EGG-GTH-5775

J ul y 1981
"WET COOLING TOWERS: 'RULE-OF-THUMB'
DESIGN AND SIMULATION"
Stephen A. Leeper
U.S. Department of Energy
Idaho Operations Office Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
This i s an informal report intended for use as a preliminary or working document
Work supported by the U. S. Department
of Energy Assi stant Secretary f or Resource
Application, Office of Geothermal, under
DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID01570.
R
DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal
liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any
agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein
do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States
Government or any agency thereof.
DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in
electronic image products. Images are produced
from the best available original document.

EGG-GTH-5775
EGG-GTH--577 5
DE82 012196
"WET COOLING TOWERS:
'RULE-OF-THUMB' DESIGN AND SIMULATION"
Stephen A. Leeper
July 1981
CONTENTS
Page
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i i
ABSTRACT
NOMENCLATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i i i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
11. DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Problem Statement
B. Outlet Air Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
C. Tower Characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
D. Loading Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
E. Tower Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7 F. Water Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
G. Power Requirements
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
H. Cost Estimation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1
I. Sample Calculation
16 111. SAMPLE CALCULATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
FIGURES 1 . .
24
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract
A survey of wet cooling tower l i terature was performed to develop a
simplified method of cool i ng tower design and simulation for use i n power
pl ant cycle opti mi zati on.
I n the report the theory of heat exchange i n wet cooling towers i s
bri efl y sumnarized.
transfer i n wet cooling towers) i s presented and discussed.
f i l l constant (Ka) i s defined and values derived.
the optimized design of cooling towers is presented.
method provides information useful i n power plant cycle opti mi zati on, including
tower dimensions, water consumption rate, exi t ai r temperature, power require-
ments and construction cost.
tower performance at various operating conditions i s presented. This information
i s also useful i n power plant cycle evaluation.
The Merkel equation (the fundamental equation of heat
The cooling tower
The rule-of-thumb design
A rule-of-thumb method for
In addition, a method for simulation of cooling
Using the information presented i n this report, i t will be possible to
incorporate wet cooling tower design and simulation i nto a procedure to evaluate
and optimize power pl ant cycles.
i i
NOMENCLATURE
a
-
A -
B -
-
Bd
c -
-
cP
D -
E -
F -
G -
h -
H -
-
HP
K -
Ka -
Kav
L
- -
-
L -
i -
L/G -
M -
P -
Q -
R -
t -
T -
2 3
Specific Transfer Surface ( f t TA/ ft fill)
Approach (T2 - twb; OF)
2
Base Area ( f tg)
B1 owdown (1 bs HpO/hr)
A constant
Heat Capacity o f Water (Btu/l bF)
D r i f t ( l bs H20/hr)
Evaporation (1 bs H20/hr)
A i r Flow Rate (actual cubic feed per minute; acfm)
A i r Flow Rate (l bs ai r/ hr)
Enthalpy o f A i r (Btu/lb dry ai r )
A i r Humidity ( l b H20/lb dry ai r )
Head of Pump ( f t )
A i r Mass Transfer Constant (l bs ai r/ hr ftTA)
Volumetric A i r Mass Transfer Constant (l bs ai r/ hr ftfill)
2
3
Tower Characteristic (1 bs a i r / l b H20)
Wat er Fl ow Rat e ( l b s H20/hr)
Loading Factor ( 1 bs HpO/hr f t i )
Water-Air Flow Rate Ratio (l bs HpO/lb ai r )
Makeup ( l bs H20/hr)
Power (hp)
Heat Load (Btu/hr)
Range (Tl - T2; OF)
A i r Temperature (OF)
Water Temperature (OF)
TC - Tower Characteristic (Kav/c l bs ai r/ l b H20)
iii
Page 2
