NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION OF LIQUID DESICCANT

DEHUMIDIFICATION PROCESS ON CROSS FLOW AND

COUNTER FLOW MODELS

A THESIS

Submitted by

M.V.S. NAGADEEPAK
(M170265ME)
In partial fulfillment for the award of the Degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
(Thermal Sciences)

Under the guidance of

Dr. GANGADHARA KIRAN KUMAR L

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT
NIT CAMPUS PO, CALICUT
KERALA, INDIA 673601

JULY 2019
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A successful completion of my endeavour is the result of timely guidance, constant
support and inspiration from many special persons about whom I would like to
mention here and use the opportunity to express my sincere gratitude towards all of
them.

First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my guide

Dr.Gangadhara Kiran Kumar L, Assistant Professor, who had been mentoring
and supporting me for completing my thesis work with his insightful and scholarly
guidance. Without his guidance and support, this work would have been impossible
for me to complete in time.

I am indebted to Dr. Biju T Kuzhiveli, Professor, Programme coordinator (M. Tech

Thermal Sciences) for his constant support in completing this thesis.

I sincerely thank to the head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering for

providing the necessary facilitates to complete my project work.

I also express my heartiest thanks to all project committee members for their
useful comments during all my presentations.

Finally, I thank my parents and all my friends who had motivated and supported
me throughout my project work.

M.V.S. Nagadeepak
 DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by
another person nor material which has been accepted for the award of any other
degree or diploma of the university or other institute of higher learning, except
where due acknowledgement has been made in the text.

Place: Calicut Signature

Date: Name: M.V.S. Nagadeepak

Reg. No.: M170265ME

 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION OF

LIQUID DESICCANT DEHUMIDIFICATION PROCESS ON CROSS FLOW
AND COUNTER FLOW MODELS” submitted by Mr. M.V.S. Nagadeepak
(M170265ME) to the National Institute of Technology Calicut towards partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree of Master of Technology in
Mechanical Engineering (Thermal sciences) is a bonafide record of the work
carried out by him under my supervision and guidance.

Dr. Gangadhara Kiran Kumar L

(Guide)
Assistant Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Dr. P. K. Rajendrakumar
Professor & Head
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Place: NIT Calicut

Date:
 CONTENTS

ABSTRACT i
LIST OF SYMBOLS ii

LIST OF FIGURES iii

LIST OF TABLES iv

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1 DETAILED REVIEW 8

2.2 OBJECTIVE 11

CHAPTER 3 MODEL DESCRIPTION 12

3.1 PHYSICAL MODEL 12

3.2 GOVERNING EQUATIONS 13

3.3 BOUNDARY CONDITION 15

3.4 NUMERICAL APPROACH 17

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS 21

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS 33
REFERENCES 34
 ABSTRACT
The traditional air conditioning system causes lot of environmental hazards and requires
high grade energy for operation. The liquid desiccant air conditioning system is one of the
substitutes for the conventional air conditioning system and it is relatively environmental
friendly. In the present study two different models, falling film and dropwise liquid
desiccant dehumidifier, were selected for CFD analysis. Two dimensional model was
simulated by using the software ANSYS (FLUENT). The volume of fluid (VOF) was
selected as the multiphase method for the simulation process. The mass fraction of water in
the air is given by using species transport model and the variation of amount of water along
the direction of air flow is simulated. The boundary conditions were set as same for both
the models. For the dropwise type the air and liquid desiccant interact in cross flow in which
the liquid desiccant enters from the top as droplets and the air enters from the left face
whereas in falling film type the air and the liquid desiccant interact in counter flow in which
the liquid desiccant enters from the top and flows along the left face as film and the air
enters from the bottom. The weak desiccant solution is collected at the down face of the
model. The liquid desiccant used here was LiCl with 30% concentration and the mass
fraction of water used in air is 0.02.The boundary condition for the wall is taken as no slip
condition. The properties of LiCl at 30% concentration were calculated and inlet parameters
of air and desiccant are given to the software.

Key words: Dehumidification, liquid desiccant, falling film, dropwise, dehumidifier.

i
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

𝜌 Density of air, Kg/m3

𝜏̿ Fluid stress tensor, N/m2

α volume fraction

𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 Effective conductivity, W/m-K

𝑔⃗ Gravity vector, m/s2

P Pressure, N/m2

t Time variable, Sec

𝑣⃗ Velocity vector, m/s

I Unit tensor

E Total energy, Watt

µ Viscosity, Pa-s

ω specific humidity

T Temperature, K

cp specific heat of fluid, J/K

ii
 LIST OF FIGURES

S.No. Name of figures Page no.

1.1 Vapour Compression Refrigeration system 1
1.2 Conceptual Solid Desiccant Dehumidification system 3

1.3 Conceptual liquid Desiccant Dehumidification system 4

3.1 Two types of models (a) counter flow (b) cross flow 18
3.2 Counter flow model 23

3.3 Cross flow model 24

3.4 Meshing (a) counter flow model (b) cross flow model 24

4.1 Mass fraction contour for counter flow at different inlet 28

mass fraction of air
4.2 Mass Fraction contour for cross flow at different inlet mass 30
fraction of air
4.3 Variation of amount of water collected with inlet mass 31
fraction of air for counter flow

4.4 Variation of amount of water collected with inlet mass 33

fraction of air for cross flow
4.5 Comparison of amount of water collected with inlet mass 34
fraction of air for both counter flow and cross flow

4.6 Comparison of dehumidification effectiveness with inlet 35

mass fraction of water vapour in air
4.7 Volume fraction contour for (a) counter flow (b) cross flow 36
4.8 Temperature contour for contour flow 37
4.9 Temperature contour for cross flow 38

iii
 LIST OF TABLES

S.No. Name of table Page no.

3.1 Properties of lithium chloride at 30% concentration 22

3.2 Inlet conditions for air and lithium chloride 22

4.1 Values of amount of water collected per kg of air for 31

counter flow
4.2 Values of amount of water collected per kg of air for cross 32
flow
4.3 Values of amount of water collected per kg of air for cross 33
flow and counter flow
4.4 Dehumidification effectiveness values for cross flow and 35
counter flow

iv
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The rapid increase in world population and economic development has led to the
decline of conventional type of energies with the increase in demand for human
comfort conditions. The pollution caused by the conventional form of energies and
the adverse effect cause by them has led to check for the alternatives. The general
dehumidification process is done by using conventional air conditioning unit
consists of normal vapour compression refrigeration system. In this air conditioning
unit, the outside air is passed over the cooling coil of the evaporator .When the air
is passed over the cooling coil, due to the low temperature of the cooling coil the
moisture present in the air gets condensed and then collected, thereby the air gets
dehumidified. But main drawback with this method is it requires more power for
dehumidification.

Fig: 1.1 Vapour Compression Refrigeration system

Generally the air conditioning units used for the dehumidification process, contains
toxic refrigerant like Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s) which causes the depletion of
ozone layer and thereby causing the environmental concerns. So, the conventional
dehumidification process consumes more power as well as causes environmental

1
impacts. Hence, the demand for alternatives is increasing day by day, one such
alternative is by using the desiccants for the dehumidification purposes.

