| 
 Scope  
In effect since March 2003, Section 601.4 of the Florida
                    Building Code applies to residential and commercial buildings
                    having interior doors and one, centrally located return air
                    intake per heating and cooling system. 
 Objective Of The New Florida HVAC Code Requirement  
Reduce
                      pressure difference in closed rooms with respect to (wrt)
                      the space where the central return is located to 0.01” water
                      column (wc) or 2.5 pascal (Pa) or less. Pressure imbalances
                      created by restricted return air flow from rooms isolated
                      from the central return by closed interior doors create
                      uncontrolled air flow patterns. 
 Technical
                    Background  
 | 
 
  Figure 80  
                        Return
                      Air Flow Test Chamber   | 
 
 
Ideally, forced-air heating and cooling systems circulate
                    an equal volume of return air and supply air through the
                    conditioning system, keeping air pressure throughout the
                    building neutral. Each conditioned space in the building
                  should, ideally, be at neutral air pressure at all times. 
When a space is under a positive air pressure, indoor air
                    will be pushed outward in the walls, floor and ceiling. When
                    a space is under a negative pressure, air will be pulled
                    inward through the walls, floor and ceiling. Negative and
                    positive air pressures in buildings result from uncontrolled
                    air flow patterns. 
Section 601.4 of the Florida Building Code specifically
                       
                    deals with the uncontrolled air flow pattern when interior
                  doors are closed thereby reducing return air flow from the
                  closed room, while maintaining the same supply air flow to
                  the room. This imbalance of supply and return air has been
                  addressed conventionally by the common practice of undercutting
                  interior doors to allow return air to flow from the room.
                  This research quantifies the volume of air flow provided
                  by this and other methods of return air egress from closed
                  rooms. 
Section
                      601.4 limits the air pressure imbalance in closed rooms
                      to 0.01” wc or 2.5 pascals when compared to,
                    or with respect to (wrt), the main body of the building where
                    the return is located. With door undercuts, researchers have
                    regularly observed room pressures with respect to the main
                    body of the house (wrt mainbody) of +7 pascals (pa) or more.
                    A room with this level of air pressure (+7pa, wrt mainbody)
                    is trapping air, starving the heating/cooling system of return
                    air. As the heating/cooling system struggles to pull in the
                    designed amount of air, the resulting negative pressure pulls
                    air into the main body of the building along the path(es)
                    of least resistance. Usually this means that air is flowing
                    through the walls, floor and ceiling from unconditioned spaces
                    or outside environment to makeup for the trapped air in the
                    closed room.  
In the closed room, positive pressure builds up when return
                    air is trapped. Conversely, the space with the central return
                    gets depressurized because extra return air is being removed
                    to make up for the air trapped in the closed room. More air
                    is leaving the space (return air) than is entering the space
                    (supply air). The positive pressure in the closed rooms pushes air
                    into unconditioned spaces, such as the attic and wall cavities.
                    The negative pressure in the main body of the building pulls air
                    from unconditioned spaces. In Florida, the air brings heat
                    and moisture with it that become an extra cooling load. This
                    air is referred to as “mechanically induced infiltration” since
                    the negative pressure drawing infiltration air in was created
                    by the mechanical system. 
 Styles of Pressure Relief  
 | 
 
  Figure 81 Installing
                      unbaffled  
                      return air flow through wall grille   | 
 
 | 
 
  Figure 82 Installing
                              sound baffled return air flow through wall insert
                      made by Tamarack.   | 
 
