Dynamic Modelling and Control of Counter-Flow
Heat Exchangers for Heating and Cooling Systems
Hector Bastida, Carlos E. Ugalde-Loo, Muditha Abeysekera, Xiandong Xu, Meysam Qadrdan
School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff UK
{BastidaHernandezJH; Ugalde-LooC; AbeysekeraM; XuX27; QadrdanM}@cardiff.ac.uk
Abstract—A heat exchanger is an essential component in
district heating and cooling networks as it transfers thermal
energy from energy centers to substations or customers. Thermal
loads are typically supplied by regulating the temperature output
of one stream of the heat exchanger and by modifying the mass
flow rate of the other one. The availability of dynamic models
suitable for control design can aid this process to be performed in
an efficient way. In this paper, thermal dynamic models of
counter-flow heat exchangers are developed. The models
encapsulate key heat exchanger characteristics and consider the
dynamic calculation of heat transfer coefficients—which includes
the hydraulic behavior of the streams. Although heat exchangers
are non-linear systems, linearized models are obtained to design
simple yet effective and robust controllers in the frequency
domain. These are validated in an advanced process simulation
software. It is shown that a good temperature control
performance in heat exchangers can be achieved for a wide range
of operating conditions with a simple PI controller.
Keywords—shell-and-tube heat exchanger, flat plate heat
exchanger, dynamic modeling, heat transfer coefficient, Apros.
I. INTRODUCTION
Integrated energy systems (IES) are becoming increasingly
important nowadays. District heating and cooling networks are
an essential part of an IES, where different energy vectors such
as electricity, heat and cooling are coupled. A heat exchanger is
a key component in such systems as it transfers thermal energy
from energy centres to substations or customers.
Shell-and-tube and flat plate heat exchangers are widely
employed in district heating and cooling systems [1,2]. The
shell-and-tube heat exchanger is preferred if large mass flows
and pressures are required. Conversely, flat plate heat
exchangers are normally found in heating and cooling
substations. Given their importance for heat transfer, the
availability of accurate models is necessary not only for a
suitable selection of the right heat exchanger, but also to design
effective temperature controllers.
Different modeling approaches have been presented in the
literature. For instance, steady-state and transfer function-based
models following system identification can be found in [3,4]. If
dynamic analysis is of interest, numerical models are usually
adopted [5,6]. However, these models are not suitable for
control design or practical implementation given the large
number of dynamic states [7]. A three-dimensional approach
based on partial differential equations (PDEs) is proposed in
[8]. Although this is useful to design heat exchangers and to
understand their internal thermal behavior in detail, such
degree of complexity is not required for control system design.
A dynamic model of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger is
978-1-7281-3349-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
presented in [9]. However, the calculation of the overall heat
transfer coefficient, a crucial parameter of the heat exchanger
behavior, is done without accounting for mass flow conditions.
Existing literature has reported temperature control design
for heat exchangers. For instance, PID and fuzzy logic were
used in [10] for the temperature regulation of a plate heat
exchanger. However, the control design processes are not
