Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Chemical Engineering

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

Solving the heat and mass transfer equations for an evaporative

cooling tower through an orthogonal collocation method
Oscar M. Hernndez-Caldern , Eusiel Rubio-Castro, Erika Y. Rios-Iribe
Facultad de Ciencias Qumico Biolgicas, Universidad Autnoma de Sinaloa, Av. de las Amricas y Blvd. Universitarios, Ciudad Universitaria,
CP 80013 Culiacn, Sinaloa, Mexico

a r t i c l e

a b s t r a c t

i n f o

Article history:
Received 27 July 2013
Received in revised form 9 June 2014
Accepted 16 June 2014
Available online 8 July 2014
Keywords:
Cooling tower
Poppe method
Orthogonal collocation
DormandPrince
Explicit Jacobian

In this paper, the orthogonal collocation technique is utilized to solve the Poppe method equations for heat
and mass transfer in counter owing wet-cooling towers. The six differential equations for unsaturated
and supersaturated air from the Poppe method are simplied, yielding three differential equations that
use the Heaviside function. The humidity ratio is demonstrated to be a nite power series at a normalized
water temperature. The air enthalpy is expressed as a function of the normalized water temperature and
the unknown coefcients of the expansion from the humidity ratio. The discrete formulation is solved
using the NewtonRaphson method using an explicit Jacobian. The proposed methodology is applied to
eight examples, and the results are compared to the results obtained when the governing equations are
integrated with the DormandPrince method. The results indicate that the accuracy is similar between
both techniques. However, the orthogonal collocation requires less CPU time.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Cooling towers are commonly used for heat rejection toward ambient air during many industrial processes, particularly when
used as condensers for refrigeration systems, power stations and the textile industry (Yilmaz, 2010). A practical cooling tower theory was rst developed by Merkel (1925), where the water lost due to evaporation and the water-lm heat-transfer resistance
are ignored, and the Lewis factor for moist air is assumed to be one. Due to these assumptions, the heat and mass transfer processes in the cooling towers are represented by a single separable differential equation. The solution of this equation reveals only
the air outlet temperature and enthalpy. Moreover, the nal estimations assume that the air leaving the cooling tower is saturated.
The Merkel method can be extended to include a nite liquid-side lm resistance to heat transfer (Baker and Shryock, 1961; Maclainecross and Banks, 1981; Marseille et al., 1991). However, for this method, the local water bulk temperature is seldom more than 0.3 K above
the air temperature at the airwater interface (Mills, 1999). Therefore, the above works indicate that it is safe to ignore the water lm
resistance when analyzing the cooling towers (Mills, 1999; Singham, 1983). Therefore, several works related to the heat and mass transfer
phenomena in cooling towers have been produced based on the above assumption. For example, the e-NTU method (effectiveness-number
of transfer units), which was developed by Jaber and Webb (1989), the water loss is neglected, similar to Merkel, and the Lewis factor is
unity.
Models that represent the heat and mass transfer processes in more detail may also include the effects of evaporative water loss
and xed Lewis factors can be found with values other than unity (Sutherland, 1983; Kloppers and Krger, 2005a, 2005b). These works
addressed the effect of the Lewis factor relative to the size of the cooling towers. However, the more complete model that circumvents
the above limitations is commonly known as the Poppe method because it was reported by Poppe and Rgener (1991); this method
involves a set of differential equations whose numerical solution reveals the behavior of the primary variables involved (i.e., air enthalpy,
air humidity, water temperature, ow rate, etc.) through the packing region of the cooling towers. In addition, the Poppe method provides
the air outlet conditions in terms of the temperature, enthalpy and humidity; the Merkel number, which is the number of transfer units,

Corresponding author. Tel.: +52 667 713 7860.

E-mail address: omhc@uas.edu.mx (O.M. Hernndez-Caldern).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2014.06.008
0098-1354/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

25

Nomenclature
Cp
DPM
E
g
H
i
ifg
J
L
Lef
m
N
NTU
OCM
P
Q
r
R
SL
SRM
t
T
w
W
x
z

specic heat at constant pressure (J/kg K)

DormandPrince method
relative error
auxiliary function
Heaviside step function
enthalpy (J/kg)
latent heat (J/kg)
Jacobian
differential operator
Lewis factor (h/(Cp hd ))
mass ow rate (kg/s)
number of quadrature points
number of transfer units
orthogonal collocation method
pressure, Legendre polynomial or function
auxiliary function
residual function
auxiliary function
saturation line
Simpsons 3/8 rule method
CPU time
temperature ( C or K)
humidity ratio (kg water vapor/kg dry air)
coefcient
normalized water temperature
normalized water temperature

Subscript
0
reference
a
air
Gauss quadrature
gq
h
heat transfer
in
inlet
j
index
k
index
mass transfer or index
m
n
degree of polynomial solution
ma
mixture of air and water vapor
outlet
out
p
index
q
index
t
total
v
vapor
w
water
wb
wet-bulb
db
dry-bulb
Superscript
*
saturation at water temperature
saturation at dry-bulb temperature of air

Greek letters

coefcient

coefcient
Tw,out Tw,in or Dirac delta function


inlet water temperature ( C or K)
domain of integration

is calculated from the solution of a differential equation and accounts for the evaporation effect relative to the water ow rate. The
Lewis factor is estimated simultaneously from the solution of differential equations through a given equation (Bosnjakovic, 1965). The
aforementioned characteristics make the Poppe method the more accurate methodology when calculating the heat and mass transfer in
cooling towers.

