Thermalfluid Lab – MEC 554 / LSRC / SCA Rev.

01-2017

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA

FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Program : Bachelor of Engineering (Hons.) Mechanical

Course : Thermalfluids Lab
Course Code : MEC 554
Lecturer/Tutor Name : PM DR. RAMLAN ZAILANI
Group : EMD5M2B2

Lab Report

Experiment’s
Tittle

CONCENTRIC TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER

Bil Student Name Student ID

1. Ahmad Syamil Bin Shahruddin 2019654456

2. Akmal Syazli Bin A’Aziyuddin 2019689028

3. Alif Ikhwan Bin Khairunnizam 2019452212

4. Alisa Afzan Binti Mohd Rasani 2019695932

Lab Session : 7 December 2020 Approved by:

(Date)

Submission of Report : 13 December 2020 Received by:

(Date)
 Assessment Rubric: Technical Content. 60 marks

Scale 1 2 3 4 5

Criteria Poor Acceptable Excellent

1. Introduction • Unable to generate a complete • Adequately generate theoretical • Student capable to generate a
(10 marks) theoretical formula i.e. only formula with small errors. complete theoretical formula
writing the final formula. Make some but tolerable errors from the beginning.
Make many errors in • in applications of engineering • All relevant engineering
• applications of engineering principles and concepts. principles and concepts are
principles and concepts. accurately and comprehensively
demonstrated and applied.
2. Experimental • Unable to produce and • Adequately produce an • Student capable to produce a
Procedure appropriate procedure to run appropriate procedure to run detailed procedure to run the
(10 marks) the experiment. the experiment i.e. missing experiment.
• Having no objective(s). steps in procedure. • Objective clearly defined. Would
Would not allow experiment • Having objective(s). Would allow experiments to achieve
to achieve any goals. allow experiment to achieve goals.
most goals.
3. Data / result and • Unable to present • Adequately present • Students capable to articulate
Sample Calculation experimental result using experimental result using experimental result using
(20 marks) appropriate tables, charts, appropriate tables, charts, appropriate tables, charts, graphs
graphs or other presentation graphs or other presentation or other presentation formats.
formats. formats.
4. Discussion and • Unable to relate theoretical • Adequately relate theoretical • Students capable to relate
Conclusion analysis with experimental analysis with experimental theoretical analysis with
(20 marks) result and their practical result and their practical experimental result and their
implication. implication. practical implication. Student
• Unable to come out a clear • Conclusion is not clear, but • capable to express a clear
and understandable yet, understandable in such and concise conclusion.
conclusion. manner.
 Assessment Rubric: Writing Performance Level. 20 marks

Scale 1 2 3 4 5

Criteria Poor Acceptable Excellent

1. Structure • Paragraphs are poorly • Paragraphs are usually well • All paragraphs are well
(5marks) organized; use of sections is organized; use of sections is organized; use of sections is
illogical and hinders logical and generally allows logical and allows easy
document navigation. easy document navigation. navigation through the document.

2. Graphics, figures, • Figures, tables and equations • Some figures, tables and • All figures, tables and equations
tables and equations. are not clearly or logically equations are logically are clearly and logically
(5marks) identified and fail to support identified and adequately identified and strongly support
the text. support the text. the text.

3. Mechanics • Sentences are poorly written; • Sentences are generally well • Sentences are well written; there
(5marks) numerous incorrect word written; a few incorrect word are no incorrect word choices
choices and errors in choices and errors in grammar, and the text is free of errors in
grammar, punctuation and punctuation and spelling. grammar, punctuation and
spelling. spelling.

4. Formatting and • Report is formatted poorly • Formatting of the report is • Formatting of the report is
references (5marks) and lacks a quality cover genarally consistent and professional and includes a
page and index. adequate,includes a quality professional cover page and
• Fails to correctly report any cover page and index. Most index.
sources or to utilize • sources are correctly • All sources are correctly
appropriate citation forms. reported; appropriate citation reported; appropriate citation
forms are genarally utilized. forms are utilized thoughout.
 FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA
40450 SHAH ALAM
SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN
Tel: 03-55435190 Fax: 03-55435160

_ _

REPORT ASSESSMENT FORM

Experiment’s Title:

_ CONCENTRIC TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER

_ Prepared by:

Bil Name Matrix No

1. Ahmad Syamil Bin Shahruddin 2019654456
2. Akmal Syazli Bin A’Aziyuddin 2019689028
3. Alif Ikhwan Bin Khairunnizam 2019452212
4. Alisa Afzan Binti Mohd Rasani 2019695932

