Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Development and evaluation of optimization-based air economizer strategies

J.E. Seem a,*, J.M. House b,*
a
Johnson Controls, Inc., 507 East Michigan Street, Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA
b
Johnson Controls, Inc., 9210 Rue Villieu, Saint-Leonard, QC, Canada H1R 2J6

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

Article history: This paper describes two new strategies for controlling air economizers. The model-based control strat-
Received 4 May 2009 egy uses a model to estimate the load on the cooling coil for 100% outdoor air and minimum outdoor air
Received in revised form 3 August 2009 and transitions dampers between these two positions to minimize the load. The optimization-based con-
Accepted 5 August 2009
trol strategy uses a cooling coil model and a one-dimensional optimization routine to determine the frac-
tion of outdoor air that minimizes the coil load. A coil model based on the contact–mixture analogy was
adopted for this study and validated with experimental data. Simulations were used to compare the new
Keywords:
economizer control strategies with traditional strategies. Simulations evaluated the sensitivity of the
Air economizer
Air handling unit
annual and peak cooling loads to outdoor air and return air sensor errors and climatic conditions. Incor-
Contact–mixture analogy rect control decisions stemming from sensor errors reduce the achievable energy savings and lead to
higher peak hourly loads. For a scenario representative of poorly maintained sensors, the lowest annual
coil loads of the economizer strategies investigated are 3.0–40.3% higher than those achieved for the ideal
scenario of optimization-based control and ideal sensors (i.e., no sensor errors), and the lowest peak
hourly loads for those cases are 6.8–84.1% higher than those for the ideal scenario.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Commercial buildings commonly require year-round cooling
because internal heat gains can exceed envelope losses even when
outdoor conditions are quite cold. Vapor-compression equipment
is commonly used to provide ‘‘mechanical cooling” in buildings;
however, when outdoor conditions are sufficiently cool, an air or
water economizer can be used to provide ‘‘free cooling” that can
significantly reduce or eliminate the need for mechanical cooling.
Fig. 1 is a schematic diagram of a single duct air-handling unit
(AHU) and controller. AHUs like the one in Fig. 1 are commonly
used for air conditioning and distribution in commercial buildings.
The AHU has a supply and return fan, three dampers for controlling
air flow between the AHU and the outdoors, heating and cooling
coils for conditioning the air, a filter for removing airborne parti-
cles, various sensors and actuators, and a controller that receives
sensor measurements (inputs) and computes and transmits new
control signals (outputs). AHUs are typically controlled to maintain
a setpoint air temperature downstream of the supply fan. Sequenc-
ing logic is used to determine how the various components of the
* Corresponding authors. Tel.: +1 514 327 7381; fax: +1 514 327 9170 (J.M.
House).
E-mail addresses: john.seem@gmail.com (J.E. Seem), house.john.m@gmail.com
(J.M. House).
AHU (e.g., heating coil, cooling coil, dampers) are controlled to
achieve the supply air temperature setpoint.
Mechanical cooling is commonly achieved by circulating chilled
water through the AHU cooling coil. Air passing over the coil is
cooled and distributed to the building. Air economizers control
the AHU dampers to introduce outdoor air in excess of the mini-
mum requirement for ventilation (up to 100% outdoor air) in an ef-
fort to reduce or eliminate the need for mechanical cooling. When
the outdoor air is excessively hot and/or humid, or when heating is
necessary, the dampers are controlled to provide the minimum
amount of outdoor air required for ventilation, hereafter referred
to as minimum outdoor air.
This paper describes two new strategies for controlling air econ-
omizers when mechanical cooling is required and uses simulations
to compare their energy performance with traditional air econo-
mizer strategies. The first new strategy uses a model to estimate
the load on the cooling coil for 100% outdoor air and minimum out-
door air, and transitions the dampers between these two positions
to minimize the estimated load. The second strategy uses a cooling
coil model and a one-dimensional optimization routine to deter-
mine the fraction of outdoor air, ranging from minimum to 100%,
that minimizes the load on the coil. For ideal circumstances with
no sensor or modeling errors, the new strategies are expected to
be climate independent and more energy efficient than traditional
control strategies. The paper evaluates the energy savings that are

0306-2619/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.08.044
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924 911

Relative Humidity Sensor climate zones in the United States. Table 1 lists the climate zones
Temperature Sensor and, for all but three cases, lists a city in the US classified within
Relief Return a particular zone. The fourth column of Table 1 (economizer
Fan
Air Air requirement) lists the cooling capacity above which an economizer
Filter is required [1].
Heating Coil
Cooling Coil Traditional economizer strategies compare measurements of
the outdoor air conditions with return air conditions or fixed
Outdoor Mixed H C Leaving Supply
Fan thresholds to determine whether the AHU dampers should be posi-
Air Air C C Air Air
tioned for 100% outdoor air or minimum outdoor air when
Outputs
mechanical cooling is required. ASHRAE [2] describes a number
of traditional strategies that can be programmed in a computer-
Controller based control system. In this study, strategies known as differential
dry-bulb temperature control and differential enthalpy control are
considered.
Inputs Differential dry-bulb temperature control compares the out-
door and return air temperatures. If the outdoor temperature is
Fig. 1. Single duct air handling unit.
greater than the return air temperature, the dampers are con-
trolled for minimum outdoor air. This strategy is prohibited in cli-
mate zones 1A, 2A, 3A and 4A [1].
possible under ideal circumstances as well as the impact of sensor Differential enthalpy control compares the outdoor and return
errors on the performance of both the new and traditional air econ- air enthalpies determined from measurements of the outdoor
omizer control strategies. and return air temperatures and relative humidities. If the outdoor
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes two econ- air enthalpy is greater than the return air enthalpy, the dampers
omizer strategies commonly used today. This is followed by a are controlled for minimum outdoor air.
description of the two new economizer control strategies in Sec- Fig. 2 shows transition lines separating control with 100% out-
tion 3. The model used by the new strategies to estimate the cool- door air and minimum outdoor air on a psychometric chart for dif-
ing load is described in Section 4 and validated in Section 5. ferential dry-bulb temperature control (labeled T = constant) and
Section 6 presents the control regions (i.e., minimum outdoor air, differential enthalpy control (labeled h = constant). To the lower
100% outdoor air, optimal fraction between minimum and 100% left of the transition lines and for outdoor air temperatures above
outdoor air) for the new economizer strategies on the psychromet- the supply air temperature setpoint of 13 °C, the control strategies
ric chart. In Section 7, simulation results are presented that com- enable 100% outdoor air to enter the AHU, and to the upper right
pare the performance of the new strategies to the two traditional they limit the outdoor air flow to the minimum required for venti-
strategies from Section 2 and to the case where an economizer is lation. The psychrometric chart is shaded to indicate the outdoor
not used. A summary and conclusions are provided in Section 8. air fraction that will produce the minimum mechanical cooling
load at a given outdoor air condition. There are three shaded re-
gions, namely: (1) minimum outdoor air (light gray); (2) 100% out-
2. Traditional strategies for controlling air economizers door air (dark gray); and (3) mixing between these two extremes
when the outdoor air temperature is less than the supply air set-
The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Condi- point temperature (i.e., free cooling eliminates the need for
tioning Engineers (ASHRAE) specifies requirements for the use of mechanical cooling). The line separating operation with minimum
economizers based on the cooling capacity of an individual AHU outdoor air from operation with 100% outdoor air is referred to
and weather characteristics of the building location [1]. ASHRAE here as the ideal transition line. These results correspond to return
classifies climate data based on temperature with a number from air conditions of 25 °C and 50% relative humidity, a minimum out-
1 to 7, and humidity, where the letters A–C, designate humid (or door air fraction of 20%, and an ideal coil that produces saturated
moist), dry, and marine climates, respectively [1]. There are 18 air at the supply air setpoint temperature when water condenses

Table 1
Climate zones and economizer requirements for 15 US cities. (qcool is the cooling capacity.)

