螺旋折流板换热器质心当量矩形通用计算模型

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20200085

化工学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 71 ›› Issue (7): 3050-3059.DOI: 10.11949/0438-1157.20200085

螺旋折流板换热器质心当量矩形通用计算模型

郑舒星(),朱子龙,陈亚平(),吴嘉峰

东南大学能源与环境学院，低碳型建筑环境设备与系统节能教育部工程中心，江苏南京 210096

收稿日期:2020-01-19 修回日期:2020-04-07 出版日期:2020-07-05 发布日期:2020-07-05
通讯作者: 陈亚平
作者简介:郑舒星（1995—），男，硕士研究生，1416254977@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(51776035)

Universal calculation model of mass center equivalent rectangle for helical baffle heat exchangers

Shuxing ZHENG(),Zilong ZHU,Yaping CHEN(),Jiafeng WU

Engineering Research Center of BEEE, Ministry of Education, School of Energy and Environment, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, Jiangsu, China

Received:2020-01-19 Revised:2020-04-07 Online:2020-07-05 Published:2020-07-05
Contact: Yaping CHEN

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

现有螺旋折流板换热器(HBHXs)螺旋通道的截面积是按照通道中被管排阻挡的最小截面计算的，而实际的螺旋通道截面是由最小截面和管间的最大截面共同构成的，螺旋流是逐步通过最小截面的。由于按此最小截面公式计算的Reynolds数不准确，因此无法获得预测Nusselt数和摩擦因子与Reynolds数关系的通用关联式。提出了一种新型质心当量矩形(MCER)模型，以更精确地计算螺旋折流板换热器的螺旋通道的截面积和壳侧流体Reynolds数，并采用商用软件HTRI和文献的实验数据对MCER模型进行了验证，获得了较满意的结果。在相同条件下，按MCER模型计算壳侧Nusselt数Nu_o的结果与采用换热器设计软件HTRI所计算结果的误差在-10%~5%范围内，与两组文献实验结果的误差分别在±18%和-5%~15%范围内，但其摩擦因子的公式结果与上述来源结果比较的误差都比较大，需要进一步完善。

关键词: 传热, 模型简化, 实验验证, 螺旋折流板换热器, 质心当量矩形

Abstract:

The existing approach of calculating cross-sectional area of the spiral channel of the helical baffle heat exchanger (HBHX) is according to the minimum cross section of the channel throttled by tube row, while the actual cross section of the spiral channel is composed of both the minimum cross section and the maximum cross section at inter tube space, and the spiral flow does not pass through the minimum cross section instantaneously. Thus the prediction has been in vain of the shell side Nusselt number and friction factor with universal correlations of the Reynolds number for helical baffle heat exchangers because of the incorrect value of Reynolds number. A novel model of mass center equivalent rectangle (MCER) is presented for more accurate calculation of the cross-sectional area of the helical flow channel of the HBHX. The verification of the MCER model is performed with satisfactory results for HBHXs by both the heat exchanger commercial design software HTRI and some experimental results in literatures. Under the same conditions, the error between the Nusselt number Nu_o calculated by the MCER model and the result calculated using the heat exchanger design software HTRI is in the range of -10% to 5%, and the errors with the experimental results of the two groups of literature are within the range of ± 18% and -5%—15%, but the error of the friction factor formula results compared with the results of the above sources is relatively large, and needs to be further improved.

Key words: heat transfer, model reduction, experimental validation, helical baffle heat exchangers, mass center equivalent rectangle

中图分类号:

TK 124

郑舒星, 朱子龙, 陈亚平, 吴嘉峰. 螺旋折流板换热器质心当量矩形通用计算模型[J]. 化工学报, 2020, 71(7): 3050-3059.

Shuxing ZHENG, Zilong ZHU, Yaping CHEN, Jiafeng WU. Universal calculation model of mass center equivalent rectangle for helical baffle heat exchangers[J]. CIESC Journal, 2020, 71(7): 3050-3059.

