2 views

Uploaded by Ankit Lonare

po

- 1-s2.0-S0017931014006619-main_R3
- REVIEW ON CFD ANALYSIS OF DOUBLE TUBE HELICAL COIL HEAT EXCHANGER.
- Determination of the operating point and the enthalpy per unit surface of a cold battery with icy water and a double heat exchanger
- Internal Test II-21.03.2013
- Heat Excahnger
- Heat Transfer Augmentation - A Review for Helical Tape Insert
- Heat Exchanger (New)
- Report Performance of Heat Exchanger
- 10.1.1.153.1705
- Heat Exchanger Presentation
- Lecture 5
- jishnu COPY
- FoulingSTHE1.docx
- 1-s2.0-S1359431108004845-main
- Lab3HeatExchanger.pdf
- GSE-EnVision-ProcessFund-Sim-I.pdf
- 0274_WeP07.2
- Cant Heat Transport
- uuuu...
- Automotive Waste Heat Conversion

You are on page 1of 8

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

heat exchangers

Parinya Pongsoi a, Patcharapit Promoppatum a, Santi Pikulkajorn b, Somchai Wongwises a,c,⇑

a

Fluid Mechanics, Thermal Engineering and Multiphase Flow Research Lab (FUTURE), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s University

of Technology Thonburi, Bangmod, Bangkok 10140, Thailand

b

Somchai Industry Co., Ltd., Bangkok 10150, Thailand

c

The Academy of Science, The Royal Institute of Thailand, Sanam Suea Pa, Dusit, Bangkok 10300, Thailand

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

Article history: The purpose of this experimental investigation is to investigate the effects of ﬁn pitch (i.e., fp of 2.4, 3.2,

Received 24 August 2012 and 4.2 mm) on the air-side heat transfer performance and frictional characteristics of L-footed spiral ﬁn-

Received in revised form 15 November 2012 and-tube heat exchangers at high Reynolds numbers (Redc) of 4000–15,000. A determinant of the parallel

Accepted 21 November 2012

cross-ﬂow and the counter cross-ﬂow is the ﬂow arrangement of the test heat exchangers. Ambient air

Available online 2 January 2013

and hot water are used as a working ﬂuid on the air- and the tube-side, respectively. The results indicate

that the air-side heat transfer coefﬁcient and Colburn factor are independent of ﬁn pitch. However, ﬁn

Keywords:

pitch does have an inﬂuential effect on the average heat transfer rate, pressure drop, and friction factor.

L-footed ﬁn

Heat transfer

In terms of industrial applications, the correlation of the Colburn factor and friction factor are proposed

Heat exchanger for practical applications.

Air–water Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Extended surface

tions at low Reynolds numbers. Wongwises and Naphon [2,3] stud-

The heat exchangers are used in two main methods of heat ied the heat transfer characteristics and the performance of a

transfer (convection and conduction modes). Many types of heat spirally coiled ﬁnned tube heat exchanger under dry-surface and

exchangers are used in industrial applications, such as intercoolers, wet surface conditions. Moreover, they tested heat exchangers that

boilers, economizers, air and liquid pre-heaters, evaporating and rely on a crimped spiral ﬁnned tube. Then, Srisawad and Wongw-

condensing heat exchangers, etc. Fin and tube heat exchangers ises [4] tested the helically coiled crimped spiral ﬁnned tube heat

are among the more favored types of heat exchangers. This kind exchanger, aiming on the heat transfer performance in dry-surface

of heat exchanger is designed for enhancing heat transfer perfor- conditions. Pongsoi et al. [5–7] studied the effect of number of tube

mance. This enhancement is very important for thermo-economic rows and ﬁn pitches on the air-side heat transfer characteristics

analysis. Moreover, this heat transfer enhancement is normally and the optimized ﬁn pitch of crimped spiral ﬁn-tube heat

limited by the thermal resistance on the heat exchanger’s air-side. exchangers having multipass parallel and counter cross-ﬂow under

Arguably, ﬁn conﬁguration improvement is one of the most effec- sensible heating conditions and purpose the e-NTU relation equa-

tive ways to augment the heat transfer rate on heat exchangers’ tion for this new water ﬂow arrangement. In addition, the correla-

air-side. tion of Colburn factor (j) and friction factor (f) of crimped spiral ﬁn-

Over the years, the spiral ﬁn has been studied by a number of and-tube heat exchangers at high Reynolds number were proposed

researchers. Some examples related to this subject can be found in this study. Hamakawa et al. [8] investigated the ﬂow around the

in [1–13]. ﬁn and vortex shedding from the ﬁn tube by using smoke wire

Nuntaphan et al. [1] tested crimped spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat technique. According to results, the spiral ﬁn seemed to have more

exchangers to analyze the effect of tube arrangement, transverse heat transfer over the conventional circular ﬁn by the inﬂuence of

tube pitch, ﬁn pacing, tube diameter, and they proposed heat downstream rotational vortices. Lee et al. [9,10] studied the air-

side heat transfer characteristics of spiral-type circular ﬁn-tube

⇑ Corresponding author at: Fluid Mechanics, Thermal Engineering and Multi- heat exchangers under frosting and non-frosting conditions. They

phase Flow Research Lab (FUTURE), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty measured these characteristics by varying the ﬁn pitches, the num-

of Engineering, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangmod, ber of tube rows and the ﬁn alignments. Kawaguchi et al. [11] stud-

Bangkok 10140, Thailand. Tel.: +66 24709115. ied the effects of ﬁn pitches on the serrated ﬁnned tube bank on

E-mail address: somchai.won@kmutt.ac.th (S. Wongwises).

