University of San Carlos

Department of Chemical Engineering

CHE 422L Chemical Engineering Laboratory 1

Data Processing & Analysis Report

(Form CHE422L-2)
Prepared and submitted by:

Navalta, Carl John Louie G.

Experiment :

Nietes, Winston Jose T.

Raboy, Von Adrian O.

Heat Transfer in a Double Pipe Heat Exchanger

Objectives of the Experiment

1. Investigate the effects of varying the inlet temperature, the flow rates, and the flow arrangement
(countercurrent or co-current parallel flow) on the temperature profiles in a double-pipe heat exchanger.
2. Determine the overall heat transfer coefficients and the effectiveness of the heat exchanger unit at the
required operating conditions and compare then with theoretically calculated values.
Results & Discussion
Objective 1. Investigate the effects of varying the inlet temperature, the flow rates, and the flow
arrangement (countercurrent or co-current parallel flow) on the temperature profiles in a double-pipe heat
exchanger.
Effect of varying inlet temperature on the temperature profile for countercurrent and co-current
operations
To investigate the effect of the varying inlet temperature, three different temperature setting of the
hot stream were used (50C, 60C, and 65C) at a fixed flowrate ratio of 2.0:2.0 (F HOT:FCOLD). Figures 1
and 2 show the temperature profiles for countercurrent and co-current operations at different hot inlet
stream with a fixed flowrate ratio.

Tmax
Tmin

Hot T=50
Cold T=50
Hot T=60
Cold T=60
Hot T=70
Cold T=70

Figur
e 1. Temperature Profile for the Countercurrent Flow at Varying Inlet Temperatures (50 C, 60 C, 70 C) and
Constant Flow Ratio of 2:2
o

Figure 1 shows the temperature profile for the system of fluids flowing in a countercurrent
arrangement. In this graph, the effect of varying the inlet temperature is presented. The respective
countercurrent flows are presented in different arrow heads and type of lines used. Nevertheless, it can be
seen that the temperature difference at each temperature setting is approximately constant throughout the
exchanger length. For fluids flowing opposite to each other, the temperature difference shows less variation
throughout the heat exchanger.
As the inlet temperatures of the entering hot fluid increased, though the difference of the
temperatures across the exchanger is approximately constant, the difference becomes larger. This is
signified by the increasing distance between the two curves for a pair of flows at each temperature. The
inlet temperature of the cold fluid entering is essentially constant because the tap water temperature is not
altered. The only factor affecting the temperature difference therefore is the inlet temperature of the
entering hot fluid. At higher inlet temperatures of the hot fluid, there is a greater driving force for heat
transfer to occur.

70.0

60.0
Hot T=65
COld T=65

50.0

Temperature (0C)

Hot T=60

Tmin

Tmax

40.0

Cold T=60
Hot T=50
Cold T=50

30.0

20.0

Figure 2. Temperature Profile for the Co-current Flow at Varying Inlet Temperature (50oC, 60oC, 65oC) and
constant flow ratio of 2:2

As shown in Figure 2, as the inlet temperature of the entering hot fluid is altered in a co-current
flow arrangement, a greater mean temperature difference is observed. The variation of the inlet
temperature greatly affects the red line curves and not much of an effect on the blue line curves. Unlike for
the countercurrent flow arrangement wherein the difference in temperature across the exchanger length is
constant, the temperature difference across the exchanger length for this case decreases. The temperature
of the streams flowing in the same direction gradually approach to the same value.

The difference between the mean temperature difference with respect to the countercurrent and
co-current flow affects the temperature driving force for heat transfer. Because of its larger mean
temperature difference, countercurrent flow offers larger temperature driving forces and is usually preferred
over the co-current flow for this reason]. At the same exchanger length, heat transfer is more effective with
a countercurrent arrangement than in a parallel flow.
Heat is being transferred from the hot fluid to the cold fluid. The cold fluid absorbs heat from the
hotter fluid which increases its temperature proportional to the amount of heat transferred. The amount of
heat transferred is directly proportional to the temperature difference of the two fluids. The greater the
temperature difference, the greater is the heat transfer rate. The rate of heat transfer, however, decreases
with respect to the length of the heat exchanger.
Effect of varying flowrate temperature on the temperature profile for countercurrent and co-current
operations
Varying the flowrate ratio of the cold and hot fluid also has an effect on the temperature profile. For
the countercurrent operation with a constant temperature setting of 50 oC and a 1:1 flowrate ratio, the inlet
and outlet temperatures of the cold fluid is approximately equal to 29 oC and 38oC respectively, and the inlet
and outlet temperatures of the hot fluid is approximately equal to 49 oC and 45oC respectively as shown in
the figure below.

