4 or 5 ton systems should be multi-stage...

Despite the passing of Regional Efficiency Standards, International Code requirements for Load Calculations and Equipment Selection, tighter homes and duct systems, I cannot see the likelihood of grossly over-sized equipment going down!  The significant problem at hand is that HVAC Contractors are either going to use the system design process, or not.  

In the meantime, Regional Standards are pushing Manufacturers into finding ways to make their systems more efficient.  Other than variable refrigerant flow (VRF), I am not sure what a manufacturer can do to increase the Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER).  In fact, some manufacturers and distributors have reported their variable capacity systems have actually tested, in a laboratory, lower EER than their two-stage and even single-stage counterparts.  We have seen the increased use of Electronic Expansion Valves (EEV) to maintain the lowest possible superheats in the industry.  Even increasing the physical size of Evaporator and Condenser coils in attempts to pick up/reject more heat.  This is all putting the burden on the contractor to find the room for installation, as well as finding systems that can deliver the latent capacity needed in the replacement market.

     So, I propose this: Why don't we require any 4 or 5 ton system be multiple stage or variable capacity?  This can address the significant over-sizing issue so often seen in the HVAC Industry.  After all, a study completed in 2006 by the Florida Solar Energy Center: "Measured Impacts of Proper Air Conditioning Sizing..." found little electrical savings for homeowners when replacing systems 47 - 65% oversized.  There is still significant peak energy savings to Electric Providers, hence the enforcement of proper sizing with most Utility Rebate Programs.  I wonder what those savings to the homeowner would have been if they just installed a multi or variable capacity system?  This code enhancement could change the industry significantly in future years, keeping the focus away from bigger coils and higher efficiency, but still pushing the contractor to proper sizing and equipment commissioning.  Yes, two-stage equipment costs more!  So you should size the equipment correctly to avoid these extra costs, increasing your bids.  Trust me, I have inspected as much as hundreds of A/C installations a year, for almost five years now, in a local utility rebate program.  Almost never do I see an installation or replacement system larger than a 3-ton.  Less than 10% of my inspected systems are larger, and almost always multi or variable capacity.  Customers still report increased comfort and reduced energy use.  Let's push efficiency using correctly sized, multiple capacity for the 4 or 5 ton systems, not physically larger units!

Views: 294

Comment

You need to be a member of Home Energy Pros to add comments!

Join Home Energy Pros

Comment by Dennis Heidner on December 6, 2013 at 12:35am

The FSEC studies are good,  but using a 2006 study seven or eight years later when newer technology exists and had not been factored into the older study - may add some bias.

Did you really mean "keeping the focus away from bigger coils and higher efficiency"   right sizing the capacity should not mean downsizing the efficiency.  You really want the right capacity with the most efficient unit if you are trying to maximize the energy reductions.  If the point is to optimize the cost - unfortunately that might mean to oversize the system...(cheapest system). and then quickly sell and move out of the house :-)

Comment by Bob Blanchette on December 5, 2013 at 6:45pm

I question the study of replacing the oversized systems. Often ductwork is WAY too small and the oversized systems is not delivering it's rated capacity. Putting in a smaller unit matches the smaller ductwork better, and the savings are more significant than the study shows.

Comment by Christopher Morin on December 5, 2013 at 6:04pm
Thanks Bob! I couldn't agree with you more! If you need a furnace that big, you should probably zone with equipment or fix the envelope...
Comment by Bob Blanchette on December 5, 2013 at 5:42pm

While we're at it lets quit doing furnaces over 80k. Very few regions of the country require a furnace over 80k, most regions can go with a 40-60k in all but the largest homes. Yet 80-100k furnaces are routinely installed when heat less is 1/2 to 1/3 of that. High limits trip, heat exchangers crack, customer complain about wide temperature fluctuations.

Don't get me started on ductwork that rarely delivers the the high BTU performance of these monster sized HVAC units !!

Home Energy Pros

Home Energy Pros was founded by the developers of Home Energy Saver Pro (sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy,) and brought to you in partnership with Home Energy magazine.

Latest Activity

Juan Roca commented on Dale Stephens's blog post LED Lighting - Garage Door opener interference
"Hi,There is a real problem with remote controls and LED lights. However, there is a solution in the…"
6 hours ago
Profile IconJuan Roca and Elizabeth Coe joined Home Energy Pros
16 hours ago
Casey Gesell posted videos
16 hours ago
Gerald Shechter posted videos
16 hours ago
Hal Skinner replied to Hal Skinner's discussion An example of what an RCC can do with no R- insulation in the walls.
"Bret,  here are the 2 reports I referred…"
19 hours ago
Craig Foley shared George Kopf's discussion on Twitter
19 hours ago
Jan Green replied to George Kopf's discussion Real Estate Professionals need our support - but how?
"Craig, I like your thinking!  With my new broker, I've been able to communicate more…"
20 hours ago
Craig Foley replied to George Kopf's discussion Real Estate Professionals need our support - but how?
"Thanks Jan, your insight, as always, is invaluable. Your suggestions regarding a top down approach…"
20 hours ago

© 2014   Created by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service