Int J. Refrig. Vol. 19, No. 1, pp.

43-51, 1996
Copyright (C~1996ElsevierScienceLtd and IIR
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
ELSEVIER 0140-7007(95)110059-3 0140-7007/96/$15.00 + .00

Knowledge base for the systematic design of wet cooling towers.

Part I: Selection and tower characteristics
A. K. M . M o h i u d d i n
D e p a r t m e n t o f M e c h a n i c a l E n g i n e e r i n g , B a n g l a d e s h Institute o f T e c h n o l o g y , D h a k a ,
G a z i p u r 1700, B a n g l a d e s h

K. K a n t
D e p a r t m e n t o f M e c h a n i c a l Engineering, I n d i a n Institute o f T e c h n o l o g y , K a n p u r
208 016, India
Received 21 June 1994; revised 26 July 1995

This paper describes part of the detailed methodology for the thermal design of wet, counterflow and
crossflow types of mechanical and natural draught cooling towers. Starting with a brief introduction, an
attempt is made here to present different steps of cooling tower design. The steps include: selection of a
cooling tower; determination of tower characteristic ratio; computation of moist air properties;
determination of the ratio of the water-to-air loading; integration procedure for the tower characteristic
ratio. The design of a cooling tower needs the use of different logical decisions, empirical relations and
assumptions. The choice of a proper tower and its proper design would increase its efficiency and help
conserve energy.
(Keywords: cooling tower; mechanical draught; natural draught; thermal design; tower characteristic ratio; water-to-air
loading)

Base de connaissances pour la conception methodique des tours de

refroidissement.
Premiere partie: S61ection et caract6ristiques des tours
Cet article d~crit une partie de la m~thodologie d~taillOe de la conception thermique des tours de refroidissement
h tirage mOcanique et ?l tirage naturel, de type humide, h contre-courant et courant transversal. Aprks une
introduction brkve, on pr~sente les diff~rentes ~tapes de la conception des tours de refroidissement." sOl~ction
d'une tour de refroidissernent; d~termination du rapport earact~ristique de la tour; calcul des propriktOs de l'air
humide; ealcul du rapport entre d~bit eau et d~bit air; procedure d'int~gration du rapport caract~ristique de la
tour. La conception d'une tour de refroidissement demande que soient prises des d~cisions logiques et que soient
prises en eompte des relations et des hypothbses empiriques. Le bon choix d'une tour de refroidissement et sa
bonne conception permettent d'accroitre son efficacitd et de faire des ~conomies d'~nergie.
(Mots-cl6s: tour de refroidissement;tirage m6canique;tirage naturel; conceptionthermique; rapport caract+ristiquede la
tour; rapport entre charge en eau et charge en air)

In a large number of industrial applications, the process
heat is removed using cooling towers, through which the
hot water from the plant is continuously recirculated to
cool the water using the principle of evaporative cooling.
The most commonly used type of cooling tower is one in
which the temperature of the circulating water is reduced
by bringing it into direct contact with air. Such towers
are called wet. cooling towers: the cooling is achieved
partly by the evaporation of a fraction of the circulating
water and partly by the transfer of sensible heat.
As cooling towers are generally separate from the
main plant, they are usually ignored until a crisis occurs.
Much attention is being paid nowadays to their design,
to ensure effective performance.
The types of cooling tower can be characterized in a
number of different ways, such as the method of air
circulation, the relative direction of air and water flow,
the shape of the tower, and the method of heat transfer.
Cooling towers are broadly classified on the basis of air
circulation (i.e. the type of draft): natural draught
(natural convection), mechanical draught (forced con-
vection), and mechanical and natural. On the basis of the
relative movement of air and water, these towers can be
grouped as crossflow or counterflow. According to the
method of heat transfer, cooling towers are classified into
three different types: wet (using evaporative cooling), dry
and wet-dry.
Mechanical draught towers (MDCT) use fans or
blowers to provide the required volume of airflow
through the tower. They are subdivided into forced

