Sealing Strips in Tubular Heat

Exchangers
This paper presents design data relating to sealing strips for tubular heat exchangers.
C. E. Taylor Sealing strip shapes, locations, and gap widths (the distance between the sealing
strip and the nearest tube) are evaluated as to the pressure drop they create and,
more importantly, as to their heat transfer characteristics. Velocity data were col-
I. G. Currie lected using a laser-Doppler anemometry system for which the fluid within the test
Mem. ASME model flow loop was refractive index matched with thepyrex rods that made up the
tube bundle. A normalized heat transfer coefficient for each test has been inferred
Department of Mechanical Engineering, from the local velocity field. Unexpected trends were found in the heat transfer and
University of Toronto, pressure drop results of the gap width tests. It was concluded that the rectangular
Toronto, Canada, M5S 1A4 sealing strip located at the seventh row with a gap equal to the difference between
the tube pitch and the tube diameter was the most effective. The successful applica-
tion of LDA in the test program introduces a powerful measuring technique for the
flow field in and around tube banks. From the measurements, pressure drops and
heat transfer coefficients may be deduced. In addition, the technique will prove to
be of great value in the field of flow-induced vibrations where detailed velocity data
are required.

Introduction
Shell-and-tube heat exchangers contain both baffle plates as a quick and easy design tool for rating various heat ex-
and sealing strips as shown in Fig. 1. The baffles force the changer geometries. This method dealt with the effectiveness
flow to pass normal to the tubes and they serve to support the of sealing strips by using a correction coefficient that varied
tubes. In order to facilitate assembly of the heat exchanger, a with bypass area and sealing strip location. Even in this cur-
space exists between the tube bundle and the retaining shell. rent rating method, neither the actual shape of the sealing strip
This space offers a hydraulic short circuit to the fluid, thus nor the size of the gap between the strip and the tube bundle
reducing the effectiveness of the device to exchange heat. Seal- was considered.
ing strips, which are metal strips mounted on the baffles and In England, heat transfer research has developed rapidly
running parallel to the tubes, are introduced to block this since the early 1960s. Gay and associates [8, 9] at the Univer-
bypass flow partially, thereby increasing the effectiveness of sity of Aston developed an electrochemical mass transfer
the device. technique, using the Chilton-Colburn analogy to predict heat
Until the late 1940s, tubular heat exchanger design was car- transfer coefficients. The early work was purposely performed
ried out with the aid of previous experience and the ideal tube in heat exchanger geometries that had previously been tested
bank data of such early researchers as Grimison [1]. The addi- by conventional methods in the USA. The far greater speed
tion of baffles, spacers, tie rods, tube-free lanes, and sealing and ease of this new technique made it the choice of H.T.F.S.'
strips led to commercially usable designs for which heat as they launched an experimental program that has been pro-
transfer and pressure drop could not be accurately predicted. ducing heat-exchanger design data since 1971. No studies on
Experimentation was required to provide a data base from sealing strips have yet been disclosed but Macbeth [10]
which empirical equations could be developed. reported many of the program findings in a 1983 publication.
Such a program was initiated in 1947 with Bergelin and Col- A review of the problems involved in heat exchanger design,
burn as the principal investigators and was known as the together with a status report on their progress, has been
Delaware project. This project adapted a shell-side flow presented by Taborek [11]. This review points out that the cur-
mechanism first presented by Tinker in 1951 [2]. Tinker iden- rent analyses of the problems, such as that presented by Palen
tified four streams in the shell-side flow of a heat exchanger and Taborek [12], rely on large data banks for the values of
and a fifth stream was later identified. The main cross-flow the flow resistances and the heat transfer coefficients. Yet,
stream passed from one baffle window, across the tubes and significant gaps exist in these data banks. For example, Gor-
out through the other window. An ideal baffled heat ex- man [13] presented data relating to cross-flow vibrations of
changer would have all of the shell-side fluid following this rods near sealing strips. However, only total flow velocities
route. The other four streams were "leakage" or "bypass"
streams which reduced the heat exchanger efficiency. One of H.T.F.S. = Heat Transfer and Fluid-Flow Service, Harwell, England.
these streams passed between the baffle and the shell. This
bypass area cannot be easily blocked and has therefore
become an accepted loss. Another stream passed between the
tubes and the shell. Some success has been found in diverting TUBES IN
this flow through the use of sealing strips. The importance of TUBE BUNDLE

