5 (2020)
5 (2020)
5 (2020)
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: In this study, a novel and innovative baffle design was offered in order to considerably reduce shell side pressure
Shell-and-tube heat exchanger loss without compromising thermal performance. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was utilized to simulate
Optimization and visualize 3-D turbulent flow field in the shell side so as to investigate various shapes of baffles for preliminary
Three-zonal baffle
baffle design purposes. The simulation results showed that a so-called three-zonal baffle could be superior over
Taguchi method
the several other configurations considered. The set of design parameters was then identified for this shape of
baffle and Taguchi method was employed to determine candidate design configurations for optimum. With the
optimized design of shell-and-tube heat exchanger (STHE) with new baffle configuration, it was found that
thermal performance of the heat exchanger with three-zonal baffles was slightly improved, whereas shell-side
pressure drop was significantly decreased compared to the conventional baffled STHE. The shell side pressure
loss was found to lower by 49%, accompanying an increase in the shell side temperature difference up to 7%. In
addition, CFD analyses of the optimized STHE with three-zonal baffles were performed considering specific
boundary conditions, and the results were validated with the experimental data obtained under the same con
ditions. The results showed that the differences between CFD analyses and experimental data were maximum
7.3% for heat transfer rate and 7.6% for the pressure drop. It was concluded that the three-zonal baffles improved
the STHE performance in terms of both heat transfer rate and pressure loss points of view.
The tube used in the heat exchanger plays an important role in en
ergy transfer. For this reason, many research studies have been carried
1. Introduction
out for heat exchanger tube developed by using heat improvement
techniques. The efforts to improve the performance of heat exchangers
Heat exchangers are devices used for transferring thermal energy
are still in progress [4–6]. The development of heat transfer in the heat
between a solid object and a fluid, or between two or more fluids. The
exchanger using different geometric models still maintains the agenda.
fluids may be separated by a solid wall to prevent mixing or they may be
The only thing targeted in all the different geometries used is to change
in direct contact. They are widely used in space heating, refrigeration,
the physical behavior of the fluid flow to increase the heat transfer.
air conditioning, power stations, petrochemical, chemical, and phar
Although there are different geometric shapes of heat exchangers, the
maceutical industries, natural gas processing and wastewater treatment
STHE has more application areas than the others due to the wide range
[1]. Among these, STHEs are the most commonly used ones. In this
of operating temperature and pressure [4–7]. There are many studies in
system, heat transfer performance depends on many parameters such as
the literature to improve the performance of STHEs. An important part
layout of tubes on the tubesheet, number of baffles, number of tubes and
of these studies focuses on baffle design. For this purpose, many in
length. It is possible to improve the performance of a heat exchanger by
novations such as new baffle design, new baffle configuration have been
changing baffle geometry. Changing the baffle geometry has significant
carried out. Examples of some new types of baffles that are being studied
effects on the flow characteristics and heat transfer on the shell side. The
to improve the performance of Shell and tube heat exchangers are
traditional STHE with segmental baffles are described by high pressure
trefoil-hole baffle [8–10], helical baffle [11–22], flower baffle [8,16,23,
drop, leakage flow in large amount, stagnant flow zones, becoming dirty
24], staggered baffle [23,25], trapezoidal baffle [26], ladder-type fold
and flow induced vibration at high speeds [2,3].
* Corresponding author. University of Sakarya, Engineering Faculty, Mechanical Engineering Department, 54187, Esentepe Campus Serdivan-Sakarya, Turkey.
E-mail address: engint@sakarya.edu.tr (T. Engin).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2020.106417
Received 10 September 2019; Received in revised form 24 March 2020; Accepted 8 April 2020
Available online 30 April 2020
1290-0729/© 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
2
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
the STHEs. CFD analyzes of the heat exchanger with three-zonal baffle
were then performed and the obtained results were compared to the
results of the heat exchanger with conventional baffles. CFD analyses
were performed for two different mass flow rates, one low and one high.
In the first case, the mass flow rates of hot water passing through the
tubes, and mass flow rates of cold water passing through the shell were
taken as 0.5 kg/s and 0.25 kg/s, respectively. On the other hand, in the
second case, the mass flow rates of hot and cold water were taken as
2.88 kg/s and 2.19 kg/s, respectively. The inlet temperatures of hot and
cold water were taken as 77 � C and 15 � C, respectively. Table 1 shows
the properties of the fluids flowing through the heat exchanger.