26

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

The Merkel method (Merkel, 1925), e-NTU (Jaber and Webb, 1989) and the Poppe method (Poppe and Rgener, 1991) are the most
commonly used approaches when rating and designing cooling towers. These situations require a good representation of the heat and
mass transfer processes to obtain the correct designs. For example, Sutherland (1983) found that designs using the Merkel method could
be 515% undersized. Moreover, some works have addressed the optimal cooling towers design for economy based on the Merkel and
e-NTU approximated methods (Serna-Gonzlez et al., 2010; Kintner-Meyer and Emery, 1995; Sylemez, 2001, 2004). Consequently, these
methods generate sub-optimal designs due to the errors introduced by neglecting the evaporative water loss while assuming that the
Lewis factor is unity. To overcome the above errors, Rubio-Castro et al. (2011) developed a mixed integer non-linear programming (MINLP)
model to optimize the design for counter ow cooling towers. The MINLP is based on the Poppe method and a detailed geometric design;
the corresponding differential equations are solved using the fourth-order RungeKutta algorithm (Kloppers, 2003). The results of this last
work are compared to the results obtained when the cooling tower rating is modeled using the Merkel method, revealing the cases where
the Merkel method provides sub-optimal designs. However, the disadvantages of using the Poppe method for optimization problems
include the large number of variables and the non-linearities related to the numerical method used to solve the corresponding differential
equations (Rubio-Castro et al., 2011). In addition, the stability of the numerical method must be considered. Due to the aforementioned
disadvantages, a strategy must be developed that gives good initials values in addition to lower and upper limits for the major variables.
Moreover, numerous computational and human efforts have been disclosed. Finally, the heat and mass transfer processes must be well
represented to optimize the cooling tower designs; this representation is accomplished through the Poppe method.
Kloppers (2003) describes the numerical methodology to solve the equations from the Poppe method through a fourth-order
RungeKutta technique. This methodology, when applied for optimization, demands at least 25 intervals to discretize the differential
equations (Rubio-Castro et al., 2011), generating signicant problems related to variables and non-linearities with considerable human
and computational demands. Utilizing an orthogonal collocation method might reduce aforementioned efforts (Finlayson, 1972) because it
demands fewer discretization points than the RungeKutta method. The orthogonal collocation method is one of several weighted-residual
methods where an approximate solution is substituted into the differential equation to form the residual. Afterwards, this residual is set to
zero at the collocation points. Choosing the collocation points is critical for collocation techniques to improve convergence and efciency.
Generally, the zeroes of the Jacobi polynomials are utilized as collocation points over the normalized interval. Therefore, the orthogonal
collocation method generates a system of algebraic equations that must be solved to determine the unknown coefcients for the proposed
approximate solution (Villadsen and Stewart, 1967). Certainly, this discrete formulation can be solved more easily if the Jacobian is constructed. For the governing equations of the Poppe method, the associated Jacobian is simple to evaluate and can be expressed explicitly.
Therefore, the operating conditions in cooling towers involve the humidity ratio and the air enthalpy, which can be expressed as polynomials; the solutions to these polynomials generate the corresponding proles relative to the cooling tower packing. The solution for the
polynomials could reduce the computational time relative to the case when the governing equations from the Poppe method are solved
using the RungeKutta method. In summary, the orthogonal collocation method offers better stability while reducing the computational
and human efforts relative to the fourth-order RungeKutta technique. This method is very important when optimizing the design details
of counterow cooling towers.
Therefore, this paper addresses the application of an orthogonal collocation technique to solve the governing equations of the Poppe
method. The humidity ratio and the air enthalpy are represented by a power series expansion relative to the normalized water temperature,
while the equations of the Poppe method including the unsaturated and supersaturated air are compacted using the Heaviside step function;
the number of transfer units (NTU) is determined by the Gauss quadrature method (Lanczos, 1956), and its accuracy was veried using
Simpsons 3/8 rule (Lanczos, 1956). Here, the application of Heaviside step function is proposed and developed in this work to simplify
the system of governing equations. Moreover, the code was implemented in the MatLab software to solve eight examples, and the results
are compared with those obtained using the DormandPrince RungeKutta integration (Dormand and Prince, 1980) in the context of CPU
time and accuracy.
2. Mathematical model
The equations for the evaporative cooling process of the Poppe method are adapted from Poppe and Rgener
(1991) and Krger (2004). These equations are derived from the mass balance in the control volumes shown in
Figs. 1 and 2. Fig. 1 shows the control volume in the ll of a counter ow wet-cooling tower, and Fig. 2 shows the air-side control
volume of the ll shown in Fig. 1.




w
Cpw m
dw
ma [w w + (w w)H(w w)]
=


dTw
Lef (ima ima ) + (1 Lef ) [(w w)iv + (w w )(iv iw )H(w w )] (w w)iw

dima
mw
iw [w w + (w w)H(w w)]
= Cpw
1+

ma
dTw
Lef (ima ima ) + (1 Lef )[(w w)iv + (w w )(iv iw )H(w w )] (w w)iw
Cpw
dNTU
=
i




dTw
Lef (ima
ma ) + (1 Lef ) [(w w)iv + (w w )(iv iw )H(w w )] (w w)iw

(1)


(2)

(3)

here H(x) is the Heaviside step function, which is given by

H(x) =

0,

x<0

1,

x0

(4)

and Tw is the water temperature; Cpw is the specic heat at constant pressure at water temperature, mw is the water ow rate, ma is the air
ow rate, w is the humidity ratio through the cooling tower, w* is the humidity saturated ratio evaluated at the water temperature, w is
the humidity saturated ratio evaluated at the dry-bulb temperature of the air, iw is the water enthalpy evaluated at water temperature, iv is
is the enthalpy of the saturated air evaluated at the water temperature,
the water vapor enthalpy evaluated at the water temperature, ima

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

27

Fig. 1. Control volume of the counter ow ll.

