Heat exchanger substitution
Thread Content
There is a heat exchanger A, with the heat-flux liquid phase flowing through the tube side； The cold fluid enters in the liquid phase; after heating, it vaporizes (with a vaporization rate of 16 wt%) and flows through the shell side. The selected model is the overlapping BJS900 heat exchanger. There is currently one heat exchanger, Model B, in the factory; it is of the BES900 type. Apart from the differences between BJS and BES, all other structural parameters are identical. Can a BES900 heat exchanger be used as a substitute for a BJS900? Thank you
To calculate it, the structural parameters are not exactly the same either; there are differences in terms of the baffling inside as well
The baffle spacing? It’s the same. Actually, I calculated BJS900 and BES900 using EDR, and the heat exchange area for both is sufficient. Personally, I think BJS is better due to the phase change, but I’m not sure if BES is feasible
It’s not the spacing; it’s the flow pattern of the two. Of course, if your calculation results are satisfactory, then there’s no problem. We also need to check whether the voltage drop and other parameters meet the requirements
If the heat exchange area is large, it’s possible. Let’s calculate it.
Okay, thank you. The voltage drop and everything else meet the requirements. I’m a bit worried that the single-pass shell (E) may not be suitable for conditions with a high gasification rate in the shell side; it seems that the shell without partitioning for flow separation (J) is more commonly used.
Thank you, it’s been calculated – the area is sufficient and the pressure drop is acceptable. The concern is that using a single-shell casing (E) is not suitable for cases where the gasification rate in the shell side is high.
Well, thank you; the voltage drop and other requirements are met. The concern is that a single-pass (E) shell may not be suitable for operating conditions with such a high gasification rate.
It’s been calculated; the area is sufficient and there are no issues with pressure drop. The concern is that a single-pass (E) shell may not be suitable for operating conditions with such a high gasification rate.