Journal Pre-proof

Experimental investigation of the solid desiccant dehumidification

system with metal organic frameworks

Jung-Gil Lee , Kyung Jin Bae , Oh Kyung Kwon

PII: S0140-7007(21)00246-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2021.06.020
Reference: JIJR 5192

To appear in: International Journal of Refrigeration

Received date: 16 March 2021

Revised date: 17 May 2021
Accepted date: 15 June 2021

Please cite this article as: Jung-Gil Lee , Kyung Jin Bae , Oh Kyung Kwon , Experimental investiga-
tion of the solid desiccant dehumidification system with metal organic frameworks, International Journal
of Refrigeration (2021), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2021.06.020

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Highlight
 ·This paper investigate the dehumidification performance of MOFs desiccant
coated heat exchanger.
 ·Maximum water uptake capacity of MOFs desiccant was around 0.4 g·g-1 in given
operating condition.
 ·90% of MOFs with 10% of solvent and binder mixture coated on the metallic fin
of heat exchanger.
 ·Increase of coating thickness can achieve the 131 % of dehumidification
performance.
 ·The decrease of space velocity shows the over 160% enhancement of
dehumidification performance.

1
 Experimental investigation of the solid desiccant
dehumidification system with metal organic frameworks
Jung-Gil Lee, Kyung Jin Bae, Oh Kyung Kwon

Thermal & Fluid System Group, Korea Institute of Industrial Technology,

Republic of Korea; jglee@kitech.re.kr
* Correspondence: kwonok@kitech.re.kr; Tel.: +82-041-589-8528

Abstract
In this study, the comprehensive study of the performance investigation of Solid
Desiccant Based Dehumidification (SDBD) system which involves the desiccant selection
and desiccant coating with metallic heat exchanger was conducted at the mild humid
conditions which represent the humid air conditions in summer, South Korea. The water
uptake capacity of three different solid desiccants was investigated to find the proper
solid desiccant in the SDBD system under the given operating conditions. Among the
three different solid desiccants, the aluminum fumarate based metal organic frameworks
(MOFs) was selected as the best solid desiccant for SDBD system and it has the
maximum water uptake capacity around 0.398 g·g-1 for given operating conditions. The
aluminum fumarate based metal organic frame works (MOFs) was coated on the metallic
surface of heat exchanger by current developed coating method and the desiccant and
binder solution is consistent of 10% of binder and solvent mixture and 90% of aluminum
fumarate based MOFs. As a result, the increase of coating thickness from 0.05 mm to 0.2
mm and operating time from 150 seconds to 300 seconds can achieve the 113% and
131% of dehumidification performance enhancement in average, respectively.
Remarkably, over 160% improvement of dehumidification performance in average can be
achieved by the decrease of space velocity from 13 s-1 to 5.2 s-1.

Keywords: Solid dehumidification, Desiccant selection method, Coating method,

Experimental analysis

2
Nomenclature

AC S Cross-sectional area (m2)

DCHE Desiccant coated heat exchanger

Deh. Dehumidification

GPHE Granular packed heat exchanger

H s a m p le
Height of series type DCHE (m)

hv Latent heat of vaporization (kJ·kg-1).

MVC Mechanical vapor compression cycle

MOFs Metal organic frameworks

m a ir Inlet humid air mass flow rate (kg·s-1)

RH Relative humidity (%)

Reg. Regeneration

SV Space velocity (s-1)

SDBD Solid desiccant based dehumidification

t : Operating time (s)

Qlatent Removal of latent load (W)

W Absolute humidity (g·g-1)

 a ir Density of air (kg·m3)

3
1. Introduction
A quality of indoor air is highly influenced on the human health and life quality. To
control the indoor air quality, the temperature and humidity should be controlled,
simultaneously (Sun et al., 2017). In conventional way to control the indoor air quality,
the mechanical vapor compression cycle (MVC), namely air conditioning system, is
generally utilized, due to its small size and easy to use (Barbosa Jr et al., 2012;
Karameldin et al., 2003). The MVC is operated to supply the proper air to indoor by
overcoming the latent load and sensible load (Vivekh et al., 2020b). However, to conduct
the dehumidification process in air conditioning system, the supply air temperature
should be below the dew-point temperature to get rid of the latent cooling load, and it
leads the insufficient energy loss and low coefficient of performance (Oh et al., 2017).
The latent cooling load is occupied around 40 % of total cooling load and it can be
increased according to the high humid region (Cui et al., 2018; Tu et al., 2017; Vivekh et
al., 2020b). Therefore, the recent researches are tried to handle the latent and sensible
cooling loads, separately, to enhance the system performance, through the change of
system configuration (Barbosa Jr et al., 2012; Cui et al., 2018; Oh et al., 2017; Tu et al.,
2017; Valarezo et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2020).
One of the suggested configurations is the solid desiccant based dehumidification
(SDBD) system to control the humidity of air. SDBD utilizes the solid desiccant to remove
the moisture in air which involves the latent heat (Chai et al., 2020; Jia et al., 2006; Vivekh
et al., 2020a). The dehumidification process with desiccant can overcome through the
cooling of the adsorption heat by the cooling water stream, therefore it can reduce the
inherent shortcomings of MVC system such as its high electric energy consumption and
inefficient energy use due to the overcooling for dew point temperature (Coney et al.,
1989; Vivekh et al., 2020b).
The conventional SDBD system has been adopted the fixed-bed and rotary types (Oh
et al., 2017; Ramzy et al., 2014; Vivekh et al., 2018). The fixed-bed types are categorized
again with two types, namely, granular packed heat exchanger (GPHE), and solid
desiccant coated heat exchanger (DCHE). The DCHE shows more excellent performance