43
44 A. K. M. Mohiuddin and K. Kant

Nomenclature
a Surface area of water droplets per unit WI' ~ W2 Specific humidities of entering and leaving
volume of tower (m 2 m -3) air (kg,, kg~aa)
CI ...C25 Constants in Equations (7), (8), (10) and (11) Ws Specific humidty of moist air saturated at t~
£ Specific heat (kJkg 1°C l) (kgw kg~)
Cpa Specific heat of dry air (kJ kg-l°C 1)
Fo Correction factor defined by Equation (25) Greek letters
G Air loading (kg h lm 2)
i Enthalpy (kJ kg- 1) 6 A variation
Specific enthalpy of inlet moist air (kJ kgda1) Pl Density of entering moist air (kgda m 3)
Specific enthalpy of saturated air leaving the P2 Density of the saturated air leaving the
/2 tower (kgda m -3)
tower (kJ kgdal)
./
ls Specific enthalpy of saturated moist air at
the water temperature tw (kJ kg~) Subscripts
/wi' ~ two Specific enthalpy of inlet and exit water a Moist air
(kJ kg 1) w liquid water
K Mass transfer coefficient (kgh-lm-Z(kgw/ wi Inlet water
kgda)-1) WO Outlet water
L Water loading (kgh lm-2) 1 Air inlet condition
Pt Total pressure (bar) 2 Air exit condition
Pws Partial vapour pressure at saturation (bar)
Ra Gas constant for dry air (kJ kg-lK -1 ) Abbreviations
So Defined by Equation (25a)
T Absolute temperature (K) CTI Cooling Tower Institute
Temperature (°C) DBT Dry-bulb temperatue
t
Dry-bulb temperature of entering air (°C) FD Forced draught
tl
FDCT Forced draught cooling tower
t7 Wet-bulb temperature of entering air (°C)
ID Induced draught
t~ Temperature of saturated air leaving the
IDCT Induced draught cooling tower
tower (°C)
V Active tower volume per unit plan area MDCT Mechanical draught cooling tower
(m 3 m -2) NDCT Natural draught cooling tower
NTU Number of transfer unit
W Specific humidity (kgw kgda1)
WBT Wet-bulb temperature

