Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

Research paper

An experimental comparison of two multi-louvered fin heat

exchangers with different numbers of fin rows
€
Bahadır Dogan a, Ozge ba Sarıçay b,
Altun a, Nihal Ugurlubilek a, Mert Tosun b, Tug
L. Berrin Erbay a, *
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering and Architecture, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Batı-Meşelik 26480, Eskişehir, Turkey
b
Arçelik Refrigerator Plant, Eskişehir Organized Industrial Zone, 1st Street, 26110, Eskişehir, Turkey

h i g h l i g h t s

An experimental study for two louvered fin flat tube type heat exchangers.

Effect of number of fin rows between the serpentine flat tubes under same conditions.

Transient period and steady state period of the heat exchangers were examined.

NTU, effectiveness, Colburn-j factor, friction factor and volume goodness factor were obtained.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An experimental comparison of double-row and triple-row multi-louvered fin exchangers was per-
Received 24 December 2014 formed to estimate air-side performance. The tests were conducted under identical thermal conditions.
Accepted 23 July 2015 The studied heat exchangers had identical frontal areas and depths. Transient and steady state conditions
Available online 20 August 2015
were considered. The air-side thermal performance data were analyzed using the effectiveness-NTU
method for a cross-flow heat exchanger with both fluids in unmixed conditions. The results were
Keywords:
evaluated using the volume goodness factor j/f1/3 for the air side, where j is the Colburn factor and f is the
Heat transfer
friction factor. As a result of the experimental study, the heat exchanger with double-row fins was found
Compact heat exchanger
Louvered fin
to be more effective in terms of NTU and effectiveness. The results of the present study were also
Flat tube compared with the correlations in the literature, and it was observed that the friction factor values of
both models were in agreement with the values found in the literature. The maximum deviation of the
friction factor was 15%, whereas the maximum deviation of the Colburn-j factor was 72% due to the
geometrical discrepancies.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Finned tube heat exchangers are used extensively in the
refrigeration and air conditioning systems and are classified as
condensers and evaporators. Many studies have been conducted to
improve the performance of heat exchangers because efficient heat
exchangers are necessary for saving energy. Therefore, multi-
louvered fin and flat tube heat exchangers area often used. Multi-
* Corresponding author. Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Faculty of Engineering
and Architecture, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bati-Meselik 26480,
Eskisehir, Turkey. Tel.: þ90 222 239 3750; fax: þ90 222 229 0535.
E-mail addresses: lberbay@ogu.edu.tr, lberbay@gmail.com (L.B. Erbay).
louvered fin and flat tube heat exchangers are compact and trans-
fer heat efficiently. In recent years, many experimental and nu-
merical studies on the multi-louvered fins have been conducted.
Kakaç and Liu [1] have contributed greatly to the calculation of
heat transfer and pressure drop in compact heat exchanger areas.
Aoki et al. [2] conducted an experimental study on the heat transfer
characteristics of a louver fin array. This study examined different
louver angles and fin pitches and reported that heat transfer co-
efficients decreased with increasing fin pitch at a low air velocity.
Kim and Bullard [3] investigated experimental air-side character-
istics of louvered fin heat exchangers and developed correlations
for the j and f factors. Lyman et al. [4] performed experimental
studies on different louver models with varied fin pitch and louver
angles over a range of Reynolds numbers. This study presented a

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.07.059
1359-4311/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278 271

Nomenclature Pt plate thickness, mm

Q_ ave average heat transfer rate, W
A total air side surface area, m2 Q_ cold fluid heat transfer rate, W
c
Ac minimum free-flow area for air side, m2
Q_ h hot fluid heat transfer rate, W
cp,c specific heat of cold fluid, J/kg  C
ReLp Reynolds number based on louver pitch
cp,h specific heat of hot fluid, J/kg  C
St Stanton number
Cc heat capacity rate of cold fluid, W/ C
t time, min
Ch heat capacity rate of hot fluid, W/ C
Tc,i inlet temperature of cold fluid,  C
Cr heat capacity ratio
Tc,o outlet temperature of cold fluid,  C
dP air side pressure drop, Pa
Td tube depth, mm
f friction factor
Th,i inlet temperature of hot fluid,  C
Fd flow depth, mm
Th,o outlet temperature of hot fluid,  C
Fh fin height, mm
Tp tube pitch, mm
Fp fin pitch, mm
DTm logarithmic mean temperature difference,  C
hc heat transfer coefficient, W/m2  C
UA overall thermal conductance, W/ C
j Colburn-j factor
uc maximum air velocity, m/s
Lh louver height, mm
Lp louver pitch, mm
Greek letters
La louver angle, 
ε effectiveness
mc mass flow rate of cold fluid, kg/s
r density, kg/m3
mh mass flow rate of hot fluid, kg/s
t characteristic time
NTU number of transfer unit
d fin thickness, mm
P pressure, Pa
b compactness, m2/m3
Pr Prandtl number

