ABSTRACT

Based on the experiment, the objectives was to calculate and analyze heat transfer at
steady state. Secondly, to determine effect of liquid flow rate on heat transfer. Thirdly, to
compare effectiveness of flow arrangement namely co-current vs counter current. Besides,
several procedure that we must followed to get precise and accurate result which are general
start-up procedure must performed by refer to work instruction on equipment. Hot tank was
set at 50˚C and followed up by switch on pumps and air cooler. Flow rate was adjusted and
system allowed to reach steady state. Then, related data was recorded. The summary of the
result is the counter current design is most efficient. This is because in co-current flow heat
exchangers, the two fluids enter the exchanger at the same end, and travel in parallel to one
another to the other side. In counter-flow heat exchanger the fluids enter the exchanger form
opposite ends in order transfer most heat and achieved highest different (11.9˚C) between hot
water inlet and outlet and the lowest different between cold water inlet and outlet (5˚C) at (20
flow rate 2). In experiment co-current achieved highest difference (7.1˚C) between hot water
inlet and outlet and 10.4˚C lowest difference between cold water inlet and outlet at (20 flow
rate 2). In the conclusion, the effectiveness of heat exchange increase, when the LPM
increased and more effectively in counter current compare with co-current.

1
METHODOLOGY

Experiment A: Counter-Current Plate Heat Exchanger

General start-up procedure was

performed. Valves HV5, HV7, HV9,
HV10,HV12 AND HV13 was open.

Hot tank temperature was set at 50˚C.

After the temperature constant at 50
˚C.Pumps (P1 and P2) and air cooler
switched on.

Valves HV1 was adjusted to set flow

rate for hot water stream and HV4 was
adjusted to set the flow rate for cold
water stream between range 2-20 LPM.

The system was allowed to reach steady

state.

All related data was recorded.

Steps 3 to 5 was repeated for next 3

different cold water flow rate between
2-20LPM.

Equipment was shut down.

2
Experiment B: Co-current Plate Heat Exchanger

General start-up procedure was

performed. Valves HV7, HV8, HV11,
HV12 AND HV13 was open.

Hot tank temperature was set at 50˚C.

After the temperature constant at 50
˚C.Pumps (P1 and P2) and air cooler
switched on.

Valves HV1 was adjusted to set flow

rate for hot water stream and HV4 was
adjusted to set the flow rate for cold
water stream between range 2-20 LPM.

The system was allowed to reach steady

state.

All related data was recorded.

Steps 3 to 5 was repeated for next 3

different cold water flowrate same as
counter surrent case.

Equipment was shut down.

3
CALCULATION
Table: Counter-Current Plate Heat Exchanger Data Analysis
Flow Rate 1 (FT1):
Flow Rate 2 Hot Water Inlet Hot Water Cold Water Cold Water Inlet
(FI2) (TT1 or TI1) Outlet Outlet (TT4 or TI4)
LPM (˚C) (TT2 or TI2) (TT3 or TI3) (˚C)
(˚C) (˚C)
5.0 49.4 41.8 40.9 29.0
10.0 50.4 40.7 37.7 29.5
15.0 48.9 38.2 36.3 30.2
20.2 49.0 37.1 37.1 30.6

Table: Co-Current Plate Heat Exchanger Data Analysis

Flow Rate 1(FI1)
Flow Rate 2 Hot Water Inlet Hot Water Outlet Cold Water Inlet Cold Water
(FI2) (TT1 or TI1) (TT2 or TI2) (TT3 or TI3) Outlet
LPM (˚C) (˚C) (˚C) (TT4 or TI4)
(˚C)
5.0 50.2 45.9 30.7 45.4
10.1 50.5 45.0 30.9 44.5
15.0 50.2 44.0 31.1 43.2
20.0 49.7 42.6 31.3 41.7

4
Log Mean Temperature Difference
∆𝑇𝐴 − ∆𝑇𝐵 ∆𝑇𝐴 − ∆𝑇𝐵
𝐿𝑀𝑇𝐷 = =
∆𝑇 ln(∆𝑇𝐴 − ∆𝑇𝐵 )
ln (∆𝑇𝐴 )
𝐵

Counter-Current
Flow Rate 2 Difference of Hot Water Difference of Cold Water
(FI2) Temperature(˚C) Temperature(˚C)
LPM ΔTH ΔTC
5.0 7.6 11.9
10.0 9.7 8.2
15.0 10.7 6.1
20.2 11.9 6.5

