education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Education for Chemical Engineers
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ ece
Spreadsheets for assisting Transport Phenomena Laboratory
experiences
Aurelio Stammitti

Transport Phenomena Laboratory, Department of Thermodynamics and Transport Phenomena, Universidad Simn Bolvar, Caracas
1080A, Venezuela
a b s t r a c t
Academic laboratories have been traditionally used for complementing and reinforcing in a practical way the the-
oretical instruction received in classroom lectures. However, data processing and model evaluation tasks are time
consuming and do not add much value to the students learning experience as they reduce available time for result
analysis, critical thinking and report writing skills development. Therefore, this project addressed this issue by
selecting three experiences of the Transport Phenomena Laboratory, namely: metallic bar temperature proles, tran-
sient heat conduction and xed and uidised bed behaviour, and developed a spreadsheet for each one of them.
These spreadsheets, without demanding programming skills, easily process experimental data sets, evaluate com-
plex analytical and numerical models and correlations, not formerly considered and, convey results in tables and
plots. Chemical engineering students that tested the spreadsheets were surveyed and expressed the added value of
the sheets, being user-friendly, helped them to full lab objectives by reducing their workload and, allowed them
to complete deeper analyses that instructors could not request before, as they were able to quickly evaluate, com-
pare and validate different model assumptions and correlations. Students also provided valuable suggestions for
improving the spreadsheet experience. Through these sheets, students lab learning experience was updated.
2013 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Educational spreadsheets; Transport Phenomena Laboratory; Laboratory experience quality; Data
processing task; Hands-on learning; Student analytical thinking
1. Introduction
It is well known that laboratory experiences are not only
used in the academic environment for complementing and
reinforcing in a practical way (hands-on approach) the theo-
retical concepts introduced to students in lectures, but also,
they are used as a means for developing skills, such as
acquiring and processing experimental data, comparing such
data against theoretical models, developing critical and ana-
lytical thinking, drawing meaningful conclusions, teamwork
and ethics, and the ability to convey experimental ndings
and conclusions in the forms of written technical reports
and oral presentations (Stubington, 1995; Arce and Schreiber,
2004; Feisel and Rosa, 2005; Domingues et al., 2010; Vazquez-