 
When
                      return air flow is restricted by closed doors, it creates
                    pressure differences between parts of the building. This
                    can be prevented by installing a fully ducted return system,
                    by creating a passive return air pathway such as a louvered
                    transoms, door undercut, “jump duct”, through-wall
                  grilles, or a baffled through-wall grill. 
A “jump duct” is
                      simply a piece of flex duct attached to a ceiling register
                      in the closed room and another ceiling register in the
                      main body of the house. A jumper duct provides some noise
                      control while providing a clear air flow path.  
A
                    through-wall grille is the simplest and least expensive approach
                    to pressure relief for closed rooms. Holes opposite each
                    other on either side of the wall within the same stud bay
                    are covered with a return air grilles. The  
                    downside of this
                    approach is a severe compromise the privacy of the closed
                    room. An improvement on this theme would be to locate one
                    of the grilles high on the wall and the opposing opening
                    low on the wall. Also, such openings in interior wall cavities
                    introduce conditioned air into what is typically an unconditioned
                    space possibly contributing to other building problems.  
However,
                      connecting the two openings with a sleeve of rigid ducting
                      forms an enclosed air flow path that limits introduction
                    of conditioned air into the wall cavity but doesn’t
                    solve the visual and sound privacy issues. To address this
                    problem, BAIHP Industry Partner Tamarack developed a sleeve
                    with a baffle that can reduce the transfer of light and sound
                    but still provide adequate air flow to minimize pressure
                    differences. The product is called a Return Air Path (RAP). 
To
                      validate the effectiveness of this product and other approaches
                      to providing return air pathways, Tamarack and BAIHP researchers
                      devised a test apparatus and conducted experiments in FSEC’s
                      Building Science Laboratory. 
 Testing Protocol  
In
                    May of 2003, a chamber was constructed at FSEC (Figure
                    80) that simulated a frame construction room with an
                    8 foot high ceiling. A “Minneapolis Duct Blaster” was
                    connected to one end of the room with a flexible duct connection
                    leading out of the room to provide control over pressure
                    in test chamber. 
In
                      the middle of the chamber, on a stool, a radio was tuned “off
                    station” to effectively create a standardized level
                    of “white noise” at 57 dBA inside the chamber
                    with the “door” closed. The temperature at the
                    start of the tests was 80°F at 40%RH. A sound meter was
                    located outside the chamber on a stand 4 feet above the floor
                    and 20 inches from the middle of the chamber wall surface. 
The
                      sound level in the test facility outside the chamber with
                      the “white noise” turned off was 36.4 dBA
                    and with the “white noise” turned on was 41.5
                    dBA, an average, sampled over a 30 second period. A series
                    of tests on 31 different set-ups were performed, measuring
                    the flow at 3 different pressure levels and recording a 30
                    second sound sample with the “Duct Blaster” deactivated. 
Tests
                      were made for 6” and 8” jump ducts, five
                    different sized wall openings (Figure 81) in different
                    configurations including straight through with and without
                    sleeves, straight through with sleeve and privacy baffle (Figure
                    82), and high/low offset using the wall cavity as a
                    duct, and three different slots simulating three different
                    size undercut doors.  
 Results  
Table 51 summarizes
                      the results of these tests arranged in ascending air flow
                      order based on the results at 2.5 Pascals (0.01” wc),
                      the maximum allowable pressure in a closed room under new
                      requirement in Florida Building Code, Section 601.4. 
 Table
                            51 Air Flow Resulting from Various Return Air  
                          Path
                            Configurations at
                                Controlled Room Pressure  
                          Difference (ΔP)with respect to Return Zone  
 | 
 
 Dim.   | 
 Air
                            Flow (cfm) at   | 
 Area   | 
 Air
                            Flow to Area Ratio   | 
 Return
                            Air Path Configuration   | 
 Extra   | 
 
 ΔP=1
                            pa   | 
 ΔP=2.5 pa  
 | 
 ΔP=5
                            pa   | 
 
 6 dia   | 
 22   | 
 36   | 
 52   | 
 28   | 
 1.29   | 
 Jumper Duct   | 
 | 
 
 4x12   | 
 26   | 
 41   | 
 60   | 
 48   | 
 0.85   | 
 Wall Cavity   | 
 | 
 
 4x12   | 
 25   | 
 42   | 
 61   | 
 48   | 
 0.88   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 RAP Insert   | 
 
 4x12   | 
 28   | 
 45   | 
 65   | 
 48   | 
 0.94   | 
 No Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 4x12   | 
 29   | 
 46   | 
 68   | 
 48   | 
 0.96   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 8x8   | 
 31   | 
 49   | 
 72   | 
 64   | 
 0.77   | 
 Wall Cavity   | 
 | 
 
