Int J. Refrig. Vol. 21, No. 7, pp.

507517, 1998
1998 Elsevier Science Ltd and IIR
All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain
PII:S0140-7007(98)00031-0 01407007/98/$19.00+00

Performance characteristics correlation for round tube

and plate finned heat exchangers
M. Abu Madi, R. A. Johns and M. R. Heikal
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of
Brighton, Brighton BN2 4GJ, UK
Received 30 June 1997; revised 17 April 1998

A number of correlation equations describing the performance characteristics of round tube

and plate fin have been published in the open literature. However, many of these correlations
are restricted to flat finned heat exchangers and a limited number of geometrical
configurations. In this study, 28 heat exchanger samples were tested in an open circuit
thermal wind tunnel over a velocity range of 1 to 20 m/s for a number of geometries. The
geometrical variations include the number of tube rows, fin thickness and the spacing between
fins, rows and tubes. Both flat and corrugated fins were tested and the results were correlated
in terms of j and f factors as a function of Reynolds number and the geometrical parameters of
the heat exchangers. An important feature of this correlation is the novel way in which the
geometric parameters are expressed in the correlation. Ratios of these parameters are derived
from consideration of the physics of the flow and heat transfer in the heat exchangers. This
results in a more accurate and physically meaningful correlation which can be applied to a
broader range of geometries. The correlation was validated against test data in the literature
for round tube and plate fin with good agreement. It was found that the fin type affects the heat
transfer and friction factor, and that the number of tube rows has a negligible effect on the
friction factor. The number of tube rows effect was found to be influenced by the fin and tube
geometries as well as the Reynolds number. 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd and IIR. All rights
reserved.
(Keywords: refrigerant; tube; fin)

Equations relatives aux performances dechangeurs de

chaleur constitues de tubes ronds et de plaques a ailettes
Un certain nombre dequations pour des caracteristiques du rendement des echangeurs de
chaleur a tubes ronds plaques a ailettes ont ete publies dans le litterature. Cependant, dans
bien des cas, ces correlations se limitent aux echangeurs a ailette plate dans un nombre limite
de configurations geometriques. Dans cette etude, 28 echangeurs de chaleur ont ete testes
utilisant une soufflerie a circuit ouvert avec une vitesse dair de 1 a 20 m/s pour plusieurs
formes geometriques. Les variations geometriques portaient sur le nombre de rangees de
tubes, lepaisseur des ailettes et la distance separant des ailettes, des rangees et des tubes. Les
ailettes plates et ondulees ont ete testees et les correlations en termes de facteurs j et f en
fonction du nombre de Reynolds et les parametres geometriques des echangeurs de chaleur.
Un aspect important de cette correlation est le facon originale dexprimer des parametres
geometriques. Les rapports de ces parametres sont obtenus a partir des flux et transferts de
chaleur dans des echangeurs de chaleur. Ce procede permet dobtenir une correlation plus
precise et utile qui sapplique a une gamme de formes geometriques plus large. La correlation
a ete validee en fonction des donnees concernant des echangeurs a tube et a plaque a ailettes
dans la litterature : les donnees experimentales et theoriques concordent bien. On a montre
que le type dailette exerce une influence sur le transfert de chaleur et le facteur de frottement.
Cependant, le nombre de rangees de tubes a un effet negligeable sur le coefficient de
frottement. On a demontre que leffet nombre de rangees de tube est influence par les
geometries des ailettes et des tubes ainsi que par le nombre de Reynolds. 1998 Elsevier
Science Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
(Mots cles : echangeur de chaleur ; frigorigene ; tube ; ailettes)

507
508 M. Abu Madi et al.

NOMENCLATURE
Aa air-side heat transfer area Nt number of tube
Ac free flow area Ntu number of transfer unit
Af face area Pr Prandtl number
Ai tube inside heat transfer area R 1R 9 geometric parameters
Ap heat transfer primary area Re Reynolds number
As heat transfer secondary area Sf fin spacing
A t,m tube wall heat transfer area at middle Sr row spacing
distance St tube spacing
C min minimum heat capacity St Stanton number
dh air-side hydraulic diameter U all overall heat transfer coefficient
di tube inside diameter Va face velocity
do tube outside diameter y fin parameter
z fin parameter
f friction factor
Ga air mass velocity Greek symbols
ha air-side heat transfer coefficient
hi tube-side heat transfer coefficient
j Colburn factor b fin parameter
j4 Colburn factor for four-row heat df fin thickness
exchanger dt tube wall thickness
j Nr Colburn factor for N r number of rows Dp pressure drop
kf fin thermal conductivity ha heat exchanger surface effectiveness
kt tube thermal conductivity hf fin effectiveness
l fin length from root to centre J fin parameter
L flow length ma air viscosity
Lt tube length ra air density
m fin effectiveness parameter j porosity
Nr number of tube rows t fin parameter

