4.7 Article

The research on plume abatement and water saving of mechanical draft wet cooling tower based on the rectangle module

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2022.106184

关键词

Plume abatement; Water saving; Rectangle module; Mechanical draft wet cooling tower

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposes a rectangular module with plume abatement and water saving performance to improve the mechanical draft wet cooling tower (MCT). The plume, water saving, and thermal performance of MCT under different environmental parameters, circulating water parameters, and crosswind conditions are analyzed. The results show that relative humidity, circulating water temperature, circulating water flow rate, and dry-bulb temperature have significant impacts on the plume generation probability. The use of the rectangular module significantly improves water saving and eliminates the plume.
To realize plume abatement and water saving of mechanical draft wet cooling tower (MCT), a rectangular module with plume abatement and water saving performance is proposed in this study. The plume, water saving, and thermal performance of MCT under different the environmental parameters, circulating water parameters, and crosswind conditions are analyzed. The result shows that, with the increase of relative humidity, circulating water temperature, and circulating water flow rate, the probability of plume generated increases. When the dry-bulb temperature increases, the probability of plume generated decreases. With the crosswind velocity increasing, the probability of plume generated decreases under the crosswind angle of 0 degrees, and that increases under the crosswind angle of 90 degrees and 180 degrees. After using the rectangular module, the variation range of water saving amount is from 0.018 to 0.046 L/min, and the water saving rate is 4.3% similar to 16.2%. The plume can be abated, and the outlet water temperature is increased by about 2 degrees C in this study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据