Step 7 Number of tubes

-3 2
Surface area of one tube = Π x (29 x 10 ) x 4 = 0.364 m (based on the o.d.)

Number of tubes needed = 39.8/0.364 = 109.3, say 110

-3 2 -4 2
Cross-sectional area of one tube = Π/4 x (25 x 10 ) = 4.91 x 10 m
3
Volumetric flow-rate of ethanol = 13.89/763.2 = 0.0182 m /s
Tube-side velocity = volumetric flow/cross-sectional area per pass
2
So, cross-sectional area per pass = 0.0182/1 = 0.0182 m
Number of passes = total cross-sectional area/ cross-sectional area per pass
-4
= (110 x 4.91 x 10 )/0.0182 = 2.9
Take as 4 passes. This will increase the tube-side velocity to above the chosen value. So, increase the
number of tubes to 120, giving a uniform 30 tubes per pass. Use E type shell.
Step 8 Shell diameter
The shell diameter is not needed at this point as the shell-side coefficient is not dependent on the
diameter. Leave till after checking the overall coefficient and tube-side pressure drop.
Step 9 Tube-side coefficient
Velocity, u = volumetric flow-rate/cross-sectional area per pass
t
-4
= (0.0182)/(30 x 4.91 x 10 ) = 1.24 m/s
4
Re = 763.2 x 1.24 x 25 x 10-3 = 34,589 (3.6 x 10 )
0.684
-3
From Fig. 12.23, j = 3.4 x 10
h
Pr = 2.68 x 103 x 0.684 x 10-3 = 11.6
0.158
-3 0.33
Nu = 3.4 x 10 (34589) (11.6) = 26

Step 11 Overall coefficient

Ethanol should not foul the tubes, so take the fouling factor for the tube-side as 0.0002,

that for light organics in Table 12.2.

1/U = ( 1/1668 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001389

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 720 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Too low, so back to Step 3. Put the overall coefficient = 720 Wm °C

3 2
Area required = (2236 x 10 )/(720 x 56.16) = 52.3 m

Number of tubes = 52.3/0.364 = 143.7 (144)

Try 144 tubes with 4 passes.

New tube velocity = 1.24 x 120/144 = 1.03 m/s

4
New Re = 34589 x 1.03/1.24 = 28,731 (2.9 x 10 )

-3
From Fig 12.23, j = 3.8 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.8 x 10 (28731)(11.6) = 245

-3 -2 -1
h = (245 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1548 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1548 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001443

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 693 Wm °C
o

Still too low but check pressure drop with this arrangement to see if the number of passes could be
increased, rather than the number tubes.

Step 12 Pressure drops

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.7 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.03 /2) = 11,718 N/m (12..30)
i

= 0.12 bar

Well below the allowable drop of 0.7 bar. So, try six passes, 24 tubes per pass.

New tube-side velocity = 1.03 x 6/4 = 1.54 m/s

4
New Re = 28731 x 1.54/1.03 = 42,957 (4.3 x 10 )

-3
From Fig. 12.24 j = 3.3 x 10
f

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.3 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.54 /2) = 24,341 N/m
i

7
 = 0.24 bar

Check on nozzle pressure drops.

Take nozzle / pipe velocity to be 2 m/s; see chapter 5, section 5.6.

2
Area of nozzle = volumetric flow-rate/velocity = 0.0182/2 = 0.0091 m

Nozzle diameter = √(4 x 0.0091/Π) = 0.108 m

Select standard pipe size, 100 mm

2
Nozzle velocity = 2 x (108/100) = 2.33 m/s
2 2
Velocity head = u /2 g = 2.33 / 2 x 9.8 = 0.277 m

Allow one velocity head for inlet nozzle and a half for the outlet; see section 12.8.2.
2
Pressure drop over nozzles = ρgh = 763.2 x 9.8 x (1.5 x 0.277 ) = 3,108 N/m

= 0.03 bar

Total tube-side pressure drop = 0.24 + 0.0 3 = 0.27 bar, well below the 0.7 bar allowed .

No limiting pressure drop is specified for the shell-side.

Back to steps 9 to 11

4 -3
From Fig 12.3, j , at Re = 4.3 x 10 , = 3.2 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.2 x 10 (42957)(11.6) = 309

-3 -2 -1
h = (309 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1,953 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1953 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001287

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 777 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Greater than the assumed value of 720 Wm °C , so the design is satisfactory.

