Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
n
k1
x
k
l
k;0
l
k;00
12
where x
k
is the mole fraction of substance k in the mixture.
For ideal gas mixture, the chemical potential integrated
h,
Start
Assume the water mass flow rate at the outlet, L
H=0
T
w, H(j+1)
= T
w, H(j)
+ T
w
,
L
H(j+1)
= L
H(j)
+ L
* L L
inlet ) (J
max
Initially prescribed flow conditions
for water and air. Input T
w,i
, T
w,e
,
T
db,i
, T
wb,i
, L
i
, G, A, Ka
For j = 1 to J
max
- 1
H
j+1
= H
j
+ H
Calculate the increasing water
temperature, dT
w
, by Eq. (7)
Yes
No
End
Calculate dh/dH from Eq. (5), where h
H(j+1)
= h
H(j)
+
Calculate d/dH by Eq. (6), where
H(j+1)
=
H(j)
+ .
Next j
*Convergence criteria, = 5 10
-5
kg/s
Fig. 2. The owchart of the calculation of waterair conditions in cooling tower.
between restricted dead state and environmental state at
ambient temperature T
0
is given by
l
k;0
l
k;00
RT
0
ln
P
k;0
P
k;00
13
It can be also noted that the specic exergy for psychro-
metric process w is a measure of the thermomechanical
exergy, changed from actual state to restricted dead state,
plus the chemical exergy, changed from restricted dead
state to environment. Thus,
w h h
0
T
0
s s
0
n
k1
x
k
l
k;0
l
k;00
14
In the wet-type cooling tower, water and air are the only
two kinds of working uids revealed in operation. So it is
important to write the exergy equations for both water
and air for applying in the analysis. On the basis of Eq.
(14), the exergy of water X
w
in environment when water
is considered as an incompressible uid [18] can be written
as
X
w
Lh
f;w
h
f;0
v
f;T
P P
sat;T
T
0
s
f;w
s
f;0
R
v
T
0
ln h
0
15
In practice, the second term on the right side of the above
equation is usually neglected when compared with
R
v
T
0
lnh
0
. That is, Eq. (15) is nally becomes:
X
w
Lh
f;w
h
f;0
T
0
s
f;w
s
f;0
R
v
T
0
ln h
0
16
For the air side, the specic exergy of air w
air
may be con-
sidered as an ideal gas mixture composed of dry air and
water vapor, which can be deducted from Eq. (14) in envi-
ronment. This can be written as [11]
w
air
x
a
h
a
h
a;0
T
0
s
a
s
a;0
l
a
l
a;0
x
v
h
v
h
v;0
T
0
s
v
s
v;0
l
v
l
v;0
17
The over-bar () represents the mole basis. Substituting the
above equation in the form of constant specic heat c
pa
and
c
pv
for Dh
a
c
pa
T T
0
and Ds
a
c
pa
lnT=T
0
RlnP=P
0
, and, on the basis of Eq. (12), l
a
l
a;0
RT
0
lnx
a
=x
a;0
, the content of water vapor can be done sim-
ilarly. As a result,
w
air
x
a
c
pa
x
v
c
pv
T T
0
T
0
ln
T
T
0
_ _
RT
0
ln
P
P
0
RT
0
x
a
ln
x
a
x
a;0
x
v
ln
x
v
x
v;0
18
Writing on a mass of dry air basis when neglecting the
change of pressure through cooling tower (P = P
0
), the
exergy of air X
air
becomes
X
air
G c
pa
xc
pv
T T
0
T
0
ln
T
T
0
_
R
a
T
0
1 1:608x ln1 1:608x
00
=1 1:608x
_
1:608xln
x
x
00
__
19
For determining the rate of exergy destruction I, the loss
potential of air to recover exergy supplied by water, can be
constructed from the control-volume exergy balance equa-
tion. The relation is applied at steady state conditions and
undergoes an adiabatic process with no work delivered.
