Heat and Mass Transfer

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-018-2282-x

ORIGINAL

Numerical simulation of calcium sulfate (CaSO4) fouling in the plate heat

exchanger
Zhiming Xu 1 & Yu Zhao 1 & Zhimin Han 1 & Jingtao Wang 1

Received: 7 May 2017 / Accepted: 9 January 2018

# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Plate heat exchanger is a widely used apparatus in the industrial production processes. Through a numerical simulation method,
this paper calculates the deposition rate of CaSO4 fouling on heat transfer surfaces of the plate heat exchanger under saturation in
the bulk. The effects of CaSO4 concentration in the range 0.7 kg/m3 to 1.5 kg/m3, inlet flow velocity under turbulent flow, and the
fluid’s inlet temperature from 288 K to 328 K on the deposition rate, removal mass rate and fouling resistance are investigated.
The simulation results are compared with the experimental results showing similar trend. The simulation results show that the
concentration and the flow velocity affect significantly the fouling characteristics in the plate heat exchanger. The deposition
mass rate, removal mass rate, and asymptotic value of fouling resistance all increase with the increase in CaSO4 concentration and
the inlet temperature of the hot fluid, while the asymptotic value of fouling resistance decreases with the increasing of inlet flow
velocity. The influence of the inlet temperature of cold fluid may be negligible.

List of symbols L0 Length of plate heat exchanger (m)

A Heat transfer area of plate heat exchanger (m2) l Characteristic length (m)
C Concentration (kg/m3) md Deposition rate (kg·m−2·s−1)
Cb The concentration in the unit space (kg/m3) mf Mass of fouling deposition on the unit heat ex-
cF Concentration of CaSO4 in cold fluid changer area (kg/m2)
Cμ,C1,C2 Constant term mr Erosion rate (kg·m−2·s−1)
cp Heat capacity at constant pressure (kJ·kg−1·K−1) Nu Nusselt number
D Diffusion coefficient q Mass flow (kg/s)
de Equivalent diameter (m) R Gas constant
dp Average radius of CaSO4 crystals in the solution Rf Fouling resistance (m2·K/W)
(μm) Rf* Asymptotic fouling resistance
E Activation energy (kJ·kg−1·mol−1) Sc Schmidt number
f Friction factor Sh Sherwood number
g Acceleration of gravity (m/s2) Sϕ General source item
h Overall heat transfer coefficient (W·m−2·K−1) T Temperature (K)
I Turbulence intensity TC Cold fluid temperature (K)
Km Mass transfer coefficient (m/s) TH Hot fluid temperature (K)
k Turbulent kinetic energy t Time (s)
kR Reaction rate constant U Velocity vector
kR0 Chemical reaction rate constant m4/(kg·s) u Velocity (m/s)
kt Convective mass transfer coefficient (m/s) V Fluid velocity (m/s)
L Hydraulic diameter of import and export (m) xf Thickness of fouling layer (mm)

Greek symbols
* Yu Zhao Γϕ Generalized diffusion coefficient
zhaoyu727@yeah.net Δp Pressure difference (Pa)
ΔT Temperature difference (K)
1
College of Energy and Power Engineering, Northeast Electric power δ Linear expansion coefficient (W·m−1·K−1)
University, Jilin, Jilin Province, China ε Turbulent energy dissipation rate

