International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

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

Experimental study on heat and mass transfer characteristics

for a desiccant-coated fin-tube heat exchanger
Zhang Li ⇑, Saikawa Michiyuki, Fujinawa Takeshi
Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 2-6-1 Nagasaka, Yokosuka City, Kanagawa Prefecture 240-0196, Japan

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

Article history: In this study, we investigated the heat and mass transfer characteristics of a desiccant-coated fin-tube
Received 30 April 2014 heat exchanger (DCHE), in which the desiccant was coated on the surface of a conventional fin-tube heat
Received in revised form 8 May 2015 exchanger. It differs from desiccant wheels in which the desiccant is cooled or heated by the fluid inside
Accepted 24 May 2015
the tube during the adsorption or desorption process, and from conventional heat exchangers, in which
moisture transfer occurs and the latent heat transfer is caused by phase change of the adsorbed moisture.
Firstly, the heat and mass-transfer model for the DCHE was presented in this paper, whereupon the influ-
Keywords:
ences of air velocity, desiccant temperature and moisture content on the overall mass-transfer coefficient
Desiccant
Adsorption
were separately analyzed for desorption and adsorption processes. It emerged that the overall
Desorption mass-transfer coefficient rose with increasing air velocity. The moisture content of the desiccant signif-
Heat exchanger icantly impacted on the overall mass-transfer coefficient. Higher desiccant temperature resulted in lower
Heat transfer overall mass-transfer coefficient. Finally, the heat transfer model given in this paper was applied to cal-
Mass transfer culate the DCHE heat transfer rate and the values obtained by calculation were observed to correlate well
with the experimental results.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction dehumidification. To overcome the influence of the adsorption

Desiccants are known to be efficient in controlling air humidity
and are used in both solid and liquid form. Natural zeolites, silica
gels and molecular sieves are just some of the solid desiccants that
have been utilized in air dehumidification systems. In general,
there are three types of solid desiccant dehumidifiers: fixed-bed,
rotary wheel and cross-cooled units [1–3]. A fixed-bed dehumidi-
fier is an original type of solid desiccant dehumidifier, in which
process and regeneration air flow through the bed alternately;
achieving both heat and mass transfer [4,5]. Considerable research
[6–10] has been conducted in recent years into desiccant wheels.
The rotary desiccant wheel includes an internal matrix of a base
material, with a desiccant material impregnated on its surface.
The cross-section of the desiccant wheel is divided into process
and regeneration air sides by the clapboard. Accordingly, both
dehumidification and regeneration processes can be realized
simultaneously as the desiccant wheel rotates. However, the dehu-
midified air in both fixed-bed and rotary wheel dehumidifiers is
subject to an undesirable temperature rise, which will reduce the
moisture adsorption capacity, and usually require cooling after
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 4 6856 2121; fax: +81 4 6856 3346.
E-mail address: zhangli@criepi.denken.or.jp (Z. Li).
heat, some researchers [3,11,12] proposed desiccant-coated
cross-cooled dehumidifier beds, based on a plate-fin air-to-air heat
exchanger, in which adsorption heat can be transferred to the cool-
ing air flow.
All desiccants must be regenerated to adsorb moisture from air
periodically and the desiccant will release moisture due to the
increased surface temperature. In the three types of dehumidifiers
mentioned here, the desiccant is heated to the desired regenera-
tion temperature by the regeneration air, which, in turn, is initially
heated by a heat source. There are two heat transfers: heat
source ? regeneration air ? desiccant. Consequently, irreversibil-
ity loss is increased, meaning a higher heat source temperature is
required in the regeneration process.
To overcome the problems involved in the adsorption and des-
orption process of traditional solid desiccant dehumidifiers, a
desiccant-coated heat exchanger (DCHE), in which the desiccant
is coated on the surface of a conventional fin-tube heat exchanger,
has been more recently proposed. Air flows through the DCHE to be
dehumidified or obtain moisture from the desiccant. Brine inside
the tubes is used to cool or heat the desiccant. Consequently, not
only can the adsorption heat be removed as part of the dehumidi-
fication process, but the desiccant is also directly heated by the
heat source. Consequently, the moisture absorption capacity can

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.05.095
0017-9310/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
642 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651

Nomenclature

Aout, Ad heat and mass-transfer area on the air side and desic- rp pore radius of desiccant (m)
cant layer (m2) Re Reynolds number
Ain, Aw heat transfer area on the brine side and tube wall (m2) R heat transfer resistance ((m2 K) kW1)
Af, At fin and tube surface area (m2) R⁄ mass-transfer resistance (m2 s) kg1)
AD adsorption RH air relative humidity (%)
Cw moisture content of desiccant ((kg moisture) (kg desic- Rp relative pressure of desiccant, namely the ratio of the
cant)1) vapor pressure at the adsorbent surface and the saturate
Cw,rich moisture content of desiccant at the end of the adsorp- vapor pressure
tion process ((kg moisture) (kg desiccant)1) Rv gas constant (kJ (kg K)1)
Cw,weak moisture content of desiccant at the end of the desorp- S1 longitudinal tube pitch (m)
tion process ((kg moisture) (kg desiccant)1) S2 transverse tube pitch (m)
de equivalent diameter of airflow channel (m) Sh Sherwood number
Dao molecular diffusivity (m2 s1) T temperature (K)
Dak Knudsen diffusivity (m2 s1) V velocity (m s1)
Ds surface diffusivity (m2 s1) W fin width (m)
Dp,eff effective diffusivity of vapor in the pore (m2 s1) X air humidity ratio (kg moisture (kg DA)1)
Ds,eff effective surface diffusivity (m2 s1) Xeq air humidity ratio in equilibrium with the desiccant (kg
din internal tube diameter (m) moisture (kg DA)1)
DE desorption
DCHE desiccant-coated heat exchanger Greek symbols
H height of DCHE (m) q density (kg m3)
HE heat exchanger c vaporization heat of water (kJ kg1)
hin, hout heat transfer coefficient on the brine and air sides (kW k thermal conductivity (kW (m K)1)
(m2 K)1) m kinematic viscosity (m2 s1)
Htotal,sen overall heat transfer coefficient (kW (m2 K)1) d thickness (m)
i enthalpy kJ (kg)1 s operation time (s)
L length of DCHE (m) egv volume faction of the gaseous mixture within the por-
kd, kout mass-transfer coefficient on the desiccant and air sides ous medium
(kg (m2 s)1) sgv tortuosity of the water vapor path
Ktotal overall mass transfer coefficient (kg (m2 s)1) sl tortuosity of the absorbed water path within the porous
m mass flow rate (kg s1) medium
Mv mass-transfer rate of moisture (kg s1) DT logarithmic mean temperature difference (K)
M_v mass-transfer rate of moisture per unit area (kg
(m2 s)1) Subscripts
Md,dry desiccant mass under dry conditions (kg) a air
Nt number of transversal tube rows b brine
Nr number of longitudinal tube rows
d desiccant
P pressure (Pa) f fin
Pf fin pinch (m) i inlet
qst adsorption heat (kJ kg1) o outlet
Q total heat transfer rate (kW)
p pore of desiccant
Qsen sensible heat transfer rate (kW) t tube
Qa,lat latent heat load of air (kW) w tube wall
Qa,sen sensible heat load of air (kW)

