FLUID TO FLUID HEAT TRANSFER:

TUBULAR HEAT EXCHANGER MOD. HE1/EV

DEPARTMENT: CHEMICAL, MATERIALS AND METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING
COURSE: PROCESS ENGINEERING I (CHEE 312)
Course Coodinator: Dr Mbako Jonas
Technical Team: Mr T. Lekgoba
Laboratory Instructor: Mr Bernard Mosweu and Mr Mompati Bulayani
Submission date: 20 October 2023, Friday
Report by:

Name Student ID Programme

Robin Bernard 21000769 Chemical Engineering
Motheo Keipeile 21000772 Chemical Engineering
Tshegofatso Gotsileng 21000732 Chemical Engineering
Sandile Sibanda 21001330 Chemical Engineering
Govind Shain 21000768 Chemical Engineering
1|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

i. DECLARATION
I declare that the work in this dissertation titled “FLUID TO FLUID HEAT TRANSFER” has been
carried out by me and my colleagues in the department of chemical, materials, and metallurgical
engineering. The information derived from the literature has been duly acknowledged in the text and
a list of references was provided. No part of this dissertation was previously presented for another
work piece of this or any other institution.

Name Student ID Signature

Robin Bernard 21000769

Motheo Keipeile 21000772

Tshegofatso Gotsileng 21000732

Sandile Sibanda 21001330

Govind Shain 21000768

1|Page
2|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

ii. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to take this moment to thank every personnel who helped me and my colleagues in the
writing of this report. This includes my lab Instructor Mr Lekgoba and lab coordinators Mr Bernard
and Mr Mompati who helped in guiding us on how to write this report.

2|Page
3|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

1. ABSTRACT
In this experiment, a tubular heat exchange is used in both co-current (parallel) and counter current
flow. The aim is to evaluate temperature reduction, thermal efficiency, heat transfer, and the heat
transfer coefficient of fluid to fluid heat transfer. While the cold fluid's temperature for the first
experimental test was reduced by 13.6°C and 17.5°C in parallel and counter current flow,
respectively, the hot fluid's temperature was reduced by 13.3°C in parallel flow and 15.7°C in counter
current flow. The fluid in counter current flow for the first experimental test had a thermal efficiency
of 96.4% whereas the fluid in parallel for the first test had a thermal efficiency of 83.4 %. In
comparison to counter flow, the heat reduction and efficiency were lower in parallel flow. The
conclusion that can be drawn from this experiment is that counter current flow is more effective than
parallel flow. Experimental results supports the theory that states that counter current flow is more
effective than co-current flow.

3|Page
4|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

TABLE OF CONTENTS
i. DECLARATION________________________________________________________________1
ii. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS_______________________________________________________2
1. ABSTRACT___________________________________________________________________3
2. INTRODUCTION AND THEORY_________________________________________________5
3. OBJECTIVES_________________________________________________________________10
4. PROCEDURE_________________________________________________________________11
5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS_____________________________________________________12
6. DISCUSSION_________________________________________________________________18
7. CONCLUSION________________________________________________________________20
8. RECOMMENDATIONS________________________________________________________21
9. REFERENCES________________________________________________________________22
10. APPENDICES_______________________________________________________________23

