MaximaLabs
Back to gallery

Cooling tower Process Flowsheets & Simulations

Explore 2 validated, solved Cooling tower simulation flowsheets in MaximaLabs — real components: ethanol, water. Open any one directly in your browser.

Solved via: NRTL, STEAM.

Process HOT
CW Supply
hot
cold
hot
cold
HX
Tower
Process OUT
CW Return
Reference model

Cooling-water tower (Merkel sizing)

A process cooling-water utility: a hot ethanol-water process stream is cooled against cooling water in a counter-current exchanger, and the warmed cooling water is then sent to an evaporative cooling tower that rejects the picked-up heat to ambient air and returns it cold. The tower reports the evaporation + blowdown makeup water and — because the wet-bulb temperature and the water-to-air ratio L/G are given — the Merkel tower characteristic KaV/L a designer sizes the fill to, plus the range (hot→cold water drop, 10 K here) and the approach to the wet-bulb (5 K). Rate a fill against that demand with the standalone Cooling tower (Merkel) analysis tool. Honest scope: the cooling-water side is shown open (supply → exchanger → tower → return); a real plant recycles the return with makeup, and the Merkel model carries Le=1 assumptions.

6 unit ops • NRTL

79 1

View & open
Process HOT
hot
cold
hot
cold
PROC HX
Process OUT
Closed Supply
CL PUMP
hot
cold
hot
cold
Plate HX
Closed Return
OPEN Supply
Tower
OPEN Return
Chemical plant cooling-water utility

Hybrid cooling — a closed circuit isolated from the tower by a plate exchanger

Three loops in series, and the middle one is the point. The process is cooled by a closed circuit of treated water that never contacts air; that circuit rejects its heat across a plate exchanger into an open evaporative circuit; and only that outer circuit goes to the tower and loses water. Why a plant pays for the extra exchanger: open cooling water picks up oxygen, airborne dirt and biology, and concentrates its dissolved salts every cycle. Putting that water through a reactor jacket or a condenser is what fouls and corrodes them. The closed loop stays clean, stays at pressure, and its inventory never concentrates — so the equipment the process actually touches sees water that does not scale. Solved here: the process leaves at 318 K, the closed circuit picks that up (303 → 320 K) and is knocked back to 306 K across the plate exchanger, the open circuit takes it (301 → 311 K) and the tower returns it to 301.15 K at a 4.0 K approach to a 297.15 K wet bulb. Water loss appears only in the open circuit — the closed one leaves with exactly the flow it entered with, which is the whole claim made arithmetic. The tower also reports its scaling limit from the makeup analysis: this water saturates in calcite at 2.2 cycles, so the 4 cycles configured here shows negative headroom — a real operating conflict, left visible rather than tuned away. Bounded: steady state, so there is no basin inventory and no level control (a level is only meaningful in the dynamic engine). Fouling is not modelled — the argument for the closed loop is made by the chemistry, not by a fouling rate. Feeds and returns are open rather than recycled, the same convention cooling-water-tower uses.

10 unit ops • STEAM

22 1

View & open

Stop fighting legacy software. Build your first flowsheet in 60 seconds.