Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Comparative study on the cooling characteristics of high level water

collecting natural draft wet cooling tower and the usual cooling tower
Yuanbin Zhao a,⇑, Fengzhong Sun a,⇑, Guoqing Long b, Xiaofeng Huang c, Wenqiang Huang c,
Dongqiang Lyv a
a
School of Energy and Power Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, China
b
Guangdong Electricity Power Design Institute, Guangzhou 510660, China
c
Zhongshan Thermal Power Plant, Guangdong Yuedian Group Co., LTD., Guangzhou 510660, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: With the rapid development of large capacity power units, high level water collecting natural draft wet
Received 18 November 2015 cooling towers (HNDWCTs) are now attractive. To study the cooling characteristics of HNDWCT, a three-
Accepted 24 February 2016 dimensional (3D) numerical model for a HNDWCT was established and validated. Combining with the
Available online 11 March 2016
verified 3D numerical models for usual natural draft wet cooling towers (UNDWCTs), the parameters
such as air pressure drop, air mass flow rate, exit water temperature, cooling load percentage of each
Keywords: zone, air velocity, air temperature and H2O mass fraction were elaborated for HNDWCT and UNDWCTs
Natural draft wet cooling tower
under the same work conditions. Comparing with UNDWCTs, the cooling characteristics of HNDWCT
High level water collecting devices
Numerical simulation
were analyzed and highlighted. The cooling load percentage of fill zone in HNDWCT is far larger than
Cooling performance those in UNDWCTs for the large air mass flow rate and large heat transfer potential. Under high velocity
Crosswind crosswind impacts, blocking the cross ventilation through HNDWCT is favorable to its cooling perfor-
mance. Suggestions concerning the orientations of water collecting gutter and cross wall are presented.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
As large-scale cooling equipments with high effectiveness,
natural draft wet cooling towers (NDWCTs) are widely used to pro-
vide cooling water for nuclear power plants or thermal power
plants. According to the characteristics of the water collecting
mode, NDWCTs can be classified into the usual natural draft wet
cooling towers (UNDWCTs) [1] and the high level water collecting
natural draft wet cooling towers (HNDWCTs) [2,3]. Fig. 1 schema-
tically shows both the UNDWCT and HNDWCT. As illustrated
in Fig. 1, except for the high level water collecting devices
(HWCDs), both the UNDWCT and HNDWCT are very similar in
structure.
In UNDWCT or HNDWCT, hot water is pumped into tower via
the vertical shaft and sprayed downward by nozzles. Colliding on
the inherent surfaces of fill, especially film fill, water droplets cling
to the film media and flow downward as water film. Below fill,
water becomes droplets again and collects in water basin or
HWCDs. Ambient air is drawn into tower by tower draft and flows
upward. Both UNDWCT and HNDWCT have three heat and mass
⇑ Corresponding authors. Tel.: +86 531 88395691.
E-mail addresses: sfzh@sdu.edu.cn (F. Sun), zhyb@sdu.edu.cn (Y. Zhao).
transfer zones, i.e., the spray zone, the fill zone and the rain zone
from spray nozzles to water basin or HWCDs, where the heat
and mass transfer from water to air occurs.
The HWCDs are composed of multi parallel water collecting
units. A water collecting unit consists of a sloping plate and the fol-
lowing U-type channel. The sloping plates and corresponding
U-type channels collect the falling water droplets from fill and
drain into the high level water collecting gutter below. So a high
water level is formed in the water collecting gutter, which can
reduce the pumping power required for circulating water between
the HNDWCT and condenser. Because the HWCDs are just beneath
the cooling fill of HNDWCT, the falling distances of water droplets
from fill bottom are correspondingly very small, so both the noise
level and air flow resistance are also very small [4].
With the advantages of small air flow resistance, low noise level
and reduced pumping power [4], HNDWCTs are becoming a
research hot spot, along with the rapid development of large
capacity power plants [5] especially in China. The HWCDs only
shorten the rain zone of HNDWCT, but do not change the water
flow form in a wet cooling tower. So the transfer mechanisms of
momentum, heat and mass between water and air in HNDWCT
are as same as those in UNDWCT. The cooling characteristics
comparison between HNDWCT and UNDWCT can promote the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.02.071
0196-8904/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164 151

Nomenclature

Ad surface area of droplet, m2 d(z) micro height, m

Af experimental correlation coefficient fi interactive force between water droplet and air in the i-
cpv constant pressure specific heat of water vapor, kJ/(kg K) direction
cw constant pressure specific heat of water, kJ/(kg K) Fi air flow resistance in the i-direction
Dm water vapor diffusion coefficient in the bulk moist air, Su source term for the governing equation of air variable u
m2/s by the air–water interaction
g gravitational acceleration, 9.8 m/s2 Sm volumetric water evaporation rate, kg/(m3 s)
ga mass flow velocity of air, kg/(m2 s) Swe volumetric energy reduction rate of water, kJ/(m3 s)
h heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K) Sae volumetric heat increase rate of air, kJ/(m3 s)
hm mass transfer coefficient, m/s T local air temperature, °C
k turbulent kinetic energy per unit mass, J/kg Tw local water temperature, °C
k1 thermal conductivity of moist air, W/(m K) Tw1 entry water temperature of tower, °C
Ka volumetric mass transfer coefficient, kg/(m3 s) Tw2 exit water temperature of tower, °C, based on the 3D
Kh volumetric heat transfer coefficient, W/(m3 K) numerical model
Lef Lewis factor Tw2e exit water temperature of tower, °C, based on the 1D
ma air mass flow rate, kg/s enthalpy difference method
mw mass of a falling water droplet, kg Tw2r real test exit water temperature of tower, °C
Mw molecular weight of moist air, kg/kmol ~
u local air velocity vector, m/s
Nd water droplet number per unit volume uc ambient natural crosswind velocity, m/s
nf experimental correlation index ui the i-direction velocity component of air, m/s
pa ambience pressure, Pa uref reference crosswind velocity, m/s
p local air pressure, Pa uwz vertical falling velocity of water droplet, m/s
Pr Prandtl number of moist air xa humidity ratio of moist air, kg/kg
pv partial pressure of water vapor in air x00w humidity ratio of saturated moist air, kg/kg
P00v saturated vapor pressure, Pa x, y, z coordinates, m
q the local water mass flow rate, kg/(m2 s)
Qw water volume flow rate, m3/h Greek symbols
R the universal gas constant, 8314 J/(kmol K) a profile index of ambient crosswind speed
Red Reynolds number based on the relative velocity be- Cu diffusion coefficient for air variable u
tween water droplet and moist air Dp air pressure drop, Pa
rw latent heat of water evaporation, kJ/kg DTw water temperature drop, °C
Sc Schmidt number dTw2 computed error between Tw2 and Tw2e
Sui internal source term for the governing equation of air e turbulent dissipation rate, m2/s3
variable u h atmospheric dry-bulb temperature, °C
l dynamic viscosity, N s/m2
m kinematic viscosity, m2/s Subscripts
q local air density, kg/m3
0 windless condition
qw water density, kg/m3 a air
s atmospheric wet-bulb temperature, °C d water droplet
u evaluated variable for air flow i coordinates of x, y and z
xv mass fraction of H2O, kg/kg(moist air)
w water
d water droplet diameter, m
dS micro area, m3

intensive study of HNDWCT and lay a good foundation for its ther-
mal performance optimization.
Unlike the recent popularity of HNDWCT in China, the UNDWCT
has been used widely around the world for about 100 years [6], and
then there have been a lot of studies about the cooling perfor-
mances of UNDWCTs, especially about the heat and mass transfer
processes from water to air. In 1923, Walker et al. [7] first
described the heat and mass transfer processes in a wet cooling
tower. In 1925, Merkel [8] rearranged the heat transfer equations
from water to air and obtained the enthalpy difference method.
Using the enthalpy difference method, Merkel presented the
widely used Merkel number, which could reflect the cooling capac-
ities of UNDWCT and its adopted fill. Using rigorous differential
equations of moist air enthalpy and humidity ratio versus water
temperature, Poppe and Rögener [9] presented the Poppe Merkel
number, which could accurately calculate the outflow air state as
well as the tower cooling capacity. But both the above Merkel
numbers [8,9] evaluate the heat transfer coefficients from water
to air, without considering the outflow air temperature [10,11].
For cross-corrugated film fills with separate depths of 0.6 m,
0.9 m and 1.2 m, Kloppers [12] tested their performance character-
istics and obtained the relevant Merkel number correlations based
on the Merkel method [8], the Poppe method [9] and the e-NTU
method [12]. Using the fill Merkel number and its loss coefficient
correlation [11], the total performance of a cooling tower can be
evaluated [13,14]. Combining with the local mass flow rates of
air and water, the heat and mass transfer intensities can also be
locally evaluated so as to reflect their differences across fill. Klop-
pers and Kröger [10] stated that the Merkel method [8] can provide
accurate results for the cooling performance calculation of a wet
cooling tower, if the same method is used when deriving its fill
performance correlations. Also with the advantage of relative con-
cision, the Merkel method was recommended as the standard
approach [13,14] for determining tower cooling performance.
Using the Merkel number given by the Merkel method [8], Reuter
and Kröger [15] numerically studied the cooling performance of a
UNDWCT and indicated that the tower cooling performance can
be improved by maximizing the fill height in the annulus and
152 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164

