i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
w w w . i i fi i r . o r g

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

Acquiring the best cooling strategy based on

thermal comfort and 3E analyses for small scale
residential buildings at diverse climatic conditions

Hamidreza Hasani Balyani, Ali Sohani, Hoseyn Sayyaadi*, Ramin Karami

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering-Energy Division, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, P.O. Box: 19395-1999, No,
15-19, Pardis St., Mollasadra Ave., Vanak Sq., Tehran 1999 143344, Iran

article info abstract

Article history: A methodology for selecting the best cooling system for small scale residential building
Received 17 January 2015 was introduced. A benchmark building was assumed to be cooled by various cooling al-
Received in revised form ternatives. The proposed systems were analyzed based on 3E (energy, economic, and
8 April 2015 environmental) as well as thermal comfort analyses. Finally, based on fuzzy-AHP method,
Accepted 9 April 2015 the best cooling alternative in each climatic condition was selected. It was suggested to
Available online 25 April 2015 implement direct evaporative cooling (DEC) in all dry areas. In wet and hot areas, the best
option was the vapor compression system; however, in temperate and humid, very hot and
Keywords: semi-humid, and temperate and wet cities, desiccant-enhanced evaporative cooling
Indirect dew point evaporative (DEVap) was the best alternative. It reduced the annual primary energy consumption (PEC)
cooling and carbon dioxide emission (CDE) up to 13970 kWh and 3.3 tons of CO2, respectively.
Desiccant enhanced evaporative Implementing DEC reduced PEC, CDE, and cooling cost of dry area up to 4875 kWh, 5.6 tons
cooling of CO2, and 168 $, respectively.
3E analysis © 2015 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
Thermal comfort
Fuzzy-AHP decision making
Small scale cooling

Acquisition de la meilleure strate
gie de refroidissement de

^ timents re
petits ba
sidentiels par analyse du confort
thermique et des 3 E pour diverses conditions climatiques
Mots cl
es : refroidissement e

vaporatif a
 point de rose

e indirect ; Refroidissement e

vaporatif ame

liore

par dessication ; Analyse 3E ;
Confort thermique ; Prise de decision par processus d'hie
rarchie analytique flou

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ98 21 8406 3212; fax: þ98 21 8867 4748.
E-mail addresses: sayyaadi@kntu.ac.ir, hoseynsayyaadi@gmail.com (H. Sayyaadi).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2015.04.008
0140-7007/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 113

Nomenclature ROI Return on investment

T Temperature (K or  C)
aijk Triangular fuzzy weights
t Up-time of the systems (s)
ACC Annualized cost of cooling (US$)
TCR Total capital recovery
BBY Balance at the beginning of year
TEC Total equipment cost
BL Book life (year)
TDI Total depreciable investment
c Unit price
TNI Total net investment
Cp Specific heat of air (kJ kg1 K1)
TRRL Levelized revenue requirement
CPE,W Purchased equipment cost at known capacity
V_ Flow rate (m3 h1)
CPE,Y Purchased equipment cost at given capacity
Vdaily Daily water consumption rate (m3 h1)
CDE Carbon dioxide emission (tons year1)
VC Vapor compression
CDEF Carbon dioxide emission factor (kg (kWh)1)
W Consumed power (W)
CRF Capital recovery factor
w Normalized fuzzy weight
DAR Desiccant to air ratio
wi Normalized triangular fuzzy weight
DEC Direct evaporative cooling
WC Water cost
DP Dew point system
DEVap Desiccant enhanced evaporative cooling Scripts
DX Direct expansion a Air
E_consume Energy consumption rate (W) ar Air velocity
Ereq Electric energy demand (kWh) cl Clothing
ESSR Electricity source site ratio db Dry bulb
FC Fuel cost dev DEVap conditioner
FCL Levelized fuel cost dp Dew point
h Enthalpy of air (kJ kg1 dry air) E Electricity
hfg Enthalpy of vaporization water (kJ kg1) eff Effective
i Discount rate env Environment
ieff Effective interest rate in Inlet
IDPEC Indirect dew point evaporative cooling j jth year of operation
IDEC Indirect evaporative cooling L Levelized
MRR Moisture removal rate (kg s1) NG Natural gas
NGSSR Natural gas source site ratio r Regenerator
OMC Operating and maintenance cost sa Supply air
Pa Water vapor pressure (Pa) w Water
PEC Primary energy consumption (kWh) wb Wet bulb
PWF0 Present worth factor
Greek symbols
Q_ cooling Cooling capacity (W)
r Air density (kg m3)
Qr Thermal energy output (W)
ε Effectiveness (%)
r Inflation rate
dij Number of decision makers Absolute humidity
RA Return air
u (grwater kg1
dry air)
RH Relative humidity (%)

1. Introduction
International Energy Outlook 2013 (IEO2013) predicted that the
world energy consumption would grow by 56% between 2010
and 2040; also, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions would
rise from about 31 billion metric tons in 2010 to 36 billion
metric tons in 2020 and then to 45 billion metric tons in 2040: a
46% increase (International Energy Outlook, 2013). Most part of
the energy demand is generally related to building envelopes
and their environment. Cooling buildings during warm sea-
sons and electricity consumption of cooling systems in
buildings are responsible for a significant part of energy con-
sumption in the world. Hence, reducing energy utilization for
air cooling systems is a precaution for energy conservation
and environmental protection in the world (Eskin and
Turkmen, 2008). In recent years, frequent summer warm
spells and growth of indoor facilities have led to the increased
requirement for air conditioning of indoor environments. The
main purpose of utilizing any air conditioning system is to
provide comfort conditions for residents. ASHRAE Standard
55-2004, Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Oc-
cupancy, has noted that indoor comfort room temperatures
for humans range between 19.5 and 27.8  C. A more specific
range can be determined from the standard, which depends
on season, relative humidity, worn clothing, activity levels,
and other factors. The standard notes that HVAC systems
must be able to maintain the humidity ratio at or below
0.012 kg kg1 dry air (ASHRAE). In order to achieve reasonable
comfort conditions, various air conditioning systems might be
considered. One of the most famous options which is used to
achieve comfort conditions at a desirable level is conventional
mechanical vapor compression air conditioning systems, VC,
114 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
also known as direct expansion system, DX. The conventional
mechanical vapor compression air conditioning systems
consume a huge amount of electrical energy that is largely
dependent upon fossil fuel. This mode of air conditioning is,
therefore, neither sustainable nor environment-friendly.
Evaporative cooling systems utilize the latent heat of water
evaporation to perform air conditioning of buildings and are
therefore a potential replacement for the existing systems.
However, evaporative cooling systems have encountered
several technical difficulties that impede their wide applica-
tion. The performance of evaporative cooling systems is
affected by environmental conditions (depending on ambient
wet bulb) and their supply of air temperature might be too high
to provide the required indoor temperature level. On the other
hand, direct evaporative cooling (DEC) increases indoor
moisture content which causes thermal discomfort (idalex).
Therefore, the outcome of DEC might be far from the desired
comfort condition. Indirect evaporative cooling (IDPEC) sys-
tems have been invented to decrease air temperature and
avoid adding moisture to the air; but, they limit the tempera-
ture of supply air to some degrees above the wet bulb of the
outdoor air, which is too high to perform air conditioning of
buildings (idalex; Stoitchkov and Dimitrov, 1998). In this re-
gard, the performance of IDPECs is even weaker than DECs.
Another class of indirect evaporative air cooling system called
dew point indirect evaporative cooling (IDPEC) based on
patented “M-cycle” has been invented to create comfort air
conditions for the buildings with a lower supply air tempera-
ture, lowest energy consumption, and highest efficiency.
IDEPC has the wet and dry sides of a plate like indirect evap-
orative coolers, but with a very different airflow which creates
a new thermodynamic cycle so that the product temperatures
which approach the dew point temperature of air are created
(Gillan, 2008). However, all types of DEC and IDPEC have
inappropriate performance in humid environmental areas
where outdoor wet bulb temperature is close to dry bulb
temperature. Therefore, there is low evaporation potential for
cool supply air. In such an area, another class of evaporative
cooling systems which utilize solid or liquid desiccants to
absorb the moisture of intake air prior to its entry into evap-
orative cooling part has been introduced (Kozubal et al., 2011).
Therefore, in humid areas in which the performance of DEC
and IDPEC is unsatisfactory due to very low difference be-
tween outdoor dry and wet bulb temperatures, desiccant
evaporative cooling system might be considered as an option
for evaporative cooling. Moreover, utilizing desiccant dehu-
midifier enables the evaporative system to provide colder
product air, even in non-humid area, in comparison to tradi-
tional evaporative cooling. There are two classes of desiccants
including solid desiccant and liquid one. Solid desiccants are
employed in evaporative cooling systems with a regenerative
desiccant wheel. In the half part of desiccant wheel rotation,
solid desiccant adsorbs moisture from intake air and, in the
next half cycles, desiccant is dehumidified using the hot air
warmed by a heat source. Desiccant wheel consumes a
considerable amount of energy and adsorption process gen-
erates a significant amount of heat leading to a higher air
temperature before entering the evaporative section. Liquid
desiccants are another option that does not need to be used in
desiccant wheels; however, they also generate heat in
absorption process and might be carried over by the product
air into conditioned space. In recent years, a new class of
desiccant evaporative cooling, namely enhanced desiccant
evaporative cooling (DEVap) has been invented by National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (Kozubal et al., 2011). In this
class of liquid desiccant systems, liquid desiccant is employed
in membrane channel to prevent its carry over. On the other
hand, there is a cooling channel adjusted to the membrane
channel that cools down a part of generated heat in absorption
process. This class of evaporative cooling system is composed
of two sections: desiccant part which contains membrane
channels with liquid desiccant and indirect evaporative sec-
tion which is dew point indirect evaporative cooling in the
class of M-cycle. This new class of desiccant indirect evapo-
rative cooling benefits both advantage of lower supply air
temperature and possibility to be implemented in hot and
humid areas. Therefore, performance of DEVap would be
comparable with that of traditional vapor compression air
conditioning systems as it may be more energy efficient;
however, desiccant system utilizes a significant amount of
thermal energy in order to recharge weak desiccant that con-
tains absorbed moisture so that it is dehumidified in the form
of strong desiccant for re-utilizing in mass exchanger. On the
other hand, providing membrane mass exchanger and desic-
cant recharging heat exchanger increases cost of the system.
Considering the aforementioned advantages and disad-
vantage of various cooling systems (VC, DEC, IDPEC, and
DEVap), it is difficult to decide which system is the best choice
for cooling an small scale residential application, since various
criteria including cost, energy consumption and efficiency,
environmental impact, and comfort specifications are simul-
taneously considered for decision making. The objective of this
paper was to present a systematic decision making method for
selecting the best cooling system in diverse climatic conditions
for a small scale residential application. In this regard, de-
cisions weres made based on energy, economic, and environ-
mental (3E) criteria as well as considering comfort conditions
as the most important criterion. The literature was reviewed
for obtaining background studies and it was found that there
are few studies, which combine “energy”, “environmental”,
and “economic” analysis (3E analysis) with “thermal comfort
analysis” and “advanced decision making model”, especially
considering the comparison of conventional cooling systems
(VC, DEC, and IDPEC) with advanced new cooling systems; i.e.
liquid desiccant-enhanced dew point cooling system. Howev-
er, a few studies were found on energy/exergy analysis and
sustainability performance of indirect evaporative cooling
systems and experimental and numerical investigation of
liquid desiccant-enhanced evaporative air cooling systems. In
this regard, Delfani et al. (2010) studied the performance of
indirect evaporative cooling systems (IDPEC) to pre-cool the
intake air of a conventional mechanical cooling system in four
cities of Iran. They designed, constructed, and tested a com-
bined experimental setup consisting of an IDPEC unit followed
by a packaged unit air conditioner (PUA). The results indicated
that IDPEC can reduce cooling load up to 75% during cooling
seasons and lead to 55% reduction in electrical energy con-
sumption of PUA. Heidarinejad et al. (2009) carried out the
experimental analysis of a two-stage indirect/direct evapora-
tive cooling system in various climatic conditions. For this
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
purpose, a two-stage evaporative cooling experimental setup
consisting of an indirect evaporative cooling stage (IDPEC)
followed by a direct evaporative cooling stage (DEC) was
designed, constructed, and tested. The results presented that
more than 60% power saving could be obtained by this system
in comparison with mechanical vapor compression systems
with only 55% increase in water consumption compared to
direct evaporative cooling systems. In addition, they claimed
that this system could fill the gap between direct evaporative
cooling systems and mechanical vapor compression systems
as energy efficient and environmentally clean alternative.
Maisotsenko and Reyzin (2005) studied the M-cycle (IDPEC)
based heat and mass exchangers for the electronics cooling. A
large cooling capacity could be obtained from the M-cycle
cooler in the range of 10 We50 kW or more. It was found that air
coolers based on M-cycle had higher energy efficiency ratio
(EER) (EER > 45) than the best conventional air coolers
(EER ¼ 13). Zhao et al. (2009) carried out the feasibility of a novel
dew point evaporative cooling system. In this regard, investi-
gation of the water availability for dew point cooling and
assessment of cooling capacity of the system within various
regions of China were considered. Lower relative humidity
resulted in higher temperature difference between the dry bulb
and dew point temperatures and higher cooling capacity of the
dew point system. Tap water could be used to support cooling
of the dew point system. High ambient temperature caused a
low effective cooling capacity as a major part of cooling energy.
The intake air kept the humidity level of 70% and below to
reach the comfortable indoor air conditions. If the building
area was considered to be 50 m2 with 60 W m2 cooling load, i.e.
09:00 to 17:00 h, its daily water consumption would be in the
range 64e72 L day1 (Zhao et al., 2009). The system consumed
more water in dry and hot climates than in mild and humid
ones. Caliskan et al. (2012) presented a comparative study on
energetic, exergetic, and environmental performance assess-
ments of three various novel air coolers based on M-Cycle for
buildings. They calculated the environmental assessments of
the systems from their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (in
“gCO2 kW hr1”) due to their electricity utilization. Caliskan
et al. (2011) carried out exergetic and sustainability perfor-
mance comparison of novel and conventional air cooling sys-
tems for building applications. The dead states temperatures
(reference environment temperatures) of higher than 23  C
(comfort temperature), exergy efficiency, and sustainability of
the novel system, which was based on the novel Maisotsenko
cycle (M-cycle), were higher than those of the conventional
systems. Ahmed et al. (1997) numerically investigated a hybrid
liquid desiccant system and open cycle vapor absorption and
used lithium bromide solution for the process of absorption
and regeneration in the solar regenerator with COP between
1.0 and 1.3. In order to use the dew point cooler more practi-
cally for humid climates, integration of the liquid desiccant
into evaporative cooling systems was investigated. An
absorber of a liquid desiccant air conditioner was developed by
Woods and Kozubal (2013) who combined an evaporatively-
cooled liquid desiccant dehumidifier (first stage) with a dew
point indirect evaporative cooler (second stage). Also, a liquid
desiccant evaporative air cooling was studied to meet new
economic, environmental, and regulatory challenges (Gao
et al., 2014).
115
The objective of the present paper was to present a deci-
sion making strategy for selecting the best cooling option for
a small scale residential application based on comprehensive
criteria in diverse climatic conditions. In this regard, various
cooling systems as alternatives for the cooling system of an
apartment with 97.1 m2 floor area including vapor compres-
sion (VC) system, direct evaporative cooler (DEC), dew point
indirect evaporative cooler (IDPEC or M-cycle), and desiccant
enhanced evaporative cooler (DEVap) were sized. In order to
cover various possible climatic conditions in the analyses,
seven cities in Iran with diverse outdoor design conditions
were chosen as the representatives for various world climatic
conditions. For each cooling system that was assumed to be
utilized in the proposed building and considered locations,
the 3E analysis (energy, economic, and environmental ana-
lyses) (Shabanpour et al., 2013) as well as a comprehensive
comfort analysis was performed. Accordingly, quantitative
values of four criteria including primary energy consumption
(PEC; as an energy criterion), annualized cost of cooling (ACC;
as an economic criterion), carbon dioxide emission (CDE0; as
an environmental criterion), and thermal comfort condition
(TCI) were obtained. The thermal comfort analysis was
evaluated based on PMV and PPD methods to investigate
thermal comfort air conditions in each location. To select the
suitable system for each location, decision making was per-
formed using the fuzzy-AHP based on the judgments of five
decision makers (experts) who linguistically defined degree of
preference of four criteria. Their judgments were trans-
formed into five pairwise comparative matrices with trian-
gular fuzzy arrays. Then, the local and global weights of
alternatives and criteria were obtained by minimizing a log-
arithmic least square function using the genetic algorithm.
Therefore, the most appropriate cooling system with the
greatest global weights fitting all the criteria was introduced
to be used in each region for small scale residential
application.
2. System description
2.1. Weather data and specifications of building
envelope
Five configurations of cooling systems including vapor
compression (VC), direct evaporative cooler (DEC), two con-
figurations of dew point indirect evaporative cooler (IDPEC) or
M-cycle (one configuration with return air and another
without return air), and finally desiccant enhanced evapora-
tive cooler (DEVap) were sized and analyzed to be used in
seven different cities with diverse climatic conditions. The
seven cities of Iran with diverse climatic conditions including
temperate and dry, temperate and wet, hot and semi-dry, hot
and very dry, very hot and semi-humid, and hot and wet were
considered. Benchmark cities for these climatic conditions
were Tabriz, Rasht, Azadshahhr, Tehran, Zahedan, Ahvaz,
and Bandar-Abbas, respectively. The summer outdoor design
conditions of the selected cities are indicated in Table 1 and
their regional distribution in Iran is shown in Fig. 1. However,
the cities were selected from Iran whose weather data would
116 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