Hot 3:1
Cold 3:1
Hot 1:1
Cold 1:1

Tmax
Tmin

Hot 1:3
Cold 1:3

Figure 3.Temperature Profile for the countercurrent flow at constant inlet temperature of 50oC and varying flow ratio
(3:1, 1:1, 1:3)

Increasing the inlet flowrate of the hot fluid so that the ratio becomes 3:1, the inlet temperature of
the cold fluid is the same but the outlet temperature increases to approximately 38.0 oC. As an effect of the
increased inlet flowrate of the hot fluid, the temperature profile of the hot fluid shifted upwards both the
inlet and the outlet temperatures of the hot fluid increased, which is approximately equal to 57.0 oC and
54.0oC respectively. On the other hand, if the inlet flowrate of the cold fluid is increased so that the ratio is
1:3, the temperature profile of the cold fluid is relatively the same with that of the 1:1 flowrate ratio. But for
the hot fluid, the inlet temperature is relatively higher than the inlet temperature when the flowrate ratio is
3:1, but the outlet temperature of the fluid is relatively lower than that of the 3:1 flowrate ratio.
Referring to figure 3, increasing the inlet flowrate of the hot fluid will increase the change or
difference between the inlet and outlet temperature of the cold fluid. On the other hand, increasing the inlet
flowrate of the cold fluid will increase the change or difference in the inlet and outlet temperature of the hot
fluid.
For the co-current flow arrangement, with the same temperature setting of 50.0 oC and a 1:1 flowrate
ratio, the inlet and outlet temperatures of the cold fluid is approximately equal to 29.0 oC and 35.0oC
respectively and the inlet and outlet temperatures of the hot fluid is 57 oC and 50oC respectively as shown in
the figure below.

70.0
60.0
Hot 3:1

50.0

Cold 3:1

Temperature (0C)

Tmax

Tmin

40.0

Hot 1:1
Cold 1:1
Hot 1:3

30.0
20.0

Cold 1:3

100

200

300

400

500

600

Distance (mm)

Figure 4.Temperature Profile for the co-current flow at constant inlet temperature 50oC and varying flow ratio (3:1,
1:1, 1:3)

Increasing the inlet flowrate of the hot fluid so that the ratio becomes 3:1, the inlet temperature of
the cold fluid is still the same but the outlet temperature increases to approximately 37.0 oC. As an effect of
the increased inlet flowrate of the hot fluid, the temperature profile of the hot fluid shifted downwards both
the inlet and the outlet temperatures of the hot fluid decreased, which is approximately equal to 53.0 oC and
50.0oC respectively. On the other hand, if the inlet flowrate of the cold fluid is increased so that the ratio is
1:3, the temperature profile of the cold fluid changed so that the outlet temperature is 32.1 oC, that is lowest
compared to that of the outlet temperature if the flowrate ratio is 3:1 and 1:1. But for the hot fluid, the same
trend is observed fro this arrangement from the countercurrent arrangement.
From figure 4, increasing the inlet flowrate of the hot fluid will increase the change or difference
between the inlet and outlet temperature of the cold fluid. On the other hand, increasing the inlet flowrate of
the cold fluid will increase the change or difference in the inlet and outlet temperature of the hot fluid. In
comparison, it can be observed that if the flowrate of the hot fluid is increased, there is a relatively larger
increase in the temperature of the cold fluid than the hot fluid. The T max for the co-current is approximately
equal to 25.0C with varying flowrates and taking the average of the inlet temperature of the hot fluid, but
the temperature gradient decreases with respect to pipe length as seen in figure 4.
In theory, the heat that is lost by the hot fluid is absorbed by the cold fluid. In effect, the
temperature of the cold fluid increases and the temperature of the hot fluid decreases with respect to pipe
length regardless of the flow arrangement .

Effect of varying flow arrangement to the temperature profile

The countercurrent operations in figures 1 and 3 are compared with the cocurrent operations in
figures 2 and 4 to investigate the effect of the flow arrangement to the temperature profile in the heat
exchanger. The temperature profiles in the countercurrent operation have a relatively constant temperature
gradient along the length of the heat exchanger. Whereas the temperature profiles in the co-current
operation experience a decrease in temperature gradient along the length of the heat exchanger.
Therefore, heat transfer is constant in countercurrent operation while varies for co-current with respect to
the length of the heat exchanger.
In the countercurrent operation, the hot and cold fluids flow in opposite directions and the
temperature difference along the length of the heat exchanger is relatively constant. In the co-current
operation, both the hot and the cold fluids enter the exchanger at the same end and flow in the same
direction. At the entrance of the exchanger, a large temperature difference prevails, resulting in a relatively
large heat-transfer rate. This driving force decreases along the length of the heat exchanger. As a
consequence, the heat exchange rate drops asymptotically as the streams approach the end of the
exchanger.

Objective 2. Determine the overall heat transfer coefficients and the effectiveness of the heat exchanger
unit at the required operating conditions and compare then with theoretically calculated values.
The overall heat transfer coefficient, U, is a measure of the overall ability of a series of conductive
and convective barriers to transfer heat. It takes into account the individual heat transfer coefficients of
each stream and the resistance of the pipe material. In the double-pipe heat exchanger the resistances
involved are the convection between the hot fluid and the pipe wall, conduction within the pipe wall and
convection between the pipe wall and the cold fluid. On the other hand, heat exchangers effectiveness, ,
is the ratio of the actual heat transferred to the heat that could be transferred by an exchanger of infinite
size. It is the best way to compare different types of heat exchangers.
There are two methods for the determination of . If the fluid inlet and outlet temperatures are
specified or can be determined by simple energy balance, the LMTD method can be used; but when these
temperatures are not available the NTU or the Effectiveness method is used. In the experiment, both
methods were used to solve for the effectiveness.
Experimentally, the U was determined from the measured overall temperature difference and heat
transfer rate while the theoretical U was determined using empirical correlations. On the other hand, the
of the heat exchanger was calculated using both the LTMD (log mean temperature difference) and NTU
(number of transfer units) method. Detailed calculations for the U can be seen in the appendix. The
following tables show the calculated values for the experimental and theoretical U and from varying the
hot water flowrate and varying the water inlet temperature for counter-current and co-current flow
operations.

