This document discusses reducing the footprint, power usage, and water usage of field erected cooling towers. It explains how cooling towers work and different types of fill and drift eliminators that can be used. While reducing footprint and power usage are conflicting goals, reducing water loss is difficult without adding costs. The best approach in the UAE is to prioritize reducing footprint due to limited water and power. Improving system efficiency through optimal cooling tower sizing provides the greatest savings over time compared to other options discussed.
Original Description:
Reducing Footprint Power Water Use for Cooling Tower
Original Title
Chris Bickerstaff- Reducing Footprint Power Water Use
This document discusses reducing the footprint, power usage, and water usage of field erected cooling towers. It explains how cooling towers work and different types of fill and drift eliminators that can be used. While reducing footprint and power usage are conflicting goals, reducing water loss is difficult without adding costs. The best approach in the UAE is to prioritize reducing footprint due to limited water and power. Improving system efficiency through optimal cooling tower sizing provides the greatest savings over time compared to other options discussed.
This document discusses reducing the footprint, power usage, and water usage of field erected cooling towers. It explains how cooling towers work and different types of fill and drift eliminators that can be used. While reducing footprint and power usage are conflicting goals, reducing water loss is difficult without adding costs. The best approach in the UAE is to prioritize reducing footprint due to limited water and power. Improving system efficiency through optimal cooling tower sizing provides the greatest savings over time compared to other options discussed.
Water Use Seeking a Balance Chris Bickerstaff Composite Cooling Solutions, L.P. The Basics A cooling tower is designed to remove heat from a fluid, usually water, to the atmosphere, most often through the process of evaporative cooling. Open-circuit cooling towers distribute hot water over a medium designed to induce splashing or the creation of a thin film of water. Evaporation removes the heat and cools the working fluid to near the wet-bulb temperature. Water & Fill Fill is designed to increase the relative surface area of a volume of water to allow for more efficient heat transfer. Splash Fill causes a continued breakup of large droplets into smaller droplets as the water falls downward through the tower. Film Fill creates a thin film of water over the sheet with a surface area over 3X that of a droplet of an equivalent volume. Reducing Footprint How Make it smaller. Remember that a cooling tower requires open area around it to allow the unimpeded flow of air into the tower. Limitations Water loading too great of a volume of water over too small of an area will cause the fill to flood and be ineffective. Air Velocities to get the same volume of air through a smaller space in the same time, the air velocity must increase. As the velocity increases it can cause maldistribution of air and reduce the effectiveness of the fill and drift eliminators Power the tighter the space the more power it takes to pull the air through the tower Reducing Power How Increase the Footprint a greater total area increases the total surface area of the fill and allows for more efficient cooling and reduces the velocity of the air moving through the tower. Increase the Tower Height deeper fill packs also increase the total surface area of the fill and taller air inlets reduce the velocity of the air entering the tower. High Efficiency Fan Selection selecting a fan with a higher efficiency will allow more of the motor power to be applied to the work of moving the air through the tower Limitations Water Loading too low of a volume of water over too great of an area will dry out areas of the fill limiting film formation and encourage scaling Air Velocities a very low velocity can cause maldistribution of air and reduce the effectiveness of the fill and drift eliminators Footprint is rarely without some limitation at a site Pump Head the taller the air inlet and the greater the fill depth, the higher the water must be pumped to spray over the fill. Field Installed Conditions fan efficiencies as stated by the fan manufacturers are based on factory testing which includes perfect tip clearance and exact fan pitch. Field installations will rarely provide more than 70%-75% efficiency. Space vs. Power 2500TR @ 105F 95F 87F 26 x 26 cell with 125 HP motor 39 x 39 cell with 30 HP motor 32.5 x 32.5 cell with 60 HP motor Reducing Water Loss Where does the water go? Blowout/Splashout water lost from the walls or air inlets of the tower due to prevailing winds, leaks, or splashing Drift water droplets carried by the air passing through the tower Blowdown water which must be removed from the system to maintain required concentrations of solids