2008, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (www.ashrae.org).

Published in ASHRAE Transactions, Volume 114, Part 1. For personal use only. Additional reproduction,
distribution, or transmission in either print or digital form is not permitted without ASHRAEs prior written permission.

NY-08-036

Using the Analogy Approach

to Extrapolate Performance Data
for Cooling Towers
John W. Mitchell, PhD

James E. Braun, PhD

Fellow ASHRAE

Fellow ASHRAE

ABSTRACT

tion available from catalogs or measurements to cover the

expected range of operation.
The analogy approach (Braun et al., 1989) provides a
general method for representing the performance of cooling
towers over a wide range of operation. The results from the
analog approach have been shown to agree with those from the
exact solution of the governing heat and mass transfer equations within about 2%. The analogy approach provides a methodology for extending catalog information to other operating
conditions, including water inlet and entering temperatures,
wet bulb temperature, air and water flow rates, and altitude.

--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Typically, catalog information for cooling towers is available only for a limited range of operating conditions for sea
level applications. The information is often not suitable for the
selection of a tower at other operating conditions (e.g., high
altitude, different ambient temperatures), the evaluation of
measured performance, or the simulation over a wide operating range. The analogy approach (Braun et al., 1989) provides
a general method for representing the performance of cooling
towers over a wide range of conditions. The accuracy of this
methodology is 2% compared to catalog values. The methodology is able to extend catalog information to other operating
conditions, including water inlet and entering temperatures,
wet bulb temperature, air and water flow rates, and altitude.
INTRODUCTION
Cooling towers are widely used in commercial air-conditioning applications. The selection of a cooling tower for a
given application is based on the heat rejection for design
conditions for the specific location. Design conditions vary
widely depending on the location, and the available catalog
information is usually for sea level operation and limited in
terms of the range of operating variables. Additionally, it is
often desired to evaluate the measured performance of a tower
against that expected, and available catalog data need to be
extended to cover the experimental conditions. Further, in
simulating the performance of an HVAC system for building
design or evaluation, the dependence of the performance of a
cooling tower on operating variables needs to be available over
a wide range of conditions. These considerations lead to the
need to develop a methodology to extend available informa-

METHODOLOGY
The analogy method for cooling towers is based on the
fundamental differential equations for heat and mass
exchange in a cooling tower (1). The analogy method will be
summarized, with the details and verification of the approach
given in Reference 1. The control volume showing mass and
energy flows for a counterflow cooling tower section is given
in Figure 1. The fill volume measured from the top of the tower
is a convenient coordinate. The relevant conservation relations
are an overall tower energy balance and an air stream energy
balance that relates the increase in the air enthalpy to the
energy transfer due to the evaporating water.
A simplifying assumption is that since the water loss is
typically 1 to 5% of the total flow the water flow rate is
constant throughout the tower. Assuming that the water flow
rate is constant allows the overall energy balance relation for
the tower to be written as:
dT w
dh a
m w c w ---------- = m a -------dV
dV

(1)

John W. Mitchell is the Kaiser Professor Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. James E. Braun
is a professor of Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

2008 ASHRAE

300

Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine

Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001

Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

It is convenient to define an equivalent capacitance rate

m* that is analogous to the thermal capacitance rate C* used
in sensible heat exchanger analysis.
m a c s
m*= ------------m w c w

(5)

The energy balance, Equation 4, is rewritten in terms of

enthalpies using the equivalent capacitance ratio m* as:
dh a
1 dh w, sat
-------- = ------- -----------------m* dV
dV

(6)

The energy balance on the air stream relates the change of

enthalpy of the air to the transfer of energy from the water
surface:
hc
dh a
m a -------- = ----- A ( h w, sat h a )
dV
cp

(7)

It is convenient to introduce a non-dimensional transfer

coefficient defined as:

Figure 1

Mass and energy flows for a cooling tower

section.

To develop the analogy relations, the energy balance is

formulated in terms of enthalpy. An effective specific heat is
introduced to allow the water temperature Tw to be replaced
by the saturated air enthalpy hw,sat evaluated at the water
temperature Tw. The effective specific heat is defined so that
the water temperature and the saturated air enthalpy at the
water temperature are related as
dT w
dh w, sat
c s ---------- = ----------------dV
dV

(2)

The effective specific heat, cs, is evaluated as the change

in enthalpy with temperature along the saturation line. The
appropriate value for the entire cooling tower process is based
on the water and air inlet and outlet states, and is evaluated
numerically as:
dh w, sat
h w, sat, i h w, sat, o
= --------------------------------------------
c s = ------------------
T w, i T w, o
dT w saturati on

(3)

(8)

dh a
Ntu
-------- = --------- ( h w, sat h a )
V
dV

(9)

Equations 6 and 9 are analogous to those for a sensible

heat transfer exchanger (see Reference 2) with the enthalpies
replacing the temperatures. This allows the effectiveness-Ntu
relations that were developed for heat exchangers to be
directly used for cooling towers.
In a heat exchanger, the heat transfer is given in terms of
effectiveness and maximum heat transfer rate. The total
energy transfer for the tower can then also be represented by
an effectiveness and a maximum energy transfer rate. The
maximum transfer would occur when the air leaving the tower
is saturated at the water inlet temperature, and is given by.

Q = m a ( h w, sat, i h a, i )

Effectiveness deleted from Equation 10

The tower energy transfer rate is given by the product of
the effectiveness and the maximum energy transfer rate:

Q = m a ( h w, sat, i h a, i )

--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`

(4)

Q = m w c w ( T w, i T w, o )

(11)

(12)

The correspondence between the cooling tower and the

sensible heat exchanger parameters is given in Table 1:
In reference 1 the results using the analogy method are
compared to those obtained by integrating the governing heat

ASHRAE Transactions

Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine

Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

(10)

The energy transfer rate is also given by an energy balance

on the water, using the inlet water flow rate, as

Incorporating the effective specific heat allows the overall

energy balance, Equation 1, to be rearranged and written in
terms of enthalpies as:
m a c s dh a
dh w, sat
- ------------------------ = ------------m w c w dV
dV

h c AV
Ntu = -----------------m a c p

301
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

and mass transfer equations through the cooling tower. The

energy transfer rate from the analogy method has been found
to agree with the exact solution within 2%. The analogy
approach is established as an accurate representation of cooling tower performance.
EXTENSION OF CATALOG INFORMATION TO
DIFFERENT OPERATING CONDITIONS
Cooling tower manufacturers provide enough information to select a tower to reject a given amount of heat at different ambient and operating conditions. In general, they do not
provide sufficient information to determine the basic cooling
tower parameters. The analogy approach provides a method
for estimating capacity at different operating conditions.
Catalog data for two sizes (Models 1 and 2) of cross-flow
cooling towers made by a manufacturer for two different fan
powers (A and B) are given in Table 2. or each model, the
capacity, which is the maximum water flow rate (in gpm) for
which the inlet (Ti,) and outlet (To) temperatures (F) will be
achieved at the indicated atmospheric wet bulb temperature
(Twb) is given. The power of the tower fan is also given. For
example, the fifth column shows that at a wet bulb temperature
of 80 F, model 1 A will cool a water flow of 53 gpm from 95
F to 85 F. The fan power required for the air flow is 1 horsepower.
The catalog information in Table 2 includes the effects of
three variables: wet bulb temperature, inlet temperature, and
outlet temperature. The data correspond to two different tower
water temperature differences (i.e., ranges) of 10F and 15F.
The approach to the wet bulb temperature is the same for both
ranges at a given wet bulb temperature. The tower capacity
(energy transfer rate) is the product of the flow rate, specific
heat, and range.
If the condition for which the capacity is desired is for
different inlet states or wet-bulb temperature but the same air
and water flow rates, then the only parameter that needs to be
changed is the effective specific heat cs. However, if either the
air or water flows rates for the desired condition are different,
a new value of the overall conductance needs to be determined
because the conductance is a function on the air and water flow
rates. A correlation that relates the overall conductance to the
flow rates and design values uses a power relation (Braun et
al., 1989):
m w m a
- -----------------h c AV = ( h c AV )base -----------------
m w, base m a, base

(13)

where the exponent n may be determined from data at different operating conditions. If data are not available, a value for
n of 0.4 is a satisfactory approximation. The relation is written
in terms of the Ntu using Equation 8.

