0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

97 visualizzazioni9 pagineMay 17, 2011

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

97 visualizzazioni9 pagineAttribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Sei sulla pagina 1di 9

Ruzhu Wang2

Lixin Li1 Simulation and Analysis of a Single-Effect

Hai Ni1

Thermal Vapor-Compression Desalination

1

Shanghai Marine Equipment

Research Institute, Shanghai,

System at Variable Operation Conditions

P. R. China.

2 A mathematical model is developed to analyze a single-effect thermal vapor com-

Institute of Refrigeration

and Cryogenics, Shanghai Jiao pression (TVC) desalination system. The effects of the variation of operation con-

Tong University, Shanghai, ditions such as the intake seawater temperature and the mass flow rate of cooling

P. R. China. water on the system performance are investigated for a specific desalination unit.

The system performance is found to decrease when the intake seawater tempera-

ture is different from the design value. By adjusting the mass flow rate of cooling

water, a better system performance can be obtained when the intake seawater

temperature differs from the design conditions. Decreasing the cooling water flow

rate to values lower than the design value can lead to a better performance when

the intake seawater temperature is lower than the design value, and the system

performance reaches a peak point when the cooling water flow rate decreases to a

definite level. A better performance can also be obtained by increasing the cooling

water flow rate to values higher than design value, when the intake seawater tem-

perature is higher than the design value and the system performance also reaches

a peak point when the cooling water flow rate increases to a definite level.

Received: August 15, 2007; revised: September 27, 2007; accepted: September 28, 2007

DOI: 10.1002/ceat.200700303

tion capacity of MVC systems, their operation face two main

The vapor compression (VC) distillation process is generally drawbacks. These are the limitation on the compressor capaci-

used for small- and medium-scale desalting units. The heat for ty and the mechanical wear of the moving parts of the com-

evaporating the water comes from the compression of vapor pressor [3]. The latter disadvantage is eliminated in the ther-

rather than the direct exchange of heat from steam produced mal vapor compression configuration [4]. The thermal vapor

in a boiler or other heat sources. Two primary methods that compression process is used on an industrial scale in the MEE

are used to compress vapor to produce enough heat to evapo- system. The combined system is particularly attractive due to

rate the incoming seawater are mechanical vapor compression its high performance ratio, low number of effects, good flex-

(MVC) and thermal vapor compression (TVC). The MVC sys- ibility to load variation, simple geometry and absence of mov-

tem was developed with the focus on providing desalinated ing parts [5]. The last feature makes the process robust and

water to small communities. Originally, the capacity of the considerably minimizes the skill required in maintenance and

MVC systems was limited to a production rate of 500 m3/day. stocking of spare parts.

However, development in the capacity of the mechanical com- Some research has been carried out to investigate the char-

pressor increased the production rate for the MVC system to a acteristics and the performance of MEE-TVC. The literature

value close to 3000 m3/day [1, 2]. There are also literature re- [6–9] describes the process characteristics of MEE-TVC and

ports [2] that MVC units with a production rate up to compares its features with other desalination processes. The re-

10000 m3/day, are also under development. cent report by Ophir and Lokiec [10] described the design

principles and various considerations concerning advanced

MED processes including MED-TVC, which result in the most

economical desalination system. It also provided an overview

– of various cases of waste heat utilization and cogeneration

Correspondence: Dr. J. G. Ji (jiangang704@yahoo.com), Shanghai MED plants, which have been operating for many years. Sever-

Marine Equipment Research Institute, Shanghai, 200031, P. R. China. al studies [11–17] have been conducted to examine how the

1634 J. Ji et al. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641

design parameters affect the system performance for single and well as conducting the thermal simulation and analysis for de-

multiple effect TVC systems. El-Dessouky and Ettouney [11] sign purposes, the system performance variation is also simu-

presented an analysis for single- and multi-effect TVC systems, lated and analyzed while the operating variables differ from

which focused on the parameters that affect the product cost. the expected design conditions, e.g., the temperature of intake

