Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Procedia
Available Engineering
online 00 (2017) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 205 (2017) 1592–1599

10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning, ISHVAC2017, 19-
10th International Symposium on22Heating,
OctoberVentilation
2017, Jinan,and
China
Air Conditioning, ISHVAC2017, 19-
22 October 2017, Jinan, China
Comparison of Noise Calculation Methods of Air Conditioning
Comparison of Noise
Duct Calculation
System used in Methods
China andofUSA
Air Conditioning
Duct System used in China and USA
Yalin Liua, Yaocheng Dongb, Lei Zhaoa,b,*
a Yalin Liua, Yaocheng Dongb, Lei Zhaoa,b,*
School of Municipal and Environmental Engineering, Xi`an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi`an, China 710055
a
b
School of MunicipalKey
andLaboratory of Environmental
Environmental Engineering,Engineering, Shaanxi
Xi`an University Province, Xi’an,
of Architecture China 710055
and Technology, Xi`an, China 710055
b
Key Laboratory of Environmental Engineering, Shaanxi Province, Xi’an, China 710055

Abstract
Abstract
A large number of potential noise sources appear in building HVAC&R systems installation. Noise generated in central plant can
be large
A confined
numberwithin installation
of potential rooms,
noise located
sources in the
appear basementHVAC&R
in building or on top systems
of a building, and be Noise
installation. treatedgenerated
properly.inBut ductwork
central plant still
can
remains
be as anwithin
confined effective sound transmission
installation rooms, located pathinwithin a building,
the basement inside
or on top ofwhich turbulent
a building, andflow is a source
be treated of broadband
properly. noise. still
But ductwork Air
distribution system including fan, straight pipe, elbow, branch take-off, grilles, diffusers, terminal boxes,
remains as an effective sound transmission path within a building, inside which turbulent flow is a source of broadband noise. Air manifolds, etc. should
be designed system
distribution carefully with acoustical
including calculation
fan, straight to minimize
pipe, elbow, sound transmissions.
branch take-off, However,
grilles, diffusers, terminalthe boxes,
methods for ductwork
manifolds, noise
etc. should
regeneration
be and attenuation
designed carefully calculation
with acoustical recommended
calculation by Practical
to minimize HVAC Design
sound transmissions. Manual,the
However, China (2008)
methods for (PDM)
ductwork [5]noise
and
ASHRAE Handbook
regeneration (2015) (AAH)
and attenuation [1] are not
calculation fully identical.
recommended by Therefore,
Practical these
HVACtwo methods
Design are compared
Manual, and a ductwork
China (2008) (PDM) [5] is taken
and
to exemplify
ASHRAE their differences.
Handbook (2015) (AAH) Airflow
[1] arenoise through
not fully fan, straight
identical. pipe,these
Therefore, elbow,
two branch
methodstake-off, etc. and
are compared andnoise attenuations
a ductwork of
is taken
these components are calculated in terms of two methods, respectively. It is found that the method used
to exemplify their differences. Airflow noise through fan, straight pipe, elbow, branch take-off, etc. and noise attenuations of in China is mainly based
on empirical
these formulae,
components with some
are calculated in figures
terms ofand twotables. Fewrespectively.
methods, empirical formulae are that
It is found given
theinmethod
relatedused
chapters in AAH,
in China but mainly
is mainly based
figure and table
on empirical based. with
formulae, Resultsome
indicates
figuresthat
andthetables.
airflow
Fewnoise of elbow
empirical as wellare
formulae as given
noise in
attenuations of elbow,
related chapters branch
in AAH, buttake-off
mainly
from two
figure and methods are Result
table based. almost indicates
identical,that
whilethe the values
airflow of airflow
noise of elbownoise of branch
as well as noisetake-off and noise
attenuations attenuations
of elbow, through
branch take-off
straight duct at low frequencies are obviously different. The differences even reach 26dB and 1.74dB
from two methods are almost identical, while the values of airflow noise of branch take-off and noise attenuations through for the case studied. We
referred duct
straight to theat method providedare
low frequencies in CIBSE
obviously Guide B4 (2016)
different. [3] and found
The differences eventhe airflow
reach 26dBnoise
and of branch
1.74dB fortake-off
the casecalculated
studied. Weby
method
referred of
to PDM is more
the method closed to
provided in the measured
CIBSE Guide values,
B4 (2016) but [3]
the and
number
found of the
cases measured
airflow noise isofvery limited.
branch Thus,
take-off a lot more
calculated by
research of
method should
PDMbeis carried out in to
more closed thisthe
direction
measured to better
values,thebutcalculation
the number method.
of casesAndmeasured
the method to determine
is very noise attenuation
limited. Thus, a lot more
through
research straight
should duct used inout
be carried China
in thisshould be updated
direction andthe
to better that used in USA
calculation can also
method. Andbethebetter gradually.
method to determine noise attenuation
© 2017 The
through Authors.
straight Published
duct used in Chinaby Elsevier
should beLtd.updated and that used in USA can also be better gradually.
Peer-review
© under responsibility
2017 The Authors. Published by of Elsevier
the scientific
Ltd. committee of the 10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and Air
© 2017 The
Conditioning. Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and Air
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and
Conditioning.
Air Conditioning.