η Hydrodynamic viscosity coefficient
ηt Turbulent viscosity coefficient
λ Thermal conductivity
λf Thermal conductivity of fouling layer W/(m·K)
ρ Density (kg/m3)
ρf Average density of fouling layer (kg/m3)
ϕ Generalized variable
ψ Correction coefficient of temperature deviation
1 Introduction
Plate heat exchangers have been widely used as a kind of
high-efficient, compact and enhanced heat exchanger equip-
ment [1]. However, their heat transfer efficiency significantly
declines after fouling deposition. Therefore, in recent years,
the heat transfer characteristics and the fouling problem have
attracted more attention. As for the heat transfer characteristics
of plate heat exchanger, Rios-Iribe et al. [2] presented a CFD
analysis of heat transfer characteristics of a non-Newtonian
fluid flowing through a plate heat exchanger, and the CFD
results were fitted to an empirical correlation. Vitillo et al.
[3] proposed an innovative plate heat exchanger and provided
designers with thermal-hydraulic correlations, which can be
beneficial to any industrial application that needs compact
heat exchanger technologies. Fratczak et al. [4] suggested a
simplified dynamical modeling for plate heat exchangers. The
result showed that the model and tuning method are useful in
practical applications. Many studies [5, 6] were performed to
investigate the performance of plate heat exchangers using
CFD, and the simulation results were compared with experi-
mental results showing similar trends. Tabari and Heris [7]
added nano-particles to water to enhance heat transfer in a
plate heat exchanger, easing the pasteurization of milk and
production of milky products. Sarafraz and Hormozi [8] stud-
ied the heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of multi-
walled carbon nanotube, aqueous nano-fluids inside a plate
heat exchanger, and the results demonstrated the presence of
multi-walled carbon nanotubes inside the water can enhance
the heat transfer performance. Jorge and Pinto [9] established
a mathematical model based on generalized configurations,
showing the distribution of the overall heat transfer coefficient
and pressure drops could be calculated.
About fouling, in 1959, Kern and Seaton [10] pro-
posed a typical mathematical model, in which the for-
mation of fouling was divided into two processes, i.e.
deposition and removal. This model was considered
generally applicable, and remained an important mile-
stone in researching the fouling. Bansal and Müller-
Steinhagen [11] investigated the effects of variable con-
ditions on CaSO4 fouling in the plate heat exchanger,
and the experimental results were fitted well to the
Heat Mass Transfer
predictions of a controlled model. Wei et al. [12] simu-
lated the precipitation and particulate fouling in corru-
gated plate heat exchangers, and concluded that, accord-
ing to the fouling model of Kern and Seaton, the foul-
ing characteristics of relevant heat transfer surface was
reasonable. Compared with the related experimental re-
sults, the error can be accepted. Zettler et al. [13] in-
vestigated the effect of surface properties on the CaSO4
crystallization fouling formation in the plate heat ex-
changer; the results showed appreciate surface of plate
heat exchanger reduced the fouling, and the surface en-
ergy alone may not be able to describe fouling behavior.
Therefore, the detailed mechanism of the deposition on
surfaces needs to be further investigated. Chen et al.
[14] estimated the unknown three-dimensional pipe
fouling- layer by using conjugate gradient inverse meth-
od. The results showed that an excellent estimation on
the fouling-layer profiles can be obtained for the cases
studied, and the investigation contributed to the sched-
uling of pipe cleaning. Grijspeerdt et al. [15] studied the
flow pattern of milk between two corrugated plates, and
the results showed that the 3D calculations easily iden-
tify regions that were sensitive to fouling, and provided
guidance for better design of a plate heat exchanger.
Pääkkönen et al. [16] calculated the deposition rate of
CaCO3 fouling on a flat-plate exchanger surface, and
the results showed that the correspondence between the
experimental and modeled results occurs when the time
scaling factor was added to the surface integration mod-
el. Abd-Elhadya and Malayeri [17] presented the effects
of crystallization fouling on the subcooled flow boiling.
Moreover, the study found that the surface temperature
of the heated tube increased with the development of
the fouling layer.
Great efforts have been devoted to the study of the heat
transfer performance of plate heat exchanger in literature.
However, it is not comprehensive enough for the study of foul-
ing characteristics in plate heat exchangers. Consequently, in
this work, the fouling characteristics of CaSO4 deposited on the
heat transfer surfaces of a plate heat exchanger under different
operating conditions were simulated using FLUENT CFD
software.
2 CFD modeling
2.1 Geometrical model
A BR0.015F plate heat exchanger (Fig. 1) was selected as the
research object, and the 3D physical model with the same size
as the actual apparatus was established. The geometries of the
BR0.015F plate heat exchanger are given in Table 1. Two
computational flow domains were considered, one for the cold
Heat Mass Transfer

Fig. 1 Plate exchanger physical

model Hot fluid outlet Hot fluid inlet

Cold fluid inlet Cold fluid outlet

and one for the hot fluid passage, and the passages are con- According to Konak’s study [19], the deposition rate of
fined between the plates. Only a surface for heat transfer be- CaSO4 fouling can be presented as follows
tween these two passages exists. 8 "   #1 = 9
<1 β 1 β 2 β 2=

2.2 Mathematical model md ¼ β⋅ ⋅ þ Δc− ⋅ þ ⋅Δc ð3Þ

:2 kR 4 kR kR ;

The analysis in this work is based on the following
assumptions:
1. The influence of gravity is negligible.
2. The effect of viscous dissipation in flow processes is
negligible.
3. The fluid is incompressible Newtonian fluid, with three-
dimensional turbulent flow.
4. The physical properties of fluid remain constant.
where β is mass transfer coefficient determined by Sherwood
and the diffusion coefficient. Δc is concentration difference
between the mainstream concentration and the saturated con-
centration on the surface of deposition layer.
Sh⋅D
β¼ ð4Þ
de
Sh can be calculated by the following semi-empirical formulas