Darwish and El-Dessouky [12] conducted a study that com- seawater varies with the different operating seasons. Due to

pared the specific available energy, performance ratio and spe- the fact that many studies have been carried out to analyze the

cific heat transfer area for MEE, MEE-TVC and MSF. Al-Ju- effects of design parameters on the system performance, this

wayhel et al. [13] performed an analysis and comparison for study mainly focuses on the analysis of the effects of the varia-

four different types of single effect desalination systems com- tion of operation conditions on the system performance for a

bined with vapor compression heat pumps, which include specific designed TVC desalination unit.

thermal (TVC), mechanical (MVC), absorption (ABVC) and

adsorption (ADVC). Hamed et al. [14] conducted and evalu-

ated the performance of TVC and compared it against an ac- 2 Process Description

tual plant. The exergy analysis was performed and compared

with conventional MEE and MVC desalination systems. The The single effect thermal vapor compression seawater desalina-

results showed that TVC yields the least exergy destruction tion process in its simplest form, is illustrated schematically in

among the three systems. Darwish and Al-Najem [15] con- Fig. 1. The main components of the unit are the evaporator,

ducted a parametric analysis using the first and second law of the steam ejector and the feed heater or the condenser.

thermodynamics for single- and multi-effect TVC systems. A known mass of seawater (Mcw + Mf ) at temperature Tcw,

Their work showed that the steam ejector and the evaporator and salt concentration Sf, is introduced into the tube side of

are the main sources of exergy destruction. Choi et al. [16] the condenser where its temperature increases to Tf1). The

tested the thermal performance of four developed MED-TVC cooling water, Mcw, is dumped back to the sea. The feed sea-

distillers whose capacities are of 1, 2.2, 3.5 and 4.4 migd, by a water, Mf, is chemically treated and de-aerated before being

steady-state simulation program based on the first and second pumped to the evaporator where its temperature is raised from

law of thermodynamics. The study showed that most of the Tf to the boiling temperature, T1. The boiling temperature, T1,

specific exergy losses in the MED-TVC desalination system oc- is higher than the saturated temperature corresponding to the

curred in the TVC and the associated effects. Alasfour et al. evaporation pressure by the boiling point elevation (BPE) of

[17] presented an exergy analysis of three different multi-effect the feed seawater. The vapor generated therein, flows through

thermal vapor compression desalting system configurations, the demister to remove the entrained brine droplets. The tem-

which included ME-TVC, ME-TVC with regenerative feed hea- perature of the vapor departing the demister is lower than T1

ters and ME-TVC coupled with a conventional MEE system. due to the temperature depression brought about by the fric-

The results also showed that irreversibilities in the steam ejec- tional pressure loss in the demister. The vapor flows from the

tor and evaporators are the main sources of exergy destruction demister to the condenser, where it splits into two portions:

in the three configurations. the first part condenses outside the tubes of the condenser,

Modeling, simulation and analysis of the single effect system while the rest is entrained by the steam ejector, where it is

forms the basis of the current study of the MEE system and the compressed by motive steam to raise the pressure and temper-

MEE combined with vapor compression. The steam ejector is ature and then it is introduced into the evaporator heat side as

one of the most important components and its performance is the heat source.

sensitive to the operation variables for the TVC desalination

system. Generally, the steam ejector attains optimum perfor-

mance at the design conditions and varies considerably while Steam Ejector

Motive Steam

Mixed steam

the operation conditions are different from the design point Mp Me Pm,Tm Mp Pp,Tp

values, which further affects the system performance. Most of Entrained Steam

Me, Pc,Tc

the previous studies only focused on how the design operation Intake Seawater

Condenser

variables affected the system performance and adopted many Mf M Sf ,Tcw

Demister

simplifying assumptions, especially for the steam ejector. It is Feed Water

Mf Sf ,Tf Md, Pv,Tv

rare to find research that conducts the performance analysis

for TVC desalination systems under off-design conditions.

