SHELL AND TUBE

HEAT EXCHANGER
MAIMUNATUN NAWAR BINTI MOHD YAZAN (2021853492)
LESTER BRAIN ANAK ADING (2021491868)
HUDA SYATIRA BINTI NAZARUDIN (2021468756)
HAZIM ZULHELMI BIN KHAIRUL FAHMI (2021622008)
KHAIREENA BINTI FIRUZ SHAH (2021459854)

ABSTRACT

Shell and tube heat exchangers are one of the forms of heat exchangers. It is the most common heat exchanger used in oil
refineries and other chemical processes. The purpose of this experiment was to analyze the performance of a shell and
tube heat exchanger in terms of heat load and heat balance, log means temperature difference (LMTD), overall heat
transfer coefficient (U). The experiment is carried out by manipulating the flowrate of each of the cold and hot water
flowrates. All the findings are sorted, calculated, and tabulated. From this experiment it can be determined that the U is
directly proportional to the heat transfer coefficient, Q. As the value of Q increase, the value of U should increase as well.
When the flowrate of cold water is equal to the hot water, the highest U is reached, which is 9.221 kW/s. m 2.C. The highest
U, 9.281 kW/s. m 2.C, is reached for a constant flowrate of cold water when the hot water flowrate is the same as the cold-
water flowrate. Reynolds number was calculated, the greater the Reynold Number, more heat is transmitted and
efficiency increase. The value of pressure drops observed increases as the flowrates and the Reynold number increase.

Keywords: Counter-current flow, hot water, heat load, LMTD, heat transfer coefficient, pressure drop.

I. INTRODUCTION
A heat exchanger is a device that transfers heat from a
hot to a cold fluid. The temperature of the fluid fluctuates
along the length of the heat exchanger while it is going
through it [1]. The basic concept of a heat exchanger is that it
transmits heat without exchanging the heat-carrying fluid.
There are no external thermal energy or work interactions in
heat exchangers. Conduction and convection are the primary
modes of heat transport. Transfer processes, quantity of fluids
and degree of surface compactness, construction features, flow
patterns, and heat transfer mechanisms are all used to classify
heat exchangers [2]. Heat exchangers are widely used in
power plants, refrigeration, and air-conditioning systems, as
well as in the space chemical, nuclear, petrochemical, and
cryogenic sectors.
Heat exchangers with a shell and tube design are one of
the types of heat exchanger. It was the most frequent type of
heat exchanger in oil refineries and other major chemical
processes, and it was designed for higher pressures
application. A shell (a huge pressure vessel) surrounds a
bundle of tubes in this form of heat exchanger. To transfer
heat between the two fluids, one fluid runs through the tubes
and another fluid flows over the tubes (via the shell) [1] . Shell
and tube heat exchangers are one of the most common types of
heat exchangers, and they have a wide range of applications
for gaseous and liquid media over a wide temperature and
pressure range[3].
Two fluids of different temperatures run through the
heat exchanger in a shell and tube heat exchanger. One runs
through the tubes (tube side), while the other flows outside the
tubes but within the shell (the shell side). Through the tube
walls, heat is transferred from one fluid to another, either from
tube to shell or vice versa. On either the shell or tube side, the
fluids can be liquids or gases. A vast heat transfer area is
employed to transmit heat efficiently, resulting in the use of
several tubes. This is a cost-effective method of conserving
energy and avoiding thermal waste [3] .
A series of tubes make up a shell and tube heat
exchanger. The fluid that needs to be heated or cooled is
contained in one set of these tubes. The second fluid flows
across the tubes that are being heated or cooled, allowing it to
either contribute or absorb heat. The tube bundle is a
collection of tubes that can be made up of numerous different
types of tubes: plain, longitudinally finned[1]. Shell and tube
heat exchangers are commonly utilised in high-pressure
applications, and the pressure used in this experiment is 50
bar.

