Course No: ChE 304

Experiment No. 01
STUDY OF HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT IN
A DOUBLE PIPE HEAT EXCHANGER

Date of Performance: 10/10/20

Date of Submission: 17/10/20

Submitted By, Submitted To,

Abir Mandal Mesbah Ahmad
Student ID. 1602021 Lecturer
Group 04(A1)
Partner’s Student ID:
1602018, 1602019, 1602020

Department of Chemical Engineering, BUET

Summary
A double pipe heat exchanger is an instrument for chemical engineers as it is used very
extensively in industry. It is one of the simplest types of heat exchangers. In this experiment
the double pipe heat exchange is studied and the objective of this experiment is to obtain
individual and overall heat transfer co-efficient as well as to study the variation of heat
transfer coefficient with the saturated steam inlet pressure. After that experimental and
estimated heat transfer coefficient was also compared. In the experiment the temperature
difference between the inlet and outlet water as well as water flow-rate was observed. The
steam condensate flow-rate was also measured. The experiment was repeated five times for
the steam pressure of 5 psig and four times for the steam pressure of 10 psig for different
water flow rate. The finding of this experiment are the theoretical and experimental overall
heat transfer coefficient. The experimental overall heat transfer coefficient varied from
822.98 W/m2.K to 2295.70 W/m2.K for different flowrate of water and saturation steam
pressure whereas the theoretical overall heat transfer coefficient varied from 675.45 W/m2.K
to 1916.89 W/m2.K. Nusselt Number versus Reynold Number on a logarithmic plots were
also includes which implies the Dittus-Boelter equation is applicable for this experiment.
From plot h versus velocity (v) on a logarithmic graph implies the heat transfer rate increases
exponentially with the velocity of water due to the forced convection heat transfer. Wilson
plot was also attached with this experiment which relates the dirt factor for this experiment.
Due to the old experimental setup the values found in the experiment caused some errors but
the experiment was done successfully.
Experimental setup

Figure 1: experimental setup of double pipe heat exchanger

Observed Data
Inner tube specifications:
Tube length = 7' 4''
Nominal diameter =1''
Schedule no. 40

Table 01: Observed data for study of double pipe heat exchanger
Observatio Steam Water temperature Water flowrate Condensate
n pressure, (oC) flowrate
no. P Inlet, T1 Outlet, Volum Time (s) Mass Time (s)
(psig) T2 e(L) (kg)

1 31.00 57.00 10.00 102.00 0.21 30

2 32.00 48.00 10.00 40.00 0.31 30.28

3 5 32.00 45.00 10.00 30.19 0.47 29.9

4 31.00 43.00 10.00 22.05 0.66 30

5 31.00 42.00 10.00 18.50 0.71 30

1 31.00 60.00 10.00 120.00 0.30 40

2 10 31.00 47.00 10.00 38.50 0.39 40

3 31.00 42.00 10.00 24.70 0.49 40

4 31.00 41.00 10.00 18.00 0.69 40

Results and Discussions
Table 02: Final findings on theoretical and experimental heat transfer co-efficient for
different trials
Observation no Steam pressure, P Experimental overall Theoretical overall
(psig) heat transfer heat transfer
coefficient, UOE coefficient, UOT
(W/m2.K)
(W/m2.K)
1 875.92 745.92
2 1230.96 1302.93
3 5 1614.61 1506.60
4 2139.06 1763.11
5 2295.70 1910.57
1 822.98 675.45
2 10 1086.32 1318.01
3 1233.19 1646.06
4 1645.38 1916.89

From the chart it can be seen that the experimental overall heat transfer co-efficient is greater
than the theoretical overall heat transfer co-efficient which is unusual. As there are fouling
due to dirt, heat radiation present in the steam pipe line, the experimental overall heat transfer
co-efficient should be smaller than theoretical overall heat transfer coefficient. To calculate
the theoretical value some experimental value was used and that values might have been
inaccurately taken during the experiment which might have resulted negative dirt factor. Thus
the experimental value was greater than the theoretical data.