--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,

302

m w n m a n 1
- -----------------Ntu = Ntu base ----------------- m w, base m a, base

Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine

Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

(14)

An example will be carried out to illustrate how catalog

information at one operating condition can be used to estimate
the performance at other ambient conditions. A representation
of a cooling tower can then be developed and the performance
evaluated over the range of operating conditions.
The example will use as a base the performance information for Model 1 B with a 2 hp fan (Table 1) operating at a wet
bulb temperature of 75F with an inlet temperature of 95F
and a range of 10F. The capacity is 107 gpm. The performance for the three conditions listed below will be estimated.
The catalog capacity given in Table 1 for these conditions is
listed in parentheses.
a.
b.
1.

A wet bulb temperature of 64F and a range of 10F (131

gpm).
A wet bulb temperature of 64F and a range of 15F (96
gpm).
A wet bulb temperature of 64F and a range of 15F with
1 hp fan (75 gpm).

The base operating conditions are used to determine the

base value of the Ntu. The water flow rate capacity is 107 gpm,
which corresponds to 53,553 lb/hr. The cooling capacity,
which is the product of the flow rate, specific heat, and range
is 535,530 Btu/hr.
The effectiveness is determined from the relation for the
maximum heat transfer to the air, Equation 11. However, the
air flow rate for this tower is not known so the effectiveness
and value of m* cannot be determined. The assumption is
made that the value of m* is unity. For well-design cooling
towers the value of m* is on the order of unity and so this is a
reasonable assumption. This allows an air flow to be determined from the definition of m*, Equation 5. The value of the
effective specific heat cs is found using the saturated air
enthalpy at the water inlet (Btu/lbm) and outlet temperature
(Btu/lbm) divided by the temperature difference (Equation 3):
( h w, sat, i h w, sat, o )
c s = -----------------------------------------------Range
( 63.2 49.3 ) ( Btu/lbm )
-------------------------------------------------------- = 1.384Btu/lbm
10 ( F )

The air flow rate is then

m w c w
53, 553 ( lbm/hr )*1.00(Btu/lb F)
m a = m* -------------- = 1* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------1.384 ( Btu/lbm F )
cs
= 38, 700 lbm/hr

The effectiveness is then determined from Equation 11.

The enthalpy of the saturated air at the inlet water temperature
and the entering air are 63.2 and 38.4 Btu/lb, respectively.

Q
= -------------------------------------------------
m a ( h w, sat, in h a, in )
535, 530 ( Btu/hr )
= ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ = 0.558
38, 700 ( lb/hr )* ( 63.2 38.4 ) ( Btu/lb )

ASHRAE Transactions
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

Table 1.

Analogous Parameters for Sensible Heat Exchangers and Cooling Towers

Parameter

Sensible Heat
Exchanger

Cooling Tower

Capacitance
rate ratio

C*

m*

Number of
Transfer Units

Ntu

Ntu*

Effectiveness

= f ( C*,Ntu )

= f ( m*,Ntu* )

Energy flow

C mi n ( T h, i T c, i )

m a ( h w, sat, i h a, i )

Table 2.
Model

1A

Fan
power
(hp)
1

Catalog Values of Cooling Tower Performance

Tower
Vol
(ft3)

Ti (F)

95

100

95

100

90

95

90

95

To (F)

85

85

85

85

80

80

80

80

80

80

75

75

70

70

64

64

140

Twb (F)
V (gpm)

53

42

84

63

74

56

102

75

68

53

107

80

95

71

131

96

87

69

137

103

122

91

168

123

101

79

160

120

142

106

197

144

1B

140

2A

210

2B

210

V (gpm)
V (gpm)
V (gpm)