Table 1. Calculated % Error of U for Varying Flowrate Countercurrent Operation

Temperat
ure (0C)

50

Flow
Rate
(L/min
)
Ratio
3:1
1:1
1:3

Experimental
Overall Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/sm2K)
Hot
Fluid
2.15
1.03
1.78

Cold
Fluid
1.49
0.83
1.43

Theoretical
Overall
Heat
Transfer
Coefficient,
U
(kJ/sm2K)
1.60
1.04
1.63

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid
33.49
1.05
9.49

Cold
Fluid
7.16
19.61
12.02

Table 2. Calculated % Error of for Varying Flowrate Countercurrent Operation

Temperat
ure (0C)

50

Flow
Rate
(L/min
)
Ratio
3:1
1:1
1:3

Experimental
Effectiveness,
actual
Hot
Cold
Fluid
Fluid
0.46
0.32
0.21
0.17
0.35
0.28

Theoretical
Effectivenes
s, theo
0.34
0.21
0.33

Table 3. Calculated % Error of U for Varying Flowrate Co-current Operation

Theoretical
Experimental
Flow
Overall
Overall Heat
Rate
Heat
Coefficient
Temperat
2
(L/min
Transfer
(kJ/sm K)
ure (0C)
)
Coefficient,
Hot
Cold
Ratio
U
Fluid
Fluid
(kJ/sm2K)
1.68
1.43
1.56
3:1
50
1.14
1.00
1.06
1:1
1.39
1.48
1.44
1:3
Table 4. Calculated % Error of for Varying Flowrate Co-current Operation
Temperat
Flow
Theoretical
Experimental
0
ure ( C)
Rate
Effectivenes
Effectiveness,
(L/min
s, theo
actual
)
Ratio
Hot
Cold

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid
33.21
1.14
8.29

Cold
Fluid
7.36
17.84
12.98

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid

Cold
Fluid

6.29
7.44
3.72

9.16
6.07
2.28

Percent Error
(%)
Hot

Cold

3:1
1:1
1:3

50

Fluid

Fluid

0.35
0.23
0.31

0.30
0.20
0.33

0.32
0.22
0.32

Fluid

Fluid

7.73
7.24
3.17

7.92
6.25
2.86

For a countercurrent operation shown in tables 1 and 2, if the inlet flowrate of the hot fluid is
increased so that the ratio is 3:1, the U of the heat exchanger also increases. Same is true when the inlet
flowrate of the cold fluid is increased so that the ratio is 1:3. The increase in U shows that the net
resistance to heat flow decreases with increasing flowrate. The same trend is observed for a co-current
operation as shown in tables 3 and 4. It can also be seen that increases as the flowrate of the hot fluid or
cold fluid is increased. Thus, increasing the flow rate of the hot water then allows higher rate of heat
transfer.
For the effect of varying inlet temperature on U shown in tables 5 and 6, an increase in the inlet
temperature increases the U experimentally and theoretically for both mode of operation. This is accounted
by the increase in temperature gradient, and in turn, increases the driving force for heat transfer.
It can also be seen that the theoretical values for U are almost similar for both countercurrent and
co-current operation. However, the expected values were not achieved experimentally. Noting that U is the
reciprocal of the overall heat transfer resistance, this implies that the heat transfer resistancse is
independent from the type of flow operation. This relationship is also shown by the formula for
determination of U (Geankoplis, 2003):
U=

1
r
r
A
1 ( o i) Ai
+
+ i
hi
A lm
ho Ao

As for the heat-exchanger effectiveness shown in tables 7 and 8, the countercurrent operation of
the heat exchanger resulted to higher values of as compared to the co-current operation. This high
effectiveness would then mean that more heat is therefore transferred when the hot and cold water flow
countercurrent with each other.
Table 5. Calculated % Error of U for Varying Temperature Countercurrent Operation

Temperat
ure (0C)

50

Flow
Rate
(L/min
)
Ratio
2:2

Experimental
Overall Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/sm2K)
Hot
Fluid
2.03

Cold
Fluid
1.64

Theoretical
Overall
Heat
Transfer
Coefficient,
U
(kJ/sm2K)
1.83

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid
10.60

Cold
Fluid
10.75

60
70

2.13
2.47

1.70
1.80

1.95
2.07

Table 6. Calculated % Error of U for Varying Temperature Co-current Operation

Theoretical
Experimental
Flow
Overall
Overall Heat
Rate
Heat
Coefficient
Temperat
2
(L/min
Transfer
(kJ/sm K)
ure (0C)
)
Coefficient,
Hot
Cold
Ratio
U
Fluid
Fluid
(kJ/sm2K)
50
1.87
1.86
1.89
2:2
1.95
1.97
2.04
60
2.04
2.02
2.08
70
Table 7. Calculated % Error of for Varying Temperature Countercurrent Operation
Experimental
Flow
Effectiveness,
Theoretical
Rate
Temperat
Effectivenes
(L/min
actual
ure (0C)
)
s, theo
Hot
Cold
Ratio
Fluid
Fluid
50
0.22
0.17
0.19
2:2
0.22
0.18
0.20
60
0.26
0.19
0.22
70