 12x6   | 
 32   | 
 52   | 
 75   | 
 72   | 
 0.72   | 
 Wall Cavity   | 
 | 
 
 12x6   | 
 33   | 
 56   | 
 82   | 
 72   | 
 0.78   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 RAP Insert   | 
 
 8x8   | 
 35   | 
 57   | 
 81   | 
 64   | 
 0.89   | 
 No Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 8x8   | 
 34   | 
 58   | 
 83   | 
 64   | 
 0.91   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 RAP Insert   | 
 
 8x8   | 
 36   | 
 59   | 
 85   | 
 64   | 
 0.92   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 12x6   | 
 36   | 
 60   | 
 88   | 
 72   | 
 0.83   | 
 No Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 12x6   | 
 37   | 
 60   | 
 88   | 
 72   | 
 0.83   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 1 x 30   | 
 39   | 
 61   | 
 88   | 
 30   | 
 2.03   | 
 Slot   | 
 | 
 
 8 dia   | 
 38   | 
 62   | 
 90   | 
 50   | 
 1.24   | 
 Jumper Duct   | 
 | 
 
 1 x 32   | 
 42   | 
 65   | 
 92   | 
 32   | 
 2.03   | 
 Slot   | 
 | 
 
 8x8   | 
 40   | 
 67   | 
 95   | 
 64   | 
 1.05   | 
 Wall Cavity   | 
 Two Inside Holes   | 
 
 8x14   | 
 44   | 
 70   | 
 100   | 
 112   | 
 0.63   | 
 Wall Cavity   | 
 | 
 
 12x12   | 
 45   | 
 72   | 
 103   | 
 144   | 
 0.50   | 
 Wall Cavity   | 
 | 
 
 1 x 36   | 
 49   | 
 73   | 
 103   | 
 36   | 
 2.03   | 
 Slot   | 
 | 
 
 8x14   | 
 61   | 
 101   | 
 146   | 
 112   | 
 0.90   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 RAP Insert   | 
 
 8x14   | 
 68   | 
 107   | 
 153   | 
 112   | 
 0.96   | 
 No Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 8x14   | 
 68   | 
 110   | 
 154   | 
 112   | 
 0.98   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 12x12   | 
 75   | 
 119   | 
 170   | 
 144   | 
 0.83   | 
 No Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 12x12   | 
 74   | 
 120   | 
 169   | 
 144   | 
 0.83   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 | 
 
 12x12   | 
 74   | 
 120   | 
 174   | 
 144   | 
 0.83   | 
 Wall Sleeve   | 
 RAP Insert   | 
 
 
  
 | 
 
Figure 83 Return air flow path  
                          provided
                            by jumper duct 
  | 
 
 
By
                      comparing the air flow of the slots (door undercut) to the
                      openings with grilles, the detrimental effect of the grille
                      becomes clear. The ratio of air flow (cfm) to the surface
                      area of the slot (in 2) is more than 2 to 1 (for example;
                      30 in 2 to 61 cfm), whereas with grilles in place the ratio
                      of air flow to area averages 0.83 to 1 (for example; 72 in
                      2 to 60 cfm). Similarly, the jump duct (Figure 83) assemblies’ air
                      flow to area ratios average 1.19 to 1. In any calculation
                      for the size of the through wall assembly, the resistance
                      of the grille becomes the critical factor in determining
                  the size of the opening for achieving the desired flow.  
The following formulas account for the grille resistance
                    and maybe used to size return air path openings. 
- Door undercuts: Area Sq. In. = CFM/2
 
