Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

A novel design for evaporative uid coolers

M.R. Jafari Nasr a, *, R. Behfar b
a
Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), P.O. Box 14665-137, West Blvd. of Azadi Sport Complex, Tehran, Iran
b
Mechanical and Energy Engineering Department, Pouya Energy Espadana Co., Isfahan, Iran

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

Article history: In the present investigation a novel design algorithm is proposed for evaporative uid coolers (EFCs) and
Received 16 January 2010 closed circuit cooling towers. The principal of this study is to derive a relationship among heat transfer
Accepted 26 July 2010 coefcients, pressure drops, heat transfer area, and mass transfer coefcient. Using maximum allowable
Available online 6 August 2010
pressure drops in this algorithm leads to minimize the required heat transfer area and a straight forward
performance appraisal of EFC can be observed. It is revealed that the novel design algorithm can successfully
Keywords:
predicts the design outputs given by the other researchers. In addition, the new algorithm is easily adaptable
Heat transfer
when heat transfer enhancement devices applied inside or outside of the tube bundle of EFCs.
Mass transfer
Evaporative uid cooler
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Rapid design algorithm
Pressure Drop

1. Introduction design. In general the traditional design procedure (Effectiveness-

Evaporative Fluid Coolers (EFCs) have many applications in the
elds of air-conditioning, refrigeration and power plants. They can
achieve higher heat transfer rates than dry heat exchangers. Heat
transfer takes place from a hot uid owing inside the tubes of the
heat exchanger to air through a water lm which is formed by
spraying water onto the heat exchanger surface. In cases in which
the load is relatively low, dry operation of an evaporative heat
exchanger could be sufcient to achieve the thermal duty [1]. Fig. 1
shows schematic diagrams of the evaporative uid cooler.
Traditional design method for EFCs was based on trial and error,
thus the calculated size of the heat exchanger would be over
designed. It also was not proper for network design. In this paper
a general mathematical model using heat and mass transfer prin-
ciples for EFCs has been described. This model then has been adapted
for rapid design algorithm (RDA). Effects of novel design algorithm
on cooling performance of EFC system have been investigated.
2. Traditional design algorithm
Evaporative coolers are currently designed using a trial and
error approach without considering pressure drop limitations in
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 98 21 48252337/98 21 48250000; fax: 98 21
44739712.
E-mail address: nasrmrj@ripi.ir (M.R. Jafari Nasr).
NTU method) will be adopted using following steps:
1. Calculate exchanger heat load, Q, using the physical properties
and condition of uid.
2. Assume specic tube dimensions, number of pass, number of
tube per row, length of tubes, and longitudinal and transversal
pitch of the tubes.
3. Knowing the spray water ow rate, calculate the heat transfer
coefcient between spray water and tube wall.
4. Knowing uid properties, calculate tube side heat transfer
coefcient.
5. Assume a mean spray water temperature, an outlet air
temperature and then calculate NTU for tube side.
6. Knowing the tube material and two uids condition determine
thermal resistance and fouling factor.
7. Combine heat transfer coefcients and thermal resistance,
calculate overall heat transfer coefcient then use it to calculate
the airside surface area based on assumed mean spray water
temperature.
8. Calculate the enthalpy of inlet moist air at inlet dry and wet
bulb temperatures.
9. Calculate the enthalpy of the saturated air at mean spray water
temperature.
10. Knowing the air and spray water properties, calculate mass
transfer coefcient between spray water and inlet moist air
using available experimental correlations.
11. Calculate NTU for dry inlet air.

