Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 33283333

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Enhancement of cooling capacity in a hybrid closed circuit cooling tower

M.M.A. Sarker a, G.J. Shim b, H.S. Lee b, C.G. Moon b, J.I. Yoon b,*
a
Department of Mathematics, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh
b
School of Mechanical Engineering, Pukyong National University, Namgu, Pusan 608-739, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Performance characteristics of the Hybrid Closed Circuit Cooling Tower (HCCCT) have been tested exper-
Received 12 August 2008 imentally. Bare-type copper tubes and n tubes were used in staggered arrangement at the heat exchan-
Accepted 10 May 2009 ger of the HCCCT and the cooling capacity and pressure drop have been studied from various
Available online 21 May 2009
perspectives. The relevant temperatures and velocities were selected based on the typical East Asian
meteorological constraints for the year round operation of the HCCCT. Performance characteristics were
Keywords: compared and found that for the n tubes, cooling capacities were about 22% and 260% higher than those
Experimental testing
of the bare tubes in wet and dry modes, respectively. The pressure drop for the n tubes was nearly two
Fin tubes
Bare tubes
times higher than that of the bare tubes in both modes. The experimental results show considerable
Cooling capacity enhancement of cooling capacity.
Pressure drop 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Cooling tower is a relatively inexpensive and dependable heat
rejection device and used for dissipating heat from water-cooled
refrigeration, air-conditioning, power plants and other industrial
process systems [1,2]. Cooling tower can remove heat from a sys-
tem or process without consuming excessive quantities of water.
The water consumption rate of a cooling tower system is only
about 5% of that of a once-through system, making it the least
expensive system to operate with purchased water supplies. The
amount of heated water discharged by cooling tower in the form
of blowdown is very small [3,4].
A HCCCT is a closed type cooling tower which is capable of
working both in wet and dry modes. The cooling or condensing
system for uids operates as a dry cooler in winter and as an evap-
orative cooler in summer by spraying water on the heat transfer
surface. A recirculating wet-cooling tower has energy penalty asso-
ciated with additional pumps, fans, and auxiliary equipment and
also requires more extensive water treatment [5]. During the
mid-season and winter while ambient temperature remains less
than 1214 C, HCCCT can produce cooling effect in plume-free,
ice-free state and lower noise level is expected in dry mode. In
wet mode operation, while the ambient temperature crosses
1214 C, HCCCT operates at its optimized level to supply cooling
effect. Water consumption by HCCCT is lower than the conven-
tional Closed-Wet Cooling Tower (CWCT) and the process water
can be cooled down to 4 C above the wet bulb temperature and
* Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +82 51 629 6180.
E-mail address: yoonji@pknu.ac.kr (J.I. Yoon).
can be packed in light and compact bundle with optimized cir-
cuitry [6]. In summer, water is sprayed using square form and wide
angle spray nozzles from the top of the tower along with a counter-
type of air ow in both summer and winter from the bottom part.
In wet mode operations, no plume formation is expected due to the
higher ambient temperature and higher dew-point temperature in
Southeast Asian region. Plume free state is predicted once again in
dry mode due to the fact that typical Southeast Asian winter ambi-
ent air contains very low moister.
2. Previous studies
Gan et al. [79] reported numerical simulation results on wet-
closed cooling tower utilizing CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics)
techniques. Khan et al. [10,11] presented mathematical models of
cooling towers. Soylemez [12] produced numerical results regard-
ing the sizing of cooling towers and registered the optimum heat
and mass transfer area at which minimum cost exists throughout
technical life of forced draft counter-current cooling towers, devel-
oping original formulae for the best thermoeconomical perfor-
mance as a design point.
Experimental studies regarding the performance of a counter-
ow, packed-bed mechanical cooling tower can be found from
Bedekar et al. [13]. Milosavljevic and Heikkilia [14] reported an
experimental study on comprehensive approach to cooling tower
design. Sarker et al. [15] carried out experimental study on the
thermal performance of closed-wet cooling tower and hinted that
the heat and mass transfer process in a CWCT is dominated by
mass transfer between the spray water and the air over the sensi-
ble heat transfer brought about by the evaporation of the spray

