Transcript Document

Heat Exchanger
Design Optimization
ME 414 Thermal / Fluid System Design
Final Project
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Fall 2005
December 13, 2005
Team Members: Kris Miller
Matt Obras
Andrew Wall
Ben Warner
Professor: John Toksoy
Problem Statement
 Design a heat exchanger to reduce the temperature of a
chemical by 10º Celsius with the following parameters:
 Mass flow rate is 80,000 kg/hr.
 Fluid enters the heat exchanger at 35º C and should leave
at 25º C.
 Material properties are approximated as water.
 Cooling of the chemical will be achieved by using
treated water.
 City water is available at 20º C.
 Mass flow rate is adjustable.
Goals
 Cool hot fluid by 10º Celsius
 Minimize costs by:
 Minimizing weight
 Minimizing pressure drops
 Optimizing tube material
Funnel Effect
7 Effecting Variables










Tube Outer Diameter
Tube Thickness
Shell Inner Diameter
Shell Thickness
Tube Length
Tube Pitch
Number of Tubes
Number of Tube Passes
Shell and Tube Material
Use of Baffles






Baffle Spacing
Baffle Cut
Shell Flow Rate
Fluid Allocation
Type of Flow
Number of Passes





1 Factor Runs
Engineering
Judgment

Tube OD
Shell ID
Tube Length
Number Passes
Shell Mass Flow
Rate
Use of Baffles
Baffle Space
3 Critical
Variables



Tube OD
Shell ID
Tube Length
2 Factor
DOE’s
Optimization
Starting Point for Optimization Process
Output Variable
Output Value
Weight
330 kg
ΔP
Shell
6000 Pa
ΔP
Tube
30000 Pa
Heat Transfer Rate
930000 W
Matlab DOE & Minitab DOE Main Effects Plots
7 Variables
Matlab DOE & Minitab DOE Main Effects Plots
3 Variables
Pareto Charts
Minitab Design Optimization
 Key Parameter Changes
 Pressure Drop (Shell and
Tube)
 Number of Tubes
 Weight
Final Heat Exchanger Parameters
Input Variable
Input Value
Output Variable
Output Value
Number Tubes
329
Weight
550 kg
Tube Passes
1
ShellΔp
2700 Pa
Tube OD
0.0127 m
TubeΔp
6140 Pa
Tube ID
0.0102 m
Heat Transfer Rate* 948302 W
Tube Length
4.6 m
Results using nominal values based on
Minitab Optimization
Tube Pitch
0.0159 m
*Fouling was taken into consideration
Shell ID
0.3366 m
Baffles
No
Shell Flow Rate
39 kg/s
Conclusion
 Chemical was successfully cooled 10 °C
and met all specifications
 Cost minimized
 Low weight = low material cost
 Low pressure drop = lower operational cost
Questions