Kong's annular (180°) NDDCS against its own CFD
Tier 3: CFD, co-simulation or another model.
- What was compared
- The windless air mass flow rate and heat transfer rate of Kong's 12-sector natural-draft direct dry cooling tower with its air-cooled condenser arranged annularly (apex angle 180°), and the gain in heat transfer rate of this arrangement over the triangular one (60°).
- Against
- Kong et al.'s steady CFD of the tower (Kong et al., 2018, Table 1 for the geometry and Table 3 at 0 m/s for the results), which is another model and not a measurement. The case is Tier 3.
- The agreement
- The air mass flow rate is reproduced to −3.82% and the heat transfer rate to −1.93%. The model puts the annular arrangement 15.1% above the triangular, where the CFD puts it 24.4% above.
- What it shows
- The agreement shows that a 1-D draft balance and Kong's CFD agree on this specification, and that a little under two thirds of the annular arrangement's benefit is reachable by a draft balance with an apex-angle correction. Neither model is evidence about a real tower.
- Source
- Y. Kong, W. Wang, X. Huang, L. Yang, X. Du, 'Annularly arranged air-cooled condenser to improve cooling efficiency of natural draft direct dry cooling system', International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 118 (2018) 587-601Table 1 (geometry), Table 3 at 0 m/s (results), Eqs. (4)-(7) (the radiator model)