Table 1 e Outdoor summer design conditions of proposed areas with diverse climatic conditions.
City Weather category Altitude Average air Lat. Lon. Tdb RH Twb Tdp Tdb  Twb Tdb  Tdp
(m) density (kg.m3) ( N) ( E) ( C) (%) ( C) ( C) ( C) ( C)
Tabriz Temperate and dry 1366 0.990 37.8 46.2 33.9 23.8 18 7.3 15.9 26.5
Tehran Hot and semi-dry 1189 1.005 35.7 51.3 37.8 30.4 19.4 7.9 18.3 29.9
Zahedan Hot and very dry 1350 0.983 29.5 60.9 37.5 9.9 17.2 0.7 20.3 36.8
Rasht Temperate and wet 4 1.172 37.3 49.7 31.9 61.3 25.7 23.5 6.2 8.4
Azadshahr Temperate and humid 129 1.146 37.1 55.2 35.6 48.1 26.1 22.8 9.4 12.8
Ahvaz Very hot and semi-humid 12 1.141 31.3 48.7 46.4 30.0 27.8 21.2 18.6 25.1
Bandar-Abass Hot and wet 10 1.152 27.2 56.4 40.6 54.3 31.9 29.7 8.6 10.8

representat any climatic conditions in the world with the
aforementioned weather categories.
Based on Table 1, temperature differences between dry
bulb and dew point temperatures as well as dry bulb and wet
bulb temperatures were calculated. Of course, a higher value
of relative humidity resulted in a lower value of these tem-
perature differences; therefore, direct evaporative cooler and
dew point indirect evaporative cooler (IDPEC) were unsuitable
in Rasht, Azadshahr, Ahvaz, and Bandar-Abbas because of
their high relative humidity. Implementing a dehumidifica-
tion enhanced dew point air cooler (DEVap conditioner) would
allow the dew point system to be used in humid areas such as
Ahvaz, Rasht, Azadshahr, and Bandar-Abbas. Conventional
vapor compression systems have the potential to be used in
all areas.
A benchmark residential flat with 97.1 m2 floor area as a
middle story of a five story building was considered in the
aforementioned cities to be cooled with the specified cooling
systems. Further information regarding the proposed building
is given in Fig. 2 and Table 2.
2.2. Description of optional cooling systems
Five configurations of cooling system introduced in Section
2.1, were considered as air conditioning options for the pro-
posed building that was described in Fig. 2 and Table 2.

Fig. 1 e Regional distribution of the proposed areas with diverse climatic conditions.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 117

Fig. 2 e (a) Side view of the proposed building; (b) Plan of the flat.

