CTI Journal

CTI Journal, Vol. 28, No.
1 1
The CTI J ournal
(ISSN: 0273-3250)
PUBLISHED SEMI-ANNUALLY
Copyright 2007 by The Cooling
Technology Institute, PO Box 73383,
Houston, TX 77273. Periodicals
postage paid at FORT WORTH, Texas.
MISSION STATEMENT
It is CTIs objective to: 1) Maintain and
expand a broad base membership of
individuals and organizations
interested in Evaporative Heat
Transfer Systems (EHTS), 2) Identify
and address emerging and evolving
issues concerning EHTS, 3) Encour-
age and support educational
programs in various formats to
enhance the capabilities and
competence of the industry to realize
the maximum benefit of EHTS, 4)
Encourge and support cooperative
research to improve EHTS Technology
and efficiency for the long-term
benefit of the environment, 5) Assure
acceptable minimum quality levels
and performance of EHTS and their
components by establishing standard
specifications, guidelines, and
certification programs, 6) Establish
standard testing and performance
analysis systems and prcedures for
EHTS, 7) Communicate with and
influence governmental entities
regarding the environmentally
responsible technologies, benefits,
and issues associated with EHTS, and
8) Encourage and support forums and
methods for exchanging technical
information on EHTS.
LETTERS/MANUSCRIPTS
Letters to the editor and manuscripts
for publication should be sent to: The
Cooling Technology Institute, PO Box
73383, Houston, TX 77273.
SUBSCRIPTIONS
The CTI Journal is published in
January and June. Complimentary
subscriptions mailed to individuals in
the USA. Library subscriptions $20/yr.
Subscriptions mailed to individuals
outside the USA are $30/yr.
CHANGE OF ADDRESS
Request must be received at
subscription office eight weeks before
effective date. Send both old and new
addresses for the change. You may
fax your change to 281.537.1721 or
email: vmanser@cti.org.
PUBLICATION DISCLAIMER
CTI has compiled this publication
with care, but CTI has not Investi-
gated, and CTI expressly disclaims
any duty to investigate, any product,
service process, procedure, design,
or the like that may be described
herein. The appearance of any
technical data, editorial material, or
advertisement in this publication
does not constitute endorsement,
warranty, or guarantee by CTI of any
product, service process, procedure,
design, or the like. CTI does not
warranty that the information in this
publication is free of errors, and CTI
does not necessarily agree with any
statement or opinion in this
publication. The entire risk of the use
of any information in this publication
is assumed by the user. Copyright
2007 by the CTI Journal. All rights
reserved.
Contents
Feature Articles
8 Enhancement of Air Cooled Condenser Operation in
Power Plants
Ram Chandran
14 Cooling Towers Work as a System
Richard J. DesJardins
28 Guidelines for Selecting The Proper Film Fill
Donald Zelek
38 Westar Energy Jeffrey Energy Center Unit #3 Cooling
Towers Reconstruction
David Spacek
48 Wind Load Rated Packaged Cooling Towers
Daniel S. Kelly
62 Dynamic Control of Dynamic Systems Advances in
Cooling System Treatment
Daniel M. Cicero
Special Sections
70 CTI Licensed Testing Agencies
72 CTI Certified Cooling Towers
86 CTI ToolKit
Departments
02 Meeting Calendar
04 View From the Tower
06 Editors Corner
see article page 48
see article page 38
see article page 28
This is a reprinted version of Volume 28, No. 1 of the CTI Journal. The Journal was
reprinted due to errors made in the original version.
CTI Journal, Vol. 28, No. 1 2
CTI J ournal
The Official Publication of The Cooling Technology Institute
Vol. 28 No.1 Winter 2007
Journal Committee
Paul Lindahl, Editor-in-Chief
Art Brunn, Sr. Editor
Virginia Manser, Managing Editor/Adv. Manager
Donna Jones, Administrative Assistant
Graphics by Sarita Graphics
Board of Directors
Steve Chaloupka, President
Thomas Bugler, Vice President
Rich Altice, Secretary
Dennis (Denny) P. Shea, Treasurer
Robert (Bob) Giammaruti, Director
Richard (Rich) Harrison, Director
James Kanuth, Director
Ken Kozelski, Director
Terry Ogburn, Director
Mark Shaw, Director
Address all communications to:
Virginia A. Manser, CTI Administrator
Cooling Technology Institute
PO Box 73383
Houston, Texas 77273
281.583.4087
281.537.1721 (Fax)
Internet Address: http://www.cti.org
E-mail: vmanser@cti.org
FUTURE MEETING DATES
Committee Annual
Workshop Conference
July 8-11, 2007 February 4-7, 2007
The Westin La Cantera Omni Corpus Christi Hotel
San Antonio, TX Corpus Christi, TX
July 5-8, 2008 February 3-7, 2008
Hyatt Regency - Orange County The Westin Galleria
Garden Grove, CA Houston, TX
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
D
O
U
G
L
A
S

F
I
R
24 Hour Service on Your Lumber and Plywood Requirements
COMPLETE FABRICATION AND TREATING
SERVICE FROM OUR OPELOUSAS, LA PLANT
GAIENNIE
LUMBER
COMPANY
BOX 1240 OPELOUSAS, LA 70571-1240
800-326-4050 337-948-3067 337-948-3069 (FAX)
Member
View From The Tower
Steven Chal oupka
P r esi dent
I look forward with great anticipation in seeing each
one of you at the 2007 Annual Conference. This years
conference is going to be held at the Omni Bayfront
Hotel in Corpus Christi, Texas. Glenn Rees (Program
Chair) and his program committee team have put to-
gether another great program. There will be the regular
seminars and technical papers we have come to expect,
but there are added events such as the Water Treating
Panel discussion and expanded committee work time.
The Owner/Operator Seminar will again be packed with
educational and informative topics, expanding on past
I want to mention that all CTI members will be receiv-
ing an updated Code of Ethics. It is very important
that all attendees to the Annual Conference adhere
to these ethical codes. With everyone paying close
attention, it will make for a smooth and enjoyable
meeting.
It is with sadness that I watch three of our Board
members rotate off of the Board of Directors. The
three retiring Board Members are Denny Shea of D&S
Engineering and Education who served as Treasurer,
Terry Ogburn of Midwest Towers who oversaw EPRI,
seminars. I do want to stress though that the Owner/ Operator
Seminar is a closed meeting and only for this category of confer-
ence attendee. We isolate this particular segment to allow our
owner/operator members and attendees a platform in which they
can openly discuss topics and issues important to them.
Tuesday evening will be a special time at the table top exhibits. I
am looking forward to this portion of the conference since it will be
even bigger and better than last year. Please use this time to visit
with exhibitors and fellow attendees to enjoy the social aspect
that this program offers.
ASME and International Relations for CTI and Rich Altice who was
your Secretary. These Board members have worked very hard dur-
ing their three year term and will be greatly missed, but the contin-
ued giving of their time and talents in a vast array of CTI committee
work will benefit our organization and will be much appreciated.
On the other hand, I am pleased to announce our three newest
Board Members who will be serving a Board term from 2007 - 2009.
They are Frank Michell of American Electric Power (Owner/Opera-
tor), Jess Seawell of Composite Cooling Solutions (Manufacturer)
and Randy White of C.E. Shepherd Company (Supplier). I look
forward to their joining the rest of the Board of Di-
rectors and know their efforts will be focused on con-
tinuing the growth within all areas of CTI.
I look forward to the upcoming year and all of the
opportunities that exists for CTI and its members. I
hope you share in my enthusiasm and ask for you to
please contact me if you have any suggestions or
concerns. CTI can only grow if its members stay
involved and committed. It is my desire and duty to
facilitate this involvement for the betterment of CTI.
Steven Chaloupka,
CTI President
Editors Corner
Paul Lindahl
Editor-In-Chief
A Strategic Issues Task Force has existed in
CTI for several years , for the purpose of iden-
tifying and developing action plans to address
strategic issues affecting the companies and
members in our industry.
We have identified strategic issues in the past
by using a facilitated process involving a cross-
section of stakeholders in our industry. This
year we conducted a process internally, and
have identified some issues for consideration
by the task force.
less issues that you perceive as being strategic
needs for the industry to consider.
These should be submitted to the following:
Chair, Strategic Issues Task Force
C/O Virginia Manser, CTI Administrator
vmanser@cti.org
Thank you in advance for assisting us with this
process.
Respectfully,
Paul Lindahl, CTI Journal Editor
We would like to take this opportunity to solicit input from
the readership of the CTI Journal, to broaden the level of
input to this process significantly. Please submit 10 or
Abstract
Use of Air Cooled Condensing system, to con-
dense turbine exhaust steam from the steam cycle
of combined cycle plants, coal fired plants and
various other plants using steam to generate elec-
tricity, has gained acceptance. However, as elec-
tricity generation is privatized, building plants at
low cost has been the priority rather than the per-
formance. This paper discusses the impact of ve-
locity consideration in the design of air cooled
condensers. The velocity at design point and the
change in velocity affect the steam duct design
and the tube bundle design. As the ambient tem-
Enhancement of Air Cooled Condenser
Operation in Power Plants
Ram Chandran
Holtec International
By:
perature varies, it affects and/ or limits the range of turbine opera-
tion. This, in turn, can improve or adversely affect the plant electric
power output. The velocity also has an effect on the condensate
temperature. The reheat of the condensate requires energy which
is redirected from generating capacity which is often ignored.
This paper will illustrate the effect of velocity on:
a. Duct design
b. Tube bundle design
c. Performance limitation
d. Control system capability
e. Range of condensate subcooling
f. Relative cost impact
Introduction
Use of Air Cooled Condensers as alternate cooling medium in the
steam cycle has become a reality. The Air Cooled Condenser market in
the last ten years has grown from $40 Million to $400 Million (Figure 1).
Ram Chandran
the forecast is for the market to be around $300 to
$400 Million per year (Figure 2). This is assuming
that only five (5) percent of the power plants built
will use Air Cooled Condensers. As the pressure
on water conservation mounts, the Air Cooled con-
denser market can grow into a Billion Dollar prod-
uct.
The power industry today is largely decentralized
and privatized. Building plants at low cost has be-
come the priority. Low initial cost does not neces-
sarily mean that it is also the low evaluated cost.
A 170 MW steam turbine (510 MW Combined
Cycle Plant) data is used as an example to illus-
trate how one aspect of the design parameter can affect the design,
performance and the cost of an Air Cooled Condenser.
Design Data
The steam from the turbine exhaust is 1,100,000 lbs/h at 5.6 inches
HgA containing 3 percent moisture. This is to be condensed at an
ambient temperature of 105 Deg.F. Such design conditions are com-
mon for units to be located in many parts of the USA, Middle East
and some countries in Asia and South America. The Air Cooled
Condenser requires thirty six (36) cells or modules arranged in six
(6) A-Frame streets of six (6) modules in each street. It occupies a
plot area of 250 ft. x 280 ft., tube length of 36 ft. and costs per ft plot
area, $350.00.
Steam Velocity and Duct Design
The vacuum steam velocity affects the pressure loss or pressure
drop through the steam duct. Thus higher the velocity, larger the
pressure the pressure drop and vice versa. The pressure drop on
the steam side is split into two (2) zones:
1. Pressure drop in the steam duct.
2. Pressure drop in the primary and secondary tube bundles.
To start the design, the steam velocity is assumed to be around 200
ft/s. The air cooled condensers, in general, are designed for this
velocity at design conditions.
The resulting ACC design is given in Figure 3.
At first look the initial material cost seems to be more as the duct
size is increased. It is also evident that the overall pressure drop
has decreased as the duct size is increased. There are two options
to consider:
1. Decrease cooling airflow and thus decrease fan power.
2. Decrease surface area required for condensing the steam
keeping the fan power constant.
Looking at the fan power consumption, the fan power has decreased
as the duct size is increased. This means that more power can be
sent to the grid generating additional revenue. Even at a capitalized
cost of $1,500/kW, the additional evaluated cost between Design 1
and 4 can be $1,357,500. The capitalized cost can vary from $1,500/
kW to $4,000/kW and the evaluated cost can vary between
$1,357,500 to $3,620,000.
The condensate subcooling has decreased requiring less heat in-
put to heat up the condensate increasing the cycle efficiency. This
can be of the same order of magnitude as the capitalized cost. This
is discussed in the next section.
Steam Duct Velocity and Performance
The air cooled condensers are designed for summer peaking
conditions. It is assumed that during winter time the turbine
can be operated at low backpressures. The four (4) designs
presented can be compared on the impact of the performance.
Figure 5 tabulates the minimum backpressure possible and
the condensate subcooling at minimum backpressure condi-
tions.
When the duct diameter is increased, the changes in pressure,
temperature and fan power consumption are given in Figure 4.
The high velocity limits the minimum pressure the turbine can
operate at. The turbine will not able to operate at its maxi-
mum efficiency if the backpressure is limited. The pressure
drop induced by high velocity results in excessive subcooling
of the condensate.
The loss due to the backpressure between Design 1 and 4
can be one (1) percent of the steam turbine output. In this
example it is 1.7 MW. Assuming that the plant operates at
minimum backpressure condition for fifty (50) percent of the
year, the loss can amount to $1,275,000 based on $1,500/kW.
In addition, the steam required to heat up the subcooled con-
densate can add another one (1) percent of the plant output
or $1,275,000 or $150,000/Deg.F.
Steam Duct Velocity and Control System
As the steam velocity limits the turbine backpressure, the minimum
operable backpressure is reached at higher ambient temperature.
Normally, single or two speed motors are used for the control of an
air cooled condenser. This may not be sufficient if the control is
limited by the backpressure. In such instances, Variable Frequency
Drives are required. This can increase the initial cost by $1,000,000.
Steam Duct Velocity and Cost Impact
A number of parameters affect the initial or material cost. Here the
obvious one is the cost of steam duct. However, when the duct size
is increased, due to the lower pressure drop the cooling air required
has decreased. This requires lower height of support structure.
This, to a certain extent, offsets the increase in duct cost. The other
cost impact is in transportation cost. This, again, is offset by the
lower structural weight against the larger duct size. It is surprising
to note that the material cost remains very similar, less than 1% of
material cost between Design 1 and 4. The cost impact is tabulated
in Figure 6.
Steam Duct Velocity and Tube Bundle design
In stead of keeping the tube bundle design the same, the absorbed
fan power can made the same for all designs considered.
The length of the tubes is changed in the tube bundles. The pres-
sure drop in the steam duct remains unchanged. As the change in
tube length is less than one foot from one design to another and as
it affects only the straight length, the change in the pressure drop
in the tube bundles is marginal (less than 0.5 Deg.F). The material
cost also changes very little. The cost impact due to bundle design
is given in Figure 7.
Steam Duct Size versus Bundle Design
From Figures 6 and 7, it is obvious that increasing duct size results
in lower evaluated cost. Even with the low power cost assumed,
lowering power consumption assists in lowering
the evaluated cost.
Conclusions
Lower duct velocity results in
- Low Backpressure operation
- Low Condensate Subcooling
- More Operations Revenue
- Savings in energy to reheat the Conden-
sate
- Minimum Impact on Initial Cost
References
1. Global Energy Power Markets, 2005
Cooling Towers Work as a System
By
Richard J. DesJardins
Cooling Tower Consultant
There are two principal concepts that often con-
fuse people who are not familiar with cooling tow-
ers and how they operate:
1) The cooling tower is part of a bigger
system: it does not set the heat load.
2) The cooling tower and its components
work as a system.
The first concept recognizes that the tower will
get rid of all the heat put on it. The cooling sys-
tem of the building or plant sets the heat load
and it will try to reach equilibrium at any given
point in time. The heat exchangers or contact
surfaces or fluids transfer heat to the water. When
design flow rate, or the design heat load, then
it becomes difficult to say the tower is meeting
its design capacity unless you have the aid of
a set of performance curves, generally supplied
by the manufacturer, that show what should
happen at other conditions. Fortunately, there
is a theory of how a tower operates within the
system of the plant, and we can determine what
will happen at off design conditions. Several
CTI papers have been presented about these
theories, so they will not be discussed in detail
here. You can purchase software to calculate
performance curves.
the water circulates over the tower it contacts the air and some of
the water is evaporated. A rough rule of thumb is that you will
evaporate 556 Kilocalories for each kg of water evaporated (1000
BTU/lb). But this says nothing about the level at which the heat is
removed.
If a tower is too small the equilibrium will be reached when the
temperatures (both the cold water temperature and the hot water
temperature) rise to the point where the system shuts down or
water boils as steam or the plant cannot get the production needed
or any number of other bad scenarios. If a tower is too big it is
possible to lower the air rates, shut off pumps, use a fewer number
of cells, or buy a smaller tower and save money.
Also, the wet bulb is constantly changing, and the hot and cold
water temperatures will fluctuate accordingly. The tower size, its
components, and the prevailing weather set the level at which the
system operates, but they do not set the heat load.
One comment heard often is. We are not getting the range we
used to get. or, The tower was designed to cool 10 degrees, and
Im only getting 8 degrees. Its not working.
Again, the tower does not set the heat load. The heat load is
defined as:
Heat load = flow rate x range x K
K is a constant that makes the units come out right: example: K=
500 (for 60 minutes an hour and 8.33 for pounds of water per gallon)
for an equation of BTU/hr, flow in gpm, and range in degrees F.
If the flow rate is constant and the heat load goes down, then the
range will go down. If a pump is turned off, or a valve is opened, or
some other change is made, then all of these components of the
basic heat equation will change. If the range is not what was ex-
pected then something else must have changed.
Another related concept is that the range or heat load does not
define the tower capacity. Capacity is a matter of cooling a specific
heat load at a specific set of temperatures. If the equipment being
cooled is not operating at the those same temperatures, or the
NOTE: Theoretical performance curves may not be quite correct.
Nozzle pressures variations may cause more or less wall water (over-
spray water runs down the walls rather than through the fill) or
poor distribution or better performance because of high nozzle pres-
sure, or fan efficiencies may not be constant because the water
loading or pressure drops are not quite the same as at the design
point. As an example, a rough estimate is that a 10% increase in
water flow rate will reduce the air flow (and performance) by 1%.
Again, the tower is a system in itself, and it is working in the system
of the plant. More will be discussed below about the effects of
changing one component and how it may change something else.
The point is that theoretical calculations assume a constant sys-
tem, and the system may not be constant.
The Art
Selecting the economic size for the tower is part art and part sci-
ence. The science is knowing how all the components work to-
gether, and the art is picking the right box size. The science will
be discussed momentarily, but first lets discuss the box size.
One can have a great big tower with a little bit of power or a small
tower that uses a lot of power. The tower can be either a cross flow
or a counter flow tower, forced draft or induced draft. They all can
be designed to have the same capacity. That means they all will
cool the same amount of water through the same temperatures at
the same wet bulb. However, one may have a high fan power, or a
high pump head while the another takes more real estate or requires
more starters and controls or has better maintenance preferences.
Deciding which tower design is best for a given plant is usually
either an economic decision or a physical need decision, and some-
times compromises are needed.
The economics usually involve a life cycle analysis of the cost of
parasitic power for fans and pumps, the size of available real estate,
piping and electrical equipment costs, cost of the basin and its
supports, the cost of capital, whether or not the taxes are involved
for a new capital expense or a write off for repairs.
Ri chard J . DesJ ardi ns
Another factor is often dictated by the banks: how long will they
give you to pay back the loan? It used to be that banks would loan
money for seven years for a refinery or chemical plant and thirty
years for a power plant. It took three years to build a refinery and
five years to build a power plant. Therefore, the economic analysis
was based on power costs of three years for a refinery or chemical
plant and twenty-five years for a power plant, regardless of how
long the plant may operate. Since the power crisis of a few years
ago there have been reassessments of these types of projects by
the lenders, and they may consider long term payouts poor invest-
ments which raises the cost of capital.
The compromise comes when the economic analysis is for only a
few years, yet it is known that the plant may run for fifty years or
more. Perhaps there needs to be a consideration for the changes
that could be made after the initial plant payout period has elapsed.
Is it possible to add another cell or change the fan power to provide
more cooling that would increase plant output or efficiency? What
effect would these changes have on the tower or other equipment
in the plant? Remember, everything works as a system. Even
though capital resources may be limited, buying on a low first cost
may not always be the best answer.
Physical needs may also limit the design options. Perhaps the
expected water quality will be contaminated by oil or excessive dirt,
fouling particles, biological growth and other contaminants. These
potential problems may dictate splash fill rather than a more effi-
cient film type fill, or less thermally efficient open flute film type
fills. Maybe larger nozzle openings or different drift eliminator
designs will be required. Easy, open access to the distribution
system available in a cross flow tower may be necessary if nozzle
plugging is expected and safety regulations do not allow entering a
tower when the plant is in operation.
The interaction of tower components:
Shown below is a typical computer program printout that lists just
about everything you need to know to design a tower.
English Units
Practical limits apply to each of the tower components. The discus-
sion that follows will look at these limits and how changes in one
will affect all the others (and, sometimes the system in which the
tower is operating).
The design temperatures
High hot water temperatures affect:
Choice of materials which are often limited to 52 C (125 F)
Long term creep of standard PVC: slumping of fill sheets and
eliminators can occur if hot water temperatures are above
53 C (127 F.)
High temperature PVC or other plastic components may al-
low higher hot water temperatures
Increased cost of water treating
Scaling in heat exchangers
Plant performance: It is suggested that running an overall
economic analysis of flow rate and temperatures would be
advisable.
Evaporation rates may increase because the discharge air
will hold more water per volume unit.
Most tower fill tests have been run by manufacturers at 38
C (100 F) hot water temperature. Several authors have docu-
mented that operation at hot water temperatures above 38
C (100 F) will likely result in design deficiencies if hot
water correction factors or revised rating theories are not
used. Since many power plants operate at hot water design
temperatures between 46 C (115 F) and 52 C (125 F), it
should be noted that necessary corrections from simplified
Merkel performance theory can be as high as 7% to 10% at
these conditions.
FRP (fiber reinforced plastic) structures may require special
design considerations.
Cold Water Temperature
One good question to ask is, What is a degree of cold water
worth? If the cold water temperature is reduced one de-
gree will production increase? If the cold water temperature
is raised a degree will the plant shut down?
How much will reducing the cold water temperature affect
the cost of heat exchangers?
Compared to the cost of shell and tube or other types of heat
exchangers, the cooling tower is usually the cheapest sur-
face in the plant, and it may pay to buy a bigger cooling
tower to give colder water rather than buy a bigger heat
exchanger.
As a rough guide, the cold water temperature changes about
0.7 to 1 for each 1 change in wet bulb temperature.
Long range and low flow rates
Water distribution at very low flow rates (less than 2.0 l/s/m
2
or 3.0 gpm/ft
2
) are often a major cause of performance being
less than expected when laboratory testing was done at
higher flow rates. This also often occurs when a low flow
rate is used for design and the system is run with fewer than
the design number of pumps at low ambient temperatures
without taking cells out of service.
Using nozzles selected for very low flow rates requires care-
ful consideration of possible variations in plant operations.
Although low flow rates will usually result in less pumping
costs, the overall affect on heat exchanger design should be
carefully considered. Low flow rates with high LMTD may
result in higher backpressure on the system and low water
velocities may lower the heat transfer coefficients to the
extent that larger heat exchangers are required.
Choosing the optimum design wet bulb
Usually an economic decision:
ASHRAE and USAF and others have studied the statistical
weather data for most regions of the world.
