0
Research Papers: Fluid-Structure Interaction

A Study About Performance Evaluation Criteria of Tube Banks With Various Shapes and Arrangements Using Numerical Simulation

[+] Author and Article Information
Amin Jodaei

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Tabriz Branch,
Islamic Azad University,
Tabriz 5157944533, Iran
e-mail: am.jodaei@gmail.com

Kamiar Zamzamian

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Tabriz Branch,
Islamic Azad University,
Tabriz 5157944533, Iran
e-mail: zamzamian@iaut.ac.ir

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received January 27, 2017; final manuscript received July 16, 2017; published online August 31, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Tomomichi Nakamura.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(5), 051303 (Aug 31, 2017) (9 pages) Paper No: PVT-17-1020; doi: 10.1115/1.4037637 History: Received January 27, 2017; Revised July 16, 2017

Tube bank heat exchangers are designed to efficiently transfer heat between two fluids. Shapes and arrangements of tubes in heat exchangers have significant effects in heat transfer and pressure drop of fluid. In this study, the three-dimensional (3D) numerical investigation is performed to determine heat transfer coefficients, friction factor, and performance evaluation criteria (PEC) of cam-shaped tube banks in aerodynamic and inverse aerodynamic directions in the cross flow air and compared with those of elliptical tube banks in heat exchanger. The arrangements of tubes are aligned and staggered with longitudinal pitch of 44.88 mm and transverse pitch of 28.05 mm. Reynolds number in the range of 11,500–18,500 was used, and the tube surface temperature was fixed and considered 352 K. Results indicate the superior heat transfer of elliptical tube bank over the cam-shaped tube banks in inverse aerodynamic and aerodynamic directions in both arrangements. Moreover, the PEC of the cam-shaped tube banks with inverse aerodynamic and aerodynamic directions and elliptical tube bank in aligned arrangement are approximately 1.4, 1.1, and 1.6, respectively. The obtained results for staggered arrangements are also 1.5, 1.3, and 1.8, respectively.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Cam profile of tube

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Cam-shaped tube bank in aerodynamic direction with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Elliptical profile of tube

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Mesh around the cam-shaped tube bank in inverse aerodynamic direction with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Boundary condition over the domain and around the cam shaped tube bank in inverse aerodynamic direction with staggered arrangement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of average Nusselt number in cam-shaped tube bank in inverse aerodynamic direction with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements obtained from experimental results and results of the present study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

The contour of static pressure for Reeq = 18500 around cam shaped tube bank in inverse aerodynamic direction with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements in x–y surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

The contour of velocity of magnitude for Reeq = 18500 around cam-shaped tube bank in aerodynamic direction with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements in x–y surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The pathline of flow for Reeq = 18,500 around elliptical tube bank with (a) aligned and (b) arrangements in x–y surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Friction factor of tube banks with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements versus Reynolds number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The contour of static temperature for Reeq = 18,500 around elliptical tube bank with: aligned and (b) staggered arrangements in x–y surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Average Nusselt number versus Reynolds number for tube bank with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

PEC of tube banks with (a) aligned and (b) staggered arrangements versus Reynolds number

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In