Course Chemical Engineering Laboratory

Course code CHMT3004

Practical No. 4
Title of the report Experimental Investigation of Heat Exchanger
Configuration
Date of submission 2023-09-2
Group No. 2
Supervisor

Declaration of group work

 We are aware that plagiarism (the use of someone else’s work without his/her
permission and/or without acknowledging the original source) is wrong
 We declare that this report has been composed by ourselves. We confirm that
the work submitted for assessment is the result of our own.
 We have followed one of the accepted conventions in referencing the ideas and
work of others
 We understand that the University may take disciplinary action against us if it
finds evidence (1) that we have taken the work of others, or (2) that we have
failed to acknowledge appropriately the source of ideas and words in our
writing

# First name, surname Student No. Signature

1 Buyisile Tracy Nyongwana 2353188
2 Mphonyana Mokoa 2324916
Abstract

This experimental was conducted to assess the performance of two distinct heat
exchanger configurations commonly used in chemical and metallurgical plants. The
configurations under investigation include a concentric-tube heat exchanger with
warm water flowing through a stainless-steel pipe within a transparent outer tube
and a plate heat exchanger with separate channels for warm and cold water. The
key variables considered are the flow rates of warm and cold water, the direction of
flow (co-current or counter-current), and the inlet and outlet temperatures. The
aims of the experiment was to calculate energy balances at various settings,
empirically determine film heat transfer coefficients for both heat exchangers, and
to compare these coefficients with established correlations from the literature. The
experimental procedure involves conducting measurements for different flow rate
scenarios and directions of flow, considering both co-current and counter-current
configurations. Despite these challenges, the study provides valuable insights into
the comparative performances of the two heat exchanger configurations,
contributing to the understanding of their efficiency in industrial applications.

ii
Introduction

Heat exchangers play an important role in the efficient utilization of energy within
chemical and metallurgical processes, serving as integral components for recovering heat
from high-temperature fluid streams and transferring it to lower-temperature streams. In
industrial settings, the choice of heat exchanger configuration can significantly impact
energy efficiency. This experimental study aims to investigate and compare the
performance of two prevalent heat exchanger designs: the concentric-tube heat
exchanger and the plate heat exchanger.

The primary objective of this study requires calculating energy balances for each
configuration, empirically determining film heat transfer coefficients for both the
concentric-tube and plate heat exchangers, and subsequently comparing these
coefficients with established correlations from the existing literature. The experimental
procedure involves systematic measurements under different flow rate of the fluid,
considering both co-current and counter-current configurations.

Despite the considerable importance of achieving steady state in experimental setups,

there are challenges that exist in reaching the true steady state within the described
apparatus. Factors that have an effect to this challenge include transient effects, delaying
in taking the measurement, the thermal inertia of the system, flow rate stabilization, and
the precision of instrument used. An understanding of these challenges is critical to the
interpretation of experimental results and the establishment of reliable comparisons
between heat exchanger configurations.
Determining which heat exchanger configuration is "better" depends on specific
application requirements and performance criteria. Each configuration, concentric-tube
and plate heat exchangers, has its own advantages and limitations.

Concentric tube heat exchanger:

Advantages:
1. Compact Design: Concentric-tube heat exchangers often have a more compact design,
making them suitable for applications with space constraints.
2. Visual Inspection: transparent outer tube allows for visual inspection, facilitating
monitoring of the flow patterns and potential fouling.
Disadvantage:
1. Limited Heat Transfer Surface: The concentric-tube design may have a limited heat
transfer surface area compared to other types of heat exchangers.
2. Difficulty in Cleaning: Cleaning the inner tube can be challenging, particularly if fouling
occurs.

1
Plate Heat Exchanger:
Advantages:
1. High Heat Transfer Efficiency: Plate heat exchangers typically offer high heat transfer
efficiency due to the large surface area provided by the plates.
2. Flexibility: The modular design allows for easy scalability and adaptability to different
flow rates and temperature requirements.
Disadvantage:
1. Space Requirements: Plate heat exchangers may require more space as they are
larger in area, making them less suitable for applications with tight space constraints.
2. Complex Cleaning Procedures: Cleaning the plates can be more complex than cleaning
a single tube, especially if fouling is a concern.

Experimental procedure

For each heat exchanger, a supply of warm and cold water was connected and allowed to
run. For each connection, firstly cold-water flowrate was kept steady at 25 g/s and the
warm water flowrate was varied between 10 g/s and 30 g/s at increments of 10. The
same procedure was done but warm water flowrate kept constant at 25 g/s while the
cold-water flowrate was varied. The inlet and outlet temperatures at each setting were
recorded.

Results and discussion

1. Calculating energy balance at each setting

2
q
=C p ∆ T
m
For co current at constant flowrate of water

q
m (
= 4.18
J
gK )
¿) =-101.992 J/g

Plate heat exchanger

Table 1: The co-current with constant flowrate of cooling water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
Hot out (
(g/s) (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
℃¿
10 36.1 12.3 -101.99 20.6 17.9 -11.29
20 36.4 12.4 -100.32 24.8 20.8 -16.72
30 36.6 12.5 -100.74 27.31 22.5 -20.06

Table 2: The co-current with constant flowrate of warm water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot out ( Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
(g/s) ℃¿ (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
10 39.4 12.8 -111.19 33.1 29.7 -14.21
20 36.2 12.6 -98.65 27.3 23.0 -17.97
30 35.6 12.5 -96.56 25.2 20.6 -19.23

Table 3: The counter current with constant flowrate of cooling water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
Hot out (
(g/s) (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
℃¿
10 36.6 12.2 -101.99 18.1 18.5 1.672
20 36.4 11.9 -102.41 22.8 21.9 -3.672
30 36.4 12.1 -101.57 26.6 23.7 -12.12