0017-9310/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2012.11.071

76 P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82

Nomenclature

Amin minimum free ﬂow area, m2 less

Ao total surface area, m2 Redc Reynolds number based on ﬁn collar outside diameter

Ap cross-sectional or proﬁle area of ﬁn, m2 (dc)

Al aluminum T temperature, °C

cP speciﬁc heat at constant pressure, J/(kg K) U overall heat transfer coefﬁcient, W/(m2 K)

dc ﬁn collar outside diameter, m Vfr air frontal velocity, m/s

df ﬁn outside diameter, m Vmax maximum velocity across heat exchanger, m/s

di tube inside diameter, m

do tube outside diameter, m Greek symbols

f Fanning friction factor, dimensionless e heat exchanger effectiveness

fp ﬁn pitch, m g ﬁn efﬁciency

ft ﬁn thickness, m go overall surface effectiveness

Gc mass ﬂux of the air based on minimum free ﬂow area, q density, kg/m3

kg/m2 s r contraction ratio of cross-sectional area

H height, m l dynamic viscosity of air, Pa s

h heat transfer coefﬁcient, W/(m2 K) / combination of terms, dimensionless;

I0 modiﬁed Bessel function solution of the ﬁrst kind, w radius ratio

order 0 DP pressure drop, Pa

I1 modiﬁed Bessel function solution of the ﬁrst kind,

order 1 Subscripts

j Colburn factor, dimensionless 1 air-side inlet

k thermal conductivity, W/(m K) 2 air-side outlet

K0 modiﬁed Bessel function solution of the second kind, a air

order 0 ave average

K1 modiﬁed Bessel function solution of the second kind, corr correlation

order 1 c multipass counter cross ﬂow or cold ﬂuid

L length, m exp experiment

m mass ﬂow rate, kg/s f ﬁn

M data point h hot ﬂuid

nt number of tubes in row i tube-side

Nrow number of tube rows m mean value

NTU number of transfer units, dimensionless max maximum

Nu Nusselt number, dimensionless o air-side

PL longitudinal tube pitch, m p multipass parallel cross ﬂow

PT transverse tube pitch, m pc multipass parallel-and-counter cross ﬂow

Pr Prandtl number, dimensionless t tube

Q heat transfer rate, W w water

ro radius of tip ﬁn, m

ri radius of base ﬁn, m

the pressure drop characteristics for higher improvement of heat tions. The effect of ﬁn pitch on the performance of the L-footed

transfer than circular spiral ﬁnned tube. Næss [12] investigated spiral ﬁn and tube heat exchangers, which have not yet appeared

the effects of tube layout and ﬁn geometry on the heat transfer in the available literature, are presented.

and pressure drop performance of serrated ﬁn and tube heat

exchangers. Moreover, Lemouedda et al. [13] studied the optimiza-

tion of ﬁn serration, ﬁn twisting and the number of segments by 2. Data reduction

numerical calculations for serrated spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat

exchangers. In this experimental work, air and hot water were used as work-

The L-footed spiral ﬁn is one of several types of ﬁn conﬁgura- ing ﬂuids. The main components of the system were the heat ex-

tions. The base of the ﬁn has an L-shape, which provides a large changer, water ﬂow loop, air supply, and the instrumentation

contact area, ensuring a good path for heat transfer from the tube and data acquisition system. In addition, detailed descriptions of

surface to the ﬁn. The spiral ﬁn seems to have a greater heat trans- the essential components are available from Pongsoi et al. [7].

fer coefﬁcient than the conventional circular ﬁn. The L-footed spir- The test samples are a type of ﬁn-and-tube cross-ﬂow heat

al ﬁn-and-tube heat exchanger may be suitable for industrial exchanger. The copper tube is ﬁnned with an aluminum ﬁn. Fig. 1

processes that present a high risk of tube corrosion. Despite its details the water-side circuit and the dimensions of the tested

importance in many applications, the air-side performance of L- ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers. Additionally, the schematic diagram

footed spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers has received little of the heat exchangers algorithm for multi-pass parallel cross-ﬂow,

attention in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, Pongsoi multi-pass counter cross-ﬂow, and multi-pass parallel and counter

et al. [14] is the only work dealing with this issue. In the present cross-ﬂows (Nrow = 2) are shown in the previous ﬁgure. For the

study, the primary concern is to study the heat transfer perfor- present ﬂow conﬁguration, the heat exchanger’s effectiveness lies

mance and frictional characteristics of L-footed spiral ﬁn-and-tube between the multi-pass parallel cross-ﬂow and the counter cross-

heat exchangers at high Reynolds numbers in industrial applica- ﬂow. Finally, the geometric parameters of the heat exchangers are

