Theoretical investigation of heat transfer correlations for supercritical organic fluids

Harmen, Willy Adriansyah, Abdurrachim, and Ari Darmawan Pasek

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020011 (2018); doi: 10.1063/1.5046595

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5046595
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1984/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Numerical simulation of cross flow around four circular cylinders in an in-line square configuration with the critical
spacing ratio “L/D” near a plane wall
AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020001 (2018); 10.1063/1.5046585

Numerical study of heat transfer and chemical kinetics of solar thermochemical reactor for hydrogen production
AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020002 (2018); 10.1063/1.5046586

Characteristics of heat transfer on solar collector channel by using a sharp turn

AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020003 (2018); 10.1063/1.5046587

Study on utilization of Indonesian non-recycled municipal solid waste as renewable solid fuel
AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020004 (2018); 10.1063/1.5046588

The preliminary study of natural convection simulation for the SAMOP test facility cooling process
AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020007 (2018); 10.1063/1.5046591

On the performance assessment of using alcohol/water mixtures in a solar Rankine cycle system with an
evacuated tube collector
AIP Conference Proceedings 1984, 020005 (2018); 10.1063/1.5046589
 Theoretical Investigation of Heat Transfer Correlations for
Supercritical Organic Fluids
Harmen1, 2, a), Willy Adriansyah1, Abdurrachim1, Ari Darmawan Pasek1,b)
1
Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl, Ganesa No. 10 Bandung 40132,
INDONESIA
2
Mechanical Engineering Department, Universitas Lampung, Jl. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1 Gedongmeneng
Bandarlampung 35145, INDONESIA
a)
Corresponding author: harmen.1969@eng.unila.ac.id
b)
aripasek@gmail.com

Abstract. Investigation on supercritical Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) to generate electricity from medium and low-
temperature energy resources is increasing in the last decade. The main challenge in supercritical organic fluids research is
how to predict heat transfer correlation (HTC) at the supercritical pressure conditions. Then, the correlation will be used to
design the supercritical heat exchanger (HE). So, the purpose of this study was to investigate the heat transfer/Nusselt
number correlations that is suitable for organic fluid such as R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea under the supercritical conditions.
A study was needed because the specific correlation for organic fluids does not exist yet. Literature study was performed
to identify eight convection heat transfer correlations. The literature study showed that many of the convection HTC were
developed from the experimental data of water and CO2 as working fluids. The thermo-physical properties of the fluids in
the area around the pseudo critical temperature are changed drastically. Generally, the current HE design is carried out
assuming constant fluid properties at the average of inlet and outlet temperatures. Hence, the method to design the heat
exchanger must be done in a segmentation manner. The convection HTC is required to calculate the heat transfer surface
area and the pipe length. A horizontal double pipe counter flows heat exchanger was used for this purpose. The investigated
correlations for organic fluid to predict convection HTC shows a large variation. The result showed that there is no single
equation can be used to predict supercritical convection HTC of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea. The constant coefficients of
some important parameter such as the ratio of specific heat, density, thermal conductivity and viscosity at the wall to the
bulk temperature were suggested to evaluate and add in the correlations. Furthermore, the convection HTC should be
evaluated and validated by the experimental study.

INTRODUCTION
Currently, Organic Rankine cycle (ORC) is the best energy conversion technology in converting energy from low-
temperature energy sources to electrical energy in small scale application [1]. The organic fluid has a low boiling
temperature, so it is possible to carry out the expansion process at low temperature. The efficiency of the ORC is
currently no more than 24%, much lower than the Rankine steam cycle efficiency which is more than 35%. Various
studies were undertaken to improve the efficiency, among others by the use of supercritical/trans-critical ORC [2].
One of the advantages of supercritical ORCs is the possibility of small temperature differences between the
temperature of the heating fluid and the temperature of the organic fluid in its supercritical heat exchanger (SHE).
Lower temperature difference will reduce the potential of exergy destruction, so its exergy efficiency will be improved.
The heat exchanger is one of the vital components in supercritical ORC in terms of cycle efficiency and economic
viability of a supercritical ORC installation. There are several challenges in designing supercritical heat exchanger.
Among them is the compatibility of its components with high pressure and high-temperature operation conditions. In
the supercritical conditions, the properties of the organic fluid/working fluid changed extremely to the temperature
around its pseudo critical temperature, so the coefficient of heat transfer is highly dependent on thermo-physical

International Conference on Thermal Science and Technology (ICTST) 2017

AIP Conf. Proc. 1984, 020011-1–020011-13; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5046595
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1700-7/$30.00

