FE ATURE

DOAS and humidity control

By Michael D. Larrañaga, Ph.D., P.E., Member ASHRAE; Mario G. Beruvides, Ph.D., P.E.; H.W. Holder, Member ASHRAE;
Enusha Karunasena, Ph.D.; and David C. Straus, Ph.D.

Key Words: Ventilation, humidity, outdoor air

Humidity control plays an important airborne microbial concentrations, relative humidities must be controlled
role in establishing and maintaining a and the lowest average indoor relative to inhibit growth of microorganisms
comfortable indoor environment.1 Using humidity.2 that may result in health problems or
a DOAS in series or parallel with non- damaged building materials.5
DOAS HVAC systems offers cost-effective In Phase II of the same project, Fischer
humidity control when compared to and Bayer stated that increasing the air Non-DOAS HVAC systems cannot
dehumidification schemes using cooling ventilation rate from 2.36 L/s to 3.78 adequately dehumidify the air in warm
coils and reheat. L/s per student challenged the ability of and humid climates.4,6,7 In a non-DOAS
the non-dedicated outdoor air systems reheat system used for dehumidification,
And, it provides the capability to meet the to maintain the space relative humidity previously cooled air is heated and then
outside air ventilation rates as per ANSI/ below the ASHRAE and American introduced into the interior of a building.
ASHRAE Standard 62.1, Ventilation for Conference of Governmental Industrial The air is first cooled to 13°C or lower
Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. In most Hygienists’ recommended 60% level. to remove the latent moisture load.
applications, using DOAS in parallel Increasing the ventilation rate of the This cold air is then reheated to satisfy
with non-DOAS HVAC systems is the non-dedicated outdoor air systems to the relative humidity and temperature
preferred method of application. the recommended 7.08 L/s per student requirements of the indoor space. Unless
allowed the space relative humidities equipped with an energy recovery system,
Fresh Air Ventilation to routinely exceed 70%. These data reheat systems used for dehumidification
explained why all of the non-DOAS incur a quadruple penalty: (1) the first
Introducing pretreated fresh air into HVAC system schools were designed
a building can improve the IAQ and cost of the cooling generation plant,
and/or operated with only 2.83 L/s
eliminate many problems associated associated auxiliaries, and electrical
per student of outdoor air or less. The
with poor ventilation and lack of fresh service is increased by the amount of
decreased ventilation rates were in direct
air. Bayer notes that IAQ improves reheat and added cooling load; (2) the
response to the performance limitations
when using active humidity control and reheat coil first-cost premium includes
of the non-DOAS cooling equipment and
continuous ventilation in schools2 to increased electrical service and/or
contributed to the poor IAQ within the
meet the requirements of Standard 62.1. schools. Schools served by the non-DOAS heating distribution piping; (3) the owner
In a study of 10 schools in Georgia, Bayer HVAC systems experienced absenteeism pays the annual operating cost for the
noted that of the five schools having at a 9% greater rate than those served extra sensible cooling of the air, and (4)
HVAC systems without DOAS, none by the desiccant-type dedicated outdoor then pays the annual operating cost
supplied outside air at the ASHRAE air systems.3 Increased absentee rates of reheating the air.
recommended 7.08 L/s per person. can have significant negative economic
The schools with desiccant DOAS To comprehend the advantages of
impacts on a school or school system. enhanced dehumidification systems, it
dehumidification were delivering as much
as three times more outside air, while Packaged, non-DOAS HVAC equipment is vital that owners and HVAC system
maintaining equal or better control of is not designed to handle the continuous designers understand this quadruple
the indoor relative humiditythan the supply of outdoor air necessary to comply penalty associated with the use of reheat
systems without DOAS. The average with Standard 62.1. As a result, these systems. Reheat should not be the sole
total volatile organic compound (TVOC) schools are likely to experience IAQ or first-in-control sequence means of
concentrations tended to be lower in problems.4 Higher ventilation rates as dehumidification.8 Buildings in the
schools with dehumidified air. The specified by Standard 62.1 translate into humid south should be pressurised to
school showing the highest air exchange greater cooling loads for non-DOAS minimise infiltration of moist outside
rate used a rotary desiccant system, and equipment, specifically, greater latent air and HVAC system design should
had the lowest carbon dioxide, TVOC, loads during cooling seasons when indoor incorporate dehumidification that

