0
Research Papers: Heat Exchangers

Experimental Investigation of Fouling Behavior of 90/10 Cu/Ni Tube by Heat Transfer Resistance Monitoring Method

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Izadi1

Mechanical & Aeronautical Engineering Department,  Clarkson University, PO Box 5725, Potsdam, NY 13699izadim@clarkson.edu Aero Package Engineering, GE Energy, Houston, TX 77015 e-mail: hauhua.lee@ge.comizadim@clarkson.edu

D. K. Aidun, P. Marzocca, H. Lee

Mechanical & Aeronautical Engineering Department,  Clarkson University, PO Box 5725, Potsdam, NY 13699izadim@clarkson.edu Aero Package Engineering, GE Energy, Houston, TX 77015 e-mail: hauhua.lee@ge.comizadim@clarkson.edu

at 100°C.

1

Corresponding author.

J. Heat Transfer 133(10), 101801 (Aug 11, 2011) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004165 History: Received December 21, 2009; Revised April 25, 2011; Published August 11, 2011; Online August 11, 2011

This paper describes an advanced monitoring system for fouling phenomenon in a wide range of tubular heat exchangers such as condensers and intercoolers. First, a mathematical model of fouling resistance in tubular heat exchangers is adapted. The model is based on the applied thermal power, the inside heat transfer coefficient, and geometrical characteristics of the heat exchanger under consideration. The resulting model is a function of measured quantities such as water and tube wall temperatures, fluid flow velocity, and some physical properties of the fluid flowing inside the tubes, such as viscosity, conductivity, and density. Second, an on-line fouling monitoring system was prepared, and the heat transfer resistance for selected solutions was measured in real time by this system. The effect of concentration and chemical reactions on fouling was studied experimentally using contaminants such as sodium bicarbonate, sodium chloride, calcium chloride, and a mixture of sodium bicarbonate and calcium chloride. Experimental results provide quantitative information of liquid-side fouling on heat transfer surfaces, and its effects on the thermal efficiency. Experimental data are critical for heat exchanger design and for planning operating and cleaning schedules of the heat exchanger. Uncertainty analysis shows that the experimental results are acceptable and the experimental setup is appropriate for measuring fouling resistance in industrial applications.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic representation of a side-stream fouling monitoring device

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic diagram of the experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Cross section of DATSTM heat exchanger unit [25]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Inlet Block and heater block of DATSTM heat exchanger unit: (a) inlet block and the inlet temperature sensor and (b) heater block and wirings

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Hourly averaged fouling resistance for Solution 1, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Daily averaged fouling resistance for Solution 1, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison of hourly averaged fouling resistance for sodium bicarbonate solution with different concentrations: 4.0 g/l and 0.4 g/l

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of daily averaged fouling resistance for sodium bicarbonate solution with different concentrations: 4.0 g/l and 0.4 g/l

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Hourly averaged fouling resistance for Solution 2, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Daily averaged fouling resistance for Solution 2, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of daily averaged fouling resistance of Solutions 1 and 2, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Pre-cut cartridge: (a) before the experiment and (b) after a 7-day-long experiment with Solution 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Hourly averaged fouling resistance for Solution 3, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Daily averaged fouling resistance for Solutions 2 and 3, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Hourly averaged fouling resistance for Solution 4, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Daily averaged fouling resistance for Solution 4, and DIW

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Comparison of daily averaged fouling resistance of Solutions 1–4, and DIW

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In