Some recent work (Walker 2001, Andrews 2002) has indicated that installing a modulating furnace in a conventional duct system may, in many cases, result in a significant degradation in thermal distribution efficiency. The fundamental mechanism was pointed out nearly two decades ago (Andrews and Krajewski 1985). The problem occurs in duct systems that are less-than-perfectly insulated (e.g., R-4 duct wrap) and are located outside the conditioned space. It stems from the fact that when the airflow rate is reduced, as it will be when the modulating furnace reduces its heat output rate, the supply air will have a longer residence time in the ducts and will therefore lose a greater percentage of its heat by conduction than it did at the higher airflow rate. The impact of duct leakage, on the other hand, is not expected to change very much under furnace modulation. The pressures in the duct system will be reduced when the airflow rate is reduced, thus reducing the leakage per unit time. This is balanced by the fact that the operating time will increase in order to meet the same heating load as with the conventional furnace operating at higher output and airflow rates. The balance would be exact if the exponent in the pressure vs. airflow equation were the same as that in the pressure vs. duct leakage equation. Since the pressure-airflow exponent is usually {approx}0.5 and the pressure-leakage exponent is usually {approx}0.6, the leakage loss as a fraction of the load should be slightly lower for the modulating furnace. The difference, however, is expected to be small, determined as it is by a function with an exponent equal to the difference between the above two exponents, or {approx}0.1. The negative impact of increased thermal conduction losses from the duct system may be partially offset by improved efficiency of the modulating furnace itself. Also, the modulating furnace will cycle on and off less often than a single-capacity model, and this may add a small amount (probably in the range 1%-3%) to the thermal distribution efficiency. Nevertheless, the effect of furnace modulation on thermal distribution efficiency, both as calculated and as measured in the laboratory, is quite significant. Although exact quantification of the impact will depend on factors such as climate and the location of the ducts within the structure, impacts in the 15%-25% range are to be expected for ducts located outside the conditioned space, as most residential duct systems are. This is too large a handicap to ignore.