4
than granular packed heat exchanger due to better contacting between metal fins and
desiccant powder(Oh et al., 2017). In addition, the DCHE requires less quantity of
desiccant than GPHE. On the other hand, the granular packed heat exchanger requires
the large amount of desiccant granules and it can cause the poor heat transfer efficiency
due to vacant space between each granules. Oh et al. (2017) shows the performance
comparison study between the granular packed heat exchanger and DCHE with RD type
silica-gel as solid desiccant. As results that the DCHE shows the higher water uptake
performance with higher heat and mass transfer. In addition, they denoted that the
desiccant which has a lower regeneration temperature, can be achieved the higher
coefficient of performance in terms of the heat energy consumption. Although the DCHE
can have higher dehumidification performance than the GPHE, the additional research
which is finding the proper binder and solvent to coat well the solid desiccant with the
metallic fin should be required, simultaneously. A. Li et al. (2016) showed the proper
binder selection process with the powdered silica-gels, namely type 3A and type RD
powder and also demonstrated the heat transfer rate around 3.4 - 4.6 folds improvement
with DCHE as compared with the packed in fin-tube heat exchanger. In addition, this
study shows the coating method to coat the solid desiccant on metallic surface.
The key parameter which is determined the SDBD system is a properties of desiccant
such as a water uptake capacity and regeneration temperature. The water uptake
capacity can determine the amount of water vapor removal in the humid air. In addition,
the low regeneration temperature leads the feasibility of utilization for low temperature
waste heat. Therefore, the development of the proper desiccant is highly important to
improve the performance of solid desiccant dehumidification system.
In order to enhance the dehumidification performance, the novel desiccants have
been developed, namely, the composite desiccant and desiccant based metal organic
frameworks (MOFs) (Aristov et al., 2002; Dhar and Singh, 2001; Hu et al., 2015; Jeong et
al., 2010; Jia et al., 2007; Karmakar et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2020; Li et al., 2016; Oh et al.,
2017; Zhang et al., 2019; Zhang and Qiu, 2007). Those novel desiccants are target to
improve the water uptake capacity and decrease of regeneration temperature. Especially,
the MOFs is attractive attention as a novel desiccant due to its several advantages such

5
as low regeneration temperature, high surface area and porosity, chemical structure
adjust possibility. Vivekh et al. (2020) developed a composite polymer desiccant
comprising a hydrophilic superabsorbent polymer and a hygroscopic salt. The water
uptake capacity increases 12 times improvement in the isothermal water uptake capacity
as comparison with the silica gel, zeolite and MOFs. And the new desiccant only requires
the regeneration temperature ranges between 40 °C to 50 °C. In addition, the use of new
composite desiccant can be achieved the high energy saving for dehumidification.
Valarezo et al. (2019) presents the performance evaluation of novel composite DCHE in
summer and winter season. The composite desiccant is manufactured by mixing silica gel
and sodium acetate. The dehumidification capacity can be enhanced the maximum 30%
with new composite desiccant. Zhang et al. (2020) introduced the aluminum MOFs as
novel desiccant which has 0.41 g·g-1 of water uptake capacity at the RH ranges between
40% to 60%. In addition, they also mentioned aluminum MOFs can remove the bacteria
concentration in the humid air. Chen and He (2020) adopted the MOFs MIL-101(Cr)/
ceramic fibre paper as a solid desiccant for desiccant wheel. The MOFs MIL-101(Cr)/
ceramic fibre paper shows the 177 mg·g-1 of water uptake capacity at even less than the
50% of relative humidity (RH). In addition, it has high thermal and hydrothermal stability
and a low regeneration temperature.
In order to improve the system performance of SDBD system, the comprehensive
study which involves the analysis of water uptake capacity at given operating range,
coating method, the performance investigation in the real operating conditions with the
economical refrigerant temperatures, and the performance investigation at the various
operating conditions is required, however, the number of studies are lacked. Therefore, in
this study, we suggested the comprehensive study which involves aforementioned above
studies and conducted the experimental study to investigate the system performance of
SDBD system with considering regional characteristics of South Korea. In addition, the
research that the finding of the proper desiccant and the coating method were also
conducted to enhance the performance of SDBD system. The experimental study is
performed at the KS C 9306 which means Korean industrial Standard for air conditioner
in summer season. And the detail condition of KS C 9306 is as follows: (i) the dry and

6
wet bulb temperatures of indoor condition are 27°C and 19°C, respectively. (ii) And the
dry and wet bulb temperatures of outdoor condition are 35°C and 24°C, respectively.