In the experiment the heat is transferred in two modes. They are conductive and convective
modes. The Nusselt number represents the ratio of convective to conductive heat transfer at a
boundary in a fluid and the convective heat transfer rate is a function of the velocity of the
fluid. And using the velocity Reynolds number can be found. Thus a log-log plot can be
drawn using the relation between the Nusselt number and the Reynolds number. Two graphs
had been plotted using the values for steam pressure at 5 psig and 10 psig. From the plot it
was found that the Nusselt number increased exponentially with Reynolds number. This
implies that with the increase in velocity of the cooler fluid (water) the convective heat
transfer increased exponentially with a base of 10 (in both cases) which is quiet desirable to
our theoretical consideration.
 400.00
Nusselt Number (Nu)

40.00
5000 50000
Reynolds Number (Re)
Figure 2: Variation of Nusselt Number with Reynolds Number (for Steam Pressure of 5 psig)

300.00

f(x) = 0.00437904391782243 x + 14.4033200041481

Nusselt Number (Nu)

30.00
4000 40000
Reynolds Number (Re)

Figure 3:Variation of Nusselt Number with Reynolds Number (for Steam Pressure of 10 psig)
A graph between heat transfer co-efficient vs velocity of water also had been plotted for both
cases (saturated steam pressure at 5 psig and 10 psig)
Heat Transfer Co-efficient (hi)

10000.00

f(x) = 4161.37747813872 x^0.759319073068409

R² = 0.999982052498896

1000.00
0.10 1.00
Velocity of Water (v)

Figure 4: Variation of Water Side Heat Transfer Coefficient with Velocity of Water (For
Steam Pressure of 5 psig)

From the graphs it were found that the heat transfer co-efficient also increases exponentially
with a base of 10 with the velocity of water as the forced convection increases with it.

10000.00

f(x) = 4100.07544289325 x^0.748170557966304

Heat Transfer Co-efficient (hi)

R² = 0.999938862565723

1000.00

100.00
0.10 1.00
Velocity of Water (v)

Figure 5: Variation of Water Side Heat Transfer Coefficient with Velocity of Water (For
Steam Pressure of 10 psig)
The effective thermal resistance between the hot and cold fluids in a heat exchanger can be
measured experimentally. However, it is not straightforward to separate out the individual
heat transfer coefficients that act on each of the two sides. The standard answer to this
problem was proposed by Wilson and his solution has remained the basis of the method and
its several subsequent refinements ever since. The Wilson Plot is based on the assumption
that there exists a simple power law relationship between surface heat transfer coefficient and
fluid flow rate. Wilson graph is plotted using the data of velocity and overall heat transfer
coefficients.

0.0016

0.0014

0.0012

0.0010
Resistance, 1/U

0.0008

0.0006

0.0004

0.0002

0.0000
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50
(1/v)0.8
Figure 6: WIlson Plot (For Steam Pressure of 5 psig)

Here, the experiment line should be above the theoretical line. The experimental thermal
resistance should be greater than the theoretical line because of the presence of dirt and
fouling inside the heat transfer tube. Also, heat also escaped from the system because of the
improper thermal insulation. To calculate the theoretical value some experimental value was
used and that values might have been inaccurately taken during the experiment which might
have resulted negative dirt factor. Thus the experimental value was greater than the
theoretical data.

In the 2nd graph at 10 psig the theoretical thermal resistance was following the correct trend.
The theoretical thermal resistance was lower than the experimental thermal resistance at
higher velocity. Then with the decrease with velocity the theoretical thermal resistivity got
above the experimental thermal resistivity.