1359-4311/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2009.05.012
 M.M.A. Sarker et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 33283333 3329

Nomenclature

A heat transfer surface area (m2) P pressure (Pa)

T temperature (C) Q cooling capacity (kW)
G ow rate of air (kg/h)
U overall heat transfer coefcient (kW/m2 C) Greek symbol
L ow rate of spray water (kg/h) D difference
M ow rate of cooling water (kg/h)

water. The effect of the wet-bulb temperature in effectively con- constant, waterair mass ow ratio is allowed to vary and the tem-
trolling the cooling water temperature has been reported by Sarker perature difference between the inlet and the outlet is measured.
et al. [16]. They have demonstrated that there is an appropriate air The uncertainties of the measured and calculated parameters are
ow rate for respective air constraints to preserve the cooling per- estimated following the procedures described in ASME PTC-23
formance in the cross ow cooling tower. Experimental studies and [20] (with a level of condence of 95%). The experimental uncer-
numerical simulation of evaporative cooling of air have been re- tainties associated with the measurement devices and sensors
ported by Kachhwaha et al. [17]. They developed a two-dimen- along with the specications of measuring devices are shown in
sional numerical model simulating the conservation of mass, Table 1. The method is based on a combination of all the uncertain-
momentum and energy of air, water, and obtained experimental ties pertinent to primary experimental measurements. It showed
data on a horizontal once through wind tunnel at different air an uncertainty of 1.14% and 2.45%, respectively, for the water ow
velocities in parallel ow conguration. Recently Sarker et al. rate and total systematic/random uncertainty.
[18,19] have reported both numerical and experimental studies The experiment is conducted under the experimental condi-
about the performance characteristics of the hybrid closed circuit tions mentioned in Table 2. The heat balance of the experimental
cooling tower. They claimed that the cooling capacity of the HCCCT apparatus and details of the experiment for the case of bare tube
was much closed to the rated one for the wet mode operation but can be found from Sarker et al. [19].
was rather poor in dry mode.
The objective of this investigation is to enhance the cooling 4. Results and discussion
capacity in a HCCCT. To accomplish this, the thermal performance
of the HCCCT will be experimentally tested using two different HCCCT can work in wet mode when spray water is uniformly
types of tubes namely; bare tube and n tube in the heat exchan- distributed from the top of the tower along with a counter-type
ger and the results will be compared to the rated ones for wet and of fan driven air ow from the bottom. In dry mode, only fan driven
dry operation modes. Performance enhancement of the HCCCT is cold air is utilized to get the cooling effect. Performance character-
expected out of this experimental study. istics differ greatly in these two modes and the results are dis-
cussed in the next two sections one by one starting with the dry
operation mode.
3. Experimental apparatus and method
4.1. Dry operation mode of HCCCT
The schematic of the experimental apparatus of the HCCCT is
shown in Fig. 1. The coil section is located at the upper part, and In the absence of spray water, the cooling capacity of HCCCT in
fans are installed at the lower part. The heat exchanger consists dry mode is much lower than that in the wet operation mode. The
of 16 rows and 22 columns in the 1.14 m  2.36 m  3.2 m dimen-
sional cooling tower. Bare-type copper coil having an outer diam-
eter of 15.88 mm is used in a staggered arrangement. The outer
diameter of n tube is 32.68 mm and the ns are 4.23 mm apart
from each other as shown in Fig. 2. The cooling water is supplied
by pipes having 65 mm inlet diameters and ows downward so
that low pressure drop may be expected across the coil bank. The
spray water is uniformly distributed at the upper part of the coils
with the help of header made of copper tube coils along with spray
nozzles having a big caliber. Recirculated cooling water collecting
tank section and the ambient air driving fans are installed at the
lower part of HCCCT.
15 HP type inverter is used to maintain air ow rate at a xed
level. Discharged air from the outlet of the cooling tower, which
is highly humid and has high temperature, passes through return
ducts and mixes with ambient air. The suitable air constraint is
maintained applying a 45 kW type heater and utilizing cooling
coils at the inlet of the HCCCT. Cooling water ows inside the coils
of the heat exchanger. 175 kW type boiler is applied to maintain a
ceaseless supply of cooling water having temperature at the de-
sired level. To control the temperature properly, a bypass system
is installed at the cooling water supplying pipe and at the hot
water supplying pipe, in addition to a plate heat exchanger as
shown in Fig. 1. Keeping the mass ow rate of cooling water Fig. 1. Schematic of the experimental apparatus.
3330 M.M.A. Sarker et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 33283333