4|Page
5|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

2. INTRODUCTION AND THEORY

Heat transfer is the science which deals with the rates of exchange of heat between hot and cold
bodies called the source and receiver (Kern, 1965). There are three distinct ways in which heat may
pass from source to receiver, although most engineering applications are combinations of two or
three. These are conduction, convection, and radiation. A heat exchanger is a system used to transfer
heat between two or more fluids. Heat exchangers are used in both cooling and heating processes. In
most heat exchangers, heat transfer occurs indirectly, this is done via a heat transfer surface that
separates the fluids ensuring they do not come into direct contact with each other or leak. However,
there are a few heat exchangers where direct contact occurs between the two fluids to exchange heat.
(Bergman, 2011). They are widely used in space heating, refrigeration, air conditioning, power
stations, chemical plants, petrochemical plants, petroleum refineries, natural-gas processing, and
sewage treatment. The classic example of a heat exchanger is found in an internal combustion engine
in which a circulating fluid known as engine coolant flows through radiator coils and air flows past
the coils, which cools the coolant and heats the incoming air. Another example is the heat sink, which
is a passive heat exchanger that transfers the heat generated by an electronic or a mechanical device to
a fluid medium, often air or a liquid coolant (Arnold, 1999). The tubular heat exchanger is the
simplest form of heat exchanger. It consists of two concentric (coaxial) tubes. The inner metal tube
carries a hot fluid, and the outer acrylic annulus carries the cold fluid, such that the inner tube’s outer
surface is in direct contact with the cold fluid. Any temperature difference across the metal tube wall
will result in the transfer of heat between the two fluid streams. The hot water flowing through the
inner tube will be cooled and the cold water flowing through the outer annulus will be heated. A
thermocouple is placed at the centre location along the heat exchanger length and at entrance and exit
of both the hot and cold fluid streams. The students control the temperature of the hot fluid and the
flow rate of the cold and hot streams. Tubular Heat exchangers can me modified so that the flow of
the two fluids can have a co-current flow or a counter-current flow (Narayanan, 2008).

5|Page
6|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Figure 2-1: Tubular heat exchanger

Counter-current flow
Counter-current flow is where hot fluid enters at one end of the heat exchanger flow path and the
cold fluid enters at the other end of the flow path (Gurgen, 2021) as shown in figure 2-1.
Countercurrent flow is the most common type of liquid-liquid flow used in heat exchangers because
the difference in temperature between the hot and cold fluids is relatively constant along the full
length of the heat exchanger and has a higher LMTD value than co-current flow at the same terminal
temperature. This practice is also beneficial because extreme differences in temperature are
eliminated that can thermally stress the heat exchanger material, thus making it more efficient.

Figure 2-2: Counter-current flow

6|Page
7|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Figure 2-3: Temperature profile for counter-current flow

In which case:

𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = TI4 − TI6

𝑇h𝑜𝑡 = TI1 − TI3

𝑄hot = FI2 × 𝜌h𝑜𝑡 × (𝐶𝑝)h𝑜𝑡 × ∆𝑇h𝑜𝑡

𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = FI1 × 𝜌𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 × (𝐶𝑝)𝑜𝑙𝑑 × ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑

TI 1−TI 3
ɳhot¿ ×100 % Thermal efficiency for hot fluid
TI 1−TI 4
TI 6−TI 4
ɳ𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 ¿ × 100 % Thermal efficiency for cold fluid
TI 1−TI 4

Parallel or co-current flow

The hot and cold streams flow in the same direction across the heat transfer surface (the two streams
enter the heat exchanger at the same end) as shown in figure 2-3. The temperature difference reduces
over the length of the heat exchanger. With parallel flow the temperature difference between the two
fluids is large at the entrance end, but it becomes small at the exit end as the two fluid temperatures
approach each other.

7|Page
8|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Figure 2-4: Co-current flow

Figure 2-5: Temperature profile for co-current flow

In which case:

𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 𝑇I6 − 𝑇I4

𝑇ℎ𝑜𝑡 = 𝑇I1 − 𝑇I3

𝑄ℎ𝑜𝑡 = 𝐹I2 × 𝜌ℎ𝑜𝑡 × (𝐶𝑝)ℎ𝑜𝑡 × ∆𝑇ℎ𝑜𝑡

𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 𝐹I1 × 𝜌𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 × (𝐶𝑝)𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 × ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑

Tubular heat exchanger calculations
Heat transfer occurs by convection in fluids and by conduction from the fluid to the wall of the pipe.
This heat transfer is down to the difference in temperature between the hot fluid and the cold fluid.
This process can be defined using the overall heat transfer coefficient ‘U.’