method for evaluating spatially resolved louver heat transfer co-
efficients. Dong et al. [5] conducted experiments on 20 types of
multi-louvered fin and flat tube heat exchangers with an Lp of
1.2 mm. They found that the fin length and fin pitch significantly
affect the heat transfer coefficients and the pressure drop as a
function of frontal air velocity. Additionally, they investigated the
air-side heat transfer and pressure drop and developed general
correlations for the j and f factors. Qui et al. [6] studied the effect of
the flow depth, the ratio of fin pitch to fin thickness, tube pitch,
number of louvers, and the angle of the louver on the heat transfer
and pressure drop in a heat exchanger with corrugated louvered
fins. Their results showed that the flow depth, the fin pitch to fin
thickness ratio and the number of louvers were the main factors
that significantly influence the thermal hydraulic performance of a
heat exchanger with corrugated louvered fins.
A generalized heat transfer correlation for louver fin geometry
was developed by Chang and Wang [7] with the aid of a large data
bank. This data bank contained 91 samples of louvered fin heat
exchangers with different geometrical parameters, including the
louver angle, tube width, louver length, louver pitch, fin length and
fin pitch. For corrugated louver fin geometry, it was shown that
89.3% of the corrugated louver fin data were correlated within ±15%
with a mean deviation of 7.55%. Li and Wang [8] conducted ex-
periments with a number of large-scale louver models with varied
louver pitch in a range of Reynolds numbers between 400 and
1600. They reported that thermal-hydraulic performance
decreased with increasing Reynolds number. Vaisi et al. [9] per-
formed an experimental investigation to compare two different
heat exchanger with multi-louvered fins in terms of geometrical
parameters. The results from this investigation indicated that the
configuration of the louvered fins has the dominant influence on
the heat transfer and pressure drop. Schampheleire et al. [10]
compared two HVAC heat exchangers using a thermodynamic
performance evaluation criterion experimentally. The first one was
a high quality louvered fin heat exchanger, while the second heat
exchanger is a prototype in house made using 10 PPI open-cell
aluminum foam. It was demonstrated that the louvered fin heat
exchanger proved to have a superior performance in particular at
high velocities (>2 m/s).
Ryu and Lee [11] reported the heat-transfer and the fluid-flow
correlations to describe the performance of heat exchangers that
use corrugated louvered fins. Their f and j correlations could be
utilized in a wide range of Fp/Lp which is not only to Fp/Lp < 1, but
also to Fp/Lp > 1, for 100 < Re < 3000. They also derived flow effi-
ciency correlation which is applicable for in 100 < Re < 3000 within
an error of ±15%. Ribeiro and Barbosa [12] conducted an experi-
mental study to compare the thermal-hydraulic performances of
cross-flow microchannel condensers using louvered fins and metal
foams as extended surfaces. A condensing temperature of 45  C was
used in all tests, with face velocities ranging from 2.1 to 7.7 m/s. A
comparison based on the thermal conductance and air-side
pumping power showed that louvered fins performed better than
the metal foams under all conditions investigated. Phan et al. [13]
conducted an experimental study to investigate the effect of a
tube row, a fin pitch and an inlet humidity on air-side heat and
mass transfer performance of louvered fin-tube heat exchangers
under wet condition. The change in a relative humidity was not
affected heat transfer and friction. However, the mass transfer
performance was slightly decreased with the increase of a relative
humidity and with the decrease of a fin pitch. The mass transfer
performance decreased with the decrease of a fin pitch. Moallem
et al. [14] investigated the frost growth on louvered folded fins in
micro channel heat exchangers. The effects of surface temperature,
fin geometries, and air environmental conditions were studied.
They found that the fin length and fin depth have minor effects on
frosting performance. Park and Jacobi [15] developed an air-side
data analysis method for flat-tube heat-exchangers under
partially wet conditions and demonstrated the method with
experimental data for a flat tube louvered-fin heat exchangers
under various latent loads. Park and Jacobi [16] studied experi-
mentally the air-side thermal-hydraulic performance of flat tube
aluminum heat exchangers and measured the heat transfer and
272 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278
pressure drop at air face velocities from 0.5 m/s to 2.8 m/s for dry
and wet-surface conditions. The correlations for the Colburn-j
factor and Fanning friction factor were developed by Park and