explained. The Nyquist stability criterion was instead used in
[11] for a similar application. Even when system stability was
assured, the desired performance specifications were not
considered. A state-space heat exchanger model was used to
design a robust controller in [12]; however, such an approach
leads to high implementation costs due to the large number of
state variables (and hence controller complexity).
The objective of this paper is to develop simple low-order
counter-flow shell-and-tube and flat plate heat exchanger
models for an IES suitable for control system design. Since the
control aim is to achieve effective temperature regulation of
one stream outlet of the heat exchanger, a one-dimensional
modeling approach is adopted. A similar approach was
presented in [13] for a parallel flat plate heat exchanger. A cell
division method [14] is also adopted in this work to obtain a
dynamic model that considers the energy balance over the hot
and cold streams. This way, ordinary differential equations
(ODEs) are developed for each cell.
The inner structure of the heat exchangers is described and
used to compute heat transfer coefficients. The calculations
consider the thermal and mechanical properties of the fluid at
different temperatures and under different flow conditions (not
always considered in the literature). The heat exchanger
models are implemented in MATLAB/Simulink and validated
in Apros—a commercial advanced process simulation
software. Following system linearization, simple PI controllers
are developed in the frequency domain. The performance of
the control systems is verified following closed-loop system
implementation in MATLAB/Simulink and Apros using the
open platform communication (OPC) protocol [15].
II. MATHEMATICAL MODELS
There are two heat exchanger flow configuration options:
parallel flow and counter-flow. For modeling purposes, a heat
exchanger may be divided in cells, as shown in Fig. 1, so that
an energy balance equation is obtained for each cell. This
process allows to consider the contribution of the inlet stream
temperature to the opposite outlet stream temperature by
means of heat transfer. Such energy addition makes the
counter-flow configuration more efficient than its parallel
flow counterpart. Due to this reason, the models developed in
this paper correspond to counter-flow configurations [2].
Heat exchanger
1 2 3
1 2 3 turbulence [16]. Although a single pass shell-and-tube heat
Figure 1. Cell division modelling approach.
In Fig. 1, the stream temperatures and mass flow rates are
defined by ThI [°C] and ṁh [kg/s] for the hot fluid, and T cI [°C]
and ṁc [kg/s] for the cold fluid. The volumetric capacities for
each stream depend on the type and dimensions of the heat
exchanger. These are defined by Vc [m3] for the cold fluid and
Vh for the hot fluid. The transferred heat increases the enthalpy
of the cold fluid (hc) while reducing the enthalpy of the hot
fluid (h h). Thus, the steady-flow thermal energy for each fluid
is defined by
Q  m (hI  hO )  mc
 p TI  TO  , (1)
where cp is the specific heat [J/kg°C]. The energy transferred
as the fluids move through the heat exchanger is calculated by
Qt  UAT , (2)
where ΔT is the temperature difference between the streams,
U [W/(m2°C)] the overall heat transfer coefficient, and A [m2]
the heat transfer area. The instant stored energy in each cell
can be defined as the input energy (Qi) plus the transferred
energy (Q t). Hence, the energy balance can be stated as
Qs  Vc p T  Qi  Qt (3)
where ρ [kg/m3] is the fluid density. The energy balance
equation for each cell (j=1, 2, …, n) is given as
mchj c phThj  m h c ph Th  j 1  Thj  U j A Tcj  Thj  , (4)
 