Sh ¼ 0:034⋅Re0:875 ⋅Sc1=3 ð5Þ

The flow and heat transfer in the plate heat exchangers
satisfy the continuity, momentum, energy, and standard k ‐ ε Reynolds number can be calculated from
turbulence model.
Vρd e
According to [12], the governing equations can be written Re ¼ ð6Þ
as η
! H
∂ðρϕÞ
*
  V¼ V0 ð7Þ
þ div ρ U ϕ ¼ div Γφ gradϕ þ S φ ð1Þ H−x f
∂t
where V is fluid velocity above the fouling layer, H is height
* between the two plates,V0 is inlet velocity, xf is thickness of
where Φ is universal variable, ρ is fluid density, t is time, U is
fouling layer, de is equivalent diameter between the two plates.
velocity vector, Γφ is general diffusion coefficient, Sφ is gen-
The Schmidt number Sc is
eral source term.
η
Sc ¼ ð8Þ
2.3 Fouling model ρ⋅D

where D is diffusion coefficient.kR is the surface reaction rate

Thermal resistance [18] of the fouling layer is defined as
constant which can be calculated by Arrhenius law [16]
dR f
ρf λf ¼ md −mr ð2Þ ‐ E
k R ¼ k R0 ⋅e R⋅T F ð9Þ
dθ
where ρf is average density of fouling layer, λf is thermal where E is reaction activation energy and k R0 is reaction con-
conductivity of fouling layer, Rf is thermal resistance of foul- stant, E = 37,143 J·mol−1 K−1, k R0 =7.07m4·kg−1 s−1, R is uni-
ing layer, md is t deposition rate, mr is removal mass rate. versal gas constant, TF is surface temperature of fouling layer.

Table 1 Geometrical specifications of plate heat exchanger

Material Dimension sheet/ Heating area Corrugation Equivalent diameter Plate thickness Process Plate spacing
mm /m2 form /mm /mm composition /mm

steel 304 258 × 100 0.15 Chevron 4 0.6 1 × 5/1 × 6 2

 Heat Mass Transfer

The model of the removal mass rate of CaSO4 fouling is dissipation rate are obtained by the following calcula-
given in [20]: tion formulas [22]:
I ¼ 0:16ðReÞ−0:125 ð12Þ
K  1=3
mr ¼ ⋅ρ f ⋅ð1 þ δ⋅ΔT Þ⋅d P ⋅ ρ2 ⋅η⋅g ⋅x f ⋅V 2 ð10Þ
P 3  2
k¼ VI ð13Þ
2
where the measurement methods of removal mass rate
k 3=2
based on Krause’s study [21], KP ¼ 83:2⋅V 0:54 , (1 + δ ε ¼ cμ 3=4 ð14Þ
l
ΔT) which describes the temperature pressure in the
fouling layer, δ is linear expansion coefficient, ΔT is where V is average velocity of inlet, l = 0.07 L is characteristic
temperature gradient in the fouling layer; dp is average length, where L is hydraulic diameter of inlet and outlet.
diameter of crystal for CaSO4 solution, which is about
36 μm.
The thickness of fouling layer is calculated as the total
3 Calculation method and validation
deposit mass per surface area divided by the density of the
experiment
fouling layer as follows:
mtþΔt 3.1 Calculation method
xf ¼ ð11Þ
ρf
The commercial Fluent 14.0 CFD software was used to sim-
ulate the process. SIMPLE algorithm was adopted. The
where mt + Δt is sum of total mass per surface area at governing equations were discretized by second-order upwind
time t added to the calculated mass rate during the scheme for convection terms, and the central difference
new computing step Δt. ρf is mean density of the foul- scheme is used for diffusion terms. A partial view of the mesh
ing layer. is shown in Fig. 2. The equal velocity method was used in the
present work, so inlet velocity of cold and hot fluid were same;
Time step was set to 3600 s. The convergence criterion of the
2.4 Boundary conditions
residual of continuity, momentum and energy equations was
set to 10−6. The accuracy of grids in numerical simulation
In the numerical simulation, the velocity inlet condition
needs to be verified; Fig. 3 shows the independent verification
is used to define inlet boundary condition in the plate
of the grid. Since when the total number of grids is 1.4million,
heat exchanger, while for the outlet the pressure outlet
Nusselt number changes little, 1.4million was chosen as the
condition is used. The surface which the cold and hot
number of girds.
fluids contact with is set to heat transfer surface; the
plates are set to COUPLED boundary condition, and hl
Nu ¼ ð15Þ
other surfaces are in adiabatic boundary condition. λ
The range of inlet temperature for the cold fluid is
within 288 K–328 K, and the range 318 K to
358 K.is the range for inlet temperature. Reynolds
number varies within 2634 to 7901; correspondingly, 3.2 Validation experiment
the inlet velocity changes from 0.4 m/s to 1.2 m/s.
Inlet concentration of CaSO 4 is from 0.7 kg/m 3 to 3.2.1 Experimental set-up
1.5 kg/m3.
During calculation, the initial value of turbulence in- The calculation results were validated by the experimental
t e n s i t y, t u r b u l e n t k i n e t i c e n e r g y a n d t u r b u l e n t results from CaSO 4 fouling tests using an existing