2. Experimental apparatus

In this section, we discussed as follows: (i) the selection of proper desiccant according
to the target region which involves the dry and wet bulb temperature in summer season,
(ii) the coating method for the coating the proper desiccant on the metallic fin, and (iii)
the experimental setup for investigation of the performance of DCHE.

2.1 Selection of proper desiccant

Fig. 1. Water uptake capacity of three different desiccants for dehumidification (Deh.)
and regeneration (Reg.) modes (Lee et al., 2020)

Fig. 1 shows the water uptake capacity gradient of three different adsorbents for
dehumidification and regeneration modes, respectively, with an increase in the RH. The

7
desiccant is one of the majority factors to determine the performance of solid desiccant
dehumidification system. Conventional solid desiccant for dehumidification system mainly
employs the silica gel as desiccant. The silica-gel is non-toxic, reusable, and inexpensive
(Azizian et al., 2006). The silica gel has a linear shape of isotherm characteristics. This
means that the performance of water uptake proportionally increases as an increase in
the RH. The maximum water uptake capacity of typical silica gel is around 0.47 g·g-1 at
the 100% of RH and the water uptake capacity is reduced around half at the 50% of RH
as shown in Fig. 1.
Meanwhile, the FAM-Z01 and aluminum fumarate based MOFs has the S-shape
isotherm characteristics. The water uptake capacity of those desiccants shows the sudden
increase to the near maximum water uptake capacity at the certain RH. In addition, those
desiccants show very low water uptake capacity at the regeneration mode. The
regeneration process of solid desiccant with linear shape of isotherm characteristics is
required the high temperature to get rid of the moisture in the pore of desiccant,
resulting the performance degradation of SDBD system. The solid desiccants which have
S-shape isotherm characteristics are more appropriate to apply to the SDBD system due
to its lower regeneration temperature than the solid desiccant with linear shape of
isotherm characteristics.
To find the appropriate solid desiccant among three different desiccants, the water
uptake capacities of three different desiccants are evaluated at given operating
conditions. The indoor and outdoor humid air conditions which are employed in this
study are denoted in Table 1.

Table 1
Indoor and outdoor humid air condition for experimental study.

Indoor
Outdoor humid
humid
air condition
air condition
Dry Bulb Temperature (°C) 27 35
Wet Bulb Temperature (°C) 19 24

8
 During the dehumidification and regeneration process, the DCHE requires the heat
energy to compensate the adsorption and desorption heat. Thus, the cold and hot water
supply to the DCHE at dehumidification and regeneration mode, respectively. Here, the
cooling water temperature and hot water temperature were set at that can be obtained
from the cooling tower and the waste heat sources. The cold and hot water temperature
can be shown in Table 2.

Table 2
Refrigerant temperatures for dehumidification and regeneration processes.

Dehumidification Regeneration
Process process
Hot Temperature (°C) - 45
Cold Temperature (°C) 27 -

According to the Tables 1 and 2, the operating conditions of dehumidification and

regeneration processes are 49% of RH and the 20% of RH, respectively. Water uptake
capacity of three different desiccants can be shown in Fig. 1. As a result, the maximum
water uptake capacity is 0.398 g·g-1 with the aluminum fumarate based MOFs. The
aluminum fumarate based MOFs shows the S-shape isotherm characteristics. As a result,
the aluminum fumarate based MOFs is determined as a proper desiccant for this study.

2.2 Coating method

9
 Fig. 2. Desiccant coated heat exchangers (left top: 0.05 mm DCHE, right top: 0.05 mm
DCHE, right bottom: 0.2 mm DCHE, and left bottom: series module (left top + right top)

The coating method of aluminum fumarate based MOFs on the metallic fin of heat
exchanger consists of following steps: (i) the metallic fin of heat exchanger is washed
with detergent and cleaned; (ii) the mixture of binder (epoxy) with solvent (water and
ethyl alcohol) is manufactured with 20,000 revolutions per minute mixer around 30
minutes; (iii) the 90% of solid desiccant pour in the 10% of mixture solution which mixed
binder and solvent, and it is mixed again around 1 hour with 20,000 revolutions per
minute mixer; (iv) the heat exchanger is immersed, namely dip coating method, in the
liquid aluminum fumarate based MOFs with epoxy binder and dried in the oven and
vacuum chamber; and (v) process (iv) is repeated until achieving the targeted coating
thickness. The weight ratio between desiccant and binder is 10%. The materials of
metallic fin and tube of heat exchanger are aluminum and copper, respectively. Fig. 2
shows the desiccant coated heat exchanger which are employed in this study. In Fig.2,
the left top and right top of DCHE have 0.05 mm of coating thickness and the right
bottom of DCHE has 0.2 mm of coating thickness. In order to increase the length of air
channel, the left top and right top of DCHE are linked with silicone adhesive as series
module and it can be seen left bottom in Fig. 2.

