You are on page 1of 115

Liquid Side Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop in
Finned-Tube Cooling-Coils

Caroline Haglund Stignor
September 2002

Thesis for the degree of Licentiate of Engineering
ISRN LUTMDN/TMHP--02/7007--SE
© Caroline Haglund Stignor, September 2002
Division of Heat Transfer
Department of Heat and Power Engineering
Lund Institute of Technology
P.O. Box 118, S-221 00 Lund
Sweden
Printed by KFS AB, Lund, October 2002
This work has been carried out at SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute.

Keywords: heat transfer. One of particular interest is cooling of the air in display cabinets. To start with. Optimising criteria for a display cabinet application were stated aiming at reducing the amount of electric energy used by the chiller. a liquid that is circulated out to the display cabinets from a central chiller does the cooling. but the improvements are moderate. the calculation model used in the parameter study for conventional cooling-coils was complemented with correlations for different enhancement techniques for laminar flow. it was found that for the most efficient cooling-coils presented in this thesis. However. the liquid pumps and the fans of the display cabinet. the moderately better or equal performance is achieved at a lower liquid flow rate. different ways to improve the performance of indirectly cooled cooling-coils have been investigated both experimentally and in theoretical parameter studies. full-scale experiments with conventional cooling-coils aimed for display cabinets were performed. This means that instead of evaporation taking place in the cooling-coil tubes. primarily in order to reduce the use of electric energy. For such criteria it was found that the overall efficiency could be improved by increasing the number of parallel loops (or circuits). especially if the flow is laminar. Thereafter. especially in the Nordic countries. In addition it has been shown that optimal operation regarding liquid flow rate and inlet temperature to the cooling-coil is strongly dependent on the cooling-coil geometry and choice of secondary refrigerant. the effect of free convection must be considered. pressure drop. In this case the liquid side heat transfer resistance is much higher compared to the case of evaporation. indirect cooling.Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate how the heat transfer performance of conventional cooling-coils can be improved. The results showed that this was the case if the liquid flow path (total tube) length of the cooling-coil is sufficiently short. Finally. Heat transfer and pressure drop performance on the liquid side for three different single-phase secondary refrigerants were studied and compared to predictions by existing correlations. However. This model was then used in a parameter study where the effect of changing the cooling-coil geometry was investigated. which might be an advantage for the rest of the cooling-system of the supermarket. cooling-coil. In the next step of the research work. appropriate correlations and assumptions were used to create a calculation model. There are many applications for cooling-coils. The latter is due to the fact that the boundary layers are destroyed and a new entrance length is formed after each U-bend. In the research work presented in this thesis. One important finding was then that when using correlations developed in small-scale experiments for prediction of the heat transfer performance of a complete cooling-coil. small-scale experiments on a single-tube including a U-bend were carried out for the purpose of verification of correlations. by reducing the tube diameter and by reducing the length between the U-bends of the cooling-coil. The model was then used to investigate whether the cooling-coil performance could be improved further by application of any of these enhancement techniques. secondary refrigerants i . laminar. optimal operation for display cabinet applications corresponded to the laminar flow regime. such as continuous and regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts and longitudinal internal fins. The reason is that new regulations regarding use of synthetic refrigerants have led to an increasing use of indirect cooling by means of liquid secondary refrigerants in supermarkets.

ii .

Finally – thanks to everyone else who have supported my work! iii . Professor Bengt Sundén and Ph. namely ABB Coiltech. Bengt Nordling for many practical advice regarding measurement technique and building of measurement set-ups.Eng. Those companies. Wica Cold and Wilo.Sc. for help with measurements and all other colleagues who have encouraged.Sc. Monica Axell for encouragement and fruitful discussions about display cabinets and cooling systems in supermarkets and M. consisting of a number of industrial partners contributing with material.Acknowledgements This work has been carried out at SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute. guided and helped me in my work. for helpful advices and discussions. The Swedish Energy Agency and the Swedish District Heating Association are gratefully acknowledged for financial support. The work has been carried out in co-operation with a project group.D. Firstly I would like to express my great appreciation to my supervisor Professor Per Fahlén. are therefore thankfully acknowledged. At SP I would like to express my gratitude to Lic. Refcon. for his many ideas and suggestions and for encouraging advice. Hydro Alunova. Temper Technology. Daniel Eriksson. Lund Institute of Technology. time and fruitful advice. Grundfos. I would also like to thank the engineers Gunilla Andersson and Peter Lidbom and the M. student Kristoffer Tyvik. Alfal Laval. Hydro Gas&Chemicals. at Chalmers University of Technology (at the beginning of the project at SP). Thanks also to my supervisors at the Division of Heat Transfer.

iv .

P. Hrnjak. P. IIR/IIF”. v . 263272. Urbana. in Proceedings of the International Conference “Zero Leakage . Improvement of conventional indirect cooling-coils for display cabinets – theory and experiments. English title: A comparison of methods for improvement of heat transfer and pressure drop in cooling-coils cooled by a liquid in the laminar flow regime). and Eriksson. P S. 263-270. B. Copenhagen. 2002. Nordiske varmepumpedage”. 120-129.List of Publications This thesis is partly based on the following papers: Haglund.Minimum Charge. C. Fahlén. pp. D. Enhancement of the performance of indirect cooling-coils for display cabinets. 2001. Fahlén. IIR/IIF Commission D1/B1”. 2002. Stockholm. in Proceedings of the International Conference “New Technologies in Commercial Refrigeration. C. Nordiske kølemøde. D. Sundén. B and Eriksson. pp. Sundén. Jämförelse av metoder för att förbättra värmeöverföring och tryckfall i köldbärarkylda kylbatterier med laminära vätskeflöden (In Swedish. C and Fahlén. Haglund. USA: Eds. P. pp. Pridasawas. W and Palm. 9. Haglund. in Proceedings of the Nordic Conference “16. Denmark. B. Sweden: Eds.

vi .

...3 Cooling-Coils with Regularly Spaced Twisted-Tape Inserts ... B4 and B5 ........................................11 2........4 Literature Survey ............2 Cooling-Coils with Continuous Twisted-Tape Inserts ....................16 2..........................2 Objectives .................. B4 and B5 ...............21 3..............1.......................................................................................2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils..........29 4......Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................24 3.....3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts ...18 2.......................................................3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts .............................1....................4...........................................................................................11 2.2 Cooling-Coils with Inserts or Internal Longitudinal Fins ...... B4 and B5 .4..............................................................................................................4 Measurement Plan ........19 2...............................4............................13 2.2 Secondary Refrigerants used in the Experiments ......................3..................................2...............................................................12 2...............................1...................................2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils......4 Cooling-Coils with Longitudinal Internal Fins ..........................2 Parameter Study.........................................................................19 2....................1 1..........................1...........................................................................................4 1....................1 Correlations .............................4.....29 4....4........................2 Optimising Criteria ..............................1 Conventional Cooling-Coils........28 4 Results............................52 vii ................. B4 and B5 ..............................................................4.............................................1 Description of Tested Objects ...................1 1.4 1..3..................................................................21 3.......12 2.........................3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts ................................3 1...................26 3.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................2 Heat Transfer Augmentation Techniques for Laminar Flow ......2................................14 2.........................................1............4 Thermophysical Properties of Liquid Secondary Refrigerants (Brines) ..1 Conventional Cooling-Coils......... B2 and B3 ...........................................8 1........4 1...1 Conventional Cooling-Coils..........................................2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils.............4 1........................................................... B2 and B3 ........................3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts ..............................3 Optimal Operation for the Purpose of Minimising the Electric Energy Use.........................................................................................1..................................................................39 4.1 Conventional Cooling-Coils without Inserts .............25 3........................50 4.....................11 2..4.....................35 4.................................................................................1 Liquid Side Performance of Full-Sized Cooling-Coils ...2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils....5 Uncertainty of Measurements........... B2 and B3 .....................3 Performance Evaluation Criteria ....1 Conventional Cooling-Coils without Inserts ..................3 Measurement Set-Up ......................21 3......9 2 Experiments ...................................14 2.........................18 2...3.................1......................2.........................................46 4............................................29 4......1 Background...................47 4...........................................................19 3 Parameter Study ..................1 Experiments .....1 Conventional Cooling-Coils......................3 Methodology.16 2.................1.............. B2 and B3 .................

........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Discussion .......................62 6 Conclusions.............................................................59 5.................................................................................................................................................................62 Uncertainty of Measurement ..........................6 5..............................................................................................................................60 Optimal Reynolds Number Regime .........................................................65 7 Recommendations for Future Work............59 Parameter Study – Conventional Cooling-Coils .....67 8 References.......83 Appendix C Uncertainty of Measurements ..................................69 Appendix A Correlations.......1 5.......................................................................75 Appendix B Experimental Data............................4 5...................................61 Evaluation of Enhancement Techniques ........7 5........................................59 New Experiments with Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils........5 5........................................................................61 Experiments with Single-Tubes.....................60 Saving Potentials ..........................................................................................................95 viii ...............3 5.........................................................8 Experiments with Conventional Cooling-Coils.....................................................2 5.......................

Nomenclature A A0 Ac Ac. J/kg/K D. % cp Specific heat. in the definition of Reynolds number) m Mass flux. m2 Total air side surface area of coil Narrowest cross-sectional area Narrowest cross-sectional area of tube bank without fins Cross-sectional flow area Surface area of fins Outer surface area of tubes without fins c Concentration. d D Dc d dh Diameter.g. J/kg L L Ltube Ltube. f = ∆p ⋅ d ⋅ 2 ρ ⋅ Ltube ⋅ u 2 Friction factor of fins Friction factor of tube bundle g Gravitational acceleration. m/s2 Gr Grashof number. Gr = Gz Graetz number. m or mm Length of the coil in the direction of air flow Heated tube length Total length of a liquid loop or circuit Characteristic length (e. m or mm Outside diameter of tubes Collar diameter Dc=D+2·δfin Inner diameter of tubes Hydraulic diameter dh = 4·Af·/P (P = perimeter) f ff ft Darcy friction factor.t Af Afin At Area. Gz = H Pitch for 180° rotation of twisted-tape h Specific enthalpy. kg/s N Number of parallel loops or circuits of a cooling-coil ( ) g ⋅ ρ 2 ⋅ d 3 ⋅ β ⋅ ∆Tw µ2 u ⋅ρ ⋅ Af ⋅ cp λLtube ix .tot l Length.

air side of coil due to the tubes Pr Prandtl number. air side of coil due to the fins Pressure difference. kPa or bar Pressure difference. Sw = α ⋅ dh λ cp ⋅µ λ ρ⋅u ⋅l µ x Re sw y . m or mm Fin pitch Longitudinal tube pitch Transverse tube pitch ∆p ∆pf ∆pt Pressure difference. Nu = Pd Wave (waffle) height. m Sw Dimensionless swirl parameter. Pa. W R Radius of tube bend. mm p pfin pl pt Pitch. Ra = Gr ⋅ Pr Re Reynolds number. m sfin Unfrosted fin spacing. s = S/d . m s Relative tape spacing (twisted-tapes). Re = Re Reax ReD ReDc Resw RePd Reynolds number based on empty tube diameter Reynolds number based on axial velocity Reynolds number based on the outer tube diameter Reynolds number based on the collar diameter Reynolds number based on actual swirl velocity at tube wall Reynolds number based on waffle height S Tape spacing (twisted-tapes). Pr = Q Cooling capacity. mm Equivalent fin radius Inner radius of the fin Ra Rayleigh number.n nt nl Specific number Number of tubes orthogonal to the direction of air flow (transversely) Number of tubes in the direction of air flow (longitudinally) Nu Nusselt number. mm r re ri Radius.

mm x Local distance along the test section from the inlet. kg/m3 xi (∂ρ ∂T ) p ρ . W Xf Projected wavy length.t Temperature. W/m/K µ Viscosity (dynamic). K U Expanded (total) uncertainty of measurements U Overall heat transfer coefficient. y = H/d Greek letters α Heat transfer coefficient. K-1 . m or mm y Twist ratio. W/(m2⋅K) u Uncertainty of measurements u Velocity. K ∆T w Wall-to-bulk fluid temperature difference. i. m or mm η ηA ηfin Efficiency Area efficiency Fin efficiency ϕ Relative humidity of air. m/s V Volume flow. W/(m2⋅K) αa Heat transfer coefficient on the air side (dry air) αb Heat transfer coefficient on the liquid (brine) side β Coefficient of isobaric thermal expansion. number of tube diameters per 180° tape twist. Pa·s or mPa·s ν Viscosity (Kinematic). % λ Thermal conductivity. kg/m3 ∆ρ Density difference (thermal expansion). m3/s or m3/h W e Electric power. °C T Temperature.e. β = − δ Thickness. m2/s ρ Density.

at inlet conditions Longitudinal Logarithmic mean Mean Compressor motor Minimal Out from cooling-coil Pump Constant pressure Uniform temperature boundary condition Transverse Total Water Wall. at wall temperature By weight Local value xii .Subscripts a b B e f H i in l lm m m min out p p T t tot W w w x Air Liquid secondary refrigerant (brine) Bulk. at bulk temperature Extra Fan Uniform heat flux boundary condition Based on maximum inside (envelope) diameter In to cooling-coil.

4 . For example meat should be kept at 0 . Indirect cooling means that. the circulating air is heated and has to be cooled to its original temperature by the cooling-coil. A typical key figure for the energy requirement of modern display cabinets is 4000-8000 kWh electricity per meter and year.8 TWh electricity per year [2].4°C and dairy products at 0 . major changes regarding regulations for the use of synthetic refrigerants have been taking place. which in turn leads to the chiller working with a lower evaporation temperature compared to the case of direct evaporation. In addition. In the display cabinet the merchandise ought to be kept at a temperature that is lower than the ambience at the same time as it should be easy for the customers to reach the merchandise.e.2 show how the air is circulated in the display cabinet. Thereafter the air is returned via a fan back to the cooling-coil. . Then the secondary refrigerant is circulated to the cooling-coils placed in the display cabinets. This results in a total energy use for display cabinets in Sweden that amounts to 0. This is fulfilled by cooling air in a cooling-coil and then distributing the air partly in a cold air curtain in front of the merchandise and partly through the back of the cabinet and above the merchandise. The cold air curtain is supposed to work as a cold barrier between the warm ambience outside the cabinet and the cold space within the cabinet. However. The arrows in Figure 1. a secondary refrigerant is cooled by heat exchange with a primary refrigerant in a liquid cooler placed close to the chiller. However. In Sweden today. there are approximately 100 km of display cabinets installed in supermarkets etc.1 Background Refrigeration of merchandise in supermarkets is responsible for a significant amount of the energy use in the commercial sector. i. 1. one disadvantage of indirect cooling is that an extra temperature difference is required in the liquid cooler.0. Besides. there are other advantages associated with indirect cooling. additional pumping power is necessary for distributing the secondary refrigerant out to the display cabinets. Application of indirect cooling for the display cabinets in supermarkets enables minimisation of the refrigerant charges and thereby also the leakage of the refrigerant. The cooling is achieved by electrically driven chillers. especially in the Nordic countries. instead of circulating the primary refrigerant through the cooling-coils of the display cabinets and hence using the cooling-coils as evaporators. they have a large energy requirement.1 and Figure 1. where previous work related to this study is presented.8°C [1]. Thereafter there is a literature survey. Lately. heat conduction through the cabinet walls and internal lighting etc. This has led to an extended use of indirect cooling by means of a liquid secondary refrigerant. mixing with the warm outside air. Open vertical display cabinets are commonly used and despite of their frequent occurrence. In reality one chiller often serves several display cabinets and not only one as in the pictures. due to infiltration.1 schematic pictures show the difference between a direct and an indirect refrigeration system. such as for example a more homogeneous cooling of the merchandise. radiation through the cabinet opening. In Figure 1.1 1 Introduction A short background stating the significance of the present study is given below. followed by the objectives of the study and the methodology used in the research work.

The cooling-coil is placed in the back of the display cabinet. Using a liquid secondary refrigerant as heat transfer medium. The cooling-coil is placed in the bottom of the display cabinet The cooling-coil is one of the key-components in a display cabinet and traditionally. When evaporation takes place in the tubes. since the air side resistance is of such a high magnitude.2. which is almost negligible.2 A display cabinet cooled by an indirect cooling system by means of a secondary refrigerant.e. different kind of tube-coils with aluminium fins on expanded copper tubes are used. An example of such a coil is presented in Figure 1. i. or in the back of the display cabinet as in Figure 1.3. A lower heat transfer coefficient must be compensated by a larger temperature difference in the cooling-coil. Therefore. The cooling-coil is either placed in the bottom of the display cabinet.1 A display cabinet cooled by (a) a direct chiller and (b) an indirect cooling system by means of a secondary refrigerant. the heat transfer coefficient on the tube side is very high and the tube-side heat transfer resistance constitutes a contribution to the total heat transfer resistance of the heat exchanger. heat transfer on the tube-side will be much lower compared to the case of evaporation of a refrigerant. a lower supply temperature of the secondary refrigerant to the cooling-coil. The tube-coil heat exchanger was originally designed for evaporation of a refrigerant.2 + (a) _ (b) Figure 1. This in turn leads to a lower evaporation temperature for the chiller and hence to a higher electric energy requirement.1. Figure 1. as in Figure 1. it is appropriate to investigate the heat trans- .

an assessment of different enhancement techniques should be made. for the purpose of optimisation.3 fer and pressure drop characteristics on the liquid side as well as the air side in this kind of heat exchanger for the purpose of finding ways for improvement. The modifications concern primarily the liquid side of the cooling-coil. especially in tubes having circular cross-section. a single-phase laminar flow regime offers a better ratio between heat transfer and pressure drop compared to the turbulent flow regime [3. even though good heat transfer often is associated with a turbulent flow regime or a change of phase. but the conditions on the air side must always be considered as well.g. Secondly. . it is possible to achieve high heat transfer coefficients even for laminar flows if an appropriate design of the heat exchanger is applied. To start with.2 Objectives Firstly. in order to find out what the design of a cooling-coil should be like to achieve an improved overall performance. see e. there are not many investigations concerning the heat transfer and pressure drop performance of a cooling-coil operated in the laminar flow regime. In such a way the limitations regarding the potential for reduction of energy usage by modifying the cooling-coil design can be estimated. However. a cooling-coil for secondary refrigerants could be designed in a totally different manner compared to the traditional tubecoil with aluminium fins on expanded copper tubes. This may lead to poor heat transfer. Improved performance is in this case first and foremost defined as reduced use of electric energy. the objective of this study is to outline the heat transfer and pressure drop performance on the liquid side of conventional cooling-coils when operated with liquid secondary refrigerants. 1. Due to the fact that many secondary refrigerants have relatively high viscosity at low temperatures. Therefore. the study is aiming at using the obtained knowledge when investigating different enhancement techniques in order to find ways for improvement of the cooling-coil performance. the flow regime is often laminar. Thereafter.3 A traditional cooling-coil consisting of aluminium fins on expanded copper tubes. This study focuses first and foremost on cooling-coils in a display cabinet application but the outcome of the study can to be used in many other applications where liquid cooled finned-tube coils are used as well. 4]. such as evaporation or condensation. In addition. The heat transfer and pressure drop performance on the air side of finned tube-coils has been thoroughly analysed by many researchers. the heat transfer and pressure drop behaviour of the cooling-coils existing on the market today should be investigated. Figure 1. On the contrary. the reference [5].

This is explained by the fact that the thermally developing regions after the U-bends are longer than expected and hence. curve fits) for different fluids were developed. The performance of the twisted-tape inserts was then verified in small-scale experiments with a single-tube including a U-bend.1 Liquid Side Performance of Full-Sized Cooling-Coils Mao et al [6] and Hrnjak [7] investigated heat transfer in cooling-coils with secondary refrigerants. In addition to these studies. previous experimental work concerning the liquid side of cooling-coils was surveyed. As a start. introductory full-scale experiments were carried out with conventional cooling-coils.1. which resulted in a proposal on how to improve conventional cooling-coils by changing the coil parameters. A calculation model was then created.4).4. the flow pattern is usually in the laminar or transitional regime. even though the air side performance as well as the turbulent flow regime are taken into consideration when necessary. In this survey correlations for predicting cooling-coil performance and enhancement techniques were studied. By using the results from these experiments. the pressure drop would be too high because of the high viscosity of the medium. 1. The researchers concluded that the thermal development and heat transfer following a U-bend is very similar to that after the inlet of the tube (see Figure 1. essential conclusions were drawn from comparison between measured data and correlations.2 Heat Transfer Augmentation Techniques for Laminar Flow When a secondary refrigerant such as e. in the parameter study correlations were used outside regions verified in the first part of the experiments.4 1. the air side performance of cooling-coils has been investigated by many researchers. the U-bend effect should be accounted for when designing heat exchangers for the laminar flow regime. In addition. Therefore. there are little experimental data regarding heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics for cooling-coils cooled by secondary refrigerants available in the literature.4. containing the appropriate selected correlations. a glycol is the flowing medium in the tubes of a cooling-coil.g. 1. The evaluated enhancement techniques were continuous and regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts and longitudinal internal fins.4 Literature Survey As mentioned in section 1. verifications were carried out with improved cooling-coils in new experiments. this research project has been performed in several experimental as well as theoretical parts. Hong and Hrnjak [8] investigated the U-bend effect further and correlations (i. The reason for this is that to reach a turbulent flow regime. This model was applied in a parameter study. this study is mainly focused on the liquid side heat transfer and pressure drop in the laminar flow regime. 1. They reported unexpectedly high heat transfer coefficients on the secondary refrigerant side at low Reynolds number in a heat exchanger of a display cabinet. Thereafter.3 Methodology This research project started by performing a literature survey. However. However.e. There are several ways to augment the tube-side laminar . Correlations for different enhancement techniques were then added to the calculation model in order to find out whether such techniques could lead to further performance improvements.

also enlarge the heat transfer area. corrugated tubes. only passive augmentation techniques will be discussed. (3) the helically twisting fluid . In addition to flow agitation. fluid vibration and application of electrostatic or magnetic fields [9]. internally finned tubes and various mixers offer significant increase in heat transfer. the twisted-tape (see Figure 1. the references [14-26]. (2) the hydraulic diameter is reduced which in effect increases the heat transfer coefficient. such as twisted-tape inserts.5 Figure 1. surface vibration. the heat transfer enhancement achieved with twisted-tape inserts is ascribed to a variety of effects: (1) the partitioning and blockage of the tube flow cross section by the tape. Many of the passive augmentation techniques are reviewed by Bergles and Joshi [10] and include applications with surface modifications such as different kinds of surface roughness on the tube inside [11] or internally finned tubes [12]. internally finned tubes and twisted-tape inserts that are in contact with the tube wall. internally finned tubes and a combination of these techniques are probably the best alternatives for heat transfer augmentation since the pressure drop penalty is less significant for these cases. Using these techniques in the laminar flow regime. the heat transfer augmentation is often accompanied with an increase in pressure drop of the same order of magnitude compared to the smooth tube. in order to disturb the boundary layer near the tube surface and introduce a heat transfer mechanism complementary to the laminar diffusion heat transfer. The former ones require no other additional power input than pumping power. However. The authors also states that when pumping power is a limiting factor. Phenomenologically. The purpose of most of these configurations is agitation of the fully developed laminar flow to create secondary flows or swirl flows.4 Elements of heat transfer characteristics in laminar developing flow [7]. Hereafter. in the case of turbulent flow.g. twisted-tape inserts. which results in higher flow velocities. Bergles and Joshi [10] conclude that several of the augmentation techniques. see e. Examples of active augmentation techniques are stirring of the fluid. heat transfer. the increase in pressure drop is often several orders of magnitude greater than that of the heat transfer increase. Among the objects inserted in the flow passage in order to improve heat transfer for laminar flow. The augmentation techniques can be classified as either passive or active augmentation techniques. Another augmentation technique is to use different kinds of inserts such as displace promoters or twisted-tape inserts [13].5) is one of the most extensively used. while the latter ones require external power.

while the corresponding pressure drop was less than four times the empty tube pressure drop.6 motion has an effectively longer flow path. Saha et al [18]. which allows higher heat fluxes to be sustained [27]. From the first study they reported that both on the basis of constant pumping power and constant heat duty. In the following studies different twist geometries were further investigated. the effective heat transfer area is increased. Figure 1. since for a tube with regularly spaced twisted-tape elements Nu as well as f can be both higher and lower than the corresponding values for the full-length twisted-tape insert. i.g. Compared to a plain tube. e. increases in heat transfer achieved by means of twisted tapeinserts are often higher or in the same order of magnitude as the increase in friction factor (pressure drop). Lopina and Bergles [28] and DuPlessis [29].5 Finned tube with twisted tape insert [31]. transition and turbulent flows.6). if in “good” contact with the tube walls. twist ratio and space between the inserts. Saha and Chakraborty [32] and Saha and Dutta [19] performed experimental studies where they investigated heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics for laminar flow in a circular tube fitted with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts (see Figure 1. (4) secondary fluid motion is generated by the tape twist and (5) the metallic tape. However.e. Figure 1. depending on Re. These correlations agree well with experimental data from their own experiments as well as with data found in the literature. . For example Hong and Bergles [13] experimentally investigated heat transfer and pressure drop for water and ethylene glycol in a tube with twisted-tape inserts and reported that the maximum increase of the heat transfer coefficient was ten times the empty tube constant property value. Later on Manglik and Bergles [27. acts as a fin.6 Regularly spaced twisted-tape elements connected to each other with a thin rod [18]. regularly spaced twisted-tape elements are found to perform significantly better than full-length twisted-tapes. 30] have worked further on developing heat transfer and friction factor correlations for tubes with twisted tape inserts and present correlations for laminar. the full-length twisted tape is not a limiting case of the geometry with regularly spaced twisted-tape elements. Many researchers have presented heat transfer and friction factor correlations for twisted tape inserts.