1
 III. THEORY
In many of the applications of heat transfer in process
plants, one or more of the mechanisms of heat transfer may be
involved. This experiment focused on shell-and-tube heat
exchangers, which studied the pressure drop and heat transfer.
So, it is important to know the basic comprehension of the
principles used for shell and tube heat exchanger calculation.
The amount of heat to be transferred across a heat exchanger
Figure 1: Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger [1].
is usually expressed in the form:
A counter current flow heat exchanger was used in this
Hot water flow rate ( HW )
experiment. Figure 2 depicts an idealized counterflow
exchanger in which two fluids flow in opposite directions but
parallel to each other. Heat exchangers with counter flow also Q H =F H × Cp H ×( t 1−t 2 )
known as contra-flow feature two flowing fluids that flow in
opposite directions (180° apart). Each flowing media enters Cold water flow rate (CW)
the heat exchanger from opposite directions and exits from
opposite directions. Because the cooler medium departs the QC =F C × Cp C ×(T 2−T 1)
counter flow heat exchanger at the same end where the hot
medium enters, the cooler fluid will approach the hot fluid's Where:
entrance temperature, resulting in a much larger delta T than
in a parallel flow heat exchanger. The most efficient heat QH = Heat load for hot water flow rate
exchanger is a counter flow heat exchanger [4]. QC = Heat load for cold water flow rate
FH  Hot water mass flow rate
FC  Cold water mass flow rate
t 1  Hot water inlet temperature
t 2  Hot water outlet temperature
T1  Cold water inlet temperature
T2  Cold water outlet temperature
Figure 2: Counter flow shell and tube heat exchanger[5].
The calculated values of Q H and QC was calculated, and
The exchanger is performing at its best when the outlet
the set of temperature and flowrate data was selected where
temperatures are equal. Counter flow heat exchangers are
the calculated values of QH and QC are closest to each other.
inherently more efficient than parallel flow heat exchangers
The greater the specific heat, the more energy is required to
because the devices can create a more uniform temperature
induce a temperature change. Substances with higher specific
difference between the fluids, over the entire length of the
heats require more heat energy to a lower temperature than do
fluid path [6]. The main difference between counterflow and
substances with a low specific heat [8]. Other than that, the
parallel flow heat exchangers is that counterflow heat
logarithmic-mean temperature difference (LMTD) is a very
exchangers are more efficient because they can interchange
important fluid heat transfer equation to help determine the
the most amount of heat, but parallel flow heat exchangers are
temperature driving force for heat transfer in flow systems. A
less efficient since it cannot exchange as much heat [7].
common heat exchanger has two ends (ΔT1 and ΔT2) at
which the hot and cold streams enter or exit on either side as
II. OBJECTIVES shown in Figure 3.
The objectives of this experiment are to evaluate and
study the heat load and heat balance, log mean temperature
difference (LMTD), and overall heat transfer coefficient (U).
Second, the aims are to calculate the Reynolds numbers at the
shell and tubes sides and study the effect of fluid temperature
on counter flow heat exchanger performance. Third, to
calculate the heat transfer coefficient for inside and outside
fluids. Fourth, to measure and determine the shell and tube
sides pressure drop.

2
 At the shell side and tube side need to perform a
calculation for Reynolds number. The Reynolds number Re
represents a dimensionless ratio of the inertial forces to the
viscous forces in fluid flow i.e., Re(s), Re(t). Fluid flow in a
heat exchanger faces frictional resistance due to the internal
roughness (e) of the pipe wall, which can create local eddy
currents within the fluid. Calculation of the Reynolds Number
helps to determine if the flow in the pipe is laminar flow or
turbulent flow.

Shell-side Re(s) for CW

De ×Gs
Figure 3: LMTD Diagram
ℜ ( s )=
μ
Where:
Thus, the equation below shows the LMTD can be
determined:
de
De=
(t 1−T 2)−(t 2−T 1) 12
LMTD= 1 1 do
ln(t 1−T 2)/(t 2−T 1) 4( ×0.86 PT − π )
2 PT 2 4
In a crossflow, in which one system, has the same
de=
1
nominal temperature at all points on the heat transfer surface, do
a similar relation between exchanged heat and LMTD holds, 2π
but with a correction factor [9]. In this experiment, a more PT = Pitch = 0.81 ins
complex design was used such as a shell and tube exchanger
with baffles, it requires a correction factor. Thus, the corrected do = Tube outside diameter, ins.
equation below is: m = Viscosity, taken at the average fluid temperature in the