Table 4: The counter current with constant flowrate of warm water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot out ( Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
(g/s) ℃¿ (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
10 37.6 12.2 -106.17 29.7 27.7 -8.36
20 37.5 12.2 -105.75 27.7 24.3 -10.03
30 37.1 12.1 -104.50 24.6 22.2 -10.03

3
Concentric tube heat exchanger
Table 5: The co-current with constant flowrate of cooling water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
Hot out (
(g/s) (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
℃¿
10 35.5 11.9 -98.65 28.4 20.7 -60.61
20 36.3 11.8 -102.41 31.2 16.9 -65.63
30 36.5 11.8 -103.25 32.3 15.3 -66.88

Table 6: The co-current with constant flowrate of warm water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
Hot out (
(g/s) (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
℃¿
10 38.0 12.2 -107.84 34.8 20.7 -58.94
20 37.5 12.0 -106.59 33.2 16.9 -68.13
30 36.4 11.8 -102.83 31.9 15.3 -69.39

Table 7: The counter current with constant flowrate of cold water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
Hot out (
(g/s) (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
℃¿
10 38.0 11.8 -109.52 32.5 19.7 -75.24
20 36.4 11.8 -102.83 30.6 17.1 -63.54
30 36.3 11.9 -102.83 32.2 15.4 -66.04

Table 8: The counter current with constant flowrate of warm water (25 g/s)
Flowrate Hot return q/m (J/g) Cold out ( Cold q/m (J/g)
Hot out (
(g/s) (℃ ¿ ℃¿ return (
℃¿
℃¿
10 37.5 11.9 -107.01 34.0 19.7 -59.77
20 37.4 11.9 -106.59 33.1 17.1 -66.88
30 36.4 11.9 -102.41 31.7 15.4 -68.13

2.The film heat transfer coefficient for concentric tube heat exchanger.

Q=h×A × ∆ T

4
Where h- film heat transfer coefficient
A- Area
Q- Heat transfer
T- Temperature
A= 0.02198 m 2

Q −98.65 J / g
h= = =160.17 W/ g m 2K
A × ∆ T 0.02198 m2 ×(11.9−35.5 K)
Table 9: Film heat transfer for co-current flow in a concentric tube heat exchanger
(constant flow of cooling water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cooling
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 190 358
20 190 208
30 190 178
In table 9, the film heat transfer is not constant as expected for the cooling water as
they are coming out of the same film but with different flowrates of warm water.

Table 10: Film heat transfer for co-current flow in a concentric tube heat exchanger
(constant flow of warm water).
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 190 165
20 190 190
30 190 190
In table 10 the film coefficient for cooling water at 10 g/s deviates from others and this
might be caused by taking the readings of temperatures too quick.

Table 11: Film heat transfer for counter current flow in a concentric tube heat exchanger
(constant flow of cooling water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 190 267
20 190 214
30 192 179

5
In table 11, the film heat transfer is not constant as expected for the cooling water as
they are coming out of the same film but with different flowrates of warm water. Also,
the film coefficient for warm water at 30 g/s deviates from others. This could be as a
result of being too slow to take the reading at the flowrate is high.

Table 12: Film heat transfer for counter current flow in a concentric tube heat exchanger
(constant flow of warm water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold1
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 190 190
20 190 190
30 190 190

3.The film heat transfer coefficient for plate heat exchanger.

A= 0.024 m 2

Q −101.99 J /g
h= = =179 W/ g m 2K
A × ∆ T 0.024 m 2 ×(12.3−36.1 K )
Table 13: Film heat transfer for co-current flow in a plate heat exchanger (constant flow
of cooling water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 179 174
20 174 174
30 174 174
In table 13, the film heat transfer coefficient for warm water at 10 g/s is higher than the
film heat transfer coefficient for warm water at other flowrates. There reading was taken
quickly before allowing water to flow all the way through.

Table 14: Film heat transfer for co-current flow in a plate heat exchanger (constant flow
of warm water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold1
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)

6
 10 174 174
20 174 174
30 174 174

Table 15: Film heat transfer for counter current flow in a plate heat exchanger (constant
flow of cooling water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 174 174
20 174 170
30 174 174

Table 16: Film heat transfer for co-current flow in a plate heat exchanger (constant flow
of cooling water)
Flowrate (g/s) Film coefficient for warm Film coefficient for cold
2 2
water (W/ g m K) water (W/ g m K)
10 174 174
20 174 123
30 174 174

Comparing the film heat coefficient of the two configurations, the concentric tube heat
exchanger has a higher film coefficient compared to plate heat exchanger.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the practical experiment effectively assessed the configurations of

concentric-tube and plate heat exchangers under co-current and counter-current flow
conditions. The data collected, including temperature differentials and flow rates,
provides valuable information for the design and operation of heat exchangers in
industrial settings, contributing to the overarching goal of energy conservation and
sustainable process operations.

Table 17: Who wrote up what1

# First name, surname Sections covered

1 Buyisile Tracy Nyongwana Title, Abstract, experimental procedure
2 Mphonyana Mokoa Introduction, Results, conclusion,

7
 referencing

1. REFERENCES

F. Dzianik (2019) Sustainable assessment of two types of heat exchangers. Vol69(issue

1-03). No 1, 36-50
R.T Tarata (2011) Assessing heat exchanger performance data using temperature
measurement uncertainty. Vol3.No8, pp. 1-12
S.Adumene(2016) design and Off-Design Performance Evaluation of Heat Exchanger in
an Offshore Process Configuration.Vol.3 No.6