mchj c pcTcj  m c c pc Tc  j 1  Tcj  U j A Thj  Tcj  .
 
Subscript ‘0’ is used to define the inlet cold (T cI=T c0) and the
outlet hot (ThO=Th0) stream temperatures. The nth cell
temperatures correspond to the outlet cold (TcO =T cn) and the
inlet hot (ThI=Thn) streams (see Fig. 1). The total mass of each
cell is the sum of the masses of each stream divided by the
total number of cells: mch1=mch2=…=mchn = (Vt+Vh)ρ/n1. The
heat transfer area is defined as A1=A2=…=An=A/n.
As it can be observed, equations (4) and (5) are non-linear.
A. Heat transfer coefficients
The overall heat transfer coefficient (U) is normally given
by the manufacturer or obtained experimentally. It depends on
the thermophysical properties and the mean velocities of the
fluids. Since the models developed in this paper are intended
for an effective control system design, the dynamic calculation
of heat transfer coefficients should be considered as part of the
modeling process. In this section, the calculation of U is based
on [14], and this process is similar for both types of heat
exchangers presented in this work. However, the calculation is
affected by the shape of the channels where the fluids flows.
1
The energy balance for each fluid should consider its own mass (mc/n or
mh/n). However, Apros considers the sum of the fluid masses in each cell
(mch/n = mc/n+mh/n).
1) Shell-and-tube heat exchanger
A schematic diagram is shown in Fig. 2. The cold fluid
flows through the tubes (Tt) and the hot fluid crosses the heat
exchanger through the shell (Ts). The tubes are supported by
baffles, which increase the convection coefficient by creating
exchanger is modeled next, the procedure can be applied for
complex configurations with more passes.
Figure 2. Schematic of shell-and-tube heat exchanger.
The overall heat transfer coefficient U is calculated
dynamically using the mechanical conditions of the fluid once
it enters the heat exchanger. It should consider the heat
transfer coefficient both at the tubes (Ht) and at the shell (Hs).
The mean velocity of the fluid at the tubes’ side is given by
vtm  m c   N t  ri 2  , (6)
whereas for shell’s side by
vsm  m h A ,
f (7)
where Nt is the number of tubes, ri is the internal radius of the
tubes and Af is the shell free flow area. The Reynolds number
(ReD) is computed as
Re D   vm Dh  , (8)
ReD is a nondimensional factor relating the inertia and viscous
forces in the fluid, where μ [Ns/m2] is the fluid viscosity and
Dh the hydraulic diameter. For the tubes’ side, Dh=2ri [17].
(5) The calculation of Hs is related to the free flow cross-sectional
area (Af) and Dh of the shell. As Af is irregular, Dh is given by
Dh  4 Af P , (9)
where P is the wetted perimeter of the cross-section, given by
P    Ds  Dtt  , (10)
where Ds is the diameter of the shell and Dtt is the sum of all
tubes’ external diameters. The Nusselt number is calculated as
Nu  0.023Re4/5 D Pr
1/ 3
, (11)
where Pr is the Prandtl number—a thermophysical fluid
property defining the relation between momentum and energy
transport by diffusion. The convection coefficient for each
fluid is calculated by
H  Nu kDh , (12)
where k is the fluid thermal conductivity [W/m°C] and its
value is also related to the fluid temperature. The overall heat
transfer coefficient U should include the heat transferred by
conduction (Hcd). Using the tube thickness (bt=ro ri) and its
thermal conductivity (kt), it can be calculated by H cd=kt/bt.
Thus, the overall heat transfer coefficient is given by
U  m , Re D , Nu   1  H t1  H s1  H cd1  . (13)
The heat transfer area (A) is given by the sum of the
external tubes’ area A=2πroL tNt, where Lt is the tubes’ length
and ro is the external radius of the tubes.
 2) Flat plate heat exchanger flat plate heat exchanger is 5 kg/s, with input temperatures T hI
The cross-sectional area for a flat plate heat exchanger is = 15°C and T cI = 3°C. Input temperatures are kept constant in
shown in Fig. 3, where PL and PW are the length and the width both cases and simulations are performed for changes in the
of the plates, respectively. The distance between the plates is hot and cold mass flow rates. As it can be observed from the
called gap(a) and allows the fluids to flow through the plates. results, the MATLAB/Simulink models considering 10 cells
exhibit a closer behavior to those in Apros.
Table I. Heat exchanger parameters
Flat plate Shell-and-tube
Variable Value Variable Value
g 1 mm ri 6.3 mm
PL 1.8 m ro 8 mm
Pw 0.5 m Tubes length Lt 4.88 m
Np 140 Nt 7000
Figure 3. Schematic of flat plate heat exchanger. Vh 0.0315 m3 Shell length Ls 5m
Vc 0.0315 m3 Af 0.01 m2
The channel structure of a flat plate heat exchanger has A 252 m2 Vt 4.26 m3
different parameters compared to a shell-and-tube type. For Dh 2 mm Vs 3.19 m3
instance, the cross-sectional and heat transfer areas are defined Ac 0.0175 m2 A 3069 m2
as Ac=PWaNp/2 and A=2PLPWNp, respectively, where Np is the bfp 1mm Dt 1.1233×10-4 m
kfp=kt 16 W/m°C Ds 0.0126 m
number of the plates. The reader is referred to [14] for the 50

detailed method to calculate U for this type of heat exchanger. Tubes

mass flow rate
mftubes
ttubes
Tt

Ts
65.99
Tt1
69.85
60 mfshell

However, the heat transferred by conduction (Hfp) is also here Tubes Input
tem perature
tshell
Cell1
U 568.9
U1
Ts1

considered to improve the calculation of U. This is defined as mftubes

72.32
Tt
ttubes Tt2
Ts 76.2
47 mfshell
tshell U 595.2 Ts2

Hfp=kfp/bfp, where kfp is the thermal conductivity of the Shell

mass flow rate
Cell2 U2

79

material of the plates and b fp is the thickness of the plates. The 90

mftubes
ttubes
mfshell
tshell
Tt

Ts

U
Tt3

627
82.92
Ts3

overall heat transfer coefficient is obtained adapting (13). Shell Input

tem perature
Cell3 U3

Figure 4. Heat exchanger models: Simulink (left) and Apros (right).