9.32
18.94

12.93
13.21

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid

Cold
Fluid

1.01
4.21
1.95

1.70
3.47
3.03

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid
10.60
9.68
18.10

Cold
Fluid
10.75
12.64
13.82

Table 8. Calculated % Error of for Varying Temperature Co-current Operation

Temperat
ure (0C)
50
60
70

Flow
Rate
(L/min
)
Ratio
2:2

Experimental
Effectiveness,
actual
Hot
Fluid
0.20
0.20
0.21

Cold
Fluid
0.19
0.20
0.21

Theoretical
Effectivenes
s, theo
0.20
0.21
0.21

Percent Error
(%)
Hot
Fluid
0.71
3.30
1.34

Cold
Fluid
1.40
2.56
2.43

From the tables above, the experimental and theoretical values for U and showed and observable
difference. One reason for their differences in calculations is that the effect of the heat transfer with respect
to the performance of the equipment was not accounted. Likewise, in the experiment, heat losses occurred
which are also unaccounted by the correlations used for determining the theoretical values for both
counter-current and co-current operation. Also, from the experiment, cavity formation was observed in the
cold stream, which could have affected the heat transfer operation.

Conclusions
For both operations, countercurrent and co-current, the maximum temperature difference, Tmax, is
greater when the inlet temperature of the hot fluid is increased. This is because the driving force of heat
transfer which is the T is also increased.
The Tmax changes when the flowrate of the inlet stream of hot or cold fluid is changed. For
countercurrent, increasing the inlet flowrate of the hot fluid and thereby increasing the flowrate ratio will
make the Tmax higher in magnitude relative to the T max when the inlet flowrate of the cold fluid is increased
where the flowrate ratio small. For co-current, the T max is constant but with increasing pipe length, the
difference decreases. Thus, for each type of flow arrangement, the rate of heat transfer is constant for
countercurrent flow arrangement and decreasing for co-current operation with respect to pipe length.
The calculated experimental and the theoretical values of the overall heat transfer coefficient
differs, as well as the effectiveness of the heat exchanger unit. This is because, the experimentally
calculated values of the overall heat transfer coefficient take into account the resistances present in the
actual operation, and thus is lower in magnitude than the theoretical value of the overall heat transfer
coefficient.
ANNEX 1: Raw Data
Please see attached file.
ANNEX 2: Processing of Data
Table A.1 Pipe Characteristics of Heat Exchanger
Heat Exchanger Unit Details

Pipe

Pipe
Material

Length
(mm)

Inner
Diameter
(mm)

L/D

Outer
Diameter
(mm)

Wall
Thickness
(mm)

Inner

Stainless
Steel

660

8.3

79.5

9.5

0.6

Outer

Clear Acrylic

660

12.0

55.0

18.0

3.0

Table A.2 Raw Data of Countercurrent Operation at Varying Flowrate Ratio

Countercurrent Operation (Effect of Changing Flowrate Ratio)
3:1
1:1
1:3
Ratio (Fhot:Fcold)
50
50
50
Temperature Reading [C]
Reading
1
2
3
AVE
1
2
3
AVE
1
2
3
AVE
Inlet Flow
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
3.2 3.3 3.3 3.2 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0
Fhot
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
1.03
0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.9
Fcold
6
2
1
6
0
0
0
3
0
0
9
3.00
Sensor
Temperature Reading [C]
Temperature Reading [C]
Temperature Reading [C]
49. 48. 49. 59. 60. 61.
57. 57. 57. 57.
THI
7
6
7
7
49
2
9
0
2
3
8
60.4
55. 55. 55. 55. 46. 46. 46. 46. 53. 54. 55.
THM
6
6
6
6
6
6
3
5
4
1
3
54.3
53. 53. 53. 53. 44. 44. 44. 44. 48. 49. 49.
THO
6
8
8
7
8
7
6
7
4
5
9
49.3
37. 37. 38. 37. 32. 32. 32. 32. 31.
32.
TCO
8
8
1
9
3
3
3
3
9
32
1
32.0
33. 33. 33. 33. 30. 30. 30. 30. 30. 30. 30.
TCM
6
5
7
6
5
5
4
5
1
2
3
30.2
28. 28. 28. 28. 28. 28. 28. 28.
28. 28.
TCI
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
29
9
9
28.9
Tmin
19.8
15.9
20.3
Tmax
25.0
16.7
28.4

