Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Nuclear Engineering and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/nucengdes

Numerical optimization of a finned tube bundle heat exchanger T

arrangement for passive spent fuel pool cooling to ambient air
⁎
Sebastian Ungera, , Eckhard Kreppera, Matthias Beyera, Uwe Hampela,b
a
Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Fluid Dynamics, Bautzner Landstr. 400, 01328 Dresden, Germany
b
Chair of Imaging Techniques in Energy and Process Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The passive cooling of nuclear spent fuel pools is a promising alternative to active cooling. Since such systems
Passive cooling work even in safety-critical situations, e.g. station blackout, the reliability of nuclear power plants would be
Spent fuel pool enhanced. As in such systems heat needs to be transfer to the environment, the heat exchanger to air has a crucial
Natural convection influence on the system performance. This paper describes investigations of the Nusselt number, the achievable
Tube bundle heat exchanger
efficiency and the volumetric heat transfer coefficient of the tube bundle heat exchangers for a passive cooling
Air cooling
Design optimization
system located at the bottom of a chimney. The effect of tube bundle configuration, tube shape, longitudinal tube
pitch, transversal tube pitch and tube row number on natural convection heat transfer was numerically studied.
These parameters were varied to optimize the heat transfer performance of the heat exchanger. It was found, that
the staggered configuration performs better than the inline arrangement, since the flow mixing is higher.
Furthermore circular tube shape and an oval tube shape with the aspect ratio of 1: 2.1 were optimum for the
inline and staggered configuration respectively. The longitudinal and transversal tube pitches of 63mm and
65mm performed best, since higher values reduced heat transfer. A tube row number greater than 5 did not
improve the heat transfer and therefore a tube row number of 5 is recommended. The Nusselt number and
volumetric heat transfer coefficient of the optimized tube bundle arrangement enhanced by 15.4% and 47.8%
respectively at a temperature difference of 40K compared to the initial design.

1. Introduction evaporator) flows as steam to a secondary heat exchanger located in

For removal of decay heat from spent fuel assemblies in nuclear
power plants, wet storage is commonly applied. Thereby, the spent fuel
pool water is cooled via active heat transfer systems, comprising
pumps, heat exchanger and water as a heat transfer medium, which
represent a potential danger in case of a longer persisting station black
out. Thus, passive heat transfer systems are under consideration as an
alternative technology. In passive heat removal systems natural con-
vection and gravitational forces drive a heat transfer medium between a
heat source and a heat sink. The natural convection is sustained by the
temperature difference between heat source and the heat sink, that is,
the difference between water pool temperature and ambient air tem-
perature. Depending on the heat transfer medium passive heat transfer
systems can be categorized into single-phase and two-phase circulation
loops. In a single-phase loop the natural circulation is driven by ther-
mally induced density difference and the fluid does not undergo phase
change. In two-phase heat transfer systems the working fluid evapo-
rates in the heat exchanger, that is located in the spent fuel pool (the
ambient air (the condenser), condenses and then flows back as liquid to
the heat exchanger in the spent fuel pool.
To enhance the reliability of nuclear power plants passive cooling
systems are considered for nuclear reactors and spent fuel pools.
Therefore emergency reactor cooling concepts were proposed by
Sviridenko (2008) using low temperature heat pipes or thermosiphons.
There, heat gets transferred from the nuclear reactor to the ambient air
via phase change of the heat transfer medium. RELAP5 was used by
Wang et al. (2013) to study the passive residual heat removal from a
300MW nuclear power plant. The heat sink was varied between an air
cooled heat exchanger surrounded by a chimney and a heat exchanger
placed in a water reservoir. It was shown that a system with a water
cooled heat exchanger performs better compared to a system with air
cooled heat exchanger in the early period. However, the water in the
reservoir evaporated in the later stages and the air-cooled heat removal
system is more effective. The effect of a finned tube surfaces compared
to plain tubes on the passive residual heat removal from a nuclear re-
actor after shutdown was investigated by Ayhan and Sökmen (2016).

