Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 277–280

www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Experimental study on the performance of mechanical cooling

tower with two types of film packing
Farhad Gharagheizi *, Reza Hayati, Shohreh Fatemi
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tehran, PO Box 11365-4563, Tehran, Iran

Received 4 April 2005; received in revised form 8 October 2005; accepted 15 April 2006
Available online 15 June 2006

Abstract

In this work, an experimental and a comparative study on terms of tower characteristics (KaV/L), water to air flow ratio (L/G) and
efficiency for two film type packings are presented for a wide range of (L/G) ratio from 0.2 to 4. The packings used in this work are
vertical corrugated packing (VCP) and horizontal corrugated packing (HCP). The obtained results showed that the performance of
the cooling tower is affected by the type and arrangement of the packings. Also, the tower performance showed a decrease with an
increase in the (L/G) ratio as is also observed in other types of cooling towers. The results showed the tower with vertical corrugated
packing (VCP) has higher efficiency than the one with horizontal corrugated packing (HCP).
 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cooling tower; Film type packing; Characteristic ratio; Corrugated packing

1. Introduction Mohiuddin and Kant presented introductive knowledge

Evaporation of water into air in order to cool the water
using a packed tower is a very widely practiced process for
treating recirculated water needed for condensers, heat
exchangers and other process equipment. Such cooling
towers are among the largest mass transfer devices in ser-
vice. They may operate either countercurrently or with
the air entering at the side of the column and flowing across
the water stream as it falls through the packing. The motive
force needed to overcome the fluid friction opposing the air
flow is provided either by forced or induced draft fans. In
counter flow cooling towers, the hot water is sprayed into
the air stream. The enthalpy of water decreases during
the heat and mass transfer, while that of air increases. In
order to increase the cooling rate, the interface area
between the air and water is increased by providing the
packed bed. There are three types of packings in use,
namely film, splash and film grid packings [1].
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 21 6112203; fax: +98 21 6957784.
E-mail address: fghara@engmail.ut.ac.ir (F. Gharagheizi).
of design for wet cooling towers and the required parame-
ters [2,3]. The performance of the cooling tower is generally
determined by the ratio of (KaV/L). This ratio is named
the tower characteristic ratio or number of transfer units
(NTU) [3]. The most important parameter for determina-
tion of NTU is the ratio of L/G. Bedekar et al. determined
the NTU for a type of VCP in the limited range of 0.05–
0.15 of L/G [1]. The effect of corrugation was studied by
Goshayshi and Missenden for some different types of
HCPs to determine the mass transfer coefficient and pres-
sure drop [4].
In this work, a counter flow induced draft mechanical
cooling tower (IDCT) was constructed in pilot scale with
two types of pickings made from PVC, which are rein-
forced with fiber glass, to provide performance data in
the area generally lacking experimental results. Because
about 96% of the packings in cooling towers are made from
PVC [4], in this work, we select this material for the
packings.
The operational range of the L/G parameter for con-
ventional cooling towers is about 0.2–4 [5]. However, no

0196-8904/$ - see front matter  2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2006.04.002
278 F. Gharagheizi et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 277–280

Nomenclature

AAD average absolute deviation K mass transfer coefficient based on humidity driv-
a contact area per unit volume [m2/m3] ing force [kg/((m2 s) (kg/kg))]
G flow rate of air [kg/s] L flow rate of water [kg/s]
G0 flow rate of air per unit area [kg/m2 s] L0 flow rate of water per unit area [kg/m2 s]
i enthalpy of air–water–vapor mixture [J/kg air] tw water temperature [K]
i* saturated enthalpy of air–water–vapor mixture Tin inlet water temperature [K]
[J/kg air] Tout outlet water temperature [K]
iin enthalpy of inlet air–water–vapor mixture Twb wet bulb temperature [K]
[J/kg air] V volume of packing (packed volume) [m3]
iout enthalpy of outlet air–water–vapor mixture y height of packing [m]
[J/kg air]