B. Validation of the models
The non-linear models described by equations (4) and (5)
have been implemented in MATLAB/Simulink to assess their
dynamic performance (see Fig. 4(a)). A comparison with
built-in models in Apros is performed to verify the accuracy of
the models under different operating conditions. It should be
highlighted that there is a compromise between the number of
cells to be considered and the desired model accuracy.
A verification exercise is carried out to select a suitable
number of cells n that would provide an accurate performance.
A comparison is done when n = 3 and n = 10. This way, the
models are described by systems of 6 and 20 equations,
respectively (i.e. the model with 10 cells has 10 cold and 10
hot temperatures, T cj and T hj). The thermophysical stream
(water) properties cp, k, ρ, and μ are defined using look-up
tables due to their temperature stream dependencies. Figure 5. Simulation of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger for district heating.
Comparison between MATLAB/Simulink (M) and Apros (A).
The heat exchanger models are implemented in Apros
using pipes and control valves. The process diagram is shown
in Fig. 4(b). It should be noted that Apros offers a
comprehensive library of models. The ones used in this work
are the tube_heat_exchanger_1 and plate_heat_exchanger.
Regardless of the software employed, the parameters of both
types of heat exchanger are provided in Table I.
Simulation results for the shell-and-tube heat exchanger
for a district heating application are shown in Fig. 5. Results
for the flat plate heat exchanger used in a district cooling
system are provided in Fig. 6. Simulation results from Apros
are labeled with prefix ‘A’, whereas ‘M’ is used for results
obtained with MATLAB/Simulink. Subscripts ‘3’ and ‘10’
denote the number of cells used in the Simulink models.
The nominal mass flow rate for the shell-and-tube heat
exchanger is 50 kg/s and the input temperatures are TsI = 90°C Figure 6. Simulation of a flat plate heat exchanger for district cooling.
and TtI = 60°C. Conversely, the nominal mass flow rate for the Comparison between MATLAB/Simulink (M) and Apros (A).
 III. LINEARIZATION AND CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN flow rate ṁ t=50 kg/s. To achieve this condition, the shell’s
A schematic diagram of a typical control scheme for a heat mass flow rate (ṁs) is varied until Tt reaches 79°C, which
exchanger is shown in Fig. 7. The outlet temperature of one occurs when ṁs= 47 kg/s. The steady-state values under these
stream is controlled by means of the mass flow rate of the conditions are provided in Table II.
other stream. The control scheme should reject disturbances Using the steady-state values given in Table II in (20) and
such as changes in the inlet temperature and variations in the (21), the following transfer function is obtained:
mass flow rate. To design simple but effective controllers in 0.0003s4  0.000116s3  1.56  105 s2  8.4  107 s  1.55  108
G  s  . (22)
s6  0.547s 5  0.12s 4  1.2  102 s 3  5.6  104 s 2  1.2  105 s  8.3  108
the frequency domain, the non-linear model given by (4) and
(5) is linearized to establish a relation between the controlled The dynamic behavior of the control valve should be
output and the input of the system (valve opening). considered when designing a closed-loop controller for the
heat exchanger (see Fig. 7). The reader is referred to [14] for
further details. In this work, the dynamic properties of the
valve employed are shown in Fig. 8. The relation between the
provided mass flow rate and the valve opening is defined by
the following transfer function:
100
Gv  s   . (23)
Figure 7. Closed-loop heat exchanger control scheme. 3s  1
A. Linearization It should be noted that the set-point in Apros for a control
The method in [14] is used to linearize a shell-and-tube valve is given by a value between 0 to 1. Thus, the numerator
counter-flow heat exchanger model. The state variables are in (23) is 100. As seen in Fig. 8(a), the linear behavior of the
defined as the temperatures of each cell. For instance, for three valve is restricted to the opening range O v = 0-70%. This is
cells (n = 3), x1=T t1, x2=Ts1, x3=Tt2, x4=T s2, x5=Tt3, and x6=Ts3. sufficient to achieve a good control performance.
For the sake of brevity, the linearized model is presented for n Table II. Steady-state values
U cp T=x mstj Aj
= 3, although this could be easily extended to a detailed Cells [W/m2°C] [J/kg°C] [°C] [kg] [m2]
representation with an arbitrary number of cells. Using (4) and Tubes (1) 4187.7 x1=65.99
(5), the following ODEs are obtained: 568.8964
Shell (1) 4189.8 x2=69.84
Tt1  x1   m t c pt1 TtI  x1   U1 A1  x2  x1   mst1c pc1 , (14) Tubes (2) 4191.4 x3=72.31
595.2211 1412 572.4
Shell (2) 4194.5 x4=76.19
Ts1  x2   m s c ps1  x4  x2   U1 A1  x1  x2   mst1c ps1 , (15) Tubes (3) 4187.7 x5=79.01
626.9451
Tt 2  x3   m c c pt 2  x1  x3   U 2 A2  x4  x3   mst 2 c pt 2 , (16) Shell (3) 4199.8 x6=82.90

