Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

The use of ducts to improve the control of supply air temperature rise
in UFAD systems: CFD and lab study
Wilmer Pasut a,⇑, Fred Bauman a, Michele De Carli b
a
Center for the Built Environment (CBE), University of California at Berkeley, United States
b
Universitá degli studi di Padova, Padua University, Italy

h i g h l i g h t s

 Experimental data demonstrated the rise in air temperature in the underfloor.

 Using ducts ‘‘reverses’’ the typical temperature distribution.
 We made detailed CFD models of the underfloor plenum equipped with a fabric duct.
 The models well predicted the discharge air temperatures and airflows.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cool supply air flowing through the underfloor plenum is exposed to heat gain from both the concrete
Received 2 March 2014 slab (conducted from the warm return air on the adjacent floor below the slab) and the raised floor panels
Received in revised form 30 July 2014 (conducted from the warmer room above). The magnitude of this heat gain can be quite high, resulting in
Accepted 1 August 2014
undesirable loss of control of the supply air temperature from the plenum into the occupied space. These
Available online 6 September 2014
warmer supply air temperatures can make it more difficult to maintain comfort in the occupied space
(without increasing airflow rates), particularly in perimeter zones where cooling loads reach their highest
Keywords:
levels. How to predict plenum thermal performance is one of the key design issues facing practicing engi-
UFAD
CFD
neers – evidence from completed projects indicates that excessive temperature rise in the plenum can be
Air systems a problem.
Air distribution One of the recommended strategies for addressing temperature rise in UFAD systems is the use of duct-
Thermal decay work (flexible or rigid) within the underfloor plenum to deliver cool air preferentially to perimeter zones
Flexible duct or other critical areas of high cooling demand.
Several experiments were carried out in a full-scale underfloor plenum test facility, in order to charac-
terize all the phenomena that take place in an underfloor plenum equipped with a fabric or metal duct.
Experimental data were collected for validation of a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the
plenum. This paper describes the first part of a more comprehensive work, whose aim is to use the val-
idated CFD plenum model to conduct simulations of a broader range of plenum design and operational
parameters. This work proves that using ductwork within the underfloor plenum reduce the temperature
rise in the plenum.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction over the world. There are several potential advantages of using
UFAD systems compared to OH systems:
Underfloor air distribution (UFAD) systems use open spaces,
called plenums, between the structural slab and raised floor panels  improved thermal comfort [1–3];
to supply conditioned air into the occupied zone [1]. During the  improved indoor air quality [1,3];
past two decades these systems have offered an alternative to tra-  reduced life cycle costs [1];
ditional overhead (OH) systems, and are now commonly used all  reduce floor-to-floor height in new construction.