draught towers (FDCT) and induced draught towers

(IDCT), depending upon the location of the fan or
blower•
Natural draught towers (NDCT) use the density
difference that exists between the heated, moist air
inside the shell (built above the cooling tower packing)
and the air outside the shell (ambient air). Typically,
these towers tend to be quite large, and are frequently
built in a hyperbolic contour for structural reasons. Fan-
assisted hyperbolic towers combine the features of both
NDCT and MDCT.
In crossflow towers, the air generally travels horizon-
tally across the falling water, while in counterflow towers
it travels vertically upwards through the falling water.
In wet cooling towers, cooling is achieved partly by the
evaporation of a fraction of the circulating water and
partly by the transfer of sensible heat. In dry cooling C
towers, cooling is achieved by the transfer of heat energy
by convection and radiation from a hot metal surface to
an air stream moving across the surface and finally
dissipating the heat into the atmosphere. Wet-dry
towers have the combined features of both dry and wet
towers. These not only conserve water, but also minimize
plume formation. This paper discusses the design PERCENT DISTANCE THROUGH TOWER
methodology of wet cooling towers only, including Figure 1 Temperature relationship between water and air in a
both MDCT and NDCT. counterflow cooling tower
Figure 1 shows the temperature relationship between Figure 1 Rapport de tempOrature entre l'eau et Fair clans une tour de
water and air as they pass through a counterflow cooling refroidissment h contre-courant
 Knowledge base for the systematic design of wet coofing towers. Part I
tower. The curves indicate the drop in water temperature
(point A to point B) and the rise in the air wet-bulb
temperature (point C to point D) in their respective
passages through the tower. The difference between the
water temperatures entering and leaving the tower is
defined as the range. The difference between the leaving
water temperature and the entering air wet-bulb tem-
perature (WBT) is known as the approach to the wet-bulb
or simply the approach of the cooling tower. The
approach is a function of cooling tower capability, and
a larger cooling tower will produce a closer approach for
a given heat load, flowrate, and entering air condition.
The thermal performance of a cooling tower is affected
by the entering air WBT.
Analysis of mechanical and natural draught wet cooling
towers
The physical situation within a cooling tower is very
complex (films and droplets of water in air are in a
constantly changing configuration). There is no mathe-
matical model that is capable of simulating every detail
of the simultaneous heat and mass transfer process
occurring within the tower. Consequently, simplifying
assumptions must be made for the analysis.
Eight numerical models are available in the literature:
ESC code; FACTS; VERA2D; STAR; Sutherland's
model; model by Fujita and Tezuka; Webb's model:
model by Jaber and Webb. Each model makes use of a
somewhat different set of assumptions (a comprehensive
list of assumptions used for the different models is given
in ref. l). Consequently, the results of calculations of
heat-mass transfer coefficients from each one of the
models also differ.
The basic theory of cooling 2tower operation was
first proposed by Walker et al., who developed the
basic equations for total mass and energy transfer,
and considered each process separately. Merkel 3 com-
bined the coefficients of sensible heat and mass transfer
into a single overall coefficient based upon the
enthalpy potential as a driving force. The theory
proposed by Merkel requires a few simplifying
assumptions, which have been almost universally
adopted for the calculation of cooling tower perfor-
mance.
ESC code
The ESC code is based on the classical Merkel model 4 for
counterflow and on the Zivi Brand model 5 for cross-
fow. It is a one-dimensional model, although for
crossflow configurations it uses a two-dimensional
matrix of air and water flow, but treats the flow as one-
dimensional (uncoupled). Thus it is appropriate to
classify this code as one-dimensional for both counter-
flow and crossflow.
Facls
This code is more sophisticated than a one-dimensional
model, yet it contains simplifications that prevent it from
being classified as a true two-dimensional code 6. An
integral formulation of the conservation equations
(conservation of mass and energy for both air and
water) is applied, in conjunction with the Bernoulli
45
equation (with head loss included). FACTS has the
capability to model towers containing hybrid fill or fills
that have voids or obstructions. To a limited extent, it
can account for flow non-uniformities, for which FACTS
offers the option of specifying a flow distribution of
water at the tower inlet. It allows for the input of
separate heat-mass transfer and pressure drop correla-
tions for spray and rain regions in counterflow towers.
The FACTS code package calculates the outlet condi-
tions of the cooling tower using the operating parameters
L and G and known (or assumed) values of Ka.
VERA2D
This code treats the flow of water in the cooling tower as
one-dimensional and the flow of air as two-dimensional
and steady v. Two-dimensional, partial differential equa-
tions are solved for the conservation of mass and energy
for both air and water and the conservation of
momentum for moist air. It also calculates the distribu-
tion of airflow throughout the tower. The VERA2D
code, because of the two-dimensional flow calculation,
includes the following generalities. Non-uniform inlet air
and water temperatures and flowrates may be specified.
The variation of air density through the tower is included
as a function of T and p. Evaporation of water (which
leads to non-uniform water distribution) is modelled.
Heat transfer is related to both water temperature and
ambient pressure. Turbulence is simulated by a local
equilibrium model.
STAR
This code is applicable to counterflow and crossflow
natural and mechanical draught cooling towers. It solves
two-dimensional differential equations of the fluid
dynamics and the thermodynamics by applying a
method of finite differences to a grid of rectangular
mesh using a fractional step algorithm s.
Sutherland's model
This is a one-dimensional model developed for mechan-
ical draft counterflow cooling towers 9.
Model by Fujita and Tezuka
This model l° calculates the thermal performance of
counterflow and crossflow M D C T using the enthalpy
potential theory. The method recommends the calcula-
tion of NTU (number of transfer units) = (KaV/L) for
counterflow towers by the CTI (Cooling Tower Institute)
method ll. Then the NTU for the crossflow tower can be
calculated using a correction factor.
Webb's model
This model ~2 outlines an exact design procedure for
cooling towers. It is a one-dimensional model, which
considers water loss by evaporation. The Lewis number
is taken to be 0.87.
Model by Jaber and Webb
This model t3 gives an effectiveness-NTU design method
46 A. K. M. Mohiuddin and K. Kant
for both counterflow and crossflow cooling towers.
Attempts to apply the F - L M E D or c-NTU methods to
cooling tower design use the enthalpy driving potential.
The operating efficiency of each code is treated as a
combination of computational efficiency and the 'user-
friendliness'. Computational efficiency involves a com-
parison of CPU time requirements and run-time memory
requirements for each computer model. It is difficult to