Correspondence address: Universidad Simn Bolvar, Dpto. Termodinmica y Fenmenos de Transferencia, Laboratorio de Fenmenos
de Transporte, Edif. TYT, Oc. 101, Apartado Postal 89000, Caracas 1080A, Sartenejas, Baruta, Edo. Miranda,
Venezuela. Tel.: +58 212 906 4113; fax: +58 212 906 3743.
E-mail addresses: aureliostammitti@usb.ve, ssaurelio@hotmail.com
Received28 August 2012; Receivedinrevisedform13 January 2013; Accepted22 February2013
Arenas and Pritzker, 2010; Patterson, 2011; Narang et al., 2012;
Vernengo and Dahm, 2012).
It is also a known issue that processing experimental data
and comparing results against theoretical models can be time
consuming due to iterative and complex calculations, which
reduce the students available time for analysis and discus-
sion and, in consequence, the resulting report is poor quality
(Stubington, 1995; Feisel andRosa, 2005; Vazquez-Arenas et al.,
2009; Vazquez-Arenas and Pritzker, 2010).
The Transport Phenomena Laboratory I (TF-2281) course
at the Simn Bolvar University, Caracas, Venezuela (USB), is
offered to the third year of the chemical engineering pro-
gramme and, comprises a total of ten heat transfer and uid
mechanics experiences (Melndez and Gutirrez, 2005). In
1749-7728/$ see front matter 2013 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2013.02.005
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e59
addition, the heat transfer lab experiences are also offered as
part of the heat transfer courses for mechanical engineering.
The experiences study some of the following concepts:
Heat transfer: transient heat conduction, steady-state con-
duction, radiation between plates, heat exchangers and
viscous ow heat transfer.
Fluid mechanics: transport properties measurement, ow
measurement instruments, pressure drop across pipes and
ttings and, xed and uidised beds.
These experiences have not received any updates or major
revisions in the last 10 years, as neither new models nor
correlations have been incorporated in the course. Labora-
tory instructors have also realised that reports delivered by
students have become very similar, almost like a template,
repeating the same discussions and conclusions due to lack
of drive, the inability of testing and comparing models and
correlations andwastedtime indata processing. For these rea-
sons and, in order to motivate students and challenge their
conclusion drawing abilities, this author decided to propose
a project for developing a software tool for each experience,
with aims of assisting time consuming data processing, and
granting the students the capability of quickly assessing and
comparing theoretical and numerical models and correlations
in different scenarios for each laboratory experience.
Through the development of such powerful and yet easy-
to-use software tools, it is expected to close the gap between
the processing task and understanding the physical concepts
presented in lectures, as students would get plenty of time for
comparing experimental results against models, discussing
conceptually, quantitatively and qualitatively the occurring
phenomenon or process and nally, understanding the effect
of variables (Hinestroza and Papadopoulos, 2003; Feisel and
Rosa, 2005; Vazquez-Arenas and Pritzker, 2010; Narang et al.,
2012).
In order to narrow the scope of the rst stage of this
project, a subset of the available laboratory experiences had
to be chosen for developing the respective software tools. The
selection criteria were discussed with laboratory instructors
and other staff members in the Thermodynamics and Trans-
port Phenomena Department at the USB. After the discussion,
this author decided to choose three experiences, taking into
account the following characteristics:
Mathematical and numerical complexity of theoretical
models and correlations.
Experimental data volume.
Number of career programmes that employ that experience.
After the analysis, one uid mechanics and two heat trans-
fer experiences were selected, as they will be presented in
Section 2. Next, a software platform needed to be chosen for
developing the tools and, as shown in Section 3, spreadsheets
provide balance between simplicity, speed and availability
(Kanyarusoke and Uziak, 2011; Stamou and Rutschmann,
2011) and therefore, this was the preferred platform. The
actual task of developing the spreadsheet tools was carried
out by two groups of fourth year chemical engineering stu-
dents (ve people in total), under the scope of the course
named Short Research Project in Chemical Engineering (EP-
4103), tutored by this author. Such course is offered within
the chemical engineering programme as a means of tak-
ing students through the whole research process, from the
literature review, experimental or development procedure,
collecting and processing data, analysing and drawing con-
clusions and nally, preparing a report with a technical
paper format, followed by an oral presentation before the
department staff, using a congress meeting session setting
(Coordinacin Ingeniera Qumica, 2008).
The developed spreadsheets were reviewed and debugged
by this author and then, introduced into the Transport
Phenomena Laboratory I course and tested with a group of
fteen students. Lastly, for assessing the effect on learning,
students response, usefulness and quality of the developed
tools, a simple survey was developed and applied to these
students after delivering each respective report (Abbas and
Al-Bastaki, 2002; Erzen et al., 2003; Domingues et al., 2010), as
presented in Section 5.
This paper summarises the selected laboratory expe-
riences and the criteria for their selection. Next, each
spreadsheet is described; typical results are displayed along-
side with the observations and comments derived fromtheir
introduction into the lab course. Remarks and conclusions
expressed by students in their reports are also included in this
work. The applied survey is then discussed and, despite it was
only applied to a small group of students; results are positive
and promising and, together with the conclusions drawn by
students, the continuation and improvement of this project
are encouraged.
2. Selected Transport Phenomena
Laboratory experiences
As mentioned in Section 1, for the initial stage of this project,
only three laboratory experiences were chosen. The selection
criteria, discussed with staff members and instructors, con-
sidered the experimental data volume to be processed, the
mathematical and numerical complexity of classic analytic
theoretical models and correlations used for describing each
phenomenon, and last but not least, the impact related to the
number of students to be beneted with this initiative.
As the set of heat transfer exercises available serve both
chemical and mechanical engineering programmes, it was
decided to take two heat transfer exercises and one uid
mechanics exercise. Now, considering the topics covered in
heat transfer theoretical courses, steady state and transient
heat conduction subjects are widely discussed, however, usu-
ally simplied analytic solutions are presented and short time
is given to the numerical approach. Therefore, the lab experi-
ences dedicated to studying these phenomena are selected, as
they pose relative complexity in their theoretical and numer-
ical models. It should be claried that traditionally, in the lab,
students were requiredto code these solutions, andfrequently
failed to accomplish the task for several reasons, such as poor
time management and insufcient computer programming
skills, even though the Applied Numerical Methods in Engi-
neering course is a prerequisite for enrolling in the laboratory.
On the other hand, within the uid mechanics course, the
topic of ow through xed and uidised beds is not covered
and yet, there is a lab experience that studies it. As this expe-
rience has never been updated, typically, students fail to fully
understand the underlying concepts due to lack of theoretical
background and insufcient information available in the lab
booklet (Melndez and Gutirrez, 2005), just one simple model
and no correlations at all. This is the third experience chosen
for this project. The selected experiences are summarised as
follows.
e60 education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71
Fig. 1 Temperature proles experience laboratory equipment.
2.1. Temperature proles
This experience studies the heat conduction through solid
metallic bars (aluminiumand stainless steel) of different cross
section diameters. The experimental apparatus is shown in
Fig. 1. The main objectives of this experience are (Melndez
and Gutirrez, 2005):
Visualising bars temperature prole evolutionwhenheated
at one end exposed to air.
Comparing air convection coefcient values estimated
through correlations and analytic models.
Estimating steels thermal conductivity.
Students record temperature readings for each bar until
reaching a steady state condition. An example of the typical
data set obtained is shown in Fig. 2.
In order to full the lab objectives, students must quanti-
tative contrast data against models. Eq. (1) shows the classic
Differential Equation (DE) that models the temperature prole
for a constant cross-section area n. For this DE there are sets
of combinations of Boundary Conditions (BC), as presented in
Eq. (2) (Incropera et al., 2007):
d
2
T
dx
2

nP
kA
c
(T T

) = 0 (1)
x = 0 : T = T
Base
(heated end)
x = L :

T = T

(inniten)
dT
dx
= 0 (insulatedend)
dT
dx
= (T

T)

n
k

(convectiveend)
(2)
Analytic solutions for Eq. (1) are presented by Incropera
et al. (2007) for each BC in Eq. (2), and these may also be solved
numerically through the nite difference method (Billo, 2007).
Students were usually told to evaluate only the analytic solu-
tions. The numerical counterpart was frequently left aside, as
students needed to code the solutions each time and, repeat-
edly faced coding problems, which delayed data processing
and, making them sometimes even fail to deliver the report
on time.
2.2. Transient heat conduction
In this lab experience is studied the heating process of solid
objects of different non-metallic homogeneous materials. The
main goals are (Melndez and Gutirrez, 2005):
Estimating and comparing waters heat convection coef-
cient values around different object shapes.
Estimating the thermal conductivity of an Unknown Mate-
rial sample.
The experimental laboratory equipment consists of a reg-
ulated temperature water bath where the sample objects
are submerged as shown in Fig. 3. Students measure the
temperature at the centre of the sample object and record
time/temperature until reaching a close-to-equilibrium con-
dition. Typical experimental results are presented in Fig. 4.
The classic analytic solutions of transient temperature pro-
les are shown in Eqs. (3)(6) (Incropera et al., 2007).

T T
0
T

T
0

CUBE
=
3
Plutc
(Bi
p
. Fo
p
. x

p
) where x

p
=
x
L
p
Fo
p
=
t
L
2
p
(3)

T T
0
T

T
0

CYL
=
Plate
(Bi
p
. Fo
p
. x

p
)
Cylinder
(Bi
c
. Fo
c
. r

c
)
where r

c
=
r
R
c
Fo
c
=
t
R
2
c
(4)
Fig. 2 Temperatures proles experience typical experimental data.
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e61
Fig. 3 Transient heat conduction experience laboratory
equipment.
Fig. 4 Transient heat conduction experience typical
experimental data.