Evaporation water which has become a vapor and saturated the air as part of the fundamental function of the cooling tower Blowout/Splashout Typical Loss 0.1% of total flow Methods of Reduction Louvers catch water and redirects it into the tower Windwalls prevent winds from passing through the tower and carrying water out of the tower Basin sizing if large enough, can eliminate the need for louvers Quality construction will reduce leaking potential to negligible or none Potential Loss 0.0% of total flow Drift Typical Loss 0.002% of total water flow with typical drift eliminators Methods of Reduction Drift Eliminators collect the drift and return it to the system. More efficient drift eliminators will be denser and/or deeper which will obstruct air imposing a pressure drop and require more power to the fan. Potential Loss 0.0005% of total water flow with high efficiency DEs Air Flow Blowdown Typical Loss 0.48% of total flow at 3 cycles of concentration (COCs) at 10F range Methods of Reduction Increase the COCs if greater concentrations of solids are allowed for in the system, then less water is required to be bled off to maintain those levels of concentrations. 4 CoCs require only 0.31% of the total flow and 5 CoCs require only 0.23%. However, a cooling tower is much more forgiving of solids than a chillers heat exchanger which will limit the maximum cycles of concentration. Filter the blowdown filtration and water treatment systems are marketed to be able to return 90% - 99% of the blowdown to the system as clean water Potential Loss 0.23% of total flow at 5 COCs at 10F range and a further reduction to 0.023% through filtrations with a 90% return from filtration Evaporation Typical Loss 1.00% of total flow at 10F Range Methods of Reduction Evaporation Reclamation by introduction of cold air or surfaces into the plenum of the cooling tower, the saturated exit air is encouraged to create a plume and condense the water within the tower to be recollected. Such systems are marketed to provide a 7% - 10% reclamation of evaporation in locations such as the UAE. This requires greater power and much more space. Indirect cooling circulates the process fluid through coils which transfer the heat to either circulating water or air. This requires greater power and much more space. Air cooled coils are limited by the dry bulb temperature instead of the wetbulb temperature. Potential Loss 0.93% of total flow at 10F Range with evaporation reclamation of 7% Comparisons of Water Loss Reduction 2500TR @ 105F 95F 87F requires 7500 GPM Typical Improvements Savings % of Flow GPM % of Makeup Method % of Flow GPM % GPM % of Makeup Blowout 0.0% 0 0 0 Drift 0.002% 1.5 1.33% Hi-Eff DEs 0.0005% 0.375 75% 2.25 2% Evaporation 1% 75 66.67% Reclamation 0.93% 69.75 7% 5.25 4.67% Blowdown (3 CoCs) 0.48% 36 32.00% 4 CoCs 0.31% 23.25 0.17% 12.75 11.33% Filtration -20.925 18.6% Makeup 1.5% 112.5 Summary A cooling tower works according to unalterable laws. Since the current technology for fill is pretty much level among the competition, no one can claim to have a truly superior performing cooling tower. Experience and knowledge of thermal design, engineering, construction and risk assessment are the true variables. Reduction of power and reduction of footprint are mutually exclusive goals. Reduction of water loss is difficult to accomplish without costly additions and increases in power and/or pumping requirements. Considering the shortage of water and power in the UAE, footprint is the most economical sacrifice when seeking the balance between space, water, and power consumption. A Final Thought System Efficiency The most efficient tower design is the one which provides the best chiller efficiency. Net savings of 22 kw at AED 0.33/kwis a savings of AED 31,799 each year for 2500TR at 50% utilization. That is nearly 13 dirhams per ton per year with no additional investment beyond good design If the cooling tower were to be increased in size to a 36x36 model, the power consumption would be 53 kw. This results in an annual savings of AED 78,052 enough to pay for the difference in only 2-3 years. 2500TR @ 104F 94F 87F 30x30 CT 52 kw Chiller 1680 kw Total 1732 kw Savings 14 kw 2500TR @ 105F 95F 87F 30x30 CT 46 kw Chiller 1700 kw Total 1746 kw 2500TR @ 103F 93F 87F 30x30 CT 68 kw Chiller 1660 kw Total 1728 kw Savings 18 kw 2500TR @ 102F 92F 87F 30x30 CT 85 kw Chiller 1639 kw Total 1724kw Savings 22 kw Composite Cooling Solutions The future of cooling towers, today. www.compositecooling.com Chris Bickerstaff Regional Manager, Middle East Composite Cooling Solutions, L.P. 4150 International Plaza, Suite 500 Fort Worth, TX 76109 Office +1 817 708 9153 +1 817 246 8700 Fax +1 817 246 8717 US Mobile +1 832 492 1802 UAE Mobile +971 50 895 2464 cbickerstaff@compositecooling.com S R Khanna U.A.E. Representative ASECO Chillers Technology P.O. Box 30303 Dubai, U.A.E. Office +971 4 335 7702 +971 4 880 2088 Fax +971 4 335 7703 +971 4 880 2055 Mobile +971 50 644 9803 khanna@aseco.ae