Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Archive of SID: Numerical Study of Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger With Different Cross Section Tubes and Combined Tubes
Archive of SID: Numerical Study of Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger With Different Cross Section Tubes and Combined Tubes
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-019-0297-9
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Received: 4 December 2018 / Accepted: 2 February 2019 / Published online: 12 February 2019
© The Author(s) 2019
Abstract
Shell and tube heat exchangers are used in various industrial processes, and are one of the most commonly used heat exchang-
ers. A shell and tube heat exchanger with a 25% baffle cut was used in this study. Tubes of different cross-sections (circular,
D
elliptical with an attack angle of 90° and elliptical with an attack angle of 0°) were studied. A combined model of a shell and
tube heat exchanger with elliptical tubes with an attack angle of 90° and circular tubes was introduced. A heat exchanger with
ellipsoidal tubes near the shell with an attack angle of 90° and circular tubes in the center of the shell showed the highest
SI
heat transfer compared with the shell and tube heat exchangers with circular tubes and elliptical tubes with an attack angle
of 90° and 0°. The pressure drop in the tube and shell side was also investigated for all five cases in this study. The effect of
the location of tubes on heat transfer was investigated. It was shown that tubes located near the shell have a greater impact
on heat transfer compared with tubes located in the center of the shell.
of
Keywords Shell and tube heat exchanger · Elliptical tubes · Circular tubes · Heat transfer · Pressure drop
Introduction segmental baffles. Baffles are plates that support the tubes
ve
and displace the flow between the inside and outside of the
Shell and tube heat exchangers are used in various industrial shell side [4]. Such equipment should be compact and light-
processes [1]. Heat exchangers allow heat transfer between weight with high efficiency.
two fluids [2] and are widely used to heat or cool non- Cross-flow heat exchangers with elliptical tube arrange-
hi
Newtonian fluids in various industries such as [3] chemi- ment increase the heat transfer surface compared with the
cal, pharmaceutical and petrochemical industries, oil and circular tube arrangement. As a result, these exchangers
gas processes, refrigeration, air conditioning, power plants have recently received much attention. However, increased
c
and many other applications [2–4]. There are various types heat transfer can lead to increased pump power consump-
of heat exchangers and thus selecting the proper type for a tion. Thus, it is essential to optimize the increase in heat
Ar
particular process is of great importance because improper transfer and the cost of the power required by the pump [6].
selection causes undesired operation and equipment failure. Experimental studies usually are time consuming and costly
Shell and tube heat exchangers are one of the most widely and, therefore, are not suitable for comprehensive analysis
used types of heat exchangers [2, 5]. The most common of parameters in heat exchanger prototypes [7, 8]. Accord-
type of shell and tube heat exchanger is those with single ingly, modeling and simulation of heat exchangers have been
widely used in the field’s literature [9]. A detailed study has
been published on the behavior of heat exchanger models
* Farivar Fazelpour
f_fazelpour@azad.ac.ir in different areas and their role in engineering processes for
efficient modeling [10]. Zaversky et al. [11] presented a pre-
1
Department of Mechanic, Faculty of Engineering, South cise modeling of this type of heat exchangers. Therefore, as
Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran a supplement to experimental studies, different numerical
2
Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Faculty approaches are widely used for evaluating the characteristics
of Engineering, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad of heat exchangers [7]. Shahdad and Fazelpour showed that
University, Tehran, Iran
use perforated fns instead of plain fns cause to increase con-
3
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, K.N. Toosi University vection heat transfer coefficient and Nusselt number [12].
of Technology, Tehran, Iran
www.SID.ir
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
34 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
Increasing heat transfer is relatively important to increase of 0° and 90°, and circular tubes. The effect of the location of
the efficiency of shell and tube heat exchangers [3]. To study tubes inside the shell on heat transfer is also studied. It was
heat transfer and flow in a heat exchanger, the pressure drop shown that tubes located near the shell have a greater impact
and heat transfer should be examined. Xie et al. [13] showed on heat transfer than those in the center of the shell.
