LEED-EB Certification
    • Maintenance Costs vs Energy Costs – further analysis
  • 34. Next Steps - 3
    • New Construction UC Irvine Gross Hall - CDCV
      • 4/2 ACH occupancy sensing
      • Emergency exhaust red button
      • CDCV - visible and audible signal to occupant
  • 35. Next Steps - 4
    • Your input
    • Other studies
  • 36. Question
    • Does Centralized Demand Controlled Ventilation (CDCV) Allow Us To Reduce Ventilation Rates & Save Energy Without Compromising Safety?
  • 37. Answer
    • CDCV has merits. Further study is needed to gain a better understanding of the system. There is energy savings, further quantification is also needed.
  • 38. Webinar Q&A
    • Use chat box to send questions to “all participants”, preface your question with “Question to Panel”
    • If you cannot write in your question, “raise hand” and we will un-mute you to talk
    • If you want to view the panel:
      • At top right corner – click on panel, then click on video
  • 39. Thank You!