2.2.1. Liquid desiccant-enhanced dew point evaporative
cooler (DEVap)
Schematics of a DEVap conditioner is shown in Fig. 3a and b.
The whole system was composed of two stages: dehumidifier
and the dew point evaporative cooler. The psychometric
process of air through the entire device is illustrated in Fig. 3c.
The ‘LiCl-38%’ line is the humidity ratio of air in equilibrium
with liquid desiccant solution (lithium chloride) at the mass
fraction of 0.38. The DEVap cooler with the 38% LiCl was
assumed to be utilized in humid areas including Ahvaz, Rasht,
Azadshahr, and Bandar-Abbas.
The first stage is made up of a heat and mass exchanger,
in which supply-side air (the product air stream) and liquid
desiccant solution contained behind the flat sheet
118 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
Table 2 e Description of the simulated building as inputs
to carrier, HAP 4.50.
Floor area (m2)
Average ceiling height (m)
External U value (W m2 K1)
Internal U value (W m2 K1)
Partition wall U value (W m2 K1)
Windows overall U value (W m2 K1)
Building weight (kg m2)
Wall gross area (m2)
Number of windows
Sash area of each window (m2)
Partition area (m2)
Total occupant (person)
membranes, is in one channel, and an exhaust-side air (the
secondary air stream) lined with wicked surfaces for water
flow is in the adjacent channel. 30% ventilation air and 70%
indoor return air are mixed into a single air stream entering
the supply-side channels (state 1). The supply-side air
stream is diffused through a vapor-permeable membrane
and is brought into contact with the liquid desiccant;
therefore, the water vapor from the supply air is absorbed
by desiccant solution and equivalent absorption enthalpy is
released in air; hence, the air temperature is increased. A
thin plastic plate that structurally separates the channels
transfers most part of this energy into an exhaust-side
channel where water is desorbing and transferring to the
air stream (states 3e4) and this air stream is exhausted to
the outside as hot humid air. The dehumidified air exits the
first stage (state 1.5) and brought into dew point evapora-
tive cooler section as the second stage of the DEVap system.
At the second stage, the supply air is cooled in counter-
flowing along the flow path (state 2). Some part of dry
supply air is diverted into the adjacent wet channel to
provide the sensible cooling by an exhaust air stream (state
5) (Kozubal et al., 2011; Woods and Kozubal, 2013; Gao et al.,
2014). Indeed, the second stage of the DEVap system is an
IDPEC which will be explained in more detail in the next
section.
The dehumidifying potential of desiccant solution will be
eventually reduced by the absorption of the water vapor
which decreases the air's vapor pressure and decreases the
desiccant's ability to absorb vapor. The liquid solution is re-
generated in the regenerator where the water vapor is des-
orbed into exhaust air stream. The regenerator is not
illustrated in Fig. 3. In the process of regeneration, the
desiccant solution is heated to the temperature at which the
equilibrium water vapor pressure is above the ambient
temperature. The water vapor is desorbed from the desiccant
solution. For regenerating the desiccant, a two-stage regen-
erator is used. This two-stage regeneration system consists of
two parts: the first part for boiling the water out of the
desiccant solution in the gas-fired heat exchanger of a boiler
and the second part is a scavenging-air regenerator for
removing the rest of water from the steam. In this study, the
boiler and heat and mass exchanger (HMX) scavenging
regenerator of two-stage regenerator were powered by the
natural gas and steam, respectively (Woods and Kozubal,
2013; Gao et al., 2014; Shabanpour et al., 2013). The two-
stage regenerator operated with the constant latent COP of
97.1
1.3 and 80% efficiency of interchange heat exchanger and a
3
standard 15 Amp, 120-V electrical connection. Specifications
1.3
1.2 of the system were taken from National Renewable Energy
1.2 Laboratory (NREL) under the U.S. Department of Energy
3.1 (Kozubal et al., 2011). Fig. 4 illustrates a packaged DEVap
341.8 conditioner that can be installed in the proposed residential
103 building in humid areas of this project (Azadshahr, Rasht,
7
Ahvaz, and Bandar-Abbas).
1.7
19.2
5 2.2.2. Indirect dew point evaporative cooling system (IDPEC)
A schematic layout of the dew point air cooling is shown in
Fig. 5a. This air cooling system uses a thermodynamic cycle
that is called M-Cycle. Heat and mass exchanger (HMX) and
psychometric chart of the M-Cycle are given in Fig. 5b.
The heat and mass exchanger of this dew point cooler was
developed to economically take the advantage of the M-cycle.
The HMX consists of several plates of a special plastic. One
side is designed to wick water and the other side is designed to
transfer heat. Also, the plates are stacked on each other,
separated by channel guides. Providing a structure to the
exchanger as well as directing the air movement within the
HMX is the aim of the channel guides. These guides separate
the intake air stream into the product air and working air. The
product air is always divided from the working air and stays
within dry channels the entire length of the exchanger. The
product air is cooled sensibly and can be designed to cool
nearby the dew point temperature of the intake air. Finally,
the product air passes through the exchanger and enters the
conditioned space (Coolerado Inc., 2010; Maisotsenko et al.).
Two scenarios were considered for utilizing this system; in the
first scenario, the intake air contained 100% ambient air (full
fresh air); in the second scenario, the desiccant part of the
DEVap conditioner was removed and its cooling core was
utilized for non-humid climatic conditions, in which the
intake air was composed of 30% fresh air and 70% return air.
Specifications of the system in the first scenario were taken
from (Duan, 2011). Also, specifications of the system in the
second scenario were taken from (Kozubal et al., 2011).
2.2.3. Conventional air cooling systems
The conventional air cooling systems that were considered
in this study included direct evaporative cooling (DEC) and
vapor-compression (VC) or direct-expansion (DX) cooling
systems. Specifications of the systems were taken from the
selected manufacturer catalogues. These systems are the
most widely used ones in small scale residential buildings.
In direct evaporative air cooling system, water is evapo-
rated into the air stream directly and reduces the dry bulb
temperature of the intake air while raising its relative hu-
midity. Also, in vapor-compression cooling system, the
refrigerant extracts heat from space, rejects heat to outdoor
air, and provides cooling to the building space. As these
systems are popular and well-developed, more details
about their working principles are not needed to be pre-
sented here.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 119

Fig. 3 e Scheme of DEVap conditioner (Woods and Kozubal, 2013): (a) Four stacked channel pairs; (b) Top view of one channel
pair; (c) Air state change on a psychometric chart.
120 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
Fig. 4 e Schematic layouts of the systems (a) Example diagram of a packaged DEVap conditioner (AIL Research and Inc,
2014).
3. Modeling
3.1. Estimating energy demand
3.1.1. Load estimation and system sizing
Annual profiles of building's electric and cooling loads were
calculated to obtain energy demands of the benchmark
building in seven selected areas with diverse climatic condi-
tions. To calculate the building's electrical and cooling load,
the proposed benchmark residential building was simulated
in Carrier-HAP4.50 software. The sensible and latent cooling
loads were calculated based on indoor design condition at
25  C and 50% relative humidity. Fig. 6 illustrates monthly
cooling load profiles of the proposed building.
Table 3 indicates the applicability of each type of cooling
system to the proposed seven regions. It can be seen that, for
wet and humid areas, all types of DEC (direct dew point
evaporative cooling) and IDPEC (indirect evaporative cooling)
systems were not applicable. Fore such an area, decision was
made between VC (vapor compression) and DEVap (liquid
desiccant-enhance evaporative) cooling systems. In dry areas,
since there was no requirement for dehumidifying the intake
air, DEVap system was not considered and decision was made
between DEC, IDPEC, and VC.
Based on maximum cooling load estimation, the size of
each cooling system for providing indoor comfort conditions
in each region was estimated. Tables 4e7 are presented here
to indicate the required specifications of DEC, IDPEC without
return air, IDPEC with return air, DEVap, and VC selected for
seven areas, respectively. Specifications of indirect dew point
evaporative cooling systems without and with return air from
conditioned space are reflected in Tables 5a and 5b,
respectively.
3.1.2. Energy analysis of the systems
Prior to any energy analysis, wet bulb and dew point effec-
tiveness expressing the performance of the air cooling sys-
tems were calculated. Also, cooling capacity and coefficient of
performance, which are very consequential for air cooling
systems, were determined for each cooling system.
The wet bulb effectiveness of dew point air cooler, εwb, is
defined as the temperature difference of intake and supply air
divided by the temperature difference between the dry bulb
and wet bulb of intake air; therefore (NREL):
T1;db  T2;db
εwb ¼ (1)
T1;db  T1;wb
where T1,db is dry bulb temperature of intake air, T2,db is dry
bulb temperature of supply air, and T1,wb is wet bulb temper-
ature of intake air.
Similar to the wet bulb effectiveness, the dew point effec-
tiveness, εdp, is defined as the temperature difference of intake
and supply air divided by the temperature difference between
the dry bulb and dew point of intake air (NREL):
T1;db  T2;db
εdp ¼ (2)
T1;db  T1;dp
where T1,dp is dew point temperature of intake air.
Cooling capacity of air conditioning systems, Q_ cooling ðWÞ,
can be defined by:
r V_ 2 ðh1  h2 Þ
Q_ cooling ¼ a (3)
3:6
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 121

Fig. 5 e (a) Schematic layout of the indirect dew point evaporative cooling (IDPEC or M-Cycle) (Coolerado Inc, 2010); (b)
Thermal process of the IDPEC.

where ra is air density in kg m3, which is illustrated in Table 1 When the outdoor air enters as intake air of the air
for all the climatic conditions, V_ 2 is the supply air volumetric conditioner systems (full fresh air application), the cooling
flow rate in m3 hr1, h1 is the enthalpy of intake air in kJ kg1, capacity of coolers can be evaluated using the equation pre-
and h2 is enthalpy of supply air. sented by ASHRAE Standard 143 as follows (ANSI, 2000):

Fig. 6 e Monthly cooling loads Qc for the selected cities.

122 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

Table 3 e Applicability of various cooling system in each area.

City Weather Category Direct evaporative Indirect dew point Liquid desiccant- Vapor compression
cooling (DEC) evaporative cooling enhanced evaporative cooling (VC)
(IDPEC or M-cycle) cooling (DEVap)
Tabriz Temperate and dry Applicable Applicable Not Recom. Applicable
Tehran Hot and semi-dry Applicable Applicable Not Recom. Applicable
Zahedan Hot and very dry Applicable Applicable Not Recom. Applicable
Rasht Temperate and wet NA NA Applicable Applicable
Azadshahr Temperate and NA NA Applicable Applicable
humid
Ahvaz Very hot and NA NA Applicable Applicable
semi-humid
Bandar-Abass Hot and wet Na Na Applicable Applicable

Table 4 e Specifications of selected DEC system in each area.

City Weather Category WB effectiveness (%) Supply air flow rate (m3 hr1) Power consumption (W)
Tabriz Temperate and dry 85 3000 220
Tehran Hot and semi-dry 85 5200 380
Zahedan Hot and very dry 85 3000 220
Rasht Temperate and wet NA NA NA
Azadshahr Temperate and humid NA NA NA
Ahvaz Very hot and semi-humid NA NA NA
Bandar-Abass Hot and wet NA NA NA

Cp ra V_ 2 ðTdb;1  Tdb;2 Þ Q_ cooling

Q_ cooling ¼ (4) COP ¼ (5)
3:6 E_consume
where Cp is specific heat of air at constant pressure considered where E_consume is the consumed rate of energy (W). In addition,
as 1 kJ kg1 K1, Tdb,1 is dry-bulb temperature of intake air (K), the latent COP of DEVap's regenerator is defined as follows
and Tdb,2 is dry-bulb temperature of supply air. (Kozubal et al., 2011):
Coefficient of performance (COP) of systems is cooling rate
divided by the rate of consumed energy. Therefore, COP of the MRR:hfg
COPlatent ¼ (6)
system can be written as: Qr

Table 5a e Specifications of selected dew point evaporative cooling system (IDPEC) without return air in each area.
City Weather Category WB effectiveness Working Intake Product Supply air flow Power
(%) ratio DBT/WBT( C) DBT( C) rate (m3 hr1) con. (W)
Tabriz Temperate and dry 102 0.4 33.9 18 17.7 1900 360
Tehran Hot and semi-dry 102 0.4 37.8 19.4 19.0 2500 470
Zahedan Hot and very dry 102 0.4 37.5 17.2 16.8 1800 340
Rasht Temperate and wet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Azadshahr Temperate and NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
humid
Ahvaz Very hot and NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
semi-humid
Bandar-Abass Hot and wet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Table 5b e The specifications of selected dew point evaporative cooling (IDPEC) with return air in each area.
City Weather Category WB effectiveness Working Intake Product Supply air flow Power
(%) ratio DBT/WBT( C) DBT( C) rate (m3 hr1) Con. (W)
Tabriz Temperate and dry 1 0.5 30.8 17.1 17.1 1700 330
Tehran Hot and semi-dry 1 0.5 33.3 18.1 18.1 2150 410
Zahedan Hot and very dry 1 0.5 33.1 15.8 15.8 1550 290
Rasht Temperate and wet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Azadshahr Temperate and humid NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ahvaz Very hot and semi-humid NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Bandar-Abass Hot and wet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 123

Table 6 e Specifications of selected DEVap system in each area.

