1990
DOI: 10.1115/1.2910374
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A General Method for the Comparison of Compact Heat Transfer Surfaces

Abstract: This paper presents a family of methods for comparing compact heat transfer surface configurations. It is shown how measures for the relative values of required hydraulic diameter, frontal area, total volume, pumping power, and number of transfer units for different surfaces can be derived and displayed, when any two of the above five parameters are held constant. A wide range of comparisons that are independent of the particular duty can be simply made. A further development allowing comparisons, where three … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The hydraulic diameter and Reynolds number are calculated using the method suggested by Cowell [30] as: = 4…”
Section: Experimental Conditions and Results Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The hydraulic diameter and Reynolds number are calculated using the method suggested by Cowell [30] as: = 4…”
Section: Experimental Conditions and Results Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the surface and volume goodness as defined by Kays and London [35]. A detailed summary is provided by Cowell [53]. Considering the uncertainty on the specific surface of the foam (as discussed above) and the availability of both heat transfer and pressure drop data for the reference surface (plain tube, see Table. 2) it was selected to compare the performance based on the reference surface: Eq.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the measured results, the volumetric flow rate ranged between 3 and 17 L/min, and the Reynolds number ranged between 156 and 921. The hydraulic diameter was calculated using a method proposed by Cowell [10], and the Reynolds number was calculated using Equations (1) and (2).…”
Section: Experimental Conditions and Results Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%