Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy & Buildings

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

Cooling performance and optimization of a tubular indirect evaporative

cooler based on response surface methodology
Tiezhu Sun a, Tingzheng Tang a, Chuanjun Yang b, Weichao Yan b, Xin Cui b,⇑, Junjie Chu a
a
School of Urban Planning and Municipal Engineering, Xi’An Polytechnic University, Xi’an, Shaanxi 710048, China
b
Institute of Building Environment and Sustainable Technology, School of Human Settlements and Civil Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi 710049, China

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

Article history: To optimize the cooling effectiveness of the tubular indirect evaporative cooler (TIEC), an experimental
Received 8 October 2022 design was conducted using the response surface methodology (RSM). In this work, the wet-bulb effec-
Revised 18 January 2023 tiveness was selected as the response value, while the influencing factors included six operation param-
Accepted 6 February 2023
eters, namely, the spray water flow rate (Qw), secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio (Rsp), primary air
Available online 10 February 2023
resistance (R1), secondary air resistance (R2), inlet air dry bulb temperature (tg1) and air relative humidity
(RH). The operation conditions of a TIEC with a tube diameter of 10 mm were optimized. The second-
Keywords:
order model fitting of the RSM was used to obtain the polynomial regression equation between the
Tubular indirect evaporative cooler
Wet-bulb effectiveness
wet-bulb effectiveness and each factor. The wet-bulb effectiveness can be achieved up to 78 % under
Response surface methodology the optimized conditions with Qw of 1.2 m3/h, Rsp of 0.5, R1 of 89 Pa, R2 of 100 Pa, tg1 of 17.3 °C, and
Optimization prediction RH of 79.6 %.
Ó 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Air conditioning, a significant component of building energy
consumption, has prompted efforts to develop sustainable air-
cooling technologies with low carbon emissions and appreciable
energy efficiency. Evaporative cooling (EC) is widely used because
of its energy-saving and environmentally friendly properties [1].
The EC is a technology that uses the evaporative heat absorption
of water to humidify and cool air. It was also reported the EC may
be employed as a wet filter [2]. The direct evaporative cooling
(DEC) mode is proposed to create a direct contact of water with
the air being treated to cool the air. The indirect evaporative cool-
ing (IEC) mode is based on DEC, where the output medium in the
dry channel is subjected to isohumidity cooling by heat conduction
between the dry and wet channels[3].
At present, the research on IECs mainly focuses on the study of
different flow forms in the process of IEC, the optimization of
materials and structures, and the simplification of models in the
development and design of IECs[4,5]. The performance optimiza-
tion methods of IECs mostly use experimental test comparison or
theoretical analysis. Krzysztof Rajski et al.[6] developed a mathe-
matical model for a gravity-assisted heat pipe based IEC, which
determined the most favorable range of operating conditions for
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cuixin@xjtu.edu.cn (X. Cui).
the unit by simulating the heat and mass transfer processes under
different operating parameters. Sergey Anisimov et al.[7] devel-
oped a mathematical model based on an improved e-NTU method,
which allowed the model to predict the overall performance of the
M
cycle IEC’s overall performance. Zhou et al.[8]combined IEC and
thermoelectric cooling technologies to operate as one system and
developed a corresponding model to simulate and optimize the
performance of the system operation. Chen et al.[9] tested the sys-
tem operation performance of IEC combined with mechanical cool-
ing under different operating conditions and estimated the energy
saving potential of using the system in major cities in Saudi Arabia.
Shi et al.[10] conducted experiments on a flat plate cross-flow IEC
using porous material for the heat transfer ducts and demonstrated
a significant improvement in cooling and energy saving
performance.
In order to further investigate the performance optimization
strategy of IECs, the establishment of mathematical models of IECs
has become one of the focuses of research. With the application of
mathematical models in solving complex problems and the advan-
tages of parallel heat and mass transfer processes, it has become
increasingly mainstream. An accurate and effective IEC model that
has been experimentally verified has been derived using various
numerical methods. The commonly used numerical methods
include finite difference method[11], Newton iteration method
based on EES (Engineering Equation Solver)[12], finite element
method based on COMSOL Multiphysics and other software[13],

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.112880
0378-7788/Ó 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al. Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