7

Longitudinal internal fins may in some situations, but not always, lead to improved heat transfer both on the basis of constant diameter (nominal area) and constant pumping power basis.
Watkinson et al [33] made heat transfer and pressure drop measurements on a number of
tubes with different straight and spiral internal fins in laminar oil flow. The researchers report
a heat transfer enhancement over the smooth tube value by 8 to 224 percent depending on
tube geometry. However, the heat transfer enhancement involved an increase in pressure drop.
At constant pumping power, the increase in heat transfer ranged from 1 to 187 percent. Tubes
with few, rather high, spiral fins performed best.
In recent years, many numerical studies have been performed in order to analyse heat transfer
in laminar flows in ducts and annuli with internal longitudinal fins, e.g. by Chai and Patankar
[34], Dong and Ebedian [35], Shome and Jensen [36], Shome [37] and Fabbri [38, 39]. Fabbri
[38, 39] numerically optimised the geometry of symmetrical as well as asymmetrical fins in
order to enhance heat transfer performance in tubes under laminar flow conditions (see Figure
1.7). He found that the heat transfer improvements depend partly on the extension of the fin
surface, but mainly on the alteration of the flow induced by the fin shape.

Figure 1.7 Different symmetrical and asymmetrical fin geometries investigated by Fabbri
[39].

8

Shome and Jensen [40] also made experimental investigation with internally finned
(longitudinal) tubes and found that the maximum heat transfer enhancement, relative to a
smooth tube, was obtained for tubes with few tall fins with strong free convection effects and
was around 75 % at the expense of a 50 % increase in pressure drop compared to the smooth
tube value. In the subsequent numerical investigations [36, 37], parameter studies were performed and it was found that for tubes with a large number of fins or tubes with tall fins, internal finning results in low heat transfer in the inter-fin regions due to low velocity of the
flow, which in turn leads to a decrease in overall heat transfer compared to the smooth tube.
This coring effect (higher velocity in the tube core as compared to the inter-fin regions) is
exaggerated when the number of fins or the fin height is increased. However, the overall heat
transfer results for finned tubes showed significant enhancement over the smooth tube value
in the near-inlet entrance region, but the enhancement level drops sharply at a large axial distance from the inlet at the expense of fairly large increases in the pressure drop.
For turbulent flows, heat transfer augmentation by means of circumferential fins is well established since the fins act as turbulence promoters and periodically interrupt the formation of
the laminar sub layer on the tube wall. On the contrary, in laminar flows circumferential fins
often lead to decreased heat transfer, which has been shown in a numerical study by Rowley
and Patankar [41]. This is due to the fact that the fins cause the main flow to move away from
the tube wall. However, for high Prandtl number fluids the heat transfer can in some situations be enhanced, but the pressure drop penalty is often severe.

1.4.3

Performance Evaluation Criteria

Whether the overall performance of the cooling-coil is improved by a certain enhancement
technique depends on the application where it is used. When comparing different augmentation techniques it is impossible to establish a generally applicable selection criterion, since
numerous factors influence the ultimate decision. However, in the case of single-phase forced
convection the relationship between thermal and hydraulic performance should be considered.
Depending on if the thermo-hydraulic goal is to reduce the size of a heat exchanger required
for a specified heat duty, increasing the heat duty of an existing heat exchanger, reducing the
temperature difference between the process streams or reducing the pumping power, different
performance evaluation criteria can be used. Such criteria are outlined by Bergles [9] and for
low Reynolds number flow in particular by Webb and Bergles [42]. In the latter study, algebraic relations for twelve different performance evaluation techniques are derived and discussed. An example of an evaluation criterion is that if the aim is to reduce the pumping
power with fixed heat transfer rate, fixed temperature difference and fixed length of the flow
path and fixed number of tubes in the heat exchanger, then the liquid flow rate and Reynolds
number in the enhanced heat exchanger must be lower compared to the one with smooth
tubes. However neither of these criteria is directly applicable on a display cabinet application
since they do not weight pump, fan and compressor power together.

9

1.4.4

Thermophysical Properties of Liquid Secondary Refrigerants
(Brines)

In display cabinet applications, the liquid secondary refrigerant (or brine according to the
standard EN255 [43]) propylene glycol is widely used, but there are many other secondary
refrigerants available on the market. However, all of them are not applicable for supermarkets
due to reliability and health aspects. In order to predict the performance of a cooling system
operated with a certain secondary refrigerant, reliable thermophysical data are essential.
Melinder [44-46] has made extensive investigations of thermophysical properties, such as
density, specific heat, viscosity and thermal conductivity, of liquid secondary refrigerants. He
presents data for several commonly used liquid secondary refrigerants in the form of charts
and tables in the references [46] (Swedish and English) and [45] (English and French).
Melinder [44] compares the heat transfer and pressure drop properties in freezer applications
for the liquid secondary refrigerants presented in the reference [45] and two additional liquid
secondary refrigerants. The liquids compared are aqueous solutions of ethylene glycol,
propylene glycol, ethanol, methanol, ammonia, calcium chloride, potassium acetate, potassium formate and lithium chloride and a few non-aqueous heat transfer liquids, i. e.
Dowtherm, Syltherm XLTHFE-7100 and d-limone and they all have concentrations giving a
freezing point temperature of -40°C. In the comparison of laminar flow heat transfer it is
shown that the aqueous solutions of chlorides perform best followed by the potassium salts
and ammonia. For turbulent flow, aqueous solutions of ammonia, the chlorides and potassium
formate perform best followed by methanol and potassium formate. The non-aqueous
solutions can compete below - 40 °C. It is also shown that the pressure drop at laminar flows
for propylene glycol is very high compared to other secondary refrigerants, much higher than
that of ethylene glycol, ethanol and potassium acetate, which in turn have higher pressure
drops than potassium formate and the chlorides. The result of the pressure drop comparison
for turbulent flows is to a large extent similar to that of laminar flows. However, when
determining which secondary refrigerant is to be used in a particular application, there are
several aspects to take into consideration, such as corrosivity, toxicity, environmental
pollution, flammability, handling safety and cost. For example, many of the salts are corrosive
when oxygen is present, ethylene glycol has a high toxicity and ethanol involves a
flammability risk.
The secondary refrigerants investigated by Melinder [44-46] are principally aqueous solutions
without additives. However most of the secondary refrigerants available on the market do
contain additives, e.g. inhibitors. In addition, there are secondary refrigerants consisting of a
mixture of substances. In such situations manufacturers’ data of thermophysical properties are
necessary.
Bergles [47] has surveyed several analytical solutions for predicting the effect of temperature
dependent fluid properties, such as viscosity and density, on heat transfer in circular tubes. In
a subsequent review by Bergles [48] the author states that the large deviations in heat transfer
coefficients from constant property values, which are predicted by analyses, are confirmed by
experience. Many analytical solutions and correlations take either variable viscosity or density
into account, but only a few consider both properties to be variable. The author concludes that
heat exchangers involving viscous liquids must be designed with heat transfer coefficient
equations that take temperature dependent viscosity and density into account.

Hishida et al [51] investigated numerically combined forced and free convection in the entrance region of an isothermally heated horizontal pipe. the solution procedure described in this paper involved no questionable assumptions or approximations. Bandyopadhyay et al [49] found that the Nusselt number could be three to ten times these obtained under pure forced flow situations. According to the authors. Hence it is expected to be applicable to fluids of arbitrary Prandtl number. which has been studied by Bandyopadhyay et al [49]. a high wall heat flux or a low mass flow rate. Such a situation could be a suitable combination of a large diameter. A parameter found by scaling analysis was used to empirically correlate the computed Nusselt number and friction factor data and the available experimental Nusselt number data for both thermally developing and simultaneously developing flow. . have wider ranges of applicability than those available in the literature. According to the authors these correlations are more accurate.10 Applications involving fluids with temperature dependent density may in some situations lead to the influence of free convection being significant during laminar forced flow in a horizontal tube. and should therefore be of much use to designers. Shome and Jensen [50] and Hishida et al [51] among others. Shome and Jensen [50] carried out a numerical analysis of thermally developing and simultaneously developing mixed convection flow and heat transfer with variable viscosity in an isothermally heated tube. The results reveal how the developing flow and heat transfer in the entrance region are affected by the secondary flow due to buoyancy forces.

Table 2. smaller distance between the tubes. was aiming at verifying the findings in the first part in a wider range. Finally.5 d mm 11.1 Conventional Cooling-Coils. the purpose of the last experimental part with a single-tube was to verify correlations for twisted-tape inserts and to link full-scale experiments with small-scale ones.0 26. i.1 (see Figure 2. B2 and B3 The dimensions of the two cooling-coils that were used in the introductory experiments are presented in Table 2. The objective of the first introductory experimental part was primarily to get an overview of the cooling-coil performance. the experiments with improved conventional coolingcoils.e. the reason for selecting these two cooling-coils was that according to the manufacturer’s data the pressure drop on the air as well as the liquid side was relatively low for a certain cooling demand. the experimental set-ups and the measurement plans are described.0 30.7 pl mm 30.7 11.5 6. more tubes in the transitional direction and fewer in longitudinal direction.5 1.5 . full-scale experiments were performed.0 pt mm 26. B2 B3 D mm 12.11 2 Experiments Due to lack of or very little experimental data for cooling-coils operated with liquid secondary refrigerants reported in the literature.1 for description of nomenclature). The subsequent part.5 *Estimated values pl pfin pt δfin plain fins D Pd wavy fins 2Xf D d p n Ltube N pfin outer diameter of tubes inner diameter of tubes pitch number of tube rows distance between U-bends number of parallel loops or circuits fin pitch δfin Pd Xf fin thickness wave height projected wave length Subscripts l t longitudinal (direction of air flow) transverse Figure 2.1 Dimensions of evaluated conventional cooling-coils. 2.1 Nomenclature of cooling-coil. However.5 12.25 0. In the following sections the tested objects.1. These two coolingcoils do not represent typical cooling-coils placed in traditional display cabinets. but have smaller tube diameter.0 nl nt 8 4 8 16 Ltube mm 2250 2250 N pfin mm 4 4 4 4 δfin mm 0. the properties of liquid secondary refrigerants.1 Description of Tested Objects 2. Xf* mm 6.25 Pd* mm 1.

δ = 1 mm. display cabinets.37 m.7 nl nt 10 10 10 10 Ltube mm 1075 500 N 10 10 pfin mm 4 4 δfin mm 0. see Figure 2. However. Table 2.1.2.0 25.12 The cooling-coil denoted B3 had the same amounts of tubes compared to B2 but was higher and had a shorter flow path in the air flow direction. The length of the tube from inlet/outlet to the U-bend was 2. However.20 0.2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils.2. in the parameter study all the dimensional values could not be varied freely. 2. when selecting the cooling-coils for this second experimental part. since there are today certain limitations regarding production of cooling-coils.0 pt mm 21. see 4. but consisted of two 90°-bends.3 B4 B5 * Estimated values 2. see Figure 2. the tube thickness as well as the tape thickness was selected in order to get a test object that was robust enough for manual mounting. this coil was of particular interest since the relative entrance length on the air side was longer compared to the B2 coil. A plain copper tube (d = 10 mm.1 2.1 5. dimensions resulting in a cooling-coil that was possible to produce with the technique of today were to be chosen.0 d mm 9. 1. the relation between the tube diameter and tube pitch could not be further decreased. The tube described above with a continuous twisted-tape insert (y = H/d 5. width = 9 mm). 2. liquid secondary refrigerants and pumps etc.2 U-bend of the test tube consisting of two consecutive 90°-bends. Therefore. giving a total heat transfer length of 4.3 9.0 10.185 m.1 Xf* mm 5. . The restraints regarding the dimensions of the evaluated cooling-coils were decided in a project group consisting of representatives from manufacturers of cooling-coils. The diameter was approximately the same as the diameter of the cooling-coils in the experiments with improved conventional cooling-coils.20 Pd* mm 2. As an example. The U-bend was not a real U-bend. Hence. B4 and B5 The dimensions of the two improved conventional cooling-coils that were experimentally evaluated in this second experimental part are shown in the table below (see Figure 2.1.2 Dimensions of evaluated improved conventional cooling-coils.1.1 for description of nomenclature).3. Figure 2.3 pl mm 25. D = 12 mm).1 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts The dimensions of the tested objects in the small-scale experiments with a single-tube containing a U-bend are given below. D mm 10.7 21. The reason for evaluating these cooling-coils was that they had improved performance compared to B2 and B3 according to the parameter study.

Hycool 20 and water as a function of temperature. 50 Dynamic viscosity (mPa·s) Density (kg/m3) 1300 1200 1100 1000 Propylene glycol Temper Hycool Water 900 800 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Temperature (°C) 20 10 0 -30 Propylene glycol Temper Hycool Water 4500 4000 Thermal conductivity (W/m/K) Specific heat (J/kg/K) 20 -20 -10 0 10 Temperature (°C) 20 30 20 30 (b) 5000 3500 3000 2500 -30 (c) 30 30 (a) Propylene glycol Temper Hycool Water 40 -20 -10 0 10 Temperture (°C) 20 30 0. Thermophysical properties of the secondary refrigerants can be seen in Figure 2. Temper –20 is the brand name of a mixture of aqueous solutions of potassium formate. 2. -20 °C.5 0.4 Density. λ (d). Temper –20. cp (b). Thermophsyical data of these secondary refrigerants have also been used in the created calculation model. and thermal conductivity. Temper –20 and Hycool 20 have been used in all the experiments (except B3). ρ (a). but is recommend for applications requiring a freezing point at -20 °C. potassium acetate and additives. .µ (c). All three secondary refrigerants had the same freezing point. dynamic viscosity.3 Continuous twisted-tape insert (sketch according to Date [14]).13 Figure 2.2 Secondary Refrigerants used in the Experiments In this research project the secondary refrigerants propylene glycol (39 %w).3 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Temperature (°C) (d) Figure 2. of propylene glycol (39 %w).7 Propylene glycol Temper Hycool Water 0.5 °C. To be exact.6 0. Hycool 20 consists of an aqueous solution of potassium formate and additives. Hyccol 20 had a freezing point of –21.4 0.4. specific heat.

Then data from Hellsten [53] was used.14 Thermophysical data for propylene glycol were taken from Melinder [46] and Fahlén [52] and for Temper –20 and Hycool 20 manufacturers’ data were used. . water was also used as secondary refrigerant. Their viscosity is lower compared to propylene glycol (see Figure 2. B2 and B3 A photo of the experimental set-up for B3 can be seen in Figure 2. one drawback of these aqueous solutions of organic salts is that they are corrosive when oxygen is present. In order for systems operated with corrosive secondary refrigerants to achieve a satisfactory function installation aspects such as material compatibility and deaeration of the system are very important. humidity and flow. which might lead to inconveniences such as leakage. the measurement set-ups used in the experiments are described. The experimental set-up is also shown schematically in Figure 2. An air conditioning plant controlled temperature.3 Measurement Set-Up In the section below.5 and the set-up for B2 was similar.5 Measurement set-up for experimental evaluation of a full-scale conventional cooling-coil (B3). 2. The length of the duct sections before and after the cooling-coil was the same as or longer than the width of the evaluated cooling-coil. The reason for choosing propylene glycol for the experimental evaluation was that it is a widely used secondary refrigerant in supermarket applications even though its performance in some situations is poor. Figure 2. a perforated plate was mounted at the inlet of the first duct section.1 Conventional Cooling-Coils. In order for the air flow to be homogeneous when reaching the cooling-coil.7. However. Temper –20 and Hycool 20 and other secondary refrigerants with similar formula have lately become more and more common. 2.4b) and they perform therefore better than propylene glycol in many situations.6 and the measuring points can be seen in Figure 2.3. In the small-scale experiments with a single-tube.

The liquid temperatures in and out of the cooling-coil and in to the flowmeter were measured by Pt-100 temperature sensors (U = +0. The pressure drop on the liquid side of the cooling-coil was measured by a differential pressure transmitter (U = +0.7 Schematic drawing of measuring points.5 % / 0. The liquid flow was measured by an electro magnetic flow meter (U = +1 %). the air temperature was measured by one Pt-100 temperature sensor (U = +0. The atmospheric pressure was measured by a manometer (U = +0.005 bar). p p t t t t RH t t t V t p t p p tt t p V Figure 2. Temperature and flow of the secondary refrigerant was controlled via a liquid loop. The relative humidity of the air was measured by a capacitive relative humidity meter (U = +3 %). The pressure drop on the air side of the cooling-coil as well as the pressure drop of the nozzle was measured by a micro manometer (U = +0.5 K) and five thermocouples were distributed in the cross-section (U = +1 K).5 mbar).6 Schematic drawing of the experimental set-up. In front of the cooling-coil.15 - + - Figure 2. The thermocouples were used in order to make sure that the temperature variation in the air-flow was negligible.3 Pa). The air flow was measured by a nozzle (U = +3 %) at air flows lower than 1000 m3/h or a fluidic device at higher air flows (U = +3 %). After the cooling-coil two Pt-100 sensors and fifteen thermocouples measured the air temperature. In the B2 case the Pt-100 sensors were shielded from radiation.1 K). .

3.3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts Small-scale experiments were performed with a single-tube. The test tube consisted of a coaxial heat exchanger and the tube that was evaluated was placed within a copper tube with a larger diameter.1) with a few exceptions. B4 and B5 The set-up for experimental evaluation of B4 and B5 was similar to that of B2 and B3 (see 2.9 and Figure 2. and the inner and outer diameter of the external tube was 25.6 and 28 mm. A schematic picture of the experimental set-up is shown in Figure 2.5 K for B4.3 K for B5 and U = +0. In these experiments the air flow was measured by a vortex flowmeter (U = +3 %). Outside the outer tube there was a layer of 30 mm “Armaflex” insulation. the heating loop. the test loop and the cooling loop. with and without inserts. The heating loop was filled with water. 2.3. In front of the cooling-coil. The magnitude of the flow in all the loops was controlled by adjustable valves.2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils. The inner and outer diameter of the inner tube was 10 and 12 mm. A thyristor controlled electric heater regulated the temperature of the water in the heating loop.8 Measurement set-up for experimental evaluation of B4. Figure 2. respectively. including a U-bend.5 K) and only nine thermocouples (U = +1 K).16 2.10. respectively.3. After the cooling-coil the air temperature was measured by only one shielded Pt-100 sensor (U = +0. The relative humidity of the air was measured by measuring the dew point of the air by a chilled mirror hygrometer (U = +0.8 and the set-up for B5 was similar. The set-up consisted of three different liquid loops. A photo of the experimental set-up for B4 can be seen in Figure 2. The temperature of the secondary refrigerant in the test loop was controlled by the cooling loop via a plate heat exchanger.5 K) instead of using a capacitive relative humidity meter.3 / 0. . the test loop contained the secondary refrigerant that was evaluated and ethylene glycol (50 %w) from the central cooling system of the laboratory at –25 °C was circulated through the cooling loop. the air temperature was measured by one shielded Pt-100 temperature sensor of which the uncertainty was estimated to be +0.

17 P R RV SV AV Pump Controller Controlling valve Adjusting valve Closing valve t p m V W e Temperature sensor Pressure sensor Mass flow meter Volume flow meter Electric energy meter Figure 2. Figure 2. .9 Experimental set-up for small-scale experiments with a single-tube. Please not that the dimensions in the figure are not according to scale. including a U-bend. including a Ubend.10 Coaxial heat exchanger (test tube) for small-scale experiments with a single-tube. with and without twisted-tape inserts. with and without twisted-tape inserts.

1 Conventional Cooling-Coils. The single-tubes were also tested with water. In each position there were three thermocouples. the laminar and the transitional regime were of particular interest. The pressure drop on the liquid side of the cooling-coil was measured by a differential pressure transmitter (U = + 0. All the cooling-coils and the single-tubes were tested with propylene glycol (39 %w). 2. 470 and 1470 mm from the inlet and at the same distances from the U-bend. In such a way the heat transfer resistance on the air side was kept constant when the heat transfer on the liquid side was evaluated and vice versa.5 mbar). by keeping the conditions on the air side constant. However.5 %). In this flow regime the heat transfer resistance on the liquid side can be determined by using wellestablished correlations and in such a way. The accuracy of these measurements was on sufficient for assessment of the heat transfer coefficient. . one on the side of the tube. Temper –20 and Hycool 20. at 70. the cooling-coil was evaluated with turbulent flow on the liquid side. the heat transfer resistance on the air side could be determined. This implies that the uncertainty regarding the heat transfer determination in the turbulent flow regime has a minor influence on the estimation of the air side heat transfer resistance. one on the upper side and one on the under side. The liquid temperature in and out of the tube was measured by Pt-100 temperature sensors. In order to obtain an acceptable uncertainty of measurement in the experiments. in some experiments there were limitations regarding the cooling capacity of the experimental set-up. The wall temperature was measured on the outside of the inner tube by 18 thermocouples (U = + 1 K).18 The liquid flow in the test loop was measured by a Coriolis mass flow meter (U = +1 %). In the turbulent flow regime the heat transfer resistance on the liquid side corresponds to a relatively low value compared to the heat transfer resistance on the air side. Where possible. the air side resistance was kept constant and the heat transfer resistance on the liquid side could be determined for the test points in the laminar flow regime. The reason for measuring the electric energy input was to enable calculation of the energy balance of the system. appropriate values of the mean temperature of the liquid were chosen.4 Measurement Plan The display cabinet application involves the flow regime on the liquid as well as the air side being often in the lower Reynolds region and therefore. Then. The thermocouples was mounted in six different positions along the tube length. To start with. but a weighed value of the measured temperatures could be used for prediction of the liquid properties at the tube wall temperature. 2.4. the liquid flow and the mean temperature of the secondary refrigerant were held constant while varying the air flow. The electric power input to the electric heater was measured by an electric energy meter (U = + 2 %) and the electric power input to the water pump was measured by an electric power meter (U = + 0. B2 and B3 When the heat transfer characteristics on the liquid side were studied the air flow and the mean temperature of the air were held constant in all the test points and the liquid flow was varied. the heat transfer resistance through the tube wall has a negligible contribution to the total heat transfer resistance.1 K) and an inductive volume flow meter measured the water flow (U = + 1 %). The temperature of the water in and out of the coaxial heat exchanger was measured by two Pt-100 temperature sensors (U = + 0. In this kind of experiments. as described above. When the heat transfer characteristics on the air side were the focus of the investigation. temperature ranges differing from display cabinet applications were also used.

the mean temperature and liquid flow on the outer side of the internal tube was held constant in all the test points and the liquid flow inside the tube was varied.4. . 2. the sum of heat transfer resistance through the tube wall and the resistance on the outer side of the internal tube can be determined. 2. the empty internal tube was evaluated with turbulent flow on the inner as well as the outer side and water was used as heat transfer medium on both sides. when the heat transfer resistance on the liquid side had been determined for all the test points.2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils. A complete uncertainty budget for e.4. During the pressure drop measurements. To start with.19 Thereafter. B4 and B5 The same measuring methodology was used in the experimental evaluation of the improved conventional cooling-coils (B4 and B5).1. This implies that the uncertainty regarding the heat transfer determination in the turbulent flow regime has a minor influence on the estimation of heat transfer resistance in the laminar flow regime. see Appendix C.4. Table 2. Hence. the liquid temperature was kept relatively constant for the purpose of measuring the isothermal pressure drop. as was used in the experiments with conventional cooling-coils (B2 and B3). In the turbulent flow regime the heat transfer resistance on the inside can be determined by using wellestablished correlations and in such a way.g. the air flow was varied at a certain value of the liquid flow with known heat transfer resistance and the heat transfer resistance on the air side could thus be determined for different test points. see 2.5 Uncertainty of Measurements The uncertainty of measurements has been evaluated according to Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement [54] and EAL-R2 [55]. These values are based on long time experience of the different measurement devices and installations. The sum of the heat transfer resistance through the tube wall and the resistance on the outside of the inner tube corresponds to a relatively low value of the total heat transfer resistance when the liquid flow inside the tube is in the laminar regime.3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts When the heat transfer characteristics on the inner side of the internal tube were studied. the water flow in the heating loop was held constant and the secondary refrigerant flow in the test loop was varied. liquid temperatures and liquid flow is presented by Fahlén [52]. 2.3 shows the estimated expanded uncertainties for each measurand used in the experiments presented in this thesis. By doing as described above the heat transfer resistance on the outside of the internal tube was kept constant and the heat transfer resistance on the inside could be determined for a number of test points in the laminar flow regime for different secondary refrigerants.