experimental study has been reported for these two types of
packings (VCP and HCP) for all of this range of L/G until
now. In this paper, the tower characteristics and efficiency
for these two types of packings are investigated for a wide
range of (L/G) from 0.2 to 4.
2. Experimental apparatus and procedure
The pilot scale IDCT was constructed with cross section
area of 0.5 · 0.5 m2 and 1.5 m height. A picture of the cool-
ing tower is shown in Fig. 1.
The tower was equipped with a fan at the top to suck the
air through the bed. The air flow rate is maintained at dif-
ferent levels by an adjustable rotating motor. A droplet
water distributor was used at the top of the packings to dis-
tribute water on the packing uniformly. Two types of pac-
kings arrangements, one horizontal and another vertical,
were made from PVC reinforced with fiber glass. The sche-
matics of the packings are shown in Fig. 2.
The height of these packings is 64 cm. The water flows
continuously through the surface of the packings and is
collected in a water basin and allowed to circulate through
the cooling tower. The controlled heating system was used
to heat the inlet water temperature with a precision of
±0.1 F. A rotameter was used to measure the inlet water
flow rate with a precision of ±1 l/min. A digital flow meter
was used to measure the flow rate of air sucked through the
tower with a precision of ±1 m3/min.
By this procedure, the liquid flow rate, air flow rate, inlet
water temperature, outlet water temperature and atmo-
sphere wet bulb temperature could be measured at different
conditions and used in the calculations. Our aim from this
experiment is calculation of the characteristic ratio and effi-
ciency in the range wider than the works of Bedekar et al.
[1].

3. Results and discussions

In this work, the main objective was to determine and

compare the characteristic (or performance) of the cooling
tower with new building materials. The performance of a
cooling tower depends on the range of cooling, the
approach of the cold water to the wet bulb temperature
of the air and the L/G ratio.
The calculations are performed on the basis of the
Merkel equation [5] to find NTU. By using a heat balance
on a short length of tower, the following equations are
derived:

L0 dtw ¼ G0 di ¼ Kaði  iÞdy ð1Þ

Z iout
G0 di
Fig. 1. Outside view of forced draft cooling tower in research petroleum y¼ ð2Þ
laboratory.
Ka iin i  i
 F. Gharagheizi et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 277–280 279

Fig. 2. Schematic arrangement of two types of packing. HCP (left), VCP (right).

Assuming the heat capacity of water is equal to 1 Btu/ VCP

lb F, the overall heat balance of the tower is 1

L
i ¼ i jt¼twb þ ðT out  T in Þ ð3Þ
G
KaV/L

Consequently, NTU, calculated on the basis of the liquid

phase by Eqs. (2) and (3), is
Z
KaV G iout di
NTU ¼ ¼ ð4Þ
L L iin i  i 0.1
The overall mass transfer coefficient is a function of the 0.1 1 10
L/G
type of packing, arrangement of packing, water and air flux
and height of the tower. For a packing with special Fig. 3. Characteristic ratio vs. L/G for VCP in log–log scale.
arrangement, neglecting the effects of wet bulb temperature
and using the Buckingham P theory, we can write:
Ka ¼ f ðL0 ; G0 ; yÞ ð5Þ HCP
    1
Kay L KaV L
0 ¼ g or ¼g ð6Þ
L G L G
KaV/L

The NTU for many different operational conditions of li-

quid flow and air flow rate are derived and presented in
Figs. 3 and 4 for the two new types of packing. It is shown
that the mass transfer coefficient decreases with increasing 0.1
L/G ratio 0.1 1 10
 m L/G
KaV L
¼c ð7Þ Fig. 4. Characteristic ratio vs. L/G for HCP in log–log scale.
L G
The parameters c and m are presented for the two sets of
packing in Table 1. The results show higher mass transfer
coefficients for VCP. As shown in Figs. 3 and 4, the range Table 1
of (L/G) is from about 0.2 to 4, which it is very much larger Calculated correlated parameters of characteristic ratio for two types of
packing
than that of the work of Bedekar et al. [1]. By using Eq. (3)
for any L/G ratio, it is possible to find the NTU. By using Type of packing c m
NTU, it is possible to calculate the water outlet tempera- Vertical corrugated packing 0.342 0.253
ture. Some other experiments were performed for different Horizontal corrugated packing 0.224 0.295
280 F. Gharagheizi et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 277–280