This study focuses on the development of a detailed steady- Evaporator

state mathematical model for the single effect TVC desalina-

tion process. The performance evaluation and simulation of

the steam ejector is simulated with a subroutine code by the Cooling Water Rejected brine Return to boiler Product Water

application of the thermal dynamic method. The model con- M Sf ,Tf Mb Sb T1 Mp Md

siders the variation of the physical properties of water and

Figure 1. Single effect thermal vapor compression desalination

steam, which are calculated using a subroutine program based

system.

on the IAPWS 1997 industrial formulation for water and

steam [18]. The variation of the physical properties of seawater

with temperature and salt concentration, boiling point eleva- –

tion and pressure drop in the demister are also considered. As 1) List of symbols at the end of the paper.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641 Modeling 1635

A 6:71 6:34 10 2 T 9:74 10 5 T 2 10 3

3.1 Overall Mass and Salt Balances (8)

B 22:238 9:59 10 3 T 9:42 10 5 T 2 10 8

Eqs. (1) and (2) describe the overall mass and salt balances: The above equation is valid for the values of S from 20–

160 g/kg and of T from 20–180 °C.

Mf = Md + Mb (1) The dimensions of the required heat transfer surface area in

the evaporator, Ae, are obtained from:

Mb = Md [Sf/(Sb – Sf )] (2) Qe

Ae (9)

Ue
Tm T1

where M is the mass flow rate and S is the salt concentration of

the seawater. The subscripts f, d and b denote the feed water, where Tm is the condensation temperature of the steam in the

product water and brine. heat side, Ue is the overall heat transfer coefficient and can be

obtained from the correlation developed by El-Dessouky et al.

[20, 21]:

3.2 Evaporator

Ue = 1969.5 + 12.057 T1 – 8.5989 · 10–2 T12 + 2.565 · 10–4 T13

The heating vapor flowing from the steam ejector and ad- (10)

mitted into the evaporator, (Mp + Me), is used to raise the

temperature of the feed seawater, Mf, from the inlet tempera- The correlation in Eq. (10) applies to a specific range of de-

ture, Tf, to the boiling temperature, T1. In addition, it supplies sign and operating parameters, which include steam velocity,

the latent heat required to evaporate the specified mass of va- concentration, temperature and physical properties. In addi-

por, Md. Therefore: tion, the correlations are dependent on the tube material, di-

Z T1 mensions, arrangement and thermal load. Further details of

Qe
Mp Me
hm ″ ′

hm Mf Cp dT Md
hv″ hv′ correlations for a range of the above parameters can be found

Tf in the literature [21].

(3)

where Qe is the thermal load of the evaporator and h is the

specific enthalpy and can be attained by a subroutine program 3.3 Condenser

for calculating the physical properties of the water and steam.

The subscripts m and v denote the condensation side (mixed The heat transfer between the condensing vapor and the feed

heating steam) and evaporation side of the evaporator, and water in the condenser can be written in terms of an overall

superscripts ″ and ′ denote the vapor state and liquid state, re- heat transfer coefficient, Uc, condenser heat transfer area, Ac,

spectively. Cp is the specific heat at constant pressure of the and the logarithmic mean temperature difference, (LMTD)c.

seawater and is given by [19]: Thus:

Z

Cp = (A +B T +C T2 + D T3) · 10–3 (4) Tf

Qc
Mf Mcw Cp dT Mc
hc″ hc′

Tcw

The variables A, B, C and D are evaluated as a function of

the water salinity, S, as follows [19]:
Md Me
hc″ hc′ U c Ac
LMTDc
11

8

>

> A 4206:8 6:6197S 1:2288 10 2 S2 where subscript cw denotes the cooling water. Mc is the mass

<

B 1:1262 5:4178 10 2 S 2:2719 10 4 S2 flow rate of the condensation vapor in the condenser. The fac-

5

> C 1:2026 10 2 5:3566 10 4 S 1:8906 10 6 S2

> tor (LMTD)c is defined as:

:

D 6:8777 10 7 1:517 10 6 S 4:4268 10 9 S2

Tf Tcw

LMTDc (12)

These equations are valid over the following ranges: 0 ≤ S ≤ ln
Tc Tcw =
Tc Tf

160 g/kg, 0 ≤ T ≤ 180 °C. The boiling temperature, T1, is high- where Tc is the condensation temperature of the condensing

er than the saturation temperature, Tv, which corresponds to vapor in the condenser. The overall heat transfer coefficient of

the pressure in the evaporator vapor space due to boiling point the condenser, Uc, can be obtained from the correlation devel-

elevation, BPE, Thus: oped by El-Dessouky et al. [20, 21]:

T1 = Tv + BPE (6) Uc = 1719.4 + 3.2063 Tv + 1.5971 · 10–2 Tv2 – 1.9918 · 10–4 Tv3

(13)

The boiling point elevation of seawater is a function of the

temperature and salinity and is usually calculated from the fol- As mentioned above, the details of the valid range of the

lowing empirical formula [19]: above correlation can be found in the literature [21].

