A CRITICAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE HEAT

AND MASS TRANSFER ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW

WET-COOLING TOWERS
J. C. Kloppers
Sasol Technology (Pty) Ltd, Secunda, South Africa
D. G. Kro ger
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Stellenbosch,
Stellenbosch, South Africa
The heat and mass transfer process of evaporative cooling in crossow wet-cooling tower
lls is investigated. The governing equations of the crossow evaporative process are
derived from rst principles. A detailed account is given of how to solve these equations. The
governing equations, according to the Poppe, Merkel, and e-NTU methods of analysis, are
considered. The equations of the Poppe method of analysis are extended to give a more
detailed representation of the transfer characteristic or Merkel number. The results of a
crossow wet-cooling tower ll analysis according to the Merket, Poppe, and e-NTU
methods of analysis are presented. The differences between the results of these methods are
evaluated.
1. INTRODUCTION
The heat and mass transfer evaporative processes according to Merkel [1],
Poppe [2], and the e-NTU [3] methods are considered. Merkel [1] developed the
theory for the performance evaluation of counterow cooling towers in 1925. The
Merkel theory relies on several critical assumptions to reduce the solution of heat
and mass transfer problem in wet-cooling towers to a simple hand calculation.
Because of these assumptions, however, the Merkel method does not accurately
represent the physics of the heat and mass transfer process in the cooling tower ll.
The critical simplifying assumptions of the Merkel theory are that the Lewis factor,
Le
f
, is equal to unity, the exiting air is saturated, and the reduction of the water ow
rate, due to evaporation, is neglected in the energy balance. Refer to Kro ger [4] for
the derivation of the governing equations for counterow cooling towers according
to the Merkel method.
The Poppe method was developed by Poppe and Ro gener [2] in the early 1970s.
This method does not make the simplifying assumptions made by Merkel. The air
Received 5 December 2003; accepted 18 June 2004.
Address correspondence to J. C. Kloppers, Sasol Technology (Pty) Ltd, Private Bag X1034,
Secunda 2302, South Africa. E-mail: chris.kloppers@sasol.com
Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A, 46: 785806, 2004
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN: 1040-7782 print=1521-0634 online
DOI: 10.1080/104077890504113
785
can, therefore, be unsaturated, saturated, or even supersaturated, according to the
Poppe method. The e-NTU method, developed by Jaber and Webb [3], is based on
the assumptions made by Merkel. The great advantage of the e-NTU method is its
simplicity in the application of crossow congurations. For crossow, however, it
must be specied whether the air and water streams are mixed or unmixed or a
combination of mixed and unmixed. Thus, there exists a choice of four possible ow
geometries for crossow. The question now is which geometry will yield the most
accurate results for a particular ll material.
During a ll performance test, the water inlet temperature, T
wi
, water outlet
temperature, T
wo
, water mass ow rate, m
w
, inlet air dry-bulb temperature, T
ai
, inlet
air wet-bulb temperature, T
wb
, dry air mass ow rate, m
a
, and the atmospheric
pressure, p
atm
, are measured. From these measurements, the transfer characteristic,
or Merkel number, Me, is determined. In the subsequent cooling-tower performance
evaluation, the variables mentioned above are generally known, as well as the Merkel
number, except for the water outlet temperature. The water outlet temperature can
then be determined by the same set of equations, solving for T
wo
and not Me, as
during the ll performance test.
Figure 1 shows an example of an induced-draft crossow wet-cooling tower. In
a crossow tower, the ll is usually installed at some angle to the vertical to make
provision for the inward motion of the droplets, due to drag forces caused by the
entering cooling air [4].
NOMENCLATURE
a surface area per unit volume, m
1
A area, m
2
c
p
specic heat at constant pressure,
J=kg K
C uid capacity rate ( C
min
=C
max
)
h heat transfer coecient, W=m
2
K
h
d
mass transfer coecient, kg=m
2
s
i enthalphy, J=kg, or index in x or x
direction
j index in z or Z direction
L length, m
Le
f
Lewis factor h=c
p
h
d
, dimensionless
m mass ow rate, kg=s
Me Merkel number h
d
a
fi
L
fi
=G
w
,
dimensionless
n number
p pressure, N=m
2
or Pa
q heat ux, W=m
2
Q heat transfer rate, W
T temperature, K or

C
U overall heat transfer coecient,
W=m
2
K
w humidity ratio (kg water vapour=kg
dry air)
x Cartesian coordinate
y Cartesian coordinate
z Cartesian coordinate
D dierential
Z non-dimensional coordinate
x non-dimensional coordinate
Subscripts
a air
atm atmospheric
c convection heat transfer, or cold
e e-NTU method
ll
h hot
i inlet
m mean, or mass transfer
max maximum
min minimum
o outlet
s saturation
ss supersaturated
v vapor
w water
wb wet-bulb
x coordinate
y coordinate
z coordinate
786 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
In 1956, Zivi and Brand [5] extended the analysis of Merkel to the ll of
crossow cooling towers. In 1976, Kelly [6] used the method of Zivi and Brand [5],
along with laboratory data, to produce a volume of crossow cooling-tower char-
acteristic curves to be used in graphical solutions of cooling tower performance. The
present analysis does not make the simplifying assumptions of Merkel and is known,
as in the case with counterow towers, as the Poppe method.
2. GOVERNING EQUATIONS FOR HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER IN FILL
FOR UNSATURATED AIR
Figure 2 shows a control volume in the ll of a crossow wet-cooling tower, where
i
ma
and w are the enthalphy and humidity ratio of the air, respectively, and T
w
and
G
w
are the temperature and mass velocity of the water, respectively.
A mass balance for the control volume in Figure 2 yields
G
w

