1 visualizações

Enviado por Majid Khan

k

- Tutorial_3_Heat_Exchanger.pdf
- Heat Transfer Calculations - Myer Kutz (McGraw-Hill, 2004)
- CerInt2003
- RPT 2015 SC
- Condensation
- heat
- 244823848 Filmwise and Dropwise Experiment
- Heat Transfer_ Exercises
- Data Sheet Massecuite D Heater Rev 0 (2)
- Homework #2
- Solved Problems Heat Transfer
- CH EN 3453 - HW 02 - 2014
- cui2008.pdf
- Science Direct
- Effstock Article - Vertical Ground Heat Exchangers - A Review of Heat Flow Models
- BMW to Use Engine Heat Losses to Gain 10-15% Fuel Economy
- CH Revised
- weldinglectures9-10-121030153810-phpapp02.pdf
- 786d3bcf9d394c10a75c0665adb897eb6
- Design and Analysis of Plate Heat Exchanger With Co2 and r134a as Working f

Você está na página 1de 10

The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share

how this access benefits you. Your story matters.

Bubble Column Dehumidifier.” Volume 3: Gas Turbine Heat

Transfer; Transport Phenomena in Materials Processing and

Manufacturing; Heat Transfer in Electronic Equipment;

Symposium in Honor of Professor Richard Goldstein;

Symposium in Honor of Prof. Spalding; Symposium in Honor of

Prof. Arthur E. Bergles (July 14, 2013).

As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/HT2013-17763

Publisher ASME International

Accessed Fri Nov 16 10:31:12 EST 2018

Citable Link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/86322

Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike

Detailed Terms http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Summer Heat Transfer Conference

HT2013

July 14-19, 2013, Minneapolis, USA

HT2013-17763

Rohsenow Kendall Heat Transfer Laboratory Rohsenow Kendall Heat Transfer Laboratory

Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139

Email: emilytow@mit.edu Email: lienhard@mit.edu

Bubble column dehumidifiers are a compact, inexpen- K Mass transfer coefficient [kg/m2 -s]

sive alternative to conventional fin-tube dehumidifiers for K∗ Dimensionless mass transfer coefficient [-]

humidification-dehumidification (HDH) desalination, a technol- k Thermal conductivity [W/m-K]

ogy that has promising applications in small-scale desalination L Equivalent length [m]

and industrial water remediation. In this paper, algebraic equa- Le f Lewis factor [-]

tions for relevant mean heat and mass transfer driving forces are M Molar mass [kg/kmol]

developed for improved modeling of bubble column dehumidi- m Water vapor mass fraction [-]

fiers. Because mixing in the column ensures a uniform liquid ṁ Mass flow rate [kg/m2 ]

temperature, the bubble column can be modeled as two single p Pressure [Pa]

stream heat exchangers in contact with the column liquid: the P Equivalent wetted perimeter [m]

seawater side, for which a log-mean temperature difference is Q̇ Heat transfer rate [J/s]

appropriate, and the gas side, which has a varying heat capacity R Specific gas constant [J/kg-K]

and mass exchange. Under typical conditions, a log-mean mass T Temperature [K]

fraction difference is shown to drive latent heat transfer, and an U Overall heat transfer coefficient [W/m2 -K]

expression for the mean temperature difference of the moist gas U∗ Dimensionless heat transfer coefficient [-]

stream is presented. These expressions will facilitate modeling u Superficial velocity [m/s]

of bubble column heat and mass exchangers. V̇ Volumetric flow rate [m3 /s]

v Bubble rise velocity [m/s]

x Distance [m]

NOMENCLATURE x∗ Dimensionless distance [-]

A Surface area [m2 ]

C Heat capacity flow rate [J/K-s] Greek

cp Specific heat at constant pressure [J/kg-K] α Thermal diffusivity [m2 /s]

D Bubble diameter [m] ∆ Mean difference

Fo Fourier number [-] ε Gas holdup [-]

H Column liquid height, measured during bubbling [m] Θ Dimensionless temperature difference [-]

h Specific enthalpy [J/kg] or heat transfer coefficient [W/m2 -K] ρ Density [kg/m3 ]

1 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

Subscripts

A Bubble

a Dry air

B Bubble inner surface

C Column liquid

coil Coil and coolant fluid

cond Condensation

D Coil metal

E Coolant

e Entry

i In

l Latent heat

LM Log mean

ma Moist air

o Out

s Sensible

sat Saturation

turn Coil turn

FIGURE 1. BUBBLE COLUMN DEHUMIDIFIER

w Water vapor

heat capacity in each stream and does not allow for the thermal

INTRODUCTION energy left in the stream by warm water vapor molecules diffus-

The development of energy-efficient desalination technolo- ing down a temperature gradient coincident with the concentra-

gies with low capital and maintenance costs is critical to combat- tion gradient. Mills provides a clear derivation of LMTD [4].