Climate Description Cities Economizer requirement (kW)

1A Very hot–humid Miami, FL None
1B Very hot–dry – None
2A Hot–humid Houston, TX None
2B Hot–dry Phoenix, AZ qcool P 40
3A Warm–humid Charlotte, NC None
3B Warm–dry Los Angeles, CA qcool P 19
3C Warm–marine San Francisco, CA qcool P 19
4A Mixed–humid New York, NY None
4B Mixed–dry Albuquerque, NM qcool P 19
4C Mixed–marine Seattle, WA qcool P 19
5A Cool–humid Chicago, IL qcool P 40
5B Cool–dry Denver, CO qcool P 19
5C Cool–marine – qcool P 19
6A Cold–humid Minneapolis, MN qcool P 40
6B Cold–dry Cheyenne, WY qcool P 19
7A Very cold–humid Rhinelander, WI qcool P 40
7B Very cold–dry Jackson, WY qcool P 40
8 Arctic – qcool P 40
912 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924

e
T= constant
Lin
n
tio
ra
A Minimum Outdoor Air

tu
Free a

S
Cooling Return Conditions
D
100%
Outdoor Air
h=
B con
sta
nt
C

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Supply Air Temp. Temperature (°C)

Fig. 2. Transition lines separating regions of 100% outdoor air operation and minimum (20%) outdoor air operation.

out of the air, and otherwise produces air at the supply air setpoint
temperature and the coil inlet air humidity ratio.
The results in Fig. 2 demonstrate that the traditional econo-
mizer strategies fail to minimize the coil load for certain outdoor
air conditions. Regions labeled A–D in Fig. 2 define outdoor air con-
ditions where either the differential dry-bulb temperature control
strategy or the differential enthalpy control strategy make control
decisions leading to energy waste. Table 2 compares the mixed air
and leaving air conditions and the resulting loads for minimum
outdoor air and 100% outdoor air at one outdoor air condition for
each of the these regions. In Table 2, the symbols T; / and q denote
temperature, relative humidity and coil load, while subscripts oa,
ma, and la designate outdoor air, mixed air and leaving air condi-
tions (see Fig. 1) and subscripts min and 100% designate minimum
and 100% outdoor air, respectively.
Region A is bounded by the ideal transition line, the constant
dry-bulb temperature line passing through the return condition,
and the saturation curve. In region A, outdoor air is heavily laden
with moisture, and bringing in outdoor air in excess of the mini-
mum requirement will place an additional latent load on the coil.
For the region A example in Table 2, differential dry-bulb temper-
ature control would use 100% outdoor air, resulting in a 44% in-
crease in the coil load compared to minimum outdoor air.
Region B is bounded by the ideal transition line, the constant
enthalpy line passing through the return condition, and the bottom
of the psychrometric chart. In region B, outdoor air is warm (or hot)
and dry. For much of this region, the moisture content of the air
entering the coil (mixed air) is low enough that water does not
condense on the coil. This is true for operation with either mini-
mum or 100% outdoor air. In this case, the coil does only sensible
cooling, which generally increases the further to the right the
mixed air condition moves on the psychrometric chart. In the
upper left-hand corner of region B the outdoor air has sufficient
moisture content that condensation will occur when the AHU
operates with minimum outdoor air, but not when the AHU oper-
ates with 100% outdoor air. In this area of region B, the additional
sensible load resulting from using 100% outdoor air is greater than
the latent load for operation with minimum outdoor air. For the re-
gion B example in Table 2, differential enthalpy control would use
100% outdoor air, resulting in a 27% increase in the coil load com-
pared to operation with minimum outdoor air.
Region C is bounded by the ideal transition line, the constant
dry-bulb temperature line passing through the return condition,
and the bottom of the psychrometric chart. Region C represents
an exception to the generalization that sensible cooling increases
the further to the right the mixed air condition moves on the psy-
chrometric chart. In region C, the outdoor air and return air tem-
peratures are nearly the same. As a result, the mixed air
temperature is approximately constant regardless of the amount
of outdoor air introduced to the AHU. Since the specific heat of
moist air increases with increasing moisture content, sensible
loads for the same entering and leaving temperatures increase
slightly as the moisture content of the mixed air increases. For
the region C example in Table 2, differential dry-bulb temperature
control would use minimum outdoor air, which would result in a
0.5% increase in the coil load compared to operation with 100%
outdoor air.
Region D is bounded by the ideal transition line and the con-
stant dry-bulb temperature line passing through the return condi-
tion. In region D, the use of 100% outdoor air places a larger
sensible load on the coil compared to operation with minimum
outdoor air, but reduces the latent load to an even greater extent.

Table 2
Comparison of coil loads in regions A–D of Fig. 2 for minimum (20%) and 100% outdoor air.

Minimum (20%) outdoor air 100% Outdoor air

Region T oa ð CÞ /oa ð%Þ T ma ð CÞ /ma ð%Þ /la ð%Þ qmin ðkJ=kgÞ /la ð%Þ q100% ðkJ=kgÞ