Fig. 2. Air-side control volume of the ll.

ima is the enthalpy of the airwater vapor mixture per mass of the dry-air. The denition of ima depends on whether the air is unsaturated
(w w < 0) or saturated (w w 0),


ima =

ia + wiv

w w < 0


ia + w iv + (w w )iw

w w 0

(5)

where ia is the dry air enthalpy evaluated at the dry-bulb air temperature, iv is the water vapor enthalpy evaluated at the dry-bulb air
 is the water enthalpy evaluated at the dry-bulb air temperature, NTU is the number of transfer units, and Lef is the
temperature, iw
Lewis factor, which represents the relationship between the heat and mass transfer during an evaporative process. The Lewis factor is a
mathematical expression that can be used for saturated and unsaturated air:
Lef = 0.8652/3

((w + 0.622)/(w (w w )H(w w ) + 0.662) 1)

ln((w + 0.622)/(w (w w )H(w w ) + 0.662))

(6)

The representation proposed for Eqs. (1)(3) and (6) is a concise form of the governing equations for heat and mass transfer in the counter
ow ll for unsaturated and supersaturated air.

3. Development of the numerical solution

The procedure for solving the Eqs. (1)(3) through the orthogonal collocation technique is shown below. First, the discretization method
for the mass and heat transfer equations, as well as the iterative scheme for solving the corresponding nonlinear discrete system, are
provided. After, the method for obtaining the NTU prole from the Gauss quadrature technique is explained.

28

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

3.1. Discrete formulation of the enthalpy of the airvapor mixture

The overall energy balance in the ll of cooling towers is as follows:
ima,in +

mw,in
mw,out
i
ima,out
iw,out = 0
ma w,in
ma

(7)

where ima,in is the inlet air enthalpy, ima,out is the outlet air enthalpy, iw,in is the inlet water vapor enthalpy, iw,out is the outlet air enthalpy,
mw,in and mw,out are the inlet and outlet water ow rates, respectively. The outlet water ow rate is calculated as follows:
mw,out = mw,in + (win wout )ma

(8)

Combining Eqs. (7) and (8) generates the mathematical expression for determining the outlet air enthalpy:
mw,in
i

ma w,in

ima,out = ima,in +

m

w,in

ma

+ win wout

(9)

iw,out

The energy balance from the top of the cooling tower to an arbitrary level is calculated for the air enthalpy (ima ):
ima +

mw,in
mw
i
ima,out
iw = 0
ma w,in
ma

(10)

This arbitrary level represents any point of the ll height, allowing the last expression to be used at any level as a function of the water
temperature. The following equation is proposed for Eq. (10) after changing the next variable:
Tw = x + 

(11)

where is the difference between the outlet and inlet water temperatures,  is the inlet water temperature and x is the normalized water
temperature with the domain [0,1], where x = 0 corresponds to the top of the cooling tower, and x = 1 represents the bottom of the cooling
tower. Therefore, these values are as follows:
= Tw,out Tw,in

(12)

 = Tw,in

(13)

Similar to the energy balance (Eq. (10)), the mass balance from the top of the cooling tower to any level is as follows:
mw = mw,in (wout w)ma

(14)

The humidity air ratio (w) can be expressed as an expanded power series (see Appendix A.2 in Supplementary material):
w=

n


Wm xm

(15)

m=0

where Wm are the polynomial unknown coefcients. Therefore, if Eq. (15) is substituted in Eq. (14), the Eq. (15) becomes the following:

mw = mw,in

wout

n


Wm x

ma

(16)

m=0

Similar to the top of cooling tower, the humidity air ratio (w) equals the outlet air humidity ratio (wout ):
w(x = 0) = wout

(17)

W0 = wout

(18)

Therefore, after combining Eqs. (18) and (16), the nal expanded power series for air humidity ratio is obtained:
mw,in 
mw
=
+
Wm xm
ma
ma
n

(19)

m=1

where mw = mw (W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , x). Therefore, substituting Eq. (19) in Eq. (10), generates the following:

ima

mw,in
=
i
+ ima,out +
ma w,in

mw,in 
+
Wm xm
ma
n

iw

(20)

m=1

Finally, substituting Eq. (9) into Eq. (20) produces a mathematical expression for the airvapor mixture enthalpy, such as an expanded
power series, where ima = ima (W0 , W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , x),
ima = ima,in

m

w,in

ma

+ win W0 iw,out +

mw,in 
+
Wm xm
ma
n

iw

m=1

Notably, this energy balance is valid for air in any state (unsaturated or supersaturated).

(21)

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

29

3.2. Discrete formulation of the air humidity ratio

First, Eq. (1) is reformulated as follows:
, x) =
R(W

, x)
P(W
, x)
Q (W

(22)

= (W0 , W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn ), and
where W
, x) =
R(W

dw
dTw

(23)
mw
[w w + (w w)H(w w)]
ma

, x) = Cpw
P(W

(24)

, x) = Lef (ima
Q (W
ima ) + (1 Lef )[(w w)iv + (w w )(iv iw )H(w w )] (w w)iw

Due to the previous change in variable, the proposed terms Cpw , w* and

ima

(25)

are dened as follows:

Cpw = Cpw (x + )

(26)

w = w (x + )

(27)

ima

(28)

ima
(x

+ )

, x) does not depend on W0 because

In addition, R(W
1
(m + 1)Wm+1 xm

n1

R(W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , x) =

(29)

m=0

Therefore, Eq. (22) can be represented by the following expression:

, x) R(W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , x)Q (W
, x) = 0
P(W

(30)

, x) when dened as follows:

The solution for Eq. (30) equals the roots of g(W
, x) = P(W
, x) R(W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , x)Q (W
, x)
g(W

(31)

coefcients are determined from Eq. (15), and these coefcients must be selected such that g(W
, x) = 0. In this case,
For Eq. (31), the W
the collocation points are the following: the zeroes of Legendre polynomial (P n1 ) to the degree of n 1 normalized in the [0,1] interval,
for example (x1 , x2 , . . ., xn2 , xn1 ) where P n1 (xk ) = 0 when 1 k n 1. Furthermore, the next boundary coordinates are employed:
x0 = 0 and xn = 1. Afterwards, substituting the points x = (x0 , x1 , . . ., xn1 , xn ) in Eq. (31) generates the next nonlinear algebraic system:
, xk ) R(W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , xk )Q (W
, xk ), where g(W
, xk ) = 0 when 0 k n. Here, the W
coefcients can be obtained through
, xk ) = P(W
g(W
the NewtonRaphson algorithm, which requires the following iterative process:

1

r+1 = W
r J g (W
)
W

W r ,x

or more explicitly:

r , x )
W
g(

g 
W0 x

(32)

g 
W1 x

...