ing global fresh water scarcity. Humidification-dehumidification This paper will follow a similar method to derive mean heat and

(HDH) is a promising desalination process because of its simple mass transfer driving forces, but will account for mass transfer

system design and compatibility with low-grade energy [1, 2]. and the resulting change in the heat capacity of the moist air

However, the high cost of conventional dehumidifiers due to the stream. Many authors have proposed mean temperature differ-

large amount of copper required inhibits the use of HDH in poor ences or corrections to LMTD for other heat exchanger configu-

and remote regions where its low-tech nature could be most use- rations [5].

ful. Failure to recognize the assumptions made in the derivation

Bubble column dehumidifiers reduce cost by moving the of LMTD has led some researchers to use it in heat and mass ex-

condensation process from expensive copper plates to the inner changers such as dehumidifiers. In their model of a bubble col-

surface of bubbles in fresh water. In a bubble column dehumid- umn dehumidifier, Narayan et al. [3] used a single-stream LMTD

ifier, shown in Fig. 1, moist gas (usually air) is bubbled through to model the sensible heat transfer driving force from the moist

a sparger into a column of fresh water cooled by a small coil air stream to the column fluid. Similarly, Chen et al. [6] used

running cold fluid (usually seawater). The high resistance to wa- LMTD to model the sensible heat transfer from the moist air in

ter vapor mass diffusion expected in dehumidifiers due to the a plate-fin tube dehumidifier. This work will show that although

high concentration of non-condensible gasses [1] is overcome by the standard LMTD is inappropriate for streams with mass ex-

condensing on a very large surface area of bubbles. Heat trans- change, the error in sensible heat transfer predicted will be on

fer coefficients between the liquid in the column and the cooling the order of 10%. Since the majority of the heat removed from

coil are so high that only a small copper coil is needed, thereby the moist air is latent, the error in the total predicted heat transfer

reducing the cost of the dehumidifier dramatically [3]. rate due to modeling the moist air stream with LMTD is small,

Simple and accurate modeling of bubble column dehumidi- but if possible, a simple algebraic equation for mean temperature

fiers (and bubble column humidifiers, which may also prove use- difference in a dehumidifier that accounts for mass transfer and

ful in HDH) will enable optimization of column designs for per- the corresponding changes in heat capacity flow rate should be

formance and cost. Developing algebraic equations such as the employed.

log-mean temperature difference (LMTD) to model heat transfer Both Narayan et al. and Chen et al. used a log-mean humid-

driving forces in parallel-flow and counterflow heat exchangers ity (in kg water/kg dry air) difference to model the mass transfer

is useful because it eliminates the need for integration of differ- driving force. Mills [7] uses a mass fraction driving force for

ential equations. However, the use of LMTD to approximate the mass transfer in his model of a humidifier which leads to a mass

mean temperature difference relies on the assumption of constant fraction profile similar to the one developed in this paper for a

2 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

dehumidifier. CA CB

Experiments demonstrate that mixing in the bubble column Rm

Qcond

ensures an essentially uniform liquid temperature, so the bubble

column will be modeled as two single stream heat exchangers of TB TC TD TE

equal heat transfer rate in contact with the isothermal column liq-

TA

uid: the seawater side, for which LMTD is appropriate, and the RAB RBC RCD RDE

gas side, which has mass exchange. Under conditions typical of

these systems, a log-mean mass fraction difference will be shown

to relate the latent heat transfer to the overall mass transfer coef-

ficient on the air side. An expression for the mean temperature Bubble A B C D E Coolant

difference of the moist gas and an algebraic approximation will

be presented. Given knowledge of the heat and mass transfer co-

efficients of the bubbles and cooling coil, the model developed

Coil

in this paper enables calculation of the condensation rate, total

heat transfer rate, and temperature pinch of a single stage bubble

column dehumidifier or humidifier.

FIGURE 2. RESISTANCE NETWORK MODEL, WITH TEMPER-

ATURES (T), CONCENTRATIONS (C), AND RESISTANCES (R)

THEORY

The dehumidifier will be modeled as two single-stream heat assuming constant specific heat of the coolant liquid, and

exchangers interacting with the same isothermal stream, one of

which has mass exchange. For the stream with mass exchange, Q̇coil = (UA∆TLM )coil (2)

mean heat and mass transfer driving forces will be found fol-

lowing a method analogous to that used to derive LMTD [4].