A 23.00 80.00 24.60 55.53 100.0 15.35 100.0 22.14

B 30.00 30.00 26.00 45.28 100.0 13.69 85.04 17.35
C 25.10 10.00 25.02 42.04 89.06 12.28 21.29 12.22
D 25.50 45.00 25.10 48.98 100.0 13.39 98.09 12.79
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924
For the region D example in Table 2, differential dry-bulb temper-
ature control would use minimum outdoor air, which would result
in a 5% increase in the coil load compared to operation with 100%
outdoor air.
Differing recommendations for the application of traditional air
economizer strategies are found among studies in the literature
(e.g. [3–6]). This lack of consensus was one of the motivating fac-
tors for the development of the new air economizer strategies de-
scribed in the next section.
3. New strategies for controlling air economizers
The new air economizer strategies utilize a model to estimate
the load on the coil. This estimate is then used to position the
dampers to achieve the minimum coil load.
3.1. Model-based control of air economizers
The new model-based economizer control strategy uses out-
door and return air temperature and humidity measurements
and a model of the cooling coil to estimate the cooling load and
control the AHU dampers when mechanical cooling is required.
The procedure for implementing the strategy follows:
1. Use a model of the cooling coil to estimate the cooling load with
100% outdoor air and minimum outdoor air.
2. Control the dampers to minimize the cooling load. If the esti-
mated cooling load for 100% outdoor air is less than the esti-
mated cooling load for minimum outdoor air, control the
dampers to allow 100% outdoor air. Otherwise, control the
dampers for minimum outdoor air.
Fig. 3 shows a state transition diagram implementing the new
model-based economizer strategy. This strategy is implemented
with logic for controlling heating and free cooling states (states
not shown) as part of a comprehensive sequencing strategy for
controlling the supply air temperature of an AHU [7]. The states
shown in Fig. 3 are described below.
3.1.1. Mechanical cooling with 100% outdoor air
In this state, feedback control is used to modulate the flow of
chilled water to the cooling coil to maintain the supply air temper-
ature at setpoint. The dampers are positioned to allow 100% out-
door air to enter the AHU. Transition to mechanical cooling with
minimum outdoor air occurs when the estimated cooling load with
100% outdoor air exceeds the estimated cooling load with mini-
mum outdoor air for 5 min.
Fig. 3. State transition diagram for model-based control of air economizers.
913
3.1.2. Mechanical cooling with minimum outdoor air
This state also uses feedback control to modulate the flow of
chilled water to the cooling coil to maintain the supply air temper-
ature at setpoint; however, the dampers are controlled to maintain
the minimum amount of outdoor air required for ventilation. With
the new model-based economizer control strategy, the transition
to mechanical cooling with 100% outdoor air occurs after the esti-
mated cooling load with minimum outdoor air has exceeded the
estimated cooling load with 100% outdoor air for 5 min.
3.2. Optimization-based control of air economizers
The new optimization-based economizer control strategy cou-
ples the model-based economizer control strategy with a one-
dimensional optimization routine to determine the outdoor air frac-
tion that minimizes the load on the cooling coil. The strategy uses
outdoor and return air temperature and relative humidity measure-
ments. The procedure for implementing the strategy follows:
1. Use a one-dimensional optimization routine to determine the
fraction of outdoor air in the supply air stream that minimizes
the load on the cooling coil. The optimal fraction of outdoor
air to supply air must be greater than or equal to the minimum
outdoor air fraction required for ventilation, and less than or
equal to 1. In this study the golden section search was used to
find the optimal outdoor air fraction.
2. Control the actuators (e.g., dampers) to achieve the outdoor air
fraction that minimizes the load on the cooling coil.
For this strategy, the two states of the model-based economizer
strategy (Fig. 3) are combined into a single state in which feedback
control adjusts the chilled water flow rate to the cooling coil to
maintain the supply air temperature at setpoint and the outdoor
air fraction is controlled to minimize the load on the cooling coil.
An alternative method for determining the optimal fraction of
outdoor air that minimizes the coil load is to use self-optimizing
control [8,9]. Self-optimizing control does not require a model of
the cooling coil, nor does it require sensors.
4. Cooling load calculation
The key to implementing the model-based and optimization-
based economizer control strategies is the model used to estimate
the cooling load. Fig. 4 is a schematic diagram of a cooling coil. Air
passes over the cooling coil and transfers heat to a refrigerant
(commonly chilled water) flowing through the coil. Conservation
of mass and energy applied to the control volume drawn around
the coil yield
Q_ coil
¼ hma  hla  ðxma  xla Þhw ð1Þ
m_a
where Q_ coil is the cooling load ðQ_ coil ¼ m
_ r ðhlr  her ÞÞ; m
_ a is the mass
flow rate of dry air across the coil, hma and hla are the total enthalpy
per unit mass of dry air of the entering and leaving air streams,
Cooling
Coil
Tma m Tla
a ma
ma la
hlr her Condensate
mw
mr mr
Refrigerant
Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of a cooling coil.
914 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924
respectively, xma and xla are the humidity ratio of the entering and
leaving air streams, respectively, and hw is the enthalpy of con-
densed water [10]. In addition, m_ r is the mass flow rate of refriger-
ant and her and hlr are the enthalpy per unit mass of the entering
and leaving refrigerant.
Using measurements of the outdoor air and return air temper-
ature and relative humidity, the entering conditions to the coil in
Eq. (1) are determined by assuming adiabatic mixing of the two
air streams for a specified outdoor air fraction. Thus, hma and xma
are known. The leaving air enthalpy and humidity ratio in Eq. (1)
are not known; however the temperature of the air leaving the coil
is approximately equal to the supply air temperature setpoint
minus the temperature rise across the supply fan, which is typi-
cally located between the cooling coil and the location where the
supply air temperature is measured. The enthalpy of the con-
densed water in Eq. (1) can be estimated from
hw ¼ cp;w T w
where cp;w is the constant pressure specific heat of water and the
temperature of the condensed water, T w , is assumed to be equal
to the leaving air temperature T la . Thus, to evaluate Eq. (1), the
moisture content of the leaving air must be determined.
The moisture content of the air leaving the cooling coil could be
determined by measuring its relative humidity, but this is not com-
monly done in commercial AHUs. Thus, a model is needed to esti-
mate the leaving air moisture content. In this study, the contact–
mixture analogy has been adopted to model the cooling coil condi-
tions [11]. The contact–mixture analogy assumes that a portion of
the entering air stream, b, bypasses the coil and leaves the coil at
the entering conditions, while the remainder of the air stream
ð1  bÞ is assumed to be cooled to the surface temperature of the
cooling coil. These two air streams are mixed to produce the leav-
ing air conditions of the coil. If the surface temperature of the cool-
ing coil is less than the dew point temperature corresponding to
the entering air conditions, some portion of the moisture in the
air will condense out of the air stream.
Whether condensation occurs or not is critical to determining
the leaving air conditions for the coil. Fig. 5 is a schematic of a cool-
ing coil that uses the contact–mixture analogy to determine the


leaving air temperature T la at which the coil surface transitions
from dry (no condensation) to wet (condensation). At the transi-
tion temperature, the air is saturated but there is no condensation
_ w ¼ 0). Thus, as shown in Fig. 5, the mass flow rate of dry air
(i.e., m
and water vapor are the same before and after the cooling coil. Per-
forming an energy balance on the dry air and water vapor entering
and leaving the control volume shown in Fig. 5 gives
_ a ha;ma þ m
bðm _ v hv;ma Þ þ ð1  bÞ ðm
_ a ha;ca þ m
_ v hv;ca Þ
 
¼m _ v hv;la
_ a ha;la þ m
where b is the fraction of the air stream that bypasses the cooling
_ a is the mass flow rate of dry air, m
coil, m _ v is the mass flow rate
Dry air control volume
Mixed Air Bypassed Air b ma , b mv Leaving
ma , mv 1 b ma
Contacted Air
=100% 1 b mv
Water vapor
mw 0 mass of water vapor entering and leaving the control volume
Cooling
Coil Condensate
Chilled
Water
Fig. 5. Schematic of contract–mixture analogy for determining transition between
dry and wet cooling coil surface.
of water vapor, ha;ma and hv;ma are the enthalpy of dry air and water
vapor, respectively, for the mixed air conditions entering the coil,
ha;ca and hv;ca are the enthalpy of dry air and water vapor, respec-
 
tively, for the contacted air, and ha;la and hv;la are the transition en-
thalpy of dry air and water vapor, respectively, for the leaving air.
For the pressures and temperatures typically found in air-condi-
tioning applications, air and water vapor exhibit ideal gas behavior
[10]. The enthalpy of the dry air is determined from
ha ¼ cp;a T ð4Þ
where cp;a is the constant pressure specific heat of dry air and T is
temperature. The enthalpy of the water vapor is determined from
hv ¼ hv0 þ cp;v T ð5Þ
where hv0 is the enthalpy of water vapor at 0 °C or 0 °F and cp;v is the
constant pressure specific heat of water vapor. Substituting Eqs. (4)
and (5) into Eq. (3) and solving for T la gives
ð2Þ
T la ¼ bT ma þ ð1  bÞT ca ð6Þ
Since the air that contacts the cooling coil is saturated, the con-
tacted air temperature is equal to the dew point temperature cor-
responding to the mixed air conditions entering the coil.
Substituting T ca ¼ T dp;ma into Eq. (6) gives
T la ¼ bT ma þ ð1  bÞT dp;ma ð7Þ
The actual leaving air temperature is then compared with the
transition temperature to determine if the coil is dry or wet. The
coil is dry and the humidity ratios for the mixed air, contacted
air, and leaving air are equal when T la is greater than or equal to
T la . Thus,
xla ¼ xca ¼ xma when T la P T la ð8Þ
and the leaving air enthalpy can be determined from [12]
hla ¼ cp;a T la þ xla ðhv0 þ cp;v T la Þ ð9Þ
Values of xla and hla from Eqs. (8) and (9) can then be substi-
tuted into Eq. (1) to determine the cooling load.
If T la is less than T la , the coil is partially wet or wet and the rel-
ative humidity for the contacted air is 100%. That is,
/ca ¼ 100% when T la < T la ð10Þ
In this case, an implicit solution involving the simultaneous
solution of seven equations and seven unknowns can be used to
determine the leaving air humidity ratio and enthalpy. The con-
tacted air enthalpy is given by
hca ¼ cp;a T ca þ xca ðhv0 þ cp;v T ca Þ ð11Þ
where the contacted air humidity ratio xca and temperature T ca are
ð3Þ unknown. Since /ca ¼ 100%, the contacted air condition falls on the
saturation curve on the psychrometric chart. Assuming the total
pressure is known, psychrometric relations can be used to relate
the contacted air humidity ratio to its temperature and relative
humidity. This relationship is represented as
xca ¼ gðT ca ; /ca Þ ð12Þ
Air where g represents a known function.
ma , mv The leaving air conditions can be related to the mixed air and
contacted air conditions by applying conservation of mass and en-
Tla*
ergy principles to the control volume in Fig. 6. Conservation of
yields
xla ¼ bxma þ ð1  bÞxca ð13Þ
and conservation of energy yields
hla ¼ bhma þ ð1  bÞhca ð14Þ
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924 915

control volume 35

Estimated Cooling Load (kJ/kg)