2.3 Experimental setup

10
 Fig. 3 shows the schematic diagram and picture of experimental set-up. The
specification of the DCHE is 250 mm X 250 mm X and 100 mm (width X length X height).
The fin pitch and fin thickness are 2.8 mm and 0.1 mm, respectively. The aluminum
fumarate based MOFs was coated on the metallic surface of heat exchanger. The SDBD
system with aluminum fumarate based MOFs is consisted of air chamber, two constant
temperature and humidity chamber, data logger, and control panel. The air chamber is
consisted of the DCHE, two RH sensors (0-100% RH, error: 2%RH, Omega), two resistance
temperature detectors (RTD, range: -200~400°C, error: ±0.01°C, Omega), and nozzle
differential pressure flow meter (pressure transmitter range: 0~1.96 kPa, error: ±0.04%,
Yokogawa).

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram (top) and picture (bottom) of experimental setup

The inlet and outlet RH, temperatures of inlet and outlet, and humid air mass flow rate
are logged at the data logger. The cross sectional area of air chamber is 40 cm2. The two
constant temperature and humidity chambers make up the humid air to match the
indoor and outdoor conditions, respectively. The stabilization time for two chambers set
11
to be 1 hour. The DCHE based dehumidification system requires the regeneration
process which gets rid of the water in the pore of desiccant for preparing the
dehumidification process. Thus, the dehumidification process and regeneration process
are sequentially repeated to remove the humidity in the air in the DCHE based
dehumidification system. The control panel controls the pneumatic dampers and valves
to change the mode for dehumidification process and regeneration process, sequentially
according to the control algorithm. The control algorithm can be shown in Table 3.

Table 3
Control algorithm.

Dampers for humid air Valves for refrigerant

Indoor Outdoor Cold water Hot water
Dehumidification
○ X ○ X
mode
Regeneration mode X ○ X ○

The experimental procedure is as follows: (i) to regenerate the DCHE, perfectly, the
regeneration mode is operated around 1 hour at the 35°C of dry bulb temperature and
24°C of wet bulb temperature of input humid air and the 45°C of heat transfer fluid, (ii)
the dehumidification mode is operated 150 seconds at the at the 27°C of dry bulb
temperature and 19°C of wet bulb temperature of input humid air and the 27°C of heat
transfer fluid, (iii) the regeneration mode is operated 150 seconds at the 35°C of dry
bulb temperature and 24°C of wet bulb temperature of input humid air and the 45°C of
heat transfer fluid, and (iv) the (ii) and (iii) are sequentially repeated. When the
dehumidification mode is operated, the damper for the supply of indoor air condition
and valve for cold water are open and the damper for the supply of outdoor air
condition and valve for hot water are closed. Therefore, the indoor condition air pass
through the DCHE in air chamber and the cold water flows in the tube of DCHE. When
the regeneration mode is operated, the damper for supply of indoor air condition and
valve for cold water are closed and the damper for supply of outdoor air condition and

12
valve for hot water are opened. Therefore, the outdoor condition air pass through the
DCHE in air chamber and the hot water flows in the tube of DCHE. The inlet and outlet
RH, humid air temperature, air flow rate are measured by the RH sensors, the resistance
temperature detectors, and nozzle differential pressure flow meter, respectively. And the
data is recorded at the data logger. Meanwhile, when the regeneration mode is operated,
the damper for indoor and valve for cold water are closed.

Table 4

Two different operating times for experimental study.

Operating time A (s) Operating time B (s)

Dehumidification mode 150 300
Regeneration mode 150 300

Table 4 shows the operating time of dehumidification and regeneration processes. To

evaluate the influence of operating time on the system performance, two different
operating conditions are employed. When the operating time A is employed, 150
seconds of regeneration process is operated and then 150 seconds of dehumidification
process is operated. And those processes are sequentially repeated and the case of
operating time B is 300 seconds.

3. Results and discussion

13
 In this section, the performance evaluation of the DCHE with aluminum fumarate
based MOFs is performed with various operating conditions to find the proper operating
conditions for the enhancement of dehumidification performance.