3
V - Fi l l Volume, Total (f tf i l l )
B - Speci fi c Fi l l Volume (f tf i l ,/f tB) 3 2
Z - Fi l l Height (f t)
r7 - Fan Efficiency (dimensionless; $0.80)
P - Density (l b/ f t3)
$ - Dollars
Subsymbol s
-
a
B -
cal c -
des -
f i l l -
F -
mi x -
OP -
P -
sa -
t -
T -
TA -
-
W
wb -
1 -
2 -
A i r
Base Area
Cal cul ated Value
Design
Fi l l Volume
Fan
Mixture of Air and Water Vapor
Operation
Pump
Saturated Air @ Water Temperature
A i r Temperature
Water Temperature
Transfer Area
Water Vapor
Wet Bulb Temperature
I nl et Condition
Exi t Condition
, '
. , . , ...
0
f
i v
I . I NTRODUCTION
c
The design of wet cooling towers i s a competitive fi el d of technology, where
design methods and constants are proprietary information.
mate design of cooling towers using rules-of-thumb i s presented and provides
information suitable for use i n power plant cycle optimization, including tower
dimensions, water consumption rate, exi t ai r temperature, power requirements
and construction cost.
at various operating conditions i s also presented.
However, the approxi-
A method for the simulation of cooling tower performance
Several types of wet cooling tower exist.
or mechanical draft. Mechanical draf t towers can be ei ther forced or induced
draft. Air and water flow can be crosscurrent, countercurrent or both.
fundamentals of wet cooling are presented by McKelvey and Brooke (1). Mechanical
draf t cooling towers are the predominate types of cooling towers bui l t i n the
United States.
subject of thi s paper.
Wet cooling towers can be natural
The
Therefore, the design of mechanical draf t cooling towers i s the
I n wet cooling towers, ai r and water are intimately mixed to provide heat trans-
fer. Therefore, psychometry i s the basis for analysis of heat transfer i n wet
cooling towers. Air-water psychometric data and psychometry theory are pre-
sented i n several references (1, 2, 3 ) .
Heat transfer i n cooling towers occurs by two major mechanisms:
sensible heat from water to ai r (convection) and transfer of l atent heat by
the evaporation of water (diffusion).
air-water boundary layer. The total heat transfer i s the sumof these two
boundary layer mechanisms. The total heat transfer can also be expressed i n
terms of the change i n enthalpy of each bul k phase.
boundary layer i s equal to the heat transfer i n the bul k phases.
ul ati on o f the terms, a fundamental equation o f heat transfer i n cooling towers
(the Merkel equation) i s obtained.
transfer of
Both of these mechanisms operate at the
The heat transfer at the
After manip-
1
The Merkel equation, named after F. Merkel who f i rst derived i t, i s:
T1
4
dT
KaB - = IT, hSa-ha
LcP
The theory of heat transfer i n wet cooling towers i s presented i n several
references (1, 3 , 4, 5).
i s presented by Kern (6). The enthalpy of the ai r stream i s ha. The ai r
stream i s i n contact wi t h water at a different temperature.
saturated ai r at the water temperature i s hsa. Air does not reach thi s
enthalpy.
between the enthalpy of saturated ai r at the water temperature and the
enthalpy of ai r at the air temperature:
An especially clear derivation of the Merkel equation
The enthalpy of
The dri vi ng force i n the Merkel equation (AhDF) i s the difference
-
"Dri vi ng Force" = AhDF - hsa - ha
Stri ctl y speaking, enthalpy difference is not the dri vi ng force i n wet cooling.
The driving force in wet cooling i s actually the difference i n water
pressure between the water and ai r phases ( 7) .
or design poi nt i s determined by solving the ri ght-hand
The tower
equation.
The Merkel equation i s presented differently by various authors.
the Merkel equation, care i s required to determine the units required by K.
As defined above, K i s an ai r mass transfer constant.
the water mass transfer constant (2) or the convective heat transfer coeffi-
cient (5). Also, C i s frequently l ef t out of the Merkel equation since i ts
P
value i % 1.0, a convention adopted i n thi s paper. The units of C cannot be
overlooked , however.
Before using
I n other sources, K i s