The flow geometry was modeled with the separate ANSYS Design
Fig. 1. The heat exchangers with conventional and three-zonal baffles.
Modeler for the conventional and three-zonal baffle model. In these
models, two separate control volumes were modeled to analyze shell-
pressure drop and increase heat transfer are determined and the
and-tube side flows. The heat exchangers with three-zonal and con
orthogonal arrays developed by Taguchi are used while blocking the
ventional baffles are shown in Fig. 1. On the other hand, geometric di
parameters. At the same time, the noise ratio (S/N - Signal/Noise) an
mensions of the conventional and three-zonal baffles are given in Fig. 2.
alyses are performed. There are three different convenient functions
In this study, a small STHE for CFD simulations was modeled. A
known as Taguchi loss function and also expressed as a function of noise
commercial CFD package, namely ANSYS Fluent was used for numerical
ratio (S/N, Signal/Noise). These are cases where the performance
computations. Since the flow in the tube-side is well-established both
characteristic is called the least favorable result;
experimentally and theoretically, the current study focused on the tube-
, !
side flow. Table 2 gives the heat exchanger specifications. 1X n
The standard k-ε turbulence model was used in the CFD analyses. S N ¼ 10 log yi 2 (1)
n i¼1
Tetrahedral elements were used and the number of elements was taken
as 7,045,950. Fig. 3. Shows element number independency of the nu In the case of the highest value is the best:
merical solution based on pressure drop and temperature difference. As , !
can be seen from the figure, when the number of elements is increased 1X n
1
S N ¼ 10 log (2)
by more than 7,045,950, there is no change in the values obtained from n i¼1 yi 2
the analyses. The overall view of the mesh structure is shown in Fig. 4. In
order to model the tube surface fouling resistance, thermal conductivity When the nominal value is the best:
was taken as 3.36 W/m-K at the interface. The simulations were per � � 2�
y
formed on a DELL T5600 Workstation (Intel® Xeon®, 3.30 GHz, 2 S N ¼ 10 log 2 (3)
S
processors, 16 cores, 128 GB RAM). The solution time was about 18 h for
each solution. P P
where y ¼ 1n ni¼1 yi , S2 ¼ n 1 1 ni¼1 ðyi yÞ2 , yi is the performance char
acteristic of performance, n is number of test in trial, y is average of
3. Taguchi optimization
observed values, and S2 is the variance of observation value.
In this study, the three-zonal baffle was optimized to provide the
In this study, Taguchi Experimental Design method was used to
maximum heat transfer rate and the minimum pressure drop. While
optimize the STHE with new design three-zonal baffles. Detailed infor
designing the geometry of the three-zonal baffle, five factors, and four
mation about Taguchi method is available elsewhere in the literature
levels of these factors were considered. Table 3 gives these factors and
and therefore we will not provide here any mathematical background of
corresponding levels. Cross-sectional view of the three-zonal baffle is
this method. Therefore, this section is more concerned with the adap
shown in Fig. 5.
tation of the Taguchi method to the study.
When these factors and their levels were taken into consideration, it
Experimental optimization of the STHEs by Taguchi method consists
was decided that the most appropriate orthogonal array was L16
of three main steps: System design, parameter design and tolerance
sequence. The order of the experiments according to this orthogonal
design. In the system design step, it is aimed to determine the parameter
array is shown in Table 4.
values affecting the performance characteristics by designing the STHE.
During this step, layout of the tubes, number of baffles, number of tubes,
4. Experimental studies
length, the distance between baffles, and cross section of the baffle are
defined. In the parameter design step, the best level of parameters are
4.1. Experimental setup and test procedure
defined to optimize the heat exchanger. At this stage, factors that reduce
The experimental studies were carried out on a STHE which has the
geometric dimensions obtained from the optimization. The tube-side
Table 1
flow was supported by a frequency converter pump with a closed
Properties of the fluids in the heat exchanger.
loop. The hot water tank was heated by electrical heaters in order to
Parameter Hot Water Cold Water keep the temperature constant. A continuous stirrer helped to maintain
(Tube side) (Shell side)
the liquid temperature at a constant value for a given test flow rate. On
Mean fluid temperature 338 346 294 298 the other hand, the cold water was controlled with the frequency con
(K)
verter pump and the heated water was evacuated out in a tank. Flow and
Mass flow rates (kg/s) 0.50 2.88 0.20 2.19
Density (kg/m3) 980.4 977.52 998.0 997.0
temperature control were done at the heat exchanger inlet and outlet
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K) 4.187 4.191 4.182 4.180 points. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 6. During the experi
Thermal conductivity 0.659 0.665 0.598 0.607 ments, flow rate and temperature control were done with the control
(W/m.K) 0.444 � 0.399 � 1.004 � 0.894 � panel and necessary controls were provided.