The Ntu can then be determined from the expression for

cross flow heat exchangers (Kays and London, 1964). The
value of Ntu corresponding to an m* of unity and an effectiveness of 0.558 is 1.504. Although the values of effectiveness
and Ntu are not correct since they are based on the assumption of an m* of unity, the combination of these values is found
to yield the correct total heat transfer.
The extension can now be made to situation a), in which
the wet bulb temperature is 64F. Using the enthalpies of saturated air at the new water inlet and outlet conditions of 55.8
and 43.6 Btu/lb, respectively, the new value for cs of 1.22 Btu/
lb-F is computed. The three coupled equations that need to be
solved simultaneously for the new condition are Equation 5 for
m*, Equation 8 for Ntu that includes the effect of the new
water flow rate from Equation 14, and the expression for the
effectiveness of a cross-flow exchanger. The solution of these
three equations yields m* = 0.723, Ntu = 1.629, and = 0.634.
The energy transfer can then be computed from Equation 11
using the value of the inlet air enthalpy of 29.2 Btu/lb for this
condition.

Q = 0.634*38,700(lb/hr)*(55.8 29.2(Btu/lb)=653,000 Btu/hr

The water flow rate is then determined from the expression for capacity, Equation 12.

Q
m = --------------------------------------------c w ( T w, in T w, out )
653, 000 ( Btu/hr )
= --------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 65, 300 lb/hr
1.00 ( Btu/lb F )* ( 90 80 ) ( F )

The flow rate of 65,300 lb/hr corresponds to 130.6 gpm.

This is essentially the same value as given in Table 1 for these
conditions of 131 gpm.
The same procedure was followed for the 15F range,
condition b). The flow rate was found to be 93.1 gpm, which
is within 3% of the catalog value of 96 gpm.
For the conditions represented by c), the air flow rate is
different from the base conditions. The actual values of the
flow rates are not given, and so the fan law relation between
power and flow rate is used to estimate the relative change in
flow rate. Fan power is proportional to the cubic power of flow
rate and the air flow rate at condition c) relative to the assumed
value for the base case is then:
Pc 1 3
m a, c = m a, base -------------
= 38, 700 (lb/hr)
P base
1 ( hp ) 1 3
--------------
= 30, 700 lb/hr
2 ( hp )

Following the calculations described earlier, the capacity

is determined to be 76.6 gpm, which is within 2% of the catalog value for that condition of 75 gpm.
The results for the extension of catalog information to
other design inlet conditions and other air and water flow rates
for Model 1 of Table 2 are summarized in Figure 2. The base
case conditions are for Model 2 B with a capacity of 107 gpm.
The extrapolated values cover a range from 35 to 130 gpm.
The standard deviation of the extrapolations for the cooling
capacity agree within about 4% (0.4 gpm) compared to the
catalog values. The analogy approach provides an accurate
--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

ASHRAE Transactions

Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine

Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

303
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

performance of a tower. The impact of different control strategies on the performance of other HVAC equipment in a
system could be evaluated.
EXTENSION OF CATALOG INFORMATION TO
DIFFERENT ALTITUDES

Figure 2 Plot of predicted value of capacity vs. catalog

value.

--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

method of extrapolating performance over a wide range of

design conditions.
In extrapolating the data to other conditions, it is important to ensure that the nozzles and sump are appropriately
sized. The catalog data presented in Table 2 for a given model
apply to a fixed tower geometry except for the orifice sizes in
the distribution nozzles and the pipe diameters used for inlet
and outlet piping connections. The sizes of these components
depend on the design flow rate. If during operation the water
flow is significantly higher or lower than the design flow (on
the order of 10 to 20%), then the performance may be affected.
For water flow rates lower than the design value the head over
the nozzles may be too low for uniform flow over the media
and for higher water flow rates the basins may overflow. For
a given tower in which the flows vary significantly the performance may deviate from that predicted by extension of the
model relations presented here. Accurate performance at offdesign conditions needs to be obtained from the manufacturer.
The results show that the analogy method can be used to
determine the basic parameters for a cooling tower. The
assumption that the value of m* is unity yields values for the
air flow rate, Ntu, and effectiveness that are not correct but
that do combine to give the actual heat transfer at the base
conditions. The parameters determined in this manner
provide accurate estimates of tower performance at design
conditions. Even with limited the catalog information or
experimental measurements, a performance map over a wider
range of ambient and operating conditions can be developed
using the analogy approach. This would facilitate the selection of a cooling tower for a given application where the
design conditions are different from those available. A model
based on the analogy method could useful in simulating the