8|Page
9|Page F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Q h ot
𝑈=
A × Δ T ∈¿ ¿

Where:

𝑄hot = 𝐹I2 × 𝜌h𝑜𝑡 × (𝐶𝑝)h𝑜𝑡 × ∆𝑇h𝑜𝑡

( TI 1−I 4 )−(TI 3−TI 6)

∆𝑇𝐼𝑛 = = ( TI 1−I 4 ) Logarithmic mean Temperature Difference
¿
(TI 3−TI 6)

𝐴 = 𝜋 × 𝑑𝑚 × 𝐿 Heat Transfer face

(dint × dext)
dm= Arithmetic Mean Diameter
2
With;
L = tube length
dint = tube inner diameter
dext = external tube diameter
From the exchanger E1, the geometrical data are the following:
L = 400 + 400 mm = 800 mm
dext = 8 mm
dint = 6 mm

9|Page
10 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

3. OBJECTIVES
 To familiarize ourselves with heat transfer in tubular heat exchangers and appreciate counter
and co current heat flows.
 To determine the heat transfer coefficient this is the measure of heat exchanger performance.
 To calculate thermal efficiency as the system changes from counter current to co-current.

10 | P a g e
11 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

4. PROCEDURE
The ELCB was firstly switched on and then the thermostat was set to a set point of 40⁰C. The hot
water circulator was switched on and the cold water control valve was adjusted to give a cold water
flow rate of around FI1 = 60 litre/h. The next step was adjusting the hot water control valve to give a
flow rate of around FI2 = 80litre/h. The heat exchanger was then allowed to stabilize and then the
temperatures TI1, TI2, TI4, TI5, TI6, FI1 and FI2 were recorded. The cold water flow rate was again
adjusted to 120litre/h and the heat exchanger was again allowed to stabilize before the temperatures
TI1, TI2, TI4, TI5, TI6, FI1, and FI2 were recorded. The same procedure was repeated again after
adjusting the cold water flow rate to 80litre/h.

11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Counter-current flow
Table 5-1: Recorded flowrates and temperature for counter-current flow
Test FI1 FI2 TI1 (°C) TI2 (°C) TI3 (°C) TI4 (°C) TI5 (°C) T16 Thot (°C) Tcold (°C)
(L/h) (L/h) (°C)
1 64 74 57.8 47.7 42.1 26.6 35.4 44.1 15.7 17.5
2 83 74 57.6 46.7 40.9 26.7 34.1 42.3 16.7 15.6
3 110 74 57.5 45.2 39.2 26.7 32.8 40.2 18.3 13.5
4 120 74 57.5 44.7 38.7 26.8 32.5 39.8 18.8 13.0
5 145 74 57.5 43.9 37.7 26.8 31.7 38.5 19.8 11.7

Sample calculations
Thot = TI1-TI3 = 57.8 – 42.1 = 15.7 °C
Tcold = TI6 – T14 = 44.1 – 26.6 = 17.5 °C
Table 5-2: Calculated data for counter-current flow
Test FI1 FI2 Thot Tcold Qhot Qcold Qlost Ƞ
(L/h) (L/h) (°C) (°C) (W) (W) (W) (%)
1 64 74 15.7 17.5 1351.2 1302.6 -48.6 96.4
2 83 74 16.7 15.6 1437.3 1505.9 68.6 95.4
3 110 74 18.3 13.5 1575.0 1727.1 152.1 91.2
4 120 74 18.8 13.0 1618.0 2087.4 469.4 77.5
5 145 74 19.8 11.7 1704.1 1973.1 269.0 86.4

Sample Calculations
Qhot = FI2 × ρhot × (Cp)hot × ΔThot
3
L kg kJ 1h 1m
=74 ×1000 3 ×4.187 ×15.7 ℃ × ×
h m kg ℃ 3600 s 1000 ml
=1.3512 kJ/s

