2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

A New Approach to
Museum HVAC Design
The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) consists of
a 10-story addition and a renovated existing five-story building.
Pictured is the view from the Yerba Buena Gardens.
BY STEVEN T. TAYLOR, P.E. FELLOW ASHRAE; DAVID HEINZERLING, P.E. MEMBER ASHRAE
PHOTO CREDIT JON MCNEAL, ©SNØHETTA.JPG

This article was published in ASHRAE Journal, August 2018. Copyright 2018 ASHRAE. Posted at www.ashrae.org. This article may not be copied and/or distributed
electronically or in paper form without permission of ASHRAE. For more information about ASHRAE Journal, visit www.ashrae.org.
34 A S H R A E J O U R N A L   a s h r a e . o r g   A U G U S T 2 0 18
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
 FIRST PLACE | 2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA)

consists of a 10-story new addition to a fully renovated
existing five-story museum. Program elements for the
486,000 ft2 (45 000 m2) project include art galleries,
theater, administrative offices, library, café, event space,
retail shop, wood shop, art conservation studios, cafete-
ria, and cold and cool storage rooms. The entire project is
served by an innovative HVAC system that could become a
new standard for museums and similar applications.

Museum Environmental in Figure 1, along with a tight enve-

Criteria lope, allows it to provide acceptable
Museums are traditionally large control because the infiltration
energy users because of the need to loads tend to vary in the same way as
provide tight humidity control. The the humidity setpoints.
design team worked closely with The concept behind central
SFMOMA conservationists to study humidification is to maintain a
various published environmental nearly constant supply air condi-
criteria for museums as well as those tion: saturated air with a dew-
from major museums across the point temperature just above that
country. Through this roundtable at the lowest acceptable space
process, the team concluded that a temperature and lowest accept-
seasonally adjusted relative humidity able relatively humidity, in our
setpoint (Figure 1) could be used while case 70°F (21.1°C) and 45% relative
still maintaining acceptable condi-
tions for artwork and still maintain-
ing a Class A rating.1 Concurrent Building at a Glance
temperature control was specified to
be 72.5°F ± 2.5°F (22.5°C ± 1.4°C). San Francisco
This relaxation in humidity con- Museum of Modern
trol allowed the design team to con-
sider centralized, rather than zonal, Art (SFMOMA)
humidification systems. Zonal Location: San Francisco
humidity controls can handle wide Owner: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art
variations in humidity loads from
Principal Use: Museum
people and infiltration, but they
cost more, have higher maintenance Includes: Art galleries, theater, administrative offices,
library, café, event space, retail shop, wood shop, art
costs, and are less energy efficient. conservation studios, cafeteria, and cold and cool storage
Centralized humidity control, on rooms.

the other hand, relies on low zone Employees/Occupants: 470 staff and 1.2 million visitors in
first year
humidity loads from infiltration,
but the relaxed humidity setpoints Gross Square Footage: 486,000

Conditioned Space Square Footage: 350,000

Steven T. Taylor, P.E. and David Heinzerling, P.E., are
Substantial Completion/Occupancy: June 2016
principals at Taylor Engineering in Alameda, Calif. Taylor
is a member of SSPC 90.1 and GPC 36. Heinzerling is a Occupancy: 100%
member of SSPC 55.

A U G U S T 2 0 18   a s h r a e . o r g   A S H R A E J O U R N A L 35
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

65 Dehumidification Setpoint
(Highest Allowable RH Level)
60
Relative Humidity (%)

55

50

45

40 Humidification Setpoint
(Lowest Allowable RH Level)
35
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

FIGURE 1   Relative humidity seasonal setpoints.