Fig. 2. Fin tube (left panel) along with its schematic and dimension (right panel).

Table 1 140 100

Measuring devices specication. Bare Tube
Fin Tube 90

Overall heat transfer coefficient(kW/m2 . C)

Parameter Sensor Range Accuracy 120
Water temperature T type 200400 C 0.1 C 80
Water ow rate Oval, vortex ow meter 148 m3/h 1%
100
Relative humidity Capacitive 0100% 1%
70

Cooling Capacity (kW)

Air temperature T type 200400 C 0.1 C
Air velocity Anemometer 020 m/s 0.03 m/s 80
Atmospheric pressure Manometer 1000 mm H2O 0.5 mm H2O 60

60 50

Table 2
40
Experimental condition.
40
Cooling water 30
Volume ow rate [m3/h] 24
Inlet temperature [C] 37 20
20
Spray water
Volume ow rate [m3/h] 33 0 10
0 5 10 15 20 25
Air
Air inlet temperature ( C)
Velocity [m/s] 3.1
Wet-bulb temperature [C] 27
Fig. 3. Cooling capacity (left axis), OHTC (right axis) by air temperature.
Dry-bulb temperature [C] 022 (dry mode)
[C] 3032 (wet mode)

Therefore, the cooling capacity decreases noticeably. Rather poor

thermal performances followed by pressure drop in dry operation
mode are discussed next.
4.1.1. Thermal performance of the HCCCT in dry operation mode
One of the objectives of this study is to enhance the cooling
capacity of the HCCCT especially in dry operation mode. In this
mode, cooling capacity largely depends on the inlet air tempera-
ture, cooling water inlet temperature and inlet air velocity of
HCCCT. The effects of air inlet temperature on the cooling capacity
and Overall Heat Transfer Coefcient (OHTC) were investigated
experimentally. It may be note that OHTC takes into account the
temperature differences and thermal resistance between the two
uids and can be dened as:
Q UADT LM
where DTLM is the log mean temperature difference. This equation
can be utilized to calculate OHTC in dry mode where the inside of
tube is lled with cooling water but only air ows over the outside
of the tube.
In this part of the experiment, the cooling water inlet tempera-
ture (CWIT) and the velocity of air were kept constant at 37 C and
3.1 m/s. Cooling capacity and OHTC for both n and bare tubes are,
respectively, shown at the left and right axes in Fig. 3. Cooling
capacity decreases almost linearly with the increase of the air inlet
temperature and vice versa for both n and bare tubes. This is sim-
ply because when air inlet temperature increases, then the differ-
ence of the cooling water inlet temperature and the air inlet
temperature decreases and thus the rate of heat transfer decreases.
cooling capacity is found in dry mode, which is a direct conse-
quence of sensible heat transfer, which is much lower than latent
heat transfer in the absence of spray water. For the n tube, the
cooling capacity is around 2.6 times higher than that of the bare
tube at 15 C of ambient air temperature. The reason for this
remarkable increase in cooling capacity for the n tube could be
the increase of the heat transfer surface area, and it is perceptible
for this experiment that, the heat transfer area of n tube is much
bigger than bare tube. The overall heat transfer coefcient also de-
creases with the increase of the air inlet temperature but the
decreasing rate is slower than that of the cooling capacity as can
be concluded from the left axis of Fig. 3. In calculating OHTC, the
outer surface area for both bare and n tubes were used and it
can be claimed that OHTC for the bare tube is nearly 1.6 times
1
higher than that of the n tube at an air inlet temperature of
15 C. This is mainly due to the fact that the heat transfer area of
n tube is much bigger than that of the bare one but the rate of
heat transfer in case of n tube, Q in Eq. (1), does not increase in
the similar rate of outer surface area increment of n tube. There-
fore, U, the OHTC for bare tube is expected to be greater than that
for the n one.
Left axis of Fig. 4 gives the cooling capacity whereas right axis
shows the OHTC for both n and bare tubes with respect to
(w.r.t.) a variable air inlet velocity. This time in the experiment,
the temperature of air and cooling water at their respective inlets
were held constant at 15 C and 37 C, respectively. At the designed
condition, the cooling capacity is about 37 kW and 98 kW for the
bare and n tube, respectively. Once again the cooling performance
 M.M.A. Sarker et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 33283333 3331