z
DxDy G
w

zDz
Dx Dy G
a
Dy Dz wj
x
G
a
Dy Dz wj
xDx
0 1
Divide Eq. (1) by Dx Dy Dx and let Dx, Dz ! 0:
qG
w
qz
G
a
qw
qx
2
The energy balance for the control volume of the ll in Figure 2 is as follows:
Figure 1. Induced-draft crossow wet-cooling tower.
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 787
c
pw
T
w
; G
w
j
z
Dx Dy c
pw
T
w
G
w
j
zDz
DxDy G
a
Dy Dz i
ma
j
x
G
a
Dy Dz i
ma
j
xDx
0 3
where c
pw
is the specic heat of the water.
Divide Eq. (3) by DxDy Dz and let Dx, Dz ! 0 and nd, after using the chain
rule of dierentiation,
c
pw
T
w
qG
w
qz
c
pw
G
w
qT
w
qz
G
a
qi
ma
qx
0 4
Substitute Eq. (2) into Eq. (4) to nd, upon rearrangement,
qT
w
qz

G
a
G
w
T
w
qw
qx

1
c
pw
qi
ma
qx
_ _
5
The mass balance for the water stream in the control volume is expressed by
G
w

z
Dx Dy G
w

zDz
DxDy h
d
a
fi
w
sw
w Dx Dy Dz 0 6
where h
d
a
fi
w
sw
w Dx Dy Dz is the amount of water evaporated in the control
volume shown in Figure 2. Refer to Kro ger [4] for the derivation of this term. h
d
, a
fi
,
and w
sw
in Eq. (6) are the mass transfer coecient, area per unit volume of ll, and
Figure 2. Control volume of crossow ll.
788 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
the humidity ratio of the air at the local water temperature. It will be shown that it is
not necessary to specify h
d
and a
fi
explicitly.
Divide Eq. (6) by DxDy Dz, and let Dx, Dz ! 0:
qG
w
qz
G
a
h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
w 7
G
a
=G
a
is introduced into the left-hand side of Eq. (7) to simplify the mathematical
manipulation later on.
Substitute Eq. (7) into Eq. (2), and rearrange to nd
qw
qx

h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
w 8
The sensible heat transfer to the air stream in the control volume is expressed
by
q
c
j
x
Dy Dz q
c
j
xDx
Dy Dz ha
fi
T
w
T
a
Dx Dy Dz 0 9
where ha
fi
T
w
T
a
DxDy Dz is the amount of sensible heat transferred to the air
stream in the control volume in Figure 2. Divide Eq. (9) by Dx Dy Dz, and let Dx,
Dz ! 0:
qq
c
qx
ha
fi
T
w
T
a
10
The latent heat transfer to the air stream in the control volume is expressed by
q
m
j
x
Dy Dz q
m
j
xDx
Dy Dz i
v
G
w

z
DxDy i
v
G
w
j
zDx
DxDy 0 11
Divide Eq. (11) by DxDy Dz, let Dx, Dz ! 0, and substitute Eq. (8) into the resultant
equation
qq
m
qx
i
v
qG
w
qz
i
v
h
d
a
fi
w
sw
w 12
An energy balance at the air=water interface inside the control volume yields
qq
qx

qq
c
qx

qq
m
qx
13
The temperature dierential in Eq. (10) can be substituted by an enthalpy
dierential. Refer to Appendix A for the derivation of the temperature potential as a
function of the enthalpy potential. Substitute Eq. (A.6) into Eq. (10). Substitute the
resultant equation and Eq. (12) into Eq. (13) to nd, upon rearrangement,
qq
qx
h
d
a
fi
h
c
pma
h
d
i
masw
i
ma
1
h
c
pma
h
d
_ _
i
v
w
sw
w
_ _
14
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 789
where h=c
pma
h
d
is the Lewis factor, Le
f
. The Lewis factor for unsaturated air,
according to Bosnjakovic [7], is given by
Le
f
0:865
0:667
w
sw
0:622
w 0:622
1
_ __
ln
w
sw
0:622
w 0:622
_ _ _ _
When the air is supersaturated with water vapor, which will be considered later, the
Lewis factor is given by
Le
fss
0:865
0:667
w
sw
0:622
w
sa
0:622
1
_ _
_
ln
w
sw
0:622
w
sa
0:622
_ _ _ _
Le
fss
is the Lewis factor for supersaturated air.
The enthalpy transfer to the air stream from Eq. (14) is
qi
ma
qx

1
G
a
qq
qx

h
d
a
fi
G
a
i
masw
i
ma
Le
f
1 i
masw
i
ma
i
v
w
sw
w
_ _
15
Substitute Eqs. (8) and (15) into Eq. (5) to nd, upon rearrangement,
qT
w
qz