Shell-side design (Step 10)

Use a square pitch as high shell-side velocities are not rquired with a condensing vapour.
-3 -3
Take the tube pitch = 1.25 x tube o.d. = 29 x 10 x 1.25 = 36.25 x 10 m

Bundle diameter, from Table 12.4, for 6 passes , square pitch , K = 0.0402, n = 2.617.
1 1

8
 1/2.617
D = 29 (144/0.0402) = 661.4 mm
b

Bundle to shell clearance, from Fig 12.10, for a fixed tube sheet = 14 mm

So, Shell inside diameter = 661.4 + 14 = 675.4, round to 680 mm

A close baffle spacing is not needed for a condensing vapour. All that is needed is sufficient baffles
to support the tubes. Take the baffle spacing as equal to the shell diameter, 680 mm.
3
Number of baffles = (4 x 10 / 680 ) – 1 = 5

Step 13 Cost
From chapter 6, Fig 6.3, basic cost for carbon steel exchanger = £10,000

Type factor for fixed tube sheet = 0.8. Pressure factor 1.0.

So, cost = 10000 x 0.8 x 1.0 = £8000 at mid-1998 prices.

Step 14 Optimisation

The design could be improved, to make use of the full pressure drop allowance on the tube-side. If
the number of tubes were reduced to, say 120, the tube-side velocity would be increased. This
would increase the tube-side heat transfer, which would compensate for the smaller surface area.

The heat transfer coefficient is roughly proportional to the velocity raised to the power of 0.8.

0.8 -2 -1 -2 -1
h ≅ 1953 (144/120) = 2344 Wm °C , giving U = 1046 Wm °C
i o

So the number of tubes required = 144 x (720/1046) = 99

Pressure drop is roughly proportional to the velocity squared.

2
ΔP = 0.24 x (144/120) = 0.35 bar, still well below that allowed.
i

To just meet the pressure drop allowance = 0.7 - 0.03 = 0.67 bar, allowing for the drop across the
1/2
nozzles, the number of tubes could be reduced to 144/ (0.657/0.24) = 87.

So it would be worth trying a six-pass design with 15 tubes per pass.

Solution 12.5
This is a rating problem, similar to problem 12.3. The simplest way to check if the exchanger is
suitable for the thermal duty is to estimate the area required and compare it with the area
available. Then check the pressure drops.

9
Procedure
1. Carry out a heat balance to determine the rate of heat transfer required and the water flow-rate

2. Estimate the tube-side coefficient using equation 12.15.

3. Evaluate the shell-side coefficient using Kern’s method, given in section 12.9 .3.

4. Determine the overall coefficient using equation 12.2.

5. Calculate the mean temperature difference; section 12.6

6. Determine the area required, equation 12.1.

7. Calculate the surface area available

= number of tubes x ( Π x tube o.d. x tube- length).

If area available exceeds that required by a sufficient margin to allow for the

uncertainties in the design methods, particularly Kern’s method, say +20%, accept

that the exchanger will satisfy the thermal duty.

If there is not sufficient margin, more sophisticated methods should be used to check the shell-side
coefficient; such a, Bell’s method (using standard clearances) or a

CAD method

8. Check the tube-side pressure drop, equation 12.20. Add the pressure drop over the

nozzles, section 12.8.2.

9. Check the shell-side pressure drop, including the nozzles; use Kern’s method section 12.9.3.

If the pressure drops are within limits, accept the exchanger.

If the shell-side limit is critical, a reasonable margin is needed to cover the approximate nature of
the method used

Notes

1. The density of the ammonia stream will vary for the inlet to outlet due to the change in
temperature. Use the mean density in the calculations.
2. The viscosity correction factor can be neglected for both streams.

Solution 12.6
First check that the critical flux will not be exceeded. Then check that the exchanger has sufficient
area for the duty specified.

By interpolation, saturation temperature = 57 °C.

10
From steam tables, steam temp = 115.2 °C.

Duty, including sensible heat, Q = (10,000/3600)(322 + 2.6(57 – 20 )) = 1162 kW

-3 2
Surface area of exchanger = (Π x 30x10 x 4.8)50 = 22.6 m
3 2
Flux = 1162 x 10 / 22.6 = 51,416 W/m

Critical flux, modified Zuber equation, 12.74

3 2 0.5 2
q = 0.44(45/30) x 322 x10 (0.85 x 9.8(535 – 14.4)14.4 ) = 654,438 W/m

√(2 X 50)

Apply the recommended factor of safety. 0.7

2
Critical flux for the bundle = 0.7 x 654438 = 458,107 W/m

So, the operating flux will be well below the critical flux.

Use the Foster-Zuber equation, 12.62, to estimate the boiling coefficient.

Tube surface temperature = steam temperature - temperature drop across the tube wall and
condensate..
2 -1
Tube wall resistance = do Ln (do/dI) = 30 x 10-3Ln (30/25) = 0.000055 °C m W (12.2)

2 k 2 x 50
w

-2 -1
Take the steam coefficient as 8000 Wm °C ; section 12.10.5.
2 -1
Condensate resistance = 1/8000 = 0.000125 °C m W

Temperature drop = q x resistance = 51416 x (0.000055 + 0.000125) = 9.3 °C

T = 115.5 - 9.3 = 106.2 °C, P = 17.3 bar

s s

h = 0.00122 ⎡ 0.0940.79 (2.6 x 103)0.45 5350.49 ⎤

nb

0.5 -3 0.29 3 0.24 0.24

⎣0.85 (0.12 x 10 ) (322 x 10 ) x 14.4 ⎦
0.24
x (106.2 - 57) {(17.3

Step 11 Overall coefficient

Ethanol should not foul the tubes, so take the fouling factor for the tube-side as 0.0002,

that for light organics in Table 12.2.