Nomenclature

n the wet-bulb effectiveness response value of the indi- Q2 the secondary air flow [m3/s]
rect evaporative cooler Qw the spray water flow rate [m3/s]
e the error in the system model gwb the wet-bulb effectiveness
x the coded values for factor levels tg1 the inlet air dry bulb temperature [°C]
b the coefficient of the variable tg2 the outlet air dry bulb temperature [°C]
b0 the constant term coefficient of the fitting formula ts1 the inlet air wet bulb temperature [°C]
bi the linear term coefficient of the fitting formula R1 the primary air resistance [Pa]
bii the quadratic term coefficient of the fitting formula R2 the secondary air resistance [Pa]
bij the interaction term coefficient of the fitting formula RH the air relative humidity [%]
N the number of experiments
k the number of factors Subscript
C0 the number of center points wb wet-bulb
Rsp the secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio
Q1 the primary air flow [m3/s]

Runge-Kutta method[14], and finite volume method based on
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation platform[15].
The finite difference method and the finite element method are
common methods for solving the partial differential equations.
Among them, the finite difference method is relatively simple in
terms of regional discretization, and the operation speed is fast,
but it is difficult to solve nonlinear problems. Although the finite
element method has high calculation accuracy and can adapt to
various complex shapes, the accuracy of the finite element method
is unstable due to its application in software, depending on the
requirements of the restoration degree and boundary conditions
of the modeling. The Newton iteration method has a fast conver-
gence speed, but it has strict requirements on functions and a large
amount of computation. The algorithm of Runge-Kutta method has
high precision, and measures are taken to suppress the error, so its
calculation process is also complicated. The finite volume method
can solve complex engineering problems well and has good adapt-
ability to grids, but the construction of high-precision models is
more complicated.
There is a lack of research on IECs using regression fitting of
experimental results to optimize the performance of the device.
In this work, according to the data obtained from an experimental
study, a multivariate polynomial fitting formula was obtained by
regression analysis, which was used to study the change of the per-
formance parameters of the IEC. The response surface methodology
(RSM), as a statistical method of experimental analysis and opti-
mization prediction, has the characteristics of less number of tests,
short test period and good prediction performance, which can pre-
dict and optimize the cooling effectiveness of IEC more accurately
[16].
The purpose of this paper is to apply the RSM to fit the experi-
mental results of the cooling efficiency of the tubular indirect
evaporative cooler (TIEC), and finally predict the optimal efficiency
under specific conditions and analyze its reliability, providing
guidance for application in practical engineering.
At present, it has been used in various fields of science and
technology.
The response value n and the design variable x should satisfy:
n ¼ e þ f ðxÞ ð1Þ
where e is the error in the system model.
When the number of selected variables is more than one:
f ðxÞ ¼ b0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ    þ bi xi þ e ð2Þ
where b is the coefficient of the variable, and its size reflects the
degree of influence of the variable on the response value.
There are various methods of RSM. Box-Behnken Design (BBD)
and Central Composite Design (CCD) are the most commonly used
methods. Among them, BBD is the most frequently used test
method for optimization design. The BBD design method set 3
levels for each factor and coded with (
1, 0, +1). Arranged on the
design table with 0 as the center point, +1,
1 are the correspond-
ing highest and lowest values. The distribution of experimental
points is shown in Fig. 1 (taking three factors as an example).
The number of experiments N required to build the BBD model
is denoted as:
N ¼ 2kðk
1Þ þ C 0 ð3Þ
where k is the number of factors; C0 is the number of center points.
The levels of all factors in the BBD method should be adjusted
within three levels (
1, 0, +1) with equal intervals between these
levels[17,18]. The BBD method has higher design efficiency than
other methods of response surface analysis (such as the CCD
method), and the experimental design using the BBD method does
not include combinations where all factors are at the highest or
lowest levels at the same time, avoiding the need to conduct exper-
iments under extreme conditions[19].

2. Experiment

2.1. Experimental method

RSM is a statistical method used for mathematical modeling,

experimental design and optimal prediction. After the data is
obtained through design and experiments, a multiple quadratic
regression equation is used to fit a certain functional relationship
between the output factors (response values) and the input factors. Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the distribution of BBD experimental points.