0
r 0

g r
g 
W r+1 W r
W0 x
W1 x
1 1
1
1

. .
..
..
.. = ..
.
.

r
r
r+1 r



g 
Wn1 Wn1 g 
W 

W1 x
r
r+1
0

Wn
xn1
Wn

r
r n1
g 



W0
W1 

W0r+1

W0r

xn

xn

r


Wn1 x
r 0
g 
Wn1 
g

g 
Wn x

gr

0
r
g1
x1
x1

..
..

.
.
r
r

gr
g 
g 
n1
Wn1 x
Wn x
gnr
n1
r
r n1

g 
g 


Wn1 x
Wn x
n
n
r 0
g 
Wn 

q
gp

(33)

coefcients obtained in the iteration q using collocation point xp , and g/Wj |x is the
is the function g evaluated using the W
p
coefcients obtained at iteration q through collocation point
partial derivative of g relative to Wj and subsequently evaluated using the W

where

xp . To search the roots faster, the explicit Jacobian of the function g is obtained:
, x)
g(W

, x) R(W1 , W2 , . . ., Wn , x)Q (W
, x)]
=
[P(W
Wj
Wj

(34)

Subsequently, abbreviating the above expression and expanding the derivative respect to Wj generates

g
P
Q
R
=
R
Q
Wj
Wj
Wj
Wj

(35)

30

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

To obtain an explicit form of Eq. (34), the following derivatives: (w/Wj ), (ima /Wj ) and (w /Wj ) must be evaluated. Therefore,
because w =

n

m=0

Wm xm ,

w
= xj 0 j n
Wj

(36)

For (ima /Wj ), if Eq. (20) is a derivative relative to Wj , the next expression is acquired:

ima,out
ima

=
+
Wj
Wj
Wj

n


Wm xm

iw

(37)

m=1

Substituting Eq. (9) into (37), similar to wout = W0 generates

ima
= iw,out
W0

(38)

ima
= iw xj 1 j n
Wj
Finally, for (w /Wj ), rstly the derivative of Eq. (5) relative to Wj for supersaturated air is generated:

i
ima
ia
w 
=
+ iv
+ w v +
Wj
Wj
Wj
Wj

w
w 

Wj Wj


iw
+ (w w )


iw
Wj

(39)

While employing the chain rule with the derivatives of the enthalpies related to Wj in Eq. (39), the following is obtained:

i Tdb w
ima
ia Tdb w
w 
=
+ iv
+ w v
+

Wj
Tdb w Wj
Wj
Tdb w Wj

w
w 

Wj Wj


iw
+ (w w )

 T

iw
db w

Tdb w Wj

(40)

 , i /T



where ia /Tdb = Cpa
db = Cpv and iw /Tdb = Cpw (all heat capacities are evaluated at dry-bulb temperature of air). Therefore,
v

ima
=
Wj




iv iw
+ [Cpa
+ w Cpv + (w w )Cpw
]

where Tdb /w = (w /Tdb )

ature. Hence,

Tdb
w 

w 
w

+ iw

.
Wj
Wj

(41)

; similarly, w /Tdb is the derivative of the saturated humidity ratio relative to the dry-bulb air temper-

 (w/W )
(ima /Wj ) iw
w 
j
=
1







Wj
iv iw + [Cpa + w Cpv + (w w )Cpw ](w /Tdb )

(42)

Substituting Eq. (36) and Eq. (38) into Eq. (42) generates the next mathematical expression:

iw,out iw
w 
=




 ](w  /T )1

W0
iv iw + [Cpa + w Cpv + (w w )Cpw
db

(43)


w 
iw iw
=
xj 1 j n
 + [C  + w  C  + (w w  )C  ](w  /T )1
Wj
iv iw
db
pa
pv
pw

Moreover, (P/Wj ), (Q/Wj ) and (R/Wj ) must be evaluated, initially generating expressions through the derivative of P relative to
Wj ,

= Cpw [w w + (w w)H(w w)]

Wj
Wj

m 
w

ma

+ Cpw

m 
w
ma

Wj

[w w + (w w)H(w w)]

(44)

Similar to (mw /ma )/W0 = 0 and (mw /ma )/Wj = w/Wj = xj , when 1 j n

P
= Cpw
W0
P
= Cpw
Wj

 m   w 
w
ma

W0

(w w )x

w 
1 H(w w)
W0

 m  w 
w
ma

Wj




+ (w w)x +

(45)

 m   w 
w
ma

Wj


x




H(w w)

1jn

Regardless of (R/Wj ), the derivative of R respect to Wj is found, as shown in Eq. (29)

R
=0
W0
R
1
= jxj1 1 j n

Wj

(46)

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

31

Therefore, when Lef/Wj 0, the derivative of Eq. (25) relative to Wj is as follows:

Q
= Lef
Wj

ima

Wj

w
+ (1 Lef )
iv +
Wj

Therefore, Eq. (47) is as follows:

Q
= Lef iw,out + (1 Lef ) iv +
W0

Q
= Lef iw xj + (1 Lef ) iv xj +
Wj

w
w 

Wj Wj

w 
W0


xj

w 
Wj

Additionally, w(x = 1) = win must be satised (i.e.,

)=
g(x = 1, W

n


(iv iw )H(w w ) + iw

w
Wj

(47)


(iv iw )H(w w ) + iw

(48)