that the heat transfer rate is increased in dimple tubes com-
pared with plain tubes, an advantage that can be used in heat
exchanger enhancement applications. Matos et al. [14–16] Methodology
compared 12 elliptical and circular tubes at Reynolds num-
bers between 300 and 800. Elliptical tubes were found to Geometrical model
have a higher efficiency so that heat transfer increased by
20%. According to Ibrahim and Gomaa [6], elliptical tubes In this study, a shell and tube heat exchanger with single
with an attack angle of 0° had a higher thermal efficiency. segmental baffle with a 25% baffle cut was used. The specifi-
Bouris et al. [17] found that fouling rate in elliptical tubes cations and size of the heat exchanger are listed in Table 1. In
within a square arrangement was reduced by 73% compared this type of heat exchanger, air enters the shell from one side
to circular tubes leading to increased heat transfer area and and water enters the tubes in the opposite direction. The tubes
reduced pressure drop. Nouri-Borujerdi and Lavasani [18, are arranged in a rotated triangular arrangement (Fig. 1).
19] studied flow and heat transfer characteristics of single Three different types of tubes were used in this study
D
cam-shape tubes. Moawed [20] experimentally examined including elliptical tubes with an attack angle of 0°, elliptical
forced convection on the outer surface of spiral tubes. Rosen tubes with an attack angle of 90° and normal circular tubes
and Dincer showed smaller heat exchanger temperature dif- [28–30] (Fig. 2). All the tubes used in this study have the
SI
ferences, and increasing heat exchanger efficiencies cause to same perimeter.
avoid temperature degradation [21]. The heat exchanger geometry was drawn in three dimen-
Mohanty et al. [22] studied the heat transfer coefficient sion using SolidWorks™ (V. 2017) (Fig. 3).
and pressure drop in circular and elliptical tubes at Re num- The new shell and tube heat exchanger with different
bers of 100–2000 in 2D. Harris and Goldschmidt [23] stud- cross-sections was investigated. The combination used in
of
ied the effect of attack angle on the overall heat transfer this research includes elliptical tubes with an attack angle
in elliptical tube heat exchangers. Khan et al. [24] studied of 90° with circular tubes. The new arrangement of tubes
forced heat conduction in elliptical tubes with an axial ratio was studied in two modes, (A) elliptical tubes with an attack
of 0.33 at an attack angle of 0°. Their results showed that angle of 90° in the center and circular tubes near the shell
ve
heat transfer rate increases with increasing air–water flow (STHE-ET90°&CT) and (B) circular tubes in the center and
rate. Li et al. [25] performed two-dimensional modeling of elliptical tubes with an attack angle of 90° near the shell
elliptical tubes with axial ratios of 0.3, 0.5 and 0.8 in laminar (STHE-CT&ET90°). Figure 4 shows these two modes three
hi
flow at constant surface temperature at Reynolds number of dimensionally in SolidWorks (V. 2017).
500–10,000. They concluded that elliptical tubes with an
axial ratio of 0.5 reduce the pressure drop by 30–40% com- Thermophysical properties
pared with circular pipes at an attack angle of 0°. Li et al.
c
[26] studied the friction factor and heat transfer in a fully In this study, air/water fluid was used to investigate the heat
Ar
developed flow inside an elliptical tube. Their results showed transfer coefficient and pressure drop in a shell and tube heat
the higher heat transfer performance of elliptical tubes than exchanger. Thermophysical properties of the fluid are given
circular tubes. Tao et al. [27] numerically studied a fin heat in Table 2 [31, 32].
exchanger with elliptical tubes and found a 30% increase in A Reynolds number of 4000 was considered for different
heat transfer compared to circular tubes. mass flow rates of air and water, which is calculated from
In this study, shell and tube heat exchangers with different
cross-sections (circular, elliptical with an attack angle of 0°
and 90°) are examined. The best arrangement in terms of Table 1 Size of the heat exchanger
lowest pressure drop and highest heat transfer rate is then Property description Value Unit
introduced. As a result, a combined model of shell and tube
Shell diameter 20 cm
heat exchanger with elliptical tubes with an attack angle of
Tube diameter 1.5 cm
90° and circular tubes is presented.