Jacobi [17,18]. Springer and Thole [19] performed numerical and
experimental studies on the flow behavior of louvered fin config-
urations and reported flow characteristics with Reynolds numbers
in the range of 230e1016. These results showed that incorrect
conclusions as to whether the flow is directed by the duct or the
louvers could be drawn. The authors noted the importance of
correctly designing an experimental facility to simulate the
numerous rows of louvered fins found in a compact heat exchanger.
Tafti et al. [20] conducted a numerical study on the flow and
temperature fields for two-dimensional louvered fin geometries
and compared flow behavior and heat transfer coefficients with
experimental results in literature.
Malapure et al. [21] performed three-dimensional simulations
of single and double row flat tubes with louvered fins. Simulations
were performed for different geometries with varying louver pitch
(0.81e1.40 mm), louver angle (20 e29 ), fin pitch (1.65e3.33 mm)
and tube pitch (8e14 mm) and for different Reynolds numbers
(400e4000). The Stanton numbers and friction factors were found
to be in good agreement with the experiment except at low Rey-
nolds numbers. Hsieh and Jang [22] studied the effects of fin pitch,
fin collar outside diameter, transverse tube pitch, longitudinal tube
pitch, number of longitudinal tube rows, louver height, louver
angle, fin thickness and louver pitch on fin performance of louver
finned-tube heat exchanger by numerically. The results showed
that fin collar outside diameter, transverse tube pitch and fin pitch
are the main factors that influence significantly the thermal hy-
draulic performance of the heat exchanger. Ryu et al. [23] carried
out a parametric study and optimization procedure to improve the
performance of a corrugated louvered fin. The JF factor of the
resulting optimum model was increased by 14e32% compared to
that of the base model for Reynolds numbers in the range
0  ReLp  500. Ameel et al. [24] performed a numerical study to
solve the interaction effects between geometrical parameters in a
vortex generator and louvered fin compact heat exchanger. The
results showed that varying the fin pitch, the louver angle, the
height ratio and the aspect ratio have the same order of magnitude
effect on the modified Colburn-j factor and the effect of the fin pitch
is the most important main effect. Carija et al. [25] analyzed the
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of test apparatus.
fluid flow and heat exchange on the air side of a multi-row fin-and
tube heat exchanger by numerically. A comparison was given be-
tween fin-and-tube heat exchanger characteristics with flat and
louvered fins over the range of Reynolds numbers within 70e350.
The greatest increase in heat transfer performance of 58% was
obtained with Reynolds ¼ 350 when using louvered instead of flat
fins.
There is no existing experimental investigation for the com-
parison of thermal-hydraulic performance in serpentine-type flat
tube heat exchangers that have the same louvered fin parameters
but also have different number of fin rows between the tubes. In the
present study, louvered fin flat tube heat exchangers with different
number of fin rows were examined. The thermal-hydraulic per-
formance of two types of heat exchangers with double row and
triple row multi-louvered fins were compared in terms of number
of transfer units (NTU), effectiveness (ε), Colburn factor (j), friction
factor (f) and volume goodness factor (j/f 1/3). In addition to the
comparison of steady state results, the startup period was also
analyzed to obtain the transient response of the two types.
2. Experimental facility
2.1. Test apparatus
A schematic of the test apparatus used in the study is shown in
Fig. 1. The unobstructed flow distances and nozzle geometry all
meet ANSI/ASHRAE 51-07 for air flow and temperature measuring
apparatus. The test apparatus consists of a suction-type wind
tunnel with square cross-section, a circulator of heat transfer fluid,
control units and a data acquisition system. The inlet part of the
wind tunnel has a cross-section of 0.18 m  0.18 m and length of
0.5 m. The test heat exchanger is placed at the middle of the inlet
part. The temperature and the pressure probes are located imme-
diately before and after the specimen to prevent from any effects of
the cross-section changes. The air-side pressure drop through the
heat exchanger is measured using a digital micro-manometer with
a range of 0e30 Pa. The wind tunnel system is in a constant tem-
perature room. Water is used as the heat transfer fluid. Air-side
inlet condition of the heat exchanger can be maintained by the
constant temperature room using a resistance heater and a cooler
with R-22. The heat exchanger is surrounded with a foam of
 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278 273