draw general conclusions concerning the comparative
merits of the correlations, or of the codes, yet an effort
was made by Mohiuddin and Kant 14 to compare the
different models from the viewpoint of design, computa-
tional error, computational time, simplicity of usage and
practicability.
Selection of a cooling tower
Many factors influence the selection of the type of tower;
most of them are very general at the outset of the
selection procedure. A simple but effective selection
process is mentioned here, which is based upon some of
the major differences 15 existing between an M D C T and
an NDCT.
For very large installations, N D C T s are preferred.
Nowadays, an N D C T is selected for power plants having
a capacity of 500 MWe and above. The initial investment
on an M D C T is much lower than that on an NDCT. An
M D C T can be built with relatively less expensive
MDCT" Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower
NDCT Natural Draft Cooling Tower
Figure 2 Selectionof the type of cooling tower. MDCT, mechanical
draught cooling tower; NDCT, natural draught cooling tower
Figure 2 SElEction du type de tour de refroidissement. MDCT, tour de
refroidissement it tirage rnEcanique; NDCT, tour de refroidissement it
tirage nature1
materials than an NDCT, but the fan cost is an
additional expenditure incurred in the former system.
The total operation and maintenance cost favours an
NDCT. In an MDCT, even though the power cost for
circulating the water is less as the pumping head is less,
the power cost for fans and the cost of maintaining the
fans and associated equipments are considerable. Recir-
culation and fogging are the major problems associated
with MDCTs. Design restrictions on tower dimensions,
orientation with the direction of the prevailing wind and
added capacity for recirculation can boost tower cost in
the case of an MDCT. Because of the elevated discharge
in an N D C T , it rarely has the problems of recirculation
and fogging. Close control of cold water temperature can
be achieved in an MDCT, as the air supply in the tower
can be controlled. A closer approach and a longer range
are possible in an MDCT, but in an N D C T exact control
of outlet water temperature is difficult to achieve.
A selection procedure for the type of tower, based on
these major differences, was adopted by the authors for
development of an expert system for the thermal design
of wet cooling towers, and is summarized in the
fowchart of F i g u r e 2.
Choice of the flow type in a cooling tower depends on
several factors. Recirculation of outlet air, maintenance
cost and cooling per unit volume of the tower are
considered to select the proper type of flow. A crossflow
tower is thermally less efficient, owing to recirculation of
outlet air. In a crossflow tower, an insufficient pressure
head on the distribution pans also clogs the orifices
because of algae and other debris that ordinarily collect
in the system 16. So crossflow towers have higher
maintenance costs than counterflow towers. A counter-
of flow accord
to user's
~ Counterf[ow ]
preference
ontknow
eCircu[ation o
onsidera -
-~.~ Counterftow 1
cost an
"._
important
~Ivlaintenance
foctor
Counterftow I
I .o //; ....
' '
Figure 3 Selection of the type of flow in a cooling tower
Figure 3 SdlEction du type d~coulement dans une tour de refroidiss-
ment. FDCT, tour de refroidissement h tirage forcE; IDCT, tour de
refroidissement h tirage par aspiration
 Knowledge base for the systematic design of wet coofing towers. Fart I
flow tower produces more cooling per unit volume for
less cost than a crossflow tower under the same design
conditions.
Based on the above factors, the selection procedure of
the flow type in a cooling tower is considered. The
flowchart of this selection procedure is shown in Figure 3.
When an M D C T is selected, the location of the fan
determines whether the cooling tower is a forced draught
(FD) or an induced draught (ID) type. Generally,
crossflow M D C T s are provided with ID fans. The
draft in an M D C T is selected on the basis of the
following considerations 17.
In an FDCT, the fan equipment is located on the
ground and is easily accessible. The fans blow the air
through the tower and discharge it at a relatively low
velocity. In an IDCT, the fan is located on the top of the
tower, which induces the flow of air through the tower
and discharges it with a relatively high velocity. So, in an
IDCT, because of its high discharge velocity, recircula-
tion is considerably reduced compared with an FDCT.
Recirculation occurs under unfavourable wind condi-
tions when part of the hot discharge air of the tower is
sucked back into the tower, which when mixed with the
fresh air raises the WBT of the entering air, and thus
reduces the tower performance. The high velocity
discharge in an I D C T represents wasted energy in so
far as the tower performance is considered. The power
requirement of an IDCT is therefore greater than that of
an FDCT. But the effect of recirculation is more
FDCT: Forced Draft Cooling Tower
IDCT: Induced Draft Cooling Tower
Figure 4 Selection of the type of draught in an MDCT. FDCT, forced
draught coolingtower; IDCT, induced draught cooling tower
Figure 4 S~l~ction du type de tirage dans une tour de refroidissement h
tirage m(canique. FDCT, tour de refroidissement it tirage forc~; IDCT,
tour de refroidissement a tirage par aspiration
47
important in the case of close-approach towers, justify-
ing, in general, the selection of an IDCT. In the case of
large approaches, it is advantageous to choose an FDCT.
Another important criterion in the selection is the level
of noise intensity. If the noise intensity at ground level is
a major consideration, an IDCT should be preferred. But
an F D C T should be preferred if the vibration is a major
consideration. In an FDCT, vibration is kept down
because the mechanical equipment is installed near the
ground on a solid foundation.
The maintenance cost of an ID fan, which is located at
the top of the tower, is higher than that of an F D fan. If the
volume of water to be cooled is large, then economics shifts
in favour of an IDCT. The selection procedure based upon
these considerations is shown as a flow chart in Figure 4.
T h e t o w e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ratio
The generally accepted concept of cooling tower
performance is in terms of the tower characteristic ratio
(KaV/L).
Consider a counterflow tower of unit plan area
through which an amount of air G ( k g h - l m 2) is
flowing upwards and an amount of water L (kg h-i m-2)
is flowing downwards. The counterflow tower can be
resolved into a one-dimensional problem 18, with the
assumption that the flow pattern is vertical, with the
water falling downwards through the tower and the air
flowing upwards.
Each water particle is surrounded by a film of
saturated air at the bulk water temperature, as shown
in Figure 5. The air is heated and becomes saturated with
moisture as it passes through the tower. The heat is
transferred from the water to the air stream partly as
sensible heat and partly as latent heat equivalent to the
fraction of water evaporated at the water-air interface.
The two processes were combined by Merkel into a single
equation:
L c w dt w = K a d V (i's - ia) = G di a (1)
which upon integration yields
Ka V f tw, Cw dtw
(2)
L L
aZwo ils - ia
KaV_ ~iz di a
(3)
, ls -- 1a
Moist air stream i,t
Saturated vapour
i,t,
Figure 5 Heat and mass transfer at the water-air interface
Figure 5 Transfert de chaleur et de masse h l'interface eau-air
48 A. K. M. Mohiuddin and K. Kant

