DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY

Gokongwei College of Engineering

Chemical Engineering Department

Unit Operations Laboratory 1

Final Laboratory Report

Experiment # 2
Performance of a Tubular Condenser

Group Name Section EA2

NAME SIGNATURE Criteria Score

1. Catapang, Jacen Mariel S. Content (50%)
2. Chan, Cary Albert D. Presentation (25%)

3. Garces, Jerome Ignatius T. Relevance (25%)

4. Lee, Angela Mae T. Total (100%)

5. Liclican, Sephi Marz G. Percentage Equivalent

6. Tiu, Sean Elijah J.

4 February 2019 11 February 2019

Date of performance Date of Submission

Dr. Allan N. Soriano

Instructor
Unit Operations Laboratory 1

Performance of a Tubular Condenser

Jacen Mariel S. Catapang, Cary Albert D. Chan, Jerome Ignatius T. Garces,
Angela Mae T. Lee, Sephi Marz G. Liclican, Sean Elijah J. Tiu
Department of Chemical Engineering, Gokongwei College of Engineering, De La Salle University,
2401 Taft Avenue, Manila 1004, Philippines

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

AY 2018–2019 | Term 2
LBYCHEE EA2
Final Laboratory Report
Experiment # 1
Date Performed: January 14, 2019
Date Submitted: January 21, 2019
Keywords
This is the format for the preparation of the LBYCHED Final Report. Please follow
this template strictly. This document can be used as a template for your preparation.
The abstract should be a single paragraph describing the background, objectives,
explains and summarizes the results of the experiment and should be between 150-
200 words only. Use Times New Roman, 10 pt, italic. For the keywords, list a
maximum of 4-5 phrases. All small letters, separated by a comma and ends with a
period. Use Times New Roman, 8 pt, italic for the keywords. Maximum of 8 pages for
LFR. The abstract should summarize the experiment/study including objectives and
results.

I. INTRODUCTION

Condensers are important heat exchangers used in chemical and petroleum processes [1]. This involves the phase change
from vapor to liquid phase which is known as condensation [2]. Distillation, for example, uses either a partial or total
condenser to turn the overhead vapor stream to liquid which results to a reflux and a liquid product stream [ 1]. In this
experiment, a tubular condenser or a surface condenser is used. Usually, this type of heat exchanger is utilized in power
plants that produce exhaust from steam turbines [1].

In line with this, it is important to determine the capacity of the tubular heat exchanger which may be in terms of the
amount of steam condensed per unit time [3]. With this amount, the heat transfer coefficient maybe obtained and the
amounts of heat absorbed and given off by the water and steam, respectively, are achieved through the following equations
[3]:

m h=(m h)measured +(m h )correction (1)

Where m h is the total amount of steam, (m h )measured is the measured amount of steam condensed per unit time,
and (m h )correction is the correction or flashing effect.
q s=mh [ λ s +c p ( T h−T c ) ] (2)
Where q s is the total amount of heat transferred by steam, λ s is the latent heat of vaporization, m h is the total
amount of steam used, c p is the specific heat, T h is the condensing temperature of steam, and T c is the
temperature of condensate.
q w =m w c p ( T w 1−T w 2 ) (3)
Whereq w is the total amount of heat gained by the water, m w is the mass flow rate of cooling water, T w 1 is the
outlet temperature of cooling water, T w 2 is the inlet temperature of cooling water, and c p is the specific heat of
water.
q L =q s−qw (4)

[1]
 Where q L is the heat lost to the surroundings.
mh λ
(U o )experimental = (5)
Ao ∆ To
Where U o is the experimental overall heat transfer coefficient, Ao is the total heat transfer area of the tubes and
N is the number of tubes.
k 3f ρ2f gc λ
hi =0.943
[ μ f L ∆T o ] (6)

Where hi is the heat transfer coefficient.

3 3
T f =T h − ∆ T o =T h− ( T h−T w ) (7)
4 4
Where T f , T h, and T w are the film temperature of condensate, temperature of condensing vapor, and assumed
temperature of the tube wall.
ho Do Do Go 0.66 C p μ 0.33 μ 0.14
k
=0.20
μ ( k ) ( ) ( )
μw
(8)

Where h o is the heat transfer coefficient of water flowing in the shell side,
mw
G o= (9)
Smin
And
π
Smin = ( D is−N D ot ) (10)
4
Where N is the number of tubes, D is is the inside diameter of the shell, and D ot is the outside diameter of the
tube.
1 1 χ Do Do
= + + (11)
U o ho k D L hi D i
Where U o is the theoretical overall heat transfer coefficient. Finally,
T h −T c T h −T w
=
1 1 (12)
U o Ao ho A o

Overall, the objectives of this experiment are:

1. To determine the capacity of the tubular condenser as a function of the flow rate of the
cooling water used.
2. To determine the experimental overall heat transfer coefficient for a vertical tubular
condenser.
3. To calculate theoretical surface coefficients of steam condensing inside the tubes and of
the cooling water flowing upwards the shell side of the condenser.
4. To compare experimental and theoretical values of the overall heat transfer coefficients
as obtained in (2) and (3).
5. To determine the heat lost to the surroundings.

