DISCUSSIONS

1. Calculate the heat loss and efficiency for both co-current and counter current
processes.

Heat loss, Q¿ ṁ c p ( T hi −T ho )=ṁ c p ( T co−T ci ) (Geankoplis, 2014)

Conversion from volumetric flow rate to mass flow rate:

1 min 1 m3 1000 kg
ṁ=Volumetric flow rate X X X (Geankoplis, 2014)
60 s 1000 L m3
kg
8 LPM =0.0016
s
kg
10 LPM =0.002
s
kg
12 LPM=0.0024
s
kg
14 LPM =0.0028
s
Counter-current

Hot water Cold water

Flow rate Inlet Outlet T hi −T ho Flow rate Outlet Inlet T co−T ci

Q (W) Q (W)
(LPM) (℃) (℃) (℃) (LPM) (℃) (℃) (℃)

5809.7
13 44 37 7 9 8 36.33 30.33 6.33 5273.65
44.3
13 3 37 7.33
6082.8 10 38 30 8 6665.28
6039.7
13 44 36 8 6 12 37 30 7 5832.12
44.6 7139.6
13 7 36 8.67 7 14 36.67 30 6.67 5557.18
Table 2.0 Determination of heat loss for counter-current flow

Co-current

Hot water Cold water

Flow rate Inlet Outlet T hi −T ho Flow rate Inlet Outlet T co−T ci

Q (W) Q (W)
(LPM) (℃) (℃) (℃) (LPM) (℃) (℃) (℃)

13 40.3 37 3.33 2767.90 8 30 36.33 6.33 5273.90

 3
44.3
13 3 39 5.33 4423.10 10 30 37 7 5832.12
13 45 38.5 6.5 5392.34 12 30 37 7 5832.12
13 45 38.7 6.3 5226.42 14 30 37 7 5832.12
Table 2.1 Determination of heat loss for co-current flow

T co −T ci
Efficiency , ε = X 100
T hi −T ci

Counter-current

Flow rate (LPM) T co−T ci T hi −T ci Efficiency

Hot water Cold water (℃)  (℃)  (%)
13 8 6.33 13.67 46.31
13 10 8 14.33 55.83
13 12 7 14 50
13 14 6.67 14.67 45.47
Table 2.2 Determination of the efficiency of the counter-current flow in plate heat
exchanger

46.31+55.83+50+ 45.47
ε mean=
4

¿ 49.4025 %

Co-current

Flow rate (LPM) T co−T ci T hi −T ci Efficiency

Hot water Cold water (℃)  (℃)  (%)
13 8 6.33 10.33 61.28
13 10 7 14.33 48.85
13 12 7 15 46.67
13 14 7 15 46.67
Table 2.3 Determination of the efficiency of the co-current flow in plate heat exchanger

61.28+48.85+ 46.67+46.67
ε mean=
4

¿ 50.87 %
 From the Table 2.0 and Table 2.1, we can see that the heat loss for the counter-current
flow is also higher to the co-current flow. A higher heat loss in the plate heat exchanger gives
a higher efficiency for the exchanger. Based on Table 2.2 and Table 2.3, we can conclude that
the efficiency of the counter-current flow is higher than the co-current flow which is same
with the theoretical statement. We found that when the flow rate of the cold water for the
both type of flow increasing, the efficiency of the plate heat exchanger decreasing.

2. Determine the log mean temperature difference (LMTD) for the both co-current
and counter current processes.

Counter-current

(Retrieved from: https://controls.engin.umich.edu/wiki/images/9/91/Counter-

current_profile.jpg)

∆T 1−∆T 2
LMTD=
∆T 1
ln
∆T 2

(Geankoplis, 2014)

Where, ∆ T 1=T hi −T co

∆ T 2=T ho−T ci

Flow rate (LPM) ∆ T 1  ∆ T 2  ∆ T 1−∆T 2  ∆T1  LMTD

ln  
Hot water Cold water (℃)  (℃)  (℃)  ∆T2 (℃) 
13 8 7.67 7 0.67 0.0914 7.33
13 10 6.33 7 -0.67 -0.1006 6.66
13 12 7 6 1.0 0.1542 6.49
13 14 8 .6 2.0 0.2876 6.95
Table 2.4 Determination of LMTD for counter-current process
 Co-current

(Retrieved from: https://controls.engin.umich.edu/wiki/images/8/8c/Co-

current_profile.jpg)