be maximized, and the required regeneration temperature reduced
to some extent.
Some studies have been performed on theoretical and experi-
mental analysis concerning the DCHE and the dehumidification
performance of DCHEs by coating FAM adsorption materials was
investigated [13]. It was concluded that the effectiveness of
DCHE dehumidification far exceeded that of a conventional desic-
cant wheel system. Experiments were performed to compare two
kinds of DCHEs coated with silica gel and polymer materials
respectively [14], the results of which showed that the silica
gel-coated heat exchanger had a higher average moisture removal,
longer effective dehumidification time and superior thermal per-
formance. A dynamic one-dimensional mathematical model was
established to predict the performance of the silica gel-coated
fin-tube heat exchanger cooling system driven by hot water at
50–70 °C or solar energy [15,16]. It emerged that the operation
time in the dehumidification process is a crucial factor for cooling
capacity [15], and 2 min was recommended as the switch time
under Shanghai, China, summer climate conditions [16]. A heat
pump desiccant unit, comprising a hermetic scroll compressor,
an expansion valve, a four-way valve and two DCHEs was intro-
duced, and its performance in heating and humidification mode
measured during winter in two office rooms [17]. The results
proved that the heat pump desiccant unit not only properly
humidified the interior without using any additional water source,
like a conventional humidifier, but also helped keep the indoor
temperature at the desired level.
The literature review revealed that using the DCHE for cooling
and dehumidification, or heating and humidification systems was
efficient and environmentally friendly. However, almost no exper-
imental studies have been conducted involving measurement of
the DCHE heat and mass-transfer coefficients, despite the fact this
is necessary and vital for both performance evaluation and system
design. In addition, desiccants are not just used to adjust the
humidity level of indoor environments, but also to prevent frosting
of outdoor heat exchangers of air-source heat pump (ASHP)
 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651
systems in winter [18–22]. For example, a frost-free air-source
heat pump water heating system with integrated solid desiccant
was proposed [20]; comprising a conventional ASHP and an extra
DCHE, in which the outside air traverses the DCHE before entering
the heat pump evaporator. Because the dew point of the air at the
DCHE outlet is lower than the evaporation temperature of the
refrigerant in the evaporator, frost-free operation could be realized
in the system. For ASHP systems, frost normally accumulates when
the air temperature is from 7 to 5.5 °C, and the relative humidity
exceeds 60%, a frequent atmospheric combination. Therefore, it is
important to measure the heat and mass transfer characteristics
of the DCHE under those air conditions.
The objective of this work is to experimentally investigate the
heat and mass transfer characteristics of a DCHE coated with
meso-porous silica within the operational ranges of air dehumidi-
fication and frost-free applications, in which the air temperature is
within the range 2 to 30 °C and with constant relative humidity
of 80%.
2. Theoretical analysis of heat and mass transfer in DCHE
2.1. Thermo-physical properties of the adsorbent
The adsorption is characterized by the moisture content (Cw) of
the adsorbent, which, in turn, varies with the equilibrium temper-
ature (Td) and relative pressure (Rp) of the desiccant. Rp is the ratio
of the vapor pressure at the adsorbent surface (Pd) and the saturate
vapor pressure (Ps) at the temperature Td. The adsorption isotherm
depends on the adsorbent material properties. Here, we employ
Taiyo Kagaku Meso-porous Silica-1.5 (TMPS-1.5) as the desiccant
with an average pore diameter of 1.8  109 m, pore volume of
373 m3 kg1, density of 281 kg m3 and average particle size of
3.2  106 m. The adsorption isotherms of the TMPS-1.5 at 0 °C is
given in literature [23], and at 25 and 50 °C are proposed by
Taiyo Kagaku Co., Ltd. as shown in Fig. 1(a). We obtained the equi-
librium adsorption equation by fitting those curves as follows:
f ðT d ; C w Þ ¼ n0 þ n1 R1p þ n2 R2p þ n3 R3p
Note that adsorption hysteresis occurs for the adsorbent of
TMPS-1.5, hence the coefficients of n0  n3 are given in terms of
adsorption (AD) and desorption (DE) processes; as shown in
Tables 1(a) and (b) separately. Moreover, we assume that the
TMPS-1.5, within a temperature range of 12.5–12.5 °C, 12.5–
37.5 °C or 37.5–62.5 °C has the same adsorption isotherm as that
at 0, 25 or 50 °C.
Xeq, the air humidity ratio in equilibrium with the desiccant, is
expressed as
Rp Ps
X eq ¼
101; 325  Rp Ps
where Ps can be calculated from Eq. (3) [24].
Ps ¼ exp ðk1 =T d þ k2 þ k3 T d þ k4 T 2d þ k5 T 3d þ k6 lnðT d ÞÞ
in which, k1 = 5800.2206, k2 = 1.3914933, k3 = 0.04860239,
k4 = 0.41764768, k5 = 0.14452093, k6 = 6.5459673.
From Eqs. (1–3), we can obtain Pd or Xeq as a function of Cw; the
results of which are given in Fig. 1(b) at three Td of 0, 25 and 50 °C.
One cycle, including adsorption, cooling, heating and desorption
processes, is also shown in Fig. 1(b).
The adsorption heat of the TMPS-1.5 (qst) is assumed to be equal
to the vaporization heat of water (c) by reference to the literature
[25,26].
643
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. (a) Isotherm of TMPS-1.5 (TMPS stands for Taiyokagaku Meso-Porous Silica).
(b) Vapor pressure and equilibrium humidity ratio evolution of TMPS-1.5 (TMPS
stands for Taiyokagaku Meso-Porous Silica).
2.2. Moisture transport in desiccant felt
The desiccant felt, comprising a composite mixture of desiccant
and inert material is shown at the top of Fig. 2. The felt is assumed
to be a particulate composite structure and is made of a mixture of
meso-porous silica and inert particles, as shown in the bottom left
ð1Þ
of Fig. 2. The meso-porous silica particles, as shown in the bottom
middle of Fig. 2, are silicon oxides arranged in well-defined sym-
metry with a porous ordered honeycomb-like structure and
nanometer-controlled pore size. Within the pore, three kinds of
diffusions: molecular diffusion, Knudsen diffusion and surface dif-
fusion, may occur simultaneously as shown in the bottom right of
Fig. 2.
Inside the porous medium, the sorbent (water) transfer is given
by the contributions of the independently parallel processes of the
gas-phase diffusion of vapor and surface diffusion of adsorbed
water [27–29].
For the gas-phase diffusion of vapor, the diffusion flux travers-
ð2Þ
ing a unit area of the pore is given by,
dX eq
M_v p ¼ Dp qa ð4Þ
dZ
ð3Þ where Dp is the diffusivity of vapor, expressed as
 1
s
Dp ¼ D1ao þ D1  eggvv . Here, Dao and Dak are molecule diffusivity
ak
T 1:685
and Knudsen diffusivity, and calculated by Dao ¼ 1:735  109 dP
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Td
and Dak ¼ 97rp 18:015 respectively [30]. egv is the volume fraction
of the gaseous mixture within the porous medium and sgv is the tor-
tuosity of the water vapor path.
For the surface diffusion of adsorbed water, Fick’s law model
can be used, in which the surface flux is assumed to be propor-
tional to the concentration gradient and expressed as
644 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651

Table 1a
Values of n0  n3 for the AD process.