Data provided by cooling tower manufacturers is for sea

level conditions and may not accurately reflect the performance at high altitude conditions. The analogy method can
also be used to extrapolate catalog data to different altitudes.
First of all, the analogy method will be used to study the influence of altitude on performance.
There are several effects of altitude. Lower air densities at
higher altitude lead to lower air mass flow rates and heat transfer coefficients for a given fan and tend to reduce the heat
rejection capacity from that stated in the catalog. However, the
driving potential for heat and mass transfer (the enthalpy
potential) actually increases with increasing altitude due to
reduced partial pressure of the water vapor.
A cooling tower fan delivers a constant volume flow rate.
Since the air density decreases with increasing altitude the
mass flow rate is approximately proportional to the air density.
It is useful to consider a volumetric heat rejection capacity to
evaluate the effect of altitude. The heat rejection per unit
volume of air flow is defined as

Q v = a ( h w, sat, i h a, i )

To determine the errors associated with using sea-level

data at higher altitudes, it is necessary to consider the effect of
altitude on air density, air enthalpies, and device effectiveness.
Air density is proportional to air pressure at a constant
temperature. To generically evaluate the effect of altitude, the
change in atmospheric pressure with elevation relative to the
sea level value is modeled as
p = p0 e

a z

(16)

At 10,000 ft (3000 m) above sea level, the air pressure and

density are about 30% less than at sea level. The air density
decreases a little more than the air pressure because the humidity ratio increases as the total pressure decreases for a given
dry bulb and wet bulb temperature. Without considering other
effects, Equation 15 indicates that the capacity of a cooling
tower would decrease by about 30% at this altitude.
The enthalpy potential is the difference between the
enthalpy of saturated air at the inlet water temperature and the
enthalpy of the atmospheric air. Figure 3 shows the influence
of altitude on enthalpy potential for a fixed air inlet dry bulb
and different wet bulb and water inlet temperatures. For a
given rating condition, the enthalpy potential increases by
about 40% at 10,000 ft as compared with sea level. The effect
of altitude is more pronounced for higher water and wet bulb
temperatures.

304

Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine

Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

(15)

ASHRAE Transactions
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

with Reynolds number raised to a power that is less than unity.

As a result, the convection coefficient can be estimated from
the convection coefficient at sea level according to
a m
h c = h c, 0 ----------
a, 0

(20)

The exponent m is generally between about 0.3 and 1.0,

and was taken to be 0.8 for this study.
Using Equations 17 and 14 with the assumption of
constant volumetric flow, the value of Ntu is related to the
value at sea level with
c pm, 0 a, 0 1 m
Ntu = Ntu 0 ------------- ----------
c pm a

Figure 3 Effect of altitude on enthalpy potential.

The enthalpy potential increases with altitude because of

the dependence of humidity ratio on pressure. Using property
relations for humid air, the enthalpy potential is
h w, sat, i h a, i = c pm ( T w, i T a, i ) + ( w w, sat, i w a, i)h f g

(17)

The first term in Equation 17 is associated with the sensible heat transfer from the water surface to the air. For given
water surface and air dry bulb temperatures, this term is essentially constant with changing altitude. For given dry bulb and
wet bulb temperatures, the specific heat increases by about
1.5% at 10,000 ft. The second term in Equation 17 is associated with the evaporation of moisture from the water surface
to the air. The humidity ratio potential (w sat,w,i wa,i) increases
with altitude due to a decrease in pressure.
The increase in humidity ratio difference with altitude can
be shown using the definition of humidity ratio.
pv
w = 0.622 -------------p pv