Plate
(Bi
p
. Fo
p
. x

p
) =

n=1
C
n.p
exp(
2
n.p
Fo
p
) cos(
n.p
x

p
) (5)

Cylinder
(Bi
c
. Fo
c
. r

c
) =

n=1
C
n.c
exp(
2
n.c
Fo
c
) j
0
(
n.p
r

c
) (6)
The
n
parameters are the positive n roots of the respec-
tive transcendental equations for plate and cylinder, which
depend on the Biot numbers for each geometry (Bi
p
=hL
p
/k;
Bi
c
=hR
c
/k) (Incropera et al., 2007).
It must be remarkedthat the implicit solutionof Eqs. (3) and
(4) for the convection coefcient can turn to be complex and
cumbersome as these are series of innite terms. Customarily,
students were asked to use the one-termsimplication of Eqs.
(5) and(6), whichis only validfor Fo>0.2 (Incropera et al., 2007).
However, this has led to inaccurate and some times, numeri-
cally inconsistent results that students were unable to neither
explain nor speculate upon the error source. Therefore, more
series terms must be incorporated in order to improve the
quality of estimated convection coefcients. So, here becomes
necessary the use of computational tools for performing such
complex calculations in reasonable time.
2.3. Fixed and uidised beds
This lab session encourages students to observe and compare
the behaviours of xedanduidisedbeds for the solidgas and
solidliquid systems. The goal for this experience is to eval-
uate the main parameters that describe this phenomenon,
such as pressure drop, Froude and Reynolds numbers, bed
void fraction and minimum uidisation velocity (Melndez
and Gutirrez, 2005). The experimental equipment consists of
two rectangular Plexiglas columns lled with bed pellets, as
shown in Fig. 5.
For eachuidsolidsystem, starting fromthe xedbedcon-
dition(
0
0.38), students graduallyincrease the uidowrate
and record bed pressure drop and bed height until reaching
Fig. 5 Fixed and uidised beds experience laboratory equipment.
e62 education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71
Fig. 6 Fixed and uidised beds experience typical
experimental data.
the uidisation condition. Typical experimental data for both
systems are presented in Fig. 6.
Students are here required to plot Froude number Eq. (7),
bed porosity Eq. (8), pressure drop and the WilhelmKwauk
parameter Eq. (9) vs. Reynolds number Eq. (10) (McCabe et al.,
2005) in order to identify the transition regions. Finally, they
are asked to compare the experimental pressure drop values
against the Ergun (1952) equation for xed beds, Eqs. (11) and
(12) for uidised beds. No other models or correlations are
requested.
Fr
dp
=
u
2
0
gd
p
(7)
= 1

L
0
L

(1
0
) (8)
K
LP
=
d
3
p
,

2j
2

LP
L
0

(9)
Rc
dp
=
,

u
0
d
p
j

(10)

LP
L

Ergun
=

150
,

u
2
0
(1 )
2
gd
p

3
Rc
dp

1.75
,

u
2
0
(1 )
gd
p

(11)

LP
L

FB
= g(1 )(,
p
,

) (12)
Recognising this deciency in the experimental procedure,
it was decided to demand the evaluation of more prediction
models, such as Barnea and Mednick (1978) equation for xed
beds, Eq. (13). In addition, a set of correlations available in the
literature (Yang, 2003) for estimating the minimum uidisa-
tion velocity value (u
mf
) needed to be included for comparison.
As this increases the amount of calculations, it is necessary to
provide a tool for assisting this task.

LP
L

BM
=

0.63 +
4.8
Rc

6,

u
2
(1 )[1 +K(1 )
1,3
]
8gd
p

where Rc

=
Rc
dp
exp[(5(1 )),3 ]
;
K =

2.57 if Rc
dp
- 400
2.76 otherwise
(13)
3. Software platform selection
Computers have supplied the perfect platform for data
processing since they became available to academic institu-
tions (Feisel and Rosa, 2005; Edgar, 2006; Baker and Sugden,
2007). Many student-oriented modelling and simulation soft-
ware tools have been developed ever since, employing
languages and computing tools such as C++, Java, MS Visual
Basic

, MATLAB

, MathCad

, COMSOL
TM
, and Spreadsheets
(Evans, 2000; Abbas and Al-Bastaki, 2002; Erzen et al., 2003;
Zheng andKeith, 2004; Coronell, 2005; Edgar, 2006; Axaopoulos
andPitsilis, 2007; Selmer et al., 2007; Stover, 2008; Kanyarusoke
and Uziak, 2011; Narang et al., 2012), as well as commer-
cial simulators (Dahmet al., 2002; Dahm, 2003; Wankat, 2006;
Vazquez-Arenas et al., 2009). Nonetheless, some of these tools,
such as MATLAB

, MathCad

and commercial simulators are

cost prohibitive to most students and many institutions, par-
ticularly in developing countries (Kanyarusoke and Uziak,
2011). Moreover, another shortcoming of commercial simula-
tors is the fact that students tend to see themas black-boxes,
and may not fully understand the underlying phenomenon
or process and simply accept the simulator outputs with-
out further questioning (Hinestroza and Papadopoulos, 2003;
Vazquez-Arenas and Pritzker, 2010).
Nowadays, spreadsheets have become universally avail-
able to institutions and students and, together with current
desktop computing capabilities, they offer a powerful and
yet simple tool for accomplishing iterative, high volume and
complex calculations, making them widely used in simula-
tion and numerical methods courses (Savage, 1995; Burns and
Sung, 1996; Evans, 2000; Hinestroza and Papadopoulos, 2003;
Coronell, 2005; Stover, 2008; Kanyarusoke and Uziak, 2011;
Stamou and Rutschmann, 2011). Particularly, MS Excel