Assessment
Course
Outcome FULL MARK GIVEN MARK
No Technical Report
1 Introduction CO2 10

Experimental
2 C02 10
Procedures
Data/result/sample of
3 CO2 20
calculation
Discussion and
4 CO2 20
Conclusion
TOTAL 60 /60

Assessment
Course
Outcome FULL MARK GIVEN MARK
No Writing Performance
1 Structure CO3 5

2 Graphics/Figures/Tabl C03 5
es
3 Mechanics CO3 5

Formatting and
4 CO3 5
references
TOTAL 20 /20

80 /80
TOTAL MARKS
 Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 2

2.0 OBJECTIVE ..................................................................................................................... 2

3.0 THEORY ........................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 APPARATUS .................................................................................................................... 3

5.0 PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................... 4

6.0 RESULT ............................................................................................................................ 6

7.0 DISSCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .......................................................................... 12

8.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 18

9.0 APPENDIX...................................................................................................................... 19
1.0 INTRODUCTION

Heat exchanger is a device which transfers heat from one medium to another, a
Hydraulic Oil Cooler or example will remove heat from hot oil by using cold water or air.
Alternatively, a Swimming Pool Heat Exchanger uses hot water from a boiler or solar heated
water circuit to heat the pool water. Heat is transferred by conduction through the exchanger
materials which separate the mediums being used. A shell and tube heat exchanger pass fluid s
through and over tubes, where as an air-cooled heat exchanger passes cool air through a core
of fins to cool a liquid.

Heat exchangers are commonly used in practice in a wide range of applications, from
heating and air-conditioning systems in a household, to chemical processing and power
production in large plants. Heat exchangers differ from mixing chambers in that they do not
allow the two fluids involved to mix. Heat transfer in a heat exchanger usually involve s
convection in each fluid and conduction through the wall separating the two fluids. In the
analysis of heat exchangers, it is convenient to work with an overall heat transfer coefficient U
that accounts for the contribution of all these effects on heat transfer. The rate of heat transfer
between the two fluids at a location in a heat exchanger depends on the magnitude of the
temperature difference at that location, which varies along the heat exchanger.

2.0 OBJECTIVE

Demonstrate the effect of flow rate variation on the performance characteristics of a

counter-flow concentric tube heat exchanger.

2
3.0 THEORY

The effect of various flow rate on the performance characteristic of counter and parallel flow
concentric tube heat exchanger can be find using these formulas.

Power Emitted = Vh ρh Cph ( Th,in – Th,out )

(Vh is the volumetric flow rate of the hot fluid)

Power Absorbed = Vc ρc Cpc ( Tc,out – Tc,in )

(Vc is the volumetric flow rate of the cold fluid)

Power Lost = Power Emitted – Power Absorbed

Logarithmic mean temperature difference (ΔTm):

ΔTm = (ΔT1 – ΔT2 ) / ln (ΔT1 /ΔT2 )

= [ (Th,in – Tc,out ) – (Th,out – Tc,in ) ] / ln [(Th,in – Tc,out ) / (Th,out -Tc,in )]

Overall efficiency (η)

η = (Power Absorbed / Power Emitted) × 100

Efficiency of the cold medium:

ηc = (Tc,out – Tc,in ) / (Th,in – Tc,in ) × 100

Efficiency of the hot medium :

ηh = (Th,in – Tc,out ) / (Th,out -Tc,in ) × 100

Mean temperature efficiency :

ηmean = ( ηc + ηh ) / 2

Overall heat transfer coefficient (U):

U = Power Absorbed / As . ΔTm

3
4.0 APPARATUS

Apparatus that was used for this experiment:

i. Concentric Tube Heat Exchanger.

5.0 PROCEDURE

i. The hot water temperature has been set to between range of 55℃to 65℃by changing the dial
and the LED light was automatically off.
ii. The volume flow rate of the hot water had been set to 1000𝑐𝑚 3 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 by adjusting the valve.
iii. The volume flowrate of the cold-water also had been set up to 2000𝑐𝑚 3 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 by using the
valve.
iv. The stopwatch had been started.
v. All the temperature on the board had been recorded after 5 minutes.
vi. Step ii. had been repeated by using different volume flow rate of hot water, 2000𝑐𝑚 3 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1,
3000𝑐𝑚3 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 and 4000𝑐𝑚 3 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 by using the valve while the cold-water volume
flowrate remains constant.
vii. Parallel flow data had been recorded.
viii. All the volumetric valve had been turned off.