Shell/tube length 50 cm
A heat exchanger with circular tubes in the center and
Number of tubes 37 Pieces
elliptical tubes with an attack angle of 90° near the shell
Shell outlet/inlet diameter 10 cm
shows the highest heat transfer rate compared to the shell and
Number of baffles 4 Pieces
tube heat exchangers with elliptical tubes with an attack angle
13 www.SID.ir
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46 35
Fig. 1 Shell and tube heat exchanger with 25% single segmental baffle
D
SI
of
ve
hi
Fig. 2 The cross-sectional shape of the tubes: a elliptical tube with 0° angle attack; b elliptical tube with 90° angle attack; c circular tube
c
Ar
Eq. (1). Therefore, the flow regime in the heat exchanger is 𝜌 = water density 971.8 W∕m K , u = water velocity 0.1 m/s ,
turbulent and incompressible. A hot fluid (water) enters the DH = Tube hydraulic diameter 0.015 m , 𝜇 = water dynamic
tubes at 353.15 K while the cold fluid (air) enters the shell at viscosity in 353.15 K 0.0003545 Pa s.
278.15 K. To evaluate the heat transfer and pressure drop, the
hot and cold fluids with different mass flow rates of 0.38025,
0.57039, 0.76049, and 0.95061 kg/s for water 0.0039857, Mathematical model
0.0059794, 0.0079740, and 0.0099697 kg/s for air were con-
sidered. The fluid entered the tubes at atmospheric pressure COMSOL Multiphysics was used for numerical solution of
and exited the shell at the same pressure. No-slip condition the governing equations of heat transfer and pressure drop.
was also considered for the surface of tubes and shell. This First, the geometries drawn in SolidWorks™ were trans-
boundary condition was used for numerical solution of the ferred to COMSOL. After specifying the type of fluid and
heat exchanger in the software: heat exchanger, the governing equations for analyzing the
𝜌uDH heat transfer and pressure drop in the heat exchanger were
Re = , (1) selected, and boundary conditions were then applied to the
𝜇
software [33].
www.SID.ir
13
36 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
D
SI
of
ve
c hi
Fig. 3 a Elliptical tube with 0° angle attack; b elliptical tube with 90° angle attack; c circular tube
Ar
The diameter of circular tubes was considered 1.5 cm. The turbulent flow k–ɛ model was used to solve this prob-
Since the perimeter of circular and elliptical tubes is the lem. COMSOL uses the Navier–Stokes equations as the basic
same, the diameter of elliptical tubes with a ratio of 1:2 equations for solving the fluid flow models [33] as follows:
can be calculated from the following equation [34]:
𝜌(u ⋅ ∇)u = ∇ ⋅ −pI + 𝜇 + 𝜇T ∇u + (∇u)T
[ ( )( )
Dcir =1.5 cm and Acir = 2𝜋r, 2( 2
]
(3)
)
− 𝜇 + 𝜇T (∇ ⋅ u)I − 𝜌kI + F,
(2)
√
a2 + b 2 1 3 3
Aell =2𝜋 and a = b,
2 2 ∇ ⋅ (𝜌u) = 0.
a = 0.474 and b = 0.949. For turbulent kinetic energy, we can write as follows:
It is well known that CFD solution in COMSOL is
[( ) ]
𝜇
based on the Finite Element Method [35, 36]. 𝜌(u ⋅ ∇)k = ∇ ⋅ 𝜇 + T ∇k + Pk − 𝜌𝜀. (4)
𝜎k
13 www.SID.ir
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46 37
D
SI
of
Fig. 4 a elliptical tubes with an attack angle of 90° in the center and circular tubes near the shell (STHE-ET90°&CT), b circular tubes in the
center and elliptical tubes with an attack angle of 90° near the shell (STHE-CT&ET90°)
ve
Table 2 Thermophysical properties of shell and tube side fluids at The constants used in the turbulent kinetic energy, tur-
atmospheric pressure bulent viscosity and dissipation equations are set to the fol-
Thermos physical properties Water Air Unit lowing values: Ce1 = 1.44 , Ce2 = 1.92 , C𝜇 = 0.09 , 𝜎k = 1 and
hi
𝜎𝜀 = 1.3.