, in
combination with MS Visual Basic for Applications

(VBA)
has become very popular, as it provides a low cost and ideal
compromise between computer programming (through VBA),
built-in functions, graphical tools, data management in tables
and matrix formats and exible user interface, through com-
mand objects such as command buttons, drop boxes, check
boxes, etc. (Jacobson, 2001; Baker and Sugden, 2007; Billo, 2007;
Foley, 2011; Stamou and Rutschmann, 2011).
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e63
Within the chemical engineering programme at the USB,
students are trained to use MATLAB

in the Computing and

Numerical Methods lecture courses. They are also acquainted
to MS Excel

in the Physics Laboratory, but only to a basic

level, learning only plot experimental data and performsome
simple cell operations.
Concerning about this deciency, this author ran a small
search through the main Venezuelan job sites and, found that
in general, employers demand familiarity and intermediate-
to-high skills in the MS Ofce

environment, MS Excel

in
particular.
As anattempt to address suchdeciency and help students
meet the job market requirements, this author decided to use
spreadsheets as the programming environment for developing
the requiredtools for the chosenlaboratory experiences. Being
MS Excel

2007 the available spreadsheet software through-

out campus and, matching the employers needs, the platform
selection was self made.
A double benet is present here, as not only students using
the developed tools will be beneted with the interaction, but
also the group of ve students that developed the rst version
of the spreadsheets, who received intensive training in VBA
programming fromthis author.
4. The spreadsheets
This section describes the developed spreadsheets for each
laboratory experience, and introduces the typical nal results
for each one of them. These nal results are the kind of plots
and tables that students must present and analyse in their lab
reports.
Each spreadsheet is designed with an interactive, simple
and user-friendly interface in order to empower the student
for testing different sets of data, conditions and correlations.
Hence, students do not require prior computer programming
skills, just the basic familiarity the spreadsheet platformenvi-
ronment. In addition, attached to each spreadsheet is a simple
user manual document.
4.1. Temperature proles spreadsheet
For this spreadsheet, students must provide as inputs the
material properties (check as known or not the thermal con-
ductivity), geometry and the collected data set in steady-state
condition for the selected bar. After processing, the sheet
presents plots andtables showing calculatedtemperature pro-
les, air convection coefcient values and estimated thermal
conductivity as the outputs. Fig. 7 is a screenshot of the input-
data section of this sheet.
Fig. 7 Screenshot of temperature proles lab experience spreadsheet.
e64 education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71
Table 1 Heat transfer convection coefcient values in
air calculated with different correlations and conditions
for the metallic bars.
Bar T
sup
(K) Convection coeff. h (W/(m
2
K))
Morgan Churchill and Chu
Al-1in.
350
a
8.1 7.4
420
b
9.7 8.9
Al-0.5in.
338
a
9.2 8.3
420
b
11.6 10.5
St-1in.
326
a
7.0 6.4
415
b
9.6 8.9
a
Average temperature.
b
Heated end temperature.
First, students are required to evaluate convection coef-
cient correlations in air for each metallic bar under different
conditions, as summarised in Table 1. Next, students must
compare analytic and numeric solutions, evaluated with the
obtained convection coefcient values, as shown in Fig. 8. In
addition, students are asked to estimate by trial and error the
air convection coefcient value that best adjusts the experi-
mental data set for the aluminiumbars, contrast it against the
values reported by correlations and, argue about the possible
causes of the encountered differences.
In general, students have found that the convection
coefcients calculated through correlations did not adjust the
experimental temperature proles, regardless whether the
analytic or numeric solution was used. In their nal reports,
some students discussed about the possible causes; some of
the proposed insights were:
. . .the correlations assume uniform cylinder temperature,
which is not the case here. . .
. . .proximity betweenbars might have inducedandascend-
ing convective air ow, which increases the convection
coefcient value. . .
. . .an unnoticed air stream could have interfered with the
experiment, causing the convection coefcients to rise. . .
For estimating the stainless steel bars thermal conduc-
tivity, based on the obtained value for the 1-in. (0.0254m)
aluminiumbar, students are told to assume an air convection
coefcient value at the heated end of the steel bar similar to
the aluminiums one, in this case, a value of 22W/(m
2
K) was
taken. The second order temperature derivative in Eq. (1) is
numerically obtainedby adjusting andderiving a secondgrade
polynomial to the rst three points of the Steels experimental
data set. These calculations lead to an estimated conductivity
Fig. 8 Comparative analytic and numeric temperature prole predictions for each metallic bar.
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e65
Fig. 9 Local air convection coefcient values for the
aluminiumbars.
value of 29.5W/(mK). It must be noticed that the estimated
conductivity value is very sensitive to the assumed convec-
tion coefcient value, for instance, if a convection coefcient
value of 21W/(m
2
K) is used, a 28.1W/(mK) conductivity value
is obtained.
In their nal reports, students compared the obtained
values against those reported in the literature (the actual
conductivity value for the steel bar is not reported in the
equipment manual, therefore it remains unknown) and, many
concluded that this method is only useful for estimating the
magnitude order of thermal conductivity, as stainless steels
thermal conductivity values range from 14 to 25W/(mK)
(Incropera et al., 2007). Some students also quoted the fol-
lowing possible error sources in their reports: . . .assumed
convection coefcient value; . . .steel bar temperature reading
errors; . . .not waiting long enough in order to get a real steady-
state condition. Asensitivity analysis was not required inthis
experience.
In this experience students are also required to evaluate
and analyse the local convection coefcient values for the alu-
miniumbars, as presented in Fig. 9. Such values are implicitly
solved with the spreadsheet fromthe analytic solutions of Eq.
(1) for all experimental data points with each boundary condi-
tion in Eq. (2). As expected, the coefcient values are higher at
the heated end of the bar and decrease exponentially with the
position, having an approximate average value of 23W/(m
2
K)
in every case. Students are asked to explain such behaviour
in terms of the involved variables. Some of their answers
were:
. . .it is logical as the temperature difference decreases
along the bars. . .
. . .the thinner bar cools down faster as it has a lower
mass/surface area ratio. . .
4.2. Transient heat conduction
In the same fashion of the former spreadsheet, here the
required inputs are material and uid properties, geometry,
analytic solution parameters and, collected temperature/time
data set. As outputs, Biot and Fourier numbers are presented,
as well as the analytic temperature proles, as showninFig. 10.
For evaluating analytic solutions in Eqs. (3) and (4) it is
mandatory to calculate the Biot numbers for each geometry,
which require a known value for the heat convection coef-
cient in water. Students are asked to evaluate through the
Table 2 Reference free convection coefcient values in
water for the selected objects calculated through the
Churchill and Chu correlation (Incropera et al., 2007).
Geometry Conv. coeff. h (W/(m
2
K))
a
Horizontal cylinder 1293
Vertical plate (cube side) 1033
Upper plate (top) 672
Lower plate (bottom) 1344
Cube weighted average 1025
a
T
0
=296K and T

