Chilled Beam and

Radiant Cooling Basics

Salt Lake City, UT ASHRAE Chapter
December 2013
Nick Searle
nsearle@dadanco.com

Contents
Radiant Ceilings & Chilled Beam Basics
Energy & Space Savings
First and Lifecycle Costs
Maintenance
Application Suitability
Design Considerations
Application Example # Laboratories
Case Study 250 S. Wacker, Chicago

Fan Energy Use in Buildings

4.5
4

Chiller/Compressor
Supply & Return Fans

Chilled Water Pump

Condenser Water Pump
Cooling Tower Fan
Condenser Fan

3
2.5
2
1.5

Energy Use KWh/SF

Design Load KW/SF

3.5

5
4
3
2

1
1

0.5

0
Central VAV

Central CAV Packaged CAV

Central VAV

Central CAV Packaged CAV

Energy Consumption Characteristics of Commercial Building HVAC

Systems publication prepared for U.S. Department of Energy

Water = Efficient Transport

10

1 Ton of Cooling
requires 550 CFM of air

or
4 GPM of water

diameter
water pipe

Chilled Ceilings
1980

Chilled Ceilings

Many buildings heated only

PCs appearing on desks
Restricted ceiling cavity

1990

2000

2010

Chilled Ceilings Radiant Effect

CW Supply
59 62F

CW Return
62 66F

55%
Convective
45%
Radiant

76F Dry Bulb

74F radiant
temperature
(black bulb)

Chilled Ceilings
Advantages

Design Issues

Excellent thermal comfort

Reduced space requirements

Low cooling output

Will fit into 6#8 cavity

Self regulating
Simple controls

Low noise
Low maintenance

20 to 25 BTUH/ft2 100%
coverage
14 to 18 BTUH/ft2 70% coverage

High cost
Separate air system required

Chilled Sails

Chilled Sails

Chilled Sails
Advantages

Design Issues

Cooling output

Good thermal comfort

Reduced space requirements
Freely suspended
Self regulating
Simple controls
Low noise
Low maintenance

40 to 50 BTUH/ft2

Separate air system required

High cost
Cannot heat
Need good acoustic treatment
to avoid hard spaces
Many connections
Aesthetics ?

Passive Chilled Beams

1980

1990

2000

2010

Chilled Ceilings
Passive Chilled Beams

Increased cooling loads

Equipment
Occupancy
Day#lighting

Inadequate perimeter
cooling

Passive Chilled Beams 1 Operation Principle

Soffit

Suspension rod
Water coil

Fabric skirt

Perforated tile

Passive Chilled Beams 1 System Highlights

Good thermal comfort
Cooling capacity up to 40 BTUH/FT2 floor space
Up to 500 BTUH per LF of beam

Reduced ductwork, riser and plant sizes

Water transports most of sensible cooling

Self regulating
simple two position controls

Low noise
Low maintenance

Design Considerations
Sensible cooling only
Latent gains must be controlled by air system

High free area perforated metal ceiling required

28% free area minimum
Exposed beams (no ceiling) are an option

Beams cannot be installed tight against slab

Typically 40% of beam width required above beam

Separate heating system must be installed

Separate air system must be installed

Passive Chilled Beams 1 Airflow Pattern

Passive Chilled Beams 1 Recessed Type

Passive Chilled Beams 1 Exposed Type

Active Chilled Beams

1980

1990

2000

2010

Chilled Ceilings
Passive Chilled Beams
Active Chilled Beams

Higher space loads

Higher occupant densities
Combined ventilation/cooling
preferred
Integration into fiber tile
ceilings required

Active Chilled Beam 1 Operation Principle

Primary air nozzles
Primary air plenum

1 Part Primary Air

Suspended ceiling

Heat exchanger

4 Parts Room Air

Heat Removal Ratio

Airflow
requirement
reduced by 70%

70% of sensible heat

removed by chilled beam
water coil

Active Chilled Beam 1 Airflow Pattern

Active Chilled Beams 1 System Highlights

Very high cooling capacity
Up to 100 BTUH/FT2 floor space
Up to 1500 BTUH per LF

Integrated cooling, ventilation and heating

All services in the ceiling cavity

Suitable for integration into all ceiling types

Reduces ceiling costs compared to Passive Beams

Active Chilled Beams 1 System Highlights

Significant space savings
Smaller ductwork saves space in shafts, plant rooms and ceiling

Can be installed tight up against the slab

Reduced floor to floor heights
Reduced construction costs on new buildings

Low noise levels

Low maintenance
No moving or consumable parts

Energy Savings 1 Compared to VAV

Source

Technology

Application

US Dept. of Energy Report (4/2001)

Beams/Radiant Ceilings

General

ASHRAE 2010 Technology Awards

Passive Chilled Beams

Call Center

41

ACEE Emerging Technologies Report (2009) Active Chilled Beams

General

20

ASHRAE Journal 2007

Active Chilled Beams

Laboratory

57

SmithGroup

Active Chilled Beams

Offices

24

*Compared to VAV

Energy Consumption Characteristics of Commercial Building HVAC

Systems publication prepared for U.S. Department of Energy

% Saving*
25#30

Active Chilled Beams 1 First Costs

Office Building, Palo Alto, CA
80,000 ft2
Thermostat in each office for beam design

costs were in line with VAV*

*HPAC Engineering Article European Technology Taking Hold in the U.S.: Chilled
Beams, Peter Rumsey, PE, CEM, FASHRAE, FRMI

Active Chilled Beams 1 First Costs

Office Building, Denver, CO
600,000 ft2 design/build renovation
Elimination of two air handlers per floor due to beams

the chilled beam system was equal

to the VAV system*
*HPAC Engineering Article European Technology Taking Hold in the U.S.: Chilled
Beams, Peter Rumsey, PE, CEM, FASHRAE, FRMI, January 1st 2010