this bypass stream has been repeatedly emphasized in papers

by Tinker [3], Bergelin et al. [4], Test [5], and Test et al. [6].
The final Delaware report was published in 1963 and has
been continually updated since that time. A recent paper by
Bell [7] outlined the "Delaware method" that was developed BAFFLE
CUT
BAFFLE
WINDOW
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division for publication in the JOURNAL OF
HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received by the Heat Transfer Division June 3,
1985. Fig. 1 Shell-and-tube heat exchanger

Journal of Heat Transfer AUGUST 1987, Vol. 109 / 569

Copyright
Downloaded From: https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 ©Use:
Terms of 1987 by ASME
http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 were recorded, not local velocities. That is, the existing data

• I1
4PF ESSURE TAPS
are inadequate with respect to their application to flow-
1"-
induced vibration analysis or computer code evaluation.
An attempt is made in this paper to illustrate the need for
further investigation into the effect of sealing strip geometry
25

25
pj 1 >. y
piillllP]
_ ^
' X
and location on the heat transfer characteristics of a tube bun-
1
dle. This need is especially apparent to those attempting to
numerically predict heat exchanger thermal-hydraulics
102
through the use of computer models.
The experimental work outlined in this paper was initiated j—12.7 DIA.
primarily to supply experimental data which could be used to
test the computer code reported by Carlucci et al. [14]. This ooooo
code has been developed to predict the detailed shell-side flow 19.1 )0000
in a wide range of shell-and-tube heat exchanger geometries. OOOOO
In 1979, Rowe [15] presented a summary of the progress made )O0O0
in the analytical approaches to thermal-hydraulic modeling. 406 356
He emphasized the need for experimental work dealing with ooooo
)0000
the turbulent mixing in rod bundles and with abnormal flow
distributions due to blockage and support structures. An ooooo
understanding of the effects of sealing strip geometry is indeed )0000
important to heat exchanger technology, the development of ooooo
which grows increasingly as we strive for more efficient )oooo
devices.
The bypass flow has a significant effect on the temperature
ooooo
profile through a heat exchanger, and on the mean T
temperature difference across it. This is a consequence of the 44
9.5 191
fact that the bypass flow does not make contact with the same
amount of heat transfer area as does the main crossflow. Thus I
*
the bypass flow experiences a lower temperature change than 25
the main crossflow, giving rise to a mixing of two flows of dif-
4PF ESSURE TAPS
fering temperatures at the exit to the tube bank. 13|j- •>-« -|
-*-
OUTLET
2 Test Facilities
Dimensions, in mm
The equipment consisted of a transparent heat-exchanger
test section, a liquid of matching refractive index, a flow loop, Fig. 2 Test section and tube array