Td = 12.5–12.5 °C Td = 12.5–37.5 °C Td = 37.5–62.5 °C

Rp = 0–0.36 Rp = 0.36–0.46 Rp = 0.46–0.93 Rp = 0–0.30 Rp = 0.30–0.40 Rp = 0.40–0.90 Rp = 0–0.33 Rp = 0.33–0.46 Rp = 0.46–0.93
n0 0.00239 5.31953 0.172329 0.00164 10.95432 0.13866 0.0000163 11.19966 0.13796
n1 0.467945 44.4388 0.428252 0.791459 96.8333 2.188143 0.487197 88.3563 2.101567
n2 1.21081 120.9105 0.27665 3.90201 283.7978 3.35493 1.54564 230.3227 3.16526
n3 2.509218 104.179 0.115215 9.37421 270.528 1.78429 3.548683 194.902 1.664465

Table 1b
Values of n0  n3 for the DE process.

Td = 12.5–12.5 °C Td = 12.5–37.5 °C Td = 37.5–62.5 °C

Rp = 0–0.22 Rp = 0.22–0.29 Rp = 0.29–0.85 Rp = 0–0.29 Rp = 0.29–0.4 Rp = 0.4–0.93 Rp = 0–0.33 Rp = 0.33–0.40 Rp = 0.40–0.87
n0 0.00164 24.45096 0.276551 0.00164 11.7986 0.213078 0.002295 103.9237 0.01083
n1 0.534154 298.285 0.316414 0.742793 93.99519 0.605003 0.506172 862.039 1.59411
n2 1.41262 1200.736 0.32123 3.47016 243.424 0.99343 1.86389 2372.92 2.45145
n3 4.434326 1528.08 0.151901 8.273829 210.7103 0.638591 4.191939 2163.36 1.334656

We defined the average mass transfer coefficient inside the des-

iccant felt (kd) as the moisture flux traversing the unit area per unit
time per humidity ratio changer as follows:
Dd qa
kd ¼ ð10Þ
dd
Eq. (9) can be rewritten as follows:

M_ v ¼ kd ðX eq;1  X eq;2 Þ ð11Þ

Consequently, the mass diffusion at the desiccant side is
expressed as an analytically convective mass transfer, in which
the mass-transfer coefficient (kd) is determined by total diffusivity
(Dd) at the constant air density (qa ) and desiccant felt thickness
dC w
(dd). Here emphasis should be placed that besides Dp and Ds, dX eq
Fig. 2. Schematics of desiccant felt, desiccant particle and diffusion in a desiccant
pore. has a significant effect on Dd, and further affects kd. A detailed dis-
cussion will be given in later section.

dC w 2.3. Heat and mass-transfer model for the DCHE

M_v s ¼ Ds qd ð5Þ
dZ
where Ds is the surface diffusivity, and calculated by Fig. 3(a) and (b) show schematic and physical photos of the
  DCHE, in which the desiccant is coated on the surface of fins
4:5104 qst

Ds ¼ D0  e [30–32], qd is the density of the desiccant par-

bRv T d and partial surface of tubes by the dipping method. Air flows
ticle, and Cw is the moisture content of the desiccant. D0 is a con- through the DCHE and contacts the desiccant-coated fin surface
stant that depends on the adsorbent and b depends on the type of to exchange moisture with the desiccant, while brine inside the
adsorption bond. tubes is used to heat or cool the desiccant. It differs from pure
The total diffusion flux in the pore can be expressed as heat exchangers in that moisture transfer (Mv) occurs and latent
    heat transfer (Mvqst) is caused by the phase change of the
dX eq dC w
M_ v ¼ M_v p þ M_v s ¼ Dp qa þ Ds qd adsorbed moisture. Consequently, the heat transfer in the DCHE
dZ dZ is composed of two parts: sensible heat transfer, caused by the
 
qd dC w dX eq temperature difference between the brine and air, and latent heat
¼  Dp þ Ds  qa  ð6Þ
qa dX eq dZ transfer caused by the phase change of the adsorbed moisture.
Furthermore, the moisture adsorption/desorption process in the
Assuming total diffusivity in the desiccant felt (Dd) is given by: DCHE differs from that in desiccant wheels, in which no hot/cool-
qd dC w ing brine is used to heat/cool the desiccant. Generally speaking, it
Dd ¼ Dp þ Ds ð7Þ is more complicated to evaluate the mass and heat transfer coef-
qa dX eq
ficients of DCHEs compared with that of heat exchangers or des-
Eq. (6) can be rewritten as, iccant wheels.
dX eq Before the heat and mass-transfer model for the DCHE was
M_ v ¼ Dd qa ð8Þ established, certain assumptions were made as follows:
dZ
Since Dd and qa are assumed to be constant, the diffusion flux inside
(1) The DCHE is considered a block, through which the air and
the desiccant felt (dd) can be expressed as
brine flow at the desiccant-coated fin side and inside the
Dd qa tube separately.
M_ v ¼ ðX eq;1  X eq;2 Þ ð9Þ
dd (2) The desiccant material is evenly coated at the DCHE surface.
 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651 645

(a) (b)

Fig. 3. (a) Sketch of the DCHE geometry (DCHE stands for desiccant-coated heat exchanger). (b) Physical, detailed and micro photos of the DCHE, fins and desiccant felt (DCHE
stands for desiccant-coated heat exchanger).