Table 1 Table 2 shows simplified specifications of the heat exchangers.

Summary of uncertainty analysis. The fin pitch is 1.5 mm. The louver pitch, louver length and fin
Parameters Uncertainty height are 1.1 mm, 6.0 mm and 8.2 mm, respectively, and the outer
Air inlet temperature 0.4%
frame of the heat exchangers is 160  160 mm. The geometric
Air outlet temperature 0.4% notations used by Kays and London [27] are used throughout the
Mass flow rate of air 0.2% present study.
Water inlet temperature 0.4%
Water inlet temperature 0.4%
Mass flow rate of water 0.15% 2.4. Test conditions and methods
Pressure drop 0.4%
The heat exchanger is installed at the wind tunnel entrance. The
heat exchanger height is less than that of the tunnel inlet di-
thickness 1 cm to prevent the heat losses through the outer surface mensions and the bypass flow is eliminated by using a thin layer of
of the specimen. The air inlet and outlet temperatures for the heat foam. The tests are regulated for the air-side with a centrifugal fan
exchanger are measured by T type thermocouples which are placed at constant Reynolds number with air flow rate of 0.0472 kg/s. In
at the both sides of the test sample, four at the inlet and four at the the present study, the Reynolds number based on the louver pitch
outlet. The air flow rate is measured using nozzle pressure differ- is 275. The mass flow rate of water through the heat exchanger is
ence. The mass flow rate and inlet temperature of the heat transfer 0.008 kg/s. The inlet air and water temperatures of the heat ex-
fluid were regulated by a water circulator. Temperatures of the heat changers are maintained at 25  C and 42  C, respectively. The ex-
transfer fluid are measured by T type thermocouples at the inlet periments are repeated three times and the average values are used
and the outlet ports of the heat exchangers. for comparisons. Heat exchangers are exposed to air flow
completely except the outer surface insulated by a tin foam layer.

2.2. Test apparatus uncertainty

2.5. Data reduction
Standard error propagation rules as described by Taylor and
The average heat transfer performance was calculated for each
Kuyatt [26] are used to determine the total uncertainty by using the
heat exchanger. The effectiveness-NTU method was used to obtain
EES (Engineering Equation Solver). The uncertainties of all
the air-side heat transfer performance.
measured parameters are summarized in Table 1. Uncertainties of
The heat transfer rate can be expressed as:
the average heat transfer rate Q, number of transfer units NTU,
effectiveness ε, friction factor f, Colburn-j factor and volume
Q_ þ Q_ c
goodness factor j/f1/3 are calculated about 3.88%, 4.18%, 3.84%, Q_ ave ¼ h (1)
2
2.59%, 3.87% and 3.67% respectively.
where Q_ h and Q_ c are the heat transfer rates determined on the air
2.3. Prototypes and water sides, respectively.


Two aluminum condensers are evaluated: a double-row multi-
Q_ h ¼ m_ h cp;h Th;i  Th;o (2)
louvered fin and flat tube heat exchanger shown in Fig. 2 and a


triple-row multi-louvered fin and flat tube heat exchanger in Fig. 3. Q_ c ¼ m_ c cp;c Tc;o  Tc;i (3)
No surface coating is used on the heat exchangers.

Fig. 2. Geometrical details of the heat exchanger with double-row multi-louvered fin.
274 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278

Fig. 3. Geometrical details of the heat exchanger with triple-row multi-louvered fin.

Table 2
Specifications of the heat exchangers.

Type of HX Fh [mm] Fp [mm] Lh [mm] Tp [mm] La[ ] Lp [mm] Fd [mm] Pt [mm] A [m2]

Double-row 8.2 1.5 6.0 19.4 26 1.1 16 0.6 0.383

Triple-row 8.2 1.5 6.0 28.2 26 1.1 16 0.6 0.316

The number of transfer units (NTU) can be calculated using the j ¼ StðPrÞ2=3 (8)
following equation:

UA where the Stanton number (St) is

NTU ¼
 (4)
_ p min
mc
hc
St ¼ (9)
where UA is ruc cp;c
The effectiveness method can be used to compare the heat ex-
Q_ changers by using the equations for unmixed fluid [28]:
UA ¼ (5)
DTm 
NTU 0:22 n   o
εI ¼ 1  exp exp  Cr NTU 0:78  1 (10)
and DTm is the logarithmic mean temperature difference, as given Cr
in Eq. (6):
εII ¼ 1  expð  NTUÞ (11)



Th;in  Tc;out  Th;out  Tc;in
DTm ¼ ! (6)
Th;in Tc;out
ln Th;out Tc;in
3. Results and discussion

The heat transfer and pressure drop can be expressed in terms of A typical set of instant experimental data for the heat exchanger
j and f factor. The f factor expression is with double-row fin was given in Table 3 to indicate the order of
magnitudes of the numerical values.
dP The measured parameters were the pressure drops across the
f ¼   (7)
2 heat exchanger and the nozzle set, and the inlet and outlet tem-
r ðu2c Þ A
Ac peratures of air and water. The other parameters were calculated
with a front-end program using the measured parameters.
where Ac is the minimum free flow area of the air side and A is the In the comparison of the heat exchangers, the transient period
total air-side surface area. The j factor expression is can be used and is considered the time it takes the process to be
 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278 275