and instrumentation for velocity, pressure, and temperature

measurement. Design details can be found in [16].
The test section was constructed of tempered glass with an glass. The full bank of rods was finished on both sides with
aluminum frame. The rod bundle geometry, which is shown in half rods to simulate the symmetry of a heat-exchanger tube
Fig. 2, was chosen to represent a section of a nuclear steam assembly. The half rods rested against thick Pyrex glass slabs
generator tube bundle. The heat exchanger tubes were mod- that created a 114.3 mm x 114.3 mm cross-sectional area
eled by 12.7 mm o.d. Pyrex rods. The rods were arranged in within the test section. After removing three streamwise rows
an equilateral triangular pattern having center-to-center spac- (two of full rods and one of half rods), an aluminum sealing
ing of 19.1 mm. This amounted to a pitch-to-diameter ratio of strip could be inserted at any rod row.
1.5. The test section consisted of 12 rows of rods in the stream- The use of a header (1.1m above the test section), a settling
wise direction, each of these consisting of six rods in the cross- chamber (0.61 m in length), and an inlet nozzle provided a
flow direction. In Fig. 2, which shows the test section with 214 steady, uniform flow with minimal boundary-layer develop-
stream wise rows removed, the flow entered at the top and ex- ment. The flow loop could not provide a wide range of flow
ited at the bottom. The first cross-flow row consisted of six rates but it was capable of maintaining a Reynolds number of
full rods while the second row consisted of five full rods and 2.6 x 104 and thus a fully turbulent tube bank flow. The
two half rods. This pattern repeated itself in the streamwise Reynolds number was calculated using the gap velocity ug for
direction. a rod-filled tube bank as the velocity scale and the rod
The Pyrex rods were cantilevered into an end plate of diameter as the length scale.
Plexiglass-55 (a particularly corrosion resistant plexiglass). The velocity measurements were made using a laser-Doppler
Plexiglass was used because it is difficult to machine Pyrex anemometry (LDA) system because of the need for an unob-

Nomenclature

C = constant in equation (1), NHTC = normalized heat transfer Re = Reynolds number

W/m 2 K coefficient u = velocity, m/s
D = rod diameter, mm Nu = Nusselt number p = fluid density, kg/m 3
Eu = Euler number P = tube pitch, mm
h = heat transfer coefficient, Pr = Prandtl number Subscripts
W/m 2 K Ap = pressure drop across the A = "all rods" test
k = fluid thermal conductivity, tube bank, N / m 2 g = gap parameter
W/m K q = nondimensionalized heat / = local parameter
m = exponent in equation (1) transfer rate oo = average inlet parameter