2
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al.
In this work, Design-Expert software was used to perform a
response surface analysis to investigate the performance of a TIEC.
The experimental design and optimization of conditions using the
BBD method involve following four main steps. Firstly, the statisti-
cal design of the experiment was conducted based on the experi-
mental objectives. Secondly, a statistical model was proposed
based on the experimental results and the analysis of variance.
Thirdly, the accuracy of the model was performed using graphical
analysis. Finally, the optimal operation conditions was predicted
for the response variables[20].
2.2. Experimental parameter selection
The TIEC takes away heat through the evaporation of water in
the secondary air channel, and performs isohumidity cooling on
the primary air. Therefore, the dry bulb temperature and relative
humidity of the outdoor air greatly affect the cooling effectiveness
of the device. The amount of water spray impacts the heat
absorbed by evaporation, so the amount of water spray is used
as one of the design variables in the system model.
In addition, the flow rate of primary air/secondary air, and the
flow resistance of primary air/secondary air in the channel also
influence the heat transfer process, thereby impacting the cooling
effectiveness of the device.
The secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio Rsp is defined as
the ratio of the secondary air flow rate to the primary air flow rate.
Q2
Rsp ¼
Q1
where Q 1 (m3/h) is the primary air flow, and Q 2 (m3/h) is the sec-
ondary air flow.
In the DEC section of the IEC, the secondary air is humidified
and cooled, and the enthalpy value remains unchanged. The theo-
retical lowest temperature that can be achieved by indirect cooling
process is the wet bulb temperature of the secondary air. The wet-
bulb effectiveness gwb is selected as the index to evaluate the cool-
ing performance of the device[21], namely, the response value in
the system model.
t g1
t g2
gwb ¼
t g1
ts1
where t g1 (°C) is the inlet air dry bulb temperature, t g2 (°C) is the out-
let air dry bulb temperature, and t s1 (°C) is the inlet air wet bulb
temperature.
Through the change of the wet-bulb effectiveness of the device,
the influence degree of variables such as inlet air dry bulb temper-
ature (tg1), relative humidity (RH), spray water flow rate (Qw),
secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio (Rsp), primary air resis-
tance (R1) and secondary air resistance (R2) on the response value
can be reflected.
In this work, the effect of different operation conditions on the
cooling performance of a TIEC was studied. The results were ana-
lyzed using RSM based on Box-Behnken Design (BBD) design
method. The wet-bulb effectiveness of the TIEC was used as the
evaluation index. The influence of operation parameters such as
tg1, RH, Rsp, R1, R2 and Qw on the response value was studied.
The response value can be described by the second-order model
formula:
X
k X
k X
k
1 X
k
n ¼ b0 þ bi xi þ bii x2i þ bij xi xj
i¼1 i¼1 i¼1 j¼1
where n is the wet-bulb effectiveness response value of the IEC. b0 ,
bi , bii , bij are the constant term, linear term, quadratic term and
interaction term coefficient of the fitting formula. xi and xj are the
coded values of each factor level, namely tg1, RH, Rsp, R1, R2 and Qw.
Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880
Table 1 shows the variation range of the design variables
selected in the RSM: A is the spray water flow rate, B is the
primary-to-secondary air volume ratio, C is the secondary air resis-
tance, D is the outdoor dry bulb temperature, E is the air relative
humidity, and F is the primary air resistance.
2.3. Experimental system
The main section of the experimental device is a TIEC with a
tube diameter of 10 mm. The cooler consists of aluminum tubes,
and the tube bundles enable a cross-flow arrangement. There are
totally 1804 tubes with the tube length of 1200 mm. The primary
air flows in the horizontal direction (outside the tube), and the
cooling water and secondary air flow in the vertical direction (in-
side the tube). The upper water distribution method is adopted.
There is a water distribution device above the core aluminum
tubes. The cooling water enters the tube and forms a water film
through the inner wall of the tube, which evenly exchanges heat
with the secondary air and strengthens the EC process. Table 2
indicates the geometrical parameters of the IEC.
A water baffle is installed at the outlet of the secondary air
channel to prevent the cooling water from being blown out of
the cooler. A viewing window is provided in the air duct where
the passage exceeds the top of the device, which is convenient to
observe the inner condition.
Both the primary channel and the secondary channel are
ð4Þ
equipped with fans. Orifice plates with a diameter of 5 mm are
installed at 0.5 m behind the fan in both channels, in order to
maintain a uniform distribution of the air flow. Removable baffles
are arranged at the corners of the secondary passage and at the
bottom of the primary passage after passing through the evapora-
tive cooler to control the flow direction of the secondary air. The
inlet of the primary/secondary channels and the outlet of the pri-
mary channel have orifice plates with a diameter of 5 mm, which
are used to stabilize the airflow.
The cooling water is circulated in the TIEC. The water is drawn
from the tank by the water pump, and returned to the tank after
passing through the water distribution device and the tubes.
ð5Þ
Fig. 2 shows the schematic diagram of the experimental setup.
The experimental setup for the prototype of a TIEC is shown in
Fig. 3.
The measuring instruments used for the experiments are shown
in Table 3.
2.4. Experimental steps
In this study, a TIEC with a tube diameter of 10 mm was used as
a platform to analyze the influence of its cooling effectiveness
under varying operating conditions.
During the test, the air flow rate is determined by maintaining a
constant flow resistance for both the primary and the secondary
air. For a specific level of the air flow resistance, the flow rate of
the primary air is adjusted by changing the Rsp. The Rsp are selected
as 0.5, 0.6, and 0.8, specifically. The Qw is regulated to maintain the
working conditions of 1 m3/h, 1.5 m3/h, and 2 m3/h, specifically for
different levels of air flow resistance and Rsp.
Two sets of measuring instruments were installed at locations
ð6Þ
of the outdoor, the primary air outlet and the secondary air outlet,
respectively, to measure the dry bulb temperature and relative
humidity of the corresponding locations. In addition, a handheld
anemometer is employed to measure the required wind speed.
The experimental data is recorded for steady states after operating
the prototype at least 30 min for each operating condition.
3
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al. Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

