Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

Thermodynamic Modeling and Optimization of Air Handling Units

Mohammad Hassan Saidi1 and Davoud Mahbobi2

1
Sharif University of Technology, School of Mechanical Engineering, Tehran, IRAN
2
Sharif University of Technology, School of Mechanical Engineering, Tehran, IRAN

Corresponding email: Saman@sharif.edu

SUMMARY

Air handling unit (AHU) is defined as a self-contained unit that the conditions of air vary while passing
through it and reach to the desired temperature and humidity. To perform variations in weather
conditions various processes such as heating, cooling, humidification, dehumidification and mixing are
applied. In this research thermodynamic modeling and mathematical optimization of air handling units
approaching minimum energy consumption is achieved. The objective function for optimization is
pressure drop of air crossing coil per cooling and heating load of the system. This function comprises all
thermal and geometrical parameters of the coils such as coil surface area, number of rows, fin spacing
and air side pressure drop of the coil. The objective function is minimized using Lagrange multipliers
method. The optimization results are composed of minimum pressure drop, optimum area, optimum
number of rows and fin spacing. The effects of varying the cooling and heating load, fin efficiency and
the surface area of the coil on fan power consumption are investigated as well.

INTRODUCTION

The major utilities in residential, commercial and industrial buildings are electrical distribution networks,
air conditioning systems, steam systems and compressed air systems. The utilities must operate at the
highest possible overall efficiency for minimization of the building’s energy requirement. Generally, the
energy consumption is minimum when the sources such as electrical energy perfectly track the loads.
These loads might be cooling or heating loads, which are directly affecting the human comfort
conditions. When there is mismatch between the source and load, energy losses will be higher [1]. One
of these utilities is air handling unit in which there are a few studies about the energy efficiency about it.
An AHU is the primary equipment in an air system of a central hydronic system. It handles and
conditions the air and distributes it to various conditioned spaces. AHUs utilize various types of
equipments, arranged in specific order, so that space conditions can be maintained. AHUs may consist of
a supply fan and coil section with a chilled water or direct expansion coil, preheat or reheat coil, heating
coil section, filter section, mixing box, or combination of mixing box and filter [2,3]. In AHUs one of the
major components in energy consumption of system are coils. The pressure drop of air passing the
system depends on thermal and geometrical parameters of coil. In this research heating coils are modeled
by log mean temperature difference and cooling and dehumidifying coils are modeled by log mean
enthalpy difference. Since then their optimization proceeds. Attempts show that the investigation of
AHUs has been performed considering only one component of the AHU. Robinson [4] investigated
experimentally damper control characteristics and mixing box effectiveness of air handling units. The
results from tests indicated that the mixing effectiveness of the mixing box was a function of the damper
position. Liu et al. [5] developed an air filter pressure loss model for fan energy calculation in air
handling units and showed to be highly consistent with available experimental data. Roulet et al. [6]
investigated real heat recovery with air handling units. Their research addressed real energy recovery
with air handling units from a theoretical point of view and presented results of measurements on 13
units. Sanaye and malekmohammadi [7] developed a new method of thermal and economical optimum
design of air conditioning units with vapor compression refrigeration system. The objective function for
optimization was total cost per unit cooling load of the system including capital investment for
components as well as the required electricity cost.
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

THERMODYNAMIC MODELING

1. Heating coil modeling

The total heat transfer rate from a heating coil is:

q = U o Ao ΔTm , (1)

where U o is overall heat transfer coefficient, Ao is total outside surface area of the coil and ΔTm is log
mean temperature difference. Considering the tube material to be copper having high thermal
conductivity, so the thermal resistance of copper tubes is ignored and the overall heat transfer
coefficient based on the outside surface area of the coil U o can be calculated as

1
Uo = , (2)
Ao 1 −η 1
+ +
Ai hi ho ( Ao AF + η ) ho

where hi is inner surface heat transfer coefficient, ho is outer surface heat transfer coefficient, Ai is
inner surface area of the coil, AF is total surface area of fins and η is fin efficiency.
McQuiston [8,9] developed the correlation between Chilton-Colburn j factors and parameter JP for
dry coils which is as follows:

⎛ h ⎞ 23
js = ⎜ o ⎟⎟ Pr = 0.00125 + 0.27 JP
⎜ G.c
⎝ p ,a ⎠
−0.15
−0.4
⎛ Ao ⎞
JP = Re D ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ , (3)
⎝ Ap ⎠
G.Do
Re D =
μ

In equation (3), Ap is total outside surface area of tubes, G is mass velocity, Do is outside diameter of
tube and μ is fluid viscosity.