Introduction
Traditional round tube and plate fin heat exchangers are
widely used in applications where pressure drops for the
internal fluid flow is a critical design factor, notably in
automotive applications for engine cooling and air
conditioning. The authors have developed software
packages for the design of the compact heat exchangers
used for condensation and evaporation in automotive air
conditioning systems14. The heat transfer and pressure
loss correlations used on the internal tube surfaces
provide adequate accuracy. Since the air-side thermal
resistance is significantly higher than that of the tube
internal wall, small errors in predicting the air-side heat
transfer performance lead to significant errors in
predicting the overall thermal performance of heat
exchangers. The accuracy of a heat exchanger model
may, therefore, be judged by the ability to predict the
air-side heat transfers and pressure losses accurately.
Many experimental studies have been carried out on
this type of compact heat exchanger to improve the
understanding of heat transfer performance and pressure
losses over a wide range of air on velocities. Correlations
have been developed to predict the Colburn factor, j, and
friction factor, f, from experimental results for the wide
range of fin and tube geometries used in these
applications. McQuiston5 developed a correlation to
determine j and f factors for round tube and plate fin heat
exchangers with staggered rows from the air-side
Reynolds number based on the tube outside diameter.
Geometrical effects were included as the ratio of the total
air-side area to the tube outside area. The equation was
derived from practical tests on heat exchangers with four
rows of tubes. The effect of the number of tube rows was
included by McQuiston through the use of the experi-
mental data of Rich6. El Mahdy and Biggs7 used
previously published data for heat exchangers with
round tubes and staggered tube arrangements and
circular or continuous flat fins to develop a correlation
for the calculation of the j factor from Reynolds number,
based on the hydraulic diameter. The geometric effects
were included as ratios of fin thickness to fin length,
hydraulic diameter to fin thickness and fin spacing to fin
thickness. Gray and Webb8 collected published data on
samples of four row heat exchangers with continuous flat
fins and round tubes in a staggered arrangement to
develop a correlation of j factor and Reynolds number
based on the tube diameter. Geometrical effects were
included as the ratios of tube spacing to row spacing and
fin spacing to tube outside diameter. A multiplier was
used to account for the effect of the number of tube rows.
The effect of the number of tube rows above five was
found to be small. They also derived a correlation for f
factor based on the superposition of friction over the
 Round tube and plate nned heat exchangers 509

tubes and that on the fins. Geometric effects were where the overall heat transfer coefficient, U all, is given
included as the ratio of tube spacing to tube diameter. by;
The tubes friction factor was calculated in this correlation 1
from the work of Zukanskas9. Wang et al.10 studied the Uall (2)
1 Aa d t A
performance of 15 samples of plate fin heat exchangers a
ha ha At, m kt Ai hi
with different geometrical parameters, including the
Parameters, R n, may be introduced to identify the effects
number of tube rows, fin spacing and fin thickness in an
of the heat exchanger geometry on the thermal perfor-
open circuit wind tunnel. The results were presented in the
mance and pressure loss performance in the heat transfer
form of j and f factors against Reynolds number based on
coefficient and friction factor correlations.
the tube collar diameter. The results for two, four and six
The heat exchanger fin surface effectiveness, h a, in
tube rows were correlated using a multiple linear
eqn (2) is taken into consideration through the geometric
regression technique in a partial range of the experimental
parameter:
data (800 Re 7500) based on the previously published
1
correlation by Briggs and Young11. Although Wang et al R1 (3)
suggested a negligible effect of the fin thickness on the ha
thermal performance and pressure drop, the proposed
correlations for j and f factors contained the number of tube
rows and the ratios of the fin thickness and fin pitch to the
tube collar diameter. Ninety-seven percent of the experi-
mental data of j factor were correlated within 10%
while 88% of the f factor data were correlated within 10%.
The published correlations, described above, are
restricted to flat finned heat exchangers and to a limited
number of geometrical configurations. None of the above
authors reported any plate fin with modified surfaces
such as corrugated and sine wave. Use of these
correlations in the models developed by the authors for
automotive air conditioning heat exchangers introduced
errors as many of the configurations used were outside
the range of the correlations which were not applicable to
modified fins. The authors, therefore, undertook a
comprehensive experimental programme with tests on
28 heat exchangers in a thermal wind tunnel. The
samples included staggered tube arrangements, one, two
and four rows, fin spacing from 4.233 mm (6 fins/inch)
to 1.587 mm (16 fins/inch), row spacing of 22, 16.5 and
16 mm, tube external diameter of 9.956 mm, and tube
spacing of 25.4 and 19 mm. Two types of fin surfaces
were tested, flat and corrugated, with fin thicknesses
ranging from 0.2 to 0.12 mm. Figure 1 shows a sketch of Figure 1 Sketch of the corrugated fin
the corrugated fin used in this study. Figure 1 Representation de lailette onduleee
A regression analysis of the experimental data was
used to derive correlations based on Colburn factor or
friction factor. The Reynolds number was based on the
hydraulic diameter. The geometrical parameters were
included in the correlations by consideration of their
significance and adoption of a fundamental approach to
heat transfer to establish the effects of these geometric
factors on the thermal and frictional performance. Unlike
the correlations published previously, the geometrical
parameters considered in this study included ratios derived
from the thermal and frictional performance and ratios of
the fin and tube geometries.