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: s.unger@hzdr.de (S. Unger).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2020.110549
Received 16 April 2019; Received in revised form 1 February 2020; Accepted 5 February 2020
Available online 19 February 2020
0029-5493/ © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S. Unger, et al.
Nomenclature
A area of convection surface, m2
Afin area of fin surface, m2
Afr area in front of heat exchanger, m2
Ccomp Heat exchanger compactness, m2/m3
Ch chimney height, m
cp specific heat, kJ/kgK
dc characteristic length based on equivalent circular dia-
meter of the oval tube, m
g acceleration due to gravity, 9.81m/s2
h average heat transfer coefficient, W/m2K
hf fin height, mm
k Turbulence kinetic energy
L Flow length, mm
Ltp Longitudinal tube pitch, mm
ṁ mass flow rate, kg/s
N number of tube rows
Nu average Nusselt number based on hydraulic diameter
Pr Prandtl number
Q heat transfer, W
−
q average heat transfer rate, W/m2
qvol volumetric heat transfer coefficient, kW/m3K
qcross cross sectional heat transfer coefficient, W/m2K
Sf inter-fin spacing, mm
The fin parameters were varied until an optimum of 5mm , 90mm and
3mm for fin thickness, fin radius and fin pitch respectively was found. In
case of passive heat removal from a nuclear reactor core the tempera-
ture difference between reactor and environment are commonly high
and so is the heat flux. However, the temperature difference between
the spent fuel pool and the ambient air are significantly lower.
Merzari and Gohar (2012) studied the natural circulation circuit for
a spent fuel pool by CFD. The fuel tank was modeled by a porous
medium approach. A similar work was performed by Ye et al. (2013) for
spent fuel pool passively cooled by heat pipes to ambient air. The si-
mulation results indicate a water temperature below saturation, which
ensures the integrity of the fuel rods. The heat transfer capability of
spent fuel pools was also investigated by Hung et al. (2013), using CFD
and the porous-medium approach. In this study, the configuration of
the spent fuel assembly was varied and the spent fuel was considered to
be under full-core discharge as well as a failing external cooling system.
For all configurations a local boiling occurred in case of failing external
cooling. Xiong et al. (2014) analyzed an experimental loop-type passive
residual heat removal system with ammonia as a working fluid and
ambient air as a heat sink. The influence of air velocity, hot water inlet
temperature and volumetric filling ratio of the heat pipe was studied. In
a following study a similar experimental setup was used by the same
author, where a large-diameter and long-length evaporator with water
as working fluid was applied (Xiong et al., 2015). From these two
studies a significant effect of pool water temperature on heat pipe
performance was determined. This parameter was followed by air ve-
locity, air temperature and water flow rate. Single phase circulation
loops for solar thermal systems and nuclear thermal hydraulic appli-
cations were extensively reviewed by Basu et al. (2014). Various model
approaches and scaling methodologies as well as unconventional topics
like nanofluids, natural circulation loops for marine reactors and system
dynamic issues were discussed. In an experimental study the passive
cooling of a wet spent fuel storage facility was demonstrated by Fuchs
et al. (2015). The operation of single-phase and two-phase circuits was
compared to understand the heat transfer capacity for both cases. The
results indicate a better performance of the two-phase systems at lower
temperature differences between the spent fuel pool and the ambient
air. Lu et al. (2016) addressed in their experiments the passive heat
2
Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549
tf fin thickness, mm
Tair average air temperature, °C
Tf fin Temperature, °C
Tin air temperature in front of the heat exchanger, °C
Ttp Transversal tube pitch, mm
Tout air temperature behind the heat exchanger, °C
Ttube outer tube surface temperature, °C
ΔTair front-to-behind air temperature difference, K
ΔTHT tube base-to-frontal temperature difference, K
x,y,z Cartesian coordinates
u,v,w velocity components in x, y, z directionrespectivelym/s ,
Greek symbols
α thermal diffusivity, m/s2
β thermal expansion coefficient, 1/K
ε turbulence dissipation rate, m2/s3
η fin efficiency
μ dynamic viscosity, kg/ms
μT turbulent viscosity, Ns/m2
v kinematic viscosity, m/s2
ρ density, kg/m3
λair thermal conductivity of air, W/mK
λS thermal conductivity of fin material, W/mK
ω turbulence frequency, s−1
removal from a heat exchanger submerged in an in-containment re-
fueling water storage tank. Heat transfer from a heat exchanger re-
presented by C-shaped heated rod bundles was investigated. Particle
image velocimetry and thermocouples in different locations were ap-
plied to qualitatively measure velocity – and temperature distribution.
After about 4000s sub-cooled boiling occurs and thus the heat transfer
increases. Different heat transfer correlations were proposed for this
scenario. In our previous study we investigated the heat transfer from a
finned oval tube heat exchanger of a passive cooling system located in a
chimney at ambient air (Unger et al., 2018). In the numerical simula-
tion the fin parameters were changed, in order to find an optimized
heat exchanger design. As a result a chimney height of 11m and an
optimum heat exchanger with a fin height of 17mm , a fin spacing of
3mm and a fin thickness of 1.5mm was recommended. The radial and
axial cladding temperatures were studied for different water levels of a
spent fuel pool by Partmann et al. (2018). Experiments were carried out
for various decay heats and storage distances. It was found, that with
higher heat load, the heat-up becomes faster and as saturation tem-
perature is reached, the water level gets lower. Arlit et al. (2018) ap-
plied a thermal anemometry grid sensor for flow velocity and tem-
perature measurements in the center of the sub channels of the rods in
the previous mentioned experimental facility. Thus, the rising steam
during boil-off experiments and circulating air during heat-up experi-
ments with a dried rod bundle can be measured. In a recent in-
vestigation Oertel et al. (2019) studied the heat transfer mechanisms of
partially uncovered spent fuel pool racks after loss of coolant (2019). A
decrease of cross-flow momentum from the pool center towards the
wall was observed. Hence, the storage of fuel assemblies with high
decay heat rate near the pool wall was recommended. In a recent article
of Wang et al. a passive decay heat removal system for inherently save
light water reactors was studied (Wang et al., 2019). Ambient air was
assumed as an unlimited heat sink and the design of the primary and
secondary heat exchangers were optimized by a MATLAB script. The
heat removal characteristics were analyzed by RELAP 5 and a sufficient
heat removal was found for a Station Black-Out scenario.
In most cases ambient air is considered as an unlimited heat sink for
passive cooling systems. Since the heat removal system is supposed to
be operated passively, natural convection heat transfer is assumed at
S. Unger, et al.
the secondary side of the heat exchanger to air. Natural convection heat
transfer occurs due to density differences induced by the heat-up of air.
Such a heat exchanger is simple, cost effective and requires minimum
maintenance (Senapati et al., 2016). Nevertheless, a major drawback is
the low heat transfer coefficient compared to a system operated under
forced convection. Typically extended heat exchanger surfaces are
used, to overcome this disadvantage. The most common design is the
finned tube heat exchanger, which is used e.g. in electronics cooling,
cooling systems for air conditioning and refrigeration and gas turbines.
Chen and Hsu (2007) studied a single finned tube under natural con-
vection. The experiments were carried out for finned tubes with dif-
ferent fin spacing. It was found, that heat transfer coefficient increases
and fin efficiency decreases, when fin spacing increases. The same au-
thors performed a numerical and experimental study on a single tube
with vertical plate fins and tube diameters of 2mm and 27.3mm as well
as different fin spacing between 10mm and 20mm (Chen et al., 2016).
For the smaller fin diameter and higher fin spacing the heat transfer
coefficient enhances and vice versa. In the investigation of Yaghoubi
and Mahdavi (2013) a horizontal finned cylinder surrounded by am-
bient air was used as the heat sink. Natural convection was studied
numerically and experimentally. The air was flowing from the top to
the bottom of the finned tube and small heat transfer coefficients were
measured. From the results new correlations for the Nusselt number as
function of Rayleigh number were derived. An annular finned hor-
izontal cylinder was studied numerically by Senapati et al. (2016) and
different fin parameters, such as fin spacing, fin height and tube base
temperature were varied. The Nusselt number, fin efficiency and op-
timum aspect ratio of fin spacing to tube diameter were predicted by
correlations.
In the experimental study of Unger et al. (2019a,b) the impact of
tube tilt angle and fin spacing on the natural convection heat transfer
from finned oval tubes was studied. It was found, that the Nusselt
number increases with fin spacing and reduces with tube tilt angle. The
transferred heat is higher for lower fin spacing and reduces at higher
tube tilt angles. Next to the studies on heat transfer from a single tube,
there is the investigation of Arshad et al. (2011), which considers the
heat transfer from a tube bundle under natural convection. An elec-
trically heated 3x3 array of vertical cylinders in a large tank of water
was analyzed in these experiments. At different positions along these
cylinders the surface temperature was measured and different correla-
tions, for Nusselt number depending on Rayleigh number, were pro-
posed.
An extensive numerical study of the thermal hydraulic character-
istics of air cooled finned tube heat exchangers was performed by
Kumar et al. (2016). The tube shape was varied from annular tube
shape to oval tube shape with axis ratios of 1: 1.5, 1: 2 and 1: 3. A flow
separation occurred later for oval tube shapes compared to annular tube
shapes and thus the wake region was smaller, which results in a lower
pressure drop and slightly higher heat transfer coefficient for oval tube
shapes. The influence of tube shape was also considered in the nu-
merical and experimental study by Li et al. (2014). Different axis ratios
were taken into account for a single heated cylinder and the heat
transfer performance was analysed. Highest heat transfer performance
was found for a minor-to-major axis ratio of 1: 2 . Similar results were
found by Lin et al. (2008) for tube bundle heat exchanger with circular
tubes without vortex generators as well as oval tubes with and without
vortex generators. For the oval tubes the pressure drop was lower
compared to the circular tubes and an axis ratio of 1: 2 was re-
commended. Another investigation addressed the axis ratio as well as
the flow angle of attack on oval tube bundle heat exchangers (Ibrahim
and Gomaa, 2009). When the flow is perpendicular to the heat ex-
changer or the flow angle of attack is 30° the optimum heat transfer
occurs for axis ratios between 1: 2 and 1: 4 or between 1: 1.5 and 1: 2
respectively. A finned oval tube was studied in the experiments of
Unger et al. (2019a,b) and fin spacing and tube tilt angle was varied.
Heat transfer increases with tube tilt angle and fin spacing, but pressure
3
Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549
drop becomes higher at higher tube tilt angles and lower fin spacing.
The overall best performance was measured, when the tube was per-
pendicular to the main flow direction.
Next to the tube shape the fin design has a significant impact on the
heat transfer and flow performance of a finned tube heat exchanger.
Commonly applied extended surfaces are plain fins, wavy fins, offset
strip fins, louvered fins and perforated fins (Bhuiyan and Islam, 2016).
Out of these different fin designs the plain annular fin is the most used
one, due its low pressure drop and simple manufacturing process. For
instance, various fin designs, such as plain circular fin, serrated fin,
crimped fin, plain plate fin, wavy fin and plain fins with punched delta
winglet pair, were studied by Kumar et al. (2017) using CFD. From the
heat transfer and pressure drop analysis it can be concluded, that the
efficiency index, which is the ratio of heat transfer to pressure drop, is
highest for circular fins. For the current investigation of natural con-
vection heat transfer low pressure drop and flow disturbance is desired,
since the driving forces and the flow velocity are small. Hence plain
annular fins seem to be a favourable choice for natural convection and
were therefore used. In the experimental study of Wang et al. (1996)
and Jang et al. (1996) the effect of tube row number for plain finned
multi row heat exchangers was investigated. The tube row number was
varied from one to six. From the point of view of optimization the
critical balance between high heat transfer and low pressure drop was
achieved for the four-row configuration. A similar experimental ana-
lysis, with tube row number changing between one and five, was per-
formed by Tutar and Akkoca (2004). It was reported, that the effect of
tube row number is insignificant as the number of tube rows becomes
more than four. From these studies it seems as the optimum for tube
row number is four. However, the mentioned studies were focused on
forced convection and the effect of tube row number for a natural
convection situation was not studied yet.
The majority of the existing literature focuses on the heat transfer
from finned tube bundle under forced convection and heat transfer
studies considering natural convection are limited to single tube in-
vestigations only. Nevertheless in passive cooling systems finned tube
bundle heat exchangers in ambient air may be operated under natural
convection. In the present study we aim to enhance the heat transfer
capacity of such a heat exchanger through the optimization of the tube
bundle configuration.
2. Numerical modeling
2.1. Geometry and simulation domain
In the present investigation finned tube bundle heat exchanger with
plain circular fins were investigated. We studied two basic configura-
tions of the heat exchangers, the inline and the staggered tube config-
uration. The optimum fin design parameters and the chimney height
were taken from our previous study (Unger et al., 2018) and kept
constant in the present analyses. The heat exchanger designs are shown
in Fig. 1 and the corresponding constant dimensions are listed in
Table 1.
We aimed to analyse and optimize the tube bundle configuration,
namely the tube configuration, the tube shape, the longitudinal tube
pitch, the transversal tube pitch and the number of tube rows. All
geometrical dimensions for inline and staggered tube bundle config-
uration as well as the boundary conditions for the simulation are shown
in Fig. 2. We used symmetry-type boundary conditions at the middle of
the fin and at the middle between two neighbouring fins. The gravita-
tional force is directed against the y-direction and the simulation do-
main is extended in positive y-direction. As ambient air gets heated up
while passing the finned tube bundle, the air density changes and
natural convection occurs. Thus, a column of heated air above the heat
exchanger is created by a chimney in application cases. A chimney
enhances the buoyancy forces and the air flow velocity. From our past
study we found a chimney height of 11m as optimum (Unger et al.,
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