1636 J. Ji et al. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641

The pressure loss while the vapor generated from evaporator is The overall mass balance is given by Eq. (16):

flowing through the demister can be given by the following

correlation [11]: Mp + Me = Mm = (1 + u) Mp (16)

DPde = 9.583 · 10–2 qde1.597 Vde0.7197 Lde1.388 (14) where M is the mass flow rate and the subscripts p, e and m

define the motive steam, the entrained steam and mixed steam

where qde, Vde and Lde denote the demister pad density, vapor (compression steam). u is the entrainment ratio of the ejector

velocity in the demister and thickness of the demister pad, and is defined as:

respectively. The correlation is valid over the following

Me

parameter ranges: 1 ≤ Vde ≤ 9 m/s, 310 ≤ qde ≤ 470 kg/m3, and u (17)

100 ≤ Lde ≤ 200 mm. Therefore, the temperature loss with va- Mp

por flow, DTde, can be obtained according to the correspond-

ing saturated pressure difference. Therefore, the relation be-

3.5.2 Primary Flow Through the Nozzle

tween the condensation temperature in the condenser and the

boiling temperature can be written as:

Taking into account the energy losses, the real velocity is given

pc pv Dpde by:

(15)

Tc T1 BPE DTde q

Vp1 u1 2
hp hp1s Vp2 (18)

3.5 Steam Ejector The real enthalpy at the nozzle exit is:

The most important and critical step in modeling the TVC de- hp1 = hp + (Vp2 – Vp12)/2 (19)

salination system is the evaluation of the performance of the

steam ejector. The main data required for analyzing the steam The motive steam reaches the choking condition at the

ejector is the determination of the mass of entrained vapor per throat of nozzle, namely the flow velocity is equal to the local

unit mass of motive vapor, u, given the pressure of the motive sonic velocity, and one obtains:

s

steam, suction pressure and discharge pressure (compression q dp

pressure). The typical ejector consists of four parts, i.e., nozzle, Vp u1 2
hp hp Vp2 ap v (20)

dv s

suction chamber, mixing chamber and diffuser, as shown in

Fig. 2. Applying the continuity equation, one obtains:

The main methods available in the literature to simulate the

performance of a steam ejector include empirical correlation Mp = Vp fp/vp = Vp1 fp1/vp1 = Vp* fp*/vp* (21)

and chart [11, 22], the gas dynamic method [23], the thermal

dynamic method [24–26] and CFD [27]. The empirical corre-

lation and chart is the simplest method but is not adaptable to

off-design conditions. The gas dynamic method is based on 3.5.3 Entrained Flow from Inlet to Entrance of Mixing

the ideal gas assumption and does not include the impact of Chamber (Section 2-2, Fig. 2)

the real gas property variations under the two-phase region in

the thermal vapor compression desalination application. The The entrained flow does not mix with the primary flow before

general thermal dynamic method simplifies the mixing pro- the entrance of the mixing chamber, and therefore, the state of

cess, which affects the simulation accuracy. The CFD method the entrained flow at section 2-2 can be obtained through the

is more accurate than the other methods, but the simulation following equations:

process is more complicated and is difficult to couple with the 8 p

system simulation. Therefore, the modified thermal dynamic < Ve2 u2 2
he he2s Ve2

method, which improves the mixing process compared to the h he
Ve2 Ve2 2 =2 (22)

: e2

gas dynamic method, is adopted here. The mathematical mod- Me Ve fe =ve Ve2 fe2 =ve2

el is described in detail as follows. The following assumptions

are made for the simulation of the model:

I. The flow inside the ejector is steady and one-dimensional 3.5.4 Mixing of Two Stream in the Mixing Chamber (from

and all of the process is adiabatic. Section 2-2 to Section 3-3, Fig. 2)

II. After emission from the nozzle, the motive steam fans out

without mixing with the entrained steam, and the two Assuming two streams start to mix with different pressure and

streams start to mix at the entrance of the mixing chamber. velocity as two coaxial flows from the entrance of mixing

III. To account for non-ideal processes, the effects of frictional chamber, the mixture reaches equal pressure and uniform ve-

and mixing losses are taken into account by introducing locity at the mixing chamber exit. A momentum balance rela-

some coefficients into the isentropic relations. tion can be derived, as follows:

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641 Modeling 1637

pp2 pp1 hp2 hp1

u3 Mp (Vp2 + u Ve2) – Mp (1 + u) V3 = (27)

fe2 f3 fp2 f3 fp1

(p3 – pp2) fp2 + (p3 – pe2) fe2 (23)

and therefore, the maximum limited flow rate of the secondary

Similarly, an energy balance relation can be derived as: flow and the maximum entrainment ratio when choke I occurs

can be written as:

(hp2 + Vp22/2) + u (he2 + Ve22/2 ) = (1 + u) (h3 + V32/2) (24)

Me I Ve2 fe2 =ve2 ae fe2 =ve

(28)

uI Me I =Mp

Applying the continuity relation, the following equation can

be obtained, Eq. (25): Choke II denotes the entrained flow reaching a critical value

at some piont (section y-y) in the mixing chamber. In this case,

Vp2 fp2/vp2 = Ve2 fe2/ve2 = V3 f3/v3 (25) the entrained flow reaches a critical level and the primary flow

expands until the pressure is equal to the secondary flow.

Therefore, the following relations can be obtained:

8

< Vey ae

3.5.5 Mixed Flow Through Diffuser

ppy pey pe (29)

:f f f

py ey 3

The mixed flow passes through the diffuser and converts the

kinetic energy into pressure energy. By applying the energy Thus, the flow parameters of the primary and secondary

balance and continuity relations, the following equations can flow can be obtained through the same procedures as the two

be obtained: streams expand as mentioned above. Therefore, the maximum

limiting flow rate of the secondary flow and the maximum en-

8

< hm hp 3 gd V32 Vms 2 =2

trainment ratio when choke II occurs can be written as:

V 2 h3 hm V32 (26)

: m Me II Vey fey =vey

V3 f3 =v3 Vm fm =vm uII Me II =Mp

(30)

When the mixed flow reaches critical levels, choke III occurs.

3.5.6 Limited Entrainment Ratio due to Choking Condition Considering the ejector configuration, this is most likely to

happen at the mixing chamber exit, i.e., the throat of the diffu-

In a one-dimensional analysis, three possible chokings can oc- ser. The mixed flow parameters in this condition can be ob-

cur [22, 28]. Choke I, the choking of the entrained flow at the tained through the reverse procedure of the mixed flow in the

entrance of mixing chamber; choke II, the choking of the en- diffuser mentioned above by applying the velocity of the mixed

trained flow at some point (section y-y, shown in Fig. 2) in the flow equal to the local sonic velocity for the given back pres-

mixing chamber, and choke III, the choking of the mixed flow sure of the diffuser exit. Therefore, the maximum limited flow

at the inlet to the diffuser. Choke I denotes the entrained steam rate of the mixed flow and the maximum entrainment ratio

reaching a critical value at the entrance of the mixing chamber when choke III occurs can be obtained from:

where the two streams just start to mix. Assuming the flow pa-

rameters and flow passage area of the primary flow at the en-
Mm III am f3 =vm

(31)

uIII
Mm III =Mp 1

trance of the mixing chamber are the same as at the nozzle

exit:

2 y 3 m

Ve2

nozzle Vp2

Pm Tm Vm

M p Pp Tp V p V3

f p* fp1 fp2 f3

motive steam 1 discharge compressed

throat vapor to evaporator

e 2 y 3 m

Me Te Ve

entrained steam

1638 J. Ji et al. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641

The corresponding computer simulation program is devel- where PR is the performance ratio, which is defined as the

oped according to the above mathematical model and verified amount of product water per unit mass of motive steam.

by comparison with the experimental results presented in the

literature [22]. The simulation program can then be coupled

into the system performance simulation model as a subrou- 3.7 Solution Procedure

tine.