Table 3
Typical experimental data at t ¼ 10 min.

dPnozzle dPsample Tc,i Tc,o Th,i Th,o Q_ c Q_ h Q_ ave UA

[Pa] [Pa] [ C] [ C] [ C] [ C] [W] [W] [W] [W/ C]

20.00 14.67 25.48 29.88 41.75 39.20 208.70 266.52 237.61 18.00

Ch Cc Cr NTU εI εII hc j f j/f1/3

[W/ C] [W/ C] [W/ C] [W/m2 C]

104.50 47.40 0.454 0.38 0.408 0.316 47.00 0.0081 0.1062 0.0172

inlet temperature cause immediate fluctuations in flow time. The

Fig. 4. Transient temperatures of fluids for the heat exchangers with double-row fin.
steady. In the experiments, steady conditions were reached after a
transient period at the beginning, as expected. Measurements
during the transient period were collected and comparisons were
made of the inlet and outlet temperatures of the fluids, Colburn
factors and the heat transfer rates. The characteristic flow time (t)
necessary for air to flow through the louvered fin between the flat
tubes can be estimated by considering the flow depth (which is the
fin width) and the fluid inlet velocity:
Fd
t¼
uc
For this apparatus, t is obtained as 4  104 s. The transient
period is approximately 18  106 times longer than the character-
istic flow time. As a natural consequence, the instabilities in the
characteristic time is also necessary to determine the importance of
viscous dissipation. Under experimental conditions in this report, it
was possible to neglect viscous dissipation. Temperatures of the
cold fluid (air) and the hot fluid (water) with respect to time are
shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, respectively.
The inlet temperature of the hot fluid is regulated by the water
bath at 42  C. The inlet temperature of the cold fluid, which is
regulated by the constant temperature room, has some fluctuation,
but the average value is nearly equal to 25  C. The exit temperature
of both fluids are affected by this fluctuation. The observations of
the transient temperatures can be attributed to the rate of NTU
because NTU provides the non-dimensionless residence time. The
non-dimensionless residence time represents the transient time of
the flowing fluid passing through the heat exchanger.
The heat transfer rate and Colburn-j factor characteristics for the
mini-channel Al extruded flat tube heat exchanger with louvered
fin are presented in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, respectively.
Fig. 6 shows the variation of the average heat transfer rate with
time for both models. Some unstable situations can be observed
due to the temperature fluctuations, but the average heat transfer
rate shows the same trend for both model. The heat transfer rate of
the double-row fin and the triple fin row heat exchanger has a
range of 180 We235 W and 200 We260 W, respectively.
Fig. 7 shows that the Colburn-j factors of the two models are
nearly equal to each other. Because the moderate variations in the
Prandtl number are negligible, the j factor completely depends on
the Stanton number, which is not a function of any geometric
characteristic dimensions. Therefore, no significant variation was
observed throughout the transient period.
(12)
The results of the experimental comparison of the heat
exchanger under steady state conditions are given in Fig. 8 in terms
of number of transfer units (NTU), effectiveness (εI and εII), Colburn
factor (j), friction factor (f) and volume goodness factor (j/f 1/3).

Fig. 5. Transient temperatures of fluids for the heat exchangers with triple-row fin. Fig. 6. Deviation of average heat transfer rate versus time.
276 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278

hydraulic performance of the heat exchangers using the Colburn-j

factor and the friction factor, and the results show that the number
of fin rows has no significant effect on the ratio of j=f 1=3 . By a
marginal evaluation considering the errors due to the uncertainties,
the greatest variation is obtained between j=f 1=3 þ 3:67% error of
double-row and j=f 1=3  3:67% error of triple-row fin heat ex-
changers, which constitutes a deviation of %11 instead of 5%. In the
reverse case the difference is going to be unnoticeable.
Additionally, previous studies on louvered fins have shown
correlations to estimate the heat transfer and the pressure drop
characteristics of multi-louvered fin heat exchangers in terms of
the Colburn-j factor and the friction factor in the literature. The
basic equations of these correlations [6] are

c
c
j ¼ C1 ReLp 2 and f ¼ C3 ReLp 4 (13)