Co-Current
Flow Rate 2 Difference of Hot Water Difference of Cold Water
(FI2) Temperature(˚C) Temperature(˚C)
LPM ΔTH ΔTC
5.0 4.3 14.7
10.2 5.5 13.6
15.0 6.2 12.1
20.0 7.1 10.4

LMTD
Counter Current
Flow Rate 2 Log Mean Temperature Difference
(FI2)
LPM
5.0 10.50
10.0 11.93
15.0 10.13
20.2 9.54

Co-Current
Flow Rate 2 Log Mean Temperature Difference
(FI2)
LPM
5.0 5.19
10.1 5.21
15.0 5.77
20.0 5.80

5
Heat Loss
Q = ρ V C ∆T HOT WATER
Q = ρ V C ∆T COLD WATER
ρ= 1000

C= 4.187 kJ/kg K
1 L/min = 1.67×10-5 m3/s
Table: Counter-Current Plate Heat Exchanger Data Analysis
Flow Rate 1 (FT1):
Flow Rate 2 Volume Hot Water Cold Water Heat Loss Hot Heat Loss Cold
(FI2) (m3/s) (˚C) (˚C) Water Water
LPM (l/min) (W/m2.K) (W/m2.K)
5.0 8.33×10-5 7.6 11.9 2.650 4.150
10.0 1.67×10-4 9.7 8.9 6.498 6.223
15.0 2.5×10-4 10.7 6.1 11.200 6.385
20.2 3.367×10-4 11.9 6.5 16.776 9.163

Table: Co-Current Plate Heat Exchanger Data Analysis

Flow Rate 1(FI1)
Flow Rate 2 Volume Hot Water Cold Water Heat Loss Hot Heat Loss Cold
(FI2) (m3/s) (˚C) (˚C) Water Water
LPM (l/min) (W/m2.K) (W/m2.K)

5.0 8.33×10-5 4.3 14.7 1.499 5.127

10.1 1.68×10-4 5.5 13.6 3.884 9.566
15.0 2.5×10-4 6.2 12.1 6.489 12.665
20.0 3.33×10-4 7.1 10.4 9.899 14.500

6
Heat Efficiency
Heat Efficiency = Q/Qmax × 100%
Q = Heat loss
Q max for Counter -Current = 40.9
Table: Counter-Current Plate Heat Exchanger Data Analysis
Flow Rate 1 (FT1):z
Flow Rate 2 Heat Loss of Heat Heat Loss of Heat
(FI2) Hot Water Efficiency of Cold Water Efficiency of
LPM (l/min) (W/m2.K) Hot (W/m2.K) Cold Water
Water(%) (%)
5.0 2.650 0.6479 4.150 0.1015
10.0 6.498 0.1589 6.223 0.1522
15.0 11.200 0.2739 6.385 0.1561
20.2 16.776 0.41017 9.1634 0.2240

Table: Co-Current Plate Heat Exchanger Data Analysis

Q max for Co-Current :45.4
Flow Rate 1(FI1)
Flow Rate 2 Heat Loss Heat Heat Loss of Heat
(FI2) of Hot Water Efficiency of Cold Water Efficiency of
LPM (l/min) (W/m2.K) Hot Water (W/m2.K) Cold Water

5.0 1.499 0.0330 5.127 0,1129

10.1 3.884 0.0856 9.566 0.2107
15.0 6.489 0.1429 12.665 0.275
20.0 9.899 0.218 14.500 0.3194

7
 Graph :Heat efficiency Against Flow Rate (Counter Current)

Heat Efficiency against Flow Rate (Counter-

current)
0.08
0.07
0.06
Heat Efficciency

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Flow Rate

Graph :Heat efficiency Against Flow Rate (Co-Current)