Table 1
Design variable variation range.

Design variable Coding Values for each level

1 0 +1
The spray water flow rate (m3/h) A 1 1.5 2
The secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio B 0.5 0.65 0.8
The secondary air resistance (Pa) C 100 210 320
The inlet air dry bulb temperature (°C) D 15 17.5 20
The air relative humidity (%) E 75 80 85
The primary air resistance (Pa) F 20 90 160

Table 2 sen to fit the experimental results in this study to obtain the rela-
Geometrical parameters of TIEC. tionship between wet-bulb effectiveness and each factor.
Name Dimension (mm) Fig. 4 shows the comparison between the actual tested wet-
Core length 650
bulb effectiveness and the predicted value. The multivariate corre-
Core Width 730 lation coefficient R2 is 0.9594, indicating that the model has a high
Core Height 1200 degree of fit of the predicted value. Equation (7) is a polynomial fit-
Tube Diameter 10 ting formula of the response value of the wet-bulb effectiveness.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Experimental data and empirical model
The experimental results were obtained according to the above
experimental methods. For the tested conditions, the highest wet-
bulb effectiveness was 60.2 % under the operating condition with
the Qw of 1.5 m3/h, the Rsp of 0.8, the R1 of 40 Pa, the R2 of
250 Pa, the tg1 of 16.9 °C, and the RH of 81.5 %. While the lowest
wet-bulb effectiveness was 15.2 % under the operating condition
with the Qw of 2 m3/h, the Rsp of 0.5, the R1 of 140 Pa, the R2 of
320 Pa, the tg1 of 17.2 °C, and the RH of 79.1 %.
According to the data related to the linear model, 2FI model,
second-order model and third-order model analyzed for the exper-
imental results in Table 4, it can be seen that the multivariate cor-
relation coefficient R2 increases, and the third-order model is the
highest, but the misfit error of the third-order model is relatively
large, which will weaken the fitting effect.
A comparison of each model is presented in Table 5. In the anal-
ysis of variance, the effect is considered highly significant when
FA > F0.01(dfA, dfe). Table 5 shows that the second-order model is
more significant compared to the linear and 2FI models, while
the difference in the degree of fit between the third-order and
second-order models does not reach a significant level. Therefore,
considering all the factors, the second-order model was finally cho-
gwb ¼
13647:29413 þ 342:44054  Q w þ 3600:89297  Rsp

0:71794  R2 þ 220:61832  t g1 þ 256:53448  RH
þ 1:33599  R1 þ 68:31852  Q w  Rsp þ 0:21922  Q w
 R2 þ 3:55511  Q w  t g1
5:02709  Q w  RH

0:274965  Q w  R1
0:258992  Rsp  R2
59:21008
 Rsp  tg1
19:04413  Rsp  RH
4:37461  Rsp  R1
þ 0:043853  R2  tg1 þ 0:003613  R2  RH þ 0:004525
 R2  R1
5:27605  t g1  RH þ 0:167991  tg1  R1

0:007299  RH  R1
36:49478  Q 2w
545:70603  R2sp

0:001237  R22 þ 6:5489  t 2g1
0:912713  RH2

0:010805  R21 ð7Þ
To verify the accuracy of the empirical model (polynomial fit-
ting formula), 20 groups of verification experiments were carried
out by changing the influencing factors. Table 6 indicates the
experimental conditions, and compares the experimental data
with the calculated results by using the empirical model. The fitted
polynomial formula can accurately predict the wet-bulb effective-
ness within a maximum relative error of 5 %. Therefore, as
expected from the fitted formula, the polynomial formula can be
used to predict the experimental results.