=335K.
spreadsheet free convection correlations for each geometry
(cylinder and plates), such as the classic Churchill and Chu
correlation (Incropera et al., 2007). Table 2 summarises typical
free convection coefcient values, evaluated at the beginning
of the heating process. As the analytic solutions of the tran-
sient heat conduction problemassume a unique and constant
convection coefcient value for all the objects surfaces, a
weightedaverage value shouldbe calculatedfor the cube using
the surface area of eachside as the weighting factor. These val-
ues are usedas aninitial reference only; since there is agitation
in the water bath, convection coefcient values are expected
to be higher than stagnant ones and, students must estimate
such quantity.
In Fig. 11 is shown a comparative analysis that students
carry out over the known material cylinder on analytic solu-
tion dependence with the number of series terms, Eqs. (4)(6).
Before introducing the spreadsheet, students were tradi-
tionally told to use the approximation of one series term for
Eqs. (5) and (6). In consequence, students were unaware of
the real behaviour of the analytic solutions and, generally
found inconsistencies between experimental data and calcu-
lated values and usually, failed to provide a sound explanation
to their results.
As expected, when students stared to use the spreadsheet,
they realised that analytic solutions reproduce experimental
data properly whenusing a highnumber of series terms (Foley,
2011) for cylinder Fourier numbers over 0.2. The spreadsheet
supports up to 200 series terms.
On the other hand, Fig. 11 shows a remarkable difference
between the experimental data and analytic solution for very
low Fourier numbers. Students were told to pay attention to
Fig. 11 Analytic solution dependence with number of
series terms for the PVC cylinder.
e66 education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71
the construction of the object sample, which uses a hollow
Plexiglas tube threaded into the object in order to allocate the
thermocouple in its centre. Finally, taking this into consider-
ation, students were asked to discuss about the effect on the
object sample conductivity around its centre. Such discussion
was never requested before, as the analytic solution with one
series termdoes not reproduce the system.
After observing the dependence on the number of series
terms, students are indicated to set this number in 100, in
order to provide accurate solutions without compromising
speed. Next, bytrial anderror, students must estimate the con-
vection coefcient value that minimises the Quadratic Error
between the experimental data and the analytic solution for
the PVC cylinder Eq. (14), as noticed in Fig. 12. The convection
coefcient value predicted by Churchill and Chu correlation
(Incropera et al., 2007) marks the limit where the Quadratic
Error becomes asymptotic. It must be claried here that very
high convection coefcient values produce extremely high
Biot numbers, which cause numerical problems when solving
the n roots for Eqs. (5) and (6), in consequence, it was estab-
lished an upper limit of 600 for the Biot number within the
spreadsheet.
E
2
=

i
(T
EXP
i
T
Anal.
i
)
2
(14)
Fig. 12 Water convection coefcient trial and error
estimation for the PVC cylinder.
Once the nal estimated convection coefcient value is
accepted by students for the PVC cylinder, the experiment
is repeated with the Unknown Material cylinder (which is a
Teon