1
c
pw
G
a
G
w
h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
wc
pw
T
w
i
masw
i
ma
Le
f
1
_
i
masw
i
ma
w
sw
wi
v
g 16
Thus, the system of equations to be solved for unsaturated air for the crossow
ll are Eqs. (7), (8), (15), and (16).
3. GOVERNING EQUATIONS FOR HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER IN FILL
FOR SUPERSATURATED AIR
The air in the ll can reach the point of saturation before leaving the ll. Since
the temperature of the saturated air at the interface is still higher than the tem-
perature of the now-saturated free-stream air, a potential for heat and mass transfer
will still exist. The excess water vapor transferred to the free-stream air will condense
as a mist. The air is then in the supersaturated state.
The governing equations when the air is supersaturated can be obtained as was
done for the unsaturated case using the same arguments:
qG
w
qz
h
d
a
fi
w
sw
w
sa
17
qw
qx

h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
w
sa
18
qi
ss
qx

1
G
a
qq
qx

h
d
a
fi
G
a
i
masw
i
ss
Le
fss
1i
masw
i
ss
i
v
w
sw
w
sa

_
Le
fss
c
pw
T
w
w w
sa

_
19
790 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
qT
w
qz

1
c
pw
G
a
G
w
h
d
a
fi
G
a
_
w
sw
w
sa
c
pw
T
w
i
masw
i
ss
Le
fss
c
pw
T
w
w w
sa

Le
fss
1i
masw
i
ss
w
sw
w
sa
i
v

_
20
Bourillot [8, 9] and Grange [10] considered the case where the air can become
supersaturated with water vapor. By considering the equations for supersaturated
air, they obtained excellent agreement between calculated and measured water
evaporation rates. According to Bourillot and Grange, the Merkel method always
underpredicts the water evaporation rate, but the error decreases for increasing
ambient air temperatures. Kloppers and Kro ger [11, 12] also found that by considering
the equations for supersaturated air, the predicted air outlet temperatures can vary
signicantly from the temperatures predicted by the Merkel method. They discuss
these dierences with the aid of psychrometric charts, which are extended to include
the properties of supersaturated air.
4. SOLVING THE SYSTEM OF PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS
To simplify the solution process of the governing equations, the ll dimensions
can be nondimensionalized. Poppe and Ro gener [2] presented the governing equa-
tions for crossow lls in nondimensional form. In this form, the ll can be analyzed
without any reference to ll dimensions.
Figure 3 illustrates an example of a grid of a crossow ll that is divided into
four intervals in both the vertical and horizontal directions, thus, i
max
j
max
5.
All the governing equations are rst-order. These rst derivatives can be ap-
proximated by rst-order backward nite-dierence expressions. An example of the
application of this nite-dierence technique to rst derivatives can be seen in
Figure 4.
When the ll dimensions are nondimensional, Eqs. (7), (8), (15), and (16),
which are applicable when the air is unsaturated, become, respectively,
qG
w
qZ
G
a
h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
w 21
qw
qx

h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
w 22
qi
ma
qx

h
d
a
fi
G
a
i
masw
i
ma
Le
f
1 i
masw
i
ma
i
v
w
sw
w
_ _
23
qT
w
qZ

1
c
pw
G
a
G
w
h
d
a
fi
G
a
w
sw
wc
pw
T
w
i
masw
i
ma

_
Le
f
1i
masw
i
ma
w
sw
wi
v

_
24
where x x=L
x
and Z z=L
z
, with L
x
and L
z
the ll lengths in the x and z
directions, respectively.
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 791
Figure 5 illustrates an excerpt of four grid points from the example compu-
tational grid in Figure 3 for generalized nondimensional coordinates. It is essential
that the ll is divided into equal intervals in both the horizontal and vertical di-
rections for the nondimensional ll analysis, and thus, DZ Dx.
By applying rst-order backward dierences and letting
Me
x
h
d
a
fi
Dx=G
a
h
d
a
fi
DZ=G
a
, Eqs. (7), (8), (15), and (16) become, respectively,
G
wi;j
G
wi;j1
G
a
Me
x
w
sw
wj
a
25
Figure 3. Example of a crossow ll that is divided into four intervals in each direction.
Figure 4. An example of a rst derivative approximated as a rst-order backward nite dierence with
respect to x for an arbitrary variable u [13].
792 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
w
i;j
w
i1;j
Me
x
w
sw
wj
b
26
i
mai;j
i
mai1;j
Me
x
i
masw
i
ma
Le
f
1 i
masw
i
ma
i
v
w
sw
w
_ _
b
27
T
wi;j
T
wi;j1

1
c
pw
G
a
G
w
Me
x
fw
sw
wc
pw
T
w
i
masw
i
ma

Le
f
1i
masw
i
ma
w
sw
wi
v
gj
a
28
The j
a
and j
b
symbols in the last terms in Eqs. (25)(28) refer to points a and b,
respectively, in Figure 5. Point a refers to the average value of the last term of Eqs.
(25) and (28) between points i; j and (i, j 71), while point b refers to the average
value of the last term of Eqs. (26) and (27) between points (i, j) and (i 71, j). Take,
for example, the average value of the last term of Eq. (28) between points (i, j) and
(i, j 71), i.e.,
1
c
pw
G
a
G
w
Me
x
fw
sw
wc
pw
T
w
i
masw
i
ma
Le
f
1i
masw
i
ma
w
sw
wi
v
gj
a