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of TIEC.

4
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al. Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

For the interaction terms, six combinations of operation param-

Fig. 3. Experimental setup: (a) Front view; (2) Back view.
3.2. Influence of various factors on wet-bulb effectiveness
Table 7 presents the calculated value for the regression coeffi-
cient analysis, and indicates the degree of significance. The linear
term includes six influential operation parameters. The Qw, and
R1/R2 in the linear term have a very significant impact on the
wet-bulb effectiveness of the TIEC.
eters (Qw and Rsp , Qw and R2, Qw and RH, Qw and R1, Rsp and R1, R1
and R2) have a great influence on the wet-bulb effectiveness.
In addition, five out of six quadratic terms (Qw, Rsp , R1, R2 and
RH) have considerable impact on the wet-bulb effectiveness of
the TIEC.
The response surface plot visually shows the effect of the inter-
action between variables on the wet-bulb effectiveness of the TIEC,
as shown in Fig. 5. The contour lines reflect the strength of the vari-
able interaction effect.
As can be seen from Fig. 5(a) that the wet-bulb effectiveness
reaches a maximum value when the Qw is 1.2 m3/h and the Rsp is
0.6. A higher spray water flow rate, is able to increase the resis-
tance of the unit, which lead to a lower heat transfer ability. In
addition, the increase of secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio
has a negative effect on the cooling performance due to the insuf-
ficient heat exchange time by increasing the secondary air velocity.
As a result, these issues enable a lower wet-bulb effectiveness.
Fig. 5(b) shows the response surface plot for the wet-bulb effec-
tiveness influenced by the interaction effect between the Qw and
R2. When the Qw is 1.2 m3/h and the R2 is 320 Pa, the wet-bulb
effectiveness reaches a maximum value.
Fig. 5(c) indicates the response surface plot for the wet-bulb
effectiveness influenced by the interaction effect between the Qw
and RH. The wet-bulb effectiveness reaches a maximum value at
Qw of 1.25 m3/h and the RH of 80 %.
Fig. 5(d) shows the response surface plot for the wet-bulb effec-
tiveness influenced by the interaction effect between the Qw and
R1. The wet-bulb effectiveness reaches a maximum value when
Qw is 1.25 m3/h and R1 is 87 Pa.
Due to the influence by the interaction effect between the Rsp
and R1, in Fig. 5(e), when the Rsp is 0.52 and the R1 is 111 Pa, the
wet-bulb effectiveness reaches the maximum value.

Table 3
Measurement instrument specifications.

Parameter Instrument Range Accuracy

Temperature testo-174H
20 – +70 °C ±0.5 °C
Relative Humidity testo-174H 0–100 %RH ±3%RH (at 25 °C)
Air velocity testo-410–1 0.4–20 m/s ± (0.2 m/s + 2 % measured value)
Air pressure testo-510 0–100 hPa ±0.03 hPa(0 – 0.3 hPa)
±0.05 hPa(0.31–1hPa)
± (1.5 % measured value + 0.1 hPa) (Other ranges)

Table 4
Model data validation.

Source Sequential p – value Lack of Fit p – value Adjusted R2 Predicted R2

Linear <0.0001 < 0.0001 0.7265 0.7241
2FI <0.0001 < 0.0001 0.8429 0.8386
Quadratic <0.0001 < 0.0001 0.9577 0.9558
Cubic <0.0001 0.0049 0.9815 0.9788

Table 5
Model data comparison.

Source Sum of Squares df F – value p – value

Mean vs Total 1.259E + 06 1 1.259E + 06 –
Linear vs Mean 53289.23 6 8881.54 294.51
2FI vs Linear 8693.70 15 579.58 33.46
Quadratic vs 2FI 8153.59 6 1358.93 291.41
Cubic vs Quadratic 1762.79 45 39.17 19.24
Residual 1203.03 591 2.04 –
Total 1.332E + 06 664 2005.86 –

5
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al. Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

Fig. 4. Normal probability distribution plot of residuals.