Analysis
The thermal performance of a compact heat exchanger may
be expressed in terms of the number of transfer units, Ntu, as:
AU Figure 2 Hexagonal fin array
Ntu a all (1)
Cmin Figure 2 Disposition hexagonale dailettes
510 M. Abu Madi et al.

This parameter is a function of the fin effectiveness, h f, where b 1

and the ratio of the secondary area to total area: r
S2
1 y S2r t (12)
R1 (4) 2
1 R7 (1 hf )
St
The parameter R 7 is the ratio of secondary and total z (13)
2
air-side areas:
The second geometric parameter defines the tube wall
As
R7 (5) thermal resistance as:
Aa
Aa d t
where R2 (14)
At, m
tanh(ml)
hf (6) where the total air-side heat transfer area, A a, is defined
ml
as:
and
s Aa A p A s (15)
2ha
hf (7) and the tube heat transfer surface area calculated at the
kf df mean diameter:
The fin length from root to centre, l, for hexagonal fins is At, m p(di dt )Lt Nt (16)
given by Schmidt12 as;
The primary heat transfer area, A p, is the total tube out-
d side area in contact with the air. The secondary heat
l o (1 t)(1 0:35 ln t) (8)
2 transfer area, A s, is the total fin surface area taking
where t for the hexagonal fin, shown in Figure 2, is account of the tube slots and fin edge areas.
defined as; The third parameter, R 3, is the ratio of total air-side
and tube inside surface areas:
t 1:27J(b 0:3)0:5 (9)
Aa
R3 (17)
S Ai
J t (10)
do The water side heat transfer coefficient is calculated
y from the DittusBoelter equation. The blockage to the
b (11) air flow arising from the fin and tube cross-sectional
z

Figure 3 Schematic diagram for the thermal wind tunnel

Figure 3 Dessin schematise de la soufflerie
 Round tube and plate nned heat exchangers 511

