Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 12 (2018) 563–568

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/csite

Performance analysis of shell and tube heat exchanger: Parametric

T
study
Ammar Ali Abda,c, Mohammed Qasim Kareema, Samah Zaki Najib,c
a
Water Resources Engineering College, Al-Qasim Green University, Iraq
b
Petroleum Engineering Department, Kerbala, Iraq
c
Chemical Engineering Department, Curtin University, Australia

A R T IC LE I N F O ABS TRA CT

Keywords: Enhancement of heat transfer through shell and tube exchangers stills taking high attention by
Shell diameter researchers. The present work investigated the effect of shell diameter and tube length on heat
Baffle spacing transfer coefficient and pressure drop for shell side with both triangular and square pitches. In
Cutting space addition, the effect of baffle spacing and cutting space on heat transfer coefficient and pressure
Fouling rate
drop were studied. Moreover, standards fouling rates used for both shell and tube sides to esti-
mate the reduced heat transfer. Increasing shell diameter with a triangular pitch and pull-through
floating head recorded 3% increasing in heat transfer coefficient for only 0,05 m increasing in
shell diameter. While 2.8% increase in heat transfer coefficient for shell side by 0.05 m increasing
in shell diameter with split-ring floating head and square pitch. Heat transfer coefficient for shell
side reduced by 15.15% by increasing baffle space by 0.2 from shell diameter and the pressure
drop by 41.25%. Increasing cutting space from 15% to 25% decreases heat transfer coefficient by
5.56% and the pressure drop diminished by 26.3%. Increasing tube length by 0.61 m leads to
enhance the heat transfer coefficient by 31.9% and pressure drop by 14.11% for tube side. For
shell side, increasing tube length by 0.61 m gives 2.2% increasing in heat transfer coefficient and
21.9% increasing for pressure drop. Fouling resistance change on shell side shows a high effect on
heat transfer more than same rate change on the tube side. Based on the result, this study can
help designers to quick understand of each parameter effect on heat transfer into shell and tube
exchangers.

1. Introduction

Shell and tube heat exchanger considers one of the most common types of exchangers widely used in the industrial processes. This
exchanger consists of a vessel with different sizes contains a number of tubes inside. Heat transfers between these tubes together and
with the shell side through tube walls. Shell and tube exchangers characterize by easy to manufacture in different sizes and flow
configurations [1]. The rate of transferred heat depends on several factors such as feed temperature and pressure, shell diameter, a
number of tubes, tube geometry, baffle spacing and cutting spacing [2]. Abd and Naji studied design of shell and tube heat exchanger
in details and tested the effect of shell diameter on overall heat transfer coefficient by using different bundle diameters [3]. Shinde
and Chavan concluded that baffle spacing, and pitch type can play a vital role in enhancing heat transfer into exchangers [4]. In the
same vein, Eryener tested the effect of baffle material on heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop by using different materials of

E-mail addresses: ammarali.abd@postgrad.curtin.edu.au, ammarali@wrec.uoqasim.edu.iq (A.A. Abd),

mohammed.qasim.salami@wrec.uoqasi.edu.iq (M.Q. Kareem), Samah.alrashid@uokerbala.edu.iq (S.Z. Naji).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2018.07.009
Received 24 December 2017; Received in revised form 16 June 2018; Accepted 23 July 2018
Available online 29 July 2018
2214-157X/ © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).
A.A. Abd et al. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 12 (2018) 563–568

Fig. 1. shell diameter against heat transfer coefficient for shell side with three types of headers and triangular pitch.

constructions to recommend stainless steel as the best choice [5]. Yu et al. tested the effects of distance, width, profile, and layout of
the baffle on the overall heat transfer of exchanger [6]. Dizaji, Jafarmadar, and Asaadi investigated experimentally using a corrugated
shell and corrugated tube instead of smooth shell and tube to improve the heat transfer through the exchanger [7]. Alimoradi and
Veysi examined the effect of geometry parameters on the heat transfer and entropy generation [8]. Gao et. al. experimentally studied
the effect of using helix angles on the performance of shell and tube heat exchanger [9]. Each part in exchanger has a direct effect on
the total transferred heat, therefore, it is important to choose carefully all the parameters (Figs. 1 and 2).
This paper will design shell and tube heat exchanger by using different parameters to study the effect of baffle spacing, cutting
space, shell diameter, tube length, fouling rate on heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop for shell and tube sides. The properties
estimated by using Hysys simulation program for dry gases in shell side and hot oil in tube side as shown in Tables 1 and 2. In the
design of shell and tube exchanger cannot avoid trial and error process to reach requested result. Therefore, study the effect of each
parameter of design can lead to quick prediction and effective design.

