MIDTERM PROJECT:

HEAT EXCHANGER DESIGN

3D Computational Modeling Techniques

Brian Tovar
Christopher Phaneuf
ME407: Computational Fluid Dynamics
Professor Scott Bondi
14 Apr 2008
Table of Contents

1 Introduction 2
1.1 Objective
1.2 Underlying Thermodynamics
1.3 Heat Exchangers

2 Design 4
2.1 Assumptions
2.2 Concepts
2.3 Geometry

3 Computational Fluid Dynamics 6

3.1 Preliminary Concept Validation
3.2 Working Fluid -- Air
3.2.1 Preprocessing
3.2.2 Solver Setup
3.3 Working Fluid -- Refrigerant

4 Results 11
5 Discussion 14

Appendix I: Thermodynamics Hand Calculations 15

Appendix II: Heat Transfer Hand Calculations 16
Appendix III: Dimensioned Schematic 17

1
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Objective

To design and evaluate an evaporator for a refrigeration unit capable of cooling air from 100 ˚F
to 50 ˚F while maintaining a flow velocity less than 500 ft/min. The overall capacity shall be one
ton (12,000 Btu/hr) and the maximum aspect ratio of the heat exchanger is 2:3. The working
fluids shall not incur “excessive” pressure drop. Estimated cost, dry weight, and efficiency also
guide the design of this heat exchanger.

1.2 Underlying Thermodynamics

The device to be designed is one of four elements in the basic vapor-compression cycle. The
diagram below illustrated the flow of the cycle:

Figure 1 Vapor compression cycle

The evaporator creates a cold reservoir by transferring heat from the air passing through / over it
to the refrigerant. This heat transfer into the refrigerant is called Q
in and is known as the capacity
of the refrigeration unit. Refrigerant temperature through the evaporator is often considered
constant to simplify thermodynamic analyses.

2
1.3 Heat Exchangers

Several heat exchangers configurations exist, each lending itself to a different application. The
most common type for the purposes discussed in this study are crossflow exchangers that feature
a coil of copper tubing and an array of fins. Another type is the shell-and-tube heat exchanger,
which send flow through a baffled shell containing a number of parallel tubes of refrigerant.

Figure 2 Heat exchangers – Standard crossflow (top) and shell-and-tube (bottom)

3
2 DESIGN

2.1 Assumptions

Refrigerant temperature is constant over length of evaporator

The convection coefficient for the annular fins is 20 W 2
m ⋅K

Outer shell of heat exchanger is insulated from surroundings

2.2 Concept

We decided to model a shell-and-tube heat exchanger. This design is effective for its ability to
promote a high level of mixing (and in turn heat transfer) by moving the flow with baffles. The
configuration presented here uses counter-flow paired with annular fins, all encased in a compact
enclosure. For the sake of meshing, our design consolidates the bank of tubes within the shell
into a single, one-inch pipe running axially through the center.

The inlet and outlet locations were a topic of debate. One simple but less realistic approach is to
run air through the annulus axially. The physical realization of the design would present issues
with interference with the refrigerant tube, which would have to obstruct part of the inlet section
or run through the center of the fan (…a future consideration for the next phase of this study).
Instead, the design is based on flow sent into the shell through perpendicular ducts as the CAD
drawings demonstrate.

Figure 3 Illustration demonstrating the simplified design

The entire exchanger is made of aluminum allow with a thermal conductivity 117 Btu
hr ⋅ ft ⋅ ° F
and an approximate dry weight of 1 kg (2.2 lbs). The exposed surface area is around 275 in2.

4
2.3 Geometry

The dimensions of the outer shell are four inches by twelve inches. This does not include a pair
of one inch offset rectangular ducts, which are themselves one and a half inches by two inches.
These serve as the inlet and outlet for airflow through the heat exchanger, and therefore must be
positioned diagonally across the volume. There are three annular fins and two annular rings that
obstruct flow and induce proper mixing. They are spaced axially two inches apart from each
other and the walls while also being a tenth of an inch thick. The outer diameter of the fins match
the inner diameter of the rings, which are both a one and a half inch radius. The pipe carrying
refrigerant runs axially parallel to the enclosure for the length of the enclosure. The total mass of
the aluminum needed for this heat exchanger is about 2.2 lbs, as determined using Solidworks.