Tower
air outlet

Tower
shell
Drift
eleminator

Spray
nozzles

Fill

Tower Tower
air inlet Water basin air inlet
High level water
Vertical collecting devices
shaft
(a) Half UNDWCT (b) Half HNDWCT
Fig. 1. Schematic of the UNDWCT and HNDWCT in half-section.

minimizing the core radius [16]. Using the Merkel number given by
the Poppe method [12], Williamson [17] established a two-
dimensional (2D) axial-symmetric numerical model for a
UNDWCT. Comparing with a one-dimensional (1D) model [18],
he studied the non-uniformity extent of heat and mass transfer
intensities across the tower [19]. By optimizing the radial layouts
of water flow rate and fill depth numerically [20], the exit water
temperature was reduced by about 0.04 K.
Using the Merkel number given by the Merkel method [8], Zhao
et al. [21] described the heat and mass transfer processes from
water to air in a UNDWCT and established the corresponding 3D
numerical model so as to study the crosswind impact. By the estab-
lished 3D numerical model [21], the effects of cross wall [22] and
non-uniform layout [23] on UNDWCT were studied under cross-
wind impact. Al-Waked and Behnia [24] also numerically studied
the crosswind impact on UNDWCT. It could be found that porous
walls on the inside or outside of UNDWCT can improve its cooling
performance under crosswind conditions [25].
As stated above, the cooling performance of UNDWCT can be
improved at both windless conditions [16,20] and crosswind con-
ditions [22,23,25]. But, it is first essential and critical to grasp the
cooling characteristics of UNDWCT. To optimize the thermo-
hydraulic design of HNDWCT and to improve its cooling perfor-
mance, it is also very important to study its cooling performance
and characteristics. The accuracy of fill performance correlations
is very critical for the subsequent tower cooling performance
analyses.
So there have been a lot of experimental studies about the per-
formance characteristics of cooling fill. For trickle fills, Grobbelaar
et al. [26] adopted the e-NTU method to calculate the Merkel num-
bers. For PVC fills, Hu et al. [27] tested their performances and
derived the corresponding Merkel numbers based on the Merkel
method [8]. Jia et al. [28] tested the effect of spacing between fill
sheets on the fill performance and the corresponding cooling per-
formance of UNDWCT.
So far, there have been relatively very few studies about the
cooling characteristics of HNDWCTs. Jin et al. [29] qualitatively dis-
cussed the design of HNDWCT. Zhao et al. [30] analyzed the econ-
omy of HNDWCT and pointed out that the HNDWCT has high
energy-saving efficiency. Fortunately, the above studies about fill
cooling performance [27,28] are also suitable for the cooling per-
formance analyses of HNDWCT, if the same analytical method is
used for both fill and HNDWCT [10,17].
To study the cooling characteristics of HNDWCT, a 3D numerical
model for HNDWCT was established based on the fill Merkel num-
ber given by the Merkel method [8]. Based on the same governing
equations and transfer models, the 3D numerical models for two
compared UNDWCTs were also established. Under windless condi-
tions and crosswind conditions, the cooling characteristics of
HNDWCT and UNDWCTs were computed and analyzed. Comparing
with the 3D numerical results of UNDWCTs, the cooling character-
istics of HNDWCT can be effectively clarified so as to lay a good
foundation for the subsequent cooling performance optimization
of HNDWCTs.
2. Geometric models and computation domains of HNDWCT
and UNDWCTs
2.1. The studied HNDWCT
As shown in Fig. 1(b), the studied HNDWCT has an air inlet
height of 9 m, an air outlet height of 130 m and an air outlet diam-
eter of 60.081 m. The fill of this HNDWCT is the S-wave fill, with a
depth of 1.5 m, a total water drenching area of 6000 m2 and a
Sloping plate
U-type channel
for water
Fig. 2. Sketch of several neighboring water collecting units.
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164
bottom height of 13.2 m. Beneath the fill, 88 sets of water collect-
ing units are set up to collect falling water droplets, whose local
structure and dimensions are shown in Fig. 2. As shown in Fig. 2,
the height of U-type channels is 9.5 m, upon which the sloping
plate is inclined at an angle of 45°. All the water collecting units
are arranged with a spacing of 2.0 m. With the overlap of two
neighboring sloping plates, all the water droplets dripping from fill
are collected and drain into the corresponding U-type channel.
2.2. The compared UNDWCTs
The advantages of little air flow resistance, low noise level and
reduced pumping power are very apparent for HNDWCT. But the
cooling characteristics of HNDWCT are still vague. So the compar-
ison here is only to clarify the cooling characteristics of HNDWCT.
Table 1 shows the main dimensions of the studied HNDWCT and
the two compared UNDWCTs. The UNDWCT1 has the same water
drenching area and the same fill depth as those of the studied
HNDWCT. The UNDWCT2 has the same water drenching area as
that of the studied HNDWCT, but a small fill depth of 1.25 m, which
is designed according to the usual design routine of UNDWCT [31].
2.3. The computation domains for the studied HNDWCT and UNDWCT
As shown in Fig. 3, all falling water droplets collect in the high
level water collecting units and drain into the water collecting gut-
ter below. The water collecting gutter lies across the bottom of
HNDWCT and separates the HNDWCT into two symmetrical
halves. So the HNDWCT can be studied in the computation domain
as shown in Fig .4, where the symmetrical plane is the longitudinal
section of HNDWCT along the water collecting gutter. Under cross-
wind conditions, the ambient crosswind direction was set along
the symmetrical plane of the computation domain. That is, the
ambient crosswind is parallel to the water collecting gutter when
the computation domain symmetrical plane is along the water col-
lecting gutter.
In Fig. 3, the main water distribution trough is perpendicular to
the water collecting gutter, and can also separate the HNDWCT
into two symmetrical halves. Under crosswind conditions, the rel-
ative orientation of the crosswind with the water collecting gutter
has an important impact on the cooling performance of HNDWCT.
Then the cooling performance of HNDWCT was also studied with
the longitudinal section of HNDWCT along the main water distri-
bution trough as the symmetrical plane of computation domain,
especially under crosswind conditions. The structure of UNDWCT
is nearly axial-symmetrical. So the computation domain for
UNDWCT [21] can also be established as Fig. 4, where the
HNDWCT is substituted by UNDWCT.
Under crosswind conditions, the boundaries for air flow around
NDWCT in the computation domain are shown in Fig. 4. The com-
putation domain shown in Fig. 4 is very larger than the studied
NDWCTs, with its height more than 6 times the tower height and
its radius more than 11 times the tower maximum radius. So under
crosswind conditions, the impact of tower body on the air flow
fields at both windward and top boundaries of the computation
Table 1
The main dimensions of the studied HNDWCT and the two compared UNDWCTs.
Items HNDWCT UNDWCT1 UNDWCT2
Water drenching area (m2) 6000 6000 6000
Cooling fill height (m2) 1.5 1.5 1.25
Tower height (m) 130 120.3 120.3
Tower top inner diameter (m) 60.081 58.238 58.238
Air inlet height (m) 9 7.828 7.828
Tower throat height (m) 97.5 90.225 90.225
Tower throat inner diameter (m) 56 54.178 54.178
153
domain is very small and can be neglected. Both the windward side
and top boundaries of the computation domain can be set as air
velocity inlets, whereas the leeward boundary of computation
domain can be set as air pressure outlet.
3. Numerical model
As stated above, both UNDWCT and HNDWCT have spray zones,
fill zones and rain zones. Both the sensible heat transfer and latent
heat transfer occur from water droplets to air in spray zones and
rain zones. Both the sensible heat transfer and latent heat transfer
occur from water film to air in fill zones. Because of the structural
similarity between UNDWCT and HNDWCT, both the flows of air
and water in HNDWCT and UNDWCT can be described by the same
governing equations.
3.1. Governing equations for air flow and water flow
In UNDWCT, water is sprayed downward from nozzles and is
collected by the water basin at the bottom. Similarly, in HNDWCT,
water is sprayed downward from nozzles but is collected by the
HWCDs. The water flow in both UNDWCT and HNDWCT are from
up to down, so the downward flow of circulating water can be
taken as nearly vertical. In addition, the heat and mass transfer
processes from water to air can be taken as a steady-state when
the tower is running with constant parameters. The air flow in
the computation domain is assumed to be incompressible because
of the small variation of air pressure around tower, which varies
only about 1–2% of the referenced ambient pressure.
3.1.1. Governing equations for air flow
Based on the above assumptions, the air flow around cooling
tower can be described by the following steady state Reynolds
Averaged Navier–Stokes equations when the tower is running with
constant parameters.
r  ðq~
uu  C/ ruÞ ¼ Sui þ Su ð1Þ
where the dependent variables u are 1 for the continuity governing
equation, the air velocity components ux, uy and uz for the momen-
tum governing equations, the air temperature T for the energy gov-
erning equation, and the mass fraction of H2O for the species
governing equation. For a dependent variable u, both Cu and Sui
are its corresponding diffusion coefficient and internal source term
respectively. For the governing equations of air momentum, energy
and species, the source term Su stands for the impact of water phase
on gas phase. To simplify the solution of Eq. (1), the involved eval-
uated species include the air species and H2O species, which are
idea gases.
As clarified by Klimanek [32], the Rayleigh number calculated
based on tower size and typical operating parameters is about
1014, which is far larger than the turbulence transition Rayleigh
number of about 108–1010. Then the classical standard k–e turbu-
lence model can be used to close the above Reynolds Averaged
Navier–Stokes equations. The variation of air static pressure
around and in tower is less than 2000 Pa, which is far less than
the reference ambient meteorological pressure about 105 Pa, so
the air flow around tower can be assumed to be incompressible
air flows. The air density variation in tower is mainly caused by
air temperature and humidity ratio as Eq. (2).
 