1/U = ( 1/1668 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001389

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 720 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Too low, so back to Step 3. Put the overall coefficient = 720 Wm °C

3 2
Area required = (2236 x 10 )/(720 x 56.16) = 52.3 m

Number of tubes = 52.3/0.364 = 143.7 (144)

Try 144 tubes with 4 passes.

New tube velocity = 1.24 x 120/144 = 1.03 m/s

4
New Re = 34589 x 1.03/1.24 = 28,731 (2.9 x 10 )

-3
From Fig 12.23, j = 3.8 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.8 x 10 (28731)(11.6) = 245

-3 -2 -1
h = (245 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1548 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1548 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001443

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 693 Wm °C
o

Still too low but check pressure drop with this arrangement to see if the number of passes could be
increased, rather than the number tubes.

Step 12 Pressure drops

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.7 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.03 /2) = 11,718 N/m (12..30)
i
= 0.12 bar

Well below the allowable drop of 0.7 bar. So, try six passes, 24 tubes per pass.

New tube-side velocity = 1.03 x 6/4 = 1.54 m/s

4
New Re = 28731 x 1.54/1.03 = 42,957 (4.3 x 10 )

-3
From Fig. 12.24 j = 3.3 x 10
f

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.3 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.54 /2) = 24,341 N/m
i

7
 = 0.24 bar

Check on nozzle pressure drops.

Take nozzle / pipe velocity to be 2 m/s; see chapter 5, section 5.6.

2
Area of nozzle = volumetric flow-rate/velocity = 0.0182/2 = 0.0091 m

Nozzle diameter = √(4 x 0.0091/Π) = 0.108 m

Select standard pipe size, 100 mm

2
Nozzle velocity = 2 x (108/100) = 2.33 m/s
2 2
Velocity head = u /2 g = 2.33 / 2 x 9.8 = 0.277 m

Allow one velocity head for inlet nozzle and a half for the outlet; see section 12.8.2.
2
Pressure drop over nozzles = ρgh = 763.2 x 9.8 x (1.5 x 0.277 ) = 3,108 N/m

= 0.03 bar

Total tube-side pressure drop = 0.24 + 0.0 3 = 0.27 bar, well below the 0.7 bar allowed .

No limiting pressure drop is specified for the shell-side.

Back to steps 9 to 11

4 -3
From Fig 12.3, j , at Re = 4.3 x 10 , = 3.2 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.2 x 10 (42957)(11.6) = 309

-3 -2 -1
h = (309 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1,953 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1953 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001287

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 777 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Greater than the assumed value of 720 Wm °C , so the design is satisfactory.

Shell-side design (Step 10)

Use a square pitch as high shell-side velocities are not rquired with a condensing vapour.
-3 -3
Take the tube pitch = 1.25 x tube o.d. = 29 x 10 x 1.25 = 36.25 x 10 m

Bundle diameter, from Table 12.4, for 6 passes , square pitch , K = 0.0402, n = 2.617.
1 1

8
 1/2.617
D = 29 (144/0.0402) = 661.4 mm
b

Bundle to shell clearance, from Fig 12.10, for a fixed tube sheet = 14 mm

So, Shell inside diameter = 661.4 + 14 = 675.4, round to 680 mm

A close baffle spacing is not needed for a condensing vapour. All that is needed is sufficient baffles
to support the tubes. Take the baffle spacing as equal to the shell diameter, 680 mm.
3
Number of baffles = (4 x 10 / 680 ) – 1 = 5

Step 13 Cost
From chapter 6, Fig 6.3, basic cost for carbon steel exchanger = £10,000

Type factor for fixed tube sheet = 0.8. Pressure factor 1.0.

So, cost = 10000 x 0.8 x 1.0 = £8000 at mid-1998 prices.

Step 14 Optimisation

The design could be improved, to make use of the full pressure drop allowance on the tube-side. If
the number of tubes were reduced to, say 120, the tube-side velocity would be increased. This
would increase the tube-side heat transfer, which would compensate for the smaller surface area.

The heat transfer coefficient is roughly proportional to the velocity raised to the power of 0.8.

0.8 -2 -1 -2 -1
h ≅ 1953 (144/120) = 2344 Wm °C , giving U = 1046 Wm °C
i o

So the number of tubes required = 144 x (720/1046) = 99

Pressure drop is roughly proportional to the velocity squared.