Fig. 2 A partial view of the mesh

Heat Mass Transfer

65
exchanger to transfer heat with hot water. Finally, the working
60
fluid flows back to the low temperature tank. The set-up also
has a high temperature circulating loop. The high-temperature,
55 pump circulates the hot water that flows through a turbine
flow meter measures the volume flow of the hot water, and
50 then the water flows back to the high temperature tank. A
Nu

cooling loop takes the heat away from the circulating working
45 fluid to make sure that the working fluid flows into the plate
heat exchanger at a set temperature. The Data Acquisition
40 System acquires temperature, fluid velocity and the pressure
signals and the results are stored into a computer.
35

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
grid number (million) 3.2.2 Experimental principles
Fig. 3 Independent verification of the grid
The fouling resistance Rf [23] is defined as
experimental set-up of a plate heat exchanger; the schematic 1 1
diagram is shown in Fig. 4. The geometries of the BR0.015F Rf ¼ − ð16Þ
k k0
plate heat exchanger are described in section 2.1, which are
identical to the computed geometries used in CFD. The set-up where k0 and k are the overall heat transfer coefficient of clean
had a working fluid circulating loop. CaSO4 fouling was pre- (unfouled) surfaces and the fouled surfaces in W·(m2·K)−1.
pared by mixing of 244.8 g CaCl2 and 313.2 g of Na2SO4 into The overall heat transfer coefficient can be calculated by
the low temperature tank of 200 dm3. The mass concentration φ
of CaSO4 was 1.5 kg/m3. According to Fig. 4, the low- k¼ ð17Þ
AψΔT m
temperature circulation pump pumps the working fluid that
flows through an electromagnetic flow meter to measure the The first law of thermodynamics requires the rate of heat
volume flow of the working fluid. Then it enters the plate heat transfer in the heat exchanger is equal to the rate of heat
circuit balancing valves
air cooler

air cooling tank

turbine flow meter

temperature measuring point
circulation pump

temperature measuring point

air cooling

circulating pump
high temperature
pressure measuring point pressure measuring point
heat exchanger

thermostatic water tank

plate heat
electric heater

exchanger
low temperature circulating pump

low temperature tank

bypass valve

pressure measuring point pressure measuring point

circuit balancing valves

temperature measuring point temperature measuring point

electromagnetic flow meter
cool loop

Fig. 4 Schematic diagram of experimental system

 Heat Mass Transfer

100
transfer from hot fluid (Ф1), and also equal to the rate of heat
transfer to cold one(Ф2).That is: 90
 0 0
0  0 0
0 80
ϕ ¼ kAψΔT m ¼ qm1 cp T 1 −T 1 ¼ qm2 cp T 2 −T 2 ð18Þ 70
60
where A is heat exchange surface in m2, Ψ is temperature

relative error
difference correction factor, ΔTm is logarithmic mean temper- 50
ature difference in K, cp is specific heat at constant pressure in 40
kJ·(kg·K)−1, qm1 and qm2 are mass fluid velocity of high- 30
temperature working fluid and low temperature working fluid
20
in kg·s−1,respectively, T1', T1'' are inlet and outlet temperatures
of the high temperature working fluid (in K), and T2', T2'' are 10
low temperature working fluid (in K). 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
time (hour)
3.2.3 Experimental results Fig. 6 The variation of relative error with time

The experimental setup consisted of 5 cold fluid pas-

sages, 6 hot fluid passages and 10 heat transfer sur-
faces. The fouling of CaSO4 deposits on the cold fluid
passages. Two plates form a passage and are both in- a
6.0
volved in the heat transfer except the plates at the ends
3
of the heat exchanger, meaning each passage has two 0.7kg/m
surfaces for heat transfer. However, in this work, only 4.8 0.9kg/m
3

