QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option The Pennsylvania State University Architectural Engineering Senior Thesis – Spring 2003 United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Feasibility of Energy Recovery in Conjunction With The Application of A Redesigned Central Cooling And Heating Plant

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Project Team Owner:QIAGEN Sciences, Inc. Architect:Capital Design Assocs., Inc. CM:Whiting-Turner GC:CDI Engineering Group Mech. Contractor:Pierce Associates MEP Engineer:Herzog-Hart Corp. Structural:Cagley and Associates

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Existing Overall Conditions Location:118 Germantown Road, Germantown, Maryland Size:213,000 Ft 2 Cost:$52.5 Million Use:R & D; storage; administrative

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Building 2 Building 1

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Existing Mechanical Conditions Air Side 16 Air-handling Units (4,770 to 46,105 CFM) 5 – 100% Outdoor air units (4,770 to 18,105 CFM) Heating Plant 2 – 400 BHP Fire-tube steam boilers 2 – 400 GPM shell and tube HX Cooling Plant 2 – 900 ton electric driven centrifugal chillers Primary-secondary distribution

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Problem Statement Substantial energy usage No energy recovery Existing 100% Outdoor Air Air-Handling Unit

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Problem Statement Peak electric costs coincide with peak cooling loads No approach for demand reduction Existing Chiller Plant

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Energy Recovery System (ERS) 4 existing 100% outdoor air units modified with total energy recovery wheels SEMCO TE3 EXCLU-SIEVE® Total Energy Wheels selectedCross-contamination issues

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility ERS Energy Analysis Carrier’s Hourly Analysis Program (HAP) V4.10Peak cooling load reduced from 1,045 tons to 885 tons, a reduction of 160 tons Peak preheating load reduced from 7,015 MBH to 4,650 MBH, a 2,365 MBH reduction

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility ERS First Cost Cost information was obtained from Spencer Goland at Rotor Source, Inc.

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign Modeling DOE 2 electric chiller modeling Correction factors based on chilled water and condenser water temperatures Regression coefficients Capacity correction Efficiency correction

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign Modeling Cooling Tower Modeling Curve fitting using manufacturer plots Linear regressions for each constant range on plot Condenser water temperature is a function of range and wet bulb temperature Curves for full and half speed Marley Cooling Tower Curves

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign Modeling Pump Modeling Curve fit existing plot Head and efficiency as a function of flow Affinity laws for variable speed pumping Head is function of flow rate and motor speed Bell & Gossett Pump Curve

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign Modeling Gas-fired absorption chiller-heater modeling Unique aspect of central plant modeling Chiller-heaters can provide simultaneous heating and cooling York YPC double-effect absorption chiller-heater model Curve fit part load performance charts provided by York for individual and simultaneous operation Individual Performance (EES)Simultaneous Performance (EES)Individual Performance (York)Simultaneous Performance (York)

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign Energy Analysis EES produces hourly energy consumption for central plant components Microsoft Excel is used to calculate energy costs Utility rates are taken from service providers

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign Energy Analysis Peak demand kW reductionsCentral plant gas usagekW Demand charge reductionsTotal Annual Energy Costs

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Central Plant Redesign First Cost Analysis First cost information for chillers from Jim Thompson at York International R.S. Means

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Electrical Analysis Why look at the electrical system? 2 direct points of connection on main switchgear #2 for existing electric driven chillers Existing electrical loads on switchgear #2 Power Panel PP4 Chillers #1 and #2 Emergency Distribution Panel EDP #3 Serves 4 Emergency Motor Control Centers (EMCC) Spare connection kVA demand calculated for load on switchgear Feeder sizing done for each case Calculations done as per NEC standards

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Electrical Analysis Case A shows no reduction in electrical service Case C reduces load by 558 kVA 2500 kVA transformer downsized to 2000 kVA $6,015 savings Wire size reduced $8,960 savings

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Structural Analysis Why look at the structural systems? Cooling tower framing Equipment foundations Centrifugal chiller foundation design 4 times the equipment weight in concrete for vibration Reinforcing for temperature and shrinkage Absorption chiller-heater foundation design Few moving parts, vibration not critical Foundation needs to support equipment operating weight