(18)

At the water surface, the vapor pressure is the saturation

pressure associated with the water temperature and does not
vary with altitude. For the atmospheric air, the vapor pressure
is evaluated as a function of dry bulb and wet bulb temperature
and also does not vary with altitude. Therefore, the humidity
ratio increases with altitude since the total pressure decreases.
The increase in humidity ratio is greater for the vapor at the
water surface because of the higher vapor pressure, and the
effect is greater for the higher vapor pressures associated with
higher water temperatures and inlet wet bulb temperatures.
The mass transfer coefficient is related to the heat transfer
coefficient through the Lewis relation
hc
h m = -------c pm

(19)

For turbulent flow such as found over cooling tower

surfaces, the convection transfer coefficients generally vary

(21)

The exponent (1-m) is equal to 0.2 for turbulent flow. For

the same volume air flow rate and the same water mass flow
rate, the cooling tower effectiveness then increases with altitude as the density decreases.
Figure 4 shows the impact of altitude on convection coefficient and number of transfer units. At 10,000 feet above sea
level, the convection coefficient is reduced by about 25%,
whereas Ntu increases by less than 10%.
The impact of the change in Ntu with altitude on effectiveness depends upon the magnitude of the Ntu at sea level.
The results shown in Figure 5 are based on the counter-flow
relation for effectiveness (Kays and London, 1964). For a high
value of Ntu and effectiveness, an increase in altitude results
in a small increase in effectiveness. However, for a less effective cooling tower the increase is more significant. This
increase counteracts the reduction due to air density depicted
in Figure 4.
For the same volume flow rate, an increase in altitude
leads to a reduced mass flow rate, a somewhat increased effectiveness and a significant increase in enthalpy potential.
Figure 6 shows the impact of altitude on the volumetric capacity for three different situations. The three cases were selected
to bound the range of performance effects of altitude for cooling towers. For low values of Ntu0 and high water and wet bulb
temperatures, the volumetric capacity increases slightly with
altitude. For high values of Ntu0 and low water and wet bulb
temperature case, the volumetric capacity decreases by 10% at
10,000 ft. However, for most design conditions, the volumetric
capacity decreases only slightly with altitude from that stated
in the catalog for sea level conditions.
In summary, the first step in correcting sea-level performance or catalog data for different altitudes is to determine a
correlation for Ntu at sea level (Ntu0) using Equation 14 as
outlined earlier. The Ntu at higher elevations can then be estimated from the correlation determined at sea level but
corrected for air property effects using Equation 21. The tower
Ntu is used along with an appropriate effectiveness relation
(crossflow or counterflow) to determine tower effectiveness.
Equation 11 is then used to determine the tower capacity for
any altitude with air enthalpies calculated at the local ambient

--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

ASHRAE Transactions
Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine
Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

305
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

pressure and the entering water and ambient wet bulb temperatures. Further, the mass flow rate used in Equation 11 and in
calculating m* for the heat exchanger effectiveness
(Equation 5) needs to be corrected for the lower density occurring at higher altitudes according to
a
m a = ---------- m a, 0
a, 0

Figure 4 Effect of altitude on convection coefficient and

Ntu.

(22)

With these corrections, sea-level catalog information can

be extrapolated to allow an estimation of the performance at
higher altitudes to be made, and an appropriate tower selected
for the application.
As an example of the effect of altitude, the performance
for Model 1 B with a 2 hp fan (Table 1) operating at a wet bulb
temperature of 75F with inlet and outlet temperatures of 95F
and 85F will be estimated for an altitude of 10,000 ft. At this
altitude the pressure is 10.1 psia and the air density is
0.0476 lbm/ft3.
The enthalpy potential, which is the difference between
the enthalpy of saturated air at the inlet water temperature and
the enthalpy of the atmospheric air, for sea level conditions is:
Enthalpy potential = ( h w, sat, i h a, i )
= ( 63.2 38.4 ) ( Btu/lbm ) = 24.8 Btu/lbm

Whereas at 10,000 ft the enthalpy potential is

Enthalpy potential = ( h w, sat, i h a, i )
= ( 83.2 43.1 ) ( Btu/lbm ) = 35.0 Btu/lbm

Figure 5

Effect of altitude and Ntu at sea level on

effectiveness.