P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82 77

Water outlet

Water inlet

Multipass parallel-and-counter cross flow

(present)

Nrow =2

Air flow

L= 320 mm PL

do

Water inlet

PT

H= 350 mm

Water flow

Water flow

direction

Water outlet

Air flow

PL

Water inlet

Water inlet

PT

Water flow

Air flow

direction

Water outlet

Water outlet

A fr = Frontal area, L × H (mm)

do = Tube outside diameter (mm)

PL = Longitudinal tube pitch (mm)

PT = Transverse tube pitch (mm)

Fig. 1. Geometric details and schematic diagram of the heat exchangers algorithm for multipass parallel cross ﬂow, multipass counter cross ﬂow and multipass parallel-and-

counter cross ﬂow ( and d signs indicate that water ﬂows into or out of the paper, respectively).

Table 1

Detailed geometric parameters of the test samples.

No. Fin type di (mm) dc (mm) df (mm) PL (mm) PT (mm) ft (mm) nt Nrow Fin material fp (mm)

1 L-footed 13.5 16.85 34.8 35 39 0.25 9 2 Al 2.4

2 L-footed 13.5 16.85 34.8 35 39 0.25 9 2 Al 3.2

3 L-footed 13.5 16.85 34.8 35 39 0.25 9 2 Al 4.2

Remarks: df = Outside diameter of ﬁn; di = Tube inside diameter; dc = ﬁn collar outside diameter; fp = Fin pitch; ft = Fin thickness; PL = Longitudinal tube pitch; PT = Transverse

tube pitch; nt = number of tubes in row; Nrow = number of tube rows.

Notes: Tube layouts of all heat exchangers are staggered layout and all test sections have a tube outside diameter (do) of 16.35 mm.

summarized in Table 1, while the photographs and schematic dia- exchanger effectiveness relations shown in Eq. (4). The air-side

gram of L-footed spiral ﬁnned tube are shown in Fig. 2. working ﬂuid and the tube-side working ﬂuid (water) are deﬁned

In the experiment, at a speciﬁc inlet water temperature, the as ﬂuid A and ﬂuid B, respectively. It should be noted that the min-

water ﬂow rate was ﬁxed while the air ﬂow rate was increased. imum heat capacity rate (Cmin) is on the air-side (Fluid A). Therefore,

The system was allowed to approach a steady state before any data the following relations are applied in the present calculation.

was recorded under the experimental conditions shown in Table 2. Multipass parallel cross-ﬂow

After the system reached a steady state, the inlet and outlet tem- For (Nrow = 2);

peratures of the air passing across the heat exchanger and the

K

water ﬂow rates were determined. ep ¼ 1 1 e2K=CA ; K ¼ 1 eNTUA ðC A =2Þ ð2Þ

2

The overall heat transfer coefﬁcient can be written in terms of

the total resistance to heat transfer. This total resistance is the Multipass counter cross-ﬂow

sum of the individual resistance values, as follows: For (Nrow = 2);

1

1 1 lnðdo =di Þ lnðdc =do Þ 1 K K 2K=C

¼ þ þ þ ð1Þ ec ¼ 1 þ 1 e A ; K ¼ 1 eNTUA ðCA =2Þ ð3Þ

UA hi Ai 2pkt L 2pkf L go ho Ao 2 2

where

The multipass parallel and counter cross-ﬂow used in this experi-

ment is a combination of multipass parallel cross-ﬂow and counter ep þ ec

eA ¼ ð4Þ

cross-ﬂow. It may be suitable to use the average value of the heat 2

78 P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82

df

L- Shape A

L-Shape

fp df dc d o di

ft fp A

fp

Section A-A

d c = Fin collar outside diameter (m) d o = Tube outside diameter (m)

d f = Outside diameter of fin (m) f p = Fin pitch (m)

d i = Tube inside diameter (m) ft = Fin thickness (m)

Table 2

Experimental conditions.

and where Ap is the area in the proﬁle of the ﬁn, as shown in Fig. 8:

Inlet-air-dry bulb temperature, °C 31.5 ± 0.5

Inlet-air frontal velocity, m/s 2–8 or Redc (4000–15000)

Ap ¼ ft ðro ri Þ ð16Þ

Inlet-water temperature, °C 55–70

The parameters Ro, Ri are given in terms of the radius ratio (w):

Water ﬂow rate, LPM 12–14 or (0.2–0.233 kg/s)

1

Ro ¼ ð17Þ

Fluid A is mixed (Cmin); Fluid B is unmixed (Cmax). 1w

eA ¼ eB =C A ð5Þ and

CA 1 w

C A ¼ ¼ ; C 6 1 ð6Þ Ri ¼ ð18Þ

C B C B 1w

where

NTU B

NTU A ¼ ð7Þ ri

C A w¼ ð19Þ

ro

⁄

where C = Cmin/Cmax is equal to Cc/Ch or Ch/Cc, depending on the va- The tube-side heat transfer coefﬁcient (hi) is calculated from the

lue of the hot and cold ﬂuid heat capacity rates. semi-empirical correlation of Gnielinski [16]:

C min ¼ C h ; Ch < Cc ð8Þ

kw ðRedi 1000ÞPr ðfi =2Þ

or

hi ¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

ð20Þ

di 1 þ 12:7 fi =2 Pr2=3 1

C min ¼ C c ; Cc < Ch ð9Þ

where the friction factor is given by:

as

fi ¼ ð1:58 ln Redi 3:28Þ2 ð21Þ

Q max ¼ ðmcP Þc ðT h1 T c1 Þ if C c < C h ð10Þ

where Redi = qVdi/l.

or

The air-side heat transfer coefﬁcient (ho) can then be calculated

Q max ¼ ðmcP Þh ðT h1 T c1 Þ if C h < C c ð11Þ from Eq. (1).

The heat transfer characteristics of the heat exchanger are pre-

Q av e sented in terms of non-dimensional groups:

e¼ ð12Þ

Q max qa V max dc

The UA term in Eq. (1) is calculated by using Eq. (13): Redc ¼ ð22Þ

l

UA ¼ C min ðNTUÞ ð13Þ

The efﬁciency of a radial ﬁn with a rectangular proﬁle is determined Nu ho

j¼ ¼ ðPrÞ2=3 ð23Þ

by Gardner’s [15] proposed method: Redc Pr1=3 qa V max cP

2w I1 ð/Ro ÞK 1 ð/Ri Þ I1 ð/Ri ÞK 1 ð/Ro Þ The ﬂow characteristics determined from the equation proposed by

g¼ ð14Þ

/ð1 þ wÞ I0 ð/Ri ÞK 1 ð/Ro Þ þ I1 ð/Ro ÞK 0 ð/Ri Þ Kays and London [17] are given in terms of the fanning friction fac-

tor. The equation includes the entrance and exit pressure losses:

where

" #

1=2 Amin qm 2DP q1 q1

2ho f ¼ ð1 þ r2 Þ 1 ð24Þ

/ ¼ ðro ri Þ3=2 ð15Þ Ao q1 G2c q2

kf Ap

P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82 79

where r is the ratio of minimum free ﬂow area to frontal area, Ao is systems, which investigated both heat transfer rates. The energy

the total heat transfer area, and Amin is the minimum free ﬂow area. balance between the air and water associated with the L-footed

The uncertainties are calculated from the root mean sum square spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers had relative errors less than

method. The maximum uncertainties are 11% for the j-factor and 5% (or |Qa Qw|/Qave < 0.05). In addition, it is found that the ranges

10% for the f-factor. The highest uncertainties were associated with of the ﬁn efﬁciency (g) and the heat exchanger effectiveness (e) are

the lowest Reynolds numbers. 0.87–0.94 and 0.14–0.36, respectively. The air-side heat transfer

and friction characteristics of all heat exchangers were examined

3. Results and discussion in this experiment, which were presented in terms of the average

heat transfer rate (Qave), air-side heat transfer coefﬁcient (ho), and

The primary analysis of the experimental data involved the en- pressure drop (DP) with air frontal velocity (Vfr). Moreover, the

ergy balance between air and water. The energy balance related to terms of a dimensionless number included the Colburn factor (j)

10 0.100

(a) fp(mm)

(a)

2.5

8 3.2

4.2 f

6

Q ave (kW)

0.010

j

4

fp(mm)

2 2.4

3.2

Tw,in= 55 oC

4.2

mw,in= 0.2 kg/s

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 0.001

Vfr (m/s) 2000 10000 18000

Reynolds number (Redc)

180

0.100

(b) fp (mm)

(b)

friction factor (f)

150 2.5

3.2

4.2 f

120

ho(W/m .K)

2

90

0.010

Colburn factor (j)

j

60

fp(mm)

2.5

30 3.2

Tw,in= 60 oC

4.2

mw,in= 0.2 kg/s

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 0.001

2000 10000 18000

Vfr(m/s)

Reynolds number (Redc)

250 0.100

(c)

friction factor (f)

fp (mm) (c)

2.5

200 3.2 f

4.2

150

Δ P(Pa)

0.010

Colburn factor (j)

j

100

fp(mm)

2.5

50 3.2

Tw,in= 60 oC

4.2

mw,in= 0.233 kg/s

0 0.001

0 2 4 6 8 10 2000 10000 18000

Vfr(m/s) Reynolds number (Redc)

Fig. 3. Effect of ﬁn pitches on the average heat transfer rate (a), heat transfer Fig. 4. Effect of ﬁn pitches on the Colburn factor and friction factor at Tw,in = 55

coefﬁcient (b) and pressure drop (c) of L-footed spiral ﬁn and tube heat exchangers. °C/mw,i = 0.2 kg/s (a), Tw,in = 60 °C/mw,in = 0.2 kg/s (b) and Tw,in = 60 °C/mw,in =

(Tw,in = 65 °C/mw,in = 0.2 kg/s). 0.233 kg/s (c).