(3) The adsorption/desorption process also takes into account Mv ¼ kd Aout ðX i  X eq Þ ð12Þ
that water vapor and adsorbed water co-exist in equilibrium
Similarly, the mass diffusion at the air side is also expressed as
inside the desiccant porous medium, in an equilibrium char-
an analytically convective mass transfer as follows:
acterized by sorption isotherms.
(4) The adsorption heat is assumed to release to the desiccant Mv ¼ kout Aout ðX a  X i Þ ð13Þ
layer only. However, it is transferred to the air and brine
where kd and kout are the mass-transfer coefficients on the desiccant
due to temperature difference.
and air sides respectively; Xa and Xeq are the air humidity ratios on
the air and desiccant sides respectively; Xi is the air humidity ratio
A schematic of the heat and mass transfer for the DCHE is
at the air-desiccant interface; Aout is the total heat and
shown in Fig. 4. Mass transfer during the adsorption or desorption
mass-transfer area on the air side, and calculated by:
process occurs between the desiccant felt and bulk air. There are
two mass transfer resistances: mass transfer resistance in the bulk Aout ¼ Af þ At ð14Þ
air (Rout ) and that in the desiccant felt (Rd ). The heat transfer
where Af and At are the fin and tube surface areas, and calculated by
between the air and brine comprises four sensible heat transfer 2
Af ¼ 2  L=P f  ðW  H  p4 ðdin þ dw þ dd Þ  N t Þ, At ¼ L=P f  ðpðdin þ dw þ dd Þ
processes, and one latent heat transfer process. Corresponding to
the four sensible heat transfer processes, there are four heat trans- ðP f  df  dd Þ  N t Þ respectively.
fer resistances: convection thermal resistance on the bulk air side The mass-transfer rate between the air and desiccant side can
(Rout), conduction thermal resistances in the desiccant layer (Rd) also be evaluated from the overall mass-transfer coefficient
and tube wall (Rw), and convection thermal resistance on the brine (Ktotal), which is defined as the moisture flux traversing the unit
side (Rin) respectively. area per unit time per humidity ratio changer as follows:
The mass-transfer rate (Mv) on the desiccant side can be Mv ¼ K total Aout ðX a  X eq Þ ð15Þ
expressed in terms of the humidity ratio difference and
mass-transfer coefficient by reference to the Eq. (11) of Section 2.2. From Eqs. (12), (13) and (15), Ktotal may be written in the form
1 1 1
¼ þ ð16Þ
K total kout kd
Eq. (16) shows that the overall mass-transfer coefficient is functions
of the mass-transfer coefficients on the desiccant and air sides.
The heat transfer between the air and desiccant felt is com-
posed of one convective heat transfer and one latent heat transfer
caused by the phase change of the adsorbed moisture, and
expressed as
Q ¼ hout  Aout  ðT a  T 1 Þ þ Mv  qst ð17Þ
The heat conductions inside the desiccant felt and the tube wall are
given as
kd Ad
Q¼ ðT 1  T 2 Þ ð18Þ
dd

kw Aw
Q¼ ðT 2  T 3 Þ ð19Þ
dw
The convective heat transfer between the tube wall and the
brine is expressed as
Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of heat and mass transfer in the DCHE (DCHE stands for Q ¼ hin  Ain ðT 3  T b Þ ð20Þ
desiccant-coated heat exchanger).
646 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651
where Q is the heat transfer rate; hin and hout are the heat transfer
coefficients on the brine and air sides; Ta and Tb are the tempera-
tures of the air and brine; dd and dw are the thicknesses of the des-
iccant layer and tube wall; kd and kw are the thermal conductivities
of the desiccant and tube wall; T1, T2 and T3 are the temperatures at
the air-desiccant, desiccant-wall, and wall-brine interfaces, respec-
tively; qst is the adsorption heat of water; Ad, Aw and Ain are the heat
transfer areas on the desiccant layer, tube wall and brine sides,
which are calculated as follows:
 
dd
Ad ¼ L  Nt  p din þ dt þ
2 brine that will be used in the following adsorption process. The
 
dt
Aw ¼ L  Nt  p din þ
2 were finished. Adsorption–desorption tests were continuously
Ain ¼ L  Nt  pdin
From Eqs. (17–20), Q can be rewritten in the form:
Htotal;sen
Q ¼ Htotal;sen  Aout  ðT a  T b Þ þ M v  qst
hout
where Htotal,sen is the overall sensible heat transfer coefficient,
expressed by
1 1 1 Aout dd Aout dw Aout
¼ þ þ þ
Htotal;sen hout hin Ain kd Ad k w Aw
In this study, the average overall mass-transfer coefficients dur-
ing the moisture adsorption/desorption process, and sensible heat
transfer coefficients during no moisture transfer were measured
experimentally.
3. Experimental apparatus and data reduction
3.1. Experimental apparatus
The schematic and photo of the experimental apparatus are
shown in Fig. 5, comprising an air loop, two brine loops: one for
cooling brine, another for hot brine, and some measurement
instruments. The air, conditioned to the required temperature
and humidity using a constant temperature and humidity air sup-
plier, traverses the DCHE, in which adsorption or desorption occurs
in terms of the brine temperature inside the DCHE tubes. There are
two thermostatic baths; one each for cooling and hot brine respec-
tively. During the adsorption process, valves (V1 and V2) were
opened and valve (V3) closed. The cooling brine, with temperature
equivalent to the air, was passed through the DCHE. Valves (V4 and
Fig. 5. Schematic and photo of the experimental apparatus.
V5) were closed and valve (V6) opened to form a bypass flow of the
hot brine that will be used in the following desorption process. The
desiccant attracted and captured moisture from the air, and the
heat of adsorption dissipated into the cooling brine. When the air
humidity ratio at the DCHE outlet (Xa,o) was equal to that at the
DCHE inlet (Xa,i), adsorption tests were finished, and the water
had to be removed from the desiccant. Subsequently, desorption
tests were performed. Valves (V4 and V5) were opened and valve
(V6) closed. The hot brine, with higher temperature than that of
the air, was passed through the DCHE. Valves (V1 and V2) were
ð21Þ closed and valve (V3) opened to form a bypass flow of the cooling
desiccant was heated by the hot brine and released its moisture
into the air. Similarly, when Xa,o was equal to Xa,i, desorption tests
ð22Þ
conducted with at least 3 cycles per test, and the experimental data
ð23Þ on the second or third cycle were collected and used in the follow-
ing data reduction.
The temperature and air humidity ratio at the DCHE inlet and
outlet are measured by Pt temperature sensors (accuracy to within
ð24Þ
±0.2 K), and a capacitive humidity sensor (accuracy to within ±1%).
The air flow rate is measured by a differential pressure flow meter
(accuracy to within ±1.5%), while the pressure drop of the air flow
through the DCHE is measured by a differential pressure trans-
ducer (accuracy to within ±0.2%FS). The flow rates of the hot or
ð25Þ cooling brine at the DCHE inlet were measured by an electromag-
netic flow meter (accuracy to within ±0.5% of the measured value).
The brine temperature was also measured at the DCHE inlet and
outlet by Pt temperature sensors (accuracy to within ±0.2 K). The
physical characteristics of the DCHE are given in Table 2, while
the main measurement instruments and their corresponding accu-
racies are listed in Table 3.
3.2. Data reduction
In this experiment, the temperature and humidity ratio of the
air, temperature and brine concentration at the inlet and outlet
of the DCHE were measured separately, which allowed the average
heat and mass-transfer characteristic for the DCHE to be obtained.
Because it is difficult to measure the humidity ratio of the air at
the air-desiccant interface (Xi), instead of using the mass-transfer
coefficients of the air (kout) and desiccant (kd) sides, the average
overall mass-transfer coefficient (Ktotal) was measured in this
study. Ktotal is obtained by
Mv
K total ¼ ð26Þ
Aout  jX a  X eq j
 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651 647

Table 2 Table 4
Physical characteristics of the DCHE. Deviation in the experimental results.