Kinematic viscosity 10 6 10 6 10 6 10 6
The basic elements used in the experimental setup are hot and cold
(m2/s)
Prandtl Number 2.75 2.30 7.01 6.14 water tanks, STHE and control panel. The system also includes globe
3
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
When the heater capacities were 15 kW, the analyses were performed for
Table 2
low flow rates to ensure the stability of the temperature. Table 5 presents
Specifications of the heat exchanger.
the conditions for hot and cold fluids entering the heat exchanger. Heat
Shell diameter 161.5 mm transfer rate was calculated by using the following equation;
Tube outlet diameter 17.2 mm
Tube layout and distance between the tubes Triangle, 22 mm Q_ ¼ mc
_ p ΔT (4)
Number of tubes 37
Heat exchanger length 1356.5 mm where, Q_ is heat transfer rate, m_ is mass flow rate, cp is specific heat of
Central baffle distance 193.5 mm
the fluid, and ΔT is temperature difference.
Number of baffle 6
Tube-to-baffle clearance 0.4
Shell-to-baffle clearance 0 4.2. Uncertainty analysis
Shell-to-bundle clearance 12.3
The measuring process of parameters such as mass flow rate and
temperature always have some errors and these lead to an uncertainty in
experimental data. The thermocouples and flow meter outputs are used
to calculate experimental heat transfer rate. In this study, experimental
uncertainties were calculated by Holman [47] method. The following
equations were used to calculate the uncertainty. The uncertainty is
consists of two parts: the uncertainty of instruments (uQ;_ Ins ) and the un
certainty of repeatability (uQ;_ Rep ).
U Q_ ¼ K � uQ_ (5)
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�ffiffiffiffi
(6)
2
uQ¼
_ ðuQ;Ins _ Þ2 þ uQ;Rep _
sffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffi
2 2
∂Q_ ∂Q_
uQ;_ Ins ¼ um_ þ uΔT (7)
∂m_ ∂ΔT
sffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffi
2 2
∂Q_ ∂Q_
uQ;_ Rep ¼ um_ þ uΔT (8)
∂m_ ∂ΔT
Fig. 3. Element number independency of the numerical solution.
where uQ;_ Ins is the uncertainty of instruments, uQ;_ Rep is the uncertainty of
valves, manometers to measure the pressure differences of the fluids
repeatability, u is the contribution of the uncertainty in the results from
entering and exiting the heat exchanger, and PT100 thermocouples for
parameters m_ and ΔT, K is the coverage factor and was considered as 2 in
measuring the temperature of the hot and cold fluids, and two pumps to
this case. Table 6 shows the measurement ranges, measurement accu
circulate two streams. Before getting the experimental data, the valve in
racy of the measuring devices used in the experimental setup, and un
the tube from which the water came from was opened and the system
certainty levels of the calculated parameters based on experimental
was expected to be filled completely. Then the cold water outlet valve
data.
was opened and the control panel provided hot and cold pumping at the
desired flow rate. After a certain period of time, the system became
stable and the necessary measurement results were taken.
Experiments were performed for seven different input conditions.
4
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
5
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
6
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
Fig. 7. Temperature distributions in the heat exchanger at a mass flow rate of 0.5 kg/s.
of dead zones behind the baffle, thereby pressure drop was decreased, are shown in Fig. 11. As can be seen in the figure, level 4 of factor A,
and thermal performance was improved. Chen et al. [21] investigated level 2 of factor B, level 4 of factor C, level 2 of factor D and level 4 of
the effects of different helical baffle designs on pressure drop and factor E should be considered to minimize the pressure drop
thermal performance of the heat exchanger. Their numerical results (A4B2C4D2E4). Since there is no defined experiment with these levels of
indicated that the helical baffle reduced the pressure drop, and factors among the 16 designed experiments, CFD analyses considering
improved thermal performance compared to the segmental baffle. the optimized factor values was carried out and the pressure drop was
However, the main improvement here is not to increase the rate of heat obtained as 26.5 Pa.
