UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES, ST.

AUGUSTINE
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING

NAME: SACHIN RAMHARACK

COURSE: MENG 2012- HEAT TRANSFER

LAB TITLE: HEAT EXCHANGER LAB

STUDENT ID: 816001643

LAB GROUP: -

LECTURER: PROF. KRISHPERSAD MANOHAR

LAB DEMONSTRATOR: MR. PETER POON CHONGDATE

PERFORMED: 20TH MARCH 2024.

DATE SUBMITTED: 27TH MARCH 2024.

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 3

AIM ................................................................................................................................................. 4

THEORY......................................................................................................................................... 5

PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................................. 7

DESCRIPTION OF APPARATUS ................................................................................................. 8

RESULTS........................................................................................................................................ 9

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS........................................................................................................ 12

DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 14

SOURCES OF ERROR ................................................................................................................ 15

PRECAUTIONS ........................................................................................................................... 15

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 16
SUMMARY
The aim of this experiment was to determine the heat transfer density and the mean surface heat
transfer coefficient for finned tubes in the 1st and 4th rows of a finned tube cross flow heat
exchanger and analyze the relation between the two. From our results, we were able to observe
how the surface heat transfer coefficient could be derived from the heat transfer density, as well as
how the Reynold’s Number of a flow has an inverse relationship with the transfer coefficient and
why that is so.
AIM
To investigate how turbulence affects the rate of heat transfer by convection between air and a
heated element by changing from the 1st to the 4th row of a finned tube cross flow heat
exchanger at a constant air flow. The two variables are: position and temperature.
THEORY
Heat exchangers are indispensable devices in engineering systems, facilitating the transfer of
thermal energy between two fluids or between a fluid and a solid surface without mixing them.
One prevalent arrangement involves transferring heat between a fluid flowing through a bundle
of tubes and another fluid flowing transversely over the outside of the tubes, known as a Cross
Flow Heat Exchanger.
Various tube layouts have been developed to enhance the efficiency of Cross Flow Heat
Exchangers, aiming to reduce the physical size for a given heat transfer rate. The primary
objective across all arrangements is to promote turbulence in the fluid flowing across the tube
bundle. This is crucial because the overall heat transfer coefficient for a Cross Flow Heat
Exchanger comprises three components:
1. The surface heat transfer coefficient for the fluid flowing through the tubes.
2. The thermal conductivity and thickness of the tube material.
3. The surface heat transfer coefficient for the fluid flowing over the external surface of the
tubes.
Enhancing the first two components involves increasing the fluid velocity in the tubes and
reducing the tube wall thickness or utilizing materials with higher thermal conductivity.
Meanwhile, the third component can be improved by increasing the external stream velocity,
leading to a higher Reynolds Number for each individual tube. Alternatively, altering the tube
layout can maximize turbulence, ensuring that turbulence induced by one row of tubes affects the
next row, creating a cascade effect where turbulence increases with the depth of the tube bundle.
Turbulence significantly enhances the surface heat transfer coefficient beyond the level achieved
by increased Reynolds Number alone. Moreover, if the fluid flowing over the outside of the
tubes is a gas, the effective heat transfer coefficient can be further increased by incorporating
extended surfaces such as fins.
Given the widespread presence of Cross Flow Heat Exchangers in various industries, it is
imperative for engineers and technologists to possess comprehensive knowledge about their
performance characteristics. Understanding the factors influencing heat transfer efficiency in
Cross Flow Heat Exchangers enables the optimization of design and operation, contributing to
enhanced system performance and energy efficiency.

Duct Air Velocity, U

𝑇𝑎×𝐻
U = 74.294√ 𝑃𝑎
Where, H – Intake Depression
Ta – Ambient Temperature
Pa – Atmospheric Pressure
Effective Air Velocity between the fins, U’
𝑈 ∗ 𝐴𝑑
U’ = 𝐴𝑡
Where, Ad – Duct Cross Sectional Area
At – Minimum Flow Area through a Finned Tube Bundle

Heat Transfer Rate, 𝑸̇

𝑉2
𝑄̇ = 𝑅
Where, V – Active Element Heater Voltage
R – Active Element Heater Resistance