12 | P a g e
13 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

=1351.2 J/s
=1351.2W
Qcold = FI1 × ρcold × (Cp)cold × ΔTcold
3
L kg kJ 1h 1m
=64 ×1000 3 × 4.187 ×17.5 ℃ × ×
h m kg ℃ 3600 s 1000 ml
=1.3026 kJ/s
=1302.6 J/s
=1302.6 W
Qlost = Qcold - Qhot = 1302.6W – 1351.2W = -48.6W
Qcold 1302.6
Ƞ= × 100 = × 100% = 96.4%
Qhot 1351.2

Table 5-3: Values of LMTD and the overall heat transfer coefficient
Test FI1 FI2 TI1 TI3 TI4 T16 TI1- T16 T13- T14 Tln (°C) Q (W) U
(L/h) (L/h) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) W/m2 °C

1 64 74 57.8 42.1 26.6 44.1 13.7 15.5 14.6 -48.6 5961.3

2 83 74 57.6 40.9 26.7 42.3 15.3 14.2 14.7 68.6 5557.6
3 110 74 57.5 39.2 26.7 40.2 17.3 12.5 14.8 152.1 6048.9
4 120 74 57.5 38.7 26.8 39.8 17.7 11.9 14.6 469.4 6299.2
5 145 74 57.5 37.7 26.8 38.5 19 10.9 14.6 269.0 6634.4

Sample calculations
( T 11−T 16 )−( T 13−T 14 ) ( 57.8−44.1 )−( 42.1−26.6 )
∆ T ¿= ¿
¿
[( T 11−T 16 )
( T 13−T 14 ) ] ¿
[
( 57.8−44.1 )
( 42.1−26.6 ) ]
= 14.6 ℃

13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

d m =¿ ¿

( 6+8 ) ( 10−3 )
¿
2
=0.007m
A = π × dm × L = π × 0.007m × 800(10-3) m = 0.017593 m2

Qhot
U=
A × ∆ T ln

1351.2W
¿ 2 = 5260.5W/m2°C
0.017593 m ×14.6 ℃

14 | P a g e
15 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Co-current flow

Table 5-4: Flowrates and temperatures for co-current flow

Test FI1 FI2 TI1 TI2 TI3 TI4 TI5 T16 Thot Tcold
(L/h) (L/h) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C)
1 62 76 57.3 45.5 44.0 40.1 37.5 26.5 13.3 13.6
2 86 74 58.1 45.0 43.0 39.0 36.3 26.6 15.1 12.4
3 103 76 57.9 44.2 41.8 38.0 35.7 26.7 16.1 11.3
4 116 78 57.8 43.8 41.2 37.6 35.2 26.8 16.6 10.8
5 151 76 57.7 42.8 39.7 36.2 34.2 26.9 18.0 9.3

Sample calculations

Thot = TI1-TI3 = 57.3 – 44.0 = 13.3 0C

Tcold = TI4 – T16 = 40.1 – 26.5 = 13.6 0C

Table 5-5: Calculated data for co-current flow

Test FI1 FI2 Thot Tcold Qhot Qcold Qlost Ƞ
(L/h) (L/h) (°C) (°C) (W) (W) (W) (%)
1 62 76 13.3 13.6 1175.6 980.7 -194.9 83.4
2 86 74 15.1 12.4 1299.6 1240.3 -59.3 95.4
3 103 76 16.1 11.3 1423.1 1353.7 -69.4 95.1
4 116 78 16.6 10.8 1505.9 1457.1 -48.8 96.8
5 151 76 18.0 9.3 1591.1 1633.3 42.2 102.7

15 | P a g e
16 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Sample Calculations
Qcold = FI1 × ρcold × (Cp)cold × ΔTcold
3
L kg kJ 1h 1m
=62 × 1000 3 × 4.187 ×13.6 ℃ × ×
h m kg ℃ 3600 s 1000 ml
=0.9807 kJ/s
=980.7 J/s
=980.7W

