A tube-by-tube reduction method for simultaneous heat and mass transfer characteristics for plain fin-and-tube heat exchangers in dehumidifying conditions

A review on the thermal hydraulic characteristics of the air-cooled heat exchangers in forced convection

“…It was also shown that the fin efficiency calculated by the enthalpy difference shows some discrepancy with the fin efficiency calculated from their presented equation, which was the combination of the fin efficiency in fully dry and fully wet conditions. Similar to their previous method (Pirompugd et al 2005), the FCFM showed some discrepancy with the method of Threlkeld (1970). The heat transfer was found to be independent of the fin pitch.…”

“…As we have discussed in Section 3.2a, Pirompugd et al (2005) performed experiments on the plain-finned-tube heat exchangers in the dehumidifying conditions. In the similar manner, Pirompugd et al (2006) carried out experiments on the wavy-finned-tube heat exchangers in the dehumidifying conditions.…”

“…Pirompugd et al (2005) investigated the performance of the plate-finned-tube heat exchanger in the dehumidifying conditions experimentally for a range of 525 ≤ Re ≤ 7650. Also, they developed a tube to tube reduction method from the method of Threlkeld (1970) to analyze the performance of the heat exchanger.…”

“…Pirompugd et al (2007a, b) developed a finite circular fin method (FCFM) and applied it on a plain-finned-tube heat exchanger to study the heat and mass transfer characteristics. The experiments were performed on the same setup as was used by Pirompugd et al (2005) for a range of 350 ≤ Re ≤ 5300. It was observed that the fin efficiency obtained for the partial wet surface was higher as compared to the fin efficiency for the fully wet surface and was lower than the fin efficiency for the fully dry surface and the fin efficiency decreased with an increase in the relative humidity.…”

“…Pirompugd et al (2009) presented a review on the reduction methods for the heat and mass transfer of the finned-tube heat exchangers under dehumidifying conditions. The major comparison was presented between the models based on lumped approach e.g., Threlkeld model (1970), tube-by-tube reduction method (TTM) developed by Pirompugd et al (2005), fully wet and fully dry tiny circular fin method (WDFM) developed by Pirompugd et al (2007b), finite circular fin method (FCFM) developed by Pirompugd et al (2007a, b), and Equivalent dry bulb method (EDT) developed by Wang & Hihara (2003). It was observed that the models based on the lumped approach (Threlkeld, EDT) were unable to predict the heat and mass transfer characteristics of the partially wet surfaces.…”