City Weather category Du L/G Intake Supply Supply air flow Power
(gr kg1) DBT/WBT ( C) DBT ( C) rate (m3 hr1) Con.(W)
Tabriz Temperate and dry NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Tehran Hot and semi-dry NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Zahedan Hot and very dry NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rasht Temperate and wet 5.4 0.4 29.5 23.3 17.8 1700 330
Azadshahr Temperate and humid 5.0 0.4 31.9 23.7 18.2 2150 410
Ahvaz Very hot and 3.9 0.3 38.9 24.8 21.0 4150 290
semi-humid
Bandar-Abbas Hot and wet 10.9 1.1 35.1 27.9 22.7 6300 1210

where MRR is the moisture removal rate in kg s1, hfg is

desorption heat of the water, kJ kg1, and Q_ r is thermal energy A ¼ 66:2324 þ 11:2711X  0:79853X2 þ ð2:1534E  02ÞX3
input for a two-stage regenerator (kJ).
 ð1:66352E  04ÞX4 (8b)
The thermal energy output of DEVap system can be ob-
tained as follows:
B ¼ 4:5751  0:416924X þ ð6:307226E  03ÞX2

  ð1:38054E  04ÞX3 þ ð1:06690E  06ÞX4 (8c)
Q_ r ¼ rair V_ sa ðDARÞ þ rair V_ sa Du hstrong desiccant
 rair ðDARÞhweak desiccant  rair V_ sa Duhvapor C ¼ ð8:09689E  04Þ þ ð2:18145E  04ÞX  ð1:36194E  05ÞX2

  (7)
¼ rair V_ sa ðDARÞ hstrong desiccant  hweak desiccant þ ð3:20998E  07ÞX3  ð2:64266E  09Þ
 
þ Du hstrong desiccant  hvapor
(8d)
where DAR is desiccant to air ration, Du is air humidity In Eqs. (8b)e(8d), X is desiccant concentration percent. On
absorbed by dehumidifier in kgwater kg1 _
dry air, Vsa is volumetric
3 1
the other hand, in Eq. (7), desiccant to air ratio (DAR) at the air
flow rate of the dry air in m hr , T is desiccant temperature in temperature of 28  C and 38% concentration of inlet desiccant
(K), and h is enthalpy in kJ kg1 calculated based on desiccant could be evaluated using the following expressions:

8
> u  u25 C;50%RH
>
>  air;in   for 9:5  uair;in  14 grwater $kg1
< 0:0005803 109:2  T u
air;in air;in þ 14:1 dry air

DAR ¼ (9)
>
> uair;in  u25 C;50%RH
: 0:0028877109:2  T
>    0:345 for 14 < uair;in  21 grwater $kg1
dry air
u
air;in air;in þ 14:1

temperature from the following expression (Chaudhari and The volumetric hourly water consumption is presented as
Patil, 2002) follows:

_ t
Vw ¼ ra VDu (10a)
hdesiccant ¼ A þ bT þ CT2 (8a) rw

where where V_ is volumetric flow rate of air in m3 h1, Du is differ-

ence between moisture content of the supply air and outdoor
air in kgwater kg1
dry air, rw is water density in kg m
3
(considered
3
as 1000 kg m ), and t is the up-time of the systems. Thus, the
Table 7 e Specifications of selected vapor-compression
daily water consumption would be:
system in each area.
City Weather Category Cooling Power Vdaily ¼ 24Vw (10b)
capacity (W) con. (W)
The cooling capacity and COP of the systems were calcu-
Tabriz Temperate and dry 4900 1510 lated in terms of average and maximum values for the
Tehran Hot and semi-dry 5150 1600
selected cities. In addition, daily water consumption for sys-
Zahedan Hot and very dry 4750 1460
Rasht Temperate and wet 5150 1600 tem use water was calculated in each city.
Azadshahr Temperate and 5000 1550
humid 3.1.3. Evaluation of the primary energy consumption (PEC)
Ahvaz Very hot and 6500 2000 Primary energy consumption (PEC) of the cooling was calcu-
semi-humid lated based on the definition of a factor, called source-site
Bandar-Abbas Hot and wet 6500 2000
ratio (SSR). The source-site ratio is defined for the electricity
124 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

emission factors are 0.598 and 0.185 kg (kWh)1 for electricity

Table 8a e Electricity source site ratios.
and natural gas, respectively (EIA, 2011). For the sake of
Year T&D Net TPE for power ESSR simplicity, in all the considered locations (seven cities of this
losses generation generation
study), these factors were considered to be the same. Accord-
(GWh) (GWh) (GWh)
ingly, the carbon dioxide emission for the DEVap air condi-
2006 45,559.6 195,158.4 541,445.7 3.619 tioner that consumed both electricity and natural gas was:
2007 48,109.6 205,698.3 566,775.5 3.597
2008 48,449.6 216,238.3 625,595.0 3.728 CDEdev ¼ Ereq $CDEFE þ Qr $CDEFNG (12)
2009 45,899.6 223,378.2 641,404.9 3.614
where CDEFE denotes carbon dioxide emission factor for the
2010 43,179.7 235,788.1 663,674.7 3.446
electricity (0.598 kg (kWh)1 (TAGTM, 1991)) and CDEFNG de-
2011 45,559.6 243,608.1 678,294.6 3.425
Average (2006e2011) 3.572 notes carbon dioxide emission factor for the natural gas
(0.185 kg (kWh)1 (EIA, 2011)). Because of no consuming ther-
mal energy by other cooling systems, the CDEFNG term in Eq.
and natural gas consumption separately. Electricity source-
(11) is zero for those cooling systems.
site ratio (ESSR) is defined as the total primary energy
involved in the electricity generation divided by the net gen- 3.3. Economic analysis
eration minus transmission and distribution (T&D) losses
(EPA, 2008). Typical values for source-site ratio in electric en- Annualized cost of cooling was calculated to assess the eco-
ergy sector are presented in Table 8a. The natural gas source-
nomic operation of various cooling systems. In order to
site ratio (NGSSR) is defined by computing sum of the natural
calculate the life cycle cost, total revenue requirement (TRR)
gas delivered to consumers, pipeline, distribution use, and
analysis was utilized (TAGTM, 1991; Bejan et al., 1996). The
plant use and then dividing the result by the total delivery to
total revenue requirement method was introduced in the
consumers (EPA, 2008). Typical values for the natural gas
report of Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (TAGTM,
source-site ratio are presented in Table 8b. Annual values for 1991) for the first time and refined later by Tsatsaronis in
the calculation of ESSR and NGSSR were extracted from the (Bejan et al., 1996).
Iran Energy Bulletin and Iran Energy Flowcharts (Energy Flow Accordingly, the annualized cost of cooling (ACC) can be
Chart, 2006; Iran Energy, 2006). obtained based on the levelized revenue requirement of the
As the DEVap system consumes both electric and thermal system, TRRL, levelized fuel cost, FCL, and present worth fac-
energies, the primary energy consumption by the DEVap air tor, PWF0, with slight modification from (Shabanpour et al.,
conditioner for a given period of time, for example one year,
2013; TAGTM, 1991; Bejan et al., 1996) as follows:
was:
TRRL þ FCL
PEC ¼ Ereq $ESSR þ Qr $NGSSR (11) ACC ¼ (13)
PWF0
where Ereq and Qr are electric and thermal energy demands of Procedures for the calculation of the levelized revenue
the DEVap cooling system for the same period of time in requirement of the system, TRRL, levelized fuel cost, FCL, and
(kWh). For a given period of time, these data were obtained by present worth factor, PWF0, will be presented in the following
integrating the demand rate of these energies for the time sections.
period. Because of no consuming thermal energy by other
cooling systems, the Qr term in Eq. (11) is zero for those cooling 3.3.1. Calculation of total levelized revenue requirement,
systems. TRRL
The levelized total revenue requirement was determined
based on the feature of the proposed air cooling systems and
3.2. Evaluation of carbon dioxide emission (CDE)
procedure given in (Bejan et al., 1996). It has been noted that
tax and insurance rates which are among the components of
Electricity and natural gas emission factors are essential for
economic parameters in original TRR method are not appli-
evaluating carbon dioxide emission of systems. Values of gas
cable in the economic analysis of these cooling systems,
because for small energy system such as air conditioner sys-
Table 8b e Natural gas source site ratios. tems, these values are negligible. Instead, in large scale energy
Year Some of pipeline, Delivery to Source systems, these parameters are among significant economic
distribution use, plant consumers site variables. For the levelized total revenue requirement, the
fuel and delivery to (MBOE) ratio following expression with slight modification from (Bejan
consumers (MBOE) et al., 1996) might be written as:
2006 688.7 401.9 1.714 0 1
  BL
2007 774.3 471.8 1.641 kð1  kBL Þ @ X TRRj A
TRRL ¼ CRF  j (14)
2008 805.3 476.5 1.690 1k j¼1 1 þ ieff
2009 866.2 519.7 1.667
2010 903.4 557.7 1.620 where CRF is capital recovery factor obtained from the
2011 947.8 652.1 1.453 following expression (Bejan et al., 1996):
Average 1.631
(2006e2011)  BL
ieff 1 þ ieff
CRF ¼  BL (15)
MBOE: Million barrel oil equivalent. 1 þ ieff 1
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 125