Among all features that characterize UFAD technology, room air

⇑ Corresponding author. stratification and temperature rise in the underfloor plenum play
E-mail address: wilmer.pasut@gmail.com (W. Pasut). key roles in determining the operational success of these systems.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.002
0306-2619/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498
Under cooling operation, a properly controlled UFAD system
produces air stratification in the conditioned space [4], resulting
in higher temperatures at the ceiling level compared to the floor.
Room air stratification has been widely investigated during the
years with case studies, laboratory tests, and energy models [4–7].
Temperature rise in the underfloor plenum is due to convective
heat gain to the conditioned supply air as it travels through the
underfloor supply plenum [8]. Bauman et al. [9] demonstrated
using a steady-state model that the magnitude of heat transfer into
the underfloor plenum through the raised floor and the floor slab is
35–45% of the total zone cooling load. Schiavon et al. [10], using
whole-building energy simulations, found that the total heat trans-
fer into the plenum is of similar magnitude, 22–37% of the total
zone peak UFAD cooling load, depending on interior or perimeter
zone location. The work done by Woods and Novosel [11] also pro-
vides clear evidence of the temperature rise in the underfloor ple-
num and its magnitude. In their study the researchers performed a
comparative analysis of conventional overhead (OH) and UFAD
system performance. They found that the room heat extraction
rate for the UFAD system is 35–64% of the instantaneous heat gain
to the room, compared to the OH system, where it is 66–93%. The
authors found the cause of this difference to be the heat entering
the supply plenum. The magnitude of the plenum heat gain can
be quite high, and the warmer supply air temperature can make
it difficult to maintain comfort in the occupied space (without
increasing airflow rates), particularly in perimeter zones where
cooling loads reach their highest levels [1]. How to predict and
account for plenum thermal performance is one of the key design
issues facing practicing engineers.
In a building conditioned with a UFAD system a desirable sce-
nario would be to deliver the coolest supply air into perimeter ple-
num zones, allowing warmer plenum temperatures in interior
zones. However, due to the common building HVAC configuration
with primary supply air ducts in the building core, conditioned air
is typically supplied into interior portions of the underfloor plenum
and flows out to perimeter zone locations. As a results of the tem-
perature rise in the plenum, buildings equipped with an open
underfloor plenum system will tend to have warmer supply air
entering the perimeter zone, and colder air into the interior zone.
Three recommended approaches to improve the control of supply
air temperature rise in UFAD systems are as follows [1]:
 Use ductwork to deliver cool air to/towards the perimeter. This
is the subject of this research work.
 Direct plenum inlets with higher inlet velocities toward critical
perimeter locations.
 Instead of the typical interior plenum inlet locations, consider
designing the plenum with perimeter inlets (shafts), if possible.
In terms of the first recommended strategy above, the advan-
tage of using ductwork is that it eliminates direct contact along
the length of the duct with the slab and underside of the raised
floor panels, thereby reducing temperature gain to the supply air.
One disadvantage is the added flow resistance caused by the duct
in comparison to airflow through an open plenum, which tends to
increase the pressure drop through the system and required fan
energy. In addition, once the supply air exits the duct and enters
the plenum, it is still exposed to the same heat transfer from the
top and bottom surfaces. The challenge and goal of this research
is to develop a validated CFD model of underfloor air supply ple-
nums equipped with flexible (or rigid) ducts.
Several experiments were carried out in a full-scale underfloor
plenum test facility, in order to characterize all the phenomena
that take place in an underfloor plenum equipped with a fabric
duct. Fabric ducts were chosen due to their ease of installation
and flexibility once installed. Experimental data were collected
491
for validation of a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of
