|
Exploring
Other Considerations in Heat Exchanger Specification Prior to completing
the heat exchanger specification data sheet, the engineer should answer questions such as:
Having answers to
these questions can help ensure that your heat exchanger specification, and ultimately the
heat exchanger that you purchase, is right for your heat transfer duty. Phase Changes Even in
liquid-liquid heat transfer duties, its important to recognize the potential for
phase changes inside the heat exchanger. For
example, if a process stream is available to 350 °F to plant water from 100 °F to 300
°F, its very important to note that both the inlet and outlet pressure of the plant
water stream. If the water stream is not under
enough pressure, it may undergo partial vaporization.
In this case, the vapor pressure of water at 300 °F is about 52 psig. So, for a heat exchanger with a nominal pressure
loss of 10 psig, the process water should enter the exchanger at a minimum pressure of
around 70 psig. Dissolved Gases While not always
common, there are several instances where a mostly liquid process stream may pickup
dissolved gases. Its important to
recognize that dissolved gases can have a profound negative impact on liquid heat transfer
as the dissolved gases serve as a significant resistance to heat transfer. If you suspect that dissolved gases may be present,
the best bet is to run the process stream through a separation vessel to allow for vapor
disengagement prior to transferring heat to or from the stream. Trying to design for a stream with dissolved gases
is very difficult and often times uneconomical. A
classic example of this can often be found in the interchangers in amine units used to
treat natural gases. Through the absorption
column, the amine solutions can pick up significant quantities of carbon dioxide that
should be removed prior to transferring heat with the amine solution. Dissolved and
Suspended Solids Dissolved solids can
be very common in the chemical processing industry. In
fact, a general rule of thumb for cooling tower water is that it should not be heated to
temperatures in excess of 120 °F. The reason
behind this guideline is that at temperatures above 120 °F, some of the common water
treatment chemicals used in the water can quickly plate out onto heat transfer surfaces. Usually, these are carbonate salts which follow an
inverse solubility curve. This means that as
temperature increases, the salts actually become less soluble in water rather than more
soluble as is usually the case. Inverse
soluble salts can be found in other processing stream as well and are not confined only to
cooling tower water. Suspended solids can
pose obvious problems for heat exchangers. Aside
from the common problem of pluggage, suspended solids can also cause erosion of the heat
transfer surfaces if the velocity in the heat exchanger is too high. If suspended solids are present, its
advisable to obtain a particle size distribution and chemical analysis to determine the
relative hardness of the particles. For
example, hard particles that range in size from a few microns to up to 0.20 mm would have
to be addressed differently than a slurry of relatively soft particles such as a powdered
solid. Usually, a plant will have a well
documented history of what type of exchangers work well with a solid-laden stream and
often times, plants will establish velocity limitations for pipelines and other processing
equipment. Operating
Pressure Examine the
operating pressures of each stream that are to enter the heat exchanger. Many companies have policies dictating that the
design pressure of a process vessel must be a certain factor above the highest operating
pressure. For example, if the highest
operating pressure for a heat exchanger is to 100 psi, then a reasonable design pressure
may be 150 psi or 200 psi. Remember, that the
higher the design pressure, the more expensive the exchanger will become as the wall
becomes thicker. Additionally, give
some thought to what will happen if a leak occurs within the heat exchanger. The higher pressure fluid will leak to the lower
pressure fluid. For example, consider a
process stream at 50 psi and cooling tower water at 75 psi.
If a leak occurs, the cooling tower water will leak into the process stream. The engineer must evaluate the consequences of such
leakage and determine which fluid should be at the higher pressure. As with any piece of
chemical process equipment, it can be subject to mechanical fatigue. Consider a heat exchanger where the two streams
have operating pressures that are very close to one another.
Without extreme pressure stability (which is often difficult to maintain), a
run chart of the pressure versus time may look like the chart below:
Notice how the
stream can be allowed to actually cross pressures in the heat exchanger if the two streams
are close in operating pressures. This
scenario, if extreme enough, can cause flexing of thinner material surfaces inside of heat
exchangers and lead to premature failures. Available
Pressure Loss If preparing to
install a heat exchanger in an existing process system, the engineer should examine any
pumps in the system to determine how much pressure loss is available. Generally speaking, most heat exchangers should
need between 5 and 15 psi of pressure loss to operate effectively. For known fouling fluids, a higher pressure loss
(corresponding to a higher velocity) will help keep the exchanger clean for a longer
period of time. Also remember that pressure
loss is proportional to the fluid viscosity. Specifying
a pressure loss of 5 psi for a process fluid with a viscosity of 300 cP may result in a
very large heat exchanger. If your pumping
system cannot handle the necessary additional pressure loss to obtain a good heat
exchanger design, then an impeller change out, a new pump, or an additional pump in series
may be justified. When utilizing a shell
and tube exchanger, you can expect the pressure loss on the tube side to be higher than
the shell side in most cases. Fouling
Tendencies of the Fluids The engineer should
also be aware of the fouling tendencies of the fluids involved. Through personal experience, interviews with other
plant personnel, or investigation into other heat exchangers, the engineer can usually
determine how quickly a particular fluid may foul an exchanger. Many plants will have a library of shell and tube
fouling factors for various process duties. Probably one of the
most common errors made in specifying a new heat exchanger is overdesign. Anticipating fouling is smart, overdesigning too
far however will ensure that fouling will occur. Choose
your fouling coefficient carefully. Remember,