2. Results and discussion

The simulation run with Hysys v8.8 program, where the fluid package chose to be Peng-Robinson. The working conditions include
input and output temperatures, mass flowrate, pressure, and compositions provided from real project executed by Clough company as
shown in Tables 1 and 2. The design suggested to pumped dry gases in shell side and hot oil in tube side.

2.1. Effects of shell diameter on shell heat transfer coefficient for triangular and square pitch

Many factors influence the fluid flow inside shell side such as tubes arrangement, pith type, baffle space, cutting space, and shell
header type. Abd and Naji mentioned procedure to calculate shell diameter based on the bundle diameter with triangular and square
pitches [3]. Here, the calculations used three different types of headers which are pull-through floating head, split-ring floating head,
and outside packed head. Shell diameter estimated for each type to check out the change in heat transfer coefficient for triangular and
square pitches respectively. Generally, heat transfer coefficient for shell side increases as shell diameter increases for both triangular
and square pitches. Pull-through floating head with triangular pitch gives 3% increasing in shell heat transfer coefficient for 0.005 m
increasing in shell diameter. While split-ring floating head promotes heat transfer coefficient on shell side by almost 1% only for
0.005 m increasing in shell diameter with a triangular pitch. Outside packed head comes with small shell diameter compare to two
other heads, and the heat transfer coefficient increases by 1.5% for 0.005 m increasing in shell diameter with a triangular pitch.
Controlling heat transfer coefficient can be achieved by manipulating the header as shown in the figure below. While square pitch
creates larger shell diameter than triangular pitch for same conditions. Where, pull-through floating head increases heat transfer
coefficient for shell side by 0.9%, 2.8% with split-ring floating head, and 1.5% with an outside-packed head for 0.005 m increasing in
shell diameter.
Based on above figures, square pitch can be selected as best choice to increase shell diameter for all three headers. The possible
reason is the design pressure for this heat exchanger is small, where square uses usually with small range of pressure. On the other
hand, triangular pitch gives the ability to control shell diameter in case of high pressure drop and high overall heat transfer.

Fig. 2. shell diameter against heat transfer coefficient for shell side with three types of headers and square pitch.

564
A.A. Abd et al. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 12 (2018) 563–568

Table 1
Dry gas properties.
Dry Gas

Temperature, T, ℃ 24.7 260 142.35

Density, ρ, (
Kg
) 39.12 19.22 29.17
m3
Viscosity, µ (cP) 0.01247 0.01867 0.01557
Specific heat, Cp KJ 2.412 2.87 2.64
Kg . K

Thermal conductivity, k, (
W
) 0.036 0.071 0.0535
m.k

Table 2
Hot oil properties.
Hot Oil

Temperature, T (°C) 280 220 250

Density, ρ (kg/m3) 1273.6 1409.4 1341.5
Viscosity, µ (cP) 0.1131 0.1804 0.14675
Specific heat, Cp (
KJ
) 2.67 2.88 2.87
Kg . K

Thermal conductivity k, (
W
) 0.0875 0.095 0.091
m.k

Note: The values at the mean temperature were obtained by linear interpolation.