120 80 50

Bare Tube Bare Tube

Overall heat transfer coefficient(kW/m2 . oC)

100 Fin Tube 40
Fin Tube
60
Cooling capacity (kW)

80

Pressure drop (Pa)

30

60
40
20

40
10
20
20

0
1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2
Air velocity (m/s) Air velocity (m/s)

Fig. 4. Cooling capacity (right axis), OHTC (left axis), w.r.t. air velocity. Fig. 5. Pressure drop in dry mode.

found for the case of n tube is about 2.6 times better than that of
10 180
the bare case and that the OHTC in case of bare tube is around 1.6
times higher than that of the n one. Bare Tube
160
Fin Tube
4.1.2. Pressure drop in dry mode 8 140
Pressure drop inside the HCCCT is a great concern for the
designers because the operational cost of HCCCT in the form of 120
Temperature Drop ( o C)

Cooling capacity (kW)

the power consumed by the pump or fan is directly proportional
6 100
to the pressure drop. Pressure drop can be reduced signicantly
through increasing the transverse pitch of the coils in the heat ex-
80
changer. Recently Sarker et al. [18,19] have demonstrated that
increasing the pitches at will is not a wise idea only for the sake 4 60
of reducing pressure drop. Minimizing the pressure drop in such
technique can minimize operating cost but it can increase the size 40
of the heat exchanger and thereby the initial cost. Pressure drop at
the internal part of the HCCCT can be assumed to be a function of 2 20
the inlet air velocity. The static pressures just below and right
above the cooling coils are measured and difference is recorded 0
22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
with the help of manometer when the fan function gets stabilized.
Wet-bulb temperature ( o C )
Pressure drops for different air inlet velocity ranging from 1.5 to
3.2 m/s have been investigated experimentally and the compara- Fig. 6. Temperature drop (left axis), cooling capacity (right axis), w.r.t. WBT.
tive results are shown in Fig. 5. The pressure drop across the coil
bank is seen to increase nearly linearly for the increase of air veloc-
ity. Since no spray water is used in dry mode, so the pressure fall- increase of the inlet wet-bulb temperature. This is because when
ing rate is low especially with the bare tube. However, n tube the WBT at the inlet increases, the temperature difference between
produces higher pressure drop and at the design condition, pres- the cooling water and air at the inlet decreases. Therefore, the rate
sure drop for the n tube is around two times higher than that of of evaporation of spray water owing at the outer surface of the
the bare tube. It may be noted that the thermal performance of pipes decreases so that the falling of the temperature of the cooling
the HCCCT in dry operation mode is found to be low. The enhance- water owing inside the tubes deceases. For the bare tube, the
ment aspects of cooling capacity are discussed next in wet opera- temperature difference is about 6 C when the inlet WBT is 24 C.
tion mode. Drastic decline in the temperature drop could be noted while the
WBT is greater 26 C and 29 C for the bare and n tubes, respec-
4.2. Wet operation mode of HCCCT tively. It is evident that for the n tube, the capacity of heat trans-
fer of the cooling coils increases with the increase of the heat
The cooling capacity of the HCCCT can be increased signicantly transfer surface area and therefore, the temperature drop, that is,
if spray water is used which is possible only in wet operation the falling of temperature for n tube is higher than that of the
mode. The thermal performance and pressure drop in HCCCT are bare tube as expected. It may be noted that temperature drop of
discussed in two different sub-sections as given below. the n tube is almost same to that of the bare tube at low WBT,
but is considerably higher at high WBT. It could be due to the fact
4.2.1. Thermal performance of the HCCCT in wet mode that latent heat transfer dominates over the sensible heat transfer
Left axis of Fig. 6 shows the temperature difference between the in case of saturated air condition encountered at the outlet of the
inlet and the outlet of the cooling water with respect to variable in- HCCCT. Evaporation of spray water is smaller at high WBT
let wet-bulb temperature (WBT). From this gure it is clear that and therefore the cooling water temperature and outlet air
the temperature drop of the cooling water decreases with the temperature remain higher at their respective outlets. Outlet air
3332 M.M.A. Sarker et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 33283333
temperature in case of n tube is much higher than that of the bare
tube and if outlet air is saturated, air humidity in case of n tube is
much higher than that of the bare tube.
Right axis of Fig. 6 shows the cooling capacity of the HCCCT. The
cooling performance of the HCCCT is dened as the product of the
temperature difference between the inlet and the outlet of the
cooling water, multiplied by the mass ow rate of the cooling
water and the specic heat of the cooling water. That is,
Q m  cp  DT
The cooling water ow rate is dened in the standard design