LMTD = FT x LMTD lbm

Shell,
ft . hr
The overall heat transfer coefficient is found by
calculating the heat gained in the system. The overall heat W s lbm
Gs = ,
transfer is influenced by the thickness and thermal A s ft 2 . hr
conductivity of the medium through which heat is transferred
[11]. To calculate the overall heat transfer, the following lbm
Ws = Flowrate,
parameters must be used in the equation below. Overall heat . hr
transfer coefficients are the most convenient to use in heat
transfer calculations since they combine all of the constituent Shell ID x Clearance x Baffle space
As=
factors into one and are based on the overall temperature drop. PT ×144
Theoretically Q above is equals to QH or QC. Otherwise, there
is an error in QH or QC, most probably due to errors in the
temperatures and flowrates.
Tube-side Re(t) for HW

Q De ×G t
U= ℜ ( s )=
A × LMTD × FT μ

Where:
D = Tube ID = 0.04125 ft
Q = Heat rate with respect to the average head load
W t lbm
FT = Correction factor Gt = ,
At ft 2 . hr
A = Total heat transfer area

3
 Nos of tubes x flow area per tube Experimental – theoretical =∆ P N/m2
At =
Nos of tube passes

To heat the water, water was passed tube-side through a
heat exchanger while steam was passed shell-side. The
convective film heat transfer coefficient for the water flowing
tube-side was of interest. The Prandtl number 𝑃𝑟, is a
dimensionless ratio of the molecular diffusivity of momentum
to the molecular diffusivity of heat.
μCp
Pr=
k
where:
µ = the viscosity of the fluid
𝑐𝑝 = the heat capacity of the fluid
𝑘 = the thermal conductivity of the fluid
IV. PROCEDURES
The experimentation of heat exchangers is conducted
using the SOLTEQ HE158C heat exchanger as in shown in
Figure 4. It is a device used to investigate the effect of varied
flow rates on heat transfer in various types of heat exchangers.
This equipment supports all four types of heat exchangers:
concentric, spiral, shell-and-tube, and plate heat exchangers.
For this experiment, the focus was on shell and tube heat
exchanger [12].

In the thermal design of shell and tube heat exchangers,

pressure drop is a major limitation. A thermal design of a shell
and tube heat exchanger is only meaningful when it is optimal,
and the extent of the optimality is limited by the pressure drop
[10]. Thermal design optimization requires minimization of
the overall heat transfer coefficient. The calculated pressure
drop (shell) and pressure drop (tube) are to be compared to the
measured pressure drop (shell) and pressure drop (tube). Figure 4: Experimental Setup of SOLTEQ Heat Exchanger
Correction to the measured pressure drop (shell) and pressure Shell and Tube.
drop (tube) can be made.
General Start-up Procedure:

1. A quick inspection was performed to make sure that

Pressure Drop at Shell sides the equipment is in proper working condition.
2 2. All valves were initially closed except V1 and V12.
L ρv
∆ P=f 3. Hot tank was filled via a water supply hose connected
DS−OD 2 to valve V27. Once the tank is full, the valve was
closed.
4. The cold-water tank was filled up by opening valve
Pressure Drop at Tube sides V28 and the valve was left opened for continuous
water supply.
L ρ v2 5. A drain hose was connected to the cold water drain
∆ P=f
OD 2 point.
6. Main power was switched on. The heater for the hot
water tank was switched on and the temperature
Friction factor, f- moody chart controller was set to 50℃.
L – length of tubes (m) 7. The water temperature in the hot water tank was
allowed to reach the set point.
DS – shell diameter (m) 8. The equipment was now ready to be run.
OS – tube outer diameter (m)
Counter-current Shell & Tube Heat Exchanger Procedures:
 - density of water kg/m3
1. General start-up procedures were performed.
v – velocity m/s
2. The valves to counter-current Shell & Tube Heat
Exchanger arrangement was switched.
3. Pumps P1 and P2 were switched on.
Measurement of Actual pressure drops, ∆ P

