See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/329024407

Comparative study between three types of cooling towers: dry, wet and hybrid

Conference Paper · November 2018

CITATION READS

1 1,414

3 authors, including:

Kamel Sidi Ali

Nuclear Research Centre of Draria
16 PUBLICATIONS   26 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Thermalhydraulics of GEN III and III+ nuclear reactors using asymptotic and CFD methods View project

Two phase flow in both vertical and horizontal ducts, with or without heating View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kamel Sidi Ali on 21 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THREE TYPES OF

COOLING TOWERS: DRY, WET AND HYBRID

T. Rahem(1), A. Aissati(1), K. Sidi-Ali(1)(2)

(1)
E.M Polytechnic, BP17 Bordj El-Bahri, Alger, Algeria.
(2)
Nuclear Research Center of Draria, BP 43 Sebala, Draria, Alger, Algeria.

ABSTRACT: Closed cooling systems use dry, wet or hybrid cooling towers. In order to compare these three types
of cooling towers together, the design of a cooling tower that can cool 100 MW is performed for each type. The
dimensioning takes into account the heat and mass transfer for the thermal part and the pressure drop on the air and
water sides for the hydraulic part. The two elements of comparison used are electricity consumption and water loss. The
airflows needed for the required cooling for each type of cooling tower are calculated and the electric extraction power
of this air and that of the water pumping system is evaluated. The water loss is also evaluated for only the wet type and
the hybrid type. The application is made for several regions in Algeria considering the most aggressive climates. The
results presented in this work relate to the highland region.

Key words: Cooling towers, Dry, Wet, Hybrid, Heat transfer, Electric power, Water loss, Consumption.

1. Introduction
Large power reactors [1] [2] use dry, wet or hybrid cooling towers when the cooling system is closed. The
choice of a type of cooling tower depends essentially on the characteristics of the site where they will be
installed and especially the costs generated. Two systems generate the majority of the operating costs: the
first system comprises the water pumping circuit and the water spray circuit and the second system the air
extraction circuit. The technology of the three types of cooling towers differs from one model to another. In a
dry cooling tower simple tubes provide heat transfer between water inside the tubes and air in a cross-flow
configuration ensures the cooling of this water. In contrast to wet cooling towers where the contact is direct
between water and air within a packing for a water film flow. The performance of this cooling tower is better
because the heat transfer is increased by a mass transfer and the temperature of the humid bulb of the air is
the reference temperature for the calculations. For hybrid cooling towers, the flow as in dry cooling towers is
taken, to which is added a water spraying system as used in wet cooling towers. The cooling is even better
than for the other two types of cooling towers.

The study presented here deals with a comparison of these three types of cooling towers. The equation of the
thermal and hydraulic design of each cooling tower type is presented. The original work involved a battery
of cooling towers for the evacuation of a 1,000 MW. This battery consists of ten cooling towers of 100 MW
each one and an additional number to ensure a given redundancy. So the load that will be used for this study
is 100 MW for each cooling tower type. When the design is finalized, the power consumption for each type
will be evaluated and the water loss generated for the completion of the cooling process will be evaluated.

2. Procedure for dimensioning the wet cooling tower

In figure (1), the design of a wet cooling tower is presented. For the mathematical model, the equations
governing the energy transferred by water and the one recovered by air are given respectively by equations
(1) and (2):
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018
Where Qc and Qa are the energies transmitted by water and air, c and a the water and air densities, CPc the
specific heat of water, tc the water temperature difference and the air enthalpy difference.

Figure 1: Wet cooling tower

In order to evaluate the air flow for the required cooling, the Merkel method [3] is used. This method takes
into account the heat and mass transfer performances on one hand and the performances of the packing on
the other hand [4], it is given by equation (3)

Where β is the mass transfer coefficient, G the air density, the surface volume of the packing, the height
of the packing, mc the mass flow rate of water, hec and hsc are respectively the enthalpy of water at the entry
and at the exit of the cooling tower.

The data required for the calculations are: the mass flow rate of water, the inlet and outlet temperatures of
water as well as the temperature of dry and humid air bulb. This data is represented graphically on Figure
(2):

Figure 2: Graphical presentation of the data

To evaluate (hs– ha) as a function of the enthalpy of water, several flow ratios are considered.
For each flow ratio, the enthalpy of the air at the outlet is calculated using equation (4) to plot the variation in
the operating line.