2
ΔP = 0.24 x (144/120) = 0.35 bar, still well below that allowed.
i

To just meet the pressure drop allowance = 0.7 - 0.03 = 0.67 bar, allowing for the drop across the
1/2
nozzles, the number of tubes could be reduced to 144/ (0.657/0.24) = 87.

So it would be worth trying a six-pass design with 15 tubes per pass.

Solution 12.5
This is a rating problem, similar to problem 12.3. The simplest way to check if the exchanger is
suitable for the thermal duty is to estimate the area required and compare it with the area
available. Then check the pressure drops.

9
Procedure
1. Carry out a heat balance to determine the rate of heat transfer required and the water flow-rate

2. Estimate the tube-side coefficient using equation 12.15.

3. Evaluate the shell-side coefficient using Kern’s method, given in section 12.9 .3.

4. Determine the overall coefficient using equation 12.2.

5. Calculate the mean temperature difference; section 12.6

6. Determine the area required, equation 12.1.

7. Calculate the surface area available

= number of tubes x ( Π x tube o.d. x tube- length).

If area available exceeds that required by a sufficient margin to allow for the

uncertainties in the design methods, particularly Kern’s method, say +20%, accept

that the exchanger will satisfy the thermal duty.

If there is not sufficient margin, more sophisticated methods should be used to check the shell-side
coefficient; such a, Bell’s method (using standard clearances) or a

CAD method

8. Check the tube-side pressure drop, equation 12.20. Add the pressure drop over the

nozzles, section 12.8.2.

9. Check the shell-side pressure drop, including the nozzles; use Kern’s method section 12.9.3.

If the pressure drops are within limits, accept the exchanger.

If the shell-side limit is critical, a reasonable margin is needed to cover the approximate nature of
the method used

Notes

1. The density of the ammonia stream will vary for the inlet to outlet due to the change in
temperature. Use the mean density in the calculations.
2. The viscosity correction factor can be neglected for both streams.

Solution 12.6
First check that the critical flux will not be exceeded. Then check that the exchanger has sufficient
area for the duty specified.

By interpolation, saturation temperature = 57 °C.

10
From steam tables, steam temp = 115.2 °C.

Duty, including sensible heat, Q = (10,000/3600)(322 + 2.6(57 – 20 )) = 1162 kW

-3 2
Surface area of exchanger = (Π x 30x10 x 4.8)50 = 22.6 m
3 2
Flux = 1162 x 10 / 22.6 = 51,416 W/m

Critical flux, modified Zuber equation, 12.74

3 2 0.5 2
q = 0.44(45/30) x 322 x10 (0.85 x 9.8(535 – 14.4)14.4 ) = 654,438 W/m

√(2 X 50)

Apply the recommended factor of safety. 0.7

2
Critical flux for the bundle = 0.7 x 654438 = 458,107 W/m

So, the operating flux will be well below the critical flux.

Use the Foster-Zuber equation, 12.62, to estimate the boiling coefficient.

Tube surface temperature = steam temperature - temperature drop across the tube wall and
condensate..
2 -1
Tube wall resistance = do Ln (do/dI) = 30 x 10-3Ln (30/25) = 0.000055 °C m W (12.2)

2 k 2 x 50
w

-2 -1
Take the steam coefficient as 8000 Wm °C ; section 12.10.5.
2 -1
Condensate resistance = 1/8000 = 0.000125 °C m W

Temperature drop = q x resistance = 51416 x (0.000055 + 0.000125) = 9.3 °C

T = 115.5 - 9.3 = 106.2 °C, P = 17.3 bar

s s

h = 0.00122 ⎡ 0.0940.79 (2.6 x 103)0.45 5350.49 ⎤

nb

0.5 -3 0.29 3 0.24 0.24

⎣0.85 (0.12 x 10 ) (322 x 10 ) x 14.4 ⎦
0.24
x (106.2 - 57) {(17.3Step 11 Overall coefficient
Ethanol should not foul the tubes, so take the fouling factor for the tube-side as 0.0002,
that for light organics in Table 12.2.

1/U = ( 1/1668 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001389

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 720 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Too low, so back to Step 3. Put the overall coefficient = 720 Wm °C

3 2
Area required = (2236 x 10 )/(720 x 56.16) = 52.3 m

Number of tubes = 52.3/0.364 = 143.7 (144)

Try 144 tubes with 4 passes.

New tube velocity = 1.24 x 120/144 = 1.03 m/s

4
New Re = 34589 x 1.03/1.24 = 28,731 (2.9 x 10 )

-3
From Fig 12.23, j = 3.8 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.8 x 10 (28731)(11.6) = 245

-3 -2 -1
h = (245 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1548 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1548 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001443

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 693 Wm °C
o

Still too low but check pressure drop with this arrangement to see if the number of passes could be
increased, rather than the number tubes.

Step 12 Pressure drops

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.7 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.03 /2) = 11,718 N/m (12..30)
i

= 0.12 bar
Well below the allowable drop of 0.7 bar. So, try six passes, 24 tubes per pass.