In Eqs. (13) and (14), ieff and BL are effective interest rates
Table 9a e Capital cost calculation of indirect dew point
(assumed as 15%) and book life of the proposed air cooling
evaporative cooling (IDPEC) and liquid desiccant
systems (assumed as 15 years), respectively. In addition, k is a enhanced evaporative cooling (DEVap) systems.
factor that is obtained by the following expression (Bejan
IDPEC DEVap
et al., 1996):
Component Cost ($) Component Cost ($)
1þr
k¼ (16) Tangible fan 98 $/ton, core 800
1 þ ieff Axial fan 84 $/kg LiCl 10
Water pump 90 2-stage regenerator 600
where r is inflation rate that was assumed to be 6% in the
Air filter 3.5 Tank 45
present analysis.
Upper water tank 7.5 Supply/mixed-air 150
In Eq. (15), TRRj is total revenue requirement associated to fan
the investment of the cooling systems for the jth year of the Lower water tank 8.5 Exhaust fan 110
system operation. By neglecting the associated terms of tax Water pipe 13 Electronics 280
and insurance for cooling system, TRRj was obtained with Fan speed controller 48 Packaging 480
slight modification from (Bejan et al., 1996) as follows: Intake air grill 1.5 2 desiccant pumps 50
Supply air grill 2.5 Solenoid 60
TRRj ¼ TCRj þ ROIj þ OMCj (17) Float switch 4.5 Filters 20
Casing galvanized 156 Pressure regulator 60
where TCRj, ROIj, and OMCj are total capital recoveries, return steel sheet 1005 mm
on investment, and operating and maintenance costs for the *605 mm *0.6 mm
jth year of the system operation, respectively. Calculation Heat exchanger 410 LiCl storage 180
aluminum sheet
procedures for these three parameters will be given in the
0.3 mm
following sections. It is required to mention that in calculating
Heat exchanger 112 Sum of the 2845
TCRj as per ref. (Shabanpour et al., 2013) as this parameter glass fiber individual
depend on total investment of the system and the present cost
cooling systems were small energy systems, their in- Sum of the individual 1039 Profit (30%  Sum) 853.5
vestments were simply composed of the total purchased cost
equipment cost, engineering and construction cost, contin- Profit (30%  Sum) 311.7
System size: 1529.1 m3 h1 System size: 10.6 kW
gency and other costs. Total equipment cost (TEC) for the dew
(900 cfm) (36000 Btu hr1)
point system was taken from (Duan, 2011) with slight modi-
Total equipment cost 1350.7 Total equipment 3698.5
fications based on Iran's market. The purchased equipment cost
cost was composed of the costs of the tangible fan, axial fan,
water pump, air filter, upper water tank, lower water tank,
water pipe, fan speed controller, intake air grill, supply air size and price of Tables 9a and 9b). In addition, in Eq. (18), a
grill, float switch, galvanized steel casing sheet, aluminum was taken as 0.6 (six-tenth rule) (Bejan et al., 1996).
heat exchanger, and glass fiber heat exchanger. Also, the
purchased equipment of DEVap system was the dehumidifier, 3.3.2. Calculating fuel cost, FCL
desiccant storage tank, desiccant pumps, and two-stage In Section 3.1.1, the procedure for calculating the first term in
regenerator which contained a boiler, scavenging-air regen- the numerator of the right hand side of Eq. (13) called the
erator, and a standard electrical connection taken from Na- levelized total revenue requirement, TRRL, was presented. The
tional Renewable Energy Laboratory (Wang, 2000) and AIL second term, in the numerator of the right hand side of Eq.
Research, Inc. 18]. Details of the purchased cost estimations (13), was the levelized fuel cost, FCL. The levelized annual cost
for DEVap and indirect dew point evaporative cooler are given of fuel was determined for the annual cost of utilities that
in Table 9a. For direct evaporative cooler (DEC) and vapor contained electricity, natural gas, and water. This term was
compression cooler (VC), the purchased equipment was evaluated with slight modification from (Shabanpour et al.,
quoted from the selected product catalogues. The final values 2013; Bejan et al., 1996) as follows:
for the purchased cost of DEC and VC are indicated in Table 9b 2  3
(Aabsal corporation; coolergazi). kFC 1  kBL
FC
FCL ¼ CRF$ 4 5$FC1 (19)
Cost data of Tables 9a and 9b were estimated for cooler ð1  kFC Þ
with a specific capacity. In order to calculate the purchased
cost of these systems at any capacity, the data of Tables 9a where kFC is a factor that was obtained from the similar
and 9b were corrected based on the six-tenths rule (Bejan expression as Eq. (14), but with the corresponding escalation
et al., 1996). Based on this rule, the cost of each cooling sys-
tem for a desired capacity was obtained based on the specific
capacities given in Tables 9a and 9b as follows:
Table 9b e Capital cost of direct evaporative cooling, DEC
 a
XY and vapor-compression, VC, systems.
CPE;Y ¼ CPE;W (18)
XW DEC VC
where CPE,Y is the purchased cost of the cooler at the given Model: Aabsal-ACDC 60 HI-18HVL
capacity or size of XY and CPE,W is the purchased cost of the system size 5946.5 m3 hr1 (3500 cfm) 5.3 kW (18000 Btu hr1)
Total cost ($) 350 900
same equipment at the known capacity or size of XW (as per
126 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
factor for the cost of fuel, rFc, that was assumed to be 6%. In Eq.
(19), FC1 is annual fuel cost in the first year of the system
operation, calculated from the following expression:
FC1 ¼ ðcE þ cNG Þ$PEC þ WC
where cE and cNG are the unit costs of electricity and natural
gas, respectively. These unit prices were evaluated based on
U.S. Energy Information Administration as 0.120 and 0.036
US$. (kWh)1 for electricity and natural gas (Average
electricity and natural gas prices), respectively. Also, PEC is
primary energy consumption for electricity and natural gas.
In Eq. (20), WC is annual cost of consumed water (In DEC,
DEVap, and IDPEC systems) obtained as follows:
WC ¼ 360cw Vdaily
where cw is unit cost of water assumed to be 0.60 $US. m3
(Canada West Foundation).
3.3.3. Calculating present worth factor, PWF0
The last term to be determined for evaluating the annualized
cost of cooling, ACC, as in Eq. (13) (in the denominator of the
right hand side of equation) was the present worth factor. The
present worth factor was evaluated based on the following
expression (Kozubal et al., 2011):
"  BL #
1 1
PWF0 ¼ 1
ieff 1  ieff
3.4. Thermal comfort model
Beside the aforementioned criteria including primary energy
consumption (PEC), carbon dioxide emission (CDE), and
annualized cost of cooling (ACC), thermal comfort is the most
important criterion for assessing any air conditioning system,
since this criterion is the main purpose in the employment of
air conditions. Therefore, in this study, implication of
considered cooling systems (VC, DEC, IDPEC, and DEVap) was
assessed in the proposed regions with thermal comfort
criteria. ASHRAE Standard 55-2004, Thermal Environmental
Conditions for Human Occupancy, has noted that indoor
comfort room temperatures for humans (comfort tempera-
ture) range from 19.5 to 27.8  C (ASHRAE). Achieving economic
advantage and acceptable thermal comfort simultaneously
imposes the indoor design temperature to be 25  C at all
operating hours of systems.
The predicted mean vote, PMV, and predicted percentage
dissatisfied, PPD, indices were evaluated here to calculate
systems' thermal comfort conditions. The PMV index pre-
dicts the general thermal sensation based on seven point
scale which was introduced by Fanger (Canada West
Foundation).
4. Decision making
Primary energy consumption, PEC, carbon dioxide emission,
CDE, annualized cost of cooling, ACC, and thermal comfort
index, TCI, were considered as four key criteria for the selec-
tion of the most suitable cooling system in each site.
Therefore, a decision making process was performed in which
PEC, CDE, ACC, and TCI were the criteria of decision making.
In this regard, various possible opinions of experts were ac-
quired and transformed into fuzzy triangular comparative
(20)
matrices. Then, those comparative matrices were processed
using the fuzzy AHP decision making method (Boender et al.,
1989). Finally, in each considered region, the best cooling op-
tion was introduced based on the opinion of each decision
maker (expert). In addition, a final recommended cooling op-
tion was introduced based on the cumulative opinion of all the
decision makers (five experts).
4.1. Fuzzy AHP decision making method
(21) Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been used as a multiple
criteria decision making (MCDM) method in many areas such
as decision making, selection, evaluation, forecasting, plan-
ning, development, and so on (Vaidya and Kumar, 2006). In
ordinary AHP method (Saaty, 1977), linguistic comparison of
criteria is converted into a pairwise comparative matrix. The
element of this matrix, aij, is obtained by comparing the ith to
jth criteria. Linguistic comparison of two criteria is converted
into numeral values based on Table 10.
Then, local weight of each option against the jth criterion
(wij) is converted into the global weight of the ith option (Wi)
and finally an option with the greatest amount of Wi is
(22)
selected as the final selected option. Due to uncertainty in
converting linguistic judgments of expression into numeral
values as in Table 10, a new class of AHP called fuzzy-AHP
method was developed (Buckley et al., 2001; Csutora and
Buckley, 2001; Kwiesielewicz and van Uden, 2001;
Kwiesielewicz and van Uden, 2001; Xu, 2000). One of the
most recent methods of fuzzy-AHP methods was introduced
by Wang et al. (Wang et al., 2006), who developed their
methods to solve the shortcomings of early fuzzy AHPs.
Among the shortcomings of early methods, inaccuracy in
the normalization of local fuzzy weights, infeasibility in
deriving the local fuzzy weights of a fuzzy comparison ma-
trix when the lower bound value of a non-normalized fuzzy
weight is greater than its upper bound value, uncertainty of
local fuzzy weights for incomplete fuzzy comparison
matrices, and unreality of global fuzzy weights can be
pointed out. In this regard, a modified fuzzy LLSM has been
introduced to calculate local and global weights in a way
that the aforementioned shortcomings do not appear (Wang
et al., 2006). This method is formulated as a constrained
nonlinear optimization model. Also, it can directly derive
normalized triangular fuzzy weights for both complete and
incomplete triangular fuzzy comparison matrices; thus, it is
suggested to tackle all the aforementioned problems. In this
regard, an objective function is constructed based on the
logarithmic least square difference of weights and fuzzy
arrays of judgment matrix and this objective function is
minimized, while local fuzzy weights, aijk, are considered as
decision variables (k is an index for the number of judgment
matrix). Using optimization algorithm such as genetic al-
gorithm, the objective function (LLSM: logarithmic least
square method) is minimized and local fuzzy weights are
computed. This method is formulated as follows (Wang
et al., 2006):
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 127

Table 10 e Fundamental scale for pairwise comparison in AHP method (Saaty, 1977).
Degree of Equal Moderate Strong Very strong Extreme Intermediate
preference importance importance importance importance importance values
Value 1 3 5 7 9 2, 4, 6, 8

dij
 2
P
n P
n P
Minimize J ¼ ln wLi  ln wUj  ln aLijk Table 11a e Fuzzy comparison matrix of the four criteria
2 
i¼1 j¼1;jsi k¼1
 2  based on opinion of 1st decision maker.
þ ln wM
i  ln wj  ln aijk
M M
þ ln wUi  ln wLj  ln aUijk PEC CDE ACC TCI
8 X n
> PEC (1,1,1) (1/3,1/1,1) (1/5,1/4,1/3) (1/7,1/6,1/5)
>
> wLi þ wUj  1;
>
> CDE (1,2,3) (1,1,1) (1/6,1/5,1/4) (1/8,1/7,1/6)
>
>
j¼1;jsi
>
> Xn (23) ACC (3,4,5) (4,5,6) (1,1,1) (1/4,1/3,1/2)
>
>
> wi þ
> wLj  1;
U
< TCI (5,6,7) (6,7,8) (2,3,4) (1,1,1)
j¼1;jsi
s:t: Pn
>
>
>
> j ¼ 1;
wM i ¼ 1; …n where
>
> i¼1 P
>
> P   UW ¼ fW ¼ ðw1 ; …; wm ÞT k wLj  wj  wUj ; m j¼1 wj ¼ 1; j ¼
>
>
n
>
> wLi þ wUi Þ ¼ 2; 1; …; mg is a set of weights. Finally, an option which has the
>
: i¼1
wUi  wM i  wi > 0;
L greatest values of global weights ( wLAi ; wM
Ai ; wAi ) is selected as
U

the final selected option. In the following section, application

where aijk ¼ (lijk,mijk,uijk) are triangular fuzzy judgments for
of this fuzzy-AHP method to the proposed case study of this
i,j ¼ 1,...,n,i s j,k ¼ 1,...,dij and dij ¼ dji, dij is total number of
paper which was selecting the best cooling system in diverse
decision makers (judgment matrices), and k is an index
climatic condition will be examined.
dedicated to the number of decision makers. If dij ¼ 0, then
there is no judgment that has been made about aijk, which is
denoted as ‘e’. Also, wL;M;U
i;j are the normalized triangular fuzzy 4.2. Application of fuzzy AHP for selecting the best
weights. The optimum solution to the above model directly cooling system
forms normalized fuzzy weights wi ¼ ðwLi ; wM i ; wi Þ; i ¼ 1; :::; n:
U

Also, the global fuzzy weights obtained by solving two linear In this study, the modified fuzzy LLSM as a multiple criteria
programming (LP) models. Therefore, for each alternative, decision making method was applied to optimize a con-
Ai(i ¼ 1,...,n), the following can be given (Wang et al., 2006): strained nonlinear optimization model and evaluate local
fuzzy weights. Then, the global fuzzy weights of decision
X
m
wLAi ¼ Min wLij wj; i ¼ 1; …; n (24a) problem were obtained based on the procedure given in Sec-
W2UW
j¼1 tion 4.1. In order to select the suitable system for the selected
cities, PEC, CDE, ACC, and TCI were the criteria of decision
X
m making. Fig. 7 shows the hierarchical structure of this multi-
wUAi ¼ Max
W2UW wUij wj; i ¼ 1; …; n (24b)
criteria decision making (MCDM) problem.
j¼1
In order to decide on the relative importance of the four
X
m decision criteria, first, through pairwise comparison, the
Ai ¼
wM ij wj i ¼ 1; …; n
wM M
(24c) triangular fuzzy comparison matrices were constructed for
j¼1 four criteria (PEC, CDE, ACC, and TCI). In this regard, linguistic

Fig. 7 e Hierarchical structure for the selection of suitable system in each location.
128 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