26 Eco l i b r i u m  • J UNE 2 0 0 9
 FE ATURE

Rental DOAS equipment at a Texas high school. Temporary DOAS distribution ductwork.

maintains the space in the 45% to 55% may offset the cost of the pretreatment reasons, many engineers specify desiccant
relative humidity range during the entire equipment.11,12 Reducing the latent or combination cooling coil/desiccant
cooling season.8 cooling load burden of the refrigeration DOAS for air-conditioning applications.
equipment results in a net increase in
Since the mid-to late-1980s, desiccant-
efficiency of the system, further offsetting
DOAS and initial purchase costs.12 The proper use
based cooling systems have found
the 7°C Dew Point of DOAS can result in improved indoor
increased applications as humidity
control devices as dedicated outside air
A separate and dedicated outside air air quality with little or no increase
pretreatment ventilation systems for
pretreatment ventilation system may in compressor size or annual energy
non-industrial structures such as schools,
be the only reliable method of meeting consumption.
homes, hospitals, and commercial
Standard 62.1 and is also the simplest Two ways to remove moisture from the air buildings.11,14 The use of active desiccants
method.9 This separate dedicated for air-conditioning applications are by enhanced the quality of the indoor
outdoor air concept can be used to cooling the air to condense water vapor or air by helping to maintain comfort
completely meet space latent loads, by passing air over or through a desiccant criteria (temperature, humidity, and
decoupling the space latent and sensible medium, which removes moisture from ventilation),3,12,15 removing particulates
loads. The separation of the sensible and the air through differences in vapour and bioaerosols from the air,15,16 and
latent loads provides a mechanism for pressures.13 Some manufacturers use an removing chemical pollutants from
dehumidification when the building is in energy-conserving combination of cooling the air.14,17 The application of desiccant
an unoccupied mode resulting in energy and desiccation by first passing the outside dehumidifiers integrated with HVAC
savings and low indoor vapor pressures to air through cooling coils and using the systems serves to precondition the outside
permit drying. waste heat generated by the cooling coil ventilation air such that the latent load is
Designing the outside air system to compressors to warm the air necessary for removed. Some of the potential benefits
deliver the required ventilation to each desiccant drying. One manufacturer of a of applying desiccant dehumidification
occupant requires a supply air dew- combination cooling coil/desiccant system to air-conditioning systems are humidity
point temperature of about 7°C to captures and sanitises the condensed control, efficient latent load removal, and
maintain a space dew-point temperature water for drinking. reduction in peak electric demands.5
around 11°C. To determine the supply Using the 7°C dew-point design criteria Other savings associated with desiccant
air conditions for a dedicated outdoor via DOAS significantly reduces the dehumidification–HVAC system
air system working in parallel with potential for microbial growth within hybridisation include 1) providing an
distributed sensible cooling equipment, the non-DOAS HVAC equipment, as the enhanced occupant comfort with lower
one should select an air dew-point dedicated outdoor air system lowers the energy use; 2) providing improved
temperature low enough to maintain dew point of the air. Both cooling- and humidity control resulting in sensible
a summer space relative humidity no desiccant-type DOAS remove water versus latent cooling; 3) reducing
greater than 40%, or a supply air dew- from the airstream. Cooling-based equipment expenditures by allowing
point temperature around 7°C.10 This dehumidification chills air below its the downsizing of the evaporator coil,
results in the elimination of terminal dew-point temperature, resulting in condensing units, distribution plenums
reheat from the HVAC system and the moisture condensation on the nearest and terminal boxes, air handlers, reduced
ability to reduce the size of the cooling surface.13 Reheat may be necessary to ductwork size and cross-section, and
equipment due to the decrease in latent increase the temperature for occupant space used for mechanical equipment
capacity required for non-dedicated comfort. Condensation within an HVAC for comparable design loads; 18 4)
outdoor air systems to dehumidify using system can result in microbial growth, allowing independent temperature
subcooling andor reheat.9 Excess cooling equipment deterioration, and excess and humidity controls; 5) allowing
capacity can be subtracted from the rest energy use and should be avoided in higher temperature setpoints due to
of the system, resulting in savings that the design or retrofit stage. For these increased evaporation off the skin of

