Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chemical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
0017.9310/87 13.00f0.00
Pergamon Journals Ltd.
and ANTHONY
F. MILLS
School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024, U.S.A.
(Received 28 March 1986 and in final form 29 July 1986)
Abstract-Experiments
have been performed to obtain the transient response of a thin adiabatic packed
bed of silica gel after a step change in inlet air conditions. Comparisons are made with predictions using
a solid-side resistance model and a pseudo-gas-side controlled model and better agreement obtained with
the former model. An apparent dynamic hysteresis for adsorption/desorption with microporous silica gel
is clearly in evidence, which could be due to a solid-side effective diffusion coefficient which decreases
with increasing moisture content, or to a lesser extent to a hysteresis in the adsorption isotherm itself.
1. INTRODUCTION
METHOD
2.1. Apparatus
1051
1052
A. A. PESARAN
and A. F. MILLS
NOMENCLATURE
a
A
cl
cp.e
CPl
DAR
D
D*
D,
4
g
g(W)
h,
H ads
ID
Ko
K G.eff
L
ml
mG
N,,
P
PGC
P
r
r*
R
R
Re
RD
RH
SSR
t
t*
T
V
W
Z
Z+
solid-side resistance
time
dimensionless time, t/r
[dimensionless]
temperature
superficial velocity of air
desiccant water content
[kg water/kg dry desiccant]
axial distance
z/L [dimensionless].
Greek symbols
ppD/K,R
[dimensionless]
P
&
porosity [dimensionless]
V
kinematic viscosity
density
of humid air
P
particle
density
PP
duration of experimental run
T
tortuosity factor for intraparticle gas
rp
diffusion [dimensionless]
tortuosity factor for intraparticle
r,
surface diffusion [dimensionless].
Subscripts
initial value
0
1
water vapor
2
dry air
average value
avg
b
bed; bulk
surrounding humid air
e
effective value
eff
K
Knudsen diffusion
in
inlet value
out
outlet value
particle
P
surface diffusion
S
s-surface, in gas phase adjacent to
S
gel particles, or dry solid phase of
the bed
saturation.
sat
1053
Exhaust
_T
4
Air In
Heater
Test
*Air
out
i;
Dryer
Test meter
Blower
A. A. PESARANand A. F. MILLS
1054
Gel
type
Processt
RD
RD
AD
AD
AD
AD
AD
AD
DE
DE
DE
DE
AD
AD
AD
4
6
I
21
24
25
29
30
35
13
14
17
RD
RD
RD
RD
RD
RD
RD
RD
ID
ID
ID
K
(lo-:rn)
1.94
1.94
1.94
1.27
0.435
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
0.33
1.94
1.94
1.94
(10-4m)
17.5
75.0
75.0
65.0
45.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
30.0
71.5
77.5
77.5
T,
(0
0.0417
0.0410
0.0450
0.0410
0.0640
0.0668
0.260
0.368
0.370
0.220
0.0088
0.0084
0.005
ml.,,
23.3
24.2
22.1
24.7
20.2
22.6
25.4
25.0
23.8
24.3
23.7
23.3
24.4
0.0100
0.0105
0.0088
0.0106
0.0088
0.0109
o.ooo7
0.0051
0.0090
0.0008
0.0097
0.0074
0.0063
L
(C) (mV)
23.3
24.2
22.1
24.7
20.6
25.6
25.4
23.9
23.5
24.3
23.6
23.3
24.4
0.21
0.32
0.55
0.39
0.30
0.40
0.67
0.40
0.65
0.28
0.45
0.18
0.67
Re
N&I
DAR
(s)
49.30
78.60
150.9
70.0
16.34
129.8
218.5
131.0
205.0
11.32
109.47
44.0
164.19
22.65
18.74
14.25
26.29
98.61
7.62
6.12
7.59
6.28
101.1
16.85
24.70
14.21
0.1285
0.0819
0.0547
0.0604
0.0554
0.0440
0.039
0.042
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.0813
0.033
1800
1800
1500
1800
1800
1800
1200
1800
1200
1800
1200
1860
1200
3. RESULTS
AND
DISCUSSION
1055
Experimental study
Model
Equilibrium condition
KG,cff= 0.704pVRe-0.
hc = 0.683pVRe-0,5
0*&L;p=~
SSR
P% = avr*
= 1x LPI
D =
Ds.err
bff
g( w
PP
K, = 1.7pVRe-0~42
h, = 1.6pVRe-0.42
0.14
Temperature
Data
1SSR (A
160
60
30
T,, = 23.3OC
_-_----------
g
?