R
q ¼ pa T ð2Þ
Mw
where pa is the reference ambient pressure, Mw is the local molec-
ular weight of moist air, R is the universal gas constant, and T is the
local air temperature.
154 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164

Water distribution trough

High level water

collecting units
Water collecting gutter

Fig. 3. Local structure of HWCDs.

The top air velocity inlet

The The
windward leeward
air air
velocity pressure
inlet The symmetry plane of computation domain outlet

Crosswind Tower body

High level water

collecting devices
Ground
for HNDWCT

Fig. 4. Computation domain and its air flow boundaries for a cooling tower under crosswind conditions.

For falling water droplets with diameters of about 5 mm [33],

Fig. 5. Finite control volume for water flowing downward.
3.1.2. Governing equations for water flow
The circulating water flows from up to down in a finite volume
as shown in Fig. 5, with the variations of water mass flow rate q
and its corresponding energy as Eqs. (3) and (4).
dq
¼ Sm
dðzÞ
d and latent heat transfer from water droplets to air [15–25]. While
ðcw T w qÞ ¼ Swe
dðzÞ
where Sm is the volumetric water evaporation rate, cw the constant
pressure specific heat of water, Tw the local water temperature, and
Swe the volumetric energy reduction rate of water.
the gravitational acceleration is much larger than the other two
horizontal accelerations. So the downward flow of water droplets
can be assumed to be vertical and represented as follows:
duwz ðq  qÞg fz
¼ w  ð5Þ
dðzÞ qw uwz mw uwz
where uwz is the vertical falling velocity of a water droplet, g the
gravitational acceleration, mw the water droplet mass, and
f z ¼ C d Red p8dl uwz the water droplet falling resistance caused by air
flow.
3.2. Air–water interaction mathematical model
In UNDWCT and HNDWCT, the mutual interaction between air
and water is very complex for the complex water flow form. In
ð3Þ both spray zone and rain zone, the classical transfer correlations
[34–36] are usually used to compute the sensible heat transfer
ð4Þ in fill zone, experimental correlations [14,27,37] for fill character-
istics are usually used [15–23] to compute the heat and mass
transfer from water film to air. By these transfer correlations, the
heat and mass transfer process in wet cooling tower is clearly pre-
sented as follows.
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164 155

3.2.1. Air–water interaction in spray zone and rain zone
According to the basic principles of discrete phase model [34],
the heat transfer coefficient h and mass transfer coefficient hm from
water droplet surface to air can be calculated by the classical Nus-
selt number correlation and Sherwood number correlation [35,36]
as Eqs. (6) and (7).
hd 1=2
Nu ¼ ¼ 2:0 þ 0:6Red Pr1=3
k1
hm d
Sh ¼ ¼ 2:0 þ 0:6Red1=2 Sc1=3
Dm
where the Reynolds number Red ¼ qdulwa is based on the droplet
diameter d and the relative velocity uwa of water droplet to air,
the Prandtl number Pr ¼ ma based on the kinematic viscosity m and
the heat dissipation rate a of air, the Schmidt number Sc ¼ Dmm based
on the kinematic viscosity m and the water vapor diffusion coeffi-
cient Dm in air, and k1 the air thermal conductivity.There is a wide
distribution of droplet sizes in tower. To study the heat and mass
transfer from water droplet to air flexibly, the water droplet equiv-
alent diameters are given [17–25]. Here, the water droplet equiva-
lent diameter d in spray zone is taken as 3 mm, and that in rain zone
is taken as 5 mm [38]. For the finite volume shown in Fig. 5, the
water droplets in it can be assumed to have the same equivalent
diameter and the same dropping velocity uwz, and then the water
droplet number per unit volume is Nd ¼ u 6qpd3 . The water droplet
wz
2 where the Lewis factor Lef is determined according to the
surface area corresponding to equivalent diameter Ad ¼ pd . Com-
bining the heat transfer coefficient h and mass transfer coefficient
hm evaluated by Eqs. (6) and (7), the corresponding volumetric heat
transfer coefficient Kh and volumetric mass transfer coefficient Ka
can be computed as follows [38,39].
K h ¼ N d Ad h
K a ¼ N d Ad h m
So the volumetric evaporation rate Sm of water, the volumetric
energy reduction rate Swe of water and the volumetric heat increas-
ing rate Sae of air can be computed as follows [38].
 
p00v p
Sm ¼ K a  v MW
RT W RT
3.2.2. Air–water interaction in fill
The fill is used to extend the air–water interface, in which the
water flow is very complex. So the performance characteristics of
fill are usually obtained by experiments [11–14]. As the recom-
mended standard approach [13,14], the Merkel method [8] is usu-
ally used to obtain the fill Merkel number and volumetric mass
transfer coefficient Ka. Based on the humidity ratio difference
[38], the volumetric water evaporation rate Sm in fill zone can be
ð6Þ
computed according to Eq. (14).
Sm ¼ K a  ðx00w  xa Þ ð14Þ
ð7Þ 0:622p00v
where x00w ¼ pP 00v
is the humidity ratio of saturated moist air at
water temperature Tw, and xa ¼ 1xxv v the humidity ratio of moist
air in the bulk gas phase.
The fill volumetric mass transfer coefficient Ka derived from the
Merkel method is evaluated according to Eq. (15).
K a ¼ Bg m
a q
n
ð15Þ
where B, m and n are coefficients by fitting experimental data, and
ga the mass flow velocity of air. For the S-wave fill with a depth of
1.5 m, the fitted parameters of B, m and n are 1.48, 0.69 and 0.30
respectively. For the S-wave fill with a depth of 1.25 m, the param-
eters B, m and n are 1.8639, 0.60 and 0.34 respectively.
By the analogy between heat and mass transfer, the fill volu-
metric heat transfer coefficient Kh is computed as Eq. (16).
K h ¼ K a  Lef ð16Þ
Bošnjaković formula [37,40].
Based on the evaluated fill volumetric mass transfer coefficient
Ka, the fill volumetric water evaporation rate Sm and the volumetric
heat transfer coefficient Kh, the volumetric energy reduction rate
Swe of water and the volumetric heat increasing rate Sae of air in fill
ð8Þ can be computed according to Eqs. (11) and (12). The pressure drop
Dp of air through fill, spray facilities, and drift eliminator was
tested and correlated as follows [14]:
ð9Þ
Dp ¼ qAf unz f ð17Þ
where both Af and nf were fitted against the experimental data
referring to the fitting correlations shown in Table 2, uz the perpen-
dicular velocity of upflowing air through fill.
ð10Þ
3.3. Boundary conditions for air and water

