Water-to-water heat transfer in tubetube heat exchanger:

Experimental and analytical study

Milind V. Rane
*
, Madhukar S. Tandale
Mechanical Engineering Department, Heat Pump Laboratory, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai,
Mumbai 400 076, India
Abstract
Tubetube heat exchanger (TTHE) is a low cost, vented double wall heat exchanger which increases reli-
ability by avoiding mixing of uids exchanging heat. It can be potentially used for heat recovery from
engine cooling circuit, oil cooling, desuperheating in refrigeration and air conditioning, dairy, and pharma-
ceutical industry, chemical industry, renery, etc. These tubetube heat exchangers are successfully demon-
strated for superheat recovery water heating applications, condenser and evaporator in heat pumps, lube oil
cooler for shipboard gas turbines, milk chilling and pasteurizing application. This paper presents an exper-
imental study on various layouts of TTHE for water-to-water heat transfer. The theoretical and experimen-
tal results on this type of heat exchanger conguration could not be located in literature. Overall heat
transfer coecient and pumping power were experimentally determined for a xed tube length and surface
area of serpentine layouts with dierent number of bends and results are compared with straight tube
TTHE. In the case investigated, serpentine layout TTHE with seven bends has shown optimum perfor-
mance, with overall heat transfer coecient 17% higher than straight tube TTHE. Two out of ve serpen-
tine layout TTHE have shown poor heat transfer performance than straight tube TTHE. The experimental
results also indicate that there is a denite optimum for a number of bends in serpentine layout TTHE. An
analytical model for prediction of thermo-hydraulic performance of straight layout has been developed and
validated experimentally.
Keywords: Double wall heat exchanger; Serpentine layout; Straight tube; Analytical model
1. Introduction
A tubetube heat exchanger (TTHE) is a double wall tubular heat exchanger wherein two or
more tubes are placed side-by-side and bonded thermally using thermal bonding material
(TBM) for eective transfer of heat. Use of bends and straight lengths in tubetube heat exchan-
ger results in signicant enhancement in heat transfer due to secondary ows induced in the
bends. The secondary ows induced in bend leads to heat transfer enhancement in bend as well
as in straight length downstream of bend without signicant increase in pressure drop [1,2].
Dean was rst to point out that the occurrence of a secondary ow at right angles to the main
ow is due to centrifugal force [4]. The distorted ow condition by the induced secondary ow
persists at a downstream distance of more than 50d
ti
for single-phase and 70d
ti
for two-phase
[5]. Chen et al. [6] proposed empirical correlation for U-type wavy tubes with small diameter
and short separation between consecutive bends (l/d
ti
= 1.937). Their correlation shows good
agreements with the experimental data. However, extrapolations of correlation with wider oper-
ating range needs further examination to check their applicability. Recently, Chen et al. [5] have
proposed a new correlation for friction factor applicable for wider separation between the consec-
utive bends (l/d
ti
= 030) but valid for limited range of Re (5010,000).
Ohadi et al. [7] have reported their study on eect of bend on pressure drop in a straight section
downstream of a 180 bend. They found about 9% higher pressure drop in downstream section
due to bend. Multi-stream Hampson heat exchanger with paired tubes reported by Kao [7] is heli-
cal coil type for three uids. The paired tubes are soldered with tinlead solder having thermal
conductivity about 10% of copper, which may not be eective in liquidliquid heat exchange
due to its low thermal conductivity.
In many heat transfer augmentation techniques, the augmentation is usually accompanied by
signicant increase in the pumping power required to overcome increase in pressure drop for
the same heat transfer rate. But, in case of TTHE with serpentine layout the secondary ows in-
duced due to bend continue their eect in the downstream portion of a bend [1,2]. Heat transfer
enhancement in downstream section is maximum at the leading edge and diminishes along its
length. Experimental and theoretical results on single-phase heat transfer on tubetube heat ex-
changer conguration could not be located in literature. This paper experimentally investigates
the thermo-hydraulic performance of serpentine layout TTHE with dierent number of bends