II. METHODOLOGY

2.1 Materials and Reagents

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[2]
 1. Thermometers
2. Stopwatch

2.2 Equipment
The experiment was performed using a vertical tube condenser illustrated in Fig. 2.2.1, with the shell and the tubes
made of steel. The tubular condenser has 38 tubes of 85 inches long within the shell. These tubes have outer diameters
of 0.7086 in. and inside diameters of 0.4375 in. The shell, on the other hand, has an outer diameter of 8.52 in. and an
inside diameter of 7.856 in.

Figure 2.2.1. Actual illustration of tubular condenser used.

Steam enters the bottom of the condenser and rises inside the tubes, where it condenses on the inside surfaces of the
tubes. The resulting condensate then flows downward and is collected at the bottom, where it is discharged through the
steam tap and collected in the condensate collection tank. The cooling water enters at the bottom of the shell and rises
outside the tube bundles and exits on top. This cooling water flows through a double pipe heat exchanger and is
discharged to the hot water collection tank. Shown in Fig. 2.2.2 is an engineering illustration of such process, with Fig.
2.2.3 illustrating the cross-sectional engineering sketch of the aforementioned tubular heat exchanger.

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[3]
 Figure 2.2.2. Engineering sketch of the tubular condenser.

Figure 2.2.3. Cross-sectional illustration of the tubular condenser.

2.3 Experimental Procedure

The water supply valves were first opened, and cooling water was allowed to flow through the condenser. The drain
valve was opened to allow steam to escape and then closed, making sure that the condensate line with the steam trap is
opened. The pressure was then increased to 40 psig. After allowing the system to stabilize, the system was operated
under constant pressure for 15 minutes. During this time, the temperature and pressure readings were recorded at regular
intervals, together with the flow rates of the condensate and the cooling water. The procedure was then repeated for a
different pressure condition (50 psig).

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[4]
III. RESULTS & DISCUSSION

This experiment dealt with the performance of a tubular condenser. Two runs were done for the experiment with one
trial utilizing a pressure of 40 psig and another at 50 psig. The temperature readings of the steam, hot water, condensate and
cold water were obtained, as well as the flow rates of the cold water and condensate. From the temperature readings, the
heat absorbed, heat supplied, and heat lost can be calculated. Table 3.1 summarizes the values for these parameters for each
trial.

Table 3.1. Heat transfer across the condenser.

Steam Pressure (psi) Heat Supplied (kW) Heat Absorbed (kW) Heat Lost (kW)
40 34.9521 118.68 -83.73
50 38.7836 119.95 -81.16

As can be seen from the table, there are significant heat losses observed for the two trials signifying that the system is not
100% efficient in condensing water. The heat lost was lower for the trial with the steam pressure at 50 psig, however there is
no clear evidence that steam supply pressure significantly affect heat lost, heat absorbed, and heat supplied. It can be seen
from the table that the heat transfer is practically the same for both runs. The heat lost in the system may be attributed to the
drops of water observed to be leaking from the pipes or from human error during the temperature readings.
The heat transfer coefficients for the system were also calculated from the physical date of the heat exchanger and the
data obtained from the experiment. These coefficients are heat transfer coefficients based on the steam condensing inside
the tubes, the water outside the tubes, the theoretical overall heat transfer coefficient and the experimental overall heat
transfer coefficient. These are summarized in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2. Heat transfer coefficients of the heat exchanger.

Steam Pressure Uo,theoretical Uo,experimental Percentage
hi (W/m2-K) ho (W/m2-K)
(psi) (W/m2-K) (W/m2-K) Error
40 3490.00 42.97 42.03 107.95 156.84%
50 3484.25 42.97 42.03 106.46 153.30%

The table shows that there is a large percentage error between the theoretical and experimental overall heat transfer
coefficient based on the outside cross-sectional area. Seeing that the experimental values are close to each other, the error
that caused this was consistent between the two runs, implying that the fault is likely due to the equipment. This error can be
again, attributed to the leaks in the system which affected the temperature readings from the experiment and in turn, the heat
transfer coefficient values. The Reynold’s Number was also calculated for each run obtaining 362.11 and 400.30 for the first
and second run, respectively, signifying that the flow is laminar. From the data gathered and calculated, it can be seen that
the heat transfer coefficient and the amount of heat transferred between the streams are sufficiently close to each other. This
indicates that these parameters are independent of the steam supply pressure. On the other hand, the Reynold’s Number
increased as the steam pressure increased, which makes sense since the increase in pressure led to an increase in the flow
rate which affects the Reynold’s Number directly.

IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

In both the 40 psi and 50 psi runs, there is a huge difference between the calculated heat absorbed by the cooling water
and heat supplied by the steam. It is seen that the heat difference is roughly the same for both runs, thus, the error can most
likely be because of same amount of leak in each run. There is also a large discrepancy (more than 100%) between the
theoretical and experimental overall heat transfer coefficients for both runs. This is due to the excessively large heat transfer
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[5]
coefficient of the inner wall. Again, this can be attributed to leaks and also faulty gauges.
V. ANSWERS TO GUIDE QUESTIONS

1. With the aid of a diagram, describe the operating principles of at least four types of steam traps.

 Balanced Pressure Steam Trap (Figure 5.1)

o The main element in this steam trap is a capsule containing a special liquid and water mixture with a
boiling point below that of water. As the condensate passes around the steam trap, it heats up the
liquid and causes the liquid inside the capsule to vaporize. This makes the capsule expand due to
increased vapor pressure and closes the valve before the steam reaches the trap.

Figure 5.1. Balanced Pressure Steam Trap

 Inverted Bucket Steam Trap (Figure 5.2)
o An inverted bucket steam trap consists of an inverted bucket attached by a lever to a valve. As condensate
enters through the bottom of the bucket and fills the body, the bucket becomes buoyant, causing the
orifice to close. The orifice is closed as the condensate is released through the small bleed hole. As this
happens, the orifice slowly opens and the condensate is released from the system.

Figure 5.2. Inverted bucket steam trap

 Labyrinth Steam Trap (Figure 5.3)
o A labyrinth steam trap consists of a series of baffles which can be adjusted by means of a handwheel.
Pressure drop across the system cause the entering hot condensate to vaporize into steam as it passes
through the baffles. The spaces around the succeeding baffles decrease in size, making it harder for the
steam to escape. Figure 3 shows a simple labyrinth steam trap.

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[6]
 Figure 5.3. Labyrinth steam trap
 Float Type Steam Trap (Figure 5.4)
o Differences in density between the steam and the condensate are what drive the operation of a
ball float type trap. As the condensate enters the trap, the increase in height will also cause the
ball float to rise, opening a valve which expels the excess condensate.

Figure 5.4. Float type steam trap

REFERENCES

Books
[1] Serth, R. and Lestina, T. Process heat transfer: Principles, applications and rules of thumb. 1st ed. Elsevier Inc., 2007.

From the internet

[2] Available online at https://nptel.ac.in/courses/103103027/pdf/mod1.pdf

Journals
[3] Olano, Jr. S. Experiment B2: Performance of a tubular condenser. From Experiments in chemical engineering. 2 nd ed.
De La Salle University, Inc.

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Shell and Tube Specifications

Shell and Tube Specifications
Shell Side Tube Side
Parameter Value (in) Parameter Value (in)
Outside Diameter, 8.720 Outside Diameter, 0.875
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[7]
 Do Do
Inside Diameter, 7.990 Inside Diameter, 0.755
Di Di
Thickness, x 0.365 Thickness, x 0.060
Length, L 86 Length, L 85
Other Parameters
Test Pressure 200 psi Tube Sheet Do 14.25 in
Number of Baffles 54 Number of Tubes 38

Appendix B. Raw data for Run 1

Run 1
Steam Pressure 40 Water Pressure 43
(psi) (psi)
Ti Temperature (℃) Flow Rate (kg/s)
me
Hot Condens Cold Condens Cold
(m Steam
Water ate Water ate Water
in)
0 144 54.0 114 26 - -
3 142 48.0 116 26 0.01472 -
6 144 49.0 116 26 0.01528 0.3436
9 143 47.0 115 26 0.01537 -
12 146 49.0 116 26 0.01535 0.2924
15 146 47.0 114 26 0.01511 -
Me 144.2 49.00 115.2 26 0.01517 0.3180
an
Appendix C. Raw data for Run 2
Run 2
Steam Pressure 50 Water Pressure 45
(psi) (psi)
Ti Temperature (℃) Flow Rate (kg/s)
me
Hot Condens Cold Condens Cold
(m Steam
Water ate Water ate Water
in)
0 148 58.0 116 26 - -
3 150 57.0 117 26 0.01667 -
6 150 57.0 118 26 0.01681 0.3143
9 154 56.0 117 26 0.01676 -
12 154 55.0 118 26 0.01681 0.3137
15 155 53.8 118 26 0.01678 -
Me 151.8 56.13 117.3 26 0.01677 0.3140
an