Assuming that airwater thermodynamics properties are
known at discrete points along the tower height, the exergy
destruction for each incremental tower height dH is
X
w;Hj1
X
air;Hj
..
Total exergy entering
X
w;Hj
X
air;Hj1
..
Total exergy leaving
I
..
Destroyed exergy
20
After rearrangement, the exergy destruction for the discrete
height dH will be
I X
w;Hj1
X
w;Hj
X
air;Hj
X
air;Hj1
21
4. Performance simulation
To validate the method, some experimental data in
Table 1 done by Simpson and Sherwood [19] is applied
to the cooling tower. The comparative results are the exit
dry-bulb temperatures (T
db,e
), and exit wet-bulb tempera-
tures (T
wb,e
). It can be noted that the error between the pre-
dicted and experimental values are within 4.0%. Thus, this
model is agreed in use for predicting the conditions of
water and air in cooling towers. The experiment No. 1 of
Table 1 is used to depict the characteristics of water and
air through cooling tower. The ambient conditions used
Table 1
Comparison between experimental data obtained from Simpson and
Sherwood [19] and those obtained from mathematical model and their
errors
Experiments no.
1 2 3 4
Experimental conditions
Inlet water ow rate, L
i
(kg/s) 1.259 1.259 1.008 1.008
Inlet dry air ow rate, G (kg/s) 1.187 1.187 1.265 1.250
Inlet dry-bulb temperature, T
db,i
(C) 29.00 30.50 35.00 35.00
Inlet wet-bulb temperature, T
wb,i
(C) 21.11 21.11 26.67 26.67
Inlet water temperature, T
w,i
(C) 28.72 34.50 38.78 38.78
Exit water temperature, T
w,e
(C) 24.22 26.22 29.33 29.33
Tower cross-sectional area, A (m
2
) 1.057 1.057 1.057 1.057
Tower characteristic, Ka (kg/m
3
s) 3.025 3.025 3.025 3.025
Experimental results
Exit dry-bulb temperature,
T
db,e,exp
(C)
26.67 30.27 33.27 33.27
Exit wet-bulb temperature,
T
wb,e,exp
(C)
26.17 29.94 32.89 32.89
Model predicted results
Exit dry-bulb temperature,
T
db,e,pred
(C)
27.42 31.17 34.44 34.46
Exit wet-bulb temperature,
T
w,e,pred
(C)
26.35 30.02 33.04 33.11
Errors in predicted values
T
db,e,pred
(%) 2.81 2.97 3.52 3.58
T
w,e,pred
(%) 0.69 0.27 0.46 0.67
for exergy analysis are at T
0
= 25 C, P
0
= 1 atm, and
x
00
= 0.009923 kg/kg (50% RH). The results from the cal-
culation are plotted in Figs. 38.
Water temperature, air temperature and humidity ratio
are plotted against the height of the tower as shown in
Fig. 3. Water temperature, T
w
, decreases continuously as
it ows downwards to the bottom. Air ows upwards from
the entrance at bottom and exits at top. The dry-bulb tem-
perature of inlet air, T
db
, initially decreases and then slightly
increases after the tower height of 0.68 m (an intersection
point of T
w
and T
db
). Before this point T
w
is less than
T
db
. This indicates that heat ows from air to water. How-
ever, after the intersection point T
w
is more than T
db
.
Therefore, heat ows in the opposite direction. It is known
that the water thermal energy is removed by both convec-
tive and evaporative heat transfers to air. The eect from
evaporation can be indicated in terms of air humidity ratio,
x, and wet-bulb temperature, T
wb
. It is also noted that
T
wb
, which increases continuously from bottom to top, is
always less than T
w
. In this case, the approach temperature
is 3.11 C. As a result, heat still ows from water into air.
Therefore, heat transfer mode in cooling tower is domi-
nated by evaporation.
Fig. 4 shows water exergy, X
w
, and water temperature.