Parameters Value Parameters Values

Height of the DCHE-H (m) 0.3 Relative deviation of Mv (%) ±5.5% (for AD) and ±16.8% (for DE)
Width of the DCHE-W (m) 0.294 Relative deviation of Ktotal (%) ±25.7% (for AD) and ±36.9% (for DE)
Length of the DCHE-L (m) 0.022 Relative deviation of Qsen (%) ±4.6%
Inner diameter of tube-din (m) 6.3  103 Relative deviation of Htotal,sen (%) ±7.1%
Thickness of tube-dw (m) 0.35  103
Longitudinal tube pitch-S1 (m) 22  103
Transverse tube pitch-S2 (m) 21  103
Fin pitch-Pf (m) 1.4  103 In this paper, Qsen was determined by the parameters of the
Number of transversal tube rows-Nt 14 brine side, because the measuring error on the brine side was
Thickness of fin-df (m) 0.1  103
smaller than that on the air side. The uncertainties of Qsen were
Number of longitudinal tube rows-Nr 1
Desiccant material Meso-porous silica ±4.6% and ±28.2% for the brine and air sides respectively, under
Average pore diameter of desiccant (m) 1.8  109 experimental conditions of Ta = 7 °C, RH = 80%, Va = 0.5 m s1,
Mass of desiccant-Md,dry (kg) 0.068 Tb = 50 °C, Mb = 3.0 L min1.
Thickness of desiccant layer-dd (m) 0.15  103 The amount of adsorbed moisture during the AD process
P
( Mv,ad) and that of the desorbed moisture during the DE process
P
( Mv,de) are calculated by integrating Mv over operation time (s) as
Table 3 follows:
Specifications of measuring instruments. X Z s
Device Type Accuracy Range
Mv ¼ M v ds ð31Þ
0
Thermometer Pt temperature ±0.2 °C 70–180 °C P P
sensor
Deviations between Mv,ad and Mv,de are almost within 5%,
Hygrometer Capacitive humidity ±1% 0–100% meaning the experimental results can be trusted to some extent.
sensor
Air flow meter Differential pressure ±1.5%FS 0.001–0.19 m3 s1 3.3. Error analysis
type
Solution flow meter Electromagnetic ±0.5%FS 0–11.76 L min1
flow meter The error analysis of the experimental results is performed
Differential pressure Silicon resonant ±0.2%FS 0–1000 Pa according to the propagation of uncertainty [33]. The primary
transmitter sensor independent variables, air flow rate, air temperature and relative
humidity, brine flow rate and temperature, have measurement
uncertainties of ±1.5%, ±0.2 °C, ±1%, ±0.5% and ±0.2 °C respectively.
X þX
in which Xa is the average air humidity ratio, X a ¼ a;i 2 a;o , Xeq, the air These uncertainties translate into uncertainties in Mv, Qsen, Ktotal
humidity ratio in equilibrium with the desiccant, is functions of Cw and Htotal,sen, and are provided in Table 4. The errors of Mv and
P
and Td and calculated by Eqs. (1–3). C w ¼ C w;rich  Mv =M d;dry for Ktotal for the DE process exceed those for the AD process because
P of the characteristic of the air relative humidity sensor: the higher
the DE process and C w ¼ C w;weak þ Mv =Md;dry for the AD process.
Td, the desiccant temperature, is assumed to be equivalent to the the air temperature, the greater the error in the measured air
T b;i þT b;o humidity ratio. The relative deviations of Qsen and Htotal,sen are
tube wall temperature (Tw) and calculated by, T d ¼ 2
 hinQAin ,
±4.6 and ±7.1%, respectively.
‘‘’’ for the DE process and ‘‘+’’ for the AD process, Mv is the
mass-transfer rate of moisture, and obtained by
4. Results and discussion
M v ¼ ma  jX a;i  X a;o j ð27Þ
The operating conditions during the AD and DE tests are shown
Here, ma, Xa,i and Xa,o are the measured mass flow rate of the air and in Table 5. The inlet air varied from 2 to 30 °C with constant rel-
its inlet and outlet humidity ratios, respectively.The average overall ative humidity of 80%. The superficial air velocities were within the
sensible heat transfer coefficient (Htotal,sen) is obtained by range 0.25–1.0 m s1; corresponding to mass flow rates of 0.028–
Q sen 0.119 kg s1. Hot brine at five different temperatures, 20, 30, 40,
Htotal;sen ¼ ð28Þ 50 and 60 °C, was selected during the DE test. In this experiment,
Aout  DT
we tried to test the DCHE characteristic under isothermal adsorp-
in which DT, the logarithmic mean temperature difference of brine tion, hence the cooling brine had a temperature equivalent to air
and air, is calculated as during the AD test. The desiccant was initially regenerated during
DE tests for 5–10 min until the humidity ratio of the air at the
ðT b;i  T a;o Þ  ðT b;o  T a;i Þ
DT ¼ T T
ð29Þ DCHE outlet was equal to that at the inlet. Subsequently, the AD
ln T b;i Ta;o
a;i tests were run and a minimum of two cycles per test were
b;o