* Corresponding author. Tel.:+0-132-0186-1435.

E-mail address:author.
* Corresponding leizhao0308@hotmail.com
Tel.:+0-132-0186-1435.
E-mail address: leizhao0308@hotmail.com
1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review
1877-7058 ©under
2017responsibility
The Authors. of the scientific
Published committee
by Elsevier Ltd. of the 10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning.

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 10th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilation and
Air Conditioning.
10.1016/j.proeng.2017.10.278
 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 205 (2017) 1592–1599 1593
2 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

Keywords: Duct system; Sound transmission; Air flow noise; Attenuation; Sound levels

1. Introduction

In modern society, air conditioning system is indispensable to create a comfortable indoor environment. However,
the noise caused by air conditioning systems has been paid more and more attention. At present, it has been found
that noise problems may involve all aspects of an air conditioning system, instead of only concerning a single
component. Therefore, it is of significance to carry out acoustic analysis and evaluation on the whole HVAC&R
system. It is necessary to compare the noise calculation methods of HVAC&R system recommended by PDM and in
foreign countries, illustrating their similarities and differences. Therefore, improvement can be made in noise
evaluation system for HVAC&R system used in our country.

2. Comparison of two theoretical methods

The newest version of PDM published in 2008 is an authoritative guideline for designers in HVAC industry in
China. The calculation methods of airflow noise and noise attenuations through straight duct, elbow, and branch
take-off are recommended in Chapter 17 of PDM. The method for noise calculations of ductwork and fittings
recommended by this manual is compared with what recommended by Chapter 48 of HVAC Applications of AAH,
2015, USA. The calculation methods are mainly based on empirical formula, with tabular data or curves. Since AAH
is updated every four year, the authoritative textbook, HVAC: Handbook of Heating, Ventilation and Air
Conditioning for Design and Implementation (HVAC DI) [2] was referred to find out formula appeared in old
versions of AAH. In the following, the calculation methods of airflow noise and noise attenuation in various
ductwork elements were compared at first.

2.1. Comparison of airflow noise calculation methods

In Chapter 17 of PDM, the sound power level Lw generated by airflow through the straight duct is calculated by
eq. (1) and those generated by rectangular elbow or branch take-off are computed by (2).

Lw = Lwc + 50 lg v + 10 lg A (1)

Lw = Lwc + 10 lg f D + 30 lg d + 50 lg v (2)

where Lwc is specific sound power level, dB; v is velocity through duct, m/s; A is cross- sectional area of straight
duct, m2; fD is octave band low limit frequency, fD= f /√2, Hz; f is octave band center frequency, Hz; d is equivalent
diameter of duct, d =2(a×b)/(a+b), m. In general, Lwc is taken to be 10 for straight duct. For rectangular elbow, Lwc is
determined from Figure 17.1-2 in PDM in terms of Strouhal number obtained from NStr= f ·d /v, in which v is
velocity of air through duct. And for branch take-off, Lwc is determined from Figure 17.1-4 in terms of NStr and vi /va,
where vi and va are inlet and outlet airflow velocity of branch take-off, m/s. The value of d and v in equation (2) is
determined according to actual situation.
In addition, the airflow noise generated by air diffuser at constant air velocity is supposed to be calculated by eq.
(3). For other types of vents, eq. (3) could also be referred to.