viscous forces. Therefore, the parameters of the tube bundle config-

uration were varied until an optimum heat transfer was achieved.

2.2. Governing equations

In our investigation ambient air was considered as an ideal gas. The

flow is governed by the steady state balance equations for momentum,
heat and mass transfer
δui
=0
δx i (1)

δu δp δ ⎛ ⎛ δui δuj ⎞ ⎞
ρ ⎛⎜uj i ⎞⎟ = − + ⎜ (μ + μT ) ⎜ δx + δx ⎟ ⎟ + SM , buoy
⎝ δx j ⎠ δx i δx j ⎝ j i⎠ (2)
⎝ ⎠

δT ⎞ δ ⎛⎛ μT cp ⎞ δT ⎞
ρcp ⎛⎜uj ⎟ = ⎜ λ +
⎜ ⎟ ⎟,
⎝ δx j ⎠ δx j ⎝⎝ PrT ⎠ δx j ⎠ (3)
Fig. 1. Finned tube bundle heat exchanger in a) inline and b) staggered con-
which are known as the Navier-Stokes equations. These partial differ-
figuration.
ential equations are discretized and the velocity vector field u(r) and
scalar temperature field T(r) was solved numerically. The other para-
Table 1 meters are described in the symbol list. The turbulent Prandtl number
Chimney height and fin design dimensions. has been set to PrT =0.9 as suggested by Yuan (2000) and the turbulent
Ch hf tf sf dc viscosity μT was calculated by

11 m 17 mm 1.5 mm 3 mm 27 mm
2018), which was used in the current investigation. The circular outer
tube diameter was 27mm and changed to oval tube shapes with dif-
ferent axis ratios of 1: 1.2 , 1: 1.6, 1: 2.1, 1: 3 and 1: 4.8. However the heat
transfer surfaces of the tube and fins were kept approximately constant
at all axis ratios, in order to allow a fair heat transfer comparison. The
initial values for the longitudinal tube pitch, transversal tube pitch and
the number of rows were 50mm , 50mm and 4 , respectively. For the heat
transfer from finned tube heat exchangers the interplay of buoyancy
force and the viscous force are relevant for the induced velocity. To
ensure high convective heat transfer buoyancy needs to dominate over
k
μT = ρ
ω (4)
with the turbulence kinetic energy k and the turbulence frequency ω.
An additional source term was used to model buoyancy via the full
buoyancy model
SM , buoy = (ρ − ρref ) (5)
When fluid density is a function of temperature or pressure this
model is used, which is the case in the present study. As the approx-
kg
imate density of air ρref = 1.205 m3 was used as a reference. The flow
field in between the fins is usually laminar, but the flow over the entire
finned heat exchanger may be turbulent. Thus, turbulence models have
been recommended for finned tube heat exchanger in natural

Fig. 2. Geometry and boundary conditions of the heat exchangers and simulation domain for a) front view inline configuration, b) front view staggered configuration
and c) side view.

4
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

convection by Chen et al. (2016). In the present investigation we ap- The total difference in air temperature across the heat exchanger is
plied the Shear Stress Transport (SST) model to calculate the turbulence
ΔTair = Tout − Tin (15)
kinetic energy and the turbulence frequency. This k − ω based model
describes the transport of turbulent shear stress and gives a good pre- giving the total heat rate
diction of the onset and the amount of flow separation under adverse
Q = ṁ cp ΔTair (16)
pressure gradients. Boutilier et al. found that this model well predicts
the flow characteristics over curved surfaces (Boutilier & Yarusevych, The heat transfer coefficient varies along the heat transfer surfaces
2012). The SST model was developed by Wilcox (1988) and adapted by of a finned tube heat exchanger. Typically the lowest heat transfer
Menter (1994). The equations for the turbulence kinetic energy and the coefficient is on the top region of the tube and the highest heat transfer
turbulence frequency are coefficient is on the bottom region of the tube (Chen et al., 2016).
However to obtain the overall performance of the heat transfer struc-
δ δ ⎡⎛ μ δk ⎤
(ρuj k ) = μ + T⎞
⎜ ⎟ + Pk − β′ρkω ture an average heat transfer coefficient was used in the present in-
δx j δx j ⎢
⎣⎝ σk3 ⎠ δx j ⎥
⎦ (6) vestigation according to