New tube-side velocity = 1.03 x 6/4 = 1.54 m/s

4
New Re = 28731 x 1.54/1.03 = 42,957 (4.3 x 10 )

-3
From Fig. 12.24 j = 3.3 x 10
f

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.3 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.54 /2) = 24,341 N/m
i

7
 = 0.24 bar

Check on nozzle pressure drops.

Take nozzle / pipe velocity to be 2 m/s; see chapter 5, section 5.6.

2
Area of nozzle = volumetric flow-rate/velocity = 0.0182/2 = 0.0091 m

Nozzle diameter = √(4 x 0.0091/Π) = 0.108 m

Select standard pipe size, 100 mm

2
Nozzle velocity = 2 x (108/100) = 2.33 m/s
2 2
Velocity head = u /2 g = 2.33 / 2 x 9.8 = 0.277 m

Allow one velocity head for inlet nozzle and a half for the outlet; see section 12.8.2.
2
Pressure drop over nozzles = ρgh = 763.2 x 9.8 x (1.5 x 0.277 ) = 3,108 N/m

= 0.03 bar

Total tube-side pressure drop = 0.24 + 0.0 3 = 0.27 bar, well below the 0.7 bar allowed .

No limiting pressure drop is specified for the shell-side.

Back to steps 9 to 11

4 -3
From Fig 12.3, j , at Re = 4.3 x 10 , = 3.2 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.2 x 10 (42957)(11.6) = 309

-3 -2 -1
h = (309 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1,953 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1953 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001287

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 777 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Greater than the assumed value of 720 Wm °C , so the design is satisfactory.

Shell-side design (Step 10)

Use a square pitch as high shell-side velocities are not rquired with a condensing vapour.
-3 -3
Take the tube pitch = 1.25 x tube o.d. = 29 x 10 x 1.25 = 36.25 x 10 m

Bundle diameter, from Table 12.4, for 6 passes , square pitch , K = 0.0402, n = 2.617.
1 1

8
 1/2.617
D = 29 (144/0.0402) = 661.4 mm
b

Bundle to shell clearance, from Fig 12.10, for a fixed tube sheet = 14 mm

So, Shell inside diameter = 661.4 + 14 = 675.4, round to 680 mm

A close baffle spacing is not needed for a condensing vapour. All that is needed is sufficient baffles
to support the tubes. Take the baffle spacing as equal to the shell diameter, 680 mm.
3
Number of baffles = (4 x 10 / 680 ) – 1 = 5

Step 13 Cost
From chapter 6, Fig 6.3, basic cost for carbon steel exchanger = £10,000

Type factor for fixed tube sheet = 0.8. Pressure factor 1.0.

So, cost = 10000 x 0.8 x 1.0 = £8000 at mid-1998 prices.

Step 14 Optimisation

The design could be improved, to make use of the full pressure drop allowance on the tube-side. If
the number of tubes were reduced to, say 120, the tube-side velocity would be increased. This
would increase the tube-side heat transfer, which would compensate for the smaller surface area.

The heat transfer coefficient is roughly proportional to the velocity raised to the power of 0.8.

0.8 -2 -1 -2 -1
h ≅ 1953 (144/120) = 2344 Wm °C , giving U = 1046 Wm °C
i o

So the number of tubes required = 144 x (720/1046) = 99

Pressure drop is roughly proportional to the velocity squared.

2
ΔP = 0.24 x (144/120) = 0.35 bar, still well below that allowed.
i

To just meet the pressure drop allowance = 0.7 - 0.03 = 0.67 bar, allowing for the drop across the
1/2
nozzles, the number of tubes could be reduced to 144/ (0.657/0.24) = 87.

So it would be worth trying a six-pass design with 15 tubes per pass.

Solution 12.5
This is a rating problem, similar to problem 12.3. The simplest way to check if the exchanger is
suitable for the thermal duty is to estimate the area required and compare it with the area
available. Then check the pressure drops.

9
Procedure
1. Carry out a heat balance to determine the rate of heat transfer required and the water flow-rate

2. Estimate the tube-side coefficient using equation 12.15.

3. Evaluate the shell-side coefficient using Kern’s method, given in section 12.9 .3.

4. Determine the overall coefficient using equation 12.2.

5. Calculate the mean temperature difference; section 12.6

6. Determine the area required, equation 12.1.

7. Calculate the surface area available

= number of tubes x ( Π x tube o.d. x tube- length).

If area available exceeds that required by a sufficient margin to allow for the

uncertainties in the design methods, particularly Kern’s method, say +20%, accept

that the exchanger will satisfy the thermal duty.

If there is not sufficient margin, more sophisticated methods should be used to check the shell-side
coefficient; such a, Bell’s method (using standard clearances) or a

CAD method

8. Check the tube-side pressure drop, equation 12.20. Add the pressure drop over the

nozzles, section 12.8.2.