Lw = Lwc + 10 lg f D + 30 lg ( d ⋅ v ) (3)

where Lwc is determined from Figure 17.1-7 in PDM in terms of NStr; d is equivalent diameter of the diffuser, m; v
is velocity of air through the diffuser neck, m/s.
1594 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 205 (2017) 1592–1599
Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 3

In AAH, however, the airflow noise generated in straight duct is not obligatory to be calculated if the airflow
velocity in duct is lower than the maximum value recommended. The values Lw generated by airflow through such
duct components as elbow and branch take-off are recommended to be calculated by eq. (4),

Lw = F + G + H (4)

where F is spectrum function, dB. It is determined according to flow characteristics in terms of NStr from Fig.16-
16 in HVAC DI [2] for rectangular elbows and from Fig.16-17 for branch take-offs, respectively. And NStr= f ·D/v, in
which the equivalent diameter D is defined by for rectangular ducts, m. G is velocity function accounting for flow
velocity through duct element, dB. It can be determined from Fig.16-18 and Fig.16-19 for rectangular elbow and
branch take-off, respectively. And H is correction function for octave band f of interest, determined from Table 1.

Table 1. Octave bandwidth correction function

octave band center frequency H octave band center frequency H

[ Hz] [dB] [Hz] [dB]
63 16 1000 28
125 19 2000 31
250 22 4000 34
500 25 8000 37

2.2. Noise attenuation calculation methods

In PDM, noise attenuation of basic components in HVAC system is recommended to be determined from figures
and tables or by logarithmic operation. For example, noise attenuation of unlined straight duct and unlined elbows
can be determined by looking up in Table 2 and Table 3 according to the size of duct and the octave band center
frequency (when velocity is less than 8m/s), respectively.

Table 2. Noise attenuation of unlined straight duct

Attenuation at octave band frequency [dB·m−1]
Duct shape and size[m]
63 125 250 500 ≫1000
0.075~0.2 0.6 0.6 0.45 0.30 0.30

Rectangular 0.2~0.4 0.6 0.6 0.45 0.30 0.20

duct 0.4~0.8 0.6 0.6 0.30 0.15 0.15
0.8~1.6 0.45 0.3 0.15 0.10 0.06

Table 3. Noise attenuation of unlined elbows

Attenuation at octave band frequency [dB·m−1]
Duct shape and size[m]
125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
0.125 — — 1 5 7 5 3

Rectangular 0.250 — 1 5 7 5 3 3
duct 0.50 1 5 7 5 3 3 3
1.00 5 7 5 3 3 3 3

However, in AAH, noise attenuation is recommended to be determined from Table 4 and Table 5 for unlined
straight duct and unlined elbows.
 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 205 (2017) 1592–1599 1595
4 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

Table 4. Noise attenuation of unlined straight duct

Attenuation[dB·m−1]
Duct shape and dimension
Octave band center frequency[Hz]
[mm]
63 125 250 500 1000 ≥1000
150×150 0.98 0.66 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
305×305 1.15 0.66 0.33 0.20 0.20 0.20
305×610 1.31 0.66 0.33 0.16 0.16 0.16
rectangular
610×610 0.82 0.66 0.33 0.10 0.10 0.10
1220×1200 0.49 0.33 0.23 0.07 0.07 0.07
1830×1830 0.33 0.33 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.07

Table 5. Noise attenuation of unlined elbows

Attenuation[dB·m−1]
Duct shape and size[m] f, center frequency[kHz]; w, duct width[mm]
fw<48 48≤fw<96 96≤fw<190 190≤fw<380 380≤fw<760 760≤fw
Rectangular elbow 0 1 5 8 4 3
Circular elbow 0 1 2 3 3 3

Moreover, as for noise attenuation of branch take-off, both methods recommend the same calculation equation as
eq. (5).

