Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Estimation of Pressure Drop in Gasket Plate Heat e
Estimation of Pressure Drop in Gasket Plate Heat e
1515/auoc-2016-0011
Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry Volume 27, Number 1, pp. 62-72, 2016
Abstract. In this paper, we present comparatively different methods of pressure drop calculation in the gasket plate
heat exchangers (PHEs), using correlations recommended in literature on industrial data collected from a vegetable
oil refinery. The goal of this study was to compare the results obtained with these correlations, in order to choose
one or two for practical purpose of pumping power calculations. We concluded that pressure drop values calculated
with Mulley relationship and Buonopane & Troupe correlation were close and also Bond’s equation gave results
pretty close to these but the pressure drop is slightly underestimated. Kumar correlation gave results far from all
the others and its application will lead to oversize. In conclusion, for further calculations we will chose either the
Mulley relationship or the Buonopane & Troupe correlation.
Keywords: pressure drop, edible oils, gasket plate heat exchangers.
*
Corresponding author: ckoncsag@univ-ovidius.ro
© 2016 Ovidius University Press
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
Fig.1.Chevron-type plate ,
= , 8 , for � > (6)
�
The total pressure drop is the sum of pressure drop It is important to know that, according to Kumar’s
in channels and in the ports. It can be estimated with observations, the critical Reynolds value for the
the Eq. (1): transition from the laminar to the turbulent flow in
PHEs, is approximately 100 [6,14] since for other
∆ � =∆ +∆ � (1)
authors [15,16] , the turbulent regime starts at Re≅
where ∆ � represents the total pressure drop (Pa), 400.
∆ – channel pressure drop (Pa), ∆ � – port pressure The early buoyancy apparition is linked to the
drop (Pa). shape of cross-corrugated passages and the abrupt
The channel pressure drop is defined by the Eq. change in density and viscosity of fluids due to strong
(2): variation of its temperature in a short distance.
� ∙� ��ℎ � − . Other researchers developed correlations of f
∆�� = ∙ ∙ ∙( )∙ (2) with Re, in their own way, following experimental
ℎ ∙ �,ℎ �
studies. All these equations (Eq. 5-10) are empirical:
where f represents the friction factor, non- - Bond correlation I [13]:
dimensional; Lp –vertical port-to-port channel length,
− ,
m; Np – number of passes; dh –hydraulic diameter, m; = , ∙ � (7)
Gch – the fluid mass velocity in the channel, kg∙m-2∙s; - Buonopane & Troupe correlation [11]:
ρc,h – density for the cold respectively for the hot
,
fluid, kg/m3; μ – dynamic viscosity of fluid at the = , (8)
�
mean temperature in the apparatus, Pa∙s; μw –
dynamic viscosity of fluids at the wall temperature, - Bond correlation II [9]:
Pa∙s. − ,
= , ∙� (9)
The friction factor f is calculated with different
equations from literature as function of Reynolds - Gulenoglu correlation [12]:
number and chevron angle.
= , ∙� − , + , (10)
The pressure drop in the port ducts can be
Mulley [12] developed a more complex
estimated with Eq. (3) [13]:
correlation (Eq. 11) taking into account the most
� important geometrical dimension, from the viewpoint
∆ � = . ∙ �� ∙ ( ) (3)
∙ �,ℎ of friction, the corrugation inclination angle relative
where Np represents the number of passes, Gp –mass to vertical direction, β, so called chevron angle:
velocity of fluid in the port, kg∙m-2 ∙s; ρc,h – density for ,
� , , ,
cold / hot fluids, kg/m3. = ∙[ + ] (11)
� � ,
63
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
64
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
The working fluids for gasket plate heat for both oil and steam circuits. The pressure drop on
exchanger PHE #2 are crude oil and steam. The the condensing steam circuit is higher than on oil
results of pressure drop for crude oil – steam are because the turbulent flow is well developed. By
presented in Table 2. Reynolds numbers indicate a comparing the values of pressure drop in the steam
turbulent flow either we accept the critical Re>100 [6, circuit, there are observed high differences, the
14], or Re>400 [15, 16] for the transition to the Kumar correlation giving results tenfold higher than
turbulent flow. As a consequences, pressure drop on Bond correlation and even differences between the
the oil circuit are higher than those in the PDE #1. other correlations’ results are important. This is due
It can be observed from Table 2 that the Kumar to the fact that all these correlations were produced
relationship give the highest values of pressure drops for liquids working in PHEs.
