Comparison Evaluations of VRF and RTU Systems Performance on Flexible Research Platform

<table class="table-group" id="tab1"><tr><td><table class="table"><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="2"><hr/></td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Location</td><td class="align_center">Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Building size</td><td class="align_center">Two-story, 12.2 m × 12.2 m, 4.3 m floor-to-floor height</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Exterior walls</td><td class="align_center">Concrete masonry units with face brick, R<sub>US</sub>-11 (R<sub>SI</sub>-1.9) fiberglass insulation</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Floor</td><td class="align_center">Slab-on-grade</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Roof</td><td class="align_center">Metal deck with R<sub>US</sub>-18 (R<sub>SI</sub>-3.17) polyisocyanurate insulation</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Windows</td><td class="align_center">Double-pane clear glazing, 28% window-to-wall ratio</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Baseloads</td><td class="align_center">9.18 W/m<sup>2</sup> lighting power density, 14.04 W/m<sup>2</sup> equipment power density</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Baseline HVAC system</td><td class="align_center">44 kW, 9.7 EER rooftop unit; 81% AFUE natural gas furnace; VAV terminal units and electric reheat</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">VRF system</td><td class="align_center">42 kW VRF system with a DOAS</td></tr><tr class="table-tr"><td colspan="2"><hr class="tbody-hr"/></td></tr></table></td></tr></table>

<div>Building and HVAC system specification.</div>

Advances in Civil Engineering

tab1

Table 1

Table 1: Comparison Evaluations of VRF and RTU Systems Performance on Flexible Research Platform 