Swe ¼ K h ðT w  TÞ þ Sm r w ð11Þ 3.3.1. Boundary conditions for air

As shown in Fig. 4, the boundaries for air flow around tower are
Sae ¼ K h ðT w  TÞ þ Sm cpv ðT w  TÞ ð12Þ presented. At the windward air velocity inlet and the top air
velocity inlet for computation domain, both the temperature
where p00v is the saturated vapor pressure corresponding to the water and humidity ratio of inflowing air were set as the ambient
droplet temperature Tw, pv the local water vapor partial pressure in meteorological parameters, whereas the inflowing air velocity
the bulk gas phase, R the universal gas constant, T the local air tem- was set as follows [41]:
perature, Mw the molecular weight of water vapor, rw the latent  z a
heat of water evaporation, and cpv the constant pressure specific ux ¼ uref ð18Þ
10
heat of water vapor.
where uref is the reference crosswind velocity at the reference
The air flow resistances in x, y and z directions caused by falling
height of 10 m, ux the velocity component at x-direction i.e. the
water droplets in spray and rain zones are computed according to
Eq. (13) and appear as source term in the gas phase momentum
equations. Table 2
Correlations for Af and nf of the adopted S-wave fill in the studied HNDWCT and
6q UNDWCTs.
Fi ¼  fi ð13Þ
qw pjuwz jd3p Correlations Af ¼ Ax q2 þ Ay q þ Az nf ¼ nx q2 þ ny q þ nz

Ax Ay Az nx ny nz
where i is the coordinates x, y and z, qw the water density, uwz the
pdl 1.25 m S-wave 0.0012 0.0456 1.0774 0.0018 0.0375 2.0656
vertical falling velocity of water droplet, and f i ¼ CdRed 8 ðui  uwi Þ
1.5 m S-wave 0.0021 0.024 0.83 0.0019 0.0214 2.0
the interactive force between water droplet and moist air.
156 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164
crosswind direction, z the local height at the boundary and a the
ambient wind speed profile index.
At the leeward air pressure outlet, the air static pressure was set
as the atmosphere pressure. For air backflow at the leeward
boundary of computation domain, the backflow direction was
specified as that in the cells neighboring to the leeward boundary.
The parameters of air backflow, such as temperature and humidity
ratio, were set as the ambient meteorological parameters. At the
symmetry plane of computation domain, all the normal gradients
of evaluated air variables were set as zero. In addition, all the solid
walls such as the ground, tower body and water collecting units’
walls were set as adiabatic and no slip. The standard wall function
was used to bridge the viscosity affected region between the wall
and the fully turbulent region.
Under windless conditions, both the foregoing windward air
velocity inlet and the leeward air pressure outlet were set as the
air pressure inlet, whereas the top air velocity inlet was set as
the air pressure outlet. At the specified air pressure inlets, the air
static pressure, temperature and humidity ratio were all set as
the ambient meteorological parameters, and the air inflow direc-
tion was set as being normal to the corresponding air pressure inlet
boundary. At the far field boundaries of computation domain, such
as air pressure inlets, air pressure outlets and air velocity inlets, the
turbulence intensity and viscosity ratio are up to the turbulence
level of ambient air flow. Under steady atmospheric boundary
layer [41], the turbulence level of ambient air flow is very low at
the far field boundaries of computation domain, so the turbulence
intensity and viscosity ratio there could be set as 1% and 1
respectively.
3.3.2. Boundary conditions for water
As shown in Fig. 1, hot water was injected into HNDWCT or
UNDWCT from spray nozzles. Under steady work conditions, the
mass flow rate and temperature of hot water sprayed from nozzles
were the initial parameters of water into tower. For the studied
work condition, the water droplets were sprayed down at an initial
velocity of 3.5 m/s and with equivalent diameter of 3 mm [38] in
spray zone, and ceased at the top of fill, where water droplets
became water film. Below fill, the water droplets dripped at an ini-
tial velocity of 0.4 m/s and with equivalent diameter of 5 mm [38],
and were then trapped by HWCDs in HNDWCT or water basin in
UNDWCT.
3.4. Grid system and computation method
3.4.1. Grid system
For the studied HNDWCT listed in Table 1, the computation
domain shown in Fig. 4 was meshed with about 1.19 million cells.
In the computation domain, small mesh sizes were used to mesh
the heat and mass transfer zones and those zones near water col-
lecting units. Near tower wall, the boundary layers were set so as
to capture the air flow characteristics there. From tower to ambi-
ence, the mesh sizes gradually increased so as to enable the
meshed domain to present accurate results with a suitable cell
number.
As shown in Fig. 6, the computation domain was separated into
several parts, among which different mesh schemes were used. To
couple each part, grid interfaces were also used between any adja-
cent two parts. In the zones around HWCDs, the grid was meshed
very small so as to capture the characteristics of air flow and
enable the solution of heat and mass transfer between water and
air more accurately. Referring to the meshing schemes of
HNDWCT, the computation domain for UNDWCT was also sepa-
rated into several parts, which were meshed respectively and cou-
pled by grid interfaces. For the studied UNDWCT1 and UNDWCT2,
both the corresponding computation domains were meshed with
about 0.97 million cells.
3.4.2. Computation method
Based on the control-volume discretization method [42], the
governing equations for air and water were discretized in terms
of the second-order upwind scheme and the body force weighted
scheme. The second-order upwind scheme was used to discretize
the governing equations for air and water, except for the continuity
governing equation for air which was discretized by the body force
weighted scheme [34]. In addition, the semi-implicit method for
pressure-linked equations was used to couple the iteration solu-
tion of air pressure and air velocity. To help the stable convergence
of the iteration solution, under-relaxation factors were set for the
iteration solution of evaluated variables. To judge the convergence
of computation iterations, the following two criteria were set: (1)
all the scaled residuals should be less than 103, except for the
scaled residual of energy equation which should be less than
106; (2) the variation of the tower exit water temperature Tw2
should be less than 0.01 °C during at least 50 consecutive iteration
steps.
3.5. Grid independence analyses
To check the grid independence of numerical results, especially
for the HNDWCT, the computation domain for HNDWCT was also
meshed by the other two grid systems, which had 0.81 million cells
and 2.06 million cells respectively. Under given working condi-
tions, the exit water temperature Tw2 of tower was a performance
parameter affected by tower resistance characteristics and heat
transfer characteristics. So the exit water temperature Tw2 was
selected as an index to judge the grid independence of numerical
results. The design work conditions for the studied HNDWCT are
listed in Table 3, among which the rated design work condition
C1 was chosen to analyze the grid independence of numerical
results.
Based on the meshed grid systems with 0.81 million cells, 1.19
million cells and 2.06 million cells, the computed exit water tem-
peratures Tw2 of HNDWCT were 25.929 °C, 25.902 °C and
25.899 °C respectively. Comparing with the two grid systems with
0.81 million cells and 2.06 million cells, the grid system with 1.19
million cells computed the Tw2 with differences about 0.027 °C and
0.003 °C. So the grid system with 1.19 million cells could present
numerical results with good grid independence. Then the following
analyses for HNDWCT were computed by the grid system with
1.19 million cells. According to the validated 3D numerical model
for the UNDWCT with a water drenching area about 12,000 m2
[23], the grid system with 0.97 million cells could give good grid-
independent numerical results. So for the compared UNDWCTs
with a small water drenching area of 6000 m2, the grid system with
0.97 million cells could mesh the computation domain finer and
then give better grid-independent numerical results.
3.6. Validation
For the studied HNDWCT, the exit water temperatures Tw2 were
computed based on the established 3D numerical model and listed
in Table 3. According to the widely used 1D enthalpy difference
method [8,31,38], the exit water temperatures Tw2e were calcu-
lated and also listed in Table 3. Comparing both Tw2 and Tw2e, it
can be found that the computed errors dTw2 were very small with
the maximum about 0.16 °C and the minimum only about 0.001 °C.
The relative errors of dTw2 to (Tw1–Tw2e) are also very small with
the maximum about 1.726% and the minimum about 0.009%. So
comparing with the widely used 1D enthalpy difference method,
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164 157

Tower inner zone Tower wall

High level water

collecting unit
Interfaces

Fig. 6. Local mesh around high level water collecting units in the longitudinal section of HNDWCT.