1 +0.5 +3 +1 +1 +0. Air Air volume flow Air temperature Air temperature difference Relative humidity Dew point temperature Air density2 Specific enthalpy difference2 Pressure difference Atmospheric pressure Liquid Liquid volume flow Liquid temperature Liquid temperature difference Pressure difference Liquid density Concentration by weight1 Liquid density2 Specific heat capacity2 Thermal conductivity2 Electric measurands Electric power (pump) Electric power (heater) 1 B2&B3 B4&B5 Single tubes % K K %(units) K % % Pa / % mbar +3 +0.3Pa +0.1 +5 +2 +3 +2 +3 +3 +1 +0.5 - tb ∆tb ∆pb ρb cw ρb cpb λb % K K mbar % % % % % +1 +0.heater % - - +2 Va ta ∆ta ϕa tda ρa ∆ha ∆pa Patm Vb Valid for propylene glycol. (Liquids premixed by the manufacturer were used in the experiments with the other secondary refrigerants.1 +0.5%/+0.1 +0.5 +2 +3 +2 +3 +3 W ep % - - +0.5 B5/B4 +0.5 +0.5%/+0.5 +1 +1 +0.5 B5/B4 +3 +0.3 Estimated expanded measurement uncertainty of the measurands in the performed experiments.5 W e. .3/0.) 2 Uncertainty for tabulated values taking the uncertainty regarding the temperature (and concentration) into account.5 +3 +0.20 Table 2.3Pa +0.1 +5 +2 +3 +2 +3 +3 +1 +0.3/0.1 +0.

21

3

Parameter Study

Experiments consume both time and money. As a consequent, only a limited number of
dimensions of the cooling-coil can be evaluated experimentally. By application of appropriate
correlations a calculation model can be created and the performance of the cooling-coil can be
predicted and hence, the number of experiments can be reduced dramatically. Such a model
was therefore created to be used in a parameter study. The objective of this parameter study
was to find out whether and how a conventional cooling-coil could be improved. To start
with, conventional cooling-coils without any kind of insert or tube wall modification was
evaluated in the parameter study. The influence of the values of the cooling-coil dimensions,
such as for example tube diameter and pitch etc., on the performance was the focus of the
investigations. However, since the purpose was to improve conventional cooling-coils,
combinations of parameter values unrealistic for production were to be avoided.
Then the purpose was to find out whether the performance of a cooling-coil in a display
cabinet application could be improved by different enhancement techniques or not. Finally,
optimal operation for different conventional cooling-coil geometries and cooling demands
was investigated by using the model.
In all cases, the calculations were performed for a full-sized cooling-coil. The reason is that
when one parameter of the cooling-coil is changed, e.g. the tube diameter, this results in
changes in heat transfer area and do also affect the heat transfer and pressure drop performance on the air side etc. In addition the optimal operation point will be shifted which in turn
will result in a new liquid flow rate and inlet temperature. Therefore, it is not possible to
optimise just one tube circuit for example.

3.1

Conventional Cooling-Coils without Inserts

The calculation model for conventional cooling-coils was created by using those correlations
whose predicted values were in best agreement with measured data in the experimental part
with the cooling-coil denoted B2, see 4.1.1 and Appendix A. The purpose of this model was
to predict the overall heat transfer and pressure drop performance for different cooling-coil
geometries for coils with plain tubes in a parameter study.

3.1.1

Correlations

For calculation of the heat transfer on the liquid side the Gnielinski (T) correlation, Eq. (A1.1)
and Eq. (A1.2), was applied for Re < 1700. A new entrance length following each U-bend was
assumed. For Re > 3700 the Dittus-Boelter correlation, Eq. (3.2), was used. In the interval
1700 < Re < 3700 the model used a linear combination of these two correlations. When
calculating the pressure drop on the liquid side the pressure drop was calculated by the correlation for laminar flow supplemented with a correlation for the entrance length according to
Eq. (A2.5), for Re up to 2000. For higher Re Gnielinski’s correlation for turbulent flows,
Eq. (A2.1) and Eq. (A2.4) was used.

22

Heat transfer on the liquid side
αb =

Nu m ⋅ λ b
d

(3.1)

(

)

3
Nu m,T =  3.66 3 + 0.7 3 + 1.615 ⋅ (x *)−1 3 − 0.7 

x* =

13

x

d Re b ⋅ Pr b

0.8
n
Nu m = 0.023 ⋅ (Re b ) ⋅ (Prb )

(A1.1)

(A1.2)
(3.2)

n =0.4 if tw > tB
Valid range: Re > 104, 0.7 < Pr < 100. Quoted, e.g. by [56]
Pressure drop on the liquid side
∆p b = f ⋅

Ltube,tot ρ ⋅ u b 2
ρ ⋅ ub 2

+ m⋅
+ ∆p hl
d
2
2

(A2.5)

m = 2.28⋅number of U-bends in the flow direction
hl = head loss
f =

64
Re

Ltube,tot ρ ⋅ u b 2

+ ∆p hl
d
2
hl = head loss

(A2.2)

∆p b = f ⋅

(A2.1)

f = (0.79 ⋅ ln Re d − 1.64) −2

(A2.4)

In the experimental evaluation of conventional cooling-coils, B2 and B3, the waves of the fins
neither seemed to affect the heat transfer nor the pressure drop on the air side of the coolingcoil at Reynolds numbers relevant for display cabinet applications (Re = 500 - 1000), see
4.1.1. Consequently, there was no meaning in optimising the length and height of the fin
waves and correlations for plain fins according to Gray and Webb [57], see Eq. (A3.2),
Eq. (A3.14), Eq. (A4.11) – Eq. (A4.14) and Eq. (A4.4), were used in the calculation model.
The fin efficiency was calculated according to Schmidt [58], see Eq. (A3.1) - Eq. (A3.6).
These correlations are valid for applications without condensation of water vapour. The main
purpose of this research project was to investigate the heat transfer performance on the liquid
side of the cooling-coil. Therefore, water vapour condensation has not been included in the

23

calculation model even though condensation takes place in cooling-coils in display cabinets.
This simplification has partly been compensated for by assuming that the cooling capacity on
the liquid side, Q b , is 22 % higher than the cooling capacity on the air side, Q a , for display
cabinet 1 and 2 and 62 % higher for display cabinet 3, see Table 3.1. However, values of the
relative humidity of the air corresponding to the specified cooling demand on the liquid side
are given in the table.
Heat transfer on the air side
(A3.1)

α a,eff = α a ⋅ η A
αa =

Nu d h ⋅ λ a

(A3.2)

dh

Nu d h = 0.14 ⋅ Pra
ηA =1−

η fin =

A fin
A0

13


⋅ Re 0D.672 ⋅ 
c

pt
 pl

(

⋅ 1 − η fin

)

−0.502

 p fin − δ fin
⋅ 
Dc




0.0312

d
⋅  h
 Dc




(A3.14)
(A3.3)

tanh(m ⋅ ri ⋅ φ)
m ⋅ ri ⋅ φ

 2 ⋅ αa
m= 
 λ fin ⋅δ fin




(A3.4)




(A3.5)

r
 
r
φ =  e − 1 ⋅ 1 + 0.35 ⋅ ln e
 ri
 
 ri





(A3.6)

Pressure drop on the air side
(A4.11)

∆p a = ∆p f + ∆pt

∆p f = f f ⋅

ff =

A f ρa ⋅ ua 2

Ac
2


0.508 ⋅ Re −D0.521 ⋅ 
c

∆p t = f t ⋅

pt
 Dc

At ρ a ⋅ u a 2

2
A c ,t

(A4.12)



1.318

(A4.13)
(A4.14)

by which the cooling demand of the display cabinet could be satisfied with lowest possible electric energy use. the figures for display cabinet 2 are not exactly representative for a real display cabinet. the cooling demand of display cabinet 3 is representative for a normally performing display cabinet found in supermarkets today. Therefore.4 % per K if the evaporation temperature is raised/lowered from –10 °C.16 ⋅  t f t = 4 ⋅  0.1 and below).25 +  π⋅ D 1.08 c   c   pt     − 1    Dc    3. • The efficiency of the fan is 0.2    (A4.24        p − Dc 0. This is due to the fact that the demand for dehumidification of the air increases more.118  ⋅ Re −D0. . the secondary refrigerant (liquid) pump and the fans of the cabinet are to be minimised. Finally.1. When calculating the electric energy usage the following simplifications and assumptions have been made: • The coefficient of performance (cooling mode. The objective of the parameter study was defined as finding a cooling-coil geometry. The electric energy usage of the compressor decreases/increases 2. • The efficiency of the pump is 0. optimising criteria have been established (see Table 3. This objective means that the sum of the electric energy required by the compressor of the chiller. The cooling demand of display cabinet 1 represent a very energy efficient display cabinet.3 (useful work / electric energy input). COP2) of the chiller is 2.4) Optimising Criteria In order to be able to compare the calculated heat transfer and pressure drop performance of different cooling-coils for a display cabinet application. Calculations were performed for three display cabinets having different cooling demands.7 at the evaporation/condensation temperature –10 °C / 40 °C and the difference between the evaporation temperature and the temperature of the secondary refrigerant leaving the liquid cooler is 5 K. in reality 50 % increase of the sensible cooling demand on the air side normally results in a larger increase of the total cooling demand on the liquid side.15 (useful work / electric energy input). The cooling demand of display cabinet 2 is 50 % higher on the air as well as on the liquid side compared to display cabinet 1. However.

(µB/µw)0.391 Nu m = 4.3) .1.4 mm. These correlations are valid for the uniform wall temperature condition for thermally developing. see Eq. were replaced by the correlations for the mean Nusselt number and the friction factor presented by Manglik and Bergles [27] for a tape with a twist ratio of y = 5 and a tape thickness of δ = 0. A new thermal entrance length has been assumed to follow each U-bend in the cooling-coil. the Rayleigh number. Heat transfer on the liquid side (  2. the heat transfer enhancement is due to tube partitioning and tube blockage. Depending upon flow rate and tape geometry.1 Optimising criteria for cooling-coils Cooling demand of display cabinet Cooling capacity on liquid side. but hydrodynamically developed laminar flows.in*: Relative humidity of air out from cooling-coil. and on the viscosity correction. ϕa. 3.25 m 0.05 m2 Nr 2 2250 W 1850 W 576 m3/h 8 °C -1 °C 64 % 100 % Nr 3 3000 W 1850 W 576 m3/h 8 °C -1 °C 86 % 100 % *Values corresponding to the given cooling demand on the liquid side. ϕa. The same optimising criteria were used as in 3. in the calculation model created for cooling-coil comparison in this study the Nusselt number dependence upon buoyancy-driven free convection. ta. Va : Air temperature in to cooling-coil.out*: Nr 1 1500 W 1230 W 576 m3/h 6 °C 0 °C 74 % 100 % Outer dimensions Total width: Height × depth: 2.835    2.25 Table 3. Then the correlations for the liquid side in the calculation model for plain tubes described in the previous section. longer flow path and secondary fluid circulation.132 ⋅ 10 ⋅ (Re ax ⋅ Ra ) ( ) ) 3.2 Cooling-Coils with Continuous Twisted-Tape Inserts The model was then modified in order to predict the performance of a cooling-coil having tubes with continuous twisted-tape inserts.3) and Eq. Q b : Cooling capacity on air side.0951 ⋅ Gz 0. The correlations were developed by combining baseline numerical solutions with experimental data and introducing correlating parameters that were derived from a theoretical analysis of the phenomenological attributes of flows with twisted-tape inserts.in: Air temperature out from cooling-coil. have been neglected due to small temperature differences between the bulk and the tube wall in display cabinet applications.894 + 6.413 ⋅ 10 −9 ⋅ Sw ⋅ Prb 0. (3.0  +    0. (3.14 (3. 3.out: Relative humidity of air in to cooling-coil. ta. The correlations presented by Manglik and Bergles [27] take all these effects into consideration.612 ⋅    2. However.5   1 + 0.1.1 µ  ⋅  B   µw  0.4).14. Q a : Air flow.23 −14  2.

55 = 4 ⋅ 15.1. Hence.5    ⋅ (1 + C ⋅ s )⋅ X (3. Saha et al [18] studied the performance of tubes with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts experimentally.767 ⋅   π − 4 ⋅ δ tape d    ( ) 16 (3.19). RSTT [18].7482 ⋅10 −3 ⋅ Prb 0.3 Cooling-Coils with Regularly Spaced Twisted-Tape Inserts For calculation of the overall heat transfer and pressure drop for cooling-coils equipped with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts (RSTT. the correlations for friction factor were developed on the basis of those of Shah and London [59] and the correlations for Nusselt number were developed on the basis of the Hong and Bergles correlation [13]. a tape spacing of s = 5 and a rod diameter that was equal to the tube inner diameter divided by 13.7 ⋅  1 y       1.5) . (3.26 Pressure drop on the liquid side 2 ( f ⋅ Re )sw  π + 2 − 2 ⋅ δ tape d   1 + 10 −6 ⋅ Sw 2. Heat transfer on the liquid side   K ⋅ Re i Nu i = 5. see Eq. The reported correlations for this kind of inserts were developed from the least square fitting method on the basis of correlations that are well accepted for fulllength twisted-tapes. Figure 3.1 was replaced by the correlations for the mean Nusselt number and the friction factor reported by Saha et al [18] for a tube with a twist ratio of y = 5. uniform wall temperature boundary condition 3. These correlations are valid for the uniform heat flux condition for thermally and hydrodynamically developed flows.1) the correlations for the liquid side in the calculation model described in 3. see Figure 3.1721 + 6.4 mm.4) Valid range: 300 ≤ Sw ≤ 1400.5) . The same optimising criteria were used as in 3.Eq. a tape thickness of δ = 0. (3.25  0.1 A tube with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts.

4 ⋅ ζ 1 ⋅ Re i−0.97 ⋅10 −3 ⋅ y ⋅ s + 0. (3. 3.17) C = −3.5 .05 + C1 ⋅ ζ 1 ⋅ Re i−0.8) X = 1 .7 ⋅ y −0.3 ⋅ (1 + C ⋅ s ) .5 ⋅ 38.95 ⋅ y −0.05 ⋅ (1 + C ⋅ s ) .01 ⋅ s + 0.8201 ⋅ y − 2. Re i < 700 (3.18 ≤ y < 7.19) Valid for 500 ≤ Re i ≤ 1550 .3622)⋅ exp[(− 0.5 .12) rod (π + 2 − 2 ⋅ δ d i )⋅ y ⋅ d i + π ⋅ (d i + d rod )⋅ s ( ((π ⋅ d ( 2 i ) ) ) ( (3.6) − 4 ⋅ δ ⋅ d ⋅ y + π ⋅ d 2 − d rod ⋅ s C = (0.13) c δ≠0 ( ) 2 π ⋅ d i2 ⋅ y + π ⋅ d i2 − d rod ⋅s (π + 2)⋅ y ⋅ d i + π ⋅ (d i + d rod )⋅ s (π ⋅ d 2 i ( ) (3.10) (3. 2.0069 ⋅ y 4 (3.5 .0296 ⋅ y − 0.4 ⋅ ζ 1 ⋅ Re i−0.305)⋅ s ] ( (3. Re i ≥ 700 (3.18) C1 = 8.46 ≤ y < 7. 6. Re i y > 155 ζ1 = (d (d 2 h 2 h (d h )δ=0 ) ⋅A ) ⋅ Ac = δ =0 (3.3 ⋅ (1 + C ⋅ s ).0422 ⋅10 −2 ⋅ s .7 ⋅ y −0.9) Valid for 675 ≤ Re i ≤ 2050 .7) ) X = 1 − 4.5 < s ≤ 5 .7 < Re i y ≤ 100 ( ) f i = 0.16) ) ) 2 − 4 ⋅ δ ⋅ d i ⋅ y + π ⋅ d i2 − d rod ⋅s 4 ⋅ (y + s ) (3.018 ⋅ y − 7.15 ⋅ 10 −3 (3.15) (3.95 ⋅ y −0.11) 100 < Re i y ≤ 155 f i = C1 ⋅ ζ 1 ⋅ Re i−0. 3.057 ⋅ y ⋅ s + 0.27 K1 = (π ⋅ d π ⋅ d 2 ⋅ (y + s ) 2 ) ( ) (3.2108 ⋅ y 3 − 0.14) ) − 4 ⋅ δ ⋅ d i ⋅ y + π ⋅ d i2 − d 2 ⋅ s (d h )δ≠0 = (Ac )δ=0 2 π ⋅ d i2 ⋅ y + d i2 − d rod ⋅s = 4 ⋅ (y + s ) (Ac )δ≠0 = (3. 2.1193 ⋅ y 2 + 0.5 ≤ s ≤ 10 Pressure drop on the liquid side f i = 38. 4 ≤ Pr ≤ 5.

which means that the average tube wall thickness (including the four fins) was 0.16 and a pressure drop scale factor of 1. which leads to a tube with four longitudinal fins.2) from a numerical study performed by Fabbri [38].1 times the outer tube radius. Here.05. For the cooling-coil comparison in this study we used the resulting Nusselt number and pressure drop for a fin profile with the following characteristics: • • • • • • The angle between two symmetry axes was π/4 rad.28 3. The polynomial order of the function describing the fin profile was zero. a uniform heat flux on the external tube wall and fully developed laminar flow were considered and hence the Nusselt number was represented by a constant. The same optimising criteria were used as in 3. The normalized unfinned wall thickness was 0. Figure 3. the correlations for the liquid side in the calculation model for plain tubes (see 3. which means that the average tube wall thickness (excluding the four fins) was 0.05 times the outer tube radius. The equivalent Nusselt number corresponds to the Nusselt number that would be calculated if the same heat flux was dissipated through a finless tube with a zero wall thickness and a radius equal to the sum of the inner radius and the tube wall thickness. The scale factor can be calculated as the fourth root of the ratio between the hydraulic resistance of the finned tube and the hydraulic resistance of an unfinned tube with the same inner radius. These parameters resulted in an equivalent Nusselt number of 18.1.1.1) was replaced by the results for a certain fin profile (see Figure 3.0879 rad.56.4 Cooling-Coils with Longitudinal Internal Fins When it comes to calculation of the overall heat transfer and pressure drop for cooling-coils having tubes equipped with longitudinal fins. which gives a straight fin. . The normalized averaged wall thickness was 0. The ratio between the finned tube and coolant thermal conductivities was 500.2 Cross-sectional geometry of tube with internal longitudinal fins evaluated by the calculation model [39]. The fin profile angle was 0.

out ) (4. even though the heat transfer resistance is plotted versus liquid volume flow or Reynolds number on the liquid side in these figures the resulting heat transfer resistance is not an unique function of these variables. As an example.out − t b.lm α a ⋅ Aa (4. The estimated experimental uncertainty for the results presented in the graphs below is presented in Table 4.out − t b. Q b = Vb ⋅ ρ b ⋅ c p . 60-64]. (4. (4. 4. Test points having a too large experimental uncertainty have been excluded and are not presented at all.1 the resulting heat transfer resistance is dependent upon which secondary refrigerant being used. As can be seen in Figure 4.5) δtube 1 1 1 = + + U ⋅ A αb ⋅ Ab λtube ⋅ Atube.7) for the different test points. The experimental uncertainty for the different test points shown in the graphs are summarized in tables in the following sections. For the other two secondary refrigerants such data were taken from the manufacturers.7). This has been done for the purpose of facilitating the comparisons.b (t b.1) . (4. In the graphs the symbols (dots) representing the measured results for the different test points and predicted values for the corresponding test points are connected with lines. The reason is that the mean temperature on the liquid side is not the same in all the test points and thereby the Prandtl number varies (see Appendix B1).7) The total heat transfer resistance (1/UA) of the cooling-coil was calculated according to Eq.29 4 Results 4. Thermophysical data for air were taken from handbooks etc. the humps of the lines in Figure 4.2.6) Nub = αb ⋅ d h λb (4.1.1) .Eq.in ) ln ((t a . (4.1 and Table 4. More detailed experimental data can be found in Appendix B.in − t b. B2 and B3 Data reduction of the measured data for the cooling-coils denoted B2 and B3 was performed according to Eq.1 Experiments In this section the results from the experiments are presented in the form of graphs.1) Q a = Va ⋅ ρ a ⋅ (ha.in − ha . However.in − t b.1 illustrate this.1 Conventional Cooling-Coils.in )) (4.3) Q m = (Q b + Q a ) 2 (4.out ) (t a .in − t b. thermophysical property data were taken from Melinder [45] and Fahlén [52].4) U ⋅ A = Q m ∆t lm (4. [53.out ) (4.2) ∆t lm = (t a.out )− (t a. For propylene glycol. In Figure 4.1b it can be seen that for a certain liquid flow Hycool 20 shows the lowest heat transfer resistance followed by .Eq.

6. As can be seen in Figure 4.5 1 0.5 0 0 0 (a) Propylene glycol Temper Hycool 1 2 3 Volume flow (m3/h) 4 5 0 5000 10000 Reynolds number 15000 20000 (b) Figure 4.98 0.95-0.7) are as the values stated below or better for the different test points with B2 and B3 presented in Figure 4. Cooling-coil Uncertainty B2 Propylene glycol  3-4 U( Qb ) % 4-16 U( Q a ) %  3-8 U( Q m ) % 4-18 U( ∆t lm ) % 5-20 U( U ⋅ A ) % Capacity balance (Q a Q b )measured 0.2b far more pumping power is required to achieve the same Reynolds number for propylene glycol compared to the other two secondary refrigerants.30 Temper –20 and propylene glycol (39 %w) gets the highest values.95 2 Propylene glycol Temper Hycool 1.5 Heat transfer resistance (K/kW) Heat transfer resistance (K/kW) 2 1.2 the required pumping power (assuming η = 1) is plotted versus liquid volume flow (a) and the Reynolds number on the liquid side (b). In Figure 4. (4.1 Heat transfer resistance for different secondary refrigerants and B2 plotted versus liquid volume flow (a) and Reynolds number on the liquid side (b).90-0. This behaviour is especially distinct in the transition region and reflects the differences concerning the viscosity of the liquids. . (4.93-0.5 1 0. Table 4.1 and Figure 4.99 0.1) – Eq.1 The estimated experimental uncertainty ranges for the different variables used in Eq.97 Temper Hycool 3 4-8 3-4 4-13 5-14 3-4 4-8 3-4 4-17 5-17 B3 Propylene glycol 3-4 4-10 4-21 3-12 4-16 0.91-0.