(iv iw )H(w w ) + iw xj

n

Wm

m=0

1jn

Wm = win ). Therefore, when x = 1, Eq. (32) must be redened:

win

(49)

m=0

and

g 
=1 0jn
Wj x=1

(50)

3.3. Determination of the number of transfer units (NTU)

By substituting Eq. (25) into (3) and changing the next variable (Tw = x + ),

Cpw x + 
dNTU
=
)
dx
Q (x, W

(51)

Integrating Eq. (51) from x = 1 (bottom tower) to x = z where 0 < z 1 (an arbitrary level on the tower) generates the NTU prole as
function of the normalized water temperature:

NTU(z) =
1

Cpw (x + )
dx
)
Q (x, W

(52)

where NTU(1) = 0. Applying the Gauss quadrature integration (see Appendix A.3 in Supplementary material) to Eq. (51) generates
Cpw (xk + )
z 1
wgq,k
)
2
Q (xk , W
N

NTU(z) =

(53)

k=1

where the collocation points are given by

x k =

z1
z+1
xgq,k +
2
2

(54)

The maximum value that NTU can reach is NTUmax = NTU(x = 0).
Finally, the Equations that form the proposed model were codied in MatLab for application to previously reported examples.
4. Results and discussion
To demonstrate the methodology presented in this paper, eight examples are solved, and the results are compared in terms of CPU time
and accuracy relative to the results obtained from the DormandPrince RungeKutta integration (Dormand and Prince, 1980). Here, the
DormandPrince method was also codied in this work. This new method is compared to the DormandPrince method instead of the 4th
order RungeKutta method because the rst one is a multistep method, which guarantees a higher accuracy and allows a fair comparison.
The data for Cases 14 and Cases 58 are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Cases 14 consist of water cooling process where
the inlet air is warm and very dry, while in the Cases 58 the inlet air is cold and almost saturated.
During the analysis of each case, the water temperature variation is from 20 C to 50 C. To avoid the fouling, scaling and corrosion
caused by the hot water, the temperature of the water sent to the cooling towers (usually coming of heat exchanger networks) should not
exceed 50 C (Douglas, 1988). The cooling towers are usually part of a closed cooling system where the cold water is returned to a heat
exchanger network; in this network, the lower water temperature required at the inlet heat exchanger network is usually approximately
20 C (Ponce-Ortega et al., 2007; Rubio-Castro et al., 2013). However, the methodology proposed here is a systematic strategy, and the
aforementioned interval can be modied without issue. The relationships used to calculate the thermodynamic properties required for
modeling evaporative cooling process are given in Appendix A.1 in Supplementary material.
Similar to the methodology proposed in this paper, Fig. 3 provides the algorithm used to solve the model through an orthogonal
collocation technique. Therefore, the humidity ratio is expressed using a polynomial with an order of n = 15 (i.e., 14-collocation points), the
relative tolerance magnitude for solving the system of nonlinear algebraic equations using the NewtonRaphson method is xed at 106
for the orthogonal collocation and the DormandPrince methods (see Fig. 3), and the NTU prole is generated using 14-quadrature points.
Additionally, the NTU prole in Eq. (51) is calculated from Simpsons 3/8 rule using 4000 equal subdivisions (x = 2.5 104 ).

32

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

Table 1
Parameters and results of the simulations for Cases 14.
Simulation parameters

Case 1

Tw,in ( C)
Tw,out ( C)
Tdb,in ( C)
Twb,in ( C)
mw,in /ma

Data

1.20

Results

NTU

DPM
OCM
DPM
OCM

E h

1.00

0.75

0.50

40.0985 103
40.0433 103
13.9064 104
13.8678 104
3.8948
3.8821
3.8636
14.2284
8.6644 105
1.0641 104
1.4767 105
6.6625 106

13.0293 103
13.0162 103
5.3721 104
5.3639 104
3.2755
3.2670
3.2635
10.5561
6.1006 106
1.5085 1011
5.6361 106
5.0866 1013

Case 7

Case 8

2.514210
4.1688104

tDPM /tOCM
E m

Case 4

DPM
OCM
DPM
OCM
DPM
OCM
SRM

ima,out

Case 3
50
20
35
15

win
ima,in
wout

Case 2

60.1309 10
60.0746 103
19.7284 104
19.6663 104
9.4955
9.3244
9.3218
20.1789
2.0148 102
1.1873 103
7.2916 104
4.7158 105

51.2931 10
51.2320 103
17.1424 104
17.0897 104
5.6146
5.5738
5.5579
16.4549
2.1644 104
4.8755 104
3.5139 105
2.1983 105

Table 2
Parameters and results of the simulations for the Cases 58.
Simulation parameters

Case 5

Tw,in ( C)
Tw,out ( C)
Tdb,in ( C)
Twb,in ( C)
mw,in /ma
win
ima,in

Data

ima,out
Results

50
20
17
16

DPM
OCM
DPM
OCM
DPM
OCM
SRM

wout

NTU
tDPM /tOCM
E m
E h

Case 6

DPM
OCM
DPM
OCM

1.20

1.00

61.2357 103
61.2172 103
19.9956 104
19.9335 104
12.9200
12.5883
12.6162
14.6979
4.6533 104
9.4736 104
4.1411 104
2.5885 105

52.5786 103
52.5653 103
17.4101 104
17.3585 104
6.6971
6.6399
6.6329
14.6483
4.1158 104
8.4238 104
3.6499 105
2.4348 105

0.75
10.9995 103
4
4.4975 10
41.8816 103
41.8683 103
14.1788 104
14.1407 104
4.4662
4.4500
4.4403
12.8910
1.3449 104
6.2757 104
3.4495 105
1.8353 105

0.50

31.3577 103
31.3511 103
10.9497 104
10.9244 104
3.4347
3.4288
3.4198
12.5077
1.0402 106
3.0446 104
4.6955 105
1.0231 105