Selections based on the statistical maximum are rarely eco-
nomical.
Selecting a design wet bulb that is too low can result in loss
of production on a hot day, or even plant shut down.
Tough duty: (Long range, close approach to a low wet bulb tem-
perature)
Requires a bigger tower
More first cost and power
Light water loadings
Taller tower
Closer spaced fill
More fill height
Smaller nozzle orifice or higher nozzle pressure.
Easy duty (Short range, long approach to a higher wet bulb tem-
perature)
Wider spaced fill
Heavy water loading can cause plugging
Lower height tower
Larger nozzle orifices
Lower fill heights and less fill volume.
An easy duty design might actually work better with half as
much fill. For example, a cross flow tower with splash fill might be
selected with closely spaced splash bars, but the water loading for
an easy duty is high and so is the air pressure drop. Removing half
of the splash bars might result in a lower fan power for the same box
size. However, the air velocity will increase, and it is necessary to
be sure the velocity limits for the drift eliminators have not been
exceeded. Again, the tower components work as a system.
Approach
The approach (cold water temperature minus the wet bulb tem-
perature) has probably the most affect on tower performance. While
most manufacturers do not want to make selections based on de-
signs with less than a 2.7C (5 F) approach because a small devia-
tion in temperature can sometimes mean a large variation in per-
centage capacity, a tower will operate at lower approaches. How-
ever, this usually means very low flow rates per unit area of tower
and it may be difficult to guarantee the actual performance will
agree with predictions based on tests at higher flow rates.
A rough general rule is that the required tower size (and cost) varies
directly with the approach. As an example, a tower with an 4C
(8 F) approach will cost 25% more than a tower with a 4C (10 F)
approach. This larger tower might be in the form of a bigger box, or
the same box with a different fill, fan, fan stack height, and/or more
power, or a combination of all of these options.
Range
Changes in the Range (hot water temperature minus the cold wa-
ter temperature) generally do not have as great of an effect on the
tower size as changes in the approach given a fixed heat load.
Altitude
The altitude or barometric pressure will definitely affect tower per-
formance. The driving force for cooling water is related to the
difference in the vapor pressure of water at the film of the water
droplet and vapor pressure of water in the air stream. (Actually,
vapor pressure can be converted to enthalpy, and standard cooling
tower theories usually use enthalpy differences between the air
and the water film as the driving force). Changes in the barometric
pressure affect the vapor pressure and air density. There is a direct
relationship between the density and the pressure drop through
each of the tower components. There is a direct effect on the fan
power and fan speed or pitch. Fan stall considerations will be
changed with changes in altitude. Computer aided selections can
easily and accurately account for changes in altitude.
Fill dimensions
Counter flow tower fill considerations:
Close spaced film fill sheets would normally have a maximum
effective height of 1.2m (4 ft) and a minimum height of 0.5m
(1.5 ft.)
Wider spaced film fill sheets can have a maximum effective
height of 0.6m to 2.3m (2 ft to 7 ft.).
Very wide spaced film fill sheets used for high fouling appli-
cations can have effective heights of as high as 3.75 m (12
ft).
The diminishing return of taller fill heights is a logarithmic
function, and it is influenced by the increased pressure drop
as well as the reduction in driving force between the air and
water enthalpies.
Cross corrugated sheets may encourage plugging
Splash fill requires much taller fill heights 4.5 m to 12 m (15 ft
to 40 ft)
Splash fill placed in the air inlet plenum below the top of the
air inlet opening has been found to be only about 50% as
thermally effective as the fill within the tower casing above
the top of the air inlet opening.
There is cooling in the rain zone below the fill, however, the
laboratory tests were conducted with some rain zone effect,
so only the marginal difference between the test rain zone
height and the actual rain zone height should be added.
A lower performance, non-plugging fill is infinitely better in
the long run, even if it requires a larger tower. A fill that will
plug in your plants specific application is never a viable
option.
Tall single lift fill packs are difficult to handle if they plug.
Cleaning or replacement costs will be increased.
Cross-oriented, lower fill height packs may encourage plug-
ging and add to the pressure drop, but they can also im-
prove water distribution, and even air and water distribution
throughout the tower is critical to obtain full performance.
The air inlet height is critical to good performance. One of
the most frequent causes of poor performance is because of
poor air distribution in counter flow towers caused by high
air inlet velocities. More comments on this are listed below.
Fill packs should be properly supported to prevent long
term structural failure.
Cross flow tower fill considerations:
In general a tough duty requires a higher fill height to air
travel ratio.
Selecting the optimum height to air travel ratio is a major
factor in selecting the optimum box size.
Film fill crossflow fills often have only a few feet of air travel,
while splash type fills require much wider towers.
Slope of the fill or fill supports may affect the performance
when high or low air flow rates change the draw of water
through the tower as it falls. The object is to keep the flow-
ing water within the fill, not on the louvers or the eliminators.
Freezing weather may dictate the need for a heavy water
loading at the air inlets and ice breaker bars within the lou-
vers to prevent damage from thawing ice blocks.
Water distribution:
Good water distribution is at least as important as good air
distribution.
Optimum performance is obtained when air and water distri-
bution is uniform throughout the tower.
I t is not possible to separate the performance of the distri-
bution system from the fill. Many authors have attempted
to calculate the difference between the two so they can ap-
ply one fill or nozzle with an alternate fill or nozzle using the
same set of test data. This cannot be done with any degree
of accuracy. To be reliable, a given fill must be tested with
a given nozzle. Failure to recognize this is often a cause of
poor tower performance.
Low pressure nozzles usually give much less performance
than high pressure nozzles. As much as 25% of the cooling
capacity can be produced by using high pressure nozzles
which usually produce finer droplet sizes with resulting
greater surface exposed to the air stream.
Low pressure nozzles usually have larger orifices and can be
used to reduce potential of clogging.
Good low pressure nozzles produce uniform distribution with
minimum pump head over the entire top surface of the fill.
Daisy petal type nozzles seldom produce uniform distribu-
tion, and as a result performance can be significantly re-
duced.
Nozzle spacing is critical for good distribution. Overlap of
sprays is not always helpful.
Up-spray nozzles do not appear to provide better perfor-
mance than down-spray nozzles.
Cross flow towers may need a distribution decking below
the nozzles to produce even water distribution. This is es-
pecially true for film type cross flow fills.
How many cells?
Part of the art of selecting the box size is selecting the optimum
number of cells. Often at least two cells are required to assure
system availability. Beyond that, the optimum number of cells is
associated with fill height, type of fill, air and water rate limits, fan
size and fan and fan stack properties. The cost of piping and
valves, pump head cost evaluation, electrical and electrical wiring
and control costs and cold water basin design and costs should
also be considered when selecting the number of cells.
Cell size
Cell sizes for package and factory assembled towers are usually
based on practical shipping limitations for truck (and sometimes
rail) shipment.
Field erected towers are usually sized on 4 ft or 6 ft (or 2 meter)
structural spacing.
Column spacing larger than 2m X 2m (6 ft X 6 ft.) would
generally result in larger transverse and longitudinal struc-
tural members.
Practical fill pack sizes often are based on a maximum sup-
port span of 2m (6 ft) for reasons of support, shipping and
handling.
Vertical structural spacing greater than 2m (6 ft) can cause
increased erection costs because workmen have more trouble
climbing through the tower. For this reason some manufac-
turers may limit the maximum fill height to avoid the cost of
an extra girt level and to avoid water and air re-distribution
problems as well as possible extra pressure drop through
the transition area.
It is usually better to make the cell length the longest direction in
order to minimize the inlet air velocity for a set inlet height. (Usually
the length is the direction of a series of cells in a row, and the width
is the dimension across one cell). Very wide cells require extra
consideration of air distribution to the middle of the tower. A few
guidelines will be discussed later.
The relationship of the fan to the cell size sets
the fan plenum size.
For counter flow towers the upper plenum height is usually
set by extending a 45 degree line from the top of the drift
eliminators to the fan blade tip using the longest dimension
of cell width or cell length.
Low height upper plenums can cause significant performance
problems due to mal-distribution of air in the fill. This is the
most important reason to get the plenum height correct.
For cross flow towers the bottom plenum width should be
adequate to keep the air velocity leaving the bottom 2m of
fill height to no more than the fill air velocity.
Long cell length, small fan diameter, cross flow towers should
have fan decks raised above the top of the fill to allow air to
properly approach the fan stack opening.
Tower orientation and configuration
In general the best layout is to have the longitudinal axis of the
tower in the same orientation as the prevailing summer (maximum
wet bulb) wind direction.
While space restrictions may require them, back-to-back
counterflow cell configurations are discouraged because
they usually result in excessive recirculation which reduces
performance. If this type of design is used it should include
low inlet velocities, high discharge velocities, and widely-
spaced tall fan stacks.
If the prevailing wind is cross-wise or quartering to the lon-
gitudinal axis, it is recommended the cell and fan sizes be
selected to maximize the space between fan stacks.
The distance between towers should generally be one tower
length to minimize discharge air interference from one tower
to the other.
Air inlet openings on all sides of a counterflow tower will
reduce the required inlet height and lower the pump head
accordingly. However, if louvers are not provided it is nec-
essary to have wind baffles to prevent water from blowing
from the tower air inlets.
I t is critical that multiple-cell counterflow towers be
checked to assure that the inlet air velocities to the inte-
rior cells are within practical limits: this is especially true
if there are transverse cell partitions, and failure to check
this design consideration has often been a major source of
poor tower performance.
Air inlets on both sides of a cross flow tower produces
desirable fan requirements because there will be twice the
amount of air flow for the same amount of pressure drop.
This is a major advantage of a cross flow tower.
Cross flow designs are often the best option for small pack-
age towers with propeller fans because counterflow designs
do not have room enough for large diameter fans to match
the required air flow. This is the main reason small packaged
counter flow towers are provided with blower fans.
For smaller applications in congested areas it is often desir-
able to orient the tower to provide the minimum noise pollu-
tion. Noise levels off the cased side of a tower will often be
6 to 12 dB less than the levels off the louver side.
Fans
Fan selection is an extremely critical part of designing a cooling
tower and changes made to a tower will usually affect fan perfor-
mance.
Fan operating power costs are often evaluated on a life cycle
basis.
Induced draft fan discharge velocities should be a least
6 m/s (1200 fpm) to minimize recirculation
Maximum fan discharge velocities may be as high as 11 m/s
(2,200 fpm), however, such high velocities are seldom eco-
nomical.
Maximum fan speeds are usually limited to blade tip speeds
of 61 m/s (12,000 fpm) to minimize stress on blade attach-
ments, keep noise to reasonable levels and reduce blade air
loading.
What really counts is total fan efficiency. One unique real-
ity of a cooling tower is the linear relationship between ther-
mal performance, first cost, and fan efficiency. If the fan
efficiency can be increased the tower size and cost can be
reduced proportionately.
A major objective is to have the fan operate in what is nor-
mally called an optimum fan efficiency zone. This can be
done by changing the fan design, number of blades, fan
speed or stack design.
There have been many cases where changes have been made to
existing cooling towers that result in performance decreases when
performance increases were expected. This is often due to chang-
ing fill types or adding fill without careful consideration of the
affect on fan performance. This can be seen in the following ex-
ample:
Fan curves are often as shown in Figure 1 with plots of total
pressure vs. air flow rate and power vs. air flow rate for lines
of constant fan pitch
FIGURE 1
A more useful plot ignores the pitch (which is often a guess
anyway) and plots power vs. air flow with lines of constant
static pressure as shown in Figure 2.
Using the original tower design it is possible to plot what is
normally called an operating line which varies the static
pressure as the square of the velocity (fan laws apply).
Changing the fan speed has the affect of moving the operat-
ing point up or down the operating line
If the fill is changed, say to a denser fill or taller fill height in
a counterflow tower, the static pressure at the same air rate
will be increased. The static pressure can also be changed
by other factors such as adding louvers, changing elimina-
tors, adding other restrictions to air flow, or plugging of the
fill with algae or other contaminants. If something is changed
it is not reasonable to expect that there will always be a
positive affect on performance. It just might go the other
way.
The effect of increasing the pressure drop is to move the
operating line to the left. This reduces the air rate at the
same power level, and in addition it pushes the operating
line close to possible fan stall.
FIGURE 2
If the fan is operating in the fan stall region it will be ineffi-
cient and performance will be erratic.
If fan changes are necessary they can be made with changes
to the pitch, fan speed, or number of blades or a more effi-
cient fan blade design. Often it is possible to change to a
larger diameter fan with the knowledge that the driveshaft,
gear box, fan stack and mechanical equipment supports will
also have to change.
Making changes without considering the total consequence
is often undesirable.
Changing the hub disk seal diameter will change the veloc-
ity pressure, and it will affect the total efficiency. A hub disk
seal will reduce or prevent air recirculation at the center of
the fan.
Two speed fans can save considerable power expense. Ac-
cording to the fan laws the fan power decreases propor-
tional to the speed cubed, and the noise level can be as
much as 13 dB less at half speed.
Fan blade tip clearance
Most fan manufacturers publish fan performance data based on
tests with very close tip clearances. Tip clearances need to be
increased due to fan stack deflections from wind, vibration and
erection tolerances. Increased tip clearances will reduce total fan
efficiencies from most standard published data.
Practical tip clearances Practical reduction in total efficiency
5 ft diameter inch 7.5%
14 ft diameter 13/16 inch 7.0%
20 ft diameter 1 1/8 inch 6.5%
28 ft diameter 1 inch 6.0%
40 ft diameter 2 inch 5.0%
Fan power should be increased to account for the lower expected
total fan efficiency.
Fan stacks
Fan stack designs are usually selected for economic reasons.
Package towers may use low straight sided stacks to keep
the first costs to a minimum while ignoring the higher power
costs. Increasing power a few kW will usually not cause a
problem for a company.
Larger towers will benefit greatly from eased inlet stack de-
signs, but tall stacks are not always justified.
Tall fan stacks will usually be justified when high power
evaluations are required or when it allows use of a smaller
motor. Changing the fan stack height can be one way of fine
tuning a design.
An extended height fan stack will improve fan efficiency. In
general, there will be recovery of the system velocity pres-
sure loss to the extent of approximately 70% of the differ-
ence between the velocity head at the fan net disk area (area
based on fan diameter less area based on seal disk diameter)
less the velocity head at the fan discharge (area based on
stack discharge diameter). This has the same effect on the
fan as lowering the static pressure loss through the rest of
the tower system.
Extending the fan stack height not only costs more for the
taller stack, but it also may affect the structural design due
to higher wind load considerations.
Low height fan stacks ( 2 m / 6 ft high) on large fans (over 7
m (22 ft) diameter) are not recommended. The wind effects
on fan performance can be significant due to eddies formed
by the upwind edge of the stack. The minimum stack height
should be 3 m (10 ft.) for applications with large diameter
fans.
Straight-sided or truncated-cone type fan stacks may be
economical to build, however the reduction in fan efficiency
is usually quite significant maybe more than 15%.
Water and air rate limits
Water rates
To obtain good water distribution the water rate per unit
area should normally be greater than 3.0 gpm/ sq. ft. for
either counter flow or cross flow towers. It is difficult to
assure good distribution below this value, but this does not
necessarily mean a tower will not perform at lower water
rates. A good distribution system and even air rates are
critical.
Cross flow maximum water rates can be as high as 13 to 17
l/s/m
2
(20 to 25 gpm/ft
2
) for splash type fills with practical
limits of 6.8 to 10 l/s/m
2
(10 to 15 gpm/ft
2
).
Counter flow maximum water rates are usually 5.8 to 6.8
l/s/m
2
(8.5 to10 gpm/ft
2
).
Some close-spaced counter flow film type fills can have a
plugging or percolating action with high air velocities and
heavy water loadings which cause unpredictable and erratic
performance. This can sometimes be overcome by spacing
the fill sheets so that every other sheet has the bottom edge
recessed into the pack (alternate tips recessed). With this
design the thickness of the fill sheets should be increased to
provide adequate structural support strength.
Air rates
It is usually best to analyze air flow rates in terms of mass
flow rather than volume flow because the mass flow rate of
dry air is the only thing that stays constant in a cooling
tower. Users of published performance data need to make
adjustments if the analysis is based on velocity as it is nec-
essary to correct for density and specific volume changes
throughout the tower.
Normal design air rates are 1.6 to 4 kg/s/m
2
(20 to 50 lb dry
air/min/ft
2
) .
Normal design air velocities for counter flow towers are as
follows:
Absolute maximum air inlet velocity 5.333 m/s
(1050 fpm). Air velocities greater than this value will
likely cause unexpected performance problems be-
cause the inlet air by-passes the outer few feet of fill.
Sometimes air inlet guide vanes will be used to pre-
turn the air, but it is not a certainty that full perfor-
mance will be available. One tool used to determine
the affinity of the air to evenly distribute below the
fill is to calculate a pressure ratio (the fill and elimina-
tor pressure drops divided by the total inlet pressure
drop consisting of louver losses, velocity head losses
at the inlet, and rain zone losses). The Pressure ratio
should be a minimum of 5 and preferably 10 or more.
Minimum fan outlet velocity 6 m/s (1.200 fpm.) -
Lower outlet velocities will increase the likelihood of
recirculation or interference.
Maximum average fill velocity 3.2 m/s (625 fpm).
Some manufacturers may want to use higher veloci-
ties, and for small towers the increased fan power
required may be justified. A 3 m/s (600 fpm) maximum
fill velocity is usually more practical. High power
evaluations often dictate use of fill velocities as low
as 2.3 to 2.5 m/s (450 to 500 fpm).
Maximum eliminator velocity 3.3 m/s (650 fpm).
Some new eliminator designs may be available that
allow higher air rates, however, water begins to float
at 3.5 to 4 m/s (700 to 800 fpm) depending on the
droplet size. Practical designs will usually limit elimi-
nator velocities to less than 3.2 m/s (625 fpm). Mod-
ern cellular eliminators can significantly improve drift
rates, and pressure drops can be less than the origi-
nal blade or wave form types. Cross flow cellular
eliminators should have drain passages to prevent
build-up of water that might result in extra drift.
For counter flow towers the maximum rates to avoid
plugging or percolating are as follows;
Fill sheet spacing 12 mm Fill sheet spacing 19 mm
m/s l/s/m
2
f pm Gpm/ft
2
m/s l/s/m
2
f pm Gpm/ft
2
3 13. 6 600 20 3 15 600 22
3. 55 6. 8 700 10 3. 55 11 700 16
3. 8 4. 0 750 6
Pressure drops
Sometimes the ability to select a proper fan is limited by high static
pressure losses. Propeller fans usually do not perform well at total
static pressures above 250 Pa (1.0 inches wg) without an excessive
number of blades or high speed. High static pressures also can
result in noisy fans.
Inlet and discharge pressure losses by enclosures, louvers, screens
or obstructions must be accounted for.
Fan power
The output from fan curves is called fan horsepower or fan kW. It
is necessary to add drive losses created by gear boxes or belts and
bearings to obtain the brake horsepower or brake kW. Spiral bevel
gears, most commonly used in cooling towers, have an inherent
efficiency of 98%, and in addition a gear box will have a no load loss
due to friction and oil viscosity which brings the total drive loss to
a total of about 4% to 5%. Actual no load losses will vary from
about 0.5 kW for small gear boxes to 3.75 kW for very large boxes.
Motor efficiency
High efficiency motors are generally economical for cooling tower
fans. Since certified tower testing is based on readings of kW input
to the motors, it behooves the manufacturer to use the best motor
efficiency possible. On the other hand, owners and operators that
need to repair a motor should seriously consider new motors rather
then re-winding the old one to get the best efficiency.
Conclusion
Designing a cooling tower is partially art and mostly science.
The art is picking the best box size and the right combination of fill,
fan, and other components to give the most economical selection.
The most economical selection may be low first cost or low evalu-
ated cost.
The science is adequately measuring the test data, developing a
theory that properly correlates the data and allows for application
of the data in a manner which does not produce distorted results.
Practical review of the results should show the laws of physics still
apply, i.e., similar fills should produce similar performance charac-
teristics, and similar fans should have similar efficiencies. There is
no Black Magic.
Air and water distribution are all important. The best performance
is going to occur when the distribution is even over the full area of
the tower. This is difficult to achieve. Some water nozzles and
distributors are better than others, and sometimes a manufacturer
may claim performance capabilities based on testing with one type
of nozzle applies to their nozzle when this is really not the case.
Fan testing may have been done in ideal eased inlet stacks with
very close tip clearances. Actual field installations seldom have
extremely close tip clearances to allow for wind load deflections,
thermal expansion of the fan blades or the stack, possible slight
slumping of a stack over time, and construction assembly toler-
ances. The shape of the stack being used may not be the same as
the fan manufacturer used for its tests. Improper fan hub seal disks
may be used.
Air distribution can be affected by high inlet velocities, louver
spacing and angles, wind, partition location, obstructions and struc-
tural blockage, etc.
Static pressure losses for various components are the most diffi-
cult data to measure and predict. Different manufacturers may
show significant variations in the pressure drop across individual
components, but the total pressure drop will normally be quite
consistent.
These are just a few of the many considerations that create uncer-
tainty. The object is not to hedge: it is to try the best possible to
predict something close to reality.
The important point to remember is that a cooling tower works as a
system, and changes to one part will usually affect others, and the
design of the tower can significantly affect the overall plant opera-
tion.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Richard J. DesJardins is a Cooling Tower and Evaporative Cooling
Consultant. He received his BSME from the University of Colo-
rado in 1959 and MBA from the University of Missouri at Kansas
City in 1965.
Prior to formation of his own company in 1984 he worked for twenty-
five years with the Marley Co and its subsidiaries. He has repre-
sented several different cooling tower, heat exchanger and indus-
trial equipment manufacturers, been Principal Engineer for an air
pollution control company, and designed and fabricated several
different types of evaporative cooling equipment. He is the author
of cooling tower and psychrometric computer programs and CTI
paper TP92-01.
By
Donald Zelek
Brentwood Industries
reduces the potential for fouling. Today there are
three basic flute geometries for counterflow tow-
ers; cross-flute, offset flute, and vertical flute.
Figure 1 illustrates these three geometries. Ex-
amples of the various packs can be seen in the
appendix.
Before choosing a fill design, water quality must
be considered. Choosing an incorrect fill could
ultimately result in a tower that lacks performance.
If a less efficient fill is used when water condi-
tions do not warrant that particular fill there is the
obvious lost potential. If a high efficiency fill is
used when water quality is poor the fill will foul
and performance will suffer in a short time.
Guidelines for Selecting The Proper
Film Fill
Abstract
For many years PVC film fills have been the most
popular choice of heat transfer media for use in
cooling towers. Throughout this history, design
features of these fills have continued to evolve
from the first cross-corrugated products through
vertically fluted fills to todays popular combina-
tion designs. Some of these features are not obvi-
ous to the casual observer and if not chosen cor-
rectly can adversely affect tower performance, prod-
uct cost, lifespan, or ease of installation. This pa-
per traces the history of these fill designs while
providing guidelines as to the proper fill selection.
History
Plastic film fills have been used in cooling towers for about 40
years. The first cross-fluted pack was patented in 1966. This was
followed shortly after by the first paper on cellular fill presented to
CTI by George Meek in the summer of 1967. During these early
years this new fill design was used primarily in smaller towers in the
US. During the 70s most large scale installations still favored
hanging sheets. It was not until the late 70s that the first large
scale new installation, AEPs Rockport facility, was designed around
film fill. It is interesting to note that the same fill is still in operation
in this tower after approximately 25 years of service. It was not
until the mid to late 80s that we began to see the first large scale
repacks with film fill such as AEPs Big Sandy and Gavin facilities.