Table 3
Design work conditions for the studied HNDWCT and corresponding Tw2 by the 1D enthalpy difference method [8] and the established 3D numerical model.

Design working conditions C1 C2 C3 C4

Atmospheric pressure pa (kPa) 100.98 100.44 101.8 101.8
Atmospheric dry-bulb temperature h (°C) 22.2 30.25 27.88 13.8
Atmospheric wet-bulb temperature s (°C) 19.86 27 25.53 10.94
Water volume flow rate Qw (m3/h) 48,257 48,257 48,257 40,585
Entry water temperature Tw1 (°C) 35 40.7 39.2 30.3
Tw2e (°C) based on the 1D enthalpy difference method 25.83 31.43 30.11 18.84
Tw2 (°C) based on the 3D numerical model 25.902 31.590 30.255 18.841
Computed error dTw2 = Tw2–Tw2e (°C) 0.072 0.16 0.145 0.001
Relative error of dTw2 to (Tw1–Tw2e) (%) 0.785 1.726 1.595 0.009

it was found that the established 3D numerical model for HNDWCT
is accurate and credible.
The 3D numerical model for UNDWCT was validated by a real
running UNDWCT with a water drenching area of 12,000 m2 [23].
Table 4 lists the real test exit water temperatures Tw2r, the corre-
sponding computation values Tw2, and the computed errors
dTw2 = Tw2–Tw2r of the 12,000 m2 cooling tower. From Table 4, it
can be found that the absolute computed errors dTw2 are very small
with the maximum about 0.25 °C and the minimum about 0.01 °C,
which are 2.02% and 0.102% of the corresponding real test water
temperature drops DTw = Tw1–Tw2r. So the established 3D numeri-
cal model for UNDWCT can accurately and credibly compute the
cooling performance of UNDWCT.
4. Results and discussion
Based on the rated design work condition C1 of the studied
HNDWCT shown in Table 3, the cooling characteristics of HNDWCT
and its aerodynamic field were analyzed as follows. Also, the cool-
ing characteristics of UNDWCTs listed in Table 1 were presented at
the C1 design work condition of the HNDWCT. When comparing
with HNDWCT, the UNDWCT1 with a fill depth of 1.5 m was
mainly discussed for the same fill depth as the HNDWCT. The cool-
ing performance of UNDWCT2 with a fill depth of 1.25 m was also
compared as a supplementary.
4.1. Comparison between HNDWCT and UNDWCTs under windless
conditions
4.1.1. Comparison about tower total performances
According to the routine design [31] of NDWCTs, the design
work conditions usually do not consider the impact of ambient
crosswind. For the C1 work condition listed in Table 3, the numer-
ical results about the cooling performances of HNDWCT and
UNDWCTs are listed in Table 5. As shown in Table 5, with HWCDs
collecting falling water droplets just below fill, the average air

Table 4
Model validation through field test data of a 12,000 m2 cooling tower [23].

Work conditions pa h s Qw Tw1 Tw2r Tw2 dTw2

kPa °C °C m3 h1 °C °C °C °C
C1 100.2 29.91 25.26 77,410 42.56 30.17 30.42 0.25
C2 100.2 28.48 25.4 77,410 42.43 30.18 30.14 0.04
C3 100.2 29.18 25.47 77,410 42.04 30.43 30.35 0.08
C4 100.2 29.33 25.65 77,410 42.16 30.52 30.49 0.03
C5 100.1 30.13 25.65 77,410 42.28 30.5 30.69 0.19
C6 100.0 29.45 25.64 112,294 41.91 32.4 32.63 0.23
C7 100.0 28.24 25.37 112,294 41.96 32.32 32.21 0.11
C8 100.0 27.96 24.98 112,294 41.96 31.99 31.96 0.03
C9 100.0 27.68 24.97 112,294 41.71 31.87 31.88 0.01
158 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164
Table 5
The cooling performance comparison between the HNDWCT and UNDWCTs under windless condition.
Items
3
Water volume flow rate Qw (m /h)
Entry water temperature Tw1 (°C)
Average air pressure drop below fill DP (Pa)
Air mass flow rate ma0 (kg/s)
Mass flow rate ratio of air to water k
Exit water temperature Tw2 (°C)
Water temperature drop DTw0 (°C)
Cooling load percentage of spray zone (%)
Cooling load percentage of fill zone (%)
Cooling load percentage of rain zone (%)
pressure drop below fill is only 16.20 Pa in the HNDWCT, which is
far less than those below fill in the UNDWCT1 and UNDWCT2. So
both the air mass flow rate and the mass flow rate ratio of air to
water in the HNDWCT are greater than those in the UNDWCTs,
which will enhance the heat and mass transfer intensity of fill zone
in the HNDWCT.
From Table 5, it can be found that the water temperature drop
DTw0 in the HNDWCT is 9.098 °C, of which 10.32%, 85.92% and
3.76% occur in the spray zone, fill zone and rain zone respectively.
Compared with UNDWCTs, it can be found that the substantial
decrease of cooling load in the rain zone is compensated by the
intensification of heat and mass transfer in the fill zone and spray
zone. In HNDWCT, the HWCDs reduce the air flow resistance below
fill and increase the air mass flow rate. So the heat and mass trans-
fer in fill zone and spray zone is intensified.
Ambient air is drawn into tower by tower draft, which increases
with tower height, so the effect of tower height is very significant.
When the tower height varies from 120.3 m to 130 m, correspond-
ing to the C1 design work condition, the exit water temperatures
Tw2 for the HNDWCT, UNDWCT1 and UNDWCT2 decrease from
26.095 °C to 25.902 °C, from 26.217 °C to 26.034 °C and from
27.023 °C to 26.847 °C respectively. The decreases of Tw2 for
HNDWCT, UNDWCT1 and UNDWCT2 are 0.193 °C, 0.183 °C and
0.176 °C respectively. So the effect of tower height on the cooling
Low velocity zone
Air
inlet
(a) The representative longitudinal section of the
HNDWCT at y=4m
Low velocity zone
Air
inlet
(b) The representative longitudinal section of the
UNDWCT1 at y=0m
Fig. 7. Air velocity contours (m/s) around the HNDWCT and UNDWCT1 under
windless condition.
HNDWCT UNDWCT1 UNDWCT2
48,257 48,257 48,257
35 35 35
16.20 32.70 29.62
11750.8 9237.91 8417.86
0.883 0.694 0.632
25.902 26.217 27.023
9.098 8.783 7.977
10.32 5.02 6.15
85.92 71.77 66.16
3.76 23.21 27.69
performance of the HNDWCT is relatively larger than both the
UNDWCT1 and UNDWCT2 because of the lower air flow resistance
of HNDWCT.
4.1.2. Comparison about the aerodynamic fields around tower heat
and mass transfer zone
To analyze the effect of HWCDs on the air flow through the
HNDWCT, both the air velocity contours around the HNDWCT
and UNDWCT1 are presented in Fig. 7, where Fig. 7(a) takes the
longitudinal section at y = 4 m as the representative for the
HNDWCT while Fig. 7(b) takes the longitudinal section at y = 0 m
as the representative for the UNDWCT1. It can be found that the
air velocity contours around the HNDWCT and UNDWCT1 are
nearly symmetrical with the maximum velocity occurring at the
tower air inlet. Unlike the UNDWCT1 with falling water droplets
blocking the horizontal air flow in the rain zone, the horizontal
air flow beneath HWCDs decelerates only for the air flowing
upward through tower in HNDWCT. So at most places beneath
HWCDs in the HNDWCT, the air velocities are correspondingly lar-
ger than those in UNDWCT1, and then the air velocities upward
through the HNDWCT are also larger than those upward through
the UNDWCT1.
As shown in Fig. 7(a), there are low velocity zones upon HWCDs
near the inner wall of HNDWCT. Correspondingly, there are also
low velocity zones upon tower air inlet near the inner wall of
UNDWCT1. Fig. 8 shows the air vectors around the HWCDs near
tower inner wall. As can be seen from Fig. 8, two large longitudinal
vortexes are induced outside the first high level water collecting
unit for the large space from air inlet to fill bottom in HNDWCT.
The induced large longitudinal vortexes debase the velocity of air
flowing upward through the corresponding fill in HNDWCT and
weaken the heat and mass transfer there. In addition, the inner
high level water collecting units play a role in guiding air flowing
upward through tower fill.
4.1.3. Comparison of air–water parameter distributions
As the cooling source for the heat and mass transfer process
inside NDWCT, the air parameter distributions inside tower can
reflect the cooling characteristics of NDWCT to some extent.
Fig. 9 shows the contours of air temperature around the HNDWCT
and UNDWCT1 under windless condition. Fig. 10 shows the con-
tours of H2O mass fraction around the HNDWCT and UNDWCT1
under windless condition. As analyzed above, the HWCDs collect
all the water droplets falling from fill and then shorten the rain
zone in HNDWCT. Below HWCDs, there are not any water droplets
and not any heat and mass transfer. So both the temperature and
H2O mass fraction of air flowing into the HWCDs are the ambient
meteorological parameters as shown in Figs. 9(a) and 10(a).
As listed in Table 5, the HWCDs reduce the air flow resistance
and then increase the air mass flow rate upward through the
HNDWCT. The heat and mass transfer in the spray zone and fill
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164 159

Fill bottom

Air inlet

The inner high level

water collecting units

The first high level

water collecting unit

Fig. 8. Air velocity (m/s) vectors around the HWCDs near tower inner wall.