Table 11b e Fuzzy comparison matrix of the four criteria Table 11e e Fuzzy comparison matrix of the four criteria
based on opinion of 2nd decision maker. based on opinion of 5th decision maker.
PEC CDE ACC TCI PEC CDE ACC TCI
PEC (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1/8,1/7,1/6) (1/6,1/5,1/4) PEC (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1)
CDE (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1/8,1/7,1/6) (1/6,1/5,1/4) CDE (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1)
ACC (6,7,8) (6,7,8) (1,1,1) (5,6,7) ACC (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1)
TCI (4,5,6) (4,5,6) (1/7,1/6,1/5) (1,1,1) TCI (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (1,1,1)

Table 11c e Fuzzy comparison matrix of the four criteria

Linguistic judgments of the five experts (decision
based on opinion of 3rd decision maker.
makers) were converted into triangular fuzzy pairwise
PEC CDE ACC TCI
judgment matrices, as shown in Tables 11ae11e, respec-
PEC (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (2,3,4) (2,3,4) tively. Then, the global fuzzy weights of the five candidates
CDE (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (2,3,4) (2,3,4) were obtained by the modified fuzzy LLSM (based on opti-
ACC (1/4,1/3,1/2) (1/4,1/3,1/2) (1,1,1) (1,1,1)
mizing the problem defined by Eqs. (23), (24a)e(24c)).
TCI (1/4,1/3,1/2) (1/4,1/3,1/2) (1,1,1) (1,1,1)
Finally, the constrained nonlinear optimization model was
solved using both direct search method and the genetic
algorithm. Global weights of each cooling options in each
judgments for each pair of criteria were suggested by five regions were obtained and a cooling system with greater
experts as follows: fuzzy global weight was recommended as the best cooling
system in that region based on the judgments of each
i. Judgment of the 1st decision maker: TCI is the most expert as well as cumulative judgments of all the five de-
important criterion, ACC is the next important criterion cision makers.
followed by CDE, and PEC is less important criterion so
that TCI is relatively more important than ACC and
much more important than CDE followed by PEC.
5. Results and discussion
ii. Judgment of the 2nd decision maker: ACC is the very
important criterion, TCI is the next important criterion
Novel and conventional air cooling systems were investi-
followed by TCI and CDE criteria so that ACC is more
gated through energy, environmental, economic, and ther-
important than PEC, much more important than CDE
mal comfort analyses for utilization in small scale
(PEC and CDE have the same value), and relatively more
residential buildings in various climatic conditions. The
important than TCI
average and maximum annual values for cooling capacity
iii. Judgment of the 3rd decision maker: PEC and CDE are the
and COP were obtained from the energy analysis. Cooling
most important criteria, TCI and ACC with the same
loads, COPs, and daily water consumption of each cooling
values are less important criteria so that PEC and CDE
system in each area are given in Table 12. According to Eq.
have the same values and are relatively more important
(5), the effective cooling capacity depends on the weather
than ACC and TCI; however ACC and TCI have the same
conditions, particularly dry bulb, wet bulb, and dew point of
value
ambient air; therefore, this parameter varies from location
iv. Judgment of the 4th decision maker: TCI is the most
to location.
important criteria, CDE and PEC with the same value are
Generally, the COP of DEVap conditioner was higher than
the next important criteria followed by ACC so that TCI
the vapor-compression system; but, in wet areas (Rasht and
is relatively more important than PEC and CDE and
Bandar-Abbas), the average annual COP of DEVap system
more important than ACC. In addition, PEC and CDE
was lower than the vapor-compression system. In addition,
with the same values are relatively more important
the daily water consumption was very high in Bandar-Abbas
than ACC
(very hot and wet area). Furthermore, the daily water con-
v. Judgment of the 5th decision maker: All the criteria have the
sumption of DEC and indirect dew point evaporative cooler
same value
(IDPEC) was almost equal in the selected cities. Based on the
systems' size as in Tables 4e7 and time-dependent cooling
loads, electric, heat, and water consumptions of each cool-
ing systems as a function of time were calculated. In this
regard, electricity consumption by each system for the
Table 11d e Fuzzy comparison matrix of the four criteria selected cities is given in Fig. 8aeg for Tabriz, Tehran,
based on opinion of 4th decision maker.
Zahedan, Rasht, Azadshahr, Ahvaz, and Bandar-Abbas,
PEC CDE ACC TCI respectively.
PEC (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (2,3,4) (1/4,1/3,1/2) In DEVap system, beside electric energy consumption of
CDE (1,1,1) (1,1,1) (2,3,4) (1/4,1/3,1/2) fans and pumps, there was a considerable amount of heat
ACC (1/4,1/3,1/2) (1/4,1/3,1/2) (1,1,1) (1/6,1/5,1/4) consumption in dehumidifying process of liquid desiccant.
TCI (2,3,4) (2,3,4) (4,5,6) (1,1,1)
Therefore, monthly heat consumption histograms of DEVap
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 129

Table 12 e COP and water consumption of various cooling systems.

City System Min supply air Maximum Average Daily water
Temp. ( C) consumption (lit.)
Qcool (W) COP Qcool (W) COP
Tabriz DEC 20.4 11,211.4 50.9 9151.4 42.2 35.6
IDPEC without RA 17.7 8412.3 23.4 6866.6 19.1 34.4
IDPEC with RA 17.1 6474.5 19.6 5586.0 16.9 38.5
VC N.L. 4530.0 3.0 4530.0 3.0 e
Rasht DEVap 17.8 6529.4 4.5 6373.7 2.8 98.6
VC N.L. 4800.0 3.0 4800.0 3.0 e
Azadshahr DEVap 18.2 8750.2 8.0 8171.9 5.3 100.1
VC N.L. 4650.0 3.0 4650.0 3.0 e
Tehran DEC 22.2 23,102.2 60.8 18,150.6 47.8 72.6
IDPEC without RA 19.0 13,110.5 27.9 10,300.5 21.9 62.6
IDPEC with RA 18.2 9175.3 22.4 7653.9 18.7 67.9
VC N.L. 4800.0 3.0 4800.0 3.0 e
Zahedan DEC 20.2 14,302.6 65.0 11,540.7 52.5 48.7
IDPEC without RA 16.8 10,243.9 30.1 8265.8 24.3 45.1
IDPEC with RA 15.8 7746.6 26.7 6621.6 22.8 49.5
VC N.L. 4380.0 3.0 4380.0 3.0 e
Ahvaz DEVap 21.0 24,316.8 10.7 22,188.8 6.4 315.7
VC N.L. 6000.0 3.0 6000.0 3.0 e
Bandar-Abbas DEVap 27,316.0 2.2 23,887.9 1.6 1315.1
VC N.L. 6000.0 3.0 6000.0 3.0 e

DEC: Direct Evaporative Cooling; IDPEC: Indirect Dew Point Evaporative Cooling; VC: Vapor Compression; DEVap: Desiccant Enhanced-
eVAPorative.

Fig. 8 e Monthly electricity consumptions of cooling system, Ereq, in (a) Tabriz; (b) Tehran; (c) Zahedan; (d) Rasht; (e)
Azadshahr; (f) Ahvaz; (g) Bandar-Abbas.
130 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
Fig. 8 e (continued).
system used in humid areas (Rasht, Azadshahr, Ahvaz, and
Bandar-Abbas) along with electricity consumption and total
energy consumption (heat plus electricity) are depicted in
Fig. 9aed, respectively.
Total equivalent electricity consumption of DEVap system
was calculated based on 35% conversion ratio of heat into
electricity (Iran Energy, 2005). Monthly equivalent electricity
consumption histograms of DEVap system in Rasht, Azad-
shahr, Ahvaz, and Bandar-Abbas compared to VC system are
depicted in Fig. 10aed, respectively.
For example, integrating the data of Figs. 8 and 9 provided
the values of Ereq and Qr for the period of one year. Also,
considering the lifetime of the cooling system, total primary
energy consumption of the cooling system during its life cycle
was obtained.
Fig. 11aec compare various cooling systems for the annual
values of primary energy consumption, carbon dioxide emis-
sion, and values of the annualized cost of cooling in different
areas, respectively. These data were presented in order to
have better insights into the overall operation of the proposed
systems.
Fig. 11a shows the total amount of annual primary energy
consumption for each system in the selected cities. The
presented figure shows that the highest annual PEC belonged
to Bandar-Abbas. Because of high temperature and high
relative humidity in Bandar-Abbas, in the dehumidification
and evaporation processes of DEVap, a great amount of
thermal energy was required. Furthermore, in all the cities,
the annual primary energy consumption of vapor-
compression system was higher than the primary energy
consumption of DEC and IDPEC systems. In very hot and wet
area (Bandar-Abbas), the primary energy consumption of
DEVap was much higher than the conventional vapor
compression system (2.3 times). In the area with a little bit
less humidity (Ahvaz as very hot and semi-humid; Azad-
shahr as temperate and humid), the annual primary energy
consumption of DEVap was less than that of vapor
compression system. In the very hot and semi-humid area
(Ahvaz) the PEC of DEVap was 14.2% less than VC; however,
in Azadshahr, DEVap consumed 32.9% less primary energy.
In the wet and temperate area (Rasht), both VC and DEVap
system had the same amount of annual primary energy
consumption.
Fig. 11b compares the annual amount of carbon dioxide
emission by each cooling system in the selected areas. As
carbon dioxide emission was directly proportional to the
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
Fig. 9 e Monthly heat consumptions of DEVap system, Q, in (a) Rasht; (b) Azadshahr; (c) Ahvaz; (d) Bandar-Abbas.
amount of primary energy consumption, the comparison
was the same as what was already performed for PEC in
Fig. 11a.
Annualized cost of cooling is a very important factor for
the assessment of the proposed systems in the selected
cities. With respect to Eq. (12), the annualized cost of cool-
ing mostly depended to the total revenue requirement,
TRRL. TRRL was entirely affected by the cost of system
(including investment and O&M costs). According to the
data presented in Fig. 11c, it can be seen that the DEC sys-
tem had the best economic conditions in the case studies.
Due to the high purchased equipment cost, the DEVap
system had the worst economic condition in the selected
case studies. In Bandar-Abbas, because of high thermal
energy and water consumption, larger cooling equipment is
needed.
In order to calculate the PMV and PPD indices, first, a
sample day in July as a representative for the hottest time of
year was considered. Then, the relative humidity profiles for
the benchmark building and proposed systems were ob-
tained in each climatic condition and the PMV and PPD
indices were calculated hour by hour and the average PMV
and PPD were considered to calculate the monthly thermal
conditions during the occupied hours. This method
131
calculates the mean predicted percentage of dissatisfaction
at specific times. Results of thermal comfort conditions are
given in Table 13.
Results of the comfort analysis are presented in Table 13.
Due to the lack of control on humidity of the space and ability
of other systems, except DEC, in bringing the temperature
below the wet bulb temperature, the worst thermal condi-
tions for occupants were acquired by DEC system. Generally,
because of the cooling ability near the dew point temperature
and keeping a constant humidity content, in non-humid
areas, the dew point cooler (IDPEC) provided the best ther-
mal comfort. In the humid area, there was no difference
between the thermal comfort feature of VC and DEVap
systems.
Table 14 summarizes the final suggested features of the
systems for the selected cities. The values are presented for
a specific building with 100 m2 residential area. Also, in order
to have better insights into other buildings, values of pa-
rameters are given per square meter of the building in Table
14.
The global fuzzy weights of the candidates obtained based
on the assessment of different experts as well as final weights
obtained by the fuzzy AHP (based on cumulative assessments
of all experts) are indicated in Table 15.
132 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
(a)
(c)
Fig. 10 e Monthly equivalent electricity consumption of DEVap system in (a) Rasht; (b) Azadshahr; (c) Ahvaz; (d) Bandar-
Abass (based on the conversion ratio of heat into electricity ¼ 35%).
As indicated in the explanation of the fuzzy AHP, in this
method, among all the options, an option with the greater
value of fuzzy weights was selected. Therefore, based on Table
15, in each city, a cooling option with greater values (nomi-
nated by bold values in Table 15 was selected and the results
are indicated in Table 16.
Based on the opinion of decision makers #1 and #2, in all
the dry area, the best cooling system was direct evaporative
cooling and, in all the humid area, the best system was vapor
compression systems, which was due to high preferences of
these decision makers to comfort and cost criteria (ACC and
TCI). Since the annualized cost of cooling of DEVap was
greater than vapor compression systems (as in Fig. 11c),
based on the judgments of decision makers #1 and #2, DEVap
system was not selected at all. Based on the judgments of
decision makers #1, #2, and #3, in temperate and wet (Rasht)
and all humid areas (Ahvaz and Azadshahr), the best system
was desiccant-enhanced evaporative cooling, DEVap. In the
dry area, judgments of decision makers #4 and #5 led to
direct evaporative cooling that was similar to what was
concluded from judgments of decision makers #1 and #2.
Therefore, it is clear that all the decision makers recom-
mended using DEC in dry areas, except decision maker #4
who recommended using indirect dew point evaporative
(b)
(d)
cooling with return air in hot and very dry (Zahedan) and
temperate and dry (Tabriz) areas. Based on all the decision
makers' judgments in the hot and wet area (Bandar-Abbas),
the best cooling system was vapor compression system. In
such a condition, due to very high humidity and very high
and dry bulb temperature, operation of DEVap system is
drastically degraded and a large amount of thermal energy is
required for dehumidifying the weak desiccant. On the other
hand, due to the harsh outdoor conditions (high temperature
and humidity), the cooling process of desiccant in dehu-
midifier section of DEVap system is degraded. Therefore, in
such conditions, the conventional vapor compression system
is the only possible alternative for cooling a small scale res-
idential building. Finally, based on the cumulative judgments
of five decision makers, it was concluded that the best cool-
ing system in the dry area was direct evaporative cooling
(DEC), in temperate and wet, temperate and humid, and very
hot and semi-humid area, DEVap system had priority to
vapor compression, and in hot and wet area, the vapor
compression system was the only choice. Due to the selec-
tion of DEVap system in temperate and wet, temperate and
humid, and very hot and semi-humid areas, the annual
amount of primary energy consumption was reduced to 655,
13970, and 9436 kWh, respectively. Using DEVap in temperate
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7 133