However. Thermophysical data of the secondary refrigerant for the liquid mean temperature was used in the correlations. Therefore.01 0 (a) 1 2 3 Volume flow (m3/h) 4 10 1 Proylene glycol Temper Hycool 0. see Eq. the heat transfer resistance on the air side. 1/(αa⋅Aa). the heat transfer coefficient on the liquid side was calculated by Dittus-Boelter’s correlation. Good agreement was found between measured Nusselt numbers and the Gnielinski (T) correlation for propylene glycol and Temper 20. The mean Nusselt number over the whole coil was calculated from the measured data according to Eq. Except for the two lowest lines (constant.Eq. The heat transfer characteristics on the air side was then evaluated at values of the liquid flow and the liquid mean temperature for which the heat transfer resistance on the liquid side had been determined in the first step. the heat transfer resistance through the tube wall represents a very small part of the total heat transfer resistance.1 0.1).31 1000 Pumping power (W) Pumping power (W) 1000 100 100 10 1 Propylene glycol Temper Hycool 0. could be determined However. 1/(U⋅A). the heat transfer behaviour for Hycool 20 differed somewhat from the other two evaluated secondary refrigerants in this experimental part. see Figure 4. (4. The measured mean Nusselt numbers on the liquid side for different test points in the experimental evaluation of B2 were compared to mean Nusselt numbers predicted by correlations found in the literature for the uniform wall temperature condition (T) as well as the uniform heat flux condition (H).6). was needed to calculate the heat transfer coefficient on the liquid side.1 0.3 and the correlations presented in appendix A1. The same value could then be subtracted from the total heat transfer resistance in all measuring points.lm). (4.01 0 5 5000 10000 15000 20000 Reynolds number (b) Figure 4. for a test point where the liquid flow was in the fully developed turbulent regime (Re > 5 000) and heat transfer characteristics well known. As can be seen in Eq.7).2). (4. By subtracting the heat transfer resistance on the liquid side from the total heat transfer resistance. T or H) it was assumed for the correlations used in these comparisons that the boundary layers were destroyed after each U-bend giving a new entrance length. δtube/(λtube⋅Atube. (3.2 Required pumping power (η = 1) for different secondary refrigerants and B2 plotted versus liquid volume flow (a) and Reynolds number on the liquid side (b). αb. the sum of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and the resistance through the tube wall. .

(a). H) 15 Nu(Sieder&Tate) Nu(Hong&Hrnjak) 10 5 Nu(constant.99 30 25 25 20 Nusselt number Nusselt number Capacity balance (Q a Q b )measured 0.2 The estimated experimental uncertainty ranges for the different variables used in Eq.7) are as the values stated below or better for the different test points with B2 presented in Figure 4.96-0. 39 %w.3. H) 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 0 500 1000 1500 Reynolds number 2000 2500 (c) Figure 4. .1) – Eq. T) 20 Nu(Gnielinski. T) 5 0 0 Nu(constant. (4.98 0. Cooling-coil Uncertainty B2 Propylene glycol 3-4 4-7 3-4 4-6 5-7 12-35 12-28 U( Q b ) % U( Q a ) % U( Q m ) % U( ∆t lm ) % U( U ⋅ A ) % U(αa) % U(Nub) % * Hycool 3 4-8 3-4 4-13 5-14 13-23 5-8 3 3-4 4-17 5-17 13-26 0.3 Measured mean Nusselt number on the liquid side of B2 for propylene glycol.97 Temper 20 15 15 10 10 5 5 0 0 0 500 1000 1500 Reynolds number 2000 2500 (a) 0 500 2500 3000 (b) 20 15 Nusselt number 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number 10 30 Nu(measured) 25 Nu(Gnielinski.32 Table 4. Temper -20 (b) and Hycool 20 (c) compared to correlations.93-0. (4.97-0.

4 Measured pressure drop (dp = ∆pb) on the liquid side of B2 for propylene glycol.20 0.15 0.20 0. i. best agreement was found with a correlation for plain fins in the Reynolds number region applicable for display cabinets. 0.4 and the correlations in appendix A2. Temper –20 (b) and Hycool 20 (c) compared to correlations. see Figure 4.e. (a). When predicting the pressure drop the head loss due to the U-bends was approximated as head loss due to two consecutive 90°-bends and the friction loss factor was taken from Hellsten [53].33 The measured pressure drop was compared to the pressure drop predicted by correlations from the literature.25 dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) dp(turb-Eckert) dp(turb-Gnielinski) 0. The measured pressure drop data were also compared to pressured drop predictions.5 Pressure drop (bar) Pressure drop (bar) 2.5 1.10 0.0 1. 500 < Re < 1000.0 0.05 0.5 and the correlations listed in appendices A3 and A4.00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number 2500 3000 (c) Figure 4. 39 %w.30 dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) dp(turb-Eckert) dp(turb-Gnielinski) 2.0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number 2500 dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) dp(turb-Eckert) dp(turb-Gnielinski) 0. For the laminar regime the measured data were first compared to pressure drops predicted without accounting for the entrance length (lam). When calculating the predicted heat transfer coefficient.10 0.25 0. where a new entrance length following each U-bend was accounted for according to Langhaar [65] (lam-Langhaar). The measured heat transfer coefficient and pressure drops on the air side for different measuring points were compared to heat transfer coefficients and pressure drop predicted by correlations for wavy and plain fins. see appendix A3.15 0.00 3000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Reynolds number (a) (b) Pressure drop (bar) 0. Even though the cooling-coil was equipped with wavy fins.5 0. see Figure 4. .05 0. the fin efficiency was determined according to Schmidt [58].

wavy) HTC(Wang 2000 . In Figure 4. However. dp = ∆pa . see equations in appendix A4.6b the longer relative entrance length did not affect the heat transfer performance in a positive direction. ReDc dp(measured) dp(Kim et al 1997 . In this case. . while such an approximation might be less appropriate for B3.wavy) dp(Gray&Webb 1986 . The cooling-coil denoted B3 was only operated with propylene glycol in the experimental evaluation. see Figure 4.wavy) dp(Mirth&Ramadhyani. In this case. the total heat transfer resistance is almost solely a function of the Reynolds number. As revealed in the figure. the same values of the liquid flow and the mean liquid temperature were applied in all the test points. In Figure 4.wavy) dp(Wang 2000 .wavy) HTC(Mirth&Ramadhyani 1994 . it was not possible to get a test point with fully turbulent flow on the liquid side.wavy) HTC(Gray&Webb 1986 .6a the total heat transfer resistance for B2 and B3 is shown versus Reynolds number on the liquid side. in the data evaluation B2 could be approximated as a pure counter-current heat exchanger.6b the heat transfer resistance of B2 and B3 is plotted versus the Reynolds number on the air side.34 200 HTC(measured) HTC(Kim et al 1997 . Therefore. The measured pressure drop on the liquid side for different measuring points for B3 is compared to the pressure drop predicted by correlations found in the literature. As can be seen.(a) and pressure drop.7a and appendix A2. which is a result of a smaller cross-sectional area on the air side.plain) 150 100 50 0 2000 0 1000 2000 3000 Reynolds number. Because of these two reasons. However. ReDc 4000 (b) Figure 4. HTC=αa.plain) 60 50 40 Pressure drop (Pa) Heat transfer coefficient (W/m 2/K) 70 30 20 10 0 0 (a) 500 1000 1500 Reynolds number. 1994 . good agreement was found with the same correlations for B3 as for B2. the heat transfer resistance is lower for B2. The relative entrance length on the air side was assumed to be longer in B3 compared to B2. All cooling-coils have a mixture of cross-current and counter-current heat transfer. for B3 the concentration of propylene glycol was 36 %w instead of 39 %w. The same values of the air volume flow and the mean air temperature were applied in all the test points. (b) on the air side of B2 compared to correlations.7b the pressure drop on the air side for different measuring points is compared to the pressure drop predicted by correlations for wavy and plain fins. In Figure 4.5 Measured heat transfer coefficient. This was one the main reasons for evaluating B3. and thereby a higher air velocity for that cooling-coil. no Nusselt number comparisons similar to those above were made for B3. which could lead to better heat transfer performance for B3. according to the results presented in Figure 4. As can be seen.

see Eq. The cooling-coil was operated with propylene glycol. T) as for B2 operated with propylene glycol and Temper.5 Heat transfer resistance (K/kW) Heat transfer resistance (K/kW) 2. in the experiments with B5 the heat transfer behaviour for Hycool in the lower Reynolds number regime was similar to the other two evaluated secondary refrigerants. The estimated experimental uncertainty for the results presented in the graphs is summarised in Table 4.5 B2 B3 2 1.5 1 0.wavy) (Wang 2000 .5 2 1. .5 0 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 5000 1000 2000 3000 4000 Reynolds number on the air side. were compared in the same way as the results from the experiments with B2. 39 %w for B2 and 36 %w for B3.3. ReDc 2500 (b) Figure 4.plain) 10 0 0 0 (a) 1000 2000 3000 4000 Reynolds number on the liquid side. 4.5). 36 %w. (A2. see Figure 4.Figure 4.5 1 0. described the measured pressure drop well even for this cooling-coil.5 3 B2 B3 2.8 .6 Total heat transfer resistance of B2 and B3 for (a) constant air flow and variable Reynolds number on the liquid side and (b) for constant liquid flow and variable Reynolds number on the air side.wavy) (Gray&Webb 1986 . When it comes to the pressure drop.9 and appendices A1 and A2. B4 and B5 The results from the experiments with the improved cooling-coil.2 Improved Conventional Cooling-Coils.35 3.wavy) (Mirth&Ramadhyani 1994 . Contrary to the experiments with B2. the correlation taking the entrance length into account. for all the tested liquids good agreement was found with the same correlation (Gnielinski.1. B5. ReDc Reynolds number on the liquid side. 40 dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) dp(turb-Eckert) dp(turb-Gnielinski) 4 3 Pressure drop (Pa) Pressure drop (bar) 5 2 1 dp dp dp dp dp 30 20 (measured) (Kim et al 1997 . Reb 0 5000 500 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number on the air side. Hence.7 Measured pressure drop (dp = ∆pb or ∆pa) compared to correlations for B3 on (a) the liquid side and (b) the air side. Both the cooling-coils were operated with propylene glycol. Reb (a) 5000 (b) Figure 4.

1) – Eq.03 0.95-0.01-1. (4.02-1. H) 100 200 300 400 1500 (c) Figure 4.36 Table 4. T) 5 5 0 0 0 0 500 1000 Reynolds number Nu(constant. (4.3 The estimated experimental uncertainty ranges for the different variables used in Eq.01-1.99-1. 20 15 10 20 15 10 5 5 0 0 0 100 200 300 Reynolds number 0 400 (a) 200 400 600 800 1000 Reynolds number 1200 1400 (b) 30 Nu(measured) 25 Nusselt number 30 Nu(Gnielinski.02 * The high values for the experimental uncertainty are due to a small temperature difference between out com- 30 30 25 25 Nusselt number Nusselt number ing air from the cooling-coil and incoming secondary refrigerant into the cooling-coil during the test point where the heat transfer resistance on the air side was determined. H) 15 Nu(Sieder&Tate) Nu(Hong&Hrnjak) 10 Nu(constant. Cooling-coil B4 Cooling-coil B5 Uncertainty Propylene Temper Hycool Propylene Temper Hycool glycol glycol 3-4 3-4 3-4 4 3-7 3-5 U( Q b ) % 4 4 4 3-5 3-4 3-4 U( Q a ) % 2-3 2-3 2-3 3 2-4 2-3 U( Q m ) % 4-11 4-11 4-14 3-11 2-4 2-5 U( ∆t lm ) % 5-11 5-12 5-15 4-11 3-6 3-6 U( U ⋅ A ) % 14-17 U(αa) % U(Nub) % 42-105* 47-125 * 44-140 * 12-30 14-32 7-23 Capacity balance (Q a Q b )measured 0.8 Measured mean Nusselt number on the liquid side of B5 for (a) propylene glycol. T) 25 20 15 10 20 Nu(Gnielinski.02 1. 39 %w.7) are as the values stated below or better for the different test points performed with B4 and B5.99 0. . (b) Temper -20 and (c) Hycool 20 compared to correlations.02 1.99 1.

wavy) 50 40 30 20 10 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0 (a) dp(measured) dp(Gray&Webb 1986 .plain) dp(Wang 2000 .9 Measured pressure drop on the liquid side (dp = ∆pb) of B5 for (a) propylene glycol. Measurements for two test points were performed in order to evaluate the heat transfer and pressure drop performance on the air side of B5.8 0.4 0.010 0.10 0.5 0.1 0.05 0. Similar to the case of B2.37 0.040 dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) 0. 39 %w. The applied correlations for comparison with measured data can be found in appendices A3 and A4.3 0.7 0. the heat transfer and pressure drop behaviour on the air side was best described by the correlations for plain fins.00 1600 (a) dP(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) dp(turb-Eckert) dP(turb-Gnielinski) 0.20 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number 2500 3000 (b) Pressured drop (bar) 0.15 0. even though the fins of the cooling-coil B5 were wavy.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Reynolds number 1200 1400 0.030 0.6 Pressure drop (bar) Pressure drop (bar) 0.2 0.25 dP(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) 0. (b) Temper -20 and (c) Hycool 20 compared to correlations. see Figure 4. ReDc 800 1000 (b) Figure 4. ReDc 800 0 1000 200 400 600 Reynolds number.000 0 200 400 600 Reynolds number 800 (c) Figure 4.plain) HTC(Wang 2000 .020 0. 16 HTC(measured) HTC(Gray and Webb 1986 .10.wavy) 14 Pressure drop (Pa) Heat transfer coefficient HTC (W/m 2/K) 60 200 400 600 Reynolds number. at low Reynolds numbers. .10 Measured (a) heat transfer coefficient (HTC=α) and (b) pressure drop (dp = ∆pa) on the air side of B5 compared to correlations.

Ltube. Hence.1. these results differed from the results for B2 and B5. the agreement is relatively good with the correlation taking the entrance length into account even for this cooling-coil.11 Measured mean Nusselt number on the liquid side of B4 for (a) propylene glycol. where good agreement was found in this Reynolds number region.(b) Temper -20 and (c) Hycool 20 compared to correlations. Otherwise. According to the figures below (Figure 4. H) 100 200 300 400 500 2000 (c) Figure 4. T) 0 0 0 0 500 1000 Reynolds number 1500 Nu(constant. there were certain limitations regarding the air volume flow capacity of the experimental set-up. 39 %w. which resulted in a small temperature difference between the out coming air and incoming secondary refrigerant when evaluating the cooling-coil B4 experimentally. However. was also compared in the same way as the results from the experiments with B2.2. This led to an experimental measurement accuracy for B4 that was inferior to that of B2 and B5 (see Table 4. B4. Table 4. However. except for the tube length.12. B4 and B5 had the same coil parameters. . see section 4.1. T) 20 Nu(Gnielinski. it is somewhat under predicted in the case of propylene glycol and Hycool and over predicted in the case of Temper.38 25 25 20 20 Nusselt number Nusselt number The results from the experiments with the improved cooling-coil.3 and Appendix B) and might be an explanation to the unexpected results. These differing results were unexpected since the Ltube/d ratio of B4 lies between the Ltube/d ratio of B2 and B5. 15 15 10 10 5 0 5 0 0 100 200 300 Reynolds number 400 500 (a) 0 200 600 800 1000 Reynolds number 1200 1400 (b) 25 20 Nusselt number 400 15 10 30 Nu(measured) 25 Nu(Gnielinski. Regarding the pressure drop comparisons presented in Figure 4.11) the mean Nusselt number was somewhat lower than the Nusselt number predicted by the Gnielinski (T) correlation for the lowest Reynolds number region. H) 15 Nu(Sieder&Tate) 10 Nu(Hong&Hrnjak) 5 5 Nu(constant.

(4. Eq.20 dp(turb-Eckert) 0.7) .3 0.4 Pressure drop (bar) Pressure drop (bar) 0.10 0.6 0.11).in − t b. 4. 39 %w.5 0. (b) Temper -20 and (c) Hycool 20 compared to correlations.2 0. was needed (see Eq. By subtracting the heat transfer resistance on the secondary refrigerant side from the total heat transfer resistance.1.in ) ln((tW .11) in order to calculate the measured mean Nusselt number.00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Reynolds number 3000 3500 (c) Figure 4. Therefore.2).30 dp(measured) 0. and the mean Nusselt number.3 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts The data reduction of the measured data was performed according to Eq.b ⋅ (t b.5.Eq. Q b = m b ⋅ c p . the heat transfer coefficient on the liquid side was calculated by Dittus-Boelter’s correlation.25 0.05 0.4 and Table 4.in )) (4.8) (4.39 0. αb.25 dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) 0.lm). In order to be able to calculate the measured heat transfer coefficient on the secondary refrigerant side.00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number 2500 3000 (b) Pressure drop (bar) 0.out ) (tW . 1/(U⋅A). (4.10 0.05 0.out − t b. The estimated experimental uncertainty for the cooling-coils is presented in Table 4.15 0.out )− (tW .in ) ∆t lm = (tW . The same value could then be subtracted from the total heat transfer resistance in all measuring points in the laminar regime. the sum of heat transfer resistance on the water side and the resistance through the tube wall.20 0.12 Measured pressure drop on the liquid side (dp = ∆pb) of B4 for (a) propylene glycol.out − t b.15 dp(turb-Gnielinski) 0. the sum of the heat transfer resistance through the tube wall and the resistance on the water side could be determined. for a test point where the liquid flow was in the fully developed turbulent regime (Re > 10 000) and the heat transfer characteristics were well known.in − t b.out − t b. 1/(αw⋅Aw)+δtube/(λtube⋅Atube.9) . Nub.1 0.30 dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) 0.0 0 200 400 Reynolds number 600 800 (a) dp(measured) dp(lam) dp(lam-Langhaar) dp(turb-Eckert) dp(turb-Gnielinski) 0. 4. (3.

7 . This predicted heat power was then compared to the measured heat power ( Q b. in the comparisons of measured and predicted heat power. correlations for mean Nusselt numbers were used. In the comparisons with the measured mean Nusselt number. the appropriate thermophysical properties of the secondary refrigerant for the actual predicted temperature in each cell was used in the stepwise calculations.lm α W ⋅ AW (4. 4.40 U ⋅ A = Q b ∆t lm (4. ∆t lm . The same equations were used as when calculating the measured mean Nusselt number (Eq. measured ). but in such a case there is a repeated variation and the total heat transfer resistance in the direction of the air flow is relatively homogeneous.11).7) However. ∆tlm. i. started with calculating the Nusselt number by using a correlation. Thereafter the heat transfer resistance was calculated and so on.Eq. local Nusselt numbers were used in the stepwise calculations. the measuring results were also evaluated by calculating the total predicted heat power ( Q b. The reason for the small temperature difference in such a case is that the secondary refrigerant flow is very small in comparison to the water flow. since the heat transfer immediately after the inlet and the U-bend is much higher compared to the rest of the tube. e. By using an iterative procedure. U⋅A is constant. (µb/µw)0. the arithmetic mean temperature difference in each cell was used in these calculations. 4. the methodology described above that includes calculating the logarithmic mean temperature difference. In a full-sized cooling-coil there is certainly also a variation in heat transfer resistance along the tubes due to the U-bends. local Nusselt numbers were calculated according to Eq.14.11) Nub = αb ⋅ d h λb (4.10) δ tube 1 1 1 = + + U ⋅ A α b ⋅ Ab λ tube ⋅ Atube. but the stepwise calculations of the predicted heat power. In those cases where only correlations for mean Nusselt numbers were presented in the references. The starting point in the calculations was the inlet of the secondary refrigerant and the outlet of the water and the measured liquid temperatures at this location. . However.corr ) transferred from the water to the secondary refrigerant by calculations step by step along the tube length. instead of using the logarithmic mean temperature difference. In addition. Then the agreement between measured and predicted heat power will be good. instead of using property data for the mean temperature. (4. when the difference between the inlet temperature of the water and the outlet temperature of the secondary refrigerant is small. it was also possible to include corrections for differing thermophysical data at the bulk and the wall. By application of this stepwise method of calculation a comparison of measured data and data predicted by different correlations could be carried out.g. even though a faulty Nusselt number is used in the calculations. In a plain tube including an original inlet and a Ubend this is not the case.e. this method does not bring any additional information.12). However. is based on the fact that heat transfer resistance along the heat exchanger is constant. Each cell in the stepwise calculations was 10 mm long and hence the tube consisted of 437 cells in total. On the other hand. Therefore.

These two test points corresponded to the highest values of the Reynolds number.13 predicted values for simultaneously developing flow (see Eq. Therefore. (A1.8) – (A1.1.2) H: Hong&Hrnjak Num according to Eq. When it comes to the correlation for mixed convection presented by Shome and Jensen [50]. On the contrary. Comparisons were made with the correlations presented in Appendix A1.1 and 4. A1.2).5) S: Shome&Jensen Num according to Eq.1 and 4.2). with a resulting higher Nusselt number. this curve fit over-predicted the measured mean Nusselt number to a large extent in the cooling-coil experiments (see 4. (A1. better agreement was obtained with the data fit presented by Hong and Hrnjak [8].1. (A1. In the predictions of mean Nusselt numbers according to this correlation. As can be seen in the figures neither the measured mean Nusselt number nor the measured heat power agree well with data predicted by the Gnielinski (T) correlation. the parameter ∆ (see Eq.12) 4. especially when it comes to the measured and predicted heat power transferred from the water to the secondary refrigerant. in the stepwise calculations the wall temperature along the tube wall was calculated in an iterative procedure.1. However. comparisons were also made with a Nusselt number correlation for laminar flow in a straight horizontal circular duct. G: Gnielinski (T) Num according to Eq.15) .Figure 4. which takes mixed convection into account and is presented by Shome and Jensen [50]. in the experiments with a single-tube compared to the experiments with full-sized cooling-coils. In Figure 4. a weighed value of the temperatures registered by the thermocouples mounted on the tube wall was used in the correlation for prediction of liquid properties at wall temperature.1) – (A1.15) was greater than unity for all test points except for two of the points tested with propylene glycol.16 the ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the ratios of the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_p/Q’_m) from the stepwise calculations are shown for the Gnielinski (T) correlation and for the data fit from similar experiments with a single-tube presented by Hong and Hrnjak [8]. This was unexpected since such a good agreement with that correlation had been found in the experiments with full-sized cooling-coils (see 4. A1.1 Single-Tube without Inserts In Figure 4.1. This leads to a significant influence of free convection in addition to the forced convection. However. The explanation for this is probably that the wall heat flux is much higher.1.13 .8) are presented for these two test points since best agreement was found for that form of the correlation.41 Nu x = d (Nu m ⋅ x ) dx (4.3. for reasons for accuracy.

.6 Nu_p/Nu_m (G) Nu_p/Nu_m (H) Nu_p/Nu_m (S) Q'_p/Q'_m (G) Q'_p/Q'_m (H) Q'_p/Q'_m (S) 1.4 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Reynolds number Figure 4.42 Ratio of Nu_p/Nu_m or Q'_p/Q'_m 1. when propylene glycol (39 %w) is used as secondary refrigerant in a plain tube without inserts.12 and equations in appendix A1).8 0. 4.14 Ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_p/Q’_m) for different correlations (see Eq. 4.4 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Reynolds number Figure 4.2 1 0.4 1.13 Ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_c/Q’_m) for different correlations (see Eq.2 1 0.6 0.4 1.8 0. Ratio of Nu_p/Nu_m or Q'_p/Q'_m 1.12 and equations in appendix A1).6 Nu_p/Nu_m (G) Nu_p/Nu_m (H) Nu_p/Nu_m (S) Q'_p/Q'_m (G) Q'_p/Q'_m (H) Q'_p/Q'_m (S) 1.6 0. when Temper -20 is used as secondary refrigerant in a plain tube without inserts.

