This paper presents the experimental-based performance evaluation of three different configurations of desiccant integrated direct/indirect evaporative cooling systems. These configurations include (1) Conventional desiccant cooling system with the direct evaporative cooler on process and regeneration sides (Configuration 1); (2) direct evaporative cooler on the process with indirect evaporative cooler (M-Cycle) on regeneration side (Configuration 2); and (3) indirect evaporative cooler (M-Cycle) on process and regeneration sides (Configuration 3). Each configuration is analyzed in terms of process air supply temperature, process air humidity ratio, thermal coefficient of performance (COP_th), and energy efficiency ratio (EER). Based on energy, economic and environmental (3E) analysis subjected to an ambient temperature range of 31–40 °C, 18 g/kg ambient humidity and regeneration temperature of 70 °C; Maximum average value COP_th of 0.49, 0.8, 1.7 and EER 3, 4.12, 7 were achieved by configuration 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Present worth cost of configuration 3 for 10 h/day operating time is 13% less as compared to a conventional system with a payback period (PBP) of 6.5 years. As compared to configuration 1, the CO₂ emission is reduced by 32% and 38% for configuration 2 and configuration 3, respectively. Hence, the energetic, environmental, and economic evaluation revealed that configuration 3 is best amongst all three configurations in subtropical climate conditions.

本文介绍了基于干燥剂的直接/间接蒸发冷却系统的三种不同配置的基于实验的性能评估。这些配置包括：（1）常规干燥剂冷却系统，在过程侧和再生侧均配有直接蒸发冷却器（配置1）；（2）在过程中使用直接蒸发冷却器，在再生侧使用间接蒸发冷却器（M-Cycle）（配置2）；（3）过程和再生侧的间接蒸发冷却器（M-Cycle）（配置3）。根据工艺空气供应温度，工艺空气湿度比，性能热系数（COP _th）分析每种配置）和能效比（EER）。根据能源，经济和环境（3E）分析，在31–40°C的环境温度范围，18 g / kg的环境湿度和70°C的再生温度下进行；通过配置1、2和3分别获得0.49、0.8、1.7和EER 3、4.12、7的最大平均值COP _th。与10天/天的运行时间相比，配置3的当前价值成本与6.5年的投资回收期（PBP）的常规系统相比减少了13％。与配置1相比，配置2和配置3的CO ₂排放量分别减少了32％和38％。因此，在能源，环境和经济方面的评估表明，配置3在亚热带气候条件下的所有三种配置中最佳。