completed.
Qsen is the measured heat transfer rate of the DCHE when the
moisture transfer rate is zero. To obtain Qsen after the DCHE was
continually heated for 30 min by 60 °C hot brine, the mass flow Table 5
rate and temperature of the brine at the inlet and outlet of the Experimental conditions.
DCHE were measured, in which the moisture transfer process Parameters AD process DE process
was almost completely finished. Qsen was calculated by
Temperature of the inlet air (°C) 2–30 2–30
Q sen ¼ mb  jib;i  ib;o j ð30Þ Relative humidity of the inlet air (%) 80 80
Velocity of the inlet air (m s1) 0.25–1.0 0.25–1.0
Here, mb are the mass flow rate of the brine and ib,i, ib,o are Temperature of the inlet brine (°C) 2–30 20–60
Flow rate of the inlet brine (kg s1) 0.026–0.074 0.026–0.072
enthalpies of the brine at the inlet and outlet of the DCHE
Operation time (min) 5–10 5–10
respectively.
648 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651
4.1. Dynamic characteristics of the DCHE for the DE and AD processes
The results of two cycles, including DE and AD processes, are
shown in Figs. 6 and 7(a) and (b). Fig. 6 shows the variation in
air temperature, humidity ratio and brine temperature over time.
Data is provided at one second intervals. During the DE process,
the humidity ratio of the air at the DCHE outlet (Xa,o) exceeds that
at the inlet (Xa,i) because of absorbing moisture from the desiccant.
Simultaneously, the air temperature increases as it travels from the
DCHE, in which the air is heated by the hot brine. Xa,o decreases
with the DE process, and is equal to Xa,i at the end of the DE pro-
cess. In the following AD process, Xa,o is lower than Xa,i because
the air is dehumidified through contact with the desiccant. The
temperature of the dehumidified air remained approximately con-
stant, because the adsorption heat dissipated into the cooling brine
at large.
Fig. 7(a) shows the variation in the transient mass transfer rate
of moisture (Mv) over time. Mv decreases over time for both DE and
Fig. 6. The variation in air and brine temperatures, air absolute humidity over time
(this figure gives the variations of Ta,i, Ta,o, Xa,i, Xa,o, Tb,i, and Tb,o over time for the
desorption and adsorption processes. Here, Ta,i, Ta,o – air temperature at the inlet
and outlet of the DCHE; Xa,i, Xa,o – air humidity ratio at the inlet and outlet of the
DCHE; Tb,i, Tb,o – brine temperature at the inlet and outlet of the DCHE; DE stands for
desorption process; AD stands for adsorption process).
(a)
(b)
Fig. 7. Variations of mass and heat transfer rate over time: (a) mass-transfer rate;
(b) heat transfer rate (the mass-transfer rate (Mv) is given in (a). The total heat
transfer rate (Q), sensible heat transfer rate (Qa,sen) and latent heat transfer rate
(Qa,lat) for the air are given in (b) respectively; DE stands for desorption process; AD
stands for adsorption process).
P P
AD processes, and the deviations between Mv,ad and Mv,de are
within 5% for the two cycles. The total heat load (Qa,total), sensible
heat load (Qa,sen) and latent heat load (Qa,lat) of the air are presented
in Fig. 7(b). Qa,total decreases over time for the DE process due to the
decrease in Mv. Qa,sen significantly exceeds Qa,lat for the DE process,
although the sensible heat transfer is not undesirable. Accordingly,
a reasonable method must be found to recover the heat from the
regeneration air to improve energy efficiency. For the AD process,
Qa,total decreases over time due to the decrease in Mv, while Qa,sen
is significantly influenced by the temperature variation
(40 °C ? 2 °C) of the DCHE from DE to the AD process.
4.2. Mass-transfer characteristics of DCHE for the DE and AD processes
4.2.1. Effect of air velocity on the average overall mass-transfer
coefficient
The average overall mass-transfer coefficient (Ktotal) was
obtained by Eq. (26) based on experimental data. Figs. 8 and 9
show Ktotal measured during the DE and AD processes against air
velocity (Va) at varying moisture content of the desiccant (Cw).
Ktotal increases with increasing air velocity from 0.25 to
1.0 m s1 for both DE and AD processes as shown in Figs. 8 and
9, because the mass-transfer coefficient on the air side is increased.
4.2.2. Effect of moisture content of desiccant on the average overall
mass transfer coefficient
The moisture content of the desiccant (Cw) is expressed as the
horizontal axis of Figs. 8 and 9. For the DE process (Fig. 8), Cw varies
from the large value of 0.38 on the right to the small value of 0.15
Fig. 8. Effect of Cw and Va on Ktotal for the DE process. (effects of the moisture
content of the desiccant (Cw) and air velocity (Va) on the average overall mass-
transfer coefficient (Ktotal) are given in this figure for the desorption (DE) process, in
which Cw is within the range 0.15–0.38, and Va varies from 0.25 to 1.0 m s1).
Fig. 9. Effect of Cw and Va on Ktotal for the AD process. (effects of the moisture
content of the desiccant (Cw) and air velocity (Va) on the average overall mass-
transfer coefficient (Ktotal) are given in this figure for the adsorption (AD) process, in
which Cw is within the range 0.15–0.38, and Va varies from 0.25 to 1.0 m s1).
 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651 649

on the left and Ktotal increases with declining Cw from 0.38 to 0.33. dC w
diffusivity (Ds) and dX eq
at constant qqd , as shown in Eq. (7). We know
a
In the following, Ktotal decreases when Cw varies from 0.33 to 0.15. that increasing the brine or air temperature for the DE or AD pro-
Comparing Fig. 1(b) and this figure, we found that the Cw of 0.33 is cess leads to an increase in the desiccant temperature (Td) corre-
a special point, at which the peak of Ktotal occurred at Fig. 8, and the spondingly. Increasing Td is also helpful to improve Dp and Ds.
vapor pressure (Pv) became independent from the Cw at Fig. 1(b). A dC w
However, dX is inversely proportional to Td for the DE and AD pro-
similar relationship between Cw and Ktotal is observed under the AD eq

process as shown in Fig. 9. Instead of the peak of Fig. 8 in the DE
process, the valley occurs at the same Cw of 0.33 in Fig. 9 for the
AD process.
4.2.3. Effect of brine and air temperatures on the average overall mass-
transfer coefficient
Fig. 10 shows Ktotal tested during the DE test against the brine
temperature at the DCHE inlet (Tb,i). It is found that increasing
the brine inlet temperature from 40 to 60 °C leads to a slight
decrease in Ktotal within a region near the peak of Ktotal.
Fig. 11 shows that Ktotal tested during the AD test is strongly
dependent on the process air temperature. Ktotal obviously
decreases with an increase in the air temperature from 2 to
30 °C and with constant relative humidity of 80%.
Eq. (16) shows that Ktotal is a function of the mass-transfer coef-
ficients on the desiccant and air sides. The mass-transfer coeffi-
cient on the air side (kout) rises with increasing brine or air
temperature for the DE or AD process to some extent, due to an
increase in the moisture diffusivity in the bulk air. Therefore, the
decrease in Ktotal observed in Figs. 10 and 11, is mainly attributed
to the mass-transfer coefficient on the desiccant side (kd) that is
determined by the effective diffusivity of the desiccant felt (Dd).
Dd is functions of effective pore diffusivity (Dp), effective surface
cesses, as shown in Fig. 12(a) and (b). Fig. 12(a) and (b) show the
variation in Xeq with Td at different moisture content of the desic-
cant (Cw). It is observed that corresponding to the variation in Cw,
the desiccant exhibits a larger change in humidity ratio in the
high-temperature region than in that of low temperature. For
dC w
example, the value of dX eq
at 40 °C is around 10 times smaller than
that at 0 °C. Therefore, it is possible that Dd decreases with increas-
dC w
ing Td, if the decrease in dX impacts more significantly on Dd than
eq
that of the increase in Dp and Ds.
4.2.4. Correlations of average overall mass-transfer coefficient
As mentioned above, the average overall mass-transfer coeffi-
cient (Ktotal) of the DCHE is determined by the gas-side mass trans-
fer coefficient (kout) and the desiccant-side mass transfer
coefficient (kd).
For kout, an analogy between heat and mass transfer was in wide
use [34,35], expressed as,
kout de
Sh ¼ ¼ f ðReÞ ð32Þ
qa Da
For kd, it is determined by molecular, Knudsen and surface dif-
fusivities, adsorption isotherm and the physical characteristics of
the adsorbent. Both the three diffusivities and adsorption isotherm
are functions of temperature (Td) and moisture content (Cw) of the
desiccant as described in Sections 2.1 and 2.2. Therefore, it is con-
cluded that kd is determined by two variables: Td and Cw, and
expressed as
kd ¼ f ðT d ; C w Þ ð33Þ
From Eqs. (32) and (33), it is observed that Ktotal are functions of
Re, Td and Cw. In this study, the average overall mass-transfer coef-
ficient correlation is given in the form

(a)

Fig. 10. Effect of Tb,i on Ktotal for the DE process (the effect of the brine temperature
(Tb,i) at the DCHE inlet on the average overall mass-transfer coefficient (Ktotal) is
given in this figure for the desorption (DE) process, in which Tb,i varies from 40 to
60 °C).