Dynamic viscosity 0.0003545 0.00001754 Pa s The production of turbulent kinetic energy can be
Ratio of specific heat 1 1.4 1
expressed as follows:
(𝛾 = CP∕C )
c
V
Specific heat capacity 4194 1006 J/(kg K) [ ) 2 ]
2
Pk = 𝜇T ∇u ∶ ∇u + (∇u)T − (∇ ⋅ u)2 − 𝜌k∇ ⋅ u,
(
Density 971.8 1.269 kg/m3 3 3
Ar
Mesh control
[( ) ]
𝜇T 𝜀 𝜀2
𝜌(u ⋅ ∇)𝜀 = ∇ ⋅ 𝜇+ ∇𝜀 + Ce1 Pk − Ce2 𝜌 ,
𝜎𝜀 k k (5)
𝜀 = ep. Due to the complex structure of shell and tube heat
exchanger (STHE), unstructured tetrahedral, pyramid,
For turbulent viscosity, prism, triangular and quadrilateral structures are produced
while meshing the geometry. Meshing was done by COM-
𝜇T = 𝜌C𝜇
k2
. (6) SOL Multiphysics. To evaluate the type and number of
𝜀 appropriate meshes, a shell and tube heat exchanger with
a 25% baffle cut with circular tubes was modeled with k–ε
model at a Reynolds number of 4337 and a mass flow rate
www.SID.ir
13
38 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
D
fer coefficient and pressure drop. Upon comparison of the By changing the mass flow rate, different Re number can be
results, the best mesh number can be selected for com- obtained. Hence, we calculated models in different Re number
putational model (1,140,747). The maximum deviation in COMSOL software. The results at a Re number 8000 are
SI
of the mesh number was less than 1.7% for heat transfer illustrated in Figs. 8 and 9.
coefficient (Fig. 6a) and 1.3% for pressure drop in shell
𝜌uDH
side (Fig. 6b). Re = ,
𝜇
of
Fig. 5 a Overall heat transfer 5.76
ve
hi
5.68
5.64
c
5.6
600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000
Ar
Element Number
A
12.3
Pressure drop in Shell
12.1
11.9
Pa
11.7
11.5
600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000
Element Number
13 www.SID.ir
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46 39
D
Fig. 6 The meshed model used in the numerical calculations of the heat exchanger with 1,140,747 meshes
SI
Fig. 7 Comparison of the 700
results obtained from the soft-
ware and experimental model 600
Pressure Drop in Sell
500
of
400
(Pa)
300
Experimental Results
200
ve
Present CFD
100
0
hi
www.SID.ir
13
40 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
D
SI
of
ve
difference for the shell and tube heat exchanger with one exchanger is obtained from the following equation [3, 40]:
shell pass countercurrent flow is obtained from the follow-
Ar
( )
ing equation: 1 1 di ln do ∕di d 1
= + + i , (12)
U hi 2k1 do ho
� ��√ �
t 2 − t1 1 + R2
ΔTm = � � �� , where hi= heat transfer coefficients for the tube side, h = heat
transfer coefficients for the shell side, k1 = thermal conduc-
√
2−P 1+R− 1+R2
ln (10) tivity of the tube, di = inner diameters of the tube, do = outer
� � √ ��
2−P 1+R+ 1+R2
13 www.SID.ir
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46 41
D
SI
of
ve
hi
Fig. 9 The velocity contour at the cross-section of the shell and tube heat exchanger for the STHE-CT, STHE-ET0°, STHE-ET90°, STHE-
ET90°&CT, STHE-CT&ET90°
The overall heat transfer coefficient for STHE-CT&ET90° The overall heat transfer coefficient in all the studied
c
increased by 30% and 10% compared to STHE-ET0° and cases is compared in Fig. 10.