4.4 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Reynolds number Figure 4.2 1 0.8 0.4 1.6 Nu_p/Nu_m (G) Nu_p/Nu_m (H) Nu_p/Nu_m (S) Q'_p/Q'_m (G) Q'_p/Q'_m (H) Q'_p/Q'_m (S) 1.15 Ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_c/Q’_m) for different correlations (see Eq.16 Ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_p/Q’_m) for different correlations (see Eq.6 0.43 Ratio of Nu_p/Nu_m or Q'_p/Q'_m 1.12 and equations in appendix A1).6 Nu_p/Nu_m (G) Nu_p/Nu_m (H) Nu_p/Nu_m (S) Q'_p/Q'_m (G) Q'_p/Q'_m (H) Q'_p/Q'_m (S) 1. when Hycool 20 is used as secondary refrigerant in a plain tube without inserts.2 1 0.4 1. . 4.8 0. Ratio of Nu_p/Nu_m or Q'_p/Q'_m 1.4 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Reynolds number Figure 4. when water is used as secondary refrigerant in a plain tube without inserts.12 and equations in appendix A1).6 0.

97-1.00 0.2 Single-Tubes with Continuous Twisted-Tape Inserts In Figure 4. .4 The estimated experimental uncertainty ranges for the different variables used in Eq. including the U-bend and the inlet and the outlet of the tube.4).2 1. dp_p/dp_m. a weighed value of the temperatures registered by the thermocouples mounted on the tube wall was used in the correlation and for prediction of liquid properties at wall temperature.99-1. (dp=∆pb) over a plain tub.1.18 the ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the ratios of the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_p/Q’_m) from the stepwise calculations are shown for the correlation for continuous twisted-tape inserts presented by Manglik and Bergles [27].00 Figure 4. including a U-bend.Eq. (4.5.99-1.0 0. 3. Ratio of dp_p/dp_m 1. In the predictions of mean Nusselt numbers according to this correlation. Plain tube Uncertainty U( Q b ) % U( W e ) % U( ∆t lm ) % U( U ⋅ A ) % U(Nub) % Propylene glycol 3-4 2 0-2 3-4 5 Capacity balance (Q b W e )measured 0.2. see Eq. For the other liquids the pressure drop was not measured.00 1.8 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Reynolds number Figure 4. (4.1 1. A2. for the pressure drop prediction according to Langhaar [65].17 Ratios of the predicted and the measured isothermal pressure drop. see Eq.3 and Eq. 4.3.9 dp_p/dp_m (Propylene glycol) 0.5.11) are as the values stated below or better for the different test points performed with the plain tube without inserts. Eq. which was used in the calculation model (see Eq. A2.03 Temper Hycool Water 3 2 0-2 3-4 5 3 2 1 3 5 2 2 1-3 2-3 4-5 0.44 Table 4. 3. an inlet and an outlet. for pressure drop prediction according to [65].17 presents the ratio of the predicted and measured isothermal pressure drop over the tube. 3.7) .

4 1. in the stepwise calculations the wall temperature along the tube wall was calculated in an iterative procedure. The reason for not presenting the measured pressure drops for the other liquids is that when these pressure .The figure shows that measured and predicted data agree well for the applied correlation.04 0. when the stepwise calculation method has been used.01-1.11) are as the values stated below or better for the different test points with the plain tube without inserts.4).8 Nu_p/Nu_m (H2O) Nu_p/Nu_m (Hycool) Nu_p/Nu_m (Temper) Nu_p/Nu_m (PG) Q'_p/Q'_m (H2O) Q'_p/Q'_m (Hycool) Q'_p/Q'_m (Temper) Q'_p/Q'_m (PG) 1. (4.6 1. Figure 4.45 However. Tubes with twisted-tape inserts Uncertainty Propylene Temper glycol 1-2 1 U( Q b ) % 2 2 U( W e ) % 1-5 1-6 U( ∆t lm ) % 2-5 2-6 U( U ⋅ A ) % U(Nub) % 4-6 5-8 Capacity balance (Q b W e )measured 1.19 presents ratio of the predicted and measured isothermal pressure drop over a tube with a continuous twisted-tape insert. 3. (3.0 0. The agreement of measured and correlated mean Nusselt number is better for high Reynolds numbers than for low numbers.8 0. including the U-bend and the inlet and the outlet of the tube. The measured pressure drop prediction is according to Manglik and Bergles [27]. when different secondary refrigerants are used in a tube with continuous twisted-tape inserts (PG = Propylene glycol and H2O = water).00-1.99 1.98-0.2 1.3 and Eq. see Eq. Table 4.99-1. The values shown represent measurements with propylene glycol.18 Ratios of the predicted and the measured mean Nusselt number (Nu_p/Nu_m) and the predicted and measured heat power (Q’_p/Q’_m) for prediction by the correlation presented by Manglik and Bergles [27] (see Eq.6 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Reynolds number 1200 1400 1600 Figure 4.01 Ratio of Nu_p/Nu_m or Q'_p/Q'_m 1.5 The expanded experimental uncertainty ranges for the different variables used in Eq. In the lower Reynolds number regime the correlation under-predicts the measured Nusselt number.4). (4.Eq. 3.00 Hycool Water 1 2 1-5 2-5 6-8 2 2 5-8 6-8 9-12 0.7) .

including a U-bend.0 0. the magnitude of the minimal electric power. ta. Contrary to the extra electric power.13) and Eq. had equalled the stated air temperature out from the cooling-coil. This was due to the fact that the tape was made of galvanized steel and such a material is not long term compatible with formates and/or acetates (Hycool and Temper).e is defined as the extra (additional) electric power required since tb.out. 4. an inlet and an outlet. in order to satisfy the cooling demand of the display cabinet. Wetot = Wem + Wep + Wef (4. The total electric power requested to satisfy the cooling demand. tb.9 0.e .8 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Reynolds number Figure 4. see Eq. In order to be able to compare the results in a comprehensive way a couple of definitions have to be established. This is due to the fact that the inlet temperature of the secondary refrigerant in to the cooling-coil must always be lower than the stated air temperature out of the cooling-coil.14) .out.2 Parameter Study In the following sections the results from the parameter study are presented in the form of graphs. Wem .e (4.in. min . which means the electric power that would have been required by the compressor if the temperature of the secondary refrigerant in to the cooling-coil. (4. Wem. (4. ta.13) Wem = Wem.14). for pressure drop prediction according to Manglik and Bergles [27].2 dp_p/dp_m (Propylene glycol) 1. no matter how good the performance of the cooling-coil is.4). Consequently. Wem. (3. Wem. Ratio of dp_p/dp_m 1. Wetot . min + Wem.19 Ratios of the predicted and the measured isothermal pressure drop (dp_p/dp_m) over a tube with a continuous twisted-tape insert.46 drop measurements were performed corrosives had started to form on the tape surface.1 1. are here defined according to Eq. Wem. min denotes the minimal electric power required by the compressor.in must be lower than the stated air temperature out from the cooling-coil. is not affected by the cooling-coil performance. and the electric power required by the compressor.

5 12.0 pt mm 26.in tb.2 9. the tube pitch. As presented in the table the tube diameter.0 10.7 9.2 pl mm 30.6.2 11.7 9.5 10.7 11.0 30.1.5 10.0 20.1 Conventional Cooling-Coils without Inserts The cooling-coil named B2 was used as a starting-point in the parameter study and the values of the varied parameters of the cooling-coils can be seen in Table 4.0 24.2. Ltube. Since the U-bends were found to affect heat transfer and pressure drop in the experimental part where conventional cooling-coils were investigated (see 4.0 24.0 12.in tb.out t a.5 10.0 24.8 20.20 A schematic drawing of a counter-current cooling-coil .47 ta. connected in parallel were compared to the performance of one full-length cooling-coil and so on. the number of tubes and the number of parallel loops or circuits were varied. even though calculations for other geometries were performed as well.designation of temperatures.8 26.6 Varied parameters of evaluated cooling-coils Cooling-coil definition B2 B2-8 D212-10 B2-8-L2 D212-10-L2 D212-10-L42 B2-32 D212-50 D mm 12.out Figure 4. As an example.0 20.0 26.0 24.0 20. the performance of two cooling-coils with half the distance between the U-bends.0 d mm 11. N 4 8 10 8 10 10 32 50 Number of cooling-coils 1 1 1 2 2 4 1 1 . Table 4.1) the performance of cooling-coils with shorter distance between the U-bends were investigated by using the calculation model.2 11.7 9.6.0 12.8 nl nt 8 8 10 8 10 10 8 10 8 8 10 8 10 10 8 10 Ltube mm 2250 2250 2250 1075* 1075* 500* 2250 2250 * The length of the tubes has been reduced to make room for the extra U-bends. Only cooling-coil geometries for cooling-coils performing better than B2 according to the stated optimising criteria are presented in Table 4.8 26. 4.0 30.0 30.

The predicted electrical power required when Temper is used as secondary refrigerant is shown in Figure 4. The value of this flow differs a lot for the different cooling-coil geometries and Figure 4.21 Sketches of the cooling-coils (a) B2 and (b) D212-10-L42. The relative magnitudes of the optimal volume flow for the different cooling-coils are similar to those in Figure 4. involving a certain value of the liquid flow rate and inlet temperature. The values of electric power that are compared to each other are related to this optimal volume flow of each cooling-coil. In this case the calculations have been performed for propylene glycol as the secondary refrigerant and display cabinet 1 (see Table 3. .1.23a. Please note that the sketches are not completely according to scale.24.22b and can be seen in Figure 4.1).22 shows the required electric power for a number of cooling-coils that require less electric power compared to B2.48 (a) (b) Figure 4.22b shows the optimal flow for different cooling-coils placed in display cabinet 1. In cases where one full-length coolingcoil have been assumed to be replaced by several smaller cooling-coils. If the cooling demand of the display cabinet is increased by 50 % (display cabinet 2. Figure 4.1) the required electric powers are according to Figure 4. according to the calculation model and the optimising criteria stated in section 3. the total volume flow to serve all the units is shown in the figure. see Table 3. Even here the relative magnitudes of the optimal flow was similar to those of propylene glycol. For each combination of cooling-coil and cooling demand there is an optimal operating point.23b.

22 Required electric power (a) and optimal total volume flow (b) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 1 operated with propylene glycol. 39 %w ( Wem.B2-8.e Wef Wep 25 20 15 10 5 0 B2 (a) B2-8 Optimal volume flow (m3/h) Required electric power (W) Figure 4.4 0.40 Wem.0 D212.B2-32 D21210 L2 10-L2 10-L42 50 (a) B2 B2-8 D212.2 1.8 1.D112.D212.B2-8.4 0.4 1.B2-32 D21210 L2 10-L2 10-L42 50 1.2 0. D212.e Wef Wep 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 B2 B2-8 Optimal volume flow (m3/h) Figure 4.8 0.D112.B2-8. min = 489 W).B2-32 D21210 L2 10-L2 10-L42 50 (a) B2 B2-8 D212.0 B2 B2-8 D212.e Wef Wep 30 20 10 0 B2 B2-8 1.D212.8 0.6 1.B2-32 D21210 L2 10-L2 10-L42 50 (b) Required electric power (W) 70 Wem.0 0.D212.D212. min = 753 W).6 Optimal volume flow (m3/h) Required electric power (W) 49 1. min = 489 W).24 Required electric power (a) and optimal total volume flow (b) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 1 operated with Temper -20 ( Wem.8 0.4 1.4 1.D212.B2-8.8 1.D212.B2-8.4 0.B2-8.23 Required electric power (a) and optimal total volume flow (b) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 2 operated with propylene glycol.2 1 0.0 0.2 0.D212.B2-32 D21210 L2 10-L2 10-L42 50 (b) Figure 4. .D212.D212.B2-32 D21210 L2 10-L2 10-L42 50 (b) 30 Wem.6 0.6 0. 39 %w ( Wem.2 1.2 0 D212.6 1. 2 1.D212.6 0.

in this case the calculations have been made for the purpose of showing how much the flow path (the total tube length) must be shortened in order for the enhancement techniques to be effective. .e Wef Wep 60 40 20 0 Plain tube Twisted-tape RSTT y=5 s=5 Internal fins y=5 (4) Twisted-tape y=5 RSTT y=5 s=5 Internal fins (4) (b) Figure 4. In the calculation model this cooling-coil has been treated as a pure counter-current coil.2 Cooling-Coils with Inserts or Internal Longitudinal Fins 100 60 50 40 Required electric power (W) Required electric power (W) In this section the results from the parameter study for enhanced cooling-coils are presented. is presented for plain and enhanced tubes.2. However. In Figure 4. The calculations have been made with propylene glycol as secondary refrigerant and for display cabinet 1.25b shows that this deterioration gets less distinct when the cooling demand of the display cabinet is increased.min = 489 W) and (b) display cabinet 2 ( W em.22 these cooling-coils are more efficient than B2 and as presented in Figure 4. i. The results reveal that if the number of parallel loops or circuits is increased from 4 to 8. According to Figure 4.e Wef Wep 30 20 10 0 Plain tube (a) 80 Wem.26b. Figure 4. instead the performance deteriorates.25 Electric power required by cooling-coil B2 with plain and enhanced tubes in (a) display cabinet 1 ( W em. In this case the calculations have been made with propylene glycol as secondary refrigerant and for (a) display cabinet 1 as well as for (b) display cabinet 2 (see Table 3.e.1). Wem.26a the required electric power for a cooling-coil similar to B2. In Figure 4.26b the cooling-coil having 32 parallel loops instead of 4 can be further enhanced by twisted-tape inserts as well as with internal fins. As the figures show. see Figure 4.25 the required electric power for the cooling-coil B2 are shown for plain tubes. to 32. If the number of parallel loops is increased further.50 4.min = 756 W) when operated with propylene glycol. This simplification is appropriate for cooling-coils having 4 to 10 parallel loops but probably not for a cooling-coil having a number of parallel loops that equals to half the total amount of tubes of the coil. for tubes with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts (RSTT) and finally for tubes with longitudinal internal fins. none of the enhancement techniques result in lower required electric power compared to the cooling-coil with plain tubes. 39 %w. but with 8 parallel liquid loops instead of 4. all the enhancement techniques leads to an improved overall efficiency. for tubes with continuous twisted-tape inserts. the cooling-coil having tubes enhanced by regularly spaced twisted-tapes corresponds to the lowest value of required electric power. the total tube length is divided by 2.

0 Plain tube Plain tube (a) 1.4 0. Hence.23. but the value of the optimal volume flow decreases considerably. 45 40 35 30 Optimal volume flow (m 3/h) Required electric power (W) The required electric power for the cooling-coil having the lowest energy consumption in Figure 4.Figure 4.28.27 Required electric power (a) and optimal total volume flow (b) for cooling-coil D212-10-L42 with plain and enhanced tubes in display cabinet 2 operated with propylene glycol.2 0.22 .e Wef Wep 25 20 15 10 5 0 Internal fins (4) Plain tube Twisted-tape RSTT y=5 s=5 y=5 Internal fins (4) (a) (b) Figure 4.e Wef Wep 25 20 15 10 5 0 Plain tube Twisted-tape y=5 RSTT y=5 s=5 30 Wem.45 40 35 30 Required electric power (W) Required electric power (W) 51 Wem.27a. Here the calculations have been made with propylene glycol as secondary refrigerant and for display cabinet 2.6 Twisted-tape RSTT y=5 s=5 y=5 Internal fins (4) Twisted-tape RSTT y=5 s=5 Internal fins y=5 (4) (b) Figure 4. 39 %w ( Wem. a cooling-coil having shorter distances between the U-bends in combination with for example twisted-tape inserts can offer a low value of both the required electric power and the optimal volume flow. Wem.27b. the required electric power for the cooling-coils B2 and D212-10-L42 are as presented in Figure 4. But otherwise. the same main conclusions that have been drawn for the different enhancement techniques when propylene .6 0. D212-10-L42. These figures show that the required electric power can not be much further reduced by applying the enhancement techniques. The corresponding values of the optimal flow for the cooling-coil D212-10-L42 with plain and enhanced tubes are shown in Figure 4.8 0. If the secondary refrigerant is changed and Temper -20 is used instead of propylene glycol. When this secondary refrigerant is used.e Wef Wep 25 20 15 10 5 0 1. min = 753 W).26 Electric power required by cooling-coil (a) B2-8 and (b) cooling-coil B-32 with plain and enhanced tubes in display cabinet 1 ( W em.0 0.min = 489 W) when operated with propylene glycol. the enhancement techniques lead to somewhat lower required electric power for the cooling-coil denoted D212-10-L42. In this case the calculations have been made for display cabinet 2. 39 %w.4 1. is shown for plain and enhanced tubes in Figure 4.2 1.

the values of the required electric power are always lower when Temper is used instead of propylene glycol.2.2.28a (B2) and if the bars in Figure 4.0 9.7 50 50 6 10 2 2250 B2 12.28 Electric power required by (a) cooling-coil B2 and (b) cooling-coil D212-10-L42 with plain and enhanced tubes in display cabinet 2 ( W em. The cooling-coil B2 is the one evaluated in the introductory experiments and was also used as a starting point in the parameter study.1.5 11.25b are compared to those in Figure 4. The cooling-coil denoted R is similar to cooling-coils found in traditional display cabinets today. see 4.g. 4. e.2. The calculations were made for three different display cabinets described in Table 3.2 24.7 Varied parameters of evaluated cooling-coils Cooling-coil D d pl pt pfin nl nt Ltube definition mm mm mm mm mm mm R 15. and the last cooling-coil.2.28b (D212-10-L42).2. Wem.3 Optimal Operation for the Purpose of Minimising the Electric Energy Use Calculations were made for three different cooling-coils (see Table 4.0 4 8 8 2250 D212-10-L42 10. This can be seen if the bars in Figure 4.e Wef Wep 20 15 10 Internal fins (4) 5 0 Plain tubes Twisted-tape RSTT y=5 s=5 y=5 Internal fins (4) (b) Figure 4.min = 753 W) when operated with Temper -20. D212-10-L42.0 26.27 are compared to them in Figure 4.1 and 4. is the one that according to the calculation model offered the lowest energy requirement (similar to B5).e Wef Wep 40 30 20 10 0 Plain tubes (a) Twisted-tape RSTT y=5 s=5 y=5 35 30 25 Wem.7 30.8 4 10 10 500* * The length of the tubes has been reduced to make room for the extra U-bends.0 20. However. N 2 4 10 Number of cooling-coils 1 1 4 . The same definitions regarding the electric energy requirement and optimising criteria were used as in 4.52 70 60 50 Required electric power (W) Required electric power (W) glycol is used as secondary refrigerant are valid when a secondary refrigerant such as Temper is used as well.5 14. Table 4.1.7) in order to outline optimal operation. optimal volume flow and temperature in to the cooling-coil.

the optimal Reynolds number is lowest for that cooling-coil. min = 489 W). (b) B2 and (c) D212-10-L42. They also reveal that even though the optimal value of the total liquid flow is highest for the cooling-coil D212-10-L42.2 500 400 300 200 100 0.5 -1. optimal volume flow(c) and optimal Reynolds number (d) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 1 when operated with propylene glycol. The values are related to operation with propylene glycol (39 %w) and display cabinet 1. optimal inlet liquid temperature (b). inlet liquid temperature.0 -1. The figures show that a higher inlet temperature is associated with a lower electric power requirement by the compressor.5 -3.53 (a) (b) (c) Figure 4. 39 %w ( Wem.8 Reynolds number Volume flow (m 3/h) 0.0 Inlet liquid temperature (°C) Required electric power (W) In Figure 4.0 -2. liquid flow and the corresponding Reynolds number on the liquid side are presented for the three cooling-coils.30 optimal values for electric power requirement.0 700 600 0.29 Sketches of the cooling-coils (a) R.0 D212-10-L42 (a) R B2 D212-10-L42 R B2 D212-10-L42 (b) 1. 70 Wep Wef Wem. 0.e 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 R B2 -0.6 0.5 -2. .30 Required electric power (a).0 R (c) B2 0 D212-10-L42 (d) Figure 4.4 0. Please note that the sketches are not completely according to scale. the one that demanded least cooling.

Even here. no frosting takes place and hence no defrosting is necessary. The values are here related to display cabinet 2. using for example the cooling-coil B2 with propylene glycol in a display cabinet having a cooling demand of 3000 W is not a realistic application.31 shows the optimal values for the electric power requirement and the Reynolds number on the liquid side for the three cooling-coils. and propylene glycol (39 %w). Hence. which means that. This cooling demand corresponds to a traditional display cabinet that is used in supermarkets today. B2 0 D212-10-L42 R B2 D212-10-L42 (b) Figure 4.31 Required electric power (a) and optimal Reynolds number (b) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 2 when operated with propylene glycol. Frosting and defrosting is not included in the calculation model. If the inlet liquid temperature is not lower than around – 2 °C. if the inlet liquid temperature is lower than –2 °C the required power input would be even higher than the presented values. The same internal relationship between the cooling-coils as in the previous case can be seen in these figures. the fin pitch of the cooling-coils B2 and D212-10-L42 is 4 mm and such a small pitch hardly allows frosting on the fins.32 for the display cabinet having the highest cooling demand. in reality. display cabinet 3.54 120 700 Wep Wef Wem. The figures show a similar internal relationship of all the values for the three coolingcoils as in the figures above. Optimal values for the three cooling-coils can be seen in Figure 4. min = 753 W). the lowest optimal Reynolds number corresponds to the most energy efficient cooling-coil. All the figures show that when propylene glycol is used as secondary refrigerant a laminar liquid flow regime in the tubes is optimal for all the cooling-coils and cooling demands presented here. while this temperature must be considerably lower for the other cooling-coils. Figure 4.32 shows that if the cooling-coil D212-10-L42 is placed in display cabinet 3 it can still be operated at a liquid inlet temperature that is just below – 2 °C even though the cooling demand is high. 39 %w ( Wem. .e 100 80 60 40 20 500 400 300 200 100 0 R (a) 600 Reynolds number Required electric power (W) Figure 4. the one that demanded 50 % more cooling compared to display cabinet 1. and propylene glycol (39 %w) as secondary refrigerant. In addition. since it would result in a large pressure drop on the air side.

33 optimal values are presented for the three cooling-coils. optimal inlet liquid temperature (b). .5 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0.0 0.200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Wep Wef Wem. the required electric power is lower and the inlet liquid temperature is higher compared to the case of propylene glycol. In Figure 4.32 Required electric power (a).5 1.0 0 R (c) B2 D212-10-L42 (d) Figure 4. the one that demanded most cooling.e R B2 0 Inlet liquid temperature (°C) Required electric power (W) 55 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 D212-10-L42 (a) R B2 D212-10-L42 R B2 D212-10-L42 (b) 2. The figures show that when propylene glycol is replaced by Temper.33d it can be seen that for the cooling-coils denoted R and B2 the optimal Reynolds number is turbulent or within the transition region. The values are here related to operation with Temper instead of propylene glycol and display cabinet 3. while it is still in the laminar region for the cooling-coil D212-10-L42. min = 978 W). Even here the most energy efficient cooling-coil corresponds to a laminar optimal flow regime. In Figure 4. 39 %w ( Wem. optimal volume flow (c) and optimal Reynolds number (d) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 3 when operated with propylene glycol.0 900 Reynolds number Volume flow (m 3/h) 800 1.

