This space contained an advertisement

The following article was published in ASHRAE Journal, July 1998. Copyright 2002 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc. It is presented for educational purposes only. This article may not be copied and/or distributed electronically or in paper form without permission of ASHRAE.

A S H RA E

JOURNAL

Bringing Fresh Air to Businesses

New Commercial Applications For Desiccant-Based Cooling

By Kevin McGahey
Associate Member ASHRAE

he expansion of desiccant technology in the marketplace has sent engineers scrambling to learn about new applications for this technology. The requirement for more fresh air in buildings has dramatically changed the way designers provide a healthy, comfortable and productive environment for patients, customers and employees. However, when larger amounts of fresh air are brought in to satisfy the new criteria for ventilation, a large amount of water in the air must be removed to maintain a reasonable humidity level in the conditioned space and ductwork. Engineers have solved this problem by including a desiccant-based cooling unit as an integral part of the buildings HVAC system. This supplies the large volumes of fresh air required by building codes. As engineers evaluate these systems for the first time, new questions arise. When should engineers consider desiccant systems? How can engineers and customers determine if a desiccant-based system is right for their application? Although these systems do have their applications, they are not a panacea and cannot be considered for every application.

Market Forces In the late 1980s a number of market forces combined to create a demand for desiccant-based air-conditioning equipment. Three distinct events provided significant opportunities for change in an industry perceived as impervious to change. Indoor Air Quality (IAQ). The major building codes in the United States have adopted ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62-1989, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality into their codes by requiring that all new buildings and major retrofits comply with this new standard. This means that buildings must increase ventilation air (outside air) on average from 5 cfm per person to 1520 cfm per person. This trend changes the latent to sensible heat ratios that HVAC systems must treat. Concern over the potential for litigation has led to the de facto adoption of Standard 62 even where it is not found in the local building code. Demand for Comfort. Controlling comfort involves bringing the air temperature and relative humidity into a reasonable range for human comfort. It is noted that humidity is at least as important as temperature because, as is often said, Its not the heat, its the humidity. In the late 1980s, desiccant applications that provided a direct economic benefit to supplying superior humidity control
July 1998

became popular. In hotels, musty odors and clammy environments forced travelers to seek out more comfortable accomodations. In supermarkets, cold frozen food aisles hastened shoppers through the freezer sectiondiscouraging impulse buying. In hospital operating rooms uncomfortable surgeons selected alternative hospitals with better climate control to perform their surgical procedures. The direct economic impact that comfort had on these facilities resulted in the demand for improved humidity control. The New Economics of Air Conditioning. In the past, applications that demanded better humidity control were a challenge to engineers. Museums required humidity control all year long to protect their collections. Hospitals required specific temperature and humidity conditions for certain operating procedures. From the engineers perspective, if the only tool on hand is a hammereverything looks like a nail! Similarly, engineers tried to solve humidity problems using the only tool available standard cold coil technologyto over-cool and sometimes re-heat the air. Humidity problems arose in other applications, creating a second tier of costs that sometimes dominated the economics of comparing equipment cost and operating cost. In supermarkets, humidity would frost freezer cases and frozen foods, driving up defrost and door heater costs and spoiling the productsappearance in the cases. In hotels, mold problems damaged floor and wall coverings as well as furniture. The American Hotel and Motel Association estimated this damage to be approximately $65 million dollars annually in the United States.1 Non-energy related economic concerns moved to the forefront for these and other applications.

Criteria for Evaluation To decide whether a desiccant system makes sense for a certain application requires an understanding of the loads (both latent and sensible) and the functional requirements for that particular building. However, six criteria emerge in application after application. If one or more of the following criteria apply, the engineer would be well advised to consider desiccant systems for that application.2
About the Author
Kevin McGahey is product marketing manager at Fresh Air Solutions in Hatboro, Pa. Previously, he was director of technology for the American Gas Cooling Center. He has an M.S. in mechanical engineering from Ohio State University. ASHRAE Journal 41

DESICCANT

Figure 1: Typical desiccant system.