Heat Flux, φ

𝑄
φ=𝐴
Where, A – Heat Transfer Surface

Mean Surface Heat Transfer Coefficient, h

φ
h = T1− T2

Reynold’s Number, Re

U′∗ d
Re = v
Where, d – Diameter of Tube
v – Kinematic Viscosity at T2

Nusselt Number, Nu

h∗d
Nu = k
Where, k – Thermal Conductivity of Air
PROCEDURE
1. The ambient temperature and pressure were recorded.
2. The active element was placed in Row 1 of the tube plate and its leads were connected to the
instrument console.
3. Dummy fins were inserted into the remaining spaces in the tube plate.
4. The main power supply on the console was switched on and the blower fan speed was adjusted
to maintain an intake depression, H, on the lower water manometer between 3.5 to 4.0 mm H2O.
5. This value was recorded for calculating the effective air flow velocity.
6. A voltage of 70V was selected and the heater control was adjusted to an input voltage of
around 18V.
7. The system was allowed to reach equilibrium.
8. The temperatures at the exit and inlet and supplied voltage were recorded.
9. Steps 6-8 were repeated, increasing the voltage by 5V each time until reaching 53V.
10. The power supply was switched off and the fan was used to cool the heating element.
11. The element was then moved from Row 1 to Row 4, swapping with a dummy fin.
12. Steps 6-8 were repeated to obtain a second set of values.
13. The apparatus was turned off and allowed to cool and the blower fan was switched off.
14. The recorded data was tabulated.
DESCRIPTION OF APPARATUS

Figure 1: Schematic of the P.A Hilton H352 Cross Flow Heat Exchanger Unit

The components of the H352C Finned Tube Heat Exchanger are:

1. Voltage Regulator Console – controls the amount of voltage sent into the heating element.
2. Active Element - electrically heated element which is placed in one of the rows in the fin
array.
3. Fin Array – allows heat transfer to occur.
4. Thermocouple Sensors – sense the surface temperature of the heating element.
5. Suction Fan – controls the speed of air that enters the duct.
6. Manometer – measures the intake depression of water, mm H2O.
RESULTS

Observed Results:
Table 1: Showing the constants of the experiment.

Ambient Air
Ambient Intake Fan Speed
Temperature, Resistance
Pressure, Pa Depression Number
Ta
305.15 K 1020 hPa 4 mmH2O 36.2 100 Ω

Table 2: Showing the Temperature and Voltage readings for Row 1 and Row 4

Row 1 Row 4
Test # T1 / oC T2 / oC Voltage / V T1 / oC T2 / 0C Voltage / V
1 33.9 29.7 19.7 33.5 29.8 19.6
2 36.2 29.5 24.9 35.2 29.8 24.7
3 39.4 29.4 30.3 37.1 30 30
4 43 29.8 35.5 39.7 29.9 35.4
5 46 29.7 39.3 42.2 30.1 39.9
6 51 29.9 45.4 45.3 30.1 45.2
7 55.7 30 49.8 49.1 30.5 50.2
8 61.1 30.1 55.3 52.7 30.2 54.8
 Table 3: Showing the Calculated Values for Row 1 and Row 4

v x 10-6 m2/s Renold’s Number Thermal Conductivity

T1 / °C T2/ °C Voltage / V Q̇ φ T1- T2 h(Heat Transfer Coef.) Nusselt Number
(dynamic viscosity) Re x10-3 W/m.K
33.9 29.7 19.7 3.88 1768.87 4.2 421.16 15.95 13141.75 0.02659 201.16
36.2 29.5 24.9 6.20 2825.93 6.7 421.78 15.94 13150.00 0.02658 201.53
39.4 29.4 30.3 9.18 4184.55 10 418.45 15.93 13158.25 0.02657 200.01
Row 43 29.8 35.5 12.60 5744.07 13.2 435.16 15.96 13133.52 0.0266 207.76
1 46 29.7 39.3 15.44 7039.61 16.3 431.88 15.95 13141.75 0.02659 206.27
51 29.9 45.4 20.61 9394.53 21.1 445.24 15.97 13125.29 0.02661 212.50
55.7 30 49.8 24.80 11303.74 25.7 439.83 15.98 13117.08 0.02662 209.84
61.1 30.1 55.3 30.58 13938.42 31 449.63 15.99 13108.88 0.02662 214.51

33.5 29.8 19.6 3.84 1750.96 3.7 473.23 15.96 13133.52 0.0266 225.94
35.2 29.8 24.7 6.10 2780.72 5.4 514.95 15.96 13133.52 0.0266 245.86
37.1 30 30 9.00 4102.10 7.1 577.76 15.98 13117.08 0.02662 275.64
Row 39.7 29.9 35.4 12.53 5711.76 9.8 582.83 15.97 13125.29 0.02661 278.17
2 42.2 30.1 39.9 15.92 7256.20 12.1 599.69 15.99 13108.88 0.02662 286.10
45.3 30.1 45.2 20.43 9311.94 15.2 612.63 15.99 13108.88 0.02662 292.28
49.1 30.5 50.2 25.20 11486.05 18.6 617.53 16.03 13076.17 0.02665 294.28
52.7 30.2 54.8 30.03 13687.51 22.5 608.33 16 13100.68 0.02663 290.12
Graphs
Graph 1: Showing Heat Flux vs Element Surface to Air Temperature Difference for Row 1 and
Row 4