The equations and narrative will assume the device under con- where (UA)coil is based on the forced convection both inside and

sideration is a dehumidifier, but the model applies equally to a outside the coil. The LMTD for a single-stream heat exchanger

humidifier as long as careful attention is paid to signs. with no mass exchange, and whose non-isothermal stream expe-

riences a positive heat transfer is, as usual,

∆TLM = . (3)

The bubble column as a whole behaves like a parallel-flow Ti −TC

ln To −TC

device because both the moist air and coolant streams interact

with the column fluid, which is very well-mixed by the bubbles

and can be treated as isothermal. Because the coil is small com- It is assumed that the temperature difference across the thin

pared to the volume of bubbles, it will be assumed that the bub- boundary layer outside the bubble is very small compared to

bles do not have significant thermal interactions with the coil that the temperature difference inside the bubble because water has

are unmediated by the column fluid. Similarly, heat transfer be- a much greater thermal conductivity and smaller thermal diffu-

tween the air stream and the coil in the air gap above the bubble sivity (and thus much thinner boundary layer) than air. This will

column will be disregarded by this analysis [8]. Figure 2 shows be discussed in greater detail in the following section, but the

a simplified resistance network model of the system, where node result of this assumption is that the resistance between B and C

B is the inner surface of the bubble on the gas side, node C is the can be neglected, and the moist air stream can be modeled as

column fluid, D is the average tube temperature, and A and E rep- interacting directly with the isothermal column fluid. This ap-

resent average stream temperatures of the bubbles and coolant, proximation greatly simplifies modeling.

respectively. For a steady pool temperature, both the sensible Applying conservation of energy to the entire air stream, as

heat transfer from A to B and the latent heat released by con- in Fig. 3,

densation at B are transferred through the rest of the resistance

network to the coolant. The total heat transfer into the coolant 0 = Q̇s + ṁa [ha (Ti ) − ha (To )] + ṁw,o [hw (Ti ) − hw (To )]

fluid is

+ (ṁw,i − ṁw,o )[hw (Ti ) − hw (TC )], (4)

Q̇coil = ṁcoil c p,coil [Tcoil,o − Tcoil,i ], (1) and assuming constant specific heat capacities of the air and wa-

3 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

IN Heat and Mass Transfer Coefficients

OUT

It is important to verify the assumption of constant heat and

mass transfer coefficients that will be employed in the driving

ha (Ti ) m a ha (To ) force model. However, detailed modeling of heat and mass trans-

hw (To ) fer coefficients is beyond the scope of this paper. Because bubble

m w,o

hw (Ti ) columns have primarily been used for gas-liquid reactions where

w ,i m

m w, o the mass transfer is controlled by the diffusion of the gas into

hw (TC ) a liquid, many past studies have addressed the heat and mass

transfer coefficients outside a rising bubble and neglected any re-

Q S sistance inside [9]. To show that the inner transfer coefficient can

be assumed constant for driving force modeling purposes, a scal-

CONDENSING ing argument can be used to approximate the entry length over

which the heat and mass transfer coefficients inside the bubble

FIGURE 3. CONSERVATION OF ENERGY FOR AIR STREAM reach steady values. Inside the bubble, diffusion and convection

WITH CONDENSATION OCCURRING JUST OUTSIDE THE CON- may both contribute to the heat and mass transfer, but a conser-

TROL VOLUME vative estimate of entry length will assume that no convection

occurs (since convection would shorten the entry length). Bub-

ble velocity is estimated with Mendelson’s wave analogy to be

ter vapor such that around v = 0.2 m/s [10]. The bubble is within its entry length at

short times, around Fo≤ 0.2, when the thermal boundary layer

ha (T1 ) − ha (T2 ) = c p,a [T1 − T2 ] (5) inside the bubble is still developing [4]. Under typical condi-

tions, the entry length for a bubble of diameter D = 4 mm can be

and approximated by Eqn. (10):

Le = vt ≈ ≈ 7 mm (10)

4α

Eqn. (7) gives the sensible heat transfer rate into the moist air,

which in the case of a dehumidifier will be negative:

Since a typical bubble column is at least 150 mm deep to en-

sure immersion of the cooling coil [3], the entry region is a suffi-

Q̇s = (ṁa c p,w + ṁw,o c p,o )(To − Ti ) ciently small fraction of the column that the constant heat transfer

+ c p,w (ṁw,i − ṁw,o )(TC − Ti ). (7) coefficient assumption is appropriate. Assuming a Lewis num-

ber of order 1 for the moist air, the mass diffusion entry length

In this equation, the first righthand side term represents the is comparable, so a constant mass transfer coefficient can also be

sensible heat lost by the moist air stream that passes through the assumed.

