Air-to-Air Heat Exchangers & Heat Recovery · Since 2005

ASHRAE 62.1 - Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality

ASHRAE 62.1 is the U.S. standard that establishes minimum ventilation rates and procedures for acceptable indoor air quality in commercial buildings.

What it requires

It prescribes outdoor air rates per occupant and per floor area, and defines compliance paths such as the ventilation rate procedure and the indoor air quality procedure.

Where heat recovery fits

Higher required outdoor airflow means more conditioned air is exhausted. Heat recovery captures energy from that exhaust, letting you meet 62.1 without a large heating or cooling penalty.

Design tip

Step Action
1 Calculate outdoor air fraction
2 Size recovery on that fraction, not total flow
3 Verify winter supply temp stays above dew point

Common pitfall

Sizing the recovery device on total airflow rather than the outdoor-air fraction. The payback is driven by the exhaust energy you actually recover.

Bottom line

62.1 sets the ventilation need; recovery is the most cost-effective way to satisfy it in cold or hot climates.

ASHRAE 84 - Measuring Thermal Performance of Energy Recovery

ASHRAE Standard 84 specifies methods of testing the thermal performance of air-to-air heat exchangers and energy recovery ventilators (ERV/HRV).

Scope

It covers the apparatus, instrumentation, and calculation procedures needed to determine sensible and latent effectiveness of recovery devices under defined conditions.

What you get

A repeatable, lab-grade effectiveness number you can compare across North American manufacturers, independent of marketing claims.

Metrics reported

Metric Definition
Sensible effectiveness Heat recovered / max possible
Latent effectiveness Moisture recovered / max possible
Air leakage Supply-to-exhaust carryover

Relation to rating

ASHRAE 84 provides the test method; rating standards such as AHRI 1060 reference it to publish certified performance.

How to use it

Request the ASHRAE 84 test report and confirm the rating conditions match your design before accepting a quoted effectiveness.

EN 16798 - Energy Performance of Buildings (Ventilation)

EN 16798 is the European standard family for the energy performance of buildings - ventilation. It is the practical calculation tool for meeting the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD).

Scope

It provides calculation methods for energy use in buildings, including thermal, internal, and HVAC loads, with dedicated modules for ventilation and air handling.

The heat-recovery link

Many national implementations of EN 16798 require mechanical ventilation systems above a defined airflow to include heat recovery with a minimum sensible effectiveness - commonly around 70-75%.

Key modules

Module Topic
EN 16798-1 Indoor environmental input parameters
EN 16798-5 Energy performance (ventilation)
EN 16798-7 Building dynamics / airflow

How to apply

When designing a non-residential building in Europe, confirm the local EPBD transposition. If your AHU exceeds the threshold airflow, you must demonstrate recovery effectiveness - which is where EN 308 testing feeds in.

Common pitfall

Treating recovery as optional. Once the ventilation rate is fixed by EN 16798-1, the recovery device is what keeps the heating/cooling energy within the EPBD budget.

EN 308 - Test Method for Heat Transfer in Heat Exchangers

EN 308 is the European standard that specifies test methods for the determination of heat transfer in heat exchangers, including the air-to-air recovery devices used in HVAC. It is the foundation that lets you trust a manufacturer's effectiveness number.

What it covers

EN 308 describes the laboratory set-up, instrumentation accuracy, and calculation procedure for measuring both sensible and - where applicable - latent (moisture) transfer between the two airstreams under controlled, repeatable inlet conditions.

The core metric: effectiveness

Term Meaning
Sensible effectiveness Actual sensible heat transferred / maximum possible
Latent effectiveness Actual moisture transferred / maximum possible
Temperature change ratio Supply temp change / (exhaust - outdoor temp)

How to read a test report

Always check the inlet temperature and humidity, the airflow rates, and whether the figure is sensible or total. A wheel quoted for total effectiveness is not comparable to a plate quoted for sensible only - EN 308 lets you normalise this.

Common pitfall

Comparing a certified EN 308 value at one airflow against a brochure value at a different airflow. Effectiveness varies with face velocity, so match the duty conditions.

Why it matters to you

Specifying against EN 308-tested values protects you from overstated performance and supports compliance with building energy rules. Pair it with the EN 13053 AHU rating for a complete specification.

