The selection of air conditioning systems usually depends on several criteria.

Firstly, attentions should be paid in the requirements and limitations thrown by means of zone control, humidity and temperature control. Meanwhile, objective aspects such as area availability for both ductwork and central plants are also important. Finally, the total life cycle cost such as capital, maintenance cost and disposal cost should be critically assessed. Before further selection, air conditioning systems can be divided into centralized air systems, partially centralized air/water services and local systems (Figure). As related building is three-floor using for commercial purpose. Centralized air systems may be suitable and generally adapted for such kind of buildings, and partially centralized air/water services could be used as supplements.

Figure 1 For this building, four potential systems, which are constant volume system (CV), variable air volume system (VAV), fan coil and chilled ceiling (beam), are considered and compared. - Zone control ability and space requirement Firstly, a short description of each system is demonstrated: - Compared with VAV system, CV is a simple-maintenance system. However, due to the disadvantage that CV systems do not have ability of zone controlling, it is impossible for CV system to work alone in multiple zones. As a result, CV system is usually cooperated with partially centralized systems such as fan coils and chilling beam. - VAV air-conditioning is an all air system which is especially suitable for offices buildings. The reason is that it is flexible to meet individual cooling requirements of different cells. Different from CV system, VAV systems supply air at constant temperature with variant flow rate, and it is usually achieved by VAV terminal units. - Fan coil systems are usually used for individual heating and cooling requirements and also available for multiple zone buildings. They contains own cooling coils

and fans, and provide flexible air conditioning. However, a CV system is usually necessary for fresh air supplement. - Similar to fan coil systems, chilled ceiling (beam) need a supplementary CV system. Apart from which, warm air rising up from floor level could also be cooled and falls back to occupied area. To be specific, a table below illuminates detail pros and cons of each system: System Advantage Disadvantage VAV - Could match particular - Space requirements are high cooling/heating demands. (plant, duct) - High energy efficiency (coordinated fan speed during low-load time). - Good zone, humidity and temperature control. Fan coil + - Ideally suited to building - Regular clean of filter CV with multiple zones - Condensation - Excellent temperature (using chilled water) control - Noisy (Internal fan) - Small diameter ductwork - More onerous maintenance (compared with full air - Risk of water leaking system) - Occupy floor area - Relatively small air-handling plant - Aesthetically preference Chilled - Quiet and draught-free - Required CV system ceiling operation - Insufficient cooling capacity for (beam) + - Require small roof space space greater than 160W/m2 CV - Maximum cooling outputs 100W/m2 160 W/m2 - Minimal maintenance - Good for perimeter heat gains Table 1 - Profitability (Life cycle cost) Table shows the typical capital costs, energy costs, maintenance cost and CO2 emissions of different air conditioning systems

Table shows that the capital of VAV is the highest which is 180 pounds/m2, but it is energy efficient which has the lowest energy costs. Moreover, the carbon dioxide emission also proves that VAV is more sustainable with low carbon foot print of 40kg/m2. In conclusion, a simple and effective comparison between the systems mentioned is made:
Zone control ability & Space Requirement System Plant Room Space Duct space Energy Efficiency Fresh air Capital provision Cost /m2 Profitability (LCC) Energy Cost /m2 MAIN. /m2 CO2 emission Kg/m2

VAV High Fan Coil + Low CV Chilled Low Beam + CV

High Very good Incorporated 180 Moderate Average Needs CV 160 Moderate Very good Needs CV -

2.4 3.2 -

Med Med -

40 50 -

Table 2 (Best performance is highlighted) From results shown above and with consideration of practical conditions in exiting building, VAV seems to be the best choice. But there are two feedbacks, one is such kind system need large plant room space and duct space, the other one is the large amount of capital cost. To some extent, these defects can be acceptable and counterbalanced. - Large occupied area This problem seems to be acceptable for this building, as in each floor, an AHU room with size of 9m x 7.5m is set for air conditioning component. Moreover, a width of 650mm gap area is set between each floor for duct distribution.

High capital cost Though the capital cost is high, VAV system is energy efficient which means there would be benefits for annual billing expenditures. When considering this benefit as a saving, it seems possible to be breakeven with its life span.

In addition, one of local systems (displacement) can also be adapted for certain areas in this building. For example toilets and kitchen areas, air quality where is not required to reach a high level. It is a wise choice to save energy by replacing direct air conditioning and shorten payback time. To be specific, ventilating window can be placed in the partitions, through which air from adjacent rooms could be driven into the specific room. Meanwhile, exhaust fans are necessary to be installed for these areas not only to generate negative pressure but also to extract odors and lampblack. Due to the fact that part of the returned air would be recycled and resent to rooms, and to prevent contaminated air in toilets and kitchen polluting refreshed air, exhaust fans should directly draw the polluted air out of the building. A visualized operation principle is shown below:
Local extract fan

Ventilating window placed on partitions

Degraded air from other spaces