Working Density, Dinamic Flow Pressure Reynolds Kumar Mulley Buonopane Bond I
fluids [kg/m3] viscosity, rate, drop, number correlation correlation & Troupe correlation
[Pa·s] [kg/s] [Pa] correlation
First campaign, sunflower oil
Crude oil 874.3 0.0087 1.736 ∆ 328 50223 39621 24339 11830
∆ � 3 3 3 3
∆ � 50227 39624 24342 11833
Steam 1.923 0.000015 0.023 ∆ 9309 121950 14136 35002 10037
∆ � 6 6 6 6
∆ � 121956 14142 35008 10042
Crude oil 874.3 0.0087 2.049 ∆ 387 66606 46261 31488 15999
∆ � 5 5 5 5
∆ � 666611 46266 31493 16004
Steam 1.923 0.000015 0.028 ∆ 10987 164814 18135 46396 12962
∆ � 8 8 8 8
65
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
Working fluids for gasket plate heat exchanger is also dependent on friction factor, f, decreasing with
PHE#3 are crude oil and water. Table 3 presents the Re, and f is four times higher in the oil circuit. The
values of pressure drops. combined effect of this two antagonist factors led to
From Table 3, also it can be observed that highest pressure drop double in the water circuit.
values of pressure drop are obtained with Kumar For gasket plate heat exchanger PHE #4, the
correlation. Also, there are higher values of pressure working fluids are crude oil and steam. The pressure
drop on water circuit because the mass velocity of drop values for this equipment are presented in Table
water is three times higher than that of oil in similar 4.
flow sections; it is to be considered that pressure drop
66
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
67
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
The pressure drop in the crude oil circuit in PHE considerations made at PHE #2 about the differences
#4 is smaller than in similar PHE #2 because the route between the results calculated with different
length is smaller and the section area is double in PHE correlations for the steam circuit are valid for the
#4 comparing with PHE#2. The same can be said PHE#4.
about pressure drop on steam circuit. Also, the same
68
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
The working fluids for gasket plate heat calculated pressure drop values for bleached oil and
exchanger #5 are bleached oil and water. The water are presented in Table 5.
69
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
In this case too, the pressure drops calculated by In the heat exchanger #6 the working fluids are
Kumar relationship are higher than with other deodorized oil – water. The pressure drop values for
methods. The methods of Bond, Mulley and this equipment are presented in Table 6.
Buonopane give closer values.
