Experimental performance of new evaporative cooling pad materials

Jain, Jithesh; Hindoliya, D.A.

doi:10.1016/j.scs.2011.07.005

Cited by 119 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This material usually consists of a plastic grid, though it may also be composed of corrugated cellulose pads, vegetable fibers found locally [10][11][12], such as wood chips, coconut fibre, etc., or porous inorganic material [13] such as perlite, volcanic rock, etc. These materials are placed in such a way as to ensure that they present the maximum possible transfer surface and the minimum resistance to the passage of the airflow.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Evaporative cooling systems using a combination of evaporative pads and extractor fans require greenhouses to be hermetic. The greatest concentration of greenhouses in the world is located in southeast Spain, but these tend not to be hermetic structures and consequently can only rely on fogging systems as evaporative cooling techniques. Evaporative cooling boxes provide an alternative to such systems. Using a low-speed wind tunnel, the present work has compared the performance of this system with four pads of differing geometry and thickness manufactured by two different companies. The results obtained show that the plastic packing in the cooling unit produces a pressure drop of 11.05 Pa at 2 m·s, which is between 51.27% and 94.87% lower than that produced by the cellulose pads. This pressure drop was not influenced by increases in the water flow. The evaporative cooling boxes presented greater saturation efficiency at the same flow, namely 82.63%, as opposed to an average figure of 65% for the cellulose pads; and also had a lower specific consumption of water, at around 3.05 L·h . Consequently, we conclude that evaporative cooling boxes are a good option for cooling non-hermetic greenhouses such as those most frequently used in the Mediterranean basin.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evaporative cooling can be also used as a pre-cooler [3], in a hybrid mode with air conditioning systems [4], and to enhance the condenser performance of refrigeration systems [5] and air cooled chillers [6]. [7], PVC sponge mesh [8], and coconut fiber [9]. In the recent years, rigid media cellulose (RMC) pads have been widely used as a cooling media for evaporation cooling because they are characterized by regular shape, compactness, wide range of types and geometries.…”

Section: Direct Evaporative Air Coolers Are Wildly Used In Dry and Homentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Investigation on Direct Evaporative Air Cooler Performance With Cellulosic Pads

Al-Badri

2018

QJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaporative cooling is an economic and environment-friendly technique for air cooling. This technique may involve air cooling with humidification (direct evaporative cooling) or sensible air cooling only (indirect evaporative cooling). In this study, the saturation efficiency of direct evaporative cooling (DEC) was investigated with rigid media cellulose (RMC) pads and compared with that of wood straw pads. Face air velocity on

show abstract

“…As a result, the amount of water evaporated increases and the temperature of the nonsaturated air decreases, (Franco et al, 2011). This material usually consists of a plastic grid, though it may also be composed of corrugated cellulose pads, vegetable fibers found locally (Gunhan et al, 2007, Ahmed et al, 2011and Jain et al, 2011, such as wood chips, coconut fibre, etc., or porous inorganic material, (Gunhan et al, 2007) such as perlite, volcanic rock, etc. These materials are placed in such a way as to ensure that they present the maximum possible transfer surface and the minimum resistance to the passage of the airflow.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Performance of the Evaporative Cooling System inside the Greenhouses and Its Effect on Tomato Productivity

G.D.M.

T.R.

Mostafa

2015

Alexandria Science Exchange Journal: An International Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experimental study was conducted to determine the performance of two evaporative cooling systems, as well as the gradients of temperature and humidity along a greenhouse. The first system was the cooling unit, (CU) compared with the traditional fan-pad one, (F-P). The cooling unit was connected with two perforated ducts inside the greenhouse. The air temperatures and relative humidities on the longitudinal axis were measured outside and just after leaving the media and at each one meter from the pad media. They were also, measured in the traverse axis parallel to the pad media at distances 0.5, 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 m from the edge of the greenhouse. A steady state mathematical model was modified to predict the greenhouse air temperature according to the state of the air just leaving the cooling media.According to the experimental results, the non-uniform temperature changes were observed along the greenhouses for the two systems. The average temperatures of the CU greenhouse were 27.9, 30.4, 33.2, 29.1 and 27.9 o C for outside ambient temperatures of 28.7, 32.4, 35.4, 32.1 and 29.4 o C, respectively. The ranges of temperature gradient inside the CU greenhouse were 2.1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2, and 2.1 o C. While in the F-P greenhouse, they were 5.9, 7.4, 8.2, 5.9 and 6.1 o C for the same ambient temperatures. The average air temperature entering to greenhouse was approximately 6.82 and 7.09 ºC lower than the outside air temperature for CU and F-P systems. The greenhouse of CU system was higher in the relative humidity than F-P one. The average relative humidities were 69.0 and 61.8% for the CU and F-P greenhouses, respectively, with increase percent 12.38%. The averages CU efficiencies were 77.55% and 74.79% in the first and second days, respectively, while they were 72.97% and 70.19% for the same days for F-P system. Consequently, the CU system was averagely more efficient than the F-P system by 6.29% and 6.58%. The water flow rate of the two systems to permit optimum wetness and air saturation were 5.6 and 6.5 L/min for the CU and F-P evaporative cooling systems, respectively. The saving percentage in water circulation was 16.1% for the CU system. The total yield per plant was 6.24 and 5.48 kg/plant for the CU and F-P systems, respectively. The CU system increased the yield per plant with 13.82% over the F-P system.

show abstract

Experimental performance of new evaporative cooling pad materials

Cited by 119 publications

References 12 publications

Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads

Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads

Experimental Investigation on Direct Evaporative Air Cooler Performance With Cellulosic Pads

Improving Performance of the Evaporative Cooling System inside the Greenhouses and Its Effect on Tomato Productivity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About