areas is represented by the geometric parameter: and

A 1 Sr
R4 f (18) R9 (27)
Ac j do
The number of tube rows in the heat exchanger influence
the total heat transfer surface area and is represented by
the parameter Thermal wind tunnel
A
R5 a (19) The induced flow thermal wind tunnel used in the
Af practical tests is shown schematically in Figure 3. It is
Therefore, the ratio between the heat transfer surface powered by a centrifugal fan capable of delivering a
area for one row and the face area, R 5,1, is: velocity of 20 m/s at the 152 152 mm test section, with
R the densest test sample in place. Flow was controlled by
R5, 1 5 (20)
Nr throttling the fan outlet. For very low velocities, below
The mass velocity, G a, in the calculation of Reynolds 5 m/s, throttling the flow lead to instabilities, and an
number, friction factor and Stanton number is based on alternative axial fan was switched into the duct. This
the free flow area: allowed stable velocities down to 0.5 m/s to be achieved.
Ga ra Va R4 (21) In all cases, flow uniformity was found to be better than
2.5% over the face of the test sample. This allowed the
Reynolds number is, therefore, calculated for a single air velocity to be measured at a single location upstream
cell in the compact heat exchanger as of the heat exchanger under test using the Pitot tube. The
rVR validity of this was checked by Achaichia13. To provide
Re a a 6 (22)
ma a signal for automatic data processing, a Pitot tube was
where the parameter, R 6, is given by connected to one of two transducers. The first had an
A A 4LAc operating range of 03 mm H 2O gauge for measurement
R6 f dh f (23) of low air velocities, and the other a range of 020 mm
Ac Ac Aa
The geometric parameters R 4 and R 5 influence the cal- H 2O gauge for high velocity measurement. The
culation of friction factor, manufacturers calibrations of both transducers were
checked against a micromanometer and were found to be
2dp
f (24) accurate to within 2%.
ra Va2 R34 R5
The air temperature differential across the sample was
and the Colburn factor measured by a 2 9 junction thermopile grid made up of
j St Pr2=3 (25) chromelalumel thermocouples. The use of nine junc-
tions for each side yielded two advantages. The first is a
The parameters R 2R 7 can be determined from the fin large signal for improved accuracy, and the second is
and tube geometries, as described in Appendix A. The automatic averaging of the air temperature distribution
effects of fin spacing and row spacing on performance on the outlet face. The air inlet temperature was
are included in the analysis through the geometric measured relative to the water inlet temperature using
parameters a differential thermocouple. The water inlet temperature
Sf was measured directly by a chromelalumel thermopile
R8 (26) and an electronic cold junction while the temperature
do

Table 1 Heat exchanger geometry for flat fin configuration with staggered tube
Tableau 1 Geometrie de lechangeur de chaleur : configuration a ailette plate et a tubes en quinconce
Sample no. No. of rows (N r) Tube spacing Row spacing Fin spacing Fin thickness
(S t) mm (S r) mm (S f) mm (d f) mm
a 4 25.4 22 1.847 0.13
b 4 25.4 16 1.615 0.12
c 4 19 16.5 1.843 0.12
d 4 19 16.5 2.646 0.12
e 4 19 16.5 2.545 0.13
f 2 25.4 22 2.620 0.13
g 2 25.4 22 1.833 0.13
h 2 25.4 16 2.543 0.12
i 2 19 16.5 1.640 0.12
j 2 19 16.5 2.593 0.12
k 2 19 16.5 2.541 0.13
l 2 19 16.5 1.915 0.13
m 1 25.4 16 1.859 0.12
n 1 25.4 16 1.635 0.12
o 1 25.4 16 2.586 0.12
512 M. Abu Madi et al.

drop across the heat exchanger was measured by means
of 2 4 junction thermopile. The air-side pressure drop
across the sample was measured from pressure tappings
upstream and downstream, which were connected to a
pressure transducer with an operating range of 025 mm
H 2O gauge. Water was heated in a 450-l reservoir with
three 7.5-kW electric heater elements. A thyristor
controller maintained the water temperature within
0.2 K. A fixed high water flow rate of 1.8 kg/s was
supplied by a centrifugal pump to ensure a low water-
side thermal resistance. The detailed description of the
test equipment is reported by Achaichia and Cowell14
and Yu15.
Experimental results
Two types of fin were considered in the experimental
programme; flat fin and corrugated fin. Little information
is reported on corrugated fins in the literature. The
physical dimensions of the compact heat exchanger
samples tested with the two types of fin are listed in
Tables 1 and 2 below.
Each sample was tested with the air-on velocity varied
from 1 to 20 m/s. Separate tests were undertaken to
determine the heat transfer and pressure losses. In
the case of heat transfer the water flow rate was constant
at 1.8 kg/s with the inlet temperature of 84C. Pressure
loss tests were conducted isothermally to eliminate
inertia terms and changes in the fluid transport
properties.
The experimental results are typified by Figure 4 of
heat dissipation and air pressure losses against air
velocity for sample h.
Figures 59 show the value of Colburn factor and
friction factor determined experimentally for the heat
exchangers used in the correlation.