J UNE 2 0 0 9 •  Eco l i b r i u m 27
 FE ATURE

building occupants; 12 and 6) allowing size [when subcooling and/or reheat operation of the central plant
for dehumidification and the complete are eliminated from the system] and and DOAS–HVAC system.
shutdown of the sensible cooling eliminate excess chiller capacity. Desiccant
The HVAC system retrofit took place
equipment during unoccupied modes. cooling systems are energy efficient and
while the school continued to hold classes
environmentally benign....Desiccant
Desiccants have a natural affinity for for the approximately 2,500 students.
systems also displace chlorofluorocarbon-
removing moisture from air. As the This was accomplished by installing
based cooling equipment, the emissions
desiccant removes water vapor from the multiple rental chillers, pre-cooling
from which contribute to the depletion
air, the latent load is removed from air coils, active desiccant drying equipment,
of the Earth’s ozone layer....Desiccant
conditioning and the sensible load can and post-cooling coils for temporary
dehumidification could reduce total
be efficiently cooled mechanically to DOAS while the permanent systems were
residential electricity demand by as much
comfortable conditions. Solid desiccants installed (see photos on page 27).
as 25% in humid regions, providing a
take advantage of differences in vapour drier, more comfortable, and cleaner The purchase, retrofit, and installation
pressure to remove moisture from the air indoor environment with a lower energy cost of the desiccant and air-conditioning
with energy required to heat regeneration bill. Desiccant systems allow more fresh air systems was US$2.1 million ~US$37.08
air for removal of the adsorbed water into buildings, thus improving indoor air per L/s. Building utility (electricity,
from the desiccant medium. In many quality without using more energy. gas, and water) operating consumption
cases, the energy expenditures required (costs) for the calendar year prior to the
for desorption can be offset by using A supply air dew-point temperature
retrofit was compared to the calendar year
waste heat from boilers, condensers, setting of 7°C was used on a high school
following the retrofit. As a result of the
and other equipment. The honeycomb HVAC system retrofit project with active
desiccant installation, the school reduced
wheel-type desiccant is light, and its desiccant dehumidification,19 which
its building operating costs from $117.25/
rotating mass is low compared to its high resulted in significant energy savings for
operating hour to $53.49/operating hour
moisture removal capacity, resulting the district. The authors provided criteria
while increasing ventilation rates to meet
in an energy efficient dehumidification for the design and installation to address
Standard 62.1. The payback period for the
unit. The design is simple, reliable, and concerns associated with chronic high
initial $2.1 million investment was 3.75
easy to maintain, and is the most widely indoor humidity at a high school in a hot
years. The present worth of the investment
installed of all desiccant dehumidifiers and humid southern valley of Texas.
was $5.8 million dollars based on an
in ambient pressure applications like air The high school had a 1,000 ton interest rate of 4% and a service life of 20
conditioning.13 (3517kW) central plant with water-cooled years without an adjustment for increasing
centrifugal chillers and a primary/ energy costs. This retrofit project shows
Investment secondary chilled water distribution the application of desiccant technology as
system. Non-DOAS air-handling units an IAQ control strategy in humid climates
Perception of DOAS and fan-coil units were equipped with can provide significant economic benefits
The main disadvantage of dedicated electric resistance heaters for heating and/ to building owners and the community.
outdoor air systems is the perceived high or reheat. Controls were minimal direct
As described previously the payback
first cost. The high initial cost is balanced digital control (DDC).
period associated with providing a
by operational advantages discussed The criteria called for eight active desiccant- desirable indoor environmental quality
previously and application flexibility.13 based air desiccant units with chilled water is short.4 Fischer indicated that the many
Regarding the appropriateness of coils to cool the air to 13°C – 16°C prior to benefits listed would be recognised year
desiccant drying systems for air- the airstream entering the desiccant wheel. after year, whereas the costs associated
conditioning applications, the United Approximately 50% of the cooled air was with providing the desirable indoor
States Department of Energy’s National bypassed around the desiccant wheel and environmental quality are a one-time
Renewable Energy Laboratory maintains: mixed with the desiccant dried air to result expense with minimal maintenance
Conventional vapour-compression in a neutral leaving air temperature costs. The expected benefits—which
cooling systems are not designed to 21°C – 24°C at a dew point of 7°C. included reductions in absenteeism and
handle temperature and humidity loads health-care costs; positive impacts on
Demand control ventilation control
separately. Consequently, oversized productivity and alertness; decreased
strategy with variable air volume (VAV)
compressors are installed to dehumidify incidences of drowsiness, allergies,
was incorporated in the design. Four
the incoming air. And to meet humidity and illness; avoidance of property
chilled water outside air units with
requirements, vapor-compression systems damage and remediation; and reduced
electric reheat were replaced with four
are often operated for long cycles and at low maintenance costs—quickly exceeded
of the desiccant units to provide the
temperatures, which reduces their efficiency any initial expense associated with
proper amount of conditioned outside
facilitating an improved indoor
and requires reheating the dry, cold air air for the existing classroom fan-coil
environment.2
to achieve some degree of comfort. Both units. The other four desiccant units
consequences are costly. Desiccant systems, provided conditioned outside air to the Kumar and Fisk proposed that costs
however, can supplement conventional air RA/OA mixing box of 12 existing air- associated with providing additional
conditioners. By working together, they handling units serving other areas of the ventilation may be more than offset by
tackle the temperature and humidity loads building. Variable frequency drives were the savings that result from reduced
separately and more efficiently. Heating, added to eight VAV handling units. The employee sick leave, and that increasing
ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) existing DDC system was replaced with a ventilation rates above the minimum
engineers can then reduce compressor system sufficient to manage control and rates specified in Standard 62.1, can