020011-1
properties of the working fluid [3]. In the supercritical condition, the different type of HE had been tested with propane
as working fluid for geothermal power generation [4]. Each type of HE is using different HTC.
Several studies had been conducted to obtain suitable convection heat transfer coefficients for supercritical organic
fluids (SOF) for various operating conditions. Lazova (2014) [5], studied about heat transfer in horizontal tubes for
ORC applications at supercritical pressures and proposed novel test facility to find more experimental data to improve
the predicting of supercritical behavior and obtain more accurate heat transfer coefficient for organic fluids. Four HTC
were investigated, but no information about which correlation were used to calculate heat transfer area of HE. To
develop an accurate heat transfer correlation to supercritical pressure conditions, Kang and Chang (2009) [6] were
done an experimental study using R-134a in 9.4 mm inner diameter tube and proposed Eq. 7 as a correlation to predict
the Nusselt number. This correlation was claimed applicable to the different supercritical experimental conditions and
other working fluids.
Experimental investigation of HT correlations or HT characteristic of supercritical fluids in plate exchangers [7]
and kerosene flowing in a horizontal short tube [8] had been done too. But so far, no convection heat transfer
coefficient has been established which can be generally accepted for SOF over a wide range of operating conditions.
In this theoretical study, eight of the existing Nusselt number correlations was reviewed and used to calculate the
convection heat transfer coefficient of SOF. Convection heat transfer coefficient of three organic fluids (R-290, R-
134a, and R-227ea) were calculated for its various supercritical pressures. This study investigated the evolution,
enhancement and deterioration of convection heat transfer coefficient and the influence of this coefficient to the
temperature. Finally, this study wasaimed to find the appropriate correlations to be used to calculate the heat transfer
coefficient of SOF as a preliminary coefficient. This preliminary heat transfer coefficient was to be used to calculate
heat transfer area of supercritical heat exchanger for experimental test facility of the supercritical heat transfer
measurement.

NUSSELT NUMBER/CONVECTION HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATION

EQUATIONS FOR SUPERCRITICAL FLUIDS
In this theoretical study, eight Nusselt number correlations that found from some literature were used to calculate
heat transfer coefficient at supercritical pressure of the organic fluids. These correlations are listed in Table 1. An
assessment of the force convection HTC at supercritical pressure was done by Chen et.al. (2015) [9]. They reviewed
more than 25 correlations which in general were divided into two categories. First were equations that were
transformed from Dittus-Boelter equation (Eq. 1) and second were transformed from Gnielinski equation (Eq. 3). It
can be seen in Table 1 that Eq. (1) was constructed by only combining Reynolds (Re) and Prandtl (Pr) number, where
the thermodynamic and transport properties was calculated at the bulk temperature.

TABLE 1. List of the Nusselt number correlation for supercritical fluids

Author Equations Reference

Dittus-Boelter ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ ͲǤͲʹ͵ܴ݁௕଴Ǥ଼ ܲ‫ݎ‬௕௡ (1) [1], [7]–[10]

(1930)
n = 0.3 for cooling, n = 0.4 for heating

Krasnochekov and ܿҧ௣

଴ǡଷହ
݇௕ ି଴ǡଷଷ ߤ௕ ଴ǡଵଵ (2) [5], [9], [11], [12]
Protopopov (1959) ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ ܰ‫ݑ‬଴ǡ௕ ቆ ቇ ൬ ൰ ൬ ൰
ܿ௣ǡ௕ ݇௪ ߤ௪

݂௕ തതത
ܴ݁ ܲ‫ݎ‬
ܰ‫ݑ‬଴ǡ௕ ൌ ‫ۇ‬ ͺ ௕ ‫ۊ‬
݂௕ ଴Ǥହ തതത ଶଷ
ͳʹǤ͹ ൬ ൰ ൬ܲ‫ ݎ‬െ ͳ൰ ൅ ͳǤͲ͹
‫ۉ‬ ͺ ‫ی‬
݂ ൌ ሺͳǤͺʹ Ž‘‰ଵ଴ ሺܴ݁௕ ሻ െ ͳǤ͸Ͷሻିଶ

Gnielinski (1976) ሺ݂Ȁͺሻሺܴ݁ െ ͳͲͲͲሻܲ‫ݎ‬ (3) [4], [9], [10], [13]

ܰ‫ ݑ‬ൌ
ͳ ൅ ͳʹǤ͹ሺ݂Ȁͺሻ଴Ǥହ ሺܲ‫ ݎ‬ଶȀଷ െ ͳሻ
For smooth tubes: f = (0.790ln(Re) - 1.64)-2 , 104 < Re < 106

020011-2
 TABLE 1. Cont.
Author Equations Reference

Jackson and Hall, ଴Ǥଷ ௡ (4) [1], [6], [7], [9], [12],
ఘ ௖ҧ೛
(1979) ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ ͲǤͲͳͺ͵ܴ݁௕଴Ǥ଼ଶ ܲത‫ ݎ‬଴Ǥହ ቀ ೢ ቁ ൬ ൰ [14]
ఘ್ ௖೛್