Table 2 T in  T out
Comparison between calculated and experimental Tout for VCP g¼ ð8Þ
T in  T wb
3
L (l/min) G (m /min) Calculated L/G Tcalc Texp
The efficiency is plotted against the L/G ratio in Fig. 5 for
18 32 0.4722 91 91.2 the two types of packings. It is shown that the efficiency of
15 32 0.3935 90.2 90.5
12 32 0.3148 90 88.5
the cooling tower decreases with increasing L/G ratio. As
18 26 0.5812 91.8 91.8 shown in Fig. 5, during the cooling process, HCP shows
15 26 0.4844 91 90.2 a lower water loss than the VCP for the same efficiency
12 26 0.3875 90.2 90.4 conditions.
15 20 0.6297 92.3 92.4
12 20 0.5037 91.3 91.8
18 13 1.1625 92.8 92.3
4. Conclusions

The experiments were conducted to investigate and com-

pare the effect of the liquid to air flow ratio on the perfor-
Table 3
Comparison between calculated and experimental Tout for HCP mance and mass transfer coefficient of the mechanical
cooling tower for two film type packings made from rein-
L (l/min) G (m3/min) Calculated L/G Tcalc Texp
forced PVC for a wide range of (L/G) from 0.2 to 4 because
15 37 0.3411 93.7 94.5
no comprehensive investigations had previously been
18 37 0.4093 94 94.5
12 37 0.2729 93.3 93.8 reported as complete as our work.
18 32 0.4733 96 97 It is concluded that the HCP causes lower water loss
15 32 0.3944 96 96.8 during the cooling process than the VCP with reasonable
15 20 0.6311 98 99.5 efficiency. The vertical corrugated type showed higher per-
12 20 0.5049 95.8 97
formance than the horizontal corrugated type. The perfor-
18 13 1.1651 97.2 97
15 13 0.9709 97 98 mance of the tower is investigated for a wide range of ratio
in comparison to the previous work [1].
Consequently, the obtained parameters can be used to
design the IDCT in a wide range of operational conditions
1
for these types of packing.
For HCP
For VCP
Acknowledgement
Efficiency

The authors acknowledge the financial support of the re-

search assistance administration of the University of
Tehran.

References
0.1
0.1 1 10
L/G [1] Bedekar SV, Nithiarasu P, Seerharamu KN. Experimental investiga-
tion of the performance of a counter-flow, packed-bed mechanical
Fig. 5. Efficiencies vs L/G for VCP and HCP in log–log scale. cooling tower. Energy 1998;23(11):943–7.
[2] Mohiuddin AKM, Kant K. Knowledge base for the systematic design
of wet cooling towers. part I: fill and other design parameters. Int. J.
L, G, Tin and Twb. The calculated Tout and experimental Refrig. 1996;19(1):43–51.
Tout are presented in Tables 2 and 3 for the two types of [3] Mohiuddin AKM, Kant K. Knowledge base for the systematic design
of wet cooling towers. part II: selection and tower characteristics. Int.
packings. It is concluded that the AAD is only 0.5% and
J. Refrig. 1996;19(1):52–60.
0.89% for the vertical and horizontal corrugated packings, [4] Goshayshi RH, Missenden JF. The investigation of cooling tower
respectively. packing in various arrangements. Appl Therm Eng 2000;20:69–80.
The efficiency of the cooling tower can be calculated by [5] Sherwood TK, Pigford R, Wilke C. Mass transfer. Chemical
the following equation: engineering series. McGraw-Hill; 1975.