δ δ ⎡⎛ μ δω ⎤ 1 δk δω ω Q
(ρuj ω) = μ+ T⎞ + (1 − F1 )2ρ + α3 Pk h=
δx j δx j ⎢
⎜

σ
⎟

δx ⎥ σ ω δx δx k AΔTLMTD (17)
⎣ ⎝ ω3 ⎠ j ⎦ ω 2 j j

− β3 ρω2 . (7) with the logarithmic mean temperature

Pk represents the turbulent production due to viscous forces and is (Tin − Ttube ) − (Tout − Ttube )
ΔTLMTD = .
calculated by ln ( Tin − Ttube
Tout − Ttube ) (18)
δu δuj ⎞ δui 2 δuk ⎛ δu
Pk = μT ⎛⎜ i + ⎟ − 3μt k + ρk ⎞
⎜ ⎟ Thus, from the average heat transfer coefficient, the thermal con-
⎝ δx j δx i ⎠ δx j 3 δx k ⎝ δxk ⎠ (8) ductivity of air and the equivalent circular diameter of the tube as
characteristic length dc the average Nusselt number is calculated ac-
F1 from Eq. (7) is a blending function and can obtain values between
cording to
1 or 0 (1 near a surface), depending on the following formula
4 hdc
⎛⎡ ⎞ Nu =
k 500ν 4ρk ⎞⎟ ⎞ ⎤ λair (19)
F1 = tanh ⎜ ⎢min ⎜⎛max ⎛⎜ , 2 , 2 ⎟⎥ ⎟⎟
⎜ ⎝ β ′ωy y ω CDkw σω 2 y ⎠⎠⎦
⎝⎣ ⎝ ⎠ (9) Even if the tube shape changes in the present study, the perimeter is
̂ is the kinetic approximately the same and thus the characteristic length is constant.
The symbol y is the distance to the nearest wall, I ½
The temperature is not uniformly distributed on the fin (Chen et al.,
viscosity and CDkω is defined as
2016 and Chen and Hsu, 2007). Therefore, we consider the fin effi-
1 δk δω ciency, which is used to calculate the ratio of real heat transfer to the
CDkω = max ⎛⎜2ρ , 1.0x10−10⎞⎟. ideal heat transfer. It is given by the ratio of the fin at real temperature
⎝ σω2 ω δx j δx j ⎠ (10)
and the fin at outer tube wall temperature (Kumar et al., 2017) as
The blending function F1 is used to calculate the constants of the SST
model α3, β3, σk3 and σω3 from the constants α1, β1, σk1 and σω1 based on ∫ (Tair − Tf ) dAfin
η= .
the k − ω model and the constants α2, β2, σk 2 and σω2 based on the ∫ (Tair − Ttube ) dAfin (20)
standard k− ε model. This calculation is done by a linear combination
The air temperature Tair was defined from the average air tem-
of the corresponding coefficients
perature values upstream and downstream of the finned tube bundle
α α α heat exchanger. According to Shah and Sekulić (2003), the compactness
⎛ 3⎞ ⎛ 1⎞ ⎛ 2⎞
⎜ β3 ⎟ = F1 ⎜ β1 ⎟ + (1 − F1 ) ⎜ β2 ⎟. of a heat exchanger is given as the ratio of heat transfer surface to the
⎜ σk3 ⎟ ⎜ σk1 ⎟ ⎜ σk 2 ⎟ heat exchanger volume as
⎝ σω3 ⎠ ⎝ σω1⎠ ⎝ σω2 ⎠ (11)
A
Ccomp = .
The constants used for the calculation are LAfr (21)
β′ = 0. 09, α1 = 5/9, β1 = 0. 075, σk1 = 1. 176, σω1 = 2, α2 = 0.44, β2
Here, L is the length of the array and Afr the frontal area. Hence, the
= 0.0828, σk 2 = 1
and σω2 = 1/0.856. A limiter is used in the SST model on the formulation product describes the envelop of the installation space of a heat ex-
for the eddy-viscosity changer. From this definition of compactness, the average heat transfer
rate and the temperature difference between the outer tube wall and
a1 k the air temperature, the average volumetric heat transfer coefficient
vt =
max(a1 ω, S F2 ) (12)
Ccomp q¯ A Q Q
to obtain a proper transport behavior. S is an invariant measure of qvol = = =
ΔTHT LAfr AΔTHT LAfr ΔTHT (22)
the strain rate and the eddy viscosity defined as
μT is defined. Hence, the heat transfer per unit heat exchanger volume
νt = . and per unit temperature difference is represented by the volumetric
ρ (13)
heat transfer coefficient. We already applied this value in our previous
Another blending function F2 is used to restrict the limiter to the study (Unger et al., 2018). Furthermore the area required to set up the
wall boundary layer. The second blending function is expressed as heat exchanger, usually described as footprint, may be of interest. Thus
2
the relation of heat flux to the frontal area of the heat exchanger and
⎛ k 500ν ⎞ ⎤ ⎞
F2 = tanh ⎡max ⎜⎛ , 2 ⎟⎥ the temperature difference is calculated as cross sectional heat transfer
⎜⎢ β ′ωy y ω ⎠⎦ ⎟ coefficient
⎝⎣ ⎝ ⎠ (14)
Q
A detailed description of this turbulence model is given by Wilcox qcross =
(1988) and Menter (1994). ΔTHT Afr (23)