Heat Efficiency against Flow Rate

(Co-Current)
0.07

0.06

0.05
Heat Efficiency

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Flow Rate

8
Overall heat transfer coefficient
q = U A ∆𝑇𝑚
U = Heat efficiency
A = Area
∆𝑇𝑚 = Difference log mean temperature

Counter-current

Flow Rate 2 Overall heat transfer coefficient

(FI2) W/(m2K)
LPM (l/min)
5.0 0.0341
10.0 0.0581
15.0 0.0506
20.2 0.0684

Co – Current
Flow Rate 2 Overall heat transfer coefficient
(FI2) W/(m2K)
LPM (l/min)
5.0 0.0188
10.1 0.0351
15.0 0.0506
20.0 0.0593

9
 Graph: Overall heat transfer coefficient for Co-Current

Overall heat transfer coefficient

0.08

0.07 0.06838
0.06 0.0581
0.05 0.0506

0.04 Overall heat transfer

0.0341 coefficient
0.03

0.02

0.01

0
5 10 15 20.2

Graph: Overall heat transfer coefficient for Co-Current

Overall heat transfer coefficient

0.07

0.06 0.05928

0.05 0.05059

0.04
0.03513
Overall heat transfer
0.03 coefficient

0.02 0.01875

0.01

0
5 10.1 15 20

10
DISCUSSION

For this experiment, calculation and analyze of the heat transfer at steady state is
showed. The equation of heat exchanger used. From the equation we can calculate the heat
loss, efficiency, log mean temperature difference, plate (cold and hot film) and overall heat
transfer coefficient for both counter current and co-current process.
The overall heat transfer coefficient, U is the amount of heat flow by conduction or
convection though a medium or system with a unit temperature difference between the
boundaries of the system. Based on the graph 7(a) and 7(b), it showed that overall heat
transfer coefficient is increasing and decreasing to the cold water flow rate. For counter-
current, at minute 5 to 10 the graph is increase, while from minute 10 to 15 the graph is
decreasing and lastly at minute 15 to 20 it increased. As the cold water flow rate increase, the
overall heat transfer coefficient also increase for co-current process. After calculating the
overall heat-transfer coefficient for both experiment, error was found, which could be due
either to the flow rate or the temperature. After some evaluation, it was concluded that the
main measurement contributing to the error was the flow rates. Due to the different flow rate
in both experiments therefore there were two graphs.
Thus, it also showed that the overall heat transfer coefficient of counter current is
higher than co-current process. It is because counter current can transfer more heat compare
to co-current in the same surface area and length due to the log mean temperature of cold and
hot water of counter current process.
From graph 7(c) and 7(d), it shows that counter current heat exchanger is more
effective than co-current heat exchanger. This is because of the log mean temperature
difference of counter current is always higher than co-current heat exchanger. Therefore, a
smaller surface area or smaller heat exchanger is required to achieve the same heat transfer
rate as co-current heat exchanger.

11
CONCLUSION
As a conclusion, plate heat exchangers are used wherever thermal energy or known as
heat has to be transferred from one fluid to another. From this experiment, for the counter
current heat exchanger, as the flowrate increases, the temperature of hot water inlet and outlet
for both cold and hot water decreases. It same goes to the co current plate heat exchanger. In
addition, for both counter current and co current flow, as the flow rate increase the heat loss
also increase. From the discussion, the effectiveness shows that the counter-current flow plate
heat exchanger transfer heat faster than co-current flow heat exchanger. This is because the
decrease in value of efficiency as the flow rate decrease is not that much as in co current
plate. It decreases from 0.1015% to 0.2240 % and not as many as co current flow which is
from 0.1129% to 0.3194%. For the recommendation, as compared to shell and tube heat
exchangers, the temperature approach in a plate heat exchangers may be as low as 1 °C
whereas shell and tube heat exchangers require an approach of 5 °C or more. For the same
amount of heat exchanged, the the size of the plate heat exchanger should be smaller, because
of the large heat transfer area afforded by the plates.

12
REFERENCES
 Bassiouny, M.K.; Martin, H. (1984). "Flow distribution and pressure drop in plate
heat exchanges. Part I. U-Type arrangement.". Chem. Eng. Sci.
 Hewitt, G (1994). Process Heat Transfer. CRC Press.
 "Plate Heat exchangers". Gold-Bar Engineering ltd.

13