P
The mass and heat transfer characteristics of cooling tower f i l l are described
by Ka, a volumetric mass transfer constant.
the wetted f i l l surface and on the surface of the drops. As a resul t, the
specific mass transfer surface (a) i s di f f i cul t to measure.
i s regarded as a single constant.
Mass and heat transfer occur on
Therefore, Ka
Ka i s a measure of the mass and heat
2
transfer rate through the boundary layer per uni t of f i l l volume.
values of Ka refl ect better mass and heat transfer characteristics of f i l l .
Larger
Cool i ng tower and f i l l vendors do not release values of Ka. However, Ka
values can be determined by back-calculation for existing towers.
towers bui l t by Research-Cottrell ( 8) , Ka values are between 64 and 140 wi t h
an average value of 95 - +35 (two standard deviations).
cooling towers (9), values of Ka varied from 49 to 152 wi t h 100 - +30 as the
average value. For conventional types of cooling tower f i l l , a Ka value of
100 gives reasonable f i l l heights (6, p.601).
as defined i n the above form of the Merkel equation.
constant, but i s a complex function of several operating variables.
remain relatively constant over normal operating variable ranges.
For 16 cooling
For 39 Marley Company
This value of Ka applies to Ka
Ka i s not stri ctl y a
Ka does
1
Detailed design of cooling towers i s a tri al and error i terati ve procedure.
Once a set of design conditions is defined, designs are performed at several
outl et ai r temperatures.
Optimization requires a trade-off between operating and construction costs.
More detailed discussions of cooling tower optimization for use wi th power
pl ants can be found i n Dickey (9) and Clark (10).
These designs are compared to determine the optimum.
3
11. DESIGN PROCEDURE
A. ProblemStatement
For a given cool i ng tower design, the quanti ty o'f water to be treat-
temperature (T2) i s specified. The difference between the inlet& and
outlet water temperatures i s the range ( R) . An ambient wet-bulb
temperature '(twb;tl) i s chosen for design, such that i t i s exceeded
only three to five percent of the time. The difference between the
wet-bulb temperature and the outlet water temperature i s the approach (A ).
The outlet water temperature approaches the ai r wet-bulb temperature,
whi ch i s the l i mi ti ng temperature to which-water can be cooled. Gen-
erally, cooling towers are designed wi th an approach of 10 to 15 de-
grees (Fahrenheit).
ed ( L ) and i ts inlet temperature (T1) are known. The outlet water
i
.
The approach i s seldomless than five degrees.
B. Outlet Air Temperature (t,)/Water-Air L Flow Rate Ratio (L /G).
For a given set of cooling tower design conditions, an optimum de-
sign (outlet ai r temperature/water-air flow rate rati o) exists.
opti mum design will result i n minimumconstruction and operating
costs. A good correlation exists between the optimum outlet ai r
temperature and the inlet and outlet water temperatures:
The
- T1 + T2
2
t2 -
As i s apparent i n Figures 1 (1, p.177) and 2 (9), the approximated
outlet ai r temperature i s very close to the actual design outlet ai r
temperature. The approximation for the outlet ai r temperature can
be used as a fi rst guess for a detailed design or may be considered
as the optimum outlet air temperature i n a rule-of-thumb design.
When the approximation i s used, air flow rate will be wi thi n - +lo%
of the optimum design i n most cases.
4
Water i s evaporated duri ng the wet cooling process. For each 10F
drop i n water temperature, approximately 1.0% of the treated water
evaporates ( 3 , p.757).
However, the evaporation rate i s small and i s commonly neglected,
yielding the following energy balance (11, p.589):
The water flow rate i s not stri ctl y constant.
The outl et ai r i s usually saturated at the outl et air temperature.
The enthalpies of the inlet and outlet are as found from a table
or chart of psychometric data. Therefore, by specifying an outl et
ai r temperature, the water-air flow rate rati o i s fixed.