9. Check the shell-side pressure drop, including the nozzles; use Kern’s method section 12.9.3.

If the pressure drops are within limits, accept the exchanger.

If the shell-side limit is critical, a reasonable margin is needed to cover the approximate nature of
the method used

Notes

1. The density of the ammonia stream will vary for the inlet to outlet due to the change in
temperature. Use the mean density in the calculations.
2. The viscosity correction factor can be neglected for both streams.

Solution 12.6
First check that the critical flux will not be exceeded. Then check that the exchanger has sufficient
area for the duty specified.

By interpolation, saturation temperature = 57 °C.

10
From steam tables, steam temp = 115.2 °C.

Duty, including sensible heat, Q = (10,000/3600)(322 + 2.6(57 – 20 )) = 1162 kW

-3 2
Surface area of exchanger = (Π x 30x10 x 4.8)50 = 22.6 m
3 2
Flux = 1162 x 10 / 22.6 = 51,416 W/m

Critical flux, modified Zuber equation, 12.74

3 2 0.5 2
q = 0.44(45/30) x 322 x10 (0.85 x 9.8(535 – 14.4)14.4 ) = 654,438 W/m

√(2 X 50)

Apply the recommended factor of safety. 0.7

2
Critical flux for the bundle = 0.7 x 654438 = 458,107 W/m

So, the operating flux will be well below the critical flux.

Use the Foster-Zuber equation, 12.62, to estimate the boiling coefficient.

Tube surface temperature = steam temperature - temperature drop across the tube wall and
condensate..
2 -1
Tube wall resistance = do Ln (do/dI) = 30 x 10-3Ln (30/25) = 0.000055 °C m W (12.2)

2 k 2 x 50
w

-2 -1
Take the steam coefficient as 8000 Wm °C ; section 12.10.5.
2 -1
Condensate resistance = 1/8000 = 0.000125 °C m W

Temperature drop = q x resistance = 51416 x (0.000055 + 0.000125) = 9.3 °C

T = 115.5 - 9.3 = 106.2 °C, P = 17.3 bar

s s

h = 0.00122 ⎡ 0.0940.79 (2.6 x 103)0.45 5350.49 ⎤

nb

0.5 -3 0.29 3 0.24 0.24

⎣0.85 (0.12 x 10 ) (322 x 10 ) x 14.4 ⎦ Step 11 Overall coefficient
Ethanol should not foul the tubes, so take the fouling factor for the tube-side as 0.0002,

that for light organics in Table 12.2.

1/U = ( 1/1668 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001389
o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 720 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Too low, so back to Step 3. Put the overall coefficient = 720 Wm °C

3 2
Area required = (2236 x 10 )/(720 x 56.16) = 52.3 m

Number of tubes = 52.3/0.364 = 143.7 (144)

Try 144 tubes with 4 passes.

New tube velocity = 1.24 x 120/144 = 1.03 m/s

4
New Re = 34589 x 1.03/1.24 = 28,731 (2.9 x 10 )

-3
From Fig 12.23, j = 3.8 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.8 x 10 (28731)(11.6) = 245

-3 -2 -1
h = (245 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1548 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1548 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001443

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 693 Wm °C
o

Still too low but check pressure drop with this arrangement to see if the number of passes could be
increased, rather than the number tubes.

Step 12 Pressure drops

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.7 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.03 /2) = 11,718 N/m (12..30)
i

= 0.12 bar

Well below the allowable drop of 0.7 bar. So, try six passes, 24 tubes per pass.
New tube-side velocity = 1.03 x 6/4 = 1.54 m/s

4
New Re = 28731 x 1.54/1.03 = 42,957 (4.3 x 10 )

-3
From Fig. 12.24 j = 3.3 x 10
f

-3 -3 2 2
ΔP = 4(8 x 3.3 x 10 x (4/25 x 10 ) + 2..5)(763.2 x 1.54 /2) = 24,341 N/m
i

7
 = 0.24 bar

Check on nozzle pressure drops.

Take nozzle / pipe velocity to be 2 m/s; see chapter 5, section 5.6.

2
Area of nozzle = volumetric flow-rate/velocity = 0.0182/2 = 0.0091 m

Nozzle diameter = √(4 x 0.0091/Π) = 0.108 m

Select standard pipe size, 100 mm

2
Nozzle velocity = 2 x (108/100) = 2.33 m/s
2 2
Velocity head = u /2 g = 2.33 / 2 x 9.8 = 0.277 m

Allow one velocity head for inlet nozzle and a half for the outlet; see section 12.8.2.
2
Pressure drop over nozzles = ρgh = 763.2 x 9.8 x (1.5 x 0.277 ) = 3,108 N/m

= 0.03 bar

Total tube-side pressure drop = 0.24 + 0.0 3 = 0.27 bar, well below the 0.7 bar allowed .

No limiting pressure drop is specified for the shell-side.