3.1. Dynamic dehumidification performance

Fig. 4 shows the dynamic difference of outlet absolute humidity for operating time
which involves the regeneration and dehumidification processes in four cycles with 0.05
mm DCHE at 0.04 kg·s-1 of humid air mass flow rate. When the regeneration mode is
employed, the inlet humid air of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures are 35°C and 24°C,
respectively, and the inlet hot water temperature is 45°C. The dehumidification mode is
conducted at the inlet humid air of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures are 27°C and
19°C, respectively, the inlet cooling water temperature is 27°C. For the regeneration and
dehumidification processes, the difference of absolute humidity between inlet and outlet
in average is around 3.6 g·kgair-1. When the regeneration and dehumidification processes
are switched at the switching time, the unexpected peak value can be occurred and it is
marked red circle in the Fig. 4. This is because the refrigerant and humid air conditions
for the dehumidification and regeneration processes are simultaneously changed and the
every switching time is required the a few seconds to achieve the steady state. Therefore,
the short switching time can issue the performance degradation of the SDBD system.

14
 Fig. 4. Dynamic difference of outlet absolute humidity between inlet and outlet

When the dehumidification process is conducted, the difference of absolute humidity

was in average 3.58 g·kgair-1. That means that the adsorbed water vapor during the
dehumidification process is well desorbed the water vapor during the regeneration
process and the dynamic operation of SDBD system can be well performed by the cyclic
batch mode in sequence.

3.2. Influence of coating thickness

To evaluate the influence of coating thickness on the performance of
dehumidification system, two DCHE which has two different coating thicknesses were
prepared and the difference of humid air RH and temperatures are measured by the RH
sensors and RTD sensors. The measured data is converted to the absolute humidity by
using American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE handbook). The two different coating thicknesses are 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm. The
operating times for the dehumidification and the regeneration modes, are 150 seconds,
respectively. The applied humid air flow rates are 0.04 kg·s-1 to 0.1 kg·s-1 and its air
velocities are 0.52 m·s-1 to 1.3 m·s-1.
15
Fig. 5. Dynamic outlet absolute humidity gradients for humidification and regeneration
modes with 0.05 mm of coating thickness DCHE at various inlet humid air mass flow
rates

16
 Fig. 6. Dynamic outlet absolute humidity gradients for humidification and regeneration
modes with 0.2 mm of coating thickness DCHE at various inlet humid air mass flow rates

Fig. 5 shows the dynamic outlet air absolute humidity gradients for dehumidification
and regeneration modes with 0.05 mm of coating thickness DCHE at various inlet humid
air mass flow rates. The inlet absolute humidity is 10.8 g·kgair-1 and 14 g·kgair-1 with
dehumidification and regeneration modes, respectively. When the 0.05 mm DCHE is
applied for dehumidification mode, the absolute humidity of outlet gradually increases
after the point of lowest absolute humidity. When the high mass flow rate of humid air
of 1 kg·s-1 is applied, the degradation of the dehumidification performance is happened
faster and steeper due to its limited water uptake capacity. On the other hand, if the
mass flow rate is low, it takes longer to reach the maximum adsorption saturation of the
sorbent, so the point of performance degradation can be shown later.

Fig. 6 represents the dynamic outlet air absolute humidity gradients for
dehumidification and regeneration modes with 0.2 mm of coating thickness DCHE at
17
various inlet humid air mass flow rates. When the 0.2 mm DCHE is employed for
dehumidification mode, the absolute humidity of outlet gradually increases after the
point of lowest absolute humidity and it shows the same trend with that of 0.05 mm
coating thickness of DCHE. The dehumidification of 0.2 mm DCHE is slightly higher than
that of 0.05 mm DCHE, this is because that the thinner DCHE has more lower water
uptake capacity than that of thicker DCHE.

When the regeneration mode is employed, the water vapor in the desiccant comes
out to the ambient and the absolute humidity of outlet humid air increases. As same
with results of dehumidification process, the high regeneration phenomena can be
shown at earlier and then it decreases.

Fig. 7 shows the difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet
DCHE with two difference thickness of DCHE during the operating time. The difference of
average absolute humidity (DAH) can be calculated by following Eqs. (1) and (2).

(1)
1
DAH 
t
 dW dt
0

d W  W in  W o u t (2)

where t is operating time (s), dW is the transient difference of inlet and outlet
absolute humidity (g·kg-1) during the operating time for dehumidification mode and
regeneration mode.

18
Fig. 7. Difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet DCHE with two
difference thickness of DCHE during the operating time

As can be shown in Fig. 7, the difference of average absolute humidity between inlet
and outlet DCHE during the operating time increases with an increases in the humid air
mass flow rate. The maximum difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and
outlet DCHE is 3.6 g·kgair-1 at the 0.04 kg·s-1 of humid air mass flow rate with the 0.2 mm
DCHE. The performance of dehumidification for the 0.2 mm DCHE is slightly higher than
that of 0.05 mm DCHE. This is because that the thicker DCHE can adsorb more water
vapor in humid air. However, it does not a proportional increase as compared with the
increase of coating thickness.

According to the decrease of inlet humid air mass flow rate, the difference of average
absolute humidity between inlet and outlet DCHE increases. This means that the contact
time between humid air mass flow and desiccant coated surface may attribute to the
performance of dehumidification process. In addition, when the low inlet humid air mass

19
flow rate is applied, the water uptake load of desiccant is reduced in same operating
time and more absolute humidity can be controlled.