Table 6. Pressure drop values in PHE #6 calculated with different correlations
Dinamic Flow Pressure Buonopane
Working Density, Reynolds Kumar Bond I Mulley
viscosity, rate, drop, & Troupe
fluids [kg/m3] number correlation correlation correlation
[Pa·s] [kg/s] [Pa] correlation
First campaign, sunflower oil
Deodorized 879.2 0.0109 1.736 ∆ 19 4904 1123 1484 2500
oil ∆ � 2 2 2 2
∆ � 4906 1125 1486 2502
Water 986.75 0.00074 6.02 ∆ 979 10533 2099 3937 2437
∆ � 24 24 24 24
∆ � 10558 2124 3962 2457
Deodorized 879.2 0.0109 2.049 ∆ 23 6137 1449 1963 3059
oil ∆ � 3 3 3 3
∆ � 6140 1451 1966 3062
Water 986.75 0.00074 7.100 ∆ 1154 14186 2827 5205 3316
∆ � 28 28 28 28
∆ � 14215 2855 5234 3345
Deodorized 879.2 0.0109 2.475 ∆ 27 8003 1920 2678 3854
oil ∆ � 4 4 4 4
∆ � 8007 1924 2682 3858
Water 986.75 0.00074 8.500 ∆ 1379 19611 3706 7046 4646
∆ � 41 41 41 41
∆ � 19652 3747 7087 4688
Deodorized 879.2 0.0109 2.713 ∆ 30 9205 2234 3171 4389
oil ∆ � 5 5 5 5
∆ � 9210 2239 3176 4394
Water 986.75 0.00074 9.400 ∆ 1528 23614 4656 8375 5584
∆ � 50 50 50 50
∆ � 23664 4706 8425 5634
Second campaign, rapeseed oil
Deodorized 878.7 0.012 2.720 ∆ 27 9449 2268 3167 4543
oil ∆ � 5 5 5 5
∆ � 9454 2273 3172 4547
Water 986.75 0.00074 9.436 ∆ 1533 23868 4708 8458 5612
∆ � 50 50 50 50
∆ � 23919 4758 8509 5663
Third campaign, sunflower oil
Deodorized 879.2 0.0116 1.736 ∆ 18 4915 1117 1461 2540
oil ∆ � 2 2 2 2
∆ � 4917 1119 1463 2542
Water 986.75 0.00074 6.022 ∆ 979 10568 2113 3947 2440
∆ � 20 20 20 20
∆ � 10589 2133 3968 2460
Deodorized 879.2 0.0116 2.049 ∆ 21 6210 1442 1936 3098·
oil ∆ � 3 3 3 3
∆ � 6213 1445 1939 3101
Water 986.75 0.00074 7.108 ∆ 1156 14283 2841 5233 3320
∆ � 29 29 29 29
∆ � 14312 2870 5261 3349
Deodorized 879.2 0.0116 2.457 ∆ 26 8024 1909 2637 3890
oil ∆ � 4 4 4 4
∆ � 8028 1913 2641 3894
Water 986.75 0.00074 8.523 ∆ 1386 19867 3930 7125 4652
∆ � 41 41 41 41
∆ � 19908 3972 7166 4693
Deodorized 879.2 0.0116 2.713 ∆ 28 9226 2224 3120 4422
oil ∆ � 5 5 5 5
∆ � 9231 2229 3125 4426
Water 986.75 0.00074 9.410 ∆ 1530 23635 4691 8430 5590
∆ � 50 50 50 50
∆ � 23685 4741 8481 5641
70
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
In the PHE #6, the pressure drop calculated with Following this comparative study we recommend
Kumar correlation is higher than after the use of other the relationships of Mulley and Buonopane & Troupe
methods, and all the other considerations for PHE# 3 for the estimation of pressure drop in gasket plate heat
and #5 (oil-water) are valid for PHE#6. exchangers. The Kumar correlation should be applied
To compare all the pressure drop values obtained with caution since it results in oversizing.
by applying different methods, the results of These correlations wouldn’t be considered for the
calculations with Buonopane & Troupe correlation calculation of pressure drop on condensing steam
were taken as a reference and relative errors to this circuits since they weren’t worked out for this type of
were calculated. fluid.
The relative error is calculated with Eq. 12:
∆� − ∆��� � �
References
� ���� �� � = × [%] (12)
∆��� � � [1] C.S. Fernandes, R.P. Dias, J.M. Maia, Recent
The comparison was made only for liquid as a Patents on Mechanical Engineering 1 (3), 198-
working fluid, because the original correlations were 205 (2008)
worked out on experimental data on liquids. Results [2] A.H.K. Al-Tae, Comparative study of
are presented in Table 7: temperature control in a heat exchanger process.
M. Sc. Thesis, Chemical Engineering/Unit
Table 7. Average relative errors of pressure drop Operation, University of Technology (2011)
values calculated with different methods compared [3] D.H. Han, K.J. Lee and Y.H. Kim, Journal of the
with those obtained with Buonopane & Troupe Korean Physical Society 43 (1), 66-73, (2003)
method, %. [4] G.N. Jogi and M.S. Lawankar, International
PHE #
Kumar Mulley Bond I Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced
method method method Engineering 2 (10), 110-115 (2012)
1 +136.5 - 2.0 -41.7
2 +114.0 -36.4 -37.7
[5] I. Gherasim, M. Taws, N. Galanis and C.T.