type material), having the same dimensions of the PVC

one. Assuming the convection coefcients to be equal for both
cylinders, it can be estimated the thermal conductivity of the
Unknown Material by trial and error. Fig. 13 displays the trial
and error evaluation process carried out by students. Before
Fig. 10 Spreadsheet for transient heat conduction lab experience.
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e67
Fig. 13 Estimated thermal conductivity for the unknown
material cylinder.
the introduction of the spreadsheet, the estimated conductiv-
ity values by students were usually inconsistent andoff-range,
preventing themfromdoing a valuable discussion.
Next, in Fig. 14 are presented the comparative solutions
using different series terms for the Unknown Material cylin-
der. This plot visually conrmed to the students the validity
of the approximation of using one series terms in Eqs. (5) and
(6) for high Fourier numbers.
In their nal reports, students were able to discuss on solu-
tion sensitivity and computational cost on number of series
terms used and the effect of the chosen convection coef-
cient value over the estimated thermal conductivity of the
Unknown Material. Some discussions offered the following
comments:
These analytic solutions are complex, as it takes over 1min
to run when 200 terms are used.
The one series termapproximationis not always valid, only
for high Fourier numbers for the cylinder.
The thermal conductivity for the Unknown Material can
only be guessed through this method, as it depends upon
the selected convection coefcient value, it has a large asso-
ciated error.
Fig. 14 Comparative analytic solutions for the unknown
material cylinder.
Fig. 15 Comparative results for the solidliquid system.
4.3. Fixed and uidised beds
This spreadsheet is very similar to the former one. It requires
as inputs the uid properties, particle geometry and density,
and pressure drop vs. bed height data set. The outputs are
the different ow parameters, Eqs. (7)(10), minimumuidis-
ation velocities, calculated from several correlations and the
corresponding plots.
In the original version of this laboratory experience, only
the Ergun (1952) pressure drop equation was considered
and, it was constantly observed that it does not faithfully
reproduce the experimental data. Therefore, in this project
was introduced the Barnea and Mednick (1978) model for
comparison purposes. Moreover, minimumuidisation veloc-
ity correlations were not included in the labs booklet nor
requested for the discussion. Hence, some selected simple
correlations have been incorporated into the spreadsheet.
Figs. 15 and 16 illustrate comparative results for each
uidsolid system. The dash-dotted lines have been manu-
ally added in order to highlight the observed transition region
on each system.
Students were explained that the experimental equip-
ment beds have a rectangular shape with simple upward
ow plenums (Fig. 5) and they observed that such arrange-
ments actually cause non-uniform particle distributions. In
the solidliquid bed is usually observed a counterclockwise
particle circulation and, in the gassolid bed it is observed a
bubble ow, with the bubbles tending to lean on the right side
at high air ows. Students were also told that pressure drop
models have been developed for cylindrical bed systems and
e68 education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71
Fig. 16 Comparative results for the solidgas system.
asked to compare the pressure drop predictions against the
experimental data and argue on the effect of the rectangular
shape of the experimental equipment on pressure drop. Such
discussion was never done before, as not enough information
was available.
In their discussions, students pointed out that both pres-
sure drop models consistently predicted the location of the
transition regions, though, these models over predicted and
under predicted pressure drop values for the solidliquid and
the solidgas systems respectively. In addition, they acknowl-
edged the fact that bed geometry affects pressure drop, but
without further explanation.
Students were alsoable toidentifythe transitionregions for
each systemthrough the Bed porosity, Eq. (8), and K
LP
param-
eter, Eq. (9), plots in Figs. 15 and 16. For this data set, the
minimum uidisation velocities (u
mf
) observed were around
0.08m/s and 0.13m/s for the solidliquid and solidgas sys-
tems respectively. Such values should be compared against
predictions of selected correlations, as listed in Table 3.
Despite the observed discrepancies among models and
experimental data, students realised that values predicted
by the most recent correlations for the solidliquid system
are closer in magnitude order to the measured value. On the
other hand, the predicted values for the solidgas systemare
very distant fromthe observed one. Regretfully, students were
unable to provide an explanation to this behaviour; some just
mentioned that: . . .it might be attributed to the rectangu-
lar shape; . . .the non-uniform ow distribution may cause
higher pressure drops. Ultimately, these ndings make the
rectangular bed systemworthy of further research.
5. Students survey
For evaluating students response to the introduction of
the spreadsheets in the laboratory, a survey was developed
(Stubington, 1995; Abbas and Al-Bastaki, 2002; Erzen et al.,
2003; Domingues et al., 2010). The survey has a total of sixteen
questions, grouped in four categories, as compiled in Table 4.
The questions are to be answered in a 15 Likert scale, where
1 stands for Fully disagree and 5 stands for Fully agree.
The spreadsheets were tested at the USB, in the Transport
Phenomena Laboratory I course during the fall quarter of 2011
with 15 students of chemical engineering. Students worked
in groups of three people during the entire course, and had
1 week for delivering the nal report after each lab session.
Students were surveyed at the moment of report delivery. It
should be claried that each group worked on the lab experi-
ences in a different sequence. Table 5 summarises the survey
results for all three spreadsheets.
Although these results are to be considered only as prelim-
inary, because of the small population, in general, the three
spreadsheets were welcomed by students.
Balancing section A results, students agreed that the
spreadsheets are attractive, user-friendly and easy-to-use,
being the Transient Heat Conduction the most complex one.
On the other hand, the user manuals were not as useful and
clear as expected, evidently indicating that they require major
improvements, as some students quoted in the open ended
section.
Section B shows some interesting and contradictory
results. Firstly, students agreed in question B.3 that all spread-
Table 3 Minimumuidisation velocity predictions by selected correlations (Yang, 2003).
Correlation Restrictions MinimumFluidisation Velocity u
mf
(m/s)
System Particle shape Solidliquid Solidgas
Carman (1937) (SG) Spheres only 24.45
Ergun (1952) (SG) Spheres only 2.23
Leva (1959) (SG) 9.23
Rowe (1961) (SL) Spheres only 0.23
Wen and Yu (1966) (SG) and (SL) 0.04 1.75
Richardson (1971) (SL) Spheres only 0.04
Riba et al. (1978) (SL) Spheres only 0.16
Grace (1982) (SG) and (SL) 0.05 1.78
Chyang and Huang (1988) (SL) Granular 0.04
Tannous et al. (1994) (SL) 0.05
Average 0.09 7.89
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e69
Table 5 Survey results for the spreadsheets as percentage of respondents for each question.
Q Temperature proles Transient heat conduction Fixed and uidised beds
1+2 3 4+5 1+2 3 4+5 1+2 3 4+5
A.1 0 13 87 0 20 80 0 20 80
A.2 0 13 87 0 40 60 0 0 100
A.3 0 0 100 20 20 60 0 0 100
A.4 0 13 87 0 20 80 0 20 80
A.5 0 20 80 20 20 60 0 20 80
A.6 0 33 67 20 20 60 20 40 40
A.7 0 73 27 0 40 60 20 40 40
B.1 0 13 87 20 0 80 0 40 60
B.2 67 0 33 40 20 40 60 20 20
B.3 0 0 100 0 20 80 0 40 60
B.4 0 13 87 0 0 100 0 60 40
C.1 13 0 87 20 0 80 0 0 100
C.2 0 13 87 0 40 60 20 20 60
C.3 13 0 87 0 0 100 0 20 80
C.4 0 13 87 0 40 60 0 20 80
C.5 0 13 87 0 40 60 0 20 80
1+2: fully disagree+disagree; 3: neutral; 4+5: agree+fully agree.
Table 4 Survey questions.
Question A Simulator characteristics and GUI design
A.1 GUI Design is attractive
A.2 GUI is user-friendly
A.3 The spreadsheet is easy to use
A.4 Size of Texts, Charts and Graphics is easy to read
A.5 Results display quality is appropriate
A.6 User manual is easy to understand
A.7 User Manual was useful for learning how to use the
spreadsheet
Question B User experience
B.1 Imcomfortable with MS Excel before the Laboratory
B.2 Instructor assistance was required for using the
spreadsheet
B.3 Interaction degree between user and spreadsheet
was good
B.4 Amount of required knowledge on the Laboratory
experience required for using the spreadsheet
Question C Contribution to learning
C.1 Spreadsheet was useful for performing calculations
C.2 Spreadsheet contributed to the understanding of
the lab session
C.3 It is justied the use of the spreadsheet in the
laboratory session
C.4 Spreadsheet provided important time reduction in
calculations
C.5 Spreadsheet facilitates fullling more easily the
objectives
D Comments
sheets are well interactive, attaining the Temperature Proles
sheet the highest score. This can be attributed to the fact that
this sheet has more drop boxes, checkboxes, command but-
tons, etc. than the other two. It also has an illustrative image
that changes according to the selected boundary condition,
making of it an attractive and playful tool. Secondly, results
for questions B.1 and B.2 appear to be somehow contradic-
tory. Even though many students claimed to be comfortable
with the MS Excel