(b)

Fig. 11. Effect of Ta,i on Ktotal for the AD process (the effect of the air temperature Fig. 12. Variation in Xeq with Cw at different Td: (a) for the DE process; (b) for the AD
(Ta,i) at the DCHE inlet on the average overall mass-transfer coefficient (Ktotal) is process (here, Xeq – equilibrium humidity ratio of desiccant; Cw – the moisture
given in this figure for the adsorption (AD) process, in which Ta,i varies from 2 to content of desiccant; Td – desiccant temperature. DE stands for desorption process;
25 °C, at constant relative humidity (RHa)). AD stands for adsorption process).
650 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651

 
de
K total ¼ n0 en1 Re
qa  Da
where de is the equivalent diameter of the air flow channel; qa is the
density of the process air; Da is the moisture diffusivity of the bulk
7 2:334
air, and calculated by Da ¼ 4:556478  10 ðT a Þ [36]; Re is the
Reynolds number of the air, and calculated by Re ¼ Vmaade ; n0 and n1
are coefficients determined by Td and Cw, and obtained from expo-
nential regression of the experimental data for the DE and AD pro-
cesses separately.
For the DE process:
n0 ¼ ð0:0172T d þ 1:5428Þ
 
 650:83C 4w þ 490:59C 3w  125:35C 2w þ 13:904C w  0:5439
n1 ¼ 1:055C 3w  0:8943C 2w þ 0:2793C w  0:0223
For the AD process:
n0 ¼ ð0:0328T d þ 1:1507Þ  ð28804C 4w  32020C 3w þ 13266C 2w
 2434:6C w þ 167:97Þ
n1 ¼ 3:7706C 3w  3:0482C 2w þ 0:844C w  0:0702
The obtained correlation (Eq. (34)) can be used to predict the aver-
age overall mass-transfer coefficient for the DCHE. The data were
obtained when the moisture content and temperature of the desic-
cant were within the ranges 0.14–0.4 and 2–50 °C, respectively,
and the temperature and superficial velocity of the air were within
the range 2–30 °C and 0.25–1.5 m s1. Deviations between the
predicted and experimental values for the DE and AD processes
were approximately ±20%, as shown in Fig. 13(a) and (b).
4.3. Heat transfer characteristics of DCHE
ð34Þ
The total heat transfer rate (Q) of the DCHE, including sensible
and latent heat transfer, can be calculated using Eq. (24),
Htotal;sen
Q ¼ Htotal;sen  Aout  ðT a  T b Þ þ hout
M v  qst , in which Mv can be cal-
culated using the average overall mass-transfer coefficients corre-
lation as given in Eq. (34). Therefore, we can predict Q if the overall
sensible heat transfer coefficient (Htotal,sen) and the air side heat
transfer coefficient (hout) are known.
Fig. 14 shows the experimental results of Htotal,sen for DCHE
within an air velocity range of 0.25–2.0 m s1. Experiments were
conducted under conditions of Ta = 2 °C, RH = 80%, Tb = 60 °C,
Mb = 3.0 L min1. After the test had been running for 30 min, exper-
imental data were collected to calculate Htotal,sen, in which the
moisture transfer was finished and the value of Mv was zero. As
seen from Fig. 14, Htotal,sen rises with the increase in air velocity.
The pressure drop on the air side is also shown in Fig. 14. As
seen, the pressure drop rises from 3.6 to 22.5 Pa with an increase
in air velocity from 0.25 to 2.0 m s1.
The air side heat transfer coefficient (hout) is calculated by the
correlation [37] as follows:
 0:38
de de
hout ¼ 2:1 Re  Pr  ð35Þ
ka W
in which, de is the equivalent diameter of the air flow channel, W is
the fin width and ka is the thermal conductivity of the air.
Substituting Htotal,sen, hout and Mv for Eq. (24), the total heat
transfer rate (Q) of the DCHE was predicted under different mois-
ture transfer rates. The values obtained by calculation (Qcal) corre-
late well with the experimental results (Qexp), as shown in Fig. 15.

(a)

Fig. 14. Effect of Va on pressure drop and Htotal,sen. (effects of the air velocity (Va) on
the pressure drop and the average overall sensible heat transfer coefficient
(Htotal,sen) are shown in this figure, in which Va varies from 0.25 to 2.0 m s1).

(b)

