<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font size="+1"><tt>750 cfm/ton is too high, you should be about
half that. I would initially let eQuest size the system, it
gives you a double check on the design. The eQuest default is a
1.15 factor for cooling and is a good starting point. You can
dial it down but that depends on the circumstances.<br>
On the practical side you might be able to get a system to run
that hard but it wouldn't be very efficient. You would probably
need a 14 row coil or more and have a significant pressure drop
across the coil taking the fan energy way up. The other thing
is you don't want the face velocity of your cooling coil to high
because the condensate will get entrained in the air stream and
you are going to have water all through your duct system.
Typically this can start to happen over 500/550 FPM. You can
use moisture eliminators but they are only effective up to a
certain point and you pay an energy price for them as well. The
cooling side of the system normally sets you airflow as this
side has the smaller delta T. This may be messing up your
heating side.<br>
Bruce Easterbrook P.Eng.<br>
Abode Engineering<br>
</tt></font><br>
On 11/10/2011 11:27 AM, R B wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+f4ixD43Vqk90RfHUv7rWR0f0Lt93hdWyGHeR5zF_yxFnEgQg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div>For reducing heating unmet hours I have found that reducing
the min flow helps, or sometimes increasing the reheat supply
temp if that is an option. </div>
<div>-Rohini<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:03 AM, nic <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ffonics@gmail.com">ffonics@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;
border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px;
border-left-style: solid;" class="gmail_quote">
<div>Hello,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I am having some issues on a EPAct project with HVAC
Equipment. The Quality Check Details states that My CFM/ton
of Cooling is high at around 750cfm/ton. I have entered the
exact design flows/ sizes of the heat pumps as indicated in
the mechanical schedules, but something seems to be short
circuiting the heating/ cooling relationship. Should I
discard the actual supply flow rate? I guess the real
question stems from the fact that when I increase the sizing
of the system above 1.0 to ~1.25, the heating actually gets
worse. Same thing with specifying airflow zone by zone. At
this point, it seems that there is something obvious I am
overlooking.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>thanks,</div>
<div>nic</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Equest-users mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org"
target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>