图/表 1

参考文献 27

1	Lutcha J, Nemcansky J. Performance improvement of tubular heat exchangers by helical baffles[J]. Chemical Engineering Research & Design, 1990, 68(3): 263-270.
2	Salahuddin U, Bilal M, Ejaz H. A review of the advancements made in helical baffles used in shell and tube heat exchangers[J]. International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 2015, 67: 104-108.
3	Movassag Z S, Farhad N T, Kazem R, et al. Tube bundle replacement for segmental and helical shell and tube heat exchangers: performance comparison and fouling investigation on the shell side[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2013, 51: 1162-1169.
4	Kral D, Stehlík P, van der Ploeg H J, et al. Helical baffles in shell-and-tube heat exchangers, part I: Experimental verification[J]. Heat Transfer Engineering, 1996, 17(1): 93-101.
5	Stehlik P, Nemcansky J, Kral D, et al. Comparison of correction factors for shell-and-tube heat exchangers with segmental or helical baffles[J]. Heat Transfer Engineering, 1994, 15(1): 55-65.
6	Stehlík P, Wadekar V V. Different strategies to improve industrial heat exchange[J]. Heat Transfer Engineering, 2002, 23(6): 36-48.
7	陈亚平．适合于正三角形排列布管的螺旋折流板换热器[J]. 石油化工设备, 2008, 37(6): 1-5.
	Chen Y P. A novel helix baffled heat exchanger suitable for tube bundle arrangement with equilateral triangles[J]. Petro-Chemical Equipment, 2008, 37(6): 1-5.
8	曹兴, 杜文静, 汲水, 等. 搭接方式对螺旋折流板换热器壳程性能的影响[J].化工学报, 2011, 62(12): 3367-3372.
	Cao X, Du W J, Ji S, et al. Effects of baffle connection manner on shell-side performance of heat exchanger with helical baffles[J]. CIESC Journal, 2011, 62(12): 3367-3372.
9	Farhad N T, Movassag Z S, Kazem R, et al. Baffle space impact on the performance of helical baffle shell and tube heat exchangers[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2012, 44(44): 143-149.
10	Wang S M, Wen J, Yang H Z, et al. Experimental investigation on heat transfer enhancement of a heat exchanger with helical baffles through blockage of triangle leakage zones[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2014, 67(1/2): 122-130.
11	Wen J, Yang H Z, Wang S M, et al. Numerical investigation on baffle configuration improvement of the heat exchanger with helical baffles[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2015, 89: 438-448.
12	Zhang J F, He Y L, Tao W Q. 3D numerical simulation on shell-and-tube heat exchangers with middle-overlapped helical baffles and continuous baffles( I): Numerical model and results of whole heat exchanger with middle-overlapped helical baffles[J]. International Journal in Heat and Mass Transfer, 2009, 52(23/24): 5371-5380.
13	Chen Y P, Sheng Y J, Wu J F, et al. Numerical simulation on flow field in circumferential overlap trisection helical baffle heat exchanger[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2013, 50(1): 1035-1043.
14	董聪, 陈亚平, 吴嘉峰, 等. 三分螺旋折流板换热器水-水传热壳侧综合性能[J]. 化工学报, 2012, 63(3): 721-727.
	Dong C, Chen Y P, Wu J F, et al. Water to water heat transfer on shell-side of trisection helical baffle heat exchangers[J]. CIESC Journal, 2012, 63(3): 721-727.
15	Dong C, Chen Y P, Wu J F. Influence of baffle configurations on flow and heat transfer characteristics of trisection helical baffle heat exchangers[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2014, 88: 251-258.
16	Chen Y P, Tang H L, Wu J F, et al. Performance comparison of heat exchangers using sextant/trisection helical baffles and segment ones[J]. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2019, 27: 2892-2899.
17	Chen Y P, Wang W H, Wu J F, et al. Experimental investigation on performances of trisection helical baffled heat exchangers for oil/water-water heat transfer[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2015, 101: 460-469.
18	Azar R T, Khalilarya S, Jafarmadar S, et al. Modeling for shell-side heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop of helical baffle heat exchangers[J]. Heat Transfer Engineering, 2017, 38(2): 265-277.
19	Zhang J F, Li B, Huang W J, et al. Experimental performance comparison of shell-side heat transfer for shell-and-tube heat exchangers with middle-overlapped helical baffles and segmental baffles[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2009, 64: 1643-1653.
20	Tang H L, Chen Y P, Wu J F, et al. Numerical investigation of the performances of axial separation helical baffle heat exchangers[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2016, 126: 400-410.
21	Gu H D, Chen Y P, Wu J F, et al. Numerical study on performances of small incline angle helical baffle electric heaters with axial separation[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2017, 126: 963-975.
22	Wang M C, Chen Y P, Wu J F, et al. Heat transfer enhancement of folded helical baffle electric heaters with one-plus-two U-tube units[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2016, 102: 586-595.
23	Dong C, Chen Y P, Wu J F. Comparison of heat transfer performances of helix baffled heat exchangers with different baffle configurations[J]. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2015, 23(1): 255-261.
24	Donohue D A. Heat transfer and pressure drop in heat exchangers[J]. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2002, 41(11): 2499-2511.
25	Zhu Z L, Chen Y P, Wu J F, et al. Performance study on s-CO₂ power cycle with oxygen fired fuel of s-water gasification of coal[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2019, 199: 112058.
26	曹日. 螺旋折流板换热器的研究[D]. 北京:北京化工大学, 2011.
	Cao R. Research of helix baffle heat exchanger[D]. Beijing: Beijing University of Chemical Technology, 2011.
27	Chen Y P, Cao R B, Wu J F, et al. Experimental study on shell side heat transfer performance of circumferential overlap trisection helical baffle heat exchangers[C]//Proceedings of ASME 2011 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE2011-63254.
	Denver, Colorado, USA, 2011.

