Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
multi effects desalination

multi effects desalination

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,645|Likes:
Published by abrar3831
process of desalination
process of desalination

More info:

Categories:Types, Brochures
Published by: abrar3831 on Sep 26, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Presented at the Conference on Desalination and the Environment, Las Palmas, Gran Canaria, November 9–12, 1999.European Desalination Society and the International Water Association.0011-9164/99/$– See front matter © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reservedDesalination 125 (1999) 259–276
Multiple-effect evaporation desalination systems:thermal analysis
Hisham T. El-Dessouky*, H.M. Ettouney
 Department of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering and Petroleum, Kuwait University, PO Box 5969, Safat 13060, Kuwait Tel. +965 481118; Fax +965 483-9498; email: eldessouky@kuc01.kuniv.edu.kw
Seawater desalination by parallel feed multiple-effect evaporation has a simple layout in comparison with other multiple-effect or multistage desalination systems. Several operating configurations are analyzed, including the parallelflow (MEE–P), the parallel/cross flow (MEE–PC), and systems combined with thermal (TVC) or mechanical (MVC)vapor compression. All models take into account dependence of the stream physical properties on temperature andsalinity, thermodynamic losses, temperature depression in the vapor stream caused by pressure losses and the presenceof non-condensable gases, and presence of the flashing boxes. Analysis was performed as a function of the number of effects, the heating steam temperature, the temperature of the brine blowdown, and the temperature difference of thecompressed vapor condensate and the brine blowdown. Results are presented as a function of parameters controllingthe unit product cost, which include the specific heat transfer area, the thermal performance ratio, the specific power consumption, the conversion ratio, and the specific flow rate of the cooling water. The thermal performance ratio of theTVC and specific power consumption of the MVC are found to decrease at higher heating steam temperatures. Also,an increase of the heating steam temperature drastically reduces the specific heat transfer area. Results indicate better  performance for the MEE–PC system; however, the MEE–P has a similar thermal performance ratio and simpler designand operating characteristics. The conversion ratio is found to depend on the brine flow configuration and to beindependent of the vapor compression mode.
Seawater desalination; Multiple-effect evaporation; Thermal vapor compression; Modeling
*Corresponding author.
 H.T. El-Dessouky, H.M. Ettouney / Desalination 125 (1999) 259–276 
1. Introduction
Desalination of sea and brackish water hasdeveloped considerably over the past four decades. Nevertheless, the adoption of thedesalination processes remains beyond the meansof hard pressed economies of developingcountries. As an example, funding requirementsfor a 25migd thermal- or membrane-baseddesalination plant may vary between $98 to $129million (Leitner, 1999). Moreover, operation of desalination plants requires consumption of largeamounts of energy. In addition, membrane-based processes require frequent replacement of themembrane modules. Today the unit product costmay have a low value of $0.45 for RO of lowsalinity water, 26,000–30,000ppm (Leitner,1999). However, desalination of higher salinitywater with values between 36,000–42,000 mayreach $0.9/m
for low-temperature multiple-effectevaporation (MEE), reverse osmosis (RO), andthe multi-stage flash (MSF) (Bednarski andMinamide, 1997). Progress in the desalinationindustry has resulted in market expansion tocover more than 100 countries with more 12,000operating units, a total production capacity of 22.8×10
/d, and a market value of $5×10
/y.To maintain the status of the desalinationmarket and to continue the progress process, it isnecessary to achieve milestone developments thatresult in reduction of the process capital andoperating costs. This is achieved by research,development, and comprehensive evaluation of various aspects of the desalination process.Several examples for these efforts can be foundin the recent literature, including:El-Dessouky and Ettouney (1999a) proposeduse of inexpensive plastic materials for construction of evaporators and preheaters.Evaluation and comparison against conven-tional materials show decrease in the specificcost of the heat transfer area.El-Dessouky et al. (1999a) and El-Dessoukyet al. (1999b) proposed novel configurationsfor the MSF plants, which focuses on increaseof the thermal performance ratio to higher values above the prevailing value of eight.The proposals make minimal modifications inthe layout and operating conditions of theconventional MSF plant; however, the perfor-mance ratio increases by 20–50% upon theuse of thermal vapor compression or by brinemixing.Borsani et al. (1995) and Genthener et al.(1997) showed that doubling the capacity of MSF plants results in 24% reduction in theunit product cost.El-Dessouky et al. (1999c) stressed the needfor qualifying of manpower for the desalina-tion industry with simultaneous coordinationof education and research processes. The proposed program has emphasis on improve-ments in operation efficiency and simul-taneous reduction in labor cost.Alatiqi et al. (1999) proposed an integratedmodel for technology transfer of thedesalination processes for developingcountries, i.e., the Gulf states, Egypt, andseveral Asian and African countries. Themodel focuses on efficient use of localresources and experiences.This paper focuses on performance evaluationof two flow configurations for parallel feedmultiple-effect evaporation (MEE–P or MEE– PC). The evaluation includes operation in astand-alone mode or combined with thermal or mechanical vapor compression. Operating linesfor the two configurations are shown in Figs. 1aand 1b where the feed seawater for all effects hasthe same temperature and salinity values of 25Cand 42,000ppm, respectively. The brine tempera-ture is highest for the first effect, which is heated by the heating steam, and lowest for the lasteffect.On the other hand, the rejected brine salinityis lowest for the first effect and highest for thelast effect. As is shown the feed is heated to the
 H.T. El-Dessouky, H.M. Ettouney / Desalination 125 (1999) 259–276 
261Fig. 1a. Calcium sulfate solubilityand top brine temperature for theMEE–P system.Fig. 1b. Calcium sulfate solubilityand top brine temperature for theMEE–PC system.
 brine boiling temperature at constant salinity,which is followed by evaporation and increase inthe brine salinity close to the solubility limit of the calcium sulfate. The operating lines for theMEE–P system (Fig. 1a) show heating of the feedseawater temperature in each effect to thesaturation temperature. On the other hand, theoperating lines for the MEE–PC system (Fig. 1b)include brine flashing from one effect to another.Existing MEE units are limited to a combinationof parallel/forward feed, which operates at a lowtop brine temperature of 70C (Fisher et al.,

Activity (33)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
XingRay liked this
Samson Raphael liked this
narayanan_anoob liked this
immanj liked this
thteh liked this
raomv1 liked this
tatmilk liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->