G = ρ .Vmin , (4)

where ρ is fluid density and Vmin is air velocity at minimum flow area. For hot and chilled water at
turbulent flow inside the tubes, the inner surface heat transfer coefficient hi , can be calculated by
Dittus-Boelter [10,11] equation:

hi Di
= 0.023Re0.8 Pr n , (5)
kw

In equation (5), Di is inside diameter of tube and kw is thermal conductivity of water. When the tube
wall temperature Tt > Tbulk , n = 0.4 and when Tt < Tbulk , n=0.3. Here Tbulk indicates the bulky water
temperature beyond the boundary layer.
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

2. Cooling and dehumidifying (wet) coil modeling

In cooling and dehumidifying coil, both heat and mass transfer occurred. With dehumidification, the
air side surface is wetted with liquid water. Since water vapor transfer does not depend on temperature
difference alone, it follows that the method generally used in the analysis of dry air side surface does
not suffice. In this paper, a modeling procedure for wet cooling coils will be presented by adopting the
method of Threlkeld [12] which bases the analysis on enthalpy potential. The total heat heat transfer
rate for cooling and dehumidifying coil is:

q = U o , w Ao Δhm , (6)

where U o , w is overall heat transfer coefficient for wet coil and Δhm is log mean enthalpy difference. If
the thermal resistance of copper tubes is ignored, the overall heat transfer coefficient based on the
outside surface area of the wet coil U o , w can be calculated as

1
U o,w = , (7)
bR Ao bw, m (1 − η w ) bw,m
+ +
Ai hi ho , w ( Ao AF + η w ) ho , w

In Eq. (7) the combined wet surface coefficient ho , w must be calculated by Eq. (8). In equation (7),
η w is wet fin efficiency. The quantity b is the slope of Eq. (9) which represents saturation enthalpy of
air as a function of temperature over a small temperature range.

1
ho , w = , (8)
c p ,a ( bw,m ho ) + yw kw
The quantity bR should be evaluated at the mean water temperature inside tubes t R while the quantity
bw,m should be evaluated at the mean water film surface temperature.

has = a + b.tas , (9)

where has is enthalpy of saturated moist air and tas is temperature of saturated moist air.
In Eq. (8) the term yw k w is usually small, so that an estimate of water film thickness is not critical
[13]. The convection heat transfer coefficient ho in Eq. (8) can be calculated by Eq. (3). The inner
surface heat transfer coefficient hi is determined by Eq. (5).
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

OPTIMIZATION

The objective function for optimization is pressure drop of air passing coil per cooling (heating) load
of the system. Air side pressure drop over a finned-tube coil is expressed by [14]

G 2 vi ⎡ 2 ⎛ vo ⎞ Ao vm ⎤
ΔP = ⎢(1 + σ ) ⎜ − 1⎟ + f ⎥, (10)
2 ⎣ ⎝ vi ⎠ Amin vi ⎦

where vi is air specific volume at the inlet of coil, vo is air specific volume at the outlet of the coil,
vm is mean specific volume and f is friction coefficient. In Eq. (10) the parameters are:

Amin
σ= , (11)
Aa

m& a ρV&a
G= = , (12)
Amin σ Aa

& a is mass flow rate of air and V&a is air volume flow rate.
where m

f = 0.124 Re−0.21 , (13)

The ratio of free flow (or minimum flow) area to face area σ is usually 0.54 to 0.6 [9]. The face area
Aa is determined by selecting a proper face velocity of 2.5 to 3 m s .

V&a
Aa = , (14)
Va

Substituting Eqs. (11)- (14), in Eq. (10), ΔP can be expressed as:

⎛ V& ⎞ ⎡⎛ ⎛ Amin ⎞ ⎞ ⎛ vo ⎞ & ⎞−0.21 A v ⎤

2 2
⎛ ρVD
ΔP = ρ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢⎜⎜1 + ⎜ ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎜ − 1⎟ + 0.124 ⎜ ⎟ . . m⎥,
o o
(15)
⎝ Amin ⎠ ⎢⎣⎝ ⎝ Aa ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ vi ⎠ ⎝ μ Aa ⎠ Amin vi ⎥
⎦

Except Ao and Amin , all other parameters of Eq. (15) are known for a coil. Therefore air side pressure
drop of a coil, ΔP can be expressed as

ΔP = f1 ( Ao , Amin ) , (16)

Total outside surface heat transfer area of heating and cooling and dehumidifying coils can be
determined from Eqs. (1) and (6) respectively. Substituting inside and outside surface heat transfer
coefficients in Eqs. (2) and (7) and by using Eqs. (1) and (6), the total outside surface heat transfer
area can be expressed as

⎛A A A ⎞
Ao = f 2 ⎜ o , o , o ⎟⎟ , (17)
⎜ Ai Ap AF
⎝ ⎠
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

Total outside surface area of a coil as a function of number of rows and face area expressed as

Ao = Fs Aa N , (18)

In equation (18), Fs is coil core surface area parameter and N is number of rows. Using Table 1, coil
surface ratios are defined as the following functions in terms of number of rows and fin spacing.