Single-Stage vs Two-Stage Heat Recovery

A single exchanger usually suffices, but extreme climates or very low supply-air temperature targets can justify staging two recovery devices.

Comparison

Single-stage Two-stage
Typical effectiveness 70-90% Up to ~95% combined
Supply temp achievable Moderate Very low
Complexity Low Higher (controls, defrost)
Cost Lower Higher

When to stage

Consider two-stage (e.g., plate + heat pumpassisted or plate + wheel) only when the heating design temperature is severe or when indoor conditions demand very low supply temps.

When single-stage is enough

Most commercial buildings meet code with one well-sized exchanger.

Enthalpy Wheel vs Plate in Humid Climates

In hot, humid conditions the dominant cooling load is often latent (moisture), not sensible (temperature). This changes the recovery calculus.

Comparison

Enthalpy wheel Sensible plate
Removes incoming moisture Yes No
Cuts dehumidification load Yes No
Summer comfort Better Worse
First cost Higher Lower

Humid summer

An enthalpy wheel transfers moisture to the exhaust before it enters, slashing the AHU dehumidification duty. A sensible plate leaves all that moisture for the cooling coil to remove.

Cold winter (humid)

In humid-cold climates an ERV also retains indoor humidity in winter, reducing static shock and dryness.

Aluminum vs Stainless Steel Plate Cores

Most plate cores are aluminum, but stainless and polymer variants exist. The choice is driven by corrosion, weight, and cleaning needs.

Comparison

Aluminum Stainless steel
Thermal conductivity Excellent Good
Weight Light Heavier
Corrosion resistance Good (coated) Excellent
Cleanability Good Excellent (aggressive CIP)
Cost Lower Higher

Choose aluminum

For typical HVAC exhaust (moderate humidity, no acids), coated aluminum gives the best conductivity-to-cost ratio.

Choose stainless

For kitchen hoods, laboratories, or corrosive industrial exhaust, stainless survives where aluminum would pit.

Counterflow vs Crossflow Plate Exchanger

Within plate exchangers, airflow arrangement sets the ceiling on performance. Counterflow (streams oppose) is thermodynamically superior; crossflow (streams perpendicular) is simpler to build.

Comparison

Counterflow Crossflow
Max sensible effectiveness Up to ~90% Up to ~75%
Coldest supply temp Lower Higher
Manufacturing More complex Simpler, cheaper
Frost Needs careful design Easier partial bypass
Best use Max recovery, cold climate Cost-sensitive, moderate climate

Why counterflow

Counterflow maintains the largest average temperature difference along the plate, so it extracts more energy and reaches lower supply temperatures - valuable in cold climates.

Why crossflow

Crossflow plates are easier to sheet-metal and seal, lowering first cost for buildings that do not need peak recovery.

Run-Around Coil vs Plate Exchanger

A run-around coil system links two coils with a pumped fluid loop (water or glycol). It recovers energy between airstreams that are too far apart for a direct plate or wheel.

Comparison

Run-around coil Plate
Airstream distance Any (loop spans building) Must be adjacent
Effectiveness 50-70% 80-90%
Cross-contamination None (separate coils) None
Pump / power Yes No
Cost Higher (loop + pump) Lower

When to use run-around

Use it when supply and exhaust are in different rooms or floors, or when total airstream separation is a code requirement. The fluid loop guarantees zero mixing.

When to use plate

Use a plate whenever the two streams are physically close; you get higher effectiveness with no pump or freeze-risk loop.

Heat-Pipe vs Plate Heat Exchanger

Heat-pipe exchangers use a row of sealed tubes charged with a working fluid that evaporates on the warm side and condenses on the cold side. Plate exchangers use stacked thin plates. Both are sensible-only, but their failure modes differ.

Comparison

Heat pipe Plate
Moving parts None None
Frost handling Self-drains; less bridging Needs bypass / preheat
Cross-contamination None None
Effectiveness 60-75% 80-90%
Orientation Must be vertical Any
First cost Higher Lower

When heat pipes win

Heat pipes excel where frost is severe: condensate drains by gravity and the device tolerates partial icing better than a plate. They also need no specific orientation of the airstream paths.

When plates win

Plates deliver higher effectiveness at lower cost and suit most temperate duties where frost control is handled by a winter bypass.

Request a Quote
Need Help?