Advertisement

An optimization of water transport through polyurethane silica-nanocomposite membrane

  • Omar Almahmoud
  • Hyo-Sun Kim
  • Young-Soo Seo
  • Seok Ho Yoon
  • Tae-Youl ChoiEmail author
Original
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

Analysis of water transport through polyurethane silica nano-composite membranes were performed by numerical simulation and experiment. Simulation work was performed using a finite element analysis (FEA) software, COMSOL Multiphysics. Experimental work was performed to validate the simulation model. Through simulation we suggest the minimum membrane-to-membrane distance for stacked membranes to be 2-mm to avoid the membrane concentration polarization effect. The method used to create a concentration gradient between the membrane feed side (humid air) and the membrane permeate side (connected to vacuum) involved with creating a pressure gradient. Water vapor pressure gradient creates a concentration gradient which drives water vapor molecules to diffuse from the membrane feed side to the membrane permeate side. Different membrane configurations including rectangular parallel membranes, perforated cylinder with circular membranes, perforated group of cylinders with circular membranes, and perforated cylinder with curved rectangular membranes were compared in terms of water vapor removal from humid air while connecting all membrane configurations to 47-mm vacuum port. The parallel 22 membranes exhibited maximum water removal. Based on the total membrane area, water vapor removal was maximized at the maximum membrane effective area in contact with humid area. The maximum total water removal was obtained for the 11 cassettes with 22 rectangular membranes with a value of 142 g/(m2·s) while the relative humidity dropped from 60% at the duct inlet to 25.6% at the duct outlet.

Nomenclature

u

Air velocity (m/s)

P

Air pressure (Pa)

ρa

Air density (kg/m3)

υ

Air kinematic viscosity (m2/s)

D

Water vapor diffusivity in air (m2/s)

Mv

Molecular weight of water vapor (kg/mol)

csat

Water vapor saturation concentration (mol/m3)

G

Specific moisture flux rate (kg/(m2·s))

cv

Water vapor concentration in air (mol/m3)

β

Water vapor permeability in membrane (kg/m2·s)

u

Membrane feed side relative humidity

d

Membrane permeate side relative humidity

k

Feed side convective mass transfer coefficient

Sh

Sherwood number

Dh

Hydraulic diameter

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea (No. 20168510011420).

References

  1. 1.
    Shao L, Riffat SB, Gan G (1998) Heat recovery with low pressure loss for natural ventilation. Energy Build 28:179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Perez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, Pout C (2008) A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy Build 40(3):394–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhang HB, Hiroshi Y (2010) Analysis of indoor humidity environment in Chinese residential buildings. Build Environ 45(10):2132–2140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    ASHRAE (2001) Ventilation for acceptable indoor air quality. ANSI/ ASHRAE standard 62–2001. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harriman LG III, Plager D, Kosar D (1997) Dehumidification and cooling loads from ventilation air. ASHRAE J 39:37–45Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mahmud K, Mahmood GI, Simonson CJ, Besant RW (2010) Performance testing of a counter-cross-flow run-around membrane energy exchanger (RAMEE) system for HVAC applications. Energy Build 42(7):1139–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Niu JL, Zhang LZ (2001) Membrane-based enthalpy exchanger: material considerations and clarification of moisture resistance. J Membr Sci 189(2):179–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Usachov VV, Teplyakov VV, Okunev AY, Laguntsov NI (2007) Membrane contactor air conditioning system: experience and prospects. Sep Purif Technol 57(3):502–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang LZ, Huang SM (2011) Coupled heat and mass transfer in a counter flow hollow fiber membrane module for air humidification. Int J Heat Mass Transf 54(5–6):1055–1063CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pan FS, Jia HP, Jiang ZY, Zheng XH, Wang JT, Cui L (2008) P(AA-AMPS)-PVA/polysulfone composite hollow fiber mem- branes for propylene dehumidification. J Membr Sci 323(2):395–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Woods J, Pellegrino J, Kozubal E, Jay B (2011) Design and experimental characterization of a membrane-based absorption heat pump. J Membr Sci 378(1–2):85–94 WebCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Izenson MG, Chen WB, Phillips S, Bue G Nonventing thermal and humidity control for EVA suits: AIAA 2011-5260. In: 41st international conference on environmental systems, Portland, OR, USA, 17–21 July 2011Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Qu M, Abdelaziz O, Gao Z, Yin H (2018) Isothermal membrane-based air dehumidification: a comprehensive review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:4060–4069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gendebien S, Bertagnolio S, Lemort V (2013) Investigation on a ventilation heat recovery exchanger: modeling and experimental validation in dry and partially wet conditions. Energy Build 62:176–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    O’Connor D, Calautit JKS, Hughes BR (2016) A review of heat recovery technology for passive ventilation applications. Renew Sust Energ Rev 54:1481–1493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rambha KS, Walke PV, Tidke D (2016) Solid desiccant dehumidification and regeneration methods—a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 59:73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    La D et al (2010) Technical development of rotary desiccant dehumidification and air conditioning: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 14:130–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sultan M et al (2015) An overview of solid desiccant dehumidification and air conditioning systems. Renew Sust Energ Rev 46:16–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yin Y, Qian J, Zhang X (2014) Recent advancements in liquid desiccant dehumidification technology. Renew Sust Energ Rev 31:38–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pan F et al (2008) P(AA-AMPS)–PVA/polysulfone composite hollow fiber membranes for propylene dehumidification. J Membr Sci 323:395–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Strathmann H (2004) Ion-exchange membrane separation processes. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 166Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yuan W, Yang B, Guo B, Li X, Zuo Y, Hu W (2015) A novel environmental control system based on membrane dehumidification. Chin J Aeronaut 28(3):712–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hoek EMV, Guiver M, Nikonenko V, Tarabara VV, Zydney AL (2013) Membrane Terminology. In: Hoek EMV, Tarabara VV (eds) Encyclopedia of membrane science and technology, vol 3. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 2219–2228CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Omar Almahmoud
    • 1
  • Hyo-Sun Kim
    • 2
  • Young-Soo Seo
    • 2
  • Seok Ho Yoon
    • 3
  • Tae-Youl Choi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Energy EngineeringUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Nanotechnology & Advanced Materials EngineeringSejong UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Thermal SystemsKorea Institute of Machinery and MaterialsDaejeonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations