Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332

www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Fluid ow analysis and extension of rapid design algorithm

for helical bae heat exchangers
a,* b
M.R. Jafari Nasr , A. Shafeghat
a
Petrochemical Research and Technology Co. (NPC-RT),1 P.O. Box 14358, Tehran, Iran
b
Chemical Engineering Department, Sahand University of Technology, Tabriz, Iran

Received 23 September 2006; accepted 15 October 2007

Available online 4 November 2007

Abstract

Shell-and-tube heat exchanger with helical baes is one of the new technologies used to improve the performance of common heat
exchangers with segmental baes. In this paper, after a short introduction of the technology, investigations of uid ow pattern are car-
ried out. By creating dierent arrangements of the helical baes, the comparison between these types of baes and the segmental one has
been performed. Then, by using derived pressure drop relationship and the rapid design algorithm, some equations for both turbulent
and laminar regimes are developed which relate pressure drop to heat transfer coecient and heat transfer area. With the help of these
relationships a straightforward design procedure has been developed.
 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Shell-and-tube heat exchanger; Rapid design algorithm; Simulation; Helical baes; CFD

1. Introduction nuclear powers, combined cycle units), for paper industries

The concept of helical bae heat exchangers was devel-
oped for the rst time in Czechoslovakia. These heat
exchangers, named helixchanger, have been able to min-
imize major shortcomings of shell-and-tube heat exchang-
ers with traditional segmental baes. Helical bae heat
exchangers have shown very eective performance espe-
cially for the cases in which the heat transfer coecient
in shell side is controlled; or less pressure drop and less
fouling are expected. It can also be very eective, where
heat exchangers are predicted to be faced with vibration
condition.
The general applications of these type of heat exchang-
ers are used in petroleum reneries (such as vacuum and
atmospheric columns, hydrotreating and hydrocracking
units), in petrochemicals industries (such as aromatics
and olen plants) and in power plant industries (such as
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 21 88043037; fax: +98 21 88607078.
E-mail address: m.jafarinasr@npc-rt.ir (M.R. Jafari Nasr).
1
Aliated of National Petrochemical Co. (NPC).
and even in food industries [1,2].
Helical baes are pseudo-circular shaped plates that are
set up in a way that each one follows the other in a shell by
specied angles respect to axis so that the shell side ow
passes a helical path. Each bae occupies one quadrant
of the cross-section and has a certain inclination with the
centerline of the exchanger. Four baes make one set baf-
e and the uid returns to its starting situation after cross-
ing the set. Adjacent baes can be mounted in such a way
that they touch at the perimeter and thus forming a contin-
uous helix at the outer periphery, or axial overlapping of
baes may be used, or a double helix design may be
employed when reduced unsupported tube spans are
needed [1].
In designing of helixchangers, pitch angle, baes
arrangement, and the space between two baes with the
same position are important parameters. Baes pitch angle
(uS) is the angle between ow and perpendicular surface on
exchanger axis and Hs is space between two following baf-
es with the same situation. These parameters are shown in
Fig. 1.

1359-4311/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2007.10.021
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332 1325

Nomenclature

A heat exchanger area [m2] y3 an adverse temperature gradient

cp heat capacity [J/kg C] y4 leakage streams
D tube inner diameter [m] y5 bypass streams
D1 shell inside diameter [m] y6 bae spacing in the inlet and outlet sections
do tube outer diameter [m] y7 a factor accounting for the change in the cross-
FT correction factor for LMTD ow characteristic
Hs helix pitch [m] y8 a turbulence enhancement factor
ht tube side heat transfer coecient [J/m2 C] Zi pressure drop correction factors
hs shell side heat transfer coecient[J/m2 C] Z1 thermophysical properties
ks shell side thermal conductivity [J/m C] Z2 leakage and bypass streams
L length of tube [m] Z3 a factor for accounting changes in the cross-ow
M mass ow rate [kg/s] characteristics
Nb number of baes Z4 a turbulence enhancement factor
n number of tubes Z5 bae spacing in the inlet and outlet sections
Pr Prantle number u inclination angle []
Q heat load [J] f friction factor
Re Reynolds number qt tube side uid density [kg/m3]
RD overall thermal resistances [m2 C/J] qs shell side uid density [kg/m3]
SP helical bae thickness [m] DPt tube side pressure drop [kPa]
U overall heat transfer coecient [W/m2 C] DPs shell side pressure drop [kPa]
us shell side uid velocity [m/s] DTLM logarithmic mean temp. di. [C]
yi heat transfer correction factors l viscosity [kg/m s]
y1 thermophysical properties
y2 scale-up from a single tube row to a bundle of
tubes

Fig. 1. A schematic of heat exchangers with helical baes (left), pitch angle (uS) and bae space (Hs) (right).

In comparison with the common shell-and-tube heat
exchangers the main advantages of helixchangers are:
Improvement of shell side heat transfer.
Less pressure drop for a given mass ow rate.
Reducing of bypass eects in shell side.
Decreasing of fouling in shell side.
Prevention of bundle vibration [3,4].
Generally, the advantages of helical baes heat
exchangers go behind the thermal and hydraulic aspects
and they can solve many operational problems such as
fouling. Higher heat transfer coecients result in the ther-
mal development; and decreasing of pressure drop
enhances the hydraulic performance due to two factors:
one, decreasing of sudden changes of the ow streams
which are resulted from expansions and contractions;
and two, leakage ows phenomenon. Finally, they can
enhance the operational conditions which mean less foul-
ing and less induced vibration as a result of existing of
lower stagnation zones. In fact, helical bae heat exchang-
ers have revealed a potential for improvement of the heat
transfer performance in two respects. First, ow pattern is
near plug ow condition within increased heat exchanger
eectiveness. Second, an occurrence of shear velocity pro-
le which is generated by vortex core creating of a vortex
which favourably and markedly aects the lm heat trans-
fer coecient.
1326 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332
Optimum design of helical bae heat exchangers is
depended on operating condition of heat exchanger, and
it can be followed and completed by consideration of
proper design of pitch angle, overlapping of baes and
tubes layout. Changing the pitch angle in helical bae sys-
tem can create wide range of ow velocities as the bae
space and bae cut in traditional heat exchangers. More-
over, overlapping of helical baes is a parameter that
can aect signicantly on shell side ow pattern [5].
2. Hydraulic analysis
Obtaining accurate data for physical processes is often
gained by practical measurements. However, practical
experiments are almost impossible to be obtained due to
the big size of equipments and incurred expensive costs.
Generally, predicting methods to evaluate physical phe-
nomena is classied into experimental and theoretical
methods. The theoretical predictions can be obtained based
on the mathematical models which include related equa-
tions. Low costs, high speed, and the ability to simulate
actual and ideal conditions are the main advantages of a
theoretical method. However, sometimes we face some
phenomena that no proper mathematical models are avail-
able for them. In such situations, using the numerical meth-
ods is the third suitable approach. Thus, the computational
uid dynamics (CFD) is used to predict the above men-
tioned physical phenomena. Computer simulation based
on CFD, includes analysis of system with uid ow, heat
transfer together with phenomena such as chemical reac-
tions. The structure of CFD programming is based on
numerical method which is very powerful method since it
covers a wide range of industrial and non-industrial
applications.
3-D modeling of helical bae heat exchangers by using
CFD technique has been already applied by Andrews and
Master [6] and also hydrodynamic studies have been exper-
imentally veried by Shuli [7], but in this study, the main
objectives were to create shell-and-tube heat exchanger
with helical bae geometries in dierent arrangement
and to investigate uid ow patterns in shell side of helix-
changer and then, to compare it with segmental bae heat
exchanger. In order to achieve these, rst a geometry for
the shell was created and then for both segmental and heli-
cal baes system, with a given specic bae spacing in dif-
ferent arrangement, and baes layout and nozzles
Fig. 2. Segmental baes system (left) and 15 angle helical baes system (right) meshed geometry.
locations were considered. The exchangers length was for
2000 mm with inner shell diameter of 225 mm. For dier-
ent cases, gas oil with various mass ow rates was consid-
ered as the uid inside the shell.
3. Results of simulation
A schematic of meshed geometries is shown in Fig. 2.
3.1. Comparison of segmental and helical baes in 40 pitch
angle
The results of simulation are presented graphically and
the analysis can be obtained by interpretation of graphs.
In the case study, it is specied that the velocity distribu-
tion for helical baes is more homogenous and about
87.5% of the ow has velocity between 0 and 0.25 m/s,
while for segmental baes nearly 62.5% of the ow is
placed within this range which has heterogeneous distribu-
tion. This is an indication of steadiness of the ow and bet-
ter velocity distribution in helical baes which is the main
cause for the decreasing of fouling and also for the unifor-
mity of this phenomenon.
In Fig. 3, the distribution of axial velocity component in
exchangers is drawn. In these graphs, negative velocities
imply back mixing ows which are reverse to the desired
ow. The existence of negative velocities is referred to the
mixing of dierent segments throughout the exchanger.
In other words, increasing of the negative velocities means
that owing more axial mixing causes decrease of the tem-
perature driving forces. As shown, in this case study more
than 17% of velocity vectors for segmental system have
negative values and velocity distribution in the direction
of exchangers axis is not homogenous, while for the helix-
changer the amount of negative axial velocities is less than
5%. The high amount of negative axial velocities in seg-
mental baes is due to the back mixing ows created
behind the baes which will be discussed more later on.
Graphs of Fig. 4 show the axial velocity distribution
throughout the exchanger. The darker areas in the illustra-
tion show the crowding and density of the velocity vectors.
In the illustration of segmental system, it can be seen that
the velocity changings range is more scatter than the heli-
cal system. The peaks of the diagrams are related to bae
windows, and by decreasing of the cross area in this region,
the axial velocity vectors become greater. Nonetheless, for
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332 1327