STHE-CT, respectively. The overall heat transfer coefficient
Ar
www.SID.ir
13
42 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
9.5 STHE-CT
(W/M2K)
8.5 STHE-ET0°
7.5 STHE-ET90°
STHE-ET90°&CT
6.5
STHE-CT&ET90°
5.5
4.5
3.5
3,000 5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000
REYNOLDS NUMBER
D
Fig. 11 The Nu number 75
variation as a function of Re in
SI
STHE-CT, STHE-ET0°, STHE-
ET90°, STHE-ET90°&CT and 65
STHE-CT&ET90°
55
STHE-CT
of
NUSSELT
45 STHE-ET0°
STHE-ET90°
35 STHE-ET90°&CT
ve
STHE-CT&ET90°
25
hi
15
3,000 5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000 13,000 15,000
REYNOLDS NUMBER
c
50
NUSSELT
40
Numerical Present study
30 Experimental Gnielinski
20
10
0
3,000 5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000 13,000 15,000
REYNOLDS NUMBER
13 www.SID.ir
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46 43
Pressure drop in shell side in STHE-CT&ET90°, the pressure drop is very close to that
in STHE-ET90° where all elliptical tubes are arranged with
The pressure drop in the shell side can be obtained using the an attack angle of 90°.
following equation [3, 41]: The pressure drop in the shell side of the STHE-
D 1 CT&ET90° combined arrangement increased by 80% com-
ΔP =f s (Nb + 1) 𝜌V 2 , pared to the STHE-CT. This confirms the impact of the
De 2
cross-sectional shape of the tubes near the shell on the shell
f =exp(0.576 − 0.19 ln Res ),
�√ � side pressure drop.
4
3P2t
−
𝜋do2 From the above two conclusions, it can be deduced that
4 8
(14) the cross-sectional shape of the tubes and their placement in
De = ,
𝜋d o the shell whether in the center or on the shell side are very
effective in the shell side pressure drop.
2
𝜌u D
Res = m e , Pressure drop in the shell for all the cases in this study is
compared in Fig. 13.
𝜇
ΔP = pressure drop in shell side , Res = Renumber in shell , Pressure drop in tube side
F = friction factor, D s = Sell diameter, D e = equivalent
D
diameter for the triangular pitch, N b = number of baffle, The pressure drop in the tube side can be calculated from the
𝜌 = density of the fluid , V = mean flow velocity, Pt =tube following equation [42]:
pith, do = outer diameters of the tube, um = velocity of the
SI
fluid, 𝜇 = dynamic viscosity of the fluid.
[ ]
fLt 1
ΔP =4 + 1 Np 𝜌V 2 ,
The lowest and highest pressure drop was observed in di 2
the shell side of STHE-CT and STHE-CT&ET90°, respec- (
f = 1.58 ln ReD − 3.28 ,
)−2
(15)
tively. The pressure drop in the shell side of STHE-ET0°
𝜌um di
and STHE-ET90°, respectively, increased by 57% and 70%
of ReD = ,
compared with STHE-CT. This indicates an increase in pres- 𝜇
sure drop in the shell side of heat exchangers with elliptical
tubes as compared with circular tubes. ΔP = pressure drop in tube side , ReD = Renumber in tube ,
The pressure drop in the shell side of the STHE- F =friction factor, Lt=tube length, di=inner diameters of the
ve
ET90°&CT combined arrangement increased by 67% com- tube, Np=number of pass, 𝜌 = density of the fluid , V =mean
pared to the STHE-CT, indicating the effect of the cross- flow velocity, um=velocity of the fluid, 𝜇 = dynamic viscos-
sectional shape of the tubes in the center of the shell on ity of the fluid.