We then evaluate (hs- ha) for each flow ratio by taking the average over four points of the evolution line of
the enthalpy of water according to British Standard BS4485. Once the values of (h s–ha) are evaluated for all
flow ratios, we can then calculate the term on the left of equation (3) by:
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

The evolution curve of IM is plotted as a function of the flow ratios for the first part of equation (5).
The second part is solved by the same way, ie for several flow ratios, is evaluated from its equivalent
equation [3]:

Where and n are coefficients referring to the packing used, determined experimentally in test cells or
found from two operating points of the cooling tower.

The solution point S is the intersection point of and , the sought flow ratio and the air flow needed for
the required cooling is then:

(7)

Once the air flow is known, one can then define the dimensions of the cooling tower. Afterwards, a pressure
loss calculation is done to know the characteristics of the air extraction system. The pumping system can also
be calculated. To evaluate the water loss the system of two equations (8) and (9) is solved according to the
difference of enthalpy of air between entry and exit of the cooling tower and thus to know exactly the
amount of water lost by mass transfer.

(8)
(9)

Where and are respectively the air and water mass flow.

3. Procedure for dimensioning a dry cooling tower

In a dry cooling tower, figure (3), the contact is not direct between the two fluids (water and air). The water
(hot fluid) flows inside finned tubes and the air (cold fluid) flows outside these tubes as in a cross-flow heat
exchanger. An air extraction system is installed downstream of the air outlet of this heat exchanger. The
dimensioning of such a tower amounts to the dimensioning of a water-air heat exchanger. The procedure is
known and gives good results.

Figure 3: Dry cooling tower

(10)
(11)
(12)

Where, mc and ma are the mass flow rates of the two fluids Cpc the specific heat of the hot fluid, Cpa the
specific heat of the cold fluid, Δtc and Δta are the temperature difference between the inlet and the outlet of
the two fluids, tcm and tam are the average temperatures of the two fluids, Uref the reference heat exchange
coefficient and Sexchange is the exchange surface.
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

The convection heat transfer coefficient inside the tubes αi is calculated according to Gnielinski [5]:
(13)

The number of Nusselt is given by the following expression

(14)

This expression is valid for : 0.6 < Prc< 2000; 2300 < Rec < 106 et 0 < di/lt <1.

The expression giving the Reynolds number for a simple cross-current exchanger is given by the following
formula:

(15)

Where Rec is the Reynolds number for the hot side, di the inside diameter of tubes, Ntot the total number of
tubes and the dynamic viscosity.

For a smooth turbulent flow, the Darcy coefficient (Ω) in equation (14) is dependant of the value of the
Reynolds number.

For 2300 ≤ Rec ≤ 105 one applies

For 105 ≤ Rec ≤ 106 one applies

The convective heat exchange coefficient outside the tubes is calculated according to the
arrangement of the tubes in the beam. For a staggered beam PFR [6], it is given by:

(18)

Where kf is the transfer coefficient of the cold fluid (air), de the outside diameter, Sa the fins surface and Stot
the total exchange surface.

The Reynolds number of the cold fluid Ref is given by:

(19)

is the average velocity in space limited by two adjacent tubes in a row.

The velocity of the fluid Vf,max in the cross section is maximum, it is given by:

Where Pt is the transverse pitch of the tubes arrangement, the air density and Nt the number of tubes per
row.

The void fraction ψ appearing in (19) is given by:

for (21.a)
for (21.b)
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

With and respectively the transverse pitch relative to the outer tube diameter and the
longitudinal pitch relative to the outer tube diameter. The characteristic length of the flow Γ is given by
.

Once the two convection coefficients calculated, one can then evaluate the global exchange coefficient using
equation (22):

(22)

Where and are respectively the fouling film resistance for the inner side and the outer side, the fin
efficiency given by , ξ the anisothermy coefficient given by , and the

finned surface global efficiency given by ,

The fin corrected lenght [5] is given by (23):

(23)

With the diameter of the fin related to the hydraulic diameter and
∗−1+0.5 ∗2−1

Where wail is the thickness of the fin and kail the fin heat exchange coefficient,

The exchange surface of fins alone is given by:

(24)

The efficiency of the dry cooling tower is given by the equation (25) deduced by the NUT method:

*100 (25)

Once the dimensions of the dry cooling tower fixed, the pressure drop can be evaluated for the air extraction
system and for the water pumping system.

