A design for a spiral plate heat exchanger – a task that is difficult to accomplish with shell-and-tube heat exchangers
Thread Content
This post was last edited by wiseboy on 2022-9-15 08:44. It is a real heat exchange project that uses spiral plate exchangers – it is extremely difficult to implement tube-and-shell exchangers in this case, or it is not cost-effective at all. Aren’t many people discussing the advantages and disadvantages of spiral plate heat exchangers and shell-and-tube heat exchangers? This is strong evidence; if you don’t believe it, try a shell-and-tube heat exchanger.
My personal opinion is purely subjective; I know this software is very powerful, but in the given operating conditions, the actual heat transfer coefficient must be higher than what’s shown here. In real-world scenarios, the heat transfer coefficient is much greater. Also, why wasn’t a plate width of 1.5 meters or 2 meters chosen when designing the plate? Furthermore, why was a plate thickness of 2 mm selected? Isn’t this thickness too thin? Finally, there’s no information regarding the arrangement and spacing of the surface spacers
This post was last edited by wiseboy on 2022-9-13 at 10:35. Your opinion is correct; the explanation is as follows: 1. Part of it is due to requirements from the manufacturer, such as board width and thickness – the manufacturer needs to use stock sheets that are 1000 units wide and 2 mm thick； There’s also the issue of plate thickness: manufacturers try to reduce the weight of the equipment (thereby cutting costs), but a thicker plate increases costs, and the client presses for lower prices during the bidding process. 2. K=1003.5, which is also not too small. Because the customer requested a voltage reduction
This example is quite funny: the client requested a shell-and-tube heat exchanger. When proposals for spiral-plate or plate-type heat exchangers were made, the client was not happy and even claimed that the bidders lacked competence, saying, \"How can others use different formulas?\" ”. I have no idea how these “other” companies can be so capable.
This post was last edited by yyong110 on 2022-9-14 at 17:09. 1. The heat transfer coefficient is closely related to the cleanliness of the material; for this water system, with a fouling thermal resistance of 0.0002, the calculated value for the overall heat transfer coefficient should be similar. The materials we come into contact with are dirty, which results in a significantly lower measured overall heat transfer coefficient. 2. The number of heat exchangers in series and parallel has not been set. For spiral plate heat exchangers, it is rare to find units with such a large area and diameter; when the diameter is too large, the thickness required to ensure the self-supporting strength of the shell becomes considerable. A flow velocity of 3.1.5 meters is too high (which also increases the overall heat transfer coefficient); after setting the pitch, the calculated pressure drop in such a long spiral channel is significantly too low. With such a long channel, at this flow rate, the pressure drop is only 10 KPa, which is a bit concerning. Problems can arise in pump selection and pipeline calculation. (This is also why it is necessary to set the number of parallel units; in spiral plate heat exchangers, a high flow rate results in a significant pressure drop.) ), the pressure drop difference is too large.
You’re right: it’s the handshake; the voltage drop was calculated incorrectly, it’s a setting issue. It has been modified.
Are there any software for shell-and-tube heat exchangers and coil heat exchangers? Could you give me one? Thank you
Are there any software for shell-and-tube heat exchangers and coil heat exchangers? Could you give me one? Thank you
It’s like asking a limited company for its commercial software for free, just as a chemical plant would ask a equipment manufacturer to provide heat exchangers at no cost. But don’t hit him: lol.