Back to steps 9 to 11

4 -3
From Fig 12.3, j , at Re = 4.3 x 10 , = 3.2 x 10
h

-3 0.33
Nu = 3.2 x 10 (42957)(11.6) = 309

-3 -2 -1
h = (309 x 0.158)/(25 x 10 ) = 1,953 Wm °C
i

1/U = ( 1/1953 + 0.0002)(29/25) + 29 x 10-3(29/25) + 1/8000 = 0.001287

o

2 x 50
-2 -1
U = 777 Wm °C
o

-2 -1
Greater than the assumed value of 720 Wm °C , so the design is satisfactory.

Shell-side design (Step 10)

Use a square pitch as high shell-side velocities are not rquired with a condensing vapour.
-3 -3
Take the tube pitch = 1.25 x tube o.d. = 29 x 10 x 1.25 = 36.25 x 10 m

Bundle diameter, from Table 12.4, for 6 passes , square pitch , K = 0.0402, n = 2.617.
1 1

8
 1/2.617
D = 29 (144/0.0402) = 661.4 mm
b

Bundle to shell clearance, from Fig 12.10, for a fixed tube sheet = 14 mm

So, Shell inside diameter = 661.4 + 14 = 675.4, round to 680 mm

A close baffle spacing is not needed for a condensing vapour. All that is needed is sufficient baffles
to support the tubes. Take the baffle spacing as equal to the shell diameter, 680 mm.
3
Number of baffles = (4 x 10 / 680 ) – 1 = 5

Step 13 Cost
From chapter 6, Fig 6.3, basic cost for carbon steel exchanger = £10,000

Type factor for fixed tube sheet = 0.8. Pressure factor 1.0.

So, cost = 10000 x 0.8 x 1.0 = £8000 at mid-1998 prices.

Step 14 Optimisation

The design could be improved, to make use of the full pressure drop allowance on the tube-side. If
the number of tubes were reduced to, say 120, the tube-side velocity would be increased. This
would increase the tube-side heat transfer, which would compensate for the smaller surface area.

The heat transfer coefficient is roughly proportional to the velocity raised to the power of 0.8.

0.8 -2 -1 -2 -1
h ≅ 1953 (144/120) = 2344 Wm °C , giving U = 1046 Wm °C
i o

So the number of tubes required = 144 x (720/1046) = 99

Pressure drop is roughly proportional to the velocity squared.

2
ΔP = 0.24 x (144/120) = 0.35 bar, still well below that allowed.
i

To just meet the pressure drop allowance = 0.7 - 0.03 = 0.67 bar, allowing for the drop across the
1/2
nozzles, the number of tubes could be reduced to 144/ (0.657/0.24) = 87.

So it would be worth trying a six-pass design with 15 tubes per pass.

Solution 12.5
This is a rating problem, similar to problem 12.3. The simplest way to check if the exchanger is
suitable for the thermal duty is to estimate the area required and compare it with the area
available. Then check the pressure drops.

9
Procedure
1. Carry out a heat balance to determine the rate of heat transfer required and the water flow-rate

2. Estimate the tube-side coefficient using equation 12.15.

3. Evaluate the shell-side coefficient using Kern’s method, given in section 12.9 .3.

4. Determine the overall coefficient using equation 12.2.

5. Calculate the mean temperature difference; section 12.6

6. Determine the area required, equation 12.1.

7. Calculate the surface area available

= number of tubes x ( Π x tube o.d. x tube- length).

If area available exceeds that required by a sufficient margin to allow for the

uncertainties in the design methods, particularly Kern’s method, say +20%, accept

that the exchanger will satisfy the thermal duty.

If there is not sufficient margin, more sophisticated methods should be used to check the shell-side
coefficient; such a, Bell’s method (using standard clearances) or a

CAD method

8. Check the tube-side pressure drop, equation 12.20. Add the pressure drop over the

nozzles, section 12.8.2.

9. Check the shell-side pressure drop, including the nozzles; use Kern’s method section 12.9.3.

If the pressure drops are within limits, accept the exchanger.

If the shell-side limit is critical, a reasonable margin is needed to cover the approximate nature of
the method used

Notes

1. The density of the ammonia stream will vary for the inlet to outlet due to the change in
temperature. Use the mean density in the calculations.
2. The viscosity correction factor can be neglected for both streams.

Solution 12.6
First check that the critical flux will not be exceeded. Then check that the exchanger has sufficient
area for the duty specified.

By interpolation, saturation temperature = 57 °C.

10
From steam tables, steam temp = 115.2 °C.

Duty, including sensible heat, Q = (10,000/3600)(322 + 2.6(57 – 20 )) = 1162 kW

-3 2
Surface area of exchanger = (Π x 30x10 x 4.8)50 = 22.6 m
3 2
Flux = 1162 x 10 / 22.6 = 51,416 W/m

Critical flux, modified Zuber equation, 12.74

3 2 0.5 2
q = 0.44(45/30) x 322 x10 (0.85 x 9.8(535 – 14.4)14.4 ) = 654,438 W/m

√(2 X 50)

Apply the recommended factor of safety. 0.7

2
Critical flux for the bundle = 0.7 x 654438 = 458,107 W/m

So, the operating flux will be well below the critical flux.