(3, 6, 7, 8 and 9) in water-to-water heat transfer. Also, an experimental comparison of thermo-
hydraulic performance of serpentine layout TTHE modules with straight tube TTHE is done.
An analytical model for prediction of thermo-hydraulic performance of straight tube TTHE is
developed and validated.
In this type of heat exchanger, there is a wide choice of congurations to select depending on
application like liquidliquid, gasliquid, two-phase etc. Fig. 1 shows dierent congurations of
TTHE. Conguration 11 is preferred for high thermal conductivity tube material, 21 for
gasliquid application and conguration nn for low thermal conductivity tube material. In
some of the applications dierent diameter tubes are paired together allowing greater exibility
2716
Nomenclature
A heat transfer surface area, m
2
BV ball valve
C Cold/heat capacity, J/K
d diameter of tube, m
dp pressure drop, N/m
2
d
bend
diameter of bend, m
FS full scale
f friction factor, dimensionless
H Hot
h heat transfer coecient, W/m
2
K
k thermal conductivity, W/m K
l length of tube, m
l
n
length of tube sector acting as a n, m
lpm liters per minute
l
st.section
length of straight section of serpentine tube, m
LMTD log mean temperature dierence, degree
m mass ow rate, kg/s
NTU number of transfer units
Nu Nusselt number, dimensionless
PICCV pressure independent characterized control valve
Pr Prandtl number, dimensionless
Q heat transfer rate, W
Re Reynolds number, dimensionless
R, R
th
thermal resistance, K/W
r fouling resistance, m
2
K/W
t temperature, C
TBM thermal bonding material
U overall heat transfer coecient, W/m
2
K
w thickness, m
w
g
gap between adjacent tubes, m
w
pp.tot
total pumping power, W
Subscripts
av average
bend tube bend
c cold
f fouling
h hot
i inside
o outside
2717
in optimising the heat exchanger with respect to heat transfer coecient and pressure drop. The
conguration 21 shown in Fig. 1(b) is used in TTHE for recovery of superheat from a 60 TR
chiller for one of the hotels in Mumbai [3].
TBM
(b)
H C H
TBM
(a)
TBM
(c)
H H C C C
H C
H
Fig. 1. Sectional view of three TTHE congurations. (a) 11 TTHE, (b) 21 TTHE and (c) nn TTHE.
min minimum
max maximum
N number of variables
pt per tube
t tube
tbm thermal bonding material
Greek symbols
e eectiveness, dimensionless
g
fs
n surface eciency, dimensionless
/ semi-ll angle subtended by thermal bonding material at tube centre, degree
2718
Some of the features of TTHE giving advantages over tube-in-tube and shell-and-tube heat
exchangers are:
(a) Possibility of using dierent material for tubes carrying uids in order to reduce the cost.
Reduction in material used by having two tubes used side-by-side, instead of one inside
the other as the case in tube-in-tube heat exchangers.
(b) For a particular design pressure, outer tube wall thickness is high which increases weight and
hence cost of heat exchanger. In TTHE, tubes are placed side-by-side. Hence, diameter of
tube replacing the outer tube is small. This reduces the thickness, weight and cost of the
tubes. This along with reduced cost of headers leads to cheaper and reliable design in spite
of small additional weight and cost due to TBM.
(c) An ability of TTHE to handle uids with brous materials, partial or complete extraction or
introduction of uids at intermediate temperature, increase or decrease the capacity of heat
exchanger by increasing or decreasing number of tube sets, good accessibility of all tubes for
ease of repair, in case of leakage.
2. Experimental setup
Schematic diagram of the experimental setup for conducting water-to-water heat transfer
experiments on TTHE modules is shown in Fig. 3. It includes a test section (TTHE module
covered with insulation), an electric water heater, valves, pump and instrumentation for measure-
ment. The experimental setup consists of two uid circuits. The rst circuit, as shown in Fig. 3,
is closed loop for hot water. Hot water is generated in an electric water heater, which has a capa-
city of about 9 kW. Flow rate of hot water from water heater is controlled by adjusting valve
and temperature of hot water at inlet to the test section is controlled by three-phase Variac.
Hot water temperature at inlet and outlet of the test section is measured by K type thermo-
couples.
The second circuit is cooling water circuit as shown in the upper half of the Fig. 3. This is open
loop with the digital turbine meter for measuring cooling water ow rate and pressure indepen-
dent characterized control valve (PICCV) for regulating the ow rate. The water ow rate is ad-
justed to dierent values and maintained constant by pressure independent characterized control