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Structural Analysis Design Parameters ACI Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcing Wide Beam Shear Flexure Punching Shear Existing centrifugal chiller foundation 36” depth 2 chillers weighing 27,000 lbs each Case A centrifugal chiller foundation Use 36” depth as in existing building 2 chillers weighing 23,400 lbs each Case C absorption chiller-heater foundation Use 12” depth 1 chiller-heater weighing 65,500 lbs Chiller-heater foundation depth reduced 24” from centrifugal chiller foundation despite weight increase of over 42,000 lbs Reduced depth saves $1,840 compared to base building and Case A foundations Concrete costs Reinforcing steel costs

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Used to determine most attractive redesign option First cost information combined with annual energy costs calculated in central plant redesigns First costs for ERS design, central plant equipment, structural and electrical redesigns Analysis Method 20 year life cycle ERS replacement at 10 years NIST Energy Price Indices Constant dollar approach using 3.9% real discount rate

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Case C hybrid plant has lowest LCC Result of reduced annual energy costs $864,475 savings over base building $230,756 savings over Case A redesign Case A redesign has instant payback Case C payback; 9 months Case C net savings over Case A; $133,132 Difference in LCC savings and first cost savings of 2 cases

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Outline Introduction/Background Existing Conditions Problem Statement Energy Recovery System (ERS) Design Central Plant Redesign Electrical Analysis Structural Analysis Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Conclusions and Recommendations Energy Recovery System Design Effective response to high energy consumption of 100% outdoor air units Decreases size of central cooling and heating plant Central Plant Redesign Case B central plant first cost and required area too high; not a feasible option Cases A and C both provide significant life-cycle cost savings Case C hybrid plant shows best annual energy costs

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Conclusions and Recommendations Final Recommendation Implement Case C gas-electric hybrid central plant redesign Short payback period attractive to owner Highest net savings of all options evaluated Flexibility of using either gas-fired chiller-heater or electric driven centrifugal as primary chiller Future electric utility rates may be more or less favorable

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Acknowledgements AE Faculty William P. Bahnfleth, Ph.D., P.E. Stanley A. Mumma, Ph.D., P.E. James D. Freihaut, Ph.D. Walt Schneider, P.E. Industry Professionals Dave Johnson, P.E. – QIAGEN Sciences, Inc. John Saber, P.E, – Encon Group, Inc. Jim Thompson – York International Corporation Spencer Goland – Rotor Source, Inc. Cindy Cogil – Smith Group 5 th Year AE Students Andy Tech – Mechanical Jim Meacham – Mechanical/CM 242 South Atherton St. – Multi-disciplinary Family, Friends, and People I Forgot

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Questions?

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Thank You For Attending!

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility ERS Wheel Selection SEMCO provided performance charts used to select proper wheel size Selection based on supply and return air quantities Return air from general room exhaust, not fume hoods Optimum face velocity of 800 FPM across wheel

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility ERS Performance Controlling cross-contamination is critical for laboratory spaces 3Å Molecular Sieve Desiccant Microscopic view of 3Å molecular sieve Adjustable Purge Air Section Purge Air Schematic Independent Testing Results Testing Results

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Energy Recovery System

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Electrical Analysis kVA demand calculations Incorporate demand factor and voltage

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Electrical Analysis kVA demand is calculated for load on switchgear NEC Table used to determine the full load current for the motors connected to EMCC’s Feeder sizing done for each case NEC Table used for wire ampacity Branch Conductor NEC D at 125% of the full load current Overload Protection NEC and NEC Table ; time delay 175% FLC Disconnect NEC at 115% of full load current Air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment analyzed per NEC 440 Grounding sized according to NEC Table Conduit sized according to NEC Chapter 9

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Structural Analysis Reinforcing design Chapter 7 specifies minimum area of steel for shrinkage and temperature

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Wide beam shear check Chapter 11.3 – Shear strength for non-prestressed members Chapter – Special provisions for slabs and footings Chapter 15.4 – Shear in footings Structural Analysis

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Structural Analysis Flexure check Chapter 15.4 – Moments in footings Chapter 12 – Development and splices of reinforcement

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Structural Analysis Punching shear check Assumes 8”x8” vibration isolation pads at 4 corners Chapter 15.5 – Shear in footings Chapter – Special provisions for slabs and footings

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility Life-Cycle Cost Analysis First cost information Manufacturer cost data R.S. Means cost data Base building first costCase A first costCase C first cost

QIAGEN Sciences Germantown, Maryland Joseph P. DiIenno Mechanical Option United States Manufacturing and Research Facility