c. Tower Characteristic
The tower characteristic i s determined from the Merkel
equati on :
Kaa - i' dT
- -
hsa - ha
-
L
T2
The right-hand side of the Merkel equation i s di ffi cul t to integrate
di rectl y because hsa - h i s di ffi cul t to express expl i ci tl y i n terms
of T.
Simpson's rule (see sample calculation). The most commonly used computer
solution i s the Tchebycheff method (2, p.12-13). A nomograph i s
also available f or estimation of the tower characteristic (2, p.12-14).
a
However, i t can be graphically integrated or solved by
5
D. Loading Factor
The l oadi ng f actor ( L ) , speci f i c water fl ow rate or water fl ow rate
densi ty i s the recommended water fl ow rate per uni t of tower cross-
secti onal area (base area; B) . Through experi ence wi t h vari ous types
of f i l l , optimum l oadi ng f actors have been determined as a function of
desi gn wet-bul b temperature, range and approach.
cool i ng j obs (l arge range and/or cl ose approach), a low l oadi ng f actor
i s required and vi sa versa. Two graphi cal methods are presented f or
determi ni ng the l oadi ng f actor (Fi gures 3, 4, 5 and Figure 6).
4
For di f f i cul t
The l oadi ng f actors determined from these two methods agree well,
but are lower than the l oadi ng f actors used wi th presentl y-used
fi l l s.
avai l abl e, however.
termined from the avai l abl e, ol der l oadi ng f actors. Therefore, the
avai l abl e, ol der l oadi ng f actors must be used when cal cul ati ons are
performed usi ng the recommended val ue of Ka.
Methods f or determi ni ng modern l oadi ng f actors are not
The back-cal cul ated val ue of Ka (100) was de-
E. Tower Dimensions
The required f i l l hei ght (2) i s equal to the specific volume ( q
and i s determined from the tower characteri sti c:
The required base area or cross-secti onal area ( B ) i s:
B = L / i
A l arger l oadi ng f actor will result i n both a smal l er tower hei ght
and i n a smal l er base area. The f i l l volume ( V) is:
V =B x Z
6
F . Water Cons ump t i on
Wet cool i ng towers consume water i n three major ways: evaporati on,
dr i f t and blowdown. The evaporati on rate ( E ) i s approxi matel y 1.0%
of the water fl ow rate
Drift ( D) refers to water whi ch l eaves the cool i ng tower entrai ned
i n the exi ti ng ai r and i s approximately 0.2% of the water fl ow rate
( 3 , p.757).
i n the cool i ng water.
system, and repl aced by fresh water, to prevent sol i ds/chemi cal s
bui l dup i n the cool i ng water.
of the evaporati on rate and depends upon the sol i ds/chemi cal s con-
centrati on whi ch can be tol erated i n the process i n which the cool i ng
water i s being used and the sol i ds/chemi cal s concentrati on of the
makeup water. Blowdown i s usual l y about 20% of the evaporati on rate.
Makeup ( M) water i s requi red to replace the consumed water:
per each 10F of cool i ng range ( 3 , p.757).
As water evaporates , sol i ds and chemicals concentrate
Blowdown (Bd) i s the water removed from the
Blowdown i s expressed as a percentage
Water Consumption Rate = M = E +D +Bd
E = .001 x R x L
D = ,002 L
M = (.0012 R + .002) L
The evaporati on rate can also be determined from a mass balance
around the ai r stream:
E = (H2 - HI) G
I n this case,
M = 1.26 ( H2 - H1) + .002 L
7
This second method of determining the evaporation rate is more
accurate than the first method, but the first method is easier to
use because it involves fewer variables.
G. Power Requirements
Pump power (P ) is determined from the following equation:
P
L x H
- -
6
pp
1.98 x 1 : x T I
The head (H ) is difficult to determine. Dickey (8, p.12) recommends
a 75 foot head.
75 f o o t head i s two t o two and a h a l f ' t i mes gr eat er t han t he r equi r e-
ment obtained from other approximations.
present the following approximation:
P
However, the power requirement obtained with a
McKelvey and Brooke (1, p. 178)
Fill Heiqht (Ft.)
20-24
24-28
hp/1000 gpm
7
8. 5
hp/106 1 bs/hr
14
17
The power requirements obtained from the above approximations tend
to be low.
head has been found to be:
From an analysis of data, a good estimate of the pump
Hp = Z + 10
This equation is convenient and allows the tower height to affect
the pump power requirements.
8
Fan power requirements can be estimated from the following approxima-
ti ons presented by McKelvey and Brooke (1, p.178):
Fi l l Heiqht (f t.) hp/1000 gpm hp/106 1 bs/hr
20-24
24-28
14
12
28
24
Fan power requirements can al so be estimated from the volume of
moist ai r moved by the fan.
of the i nl et ai r i s used i n the calculation. For induced draft
towers, use the volume of the exi t ai r.
required f or each 8,000 actual cubic f eet of ai r per minute (acfm)
moved by the fan (1, p.178), the fan power i s approximated from the
following formula:
For forced draft towers, the volume
Assuming that one hp i s
F
-
pF - 8,000
where PF = Fan Power (hp)
F = Air Flow Rate (acfm)
Ht = Air Humidity @ t (l bs HpO/lb dry ai r)
G = Air Flow Rate (lbs air/hr)
P mi x, t = Density of Moist Air (3 t (l bs/ft3)
Pa,t
P W, t
42.6439
t +460
- -
= Density of Water Vapor (3 t (l bs/ft3)
- - 26.6525
H (t +460)
t
9
are deri ved from
w, t
The formulas f or cal cul ati on of p
the i deal gas law.
wi t h data reported by Research - Cottrel l (11).
and p
a ,t
The assumption of 1 hp/8,000 acfm i s consi stent
The total power i s obtai ned by adding fan power and pump power.
McKelvey and Brooke (1, p.179) present a method f or approximating
total power requi rements from range, appoach, desi gn wet-bul b temper-
ature and water fl ow rate.
H. Cost Esti mati on
Zanker (12) has deri ved an equati on f or the esti mati on of cool i ng
tower constructi on cost:
Q
- -
$1967
C x A +39.2R - 586
= 1967 dol l ars
where $1967
Q = Total Heat Load (Btu/hr)
R = Range (OF)
A = Approach ( OF)
279
C =
[ 1 t 0.0335 (85 - twb)1.143]
= Design Wet-Bul b Temperature
twb
Mul ti pl i cati on of 1967 dol l ars by 2.7 [ l.0813] will approximately
correct to 1980 dol l ars.
Dickey (9) presents a method f or esti mati on of cool i ng tower con-
structi on costs. From anal ysi s of 39 cool i ng towers bui l t by
10
Marley Co, cooling tower construction cost was found to be $14.45
(1978 dol l ars) per cooling tower uni t (TU).
units in a gi ven cooling tower are found as follows:
The number of tower
TU = Water Flow Rate (gpm) x Rating Factor. .
The rating factor i s a measure of the cooling job di ffi cul ty.
the 39 Marley Co. cooling towers, a l i near relationship (correlation
coefficient = .9844) was found between the Rating Factor and the
tower characteri sti c (TC) :
For
Rating Factor = .9964 x TC - .3843
A method of estimating cooling tower cost from the tower character-
i sti c i s therefore:
14.45 ~
- - L ( .9964 x TC - -3843)
$1978 500
To convert from 1978 dollars to 1980 dol l ars, multiply by 1.4.
the tower characteri sti c equation, a separate construction cost i s
obtained for each design (outl et ai r temperature); whereas, the
Zanker equation yi el ds only one cost for each set of desi gn con-
di tions.
From
I . Sample Calculation (Example 1)
6
Design a cooling tower to cool 120,000 gpm (60 x 10 lbs/hr) from
119'F to 89OF, when the wet-bulb temperature i s 75OF. Also, estimate
water consumption rate, power requirements and construction cost.
Assume Ka equals 100.
11
Sol ut i on :
Estimate outl et ai r temperature (t2) and t/G:
= 104OF
T1 + T2
-
2
t2 -
+(104F, sat'd) = 79.31 Btu/ l b dry ai r
= 75OF) = 38.62 Btu/ l b dry ai r
hl (twb
79.31 - 38.62
(1.0)(119 - 89)
= 1.36
- -
h2 - hl
L
G Cp ( TI - T2)
Calculate tower characteri sti c by the Simpson rul e.
range i nto fi ve equal secti ons o f 6OF each, then
Divide
79.31 - 38.62
- = 8.139 Btu/ l b ai r.
A ha - - 5
89 54.85 38.62 16.23 .0616
95 63.34 46.76 16.58 .0603
101 73.58 54.90 18.68 .0535
107 85.59 63.04 22.55 .0443
113 99.74 71.18 28.57 .0350
119 116.50 79.31 37.19 .0269
.2816
Ave = .0469
KaB 1
( T ) ~ ~ ~ ~ = R x ( hsa- ha) = 30 x .0469 = 1.408
ave
12
Determine the loading factor:
-
L = 2.75 gpm/fti
= 1375 l bS/ hr/ f tB 2
Determine the tower dimensions:
1.408 x 1375
1 KaV 1 L
- = 19.4 ft. x - -
100
= Idc Ka
2