80 P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82

0.100 data correspond with Pongsoi et al. [5], who studied the effect of

ﬁn pitch on the air-side performance of the crimped spiral ﬁn. Fur-

frictionfactor (f)

f

2.4 mm, the pressure drop increases by about 18% (for fp = 3.2)

and 38% (for fp = 2.4). The reason for this is increasing pressure

blocking the ﬂow area due to decreasing ﬁn pitch.

The examination on the effect of ﬁn pitch in the dimensionless

j

0.010 terms is shown in Fig. 4. As expected, both the Colburn factor (j)

Colburnfactor(j)

and the friction factor (f) decrease with increasing Reynolds num-

Tube

Fin types Arrangement Nrow fp (mm) ber over the range of operating conditions. The result shows that

L-footed staggered 2 2.50 Present data the ﬁn pitch has a negligible effect on the Colburn factor (j), which

Circular staggered 2 2.50 Briggs and Young [19]

Plain staggered 2 2.50 Wang and Chang [20] is supported by ﬁndings in other research [5,6,18]. This phenome-

Plain staggered 2 2.50 Wang et al. [21] non occurs because the high Reynolds number accentuates the

Wavy staggered 2 2.54 Kim et al. [22]

Slit staggered 2 2.50 Wang et al. [23] good mixing, leading to better heat transfer performance, regard-

0.001 less of ﬁn pitch changes.

1000 10000 18000

In terms of the friction factor, it is clear that at Reynolds num-

Reynolds number (Redc)

bers greater than 6000, ﬁn pitch has a signiﬁcant effect (i.e., the

friction factor is higher for a larger ﬁn pitch than for a smaller ﬁn

Fig. 5. Comparison of Colburn factor and friction factor between present data with

correlational and experimental data of several ﬁn types. pitch). According to Eq. (24), the ratio of minimum free-ﬂow area

and the total heat transfer area (Amin/Ao) and mass ﬂux of air (Gc)

and friction factor (f) plotted against Redc, which was the Reynolds showed that Ao signiﬁcantly increases as ﬁn pitch is changed from

number based on the ﬁn collar’s outside diameter (do + 2ft). 4.2 to 3.2 or 2.4 mm. Conversely, the reduction of Amin is compar-

Fig. 3 shows the effect of the ﬁn pitches on the average heat atively small. For these reasons, the friction factor signals a detect-

transfer rate, air-side heat transfer coefﬁcient, and pressure drop able rise for greater ﬁn pitch. In summary, a large ﬁn pitch

for an aluminum ﬁn with an outside ﬁn collar diameter of increases the ratio of minimum free-ﬂow area and the total heat

16.85 mm and outside ﬁn diameter of 34.8 mm. This study has ex- transfer area (Amin/Ao), but decreases mass ﬂux of the air (Gc). A

tended the ﬁn pitches of 2.4, 3.2, and 4.2 mm. The results show low value of Gc will make the friction factor higher. It should be

that the average heat transfer rate, air-side heat transfer coefﬁ- noted that the dynamic effects (Amin/Ao and Gc) have a more pro-

cient, and pressure drop increase with increasing air frontal veloc- nounced effect upon the friction factor than the air-side pressure

ity. Fig. 3(a) depicts the effect of ﬁn pitches on average heat drop (DP). Nevertheless, the effect of ﬁn pitch on the friction factor

transfer rate. It was found that the average heat transfer rate of tends to vanish at Reynolds numbers less than about 6000.

fp = 2.4 and 3.2 mm are higher than that for fp = 4.2 mm by about Initial validation comparison for the air-side heat transfer and

37% and 26%, respectively, over the range of air frontal velocities. ﬂow characteristics of the performance of an L-footed spiral ﬁn con-

This is be because the surface heat transfer area of the smaller trast with the performance of several plate ﬁn types (circular [19],

ﬁn pitch is generally higher than that of larger ones which leads plain [20,21], wavy [22], and slit [23] ﬁn) at high Reynolds numbers,

to the increasing of the average heat transfer rate. as shown in Fig. 5. It was found that the present data and other ﬁn

However, Fig. 3(b) shows that the ﬁn pitches had an insigniﬁ- types produce similar trends and slopes of the Colburn factor,

cant effect on the air-side heat transfer coefﬁcient. The present which decrease with an increasing Reynolds number. However,

(a)

L-footed spiral fin

Air flow

Air flow

(b)

Plain fin

Air flow

Air flow

Fig. 6. Schematic showing the ﬂow distribution (a) L-footed spiral ﬁn (b) plain ﬁn.