570/Vol. 109, AUGUST 1987 Transactions of the AS ME

Downloaded From: https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 Table 1 Test data—summary velocities over the tests, the heat transfer coefficients were
divided by the inlet row equivalent coefficient. The values of
Category •Type Euler Normalized C, m, and D all depended only upon the tube bank geometry
Number Heat Transfer
s and therefore did not vary throughout the tube bank. The
Coefficient
nondimensionalized value of the heat transfer coefficient h is
Control All Rods No 0.354 1.84 1.000
then simply the ratio of the local velocity ut to the average in-
Tests Sealing Strip 0.356 0.67 0.666 let velocity u„, all raised to the exponent m = 0.562. The local
Rectangular 0.370 1.12 0.830 velocities within the first row of the tubes were not included in
Shapes Semi-circular
Triangular
0.356
0.366
0.88
0.83
0.789
0.798
the summation because the flow was not highly turbulent as it
entered the tube bank. All summations were performed over
21.6 cm 0.370 1.12 0.830
••Locations 25.4 cm 0.364 1.08 0.783 the same tube area so that comparisons would be legitimate. A
29.2 cm 0.353 0.94 0.753 normalized heat transfer coefficient NHTC was inferred from
No Gap 0.364 1.47 0.842 the measured data by dividing by the ideal "all rods" case in
Gap
Sizes
0.5
0.75
0.355
0.355
1.21
1.10
0.789
0.791
which no tube-free lane was present.
1.0 0.370 1.12 0.830
*« ( -G2R.) 1.25 1.07
0.366 0.790
1.5 0.358 0.93 0.751
NHTC = = (2)
* Unless otherwise noted all tests were run with
Shape = Rectangular
. \ a„ / JA
Location ~21.6 cm
Gap/(P-D) = 1.0 Pressure drop readings taken for each test have been
presented in this paper in the nondimensionalized Euler
** Locations are measured in the x-direction from the origin shown in Figure 2. number form. A nondimensionalized form was important due
*** The gap between the sealing strip and rod has been nondimensionalized by the gap
to the dependence of the pressure drop on the average inlet
between the tubes (the tube pitch minus the tube diameter). velocity. The equation for the Euler number given below in-
corporates ug, the gap velocity, where ug is equal to the
average inlet velocity multiplied by P/(P—D)
trusive device to measure the gap velocities. A major obstacle
with LDA is the need to make the test section "optically invisi- Ap
Eu = —V (3)
ble" to the laser beams. This was accomplished by using a
fluid mixture of four parts tetrachloroethylene (TCE) and one
part Freon-113 which had a refractive index equivalent to that
of the Pyrex rods and side plates. A temperature control 4 Results
system provided the fine tuning required to maintain the The use of sealing strips to divert flow within heat ex-
proper refractive index of the fluid mixture at 1.471. The mix- changers was approached by examining the variation of seal-
ture had a density of 1610 kg/m3 and a viscosity of 0.844 ing strip shape, location, and gap size. Pressure drop readings
mPa-s, making it 60 percent more dense than water and 16 as well as complete velocity field measurements were used to
percent less viscous than water. determine the Euler number and the normalized heat transfer
A Spectra Physics HeNe 15 mW laser, OEI transmitting op- coefficient for each test. With a greater weighting on the heat
tics, and TSI receiving optics were situated on a traversing transfer results, these two parameters were used to rate the
mechanism. This mechanism enabled the entire LDA system various sealing strip geometries. A summary of the test data is
to move simultaneously from one measuring location to the provided in Table 1.
next without requiring readjustment of the optics. The flow loop could not provide a wide range of flow rates,
The LDA system was capable of measuring only one com- but it was able to maintain a steady flow. For each test con-
ponent of velocity at a time. Since both vertical and horizontal figuration, the flow rate was adjusted to a value between 4.6
components were required, all measurements of a given com- and 4.7 liters per second. This resulted in test section approach
ponent were taken and then the test section was traversed velocities of between 0.353 and 0.370 m/s, as shown in Table
again for the second component. Within the tube bank all of 1. The corresponding Reynolds number, based on the gap
the velocity measurements were made midway between the velocity for a full array of rods and the diameter of the rods,
tubes and at the narrowest gap so that the maximum velocity was 2.6 x 104.
was obtained. Two full velocity field tests without sealing strips were used
as standards. The first test had no tube-free lane while the sec-
3 Data Analysis ond test had a tube-free lane but did not have a sealing strip.
An ideal heat exchanger has no tube-free lanes for shell-side
A comparison of the heat transfer coefficients between the fluid to pass by the tubes. In accordance with this, the all rods
various tests was possible because of the high Reynolds test had a heat transfer coefficient which was 15 percent higher
number of the flow. It was assumed that the fluid properties than any other result. In contrast, the second test had a heat
were constant throughout the tube bank. This is a reasonable transfer result that was almost 10 percent less than any other
estimate in the fully mixed area of the tube bundle (beyond the test, and 33 percent less than the all rods case. Without a seal-
first row) and the heat transfer coefficient is then dependent ing strip to divert the flow back into the tube bank, the fluid
only upon the local velocity. The local velocities are related to moved rapidly at first, then more gradually, into the tube-free
the heat transfer rate through the heat transfer coefficient h, lane as it passed through the test section.
which itself is a function of the Nusselt number. A simple 4.1 Sealing Strip Shape. In practice, the geometry of seal-
form of the Nusselt number for flow across tube bundles of ing strip cross sections has been limited to rectangular shapes.
ten or more rows was developed by Grimison [1] and results in In this study semicircular and triangular shapes were also
the following equation for the heat transfer coefficient: tested, as illustrated in Fig. 3. A large recirculation zone
developed behind the rectangular sealing strip while the
h = CRemPr 3
— for 2000< Re< 40,000; Pr 5:0.7 (1) triangular sealing strip had a narrower zone and the semicir-
cular strip had no noticeable reverse flow area. In selecting the
In order to compensate for the slight variation in inlet rectangular shape as the most effective, the substantially