Fig. 11 e Comparison of various cooling systems based on the values of (a) Annual primary energy consumption; (b) Annual
carbon dioxide emission; (c) Annualized cost of cooling.
134 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

Table 13 e Results of the thermal comfort conditions.

City Weather Category System PMV PPD (%)
Tabriz Temperate and dry DEC 0.20 6.0
IDPEC without RA 0.06 5.1
IDPEC with RA 0.06 5.1
VC 0.15 5.5
Tehran Hot and semi-dry DEC 0.23 6.1
IDPEC without RA 0.17 5.6
IDPEC with RA 0.17 5.6
VC 0.15 5.5
Zahedan Hot and dry DEC 0.16 5.6
IDPEC without RA 0.00 5.0
IDPEC with RA 0.00 5.0
VC 0.15 5.5
Rasht Temperate and wet DEVap 0.15 5.5
VC 0.15 5.5
Azadshahr Temperate and humid DEVap 0.15 5.5
VC 0.15 5.5
Ahvaz Very hot and semi-humid DEVap 0.15 5.5
VC 0.15 5.5
Bandar-Abbas Hot and wet DEVap 0.15 5.5
VC 0.15 5.5

DEC: Direct Evaporative Cooling; IDPEC: Indirect Dew Point Evaporative Cooling; VC: Vapor Compression; DEVap: Desiccant Enhanced-
eVAPorative.

and wet, temperate and humid, and very hot and semi-
humid areas led to 1.2, 3.3, and 3.3 tons of CO2 reduction of
carbon dioxide emission, respectively. Nevertheless, imple-
menting DEVap in temperate and wet, temperate and humid,
and very hot and semi-humid areas increased 195, 194, and
267 $ in the annual cost of cooling in these areas compared to
the vapor compression system. In the dry area, if DEC was
substituted by the vapor compression system, 3750, 4875, and
3964 kWh were reduced from the total annual amount of
primary energy consumption in the temperate and dry, hot
and semi-dry, and hot and very dry areas, respectively. This
reduction for the annual amount of carbon dioxide emission
was 3.7, 5.6, and 4.5 tons of CO2 per year in the temperate and
dry, hot and semi-dry, and hot and very dry areas, respec-
tively. Furthermore, implementing DEC instead of VC led to
159, 174, and 168 $ reduction in the annual cost of cooling in
temperate and dry, hot and semi-dry, and hot and very dry
areas, respectively.
6. Conclusion
The 3E and thermal comfort analyses were applied for air
cooling system alternatives considered for a small scale res-
idential building in seven different cities with diverse cli-
matic conditions in Iran. Various cooling alternatives
including direct evaporative cooling (DEC), dew point indirect
evaporative cooling (IDPEC), vapor compression (VC) system,
and desiccant-enhanced evaporative cooling (DEVap) were
analyzed using 3E and thermal comfort analysis. The 3E
analysis considered energy, environmental, and economic
analysis simultaneously. Based on the analyses, four criteria
for the selection and evaluation of various cooling alterna-
tives were obtained. Therefore, primary energy saving, PEC,
carbon dioxide emission, CDE, annualized cost of cooling,
ACC, and thermal comfort index, TCI, were obtained as the
four major criteria for selecting the best alternative. Among
the selected cities, from the view point of annual primary
energy consumption and annual carbon dioxide emissions,
DEC and dew point coolers had the best performance and
vapor-compression system had the worst performance.
Furthermore, the economic analysis based on the annual cost
of cooling was performed. DEVap and DEC systems had the
highest and lowest values of annualized cost of cooling,
respectively. The capability of the DEVap conditioner and
dew point cooling system in achieving the comfort condi-
tions in humid and non-humid areas, respectively, was
considerably higher than that of other systems. Based on the
fuzzy-AHP decision making implemented based on the
judgments of five experts, in the dry area, direct evaporative
cooling was the best alternative. In the very hot and semi-
humid, temperate and wet, and temperate and humid
areas, the DEVap system was suggested to be used instead of
vapor compression systems. In the hot and wet area, due to
degrading the dehumidification section of DEVap system, the
best choice of cooling system was the conventional vapor
compression system. As the candidate cities had a very wide
range of climatic diversity including temperate and dry, hot
and semi-dry, humid and temperate, wet and temperate, hot
and very dry, very hot and semi-humid, and hot and wet
Table 14 e Final specifications of the systems at the selected locations.
City System Annual PEC Annual PEC Annual CDE Annual TPEC TPEC LCC LCC ACC ACC
(MWh year1) Per m2 (tons year1) CDE Per m2 (US $) Per m2 (US $) Per m2 ($ year1) Per m2
Abali All systems N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Tabriz DEC 3.7 0.037 0.62 0.006 1250 12.5 3719.8 37.2 53.4 0.5
IDPEC without RA 5.4 0.054 0.90 0.009 7500 75.0 19063.2 190.6 273.7 2.7
IDPEC with RA 5.4 0.054 0.89 0.009 7500 75.0 19063.2 190.6 273.7 2.7

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
DEVap N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
VC cooler 26.1 0.261 4.36 0.044 4250 42.5 14777.3 147.8 212.2 2.1
Rasht DEC N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC without RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC with RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
DEVap 29.3 0.293 3.83 0.038 9400 94.0 29387.8 293.9 421.9 4.2
VC cooler 30.0 0.300 5.02 0.050 4400 44.0 15822.3 158.2 227.2 2.3
Azadshahr DEC N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC without RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC with RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
DEVap 28.3 0.283 3.76 0.0377 10250 102.5 31215.3 312.15 448.2 4.5
VC cooler 42.3 0.423 7.09 0.071 4300 43.0 17725.4 177.25 254.5 2.5
Tehran DEC 4.9 0.049 0.82 0.008 1750 17.5 5177.8 51.8 74.3 0.7
IDPEC without RA 8.6 0.086 1.4 0.014 8875 88.7 22970.6 229.7 329.8 3.3
IDPEC with RA 8.2 0.082 1.38 0.014 8875 88.7 22919.7 229.2 329.1 3.3
DEVap N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
VC cooler 38.4 0.384 6.43 0.064 4400 44.0 17282.8 172.8 248.1 2.5
Zahedan DEC 4.0 0.040 0.66 0.007 1250 12.5 3777.1 37.8 54.2 0.5
IDPEC without RA 5.5 0.055 0.93 0.009 7300 73.0 18624.4 186.2 267.4 2.7
IDPEC with RA 5.0 0.050 0.84 0.008 7300 73.0 18536.6 185.4 266.1 2.7
DEVap N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
VC cooler 30.7 0.307 5.14 0.051 4200 42.0 15464.7 154.6 222.0 2.2
Ahvaz DEC N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC without RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEc with RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
DEVap 57.4 0.574 7.86 0.079 12000 120.0 42300.8 423.0 607.3 6.1
VC cooler 66.9 0.669 11.20 0.112 5000 50.0 23684.7 236.8 340.1 3.4
Bandar Abbas DEC N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC without RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
IDPEC with RA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
DEVap 346.1 3.461 42.54 0.425 10950 109.5 106039.6 1060.4 1522.4 15.2
VC cooler 110.5 1.105 18.51 0.185 5000 50.0 31282.3 312.8 449.1 4.5

DEC: Direct Evaporative Cooling; IDPEC: Indirect Dew Point Evaporative Cooling; VC: Vapor Compression; DEVap: Desiccant Enhanced-eVAPorative.