Desiccant Dehumidification:-

Desiccants are the materials which absorb moisture or water required for
dehumidification process. Desiccant dehumidifier is the most accepted system in
industries for the required humidity conditions. It is one of the most energy friendly
methods of dehumidification. A desiccant dehumidifier has an advantage, it can
function well at extremely low to high levels of humidity without regeneration
problems. The main characteristic feature of this is it can perform in any type of
application which is unique among the methods of drying air. When the air is passed
through the desiccant it absorbs moisture from the air. So an air stream passes
through the desiccant and becomes drier without elaborate cooling, compression, or
other complex systems or controls. After the drying process is finished, the
desiccant is dried using hot air in a process called regeneration, and is ready for the
next cycle to dry the next incoming air. The common types of desiccants are silica
gel, calcium chloride, lithium chloride, lithium bromide, potassium formate etc.so
the desiccants are broadly classified into
 Solid desiccants (silica gel, bentonite etc. )
 Liquid desiccants (LiCl, LiBr, CaCl2 etc. )

Solid desiccant dehumidification:-

The inlet air which is to be dehumidified is allowed through the one side of the
rotary wheel, while the hot air jet is passed through another side for simultaneous
desiccant dehumidification and regeneration. After when air is dehumidified any of
the cooling methods are used to cool the dehumidified air which lowers the air
temperature and that air enter the required space. The concentrated desiccant is
continuously in contact during the dehumidification process. The solid desiccant is
to be regenerated so that it can be used for the next cycle. In order to achieve this,
the desiccant is then heated to release water and the released water is passed with
the high jet speed of the air and thereby moisture is removed.

2
 Fig: 1.2 Conceptual Solid Desiccant Dehumidification system

The benefit of using solid desiccant is that it has a greater dry capacity. But the solid
desiccants requires a greater regeneration temperature (more than 70°C) and also a
high pressure-drop in the air stream which makes it to consume more energy for the
system running. Generally used solid desiccants are silica gel, zeolite, activated
carbon etc. out of which silica gel is having the high drying capability. The figure
1.2 represents the working of the solid desiccant dehumidification system, how the
outside air enters the dehumidifier gets dehumidified and how it goes to the
conditioned space.

Liquid desiccant dehumidification:-

In this dehumidification process the concentrated liquid desiccant enters the

dehumidifier along with the air. Inside the dehumidifier chamber both the liquid
desiccant and the air mixes in direct contact and then the concentrated liquid
desiccant absorbs the moisture from the air and become weak desiccant and is
collected. The dehumidified air is passed through the cooling process where the air
becomes cooled and then the cooled and dehumidified is passed through the
conditioned space. Simultaneously the weak liquid desiccant is passed through the

3
regenerator where the hot air is passed over the weak liquid desiccant due to this
heating it loses water and the weak liquid desiccant converts to concentrated liquid
desiccant and then this strong concentrated liquid desiccant is again passed through
the dehumidifier and the cycle continues.

Fig: 1.3 Conceptual Liquid Desiccant dehumidification system

The figure 1.3 represents the working of the liquid desiccant dehumidification
system, how the outside air enters the dehumidifier gets dehumidified and how it
goes to the conditioned space. The main advantage of the liquid desiccants is that it
has lower pressure drop compared to solid desiccants and also the regeneration
temperature required for regeneration is less so renewable energy like solar can be
used. The properties of the liquid desiccant are: 1) non-corrosiveness, 2) odourless,
3) non-toxic, 4) non-flammable, 5) stable, 6) easily available and 7) inexpensive.
surface tension has a vital role in these liquid desiccants. Some common liquid
desiccants are lithium chloride (LiCl), lithium bromide (LiBr), calcium chloride
(CaCl2), potassium formate (KCOOH) etc.

4
 Solid desiccants Liquid desiccants

Solid desiccants have higher drying The liquid desiccants requires low
capability than liquid desiccant but regeneration temperature than the
Solid desiccants require high solid desiccants.
regeneration temperature.
Silica gel has higher absorption a A liquid desiccant system does not
capacity with lower regeneration require simultaneous air
temperature than other solid Dehumidification and desiccant
desiccants. regeneration.
Face velocity and air flow ratio Liquid desiccant system reduces
highly contributing to sensible and indoor health issues.
latent heat effectiveness of solid
desiccant wheel.
Solids desiccants have higher The liquid desiccant systems have a
pressure drop. lower pressure drop.
Desiccant wheel is more convenient The air flow speed, thickness of
to install into the conventional desiccant film greatly affected the
effectiveness of dehumidification
HVAC system compare to solid system.
desiccant bed.

Advantages of desiccant dehumidification:-

 The installation setup cost is less

 It is easy for operation
 The humidity will be under control
 This system is energy Efficient (requires little energy for operation
 The growth of the micro-organisms will be low
 The maintenance cost is less
 The space required for setup is less
 It functions well at low to very high levels of humidity without any
regeneration problem

5
Challenges in desiccant dehumidification:-

 It requires experienced staff for construction and maintenance.

 The main problem in liquid desiccant is the corrosive nature of the desiccant
which damages the setup.

Energy savings and costs:

The most attractive application for the liquid desiccant air conditioning system will
be in humid climates where its beneficial impact will include:

 Improves indoor air quality that leads to improved worker productivity in

offices and in schools.
 Improves indoor comfort for the people in restaurants, movies, and shopping
malls.
 It lowers indoor humidity that avoids remediation costs associated with mild
dew.
 Direct savings by the elimination (or reduction) of reheat as a means of
humidity control. In humid climatic regions with long cooling seasons, the
elimination of reheat can reduce annual HVAC costs by 30% or more.

Comparison between desiccant dehumidification and normal

dehumidification processes.

Desiccant Normal dehumidification

dehumidification
Energy effective Yes No
Bacterial & Fungal Yes No
removal(microorganisms)
Removal of odour Yes No
Suitable Can function at At higher ambient
extreme low to high temperature indicates dew
level of humidity point temperature is high
most effective at relative

6
 lower humidity, higher if
the air is cold. Lesser
effectiveness in colder
climate.
Replacement cost Negotiable Considerable
Replacement time 10 min by customer Few hours after
himself inspection by skilled
mechanic
maintenance cost Negotiable Considerable
space required according to Not available in small
requirement either sizes
smaller or Larger.

7
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 DETAILED REVIEW

Chen et al.[1] studied the solid desiccant dehumidification by combining three

materials silica gel , polyacrylic acid and sodium polyacrylate as a composite
material in the ratio of 10:1:1. Two tests were conducted 1) sorption capacity test
and 2) dehumidification test. The results shows that the composite material has a
higher dehumidification value when compared with single desiccant in both the
tests.

Tao Wen et al.[2] investigated two kinds of single channel dehumidifiers

experimentally with and without anodizing aluminium plates using liquid desiccant
counter flow dehumidification. The wettability characteristics were compared by
means of contact angles and wetting areas over the aluminium plates. The results
were collected, and it shows that anodised aluminium shows a better corrosion
resistance. Also, the wetting area, contact angle and the dehumidification
effectiveness is shown positively for anodised aluminium plate when compared
with ordinary aluminium plate.