4
 Figure 1: Valve that were used to change the configuration

ix. The valve on the board in Figure X had been configured to counter flow configuration.
x. Step i. until vi. had been repeated and the counter flow data had been recorded
xi. Parallel flow data and the counter flow data had been tabulated and the heat transfer
coefficient had been calculated for each heat exchanger configuration.

5
6.0 RESULT

Hot water temperature: 64o C

Fixed cold water flow rate: 2000 cm3 /min

Additional info: Tube Specification

1. Heat transmission length: 1.5m

2. Heat transmission area: 0.067 m2
3. Tube outer diameter: 15 x 0.7 mm (thin-wall)
4. Shell outer diameter: 22 x 0.9 mm (thin-wall)
5. Insulation thickness: 20mm

Parallel flow

Hot water Hot water Hot water Hot water Cold water in, Cold water mid, Cold water
flow rate, in, o C mid, o C out, o C oC oC out, o C
cm3 /min

1000 64 47 39 27 29 30

2000 64 48 41 27 30 31

3000 64 48 41 27 30 32

4000 64 49 42 27 31 33

6
Counter flow

Hot water Hot water Hot water Hot water Cold water Cold water mid, Cold water
flow rate, in, o C mid, o C out, o C in, o C oC out, o C
cm3/min

1000 64 47 39 27 29 31

2000 64 50 42 27 31 34

3000 64 51 43 28 32 35

4000 64 50 43 28 32 35

Sample Calculation

- Assume for 1000 cm3 /min hot water volumetric flow rate.
- Refer table A-2 Boiling and Freezing Point Properties for liquid properties.

7
Parallel flow

Interpolate to find 𝜌𝑐and𝜌ℎ,

8
9
10
 Hot wate r Power Power Power Efficiency ΔT1 ΔT2 ΔTm U
flow rate Emitted Lost
Absorbed η
(cm3 /min) (W) (W)
(W) (%) (˚C) (˚C) (˚C) W/(m2 .˚C)

1000 1709 416.8 1292.2 24.39 37 9 19.81 314.03

2000 3147.1 555.3 2591.8 17.6 37 10 20.6 402.3

3000 4720.6 694.1 4026.5 14.7 37 9 19.8 523.2

4000 6020.5 832.9 5187.6 13.8 37 9 19.8 627.8

Counter Flow

Sample Calculation

“Same as Parallel Flow”

Hot wate r Power Power Power Efficiency ΔT1 ΔT2 ΔTm U

flow rate Emitted Lost
Absorbed η
(cm3 /min) (W) (W)
(W) (%) (˚C) (˚C) (˚C) W/(m2 .˚C)

1000 1710.4 555.3 1155.1 32.5 33 12 20.8 398.5

2000 3010.3 971.7 2038.6 32.3 30 15 21.6 671.4

3000 4310.1 971.4 3338.7 22.5 29 15 21.2 683.9

4000 5746.9 971.4 4775.5 16.9 29 15 21.2 683.9

11
7.0 DISCUSSION
AND
CONCLUSION
AHMAD SYAMIL BIN SHAHRUDDIN 2019654456

DISCUSSION

By referring to the result that was calculated, it is shown that the counter flow is better
than parallel follow in factor of heat exchanger. When the water flow rate increases from
1000cm3 /min to 4000cm3 /min, the power emitted by counter flow bit lower than parallel flow.
When looking in term of efficiency, counter flow has higher efficiency. For flow rate of
4000cm3 /min, counter efficiency is 16.9% mean while parallel flow is 13.8%. This is because
counter flow make use every power that is emitted so the power loss will be reduced.

When looking into heat transfer coefficient, counter flow has larger value than the
parallel flow. This is because, logarithmic mean temperature difference counter flow ranged
between 20.8℃ to 21.6℃ meanwhile for parallel flow ranged between 19.8℃ to 20.6℃.

There are some errors that can be found during this experiment and will affects the
recorded result. Systematic is one of the error that is found where this error comes from the
equipment itself. In order to prevent and reduce this error, scheduled maintenance must be done
for the equipment. In addition, other errors is human error. This is because this error happens
when trying to read the level of volume flow of water into desired value. In order to reduce this
error, the eyes must be perpendicular to the measurement level.