P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82 81

" #

signiﬁcant difference existed between an L-footed ﬁn and plain ﬁn 1 XM

jUcorr Uexp j

on the friction factor. The authors found that the friction factor of L- Mean deviations ¼ 100% ð27Þ

M 1 Uexp

footed spiral ﬁns is about 80–90% different from the plain ﬁn (con-

ventional heat exchanger). As demonstrated in Fig. 6, the plain ﬁn Fig. 7 shows the comparison of the proposed correlations with

experiences single ﬂow though channels. Therefore, this phenome- experimental data. The correlation Eqs. (25) and (26) describe

non might occur from the geometry of the plain ﬁn that leads to 100% and 95% of the j and f factors, respectively, to be within

contact surface friction greater than that of L-footed spiral ﬁns. ±10%. The proposed heat transfer and friction correlations have

Finally, empirical correlations for the Colburn factor (j) and the mean deviations in Eq. (27) of 4.29% and 2.12%, respectively. How-

friction factor (f) are proposed in this study which parallel actual ever, these correlations can be used not only for parallel-and-coun-

industrial applications operated at high Reynolds numbers. It must ter cross-ﬂow types of water ﬂow arrangements, but also used for

be noted that ﬁn pitches have a negligible inﬂuence on the Colburn parallel cross-ﬂow, counter cross-ﬂow, and pure cross-ﬂow.

factor, as mentioned above. Thus, the ﬁn pitch is not included in

the Colburn factor correlation. The present data is correlated as

4. Conclusions

suggested by Pongsoi et al. [6] in the form of j ¼ aRebdc and

c

f

f ¼ aRebdc dpc , where a, b, and c are the empirical constants ob- This research determined the extent of the probable effect of ﬁn

tained from least-square ﬁtting of the experimental data. Accord- pitch on the heat transfer performance of L-footed spiral ﬁn-

ing to the data analysis, friction factor correlation was also and-tube heat exchangers. Total test sections have a ﬁn thickness

associated with ﬁn pitch. Therefore, the present correlation for f of 0.25 mm, outside ﬁn diameter (df) of 34.8 mm, two tube rows

factor is modiﬁed by including the dimensionless ﬁn pitch (fp) nor- (Nrow) and various ﬁn pitches from 2.4, 3.2, and 4.2 mm (i.e., 10,

malized by the tube’s outside diameter (dc). The computable corre- 8, and 6 fpi, respectively), which are the manufacturing limitations

lations for the Colburn and friction factors were suggested for this kind of ﬁn. The test samples were multi-pass parallel-and-

according to the form: counter cross-ﬂows arrangement under sensible heating condi-

tions and examined at a high Reynolds number (4000–15,000)

jcorr ¼ 0:2150Re0:4059

dc ð25Þ based on the ﬁn collar’s outside diameter. In summary, the follow-

ing major conclusions emerged from this study:

0:4771

fp

fcorr ¼ 0:4852Re0:2156

dc ð26Þ – It was conﬁrmed that the average heat transfer rate, air-side

dc

heat transfer coefﬁcient, and pressure drop increase with

increasing Reynolds numbers. In addition, the effect of ﬁn pitch

0.009 on average heat transfer rate and pressure drop were consid-

(a) +10% +5% ered signiﬁcant. On the contrary, results suggest that the air-

-5%

jcorr = aRedc

b side heat transfer coefﬁcient is independent of ﬁn pitch.

– Fin pitch has no signiﬁcant effect on the Colburn factor (j factor)

-10%

at high Reynolds numbers (4000–15,000).

– The effect of ﬁn pitch on the friction factor is negligible at Rey-

0.006

nolds numbers lower than 6000. In other words, a detectable

corr

j

– A correlation is proposed for the Colburn factor (j) and friction

factor (f) for L-footed spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers at

a = 0.2150

b = -0.4059

high Reynolds number. The mean deviations of the proposed

0.003

Colburn and friction factors correlations are 4.29% and 2.12%,

respectively.

0.003 0.006 0.009 – The authors hope that future research will use this study as a

j foundation for enhancing our understanding of the effect of

exp

ﬁn pitch on L-footed spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers.

0.06

(b) c

b ⎛ p ⎞

f +5% Acknowledgments

f corr = aRedc ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ +10% -5%

d

⎝ c⎠

-10% The authors are indebted to the Thailand Research Fund, the Of-

ﬁce of the Higher Education Commission and the National Re-

0.04

search University Project for supporting this study.

corr

f

References

a = 0.4852 [1] A. Nuntaphan, T. Kiatsiriroat, C.C. Wang, Heat transfer and friction

b = -0.2156 characteristics of crimped spiral ﬁnned heat exchangers with

0.02

c = 0.4771 dehumidiﬁcation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (2005) 327–340.

[2] S. Wongwises, P. Naphon, Heat transfer characteristics of a spiral-coil, ﬁnned

tube heat exchanger under dry-surface conditions, Heat Transfer Eng. 27 (1)

(2006) 25–34.

0.02 0.04 0.06 [3] S. Wongwises, P. Naphon, Thermal performance of a spiral-coil ﬁnned tube

f heat exchanger under wet-surface conditions, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 20 (2)

exp (2006) 212–226.

[4] K. Srisawad, S. Wongwises, Heat transfer characteristics of a new helically

Fig. 7. Comparison of the proposed correlations with experimental data: (a) coiled crimped spiral ﬁnned tube heat exchanger, Heat Mass Transfer 45 (4)

Colburn factor and (b) friction factor. (2009) 381–391.

82 P. Pongsoi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 59 (2013) 75–82

[5] P. Pongsoi, S. Pikulkajorn, C.C. Wang, S. Wongwises, Effect of ﬁn pitches on the [14] P. Pongsoi, S. Pikulkajorn, S. Wongwises, Experimental study on the air-side

air-side performance of crimped spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers with a performance of a multipass parallel and counter cross-ﬂow L-footed spiral ﬁn-

multipass parallel and counter cross-ﬂow conﬁguration, Int. J. Heat Mass and-tube heat exchanger, Heat Transfer Eng. 33 (15) (2012) 1251–1263.