the plenum. This paper describes the first part of a more compre-
hensive work, whose aim is to use the validated CFD plenum model
to conduct simulations of a broader range of plenum design and
operational parameters. In particular the validated model will be
used to compare the use of ductwork, to deliver cool air to/towards
the perimeter vs. the use of plenum inlets with higher inlet veloc-
ities (the CFD model for this previous open plenum configuration
was developed by Jin et al. [12] using the same plenum test facil-
ity), in order to highlight the limits and the capabilities of these
two technical solutions to reduce the temperature rise in the
underfloor plenum.
2. Methods
The technical approach includes the following tasks:
(1) Full-scale experiments in underfloor plenum test facility.
(2) Development of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model
of underfloor plenum.
(3) Validation of CFD plenum model by comparison with full-
scale experimental database.
2.1. Underfloor ductwork
One of the approaches to provide cooler air temperature in the
perimeter parts of the underfloor plenum is using ductwork. Either
sheet metal ducts or fabric ducts can be used for this purpose. For
this study, a plenum equipped with a fabric duct was studied.
Fabric ducts present many interesting features for underfloor
plenum air distribution. Fabric ductwork features easy installation
within the plenum space. The duct used during the test was made
by modular and zippered straight 1.52 m long sections. This makes
this system a good solution in cases of frequent re-design. Every
module can be a solid fabric module or can include outlet holes
along two sides to better distribute the air into the underfloor
plenum (Fig. 1).
The end of the duct is closed by a modular cap. It can be
adjusted to let out a certain amount of air from the end of the duct.
Usually the diameters of fabric ducts range from 0.30 m to 0.45 m.
Due to the porosity of the fabric material, a certain amount of air
leaks through the fabric from the duct to the plenum. The amount of
leakage through the fabric can be represented, with a good level of
confidence, by a linear equation, a function of pressure difference
between inside and outside of the duct. In Eq. (1) (provided by
the manufacturer) the correlation between pressure difference P
(Pa) and leakage rate through the fabric L (m3 s1/m2) is presented.
L ¼ 0:00006  P ð1Þ
Fig. 1. Outlet holes along the duct.
492 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498
The equation has been provided by the manufacturer of the
flexible duct.
2.2. Full-scale plenum facility
Several full-scale experiments have been completed to investi-
gate the influence of using a flexible fabric duct to produce cooler
plenum air temperatures in the perimeter zone. To do the experi-
ments an underfloor air supply plenum facility was used. It is
installed in a warehouse, in Berkeley, California, with an exposed
concrete slab floor. The plenum area is 6.7  14.6 m with the
height of 30.5 cm.
The raised floor system was constructed from commercially
available floor panels and included 10 variable-air-volume (VAV)
floor diffusers. The floor panels are 0.61 m  0.61 m  3.3 cm,
constructed from a welded steel outer shell filled with lightweight
cementitious material. The thermal conductivity of a panel is
0.196 W/m K. The plenum is built on a 0.254-m thick structural
concrete slab with an estimated thermal conductivity of
0.93 W/m K.
A heating, ventilating and air-conditioning system (HVAC)
delivers supply air at a controlled temperature and volume into
the underfloor plenum.
2.3. Measurement setup
2.3.1. Temperature measurement system
Type-T thermocouples and a modular data acquisition and con-
trol system were installed to monitor air temperatures at the flex-
ible duct inlet and outlet, floor diffusers, and selected locations
inside the plenum. The data were collected with a frequency of
1 min. The thermocouples inside the plenum were fixed to pedes-
tals and positioned at equal distance (15 cm above slab) between
concrete slab and floor panels. The temperature measuring system
was also used to measure the slab temperature. Several 0.1-m deep
holes into the slab were drilled at different locations within the
plenum. Inside of every hole four thermocouples were embedded,
one every 25 mm, and the holes were refilled with concrete. With
these thermocouples, it was possible to measure the vertical slab
temperature difference. The average temperatures measured by