Fig. 3. Velocity distribution in the direction of exchangers axial for segmental system (left) and for helical system with 40 angle (right).

Fig. 4. Axial velocity distribution for segmental (left) and for 40 angle helical (right) systems.

helical bae system the accumulation of negative axial
velocity vectors is seen in the beginning and at the end of
exchanger. The accumulation occurred at the end of
exchanger caused by the impingement and hitting of the
uid with the exchanger head.
3.2. Comparison of segmental and helical bae systems at
the pitch angle of 15
The graphs of Fig. 5 represent the velocity vectors dis-
tribution in exchangers with segmental and helical baes.
It is seen that helical system, compared with segmental sys-
tem, has a more uniform and homogenous velocity distri-
bution. When we examine the sum of velocities up to
1 m/s it is cleared that more than 91.5% of ow for
helical bae system is placed in this range of velocity
while for segmental system it is 81%. This means that for
smaller angles of helical system, the condition of ow is
approached to the system with segmental baes.
Studying the distribution of axial velocity components
graphs showed that the amounts of negative velocities for
the helical system are far less than that of segmental system
and as mentioned before, these negative axial velocity com-
ponents result in an increase in mixing of ow cells and a

Fig. 5. Distribution of velocity vectors in segmental system (left) and helical system with the pitch angle of 15 (right).
1328 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332
decrease in middle temperature dierence so that the over-
all heat transfer rate will be decreased. Also, analyzing the
distribution of axial velocity graphs throughout the
exchanger showed that in segmental system, negative veloc-
ities occur immediately after the velocity peaks (when the
ow passes bae windows); while for helical system are
seen only in two parts; one in the beginning and the other
at the end of the exchanger. This expresses that the passing
of reverse ow from baes edges are very low.
Fig. 6 shows the distribution of axial velocity compo-
nent in x-direction (indicated in Fig. 2). The highest veloc-
ities for segmental system occur in two areas which are also
symmetrical and negative velocities exist mostly in central
areas in a shell with a quarter-radius of exchanger diame-
ter. Nevertheless, in helical system, the change range for
axial velocity component is shorter, and it is almost con-
stant through shell radius.
3.3. Comparison of helical baes with pitch angle of 15 and
40
In this part, a comparison is performed for the ow
pattern of the two arrangements of helical baes with
pitch angle of 15 and 40 in order to study the ow dis-
tribution in small and large angles. Velocity distribution
graphs for systems with pitch angle of 40 is more uniform
or homogeneous and closer to the plug ow; and this
means that the smaller helical baes angles lead to closer
Fig. 6. Distribution of axial velocity component in x direction, segmental system (left) and helical system (right).
Fig. 7. Axial velocity components distribution through the exchanger for 40 (left) and 15 (right) of helical bae heat exchanger.
condition to segmental system. The same results were
achieved when velocity vectors in x and z axes were
compared.
Fig. 7 represent axial velocity components distribution
through the exchanger in which the middle spurts indicate
the passing of the ow through the triangle space in-
between two baes; in these areas by decreasing the cross
area greater velocity vectors appear. These spurts in 40
helical bae system are less because there are fewer baes
and bigger free-areas between the baes. Regarding these
graphs, it is revealed that the negative velocities throughout
the exchanger are more for 15 than for 40 system, though
accumulation of spurt-points in the gures represents their
minority comparing the whole amount of ow. In addition,
the part of the graph seen as a line indicates the velocities
on walls that have a value of zero.
The study of distribution of cross velocity components
in cross-section of the exchanger (velocity components in
x-direction) with pitch angles of 15 and 40 showed that
the amount of cross velocities in the center of system is
more than that of other sections, even though the distribu-
tion of this velocity component through the exchangers
diameter is rather homogenous; this can be related to the
eects of the following baes edge on the ow, and in fact
it causes the decreasing of the ow angle in the center of the
exchanger and makes the ow condition closer to the cross
type. This eect was observed in all of the investigated
geometries [8].
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332 1329
 
4. Extension to rapid design algorithm K 2 8:105k s 1 2:443Re0:1 Pr0:67  1
 
= cps l0:3
s qs D
0:7 0:7
3
Rapid design algorithm in fact was developed as a
design procedure for shell-and-tube heat exchanges and K 3 2fnr qs Z 1 Z 2 Z 3 Z 4 =npd o H s  4
then very soon extended to other type of heat exchangers Y
4

[9,10]. Heat transfer coecients and pressure drop calcula- K 4 2fnr qs Z i Z 5  0:5 5
i1
tions are the main part of design of heat exchangers with a
given duty. In traditional approaches such as Kern and and for laminar regime in shell side:
BellDelaware methods a design starts with a specied pri- 4
DP K 11 A K 22  h K 33 6
mary guess for the overall heat transfer coecient and
geometry of exchanger so that at the end of one run of cal- 3
Y
4
K 11 2fnr qs pd o Zi
culations the pressure drops are re-calculated and compare
i1
with the maximum available pressure drops given in a pro- . 
cess. If for the designed heat exchanger the duty and the 0:823364  nH s  q4s d 2o c1:32
ps k 2:68 0:68
s l s 7
pressure drops restrictions are satised the primary design Y
4
4
is accepted otherwise the primary guess would be changed K 22 2fnr pd o Z i  Z 5  0:5
or updated and the calculation need to be repeated on and i1
. 
on. The principal of this algorithm is based on the full use 0:823364  q4s d 2o c1:32 2:68 0:68
8
ps k s ls
of stream pressure drop as a design objective rather than
design restrictions. It is important that the optimum allow- K 33 0:372k s =pd o 9
able pressure drops be selected for the streams in a heat
where Zi and yi are pressure drop and heat transfer correc-
exchanger design as far as possible. Furthermore, once
tion factors, respectively. These correction factors can be
the allowable pressure drops of the stream have been set
specied with presented graphs by Stehlik et al. [4] or pre-
full advantage must be taken of them in order to obtain
sented relations in Ref. [8,11].
optimum heat exchanger area in the design. The algorithm
With replacement of Eq. (10) into (11) and with given
leads to a straightforward approach without needing to
maximum allowable pressure drops as for DPs and DPt,
any trial and error, reaping tedious calculations which
Eq. (14) can be achieved
are required in traditional design methods. The design pro-
cedure is known as a simple and interesting method and the Q U  A  F T  DT LM 10
main philosophy behind that is to utilize completely the 1 1
maximum allowable pressure drop for both of cold and U 1 RD 11
hs ht
hot ows. In fact, the fully usage of pressure drops allows
DP s f A; hs ; hs f A; DP s 12
the exchanger to operates in the highest possible velocities
and as a result of that, achieving to the highest heat trans- DP t f A; ht ; ht f A; DP t 13
fer coecients and ultimately the exchanger will have the  1
Q 1 1
minimum size for a given duty [9,10]. RD 14
A  F T  DT LM h s ht
The general idea behind this procedure consists of creat-
ing a simple relationship between pressure drop, heat trans- The equations of (11)(13) have three unknowns, ht, hs, and
fer coecient and heat exchanger area for each side i.e.: A, which can be combined and re-arranged so that it has
DP = f(h, A). one unknown, i.e. area heat transfer (A). This nonlinear
Then, these relationships for shell-and-tube sides sepa- equation can be solved numerically straightforward. It is
rately together with the basic heat exchanger equation noteworthy to know that using the Kern method, need a
can be solved so that heat exchanger area is obtained. h loop calculation to reach to nal answer while designs
and DP are related to velocity so relations between DP, h based on Bell method due to consisting of many geometric
and A are achieved by omitting velocity and creating heat parameters; it needs many primary guesses such as shell
exchanger area term (A). The relations for helical bae diameter, so that the achieved values in primary levels
exchangers for turbulent regime in shell side are obtained should be corrected in the following levels [8].
as:
4.1. Results based on rapid design algorithm
2:857
DP K 1 h K 2  K 3 A K 4 1
The following part investigates the eects of some
where parameters to design of heat exchanger. Some case studies
  have been performed to nd out the eects of certain
K 1 pd o 1 2:443Re0:1 Pr0:67  1 parameters on design. For instance, the eects of shell side
," #
Y
8 mass ow rate on design were investigated. By changing the
0:3 0:7 0:7
0:046cps ls qs D yi 2 shell side mass ow rate for a given duty of heat transfer
i1 between shell-and-tube side ows and certain pressure
1330 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332

Table 1 Another remarkable point in these graphs is the com-

Input data parison between pitch angles of 30 and 40 which indicates
Tube side inlet 32.22 C Tube side pressure 66.75 kPa that a smaller area is required for the 40 arrangement with
temp. drop a certain mass rate.
Shell side inlet 198.89 Shell side pressure 0.05
temp. drop
In Fig. 9 the eect of pressure drop on the required heat
Tube side output 38.33 Tube side heat 1858 J/kg C transfer area and on the heat transfer coecient in helical
temp. capacity baes with various angles are studied. The rate and outlet
Shell side output 65.55 Shell side heat 2371 temperature of shell side ow are the same as shown in
temp. capacity Table 1, however, the pressure drop changes in a range
Tube side mass 158.63 kg/s Tube side thermal 0.13 W/m C
ow rate conductivity
between 0.5 and 10 kPa. General trend of changes shows
Shell side mass 5.69 Shell side thermal 0.123 that as the pressure drop increases the heat transfer coe-
ow rate conductivity cient increases and the required exchanger area decreases.
In fact, by increasing of the pressure drop, higher velocities
occurred in shell side which causes the Reynolds number
drops the required area heat transfer was obtained. Fluid and heat transfer coecient to raise in shell side, while
ow conditions in exchanger are briey presented in Table the required area decreases due to the increasing of velocity
1. and turbulency. These behaviors are almost the same for all
By changing the ow rate the heat balance is disturbed, studied angles, except that the 40 angle. In comparison
thus in order to keep the heat balance the outlet tempera- with other angles, this angle provides higher heat transfer
ture in shell side is to be corrected. The results are pre- coecient and smaller required area. Nevertheless the
sented by graphs so that changing of process can be behavior of 20 angle is also noticeable. Comparing with
evaluated. angles of 15, 25 and 30, there is a higher heat transfer
As predicted, by increasing the ow rate, velocity raises; coecient and a smaller required area in 20 angle. The
and because pressure drop is given as input, in order to physical justication of this phenomenon requires labora-
retain this pressure drop in higher velocities, the exchanger tory and experimental studies on the pattern of ow distri-
area should be decreased so that friction losses lessen when bution, type and development of boundary layers on tubes
pressure drop increases in higher velocities. The graph on in various pitch angles. However, at a glance on presented
the left in Fig. 8 represents these changes. Shell diameter correction factors in the literature, it seems that around the
changes also were drawn with ow rate changes. The grad- 20 angle is critical because enhanced turbulence and
ual decrease of the shell diameter by increasing of the ow changing in cross-ow condition correction factors after
rate in shell side is shown in Fig. 8. this angle shows a special behavior; and interactions of

140 0.6
fi=40 fi=40
120
fi=30
Shell diameter (m)

fi=30
100 0.55
Area (m2)

80
0.5
60

40
0.45
20

0 0.4
5 6 7 8 9 10 5 6 7 8 9 10
Shell side mass flow rate (kg/sec) Shell side mass flow rate (kg/sec)

Fig. 8. Changing of required area (left) and inner diameter of shell (right) versus shell side mass ow rate.

4000 80
fi=40
fi=40
Shell side heat transfer

fi=30
fi=30
fi=25
3000 70 fi=25
coefficient

fi=20
Area (m2)

fi=20
fi=15
fi=15

2000 60

1000 50
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Shell side pressure drop Shell side presure drop (kPa)

Fig. 9. Shell side heat transfer coecient (W/m2 C) and required area versus on shell side pressure drop changing in various pitch angles.
 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332 1331

heat transfer and pressure drop correction factors on As cleared by the Fig. 11, the 20 and 40 angles have
design might cause achieving less area and more heat trans- shown the better performance compared to other angles.
fer coecient in this angle compared to 15, 25 and 30.
Doubtless, ow condition is eective on this phenomenon, 5. Conclusion
too. However, other case studies were investigated in dier-
ent conditions which had led to the same results. Studies on Based on this study and the presented results, the helical
Reynolds numbers for various angles showed that decreas- baes heat exchangers are proper replacement for shell-
ing of baes pitch angles results in higher Reynolds num- and-tube heat exchangers with segmental baes. They could
bers that can be due to decreasing of velocity caused by cover and are able to expel many of the drawbacks of shell-
bigger area for crossing ow in bigger angles. These results and-tube heat exchangers with segmental baes. Designing
are agreed with the achieved results in helical bae hydrau- of helical bae heat exchangers oer higher exibility by
lic analysis section. choosing optimum angles and this makes wide range of ow
In order to examine the validity of the developed algo- velocities and temperature proles so that the operation
rithm and the relationship, the results of program were condition is controlled under the fouling threshold.
compared with the well-known software, EXPRESS In this work based on the concept of rapid design algo-
[12]. In rapid design algorithm the pressure drops as an rithm a relationship between area, heat transfer coecient
input were given to the program. However, the design pro- and pressure drop for shell side equipped with helical bae
cedure and calculations in the software are dierent. To be system were developed.
able to compare the results in dierent pressure drops, rst The simulation of ow analysis in shell side showed that
the design was performed with the software and then velocity distribution in helical bae system is more uni-
changing the design conditions a range of pressure drops form and homogenous than segmental bae system. This
were achieved. Then, the obtained pressure drops were leads to less fouling rate and also less erosion/corrosion
used as inputs to design by the new program. occurrence inside the shell. Flow distribution in helical baf-
Fig. 10 shows the comparison between calculated heat es systems with small angles is approached to segmental
transfer area and shell side pressure drop changes. In these bae conditions.
evaluations, the main aim was to compare the trends. As The existence of negative velocity prole in axial direc-
seen, the trends for both of results, programming and soft- tion will result in deviation from counter current condition
ware, are similar. This illustrates validity of algorithm for and also decrease in temperature driving forces. In
diverse ranges of shell side uid velocities. Also, by this observed ow patterns, it was elaborated that these nega-
algorithm the eect of various pitch angles was studied. tive velocity proles were signicantly less for the helical
bae system compared to segmental baes.
The results from computer programming and ow sim-
110 ulation demonstrated that in small angles, helical baes
105
Express heat exchangers achieved higher velocities due to reducing
Program
of cross areas, however, when a certain pressure drop is
100
expected to fulll the determined thermal duty a bigger
Area (m2)