- Wall opening with grilles: Area Sq. In. = CFM/.83
 
- Flexible
                    jumper duct with grilles: Diameter = ÖCFM
 
 
Although there does not appear to be significant flow improvement
                    when a sleeve is used, such an assembly will reduce the possibility
                    of inadvertent air flow from the wall cavity itself. 
The high/low grilles using the wall cavity reach maximum
                    flow at 72 cfm because of the dimensional limitations of
                    the wall cavity itself. Increasing the opening of each grille
                    beyond 112 square inches does not significantly increase
                    the flow of air through the wall cavity. 
The accompanying bar chart (Figure 84) can
                      be used to select the best method at various air flows
                      while maintaining the room-to-building pressure difference
                      at .01” wc.
                    The strategies are ranked by air flow allowance (cfm) on
                    equivalent to supply air delivered to the room. For example,
                    an 8” jumper duct could be used to maintain 0.01 wc
                    in rooms with supply air up to 60 cfm. Note that these transfer
                    methods are additive so that, for example, combining a 6” transfer
                    duct with a 1” undercut a 30” door, will provide
                    a flow of 95 cfm to be delivered at .01” wc (Figure
                    85) or combining a R.A.P. 12.12 with a 1” undercut
                    would allow up to 175 cfm to be delivered (Figure 86).
                    It should be noted that door undercuts are under builder
                    not HVAC control and that the actual dimensions are greatly
                    affected by the thickness of the floor coverings. 
Summary  
Ideally buildings with forced air heating/cooling systems
                    are pressure neutral. The same amount of air is removed from
                    the building (and each room) as is supplied to it. However,
                    this balance can be disturbed in homes that have one, centrally
                    located return intake when interior doors are closed, blocking
                    return of air supplied to private rooms. Other factors outside
                    the scope of this study may also result in household pressure
                    imbalances.  
These research results are relevant to homes with forced
                    air heating and cooling systems having a single, centrally
                    located return air inlet with no engineered path for return
                    air to exit closed rooms. Such systems pull return air from
                    the whole house as long as interior doors are open. When
                    an interior door is closed, more air is supplied to the closed
                    room than can be removed, or returned, from the room.  
Positive
                      pressure builds up in the closed room while a negative
                      pressure occurs in the connected spaces. Positive pressure
                      presses outward on all surfaces and may eventually reduce
                      supply air flow into the closed room and while pushing
                      conditioned air through small breaks in the room’s
                    air barrier.  
To overcome house pressure imbalances caused by door closure,
                    a variety of passive return path strategies are studied including
                    a product produced by BAIHP Industry Partner Tamarack that
                    overcomes privacy issues associated with through-wall grills.
                    Achievable air flows for jump ducts, through-wall grilles,
                    sleeved through-wall grilles, and the Tamarack baffled through-wall
                    grille are presented.  
 | 
 
  Figure 84 Maximum
                            air flow achievable using various return air paths
                             
                          from closed rooms for a give supply at a room
                          pressure of 2.5 pa or 0.1” 
                      wc with respect to the return
                            zone. For example, an 8” jumper duct could  
                          be used to maintain 0.01 wc in rooms with supply
                    air up to 60 cfm.   | 
 
 
- Heat
                      Pump Water Heater Evaluation
 
 
 | 
 
  Figure 87 Airflow
                            measurements  
                          using a Duct tester on heat pump  
                          cold
                    air discharge side   | 
 