Since these early products there has been considerable advance-
ment in fill design. The early designers were looking at alternatives
to wood splash bars and heavy cement sheets. Early designers
such as Carl Munters realized that packs produced of cross-fluted
sheets provided much greater efficiency with much less weight.
Fouling concerns were primarily limited to scaling. However, over
the years operating conditions have changed and todays towers
have much greater demands applied to them. Economic issues
have forced tower sizes to be smaller raising airflows and water
loadings. Availability of water has been reduced which in many
cases has resulted in reduced water quality such as the use of
municipal waste water for cooling. These factors have all forced
film fills to change with these demands.
Flute geometry counterflow towers
While the early cross-fluted fills are still available and popular, the
industry has learned that there are limitations to these products.
The angled flutes that reduce the speed of the migration of the
water through the packing making the design efficient also create
an environment that permits fouling. As a result flute geometries
have changed to increase the water velocity through the pack which
There are two main components to fouling. High total suspended
solids (TSS) which can be both water born and air born will create
the fouling load. But in addition to this a binding agent is also
needed in the form of high biological content or the presence of oils
or grease. These are the components that bind the TSS to the
packing and previous layers of TSS. To create an environment for
high fouling potential all three of these components will be present
in high concentrations.
This paper will not provide an in depth review of the aspects of
fouling. There have been several good papers presented at CTI on
this topic. Here, we will only be concerned with knowing how to
respond to this information. The guidelines presented for the se-
lection of fills with respect to the fouling environment are based on
over 15 years of experience with fills in fouling environments in
waters serving steel mills, paper processors, petrochemical plants
and power plants using open bodies of water such as lakes
and rivers. Extensive research conducted by CTI member compa-
nies have also added to this knowledge base to provide the guide-
lines presented here. Selected important references are also included
in references list.
Cross-fluted fills have always been highly efficient. The cross
flutes with the numerous contact points within the packs allow for
good redistribution of water. The microstructure allows for turbu-
Figure 1
Donal d Zel ek
We now offer "Direct Size Wood Replacement"
profiles, featuring:
3 1/2" x 3 1/2" x 1/4" square tube replaces 4 x 4 lumber
5 1/2" x 1 1/2 x 1/4 channel replaces 2 x 6 lumber
3 1/2" x 1 1/2 x 3/16 channel replaces 2 x 4 lumber
3 1/2" x 1 1/2" x 3/16" IBeam replaces 2 x 4 lumber
5 1/2" x 2 1/2" x 1/4" IBeam replaces 2 x 6 lumber
3" x 3/8" FRP strap
Bedford Reinforced Plastics, Inc. specializes in FRP
Pultruded Products for the cooling tower market. We
have inventory located on the east and west coast and
in Houston, TX.
Ask us about our replacement fan deck.
24 x 1 1/2 deck
24 x 1 1/8 deck
Literature is available upon request.
lent water flow. Microstructure is the small bumps and ridges formed
into each sheet and is present on most film fills. It can enhance the
products performance significantly. A fill with an aggressive mi-
crostructure will create a water film that is very turbulent and well
mixed as shown in Figure 2. This will help improve efficiency but
will also increase fouling potential. The angled flutes on cross-
fluted fills provide a path that moves the water at a relatively low
velocity through the fill. But all of these attributes also provide for
greater fouling potential. As a result cross-fluted fills should only
be used when good water chemistry and treatment is in place. As a
general rule TSS should not exceed 100ppm if there is good biologi-
cal and scale control and there should be no oils or grease. The TSS
should be reduced to no more then 25ppm if the biological count is
high. Generally, this author is defining good biological control to
mean total aerobic bacteria not exceeding 10,000 colony forming
units per ml (CFU/ml). A high biological count is 100,000CFU/ml.
Fills with an offset flute design are more resistant to fouling. How-
ever, they should not be considered the most fouling resistant.
Offset fluted designs have fewer contact points and between them
the flutes are vertical or near vertical. The vertical flutes allow for a
faster water migration through the packing. This flushing action
keeps the fill cleaner. Fills of this type generally can withstand TSS
up to 200ppm provided there is good biological and scale control.
Oils and grease should not exceed 1ppm.
Vertically fluted film fills are the most tolerant to fouling. Unfortu-
nately, the trade off is that they are also the least efficient. Water
moves through the vertical flutes unrestricted by any contact points.
Water film velocity is the greatest in these fills. The shearing ac-
tion of the high velocity water film keeps these types of fill cleaner
in poor water conditions. However, it is important to note that one
can not assume that these types of fill are tolerant to all water
conditions. All film fills can foul when the correct conditions are
present.
This group can be further divided into two sub groups when look-
ing at their potential for fouling. Vertically fluted fills with an ag-
gressive microstructure can tolerate a TSS up to 500ppm with good
biological and scale control. With a poor biological control TSS
should not exceed 200ppm. Oils and grease should not exceed
5ppm.
Of the film fills, vertically fluted products with little or no micro-
structure are most resistant to fouling. The trade off is that these
fills will have the lowest thermal performance. They can operate in
environments with poor biological and scale control. TSS can be
up to 1000ppm with high biological content. Oils and grease can be
present up to 25ppm. However, environments that have fibers can
be an issue for even these fills. Processes that permit fibers such
as paper mills should carefully evaluate their own case before us-
ing any film fill.
The information presented so far is summarized in Table 1. It should
be noted that the limits presented here are guidelines and not abso-
lute. There may be other factors such as scale or potential cross-
contamination from heat exchangers. Site specific elements must
be considered.
Cross-flute Offset flute Vertical flute Vertical flute
microstructure no microstructure
TSS(ppm)w/high Bio <100 <25 <200 <50 <500 <200 <2000 <1000
Bio and Scale Control Good Good Good Poor
Oil and Grease None <1 <5 <25
Fibers None None None None
Table 1
Flute geometry crossflow towers
Up to this point all of the fills discussed have been for use in
counterflow towers. We can not leave out a significant portion of
the market, film-filled crossflow towers. But unlike the counterflow
towers more of the concerns with these towers revolve around
water management and not water quality. This is due in large part
that a higher percentage of these towers serve applications that
involve cleaner water for HVAC or light industrial use. Also these
towers generally have much higher water loadings which will help
to reduce the potential for fouling.
Traditionally there have been three types of film fill used for
crossflow towers, cross-fluted, herringbone, and serpentine de-
signs as shown in Figure 3. The cross-fluted types are the same as
those that were discussed previously. All of these designs have a
proven performance record. However, it has been remarked that
cross-fluted designs are only for counterflow towers and not de-
signed for crossflow. Cross-fluted designs have worked for many
years successfully in these applications. In fact, the very early
patents on cross-fluted designs listed crossflow towers as one
possible application.
Figure 3
As tower manufacturers become more competitive, more capacity
is being packed in smaller models. This has resulted in towers with
exceptionally high air velocities and water loadings. 15 years ago a
crossflow tower with a water loading of 22-25gpm/ft
2
was consid-
ered high. Today, high capacity towers regularly have loadings in
excess of 30gpm/ft
2
. This has created water management issues for
Figure 2
cross-fluted fill. Fill manufacturers have incorporated integral lou-
vers and drift eliminators into their crossflow fills. These features
are required in most retrofits. However, the cross-fluted designs
have trouble managing the heavy water loadings. The angled flutes
force the water towards the louver face. As more water travels
down the drainage channel which separates the cross-fluted sec-
tion from the integral louver, that passage way becomes flooded.
The excessive water in this channel will then block airflow through
the fill.
In most cases the tower can be engineered to correct or at least
minimize this problem. However, this requires an expert under-
standing of the tower in question and forces at work. Unfortu-
nately, the solution may be different for each tower. These precise
modifications have made cross-fluted designs more difficult to use
and their performance somewhat unpredictable. In recent years the
trend has been to use herringbone designs for retrofits. With this
design there is no flute bias pushing the water towards the louver
face. The engineered zig-zag pattern keeps the water more evenly
distributed throughout the fill at higher air velocities.
Economic considerations
Once a flute type is determined, attention can be paid to economic
issues. The fill comprises approximately 20% of the cost of a new
tower. Items that can adversely affect fill costs are material gauge,
material type, installation labor, and freight.
In todays cost conscious world, thinner material gauges have be-
come more common. In some cases this is not necessarily bad.
Advanced thermoforming techniques have been able to more evenly
distribute material during the forming process. As result it has
become common to use a mix of gauges throughout the same tower.
Typically the material on the top layer of the fill section will be of a
heavier gauge to better withstand the foot traffic of routine mainte-
nance. Heavier material gauges on the bottom layer should also be
considered. This is particularly true with vertically fluted medias.
Many of these products have larger flute openings which do not
have the load bearing strength of the denser cross-fluted fills. The
point loads applied at the supports can be too great in some cases
for lighter material gauges.
It is difficult to apply a life span to a material gauge. There are
numerous examples at both ends of the spectrum of up to 25 years.
It is known that all plastics will break down with time. The molecu-
lar bonds break causing the plastic to become brittle. A heavier
gauge product will withstand this process for a longer period of
time and should be given consideration particularly when external
forces are expected such as regular foot traffic or ice loads.
At this point a note needs to be made on specifying material gauge.
This can become a confusing issue for those unfamiliar with PVC
fills because the cooling tower fill manufacturers do not necessar-
ily use consistent notation when expressing the gauge of fill. In
some cases it could be expressed as an after-forming gauge and in
other cases it could be a before-forming gauge. During the forming
process the raw material is heated and passed over a tool which has
the shape of the product desired. When this occurs the raw mate-
rial is stretched at certain points as shown in figure 4. This stretch-
ing process is not uniform and the ability of the manufacturing
process will dictate to what degree the final product is thinned out.
It should be noted that the CTI standard STD-136 specifies that the
material gauge shall be based on an average and a minimum
thickness after forming, as well as a raw material starting thickness
before forming.
Figure 4
A fills after-forming gauge will always be less than its before-form-
ing gauge. It is important to know which gauge notation is being
specified. Do not be misled into thinking that a heavier gauge
product is being supplied. Statements like made of xx mil are
intentionally vague and could imply to mean either after-forming or
before-forming.
When purchasing any film fill, raw material type and quality must
also be considered. In the world today polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is
the most widely used material. Properties such as its low cost, ease
in forming and assembly, resistance to chemicals and degradation,
and self extinguishing characteristics makes this material the over-
whelming material of choice. Other materials such as polypropy-
lene, polystyrene, and cement boards are used but have drawbacks
such as weight, price, durability, and flammability. Options for
assembling other materials such as polypropylene are limited as
solvents are not effective on this material.
When specifying PVC it is important to insist that all raw materials
meet CTI Standard 136. Products that dont meet this standard are
likely to have problems such as a much lower heat deflection tem-
perature. CTI standard 136 requires ASTM test D648 meet 160F.
Products not meeting this property would experience symptoms
such as shrinking at elevated temperatures. Cheaper materials may
also use a high level of less expensive flexible vinyls containing
plasticizers creating a finished product with poor beam strength or
little UV resistance. These inferior raw materials can not be noticed
by simple inspection in the field. Therefore, it is best to use raw
materials that have been QA tested to CTI standards.
Even what would appear to be small differences in fills such as part
size can influence the installed cost of the product. Bay size will
dictate to some degree the part size needed for a particular site.
However, even with the length fixed there are still many options
available. Most of the film fills today are supplied in assembled
blocks that range from as small as 4ft
3
each to as large as 40ft
3
each.
There are numerous arguments as to which size is best. Several
points will be presented here but ultimately this is a site specific
issue.
As a general rule packs that are between 12ft
3
and 20ft
3
are less
expensive to manufacture then those that are much smaller or larger.
These parts are usually 2ft deep and between 6 and 10 ft in length.
These sizes are also typically favored by field personnel for their
ease in handling. However, poor water distribution would favor
shallower 12" deep packs. Each layer of fill is generally installed
90 to the previous one. This crossed pack design enables better
water distribution through the fill. There have been claims made
that the greater number of pack to packs interfaces created by
shallower packs will result in a greater potential for fouling. How-
ever, research shows that the water film velocity dictates the great-
est potential for fouling and not the size of the opening at interface
of two packs.
Transportation costs continue to be a greater percentage of any
products final cost. This is no different for fill medias. Freight is a
very large component to their final cost as most of the product is
air. A typical truck can carry approximately 3,500ft
3
of assembled
material, where as a large tower can hold over 250,000ft
3
of fill. At
this size this is over 70 truck loads. Depending on the site location
it could be over 1,000 miles from the closest manufacturing plant.
With average fuel rates continuing to rise a freight bill in excess of
$150,000 is possible. In some cases site assembly of the fill can
become very attractive because unassembled sheets can be packed
very compressed in a truck. Approximately seven times more
unassembled material can ship in each truck.
The history of assembling fills on site has been a difficult one. The
traditional adhesives used to assemble PVC are difficult to trans-
port, store, and use. All are flammable and/or contain VOCs and are
strictly controlled. Their use in large quantities has become diffi-
cult to use in many parts of the country as well as internationally.
Substitutes are expensive and require complicated applicators which
can be difficult to control with inexperienced help typically found
in the field.
Advancements in pack construction now permit sheets to be as-
sembled without the use of any adhesives or solvents. Mechanical
assembly techniques employ the use of concentric cones that are
crushed creating a cold formed rivet as shown in Figures 5 and 6.
This process provides for a fast assembly rate that is similar to
factory built packs which is critical for large volume jobs. In addi-
tion to speed, the process allows for a strong and very uniform
bonded joint. Again, this becomes very important when inexperi-
enced labor is being used.
Figure 5
Conclusion
Film fills are the best choice for many cooling towers. Their perfor-
mance is unmatched. However, before any fill is chosen, a good
understanding of the water chemistry is required. This needs to
include both current conditions and anticipated conditions in the
future. Have a good understanding of the fill being offered and pay
attention to the details. Know where the product is being manufac-
tured. This market is a mature one. Todays manufactures are
designing highly engineered products to meet very specific needs.
There are many options available and the one with the least expen-
sive up front cost may not be the best in the long run. If unfamiliar
with the product, ask for drawings and samples and most impor-
tantly, ask questions.
References:
1. Aull, Richard and Tim Krell. Design features and their
affect on high performance fill. Paper presented at the
Cooling Tower Institute meeting, Houston, TX, 2000.
2. Deuvall, Brian; Frank Michell and Dan Drew. Refurbish-
ing Americas First Hyperbolic Cooling Tower. Paper
presented at the Cooling Tower Institute meeting, New
Orleans, LA, 1991.
3. Duke, Jay. Allegheny Powers Experience with PVC Film
Fill in Cooling Towers. Paper presented at the American
Power Conference, Chicago, IL, 1994.
4. Meek, George. Cellular Cooling Tower Fill. Paper pre-
sented at the Cooling Tower Institute meeting, New York,
NY, 1967.
5. Mortensen, Kenneth. Low Clog Fill New Approaches.
Paper presented at the Cooling Tower Institute meeting,
Corpus Christi, TX, 2001.
6. The Munters Story, Published by Gullers Pictorial AB,
Stockholm, Sweden, 1983.
7. Whittemore, Michael and Tom Massy. Current Fouling
Problems of PVC Film Fills and Research into New De-
signs to Eliminate Fouling. Paper presented at the
American Power Conference, Chicago, IL, 1992.
8. Personal communications with Mr. Frank Michell Novem-
ber, 2005.
Appendix
Cross-flute designs
Figure 6
Vertical flute designs with microstructure
Offset flute designs
David Spacek
Westar Energy
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to detail the activities which took place
before and during the reconstruction of the (2) cooling towers of
Unit #3 during the months of October and November of 2005. The
paper identifies the activities and justification involved leading up
to this replacement as well as the procedures performed to actually
demolish and rebuild these (2) towers during a 5-week outage.
Figure 1
Background
The Westar Energy Company is the electric utility, which serves
the northeast, central, and east-central parts of Kansas. The Jef-
frey Energy Center is a 2,300-Megawatt coal fired power plant,
which is part of the Westar Energy fleet and is located approxi-
mately 40 miles northwest of Topeka, Kansas. The plant consists
of three like size units (approximately 765 MW each) and burns
western coal from the Powder River Basin area of Wyoming. Each
is serviced by (2) round mechanical draft cooling towers.
The Cooling Towers, which serve Jeffrey Energy Center Unit #3,
were constructed and placed into service in 1983. There are two
towers and they are both round mechanical draft cross flow design.
Each tower is approximately 175 in diameter and approximately 40
feet tall. The airflow on each tower is supplied by eight mechanical
draft fans. The fans are all situated on a concrete deck on the top
and center of the tower and pull air through the fill sections in a
cross flow manner. The fans are really completely separate from the
heat transfer or fill section of the tower, which is located around the
perimeter of the concrete structure. Each tower is designed to flow
166,000 gallons per minute. The structural members in the heat
transfer section of the tower are treated Douglas Fir. The fill media
is a splash type in a parallel configuration.
Reasons To Rebuild
A discussion should take place at
this point about the reasons for
rebuilding the towers. A recon-
struction program began approxi-
mately fours ago on the other (4)
cooling towers on Unit #2 and pro-
ceeded to Unit #1. The Unit #3
cooling towers were the last ones
to be reconstructed at the Jeffrey
Energy Center.
Westar Energy Jeffrey Energy Center
Unit #3 Cooling Towers Reconstruction
As mentioned in a previous paragraph, the Unit #3 towers went
into service in 1983. Therefore, they have 22 years of service since
original construction. The original outer rings were constructed
Davi d Spacek
Figure 2
with Douglas Fir and Stainless Steel hardware. The condition of
the wood had become suspect. During outage inspections it was
quite clear that significant erosion of the diagonal cross members
and girts had occurred. At almost every recent outage, drift elimi-
nators had fallen out and in the course of putting them back in
place, it was clear the wood behind them had deteriorated. Also,
numerous perimeter louvers had fallen from the towers in the last
two years and in the course of reinstalling back in place, it was
clear that the wood had deteriorated on the inside fill area as well.
With the deterioration of the tower in general, the overall perfor-
mance of the tower had decreased. There was also a need to bring
the towers at least back to the original design conditions.
Figure 3
They had also experienced some special occurrences during their
life. Those occurrences are listed below:
1. During the middle 1980s, there was a partial collapse of
one of the towers. This occurred during a shutdown of
Unit #3 in the middle of the winter. There was no heat load
on the tower during this time and the weather was cold
enough to freeze the water flowing over the tower and
cause the partial collapse.
2. A windstorm in the summer of 1994 collapsed about half
of the fan cylinders and also destroyed the fans and drive
shafts in those same cylinders.
3. About five years ago, it was determined that the hot water
basins on both towers were in very poor condition. Dur-
ing an outage in 2001 a plywood overlay of the basins was
done as a temporary repair until such time to reconstruct
the towers.
4. Some minor freeze damage occurred on one of the towers
in the spring of 2002. Some broken columns, girts, col-
lapsed grid and fill, and some fallen louvers resulted from
water flowing over the tower with no heat load and an
unexpected cold spell caused the water to freeze.
5. Two partial collapses occurred on one of the towers dur-
ing the winter of 2003. The tower was in service at the
time. The damage consisted of several broken columns
and the resulting collapsed girts, grid, and fill. Fortu-
nately, the damaged areas were walled off and the remain-
der of the tower was able to operate normally.
6. A general increase of maintenance has occurred due to
some of the above mentioned problems as well as age of
the equipment.
Preparatory Work
Most of the construction materials arrived in the fall of 2004. There
were two reasons why the material arrived so early. Some consider-
ation had been given to doing the reconstruction on the towers in
the spring of 2005. As illustrated by the items mentioned above,
the towers are in poor condition and if one of them did fail we
wanted to be prepared for an emergency replacement. Secondly,
the projection was for raw materials prices used to manufacture the
parts and pieces for the towers were going to climb because of oil
prices and we wanted to take advantage of the lower costs.
A small construction crew arrived on site in May of 2005. A work
area was established for them around the towers and also inside of
a seldom-used building at the plant. An office trailer and a crew
trailer were brought on site to be used by the construction crew.
The office trailer was easily connected with 220 VAC power. Also,
Internet and phone service was established via wireless Internet.
This worked very well. The construction crew spent the summer
assembling bents, installing clips on grids, and building walkways.
Having a building available to do some of the work insured no lost
production time due to the weather. On the past (4) towers, the
asbestos louvers were removed prior to the demo, but the louvers
on Unit #3 were not asbestos so this was not necessary.
Removal OF Existing Towers
Unit #3 was shut down the evening of October 7, 2005. At approxi-
mately midnight, the water flow to the towers was shut off. Imme-
diately after the water was shut off, previously installed temporary
pumps were turned on to begin pumping out the cold water basin
into the normal drain system. As people arrived the next morning to
begin work, the water level was well below the basin floor level of
the cooling towers. The demolition could begin with minimum
water in the basins. After about two hours of preparation and set
up that morning, the demolition of the old towers began.
The demolition of the old towers was not a pretty sight. It was
done with a long pipe, which had hooks on the end of it. This pipe
was attached to a front-end loader. The front-end loader jabbed
this hooked pipe in the fill sections of the towers and with some
extra maneuvering brought both of them down with the debris fall-
ing into the basin. The demolition took approximately a day and a
half. This removal of the debris from the cold water basins had
taken approximately three days. The basins in both towers were
completely clean and dry. The old anchor castings were removed
and construction was ready to begin.
The (8) sets of mechanical equipment on top of the concrete struc-
ture was left intact. No replacement was performed.
Figure 4
Figure 5
Installation Of New Towers
The installation of the new anchor castings and pre-assembled
bents began. Based on past experience, it was determined to be
best to install the bents in two parts. The lower sections of the
bents were installed rather quickly with the aid of a mobile crane.
The upper sections of the bents would be installed at a later time.
Handling the bents in two sections makes them easier and safer to
deal with.
As soon as bents were in place, installation of the fiberglass hot
water basins on top of the towers began. Also, the installation of
grids and fill also began simultaneously. Both towers were con-
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
structed at the same time to insure the completion during the 5-
week outage, and different jobs were performed simultaneously.
The installation of the drift eliminators and walkways were some of
the last tasks to complete. The stairwells remained intact and re-
used on the new towers. These methods were refined over the last
four years during the reconstruction of four previous cooling tow-
ers at the Jeffrey Energy Center. Many lessons were learned during
those previous jobs and efficiencies of motions and methods were
achieved.
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Additional Tasks Performed
There were some additional jobs, which were performed during this
reconstruction. The hot water distribution troughs or in Jeffrey
Energy Center terminology ring headers are constructed of con-
crete with butt joints of the concrete sections. During this outage,
those joints were cleaned and sandblasted after which the joints
had a sealer applied to them to insure no leakage of water between
Figure 14
the joints. Some minor repair of broken concrete around the cold-
water basins and the access tunnels to the interiors of the towers
were also repaired. Lastly, six torsion tubes and the accompanying
support beams will be replaced on one of the towers. These torsion
tubes replacements will complete a project begun several years
ago. The torsion tubes currently in service in these six locations
are in poor condition and this replacement will insure reliable op-
eration of those particular cells.