the deepest thermocouples inside the slab were used as boundary
conditions for the CFD plenum model.
An infrared thermometer (IR) was used to measure ceiling tem-
perature in the warehouse to establish boundary conditions for the
model.
2.3.2. Air velocity
The air velocity was measured at selected points inside the ple-
num to estimate the velocity field. For this scope an omnidirec-
tional anemometer was used. The measurement range of the
anemometer is 0.05–5 m/s with an accuracy of ±3% of the readings.
To complete the assessment of airflow patterns inside the ple-
num for purposes of comparison with CFD predictions, qualitative
observations of airflow directions were made at the same points
where air velocity was measured using a smoke-stick.
Air velocity through the orifices along the flexible duct was
measured. A directional anemometer, with the higher velocity
range of 0.15–30 m/s, was used. Also for this anemometer the
accuracy of the readings was ±3%.
2.3.3. Airflow
Airflow delivered into the plenum and through diffusers was
measured during the tests using a flow hood. The instrument as
an accuracy of ±3% of the readings.
2.4. Tests
Several full-scale experiments have been completed. Two dif-
ferent configurations were selected for comparison with the CFD
plenum model predictions. Both represent a fairly simple installa-
tion of a straight length of fabric duct extending from the normal
plenum inlet location on one edge (interior zone) down the middle
to the far end of the plenum, representing the perimeter zone.
2.4.1. Configuration #1
Configuration #1 delivered supply air into the plenum through
small holes (Fig. 1) on two opposing sides of the fabric duct over
the final 3 m of length (see Fig. 2). This is a unique feature of the
flexible fabric duct. For this test the hole diameter was 1 cm,
and there were 52 holes per meter on each side. For this configura-
tion the end cap was closed. The plenum area was ideally divided
into two parts: interior zone and perimeter zone. The perimeter
zone is almost one third of the total plenum area. The diffuser
VAV dampers in the interior zone were regulated, using the flow
hood, in order to have reasonable airflow density in the perimeter
zone (around 6.5  103 m3/s/m2) and the interior zone
(2.5  103 m3/s/m2).
2.4.2. Configuration #2
Fig. 3 shows configuration #2, which featured unvented fabric
duct with an open end. This configuration represents a simple
straight duct installation (either flexible or rigid).
2.4.3. Tests conditions
During the tests, the plenum supply air was measured for the
two configurations. The tests conditions are presented in Table 1.
The plenum supply air temperatures were quite low for both
configuration #1 and #2 compared with common practice to
increase the temperature differences between the warehouse ceil-
ing and top panels surface, and between plenum air and bottom
surface slab. These larger temperature differences aided the ability
to detect variations in plenum air temperature distribution for dif-
ferent test configurations.
2.5. CFD model
The experiments carried out in the full-scale underfloor plenum
test facility were used to characterize the major variables that
must be accommodated by the underfloor plenum model. A com-
mercial software package was used.
2.5.1. Turbulence model
One of the most prominent turbulent models, the k–e model,
has been implemented in these simulations. It is a commonly used
model and is suitable for a wide range of applications.
For more details about k–e model please refer to [14–16].
2.5.2. CFD model features and boundary conditions
The main dimensions of the plenum model are the same as the
main dimensions of the plenum test facility.
To take into account the thermal radiation from the ceiling to
the top surface of the floor panels, the room above the plenum is
included in the CFD model. Studying the room temperature distri-
bution is not a scope of this work. The only benefit of modeling the
room space was to simulate the ceiling radiation.
Particular attention was paid during the diffuser modeling. The
first simulations, made to better understand the problem, have
provided evidence of the importance of modeling the boxes located
below the diffusers. In fact, if the plenum airflow pattern is charac-
terized by high air velocities, the diffuser boxes work as ‘‘flow-
catchers’’. The experiments and the simulations have shown that
 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498 493