4
 4. Valves V3 and V14 were adjusted and opened to
obtain the desired flowrates for hot water and cold-
FT1(LPM) Qh Qc Q LMTD, U
water streams, respectively. (kW) (kW) (kW) TLM (kW/s.m2.C)
5. The system was allowed to reach steady state for 10 (C)
minutes.
6. FT1, FT2, TT1, TT2, TT3 and TT4 were recorded. 2 1.059 1.249 1.154 12.771 4.518
7. Pressure drop measurements for shell-side and tube
4 1.403 1.458 1.431 14.749 4.851
side were recorded for pressure drop studies.
8. Steps 4 to 7 were repeated for different combinations 6 1.898 2.082 1.990 14.886 6.684
of flowrate FT1 and FT2.
9. Pumps P1 and P2 were switched off after the 8 2.310 2.221 2.266 13.734 8.249
completion of experiment.
10 2.750 2.915 2.833 15.099 9.281
General Shutdown Procedure: FT1 FT2 TT1 TT2 TT3 TT4 DPT1 DPT2
(LPM) (LPM) (C) (C) (C) (C) (mmH2O) (mmH2O)
1. The heater was switched off. The hot water
temperature was waited until it dropped below
2 10 31.8 30.0 40.9 48.6 8 158
40⁰C.
2. All the pumps, Pump 1 and Pump 2 were 4 10 32.1 30.0 43.3 48.4 22 160
switched off.
3. Equalized (vertical or “0”) on DP Selector 6 10 33.2 30.2 44.3 48.9 46 157
Switch.
8 10 33.4 30.2 43.5 47.7 76 160
4. The main power was switched off.
5. All water in the process line was drained off. The 10 10 34.4 30.2 45.4 49.4 127 161
water in the hot and cold-water tanks were
retained for next laboratory sessions.
6. All valves were closed.
Part 1: Table of Heat Load Qh, Heat Balance Qc, LMTD,
Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient, U.

Experiment 1: FT1 constant (shell)

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
FT2(LPM) Qh Qc Q LMTD, U
(kW) (kW) (kW) TLM (kW/s.m2.C)
SHELL AND TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER
(C)
(COUNTER-CURRENT)
2 1.032 1.499 1.266 10.257 6.171
Experiment 1: FT1 constant Hot water constant (shell)
4 1.719 2.166 1.943 13.375 7.264
FT1 FT2 TT TT TT TT DPT1 DPT2
6 2.201 2.457 2.329 14.308 8.139
(LPM (LPM 1 2 3 4 (mmH2 (mmH2O
) ) (C (C (C (C O) ) 8 2.407 2.666 2.537 14.240 8.908
) ) ) )
10 2 41. 30. 46. 47. 123 36 10 2.544 2.638 2.591 14.049 9.221
4 6 2 7
10 4 37. 29. 45. 48. 126 59
4 6 8 3
10 6 35. 29. 45. 48. 122 97
4 5 2 4
10 8 34. 29. 44. 48. 122 123
4 6 5 0
10 10 33. 30. 44. 47. 122 158 Experiment 2: FT2 constant (tube)
9 1 2 9

Experiment 2: FT2 constant Cold-water constant (tube)

Part 2: Table of Reynold Number, Re

Experiment 1: FT1 constant (shell)

5
 FT2(LPM) Volume Area, A Velocity, Reynold Experiment 2: FT2 constant (tube)
flowrate, (m2) V (m/s) number, Re
v (m3/s)
2 3.33x10- 5.603x10- 0.0059 553.69 FT1(LPM Reynold number, Pr Nu h
5 3
(laminar) ) Re (W/m2.C
4 6.67x10- 5.603x10- 0.0119 1116.78 )
5 3
(laminar) 2 9837.75 3.564 54.725 3695.804
6 1.00x10- 5.603x10- 0.0178 1670.47 (turbulent)
4 3
(laminar) 4 19703.37(turbule 3.564 95.389 6442.011
8 1.33x10 -
5.603x10- 0.0237 2224.17 nt)
4 3
(transitional) 6 29527.18 3.564 131.83 8903.629
10 1.67x10- 5.603x10- 0.0298 2796.64 (turbulent) 9
4 3
(transitional)
8 39381.32 3.564 165.99 11210.45
(turbulent) 7 8
Experiment 2: FT2 constant (tube)
10 49342.02 3.564 198.81 13426.52
FT1(LPM) Volume Area, A Velocity, Reynold number, (turbulent) 1 3
flowrate, (m2) V (m/s) Re
v (m3/s)
2 3.33x10- 4.717x10- 0.706 9837.75 (turbulent)
5 5
Part 4: Table of Pressure Drops, P
4 6.67x10- 4.717x10- 1.414 19703.37(turbulent)
5 5
Experiment 1: FT1 constant (shell)
6 1.00x10- 4.717x10- 2.119 29527.18
4 5
(turbulent)
8 1.33x10- 4.717x10- 2.819 39381.32 Actual
Reynol Pressur
4 5
(turbulent) Pressur
FT2(LPM d Types of e drops,
10 1.67x10- 4.717x10- 3.541 49342.02 ) number flows
f P
e drops,
4 5
(turbulent) P
, Re (N/m2)
(N/m2)