B = L / i = 120,000/2.75 = 43,636 f tg
3
V = B x Z = 844,740 f tf i l l
13
Estimate pump power:
= Z + 10 = 29.4 f t.
HP
L x Hp (60 x lo6), 29.4
2 1100 hp
- - -
pp 1.98 x l o6 TI - (1.98 x l O6)x(.8O)
Estimate fan power (Induced draft; t2 = 104OF):
42.6439
P - - = .0756 l bs/ft3
a, t t2 +460
Ht = .0491 l bs H20/lb air
26.6525
P - - = .9624 1bs/ft3
w, t (t +460) ~ Ht
(1 +H t ) G
'mi x,t
6 3
F = = 10.52 x 10 acfm (f t /mi n)
60
= 1300 hp
F
8000
-
'F -
Total power requirement i s approximately 2400 hp.
14
Estimate construction cost:
6
14*45 L (.9964 x TC - .3843) = 1.77 x 10 dol l ars
- -
$1978 500
Estimate water consumption:
M = (.0012R + .002) L
6
= 3.36 x 10 lbs/hr
= 6720 gpm
15
I I I . SIMULATION CALCULATIONS
Cooling towers operate most of the time at conditions different than thei r
design conditions.
di ti ons i s important i n the opti mi zati on o f power plant cycles. A change i n
one operation parameter changes the performance of the tower.
calculations are required to determine the new operating state.
Prediction of cool i ng tower performance at various con-
Simulation
The parameter which changes most often i s the ambient wet-bulb temperature.
A change i n the wet-bulb temperature will affect the range and the approach
of the tower, but the tower characteristic - wi 1 1 remain unchanged.
The ai r flow rate i s also frequently changed by reducing the fan speed.
When the ai r flow rate i s changed, not onl y i s the approach affected, but the
tower characteristic i s also changed. Water flow rate also affects the tower
characteristic. A change in the i nl et water temperature does not affect the
tower characteri sti c, but does change the approach and can change the range.
(K;)
The tower characteristic (p - ) i s a function of L/G by the following
re1 ationshi p:
or
16
The sl ope (M) i s approximately equal to -0.6 f or most condi ti ons (13, p.2.8).
I f one poi nt on the l i ne i s known (f or i nstance,
the intercept (logloC) can be cal cul ated and C determined.
mined, the tower characteri sti c can be determined for other L /G. The above
equati on i s accurate wi thi n the fol l owi ng range: - x ( k)d;s TCdes
Mathematical sol uti ons to si mul ati on problems must be solved by tri al -and-error.
Two examples of ari thmeti cal l y sol ved si mul ati on problems are gi ven below.
The sol uti on of si mul ati on problems usi ng Cooling Tower I nsti tute Performance
Curves (14) i s given by the Cooling Tower I nsti tute (15, 16).
KaV -
L
at desi gn L / G) ,
Once C i s deter-
1 < - X ( k ) 3 .
des
2 2
Example 2
A cool i ng tower i s designed to cool 8950 gpm (4.475 x l o6 lbs/hr) from l l OF
to 84OF ( R = 26) at a wet-bulb temperature of 69OF ( A = 15OF) wi th a tower
characteri sti c of 1.49 (L/G = 1.30 and t2 = 97.3OF).
ature drops to 6OoF, what will T1 and T2 be f or L /G and range held constant?
When the wet-bul b temper-
Sol uti on (Tri al and Error)
hl (twb = 6OOF) = 26.46 Btu/ l b ai r
Guess 1: T2 = 75OF (T1 = 101OF)
L
- T2) = 60.26 Btu/l b ai r
hsa (T = 75, sat'd) = 38.62 Btu/ l b
(T = 101, sat'd) = 73.58 Btu/ l b
hsa
dT
hsa - ha
= 2. 34
17
Guess 2: T2 = 8OoF (TI = 106OF)
h2 = 60.26OF
(F) = 1. 43
2
Guess 3: I nterpol ati on - T2 = 79OF (T1 = 105OF)
h2 = 60.26OF
(F) = 1.56
3
Guess 4: I nterpol ati on - T p = 79.5OF (TI = 105.5OF)
h2 = 60.26OF
('< ) 4 = 1.49
0
0 0 T2 = 79.5OF and T1 = 105.5OF
Example 3
Consider the above cooling tower.
approximately 40% reduction i n ai r flow rate), what will T1 and T2 be
f or twb = 6OoF and the range held constant?
I f the fan rpm i s reduced 50% (an
18
Sol uti on: (Tri al and Error)
1.30
(:)op = &(:)des .60
= 2.17
- - -
c = x (;> des
= 1.7442
M
(F)op = C x(:) = 1.096
OP
dT
hsa - ha
0.0 1.096 = i1
T2
Sol ve by tri al and error as i n Example 2.
T2 = 89.6OF and T1 = 115.6OF.
19
L L
0
I
110
a, 100
aJ
c,
c,
c
c,
J
na
O 90
L 70
60
b 50
aJ
c,
la
aJ
m
la
>
50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Air outl et temp., OF
FIGURE 1:
Average o f water i nl et and outl et
temperature v s . Design ai r outl et
[From McKelvey & Brook (1, p.17711
20
S