Water distribution
trough

(a) The representative longitudinal section of the HNDWCT at y=4m

Vertical shaft

(b) The representative longitudinal section of the

UNDWCT1 at y=0m
Fig. 9. The contours of air temperatures around the HNDWCT and UNDWCT1 under windless condition.

zone was intensified. So the water temperature flowing into the
small rain zone is very low, which debases the heat and mass
transfer potentials there. According to Table 5, the water tempera-
ture drop in the small rain zone of HNDWCT is only 0.342 °C, and
then the variations of air temperature and H2O mass fraction below
the fill in HNDWCT are also very small as shown in Figs. 9
(a) and 10(a).
In UNDWCT1, the rain zone is full of falling water droplets,
which transfers heat and mass to the inflowing air. As shown in
Figs. 9(b) and 10(b), both the air temperature and H2O mass frac-
tion increase along the negative radius direction in the rain zone.
So the cooling potential of air decreases gradually along the nega-
tive radius direction in the rain zone. Both the air temperature and
H2O mass fraction below the fill in UNDWCT1 are higher than
those below the fill in HNDWCT. That is, the cooling potential of
air in the fill of HNDWCT is higher than that of air in the fill of
UNDWCT1. Combining with the large increase of air mass flow rate
upward through the HNDWCT, the heat and mass transfer inten-
sity in the fill of HNDWCT is stronger than that in the fill of
UNDWCT1. Correspondingly, the cooling load percentage of the fill
zone in HNDWCT is 85.92% which is higher than that of 71.77% in
UNDWCT1.
As shown in Fig. 8, there are two large longitudinal vortexes
outside the first high level water collecting unit. Then the upward
air velocity through the fill corresponding to the two large vortexes
is very low. Both low air velocity and large vortexes cause more
heat and mass transfer to per unit mass air. So unlike the
UNDWCT1 with maximum air temperature and maximum H2O
mass fraction in its core, both the maximum air temperature and
maximum H2O mass fraction in HNDWCT are upon the outside
part of fill and near tower wall.
The distributions of air velocity, air temperature and H2O
mass fraction inside NDWCTs also impact the cooling characteris-
tics of water inside tower. Fig. 11 shows the radius variation of
160 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164

Water distribution
trough

(a) The representative longitudinal section of the HNDWCT at y=4m

Vertical shaft

(b) The representative longitudinal section of the

UNDWCT1 at y=0m
Fig. 10. The contours of H2O mass fraction around the HNDWCT and UNDWCT1 under windless condition.

presented by this paper were based on the established 3D numer-

ical models with vertical shafts in the innermost part.
The above analyses and comparisons about the dimensionless
water temperature variations along the dimensionless radius show
that the numerical results are accurate and the established 3D
numerical models are credible. Fig. 11 also shows the radius vari-
ations of the dimensionless temperature of water flowing out of
the fill in HNDWCT. It can be seen that except for the outer part,
the dimensionless water temperatures are mostly uniform along
the radius in the HNDWCT, because the temperature and H2O mass
fraction of air flowing into fill are nearly the ambient meteorolog-
ical parameters. In the outer part of HNDWCT near tower wall, the
dimensionless water temperatures sharply increase because of
large longitudinal vortexes existing around the first high level
water collecting unit, where the cooling performance is the worst.

Fig. 11. The radius variation of the dimensionless temperature of water flowing out
of fill. 4.2. Comparison of crosswind impacts on HNDWCT and UNDWCTs

4.2.1. Comparison about crosswind influence tendencies

dimensionless temperature of water flowing out of fill. Twmax and
Twmin are the maximum temperature and the minimum tempera-
ture of water flowing out of fill along the radius respectively.
rmax is the maximum radius of fill. So the variation of the
dimensionless water temperature (Tw–Twmin)/(Twmax–Twmin) along
the dimensionless radius r/rmax can reflect the relative variation
of water temperature flowing out of fill along the radius.
For UNDWCTs, it can be seen that both this study and
Williamson et al. [19] present similar variation trends for the dimen-
sionless water temperature variations along the dimensionless
radius. Except for the outer parts, the dimensionless water temper-
atures mostly increase along the inverse radial direction, because
of the gradually decreasing air cooling potential along the negative
radius direction of rain zone as stated above. At the outer parts, the
dimensionless water temperatures sharply increase mainly
because of the low velocity zones upon tower air inlet near the
inner wall of UNDWCTs, which are caused by the air inflow deflec-
tion as shown in Fig. 7(b). Also, in the innermost parts of UNDWCT,
there is a little difference between the dimensionless water tem-
perature variations presented by this study and by Williamson
et al. [19]. This is mainly because the numerical results presented
by Williamson et al. [19] were based on an axisymmetric 2D model
with a blockage in the innermost part, while numerical results
As stated by Hooman [43] and Lu et al. [44], the convective heat
transfer caused by natural draft is impacted by the crosswind iner-
tial force. Al-Waked [25] and Zhao et al. [21–23] clarified the neg-
ative impact of crosswind on UNDWCT, which reduces the air mass
flow rate upward through tower and debases the cooling perfor-
mance of UNDWCT. Similarly, the impact of ambient crosswind
on the cooling performance of HNDWCT is also negative. Compar-
ing the crosswind impact on UNDWCTs, the cooling characteristics
of HNDWCT under crosswind conditions were clarified. Both the
dimensionless air mass flow rate ma/ma0 and the dimensionless
water temperature drop DTw/DTw0 were used to analyze the cross-
wind effect on the cooling characteristics of NDWCTs. ma is the air
mass flow rate upward through tower under crosswind conditions,
while ma0 is the air mass flow rate upward through tower at wind-
less condition. DTw is the water temperature drop in tower under
crosswind conditions, while DTw0 is the water temperature drop in
tower under windless condition.
Fig. 12 shows the crosswind impacts on HNDWCTs and
UNDWCTs, where the parameter variation curves of HNDWCTs
are presented in terms of HNDWCT1 and HNDWCT2. For the
HNDWCT1, the ambient crosswind is parallel to the water collect-
ing gutter. For the HNDWCT2, the ambient crosswind is perpendic-
ular to the water collecting gutter as shown in Fig. 13. The
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164 161

(a) Variation of air mass flow rates relative (b) Variation of water temperature drops relative
to those under windless conditions to those under windless conditions
Fig. 12. Comparison of crosswind impacts on the HNDWCTs and UDWCTs.

Crosswind

Water collecting gutter

Fig. 13. The perpendicular orientation of ambient crosswind to the water collecting gutter (HNDWCT2).