Fig. 8. Influence of the coating thickness on removal of latent load with respect to
the humid air mass flow rate

Fig. 8 shows the influence of the coating thickness on removal of latent heat with
respect to the humid air mass flow rate. The removal of latent heat was evaluated by
following Eq. (3).

Q la te n t  m a ir (W in  W o u t ) h v (3)

where, Qlatent is removal of latent load (W), m a ir is humid air mass flow rate (kg·s-1), and hv
is latent heat of vaporization (kJ·kg-1).

The removal of latent heat for 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm DCHE increases from 312 W to
487 W and from 351 W to 536 W with an increase in the humid air mass flow rate,

20
respectively. Uncertainty analysis for the removal of latent heat calculation was
conducted based on the previous literature (Taylor and Kuyatt, 1994) and the maximum
uncertainty value was 2.1 % for removal of latent heat.

As a result, the 0.2 mm of coating thickness does not show the proportional
enhancement of dehumidification performance during the 150 seconds of operating time.
Although, the 0.2 mm DCHE has 4 times higher coating thickness than the 0.05 mm
DCHE, the maximum improvement of removal of latent heat was only 113% at 0.08 kg·s-1
of inlet humid air mass flow rate.

3.3. Influence of operating time

In order to investigate the influence of the operating time on the dehumidification
process, two different operating times are adopted on the dehumidification system with
two different DCHE. The difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and
outlet DCHE during the operating time for two difference thickness of DCHE are
compared between 150 seconds and 300 seconds of operating times at various humid
air mass flow rate.

21
Fig. 9. Difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet (a) 0.05 mm and
(b) 0.2 mm DCHE for 150 seconds of operating time

Fig. 10. Difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet (a) 0.05 mm
and (b) 0.2 mm DCHE for 300 seconds of operating time
22
 Figs. 9 and 10 show the difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and
outlet DCHE for 150 seconds and 300 seconds of operating times. The SDBD system is
operated as a cyclic batch mode of dehumidification and regeneration. The proper
operating time for dehumidification and regeneration processes should be considered to
improve the performance of dehumidification system. The too long operating time may
issue the performance degradation due to its limited water uptake capacity of desiccant
during the operating time. On the other hand, the too short operating time can issue the
noise problem, the malfunction of the valves, dampers, and control system. In this
section, the 150 seconds and 300 seconds of operating times were employed to
investigate the influence of the operating time on the SDBD system.

Fig. 9 shows the difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet
DCHE during the operating time for two different operating times with 0.05 mm DCHE.
When the 0.05 mm DCHE is employed, the difference of average absolute humidity
between inlet and outlet DCHE decreases from 3.2 g·kgair-1 to 2 g·kgair-1 and from 3
g·kgair-1 to 1.7 g·kgair-1 with an increase in the operating time from 150 seconds to 300
seconds at inlet humid air mass flow rate from 0.04 kg·s-1 to 0.1 kg·s-1. This is because
the thin coated DCHE does not have sufficient water uptake capacity for the long term
operation, resulting in poor performance over time. In addition, a short period of
operating time in dynamic system can disturb the performance of dehumidification and
regeneration processes due to its short switching time between dehumidification and
regeneration processes. Meanwhile, when the 0.2 mm DCHE is applied as shown in Fig.
10, the difference of average absolute humidity of 300 seconds was the 131% in average
value higher than that of 150 seconds at 0.04 kg·s-1 of inlet humid air mass flow rate.
This is because the thick coated DCHE can absorb the higher quantity of water uptake
capacity than thin coated DCHE.
In summary, the thin coated DCHE is not sufficient for the long term operation due
to its limited water uptake capacity, and the inappropriate short operating time is also
harmful to the dehumidification and regeneration processes due to its short switching
time. The batch cycle process requires the initial time for steady state and the

23
performance degradation is issued during the initial time for steady state. Therefore, the
optimization of proper operating time for the dehumidification and regeneration
processes is important to improve the performance of SDBD system.

3.4. Influence of space velocity

In order to investigate the influence of the space velocity on the dehumidification
system, the performance of 0.1 m and 0.2 m height of DCHE are compared in terms of
the difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet at the various
space velocities and 150 seconds of operating time. 0.2 m height of DCHE is consisted of
two 0.05 mm DCHE which has each 0.1 m of height and those are linked in series. The
dimension of the 0.2 height of DCHE is 250 mm Χ 250 mm Χ and 200 mm (width Χ
length Χ height) and the coating thickness was 0.05 mm. The results of 0.05 mm DCHE
which discussed at above section is used to compare with the dehumidification
performance of 0.2 m height DCHE.
The space velocity can be calculated by following Eq. (4).