transfer, but to lower the pressure drop in the shell side without wors The confirmation tests were performed and the results were pre
ening the heat transfer. This result was obtained by providing a more sented in Table 9 and Table 10. In Table 9, predicted and actual cold
intense and homogeneous mixing on the shell side and eliminating the water outlet temperature are presented. As can be seen from the table,
recirculation zones and stagnation points. Both CFD results and exper there is very good agreement between predicted and actual values. The
imental measurements confirm this conclusion. results show that improvement in S/N ratio for cold water outlet tem
perature is 0.013 dB. The cold water outlet temperature was also
5.2. Taguchi optimization results approximately 0.15% increased. On the other hand, Table 10 shows
predicted and actual pressure drop values. For pressure drop, the
Table 8 shows the CFD results of the cold water outlet temperature improvement in S/N ratio was 4.3 dB, and the decrease in pressure drop
and pressure drop values in the heat exchanger, which was carried out was approximately 39.27%. The results obtained from confirmation
by taking the experimental conditions determined according to Taguchi tests confirmed the validity of the Taguchi approach used in the opti
optimization method. The results of the analyses show that the mization of design parameters.
maximum outlet temperature is obtained under test conditions 1 and the Table 11 shows ANOVA variance analyses results. As can be seen
minimum pressure drop value is obtained under test conditions 13. from the table, the most important design factor in terms of temperature
Optimum conditions were determined by using Taguchi method for is A with at least 99.99% confidence level. Factors C and D are less
cold water outlet temperature. As the generated design has not been effective. On the other hand, factors B and E are significant but not
included in the main experimental layout, the process was re-iterated effective. In terms of pressure drop, the most important design factors
until the required criteria are satisfied. Fig. 10 shows the Taguchi ana are A, C and E with a confidence level of 95%. However, factors B and D
lyses results performed with Minitab statistical software for cold water are less effective.
outlet temperature. After confirmation test carried out at the 99% con
fidence level, the optimum design factor combination of the baffle were 5.3. Validation of CFD results
obtained by taking into account level 1 of factor A, level 3 of factor B,
level 1 of factor C, level 1 of factor D, and level 1 of factor E In the study, the CFD analyses results were validated with the
(A1B3C1D1E1). Since this experiment was not included among the experimental data. For this purpose, the heat exchanger with conven
defined 16 experiments, the outlet temperature was estimated as 331.5 tional and three-zonal baffles were tested for seven non-consecutive
K considering optimized factors. different mass flow rates and the results were used to validate the CFD
The second objective was to minimize the pressure drop in the heat analyses results performed under the same operating conditions. In
exchanger. The results of Taguchi analyses performed for this purpose Figs. 12 and 13, this validation is performed in terms of pressure drop
7
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
Fig. 8. Pressure distributions in the heat exchanger at a mass flow rate of 0.5 kg/s.
and heat transfer rate, respectively. The results show a good agreement range of 25.3–257.1 Pa. There was a difference up to 7.6% between the
between the CFD analyses results and the experimental values. experimental values and the CFD results.
In Fig. 12, the tube-side experimental pressure drops are compared The heat transfer rates of the heat exchangers calculated using the
with the calculated pressure drops based on CFD analyses for the three- experimental and CFD data are compared in Fig. 13. The horizontal axis
zonal baffle. As can be seen from the figure, the pressure drop in the in the figure shows seven non-consecutive mass flow rate values for
tubes increase with the increase of the mass flow rate as expected. The which experiments and analyzes were performed. As shown in the
experimental pressure drops were calculated in the range of 23.5–240 figure, the heat transfer rate increases as the mass flow rate increases for
Pa, and the pressure drops calculated based on CFD analyses were in the both baffles. A difference of up to 7.3% occurred between the
8
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
Fig. 9. Velocity streamlines in the heat exchanger at a mass flow rate of 0.5 kg/s.
Table 7
Temperature difference and pressure drops in heat exchangers with conven
tional and three-zonal baffles.
Baffle type Mass Mass Temperature Pressure Pressure
flow flow difference drop (Pa) drop (Pa)
rate of rate of between inlet (CFD) (Kern)
cold hot and outlet (K)
water water (CFD)
(kg/s) (kg/s)
Table 8
Pressure and temperature values obtained by CFD analyses.