The solution procedures for the simulation of the above model

are shown in Fig. 3. A subroutine code for calculating the

3.6 System Performance Variables properties of water and water vapor are embedded in the sim-

ulation program.

The main variable affect on the cost of product water is de-

fined as:

Md

4 Results and Discussion

PR (32)

Mp The effect of variations of the operation conditions on the sys-

tem performance for a TVC desalination plant designed at a

specific condition has been investigated. Here,

Input given design parameters

M f , M cw , Tcw , p p , T p , f p* , f p1 , f p 2 , f pm , Ae , Ac , S f , ρ de , L de

the simulation example at design is:

– Product fresh water mass flow rate,

Md = 50 t/day;

Define ϕ 1 , ϕ 2 , ϕ 3 , η d , V de – Boiling temperature, T1 = 50 °C;

– Intake seawater temperature, Tcw = 25 °C;

– Intake seawater salinity, Sf = 35 g/kg;

Calculate M p from Eqs. 18-21 – Salinity of rejected brine, Sb = 60 g/kg;

– Feed water temperature, Tf = T1 – 5;

– Compression ratio of ejector, Cr = 1.85;

Assume Tv

– Vapor velocity in demister, Vde = 6 m/s;

Pv at saturation of Tv – Thickness of demister, Lde = 100 mm;

Calculate T1 , p c , Tc from Eqs.6-8 and 14-15 – Density of demister, qde = 375 kg/m3.

The following set of specifications can be

obtained under the design condition:

Calculate Qc , M c from Eqs.11-13 – System performance ratio, PR = 1.926;

– Heat transfer area of condenser, Ac = 30 m2;

Assume M d – Heat transfer area of evaporator,

Ae = 49.2 m2;

– Mass flow rate of cooling seawater,

Calculate Qe , Tm , M m from Eqs. 3,9-10

Mcw = 26.572 t/h;

M d = M d + dM

– Mass flow rate of feed seawater, Mf = 5 t/h;

Calculate M d (new) from M d = M m − M p + M c – Diameters of main cross-section of ejector,

dp* = 22.2 mm, dp1 = 62.6 mm and d3 =

No 174 mm.

M d (new)= M d ? The effects of intake seawater temperature

on the product fresh water mass flow rate and

Yes system performance ratio, are shown in Figs. 4

Calculate u from u = ( M d − M c ) / M p and 5. It can be seen that the product fresh

water mass flow rate and performance ratio de-

Tv = Tv + dT

crease when the temperature of the intake sea-

Calculate u (new) from Eqs. 16-31 water is different from the design value. This is

because the ejector gains the best performance

only at the design condition. Any increase or

No

u (new)= u ? decrease in the intake seawater temperature re-

sults in a lower or higher boiling temperature

Yes than the design value, shown in Fig. 6, and

leads to the decrease of the ejector perfor-

Calculate PR from Eq.32

mance, shown in Fig. 7.

The variations of product fresh water mass

Output PR and M d flow rate and performance ratio with changes

in cooling seawater flow rate when the intake

Figure 3. Solution procedure of simulation. seawater temperature is different from the de-

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641 Modeling 1639

55 52

50

48

45

44

Md / t/d

Md / t/d

40

40

35 Design point Design mass flow

T cw=20 ºC

36 T cw=10 ºC

30

25 32

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28

Tcw / ºC (a) Mcw / t/hr

fresh water mass flow rate.

48

2 T cw=30 ºC

Md / t/d

46 T cw=33 ºC

1.8

Design mass flow

44

1.6

PR

Design point

1.4 42

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

1.2 (b) Mcw / t/hr

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 product fresh water mass flow rate; (a) Intake seawater tempera-

Tcw / ºC ture lower than design value; (b) Intake seawater temperature

Figure 5. Effect of intake seawater temperature on the system higher than design value.

performance ratio.