2 553.69 Laminar 0.115 0.0133 353.03

6
4 1116.7 Laminar 0.057 0.0263 578.57
8 3
6 1670.4 Laminar 0.038 0.0400 951.21
7 3
8 2224.1 Transitiona 0.049 0.0909 1206.1
7 l 1 3
10 2796.6 Transitiona 0.045 0.1329 1549.3
4 l 4 2

Part 3: Table of Heat Transfer Coefficient, h

Experiment 2: FT2 constant (tube)
Experiment 1: FT1 constant (shell)

FT2(LP Reynold number, Pr Nu h (W/m2.C)

Reynol Types f Pressur Actual
FT1(LP d of flows e Pressure
M) Re M) number, drops, drops, P
2 553.69 (laminar) 5.44 7.121 58.076 Re P (N/m2)
2 (N/m2)
4 1116.78 (laminar) 5.44 12.42 101.357 2 9837.75 Turbule 0.031 50.97 27.48
2 8 nt 0
4 19703.3 Turbule 0.025 170.78 44.96
6 1670.47 (laminar) 5.44 17.15 139.884 7 nt 9
2 2 6 29527.1 Turbule 0.023 356.54 94.57
8 2224.17 5.44 21.56 175.883 8 nt 4
(transitional) 2 6 8 39381.3 Turbule 0.021 574.00 171.31
10 2796.64 5.44 25.90 204.639 2 nt 9
(transitional) 2 2 10 49342.0 Turbule 0.020 864.33 381.12
2 nt 9

6
 VI. CALCULATIONS ( 988.18 )( 0.706 )( 0.00775 )
ℜ= =9837.75
Part 1 ( 5.494 ×10−4 )

[
Q h= 2
L
×
1 m3
×
1 min
min 1000 L 60 s ][
kg
× 988.18 3 ×4175
m
J
kg . K
Part 3
]
× [ 47.7−46.2 ]° C
Experiment 1
Qh=1.032 kW
J Pr= ( 8.007 ×10 ) ( 4183 ) =5.442
−4

Qc = 2[ L
×
1 m3
×
1 min
min 1000 L 60 s
kg
][
× 995.67 3 ×4183
m kg . K
× [ 41.4−30.6
]
] °C
0.6155
Qc =1.499 Kw Nu=0.0023 ×553 0.8 × 5.4420.4=7.121
Q=0.5 ( 1.032+1.499 ) =1.266 kW (7.121)(0.6155)
h= =58.076 W /m2 .C
(0.085−0.00953)
( 47.7−41.4 ) −(46.5−30.6)
LMTD= =10.257 ° C
( 47.7−41.4 ) Experiment 2
¿
(46.5−30.6)
( 5.494 ×10−4 ) ( 4175 )
Pr= =3.564
1 1 0.6436
U =1.266× × =6.171 kW / s . m2 .C
0.02 10.257
Nu=0.0023 × 98370.8 ×3.564 0.33=54.725
Part 2
(54.725)(0.6436)
Experiment 1 h= =3695.804 W /m2 . C
(0.00775)
3 3
L 1m 1 min −5 m
v=2 × × =3.33 ×10
min 1000 L 60 s s Part 4

(0.085 ¿ ¿2−0.00953 )
2
−3 2 Friction factor determine using moody chart.
A=π =5.603 ×10 m ¿
4
Experiment 1
2
3.33 ×10
−5 0.5 ( 988.18 )( 0.0059 ) 2
V= =0.0059 m/ s ∆ P=0.1156 × × =0.0133 n/m
0.00953 2
5.603 ×10−3

( 995.67 ) ( 0.0059 )( 0.085−0.00953 ) 2

ℜ= =553.69 ∆ P=343.233−0.0133=353.03 n/m
( 8.007 ×10 ) −4

Experiment 2
2
Experiment 2 0.5 ( 995.67 ) ( 0.706 )
∆ P=0.0310 × × =50.97 n/
0.085−0.00953 2
L 1 m3 1 min
v=2 × × =3.33 ×10−5 m3 / s
min 1000 L 60 s ∆ P=78.45−50.97=27.48 n/m
2

