KC-19-A015 Extended Abstract

Comparison of Hydronic Fan-

Coil Unit Energy Consumption
with Modulation and On-Off
Controls

Zahra Sardoueinasab Peng Yin, PhD Dennis O’Neal, PhD, PE

Student Member ASHRAE Associate Member ASHRAE Fellow ASHRAE

ABSTRACT HEADING
This paper investigated the energy saving potential of modulation control of hydronic fan-coil units (FCUs) relative to traditional on-off control. Building
load profiles were first generated by using a hotel building model in EnergyPlus under five different climates. The typical performance of variable air variable
water FCUs was represented by a group of empirical curves derived from experimental data. A system model consisting of multiple thermal zones served by
FCUs, a variable speed pump, and a chiller was constructed by connecting the component models following the mass and energy balance approach. The
simulation results showed that the modulation control could save 20-30% in FCU fan energy, 50-70% in pump energy, and 2-7% in total HVAC
energy compared with the traditional on-off control.

INTRODUCTION

Hydronic room fan-coil units (FCUs) are widely used in commercial buildings. Traditional FCUs are equipped
with permanent split capacitor (PSC) motors with three or more discrete fan speed settings. The water flow rate is
controlled by on-off valves that are either fully open or fully closed. More recently, an increasing number of
manufacturers are using electronically commutated motors (ECMs) and modulating valves in FCU design. The use of
ECM fans allows variable airflow operation while the modulating valves can vary water flow over a wide range. The pair
of ECM fans and modulating valves enables more precise thermal load tracking by varying both air and water flows.
Considering that FCUs are rarely running at the full load condition, energy savings would be expected from the
modulation control. Also, modulating both air and water flows in proportional with zone load could mitigate the low
delta-T syndrome in chilled water loops. The objective of this paper is to investigate the energy saving potential of
modulation control relative to the on-off control in systems with hydronic FCUs.

METHODOLOGY

As the first step, a four-story hotel prototype building model (Deru et al. 2011) was simulated in EnergyPlus under
five different climates to generate hourly zone load profiles throughout a year. The selected hotel prototype building
model has a dimension of 55 m ×18.3 m ×12 m (180 ft × 60 ft × 40 ft) with a total conditioned floor area of 4013 m2
(43200 ft2). Building operating characteristics, such as occupancy, internal heat gains, infiltration, and ventilation, were
added to the building model along with representative schedules and thermostat settings for rented and vacant rooms.

46 © 2019 ASHRAE
Published in ASHRAE Transactions, Volume 125, Part 2
 A group of empirical curves were used to represent the typical performance of variable air variable water FCUs.
These empirical curves were derived based on the experimental data from ten horizontal high-capacity FCUs provided
by three manufacturers over a wide flow and thermal conditions. The gross total and sensible cooling capacities of FCUs
can be represented over the tested operating range by using the following equations
𝑞̇ 𝑡𝑜𝑡 = 𝑞̇ 𝑡𝑜𝑡,𝑟𝑒𝑓 × 𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 × 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑡𝑜𝑡 (1)
𝑞̇ 𝑠𝑒𝑛 = 𝑞̇ 𝑠𝑒𝑛,𝑟𝑒𝑓 × 𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 × 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑠𝑒𝑛 (2)
where 𝑞̇ 𝑡𝑜𝑡,𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 and 𝑞̇ 𝑠𝑒𝑛,𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 are the gross total and gross sensible capacities measured at the reference condition
with the maximum airflow rate, 𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 is the flow modifier curve, and 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑡𝑜𝑡 and 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑠𝑒𝑛 are temperature modifier
curves for total and sensible capacities, respectively. The capacities measured at the condition of 80/67°F (26.7/19.4°C),
dry- and wet- bulb temperatures (DB and WB), 45°F (7.2°C) entering water temperature (EWT), 10°F ΔT, and
maximum airflow were selected as the reference performance considering that this condition has been traditionally used
for FCU performance rating. The flow modifier curve 𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 is used to account for the impact of air and water flows on
the cooling capacity while the temperature modifier curves 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑡𝑜𝑡 and 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑠𝑒𝑛 are used when inlet air and water
thermal conditions deviate from the reference condition. All three modifier curves are linear curves with coefficients
and input parameters summarized in Table 1.
Table 1 Coefficients and inputs for performance curves

Name Input Linear factor Offset factor R2 value

𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 airflow fraction 0.999 -0.0135 0.980
𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑡𝑜𝑡 WB-EWT 0.0449 0.00691 0.941
𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑠𝑒𝑛 DB-EWT 0.0328 -0.158 0.973

The operating sequences were developed for variable air variable water FCUs in cooling and heating modes based
on the assumption of known inlet air DB, WB and EWT. In the cooling mode, the airflow rate 𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 required to satisfy
the zone sensible load can be determined by solving Equation (3)
𝐿̇𝑠𝑒𝑛
𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 (𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 ) = (3)
𝑞̇ 𝑠𝑒𝑛,𝑟𝑒𝑓 × 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑠𝑒𝑛 (𝐷𝐵 − 𝐸𝑊𝑇)

