Case Study: Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) - Canadian Centre for Housing Technology (CCHT) in Ottawa, Ontario.
| Application: | Test facility that applies winter conditions on two identical research houses to monitor efficiencies of different ERV and HRV systems. In one house, an industry standard Coroplast HRV core is installed and in the other, a dPoint ERV Core featuring its polymer membrane. |
  |
|---|---|---|
| Conditions: | Testing occurred between February 27, 2008 through March 16, 2008 with outside temperatures ranging from 0 C to -19 C and indoor temperatures held fixed at 21 C. The indoor relative humidity level was held fixed at 20% for the first week of testing and at 30% for the second week. | |
| Results: | The dPoint ERV Core was found to be superior to the Coroplast HRV in terms of latent energy recovery and overall effectiveness with the added ability to recapture moisture (previously lost) reducing energy and water usage in the humidifier and removing the need for a drainage system entirely. |
As compared to the Coroplast HRV, the dPoint ERV Core:
- Recovers latent energy resulting in a 10% increase in total effectiveness
- Improves sensible recovery by 3%
- Retains more heat (133W saved each day)
- Recovers 1.8 litres of moisture per day more than the HRV in 20% RH test periods and 2.5 litres more in 30% RH test periods
- Reduces demand on the humidifier directly saving water and energy usage
- Removes the need for drainage with zero condensation - the dPoint ERV Core removes all moisture from the exhaust air stream and transfers it to the fresh air stream. No moisture lost. (HRV condensed .5 litres/day that is drained)