135
136 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7

Table 15 e Global fuzzy weights of the candidates obtained by the modified fuzzy LLSM.
City Cooling Global fuzzy weights (%)
options
1st Decision 2nd Decision 3rd Decision 4th Decision 5th Decision Final
maker maker maker maker maker
Tabriz DEC (28.9,30.6,33.3) (48.5,49.4,51.7) (36.4,38.7,41.8) (26.2,29.1,30.9) (40.1,41.6,43.5) (35.1,38.0,40.6)
IDPEC (25.5,26.9,27.4) (15.3,16.7,17.6) (23.8,25.3,26.5) (28.3,28.9,29.9) (21.5,22.6,23.5) (23.0,23.9,25.3)
without RA
IDPEC (25.7,27.44,28.5) (15.1,16.8,18.0) (25.7,28.2,29.9) (29.5,30.7,32.5) (23.1,24.5,25.6) (24.0,25.6,27.4)
with RA
VC (14.1,15.1,16.6) (16.5,17.2,18.3) (7.2,7.7,8.2) (10.6,11.3,12.6) (10.6,11.2,11.7) (11.8,12.5,13.6)
Rasht DEVap (42.9,45.3,46.6) (31.9,33.9,34.7) (56.9,67.5,71.9) (53.9,56.1,57.5) (47.7,53,55.2) (48.1,50.3,52.4)
VC (52.8,54.7,57.0) (64.3,66.1,68.1) (27.1,32.4,43.0) (42.5,43.9,46.1) (43.6,47,52.3) (47.5,49.7,51.9)
Azadshahr DEVap (44.4,46.8,48.2) (33.9,35.9,36.6) (66.6,68.9,71.0) (57.6,59.8,60.5) (53.9,57,59.9) (51.8,54.1,55.6)
VC (51.3,53.2,55.5) (63,64.1,66.1) (29,31.1,34.0) (39.4,40.2,42.4) (40.1,43,46.2) (44.3,45.9,48.1)
Tehran DEC (27.5,29.6,32.4) (44.8,45.6,47.6) (43.8,45.7,47.6) (27.1,30.4,32.3) (40.5,41.9,43.1) (34.8,37.8,39.9)
IDPEC (20.6,21.8,22.2) (13.7,14.9,15.4) (19.1,20.1,22.4) (23.1,23.8,24.8) (19,19.9,21.1) (19.5,20.5,21.7)
without RA
IDPEC (21.4,22.6,24.1) (14.9,16.2,17.2) (21.5,23.4,25.4) (24.3,25.2,27.1) (20.7,21.9,23.5) (20.9,22.1,24.0)
with RA
VC (24.2,26.1,27.4) (21.9,23.3,24.1) (9.3,10.2,10.5) (19.3,20.6,22.2) (15.1,16.3,16.8) (18.5,19.6,20.9)
Zahedan DEC (28.9,30.5,33.2) (48.0,49.1,51.1) (39.5,43.0,45.5) (25.6,28.8,30.6) (38.7,41,42.6) (34.3,37.6,40.2)
IDPEC (26,27.4,27.7) (15.4,16.9,17.5) (21.3,22.6,24.5) (28.8,29.4,30.6) (21.7,22.9,23.5) (23.4,24.3,25.6)
without RA
IDPEC (26.7,28.4,29.7) (16.4,17.9,19.3) (24.5,26.8,29.4) (30.4,31.7,33.8) (24.1,25.8,27.8) (25.1,26.5,28.7)
with RA
VC (12.7,13.6,14.9) (15.4,16.1,17.9) (7.0,7.5,7.9) (9.6,10.2,11.0) (9.9,10.4,11) (10.8,11.5,12.6)
Ahvaz DEVap (44.1,46.3,47.2) (33.6,35.5,36.1) (58.0,61.9,64.7) (56.7,58.5,59.1) (55.1,56.3,57.3) (50.1,52.8,54.2)
VC (51.9,53.7,55.9) (62.3,64.5,66.4) (35.2,38.1,42.0) (40.8,41.5,43.3) (42.6,43.7,44.9) (45.7,47.2,49.0)
Bandar-Abbas DEVap (35.1,36,37.0) (22.8,24.2,26.4) (20.2,21.4,22.7) (34.3,34.5,36.2) (23.4,25.1,27.4) (28.7,28.9,30.1)
VC (63,64,64.8) (73.5,75.8,77.2) (77.1,78.6,79.8) (63.7,65.5,65.7) (71.5,74.9,76.6) (69.0,71.1,71.2)

DEC: Direct Evaporative Cooling; IDPEC: Indirect Dew Point Evaporative Cooling; VC: Vapor Compression; DEVap: Desiccant Enhanced-eVAP-
orative.
Bold data indicates the global fuzzy weights of selected option.

Table 16 e The best choice for cooling system of small scale residential building based on fuzzy AHP.
City Weather Category The best cooling option
1st Decision 2nd Decision 3rd Decision 4th Decision 5th Decision Final
maker maker maker maker maker decision
Tabriz Temperate and dry DEC DEC DEC IDPEC with RA DEC DEC
Tehran Hot and semi-dry DEC DEC DEC DEC DEC DEC
Zahedan Hot and very dry DEC DEC DEC IDPEC with RA DEC DEC
Rasht Temperate and wet VC VC DEVap DEVap DEVap DEVap
Azadshahr Temperate and humid VC VC DEVap DEVap DEVap DEVap
Ahvaz Very hot and semi-humid VC VC DEVap DEVap DEVap DEVap
Bandar-Abbas Hot and wet VC VC VC VC VC VC

DEC: Direct Evaporative Cooling; IDPEC: Indirect Dew Point Evaporative Cooling; VC: Vapor Compression; DEVap: Desiccant Enhanced-
eVAPorative.

conditions, these areas could be extended to cover the wide
range of climatic conditions of the world. Therefore, the re-
sults of this study could be considered as a general
conclusion.
references
Aabsal corporation. http://www.aabsalco.com/persian/
viewproduct.php?catcode¼171.
Ahmed, C.S.K., Gandhisan, P., Al-Farayedhi, A.A., 1997.
Simulation of a hybrid liquid desiccant based air-conditioning
system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 17, 162e170.
AIL Research, Inc, 2014. Two Stage Regenerator. http://ailr.com/
our-technology/two-stage-regenerator/.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 143-2000, Method of Test Rating Indirect
Evaporative Coolers, 2000. American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. GA 30329.
ASHRAE. ASHRAE Technical Committee 2.1- physiology and
human environment. http://tc21.ashraetcs.org/faq.html
(accessed 05.10.10.).
Average electricity and natural gas prices. http://www.eia.gov/.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 5 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 1 1 2 e1 3 7
Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., Moran, M., 1996. Thermal Design and
Optimization. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Boender, C.G.E., de Graan, J.G., Lootsma, F.A., 1989. Multi-criteria
decision analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparisons. Fuzzy Sets
Syst. 29, 133e143.
Buckley, J.J., Feuring, T., Hayashi, Y., 2001. Fuzzy hierarchical
analysis revisited. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 129, 48e64.
Caliskan, H., Dincer, I., Hepbasli, A., 2011. Exergetic and
sustainability performance comparison of novel and
conventional air cooling systems for buildings applications.
Energy Build. 43, 1461e1472.
Caliskan, H., Dincer, I., Hepbasli, A., 2012. A comparative study on
energetic, exergetic and environmental performance
assessments of novel M-Cycle based air coolers for buildings.
Energy Convers. Manag. 56, 69e79.
Canada West Foundation. Water, water Use and Water Pricing
Around the World. http://cwf.ca/publications-1/Canadian_
Water_Pricing_Backgrounder_8.
Chaudhari, S.K., Patil, K.R., 2002. Thermodynamic properties of
aqueous solutions of lithium chloride. Phys. Chem. Liq. 40 (3),
317e325.
Coolerado Inc., 2010. How Coolerado Air Conditioners Work.
http://www.coolerado.com/tech-info/how- coolerado-air-
conditioners- work/.
Coolerado Inc. Coolerado reference manual C60, M50, M30,
Version 2010-1. http://www.coolerado.com/products/m50-
energy-efficient-air-conditioner/.
http://www.coolergazi.ir/Product54-%DA%A9%D9%88%D9%84%
D8%B1-%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B2%DB%8C%D9%87%D8%A7%
DB%8C%D8%B3%D9%86%D8%B3(HISENSE).aspx..
Csutora, R., Buckley, J.J., 2001. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis: the
Lamda-Max method. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 120, 181e195.
Delfani, Sh, Esmaeelian, J., Pasdarshahri, H., Karami, M., 2010.
Energy saving potential of an indirect evaporative cooler as a
pre-cooling unit for mechanical cooling systems in Iran.
Energy Build. 42, 2169e2176.
Duan, Zh, 2011. Investigation of a Novel Dew Point Indirect
Evaporative Air Conditioning System for Buildings. PhD thesis.
University of Nottingham. http://www.nottingham.ac.uk.
US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration
(EIA), 2011. Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases. http://
www.eia.gov/oiaf/1605/1605b_from_and_instructions.htm.
Energy Flow Chart, Planning Association of Power and Energy of
Iran Ministry of Power; 2006e2011. http://pep.moe.gov.ir.
US environmental protection agency (EPA), May 2008. Direct
Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources. EPA430-K-
08e003. www.epa.gov/resources/
stationarycombustionguidance.pdf [cited...].
Eskin, N., Turkmen, H., 2008. Analysis of annual heating and
cooling energy requirements for office buildings in different
climates in Turkey. Energy Build. 40 (5), 763e773.
Gao, W.Z., Cheng, Y.P., Jiang, A.G., Anderson, T.L.K., 2014.
Experimental investigation on integrated liquid desiccant-
indirect evaporative air cooling system utilizing the
Maisotsenko-Cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.08.066.
Gillan, L., 2008. Maisotsenko cycle for cooling processes. Int. J.
Energy Clean. Environ. 9 (1e3), 47e64.
137
Heidarinejad, Gh, Bozorgmehr, M., Delfani, Sh, Esmaeelian, J.,
2009. Experimental investigation of two-stage indirect/direct
evaporative cooling system in various climatic conditions.
Build. Environ. 44, 2073e2079.
http://www.idalex.com/technology/how_it_works_-_
engineering_perspective.htm.
International Energy Outlook, 2013. Energy Information
Administration. US, Department of Energy. http://www.eia.
gov/forecasts/ieo/.
Iran Energy Balance Report, 2005. Iran Ministry of Power,
Department of Power and Energy (In Persian).
Iran Energy Bulletin, Ministry of Power Energy Organization,
2006e2011. http://iraneenrgy.org.ir.
Kozubal, E., Woods, J., Burch, J., Boranian, A., Merigan, T., 2011.
Desiccant Enhanced Evaporative Air-conditioning (DEVAP):
Evaluation of a New Concept in Ultra Efficient Air
Conditioning. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. TP-
5500e49722.
Kwiesielewicz, M., van Uden, E., 2001. An optimization approach
to estimating ratios in Saaty's priority theory. Cent. Eur. J.
Oper. Res. 9, 237e254.
Maisotsenko, V., Reyzin, I., 2005. The Maisotsenko cycle for
electronics cooling. In: Proceedings of the ASME/Pacific Rim
Technical Conference and Exhibition on Integration and
Packaging a, July 17e22, 2005, San Francisco, CA, USA,
pp. 415e424. ISBN-10:0791842002.
Maisotsenko V, Gillan L.E, Heaton T.L, et al. Method and plate
apparatus for dew point evaporative cooler: US6,581,402,B2[P].
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). US Department of
Energy by Midwest Research Institute, Battelle, Bechtel. http://
www.nrel.gov/.
Saaty, T.L., 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical
structures. J. Math. Psychol. 15 (3), 234e281.
Shabanpour, M.R., Sayyaadi, H., Hosseinzade, H., 2013. Sizing a
solar dish stirling micro-CHP system for residential
application in diverse climatic conditions based on 3E
analysis. Energy Convers. Manage. 75, 348e365.
Stoitchkov, N.J., Dimitrov, G.I., 1998. Effectiveness of crossflow
plate heat exchanger for indirect evaporative cooling. Int. J.
Refrigeration 21 (6), 463e471.
Technical Assessment Guide (TAGTM), 1991. Electric Power
Research Institute. TR100281, Vol. 3. Revision 6.
Vaidya, O.S., Kumar, S., 2006. Analytic hierarchy process: an
overview of applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 169 (1), 1e29.
Wang, Sh. K., 2000. Handbook of Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration, second ed. McGraw-Hill.
Wang, Y.M., Elhag, T.M.S., Zh, Hua, 2006. A modified fuzzy
logarithmic least squares method for fuzzy analytic hierarchy
process. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 157, 3055e3071.
Woods, J., Kozubal, E., 2013. A desiccant-enhanced evaporative air
conditioner: numerical model and experiments. Energy
Convers. Manage. 65, 208e220.
Xu, R., 2000. Fuzzy least-squares priority method in the analytic
hierarchy process. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 112, 359e404.
Zhao, X., Yanga, S., Duan, Z., Riffat, S.B., 2009. Feasibility study of
a novel dew point air conditioning system for china building
application. Build. Environ. 44 (9), 1990e1999.