ASHRAE Journal Direct Expansion

Applying DX Equipment
In Humid Climates
By Steve Doty, P.E. moisture level of 126 grains per lb (18 g/
Associate Member ASHRAE kg). A dew point design day in Orlando
has a dry-bulb temperature of 83°F

T he “DX dilemma” is the loss of humidity control caused by the (28°C) but a moisture level of 142 grains
per lb (20 g/kg) (see 1997 ASHRAE Hand-
combination of natural cycling of direct expansion (DX) equip- book—Fundamentals, Page 26.9). This
ment and constant outside air ventilation. This article presents is significant because the maximum
moisture load occurs when the sensible
a simplified method of applying standard DX equipment systems in loads are reduced.
humid climates to predict humidity control effectiveness and to reduce Another significant weather point in
the Orlando area is a typical spring morn-
the risk of humidity damage, including mold and mildew. ing, which often is 75°F (24°C) dry bulb
Many software programs can deter- units. However, many projects have bud- and 90% RH. The significance of this
mine the moisture loads in the space. The get constraints that preclude their use. weather point is that the sensible loads
method presented here goes beyond the Reheat also works well, but adds an en- through the building envelope are nearly
load calculations by evaluating equip- ergy penalty. When systems of choice are zero (outside air temp = inside air temp),
ment selections to see how they are ruled out due to cost, the engineers must while the outside air intake has nearly
matched to their moisture load. A spread- do the best they can with the typical lower the same moisture content as the design
sheet compares the full-load and part- cost DX equipment. This article addresses day.
load moisture intake rate of the system that situation: constant volume, single- Sizing of DX equipment is critical, and
with the corresponding moisture removal path mixed air systems, using rooftop or most designers know that over-sizing
rates for the equipment, and then rates split DX equipment. (Note: Some systems should be avoided. Even so, this “gar-
the performance of the system on a scale and equipment close off outside air when- den variety” DX equipment application
of 1 to 10 based on moisture balance. ever the compressors are not running as a often results in excessive space humid-
A score of 5 indicates a balance of mois- strategy to improve humidity control. ity and subsequent mold and mildew
ture in vs. moisture out, and should be These systems do not meet ANSI/ damage due to the natural system opera-
the minimum acceptable score for a suc- ASHRAE Standard 62-1999, Ventilation tion with moderate-temperature, high-
cessful design. Scores of 5 or higher are for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality guide- humidity part load conditions. This is es-
considered acceptable for moisture con- lines and are not recommended.) pecially true if the outside air represents
trol. The spreadsheet algorithms do not a significant portion of the total supply
calculate relative humidity but will pro- The Problem airstream.
vide good indicators of humidity con- The region identified by ASHRAE as To control humidity, the moisture re-
trol and will alert the designer to sys- a subtropical microclimate has a high moval rate must equal the amount of mois-
tems likely to succeed as well as systems number of annual wet-bulb hours and ture being introduced into the space. Mois-
likely to have problems. poses unique challenges to HVAC sys- ture sources include indoor and outdoor
The value of the spreadsheet is the abil- tem designers. Climate references made sources. The outdoor source is outside air,
ity to compare the dehumidification per- in this article describe the central Florida while indoor sources include people,
formance of different equipment during area. However, other areas within the sub- plants, food, cooking, etc. In commercial
the design phase, and to avoid choosing tropical zone will behave in a similar fash- applications where outside air intake is
one that will have humidity problems. ion. continuous, cooling equipment cycles off
(See sidebar, Basis of Calculations, Page In humid climates, with outdoor tem- and on in response to a thermostat, which
33). peratures above 55°F or 60°F (13°C or
Other HVAC systems can provide bet- 16°C), the outside air contains a signifi- About the Author
ter year-round humidity control than cant amount of moisture. For example, a Steve Doty, P.E., lives in Colorado
conventional DX equipment, such as VAV, sensible design day in Orlando, Fla., Springs, CO, with 15 years prior HVAC
face and bypass, and preconditioning (92°F [33°C] db/79°F [26°C] wb) has a design experience in humid climates.
30 ASHRAE Journal w w w. a s h r a e j o u r n a l . o r g March 2001