்
ܿҧ௣ ൌ ቀ‫ܿ ್ ்׬‬௣ ݀ܶ ቁൗሺܶ௕ െ ܶ௪ ሻ
ೢ

n = 0.4 for Tb < Tw < Tpc and 1.2Tpc < Tb < Tw

n = 0.4 + 0.2[(Tw/ Tpc) – 1] for Tb < Tpc < Tw
n = 0.4 + 0.2[(Tw/ Tpc) – 1] [1 – 5(Tb/ Tpc – 1)] for Tpc < Tb
< 1.2Tpc and Tb < Tw

Petukhov et al., ሺ݂Τͺሻܴ݁௕ തതതതത

ܲ‫ݎ‬௕ (5) [9]
(1983) ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ
തതത ଶȀଷ െ ͳቁ
ͳ ൅ ͻͲͲΤܴ݁௕ ൅ ͳʹǤ͹ඥ݂Τͺ ቀܲ‫ݎ‬ ௕

݂ ൌ ݂଴ ሺߩ௪ Τߩ௕ ሻ଴Ǥସ ሺߤ௪ Τߤ௕ ሻ଴Ǥଶ

݂଴ ൌ ሺͳǤͺʹ Ž‘‰ଵ଴ ሺܴ݁௕ ሻ െ ͳǤ͸Ͷሻିଶ

Razumovskiy et al., ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ

ሺ௙ೝ ሻோ௘್ തതതതത
௉௥್
൫ܿഥ௣ Τܿ௣ǡ௕ ൯
଴Ǥ଺ହ (6) [9]
(1990) തതതത మȀయିଵቁ
ଵǤ଴଻ାଵଶǤ଻ඥ௙ೝ Τ଼ቀ௉௥ ್

݂௥ ൌ ݂଴ ሺߩ௪ Τߩ௕ ሻ଴Ǥଵ଼ ሺߤ௪ Τߤ௕ ሻ଴Ǥଵ଼

Kang and Chang ఘ ଴Ǥ଴ଶଽଷ (7) [6]

തതത ଴Ǥହହଶ ቀ ೢ ቁ
ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ ͲǤͲʹͶͶܴ݁௕଴Ǥ଻଺ଶ ܲ‫ݎ‬
(2009) ఘ್

തതത ൌ ܿഥ௣ ఓ
ܲ‫ݎ‬
௞

Mokry et al. (2010) ఘ ଴Ǥହ଺ସ (8) [9]

തതത ଴Ǥ଼ଷଷ ቀ ೢ ቁ
ܰ‫ݑ‬௕ ൌ ͲǤͲͲ͸ͳܴ݁௕଴Ǥଽ଴ସ ܲ‫ݎ‬
ఘ್

Eq. (7) and (8) were developed by combining Dittus-Boelter correlation and ratio of densities at the wall and bulk
temperature with different constant coefficients. Before, Jackson and Hall (Eq. 4) developed Nusselt number
correlation by combining Dittus-Boelter correlation and ratio of density and specific heat at the wall and bulk
temperature.
Gnielinski carried out a different approach to construct Nusselt number correlation (Eq. 3). He combined Re, Pr,
and friction factor (f) to find this Equation. In 1959, Krasnochekov and Protopopov proposed this combination by
considering the ratio of specific heat, thermal conductivity, and viscosity evaluated at the wall temperature to those at
the bulk temperature. Petukhov and Razumovskiy (Eq. 5 and Eq. 6) modified Gnielinski correlation by combined the
ratio of density and viscosity calculated at the wall temperature to those at the bulk temperature.

MODELING OF HEAT TRANSFER PROCESS

The heat transfer process from the heating fluid/hot fluid to the working fluid/organic fluid in a horizontal double
pipe supercritical heat exchanger (SHE) was modeled into 3 processes. First process was convection process from hot
fluid to outer wall of inner pipe. Second process was conduction process that transfer heat from outer wall of inner
pipe to inner wall of inner pipe and the last process was convection process from inner wall of inner pipe to organic
fluid. The sketch of these process is given in Figure 1 below.

020011-3
 Insulator Q=0
n
0
Tb,HO Hot oil, V = 10 l/min
T0,HO = 50oC
hc,HO

r = 11.2 mm
Tn,HO
Tw,o
Copper, k = 390 W/m.K

r = 6 mm
T0,FO = 120oC Tw,i

r = 4 mm
hc,OF Tn,FO = 119oC
Tb,OF Propane, V = 0.5 l/min
0 Symetric axis n

FIGURE 1. The process sketch of heat transfer from hot fluid to organic fluid

METHODOLOGY TO CALCULATE CONVECTION HEAT TRANSFER

COEFFICIENT
Calculation of the convection heat transfer coefficient for the organic fluids was done by using a horizontal counter
flow double pipe heat exchanger. Model of the heat transfer process is show such as performed in the Figure 1.
Diameter of inner and outer pipe listed in Table 2. In this table, six fixed parameters are presented too.