Conclusion
This total project was the culmination of a reconstruction of all (6)
of the cooling towers at the Jeffrey Energy Center. This paper has
only outlined the replacement of the final (2) towers. Much was
learned in the replacement of the first (4) and applied to this final
project. Recognition of Westar Energy management should be
made in this instance for having the foresight to reconstruct the
towers before any of them completely failed. This is certainly the
intelligent manner of business operation. Particular recognition of
the provider of these (6) cooling tower rebuilds should be made.
This would include sales representatives, engineering support,
construction managers, field personnel, and the construction crew.
These jobs were all completed in a timely fashion with excellence
achieved in both Safety and Craftsmanship. Also, I wish to recog-
nize Westar Energy employees Dale Larson and Mark Hanson both
of whom worked most directly with me on these projects for their
support and construction expertise. Through the course of these
projects, the people mentioned above started out as business as-
sociates and became friends.
Figure 15
Wind Load Rated Packaged Cooling
Towers
by:
Daniel S. Kelly, Product Manager
EVAPCO, Inc.
Daniel S. Kelly
Abstract:
Changes to national building code and the state
building code of Florida have given rise to special
requirements for cooling towers to be able to with-
stand hurricane forces.
This paper will review national and Florida state
building codes as they apply to cooling towers
with emphasis on what must be communicated to
specifying engineers, owners and building inspec-
tors with the goal of getting unit acceptance at
the jobsite and also design of units that meet the
code.
the registered design professional related to com-
ponents that are not designed by the profes-
sional, such as cooling towers. The code requires
the professional to provide in the contract docu-
ments the design wind load pressure (psf) (kN/
m
2
).
Regardless if IBC 2003 is the governing code, it
is incumbent upon the registered design profes-
sional to provide the information necessary so
the manufacturers know how the component is
to be designed. The aim of the paper is to assist
in the interpretation of the code(s) as applicable
to cooling towers to facilitate good, accurate and
concise communication with the component sup-
pliers.
Introduction:
Cooling towers are an integral part of HVAC and industrial process
cooling systems. A heat load from a conditioned space or a manu-
facturing process is rejected into the atmosphere using a cooling
tower by evaporating a small percentage of the re-circulating water.
Because the atmosphere is the heat sink, cooling towers are usu-
ally installed exterior to the building allowing easy rejection of the
buildings cooling load to the atmosphere.
Building codes identify design dead, live, wind, snow, rain and
seismic loads for building or building components, such as cooling
towers. The minimum design criteria are described for the building
or component that is exposed to direct atmospheric conditions;
such as hurricane wind forces, when the failure of the component
could pose a loss of life hazard.
When an owner commissions design professionals to design and
construct his building, the owners expectations are not only a
finished building that is functional and aesthetically pleasing, but
one that meets all applicable building codes in order to obtain the
certificate of occupancy from the local authority. It is the responsi-
bility of the registered design professionals to design, specify, pur-
chase and install parts, materials, assemblies and systems, includ-
ing components such as the cooling tower that meet or exceed the
minimum design criteria in the governing building code.
There are many different building codes published and adopted
across the country. IBC 2003 is currently adopted by 45 states and
Washington D.C. (see figure 1). ASCE 7 is referenced in IBC 2003
as the governing code when the provisions and exceptions allow-
ing IBC 2003 to apply are not satisfied. Florida has its own state
code again based upon ASCE 7. Some states have adopted the IBC
2003 building code state wide, while others leave the codes up to
the local jurisdictions.
The registered design professional, usually the engineer of record,
specifies the details of the cooling tower in mechanical specifica-
tions. The IBC 2003 code explicitly identifies the responsibility of
Each section of the paper covering the three main wind load codes
discussed herein has the following parts:
Applicability: when and where it applies to cooling towers.
Application: how it applies to cooling towers.
Administration: Communication of the design parameters to the
manufacturer in order to be assured the cooling tower design meets
the code.
SECTION I: IBC 2003: Section 1609 WIND
LOADS
I. Applicability
IBC 2003 can be applied to a cooling tower when the associated
building meets certain criteria defined in the code. The code states
Loads on all buildings shall be determined in accordance with
Section 6 of ASCE 7 unless certain criteria apply. Section 6 of
ASCE 7 is analyzed in section II of this paper.
IBC 2003 applies when:
1. The building is enclosed
2. The building has a mean roof height of 60 ft or less
3. The building has a mean roof height that does not exceed
the least horizontal dimension
4. The building does not have response characteristics
making it subject to:
a. Cross winds
b. Vortex shedding
c. Instability due to galloping or flutter
5. The building does not have a site location for which chan-
neling or buffeting of upwind obstructions warrant spe-
cial consideration.
If the building fails to meet all of these criteria, then the cooling
tower shall be designed to meet the Design Pressure detailed in
Section 6 of ASCE 7 (please refer to Section II of this paper).
If the building meets all these criteria, then the cooling tower shall
be designed to meet the Design Pressure detailed in Section
1609.6.2.2.
II. Application
Reading Chapter 1609.1 IBC 2003 and progressing through the code,
there are defining parameters to be determined useful in the inter-
pretation and application of the code to cooling towers.
Basic wind speed is determined by Figure 1609 in IBC 2003. Figure
1609 is a series of maps with contour lines of constant wind speed.
One locates the jobsite on the maps and may interpolate linearly
between contours to determine the design basic wind speed for the
jobsite. Local jurisdictions may require wind speeds be employed
other than that defined in Figure 1609, particularly if the jobsite is
located in a special wind region, near mountainous terrain or near
gorges. Localized high wind velocities may occur in such regions.
When wind speeds are determined by local jurisdictions, Section
6.5.4 of ASCE 7 shall apply. Adjustments to the basic wind speed
by the local jurisdictions are based upon meteorological informa-
tion. The registered design professional should investigate if local
high wind speeds apply.
Exposure Category reflects the characteristics of the ground sur-
face irregularities. Variations in ground surface roughness due to
natural topography, vegetation and constructed features all con-
tribute to the exposure category. The openness or amount of expo-
sure the component (cooling tower) has to the impact of the wind
forces is accounted for in the exposure category.
Exposure A is not used in IBC 2003
Exposure B is the basic, catch all category. If the building does not
fall into Exposure C or D, then it shall have Exposure B. Exposure B
is characterized by urban and suburban areas with densely packed
obstructions having the size of single family dwellings or larger.
Exposure C is characterized by open terrain with scattered obstruc-
tions. Exposure C has a smooth natural topography and irregulari-
ties having height of 30 feet or less extending 1500 feet (457m) in all
directions from the building site. This category includes flat open
country, grasslands and shorelines in hurricane prone areas such
as the US Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf Coast where the figure 1609
basic wind speed exceeds 90 mph (39.6 m/s) and Hawaii, Puerto
Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands and American Samoa.
Exposure D is characterized by flat, unobstructed areas exposed to
wind flowing over open water (excluding hurricane prone areas) for
a distance of 1 mile (1.61 km). Shorelines include inland water ways,
the great lakes, the coastline of California, Oregon, Washington
and Alaska. Exposure D extends inland only 1500 feet (460m) or 10
times the building height, whichever is greater.
Importance Factor
The cooling tower is assigned a wind load importance factor, I
w
.
Table 1604.5 provides guidance in selecting the importance factor
based upon the type of building and the occupancy. There are
three importance factor values; low hazard with I
w
= 0.87 (or 0.77 in
hurricane prone areas), substantial hazard with I
w
= 1.00 and essen-
tial facilities with I
w
= 1.15. The building category or nature of the
occupancy determines the appropriate importance factor.
All cooling towers installed on a building in comfort cooling appli-
cations should be assigned an importance factor of 1.00, unless
they meet more stringent requirements of Category III or IV build-
ings, where the importance factor should be 1.15. Cooling towers
installed on grade or otherwise installed on structural supports not
integral with the main windforce-resisting system of the building it
serves or on a Category II building may use 0.87 (or 0.77 in hurri-
cane prone areas) or 1.0 importance factor as the design profes-
sional determines appropriate.
Category I buildings or other structures are those which pose a low
hazard to human life in the event of a failure, such as agricultural
facilities, temporary facilities and minor storage facilities.
Category II buildings and other structures are those that are not
listed in Category I, III or IV.
Category III and IV buildings and other structures are those which
pose a substantial hazardor designed as essential facilities, re-
spectively. Examples of Category III and IV buildings are:
Where more than 300 people can congregate in one area
Non-adult educational structures with an occupant load
greater than 250
Adult educational structure with an occupant load greater
than 500
Jails and detention centers
Hospitals and health care facilities
Fire, rescue or police stations and emergency vehicle ga-
rages
Facilities used for emergency management/response.
Aviation towers, air traffic control centers
Water treatment, waste water facilities, water facilities re-
quired to maintain water pressure for fire suppression.
Buildings having critical national defense functions
Any other occupancy with an occupant load greater than
5000
The Design Procedure
The design procedure is to determine the Basic Wind Speed, Im-
portance Factor, Exposure Category and Height and Exposure Ad-
justment Coefficient specific to the site location. These parameters
are inputs used to determine the Design Wind Pressure.
The Basic Wind Speed is determined using IBC 2003 Section 1609.3
as described above.
The Importance Factor is determined using IBC 2003 Section 1609.5
as described above.
The Exposure Category is determined using IBC 2003 Section 1609.4
as described above.
The Height and Exposure Adjustment Coefficient, l is determined
using IBC 2003 Table 1609.6.2.1(4) as described in the next section.
The Design Wind Pressure
The design wind pressure is calculated based upon a nominal wind
pressure, p
net 30
. The nominal wind pressure is presented in Table
1609.6.2.1(2) for a building or structure that has Exposure B, mean
roof height of 30 feet and an importance factor of 1.0. With informa-
tion about the actual structure being designed, adjustments are
made to the nominal wind pressure to account for off-nominal con-
ditions; ie, Exposure C or D, shorter or taller buildings or structures
(up to 60 feet) and 0.87 (0.77 in hurricane prone areas) or 1.15 Impor-
tance Factor.
Per Section 1609.6.2.2, the net design wind pressure is the sum of
the pressures applied normal to the cooling tower surface as shown
in Figure 1609.2.2. An additional sketch of a cooling tower with the
pressures acting toward and away from the cooling tower normal to
the surface is provided in Figure 2 in this paper.
The net design wind pressure, p
net
is determined using IBC 2003
Equation 16-35:
p
net
= * I
w
* (p
net 30,pt
+ p
net 30,pa
)
where:
= Adjustment factor for building height and exposure. Table
1609.6.2.1(4).
I
w
= Importance factor. Section 1609.5.
p
net 30,pt
= Net design wind pressure towards the cooling tower for
Exposure B, at h=30 feet and for I
w
= 1.0, from Tables
1609.6.2.1 (the positive value in the table)
p
net 30,pa
= Net design wind pressure away the cooling tower for
Exposure B, at h=30 feet and for I
w
= 1.0, from Tables
1609.6.2.1 (the negative value in the table)
Table 1609.6.2.1 requires one additional piece of information to prop-
erly look up the design wind pressure, the Zone number. Figure 2 of
this paper indicates the applicable zones for cooling towers based
upon IBC 2003 Figure 1609.6.2.2. The side of the cooling tower
reacts to wind loading as a flat wall of the Flat Roof building sketched
in IBC 2003 Figure 1609.6.2.2. For all cases, the cooling tower should
be designed in Zone 5.
III. Administration
Suggested values to provide in the mechanical specifications:
Mean Roof Height or Height Above Grade
Basic Wind Speed: Site Location for use in IBC 2003 Figure 1609 of
the value.
Importance Factor: Building Category or Nature of the Occupancy
for use in IBC 2003 Table 1604.5 or the value.
Exposure Category
Height and Exposure Adjustment Coefficient: Mean Roof Height
and Exposure or the value.
Examples:
I. Determine the design wind pressure for a cooling tower installed
on top of a 3 story commercial office building located in New York
City, New York.
The Mean Roof Height is about 40 feet for a 3 story building.
The Basic Wind Speed for NYC is 110mph. Figure 1609
The Importance Factor is 1.0. Table 1604.5
The Exposure Category is B Section 1609.4
The Height and Exposure Adjustment Coefficient is 1.09.
Table 1609.6.2.1(4)
The Net Design Wind Pressure towards the 100 ft
2
tower is 18.5.
Table 1609.6.2.1(2)
The Net Design Wind Pressure away from the 100 ft
2
tower is 22.6.
Table 1609.6.2.1(2)
The Design Wind Pressure is therefore: (1.0) * (1.09) * (18.5 + 22.6)
= 44.8 psf.
II. Determine the design wind pressure for a data center installed at
grade in Atlanta, Georgia.
The Mean Roof Height is at grade.
The Basic Wind Speed for Atlanta is 90mph. Figure 1609
The Exposure Category is B Section 1609.4
Table 1609.6.2.1(4)
2
tower is 12.4.
Table 1609.6.2.1(2)
2
tower is 15.1.
Table 1609.6.2.1(2)
= 31.6 psf.
Section II: ASCE 7: Section 6 WIND LOADS
I. Applicability
Section 6 of ASCE 7 is applied when the building or component
does not meet the criteria discussed in the IBC 2003 Applicability
section above. There are three Methods outlined in Section 6 of
ASCE 7:
Method 1 Simplified Procedure for buildings meeting the
requirements specified in Section 6.4. The requirements for
Method 1 are similar to IBC 2003; therefore, IBC 2003 shall
apply.
Method 2 Analytical Procedure as for buildings meeting the
requirements specified in Section 6.5. This is the applicable
section for cooling towers.
Method 3 Wind Tunnel Procedure as specified in Section 6.6.
If the building is subject to unusual wind loads or is of unusual
shape, then wind tunnel testing may be required. All cooling
towers are regular shaped, so Method 3 is not applicable.
Section 6 ASCE 7, Method 2 applies when:
1. IBC 2003 does not.
2. The building has a mean roof height of 60 ft or more
a. Across wind loading
b. Vortex shedding
c. Instability due to galloping or flutter
cial consideration.
II. Application
Reading Section 6.5 Method 2 ASCE 7 and progressing through
the code, there are defining parameters to be determined useful in
the interpretation and application of the code to cooling towers.
Basic Wind Speed is determined by Figure 6-1. Wind speed con-
tour maps are provided. (IBC 2003 uses the same maps). One lo-
cates the jobsite on the maps and may interpolate linearly between
contour lines to determine the design basic wind speed for the
jobsite. Exceptions to using Figure 6-1 are for special wind regions
indicated as shaded areas in Figure 6-1 or other estimations of wind
speeds are available using approved statistical procedures and
good records of the wind data are available. The registered design
professional should investigate if local high wind speeds apply.
Importance Factor is determined using Section 6 ASCE 7, Table 6-
1 using building and structure categories listed in Table 1-1. (IBC
2003 uses the same wind load importance factors as Section 6 ASCE
7). There are three importance factor values; 0.87 (or 0.77 in hurri-
cane prone areas), 1.00 and 1.15. The building category or nature of
the occupancy determines the appropriate importance factor.
All cooling towers installed in comfort cooling applications should
be assigned an importance factor of 1.00, unless they meet more
stringent requirements of Category III or IV buildings, where the
importance factor should be 1.15. Cooling towers installed on grade
or on structural supports not integral with the main windforce-
resisting system or on a Category II building may use 0.87 (or 0.77
in hurricane prone areas) or 1.0 importance factor as the design
professional determines appropriate.
facilities, temporary facilities and minor storage facilities.
greater than 250
than 500
rages
5000
Exposure reflects the characteristics of the ground surface irregu-
larities. Variations in ground surface roughness due to natural to-
pography, vegetation and constructed features all contribute to
the exposure category. The openness or amount of exposure the
component has to the brunt of the wind forces is accounted for in
the exposure category.
A ground surface roughness is employed for the purpose of as-
signing an exposure category.
Surface Roughness B is defined as urban and suburban ar-
eas, wooded areas or other terrain with numerous closely
spaced obstructions having the size of single family dwell-
ings or larger.
Surface Roughness C is defined as open terrain with scat-
tered obstructions having heights generally less than 30ft,
including flat open country, grasslands and all water sur-
faces in hurricane-prone regions.
Surface Roughness D is characterized by unobstructed ar-
eas and water surfaces outside hurricane-prone areas.
Exposure Categories
Exposure B applies when the ground surface roughness B condi-
tion prevails in the upwind direction for the greater of a distance of
at least 2630 feet or 10x the height of the building. If the building
mean roof height is less than or equal to 30 feet, then the upwind
distance consideration of the ground surface condition is reduced
to 1500 ft.
Exposure C is the catch all category in Section 6 ASCE 7. If the
building does not fall into Exposure B or D, then it shall have Expo-
sure C.
Exposure D applies when the ground surface roughness D prevails
in the upwind direction for the greater of a distance of at least 5000
ft. or 10x the building height. Exposure D extends inland from shore-
lines (not in hurricane-prone areas) for the greater of 660 ft. from
the shoreline or 10x the building height.
Topographical Effects take into account increases in wind speeds
if the structure is located on top of a hill, ridge or escarpment. The
physical attributes of hill, ridge or escarpment are used to deter-
mine the topographical factor. Typically, this factor is equal to 1.0,
however the registered design professional should investigate if
there are topographical issues which need to be considered.
Enclosure Classifications are used in determining the internal pres-
sure coefficients. All buildings or structures shall be defined as
enclosed, partially enclosed or open. An Open building is one hav-
ing each wall at least 80% open. Partially Enclosed is where the
total area of openings in the windward wall exceeds the sum of the
open areas in the other walls and roof by 10% and the total area of
the windward wall openings exceeds 4 square feet or 1% of that
wall area with the percentage of the openings in the balance of the
building envelope not exceeding 20%. In a partially enclosed build-
ing, wind pressure can enter the building through an opening larger
than openings in the remaining walls, thus producing a positive
pressure inside the building. Buildings not meeting Open or Par-
tially Enclosed criteria are defined as Enclosed.
Velocity Pressure, q
z
, evaluated at height z is calculated using
Section 6 ASCE 7 Equation 6-15
q
z
= 0.00256 * K
z
* K
zt
* K
d
* V
2
* I
where:
K
z
= is the Velocity Pressure Coefficient, a factor on the nomi-
nal velocity pressure to account for the varying expo-
sures from Section 6 ASCE 7 Table 6-3. The value depends
upon the height above ground and exposure category.
K
zt
= is the Topographical Factor
K
d
= is the Wind Directionality Factor, a factor accounting for
the structure type, such as component, chimney, tank,
sign, or trussed towers. This value is 0.85 for cooling tow-
ers.
V = Basic Wind Speed
I = Importance Factor
Note that q
h
is the velocity pressure using Section 6 ASCE 7 Equa-
tion 6-15 evaluated at height h. For purposes of components in-
stalled on a building roof that is more than 60 feet above grade,
height h and height z can be taken as equal, therefore q
h
= q
z
.
Pressure and Force Coefficients
Internal Pressure Coefficient, GC
pi
is an adjustment of
the pressure internal to the unit and given in Section 6 ASCE 7
Figure 6-5 equals +/- 0.18 for enclosed components such as cooling
towers.
External Pressure Coefficient, GC
p
is an adjustment of
the pressure external to the unit given in Section 6 ASCE 7 Figure 6-
17. The value depends upon the area of the cooling tower normal to
the direction of the wind.
Design Wind Load for Cooling Towers on buildings with mean roof
height greater than 60ft.
p = q * (GC
p
) q
i
* (GC
pi
)
where:
q = q
z
, the external velocity pressure on the windward wall
calculated at height z.
= q
h
, the external velocity pressure on the leeward wall and
roofs at height h.
q
i
= q
h
, the internal velocity pressure on the windward wall,
leeward wall and roofs at height h.
GC
p
= External pressure coefficient
GC
pi
= Internal pressure coefficient
Sign Convention: positive pressures act toward the surface and
negative pressures act away from the surface.
Critical Load Condition: values of external and internal pressures
shall be combined algebraically to determine the most critical load.
Figure 2 of this paper indicates the applicable zones for cooling
towers for Section 6 ASCE 7. The side of the cooling tower reacts to
wind loading as a flat wall. For velocity pressures on the walls, the
cooling tower should be designed in Zone 5.
The most critical design wind load is determined by calculating the
internal and external loads on the windward wall and leeward wall
individually. The greatest wind load shall determine the design
wind load for all walls of the component.
III. Administration
Basic Wind Speed
Velocity Pressure Coefficient
Importance Factor
Exposure: Ground Surface Roughness and Exposure Category
Topographical Factor (if applicable)
Examples:
on top of a 10 story commercial office building located in Miami,
Florida.
The Basic Wind Speed, V, for Miami is 147mph. Figure 6-1b
The Wind Directionality Factor, K
d
, is 0.85 Table 6-4
The Velocity Pressure Coefficient, K
z
, is 1.36 Table 6-3
The Importance Factor, I, is 1.0. Table 6-1
The Roughness Category is C. Section 6.5.6.2
Exposure Category is C. Section 6.5.6.3
There are no Topographical Effects, K
zt
, equals 1.0Section 6.5.7
(there are no topographical irregularities defined)
The Velocity Pressure,
q
z
= 0.00256 * 1.36 * 1.0 * 0.85 * (147^2) * 1.0 = 63.95 psf
The Internal Pressure Coefficient, GC
pi
, is +/-0.18 Figure 6-5
The External Pressure Coefficient, GC
p
, is +0.75. Figure 6-17
(Zone 5, Windward Wall at 100 square feet)
p
, is -1.40. Figure 6-17
(Zone 5, Leeward Wall at 100 square feet)
The Design Wind Pressure is therefore:
Windward with Positive Internal:
p = 63.95 * 0.75 + 63.95 * -0.18 = 36.5 psf
Windward with Negative Internal:
p = 63.95 * 0.75 + 63.95 * +0.18 = 59.5 psf
Leeward with Positive Internal:
p = 63.95 * -1.40 + 63.95 * -0.18 = 101.0 psf
Leeward with Negative Internal:
p = 63.95 * -1.40 + 63.95 * +0.18 = 78.0 psf
The critical design wind load is the largest of the surfaces, 101.0
psf.
II. Determine the design wind pressure for a Hospital installed on a
6 story building in Baltimore, Maryland.
The Basic Wind Speed, V, for Baltimore is 90 mph.
The Wind Directionality Factor, K
d
, is 0.85
The Velocity Pressure Coefficient, K
z
, is 0.93
The Importance Factor, I, is 1.15.
The Roughness Category is B.
Exposure Category is B.
There are no Topographical Effects, K
zt
, equals 1.0
The Velocity Pressure
q
z
, = 0.00256 * 0.93 * 1.0 * 0.85 * (90^2) * 1.0 = 16.39 psf
The Internal Pressure Coefficient, GC
pi
, is +/-0.18. Figure 6-5
p
, is +0.75. Figure 6-17
(Zone 5, Windward at 100 square feet)
p
, is -1.40. Figure 6-17
(Zone 5, Leeward at 100 square feet)
The Design Wind Pressure is therefore:
Windward with Positive Internal:
p = 16.39 * 0.75 + 16.39 * -0.18 = 9.3 psf
Windward with Negative Internal:
p = 16.39 * 0.75 + 16.39 * +0.18 = 15.2 psf
Leeward with Positive Internal:
p = 16.39 * -1.40 + 16.39 * -0.18 = 25.9 psf
Leeward with Negative Internal:
p = 16.39 * -1.40 + 16.39 * +0.18 = 20.0 psf
The critical design wind load is the largest of the surfaces, 25.9 psf.
SECTION III: FLORIDA BUILDING CODE:
Section 1609 Wind Loads
The Florida building code reads verbatim from the IBC 2003, with
few exceptions. Differences are noted in italics.