Fig. 7. Deviation of Colburn-j factor versus time. where Cl, C2, C3 and C4 are dependent on the physical dimensions of
the heat exchanger.
An important design parameter of the heat exchangers is the Experimental results of this study were compared with the
number of transfer units, NTU. The NTU represents the relative correlations obtained by.
magnitude of the heat transfer rate in comparison with the rate of
change of the enthalpy of the fluid with the minimum heat capacity
Kim and Bullard [2], 100  ReLp  600
rate. Therefore, the air that is the fluid for external flow with the
minimum heat capacity rate has a direct effect on the NTU. The NTU  0:257  0:13  0:29  0:235
is not considered to be a direct indicator of physical size of the heat La Fp Fh Fd
j ¼ Re0:487
Lp
exchanger whereas it provides the thermal size of the heat 90 Lp Lp Lp
exchangers. (14)
 0:68  0:279  0:05
It is quite valuable to use the normalized values of parameters L Tp d
 h
like the number of transfer units NTU, or effectiveness ε for Lp Lp Lp
different structures of the heat exchangers from the designer's
point of view. Normalized values (NTU, ε, j, f ) are obtained such that  0:444  1:682  1:22  0:818  1:97
La Fp Fh Fd Lh
the value of the selected parameter divided by the maximum value f ¼ Re0:781
Lp
90 Lp Lp Lp Lp
within the related results of both types. They are presented in Fig. 8
to get a clear comparison between the heat exchangers. (15)
Measures over the last 20 min for the quasi-steady state time
period of 150 min were used for the comparison of heat exchangers.
The figure shows that the NTU value of the double-row fin heat
Dong et al. [4], 200  ReLp  2500
exchanger is approximately 20% greater than the NTU values of the
triple-row fin heat exchanger under quasi-steady state conditions.
     
Effectiveness of the heat exchangers were calculated using two La 0:257 Fp 0:5177 Fh 1:9045
j ¼ 0:26712Re0:1944
different approximations, εI andεII . Clearly, the magnitude of the Lp
90 Lp Lp
effectiveness values is related with NTU. Therefore, the double-row (16)
 1:7159  0:2147  0:05
finned model has a higher effectiveness value. The j factors are L Fd d
 h
nearly equal, but the friction factor of the double-row fin heat Lp Lp Lp
exchanger is greater than that of the triple-row fin heat exchanger
due to its compactness defined by the heat transfer surface area  0:444  0:9925  0:5458
density designated b (m2/m3). b values of double fin row and triple La Fp Fh
f ¼ 0:54486Re0:3068
Lp
fin row heat exchangers are 935.06 and 771.48 m2/m3, respectively. 90 Lp Lp
(17)
Volume goodness factors were calculated to compare the thermo-  0:0688  0:2003
F Lh
 d
Lp Lp