20
g
5
o.ooP
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.60
t. Time, Fraction of Period
I-10
1.00
1056
A. A. PESARANand A. F. MILLS
ml ,n = 0.0066
PGC Model
O.OO~-IO
0.00
0.20 0.40
0.60
0.60
1.00
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.60
t, Time, Fraction of Period
0.12
40
7
SI
0 10
h
T,, = 24.7C
-20
5
z
$
E
I-
0.06
2 0.10
.P
5
5
30 ?E
52
I;
0.06
20 :
0.06
?
al
10 ;
2
;
%
0
- 0.04
2
0.04
0 02
- -10
1.00
EC
5
0
;
c
0.02
-10
.
0 00
0. 1
0.001
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.60
t, Time, Fractton of Period
1.00
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.60
t, Time, Fraction of Period
J-20
1.00
predicted.
1057
Experimental study
T,n = 24.3C
0.12
7
z
T,, = 25.4C
PGC
: 0.08
.o
t;
A
Model
Model
-20
-10
5
Ez
$
-0
E
k
5
5
0
- -10
0.00
0.00
0.0007
1
0.00,,,1.,8
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60
ml,,,
t'.Time,
FIG. 8. Comparison
Fraction
0.20
t, Time,
I
0.40
3.60
0.80
Fraction
-30
1.00
of Period
of Period
- 40
A * .
0.12
E
g
I
IL
0.10
A A A A20
0.08
p
5:
z
;
5
a
E
-30
0.20
0.40
t, Time,
0.60
Fraction
0.80
0.08
of Period
ooo()
.lo
-0
--10
0.04
E
:
zi
2
0
;
:
A. Test 24
NJ Test 29
- -20
1 .oo
G
e
E
2
t
0.02
0.00
,&
:
5!
x
o.ool-30
0.00
0.20
t, Time,
0.40
0.60
Fraction
0.80
1.00
of Period
20
A
10
0
-10
-20
o^
e
?
2
L
d
E
Ixi
5
0
<
2
-30
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
t, Time, Fraction of Period
1.00
1058
50
SSR Model
,PGC
0.14
Model
Temperature Data
Humldity Data
50
t
12
x 010
40
6
e
-El
0
I;
.lO
30
.08
20
.06
10
008
2
5
0.06
=
5
PGC
^^.
Model
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.80
0.60
t, Time, Fraction
of experimental
for Test 13.
: 0.10
.c
z
k!
k 0.08
SSR
Model
and predicted
results
40
A+..
&A..
T,, = 23.3C
0.20
0.40
30
20
0.60
-10
0 20
G
??
3
fi;
6
0.80
0.40
0.60
t. Time, Fraction
FIG. 15. Comparison
02
ml , = 0 00735
0.00
0.00
PGC Model
AA.
04
o.ooP
1.00
of Period
-%-1
0.12
I
s
SSR Model
r
0
$
I
t
g
0.80
l-20
1.00
of Period
of experimental
for Test 17.
and predicted
results
transition to a more gradual increase; T,,, also increases to its peak value very quickly and subsequently
decreases
rapidly
to the inlet air temperature. The predictions of m,,O,, of the SSR model are
better than those of the PGC model, especially at
small times. This behavior is similar to that noted
before for adsorption experiments on RD gel. At
longer times, m, ,Oy, is overpredicted by the SSR
model. Usually, the PGC model underpredicts the
experimental ml,Ou, initially and overpredicts later.
Generally T,,, is underpredicted by both models,
especially after the peak value is reached, with the
PGC model doing somewhat better than the SSR
model.
1.00
of Penod
of experimental
for Test 14.
and predicted
results
4. CONCLUSIONS
1059
Experimental study
Acknowiedgments-This
work was supported by a grant
from the Solar Energy Research Institute/U.S. Department
of Energy, Grant No. DE-FGO2-SOCS84056. The Technical
Mritor
was T. Penney. Computer time was supplied by
the Campus Computing Network of the University of
California, Los Angeles. The Publication Development
Branch of the Solar Energy Research Institute assisted in
preparing this paper.
Relative Humidity,
REFERENCES
1. A. A. Pesaran and A. F. Mills, Moisture transport in
silica gel packed particle beds--f. Theoretical study, Int.
J. Heat Mass Transfer 30, 1037-1049 (1987).
2. J. E. Clark, Design and construction of thin, adiabatic
desiccant beds with solar air conditioning applications,
M.S. Thesis, School of Engineering and Applied Science,
University of California, Los Angeles (1979).
3. J. E. Clark, A. F. Mills and H. Buchberg, Design and
testing of thin adiabatic desiccant beds for solar air
conditioning applications, J. Solar Energy Engng 103
(May 1981).
4. A. A. Pesaran, Air dehumidification in packed silica gel
beds, M.S. Thesis, School of Engineering and Applied
Science, University of California, Los Angeles (1980).
5. A. A. Pesaran, Moisture transport in silica gel particle
as, Ph.D. Dissertation, School of Engineering and
A
% lied ScienceZ, University of California, Los Angeles
(1983).