Transfer 54 (9–10) (2011) 2234–2240. [15] K.A. Gardner, Efﬁcient of extended surface, ASME Trans. 67 (1945) 621.

[6] P. Pongsoi, S. Pikulkajorn, C.C. Wang, S. Wongwises, Effect of number of tube [16] V. Gnielinski, New equation for heat and mass transfer in turbulent pipe and

rows on the air-side performance of crimped spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat channel ﬂow, Int. Chem. Eng. 16 (1976) 359–368.

exchangers with a multipass parallel and counter cross-ﬂow conﬁguration, [17] W.M. Kays, A. London, Compact Heat Exchangers, third ed., Mcgraw-Hill, New

Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (4) (2012) 1403–1411. York, 1984.

[7] P. Pongsoi, S. Pikulkajorn, S. Wongwises, Effect of ﬁn pitches on the optimum [18] S. Wongwises, Y. Chokeman, Effect of ﬁn pitch and number of tube rows on the

heat transfer performance of crimped spiral ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers, Int. air side performance of herringbone wavy ﬁn and tube heat exchangers,

J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (23–24) (2012) 6555–6566. Energy Convers. Manage. 46 (2005) 2216–2231.

[8] H. Hamakawa, K. Nakashima, T. Kudo, E. Nishida, T. Fukano, Vortex shedding [19] D.E. Briggs, E.H. Young, Convective heat transfer and pressure drop of air

from a circular cylinder with spiral ﬁn, J. Fluid Sci. Technol. 3 (6) (2008) 787– ﬂowing across triangular pitch banks of ﬁnned tubes, Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp.

795. Ser. 59 (41) (1963) 1–10.

[9] M. Lee, T. Kang, Y. Kim, Air-side heat transfer characteristics of spiral-type [20] C.C. Wang, C.-T. Chang, Heat and mass transfer for plate ﬁn-and-tube heat

circular ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers, Int. J. Refrig. 33 (2) (2010) 313–320. exchangers with and without hydrophilic coating, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 41

[10] M. Lee, T. Kang, Y. Joo, Y. Kim, Heat transfer characteristics of spirally-coiled (1998) 3109–3120.

circular ﬁn-tube heat exchangers operating under frosting conditions, Int. J. [21] C.C. Wang, Y.J. Chang, Y.C. Hsieh, Y.T. Lin, Sensible heat and friction

Refrig. 34 (1) (2011) 328–336. characteristics of plate ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers having plane ﬁns, Int. J.

[11] K. Kawaguchi, K. Okui, Y. Asai, Y. Hasegawa, Effects of serrated ﬁn and ﬁn pitch Refrig. 19 (4) (1996) 223–230.

on pressure drop of the ﬁnned tube banks, Turbomachinery 32 (2004) 551–559. [22] N.H. Kim, J.H. Ham, J.P. Cho, Experimental investigation on the airside

[12] E. Næss, Experimental investigation of heat transfer and pressure drop in performance of ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers having herringbone wave ﬁns

serrated-ﬁn tube bundles with staggered tube layouts, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 and proposal of a new heat transfer and pressure drop correlation, J. Mech. Sci.

(2010) 1531–1537. Technol. 22 (2008) 545–555.

[13] A. Lemouedda, A. Schmid, E. Franz, M. Breuer, A. Delgado, Numerical [23] C.C. Wang, W.H. Tao, C.J. Chang, An investigation of the airside performance of

investigations for the optimization of serrated ﬁnned-tube heat exchangers, the slit ﬁn-and-tube heat exchangers, Int. J. Refrig. 22 (1999) 595–603.

Appl. Therm. Eng. 31 (2011) 1393–1401.