INTERIOR PERIMETER
Diffuser 4.6
15mft

adjustable
end cap
6.7 m
22 ft

non-vented vented

14.6 m

Fig. 2. Plan view of full-scale plenum test facility showing underfloor fabric duct configuration. Configuration #1 with vented fabric duct.

INTERIOR PERIMETER
Diffuser 4.6
15mft

open end
6.7 m

14.6m
48 ft

Fig. 3. Plan view of full-scale plenum test facility showing underfloor fabric duct configuration. Configuration #2 with unvented fabric duct and open end.

Table 1
Tests conditions.

Air inlet (m3/s) Air inlet temperature (°C) Ceiling surface temperature (°C) Slab temperature at 10.1 cm deep (°C)
Configuration #1 0.402 10.6 22 16.5
Configuration #2 0.462 8.2 23 14.9

the airflow through the diffusers is not only influenced by plenum
pressure, but also by airflow patterns into the plenum which can
interact with the boxes below the diffusers.
The fabric duct has been modeled with the same surface area as
the real duct, in order to model the air leakage through the fabric
with the right velocity.
The temperature for the air entering the duct from the HVAC
system was measured, and the difference between the air entering
the duct and coming out from the outlet holes is negligible. For this
reason the same temperature was used as boundary conditions for
the air outlets along the duct and for the air leakage through the
fabric.
Air velocities through the outlet holes were quite high, around
13 (m/s).
The CFD model of the duct for configuration #2 has the same
shape as configuration #1, but in this case a solid duct with an
open end was modeled. The air velocity outlet through the end
of the duct was 5.73 (m/s).
The structural slab was represented as a single-layer surface
with an equivalent heat transfer coefficient and a constant outside
temperature. The constant outside temperature was set equal to
the average temperature measured with the thermocouples
located at ten centimeters depth into the slab, and the heat transfer
coefficient was representative of the ten-centimeter slab. Its value
is 9.2028 (W/m2 K). The outside temperature was 16.5 (°C) and
14.8 (°C), respectively for configurations #1 and #2.
Floor panels were modeled with the same thickness (3.3 cm)
and the same thermal conductivity (0.188 (W/m2 K), given by the
manufacturer) as the real case.
During the tests, air plenum leakages were measured. They
were modeled as distribute airflow through the plenum surfaces,
and as concentrated leakage if and where they were observed dur-
ing the experiments. As presented by Jin et al. [12], there are two
approaches available for representing the resistance of the pedes-
tals in the CFD model:
 Actually building the pedestals into the geometry of the CFD
model.
 Adding a resistance to the fluid domain as a source term in the
governing equation to represent the average resistance caused
by the pedestals (please refer to [12]).
In cases with pedestals uniformly distributed through the ple-
num, and for a flow pattern not characterized by strong air velocity
and momentum, the second approach presents many advantages:
simplicity, efficiency, and low computational power requirement.
This method fit well with configuration #1 in which the airflow
outlets are characterized by a low momentum.
In the configuration #2 the entire airflow enters the plenum
from the end part of the duct at 5 m/s. Due to high momentum
in the outlet area the pedestals were modeled for the entire
plenum.
494 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498
2.5.3. Thermal radiation model
The Discrete Transfer model was used as thermal radiation
model. This model is based on tracing the domain by multiple rays
leaving from the bounding surfaces. The technique was developed
by Shah [16] and depends upon the discretization of the equation
of transfer along rays. For a more detailed presentation of the ther-
mal radiation model please refer to [16].
2.5.4. Mesh features
A critical parameter that strongly influences the computational
time is the number of cells used to mesh the domain. Before doing
the simulations different meshes were tested, in order to deter-
mine the minimum amount of cells that can guarantee the invari-
ability of the results. We focused our attention on the plenum,
since studying the temperature distribution in the room above
the plenum is not a scope of this work.
The three model elements that mostly influenced the number
and size of cells were the diffusers, the inlet holes along the duct
(only for the configuration #1), and the pedestals (only for the con-
figuration #2).
For both configurations we generated a mesh that was fine
enough to ensure high-quality solutions of the governing equa-
tions. To verify the grid independence the concept of grid-conver-
gence was applied. Sørensen and Nielsen [17] on their paper stated
that obtaining a grid–convergence implies that the solution
asymptotically approaches the exact solution, and it is expected
that further refinement of computational grid will not significantly
change the solution. To ensure that the used meshes were within
the asymptotic range we used the approach presented by Roache
[18,19], and calculated the grid convergence index (GCI). The
objective of the mesh refinement process was to obtain a GCI index
lower than 2%.
For the two models the meshes used have:
 2,000,000 cells for configuration #1.
 3,500,000 cells for configuration #2.
For configuration #2 the total number of cells was higher
because for this configuration the pedestals were modeled for
the entire plenum.
Configuration #1
PERIMETER
INTERIOR
Configuration #2
PERIMETER
INTERIOR
Fig. 4. Measured diffuser airflows, configuration #1 and 2.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Test measurement results and discussion
The most important information is related to the diffusers,
because they can be considered as the interface between the sup-
ply plenum and the room. The airflow through each diffuser was
measured with the airflow-meter. As shown in Fig. 4, the airflows
through the four perimeter diffusers are on average higher than for
the interior diffusers. This is due to the VAV diffuser’s damper
setting.
It is also interesting to see that in configuration #2, even if the
four perimeter VAV diffusers are all fully open, the two central dif-
fusers 5 and 6 have a lower airflow compared with diffusers 4 and
7. It was verified that this phenomenon is due to the strong airflow
close to the two diffusers in this configuration. In fact the plenum
has almost a constant pressure, but in the presence of strong ple-
num air velocities, these could form some localized zone with a
lower pressure that could strongly influence the amount of airflow
passing through a nearby diffuser. Previous research has shown
that the plenum will typically have a uniform pressure, and so
from an airflow point of view the diffuser positions were consid-
ered insignificant. These results show that it is not true that the air-
flow is only influenced by the diffuser damper and plenum
pressure, but it can also be strongly influenced by the local air
velocities inside the underfloor plenum.
The measured diffuser air temperatures for configuration #1
and 2 are presented in Fig. 5. Even though the ceiling temperature
and slab temperature during this test were not so high to cause a
strong temperature rise in the underfloor plenum, the phenome-
non is still visible.
It is interesting to see that the airflow temperature for diffuser
number 7, in configuration #2, is higher than the airflow tempera-
ture for diffuser number 8. This phenomenon is related with the
concentrated leakage mentioned before, which strongly modifies
the airflow pattern in the underfloor plenum. The temperature
results indicate that the small outlet holes (configuration #1) do
a better job of providing more uniform supply temperatures to
all diffusers, while configuration #2 provides cooler temperature
air on average to the perimeter zone.
 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498 495

Configuration #1

PERIMETER
INTERIOR

Inlet temperature
Configuration #2
PERIMETER
INTERIOR

Inlet temperature

Fig. 5. Measured diffuser temperatures, configurations #1 and #2.