humidity, where RH is adjusted based on time of year

as discussed above. For zones that are unoccupied with
low cooling loads, the resulting space condition is the
FIGURE 2   Psychrometric process of centralized humidity control.
“Unoccupied” point in Figure 2. For spaces that are fully
occupied, the room temperature is allowed to rise to
75°F (23.9°C) and, with the moisture added by people, resulted in microbial growth and all cold duct acoustical
the resulting condition is the “Fully Occupied” point. lining had to be removed.
Thus, with a single supply air condition, all spaces can •• Access to the coils, filters, and fans of the field-built
be maintained in the required humidity range pro- air handlers was very poor, requiring the building en-
vided humidity loads from infiltration, especially of gineer to climb over obstructions with ladders to reach
cold, dry air, are small. Where they are not expected this equipment. Replacing the 100 hp (75 kW) supply fan
to be small, e.g., at entries, local humidifiers can be motors and 40 hp (30 kW) return fan motors bordered
added to augment the centralized system. on impossible.
•• The variable pitch vane-axial fans required annual
Existing System Upgrades tear-down and rebuild, made more difficult and expen-
The two air handlers serving the existing museum sive by the poor access.
were single-fan/dual duct (SFDD) systems with return •• The humidifiers were located in ceiling plenums
fans and steam humidifiers in the cold duct mains that were difficult to access for maintenance. They also
on each floor. Operational problems with the systems caused condensation in ductwork due to the nearly satu-
included: rated supply air when the chillers and cooling coils were
•• The economizer on the SFDD significantly increases active, which was most of the time. Some were relocated
heating energy use on the hot deck because the hot wa- to the hot decks to avoid this problem. Humidity control
ter coil entering air temperature is the same as the cold was accordingly very poor.
deck supply air temperature. The added outdoor air to These two air-handling systems were gutted and
the hot deck also increases the humidification load. The replaced with dual-fan/dual-duct (DFDD) systems with
economizer had to be disabled even at mild outdoor air relief fans and central humidification shown schemati-
conditions, causing the chiller plant to run most of the cally in Figure 3. A third DFDD system was installed in
time. the expansion building. Together the systems totaled
•• The blow-through arrangement of the SFDD system 350,000 cooling cfm (165 000 L/s) and 123,000 heating
results in nearly saturated cold duct supply air when cfm (58 000 L/s).
mechanical cooling is active. This resulted in over-satu- The revised design resolves all the operational prob-
ration and condensation on the supply air ducts leaving lems of the existing system and included additional
the cold deck discharge plenum due to the pressure features to further improve energy efficiency and tem-
drop as air accelerated into the supply air mains. This perature and humidity control:

36 A S H R A E J O U R N A L   a s h r a e . o r g   A U G U S T 2 0 18
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

•• The use of a DFDD design instead of SFDD resolved

the first two issues listed above. DFDD also has lower
fan energy because with SFDD systems, duct pressure
is always higher than it needs to be in one of the two
supply air ducts. DFDD systems can maintain hot and
cold duct pressure independently with independent
pressure setpoint reset based on VAV box damper posi-
tion.
•• Centralized humidity control with direct evapora-
tive (adiabatic) humidifiers reduces energy use, first
costs, and maintenance costs (see next section for

PHOTO ©IWAN BAAN, COURTESY SFMOMA

details).
•• The use of relief fans instead of return fans allowed
the layout of the mechanical rooms to be improved,
resolving the maintenance access issues. Relief fans are
more flexible because, unlike return fans, they need
not be in series with the supply fans and can be located
anywhere in the common return air path. Relief fans in Expansion of the new SFMOMA.
this application are also more efficient than return fans
in this low-pressure plenum return application.2,3 Cooling Fan
•• The dual-fan/dual-duct system fully implements Economizer Array
sequences from ASHRAE Guideline 36-2018, High-Per- Outside Air Cooling Supply Air Duct
Filter Direct Evap VSD
formance Sequences of Operation for HVAC Systems, including Bank Cooling Humidifier
Coil
snap-acting dual-duct VAV box logic in non-humidity-
controlled zones, which eliminates simultaneous heat- Heating Supply Air Duct
Filter Heating Steam VSD
ing and cooling. Gallery zones with humidity control use Bank Coil Humidifier Dual Duct
a dual-duct mixing logic that minimizes simultaneous VAV Box

heating and cooling while allowing for some zone-level

Relief Return Air
humidity control through different dew-point tempera- Air Plenum
tures in the hot deck (higher) and cold deck (lower). VSD
Relief R.A.
•• All gallery and high occupancy zones have CO2 sen- Fan
sors, and all other spaces have occupancy sensors, with
demand-controlled ventilation sequences to eliminate
energy associated with excessive ventilation. FIGURE 3   Dual fan/dual duct air handler schematic.

•• Minimum airflow rate setpoints are the lowest al-

lowed to meet ventilation requirements and air is shut off
entirely during unoccupied hours for non-gallery spaces.
This dramatically improves efficiency compared to
constant volume systems recommended by the ASHRAE
Handbook, HVAC Applications. Despite low airflow rates,
trend data show temperature and humidity setpoints are
consistently maintained (see Figure 9, page 42).
•• The new air handlers have multiple plenum fan
arrays, a total of 84 fans, each with its own variable
frequency drive and near-zero pressure drop backdraft
dampers. Fan arrays have few if any disadvantages
compared to the large vane-axial fans they replaced in
the existing building, including reduced space require-
ments, eliminated sound attenuators, improved redun-
dancy, improved low load efficiency, and much easier
future motor and fan replacement. Compared to smaller
distributed air handing units, large air-handling units
are less expensive, require less space, have lower main-
tenance costs, and, in this application, are more energy
efficient.4
•• The cooling towers are very high efficiency (>100
gpm/HP at ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 conditions).
•• Heat rejected to the closed condenser water loop
(which serves water-cooled kitchen and cold room

