Moore Building is located in University Park, PA, which is Penn State University’s main campus.  It houses the Psychology Department and numerous therapy/laboratory spaces that professionals and students can utilize at their disposal.   Most of the spaces are considered to be “Office” spaces simply because the activities that are done in the room do not require additional ventilation.

​

       The primary focus of this report was to analyze and compare the central steam and chilled water plants on Penn State’s campus to a dedicated heating and cooling plants in Moore Building.  To start the analysis, two types of chillers were analyzed: water-cooled and air-cooled.  It was found through a Trane TRACE 700 model that the water cooled chiller would save an average of about $6,000 per year on utilities cost.  However, the initial cost of the water-cooled chiller also includes the cost of a cooling tower as well.  The water-cooled chiller system’s initial cost is $6,667 more than the air cooled chiller.  Seeing that the university is concerned with sustainability with their buildings, the water-cooled chiller was chosen as the more beneficial cooling plant.  In the 20 year life span of the chillers, the university would save $107,483.40.

​

       Two types of boilers were compared as well to determine what was most efficient for Moore Building: a condensing boiler vs. a non-condensing boiler.  Initially, the condensing boiler costs $32,000 more than its non-condensing counterpart.  However, it was calculated that each year, the condensing boiler would save about $3,000 in utilities cost.  This leads to a 24 year lifetime cost that it $41,464.40 less than the non-condensing boiler.  There is also a concern with the return water temperature not being high enough to condense the flue gases from the natural gas.  This could lead to sulfuric acid build up that would eventually erode the boiler.  Overall, the condensing boiler was chosen as the better system for Moore Building.

​

       Space was also considered for each piece of equipment.  The basement mechanical room is directly adjacent to an unexcavated space.  Since this proposed design is being treated a new design, it can be assumed that the unexcavated space would have originally be built as a mechanical room to house the chiller and boilers.  As for the cooling tower, there is a large open space next to the mechanical penthouse on the roof.  The cooling tower would have ample space to be placed there. 

​

       The water-cooled chiller and the condensing boiler system were then compared to the central steam and chilled water plants on the campus.  It was found that for the boilers, the annual operations cost is within $1,000 of the steam plant.  However, the initial cost for the boiler is much higher than the initial cost of connecting the building to the steam plant.  Also, the boiler has a lifespan of about 20 years while the steam plants lifespan is indefinite.  The steam plant was chosen as the more efficient plant in a large campus setting like Penn State.  For the chiller, both the initial cost and annual utilities cost were significantly higher.  The university would save around $130,000.00 initially and about $40,000.00 annually by using the central chilled water plant.

​

       The impact that the added equipment had on the electrical distribution system was then analyzed.  It was found that two power panel boards would have a higher ampacity that would lead to larger wires sizes and added cost.  The main switchgear also would be upsized which leads to additional costs to the building. 

​

       An acoustical analysis showed that the addition of a chiller and cooling tower would create sound and vibration issues throughout the building.  Simple techniques were implemented to mitigate the noise and vibration issues.