the shell side pressure drop. Due to the use of elliptical
hi
100
STHE-CT
(PA)
80 STHE-ET0°
STHE-ET90°
60
STHE-ET90°&CT
40 STHE-CT&ET90°
20
0
3,000 5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000 13,000 15,000
REYNOLDS NUMBER
www.SID.ir
13
44 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
STHE-CT
(PA)
304.5 STHE-ET0°
STHE-ET90°
204.5 STHE-ET90°&CT
STHE-CT&ET90°
104.5
4.5
3,000 5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000 13,000 15,000
D
REYNOLDS NUMBER
pressure drop in STHE-ET0 ° increased by 28% compared 2. The highest overall heat transfer coefficient was obtained
SI
to STHE-CT. for STHE-CT&ET90° and STHE-ET90° arrangements,
The pressure drop in the tube side of STHE-ET90°&CT respectively. This indicates an increase in heat transfer
and STHE-CT&ET90° combined modes, respectively, in heat exchangers with elliptical tubes with an attack
increased by 40% and 55% compared with STHE-CT. The angle of 90° as compared with circular tube.
pressure drop in the shell side of STHE-ET90° was 67% 3. Additional conclusion that was drawn from this analysis
of
higher than in STHE-CT. This shows a lower increase in is the impact of tube location in heat transfer. The impact
the pressure drop due to the use of two types of tubes with of tubes near the shell on the overall heat transfer coeffi-
different cross sections. cient is much higher than those in the center of the shell.
As a result, the pressure drop increased in the tube side 4. STHE-CT and STHE-CT&ET90° showed the lowest
ve
of circular tubes and elliptical tubes with an attack angel of and highest pressure drop in the shell side, respectively.
0° and 90°, respectively. The change in the cross-section of tubes from circular to
The pressure drop in tubes in the shell and tube heat elliptical caused an increase in the pressure drop in the
hi
in the shell side and tube side of the shell and tube heat tively. This indicates an increased pressure drop in the
exchanger with simple segmental baffle with 25% baffle cut tube side in the elliptical tubes.
were examined by changing the cross-sectional shape of the 7. The pressure drop in the shell side and tube side of ellip-
tubes and introduction of new type of tube bundles consist- tic tubes with an attack angle of 90° and 0° is higher
ing of tubes with circular cross-section and elliptical cross- than that in the circular tubes.
section with an attack angle of 90°. The following results 8. Although STHE-CT&ET90° and STHE-ET90°&CT
were obtained: combined arrangements increase the heat transfer by
10% and 3%, respectively, compared to STHE-CT, they
1. Upon comparison between STHE-CT, STHE-ET0° and cause an increase in the pressure drop in the shell side,
STHE-ET90°, minimum and maximum heat transfer respectively, by 80% and 67% and lead to 55% and 40%
coefficient was obtained in STHE-ET0° and STHE- increase in the tubes side compared with STHE-CT.
ET90°, respectively. However, the result indicates that
for STHE-ET90°, the maximum pressure drop occurs in
tube and in shell. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://
13 www.SID.ir
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46 45
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, 16. Matos, R., Vargas, J., Laursen, T., Saboya, F.: Optimization study
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appro- and heat transfer comparison of staggered circular and elliptic
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to tubes in forced convection. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 44(20),
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 3953–3961 (2001)
17. Bouris, D., Papadakis, G., Bergeles, G.: Numerical evaluation of
alternate tube configurations for particle deposition rate reduction
in heat exchanger tube bundles. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 22(5),
References 525–536 (2001)
18. Nouri-Borujerdi, A., Lavasani, A.: Experimental study of forced
1. Yang, J.-F., Zeng, M., Wang, Q.-W.: Numerical investigation on convection heat transfer from a cam shaped tube in cross flows.
shell-side performances of combined parallel and serial two shell- Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 50(13–14), 2605–2611 (2007)
pass shell-and-tube heat exchangers with continuous helical baf- 19. Nouri-Borujerdi, A., Lavasani, A.M.: Pressure loss and heat trans-
fles. Appl. Energy 139, 163–174 (2015) fer characterization of a cam-shaped cylinder at different orienta-
2. Labbadlia, O., Laribi, B., Chetti, B., Hendrick, P.: Numerical tions. J. Heat Transfer 130(12), 124503 (2008)
study of the influence of tube arrangement on the flow distribu- 20. Moawed, M.: Experimental study of forced convection from
tion in the header of shell and tube heat exchangers. Appl. Therm. helical coiled tubes with different parameters. Energy Convers.