Ai
ΔLw = 10 lg (5)
A i

where Ai is cross-sectional area of the ith branch duct, m2; ∑Ai is the total cross- sectional area of all branch ducts,
m .In addition, noise attenuation of end reflection loss in HVAC system is recommended to be determined from
2

Fig.17.2-2 in PDM, while the same item is given by Table 28 in Chapter 48 of AAH 2015.
Apart from these, the calculation also involves the superposition of noise values as eq. (6), suggested by both
methods, but it is simplified by adding an additional value to the maximum value of sound power level of the
superimposed two items if their difference is less than 10 dB. If the difference is greater than 10 dB, then the
additional value is taken to be zero.

(
Lw = 10 lg 10
Lw1 10
+ 10
Lw2 10
) (6)

3. Examplification of the difference between two methods

Referring to example 9 in chapter 16 of HVAC DI[2], we illustrated the similarities and differences between two
methods based on the example of an air-conditioning ductwork system shown in Figure 1.
1596 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 205 (2017) 1592–1599
Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Fig. 1. Ducted air supply system

Assuming that the fan outlet sound power level can be determined by the data provided by manufacturer,
compute the sound pressure levels in octave bands for the listener location. The supply fan is of the radial blade type
with 16 blades operating at 50.8 mm (2 inches) of water pressure drop and 52.36 rad/s (500 rpm) to supply
16,980m3/h of air. Selecting the center frequency of 63Hz and 500Hz, the basic calculation steps and results are
presented in Table 6 in Appendix A. of this paper.

4. Result and discussion

The equivalent diameter is defined by different formulae of (a×b)/(a+b) and ，respectively in PDM and AAH. As
a result, the calculated values of NStr are different. It causes minor differences in specific sound power level
determined from figures in two methods.
Although equation is given to determine airflow noise in straight duct in PDM, the in-duct airflow noise is
neglected when calculate the downstream noise, since the difference between the two superimposed items is always
greater than 10 dB. However, the airflow velocity in duct is recommended in AAH to be lower than the maximum
value suggested so that noise problems generated in duct can be avoided. Thus, the calculation procedure is
simplified.
The airflow noises of both branch take-off and elbow are recommended to be calculated by the same equations in
two methods, respectively. But, the equation forms are different in PDM and AHH, as illustrated by eq. (2) and (4).
The airflow noise through branch take-off is only calculated for branch duct in terms of NStr determined by its
airflow velocity in PDM. While airflow noises through both main and branch duct of branch take-off are calculated
in terms of NStr determined by main duct airflow velocity, respectively, in AHH. And the differences between the
results from two methods exceed 55%, in 6th and 18th rows in Table 6. To find out a more reliable method, the
conditions of airflow noises of two branch take-offs measured as given in CIBSE guide B4 in UK were substituted
into eq.(2) and eq.(4). The values from eq. (2) are closer to the results from the method in CIBSE than those from eq.
(4). The airflow noise through branch take-off calculated by the method recommended by PDM seems more reliable
than AHH. However, only the airflow noise in branch duct of branch take-off is calculated in PDM, as only two
cases of pressure loss factors in branch take-offs were involved in CIBSE, further research can be carried out to
better the calculation method.
The noise attenuation of straight duct both determined in terms of characteristic dimension and frequency in two
methods. The characteristic dimension is equivalent diameter in PDM but lengths of sides in AAH for rectangular
duct. And the condition of in duct flow velocity being less than 8m/s is stipulated in PDM while there is no such
specification in AHH. It is found that the obtained noise attenuation values for rectangular duct are different from
two methods, especially at low frequencies. As shown by the 2nd, 8th, and 16th row in Table 6, the value from method
in PDM is 26% less than that from method in AAH at least. It is found that the Table of noise attenuation of straight
6 Yalin Yalin
Liu etLiu
al. /etProcedia
al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 205 (2017)
00 (2017) 000–0001592–1599 1597

duct in PDM was taken from AHH of the old version issued in 1973. The method recommended by AAH 2015 is
more reliable, which is also testified by the calculation method recommended by CIBSE guide B4 as well.
The identical results are achieved for elbow and branch take-off noise attenuations. However, it is determined by
the multiplication of frequency and diameter in AHH and is determined according to diameter ranges and discrete
centre frequencies in PDM. Thus, linear interpolations may be incurred to obtain the attenuation values for the
diameter and frequency not listed in the Table 3. This indicates the AHH method is more scientific.