column and the second represents the sensible cooling of water The heat transfer coefficients inside and outside the coil can

vapor that diffuses to the liquid surface, at TC , and condenses also be taken to be constant along the length of the coil. In lam-

there. The latent heat of vaporization is not present in Eqn. (7) inar flow, secondary flows induced by the coil curvature signif-

because the heat released is absorbed on the liquid side of the icantly reduce the radial length scale for convection (see Mori

bubble surface, which is not part of the air stream. The latent heat and Nakayama [11]) compared to a straight tube, thus shorten-

transfer rate into the liquid can be computed from the change in ing the thermal entry length inside the coil. These secondary

water vapor mass flow rate in the moist air stream, which is equal flows also significantly raise the inside heat transfer coefficient

to the rate of condensation: above the straight pipe value, scaling as hDE ∼ (Dcoil /Dturn )1/4 ,

where Dturn is the diameter of coil winding. For example, the

Q̇l = h f g (ṁw,i − ṁw,o ) = h f g (ṁcond ). (8) curved pipe Nusselt number was nearly ten times the straight

pipe value for the cooling coil used in the bubble column de-

humidifier tested in [8]. In turbulent flow, a short entry length

Assuming no heat is lost to the environment, the total steady

is expected regardless of coil curvature, though the curvature-

heat transfer rate into the coolant is the sum of the latent and

induced augmentation of the heat transfer coefficient does ex-

sensible heat transfers to the column fluid:

tend, to a lesser extent, into turbulent flow [12]. Outside the coil,

the heat transfer coefficient is expected to be approximately con-

Q̇coil = −Q̇s + Q̇l = ṁcoil c p,coil [Tcoil,o − Tcoil,i ]. (9) stant so long as the flow conditions are consistent in the vicinity

4 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

of the entire coil, e.g. for a single loop placed centrally on a In high orifice velocity gas sparging, bubbles will be neither

symmetrical sparger. spherical nor uniform in size, and correlations from the litera-

Estimating the heat and mass transfer coefficients inside and ture for interfacial area should be used to compute the effective

outside the bubble will help verify the approximation of a negli- perimeter [14].

gible temperature gradient outside the bubble. The bubbles are

large enough that the bubble surface can be treated as free, and

Mass Fraction Profile

the temperature profiles both inside and outside can be approxi-

The condensation rate is regulated by diffusion of water va-

mated as semi-infinite slabs moving at the bubble

pterminal veloc- por through the moist air to the bubble surface, which is assumed

ity. The thermal boundary layer will grow as παx/v. Using

to have the temperature of the column fluid. The partial pres-

a characteristic length of the bubble diameter, the heat transfer

sure of water vapor at the bubble surface is equal to the satura-

coefficient can then be approximated by conduction through the

tion pressure at that temperature. It will be assumed that no mist

boundary layer thickness as in Eqn. (11):

forms inside the bubbles and that all condensation occurs at the

bubble surface.

r

v Mass transfer is examined through a differential control vol-

h≈k (11) ume of length dx with a mass fraction-based mass transfer coef-

παD

ficient K with units of [kg/m2 -s] such that:

For typical dehumidifier operation temperatures and 4 mm

bubbles, hAB ≈ 20 W/m2 -K and hBC ≈ 7000 W/m2 -K, confirm- d ṁcond (x) = KPdx[m(x) − mC ]. (14)

ing the assumption that hAB hBC . Even considering that the

heat transfer rate outside the bubble is greater due to the latent In Eqn. (14), a dilute mixture of water vapor in air is as-

heat transferred to the bubble surface, the heat transfer coefficient sumed such that a mass fraction difference can represent the mass

outside the bubble should is so much greater that the temperature transfer driving force, as in Mills’ humidifier model [7]. The sat-

difference between B and C can be neglected in the analysis of urated bubble surface mass fraction is

the mean heat and mass transfer driving forces.

psat (TC )

mC = . (15)

Rw TC ρma (TC )

Equivalent Length and Perimeter

For simplicity, the bubble stream will be modeled as a

stream having an equivalent length and perimeter. The equiva- Steady-state conservation of mass demands that

lent length L is related to the superficial (u) and terminal (v) ve-

locities, gas holdup ε and column liquid height H by Eqn. (12). d ṁcond (x) = ṁw (x) − ṁw (x + dx), (16)

v so the differential equation for water mass flow rate becomes:

L= εH (12)

u

d ṁw (x)

= −KP[m(x) − mC ]. (17)

A wide array of experimental correlations for holdup can be dx

found in the literature, depending on the choice of gas and liquid,

operating conditions, sparger design, and column configuration Assuming the change in moist air mass flow rate is small,

[13].