4. Procedure for dimensioning an hybrid cooling tower

A hybrid cooling tower has a water-to-air heat exchanger as in a dry cooling tower and a water spraying
system as in a wet cooling tower, as shown in figure (4). Hot water flows inside finned tubes and air flows
from bottom to top to cool these tubes. The water spray water flows from top to bottom and at the same time
cools dry air and finned tubes. A double use of this hybrid tower is then possible either in a completely dry
system or in a wet system but with indirect contact between the two coolants.
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

Figure 4: Hybrid cooling tower

In order to evaluate water temperature in the heat exchanger, a correlations model is used. This model was
first introduced by [7]. In this model, the whole surface of the tubes is supposed to be wet; this assumption is
valid for a uniform spraying of the water. The variation of the temperature of the water spray can be
evaluated; however, the temperature of the water spray is considered equal to the temperature of the water/air
film interface. The variation of the temperature of water inside tubes can be calculated thanks to the
equilibrium equation between water and air.

Variations of water temperature and air enthalpy are given respectively by equations (26) and (27):

Where is the water spray temperature and the enthalpy of the water/air film interface

The evolution of water spray temperature is calculated by neglecting the evaporation of water.

The evolution of air moisture rate can be calculated by:

Where is the moisture rate at the water/air film interface.

The global heat exchange coefficient is given by:

Where is the water film convective heat exchange coefficient given by:

Valuable for and the term is given by . A value of the

ratio is set in order to evaluate the water spray flow rate.
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

For a staggered tube configuration and a turbulent flow, the Nusselt number is given by:

For an internal flow in a smooth tube, the coefficient of friction is given by:

For a staggered tube configuration with a pitch of , the mass transfer coefficient β is given by:

The Reynolds number for water spray is evaluated by:

Water losses are evaluated in the same way as for wet cooling towers.

Once the dimensional characteristics are known, the pressure drop can be evaluated. We could thus size the
air extraction system, the hot water pumping system and finally the cold water spraying system.
5. Energy consumption

In an industrial cooling system, main energy consumers are pumps and fans. Pumps ensure the
circulation of water and fans ensure the circulation of air.

The electrical pump power used in this system is calculated by the following formula:

(35)

Where is the electrical power, the density of the fluid, the water flow, the total pressure in
the water side, the gravity acceleration and the pump efficiency.

For the fan power, the same equation is used. The air density is taken equal to 1 kg/m3:

(36)

Where is the air flow, the total pressure in the air side and the fan efficiency.

6. Loss of water by evaporation

This is the amount of water evaporated to ensure cooling. It is mainly a function of the transferred
heat. As a first approximation, it is equal to 1% of the flow of water circulating in the cooling tower. This
water loss is evaluated, as said, by resolving equations (8) and (9) or it is given by [3][8]:

(37)

With and respectively the rate of water in air respectively at the exit and at the entrance of the
cooling tower
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

7. Applications and obtained results:

By applying the already detailed sizing methods, the obtained results for each type of cooling tower are
presented here after:

- Dry cooling towers: the study is done on a cooling system consisting of 155 tubes per row and 36 rows,
these tubes have an inside/outside diameter of 300/320 mm and a length of 40 m, the tubes arrangement is
staggered at an angle of 60°, the transverse pitch and the longitudinal pitch are calculated from the
equilateral tubes arrangement and depending on the dimensions of the tubes and the geometry of the bundle
of tubes, the material used is copper, these tubes carry aluminum fins in an integral construction. They have
the following dimensions: height of 100 mm for 1mm of thickness, their number is 300 fins per unit of
length, the necessary power to ensure the water circulation is 286.2 kWatt. It is assumed that the efficiency
of the pump is 75%, the electric power is therefore 408.8 kWatt. The power of the air extraction system is
5.047 MWatt. In the same way, it is assumed that the selected fans have a yield of 80% so the electrical
power will be 7.21Mwatt.

- Wet cooling towers: The study is made for four types of packing, of dimensions 5 m long, 8 m wide and 2
m high, for a heat exchange of about 100 MW. The spacing between the plates of the packing is 10 mm.
These dimensions were applied to the four types of packing. The water losses are 19.18, 23.93, 17.03 and
22.32 liters/s for types (i), (e), (d) and (c) described in [9] respectively. The power consumed by the
ventilation system with a fan efficiency of 80% is 5.4 MW. Considering that, the calculation of the pumping
system is mainly at the level of the heat exchangers, it will be neglected for the wet system.