Furthermore, the accuracy of the orthogonal collocation and DormanPrince methods are determined using the absolute relative error.
This value is calculated in term of mass and heat transfer equations (Eqs. (1) and (2)) as follows:




w


Cpw m
ma [w w + (w w)H(w w)]


Em = 1
i





[(dw/dTw )][Lef (ima
ma ) + (1 Lef )[(w w)iv + (w w )(iv iw )H(w w )] (w w)iw ]




Cpw (mw /ma )
iw [w w + (w w)H(w w)]

Eh = 1
1+
i




Lef (ima
(dima /dTw )
ma ) + (1 Lef )[(w w)iv + (w w )(iv iw )H(w w )] (w w)iw 

(55)

(56)

These expressions are obtained from Eqs. (1) and (2), and Appendix A.4 (see Supplementary material) provides the mathematical
procedure used to generate the above expressions. Moreover, to evaluate the error of both methods, a grid with spacing equal to x = 106
is employed. The grid independence was analyzed to determine this value. Specically, the grid space was varied to determine its effect on
the mean relative error related to the heat and mass transfers; when x was below 106 , the mean relative error remained constant. The
above procedure (analysis of grid independence) was applied only during the DormandPrince method because the grid space affects the
mean numerical accuracy of this method by dw/dTw evaluating and dima /dTw because these derivatives are evaluated using the forward
Euler technique. For the orthogonal collocation method, the numerical accuracy remains independent of the grid spacing. Therefore, the
numerical accuracy is evaluated from a series expansion of humidity ratios and air enthalpies; consequently, the grid points reveal only
the location for the error evaluation.
The proposed methodology is applied to the cases in Tables 1 and 2, and the proles relative to the water temperature for humidity ratio,
air enthalpy and number of transfer units are given in Figs. 4 and 5. The rst prole is presented in Figs. 4a (warm air) and 5a (cold air), the
second is shown in Figs. 4b (warm air) and 5b (cold air), and the last is presented in Figs. 4c (warm air) and 5c (cold air). Notably, Figs. 4 and 5
include the proles obtained from the orthogonal collocation and DormandPrince methods on a psychometric chart. For all cases, the
proles for humidity ratio, moist air enthalpy and number of transfer units from orthogonal collocation and DormandPrince methods are
similar (see Figs. 4ac and 5ac). However, the number of transfer units for Cases 1 and 5, whose proles like can be observed in Fig. 5a
and b, show an obvious discrepancy. Graphically, both methods represent the heat and mass processes transfer with the same accuracy.

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

33

coefcients.
Fig. 3. Algorithm for evaluating the W

However, when evaluating the absolute relative error for each case through Eqs. (55) and (56), the DormandPrince method for each case
generates larger errors than orthogonal collocation (see Table 1). In Tables 1 and 2, the biggest errors for both methods correspond to Cases
1 and 5; Figs. 4a and 5b show that these cases are the closest to the saturation line. Therefore, because the value for mw,in /ma is high, Cases
1 and 5 exhibit the highest waterair mass ow rate ratio.
The discrepancy observed for the number of transfer units in Cases 1 and 5 occurs because the differences (w w) and (w w ) are
very small near the saturation line. The next mathematical denition for the number of transfer units (this is obtained combining Eqs. (1)
and (3)) is as follows:
dNTU
1
mw
dw
=
ma w w + (w w)H(w w) dTw
dTw

(57)

The aforementioned differences strongly impact the number of transfer units. Specically, this expression is more sensitive toward the
accuracy of the applied method relative to the humidity ratio and air enthalpy. Tables 1 and 2 show the number of transfer units for each
case from both numerical methods; the gap for each example ranges from 0.1718% to 2.5673%, and Cases 1 and 5 present the largest gaps
(1.8019% for Case 1 and 2.5673% for Case 5). In addition, the estimated number of transfer units is very important when designing cooling
towers because the overall transfer and the loss coefcients are determined through the packing height and area (Kloppers and Krger,
2003, 2005c); these values have a strong impact on the cooling tower performance and costs.
Fig. 6 shows the humidity air ratio path for Case 4, and Supplementary Fig. 1 for Cases 1 and 8; the values obtained from both numerical
methods are indicated on a psychometric chart. Notably, the behavior is physically appropriated relative to the inlet air conditions (Mills,
1999; Singham, 1983), and only Case 4 exhibits a perceptible difference in the path. However, when comparing the outlet air enthalpy
determined by orthogonal collocation and DormandPrince methods, a larger gap exists between the values for the outlet air enthalpy

34

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

Fig. 4. The results for the governing equations from the Poppe method that were obtained through the orthogonal collocation (OCM) and DormandPrince methods (DPM)
while using the following process parameters: Tw,in = 50 C, Tw,out = 20 C, Tdb,in = 35 C, Twb,in = 15 C and mw,in /ma = 1.20, 1.00, 0.75 and 0.50 kg water/kg dry-air. (a)
Air humidity ratio prole. (b) Moist air enthalpy prole. (c) NTU prole. SL is the saturation line.

