You are on page 1of 14
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia EMM3210: Thermodynamics Laboratory Semester

Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia EMM3210: Thermodynamics Laboratory Semester 2 – 2015/ 2016

Lecturer

:

Dr. Azmah Hanim bt. Mohamed Ariff

Demonstrator

:

Nur Liyana binti Mat Hussin

Laboratory Staff

:

En. Noor Azmi Ismail

:

En. Mohd Saiful Azuar Md. Isa

Activity

Name of Activity

A3

Cooling Tower

 

Group

Members

Matric Number

 

Muhammad Syazli bin Mohd Nasir

162124

Ahmad Nashrudin bin Mazlan

176578

2

Nurfarahin binti Abdul Rahaman

178279

Muhammad Redzuan bin Kamarudin

180590

Mahmmud Mohamed Rehei

181179

 

Date of Experiment

15 March 2016

 

Date of Submission

22 March 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No.

Content

Page

1.

Abstract

1

2.

Introduction

1

3.

Objectives

1

4.

Theory

2

5.

Specimen and Equipment

4

6.

Procedures

5

7.

Results

6

8.

Calculation

7

9.

Discussions

8

  • 10. Conclusions

9

  • 11. References

10

ABSTRACT

This experiment was conducted to perform energy and mass balance on the cooling tower system and to observe the effects of one of the process variables on the exit temperature of water. For water cooling tower experiment, there are several parameters that can be adjusted to observe its effects on the evaporation of water. The parameters are temperature and flow rate of water, relative humidity and flow rate of air and cooling load. In this experiment, we chose the cooling load as variable while water flow rate and flow rate as constant parameters. The steady flow equations which is energy and mass balances were employed in order to provide an insight on the amount of energy transferred between phase sunder different conditions.

INTRODUCTION

In a cooling tower of infinite size and with an adequate air flow, the water outlet will be at the wet bulb temperature of the incoming air. The difference between the temperature of the water leaving a cooling tower and the local wet bulb temperature is an indication of the effectiveness of the cooling tower. The approach to wet bulb is one of the important parameters in the testing, specification, design and selection of cooling towers.

OBJECTIVES

  • 1. To determine ‘end state’ properties of air and H2O from tables or charts, and the application of the steady flow equation to selected systems to draw up energy and mass balances.

  • 2. To determine the relationship between the cooling load and cooling range of a cooling tower.

THEORY

Cooling Tower Terms

Cooling Range

The difference between the water temperature at entry to and exit from the tower.

Cooling Load

The rate at which heat is removed expressed in kW, Btu/h or k Cal/h.

from the

water. This may

be

Make-Up

The quantity of fresh water which must be supplied to the water circuit to make good the losses due to evaporation and other causes.

Drift or Carry

Droplets of water which are entrained by the air stream leaving the tower.

Over Packing or Fill

Approach to Wet Bulb

The material over which the water flows as it falls through the tower, so that a large surface area is presented to the air stream.

The difference between the temperature of the water leaving the tower and the wet bulb temperature of the air entering.

Basic Principles

Consider the surface of a warm water droplet or film in contact with an air stream.

THEORY Cooling Tower Terms Cooling Range The difference between the water temperature at entry to and

Assuming that the water is hotter than the air, it will be cooled:

  • 1. By radiation- This effect is likely to be very small at normal conditions and may be neglected.

  • 2. By conduction and convection - This will depend on the temperature difference, the surface area, air velocity, etc.

  • 3. By evaporation- This is by far the most important effect. Cooling takes place as molecules of H2O diffuse from the surface into the surrounding air. These molecules are then replaced by others from the liquid (evaporation) and the energy required for this is taken from the remaining liquid.

Evaporation from a Wet Surface

The rate of evaporation from a wet surface into the surrounding air is determined by the difference between the vapour pressure at the liquid surface, i.e. the saturation pressure corresponding with the surface temperature, and the vapour pressure in the surrounding air. The latter is determined by the total pressure of the air and its absolute humidity [1].

In an enclosed space, evaporation can continue until the two vapour pressures are equal, i.e. until the air is saturated and at the same temperature as the surface. However, if unsaturated air is constantly circulated, the wet surface will reach an equilibrium temperature at which the cooling effect due to the evaporation is equal to the heat transfer to the liquid by conduction and convection from the air, which under these conditions, will be at a higher temperature [2]. The equilibrium temperature reached by the surface under adiabatic conditions, i.e. in the absence of external heat gains or losses, is the "wet bulb temperature", well known in connection with hygrometry.

In a cooling tower of infinite size and with an adequate air flow, the water leaving will be at the wet bulb temperature of the incoming air.

For this reason, the difference between the temperature of the water leaving a cooling tower and the local wet bulb temperature is an indication of the effectiveness of the cooling tower. The "Approach to Wet Bulb" is one of the important parameters in the testing, specification, design and selection of cooling towers. Conditions within a cooling tower packing are complex due to the changing air temperature, humidity and water temperature as the two fluids pass through the tower - usually in a counter flow fashion.