Chuanshuai Dong et al.[3] investigated two kinds of single channels internally

cooled plate dehumidifiers experimentally with and without coating of TiO2 super
hydrophilic particles. The test results showed that the contact angle of the liquid
desiccant was significantly reduced from 84.6° to 8.8° due to coating. The energy
consumption was also reduced and also the average enhancing ratios for moisture
removal rate and dehumidification efficiency were more for coated plate than the
uncoated plate.

8
Tao Wen et al.[4] studied a new kind of non-volatile, odourless desiccant material
by adding non-toxic additive (polyvinyl pyrrolidine PVP-K30) into liquid desiccant
Lithium chloride experimentally. He added 3% additive to lithium chloride liquid
desiccant. The results shows that by adding the additive the contact angle reduced
and the wetting ratio is increased. Also, the dehumidification rate and effectiveness
shows a better result than the single liquid desiccant and performed a higher value
than the normal desiccant value. Also due to this surfactant the film thickness along
the flow is decreased thereby increased the dehumidification value.

Chua et al.[5] performed a hybrid membrane composite desiccant dehumidification

system to promote moisture removal rate and as well as to reduce energy
consumption experimentally. He did various sets of experiments by combination of
composite desiccants and hybrid membrane system. He found that the moisture
removal rate reduced when the inlet velocity of the air increased. Also he found
that hybrid membrane with composite desiccants system has given the maximum
moisture removal rate from the air with least energy consumption.

Shaji mohan et al.[6] combines the liquid desiccant(LD) and vapour compression
(VC) systems and done the inlet conditions of air at different humidity and at
different temperatures of air. He uses the evaporator and condenser of the vapour
compression refrigeration system for cooling of the dehumidified air and
regeneration purpose of the liquid desiccant so completes the cycle. The results
shows that when the inlet air temperature increases the dehumidification effect
reduces and when the inlet air humidity was increased the amount of moisture
collected was increases up to 2g/kg.

Srithara et al.[7] aims to improve the coefficient of performance (COP) of a vapour

compression refrigeration system by using humidification dehumidification
desalination process. Four sets of experiments were done by using twisted tapes and
cone turbulators and the results were noted. Different flow rates of water and air
were done and found the optimum mass flow rate of water and air are 544kg/hr and
30kg/hr. higher COP was attained when using cone type turbulators rather than
twisted type turbulator with cone angle of 45°.

9
Sreelal and Hariharan.[8] has done a numerical simulation for a flat plate
dehumidifier. He created a two-dimensional model for counter flow
dehumidification of air. The results shown were volume fraction at different
velocities of air and at different temperatures of air. The simulation done using
ANSYS (fluent) using transient, multiphase method considering volume of fluid
(VOF) method.

Jubair et al.[9] tries to reduce pressure drop in solid desiccant dehumidification

system by arranging the binders parallel to the flow of air. Multilevel beds are
arranged parallel to each other. When the solid desiccant beds get saturated with
moisture dry nitrogen(N2) gas is used for regeneration process. The results shows
that the pressure drop problem for solid desiccant is reduced.

Y Luo et al.[10] established a model on the basis of CFD to study the performance
of dehumidifier under different conditions such as variation in inlet desiccant
temperature, increase in desiccant flow rate , with and without the internally
cooling. It was found at higher desiccant temperature worsened the
dehumidification performance and also the dehumidification performance was
more for internal cooled rather than the model without cooling.

Ertas et al.[11] discussed the properties of different desiccants either solid

desiccants and liquid desiccants such as density, viscosity, thermal conductivity,
surface tension, molecular weight which are used for the calculation purposes.

Minaal Sahlot and Saffa B. Riffat [12] discussed various cooling systems by using
desiccants itself and hybrid desiccant cooling system and their energy effectiveness.
In this various components such as dehumidifier, regenerator etc. have been
discussed in detail.

H Cho et al.[13] compared the performance of dehumidification rate of counter

flow and cross flow model experimentally with the change in different parameters
like variation in inlet humidity of air, change in inlet desiccant temperature. From
this he found out the dehumidification effectiveness and dehumidification rate by

10
means of some empirical relations related to the experiment and found counter flow
model has more dehumidification rate but the cross-flow model has more stability.

Jani et al.[14] discussed about the properties of solid desiccant air conditioning
system and general features of the solid desiccant cooling. He discussed the
performance of the solid desiccants with the use of renewable sources of energy for
heating purpose in the regeneration process. He detailed the properties of the
different solid desiccants which can be used for dehumidification purposes.

M.R. Islam et al.[15] studies the heat and mass transfer characteristics in liquid
desiccant dehumidification system by developing a simple theoretical model in
which several equations are simultaneously solved by using the runge-kutta
method. He developed a falling film model and analyzed the model by changing the
different parameters like solution flow rate, inlet cooling water temperature.

Geleta Fekadu et al.[16] discussed the pros and cons of the liquid desiccant air
conditioning system and usage of liquid desiccant dehumidification with the
renewable sources of energy for regeneration purpose. He shows the different
desiccants and their properties like corrosiveness. He discussed the detailed review
of the liquid desiccants for using in dehumidification purpose.

J. Emhofer et al.[17] analyzed the cross flow liquid desiccant dehumidification

system using LiBr as a liquid desiccant. He developed a mathematical model where
it takes into the account of heat and mass transfer properties between the air and the
liquid desiccant. He discussed the problems caused by the current geometry and
provided a remedy for that. He has validate the mathematical result with the
experimental result and found to be satisfactory.

Xianhua Ou et al.[18] experimentally investigates the heat and mass transfer

performance in liquid desiccant dehumidification system. He varied the different
inlet parameters of both the liquid desiccant and the air and also the cooling water
temperature. He predicted a simple empirical relation and compared the values with
the experimental results obtained and found to be under 10% error.

11
Lun Zhang et al.[19] experimentally investigates the heat and mass transfer for
counter flow packed tower dehumidifier using liquid desiccants for three different
paths. Simultaneously NTU( number of transfer units) method is used to determine
the heat and mass transfer theoretically and it is verified with the experimental
results. The packing tower is made with the honey comb packing inside the
chamber.

Huang-Xi Fu et al.[20] experimentally investigates the impact of liquid desiccant

on the indoor air quality inside the conditioned room. Different individual
experiments are conducted for the microorganisms in the dehumidified air.
Different meshes are used for the experimental purposes and also carry over of the
liquid desiccant along with the air is check in the dehumidified air.

Tao Wen et al.[21] studies the thermal properties of the potassium formate which
is used as a liquid desiccant. He found out the vapour pressure and the density at
different concentrations of the potassium formate. The wetting ratio along the wall
is found and the impact of wetting ratio on the dehumidification rate. Besides the
thermal properties, the mass transfer properties also found out for the potassium
formate solution.

K.J. Chua.[22] develops a composite desiccants for the energy efficiency in the
dehumidification system. He takes the solid desiccant for the dehumidification
process and for that he uses silica gel, polyvinyl alcohol is mixed for the composite
desiccant formation. He investigated with different inlet parameters like the change
in velocity and concentrations and from this moisture removal capacity is found
out.