5
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

2.3. Boundary conditions, model assumptions and simulation method
The commercial code ANSYS CFX 19.0 was used in the present
study. This is a Finite Volume Method (FVM) code, which discretizes
the spatial domain into finite control volumes. Hence, the equations
given in the chapter above are solved for each control volume to pre-
serve the quantities of mass, momentum and energy. A high resolution
advection scheme is used to solve the Reynolds-average Navier-Stokes
equations and the RMS residual target was set to 10−4 for mass, mo-
mentum and energy equations. A hexahedron grid was created by
ANSYS Meshing with fine grid close to the fin and tube surfaces, which
gets gradually coarser further away from the surfaces. For the solid
W
section a thermal conductivity of λs = 16.2 mK was applied. Moreover,
the boundary conditions and computational model assumptions are
listed in Table 2.
2.4. Grid independency study
In order to prove the independency of the numerical results from the
grid an analyses with different grid was performed. For that, we mod-
elled finned tube heat exchanger with circular tube shape,
Ttp = 50.0mm , Ltp = 50.0mm and a tube row number of 4 at temperature
differences of ΔTHT = 60K , 40K and 20K . The resolution of the grid was
varied between 0.32 million and 6.3 million nodes and as evaluation
criterions frontal velocity, Nusselt number and volumetric heat transfer
coefficient were used. The results of the mesh independency study are
listed in Table 3.
As one can see, the values of the criteria change only little at about
4.6 million nodes. In fact between 4.6 million and 6.3 million nodes the
velocity changes less than 0.34%, the Nusselt number changes less than
0.21% and the volumetric heat transfer coefficient changes less than
0.26%. Hence, the grid of about 4.6 million nodes has a maximum
y + value below 1.7 and was applied for the numerical investigation.
3. Numerical results and discussion
We investigated a finned tube bundle configuration, located at the
bottom of a chimney structure. The aim of the study was to optimize the
tube shape, the longitudinal tube pitch Ltp , the transversal tube pitch Ttp
and the number of tube rows N for an inline and staggered config-
uration.
3.1. Effect of tube shape
For the present study the outer tube surface temperature Ttube was
varied from 30 °C to 80 °C. Eventually, we used the temperature differ-
ence between the tube wall and the air upstream of the tube
ΔTHT = Ttube − Tin as the potential for the heat transfer. The tube shape
influences the flow separation from the tube surface and thus the
thermal wake region. Hence, the heat transfer along a single tube and
the tube bundle in downstream direction change with tube shape. Even
though the impact of tube shape on heat transfer flow development was
studied in forced convection situation by Lin et al. (2008), Li et al.
(2014) and Kumar et al. (2016), the influence on natural convection
heat transfer was not studied yet. Starting from a circular tube shape we
changed the axis ratio to 1: 1.2 , 1: 1.6, 1: 2.1, 1: 3 and 1: 4.8.
The variation of Nu with ΔTHT is presented in Fig. 3 for different
deflection at the staggered configuration. In fact the Nusselt number of
the staggered configuration is higher by 88.5% compared to the inline
configuration at ΔTHT = 40 K and an axis ratio of 1:2.1. These results
are similar to the forced convection situation studied by Bhuiyan and
Islam (2016). For the inline configuration Nu reduces with tube axis
ratio for all temperature differences. The flow is more in-line for the
more oval tube shapes and thus the flow mixing as well as the Nusselt
number reduces. However the impact of tube axis ratio is much smaller
for the staggered configuration compared to the inline one. To be more
precise, at a certain temperature difference of 40 K Nu reduces by
24.6% for the inline configuration and by only 5.3% for the staggered
pipes, when the tube axis ratio changes from circular to 1:4.8.
The velocities around the tube bundles are shown in Fig. 4 as ve-
locity plots in the XY plane in the middle between fin surfaces. As one
can see, the wake regions become smaller with increasing axis ratios for
both bundle configurations. Furthermore, it becomes clear that for the
inline configuration the tubes downstream are placed in the thermal
wake regions of the previous tubes and thus the highest flow velocities
occur between the tubes. This effect is less crucial for the staggered
configuration, which is an additional reason for the higher heat transfer
performance. Eventually, the wake regions get slightly more prominent
downstream of the heat exchanger, which is similar to the findings of
Kumar et al. (2016).
The variation of fin efficiency with tube axis ratio at various tem-
perature differences and for the inline and staggered bundle config-
uration is shown in Fig. 5. Fin efficiency is higher for lower temperature
differences for both configurations, since the buoyancy induced velo-
city is smaller and thus is the heat dissipation, which results in a higher
average fin temperature and fin efficiency. For example, η rises for an
axis ratio of 1: 2.1 from ΔTHT = 60 K to ΔTHT = 10 K by 6.9 % and 9.4 %
for the inline and staggered configuration, respectively. The lower heat
dissipation at the inline configuration causes a higher fin efficiency and
thus η of the staggered configuration is 18.6 % smaller than for the inline
configuration at ΔTHT = 40 K and an axis ratio of 1: 2.1. η increases with
tube axis ratio for inline configuration due to higher heat dissipation.
Nevertheless, for the staggered configuration η stays almost constant,
similar to the Nusselt number. When the tube shape changes from cir-
cular to oval with an axis ratio of 1: 4.8 at ΔTHT = 40 K the fin efficiency
increases by 3.1% and reduces by 1.0% for the inline and staggered
configuration, respectively. In general, the effect of tube shape on fin
efficiency is minor.
To evaluate the heat transfer performance of the tube bundle con-
figurations from an engineering perspective the volumetric heat
transfer coefficient qvol was assessed. In Fig. 6 the graphs of qvol are
shown as a function of the tube axis ratios for various ΔTHT . Similar to
the Nusselt number the heat transfer performance increases with tem-
perature difference due to enhanced buoyancy. Here qvol improves for
an axis ratio of 1:2.1 between 10 K and 60 K for the inline and staggered
configuration by 73.3% and 48.8% respectively. Such behaviour is
beneficial for the operation of passive heat removal systems, since a
rising temperature of the spent fuel pool water will increase the heat
exchanger tube wall temperature and consequently the heat transfer.
Table 2
Boundary values and conditions.
Interfaces Temperature Velocity Pressure

tube shapes and the inline and staggered configuration. Nusselt number Inlet Fixed value(293.15K) δu Atmospheric
=0
increases with ΔTHT for all tube shapes and tube bundle configurations, δy

due to growing buoyancy force with higher density difference. Thus the Outlet δT
=0
δu
=0 Atmospheric
δy δy
buoyancy induced flow velocity rises and consequently the convective Outer tube Fixed values No slip Calculated by ANSYS
heat transfer increases by 71.0% and 30.1% from ΔTHT = 10 K to surface CFX
ΔTHT = 60 K for an axis ratio of 1:2.1 for the inline and staggered Fin surface Calculated by ANSYS No slip Calculated by ANSYS
CFX CFX
configuration, respectively. The Nusselt number of the staggered con-
Symmetry δT
= 0,
δT
=0
δu
= 0,
δu
=0
δp
= 0,
δp
=0
figuration is much larger compared to the inline configuration. Because planes δx δz δx δz δx δz

of enhanced flow mixing the heat transfer improves, due to flow

6
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

Table 3 longitudinal tube pitch is shown in Fig. 7 for the inline and staggered
Grid size independence results. configuration. As one can see, the Nusselt number increases with in-
Number of nodes m Nusselt number Volumetric heat creasing Ltp for the inline configuration and reduces with increasing Ltp
Velocity in
s for the staggered configuration. Furthermore Nusselt number as well as
transfer coefficient
in kW the change in Nu with Ltp is higher for the staggered configuration
3
m K
compared to the inline configuration. Actually the Nusselt number of
Temperature 60K 40K 20K 60K 40K 20K 60K 40K 20K the inline configuration changes only little with longitudinal tube pitch.
differenceΔTHT This is, because the following tubes downstream the tube bundle lie
within the wake region of the previous tubes and this wake region
320, 000 1.52 1.25 0.88 22.47 21.34 19.41 2.72 2.48 2.06
1, 000, 000 1.44 1.18 0.83 22.27 21.14 19.19 2.65 2.41 2.00 changes only slightly downstream. Hence the longitudinal tube pitch
2, 200, 000 1.40 1.15 0.81 22.22 21.11 19.14 2.62 2.39 1.97 has small influence on the heat transfer for inline configuration. For the
3, 300, 000 1.39 1.14 0.81 22.22 21.10 19.11 2.61 2.38 1.96 staggered configuration the wake region gets stronger influenced by the
4, 600, 000 1.38 1.13 0.80 22.21 21.09 19.11 2.60 2.37 1.95 next shifted tube. Thus a smaller Ltp increases the flow mixing and
6, 300, 000 1.38 1.13 0.80 22.17 21.09 19.07 2.60 2.37 1.95
consequently the convective heat transfer. For a particular temperature
difference of ΔTHT = 40 K and an increase of longitudinal tube pitch
The better convective heat transfer of the staggered configuration re- from 73 mm to 93 mm the Nusselt number increases for the inline con-
sults in a better volumetric heat transfer coefficient, which is 72.1% figuration by 2.7 % and reduces for the staggered configuration by 4.8 %.
higher compared to the inline configuration at ΔTHT = 40 K and an axis The increase of heat transfer with Ltp for the staggered configuration is
ratio of 1:2.1. The trends of qvol with tube axis ratio are different for the similar to the findings by Bhuiyan and Islam (2016). The relative effect
inline and staggered configuration. In fact, the circular tube outper- of Ltp on Nusselt number is higher at lower ΔTHT and vice versa for both
forms the oval shaped tube, when the tube configuration is inline and configurations.
the more oval shaped tubes perform better for the staggered config- The velocity distribution over the tube bundle are shown in the
uration. Hence qvol reduces for the inline configuration for ΔTHT = 40 K middle of the fin thickness in Fig. 8 for the inline and staggered con-
from circular-shape to oval-shape tubes with axis ratio of 1: 4.8 by figuration for various Ltp and at ΔTHT = 40K . One can see the larger
20.6%. However, for the staggered configuration qvol enhances for wake regions of the inline compared to the staggered configuration as
ΔTHT = 40 K from the circular to the oval shaped tube with an axis ratio well as the stagnation points in front of the first fin. Even if the wake
of 1:2.1 by 5.7% and from the last one to the tube with axis ratio of region becomes smaller in upstream direction, this effect is small for the
1:4.8 by 0.7% only. This result agrees with the findings from Lin et al. inline configuration. At the staggered configuration the wake regions
(2008), Li et al. (2014) and Ibrahim and Gomaa (2009), where the become significantly smaller at lower Ltp , since the deflected flow is
optimum axis ratio for oval tubes was found to be at 1:2 and between closer to wake region. Thus, the flow mixing is very close to the
1:1.5 and 1:2 respectively, as the heat transfer does not change sub- downstream part of the fins and heat transfer enhances.
stantially for higher axis ratios. Eventually, the circular tube shape was The variation of the fluid dynamics due to Ltp will also impact the
used for the inline tube configuration and the oval tube shape with an heat dissipation from the fin surface and thus the fin efficiency. The
axis ratio of 1:2.1 was used for the staggered tube configuration, since impact of longitudinal tube pitch on η can be seen in Fig. 9 for several
the impact of a further increase of the axis ration is insignificant. This temperature differences and both tube configurations. Similar to the
tube shapes were used for the following tube bundle parameter ana- Nusselt number η changes only slightly for the inline configuration, but
lysis. η increases stronger for the staggered configuration with Lpt . Reason for
that is the heat dissipation from the fin surface that has already been
discussed above. In fact, the fin efficiency reduces for the inline con-
3.2. Effect of longitudinal tube pitch figuration by 0.6% and rises for the staggered configuration by 2.8% for a
temperature difference of ΔTHT = 40K , when Ltp changes from 63mm to
Behind each finned tube a thermal wake region appears with a 98mm .
certain length in downstream direction, depending on the flow velocity. The volumetric heat transfer coefficient is influenced by convective
Hence the longitudinal tube pitch influences the location, where the heat transfer as well as the required installation space for the heat ex-
wake region penetrates the fins and tubes in downstream direction. changer. Thus, a higher longitudinal tube pitch extends the installation
However the required installation space increase with longitudinal tube space and a heat exchanger with the same amount of heat transfer
pitch and the compactness of the heat exchanger reduces. surface needs more volume. One can see the volumetric heat transfer
The variation of Nusselt number with temperature difference and

