You are on page 1of 57
DESIGN OF SHELL-AND-TUBE HEAT EXCHANGERS Contents 5.1 Introduction __ 188 5.2 Heat-Transfer Coefficients 188 5.3 Hydraulic Calculations 189 54 Finned Tubing 192 5.5 TubeCount Tables 194 5.6 Factors Affecting Pressure Drop 195 5.7 Design Guidelines 197 5.8 Design Strategy 201 5.9 Computer Software 218 5/188 DESIGN OF SHELL-AND-TUBE HEAT EXCHANGERS 5.1 Introduction Preliminary design- and thermabrating calculations for shell-and-tube exchangers were presented in Chapter 3. Both are used, along with hydraulic calculations, in the complete design of shell- andtube exchangers. As with double-pipe units, these exchangers are typically designed with specified pressure-drop constraints on the two streams. Due to the greater complexity and vari- ety of shelland-tube configurations, however, there are more design variables that must be taken into consideration. This complexity is also the source of computational difficulties on the shell side, which were alluded to in Chapter 3. The upshot is that design of shell-and-ube equipment is considerably more complicated than design of double-pipe exchangers. In this chapter, the key aspects of shell-and-tube exchanger design are presented and illustrated with examples involving both plain and finned tubing. The Simplified Delaware method is used for shell-side calculations in order to keep the computations manageable. More sophisticated computational methods are considered separately in subsequent chapters. 5.2 Heat-Transfer Coefficients ‘The heat transfer correlations used in this chapter were presented in Section 2.4, Section 3.8, and Section 4.2. They are repeated here for convenience. For the tube-side heat-transfer coefficient, h, the Seider—Tate and Hausen equations are used as, follows. For Re = 104, 023 Re Pr (1/1) (4.1) For 2100 < Re < 10, Nu = 0.116 (Re?! — 125) Pr (u(t) 401 + (D/L) 237) For Re <2100, Nu = 1.86 [RePrD/L\""(/i1)? (2.36) Alternatively, Equation (2.38) may be used for the turbulent and transition regions. The Reynolds number in these correlations is calculated using the mass flow rate per tube: tnuny m ‘per tabe = 6.19) where m; = total mass flow rate of tube-side fluid ‘number of tube-side passes number of tubes The shell-side heat-transfer coefficient, ho, is computed using the following curve fit to Figure 3.12 (note that jj7 is dimensionless): iy = 0.5(1 + B/d;) (0.08 Re"! + 0.7 Re™7”) 21) where (De /R) (Cpue/R)- 9 (a te)" baffle ing shell ID ‘equivalent diameter, in proper units, from Figure 3.12 DESIGN OF SHELL-AND-TUBE HEAT EXCHANGERS _ 5/189 ‘The Reynolds number in Equation (8.21) is calculated using the equivalent diameter and flow area given in Figure 3.12. The correlation is valid for tube bundles employing plain or finned heat- exchanger tubing, 20% cut segmental baffles, and one pair of sealing strips per 10 tube rows. It is also based on TEMA standards for tube-to-baffle and baffle-to-shell clearances. (See Section 6.7 for details regarding clearances.) Although the correlation was derived from results of the Delaware study, it contains a built-in safety factor of approximately 25% [1]. Therefore, it should generally yield lower values of the heat-transfer coefficient than the Delaware method itself. 5.3 Hydraulic Calculations 5.3.1 Tube-side pressure drop The pressure drop due to fluid friction in the tubes is given by Equation (4.5) with the length of the flow path set to the tube length times the number of tube passes. Thus, Ff mph AP = Fe TED sp 6.1) where Darcy friction factor (dimensionless) tube length (ft) G =mass flux (bm/h.- f°) Dj =tube ID (ft) fluid specific gravity (dimensionless) viscosity correction factor (dimensionless) = (4/4w)° for turbulent flow (14/11w)°* for laminar flow Here, AP; ocpsi. (English units are used throughout this section; see Appendix 5.A for the hydraulic equations in terms of SI units.) For laminar flow, the friction factor is given by: 64 Re f (4.6) For turbulent flow in commercial heat-exchanger tubes, the following equation can be used for Re> 3000: f = 0.4137 Re 02585 (6.2) (Note the similarity between this equation and Equation (4.8) for commercial pipe. The surface roughness tends to be lower for heat-exchanger tubes than for pipes, resulting in somewhat smaller friction factors for tubing.) ‘The tube-side fluid experiences a sudden contraction when it enters the tubes from the header and a sudden expansion when it exits the tubes at the opposite header. The associated pressure losses can be calculated using standard hydraulic formulas [2], and depend on the tube diameter, pitch and layout. However, for commonly used tube configurations, the sum of the entrance and exit losses can be approximated by 0.5 tube velocity heads in turbulent flow [2]. For laminar flow the number of velocity heads depends on the Reynolds number, but for Re > 500 a reasonable approximation is one velocity head for the entrance loss and §/ velocity head for the exit loss, giving a total of 1.75 velocity heads. Inthe return header, the fluid experiences a 180° change of direction. Henry [2] has suggested an allowance of 1.5 velocity heads for the associated pressure loss, similar to that for a pipe bend. Since the flow pattern in the header is complex regardless of whether the flow in the tubes is laminar or turbulent, this allowance is probably reasonable for both flow regimes.