(4)
m a ir 1
SV  
 a ir AC S  H s a m p le

where, SV is the space velocity (s-1),  a ir is the density of air (kg·m3), AC S is the cross-
sectional area (m2), and H s a m p le
is height of series type DCHE (m). When the 0.1 m and

0.2 m height of DCHE are employed, the space velocity increases from 5.2 s-1 to 13 s-1
and 2.6 s-1 to 6.5 s-1 according to the increase of inlet humid air mass flow rate from
0.04 kg·s-1 to 0.1 kg·s-1.

24
 Fig. 11. Influence of space velocity and height of DCHE on the difference of average
absolute humidity between inlet and outlet

The influence of space velocity and height of DCHE on dehumidification performance

are plotted in Fig. 11. The difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and
outlet decreases with an increase in the space velocity. This is because that when the
lower space velocity is employed, the humid air can have more chance to contact with
the coated desiccant on the metallic surface. The difference of average absolute humidity
with 0.1 m height DCHE increases from the 2 g·kgair-1 to 3.2 g·kgair-1 according to the
decrease of space velocity from 13 s-1 to 5.2 s-1. Meanwhile, when the 0.2 m height DCHE
is employed, the difference of average absolute humidity decreases from 4.7 g·kgair-1 to
3.1 g·kgair-1 according to the increase of the space velocity from 2.6 s-1 to 6.5 s-1. When
the 0.2 m height of DCHE is employed, the space velocity and the quantity of desiccant
are reduced half and increased double, respectively, however the maximum difference of
average absolute humidity only increases around 160%. This is because that the increase
of the difference of average absolute humidity is issued the increase of adsorption heat
25
and it attributes the degradation of performance of dehumidification process according
to the increase of coolant temperature in the coolant channel of DCHE. In addition, the
water uptake is very sensitive to the ambient temperature of desiccant coated metallic
surface of DCHE and the coolant temperature as can be seen the water uptake capacity
against the RH (see Fig. 1).

4. Conclusion
In this work, the performance of solid desiccant based dehumidification (SDBD)
system with aluminum fumarate based MOFs is investigated in experimentally at the mild
humid conditions as 49%RH of indoor condition and 40% of outdoor condition with
various operating conditions. The following conclusion can be summarized as:
(1) Aluminum fumarate based MOFs has the highest difference of water uptake capacity
as 0.389 g·g-1 among three different solid desiccants at the given operating conditions.
Therefore, it is determined as the most proper solid desiccant to enhance the
performance of SDBD system at the given operating conditions.
(2) Although the coating thickness increases from 0.05 mm to 0.2 mm, the maximum
increase of difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet is only
113%. The removal of latent heat does not show the significant increase with an increase
in the coating thickness.
(3) An inappropriate short operating time can reduce the difference in the average
absolute humidity between the inlet and outlet owing to its initial time for steady state,
which can cause performance degradation. However, an inappropriate long operating
time also can cause performance degradation because of the limited water uptake
capacity of the desiccant. When the thinner coated DCHE is employed, the difference of
average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet DCHE is reduced around 6.25% and
15% with an increase in the operating time from 150 seconds to 300 seconds at inlet
humid air mass flow rate from 0.04 kg·s-1 to 0.1 kg·s-1.
(4) Meanwhile, when the 300 seconds of operating time is applied, the performance
enhancement of thicker coated DCHE increases around 131% of at the 0.4 kg·s-1 of inlet

26
humid air mass flow rate as compared with that of 150 seconds. This is because, the
thicker coated DCHE can have higher water uptake capacity than thinner coated DCHE.
(5) Among the various operating conditions, the remarkable performance enhancement
in terms of the difference of absolute humidity between inlet and outlet was achieved
around 160 % with the space velocity. When the 0.1 m height of DCHE is employed, the
difference of average absolute humidity between inlet and outlet increases from 2 g·kgair-
1
to 3.2 g·kgair-1 according to the decrease of space velocity from 13 s-1 to 5.2 s-1.

Conflict of interest
The author declared that there is no conflict of interest
Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this
paper.

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and
Planning(KETEP) grant funded by the Korea government(MOTIE)(No. 20192050100070,
Development of an ultra-high efficiency heat pump system that reduces latent and
sensible heat loads.)