0.0016

0.0014

0.0012

0.0010

0.0008
1/U

0.0006

0.0004

0.0002

0.0000
0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

(1/v)0.8
Figure 7: WIlson Plot (For Steam Pressure of 10 psig)

To find more accurate result and plots the experiment should be done more carefully. To
reduce error the experiment should be done with more time. As the experimental setup was
old, there were some defects like improper insulation, deposited dirt in the heat transfer tube
which caused fouling. This might also added some error in the experimental data. If these
problems were avoided more accurate and uniform result might be found from the
experiment.

REFERENCES
1. Cengel, Yunus., and Ghajar, Afshin J. Heat and mass transfer: fundamentals and
applications. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2014,Page-920,Table A-11.
2. Kern, Donald Q. Process heat transfer. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 1997, Page-844,
Table 11.
3. Holman, J. P., and Bhattacharyya, Souvik. Heat Transfer-In Si Units. Tata McGraw-Hill
Education, 2002,Page-597,Table-A2.
APPENDIX
Calculated Data

Table 03: Water properties at average water temperature

Observation Temperature Average Specific Density, ρ Viscosity, Thermal

no difference of water heat, Cpm (kgm-3) μ×104 conductivity,

inlet and temperature (Jkg-1.K-1) (Pa.s) Km (Wm-1K-1)

outlet water (OC)

∆T

(OC)

1 (5 psig) 26.00 44.00 4179.8 990.5 6.074 0.64

2 (5 psig) 16.00 40.00 4179.8 992.21 6.53 0.63

3 (5 psig) 13.00 38.50 4178.8 992.67 6.73 0.63

4 (5 psig) 12.00 37.00 4178.8 993.2 6.81 0.63

5 (5 psig) 11.00 36.50 4178.8 993.43 6.91 0.63

1 (10 psig) 29.00 45.50 4180.8 989.9 5.91 0.64

2(10 psig) 16.00 39.00 4178.8 992.48 6.66 0.63

3(10 psig) 11.00 36.50 4178.8 993.43 7.00 0.63

4(10 psig) 10.00 36.00 4178.8 993.62 7.07 0.62

Table 04: Calculated data for saturation temperature, latent heat of condensation, mass flow
rate of water and condensate, heat given by steam and heat taken by water.

Obs. no Steam Saturation Latent heat Mass Mass Heat Heat

pressure temperature of flow flow given up taken
(psig) of steam condensation rate of rate of by steam, up by
(OC) , λ (kJ/kg) water, conden Qc water, Qw
MW sate, (W) (W)
(kg/s) MC
×102
(kg/s)

1 0.10 0.7 15640.43 10553.18

2 0.25 1.02 22874.75 16585.78

3 5 108.37 2234.3 0.33 1.57 35121.84 17861.85

4 0.45 2.20 49155.63 22582.80

5 0.54 2.37 52879.55 24680.72

1 0.08 0.75 16615.50 9999.88

2 0.26 0.97 21600.15 17233.37

10 115.20 2215.5
3 0.40 1.23 27138.65 18485.56

4 0.55 1.73 38215.65 23064.13

Table 05: Calculated data for Mean rate of heat, experimental overall heat transfer
coefficient, Wall temperature, velocity and Reynolds number.
Obs. Steam Mean LMTD Experiment Wall Velocity Reynolds

no pressure rate of (OC) al overall temperature, v no. Re

(psig) heat, QM heat transfer TW (m/s)

(W) coefficient, (OC)

UOE

(W/m2.K)

1 13096.80 63.51 875.92 76.20 0.18 7638

2 19730.27 68.08 1230.96 74.20 0.45 18149

3 26491.84 69.69 1614.61 73.45 0.59 23339

4 5 35869.22 71.22 2139.06 72.70 0.81 31592

5 38780.13 71.75 2295.70 72.45 0.97 37134

1 13307.69 68.68 822.98 80.35 0.15 6668

2 19416.76 75.92 1086.32 77.10 0.47 18482

3 22812.11 78.57 1233.19 75.85 0.73 27455

10

4 30639.89 79.09 1645.38 75.60 1.00 37324

Table 06: Calculated data for Prandtl no., Water side heat transfer coefficient, Nusselt no.,
film temperature and water density, viscosity, thermal conductivity at film temperature.

Obs. Steam Prandtl Water side Nussel Film Water Water Thermal
no pressur no. heat t no. Temperatur Densit viscosity conductivit
e Pr transfer Nu e, Tf y at Tf, at Tf, μf y
(OC) ρf ×104 at Tf, kf
(psig) coefficient,
(kg/ (Pa.s) (W/m.K)
hi m3)
(W/m2.K)

1 3.99 1111.37 46.62 84.25 968.66 3.35 0.67

2 4.32 2263.59 95.67 82.75 969.77 3.43 0.67

3 5 4.47 2789.06 118.33 82.18 970.14 3.45 0.67

4 4.54 3558.37 151.55 81.62 970.57 3.48 0.67

5 4.62 4065.33 173.36 81.43 970.74 3.49 0.67

1 3.87 989.85 41.40 89.06 965.83 3.18 0.67

2 4.42 2308.30 97.81 86.62 967.19 3.27 0.67

3 10 4.68 3206.66 136.75 85.69 967.71 3.31 0.67

4 4.73 4109.16 175.46 85.50 967.82 3.31 0.67

Table 07: Calculated data for Steam side heat transfer coefficient, theoretical overall
heat transfer coefficient, experimental 1/U, theoretical 1/U, and (1/v)0.8.

Obs. Steam Steam side Theoretical overall Experimental Theoretical (1/v)0.8

no pressure heat transfer heat transfer 1/UOE 1/UOT (s/m)
(psig) coefficient, hO coefficient, UOT (m2.K/W) (m2.K/W)
×104 ×104
(W/m2.K) (W/m2.K)

1 8315.98 745.92 11.4 13.4 4.02

2 8136.28 1302.93 8.12 7.67 1.90

3 5 8078.20 1506.60 6.19 6.64 1.52

4 8021.14 1763.11 4.67 5.67 1.18

5 8003.12 1910.57 4.36 5.23 1.03

1 8247.27 675.45 12.2 14.8 4.58

2 8007.53 1318.01 9.21 7.59 1.84

10
3 7920.48 1646.06 8.11 6.08 1.29

4 7903.61 1916.89 6.08 5.22 1.00

Sample calculation
For observation no. 04 (5 psig Steam Pressure, No. 4 Observation):
Water inlet temperature, T1 = 31.00 oC
Water outlet temperature, T2 = 43.00 oC
(T 1+T 2) (31.00+ 43.00) o
Mean temperature of water, Tm = = C = 37.00 oC
2 2
Properties at mean temperature, Tm= 37.00oC
Density of water, ρm = 993.20 kg/m3 [1]
Viscosity of water, μm = 6.81 x 10-4 kg/m.s [1]
Thermal conductivity of water, km = 0.63 W/m.oC [1]
Specific heat of water, Cp= 4178.00 J/kg.K [1]

Volume of water, L = 10 L
Water collection time, tw = 22.05 sec
10
Volumetric flow rate of water, Ww = L/ s =0.45 L/s
22.05
0.45 ×993.20
Mass flow rate of water, Mw = W w × ρm = ( ) kg/s = 0.45 kg/s
1000

Mass of condensate collected, Wc = 0.66 kg

Condensate collection time, tc = 30 s
Wc 0.66
Mass flow rate of condensate, MC = =( ) kg/s = 0.022 kg/s
tc 30

Rate of heat taken by water, Qw = Mw × Cp× (T2-T1)

= 0.45 × 4178.00 × (43.00-31.00) J/s
= 22582.8 J/s

Heat of condensation of steam at 5 psig (19.7 psia), λs = 2234.3 kJ/kg

Rate of heat given by steam, Qc = Mc × λs
= (0.022 × 2234.3) kJ/s
= 49154.6 J/s

Mean rate of heat flow,

QW +QC 22582.8+49154.6
Qm = = J /s = 35869.22 J/s
2 2

Saturation temperature of steam at 5psig (19.7 psia), Ts = 108.39oC

Temperature difference at inlet,

ΔT1 = Ts - T1 = (108.39 – 31.00)oC = 77.39oC
Temperature difference at outlet,
 ΔT2 = Ts - T2 = (108.39 – 43.00) oC = 65.89 oC
Log mean temperature difference,
ΔT 1 −ΔT 2
ΔT 1 77.39−65.89
ln 77 .39
ΔT 2 ln
65.89
o
ΔTlm = = C = 71.48oC

For 1 in. nominal diameter & schedule 40 steel tube,

The outside surface per linear feet, Ao = 0.344 ft2/ft[2]
Inside diameter (ID) of the pipe, Di = 1.049 in. = 0.02665 m.[2]
Outside diameter (OD) of the pipe, Do = 1.32 in. = 0.033528 m.[2]
Tube length = 7 ft. 4 in. = 88 in. = 7.33 ft.
Outside area available for heat transfer, Ao = 0.344×7.33 ft2 = 23.54 x 10-2 m2.

Qm
Experimental overall heat transfer coefficient, UOE = ΔT lm . A0
35869.22 2 o
= −2 W/m . C
71.48× 23.54 ×10
= 2139.06 W/m2.oC
Now,
0.45
Ww 1000
Velocity of water flow, v = = 2 m/s = 0.81 m/s
Ai 0.02665
3.1416 ×( )
4

Di × ρ× v 0.02665 ×993.20×0. 81
Reynolds number of water, Re = = −4 = 31592
μm 6.81 ×1 0

C P × μm 4178 ×6.81 ×1 0−04

Prandtl no. of water, Pr = = = 4.54
km 0.63

1
Nusselt number of water, Nu=0.023 × ℜ0.8 × Pr 3 = 151.55

Water side heat transfer coefficient for turbulent flow using Dittus-Boelter equation,
km
hi = 0.023 × D i ×(Re)0.8 ×(Pr)1/3
 0.63
= 0.023× × (31592)0.8× (4.54)1/3
0.02665

= 3558.37 W/m2.oC

T s+T m 108.39+37.00
Wall temperature,Tw= = ℃=72.70 ℃
2 2

Film temperature, Tf = Ts - 0.75 × (Ts-Tw)

= 108.39 - 0.75× (108.39–72.70) oC
= 81.62 oC

Properties of condensate at film temperature, Tf = 81.62oC

Density, ρf = 970.57 kg/m3[1]

Viscosity of condensate, μf = 3.48 ×10−4 kg/m.s[1]

Thermal conductivity of condensate, kf = 0.67 W/m.oC[1]

Steam side heat transfer coefficient using Nusselt equation for film type condensation,
k 3 . ρ 2 . g . λS
f f 0. 25
0 . 725×[ ]
ho = D 0 (T S −T W )μ f

=0.725 ׿ W/m2.oC
= 8021.14 W/m2.oC

Carbon-steel metal’s thermal conductivity, kM = 43 W/m.oC [3]

Theoretical overall heat transfer coefficient,

UOT = ¿
= ¿ W/m2.oC
= 1763.11 W/m2.oC

1 1
Now, = =¿ 4.67 ×10−4 m2.oC/W
U OE 2139.06
 1 1
= = 5.67 ×10−4 m2.oC/W
U OT 1 763.11

1 1
= 0.8
v
0.8 ¿ ¿ (s/m)

Marking Scheme

STUDY OF HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT IN A DOUBLE

PIPE HEAT EXCHANGER

NAME: Abir Mandal

STUDENT NO: 1602021

Section and % Marks Allocated Marks

Summary (15%)

Experimental work (25%)

Result and Discussion (30%)

Quality of Figures (10%)

Quality of Tables (10%)

Overall Presentation (10%)

Total (100%)