(0.00775¿ ¿2)
A=π =4.717 × 10−5 m2 ¿ Mechanism of heat exchanger implied the transfer of
4
heat in combination of convection and conduction.
Temperature differences in between one or two species inside
3.33 × 10−5 m
V= =0.706 the heat exchanger is the driving force of a heat exchange to
4.717× 10 −5
s occur [13]. Therefore, in this experiment the interception of

7
cold water and hot water is the driving force for the heat
exchange. Whereby, the temperature differences between the
water signals a heat transfer. In this experiment the flows of
cold water and hot water operated in counter current. These
characteristics help the purpose to evaluate the performance of
the heat exchangers.
Shell and tube heat exchanger were used in this
experiment which then the heat load Qh and the heat balance
Qc, log mean temperature difference (LMTD) and overall heat
transfer coefficients (U) was calculated based of the spike of
the temperature difference in the water and the correlation of
the flowrates and the types of flows. Where the shell side
carried the cold water, and the tube side carried the hot water.
Ultimately, with the information gathered the pressure drops
of this experiment was calculated.
The first procedure of the experiment, the flowrates of
FT1 was constant to 10LPM, opposing to the FT2 flowrates
that were changed every 10 minutes starting from 2,4,6,8 and
10LPM. After 10 minutes per flowrates, the corresponding T1,
T2, T3 and T4 temperature value was noted. Then the second
set of experiments was conducted, whereby the value of FT2
was constant and the FT1 having flowrates starting from
2,4,6,8 and 10LPM. The data was also recorded and tabulated,
this data was then used to analyzed and to be compared.
The log mean temperature difference (LMTD) was
calculated for each set of FT2 and FT1 flowrates. The LMTD
value was observed increases as when the flowrate of FT2
increases in the first experiment same goes FT1 in the second
experiment. Which this indicates that the heat exchange
between the shell and tube happened effectively. Based on the
result recorded, the value of Qc and Qh from flowrates of 2 to
10LPM relatively increases. Heat coefficient U can be
determined using LMTD value. In this case, a large LMTD
value indicates more heat is transferred from hot water to cold
water. Which based of the data calculate, the LMTD value
was steadily escalated. For experiments 1 the value of LMTD
was 10.257, 13.375, 14.308, 14.240, and 14.049 whereas experiment
2 was 12.771, 14.749, 14.886, 13.734 and 15.099 in the unit of
temperature. The overall heat transfer in this system also being
determined by calculating overall heat transfer coefficient, U.
Overall Heat transfer coefficient, U in the system was
influenced by the thickness and by the thermal conductivity of
the Shell and tube heat exchangers and water as the
medium[14][15]. The heat transfer, Q is directly proportional
to the overall heat transfer coefficient, U. For instance,
theoretically when the Q is increases the value of U is also
increases[15].
The results showed that the hot water was more
conductive than the cold water, making the heat from the hot
water transferred to the cold water increasing it temperature.
This finding also supported by the value of overall heat
transfer coefficient, U comparing both experiments.
Experiment 1 having slightly higher U value than the
8
experiment 2, the flowrate of hot water was constant at
experiment 1 whereas experiment 2 having flowrates of hot
water from 2 to 10LPM. Higher heat transfer coefficient in
this case also indicates the shorter time needed for the hot
water temperature to dropped. The value of heat coefficient, h
of experiment 1 was 58.076, 101.357, 139.884, 175.883 and
204.639 whereas experiment 2 was 3695.804, 6442.011,
8903.629, 11210.458 and 13426.523 in the unit of W/m2.C.
To predict the flows of water in the experiment, using
the information gathered the Reynold number was determined.
Reynold number was calculated both shell and tube using
varies flowrates. Starting from shell both (hot water flowrate
was constant to 10LPM and cold-water having flowrates
staring from 2 to 10LPM), the Reynold number behavior
numerically getting bigger (from laminar to transitional).
Turbulent flows of water were not noticed in the shell part as
it has larger surface area and small friction factor compared to
the shell part of the heat exchanger.
Opposing the tube part of the heat exchanger, the flow
of water in the tube was turbulent starting from lower flowrate
to higher flowrates but the friction factor is Independent to the
Reynold numbers at a very large value of Reynold numbers
(turbulent). From this analysis, the Reynold number also
affecting the heat transfer of from hot water to cold water. The
higher the Reynold Number, the higher and more effective the
heat transferred. Also, when the value Nusselt number
increases, the value of Reynold number increases.
To conclude, the value of pressure drops of the system
calculated to be high on the tube side compared to the shell
side. One of many factors contributing to the higher pressure
drops in the tube side might be the amount of tube where the
water flows, the diameter of the tube was not big/small enough
for water to flows through[16]. For instance, the value of
pressure drops in experiment 1 was 353.03, 578.57, 951.21,
1206.13 and 1549.32 whereas experiment 2 was 27.48, 44.96, 94.57,
171.31 and 381.12 in the unit of N/m2. This may affect the flows
of the water, overall, the efficiency of the heat exchanger. The
relationship of pressure drops, and Reynold number is directly
proportional. Whereby, when the flow of water in the tube
side is turbulent, the bigger the value of pressure drops.
Similar on the shell side (experiment 1) the value of pressure
drops observed to be increases as the flowrates increases as
well as the Reynold number.
VII. CONCLUSION