that specifying too large a fouling factor will often result in more tube or parallel
channels. This will lower the velocity in the
exchanger and actually promote the fouling. This
is a balancing act that is well worth a little time and effort. When considering a
fouling factor, its very important to note the type of equipment that may be used in
the service. Another common mistake during
heat exchanger specification is to apply fouling factor information from one type of
equipment to a completely different type of equipment. Remember that shell
and tube fouling factors have been compiled over decades through experience and
temperature measurement. Also, realize that
typical overall heat transfer coefficients for shell and tube may range from 150 to 400
Btu/h ft2 °F while compact heat transfer technologies can easily obtain
overall heat transfer coefficients ranging from 600 to 1000 Btu/h ft2 °F. If we examine the equation:
for a shell and tube
exchanger and for a compact heat exchanger, well see how the difference can impact
designs. If the engineer were to specify a
fouling factor of 0.001 h ft2 °F/Btu independent of the type of heat exchanger
used, the result would look like this:
So, the U-value for
the shell and tube went from 136 to 120 Btu/h ft2 °F through the fouling
coefficient. The U-value for the compact
exchanger went from 445 to 308 Btu/h ft2 °F through the fouling coefficient. Therefore, the shell and tube overdesign is about
12% while the compact exchanger overdesign is over 40%. The specifying
engineer must realize where the fouling factor information is derived from and apply it
properly in the future. While shell and tube
exchangers have long used fouling factors, compact heat exchangers generally utilize a
heat transfer margin that is typically 10-25% over the clean heat transfer
coefficient. This change in language was
designed to avoid confusion as shown above and to bring the overdesign between the two
technologies onto even ground to avoid problems. Also
realize that overdesigning in compact heat exchangers is even more detrimental to
performance than in a shell and tube heat exchanger. Non-Newtonian
Fluids While most fluids in
the chemical processing industry are Newtonian in their flow behavior, some are not. In short, a Newtonian fluid is one whose viscosity
in NOT dependent on the forces acting upon it (shear stress in heat exchangers), only on
the fluids temperature. Some fluid, know
as being non-Newtonian, have flow characteristics such that they can actually become more
or less viscous depending on the forces acting on the fluid.
Confirming that a fluid is Newtonian during the design stage can save the
engineer from procuring a heat exchanger that is vastly over or under sized later. Corrosion
Potential and Materials of Construction Specifying materials
on construction for the heat exchanger is an extremely important part of the overall
process. Again, most plants have some history
regarding what metals are appropriate for their process fluids. Typically, if one fluid requires a higher
metallurgy than another, then that fluid is placed on the tube side of a shell and tube
exchanger to minimize costs as cladding a shell can become quite expensive. Its important
to consider temperature and pH when deciding on a material of construction for your
exchanger. If youre not sure what metal
you need, consult with a corrosion expert as this is one aspect of heat exchanger design
that no one can afford to get wrong. If your duty does
require an expensive alloy, then a compact heat exchanger may cost significantly less
considering their higher overall heat transfer coefficients.
Another point to remember is that just because a fluid is compatible with a
stainless steel tube for example, it may not be compatible with a stainless steel plate
that has been pre-stressed (during the pressing process).
Pre-stressing of metals can make them susceptible to pitting corrosion such
as chloride attack. Consult with manufacturers
of compact equipment. While they will seldom
take the legal responsibility for choosing a material of construction, then can point you
in the right direction and save you from making a costly mistake. Elastomers and
Compression Gasket Compatibility Depending on the
type of heat transfer technology that is being considered for the application, a check of
gasket compatibility may be required. Elastomer
gaskets are most commonly offered in materials such as EPDM, Nitrile, PTFE, and FKMG (a
generic form of Viton-G from Dupont). Elastomer
gaskets can seldom be rated for temperatures in excess of 320 °F. Generally speaking, the engineer should seek a
recommendation from the heat exchanger manufacturer as they usually have extensive
databases that show the best gasket choice for a given application. For compression
gaskets, such as those used on the heads of shell and tube exchangers, there are a couple
of rules of thumb to keep in mind. In addition
to the need for the gasket to be compatible with the process or service fluid, the
engineer may need to decide between a metallic or non-metallic compression gasket. Consider this guideline:
Lethal Service
Requirements The ASME pressure
vessel code stipulates very specific pressure vessel requirements for heat transfer
service that are qualified as lethal. If
the service requires an ASME L stamp, be sure to specify this to the heat
exchanger manufacturer. Cleaning
Considerations Some process fluids
can leave fouling deposits that can be especially difficult to remove. Sometimes, these deposits can be removed by
chemical cleaning. Chemical cleaning of heat
exchangers, in general, is popular in industries that utilize sanitary protocols (food,
pharmaceutical, etc.) and chemical cleaning is widely accepted in the chemical process
industry in
For heat transfer
duties where chemical cleaning does not seem like the best choice, the engineer must be
sure that the fouling fluid is placed on a side of the heat exchanger that is readily
accessible for mechanical cleaning. Mechanical
cleaning usually consists of a high pressure water spray of the affect area, although
additional scraping can sometimes be necessary. Floating
head shell and tube heat exchangers, gasketed plate exchangers, spiral heat exchangers,
and some welded plate heat exchangers allow good access for mechanical cleaning. A final
consideration for mechanical cleaning is the space required around the heat exchanger. When choosing an installation location, be sure
that the necessary maintenance space is available for proper and safe maintenance of the
new equipment.
By: Christopher Haslego, Owner and Chief Webmaster (read the author's Profile) |
ChE Plus Subscriber - Click Here for a Printable Version
Send this Page to a Friend