28 Eco l i b r i u m  • J UNE 2 0 0 9
 FE ATURE

yield substantial benefits, including the 3. Fischer, J.C., C.W. Bayer. 2003. “Report card indoor air by a desiccant wheel using a 1M
reductions of the incidence of allergy and on humidity control.” ASHRAE Journal, type desiccant.” Journal of Solar Energy
45(5):30 – 39. Engineering 121(2): 1 – 13.
asthma in building occupants.20
4. Fischer, J.C. 1996. “Optimising IAQ, 18. Mumma, S.A. 2001. “Ceiling panel cooling
humidity control, and energy efficiency systems.” ASHRAE Journal 43(11):28 – 32.
Time for Acceptance in school environments through the
application of desiccant-based total energy
19. Wilson, S.C., et al. 2004. Identification,
Remediation, and Monitoring Processes Used
A widespread perception exists that HVAC recovery systems.” Proceedings of IAQ ‘96. in a Mold-Contaminated High School, in
systems using DOAS have higher first costs Atlanta: ASHRAE. Sick Building Syndrome, D.C. Straus, editor.
than non-dedicated outdoor air systems. 5. Pesaran, A.A. 1994. “A Review of Desiccant Elsevier Academic Press.
The authors routinely encounter engineers Dehumidification Technology.” Golden, 20. Kumar, S., W.J. Fisk. 2002. “IEQ and the
Colo.: National Renewable Energy
who are strongly opposed to considering impact on employee sick leave.” ASHRAE
Laboratory. NREL/TP-472-7010: pp. 1 – 8. Journal 44(7):97 – 98.
DOAS when designing mechanical 40 ASHRAE Journal May 2008
systems for buildings in humid climates. 6. Bayer, C.W., S.A. Crow. 1992. “Odorous
21. Dieckmann, J., K.W. Roth, J. Brodrick.
These poor perceptions of DOAS are the 2003. “Dedicated outdoor air systems.”
volatile emissions from fungal ASHRAE Journal 45(3).
result of the HVAC system industry’s contamination.” IAQ ’92: Environments for
unfamiliarity with DOAS, in general, and People. Atlanta: ASHRAE. pp. 99 – 104.
the relatively recent application of active 7. Davanagere, B.S., D.B. Shirey, K.
dehumidification to separate the sensible Rengarajan, F. Colacino. 1997. “Mitigating
and latent loads. When viewed as an the impacts of ASHRAE Standard 62-1989
on Florida schools.” ASHRAE Transactions
investment, DOAS can provide significant pp. 241 – 258.
benefits with substantial savings. The use of
8. Gatley, D.P. 1993. “Energy efficient
DOAS, specifically desiccation, falls outside dehumidification technology.” in Bugs,
of conventional HVAC system design,21 but Mold, and Rot II. Washington, D.C.: About the Authors
the benefits of using these systems dictate National Institute of Building Sciences. pp.
the need for change and transformation to 117 – 143. Michael D. Larrañaga, Ph.D., P.E.,
9. Mumma, S.A. 2001. “Designing dedicated is Simplex Professor and department
a new paradigm within the HVAC system
outdoor air systems.” ASHRAE Journal head of the School of Fire Protection
industry. From 1997 through 2001, 6,700 and Safety at the Oklahoma State
43(5):28 – 31.
new desiccant installations for IAQ- and University, School of Fire Protection
ventilation-specific applications occurred 10. Shank, K., S.A. Mumma. 2001. “Selecting
the supply air conditions for a dedicated and Safety Engineering Technology,
nationwide without significant awareness, outdoor air system working in parallel Stillwater, Okla.
education, and training regarding with distributed sensible cooling terminal Mario G. Beruvides, Ph.D., P.E., is