Fig. 5(f) indicates the response surface plot for the wet-bulb
effectiveness influenced by the interaction effect between the R1
and R2. The wet-bulb effectiveness reaches a maximum value at
R1 of 90 Pa and the R2 of 320 Pa.
3.3. Determination of the optimal condition of the model
According to the RSM based on the BBD method, the design
variables can be optimized so that the response value reaches
the maximum value within the variable range[22]. Based on the
model prediction, the optimal operation conditions are determined
as the Qw of 1.2 m3/h, the Rsp of 0.5, the R1 of 89 Pa, the R2 of 100 Pa,
the tg1 of 17.3 °C, and the relative air humidity of 79.6 %. The
response value of wet-bulb effectiveness takes the maximum value
of 78.0 % under the simulated optimization conditions.
6
According to the simulated design variable conditions (includ-
ing inlet air dry bulb temperature, relative humidity, spray water
flow rate, secondary-to-primary air flow rate ratio, primary air
resistance and secondary air resistance), three sets of validation
experiments were conducted by adjusting each parameter to
approximately the optimal conditions. Table 8 presents the exper-
imental conditions and the wet-bulb effectiveness obtained from
the experiments. Three groups of parallel experimental results
indicate the average wet-bulb effectiveness was 74.2 %, and the
discrepancy between the experimental data and the predicted
value was 4.9 %. The theoretical prediction of the wet-bulb effec-
tiveness obtained by the regression equation is very close to the
experimental value. The model prediction results of the RSM fit
well the wet-bulb effectiveness of the TIEC within the range of
variable settings. The results demonstrate that the RSM based on
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al. Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

Table 6
Experimental results for validating the empirical model.

The spray The secondary-to- The secondary The inlet air dry The air The primary Experimental wet- Predicted wet- Relative
water flow rate primary air flow rate air resistance bulb temperature relative air resistance bulb effectiveness bulb error (%)
(m3/h) ratio (Pa) (°C) humidity (%) (Pa) (%) effectiveness (%)
1.0 0.5 300 17.7 76.6 91 42.2 44.1
4.4
1.0 0.5 300 17.6 77.1 91 43.4 44.4
2.3
1.0 0.5 300 17.2 78.5 91 41.9 42.5
1.4
1.5 0.5 300 17.4 79.1 91 46.5 46.9
0.8
1.5 0.5 300 17.3 79.4 91 45.1 46.5
3.2
1.5 0.5 300 17.4 79.3 91 47.1 47.8
1.6
2.0 0.5 300 17.4 78.7 110 26.6 27.6
3.6
2.0 0.5 300 17.3 79.0 110 24.3 24.0 1.1
1.0 0.6 300 17.3 80.2 61 47.0 46.5 1.0
1.5 0.6 300 17.2 80.5 61 43.3 45.0
3.9
1.5 0.6 300 17.2 80.9 61 45.1 44.5 1.5
1.0 0.8 300 16.9 82.2 38 44.4 45.2
1.6
1.5 0.8 300 16.9 82.4 39 50.3 48.3 4.1
1.0 0.5 320 16.4 80.9 151 37.1 36.8 0.8
1.5 0.5 320 16.3 81.3 122 38.1 37.9 0.6
2.0 0.5 320 17.3 79.0 140 21.4 21.6
1.0
1.0 0.8 320 16.2 82.9 56 58.1 56.3 3.2
1.0 0.8 250 16.6 82.0 24 56.3 57.1
1.4
1.5 0.8 180 17.4 79.6 21 55.6 53.6 3.5
1.0 0.8 200 17.3 79.1 30 54.5 54.4 0.1

Table 7
Quadratic multinomial model regression coefficient analysis.

Type Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F – value p – value Significance

Constant – 70136.51 27 2597.65 557.05 < 0.0001 **
Linearity Qw 1129.75 1 1129.75 242.27 < 0.0001 **
Rsp 0.8020 1 0.8020 0.1720 0.6785 –
R2 134.45 1 134.45 28.83 < 0.0001 **
tg1 39.49 1 39.49 8.47 0.0037 *
RH 5.37 1 5.37 1.15 0.2834 –
R1 65.78 1 65.78 14.11 0.0002 **
Interactivity QwRsp 166.79 1 166.79 35.77 < 0.0001 **
QwR2 702.84 1 702.84 150.72 < 0.0001 **
Qwtg1 5.93 1 5.93 1.27 0.2598 –
QwRH 418.21 1 418.21 89.68 < 0.0001 **
QwR1 135.22 1 135.22 29.00 < 0.0001 **
RspR2 1.09 1 1.09 0.2337 0.6290 –
Rsptg1 11.38 1 11.38 2.44 0.1188 –
RspRH 32.43 1 32.43 6.95 0.0086 *
RspR1 82.37 1 82.37 17.66 < 0.0001 **
R2tg1 3.06 1 3.06 0.6570 0.4179 –
R2RH 0.7071 1 0.7071 0.1516 0.6971 –
R2R1 79.93 1 79.93 17.14 < 0.0001 **
tg1RH 37.01 1 37.01 7.94 0.0050 *
tg1R1 8.29 1 8.29 1.78 0.1829 –
RHR1 0.2635 1 0.2635 0.0565 0.8122 –
Quadratic Qw2 4993.04 1 4993.04 1070.72 < 0.0001 **
Rsp2 47.73 1 47.73 10.24 0.0014 *
R22 93.02 1 93.02 19.95 < 0.0001 **
tg12 6.86 1 6.86 1.47 0.2257 –
RH2 80.93 1 80.93 17.36 < 0.0001 **
R12 130.76 1 130.76 28.04 < 0.0001 **
Residual 2965.82 636 4.66 – – –
Lack of Fit 2747.76 493 5.57 3.65 < 0.0001 –
Pure Error 218.06 143 1.52 – – –
Cor Total 73102.33 663 – – – –