6; J. W. Nienberg, Modeling of desiccant performance
for solar desiccant-evaporative
cooling systems, MS
Thesis, School of Engineering and Applied Science,
University of California, Los Angeles (1977).
7. W. R. Grace and Co., Davison Silica Gel, Bulletin No.
IC-15-378; and W. R. Grace and Co., Fluid Processing
Handbook. Baltimore, Maryland (1966).
8. S. H. Jury and H. R. Edwards, The silica gel water
vapor sorption therm, Can. J. them. Engng 49,663-666
(October 1979).
9. W. W. Kruckels, On gradient dependent diffusivity,
Chem. Engng Sci. 28, 1565-1576 (1973).
10. R. S. Barlow, Analysis of adsorption process and of
desiccant cooling systems-a pseudo-steady-state model
for coupled heat and mass transfer, SERI/TR-631-1329,
Solar Energy Research Institute, Golden, Colorado
(1982).
APPENDIX.
AUXILIARY DATA
FIG.
RH
(Al)
(A2)
kJ /kg water
(A3)
w > 0.051
1
(4 + 273.15)-(q
+ 273.15)
2095,
W< 0.15
kJ /kg water
w z 0.151
(A4)
WI
4,,ff
and depends on both surface and Knudson diffusion coefficients for macroporous ID gel
D = D,,,,, + DKg(w)
YP
1060
A. A. PESARANand A. F. MILLS
by
given
LtK,tff = :22.86(T+
273.15)%
TRANSPORT
(A7)
/(T + 273.131
DHUMIDITE
648)
ETUDE
R&m&Des
expkriences sent conduites pour obtenir la riponse transitoire dun lit fixe adiabatique et
mince de silicagel aprts un changement dCchelon des conditions dentree dair. Des comparaisons sont
faites avec des calculs utilisant un modble de rCsistance &cot6 solide et un modele i cot6 pseudo-gaz et le
meilleur accord est obtenu avec le premier modhle. Un hysttresis dynamique apparent pour absorption/
d&sorption avec un silicagel microporeux est clairement visible, lequel pourrait Ctre dti 8 un coefficient de
diffusion effectif cot& solide qui diminue avec Iaccroissement dhumiditi, ou $ une moindre hystt&is dans
Iisotherme dadsorption elle-meme.
FEUCHTETRANSPORT
IN SILICAGEL-FESTBETTEN-II:
UNTERSUCHUNG
EXPERIMENTELLE
Zusammenfassung-Es
wurden Experimente durchgefiihrt, urn das Ubergangsverhalten eines diinnen adiabaten Silicagel-Festbettes nach einer sprunghaften Veriinderung der Lufteint~tts~dingungen
zu ermitteln.
Es wurden Vergleiche mit Vorhersagen angestellt, die ein Widerstandsm~ell fiir die feste Phase und ein
Pseudo-Gas-Model1 verwenden, wobei mit dem ersten Model1 eine bessere ~~reinstimmung erzielt wurde.
Es liegt eindeutig eine ausgeprlgte dynamische Hysterese fiir die Adsorption/Desorption
im pot&en
Silicagel vor, welche entweder durch den effektiven Diffusionskoeffizienten auf der FestkGrperseite, welcher
mit ansteigendem Feuchtegehalt absinkt, oder-weniger
ausgepriigt-durch
eine Hysterese in der
Adsorptionsisotherme selbst hervorgerufen wird.
l-IEPEHOC BJIAI-M
3 l%JIOTHbIX CJlOIiX
CE~~KArEn~-II.
~~C~E~OBAH~E
AHHoTaum-ITposenetibl
EiaTtwecKoro
hC'Wbt,
nnoTttor0
centwarenfi
ItOJtyYetiHbte C nOMOIllbK2
TbteatorueR
COOIBeTCTBNe
nOJtyYeH0
no
onpenenetwo
nepeHocHbtx
nptt cTyneHYaT0h.t
MOaeJtH
ruttisw~e nceBnoomt0Katomero
ancop6unn/~~op6unn
3~~KT~BHOrO
3KcneptiMetirbt
cnon
H3MeHeHtttt
KOHTaKTHO-WpMH'teCKOrO
ra3a,cpasttssatoTcx
3KC~EP~MEHTA~bHO~
xaparrepecrsr
napah4eTpoB
TOHKO~O
Bo3nyxa
aiItia-
tia sxone.
cpe3ynbTaTar.w
sKcnepuMeH~a.JIywuee
Ha6nmAaeMbig lWHaMWteCK&
rtfCTepe3MC
il.%+
c MnKponop~cTbIM cenmcareneM hfo~fz sBnriTbcz4 cneilcTiweM
ti3ktetietttts
KO~~~U~eHTa
RJtSt ItepBOii
MOneItH.
nt4t~y3titi Tsepnoii
Qla3at. yMeHbma~meroc~
c POCTOM
Bnaroconepma-
K30TepMeaACOp6Uttt4.