valve. Thermocouples are placed in cooling water stream to measure temperatures at inlet and
outlet of a test section.
2.1. Test section
The test section comprising tubetube heat exchanger module, is shown as a sectional view in
Fig. 2(a). Various modules of TTHE are fabricated for test. TTHE modules being tested consist of
two copper tubes of 9.525 mm OD, which are brazed all along their lengths with copper ller
material. The copper ller, which will be referred in this paper as thermal bonding material
(TBM), subtends semi-ll angle /
max
of 36.7 at the tube centre. The gap between the tubes, w
g
is measured at dierent sections along the length to calculate the average gap between the tubes
of TTHE module. The simulation results show that for TTHE with copper tubes, a gap of up to
2719
1 mm has insignicant eect on heat transfer. However, with lower thermal conductivity TBM,
the eect of gap will be considerable. The average gap between the tubes is less than 0.5 mm
for all modules tested. This small gap between the tubes allow thermal bonding material to ow
to other side of tubes during brazing.
Hot water ows through one tube and cooling water through other. All modules during the
tests are oriented such that the hot water tube is below the cooling water tube. This eliminates
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2. TTHE module. (a) Cross-sectional view of 11 TTHE module; (b) serpentine layout TTHE module with six
bends.
2720
the eects, though insignicant, of variants other than number of bends on performance of mod-
ules. All modules are insulated thermally from their surroundings during tests by the closed cell
foam insulation (thickness 25.4 mm and thermal conductivity 0.046 W/m K).
2.1.1. Straight layout
11 TTHE module (one tube for hot water and another tube for cooling water) fabricated using
two copper tubes with 9.525 mm OD. These straight tubes are brazed all along their lengths with
copper ller.
2.1.2. Serpentine layout
A pair of copper tubes with 9.525 mm OD is rst bent to a serpentine shape on tube bending
machine. The ratio of bend diameter to tube diameter (d
bend
/d
ti
) is 5.29. These tubes are brazed all
along their lengths. Five modules of serpentine layout with 3, 6, 7, 8 and 9 bends are fabricated
giving dierent ratio of length of the straight section to tube diameter (l
st.section
/d
ti
). Fig. 2(b)
shows serpentine layout TTHE with six bends.
2.2. Experimental method
The cooling water inlet temperature during the test is 29 0.5 C. The ow rate of water is ad-
justed by pressure independent characterized control valve and held constant irrespective of tap
water pressure. The cooling water ow rate is changed from 3 to 10 lpm in step of about
1 lpm. Flow rate on two sides is kept same in all sets of readings. The temperature of hot water
inlet to the test section is adjusted to 85 0.1 C by changing heater input through three-phase
Variac.
Fig. 3. Schematic of experimental setup for water-to-water heat transfer.
2721
2.2.1. Instrumentation
Instruments used for measuring various parameters during the experimentation are:
(a) Water ow rate is measured using digital turbine meter. Make: GPI turbine meter, Model
No. S050 N1/2
00
, Mid-ow, accuracy: 2% of reading in the range 3.837.9 lpm, range:
1.937.9 lpm.
(b) Flow rate of cooling water below 3.8 lpm is measured by measuring weight of water using
weighing balance with an accuracy of 1% of reading. Make: PAG Oerlikon AG CH-Dieti-
kon Precisa Balances, Model No. 87113 type 2300-9535/H6200D. The range and resolution
of instrument is 06.2 kg and 0.1 g respectively. This was done since the accuracy of turbine
meter is lower than 2% for ow rate below 3.8 lpm.
(c) The pressure losses are measured by digital dierential pressure transducers. Make:
HBM, Digibar, range: 01.2 bar, resolution: 0.5% of the measurement, and accuracy:
2%. The instrument was calibrated using accurate dial gauge having accuracy of 0.1% of
FS.
(d) The uid temperatures are measured using K type thermocouples with an accuracy of
0.3 C. The range and resolution of instrument is 20 to 300 C and 0.1 C, respec-
tively. Thermocouples are calibrated using thermocouple calibrator in Instrumentation
Laboratory.
The bends in serpentine TTHE modules tested are not perfectly circular in cross-section due to
the manufacturing process used. As a result of this, the tube cross-section became elliptical due to
attening. The maximum attening of the bends of all modules tested is less than 8%. The atten-
ing is calculated by following equation [12]
flattening
d
tmax
d
tmin