27
Reference

Aristov, Y.I., Restuccia, G., Cacciola, G., Parmon, V., 2002. A family of new working
materials for solid sorption air conditioning systems. Applied thermal engineering 22,
191-204.
Azizian, J., Mohammadi, A.A., Karimi, A.R., Mohammadizadeh, M.R., 2006. KAl (SO4) 2·
12H2O supported on silica gel as a novel heterogeneous system catalyzed biginelli
reaction: One-pot synthesis of di-hydropyrimidinones under solvent-free conditions.
Applied Catalysis A: General 300, 85-88.
Barbosa Jr, J.R., Ribeiro, G.B., de Oliveira, P.A., 2012. A state-of-the-art review of compact
vapor compression refrigeration systems and their applications. Heat Transfer
Engineering 33, 356-374.
Chai, S., Zhao, Y., Ge, T., Dai, Y., 2020. Experimental study on a fresh air heat pump
desiccant dehumidification system using rejected heat. Applied Thermal Engineering 179,
115742.
Coney, J., Sheppard, C., El-Shafei, E., 1989. Fin performance with condensation from
humid air: a numerical investigation. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 10, 224-
231.
Cui, S., Qin, M., Marandi, A., Steggles, V., Wang, S., Feng, X., Nouar, F., Serre, C., 2018.
Metal-Organic Frameworks as advanced moisture sorbents for energy-efficient high
temperature cooling. Scientific reports 8, 1-9.
Dhar, P., Singh, S., 2001. Studies on solid desiccant based hybrid air-conditioning
systems. Applied Thermal Engineering 21, 119-134.
Hu, L., Ge, T., Jiang, Y., Wang, R., 2015. Performance study on composite desiccant
material coated fin-tube heat exchangers. International journal of heat and mass transfer
90, 109-120.
Jeong, J., Yamaguchi, S., Saito, K., Kawai, S., 2010. Performance analysis of four-partition
desiccant wheel and hybrid dehumidification air-conditioning system. International
journal of refrigeration 33, 496-509.
Jia, C., Dai, Y., Wu, J., Wang, R., 2006. Analysis on a hybrid desiccant air-conditioning
system. Applied Thermal Engineering 26, 2393-2400.
Jia, C., Dai, Y., Wu, J., Wang, R., 2007. Use of compound desiccant to develop high
performance desiccant cooling system. International journal of refrigeration 30, 345-353.

28
Karameldin, A., Lotfy, A., Mekhemar, S., 2003. The Red Sea area wind-driven mechanical
vapor compression desalination system. Desalination 153, 47-53.
Karmakar, A., Prabakaran, V., Zhao, D., Chua, K.J., 2020. A review of metal-organic
frameworks (MOFs) as energy-efficient desiccants for adsorption driven heat-
transformation applications. Applied Energy 269, 115070.
Lee, J.-G., Bae, K.J., Kwon, O.K., 2020. Performance investigation of a two-bed type
adsorption chiller with various adsorbents. Energies 13, 2553.
Li, A., Thu, K., Ismail, A.B., Shahzad, M.W., Ng, K.C., 2016. Performance of adsorbent-
embedded heat exchangers using binder-coating method. International journal of heat
and mass transfer 92, 149-157.
Oh, S.J., Ng, K.C., Chun, W., Chua, K.J.E., 2017. Evaluation of a dehumidifier with
adsorbent coated heat exchangers for tropical climate operations. Energy 137, 441-448.
Ramzy, A., ElAwady, W.M., AbdelMeguid, H., 2014. Modelling of heat and moisture
transfer in desiccant packed bed utilizing spherical particles of clay impregnated with
CaCl2. Applied thermal engineering 66, 499-506.
Sun, X., Dai, Y., Ge, T., Zhao, Y., Wang, R., 2017. Comparison of performance
characteristics of desiccant coated air-water heat exchanger with conventional air-water
heat exchanger–Experimental and analytical investigation. Energy 137, 399-411.
Taylor, B.N., Kuyatt, C.E., 1994. Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty
of NIST measurement results.
Tu, Y., Wang, R., Ge, T., Zheng, X., 2017. Comfortable, high-efficiency heat pump with
desiccant-coated, water-sorbing heat exchangers. Scientific reports 7, 1-10.
Valarezo, A.S., Sun, X., Ge, T., Dai, Y., Wang, R., 2019. Experimental investigation on
performance of a novel composite desiccant coated heat exchanger in summer and
winter seasons. Energy 166, 506-518.
Vivekh, P., Bui, D., Islam, M., Zaw, K., Chua, K., 2020a. Experimental performance
evaluation of desiccant coated heat exchangers from a combined first and second law of
thermodynamics perspective. Energy Conversion and Management 207, 112518.
Vivekh, P., Islam, M., Chua, K., 2020b. Experimental performance evaluation of a
composite superabsorbent polymer coated heat exchanger based air dehumidification
system. Applied Energy 260, 114256.
Vivekh, P., Kumja, M., Bui, D., Chua, K., 2018. Recent developments in solid desiccant
coated heat exchangers–A review. Applied Energy 229, 778-803.

29
Zhang, G., Wang, B., Li, X., Shi, W., Cao, Y., 2019. Review of experimentation and
modeling of heat and mass transfer performance of fin-and-tube heat exchangers with
dehumidification. Applied Thermal Engineering 146, 701-717.
Zhang, J., Li, P., Zhang, X., Ma, X., Wang, B., 2020. Aluminum Metal–Organic Frameworks
with Photocatalytic Antibacterial Activity for Autonomous Indoor Humidity Control. ACS
Applied Materials & Interfaces 12, 46057-46064.
Zhang, X., Qiu, L., 2007. Moisture transport and adsorption on silica gel–calcium chloride
composite adsorbents. Energy conversion and management 48, 320-326.

30