Mixed Bypassed Air b ma , b mv,ma Leaving
Air Air 30
Contacted 1 b ma
ma , m v,ma Air
ma , m v,la
=100% mv,ca Tla 25
Water vapor
Dry air
m w, T w
Condensate 20
Cooling
Coil Chilled
Water
15
Fig. 6. Control volume for determining leaving air conditions for a wet or partially
wet cooling coil. 10
The cooling load and other unknowns can be found by solving 10 15 20 25 30 35
Eqs. (1), (2), (9), (11), (12), (13) and (14) simultaneously using Measured Cooling Load (kJ/kg)
known values of the entering air conditions (xma and hma ), leaving
air temperature ðT la Þ, bypass factor b, total mixture pressure P, and Fig. 7. Comparison of measured and estimated experimental loads.
contacted air relative humidity ð/ca ¼ 100%Þ, and assuming the
condensate water is at the leaving air temperature.
ature and relative humidity over a range of conditions. Both wet
An approximate wet coil solution can be obtained explicitly by
and dry coil conditions were included in the data set.
assuming the specific heat of the bypassed air and contacted air are
The experimental data set included 11 points for which the
the same. Under this assumption, the bypass factor is related to the
leaving air conditions have a slightly higher moisture content than
temperature of the contacted air, bypassed air and leaving air by
the entering air conditions. Since moisture is not being added, this
[12]
result was attributed to measurement error and it was assumed
T la  T ca that the coil was dry and the leaving air humidity ratio was the
b¼ ð15Þ
T ma  T ca same as the entering air humidity ratio. The corrections to the leav-
ing air humidity ratio range in magnitude from 0.000036 to
Solving Eq. (15) for T ca gives
0.000516 kgv/kga, which are 0.5–6.7% of the values calculated from
T la  bT ma the corresponding relative humidity measurements. The average
T ca ¼ ð16Þ
1b correction and percentage correction are 0.000252 kgv/kga and
With the contacted air temperature T ca known, the humidity ra- 3.27%, respectively.
tio of the contacted air, xca , can be determined. Eq. (13) can then Using the corrected data and the measured leaving air temper-
be used to determine the humidity ratio of the leaving air, xla , ature, the coil bypass factor was determined that minimized the
and Eq. (9) can be used to determine the leaving air enthalpy, hla . sum of squared errors of the estimated load and the load based
Finally, the cooling load can be calculated from Eq. (1). Algorithm on measurements. The resultant value was b = 0.1715.
1 shows the procedure for obtaining the approximate cooling load Fig. 7 shows the estimated load plotted versus the measured
using the simplifying assumption that the specific heat of the by- load for a bypass factor of 0.1715. The average error in the load
passed and contacted air are the same. is 0.83% and ranges in value from 0% to 3.26%. The two largest er-
rors occur at the two highest cooling loads and correspond to
Algorithm 1. Explicit solution for the approximate cooling load nearly identical inlet conditions.
using the contact–mixture model. The sensitivity of the model prediction to the coil bypass factor
was evaluated by utilizing non-optimal bypass factors. If a coil by-
pass factor of 0.1 is used instead of 0.1715, the resultant average
error is 2.46% and the worst case error is 9.67%. If a coil bypass fac-
tor of 0.2 is used, these values are 1.26% and 5.33%, respectively.

6. Control regions on psychometric chart

6.1. Model-based control of air economizers

Fig. 8 shows the transition lines for model-based control for a

5. Coil model validation
The coil model was validated using laboratory data for an eight-
row coil [13]. The data consisted of 32 steady-state operating
points and included entering and leaving values of the air temper-
cooling coil with a bypass factor b of 0, 0.1 and 0.2. The transition
line for b ¼ 0 corresponds to that of an ideal coil shown in Fig. 2. As
in Fig. 2, the results in Fig. 8 were obtained using a return air con-
dition of 25 °C and 50% relative humidity, a minimum outdoor air
fraction of 20%, and a supply air setpoint temperature of 13 °C.
Fig. 8 shows that for the range of bypass factors studied, the
range of outdoor conditions for which 100% outdoor air minimizes
the coil load increases as the bypass factor increases. This can be
understood by examining Eq. (16) and through the consideration
of an example. Eq. (16) shows that for a constant mixed air temper-
ature, lower contacted air temperatures are necessary to achieve
the same leaving air temperature for higher bypass factors. Assum-
ing condensation is occurring, as the contacted air temperature
916 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924

0.015

ine Return
ionL Conditions
tu rat
Sa 0.010

Humidity Ratio
Ideal Coil
b=0
Supply Air Temp.

0.1
b=
0.005

0.2
10 15 20 25
b= 30
0.000

Temperature (°C)

Fig. 8. Transition lines for model-based control with different bypass factors.

decreases, so too will the moisture content of the contacted air.

This will generally result in lower moisture content in the leaving
air and therefore, a higher latent load for the same mixed air con-
ditions and leaving air temperature.
Consider an example where the outdoor air temperature is
28 °C and the relative humidity is 33%. The return air conditions
are 25 °C and 50% relative humidity. The sensible ðq_ sen Þ, latent Fig. 9. Optimal outdoor air fraction obtained with optimization-based control for a
ðq_ lat Þ and total coil loads ðq_ tot Þ for minimum outdoor air and bypass factor of 0.1.

100% outdoor air are shown in Table 3. This example shows that
the increase in the bypass factor causes the latent load to increase as dashed lines on the psychrometric chart. Fig. 9 shows that there
both for operation with minimum outdoor air and for operation is a region to the right and below the return condition that falls be-
with 100% outdoor air. The increase with minimum outdoor air tween these transition lines where an outdoor air fraction between
is larger though, and sufficiently large to cause the total load for the minimum value and 100% outdoor air will minimize the load
operation with minimum outdoor air to exceed the total load with on the cooling coil. There is also a small region along the saturation
100% outdoor air. line and above the transition line for differential enthalpy control
The results in Fig. 8 reveal that the traditional differential dry- where the coil load is minimized with an outdoor air fraction that
bulb economizer control strategy becomes less appropriate in dry is slightly less than 100%.
climates as the bypass factor increases. Consider only outdoor con-
ditions for which the temperature is greater than 25 °C and the 7. Simulations
humidity ratio is less than 0.009822 kgv/kga, which corresponds
to the humidity ratio at the return conditions. The differential The energy performance of air economizer control strategies
dry-bulb economizer strategy will use minimum outdoor air was evaluated through simulations that computed the coil load
whenever the outdoor air temperature exceeds 25 °C; however, for each strategy for a one-year period for each of the 15 cities
Fig. 8 shows that there is a fairly large region within this range listed in Table 1. The calculations were made on an hourly basis
of outdoor conditions for which the minimum coil load is achieved assuming the AHU operated continuously throughout the year.
with 100% outdoor air. Furthermore, the additional load due to The following strategies were simulated (abbreviated strategy
incorrect control decisions can be as high as 3.17 kJ/kg or 25% of names used in figures that follow are given in parentheses):
the coil load.
1. Differential dry-bulb temperature control (temperature).
6.2. Optimization-based control of air economizers 2. Differential enthalpy control (enthalpy).
3. Model-based control (model).
Fig. 9 shows the outdoor air fraction obtained with optimiza- 4. Optimization-based control (optimization).
tion-based control that minimizes the load on the cooling coil.
The results were obtained using a bypass factor b of 0.1, a return In addition, the scenario where no economizer is utilized was
air condition of 25 °C and 50% relative humidity, a minimum out- also simulated. Outdoor air conditions were obtained from TMY3
door air fraction of 20%, and a supply air setpoint temperature of data files for each city considered [14]. The conditioned space
13 °C. For convenience, transition lines for differential dry-bulb was not modeled and therefore it was necessary to make simplify-
temperature control and differential enthalpy control are shown ing assumptions about the return conditions. The return air

Table 3
Comparison of coil loads for different bypass factors and outdoor air fractions. The outdoor conditions are 28 °C and 33% relative humidity, the return conditions are 25 °C and 50%
relative humidity, and the supply air temperature is 13 °C.