This is a 40% increase in potential, as shown in Figure 3.

The effect of altitude on the Ntu is given by Equation 21,
which shows that the main effect is that of the density. The Ntu
of the Model 1 B at sea level was found to be 1.504. At altitude,
the Ntu is
3
0.247 ( Btu/lbm F ) 0.0705 ( lbm/ft )
Ntu = 1.504* ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
0.251 ( Btu/lbm F ) 0.0476 ( lbm/ft 3 )

0.2

= 1.60

The Ntu is increased by 6.6%, as shown in Figure 4. The

effectiveness is increased from the sea level value of 0.558 to
0.574, which is an increase of 3%, as shown in Figure 5. The
volumetric heat capacity is increased
3

Q v = 0.574*0.0476 ( lbm/ft )*(83.2-48.1) ( Btu/lbm )

= 0.958 Btu/ft

Figure 6 Effect of altitude on volumetric heat rejection

capacity relative to sea level catalog values.

The volumetric heat capacity for sea level conditions is

0.0975 Btu/ft3, which is 2% greater than that at 10,000 ft, as
shown by Figure 6 for these conditions.
The implication for this change in volumetric heat capacity on the design point capacity is that the design water flow
rate is reduced 2% (from 107 gpm to 105 gpm) to provide the
same range for these conditions. This is a relatively small
--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

306
Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine
Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

ASHRAE Transactions
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST

difference, but as shown in Figure 6, there would be significantly greater differences for lower wet-bulb temperatures,
lower water inlet temperatures, and exchangers with higher
Ntu and effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS
The analogy method provides a general representation of
the performance of cooling towers over a wide range of operation. The parameters of the analogy method can be calibrated using baseline data at one operating condition.
Together with correlations for the transfer coefficients, the
analogy method can be used to extend the baseline data to
cover a wide range of operating conditions. The approach is
demonstrated to accurately extend catalog data at one condition to cover a wide range of entering and leaving water
temperatures, ambient air wet bulb temperatures, air and water
flow rates, and altitude.
NOMENCLATURE
a
A

exponent for altitude effect

area per unit volume

cs
cp
cpm

effective specific heat

specific heat of air
specific heat of air-water vapor

cw
Cmin

specific heat of water

min

C*
h

capacitance rate ratio

enthalpy

hc
hfg

con
latent heat of vaporization for water

hm
m

mass transfer coefficient

exponent

m*
n
Ntu
p
pv

Q m ax

Qv

T
V
w
z

mass flow rate

mass flow rate ratio
exponent
Number of Transfer Units
pressure
partial pressure of vapor
maximum energy transfer rate
capacity or heat transfer rate
heat transfer rate per unit volume
temperature
volume
humidity ratio
elevation above sea level
effectiveness
density of air

Subscripts
a
base
i
o
w
w, sat
0

air
base conditions
inlet
outlet
water
saturated air at water temperature
sea level conditions

REFERENCES
1.Braun, J. E., S. A. Klein, and J. W. Mitchell, Effectiveness
Models for Cooling Towers and Cooling Coils,
ASHRAE Transactions, 95, Part 2, 164, 1989
2.Kays, W. M. and A. L. London Compact Heat Exchangers, McGraw Hill, 1964
3.Marley Cooling Tower, Marley, Mission, Kansas, 2003

--`,,,`,,``````,``,````,``,,,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

ASHRAE Transactions

Copyright American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engine

Provided by IHS under license with ASHRAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

307
Licensee=Istanbul Teknik Universtesi/5956919001
Not for Resale, 12/26/2014 00:54:32 MST