Eng. 126, 315–321 (2017) Manag. 52(2), 1150–1156 (2011)
3. He, Z., Fang, X., Zhang, Z., Gao, X.: Numerical investigation on 21. Rosen, M., Dincer, I.: Exergy methods for assessing and compar-
performance comparison of non-Newtonian fluid flow in vertical ing thermal storage systems. Int. J. Energy Res. 27(4), 415–430
heat exchangers combined helical baffle with elliptic and circular (2003)
tubes. Appl. Therm. Eng. 100, 84–97 (2016) 22. Mohanty, R.L., Swain, A., Das, M.K.: Thermal performance
D
4. Ayub, Z.H., Yang, D., Khan, T.S., Al-Hajri, E., Ayub, A.H.: Per- of mixed tube bundle composed of circular and elliptical tubes.
formance characteristics of a novel shell and tube heat exchanger Therm. Sci. Eng. Progress 5, 492–505 (2018)
with shell side interstitial twisted tapes for viscous fluids applica- 23. Harris, D.K., Goldschmidt, V.W.: Measurements of the overall
tion. Appl. Therm. Eng. 134, 248–255 (2018) heat transfer from combustion gases confined within elliptical tube
SI
5. Qiu, Y., Li, M.-J., Wang, W.-Q., Du, B.-C., Wang, K.: An exper- heat exchangers. Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci. 26(1), 33–37 (2002)
imental study on the heat transfer performance of a prototype 24. Khan, M.G., Fartaj, A., Ting, D.S.-K.: An experimental charac-
molten-salt rod baffle heat exchanger for concentrated solar power. terization of cross-flow cooling of air via an in-line elliptical tube
Energy 156, 63–72 (2018) array. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 25(4), 636–648 (2004)
6. Ibrahim, T.A., Gomaa, A.: Thermal performance criteria of ellip- 25. Li, Z., Davidson, J., Mantell, S.: Numerical simulation of flow
tic tube bundle in crossflow. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48(11), 2148–2158 field and heat transfer of streamlined cylinders in crossflow. In:
of
(2009) ASME 2005 Summer Heat Transfer Conference collocated with
7. Horvat, A., Leskovar, M., Mavko, B.: Comparison of heat transfer the ASME 2005 Pacific Rim Technical Conference and Exhibition
conditions in tube bundle cross-flow for different tube shapes. Int. on Integration and Packaging of MEMS, NEMS, and Electronic
J. Heat Mass Transf. 49(5–6), 1027–1038 (2006) Systems 2005, pp. 531–541. American Society of Mechanical
8. Fazelpour, F., Vafaeipour, M., Rahbari, O.: CFD simulation of Engineers
ve
hydrodynamics of gas-solid two-phase flow for different geom- 26. Li, B., Feng, B., He, Y.-L., Tao, W.-Q.: Experimental study on
etries of solid particles. The 5th International Congress of Energy friction factor and numerical simulation on flow and heat transfer
and Environment Engineering and Management, Lisbon (2013) in an alternating elliptical axis tube. Appl. Therm. Eng. 26(17–
9. Bonilla, J., de la Calle, A., Rodríguez-García, M.M., Roca, L., 18), 2336–2344 (2006)
hi
Valenzuela, L.: Study on shell-and-tube heat exchanger models 27. Tao, Y., He, Y., Wu, Z., Tao, W.: Three-dimensional numeri-
with different degree of complexity for process simulation and cal study and field synergy principle analysis of wavy fin heat
control design. Appl. Therm. Eng. 124, 1425–1440 (2017) exchangers with elliptic tubes. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 28(6),
10. Skoglund, T., Årzén, K.-E., Dejmek, P.: Dynamic object-oriented 1531–1544 (2007)
28. Pal, E., Kumar, I., Joshi, J.B., Maheshwari, N.: CFD simulations
c
for the transient response simulation of multi-pass shell-and-tube 29. Markowski, M., Trafczynski, M., Urbaniec, K.: Identification of
heat exchangers as applied in active indirect thermal energy stor- the influence of fouling on the heat recovery in a network of shell
age systems for concentrated solar power. Energy 65, 647–664 and tube heat exchangers. Appl. Energy 102, 755–764 (2013)
(2014) 30. Yang, J., Fan, A., Liu, W., Jacobi, A.M.: Optimization of shell-
12. Shahdad, I., Fazelpour, F.: Numerical analysis of the surface and and-tube heat exchangers conforming to TEMA standards with
geometry of plate fin heat exchangers for increasing heat transfer designs motivated by constructal theory. Energy Convers. Manag.