The main goal of the experiment is to analyze and
examine the overall heat transfer coefficient (U), log mean
temperature difference (LMTD), heat transfer, as well as the
heat load and heat balance of the shell and tube heat
exchangers under various condition. The fluid flows in the
shell and tube heat exchanger are in a counter-current flow,
which result in faster heat transfer. In the experiment, the log
means temperature difference (LMTD) value increased when
the flowrate increased, and vice versa. This implies that the
heat transfer between the shell and tube was successful. This
indicates that when the heat transfer coefficient (Q) increases,
so does the overall heat transfer coefficient (U). For a constant
flowrate of hot water stream, the highest overall heat transfer
coefficient is achieved which are 9.221 kW/s.m2.C when the
flowrate of the cold-water is the same as the hot water. Then,
for a constant flowrate of cold-water stream, the highest
overall heat transfer coefficient is achieved which are 9.281
kW/s.m2.C when the flowrate of the hot water is the same as
the cold-water. The Reynolds number was calculated at the
flowrate of cold-water stream and the highest Reynold number
is 2796.64 which is a transitional flow. For hot water stream
the Reynold number is 49342.02 which is a turbulent flow.
This result shows that the greater the Reynold Number, the
more heat is transmitted and the more efficient it is. The
experiment also shows that the system's pressure drops are
higher on the tube side than on the shell side. The value of
pressure drops recorded on the shell side experiment 1 were
353.03, 578.57, 951.21, 1206.13, and 1549.32 N/m2 while in
experiment 2, the pressure drops were lower which is at 27.48,
44.96, 94.57, 171.31, and 381.12 N/ m2. The value of pressure
drops observed increases as the flowrates and the Reynold
number increase.
VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS
First and foremost, in every experiment, measuring an
accurate data is a crucial part in achieving the objectives of the
experiment. As in this experiment, the important parameters
involve is the flowrates, temperature, and pressure. These
parameters are dependently relied on what are the scale of the
flow meter in the tube that was taken. To avoid parallax error,
the eyes must align or perpendicular to the scale of the flow
meter shown so that the reading is accurate [9]. Therefore,
during the experiment, it is recommended that the readings of
the parameters involve, must be taken when the readings are
steady as well as the scale of the flow water is accurate, and
the time taken is exactly at 10 minutes for every reading. By
doing so, the error in the experiment can be reduce, eventually
the calculations done will be approximate close to the true
value.
Apart from that, it is best to keep the heat exchanger well
[8]
insulated in order to prevent a huge heat loss to the
surrounding which will affect the heat exchanger efficiency. [9]
By choosing the lowest thermal conductivity is the best way to
maintain the temperature of heat exchanger [10]. It is observed
that when the heat exchanger has no insulation was install,[10] it
can affect the results obtained from the experiment. Insulation
system is an essential part, to save up energy, assure the safety
of the people to touch and maintain the steam quality [11]
generated in the system.
Last but not least, during the experiment, it is found that
[12]
there is some leaking occurred from the bottom of the heat
exchanger, it is recommended to check and ensure all the
9
equipment is in a good condition before using it in order to
keep the heat exchanger work fully maximize its functions.
However, it is best to refer to the technicians or engineers
regarding any inquiries on the equipment so that the problem
can be resolve.
REFERENCES
G. V. S. Rao, C. J. Rao, and N. Haribabu,
“INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN
AERONAUTICAL AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
HEAT TRANSFER ANALYSIS ON SHELL AND TUBE
HEAT EXCHANGERS,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
RESEARCH IN AERONAUTICAL AND MECHANICAL
ENGINEERING, vol. 2, no. 1, 2014.
R. K. Shah and D. P. Sekulic, “FUNDAMENTALS OF HEAT
EXCHANGER DESIGN,” 2003.
P. Bichkar, O. Dandgaval, P. Dalvi, R. Godase, and T. Dey,
“Study of Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger with the Effect of
Types of Baffles,” in Procedia Manufacturing, 2018, vol. 20,
pp. 195–200. doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.028.
“Shell and Tube Type Heat Exchanger Explained - saVRee.”
https://savree.com/en/encyclopedia/shell-and-tube-type-heat-
exchanger (accessed Apr. 14, 2022).
“HEAT EXCHANGERS - Wattco.”
https://www.wattco.com/casestudy/heat-exchangers/ (accessed
Apr. 14, 2022).
“Heat Transfer/Heat Exchangers - Wikibooks, open books for
an open world.”
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Heat_Transfer/Heat_Exchangers
(accessed Apr. 14, 2022).
“What is the Difference Between Counterflow and Parallel
Flow Heat Exchanger | Compare the Difference Between
Similar Terms.” https://www.differencebetween.com/what-is-
the-difference-between-counterflow-and-parallel-flow-heat-
exchanger/ (accessed Apr. 14, 2022).
M. Zhou, “Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers,” 2015.
J. A. Oulton, “Inside View,” Int. Nurs. Rev., vol. 51, no. 1, pp.
13–14, 2004, doi: 10.1111/j.1466-7657.2004.00230.x.
N. Connor, "What is Logarithmic Mean Temperature
Difference LMTD Definition.," 22 5 2019. [Online].
S. K. S. /. D. Stephan, "Managing Pressure Drop in the Design
of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers," 16 April 2022. [Online].
Manual, Experimental, “SOLTEQ, HEAT
EXCHANGER TRAINING APPARATUS (Model:
HE 158C)”, 2017.
[13] “Heat Exchanger: What Is It? How Does It Work?
Types Of.”
https://www.iqsdirectory.com/articles/heat-
exchanger.html (accessed Apr. 15, 2022).

