Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 3

shell and tube heat exchanger Related Abstracts

3 Effect of Number of Baffles on Pressure Drop and Heat Transfer in a Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger

Authors: A. Ghafouri, A. Falavand Jozaei, M. Mosavi Navaei


In this paper for a given heat duty, study of number of baffles on pressure drop and heat transfer is considered in a STHX (Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger) with single segmental baffles. The effect of number of baffles from 9 to 52 baffles (baffle spacing variations from 4 to 24 inches) over OHTC (Overall Heat Hransfer Coefficient) to pressure drop ratio (U/Δp ratio). The results show that U/Δp ratio is low when baffle spacing is minimum (4 inches) because pressure drop is high; however, heat transfer coefficient is very significant. Then, with the increase of baffle spacing, pressure drop rapidly decreases and OHTC also decreases, but the decrease of OHTC is lower than pressure drop, so (U/Δp) ratio increases. After increasing baffles more than 12 inches, variation in pressure drop is gradual and approximately constant and OHTC decreases; Consequently, U/Δp ratio decreases again. If baffle spacing reaches to 24 inches, STHX will have minimum pressure drop, but OHTC decreases, so required heat transfer surface increases and U/Δp ratio decreases. After baffle spacing more than 12 inches, variation of shell side pressure drop is negligible. So optimum baffle spacing is suggested between 8 to 12 inches (43 to 63 percent of inside shell diameter) for a sufficient heat duty and low pressure drop.

Keywords: pressure drop, shell and tube heat exchanger, single segmental baffle, overall heat transfer coefficient

Procedia PDF Downloads 308
2 Investigation of Heat Transfer Mechanism Inside Shell and Tube Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage Systems

Authors: Dong Chen, Saeid Seddegh, Xiaolin Wang, Alan D. Henderson, Oliver Oims


The main objective of this research is to study the heat transfer processes and phase change behaviour of a phase change material (PCM) in shell and tube latent heat thermal energy storage (LHTES) systems. The thermal behaviour in a vertical and horizontal shell-and-tube heat energy storage system using a pure thermal conduction model and a combined conduction-convection heat transfer model is compared in this paper. The model is first validated using published experimental data available in literature and then used to study the temperature variation, solid-liquid interface, phase distribution, total melting and solidification time during melting and solidification processes of PCMs. The simulated results show that the combined convection and conduction model can better describe the energy transfer in PCMs during melting process. In contrast, heat transfer by conduction is more significant during the solidification process since the two models show little difference. Also, it was concluded that during the charging process for the horizontal orientation, convective heat transfer has a strong effect on melting of the upper part of the solid PCM and is less significant during melting of the lower half of the solid PCM. However, in the vertical orientation, convective heat transfer is the same active during the entire charging process. In the solidification process, the thermal behavior does not show any difference between horizontal and vertical systems.

Keywords: Melting, Solidification, natural convection, shell and tube heat exchanger, phase change material, latent heat thermal energy storage

Procedia PDF Downloads 404
1 Economic Optimization of Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Using Nanofluid

Authors: Hassan Hajabdollahi


Economic optimization of shell and tube heat exchanger (STHE) is presented in this paper. To increase the rate of heat transfer, copper oxide (CuO) nanoparticle is added into the tube side fluid and their optimum results are compared with the case of without additive nanoparticle. Total annual cost (TAC) is selected as fitness function and nine decision variables related to the heat exchanger parameters as well as concentration of nanoparticle are considered. Optimization results reveal the noticeable improvement in the TAC and in the case of heat exchanger working with nanofluid compared with the case of base fluid (8.9%). Comparison of the results between two studied cases also reveal that the lower tube diameter, tube number, and baffle spacing are needed in the case of heat exchanger working with nanofluid compared with the case of base fluid.

Keywords: shell and tube heat exchanger, nanoparticles additive, total annual cost, particle volumetric concentration

Procedia PDF Downloads 276