The figures also reveal that the electric energy use is lower for Temper and Hycool compared to propylene glycol. The cooling-coil design defines e. .g. The same trends are seen when comparing these figures with the figures for propylene glycol (Figure 4. In addition.33) with the ones for propylene glycol.0 0. the efficiency of the pump. number of tubes in the longitudinal/transverse direction etc. the optimal flow regime is always laminar. it is seen in the figures that for the most efficient cooling-coil. but the cooling-coils are operated with Hycool in this case. min = 978 W). which secondary refrigerant being used and on the cooling-coil design. the required electric power is somewhat lower compared to the case of Temper.0 -1.5 -1.32) as when comparing the figures for Temper (Figure 4.e Inlet liquid temperature (°C) Required electric power (W) 56 -0.33 Required electric power (a). since much of the gain is lost otherwise.5 1. The figures presented in this section show that the optimal values of inlet liquid temperature. However.0 4000 Reynolds number Volume flow (m 3/h) 3500 1.0 R B2 D212-10-L42 (a) R B2 D212-10-L42 R B2 D212-10-L42 (b) 2. distance between U-bends.g. the liquid flow and the corresponding Reynolds number depend on the cooling demand.0 R (c) B2 0 D212-10-L42 (d) Figure 4.5 -3. the cooling-coil must be operated at a higher inlet temperature compared to the case of propylene glycol.5 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0. As an example.0 Wep Wef Wem. tube diameter. optimal volume flow(c) and optimal Reynolds number (d) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 3 when operated with Temper -20 ( Wem.200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0. in order to make use of the better heat transfer performance of these secondary refrigerants. a higher efficiency of the pump would result in a higher optimal liquid flow and Reynolds number and so on. However. optimal inlet liquid temperature (b).34 the same things are shown as in the figures above. In Figure 4.0 -2. Of course all the values presented in this section is a result of the assumptions made in the model regarding e. fan and compressor and the temperature difference in the liquid cooler etc. number of parallel loops.5 -2.

0 R B2 D212-10-L42 (a) R B2 D212-10-L42 R B2 D212-10-L42 (b) 2.5 -2. min = 978 W).0 R (c) B2 0 D212-10-L42 (d) Figure 4.5 -1.5 -3.e Inlet liquid temperature (°C) Required electric power (W) 57 -0.0 0. optimal volume flow(c) and optimal Reynolds number (d) for different cooling-coils in display cabinet 3 when operated with Hycool 20 ( Wem.0 -2.5 1.0 4000 Reynolds number Volume flow (m 3/h) 3500 1.200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0. optimal inlet liquid temperature (b).0 Wep Wef Wem. .0 -1.5 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0.34 Required electric power (a).

58 .

1000).7. district cooling and heat recovery. Therefore. the deviation from the values predicted by the correlation might also be an effect of a larger uncertainty of measurement in this regime. They found that the heat transfer behaviour after the U-bend was almost as good as after the original inlet into the tube. Then it was found that a reduction of the tube diameter has to be accompanied by an increase in the number of parallel loops of the coil if an im- . 5. These findings are in agreement with results from experiments with a coaxial heat exchanger presented by Hong and Hrnjak [8]. no effort should be put on optimising the waves of the fins in a display cabinet application and correlations for plain fins can be used without getting too erroneous results. is proportional to the inverted value of the diameter of the tube. it has been assumed that the boundary layers are destroyed and a new entrance length formed after each U-bend and this assumption seems to agree well with reality. the effect of decreasing this diameter was studied. The results from the experiments with conventional cooling-coils. α. the waves of the fins do neither affect the heat transfer nor the pressure drop performance of the cooling-coil much. In Figure 4. such as for example air conditioning. which can be seen in Figure 4. showed that the total heat transfer resistance of B3 was considerably higher than that of B2.3.24. the measured mean Nusselt numbers in the full-scale cooling-coil are not as high as the curve fit from measured data for the coaxial heat exchanger presented by them. the fact that the relative entrance length on the air side was longer for B3 compared to B2 did not affect the heat transfer performance of B3 in a positive direction. When it comes to the air side the results showed that for such low air flows used in display cabinet applications (Re ≈ 500 . Thereafter. However. as can be seen in Figure 4.1 Experiments with Conventional Cooling-Coils In the experiments with conventional cooling-coils some of the main results were that good agreement was found between measured Nusselt numbers and Nusselt numbers predicted by the Gnielinski’s correlation for thermally developing flow and the uniform wall temperature boundary condition (T).59 5 Discussion The discussion below is mostly about display cabinet applications.22 . Due to the fact that the U-bends were found to affect the heat transfer as well as the pressure drop performance of a cooling-coil the effect of shortening the distance between the U-bends was investigated with successful results.6a.6b. The agreement was good when the cooling-coil was operated with propylene glycol or Temper –20 as secondary refrigerant for Re < 1700.1). see Figure 4. B2 and B3. (3.2 Parameter Study – Conventional Cooling-Coils The knowledge from the experiments with conventional cooling-coils was used to create a calculation model to be used in a parameter study. the same outer dimensions as those of B2 were kept in the parameter study. see Eq. However. see Figure 4. the transition to turbulent flow seems to start. Therefore. Best agreement for Re up to around 2000 was found when the extra pressure drop caused by the new entrance lengths following each U-bend was accounted for according to Langhaar [65] in the predictions. see Figure 4. 5.4 measured pressure drops on the liquid side over the coolingcoil are compared to pressure drops predicted by correlations. When using the correlations. In addition.Figure 4. but the results of the research work presented in this study can be useful in many other applications where coolingcoils are used as well. Since the heat transfer coefficient.

This is also shown in 4. Most of the other cooling-coils presented in this study are according to the stated optimising criteria even more efficient than B2. For that reason. water vapour condensation has not been included in the model even though condensation takes place in cooling-coils placed in display cabinets. However.8. the value of the optimal liquid flow corresponded to rather low Reynolds numbers. the heat transfer performance predicted by using the model should not differ too much from the real situation. The results from the experiments with the improved conventional cooling-coil B5 showed good agreement with the correlations used in the calculation model. When it comes to the cooling-coil B4 the measured Nusselt number differed somewhat from the Gnielinski (T) correlation in the lowest Reynolds number region.32. D212-10-L2 and D212-10-L42. the calculation model can be regarded as valid even for low Reynolds numbers and tube length . Hence. the measurement uncertainty was poor in these experiments and the results for the cooling-coil B5 are therefore more reliable.3 New Experiments with Improved Conventional CoolingCoils When calculating the performance for the most efficient cooling-coils in the parameter study. the cooling-coil should be operated in an optimal manner. This is due to the pressure drop penalty caused by reducing the diameter and increasing the total flow length. cooling-coils usually placed in display cabinets have a larger tube diameter. 5. 66] the sensible heat transfer coefficient is not very much affected by condensation.2. around 100-200 for propylene glycol and 400-500 for Temper -20.3. which can be seen in Figure 4. However. new experiments were carried out with cooling-coils similar to D212-10-L2 and D212-10-L42. B2 should therefore be regarded as more efficient than those cooling-coils normally found in display cabinets.60 proved performance is to be obtained.diameter relations of sizes down to that of B5. This means that the cooling-coil should be run with optimal values of the liquid inlet temperature and liquid flow. Therefore it was of interest to examine the heat transfer and pressure drop behaviour for such low Reynolds numbers in a cooling-coil with shorter distance between the U-bends. since the same assumptions have been made for all the evaluated cooling-coil geometries and the changes mainly concerns the liquid side of the cooling-coil. Compared to B2. In the parameter study. it is probably underestimated by the model. Figure 4. namely B4 and B5. fewer parallel loops and larger fin pitch. In the parameter study it has been assumed that the cooling demand is higher on the liquid side compared to the air side and according to the references [5. According to the results from the parameter study where the calculation model was used. When it comes to the pressure drop. 5. which is shown in Figure 4.11. These results were unexpected since the tube length to diameter relation (Ltube/d) of B4 lies between that of B5 and B2. even though they are contained within the same volume. Hence. e. Even though .g.4 Optimal Reynolds Number Regime In order to reach the lowest possible electric energy requirement for cooling a display cabinet. the internal order of the performance of the cooling-coils should not be affected by this simplification. due to air flow capacity limitations in the experiments with B4. Then the question arises concerning how reliable the results are for a “real” application.

is associated with a value of the optimal Reynolds number that is within the laminar flow regime.3. the most efficient one according to the results from the parameter study. in the calculations the electric energy usage due to frosting and defrosting of the cooling-coil has not been taking into consideration. compared to display cabinet 3. On the contrary.2. This is in agreement with the argument stating that the most energy efficient solution always involves a laminar flow regime. The saving potential for the display cabinets having lower cooling demand is of course smaller.2.e.e. i. 5.6 Evaluation of Enhancement Techniques The results from the parameter study for cooling-coils with plain tubes reveal that the values of the optimal flow gets higher when splitting the cooling-coil into several small ones with shorter distance between the U-bends and when increasing the number of parallel loops. In addition. If the secondary refrigerant propylene glycol is replaced by for example Hycool instead of replacing the cooling-coil the electric energy use is reduced to 1074 W (8 %). However. Hence.2. the . Such changes might involve enhancements of the tubes and this was investigated by using the calculation model complemented with correlations for different enhancement techniques. this can be seen in Figure 4. 5.3 the saving potentials for a display cabinet application can be estimated. for display cabinet 3 (the one demanding most cooling) operated with propylene glycol. the most energy efficient cooling-coil presented in the results from the parameter study. especially the twisted-tape inserts. For example.61 the heat transfer coefficient is always higher for turbulent flow compared to laminar flow in a given heat exchanger. However.5 Saving Potentials By studying the graphs presented in section 4.2 . other changes than varying the conventional cooling-coil parameters have to be done. in order to reduce the required electric power further while maintaining a low optimal flow for the cooling-coil. Nevertheless. a liquid flow path (total tube length) that is short enough. in some situations the overall performance of the cooling-coil deteriorates.4. If both the cooling-coil and the secondary refrigerant are replaced the energy used can be reduced to 1038 W (11 %). In addition. In the calculation model the uniform wall temperature boundary condition is used for the cooling-coil with plain tubes and tubes with continuous twisted-tape inserts. i. the lower values of the optimal flow. D212-10-L42. section 4.24. no matter which secondary refrigerant that is used (see section 4.3). However. in order to achieve an improvement. the electric energy use can be reduced from 1165 W to 1046 W (10 %) if the reference cooling-coil denoted R is replaced by the coil denoted D212-10-L42. the cooling-coil must have a sufficient number of parallel loops. On the contrary. the improvement is moderate which makes the most important benefit from the enhancement techniques. it can be concluded that the evaluated enhancement techniques. since frosting is necessary for the reference cooling-coil R in most cases while it is probably not for the most efficient coil D212-10-L42.22 . The reason for this is that the latter coil can be operated at higher liquid inlet temperatures compared to the other one. the turbulent flow regime does not always offer the most energy efficient solution. As can be seen in the results from using this calculation model. see 3.Figure 4. none of the evaluated enhancement techniques leads to an improved overall performance for a display cabinet application for all cases. the savings will be even greater in reality. As an example. no matter which of the evaluated enhancement techniques that is used. can be used to improve the overall efficiency in some situations.2.

The results from Fabbri [38] used in the calculations for internally finned tubes are based on a numerical study and the correlations used for the calculations with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts are in this paper sometimes used outside regions verified by Saha [18]. When it comes to the empty tube. When it comes to the thermally developing region. the results for the tubes with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts and the internally finned tubes may be a bit over-predicted. who presented the correlations. The uniform wall temperature conditions are the most appropriate ones for a display cabinet application. To make the correlations reliable for heat transfer for a single-tube as well as a full-sized coolingcoil.8) is probably due to a contribution from free convection in their experiments with a single-tube including a U-bend. For the cooling-coils with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts the uniform heat flux boundary condition is used and the correlations are valid for fully developed flow.1.Table 4. the correlations should contain a term taking free convection into account. especially in the ones with full-scale cooling-coils (see Table 4. This makes the comparison of the different enhancement techniques somewhat uncertain.1.3 . 5.Figure 4. (The correlations for twisted-tape inserts presented by Manglik and Bergles [27] do so.3. One of the parameters that affects the uncertainty strongly is the temperature difference at the inlet or the .5 and Appendix B). This leads to the fact that extra considerations must be taken when using correlations from the literature that are developed from experiments with a single-tube when the purpose is to predict the heat transfer of a full-sized cooling-coil.8 Uncertainty of Measurement The uncertainty of measurement is rather high in all the experiments. This is also confirmed by the results from the experimental verification with a single-tube including a U-bend (see 4. free convection as a contribution to forced convection.1.1.62 correlations presume thermally developing laminar flow.1 . This.) The deviation of the measured Nusselt number from the curve-fit presented by Hong and Hrnjak [8] in the experiments with full-scale cooling-coils (see Figure 4. resulted in higher measured Nusselt numbers than expected. in combination with the boundary condition inconsistency for the different enhancement techniques. If Figure 4. see 4.16 are studied it can be seen that the measured Nusselt number in the experiments with a single-tube in the present study actually agrees rather well with the the Nusselt number predicted by using the curve-fit presented by Hong and Hrnjak [8] at the same time as they agree with the Nusselt number prediction using the correlation containing a term taking free convection into account presented by Shome and Jensen [50]. makes the results for plain tubes and for tubes with continuous twisted-tape inserts the most reliable. The reason for this is not bad measurement devices or measurement technique. The same is true for the internally finned tubes due to small flow passages. The reason for using the uniform heat flux boundary conditions for tubes with regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts or internally finned tubes is simply lack of known correlations for the uniform wall temperature conditions.Figure 4. Therefore.14 .2. this region is probably of minor importance for a tube fitted with continuous as well as regularly spaced twisted-tape inserts. 5.3).3. but is simply due to the fact that a small uncertainty of measurement is hard to obtain in this kind of experiments. This can be seen in the figures in section 4.7 Experiments with Single-Tubes Correlated heat transfer and pressure drop for a tube with a twisted-tape insert using correlations according to Manglik and Bergles [27] were in relatively good agreement with measured data.

but either plus or minus. despite the uncertainty. the temperature difference on either of the sides will be very small. In the experiments with cooling-coil the uncertainty is normally least for the lowest Reynolds numbers. which in turn results in a large uncertainty for the measured Nusselt number. Some results related with too high values of the uncertainty are not even presented in this thesis. However. a more thorough analysis of the uncertainty of measurement separating the different contributions is beyond the scope of this study. in some test points the energy balance deviated relatively much from 1. the results from the experiments allow us to draw some essential conclusions. which motivates the estimated values of the uncertainty of measurement. while the opposite is true for the experiments with the coaxial heat exchanger (single-tube). This is due to the fact that air is the heat transfer medium on the “outer side” in the former case (low value of m ⋅ c p ) and water in the latter (high value of m ⋅ c p ). However.63 outlet of the heat exchanger.00. Since the agreement is very good with the Gnielinski correlation in many of the experiments it might be suspected that the uncertainty of measurement is somewhat overestimated. This results in a high uncertainty regarding the logarithmic mean temperature difference (∆tlm). When the energy flow ( m ⋅ c p ) on the two sides of the heat exchanger differ too much (which can not be avoided in this kind of experiments). The sign in the different contributions should maybe not always be +. . In addition.

64 .

• Application of enhancement techniques such as twisted-tape inserts and longitudinal internal fins may lead to further improvement of the cooling-coil performance if the flow path (the total tube length) is short enough. e. for a large number of parallel loops and/or in the case of several smaller cooling-coils with shorter distance between the U-bends. • For the optimising criteria stated in this study it has been concluded by using the created calculation model that the overall efficiency of the cooling-coil can be improved by replacing one full-length coil with up to four shorter ones contained within the same total volume. However. • When results from small-scale experiments. the overall efficiency can be improved by reducing the tube diameter. the most important benefit from the enhancement techniques is that they offer the lower values of the optimal liquid flow. these entrance lengths must be accounted for. the heat transfer contribution due to free convection must be considered. In addition. Besides. assuming a new entrance length is formed after each Ubend. it was found that for the most efficient cooling-coils. when predicting the pressure drop on the liquid side of the cooling-coil. optimal operation for display cabinet applications corresponded to the laminar flow regime. when predicting the heat transfer performance on the liquid side of a cooling coil the Gnielinski (T) correlation leads to good agreement for Re up to 1700. . • It has been shown that optimal operation regarding liquid flow rate and inlet temperature to the cooling-coil is strongly dependent upon cooling-coil geometry. The overall efficiency can also be improved by increasing the number of parallel loops in the cooling-coil. However. are used for prediction of the performance of a cooling-coil. no matter which of the liquids being used.65 6 Conclusions • From the experiments with cooling-coils served with a secondary refrigerant as heat transfer medium it has been concluded that.g. choice of secondary refrigerant and cooling demand. experiments with a single-tube.

66 .

the piping. the assumptions regarding the efficiency of the different components. other items than the conventional coil parameters have to be changed and the traditional finned-tube coil design might be abandoned.67 7 Recommendations for Future Work In order to obtain further improvements of the cooling-coil performance. In addition. When it comes to the optimising criteria for a display cabinet application. the liquid cooler etc.g. in future work other parts of the system than the display cabinet and the chiller might be included in the system. e. Therefore. . in future work the heat transfer and pressure drop performance of other cross-sectional geometries of the tubes than the circular one should be investigated. should be developed further in order to make the comparisons more general. such as for example the liquid pumps.

68 .

3. Augmentation of laminar flow heat transfer in tubes by means of twisted-tape inserts.Commission D1. Nordiske varmepumpedage". Canada: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation: pp. Techniques to augment heat transfer. Laminar flow heat transfer in internally finned tubes with twisted-tape inserts. Proceedings of the 4th NATO Advanced Study Institute on Heat Transfer. 583-588. Fahlén. 2001. 244-251. 56 p. Augmentation of tubeside laminar heat transfer by means of twisted-tape inserts. S W and Bergles. 251-256. 1978. 1998. M and Fahlén. Marner. 577-581. W J and Bergles. 8. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer. in Proceedings of the 6th International Heat Transfer Conference. A E. in Workshop IEA Annex 26. R A. Marner. Chapter 3. and internally finned tubes. S D. 1989. static-mixer inserts. 2000. Sweden: The Royal Institute of Technology. SLV FS 1996:5 Statens livsmedelsverks kungörelse med föreskrifter och allmänna råd om hantering av livsmedel (In Swedish). A E and Joshi.69 8 1. International Journal of Heat Exchangers. and Hrnjak. 1976(2): pp. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science. SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute: SP RAPPORT 2000:03. 154 p. Hrnjak. Recent progress on the air-side performance of fin-and-tube heat exchangers. J W and Gowen. in Proceedings of the Nordic conference "16. AIChE Journal. Performance of a display case at low temperatures refrigerated with R404A and secondary coolants. Terrell. 15. A W. A. 263-272. Axell. A E. D2/3. 6. in Proceeding of the 6th International Heat Transfer Conference. Urbana. S et al: pp. USA. Smith. H M and Feingold. Y. Washington. J. W. in Low Reynolds Number Flow Heat Exchangers. Heat transfer in thermally developing flow of fluids with high Prandtl numbers preceding and following U-bend. 1996. 1978. 11. S H and Hrnjak. Copenhagen. 7. 1974. 2: pp. in Proceeding of the International Conference "Refrigerated transport. 9. P S. . 14. 1(1): pp. 941-943. Cambridge. 10. W J and Bergles. Ankara. Hong. in Proceedings of the 6th International Heat Transfer Conference. 11: pp. P S. Eds. 2000. DC: Hemisphere Publishing: pp. P. Kakac. Denmark: pp. Heat transfer issues in laminar flow of single-phase secondary refrigerants through the pipes. Date. Augmentation of highly viscous laminar heat transfer inside tubes with constant wall temperature. 9. 1998. 2000. 571-576. University of Illinois: (217) 333-3115. C and Fahlén. 16. Toronto. 49-76. 695-720. 2. Stockholm. Augmentation techniques for low Reynolds number in-tube flow. Nordiske kølemøde. Hong. Air Conditioning and Refrigerating Center. Heat transfer efficiency in rough pipes at high Prandtl Number. Toronto. 17: pp. A E. United Kingdom: International Institute of Refrigeration. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 1985. 845-859. Haglund. United Kingdom: International Institute of Refrigeration: pp. References Livsmedelsverket. 1978. 5. Butikskyla (In Swedish). A E. Cambridge. Sweden. Wang. 252-267. Mao. Bergles. R S and Kröger. Soliman. Jämförelse av metoder för att förbättra värmöverföring och tryckfall i köldbärarkylda kylbatterier med laminära vätskeflöden (In Swedish). Prediction of fully developed-flow in a tube containing a twisted tape. 13. 12. van Rooyen. P. P. Promotion of energy efficient display cabinets. 4. Bergles. P. 1999. in Handbook of Heat Transfer Applications. D2/3. Borås. storage and retail display" of IIR D1. in IIF-IIR . Turkey: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation. 1983. 17. Canada: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation: pp. 1965. D G. C-C. Analysis of heat transfer in internally finned tubes under laminar flow conditions. McGraw-Hill: New York.

Fluid Mechanics. 1969. 21. J. Influence of free convection on heat transfer during laminar flow in tubes with twisted tapes. B. 24. 27. p. 1993. and Sir. J and Sasic. Lopina. A E. A E. A W.70 18. 2001. 25. 881. Sundén. 27: pp. Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristcs of laminar flow in circular tube fitted with regularly spaced twisted-tape elements. 1-9. 22. Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of laminar flow through a circular tube fitted with regularly spaced twisted tape elements with multiple twist. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute: Troy. 890-896. I. Z. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer. 417-427. Analysis of tubeside laminar and turbulent heat transfer with twisted tape inserts. R M. 434-442. R M and Bergles. 1992. J P. U N. 123: pp. 1991. D. and Date. Machac. Eds. 30: pp. 11-49. Wärme. Heat transfer and pressure drop correlations for twisted-tape inserts in isothermal tubes. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science. in Heat Transfer Enhancement and Energy Conservation. Numerical modelling and analysis of laminar heat transfer in non-circular compact channels. 210-217. ASME PAPER 75-HT-41. Heat transfer enhancement and pressure drop in viscous liquid flows in isothermal tubes with twisted-tape inserts. 509-515. Saha. B and Faghri. 1989. Thermohydraulic study of laminar swirl flow through a circular tube fitted with twisted tapes. Lecjaks. Dasmahapatra.Laminar flows. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer. 1997. 32. 33. A E. and Sukhatme. Gaitonde. R F and Bergles. pp. R M and Bergles. Donevski. and Sir. Kulesza. International Chemical Engineering. Bandyopadhyay. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer. 205-209. Lecjaks. Manglik. Hemisphere Publishing: New York. 91: pp. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. I. 1991. S K. Manglik. A. Saha. 1990. R M and Bergles. 313-318. M. 249-257. USA 26. 31. S K and Dutta. Heat transfer enhancement of intube flows in process heat exchangers by means of twisted-tape inserts (PhD Thesis). 115(4): pp. Heat transfer to a newtonian liquid flowing through a tube with an internal helical element. S K and Chakraborty. 1998. in Proceedings of the 14th National Heat and Mass Transfer Conference and 3rd ISHMT-ASME Joint Heat and Mass Transfer Conference. Z. India: pp.und Stoffubertragung. Saha. 577-586. Heat transfer and pressure drop correlations for twisted-tape inserts in isothermal tubes: part I . M: Southampton. Machac. 115(4): pp. 1987. A E. DuPlessis. and Thermodynamics 1991. Heat transfer and pressure drop in tape-generated swirl flow of single-phase water. 19. 27: pp. Transition and turbulent flows. II. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science. J K. 23. 1975: pp. in Experimental Heat Transfer. 20. Gaitonde. Pressure loss in fluids flowing in pipes equipped with helical screws. Augmentation of tube side heat transfer to power law fluids in laminar flow by means of twisted tape inserts. Miletti. . Manglik.889. A P. 28. 175-185 p. Plocek. 1991. 1993. 310-322. R M and Bergles. Watkinson. Elsevier Science Publishing: New York. 1987. U N. Heat transfer correlations for thermally developing laminar flow in a smooth tube with a twisted-tape insert. in Computer Simulations in Compact heat Exchangers. P S. Heat transfer and pressure drop of internally finned tubes in laminar oil flow. J. IIT Kanpur. 4: pp. 1987. Manglik. United Kingdom. D L. Computational Mechanics Publication. M. Manglik. 27: pp. 661-667. A E. and Kubanek. International Chemical Engineering. 29. G K. 2: pp. 30. NY. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer. S P.