** means extremely significant, p < 0.001; * means significant, 0.001 < p < 0.05.

7
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al. Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880

Fig. 5. Response surface plot for the impact of various factors on wet-bulb effectiveness.

Table 8
Experimental data for the optimal operation conditions.

The spray water The secondary-to-primary The secondary air The inlet air dry bulb The air relative The primary air Experimental wet-bulb
flow rate (m3/h) air flow rate ratio resistance (Pa) temperature (°C) humidity (%) resistance (Pa) effectiveness (%)
1.2 0.5 101 17.3 79.5 90 74.6
1.2 0.5 104 17.2 79.6 87 73.8
1.2 0.5 102 17.3 79.8 91 74.4

the BBD method is reasonable to optimize the cooling effectiveness
of the TIEC.
4. Conclusions
In this paper, the RSM was used to optimize and predict the
operation conditions of the TIEC to improve its cooling effective-
ness. The main conclusions of this study are as follows.
1) It was reasonable to use the second-order model of the RSM
to fit the influence degree of each factor on the wet-bulb
effectiveness.
2) From the regression analysis, it can be seen that six opera-
tion parameters (Qw, Rsp , R1, R2, tg1 and RH) interact to influ-
ence the wet-bulb effectiveness.
3) The optimization experiment was designed using the RSM.
Under the conditions of Qw of 1.2 m3/h, Rsp of 0.5, R1 of
89 Pa, R2 of 100 Pa, tg1 of 17.3 °C, and RH of 79.6 %, the