38 A S H R A E J O U R N A L   a s h r a e . o r g   A U G U S T 2 0 18
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

refrigeration systems, water-cooled IT air conditioners,

and other process loads) is recovered as preheat for the
domestic hot water system.
•• Heating hot water is generated by three 3,000 kBH
high efficiency condensing boilers with primary-only
variable flow with only two-way valves and oversized
heating coils, resulting in high ΔTs and thus low return
water temperatures ensuring condensing and high
boiler efficiency.
•• The chilled water system is primary-only, variable
speed serving two existing 365 ton (1284 kW) variable
speed centrifugal chillers a new 100 ton (352 kW) scroll
chiller.

Centralized Humidity Control with Direct

Evaporative Humidifiers
The primary design innovation for this project is
the humidification design. The direct-evaporative
humidifiers (DEHs) on the cold deck humidify out-
door air during cool and cold weather and provide

PHOTO ©IWAN BAAN, COURTESY SFMOMA

evaporative cooling during warm dry weather. The
electric steam humidifiers on the hot deck provide
the additional humidification required due to infil-
tration of outdoor air at museum entries. The energy
savings of the DEH in cold weather at high airflow*
can be seen in Figure 4, which shows the psychromet-
ric process superimposed on San Francisco weather Alexander Calder’s Untitled (1963) on view in the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Atrium at
data. The conventional system (Figure 4a) has the the new SFMOMA.
economizer shut off to reduce humidification loads,
so both chiller and humidification energy (typically Energy Usage
electricity) are required. But the DEH system (Figure The project is LEED 3.0 Gold certified, with 43%
4b) uses warm return air to evaporate the humidi- annual site energy savings compared to the Standard
fication moisture needed and uses no chiller or 90.1-2007 baseline (Figure 7) and 33% energy cost sav-
humidifier energy. Figure 5 shows the performance in ings. The first operational year of the completed project
warm, dry weather. The conventional system (Figure used 34% less electricity/ft2 and 44% less gas/ft2 than the
5a) uses both chiller and humidification energy original museum did in its last year of operation (2012-
while the DEH system (Figure 5b) becomes a direct 2013) as shown in Figure 8. The overall EUI of the building
evaporative cooler to reduce chiller energy and is 70.9 kBtu/ft2·yr. (224 kWh/m2) compared with 112.5
eliminate humidification energy. The annual per- kBtu/ft2·yr. (355 kWh/m2) for the original museum, a
formance of the DEH versus a conventional system 37% reduction. Despite having a more energy intense
is shown in Figure 6; it lowers or eliminates energy program than the original museum, with new large cold
costs when the outdoor air dew-point temperature is storage rooms and on-site art-restoration laboratories,
less than desired supply air dew-point temperature the new museum uses significantly less energy/ft2 than
(about 50°F [10°C]) and has the same costs at higher the original museum, due in large part to the energy-
dew-point temperatures. efficient HVAC system design.
* Museums are very internally load dominated due to high lighting and people loads and small or zero envelope loads since most galleries are internal spaces without windows. Hence it is not uncommon to have high
airflow requirements in cold weather.

40 A S H R A E J O U R N A L   a s h r a e . o r g   A U G U S T 2 0 18
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
 FIRST PLACE | 2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

A.
A.

B.
B.

FIGURE 4   Cold weather, high airflow. A. Conventional system (top). B. Evaporative humidifier FIGURE 5   Warm dry weather. A. Conventional system (top). B. Evaporative humidifier
(bottom). (bottom).

Indoor Air Quality and Thermal Comfort

The air-handlers have design minimum outdoor airflow
setpoints 30% higher than ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2013;
however, given the mild climate of San Francisco, for the
vast majority of the year higher ventilation rates are pro-
vided due to the use of the airside economizer. Air quality
was improved by eliminating lined ductwork, a potential
source of microbial growth given the continuously satu-
rated supply air, made possible, in part, through the use
of quiet and efficient custom fan-array air handlers. The
risk of microbial growth on the direct-evaporative humid-
ifiers was mitigated by UV radiation and conductivity
control of the water circuit, along with a control sequence
FIGURE 6   Performance summary of direct evaporative humidifier.
where each section of the evaporative media is allowed to
fully dry out sequentially once per day.
Given the responsibility of the museum to keep the each zone is tracked closely and trend reports are
art within these agreed upon environmental condi- regularly generated to show consistent compliant
tions at all times, the temperature and humidity of conditions, and consequently high thermal comfort.