Experiment number A B C D E Temperature (K) Pressure (Pa)
Fig. 10. Taguchi analyses results performed with Minitab statistical software
1 1 1 1 1 1 331.3 43.14 for cold water outlet temperature.
2 1 2 2 2 2 328.7 32.43
3 1 3 3 3 3 330.1 32.18
4 1 4 4 4 4 328.1 31.77 experimental values and the CFD results.
5 2 1 2 3 4 325.3 38.21
6 2 2 1 4 3 325.7 37.96 6. Conclusions
7 2 3 4 1 2 325.8 33.05
8 2 4 3 2 1 325.8 37.81
9 3 1 3 4 2 326.1 32.81
In this study, a new three-zonal baffle was designed for use in the
10 3 2 4 3 1 326.1 32.61 STHEs. After that, CFD analyzes of the heat exchangers with conven
11 3 3 1 2 4 326.7 32.54 tional and three-zonal baffles were performed and the results of the
12 3 4 2 1 3 327.4 32.63 analyses were compared. The shell-and-tube heat exchanger with the
13 4 1 4 2 3 327.7 29.96
newly developed three-zonal baffle was then optimized using the
14 4 2 3 1 4 328.6 30.09
15 4 3 2 4 1 328.4 35.31 Taguchi method. In the final stage of the study, the results of CFD an
16 4 4 1 3 2 329.7 34.01 alyses using optimized baffles were validated with the experimental
results obtained under the same working conditions. The conclusions
obtained in this study are as follows:
9
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
Fig. 12. Pressure difference on the tube side of the heat exchanger.
Fig. 11. Taguchi analyses results performed with Minitab statistical software
for pressure drop.
Table 9
Confirmation test results for cold water outlet temperature.
Initial Optimum parameters
parameters
Prediction Experiment
Table 10
Confirmation test results for pressure drop.
Initial Optimum parameters
parameters
Prediction Experiment
References
� The three-zonal baffle does not partially block the flow in the shell-
side. Thus, there are no stagnant zones behind the baffles. This re [1] S. Kakac, H. Liu, A. Pramuanjaroenkij, Heat Exchangers Selection, Rating and
duces the fouling and ensures long-term operating periods. Thermal Design, third ed., CRC Press, Washington D.C., 2012.
[2] M. Petrik, G.L. Szepesi, Shell side CFD analysis of a model shell-and-tube heat,
� In the case of using three-zonal baffles, very low pressure drops in the Chemıcal Engıneerıng Transactıons 70 (2018) 313–318.
shell-side occur compared to conventional baffles. With the use of [3] C. Yua, T. Chengb, J. Chenb, Z. Renb, M. Zeng, Investigation on thermal-hydraulic
three-zonal baffles, to the pressure loss in the shell-side has lowered performance of parallel-flow shell and tube heat exchanger with a new type of anti-
vibration baffle and wire coil using RSM method, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 138 (2019)
by 49% compared to conventional segmentally baffled
351–366.
10
N. Biçer et al. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 155 (2020) 106417
[4] B.I. Master, K.S. Chunangad, A.J. Boxma, D. Kral, P. Stehlík, Most frequently used [26] X. Gu, Y. Luo, X. Xiong, K. Wang, Y. Wang, Numerical and experimental
heat exchangers from pioneering research to worldwide applications, Heat Tran. investigation of the heat exchanger with trapezoidal baffle, Int. J. Heat Mass Tran.
Eng. 27 (2006) 4–11. 127 (2018) 598–606.
[5] L. Liebenberg, J.P. Meyer, In-tube passive heat transfer enhancement in the process [27] J. Xiao, S. Wang, S. Ye, J. Wang, J. Wen, J. Tu, Experimental investigation on pre-
industry, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 2713–2726. heating technology of coal water slurry with different concentration in shell-and-
[6] S. Yang, Y. Chen, J. Wu, H. Gu, Influence of baffle configurations on flow and heat tube heat exchangers with ladder-type fold baffles, Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 132
transfer characteristics of unilateral type helical baffle heat exchangers, Appl. (2019) 1116–1125.