Low Sensible Heat Ratios. A load can be broken down into two parts: the latent (moisture) load and the sensible load. Engineers often refer to the ratio of the sensible load to the total load as the sensible heat ratio. Conventional equipment (such as a rooftop unit) works well when the sensible heat ratio is above 80%. When the sensible heat ratio falls below 80%, conventional equipment begins to lose control of humidity and the air may begin to feel cold and clammy. A restaurant is a good example of an application with a low sensible heat ratio. The ASHRAE HandbookHVAC Applications states that, Often, the ideal design condition must be rejected for an acceptable condition because of equipment cost or performance limitations. Restaurants are frequently affected in this way, because ratios of latent to sensible heat may result in uneconomical equipment selection, unless a combination of lower design dry-bulb temperature and higher relative humidity is selected. Again, this statement only considered the conventional rooftop unit. Restaurants usually have seating areas designed to accommodate a large number of patrons in a relatively small area. A high people density requires large ventilation loads per square foot in addition to the makeup air required to replace the air exhausted through the kitchen exhaust hoods. This situation is worsened by the fact that restaurants draw the largest crowds in the evenings when the sensible load carried by the ventilation air is reduced. However, the ventilation air still carries a large amount of water with it, and the people in the restaurant continue to release moisture through perspiration and respiration. All these factors combine to create a situation where the restaurant has a very low sensible heat ratio. Consequently, the restaurant seems cold to the patrons. Low Humidity Requirements. Is there an economic benefit
July 1998

to having low humidity? An ice rink is an excellent example of an application that benefits financially from maintaining low humidity. Conventional equipment does a good job of providing air at a dew point of 50F (10C). However, the ice sheet in an ice rink is about 28F (2.2C), so water quickly condenses out of the air onto the ice sheet, softening the ice, contributing to fog over the ice and requiring the operator to frequently resurface the ice. Additionally, the heat that water drops transfer to the ice sheet as it condenses must be removed by the refrigeration systems, which drives up the operating cost of the ice-making system. Ice rinks often shut down in the spring because of fog over the ice created by humidity problems. Desiccant systems solve problems like this by maintaining the rink at a dew point of 30F to 35F (1.1C to 1.6C). The air can be kept at a warmer but dryer condition, providing more comfort for spectators and a higher quality ice sheet for skaters. The rink can stay open all year long resulting in additional revenue for the owner. Need for more fresh air. As previously discussed, Standard 62 demands 15 cfm (7 L/s) per person be brought into most buildings to address IAQ issues. Conventional equipment works well up to 15% outside air. However, once the percentage of outside air goes beyond 15%, most units begin to lose control over humidity. As owners bring their existing buildings up to code, they are faced with this equipment limitation in providing more fresh air to the conditioned space. An example of a facility under this constraint would be a school. A typical classroom in Atlanta using the old guideline of 5 cfm (2.3 L/s) per person would have a load that is about 30% latent and 70% sensible.4 Bringing the school up to the new guideline of 15 cfm (7 L/s) per person of ventilation air changes the load to one that is about 40% latent. If the new dew
ASHRAE Journal 42