The airflows delivered into the plenum were measured with the
airflow-meter and their values were compared with the sums of
airflows through the diffusers. The difference between these two
values is the plenum air leakage. As reported in [13] uncontrolled
air leakage from the pressurized underfloor plenums (through gaps
between panels, electrical floor outlets, etc.) that enters the room
has a typical range for ‘‘well sealed’’ raised floors (carpet, tape,
etc.) of 0.254  103 to 0.508  103 m3 s1/m2 and a typical value
for ‘‘not well sealed’’ raised floors of 0.0127 m3 s1/m2 or greater.
Uncontrolled air leakage for configuration #1 is in the range of a
well-sealed raised floor (see Table 2), while for configuration #2,
it is in the range of a less well-sealed raised floor. The cause of
the difference between configuration #1 and #2 is related to a con-
centrated leakage formed in a plastic edge of the plenum located in
the perimeter. This phenomenon was modeled in the CFD plenum
model because of its influence on the plenum air behavior.
3.2. CFD simulation results and discussion
3.2.1. Airflow pattern: configuration #1 and #2
Fig. 6 presents the predicted air velocity distribution as a col-
ored horizontal contour map located at the middle height of the
plenum.
As seen in the figure, there are four big circular airflow patterns
in the plenum, two located in the perimeter, and two located in the
interior part. The air that comes out from the small holes is split
into two parts, one turning toward the perimeter and the other
toward the interior. For configuration #1 the air temperature
through diffuser 1 and 10 was lower (see Fig. 5). The explanation
of this phenomenon is clearly visible in Fig. 6. The two strong air-
flow patterns turning to the interior part of the plenum, directly
feed diffusers 1 and 10, keeping the air temperature lower for these
two.

Table 2
Measured airflows and leakage rates.

Configuration Inlet (m3/s) Diffuser air flow perimeter (m3/s) Diffuser air flow interior (m3/s) Leakage (%)
#1 0.402 0.192 0.164 11.4
#2 0.462 0.170 0.196 20.8

Fig. 6. Air velocity field. Configuration #1.

496 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498

In Fig. 7 the air velocity field for configuration #2 is presented.
The image was obtained merging the air velocity image with the
stream lines. It can be noticed that the presence of the concen-
trated leakage broke airflow pattern symmetry. This phenomenon
is visible also in Fig. 5 for the diffuser air temperatures.
3.2.2. Temperature field: configuration #1 and #2
The temperature field for configuration #1 (Fig. 8), and for con-
figuration #2 (Fig. 9), can be visualized using the same plane pre-
sented before for the velocity field. For both systems it is clearly
visible what was already proved by the measurements: using ducts
into the plenum to deliver fresh air can reverse the temperature
rise in the underfloor plenum, reducing the air temperature in
the perimeter an increasing it in the interior.
3.3. CFD model validation
The validation work was focused on the diffuser parameters:
diffuser discharge air temperature and volume. In order to evaluate
the accuracy of the predictions, a robust scientific method must be
used. For this work the method presented by Zhang et al. [14] was
selected, which was used by the authors to evaluate the goodness
of some CFD predictions of air temperature distribution in a condi-
tioned room. This method is composed of four letters to classify the
accuracy of the prediction: A, B, C, D. The method uses the relative
error between prediction and measurement at measured points as
a major criterion. If this error is less than 10% or larger than 50% at
most measured points, the model accuracy is rated as A or D,
respectively. While ratings A and D quantify the extremes, the dif-
ference between B and C can be more subtle. Rating B is given to

Fig. 7. Airflow pattern. Configuration #2.

Fig. 8. Plenum temperature field. Configuration #1.

Fig. 9. Plenum temperature field. Configuration #2.