0.5 d
tmax
d
t. min

1
Since 10% attening results in very small 0.3% reduction in cross-sectional area; 8% attening in
the present case is expected to have insignicant eect on pressure drop.
3. Results and discussion
Pressure drop and heat transfer results for the layouts tested in water-to-water heat transfer are
shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
3.1. Pressure drop
Fig. 4 represents variation in experimental pressure drop with mass ow rate on hot water side
for all six modules of TTHE. In serpentine layouts, the pressure drop increases with number of
bends. The straight layout TTHE has shown lowest pressure drop amongst all layouts tested,
which is as expected.
2722
2 4 6 8 10 12
Flow Rate of Water, m
h
(kg/min)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

D
r
o
p

o
n

H
o
t

W
a
t
e
r

S
i
d
e
,

d
p
h

(
b
a
r
)
Straight
Serpentine (3 bends)
Serpentine (6 bends)
Serpentine (7 bends)
Serpentine (8 bends)
Serpentine (9 bends)
Fig. 4. Variations in pressure drop with mass ow rate of water.
0 8 12 16 20 24
Total Pumping Power, W
pp.tot
(W)
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
O
v
e
r
a
l
l

H
e
a
t

T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r

C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

U
i
.
h

(
k
W
/
m
2

K
)
Straight
Serpentine (3 bends)
Serpentine (6 bends)
Serpentine (7 bends)
Serpentine (8 bends)
Serpentine (9 bends)
4
Fig. 5. Variations in experimental overall heat transfer coecient with total pumping power.
2723
3.2. Overall heat transfer coecient
Fig. 5 represents variation of experimentally determined overall heat transfer coecient with
total pumping power for six modules tested. For a xed pumping power, serpentine layout TTHE
with seven bends has shown highest overall heat transfer coecient. Its maximum value is higher
than straight tube TTHE by 17%.
When comparison is done amongst serpentine layouts, the overall heat transfer coecient is
highest in serpentine layout with seven bends and lowest with nine bends. For serpentine layout
with three bends, the overall heat transfer coecient is lower than serpentine layout with seven
bends in this range of ow rate. Thus, the experimental results indicate that in serpentine layout
TTHE, there is a denite optimum for a number of bends for a particular application.
In serpentine layout with three and six bends, with d
bend
/d
ti
of 55.3 and 28.1, respectively, part
of the straight sections does not oer enhancement in heat transfer. Eect of secondary ow
diminishes long before the uid enters the subsequent bend.
In serpentine layouts with eight and nine bends, with d
bend
/d
ti
of 20.9 and 15.8, respectively, the
secondary ow generated by the previous bend probably persists as the uid enters in the next
bend. Since the secondary ow is reversed in subsequent bends in a serpentine layout, pressure
drop increases without commensurate increase in heat transfer.
Benets of the bends are not realized, since number of bends per unit length is large as in the
case of eight and nine bends, the secondary ow is rst neutralized as it passes the bend and re-
versed as it comes out. The consecutive bend interactions are so severe that the performance of the
serpentine layout is worse than that of a straight tube TTHE.
The quantities measured directly include the volume ow rate of water, inlet and outlet temper-
ature of water. The uncertainty in measurement of volume ow rate of water is 2% of reading
(maximum uncertainty: 0.2 lpm). The uncertainty of temperature measurement is 0.3 C.
According to the uncertainty analysis based on Kline and McClintock method illustrated by Mof-
fat [11], the maximum uncertainties of overall heat transfer coecient, heat transfer rate, and log
mean temperature dierence is 3.3%, 3% and 0.76%, respectively.
4. Model development
An eectiveness-NTU method is used in the model developed for performance prediction of
tubetube heat exchanger. The present model developed for straight tubetube heat exchanger
incorporates following attributes:
(a) Layout: straight.
(b) Flow conguration: counter ow or parallel ow.
(c) Geometric parameters of tubes: number, diameter, thickness, material on two sides.
(d) Thermal bonding of tubes: material and its size (/), gap between the adjacent tubes.
Appropriate parameters like length of n, l
n
(part of the tube transferring heat by n eect),
number of tubes on two sides, semi-ll angle / are included in the model to analyse most of the
congurations (various congurations with dierent number of tubes) of tubetube heat exchan-
2724
ger. The performance parameters like overall heat transfer coecient, pressure drop, pumping
power, cost, and size of heat exchanger are calculated for straight layout. Input parameters to
the model are inlet temperatures and mass ow rates of water. Other input parameters necessary
for the analysis are ow arrangement, number of tubes, tube material, tube diameter, tube thick-
ness, thermal bonding material and its size.
Following assumptions were made in the model development.
(a) Steady state operation.
(b) No heat loss to the surroundings.
(c) No heat transfer in the direction of ow.
(d) Uniform uid distribution in all tubes in multiple tube tubetube heat exchanger.
(e) One dimensional ow of heat through part of the tube and thermal bonding material.
(f) No phase change.
4.1. Heat transfer equations
The net heat transfer depends on the waterside heat transfer coecients, fouling factors, ther-
mal resistance by tube walls, and thermal bonding material. The correlations for heat transfer
coecients and friction factors reported in the literature have been used in the model. Few impor-
tant equations used in the model are given below.
NTU is calculated by
NTU
UA
C
min
2
Theoretical relations for eectiveness as a function of NTU and heat capacity ratio are available
for dierent ow arrangements like counter ow or parallel ow. For counter ow, equation for
eectiveness is
e
1 expNTU 1 C
ratio

1 C
ratio
expNTU 1 C
ratio

3
where,
C
ratio

C
min
C
max
The maximum possible heat transfer rate is calculated by
Q
max
C
min
t
hi
t
ci
4
The actual heat transfer rate in heat exchanger is calculated by equation
Q e C
min
t
hi
t
ci
5
2725
4.2. Heat transfer coecient
The net heat transfer depends on heat transfer coecients, fouling factors, thermal resistance
by tube walls, and thermal bonding material.
Gnielinskis correlation [9] is used for heat transfer coecient calculation for transition region
as well as fully developed turbulent ow for a straight smooth circular tube
Nu
f
2
Re 1000 Pr
1 12.7
f
2
_
0.5
Pr
2=3
1
6
For 2300 6 Re 6 5 10
6
and 0.5 6 Pr 6 2000.
It is modied version of second Petukhov correlation, which agrees with most reliable experi-
mental data to an accuracy of 5%.
4.3. Friction factor
For friction factor in fully developed turbulent ow for a straight smooth circular tube, Prandtl,
Karman, Nikuradse (PKN) correlation is classical correlation valid for wide range of Re
(4 10
3
6 Re 6 10
7
). The correlation is also used for comparison of recent correlations.
1

f
p 1.7372 ln Re

f
_
_ _
0.3946 7
Predictions of this correlation agree with the extensive experimental measurements within 2 [4].
However, the PKN correlation is not explicit form; Techo, Tickner, James correlation [10] is
used for friction factor calculations.
1

f
p 1.7372 ln
Re
1.964 ln Re 3.8215
_ _
8
This explicit form of PKN correlation agrees within 0.1% of PKN correlation for 10
4
6
Re 6 2.5 10
8
.
5. Overall heat transfer coecient
The overall heat transfer coecient is obtained using following expression
1
UA

1
h
h
r
fh
_ _
1
A
h
g
fsh
R
thh
R
thtbm
R
thc

1
h
c
r
fc
_ _
1
A
c
g
fsc
9
R
thtbm
is thermal resistance of thermal bonding material. Thickness of thermal bonding material
(measured in the direction of heat transfer) varies from minimum at / = 0 to maximum at the
limiting value /
max
. R
thh
and R
thc
are thermal resistance of portion of tubes in contact with ther-
mal bonding material on hot water and cooling water side, respectively. Similarly, r
fh
and r
fc
are
fouling resistances on hot water and cooling water side, respectively. Thermal resistance of ther-
mal bonding material is calculated considering dierential element as shown in Fig. 2(a).
2726
Thermal resistance of dierential element is given by
R
d
to
1 cos / w
g
k
tbm
d
to
2
d/ cos / l
pt
_ _ 10
where, R is thermal resistance of the dierential element in terms of dierential angle d/. The ther-
mal resistances of all elements of TBM are in parallel. Therefore, the overall thermal resistance of
TBM is obtained by integrating 1/R term for the dierential element between the limits /
max
to
/
max
. The derived equation for overall thermal resistance of TBM is
R
thtbm
2
_
/
max
0
k
tbm
d
to
2
cos / l
pt
d
to
1 cos / w
g
d/
_ _1
11
Another approach to obtain thermal resistance of thermal bonding material is by calculating
equivalent/average thickness considering the area equivalence. Following equation gives equi-
valent/average thickness of thermal bonding material.
w
tbmav
w
g

sin /
max
1 cos /
max

1
2
/
max

p
180
sin /
max
cos /
max
_
sin /
max
d
to
12
The thermal resistance of thermal bonding material calculated using Eq. (11) and other calculated
by considering the approach of average thickness of thermal bonding material deviates within
10%.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Predicted Pressure Drop, dp
h
(bar)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l