3
one cold fluid passage and one hot fluid passage were 1.1kg/m
md/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

3
1.3kg/m
simulated. Therefore, it is necessary to convert the area 3.6 3
1.5kg/m
of heat transfer first. The heat transfer surfaces in the
experiment should be converted into the same number
as the numerical simulation, and then compared the val- 2.4
ue of simulation with experimental results. The compar-
ison between experimental results and simulation results 1.2
is shown in Fig. 5; the variation of relative error with
V=0.6m/s, TC inlet
=308K, TH inlet
=328K
time is shown in Fig. 6. From Fig. 6, the relative error
0.0
is larger at the early stages of the fouling growth peri- 0 100 200 300 400
od, and then the variation range is less than 10%. time (hour)
b
1.079114
Expreimental results
6 Simulation results 3
1.079113 0.7kg/m
Fitting curve of expreimental results
md/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

5
1.079112
-1

4
10 m K·W
-5 2

1.079111
3

2 1.079110
R /
f

1 1.079109
3
c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , V=0.1m/s, TC, inlet=308K, TH, inlet=323K V=0.6m/s, TC, inlet=308K, TH, inlet=328K
F

0 0 100 200 300 400

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 time (hour)
time (hour)
Fig. 7 a Effect of CaSO4 concentration on the deposition rate. b The
Fig. 5 Comparison between experimental and simulation results magnification of deposition rate for the concentration of 0.7 kg/m3
Heat Mass Transfer

6.0
5.364 0.4m/s
3 0.6m/s
0.7kg/m
4.8 3 0.8m/s
0.9kg/m 5.346 1.0m/s
3

md/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)
1.1kg/m 1.2m/s
mr/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

3
1.3kg/m
3.6 3
1.5kg/m 5.328

2.4
5.310

1.2
5.292 c (CaSO )=1.5kg/m3, T =308K, TH, inlet=328K
F4 C, inlet
V=0.6m/s, TC，inlet=308K, TH，inlet=328K
0.0 0 100 200 300 400
0 100 200 300 400
time (hour)
time (hour)
Fig. 10 Effect of flow velocity on the deposition rate
Fig. 8 Effect of CaSO4 concentration on the removal mass rate

4 Simulation results and discussion

4.1 Effects of CaSO4 concentration on the fouling

characteristics
a
10 The simulation was carried out at different concentrations of
0.7kg/m
3
0.7, 0.9, 1.1, 1.3, and 1.5 kg/m3. Velocity of inlet in the cold
3
0.9kg/m and the hot fluid in the plate heat exchanger is constant at
8 3
1.1kg/m 0.6 m/s. The temperatures of the cold and the hot fluid are
3
1.3kg/m
308 K and 328 K, respectively. The deposition rate, the re-
-1

3
6 1.5kg/m
10 m K· W

moval mass rate and the fouling resistance curves of CaSO4

-6 2

fouling are shown in Figs. 7, 8, and 9.

4 From Fig. 7, the deposition rate increases with the increase
in CaSO4 concentration. The main reason is the increasing
R /
f

2 concentration leads the increase in the fouling deposition rate.

V=0.6m/s, TC =308K TH =328K The boundary concentration is rarely influenced by the change
inlet inlet
0 of hot saturated fluid and remains unchanged. Therefore, the
0 100 200 300 400
concentration difference becomes large between the main
time (hour)
flow region and the boundary layer nearby. The large concen-
b
9.2
6

0.4m/s
5 0.6m/s
6.9
-1

0.8m/s
10 m K· W

1.0m/s
4
mr/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

1.2m/s
-6 2

4.6
3
Rf /
*

2
2.3
V=0.6m/s, TC inlet
=308K, TH inlet
=328K
1
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 3
c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TC，inlet=308K, TH，inlet=328K
c(CaSO4)/kg.m
-3 F
0
0 100 200 300 400
Fig. 9 a Effect of CaSO4 concentration on fouling resistance. b The
time (hour)
variation of the asymptotic value of fouling resistance with CaSO4
concentration Fig. 11 Effect of flow velocity on the removal mass rate
 Heat Mass Transfer

a 12 6
318K
10 0.4m/s 5 328K
0.6m/s 338K

mr/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)
0.8m/s 348K
4
8
-1

1.0m/s 358K
R / 10 m K·W

1.2m/s
3
-6 2

2
4
f

1 3
2 V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TC，inlet=308K
3 F
c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TC，inlet=308K, TH，inlet=328K
F
0
0 0 100 200 300 400
0 100 200 300 400 time (hour)
time (hour)
Fig. 14 Effect of inlet temperature of hot fluid on the removal mass rate
b
10.5
of deposition rate for the concentration of 0.7 kg/m3 is shown
in Fig. 7b, where the downward trend of the deposition rate
9.0 during the process of deposition can be clearly seen. The rea-
son is that, the boundary concentration is saturated and
-1
Rf / 10 m K· W