2

60

1.8

55

50

PR

1.6

Tcw=20 ºC

T1 / ºC

45

Tcw=10 ºC

Design point

40 1.4

35

1.2

30

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28

Tcw / ºC

(a) Mcw / t/hr

Figure 6. The boiling temperature varies with the intake sea- 1.9

water temperature.

1.85

1 1.8

Tcw=30 ºC

0.9

Tcw=33 ºC

PR

0.8 1.75

Design point 1.7

0.6

u

0.5

1.65

0.4

0.3

1.6

0.2 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

0.1 (b) Mcw / t/hr

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Tcw / ºC Figure 9. Effect of mass flow rate of cooling seawater on the sys-

tem performance ratio; (a) Intake seawater temperature lower

Figure 7. The entrainment ratio of ejector varies with the intake than design value; (b) Intake seawater temperature higher than

seawater temperature. design value.

1640 J. Ji et al. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641

sign value, are demonstrated in Figs. 8 and 9. As shown, the h [J/kg] specific enthalpy

decrease of cooling seawater flow rate (lower than the design L [m] thickness

value) results in an increase of product fresh water mass flow M [kg/s] mass flow rate

rate and performance ratio when the temperature of the intake p [Pa] pressure

seawater is lower than design value. The product fresh water PR [–] performance ratio

mass flow rate and performance ratio reach the peak point Dp [Pa] pressure loss

when the mass flow rate of cooling seawater decreases to a def- Qc [W] heat load of condenser

inite level. When this level is exceeded, the product fresh water Qe [W] heat load of evaporator and

mass flow rate and performance ratio decrease with decreases condenser

of the cooling seawater flow rate. In contrast, increasing the S [g/kg] salinity of seawater

cooling seawater flow rate (higher than the design value) re- T [°C] temperature

sults in an increase of the product fresh water mass flow rate T1 [°C] boiling temperature

and performance ratio when the temperature of the intake sea- Tc [°C] condensation temperature of

water is higher than the design value. Similarly, the product condenser

fresh water mass flow rate and performance ratio reach the Tv [°C] saturation evaporation

peak point when the mass flow rate of the cooling seawater in- temperature of evaporator

creases to a definite level. When this level is exceeded, the DT [°C] temperature decrease caused by

product fresh water mass flow rate and performance ratio de- pressure loss

crease with increases of the cooling seawater mass flow rate. u [–] entrainment ratio of steam

ejector

Uc [W/m2 °C] overall heat transfer coefficient

5 Conclusions of condenser

Ue [W/m2 °C] overall heat transfer coefficient

The present study introduces a theoretical model to analyze a of evaporator and condenser

single-effect vapor compression desalination unit. The effects v [m3/kg] specific volume

of the variations of operating condition on the system perfor- V [m/s] velocity

mance are investigated and analyzed. The following conclu-

sions are made in the light of the results and discussion pre- Greek symbols

sented in the previous sections.

u1 [–] velocity coefficient of motive

For a TVC desalination plant designed at a specific condi-

steam

tion, the product fresh water mass flow rate and performance

u2 [–] loss coefficient of mixing

ratio both decrease when the temperature of the intake sea-

u3 [–] velocity coefficient of entrained

water differs from the design value. When the intake seawater

flow

temperature is different from the design condition, a better

q [kg/m3] density

system performance can be obtained by adjusting the flow rate

gd [–] diffuser efficiency

of the cooling seawater. Decreasing the cooling water flow rate

(lower than the design value) can lead to better performance Subscripts

when the intake seawater temperature is lower than the design

value, and the system performance reaches peak point when 0 nozzle inlet

the cooling water flow rate decreases to a definite level. A bet- 1 nozzle exit

ter performance can be obtained by increasing the cooling 2 entrance of the mixing chamber

water flow rate (higher than the design value) when the intake 3 exit of the mixing chamber

seawater temperature is higher than the design value and it b brine

reaches peak point when the cooling water flow rate increases cw cooling seawater

to a definite level. de demister

d product water

e entrained steam

Symbols used f feed seawater

m mixed steam

a [m/s] local sonic velocity p motive steam

Ac [m2] heat transfer area of condenser s isentropic process

Ae [m2] heat transfer area of evaporator y location of choking for the entrained flow