Therm. Eng. 133 (2018) 739–748. [28] C. Yu, Z. Ren, M. Zeng, Numerical investigation of shell-side performance for shell
[7] S.K. Singh, D. Stephan, in: https://www.process-worldwide.com/, 2014. and tube heat exchangers with two different clamping type anti-vibration baffles,
[8] J. Mahendran, Experimental analysis of shell and tube heat exchanger using flower Appl. Therm. Eng. 133 (2018) 125–136.
baffle plate configuration, Materials Today:Proceedings 21 (2020) 419–424. [29] C. Yua, J. Chenb, M. Zengb, B. Gao, Numerical study on turbulent heat transfer
[9] K. Wang, C. Bai, Y. Wang, M. Liu, Flow dead zone analysis and structure performance of a new parallel flow shell and tube heat exchanger with sinusoidal
optimization for the trefoil-baffle heat Exchanger, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 140 (2019) wavy tapes using RSM analysis, Appl. Therm. Eng. 150 (2019) 875–887.
127–134. [30] X. Wang, Y. Liang, Y. Sun, Z. Liu, W. Liu, Experimental and numerical investigation
[10] L. Ma, K. Wang, M. Liu, D. Wang, T. Liu, Y. Wang, Z. Liu, Numerical study on on shell-side performance of a double shell-pass rod baffle heat exchanger, Int. J.
performances of shell-side in trefoil-hole and quatrefoil-hole baffle heat Heat Mass Tran. 132 (2019) 631–642.
exchangers, Appl. Therm. Eng. 123 (2017) 1444–1455. [31] Y. Lei, Y. Li, S. Jing, C. Song, Y. Lyu, F. Wang, Design and performance analysis of
[11] C. Donga, X.F. Zhoub, R. Dongc, Y.Q. Zhenga, Y.P. Chend, G.L. Hua, Y.S. Xua, Z. the novel shell-and-tube heat exchangers with louver baffles, Appl. Therm. Eng.
G. Zhanga, W.W. Guo, An analysis of performance on trisection helical baffles heat 125 (2017) 870–879.
exchangers with diverse inclination angles and baffle structures, Chem. Eng. Res. [32] G.B. Leoni, T.S. Klein, R.A. Medronho, Assessment with computational fluid
Des. 121 (2017) 421–430. dynamics of the effects of baffle clearances on the shell side flow in a shell and tube
[12] X. Cao, T. Du, Z. Liu, H. Zhai, Z. Duan, Experimental and numerical investigation heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 112 (2017) 497–506.
on heat transfer and fluid flow performance of sextant helical baffle heat [33] M. Mellal, R. Benzeguir, D. Sahel, H. Ameur, Hydro-thermal shell-side performance
exchangers, Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 142 (2019) 118437. evaluation of a shell and tube heat exchanger under different baffle arrangement
[13] J. Chen, X. Lu, Q. Wang, M. Zeng, Experimental investigation on thermal-hydraulic and orientation, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 121 (2017) 138–149.
performance of a novel shell-and-tube heat exchanger with unilateral ladder type [34] A.A.A. Arania, R. Moradi, Shell and tube heat exchanger optimization using new
helical baffles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 161 (2019) 114099. baffle and tube configuration, Appl. Therm. Eng. 157 (2019) 113736.
[14] S. Yang, Y. Chen, J. Wu, H. Gu, Influence of baffle configurations on flow and heat [35] C.S. Pandey, H. Sharma, M. Dadhich, S.K. Jain, Numerical analysis and
transfer characteristics of unilateral type helical baffle heat exchangers, Appl. optimization of corrugated heat exchanger with Taguchi method, Int. J. Res. Appl.
Therm. Eng. 133 (2018) 739–748. Sci. Eng. Technol. 6 (2018) 874–879.
[15] S. Shinde, U. Chavan, Numerical and experimental analysis on shell side thermo- [36] S. Gunes, E. Manay, E. Senyigit, V. Ozceyhan, A Taguchi approach for optimization
hydraulic performance of shell and tube heat exchanger with continuous helical of design parameters in a tube with coiled wire inserts, Appl. Therm. Eng. 31
FRP baffles, Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 5 (2018) 158–171. (2011) 2568–2577.
[16] L. He, P. Li, Numerical investigation on double tube-pass shell-and-tube heat [37] S. Chamoli, A Taguchi approach for optimization of flow and geometrical
exchangers with different baffle configurations, Appl. Therm. Eng. 143 (2018) parameters in a rectangular channel roughened with V down perforated baffles,
561–569. Case Stud., Therm. Eng. 5 (2015) 59–69.
