EnergyConversionandManag

ement159(2018)232–243

Listas de contenidos disponibles en ScienceDirect

Conversió n y Gestió n de Energía

página principal de la revista:
www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Modelado matemá tico y estudio experimental de la transferencia de calor en un

intercambiador de calor refrigerado por aire de baja resistencia
Dawid Taler
Universidad de Tecnología de Cracovia, Facultad de Ingeniería Ambiental, ul. Warszawska 24, 31-155 Cracovia, Polonia

A R I C I I I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Palabras clave:
Intercambiador de calor
Muchos intercambiadores de calor de placas fin y tubos operan bajo cargas bajas cuando la tasa de flow de aire y
refrigerado por aire agua es baja. El régimen flow en los tubos puede cambiar de laminar a travé s de la transició n a turbulenta. En este
Correlació n de trabajo, se prestó mucha atenció n para determinar una correlació n semi-empírica para el nú mero de Nusselt en
transferencia de calor el lado del agua en el rango de transició n y turbulento cuando el nú mero de Reynolds Rew es mayor que 2300. Se
Operació n de baja propuso una nueva relación para el factor de fricción en el régimen fl ow de transició n. El factor de fricció n en el rango de transició n flow
carga Estudio 2300 Rew 3000 se obtuvo por interpolació n lineal del factor de fricció n para Rew = 2300, y Rew = 3000. Se mostró la
exPERIMENTAL influencia de la fó rmula para determinar el factor de fricció n del lado del agua en el régimen flow de transición en
el número de Nusselt. Sobre la base de datos experimentales, se determinaron correlaciones de transferencia de calor
para los números de Nusselt del lado del aire y del lado del agua para la baja velocidad del aire y el agua. La
correlación semi-empírica para el número de Nusselt en el lado del agua derivada de la integración de la ecuación de
conservación de energía promedio de Reynolds para fl ow turbulento concuerda bien con la correlación empírica para el número de Nusselt. La tasa de flow de
calor del agua caliente al aire frío se calculó en funció n de la tasa de flow del agua utilizando un modelo numérico
del intercambiador de calor con la correlación para el número de Nusselt del lado del agua desarrollado en el documento
para compararlo con los resultados de las mediciones. Los resultados de la simulación numérica concuerdan muy bien
con los resultados de las mediciones.

1. Introducció n fins se discuten. Ademá s, se presentan técnicas different para intensificar

Los intercambiadores de calor con aletas se utilizan cuando un fluid
es un gas y el líquido flows dentro de los tubos. Los fins está n unidos a los
tubos. Los calentadores de agua, evaporadores y sobrecalentadores en
generadores de vapor de recuperació n de calor (HRSG) generalmente
está n hechos de tubos finned. Los intercambiadores de calor con tubos
finned por fins individuales o continuos son el equipo esencial en los
sistemas de refrigeració n seca utilizados para enfriar el agua en las
centrales elé ctricas [1]. Los intercambiadores de calor de placas y tubos
(PFTHE) son ampliamente utilizados como radiadores de automó viles y
calentadores de aire para automó viles. Ademá s, los PFET está n muy
extendidos en los sistemas de ventilació n y aire acondicionado. El
desarrollo intensivo de fuentes de energía renovables favorece el
desarrollo de los PFET. Los cambiadores de corriente en tales
instalaciones se caracterizan por un funcionamiento de baja carga
cuando las velocidades del aire fldue perpendicular al eje del tubo y fldue
líquido dentro del tubo son bajas. Diseño térmico e hidráulico
Shah y Sekulić [2] presentan detalladamente la teoría de los TFET
monofá sicos para el funcionamiento en estado estacionario.
Fundamentos termo-hidrá ulicos, diseñ o y fabricació n de
intercambiadores de calor, incluyendo PFTHEs,
se describen en el libro de Kuppan [3]. Webb discute a fondo varias
té cnicas de aumento de calor en los TFET [4]. Muchas superficies de
manejadoras de aire mejoradas, como varias placas onduladas fins y
persianas
la transferencia de calor dentro de los tubos.
En los cá lculos de diseñ o de intercambiadores de calor, el mé todo de
medición de temperatura media de log (LMTD) es el más comúnmente
utilizado. En los cálculos de rendimiento de PFTHEs, los mé todos ε-NTU o
P-NTU son ampliamente utilizados para cálculos no iterativos
de la temperatura de ambos
fluids en la salida de los PFTHEs. Los símbolos ε y P denotan la
effectiveness del intercambiador de calor, y el NTU denota el número de
unidades de transferencia. Shah y Sekulić [3] y Kuppan [4] presentan
fórmulas y diagramas para ε (NTU) y P (NTU) para PFTHEs con varios
arreglos flow con un nú mero different de pases. La
las temperaturas de salida de ambos fluids se pueden calcular fá cilmente
utilizando el
fó rmulas para calcular o P para un valor de NTU dado. Si el sistema flow
del intercambiador es complicado y no hay fórmulas para calcular la
effectiveness o P, el modelo numé rico del intercambiador PFTHE puede
construirse utilizando el mé todo desarrollado por Taler [5]. Las
correlaciones de transferencia de calor para calcular la coefficiencia de
transferencia de calor en el lado del aire y el agua son necesarias en los
cá lculos té rmicos de los cambiadores de calor utilizando mé todos de
ingeniería como LMTD, -NTU y P-NTU. Estas correlaciones tambié n son
necesarias en el modelo finite difference desarrollado en [5].

Dirección de correo electrónico: dtaler@pk.edu.pl.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.01.018
Recibido el 30 de octubre de 2017; Recibido en forma revisada el 22 de diciembre de 2017; Aceptado el 6 de enero de 2018
0196-8904/©2018ElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserveded.
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

Nomenclatura
t nα/2
m cuantil de la distribució n t del Estudiante para el nivel de
confidence α y n m grados de libertad
Una superficie (m2)
T temperatura (°C o K)
Acin, Aco interior y exterior de la secció n transversal del tubo oval
Ta m, Ta m temperaturamediadeentradaysalidadelaire (°C)
(m2)
Af á rea de transferencia de calor de Tw , Tw Temperatura de entrada y salida del agua, respectivamente (°C)
la fin (m2)
Amf á rea del tubo desnudo entre dos fins adyacentes (m2) Tw ,1, Tw ,2 temperaturadesalidadelaguadela first y la segunda fila de tubos en el paso superior (first),
Am superficie media del tubo, Am = (Ao + Ain)/2 respectivamente (°C)
Amin á rea frontal mínima libre flow en el lado del aire Tw ,3, Tw ,4 temperaturadesalidadeaguadela first y la segunda fila de tubos en el paso inferior (segundo),
(m2) respectivamente (°C)
c calor específico (J/(kg K)) Twm temperatura de salida del agua aguas abajo el paso first
cc centímetro cú bico (cm3)
cp T0 Calor específico medio a presión constante en el intervalo de (°C)
temperatura con el límite 0 y T (J/(kg K)) (Tw ) medición de la temperatura del agua en la salida del calor
Ain, Ao superficie interior y exterior del tubo desnudo (m2) changer (°C)
da diá metro hidrá ulico de los conductos de aire flow (m) Uo coefficient total de la transferencia de calor que se refiere a la
din,min, din,máx mínimo y máximo diámetro interior del óvalo superficie exterior del tubo desnudo (W/(m2 K))
tubo, respectivamente (m) Vẇ volumen de agua flcaudal en la entrada del intercambiador de
do, min, do, máx mínimo y máximo diámetro exterior del óvalo calor (L/h o m3/s)
tubo, respectivamente (m) w0 velocidad frontal promedio flow (velocidad del aire antes del
dw diá metro hidrá ulico en el lado líquido, 4Ain /Pin (m) calor
h coefficient (W/(m2 K)) exchanger) (m/s)
ha, hw la transferencia de calor de aire y agua coefficient (W/ wmax velocidad axial media en el á rea mínima libre flow (m/s)
(m2 K)) Wch espesor del intercambiador de calor, Wch = 2p2 (m)
puta effective heat transfer coefficient teniendo en cuenta fin x, y, z Cartesian coordinates
efficiency
x+ coordenada adimensional, x+ = x/Lch
basado en la superficie exterior del tubo desnudo (W/ (m2
y+
coordenada adimensional, y‍ = y/p2
K))
k conductividad té rmica (W/(m K)) Símbolos griegos
kt conductividad té rmica del material del tubo (W/(m K))
(k) nú mero de iteració n δf Espesor (m)
L longitud del tubo (m) δt espesor de la pared del tubo (m)
Lch longitud del intercambiador de calor (m) Γ Funció n gamma
m nú mero de pará metros buscados μ viscosidad diná mica (Pa s)
ṁ tasa de masa flow (kg/s) ηf fin efficiency
ṁa velocidad de masa de aire en el radiador del automó vil viscosidad cinemá tica (m2/s)
(kg/s)
ξ Factor de fricció n Darcy-Weisbach
ṁw tasa de masa de agua en el radiador del automó vil ρ densidad de fluid (kg/m3)
(kg/ s) nú mero de conjuntos de datos ρam densidad media de aire en el intercambiador de calor
Ng, Nl nú mero de unidades de transferencia para el lado del aire y (kg/m3)
el agua, ρaw densidad media de agua en el intercambiador de calor
(kg/m3)
Num,q nú mero medio de Nusselt para laminar flow en el tubo para
la pared de calor constante flux Subíndices
Num,q,1 nú mero medio de Nusselt para flow desarrollado
hidrodiná mica y té rmicamente completamente en el tubo un aire
con calor uniforme flux en inner
Nuw Nú mero de Nusselt, hw dw/kw l líquido
Nua nú mero de Nusselt, hada/ka p a presió n constante
p1 paso de los tubos en plano perpendicular a flow (altura de w agua
la
fin) (m) Superíndices
p2 paso de los tubos en la direcció n de flow (ancho de la fin)
(m) medida mesurado
Pin, Po perímetro interior y exterior del tubo oval, respectivamente + adimensional
(m) — mezquino
Pr Nú mero de prandtl, μcp/k ′ inlet
Q̇ Velocidad de transferencia de calor (W) ″ outlet
Rea Nú mero de Reynolds del lado aéreo,
wmax da/νa Rew Nú mero de Reynolds del lado
líquido, ww dw/νw s Campo de juego (m)

En el documento de Fahmy y Nabih [6], se utilizó el método LMTD
para evaluar la tasa de flujo de aire en el intercambiador de calor
refrigerado por aire finned utilizado para el enfriamiento previo de
propano en una instalació n de GNL (gas natural licuado). Se aplicó la
23
correlació n de Sieder y Tate para el tubo turbulento flow [7] para el
cá lculo de la transferencia de calor coefficient en la superficie interna
del tubo y una relació n de tipo de potencia para evaluar la
transferencia de calor del lado del aire coefficient .
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
Las correlaciones en el lado del aire se determinan típicamente 2018)232–243
dentro de los tubos. Las relaciones para determinar la coefficient de la
experi- mentalmente para different ondulado fins manteniendo un fluid
transferencia de calor del lado del tubo no se determinan
flow turbulento
experimentalmente sino que se toman de la literatura para el flow turbulento
del líquido en tubos rectos largos. La correlación de Gnielinski [9] para el
flow turbulento fue utilizada en el artículo por Li et al. [10] y por Wen et
al. [11] para evaluar la transferencia de calor coefficient. Se utilizó la
fó rmula propuesta por Filonienko [12]
para calcular el factor de fricción Darcy-Weisbach ξw que aparece en la
relació n Gnielinski. Las desventajas y ventajas de la des
determinació n de la correlació n aire-lado, suponiendo que la correlació n

23
D. Taler
se conoce el cá lculo de la coefficient de transferencia de calor en la
superficie interna de los tubos, han sido discutidos por Taler [13].
En los ú ltimos añ os, las correlaciones de transferencia de calor del
lado del aire en los TFET se han determinado mediante simulació n de
CFD (dinámica computacional fluid). Debido a la baja potencia informática
de las computadoras modernas, flow y la transferencia de calor solo se
modelaron en el lado del aire. La temperatura de la superficie exterior o
interior de los tubos e incluso de todo el fins fue igual de uniforme. El flow de
aire fue modelado como laminar o tur- bulente usando modelos de turbulencia
different. Ademá s, se utilizó un enfoque sin modelos de turbulencia, es
decir, DNS (simulació n numé rica directa) para predecir la correlació n
para el nú mero de Nusselt del lado del aire.
Lin et al. [14] realizaron una simulació n CFD de la transferencia de
calor del lado del aire de intercambiadores de calor de tubos finned
perforados con alturas fin grandes utilizando el código FLUENT 15.0. Se
utilizaron las ecuaciones promediadas de Reynolds para la masa, el
momento y la conservació n de energía en conjunció n con el modelo de
turbulencia k-ε. Se asumió la temperatura constante de la pared
del tubo igual a 323 K y la temperatura del aire de entrada de
298 K. Yaϊci et al.
[15] masa tridimensional resuelta, momento, y energía con
Las ecuaciones de servació n suponiendo el estado estacionario laminar
flow como el nú mero de Reynolds del lado del aire estaba dentro del
rango de 150 Rea 2000. El software comercial COMSOL de CFD se utilizó
para modelar PFTHEs con cuatro filas con disposició n de tubo
escalonada. Se asumió la pared uniforme del tubo y la temperatura fin.
El objetivo principal del documento de Gholami et al. [16] era
simular el rendimiento en el lado del aire de los PFTC de cuatro
hileras con tubos ovalados y fins ondulados. Se modelaron nuevos
patrones fin con una o tres ondulaciones (ondas) por paso longitudinal
del tubo. La superficie exterior de los tubos y fins se mantuvo a una
temperatura constante igual a 350 K. La temperatura del aire en la entrada
PFTHE fue de 300 K. El banco de trabajo ANSYS se utilizó para simular
flow laminar y transferencia de calor en el lado del aire. Se han realizado
simulaciones por computadora para el nú mero de Reynolds Rea del lado
del aire que van de 200 a 900. El modelado de CFD muestra que los
tubos ovalados y fins ondulados mejoran la effectiveness de PFTHEs
comparados con los PFTHEs convencionales con tubos circulares y fins
lisos.
Zeeshan et al. [17] buscaban numé ricamente la forma ó ptima de los
tubos y la disposició n de los mismos en los TFET. Usaron el software
ANSYS- FLUENT 14.0 para simular el estado estacionario laminar flow y
la transferencia de calor en PFTHEs. La caída de presió n del lado del aire
y el coeficiente de transferencia de calor ficient se calcularon para las
formas different libres de los tubos, es decir, cir- culares, ovales y flat. La
disposició n del tubo en línea y escalonada fue stu- murió . La pared del
tubo y la temperatura fin fueron 291.77 K, y la temperatura del aire de
entrada fue 310.6 K. El nú mero de Reynolds del lado del aire basado en el
diá metro hy- draulic varió de 400 a 900. Los resultados presentados en el
trabajo
[17] puede ser ú til en la optimizació n de PFTHEs.
Deepakkumar y Jayavel [18] modelaron PFET de tubos circulares
y elípticos. El có digo comercial CFD ANSYS-FLUENT 15.0 se utilizó
para simular flow y transferencia de calor en PFTHE con un nú mero
different de filas de tubos. Debido a la baja velocidad del aire frente a los
intercambiadores de calor modeled igual a 0.5-2.5 m/s la flow laminar del
aire
se asumió . La temperatura de fins era constante e igual a la
temperatura de la superficie exterior de los tubos. Basá ndose en
simulaciones realizadas por ordenador, los autores encontraron que un
tubo elíptico seguido de un tubo circular en la direcció n del aire flow
funciona mejor en comparació n con un posicionamiento inverso de los
tubos cuando un tubo circular
followed by an elliptical tube.
Singh et al. [19] investigated the impact of the trapezoidal profile of
the fins on the performance of finned heat exchanger made from cir-
cular tubes with fins type H. Flow and heat exchange was modeled only
on the flue gas side. The uniform temperature of the inner surface of the
23
EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243
El DNS (simulació n numé rica directa) fue utilizado por Nagaosa [20]
para modelar el paso repetido de un PFTHE. El nú mero de Reynolds
basado en el diá metro del tubo exterior estaba en el rango de 280-9100.
La temperatura del aire en la entrada del intercambiador de calor fue de
293,2 K. La temperatura de los fins y la superficie exterior de los tubos se
mantuvieron en el
temperatura constante de 312.2 K. El paquete de có digo abierto CFD
Open- FOAM se utilizó para resolver las ecuaciones de conservació n de
masa, mercurio y energía. El tiempo de computació n para un conjunto de
datos fue bastante largo y fue de unos 35 días. Los resultados de las
simulaciones por ordenador coincidieron bien con los resultados
experimentales.
Taler y Cebula [21] y Taler y Ocłoń [22] simularon flow y
Transferencia de calor en el lado del aire de los PFAT de tubos ovalados.
Se asumió una temperatura del agua conocida en el lado del agua, y la
coefficient de transferencia de calor en la superficie interna de los tubos se
calculó mediante la correlación de Gnie-linski [9] vá lida para flow
turbulento.
En el trabajo [21] se simuló el aire laminar flow utilizando el có digo
FLUENT, y en el documento [22] la transició n y el aire turbulento flow
utilizando el software ANSYS-CFX con el modelo de turbulencia SST. Se
compararon los resultados del modeling de la computadora con los resultados
de la medición. En los documentos [23] y [24] se propusieron nuevos
mé todos para determinar la resistencia té rmica entre la superficie
exterior del tubo y la base de los fins. La resistencia térmica del contacto
entre el tubo y el fin se seleccionó de modo que la correlación aire-lado para
el número de Nusselt basado en la simulación de CFD coincidió bien con la
correlación empírica.
The literature review shows that the subject of previous experi-
mental and CFD simulations was the determination of air-side heat
transfer correlations for different tube shapes and fin patterns.
Limitation of heat transfer modeling only to the air side was due to the
insufficient computational power of modern computers that are unable
to simulate the heat transfer on the water and air-side including the tube
wall simultaneously. However, the liquid-side heat transfer should also
be modeled to determine the air-side heat transfer coefficient correctly.
In the CFD heat exchanger studies, PFTHEs were usually analyzed for
constant tube wall temperature and even for uniform fin temperature.
Such unrealistic assumptions can lead to imprecise de- termining the air-
side heat transfer coefficient. Assuming the con- vective boundary
condition at the inner surface of the tube for high
fluid velocity in tubes, when fluid flow is turbulent [21–24], increased
the accuracy of heat transfer coefficient determining on the air-side.
There are not available experimental or numerical results for
PFTHEs obtained in a full load range including low liquid velocities in
tubes when transitional flow occurs. Favorite heat transfer correlations
for turbulent flow such as the relationship of Dittus-Boelter [25] or
Gnielinski [9] are suitable only for greater Reynolds numbers when the
Rew is larger than 4000.
Using the Dittus-Boelter relationship for smaller values of Reynolds
numbers for flow in tubes leads to too high heat transfer coefficients [26–
27] and in consequence to excessive heat flow rates transferred in
PFTHEs from hot water to air [27].
Recently, Taler [28] proposed a new correlation to calculate the
Nusselt number for the transitional and turbulent fluid flow inside the
tubes at a given tube surface temperature or constant heat fluX.
The average Nusselt number Nuw for the tube with length L and
constant wall heat fluX is given by the following relationship [28]
ξw
8 (Rew−2300)Pr1.008
Nuw = Num,q (Rew = 2300) +
1.08 + 12.39 ξ (Pr 2/3w1)
dw
8
⎡
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
⎥
⎜
2018)232–243
2/3
tubes
Prequal to 453.15 K was assumed. The Reynolds number based on 1⎣ Rebobinar 10 ,0.1 Prw
w 0.11 € dL ⎝ ⎠ Pr
⎦ ⎝ wall ⎠
, 2300
6
the outer tube diameter changed from 5000 to 13,000. The temperature w
1000, 1
distribution in the fins and flue gas was determined using commercial L (1)
multiphysics software COMSOL v. 5.2. The SST (shear stress transport)
turbulence model was adopted. The cross-section of H-type fins was where the symbol Num,q denotes the Nusselt number for the laminar
trapezoidal. An optimum value of the ratio of the H-fin thickness at the flow.
fin tip to the fin thickness at the base was estimated. The friction factor ξw for smooth tubes was calculated using the

23
D. Taler
Filonienko relationship [12,29]. However, the Filonienko formula is valid
for turbulent tube flow when the Reynolds number is higher than 3000.
Also, the accuracy of the Filonienko relationship for small values of the
Reynolds number close to Rew = 3000 is insufficient.
The novelty of this paper is a semi-empirical correlation for the
calculation of the tube side Nusselt number. An empirical correlation was
also determined based on 63 measurement series including laminar and
turbulent flow regimes. Also, the linear interpolation of the water-
side friction factor between ξw = 64/Rew for laminar flow at Rew = 2300 and
the friction factor for the turbulent flow ξw (Rew = 3000) was pro- posed to
calculate the friction factor both in semi-empirical and em-
pirical formulas. The water-side friction factor in the turbulent flow
regime, when the Reynolds number is greater than 3000, was evaluated
using explicit formula recently proposed by Taler [29].
A finite-volume model of a PFTHE was developed to simulate its
operation for various fluid flow regimes within tubes. The flow can be
laminar, transitional or turbulent while maintaining the continuity of
heat transfer coefficient as a function of the Reynolds number, i.e.,
there is no abrupt change in heat transfer coefficient for Rew = 2300
when the flow goes from laminar to transitional and at the transition
from the transitional to turbulent flow. The heat flow rate transferred
from the hot water to the air was calculated using a finite volume
model
23
EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243
of the heat exchanger in which new heat transfer correlations were used.
EXtensive experimental study of the plate fin and tube heat ex- changer
was carried out to validate the numerical model of the heat exchanger
and the proposed formula for the water-side Nusselt number in laminar,
transitional, and turbulent tube flow.
It was shown that computed and experimentally determined heat
flow rates are in excellent agreement.
2. Mathematical model of a plate fin and tube heat exchanger
Flow-heat tests of air-cooled finned heat exchanger were performed
for a laminar, transition and turbulent flow regime of water in the tubes.
The tested heat exchanger was a car radiator for a spark engine with a
displacement volume of 1 600 cc. Two-pass car radiator has two rows of
oval tubes. There are twenty tubes in the first pass, ten in each row. The
number of tubes in the second pass is smaller and is eighteen, nine in
each row. The tube arrangement is in-line. Water flows in parallel
through the first and second row of tubes in both first and second pass.
Between the first and second pass, there is a chamber in which water
from the first and second row of tubes is miXed and then flows into the
second pass. The flow system of an automobile radiator is shown in Fig.
1. The minimum and maximum internal diameter of the
Fig. 1. Two-row car radiator with two passes; (a)
front and top view, (b) flow arrangement; 1 – the
first tube row in the first pass, 2 – the second tube
row in the first pass; 3 – the first tube row in the
second pass, 4 – the second tube row in the second
pass.
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

oval tube with the wall thickness δt = 0.4 mm are respectively dw dw

Num,q,2 = 31/3Γ(2/3)(Rew Prw )1/3 = 1.9530(Rew Prw )1/3 , Rew ⩽ 2300
din,min = 5.55 mm and din,max = 11.02 mm. The transverse pitch of the L L
tube arrangement is equal to p1 = 18.5 mm, and the longitudinal pitch (6)
is p2 = 17 mm. The plate fins with a thickness of 0.08 mm are set on
Eq. (6) was derived by Lé vê que [32] using the local Nusselt number
tubes with the pitch of 1 mm. Dimensions of the heat exchanger are as
for small values of the parameter (x/dw)/(Rew Prw), where x is the dis- tance
follows: length Lch = 520 mm, height Hch = 359 mm, and thickness,
from the tube inlet.
Wch = 34 mm. The mathematical model of the examined heat
The Nusselt number Num.q.3 appearing in the correlation developed
exchanger was developed by Taler [5] that assumed turbulent flow of
for a tube with a constant wall heat fluX is given by
water in the tubes with the Reynolds number Rew higher than 4000.
When operating dw
the heat exchanger in a wide range of loads, the flow regime inside the 0.924Pr1/3 ⎛Re 1/2 , Re 2300
Nu
tubes can be laminar, transitional or turbulent. The heat transfer
m,q,3 = w w w (7)
⎝ L ⎠
coefficient for the laminar flow on the waterside depends on the as-
The relationship (7) was obtained by an appro Ximation of Nusselt
sumed boundary condition on the tube surface. It is possible to set a
numbers obtained from a numerical solution of the momentum and
constant tube wall temperature or a constant heat fluX. In the case of
energy conservation equations assuming a uniform velocity and tem-
tubular cross-flow heat exchangers, better compatibility with experi-
perature profiles at the inlet of the tube.
mental results was obtained assuming a constant heat fluX at the
Taler [28] determined the Nusselt number for the turbulent flow
inner surface of the tubes. Fluid temperature variations in the tubular
in the tube as a function of Prandtl and Reynolds numbers by
cross- flow heat exchanger are similar to changes in fluid
integrating the energy conservation equation assuming a radial
temperatures that occur in counter-flow heat exchangers. The
velocity distribu- tion determined experimentally. Using the Nusselt
difference between the temperatures of both fluids is almost constant
number values ob- tained by Taler [28], the following correlation for
over the length of the entire heat exchanger. It can, therefore, be
transitional and turbulent flow on the water-side was found by the
assumed that the heat fluX at the inner surface of the tubes is
method of least squares
constant.
ξw
(Rew−2300)Pr1.008
w
Nuw = Num,q + 8 ⎡1
2.1. Air-side heat transfer correlation ⎢
2/3
ξw
The Nusselt number on the air side was assumed in the following 1.084 + 12.48 (Prw 1)
form 2300 ⩽ Rew⩽106
2/3
x2 1/3
dw
L 0,1 Pr 1000, dw 1
Nua = Pra 146 ⩽ Rea ⩽ 350 (2) ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ w L (8)
x1Rea
where x1 and x2 are the parameters, which were to be determined based
on the experimental data. The hydraulic diameter on the air side of the The friction factor ξw appearing in the relationship (8) was eval- uated
using the explicit formula
investigated heat exchanger was da = 1.41 mm. The formula proposed
by Kays and London was used [30] to calculate the diameter da. The air- ξw = (1.2776logRew 0.406) 2.246 (9)
side Reynolds number was defined as Rea = wmax da/νa, where wmax is the air
velocity in the minimum free flow area. The maximum air ve- locity wmax proposed by Taler [29].
The water-side Reynolds number Rew = ww dw/νw is based on the
occurring within the in-line tube rows is
hydraulic diameter dw = 4Acin /Pin, where Acin denotes inner cross-sec- tion
sp1 Tam ++273 area of the oval tube. The hydraulic diameter of the oval tubes is dw = 7.06
wmax = (s−δf )(p −do,min) T′ 273w0 (3)
mm. The physical properties of the water were determined at
1 am
the mean temperature Tw = (Tw′ + Tw″)/2. The water-side
correlation
where w0 is the air velocity upstream the heat exchanger. The tubes in Nuw = f (Rew Prw) was assumed for the investigated heat exchanger in the
the radiator were arranged inline. Thus, wmax was the air velocity in form similar to the correlation (8) valid for flow in straight tubes
the
narrowest cross-section between two neighboring tubes located in the ξ
(Rew−2300)Pr1.008 2/3
w
same row. All physical air properties in Eq. (2) were evaluated at the Nuw = x3 + 8
1 pulgada por ,2300 Rew
minuto ξ
average temperature Tam = (Ta′m + Ta″m)/2 ⎢
⎣ L ⎦
. 1.084 + (Prw2/3 1)
12.48
= 7.06
12000,2.5 Prw 3.3, dw (10)
2.2. Liquid-side heat transfer correlation
L 520

In this section, heat transfer correlations for laminar flow as well

The unknown parameter x3 in formula (10) corresponds to the
as for transition and turbulent flow in tubes used in the mathematical
average Nusselt number Num,q in Eq. (8). The parameter x3 was de-
model of the exchanger are presented. The average Nusselt number
termined by the least squares method using experimental data.
Num,q for hydraulically and thermally developing laminar fluid flow
in a tube with the uniform wall heat fluX, which usually occurs in heat
2.3. Friction factor for flow in smooth tubes
exchangers was used. The following formula recommended by the
VDI Heat Atlas [31] was applied
The friction factor ξw in Eqs. (8) and (10) for turbulent flow in
Num,q = [Nu 3 smooth tubes can be calculated using the Prandtl-von Ká rmá n-Nikur-
+ 0,63 + (Num,q,2 0,6)3 + Nu m,q,3
3
]1/3,Rew 2300 (4)
m,q,1 adse (PKN) equation [33]
The symbol Num,q,1 in Eq. (4) denotes the mean Nusselt number for
1
hydrodynamically and thermally fully developed flow = 2log(Re ξw ) 0.8 3 103 Rew 3.2 106
23
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
(11) ξw 2018)232–243

48
Num,q,1 = = 4.364,Rew ⩽ 2300 Nonlinear algebraic Eq. (11) must be solved iteratively to find the
11 (5)
friction factor ξw .
The Lé vê que solution [32] Num,q,2 denotes the mean Nusselt number For this reason, Eq. (11) was approXimated by the explicit re-
for hydrodynamically and thermally fully developed flow over the plate lationship (9) that was used in Eqs. (8) and (10). Fig. 2 illustrates that
with a linear temperature profile in the fluid and constant heat fluX at the agreement between the explicit relationship (9) and implicit re-
the wall surface lationship (11) is excellent. Also, very well compatibility is observed

23
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

64
ξw|Rew= 2300 = = 0.02783
2300
1
ξw|Rew= 3000 = = 0,04355
(1,2776log3000 0,406)2,246

Eq. (13) takes the form

ξw = 0.02783 + 2.2457 10 5 (Rew 2300) 2300 Rew 3000
(14)
Changes in the friction factor ξw for transition and turbulent flow as a
function of the Reynolds number Rew are shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 4 also
shows the relative difference between the friction factor for the tur-
bulent flow determined by the formula (9) and the expression (14)
ξw,turb
ξw,interp
εξ = 100
ξw,interp (15)

Fig. 2. Comparison of explicit relation (9) with implicit relationship (11) of Prandtl-von
Ká rmá n Nikuradse (PKN) [1,6–8], and experimental data of Furuichi et al. [34].
The symbol ξw,turb in Eq. (15) is the friction factor for turbulent flow
given by Eq. (9) and ξw,interp is the friction factor (14) for transition flow
when the Reynolds number is between 2300 and 3000 or the friction
factor (9) for turbulent flow when Reynolds number is greater than
3000. The largest value of εξ exceeding 60% occurs at Rew = 2300,
i.e., at the beginning of the transitional flow regime.
3. Experimental study

Air was forced through the open-loop wind tunnel by a variable speed
between Eqs. (9) and (11) and the experimental data of Furuichi et al.
axial fan. The air flow passed the whole front cross-section of the heat
[34] (Fig. 3). The friction factor was determined by Furuichi et al. [34] for
exchanger. The air velocity was adjusted by changing the fan an- gular
fully developed tube flow in the range of Reynolds number from
velocity using a frequency inverter. The hot water was pumped from the
7.7 103 a 1.8 107. The experiments were conducted in the test line A
thermostatically controlled tank of 800 L capacity through the radiator
with the tube diameter of 387 mm (Test P1) and the test line B with the
by the centrifugal pump with a frequency inverter.
tube diameter of 100 mm (Test P2). Dimensionless pipe length was L/din
The water flow rate was measured with a turbine flow meter that was
= 31 in line A, and L/din = 90 in line B. Measurements P1 were
calibrated using a weighing tank. The water volume flow rate was
conducted online at low temperatures in the range of 16.3 °C to 20.9
additionally measured using a rotameter. The 95% uncertainty in the
°C, and higher temperatures ranged from 69.5 °C to 70.2 °C. The
flow measurement was of ± 0.004 L/s. The water temperature at the
Reynolds number ranges were 4.7 × 104 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 6.7 × 106 for T = 20
inlet and outlet of the heat exchanger was measured using pre-cali-
°C and
brated K-type thermocouples with the 95% uncertainty interval of
3.3 × 106 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 1.8 × 107 for T = 70 °C. During the measurement of 0.1 K. The water pressure difference between the inlet and outlet of the
the pressure drop on the test line P2 (line B) the water temperature
heat exchanger was measured with temperature compensated piezo-
varied from 21.3 °C to 22.1 °C. The Reynolds number in the line P2
resistive sensors with uncertainty to within ± 0.5 kPa. Air temperature
varied in the range 7.1 × 103 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 1.1 × 105. The expression (9) is
more accurate than Filonienko’s explicit relationship [12]
1
ξw = ,3 103 Rew 5 107
(1.82log Rew− 1.64) 2 (12)

that is used widely in heat transfer literature.

It can be seen from the comparison shown in Fig. 3 that the Filo-
nienko formula (12) is less accurate than the expression (9) for small
Reynolds numbers. The relative difference εξ depicted in Fig. 3 was
calculated using the expression: εξ = 100(ξw,PKN−ξw,Fil)/ξw,PKN , where
ξw,PKN represents the friction factor calculated by the PKN model (11),
and ξw,Fil the friction factor calculated using the Filonienko formula
(12). From the analysis of Fig. 3, it can be seen that the Filonienko
formula overruns the value of the PKN friction factor by 4.5% for
Rew = 3000.
In the present paper, the formula (9) was used in Eq. (8) or in Eq.
(10) for evaluating the water-side Nusselt number in the turbulent flow.
The friction factor in the transition region 2300 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 3000 was ob-
tained from linear interpolation between ξw for laminar flow at
Rew = 2300 and turbulent friction factor given by Eq. (9) at Rew = 3000
(Fig. 4)

ξ=ξ ξw Rew = 2300 Re 2300 2300

w w|Rew=2300 Rew = 3000 700 w ⎟ Fig. 3. Comparison of Taler’s (9) and Filonienko’s (12) relations for friction factor ξw with
⎝ ⎠
PKN implicit relationship (11); in the relative difference: εξ = 100(ξ ξw)/ξw,PKN , the
Rew ⩽ 3000 w,PKN
Considering that

24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
(13) sym 2018)232–243
bol
ξw,P
KN
den
otes
the
frict
ion
fact
or
calc
ulat
ed
usin
g
PKN
equ
atio
n
(11)
and
ξw
stan
ds
for
the
frict
ion
fact
or
obta
ined
fro
m
Tale
r’s
expl
icit
rela
tion
(9)
or
Filo
nien
ko’s
rela
tion
(12)
.

24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

Fig. 4. Comparison of explicit relation (9) for ξw in turbulent flow with linear inter-
polation by Eq. (14) of ξw between ξw |Rew = 2300 for laminar flow and the friction factor
ξw |Rew = 3000 for turbulent flow and the relative difference εξ given by Eq. (15).
temperature of 10 °C. The water-side pressure drop Δpw and loss coef-
ficient ζw as a function of the Reynolds number Rewm = wmdw/νw are
shown in Fig. 7.
The pressure drop on the air-side of the heat exchanger was also
measured. Before and after the heat exchanger there were four open-
ings, one hole in the middle of each wall of the rectangular duct wall, for
measuring static pressure upstream and downstream of the heat
exchanger. Four holes in front of the heat exchanger were connected to
one manifold to average the static pressure. Similarly, four holes in the
duct walls behind the heat exchanger were connected to another
manifold.
A differential pressure gauge measured the difference between the
static pressure at the inlet and outlet manifold. Pressure drop mea-
surements were made for air velocity w0 before the exchanger changing
from 0.25 m/s to 2.2 m/s. The air temperature of 10 °C was constant
during the tests and was equal to the temperature of the water flowing
through the heat exchanger. The results of the pressure drop mea-
surement on the air side of the heat exchanger as a function of the
Reynolds number are shown in Fig. 8. The air-side friction factor ξa was
determined based on the measured pressure drop Δpa using the fol-
lowing expression
2Δpa dh
ξun= Wch ρ w 2 (21)
am max

measurements were made with multipoint K type sheath thermocouple where the symbol Wch = 2p2 denotes the thickness of the heat ex-
grids. The hot air after the heat exchanger was miXed by a propeller to changer.
obtain the uniform temperature of the air in the cross-section of the duct. The mean density of the air ρam is defined as follows
The air flow rate was determined at three cross sections from the +
measurement of the velocity obtained by Prandtl traverses. Measured Ta m Ta m
air velocity distributions at these cross-sections were verified by CFD ρam = ρa ⎜
2 .
⎝ ⎠ (22)
simulations using the commercial code FLUENT 6.3. A computer-based
The values of ξa calculated from formula (21) were approXimated
data-acquisition system was used to measure, store and to process the
using the least squares method to obtain
data.
The air-side friction factor ξa, pressure loss coefficient ζw on the water 8.4615
ξa = 0.0834 + , 50 Rea 350
side, the correlation for the Nusselt number Nua, correlation for Reun0.568 (23)
the Nusselt number Nuw on the water side, and heat flow rate Qẇ
transferred from the hot water to the cold air were determined based on The calculated values of and the function (23) together with 95%
ξa
confi
flow and thermal measurements of the car radiator. dence interval limits are shown in Fig. 8. The physical properties
of air were evaluated at the air mean temperature Tam = (Ta′m + Ta
3.1. Water and air-side pressure loss ″m )/2.

Measurement of the pressure drop on the heat exchanger is shown 3.2. Determining the water-side Nusselt number using semi-empirical and
empirical correlation
in Fig. 6. The water-side pressure difference Δpw between the point 1
and 2 was given by The number
Nusselt Nu ξw in formulas (8) and (10) for determining the
friction factor

Δpw = (p1 p2 ) + gρwm (z1 z2) w on the waterside was calculated from the formula

(16) (13) for the transitional flow regime in the Reynolds number range
where p and p – static pressure at point 1 and 2 (Fig. 6), g - grav- from 2300 to 3000. The formula (10) was used for turbulent flow when
1 z and z - altitudes of points 1 and 2.
2 the Reynolds number was higher than 3000. If the friction factor ξw
itational acceleration, 1 2 would be calculated for the transition and turbulent flow, i.e., for

ρw The mean density ρwm is

Reynolds numbers greater than 2300 using the same formula (9)
m
ρw (Tw ) + ρw valid only for turbulent flow, then the Nusselt number Nuw in the
= 2 (17) transition flow regime should be expected too high (Fig. 5a-5c). The
(Tw )
relative difference in the calculated Nusselt numbers Nuw was
The pressure loss Δpw is a function of water velocity wu at the first
calculated using
the following expression
(upper) pass and velocity wl at the second (lower) pass
1 ρw2 1 ρw2 w2
Nuturb−Nulin
u l m εNu = Nulin 100 (24)
Δpw = ζw
wm
+ ζw wm = ζw ρwm (18)
2 2 2 2 2
where the mean water velocity wm is where Nuturb was determined using Eq. (8) with the friction factor ξw
2 2 0,5
for turbulent flow given by Eq. (9), and Nulin is calculated by Eq. (8)
w +w with
the friction
2300 ⩽ Rew ⩽factor
3000ξor forthe
w by transition flowwhen
model (9) givenReby Eq. (14) when
w was higher than 3000.
wm = u 2
⎜ l ⎟
24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
⎝ ⎠ (19) 2018)232–243
If in the transition range of Rew the friction factor ξw was determined
Comparison of relationships (16) and (18) gives using the relationship (9) valid for turbulent flow, then for the relative
2[(p1 p2 ) + gρwm (z1 z2)] difference εNu was about 6.5% for Prw =3 (Fig. 5a). The relative dif-
ζw = ference εNu increases with the Prandtl number Prw. The relative differ-
ρwm
w2 m (20)
ence εNu reaches about 13% for Prw = 500 (Fig. 5c). The comparisons
Water pressure drop measurements were carried out at a constant show that the friction factor in the semi-empirical correlation (8)

24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

Fig. 5. The Nusselt number for transitional and turbulent flow using different friction factors; 1 – Nulin - linear interpolation of ξw in the range 2300 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 3000 between ξw |Rew = 2300 for
laminar flow and the friction factor ξw |Rew = 3000 for turbulent flow; for turbulent flow regime when 3000 ⩽ Rew the friction factor was calculated using Eq. (9), 2 – Nuturb - friction factor ξw
calculated in transitional and turbulent flow, i.e. for 2300 ⩽ Rew , using Eq. (9) valid for turbulent flow, 3 – relative difference εNu = 100(Nuturb−Nulin)/Nulin .

should be calculated in the transitional range by the formula (13). The

The issue of determining heat transfer correlations at the side of air
use of the relationship (9) valid only for turbulent flow in the transi-
and water is an inverse heat transfer problem. The procedure of si-
tional flow regime results in noticeable errors in the Nusselt number.
multaneous determination of heat transfer correlations will be pre-
Heat transfer correlations on both sides of the tubes can be de-
sented in detail when searching an airside heat transfer correlation and a
termined simultaneously based on the measurements of the following
water-side correlation which is valid both in transitional and turbu- lent
parameters:
flow regime.
At first, specific forms are adopted for the Nusselt number on the
• water mass flow rate ṁw, airside Nua = Nua (x1,x2) and the waterside Nuw = Nuw (x3). The Nusselt
• air mass flow rate ṁa, number on the airside is given by relationship (2), which contains two
• air inlet temperature Ta′m unknown parameters x1 and x2.
• water inlet temperature Tw′ , Correlation (10) for the waterside Nusselt number contains only one
• water outlet temperature Tw″. unknown parameter x3, which represents the Nusselt number Nuw for the
laminar flow at the Nusselt number of 2300.

24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

Fig. 6. Measurement of the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet of the heat ex-
changer; 1 – pressure measurement at the inlet to the heat exchanger, 2 – pressure
measurement at the outlet of the heat exchanger.

Fig. 8. Measured air-side pressure drop Δpa and friction factor ξa as functions of the
Reynolds number Rea.

The friction factor ξw in Eq. (10) was calculated from formula (14)
when fluid flow was transitional, i.e., when Reynolds number was in
the interval 2300 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 3000. In the turbulent flow regime, when
3000 ⩽ Rew, the friction factor ξw appearing in the correlation (10) was
calculated using the formula (9) proposed by Taler [29].
The outlet temperature of the water Tw″ is a function of all
coeffi- cients x1,x2, and x3. The parameters x1,x2, and x3 are selected so that
the sum of squared differences between the measured water outlet tem-
peratures (Tw″,i)meas and calculated water temperatures Tw″,i
n
S= [(Tw ,i)meas Tw ,i (x1,x2,x3)]2 i=
i=1 1,... ,n (25)

achieves minimum. The symbol n denotes the number of measurement

series. The unknown coefficients x1,x2, and x3 at which the sum of the
squares is minimum were determined by the Levenberg-Marquardt (LM)
method. The LM algorithm is a combination of the steepest des- cent and
the Gauss-Newton method. It combines the excellent con- vergence of the
gradient descent method when the initial values of the unknown
parameters are far from the correct solution with the fast convergence of
the Gauss-Newton method when the current parameter values are close
to the correct solution. The LM algorithm works very well in practice.
The water temperature Tw″,i was calculated at every iteration using
the numerical mathematical model of the investigated heat exchanger [5].
Each pass of the heat exchanger was divided into
20 finite volumes. The real values of the parameters ∼x ,∼x , and ∼x lie
with
1 2 3
the probability P = 100 × (1−α),% in the following ranges
x i tα/ 2 st x xi + t α/2 st
(26)
nm cii i nm
cii

where xi – the value of the parameter determined by the least squares

method, t α/2 – quantile of the Student’s t distribution for the confidence
nm
level −α and n−m degrees of freedom.
The symbol m = 3 stands for the number of unknown parameters.
The variance estimate s 2t is given by
n
[Tw ,i (x1,...,xm) (Tw ,i)meas]2
Smin (x1,…,xm)
s 2 = i=1 =
t
nm nm (27)

The symbol cii designates the diagonal element of the covariance

matriX Cx
Fig. 7. Water-side pressure drop Δpw (a) and loss coefficient ζw (b) as a function of the
Reynolds number Rewm = wmdw/νw . Cx(s) = [(J(s) )TJ(s) ] 1 (28)

where the superscript (s) denotes the number of the last iteration.
The Jacobian J(s) is defined as
24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243
Q w,calc Qw,ėxp
J(s) D o s ,i (x) s =
= x = 1,... ,n j = 1,... ,m εQ ·100,%
xj |⎦ ,i Q (33)
⎣ (29)
w,cal

where x = (x1,…,xm)T is the vector of the estimated parameters. The The comparisons of the calculated and measured heat flow rates are
Jacobian J(s) is a matriX of n × size shown in Tables 1 and 2, as well as in Figs. 10 and 11. The relative
difference values εQ given in Tables 1 and 2 were calculated for each
T1
w ,1 Tw ,1
T xm
w ,1 measurement series. The heat flow rate Q̇w,calc in Eq. (33) was calculated
x2
x w, using the mathematical model of the heat exchanger, in which the input
(s)
T Tw ,2
T
w ,2
data was the air velocity w0, the volume flow rate Vẇ, the air tem-
2
J = x1 x2 xm perature T′ and water temperature T′ as listed in Tables 1 and 2. The
⎢⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⎥ aṁ w
⎢ Tw ,n Tw ,n T, ⎥ heat flow rate Qw,calc is indicated in Figs. 10 and 11 with empty circles
⎢ (entry no. 2). Then the mean values w0 , Ta′m , and T w′ from the nine
wn
x1 x2 xm (30
) measurement series in Table 1, and 10 measurement series in Table 2
The number of measurement series was equal to n = 63, and the were calculated and used in mathematical model of the heat
number of searched parameters was m = 3. The quantile t α/2 for the ̇
exchanger to determine Qw,calc as a function of the volumetric flow
95% confidence level ( = 0.05) is t
0.025 rate Vẇ. The
nm x , x , Q values were evaluated using semi-empirical correlation (8) for
60 = 2.0. The w,calc
parameters 1 2
and x3 obtained by the least squares method using 63 data sets are: Nuw (solid line in Figs. 10 and 11, entry no. 3) and empirical correlation
x = 0,0777;
x = 0,749; x = 11.53 (31) (14) (point curve in Figs. 10 and 11, entry no. 4) and used for de-
1 2 3
termining εQ by Eq. (33) (dashed line in Figs. 10 and 11, entry no. 5). An
The limits of 95% confidence intervals are as follows: inspection of the results presented in Tables 1 and 2, as well as in Figs.
0.0607 x1 0.0947, 0.7088 x2 0.7888 y 11.3041 x3 11.7539. 10 and 11, shows that the application of the semi-empirical cor- relation
(8) [28] for the water-side Nusselt number in transitional and turbulent
The minimum sum of squares is Smin = 1.32688K2. The empirical cor-
relation (10) with x3 = 11.53 was compared in Fig. 9 with semi-em- flow regime gives very satisfactory agreement between cal- culated and
pirical correlation (8). The empirical correlation (10) and semi-em- experimental values. Also, the differences between calcu- lated and
pirical correlation (8) are very close. Taking into account that the experimentally determined heat flow rates in laminar flow range are
average Prandtl number for all 63 data series was Prw = 3, the laminar small. Many other experimental tests were carried out for
Nusselt number obtained from Eq. (4) is Num,q various air velocities and water flow rates. An excellent compatibility
Rew=
=
x 10.18, while
2300 between measured and calculated heat flow rates was achieved for all
the experimental value of the constant x3 in Eq. (10) is 3 = 11.53. The
relative difference in experimental and theoretical Nusselt numbers is εNu datasets.
= 100(11.53−10.18)/10.18 = 13.26% for Rew = 2300. The differences
between the Nusselt numbers obtained from empirical correlation (10) 4. Conclusions
and semi-empirical relationship (8) become smaller as the Reynolds
number increases (Fig. 9). The natural convection occurring at the flow A new semi-empirical heat transfer correlation for calculating the
of water in the horizontal tubes of the heat exchanger may result in a water-side Nusselt number in transition and turbulent flow regime was
higher value of the Nusselt number determined experimentally com- derived and validated experimentally. Also, empirical heat transfer
pared to the theoretical value. correlations on the water and air side were simultaneously determined. A
new relationship for the friction factor in the transitional flow regime
that is needed to calculate the water-side Nusselt number was proposed.
3.3. Experimental validation of the mathematical model of the heat The friction factor in the transitional flow range 2300 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 3000 was
exchanger at low loads

The heat flow rate Qċ,calc transferred from the hot water to cold air
was evaluated using the numerical mathematical model of the in-
vestigated plate fin and tube heat exchanger developed by Taler [5].
The air-side Nusselt Nu a number was calculated using the correlation
(2) with the parameter values x1 and x2 given by Eq. (27) and the water-
side Nusselt number Nuw was obtained from the empirical correlation
(10) with x3 given by Eq. (27) or by the semi-empirical relationship (8). If
the Reynolds number Rew is less than 2300, the water-side heat transfer
coefficient was calculated using the formula (4). The input
parameters to the numerical model of the heat exchanger were: water
volume flow rate Vẇand water temperature Tw′ at the heat exchanger
inlet, air velocity w0 , and air temperature Ta′m upstream the heat
ex- changer. The measured volumetric flow rate Vẇat the inlet of the heat
exchanger, as well as the measured inlet water temperature Tw′ and the
outlet temperature Tw″ of the water, were used for calculating the
heat
flow rate Q̇w,exp

Q w,exp = Vẇρw(Tw )cw (Tw Tw )

(32)

24
D. Taler
where ρw – water density, cw – mean specific heat of the water between
Tw″ and Tw′ .
The relative difference between the calculated heat flow rate Q̇w,calc
obtained using the mathematical model of the heat exchanger in con-
junction with the semi-empirical correlation (12) for the waterside
Nusselt number and the heat flow rate Q̇w,exp determined experimentally
was determined as follows
EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243
Fig. 9. Comparison of semi-empirical correlation (8) with empirical correlation (10) for
x3 = 11.53; linear interpolation of ξw by Eq. (14) in the range 2300 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 3000 between
ξw Rew=2,300 for laminar flow and the friction factor ξw Rew=3000 for turbulent flow; in
turbulent flow when 3000 ⩽ Rew the friction factor was calculated using Eq. (9).

24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243

Table 1
Comparison of measured and calculated heat flow rates for two-row plate fin and tube heat exchanger with two passes for w 0 = 0.976 m/s, Ta′m = 13.29 °C, Tw′ = 60.95 °C.

No. w0 m/s Vẇl/h No hay nada Tw °C Rew,upper Rea Q̇w,exp W Q̇w,calc W εQ %

más °C
1 0.99 306.00 13.55 60.72 1203.89 153.94 5739.53 5605.79 −2.39
2 0.98 434.40 13.40 61.01 1764.38 151.99 6288.38 6176.56 −1.81
3 0.98 634.20 13.30 61.14 2633.08 151.31 7052.59 7080.76 0.40
4 0.98 875.40 13.53 61.30 3694.24 150.43 7686.17 7876.99 2.42
5 0.98 1009.20 13.30 61.20 4277.83 150.42 7951.33 8150.39 2.44
6 0.97 1222.91 13.10 61.00 5209.54 148.82 8239.84 8363.95 1.48
7 0.97 1532.73 13.10 60.90 6570.89 148.62 8577.78 8600.57 0.26
8 0.97 1836.55 13.20 60.90 7915.71 148.41 8810.11 8744.81 −0.75
9 0.96 2092.91 13.20 60.71 9029.41 146.81 8869.51 8734.89 −1.54
10 0.98 2424.00 13.25 60.66 10481.53 149.79 9110.09 8966.48 −1.60

Table 2
Comparison of measured and calculated heat flow rates for two-row plate fin and tube heat exchanger with two passes for w 0 = 1.984 m/s, Ta′m = 13.82 °C, T w′ = 72.50 °C.

No. w0 m/s Vẇl/h No se Tw °C Rew,upper Rea Q̇w,exp W Q̇w,calc W εQ %

encont
ró la
página

1 2.00 312.55 13.60 72.77 1362.93 312.62 9946.22 9319.77 −6.72

2 2.02 432.00 13.50 72.91 1950.39 314.92 11362.94 10599.91 −7.20
3 1.98 614.73 14.39 73.12 2843.70 304.86 13192.83 12929.93 −2.03
4 1.99 873.82 13.74 73.20 4123.31 305.41 15354.47 15599.44 1.57
5 1.98 1221.27 13.41 72.75 5854.96 303.04 17141.82 17263.02 0.70
6 1.98 1525.64 13.68 72.37 7378.01 301.95 17798.76 17976.56 0.99
7 1.97 1836.55 13.62 72.05 8933.00 300.05 18697.45 18478.22 −1.19
8 1.97 2088.55 14.01 71.80 10192.03 299.19 18940.86 18645.68 −1.58
9 1.97 2420.40 14.43 71.50 11844.52 298.31 19231.19 18785.7 −2.37

Fig. 10. Comparison of the heat flow rate determined experimentally with the heat flow
rate obtained using the numerical model of two-row plate fin and tube heat exchanger in
the Reynolds number range 500 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 12000; 1 – heat flow rate Q̇w,exp determined
experimentally, 2 – heat flow rate Q̇w,calc calculated using the mathematical model of the
heat exchanger with semi-empirical correlation (8) for Nuw, 3 – heat flow rate Q̇w,calc
calculated using the mathematical model of the heat exchanger and semi-empirical re-
lationship (8) for Nuw using the mean values of measured quantities w0 = 0.976 m/s,
Ta′m = 13.29 °C, T w′ = 60.95 °C, Num,q Rew =2300 = 10.18, 4 – heat flow rate Q̇w,calc
calcu-
lated using the mathematical model of the heat exchanger and empirical relationship
(10) for the water-side Nusselt number Nuw using the mean values of measured
quantities
w0 = 0.976 m/s, Ta m = 13.29 °C, Tw = 60.95 °C, y x 3 = 11.53, 5 - difference εQ
between Q̇w,exp and Q̇w,calc .

obtained by linear interpolation of the friction factor for Rew = 2300, and
Rew = 3000. The influence of the formula for determining the water-side
friction factor in the transitional flow regime on the Nusselt number was
shown. If the friction factor for the turbulent flow was also used in
transitional flow range, then the calculated Nusselt numbers can
Fig. 11. Comparison of the heat flow rate determined experimentally with the heat flow
rate obtained using the numerical model of two-row plate fin and tube heat exchanger in
the Reynolds number range 500 ⩽ Rew ⩽ 12,000; 1 – heat flow rate Q̇w,exp determined
̇
experimentally, 2 - heat flow rate Qw,calc calculated using the mathematical model of the
heat exchanger with semi-empirical correlation (8) for Nuw, 3 – heat flow rate Q̇w,calc
calculated using the mathematical model of the heat exchanger and semi-empirical re-
lationship (8) for Nuw using the mean values of measured quantities w0 = 1.984 m/s,
Ta m = 13.82 °C, Tw = 72.50 °C, y Num,q Rew=2300 = 10.18, 4 - calor fl ow rate Q w,
calc
calculated using the mathematical model of the heat exchanger and empirical relation-
ship (10) for Nuw using the mean values of measured quantities w0 = 1.984 m/s,
Ta′m = 13.82 °C, T w′ = 72.50 °C, and x3 = 11.53, 5 – relative difference εQ between
̇
Qw,exp
and Q̇w,calc .

be higher up to about 6.5% for Prw = 0.7 and up to 13% for Prw =
500 compared to the Nusselt numbers obtained using the
friction factor obtained by linear interpolation between
the laminar and turbulent flow.

24
D. Taler EnergyConversionandManagement159(
The proposed semi-empirical and empirical water-side correlations 2018)232–243

ensure the continuity of the Nusselt number at the transition from

24
D. Taler
laminar flow to turbulent flow. The heat flow rates calculated using a
mathematical model of the investigated plate fin and tube heat ex-
changer with new heat transfer correlations agreed very well with the
heat flow rates determined experimentally. The new water-side re-
lationships for the friction factor and Nusselt number in transitional
and turbulent flow regime proposed in the paper can be used in a
wide range of load changes. The liquid flow regime in tubes can vary
from laminar through transitional to turbulent, and vice versa. The
heat transfer coefficient on the inner surface of the tube is a
continuous function of the Reynolds number without sudden
variations during the change of the laminar to transition or transition
to the turbulent flow regime. Due to the continuity of variations in the
water-side heat transfer coefficient, the mathematical model of the
heat exchanger can be used in automatic temperature control systems
based on the heat exchanger's mathematical model. The fluid
temperature at the outlet of the heat exchanger or the heat flow rate
transferred from hot to the cold fluid can be adjusted automatically by
changing the rotational speed of the pump, i.e., by changing the
volumetric flow rate of the liquid.
References
[1] Kraus AD, Aziz A, Welty J. EXtended surface heat transfer. New York, USA:
Wiley; 2001.
[2] Shah RK, Sekulić DP. Fundamentals of heat exchanger design. Hoboken, USA:
Wiley; 2003.
[3] Kuppan T. Heat exchanger design handbook. 2nd ed Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press-
Taylor and Francis Group; 2013.
[4] Webb RL, Kim NH. Principles of enhanced heat transfer. 2nd. ed. Boca Raton: CRC
Press; 2005.
[5] Taler D. Mathematical modeling and control of plate fin and tube heat exchangers.
Energy Convers Manage 2015;96:452–62.
[6] Fahmy MFM, Nabih HI. Impact of ambient air temperature and heat load variation
on the performance of air-cooled heat exchangers in propane cycles in LNG plants-
Analytical approach. Energy Convers Manage 2016;121:22–35.
[7] Sieder EN, Tate GE. Heat transfer and pressure drop of liquids in tubes. Ind Eng
Chem 1936;28(12):1429-35.
[8] Kern DQ, Kraus AD. EXtended surface heat transfer. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill;
1972.
[9] Gnielinski V. New equations for heat and mass transfer in turbulent pipe and
channel flow. Int Chem Eng 1976;16:352–68.
[10] Li J, Wang S, Zhang W. Air-side thermal hydraulic performance of an integrated fin
and micro- channel heat exchanger. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52:983–9.
[11] Wen J, Huang H, Li H, Xu G, Fu Y. Thermal hydraulic performance of a compact
plate finned tube air-fuel heat exchanger for aero-engine. Appl Therm Eng
2017;126:920–8.
[12] Filonienko GK. Friction factor for turbulent pipe flow. Teploenergetika
1954;1(4):40-4. (en ruso) .
[13] Taler D. Prediction of heat transfer correlations for compact heat exchangers.
Forsch Ingenieurwes 2005;69:137–50.
25
EnergyConversionandManagement159(
2018)232–243
[14] Lin X, Yu J, Yan G. A numerical study on the air-side heat transfer of
perforated finned tube heat exchangers with large fin pitches. Int J Heat Mass
Transf 2016;100:199–207.
[15] Yaϊci W, Ghorab M, Entchev E. 3D CFD study of the effect of inlet air flow mal-
distribution on plate-fin-tube heat exchanger design and thermal hydraulic per-
formance. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2016;101:527–41.
[16] Gholami A, Wahid MA, Mohammed HA. Thermal-hydraulic performance of fin-and-
oval tube compact heat exchangers with innovative design of corrugated fin pat-
terns. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2017;106:573–92.
[17] Zeeshan M, Nath S, Bhanja D. Numerical study to predict optimal configuration of
fin tube compact heat exchanger with various tube shapes. Energy Convers Manage
2017;148:737–52.
[18] Deepakkumar R, Jayavel S. Air-side performance of finned-tube heat exchanger
with combination of circular and elliptical tubes. Appl Therm Eng
2017;119:360–72.
[19] Singh S, Sørensen K, Simonsen AS, Condra TJ. Implications of fin profiles on overall
performance and weight reduction of a fin and tube heat exchanger. Appl Therm
Eng 2017;115:962–76.
[20] Nagaosa RS. Turbulence model-free approach for predictions of air flow dynamics
and heat transfer in a fin-and-tube exchanger. Energy Convers Manage
2017;142:414–25.
[21] Taler D, Cebula A. Modeling of air flow and heat transfer in compact heat ex-
changers. Chem Process Eng-Inz 2004;25:2331–42.
[22] Taler D, Ocłoń P. Determination of heat transfer formulas for gas flow in fin-and-
tube heat exchanger with oval tubes using CFD simulations. Chem Eng Process
2014;83:1–11.
[23] Taler D, Cebula A. A new method for determination of thermal contact resistance of
a fin-to- tube attachment in plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers. Chem Process Eng-
Inz 2010;31:839–55.
[24] Taler D, Ocłoń P. Thermal contact resistance in plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers
determined by experimental data and CFD simulations. Int J Therm Sci
2014;84:309–22.
[25] Dittus FW, Boelter LMK. Heat transfer in automobile radiators of the tubular type.
University of California Publications on Engineering 1939; 2:443–461, reprinted in
Int Commun Heat Mass 1985;12:3–22.
[26] Taler D. Simple power-type heat transfer correlations for turbulent pipe flow in
tubes. J Therm Sci 2017;26:339–48.
[27] Mirth DR, Ramadhyani S, Hittle DC. Thermal performance of chilled-water cooling
coils operating at low water velocities. ASHRAE Tran 1993;99(PT1):43–53.
[28] Taler D. A new heat transfer correlation for transition and turbulent fluid flow in
tubes. Int J Therm Sci 2016;108:108–22.
[29] Taler D. Determining velocity and friction factor for turbulent flow in smooth tubes.
Int J Therm Sci 2016;105:109–22.
[30] Kays WM, London AL. Compact heat exchangers. 3rd ed. Malabar, Florida, USA:
Krieger; 1998.
[31] Gnielinski V. Forced convection in tubes. In: VDI Heat atlas, chapter G1, Springer-
Vieweg, Berlin-Heidelberg; 2013. p. 785-92.
[32] Lévêque MA. Les lois de la transmission de chaleur par convection. Ann Mines,
Memoires, Series 12, 1928;13:201–99, 305–62, 381–415.
[33] Nikuradse J. Gesetzmä ßigkeit der turbulenten Strö mung in glatten Rohren. Forsch
Arb Ing Wes 1932; 356 (English translation, Laws of turbulent flow in smooth
pipes. NASA TT F-1O 1966; 359).
[34] Furuichi N, Terao Y, Wada Y, Tsuji Y. Friction factor and mean velocity profile for
pipe flow at high Reynolds numbers. Phys Fluids 2015;27. 095108-1-095108-15.