Me
x
G
a
2
1
c
pwi;j
G
wi;j
w
swi;j
w
i;j
c
pwi;j
T
wi;j
i
maswi;j
i
mai;j

Le
fi;j
1i
maswi;j
i
mai;j
w
swi;j
w
i;j
i
vi;j

_
_
_
_
_
_

1
c
pwi;j1
G
wi;j1
w
swi;j1
w
i;j1
c
pwi;j1
T
wi;j1
i
maswi;j1
i
mai;j1
Le
fi;j1
1i
maswi;j1
i
mai;j1
w
swi;j1
w
i;j1
i
vi;j1

_
_

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
29
Figure 5. Four generated grid points of one cell of a crossow ll.
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 793
where G
a
and Me
x
are constant throughout the solution domain. Equation (29) can
be substituted into Eq. (28) to obtain the value of T
wi;j
. Equations (25)(27) are
treated in a similar manner to obtain average values for the last terms of these
equations.
The enthalpy of the air at every point in the solution domain is given by
Eq. (A.4). When the air is supersaturated, the enthalpy of the air is given by
i
ss
c
pa
T
a
w
sa
i
fgwo
c
pv
T
a
w w
sa
c
pw
T
a
30
where w
sa
is the humidity ratio of saturated air at temperature T
a
. The thermo-
physical properties given in the governing equations and Eqs. (A.4) and (30) are
given in Appendix B.
The governing partial dierential equations are solved by an iterative techni-
que. G
w
and T
w
are known at the water inlet side. i
ma
and w are known at the air inlet
side and G
a
is constant throughout the solution domain. Equations (25) and (28) are
used to solve for G
w
and T
w
, respectively, at the air inlet side, while Eqs. (26) and (27)
are used to solve for w and i
ma
at the water inlet side. Equations (25)(28) can be
solved simultaneously throughout the rest of the domain.
If the air is supersaturated at a point in the ll, the governing equations for
supersaturated air must be employed instead of the equations for unsaturated air.
Refer to Kloppers [14] for a procedure to determine whether the air is unsaturated or
supersaturated at a point in the solution domain.
The mean water outlet temperature can be obtained by integrating the water
temperature values at the water outlet side of the ll, i.e.,
T
wom

1
n
x
_
n
x
0
T
wo
dx 31
where Z
x
is the number of ll intervals in the x or x direction.
The mean outlet air enthalpy and humidity can be obtained by integrating
these values at the air outlet side of the ll, i.e.,
i
maom

1
n
Z
_
n
Z
0
i
mao
dZ 32
w
om

1
n
Z
_
n
Z
0
w
o
dZ 33
where n
Z
is the number of ll intervals in the Z or z direction.
Me
x
in Eqs. (25)(28) can be referred to as the local Merkel number according
to the air stream in the horizontal direction, where
Me
x
h
d
a
fi
Dx=G
a
h
d
a
fi
DZ=G
a
34
At every point in the solution domain the local Merkel number according to the
water stream in the vertical direction is given by
794 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
Me
Zi;j

G
a
G
wi;j
Me
x
35
The Merkel number for the ll, Me, is obtained by integrating Me
Zi;j
across
the entire ll. First, determine the average of the Me
Zi;j
quantities at the center of
each cell of the entire ll. The mean Merkel number, Me
Zmi;j
at the cell center is
calculated from Figure 6 as follows:
Me
Zmcelli;j
Me
Zi;j
Me
Zi1;j
Me
Zi;j1
Me
Zi1;j1
=4 36
The mean quantity of all the Me
Zmcelli;j
values is denoted by Me
Zm
, where
Me
Zm

Me
Zmcelli;j
n
x
n
Z
37
From the denition of the Merkel number, as given by Kro ger [4], and Eqs. (34)
(37), the Merkel number of the ll is given by
Me
h
d
a
fi
L
z
G
w

h
d
a
fi
n
Z
DZ
G
w
n
Z
Me
Zm
38
where L
z
n
Z
DZ.
The Merkel number for a crossow ll is determined from the ll performance
experimental data by the following approach. A value for Me
x
is guessed. This value
is constant throughout the computational domain. The water outlet temperature is
determined according to Eq. (31) after the governing equations have converged. Me
x
is varied until the water outlet temperature from Eq. (31) matches the measured
water outlet temperature. The Merkel number is then determined according to
Eq. (38).
Figure 6. Average value of Me
Zi;j
at the cell center.
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 795
5. EFFECTIVENESS-NTU METHOD
Jaber and Webb [3] developed the equations necessary to apply the heat
exchanger e-NTU method for sensible heat transfer directly to counterow or
crossow cooling towers. The method is particularly useful in the latter case and
simplies the method of solution when compared to the more conventional numerical
procedure discussed above. Kro ger [4] gives a detailed derivation and implementa-
tion of the e-NTU method applied to evaporative air water systems.
It can be shown according to Jaber and Webb [3] that
di
masw
i
ma

i
masw
i
ma

h
d
di
masw
=dT
w
m
w
c
pw

1
m
a
_ _
dA 39
Equation (39) corresponds to the heat exchanger e-NTU equation, where
dT
h
T
c

