1. Demand Controlled Filtration David Faulkner, MS, PE Indoor Environment Department Lawrence Berkeley National Lab

2. - Slide 2 Demand Controlled Filtration What it is, what it is not Background Previous work Energy savings potential

3. - Slide 3 What it is, what it is not Controls particle concentration, via the recirculation fans, not controlling ventilation (amount of outside air) As particle counts increase, then recirculation fans increase speed

4. - Slide 4 Previous Study Class 100 cleanroom Area of 300 ft 2 Intermittent use Energy reduction of 60-80% Reference: Faulkner, D., W.J. Fisk, and J.T Walton, “ Energy Savings in Cleanrooms from Demand-Controlled Filtration, ” Journal of the Institute of Environmental Sciences 39 (6): 21-27, 1996. LBNL-38869.

5. - Slide 5 Current Study Industrial Cleanroom in San Francisco Bay Area 4 separate regions with different cleanliness ratings Experiments performed in Class 10,000 room 16 FFU Floor Area 606 ft 2

6. - Slide 6 Other Industrial Settings Southern CA industrial facility is saving energy by night-time setback Large Southern CA manufacturer is in the process of implementing DCF Large university in the East recently retrofitted cleanroom facilities and is ready to implement DCF

7. - Slide 7 Case study – recirculation setback  Setback based solely on time clock, 8:00 PM-6:00 AM  No reported process problems or concerns from process engineers  60% – 70% power reduction on turndown

8. - Slide 8 Facility Existing Procedures All fans controlled by PC running proprietary software Software capable of scheduling fan speeds Fans controlled from 100% during day to 50% at night and weekends?? 100% from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm

9. - Slide 9

10. - Slide 10

11. - Slide 11

12. - Slide 12

13. - Slide 13 Study Phases Background measurements DCF Occupancy sensor

14. - Slide 14 DCF Used a MetOne particle counter Continued night and weekend setback

15. - Slide 15 Occupancy Sensors Stopped weekend and night setback 6 wireless occupancy sensors 30 minute delay after last occupancy detection

16. - Slide 16

17. - Slide 17

18. - Slide 18

19. - Slide 19

20. - Slide 20

21. - Slide 21

22. - Slide 22 The Savings ConfigurationkW-h Percent of reference 24/7 151 Reference Night & Weekend Setback 10972% Reference Occupancy Sensor 9663%88% DCF 9160%83% Half Speed 7046%64%

23. - Slide 23 Conclusions Facility was already saving (?) 28% by night and weekend setback as compared to 24/7 Additional savings possible of 40% with DCF Smaller but still significant savings of 37% with Occupancy Sensors

24. - Slide 24 Acknowledgements Paul Rogensack and Tony Wong Larry Chu and Peter Rumsey Dennis DiBartolomeo, Duo Wang, and Bill Tschudi Industry contacts Pacific Energy Center

25. - Slide 25 Future Work & Questions Is increase recirculation fan speed optimum? Simple interface for control

26. - Slide 26 DAVID FAULKNER D_Faulkner@lbl.gov 510.486.7326