than that related to the air humidity ratio (see Tables 1 and 2). Therefore, the gap between the air enthalpy paths is attributed to the
accuracy when calculating the air enthalpy. Consequently, this accuracy could be improved through a numerical strategy, which enables a
better approximation for the rst derivatives of the humidity ratio (dw/dTw ) and the air enthalpy (dima /dTw ). For example, the orthogonal
collocation on the nite element using the cubic polynomial of Hermite (Davis, 1984) establishes a larger number of collocation points,
which guarantee the continuity of the aforementioned derivatives and therefore provide a better approximation.
As previously discussed, the accuracy of the numerical method is very important when optimizing designs (Rubio-Castro et al., 2011);
therefore, in this work, the absolute relative error for each case relative to the mass and heat transfer equations are estimated for both
the orthogonal collocation and DormandPrince methods. The results are shown in Fig. 7 and Supplementary Fig. 2 for the Case 1 (Fig. 7),
Case 4 (Supplementary Fig. 2a) and Case 8 (Supplementary Fig. 2b). These graphics indicate the following: (a) the order of accuracy is
similar in both methods and (b) the maximum absolute relative error of orthogonal collocation method occurs when there is saturated
air. Furthermore, the mean relative error of Eqs. (1) and (2) are calculated, as shown in Tables 1 and 2. The DormandPrince method is
slightly superior to the orthogonal collocation method in this case. However, the orthogonal collocation technique exhibits errors equal or
lower in magnitude relative to 103 and 105 for the mass and heat transfer equations, respectively. Therefore, the orthogonal collocation
is accurate.
In addition, the tDPM /tOCM ratio (where tDPM is CPU time using the DormandPrince method and tOCM is CPU time using the orthogonal collocation method) is determined for all cases, as shown in Tables 1 and 2. These values must be highlighted because for similar accuracies, the
orthogonal collocation method requires much less computational time than the DormandPrince method (i.e., for Case 1 DormandPrince
method require 20 times more computational time to converge, while for Cases 28 the above relationship is 16 times, 14 times, 10
times, 14 times, 14 times and 12 times, respectively). This difference occurs because the orthogonal collocation method requires fourteen
interpolation points, while DormandPrince method requires sixty-one. Specically, the problem size generated by the DormandPrince
method is considerably larger than that from the orthogonal collocation method, which is very important during optimization problems
to reduce the human and computational efforts when searching for optimal designs. Therefore, the orthogonal collocation methodology
developed here might be a good alternative for optimizing the design of cooling towers in terms of performance and costs; this technique
represents the heat and mass transfer processes rigorously with fewer computational demands than the methods used previously (i.e.,
fourth-order RungeKutta algorithm and DormandPrince method).
Another important aspect is related to the stability of the procedure. For high mw,in /ma values, the accuracy of both methods is affected
because the cooling process path is close to the saturation line (see Cases 4a and 5a). Specically, Twb is approximately equal to Tw .
Consequently, Eq. (1) generates an indeterminate (0/0), causing the DormandPrince method to fail because the size of integration step

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

35

Fig. 5. The results for the governing equations from Poppe method that were obtained through the orthogonal collocation (OCM) and DormandPrince methods (DPM)
while using the following process parameters: Tw,in = 50 C, Tw,out = 20 C, Tdb,in = 17 C, Twb,in = 16 C and mw,in /ma = 1.20, 1.00, 0.75 and 0.50 kg water/kg dry-air. (a)
Air humidity ratio prole. (b) Moist air enthalpy prole. (c) NTU prole. SL is the saturation line.

Fig. 6. The path for the air in a wet-cooling tower as indicated on a psychrometric chart with the results obtained through the orthogonal collocation (OCM) and
DormandPrince methods (DPM) for Case 4.

close to saturation line is reduced below the smallest allowed value. However, the orthogonal collocation method nds the residuals
equal to zero in the collocation points, affecting the accuracy for the above indeterminate only when the selected collocation points are
located too close to the saturation line. Therefore, for high mw,in /ma values, the orthogonal collocation method is more stable than the
DormandPrince method. For example, Fig. 8 shows the humidity ratio prole where a high mw,in /ma value is used for specic air and water
conditions. The DormandPrince method does not converge, and this behavior stops when the humidity prole is too close to saturation
line. For the same case, the orthogonal collocation converges without problems. Therefore, the largest discrepancy in the stability for each
method close to saturation line is observed (see Figs. 4c and 5c for Case 1). Therefore, this analysis reveals that the orthogonal collocation
method considers the practical problems with any mw,in /ma relationship.

36

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

Fig. 7. Absolute relative error of the orthogonal collocation (OCM) and DormandPrince methods (DPM) applied to the governing heat and mass transfer equations from the
Poppe method for Case 1.

Fig. 8. Stability of the DormandPrince and orthogonal collocation methods for high values including mw,in /ma (Tw,in = 50 C, Tw,out = 20 C, Tdb,in = 17 C, Twb,in =
16 C and mw,in /ma = 1.33 kg water/kg dry-air).

The relationship between the convergence and the number of collocation points in Supplementary Figs. 3 and 4 is shown the behavior
of the humidity ratio for all cases for different numbers of collocation points (n 1). Specically, the values for n are 3, 4, 6, 15 and 20;
Supplementary Figs. 3 and 4 show that all cases with ve collocation points reach a numerical convergence because when n exceeds 6,
the humidity ratio prole remains constant. Therefore, the orthogonal collocation requires few points to reach the convergence. However,
fourteen collocation points are used in this work to increase the accuracy of the method. Specically, even a numerical convergence is
obtained from ve collocation points, and for practical problems, these collocation points could be appropriated; these problems increase
until the numerical error becomes constant. When comparing the accuracy of the DormanPrince and orthogonal collocation methods,
the latter provides a better or similar representation of the heat and mass transfer processes than DormandPrince.
For example, Fig. 9 shows the proles for the error (heat and mass transfer) relative to the number of collocation points. When using
fourteen collocation points, the error remains constant, except for Case 4 where the error continues to decrease. Therefore, for this case,
the error can be improved further, but, if the number of collocation points is increased, the computational effort is large. However, the
error presented using fourteen collocation points is very good. Consequently, this number of collocation points is used to show the best
accuracy generated by the orthogonal collocation method.
Finally, for cases where the orthogonal collocation method does not converge or a large number of collocation points is require,
orthogonal collocation on a nite element is recommended (Carey and Finlayson, 1975).
5. Conclusion
A numerical methodology for solving the heat and mass transfer equations during evaporative cooling processes was proposed. The
methodology is based on the orthogonal collocation method, and the heat and mass transfer is represented by the rigorous Poppe method;
in this method, the six differential equations for the humidity ratio, air enthalpy and numbers of transfer units in the unsaturated and
supersaturated air region were simplied to yield three differential equations using the Heaviside step function. The expanded power
series were used to represent both the humidity ratio and the air enthalpy, while the number of transfer units was calculated using the
Gauss quadrature method.