1359-4311/$ e see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.07.030
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, R. Behfar / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752 2747

Nomenclature RD fouling resistances and tube wall resistances (m2 K/W)

Re Reynolds number
s, z, k, x, y heat transfer enhancement parameters
Symbols T temperature ( C) or ( K)
A area (m2) U overall heat transfer coefcient, (W/m2 K)
Ac cross-sectional area between the tubes (m2) v velocity of uid, (m/s)
e1, e2, e3, e4, e5, e6, e7, E1, E2, E3 design parameters u humidity ratio, (kg water vapor/kg dry air)
fr friction factor z coordinate, or elevation, (m)
h heat transfer coefcient, (W/m2 K) Gm ow rate per unit length, (kg/s.m)
hd mass transfer coefcient, (kg/m2 s) m dynamic viscosity,(kg m1 s1)
i enthalpy, (J/kg) r density (kg m3)
ifg latent heat,(J/kg) p pressure drop (N/m2), or (Pa)
kf thermal conductivity of uid (W m1 K1) TLM log mean temperature difference
kw thermal conductivity of tube wall, (W m1 K1)
L tube length (m) Subscripts
Lef Lewis factor a air, or airside
m mass ow rate (kg/s) c convection heat transfer
np number of pass f process uid
nr number of row i inlet, inner
ntr number of tube per row m mean, or mass transfer, or mixed
NTU number of transfer units o outlet, airside
Nu Nusselt number s saturation
p pressure, (N/m2), or(Pa) ss supersaturated
PL longitudinal pitch (m) t tube side
Pr Prandtl number v vapor
Pt transversal pitch (m) w water, or spray water
Q, q heat transfer rate, (W) wb wet bulb

12. Using the heat balance equation between spray water and the
tube wall, conrm the obtained area and the assumed mean
spray water temperature.
13. Finally, by knowing the total surface area and specic tube
dimensions, number of rows, number of pass, and length,
calculate airside and tube side pressure drop using the Fanning
friction factor with the relevant empirical correlations.
14. Knowing the allowable tube side and airside pressure drops,
conrm the geometry and area of heat exchanger.
Fig. 1. An evaporative uid cooler.
Thermal engineers commonly follow up the above steps to
design. However, as seen, this needs tedious trial and error calcu-
lations in the procedure to meet not only to the required heat load
duty as an objective but also to satisfy the maximum allowable
pressure drops for airside and process uid as two main constraints.
3. Rapid design algorithm
Polley et al. have presented design algorithms for the rapid
sizing of shell and tube and compact heat exchangers on a more
objective basis. These algorithms may be used in conjunction with
the detailed rating methods presented in the previous studies as
well as programs for mechanical design and tube bundle vibration
analysis to achieve to an optimal design [2,5]. The philosophy is to
utilize completely of the maximum allowable pressure drops on
both the hot and cold streams rather than use these specications
as mere constraints. Full use of both pressure drops ensures that the
exchanger is designed for the highest possible velocities and
consequently heat transfer coefcients. Thus, the exchanger is the
smallest size for a given service and presumably the most
economical [3].
In previous studies rapid design algorithm (RDA) applied as
a new approach to design shell and tube heat exchangers, compact
heat exchangers, and air-coolers in which the interface among heat
transfer coefcients, pressure drops, and heat transfer area, were
considered.
In this work the new design algorithm is extended to evapora-
tive heat exchangers while it is considered pressure drops as
objective function rather than constraints that are necessary in heat
exchanger design so the outcome is the most economical design in
comparison with the traditional methods. This new algorithm is
also adaptable when heat transfer enhancement technology
applied for tube bundles [4].
2748 M.R. Jafari Nasr, R. Behfar / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752

To introduce and describe the RDA for evaporative heat hw e4 $m0:333 (10)
w
exchangers, thermal and hydraulic characteristic of airside and tube
side analyzed separately with the following steps: Where,

3.1. Tube side correlations e4 2109:9=2ntr :Pt :L0:333 (11)

The data for airside pressure drop obtained by Nitsu et al. are
The correlations given by Jafari Nasr and Alaei can be used here correlated by the following equation [9]:
[6]. For the tube side, the following classical and generalized
correlations can be used; Dpa 4:9nr PL $ma =Ac 1:85 $Gm =do 0:285 ; N=m2 (12)
ht di This equation is validated for 1.3 < (Gm/do) < 3.5 kg/m s and for
2
Nu sRezf Prkf (1)
kf plain tube banks.
Where Ac is the minimum cross-sectional airow area between
the tubes:
Dpt rf di
fr xReyf (2)
2m2f Lnp Ac ntr $L$Pt  do (13)