Niu Run-ping.[23] develops the mathematical model for the simulation purpose. He
took a simple cross flow model and analyzed for the heat and mass transfer
characteristics by using the relevant equations. The results from the numerical
simulation is verified with the experimental results of one of the paper. LiCl is used
as the liquid desiccant for the simulation purpose.

12
Manuel R. Conde.[24] experimentally determines the properties of lithium chloride
and calcium chloride like vapour pressure, density, surface tension, viscosity,
thermal conductivity, specific heat capacity by doing several set of experiments like
sorption test to find out the different properties of the two desiccants. The collected
properties are assembled by means of graphs so that the properties can be easily
determined at different temperature and concentrations.

X.N. Wu et al.[25] reviews the impact of substrate on the desiccant wheel. He used
solid desiccant dehumidification system with the porous wavy substrate in the
desiccant rotary wheel. He determined the impact of substrate on the pressure drop
across the desiccant wheel.

Gallardo Salazar et al.[26] used a electrospray to produce small tiny liquid desiccant
so that the contact surface area increases which thereby increases the
dehumidification rate. He used an electrically driven spray so that more and more
tiny droplets can be obtained instead of using mechanically driven sprayers.
Micrometric size droplets are obtained by the use of electrospray.

Chuanshuai Dong et al.[27] investigated the effect of surface properties of the three
different plates on the dehumidification performance. He used solar energy for the
regeneration purpose. Three plates such as stainless steel, titanium, PTFE plate are
chosen for the investigation purpose and the experiments are conducted on the
falling film dehumidifier. Energy consumption analysis also conducted for this
experiments and shown positive for titanium plate.

Changfeng Zhan et al.[28] conducted the experiments with different liquid

desiccants and chosen the best one. He used the outside air to enter the air
compressor and that compressed air is passed to the dehumidifier where it gets
dehumidified. The moisture present in the compressed air gets dehumidified when
passed through the dehumidifier.

Maher Shehadi.[29] reviewed the different humidity control technologies used for
dehumidification purpose. He discussed about the different desiccant
dehumidification processes like solid desiccant dehumidification, liquid desiccant

13
dehumidification and hybrid desiccant system and found out that the liquid
desiccant along with the hybrid system proves the better technology.

Yue LYu et al.[30] investigated numerically the wettability characteristics of LiCl

liquid desiccant in the film type dehumidification. He found out the different aspects
for the wetting properties like temperature concentration and so on. He used the
VOF model with the least square method for determination of wetting characteristic
of the falling film liquid desiccant.

Joon-Young Park et al.[31] theoretically investigated the dehumidification

effectiveness by using linear regression analysis method to find out the empirical
formula. The empirical formula has been tested for six different operating
conditions for a packed bed dehumidifier and also tested with the existing empirical
models.

Ye Yao et al.[32] conducted the experiment to find out the vapour pressure of the
LiCl-CaCl2 liquid desiccants by means of two models i.e. Simple mixing rule(SMR)
and non-random two-liquid(NRTL) model. He has done the experiments under
different operating conditions like the change in temperature and the change in mass
concentration of the liquid desiccants.

Qi Ronghui et al.[33] investigated the contact angle of liquid desiccant on the

dehumidification rate. He did the experiment with the LiCl and LiBr liquid
desiccants on the stainless steel plate as a falling film. He found out that increase in
mass concentration or decrease in temperature of the liquid desiccant influenced the
contact angle and the contact area of the liquid desiccant which indirectly influences
the dehumidification rate.

Abdulrahman Th. Mohammad et al.[34] reviewed the control strategy for the liquid
desiccant systems. He firstly discussed the dehumidification process followed by
the liquid desiccant dehumidification process followed by the heat and mass transfer
performance in the liquid desiccant system and the control strategy for the liquid
desiccant system. He found out the control strategy can reduce the energy
consumption for the liquid desiccant system.

14
Zili Yang et al.[35] compared the performance of the dehumidification of
ultrasonic atomization of liquid desiccant model with the packed bed model. He
maintained the same inlet operating conditions for both the models. The ultrasonic
atomization was done using the ultrasonic transducer by using a ruby rod and by
using this ultrasonic frequencies, the atomization is done.

Yimo Luo et al.[36] numerically investigated the effect of heat and mass transfer
between the liquid desiccant and the air by using the VOF model. He considered
the effect of gravity, viscosity, surface tension into account. He used the LiCl as the
liquid desiccant and falling film as model for simulation.

Niccolò Giannetti et al.[37] has done both experimental and theoretical for the
performance of wetting characteristic in film of liquid desiccant system. For the
experimental purpose he used the image processing technique for finding the
contact area and hysteresis method for the theoretical determination. The both
results are compared for the wetting behavior which effects the dehumidification
rate.

Jinghui Zhi et al.[38] conducted the experiment to enhance the wetting area and
increase the dehumidification performance. He has taken plastic plates coated with
super hydrophilic solutions. He compared the results with the uncoated plastic
plates and the results shown that the coated plate has a higher dehumidification
performance than the uncoated plate.

Ertu grul Cihan et al.[39] conducted the experiment to enhance the performance of
the dehumidification by using a polycarbonate boards coated with surfactants in the
falling film dehumidifier. He used the LiCl as the liquid desiccant. The use of that
polycarbonate boards along with surfactant proved a better dehumidification
performance with more wetting area.

Juan Prieto et al.[40] conducted the experiment by using the horizontal tubes made
of polypropylene so that the liquid desiccant will be falling along the tube and the
air will be interacting in cross flow direction. Two horizontal tube frame were

15
selected out of which one is subjected to plasma surface treatment and other left
normal and the results are compared with different inlet conditions.

Zhenying Wang et al.[41] investigated the heat and mass transfer properties of
liquid desiccant for the air having high levels of humidity by means of counter flow.
He investigated by means of both experiment and theoretical means. He uses the
potassium formate solution as liquid desiccant and conducted 313 experiments. He
uses finite difference method for theoretical means.

2.2. OBJECTIVE

After reviewing from the literature, it is found that most of the papers have done
experimental studies while very less papers were done on the numerical simulation.
Also, it is seen that no papers concentrated on the comparison between the counter
flow (film wise) dehumidification and cross flow (drop wise) dehumidification and
figure out which model is best. So, the main objective is to compare the two models
(counter flow and cross flow) numerically and find out which model is best for
dehumidification.

To achieve the goal following objectives are framed:

 Find out the exit mass fraction of air and volume fraction for a counter flow
dehumidification model.
 Find out the exit mass fraction of air and volume fraction for a cross flow
dehumidification model.
 Compare the dehumidification values of both the models and figure out
which model is better.

Following steps were done for achieving the objectives stated above.

 Two-dimensional models are created for both counter flow and cross flow
dehumidification and analysed in ANSYS for predicting the exit mass
fractions values of air.

16
 Six different inlet humidity values (mass fractions) are selected 0.01, 0.012,
0.014, 0.016, 0.018, 0.02 and the effect of changing inlet humidity values
are studied.