2007 environment before the laboratory

session, over 30%required assistance for using the sheet. Such
fact might be attributed to several factors as: user manuals
were not clear enough; students did not fully understand the
task and, some other students actually turnedto be unfamiliar
with the spreadsheet platform. Ultimately, question B.4 par-
tially conrms that the developedtools are neither virtual-labs
nor didactic simulators, which are tools used for introducing
newconcepts or procedures. Here, students require some the-
oretical background in order to process the experimental data
and properly estimating parameters via trial and error runs.
In section C students considered the spreadsheets as use-
ful and their incorporation justied (questions C.1 and C.3).
Results for question C.2 are in some way confusing, spe-
cially for the Fixed and Fluidised Beds experience, which had
the lowest score. This could be related to the students lack
of background, as this subject is not covered in theoretical
undergraduate courses. Now, regarding questions C.4 and C.5,
students perceived time savings when using the spreadsheets
considering the workload and, on the whole, acknowledged
that the sheets contributedtofullling laboratoryexperiences
objectives. It should be reminded here that in contrast to the
traditional approaches, instructors requested more complex
calculations and analyses.
Students also submitted valuable comments and sugges-
tions, such as incorporating more heat convection coefcient
correlations, as the available ones did not fully reproduced
data; including spherical geometry for transient heat conduc-
tion, as such sample objects are available in the laboratory;
incorporating error bars in the graphics of xed and uidised
beds, because actual readings tend to be unstable and uctu-
ating, and nally, incorporating calculation examples within
the user-manuals.
6. Conclusions and future work
Three spreadsheets were presented in this project. They were
designed for assisting the data processing and complex model
evaluation tasks of selected experiences of the Transport
Phenomena Laboratory I (TF-2281) course at the USB. These
spreadsheets comprise analytical and numerical solutions of
different models, as well as correlations available in the liter-
ature. Fifteen chemical engineering students who tested the
spreadsheets were surveyed, showing that spreadsheets were
considered useful for reducing workload and boosting anal-
yses quality as students had the new possibility of quickly
rehearsing with diverse correlations and models. Students
e70 education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71
also submitted valuable suggestions for improving the spread-
sheet experience, suchas incorporating more correlations and
models and examples into the user manuals, which will be
considered for the next stage of this project, which is to cre-
ate a spreadsheet for each lab experiment available in the
Transport Phenomena Laboratory courses. Finally, the goal of
updating the teaching and learning experience of chemical
engineering students at the Laboratory through computers
was fullled by the introduction of these spreadsheets, with-
out the need for students to acquire any programming skills to
be able to use them. This can be considered a practical advan-
tage, as it would allow other fellow communities to benet
fromthis work.
Spreadsheets freely available upon request to the corre-
sponding author.
List of symbols and notation
Al aluminium
Bi Biot number [1]
C constant for plate or cylinder analytic solution
d diameter [m]
E error
Fo Fourier number [1]
Fr Froude number [1]
g acceleration of gravity [9.81m/s
2
]
h heat convection coefcient [W/(m
2
K)]
K Barnea and Mednick (1978) constant (Eq. (13)) [1]
K
LP
WilhelmKwauk parameter [1]
k thermal conductivity [W/(mK)]
L bar length; bed height [m]
PVC polyvinyl chloride material
r radial position [m]
R cylinder radius [m]
Re Reynolds number [1]
St steel (stainless)
t time [s]
T temperature [K]
u velocity [m/s]
x axial position [m]
Greek letters
thermal diffusivity [m
2
/s]
LP pressure drop [Pa]
bed porosity [1]
, density [kg/m
3
]
j dynamic viscosity [Pas]
root of transcendental equation for plate or cylinder
[1]
Subscripts and superscripts
Anal. analytic
Base bar heated end
BM Barnea and Mednick (1978)
c cylinder
dp particle diameter
EXP experimental
FB uidised bed
f uid
i counter
mf minimumuidisation
n series termnumber
p plate; particle
0 initial value
* dimensionless coordinate
surrounding uid
Acknowledgements
Firstly, the author wishes to thank the undergraduate students
Alejandra Van-Dewalle, Rmulo Rothe, Elizabeth Rischbeck,
Migueddy Prez and Jess Tezara for their valuable con-
tributions in the rst development of the spreadsheets
alpha-versions as Short Research Projects in Chemical Engi-
neering at the USB, tutored by this author. Finally, thanks to
all the Transport Phenomena Laboratory I course students
and instructors that participated in the assessment process
of the spreadsheets.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.
2013.02.005.
References
Abbas, A., Al-Bastaki, N., 2002. The use of software tools for ChE
education: students evaluations. Chem. Eng. Educ. 36 (3),
236241.
Arce, P.E., Schreiber, L.B., 2004. High-performance learning
environments. Chem. Eng. Educ. 38 (4), 286291.
Axaopoulos, P., Pitsilis, G., 2007. Energy software for educational
use. Renew. Energy 32, 10451058.
Baker, J., Sugden, S.J., 2007. Spreadsheets in education the rst
25 years. Spreadsheets Educ. 1 (1), 1843.
Barnea, E., Mednick, R.L., 1978. A generalized approach to the
uid dynamics of particulate systems Part III: General
correlation for the pressure drop through xed beds of
spherical particles. Chem. Eng. J. 15, 215227.
Billo, E.J., 2007. Excel for Scientists and Engineers: Numerical
Methods. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, USA.
Burns, M.A., Sung, J.C., 1996. Design of separation units using
spreadsheets. Chem. Eng. Educ. 30 (1), 6269.
Coordinacin Ingeniera Qumica, 2008. Informacin sobre
Miniproyecto (EP-4103). Universidad Simn Bolvar, Venezuela,
http://www.iq.coord.usb.ve/documentos/Miniproyecto/info
miniproyecto.pdf (accessed 15.03.2012).
Coronell, D.G., 2005. Computer science or spreadsheet
engineering? An Excel/VBA-based programming and problem
solving course. Chem. Eng. Educ. 39 (2), 142145.
Dahm, K.D., Hesketh, R.P., Savelski, M.J., 2002. Is process
simulation used effectively in ChE courses? Chem. Eng. Educ.
36 (3), 192203.
Dahm, K.D., 2003. Process simulation and McCabe-Thiele
modeling: specic roles in the learning process. Chem. Eng.
Educ. 37 (2), 132141.
Domingues, L., Rocha, I., Dourado, F., Alves, M., Ferreira, E.C.,
2010. Virtual laboratories in (bio)chemical engineering
education. Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng. 5, e22e27.
Edgar, T.F., 2006. Enhancing the undergraduate computing
experience. Chem. Eng. Educ. 40 (3), 231238.
Ergun, S., 1952. Fluid ow through packed columns. Chem. Eng.
Prog. 48, 8994.
Erzen, F., Birol, G., C inar, S., 2003. Development and
implementation of an educational simulator: glucosim.
Chem. Eng. Educ. 37 (4), 300305.
Evans, J.R., 2000. Spreadsheets as a tool for teaching simulation.
INFORMS Trans. Educ. 1 (1), 2737.
Feisel, L.D., Rosa, A.J., 2005. The role of the laboratory in
undergraduate engineering education. J. Eng. Educ. 94 (1),
121130.
education for chemical engineers 8 ( 2 0 1 3 ) e58e71 e71
Foley, G., 2011. Three classic ultraltration problems solved with
the exponential integral. Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng.
6, e90e96.
Hinestroza, J.P., Papadopoulos, K., 2003. Using spreadsheets and
Visual Basic Applications as teaching aids for a unit
operations course. Chem. Eng. Educ. 37 (4), 316320.
Incropera, F.P., De Witt, D.P., Bergman, T.L., Lavine, A.S., 2007.
Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, sixth ed. John Wiley
& Sons, USA.
Jacobson, R., 2001. Microsoft