Table A.3 Raw Data of Countercurrent Operation at Varying Inlet Temperatures

Countercurrent Operation (Effect of Changing Inlet Temperature)
Ratio (Fhot:Fcold)
2:2
2:2
2:2
Temperature Reading [C]
50
60
70
Reading
1
2
3
AVE
1
2
3
AVE
1
2
3
AVE
Inlet Flow
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
Fhot
2.00 2.00 2.10 2.03 2.00 2.00 2.10 2.03 2.10 2.00 1.90 2.00
Fcold
2.00 2.00 2.06 2.02 2.00 2.00 2.11 2.04 2.10 2.04 1.90 2.01
Sensor
Temperature Reading [C]
Temperature Reading [C]
Temperature Reading [C]
THI
50.5 49.7 49.5 49.9 59.3 59.2 59.1 59.2 70.3 70.3 70.0 70.2
THM
48.0 47.0 46.9 47.3 55.7 55.5 55.5 55.6 64.5 64.8 64.5 64.6
THO
45.9 45.2 45.1 45.4 52.6 52.4 52.3 52.4 59.6 59.7 59.6 59.6
TCO
32.8 32.6 32.4 32.6 34.5 34.4 34.4 34.4 36.9 36.8 36.9 36.9
TCM
30.8 30.6 30.6 30.7 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 32.9 33.0 32.9 32.9
TCI
29.0 28.9 29.0 29.0 29.1 29.1 29.1 29.1 29.3 29.3 29.3 29.3
Tmin
16.4
23.3
30.3
Tmax
17.3
24.8
33.3

Table A.4 Raw Data of Co-rcurrent Operation at Varying Flowrate Ratios

Co-current Operation (Effect of Changing Flowrate Ratio)
Ratio (Fhot:Fcold)
3:1
1:1
Temperature Reading [C]
50
50
Reading
1
2
3
AVE
1
2
3
AVE
Inlet Flow
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
3.0 3.0 3.0
1.0 1.0 1.0
Fhot
0
0
0
3.00
0
0
0
1.00
0.9 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0
Fcold
9
0
0
1.00
1
0
0
1.00
Sensor
Temperature Reading [C]
Temperature Reading [C]
52. 52. 52.
57. 56. 57.
THI
9
9
7
52.8
3
7
1
57.0
51. 50. 50.
53. 52. 53.
THM
0
9
8
50.9
2
6
1
53.0
50. 50. 50.
50. 50. 50.
THO
3
1
0
50.1
8
4
7
50.6
36. 36. 36.
35. 35. 35.
TCO
5
5
4
36.5
2
0
2
35.1
33. 33. 33.
32. 32. 32.
TCM
4
3
3
33.3
7
6
6
32.6
29. 29. 29.
29. 29. 29.
TCI
6
5
6
29.6
6
6
6
29.6
Tmin
13.7
15.5
Tmax
23.3
27.4

1:3
50
1
2
3
AVE
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
1.0 0.9
0.90
0
0
0.93
3.0 2.9
2.99
0
9
2.99
Temperature Reading [C]
54. 54.
54.0
2
2
54.1
49. 49.
49.1
2
3
49.2
46. 46.
46.5
5
6
46.5
32. 32.
32.1
1
1
32.1
30. 30.
30.8
9
9
30.9
29. 29.
29.6
6
6
29.6
14.4
24.5

Table A.5 Raw Data of Co-current Operation at Varying Inlet Temperatures

Co-current Operation (Effect of Changing Inlet Temperature)
Ratio (Fhot:Fcold)
Temperature Reading [C]
Reading
Inlet Flow
Fhot
Fcold
Sensor
THI
THM
THO
TCO
TCM
TCI
Tmin
Tmax

2:2
50

2:2
60

1
2
3
AVE
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
2.1
0
2.10 2.10 2.10
2.0
4
2.01 2.01 2.02
Temperature Reading [C]
49.
5
49.6 49.7 49.6
46.
9
47.1 47.1 47.0
45.
8
45.8 45.9 45.8
33.
5
33.5 33.6 33.5
31.
7
31.7 31.8 31.7
29.
6
29.7 29.7 29.7
12.3
19.9

2:2
65

1
2
3
AVE
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
2.00

2.00

2.10

2.03

1
2
3
AVE
Flowrate Reading [L/min]
2.10

2.10

2.10

2.00 1.99 2.10 2.03

Temperature Reading [C]

2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

Temperature Reading [C]

60.8

61.5

61.5

61.3

64.5

65.7

65.6

65.3

56.8

57.4

57.3

57.2

59.9

61.0

61.1

60.7

54.6

55.0

55.0

54.9

57.3

58.2

58.5

58.0

35.8

35.9

36.0

35.9

36.8

37.0

37.1

37.0

33.0

33.1

33.1

33.1

33.5

33.6

33.6

33.6

29.5

29.5 29.5
19.0
31.8

29.5

29.5

29.5 29.5
21.0
35.8

29.5

Table A.6 Physical Properties of Water (Used in Countercurrent Operation)

Bulk Temperature

Density, (kg/m3)

Cp (kJ/kgK)

55.67
46.74
54.66
47.53
55.73
64.81

985.3314
989.4327
985.8192
989.1025
985.3024
980.6282

4.1853
4.1823
4.1849
4.1825
4.1853
4.1894

33.40
30.52

994.5138
995.5016

4.1810
4.1810

2.10

Viscosity,
(kg/ms)

Thermal
Conductivity of
Water, k (W/mK)

Thermal
Conductivity of Pipe,
i (kJ/smK)

5.01E-04
5.81E-04
5.09E-04
5.73E-04
5.01E-04
4.37E-04

0.6447
0.6364
0.6438
0.6371
0.6448
0.6533

0.0152
0.0150
0.0152
0.0150
0.0152
0.0154

7.46E-04
7.93E-04

0.6211
0.6166

0.0146
0.0146

HOT

COLD

30.38
30.74
31.71
33.03

995.5497
995.4262
995.0935
994.6407

4.1810
4.1810
4.1810
4.1810

7.94E-04
7.89E-04
7.73E-04
7.53E-04

0.6164
0.6169
0.6185
0.6205

Flow
Rate
Rati
o

Bulk
Temperature
(C)

mass
flow
rate
(kg/min)