Fig. 3. Variation of Nusselt number Nu against tube axis ratio for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered configuration.

7
S. Unger, et al.
Fig. 4. Velocity distribution in the XY plane in the middle between fin surfaces along the tube bundle with a) inline and b) staggered configuration for different tube
shapes at a temperature difference of ΔTHT = 40K .
coefficient as a function of the longitudinal tube pitch for different ΔTHT
and the inline and staggered configurations in Fig. 10. It becomes clear,
that the lowest Ltp gives highest qvol for all temperature differences and
both configurations. The required volume of the heat exchangers be-
comes less as Ltp reduces and thus the ratio of heat transfer per volume
rises. For the staggered configuration the enhancement of qvol at redu-
cing Ltp is greater compared to the inline configuration, since the vo-
lume reduces and the Nusselt number increases. qvol improves from
Ltp = 98mm to Ltp = 63mm by 30.5% and 37.2% for the inline and stag-
gered configuration respectively. For both configurations a longitudinal
tube pitch of Ltp = 63mm was chosen, as qvol becomes maximum there.
3.3. Effect of transversal tube pitch
The required volume of the heat exchanger and the fluid dynamics
changes with rising transversal tube pitch. Ttp impacts the flow in
downstream direction as well as the flow between neighboring tubes.
The effect of transversal tube pitch on Nusselt number can be seen in
Fig. 11 for different ΔTHT and the inline and staggered configuration.
Since the tube shape of the staggered configuration is more oval, the
transversal tube pitch can be at lower values, without getting in contact
with neighboring fins. For both configurations Nu enhances, when Ttp
reduces, which corresponds to the findings of Bhuiyan and Islam
Fig. 5. Variation of fin efficiency η against tube axis ratio for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered configuration.
8
Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549
(2016). Especially the inline configuration benefits strongly from small
transversal tube pitches. As the transversal tube pitch reduces, the
amount of bypassing flow between the tubes becomes less. Thus, the
mixed air downstream of the heat exchanger has a higher temperature,
the buoyancy induced velocity enhances and consequently the con-
vective heat transfer improves. When Ttp reduces from 100mm to 64mm
and 65mm the Nusselt number enhances by 67.5% and 29.2% for the
inline and staggered configuration at a particular temperature differ-
ence of 40K . Nevertheless, for the staggered configuration Nu does not
increase significantly, when Ttp becomes smaller than 65mm .
Fig. 12 shows the fin efficiency as a function of Ttp for various
temperature differences for both tube configurations. The fin efficiency
performs opposite to the Nusselt number, since higher convective heat
transfer reduces average fin efficiency. Particularly interesting is the
minimum value of η at Ttp between 70mm and 75mm for the higher and
lower ΔTHT , where the global minimum is at Ttp = 70mm . This beha-
viour can be explained by a higher convective heat transfer (Fig. 11) up
to Ttp = 70mm due to enhanced mixing. From this value on the con-
vective heat transfer stays almost constant but the air gets heated up to
higher temperatures, since the flow channel between the tubes is nar-
rower. Consequently, the temperature difference and heat flux between
the air and the fins reduces and fins become warmer. To be more pre-
cise, the fin efficiency reduces from Ttp = 100mm to Ttp = 70mm by 5.6%
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

Fig. 6. Variation of volumetric heat transfer coefficient qvol against tube axis ratio for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered
configuration.

Fig. 7. Variation of Nusselt number Nu against longitudinal tube pitch (Ltp) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered config-
uration.

Fig. 8. Velocity vectors in the XY plane along the tube bundle in the middle of the fin thickness with a) inline and b) staggered configuration for different longitudinal
tube pitches (Ltp) at a temperature difference of ΔTHT = 40K .

9
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

Fig. 9. Variation of fin efficiency η against longitudinal tube pitch (Ltp) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered configuration.

Fig. 10. Variation of volumetric heat transfer coefficient qvol against longitudinal tube pitch (Ltp) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b)
staggered configuration.

and from Ttp = 56mm to Ttp = 70mm by 4.3% for the staggered config-
uration and ΔTHT = 40K . The fin efficiency of the inline configuration
increases from Ttp = 64mm to Ttp = 100mm by 10.5% at ΔTHT = 40K .
The impact of the transversal tube pitch on the volumetric heat
transfer coefficient can be seen in Fig. 13 for the inline and staggered
configuration. qvol rises as the transversal tube pitch reduces for the
inline at all temperature differences, since the required volume of the
heat exchanger becomes less. Although qvol increases at lower Ttp for the
staggered configuration, there is a reduction of qvol when Ttp becomes
lower than 65mm . Here, the flow resistance is particular high and as a
result the frontal flow velocity strongly reduces. For example the flow
velocity reduces from Ttp = 100mm to Ttp = 95mm by 0.2% and from
Ttp = 60mm to Ttp = 56mm by 7.6% for a temperature difference of 40K .
Altogether qvol increases for the inline configuration from Ttp = 100mm
to Ttp = 64mm by 77.4% at ΔTHT = 40K . For the staggered configuration
the volumetric heat transfer coefficient increases from Ttp = 100mm to
Ttp = 65mm by 40.4% and reduces from Ttp = 65mm to Ttp = 56mm by
1.6% at ΔTHT = 40K . Thus, transversal tube pitches of 64mm and 65mm
were chosen for the inline and staggered configuration respectively.