TABLE 2. Parameters input of convection heat transfer calculation for supercritical organic fluid
Parameters Values
Inner diameter of inner pipe, di 8 mm
Outer diameter of inner pipe, do 12 mm
Inner diameter of outer pipe, Di 22.4 mm
Outer diameter of outer pipe, Do 25 mm
Volume rate of hot oil, ࢂሶࡴࡲ 10 litre/minute
Pressure of hot oil, pHO 1 bar
Inlet temperature of hot oil, Tin,HF 150oC
Volume rate of organic fluid, ࢂሶࡻࡲ 1 litre/minute
Pressure of organic fluid, pOF 50 bar
Outlet temperature of organic fluid, Tin,OF 120oC

Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Organic Fluids

The thermodynamic and transport properties of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea were determined using NIST
Standard Reference Database 23, version 9. 1 [15]. In Table 3 we show some chemical, physical properties, and
environmental impact of these three organic fluids.

TABLE 3. Physical-chemical properties and environmental impact of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea [15], [16]
Name Propane 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroetane 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-Heptafluoropropane
ASHRAE code R-290 R-134a R-227ea
Chemical formula C3H8 CH2F-CF3 CF3CHFCF3
Molecule weight, kg/kmole 44.1 102.03 170.03
Critical temperature, oC 96,74 101,06 102,80
Critical pressure, bar 41,95 40,60 30,00
Environmental impact ODP = 0 ODP = 0 ODP = 0
GWP = 3.3 GWP = 1430 GWP = 3220
Flammability and toxicity grade A3 A1 A1

These three organic fluids were selected because their critical temperature is almost the same. Although
flammability of propane is much higher than R-227ea as well as from R134a, but propane is quite readily available in
Indonesia.

020011-4
 120
R-227ea R-134a R-290
100

80

T, oC 60

40

20

0
1 1.5 2 2.5
s, kJ/kg.K
FIGURE 2. T – s diagram of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea

Fig. 2 shows the T-s diagrams of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea. In general, Liu, et al. 2004, distinguished organic
fluids over three categories. This classification was based on the slope of its saturation steam curve in the temperature-
entropy diagram. The organic fluid is classified as dry fluid ([ > 0) when the slope of the saturation vapor curve is
positive, it categorized as wet fluid ([ < 0) if the slope is negative, and it is isentropic fluid ([ ~ 0) if saturation steam
curve perpendicular to the entropy axis. Based on these criteria, R-227ea was classified as dry fluids and R-134a and
R-290 were classified as wet fluids. Also from Fig. 2, it was known that R-290 has a higher energy of evaporation
than R-134a and R-227ea.

600 42 bar 50
42 bar
Specific Heat, kJ/(kg.K)

44 bar
500 40 44 bar
46 bar
Density, kg/m3

400 48 bar 46 bar

50 bar 30 48 bar
300 55 bar
20 50 bar
200 60 bar 55 bar
100 10 60 bar
0 0
o
0 50 100 T, oC 150 200 0 50 100 150 T, C 200
(a) Density, R-290 (b) Specific heat, R-290
1500 41 bar 20
Specific Heat, kJ/(kg.K)

44 bar 41 bar
46 bar 44 bar
15
46 bar
Density, kg/m3

1000 48 bar
50 bar 48 bar
10
55 bar 50 bar
500 60 bar 55 bar
5
60 bar
0 0
o
0 50 100 T, oC 150 200 0 50 100 150 T, C 200
(c) Density, R-134a (d) Specific heat, R-134a

FIGURE 3. The different specific density and heat of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea
to temperature at seven supercritical pressure

020011-5
 2000 31 bar 20

Specific Heat, kJ/(kg.K)

35 bar 41 bar
40 bar 44 bar
1500 15
45 bar 46 bar

Density, kg/m3
50 bar 48 bar
1000 55 bar 10
50 bar
60 bar
55 bar
500 5
60 bar
0 0
0 50 100 T, oC 150 200 0 50 100
o
150 T, C 200
(e) Density, R-227ea (f) Specific heat, R-227ea
FIGURE 4 (con’t). The different specific density and heat of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea
to temperature at seven supercritical pressure

In Fig. 3 above, two of thermodynamic properties (U and cp) of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea at seven supercritical
pressure is displayed. These two properties affected the heat transfer coefficient of the fluids. For all of these organic
fluids, the difference in density and specific heat increased sharply when supercritical pressure was close to critical
pressure around the pseudo-critical point. Below the critical temperature, increased supercritical pressure did not
significantly affect the value of density and specific heat. Above the critical temperature, the density increased as
supercritical pressure increased. Highest specific heat only occurred at pseudo critical point, but decreased sharply
along with the increase in supercritical pressure. High specific heat will improve the ability of fluids to receive heat
from heating fluid.
The change in transport properties to temperature was not very different with the change in thermodynamic
properties to temperature. The pattern of the graph was relatively identic as presented in Fig. 4. The influence of
increased supercritical pressure only existed around pseudo-critical point, where viscosity of fluids was tend to rise
and Prandtl number fell down.