I. Applicability
Florida Building Code (FBC) states Loads on all buildings shall be
determined in accordance with Section 6 of ASCE 7 unless certain
criteria apply.
FBC applies when:
1. The building is simple diaphragm building with flat,
hipped or gables roofs
a. Diaphragm is defined as a system acting to transmit
lateral forces to the vertical elements. The cooling
tower must be anchored down.
2. The building has a mean roof height of 60 ft or less
3. The building has a mean roof height that does not exceed
the least horizontal dimension
d. Cross winds
e. Vortex shedding
f. Instability due to galloping or flutter
cial consideration.
If the building fails to meet all of these criteria, then the cooling
tower shall be designed to meet the Design Pressure detailed in
Section 6 of ASCE 7 (please refer to Section II of this paper).
If the building meets all these criteria, then the cooling tower shall
be designed to meet the Design Pressure detailed in Section
1609.6.2.2.
II. Application
Basic wind speed is determined by Figure 1609 in FBC. Figure 1609
is a map of Florida with contour lines of constant wind speed. One
locates the jobsite on the maps and may interpolate linearly be-
tween contour lines to determine the design basic wind speed for
the jobsite. Local jurisdictions may establish specific wind speeds
other than that defined in Figure 1609, particularly if the jobsite is
located in a special wind region, near mountainous terrain, near
gorges or ocean promontories. Localize high wind velocities may
occur in such regions. Broward County shall have a basic wind
speed of 140 mph and Miami-Dade shall have a basic wind speed
of 146 mph.
Exposure Category reflects the characteristics of the ground sur-
face irregularities. Variations in ground surface roughness due to
natural topography, vegetation and constructed features all con-
tribute to the exposure category. The openness or amount of expo-
sure the component has to the brunt of the wind forces is ac-
counted for in the exposure category.
Exposure A is characterized by large city centers with at least 50
percent of the buildings having height in excess of 70 feet. Expo-
sure A is limited to areas for which this terrain prevails in an
upwind direction the greater of at least mile or 10 times the
building height.
Exposure B is the basic, catch all category. If the building does not
fall into Exposure C or D, then it shall have Exposure B. Exposure B
is characterized by urban and suburban areas with densely packed
obstructions having the size of single family dwellings or larger.
Exposure C is that area which lies within 1500 feet of a coastal
construction control line or 1500 feet of a high tide line, except
high velocity hurricane zones. Broward and Miami-Dade coun-
ties are high-velocity hurricane zones and shall be taken as Ex-
posure C.
Exposure D is characterized by flat, unobstructed areas exposed to
wind flowing over open water (excluding hurricane prone areas) for
a distance of 1 mile (1.61 km). Shorelines include inland water ways,
the great lakes, the coastline of California, Oregon, Washington
and Alaska. Exposure D extends inland only 1500 feet (460m) or 10
times the building height, whichever is greater.
Importance Factor
The cooling tower is assigned a wind load importance factor, I
w
.
Table 1604.5 provides guidance in selecting the importance factor
based upon the type of building and the occupancy. There are
three importance factor values; 0.87 (or 0.77 in hurricane prone
areas), 1.00 and 1.15. The building category or nature of the occu-
pancy determines the appropriate importance factor.
All cooling towers installed in comfort cooling applications should
be assigned an importance factor of 1.00, unless they meet more
stringent requirements of Category III or IV buildings, where the
importance factor should be 1.15. Cooling towers installed on grade
or on structural supports not integral with the main windforce-
resisting system or on a Category II building may use 0.87 (or 0.77
in hurricane prone areas) or 1.0 importance factor as the design
professional determines appropriate.
facilities, temporary facilities, minor storage facilities, and screen
enclosures.
greater than 250
than 500
Figure 1. Map of States which have adopted IBC 2003.
Source: www.iccsafe.org
rages
5000
The Design Procedure
The design procedure is to determine the Basic Wind Speed, Im-
portance Factor, Exposure Category and Height and Exposure Ad-
justment Coefficient specific to the site location. These parameters
are inputs used to determine the Design Wind Pressure.
The Basic Wind Speed is determined using FBC Section 1609.3 as
described above.
The Exposure Category is determined using FBC Section 1609.4 as
described above.
The Importance Factor, I
w
is determined using FBC Section 1609.5
as described above.
The Height and Exposure Adjustment Coefficient, l is determined
using FBC Table 1609.6D.
The Wind Pressure is determined by taking the loads from Table
1609.6B, multiplied by the appropriate height and exposure factor
coefficient, l and the importance factor, I
w
.
III. Administration
Basic Wind Speed: Site Location for use in IBC 2003 Figure 1609 of
the value.
Importance Factor: Building Category or Nature of the Occupancy
for use in IBC 2003 Table 1604.5 or the value.
Exposure Category
Height and Exposure Adjustment Coefficient: Mean Roof Height
and Exposure or the value.
Examples:
on top of a 3 story commercial office building located in Miami.
The Basic Wind Speed for Miami is 147mph. Figure 1609
The Exposure Category is C Section 1609.4
Table 1609.6D
2
tower is 40.5.
Table 1609.6B
2
tower is 33.1.
Table 1609.6B
= 109.7 psf.
II. Determine the design wind pressure for a shopping mall installed
at grade in downtown Orlando.
The Mean Roof Height is at grade.
The Basic Wind Speed for Orlando is 105 mph.
The Importance Factor is 1.0.
The Exposure Category is B.
2
tower is 17.8.
2
tower is 22.5.
The Design Wind Pressure is therefore: (1.0) * (1.0) * (17.8 + 22.5) =
40.3 psf.
Figure 2. Sketch of the net design pressures on a
cooling tower (related to Figure 1609.6.2.2 in IBC 2003,
Figure 6-17 Section 6 ASCE 7 and Figure 1609.6C in the
Florida Building Code)
Abstract
Every cooling system operates under stress. As
stress varies, the potential for scale, corrosion and
fouling changes. The ability to monitor the changing
potential for these operational problems, detect up-
sets and take appropriate, corrective action becomes
increasingly important as systems are pushed harder
to reduce total cost of operation. Over the past two
years, new methods of managing open industrial cool-
Dynamic Control of Dynamic Systems
Advances in Cooling System Treatment
By
Daniel M. Cicero
Nalco Company
tion of biocides, allowing bio-populations to
grow.
Effective response to system stress requires constant
monitoring of system parameters that reveal chang-
ing conditions. When upsets are detected, an appro-
priate, timely response is required to prevent a prob-
lem. Finally, information about the upset and the cor-
rective action taken must be delivered to system us-
ers to allow them to take further corrective action,
identify the root cause of the problem or make opera-
tional changes to prevent its recurrence.
ing water systems based on the actual stresses placed upon them
have been developed and evaluated in the field. This paper dis-
cusses three applications in which variation in system stress pre-
sented the potential for scale, corrosion and microbial fouling.
Operational data will be presented to explain how these stresses
were managed using a comprehensive treatment, monitoring and
control strategy.
Introduction
Every cooling system operates under stress. As stress varies, the
potential for scale, corrosion and fouling changes. The ability to
monitor the changing potential for these operational problems, de-
tect upsets and take appropriate, corrective action becomes in-
creasingly important as systems are pushed harder to reduce total
cost of operation.
System Stress: A Definition
For purposes of this paper, system stress is defined as any me-
chanical, operational or chemical aspect of system operation that
could result in an operational problem: mineral scale, corrosion or
microbial fouling.
Some examples:
The phosphate concentration in the make-up to a cooling
tower varies. When concentrations exceed solubility limits,
calcium phosphate scaling occurs and heat exchanger effi-
ciency decreases.
The pH in a cooling system varies in response to changes
beyond the control of the system operators. When the pH
drops, corrosion occurs and equipment life is reduced.
A cooling system is susceptible to microbial contamination
from operational factors beyond the control of operators.
Without timely addition of a biocide, microbial fouling oc-
curs and system performance degrades rapidly.
Constraints on operational costs have reduced the number
of operators available for routine testing. The time between
detection of a problem and proper corrective action is long
enough to allow scale, corrosion or fouling to occur.
Operational realities such as the need to take equipment
offline for periods of time eliminate the effective applica-
Case Study #1: Scale Control
A Gulf Coast chemical plant documented a $250,000 loss of revenue
tied to calcium phosphate fouling in one critical heat exchanger.
1
System stress had several sources:
Mechanical Stress
Several critical processes in the plant depended on plate-and-frame
heat exchangers exposed to high temperatures in excess of 170F
(77C) and flow rates below 2 fps. These mechanical factors
contributed to Ca
3
(PO
4
)
2
fouling.
Operational Stress
System control provided another stress on the system. Because
the total inorganic phosphate (TIP) concentrations in the recircu-
lating water varied dramatically, better system control was needed
to prevent Ca
3
(PO
4
)
2
fouling. High temperatures caused
polyphosphate reversion, which meant recirculating water phos-
phate concentrations varied independently of cycles of concentra-
tion and pH. Without control over the amount of reversion, fouling
control was difficult.
Chemical Stress
River water containing about 100 ppm of calcium hardness and 0.8
1.2 ppm of PO
4
was used as make-up water. Cycles of concentra-
tion were maintained at about 6.0. A neutral phosphate chemical
treatment program was in place, maintaining 18 20 ppm of total
inorganic phosphate (TIP) in the recirculating water.
Control Based on System Stress
High temperatures, low flows and poor TIP control were identified
as the root causes of the fouling at this facility. Although recom-
mendations were made regarding the high temperatures and low
flows, the cost to make the necessary mechanical changes was too
high. Achieving better TIP control through use of an effective
dispersant polymer was seen as the most viable solution to the
problem.
An inert tracer material contained in the treatment chemical served
as a reference point in the recirculating water. Because its concen-
tration can be measured with great accuracy and precision using an
online fluorometer, changing concentrations of other cooling water
Daniel M. Cicero
constituents can be referenced to it. Research showing the direct
correlation between polymeric dispersant consumption and the
onset of scaling is well established.
2
By comparing the concentra-
tion of the inert fluorescent material and a chemical tag on the
dispersant polymer which establishes the amount of active
polymer available the amount of polymer consumption can be
continuously measured. Monitoring the rate of change between
the two fluorescent species permits response to upsets and adjust-
ments to operational and chemical control before the scaling condi-
tions result in an operational problem.
Results
By reducing TIP concentrations, fouling reduction was achieved.
As shown in Figure 1, TIP was reduced through improved control
using the tagged dispersant polymer. The results are shown in
Figure 2. Heat exchanger efficiencies improved following adoption
of tagged polymer control.
Figure 1: The improvement in TIP control gained through
tagged polymer control is apparent. Online control based
strictly on the inert tracer material was an improvement over
conventional control using wet chemistry and manual
adjustment. Advancing to tagged polymer control, where
chemical adjustments are made based on the scale-forming
stress on the system, reduced TIP contribution even further.
Figure 2: Improved control of TIP concentrations resulted in
improved heat exchanger efficiencies at this facility. % U Factor
a measure of heat transfer efficiency improved after
adoption of tagged polymer control.
Case Study #2: Corrosion Control
In the western United States, where water supplies are limited, many
industrial cooling systems utilize tertiary treated wastewater
commonly referred to as Title 22 water as their make-up source.
Although prudent from an environmental and economic standpoint,
Title 22 water presents a technical challenge. This water source is
highly variable. Concentrations of chlorides and sulfate often make
it corrosive. At other times, elevated inorganic phosphate concen-
trations make it scale-forming. If the water were uniformly corro-
sive or scale-forming, treatment and control would be fairly straight-
forward. It is the variability, and its unpredictability, that make this
water a treatment challenge.
One West Coast refinery using Title 22 water needed to reduce
localized corrosion rates and prevent scale formation in critical heat
exchangers.
3
Mechanical Stress
Mechanical stresses were moderate. Adequate flow was main-
tained through all exchangers and maximum skin temperatures were
only 130F (54C).
Operational Stress
Automation and good preventive maintenance minimized any op-
erational stress.
Chemical Stress
The predominant stress at this facility was chemical. Elevated chlo-
rides, sulfates and conductivity made the water very corrosive most
of the time, but inorganic phosphate concentrations were highly
variable, rendering the water scale-forming at other times.
Pyrophosphate is commonly used as a corrosion inhibitor in these
types of applications. The pyrophosphate forms a calcium-pyro-
phosphate film at the cathode. The weakness of pyrophosphate is
its reversion to orthophosphate with time, pH, temperature and
microbiological population. The new treatment approach chosen
for this system, phosphino succinic oligomer (PSO), does not re-
vert under these high-stress conditions. Additionally, it is an ef-
fective scale-inhibitor, capable of protecting the system when the
potential for calcium phosphate scaling presented itself.
4
Results
As shown in Figure 3, localized corrosion rates improved by 61%
after the change from the traditional, pyrophosphate-based treat-
ment program to a PSO-based program. Figure 4 shows corrosion
coupons removed from the system before and after adopting the
PSO-based treatment program.
Figure 3: PSO-based treatment delivered better localized
corrosion protection than pyrophosphate in this application.
Figure 4: The corrosion coupon on the left shows the pitting
corrosion seen in the system before the use of a PSO-based
treatment program. The coupon on the right shows the results
after changing treatment programs.
Case Study #3: Microbial Control
The mechanical, operational and chemical stresses on a cooling
system are often beyond the control of the system users. That was
the case at one midwestern office complex. During the summer
months, the cooling system was largely idle over the weekends.
Because biocides could not circulate through the offline equip-
ment during the weekends, microbial populations increased. Use
of ORP control to apply oxidizing biocides could not detect these
upsets or respond in a timely manner.
Mechanical Stress
Mechanical stress on the system was low. The system was well-
designed and sized properly for the application.
Operational Stress
During the summer months, the cooling system was not needed
over the weekends. Operators shut down some of the chillers
during those times, bringing them back online when the heat load
on the building warranted it. Because no water flowed through the
chillers during this time, biocides could not act on the bio-popula-
tion in the offline equipment.
5
Chemical stress
Using ORP control to dose oxidizing biocides was effective, but
not optimal. Biocide usage was higher than necessary to achieve
good microbial results.
Detecting upsets in bio-population and applying exactly the right
concentration of biocide at the right time would reduce the amount
of oxidant fed to the system, delivering better bio-control with less
oxidant.
A fluorescent material, a bio-reporter, was introduced into the recir-
culating water. This material fluoresced at a wavelength detectable
by an online fluorometer. The bio-reporter reacted with an enzyme
dehydrogenase produced by respiring organisms. The re-
acted form of the bio-reporter was also detectable by the online
fluorometer. By monitoring the concentrations of both the reacted
and un-reacted forms of the bio-reporter, and the rates at which
they changed, an accurate, continuous picture of the bio-activity
in the system emerged.
6
Results
As can be seen in Figure 5, bio-populations were high every Mon-
day morning, the result of bringing chillers offline over the week-
end and then bringing them back online during the work week.
Figure 6 shows the dynamic bio-conditions found in the system on
a Monday and how the bio-control program reacted. As the bio-
population increased, the oxidant pump ran for longer periods of
time, injecting more biocide into the system. When the inflexion
point was reached, the biocide pump ran less frequently and for
shorter periods of time. Biocide use was minimized and bio-popu-
lations were quickly brought under control. Because the bio-re-
porter reacted with all dehydrogenase in the system, changes re-
flected total system bio-activity, not just that associated with plank-
tonic bacteria. Overall bio-control, both planktonic and sessile,
improved as a result.
Figure 5: The stress on this system was Monday morning, an
example of the kind of operational stress beyond the control of
system users.
Figure 6: When a change in bio-activity is detected, the oxidant
pump runs more frequently and for longer periods of time. When
bio-activity is brought under control, less biocide is applied.
Conclusions
System control based on the stresses actually applied to a cooling
system is not a new idea. The differences between the approach
highlighted here and previous approaches address these new needs
expressed by cooling system users:
The requirement to use more highly variable make-up water
sources, but prevent operational problems.
The requirement to improve control of scale, corrosion and
microbial fouling, but to do it economically and automati-
cally.
The requirement to collect data in a useful format that allows
diagnosis and troubleshooting, in addition to highlighting
areas for improvement.
The requirement to measure all key parameters related to
system stress, detect upsets and take an appropriate, auto-
matic corrective action. The goal: prevention of operational
problems and minimization of total cost of operation.
Most of the stresses under which a cooling system operates are
beyond the control of the system users: variability in water chem-
istry, production rates, operational schedules, etc. The key to good
performance is the ability to actively respond to changes in system
stress, automatically, taking corrective action before an operational
problem occurs.
(Endnotes)
1
Gulf Coast chemical plant increases production with 3D
TRASAR program, CH-572, Nalco Company, 2004
2
Moriarty, B.E., Rasimas, J.P, Young, P.R., Hoots, J.E., Methods
to Monitor and Control Scale in Cooling Water Systems, Cor-
rosion/2001, Houston, Texas, March 1116, 2001.
3
3D TRASAR improves localized corrosion and scale protec-
tion at West Coast refinery using Title 22 reclaim water, Nalco
Company, 2004, CH-580.
4
Meier, D.A., Moriarty, B.E., Rasimas, J.P., Stonecipher, D.L.,
Advanced Cooling Water Performance with New Dual Func-
tioning Inhibitor, International Water Conference, 2002, Nalco
Company, R-813
5
Intermittent Operation: A source of cooling system stress,
Nalco Company, 2005, CH-565
6
Chattoraj, et. al., On-Line Measurement and Control of Micro-
biological Activity in Industrial Water Systems, CORROSION/
2001, Houston, TX, 11-16 March, 2001, Nalco Company, R-804.
Table Top Exhibits
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Westin Galleria, Houston, Texas
Don't forget to
reserve your
space.
48 exhibit spaces
available at
$1200/space.
for more information
contact
Virginia Manser at
281.583.4087 or
vmanser@cti.org
Cooling Technology Institute
Licensed Testing Agencies
For nearly thirty years, the Cooling Technology Institute has
provided a truly independent, third party, thermal performance
testing service to the cooling tower industry. In 1995, the CTI
also began providing an independent, third party, drift
performance testing service as
well. Both these services are
administered through the CTI
Multi-Agency Tower Perfor-
mance Test Program and provide
comparisons of the actual operat-
ing performance of a specific
tower installation to the design
performance. By providing such
information on a specific tower
installation, the CTI Multi-
Agency Testing Program stands
in contrast to the CTI Cooling
Tower Certification Program
which certifies all models of a
specific manufacturer's line of cooling towers perform in
accordance with their published thermal ratings.
To be licensed as a CTI Cooling Tower Performance Test
Licensed CTI Thermal Testing Agencies
License Agency Name Contact Person Telephone
Type* Address Website / Email Fax
A,B Clean Air Engineering Kenneth Hennon 800.208.6162
7936 Conner Rd www.cleanair.com 865.938.7569
Powell, TN 37849 khennon@cleanair.com
A, B Cooling Tower Technologies Pty Ltd Ronald Rayner 61 2 9789 5900
PO Box N157 coolingtwrtech@bigpond.com 61 2 9789 5922
Bexley North, NSW 2207
AUSTRALIA
A,B Cooling Tower Test Associates, Inc. Thomas E. Weast 913.681.0027
15325 Melrose Dr. www.cttai.com 913.681.0039
Stanley, KS 66221-9720 cttakc@aol.com
A, B McHale & Associates, Inc Thomas Wheelock 865.588.2654
6430 Baum Drive www.mchale.org 425.557.8377
Knoxville, TN 37919 tom.wheelock@mchale.org
* Type A license is for the use of mercury in glass thermometers typically used for smaller towers.
Type B license is for the use of remote data acquisition devices which can accommodate multiple measurement locations required by larger towers.
Licensed CTI Drift Testing Agencies
Agency Name Contact Person Telephone
Address Website / Email Fax
Clean Air Engineering Kenneth Hennon 800.208.6162
7936 Conner Rd www.cleanair.com 865.938.7569
Powell, TN 37849 khennon@cleanair.com
McHale & Associates, Inc. Thomas Wheelock 865.588.2654
6430 Baum Drive www.mchale.org 425.557.8377
Knoxville, TN 37919 tom.wheelock@mchale.org
Agency, the agency must pass a rigorous screening process and
demonstrate a high level of technical expertise. Additionally, it
must have a sufficient number of test instruments, all meeting
rigid requirements for accuracy and calibration.
Once licensed, the Test Agencies
for both thermal and drift testing
must operate in full compliance
with the provisions of the CTI
License Agreements and Testing
Manuals which were developed
by a panel of testing experts
specifically for this program. In-
cluded in these requirements are
strict guidelines regarding conflict
of interest to insure CTI Tests are
conducted in a fair, unbiased
manner.
Cooling tower owners and manu-
facturers are strongly encouraged
to utilize the services of the licensed CTI Cooling Tower
Performance Test Agencies. The currently licensed agencies are
listed below.
As stated in its opening
paragraph, CTI Standard
201... "sets forth a program
whereby the Cooling Tech-
nology Institute will cer-
tify that all models of a line
of water cooling towers of-
fered for sale by a specific
Manufacturer will perform
Cooling Towers Certified by CTI Under STD-201
thermally in accordance with the Manufacturer's published rat-
ings..." By the purchase of a "certified" model, the User has assur-
ance that the tower will perform as specified, provided that its
circulating water is no more than acceptably contaminated-and
that its air supply is ample and unobstructed. Either that model, or
one of its close design family members, will have been thoroughly
tested by the single CTI-licensed testing agency for Certification
and found to perform as claimed by the Manufacturer.
CTI Certification under STD-201 is limited to thermal operating
conditions with entering wet bulb temperatures between 12.8C
and 32.2C (55F to 90F), a maximum process fluid temperature of
51.7C (125F), a cooling range of 2.2C (4F) or greater, and a
cooling approach of 2.8C (5F) or greater. The manufacturer may
set more restrictive limits if desired or publish less restrictive limits
if the CTI limits are clearly defined and noted in the publication.
Following is a list of cooling tower models currently certified under
STD-201. They are part of product lines offered by Amcot Cooling
Tower Corporation; AONE E&C Corporation Ltd; Baltimore Aircoil
Company, Inc.; Delta Cooling Towers, Inc.; Evapco, Inc.; Fabrica
Mexicana De Torres, S.A.; HVAC/R International, Inc.; Imeco, div
of York International; Ltd; KIMCO (Kyung In Machinery Com-
pany), Ltd.; Liang Chi Industry Company, Ltd.; Mesan Cooling
Tower, Ltd; Polacel b.v.; Protec Cooling Towers; Ryowo (Holding)
Company, Ltd; SPX Cooling Technologies; The Cooling Tower
Company, L.C; The Trane Company; Tower Tech, Inc; and Zhejiang
Jinling Refrigeration Engineering Company who are committed to
the manufacture and installation of full-performance towers. In
competition with each other, these manufacturers benefit from know-
ing that they each achieve their published performance capability.
They are; therefore, free to distinguish themselves through design
excellence and concern for the User's operational safety and con-
venience.
Those Manufacturers who have not yet chosen to certify their
product lines are invited to do so at the earliest opportunity. You
can contact Virginia A. Manser, Cooling Technology Institute, PO
Box 73383, Houston, TX 77273 for further information.
Amcot Cooling Tower Corporation
LC Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
CTI Certification Validation Number 96-20-01
November 20, 2006 (Revision 1)
LC-125 LC-150 LC-175 LC-200 LC-225 LC-250
Multiple cell models of the single cell models above are also available but
not listed.