The final forms of the Merkel equations are given as temperature range of 0-200°C is given by
Equations (2) and (3), which were obtained by neglect-
ing: any resistance to mass transfer at the water-air ln(105 × Pw~) = Cs
interface; the temperature differential between the bulk
water and the interface; and the effect of evaporation. T+C9+GoT+Cll T 2 +C12 T 3 +C13 In(T) (8)
The fight-hand side of Equations (2) and (3) contains
only the thermodynamic quantities for the cooling where C 8 = -5800.2206; C9 = 1.391 499 3;
process, and is determined wholly by the initial and G0 = -0.048 640239; Cll = 0.417 647 68 × 10-4;
end temperatures of the water and by the initial and end C12 = -0.144 52093 × 10-7; C13 = 6.545 967 3. In both
conditions of the air flowing through the tower. The left- equations (7) and (8), Pws is the saturation pressure (bar),
hand side of the equations is independent of the and T is the absolute temperature (K).
thermodynamic conditions in the tower and is deter- The density of moist air mixture Pl (kgoam 3), is
mined by the characteristics of the tower design, Ka V, calculated using the following equation:
and the flowrates of water (L) and air (G). The diffusion
coefficient for a given G depends only upon the type of Pt
Pl = RaT( 1 + 1.6078w) (9)
packing provided in the tower. Equations (2) and (3) are
the basic equations for calculating cooling tower where, Ra is the gas constant for dry air = 0.287055
performance. The ratio (KaV/L) is referred to as the kj k g - l K 1.
tower characteristic or NTU, as mentioned earlier 1°. The specific enthalpy of saturated air leaving the
tower, iz (kJ kgd2 ) at temperature t~ (°C) is calculated
Moist air properties using the following equations, which are obtained by
fitting a polynomial to the enthalpy data.
Moist air properties are calculated by using the following For the temperature range 10-35°C, the specific
equations 19. enthalpy of the saturated air is given by
The specific enthalpy of moist air il (kJkgd1) is
calculated using the equation iz = C14

iI = Cpa" t~ + W(2501 + 1.805 tl) (4) t~ -'}-C15 + C16t~ + Clvt~2 + C18/'~ 3 -4- CI9I~ 4 (10)

where C14 = 53.525 15; Cl5 = -3.517334; C16 =

where epa is the specific heat of dry air = 1.004 kJ kg I 2.809715; Ct7 = -0.1669836 x 10-1; C18 =
° c - l ; tl is the dry-bulb temperature (DBT) of moist air 0.924304 1 x 10-3; Cl9 ----0.9275973 x 10-5 .
(°C); and w is the specific humidity of moist air For the temperature range 35-60°C, the specific
(kgw kgda1). enthalpy of the saturated air is given by
The specific humidity of moist air, w, is given by
i 2 = C20
(2501 - 2.381t~)w s - (q - t;)
w = (5) t~ + C21 + C22t ~ q- C23t~2 + C24t~3 + C25t~4 (11)
2501 + 1.805tt -4.186t]
where C20 -- -263 25.88; C21 = 3174.125; C22 =
where t~ is the moist air WBT (°C); w~ is the specific -151.3213; C23 = 3.762619; C24 = -0.046 17667;
humidity of moist air saturated at temperature t~ C25 = 0.249 5032 x 10-3. In both Equations (10) and
(kgw kgdal). In terms of the partial pressure of water (11), t~ is the WBT of the saturated air leaving the tower
vapour, w~ can be written as (°C).
Referring to Figure 6, t I and t~ are the inlet air DBT
ws = 0.62198 Pws (6) and WBT respectively. The temperature of the outlet air,
Pt - Pws
where Pt is the total pressure (bar); Pws is the partial
vapour pressure at saturation (bar). twi t1'i2 'P2
The water vapour saturation pressure Pws in Equation r
(6) can be calculated using one of the following two
equations.
tWate
inlet lAir outlet

The saturation pressure over ice for the temperature

range of -100°C to 0°C is given by

ln(105 Xpws) = C]
T + C2 + C 3 T + C4T 2 + CsT 3 //////////P////~

+ C6 T4 q.- C71n(T) (7)

* IAir /woter
where, C1 = -5674.5359; C2 = 6.392 524 7; C3 = tl'tl /inlet ~ outlet
-0.9677843 x 10-2; C 4 = 0.622 1570 x 10-6; Cs = il, Pt two
0.20747825 x 10-8; C6 = -0.9484024 x 10-12; C7 =
4.163 501 9. Figure 6 Thermal analysisof a coolingtower
The saturation pressure over liquid water for the Figure 6 Analyse thermique d'une tour de refroidissement
 Knowledge base for the systematic design of wet coofing towers. Part I 49

assumed saturated, is t~. The inlet and outlet water method:

temperatures are twi and two respectively. n

The specific enthalpy of the inlet moist air, il, is
calculated using Equations (4)-(8). The density of moist
air at the tower inlet is calculated using Equations (5)-
(9).
In the specific case where the outlet water temperature
two is not known to the designer, the empirical relation
given below can be used to determine it2°-:
_if(x) dx = 2-E f ( x j ) (15)
l n j= 1
where xj indicates the real roots of the Tchebyshev
quadrature polynomial for different values of n.
For n = 4, the roots xj are given as ±0.187 592 (~- ±0.2)
and ±0.794 654 (-~ ±0.8). According to Equation (2):

twi + 2t~ + tl (12) K a V l'tW' cw

7 -dtw
- - -- Cw f ~i (16)
two = 4 Jtwo ls -- la o
Again, in the specific case where the temperature of the For the above integral one can write
saturated air leaving the tower, t~, is not known to the
designer, it can be approximated by the average of the twi + two twi -- two (17)
tw - - - - -~
inlet and outlet water temperatures. This is substantiated 2 2
by the experiments carried out by the authors and also by where
the data of Hutchison and Spivery 21 and McKelvey and
Brooke 16, shown in Figure 7. 6 = -1, tw = two
6 = +1, tw = twi
Determination of the ratio of the water-to-air loading, L/G
Also
Heat balance for the tower gives
dtw - twi - two d6
L c w ( t w i - two) = G ( i 2 - il) (13) 2
Now, substituting tw in terms of 6 from Equation (17)
Therefore into Equation (16), and inserting the corresponding
L i2 - il (14) limits for 6, one obtains the value of the integral I, as
- - z

G C w ( t w i - two) [twidtw twi - two fld6

1~
In general, this ratio lies between 1 and 3. MDCTs are atwo Ai ~ J-l Ai
normally designed for L/G ratios ranging from 0.75 to Using Equation (15), one obtains
1.50; for NDCTs this ratio usually lies in the range 0.5-
3.0. , 1 ,18,
5 /=1 A!/
Integration procedure for the tower characteristic For n = 4, therefore,
The tower characteristic is calculated using Tchebyshev's
method as suggested by the CTI 1°'22'e3. According to this
z~ij (19)