150 42 bar 20
42 bar
Prandtl Number

44 bar
46 bar 15 44 bar
Viscosity, mPa.s

100 48 bar 46 bar

50 bar 48 bar
10 50 bar
55 bar
50 60 bar 55 bar
5 60 bar

0 T, oC 0
o
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 T, C 200
(a) Viscosity of R-290 (b) Prandtl number of R-290
400 41 bar 12
44 bar 41 bar
Prandtl number

46 bar 10 44 bar
300 46 bar
48 bar 8
Viscosity, mPa.s

50 bar 48 bar
200 55 bar 6 50 bar
60 bar 55 bar
4
100 60 bar
2
0 0
T, oC o
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 T, C 200
(c) Viscosity of R-134a (d) Prandtl number of R-134a

FIGURE 5. The different transport properties of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea

to temperature and to the increase of supercritical pressure.

020011-6
 400 31 bar 10
31 bar
35 bar 35 bar

Prandtl number
8
300 40 bar 40 bar

Viscosity, mPa.s
45 bar 6 45 bar
200 50 bar 50 bar
55 bar 4 55 bar
60 bar 60 bar
100
2

0 0
T, oC
0 50 100 150 T, oC 200 0 50 100 150 200
(e) Viscosity of R-227ea (f) Prandtl number of R-227ea
FIGURE 6 (con’t). The different transport properties of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea
to temperature and to the increase of supercritical pressure.

Four of fluid properties above was predicted to have significant impact to the supercritical convection heat transfer
coefficient. In Fig. 5, the comparison of each properties of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea at supercritical pressure of 50
bar is shown.

1600 18
50 bar Propane

Specific Heat, kJ/(kg.K)

1400 50 bar Propane 16 50 bar R-134a
50 bar R-134a 14
1200 50 bar R-227ea
50 bar R-227ea
Density, kg/m3

12
1000
10
800
8
600
6
400 4
200 2
0 0
0 50 T, oC 100 150 200 0 50 T, oC 100 150 200

(a) Density (b) Specific heat

7 400
50 bar Propane 50 bar Propane
6
50 bar R-134a 50 bar R-134a
5 50 bar R-227ea 300
50 bar R-227ea
Viscosity, mPa.s

4
200
Prandtl Number

3
2 100
1
0 0
0 50 T, oC 100 150 200 0 50 T, oC 100 150 200
(c) Prandtl number (d) Viscosity
FIGURE 7. Comparison of density, specific heat, Prandtl number, and viscosity of R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea to the
temperature at 50 bar supercritical pressure

According to Fig. 5, it could be seen that propane had highest specific heat for whole temperature. Highest Prandtl
number, lowest density and viscosity only existed at pseudo-critical point. R-227ea had highest values in density,
Prandtl number, and viscosity. Yet, it had lowest in term of specific heat. Influence of supercritical convection heat
transfer coefficient of that three organic fluids to temperature would be explained in the Result and Discussion section.

Determination of Heating Fluid Properties

Hot oil with the trademark Therminol@ADX-10 was used as heating fluid for this study. Thermodynamic and
transport properties of hot oil were found from Therminol@ADX-10 website and by using MS Excel spreadsheet, the
graph as shown in Fig. 6 below could be drawn.

020011-7
 950 3.0 1000 0.14

Thermal Conduktivity, kJ/(m.K)

Density Heat Capacity

Kinematic Viscisity, mm2/s

900 0.12

Heat Capacity, kJ/(kg.K)

800
850 0.10
Density, kg/m3
2.5
800 600 0.08
Kinematic Viscosity
750 400 Thermal Conductivity 0.06
2.0
700 0.04
200
650 0.02
Temperature, oC
600 1.5 0 0.00
-50 -20 10 40 70 100 130 160 190 220 250 280 -50 -20 10 40 70 100 130 160 190 220 250 280
Temperature, oC
(a) (b)
FIGURE 8. Therminol@ ADX10 properties vs temperature (a) density and heat capacity
(b) kinematic viscosity and thermal conductivity