Table 1 Finned- tube coil construction parameters [9]

Fin Spacing S F (fins/m) Ao Ap Ao Ai AF Ao Fs
315 7.85 7.95 0.873 9.91
394 9.68 9.68 0.896 12.07
472 11.54 11.40 0.913 14.21
551 13.46 13.17 0.925 16.37
591 14.47 14.03 0.928 17.48

Ao
= 0.8694 S F + 0.9872
Ai
Ao
= 0.9442S F + 0.2584
Ap , (19)
Ao
= 0.001S F2 − 0.0322S F + 1.3399
AF
Fs = 1.0795S F + 1.2698

Substituting Eqs. (17)- (19) in Eq. (16), the objective function, ΔP is obtained as

ΔP = f 3 (N , S F ) , (20)

To find the system optimum design parameters, the objective function (20) is minimized by Lagrange
multipliers method [15,16]. The boundary conditions of problem are number of rows and fin spacing.
Fin spacing is usually expressed in fins per meter, and it often varies from 315 to 591 fins/m (1.6 to
3.1-mm fin spacing) for coils used in air conditioning systems. The number of tube rows in heating
coils varies from 1 to 4 rows and in cooling and dehumidifying coils varies from 4 to 8 rows [9].

RESULTS

1. Heating coil

Figure 1 shows the influence of heating load on optimum surface area and pressure drop of heating
coil in 4200 m3 hr air flow rate. Since the conditions of air entering the AHU can be different,
optimum design parameters is determined in three different entering temperatures namely,
−18°C , −7°C and 5°C . In the optimization process of heating coil, the entering water temperature to
coil is always 82°C and leaving water temperature from it is 71°C . In Fig 1, by increasing the
heating load, the optimum surface area of coil increases. If two different inlet temperatures are
considered, at a constant heating load, optimum surface area of greater temperature of entering air is
higher than optimum surface area of smaller inlet temperature. To justify this result one can say that
by increasing the inlet temperature of air, log mean temperature difference decreases and by using Eq.
(1) and considering constant heating load, optimum surface area of coil increases. In this Figure, by
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

increasing the heating load, optimum pressure drop of coil increases, since by increasing the heating
load, optimum surface area of coil increases and relevant with Eq. (10), pressure drop is proportional
to surface area of coil. Also at a constant heating load, optimum pressure drop of greater inlet
temperature is higher than the optimum pressure drop of smaller inlet temperature. This result can be
justified by considering proportion of pressure drop with surface area.

Figure 1 The influence of heating load on optimum surface area and pressure drop

Figure 2 The influence of heating load on optimum number of rows and fin spacing

Figure 2 shows the influence of heating load on optimum number of rows and fin spacing of heating
coil in 4200 m3 hr air flow rate. In this Figure, at the inlet temperature of −18°C , it is observed that
by increasing the heating load, primarily the number of rows increase and fin spacing remains
constant, then the number of rows remain constant and fin spacing increases. At the inlet temperature
of −7°C , by increasing the heating load, at first number of rows and fin spacing remain constant and
then both of them increase. At the inlet temperature of 5°C , by increasing the heating load, fin spacing
decreases since with decreasing fin spacing, the number of rows increases, as a result of this,
consequently optimum surface area of coil increases. In Figure 2 in some cases with increasing heating
load, the number of rows or fins remains constant, because in that heating range, coil can have further
heat transfer without increasing number of rows or fins.

2. Cooling and dehumidifying coil

In Figure 3 the influence of cooling load on optimum surface area and pressure drop of cooling and
dehumidifying coil in three different conditions of air is shown. In the optimization process of cooling
and dehumidifying coil, the entering water temperature to coil is always 7°C and leaving water
temperature from it is 13°C .
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

Figure 3 The influence of cooling load on optimum surface area and pressure drop

In Figure 3 by increasing the cooling load, optimum surface area of coil increases. Optimum pressure
drop of passing air is proportional to outside surface area of coil and with increasing the cooling load,
it increases. If two different conditions of entering air are considered, at a constant cooling load,
optimum surface area of greater dry bulb temperature of entering air is smaller than optimum surface
temperature of smaller dry bulb temperature of entering air. To justify this result, one can say that by
increasing dry bulb temperature of entering air, log mean enthalpy difference increases and by using
Eq. (6) and considering constant cooling load, optimum surface area of the coil decreases.

