tmp3F73 TMP
tmp3F73 TMP
tmp3F73 TMP
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
This research is a comparative study between vacuum membrane distillation and direct contact
membrane distillation technologies. The first part focuses on an energy and exergy analysis of
vacuum membrane distillation and direct contact membrane distillation configurations. The results
of the energy analysis show the vacuum membrane distillation has lower energy losses across the
membrane compared to direct contact membrane distillation. The results of the exergy analysis
show that direct contact membrane distillation requires less work compared to vacuum membrane distillation. The second part of this research focuses on modeling of temperature distribution in feed channel for DCMD and VMD. The results of the numerical solution show that the
temperature polarization effort in VMD is smaller than in DCMD. The membrane temperature in
VMD approach constant temperature case and this reduces dissipated energy in the membrane
distillation process.
Keywords: Vacuum, Membrane distillation, Direct contact membrane distillation, Energy, Exergy, Temperature
Nomenclature
A:
COP:
CP:
D .:
Dequ.:
EN:
EX:
EX 9:
f:
K:
h:
hc:
J:
LW:
_
m:
p:
Pext :
PV FEED :
PV PERMEATE :
PP:
Q:
T:
T W ; m:
W:
u, v:
v:
membrane area
coefficient of performance for the process
specific heat
diameter
diameter of air gap on membrane surface
energy input for feed stream or permeate
stream
exergy
final exergy
friction factor
thermal conductivity
enthalpy
heat transfer coefficient
flux in kg/m2.hr
lost work
mass flow rate
pressure
working pressure
vapor pressure at feed side
vapor pressure at permeate side
pumping power for feed stream or permeate
stream
heat transfer
temperature in Cu
temperature of membrane surface
work of expansion
are the velocity components in X, Y
specific volume
vvFEED :
vvpermeate :
nsuction :
Ma:
Nu:
Re:
Ra:
Pr:
m:
g:
d:
dT :
Introduction
2014
VOL
NO
3-4
121
Fakron
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
In the thermal analysis for membrane distillation process the process was divided into two systems; a feed
system and a permeate system. The interaction between
the feed stream system and the permeate stream system
included heat transfer and work. Figure 2 shows the
systems and heat and work were transferred across the
membrane boundary.
The exergy equations are
Q1 A hc T 1 2 T membrane
12
EX h 2 T SURRONDING S
13
_ AJ
m
EX OUT 2 EX IN
LW
15
T 5 T 3 T 4 =2
16
_ 1 C p T 1 2 T 0 2 C P T 0 ln T 1 =T 0
EX 1 m
17
_12m
_ 3 C p T 2 2 T 0
EX 19 m
2 C P T 0 ln T 2 =T 0
18
2014
VOL
14
T SURROUNDING
EX Q 1 2
W SYSTEM
T SYSTEM
in
X
T SURROUNDING
EX Q 1 2
2
WS
T SYSTEM
OUT
_
W PV FEED 2 PV PERMEATE vvpermeate 2 vvFEED m
X
V1
122
Q2 Awall hc T 1 2 T wall
W MIN
11
PdV
V1
V2
Pext dV
10