Ts 2  x 4   m s c ps 2  x6  x4   U 2 A2  x3  x4   mst 2c ps 2 , (17)

Tt 3  x5   m t c pt 3  x3  x5   U 3 A3  x6  x5   mst 3c pt 3 , (18)
Ts 3  x6   m s c ps3 TsI  x6   U 3 A3  x5  x6   mst 3c ph3 . (19)
The system given by (14)-(19) is linearized considering
 f1 f1   f1 

 x1   x1 x6   x1   u 

     
                 u  ,
 x6   f 6 f 6   x2   f6 
  
 x1 x6  x  u  us
s
Figure 8. (a) Valve opening versus mass flow curve. (b) Dynamic response of
 x1  the valve at different set-points.
 y    0 0 0 0 1 0    , (20)
 x6  B. PI controller design
A frequency domain-based control design is carried out
where f n = xn and u is the system input. In general, the input using (22) and (23). The desired performance requirements of
can be the mass flow rate of any stream and would depend on the closed-loop system, in the time domain, are a settling time
whether the heat exchanger is employed for cooling or heating
ts = 100 s and an overshoot o s = 5%. These specifications are
purposes. System (20) is in state-space form; thus, a transfer
translated to the frequency domain as a damping ratio ζ = 0.7,
function between the output (y) and the input (u) is given as: a phase margin of at least 64.6° and a minimum bandwidth
1
Y  s  U  s   G  s   C  sI  A  B . (21) ωbw = 0.0571 rad/s [18]. These requirements are met by the
The linearization process requires steady-state values (xs) following PI controller:
for specific operating points prior to the calculation of the ki 0.1633s  0.001736
C s   kp   , (24)
transfer function (21). These can be obtained using the non- s s
linear system built in MATLAB/Simulink in an open-loop where the controller proportional (kp) and integral (ki) gains
configuration. The following operating point is selected: an are 0.1633 and 0.001736, respectively. The controller was
outlet tubes temperature Tt = x5 = 79°C and a constant mass designed using Bode shaping techniques.
 Fig. 9(a) shows the open loop frequency response of the
system. A phase margin of 71° and a bandwidth of ωbw =
0.061 rad/s have been achieved. The closed-loop step response
is shown in Fig. 9(b), where the system exhibits an overshoot
of 1% and a settling time of ts = 100 s.
Magnitude(dB)
actuator is the valve opening (O v) of the cold stream. The
operating point is Th = 6°C and ṁh = 5 kg/s. The design
specifications are ts = 40 s and no overshoot. Using the method
described in Section III, the following PI control gains were
obtained: [kp, ki] = [0.4060, 0.01943] for a model with 3 cells
and [kp, ki] = [0.2992, 0.00927] for a model with 10 cells.