Table 2 Heat exchanger geometry for corrugated fin configuration with staggered tube
Tableau 2 Geometrie de lechangeur de chaleur : configuration a ailette ondulee et a tubes en quinconce
Sample no. No. of rows (N r) Tube spacing Row spacing Fin spacing Fin thickness
(S t) mm (S r) mm (S f) mm (d f) mm
p 4 25.4 22 4.129 0.2
q 4 25.4 22 2.548 0.12
r 4 25.4 22 1.820 0.12
s 4 25.4 22 2.567 0.13
t 4 25.4 22 1.853 0.13
u 4 25.4 16 2.586 0.13
v 4 25.4 16 2.122 0.13
w 2 25.4 22 4.018 0.2
x 2 25.4 22 2.543 0.12
y 2 25.4 22 1.838 0.12
z 2 25.4 22 2.612 0.13
A 2 25.4 22 1.827 0.13
B 2 25.4 16 2.589 0.13

Figure 4 Heat dissipation and pressure drop for sample h

Figure 4 Dissipation denergie et chute de pression pour lechantillon h
 Round tube and plate nned heat exchangers 513

Geometry effect
Figure 10 shows the effect of fin type on the thermal
performance and friction factor of the round tube and
plate fin heat exchanger. The results show an increase in
the j and f factors for corrugated fins over the flat fins.
This may be due to the fact that corrugated fins
accelerate the air flow and intensify the turbulence of
the air flow between them, thereby enhancing the heat
transfer rate. This results in an increase in pressure drop
and corresponding increase in the friction factor.
The effect of fin thickness on the heat transfer and
pressure drop was studied by comparing the performance of
12 samples with flat and corrugated fins. Two fin thickness
of 0.12 and 0.13 mm were considered in this comparison.
Figure 5 includes the performance of samples d and e.
The results show an increase in the j factor with smaller
fin thickness. The fin thickness effect on the friction factor
was found to be very small. The same results were found
for samples with different fin spacing and number of tube
rows, samples j and k in Figure 7, samples q, s, r and t in
Figure 6 and samples x, z, y and A in Figure 8.

Figure 5 Colburn factor and friction factor for four-row, flat fin heat exchangers
Figure 5 Coefficients de Colburn et de frottement pour des echangeurs de chaleur a ailette plate a 4 rangees

Figure 6 Colburn factor and friction factor for four-row, corrugated fin exchangers
Figure 6 Coefficients de Colburn et de frottement pour des echangeurs de chaleur a ailette ondulee a 4 rangees
514 M. Abu Madi et al.

Correlation equation factors evaluated from the experimental results was

The determination of correlations for Colburn and
friction factors was carried out in two stages. An initial
correlation was undertaken on the experimental data
obtained for the four tube row samples. The effect of the
number of tube rows was then superimposed for one and
two rows. The two types of fin were considered
separately.
Four-row heat exchangers
The regression analysis of the Colburn and friction
undertaken using Sigma Plot software. Multiple regres-
sion analysis was used to identify the influence of the
geometric factors R n. Those of little influence were
excluded from the correlation. A generic equation, which
includes the significant geometric factors, was obtained:
j Rec1 Rc2 c3 c4 c5
4 R5, 1 R7 R9 (28)
The values of the indices (cn) for four-row heat
exchangers with flat and with corrugated fins are
shown in Table 3.
The coefficient of determination was between 98.4

Figure 7 Colburn factor and friction factor for two-row, flat fin exchangers
Figure 7 Coefficients de Colburn et de frottement pour des echangeurs de chaleur a ailette plate a 2 rangees

Figure 8 Colburn factor and friction factor for two-row, corrugated fin exchangers
Figure 8 Coefficients de Colburn et de frottement pour des echangeurs de chaleur a plaque ondulee a 2 rangees
 Round tube and plate nned heat exchangers 515

and 93.9% with an rms error of 1.93.6%. The friction
factor for both types of fin was based on a similar
correlation used for j factor with coefficient of
determination varying between 98.1 and 92.7% with
rms errors of 1.2 and 2.8% for flat and corrugated fins,
respectively.
f Rec1 Rc2 c3 c4 c5
4 R5, 1 R8 R9
data of McQuiston16 for a similar geometry. The sample
had a tube spacing of 25.4 mm, fin spacing of 1.814 mm,
row spacing of 22 mm, fin thickness of 0.1524 mm, tube
outside diameter of 9.956 mm and four tube rows. The
predicted j and f factors were plotted against the experi-
mentally determined ones in Figure 11. This showed an
overall agreement of 11% and 5% for the j factor,
(29) while the f factor was predicted within 11% and 8%.