Qhot = FI2 × ρhot × (Cp)hot × ΔThot

3
L kg kJ 1h 1m
=76 ×1000 3 × 4.187 ×13.3 ℃ × ×
h m kg ℃ 3600 s 1000 ml
=1.1756 kJ/s
=1175.6 J/s
=1175.6 W
Qlost = Qcold - Qhot = 980.7W –1175.6W = --194.9W

Qcold 980.7
Ƞ= × 100 = × 100% = 83.4%
Qhot 1175.6

Table 5-6: Values of LMTD and the overall transfer coefficient

Test FI1 FI2 TI1 TI3 TI4
TI1- T16 T13- Tln Q U
(L/h) (L/h) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) T16 T14
(K) (W) W/m2 °C
(K) (K)
1 62 76 57.3 44.0 40.1 26.5 30.8 3.9 13.0 -194.9 5133.5

2 86 74 58.1 43.0 39.0 26.6 31.5 4.0 13.3 -59.3 5543.5

3 103 76 57.9 41.8 38.0 26.7 31.2 3.8 13.0 -69.4 6215.6

4 116 78 57.8 41.2 37.6 26.8 31.0 3.6 12.7 -48.8 6726.1

5 151 76 57.7 39.7 36.2 26.9 30.8 3.5 12.6 42.2 7204.5
17 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

Sample calculations
( T 11−T 16 )−( T 13−T 14 ) ( 57.3−26.5 ) −( 44.0−40.1 )
∆ T ¿= ¿
¿
[ ]
( T 11−T 16 )
( T 13−T 14 )
¿
[( 57.3−26.5 )
( 44.0−40.1 )]
= 13.0°C

d m =¿ ¿

( 6+8 ) ( 10−3 )
¿
2
=0.007m
A = π × dm × L = π × 0.007m × 800(10-3) m = 0.017593 m2

Qhot
U=
A × ∆ T ln

1175.6 W
¿ 2 = 5140.2W/m2°C
0.017593 m ×13.0 ℃
18 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

6. DISCUSSION
In this experiment form the observed data tables, Table 5-1 and 5-4, it is clear the outlet
temperature of the hot fluid for both the counter-current and the co-current (parallel) flows
have been reduced compared to the inlet temperature, though they are still higher than that of
the cold fluid at outlet. This implies that heat may not be transferred spontaneously from a
cold body to a hot body and thereby agrees with the second law of thermodynamics, stated as,
a cyclic transformation whose only final result is to transfer heat from a body at a given
temperature to a body at a higher temperature is impossible (Gregersen, 2021). The results
from Table 5-1 and 5-4, for counter-current and co-current flow respectively show that
corresponding Thot and Tcold values for counter-current flow are all higher than in co-current
flow. This can be explained by the fact that as development of a uniform temperature
difference is established in counter-current flow between the fluids over the whole exchanger
and fluid paths. In parallel flow, however the maximum temperature difference is happening
in the inlet and it decreases to reach the minimum at the outlets. For instance, this is shown
by referencing Table 5-1 for counter current, F11 is 64L/h and F12 is 74L/h, with T hot value of
15.7°C and Tcold value of 17.5°C while for Table 5-4 for co-current, F11 is 62L/h and F12 is
76L/h, Thot value is 13.3°C and Tcold value is 13.6°C. The results from Table 5-2 and 5-5, for
counter-current and co-current flow respectively show that corresponding Q hot and Qcold
values for counter-current flow are all higher than in co-current flow. When F11 was 64L/h
and F12 was 74L/h for counter-current, from Tables 5.2, the Q hot value was 1351.2 W while
Qcold was 1302.6 W and the average temperature efficiency was 96.4% and for the parallel
flow system at the similar flowrate as F11 at 62L/h and F12 at 76L/h, from Table 5-5, the Q hot
value was 1175.6 W while Qcold was 980.7W, and the average temperature efficiency was
83.4%. This depicts that counter-current flow has a higher rate of temperature dissipation, as
well as a higher temperature efficiency when compared to co-current flow. The higher
efficiency of the counter-current flow in energy transfer is because of the development of a
uniform temperature difference between the fluids over the whole exchanger and fluid paths
hence maximum heat transfer. In parallel flow, both inlets are placed on the same side, and all
the outlets on the other side, thus maximum temperature difference is happening in the inlet,
and it decreases to reach the minimum at the outlets. It is totally the inverse flow system
compared to the counter flow. This supports generally held knowledge and experimental data
related to the two types of inline heat flow exchanges as governed by the Clausius Statement.
As extracted from the data in Table 5-3 and 5-6, the values of T In are generally higher in co-
current flow than in counter-current flow. This infers that in co-current flow, more heat
energy is being transferred to the cold stream, this can also be inferred from the generally less
amount of heat lost in transmission as can be compared in Table 5-2 and 5-5, for counter
current and co current respectively. As extracted from the data in Table 5-3 and 5-6, the
corresponding values of U are all higher in counter-current flow than in co-current flow. For
example, from Table 5-3 and 5-6 for counter-current and co-current flow the heat transfer
coefficient values at F11 of 64L/h and F11 of 74L/h the U value is 5961.3 W/m 2 °C while for
co-current at F11 of 62L/h and F12 of 76L/h, the U value was 5133.5W/m2 °C. This means
that in counter-current flow there was a larger driving force and thus much easier to transfer
19 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