2.2. Effect of baffle and cutting spacing on overall heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop

Baffles can play a vital role in enhancing heat transfer by increasing velocity and direct the fluid stream. Single segmental
considers as common baffle type. Eryener examined the determination of optimum baffle spacing in the design of shell and tube heat
exchanger [5]. Sinnott concluded that effective baffle spacing range is between 0.2 and 1 from shell diameter [10]. Li and Kottke
investigated experimentally the effect of baffle spacing on the performance of heat exchanger [11]. While Saffar and Damangir
developed a new correlation to estimate the optimum baffle spacing [12]. This study uses different baffle spacing to inspect the
change in both pressure drop and heat transfer coefficient on the shell side. Fig. 3 shows that pressure drop, and heat transfer
coefficient decreases as baffle spacing increases. Where heat transfer coefficient reduces by 15.15% for 0.2 from shell diameter
increasing in baffle spacing. Shell pressure drop decreases by 41.25% to 0.2 from shell diameter baffle spacing increases as shown in
the figure below. Where, increasing baffle space leads to reduce velocity, as a result, the pressure drop decrease and overall heat
transfer as well, this finding agrees with what was reached by Li and Kottke experimentally.
While Fig. 4 illustrates that increasing cutting space reducing both heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop of shell side. It
shows that using 15% cutting space lead to higher heat transfer coefficient and high-pressure drop. Increasing in cutting space by
10% produces decreasing in shell heat transfer coefficient by 5.56% and the pressure drop reduces by 26.3%. instead of heat transfer
coefficient and pressure drop decreases, however pressure drop reduced by percent higher than heat transfer coefficient which can be
a method to reduce generated pressure into shell side.
Therefore, the cutting space and baffle spacing can be selected based on the required specification to balance the pressure drop
and high heat transfer.

2.3. Effect of tube length on overall heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop for tube and shell sides

Tube length considers as an important factor in balancing pressure drop and heat transfer coefficient of shell and tube exchangers.
Standards tube length 1.83 m, 2.44 m, 3.66 m, 4.88 m, and 6.1 m used to simulate the effect of length on heat transfer coefficient and

Fig. 3. Baffle spacing against shell heat transfer coefficient and shell pressure drop.

565
A.A. Abd et al. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 12 (2018) 563–568

Fig. 4. Cutting space against shell heat transfer coefficient and shell pressure drop.

pressure drop on both sides [10]. Abd and Naji studied the effect of tube length on the overall heat transfer coefficient [3]. Here,
analysis study used to check the effect of tube length on the heat transfer coefficient for both shell and tube sides. In addition, the
effect of tube length on pressure drop tested for both sides as well. Heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop increase as tube length
increase for both sides as shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 5 shows that tube length increasing by 0.61 m result increasing in heat transfer
coefficient on tube side by 31.9%. while the pressure drops increase by 14.11% for 0.61 m increasing in tube length. On the other
hand, increasing in tube length by 0.61 m leads to 2.2% increase in heat transfer coefficient on the shell side. The pressure drops for
shell side increases by 21.9% for 0.61 m increasing in tube length as shown in Fig. 6. Based on the result, heat transfer coefficient and
pressure drop for tube side are more sensitive to change with tube length than shell side.
The reason after increases operation pressure and overall heat transfer coefficient with tube length increasing is that cross section
area directs proportion to tube length. As a result, total heat transfer and pressure increases.

2.4. Effect of fouling factor on heat transfer

Fouling can be considered as one of industrial operations problems that lead to reducing thermal and hydraulic performance of
equipment. where any material deposits on surfaces can lead to additional resistance against energy transfer. Therefore, the pre-
vention of these deposits can play a vital role in enhancing the heat transfer. Lei, et al. illustrates six forms of fouling which are
crystallization, particulate, chemical, corrosion, biological and solidification [13]. Many studies devoted to examining the factors that
influence fouling deposits. Lemos, Costa, and Bagjewicz stated that the fouling factor relates directly to baffle spacing [14]. Srini-
vasan, mentioned that fouling deposit rate increases as fluid temperature decreases [15]. Rodriguez and Smith proposed new cor-
relation to predict the fouling rate and the decreasing in heat transfer efficiency with time [16]. Aminian and Shahhosseini evaluated
the generated fouling rate with crude oil flow by studies different parameters such as the velocity of flow and feed temperature [17].
Ishiyama et al. considered control fouling rate by monitoring the feed temperature and velocity [18]. Fouling rate depends strongly
on the fluid compositions that flow into equipment, where in our design the fluids are hot oil and dry gas. This part will test the effects
of fouling factor on overall heat transfer and energy amount. Several standards fouling rate used for both sides shell and tube to study
the rate of change in heat transfer against fouling rate. The findings are on the shell side the change in fouling rate by 0.00003 m2 K/
W lead to decreasing in heat transfer by 50 kW as shown in Fig. 7. On the other hand, heat transfer for tube side decreases by 6 kW
with 0.00003 m2 K/W fouling rate change for same conditions as shown in Fig. 8.

3. Conclusion

The study investigated the effect of change some parameters on heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop for shell and tube heat
exchanger. The study concluded that as shell diameter increases the heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop increases. The pull-
through head with triangular pitch can be the best choice to increase heat transfer coefficient. While, baffle spacing and cutting space

Fig. 5. Tube length against heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop for tube side.