T
h
T
c

U
1
m
h
c
ph

1
m
c
c
pc
_ _
dA 40
Two possible cases of Eq. (39) can be considered, where m
a
is greater or less
than m
w
c
pw
=di
masw
=dT
w
. The maximum of m
a
and m
w
c
pw
=di
masw
=dT
w
is denoted
by C
max
and the minimum by C
min
. The gradient of the saturated air enthalpy
temperature curve is
di
masw
dT
w

i
masw
i
maswo
T
wi
T
wo
41
The uid capacity rate ratio is dened as
C
C
min
C
max
42
The eectiveness is given by
e
Q
Q
max

m
w
c
pw
T
wi
T
wo

C
min
i
maswi
l i
max

43
where l is a correction factor, according to Berman [15], to improve the approx-
imation of the i
masw
-versus-T
w
curve as a straight line. The correction factor, l, is
given by
l
i
maswo
i
maswi
2i
maswm
4
44
where i
maswm
denotes the enthalpy of saturated air at the mean water temperature.
The number of transfer units, NTU, for counterow cooling towers is given by
NTU
1
1 C
ln
1 eC
1 e
45
796 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
Four dierent crossow congurations are possible with the e-NTU method. Both
the air and water streams can be unmixed or mixed, or one can be mixed and the
other unmixed or vice versa. NTU can be obtained by iterative means for the four
ow congurations from Eqs. (46)(49).
For crossow towers with both streams unmixed, nd
e 1 exp NTU
0:22
expC NTU
0:78
1
_
=C
_
46
For crossow with both streams mixed, nd
e
1
1 expNTU

C
1 expC NTU

1
NTU
_ _
1
47
For crossow with C
max
mixed and C
min
unmixed, nd
e 1 expfC1 expNTUg=C 48
For crossow with C
max
unmixed and C
min
mixed, nd
e 1 expf1 expC NTU=Cg 49
If m
a
is greater than m
w
c
pw
=di
masw
=dT
w
, the Merkel number according to the
e-NTU method is given by
Me
e

c
pw
di
masw
=dT
w
NTU 50
If m
a
is less than m
w
c
pw
=di
masw
=dT
w
, the Merkel number according to the e-NTU
method is given by
Me
e

m
a
m
w
NTU 51
6. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
During a crossow ll performance test, the following variables are measured:
Atmospheric pressure p
atm
101712:27 Pa
Air inlet temperature T
ai
9:7

C 282:85 K
Air inlet temperature (wet-bulb) T
wb
8:23

C 281:38 K
Dry air mass ow rate m
a
4:134 kg=s
Water inlet temperature T
wi
39:67