7.5
-6 2

a
6.0
10 318K
*

328K
4.5 338K
3 8 348K
c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , Tc，inlet=308K, Th，inlet=328K
F 358K
-1

3.0
R / 10 m K· W

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 6

-6 2

m/s
Fig. 12 a Effect of flow velocity on the fouling resistance. b Asymptotic 4
value of fouling resistance changes with the velocity
f

2
3
tration difference in the cold fluid leads to the deposition rate V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TC，inlet=308K
F
increases with increase of CaSO4 concentration.
0
The deposition rate presents a very small downward trend 0 100 200 300 400
at the beginning that cannot be observed clearly in Fig. 7. time (hour)
After the vertical coordinates are enlarged, the magnification b
10.0
318K
5.44 328K
338K 9.5
* / 10-6m2K· W-1

348K
5.12 358K
md/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

9.0

4.80
8.5
f
R

4.48
8.0 3
V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TC，in=308K
F
3
4.16 V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TC，inlet=308K 310 320 330 340 350 360
F

T/K
0 100 200 300 400
Fig. 15 a Effect of the inlet temperature of hot fluid on the fouling
time (hour)
resistance. b Asymptotic value of fouling resistance changes with the
Fig. 13 Effect of inlet temperature of hot fluid on the deposition rate inlet temperature of hot fluid
Heat Mass Transfer

6
328K
of the increase of reactants, the asymptotic value of fouling
318K resistance also increases with the increase of CaSO4 concen-
5 308K
tration. In summary, the deposition rate, removal mass rate
298K
288K and asymptotic value of fouling resistance all increase with
md/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

4
3
2
1 3
V=0.6m/s, cF(CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , Th，in=358K
0
0 100 200 300
time (hour)
Fig. 16 Effect of the inlet temperature of cold fluid on deposition rate
constant. However, the high concentration of the solution in-
creases concentration of the main flow region, and promotes
the concentration difference between the main flow region and
the boundary surface. Therefore, the deposition rate of high
concentration of CaSO 4 is larger than that of low
concentration.
Figure 8 shows that the removal mass rate increases with
the increase in CaSO4 concentration in cold fluid. On the one
the increase of CaSO4 concentration.
4.2 Effect of inlet velocity on the fouling
characteristics
The simulation was carried out at different velocity of 0.4, 0.6,
0.8, 1.0 and 1.2 m/s. The CaSO4 concentration in the cold
400 solution was constant at 1.5 kg/m3. The inlet temperatures of
the cold and the hot fluids were 308 K and 328 K, respectively.
The deposition rate, the removal mass rate and the fouling
resistance curves of CaSO4 fouling are shown in Figs. 10,
11 and 12. From Fig. 10, the deposition rate increases with
the increase in velocity. The reason can be explained using Eq.
(3) to Eq. (6) in which the deposition rate is proportional to the
a
9.0
328K
7.2 318K
308K
-1

hand, the deposition amount increases with the increase in the

R / 10 m K· W

298K
concentration resulting in the increase of the fouling layer 5.4 288K
-6 2

thickness and the erosion rate of fouling. On the other hand,

the increase in the fouling layer thickness may cause the de- 3.6
f

crease in the flow area and the increase in the velocity.

Therefore, the removal mass rate increases with the increase
of concentration. 1.8
3
As seen in Fig. 9, before the fouling resistance reaches the V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TH，inlet=358K
F

asymptotic value, the slope of the fouling resistance increases 0.0

0 100 200 300 400
with the increase in CaSO4 concentration because the increase
time (hour)
of the reactants accelerates the reaction rate, which leads to the
increase of the deposition rate. As shown in Fig. 9b, because b 12

5
10
4 328K
* / 10-6m2K· W-1

318K
308K
mr/(10-8kg.m-2s-1)