G. with E1 & E2.Charts and tables. Chai. Kakac. Commission B1. 1997. Ankara. 48. M K. 1983.tables and diagrams for the refrigeration industry. Heat transfer by combined free and forced laminar convection to a thermic fluid flowing in a heated horizontal tube. S. Fabbri. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. Å. 729-735. 1997. Shome.1997. liquid chilling packages and heat pumps with electrically driven compressors . CEN European Committee for Standardization. 35-51. 1996. S et al: pp. Eds. Å. Kakac et al: pp. 4(1): pp. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. Handbook No 12 of the Swedish Society of Refrigeration. M K. 12(2): pp. 1983. Dubrovnik. Mixed convection laminar flow and heat transfer of liquids in horizontal internally finned tubes. Jugoslavia: Elsevier: pp. B and Jensen. M A. France: International Insitute of Refrigeration. 43. Melinder. 1997. Turkey: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation. USA: pp. 473-486. Prediction of the effects of temperature-dependent fluid properties on laminar heat transfer. Analysis of laminar flow and heat transfer in tubes with internal circumferential fins. Paris. Bandyopadhyay. 1998. Heat transfer and other characteristics of low temperature liquid secondary refrigerants. 37. 553-560. Melinder. S P. 46. 41(10): pp. 2 ed. Shome.71 34. in The Second World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer. G. B. . R L and Bergles. U N. Proceedings of the 4th NATO Advanced Study Institute on Heat Transfer. Experimental verification of analyses and correlation of the effects of temperature dependent fluid properties on laminar heat transfer.heating mode. A E. Webb. 1998. 1983. 38. 1999. Part A: Applications. Part A. 24(1): pp. Turkey: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation. Numerical Heat Transfer. in Low Reynolds Number Flow Heat Exchangers. 44. S V. P S. 35. 42. 451-471. A E. Ankara. in Low Reynolds Number Flow Heat Exchangers. 735-753. Thermophysical properties of liquid secondary refrigerants . Laminar natural convection in internally finned horizontal annuli. Turkey: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation. Thermophysical properties of liquid secondary refrigerants . Bergles. 1996. Melinder. Journal of Enhanced Heat Transfer. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow. Optimum profiles for asymmetrical longitudinal fins in cylindrical ducts. 1243-1253. 42(3): pp. Heat transfer optimization in internally finned tubes under laminar flow conditions. Å. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. J C and Patankar. Fluid Mechanics. Proceedings of the 4th NATO Advanced Study Institute on Heat Transfer. Sweden: Swedish Society of Refrigeration 47. Dong. Performance evaluation criteria for selection of heat transfer surface geometries used in low Reynolds number heat exchangers. S et al: pp. A numerical analysis of thermally developing flow in elliptic ducts with internal fins. B and Jensen. 36. Shome. 40. 1984. 4(1): pp. Air conditioners. Ankara. Applications. Z F and Ebadian. 1993. Proceedings of the 4th NATO Advanced Study Institute on Heat Transfer. 166-172. 67-87. Numerical Heat Transfer. 1991. S V. 1991. Bergles. Numerical investigation of laminar flow and heat transfer in internally finned tubes. 39. A E. and Sukhatme. 27: pp. in Procceding of IIR (IIF) Conference "Heat transfer issues in natural refrigerants". Stockholm. 53-70. Fabbri. Rowley. Kakac. Experimental investigation of laminar flow and heat transfer in internally finned tubes. 150-159. Eds. in Low Reynolds Number Flow Heat Exchangers. Gaitonde. 45. 41. 33(1): pp. College Park. 511-523. 49. Eds. and Thermophysics. G J and Patankar. 6583. EN255. Journal of Enhanced Heat Transfer.

Mirth. USA: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation: pp.Quality of results. 68. R L.Air humidity. Eckert. Sweden: Almqvist & Wiksell Förlag AB 54. E R G. 1936. E N and Tate. Sweden. 1984. Gnielinski. M K. Borås. 1963. Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. 58. 1429. 328 p. 153-159. 4. 1963. 1994. ASHRAE Hanbook . in Proceedings of the 8th International Heat Transfer Conference. Nagano. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. Stockholm. International Chemical Engineering. 66. 1994. 60.och kemitekniska tabeller (In Swedish). Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers 63. J R. 359-368.Berechnunsblätter für den Wärmeubergang.och kemiteknik. Schmidt. New equations for heat and mass transfer in turbulent pipe and channel flow. Meteorological measurements concerning questions of air pollution . Gray. 3 ed. GUM. Experimental Heat Transfer. 351-357. EAL European Cooperation for Accreditation of Laboratories. Vol. 1982. Laminar flow forced convection in ducts . V. and Montesclaros. Heat transfer and pressure liquids in tubes. D R and Ramadhyani. 160-161. 1995. V p. C E. 803 p. G. VDI-Wärmeatlas . Heat transfer calculations for extended surfaces. Welty. Heat transfer and friction correlations for plate finned-tube heat exchangers having plain fins. 56.Fundamentals. Düsseldorf. S-E and Hellsten. 143-162. EAL-R2. Journal of Applied Mechanics. Steady flow in the transition length in a straight tube.Energi. H L. P. Gnielinski. 59. Langhaar.1995. Tabeller och diagram. 53. 28: pp. 1978. 1986. USA: American Society of Heating. Sieder. V. Journal of Heat Transfer. B and Jensen.1997. Data och diagram . Heat and Mass Transfer. C E. Hishida. Hellsten. 51. VDI-Wärmeatlas . 1949(April): pp. T E. Atlanta. Germany: VDI-Verlag 62. R E. San Francisco. Y. 38(11): pp. New York: Academic press. Mörstedt. 1942. 477 p. 61(2): pp. Advances in heat transfer. 1976. D L and Webb. Falköping. 1997. Chemieingenieurtechnik. M S. A55-A58. 104: pp. International Organization for Standardization.Berechnunsblätter für den Wärmeubergang (In German). 67. Refrigerating Engineering. Wicks. Combined forced and free convection in the entrance region of an isothermally heated horizontal pipe. . Fahlén. Expression of the uncertainty of measurement. S. Correlations for predicting the air-side Nusselt numbers and friction factors in chilled-water cooling coils.72 50. Shome. R K and London. 1997. 1989. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons. 65. 9: pp. 1984. 27452750. Sweden: Förlags AB VVS 61. G. New York: McGraw-Hill 71. and Wilson. 1945-1956. SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute: SP REPORT 1994:01. 52. VDI-Kommission Reinhaltung der Luft. Energi. Stockholm: Liber Utbildning AB 64. VVS Handboken (In Swedish). M. Shah.1985. Zur Wärmeübertragung bei laminarer Rohrströmung und konstanter Wandtemperatur (In German). Industrial and Engineering Chemistry.Supplement 1. 1992. 55. 1. Mixed convection laminar flow and heat transfer of liquids in isothermal horizontal circular ducts. Introduction to heat and mass transfer. 70. 57. 16: pp. Performance tests of air source heat pumps under frosting conditions . A L. 7(2): pp. Fundamentals of Momentum. 1 ed. 1994. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 69. 1 ed. 6 ed.

Yun.73 72. Kim. 119(3): pp. J-H. 560-567. . R L. Heat transfer and friction correlations for wavy plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers. 1997. and Webb. N-H. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer.

74 .

1 d ⋅ Re b ⋅ Pr (A1.001< x*< 0.615 ⋅ (x *)−1 3 − 0.953 ⋅ (x *)−1 3 − 0. Accurate to within 6 % in the range of 0. T) [67] quoted by [68] ( ) 3 Nu m. fully developed velocity profile.1) (A1. Accurate to within 1 % in the range of 0.3) x* according to Eq.75 Appendix A Correlations In this appendix all the correlations used in the comparisons with measured data presented in the result section 4.66 3 + 0. H) Quoted by [68] ( ) 13 3 Nu m.2) Valid range: Developing temperature profile.2) x d ⋅ Re b ⋅ Prb Valid range: Developing temperature profile. fully developed velocity profile. Nu(Gnielinski.01. A1 Liquid Side Heat Transfer Correlations Nu(Gnielinski. (A1.7    x* = 13 (A1.86 ⋅  Re b ⋅ Prb  L  13 µ ⋅  B  µw    0. H =  4.1 are listed.7 3 + 1.6    (A1.4) 0.14 =1 .6 3 + 1.14  µB    µw  with the approximation that  Valid range: Ltube < 0.01< x*< 0.36 3 + 0.T =  3. Nu(Sieder&Tate) [69] Nu m d  = 1.1.

9) ) For ∆ > 1 (See Eg.CP  ν+  =  ν+  NuTD .36 (A1.3351 .13 ⋅ ∆ ) ∆ z+ = (A1.05 ⋅ ln (1 + 0.76 Nu(Hong&Hrnjak) [8] Nu m 3    − 0. a curve fit created from results from experiments on a single-tube including a U-bend presented by Hong and Hrnjak [8].10) x d ⋅ Re in ⋅ Prin (A1.2) E.93 ⋅ Ra 0.3686  .6568 + 0.6) Valid range: Fully developed laminar flow. A1. 10 −3 ≤ z + ≤ 10 − 2 = 0. Constant wall temperature boundary condition. H) [59] NuH=4. T) [59] NuT=3.1563 ⋅ z + .067 ⋅ z + ⋅ Prb  ) − 0.21 ⋅ F −0. Constant heat flux boundary condition.57 ⋅ z + −0. A1.CP − 0.22 ( ⋅ 1 + 0.7 +  ⋅ (x *) − 0. (A1.11) .7373 ⋅ exp − 3.8) (A1. Nu(Shome&Jensen) [50] For ∆ ≤ 1 (See Eg.15) Nu m = 7. Nu(constant.9828 + 1. Nu(constant.369)     13 (A1.66 (A1. z + > 10 − 2 3.7   ( 1 − 0. 10 −6 ≤ z + ≤ 10 −3  − 0.5632 + 1.129 ⋅ z +  + − 0.27 simultaneously developing (A1.18 0.7) Valid range: Fully developed laminar flow.5) x* according to Eq.g.62  ( ) ( ) ( )  ( 0.461  = 7 + 0.369 3 3  1.1272 ⋅ z  0.15) ( ) ( ) thermally developing Nu m Nu TD.

12) (dν dT )B ⋅ (TB − Tw ) νB 1 + νˆ (A1.77 ν+ = νˆ = F= νB νw (A1.15) .6. (A1. 6⋅102 < Ra < 108.14) ν+ ( ) ∆ = Ra 1 4 ⋅ F 1 4 ⋅ z + 12 Valid range: 0.13) (A1.0048 < µw < 51. 2 < Pr <15100.2 and Re < 2420. 10-6 < z+ > 0.

64)−2 (A2.2) m=2.tot ρ b ⋅ u b 2 ⋅ + ∆p hl d 2 hl = head loss ∆p b = f ⋅ (A2.2) Valid range: Single phase laminar flow in circular tubes with Red < 2300 (in smooth tubes up to 8000). turb-Gnielinski [71] f = (0. (A2.1) lam [59] f = 64 Reb (A2.tot ρ b ⋅ u b 2 ρb ⋅ ub 2 ∆p b = f ⋅ ⋅ + m⋅ + ∆p hl d 2 2 f according to Eq.4) Valid range: Single phase flow with Re > 2300 lam-Langhaar [65] Ltube. turb-Eckert [70] f = 0.78 A2 Liquid Side Pressure Drop Correlations dp =∆pb Ltube.79 ⋅ ln Reb − 1.5) .3164 4 Re b (A2.3) Valid range: Turbulent flow in circular ducts.28 hl = head loss (A2.

1 ≤ nl ≤ 4 .2) dh ηA =1− η fin = A fin A0 ( ⋅ 1 − η fin ) (A3.44 ≤ X f − δ Pd ≤ 10. (A3.23 ≤ Pd (p fin − δ)≤ 1. 1.8) . staggered tube layout. HTC(Wang 2000 .21 . ( ) ( ) 0.6) HTC(Kim et al 1997 . (A3. 0.7) Valid range: 500 ≤ Re Dc ≤ 6000 .79 A3 Air Side Heat Transfer Correlations Schmidt [58] (A3.3) tanh(m ⋅ ri ⋅ φ) m ⋅ ri ⋅ φ  2 ⋅ αa m=   λ fin ⋅δ fin  (A3.2) Nu d h −0.133  X −0.wavy) [5] αa according to Eq.0 .33 .2) Nu d h = j ⋅ Re Dc * Pra−1 3 (A3.643 ⋅  p t   ⋅ Dc p    Dc  l   = − 0.15 ≤ p fin − δ D ≤ 0.35 ⋅ ln e  ri    ri    (A3.1) HTC = α a.272   p fin − δ fin   0.33 .16 ≤ p t p l ≤ 1.wavy) [72] αa according to Eq.4)     (A3. 1.205  ⋅       (A3.558    dh  Pd   ⋅  f    ⋅ ⋅  p − δ    Pd  D fin c     fin        −0.eff = α a ⋅ η A αa = Nu d h ⋅ λ a (A3.5) r   r φ =  e − 1 ⋅ 1 + 0.394 ⋅ Pra1 3 ⋅ Re 0.

2         (A3.5mm ≤ p l ≤ 33mm .plain) [57] αa according to Eq.0197 ⋅ Re 02.9)     −0.493 − 0.502  p fin − δ fin ⋅  Dc  Valid range: Staggered configuration.wavy) [66] αa = Nu ⋅ λ a 2 ⋅ s fin (A3. 2. 1 ≤ nl ≤ 6 .1mm . 12.s94 ⋅    Re 2 s = Va ⋅ ρa ⋅ 2 ⋅ s fin   − 0. 13.7 (degree). 6.10) Valid range: 500 ≤ Re Dc ≤ 10000 .12) (A3.25mm .0312 d ⋅  h  Dc     (A3.79097 ⋅ Re D ⋅ c   p J 1 = −0.886 ⋅ nl  P ⋅ d Xf  −0. HTC(Mirth&Ramadhyani 1994 .6mm ≤ Dc ≤ 16.374 ⋅  l  δ fin  ⋅ nl     −0.43mm .317  P ⋅ d Xf  (A3.456 J1  = 1.3 ≤ θ ≤ 14.85mm .87mm ≤ X f ≤ 8.     0. Pd = 1.343 −0.98mm ≤ p fin ≤ 6.14 ⋅ Pra 13  ⋅ Re 0D.11)  Nu = 0.80 j  pl    δ  fin  −0. 27.27  p fin ⋅   Dc  p fin ⋅   Dc         −1.75mm ≤ p t ≤ 38.1707 − 1. 31.3  pt − Dc  111900 ⋅ 1 +   2 ⋅ s fin    Re ⋅ L   2s 2 ⋅ s fin       ⋅ Pr 1 / 3 1.13) Ac ⋅ µ a HTC(Gray&Webb 1986 .2) Nu d h = 0.0296 (A3. (A3.8 .143     0.14) .672 ⋅  c pt  pl     −0. nl > 4.

1 ≤ nl ≤ 8 .276 d ⋅  h  Dc    0.16 ⋅  t f t = 4 ⋅  0. staggered tube layout.423 ⋅  c pt  pl    δ    ⋅ 1 − fin   p fin   −1.25        F3  A ⋅  ln 0    At        Pd  ⋅   X f     A ⋅ ln 0  At −2.29 ≤ Pd (p fin − δ)≤ 1. ( ) ( ) 0.672 (A4.05273 ⋅ Re FD1 ⋅  c   p fin ⋅   pt  p fin F1 = 0.467 ⋅ Re −D0.81 A4 Air Side Pressure Drop Correlations dp = ∆pa dp(Kim et al 1997 .33 . 3. 1.33 .25 + c ( pt Dc − 1)    π ⋅ Dc Xf ⋅   Pd     −0.5) −0.118   ⋅ Re −D0.23 ≤ X f − δ Pd ≤ 5.1714 − 0.426 ⋅   pl     0.7) .wavy) [5] ∆pa according to Eq.1) f =  Pd    X f   F2 0. (A4.4) Valid range: 500 ≤ Re Dc ≤ 9000 .07372 ⋅   pl  p fin F 2 = 0.6) (A4. dp(Wang 2000 .wavy)[72] ∆p a = f ⋅ f = ff ⋅ ff = A0 ρ a ⋅ u a 2 ⋅ Ac 2 A fin A0 (A4.08     (A4.3)    (A4. 0.3 A ⋅ ln 0  At     0.11 ≤ p fin − δ D ≤ 0.1) A fin  + f t 1 − A0   4.16 ≤ p t p l ≤ 1.1325 ⋅ n l0.2)  p fin − δ   ⋅   D c   −0.65 .0 .2 (A4.0339   p − Dc 0.02305 (A4.

1 ≤ nl ≤ 6 .t 2 ft according to Eq.12) ff =  0.9) (A4.75mm ≤ p t ≤ 38.2192 ln Re Dc F3 = ( ) (A4.8) Valid range: 500 ≤ Re Dc ≤ 10000 . Pd = 1.5mm ≤ p l ≤ 33mm . (A4. 12.25mm .98mm ≤ p fin ≤ 6.8 .85mm .10) dp(Gray&Webb 1986 .1mm .plain) [57] ∆p a = ∆p f + ∆pt (A4.3 ≤ θ ≤ 14. (A4.7 (degree).4) Valid range: Staggered configuration.368 Pd  =  2 ⋅ s fin 8.64 ⋅ Re −P0.13) (A4. 27.17  pt   Dc    1.2) with ff 0.545 ) 1.6mm ≤ Dc ≤ 16.82 − 10. 2. (Entrance and exit losses are included) dp(Mirth&Ramadhyani 1994 .174 ⋅ ln Re Dc  pt   Dc − 0. 31.508 ⋅ Re −D0.24    (A4.43mm .08 −   L  ⋅   p    l ( 0.11) A f ρa ⋅ ua 2 ∆p f = f f ⋅ ⋅ Ac 2 (A4. nl > 4. (A4. (A4.wavy) [66] ∆pa according to Eq.375 ⋅ Re −0.318 At ρ a ⋅ u a 2 ⋅ A c .1) with f according to Eq.521 ⋅  c ∆p t = f t ⋅ pt  Dc     1.14) .457 ⋅   P d   d ft = 2. 6.87mm ≤ X f ≤ 8. 13.

1.256 302 61.6 1.7 6.3 9.55 8.6 6. e.63 0.7 12.8 0.318 29.8 5. B1 Conventional Cooling-Coils Cooling-coil B2.7 0.55 0.out 9. All the values listed below are mean values over a time period.2 17. are based on mean temperature of the liquid or the air.2 8.6 4.78 0.3 11. Figure 4.2 10.020 1149 65.1 2945 63.8 1.3 27.550 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b 6.9 12.72 1839 1443 0.510 606 61.2.72 1853 1448 0.83 Appendix B Experimental Data Below.8 0.1 are listed.500 1706 64.55 7.6 0.5 0.1 1.93 0.228 25.108 24.66 0.6a Variable Unit tb.72 0.3a.7 10.95 0.848 27.8 20. in 5.55 11.3 0.878 30. Pr.5 10.378 28.72 1840 1442 0.1 7. Re.7 9.93 0.000 2.7 6.in ta.g.9 2.528 27.7 5.93 0.61 0.3 3.9 0.72 1841 1454 0.1 16.3 1839 1439 0. Figure 4.4a. The temperature dependent variables.8 4.8 11.5 1.1 0.7 12. Figure 4.7 °C tb.03 0.94 0. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.8 3.94 .6 11.5 2.72 1839 1447 0.4 1.7 13.8 3965 68.55 0.4 2.95 0.35 0.out Va.428 28. experimental data presented in the graphs in section 4.2 -1.94 0.1 °C m3/h Vb 3.55 14.7 6.0 8.650 3.9 3430 64.8 11.030 2376 62.55 0.72 1840 1433 0.93 0.2 10.55 24.8 1.2 7.4 14.72 1840 1429 0. Figure 4.4 4.18 0.

95 0.254 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.9 3.72 63.7 46.55 0.60 0.8 8.4 6.1 14.6b Variable Unit tb.260 4600 15.93 6.80 3884 3144 0.72 1839 1406 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b -1.256 302 61.9 28.7 0.7 2.80 4877 3949 0.5 0.1 1. Figure 4.0 17.91 0.847 30.0 8.65 0.000 10370 16.9 23.010 7136 16.72 1826 1400 0.5 1.72 96.72 1839 1409 0.in ta. in 2.8 0.7 0.72 26. .8 6.3 8.95 0.55 0.09 0.4 14.72 36.84 Cooling-coil B2.9 12.007 30.55 0.4 22.97 0.4 81.847 29.257 307 61.6 14.6 34.3 22.72 16.71 0.2 5.7 5.9 0.9 1.9 11.8 9.7 34.6 5.in ta.9 1.97 0.72 2.80 2408 1942 0.258 309 60.9 21. Temper -20 Figure 4.3 °C tb.1 8.5 13.67 0.7 13.1 301 61.3 1.12 0.0 7.7 592 468 0.72 7.0 16.0 24.4 0.1 2.0 4.4 16.6 8.1 13.72 1839 1415 0.1 16.8 0.1 4.2 1.1.0 97.9 19.8 0.520 5535 15.93 0.7 6.5 5.2 6.3 1.out Va.55 0.65 0.99 0.8 20.257 307 61.55 0.0 8.7 6.72 0.0 0.7 9.0 2.5 7.4 0. in °C tb.7 19.62 0.917 30.259 307 61.55 9.520 5512 15.80 14.out °C 3 m /h  Vb Reb Prb ∆p b ta.8 1.8 * 0.0 0.58 0.0 57.94 0.93 0.607 29.80 1841 1489 0.407 30.0 5.3 12. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.out 17.5.4 1.64 0.0 9.3 5.5 0.8 -2.3 24.9 24.96 0.250 299 60. Figure 4.55 0.2 -1.35 0.0 24.060 13827 17.4 21.5 29.0 °C m3/h Vb 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅⋅A)b+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b Cooling-coil B2.7 7.96 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).0 -1.8 0.5 1.80 1124 882 0.out Va.1 19.9 16.8 -2.80 2895 2336 0.6 1839 1404 0.7 5.1 8.72 1839 1412 0.020 3806 15.72 1840 1417 0.0 10.96 0.2 Variable Unit tb.96 0.417 28.20 0.96 0.03 0.0 5.2 21.

72 1840 1446 0.96 0.95 0.3 °C m3/h Vb 0.5 12.57 0.55 0. Figure 4.84 0.6 0.1.9 14.72 0.216 16064 13.72 1839 1428 0.8 18.2 1.55 0.4 0.0 7.2 10.6 3.0 4. in 4.8 11.8 0.98 0.55 9.7 1826 1428 0.2 1.9 0.3 5.1 0.2 21.in ta.8 1.3 21.2 Variable Unit tb.263 950 15.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b Cooling-coil B2.2 0.007 4063 12.3b.3 0.2.55 0.4 12.in ta.9 13.85 Cooling-coil B2.0 1857 15.9 0.72 1841 1456 0.980 7704 12.2 4.23 5.67 0.8 °C tb.0 1842 1429 0.1.55 8.72 1842 1429 0.98 0.7 15.81 7.766 0.97 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).97 0.60 0. Figure 4.5 1.55 6.38 29.72 1839 1422 0.7 5.2 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b -2.4b Variable Unit tb.78 30.79 8. Temper -20 Figure 4.513 5957 12.56 30.047 24.27 0.5 8.0 13.3 1.72 0.51 6.09 0.98 0.09 30.23 28.59 0.1 8. in °C tb.107 26.49 0.72 1841 1465 0.027 22.30 30.37 * 0.3 1.out Va.2 0.6 2892 15.1 22.72 0.8 5.out 17.2 -3.out °C m3/h Vb Reb Prb ∆p b ta.3 1.55 0.55 0.020 11621 13.81 30.2 18.164 585 16.5 13.72 1839 1430 0. Figure 4.55 15.227 27.8 5. .6 0.7 10.505 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.2 9.64 6.1 2.79 5.5 16.65 0. Hycool 20 Figure 4.7 0.55 4.72 1826 1416 0.63 0.250 4991 12.1 3.1 1.0 13.0 15.98 6.1 8.96 0.4 8.55 0.765 3135 12.4 9.6 4.96 0. Figure 4.9 1.4 21.6 6.72 1832 1424 0.0 8.2 5.out Va.96 0.

