<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/6640460486905953734?origin\x3dhttp://webwormcpt-wwhx.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
 

Heat Exchanger Technology

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Display problem ? Click HERE


Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association (TEMA) has developed a series of fouling factor for Shell and Tube (S&T). These fouling factor are generally higher than Plate Heat Exchanger (PHE), why not use S&T fouling factors to size PHE ?

Isn't this approach conservative and guarantee the performance ?

Reason being...
  • Oversized Plate Heat Exchanger (PHE) required extra CAPEX and extra Space for oversized PHE
  • Tubulence minimise fouling tendencies in correctly sized PHE. Oversized PHE results low actual velocity and increase potential fouling and inefficient heat transfer
  • HTRI studies showed PHE fouling significant lower than Shell & Tube Heat Exchanger (S&T)... factor of 6.7
GUIDELINE : Do not oversized PHE more than 25% against required area.

Related Post

Labels: , ,

posted by Webworm, 12:14 PM

0 Comments:

Add a comment