 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498 497

predictions with relative error less than 30%. Rating C is given to Table 3
the remaining predictions. The relative error calculations for the Diffuser airflow and temperature ratings, configuration #1.

temperature were based on the nominal temperature differential Diffuser number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

[14]. In this case the nominal temperature differential is the differ-
ence between the plenum inlet temperature and the average, inte-
rior or perimeter, outlet temperature, measured respectively for
the perimeter diffusers or for the interior diffusers.
In Fig. 10 the differences, in terms of temperature and airflow,
between the model predictions and the measured data are shown
for configuration #1. As it can be seen, predicted air temperatures
are always cooler than measured data, except for diffusers 2 and 9.
This could be caused by an overestimation of the slab thermal
resistance. In fact, due to the location of the plenum facility in a
large existing warehouse, it was not possible to accurately measure
the real value of thermal resistance. However, the model is able to
qualitatively predict the air temperature trend. This entails a good
level of prediction for the airflow pattern, and heat exchange phe-
nomena inside of the underfloor plenum.
A very good agreement for the airflows is exhibited.
Using the evaluation method presented above it was possible to
obtain the values presented in Table 3.
The agreement for the CFD diffuser airflows with the measured
values is very good. The error is less than 10% for every estimated
airflow. Also the agreement between the CFD predicted tempera-
tures and the experimental data is good, even if there are two C rat-
ings that highlight some inaccuracies. The most probable cause is
the overestimation of the slab thermal resistance.
The CFD model, which reproduces configuration #1, has shown
very good capabilities to predict the plenum airflow pathway, and
rather good capabilities to simulate the heat exchange phenomena
into the plenum. The overall evaluation of the model is good. This
CFD model can be used to estimate the performance of underfloor
plenums using fabric, or metal, ducts to improve the temperature
distributions.
The model for configuration #2 presented some more difficul-
ties compared with the other model. First of all the high leakage
introduced an additional complexity into the model. Since the
higher leakage value was mainly due to a concentrated leakage
situated at the right wall of the plenum (Fig. 3), it generated an
unusual cold temperature for diffuser number eight, and similarly
unusual warm temperature for the diffuser number seven. The CFD
model has shown some difficulties to reproduce this phenomenon.
Airflow rating A A A A A A A A A A
Temperature rating B B A C B B C B A B
Another complexity was introduced into the model by the
pedestals modeling.
The charts with the comparisons between the measured data
and the predicted data for the diffuser airflows and air tempera-
tures are reported in Fig. 11.
The CFD prediction of diffuser air temperatures shown in Fig. 11
is more linear than for the real case. Similar to configuration #1,
this model shows a good level of agreement in terms of airflow
predictions.
A better explanation of the model quality can be given using the
evaluation method, Table 4.
Table 4 highlights that diffusers 2, 4, and 5 demonstrate prob-
lems with the model agreement. This analysis shows that the error
strongly affects one side of the plenum compared to the other. This
phenomenon can be related only with the concentrated leakage
because it is the only element not symmetrical in the model.
It is useful to analyze the energy balance for the air as it passes
through the plenum. Using Eq. (2) it is possible to estimate the rate
of heat transferred for the CFD model and for the test, for configu-
ration #2;
X
n
H¼ _ i cp ðT in  T i Þ
m ð2Þ
i¼1
where i is the diffuser number; m _ i is the airflow through diffuser i;
cp is the specific heat capacity of air; Tin is the plenum air inlet tem-
perature and Ti is the discharge air temperature through the diffuser
i. The rate of heat transferred estimated using Eq. (2) is 1758 W for
the real case, and 1890 W for the CFD model. The difference
between the two values is very small, less than 8%, which means
that the CFD model can predict the heat exchange phenomena in
the plenum with a very good level of agreement with the experi-
mental data.

Configuration #1
PERIMETER
INTERIOR

Fig. 10. Comparison of diffuser air temperatures and airflows, configuration #1.
498 W. Pasut et al. / Applied Energy 134 (2014) 490–498

Configuration #2

PERIMETER
INTERIOR

Fig. 11. Comparison of diffuser air temperatures and airflows, configuration #2.