Fig. 13 shows the performance of the control systems. It

should be noted that the system exhibits a small overshoot of
0.15°C and a larger settling time (80 s) when the model of 3
Amplitude

cells is used, but this issue is not present as the number of

Phase(deg)

cells, and thus, the accuracy of the model, increases. Fig. 14

shows the performance of the system upon disturbances. As
with the shell-and-tube heat exchanger, the system
performance is adequate for the flat plate heat exchanger: the
reference temperature can be reached upon variations to the
Figure 9. (a) Open loop Bode plots of Gv(s)G(s) and C(s)Gv(s)G(s) with PI hot stream mass flow rate and input temperatures.
controller. (b) Closed-loop step response of the controlled plant.
The control system design process described in this
section can be applied in a similar way for a flat plate heat
exchanger but has not been included due to space limitations.
IV. RESULTS
The performance of the control system is assessed in Figure. 10. Closed-loop diagram showing OPC link
Apros, with the designed controller being first programmed in
MATLAB/Simulink. This is interfaced to Apros using an OPC
protocol, as shown in Fig. 10, to link the temperature sensor
(temperature) and the actuator (valve) with the PI controller.
The linearized models for each heat exchanger using 3 and
10 cells are used to design simple PI controllers following the
method presented in Section III. For the shell-and-tube heat
exchanger, the system output is the tubes’ temperature (Tt) and
the input is the shell’s stream valve opening (Ov). The
operating point is an outlet tubes’ temperature of 79°C. The
desired performance specifications are settling time ts = 100 s
and no overshoot. The following proportional and integral
control gains for the PI controllers were obtained: [kp, ki] = Figure 11. Time domain simulation of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger for a
[0.11633, 0.001736] for the model with 3 cells and [kp, ki] = district heating system.
[0.1049, 0.0009207] for the model with 10 cells. 81
Temp [°C]

To assess the performance of the control systems, step

changes in the reference temperature are carried out, with 79
results shown in Fig. 11. As it can be observed, the controllers 77
work successfully for different operating points (e.g. 70°C and
78°C) even when they were specifically designed for 79°C. 60
Although the transient characteristics are slightly affected, the 50
reference temperature can be achieved. 40
The control system performance is assessed under 95
Temp [°C]

70
disturbances, with results shown in Fig. 12. The mass flow 65 90
rate of the controlled temperature stream (ṁt), the inlet tubes 60
and the shell temperatures (T tI, T sI) are varied in the 55
85
simulation. These disturbances represent potential changes 60
which may occur in real scenarios. Although there are 45
fluctuations in the tubes’ mass flow rate nominal value (10
30
kg/s below at 900 s and 10 kg/s above at 1700 s), the system is
15
able to follow a constant reference temperature of 79°C.
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400
A similar assessment of the flat plate heat exchanger is
done. In this case, the controlled output is the temperature of Time [secs]
the hot stream (Th), which is typical for cooling systems. The Figure. 12. Time domain simulation of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger under
disturbances for a district heating system.