condition given in Table 2 and the specic heat of cooling water
could be assumed to be constant, therefore the trend of the cooling
capacity of the HCCCT looks identical to that of the temperature
drop plot given in the left axis of Fig. 6. The cooling capacity found
from right axis of Fig. 6 for the bare tube is 132 kW whereas for the
n tube, it is about 163 kW at the designed WBT of 27 C. The cool-
ing capacity of HCCCT with n tube is nearly 22% higher than that
of the bare tube, with respect to the rated capacity and this might
have happened due to the increase of the sensible heat transfer in
case of the n tube.
The temperature drop and the cooling capacity of the HCCCT
with respect to variable cooling water inlet temperature are,
respectively, shown at the left and right axes of Fig. 7. As the inlet
temperature of the cooling water increases, the temperature drop
and the cooling capacity increase almost linearly. When the tem-
perature of the cooling water is remaining less than or equal to
35 C, Fig. 7 indicating that the temperature drop and the cooling
capacity for bare and n tubes are not that different. This is mainly
because the temperature difference between cooling water inlet
temperature and wet-bulb temperature is very small at low cool-
ing water inlet temperature. However, as the cooling water inlet
temperature increases, the temperature drop and the cooling
capacity between n and bare cases differ signicantly. At the de-
signed temperature of 37 C, the cooling capacity of the HCCCT
with n tubes is about 15% higher than that with bare ones. There-
fore it can be claimed that HCCCT having n tube at the heat ex-
changer has a clear advantage over one having bare tube if
HCCCT has to operate with relatively high cooling water inlet
temperature.
The temperature drop and the cooling capacity with respect to
the ratio of mass ow rate of spray water and air are, respectively,
shown in the left and right axes of Fig. 8. The experiment was
conducted keeping L, the mass ow rate of spray water, constant
10
8 160
Temperature Drop ( O C)
6
4
Bare Tube
Fin Tube
2 20
32 34 36 38 40 42
O
Cooling water inlet temperature ( C)
Fig. 7. Temperature drop (left axis), cooling capacity (right axis), w.r.t. CWIT.
and letting G, the mass ow rate of air, to vary. From this gure,
it is evident that temperature drop and the cooling capacity in-
crease with the increase of the mass ow rate of air. In other words,
cooling capacity and temperature drop of cooling water are
decreasing for the increasing L/G. This is mostly because when L/
G increases over the standard designed value of L/G = 0.83, then
the mass ow rate of air decreases so that the air humidity at
the outlet increases, therefore the falling of temperature slows
down.
2
The cooling capacity found at L/G = 0.83 is around 130 kW and
162 kW, respectively, for the bare and n tubes. The cooling capac-
ity of the HCCCT with n tube is enhanced largely by the latent
heat transfer brought about by the increase of heat transfer area
by n. Cooling capacity of the bare tube at L/G = 0.83 can be
achieved using only 80% of the mass ow rate of air while using
n tube which could minimize the operating cost.
In Fig. 9, temperature drop and cooling capacity with respect to
spray water volume ow rate are shown at the left and right axes,
respectively. Thermal performance of the HCCCT with n tube is
considerably higher than that with bare tube as can be inferred
from this gure as well. Since the designed spray water volume
ow rate was 33 m3/h in this experiment, so, at the outlet of the
HCCCT, the air could be at an under-saturated state for lower spray
water mass ow rate than 33 m3/h. The cooling capacity of the bare
tube reduces almost linearly with the decreasing spray water vol-
ume ow rate. However, for the case of n tube, rate of evaporation
is augmented by the exacerbated heat transfer area; therefore, the
cooling capacity is much higher than bare tube. It may be noted
that air at the outlet of the HCCCT becomes under-saturated while
the spray water volume ow rate remains approximately less than
25 m3/h and over there, thermal performance for both bare and n
tubes decrease at a faster rate.
If n tube is used at the heat exchanger of the HCCCT, a spray
water volume ow rate of only 20 m3/h is required to attain the
same cooling capacity with bare tube, which requires a spray water
volume ow rate of 33 m3/h.
4.2.2. Pressure drop in wet mode
Fig. 10 shows the pressure drop of the HCCCT with respect to a
variable inlet air velocity in wet operation mode. It is evident that
pressure drop increases almost exponentially with the increase of
the air velocity. The increasing rate has been augmented due to
the spray water in the wet mode operation. In case of bare tube,
200 10 200
180 Bare Tube 180
160
Fin Tube
8
140 140
Cooling Capacity (kW)
Cooling capacity (kW)
Temperature Drop ( OC)
120 120
100 6 100
80 80
60 60
4
40 40
20
0 2 0
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
L/G
Fig. 8. Temperature drop (left axis), cooling capacity (right axis) versus L/G.
 M.M.A. Sarker et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 33283333 3333