CONCLUSION

For the conclusion based on the result, when volume flow rate increase, the power
emitted and absorbed for each flow increase too. Next, counter flow is the best option for heat
exchanging mechanism because it has higher efficiency than parallel flow. In addition, the heat
transfer coefficient changes when the volume flow rate increase. After that, when choosing a
flow that will be used for heat exchange, counter flow is the most suitable option because it
has better performance than parallel flow. For the recommendation, other type of flow may be
observed and compared between parallel and counter flow to see which flow is better in term
of efficiency, and heat transfer coefficient.

13
AKMAL SYAZLI BIN A’AZIYUDDIN 2019689028

DISCUSSION

Based on the outcome, the counter flow can be shown to have a greater heat exchanger
factor compared to the parallel flow. As the volumetric flow rate rises from 1000 to 4000, the
power emitted by the counter flow can be shown to be less than the parallel power. The overall
power emitted is 5746.9W for the counter flow, while the power emitted for parallel flow is
greater than the counter flow of 6020.5W. Meanwhile in terms of power consumed and power
lost, counter flow effectively makes use of any power emitted with each flow, making each
volumetric flow rate's power loss smaller than the parallel flow power lost. In manufactur ing,
saving more capital would ultimately be a top priority for both of them, so a commodity that
can use less intakes such as power or electricity will be chosen to conserve more cash while
having the good quality. So a counter flow is a safer alternative rather than parallel flow in this
experiment.

Meanwhile the average efficiency in counter flow is again more desirable. Compared
to parallel flow, counter flow has a higher efficiency, with the maximum measured average
efficiency being 32.5 percent for a counter flow and 24.39 percent for parallel flow. For both
parallel flow and counter flow, the efficiency is diminished linearly as the volumetric flow rate
is increased. A parallel flow has a lower value compared to a counter flow in terms of the
logarithmic mean temperature. The counter flow has a value of 20 to 21, while the logarithmic
mean temperature range is between 19 and 20 for parallel flow. In this case, a smaller value is
expected than a larger value, such that the total coefficient of heat transfer is greater depending
on the formula to obtain the coefficient of heat transfer; the logarithmic mean temperature is
divided by the power consumed to obtain the coefficient of heat transfer. The value of the
counter flow heat transfer coefficient is also greater than the parallel flow value. As the
volumetric flow rate is increased, the heat transfer coefficient increases linearly for all flows.

There may be a few variables that lead to the experiment's mistake, which is the
structural mistake and the individual mistake. Systematic error is an error created by the
computer itself while human error is caused by the human being himself. So the
methodological mistake that resulted in this experiment is where the original flow temperature
is changed. During the parallel flow, the temperature tends to rise during the experiment, which
can affect the measured and determined results. Meanwhile when changing the volumetric flow
rate, human error is involved. It is perhaps very difficult to achieve the exact value since the
eyes will not be perpendicular to the scale.

14
AKMAL SYAZLI BIN A’AZIYUDDIN 2019689028

CONCLUSIONS

It can be stated on the results of the experiment that:

1) Increasing the volumetric flow rate would increase the power produced and
consumed by both counter flow and parallel flow, and will definitely influence either
of the volumetric flow rate and reduce the power lost.

2) The counter flow performance is greater than parallel flow, making the flow a safer
alternative for a heat exchanger device. In addition, the coefficient of heat transfer is
often altered as the volumetric flow rate is increased.

3) Overall, when it comes to making a decision with parallel flow, counter flow has a
greater heat exchanger efficiency factor.

Using another kind of flow that is in series, for recommendation, to compare the output factor
of the heat exchanger when adjusting the volumetric flow rate.

15
ALIF IKHWAN BIN KHAIRUNNIZAM 2019452212

DISCUSSION

From the result, it can be observed that the counter flow has a good performance of heat
exchanger factor comparing to parallel flow. When the volumetric flow rate is increase from
1000cm3/min to 4000cm3 /min it can be observed that the power emitted by the counter flow is
smaller than the parallel. For the parallel flow, the highest power emitted is 6020.5W while for
the power emitted for parallel flow is higher than counter flow which is 5746.9W. Next, in
term of power absorbed and power lost, basically counter flow make used of every power that
is emitted for each flow making the power loss of each of the volumetric flow rate to be lesser
than the power losses of parallel flow.