Minimum (20%) outdoor air 100% Outdoor air

Bypass factor q_ sen ðkJ=kgÞ q_ lat ðkJ=kgÞ q_ tot ðkJ=kgÞ q_ sen ðkJ=kgÞ q_ lat ðkJ=kgÞ q_ tot ðkJ=kgÞ
0.1 12.875 2.148 15.023 15.306 0.000 15.306
0.2 12.860 3.797 16.657 15.295 1.012 16.307
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924 917

temperature was assumed to be constant at 25 °C and the initial
value of the return air humidity ratio was 0.0115 kgv/kga for each
strategy. At each subsequent hour, the return air humidity ratio
was determined by assuming a constant moisture addition of
0.0015 kgv/kga to the leaving air humidity ratio at the previous
hour for each strategy (i.e., different strategies could produce dif-
ferent mixed air conditions and therefore, different leaving air con-
ditions). For all the load calculations, the temperature rise due to
the supply fan was neglected and the coil leaving air temperature
was assumed to be equal to the supply air temperature setpoint
value of 13 °C. The constant moisture addition of 0.0015 kgv/kga
is approximately equal to the amount of moisture that must be
added to air leaving the coil at 13 °C and 90% relative humidity
(a typical leaving air condition when moisture condenses out of
the air) to produce return air at 25 °C and 50% relative humidity.
All simulations used a coil bypass factor of 0.15. The coil leaving
air humidity ratio was calculated with the contact–mixture anal-
ogy model described in Section 4.
The minimum outdoor air fraction for the simulations was 20%.
When the outdoor air temperature was less than the supply air
temperature setpoint, free cooling (mixing of outdoor and return
air) was used by all the economizer strategies to meet the setpoint
and mechanical cooling was not required. Under these conditions,
the mixed air conditions that satisfied the supply air temperature
setpoint became the leaving air conditions of the coil. For simula-
tions with no economizer, the mixed air conditions were always
determined by mixing 20% outdoor air with 80% return air and
mechanical cooling was necessary the entire year.
The simulations were used to evaluate the sensitivity of the
economizer control strategies to sensor errors. For each one-year
simulation, a constant bias error was applied to the outdoor and re-
turn air error temperatures, and a second constant bias error was
applied to the outdoor and return air relative humidities. The bias
values for the temperature errors were 0, ±1 and ±2 °C, and for the
relative humidity errors were 0%, ±3%, ±5%, ±7% and ±10% relative
humidity. The bias errors for the outdoor and return air sensors
were of opposite signs (e.g., positive errors for outdoor air temper-
ature and relative humidity, and negative errors for return air con-
ditions, or vice versa) in an effort to capture the worst case effect of
the errors. In all, 29 simulations were performed for each of the 15
US cities listed in Table 1. The results that follow summarize the
findings for three scenarios: (1) ideal sensors (i.e., no sensor er-
rors); (2) well maintained sensors with maximum errors of ±1 °C
and ±5% relative humidity; and (3) poorly maintained sensors with
maximum errors of ±2 °C and ±10% relative humidity. For ideal
sensors, the control strategies always make the correct control
decision according to the intent of the algorithm, whereas when
sensor errors occur, incorrect control decisions can and do occur.
Fig. 10 shows the annual loads corresponding to ideal sensors,
well maintained sensors, and poorly maintained sensors for the
15 US cities listed in Table 1. The annual loads are arranged in a lat-
tice plot that shows results for marine climates in the left-hand
column of plots, results for dry climates in the center column,
and results for humid climates in the right-hand column [15]. Each
row in the lattice plot represents a different climate temperature
classification. Results are presented for the case with no

Ideal Sensors
Well Maintained Sensors Optimization
Poorly Maintained Sensors Model
50000 150000 Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
50000 150000 Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None

50000 150000
Annual Cooling Load (kJ/kg)
Fig. 10. Annual loads for 15 US cities with ideal sensors, well maintained sensors, and poorly maintained sensors.
918 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924

economizer and the four economizer strategies listed above. For
the well maintained and poorly maintained sensor results, the
plotted point represents the largest annual load among all the
cases with errors less than or equal to the maximum errors of
±1 °C and ±5% relative humidity for well maintained sensors, and
±2 °C and ±10% relative humidity for poorly maintained sensors.
All loads are presented on a per unit mass basis assuming a con-
stant airflow rate through the AHU. In a variable-air-volume
AHU, the airflow rate is controlled to match the building load
and the annual load in kilowatts would be calculated using an
hourly average of the flow rate. The data presented in Fig. 10 are
also provided in Tables 4–6 in Appendix A.
The following are key findings that can be taken from Fig. 10
and Tables 4–6:
1. The lowest annual loads are achieved with optimization-based
control and ideal sensors.
2. For each of the humidity classifications (marine, dry, or humid),
as the climate gets warmer, the annual cooling load increases.
3. For a given temperature classification, humid climates have the
largest annual cooling loads, followed by dry climates.
4. As the sensor errors increase, the maximum annual cooling load
increases for all economizer strategies.
5. Generally speaking, the warmer the climate, the greater the
sensitivity of the annual loads to sensor errors.
6. Of the four economizer control strategies simulated, differential
dry-bulb temperature control is the least sensitive to sensor
errors, as indicated by the proximity of the data points to one
another.
7. Despite the sensor errors, in most every climate, significant
energy savings can be achieved compared to the no economizer
case using any of the economizer control strategies. The only
exceptions are the hot–humid and very hot–humid climates.
In the climate zones where savings can be achieved for all the
sensor errors considered, worst-case savings range from 5.6%
(6800 kJ/kg) in the hot–dry climate, to 77.6% (57 614 kJ/kg) in
the very cold–dry climate.
8. In all climate types, of the four economizer strategies simu-
lated, dry-bulb temperature control yields the lowest maxi-
mum annual load for poorly maintained sensors; however,
in humid climates with very hot, hot, warm, and mixed tem-
peratures, the maximum annual loads for differential
dry-bulb temperature control are 7.3–18.5% higher than dif-
ferential enthalpy control when the sensors are well
maintained.
The peak hourly coil loads for ideal sensors, well maintained
sensors, and poorly maintained sensors for the 15 US cities listed
in Table 1 are shown in Fig. 11. Peak loads impact utility bills
and dictate the sizing of equipment, piping, and duct work. For
the well maintained and poorly maintained sensor results, the
plotted point represents the largest peak load among all the cases
with errors less than or equal to the maximum errors of ±1 °C and
±5% relative humidity for well maintained sensors, and ±2 °C and
±10% relative humidity for poorly maintained sensors. It should
be noted that the peak loads in Fig. 11 do not necessarily corre-
spond to the same sensor errors that produced the maximum an-
nual loads in Fig. 10. The data presented in Fig. 11 are also