In Fig. 5, it could be seen that the density of hot oil was decreased as the temperature went up. A three-degree
polynomial equation (Eq. 9) as function of temperature was used as formula to calculate this density.
ߩሺ݇݃Ȁ݉ଶ ሻ ൌ ͺ͹ͲǤʹͻ͹ െ ͲǤ͸ͺͶͶͻ͹ ή ܶሺԨሻ ൅ ͷǤͳͺͶͶͳ‫ିͲͳݔ‬ହ ή ܶ ଶ ሺԨሻ െ ͳǤͲ͸ͻͷ‫ ଺ିͲͳݔ‬ή ܶ ଷ ሺԨሻ (9)
Oppositely, the heat capacity of hot oil was increased if the temperature went up. The heat capacity value was predicted
by using Eq. (10).
ܿ௣ ሺ݇‫ܬ‬Ȁ݇݃Ǥ ‫ܭ‬ሻ ൌ ͳǤͺ͵͸͵ ൅ ͲǤͲͲ͵ͻʹ ή ܶሺԨሻ െ ͳǤͷ‫ ଺ିͲͳݔ‬ή ܶ ଶ ሺԨሻ (10)
The quadratic equation (Eq. 11) was used to predict thermal conductivity of hot oil, where this property was fell down
if the temperature was raised.
݇ሺܹȀ݉Ǥ ‫ܭ‬ሻ ൌ ͲǤͳʹ͸ͷ െ ͲǤͲͲͲͳʹ͵ ή ܶሺԨሻ െ ͻǤͳ͸ͳ‫ ଼ିͲͳݔ‬ή ܶ ଶ ሺԨሻ (11)
o
Below 0 C, kinematic viscosity of hot oil was slumped dramatically and after that went down very slightly. To predict
this kinematic viscosity, an exponential equation (Eq. 12) was used.
లరఱǤభయ
ቀ ିଶǤ଺଺ଶቁ
ߥሺ݉݉ଶ Ȁ‫ݏ‬ሻ ൌ ݁ ೅ሺԨሻశభభళǤఴ (12)

Calculation of Convection Heat Transfer Coefficient

The thermodynamic and transport properties of the organic fluids was changed dramatically around the pseudo-
critical point. Constant properties assumption in the whole of temperature operation condition couldn’t be applied. So,
in the Modeling section it was proposed to calculate the convection heat transfer coefficient for 'T = 1oC. If the range
of temperature difference is small, the constant properties assumption in that range could be accepted. Fig. 7 presented
the methodology to calculate supercritical convection heat transfer coefficient. This methodology was part of the
methodology given in Harmen (2017) with few modifications.
Amount of heat that transfer to organic fluid was calculated by using Eq. (13).
ܳ௡ǡைி ൌ ݉ሶைி ݄௡ǡைி ൫ܶ௡ǡைி െ ܶ଴ǡைி ൯ (13)
Where enthalpy of organic fluids was calculated at film temperature (ˆ) by using Refprop 9.1 database.
The outlet temperature of hot oil for each segment was calculated using Eq. (14).
ொ೙
ܶ௡ǡுை ൌ ܶ଴ǡுை ൅ (14)
௠ሶಹೀ ௖೛ಹೀ

Specific heat of hot oil was calculated by using Eq. 10. Because Eq. (10) was the function of ǡ, iteration process
was needed to find appropriate …’ and  of hot oil.

020011-8
 Velocity of organic fluids and hot oil was calculated by using Eq. (15).
௠ሶ
˜ൌ (15)
ఘ஺೎

Then the Reynolds was calculated using Eq. (16) below.

ఘ୴ୈ ୴ୈ
ܴ݁ ൌ ൌ (16)
ఓ ௩

And so on, the Nusselt number of organic fluids were calculated using equations that listed in Table 1. The Nusselt
number of hot fluids was calculated by using Dittus-Boeltler equation only. Finally, supercritical convection heat
transfer coefficient was calculated by using Eq. (17).
௞ே௨
݄௖ ൌ (17)
஽

This calculation was done until  = ‘—–ǡ or until  = 120oC. After that, the last process was to inspect ǡ, if
ǡ = ‹ǡ± e, with e = 10-5. If fulfilled, the calculation could be stopped. If not, the assumption of Ͳǡmust be
changed with other value.

Start

Tin,OF, Tout,OF, 'TOF, Tin,HO

pOF, mdot,OF , di, do, Di, Do,

Guess Tout,HO

T0,OF = Tin,OF
T0,HO = Tout,HO

Tn,OF = T0,OF + 'TOF

Tout,HO,new = Tout,HO + (Tin,HO - Tn,HO)/2

Calc. Qn

Calc. Tn,HO
Organic fluids properties
(Refprop Database 9.1)

Tn,OF, new = T0,OF, new + 'TOF

h, U, Q, k, Pr

Calc. vn,OF & vn,HO

Calc. Ren,OF & Ren,HO

Calc. Nun,OF & Nun,HO

No Calc. hcn,OF & hcn,HO

Tn,HO = Tin,HO ± e
e = error = 10-5 T0,OF,new = Tn,OF

Yes
Stop Tn,OF = Tout,OF
Yes No

FIGURE 9. Flow chart to calculate convection heat transfer coefficient of supercritical organic fluids [17]

020011-9
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The calculation results of the change of organic fluid temperature, hot fluid temperature, outer and inner wall
temperature of inner pipe, and heat rate are listed in Table 4 and presented as T – Q diagram in Fig. 8.