Chang and Wang [6], 100  ReLp  1000

 0:239  0:0206  0:285

La Fp Fh
j ¼ 3:67Re0:591
Lp
90 Lp Lp
(18)
 0:0671  0:243
L Tp
 h
Lp Lp
Fig. 8. Comparison of heat exchangers under steady state conditions.
 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278
Table 4
Comparison of the present study with literature.
HX with double-row fin
j Deviation f Deviation
Present study 0.00842 e 0.10624
Kim and Bullard [2] 0.02163 61% 0.09269
Dong et al. [4] 0.01410 40% 0.10553
Chang and Wang [6] 0.02968 72% non-use
These correlations were insensible for the effects of the pres-
ence of intermediate plate. Under this circumstances the deviations
between the calculated and the measured j factors for both types
are given in Table 4.
The results show that the Reynolds number agrees with the
given correlations. Additionally, the average heat transfer rate
found in the present study and that found in the literature were
calculated using the ε-NTU method for cross flow and unmixed
fluids. Table 4 shows the comparison of the Colburn-j factor and the
friction factor obtained in the present study with the results of
previous studies using the correlations calculated above and the
deviations of the correlation results from the present study. The
deviation of Colburn-j factor is between 40% and 72% for both heat
exchanger models. The f factors from the previous studies are more
similar to the f factors found in the present study than the j factors
are. Specifically, the f factors of present study are in good accor-
dance with those found by Dong et al. [4]. The maximum deviation
is 5%. Geometrical differences have the most significant effects on
these deviations summarized as follows.
Kim and Bullard [2] performed experiments for 45 heat ex-
changers with different louver angles (15e29), fin pitches (1.0, 1.2,
1.4 mm), flow depths (16, 20, 24 mm). The core size is
350 mm  225 mm with triangular channels. The present tube
pitches of 19.4 and 29.2 mm, the core size 160 mm  160 mm and
rectangular channels were not included in their correlation given
by Eq. (14) and Eq. (15). Dong et al. [4] tested 20 types of multi-
louvered fin and flat tube heat exchangers with different flow
depths (36.6, 53.0, 65.0 mm), fin pitches (2.00e2.75 mm). The core
size is 250 mm  200 mm. The present flow depth and the fin pitch
are 16 mm and 1.5 mm, respectively. Especially the flow depth
range of the correlations given in Eq. (16) and Eq. (17) were
incompatible for the present flow depth. Chang and Wang [6]
considered 91 samples of louvered fin heat exchangers with
different geometrical parameters. Within the samples, a unique
sample has a single intermediate plate the between fin rows and
additionally its fin pitch is one third of that of the present double fin
row type.
The explanations of experimental data cannot be generalized
due to the case dependent unique plate-fin and flat-tube geometry.
Unfortunately an assumption of a monotonic parametric effect can
cause misinterpretations. In addition to the discrepancies between
the data in the correlations, our measurements are near the bottom
range for the correlations due to the lower Reynolds number.
Therefore the experimental data of our unique specimens could not
be compared perfectly by the reported data in the literature.
4. Conclusion
The study focused on the effect of fin rows between the tubes in
a multi-louvered fin heat exchangers. The models under consider-
ation had either double or triple fin rows between the flat tubes.
Transient and quasi-steady state conditions were considered.
During the tests, some unstable situations occurred due to tem-
perature fluctuations, but the average heat transfer and the
277
HX with triple-row fin
j Deviation f Deviation
e 0.00785 e 0.09991 e
15% 0.01948 60% 0.09269 8%
1% 0.01410 44% 0.10553 5%
e 0.02710 71% non-use e
Colburn-j factor of the two heat exchangers yield similarities. Under
quasi-steady state conditions, the results show that the heat
exchanger with double-row fins has a higher thermal performance
in terms of NTU and effectiveness, but this model also has a higher
friction factor. The volume goodness factor, representing the
thermo-hydraulic performance of the heat exchangers, has similar
order of magnitudes. The results suggest that the number of fin
rows does not significantly affect the thermo-hydraulic perfor-
mance of the heat exchangers under conditions considered.
The Colburn-j and friction factors found in the present study
were compared with those found in previous studies of multi-
louvered fin heat exchanger. The correlations found in the litera-
ture were insensible for the effects of the presence of intermediate
plate between the louvered-fins. Therefore the deviations were
found between the Colburn-j values of this study and those of other
studies, but the friction factor values of both models were similar to
those found in the literature. The heat exchangers considered in the
literature had only one louvered fin row between the serpentine
flat tubes, whereas the heat exchangers tested in the present study
had two fin rows with one intermediate plate and three fin rows
with two intermediate plates. Obviously using of more than one fin
row between the serpentine tubes profound some differences. The
range of the tube pitch, the flow depth and the ratio of Fp/Lp were
also incompatible with the correlations. Additionally the present
louvered-fins were vertically attached to the flat tubes so that the
rectangular flow passages were obtained. However triangular
passages were observed in the correlations. As a result of these
differences the deviations of Colburn-j and friction factors are up to
72% and %15, respectively.
Although the heat transfer and the pressure drop correlations
are defined generally for heat exchangers with multi-louvered fins,
it is necessary that the performance of every new type of heat
exchanger is analyzed individually. The difference between the