C 312:82 K
Water outlet temperature T
wo
27:77

C 300:92 K
Inlet water mass ow rate m
w
3:999 kg=s
The governing partial dierential equations for the crossow conguration pre-
sented above are solved by a point-by-point Gauss-Seidel [16, 17] iterative procedure
across a two-dimensional domain using the principle of nite dierences.
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 797
6.1. Poppe Method
The governing equations of the Poppe method for crossow lls are solved by
an iterative technique, as discussed above. The governing equations must be satised
on each vertex in the computational domain before convergence can be obtained.
Figure 7 shows the solution domain of a counterow ll for nondimensional ll
dimensions. The solution domain for this example problem is divided into 50
intervals in both directions. It can be seen from Figure 7 in which parts of the ll the
air is unsaturated and supersaturated for the particular experimental inlet and outlet
measurements. The dividing line between the unsaturated and supersaturated regions
will be smooth if the solution domain is divided into many more intervals. It can be
seen from this example problem that the air becomes saturated soon after entering
the ll, especially in the top parts of the ll. The governing equations for unsaturated
and supersaturated air are, thus, solved in the respective regions shown in Figure 7.
Figures 8a8f show the distribution of the water temperature, water mass
velocity, Lewis factor, air enthalpy, air temperature, and the humidity ratio of the air,
respectively, across the nondimensional solution domain of the crossow ll. Refer to
Figure 7 for the coordinate system convention used in Figure 8. The water and air
inlet sides of the various plots in Figure 8 are the same as those illustrated in Figure 7.
The distribution of the water temperature across a vertical section of the ll is
illustrated in Figure 8a. The mean water outlet temperature is determined by Eq. (31)
and is equal to the measured 300.92 K. It can be seen that water cooling is more
eective near the air inlet side. This is because the water near this location is in
Figure 7. State of air in ll for nondimensional ll dimensions.
798 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
Figure 8. Distribution of water temperature, water mass velocity, Lewis factor, air enthalpy, air tem-
perature, and humidity across a crossow ll, determined according to the Poppe method.
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 799
contact with the cool inlet air all the time it falls through the ll. The mass velocity of
the water as it passes through the ll can be seen in Figure 8b. Approximately the
same trends can be observed, as with the water temperature in Figure 8a. The water
mass velocity is reduced as it passes through the ll because of evaporation. The
evaporation loss is larger near the air inlet side because the inlet air is relatively dry
compared to the air deeper into the ll. Thus, a greater potential for evaporation loss
exists where the air is the driest. Figure 8c shows how the value of the Lewis factor,
according to the equation of Bosnjakovic [7], is distributed across the ll. Figures 8d
8f show the enthalpy, temperature, and humidity ratio of the air as it passes through
the ll. It can be seen that the plotted contours of these three variables follow ap-
proximately the same trends. The air enthalpy increases more rapidly in the top of
the ll because the air is in contact with the hot inlet water stream all the time as it
moves through the ll. The heat rejection rate, Q, air outlet temperature, T
ao
, water
evaporation rate, m
w(evap)
, and the Merkel number, Me, according to the Poppe
method, are shown in Table 1.
6.2. Merkel Method
It is assumed in the Merkel method that Le
f
1 and that the water that eva-
porates in neglected in the energy balance. Figures 9a and 9b show the distribution of
the water temperature and air enthalpy according to the Merkel method. The results
Table 1. Fill performance characteristics of a crossow ll according to the Poppe, Merkel, and e-NTU
methods
Poppe Merkel e-NTU
1
e-NTU
2
e-NTU
3
e-NTU
4
Q, MW 0.2065 0.1988 0.1988 0.1988 0.1988 0.1988
T
ao
, K 297.84 297.43 297.43 297.43 297.43 297.43
m
wevap
; kg=s 0.0628 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540
Me 0.7976 0.7395 0.7405 0.7751 0.7589 0.7486
Figure 9. Water temperature and air enthalpy distribution in a crossow ll according to the Merkel
method.
800 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
of the Merkel method can be compared to the results of the more rigorous Poppe
method presented in Figure 8. The mean water outlet temperature of methods is
equal to 300.92 K, as this is the measured value. The mean outlet air enthalpy and
temperature of the Merkel method are less than that predicted by the Poppe method.
According to the Merkel method, Q, T
ao
, m
w(evap)
, and Me are also shown in
Table 1. The temperature of the outlet air can only be determined according to the
Merkel method through the assumption that the outlet air is saturated with water
vapor. Refer to Kloppers and Kro ger [11, 12] for a detailed discussion of the impli-
cations of this assumption.
6.3. e-NTU Method
The crossow Merkel number according to the four variants of the e-NTU
method is not solved by two-dimensional nite dierences. The results of the dif-
ferent e-NTU methods are shown in Table 1. In Table 1, e-NTU
1
and e-NTU
2
, refer,
respectively, to the crossow cases, where both the water and air streams are un-
mixed and both the air and water streams are mixed. e-NTU
3
refers to the crossow
case where C
max
, which is generally the water stream, is mixed, and C
min
, which is
generally the air stream, is unmixed. C
max
is unmixed and C
min
is mixed for the e-
NTU
4
case. The comparison of the four dierent e-NTU methods and the com-
parison to the Merkel and Poppe methods are presented in the next section.
7. COMPARATIVE RESULTS OF THE e-NTU, MERKEL, AND
POPPE METHODS
The illustrative example shows an example of a ll performance test when the
water outlet temperature is known. The Merkel number, or transfer characteristic, is
then determined for each method of analysis. If the Merkel number is known for
each method of analysis, together with all the other variables, except for the water
outlet temperature, the water outlet temperature can be obtained for each method by
an iterative procedure. The water outlet temperature determined by each method of
analysis should, therefore, be identical.
It is, therefore, very important that the same method of analysis be employed in
the ll performance test (when the Merkel number is determined) and in the cooling
tower design calculations (when the water outlet temperature is determined). This is
because the Merkel number diers for each of the dierent methods of analysis.
It can be seen from Table 1 that Q, T
ao
, and m
w(evap)
, determined by all four
variants of the e-NTU method, are identical. These variables are also identical to the
values obtained by the Merkel method. This is because it is assumed, for both
methods, that the outlet air is saturated with water vapor. The heat rejection rate is
calculated by exactly the same manner for all the variants of the e-NTU method and
the Merkel method, i.e., Q m
w
c
pwm
(T
wi
7T
wo
). The water evaporation rate,
according to the Merkel and e-NTU methods, is given by m
w(evap)
m
a
(w
o
7w
i
),
where the outlet humidity ratio, w
o
, is determined by assuming that the outlet air is
saturated with water vapor.
Cooling tower performance, predicted by the all the variants of the e-NTU
method and the Merkel method, will, therefore, be practically identical if the same
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 801
method is employed in the ll performance test and in the subsequent cooling-tower
performance analysis. It is recommended that the ll performance evaluation be
carried out at approximately the same conditions at which the cooling tower will
operate.
Tables 25 show more examples of ll performance test results. The cases
presented in these tables were not obtained during actual ll tests, but they are given
for the illustration of the relative dierences between the dierent methods of ana-
lysis at extreme ambient conditions. The results in Tables 25 are obtained when
T
wi
45

C and T
wo
35

C. The variables p
atm
, m
a
, and m
w
are the same as in the
illustrative example. The results in Tables 2 and 3 are obtained when T
ai
28

C.
T
wb
27.8

C for the results presented in Table 2. The air is, therefore, almost
saturated with water vapor. T
wb
10

C for the results in Table 3. The air is,

therefore, almost void of water vapor. T
ai
7

C in Tables 4 and 5. T
wb
6.8

C
(almost saturated air) in Table 4, and T
wb
1

C (almost void of vapor) in Table 5.