By considering Equations (1) and (2) and elimination of velocity Since the heat transfer area is given by;
term between them, the relationship between the pressure drop,
heat transfer area, and heat transfer coefcient is obtained: A p$nr do ntr $L
Therefore by expanding the pressure drop equation we reach to:
Dpt s1 Ai ht3y=z (3)
Dpa e5 $A$m0:285
w (14)
Where,
Where,
e1 e2
s1 3y=z
(4)
e3 e5 4:9PL =do $p$L$ntr $ma =Ac 1:94 $2ntr $Pt $L0:285 (15)

2x Substituting Equation (14) into (10) results in a relationship

e1 (5) between the pressure drop and the heat transfer coefcient and
rf dy
i
myf
heat transfer area:

1 Cpf DT hw s2 $Dp1:168
a $A1:168 (16)
e2 (6)
4mf 1 4q Where,

skf Prkf s2 e4 $e1:168

5 (17)
e3 (7)
d1z
i
mzf
3.2.2. Mass transfer process
3.2. Airside correlations Mass transfer process takes place between the spray water and
inlet air. Mizushina et al. [7,8] tested bundles having 12e40 mm
Mizushina et al. [7,8] conducted tests on the cores of an EFC with outside diameter tubes arranged on a 2do triangular pitch. They
three different tube diameters. The assumption of constant spray found that the following equation for mass transfer coefcient:
water temperature inside the tower was applied to evaluate the
empirical heat and mass transfer correlations. The results of the hd 5:5439  108 Re0:9 0:15 1:6
a $Rew $do (18)
mass transfer coefcient were presented in terms of the air and
spray water Reynolds numbers. Evaporative heat exchangers can be This equation is validated for 1.2  103 < Rea < 1.4  104 and
constructed from plain circular tubes, nned circular tubes, and 50 < Rew<240.
oval tubes to enhance the heat transfer coefcient in both sides. In Where,
this study plain circular tube bank is considered. In airside there are
Rea ma do =Ac $ma
two processes; heat transfer process between tube and spray water
Rew mw do =Ac $mw
lm, and mass transfer process between spray water and air.
Therefore,
3.2.1. Heat transfer process
Heat transfer takes place between the tube and spray water lm. hd e6 $m0:9
a (19)
According to Mizushina et al. [7,8] heat transfer coefcient given by
Where,
following equation:
e6 5:5439  108 $Re0:15
w $do
2:6
$do =Ac ma 0:9 (20)
hw 2109:9Gm =do 0:333 (8)
By expanding the Equation (12):
This equation is validated for 0.2 < (Gm/do) < 5.5 kg/m2 s and airside
Reynolds numbers in the range 1500e8000. Tube diameters varied Dpa e7 $A$m1:85
a (21)
from 12.7 mm to 40 mm arranged on a 2do equilateral pitching. Where,
Where,
Gm mw $do =2ntr $Pt $L (9) e7 4:9PL =do $p$L$ntr $A1:85
c $Gm =do 0:285 (22)
Therefore, Substituting Equation (21) into (19) results in a relationship
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, R. Behfar / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752 2749

between the pressure drop and the mass transfer coefcient and
mass transfer area:

hd s3 $Dp0:487
a $A0:487 (23)
Where,

s3 e6 $e0:487
7 (24)