8
T. Sun, T. Tang, C. Yang et al.
response value wet-bulb effectiveness achieved the maxi-
mum value of 78.0 %. According to the verification experi-
ment, the relative error between the experimental value
and the actual value was 4.9 %.
In this study, the experimental results of cooling effectiveness
of a TIEC with 10 mm tube diameter were fitted by applying
RSM, and the fitted equations for the effect of each design variable
on wet-bulb effectiveness were obtained. The final optimization
predicted the optimal efficiency under specific conditions and ana-
lyzes its reliability so as to provide a reference for optimizing the
unit for application in engineering.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by National Natural Science Founda-
tion of China (52106025), Natural Science Basic Research Program
of Shaanxi (China) (2021JQ-689), and Natural Science Basic
Research Program of Shaanxi (China) (2021JQ-048).
References
[1] Z. Duan, M. Wang, X. Dong, J. Liu, X. Zhao, Experimental and numerical
investigation of wicking and evaporation performance of fibrous materials for
evaporative cooling, Energy Build. 255 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2021.111675.
[2] Y.M. Xuan, F. Xiao, X.F. Niu, X. Huang, S.W. Wang, Research and application of
evaporative cooling in China: A review (I) - Research, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 16 (2012) 3535–3546, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.052.
[3] Y. Chen, H. Yang, Y. Luo, Parameter sensitivity analysis and configuration
optimization of indirect evaporative cooler (IEC) considering condensation,
Appl. Energy. 194 (2017) 440–453, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.06.121.
[4] S. De Antonellis, C.M. Joppolo, P. Liberati, Performance measurement of a cross-
flow indirect evaporative cooler: Effect of water nozzles and airflows
arrangement, Energy Build. 184 (2019) 114–121, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2018.11.049.
[5] T. Sun, X. Huang, Y. Chen, H. Zhang, Experimental investigation of water
spraying in an indirect evaporative cooler from nozzle type and spray strategy
perspectives, Energy Build. 214 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2020.109871.
[6] K. Rajski, J. Danielewicz, E. Brychcy, Performance evaluation of a gravity-
assisted heat pipe-based indirect evaporative cooler, Energies. 13 (2020) 1–20,
https://doi.org/10.3390/en13010200.
Energy & Buildings 285 (2023) 112880
[7] S. Anisimov, D. Pandelidis, V. Maisotsenko, Numerical Study of Heat and Mass
Transfer Process in the Maisotsenko Cycle for Indirect Evaporative Air Cooling,
Heat Transf. Eng. 37 (2016) 1455–1465, https://doi.org/10.1080/
01457632.2016.1142314.
[8] Y. Zhou, T. Zhang, F. Wang, Y. Yu, Numerical Study and Optimization of a
Combined Thermoelectric Assisted Indirect Evaporative Cooling System, J.
Therm. Sci. 29 (2020) 1345–1354, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11630-020-1362-
7.
[9] Q. Chen, M.K. Ja, M. Burhan, M.W. Shahzad, D. Ybyraiymkul, H. Zheng, K.C. Ng,
Experimental study of a sustainable cooling process hybridizing indirect
evaporative cooling and mechanical vapor compression, Energy Reports. 8
(2022) 7945–7956, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.06.019.
[10] W. Shi, Y. Min, X. Ma, Y. Chen, H. Yang, Performance evaluation of a novel
plate-type porous indirect evaporative cooling system: An experimental study,
J. Build. Eng. 48 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103898.
[11] G. Heidarinejad, S. Moshari, Novel modeling of an indirect evaporative cooling
system with cross-flow configuration, Energy Build. 92 (2015) 351–362,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.01.034.
[12] J. Woods, E. Kozubal, A desiccant-enhanced evaporative air conditioner:
Numerical model and experiments, Energy Convers. Manag. 65 (2013) 208–
220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2012.08.007.
[13] A. Pakari, S. Ghani, Comparison of 1D and 3D heat and mass transfer models of
a counter flow dew point evaporative cooling system: Numerical and
experimental study, Int. J. Refrig. 99 (2019) 114–125, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2019.01.013.
[14] D. Pandelidis, S. Anisimov, Numerical analysis of the heat and mass transfer
processes in selected M-Cycle heat exchangers for the dew point evaporative
cooling, Energy Convers. Manag. 90 (2015) 62–83, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2014.11.008.
[15] Y. Wan, C. Ren, L. Xing, An approach to the analysis of heat and mass transfer
characteristics in indirect evaporative cooling with counter flow
configurations, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 108 (2017) 1750–1763, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.01.019.
[16] W. Yan, X. Meng, X. Cui, Y. Liu, Q. Chen, L. Jin, Evaporative cooling performance
prediction and multi-objective optimization for hollow fiber membrane
module using response, Appl. Energy. 325 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2022.119855.
[17] W.H. Chen, C.M. Chang, J.K. Mutuku, S.S. Lam, W.J. Lee, Analysis of
microparticle deposition in the human lung by taguchi method and response
surface methodology, Environ. Res. 197 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2021.110975.
[18] M. Yolmeh, S.M. Jafari, Applications of Response Surface Methodology in the
Food Industry Processes, Food Bioprocess Technol. 10 (2017) 413–433, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11947-016-1855-2.
[19] S.N. Nam, H. Cho, J. Han, N. Her, J. Yoon, Photocatalytic degradation of
acesulfame K: Optimization using the Box-Behnken design (BBD), Process Saf.
Environ. Prot. 113 (2018) 10–21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.09.002.
[20] M.D.G. de Luna, M.M. Sablas, C.M. Hung, C.W. Chen, S. Garcia-Segura, C. Di
Dong, Modeling and optimization of imidacloprid degradation by catalytic
percarbonate oxidation using artificial neural network and Box-Behnken
experimental design, Chemosphere. 251 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chemosphere.2020.126254.
[21] R. Kousar, M. Ali, M.K. Amjad, N.A. Sheikh, W. Ahmad, Performance
characterization and optimization of counter-flow dew point indirect
evaporative cooler through response surface methodology, Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. Part A J. Power Energy. 235 (2021) 1789–1805, https://doi.org/10.1177/
09576509211007976.
[22] B. yul Tak, B. sik Tak, Y. ju Kim, Y. jin Park, Y. hun Yoon, G. ho Min, Optimization
of color and COD removal from livestock wastewater by electrocoagulation
process: Application of Box-Behnken design (BBD), J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 28 (2015)
307–315, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2015.03.008.