298K 8
3 288K

2 6
f
R

3
V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TH，inlet=358K
1 F

3
4
V=0.6m/s, c (CaSO4)=1.5kg/m , TH，inlet=358K 280 290 300 310 320 330
F
0 T/K
0 100 200 300 400
Fig. 18 a Effect of the inlet temperature of cold fluid on fouling
time (hour)
resistance. b Variation of the asymptotic fouling resistance with the inlet
Fig. 17 Effect of the inlet temperature of cold fluid on removal mass rate temperature of cold fluid

mass transfer coefficient, and the mass transfer coefficient is
indirectly proportional to the Reynolds number.
Consequently, the mass transfer coefficient increases with
the velocity increases in the plate heat exchanger.
From Fig. 11, the removal mass rate of CaSO4 fouling
increases with the increase in velocity. The model of removal
mass rate can explain the phenomenon the velocity greatly
influences the removal mass rate and the increase in velocity
would increase the shear stress that the fluid flows over the
fouling layer. High velocity is favorable to the fouling forma-
tion from the perspective of transport process of fouling for-
mation, but the velocity greatly impacts the removal. The ef-
fect of the velocity on removal mass rate is larger than that on
the deposition rate. By comparing Figs. 10 and 11, the incre-
ment of removal mass rate is much higher than that of depo-
sition rate. Therefore, the asymptotic fouling resistance de-
creases with the increase in flow velocity. (Fig. 12).
4.3 Effect of hot fluid inlet temperature on the fouling
characteristics
The simulation was carried out at the hot fluid inlet tempera-
ture of 318, 328, 338, 348 and 358 K. The inlet temperature of
the cold fluid was 308 K. The CaSO4 concentration in the cold
fluid was 1.5 kg/m3 and the velocity was 0.6 m/s. The depo-
sition rate, the removal mass rate and the fouling resistance
curves of CaSO4 fouling are shown in Figs. 13, 14, and 15.
From Fig. 13, the deposition rate increases with the increase in
the inlet temperature of hot fluid because the increase in the
hot fluid inlet temperature leads to the increase in cold fluid
temperature at the wall and the change of the temperature
field. As CaSO4 is a kind of sulfate showing inverse solubility,
the solubility of CaSO4 decreases with the increase in the
temperature. As a result, the concentration difference would
enlarge, and more CaSO4 precipitates from the cycle working
fluid. So the deposition rate increases with the increase in the
inlet temperature of the hot fluid.
Figure 14 shows that the removal mass rate increases with
the increase in the inlet temperature of the hot fluid, and the
deposition amount of fouling increases with the increase in the
hot fluid temperature. The increase in deposition amount pro-
duces the following two results: 1) the increase inthe thickness
of fouling layer; 2) the decrease in the cross-sectional area and
the increase in the velocity. These two effects both increase the
removal mass rate of fouling.
The effects of the inlet temperature on fouling resistance
are shown in Fig. 15a. Both the fouling rate and the asymp-
totic value of fouling resistance increase with the increase in
hot fluid inlet temperature, and the time for reaching the as-
ymptotic value of fouling resistance is approximately the
same. From the analysis above, the increase of the inlet tem-
perature in hot fluid would result in the increase in the super-
saturation at the side of cold fluid near the heat transfer surface
Heat Mass Transfer
and the increase in reaction rate constant. Therefore, the as-
ymptotic value of fouling resistance increases with the in-
crease in the inlet temperature of the hot fluid (Fig. 15b).
4.4 Effect of the inlet cold fluid temperature
on the fouling characteristics
The simulation was carried out at the inlet cold fluid temper-
ature of 288, 298, 308, 318, and 328 K. Inlet temperature of
the hot fluid was 358 K. CaSO4 concentration in the cold fluid
was 1.5 kg/m3 and the velocity was 0.6 m/s. The deposition
rate, the removal mass rate and the fouling resistance curves of
CaSO4 fouling are shown in Figs. 16, 17, and 18, respectively.
From the figures, the inlet temperature of cold fluid does not
affect the deposition rate, removal mass rate and fouling resis-
tance. The deposition rate, removal mass rate and fouling re-
sistance curves all coincide.
5 Conclusion
In this paper, numerical simulations were carried out to inves-
tigate the effects of CaSO4 concentration, inlet flow velocity,