Ideal Sensors
Well Maintained Sensors Optimization
Poorly Maintained Sensors Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
20 30 40 Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None

20 30 40 20 30 40
Peak Cooling Load (kJ/kg)

Fig. 11. Peak loads for 15 US cities with ideal sensors, well maintained sensors, and poorly maintained sensors.
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924
provided in Tables 7–9 in Appendix A. The following are key find-
ings that can be taken from Fig. 11 and Tables 7–9:
1. For ideal sensors, the peak coil loads for model-based and opti-
mization-based control are almost always less than or equal to
the peak coil loads for the differential dry-bulb temperature and
differential enthalpy control strategies. The only exception is
the warm–dry climate, for which a peak coil load of 18.7 kJ/kg
was obtained for differential enthalpy control and 19.19 kJ/kg
was obtained for both model-based and optimization-based
control.
2. As the magnitude of the sensor errors increases, the peak load
for each strategy generally increases. Exceptions include the
marine climates and the warm–dry climate. For the marine cli-
mates, the three strategies that use relative humidity (differen-
tial enthalpy control, model-based control, and optimization-
based control) have the same peak loads for well maintained
and poorly maintained sensors. For the warm–dry climate, all
four economizer strategies have the same peak loads for well
maintained and poorly maintained sensors. A small number of
similar examples like this can be found in the results.
3. The peak loads for the economizer strategies that use relative
humidity are more sensitive to sensor errors in humid climates
than in marine or dry climates. In humid climates, peak load
increases with these strategies range from 40% to 55% when
considering poorly maintained sensors compared to well main-
tained sensors.
4. An exception to the previous finding occurs in the hot–dry cli-
mate, where the peak loads for model-based and optimiza-
tion-based control increase by similar magnitudes and
percentages as they do in the humid climates.
5. The peak loads for dry-bulb temperature control are generally
less sensitive to sensor errors than the economizer strategies
that use relative humidity measurements.
6. In humid climates, dry-bulb temperature control results in the
highest peak loads irrespective of sensor errors; however, as
the sensor errors increase, the difference between the peak
loads for dry-bulb temperature control and the three other
economizer strategies gets smaller. For well maintained sen-
0 10 20 30 40
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
0 10 20 30 40
Fig. 12. Hourly load distributions for hot–dry, warm–dry and mixed–dry climates with ideal, well maintained and poorly maintained sensors.
919
sors, the difference between the peak load with differential
dry-bulb temperature control and the maximum peak load
from the other three strategies ranges from 10.94 to 15.76 kJ/
kg. For poorly maintained sensors, this range is only 0.72–
3.94 kJ/kg.
Taken together, the results in Figs. 10 and 11 support the use of
differential dry-bulb temperature control in marine and dry cli-
mates. It is the simplest of the four strategies simulated, has the
fewest sensor requirements, and yields the lowest annual cooling
loads of the four economizer strategies for well maintained and
poorly maintained sensors. With the exception of the hot–dry cli-
mate, it also yields the lowest peak cooling loads of the four econ-
omizer strategies for well maintained and poorly maintained
sensors. Excluding the hot–dry climate and considering the
worst-case scenario of poorly maintained sensors, annual energy
savings not lower than 53% (warm–dry climate) to 84% (very
cold–dry climate) can be achieved with differential dry-bulb tem-
perature control compared to the no economizer case; however,
the energy savings achieved will be accompanied by increased
peak loads that could be as high as 7% (cold–dry climate) to 39%
(warm–dry climate).
Fig. 10 shows that the benefits of using an economizer in a hot–
dry climate are less than those in marine climates and other dry
climates, and Fig. 11 shows that the increase in the peak loads
associated with increasing sensor errors and with the use of an
economizer in a hot–dry climate is greater than in marine climates
and other dry climates. For poorly maintained sensors, the annual
load for differential dry-bulb temperature control (90,008 kJ/kg) is
26% less than that for no economizer (121,227 kJ/kg), while the
peak load for differential dry-bulb temperature control (38.36 kJ/
kg) is 81% higher than the peak load for no economizer (21.23 kJ/
kg). Additional insight into the results for the hot–dry climate
can be obtained from the box-percentile trellis plot in Fig. 12,
which shows the distribution of the hourly cooling loads in the
hot–dry, warm–dry, and mixed–dry climates [16]. Results are
shown for ideal sensors, well maintained sensors and poorly main-
tained sensors. Fig. 13 is a box-percentile plot that illustrates the
quantiles, range covered, and upper and lower extreme values. In
0 10 20 30 40
920 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924
Quantiles
0.5
0.375 0.625
0.25
0.125
0.05
0.01
Extreme Values
Median
14
12
34
9 10
98 100
Fraction of Sample Covered
Fig. 13. Quantiles, fraction of sample covered, and extreme values for box-percentile plot.
this study, the load corresponding to the 0.99 quantile is referred
to as the 99% design load.
Fig. 12 shows how increasing sensor errors stretch the distribu-
tion of cooling loads, particularly in the hot–dry climate and partic-
ularly for the economizer strategies that use relative humidity
measurements. The distribution for differential dry-bulb tempera-
ture control is comparatively less sensitive to increasing sensor er-
rors, with the 99% design load increasing from 20.16 kJ/kg for ideal
sensors to 24.63 kJ/kg for poorly maintained sensors in the hot–
dry climate. Perhaps the most important result that can be taken
from Fig. 12 is the fact that although the peak load corresponding
to differential dry-bulb temperature control with poorly maintained
sensors is 81% higher than the peak load for no economizer, the 99%
design load for differential dry-bulb temperature control is only 23%
higher than the design load for no economizer. Because the upper 1%
of the cooling loads for this strategy are spread over a large range
(24.63–38.36 kJ/kg), there could be a significant number of hours
during which the equipment capacity falls well short of the demand
if the equipment is sized based on the 99% design load. In this case,
there are 45 h for which the cooling load exceeds the 99% design load
by 20% or more. Thus, in a hot–dry climate with poorly maintained
sensors, one must evaluate whether the energy savings that can be
achieved with an economizer strategy are outweighed by either
the necessity for larger equipment that will have higher operating
costs that negate the economizer energy savings, or inadequate
occupant comfort for a significant number of hours each year.
If, on the other hand, the sensors are well maintained, optimiza-
tion-based control and model-based control yield annual energy
savings the are nearly equivalent to differential dry-bulb tempera-
ture control, have 99% design loads that are 18% higher than that of
differential dry-bulb temperature control, and have peak loads that
are 21% less than that of differential dry-bulb temperature control.
The spread of the upper 1% of the loads is such that there were only
27 h of operation with differential dry-bulb temperature control
during which the load exceeded the 99% design load by at least
20%. For optimization-based control and model-based control,
there would be 0 h of operation characterized in this way because
the peak load is less than 11% higher than the 99% design load.
Thus, it could be concluded that optimization-based control and
model-based control would lead to comparable energy savings
and better comfort (because the upper 1% of data has less spread
than that for differential temperature based control) at the cost
of somewhat larger equipment and the likelihood of higher associ-
ated operating costs.
0.75
0.875
0.95
0.99
Mean Extreme Values
Fig. 14 shows the distribution of cooling loads for the hot–hu-
mid, warm–humid, mixed–humid, and cool–humid climates. Re-
sults are shown for ideal sensors, well maintained sensors, and
poorly maintained sensors. The plots reveal clearly how as the cli-
mate gets warmer and the sensor errors get larger, the distribution
of cooling loads in general gets stretched and the savings that can
be achieved using an economizer strategy decreases, to the point
where all four economizer strategies result in higher annual loads
than the no economizer case for poorly maintained sensors in a
hot–humid climate.
The results for the mixed–humid and cool–humid climates are
particularly interesting. Recall from Table 1 that an economizer is
not required in the mixed–humid climate, but it is in the cool–hu-
mid climate. Furthermore, from the discussion in Section 2, differ-
ential dry-bulb temperature control is prohibited in the mixed–
humid climate. Considering the distributions for differential en-
thalpy control, model-based control, and optimization-based con-
trol, there is very little difference between the mixed–humid and
cool–humid climates. In the mixed–humid climate, annual energy
savings compared to the case with no economizer range from 52%
for ideal sensors to 40% for poorly maintained sensors, whereas in
the cool-humid climate, the savings range from 56% for ideal sen-
sors to 43% for poorly maintained sensors. The 99% design loads are
nearly the same between the two climates when considering the
same sensors errors. In addition, for poorly maintained sensors,
the annual load and 99% design load for differential dry-bulb tem-
perature control are less than those for the three other economizer
strategies.
The simulation results highlight the energy savings that can be
achieved with economizer strategies and the reduction in savings
that can occur due to incorrect economizer control decisions
stemming from sensor errors. The new control strategies outper-
form the traditional strategies for ideal sensors, but like the tradi-
tional strategies, are susceptible to sensor errors that degrade
their performance. For a scenario representative of poorly main-
tained sensors, the lowest annual coil loads of the four econo-
mizer strategies investigated are 3.0–40.3% higher than those
achieved for the ideal scenario of optimization-based control
and ideal sensors, and the lowest peak hourly loads are 6.8–
84.1% higher than those corresponding to optimization-based
control and ideal sensors.
The results also point out the importance of accounting for sen-
sor errors during design. If the impact of sensor errors on hourly
loads are not taken into consideration, the air conditioning
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924
0 10 20 30 40
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
Optimization
Model
Enthalpy
Temperature
None
0 10 20 30 40
Fig. 14. Hourly load distributions for hot–humid, warm–humid, mixed–humid and cool–humid climates with ideal, well maintained and poorly maintained sensors.
equipment may be undersized and unable to satisfy cooling loads
for hundreds of hours each year. To emphasize this point, assume
that equipment sizing is based on the 99% design load resulting
from the use of differential enthalpy control with well maintained
sensors. In the mixed–humid climate, this load is 25.4 kJ/kg. Using
the same control strategy with poorly maintained sensors results
in hourly loads that exceed the 99% design load for well main-
tained sensors 872 times over the course of the year. Conversely,
while sizing the equipment for the worst case sensor errors can
help ensure that loads are met, it may increase capital expendi-
tures and operational costs (due to higher fan and pumping energy
use, poorer equipment performance at part load, etc.) to the point
where they exceed the economizer savings.
8. Summary and conclusions
This paper described two new control strategies for controlling
air economizers when mechanical cooling is required. Because the
strategies calculate the coil load for the existing conditions and
determine the outdoor air fraction that minimizes this load, they
can be applied in any climate. Simulations were used to compare
the new strategies with traditional differential dry-bulb tempera-
ture control, differential enthalpy control, and the case where no
economizer is used. Results of the simulations revealed the follow-
ing key findings:
1. With ideal sensors and a perfect model of the coil, optimization-
based control yields the lowest annual coil load in all 15 cities
considered and, with the exception of the warm–dry climate,
also yields the lowest peak coil load of the four economizer
strategies considered.
2. In dry and marine climates, and for sensors errors representa-
tive of well maintained sensors and poorly maintained sensors,
differential dry-bulb temperature control yields the lowest
annual coil load and almost always yields the lowest peak
921
0 10 20 30 40
hourly coil load of any of the economizer strategies considered.
In addition, the annual and peak hourly coil loads resulting for
differential dry-bulb temperature control are relatively insensi-
tive to the magnitudes of the sensor errors.
3. In humid climates, no one strategy consistently produced lower
annual and peak hourly coil loads over the range of sensor
errors simulated. With well maintained sensors, differential
enthalpy control, model-based control, and optimization-based
control performed better than differential dry-bulb tempera-
ture control when both the annual coil loads and peak hourly
coil loads are taken into consideration. With poorly maintained
sensors, differential dry-bulb temperature control yielded the
lowest annual coil loads and peak hourly loads that were only
slightly higher than the corresponding values for the other
three economizer control strategies.
All of the economizer control strategies investigated are suscep-
tible to sensor errors. Incorrect control decisions that result from
sensor errors reduce the energy savings that can be achieved and
lead to higher peak hourly loads on the coil. For a scenario repre-
sentative of poorly maintained sensors, the lowest annual coil
loads of the four economizer strategies investigated are 3.0–
40.3% higher than those resulting from the ideal scenario of opti-
mization-based control and ideal sensors, and the lowest peak
hourly loads are 6.8–84.1% higher than those corresponding to
optimization-based control and ideal sensors.
The model-based and optimization-based control strategies are
also susceptible to modeling errors; however, sensitivity to model-
ing errors was not investigated here. Such a sensitivity study
should ideally include data from a number of coils of different sizes
with variations in the air inlet temperature, humidity ratio and
flow rate as well as variations in the inlet water temperature and
flow rate. The study should evaluate the error associated with
using a single optimal bypass factor for all conditions, as well as
the sensitivity of the results to suboptimal values of the bypass
922 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924