Table 6
The exit water temperatures Tw2 (°C) of HNDWCTs and UNDWCTs under crosswind impacts.

uref (m/s) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
HNDWCT1 25.902 25.997 26.540 27.294 28.122 28.987 29.637 30.129 30.609 30.772 30.917
HNDWCT2 25.902 26.099 26.886 27.702 28.199 28.435 28.456 27.33 27.367 27.367 27.292
UNDWCT1 26.211 26.453 26.838 27.29 27.879 28.355 28.61 28.533 28.376 28.104 27.531
UNDWCT2 27.019 27.337 27.4 27.802 28.403 28.792 28.899 28.823 28.602 28.24 27.788
HNDWCT1 (cross wall) 25.902 26.086 26.651 27.250 27.698 27.862 27.855 27.122 27.071 27.081 27.147

crosswind impacts on HNDWCTs and UNDWCTs are also listed in
Table 6. In addition, the exit water temperatures of the HNDWCT1
with cross wall are also listed in Table 6.
As shown in Fig. 12, the cooling performances of HNDWCTs and
UNDWCTs are weakened by crosswind. It can be found that both
the ma/ma0 and DTw/DTw0 of HNDWCTs and UNDWCTs gradually
decrease with similar tendencies when the reference crosswind
velocity uref is less than 4 m/s. That is, at low velocity crosswind
conditions, both the variation tendencies of tower air mass flow
rates and water temperature drops with uref are not sensitive to
tower type and its detailed structure. The main reason for tower
cooling performance deterioration at low velocity crosswind is
the damage of crosswind on tower aerodynamic field, which is
symmetrical under windless condition.
But when the reference crosswind velocity uref is larger than
4 m/s, the influence tendencies of ambient crosswind on
HNDWCTs and UNDWCTs are different from each other. That is,
when uref is larger than 4 m/s, the crosswind influence tendencies
on tower are sensitive to the tower types, structures and its orien-
tations. For the HNDWCT1, corresponding to the parallel orienta-
tion of crosswind to the water collecting gutter, both the air
mass flow rate ma and water temperature drop DTw substantially
decrease under high velocity crosswind conditions. Whereas
for UNDWCTs, both the air mass flow rates and water tempera-
ture drops begin to increase under high velocity crosswind
conditions.
The reason why a high velocity crosswind seriously deteriorates
the cooling performance of HNDWCT1 is that there is nearly no air
flow resistance below HWCDs in the HNDWCT1 corresponding to
the parallel orientation of crosswind to the water collecting gutter.
Under windless conditions, the small air flow resistance below
HWCDs increases the air mass flow rate ma upward through the
HNDWCT1. But under high velocity crosswind conditions, the
small air flow resistance below HWCDs also facilitates the cross
ventilation through HNDWCT1, which sharply reduces the air mass
flow rate ma upward through HNDWCT1. So when the crosswind is
162 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164
(a) Air mass flow rate ma
Fig. 14. Comparison of crosswind impacts on HNDWCTs.
parallel to the water collecting gutter, the cooling performance of
HNDWCT substantially deteriorates under high velocity crosswind
conditions.
In UNDWCTs, there are large rain zones ranging from the fill
bottom to the water basin, in which falling water droplets produce
large resistances to the air flow upward through tower or crossing
through tower. So the blocking of tower cross ventilation reduces
the crosswind negative impact on UNDWCTs. Under high velocity
crosswind conditions, the crosswind impacts on UNDWCTs are cor-
respondingly small and even become better when uref is larger than
6 m/s. For the HNDWCT2 with water collecting gutter being per-
pendicular to ambient crosswind as shown in Fig. 13, the water
collecting gutter can play a role in blocking the cross ventilation
through the HNDWCT2. So the disadvantageous impact of cross-
wind on HNDWCT is effectively alleviated. The air mass flow rate
ma upward through HNDWCT2 slightly decreases when uref varies
from 4 m/s to 6 m/s, jumps 12.3% from 6 m/s to 7 m/s, and then
slightly increases. Correspondingly, the water temperature drop
DTw of HNDWCT2 has a very similar varying tendency as that of
the air mass flow rate ma upward through HNDWCT2.
Crosswind
(a) UNDWCT1
Crosswind Gutter
(c) HNDWCT2 (crosswind perpendicular
to gutter)
Fig. 15. The air velocity contours and its stream lines at the z = 6 m cross section of NDWCT under uref = 6 m/s.
(b) Water temperature drop ΔTw
4.2.2. Impacts of water gutter and cross wall on HNDWCT and relevant
mechanisms
As clarified above, the water collecting gutter can alleviate the
negative impact of high velocity crosswind on the HNDWCT by
blocking the cross ventilation below HWCDs. When the high veloc-
ity crosswind is parallel to the water collecting gutter, it is sug-
gested that a cross wall should be installed perpendicular to both
the ambient crosswind and the water collecting gutter so as to
block the cross ventilation through the HNDWCT. For the condi-
tions of crosswind being parallel to gutter, it can be found from
Fig. 14 that a cross wall can improve the air mass flow rate ma
upward through HNDWCT and its water temperature drop DTw
under high velocity crosswind conditions. So the cross wall is nec-
essary for the conditions of high velocity crosswind being parallel
to the water collecting gutter in HNDWCT.
Under low velocity crosswind conditions, the air mass flow rate
ma upward through HNDWCT1 is larger than that upward through
HNDWCT2, and the corresponding water temperature drop DTw of
HNDWCT1 is also larger than that of HNDWCT2. That is, under low
velocity crosswind conditions, the parallel orientation of the water
Crosswind
Gutter
(b) HNDWCT1 (crosswind parallel to gutter)
Crosswind Cross wall
(d) HNDWCT1 with cross wall
(crosswind parallel to gutter)
 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164
collecting gutter to ambient crosswind is better than the perpen-
dicular orientation. If the local year-average ambient crosswind
velocity is less than 4 m/s, which is true for most areas, it is sug-
gested that the water collecting gutter should be constructed with
its orientation parallel to the local year-average crosswind direc-
tion. Comparing the cooling performance of the HNDWCT1 with
cross wall and the HNDWCT2, it can be found that even if their
air mass flow rates are nearly the same, the cooling performance
of the HNDWCT1 with cross wall is better than that of the
HNDWCT2. So it is suggested that the construction of water col-
lecting gutter in HNDWCT should be parallel to the local year-
average crosswind direction, with a cross wall perpendicular to
both the gutter and the local year-average crosswind direction.
To further clarify the impact mechanisms of crosswind on the
cooling performances of HNDWCTs and UNDWCTs, both the air
velocity contours and stream lines around tower at the cross sec-
tion of z = 6 m are presented in Fig. 15 under uref=6 m/s. As shown
in Fig. 15(a), the air velocity contours gradually decrease along the
stream lines through the UNDWCT1 because of the blocking of a
large amount of falling water droplets in its rain zone. The mini-
mum air velocity contour appears at the latter part of the z = 6 m
cross section, without any cross ventilation through the
UNDWCT1. As shown in Fig. 15(b), the crosswind direction is par-
allel to the gutter, and there is nearly no air flow resistance at the
z = 6 m cross section. The cross ventilation through the HNDWCT1
is so large that nearly all the leeward air inlet becomes air outflow
area. Then the air mass flow rate ma upward through HNDWCT1
sharply decreases to 43% of that under windless condition.
With a change of the gutter orientation perpendicular to the
ambient crosswind as shown in Fig. 15(c), the gutter blocks the
cross ventilation through the HNDWCT2 and reduces a large
amount of air outflow area at the tower leeward side. Then the
air mass flow rate upward through HNDWCT2 recovers to some
extent, which in turn increases the water temperature drop DTw
of the HNDWCT2. Keeping the gutter orientation parallel to the
ambient crosswind but installing a cross wall as illustrated in
Fig. 15(d), the cross wall also can block the cross ventilation
through the HNDWCT1 and reduce the air inflow area at tower lee-
ward side. But the air velocity contours in Fig. 15(c) and (d) are
obviously different from each other, even with a similar air flow
structure.
In addition, when the orientation of the gutter is parallel to the
ambient crosswind, the water collecting units are perpendicular to
the ambient crosswind and can play a role of guiding air upward
through tower. As illustrated in Fig. 14(b), the water temperature
drop of the HNDWCT1 with a cross wall is always higher than that
of the HNDWC2. As shown in Fig. 14, both the air mass flow rate
and the water temperature drop of HNDWCT1 with cross wall