17
 CHAPTER 3

MODEL DESCRIPTION

3.1 PHYSICAL MODEL

Fig. 2.1 shows the schematic diagram of the two different types of physical models
for studying the performance of dehumidification. To study the impact of flow, two
different types of two-dimensional models were developed i.e. (a) counter flow
(film-wise) (b) cross flow (drop-wise) model. Both the models are vertically
aligned. For the counter flow model the desiccant inlet is given at the top left portion
of 2mm and for the cross flow model the desiccant inlet is given at top middle
portion as shown in the Figure 3.1-a,b.

(a) (b)
Fig:3.1 Two types of models (a) counter flow (b) cross flow

18
3.2 GOVERNING EQUATIONS

Two-dimensional equations for continuity, momentum, and energy are taken into
consideration to analyse the problem stated above. All the fluid properties are taken
to be constant terms initially but while the simulations is running the properties of
density and viscosity are adjusted with the volume fraction. As it is a gas-liquid 2-
phase mixture, the conservation of mass and momentum equations are based on
volume fractions of gas and liquid. The properties like density 𝜌 and viscosity µ in
each computational cell is represented by

𝜌 = 𝛼𝑙 𝜌𝑙 + 𝛼𝑔 𝜌𝑔

µ = 𝛼𝑙 µ𝑙 + 𝛼𝑔 µ𝑔

the volume fraction relationship between the liquid and gas is given by

𝛼𝑙 + 𝛼𝑔 = 1

The cases of volume fraction is given as

If 𝛼𝑙 = 1the cell is full of liquid

𝛼𝑙 = 0 the cell is empty of liquid

0 < 𝛼𝑙 < 1 the cell is mixture of liquid and gas

The fundamental governing equations for fluid flow are Navier-Stokes equations.
The velocity and temperature profile of the fluid flow strongly depends up on three
fundamental equations which are continuity momentum and energy.

The conservation of mass equation is written as

𝜕𝜌
+ ∇. (𝜌 𝑣⃗) = 0 (1)
𝜕𝑡
Where ρ is the density, t is time and 𝑣⃗ is the velocity vector.

Conservation of momentum equation can be expressed as

19
 𝜕𝜌𝑣⃗
+ ∇. (𝜌 𝑣⃗𝑣⃗) = −∇𝑝 + ∇(𝜏̿) + 𝜌𝑔⃗ (2)
𝜕𝑡
Where p ,̿and 𝑔⃗represents pressure, fluid stress tensor and gravity vector
respectively. The stress tensor is expressed as
2
𝜏̿ = 𝜇 [(∇𝑣⃗ + ∇𝑣⃗ 𝑇 ) − ∇. 𝑣⃗𝐼] (3)
3
Where µ is the molecular viscosity, I is the unit tensor or identity tensor, and the
second term on the right hand side is the effect of volume dilation. The last term of
the equation no 2.2 refers the gravity term due to the vertical chamber.

The conservation of energy equation can be written as,

𝜕
(𝜌𝐸) + ∇. [𝑣⃗(𝜌𝐸 + 𝑃)] = ∇. 𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 ∇𝑇 + ∇. (𝜏̿𝑒𝑓𝑓 . 𝑣⃗) + 𝑆𝐸 (4)
𝜕𝑡
Where E and 𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 represent total energy and effective conductivity and 𝑆𝐸 is the
energy source term. . The equation for E is given by

∑𝑛𝑞=1 𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑞 𝐸𝑞
𝐸=
∑𝑛𝑞=1 𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑞

where, Eq is obtained by the specific heat and temperature at the qth phase.

The specific heat of the fluid is calculated by:

𝑐𝑝 = 𝜌−1 (𝛼𝑙 𝜌𝑙 𝑐𝑝,𝑙 + (𝛼𝑔 )𝜌𝑔 𝑐𝑝,𝑔 ) (5)

For the species transport equations

𝜕
(𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑞 𝑥𝑘,𝑞 ) + ∇. (𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑞 𝑢𝑥𝑘,𝑞 ) = 𝑆𝑗,𝑔𝑘 (6)
𝜕𝑡

Where q=1……n k=1…….m

𝑆𝑗,𝑔𝑘 = 𝐾𝑔 (𝜔𝑔𝑏 − 𝜔𝑔𝑒 ) (7)

Where 𝑥𝑘,𝑞 is the mass fraction of the component k in the qth phase. 𝑆𝑗,𝑔𝑘 is the mass
transfer source and (𝜔𝑔𝑏 − 𝜔𝑔𝑒 ) represents the difference in specific humidity with
the equilibrium specific humidity.
20
3.3 BOUNDARY CONDITION

For both the counter flow and cross flow models same boundary conditions were
given and the results were noted. For specifying the inlet humidity of the air one
cannot give directly humidity value as the inlet condition, either it has to be changed
into mass fraction or mole fraction. Here in this I have considered mass fraction and
the value of mass fraction is obtained as follows: So, the value of mass fraction is
given by using species transport model in which the air and the water vapour is
mixed in a specified ratio.

Assume R.H= 70%

𝑃𝑣
= 0.7
𝑃𝑣𝑠

At Ta = 32°C

𝑃𝑣𝑠 = 4500𝑃𝑎

𝑃𝑣 = 3150𝑃𝑎

𝑃𝑣
ω = 0.622
𝑃𝑎 −𝑃𝑣

=0.021 kg/kg of dry air

𝑚
ω = 𝑚𝑣
𝑎

𝑚𝑣
Mass fraction of water vapor in air is𝑚 = 0.0197~0.02
𝑎+ 𝑚𝑣

For the liquid desiccant which is LiCl used for the simulation have the following
properties. The properties values are given as

21
 Table 3.1 Properties of lithium chloride at 30% concentration
Density (kg/m3 ) 1180
Viscosity (kg/m-s) 0.00359
Surface tension (N/m) 0.0893
Specific heat capacity (J/kg K) 2933
Molecular weight (kg/kmol) 42.35
Thermal conductivity(W/m-k) 0.45
Standard state enthalpy(J/kmol) -400.32

Table 3.2 Inlet conditions for air and lithium chloride

Parameters Air Desiccant
Temperature (K) 305 298
Inlet velocity(m/s) 0.2 0.07
Mass concentration (%) 2 30

Firstly, the phase 1 is given as air and phase 2 is given as liquid desiccant. The
boundary conditions are started at the air inlet with a velocity of 0.2m/s and
temperature of 305K. The mass fraction of the water vapour in air at the air inlet is
given as 0.02 and the volume fraction of the phase 2(desiccant) at the air inlet is
given as 0 which indicates no liquid desiccant is flowing at the air inlet. Next at the
air outlet the condition is given as pressure-based boundary condition as the
conditions at the air outlet are unknown. Next at the desiccant inlet the velocity is
given as 0.07m/s and the temperature are given as 298K. The mass fraction of the
water vapour in air at the desiccant inlet is given as 0 which indicates that there is
no air passing at the desiccant inlet and the volume fraction of phase 2(desiccant)
at the desiccant inlet is given as 1 which indicates that at the desiccant inlet only
liquid desiccant is entering. Next at the desiccant outlet the condition is given as
pressure-based boundary condition as the conditions at the desiccant outlet are
unknown. No slip velocity boundary condition is given at the fluid wall interaction.
Here the surface tension also plays a vital role, so the surface tension value of
0.0893 N/m is also initialised.

