Case Study Wakefield
Case Study Wakefield
Case Study Wakefield
Energy Comparison
Operating Annual
System Starting Current Annual kWh CO2 emissions
current operating cost
Old belt driven >80 A 8.6 A 18,640 12.7 tonnes $3,540
centrifual fan
New EC plug fan <6 A 4.7 A 9,170 6.2 tonnes $1,740
Savings 9,470 6.5 tonnes $1,800
Supply airflow +10%
Cooling capacity +20%
Fan energy used -50%
The iconic Wakefield House building in The EC RadiPac fan pressurises the plenum After 2 years in operation, a site evaluation
Adelaide, South Australia, was not delivering chamber and provides uniform air pressure confirmed a 194,000kWh avoided energy
airflow as per the National Construction Code and volume across the whole cooling coil, usage per annum for the building, equivalent
(NCC) standard due to poor fan installation. achieving greater capacity. The new ebm- to 132t CO2e.
Wakefield House underwent a 2-step retrofit papst EC RadiPac fans were placed away from
program to bring the installation up-to-date the coil, and a new damper was installed to As fan energy is typically the most significant
and reach compliance with the NCC. provide an equivalent pressure drop, which consumer of energy in a commercial building,
provides more stable distribution and supply the reduction of approximately 50% from
The old belt-driven AC fan system‘s proximity air control. replacing AC fans with EC plug fans had a
to the cooling coil reduced the cooling significant impact on the total energy
capacity of the AHU, as only part of the coil consumption and reduction in greenhouse gas
face was utilised, which resulted in insufficient emissions.
capacity delivered to the floor.
Airflow increased by 10%, returning the
Locating the fan so close to the cooling coil supply air quantity to the design figure.
creates turbulence and increases the system Combined with increased coil efficiency,
static, which reduces the supply air quantity cooling delivered to the floor was increased by
by approximately 10-15% from design. When approximately 15-20%.
combined with the reduced performance of
the cooling coil, the net reduction in capacity
to the floor is approximately 45% from design.