results of the present study and those of previous studies illustrates
the importance of experimental studies for all new heat ex-
changers. Due to the complexity of the combined effects of
geometrical and operational parameters, the results obtained in
this study with the unique geometries are the main contribution to
the literature.
Acknowledgements
This research was performed under the Santez Project (00865-
STZ.2011-1). The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Sci-
ence, Industry and Technology and the Research and Development
Department of the Arçelik A.Ş. Eskişehir Refrigerator Plant for their
support.
References
[1] S. Kakaç, H. Liu, Heat Exchangers: Selection, Rating and Thermal Design,
second ed., CRC Press, Florida, 2002.
[2] H. Aoki, T. Shinagawa, K.K. Suga, An experimental study of the local heat
transfer characteristics in automotive louvered fins, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2
(1989) 293e300.
278 B. Dogan et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 91 (2015) 270e278
[3] M.H. Kim, C.W. Bullard, Air-side thermal hydraulic performance of multi-
louvered fin aluminum heat exchangers, Int. J. Refrig. 25 (2002) 390e400.
[4] A.C. Lyman, R.A. Stephan, K.A. Thole, L.W. Zang, S.B. Memory, Scaling of heat
transfer coefficients along louvered fins, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 26 (2002)
547e563.
[5] J. Dong, J. Chen, Z. Chen, W. Zhang, Y. Zhou, Heat transfer and pressure drop
correlations for the multi-louvered fin compact heat exchangers, Energy
Convers. Manag. 48 (2007) 1506e1515.
[6] Z.G. Qi, J.P. Chen, Z.J. Chen, Parametric study on the performance of a heat
exchanger with corrugate louvered fins, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007)
539e544.
[7] Y. Chang, C. Wang, Air-side performance of brazed aluminum heat ex-
changers, J. Enhanc. Heat Transf. 3 (1) (1996) 15e28.
[8] W. Li, X. Wang, Heat transfer and pressure drop correlations for compact heat
exchangers with multi-region louver fins, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 53 (2010)
2955e2962.
[9] A. Vaisi, M. Esmaeilpour, H. Taherian, Experimental investigation of geometry
effects on the performance of a compact louvered heat exchanger, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 31 (2011) 3337e3346.
[10] S.D. Schampheleire, P.D. Jaeger, H. Huisseune, B. Ameel, C. T'Joen, K.D. Kerpel,
M.D. Paepe, Thermal hydraulic performance of 10 PPI aluminum foam as
alternative for louvered fins in an HVAC heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 51
(2013) 371e382.
[11] K. Ryu, K.-S. Lee, Generalized heat-transfer and fluid-flow correlations for
corrugated louvered fins, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 83 (2015) 604e612.
[12] G.B. Ribeiro, J.R. Barbosa, Comparison of metal foam and louvered fins as air-
side heat transfer enhancement media for miniaturized condensers, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 51 (2013) 334e337.
[13] T.-L. Phan, K.S. Chang, Y.C. Kwon, J.-T. Kwon, Experimental study on heat and
mass transfer characteristics of louvered fin-tube heat exchangers under wet
condition, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 38 (2011) 893e899.
[14] E. Moallem, T. Hong, L. Cremaschi, D.E. Fisher, Experimental investigation of
adverse effect of frost formation on microchannel evaporators, part 1: effect
of fin geometry and environmental effects, Int. J. Refrig. 36 (2013)
1762e1775.
[15] Y. Park, A.M. Jacobi, A simple air-side data analysis method for partially wet
flat-tube heat exchangers, Heat Transf. Eng. 32 (2) (2011) 133e140.
[16] Y. Park, A.M. Jacobi, The air-side thermal-hydraulic performance of flat-tube
heat exchangers with louvered, wavy, and plain fins under dry and wet
conditions, J. Heat Transf. 131 (2009) 061801.
[17] Y. Park, A.M. Jacobi, Air-side heat transfer and friction correlations for flat-
tube louver fin heat exchangers, J. Heat Transf. 131 (2009) 021801.
[18] Y. Park, A.M. Jacobi, Air-side Performance Characteristics of Round- and Flat-
tube Heat Exchangers: A Literature Review, Analysis and Comparison, Air
Conditioning and Refrigeration Center ACRCCR-36, 2001. May.
[19] M.E. Springer, K.A. Thole, Experimental design for flowfield studies of
louvered fins, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 18 (1998) 258e269.
[20] D.K. Tafti, L.W. Zhang, G. Wang, Time-depend calculation procedure for fully
developed and developing flow and heat transfer in louvered fin geometries,
Numer. Heat Transf. Part A 35 (1999) 225e249.
[21] V.P. Malapure, K.M. Sushanta, A. Bhattacharya, Numerical investigation of
fluid flow and heat transfer over louvered fins in compact heat exchanger, Int.
J. Therm. Sci. 46 (2007) 199e211.
[22] J.-T. Hsieh, J.-Y. Jang, Parametric study and optimization of louver finned-tube
heat exchangers by Taguchi method, Appl. Therm. Eng. 42 (2012) 101e110.
[23] K. Ryu, S.-J. Yook, K.-S. Lee, Optimal design of a corrugated louvered fin, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 68 (2014) 76e79.
[24] B. Ameel, J. Degroote, H. Huisseune, J. Vierendeels, M.D. Paepe, Interaction
effects between parameters in a vortex generator and louvered fin compact
heat exchanger, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 77 (2014) 247e256.
[25] Z. Carija, B. Frankovic, M. Percic, M. Cavrak, Heat transfer analysis of fin-and-
tube heat exchangers with flat and louvered fin geometries, Int. J. Refrig. 45
(2012) 160e167.
[26] B.N. Taylor, C.E. Kuyatt, Guidelines for Evaluating and Expressing the Uncer-
tainty of NIST Measurement Results, National Institute of Standards and
Technology, Gaithersburg, 1994. Technical Note 1297.
[27] W.M. Kays, A.L. London, Compact Heat Exchangers, second ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1984.
[28] F.P. Incropera, D.P. DeWitt, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, fifth ed.,
John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2002.