The equivalent perimeter, P, which satisfies the relationship ṁcond

1, (18)

PL = A , where A is the total surface area of bubbles entrained in ṁma,i

the column, is

then

6V̇ma,i

P= , (13)

vD ṁw (x) ≈ m(x)ṁma,i (19)

face area due to vapor condensation and temperature change, and

a nearly constant rise velocity. The density of the moist air can be dm(x) KP

=− [m(x) − mC ]. (20)

calculated by assuming an ideal mixture of air and water vapor. dx ṁma,i

5 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

Solving for m(x) and applying the boundary condition

m(x = 0) = mi gives the water mass fraction profile:

a ha (T ( x))

m a ha (T ( x dx))

m

(−K ∗ x∗ )

m(x∗ ) = mC + [mi − mC ]e , (21) w ( x)hw (T ( x))

m m w ( x dx)hw (T ( x dx))

AIR

where WATER x x dx

cond hw (TC ) dQ s ( 0)

dm

∗ x

x = (22)

L

FIGURE 4. CONSERVATION OF ENERGY ON A DIFFEREN-

and the mass transfer NTU, K ∗ , is: TIAL CONTROL VOLUME OF MOIST AIR

KPL

K∗ = . (23) where the sensible heat transfer rate into the differential element

ṁma,i is

The mean mass fraction difference, ∆m, is defined by:

and d ṁcond is defined by Eqn. (16).

ṁcond The latent heat of vaporization does not appear in the first

∆m = . (24)

KPL law for the chosen control volume because the diffusing water

leaves as vapor and condenses just outside the control volume.

Evaluation of Eqn. (21) at the outlet gives the expected outlet The latent heat is then assumed to be carried away across the thin

mass fraction: liquid-side thermal boundary layer into the well-mixed column.

Taking the limit of small dx leads to the differential form of

mo = mC + [mi − mC ]e(−K

∗)

(25) conservation of energy, assuming, again, constant specific heats.

d ṁw

Combining Eqns. (19), (23), (24) and (25) gives the mean 0 = c p,w +UP (T (x) − TC )

dx

mass fraction difference, which in this case is a log mean mass dT dT

fraction difference: + c p,w ṁw (x) + c p,a ṁa (29)

dx dx

mi − mo Next we define a dimensionless temperature Θ:

∆m = . (26)

ln mmoi −mC

−mC

T (x∗ ) − TC

Θ(x∗ ) ≡ . (30)

The log-mean density difference can be used in Eqn. (24) to Ti − TC

find the condensation rate, which can then be used in Eqn. (8) to

compute the latent heat transfer rate. Substituting in the water mass flow profile, Eqn. (21), and

nondimensionalizing gives a linear, homogeneous, first-order

ODE:

Temperature Profile

The sensible heat transfer from the bubbles to the column C −C

∗ i C ∗ (−K ∗ x∗ )

fluid is regulated by the temperature difference between the bulk 0= U − K e Θ(x∗ )

CC

air and the bubble surface. Figure 4 illustrates conservation of C(x∗ ) dΘ(x∗ )

mass and energy on a differential control volume of moist air + , (31)

inside the bubble, modeled as a stream with equivalent length CC dx∗

and perimeter:

where the heat transfer NTU is

d Q̇s = d ṁcond hw (TC ) + ṁa [ha (x + dx) − ha (x)] UPL

+ ṁw (x + dx)hw (T (x + dx)) − ṁw (x)hw (T (x)), (27) U∗ = , (32)

CC

6 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

and the heat capacity flow rates are The full solution for ∆T includes the ratio of dimensionless

heat and mass transfer coefficients:

Ci = ṁa c p,a + mi ṁma,i c p,w , (33)

(Ti − TC )(Ci −Co Θo )/CC

∆T = ∗ . (41)

1 + UK ∗ ln CCoi − ln(Θo )

Solving for ∆T without U ∗ and M ∗ presents a challenge

and because it appears in both exponents of Eqn. (38). However,

Eqn. (41) can be modified by relating U ∗ and K ∗ to the Lewis

∗ x∗ factor, using the specific heat of the saturated mixture near the

C(x∗ ) = CC + (Ci −CC )e−K (35) bubble surface [7, 15].

Solution of Eqn. (31) gives the dimensionless temperature profile U ∗ UPL ṁma,i U

of the moist air along its path through the bubble column: ∗

= ≈ = Le f (42)

K CC KPL Kc p,ma (TC )

U ∗ +1

K∗

∗ x∗ ) Ci Various Lewis factor correlations based on the Lewis num-

Θ(x∗ ) = e(−U . (36)

C(x∗ ) ber have been proposed, but Lewis himself found that for air-

water mixtures Le f ≈ 1 [16]. Therefore, for dehumidifiers con-

If Eqn. (36) excluded the second righthand term, the tem- densing water out of air, the first approximation for ∆T is

perature profile would be consistent with the profile assumed in

the usual derivation of LMTD. However, this term appears for (Ti − TC )(Ci −Co Θo )

two reasons: the decreasing heat capacity of the moist air stream ∆T1 = 2 . (43)

as water condenses, and the thermal energy left in the moist air CC ln ΘCCi 2

o o

stream from water vapor cooling as it diffuses to the bubble sur-

face. The accuracy can be improved by iterating as follows:

The relevant mean temperature difference ∆T is defined as ∆Tn = h i. (44)

Ci −ΘoCo Ti −TC ∆m Ci

the solution to the equation CC CC ∆Tn−1 mi −mo + 1 ln Co − ln(Θo )

Q̇s = −UPL∆T. (37) The temperature profiles that lead to the computation of

∆TLM , ∆T1 , and ∆T = ∆T∞ are plotted in Fig. 5 for a bubble col-

Combining Eqns. (7), (23), (24), (32), (33), (36), and (37) umn dehumidifier with typical operating conditions and approxi-

at the air stream exit, x∗ = 1, leads to an expression for the mate heat and mass transfer coefficients. The temperature profile

mean temperature difference, ∆T , which drives heat transfer in implicitly assumed by using the standard LMTD is consistently

the moist air stream of the bubble column dehumidifier: lower than those which take into account changing heat capacity

and mass transfer, leading to approximately a 10% underestima-

C −C Θ T −T

tion of the mean temperature difference. The heating due to mass

1+ i C o o i∆T C m ∆m C −C Θ T −T

Ci C i −mo − i C o o i∆T C diffusion down a temperature gradient leads to a higher tempera-

Θo = e C , (38)

Co ture than predicted by LMTD, and the reduction in heat capacity

leads to the steeper slope at low values of Θ. The temperature

where profiles of ∆T∞ and ∆T1 are almost indistinguishable, so as long

as Le f ≈ 1, Eqn. (43) for ∆T1 can be used to approximate the

mean temperature difference, which is presented in dimensional

Co = ṁa c p,a + ṁw,o c p,w , and (39)

form in Eqn. (45):

To − TC ∆T ≈ ∆T1 = 2 . (45)

(Ti −TC )

Θo =

Ti − TC

. (40) CC ln CCi 2 (T −T )

o o C

7 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

1 CONCLUSION

ΔT_LM A model was developed which treats a bubble column de-

0.9 humidifier as one single-stream heat exchanger and one single-

ΔT_∞

stream heat and mass exchanger in contact with isothermal col-

0.8 ΔT_1 umn liquid. Algebraic expressions were developed for the mean

heat and mass transfer driving forces. The LMTD commonly

0.7 used to model the mean temperature difference in heat exchang-

0.6 ers does not apply to the stream with both heat and mass ex-

change due to: (a) the changing heat capacity flow rate; and (b)

0.5 heating of the moist air stream by diffusion of water vapor down

Θ

0.4 exchange, a log-mean mass fraction difference was shown to be

the driving force for mass transfer, and a mean temperature dif-

0.3

ference was presented which drives sensible heat transfer. With

0.2 relevant heat and mass transfer coefficients taken from the liter-

ature, these simple algebraic expressions can be used to model

0.1 heat and mass exchange in a bubble column dehumidifier or hu-

midifier.

0

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

x* ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We would like to acknowledge support from the Center for

FIGURE 5. DIMENSIONLESS TEMPERATURE PROFILE

Clean Water and Clean Energy at MIT and KFUPM. The first

author would also like to thank the National Science Foundation,

the Flowers Family Fellowship, and the Pappalardo Fellowship

This equation can be used to find the mean temperature dif- for partially funding this work.

ference driving sensible heat transfer in the moist air stream of a

bubble column dehumidifier or humidifier. Because of the sign

conventions used in this work, ∆T will be negative in the case of a REFERENCES

humidifier, resulting in positive sensible heat transfer into the hu- [1] Ettouney, H., 2005. “Design and analysis of humidifica-

midifying air stream. If the inlet, outlet, and bubble surface heat tion dehumidification desalination process”. Desalination,

capacities are set equal, Eqn. (45) reduces to the standard LMTD 183(1-3), pp. 341 – 352.

for a single-stream heat exchanger in which the non-isothermal [2] Narayan, G. P., Sharqawy, M. H., Summers, E. K., V, J.

stream is experiencing a negative heat transfer. H. L., Zubair, S. M., and Antar, M., 2010. “The poten-

tial of solar-driven humidification-dehumidification desali-

The mean temperature and mass fraction differences are

nation for small-scale decentralized water production”. Re-

used in the energy balance for a a column with steady liquid tem-

newable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(4), pp. 1187

perature and no heat loss to the environment:

– 1201.

[3] Narayan, G. P., Sharqawy, M. H., Lam, S., Das, S. K., and

(UA∆TLM )coil = UPL∆T + h f g KPL∆m. (46) Lienhard V, J. H., 2012. “Bubble columns for condensation

at high concentrations of non condensable gas: Heat trans-

fer model and experiments”. AIChE Journal, Accepted,

With the heat and mass transfer coefficients and the defini- pp. n/a–n/a.

tions of effective length and perimeter, the system consisting of [4] Mills, A. F., 1999. Heat Transfer. Prentice Hall.