3.3. Governing equations for airside evaporative cooler

Krger has presented and described governing equations in

evaporative coolers as following [10]:
A mass balance for the control volume in Fig. 2 yields,
Fig. 3. Airside control volume.
dmw ma dw (25)
The energy balance for the control volume in Fig. 2 is as follows:
dQc hTw  Ta dA (32)
The temperature differential in Equation (32) can be replaced by an
ma dima  mw diw  iw dmw 0 (26) enthalpy differential. The enthalpy of saturated air evaluated at the
Where ima is the enthalpy of the airevapor mixture. Substituting local bulk water temperature is given by;
Equation (25) into Equation (26) to nd upon rearrangement,  

 imsaw Cpa Tw wsw ifgwo Cpv Tw (33)
ma 1
dTw dima  Tw dw (27)
mw Cpw Substitute Equation (31) into Equation (33), rearrange and nd;

Consider the interface between the water and the air in Fig. 3 an imasw Cpa Tw wiv wsw  wiv (34)
energy balance at the interface yields,
The enthalpy of the airewater vapor mixture per unit mass of
dQ dQm dQc (28) dry air is expressed by;
 
Where dQm is the enthalpy transfer due to difference in vapor
ima Cpa Ta w ifgwo Cpv Ta (35)
concentration between the saturated air at the interface and the
mean stream air and dQc is the sensible heat transfer due to the Subtracting Equation (35) from (34), the resultant equation can be
difference in temperature. The mass transfer at the interface is simplied if the small differences in specic heats, which are
expressed by; evaluated at different temperatures, are ignored;
dmw hd wsw  wdA (29) imasw  ima  wsw  wiv
Tw  Ta (36)
The corresponding enthalpy transfer for the mass transfer in Cpma
Equation (29) is:
Substituting Equation (36) into Equation (32) and similarly by
substituting Equation (30) into Equation (28) and nally with
dQm iv dmw iv hd wsw  wdA (30)
substitution of the resultant equations follow by a rearrangement,
The enthalpy of the water vapor, iv, at the bulk water tempera- we yield to:
ture, Tw, is given by; 
 
h h
iv ifgwo cpv Tw (31) dQ hd imasw  ima 1  iv wsw  w dA
Cpma hd Cpma hd
The convective heat transfer from Fig. 3 is given by; (37)
h/Cpmahd in Equation (37) is known as the Lewis factor Lef and is an
indication of the relative rates of heat and mass transfer in an
evaporative process.
The enthalpy transfer to the air stream from Equation (37) is:

1
dima dQ
ma
h dAh   i
d Lef imasw  ima 1  Lef iv wsw  w (38)
ma
To simplify the analysis of an evaporative cooling process Merkel
assumed that the evaporative loss is negligible, i.e. dw 0, From
Equation (27), and that the Lewis factor is equal to one. Equations
(27) and (38) of the counter ow evaporative process simplify
respectively to:

dQ hd $imasw  ima $dA (39)

Fig. 2. Control volume of counter ow between air and spray water lm. Or,
2750 M.R. Jafari Nasr, R. Behfar / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752

Q hd imasw  ima A (40) Table 1

Comparison between results.

Krgers Traditional New algorithm

and by dividing Equation (27) by dz on both sides of Equation (27) results algorithm (Rapid design
to: algorithm)
Rate of Heat transfer, Q (w) 22379 22379 22379
dTw ma 1 dima Area, A (m2)
(41) 27.17 28.32 11.51
dz mw Cpw dz Number of Tube per Row, ntr 31 32 19
Number of Tube Rows, nr 16 17 12
The spray water lm throughout the cooler is at the constant mean Inlet Cooling Water Temperature, 15.6 15.6 15.6
Tfo ( C)
lm temperature. As shown by Mizushina and other investigators, Outlet Cooling Water Temperature, 13.6 13.6 13.6
the deviation in spray water temperature as ows through the tube T ( C)
bank or bundle is often relatively small. Therefore, it could be Mean Spray Water Temperature, 13.12 13.25 11.54
assumed that the spray water temperature is constant and equal to Twm ( C)
Tube side Heat transfer 2302.96 1549.1 3077.7
Twm.
Coefcient, ht (W/m2K)
In other hand basic exchanger design equation is: Spray Water Film Heat transfer 1238 2172.1 2583.9
Coefcient, hw (W/m2 K)
Q UADTLM (42) Overall Heat transfer Coefcient, 708.3 749.83 1173.7
U (W/m2 K)
Where, Mass transfer Coefcient, hd (kg/sm2) 0.3115 0.2055 0.2690
h   i. h . i Tube side Pressure Drop, pt (Pa) 4100.13 4116.20 4200
DTLM Tfi Twm  Tfo Twm Ln Tfi Twm Tfo Twm Allowable Tube side Pressure Drop, e 4200 4200
pt allow (Pa)
(43) Airside Pressure Drop, pa (Pa) 87.21 86.59 98
Allowable Airside Pressure Drop, e 98 98
Energy balance between tube wall-spray water lm and spray pa allow (Pa)
water lm-air yields,