5. Conclusions

Although noise may attenuate along ductwork and at duct components, airflow noise occurs in ducts and duct
components. The airflow noise directly affects the degree of noise attention. In practice, they should be calculated
and verified. The noise calculation methods for air-conditioning ductwork recommended by PDM and AHH have
many similarities. But there exist obvious difference in calculation of branch take-offs. And the results from method
recommended by PDM is more closer to that from the method suggested by CIBSE guide B4 than the results from
AHH. However, the experimental work should be further carried out to better the calculation method.
The noise attenuations calculated by two methods are basically the same, but the differences of the noise
attenuation values in rectangular duct at low frequencies are obvious. As the reference of PDM is AHH 1973, a very
old version, it needs to be updated. The calculation results from the method recommended by the update AHH 2015
was testified by the calculation results from the method recommended by CIBSE guide B4. This indicates that the
previous contents updated with new achievements can obtain more accurate results. Even so, low-frequency noise
problems are worth of further study since it may lead to resonance.
The formulae in PDM involve many empirical constants subjected to experimental conditions in the past. There
is no doubt that it is possible to conduct experiments with advanced technology to obtain more accurate values. The
method recommended by PDM should be updated and supplemented with the development of air-conditioning
industry, though it has some advantages over the method in AHH in some aspects. In addition, it was often found
that there were gaps between theoretical calculation results and values measured in practical projects. For example,
the same equivalent diameter of flat or oval duct as that of ordinary duct may bring about identical noise calculation
results. However, actually situation turns out to be different. This indicates we can carry out a lot of experiments to
supplement the contents. Therefore，it is feasible for us to continue our study experimentally and numerically to
overcome these problems and to improve the noise evaluation methods systematically.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China
Grant No. 51505362 and Scientific Research Program Funded by Shaanxi Provincial Education Department No.
16JK1457.

Appendix A. Calculation process of the example

Table 6. Calculation process of the example

Sound power levels [dB]
Calculation content Steps according Steps according
63Hz 500Hz 63Hz 500Hz
to PDM to AHH
Sound power level
Check data from Check data from
1 of fan outlet at 91.00 86.00 91.00 86.00
manufacturer manufacturer
point 1
Attenuation of duct
2 Table 2 -2.76 -0.69 Table 4 -3.77 -0.46
from point 1 to 2
Air flow noise of The noise of straight
3 duct from point 1 Eq. (1), v=10.2m/s 52.17 49.16 / /
duct can be neglected.
to 2
4 Sound power level Adding values in row 1, 88.24 85.31 Adding values in row 1, 87.23 85.54
1598 YalinYalin
Liu Liu
et al.et/ Procedia
al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 205 (2017)
00 (2017) 1592–1599
000–000 7

at point 2 2 and 3. 2 and 3.

Attenuation of the
5 branch take-off Eq. (5) -4.26 -4.26 Eq. (5) -4.26 -4.26
from point 2 to 3
F:60.00 F:39.50
Air flow noise of
Eq. (2) Eq. (4) G:-4.50 G:-4.50
6 the branch take-off 53.26 41.34
d=0.52m, v=5.1m/s D=0.77m, A3=0.28m2 H:16.00 H:25.00
from point 2 to 3
Lw=71.50 Lw=60.00
Sound power level Adding values in row 4, Adding values in row 4,
7 83.98 81.05 83.27 81.31
at point 3 5 and 6. 5 and 6.