BPE [°C] boiling temperature elevation of * critical condition

seawater I, II, III choke I, choke II and choke III

Cp [kJ/kg °C] specific heat at constant pressure

of the seawater Superscripts

Cr [–] compression ratio, (pm/pc) ″ vapor state

f [m2] cross-section area of ejector ′ liquid state

section

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2007, 30, No. 12, 1633–1641 Modeling 1641

Reference [16] H.-S. Choi, T.-J. Lee, Y.-G. Kim, S.-L. Song, Desalination

2005, 182, 239.

[1] Z. Zimerman, Desalination 1996, 96, 51. [17] F. N. Alasfour, M. A. Darwish, A. O. Bin Amer, Desalination

[2] G. Kronenberg, F. Lokiec, Desalination 2001, 136, 189. 2005, 174, 39.

[3] H. Aly Narmine, A. K. El-Fiqi, Desalination 2003, 158, 143. [18] Release on the IAPWS Industrial Formulation 1997 for the

[4] H. T. El-Dessouky, Symp. on Desalination of Seawater with Thermal-dynamic Properties of Water and Steam, , The Inter-

Nuclear Energy, Taejon, China, May 1997. national Association for the Properties of Water and Steam,

[5] H. T. El-Dessouky, H. M. Ettouney, F. AL-Juwayhel, Trans Erlangen 1997, (http://www.iapws.org).

IChemE 2000, 78 (A), 662. [19] H. E. Homig, FICHTNER-Handbook, Vulkan-Verlag, Essen

[6] O. J. Morin, Desalination 1993, 9, 69. 1978.

[7] C. Temstet, G. Canton, J. Laborie, A. Durante, Desalination [20] H. T. El-Dessouky, I. Alatiqi, S. Bingulac, H. M. Ettouney,

1996, 105, 109. Chem. Eng. Technol. 1998, 21 (5), 437.

[8] C. Temstet, J. Laborie, IDA World Congress on Desalination [21] H. M. Ettouney, H. T. El-Dessouky, Y. Al-Roumi, Int. J. En-

and Water Science, Abu Dhabi, November 1995. ergy Res. 1999, 23, 431.

[9] T. Michels, Desalination 1993, 93, 111. [22] B. R. Power, Steam Jet Ejectors for Process Industries,

[10] A. Ophir, F. Lokiec, Desalination 2005, 182, 181. McGraw-Hill, New York 1994.

[11] H. T. El-Dessouky, H. M. Ettouney, Heat Transfer Eng. 1999, [23] E. R. Solokov, N. M. Zinger, Jet Devices, Scientific Publishers,

20 (2), 52. Peking 1977 (in Chinese, Translated by Q. Y. Huang).

[12] M. A. Darwish, H. T. El-Dessouky, Appl. Therm. Eng. 1996, [24] H. A. Narmine, A. Karameldin, M. M. Shamloul, Desalina-

18, 523. tion 1999, 123, 1.

[13] F. Al-Juwayhel, H. T. El-Dessouky, H. M Ettouney, Desalina- [25] H. T. El-Dessouky, H. M. Ettouney, I. Alatiqi, G. Al-Nuwai-

tion 1997, 114, 253. bit, Chem. Eng. Process. 2002, 41, 551.

[14] O. A. Hamed, A. M. Zamamiri, S. Aly, N. Lior, Energy Con- [26] B. J. Huang, J. M. Chang, C. P. Wang,V. A. Petrenko, Int. J.

version Manage. 1996, 37, 379. Refrigeration 1999, 22, 354.

[15] N. M. Al-Najem, M. A. Darwish, F. A. Youssef, Desalination [27] I. S. Park, S. M. Park, J. S. Ha, Desalination 2005, 182, 199.

1997, 110, 223. [28] S. K. Chou, P. R. Yang, C. Yap, Int. J. Refrigeration 2001, 24,

486.