C
(kJ/Ks
)

Heat
Transfer,
H
(kJ/s)

3:1

55.67

3.2187

0.2245

0.8831

22.30

1:1

46.74

1.0224

0.0713

0.3088

16.31

1:3

54.66

1.0187

0.0711

0.7934

2:2

47.53
55.73

2.0112
2.0034

0.1402
0.1398

0.6309
0.9456

64.81

1.9613

0.1369

1.4470

3:1

33.40

0.9580

0.0668

0.6142

1:1

30.52

1.0287

0.0717

0.2509

1:3
2:2

30.38

2.9833

0.2079

0.6375

30.74

2.0108

0.1401

60

31.71

2.0267

70

33.03

2.0025

Temperature
(C)

50

60
70

50

Lateral
Surface
Area,
Ai (m2)

Overall
Heat
Tlm
Coefficient
(kJ/s.m2.K)
Hot Fluid

0.0146
0.0146
0.0146
0.0146

Cmin

Cmax

NTU

H
max
(kJ/s)

2.1464

0.0668

0.2245

0.5933

1.9338

1.0259

0.0713

0.0717

0.2656

1.4420

24.16
16.86

1.7797
2.0274

0.0711
0.1401

0.2079
0.1402

0.4622
0.2670

2.2381
2.9331

24.04

2.1314

0.1398

0.1412

0.2814

4.2065

31.81

2.4651
Cold Fluid

0.1369

0.1395

0.3322

5.6009

22.30

1.4927

0.0668

0.2245

0.4126

1.9338

16.31

0.8334

0.0713

0.0717

0.2158

1.4420

24.16

1.4301

0.0711

0.2079

0.3714

2.2381

0.5091

16.86

1.6360

0.1401

0.1402

0.2155

2.9331

0.1412

0.7532

24.04

1.6976

0.1398

0.1412

0.2242

4.2065

0.1395

1.0559

31.81

1.7988

0.1369

0.1395

0.2424

5.6009

Crosssectional
area (m2)

Velocity,
(m/s)

Reynolds
Number,
NRe

Prandtl
Number,
NPr

Mass
Velocity,
G
(kg/m2s)

5.41E-05

0.0185

0.0185

Exp
Effe

Table A.7 Calculations of Experimental Effectiveness on Countercurrent Operation

Temperature
(C)

50

60

Flow
Rate
Ratio

Bulk
Temperature
(C)

Heat
Transfer,
H (kJ/s)

Tmax
(K)

Tmin
(K)

Tlm

Overall
Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/s.m2.K)

3:1

55.67

0.8831

25.03

19.77

22.30

2.1464

1.0063

16420.69

3.2532

991.4934

1:1

46.74

0.3088

16.73

15.90

16.31

1.0259

0.3183

4499.93

3.8178

314.9411

1:3
2:2

54.66

0.7934

28.43

20.33

24.16

1.7797

0.3183

5113.91

3.3105

313.7909

47.53
55.73

0.6309
0.9456

17.30
24.77

16.43
23.33

16.86
24.04

2.0274
2.1314

0.6263
0.6263

8973.79
10230.75

3.7616
3.2498

619.5160
617.1359

70

64.81

1.4470

33.33

30.33

31.81

2.4651

0.6161

11481.33

2.8006

604.1392

Velocity,
(m/s)

Reynolds
Number,
NRe

Prandtl
Number,
NPr

Mass
Velocity,
G
(kg/m2s)

Table A.8 Calculations of Theoretical Effectiveness on Countercurrent Operation Based on Hot Fluid

Temperature
(C)

50

Flow
Rate
Ratio

Bulk
Temperature
(C)

Heat
Transfer,
H (kJ/s)

Tmax
(K)

Tmin
(K)

Tlm

Overall
Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/s.m2.K)

3:1

33.4

0.6142

25.03

19.77

22.30

1.4927

0.3803

1266.98

5.0238

378.2403

1:1

30.5

0.2509

16.73

15.90

16.31

0.8334

0.4080

1281.16

5.3737

406.1279

1.1831

3707.87

5.3862

1:3

30.4

0.6375

28.43

20.33

24.16

30.7

0.5091

17.30

16.43

16.86

1.6360

0.7975

2514.68

5.3487

1177.827
7
793.8543

31.7

0.7532

24.77

23.33

24.04

1.6976

0.8041

2588.37

5.2244

800.1368

33.0

1.0559

33.33

30.33

31.81

1.7988

0.7949

2626.61

5.0704

790.6100

1.4301

60

2:2

70

Crosssectional
area (m2)

4.22E-05

Table A.9 Calculations of Theoretical Effectiveness on Countercurrent Operation Based on Cold Fluid

Table A.6 Physical Properties of Water (Used in Co-current Operation)

Bulk Temperature

Density, (kg/m3)

Cp (kJ/kgK)