0 1811 701 0.4 8.10 27.72 0.20 23.72 1803 698 0.6 5.93 Cooling-coil B3.49 5.97 0.1 11.84 26.61 7.029 2513 59.8 12.in ta.82 4.9 10.43 5.3c.03 24.7a Variable Unit tb.3 -2.6a.4 14.8 1.07 4.72 1804 715 0.72 0.99 5.72 1804 709 0.36 29.2 1836 1440 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b -4.56 0.527 761 52.95 1.out Va.6 °C m3/h Vb 0.5 17.1 0.90 0.72 1806 698 0.72 1807 715 0.92 0.96 1.86 0.8 .6 11.3 15.5 °C m3/h Vb 3. in 1.152 590 13.4 9. Propylene glycol 36 %w Figure 4.697 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.2 5.8 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b 2004 12.38 29.97 6.6 1046 12.2 10.498 1898 58. Hycool 20 Figure 4.6 4.90 0.8 5.55 10. Figure 4.86 Cooling-coil B2.1 0.82 0.3 9.2 21.73 0.495 0.265 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.in ta.24 23.7 16.52 25.91 0.9 5.7 0.24 0.60 13.84 5.3 2.72 1841 1456 0.86 29.242 311 57.out 20.038 1416 54.79 0.28 1.2 15.17 1.43 27.0 0.55 4.99 0.92 0.55 5.4 9.82 5. Figure 4.5 -1.1.out Va.98 1.1 10.5 1.7 2. in 5.4 0.3 °C tb.9 4434 61.17 5. Figure 4.8 2.5 3.0 5.8 1.9 3.517 3115 59.5 0.09 5.92 0.5 °C tb.72 1806 711 0.01 22.1 21.25 0.7 0.91 0.13 26.4 12.15 12.8 14.4 0.4c Variable Unit tb.Figure 4.93 0.018 3692 60.72 1837 1461 0.72 1811 704 0.2.2 9.7 0.69 17.out 8.52 1.

3 5.99 Cooling-coil B5.1 1.6 4.9 -1.out Va. Propylene glycol 36 %w Figure 4.7 0.92 0.6 17. Figure 4.4 4.55 11.72 3.1 16.7 0.55 6.257 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.4 15.0 15.87 Cooling-coil B3.1 0.1 4.27 113 91.95 0.6 0.1 0.0 1.6 21.4 0. in 0.7 4.10 49 76.5 18.257 331 57.33 5968 2456 0.1 8.7 -0.320 1.0 -2.72 21.4 21.058 30.9 19.8a.7 1.259 335 57.715 1.1 10.1 12.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b 1413 97.6 6.7 16.72 15.58 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.92 2504 1019 0.94 0.4 0.00 403 95.256 332 57.08 1135 452 0.93 0.7 2.55 14.4 1.92 0.9 0.2 7.1 10.72 3.7 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b -1. in 0.4 2. Figure 4.8 -0.8 19.8 -0.5 17.4 0.45 4973 2043 0.95 0.5 °C tb.out 16.in ta.6 13.91 0.7 14.02 2.4 21.0 20.71 2995 1229 0.7 2.1 0.95 0.7b Variable Unit tb.2 3.6b.6 15.72 314 837 0.6 0.4 -1.2 °C m3/h Vb 0.7 -0.99 0.59 3884 1602 0.258 328 58.out 1.3 0.6 2.9a Variable Unit tb.72 312 837 0.72 1.72 4.1 15.50 2.8 12.out Va.4 26.8 15.67 2.7 0.2 34.010 27.55 8.2 16.5 313 834 0.6 -1.3 1.253 326 57.4 6.9 17.1 17.3 18.1 °C tb.0 4.030 30.2 -0.253 325 57.133 30.48 193 96.1 599 228 0.1 2.91 0.13 2.2 2.3 7.256 339 56.in ta.7 0.3 °C m3/h Vb 3.2 30.2 0.31 1860 759 0.72 9.72 6.7 -5.3 0.7 4.3 0.1 328 58.72 307 832 0.7 21.4 5. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.6 17.04 814 96.0 1.72 2.4 5.26 .90 0.

60 2.3 25.3 0. in °C tb.95 * -0.2 2.3 3. Propylene glycol 39%w Figure 4.5 0.9 30.2 14.6 17.0 5.5 3.6 °C tb.50 1.535 736 21.72 3.7 4.7 -0.1 0.82 2.4 0.1 -1.4 0.24 2.out 6.8 32.out Va.70 2.0 316 821 314 826 0.251 352 21. Temper -20 Figure 4.55 7.5 4.9 312 837 0.8 14.99 0.0 0.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b -0.3 4.23 1.019 31.7 °C 3 m /h  Vb 0.1 3.72 308 818 0.0 30.9b Variable Unit tb.55 3.4 0.000 30.758 6030 23.3 0.9 0.4 15.3 17.8 0.99 0.99 0.2 -3.4 7.6 -4.10 Variable Unit tb.3 113 91.7 4. in -2.2 -1.4 18.72 312 825 0.97 139 372 0.8b.1 0.97 28.0 2.99 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).6 4.in ta.55 5.9 7.99 0.72 11.out °C m3/h Vb Reb Prb ∆p b ta.267 112 92.9 0. .92 0.7 5.72 2.0 4.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)b+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b Cooling-coil B5.000 28.72 312 827 0.0 6.112 179 18.052 32.55 10. Figure 4.1 0.864 32.4 4.9 -0.0 10.0 4.55 12.268 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.in ta.972 1227 23.out Va.74 2.6 1.4 0.4 0.88 Cooling-coil B5.

99 1.72 372 469 0.54 4.6 1.107 32.54 9.52 9.230 33.2 0.003 409 94.6 -1.out Va. Figure 4.9 0.4 0.046 31.54 7.1 0.90 1.1 -1.0 0.31 2.3 7.9 0.122 216 14.5 377 473 0.87 2.4 -3.9 10.out °C 3 m /h  Vb Reb Prb ∆p b ta.004 29.3 8.2 2.7 °C m3/h Vb 2.4 3.72 295 783 0.4 3.5 0.7 -1.2 3.4 4.4 5.12a Variable Unit tb.9 4.72 290 787 0.in ta.6 0.9c Variable Unit tb.580 5378 17.0 3.2 1.018 28.54 5.in ta.8 4.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b 791 98.01 1.11a.89 Cooling-coil B5.9 -0.8 4.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b * -2.9 0.64 2.3 35.4 -5.2 -0.7 9.4 299 798 0.023 31.37 2.58 1.020 Reb Prb ∆p b ta.5 5. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.6 57.4 18.4 0.6 2.72 375 471 0.02 .72 297 787 0.72 2.261 451 14.1 0.5 41.4 -1.02 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).4 -1.9 0.2 °C tb.1 11.0 3.540 -0.6 33.1 7.9 23.510 846 15. in -0.98 1.9 5.490 219 85.1 4.2 105.00 1.8c.8 76.260 123 80. Cooling-coil B4.7 0.5 0.6 3.02 1.69 2.52 3.72 293 781 0.01 1.9 0.4 0.6 0. Hycool 20 Figure 4.01 1. Figure 4.006 30.out Va.3 6.9 3.32 1.7 10. in °C tb.72 2.52 6.out 1.5 0.72 372 472 0.5 13.116 64 67.4 15.980 1562 16.6 2.7 2.52 5.4 3.5 1.0 0.52 14.41 1.

2 0.6 124. in °C tb.1 0.5 8.8 0.5 0.72 380 454 0.70 1. Figure 4.72 386 484 0.8 20.5 -0.7 5.040 34.2 383 462 0.095 181 13.72 1.9 -6.7 -2.54 2.490 675 21.256 436 15.5 90.2 0.8 43.8 0.out Va.372 33.5 2. Cooling-coil B4.1 3.7 1.20 1.8 7.4 -4.7 -3.7 3.54 5.0 0.6 2.7 42.9 4.4 4.0 380 478 0.72 383 482 0.97 1.029 2681 22.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub W/m2/K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b * 0.3 0.9 0.93 1.3 0.55 5.792 6321 22.5 -1.54 3.44 1.8 5.2 -0.988 1614 15.4 0.02 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).5 2.4 67.506 827 15.0 0.252 0.082 33.0 6.9 -0.3 2.248 374 19.8 -3. .61 1.11c.7 0.6 0.9 10.5 21.1 2.54 7.72 383 481 0.8 0.20 1.9 0.8 5.6 11.3 0.5 1.in ta.55 2.69 1.in ta.34 1.4 0.out Va.02 1.003 28.01 1.2 88.90 Cooling-coil B4. in °C tb.028 34.54 9.0 0.992 6491 16.55 6.72 383 459 0.280 33.out °C 3 m /h  Vb Reb Prb ∆p b ta.42 1.7 5.2 0.6 0.72 1.996 1323 22.4 1.0 0. Hycool 20 Figure 4.012 33.6 -0.3 -2.4 -0.14 1.6 5.72 385 459 0.72 376 480 0.090 33.4 0.7 140.4 2.9 -0.000 28.12c Variable Unit tb.2 0.950 33.9 0.998 3273 15.4 3.72 376 457 0.03 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the air side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).2 68.030 34.0 2.01 1.9 47.11b.4 14.55 10.2 47.6 0. Figure 4.55 3.03 1.3 4.out °C m3/h Vb Reb Prb ∆p b ta.2 11.6 1.12b Variable Unit tb.6 3.in bar °C °C m3/h ReDc Pra Pa ∆p a K/kW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)a+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube K/kW Nub 2 W/m /K αa % U(U⋅A) U(Nub) % % U(αa) Q a Q b * 0.106 185 16.62 1. Temper 20 Figure 4.02 1.02 1.

8 0.9 15.03 12.6 9.1 21.3 426 22.3 15.2 8.0 8.7 107.0 1.2 -6.5 5.00 8.7 22.7 1.5 2.1 1.5 °C tb.7 5.83 15.03 0.6 98 101. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.86 -14.9 -14.83 0.17 Variable Unit tb.9 161 1.03 1.2 Reb 1552 1056 524 kPa 12.8 1.7 8.8 29.7 203.84 16.28 3.99 1.6 -14. in 8.02 3.6 12.99 0.8 1.3 °C tW.2 25.7 22.3 21.3 4.6 16.9 8.7 49.5 -14.14 Variable Unit tb.8 Reb Prb tW.out 7. in -4.1 203 101.7 112.3 22.9 1.0 °C m3/h m b 297.6 11.8 °C m3/h m b 296.8 Reb 903 611 360 Prb 111.12 3.2 20.7 20.0 0.out 9.56 30.40 7.2 19.5 1.97 1.9 0. in -10.3 4.35 3.3 5.8 0.8 8.83 25.out 1.5 59 88.8 21.6 22.67 ∆p b 8.9 22.0 °C tb.86 3.6 12.6 9.81 14.9 1.0 17.out VW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e °C °C m3/h K/kW K/kW % % - -14.in 22.98 3.7 0.0 14.2 45.84 0.5 1.7 5.84 17.54 3.8 68 0.36 3.13 Variable Unit tb.3 0.7 503 23.out 20.2 15.3 22.4 976 24.9 21.40 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e K/kW K/kW % % - Single-tube without inserts.6 10.5 21.in tW.8 295 20.2 21.0 tW.9 0.3 4.9 19.29 3.03 1.3 4.91 B2 Single-Tubes with and without Inserts Single-tube without inserts.8 13.6 14.83 21.3 231 1.0 21.6 11.1 °C 3 m /h m b 99.1 -5.00 .03 Single-tube without inserts.6 10.3 4.5 1.7 22.6 9.2 113.6 5. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4. Temper -20 Figure 4.46 3.99 0.4 13.1 40.4 8.1 °C 3 m /h  VW 0.2 °C tb.

84 16.99 1.7 1304 16.out 8.0 0.4 45.5 Single-tube without inserts.out VW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e °C °C m3/h K/kW K/kW % % - -11.1 1.9 °C 3 m /h m b 107.6 9.84 13.00 *Test point used for determination of the heat transfer resistance on the water side and through the tube wall (1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube).6 11.00 4.2 5.4 24.0 1137 9.2 0.66 3.5 1.6 °C tb.1 16.in tW.4 0.0 547 15. Hycool 20 Figure 4.9 49.00 1.out VW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e °C °C m3/h K/kW K/kW % % - 12587 8.8 °C tb.9 1.3 1.in tW.4 40.00 1. .7 22.6 21.9 0.9 0.1 1. in -9. Water Figure 4.6 °C 3 m /h m b 403.2 21.5 4.83 2.6 12.6 11.2 Reb Prb tW.4 -12.out 16.1 3.4 23.0 55.8 21. in 10.85 14.15 Variable Unit tb.8 15.34 2.99 0.7 1384 9.87 3.4 22.9 4.3 0.92 Single-tube without inserts.2 22.00 1.6 2.7 22.0 1.1 17.2 707 15.0 0.5 21.3 5.1 715 8.6 8.0 3.2 19.0 21.84 18.8 17.2 21.7 1.43 3.65 2.0 21.0 20.9 Reb Prb tW.85 16.8276 2.16 Variable Unit * tb.0 42.3 0.9 21.6 9.7 1.85 14.4 4.

00 1.6 17.8 -13.6 12.1 0.99 1.1 107.5 10.out 9.62 1.7 4.6 54.2 1.5 8.in tW.82 -14.85 7.3 0.3 7.9 19.0 °C m3/h m b 209.9 20.93 5.9 8.82 18.04 1.3 1.3 °C tb.3 50.9 39.0 60 85.81 0.5 22.4 5.8 5.6 588 20.4 21.4 20.9 467 20.99 46.2 8.0 299 19.8 6.01 1.0 50.0 25.3 5.7 1.78 7.5 0.18 Variable Unit tb.9 °C tb.0 -13.7 101.96 19.3 8.3 1.3 20.8 162 4.15 1.1 °C m3/h VW 0.18 Variable Unit tb.42 2.88 11.2 21.0 -12.0 -14.7 9.3 0.6 Reb 1106 1065 545 264 kPa 46.00 1.7 22.9 21.92 5.5 30.6 5.6 °C tb.48 1.74 3.04 1.7 102.2 88.66 1.9 12.1 Reb 978 332 181 115 Prb 68.9 22.4 tW.3 22.04 Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.4 1.3 °C 3 m /h m b 200.7 1.0 6.85 5.4 1.6 8.3 1.41 2.2 15.out 18.5 °C 3 m /h m b 99.4 -13.9 22.9 21.9 22.2 50.6 1.05 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e K/kW K/kW % % - Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.6 32.6 23.4 207.6 40.4 21.83 0.1 7.1 21. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.9 1.8 21.1 13.5 1202 19.in 22.out VW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e °C °C m3/h K/kW K/kW % % - -14.3 22. in 9.59 ∆p b 8.6 16.4 20. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4.out 13.6 4.19 Variable Unit tb.7 94.9 0.6 27.93 Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.02 1.2 4. Temper -20 Figure 4.1 °C tW.4 Reb Prb tW.88 8.6 22.6 16.8 0.3 9.0 8.1 21.7 0.out 20.7 7.20 15. in -10.00 .4 78 2.4 20. in 1.5 30.

7 9.82 5.6 6.1 21.5 14.03 °C tb.3 0. Hycool Figure 4.9 -14.5 14.5 12.out VW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e °C °C m3/h K/kW K/kW % % - 1405.2 21.4 39.6 0.2 22.1 0.2 22.1 7.3 49.6 °C m3/h m b 49.4 °C tb. Water Figure 4.8 Reb Prb tW.6 1.9 Reb Prb tW.5 21.6 38.6 34.out 21.0 22.4 21.99 Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.7 20.00 1.18 5.01 .6 24.5 0.0 22.85 2.84 7.3 0.in tW.94 Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.4 1.2 15.out VW 1/(U⋅A) 1/(α⋅A)W+δtube/(λ⋅A)tube Nub U(U⋅A) U(Nub) Q b W e °C °C m3/h K/kW K/kW % % - -14.7 1.5 1526 8.3 21.6 31. in 5.12 5.out 19.0 21.0 40.18 Variable Unit tb.in tW.98 0. in -7.1 6.83 6.2 1.8 1.1 8.4 0.86 5.6 666.98 0.34 3.6 27.2 1233 8.07 5.43 21.1 538.2 1.9 22.18 Variable Unit tb.85 6.3 °C 3 m /h m b 99.

2.4) where ci is the sensitivity coefficient associated with the input estimate xi. In this case the standard uncertainty u(xi) is the experimental standard deviation of the mean that follows from an averaging procedure or an appropriate regression analysis..2) using input estimates xi for the values of the input quantities Xi y = f (x1. Xi (i = 1. X2.XN) (C. but it concentrates on the method most suitable for measurements in a calibration laboratory.N) according to the functional relationship... Y = f (X1.. Y. The latter method is in accordance with the former one..3 . the partial derivative of the model function f with respect to Xi. The output quantity depends on a number of input quantities.1) An estimate of the measurand Y... x2. According to these methods the measurand or (output quantity). The former method establishes general rules for establishing and expressing uncertainty in measurements that can be followed in most fields of physical measurements. The Type B evaluation of standard uncertainty u(xi) is the method of evaluating the uncertainty by means other than the statistical analysis of a series of observations.3) N u 2 ( y ) = ∑ u i2 ( y ) i =1 The quantity ui (y)(i = 1.N) is the contribution to the standard uncertainty associated with the output estimate y resulting from the standard uncertainty associated with the input estimate xi ui(y) = ci ⋅ ui(xi) (C. i. (C. The Type A evaluation of standard uncertainty is the method of evaluating the uncertainty by the statistical analysis of a series of observations. The model function f describes how values of the output quantity Y can be determined from the input quantities Xi. Calculation of the Standard Uncertainty of the Output Estimates For the uncorrelated input quantities the square of the standard uncertainty associated with the output estimate y is given by (C.2) Evaluation of Uncertainty of Measurement of Input Estimates The uncertainty of measurement associated with the input estimates is evaluated according to either a “Type A” or a “Type B” method of evaluation.2. is obtained from Eq..95 Appendix C Uncertainty of Measurements The uncertainty of measurements has been evaluated according to Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement [54] and EAL-R2 [55]. In this case the evaluation of the standard uncertainty is based on some other scientific knowledge. the output estimate y. ci = ∂f ∂f = ∂xi ∂X i (X1 = x1…XN = xN) (C. .e. xN) (C.5) . evaluated at the input estimate xi.. is the particular quantity subject to measurement..

. X 2 .9) i =1 the output estimate again is the corresponding product or quotient of the input estimates N pi y = c ⋅ ∏ xi (C. U = k·u(y) (C.6) the output estimate y is given by the corresponding sum or difference of the input estimates (C. X 2 . if the relative standard uncertainties w(y) = u(y)/| y| and wi = u(xi)/| xi| are used.8) If the model function f is a product or quotient of the input quantities Xi N pi f ( X 1 .8) is obtained from the Eq. (C. (C. obtained by multiplying the standard uncertainty u(y) of the output estimate by a coverage factor k.96 If the model function f is a sum or a difference of the input quantities Xi f (X 1.10) i =1 The sensitivity coefficients is equal to pi⋅y/xi in this case and an expression analogous to Eq.11) Expanded Uncertainty of Measurement The expanded uncertainty of measurement U.12) In cases where a normal (Gaussian) distribution can be attributed to the measurand and the standard uncertainty associated with the output estimate has sufficient reliability. The assigned expanded uncertainty corresponds to a coverage probability of approximately 95 %.7) N y ( xi ) = ∑ ( p i ⋅ xi ) i =1 whereas the sensitivity coefficients equal pi and the square of the standard uncertainty associated with the output estimate can be calculated according to N ( u 2 ( y ) = ∑ pi2 ⋅ u 2 ( xi ) i =1 ) (C... N ( w 2 ( y ) = ∑ pi2 ⋅ w 2 ( xi ) i =1 ) (C..3).. the standard coverage factor k = 2 shall be used. X N N ) = ∑ i =1 (p i ⋅ X i ) (C. . X N ) = c ⋅ ∏ X i (C..

97 The uncertainty of the calculated quantities has been calculated in a way analogue to Eq.13) Q b = Vb ⋅ ρ b ⋅ c pb ⋅ (t bout − t bin ) 2 2 2  ∂Q b   ∂Q b   ∂Q b  2  [U (Qb )] =   ⋅ U (Vb ) +  ⋅ U (c pb ) + ⋅ U (ρ b ) +   ∂(c pb )  ∂ (ρ b )   ∂(Vb )     ∂Q b ⋅ U (t bout − t bin )   ∂ (t bout − t bin )  2 (C. (C.11).1 and in Appendix B. has been calculated according to the expression below. As an example the uncertainty of the cooling capacity on the liquid side. (C.14) . (C. The expanded uncertainty of the results of the experiments is presented in 4.8) and Eq. Q b .

.

7) . Figure 4.2 (+2) +0. (4.2 (+2) % +0. 3-6 (2-5) 3-6 (2-6) U( U ⋅ A ) % U(Nub) % 5-7 (4-6) 6-8 (5-8) Hycool Water 3 (1) 2 (2) 4-6 (2-5) 7-8 (6-8) 6-8 (6-8) 9-12 (9-12) …….5 The expanded experimental uncertainty ranges for the different variables used in Eq.3 Estimated expanded measurement uncertainty of the measurands in the performed experiments. New (Old): B2&B3 B4&B5 Single tubes …….2 (+2) +0.32a.33a and Figure 4.2 (+2) ρb 2 Specific heat capacity % +3 (+3) +3 (+3) +3 (+3) cpb 2 Specific heat capacity (water) cpb % +1 …….Liquid Side Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop in Finned-Tube Cooling-Coils ISRN LUTMDN/TMHP—02/7007—SE ISSN 0282-1990 – Errata (2002-10-21) Page 20 Table 2. min = 978 W New: W&em.2 (+2) ρb 1 Concentration by weight % +2 (+3) +2 (+3) +2 (+3) cw Liquid density2 +0. min = 1004 W. Figure 4. The W& em.Eq.e -part of the bars in the graphs shall be reduced by 27 W. New (Old): Tubes with twisted-tape inserts Uncertainty Propylene Temper glycol 3 (1-2) 3 (1) U( Q& b ) % ……. Liquid density % +0.2 (+2) +0. (4. Page 55-57.34a Old: W&em.11) are as the values stated below or better for the different test points with the plain tube without inserts. Page 45 Table 4. .

.. % U(U⋅A) 3.. Temper -20 Figure 4..7(5. ..4(5..5(6.3(5.1) U(Nub) % 7.1) 4..4(5.6(3.2(4. % U(U⋅A) 3..5(2.0(6.4(3.1) 5... New (Old): Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.3) 6.9(5.6) 4.6) 5.1(5.0) U(Nub) % 7.6) ..1) 7..2(1...7) 8...3(1.18 Variable Unit .5) .8) 3.9(2.6(1.5) 5.4(6.18 Variable Unit …….8(4....6) 3.....7) U(Nub) % 7.2) 5.. % U(U⋅A) 3.3(6.7) 3...9) 6..6(2. Hycool Fel! Hittar inte referenskälla.3) 7.3) 6.2(7. Variable Unit ..Page 93 New (Old): Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts. Propylene glycol 39 %w Figure 4. Page 94 New (Old): Single-tube with twisted-tape inserts.4) 8..3) 5...3) .8) 3.8(5.4(7.4(1.