Excel 2002 Visual Basic

for
Applications Step by Step. Microsoft Press, Washington, USA.
Kanyarusoke, K.E., Uziak, J., 2011. Spreadsheets: the ideal tool for
distance learning in engineering education. Comput. Appl.
Eng. Educ. 19 (2), 216223.
McCabe, W., Smith, J., Harriot, P., 2005. Unit Operations of
Chemical Engineering, seventh ed. USA, McGraw-Hill.
Melndez, J., Gutirrez, B., 2005. Gua para el Laboratorio de
Fenmenos de Transporte I TF-2281. Departamento de
Termodinmica y Fenmenos de Transferencia, Universidad
Simn Bolvar, Venezuela, https://asignaturas.usb.ve/osmosis/
dokeos/claroline/document/document.php?openDir=
%2FLaboratorio de Fenomenos de Transporte I (accessed
15.09.11) (in Spanish).
Narang, A., Ben-Zvi, A., Afacan, A., Sharp, D., Shah, S.L., Huang,
B., 2012. Undergraduate design of experiment laboratory on
analysis and optimization of distillation column. Trans.
IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng. 7, e187
e195.
Patterson, D.A., 2011. Impact of a multimedia laboratory manual:
investigating the inuence of student learning styles on
laboratory preparation and performance over one semester.
Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng. 6, e10
e30.
Savage, P.E., 1995. Spreadsheets for thermodynamics instruction.
Chem. Eng. Educ. 29 (3), 262269.
Selmer, A., Kraft, M., Moros, R., Colton, C.K., 2007. Weblabs in
chemical engineering education. Trans. IChemE D: Educ.
Chem. Eng. 2, 3845.
Stamou, A.I., Rutschmann, P., 2011. Teaching simple water quality
models. Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng. 6, e132e141.
Stover, R.L., 2008. SWRO process simulator. Desalination 221,
126135.
Stubington, J.F., 1995. Quality in teaching laboratories. Chem. Eng.
Educ. 29 (2), 186190.
Vazquez-Arenas, J., Ortiz-Rodriguez, E., Ricardez-Sandoval, L.A.,
2009. A computational laboratory on the role of mass
transport contributions in electrochemical systems: copper
deposition. Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng. 4, 4349.
Vazquez-Arenas, J., Pritzker, M., 2010. How to relate experiments
and theory for electrochemistry? Linear sweep voltammetry
for the reduction of Fe(CN)
6
3
. Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem.
Eng. 5, e78e86.
Vernengo, J., Dahm, K.D., 2012. Two challenge-based laboratories
for introducing undergraduate students to biomaterials.
Trans. IChemE D: Educ. Chem. Eng. 7, e14e21.
Wankat, P.C., 2006. Using commercial simulator to teach sorption
separations. Chem. Eng. Educ. 40 (3), 165172.
Yang, W.-C. (Ed.), 2003. Handbook of Fluidization and
FluidParticle Systems. Marcel Dekker Inc., USA.
Zheng, H., Keith, J.M., 2004. Java-based heat transfer visualization
tools. Chem. Eng. Educ. 38 (4), 282285.