/
• Hutchison and Spivey 9 /
4C o Mckelvey ond Brooke /

i2 twi
35
t.) i1+0.9(i 2- i 1) two'l- 0-9 (twi-two)
o

30
P
E 25 i14-0.6(i2-i 1) two+0.6 (twi-two)

.t-
t~ i ÷ 0 . 4 ( i 2 - i 1) two÷0.4 (twi - two)
20

g 15

i +0.1 (i 2 - i 1 ) two4"0-1 ( twi - two)

5 20 30 40
it two
Average of inlet and outlet water tempo'C

Figure 7 Variation of outlet air temperature with average water Figure 8 Enthalpy and temperature distribution in a counterflow
temperature tower
Figure 7 Variation de la temperature de l'air ~ la sortie par rapport ~ la Figure 8 Distribution de I'enthalpie et de la temp&ature dans une tour il
tempdrature moyenne de l'eau contre-eourant
 50 A. K. M. Mohiuddin and K. Kant

Table 1 Calculation procedure for the counterflow tower characteristic

Tableau 1 Procedure de calcul pour la caract~ristique d'une tour de refroidissement h contre-courant

Enthalpy of
saturated air E n t h a l p y of
Water at water air at air
temperature temperature temperature
(°C) i~(kJkg~) ~(kJkg,~2) •

Al:ls
.t
--
±
Ai

two = -- il --
two + 0.1 (twi - two) i~, ij + 0.1 (i 2 - ij)
=t A =i A
two + 0.4(twi - two) i~ i I + 0.4(i 2 - i]) L

= tB = iB
two + 0.6(twi - two) i~ il + 0.6(i2 - i!) L

= tC =i c
two + 0.9(twi - two) i~ il + 0.9(i2 - il)
: lD = iD

/wi = -- /'2 - -

Therefore j=!

KaV /"w~ dt w 4
t ~ i - two ~Z'_I__I
L =Cw Jtwo i's-ia Cw 4 ~_lAij
(23)

Consider the height of a counterflow tower, such that Tezukal°:

twi and two represent the temperatures of the inlet and
outlet water (Figure 8). These temperatures correspond Crossflow tower characteristic =
to the points +1 and - 1 respectively in the interval Counterflow tower characteristic
( - 1 , + 1) considered in the integral of Equation (8).
Correction factor (24)
In order now to determine the temperature at the four
specified points in the interval ( - 1 , + 1), we use Equation The value of the correction factor [o is given by
(17), for the values
F o -- 1 - 0.106(1 - So) 3"5 (25)
= -0.8, to get tw = two + 0.1 (twi - two) (20a) where
6 = -0.2, to get tw = two + 0.4 (twi - two) (20b)
So - (iwo
i = -) (25a)
= +0.2, to get tw = two + 0.6 (twi -- two) (20c) (iwi - il )
6 = +0.8, to get tw = two + 0.9 (twi -- two ) (20d)

Similarly, the enthalpy can be written as

i -- ~ + (5 (21) ° 3"/, J
J
1.5 _. 2%
p..
Following the same procedure, the enthalpy at the z
corresponding sections of the tower can be obtained.
o ~
For: if-
1.0 2
1 Twt = 30 - 50"C

6=-0.8; i=i]+0.1(i 2-i1) (22a) i-

ITwB2=5 27"C -

6 = -0.2; i = i1 + 0.4 (i2 - i]) (22b)

0.5
--- +0.2; i = i 1 + 0.6 (i2 - il) (22c) /
/

6 = +0.8; i = il + 0.9 (i2 - i]) (22d)