desiccant–HVAC hybridisation within equipment.” ASHRAE Transactions 107(1). professor and director of the Center
the HVAC system industry.1 11. Harriman III, L.G., M.J. Witte, M. for Systems Solutions at Texas Tech
Czachorski, D.R. Kosar. 1999. “Evaluating University, Department of Industrial
Strong proponents of using DOAS active desiccant systems for ventilating Engineering, Lubbock, Texas.
in HVAC applications are the U.S. commercial buildings.” ASHRAE Journal H.W. Holder is an independent
Department of Energy, the Air- 41(10):28 – 32. building and construction consultant
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration 12. Meckler, M. 1994. Desiccant-assisted at Assured Indoor Air Quality,
Institute, and the authors. Although air conditioner improves IAQ and LP, Dallas.
active desiccation–HVAC hybridization comfort.” Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning Enusha Karunasena, Ph.D.,
Engineering (10):75 – 84. is a post-doctoral fellow in the
remains a highly controversial subject
13. Harriman III, L.G., ed. 2002. The department of Animal and Food
within the industry,1 the use of cooling Dehumidification Handbook Second Edition. Sciences at Texas Tech University,
coils as a DOAS is somewhat accepted. Second ed. Amesbury, Mass.: Munters Department of Animal Science and
It is unlikely that the increased use of Corporation. Food Technology, Lubbock, Texas.
dedicated outdoor air systems for IAQ- 14. Hines, A.L., and T.K. Ghosh, S.K. Loyalka, David C. Straus, Ph.D., is a
and ventilation-related applications is the and R.C. Warder, Jr. 1992. “A Summary professor of medical microbiology
result of chance, but appears to be due to of Pollutant Removal Capabilities of Solid and Immunology at Texas Tech
the insights of engineers and designers and Liquid Desiccants From Indoor Air: University Health Science Center,
Investigation of Co-Sorption of Gases and Department of Microbiology and
who realise the increased value of DOAS Vapors as a Means to Enhance Indoor Air
for HVAC system applications. The use of Immunology, Lubbock, Texas.
Quality.” Gas Research Institute GRI-
DOAS for air-conditioning applications 92/0157.1.
may become the norm, as energy costs 15. Kovak, B., P.R. Heimann, J. Hammel. 1997.
rise and their increased use provides “The sanitising effects of desiccant-based
evidence of increasing acceptance and cooling.” ASHRAE Journal 39(4):60 – 64.
benefits of use within the industry. ❚ 16. Hines, A.L., T.K. Ghosh, and S.K. This article originally
Loyalka. 1992. “Removal of Particulates appeared in the May 2008 issue
and Airborne Microorganisms by Solid of The ASHRAE Journal.
References Adsorbents and Liquid Desiccants: Reprinted by permission.
1. Wurm, J., D. Kosar, T. Clemens. 2002. “Solid Investigation of Co-Sorption of Gases and
Vapors as a Means to Enhance Indoor Air Copyright remains with ASHRAE,
desiccant technology review.” Bulletin of the and the article may not be
International Institute of Refrigeration. www. Quality – Phase II.” Gas Research Institute
GRI-92/0157.5. reproduced without the express
iifiir.org/en/doc/1043.pdf. permission of ASHRAE.
2. Bayer, C.W. 2000. “Humidity control and 17. Popescu, M., T.K. Ghosh. 1999.
“Dehumidification and simultaneous Visit www.ashrae.org
ventilation in schools.” IAQ Applications
Summer. 1(3)6 – 10. removal of selected pollutants from

J UNE 2 0 0 9 •  Eco l i b r i u m 29