- 1-s2.0-S0017931014006619-main_R3Uploaded byAnonymous 7BQxlt8c
- REVIEW ON CFD ANALYSIS OF DOUBLE TUBE HELICAL COIL HEAT EXCHANGER.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- Determination of the operating point and the enthalpy per unit surface of a cold battery with icy water and a double heat exchangerUploaded byInnovative Research Publications
- Internal Test II-21.03.2013Uploaded byvsureshkannanmsec
- Heat ExcahngerUploaded byMandar Kadam
- Heat Transfer Augmentation - A Review for Helical Tape InsertUploaded byInnovative Research Publications
- Heat Exchanger (New)Uploaded byRochie Cabrito Diez
- Report Performance of Heat ExchangerUploaded byAnonymous ntK705Rt
- 10.1.1.153.1705Uploaded byAmit Patel
- Heat Exchanger PresentationUploaded byMd Akhtar
- Lecture 5Uploaded byMesbahose Salekeen
- jishnu COPYUploaded byDevarajanRaghavan
- FoulingSTHE1.docxUploaded byAshrooo
- 1-s2.0-S1359431108004845-mainUploaded by1AdityaPathania1
- Lab3HeatExchanger.pdfUploaded byfaisal_ahsan7919
- GSE-EnVision-ProcessFund-Sim-I.pdfUploaded byFungky King
- 0274_WeP07.2Uploaded byRajwinder Singh
- Cant Heat TransportUploaded byBabu Aravind
- uuuu...Uploaded byIV0703
- Automotive Waste Heat ConversionUploaded byjanimerkun
- Assignmsenst for StudentUploaded byParth Patel
- Basic Heat & Mass TransferUploaded byInnocent Godfirst Ehikhioya
- 07 PPP TTE Heat Exchanger InspectionUploaded byAlfredo Del Rio Lambis
- swld standard evaporative condenserUploaded byvchan12
- simulacion aero enfriador.pdfUploaded byNicandroGonzales
- POWERFUL MODELS IN A FLEXIBLE RANGE OF SIZES - kelvionUploaded byHakkı Yılmaz
- analysis of segmental and helical baffle.pdfUploaded byannisa fitri
- Fouling Mitigation by DesignUploaded byJoseAndresCarreño
- Course+Syllabi+MPEUploaded byKhairy Elsayed
- IJETR041945Uploaded byerpublication

- Test Plan - Immersed HX Tank_May2012-1Uploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Designing Airflow SystemsUploaded bywillcham
- 06 Fan LawsUploaded byEngr_WRQ
- DissertationUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Fitzer.docxUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- AnnexureIUploaded byBhanu Tej
- AnnexureIUploaded byBhanu Tej
- Web Designer ProUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Solution PropertiesUploaded bydhavalesh
- Fitzer.docxUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Main Paper Rabas1981Uploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Pro Engineer WF Surface ModelingUploaded byAnil Khandual
- CFD of pumpUploaded byFarCfd
- a193337.pdfUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- a193337.pdfUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- ChartUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- C.G. CalculationUploaded byraveemakwana
- hdhsjskjsUploaded byhappywhewmi
- dgdgfxxUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Helium Leak Test ProcedureUploaded byhiteshnmodi
- Helium Leak Test ProcedureUploaded byhiteshnmodi
- Nitrile vs. Neoprene _ What's the Difference_ _ Rubber and Elastomers _ Elasto ProxyUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- All Pipe SizeUploaded byAnkit Lonare
- DSI-May12-presentatiUploaded byNghiêm Lê
- Main Paper Rabas1981Uploaded byAnkit Lonare
- Wang 2017Uploaded byAnkit Lonare
- 2932_1993Uploaded byAnu Prasobh
- Test Plan - Immersed HX Tank_May2012-1Uploaded byAnkit Lonare
- HX1Uploaded bymvsscribd
- RadiatorUploaded byjd4u

- 12_Rotating Biological Contactor-processUploaded byMohammed Barni
- Alnahhal Mohammed_PhD thesis.pdfUploaded byKaffel
- 2011_issue1.pdfUploaded byvikram
- 2017 Manuals List 2.22.2017Uploaded byMiuipiui
- Final Report - Group 7Uploaded bySaif BT
- How-To-Apply-Valve-equatUploaded byfrancesco_rossi7092
- WInd calUploaded byUday
- Slug-Catcher Design for Dynamic Slugging in an Offshore Production FacilityUploaded bym.shehreyar.khan
- Water Phase DiagramUploaded byboddarambabu
- Hydrapak_IOM_EN_02Uploaded byMarc Luna
- Chapter Chemical KineticUploaded byQurrotul Anfa
- Syngas and Biofuel UpgradingUploaded byAnna Yunita Sitompul
- flow1.pdfUploaded byArkadu Jyothiprakash
- Steam Circulation System of pulverized coal fired boiler.Uploaded byRupesh Anand
- Kunkle OverviewUploaded bysamix999
- Fluidized Bed Combustion System (Fbc)Uploaded byashishmathew
- Rawson Gulf Coast Product Line SheetUploaded byJose Evans
- Atrium Smoke ControlUploaded byOmar Al-Gubuory
- 52817424 AE2353 Wind Tunnel Techniques Anna University Question BankUploaded bynandhinidish
- Numerical Investigation of a Single Phase Air Flow inside Porous Media of a Cross Flow Cooling TowerUploaded byIjsrnet Editorial
- Engine Friction and LubricationUploaded bydzh513
- DESALINATION THROUGH DIESEL ENGINE EXHAUST WASTE HEATUploaded byIJORAT
- IRJET-Research of Cooling Characteristics of Hot Surface using Two Inclined Air Jets at 60 DegreesUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Wind Turbine Post-stall Airfoil Perfomace Characteristics Guidelines for Blade-element Momentum MethodsUploaded bySebastian Carenzo
- Sly Venturi ScrubberUploaded byzguy360
- SPE-152975-MSUploaded bymatheus_moreira0990
- OSHA Tank Vent DefinitionsUploaded byIskandar Hasibuan
- 1556-276X-6-334.pdfUploaded byGhassan Mousa
- Radiation Heat Transfer 2Uploaded byShezan Kanjiyani
- Gas Liquid Separation TechnologyUploaded byLuevandres