0
7

.
C

v
)

a
J

U

.
.

(
u

c
,

I1

Q

Q

5

m

c
u

c
,

0

m

0

c
o

a
J

L

3

L
)

5

L

a
J

Q

E

Q
)

c
1

.
V

v
)

>
5

c
,

a
J
a

L
U

s

L
)
.

.
.

(
u

2
1

35
30
25
LI,
0
QI 20
15
0,
S
lu
cc
10
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 _ _ _ . -
I
! l b
sq. ft/1000 U. S. gpm
FIGURE 3: 6OoF wet b u l b - Design chart
f or mechanical draft
Approach
[YOo 15' 10' 5O
35
LL 30
0
e
aJ
CEI 25
20
z
15
10
towers
200 400 600 800 1000 1200.
sq. ft./1000 U.S. gpm
FIGURE 4:
70 wet bul b - Design chart
f or mechanical draft towers
22
Approach
r I
I
0 0 I
1 20' 15' 10 5
I
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
sq/ft.
FIGURE 5:
80' wet bulb - Design chart
f or mechanical draf t towers
I 1000 U. S. gpm
FIGURE 6: Loading Factor (Water Concentration)
Determination Chart f or Induced-Draf t
Cool i ng Towers
23
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
K. K. McKelvey and M. Brooke, The Industrial Cooling Tower, Elsevier
Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1959.
E. Bagnoli,
Evaporative Cooling, Air Conditioning and Refrigeration," Chemical
Engineers Handbook 5th Ed., R. H. Perry and C. H. Chilton, Editors,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York , 1973.
F. H. Fuller, V. J . Johnson and R. W. Norris, "Psychometry,
W. L. McCabe and J . C. Smith, Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering
3rd Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1976.
W. S. Norman, Absorption, Distillation and Cooling Towers, Longmans,
Green and Co. , Ltd., London, 1961.
B. Woods and P. Betts, "A Temperature-Total Heat Diagram for Cooling
Tower Calculations, No. I," The Engineer 189 (4912), 337 (1950).
D. Q. Kern, Process Heat Transfer, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1950.
W. Gloyer, "Review of Cooling Tower Calculation," Cooling Tower Institute -
#TP-l94A, January 1978.
Research-Cottrell (Hamon Cooling Tower Division) U. S. Installation List,
1980; Obtained from Mr. Allen J . George, P. 0. Box 1500, Somerville, NJ
08876 (201) 685-4045.
J. B. Dickey, "Managing Waste Heat with the Water Cooling Tower, 3rd Ed.,"
Marley Cooling Tower Co., Mission, Kansas 66202, 1978.
S. D. Clark, "Sizing Cooling Towers to Optimize Plant Performance,"
Cooling Tower Institute - #TP-218A, January 1980.
Research-Cottrell (Hamon Cooling Tower Division), "Mechanical Draft
Cooling Tower Construction,'' Bound Brook, New Jersey 08805; data on the
city of Tallahassee's Arvah B. Hopkins Unit #2 given inside front cover,
1976.
A. Zanker, "Coolin Tawer Costs from Operating Data," Calculation and
Shortcut Handbook 9 07-X), McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, pp.47-48.
Cooling 'Tower Institute, "Chapter 2: Basic Concepts of Cooling Tower
Operation," Cooling Tower Manual , Cooling Tower Institute, Houston,
Texas 77037, January 1977.
Cooling Tower Institute, Cool ing Tower Performance Curves, 1967.
Cooling Tower Institute, "Acceptance Test Code for Water-Cool ing Towers,"
CTI #ATC-105 , February 1975.
Cooling Tower Institute, "Chapter 3:
Cool i ng Tower Manual, January 1977.
Cooling Tower Performance Variables,"
24