AONE E&C Corporation, Ltd.
ACT-R and -RU Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
September 29, 2006 (Revision 1)
Standard Fan Low Noise Fan
ACT-80R ACT-70RU
ACT-100R ACT-80RU
ACT-125R ACT-100RU
ACT-150R ACT-125RU
ACT-175R ACT-150RU
ACT-200R ACT-175RU
ACT-225R ACT-200RU
ACT-250R ACT-225RU
ACT-300R ACT-250RU
Footnotes:
1. Certification includes tower construction materials indicated by the
suffixes -B, -E, and S which are added to basic model numbers above.
-B is for FRP casing, FRP basin and HDG mainframe and
hardware.
-E is for FRP casing, FRP basin and stainless steel main
frame and hardware
-S is for stainless steel casing, basin, mainframe and hard
ware.
2. Certification includes use of side, end, or bottom water inlet configu-
ration.
3. Certification includes units with optional gear drive in place of stan-
dard belt drive.
4. Certification includes use of optional handrail and/or ladder cage.
5. Multiple cell models of the single cell models above are also available
but not listed.
Baltimore Aircoil Company, Inc.
FXT Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
FXT-6 FXT-16 FXT-38 FXT-74-FM FXT-160-HM
FXT-7.5 FXT-16-CM FXT-42 FXT-74 FXT-160
FXT-7.5-CM FXT-20 FXT-47 FXT-87 FXT-175
FXT-20-EM FXT-47-HM FXT-95 FXT-192
FXT-11 FXT-26-CM FXT-58-EM FXT-115-GM FXT-216-JM
FXT-11-CM FXT-26 FXT-58-FM FXT-115 FXT-216
FXT-11-DM FXT-30 FXT-58 FXT-130 FXT-240
FXT-33 FXT-68 FXT-136 FXT-257
FXT Optional Accessories and Constructions B Certification Status
Construction Options Suffi x CTI Capacity Adjustment
(Note 1) Certified Required
Multiple Cells None Yes No, Note 2
Non-Standard Motor Size M Note 3 Yes, Note 3
Not CTI Certified X No Note 4
Notes:
1. Typically no suffix is used for an accessory or modification that does not affect
capacity.
2. Multiple cell models of the single cell models above are also available but not
individually listed (e.g. two cells of an FXT-115 is marketed as an FXT-230).
3. Units with non-standard motor sizes are certified only if they are listed in the
Data of Record and sold at the revised capacity listed in the rating table.
4. This suffix is affixed to model numbers of units that are not CTI Certified, due
either to application or product accessories or modifications to the tower (e.g.
FXT-11X).
FXV Closed Circuit Cooling Tower Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
May 5, 2006 (Revision 4)
Models with One Air Inlet Side and One Coil
FXV-L421-GM FXV-L431-HM FXV-L441-JM FXV-LQ640-KM FXV-LQ660-KM
FXV-L421 FXV-L431 FXV-L441 FXV-LQ640 FXV-LQ660
FXV-421 FXV-431 FXV-441 FXV-Q640-MM FXV-Q660-MM
FXV-421-KM FXV-431-LM FXV-441-MM FXV-Q640 FXV-Q660
FXV-Q640-OM FXV-Q660-OM
FXV-L422-GM FXV-L432-HM FXV-L442-JM FXV-L641-KM
FXV-L661-KM
FXV-L422 FXV-L432 FXV-L442 FXV-L641 FXV-L661
FXV-422 FXV-432 FXV-442 FXV-641-MM FXV-661-MM
FXV-422-KM FXV-432-LM FXV-442-MM FXV-641 FXV-661
FXV-641-OM FXV-661-OM
FXV-L423-GM FXV-L433-HM FXV-L443-JM FXV-LQ641-KM FXV-LQ661-KM
FXV-L423 FXV-L433 FXV-L443 FXV-LQ641-LM FXV-LQ661-LM
FXV-423 FXV-433 FXV-443 FXV-LQ641 FXV-LQ661
FXV-423-KM FXV-433-LM FXV-443-MM FXV-Q641-NM FXV-Q661-NM
FXV-Q641 FXV-Q661
FXV-L424-GM FXV-L434-HM FXV-L444-JM FXV-L642-KM FXV-L662-KM
FXV-L424-HM FXV-L434-JM FXV-L444-KM FXV-L642 FXV-L662
FXV-L424 FXV-L434 FXV-L444 FXV-642-MM FXV-662-MM
FXV-424 FXV-434 FXV-444 FXV-642 FXV-662
FXV-LQ440-JM FXV-LT642-KM FXV-LT662-KM
FXV-LQ440 FXV-LT642 FXV-LT662
FXV-Q440 FXV-T642-MM FXV-T662-MM
FXV-Q440-MM FXV-T642 FXV-T662
FXV-T642-OM FXV-T662-OM
FXV-LQ441-JM FXV-L643-KM FXV-L663-KM
FXV-LQ441-KM FXV-L643 FXV-L663
FXV-LQ441 FXV-643-MM FXV-663-MM
FXV-Q441 FXV-643 FXV-663
FXV-L644-KM FXV-L664-KM
FXV-L644-LM FXV-L664-LM
FXV-L644 FXV-L664
FXV-644-NM FXV-664-NM
FXV-644 FXV-664
FXV Closed Circuit Cooling Tower Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
Models with Two Air Inlet Sides and Two Coils
FXV-288-31M FXV-288-2TM FXV-364-31N FXV-364-2TN
FXV-288-31N FXV-288-2TN FXV-364-31O FXV-364-2TO
FXV-288-31O FXV-288-2TO FXV-364-31P FXV-364-2TP
FXV-288-31P FXV-288-2TP FXV-364-31Q FXV-364-2TQ
FXV-288-31Q FXV-288-2TQ FXV-364-31R FXV-364-2TR
FXV-288-31R FXV-288-2TR FXV-364-31S FXV-364-2TS
FXV-288-41M FXV-288-1QM FXV-364-41N FXV-364-1QN
FXV-288-41N FXV-288-1QN FXV-364-41O FXV-364-1QO
FXV-288-41O FXV-288-1QO FXV-364-41P FXV-364-1QP
FXV-288-41P FXV-288-1QP FXV-364-41Q FXV-364-1QQ
FXV-288-41Q FXV-288-1QQ FXV-364-41R FXV-364-1QR
FXV-288-41R FXV-288-1QR FXV-364-41S FXV-364-1QS
FXV Closed Circuit Cooling Towers
Optional Accessories and Constructions Certification Status
Construction Options Suf f i x CTI Capacity Adjustment
(Note 1) Certi fi ed Requi red
Cleanable Tube Coil A Yes Note 2
Heavy Duty Coil S Yes Note 2
Low Sound Fan Q Yes Note 3
Internal Access Package none Yes Note 4
Process Fluid Note 6 Note 6 Note 6
Notes:
1. Typically no suffix is used for an accessory or modification that does not affect capacity.
2. Construction does not affect thermal capacity, but does increase Process Fluid Pressure
Drop as noted in BAC Selection Software.
3. Low Sound fans on models with Two Air Inlet Side and Two Coils incur a capacity
reduction of 2% relative to the same model with a standard fan.
4. Internal Access Package on the models with One Air Inlet Side and One Coil incur a
capacity reduction of ~1.8%, depending on the model and operating conditions. Refer
to BAC Selection Software to determine the effect on a specific model at a specific oper-
ating condition.
5. This suffix is affixed to model numbers of units that are not CTI Certified, due either to
application or product accessories or modifications to the tower.
6. The CTI thermal performance certification applies only to units with water as the pro-
cess fluid.
Series V Closed Circuit Cooling Tower Line, VF1 Models
Of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
VF1-009-12E VF1-036-21J VF1-096-12N VF1-192-12N VF1-144-12P VF1-288-11P
VF1-009-12F VF1-036-21K VF1-096-12O VF1-192-12O VF1-144-12Q VF1-288-11Q
VF1-009-12G VF1-036-21L VF1-096-12P VF1-192-12P VF1-144-12R VF1-288-11R
VF1-009-22E VF1-036-22J VF1-096-21O VF1-192-21O VF1-144-21P VF1-288-12P
VF1-009-22F VF1-036-22K VF1-096-21P VF1-192-21P VF1-144-21Q VF1-288-12Q
VF1-009-22G VF1-036-22L VF1-096-21Q VF1-192-21Q VF1-144-21R VF1-288-12R
VF1-036-41J VF1-096-32O VF1-192-32O VF1-144-32P VF1-288-31P
VF1-018-02G VF1-036-41K VF1-096-32P VF1-192-32P VF1-144-32Q VF1-288-31Q
VF1-018-02H VF1-036-41L VF1-096-32Q VF1-192-32Q VF1-144-32R VF1-288-31R
VF1-018-12F VF1-036-42J VF1-096-41O VF1-192-41O VF1-144-41P VF1-288-32P
VF1-018-12G VF1-036-42K VF1-096-41P VF1-192-41P VF1-144-41Q VF1-288-32Q
VF1-018-12H VF1-036-42L VF1-096-41Q VF1-192-41Q VF1-144-41R VF1-288-32R
VF1-018-22G VF1-036-51J VF1-096-42O VF1-192-42O VF1-144-42P VF1-288-41P
VF1-018-22H VF1-036-51K VF1-096-42P VF1-192-42P VF1-144-42Q VF1-288-41Q
VF1-018-22J VF1-036-51L VF1-096-42Q VF1-192-42Q VF1-144-42R VF1-288-41R
VF1-018-32G VF1-096-51P VF1-192-51P VF1-144-51P VF1-288-42P
VF1-018-32H VF1-048-21L VF1-096-51Q VF1-192-51Q VF1-144-51Q VF1-288-42Q
VF1-018-32J VF1-048-21M VF1-144-51R VF1-288-42R
VF1-018-42G VF1-048-22L VF1-144N-21P VF1-288N-21P VF1-288-51P
VF1-018-42H VF1-048-22M VF1-144N-21Q VF1-288N-21Q VF1-216-21N VF1-288-51Q
VF1-018-42J VF1-048-31M VF1-144N-21R VF1-288N-21R VF1-216-21O VF1-288-51R
VF1-048-31N VF1-144N-22P VF1-288N-22P VF1-216-21P
VF1-027-21H VF1-048-32M VF1-144N-22Q VF1-288N-22Q VF1-216-22N VF1-432-21N
VF1-027-21J VF1-048-32N VF1-144N-22R VF1-288N-22R VF1-216-22O VF1-432-21O
VF1-027-21K VF1-048-41M VF1-144N-31P VF1-288N-31P VF1-216-22P VF1-432-21P
VF1-027-22H VF1-048-41N VF1-144N-31Q VF1-288N-31Q VF1-216-31N VF1-432-22N
VF1-027-22J VF1-048-42M VF1-144N-31R VF1-288N-31R VF1-216-31O VF1-432-22O
VF1-027-22K VF1-048-42N VF1-144N-32P VF1-288N-32P VF1-216-31P VF1-432-22P
VF1-027-31H VF1-048-51M VF1-144N-32Q VF1-288N-32Q VF1-216-41O VF1-432-31N
VF1-027-31J VF1-048-51N VF1-144N-32R VF1-288N-32R VF1-216-41P VF1-432-31O
VF1-027-31K VF1-144N-41P VF1-288N-41P VF1-216-41Q VF1-432-31P
VF1-027-32H VF1-072-21M VF1-144N-41Q VF1-288N-41Q VF1-216-51O VF1-432-41O
VF1-027-32J VF1-072-21N VF1-144N-41R VF1-288N-41R VF1-216-51P VF1-432-41P
VF1-027-32K VF1-072-21O VF1-144N-51P VF1-288N-51P VF1-216-51Q VF1-432-41Q
VF1-027-41H VF1-072-22M VF1-144N-51Q VF1-288N-51Q VF1-432-51O
VF1-027-41J VF1-072-22N VF1-144N-51R VF1-288N-51R VF1-432-51P
VF1-027-41K VF1-072-22O VF1-432-51Q
VF1-027-42H VF1-072-31M
VF1-027-42J VF1-072-31N
VF1-027-42K VF1-072-31O
VF1-027-51H VF1-072-32M
VF1-027-51J VF1-072-32N
VF1-027-51K VF1-072-32O
VF1-027-52H VF1-072-41M
VF1-027-52J VF1-072-41N
VF1-027-52K VF1-072-41O
VF1-072-51N
VF1-072-51O
Series V Closed Circuit Cooling Towers, VF1 & VFL Models
Optional Accessories and Constructions Certification Status
Option Suffi x CTI Certified Capacity Adjustment
(Note 1) Required
Capacity Control Dampers D Yes Yes
Tapered Discharge Hood R Yes Yes
Positive Closure Damper Hood - Tapered H Yes Yes
Positive Closure Damper Hood - Straight W Yes Yes
Discharge Sound Attenuation Z Yes Yes
Cleanable Tube Coil A Yes Note 2
Cleanable Header Coil none Yes No
Heavy Duty Coil S Yes Note 2
ASME Code Coil none Yes Note 3
Unit not CTI Certified X No Note 4 & 5
Notes:
1. Typically no suffix is used for an accessory or modification that does not affect
capacity.
2. Construction does not affect thermal capacity, but does increase Process Fluid Pres-
sure Drop as noted in Selection Software.
3. ASME Code construction per se does not affect capacity or pressure drop, but often
Heavy Duty Coil construction is specified as well which does affect pressure drop.
4. This suffix is affixed to model numbers of units that are not CTI Certified, due either
to application or product accessories or modifications.
5. The CTI thermal performance certification applies only to units with water as the
process fluid.
Series V Open Cooling Tower Line, VT0 Models
April 12, 1995 (Revision 3)
VT0-12-E VT0-32-H VT0-78-JM VT0-132-L
VT0-14-F VT0-41-J VT0-78-K VT0-145-M
VT0-19-G VT0-41-KM VT0-88-L VT0-155-N
VT0-19-HM VT0-155-OM
VT0-24-EM VT0-52-HM VT0-102-KM VT0-166-LM
VT0-24-FM VT0-52-J VT0-102-L VT0-166-MM
VT0-24-G VT0-57-K VT0-102-MM VT0-166-N
VT0-28-H VT0-176-O
VT0-65-J VT0-107-KM
VT0-75-K VT0-107-L
VT0-75-LM VT0-116-M
Footnotes:
1. Towers which include the suffix D added to the models above (e.g. VT0-12-ED)
are furnished with capacity control dampers and the certified capacity is 98.5% of
the published value.
2. Towers which include the suffix X added to the models above (e.g. VT0-19-GX)
are not CTI Certified due either to application, product accessories or modification.
Series V Open Cooling Tower Line, VT1 Models
VT1-N209-KM VT1-N301-MM VT1-275-LM VT1-416-LM
VT1-N209-LM VT1-N301-NM VT1-275-MM VT1-416-MM
VT1-N209-MM VT1-N301-OM VT1-275-NM VT1-416-NM
VT1-N209-NM VT1-N301-PM VT1-275-OM VT1-416-O
VT1-N209-OM VT1-N301-Q VT1-275-P VT1-416-PM
VT1-N209-P VT1-N301-RM VT1-275-QM
VT1-N209-QM VT1-N301-SM VT1-275-RM
VT1-N220-MM VT1-N325-OM VT1-307-NM VT1-478-N
VT1-N220-NM VT1-N325-P VT1-307-O VT1-507-O
VT1-N220-O VT1-N346-Q VT1-340-P VT1-507-PM
VT1-N240-P VT1-N346-RM VT1-340-QM VT1-507-QM
VT1-N240-QM VT1-N346-SM VT1-340-RM
VT1-N255-MM VT1-N370-OM VT1-375-NM VT1-560-NM
VT1-N255-NM VT1-N370-PM VT1-375-OM VT1-560-O
VT1-N255-OM VT1-N370-Q VT1-375-P VT1-600-P
VT1-N255-P VT1-N395-R VT1-400-Q VT1-600-QM
VT1-N270-Q VT1-N395-SM VT1-415-R
VT1-415-SM
Footnotes:
but not listed.
2. Towers which include the suffix D added to the models above (e.g.
VT1-307-OD) are furnished with capacity control dampers and the
certified capacity is 98.5% of the published value.
3. Towers which include the suffix X added to the models above (e.g.
VT1-N301-QX) are not CTI Certified due either to application,
product accessories or modification.
Series V Open Cooling Tower Line, VTL Models
October 31, 2003 (Revision 2)
VTL-016-DM VTL-051-G VTL-103-JM VTL-227-LM
VTL-016-E VTL-059-H VTL-103-K VTL-227-MM
VTL-021-F VTL-066-J VTL-116-L VTL-227-NM
VTL-021-GM VTL-072-K VTL-126-M VTL-227-O
VTL-027-EM VTL-079-GM VTL-137-JM VTL-245-MM
VTL-027-F VTL-079-HM VTL-137-KM VTL-245-NM
VTL-030-G VTL-079-JM VTL-137-LM VTL-245-OM
VTL-034-H VTL-079-K VTL-137-M VTL-245-P
VTL-039-EM VTL-082-HM VTL-152-LM VTL-272-MM
VTL-039-FM VTL-082-JM VTL-152-M VTL-272-NM
VTL-039-GM VTL-082-K VTL-152-NM VTL-272-OM
VTL-039-H VTL-092-L VTL-152-OM VTL-272-P
VTL-045-FM VTL-095-HM VTL-171-L
VTL-045-GM VTL-095-JM VTL-185-M
VTL-045-H VTL-095-K VTL-198-N
VTL-045-JM VTL-095-LM VTL-209-O
VTL-095-MM
Footnotes:
1. Towers which include the suffix D added to the models above (e.g.
VTL-126-MD) are furnished with capacity control dampers and the
certified capacity is 98.5% of the published value.
2. Towers which include the suffix X added to the models above (e.g.
VTL-079-GMX) are not CTI Certified due either to application,
product accessories or modification.
Series V Closed Circuit Cooling Tower Line, VFL Models
VFL-012-02F VFL-036-12K VFL-048-12K VFL-072-21M VFL-096-21N
VFL-012-02G VFL-036-12L VFL-048-12L VFL-072-21N VFL-096-21O
VFL-012-02H VFL-036-12M VFL-048-12M VFL-072-21O VFL-096-21P
VFL-012-12F VFL-036-21J VFL-048-21K VFL-072-21P VFL-096-22N
VFL-012-12G VFL-036-21K VFL-048-21L VFL-072-22M VFL-096-22O
VFL-012-12H VFL-036-21L VFL-048-21M VFL-072-22N VFL-096-22P
VFL-012-22F VFL-036-21M VFL-048-22K VFL-072-22O VFL-096-31N
VFL-012-22G VFL-036-22J VFL-048-22L VFL-072-22P VFL-096-31O
VFL-012-22H VFL-036-22K VFL-048-22M VFL-072-31N VFL-096-31P
VFL-012-32F VFL-036-22L VFL-048-31K VFL-072-31O VFL-096-32N
VFL-012-32G VFL-036-22M VFL-048-31L VFL-072-31P VFL-096-32O
VFL-036-31L VFL-048-32K VFL-072-32O VFL-096-41N
VFL-024-12H VFL-036-31M VFL-048-32L VFL-072-32P VFL-096-41O
VFL-024-22J VFL-036-32L VFL-048-41L VFL-072-41O VFL-096-42N
VFL-024-32H VFL-036-32M VFL-048-41M VFL-072-41P VFL-096-42O
VFL-024-32J VFL-036-41K VFL-048-42L VFL-072-42N VFL-096-42P
VFL-036-41L VFL-048-42M VFL-072-42O VFL-096-51N
VFL-036-41M VFL-072-42P VFL-096-51O
VFL-036-42K VFL-096-51P
VFL-036-42L VFL-096-52N
VFL-036-42M VFL-096-52O
VFL-096-52P
Series 1500 Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
June 30, 2006 (Revision 6)
15146-HM 15162-HM 15200-JM 15214-JM 15296-KM 15310-KM
15146 15162 15200 15214 15296 15310
15160 15177 15227 15245 15325 15340
15176 15201 15250 15270 15350 15365
15219 15282 15368 15385
15425
Series 1500 Optional Accessories and Constructions
Certification Status
Option Suffix CTI Capacity Adjustment
Note 1 Certified Required
Access Platform External none Yes No
Energy-Miser Fan System none Yes No
Low Sound Fan Q Yes Note 2
Whisper Quiet Low Sound Fan WQ Yes Note 3
Discharge Sound Attenuation none Yes No
Unit not CTI Certified X No Note 5
Note:
1. Typically no suffix is used for an accessory or modification that does
not affect capacity.
2. Low sound fans on Series 1500 Cooling Towers incur a capacity
reduction of 3% relative to the same unit with a standard fan.
3. Whisper Quiet low sound fans on Series 1500 Cooling Towers use a
high solidity fan running at reduced speed and incur a capacity reduc-
tion of 3 % relative to the same unit with a standard fan.
4. Units with non-standard motor sizes are certified only if they are
listed in the Data of Record and sold at the revised capacity listed in
the rating table.
5. This suffix is affixed to model numbers of units that are not CTI
Certified, due either to application or product accessories or modifi-
cations.
Series 3000A Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
North American Models
3240A-JM 3412A-JM 3473A-KM 3728A-NM 3985A-PM 31132A-PM
3240A 3412A-KM 3473A-LM 3728A-OM 3985A-QM 31132A-QM
3272A 3412A-LM 3473A-MM 3728A 3985A 31132A-RM
3299A 3412A-MM 3473A 3781A 31056A 31132A
3412A 3501A 3828A
3436A
3333A-JM 3455A-KM 3552A-LM 3872A-OM 3583A-MM 31213A-QM
3333A-KM 3455A-LM 3552A-MM 3872A-PM 3583A 31213A-RM
3333A-LM 3455A-MM 3552A-NM 3872A 3618A 31213A
3333A 3455A 3552A 3923A 3676A 31301A
3358A 3482A 3604A 3970A 3725A
3379A 3527A 3648A
3672A
European Models
S3-D240JL S3-D412JL S3-D473KL S3-D728NL S3-D985PL S3-D1132PL
S3-D240L S3-D412KL S3-D473LL S3-D728OL S3-D985QL S3-D1132QL
S3-D272L S3-D412LL S3-D473ML S3-D728L S3-D985L S3-D1132RL
S3-D299L S3-D412ML S3-D473L S3-D781L S3-D1056L S3-D1132L
S3-D412L S3-D501L S3-D828L
S3-D436L
S3-D333JL S3-D455KL S3-D552LL S3-D872OL S3-D583ML S3-D1213QL
S3-D333KL S3-D455LL S3-D552ML S3-D872PL S3-D583L S3-D1213RL
S3-D333LL S3-D455ML S3-D552NL S3-D872L S3-D618L S3-D1213L
S3-D333L S3-D455L S3-D552L S3-D923L S3-D676L S3-D1301L
S3-D358L S3-D482L S3-D604L S3-D970L S3-D725L
S3-D379L S3-D527L S3-D648L
S3-D672L
Series 3000A Optional Accessories and Constructions
Certification Status
Option Suffix CTI Capacity Adjustment
Note 1 Certified Required
Access Platforms External L Yes No
Service Platform Internal P Yes No
Energy-Miser Fan System none Yes No
Discharge Sound Attenuation Z Yes No
Two Drift Eliminator Sets E Yes Yes, Note 2
Gear Drive G Yes No
Low Sound Fan Q Yes Yes, Note 3
Velocity Recovery Fan Stack V Yes Yes, Note 5
European Models none Yes See Note 6
Notes:
1. Typically no suffix is used for an accessory or modification that does
not affect capacity.