Figure 4 Overall design geometry (modeled in Solidworks)

(see appendix for dimensioned schematic)

5
3 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS

3.1 Preliminary Concept Validation

Following a suggestion to perform a simple preliminary simulation to verify the potential for
adequate performance, a 2D-axisymmetric analysis was evaluated. A straightforward quad mesh
(52875 cells, 106665 faces, 53791 nodes) was generated and run using a k-e turbulence model.
The geometry is exactly that a cross-section of the three-dimensional model, except the boundary
conditions had to be altered since the device is necessarily a three-dimensional case. This
difference should not stray too far from realistic results since only the orientation of the inlet and
outlet have changed. As expected, the stream encounters a series of baffles that stirs up the flow,
a catalyst for improved heat transfer.

3.2 Working Fluid – Air

3.2.1 Preprocessing

The space for airflow through the model was designed in Solidworks and its geometry was
exported to STEP format. IGES, when imported into Gambit leaves more residual points that are
tedious to clean up; hence STEP was the better option. The mesh was created first using addition
and subtraction of automatically generated volumes; such as cylinders and bricks. Then, when
the overall geometry was only the space that the air would flow through the heat exchanger, each
face was meshed. Some faces had to have different, or rather, finer mesh settings but they all had
meshing scheme of quad paved. The volume was successfully meshed using a Hex Core scheme
with a T Grid setting. The mesh, though large, was the only reasonable geometry that we were
able to volume mesh. It had on upward of a half-million elements:

597,984 cells
1,258,467 edges
121,374 nodes

6
 Figure 5 4 View Drawing of Mesh in Gambit

Figure 6 Detail of Face Mesh along the Inner Fin and Refrigerant Tube

7
3.2.2 Solver Setup

Figures 7 & 8 Viscous Model and Velocity Inlet Settings

Figures 9 & 10 Fin and Refrigerant Pipe Thermal Properties

8
3.3 Working Fluid -- Refrigerant

In order to confirm reasonable refrigerant flow, a 2D simulation was run for simple pipe flow.
The mesh consists of 3,120 cells and features a successive spacing toward the walls. With the
material properties of R-134a manually entered into FLUENT, the simulation was run with a k-
epsilon Realizable turbulence model. The negligible pressure drop is illustrated in the pressure
distribution plot below.

Figure 11 Pressure distribution of R-134a

9
Figure 12 Temperature distribution of R-134a

Figure 13 Velocity distribution of R-134a

10
4 RESULTS

Outlet temperature: 49.8 °F

Pressure drop: 0.0016 psi

Figure 14 Residuals history

11
Figure 15 Contour Plot of Temperature along the vertical mid-plane

Figure16 Pressure Drop from Inlet to Outlet

12
 Figure 17 Streamlines colored by Velocity Magnitude

Figure 18 Contour Plot of Velocity along the vertical mid-plane

13
5 DISCUSSION

Taking the unconventional approach of modeling an experimental shell-and-tube heat exchanger

yielded surprisingly successful performance. Once the settings for the boundary conditions were
tweaked to correspond to realistic flow parameters based on hand calculations and common
sense, our heat exchanger was able to meets the requirements. Benefits of our design include
flexibility of implementation. The current perpendicular ducting for the inlet and outlet serves as
one of many options for the flow orientation. Sending the warm air into the shell axially may
require some alteration of geometry but will still likely demonstrate the effectiveness and
modularity of the design. One aspect of the design that sets it apart from typical evaporators is
the single, straight section of refrigerant pipe. Without the numerous bends observed with most
exchangers, the flow encounters fewer sources of head loss and therefore maintains its pressure.
The compact size makes for a light and relatively inexpensive device. For a cost estimate based
on materials and labor (at $11.00/hour), a one-off version of our design would cost about
$520.00. That is obviously not representative of the actual cost of this component for large-scale
production but would be an attractive price for an employer looking for an innovative and
thoroughly analyzed heat exchanger concept.

14
APPENDIX I: Thermodynamics Hand Calculations

15
APPENDIX II: Heat Transfer Hand Calculations

16
APPENDIX III: Dimensioned Schematic

17