It can be seen from Tables 2, 4, and 5 that m
w(evap)
and T
ao
, according to the
Poppe method and the methods based on the assumptions of Merkel, are relatively
close. However, for the results in Table 3, the discrepancies between the Poppe
method and the methods based on the Merkel assumptions are greater. The reason
for this is that the outlet air is unsaturated according to the Poppe method. Refer to
Kloppers and Kro ger [11, 12] for a detailed discussion of this point.
8. CONCLUSION
A system of equations is derived from rst principles to solve the heat and mass
transfer process of evaporative cooling in crossow wet-cooling tower lls. A dif-
ferent system of equations is applicable when the air is supersaturated than when the
air is unsaturated. The unique solution techniques and procedures to solve a system
of equations are presented. The ll dimensions are not required in the analysis, as the
Table 2. Fill performance characteristics of a crossow ll according to the Poppe, Merkel, and e-NTU
methods T
ai
28

C; T
wb
27:8

C
Poppe Merkel e-NTU
1
e-NTU
2
e-NTU
3
e-NTU
4
Q, MW 0.1752 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670
T
ao
, K 308.45 308.16 308.16 308.16 308.16 308.16
m
wevap
; kg=s 0.0582 0.0532 0.0532 0.0532 0.0532 0.0532
Me 0.8973 0.8270 0.8083 0.9492 0.9029 0.8530
Table 3. Fill performance characteristics of a crossow ll according to the Poppe, Merkel, and e-NTU
methods T
ai
28

C; T
wb
10

C
Poppe Merkel e-NTU
1
e-NTU
2
e-NTU
3
e-NTU
4
Q, MW 0.1745 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670
T
ao
, K 304.83 296.43 296.43 296.43 296.43 296.43
m
wevap
; kg=s 0.0621 0.0733 0.0733 0.0733 0.0733 0.0733
Me 0.3897 0.3670 0.3711 0.3690 0.3678 0.3662
802 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
equations are presented in nondimensional form. The equations of the relatively
simple e-NTU method are also presented.
Results of a typical ll performance test are obtained by the Poppe, Merkel,
and e-NTU methods of analysis by employing the equations presented in this
study. The comparison between the results of these methods is critically evaluated.
The Poppe method predicts higher heat rejection rates and water evaporation rates
than the Merkel and all variants of the e-NTU methods. The heat rejection rates,
water evaporation rates, and air outlet temperatures predicted by the Merkel and
the four variants of the e-NTU method are identical. This is because all these
methods are based on the same simplifying assumptions. It is, therefore, very
important that the same method of analysis be employed in the ll performance
test and in the subsequent cooling-tower performance analysis. The transfer
characteristic determined by a particular method, therefore, cannot be employed in
a cooling-tower performance analysis if it was determined by employing another
method.
The Poppe method is relatively complex, but more accurate, than the Merkel
and e-NTU methods. If the amount of water that evaporates or the air outlet
temperature is an important consideration in the design of cooling towers, then the
Poppe method is the preferred method of analysis. The temperature of the outlet
air must be determined as accurately as possible for natural-draft cooling towers,
as the potential for draft is a function of the air temperature at the air outlet side
of the ll. The Poppe method is also more accurate at extreme ambient conditions
when the air is relatively hot and dry. The Merkel and e-NTU methods are not as
accurate under these conditions. Under normal ambient conditions, the Merkel
and especially the e-NTU methods of analysis can be employed if only the water
outlet temperature is an important consideration in the design of cooling towers.
This is due to the relative simplicity of these methods of analyses compared to the
Poppe method.
Table 4. Fill performance characteristics of a crossow ll according to the Poppe, Merkel, and e-NTU
methods T
ai
7

C; T
wb
6:8

C
Poppe Merkel e-NTU
1
e-NTU
2
e-NTU
3
e-NTU
4
Q, MW 0.1734 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670
T
ao
, K 294.99 294.63 294.63 294.63 294.63 294.63
m
wevap
; kg=s 0.0540 0.0417 0.0417 0.0417 0.0417 0.0417
Me 0.3663 0.3457 0.3501 0.3470 0.3461 0.3449
Table 5. Fill performance characteristics of a crossow ll according to the Poppe, Merkel, and e-NTU
methods T
ai
7