creates periods where the outside air and
its moisture load enter the building un-
challenged, raising humidity levels. This
condition is amplified during moderate-
temperature, high-humidity part load con-
ditions, because the cooling equipment
runs for shorter periods.
Additionally, the capacity of the cool-
ing equipment increases at the lower out-
door ambient temperatures, further reduc-
ing the run-time required to satisfy the
thermostat. The standard DX system pro-
vides its best humidity control at full oc-
cupancy on a sensible design day, and
provides progressively less humidity
control as the sensible load drops off.
The Simplified Solution/Method
First, define the maximum and mini-
mum sensible and latent loads. This is
done using load calculations at full load,
and then re-running the loads with re-
duced internal loads and modifying the
weather data to reAflect a moderate but
clammy day like 75°F (24°C) and 90%
RH. In other words, simulate the low sen-
sible load conditions that create the DX
dilemma. The assumption is made that if
the system works at both extremes, it will
work adequately between the two condi-
Advertisement in print edition formerly in this space.
March 2001
tions.
Next, determine the actual DX equip-
ment capacity (sensible and latent) at the
maximum and minimum conditions of
the model. This usually requires that the
manufacturer run the equipment selec-
tion at both sets of indoor and outdoor
conditions. (Note: The success of this
method often requires several iterations
of equipment selections before a good
fit is found. It is important to choose a
manufacturer’s rep. who has patience.)
Finally, compare the equipment capaci-
ties to the loads. This is where the “what-
if ” equipment combinations are put to the
test. Systems with predicted performance
of 5 or higher are considered viable, with
the higher values being preferred. See
sample spreadsheet, where several options
were explored and a system chosen.
Limitations
1. Determining percent run-time
or moisture removal rate is straightfor-
ward. However, determining the result-
ing relative humidity is a very complex
subject. This spreadsheet does not pre-
dict actual space relative humidity. What
this spreadsheet does is provide perfor-
mance indicators, by relating ratios of
Direct Expansion
sensible and latent equipment capacities
to the loads they serve, both at part-load
and full-load states.
2. This method is intended for DX sys-
tems with low percentages of outside air.
High outside air percentages (more than
20% to 25%) will tend to have humidity
problems in any event. In these cases,
other systems or supplemental O/A pre-
conditioning systems should be consid-
ered.
3. This method uses actual equipment
performance numbers, and so any changes
in conditions (including design changes
and substitutions) will affect the results.
Conclusions
The DX dilemma is the natural ten-
dency of DX systems to lose control of
space humidity in humid climates where
there is continuous outside air ventila-
tion. Since this system is normally ap-
plied in the commodity segment of the
design market, design fees are low and
the problem is even more of a dilemma.
The method presented in this article pro-
vides a quick means to compare humid-
ity control performance of different
equipment combinations during part-
load and full-load conditions.
ASHRAE Journal 31
ASHRAE Journal