Eqns. (1), (7), (8), (15), (46), and Eqn. (47), [5] Nagle, W. M., 1933. “Mean temperature differences in mul-

tipass heat exchangers”. Industrial & Engineering Chem-

istry, 25(6), pp. 604–609.

ṁma,i mi − ṁma,o mo

∆m = , (47) [6] Chen, T. D., Conklin, J. C., and Baxter, V. D., 1999. “Dehu-

KPL midification: Prediction of condensate flow rate for plate-

fin tube heat exchangers using the latent j factor”. In Pro-

can be solved for the six unknown quantities: Tcoil,o , Ta,o , TC , mo , ceedings of the ASME/JSME Joint Thermal Engineering

mC , and finally the total heat transfer rate, Q̇coil . Conference, San Diego, CA.

8 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

[7] Mills, A., 2001. Mass Transfer. Prentice Hall.

[8] Tow, E. W., and Lienhard V, J. H., 2013. “Heat flux and

effectiveness in bubble column dehumidifiers for HDH de-

salination”. In Proceedings of the 2013 International De-

salination Association World Congress, Tianjin, China.

[9] Gumerov, N., 1996. “The heat and mass transfer of a vapor

bubble with translatory motion at high Nusselt numbers”.

International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 22(2), pp. 259 –

272.

[10] Mendelson, H. D., 1967. “Prediction of bubble termi-

nal velocities from wave theory”. AIChE Journal, 13(2),

pp. 250–253.

[11] Mori, Y., and Nakayama, W., 1965. “Study on forced con-

vective heat transfer in curved pipes: (1st report, laminar

region)”. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,

8(1), pp. 67 – 82.

[12] Mori, Y., and Nakayama, W., 1967. “Study of forced con-

vective heat transfer in curved pipes (2nd report, turbulent

region)”. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,

10(1), pp. 37 – 59.

[13] Akita, K., and Yoshida, F., 1973. “Gas holdup and volu-

metric mass transfer coefficient in bubble columns: Effects

of liquid properties”. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry

Process Design and Development, 12(1), pp. 76–80.

[14] van Krevelen, D. W., and Hoftijzer, P. J., 1950. “Studies of

gas-bubble formation calculation of interfacial area in bub-

ble contactors”. Chemical Engineering Progress, 46(1),

pp. 29–35.

[15] Kloppers, J. C., and Kroger, D. G., 2005. “The Lewis

factor and its influence on the performance prediction of

wet-cooling towers”. International Journal of Thermal Sci-

ences, 44(9), pp. 879 – 884.

[16] Lewis, W. K., 1922. “The evaporation of a liquid into a

gas”. Mechanical Engineering, 44, pp. 445–446.

9 Copyright

c 2013 by ASME

- Tutorial_3_Heat_Exchanger.pdfEnviado porBipin Giri
- Heat Transfer Calculations - Myer Kutz (McGraw-Hill, 2004)Enviado porfsijest
- CerInt2003Enviado porAleksandra Sander
- RPT 2015 SCEnviado porMuhd Mustaffa Kamal Abidin
- CondensationEnviado porShashi Mashal
- heatEnviado porultrakawe
- 244823848 Filmwise and Dropwise ExperimentEnviado porRizuan Hakim
- Heat Transfer_ ExercisesEnviado porKareem Hamza
- Data Sheet Massecuite D Heater Rev 0 (2)Enviado porrudiskw456
- Homework #2Enviado porLUISRO
- Solved Problems Heat TransferEnviado porFaisal Sadaat
- CH EN 3453 - HW 02 - 2014Enviado porDennis Ling
- cui2008.pdfEnviado porLuis Christopher
- Science DirectEnviado poralialavi2
- Effstock Article - Vertical Ground Heat Exchangers - A Review of Heat Flow ModelsEnviado porsaqi3633
- BMW to Use Engine Heat Losses to Gain 10-15% Fuel EconomyEnviado porRaj Gururaj
- CH RevisedEnviado porEjaz Anwar
- weldinglectures9-10-121030153810-phpapp02.pdfEnviado porJordArt GR
- 786d3bcf9d394c10a75c0665adb897eb6Enviado porgazwang478
- Design and Analysis of Plate Heat Exchanger With Co2 and r134a as Working fEnviado porIAEME Publication
- Three-dimensional Optimization of Staggered Finned Circular and Elliptic Tubes in Forced Convection - MatosEnviado porMeshal Al-mutairi
- 1111Enviado porregil01
- Heat Transfer Efficiency Analysis of Infant RadiantEnviado porGomathi Varshini
- Untitled 2Enviado porKr Nelson
- Generalized Correlation for Liquids Lect-7Enviado porJunaid
- Heat Transfer in Two-Phase Solid-Liquid Food Flows- A Review 1998Enviado porRadmila Garić Grulović
- 1-s2.0-S2214860416302032-mainEnviado porsamaisantos
- 07-1Enviado porAbianoAl-Affan
- 08_HeattransferEnviado poramundackal
- BP Refrigeration ReportEnviado porparkerbernard