Active Chilled Beams 1 Lifecycle Costs

100,000 ft2 Office Building, Cincinnati, OH
15 year lifecycle study
15% Energy Savings Compared to VAV
$0.79 versus $0.93 ft2

22% reduction in mechanical installation costs

$19.50 versus $25.00 per ft2

Lifecycle costs analysis over 15 years

Favored chilled beam system by 20%
$32 ft2 versus $40 ft2

HIXSON ARCHITECTURAL INTERIORS Spring 2009

LEED Certification 1 LEED NC V3.0

Optimize Energy Performance
# up to 48% (new) or 44% (existing)
more efficient than ASHRAE 90.1
(EA Credit 1) # up to 19 points
Increased Ventilation
# 30% more outdoor air than
ASHRAE 62
(IEQ Credit 2) # 1 point
Controllability of Systems
# individual temperature control
(IEQ Credit 6.2) # 1 point
Thermal Comfort
# meet ASHRAE 55
(IEQ Credit 7.1) # 1 point

(Minimum 40 points needed

for certification
out of 100 maximum)

Maintenance
No moving parts
No filter
No condensate pumps
No consumable parts
Up to 4 year inspection & clean
Easy maintenance access

Cleaning Access

Active Chilled Beams 1 Typical Installation

Active Chilled Beams 1 Typical Installation

Active Chilled Beams 1 Typical Installation

Concealed Active Beams

Bulkhead Active Chilled Beams

ACTIVE CHILLED BEAM DESIGN

CONSIDERATIONS

Building Suitability
Building Characteristics that favor Active Chilled Beams
Zones with moderate#high sensible load densities
Where primary airflows would be significantly higher than needed for
ventilation
Sensible Heat Ratios (SHR) of 0.8 and above

Buildings most affected by space constraints

Hi rises, existing buildings with induction systems

Zones where the acoustical environment is a key design

criterion
Laboratories where sensible loads are driving airflows as
opposed to air change rates
Buildings seeking LEED or Green Globes certification

Building Suitability
Characteristics that less favor Active Chilled Beams

Buildings with operable windows or leaky

construction
Beams with drain pans could be considered
Building pressurization control should be used

Zones with relatively low sensible load densities

Zones with relatively low sensible heat ratios and low
ventilation air requirements
Zones with high filtration requirements for the re#
circulated room air
Zone with high latent loads

APPLICATION EXAMPLE:
LABORATORIES

Laboratory Design Issues

Sensible heat gains of up to 70 BTUH/ft2
Space ventilation requirements of 6 to 8 ACH
Laboratories where chemicals and gases are present
require 100% outdoor air
Air systems require 15 to 20 ACH of outside air to
satisfy sensible load

Cooling Load and ACH

Benefits of Active Beams in Labs

Eliminated or reduced reheat
Reheat can account for 20% or more HVAC energy costs

Water more efficient transport medium

Reduces fan energy costs

Smaller space requirements

System sized for 6 ACH instead of 15 ACH

Active Chilled Beam Design

Cooling Load

= 65 BTU/H ft2

Ventilation Rate = 6 Air Changes

VAV Solution

= 15 Air Changes

Chilled Beam Solution = 6 Air Changes

Active Chilled Beam Solution = 6 x 6 Long, 130 CFM each

Reheat Reduction
VAV System

ACB System

Minimum Airflow

Minimum Airflow

6 ACH = 760 CFM

Cooling Load
65 BTU/H ft2
41,000 BTU/H Peak

Maximum Airflow
1,860 CFM (15 ACH)

Minimum Cooling without reheat

6 ACH @ 55F
16,600 BTU/H

Turndown without reheat

16,600/41,000
59%

6 ACH = 760 CFM

Cooling Load
65 BTU/H ft2
41,000 BTU/H Peak

Maximum Airflow
760 CFM

Minimum Cooling without reheat

6 ACH @ 65F
8,300 BTU/H

Turndown without reheat

8,300/41,000
80%

CASE STUDIES

250 South Wacker

Chicago, IL

250 S. Wacker, Chicago 1 Case Study

16#story tower
215,000 sq. ft.
1st floor retail
2 16th floor offices

Separate HVAC systems

for 1st and 16th floors

Perimeter induction system

with floor#mounted units
serving 2 # 15th floors

Interior constant volume/

variable temperature
system serving
2 15th floors

250 S. Wacker, Chicago Case Study

Building Renovated with 1

100% glazing with E#glass (190 Btuh/Ln.ft.

heat loss)

Single duct cooling only VAV interior

system

Evaluated fan#powered VAV or

active chilled beam
perimeter system

Seeking LEED
certification

250 S. Wacker, Chicago Case Study

Perimeter
System
Type

Existing
Induction
System

Proposed
Fan#powered
VAV System **

Proposed
Active Chilled
Beam System **

Design Cooling
Load

262 tons
(382 sq.ft./ton)

156 tons
(641 sq.ft./ton)

156 tons
(641 sq.ft./ton)

Primary Airflow

25,600 cfm
(0.5 cfm/sq.ft.)

86,270 cfm
(1.7 cfm/sq.ft.)

15,880 cfm
(0.3 cfm/sq.ft.)

Fan Energy at
Design

64 kW

182 kW

22 kW

Fan Energy at
70% of Design

64 kW

116 kW

22 kW

Pump Energy

28 kW

8 kW

12 kW

Combined Fan
& Pump Energy

92 kW

190 kW @
Design
124 kW @ 70%

34 kW

** Required larger ductwork/risers

** Used existing ductwork/risers

250 S. Wacker, Chicago Case Study

25 250 S. Wacker, Chicago Case Study

QUESTIONS?