2. Two sets of drift eliminators incur a capacity reduction of 2% rela-
tive to the standard unit.
3. Low Sound Fans on Series 3000A Cooling Towers incur a capacity
reduction of 3% relative to the same unit with a standard fan.
4. Units with non-standard motor sizes are certified only if they are
listed in the Data of Record and sold at the revised capacity listed in
the rating table.
5. Velocity Recovery Fan Stacks increase the capacity of a tower model
by 3 to 6%, depending upon the model and the operating conditions.
Refer to BAC Selection Software to determine the effect on a par-
ticular model at a specific operating condition.
6. Models beginning with the prefix S3 (European models) utilize low
sound fans as standard, and a different fan guard from the North
American models. Therefore they incur a capacity reduction of 5%
(3% for low sound fans plus 2% for fan guard) compared to the North
American models.
7. This suffix is affixed to model numbers of units that are not CTI
Certified, due either to application or product accessories or modifi-
cations.
Delta Cooling Towers, Inc.
TM Series of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
TM105319 TM205319 TM305319 TM405319 TM505319 TM605319
TM175319 TM275319 TM375319 TM475319 TM575319 TM675319
TM110319 TM210319 TM310319 TM410319 TM510319 TM610319
TM115319 TM215319 TM315319 TM415319 TM515319 TM615319
TM105419 TM205419 TM305419 TM405419 TM505419 TM605419
TM175419 TM275419 TM375419 TM475419 TM575419 TM675419
TM110419 TM210419 TM310419 TM410419 TM510419 TM610419
TM115419 TM215419 TM315419 TM415419 TM515419 TM615419
TM105312 TM205312 TM305312 TM405312 TM505312 TM605312
TM175312 TM275312 TM375312 TM475312 TM575312 TM675312
TM110312 TM210312 TM310312 TM410312 TM510312 TM610312
TM115312 TM215312 TM315312 TM415312 TM515312 TM615312
TM105412 TM205412 TM305412 TM405412 TM505412 TM605412
TM175412 TM275412 TM375412 TM475412 TM575412 TM675412
TM110412 TM210412 TM310412 TM410412 TM510412 TM610412
TM115412 TM215412 TM315412 TM415412 TM515412 TM615412
Evapco, Inc.
AT Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
July 15, 2006 (Revision 6)
AT Line AT Models, USS/UAT Models, and UT Models
19- 56 19- 412 29- 024 112-012 212-024 312-036 424-024 114-0124 228-0124
19- 66 19- 512 29- 124 112-112 212-124 312-136 424-124 114-0224 228-0224
19- 76 19- 612 29- 224 112-212 212-224 312-236 424-224 114-0324 228-0324
19- 86 19- 712 29- 324 112-312 212-324 312-336 424-324 114-0424 228-0424
19- 96 19- 812 29- 424 112-412 212-424 312-436 424-424 114-0524 228-0524
19- 912 29- 524 112-512 212-524 312-536 424-524 114-0624 228-0624
19- 28 29- 624 112-612 212-624 312-636 424-624 114-0724 228-0724
19- 38 19- 114 29- 724 112-712 212-724 312-736 424-724 114-0824 228-0824
19- 48 19- 214 29- 824 112-812 212-824 312-836 424-824 114-0924 228-0924
19- 58 19- 314 29- 924 112-912 212-924 312-936 424-924 114-1024
19- 68 19- 414 114- 1124 428- 0148
19- 78 19- 514 29- 228 112-314 212-128 312-042 424-028 114-1224 428-0248
19- 88 19- 614 29- 328 112-414 212-228 312-142 424-128 428-0348
19- 98 19- 714 29- 428 112-514 212-328 312-242 424-228 214-0148 428-0448
19- 814 29- 528 112-614 212-428 312-342 424-328 214-0248 428-0548
19- 59 19- 914 29- 628 112-714 212-528 312-442 424-428 214-0348 428-0648
19- 69 29- 728 112-814 212-628 312-542 424-528 214-0448 428-0748
19- 79 29- 318 29- 828 112-914 212-728 312-642 424-628 214-0548 428-0848
19- 89 29- 418 29- 928 212-828 312-742 424-728 214-0648 428-0948
19- 99 29- 518 112-018 212-928 312-842 424-828 214-0748 428-1048
29- 618 39- 336 112-118 312-942 424-928 214-0848 428-1148
19- 111 29- 718 39- 436 112-218 212-036 214-0948 428-1248
19- 211 29- 818 39- 536 112-318 212-136 312-054 424-036 214-1048
19- 311 29- 918 39- 636 112-418 212-236 312-154 424-136 214-1148
19- 411 39- 736 112-518 212-336 312-254 424-236
19- 511 29- 121 39- 836 112-618 212-436 312-354 424-336 314-0172
19- 611 29- 221 39- 936 112-718 212-536 312-454 424-436 314-0272
19- 711 29- 321 112-818 212-636 312-554 424-536 314-0372
19- 811 29- 421 39- 242 112-918 212-736 312-654 424-636 314-0472
19- 911 29- 521 39- 342 212-836 312-754 424-736 314-0572
29- 621 39- 442 112-520 212-936 312-854 424-836 314-0672
29- 721 39- 542 112-620 312-954 424-936 314-0772
29- 821 39- 642 112-720 224-018 314-0872
29- 921 39- 742 112-820 224-118 312-260 314-0972
39- 842 112-920 224-218 312-360 314-1072
39- 942 224-318 312-460 314-1172
224-418 312-560 314-1272
224-518 312-660
224-618 312-760
224-718 312-860
224-818 312-960
224-918
See Footnotes 1a, 2a, 3, 4, 5, & 6 for Additional Information
Evapco, Inc.
AT Line, USS/UAT Series, and UT Series Models (Metric Sizes)
18- 49 18- 312 28- 518 38- 236 110-112 210-124 310-136 220-112 420-124
18- 59 18- 412 28- 618 38- 336 110-212 210-224 310-236 220-212 420-224
18- 69 18- 512 28- 718 38- 436 110-312 210-324 310-336 220-312 420-324
18- 79 18- 612 28- 818 38- 536 110-412 210-424 310-436 220-412 420-424
18- 89 18- 712 28- 918 38- 636 110-512 210-524 310-536 220-512 420-524
18- 99 18- 812 38- 736 110-612 210-624 310-636 220-612 420-624
18- 912 28- 521 38- 836 110-712 210-724 310-736 220-712 420-724
18- 511 28- 621 38- 936 110-812 210-824 310-836 220-812 420-824
18- 611 18- 214 28- 721 110-912 210-924 310-936 220-912 420-924
18- 711 18- 314 28- 821 38- 442
18- 811 18- 414 28- 921 38- 542 110-118 210-136 310-154 220-118 420-136
18- 911 18- 514 38- 642 110-218 210-236 310-254 220-218 420-236
18- 614 28- 524 38- 742 110-318 210-336 310-354 220-318 420-336
18- 714 28- 624 38- 842 110-418 210-436 310-454 220-418 420-436
18- 814 28- 724 38- 942 110-518 210-536 310-554 220-518 420-536
18- 914 28- 824 110-618 210-636 310-654 220-618 420-636
28- 924 110-718 210-736 310-754 220-718 420-736
110-818 210-836 310-854 220-818 420-836
28- 428 110-918 210-936 310-954 220-918 420-936
28- 528
28- 628
28- 728
28- 828
28- 928
See Footnotes 1a, 2a, 3, 4, 5, & 6 for Additional Information
AT Line REP Models
217-111 217-412 217-214 224-018 224-720
217-211 217-512 217-314 224-118 224-820
217-311 217-612 217-414 224-218 224-920
217-411 217-712 217-514 224-318
217-511 217-812 217-614 224-418
217-611 217-912 217-714 224-518
217-711 217-814 224-618
217-811 217-914 224-718
217-911 224-818
224-918
See Footnotes 1a, 2a, 3, 4, 5, & 6 for AddMitional Information
Evapco, Inc.
July 15, 200 6 (Revision 6)
AT Line UBT Models
8-56B 8-012B 8-324B 12-212B 12-324B 12-454B 24-524B
8-66B 8-112B 8-424B 12-312B 12-424B 12-554B 24-624B
8-76B 8-212B 8-524B 12-412B 12-524B 12-654B 24-724B
8-86B 8-312B 8-624B 12-512B 12-624B 12-754B 24-824B
8-96B 8-412B 8-724B 12-612B 12-724B 12-854B 24-924B
8-512B 8-824B 12-712B 12-824B 12-954B
8-612B 8-924B 12-812B 12-924B
8-712B 12-912B
8-812B
8-912B
8-29B 8-318B 8-536B 12-218B 12-136B 24-218B 24-336B
8-39B 8-418B 8-636B 12-318B 12-236B 24-318B 24-436B
8-49B 8-518B 8-736B 12-418B 12-336B 24-418B 24-536B
8-59B 8-618B 8-836B 12-518B 12-436B 24-518B 24-636B
8-69B 8-718B 8-936B 12-618B 12-536B 24-618B 24-736B
8-79B 8-818B 12-718B 12-636B 24-718B 24-836B
8-89B 8-918B 12-818B 12-736B 24-818B 24-936B
8-99B 12-918B 12-836B 24-918B
12-936B
See Footnotes 1b, 2b, 3, 4, 5, & 6 for Additional Information
Footnotes:
1a. AT, USS, UAT, UT and REP are prefixes to be added to the basic numeric model
designations listed above to indicate the tower construction materials, generic
configuration or options.
AT is used for units with standard galvanized materials and fabrication methods.
USS or UAT is used to indicate units with stainless steel materials for corrosion
resistance.
UT is used to indicate units with super low sound fans.
REP is used to indicate units with water inlet on the end rather than the side.
1b. UBT is the prefix to be added to the basic numeric model designations listed
above to indicate units with alternate fabrication methods for seismic resistance.
2a. Certification includes use of side, end, or bottom water inlet configuration.
2b. Certification includes use of side or end water inlet configuration.
3. Certification includes units with optional gear drive in place of standard belt drive.
4. Certification includes use of optional water silencers.
5. Certification includes use of optional external platforms/ladders for access.
6. Certification includes an optional supplier for fans on standard models and two
optional low sound fan types one of which requires a 3.5% reduction in thermal
capacity.
Evapco, Inc.
ESWA Line of CTI Certified Closed Circuit Coolers
ESWA 77-23H ESWA 102-23H ESWA 153-23H ESWA 72-23H ESWA 96-23H ESWA 142-23H ESWA 144-23I ESWA 216-23J
ESWA 77-23I ESWA 102-23I ESWA 153-23I ESWA 72-23I ESWA 96-23I ESWA 142-23I ESWA 144-23J ESWA 216-23K
ESWA 77-23J ESWA 102-24H ESWA 153-23J ESWA 72-23J ESWA 96-24H ESWA 142-23J ESWA 144-23K ESWA 216-23L
ESWA 77-24H ESWA 102-24I ESWA 153-24H ESWA 72-24H ESWA 96-24I ESWA 142-24H ESWA 144-24I ESWA 216-23M
ESWA 77-24I ESWA 102-25H ESWA 153-24I ESWA 72-24I ESWA 96-25H ESWA 142-24I ESWA 144-24J ESWA 216-24J
ESWA 77-24J ESWA 102-25I ESWA 153-24J ESWA 72-24J ESWA 96-25I ESWA 142-24J ESWA 144-24K ESWA 216-24K
ESWA 77-25H ESWA 102-26H ESWA 153-25H ESWA 72-25H ESWA 96-26H ESWA 142-25H ESWA 144-25I ESWA 216-24L
ESWA 77-25I ESWA 102-26I ESWA 153-25I ESWA 72-25I ESWA 96-26I ESWA 142-25I ESWA 144-25J ESWA 216-24M
ESWA 77-25J ESWA 153-25J ESWA 72-25J ESWA 142-25J ESWA 144-25K ESWA 216-25J
ESWA 77-26H ESWA 153-26H ESWA 72-26H ESWA 142-26H ESWA 144-26I ESWA 216-25K
ESWA 77-26I ESWA 153-26I ESWA 72-26I ESWA 142-26I ESWA 144-26J ESWA 216-25L
ESWA 77-26J ESWA 153-26J ESWA 72-26J ESWA 142-26J ESWA 144-26K ESWA 216-25M
ESWA 216-26J
ESWA 216-26K
ESWA 216-26L
ESWA 216-26M
ESWA 77-33H ESWA 102-33H ESWA 153-33H ESWA 72-33H ESWA 96-33H ESWA 142-33H ESWA 144-33I ESWA 216-33K
ESWA 77-33I ESWA 102-33I ESWA 153-33I ESWA 72-33I ESWA 96-33I ESWA 142-33I ESWA 144-33J ESWA 216-33L
ESWA 77-33J ESWA 102-33J ESWA 153-33J ESWA 72-33J ESWA 96-33J ESWA 142-33J ESWA 144-33K ESWA 216-33M
ESWA 77-33K ESWA 102-33K ESWA 153-34H ESWA 72-33K ESWA 96-33K ESWA 142-33K ESWA 144-34I ESWA 216-34K
ESWA 77-34H ESWA 102-34H ESWA 153-34I ESWA 72-34H ESWA 96-34H ESWA 142-34H ESWA 144-34J ESWA 216-34L
ESWA 77-34I ESWA 102-34I ESWA 153-34J ESWA 72-34I ESWA 96-34I ESWA 142-34I ESWA 144-34K ESWA 216-34M
ESWA 77-34J ESWA 102-34J ESWA 153-35H ESWA 72-34J ESWA 96-34J ESWA 142-34J ESWA 144-34L ESWA 216-34N
ESWA 77-34K ESWA 102-34K ESWA 153-35I ESWA 72-34K ESWA 96-34K ESWA 142-34K ESWA 144-35I ESWA 216-35K
ESWA 77-35H ESWA 102-35H ESWA 153-35J ESWA 72-35H ESWA 96-35H ESWA 142-35H ESWA 144-35J ESWA 216-35L
ESWA 77-35I ESWA 102-35I ESWA 153-36H ESWA 72-35I ESWA 96-35I ESWA 142-35I ESWA 144-35K ESWA 216-35M
ESWA 77-35J ESWA 102-35J ESWA 153-36I ESWA 72-35J ESWA 96-35J ESWA 142-35J ESWA 144-35L ESWA 216-35N
ESWA 77-35K ESWA 102-35K ESWA 153-36J ESWA 72-35K ESWA 96-35K ESWA 142-35K ESWA 144-36I ESWA 216-36K
ESWA 77-36H ESWA 102-36H ESWA 72-36H ESWA 96-36H ESWA 142-36H ESWA 144-36J ESWA 216-36L
ESWA 77-36I ESWA 102-36I ESWA 72-36I ESWA 96-36I ESWA 142-36I ESWA 144-36K ESWA 216-36M
ESWA 77-36J ESWA 102-36J ESWA 72-36J ESWA 96-36J ESWA 142-36J ESWA 144-36L ESWA 216-36N
ESWA 77-36K ESWA 102-36K ESWA 72-36K ESWA 96-36K ESWA 142-36K
ESWA 77-43I ESWA 102-43I ESWA 153-43I ESWA 72-43I ESWA 96-43I ESWA 142-43I ESWA 144-43J ESWA 216-43K
ESWA 77-43J ESWA 102-43J ESWA 153-43J ESWA 72-43J ESWA 96-43J ESWA 142-43J ESWA 144-43K ESWA 216-43L
ESWA 77-43K ESWA 102-43K ESWA 153-43K ESWA 72-43K ESWA 96-43K ESWA 142-43K ESWA 144-44J ESWA 216-43M
ESWA 77-44I ESWA 102-44I ESWA 153-44I ESWA 72-44I ESWA 96-44I ESWA 142-44I ESWA 144-44K ESWA 216-44K
ESWA 77-44J ESWA 102-44J ESWA 153-44J ESWA 72-44J ESWA 96-44J ESWA 142-44J ESWA 144-44L ESWA 216-44L
ESWA 77-44K ESWA 102-44K ESWA 153-44K ESWA 72-44K ESWA 96-44K ESWA 142-44K ESWA 144-44M ESWA 216-44M
ESWA 77-45I ESWA 102-45I ESWA 153-45I ESWA 72-45I ESWA 96-45I ESWA 142-45I ESWA 144-45J ESWA 216-44N
ESWA 77-45J ESWA 102-45J ESWA 153-45J ESWA 72-45J ESWA 96-45J ESWA 142-45J ESWA 144-45K ESWA 216-44O
ESWA 77-45K ESWA 102-45K ESWA 153-45K ESWA 72-45K ESWA 96-45K ESWA 142-45K ESWA 144-45L ESWA 216-45K
ESWA 77-46I ESWA 102-46I ESWA 153-46I ESWA 72-46I ESWA 96-46I ESWA 142-46I ESWA 144-45M ESWA 216-45L
ESWA 77-46J ESWA 102-46J ESWA 153-46J ESWA 72-46J ESWA 96-46J ESWA 142-46J ESWA 144-46J ESWA 216-45M
ESWA 77-46K ESWA 102-46K ESWA 153-46K ESWA 72-46K ESWA 96-46K ESWA 142-46K ESWA 144-46K ESWA 216-45N
ESWA 144-46L ESWA 216-45O
ESWA 144-46M ESWA 216-46K
ESWA 216-46L
ESWA 216-46M
ESWA 216-46N
ESWA 216-46O
ESWA 216-46P
ESWA 216-46S
Footnotes:
1. Certification includes units with optional High Flow Header Connections for better process fluid distribution at higher flows.
3. Certification includes use of optional external platforms/ladders for access.
4. Certification includes an optional supplier for fans on standard models and two optional low sound fan types one of which requires a 3.5% reduction in thermal capacity.
5. Certification includes an optional stainless steel coil section which requires a slight reduction in thermal capacity. See selection data for capacity of stainless steel coil units versus
standard units.
Evapco, Inc.
LPT Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
January 3, 2005 (Revision 0)
LPT Series Basic Models
LPT 316 LPT 516 LPT 519 LPT 5112 LPT 819 LPT 8112
LPT 576 LPT 5712 LPT 879 LPT 8712
LPT 586 LPT 8812
LPT 596
Footnotes:
1 The following suffixes (I, D, H, F, L, U, LI, LD, LH and LF) are to be
added to the basic numeric model designations listed above to indicate
the tower configuration options that are also included in the CTI Certi-
fication.
I = Intake sound attenuation
D = Discharge sound attenuation
H = Tapered Discharge Hood
F = Full sound attenuation
L = One motor size smaller
U = Two motor sizes smaller
LI = Intake sound attenuation + One motor size smaller
LD = Discharge sound attenuation + One motor size smaller
LH = Tapered Discharge Hood + One motor size smaller
LF = Full sound attenuation + One motor size smaller
2. The optional tower configurations are unique in capacity. Selection
software should be consulted for appropriate ratings of the tower con-
figuration
Evapco, Inc.
LSTB Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
LSTB Series Basic Models
LSTB 5112 LSTB 8P112 LSTB 8P124 LSTB 10112 LSTB 10124
LSTB 10612
LSTB 5618 LSTB 8P618 LSTB 10618 LSTB 10636
LSTB 5718 LSTB 10718
Footnotes:
1. The following suffixes (I, D, H, F, L, U, LI, LD, LH and LF) are to be
added to the basic numeric model designations listed above to indicate
the tower configuration options that are also included in the CTI Certi-
fication.
I = Intake sound attenuation
D = Discharge sound attenuation
H = Tapered Discharge Hood
F = Full sound attenuation
L = One motor size smaller
U = Two motor sizes smaller
LI = Intake sound attenuation + One motor size smaller
LD = Discharge sound attenuation + One motor size smaller
LH = Tapered Discharge Hood + One motor size smaller
LF = Full sound attenuation + One motor size smaller
2. The optional tower configurations are unique in capacity. Selection
software should be consulted for appropriate ratings of the tower con-
figuration
Fabrica Mexicana De Torres, S. A.
Reymsa Cooling Towers
GHR Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
GHRFG Series GHRGS Series GHRSS Series GHRFS Series
Molded Fiberglass Structure Galvanized Steel Structure Stainless Steel Structure Galvanized Steel Structure
& Fiberglass Casing & Galvanized Steel Casing & Stainless Steel Casing & Fiberglass Casing
GHRFG-303115 GHRGS-303115 GHRSS-303115 GHRFS-303115
Fabrica Mexicana De Torres, S. A.
Reymsa Cooling Towers
HR Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
HRFG-303115 HRFG-707175 HRFG-808175 HRFG-714275 HRFG-1414475
HRFG-808115
HRFG-708115 HRFG-809115 HRFG-816215 HRFG-1616415
HRFG-505103 HRFG-709175 HRFG-810110
HRFG-505105 HRFG-709110 HRFG-810115
HRFG-709115 HRFG-810120
HRFG-606105 HRFG-811115
HRFG-606175 HRFG-811120
HRFG-812115
HRFG-812120
HRFG-812125
HVAC/R International, Inc.
Therflow Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
Standard Fan Standard Fan Low Noise Fan
Standard Stack Extended Stack Standard Stack
TFW-80 TFW-80S TFW-70UL
Footnotes:
1. Certification includes tower construction materials indicated by the suffixes -B, -
E, and -S which are added to basic model numbers above.
-B is for FRP casing, FRP basin and HDG mainframe and hardware.
-E is for FRP casing, FRP basin and stainless steel mainframe and hardware
-S is for stainless steel casing, basin, mainframe and hardware.
2. The basic model numbers above are for 50hz fan motor and the suffix /F is added for
60hz motor applications. For example, TFW-100S-B is for 50hz motor, TFW-100S-
B/F is for 60hz motor.
3. Certification includes use of side, end, or bottom water inlet configuration.
listed.