hd imasw  ima U DTLM (44)

heat exchanger with a given duty can be calculated straight
Then, forward. It should be noted that the calculated area is an optimized
value because of maximum usage of the available pressure drops in
hd imasw  ima  U DTLM 0 (45) the design equation.
The airside and tube side heat transfer coefcients can be
By inversing above equation,
obtained by Equations (16) and (3), the mass transfer coefcient
can be obtained by Equation (23), and the number of tube rows
hd imasw  ima 1 U 1 DTLM
1
0 (46)
simply is given by;
Since the overall heat transfer coefcient is given by;
nr A=p$ntr $do: L
U 1 1=hw C=ht CRD  (47) The availability of these pressure drop relationships, for the tube
Where, side and airside along with the basic heat exchanger design equa-
tion Q U$A$DTLM allows to develop a new design algorithm. In
C do =di this algorithm the whole system is involved the above four equa-
tions where pa, pt, ia, and Q are used as the design requirements.
And,
Therefore, we have four equations with four unknowns (ht, hw, hd,
do and A).
CRD Lndo =di Note that the parameters, x, y, s, z, and k in the above equations
2kw
may considerably vary with different physical and geometrical tube
Then, shapes. In fact these are heat transfer enhancement parameters and
vary when heat transfer enhancement technology would be
hd imasw  ima 1 1=hw C=ht CRD DTLM
1
0 (48) applied in heat exchanger such as tube inserts or twisted tubes.
Jafari Nasr presented these parameters at different Reynolds
By substituting Equation (16), Equation (23) and Equation (3) into
numbers for the wide range of tube insert devices [4,6].
Equation (48) results the nal relationship of heat and mass
transfer area as follows:
4. Results and discussion
E1 A0:487  E2 A1:168  E3 Az=3y  CRD DTLM
1
0 (49)
The new design algorithm for an EFC, based on the Mizushina
Where,
transfer coefcients, is developed and generated a computer
program for it. Krger [10] has presented an evaporative cooler
E1 s1:
3 Dpa
0:487
imasw  ima 1
sample. The new design program, RDA Algorithm, run with Krgers
sample specications and then the results will be compared with
E2 s1
2 $Dpa
1:168 1
DTLM traditional design algorithm that explained above, and Krgers
results.
E3 s1 =Dpt z=3y $C 3yz=3y $DTLM
1
The Krgers sample consists of 31 tubes of 19.1 mm outside
diameter and 15 mm inside diameter arranged in 16 rows in
Solving this equation by typical numerical techniques, such as the a staggered arrangement. Each row is 913 mm in the horizontal
NewtoneRaphson iteration, the area required for an evaporative direction. The longitudinal and transversal pitch of the tubes are
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, R. Behfar / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752 2751

140 3000

Spray water film heat transfer coefficient (W/m 2 K)

Traditional Algorithm
120
Rapid Design Algorithm 2500

100

2000
80
Area(m 2)
60 1500

40
1000

20
500 Traditional Algorithm
0 Rapid Design Algorithm
1 2 3 4 5 6
0
Tubeside mass flow rate(kg/s)
1 2 3 4 5 6
Fig. 4. Variation of heat transfer area vs. tube side mass ow rate for two algorithms. Tubeside mass flow rate (kg/s)