heat than in co-current flow. From the data in Tables 5-3 and 5-6, the temperature differences
under different flow rates are shown. In these cases, the value for F12 was maintained
somewhat constant at 74L/h for all experiments. The ratio between temperature difference in
the hot fluid and temperature difference in the cold fluid changes with respect to the flow
rates. The higher the flow rate of a fluid, the lower the temperature change in that fluid will
be as contact time between fluid systems is reduced. It is demonstrated by the temperature
difference in Table 5-6, for co-current for F11 of 62 L/h with T11-T16 value of 30.8°C and
T13-T14 of 3.9°C, while for same table, F11 of 103 L/h and F12 of 76 L/h, T11-T16 value of
31.2°C and T13-T14 of 3.8°C. The opposite is also true, the lower the flow rate of the fluid,
the higher the temperature change in the fluid will be.
20 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

7. CONCLUSION
A tubular heat exchanger encompasses of two flows which are the counter current and the co
current flows respectively which were both observed through this experiment as per the
above results. In a nutshell the co-current flow involves a situation whereby both the hot and
cold flow streams enter at opposite ends of the heat exchanger at one end and leave at the
opposite ends while in the co current flow the reverse is true, where the streams enter at
opposite ends of the heat exchanger. The main motive behind this experiment was to observe
the effects of varying flow rates on the temperature differences for both the afore mentioned
flows and the results were recorded and tabulated, respectively. Regarding both the flows of
interest, it can be observed from the table of results that in a nutshell there is a greater
temperature difference in the counter current flow and a relatively small temperature
difference in the co current flow explained by the fact that a counter current flow is
maintained by a slowly declining temperature gradient so in conclusion we can observe a
linear direct proportionality between the rate of declining temperature difference and the flow
rates, that is, an increase in flow rate leads to a higher temperature difference and a decrease
in flow rates leads to small temperature gradient in the same manner. The counter current
flow has a higher temperature dissipation than the co current flow. As per other variables the
necessary temperature efficiency calculations were also done for both the afore mentioned
flows and it was observed that a counter current type of flow has a higher temperature
efficiency as compared to the co current flow. In practice in a turbulent flow condition, an
increase in heat transfer is higher than in the laminar flow, but as per our calculations, within
the tubular heat exchanger we can conclude that the overall heat transfer coefficient for a
counter current flow is higher than that of co current flow calculated to be 5140.2 W/𝑚2 °C
for the co current flow and 5260.5 W/𝑚2 °C for the counter current flow and hence this
explains why at the end of it all in the industry a counter current type of flow is preferred
over the co current flow as proved by our experiment along with the applicable mathematical
proofs.
21 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