8 Attenuation of duct Table 2, d=0.52m -4.74 -1.19 Table 4, D=0.60m -6.48 -0.79
from point 3 to 4
Air flow noise of The noise can be
9 duct from point 3 Eq. (1), v=5.1m/s 34.83 31.83 neglected as air speed is / /
to 4 less than 8.9 m/s.

10 Sound power level Adding values in row 7, 79.25 79.86 Adding values in row 7, 76.79 80.52
at point 4 8 and 9. 8 and 9.
Attenuation of
11 elbow from point 4 Table 3, d=0.52m 0.00 -7.00 Table 5, D=0.60m -0.00 -8.00
to 5
F:55.10 F:26.80
Air flow noise of
G:-24.10 G:-24.10
12 elbow from point 4 Eq. (2), v=5.1m/s 51.55 27.85 Eq. (4)
H:16.00 H:25.00
to 5
Lw=47.00 Lw=27.70
Sound power level Adding values in row Adding values in row
13 79.25 72.86 76.79 72.52
at point 5 10, 11 and 12. 10, 11 and 12.
Attenuation of duct
14 Table 2, d=0.52m -1.44 -0.36 Table 4, D=0.60m -2.00 -0.24
from point 5 to 6
Air flow noise of The noise can be
15 duct from point 5 Eq. (1), v=5.1m/s 34.74 31.74 neglected as air speed is / /
to 6 less than 8.9 m/s.
Sound power level Adding values in row Adding values in row
16 77.81 72.50 74.79 72.28
at point 6 13, 14 and 15. 13, 14 and 15.
Attenuation of the
17 branch take-off Eq. (5) -6.00 -6.00 Eq. (5) -6.00 -6.00
from point 6 to 7
F:50.10 F:30.50
Air flow noise of
Eq. (4), D=0.34m, G:-9.00 G:-9.00
18 the branch take-off Eq. (2), d=0.24m 31.10 20.11
A3=0.1m2 H:16.00 H:25.00
from point 6 to 7
Lw=57.10 Lw=46.50

Sound power level Adding values in row Adding values in row

19 71.81 66.50 68.80 66.28
at point 7 16, 17 and 18. 16, 17 and 18.
Attenuation of duct
20 Table 2, d=0.24m -1.86 -0.93 Table 4, D=0.34m -3.57 -0.62
from point 7 to 8
The noise can be
Air flow noise of
neglected as the air
21 duct from point 7 Eq. (1), v=3.1m/s 19.24 16.23 / /
speed is less than 8.9
to 8
m/s.
End reflection loss Fig.17.2-2 in PDM, Table 28 in Chapter 48,
22 -12.60 -1.10 -12.00 -1.00
at point 8 d=0.24m D=0.34m

Sound power level Adding values in row Adding values in row

23 57.35 64.47 53.23 64.66
at point 9 19, 20, 21 and 22. 19, 20, 21 and 22.
24 Air flow noise at Equation (3), d=0.24m 46.13 32.63 No calculation method / /
 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 205 (2017) 1592–1599 1599
8 Yalin Liu et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

point 9 is provided
Sound power level Adding values in row 23 Adding values in row 23
25 57.35 64.47 53.23 64.66
at diffuser outlet and 24. and 24.
26 Room correction r=4.3m, R=21m2 -6.99 -6.75 r=4.3m, R=21m2 -7.00 -7.00
Sound pressure
Adding values in row 25 Adding values in row 25
27 level at listener 50.36 57.72 46.23 57.66
and 26. and 26.
location

References

[1] ASHRAE, ASHRAE Handbook, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), ASHRAE
Inc.,Atlanta, 2015.
[2] A. Vedavarz, S. Kumar, M. Hussain, HVAC: Handbook of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning for Design and Implementation,
Industrial Press Inc., New York, 2007
[3] CIBSE, CIBSE guide B4, Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE), CIBSE Inc., London, 2016.
[4] SHASE, Air conditioning, Sanitary Engineering Handbook, Society of Heating, Air- conditioning and Sanitary Engineers, SHASE Inc.,
Tokyo, 2009.
[5] Y. Lu, K. Zhang, Practical design handbook for heating and air conditioning, China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, 2008, pp. 1359–
1375.