factor. The sensitivity of the results to the return conditions should
also be assessed for all the economizer strategies using a more de-
tailed model of the conditioned space.
Although not investigated, self-optimizing economizer control
merits further attention [8,9]. Because sensors and models are
not used, this strategy has the potential to achieve the ideal results
corresponding to optimization-based control and ideal sensors.
Appendix A
Tables 4–6 contain the annual coil load data plotted in Fig. 10
for ideal sensors, well maintained sensors and poorly maintained
sensors, respectively. Tables 7–9 contain the maximum peak
hourly coil load data plotted in Fig. 11 for ideal sensors, well main-
tained sensors and poorly maintained sensors, respectively.

Table 4
Annual coil loads corresponding to ideal sensors.

Annual coil load (kJ/kg)

Climate No economizer Differential dry-bulb temperature control Differential enthalpy control Model-based control Optimization-based control
Very hot–humid 158,208 164,601 146,152 146,125 146,119
Hot–humid 139,472 121,147 106,328 106,300 106,294
Warm–humid 117,827 76,775 69,019 68,957 68,920
Mixed–humid 106,954 57,308 50,925 50,886 50,864
Cool–humid 99,119 46,236 43,329 43,257 43,228
Cold–humid 91,799 38,744 36,721 36,687 36,679
Very cold–humid 87,827 32,987 31,442 31,327 31,312
Hot–dry 121,227 86,994 88,283 86,537 86,141
Warm–dry 120,327 55,319 54,822 54,691 54,688
Mixed–dry 96,149 40,166 40,527 39,847 39,642
Cool–dry 90,703 31,110 31,695 30,909 30,698
Cold–dry 82,498 17,987 18,300 17,873 17,750
Very cold–dry 74,213 10,884 11,108 10,871 10,830
Warm–marine 108,257 18,557 18,546 18,520 18,515
Mixed–marine 99,145 16,135 16,078 16,071 16,063

Table 5
Maximum annual coil loads for well maintained sensors.

Maximum annual coil load (kJ/kg)

Climate No economizer Differential dry-bulb temperature control Differential enthalpy control Model-based control Optimization-based control
Very hot–humid 158,208 182,790 154,256 156,040 156,089
Hot–humid 139,472 130,697 111,940 112,574 112,641
Warm–humid 117,827 79,866 74,410 75,548 75,616
Mixed–humid 106,954 60,332 55,228 55,679 55,691
Cool–humid 99,119 47,867 47,654 46,988 46,937
Cold–humid 91,799 39,935 40,811 39,606 39,590
Very cold–humid 87,827 33,854 35,861 34,379 34,392
Hot–dry 121,227 88,025 101,616 89,028 89,563
Warm–dry 120,327 55,379 70,546 64,463 64,520
Mixed–dry 96,149 41,176 44,512 43,053 43,092
Cool–dry 90,703 31,853 34,483 33,040 33,054
Cold–dry 82,498 18,536 19,695 18,972 18,994
Very cold–dry 74,213 11,122 11,597 11,285 11,288
Warm–marine 108,257 18,785 22,679 20,561 20,582
Mixed–marine 99,145 16,575 19,263 18,067 18,080

Table 6
Maximum annual coil loads for poorly maintained sensors.