TABLE 4. The range of temperature difference between fluid & inner pipe and the heat rate
Descriptions R-290 R-134a R-227ea
Organic fluid temperature 50.00 – 120.00oC 50.00 – 120.00oC 50.00 – 120.00oC
Hot fluid temperature 150.00 – 145.73oC 150.00 – 144.96oC 150.00 – 146.56oC
Outer wall temperature of inner pipe 103.49 – 132.62oC 100.26 – 130.42oC 105.92 – 132.80oC
Inner wall temperature of inner pipe 103.39 – 132.58oC 100.15 – 130.37oC 105.82 – 132.76oC
Total heat rate 1361 Watt 1605 Watt 1095 Watt

The organic fluids were heated from 50oC to 120oC, causing the hot oil temperature to drop until 4.27oC for
R-290, 5.03oC for R-134a, and until 3.43oC for R-227ea. During the heating process, total heat rate obtained was 1.36
kW, 1.6 kW, and 1.1 kW for R-290, R-134a, and R-227ea respectively. Outer and inner wall temperature of inner pipe
was not significantly different. From these results, it was known that R-134a received highest heat during the process.

190 190
T,oC

T,oC
140 140

90 Temp. HO 90
Temp. OF
Temp. HO Temp. OF
Temp. Wo
Temp. Wi Temp. Wo Temp. Wi
40 40
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0 0.5 1 1.5
Q, kW Q, kW
(a) R-290 (b) R-134a
190
T,oC

140

90
Temp. HO Temp. OF
Temp. Wo Temp. Wi
40
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Q, kW
(c) R-227ea
FIGURE 10. T – Q diagram of (a) R-290, (b) R-134a, and (c) R-227ea

The heat transfer coefficient of each SOF was calculated using 8 correlations of the Nusselt number. The results
of the calculations are shown in Fig. 9. For SOF R-290 and R-134a, the heat transfer coefficient profile exhibited the
same profiles. The very different profiles were shown by the heat transfer coefficient obtained from the Razumovskiy
and Krasnovchekov correlation. There was no peak value at the graph of supercritical HTC that calculated by
Razumovskiy and Krasnovchekov correlation. This phenomenon could not be explained yet by this theoretic study.
Therefore, both correlations were unacceptable yet to calculate the supercritical HTC of these organic fluids.

020011-10
 TABLE 5. Maximum value of Supercritical HTC at p = 50 bar of R-290 and R-134a
Equation Maximum Supercritical HTC, Watt/(m2.oC) at p = 50 bar
R-290 (’… = 106oC) R-134a (’… = 112oC)
Dittus-Boelter 1,299.11 (T = 107oC) 1,299.34 (T = 113oC)
Gnielinski 1,423.15 (T = 107oC) 1,459.19 (T = 113oC)
o
Petukhov 848.07 (T = 107 C) 957.45 (T = 113oC)
o
Jackson and Hall 988.78 (T = 106 C) 1,066.54 (T = 113oC)
o
Kang and Chang 838.59 (T = 106 C) 915.14 (T = 111oC)
o
Mokry 885.15 (T = 106 C) 1,076.99 (T = 112oC)

Different profiles were given by the SOF R-227ea heat transfer coefficient curve. At 50 bar supercritical pressure,
the graph of heat transfer coefficient still increased slightly. No peak value could be found. This occurred because
R-227ea supercritical pressure (50 bar) was much greater than the critical pressure of R-227ea (30 bar).
HT Koef., W/(m2.K)

1,500

1,000

500
Dittus Gnielinski Mokry Kang
Jackson Razumovski Petukhov Krasnovchekov
0
Tb, oC
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
(a) R-290
2,000
HT Koef., W/(m2.K)

Dittus Gnielinski Mokry Kang

Jackson Razumovski Petukhov Krasnovchekov
1,500

1,000

500
Tb, oC
0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
(b) R-134a
FIGURE 11. Profile of the supercritical convection heat transfer coefficient to temperature of (a) R-290, (b) R-134a, and
(c) R-227ea at 50 bar supercritical pressure that calculated by used 8 different Nuselt number equations.

020011-11
 1,000

HT Koef., W/(m2.K)
800

600

400

200 Dittus Gnielinski Mokry

Kang Jackson Razumovski
Tb, oC
0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
(c) R-227ea
FIGURE 12 (con’t). Profile of the supercritical convection heat transfer coefficient to temperature of (a) R-290, (b) R-134a, and
(c) R-227ea at 50 bar supercritical pressure that calculated by used 8 different Nuselt number equations.

Other graphs for R-290 and R-134a seemed to have the same profile. In the temperatures below the pseudo-critical
temperature, supercritical HTC increased slightly with a small gradient, grew up dramatically close to pseudo-critical
temperature until it achieved peak value at pseudo-critical temperature, and then went down suddenly. Maximum
value of supercritical HTC of R-290 and R-134a at the p = 50 bar are listed in Table 5. The supercritical HTC of R-
290 and R-134a that calculated by Dittus-Boelter and Gnielinski correlation had greater than other correlations at the
p = 50 bar. However in this study, it could not be concluded which was the best correlation that can be used to predict
HTC in the supercritical condition. Hence, to determine whether a HT correlation equation can be used to calculate
the convection HTC of organic fluid at supercritical pressure it is necessary to conduct experimental research.