The calculated 𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 needs to be capped between the minimum and maximum airflow provided by the fan. The water flow
rate can be calculated as
𝑞̇ 𝑡𝑜𝑡,𝑟𝑒𝑓 × 𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 (𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 ) × 𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝,𝑡𝑜𝑡 (𝑊𝐵 − 𝐸𝑊𝑇)
𝑄̇𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = (4)
𝛥𝑇 × 𝜌𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 × 𝑐𝑝,𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

where water 𝛥𝑇 was linearly varied with airflow fraction between 15 and 10°F (4.4 and 7.6°C). The discharge air
temperature and enthalpy can be calculated following the mass and energy balance across the cooling coil.
𝑞̇ 𝑠𝑒𝑛 − 𝑞̇ 𝑏𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
𝑇𝑎𝑖𝑟,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑐 = 𝑇𝑠𝑒𝑡 − (5)
𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝜌𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑐𝑝
𝑞̇ 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 − 𝑞̇ 𝑏𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑟,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑐 = ℎ𝑠𝑒𝑡 − (6)
𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝜌𝑎𝑖𝑟

The discharge air humidity ratio can be determined through the psychrometric calculation with the air dry-bulb
temperature and the enthalpy as inputs. For simplicity, electric heating coils were modeled in the heating operation with
the maximum discharge temperature at FCU outlet being limited to be 20°F (11.1°C) above the zone setpoint (Yin and
O'Neal 2018). The airflow rate required to satisfy the zone sensible load can be calculated as
𝐿̇𝑠𝑒𝑛
𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 = (7)
𝜌𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑐𝑝 (𝑇𝑠𝑒𝑡 − 𝑇𝑎𝑖𝑟,𝑜𝑢𝑡 )

ASHRAE Transactions 47
Published in ASHRAE Transactions, Volume 125, Part 2
The electric heating coil energy can be calculated from airflow rate, air temperature rise, and FCU blower heat gain.
𝑞̇ ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 𝑄̇𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝜌𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑐𝑝,𝑎𝑖𝑟 (𝑇𝑎𝑖𝑟,𝑜𝑢𝑡 − 𝑇𝑠𝑒𝑡 ) − 𝑞̇ 𝑏𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 (8)

Upon the completion of zone analysis, the water flow rate in the chilled water loop is the sum of water flow rate in each
individual zone. A variable speed pump was defined according to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 2018). Also, a
simple chiller model was defined with a constant COP.

RESULTS

The energy consumption of FCUs with PSC fans and on-off control was selected as the baseline case. The energy
savings of FCUs with ECM fans and modulation control were determined as the percentage change relative to the
baseline. Table 2 summarizes the percentage change in the annual energy consumption relative to the baseline.
Table 2 Summary of Percentage Change in Annual Energy Consumption
FCU Fan, FCU Electric HVAC System,
Location Chiller, % Chilled Water Pump, %
% Heating Coil, % %
Tampa, FL -24 5 -3 -50 -7
Atlanta, GA -20 5 -3 -57 -7
Albuquerque, NM -30 4 -4 -75 -7
Denver, CO -28 3 -4 -71 -5
Rochester, MN -24 2 -3 -55 -2

As can be seen in Table 2, the modulation control of air and water flows leads to significant savings in FCU fans
and chilled water pump. These savings were achieved by allowing fans and pumps running at lower speeds in part load
conditions. The FCU electric heating coil energy increased by 2-5% compared with the baseline, which is caused by the
decrease in FCU fan heat gains. Since FCU fans are in the air stream, it is assumed that the fan power is completely
converted to heat gains and absorbed by the conditioned air. At a given heating load, more heating energy is needed
from electric heating coils to compensate for the decreased heat gains from FCU fans. The chiller energy consumption
decreased by 3-4% compared with the baseline. Although both control cases matched the zone cooling sensible load, it
was found that the modulation control delivered less latent capacity compared with the on-off control. Also, the less
heat gains from chilled water pump and FCU fans contribute to the chiller energy reduction. Compared with the
baseline, the modulation control had 2-7% energy savings in the HVCA system.

CONCLUSION

The energy saving potential of modulation control of FCUs relative to the on-off control was investigated in this
study by using simulated building load profiles and performance curves derived from experimental data. The results
showed 2-7% energy savings in an HVAC system using modulation control compared with the on-off control depending
on local climates. Future study will focus on incorporating a more sophisticated chiller model for energy calculation.
The low delta-T in chilled water loops has negative impact on the chiller energy consumption, which cannot be captured
by using the simple chiller model with a constant COP.

REFERENCES
ASHRAE. 2018. ASHRAE Standard 90.1, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta: ASHRAE
Deru, M., K. Field, D. Studer, K. Benne, B. Griffith, P. Torcellini, B. Liu, M. Halverson, D. Winiarski and M. Rosenberg.
2011. US Department of Energy commercial reference building models of the national building stock.
Yin, P. and D. L. O'Neal. 2018. Modelling Variable Airflow Parallel Fan-Powered Terminal Units with a Mass and Energy
Balance Approach. ASHRAE Transactions 124: 33-43.

48 ASHRAE Transactions
Published in ASHRAE Transactions, Volume 125, Part 2