Table 4 [3] Fisk WJ, Faulkner D, Sullivan DP, Chao C, Wan MP, Zagreus L, et al. Performance
Diffuser airflow ratings, configuration #2. of underfloor air distribution in a field setting. Int J Vent 2005;5(3):291–300.
[4] Bauman F, Webster T, Linden P, Buhl F. Energy performance of underfloor air
Diffuser number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 distribution systems. In: PIER final project report submitted to California
Energy Commission Public Interest Energy Research Program, Center for the
Airflow rating B A A B A B A A A A
Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley (CA), CEC-500-2007-050;
Temperature rating A C B C C B B B B A 2007. <http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-500-2007-050/>.
[5] Webster T, Bauman F, Reese J. Underfloor air distribution: thermal
stratification. ASHRAE J 2002;44(5).
[6] Webster T, Bauman F, Reese J, Shi M. Thermal stratification performance of
From the above evaluations it may be concluded that the model underfloor air distribution (UFAD) systems. In: Proceedings of indoor air 2002,
shows a good capability to predict the heat exchange in the ple- Monterey, CA; 30 June–5 July.
[7] Bauman F. Designing and specifying underfloor systems: shedding light on
num, and to estimate the airflow through the diffusers. common myths. HPAC Heat, Pip, Air-Condition Eng 2003;75(12):26–39.
[8] Lee KH, Schiavon S, Bauman F, Webster T. Impact of plenum thermal decay on
underfloor air distribution (UFAD) system performance. Appl Energy
4. Conclusions
2012;92(1):197–207.
[9] Bauman F, Jin H, Webster T. Heat transfer pathways in underfloor air
The tests conducted using the underfloor plenum facility have distribution (UFAD) systems. ASHRAE Trans 2006;112(2).
demonstrated the rise in air temperature as it flows through the [10] Schiavon S, Lee KH, Bauman F, Webster T. Simplified calculation method for
design cooling loads in underfloor air distribution (UFAD) systems. Energy
underfloor plenum. The tests proved also that using fabric ducts Build 2011;43(2–3):517–28.
(as well as rigid ducts) to deliver cool air directly into the plenum [11] Woods JE, Novosel D. Comparative analysis of conventional and underfloor air
perimeter ‘‘reverses’’ the typical temperature distribution, with distribution system performance using the air diffusion performance index
method. In: Extended abstract of technical report, The National Center for
colder air in the perimeter and warmer air in the interior zone. Energy Management and Building Technologies; August 2008.
Using the test results it was possible to make two detailed CFD [12] Jin H, Bauman FS, Webster T. Testing and modeling of underfloor air supply
models of the underfloor plenum equipped with a fabric duct. The plenum. ASHRAE Trans 2006;112(Part 2).
[13] Web page; 2010. <http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/research/pdf_files/
two models showed a good ability to predict the discharge air tem- ufaddesigntoolnotes.pdf>. <http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu>.
peratures and airflows through the diffusers. The modeling work [14] Zhang Z, Zhang W, Zhai Z, Chen Q. Evaluation of various turbulence models in
also exhibited the behavior of some critical parameters for the predicting airflow and turbulence in enclosed environment by CFD: Part 2 –
comparison with experimental data from literature. HVAC&R Res 2007;13:
CFD analysis.
871–86.
In future simulation studies, the two validated configurations [15] Launder BE, Spalding DB. The numerical computation of turbulent flows.
presented in this paper will be compared with other technical solu- Comput Meth Appl Mech Energy 1974:269–89.
[16] ANSYS Inc. ANSYS CFX-Solver Theory Guide; April 2009.
tions used to reduce and manage the temperature rise in the
[17] Sørensen DN, Nielsen PV. Quality control of computational fluid dynamics in
underfloor plenum. indoor environments. Indoor Air 2003;13:2–17.
[18] Roache PJ. Perspective: a method for uniform reporting of grid refinement
References studies. J Fluids Eng 1994;116:405–13.
[19] Roache PJ. Quantification of uncertainty in computational fluid dynamics.
Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1997;29:123–60.
[1] Bauman F. Underfloor air distribution (UFAD) design guide. ASHRAE 2013.
[2] Montanya EC, Keith D, Love J. Integrated design and UFAD. ASHRAE J
2009:30–40.