A U G U S T 2 0 18   a s h r a e . o r g   A S H R A E J O U R N A L 41
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
2018 ASHRAE TECHNOLOGY AWARD CASE STUDIES

Electricity

Annual Site Energy Intensity (kBtu/ft2·yr)

20,000 43% 80 2.50
Energy Consumption (Million Btu)

18,000

Power Density (kWh/ft2)

70
16,000 2.00
60 34% Total Savings
14,000 1.50
12,000 50
10,000 40 1.00
8,000 30 0.50 Old SFMOMA New SFMOMA
6,000 20
4,000 0.00
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
2,000 10
0 0 2012/2016 | 2013/2017
Baseline Design Proposed Building Gas
4.50

Gas Density (MBtu/ft2)

Space Cool Space Heat Heat Rejection Ventilation Fans
Pumps & Auxilliary Hot Water Miscellaneous Equipment 3.50 44% Total Savings
Ext. Usage Decorative + Art Lighting Area Lights 2.50
1.50
FIGURE 7   Energy modeling results (courtesy of Atelier 10)
0.50 Old SFMOMA New SFMOMA
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Figure 9 shows aggregated five-minute temperature and
2012/2016 | 2013/2017
relative humidity data for every gallery zone served by
AH-1, showing conditions within design parameters FIGURE 8   Electricity (top) and gas usage density (bottom).
(green zone is the allowable range, minimum RH for
July is 44% and maximum is
56% per Figure 1, temperature 60
58
is always 70°F to 75°F [21.1°C to 56
Zone Relative Humidity (%)

23.9°C]). Similar charts have 54

been made for all zones in all 52
50
seasons, showing compliance. 48
46
Cost Effectiveness 44
42
Compared to a traditional VAV- 40
reheat system, dual-duct has 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
more ductwork, but no zone hot
water piping and less expensive Maximum
VAV zones, resulting in first-cost 90th Percentile
78
savings, improved efficiency, 10th Percentile
and, most importantly to the 76 Minimum
Zone Temperature (°F)

museum, elimination of risk of 74

damage to art due to a piping
72
leak. The central humidification
also reduces first costs com- 70
pared to zonal humidifiers, and 68
also eliminates leak issues and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
maintenance issues due to poor FIGURE 9   Humidity and temperature trend data for all gallery zones on AH-1.
access to humidifiers located
above high ceilings. scroll chiller was added to the central plant. The fact
Special attention was paid to reusing as much exist- that 10 stories were added to the existing museum, more
ing equipment as possible, reducing first costs. The two than doubling the overall square footage, and only an
existing 365 ton (1284 kW) variable speed centrifugal additional 100 ton (352 kW) chiller was added to supple-
chillers were retained and only a new 100 ton (352 kW) ment the existing 730 tons (2567 kW) is testament to

42 A S H R A E J O U R N A L   a s h r a e . o r g   A U G U S T 2 0 18
ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.
engineering right-sizing resulting
in significant first-cost savings.
Reusing existing pumps upgraded
with variable frequency drives also
helped reduce first costs for the
project.

Conclusions
The new SFMOMA building is a
beautiful space, housing a world-
class art collection, kept comfortable
for both the visitors and the artwork
using a very energy-efficient HVAC
system that is also cost-effective and
easily operated and maintained. Key
elements of the innovative design
include dual fan/dual duct variable
air volume distribution systems with
air economizers and centralized
humidity control using direct evapo-
rative humidifiers. The system is
much more energy efficient and less
expensive than traditional constant
volume systems with zonal humidity
control, yet it provides the same tight
humidity and temperature control
required in museums. Because of
the combination of low cost and high
efficiency, the design should be con-
sidered for all museums and other
applications requiring tight humidity
control.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Jeff
Phairas, SFMOMA’s Chief Engineer,
for providing the energy data for this
article, and for his salient feedback
and insights throughout the project.

References
1. 2015 ASHRAE Handbook—HVAC
Applications, Chapt. 23.
2. Taylor, S. 2000. “Comparing economizer
relief systems.” ASHRAE Journal, 42(9).
3. Kettler, J. 2004. “Return fans or relief
fans.” ASHRAE Journal, 46(4).
4. Taylor, S. 2018. “Designing mega AHUs.”
ASHRAE Journal, 60(4).

A U G U S T 2 0 18 ashrae.org ASHRAE JOURNAL 43

ThisfileislicensedtoStevenTaylor(staylor@taylor-engineering.com).CopyrightASHRAE2018.