05 1.0 2.0 2.5
t./6
To calculate the enthalpy of saturated air at water
temperatures, one can use Equations (10) or (11) by Figure 9 Error m a p for crossflow N T U calculated using counterflow
replacing t~ by water temperatures in Equation (20). N T U and the correction factor F 0
These results are arranged in Table 1 for the calculation Figure 9 Recapitulation des erreurs commises dans le calcul du nombre
d'unit~s de transfert constat~ lors du fonctionnement h courant
of the counterflow tower characteristic (see Equation transversal, operation faite h l'aide du nombre d'unitOs de transfert
(23)). The crossflow tower characteristic can be constatd lors du fonctionnement ~ contre-courant, ainsi que le facteur de
calculated using the relation obtained by Fujita and correction Fo
 Knowledge base for the systematic design of wet coofing towers. Part I
iwi is the e n t h a l p y of saturated air at entering water
t e m p e r a t u r e , lwi; iwo is the e n t h a l p y o f saturated air at
outlet water t e m p e r a t u r e , two; i2 is the e n t h a l p y of leaving
air; a n d il is the e n t h a l p y o f e n t e r i n g air. Errors involved
in the calculation ofcrossflow N T U are s h o w n in Figure 9.
Conclusions
A detailed selection a n d design p r o c e d u r e for wet
counterflow a n d crossflow, m e c h a n i c a l a n d n a t u r a l
d r a u g h t cooling towers has been developed. Various
logical decisions, empirical relations a n d a s s u m p t i o n s
are to be used for the p r o p e r selection a n d design o f a
tower.
References
1 Johnson, B. M. EPRI Cooling Tower Performance Prediction and
Improvement, Applications Guide EPRI GS-6370 California
(1990) Vol 1
2 Walker, Wo H., Lewis, W. K., MeAdams, W. H., Gilliland, E. R.
Principles of Chemical Engineering 3rd ed, McGraw-Hill, New
York (1923)
3 Merkel, F. VerdunstungskfJhlung VDI Forschungsarbeiten
(1925) No. 275 Berlin
4 Baker,D. R. Cooling Tower Performance Chemical Publishing
Co., New York (1984) pp 122-133
5 Zivi, S. M., Brand, B. B. An analysis of the crossflow cooling
tower Refrig Eng (1957) 64 31-34, 90 92
6 Benton,D. J. A Numerical Simulation of Heat Transfer in
Evaporative Cooling Towers Tennessee Valley Authority Report
1983, WR 28-1-900-110(1983)
7 Majumdar,A. K., Singhal, A. K., Spalding, D. B. VERA2D:
Program for 2-D Analysis of Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer in
Evaporative Cooling Towers; Volume 1: Mathematical Formula-
tion, Solution Procedure, and Applications EPRI CS-2923
California (1983)
,51
8 Caytan, Y. Validation of the two-dimensional numerical model
'STAR' developed for cooling tower design Proc 3rd Cooling
Tower Workshop Int Assoc for Hydraulic Research Budapest
Hungary (1982)
9 Suthedand, J. W. Analysis of mechanical draught counterflow
air/water cooling towers Trans ASME, J Heat Transfer (1983)
105 576-583
10 Fujita, T., Tezuka, S. Calculations on thermal performance of
mechanical draft cooling towers ASHRAE Trans (1986) 92
274-287
11 CTI Code ATC-105 Acceptance Test Code for Water Cooling
Towers, Cooling Tower Institute, Houston, TX (1982)
12 Wehb,R. L. A critical evaluation of cooling tower design
methodology, in Heat Transfer Equipment Design (Ed. R. K.
Shah et al) Hemisphere Publishing Washington, DC (1988)
547 -558
13 Jaber, H., Webb, R. L. Design of cooling towers by the
effectiveness-NTU method Trans ASME, J Heat Transfer
(1989) 111 837-843
14 Mohinddin,A. K. M., Kant, K. Analysis of mechanical draft wet
cooling towers J Energy. Heat Mass Transfer (1991) 13 165
187
15 Cheremisinoff, N. P., Cheremisiooff, P. N. Cooling Towers
Selection, Design and Practice Ann Arbor Science Publishers
Inc., Michigan (1981)
16 MeKeivey,K. K., Brooke, M. The Industrial Cooling Tower
Elsevier, Amsterdam (1959)
17 Lichtenstein,J. Performance and selection of mechanical draft
towers Trans A S M E (1943) 65 779-787
18 Baker,D. R. Shryoek, H. A. A comprehensive approach to the
analysis of cooling tower performance Trans ASME, J Heat
Transfer (1961) 83 339-350
19 Psychrometrics,ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals ASH-
RAE, Atlanta, GA (1981) 5.1-5.5
20 Jordan, R. C., Priester, G. B. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
Prentice-Hall of India (Pvt) Ltd, New Delhi (1966)
21 Hutehison,W. K., Spivey,E. Design and performance of cooling
towers Trans Inst Chem Eng (1942) 20 14-29
22 Cooling Tower Institute Bulletin ATC-105 Cooling Tower
Institute, Houston, TX (1982)
23 Hallett, G. F. Performance curves for mechanical draft cooling
towers J Eng Power (1975) 97 503-508