Fig. 6. Variation of spray water lm heat transfer coefcient vs. tube side mass ow
24.81 mm and 28.65 mm, respectively, thus heat transfer area A is rate for two algorithms.
27.17 m2. Nominal operating conditions for the tower are: airow
rate ma 2.07 kg s1, process cooling water ow rate
equations. It should be noted that Mizushina [6] ndings for
mf 2.67 kg s1, spray water ow rate mw 1.845 kg s1, inlet
transfer coefcients has been applied in this algorithm. As
cooling water temperature T 15.6  C, inlet dry bulb temperature
explained, this algorithm is in fourteen stages. The allowable
Tai 10  C, inlet wet bulb temperature Twbi 8.45  C and tube wall
pressure drops were determined arbitrary; however they are close
thermal conductivity kw 45 W m1 K1 (galvanized steel).
to those calculated from Krger sample.
Krger executed rating problem and obtained the following
The last column is determined based on the RDA algorithm.
results for the nominal operating conditions: total rejected heat is
Because of the full usage of maximum allowable pressure drops and
22379 W, outlet cooling water temperature tfo 13.6  C, and mean
consequently maximum uid velocity and heat transfer coefcients
spray water temperature 13.12  C. Although Krger has not
leads to minimum area.
addressed, pressure drops are calculated for Krger problem for
The new design algorithm shows a 26.5% increase in the amount
comparison. Table 1 presents a comparison between the Krger
of mass transfer coefcient, 17.7% increase in the amount of spray
calculations, the results obtained from the traditional algorithm
water lm heat transfer coefcient and 92.2% increase in the
based on Mizushina ndings, and the new design algorithm.
amount of tube side heat transfer coefcient.
First column is related to Krgers results for the rating problem.
It should be noted in traditional design procedure, tube side
It should be noted that he has used transfer coefcients which
pressure drop equation is obtained according to Krger:
presented by Parker and Treybal.
Second column is related to the traditional algorithm for sizing  
problem that uses Effectiveness-NTU method and the basic thermal Dp fr L=di rv2 =2

3500
0.35

3000
Tubeside heat transfer coefficient(W/m 2 K)

Traditional Algorithm
0.3 Rapid Design Algorithm
Mass transfer coefficient(kg/sm 2 )

2500
0.25

2000
0.2

1500
0.15

1000
0.1

Traditional Algorithm
500 0.05
Rapid Design Algorithm

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tubeside mass flow rate(kg/s) Tubeside mass flow rate (kg/s)

