Cargando…
Experimental Investigations on the Performance of a Hollow Fiber Membrane Evaporative Cooler (HFMEC) in Hot–Dry Regions
The applicability of a hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooler in hot–dry regions was investigated by experimental studies. To better understand the actual operating environment of the hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooler, the outdoor air design conditions for summer air conditioning in five ci...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9416795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36005708 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes12080793 |
Sumario: | The applicability of a hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooler in hot–dry regions was investigated by experimental studies. To better understand the actual operating environment of the hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooler, the outdoor air design conditions for summer air conditioning in five cities were simulated by an enthalpy difference laboratory. Subsequently, the effects of water and air flow rates on outlet air parameters and performance parameters were investigated by setting-up a hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooling experimental rig. It was found that the hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooler has good application prospects in hot–dry regions such as Lanzhou, Xi’an, Yinchuan, Urumqi, and Karamay. Among them, the hollow fiber membrane evaporative cooler has higher applicability in regions with higher air temperatures and lower humidity such as Urumqi and Karamay. The results indicate that the air outlet temperature and relative humidity ranged from 26.5 °C to 30.8 °C and 63.5% to 82.8%, respectively. The outlet air temperature and relative humidity of the HFMEC can meet the thermal comfort requirements of hot–dry regions in the summer at an appropriate air flow rate. The maximum air temperature drop, wet-bulb efficiency, cooling capacity, and COP were 7.5 °C, 62.9%, 396.4 W, and 4.81, respectively. In addition, the effect of the air flow rate on the performance parameters was more significant than that of the water flow rate. |
---|