Comparative Experimental Study on Performance of Corrugated Tube and Straight Tube Heat Exchanger

Article Preview

Abstract:

The experiments on heat transfer coefficient, pressure drop and thermal stress were done to heat exchangers with corrugated tubes and staight tubes. By analyising and comparing the heat transfer coeffient, pressure drop in tube side and shell side and axial force and stress, some conclusions can be conducted that the corrugated tube heat exchanger has better heat transfer coeffient, higher pressure drop and much lower stress caused by temperatur difference, also, it has obvious advantages under the circumstance of low Reynolds number and high temperature difference.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 560-561)

Pages:

156-160

Citation:

Online since:

August 2012

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2012 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] S. Rozzi, R. Massini, G. Paciello, G. Pagliarini, S. Rainieri et al., Heat treatment of fluid foods in a shell and tube heat exchanger: Comparison between smooth and helically corrugated wall tubes, Journal of Food Engineering. Columbus, vol. 79, p.249–254, March (2007).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.01.050

Google Scholar

[2] XU Jianmin and WANG Xiaoqing, Numerical Simulation of Fluid Flow and Transfer in Corrugated Tubes, PETRO-CHEMICAL EQUIPMENT. Beijing, vol. 37, p.4–7, Jan (2008).

Google Scholar

[3] A. García, J.P. Solano, P.G. Vicente and A. Viedma, The influence of artificial roughness shape on heat transfer enhancement: Corrugated tubes, dimpled tubes and wire coils, Applied Thermal Engineering. Ostrander, vol. 35, p.196–201, October (2011).

DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.10.030

Google Scholar

[4] S. Pethkool, S. Eiamsa-ard, S. Kwankaomeng and P. Promvonge, Turbulent heat transfer enhancement in a heat exchanger using helically corrugated tube, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer. Columbus, vol. 38, p.340–347, December (2010).

DOI: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2010.11.014

Google Scholar