Revision history [back]

I am modeling a UFAD system in IES-VE. IES has the capability of modeling several zones, so I have followed the ApacheHVAC Manual Appendix G: UFAD Systems guidance to have a common supply air plenum, a 6' high occupied zone, a stratified zone, and a common return air plenum. The guide recommends modeling heat gain through the supply plenum by raising the temperature supplied at the diffusers. My question has a few parts: 1) is this the best practice? 2) would there really be much more heat gain than in a typical overhead VAV system? Any suggestions of the best approach for splitting up the zone and the supply air temperature setpoints would be appreciated, or references that outline the approach.

I am modeling a UFAD system in IES-VE. IES has the capability of modeling several zones, so I have followed the ApacheHVAC Manual Appendix G: UFAD Systems guidance to have a common supply air plenum, a 6' high occupied zone, a stratified zone, and a common return air plenum. The guide also recommends modeling heat gain through the supply plenum by raising the temperature supplied at the diffusers. My question has a few parts: 1) is this zoning method the best practice? 2) would there really be much more heat gain than in a typical overhead VAV system? Any suggestions of the best approach for splitting up the zone and the supply air temperature setpoints would be appreciated, or references that outline the approach.

I am modeling a UFAD system in IES-VE. IES has the capability of modeling several zones, so I have followed the ApacheHVAC Manual Appendix G: UFAD Systems guidance to have a common supply air plenum, a 6' high occupied zone, a stratified zone, and a common return air plenum. The guide also recommends modeling heat gain through the supply plenum by raising the temperature supplied at the diffusers. My question has a few parts: 1) is this zoning method the best practice? 2) would there really be much more is accounting for heat gain than in a typical overhead VAV system? through the plenum necessary and 3) do most UFAD systems use 55F SAT at the coil or an elevated SAT at the coil? Any suggestions of the best approach for splitting up the zone and the supply air temperature setpoints would be appreciated, or references that outline the approach.

I am modeling a UFAD system in IES-VE. IES has the capability of modeling several zones, so I have followed the ApacheHVAC Manual Appendix G: UFAD Systems guidance to have a common supply air plenum, a 6' high occupied zone, a stratified zone, and a common return air plenum. The guide also recommends using a 55F coil SAT, but modeling heat gain through the supply plenum by raising the temperature supplied at of air coming from the diffusers. My question has a few parts: 1) is this zoning method the best practice? practice 2) is accounting for heat gain through the plenum necessary and 3) do most UFAD systems use 55F SAT at the coil or an elevated SAT at the coil? Any suggestions of the best approach for splitting up the zone and the supply air temperature setpoints would be appreciated, or references that outline the approach.

I am modeling a UFAD system in IES-VE. IES has the capability of modeling several zones, so I have followed the ApacheHVAC Manual Appendix G: UFAD Systems guidance to have a common supply air plenum, a 6' high occupied zone, a stratified zone, and a common return air plenum. The guide also recommends using a 55F coil SAT, but modeling heat gain through the supply plenum by raising the temperature of air coming from the diffusers. My question has a few parts: 1) is this zoning method the best practice 2) is accounting for heat gain through the plenum necessary and 3) do most UFAD systems use 55F SAT at the coil or an elevated SAT at the coil? Any suggestions of the best approach for splitting up the zone and the supply air temperature setpoints would be appreciated, or references that outline the approach.