22
3.4 NUMERICAL APPROACH

Ansys fluent is used to solve this problem. Pressure based solver is used and
absolute velocity formulation is taken. As this is a time vary problem so transient
case is initialised. As this is a vertical chamber case so the action of gravity cannot
be neglected so the value of gravity is also given which is 9.81m/s2. Sequence of
operations like geometry, meshing, setup, results are done in the numerical
approach and are explained in brief in below.

 Geometry –The models were made in Ansys and dimension was made
according to the requirement of the problem. The opening of the different
inlets and outlets of the desiccant and air was given a line command and the
different was given by the inlet and outlet condition. For the cross flow
model the inlet opening line command is given at the top face centre while
for a counter flow model the liquid desiccant inlet line command is given at
the top left face corner while the air inlet line command was given at the
bottom face right corner.

Fig 3.2: - Counter flow model

23
 Fig 3.3: - Cross flow model

 Meshing –The meshing of the model is done with fine relevance throughout
the model and also during this set up the appropriate inlet and outlet opening
naming are done to avoid any chaos with appropriate dimensions.

(a) (b)
Fig 3.4 : - Meshing (a) counter flow model (b) cross flow model

24
  Setup – The solver is pressure based and transient. The boundary conditions
were given as per the requirements of the problem as stated in the above.
The scheme was taken as SIMPLE (Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure
Linked Equations) for pressure velocity coupling. The gradient was taken
as least square cell based. Scheme used for solving pressure and momentum
were second order upwind and PRESTO respectively. Laminar viscous
model was selected for this problem.
 Results – The CFD results were taken in the form of mass fraction, volume
fraction, temperature and velocity contours and the values of the mass
fraction of water vapour in air at the air outlet is imported to the excel sheet
and required graphs are drawn.
The flowchart for the numerical approach is given below:

Geometry

 Draw the model

Meshing

 Fine mesh was done

 Inlet and outlet sections were
specified

Solver

 Pressure based
 Transient

Model

 Species transport on
 Multiphase flow on
 Energy on


25
Materials

 Fluid
Phase1: - mixture (air + water
vapour)
Phase2: - liquid desiccant (LiCl)

Boundary conditions

 Respective boundary
conditions were given for both
liquid desiccant and mixture of
air and water vapor

Solution method and initialization

 SIMPLE
 Initialize from desiccant inlet
condition

CFD SETUP

26
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

CFD analysis were carried for the two different types of models: counter flow and
cross flow model. The inlet conditions were given same for both the models and the
results are collected. Six different inlet mass fractions were given from 0.01 to 0.02
in increments of 0.002 for both the models and contour of mass fractions of water
vapour in air were shown below. The simulations are carried out 10 seconds. Figure
4.1 shows the mass fraction contour of water vapour in air for counter flow and
Figure 4.2 shows the mass fraction contour of water vapour in air for cross flow.

The below figures show the contour of mass fraction of water vapour in air for
different inlet mass fractions of water vapour in air. The inlet velocity for air is
chosen to be 0.2m/s because at that velocity the air starts moving out at the air outlet
for the counter flow. So, this velocity is chosen as the base velocity value for both
counter flow and cross flow.

0.01 0.012

27
 0.014 0.016

0.018 0.02

Fig 4.1: Mass fraction contour for counter flow at different inlet mass fraction
of air

28
0.01 0.012

0.014 0.016

29
 0.02
0.018

Fig 4.2: Mass Fraction contour for cross flow at different inlet mass fraction of
air

Table 4.1 shows that the values of inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air, mass
fraction of water vapour in air at the air outlet and the amount of water collected
per kg of air for counter flow model. The values shows that with the increase in
inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air the amount of water collected from air per
kg of air shows an increasing trend which means that the collection of water is
increased when the inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air is made to increase
because the vapour pressure of the air increases which in turn increases the mass
transfer driving force.

Also, from the graph in figure 4.3 it is shown that the when the inlet mass fraction
of water vapour in air is increased the amount of water collected per kg of air is also
shown an increasing trend. The x-axis of the graph shows the variation in inlet mass
fraction and in the y-axis of the graph shows the amount of water collected with the
variation of inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air. So from the both we can
conclude that the amount of water collected shows an increasing trend with inlet
mass fraction of air for the counter flow model.
30
 Table 4.1: - Values of amount of water collected per kg of air for counter flow
Mass fraction inlet Mass fraction outlet Amount of water
collected per kg of air

0.01 0.001198 0.008703

0.012 0.000977 0.010881

0.014 0.001375 0.012431

0.016 0.002985 0.012763

0.018 0.002211 0.015471

0.02 0.003056 0.016944

0.018

0.016
Amount of water collected per kg of air

0.014

0.012

0.01

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002

0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Inlet mass fraction of air

Fig 4.3: - Variation of amount of water collected with inlet mass fraction of air for
counter flow

31
Table 4.2 shows that the values of inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air, mass
fraction of water vapour in air at the air outlet and the amount of water collected
per kg of air for cross flow model. The values shows that with the increase in inlet
mass fraction of water vapour in air the amount of water collected from air per kg
of air shows an increasing trend which means that the collection of water is
increased when the inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air is made to increase
because the vapour pressure of the air increases which in turn increases the mass
transfer driving force

Table 4.2: - Values of amount of water collected per kg of air for cross flow
Mass fraction inlet Mass fraction outlet Amount of water
collected per kg of air
0.01 0.003632 0.006269
0.012 0.004368 0.00749
0.014 0.005112 0.008695
0.016 0.005844 0.009904
0.018 0.006576 0.011106
0.02 0.007486 0.012514

Also, from the graph in figure 4.3 it is shown that the when the inlet mass fraction
of water vapour in air is increased the amount of water collected per kg of air is also
shown an increasing trend. The x-axis of the graph shows the variation in inlet mass
fraction and in the y-axis of the graph shows the amount of water collected with the
variation of inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air. So from the both we can
conclude that the amount of water collected shows an increasing trend with inlet
mass fraction of air for the cross flow model. From the above two results of both
counter flow model and cross flow model the values for the amount of water
collected per kg of air are inserted in the excel sheets and the graphs are drawn,
taking the inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air on the x-axis while the amount
of water collected per kg of air on the y-axis.

32
 0.014

Amount of water collected per kg of air

0.012

0.01

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002

0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Inlet mass fraction of air

Fig 4.4: - Variation of amount of water collected with inlet mass fraction of air for
cross flow

When the values of amount of water collected per kg of air are compared with
respect to mass fraction of water vapour in air for both cross flow and the counter
flow shown in the Table 4.3, the values of amount of water collected per kg of air
for counter flow model shows a higher value than that of the cross flow model.