V2
NO
3-4
Fakron
_ 2 C p T 3 2 T 0 2 C P T 0 ln T 3 =T 0
EX 2 m
19
_2m
_ 3 C p T 4 2 T 0
EX 29 m
2 C P T 0 ln T 4 =T 0
20
_ 3 C p T 5 2 T 0 2 C P T 0 ln T 5 =T 0
EX 3 m
21
W min EX 19 2 EX 1 EX 3
22
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
T5
LW EX 1 2 EX 19 2 W 2 Q1 1 2
T1
T0
2 EX 3
2 Q2 1 2
T1
23
gfeed
W min
LW W min
24
W min EX 29 2 EX 2 2 EX 3
T1
LW EX 2 2 EX 92 W Q1 1 2
T5
EX 3
25
26
gpermeate
W min
LW W min
27
28
31
32
mC p
31; Nu a Re b Pr c Ma d
K
33
Lu Lv
0:0
Lx Ly
34
Lu
Lu
1 LP
L2 u L2 u
n
u v 2
Lx
Ly
r Lx
Lx 2 Ly 2
nsuction F x; T m1 ; T m2 ; f ; porosity
30
35
LT
LT
n L2 T
u
v
Lx
Ly pr Ly 2
36
Lu
LT
0:0; v 0:0;
0:0
Ly
Ly
y 0:0; u 0:0; v cons; T W cons
y d;
37a
2014
VOL
NO
3-4
123
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
Fakron
Lu
LT
0:0; v 0:0;
0:0
Ly
Ly
37b
37c
p
u
x
; X ; V u Re L =ucc ;
ucc
L
p
Y y Re =L; P P 2 P1 =ru 2cc ;
LU LV
0:0
h T 2 T 1 =T W 2 T 1 ;
LX LY
U
37d
LU
LU
dp L2 U
V
2
LX
LY
dx LY
38
Lh
Lh
1 L2 h
V
LX
LY
Pr LY 2
39
2014
VOL
40
LY 2
i;j
DY 2
41
U i;j 2 U i21;j
LU
LX
i;j
DX
42
As shown in Figure 7.
Substituted in the momentum equation to get the algebraic equation:
Aj U i;j Bj U i;j1 C j U i;j21 Dj
124
U i;j1 2 U i;j21
LU
LY
i;j
2DY
NO
3-4
43
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
Fakron
Aj
Bj
U i21;j
DX
V i21;j
2DY
DY 2
1
2
DY 2
44
V i21;j
1
Cj 2
2
2DY
DY 2
Dn
U 2i21;j
DX
dp
dx
45
46
U i;1 0:0
47
48
49
50
U i;N U 1
51
32 U 3 2 0 3
i:1
7 6
7
6
76
7 6
7
6 C 2 A2 B2 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::0 76
7 6
7
6
76
7
7
6
6
6
76
7
7
6
6
76
7 6
7
60
76
7
7
6
6
76
7 6
7
6
76
7
7
6
6:
76
7
6
7 52
6
76
76
7
6
76
7
6
7
6
76
7 6
7
6:
76
7
6
7
6
76
7
6
7
6
76
7 6
7
6 0:::::::::::::C
7
6
7
6
7
6
N21 AN21 BN21 76
7 6
7
4
54
5 4
5
U i;N
U1
0::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::1
2
1::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0
QU U i;j RU
53
2014
VOL
NO
3-4
125
Fakron
Then
54
Then X n cn 54;
55
70
hi ci 2 ai hI1
71
72
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
a1
hn cn
X i ci 2 ai X I1
56
57
L2 h
hi;j1 hi;j21 2 2hi;j
2
LY
DY 2
58
Ej
DX
Pr DY 2
V i21;j
1
Fj
2
DY
Pr DY 2
59
62
60
61
63
64
65
66
QT hi;j RT
68
67
a1
126
69
2014
VOL
NO
3-4
40
59
13.4
25.4
19040.7
1598.94
82.7981
8.00932
2.82222E-05
36.81441996
360.3
10.21771301
25.87899082
7.917178774
cm2
C0
C0
kg/m2hr
Pa
Pa
m3/kg
m3/kg
kg/sec
Watt
Watt
%
%
%
Fakron
cm2
C0
Pa
m3/kg
Pa
m3/kg
kg/m2hr
kJ/kg
Watt
Watt
%
%
%
References
Ma
No n
t f ey
or Pu
Di bl
st ish
rib in
ut g
io
n
Membrane area
Feed temperature
Feed vapor pressure
Feed saturated vapor
Vacuum pressure
Saturated vapor to permeate
Water flux
Specific enthalpy of vaporization
Energy consumption
Work
Energy performance
Exergy efficiency for feed stream
Exergy efficiency for permeate stream
Conclusions
N
N
N
N
2014
VOL
NO
3-4
127