Journal of Heat Transfer AUGUST 1987, Vol. 109/571

Downloaded From: https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 0.90

I EZZZ\ (a) O
l-
I
0.85

r 0.80

0.75

0.70

I (b)

b
CO
E
0.65

z 0.60 0.5 (3

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

Gap/(P-D)
Fig. 4 Variation of heat transfer with sealing strip gap

obtained in this part of the test program. A peak can be seen at

(c) GAP/(P—D) = 1.0 in both the heat transfer coefficient and
Euler number data. The m = 0.65 and m = 0.5 heat transfer
lines were included to illustrate the fact that the choice of the
value for the exponent m was not crucial in determining the
existence or even the relative size of the peak.
Fig. 3 Sealing strips: (a) rectangular, (b) semicircular, (c) triangular
Some indication as to how the peak happened to occur at
GAP/(P—D) = 1.0 can be found in Figs. 5 and 6. Figure 5
provides typical streamline diagrams of the flow fields that
were measured. These streamline positions were calculated
higher heat transfer coefficient more than compensated for
under the premise that an equal volume of fluid should pass
the greater pressure drop which accompanied it. The large
between each pair of lines. G A P / (P—D) = 0.0 had velocities
recirculation zone created behind the rectangular shape was a
as high as 1.6 m/s within the tube bank and had a very large
desirable phenomenon since it extended the effectiveness of
recirculation zone behind the sealing strip. The size of this
the sealing strip several rows beyond the strip itself.
recirculation zone did not simply decrease as the gap widths
4.2 Sealing Strip Location. Due to the success of the sim- increased. In fact, G A P / ( P - £ > ) = 0.5 and 0.75 had slightly
ple rectangular shape in the pressure test program, the rec- smaller areas of reverse flow than did GAP/ (P—D) = 1.0.
tangular cross section was used in all of the tests that followed. As the gaps were increased further the velocities through the
Moving the sealing strip to different locations within the bypass lane increased and the recirculation zones decreased in
bypass lane simulated changes in the distance between strips in size appropriately.
a full heat exchanger. As the location was lowered, from 21.6 The heat transfer maps shown in Fig. 6 also illustrate that
cm to 25.4 cm and finally to 29.2 cm (see Fig. 2 for the x- GAP/ (P-D) = 1.0 was the most effective gap size. This gap
direction origin), the effective width between the sealing strips size did not produce the highest heat transfer but the higher
increased accordingly. In all cases the effect of the sealing strip values were distributed further into the tube bank. It should be
was obvious. The heat transfer results shown in Table 1 agree noted that the very low values of heat transfer which occur
with the Delaware method [7] and suggest that an increase of along the edge of the tube bank were due, first, to the fact that
15 percent in the heat transfer coefficient would be possible the local velocities were lower in the tube-free lane, and sec-
for this particular tube bank geometry if a sealing strip was ond, to the fact that they were further reduced to compensate
placed at every fifth row of tubes. Of course, the amount of for the smaller tube-surface area which the edge flow
increase in the heat transfer coefficient will depend on the influences.
width of the bypass lane relative to the total flow width of the Figures 5 and 6 help to explain how a peak happens to ap-
tube bank. pear, but the question still remains as to why it is there. The
The rectangular sealing strip was located at x = 21.6 cm for factors influencing the flow patterns within a tube bank and
all further tests. sealing strip geometry are many. To name a few, the inlet
4.3 Sealing Strip Gap Size. The most extensive part of this velocity, tube array geometry, bypass lane size, gap size, and
test program was an investigation of the consequences of vary- fluid properties all affect the local velocities that will be found
ing the distance between the end of the sealing strip and the within the tube bundle. Although only the gap size was altered
nearest tube. These gap size results did not come out as intui- with each new test, the other factors still remain as part of the
tion might suggest. One might expect that as the gap size was balance.
decreased more and more, fluid would be diverted into the The plot in Fig. 4 has been divided into three regions.
tube bank and therefore a monotonic increase in heat transfer Region A represents the "small gap" area. In this area the
coefficient would occur. Figure 4 shows a plot of the results velocities within the tube bank are very high and a very large