C; T
wb
1

C
Poppe Merkel e-NTU
1
e-NTU
2
e-NTU
3
e-NTU
4
Q, MW 0.1739 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670 0.1670
T
ao
, K 291.85 291.36 291.36 291.36 291.36 291.36
m
wevap
; kg=s 0.0539 0.0474 0.0474 0.0474 0.0474 0.0474
Me 0.3367 0.3159 0.3205 0.3165 0.3159 0.3150
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 803
REFERENCES
1. F. Merkel, Verdunstungsku hlung, VDI-Zeitschrift, vol. 70, pp. 123128, January 1925.
2. M. Poppe and H. Ro gener, Berechnung von Ru ckku hlwerken, VDI-Warmeatlas, pp. Mi
1Mi 15, 1991.
3. H. Jaber and R. L. Webb, Design of Cooling Towers by the Eectiveness-NTU Method,
J. Heat Transfer, vol. 111, pp. 837843, November 1989.
4. D. G. Kro ger, Air-Cooled Heat Exchangers and Cooling Towers, Penn Well Corp., Tulsa,
OK, 2004.
5. S. M. Zivi and B. B. Brand, An analysis of the Crossows Cooling Tower, Refrig. Eng.,
vol. 64, pp. 3134, 9092, 1956.
6. N. W. Kelly Kellys Handbook of Crossow Cooling Tower Performance, Neil W. Kelly
and Associates, Kansas City, MO, 1976.
7. F. Bosnjacovic, Technische Thermodinamik, Theodor Steinkopf, Dresden, 1965.
8. C. Bourillot, TEFERI, Numerical Model for Calculating the Performance of an Eva-
porative Cooling Tower, EPRI Rep. CS-3212-SR, August 1983.
9. C. Bourillot, On the Hypothesis of Calculating the Water Flowrate Evaporated in a Wet
Cooling Tower, EPRI Rep. CS-3144-SR, August 1983.
10. J. L. Grange, Calculating the Evaporated Water Flow in a Wet Cooling Tower, Proc. 9th
IAHR Cooling Tower and Spraying Pond Symp., von Karman Institute, Brussels, Belgium,
September 1994.
11. J. C. Kloppers and D. G. Kro ger, Cooling Tower Performance: A Critical Evaluation of
the Merkel Assumptions, South African Institution of Mechanical Engineers, R&D
Journal, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 2429, 2004.
12. J. C. Kloppers and D. G. Kro ger, The Supersaturated Psychrometric Chart with an Il-
lustrative Cooling Tower Example, HEFAT2004, 3rd Int. Conf. on Heat Transfer, Fluid
Mechanics and Thermodynamics, Cape Town, South Africa, 2124 June 2004.
13. J. D. Anderson, Jr., Computational Fluid Dynamics, The Basics with Applications,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1995.
14. J. C. Kloppers, ACritical Evaluation and Renement of the Performance Prediction of Wet-
Cooling Towers, Ph.D. thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2003.
15. L. D. Berman, Evaporative Cooling of Ciruculating Water, 2nd ed., pp.9499, H. Sawis-
towski, ed., translated from Russian by R, Hardbottle, Pergamon Press, New York, 1961.
16. S. V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow, Hemisphere, New York, 1980.
17. J. H. Mathews, Numerical Methods for Mathematics, Science, and Engineering, 2d ed.,
Prentice-Hall International, London, 1992.
APPENDIX A: EXPRESSING THE TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL AS AN
ENTHALPY DIFFERENTIAL
The temperature dierential, T
w
T
a
, employed in Eq. (10) for unsaturated air can
be rewritten in terms of an enthalpy dierential i
masw
i
ma
. The enthalpy of the
water vapor, i
v
, at the bulk water temperature, T
w
, is given by
i
v
i
fgwo
c
pv
T
w
A:1
The enthalpy of saturated air evaluated at the local bulk water temperature is given by
i
masw
c
pa
T
w
w
sw
i
fgwo
c
pv
T
w
A:2
Substitute Eq. (A.1) into Eq. (A.2) and nd, upon rearrangement,
804 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER
i
masw
c
pa
T
w
wi
v
w
sw
wi
v
A:3
The enthalpy of the airwater vapor mixture per unite mass of dry air, which
according to Kro ger [4] is expressed by
i
ma
c
pa
T
a
wi
fgwo
c
pv
T
a
A:4
where the specic heats are evaluated at T
a
273:15=2 and the latent heat, i
fgwo
, is
evaluated at 273.15 K according to Eq. (B.7).
The specic heat of the air water vapor mixture for unsaturated air is dened
by
c
pma
c
pa
wc
pv
A:5
Substract Eq. (A.4) from Eq. (A.3). The resultant equation can be simplied if the
small dierences in specic heats, which are evaluated at dierent temperatures, are
ignored.
T
w
T
a

i
masw
i
ma
w
sw
wi
v
c
pma
A:6
where c
pma
is given by Eq. (A.5).
APPENDIX B: THERMOPHYSICAL PROPERTIES
The thermophysical properties summarized here are presented in Kro ger [4].
Refer to Kro ger [4] for the ranges of applicability of the following equations of the
thermophysical properties. All the temperatures are expressed in Kelvin.
The specic heat of dry air is given by
c
pa
1:045356 10
3
3:161783 10
1
T
7:083814 10
4
T
2
2:705209 10
7
T
3
; J=kg K B:1
The vapor pressure of saturated water vapor is given by
p
v
10
z
; N=m
2
B:2
where
z 10:795861 273:16=T 5:02808 log
10
273:16=T
1:50474 10
4
1 10
8:29692T=273:161
_ _
4:2873 10
4
10
4:769551273:16=T
1
_ _
2:786118312
The specic heat of saturated water vapor is given by
ANALYSIS OF CROSSFLOW WET-COOLING TOWERS 805
c
pv
1:3605 10
3
2:31334 T 2:46784 10
10
T
5
5:91332 10
13
T
6
; J=kg K
B:3
The specic heat of mixtures of air and water vapor is given by
c
pma
c
pa
wc
pv
; J=K kg dry air B:4
The humidity ratio is given by
w
2501:6 2:3263T
wb
273:15
2501:6 1:8577T 273:15 4:184T
wb
273:15
_ _
0:62509p
vwb
p
atm
1:005p
vwb
_ _

1:00416T T
wb

2501:6 1:8577T 273:15 4:184T

wb
273:15
_ _
B:5
where p
vwb
is the vapor pressure from Eq. (B.2) evaluated at the wet-bulb tem-
perature.
The specic heat of water is given by
c
pw
8:15599 10
3
2:80627 10 T
5:11283 10
2
T
2
2:17582 10
13
T
6
; J=kg K B:6
The latent heat of water is given by
i
fgw
3:4831814 10
6
5:8627703 10
3
T 12:139568T
2
1:40290431 10
2
T
3
; J=K B:7
i
fgwo
is obtained from Eq. (B.7), where T 273:15.
806 J. C. KLOPPERS AND D. G. KRO

GER