51.29
53.54
49.96
47.49
57.77
61.31

987.4469
986.3602
988.0867
989.1192
984.3171
982.5287

4.1835
4.1844
4.1830
4.1825
4.1861
4.1877

33.12
32.46
30.86
31.64
32.82
33.34

994.6098
994.8362
995.3850
995.1175
994.7127
994.5344

4.1810
4.1810
4.1810
4.1810
4.1810
4.1810

Viscosity,
(kg/ms)

Thermal
Conductivity of
Water, k (W/mK)

Thermal
Conductivity of Pipe,
i (kJ/smK)

5.38E-04
5.18E-04
5.50E-04
5.73E-04
4.85E-04
4.46E-04

0.6406
0.6427
0.6394
0.6371
0.6467
0.6500

15.0823
15.1385
15.0490
14.9873
15.2443
15.3328

7.51E-04
7.61E-04
7.87E-04
7.74E-04
7.55E-04
7.47E-04

0.6207
0.6197
0.6172
0.6184
0.6202
0.6210

14.6280
14.6115
14.5715
14.5910
14.6205
14.6335

HOT

COLD

Table A.7 Calculations of Experimental Effectiveness on Co-current Operation

Temperature
(C)

Flow
Rate
Ratio

Bulk
Temperature
(C)

mass flow
rate
(kg/min)

C (kJ/Ks)

Heat
Transfer,
H (kJ/s)

Lateral
Surface
Area, Ai
(m2)

Tlm

Overall Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/s.m2.K)

Cmin

Cmax

NTU

Hot Fluid

50

60

3:1

51.29

2.9623

0.2066

0.5577

1:1

53.54

0.9864

0.0688

0.4402

1:3

49.96
47.49

0.9222
2.0772

0.0643
0.1448

0.4886
0.5454

2:2

57.77

2.0014

0.1396

61.31

2.0633

33.12

0.9913

70
3:1
50

60
70

18.04

1.6749

0.0691

0.2066

0.4475

20.90

1.1414

0.0688

0.0696

0.3062

19.04
15.81

1.3908
1.8693

0.0643
0.1401

0.2076
0.1448

0.3992
0.2463

0.8937

24.82

1.9513

0.1396

0.1407

0.2579

0.1440

1.0465

27.75

0.1386

0.1440

0.2721

0.0691

0.4766

18.04

2.0434
Cold Fluid
1.4315

0.0691

0.2066

0.3824

20.90

0.9978

0.0688

0.0696

0.2677

19.04

1.4774

0.0643

0.2076

0.4240

15.81

1.8563

0.1401

0.1448

0.2446

24.82

1.9662

0.1396

0.1407

0.2598

27.75

2.0209

0.1386

0.1440

0.2691

1:1

32.46

0.9982

0.0696

0.3849

1:3

30.86

2.9795

0.2076

0.5191

2:2

31.64

2.0101

0.1401

0.5416

32.82

2.0193

0.1407

0.9005

33.34

1.9891

0.1386

1.0349

0.0185

0.0185

Table A.8 Calculations of Theoretical Effectiveness on Co-current Operation Based on Hot Fluid

Temperature
(C)

Flow
Rate
Ratio

Bulk
Temperature
(C)

Heat
Transfer,
H (kJ/s)

Tmax
(K)

Tmin
(K)

Tlm

Overall
Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/s.m2.K)

3:1

51.29

0.5577

23.3

13.7

18.04

1.6749

1:1

50

1:3

60

2:2

65

53.54

0.4402

27.4

15.5

20.90

1.1414

49.96

0.4886

24.5

14.4

19.04

1.3908

47.49

0.5454

19.9

12.3

15.81

1.8693

57.77
61.31

0.8937
1.0465

31.8
35.8

19.0
21.0

24.82
27.75

Crosssectional
area (m2)

5.41E-05

1.9513
2.0434

Velocity,
(m/s)

Reynolds
Number,
NRe

Prandtl
Number,
NPr

Mass
Velocity,
G
(kg/m2s)

0.9241

14081.57

3.5123

912.5101

0.3080

4863.83

3.3755

303.8353

0.2875

4288.70

3.5967

284.0760

0.6469

9261.71

3.7644

639.8388

0.6263

10551.61

3.1391

616.5188

11828.61

2.8731

Velocity,
(m/s)

Reynolds
Number,
NRe

Prandtl
Number,
NPr

Mass
Velocity,
G
(kg/m2s)

0.3935

1303.42

5.0564

391.3660

0.3961

1294.90

5.1334

394.0735

1.1818

3738.65

5.3288

1176.3230

0.7975

2563.98

5.2318

793.6082

0.8015

2638.83

5.0913

797.2125

0.7896

2627.22

5.0308

785.2902

0.6469

635.5756

Table A.9 Calculations of Theoretical Effectiveness on Co-current Operation Based on Cold Fluid

Temperature
(C)

50

Flow
Rate
Ratio

Bulk
Temperature
(C)

Heat
Transfer,
H (kJ/s)

Tmax
(K)

Tmin
(K)

Tlm

3:1

33.12

0.4766

23.3

13.7

18.04

1:1

32.46

0.3849

27.4

15.5

20.90

1:3

30.86
31.64

60
65

2:2

0.5191
0.5416

24.5
19.9

14.4
12.3

19.04
15.81

32.82

0.9005

31.8

19.0

24.82

33.34

1.0349

35.8

21.0

27.75

Overall
Heat
Coefficient
(kJ/s.m2.K)