Maximum annual coil load (kJ/kg)

Climate No economizer Differential dry-bulb temperature control Differential enthalpy control Model-based control Optimization-based control
Very hot–humid 158,208 204,960 212,903 212,596 212,580
Hot–humid 139,472 140,602 147,788 146,195 146,024
Warm–humid 117,827 84,249 90,667 89,854 89,794
Mixed–humid 106,954 63,084 64,380 64,522 64,430
Cool–humid 99,119 49,966 56,708 51,692 51,602
Cold–humid 91,799 41,701 48,251 43,637 43,632
Very cold–humid 87,827 34,731 44,261 39,233 39,723
Hot–dry 121,227 90,008 114,427 100,889 100,755
Warm–dry 120,327 56,347 99,113 83,612 84,278
Mixed–dry 96,149 43,530 54,289 48,089 47,665
Cool–dry 90,703 33,612 45,158 38,273 38,211
Cold–dry 82,498 19,680 29,089 21,986 21,998
Very cold–dry 74,213 11,815 16,599 12,513 12,482
Warm–marine 108,257 19,824 56,583 33,187 34,929
Mixed–marine 99,145 17,768 37,707 25,214 25,664
 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924 923

Table 7
Peak hourly coil loads for ideal sensors.

Peak coil load (kJ/kg)

Climate No economizer Differential dry-bulb temperature control Differential enthalpy control Model-based control Optimization-based control
Very hot–humid 22.23 37.53 22.23 22.23 22.23
Hot–humid 22.81 39.08 22.81 22.81 22.81
Warm–humid 22.14 37.01 22.14 22.14 22.14
Mixed–humid 21.90 37.01 21.90 21.90 21.90
Cool–humid 22.54 35.15 22.54 22.54 22.54
Cold–humid 22.48 35.98 22.48 22.48 22.48
Very cold–humid 24.28 39.08 24.28 24.28 24.28
Hot–dry 21.23 33.66 29.01 21.23 21.23
Warm–dry 18.21 25.31 18.7 19.19 19.19
Mixed–dry 17.47 19.45 25.1 17.92 17.92
Cool–dry 18.11 19.72 26.69 18.12 18.12
Cold–dry 16.15 16.15 21.18 16.15 16.15
Very cold–dry 15.19 15.12 20.28 15.12 14.70
Warm–marine 17.59 19.45 17.54 17.54 17.54
Mixed–marine 17.46 17.74 17.46 17.46 17.46

Table 8
Maximum peak hourly coil loads for well maintained sensors.

Maximum peak coil load (kJ/kg)

Climate No economizer Differential dry-bulb temperature control Differential enthalpy control Model-based control Optimization-based control
Very hot–humid 22.23 42.90 29.74 28.19 28.16
Hot–humid 22.81 42.90 30.54 28.45 28.16
Warm–humid 22.14 44.63 28.87 28.45 28.16
Mixed–humid 21.90 40.4 27.57 28.19 28.16
Cool–humid 22.54 38.75 27.52 27.81 27.81
Cold–humid 22.48 39.47 27.68 28.19 27.81
Very cold–humid 24.28 42.06 26.98 28.07 28.07
Hot–dry 21.23 33.66 33.32 26.62 26.62
Warm–dry 18.21 25.31 25.31 25.31 25.31
Mixed–dry 17.47 19.91 26.14 24.31 23.83
Cool–dry 18.11 20.86 27.32 24.16 24.16
Cold–dry 16.15 16.61 21.19 18.35 17.25
Very cold–dry 15.19 15.13 20.28 17.22 16.02
Warm–marine 17.59 19.45 24.31 24.31 24.29
Mixed–marine 17.46 20.17 23.62 23.62 23.62

Table 9
Maximum peak hourly coil loads for poorly maintained sensors.

Maximum peak coil load (kJ/kg)

Climate No economizer Differential dry-bulb temperature control Differential enthalpy control Model-based control Optimization-based control
Very hot–humid 22.23 44.76 42.02 40.61 40.61
Hot–humid 22.81 46.72 42.78 40.61 40.61
Warm–humid 22.14 44.63 41.59 40.28 40.28
Mixed–humid 21.90 41.50 40.78 40.40 40.31
Cool–humid 22.54 43.97 40.81 40.15 40.15
Cold–humid 22.48 41.50 40.78 39.37 39.37
Very cold–humid 24.28 43.55 41.92 39.94 39.94
Hot–dry 21.23 38.36 43.31 39.07 39.07
Warm–dry 18.21 25.31 25.31 25.31 25.31
Mixed–dry 17.47 21.79 26.14 24.31 24.31
Cool–dry 18.11 24.16 27.32 26.51 26.51
Cold–dry 16.15 17.25 21.19 20.78 17.25
Very cold–dry 15.19 16.27 20.28 20.28 16.27
Warm–marine 17.59 22.55 24.31 24.31 24.29
Mixed–marine 17.46 23.62 23.62 23.62 23.62

References [3] Spitler J, Hittle D, Johnson D, Pederson C. A comparative study of the

performance of temperature-based and enthalpy-based economy cycles.
ASHRAE Trans 1987;93(2):13–22.
[1] ASHRAE. Energy standard for buildings except low-rise residential buildings,
[4] US DOD. Heating, ventilating, air conditioning, and dehumidfying systems.
ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA standard 90.1-2004, American Society of Heating,
Tech. rep. UFC 3-410-02N, Unitied States Department of Defense; 2005.
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 1791 Tullie Circle NE,
[5] Hydeman M, Taylor S, Stein J, Kolderup E, Hong T. Advanced variable air
Atlanta, GA 30329; 2004.
volume system design guide. Tech. rep., California Energy Commission; 2003.
[2] ASHRAE. 90.1 User’s manual ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA standard 90.1-2004. Tech.
[6] GSA. Facilities standards for the public buildings service – mechanical
rep., American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
engineering. Tech. rep. 5, US General Services Administration; 2003.
Engineers, Inc.; 2004.
924 J.E. Seem, J.M. House / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 910–924

[7] Seem JE, Park C, House JM. A new sequencing control strategy for air-handling [12] Kuehn TH, Ramsey JW, Threlkeld JL. Thermal environmental
units. HVAC&R Res 1999;5(1):35–58. engineering. Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 1998.
[8] Li P, Li Y, Seem J. Dynamic modeling and self-optimizing control of air-side [13] Zhou X, Braun JE. Dynamic modeling of chilled water cooling coils. Tech. rep.,
economizers. Proceedings of modelica. The Modelica Association; 2008. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers,
[9] Li P, Li Y, Seem JE. Efficient operation of air-side economizer using extremum final report of ASHRAE 1194-RP; 2005.
seeking control. J Dyn Syst 2010 (in press). [14] Wilcox S, Marion W. Users manual for TMY3 data sets. Tech. rep., National
[10] Cengel YA, Boles MA. Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. sixth Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado., technical report NREL/TP-
ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 2008. 581-43156; 2008.
[11] Carrier WH. The contact–mixture analogy applied to heat transfer [15] Sarkar D. Lattice: multivariate data visualization with R. Springer Verlag;
with mixtures of air and water vapor. Trans Am Soc Mech Eng 1937;59: 2008.
49–53. [16] Harrell Jr FE, Hmisc: harrell miscellaneous, R package version 3.5-2; 2008.