are slightly less than those of HNDWCT1. But the negative impact
of cross wall under low velocity crosswind conditions is very little.
So to improve the cooling performance of HNDWCT under high
velocity crosswind, it is necessary to constructing a cross wall per-
pendicular to the year-average crosswind direction and the water
collecting gutter.
5. Conclusions
Based on the extensive fill performance correlations given by
Merkel’s theory, the 3D numerical models for HNDWCTs and
UNDWCTs were established and validated by the 1D enthalpy dif-
ference method, the field test data and the published data. With
high level water collecting devices, the air flow resistance below
the fill in HNDWCT is less than those in UNDWCTs. Combining
with the increased air mass flow rate and transfer potentials, the
heat and mass transfer in the fill of HNDWCT is intensified. For
163
the studied work condition without crosswind impact, the fill zone
in HNDWCT contributes 85.92% of the total cooling load, which is
far larger than that about 70% in UNDWCTs. Unlike the UNDWCT,
the minimum heat and mass transfer intensity in HNDWCT occurs
near the tower wall for the large longitudinal vortices there. Block-
ing the cross ventilation through HNDWCT can substantially
improve its cooling performance under high velocity crosswind
conditions. With the advantage of the inner water collecting units
guiding air flowing upward, the effect of blocking cross ventilation
by cross wall is better than that by water collecting gutter. So it is
suggested that the water collecting gutter of HNDWCT should be
parallel to the local year-average crosswind direction, with a cross
wall perpendicular to both the local year-average crosswind direc-
tion and the water collecting gutter.
References
[1] Kröger DG. Air-cooled heat exchangers and cooling towers: thermal-flow
performance evaluation and design, vol. II. Tulsa, Oklahoma: Pennwell
Corporation; 2004.
[2] Dana P. High-position water collecting device and wet-type cooling tower with
same. CN203190872 U, 2013 September 11.
[3] Dana P. Structure of wet cooling tower system. CN203190835 U, 2013
September 11.
[4] Natural draft cooling towers with water collecting devices [Web Page].
Mont-St-Guibert Belgium: Hamon Group; [cited 2015 April 6]. Available from: :
<http://www.hamon.com/index.php/index/cms/page/natural-draft/lang/en>.
[5] The application of high level water collecting cooling tower in Shenhua
Wanzhou project [Web Page]. Wanzhou, China: Shenhua Guoneng Group;
[cited 2015 Apr 6]. Available from: <http://wenku.baidu.com/view/
1c35b2fda0116c175e0e485a.html> [in Chinese].
[6] Bustamante JG, Rattner AS, Garimella S. Achieving near-water-cooled power
plant performance with air-cooled condensers. Appl Therm Eng 2015.
[7] Walker WH, Lewis WK, McAdams WH, Gilliand ER. Principles of chemical
engineering. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.; 1923.
[8] Merkel F. Verdunstungshuhlung. Zeitschrift desvereines Dentscher Ingenieure
(VDI) 1925;70:123–8.
[9] Poppe M, Rögener H. Berechnung von Rück Kühlwerken. VDI-Wärmeatlas;
1991. p. 1–15.
[10] Kloppers JC, Kröger DG. A critical investigation into the heat and mass transfer
analysis of counterflow wet-cooling towers. Int J Heat Mass Trans 2005;48
(3):765–77.
[11] Kloppers JC, Kröger DG. Loss coefficient correlation for wet-cooling tower fills.
Appl Therm Eng 2003;23(17):2201–11.
[12] Kloppers JC. A critical evaluation and refinement of the performance of wet-
cooling towers. Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch; 2003.
[13] ASHRAE. Cooling towers. In: the 4th HVAC System and equipment of ASHRAE
handbook; 2000.
[14] China National Development and Reform Commission. DL/T933-2005, Test
methods for determining the performance of cooling tower of transfer
packing, drift eliminator and sprayer. Beijing: Power Station Steam Turbine
Standardization Technology Committee of the People’s Republic of China;
2005.
[15] Reuter H, Kröger DG. A new two-dimensional CFD model to predict the
performance of natural draught wet-cooling towers packed with trickle or
splash fills. In: Proceedings of the ASME international heat transfer conference
– 2010, vol. 4: heat transfer measurement techniques, heat transfer
equipment, thermoelectrics; 2010. p. 589–98.
[16] Reuter HCR. Performance evaluation of natural draught cooling towers with
anisotropic fills. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch; 2010.
[17] Williamson NJ. Numerical modelling of heat and mass transfer and
optimisation of a natural draft wet cooling tower. Sydney: The University of
Sydney; 2008.
[18] Williamson N, Behnia M, Armfield S. Comparison of a 2D axisymmetric CFD
model of a natural draft wet cooling tower and a 1D model. Int J Heat Mass
Trans 2008;51(9–10):2227–36.
[19] Williamson N, Armfield S, Behnia M. Numerical simulation of flow in a natural
draft wet cooling tower – the effect of radial thermofluid fields. Appl Therm
Eng 2008;28(2):178–89.
[20] Williamson N, Behnia M, Armfield SW. Thermal optimization of a natural draft
wet cooling tower. Int J Energy Res 2008;32(14):1349–61.
[21] Zhao YB, Sun FZ, Gao M, Wang K. Three-dimensional numerical analysis of wet
cooling tower. In: 2007 International symposium on nonlinear dynamics.
Shanghai, China; 2007.
[22] Zhao Yuanbin, Sun Fengzhong, Wang Kai, et al. Numerical analysis of the
cooling performance of wet cooling tower with cross wall. Proc CSEE 2009;19
(8):6–13 [in Chinese].
[23] Zhao Yuanbin, Yang Zhi, Gao Ming, et al. Impact of fill non-uniform layout on
cooling performance of large-scale cooling towers. Proc CSEE 2013;33
(20):96–104 [in Chinese].
164 Y. Zhao et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 116 (2016) 150–164
[24] Al-Waked R, Behnia M. CFD simulation of wet cooling towers. Appl Therm Eng
2006;26(4):382–95.
[25] Al-Waked R, Behnia M. Enhancing performance of wet cooling towers. Energy
Convers Manage 2007;48(10):2638–48.
[26] Grobbelaar PJ, Reuter H, Bertrand TP. Performance characteristics of a trickle
fill in cross- and counter-flow configuration in a wet-cooling tower. Appl
Therm Eng 2013;50(1):475–84.
[27] Hu Sanji, Chen Yuling, Liu Tingxiang, Tang Fa. Experimental investigation of
thermodynamic and resistance performance about different heights PVC
transfer packing in counter-flow cooling tower. Jilin Electric Power
2003;167:9–11 [in Chinese].
[28] Jia Mingxiao, Hu Sanji, Chen Yuling. Performance study on water drenching
filler with modified small spacing in cooling towers. Therm Power Generation
2013;42(7):70–3 [in Chinese].
[29] Jin XQ, Xie HY, Ni JL, Wang ZS. Design of high level water collection cooling
tower. Electr Power 1993;26(6):39–43 [in Chinese].
[30] Zhao YC, Hou YH, Wang DH, Guan YT, Liu DY. Discussion of the process design
of the super high-level water collecting cooling tower. Water Wastewater Eng
2009;35(11):69–72 [in Chinese].
[31] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of
China. GB/T 50102–2003, Code for design of cooling for industrial recirculating
water. Changchun: Northeast Electric Power Design Institute Co., LTD. of China
Power Engineering Consulting Group; 2003.
[32] Klimanek A. Numerical modeling of natural draft wet-cooling towers. Arch
Comput Methods Eng 2013;20:61–109.
[33] Terblanche R, Reuter HCR, Kröger DG. Drop size distribution below different
wet-cooling tower fills. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29(8–9):1552–60.
[34] FLUENT Incorporated. FLUENT user’s guide v6.1. Lebanon: New Hampshire;
2003.
[35] Ranz W, Marshall W. Evaporation from drops, Part I. Chem Eng Progr
1952;48:141–6.
[36] Ranz W, Marshall W. Evaporation from drops, Part II. Chem Eng Progr
1952;48:173–80.
[37] Kloppers JC, Kröger DG. The Lewis factor and its influence on the performance
prediction of wet-cooling towers. Int J Therm Sci 2005;44(9):879–84.
[38] Zhao ZG. Cooling tower. Chinese Water and Electricity Press; 1994 [in
Chinese].
[39] Hawlader MNA, Liu BM. Numerical study of the thermal–hydraulic
performance of evaporative natural draft cooling towers. Appl Therm Eng
2002;22(1):41–59.
[40] Bošnjakovíc F. Technical thermodynamics. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston; 1965.
[41] Yao Zengquan. Transportation and diffusion of fire power plant smoke and
plume. Beijing: Chinese Electric Power Press; 2003 [in Chinese].
[42] Patankar SV. Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow. Hemisphere Publishing
Co.; 1980.
[43] Hooman K. Theoretical prediction with numerical and experimental
verification to predict crosswind effects on the performance of cooling
towers. Heat Transfer Eng 2015;36(5):480–7.
[44] Lu Y, Guan Z, Gurgenci H, Hooman K, He S, Bharathan D. Experimental study of
crosswind effects on the performance of small cylindrical natural draft dry
cooling towers. Energy Convers Manage 2015;91:238–48.