This space contained an advertisement

This space contained an advertisement

This space contained an advertisement

point design conditions outlined in the 1997 ASHRAE HandbookFundamentals are used, the load is now 50% latent, making it almost impossible for conventional equipment to maintain a reasonable humidity condition inside the school. One solution is to add a desiccant-based makeup air unit to handle the majority of the fresh air requirements, while operating the existing equipment at 10% fresh air. This approach allows the owner to bring a building up to code, avoid replacing existing equipment and provide a more comfortable environment by independently controlling humidity. Exhaust post cooling is available. Another situation that favors desiccant technology is supply and return ducts that are located close together allowing for heat recovery. Many desiccant systems have a built-in heat recovery heat exchange wheel that acts as a heat recovery device in the cooling and heating season. In the summer, as cool air is exhausted from the building, exchanging heat with this exhaust stream through the heat exchange wheel cools the ventilation airstream, reducing the sensible cooling load. Similarly, in the winter, as the warmer exhaust air leaves the building, the exhaust air is used to heat the ventilation air by exchanging heat in the heat exchange wheel, reducing the buildings heating load. Low thermal energy costs. Another advantage to desiccant equipment is that it is thermally driven. The heat can come from an internal boiler or from an external heat source providing heat to a manufacturer-supplied coil in the unit. Therefore, the unit can be driven using waste heat or an under-utilized boiler. Because natural gas costs usually are low in the summer, the desiccant unit saves operating costs by lowering on-peak power consumption. Economic benefit to dry ductwork. Fungus and bacteria thrive when four key ingredients are present. First, bacteria or mold spores must be present. Second, the temperature must be suitable for their growth, which is usually the same temperature humans enjoy. Third, a food source must be present. Mold and bacteria can find food in just about any duct, floor or wall covering. Finally, water must be present. Water is the only element that can be controlled effectively to slow the growth in ductwork. Standard 62 recommends ductwork be kept below 70% relative humidity to avoid or minimize the mold growth in ductwork. If the air supplied by this ductwork is supplying a hospital operating room where the air is blown toward an open wound, the benefit to dry ductwork is obvious.

Equipment Applications Finally, when an application for a desiccant-based air-conditioning unit has been identified, the question shifts to how it should be applied. Should the desiccant system replace the conventional equipment? While a desiccant unit can act as a stand-alone unit by providing both latent and sensible cooling, the unit usually is used in conjunction withnot in place of conventional equipment. This approach takes advantage of the strengths of both types of equipment. The two approaches to applying desiccant equipment include directly introducing the air into the space or pre-treating the air into other equipment. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages.
July 1998

44

ASHRAE Journal

DESICCANT
Introducing the air directly into the space is usually a good approach for schools, hotels, supermarkets and ice rinks. This approach usually minimizes the duct requirements, especially when used in conjunction with fan coil units. Directly introducing the dehumidified air into the space has the advantage of maintaining constant ventilation and humidity control while allowing lower capacity equipment (now only handling the sensible load) to react to the more diverse sensible loads. Using this approach requires good circulation of the dehumidified airstream from the desiccant unit with the cool air from the DX or fan coil units. Good air circulation is usually achieved by positively pressurizing the classroom or hotel room, negatively pressurizing the corridor or hallway with an exhaust fan and allowing for air movement by using adequately-sized air passages in the doorways. The second application approach to applying desiccantbased cooling systems is to pre-treat the air into either a packaged rooftop air conditioner or into an air-handling unit. Pretreating the air into a rooftop unit is a good method for a restaurant or movie theater. This approach can be a retrofit solution to a building with a humidity problem, while minimizing the number of roof penetrations and using conventional equipment as an inexpensive way to post-cool the delivered air. Delivering the pre-treated air to an air-handling unit would have the same benefit as before, but would be more applicable to larger applications such as hospitals or office buildings. These approaches help reduce the size of the conventional equipment because it deals only with sensible load, while providing independent control of humidity.

References
1. American Hotel and Motel Association. 1992. Mold and Mildew in Hotels and Motels. Washington, D.C. 2. American Gas Cooling Center. 1996. Desiccant Systems Application Guide. Arlington, Va. 3. ASHRAE Handbook HVAC Applications. 1995. Commercial and public buildings, chapter 3.5. 4. Active humidity control systems for commercial comfort cooling. 1997. Hatboro, Pa.: Engelhard/ICC. Please circle the appropriate number on the Reader Service Card at the back of the publication. Extremely Helpful ................................................... 458 Helpful ................................................................. 459 Somewhat Helpful ................................................. 460 Not Helpful ........................................................... 461

This space contained an advertisement

This space contained an advertisement

July 1998

ASHRAE Journal

45