January-February 2008

Big-Picture Retrofitting

An engineering team improves one university’s cooling and heating efficiency by focusing on several buildings’ impact on the distribution network.

Article Tools

Create a Link to this Article

By Don Talend

Comments

A recent retrofit of the cooling and heating system at the Lakeshore Campus of Chicago’s Loyola University demonstrates how a holistic approach to configuring such a system at an operation consisting of multiple buildings can provide a tremendous boost to efficiency at a minimal cost.

The 100-year-old campus, which serves about 7,500 students, has more than 50 buildings, including the library and sports center, spread throughout 100 acres on the city’s north side. Like many multifacility properties, it has experienced incremental construction of buildings and campuswide infrastructures throughout the years. As is often the case on such a property, the construction was done in piecemeal fashion by various contractors and within budgetary constraints at various times. The result, an architectural consultant for Loyola notes, was a campus-wide HVAC system that operated with less-than-ideal efficiency and thus generated higher-than-necessary energy costs.

Nancy Hamill Governale, owner of architectural firm Facilities Research and director of facilities and adjunct faculty member at the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT), says that she found out about opportunities for efficiency improvements at Loyola through a chance meeting with the university’s vice president of facilities back in 2000. “We started talking about some of the energy conservation work that I was doing at IIT at the time, and we felt that it was really a good fit that I start consulting up at Loyola—Loyola was actually my first assignment,” Hamill Governale notes, regarding the founding of the consulting firm.

“Nancy’s a very interesting woman; she’s not like any other architect I’ve ever met. She’s extremely mechanically oriented and inclined and extremely knowledgeable about energy,” says Charlie McLauchlan, president of Delta Controls Chicago, which supplied control systems and engineering for the reconfiguration of the HVAC distribution network for Loyola. The team consisted of Delta Controls Chicago and Elara Engineering of Hillside, IL, which was retained for mechanical and electrical engineering services on the project.

Energy audits of both the Water Tower (downtown) campus and the Lakeshore campus were the first instance of Facilities Research’s approach to consulting. Because energy costs were extremely high at both campuses and it would be impossible to rectify the situation in one fell swoop, “I wanted to put together more of a package that would allow a facilities group to implement projects on an ongoing basis,” says Hamill Governale. Wayne Sliwa, senior project manager with Loyola, worked with Hamill Governale in developing a project-specific matrix that the University could implement over time according to available funds.

One study that Hamill Governale oversaw was whether or not the Lakeshore campus’ existing chiller plant was operating at optimal energy efficiency while supplying chilled water to nine of the largest existing academic and athletics buildings and would do the same for some new buildings that would be added to the campus in the future. An upgrade of the existing chiller plant and chilled-water distribution network eliminated the need for Loyola to have a new $750,000 underground pipe network constructed, saving the university about $30,000 in energy costs every month, and winning a First Place Engineering Excellence Award from the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Illinois Chapter in 2003.

Existing System
The chiller plant was equipped with a 1,250-ton-capacity centrifugal chiller that appeared to be about 30 years old with no records to indicate the unit’s operating condition, along with two relatively new 750-ton centrifugal chillers. These chillers were the central equipment in a traditional constant-flow chilled-water distribution network that prioritized chiller preservation, by maintaining design flow at all times, over energy savings.

Until recently, when energy efficiency became a higher priority than ever, chilled-water distribution networks had been designed to maintain a more or less constant flow rate in order to minimize peak loading on chiller pumps, explains McLauchlan. “Up until a few years ago, all of the chiller manufacturers had this mantra that the water flow through the chiller had a very strict, constant volume requirement; they had a certain range, but it was a very tight range of flow that was safe and appropriate,” he says. “So nobody wanted to go outside that box.”

At Loyola and many other chilled-water distribution networks, this constant flow rate was maintained with a primary-secondary-tertiary piping configuration whereby chilled water is pumped and distributed via three-way valves at air handlers. The primary or main piping loop carried chilled water from the plant to three-way valves at the air handlers. At each building served by the main loop, the secondary pumps took chilled water off of the main loop and redirected the appropriate volume of chilled water for the building’s heating and cooling design load; the return water flowed back to the plant via the main loop after going through the coil three-way valves. This design resulted in large quantities of unused chilled water going directly back to the plant via the three-way valve bypass port. The water returning via the bypass had a temperature that was only about 3 or 4 degrees Fahreheit higher than the chiller output water (described as the temperature differential or delta-t), making the chiller consume more energy to lower the chilled water temperature. The warmer the return water, the more efficient the chiller operates, because heat from the return water is essentially transferred to the chiller in the form of kinetic energy.

Advertisement

Hamill Governale brings up a typical problem that resulted from the piecemeal fashion in which new buildings were constructed on campus throughout the years. “It was pretty obvious from a master planning perspective that when buildings had been put in over the years, they were put in on a one-by-one basis, and as those buildings were added on, the valving, the distribution, and the route that the chilled water had to take really didn’t benefit that continuous delta-t,” she says. “It detracted from the efficiency—that goes back to the ’60s and ’70s, when those buildings were added on.” As a result, some buildings were cooled less efficiently than others, leading to numerous comfort complaints from students and staff.

Typical of older multifacility properties, the campus also lacked central HVAC control, a major contributing factor to the distribution network’s inefficiency. Various nonintegrated, building-specific control systems had been installed throughout the years. “They had a handful of systems around that were aging extremely,” notes McLauchlan. “They had some of the original Honeywell ‘Delta’ controllers that were 20-plus years old and some pneumatic controls—it was primarily pneumatic.” Next Page >

What Do You Think?

Post a Comment

Be the first to tell us what you think!

Post a Comment

Not a subscriber? Sign Up
 
 
*  
 




 

Get Distributed Energy Email Updates!

Get weekly news and updates through our Distributed Energy email newsletter!