Imeco, Div. of York International
IMC Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
August 28, 2005
IMC 806-080-1-3 IMC 812-205-1-15 IMC 1212-265-1-15 IMC 1218-840-2-20
IMC 806-100-1-5 IMC 812-200-1-10 IMC 1212-290-1-20 IMC 1218-910-2-25
IMC 806-110-1-7.5 IMC 812-245-1-20 IMC 1212-305-1-25 IMC 1218-960-2-30
IMC 806-112-1-5 IMC 812-246-1-15 IMC 1212-325-1-30 IMC 1218-1085-2-25
IMC 806-125-1-10 IMC 812-260-1-20 IMC 1212-345-1-20 IMC 1218-1150-2-30
IMC 806-115-1-5 IMC 812-247-1-10 IMC 1212-360-1-25 IMC 1218-1255-2-40
IMC 806-130-1-7.5 IMC 812-273-1-15 IMC 1212-438-1-25 IMC 1218-1250-2-30
IMC 806-136-1-7.5 IMC 812-280-1-15 IMC 1212-457-1-30 IMC 1218-1342-2-40
IMC 806-145-1-10 IMC 812-297-1-20 IMC 1218-1427-2-50
IMC 806-155-1-15 IMC 812-317-1-25
IMC 809-140-1-7.5 IMC 809-310-2-10 IMC 1212-580-2-20 IMC 1218-1370-3-25
IMC 809-156-1-10 IMC 809-300-2-7.5 IMC 1212-610-2-25 IMC 1218-1445-3-30
IMC 809-170-1-10 IMC 809-340-2-10 IMC 1212-685-2-20 IMC 1218-1730-3-30
IMC 809-190-1-15 IMC 809-380-2-15 IMC 1212-720-2-25 IMC 1218-1885-3-40
IMC 809-180-1-10 IMC 809-360-2-10 IMC 1212-760-2-30 IMC 1218-2000-3-40
IMC 809-206-1-15 IMC 809-447-2-20 IMC 1212-870-2-25 IMC 1218-2127-3-50
IMC 809-217-1-15 IMC 809-467-2-20 IMC 1212-927-2-30
IMC 809-234-1-20
IMC 812-440-2-20 IMC 1218-460-1-25 IMC 1218-1750-4-25
IMC 812-405-2-10 IMC 1218-485-1-30 IMC 1218-1955-4-20
IMC 812-430-2-10 IMC 1218-545-1-25 IMC 1218-2100-4-25
IMC 812-520-2-20 IMC 1218-580-1-30 IMC 1218-2215-4-30
IMC 812-590-2-20 IMC 1218-630-1-40 IMC 1218-2410-4-40
IMC 812-600-2-20 IMC 1218-627-1-30 IMC 1218-2587-4-40
IMC 812-632-2-25 IMC 1218-677-1-40 IMC 1218-2750-4-50
IMC 1218-717-1-50
Mesan Cooling Tower, Ltd
MCR Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
MCR-L SERIES MCRI-L SERIES MCR-SL SERIES MCRI-SL SERIES
Standard Low Noise Standard Low Noise Super Low Noise Super Low Noise
(SI- Metric Units) (IP- English Units) (SI- Metric Units) (SI- English Units)
MCR-80L MCRI-80L MCR-80SL MCRI-80SL
Footnotes:
1. Model numbers listed above are for standard construction of FRP (Fiberglass Rein-
forced Plastic) casing and HDG (Hot Dipped Galvanized) steel structure. Certified
models with optional SS (Stainless Steel) casing and structure are also available but
not listed.
For FRP casing with SS structure add the suffix -S, for example MCR-80L-S.
For SS casing with SS structure add the suffix -SC, for example MCRI-700SL-SC.
KIMCO (Kyung In Machinery Company, Ltd.)
EnduraCool Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
EX Series
a
EC Series
b
EX Series
a
EC Series
b
(SI - Metric Units) (IP - English Units) (SI - Metric Units) (IP - English Units)
Standard Fans Standard Fans Low Noise Fans Low Noise Fans
EX-80KLb EC-65 EX-80KLSb EC-65L
EX-125KLb EC-100 EX-112.5KLSb EC-90L
EX-125KLSb EC-100L
EX-150KLb EC-120
EX-175KLSb EC-140L
EX-200KLb EC-160
EX-200KLSb EC-160L
EX-225KLb EC-180
EX-250KLb EC-200 MEX-250KLS EC-200L
MEX-300KLS EC-240L
MEX-300 EC-240
MEX-350 EC-280 MEX-350KLS EC-280L
MEX-400 EC-320 MEX-400KLS EC-320L
MEX-500 EC-400
a
EX Series models are manufactured and distributed by KIMCO.
b
EC Series models are manufactured by KIMCO and distributed in North America by
Great Lakes Fluid/Air, Inc. (GLFA) with equivalent dimensions and thermal ratings.
Multiple cell models of the single cell models above are also available but not listed.
KIMCO (Kyung In Machinery Company, Ltd.)
CKL Line of CTI Certified Closed Circuit Cooling Towers
CKL-60
CKL-80
CKL-100
CKL-125
CKL-150
CKL-175
CKL-200
CKL-250
CKL-300
Liang Chi Industry Company, Ltd.
LC Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
LC-125 LC-150 LC-175 LC-200 LC-225 LC-250
Multiple cell models of the single cell models above are also available but
not listed.
Polacel, b. v.
CR Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
CMDR Models
CMDR12 135-DL-60 CMDR12 300-DL-60 CMDR19 135-DL-90 CMDR19 300-DL-90
CMDR12 135-DM-60 CMDR12 300-DM-60 CMDR19 135-DM-90 CMDR19 300-DM-90
CMDR12 135-DH-60 CMDR12 300-DH-60 CMDR19 135-DH-90 CMDR19 300-DH-90
Mesan Cooling Tower, Ltd
MXR Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
MXR-L SERIES MXRI-L SERIES MXR-SL SERIES MXRI-SL SERIES
Standard Low Noise Standard Low Noise Super Low Noise Super Low Noise
(SI- Metric Units) (IP- English Units) (SI- Metric Units) (SI- English Units)
MXR-80L MXRI-80L MXR-80SL MXRI-80SL
Footnotes:
1. Model numbers listed above are for standard construction of FRP (Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic) casing and HDG (Hot Dipped Galvanized) steel structure. Certified models with
optional SS (Stainless Steel) casing and structure are also available but not listed.
For FRP casing with SS structure add the suffix -S, for example MXR-80L-S.
For SS casing with SS structure add the suffix -SC, for example MXRI-700SL-SC.
3. Multiple cell models of the single cell models above are also available but not listed.
Polacel, b. v.
CR Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
CMC Models
CMC1-DL-60 CMC9-DL-60 CMC2.9-DL-60 CMC3.9-DL-60
CMC1-DM-60 CMC9-DM-60 CMC2.9-DM-60 CMC3.9-DM-60
CMC1-DH-60 CMC9-DH-60 CMC2.9-DH-60 CMC3.9-DH-60
CMC6-DL-60
CMC6-DL-90
CMC6-DM-60
CMC6-DM-90
CMC6-DH-60
CMC6-DH-90
Footnotes for CMDR and CMC models.
1. The basic model numbers above are for 50 hz fan motors and the suffix U is added for 60 hz fan motor applications. For example, CMDR19 630-DH-
150 is for 50 hz and CMDR19 630-DH-150U is for 60 hz.
2. The suffix -PS1 through -PS10 is added to the basic model numbers to indicate the nozzle size required for the application flow rate.
3. The cold water basin configuration is indicated by either suffix /2 for no cold water basin, the suffix /3 for a GRP basin with HDGS sub-frame, or the suffix
/4 for a GRP basin only.
Polacel b. v.
XR Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
XE Models XL Models XT Models
XE 2.120-VL XL 2.320-VVL-235_60 XT 2.240-VL-135 XT 2.480-VL-135 XT 2.720-VL-135
XE 2.120-L XL 2.320-VL-235_60 XT 2.240-L-135 XT 2.480-L-135 XT 2.720-L-135
XE 2.120-M XL 2.320-L-235_60 XT 2.240-M-135 XT 2.480-M-135 XT 2.720-M-135
XE 2.120-H XL 2.320-M-235_60
XL 2.320-VVL-235_90 XT 2.240-VL-185 XT 2.480-VL-185 XT 2.720-VL-185
XL 2.320-VL-235_90 XT 2.240-L-185 XT 2.480-L-185 XT 2.720-L-185
XL 2.320-L-235_90 XT 2.240-M-185 XT 2.480-M-185 XT 2.720-M-185
XL 2.320-M-235_90
XL 4.440-VVL-235_90 XT 2.240-VL-235 XT 2.480-VL-235 XT 2.720-VL-235
XL 4.440-VL-235_90 XT 2.240-L-235 XT 2.480-L-235 XT 2.720-L-235
XL 4.440-L-235_90 XT 2.240-M-235 XT 2.480-M-235 XT 2.720-M-235
XL 4.440-M-235_90
XL 4.520-VVL-235_90
XL 4.520-VL-235_90
XL 4.520-L-235_90
XL 4.520-M-235_90
Footnotes for XR Series models.
1.The basic model numbers above are for 50 hz fan motors and the suffix U is added for 60 hz fan motor applications. For example, XE 2.120-VL is for 50
hz and XE 2.120-VLU is for 60 hz.
2.The cold water basin configuration is indicated by either suffix /2 for no cold water basin, the suffix /3 for a GRP basin with HDGS sub-frame, or the suffix
/4 for a GRP basin only.
Protec Cooling Towers, Inc
FWS Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
March 8, 2006 (Revision 1)
FWS-94-3.7 FWS-127-5.5 FWS-169-7.5
FWS-94-5.5 FWS-127-7.5 FWS-169-11
FWS-94-7.5 FWS-127-11 FWS-169-15
Footnotes:
1. Suffixes -GI, -SS, -AS, -AG are added to the basic model numbers listed
above to indicate the tower construction materials or options:
-GI for FRP casing, FRP basin and HDG structural members and hard-
ware.
-SS for FRP casing, FRP basin and stainless steel structural members and
hardware.
-AS for stainless steel casing, basin, structural members and hardware.
-AG for HDG casing, basin, structural members and hardware.
2. Suffixes /E and /L are added to the basic model numbers to indicate
optional parts:
/E is for additional drift eliminator installed to the basic models (reduces
capacity ~2%).
/L is for additional louver installed in front of air inlet face.
3. Certification includes units with optional gear drive in place of standard
belt drive.
4. Certification includes units with motor mounted outside air stream in
place of inside air stream.
5. Certification includes use of optional handrail and/or optional caged
ladders.
but not listed.
Ryowo (Holding) Company, Ltd
FRS Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
FRS-80-2.2 FRS-100-4 FRS-150-5.5 FRS-250-11 FRS-350-15
FRS-80-4 FRS-100-5.5 FRS-150-7.5 FRS-250-15 FRS-350-18.5
FRS-80-5.5 FRS-100-7.5 FRS-150-11 FRS-250-18.5 FRS-350-22
Footnotes:
ware.
hardware.
2. Suffix /E is added to the basic model numbers to indicate optional parts:
capacity ~2%).
belt drive.
ladders.
Ryowo (Holding) Company, Ltd.
FWS Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
FWS-94-3.7 FWS-127-5.5 FWS-169-7.5
FWS-94-5.5 FWS-127-7.5 FWS-169-11
FWS-94-7.5 FWS-127-11 FWS-169-15
Footnotes:
ware.
hardware.
2. Suffixes /E and /L are added to the basic model numbers to indicate
optional parts:
capacity ~2%).
/L is for additional louver installed in front of air inlet face.
belt drive.
ladders.
but not listed.
Ryowo (Holding) Company, Ltd.
FXS Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
FXS-200 FXS-300 FXS-400 FXS-500
FXS-250 FXS-350 FXS-450 FXS-550
Footnotes:
ware.
hardware.
belt drive.
ladders.
SPX Cooling Technologies (Marley)
Aquatower Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
December 2, 2002 (Revision 1)
Series 4900
(Metal Structure)
490A
490B
492A
492B
493A
493B
494A
494B
494C
495A
495B
496A
496B
MCP Series of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
MCP301116K MCP301216L
MCP301116L MCP301216M
MCP301117L MCP301217L
MCP301217M
MCP301118L
MCP301218M
MHF Series of CTI Certified Closed-Circuit Fluid Coolers
MHF702B061 MHF703C061 MHF704D061 MHF705F061 MHF706E061 MHF707H061
MHF703C122 MHF704D122 MHF705F122 MHF706E122 MHF707H122
MHF703C124 MHF704D124 MHF705F124 MHF706E124 MHF707H124
MHF702C061 MHF703D061 MHF704E061 MHF705H061 MHF706H061 MHF707J061
MHF703D122 MHF704E122 MHF705H122 MHF706H122 MHF707J122
MHF703D124 MHF704E124 MHF705H124 MHF706H124 MHF707J124
MHF702D061 MHF703E061 MHF704G061 MHF705J061 MHF706J061 MHF707L061
MHF703E122 MHF704G122 MHF705J122 MHF706J122 MHF707L122
MHF703E124 MHF704G124 MHF705J124 MHF706J124 MHF707L124
MHF704H061 MHF705K061 MHF706L061 MHF707M061
MHF706M061 MHF707N061
MHF706M062 MHF707N062
MHF706M081 MHF707N081
MHF706M082 MHF707N082
MHF706M084 MHF707N084
MHF706M101 MHF707N101
MHF706M102 MHF707N102
MHF706M121 MHF707N121
MHF706M122 MHF707N122
MHF706M124 MHF707N124
MHF706N061
MHF706N062
MHF706N081
MHF706N082
MHF706N084
MHF706N101
MHF706N102
MHF706N121
MHF706N122
MHF706N124
NC Class Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
NC Class Box Standard Models Low Noise Fan Models Ultra Low Noise Fan Models
Size Low Noise Designator Low Noise Designator Low Noise Designator
Not Applicable L, K, M, N, P, Q, R, S, T C, U, V
Fan Motor Power/Stack Designator
8301 C,D,E,F A,B,C,D,E -
8302 D,E,F,G A,B,C,D,E,F A,B,C,D,E,F
8303 E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F A,B,C,D,E,F
8304 D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H
NC 8305 D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
Steel 8306 D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
Models 8307 E,F,G,H,J,K,M A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
8309 C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K
8311 C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K
8312 C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N,R A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N
Standard Models Low Noise Fan Models Ultra Low Noise Fan Models
Low Noise Designator Low Noise Designator Low Noise Designator
Not Applicable L Not Applicable
8321 C,D,E - -
8322 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
8323 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
8324 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
NC 8325 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
Fiberglass 8326 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
Models 8327 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
8328 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
8329 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
8330 C,D,E,F,G C,D,E,F,G -
8331 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
8332 C,D,E,F C,D,E,F -
See Low Noise Configuration Options and Low Noise Designator Definitions in the Table Below
Low Noise Configuration Option Low Noise Designator CTI Certified (Note 1)
Standard Models No Designator Yes
Low Noise Fan No Attenuation L Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet Attenuation K Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Inlet Attenuation M Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Outlet Attenuation N Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Outlet Attenuation P Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet & 2 ft. Outlet attenuation Q Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Inlet & 2 ft. Outlet attenuation R Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet & 4 ft. Outlet attenuation S Yes
Low Noise Fan with 4 ft. Inlet & 4 ft. Outlet attenuation T Yes
Ultra Low Noise Fan No Attenuation C Yes
Ultra Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet Attenuation U Yes
Ultra Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Inlet Attenuation V Yes
Footnotes:
1. Capacity adjustments are required for all non-standard model configurations. See selection
software at www.spxcooling.com or www.marleyct.com for specific capacity of each con-
figuration.
3. Sample Model Number NC8305DM2 where
NC8305 = Box Size
D = Motor Power/Stack Designator
M = Low Noise Option Designator
2 = Number of Cells
AV Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
AV61001 AV63001 AV65001 AV67001
AV61011 AV63011 AV65011 AV67011
AV61021 AV63021 AV65021 AV67021
AV61031 AV63031 AV65031 AV67031
AV61041 AV63041 AV65041 AV67041
AV65051
AV62001 AV64001 AV66001
AV62011 AV64011 AV66011
AV62021 AV64021 AV66021
AV62031 AV64031 AV66031
AV62041 AV64041 AV66041
AV62051 AV64051
MCW Series of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
MCW901731K1 MCW901736L1 MCW901746N1 MCW901756Q1
MCW901736M1
MCW901732L1 MCW901747N1 MCW901757Q1
MCW901732M1 MCW901737N1 MCW901747P1 MCW901757R1
MCW901738N1 MCW901748P1 MCW901758R1
MCW901748Q1
The Cooling Tower Company, L. C.
Series TCI Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
1 Cell Models 2 Cell Models 3 Cell Models
TCI-0404-1-1 TCI-1108-5-1 TCI-0812-5-2 TCI-1116-5-2 TCI-1130-10-3
TCI-0404-3-1 TCI-1108-7.5-1 TCI-0812-7.5-2 TCI-1116-7.5-2 TCI-1130-15-3
TCI-1108-15-1 TCI-0812-15-2 TCI-1116-15-2 TCI-1130-25-3
TCI-0606-3-1 TCI-1108-20-1 TCI-1116-20-2
TCI-0606-5-1 TCI-0816-5-2 TCI-1136-15-3
TCI-0606-7.5-1 TCI-1110-10-1 TCI-0816-7.5-2 TCI-1120-10-2 TCI-1136-20-3
TCI-1110-15-1 TCI-0816-10-2 TCI-1120-15-2 TCI-1136-25-3
TCI-0806-7.5-1 TCI-1110-25-1 TCI-1120-25-2
TCI-0806-10-1 TCI-0820-10-2 TCI-1142-20-3
TCI-1112-20-1 TCI-0820-20-2 TCI-1124-20-2 TCI-1142-30-3
TCI-0808-7.5-1 TCI-1112-30-1 TCI-1124-30-2
TCI-0808-10-1 TCI-0824-10-2 TCI-1148-25-3
TCI-1114-25-1 TCI-0824-20-2 TCI-1128-25-2 TCI-1148-40-3
TCI-0810-15-1 TCI-1114-40-1 TCI-1128-40-2
TCI-0810-20-1 TCI-0828-15-2
TCI-0810-25-1 TCI-1116-25-1 TCI-0828-20-2 TCI-1132-25-2
TCI-1116-30-1 TCI-0828-25-2 TCI-1132-30-2
TCI-0812-10-1 TCI-1116-40-1 TCI-0828-30-2 TCI-1132-40-2
TCI-0812-15-1 TCI-1116-50-1 TCI-1132-50-2
TCI-0812-20-1
TCI-0812-25-1 TCI-1118-30-1 TCI-1136-30-2
TCI-1118-40-1 TCI-1136-40-2
TCI-0814-15-1 TCI-1118-50-1 TCI-1136-50-2
TCI-0814-20-1 TCI-1118-60-1 TCI-1136-60-2
TCI-0814-25-1
TCI-0814-30-1
Footnotes:
1. Series TCI towers are supplied with stainless steel basins and are available with either stainless steel or galvanized panels and structure.
2. Series TCI towers are offered with either gear or belt drives.
3. Fixed or variable orifice nozzles are available with all Series TCI towers.
4. Premium efficient motors are supplied on all Series TCI towers.
Tower Tech, Inc.
TTXE Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
3.0 hp/fan Models 5.0 hp/fan Models 7.5 hp/fan Models
TTXE-021930 TTXE-021950 TTXE-021975
TTXE-031930 TTXE-031950 TTXE-031975
TTXE-041930 TTXE-041950 TTXE-041975
TTXE-061930 TTXE-061950 TTXE-061975
TTXE-081930 TTXE-081950 TTXE-081975
TTXE-101930 TTXE-101950 TTXE-101975
Footnotes:
1. Models listed above are for single cells with a base inlet height of 6-
f t .
but not listed.
3. Models with inlet heights more or less than 6-ft are also available but
not listed.
4. Multiple cell models of the single cell models and/or models with air
inlet heights more or less than 6-ft require capacity correction per
the TTXE correction table submitted with the CTI Certification
application.
Quadraflow Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
21121 22121 23121 24121
21122 22122 23122 24122
21123 22123 23123 24123
21124 23124 24124
22221 24125
21221 22222 23221 24126
21222 22223 23222 24127
22224 23223
21321 22225 23224 24221
21322 23225 24222
21323 24223
24224
24225
The Trane Company
Series Quiet (TQ) Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
Series Box Standard Models Low Noise Fan Models Ultra Low Noise Fan Models
Quiet Size Low Noise Designator Low Noise Designator Low Noise Designator
Not Applicable L, K, M, N, P, Q, R, S, T C, U, V
8301 C,D,E,F A,B,C,D,E -
8302 D,E,F,G A,B,C,D,E,F A,B,C,D,E,F
8303 E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F A,B,C,D,E,F
8304 D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H
8305 D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
TQ 8306 D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
8307 E,F,G,H,J,K,M A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
8311 C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K
8312 C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N,R A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,K,N
See Low Noise Configuration Options and Low Noise Designator Definitions in the Table Below
Low Noise Configuration Option Low Noise Designator CTI Certified (Note 1)
Standard ModelsNo Designator Yes
Low Noise Fan No Attenuation L Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet Attenuation K Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Inlet Attenuation M Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Outlet Attenuation N Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Outlet Attenuation P Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet & 2 ft. Outlet attenuation Q Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Inlet & 2 ft. Outlet attenuation R Yes
Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet & 4 ft. Outlet attenuation S Yes
Low Noise Fan with 4 ft. Inlet & 4 ft. Outlet attenuation T Yes
Ultra Low Noise Fan No Attenuation C Yes
Ultra Low Noise Fan w/ 2 ft. Inlet Attenuation U Yes
Ultra Low Noise Fan w/ 4 ft. Inlet Attenuation V Yes
Footnotes:
1. Capacity adjustments are required for all non-standard model configurations. See selection software for SPX Cooling Technologies (Marley) NC Class line of towers at
www.spxcooling.com or www.marleyct.com for specific capacity of each configuration of the Trane Quiet Series (TQ) with equivalent model numbers.
3. Sample Model Number: TQ8305DM2 where
TQ8305 = Box Size
D = Motor Power/Stack Designator
M = Low Noise Option Designator
2 = Number of Cells
Zhejiang Jinling Refrigeration Engineering Co., Ltd.
JNT Series Line of CTI Certified Cooling Towers
Standard Fan Standard Fan Low Noise Fan
Standard Stack Extended Stack Standard Stack
JNT-80 JNT-80S JNT-70UL
Footnotes:
1. Certification includes tower construction materials indicated by the suffixes -B, -E,
and -S which are added to basic model numbers above.
-B is for FRP casing, FRP basin and HDG mainframe and hardware.
-E is for FRP casing, FRP basin and stainless steel mainframe and hardware
-S is for stainless steel casing, basin, mainframe and hardware.
2. The basic model numbers above are for 50hz fan motor and the suffix /F is added for
60hz motor applications. For example, JNT-100S-B is for 50hz motor, JNT-100S-B/
F is for 60hz motor.
3. Certification includes use of side, end, or bottom water inlet configuration.
listed.
Advance Cooling Towers ...................... 25
Aggreko Cooling Tower Services ......... 44, 45
AHR Expo ............................................... 71
AirFlo Cooling Technologies .................. 39
Amarillo Gear Company ......................... IBC
American Cooling Tower, Inc. ............... 13, 67
Amcot Cooling Tower Corporation ........ 35
AMSA, Inc. ............................................. 15, 55
Bailsco Blades and Casting, Inc............ 36
Baltimore Aircoil Company ..................... OBC
BASF ...................................................... 51
Bedford Reinforced Plastics ................. 27
BIC Magazine.......................................... 6
Brentwood Indistries, Inc. ..................... 57
ChemTreat, Inc. ...................................... 11
ClearAir .................................................. 47
CTI Certified Towers .............................. 72 - 85
CTI Licensed Agencies .......................... 70
CTI Table Top Exhibits ............................ 69
CTI ToolKit ............................................... 86
Cooling Tower Resources, Inc. ............. 49
CTL Group .............................................. 61
Dynamic Fabricators.............................. 7
Electric Power ........................................ 27
Fibergrate Composite Structures .......... 63
Gaiennie Lumber Company ................... 2
Howden Cooling Fans ........................... 5
Hudson Products Corporation............... 23
Industrial Cooling Tower ........................ 12, IFC
KIMCO ..................................................... 65
McHale & Associates, Inc. .................... 59
Midwest Towers, Inc. ............................ 43
Multi-Wing ............................................... 37
Myron L Company.................................. 4
Neri .......................................................... 41
Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd. .............. 33
Paltech Cooling Towers ......................... 21
Rexnord .................................................. 3
C.E. Shepherd Company ....................... 19
SPIG ........................................................ 17
Spraying Services, Inc. .......................... 31
SPX Cooling Technologies ..................... 53
Strongwell .............................................. 9
Tower Performance............................... 88
WQA-Aquatech ..................................... 68
Index of Advertisers

CTI Journal

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CTI Journal

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CTI Journal, Vol. 28, No.

S-ar putea să vă placă și