Water exergy dened as the available energy carried by sup-
plying water decreases continuously from top to bottom. It
can be explained from the fact that water temperature
decreases from top to bottom as a result of supplying its
exergy to air. Water exergy shows that the supplying rate
is nearly constant until approaching the bottom. Eq. (16)
explains water exergy where the rst two terms are known
as thermal exergy and the last is chemical exergy. Thermal
exergy is the exergy associated with dierence in tempera-
tures, and chemical exergy is the one that associated with
118.5
118.8
119.1
119.4
119.7
120.0
120.3
0.00 0.13 0.26 0.38 0.51 0.64 0.77 0.90 1.02 1.15
Height of tower (m)
E
x
e
r
g
y
o
f
w
a
t
e
r
(
k
W
)
22.0
24.0
26.0
28.0
30.0
32.0
W
a
t
e
r
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
C
)
Tw
Xw
Fig. 4. Exergy of water and water temperature proles through the
cooling tower.
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.00 0.13 0.26 0.38 0.51 0.64 0.77 0.90 1.02 1.15
Height of tower (m)
E
x
e
r
g
y
o
f
a
i
r
v
i
a
c
o
n
v
e
c
t
i
v
e
h
e
a
t
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
(
k
W
)
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
D
r
y
-
b
u
l
b
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
C
)
Tdb
Xair,conv
Fig. 5. Exergy of air via convective heat transfer and air temperature
proles through the cooling tower.
18.0
20.0
22.0
24.0
26.0
28.0
30.0
0.00 0.13 0.26 0.38 0.51 0.64 0.77 0.90 1.02 1.15
Height of tower (m)
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
C
)
0.01000
0.01500
0.02000
0.02500
0.03000
0.03500
0.04000
H
u
m
i
d
i
t
y
r
a
t
i
o
(
k
g
w
/
k
g
a
)
Tdb
Twb
Tw
Fig. 3. Temperature proles of water and air, and humidity ratio prole
through the cooling tower.
0.000
0.200
0.400
0.600
0.800
1.000
0.00 0.13 0.26 0.38 0.51 0.64 0.77 0.90 1.02 1.15
Hieght of tower (m)
E
x
e
r
g
y
o
f
a
i
r
v
i
a
e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
h
e
a
t
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
(
k
W
)
0.0100
0.0120
0.0140
0.0160
0.0180
0.0200
0.0220
H
u
m
i
d
i
t
y
r
a
t
i
o
(
k
g
w
/
k
g
a
)
Xair,evap
Fig. 6. Exergy of air via evaporative heat transfer and humidity ratio
proles through the cooling tower.
ambient humidity, h
0
. Because the chemical exergy at ambi-
ent is constant, the temperature of water can be used as an
indicator of water exergy. The process shows that water
exergy at the bottom is less than that at the top. Similar ten-
dency can be held for water temperature.
On the air side, its exergy, X
air
, means that available
energy of air to recovers or utilizes that supplied by water.
There are two kinds of exergy in air: exergy of air via con-
vective heat transfer, X
air,conv
, and exergy of air via evapo-
rative heat transfer, X
air,evap
. The process is described by
Eq. (19) where the rst term represents X
air,conv
and the rest
is X
air,evap
. Fig. 5 shows exergy of air via convective heat
transfer and dry-bulb temperature proles along the cool-
ing tower. The reduction of X
air,conv
and T
db
can be noted
from the bottom to the height of 0.68 m. These correspond
with the results discussed earlier in Fig. 3. In that region,
heat transfer is taking place from air to water due to neg-
ative convection. The intersection point of T
db
and T
w
indi-
cates no temperature dierence; hence, no convective heat
transfer of air to water with the minimum T
db
value. This
also indicated the minimum value of X
air,conv
. After this
point, X
air,conv
contained in air is able to let the thermal
energy ow into it and its T
db
increases.
Exergy of air via evaporative heat transferX
air,evap