Table 4.3: - Values of amount of water collected per kg of air for cross flow and
counter flow
Mass fraction inlet Amount of water Amount of water
collected per kg of collected per kg of
air(counter flow) air(cross flow)
0.01 0.008703 0.006269
0.012 0.010881 0.00749
0.014 0.012431 0.008695
0.016 0.012763 0.009904
0.018 0.015471 0.011106
0.02 0 .016944 0.012514
The values in the table are taken and are drawn in the graph, the x-axis of the graph
shows the variation in inlet mass fraction and in the y-axis of the graph shows the
33
amount of water collected with the variation of inlet mass fraction of water vapour
in air. Also in the graph the increase in counter flow line is more than that of cross
flow line which shows that the counter flow dehumidification is more than the
counter flow dehumidification. The square boxes line represents the counter flow
model results line and the triangular boxes line represents the cross flow model
results line.

0.018
Amount of water collected per

0.016
0.014
0.012
kg of air

0.01
0.008
cross flow

0.006 counter flow

0.004
0.002
0
0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Inlet mass fraction of air

Fig 4.5: - Comparison of amount of water collected with inlet mass fraction of air
for both counter flow and cross flow

Dehumidification effectiveness: -

The ratio of the actual humidity ratio variation of the process air to the theoretical
maximum humidity ratio variation.

𝜔𝑎,𝑖𝑛 − 𝜔𝑎,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝜀𝑑 =
𝜔𝑎,𝑖𝑛 − 𝜔𝑎,𝑒𝑞

𝑃𝑣
𝜔𝑎,𝑒𝑞 = 0.622
𝑃𝑎 − 𝑃𝑣

At air temperature Ta = 32°C

Pa = 101.32 kpa

Pv = 1.445 kpa
34
ωa,eq = 0.008998

Substitute the values in the above equation and find the dehumidification for
different inlet mass fraction inlet. The values for dehumidification effectiveness for
both counter flow model and cross flow model is shown in the below table.

Table 4.4: - Dehumidification effectiveness values for cross flow and counter flow
Mass fraction inlet Dehumidification Dehumidification
effectiveness (counter effectiveness (cross
flow) flow)
0.01 0.157669 0.113858371
0.012 0.394336 0.272367274
0.014 0.564435 0.396269779
0.016 0.691758 0.5383689
0.018 0.790976 0.570309894
0.02 0.88686 0.657935683

1
Dehumidification effectiveness

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
e counter
0.4
0.3
e cross

0.2
0.1
0
0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02 0.022
Inlet mass fraction of air

Fig 4.6: - Comparison of dehumidification effectiveness with inlet mass fraction

of water vapour in air

The values in the Table 4.4 shows that the values of dehumidification effectiveness
increase with the increase in inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air for the counter

35
flow model and the cross flow model. Also, when the values for counter flow model
is compared with the cross flow model, the values for dehumidification
effectiveness for counter flow model shows a higher value than the cross flow
model. The values in the table are taken and are drawn in the graph, the x-axis of
the graph shows the variation in inlet mass fraction and in the y-axis of the graph
shows the amount of water collected with the variation of inlet mass fraction of
water vapour in air is shown in the Figure 4.6. The square boxes line represents the
cross flow model results line and the triangular boxes line represents the counter
flow model results line.

Volume fraction:-

(a) (b)
Fig 4.7: - Volume fraction contour for (a) counter flow (b) cross flow

36
 0.01 0.012 0.014

0.016 0.018 0.02

Fig 4.8 :- Temperature contour for counter flow

The figure 4.8 shows the variation of temperature contour for counter flow model
with the inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air. The contour clearly shows the
temperature variation in the air and also along the desiccant flow and also the flow
of film desiccant flow along the wall.

37
 0.01 0.012 0.014

0.016 0.018 0.02

Fig 4.9:- Temperature contour for cross flow

The figure 4.8 shows the variation of temperature contour for cross flow model with
the inlet mass fraction of water vapour in air. The contour clearly shows the
temperature variation in the air and also along the desiccant flow and also the flow
of droplet desiccant flow.

38
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS

This study compares the dehumidification performance of the counter flow model
with that of the cross flow model under the same inlet conditions of the air.

 When the inlet mass fraction of the moist air is increased for both cross flow
(drop-wise dehumidification) and counter flow (film-wise
dehumidification) models the amount of water collected per kg of air shows
an increasing trend.
 It is observed that when the values of amount of water collected are
compared for both counter flow (film-wise dehumidification) and cross flow
(drop-wise dehumidification) models, the amount of water collected for
counter flow is more than the crossflow dehumidification.
 The dehumidification effectiveness values shows an increasing trend when
the inlet mass fraction of air is increasing for both counter and cross flow,
out of which counter flow case has a higher rate of dehumidification than
the cross flow condition.
 When the inlet velocity of the air is increased beyond 3m/s it is observed
that the carry-over of the liquid desiccant is being taking place.
 The desiccant dehumidification is an exothermic reaction which means
when the desiccant absorbs moisture it releases heat due to which it is
observed there is slight increase in temperature values.

39
 REFERENCES

[1] Chih-Hao Chen, Chien-Yeh Hsu, Chih-Chieh Chen, Sih-Li Chen “Silica gel
polymer composite desiccants for air conditioning systems.” Energy and Buildings,
vol. 101, pp. 122-132.

[2] Tao Wen, Lin Lu, Chuanshuai Dong, Yimo Luo, “Development and
experimental study of a novel plate dehumidifier made of anodized aluminum.”
Energy, vol. 144, pp. 169-177.

[3] Chuanshuai Dong, Lin Lu, Tao Wen, “Experimental study on

dehumidification performance enhancement by TiO2 super hydrophilic coating for
liquid desiccant plate dehumidifiers.” Buildings and Environment, vol. 124, pp.
219-231.

[4] Tao Wen, Lin Lu, Chuanshuai Dong. “Enhancing the dehumidification
performance of LiCl solution with surfactant PVP-K30.” Energy and Buildings,
vol. 171, pp. 183-195.

[5] K.J. Chua, S.K. Chou, M.R. Islam, “On the experimental study of a hybrid
dehumidifier comprising membrane and composite desiccants,” Applied Energy,
vol. 152, pp. 19-21.

[6] Shaji Mohan, Shaligram Tiwari, M.P Maiya, “Experimental investigations

on performance of liquid desiccant-vapor compression hybrid air conditioner,”
Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 77, pp. 153-162.

[7] K. Srithara, T. Rajaseenivasana, M. Arulmania, R. Gnanavela, M. Vivarb,

Manuel Fuentesc, “Energy recovery from a vapour compression refrigeration
system using humidification dehumidification desalination,” Desalination, vol. 439,
pp. 155-161.

40
[8] Sreelal. B, Hariharan R, “The Effect of Air Velocity in Liquid Desiccant
Dehumidifier Based on Two Phase Flow Model Using Computational Method,”
International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, vol. 2, pp. 142-152.

[9] Jubair A. Shamim, Wei-Lun Hsu, Kenji Kitaoka, Soumyadeep Paul,

Hirofumi Daiguji, “Design and performance evaluation of a multilayer fixed-bed
binder-free desiccant dehumidifier for hybrid air-conditioning systems”
International Journal Of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 116, pp. 1361-1369.