Fig. 5. Variation of tube side heat transfer coefcient vs. tube side mass ow rate for Fig. 7. Variation of mass transfer coefcient vs. tube side mass ow rate for two
two algorithms. algorithms.
2752 M.R. Jafari Nasr, R. Behfar / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2746e2752
and airside pressure drop equation is obtained according to Nitsu as
Equation (12).
Figs. 4e7 show comparison of the variations between traditional
algorithm and RDA Algorithm for a range of tube side mass ow
rate variation.
Fig. 4 shows comparison of the area variations between tradi-
tional algorithm and RDA Algorithm. As shown the area in the new
algorithm has reduced because of considering maximum allowable
pressure drops, maximum possible velocities and maximum
transfer coefcients at both sides. Note that pressure drops in the
traditional algorithm are less than allowable ones but in the new
algorithm pressure drops are just equal to allowable pressure
drops.
The benet of considering maximum allowable tube side pres-
sure drop in design algorithm is obvious. Fig. 5 presents comparison
of the tube side heat transfer coefcient variations between tradi-
tional and RDA algorithms. Considering maximum allowable tube
side pressure drop causes maximum possible velocity in tubes that
makes maximum turbulence in boundary layer (increscent of the
Reynolds number expresses this upheaval) and results the
maximum heat transfer coefcient is obtained.
Fig. 6 shows comparison of the spray water lm heat transfer
coefcient variations between traditional algorithm and RDA. By
considering the maximum allowable airside pressure drop,
maximum possible velocity for spray water lm can be obtained.
This means the frontal area can be minimized and the spray water
mass ow rate per unit length over the tube bundle can be maxi-
mized which causes maximum heat transfer coefcient.
When maximum allowable airside pressure drop is considered,
the airside velocity increases as much as possible. In other words,
air velocity and spray water velocity rise as much as possible.
Therefore, air Reynolds number and spray water Reynolds numbers
increase and consequently the mass transfer coefcient is maxi-
mized. Fig. 7 indicates this behavior.
5. Conclusion
A novel design procedure, based on the Rapid Design Algorithm
(RDA), for the optimum design of evaporative heat exchangers in
EFCs and closed circuit cooling towers has been presented. In
contrast with the traditional algorithms, in this work by developing
a simple relationship among the pressure drop, area, the heat
transfer coefcients, and the mass transfer coefcient, the design of
EFCs can be optimized straight forward without needing to any
tedious trial and error calculations.
In general by considering maximum allowable pressure drops
for both sides, the frontal area of ows is minimized. Therefore, the
velocity of ows can be maximized as possible. This event results
the heat and mass transfer coefcients maximized so the heat
transfer area can be minimized. The performance was demon-
strated by its application for design of the optimum EFCs in a case
study. The generated optimum EFCs were better than those
reported in the literature. However, the speed and exibility of the
proposed procedure is superior to that of traditional algorithms,
mainly because it produces the minimum heat transfer area
required in a very short time as mentioned earlier.
The new RDA algorithm that developed for EFC with plain tubes
can also be extended simply to enhanced tube bundles such as
lled tubes by various tube inserts and even twisted tubes just
simply by replacing the heat transfer and friction factor coefcients
correspondingly. This subject is considered for another paper
publication by authors.
References
[1] Ala Ali Hasan, Performance Analysis of Heat Transfer Processes from Wet and
Dry Surfaces: Cooling Towers and Heat Exchangers, the Department of
Mechanical Engineering. Helsinki University of Technology, 2005, Ph.D.
Thesis.
[2] G.T. Polley, M.H. Panjeh Shahi, M. Picon Nunez, Rapid Design Algorithms for
Shell-and-Tube and Compact Heat Exchangers, Trans. IChemE. Chem. Eng. Res.
Des. 69 (1991) Part A 435e444.
[3] Uday V. Shenoy, Heat Exchanger Network Synthesis. Gulf Publishing Co,
Houston, Texas, USA, 1995, Chapter 6.
[4] M.R. Jafari Nasr, G.T. Polley, Should you use enhanced tubes, Chemical Engi-
neering Progress 98 (4) (2002) 44e50.
[5] M.R. Jafari Nasr, G.T. Polley, Extension of rapid sizing algorithm for shell-and-
tube heat exchangers with tube-side pressure drop constraint and multi-
passes, Chemical Engineering and Technology, CET, Part B (2000) 141e150.
[6] M.R. Jafari Nasr, S.H. Alaei, A New Algorithm for Design, Simulation, and
Optimization of Enhanced Air Coolers, Journal of Enhanced Heat Transfer 14
(2) (2007) 147e160.
[7] T. Mizushina, R. Ito, H. Miyashita, Experimental study of an evaporative cooler,
International Chemical Engineering 7 (4) (1967) 727e732.
[8] T. Mizushina, R. Ito, H. Miyashita, Characteristics and methods of thermal
design of evaporative cooler, International Chemical Engineering 8 (3) (1968)
532e538.
[9] Y. Nitsu, K. Naito, T. Anzai, Studies on characteristics and design procedure of
evaporative coolers, Journal Of The Society Of Heating Air-Conditioning
Sanitary Engineering Of Japan 41 12 (13) (1967).
[10] D.G. Krger, Air-Cooled Heat Exchangers and Cooling Towers, vol. 1, Penn
Well Corp, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 2004, pp. 236e298.