[14] F. M. White, “Fluid mechanics,” p. 862, 2011.

[15] A. Shukla, P. Kumar, and D. R. Tiwari, “Design Procedure of
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger,” Int. J. Eng. Tech. Res., vol.
3, no. 12, pp. 116–119, 2015.

[16] 宗成庆, “Design Fundamentals of Shell and tube Heat

Exchangers,” pp. 70–126.

[17] J. McGill, “What is an X-ray grid?,” Sciencing, 02-Mar-2019.

[Online]. Available: https://sciencing.com/xray-grid-
5436984.html. [Accessed: 16-Apr-2022].

[18] “Understanding heat exchangers,” Types, Designs, Applications

and Selection Guide. [Online]. Available:
https://www.thomasnet.com/articles/process-equipment/under
standing-heat-exchangers/. [Accessed: 16-Apr-2022].

10
 APPENDIX

A. Hot water and Cold-water properties

Hot water (h) Cold water (c)

Density ρ , kg /m3 `988.18 995.67
Heat capacity Cp , J / kg . K 4175 4183
Thermal cond k , W /m . K 0.6436 0.6155
Viscosity μ , Pa . s 5.494x10-4 8.007x10-4

B. Shell and tube heat exchanger layout

Tube 1
Shell 1
Length of the tubes, L (m) 0.5
Tube inner diameter, ID (mm) 7.75
Tube outer diameter, OD (mm) 9.53
Tube surface area (m2) 0.015
Shell diameter, DS (mm) 85
Area, A (m2) 0.02

C. Nomenclature

∆P pressure drops N/m2

v Volume flowrate m3 /s
ℜ Reynolds number dimensionless
v Velocity m/ s
Qh HEAT LOAD kW
Qc HEAT BALANCE kW
LMTD Log mean temperature difference C
A Area m2
U Overall heat transfer coefficient kW/s.m2.C
h heat transfer coefficient kW/m2.C
Nu Nusselt number dimensionless
Pr Prandtl number dimensionless
f Friction factor dimensionless
h Hot
c Cold
ρ Density kg /m3
μ Viscosity Pa .m
k Thermal conductivity W /m . K
Cp Heat capacity kg /m
3

DS Shell diameter mm
L Length of the tubes m
ID Tube inner diameter mm
OD Tuber outer diameter mm

11