Basis of Calculations Humidity Ratio lbw /lba

80% 60%
To make a fair assessment of humidity control, there must be 0.025
consideration of all sources of moisture sources and sinks, Dewpoint Design Day
including people, plants, food and beverages, spillage, pro- 0.020
Yardstick Test Point
cesses, infiltration, outside air. For spaces cooled by DX equip-
ment, moisture removal rate and percentage of run time are 40% 0.015
also determining factors. The most confounding part of hu-
midity control predictions is that each component is dynamic. 0.010
Refer to the psychrometric chart, and compare the three 20%
points shown. 0.005
• On a sensible design day, the dry-bulb temperature is the
highest. Under this outside air condition, the space will
experience the greatest sensible gains through the build- 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
ing envelope (skin load) and the greatest overall load. This Dry Bulb Temperature °F *
value is used to determine the unit’s total capacity. Psychrometric chart for altitude of 0 ft and pressure of
• On a dew point design day, the moisture content of the 29.92 in. Hg. (7444 kPa).
outside air at its highest. Under this outside air condition,
the outside air and infiltration components of the system Algorithms used in the spreadsheet:
moisture load will be its highest. The dry-bulb temperature (A) SLOADFULL = Full Load Sensible Coil Load
is still above the room temperature, so there is still some
(B) SLOADPART = Part Load Sensible Coil Load
amount of sensible gains through the building envelope.
So, while the moisture load is at its peak, the run time (based (C) LLOADFULL = Full Load Latent Coil Load
on sensible gains) is at an intermediate value.
(D) LLOADPART = Part Load Latent Coil Load
• On a “Yardstick Test Point” day, the moisture content of the
outside air is similar to, but slightly less than, a design day. (E) SCAPFULL = Full Load Sensible Capacity at 95°F (35°C)
The outside air dry-bulb temperature is equal to the inside ambient
temperature (assuming a 75°F [24°C] thermostat setpoint) (F) SCAPPART = Part Load Sensible Capacity at 75°F (24°C)
so the sensible gains through the building envelope are ambient
practically eliminated.
(G) LCAPFULL = Full Load Latent Capacity at 95°F (35°C)
The exact evaluation of dehumidification performance
ambient
would require exhaustive analysis including weather condi-
tions of a design day, a dew point design day, points in be- (H) LCAPPART = Part Load Latent Capacity at 75°F (24°C)
tween and other points when cooling is active. Each of these ambient
points would then be evaluated at the different percentages of
(I) RTIME FULL = Full Load Run Time = (SLOAD FULL)/
internal loads that could occur.
(SCAPFULL)
The proposed yardstick method used in the spreadsheet
makes assumptions to eliminate variables and simplify the (J) RTIME PART = Part Load Run Time = (SLOAD PART)/
design process. The outside air yardstick test point is used in (SCAPPART)
the part load HVAC load calculations because it eliminates the
(K) MR-EFFECTIVEFULL= Full Load Moisture Removal Ef-
skin load effect on equipment run time. In practice DX sys-
fectiveness = (RTIMEFULL  LCAPFULL) / LLOADFULL
tems do a poor job of controlling humidity at this condition,
because if moisture is in the air and the thermostat is not call- (L) MR-EFFECTIVEPART =Part Load Moisture Removal Ef-
ing, the outside air comes in unchallenged. Other assumptions fectiveness = (RTIMEPART  LCAPPART) / LLOADPART
made include the following:
(M) MR-SCOREFULL= Full Load Moisture Removal Score =
a) Thermostat control, no humidistat, no reheat cycle.
1) If MR-EFFECTIVEFULL >1, then MR-SCOREFULL = 5.0
b) Re-evaporation of moisture from the DX coil, when the
+ [(1– MR-EFFECTIVEFULL)  2.5]
compressor is turned off, is ignored.
2) If MR-EFFECTIVEFULL <1, then MR-SCOREFULL = 5.0
c) If the chosen system has a balance of moisture-in vs. mois-
+ [(1 – MR-EFFECTIVEFULL)  5.0]
ture-out (score of 5 or higher) for both full load and part
load, then it is assumed to control humidity adequately for (N) MR-SCOREPART= Part Load Moisture Removal Score =
outside air conditions in between. 1) If MR-EFFECTIVEPART >1, then MR-SCOREPART = 5.0
+ [(1 – MR-EFFECTIVEPART)  2.5]
*°F to °C= –32 × 5÷ 9 2) If MR-EFFECTIVEPART <1, then MR-SCOREPART = 5.0
gr/lb to g/kg = × 0.143

32 ASHRAE Journal w w w. a s h r a e j o u r n a l . o r g March 2001


DX Dilemma:
Equipment
performance
comparison.
+ [(1 – MR-EFFECTIVEPART)  5.0]
(O) Explanation of items M and N (moisture removal scoring
system): The calculation uses a scale of 1 to 10, with a
baseline of 5.0. The basis for the scoring is the moisture
removal effectiveness factor. The scoring is increased or
decreased from the center point of 5.0 based on this factor.
(P) For systems with a deficit in moisture removal effective-
ness (MR-EFFECTIVE <1), the negative scoring will be
calculated as a straight-line interpolation between 5.0 and
0.0, based on the deficiency amount. The algorithm as-
sumes that the under-capacity of the dehumidification
*°F to °C= –32 × 5÷ 9
March 2001
Direct Expansion
CHOOSE
CHOOSE
appliance will have a direct effect on the space humidity.
For systems with a surplus in moisture removal effective-
ness (MR-EFFECTIVE >1), the positive scoring will be calcu-
lated as a 0.5 weighted straight line interpolation between 5.0
and 10.0, based on the surplus amount. The algorithm assumes
that the over-capacity of the dehumidification appliance will
have a direct effect on the space humidity, but will be self-
limiting because the vapor drive through the building enve-
lope will increase as the space “tries” to get drier. The assump-
tion is made that only half of the apparent reduction in space
humidity will be realized for this reason. Therefore, one of the
terms has a 2.5 factor instead of 5.0.
ASHRAE Journal 33