[17] T. Dua, Q. Chen, W. Dua, L. Cheng, Performance of continuous helical baffled heat [38] L.H. Tang, S.C. Tan, P.Z. Gao, M. Zeng, Parameters optimization of fin-and tube
exchanger with varying elliptical tube layouts, Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 133 (2019) heat exchanger with a novel vortex generator fin by Taguchi method, Heat Tran.
1165–1175. Eng. 37 (2016) 369–381.
[18] S. Yang, Y. Chen, J. Wu, H. Gu, Performance simulation on unilateral ladder type [39] M. Zeng, L.H. Tang, M. Lin, Q.W. Wang, Optimization of heat exchangers with
helical baffle heat exchanger in half cylindrical space, Energy Convers. Manag. 150 vortex-generator fin by Taguchi method, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 1775–1783.
(2017) 134–147. [40] A.Z. Aghaie, A.B. Rahimi, A. Akbarzadeh, A general optimized geometry of angled
[19] B.O. Dandgaval, P.D.R. Godase, T. Dey, Study of shell and tube heat exchanger ribs for enhancing the thermo-hydraulic behavior of a solar air heater channel – a
with the effect of types of baffles, Procedia Manufacturing 20 (2018) 195–200. Taguchi approach, Renew. Energy 83 (2015) 47–54.
[20] G. Yang, G. Ding, J. Chen, W. Yang, S. Hu, Experimental study on shell side heat [41] T. Du, W. Du, K. Che, L. Cheng, Parametric optimization of overlapped helical
transfer characteristics of two-phase propane flow condensation for vertical baffled heat exchangers by Taguchi method, Appl. Therm. Eng. 85 (2015)
helically baffled shell-and-tube exchanger, Int. J. Refrig. 107 (2019) 135–144. 334–339.
[21] Y. Chen, H. Tang, J. Wu, H. Gu, S. Yang, Performance comparison of heat [42] T. Sivasakthivel, K. Murugesan, H.R. Thoma, Optimization of operating parameters
exchangers using sextant/trisection helical baffles and segmental ones, Chin. J. of ground source heat pump system for space heating and cooling by Taguchi
Chem. Eng. 12 (2019) 2892–2899. method and utility concept, Appl. Energy 116 (2014) 76–85.
[22] M. Miansari, A. Jafarzadeh, H. Arasteh, D. Toghraie, Thermal performance of a [43] M.M. Etghani, S.A.H. Baboli, Numerical investigation and optimization of heat
helical shell and tube heat exchanger without fin, with circular fins, and with V- transfer and exergy loss in shell and helical tube heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng.
shaped circular fins applying on the coil, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. (2020). In press, 121 (2017) 294–301.
corrected proof, Available online 07 February 2020. [44] J.N. Zhang, M. Cheng, Y.D. Ding, Q. Fu, Z.Y. Chen, Influence of geometric
[23] E.M.S. El-Saida, M.M.A. Al-Sood, Shell and tube heat exchanger with new parameters on the gas-side heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of three-
segmental baffles configurations: a comparative experimental investigation, Appl. dimensional finned tube, Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 133 (2019) 192–202.
Therm. Eng. 150 (2019) 803–810. [45] S. Chamoli, P. Yu, A. Kumar, Multi-response optimization of geometric and flow
[24] J. Chen, P. Zhao, Q. Wang, M. Zeng, Experimental investigation of shell-side parameters in a heat exchanger tube with perforated disk inserts by Taguchi grey
performance and optimal design of shell-and-tube heat exchanger with different relational analysis, Appl. Therm. Eng. 103 (2016) 1339–1350.
flower baffles, Heat Tran. Eng. (2020). In press, corrected proof, Available online [46] M. Miansari, M.A. Valipour, H. Arasteh, D. Toghraie, Energy and exergy analysis
04 February 2020. and optimization of helically grooved shell and tube heat exchangers by using
[25] X. Wang, N. Zheng, Z. Liu, W. Liu, Numerical analysis and optimization study on Taguchi experimental design, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 139 (2020) 3151–3164.
shell-side performances of a shell and tube heat exchanger with staggered baffles, [47] J.P. Holman, Experimental Methods for Engineers, eigth ed., The McGraw-Hill,
Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 124 (2018) 247–259. New York, NY, 2011.
11