and fluid inlet temperature on fouling characteristics in the
plate heat exchanger. The following main conclusions can
be drawn:
1. CaSO4 concentration significantly affects the fouling
characteristics in the plate heat exchanger; the deposition
rate, removal mass rate and asymptotic fouling resistance
all increase with the increase in CaSO4 concentration.
2. Deposition rate and removal mass rate increase with the
increase of inlet flow velocity, while asymptotic fouling
resistance decreases.
3. Deposition rate, removal mass rate, and asymptotic foul-
ing resistance all increase with the increase in the inlet
temperature of hot fluid.
4. The influence of inlet temperature of the cold fluid on
fouling characteristics is negligible. There is no obvious
variation on the deposition rate, removal mass rate, and
value of asymptotic fouling resistance, when the inlet
temperature of cold fluid changes.
Acknowledgements Authors gratefully acknowledge the financial sup-
port of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No.51476025).
References
1. Wei L, Kan Z, Raj MM, Guan-Qiu L, Arthur EB (2016)
Investigation of CaCO3 fouling in plate heat exchangers. Heat
Mass Transf 52:2401–2414
Heat Mass Transfer
2. Rios-Iribe EY, Cervantes-Gaxiola ME, Rubio-Castro E (2015) Heat
transfer analysis of a non-Newtonian fluid flowing through a circu-
lar tube with twisted tape inserts. Appl Therm Eng 84:225–236
3. Vitillo F, Cachon L, Reulet P (2015) An innovative plate heat ex-
changer of enhanced compactness. Appl Therm Eng 87:826–838
4. Fratczak M, Nowak P, Czeczot J (2016) Simplified dynamical in-
put–output modeling of plate heat exchangers–case study. Appl
Therm Eng 98:880–893
5. Vijaya SG, Bengt S (2014) CFD simulation of heat transfer and
pressure drop in compact brazed plate heat exchangers. Heat
Transfer Eng 35:358–366
6. Sarraf K, Launay S, Tadrist L (2015) Complex 3D-flow analysis
and corrugation angle effect in plate heat exchangers. Int J Therm
Sci 94:126–138
7. Tabari ZT, Heris SZ (2015) Heat transfer performance of milk pas-
teurization plate heat exchangers using MWCNT/water nanofluid. J
Dispers Sci Technol 36:196–204
8. Sarafraz MM, Hormozi F (2016) Heat transfer,pressure drop and
fouling studies of multi-walled carbon nanotube nano-fluids inside
a plate heat exchanger. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci 72:1–11
9. Jorge AWG, Pinto JM (2003) Modeling of plate heat exchangers
with generalized configurations. Heat Mass Transf 46(3):2571–
2585
10. Kern DQ, Seaton RE (1959) A theoretical analysis of thermal sur-
face fouling. Br Chem Eng 4:258–262
11. Bansal B, Müller-Steinhagen H (1993) Crystallization fouling in
plate heat exchangers. J Heat Transf 115:584–591
12. Wei L, Hongxia L, Guan-Qiu L (2013) Numerical and experimental
analysis of composite fouling in corrugated plate heat exchangers.
Int J Heat Mass Transf 63:351–360
13. Zettler HU, Wei M, Zhao Q, MÜller-Steinhagen H (2005) Influence
of surface properties and characteristics on fouling in plate heat
exchangers. Heat Transfer Eng 26:3–17
14. Chen WL, Yang YC, Lee HL (2009) Three-dimensional pipe foul-
ing layer estimation by using conjugate gradient inverse method.
Numer Heat Transfer 9:845–865
15. Grijspeerdt K, Hazarika B, Vucinic D (2003) Application of com-
putational fluid dynamics to model the hydrodynamics of plate heat
exchangers for milk processing. J Food Eng 57:237–242
16. Pääkkönen TM, Riihimäki M, Simonson CJ, Muurinen E, Keiski
RL (2015) Modeling CaCO3 crystallization fouling on a heat ex-
changer surface-definition of fouling layer properties and model
parameters. Int J Heat Mass Transf 83:84–98
17. Abd-Elhady M, Malayeri MR (2016) Transition of convective heat
transfer to subcooled flow boiling due to crystallization fouling.
Appl Therm Eng 92:122–129
18. Mwaba MG, Rindt CCM, Van Steenhoven AA (2006) Validated
numerical analysis of CaSO4 fouling. Heat Transfer Eng 27:50–62
19. Konak AR (1974) A new model for surface reaction-controlled
growth of crystals form solution. Chem Eng Sci 29:1537–1543
20. Brahim F, Augustin W, Bohnet M (2003) Numerical Simulation of
the fouling process. Int J Therm Sci 42:323–334
21. Krause S (1993) Fouling of heat transfer surface by crystallization
and sedimentation. Int Chem Eng 33:355–401
22. FLUENT Incorporated (2006) FLUENT 6.3 User’s Guide, Fluent
Incorporated Lebanon NH, USA
23. Zhiming X, Jingtao W, Yuting J, Xiaoya G, Zuodong L (2016)
Experimental study on microbial fouling characteristics of the plate
heat exchanger. Appl Therm Eng 108:150–157