Use the Foster-Zuber equation, 12.62, to estimate the boiling coefficient.

Tube surface temperature = steam temperature - temperature drop across the tube wall and
condensate..
2 -1
Tube wall resistance = do Ln (do/dI) = 30 x 10-3Ln (30/25) = 0.000055 °C m W (12.2)

2 k 2 x 50
w

-2 -1
Take the steam coefficient as 8000 Wm °C ; section 12.10.5.
2 -1
Condensate resistance = 1/8000 = 0.000125 °C m W

Temperature drop = q x resistance = 51416 x (0.000055 + 0.000125) = 9.3 °C

T = 115.5 - 9.3 = 106.2 °C, P = 17.3 bar

s s

h = 0.00122 ⎡ 0.0940.79 (2.6 x 103)0.45 5350.49 ⎤

nb

0.5 -3 0.29 3 0.24 0.24

⎣0.85 (0.12 x 10 ) (322 x 10 ) x 14.4 ⎦
0.24
x (106.2 - 57) {(17.3
2.2 Background A column should be designed with a specific wall thickness to ensure it has sufficient
rigidity to be able to cope with the maximum amount of pressure which it is expected to be susceptible
to in operation (Sinott 2008).The minimum column wall thickness needed to withstand the vessel weight
itself as well as other incidental loads such as internal pressure is calculated and shown in the following
calculation section The design pressure for vessels under internal pressure is conventionally taken as the
pressure where the relief device is set. This is usually about 5-10 % above the regular working pressure.
This is done to avoid spurious operation during minor process upsets. (Sinott 2008). 2.3 Required
Specifications The specification to calculate the column wall thickness are tabulated in Table 2.3.1 below
: Table 2.3. 1 : Specification for Column Wall Thickness Properties Specification Unit Conversion Design
pressure, : ⁄ ⁄ Operating temperature, - Internal diameter, Material Stainless steel, unstabilised (304) -
Corrosion allowance, Joints welds Fully radiographed. Joint factor, . (Appendix A: Figure A.1) 1.0 Typical
Design Stress, f 127 ⁄ (Appendix B: Figure B.1) - Group 19 MECHANICAL DESIGN OF SIEVE PLATE
COLUMN 2015 5 | P a g e 2.4 Calculations 2.4.1 Typical Design Stress From Figure 2.3.1 , It can be seen
that there is no specific value of design stress at temperature 160 °C. Therefore, interpolation between
the temperature of 150 °C. and 200 °C is executed. Figure T below outlined the interpolation range in
the typical design stress for plate. The full typical design stress table can be referred to Appendix B :
Figure Using interpolation metod , the design stress for the particular temperature of 160 °C is
calculated : 2.4.2 Minimum Column Wall Thickness With the specifications and requirement provided
previously, the column wall thickness is then calculated using Equation (2.3.2) (Sinott 2005): Where,
minimum plate thickness (mm) design pressure (N/mm2 ) internal diameter (mm) joint efficient factor
maximum allowable working or design stress (N/mm2 ) corrosion allowance (mm) minimum plate
thickness (mm) Figure 2.3. 1 : Interpolation Range Group 19 MECHANICAL DESIGN OF SIEVE PLATE
COLUMN 2015 6 | P a g e With addition of corrosion allowance , : 2.4.3 Mean Thickness of Column Wall
Since a vessel needs to withstand design loads such as wind and the dead weight loads, the column wall
has to be gradually thicker from the top to the bottom (Sinott 2008).,Therefore, the column wall is
divided into 5 sections with an increase of for each section going downwards. The column wall thickness
from top to bottom is (13,15,17,19 and 21) mm. The mean thickness of Column wall can then be
calculated. 2.5 Comments Although the calculated value of minimum column wall thickness is 12.23mm,
13 mm is chosen as column wall thickness following the standard manufacture’s column wall thickness
available, following the ASME BPVCode Sec. VIII D.1 specifies a minimum wall thickness of 1/16 inch (1.5
mm) (excluded corrosion allowances) Therefore, Including the corrosion allowance of 4 mm, the actual
column wall thickness is 13 mm. The mean thickness of the column wall is calculated to be 17mm The
thickness of the column increasing when nearing to bottom to withstand wind and the dead weight load
of. Thus, the pressure at the vessel base is maintained at maximum and this requires greater thickness
of the column wall and also larger diameter for the column. This is crucial to prevent the vessel from
collapsing as well as to increase its capability to endure wind loading and dead weight of vessel and
content that contributed to the high stress from increase in pressure. Group 19 MECHANICAL
 0.24
x (106.2 - 57) {(17.3