572/Vol. 109, AUGUST 1987 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 to be reached. For the purposes of this study an emphasis was
placed on obtaining a high rate of heat transfer. The rec-
tangular cross section then became an obvious first choice.
The placement of the rectangular sealing strip at three dif-
ferent locations within the tube-free lane supported data
already given in the literature. Sealing strips placed close
together (3.6 rows apart) will provide optimum heat transfer
characteristics by diverting a maximum amount of fluid into
the tube bundle.
The most significant results were obtained from the tests
carried out at various gap widths. It was found that
GAP/(P—D) = 1.0 was preferable. This corresponds to a
gap width equal to the spacing between the rods. The flow
mechanisms which produced a peak in the heat transfer results
are not easily explained.
The LDA measurement technique has proved to be ex-
tremely valuable in the present study. It represents an impor-
Fig. 5 Typical streamline plots tant contribution to the state of the art in direct velocity
measurement and inferred heat transfer coefficients and
pressure drops. It is expected to prove to be even more
valuable in flow-induced vibration analysis where details of
the fluid velocity are required, but are difficult to obtain.
The study on the effect of varying gap widths has indicated
that it will be worthwhile performing further tests on actual
heat exchanger geometries. In such tests variation of the tube
diameter, pitch, layout angle and bundle outer tube diameter
could be considered.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the technical
assistance of Dr. R. L. Varty who so capably initiated this
research project. Much of the design and construction of the
flow loop was carried out by E. Morala. Special thanks are ex-
tended to these two individuals for their contributions to this
work.
The research which formed the basis of this paper was spon-
Fig. 6 Typical heat transfer maps
sored by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, Chalk River
Nuclear Laboratories in the form of a research contract held
with the University of Toronto. The financial assistance of-
fered through this contract is gratefully acknowledged.
recirculation zone exists. As the gap widens the flow within the Appreciation is also extended to L. N. Carlucci, of the
tube bank decreases slightly and the momentum no longer car- Engineering Research Branch at the Chalk River Nuclear
ries the flow as far past the sealing strip so that the NHTC Laboratories, for contributing his expertise throughout the
decreases. In Region C the same mechanism is at work with tenure of the research project.
the result that the heat transfer decreases as the gap widens.
The anomaly occurs in Region B. If one moves from Region C
into Region B, one finds that the volume of flow within the
tube bank reaches a quantity such that it is forced back into References
the tube-free lane since its own downward momentum is still 1 Grimison, E. D., ASME Transactions, Vol. 59, 1937, pp. 583-594.
not great enough to maintain the tube bank flow. As one con- 2 Tinker, T., "Shell Side Characteristics of Shell and Tube Heat Ex-
tinues to narrow the gap the growing momentum of the tube changers," General Discussion on Heat Transfer, Institution of Mechanical
bank flow combined with the increased sealing strip length Engineers, London, England, 1951, pp. 97-116.
3 Tinker, T., "Shell Side Characteristics of Shell and Tube Exchangers-A
eventually causes the recirculation zone to grow again and, Simplified Rating System for Commercial Heat Exchangers," ASME Trans-
therefore, the heat transfer coefficient to increase as in Region actions, Vol. 80, 1958, pp. 36-52.
A. This is one attempt at an explanation as to why GAP/ 4 Bergelin, O. P., Bell, K. J., and Leighton, M. D., "Heat Transfer and
(P—D) = 1.0 is the most effective gap size. Fluid Friction During Flow Across Banks of Tubes - VI, The Effect of Internal
Leakages Within Segmentally Baffled Exchangers," ASME Transactions, Vol.
The greatest heat transfer coefficient existed when no gap 80, 1958, pp. 53-60.
was allowed between the sealing strip and the tube. This was 5 Test, F. L., "The Influence of Bypass Channels on the Laminar Flow
not, however, chosen as the most effective gap width because Heat-Transfer and Fluid Friction Characteristics of Shell and Tube Heat Ex-
the Euler number was very high and having the sealing strip changers," ASME JOURNAL OF HEAT TRANSFER, Vol. 83, 1961, pp. 39-47.
6 Test, F. L., and Kingston, R. I., " A Study of Heat Transfer and Pressure
touching the tube was not practical. Drop Under Conditions of Laminar Flow in the Shell-Side of Cross-Baffled
Heat Exchangers," ASME Transactions, Vol. 80, 1958, pp. 593-600.
5 Conclusions 7 Bell, K. J,, "Delaware Method for Shell-Side Design," Heat Exchangers:
Thermal Hydraulic Fundamentals and Design, S. Kakac et al., eds., Hemisphere
The use of any sealing strip will provide a heat transfer coef- Publishing Co., New York, 1981, pp. 581-618.
ficient that will fall between that of the "ideal" rod-filled test 8 Gay, B., and Roberts, P. C. O., "Heat Transfer on the Shell-Side of a
Cylindrical Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger Fitted With Segmental Baffles. Part
section and that of the case with no sealing strip. A test of II: Flow Patterns and Local Velocities Derived From the Individual Tube Coef-
various sealing strip shapes exposed the fact that a com- ficients," Transactions Institution Chemical Engineers, Vol. 48, 1970, pp.
promise between heat transfer and pressure drop would have T3-T6.