rate. Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 9(2), 155–167 (2018) 78, 468–476 (2014)
13. Xie, S., Liang, Z., Zhang, L., Wang, Y.: A numerical study on heat 31. Dinçer, İ., Zamfirescu, C.: Appendix B Thermophysical Proper-
transfer enhancement and flow structure in enhanced tube with ties of Water. Drying Phenomena: Theory and Applications, pp.
cross ellipsoidal dimples. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 125, 434–444 457–459
(2018) 32. Hilsenrath, J.: Tables of Thermodynamic and Transport Properties
14. Matos, R., Laursen, T., Vargas, J., Bejan, A.: Three-dimensional of Air, Argon, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Hydrogen,
optimization of staggered finned circular and elliptic tubes in Nitrogen, Oxygen, and Steam. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1960)
forced convection. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 43(5), 477–487 (2004) 33. Multiphysics, C.: Comsol multiphysics user guide (version 4.3 a).
15. Matos, R., Vargas, J., Laursen, T., Bejan, A.: Optimally staggered COMSOL, AB, 39-40 (2012)
finned circular and elliptic tubes in forced convection. Int. J. Heat 34. Oberg, E.: Machinery’s Handbook 29th Edition-Full Book. Indus-
Mass Transf. 47(6–7), 1347–1359 (2004) trial Press, New York (2012)
35. Pepper, D.W., Heinrich, J.C.: The Finite Element Method: Basic
Concepts and Applications. Taylor & Francis, Abingdon (2005)
www.SID.ir
13
46 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2019) 10:33–46
36. Zimmerman, W.B.: Multiphysics Modeling with Finite Element friction factor of Fe3O4 nanofluids flow in a double pipe U-bend
Methods, vol. 18. World Scientific Publishing Company, Singa- heat exchanger. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 95, 53–62
pore (2006) (2018)
37. El Maakoul, A., Laknizi, A., Saadeddine, S., El Metoui, M., 41. Gaddis, E.S., Gnielinski, V.: Pressure drop on the shell side of
Zaite, A., Meziane, M., Abdellah, A.B.: Numerical comparison shell-and-tube heat exchangers with segmental baffles. Chem.
of shell-side performance for shell and tube heat exchangers with Eng. Process. 36(2), 149–159 (1997)
trefoil-hole, helical and segmental baffles. Appl. Therm. Eng. 109, 4 2. Kakac, S., Liu, H., Pramuanjaroenkij, A.: Heat Exchangers: Selec-
175–185 (2016) tion, Rating, and Thermal Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2012)
38. Azar, R.T., Khalilarya, S., Jafarmadar, S.: Tube bundle replace-
ment for segmental and helical shell and tube heat exchangers: Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
experimental test and economic analysis. Appl. Therm. Eng. jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
62(2), 622–632 (2014)
39. Allen, B., Gosselin, L.: Optimal geometry and flow arrange-
ment for minimizing the cost of shell-and-tube condensers. Int. J.
Energy Res. 32(10), 958–969 (2008)
40. Kumar, N.R., Bhramara, P., Kirubeil, A., Sundar, L.S., Singh,
M.K., Sousa, A.C.: Effect of twisted tape inserts on heat transfer,
D
SI
of
ve
c hi
Ar
13 www.SID.ir