Comparison of Heat Exchanger Types Ibrahim AlMusawi Sabrina

Comparison of Heat Exchanger Types Ibrahim Al-Musawi, Sabrina Marnoto, Ibrahim Muhic Dr. Adam St. Jean Department of Chemical Engineering, University of New Hampshire Design Problem Calculations Introduction • Each heat exchanger type has varied pros and cons[2] • Cost determined by material, efficiency, and size [3] Tubular • Compare different types of heat exchangers 11000 0. 035 0. 03 0. 05 0. 15 0. 25 1. 2. 3. 4. 0. 35 1/(Rem) Similar to water Flow rate of hot in = 3. 5 kg/s Constant Cp values Arbitrary velocity of 2 m/s Specifications: 1. Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger 2. Co-current Flow Shell and Tube Plate 7500 Counter Current Flow Cocurrent Flow 6500 hi (W/m 2 K) • Determine effect of cooling water flow rate on overall *= p-value>0. 1 9000 hi (W/m 2 K) heat transfer coefficient (hi) 7000 5000 3000 1000 28. 09 Methods 18. 88 4. 53 Shell and Tube 4500 1000 • Average Reynold's Number Plate 244. 75 10500 Tubular 5000 4000 3000 500 Flow Rate (m 3/s) 0. 88 Average Reynold's Number 0. 45 Hot Tout = 54. 3 °C 8. 33 E-06 in hi with Reynolds number • Counter and co-current flow significantly • Shell and Tube has highest hi for cocurrent • Tubular has highest hi for counter current • The % difference for co-current with in Shell and Tube Plate Tubular • Ds=. 371 m 4500 1000 1. 67 E-05 1. 69 6500 2500 3. 33 E-05 2. 55 Cold Tout = 50 °C Cold Tin = 20 °C * 8500 2000 5. 00 E-05 m = 3 kg/s Counter current different • Varying flow rate of cold inlet (L/min): 3, 2, 1, 526. 43 Counter Current Flow 3000 1500 1052. 85 Hot Tin = 80 °C 4000 2000 1548. 50 *= p-value>0. 1 5000 2500 Conclusions and 2 L/min 6000 5500 • % difference in hi between shell and tube and tubular significantly as flow rate for cocurrent Tubular 40 o. C Counter Current Flow Cocurrent Flow hi (W/m 2 K) 6000 temperatures 7000 Co-current 7000 hi (W/m 2 K 9. 55 Average Reynold's Number 8000 Plate • Measuring inlet and outlet cold and hot fluid *= p-value>0. 1 3500 heat transfer coefficient (U) 0. 5 Assumptions: 0. 04 8500 • Investigate effect of flow pattern on rate of convective • Hot inlet kept at constant temperature of 0. 045 Results http: //www. pre-heat. com/industrial-shell-tube-heat-exchanger. html Objectives Shell and tube R 2 = 0. 9919 0. 05 hi (W/m 2 K) https: //www. indiamart. com/proddetail/industrial-plate-heat-exchanger 4109995912. html • Liquid Reactor • Stream Heated from 20°C to 50°C entering at 3 kg/s • Hot Water Stream 80 °C 0. 055 m=0. 8 http: //www. heatexchangerasia. co/tubular-heat-exchanger. html Problem: Wilson Plot Analysis Roverall • Heat exchangers: used to transfer heat [1] 5. 00 E-05 3. 33 E-05 1. 67 E-05 Flow Rate (m 3/s) 8. 33 E-06 • Overall 50 -55% difference in hi between shell and tube and tubular exchangers Future Work • Test other types of heat exchangers → Regenerative and Adiabatic Wheel • Investigate different types of fluids • Determine effect of baffles • U=15. 2 W/m 2 K Overall length = 331. 1 m Number of tubes= 15 Length of individual tube = 8. 28 m • Investigate the affect of fouling on hi References 1. C. J. Geankoplis, Transport Processes and Separation Process Principles, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc, 2003. 4 2. J. E. Edwards, "Design and Rating Shell and Tube, " J. E. Edwards of P & I Design Ltd, Teesside, UK, 2008. 3. R. K. Shah and D. P. Sekulic, Fundamentals of Heat Exchanger Design, Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2003. 4. R. Mukherjee, "Effectively Design Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers, " Chemical Engineering Progress, 1998. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of New Hampshire for providing resources to enable this project. We would also like to acknowledge Dr. Adam St. Jean, Darcy Fournier, and Zhen Tian for their support.