Journal of Heat Transfer AUGUST 1987, Vol. 109/573

Downloaded From: https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 9 Gay, B., and Williams, T. A., "Heat Transfer on the Shell-Side of a Liquid Flow Induced Vibrations in Heat Exchangers and Steam Generators,"
Cylindrical Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger Fitted With Segmental Baffles. Part Proceedings 4th International Conference in Structural Mechanics in Reactor
I: Bundle and Zonal Average Heat Transfer Coefficients," Transactions Institu- Technology, San Francisco, 1977.
tion Chemical Engineers, Vol. 46, 1968, pp. T95-T100. 14 Carlucci, L. N., Galpin, P. F., and Brown, J. D., "Numerical Predic-
10 Macbeth, R. V., "Heat Exchanger Design and Practices," Heat Ex- tions of Shellside Heat Exchanger Flows," A Reappraisal of Shellside Flow in
changers: Theory and Practice, J. Taborek et al., Hemisphere Publishing Cor- Heat Exchangers, HTD Vol. 36, W. J. Marner and J. M. Chenoweth, eds.,
poration, New York, 1983, pp. 615-629. ASME, New York, 1984.
11 Taborek, J., "Heat Exchanger Design," Proceedings of 6th Interna- 15 Rowe, D. S., "Progress in Thermal Hydraulics for Rod and Tube-
tional Heat Transfer Conference, Toronto, 1978, pp. 269-283. Bundle Geometries,'' Fluid Flow and Heat Transfer Over Rod or Tube Bundles,
12 Palen, J. W., and Taborek, J., "Solution of Shell Side Flow Pressure ASME Conference, New York, 1979.
Drop and Heat Transfer by Steam Analysis Method," Chemical Engineering 16 Taylor, C. E., "Experimental Development of Sealing Strip Design in
Progress Symposium Series, Vol. 65, 1969. Tubular Heat Exchangers," Master of Applied Science Thesis, University of
13 Gorman, D. J., "Experimental Study of Peripheral Problems Related to Toronto, 1984.

574/ Vol. 109, AUGUST 1987 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use