Therefore, the overall efficiency is much higher for counter flow compare to parallel
flow. Counter flow has a higher efficiency comparing to the parallel flow which the highes t
overall efficiency calculated is 32.5% for a counter flow and 24.39% for parallel flow. For
parallel flow, when the volumetric flow rate is increases, the efficiency is increases too. Then,
for counter flow, the efficiency of the system decreases when the volumetric flow rate in
increases. In term of the logarithmic mean temperature, a counter flow has a smaller difference
comparing to parallel flow. Counter flow has a range of 20℃ to 22℃ while for parallel flow
the range of the logarithmic mean temperature is between 19℃ until 21℃. In this experiment,
a small value is needed compare to a larger value so that the overall heat transfer coefficie nt
will be higher based on the formula to obtain the heat transfer coefficient. Lastly, the value for
the heat transfer coefficient for counter flow is greater than the parallel flow. The heat transfer
coefficient increased linearly for both of the flow when the volumetric flow rate is increased.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, when the volumetric is increase, the power emitted and absorbed for both
counter flow and parallel flow will increase linearly. Then, the power lost for each of
volumetric flow rate will be decreases. Next, the efficiency of the counter flow is higher than
compare to the parallel flow. This shows counter flow is the most suitable option for the heat
exchanger system. After that, the heat transfer coefficient is affected when the volumetric flow
rate is increases. Lastly, we can see that counter flow has a great performance factor compare
to the parallel flow in the heat exchanger system.

16
ALISA AFZAN BINTI MOHD RASANI 2019695932

DISCUSSION

According to result that had been obtained, it shows that counter flow heat exchanger
is better than parallel flow heat exchanger. The value of volumetric flow rate increase from
1000cm3 /min to 4000cm3 /min showing that power emitted by the counter flow heat exchanger
is lower than parallel flow heat exchanger. When the value of volumetric flow rate is
4000cm3 /min for the counter flow heat exchanger the value of power emitted is 5746.9W.
Meanwhile the power absorbed is 9710.4W and its efficiency is 16.9% higher than parallel
flow heat exchanger efficiency, 13.8%. This is because counter flow heat exchanger uses all
power that is emitted and results to decrease of total power lost. The logarithmic mean
temperature for counter flow heat exchanger is higher compare to parallel flow heat exchanger
which is between 20.8℃ to 21.6℃ while for parallel flow is 19.8℃ to 20.6℃. In this case
there are a few reasons for errors occur in this experiment. First error is systematic error that
caused by the equipment when the initial temperature of the flow is adjusted. Second the error
that caused by the person who execute the experiment which is the human error when adjusting
the volumetric flow rate. This is because it is quite hard to read the exact value as the eye might
not be perpendicular to the scale.

CONCLUSION

For the conclusion, it can conclude that, the value of power emitted and also power
absorbed depend on the value of volumetric flow rate. When the value of volumetric flow rate
for both type of heat exchanger increases the value of power emitted and absorbed also
increase. The efficiency for counter flow heat exchanger is bigger compare to parallel flow
heat exchanger. So counter flow heat exchanger is the best option for a heat exchanger system
compare to parallel flow heat exchanger. Besides counter flow heat exchanger also has a batter
heat exchanger performance factor compare to parallel flow heat exchanger. It is
recommended to use series type of flow for heat exchanger.

17
8.0 REFERENCES

1) Chris, W. (2016, November 12). How do heat exchangers work? Retrieved October
30, 2017, from http://www.explainthatstuff.com/how-heat-exchangers-work.html
2) Dam, G. (n.d.). HEAT TRANSFER - PRINCIPLES & EQUIPMENT - FACTORS
AFFECTING HEAT TRANSFER. Retrieved October 30, 2017, from
http://articles.compressionjobs.com/articles/oilfield-101/1856-heat-exchangers-
boilers-furnaces?start=8
3) Heat Exchanger Flow: Cross flow, Parallel flow, Counter Flow Heat Exchangers.
(2010, January 28). Retrieved October 30, 2017, from
http://www.brighthubengineering.com/hvac/62410- heat-exchanger-flow-patterns/
4) Parallel Heat Flow Exchanger. (n.d.). Retrieved October 30, 2017, from
https://www.brazetek.com/articles/112-parallel- flow-heat-exchangers
5) What is a Heat Exchanger? (n.d.). Retrieved October 30, 2017, from
http://www.thermex.co.uk/news/blog/160-what-is-a-heat-exchanger
6) What is a Heat Exchanger? (n.d.). Retrieved October 30, 2017, from
http://www.thermex.co.uk/news/blog/605-why-counter- flow-heat-exchangers-are-
more-efficient
9.0 APPENDIX
Figure 1: Valve that were used to change the configuration

Figure 2: Concentric Tube Exchanger