∆T 1−∆T 2
LMTD=
∆T 1
ln
∆T 2

(Geankoplis, 2014)

Where, ∆ T 1=T h 0−T co

∆ T 2=T hi −T ci

Flow rate (LPM) ∆ T 1  ∆ T 2  ∆ T 1−∆T 2  ∆T1  LMTD

ln  
Hot water Cold water (℃)  (℃)  (℃)  ∆T2 (℃) 
13 8 10.23 0.67 9.56 2.726 3.53
13 10 14.23 2 12.23 1.962 6.26
13 12 15 1.5 13.5 2.303 5.86
13 14 15 1.7 13.3 2.177 6.11
Table 2.5 Determination of LMTD for co-current process

3. Determine the plate heat coefficient (hot and cold film) and the overall heat transfer
coefficient for both co-current and counter-current processes.

Plate heat coefficient

Q=UA ( LMTD) (Geankoplis, 2014)

Q W
U= ( 2 )
A ( LMTD ) m ∙℃
 A=0.00024 m 2

Flow rate (LPM) Hot Plate Cold Plate

LMTD
Cold
(℃) 
Hot water water Q (W) U Q (W) U
6
13 8 7.33 5809.79 3.3×10 5273.65 3.0×106
13 10 6.66 6082.8 3.8×106 6665.28 4.2×106
13 12 6.49 6039.76 3.9×106 5832.12 3.7×106
13 14 6.95 7139.67 4.3×106 5557.18 3.3×106
Table 2.6 Determination of the plate coefficient for hot plate and cold plate

Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient

Q=UA ( LMTD) (Geankoplis, 2014)

Q W
U= ( 2 )
A ( LMTD ) m ∙℃

A=0.96 m2

Counter-current

Flow rate (LPM) Hot water Cold water

LMTD
Cold
(℃)
Hot water water Q (W) U Q (W) U
13 8 7.33 5809.79 825.63 5273.65 749.4
13 10 6.66 6082.8 951.39 6665.28 1042.50
13 12 6.49 6039.76 1065.70 5832.12 936.07
13 14 6.95 7139.67 1076.64 5557.18 832.91
Table 2.7 Determination of the overall transfer coefficient for the hot water and cold
water for counter-current process

Co-current

Flow rate (LPM) Hot water Cold water

LMTD
Cold
(℃)
Hot water water Q (W) U Q (W) U
13 8 3.53 2767.90 816.78 5273.90 1556.27
13 10 6.26 4423.10 736.01 5832.12 970.47
13 12 5.86 5392.34 958.54 5832.12 1036.71
13 14 6.11 5226.42 891.03 5832.12 994.29
Table 2.8 Determination of the overall transfer coefficient for the hot water and cold
water for co-current process
2. Plot graph overall heat transfer coefficient, efficiency vs. cold water flow rate.
Discuss about each plotted graph.

Graph Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient vs Cold Water Flow Rate

Overall Heat TRansfer Coefficient (W/m2 X °C )

1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
8 10 12 14
Cold Water Flow Rate ( LPM )

Counter-current Co-current

Graph 3.0 Overall heat transfer coefficient versus cold water flow rate for both
counter-current and co-current

According to Graph 3.0, the overall heat transfer coefficient for the counter-current
increases from 8 LPM to 10 LPM when the cold water flow rate increases. However the
overall heat transfer coefficient for the counter-current is starting to decrease from 10 LPM to
14 LPM. For the co-current, the overall heat transfer coefficient increases from 8 LPM to 10
LPM. But then the overall heat transfer coefficient decreases from 10 LPM to 12 LPM and
decreases from 12 LPM to 14 LPM when the cold water flow rate increases.
 Graph Efficiency vs Cold Water Flow Rate
120

100

80
Efficiency ( % )

60

40

20

0
8 10 12 14
Cold Water Flow Rate ( LPM )

Counter-Current Co-Current

Graph 3.1 Efficiency versus cold water flow rate for both counter-current and co-
current

According to graph 3.1, the efficiency for the plate heat exchanger for co-current
decrease as the cold water flow rate increases. For the first flow rate, 8 LPM, the
efficiency for co-current is 46.31%. At this flow rate, the efficiency of the plate heat
exchanger for co-current has reached the highest efficiency. Meanwhile, the efficiency for
the plate heat exchanger for counter-current increase from 8 LPM to 10 LPM but then
start to decrease from 10 LPM to 14 LPM. When the cold water flow rate reached 14
LPM, the efficiency for the counter-current and co-current process are the lowest.