 
BAIHP researcher tested the efficiency of a heat pump water
                    heater manufactured by EMI, a division of ECR International.
                    The unit features a compressor (R-134A refrigerant) with
                    a wrap-around heat exchanger mounted on top of a 50-gallon
                    storage tank. The latest controller board model #AK 4001
                  was installed during the test. 
The
                      temperature regulation of the unit is achieved by an adjustable
                      potentiometer which sets a resistance that is measured
                      by the controller board and translated into the corresponding
                      temperatures. The set temperature is stored in the controller’s
                    memory.  
The
                      controller logic is designed to operate  
                    the heat pump when
                    the temperature in the bottom of the tank drops below the
                    effective dead band temperature of 30°F (20°F
                    deadband + assumed stratification of 10°F). The heat
                    pump shuts off when the temperature in the bottom of the
                    tank has reached 10°F below the set point temperature.
                    The upper element of the tank operates only when the temperature
                    in the upper tank reaches 27°F below the set point temperature.  
During
                      laboratory testing the controller’s performance
                    was evaluated by measuring inlet and outlet water temperatures
                    using thermocouples mounted to the copper inlet and outlet
                    pipes as well as a Fluke hand-held thermometer inserted into
                    the hot water outlet stream. One minute average measurements
                    during draws were in agreement with the 10°F stratification
                    logic utilized by EMI. 
Also,
                      following a series of hot water draws during the efficiency
                      test (described below), the compressed refrigerant heat
                      was able to replenish the tank to the 130 °F temperature
                    level. However, following the heating recovery, neither compressor
                    or resistance element were activated during standby until
                    three days later when bottom tank temperatures dropped below
                    95°F. The compressor was called into operation when the
                    tank was submitted to a hot water draw which triggered the
                    ON compressor event in less than a minute. 
Table 52 is
                      a summary of electrical efficiency results generated from
                      three tests performed in the laboratory. Tank pre-heating
                      for test #1 and #2 were performed in a similar way, by
                      forcing the compressor to turn “ON”.
                    The tank was allowed to loose heat on standby (1-2 days)
                    and then purged with a draw of at least 30 gallons of new
                    water. The purge forced the compressor to operate. Preheating
                    for the test #3 was performed with the tank relatively hot
                    and only twelve gallons of hot water were purged. This might
                    explain the higher outlet temperatures read during test 3.
                    For all three tests, we attempted to heat water so that initial
                    hot water draws were near 130 °F (+/- 5 °F). However,
                    we noticed that temperatures at the top of the tank (upper
                    level) increased slightly with each purge (i.e., 10.7 gallon
                    draw). During the third test shown in Table 52 for
                    example, outlet temperatures during the first draw averaged
                    129.2 °F, but during the last draw temperatures reached
                    an average of 143.4 °F. The values shown for test #3
                    shows an overall hot water delivery temperature (T outlet)
                    of 136.6 °F. The controller never called for compressor
                    or auxiliary energy when left on standby during the completion
                    of the test (24-hr.). 
 Table
                            52 Electrical Efficiency Results from Laboratory
                            Tests   | 
 
 Test   | 
 Total
                            Gallons Drawn   | 
 Average
                            T inlet (°F)  
 | 
 Average
                            T outlet (°F)   | 
 Total
                            Qout kWh   | 
 Total
                            Qin kWh   | 
 COP   | 
 
 #1   | 
 63   | 
 82.3 °F   | 
 133.2 °F   | 
 7.756   | 
 3.974   | 
 1.95   | 
 
 #2   | 
 53.5   | 
 82.1 °F   | 
 131.2 °F   | 
 6.533   | 
 3.516   | 
 1.86   | 
 
 #3   | 
 65.9   | 
 82.0 °F   | 
 136.4 °F   | 
 8.789   | 
 4.254   | 
 2.06   | 
 
 
 Conclusions  
The
                      WattSaver™ heat pump water heater is rated with
                    an energy factor (EF) of 2.45 and clearly demonstrates that
                    heating water can be accomplished at a relative higher efficiency
                    when compared to conventional electric water heaters. Installed
                    in a conditioned space, and under operation with inlet water
                    temperatures above 80 °F (e.g., Central Florida summer
                    water mains temperatures), an average electrical (COP) efficiency
                    of 2.0 was attained. Other measurements and performance indicators
                    are summarized in Table 53. 
Two
                      caveats to the heat pump water heater’s performance
                    was first the delayed recovery during standby which would
                    present larger hot water temperature variation to the residential
                    user. This also leads to diminished hot water capacity during
                    long periods of no hot water use activity. Second, because
                    the compressor’s discharge refrigerant (i.e., hottest
                    temperatures) enter the wrap-around heat exchanger at the
                    top of the tank, the unit demonstrated larger hot temperature
                    variations at the tank’s upper levels when the top
                    portion was already pre-heated. These stratified tank temperature
                    levels differ from those obtained when heating is started
                    with the tank filled up with mains (colder) water conditions.  
Table
                              53 Summary of Other Measurements and Performance
                              Overview   | 
 