[1]	晁京伟, 许嘉兴, 李廷贤. 基于无管束蒸发换热强化策略的吸附热池的供热性能研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 302-310.
[2]	程成, 段钟弟, 孙浩然, 胡海涛, 薛鸿祥. 表面微结构对析晶沉积特性影响的格子Boltzmann模拟[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 74-86.
[3]	张双星, 刘舫辰, 张义飞, 杜文静. R-134a脉动热管相变蓄放热实验研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 165-171.
[4]	张义飞, 刘舫辰, 张双星, 杜文静. 超临界二氧化碳用印刷电路板式换热器性能分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 183-190.
[5]	陈爱强, 代艳奇, 刘悦, 刘斌, 吴翰铭. 基板温度对HFE7100液滴蒸发过程的影响研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 191-197.
[6]	刘明栖, 吴延鹏. 导光管直径和长度对传热影响的模拟分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 206-212.
[7]	王志国, 薛孟, 董芋双, 张田震, 秦晓凯, 韩强. 基于裂隙粗糙性表征方法的地热岩体热流耦合数值模拟与分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 223-234.
[8]	王浩, 王振雷. 基于自适应谱方法的裂解炉烧焦模型化简策略[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3855-3864.
[9]	齐聪, 丁子, 余杰, 汤茂清, 梁林. 基于选择吸收纳米薄膜的太阳能温差发电特性研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3921-3930.
[10]	李艺彤, 郭航, 陈浩, 叶芳. 催化剂非均匀分布的质子交换膜燃料电池操作条件研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3831-3840.
[11]	王玉兵, 李杰, 詹宏波, 朱光亚, 张大林. R134a在菱形离散肋微小通道内的流动沸腾换热实验研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3797-3806.
[12]	李科, 文键, 忻碧平. 耦合蒸气冷却屏的真空多层绝热结构对液氢储罐自增压过程的影响机制研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3786-3796.
[13]	洪瑞, 袁宝强, 杜文静. 垂直上升管内超临界二氧化碳传热恶化机理分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3309-3319.
[14]	陈天华, 刘兆轩, 韩群, 张程宾, 李文明. 喷雾冷却换热强化研究进展及影响因素[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3149-3170.
[15]	闫琳琦, 王振雷. 基于STA-BiLSTM-LightGBM组合模型的多步预测软测量建模[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3407-3418.

螺旋折流板换热器质心当量矩形通用计算模型

Universal calculation model of mass center equivalent rectangle for helical baffle heat exchangers

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 1

参考文献 27

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价