566
A.A. Abd et al. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 12 (2018) 563–568

Fig. 6. Tube length against heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop for shell side.

Fig. 7. Fouling rate changing on shell side against heat transfer.

Fig. 8. Fouling rate changing on shell side against heat transfer.

reduced the heat transfer coefficient when increases. The fouling factor on shell side can affect the heat transfer heat more than that
for tube side, therefore it is important to reduce fouling rate on shell side. The parameters selection has direct effect on both overall
heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop.

References

[1] M. Mirzaei, H. Hajabdollahi, H. Fadakar, Multi-objective optimization of shell-and-tube heat exchanger by constructal theory, Appl. Therm. Eng. 125 (2017)
9–19.
[2] L. Liu, N. Ding, J. Shi, N. Xu, W. Guo, C. Wu, Failure analysis of tube-to-tubesheet welded joints in a shell-tube heat exchanger, Case Stud. Eng. Fail. Anal. (2016)
32–40.
[3] A.A. Abd, S.Z. Naji, Analysis study of shell and tube heat exchanger for clough company with reselect different parameters to improve the design, Case Stud.
Therm. Eng. 10 (2017) 455–467.
[4] S. Shinde, U. Chavan, Numerical and experimental analysis on shell side thermo-hydraulic performance of shell and tube heat exchanger with continuous helical
FRP baffles, Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2017.11.006.
[5] D. Eryener, Thermoeconomic optimization of baffle spacing for shell and tube heat exchangers, Energy Convers. Manag. 47 (11–12) (2006) 1478–1489.
[6] C. Yu, Z. Ren, M. Zeng, Numerical investigation of shell-side performance for shell and tube heat exchangers with two different clamping type anti-vibration
baffles, Appl. Therm. Eng. (2018).
[7] H.S. Dizaji, S. Jafarmadar, S. Asaadi, Experimental exergy analysis for shell and tube heat exchanger made of corrugated shell and corrugated tube, Exp. Therm.
Fluid Sci. (2017) 475–481.
[8] A. Alimoradi, F. Veysi, Optimal and critical values of geometrical parameters of shell and helically coiled tube heat exchangers, Case Stud. Therm. Eng. (2017)
73–78.
[9] B. Gao, Q. Bi, Z. Nie, J. Wu, Experimental study of effects of baffle helix angle on shell-side performance of shell-and-tube heat exchangers with discontinuous
helical baffles, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. (2015) 48–57.
[10] R.K. Sinnott, Chemical Engineering Design, 2 ed, 6 Pergamon, 1993.
[11] H. Li, V. Kottke, Effect of baffle spacing on pressure drop and local heat transfer in shell-and-tube heat exchangers for staggered tube arrangement, Int. J. Heat.

567
A.A. Abd et al. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 12 (2018) 563–568

Mass Transf. 41 (10) (1998) 1303–1311.

[12] M. Saffar-Avval, E. Damangir, A general correlation for determining optimum baffle spacing for all types of shell and tube exchangers, Int. J. Heat. Mass Transf.
38 (13) (1995) 2501–2506.
[13] C. Lei, Z. Peng, T. Day, X. Yan, X. Bai, C. Yuan, Experimental observation of surface morphology effect on crystallization fouling in plate heat exchangers, Int.
Commun. Heat. Mass Transf. 38 (1) (2011) 25–30.
[14] J.C. Lemos, L.H. Costa, J. Bgajewicz, Linear method for the design of shell and tube heat exchangers including fouling modeling, Appl. Therm. Eng. 125 (2017)
1345–1353.
[15] M. Srinivasan, Heat exchanger fouling of some Canadian crude oils, Heat. Transf. Eng. (2005) 7–14.
[16] C. Rodriguez, R. Smith, Optimization of operating conditions for mitigating fouling in heat exchanger networks, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 85 (6) (2007) 839–851.
[17] J. Aminian, S. Shahhosseini, Evaluation of ANN modeling for prediction of crude oil fouling behavior, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (7) (2008) 668–674.
[18] E.M. Ishiyama, A.V. Heins, W.R. Paterson, L. Spinelli, D.I. Wilson, Scheduling cleaning in a crude oil preheat train subject to fouling: incorporating desalter
control, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (13) (2010) 1852–1862.

568