[10] Yimo Luo, Yi Chen, Hongxing Yang, Yuanhao Wang, “Study on an

internally-cooled liquid desiccant dehumidifier with CFD model” Applied Energy,
vol. 194, pp. 399-409.

[11] A. Ertas, E.E. Anderson, I. Kiris, “Properties of a new liquid desiccant

solution-- lithium chloride and calcium chloride mixture” Solar Energy, vol. 49, pp.
205-212.

[12] Minaal Sahlot and Saffa B. Riffat, “Desiccant cooling systems: a review”
International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, vol. 24, pp. 1-17.

[13] Hye-Jin Cho, Seong-Yong Cheon, Jae-Weon Jeong, “Experimental analysis

of dehumidification performance of counter and cross-flow liquid desiccant
dehumidifiers” Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 150, pp. 210-223.

[14] D.B. Jani, Manish Mishra, P.K. Sahoo, “Solid desiccant air conditioning – A
state of the art review” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 60, pp.
1451-1469.

[15] M.R. Islam, S.W.L. Alan, K.J. Chua, “Studying the heat and mass transfer
process of liquid desiccant for dehumidification and cooling” Applied Energy, vol.
221, pp. 334-347.

[16] Geleta Fekadu, Sudhakar Subudhi, “Renewable energy for liquid desiccants
air conditioning system: A review” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
vol. 93, pp. 364-379.

41
[17] J. Emhofer, B. Beladi, P. Dudzinski, T. Fleckl, H.C. Kuhlmann, “Analysis of
a cross-flow liquid-desiccant falling-film” Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 124,
pp. 91-102.

[18] Xianhua Oua, Wenjian Cai, Xiongxiong Hea, Deqing Zhai, “Experimental
investigations on heat and mass transfer performances of a liquid desiccant cooling
and dehumidification system” Applied Energy, vol. 220, pp. 164-175.

[19] Lun Zhanga, Xiaohua Liub, Hongyang Wei, Xiaosong Zhang, “Experimental
study and analysis of heat and mass transfer ability of counter-flow packing tower
and liquid desiccant dehumidification system” Energy and Buildings, vol. 158, pp.
150-161.

[20] Huang-Xi Fu, Xiao-Hua Liu, “Review of the impact of liquid desiccant
dehumidification on indoor air quality” Building and Environment, vol. 116, pp.
158-172.

[21] Tao Wena, Meng Wanga, Yi Chen, Weifeng He, Yimo Luo, “Thermal
properties study and performance investigation of potassium formate solution in a
falling film dehumidifier/regenerator” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, vol. 134, pp. 131-142.

[22] K.J. Chua, “Heat and mass transfer of composite desiccants for energy efficient
air dehumidification: Modelling and experiment” Applied Thermal Engineering,
vol.89, pp. 703-716.

[23] Niu Run-ping, “Modeling and Numerical Simulation of Dehumidifier Using

LiCl Solution as the Liquid Desiccant” Advanced Materials Research, vol. 383, pp.
6568-6573.

[24] Manuel R. Conde, “Properties of aqueous solutions of lithium and calcium

chlorides: formulations for use in air conditioning equipment design” International
Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 43, pp. 367-382.

42
[25] X.N. Wu, T.S. Ge, Y.J. Dai, R.Z. Wang, “Review on substrate of solid
desiccant dehumidification system” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
vol. 82, pp. 3236-3249.

[26] Manuel Gallardo Salazar, Rogelio Zubizarreta Jiménez, Ignacio González

Loscertales, Antonio Hijano Reyes, “Electrospray technique to produce fine sprays
of desiccant liquids. Application to moisture removal from air” Energy and
Buildings, vol. 162, pp. 187-197.

[27] Chuanshuai Dong, Lin Lu, Tao Wen, “Investigating dehumidification

performance of solar-assisted liquid desiccant dehumidifiers considering different
surface properties” Energy, vol. 164, pp. 978-994.

[28] Changfeng Zhan, Yonggao Yin, Xiaoshuang Guo, Xing Jin, Xiaosong Zhang,
“Investigation on drying performance and alternative analysis of different liquid
desiccants in compressed air drying system” Energy, vol. 165, pp. 1-9.

[29] Maher Shehadi, “Review of humidity control technologies in buildings”

Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 19, pp. 539-551.

[30] Yue LYu, Yonggao Yina, Xiaosong Zhanga, Xing Jin, “Investigation of
falling-film plate wettability characteristics under dehumidification and
regeneration conditions using LiCl-H2O” International Journal of Refrigeration,
vol. 94, pp. 118-126.

[31] Joon-Young Park, Dong-Seop Yoon, Sung-Joon Lee, Jae-Weon Jeong,

“Empirical model for predicting the dehumidification effectiveness of a liquid
desiccant system” Energy and Buildings, vol. 126, pp. 447-454.

[32] Ye Yao, Yuebin Yu, Zhengyuan Zhu, “Experimental investigations on surface

vapor pressure models for LiCl–CaCl2 desiccant solutions” Solar Energy, vol. 126,
pp. 1-13.

43
[33] Qi Ronghui, Lu Lin, Jiang Yu, “Investigation on the liquid contact angle and
its influence for liquid desiccant dehumidification system” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 88, pp. 210-217.

[34] Abdulrahman Th. Mohammad, Sohif Bin Mat, K. Sopian, Abduljalil A. Al-
abidi, “Review: Survey of the control strategy of liquid desiccant systems”
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 58, pp. 250-258.

[35] Zili Yang, Zhiwei Lian, Kaisheng Zhang, “Study on the Operational Economy
of the Ultrasonic Atomization Liquid Desiccant Dehumidification System”
Procedia Engineering, vol. 205, pp. 2879-2886.

[36] Yimo Luo, Hongxing Yang, Lin Lu, “Liquid desiccant dehumidifier:
Development of a new performance predication model based on CFD” International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 69, pp. 408-416.

[37] Niccolò Giannetti, Seiichi Yamaguchi, Kiyoshi Saito, “Wetting behavior of a

liquid film on an internally-cooled desiccant contactor” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 101, pp. 958-969.

[38] Jinghui Zhi, Chuanshuai Donga, Mingming Guo, Ronghui Qi, Li-zhi Zhang,
“Wettability and performance enhancement with durable super-hydrophilic
surfaces for plastic liquid desiccant dehumidification systems” Energy & Buildings,
vol. 187, pp. 77-85.

[39] Ertugrul Cihan, Barıs¸ Kavasogullar, Hasan Demir, “Enhancement of

performance of open liquid desiccant system with surface additive” Renewable
Energy, vol. 114, pp. 1101-1112.

[40] Juan Prieto, Jordi Ortiga, Alberto Coronas, “Experimental performance of

polymeric air-solution contactors for liquid desiccant systems” Applied Thermal
Engineering, vol. 121, pp. 576-584.

[41] Zhenying Wang, Xiaoyue Zhang, Zhen Li, “Investigation on the coupled heat
and mass transfer process between extremely high humidity air and liquid desiccant

44
in the counter-flow adiabatic packed tower” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, vol. 110, pp. 898-907.

45