8 160 n tube. In case of n tube, a spray water volume ow rate of only

Bare Tube 140 20 m3/h is required to achieve the same cooling capacity with bare
Fin Tube tube which requires a spray water volume ow rate of 33 m3/h.

Cooling capacity (kW)

6 120 The pressure drop for the n tube was nearly double of that of
Temperature Drop ( C)
O

100 the bare one in both modes which should get proper attention
from the designers of HCCCT. The results of this experimental
4 80
study indicate that if higher cooling capacity is preferred over
60 the energy consumption, then n tube should be used in the heat
exchanger instead of bare tube. If the operation mode of the HCCCT
2 40
is selected judiciously and the designed conditions are set sensibly,
20 then the initial as well as operational cost can be greatly reduced
0 for the year round operation of the HCCCT.
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Spray water volume flow rate (m /h)

3 Acknowledgement

Fig. 9. Temperature drop (left axis), cooling capacity (right axis) versus spray water This study was supported nancially by the Grant No.
ow rate.
70000279 from the Regional Industry Program of Gyongnam,
South Korea. Their cooperation is greatly acknowledged.
90
References
80
Bare Tube
[1] R.C. Rosaler, The Standard Handbook of Plant Engineering, second ed.,
Fin Tube McGraw-Hill, New York, 1995.
70 [2] D.W. Green, R.H. Perry, Perrys Chemical Engineers Handbook, sixth ed,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1984.
[3] Cooling Towers, ASHRAE HVAC Systems and Equipment, American Society of
60 Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, USA, 2000.
Pressure drop (Pa)