Fig. 11. Variation of Nusselt number Nu against transversal tube pitch (Ttp) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered config-
uration.

10
S. Unger, et al.
Fig. 12. Variation of fin efficiency η against transversal tube pitch (Ttp) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered configuration.
3.4. Effect of row number
Usually, tube bundle heat exchangers comprise several tube rows.
However, the amount of tube rows can vary and so does the heat
transfer performance. The air gets further heated up with every addi-
tional tube row in downstream direction and increases the buoyancy.
Nevertheless, the additional tube rows represent an additional flow
blockage as well. Furthermore, the temperature of the air increases
after each tube row downstream of the heat exchanger and thus the
temperature difference between air and heat exchanger reduces.
Consequently, additional tube rows downstream contribute less to the
heat flux compared to the tube rows further upstream of the heat ex-
changer.
In Fig. 14 the variation of Nu with tube row number N is shown for
various temperature differences and for the inline and staggered con-
figuration. As one can see, Nu enhances as the tube row number reduces
for both configurations. This is, because the temperature difference
between heat exchanger and air and the flow velocity is highest at
lowest N. Consequently Nu becomes maximum for small N. As a result,
the Nusselt number enhances from N = 8 to N = 2 by 49.1% and 6.4% for
the inline and staggered configuration respectively for a certain tem-
perature difference of 40K .
It becomes clear, that the effect is much greater for the inline than
for the staggered configuration. Since the intermixing of air flow is
much less for the inline configuration, the tube rows in downstream
direction are shaded by the hotter air flow coming from the tubes in
upstream direction. Thus, the effect of tube row number is more sig-
nificant for the inline configuration than for the staggered configura-
tion. These effect as well as the most uniform fin temperature further
downstream can be seen in Fig. 15 for the inline and staggered
Fig. 13. Variation of volumetric heat transfer coefficient qvol against transversal tube pitch (Ttp) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b)
staggered configuration.
11
Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549
configuration at ΔTHT = 40K .
The effect of tube row number on η can be seen in Fig. 16 for the
inline and staggered configuration for various ΔTHT . Fin efficiency
changes opposite to the Nusselt number, that is an increase with tube
row number for all ΔTHT . Since the heat dissipation reduces as the
temperature differences between heat exchanger and air reduces, the
average fin temperature as well as fin efficiency increases. In fact η
increases from N = 2 to N = 8 by 13.5% and 17.1% for the inline and
staggered configuration at ΔTHT = 40K .
The tube row number influences the volumetric heat transfer coef-
ficient by several aspects. First, by the change in convective heat
transfer described by the Nusselt number, second by the amount of heat
transfer surface due to the finned tube rows and third by the required
volume of the heat exchanger. As N increases the heat transfer surfaces
and the required volume of the heat exchanger increase as well.
Nevertheless, the additional heat transfer surface is less efficient, as
described for the Nusselt number and thus the highest qvol occur for the
lowest N. More precisely qvol enhances from N = 8 to N = 2 by 95.0%
and 89.6% for the inline and staggered configuration at ΔTHT = 40K .
Even through the present study is focused on heat transfer perfor-
mance of the heat exchanger, it is worth to mention that parts like flow
distributor, collector and the piping system are needed independent of
the tube row number (Fig. 17). Thus, low tube row number would
generate higher investment cost per heat exchanger at a certain heat
capacity. Therefore, we studied the heat flux per cross-section of the
heat exchanger, which is often described as the footprint. In Fig. 18 the
cross sectional heat transfer coefficient qcross is shown as a function of
the tube row number for different ΔTHT and both tube configurations. It
becomes clear, that qcross improves as N increases up to a tube row
number between 4 and 6. At this point the additional tube rows give no
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

Fig. 14. Variation of Nusselt number Nu against tube row number (N) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered configuration.

additional heat transfer advantage, since the additional flow blockage the present findings. For a particular temperature difference of 40K the
reduces the convective heat transfer over the whole heat exchanger. In cross sectional heat transfer coefficient increases from N = 2 to N = 5
the studies of Wang et al. (1996) and Jang et al. (1996) an optimum by 33.3% and 43.5% for the inline and staggered configuration respec-
heat transfer was found for 4 row heat exchanger, which corresponds to tively. However, from N = 5 to N = 8 qcross increases by 2.9% and

Fig. 15. Temperature contours in XY plane along the tube bundle for 2, 4, 6 and 8 row heat exchanger at ΔTHT = 40K for a) inline and b) staggered configuration.

12
S. Unger, et al. Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549

Fig. 16. Variation of fin efficiency η against tube row number (N) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b) staggered configuration.

Fig. 17. Variation of volumetric heat transfer coefficient qvol against tube row number (N) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b)
staggered configuration.

Fig. 18. Variation of cross sectional heat transfer coefficient qcross against tube row number (N) for various temperature differences a) inline configuration and b)
staggered configuration.

reduces by 4.9% for the inline and staggered configuration at
ΔTHT = 40K . In fact, it is not worth to increase the tube row number
higher than 6, since the heat transfer is not increasing or is even re-
ducing for most temperature differences. These results differ from the
findings for forced convection situations by Tutar and Akkoca (2004),
were heat transfer does not increase at a tube row number greater than
4 . For the present study we recommend a tube row number of 5 for both
configurations, since the heat transfer performance is high for most
temperature differences.
4. Conclusion
In the present work the heat transfer performance of an air cooled
heat exchanger for passive residual heat removal systems was studied in
terms of heat transfer and compactness of the heat exchanger. The tube
bundle configuration parameters, such as tube configuration, tube
shape, longitudinal tube pitch, transversal tube pitch and tube row
number, were analysed by the commercial CFD code ANSYS CFX 19.0.
A passive operation of the heat exchanger is expected and thus flow is
driven only by buoyancy. The natural convection heat transfer from the
staggered configuration was significantly higher compared to the inline
configuration. The best performance for both configurations was found
for the circular tube shape and the oval tube shape with an axis ratio of
1: 2.1. As the longitudinal tube pitch reduces, the heat transfer perfor-
mance enhances and the required volume becomes low. Hence, a
minimum longitudinal tube pitch of 63mm was chosen for both