- Hybrid cooling towers: the hybrid cooling system consists of 12 rows containing 25 tubes each. The tubes
are made of stainless steel, 320 mm outside diameter and 300 mm inside diameter. The electrical power
required for the operation of the cooling tower is 1.58 MW for the water pumping system, 0.539 MW for the
spray system and 1.4 MW for the air extraction system

The obtained results for these applications are presented here after:

Figure1: Evolution of electric fan power as a function of airflow

Figure (1) shows the evolution of electric power as a function of air flow. One notes that electrical power
increases when air flow increases. The electric power depends on the type of the cooling tower used. For
hybrid and dry cooling towers, electrical power evolves in the same way with a fixed value that separates
them, because these two cooling towers have the same geometry. However, it is found that the power in the
case of hybrid cooling tower is higher than the one of dry cooling tower because of losses due to air-water
 12èmeCongrès National de la Physique et de ses Applications
Alger, 13-15 Novembre 2018

film contact. For the case of wet cooling tower, the power is much higher than the other types; this means
that the air pressure drop in this kind of cooling tower is the larger.

Table 1: Electrical power for different equipments

Cooling tower type hybrid Dry Wet
system
Pump (hot water) [KW] 582 408.8 0
Extracting fan [KW] 1300 7210 5400
Pump (water spray) [KW] 539 0 1226
Total [KW] 2421 7618 5900

Table (1) summarizes power consumption for different cooling towers. According to the results obtained, the
most economical cooling tower is the hybrid one. The dry cooling tower is the one that requires the greatest
electrical load. The wet cooling tower is less energy-consuming than the dry cooling tower.

Water losses are presented in table (2):

Table 2: Water losses for the three cooling towers

Water losses hybrid dry wet
l/s 33.69 0 31.53
% 1.60 0 0.9

Water losses for the hybrid cooling tower are the most important followed by the wet cooling tower, while
the dry cooling tower consumption is zero.

8. Conclusions

Each of the three cooling tower types offers advantages and disadvantages. For dry cooling towers, energy
consumption is the largest among the cooling towers studied, but they offer the advantage of zero water loss.
For wet cooling towers, the heat and mass transfer offers the advantage of having a more compact geometry
than the dry cooling tower which requires a large exchange surface; the energy consumption is lower than
the dry cooling towers but larger than that of hybrid cooling towers. Closed-circuit hybrid cooling towers
require less space than a dry cooling tower but more space than a wet cooling tower. The main advantage of
this type of cooling tower is their minimal energy consumption among the three cooling towers studied, they
can be used in both humid or dry environment.

9. References

[1] L.E. Echávarri, L’énergie nucléaire aujourd’hui, Agence pour l’énergie Nucléaire, (2003).
[2] ***, Nuclear Power Technology Development Section Division of Nuclear Power , Department of Nuclear Energy,
, Status of Small and Medium Sized Reactor Designs, International Atomic Energy Agency, (2011).
[3] K. Sidi-Ali, Dimensioning of wet Cooling towers for nuclear power plants, original title in french: dimension-
nement des tours de Refroidissement humides des centrales électronucléaires, SPRUA, Ain-Oussera (1998).
[4] K. Sidi-Ali, Effects of packing depth on the main parameters of a wet cooling tower, original title in french: Effets
de la profondeur du garnissage sur les principaux paramètres d’une tour de refroidissement humide, SIPE, Bechar
(2002).
[5] V. Gnielinski, New equation for heat and mass transfer in turbulent pipe and channel flow, Int. Chem. Eng., vol. 16,
(1976).
[6] PFR Engineering Systems, Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of dry towers extended surfaces. Part II:
DATA analysis and correlation”, Calif. Marina del, Rey: PFR, Rapport d'étude n°BNWL-BFR-7-102. (1976)
[7] Mizushina, R.I.T, Miyashita, H, Characteristics And Methods Of Thermal Design Of Evaporative Coolers, Int.
Chemical Engineering 8 (3). (1968)
[8] Stoecker, WF and Jones, JW, Cooling towers and evaporative condensers, Refrigerating and air conditionning, Mc
Graw-hill ISE, (1982).
[9] H.J. Lowe, D.G. Christie, Heat transfer and pressure drop data on cooling tower packings and model studies of the
resistance of natural draught towers, IHTC Colorado, (1961).

View publication stats