Fig. 13. Comparison of the predicted and experimental average overall mass
transfer coefficients: (a) for the DE process; (b) for the AD process (here, Ktotal-exp –
experimental results; Ktotal-cal – predicted results. DE stands for desorption process;
AD stands for adsorption process).
Fig. 15. Comparison of predicted and experimental total heat transfer rates at
different Mv for the DCHE (the total heat transfer rate includes the sensible and
latent heat transfer rate. Mv is the moisture transfer rate between the desiccant and
the air, and the latent heat transfer rate is decided by the phase change of Mv. DCHE
stands for desiccant-coated heat exchanger).
 Z. Li et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 641–651
5. Conclusions
Experimental and theoretical studies were carried out to inves-
tigate the heat and mass transfer characteristics during the DE and
AD processes for a DCHE over wide-ranging operational conditions.
The following conclusions can be drawn:
(1) The air velocity (Va), temperature (Tb) and moisture content
(Cw) of the desiccant felt affects the average overall
mass-transfer coefficient (Ktotal). Ktotal rises with an increase
in Va, but decreases with increasing Tb because of the inver-
sely proportional relation between Tb and dCw/dXa.
(2) The total heat transfer rate of the DCHE, including sensible
and latent heat transfer, can be calculated by the heat transfer
model presented in this paper: Q ¼ Htotal;sen  Aout  ðT a  T b Þ þ
Htotal;sen
hout
M v  qst . It was proved that the calculated values of Q
correlated well with the experimental results.
(3) The average overall mass-transfer coefficient correlation
was obtained for the DCHE for both DE and AD processes.
Deviations between the predicted and experimental values
were within ±20%.
Conflict of Interest
None declared.
Acknowledgements
This authors wish to acknowledge the support provided by
Taiyo Kagaku Corporation. We also wish to thank former Prof.
Fumio Matsuoka of the University of Tokyo for his continued sup-
port in performing this study and Mr. Shinichi Kayama for his work
on the experimental test.
References
[1] A. Ramzy K, T.P. Ashok Babu, R. Kadoli, Semi-analytical method for heat and
moisture transfer in packed bed of silica gel, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 54
(2011) 983–993.
[2] http://www.mpi.co.jp/products/building_equipment/be004.html, 2013.3.
[3] W.X. Yuan, Y. Zheng, X.R. Liu, X.G. Yuan, Study of a new modified cross-cooled
compact solid desiccant dehumidifier, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (2008) 2257–2266.
[4] C.S. Tretiak, N.B. Abdallah, Sorption and desorption characteristics of a packed
bed of clay-CaCl2 desiccant particles, Sol. Energy 83 (2009) 1861–1870.
[5] M. Fatouh, T.A. Ibrahim, A. Mostafa, Experimental investigation on a solid
desiccant system integrated with a R407C compression air conditioner, Energy
Convers. Manage. 50 (2009) 2670–2679.
[6] S. Neti, E.I. Wolfe, Measurements of effectiveness in a silica gel rotary
exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 20 (2000) 309–322.
[7] J.D. Chung, D.Y. Lee, S.M. Yoon, Optimization of desiccant wheel speed and area
ratio of regeneration of dehumidification as a function of regeneration
temperature, Sol. Energy 83 (2009) 625–635.
[8] M.N. Golubovic, H.D.M. Hettiarachchi, W.M. Worek, Sorption properties for
different types of molecular sieve and their influence on optimum
dehumidification performance of desiccant wheels, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer
49 (2006) 2802–2809.
[9] L.A. Sphaier, W.M. Worek, Analysis of heat and mass transfer in porous
sorbents used in rotary regenerators, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 47 (2004)
3415–3430.
651
[10] T.S. Ge, Y. Li, R.Z. Wang, Y.J. Dai, A review of the mathematical models for
predicting rotary desiccant wheel, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 12
(2008) 1485–1528.
[11] W.M. Worek, Z. Lavan, Performance of a cross-cooled desiccant dehumidifier
prototype, J. Sol. Energy 104 (8) (1982) 187–196.
[12] K. Fathalah, S.E. Aly, Study of a waste heat driven modified packed desiccant
bed dehumidifier, Energy Convers. Manage. 37 (4) (1996) 457–471.
[13] S. Shimooka, K. Oshima, H. Hidaka, T. Takewaki, H. Kakiuchi, A. Kodama, M.
Kubota, H. Matsuda, The evaluation of direct cooling and heating desiccant
device coated with FAM, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 40 (13) (2007) 1330–1334.
[14] T.S. Ge, Y.J. Dai, R.Z. Wang, Z.Z. Peng, Experimental comparison and analysis on
silica gel and polymer coated fin-tube heat exchangers, Energy 35 (2010)
2893–2900.
[15] T.S. Ge, Y.J. Dai, R.Z. Wang, Performance study of silica gel coated fin-tube heat
exchanger cooling system based on a developed mathematical mode, Energy
Convers. Manage. 52 (2011) 2329–2338.
[16] T.S. Ge, Y.J. Dai, R.Z. Wang, Simulation investigation on solar powered
desiccant coated heat exchanger cooling system, Appl. Energy 93 (2012)
532–540.
[17] T.N. Aynur, Y. Hwang, R. Radermacher, Field performance measurements of a
heat pump desiccant in heating and humidification mode, Energy Build. 42
(2010) 678–683.
[18] P. Zhang, P.S. Hrnjak, Air-side performance of a parallel-flow parallel-fin (PF2)
heat exchanger in sequential frosting, Int. J. Refrig 33 (2010) 1118–1128.
[19] L. Zhang, C.B. Dang, E. Hihara, Performance analysis of a no-frost hybrid air
conditioning system with integrated liquid desiccant dehumidification, Int. J.
Refrig 33 (2010) 116–124.
[20] L. Zhang, T. Fujinawa, M. Saikawa, A new method for preventing air-source
heat pump water heater from frosting, Int. J. Refrig 35 (2012) 1327–1334.
[21] A. Endo, T. Yamaura, K. Yamashita, et al., Water adsorption-desorption
isotherms of two-dimensional hexagonal mesoporous silica around freezing
point, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 367 (2012) 409–414.
[22] Z.H. Wang, Y.X. Zheng, F.H. Wang, et al., Experimental analysis on a novel
frost-free air-source heat pump water heater system, Appl. Therm. Eng. 70
(2014) 808–816.
[23] F. Matsuoka, Expectations for separate sensible and latent air-conditionings,
Heating Piping & Air Conditioning 48 (2010) 1–5 (In Japanese).
[24] R.W. Hyland, A. Wexler, Formulations for the thermodynamic properties of the
saturated phase of H2O from 173.15 K to 473.15 K, ASHRAE Trans. 89 (1983)
506–507.
[25] S. Yamaguchi, K. Saito, Numerical and experimental performance analysis of
rotary desiccant wheels, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 60 (2013) 51–60.
[26] K.C. Ng, H.T. Chu, C.Y. Chung, et al., Experimental investigation of the silica gel-
water adsorption isotherm characteristics, Appl. Therm. Eng. 21 (2001) 1631–
1642.
[27] I. Medved, R. Cerny, Surface diffusion in porous media: a critical review,
Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 142 (2011) 405–422.
[28] M.D. Pritzker, Model for parallel surface and pore diffusion of an adsorbate in a
spherical adsorbent particle, Chem. Eng. Sci. 58 (2003) 473–478.
[29] H. Yoshida, M. Maekawa, M. Nango, Parallel transport by surface and pore
diffusion in a porous membrane, Chem. Eng. Sci. 46 (1991) 429–438.
[30] L.A. Sphaier, W.M. Worek, Analysis of heat and mass transfer in porous
sorbents used in rotary regenerators, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 47 (2004)
3415–3430.
[31] C.R. Ruivo, J.J. Costa, A.R. Figueiredo, On the validity of lumped capacitance
approaches for the numerical prediction of heat and mass transfer in desiccant
airflow systems, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 47 (2008) 282–292.
[32] P. Majumdar, Heat and mass transfer in composite desiccant pore structures
for dehumidification, Sol. Energy 62 (1998) 1–10.
[33] S.J. Kline, F.A. McClintock, Describing uncertainties in single sample
experiments, Mech. Eng. 78 (1953) 3–8.
[34] A.A. Pesaran, A.F. Mills, Moisture transport in silica gel packed beds-I.
Theoretical study, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 30 (1987) 1037–1049.
[35] P. Stabat, D. Marchio, Heat-and-mass transfers modelled for rotary desiccant
dehumidifiers, Appl. Energy 85 (2008) 128–142.
[36] R.B. Bird, W.E. Stewart, E.N. Lightfoot, Transport Phenomena, Revised 2nd ed.,
Wiley, New York, 2007. PP.521-522.
[37] Y. Seshita, M.O. Fujiyi, Compact heat exchangers, Business & Technology Daily
News, Tokyo, 1992, pp. 118 (in Japanese).