8. RECOMMENDATIONS
The experiment was a success, and all the necessary results were obtained except for a few
factors that need to be rectified next time. To improve the efficiency of a heat exchanger, the
fouling factor must be minimized by increasing the flow rate frequently since the heat
exchanger efficiency is affected by the velocity. Secondly the experiment should be
conducted in an environment that has proper ventilation to ensure no heat loss or gain
between the system (heat exchanger) and surroundings to improve precision and accuracy of
the experiment. To minimize equipment errors when taCing the readings, the students should
familiarize themselves with the operation of the equipment before use hence why a teaching
assistant is necessary. Lastly, an increase in column diameter may lead to a greater efficiency
and overall heat transfer coefficient of a heat exchanger.
22 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

9. REFERENCES
Arnold, C., 1999. Design of Gas-Handling Systems and Facilities. In: Surface Production
Operations. s.l.:s.n., pp. 2-3.

Bergman, T. l. &. L. A. S., 2011. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer. 7th ed.
s.l.:Danver: John Wiley & Sons.

Gregersen, E., 2021. Britannica. [Online] Available at:

https://www.britannica.com/science/second-law-of-thermodynamics/
additionalinfo#history

Gurgen, A., 2021. Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy: Nuclear Power Plant Design and
Analysis Codes. Sciencedirect, pp. 261-276.

Cern, D. Q., 1965. PROCESS HEAT TRANSFER. s.l.:McGraw-Hill BooC Company .

Narayanan, V. C. M. a. J. J., 2008. Heat Exchanger Analysis Modified to Account for a Heat
Source. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Volume 130.

Cothandaraman, C., 2006. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass transfer. Revised Third Edition
ed. New Delhi: NEW AGE INTERNATIONAL (P) LIMITED, PUBLISHERS.

F. P. Incropera, D. P. D. T. L. B. a. A. S. L., 2007. fundamentals of heat and ass transfer.

SIXTH ed. s.l.:Wiley
23 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R

10. APPENDICES

Q h ot
𝑈=
A × Δ T ∈¿ ¿

𝑄hot = 𝐹I2 × 𝜌h𝑜𝑡 × (𝐶𝑝)h𝑜𝑡 × ∆𝑇h𝑜𝑡

( TI 1−I 4 )−(TI 3−TI 6)

∆𝑇𝐼𝑛 = = ( TI 1−I 4 ) Logarithmic mean Temperature
¿
(TI 3−TI 6)
Difference

𝐴 = 𝜋 × 𝑑𝑚 × 𝐿 Heat Transfer face

(dint × dext)
dm= Arithmetic Mean Diameter
2
With;
L = tube length
dint = tube inner diameter
dext = external tube diameter

From the exchanger E1, the geometrical data are the following:
L = 400 + 400 mm = 800 mm
dext = 8 mm
dint = 6 mm

𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = TI4 − TI6

𝑇h𝑜𝑡 = TI1 − TI3

𝑄hot = FI2 × 𝜌h𝑜𝑡 × (𝐶𝑝)h𝑜𝑡 × ∆𝑇h𝑜𝑡

𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = FI1 × 𝜌𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 × (𝐶𝑝)𝑜𝑙𝑑 × ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑

TI 1−TI 3
ɳhot¿ ×100 % Thermal efficiency for hot fluid
TI 1−TI 4
TI 6−TI 4
ɳ𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 ¿ × 100 % Thermal efficiency for cold fluid
TI 1−TI 4
24 | P a g e F LU I D TO F LU I D H E AT T R A N S F E R