13
S. Unger, et al.
configurations. The heat transfer improves and the required volume of
the heat exchanger reduces for a lower transversal tube pitch until
65mm for the staggered and 64mm inline configuration. Eventually, the
tube row number was studied. As the number of tube rows increase the
surrounding air gets heated up with every additional tube row, but the
flow blockage increases. In fact, a tube row number greater than 5 in-
creases the heat transfer insignificantly and is not recommended for
both configurations. Compared to the initial tube arrangement the
Nusselt number and volumetric heat transfer coefficient enhanced by
15.4% and 47.8% respectively at ΔTHT = 40K for the staggered config-
uration. Our results may be helpful for the design of optimum finned
tube bundle heat exchanger for passive cooling systems under natural
convection.
From the previous and the present investigations an optimized
finned tube bundle heat exchanger design under natural convection was
derived. The impact of different fin designs, such as serrated fins, plain
plate fins, wavy fins, circular integrated pin fins or serrated integrated
pin fins, on heat transfer was not studied. Such various fin designs may
be focused in future investigations, in order to determine the optimum
thermal performance for passively air cooled heat exchanger.
References
Arlit, M., Partmann, C., Schleicher, E., 2018. Instrumentation for experiments on a fuel
element mock-up for the study of thermal hydraulics for loss of cooling or coolant
scenarios in spent fuel pools. Nucl. Eng. Des. 336, 105–111.
Arshad, M., Inayat, M.H., Chughtai, I.R., 2011. Experimental study of natural convection
heat transfer from an enclosed assembly of thin vertical cylinders. Appl. Therm. Eng.
31, 20–27.
Ayhan, H., Sökmen, C., 2016. Investigation of passive residual heat removal system for
VVERs: effect of finned type heat exchanger tubes. Appl. Therm. Eng. 108, 466–474.
Basu, D.N., Bhattacharyya, S., Das, P.K., 2014. A review of modern advances in analyses
and applications of single-phase natural circulation loop in nuclear thermal hy-
draulics. Nucl. Eng. Des. 280, 326–348.
Bhuiyan, A.A., Islam, A.S., 2016. Thermal and hydraulic performance of finned-tube heat
exchangers under different flow ranges: a review on modeling and experiment. Int. J.
Heat Mass Transf. 101, 38–59.
Boutilier, M., Yarusevych, S., 2012. Separated shear layer transition over an airfoil at a
low Reynolds number. Phys. Fluids 24, 1–23.
Chen, H.-T., Hsu, W.-L., 2007. Estimation of heat transfer coefficient on the fin of annular-
finned tube heat exchangers in natural convection for various fin spacing. Int. J. Heat
Mass Transf. 50, 1750–1761.
Chen, H.-T., Lin, Y.-S., Chen, P.-C., Chang, J.-R., 2016. Numerical and experimental study
of natural convection heat transfer characteristics for vertical plate fin and tube heat
exchnagers with carious tube diameters. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 100, 320–331.
Fuchs, T., Trewin, R., Reck, M., Ornot, L., 2015. Passive cooling systems for spent fuel
pools. Nucl. Eng. Int. 2 (2), 35–37.
Hung, T.-C., et al., 2013. The development of three-dimentional transient CFD model for
predicting cooling ability of spent fuel pool. Appl. Therm. Eng. 50, 496–504.
Ibrahim, T.A., Gomaa, A., 2009. Thermal performance criteria of elliptica tube bundle in
crossflow. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48, 2014–2158.
Jang, J.-Y., Wu, M.-C., Chang, W.-J., 1996. Numerical and experimental studies of
threedimensional plate-fin and tube heat exchangers. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 39,
3057–3066.
14
Nuclear Engineering and Design 361 (2020) 110549
Kumar, A., Joshi, J.B., Nayak, A.K., Vijayan, P.K., 2016. 3D CFD simulations of air cooled
condenser-III: Thermal-hydraulic characteristics and design optimization under
forced convection conditions. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 93, 1227–1247.
Kumar, A., Joshi, Y.B., Nayak, A.K., 2017. A comparison of thermal-hydraulic perfor-
mance of various fin patterns using 3D CFD imulations. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 109,
336–356.
Lin, C.-N., Liu, Y.-W., Leu, J.-S., 2008. Heat tranfer anf fluid flow analysis for plate-fin and
oval tube het exchangers with vortex generators. Heat Transfer Eng. 29, 588–596.
Li, W., et al., 2014. Analysis of flow and heat transfer characteristics around an oval-
shaped cylinder. J. Heat Transfer 136.
Lu, D., et al., 2016. Experimental investigation on natural convection heat transfer
characteristics of C-shape heating rods bundle used in PRHR HX. Ann. Nucl. Energy
98, 226–238.
Menter, F.R., 1994. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering ap-
plications. AIAA J. 32, 1598–1605.
Merzari, E., Gohar, Y., 2012. Numerical Simulation of a completely passive spent fuel
pool: lessons learned. In: Proceedings of the 2012 20th International Conference on
Nuclear Engineering, pp. 553–561.
Oertel, R., et al., 2019. Two-scale CFD analysis of a spent fuel pool involving partially
uncovered fuel storage racks. Nucl. Eng. Des. 341, 432–450.
Partmann, C., Schuster, C., Hurtado, A., 2018. Experimental investigation of the thermal
hydraulics of a spent fuel pool under loss of active heat removal conditions. Nucl.
Eng. Des. 330, 480–487.
Senapati, J.R., Dash, S.K., Roy, S., 2016. Numerical investigation of natural convection
heat transfer over annular finned horizontal cylinder. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 96,
330–345.
Shah, R. K. & Sekulić, D. P., 2003. Fundamentals of heat exchanger design. s.l.:s.n.
Sviridenko, I.I., 2008. Heat exchangers based on low temperature heat pipes for auton-
omous emergency WWER cooldown systems. Appl. Therm. Eng. 28.
Tutar, M., Akkoca, A., 2004. Numerical analysis of fluid flow and heat transfer char-
acteristics in three-dimensional plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers. Numerical Heat
Trans. A: Appl. 46, 301–321.
Unger, S., et al., 2019a. An experimental investigation on the air-side heat transfer and
flow resistance of finned short oval tubes at different tube tilt angles. Int. J. Therm.
Sci. 140, 225–237.
Unger, S., Beyer, M., Thiele, J., Hampel, U., 2019b. Experimental study of the natural
convection heat transfer performance for finned oval tubes at different tube tilt an-
gles. Exp. Therm Fluid Sci. 105, 100–108.
Unger, S., Krepper, E., Hampel, U., 2018. Numerical analysis of heat exchanger designs
for passive spent fuel pool cooling to ambient air. Nucl. Eng. Des. 333, 224–234.
Wang, C.-C., Chang, Y.-J., Hsieh, Y.-C., Lin, Y.-T., 1996. Sensible heat and friction
characteristics of plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers having plane fins. Int. J. Refrig
19, 223–230.
Wang, M., et al., 2019. Passive decay heat removal system design for the integral inherent
safety light water reactor (I2S-LWR). Ann. Nucl. Energy.
Wang, M., et al., 2013. The comparison of designed water-cooled and air-cooled passive
residual heat removal system for 300 MW nuclear power plant during the feed-water
line break scenario. Ann. Nucl. Energy 57, 164–172.
Wilcox, D., 1988. Multiscale model for turbulent flows. AIAA journal 26 (11), 1311–1320.
Xiong, Z., Gu, H., Wang, M., Cheng, Y., 2014. The thermal performance of a loop-type
heat pipe for passively removing residual heat from spent fuel pool. Nucl. Eng. Des.
280, 262–268.
Xiong, Z., Ye, C., Wang, M., Gu, H., 2015. Experimental study on the sub-atmospheric
loop heat pipe passive cooling system for spent fuel pool. Prog. Nucl. Energy 79,
40–47.
Yaghoubi, M., Mahdavi, M., 2013. An investiagtion of natural convection heat transfer
from a horizontal cooled finend tube. Exp. Heat Transfer 26, 343–359.
Ye, C., et al., 2013. The design and simulation of a new spent fuel pool passive cooling
system. Ann. Nucl. Energy 58, 124–131.
Yuan, Z., 2000. Numerical study of periodically turbulent flow and heat transfer in a
channel with transverse fin arrays. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Heat Fluid Flow 10, 842–861.