P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

D
r
o
p
,

d
p
h

(
b
a
r
)
45 deg line
Fig. 6. Experimental vs. simulated pressure drop.
2727
6. Experimental validation of model
The present model developed for straight tube TTHE is validated experimentally for water-
to-water heat transfer by testing a typical module of straight tube TTHE. The experimental setup
used for conducting experiments is explained in earlier section.
The experimental and simulated results on pressure drop and overall heat transfer coecient
for straight tube TTHE are represented in Figs. 6 and 7. The results show good agreement bet-
ween the results prediction by model and the experimental results. The average dierence between
the predicted and experimental results of pressure drop on hot water side is 2.3% and the maxi-
mum dierence is 4.2%. The average dierence between the predicted and experimental overall
heat transfer coecient is 2% and maximum dierence is 6.2%.
7. Conclusions
Five dierent serpentine layouts of TTHE have been experimentally evaluated for the eect of
varying straight lengths between bends on thermo-hydraulic performance. Tubes used in all ve
serpentine layout TTHE are 9.525 mm OD and 43 mm bend diameter. Maximum overall heat
transfer coecient is obtained for the serpentine layout TTHE with seven bends when the perfor-
mance is compared at same pumping power. Also, the overall heat transfer coecient in serpen-
tine layout TTHE with seven bends is higher than TTHE with straight layout by 17%.
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Predicted Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient, U
i.h
(kW/m
2
K)
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l

O
v
e
r
a
l
l

H
e
a
t

T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r

C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

U
i
.
h

(
k
W
/
m
2

K
)
45 deg line
Fig. 7. Experimental vs. predicted overall heat transfer coecient.
2728
In waterwater heat transfer, not all serpentine TTHE layouts are better than straight layout.
The serpentine layout TTHE with three and nine bends have shown lower heat transfer perfor-
mance than straight layout TTHE. However, at very low pumping power (below 3 W), serpentine
layout with three bends has shown slightly better heat transfer performance than straight tube
TTHE. The maximum dierence in performance of optimum serpentine layout TTHE (seven
bends) and nine bend serpentine TTHE, which is a non-optimum, is 30%. Thus, due care should
be taken while designing TTHE with serpentine layout to maximize the benets of this design.
In case of serpentine layout TTHE, the experimental results indicate that there is a denite opti-
mum for a number of bends for a particular application. In the present case, the optimum number
of bends in serpentine layout is 7.
An analytical model for simulation of straight tube TTHE in waterwater heat transfer is val-
idated experimentally. Eectiveness-NTU approach is used in the model for performance predic-
tions. The average and maximum deviation between predicted and experimental values of overall
heat transfer coecient is 2% and 6.2%, respectively. Similarly, average and maximum deviation
is pressure drop 2.3% and 4.2%, respectively.
References
[1] M.V. Rane, M.S. Tandale, Tubetube heat exchangers, Filed PCT/IN03/00377, 2003.
[2] M.V. Rane, M.S. Tandale, An experimental study on various layouts of tubetube heat exchanger in steam
condensation, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, submitted for publication.
[3] M.V. Rane, M.S. Tandale, Benets of superheat recovery on chillers- case study for a hotel installation, Paper
presented at 21st IIR International Congress of Refrigeration, Washington, DC, August 2003, pp. 1722.
[4] R.K. Shah, S.D. Joshi, Convective heat transfer in curved ducts, in: S. Kakak, R.K. Shah (Eds.), Handbook of
Single-phase Convective Heat Transfer, rst ed., John Wiley and Sons, 1987.
[5] I.Y. Chen, J.C. Huang, C.C. Wang, Singe-phase and two-phase frictional characteristics of small U-tube wavy
tubes, International Communication Heat Mass Transfer 31 (3) (2004) 303314.
[6] I.Y. Chen, S.K. Lai, C.C. Wang, Frictional performance of small diameter U-type wavy tubes, ASME Journal of
Fluids Engineering 47 (2003) 22412249.
[7] M.M. Ohadi, E.M. Sparrow, A. Walawalkar, A.I. Ansari, Pressure drop characteristics for a turbulent ow in a
straight circular tube situated downstream of a bend, International Journal of Heat Mass Transfer 33 (4) (1990)
583591.
[9] V. Gnielinski, New equations for heat and mass transfer in turbulent pipe and channel ow, International
Chemical Engineering 16 (2) (1976) 359368.
[10] R. Techo, R.R. Tickner, R.E. James, An accurate equation for the computation of the friction factor from smooth
pipes from the Reynolds number, ASME Transaction Journal of Applied mechanics 32 (1965) 443.
[11] R.J. Moat, Describing the uncertainties in experimental results, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 1 (1988)
317.
[12] D.F. Geary, Return bend pressure drop in refrigeration systems, ASHRAE Transactions 2342 (1980) 250265.
2729