50
40
30
20
10
1.5 2.0 2.5
Air velocity (m/s)
Fig. 10. Pressure drop in wet mode.
pressure drop at an air velocity of 2 m/s is found to be around
19.6 Pa and at an air velocity of 3.1 m/s, the pressure drop can be
seen to be about 39.3 Pa. HCCCT having n tube at the heat exchan-
ger, pressure drop is about 40.2 Pa and 80.4 Pa, respectively, at an
air velocity of 2 m/s and 3.1 m/s. It conferred that the pressure
drop at the design condition for the n tube is nearly two times
higher than that of the bare tube which could be a concern for
the designers of HCCCT.
5. Concluding remarks
Experimental study has been done using bare and n tubes at
the heat exchanger to enhance the cooling capacity of the HCCCT.
It is observed that HCCCT having n tube at the heat exchanger
showed better thermal performance than one having bare one.
Cooling capacities were about 22% and 260% higher than those of
the bare tubes in wet and dry modes, respectively. In wet mode,
the cooling capacity produced by the bare tube case can be
achieved using only 80% of the mass ow rate of air while using
[4] F.C. McQuiston, J.D. Parker, Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Analysis
and Design, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1997.
[5] B. Korenic, Computerized simulation of closed circuit cooling towers with
parallel and counterow spray waterair ow design, CTI Journal (1995).
TP95-17.
[6] GEA erge-spirale soramat, <http://www.gea-erge.fr/>.
[7] G. Gan, S.B. Riffat, Numerical simulation of closed wet cooling towers for
chilled ceiling systems, Applied Thermal Engineering 19 (12) (1999) 1279
1296.
[8] G. Gan, S.B. Riffat, L. Shao, P. Doherty, Application of CFD to closed-wet cooling
towers, Applied Thermal Engineering 21 (1) (2001) 7992.
[9] G. Gan, S.B. Riffat, Predicting thermal performance of a closed-wet cooling
tower for chilled ceilings, Building Services Engineering Research and
3.0 3.5 Technology 20 (4) (1999) 181190.
[10] Jameel-Ur-Rehman Khan, M. Yaqub, Syed M. Zubair, Performance
characteristics of counter ow wet cooling towers, Energy Conversion and
Management 44 (2003) 20732091.
[11] Jameel-Ur-Rehman Khan, Syed M. Zubair, An improved design and rating
analyses of counter ow wet cooling towers, Journal of Heat transfer 123 (4)
(2001) 770778.
[12] M.S. Soylemez, On the optimum sizing of cooling towers, Energy Conversion
and Management 42 (7) (2001) 783789.
[13] S.V. Bedekar, P. Nithiarasu, K.N. Seetharamuz, Experimental investigation of
the performance of a counter-ow packed-bed mechanical cooling tower,
Energy 23 (11) (1998) 943947.
[14] Nenand Milosavljevic, Petti Heikkilia, A comprehensive approach to cooling
tower design, Applied Thermal Engineering 21 (9) (2001) 899915.
[15] M.M.A. Sarker, E.P. Kim, C.G. Moon, J.I. Yoon, Thermal performance
characteristics of closed-wet cooling tower, Journal of Korean Society for
Power System Engineering 9 (2) (2005) 8892.
[16] M.M.A. Sarker, J.I. Yoon, E. Kim, S.K. Jeong, K.H. Min, J.D. Kim, Performance
characteristics of cooling tower in small absorption chiller, Journal of Korean
Society of Marine Engineers 28 (7) (2004) 11451151.
[17] S.S. Kachhwaha, P.L. Dhar, S.R. Kales, Experimental studies and numerical
simulation of evaporative cooling of air with a water spray l. Horizontal
parallel ow, International Journal of Heat Mass Transfer 41 (2) (1998) 447
464.
[18] M.M.A. Sarker, C.G. Moon, E.P. Kim, J.I. Yoon, Numerical simulation of the
performance characteristics of the hybrid closed circuit cooling tower,
Nonlinear Analysis Modelling and Control 13 (1) (2008) 89101.
[19] M.M.A. Sarker, E. Kim, J.I. Yoon, Performance characteristics of the hybrid
closed circuit cooling tower, Energy and Building 40 (8) (2008) 15291535.
[20] ASME PTC-23, Atmospheric Water Cooling Equipment, American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, 2003.