Temp [°C]
Figure 13. Time domain simulation of a flat plate heat exchanger for a district
cooling system.
Figure. 14. Time domain simulation of a flat plate heat exchanger under
disturbances for a district cooling system.
The results included in this section show that the heat
exchanger models presented in Section III can be used to
design simple and low order linear controllers that ensure a
satisfactory performance of the original non-linear system.
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, dynamic non-linear models of counter-flow
shell-and-tube and flat plate heat exchangers have been
developed using a cell division approach, energy balance
analysis and principles of fluid mechanics. The developed
models have been assessed considering different operating
conditions. Results show that a higher accuracy is achieved as
the number of cells considered by the models increases.
A linearization method was applied to obtain a single-
input single-output representation suitable for control system
design. Using MATLAB, control systems based on simple PI
controllers were designed in the frequency domain. Such
controllers were assessed in closed-loop configurations
implemented in Apros to verify the performance of the
controllers. Simulation results show that complex controllers
are not required to achieve a good performance and that
simple PI control is sufficiently robust to regulate the
temperature of heat exchanger streams under different
operating points and disturbances.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work has been funded by the National Council for
Science and Technology and the Energy Ministry of Mexico
(CONACYT-SENER). This work was also supported by
FLEXIS—a project part-funded by European Regional
Development Fund (ERDF) through the Welsh Government.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Kakaç, H. Liu, and A. Pramuanjaroenkij, Heat Exchangers: Selection,
Rating, and Thermal Design, Third Edition, 3 edition. Boca Raton, FL:
CRC Press, 2012.
[2] S. Frederiksen and S. Werner, District Heating & Cooling. Lund:
Studentlitteratur Ab, 2013.x
[3] R. Whalley and K. M. Ebrahimi, “Heat exchanger dynamic
analysis,” Applied Math. Modelling, vol. 62, pp. 38–50, Oct. 2018.
[4] C. Miron, D. Popescu, I. Arsu, S. Olteanu, “Control systems for a heat
exchanger with distributed parameters,” in 2017 21st International Conf.
System Theory, Control and Computing (ICSTCC), 2017, pp. 518–523.
[5] T. Gao, B. Sammakia, and J. Geer, “Dynamic response and control
analysis of cross flow heat exchangers under variable temperature and
flow rate conditions,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
vol. 81, pp. 542–553, Feb. 2015.
[6] A. Korzeń and D. Taler, “Modeling of transient response of a plate fin
and tube heat exchanger,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences,
vol. 92, pp. 188–198, Jun. 2015.
[7] D. Taler, “Mathematical modeling and control of plate fin and tube heat
exchangers,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 96, pp. 452–
462, May 2015.
[8] J. A. Burns and L. Zietsman, “Control of a thermal fluid heat exchanger
with actuator dynamics,” in 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision
and Control (CDC), 2016, pp. 3131–3136.
[9] J. Bonilla, A. de la Calle, M. M. Rodríguez-García, L. Roca, and L.
Valenzuela, “Study on shell-and-tube heat exchanger models with
different degree of complexity for process simulation and control
design,” Applied Thermal Eng., vol. 124, pp. 1425–1440, Sep. 2017.
[10] S. K. Al-Dawery, A. M. Alrahawi, and K. M. Al-Zobai, “Dynamic
modeling and control of plate heat exchanger,” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 55, no. 23, pp. 6873–6880, Nov. 2012.
[11] Y. Wang et al., “Operation stability analysis of district heating
substation from the control perspective,” Energy and Buildings, vol.
154, pp. 373–390, Nov. 2017.
[12] Y. Wang, S. You, W. Zheng, H. Zhang, X. Zheng, and Q. Miao, “State
space model and robust control of plate heat exchanger for dynamic
performance improvement,” Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 128, pp.
1588–1604, Jan. 2018.
[13] E. I. Varga, K. M. Hangos, and F. Szigeti, “Controllability and
observability of heat exchanger networks in the time-varying parameter
case,” Control Eng. Practice, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 1409–1419, Oct. 1995.
[14] H. Bastida, C.E. Ugalde-Loo, M. Abeysekera, and M. Qadrdan,
“Dynamic modeling and control of a plate heat exchanger,” in 2017
IEEE Conference on Energy Internet and Energy System Integration
(EI2), 2017, pp. 1–6.
[15] “Home Page,” OPC Foundation. [Online].
Available: https://opcfoundation.org/. [Accessed: 12-Nov-2018].
[16] F.P. Incropera, D. P. DeWitt, T.L. Bergman, and A. S.
Lavine, Principles of Heat and Mass Transfer, 7th Edition International
Student Version edition. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
[17] D. Q. Kern, Process Heat Transfer, Reprint ed. edition. Brattleboro:
Echo Point Books & Media, 2017.
[18] K. Ogata, Modern Control Engineering, Edition: 01. Boston, Mass.:
Financial Times Prencie Hall, 2009.