SPECIMEN AND EQUIPMENT

Bench top cooling tower.

SPECIMEN AND EQUIPMENT Bench top cooling tower.

PROCEDURE

Before the experiment:

  • 1. All valves and switches was ensured in desired position.

  • 2. The apparatus was set up properly and no air trap in the pump was ensured.

  • 3. The manometer level, orifice, float valve, wet bulb thermometer, and etc was checked so that they operate in optimized operating mode.

  • 4. The unit was ensured ready for use before set to the desired condition.

Objective 1:

  • 1. The unit was prepared and allowed to stabalized under the following suggested conditions:

    • a. Orifice differential 16 mm H2O

    • b. b. Water flow rate 40 gm/s

    • c. Cooling load 1

.0 kW

  • 2. The temperature and flowrates at the desired time interval was taken note.

  • 3. The quantity of make-up water which has been supplied to the make-up tank within the time interval was determined.

  • 4. The experiment was repeated with other water or air flow rates and with another load.

Objective 2:

  • 1. The unit with selected packing was prepared and set to stabilize with no load, at the desired water flow rate and at a certain orifice differential.

  • 2. The cooling load was slowly increase to a certain amount without changing the water or air flow rates and the observation was made at 1.0 and 1.5kW cooling load.

  • 3. The test was repeated at:

    • a. Other water flow rate

    • b. Other air flow rate

RESULTS

DISCUSSIONS

Objective 1

1. Is mass continuity evident from your results? Is the amount of make-up water the same as the amount gained as increased humidity? How much mass is unaccounted for? Can the error be explained by the uncertainty in the measurements? Indicate other likely sources of error in the mass balance.

Yes. The mass continuity evident is actually from our results. On the other hand, the amount of make-up water is not the same as the amount gained as increased humidity. The make-up water has a big range flow through the unit. Moreover, two separate channel system are provided in each transfer plate as the gasket arrangement. The error that has been found in this experiment can be explained by the uncertainty in this experiment such as when finding the point of A and B in the psychometric chart. The other source that may contribute to the error is the ratio of humidity in the experiment if the level of humidity is high in an area then the make-up water quantity will be less because the surrounding is already wet and it does not need plenty of water to compensate for the losses.

  • 2. Is energy conservation evident from your experimental results? Is the load equal to the heater power? How much energy is unaccounted for? Discuss on the energy imbalance. Yes. The energy conservation evident is from our experimental results. Secondly, the load is not equal to the heater power. The energy from calculation is 0.91kW while the experimental data for energy ranges from 1.0kW to 1.5kW. The energy accounted may be around 0.1kW to 0.7kW. This is due to the other variable such as water flow and air flow in the experiment.

Objective 2

  • 1. Describe the variations in load with air and water flow rates. Are they what you expect? As the load increased from 1kW to the 1.5 with the fixed air and water flow meter, we can saw that the temperature of T1 to T6 increased and then goes down respectively. It shows that the heat is increases almost directly proportional to the heat load provided to the system. Whenever the air flow adjusted the water flow must be fixed. This changes the temperature T1 to T6 decreases with a small changes. The air flow also changes from 2 to 14. The system temperature also decreases. When the variable change from air flow pressure to water flow pressure from 6 selective water flow rates between 40-30 the cooling tower also drop its temperature hence reducing the heat load. The outcome and observation obtained as expected.

  • 2. What advantage does a cooling tower have over a heat exchanger that does not mix the two fluids? There is direct contact between two fluids like in cooling towers, but in heat exchangers it is not needed. Cooling Tower is a kind of heat exchanger. The difference lies in the method of energy transfer. Cooling tower may also be considered as a Mass Transfer device because the cooling of water takes place because of the evaporation of water caused by air. In a normal heat exchanger, only energy transfer takes place, but in a cooling tower both energy and mass transfer takes place.

  • 3. What are the disadvantages of a cooling tower? Why don’t most residential air conditioning systems use them? The disadvantages of a cooling tower are the cooling tower has to be registered with local authorities. It also requires water treatment and has to be cleaned twice a year. It also causes a minor water loss. Most residential air conditioning systems do not use the cooling tower because this cooling tower requires maintenance which will take a lot time on that. The cooling tower is not appropriate in residential air conditioning systems because this cooling tower could produce minor water loss.

CONCLUSION

This experiment has been conducted to study the effects of heater power on the exit temperature of water and to perform energy and mass balance on the cooling tower system. According to the results that we acquired, we can infer that the difference in temperature between the water and air increase, the rate of heat energy being transferred is higher than the lowered heater power. Thus, it can be said that the heater power is directly proportional to heat energy transfer rate. Throughout the experiment being conducted we need to ensure that the system is in steady state. Otherwise, if it is not in the steady state the results will not be accurate and thus affecting all the measurements and thus resulting in errors. As a conclusion, the experiment can be said as successfully done as the objective of the experiment is accomplished.

REFERENCES