3 +183.8 -29.4 -35.9 Nguyen, Applied Thermal Engineering 51, 346-
4 +171.63 -9.0 -35.7 363 (2013)
5 +176.32 +16.3 -38.2 [6] C.S. Fernandes, R.P. Dias, J.M. Noberga and
6 +191.01 +11.7 -36.1 J.M. Maia, Chemical Engineering and
The pressure drop values calculated with Mulley Processing 46, 825-833 (2007)
relationship and Buonopane & Troupe correlation [7] Z.Luan, G. Zhang, M. Tian and M. Fan, Journal
were close and also Bond’s equation gave results of Hydrodynamics 20(4), 524-529 (2008)
close to the previous but systematically [8] G. Gulenoglu, F. Akturk, S. Aradag, N.S. Uzol,
underestimated. Kumar correlation gave results far S. Kakac, International Journal of Thermal
from all the others and its application will lead to Sciences 75, 249-256, (2014)
oversize. [9] V.R. Naik, V.K. Matawala, International Journal
Following this comparative study we recommend of Engineering and Advanced Technology
the relationships of Mulley and that of Buonopane to (IJEAT), 2 (4), 362-369 (2013)
be used for the estimation of pressure drop in gasket [10] T. Kuppan, Heat Exchanger Design Handbook,
plate heat exchangers. The Kumar correlation should Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York,
be applied with caution since it results in oversizing. (2000)
[11] S. Kakac, H. Liu, Heat Exchangers. Selection,
5. Conclusions Rating and Thermal Design, Second Edition,
CRC Press (2002)
Different models developed by Kumar, Mulley, [12] F. Akturk, G. Gulben, S. Aradag, , N.S. Uzol, S.
Bond and Buonopane & Troupe were applied in Kakac, 6th International Advanced Technologies
industrial conditions on six PHEs in an industrial Symposion, 16-18 May,172-178 ( 2011)
plant, in different size and working with different [13] S. Kakac, H. Liu, Heat Exchangers Selection,
fluids (oils with changing properties, cooling water Rating, and Thermal and Design, second ed.,
and condensing steam). CRC Press, Boca Raton, 373–412 (2002)
The pressure drop values calculated with Mulley [14] H. Kumar, The plate heat exchanger:
relationship and Buonopane correlation were very construction and design, in: Proceedings First,
close and also Bond’s equation gave results close to UK National Conference on Heat Transfer,
the previous but slightly underestimated. Kumar University of Leeds, Inst. Chem. Symp. Series
correlation gave results far from all the others and its No. 86, 1275–1288, (1984), cited in [6]
application will lead to oversize.
71
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM
A. A. Neagu et al. / Ovidius University Annals of Chemistry 27 (2016) 62-72
[15] W.W. Focke, J. Zachariades, I. Olivier, The [18] A.A Neagu, I. Niţă, E. Botez, S. Geacai, Ovidius
effect of the corrugation inclination angle on the University Annals of Chemistry 24 (2), 121-126
thermo-hydraulic performance of plate heat (2013)
exchangers, International Journal of Heat and
[19] K. Raznjevic, Thermodynamic Tables and
Mass Transfer 28 (8), 1469-1479 (1985)
[16] A. Cooper, J.D. Usher, Heat Exchanger Design Diagrams (Tabele si diagrame termodinamice, in
Handbook, Vol. 3, Section 3.7. Plate heat Romanian), Ed. Tehnica, Bucharest (1978)
exchangers, Hemisphere, Washington, USA
(1983) Received: 10.04.2016
[17] A.A. Neagu, I. Niţă, E. Botez, Ovidius Received in revised form: 08.06.2016
University Annals of Chemistry 25 (2), 71–74 Accepted: 09.06.2016
(2014)
72
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/30/16 9:28 AM