100000.00
Heat Flux (W/m^2)

10000.00
Row 1
Row 4

1000.00
1 10 100
Active Element Surface to Air Temperature Difference (°C or K)

Graph 2: Showing Mean Surface Heat Transfer Coefficient vs Reynolds Number

7.00
Mean Surface Heat Transfer Coefficient × 102

6.50

6.00

5.50
(W/m^2K)

Row 1

5.00 Row 4

4.50

4.00
1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.32 1.32 1.32
Reynold's Number × 104
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Using row 4 Reading 7:

Duct Air Velocity, U

𝑇𝑎×𝐻
U = 74.294√ 𝑃𝑎
Where, H – Intake Depression =4mm
Ta – Ambient Temperature =305.15 K
Pa – Atmospheric Pressure =1020 hPa

305.15 ×4
U = 74.294√ = 8.127 ms-1
102000

Effective Air Velocity between the fins, U’

𝑈 ∗ 𝐴𝑑
U’ = 𝐴𝑡
Where, Ad – Duct Cross Sectional Area = 9.75 x 10-3 m2
At – Minimum Flow Area through a Finned Tube Bundle = 4.498 x 10-3 m2
𝑈 ∗ 𝐴𝑑 8.127 𝑥 9.75 x 10−3
U’ = = = 17.617 ms-1
𝐴𝑡 4.498 x 10−3

Heat Transfer Rate, 𝑸̇

𝑉2
𝑄̇ = 𝑅
Where, V – Active Element Heater Voltage = 50.2 V
R – Active Element Heater Resistance = 100 Ω

𝑉2 50.22
𝑄̇ = = = 25.20 W
𝑅 100
➢ Heat Flux, φ

𝑄
φ=𝐴
Where, A – Heat Transfer Surface = 2.194 x 10-3 m2
𝑄 25.20
φ = 𝐴 = 2.194 x 10−3 = 11486.05 Wm-2

➢ Mean Surface Heat Transfer Coefficient, h

φ
h = T1− T2

Where, T1 = 49.1 oC
T2 = 30.5 oC
φ 11486.05
h = T1− T2 = 49.1−30.5 = 617.53

Reynold’s Number, Re

U′∗ d
Re = v
Where, d – Diameter of Tube = 12.7 mm
v – Kinematic Viscosity at T2 = 1.603 x 10-5
U′∗ d 17.617∗ 12.7 x 10^−3
Re = = = 13957.32
v v

Nusselt Number, Nu

h∗d
Nu = k
Where, k – Thermal Conductivity of Air = 0.02669
617.53 ∗ 12.7 x 10^−3
Nu = = 294.84
0.02669
DISCUSSION

Upon analyzing the graphs plotting Heat Flux against Active Element Surface to Air Temperature

Difference, a consistent trend is evident across both rows 1 and 4. This trend is likely attributed

to the influence of the mean surface heat transfer coefficient, inferred from the slope of the plot.

However, variations and discrepancies within the datasets hint at potential experimental errors.

Further exploration reveals the relationship between the heat transfer coefficient and the

Reynold's number, a crucial parameter indicating fluid flow characteristics. A higher Reynold's

number denotes increased turbulence. Our calculations consistently show that as the element

voltage or surface temperature increases, there's a corresponding decrease in the Reynold's

number. Graph 2 also illustrates an inverse relationship, indicating that as the mean surface heat

transfer coefficient increases, the Reynold’s number decreases. This suggests that more efficient

heat transfer occurs with less turbulent flow.

The concurrent decline in the mean surface heat transfer coefficient alongside the Reynold's

number underscores the complexity of heat transfer processes within the heat exchanger. These

observations highlight the importance of meticulous analysis in optimizing heat exchanger

performance.
SOURCES OF ERROR
Some sources of error that were observed were:
1. Fluctuation of temperature values – the console was quite sensitive and there was
inconsistency with obtained temperature values even after allowing the system to reach
equilibrium.
2. Changes in ambient temperature were not accounted for – during this experiment ambient
temperature may have increased or decreased due to heating and cooling elements in the
environment.
3. Parallax error in reading the manometer

PRECAUTIONS
Some precautions that were observed were:
1. The system was allowed to reach a steady state by settling for 2 minutes before readings were
recorded to avoid major skews in findings.
2. The pathways of the heat exchanger were ensured to be clear of any debris and a safe distance
from the exhaust was maintained.
3. The heating element was allowed to cool before being removed from the equipment as the
ensure proper safety.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the heated element placed in row 1 had more efficient heat transfer to the ambient
air via convection due to it experiencing a greater flow by it being higher than row 4. The mean
heat transfer coefficient was observed to increase with decreasing turbulent flow which was to be
expected. An improvement to this experiment would be to replace fins regularly to ensure that
heat transfer is not affected by faulty equipment.