Crosssectional
area (m2)

1.4315
0.9978
1.4774
1.8563
1.9662
2.0209

4.22E-05

Sample Calculations for Counter Current Operations

Based on Hot Fluid (Temperature: 50oC, Flow ratio: 3.0:1.5)
CALCULATION OF EXPERIMENTAL EFFECTIVENESS
Bulk Temperature

T bulk =

T 1 +T 2+T 3 57.7 +55.6+53.7

=
=55.67 o C
3
3

Mass Flow Rate

m= V =985.3314

kg
L
3.27
3
min
m

)(

1 m3
kg
=3.2187
1000 L
min

Thermal Capacity Rate

C=mC p=3.2187

kg
kJ
4.1853
min
s K

)( 160mins )=0.2245 skJ K

Heat Transfer Rate

H =m C p ( T hi T ho ) =0.2245

kJ
kJ
( 57.753.7 ) K=0.8831
sK
s

Lateral Surface Area

A=

2
Di + Do
8.3 mm+9.5 mm
1m
L=3.14
( 660 mm )
=0.0185 m2
2
2
1000 mm

Log Mean Temperature Difference (LMTD)

T lm=

T max T min
ln

T max
T min

25.019.8
o
=22.30 C
25.0
ln
19.8

( )

Experimental Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient

kj
0.8831
H
s
kJ
U exp=
=
=1.0827 2
2
o
A T lm 0.0185 m (22.30 C )
m sK
Lower Thermal Capacity of Fluid

For this case ,

Cmin =C C =( mC p )c =0.9580
Higher Thermal Capacity of Fluid

kg
kJ
4.1810
min
kgK

kJ
)( 160mins )=0.0668 Ks

Cmax =C h=( mC p )h=0.2245

kJ
s K

Number of Transfer Units (NTU)

NTU =

U exp A
=
C min

1.0827

kJ
( 0.0185 m2 )
m sK
=0.5933
kJ
0.0688
Ks
2

Maximum Heat Transfer Rate

H =C min ( T hiT ci )=0.0688

max

kJ
kJ
( 57.728.7 ) K =1.9338
Ks
s

Experimental Effectiveness

exp = H =
H max

kJ
s
=0.3885
kJ
1.9338
s
0.8831

CALCULATION OF THEORETICAL EFFECTIVENESS

Cross Sectional Area

A C=

2
2 3.14 (
2
1m
D=
8.3 mm )
=0.000054 m2
4
4
1000mm

Fluid Velocity
3

v=

v
=
Ac

3.27

L 1min
1m
(
)(
)
min 60 s 1000 L
m
=1.0063
2
s
0.0000541m

Reynold Number

Dv
N =
=

8.3 mm

( 10001 mmm )( 1.0063 ms )( 985.3314 mkg ) =16420.69

3

0.000501

kg
ms

Prandtl Number

Cp
N Pr =
=
k

kg
kJ
4.1853
ms
sK
=3.2532
W
0.6447
mK

0.000501

Mass Velocity

G=v=985.3314

kg
m
kg
1.0063 =991.4934 2
3
s
m
m s

Convective Heat Transfer Coefficient

Correlation of experimental results on heating and cooling single-phase fluid flowing inside tubes from
Brown (L/D=80)

hi=

( yaxisreading ) C p G

Cp
K

2
B 3

W
B

0.14

)( )

0.00371( 4.1853
=

( 3.2532 )

2
3

kJ
kg
)(991.4934 2 )
sK
m s

kg
ms
kg
0.000501
ms

0.00060435

0.14

=6.8385

kJ
smK

Log Mean Area

A lm=

A 2 A1 0.0000541 m2 0.0000422m 2
2
=
=0.0000479 m
2
A2
0.0000541m
ln ( )
ln (
)
2
A1
0.0000422m

Theoretical Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient

U theo=

1
=
Ai
1 ( r o r i ) A
+
+
hi
A lm
Ao ho

(+ 9.52mm 8.32mm )( 10001 mmm )(0.0185m ) +

2

1
6.8385

kJ
smK

0.0152

Theoretical Number of Transfer Units (NTU)

U theo A
NTU =
=
C min

1.6079

kJ
( 0.0185 m2)
2
s m K
=0.4445
kJ
0.0668
Ks

Theoretical Effectiveness for Countercurrent

kJ
2
0.0000479 m
smK

0.0185 m2
2

0.0185 m (2.1022

kJ
Ks
1exp [0.4445(1
)]
C min
kJ
1exp [NTU (1
)]
0.2245
C max
s K
theo=
=
=0.3428
C min
C min
kJ
kJ
0.0668
0.0668
1(
) exp [NTU (1
)]
Ks
Ks
Cmax
C max
1(
)exp [0.4445(1
)]
kJ
kJ
0.2245
0.2245
sK
sK
0.0668

%ERROR FOR EFFECTIVENESS

x 100 =33.21
0.3428
exp theo x 100 =
theo
error =

0.45670.3428

%ERROR FOR OVERALL HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT

x 100 =33.49
1.6079
U exp U theo x 100 =
U theo
error =

2.14641.6079

Calculations on Co-current Operations follow the same procedure but with a different
definition for theoretical effectiveness:
1exp [NTU (1+
theo =
1+(

C min
)
C max

C min
)]
C max