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

37

Fig. 9. The mean relative error of the orthogonal collocation method (OCM) in (a) the mass and (b) heat transfer equations for Cases 18.

To demonstrate the proposed methodology, eight cases were studied, and the results were compared to the results obtained with the
DormandPrince technique. This comparison was carried out in terms of the absolute relative error; the orthogonal collocation method is
more stable than the DormandPrince method because the orthogonal collocation method does not have problems converging when the
cooling prole is close to the saturation line. In addition, the orthogonal collocation method demands less computational time because it
generates smaller problems. This behavior is advantageous when optimizing cooling tower designs because the rigorous Poppe method
can be solved using less computational and human efforts.
The numerical convergence of the orthogonal collocation method can be reached with ve collocation points, but minimizing the error
requires at least fteen points. Otherwise, the accuracy can be improved by performing orthogonal collocation on a nite element.
Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the nancial support by the Universidad Autnoma de Sinaloa (PROFAPI 2013/081).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary material related to this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2014.06.
008.

38

O.M. Hernndez-Caldern et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 71 (2014) 2438

References
Baker DR, Shryock HA. A comprehensive approach to the analysis of cooling tower performance. ASME J Heat Transfer 1961;83(3):33949.
Bosnjakovic F. Technische thermodinamik. Dresden: Theodor Steinkopf; 1965.
Carey GF, Finlayson BA. Orthogonal collocation on nite elements. Chem Eng Sci 1975;30:58796.
Davis ME. Numerical methods and modeling for chemical engineers. 1st ed. NY: John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 1984.
Dormand J, Prince P. A family of embedded RungeKutta formulae. J Comp Appl Math 1980;6:1926.
Douglas JM. Conceptual design of chemical process. NY: McGraw-Hill; 1988.
Finlayson BA. The method of weighted residuals and variational principles: with applications in uid mechanics, heat and mass transfer of Mathematics in Science and
Engineering. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1972.
Jaber H, Webb RL. Design of cooling towers by the effectiveness-NTU method. ASME J Heat Transfer 1989;111(4):83743.
Kintner-Meyer M, Emery AF. Cost-optimal design for cooling towers. ASHRAE J 1995;37(4):4655.
Kloppers JC. [PhD thesis] A critical evaluation and renement of the performance prediction of wet-cooling towers [PhD thesis]. Stellenbosch, Western Cape, South Africa:
University of Stellenbosch; 2003.
Kloppers JC, Krger DG. Loss coefcient correlation for wet-cooling tower lls. Appl Therm Eng 2003;23(17):220111.
Kloppers JC, Krger DG. The Lewis factor and its inuence on the performance prediction of wet-cooling towers. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2005a;44(9):87984.
Kloppers JC, Krger DG. A critical investigation into heat and mass transfer analysis of counterow wet cooling towers. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2005b;48:76577.
Kloppers JC, Krger DG. Renement of the transfer characteristic correlation of wet-cooling tower lls. Heat Transfer Eng 2005c;26(4):3541.
Krger DG. Air-cooled heat exchangers and cooling towers. 1st ed. Tulsa, OK: Penn Well Corp.; 2004.
Lanczos C. Applied analysis. Reprint of 1956 Prentice-Hall ed. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications Inc; 1988.
Maclaine-cross IL, Banks PJ. A general theory of wet surface heat exchangers and its application to regenerative cooling. ASME J Heat Transfer 1981;103(3):57985.
Marseille TJ, Schliesing JS, Bell DM, Johnson BM. Extending cooling tower thermal performance prediction using a liquid-side lm resistance model. Heat Transfer Eng
1991;12(3):1930.
Merkel F. Verdunstungskhlung, Zeitschrift Verein. Deutsch Ing 1925;70:1238.
Mills AE. Basic heat and mass transfer. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1999.
Ponce-Ortega JM, Serna-Gonzlez M, Jimnez-Gutirrez A. MINLP synthesis of optimal cooling networks. Chem Eng Sci 2007;62(21):572835.
Poppe M, Rgener H. Berechnung von Rckkhlwerken. VDI-Wrmeatlas; 1991. p. Mi115.
Rubio-Castro E, Serna-Gonzlez M, Ponce-Ortega JM, Morales-Cabrera MA. Optimization of mechanical draft counter ow wet-cooling towers using a rigorous model. Appl
Therm Eng 2011;31(16):361528.
Rubio-Castro E, Serna-Gonzlez E, Ponce-Ortega JM, El-Halwagi MM. Synthesis of cooling water systems with multiple cooling towers. Appl Therm Eng 2013;50(1):95774.
Serna-Gonzlez M, Ponce-Ortega JM, Jimnez-Gutirrez A. MINLP optimization of mechanical draft counter ow wet-cooling towers. Chem Eng Res Des 2010;88(56):61425.
Singham JR. Cooling towers. In: Heat exchanger design handbook. USA: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation; 1983.
Sylemez MS. On the optimum sizing of cooling towers. Energy Convers Manage 2001;42(7):7839.
Sylemez MS. On the optimum performance of forced draft counter ow cooling towers. Energy Convers Manage 2004;45(1516):233541.
Sutherland JW. Analysis of mechanical-draught counterow air/water cooling towers. ASME J Heat Transfer 1983;105(8):57683.
Villadsen JV, Stewart WE. Solution of boundary value problems by orthogonal collocation. Chem Eng Sci 1967;22:1483501.
Yilmaz A. Analytical calculation of wet cooling tower performance with large cooling ranges. J Therm Sci Technol 2010;30(2):4556.