- ME536_1Enviado porMajid Khan
- ME536_1Enviado porMajid Khan
- ME536_1Enviado porMajid Khan
- Solar StillEnviado porMajid Khan
- Cta Advertisement in UrduEnviado porMajid Khan
- Hajat_IstikhaaraEnviado poraminasalam
- 23-37-pmr-jan08Enviado porMajid Khan
- Hajat_IstikhaaraEnviado porMajid Khan
- Diesel+EnginesEnviado porFakhrur Rifa'i
- Thermal de SalEnviado porMajid Khan
- drshakib.pdfEnviado porMajid Khan
- 2018_19 Olin College Catalog (1)Enviado porMajid Khan
- 23-37-pmr-jan08Enviado porMajid Khan
- 23-37-pmr-jan08Enviado porMajid Khan
- ChuEnviado porMajid Khan
- aml715-38Enviado porMajid Khan
- Chapter2 - Combustion and Emissions - ME537Enviado porMajid Khan
- Porous Plates With Varying ViscosityEnviado porMajid Khan
- Ch4-sum-151Enviado porMajid Khan
- Ch1-FW-151Enviado porMajid Khan
- 1-s2.0-0017931094903786-mainEnviado porMajid Khan
- Formula SheetEnviado porMajid Khan
- Modelling_and_simulation_of_fluid_flow_i.pdfEnviado porMajid Khan
- Project List 172Enviado porMajid Khan
- Diseño Columna de HumidificaciónEnviado porJose Angel Beleño Alcazar
- SE_Getting_Started224.pdfEnviado porHugo Badin
- 1-s2.0-S0017931015301046-main (1)Enviado porMajid Khan
- Particulate Matter Formation and Its Control Methodoloies for Diesel Engine - A Comprehensive ReviewEnviado porMajid Khan
- Final TableEnviado porMajid Khan

- Welding FormulaEnviado porchirpynik
- Me- 302 e Dynamics of Machines Sessional Theory Total DurationEnviado porshrey_ecotechcars
- PGECET 2011 SyllabusEnviado porPrashanth Kumar
- Sensitivity Study on Brake Cooling PerformanceEnviado porvinaypatil
- 1997 Ding Wall 1 PhdEnviado porYusuf
- Optimal Design of a High Power High Frequency TransformerEnviado porPablo Kuziw
- 222072068 Conventional JacketsEnviado porkaye
- Heat Transfer EquipmentEnviado porSrinivas Bobby
- Paper 51Enviado porevo2005_2006
- Tutorial problems on air conditioning_2018Enviado porAnonymous 8IQazbXqZF
- 153091360-Fluid-Bed-Drying.pdfEnviado porsouhir gritli
- DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF AIR PREHEATEREnviado porTJPRC Publications
- 161605-161906-HMTEnviado porKislay Choudhary
- Heat ExchangersEnviado porthirumugam197
- PrasadEnviado porAnonymous jbWyBgJe
- Solution Geankoplis Chapter 4Enviado porFitraella
- Design of Compact Plate Fin Heat ExchangerEnviado porIndra Uchiha
- Heat and Mass Transfer by S K Mondal T&QEnviado porajaykrishna_99
- Experimentally Investigate The Heat Transfer Performance Of Annular FinsEnviado porInnovative Research Publications
- Heat-Transfer-Lab-Manual.pdfEnviado porAndriya Narasimhulu
- Heat Requirement CalculationsEnviado porTrishul Nath Pallay
- Expt. 7 Finned TubeEnviado porPradeep Diwakar
- Heat Transfer From Extended SurfacesEnviado porHala Salah
- Mid Semester Question 2017 KeyEnviado porMihir Kumar Mech
- Heat and Mass Transfer in Structured PackingsEnviado porVictor Vazquez
- Full Text 01Enviado porDr alla talal yassin
- 2002 - Uche - Comparison of heat transfer coefficient correlations for thermal desalination units.pdfEnviado porConstanzaMuñozSepúlveda
- MSC.Nastran 2002 Thermal Analysis User’s GuideEnviado porMSC Nastran Beginner
- Design Project Isaac FinalEnviado porIsaac Mohanadasan
- lecture notes on heat mass transfer.docEnviado porvis