Typical
                              Cooling 
Air
                          Flow rate: 87 CFM (Figure 87) 
Top
                          cavity/Fan operating : -6.4 pa 
Evaporator
                          Air temp: 73 °F (63%RH entering) / 53.1 °F
                          (leaving) 
Condensate:
                          502.6 g/hr. (1.1 lb/hr) 
Sensible:
                          1900 Btu/hr. 
Latent:
                          957 Btu/hr 
Total
                      Capacity : 2,857 Btu/hr  | 
Current
                              consumption (208 VAC) 
Compressor2.9
                          amps 
Fans
                          (2) : 0.08 Amps/each 
Total
                      3.08 amps   | 
 
 
- NightCool - Building Integrated Cooling System
 
 
Technical
                      Background  
Using
                      a building’s roof to take advantage
                      of long-wave radiation to the night sky has been long identified
                      as a potentially productive means to reduce space cooling
                      in buildings. This is because a typical roof at 75 F will
                      radiate at about 55-60 W/m2 to clear night sky and about
                      25 W/m2 to a cloudy sky. For a typical roof (250 square
                      meters), this represents a cooling potential of 6,000 -
                      14,000 Watts or about 1.5 - 4.0 tons of cooling potential
                      each summer night. Various physical characteristics (differential
                      approach temperature, fan power, convection and conductance)
                      limit what can be actually achieved, however, so that perhaps
                      half of this rate of cooling can be practically obtained.
                      Even so, careful examination of vapor compression space
                      cooling in many homes in Florida shows that typical homes
                      experience cooling loads averaging 33 kWh per day from
                      June - September with roughly 9.2 kWh (28%) of this air
                      conditioning coming between the hours of 9 PM and 7 AM
                    when night sky radiation could greatly reduce space cooling. 
The
                      big problem with night sky radiation cooling concepts has
                      been that they have typically required exotic building
                      configurations. The research literature is extensive. These
                      have included very expensive “roof ponds” or,
                    at the very least, movable roof insulation with massive roofs
                    so that heat is not gained during daytime hours. The key
                    element of this configuration is that rather than using movable
                    insulation with a massive roof or roof ponds, the insulation
                    is installed conventionally on the ceiling. The operation
                    of the system is detailed in the attached schematic.  
During
                      the day, the building is de-coupled from the roof and heat
                      gain to the attic space is minimized by the white reflective
                      metal roof. During this time the space is conventionally
                      cooled with a small air conditioner. However, at night
                      as the interior surface of the metal roof in the attic
                      space falls two degrees below the desired interior thermostat
                      setpoint, the return air for the air conditioner is channeled
                      through the attic space by way of electrically controlled
                      louvers with the variable speed fan set to low. The warm
                      air from the interior then goes to the attic and warms
                      the interior side of the metal roof which then radiates
                      the heat away to the night sky. As increased cooling is
                      required, the air handler fan speed is increased. If the
                      interior air temperature does not cool sufficiently or
                      the relative humidity is not kept within bounds (<55%
                      RH) the compressor is energized to supplement the sky radiation
                      cooling. However, by midnight on clear nights, the temperature
                      of the metal will have dropped sufficiently to begin to
                      dehumidify the air introduced to the attic. The collected
                      moisture on the underside of the roof will then drain to
                      collection points at either side of the soffits so that
                      the home can be dehumidified during evening hours by way
                      of only the operation of the blower fan (200-300 W). The
                      massive construction of the home interior (tile floor and
                      concrete interior walls) will store sensible cooling to
                    reduce space conditioning needs during the following day. 
 Experimental Design  
BAIHP
                      researcher Danny Parker developed an experiment to test
                      the viability of NightCooling in Florida’s hot-humid
                    climate. However, construction of a suitable laboratory facility
                    to conduct this study has been delayed. BAIHP is working
                    with UCF and local officials to develop a design allowable
                    under current codes for a pair of free standing, room size
                    structures to serve as a “control” and a “test” case.
                    A schematic of the test case and a similar drawing of the
                    concept in a real home are shown in Figures 88 and 89. 
 | 
 
 Figure 88 -Scehmatic
                      design for NightCool test facility.    | 
 
 | 
 
 Figure 89 Schematic
                      of NightCool concept in typical residential building.   | 
 
 
 
  |