Sample Calculations

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[8]
A. Heat supplied by the steam:
q s=mh [ λ s +C p ( T h−T c ) ]
Run 1:
kg kJ kJ
q s=0.01517
s [
2182.6907 + 4.184
kg kg K
( 144.2−115.2 ) K ]
kJ
q s=34.9521
s
Run 2:
kg kJ kJ
q s=0.01677
s [
2168.3274 + 4.184
kg kg K
( 151.8−117.3 ) K ]
kJ
q s=38.7836
s
B. Heat absorbed by cooling water:
q w =mw C p ( T w 1−T w2 )
Run 1:
kg kJ
q w =0.3180 ∗4.184 ( 115.2−26 ) K
s kg K
kJ
q w =118.68
s
Run 2:
kg kJ
q w =0.3140 ∗4.184 ( 117.3−26 ) K
s kg K
kJ
q w =119.95
s
C. Heat lost to surroundings:
q l=q s−qw
Run 1:
kJ kJ
q l=34.9521 −118.68
s s
kJ
q l=−83.73
s
Run 2:
kJ kJ
q l=38.7836 −119.95
s s
kJ
q l=−81.16
s
D. Heat transfer coefficient of steam:
k 3f ρ2f gc λ 0.25
hi =0.943[ ]
∆ To L μf
Run 1:

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[9]
 3 0.25
W kg 2 J

hi =0.943
[ ( 0.6836
m )(
942.76 3 ( 1 ) 2182690.7
mK

( 136.375−130 ) K ( 85∗0.0254 ) m 0.00024

hi =3490.00 2
W
kg
kg
ms
) (
(
)
) ]
m K
Run 2:
3 0.25
W kg 2 J

hi =0.943
[ ( 0.6836
m )(
942.76 3 ( 1 ) 2168327.4
mK

( 136.375−130 ) K ( 85∗0.0254 ) m 0.00024

hi =3484.25 2
W
kg
kg
ms
) (
(
)
) ]
m K
E. Heat transfer coefficient of cooling water:
0.66 0.33
D o Go Cp μ μ 0.14 k
h o=0.2 ( μ ) ( ) k
(
μw
)
Do
Run 1:
h o=0.2 ¿ ¿
W
h o=42.97
m2 K
Run 2:
h o=0.2 ¿ ¿
W
h o=42.97
m2 K
F. Theoretical overall heat transfer coefficient:
1 1 x m Do Do
= + +
U o ho k m D ave hi Di
Run 1:
1 1 ( 0.365∗0.0254 ) m ( 0.875∗0.0254 ) m 0.875∗0.0254 m
= + +
Uo W W ( 0.875+0.815 )∗0.0254 W
42.97 45 ( ) 3490.00 2 ( 0.815∗0.0254 ) m
m2 K mK 2 m K
W
U o =42.03 2
m K
Run 2:
1 1 ( 0.365∗0.0254 ) m ( 0.875∗0.0254 ) m 0.875∗0.0254 m
= + +
Uo W W ( 0.875+0.815 )∗0.0254 W
42.97 45 ( ) 3484.25 2 ( 0.815∗0.0254 ) m
m2 K mK 2 m K
W
U o =42.03 2
m K

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[10]
G. Experimental overall heat transfer coefficient:

mh λ
U=
A o ∆T o
Run 1:
kg kJ
0.001452
∗2198640
s kg
U=
( 0.7086∗0.0254 m ) ( 85∗0.0254 m )∗38∗π ( 136.375−130 ) K
W
U =107.95 2
m K
Run 2:
kg kJ
0.001452
∗2168327.4
s kg
U=
( 0.7086∗0.0254 m ) ( 85∗0.0254 m )∗38∗π ( 136.375−130 ) K
W
U =106.46 2
m K
H. Reynolds number:
ρDv
ℜ=
μ
Run 1:
kg
ℜ=942.76 (0.0875∗0.0254 m)¿ ¿
m3
ℜ=362.11
Run 2:
kg
ℜ=942.76 (0.0875∗0.0254 m)¿ ¿
m3
ℜ=400.30

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[11]