Design Validation of Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger by HTRI

Xchanger Software

Nirmal S. Parmar
Parul Institute of Engineering and Technology, Limda, Baroda.
PG student, Mechanical Engineering Department,
E-mail ID: [email protected]

Adil A. Khan
Parul Institute of Engineering and Technology, Limda, Baroda.
Assitant Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department,
E-mail ID: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

This paper is intended to assist anyone with some general technical experience, but perhaps limited specific knowledge
of heat transfer equipment. A characteristic of heat exchanger design is the procedure of specifying a design, heat
transfer area and pressure drops and checking whether the assumed design satisfies all requirements or not. The
purpose of this paper is how to design the shell-and-tube heat exchanger which is the majority type of liquid-to-liquid
heat exchanger. General design considerations and design procedure are also illustrated in this paper. In design
calculation HTRI software is used to verify manually calculated results. In this paper attempt is made to overcome
some major theoretical assumptions and serve practical approach as much as possible for shell tube heat exchanger
design. It is hoped that the software will bridge the gap between engineering fundamentals and the existing industry
practice of shell and tube heat exchanger design.

KEY WORDS hid = shell side heat transfer coefficient for ideal
tube bank, W/m2K
Heat exchanger, HTRI, pressure drop, fouling, he = shell side heat transfer coefficient for heat
heat transfer coefficient, LMTD, EMTD exchanger, W/m2K
ks = thermal conductivity of shell side, W/mK
NOMENCLATURE kt = thermal conductivity of tube side, W/mK
L = effective tube length of heat exchanger
Ao = heat transfer area based on the outside between tube sheets, m
surface area of tubes, m2 ms = shell side mass flow rate, kg/s
Ai = heat transfer area based on the inside surface mt = tube side mass flow rate, kg/s
area of tubes, m2 Nt = total number of tubes or total number of
As = crossflow area at or near shell centerline, m2 holes in tube sheet
Aw = area for flow through baffle window, m2 Nu = Nusselt number
C = clearance between tubes, m P = perimeter, m
CL = tube layout constant ∆P = pressure drop, Kpa
CTP = tube pass constant Pr = Prandtl number
Ds = shell inner diameter, m PT = pitch size, m
Dw = equivalent diameter of baffle window, m Q = heat load duty of heat exchanger, W
do = tube outer diameter, m R = thermal resistance
di = tube inner diameter, m Re = Reynolds Number
F = correction factor to LMTD for non counter T = absolute temperature, oC, K
flow systems ∆T = temperature difference, oC, K
fi = friction factor for flow across an ideal tube Uc = overall heat transfer coefficient for clean
bank surface based on total external surface area,
G = mass velocity, kg/m2s W/m2k
h = heat transfer coefficient, W/m2K
hi = tube side heat transfer coefficient, W/m2K

STHE Thermal Design with Optimization of Flow Pressure Drop due to Fouling 82
Uf = overall heat transfer coefficient for fouled coefficients, the wall and fouling resistance and
surface based on total external surface area, the overall surface efficiency using equation
W/m2k
Uo = overall heat transfer coefficient based on 1 A �1 R fi � R fo 1
total external surface area, W/m2k = o� + �+ Ao Rw + +
Uo hi hi hi �
Ai � ho ho ho
um = average velocity of fluid, m/s (2)