Figure 4 The influence of cooling load on optimum number of rows and fin spacing

In Figure 4 by increasing the cooling load may one of the following cases may occur and at all cases
with increasing the cooling load, optimum surface area increases.
a. Number of rows remains constant and fin spacing increases.
b. Both number of rows and fin spacing increase.
c. Number of rows decrease and fin spacing increases.
d. Number of rows increase and fin spacing decreases.
e. Number of rows increase and fin spacing remains constant.
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

3. Influence of air flow rate on optimum surface area of the coil

Figure 5 show the influence of air flow rate on optimum surface areas of heating coil and wet coil. In
both coils by increasing air flow rate, cooling or heating load increases with the subsequent of increase
of optimum surface areas of coils.

Figure 5 The influence of air flow rate on optimum area of heating and wet coils

4. Influence of fin efficiency on optimum surface area of the coil

In Figure 6 the influence of fin efficiency on optimum surface areas of heating coil and wet coil is
shown.

Figure 6 The influence of fin efficiency on optimum areas of heating and wet coils

At a constant heating or cooling load, by increasing fin efficiency, optimum surface areas of heating
coil and wet coil decrease. To justify this result, one can say that by increasing fin efficiency, overall
heat transfer coefficient increases and at the constant load, by using Eqs. (1) and (6) the optimum
surface areas of coils decrease. In another word, by increasing fin efficiency, heating resistance of the
coil decreases and it may have the same heat transfer in a smaller heating load.

DISCUSSION

In this paper, a method for thermodynamic modeling and mathematical optimization of air handling
units having cooling and heating coils is proposed. The design parameters include thermal and
geometrical parameters of cooling and heating coils. On the basis of the previously discussed results
the following conclusions have been extracted.

1. The optimum conditions of coils composed of the surface area, pressure drop of passing air, number
of rows and fin spacing in different conditions of air and different heating or cooling loads are
determined.

2. In heating coils, by increasing the heating load, the optimum surface area of coil increases. In two
different inlet temperatures and at a constant heating load, optimum surface area of greater inlet
temperature is higher than optimum surface area of smaller inlet temperature.
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

3. In wet coils, by increasing the cooling load, optimum surface area of coil increases. In two different
inlet conditions of air and at a constant cooling load, optimum surface area of greater dry bulb
temperature is smaller than optimum surface area of smaller dry bulb temperature.

4. In both heating and wet coils by increasing air flow rate, optimum surface areas of coils increase.

5. At a constant heating or cooling load, by increasing fin efficiency, optimum surface areas of both
heating and wet coils decrease.

REFERENCES

[1] Siddhartha Bhatt, M., Energy Audit Case Studies II- Air Conditioning (Cooling), J. Applied
Thermal Engineering, Vol. 20, 2000, pp. 297-307.
[2] ASHRAE, Handbook of Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air
Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA, 2005.
[3] ASHRAE Handbook, HVAC Systems and Equipments, American Society of Heating
Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA, 2004.
[4] Robinson K.D., Damper Control Characteristics and Mixing Effectiveness of an Air- Handling
Unit Combination Mixing/Filter Box, ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 57, 1998, pp. 629-637.
[5] Liu M., Claridge D.E., and Deng S., An Air Filter Pressure Loss Model for Fan Energy
Calculation in Air Handling Units, Int. J. Energy Research, Vol. 27, 2003, pp. 589-600.
[6] Roulet C.A., Heidt, F.D, Foradini F., and Pibiri M.C., Real Heat Recovery with Air Handling
Units, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 33, 2001, pp. 495-502.
[7] Sanaye S., Malekmohammadi H.R., Thermal and Economical Optimization of Air Conditioning
Units with Vapor Compression Refrigeration System, J. Applied Thermal Engineering, Vol. 24,
2004, pp. 1807-1825.
[8] McQuiston F.C., Parker J.D., Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning, 2nd Ed., John Wiley
and Sons,Inc, 2000.
[9] Wang S.K., Handbook of Air Conditioning and Refrigeration, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New
York, 2000.
[10] McQuiston F.C., Heat, Mass and Momentum Transfer Data for Five Plate-Fin TubeTransfer
Surfaces, ASHRAE Transaction, Vol. 84, part 1, 1978, pp.266-293.
[11] McQuiston F.C., Heat Mass and Momentum Transfer in a Parallel Plate Dehumidifying
Exchanger, ASHRAE Transaction , Vol. 82, part 2, 1976, pp. 87-101.
[12] Threlkeld J.L., Thermal Environmental Engineering, Prentice-Hall, New York, 1972.
[13] Theerakulpisut S., Priprem S., Modeling Cooling Coils, Int.Comm. Heat Mass Transfer, Vol.
25, No.1, 1998, pp. 127-137.
[14] Kays W.M., London A.L., Compact Heat Exchangers, 3rd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1984.
[15] Stoecker W.F., Design of Thermal Systems, McGraw-Hill, 1989, pp. 143-185.
[16] G.N. Vanderplaats, Numerical Optimization Techniques for Engineering Design, McGraw-Hill,
1984.