95 area is required. In all of case studies angles, 40 angle

90 showed the better results in comparison with other angles
85
and it can be selected as an optimum angle. However,
nearby the 20 angle, the angles have a close performance
80
0.07 0.075 0.08 0.085 0.09 0.095 0.1 0.105 0.11 to 40 angle while the performances of other angles were
Shell side pressure drop (kPa) aected by ow conditions.

Fig. 10. Calculated area comparing between programming and software.

References

[1] P. Stehlik, Vishwas V. Wadekar, Dierent strategies to improve

750 industrial heat exchange, Heat Transfer Engineering 23 (6) (2002).
Shell side heat transfer

Express [2] Bashir I. Master, Kirishnan S. Chunangad, Bert Boxma, Delibor

Program
Kral, Stehlik Petr, Most frequently used heat exchangers from
550 pioneering research to applications worldwide, Chisa/Press, 2004.
coefficient

[3] J. Lutcha, J. Nemcansky, Performance improvement of tubular heat

exchangers by helical baes, Transactions of IChemE, Part A 68
350
(1990).
[4] P. Stehlik, J. Nemcansky, D. Kral, L.W. Swanson, Comparison of
150
correction factors for shell and tube heat exchangers, Heat Transfer
10 20 30 40 50 Engineering 15 (1) (1994).
Inclination angle [5] D. Kral, P. Stehlik, H.J.V.D. Ploeg, B.I. Master, Helical baes in
shell-and-tube heat exchangers, Part 1: experimental verication,
Fig. 11. Shell side heat transfer coecient for various pitch angles. Heat Transfer Engineering 17 (1) (1996).
1332 M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 13241332
[6] M. Andrews, B.I. Master, 3-D modeling of the ABB lummus
heat transfer HELIXCHANGER using CFD, in: International Con-
ference Compact Heat Exchangers, Ban, Canada, July 1923, 1999.
[7] Wnag Shuli, Hydrodynamic studies on heat exchangers with helical
baes, Heat Transfer Engineering 23 (2002) 4349.
[8] A. Shafeghat, Design and simulation of shell and tube heat exchangers
with helical baes, M.Sc. Dissertation, supervised by M.R. Jafari Nasr,
S. Shaei, Sahand University of Technology, Tabriz, Iran, 2006.
[9] Uday V. Shenoy, Heat Exchanger Network Synthesis, Gulf Publish-
ing Company, 1995.
[10] F.O. Jegede, G.T. Polley, Optimum heat exchanger design, Transac-
tions of IChemE, Part A 70 (1992) 133141.
[11] M.R. Jafari Nasr, A. Shafeghat, Rapid design algorithm for
new technology: shell and tube heat exchangers with helical
baes, Research on Science and Engineering of Petroleum,
Bulletin of the Iranian Institute of Petroleum Industry, RIPI, 15
(52) (2006).
[12] ESDU (The Engineering Science Data Unit), Rapid Sizing, Selection
and Costing of Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger, www.ihsesdu.com,
EXPRESS Software ver. 3, London, 2003.