INTRODUCTION For the single tube pass, purely countercurrent

heat exchanger, F= 1.00. For preliminary design
The heat exchanger is equipment that allows heat shell with any even number of tube side passes,
transference between two fluids at different F may be estimated as 0.9
temperatures. Heat exchangers are extensively Heat load can be estimated from the heat balance
used in industry due to their wide variety of as:
construction and applications in heat transfer
processes for producing conventional energy Q = (mCp)c (Tc2 – Tc1) = (mCp)h (Th2 – Th1) (3)
such as condensers, heaters, boilers or steam If one stream changes phase:
generators. They provide an adequate surface for
heat transference to occur and their mechanical Q = mhfg (4)
and thermal characteristics allow high pressure
and high temperature processes. LMTD (Log Mean Temperature Difference
In recent years, new software’s for design of heat Method) calculation:
exchangers has been focusing in adapting the
equipment to the required process and new If three temperatures are known, the fourth one
solutions have been found that make the design can be found from the heat balance,
time shorter.[1] (Th1 - Tc 2 ) - (Th 2 - Tc1 )
DTlm =
(T - Tc 2 )
ln h1
BASIC DESIGN PROCEDURE (Th 2 - Tc1 ) (5)
Heat transfer area can be calculated from
A selected shell and tube heat exchanger must equation (1). Number of tubes of diameter (do),
satisfy the process requirements with the shell diameter (Ds) to accommodate the number
allowable pressure drops until the next scheduled of tubes (Nt), with given tube length (L) can be
cleaning of the plant estimated,
The following are the major assumptions made
for the pressure drop analysis; Ao = p e N t L
1. Flow is steady and isothermal, and fluid (6)
properties are independents of time.
2. Fluid density is dependent on the local One can find the shell diameter (Ds), which
temperature only or is treated as constant. would contain the right number of tubes (Nt), of
3. The pressure at a point in the fluid is diameter (dt).
independent of direction. The total number of tubes can be predicted in fair
4. Body force is caused only by gravity. approximation as function of the shell diameter
5. There are no energy sink or sources along by taking the shell circle and dividing it by the
streamline; flow stream mechanical energy projected area of the tube layout pertaining to a
dissipation is idealized as zero. single tube A1.
6. The friction factor is considered as constant
with passage flow length.[4] p Ds 2
N t = (CTP )
4 Ai (7)
Preliminary Estimation of Unit Size:
Heat transfer or the size of heat exchanger Where CTP is the tube count calculation constant
that accounts for the incomplete coverage of the
Q = UoAo∆Tm (1) shell diameter by the tubes.
The overall heat transfer coefficient Uo based on Based on fixed tube sheet the following values
the O.D. of tubes can be estimated from the are suggested:
estimated values of individual heat transfer

STHE Thermal Design with Optimization of Flow Pressure Drop due to Fouling 83
One tube pass: CTP = 0.93
Two tube pass: CTP = 0.90 0.55 1 0.14

Three tube pass: CTP = 0.85

ho De �D G � �c p m �3 �m �
= 0.36 � e s � � � � b �
k � m � � k � �m w � (15)
A1 = (CL) (PT)2 (8)
s s Ds
Where CL is the tube layout constant: 400 < Re s = �1 �10 6
CL = 1.0 for 90o and 45o For, m
CL = 0.87 for 30o and 60o The equivalent diameter (De) can be given by
For square pitch;
Equation (7) can be written as:
4 � 2 p do2 �
CTP � Ds 2 De = �PT - �
� p do � 4 �
N t = 0.875 � � 2 2 (16)
�CL � (Pr ) d o (9) For triangular pitch;

Where PR is the Tube Pitch Ratio (PR = PT/do). 4 �PT 2 3 p d o 2 �

The shell diameter in terms of main construction De = �
� 4 - �
�
p do � 8 �
diameter can be obtained as from equations (6) 2 (17)
and (9),
Bundle cross flow area As , at the centre of
1/ 2 the shell;
CL �Ao (Pr ) d o �
2
Ds = 0.637 � �
CTP � L � (10) Ds CB
As =
PT (18)
Tube Side Pressure Drop:
The tube side pressure drop can be calculated by Where, C = clearance between adjacent
knowing the number of tube passes (Np) and tubes
length (L) oh heat exchanger, B = baffle spacing
The pressure drop for the tube side fluid is given PT = pitch of tubes
by equation
Ds = equivalent diameter
LN p um 2
DPt = 4 f r Shell side mass flow rate Gs;
di 2 (11) .
m
DPt = 4 f
LN p Gi 2 Gs =
di 2 r As (19)
(12)
Where, m = mass flow rate
The change of direction in the passes
introduction in the passes introduction an This method is based on Kern theory. The shell
additional pressure drop due to sudden side pressure drop depends on the number of
expansions and contractions that the tube fluid tubes, the number of times the fluid passes the
experiences during a return that is accounted for tube bundle between the baffles and the length of
allowing four velocity head per pass each crossing.
The pressure drop on the shell side is calculated
r um 2 by the following expression:
DPt = 4 N p
2 (13) Gs 2 ( N b + 1) Ds
The total pressure drop of the side becomes: DPs = f
2 r Dsfs (20)
� LN p �r u 2
DPt = �4f + 4N p � m Where, фs = (µb/ µs) 0.14
� di �2 Nb = Number of baffles
(14)
(Nb + 1) = Number of times fluid passes
Shell Side Pressure Drop: to the tube bundle
Kern suggested following correlations for the
shell side heat transfer coefficient; Friction factor (f) calculated from:

STHE Thermal Design with Optimization of Flow Pressure Drop due to Fouling 84
 Th2 (‘c) 36.97 37.00 0.08
f = exp(o.576 - 0.19 ln Re s )
(21) TUBE SIDE
∆P (kpa) 35.53 37.15 4.36
Where, h (W/m2-K) 5006.38 5203.40 3.78
s s Ds Re 33918.17 34900.00 2.81
400 < Re s = �1�10 6
m (22) Uf (W/m2-K) 757.95 728.79 3.85
Uc (W/m2-K) 1656.10 1601.79 3.39
The correlation has been tested based on data EMTD (‘c) 5.20 4.60 13.04
obtained on actual exchangers. The friction Heat 0.1365 0.1360 0.37
coefficient also takes entrance and exit losses exchanged
into account.[2][4] (Q) (MW)
Table 1: calculated and HTRI Xist results
PROBLEM DEFINATION
Manually calculated results are based on inlet
Data for feed water cooler is shown in table and outlet conditions as well as with major
taken from the CCPL (Charisma Career Pvt. assumption explained earlier. While HTRI
Ltd.). Both fluids are in liquid phase. It is liquid calculate the results at different point on the
to liquid heat transfer process. There is counter length from the inlet of heat exchanger.(figure:1
flow in heat exchanger. It is assumed that shell to 6) The fluid properties, heat flux , pressure
and tube are made of carbon steel. drop etc, are iterated at these points which gives
inherent results of the heat exchanger design.[3]
SHELL SIDE: Sour water
Mass flow rate (kg/s) : 3.6575
ID (m) : 0.475
Inlet temperature (oC) : 45.9
Fouling factor (m2-K/W) : 0.000334

TUBE SIDE: Cooling

water
Inlet temperature (oC) : 33
Outlet temperature (oC) : 37
Mass flow rate (kg/s) : 8.1737
ID (m) : 0.025
OD (m) : 0.027 Figure 1: Liquid thermal conductivity v/s
Length (m) : 0.6 temperature
Pitch (m) : 0.032
Tube layout : 90o
Tube count : 106

This problem is solved by theory based

calculation as well as by HTRI Xchanger.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Calculated outputs and HTRI Xchanger software

outputs are shown in table 1;

Property Calculated HTRI Error

Figure 2: Liquid density v/s temperature
results results (%)

SHELL SIDE
∆P (kpa) 6.82 5.92 13.19
h (W/m2-K) 2696.97 2758.60 2..23
Re 10706.23 10476.00 2.14

STHE Thermal Design with Optimization of Flow Pressure Drop due to Fouling 85
 shows variation in properties of the fluids. There
is gradual increase in liquid thermal conductivity
and gradual decrease in density of cooling water.
In theoretical approach these values are kept
constant. Thus how this software designing
approach overcome some assumption made in
theories.
Figure 4 shows the overall heat transfer
coefficient distribution along the length from the
inlet. Its almost near to the calculated values.
Figure 5 shows the graph of the Reynolds
number, in which shell side Reynolds number is
almost constant but there is little variation at tube
side as shown in graph. Figure 6 shows the duty
Figure3: Bulk tempreture v/s length from inlet curve for shell and tube side along length from
inlet. So these results are very useful to
understand inside process of heat exchanger.[3][5]

CONCLUSION

This paper identifies the advantages of having

the appropriate exchanger designing software.
Optimal design condition can be obtained in less
time. Number of iterations and their comparison
can be analyzed easily.
There is gradual variation in thermal
conductivity, Bulk temperature and density of the
Figure 4: Overall U v/s length from inlet fluid in HTRI results. In theories it is assumed
that fluid properties kept constant and process is
isothermal. So it may cause for result variation.
As shown in result table-1 there is 4.5% average
error variation in results.

REFERENCES

1. Arturo R L, Miguel T V & Pedro Q D.

(2011) “The Design Of Heat
Exchanger”, science research. Vol 3 pp
911-920
Figure 5: Reynolds number v/s lenth from inlet 2. Kakkan, S (1999). “Heat Exchangers
Selection, Rating and Thermal Design”.
pp 263-274
3. Leong kc & Toh kc (1998), “shell and
tube heat exchanger design software for
educational applications”,
int.j.engng.ed. vol14 pp 217-234
4. Shah, RK (2003). “Fundamental of heat
exchanger design” Rochster Institute of
Technology. pp 381
5. Su Thet Mon Than, (2008) “Heat
Exchanger Design”, world academy of
Figure 6: Duty v/s length from the inlet science engineering and technology. pp
604-611

Figures 1 to 6 shows few results of HTRI

Xchanger for given problem. Figures 1, 2 & 3

STHE Thermal Design with Optimization of Flow Pressure Drop due to Fouling 86