CONCLUSIONS
In the theoretical studies of convection heat transfer coefficients of the organic fluids R-290, R-134a, and R-27ea
at supercritical conditions, some conclusions were given as follows.
x Extreme increment and decrement of heat transfer coefficients of R-290, R-134a, and R-227 around the
pseudo-critical temperature only occurred at a supercritical pressure that was not too high from the critical
pressure. Thus, in further experimental research, attention should be more focused at temperature and pressure
close to pseudo-critical temperature and critical pressure.
x This theoretical study had not been able to infer a correlation equation suitable for a particular supercritical
organic fluid. Nevertheless, Krasnochekov-Protopopov and Razumovskiy correlations can be used as
preliminary prediction to calculate heat transfer coefficient of R-290, R-134a, and R-227 at supercritical
pressure. However, some constants coefficient in the correlations for water and CO 2 were predicted to be
different from organic fluids.
x Verification to validate existing correlation equations is required through experimental studies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Authors would like to acknowledge the Indonesian Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher
Education for Doctoral Dissertation Research Project 2017 with contract number 071/SP2H/LT/DRPM/IV/2017584.

020011-12
 REFERENCES
1. S. Karellas and A. Schuster, “Supercritical fluid parameters in organic Rankine cycle applications,” Int. J.
Thermodyn., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 101–108, 2008.
2. A. Schuster, S. Karellas, and R. Aumann, “Efficiency optimization potential in supercritical Organic Rankine
Cycles,” Energy, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 1033–1039, Feb. 2010.
3. M. Lazova, A. Kaya, H. Huisseune, and M. De Paepe, “Supercritical heat transfer and heat exchanger design for
organic rankine application,” 2015.
4. E. Schröder, K. Neumaier, F. Nagel, and C. Vetter, “Study on Heat Transfer in Heat Exchangers for a New
Supercritical Organic Rankine Cycle,” Heat Transf. Eng., vol. 35, no. 18, pp. 1505–1519, Dec. 2014.
5. M. Lazova, S. Daelman, A. Kaya, H. Huisseune, and M. De Paepe, “Heat transfer in horizontal tubes at
supercritical pressures for organic Rankine Cycle applications,” 2014.
6. K.-H. Kang and S.-H. Chang, “Experimental study on the heat transfer characteristics during the pressure
transients under supercritical pressures,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 52, no. 21–22, pp. 4946–4955, Oct. 2009.
7. P. Forooghi and K. Hooman, “Experimental analysis of heat transfer of supercritical fluids in plate heat
exchangers,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 74, pp. 448–459, Jul. 2014.
8. Z. Yang, Q. Bi, Z. Liu, Y. Guo, and J. Yan, “Heat transfer to supercritical pressure hydrocarbons flowing in a
horizontal short tube,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., vol. 61, pp. 144–152, Feb. 2015.
9. W. Chen, X. Fang, Y. Xu, and X. Su, “An assessment of correlations of forced convection heat transfer to water
at supercritical pressure,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, vol. 76, pp. 451–460, Feb. 2015.
10. Y. A. Cengel, Heat transfer: a practical approach. McGraw Hill Book Company, 2003.
11. Z. Yang, Q. Bi, Z. Liu, Y. Guo, and J. Yan, “Heat transfer to supercritical pressure hydrocarbons flowing in a
horizontal short tube,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., vol. 61, pp. 144–152, Feb. 2015.
12. M. van der Kraan, M. M. W. Peeters, M. V. F. Cid, G. F. Woerlee, W. J. T. Veugelers, and G. J. Witkamp, “The
influence of variable physical properties and buoyancy on heat exchanger design for near- and supercritical
conditions,” J. Supercrit. Fluids, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 99–105, May 2005.
13. C.-R. Zhao and P.-X. Jiang, “Experimental study of in-tube cooling heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics
of R134a at supercritical pressures,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 1293–1303, Oct. 2011.
14. J. D. Jackson, “Fluid flow and convective heat transfer to fluids at supercritical pressure,” Nucl. Eng. Des., vol.
264, pp. 24–40, Nov. 2013.
15. E. W. Lemmon, M. O. McLinden, and M. L. Huber, “NIST standard reference database 23: Reference Fluid
Thermodynamic and Transport Properties-REFPROP, version 9.1.” National Institute of Standard and
Technology, Standard Reference Data Program, The U.S. secretary of Commerce, 2013.
16. H. S. Eggleston, L. Buendia, K. Miwa, T. Ngara, and K. Tanabe, “The 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventtories.” IGES, Japan, 2006.
17. H. Harmen, W. Adriansyah, A. Abdurrachim, and A. D. Pasek, “Metodologi Perhitungan Koefisien Perpindahan
Panas Konveksi Paksa Fluida Organik Propana pada Kondisi Superkritik,” J. Teknol., vol. 9, no. 2, p. 89, Jun.
2017.

020011-13