The limits of eqns. (28) and (29) are shown in Table 4.

Tube row effect
The correlation developed for flat fin and tube heat
exchangers was validated against previously published Previous studies5,8 used the database of Rich6 to derive a

Figure 9 Colburn factor and friction factor for one-row, flat fin exchangers
Figure 9 Coefficients de Colburn et de frottement pour des echangeurs de chaleur a ailette plate a 1 rangee

Figure 10 Effect of fin type on Colburn factor and friction factor

Figure 10 Effet du type de plaque sur le coefficient de Colburn et le facteur de frottement
516 M. Abu Madi et al.

Table 3 Coefficients for eqn (28) eqn (29)

Tableau 3 Coefficcients des equations (28) et (29)
Type of fin c1 c2 c3 c4 c5
j Flat 0.44 3.07 0.37 6.14 2.13
f Flat 0.25 1.43 1.37 1.65 3.05
j Corrugated 0.44 11.4 1.25 21.4 0.47
f Corrugated 0.25 1.15 0.70 1.24 1.12

Table 4 Limits of eqns (28) and (29)

Tableau 4 Limites des equations (28) et (29)
Type of fin R4 R 5,1 R7 S f/d o S r/d o
Flat 1.772.25 11.021.8 0.860.95 0.160.27 1.602.21
Corrugated 1.731.77 10.422.1 0.890.95 0.180.41 1.602.21

Figure 11 Validation of flat fin correlation

Figure 11 Validation de la correlation de lailette plate

factor to account for the effect of a different number of
rows in the correlation. One heat exchanger configura-
tion was used, circular flat fins on round tubes. In the
above studies the only factor reported as influencing the
thermal performance through the effect of the number of
rows of tubes was the Reynolds number. The number of
rows had little influence on friction factor.
In this study, 10 samples with five different geome-
tries of corrugated fins and 14 samples with six different
geometries of flat fin were used to establish the influence
of the number of tube rows on thermal performance. A
regression analysis was used to establish the influence of
the number of tube rows on Colburn factor from the
experimental data.
j4
a0 a1Rea2 Nra3 Ra4 a5
3 R5, 1
jN r
The values of the constant and indices (an) for eqn (30)
are shown in Table 5. The limits of eqn (30) are shown in
Table 6. The results show that the tube row effect is
influenced by the heat exchanger geometries as well as
the Reynolds number. A regression analysis of the
experimental data showed that the number of tube
rows had little effect on the friction factor.
Conclusions
Experimental results are presented for a number of round
tube and plate fin heat exchangers of different geometric
configurations with both flat and corrugated fins.
Correlation equations for the j and f factors are presented
as functions of Reynolds number, based on the hydraulic
diameter, and geometric parameters of the heat exchan-
(30) gers. This equation is believed to be more accurate than
earlier correlations with a broader scope of applications.
A novel approach was developed for deriving the
 Round tube and plate nned heat exchangers 517

Table 5 Coefficients for eqn (30)

Tableau 5 Coefficients de lequation (30)
Type of fin a0 a1 a2 a3 a4 a5
Flat 0.87 1.43E-5 0.55 0.67 3.13 4.95
Corrugated 1.08 0.23 0.03 2.62 0.14 0.21

Table 6 Limits of eqn (30) References

Tableau 6 Limites de lequation (30)
1. Abu-Madi, M., Johns, R. A. and Heikal, M. R. The effect
Type of fin Nr R3 R 5,1 Re of refrigerant properties on the design of automotive air
conditioning systems. In Proceedings of the IMechE
Flat 14 7.2619.3 11.021.8 2006000 VTMS 2 Conference, London, 1995, pp. 307315.
Corrugated 24 9.3819.4 10.722.1 2505000 2. Johns, R. A., Abu-Madi, M. and Heikal, M. R. The per-
formance of non-ozone depleting refrigerants in condensers
and evaporators. In Proceedings of the IMarE Conference
geometric ratios in the correlation equations based on on Marine Refrigeration, Vol. 107, No. 3, London, 1995,
pp. 3148.
consideration of the heat transfer and fluid flow relations 3. Abu-Madi, M., Johns, R. A. and Heikal, M. R. The per-
for the heat exchanger surfaces. The correlation formance of compact finned tube evaporators in automotive
equations show good agreement with published test air conditioning systems using non-ozone depleting refrig-
data for round tube and plate fin heat exchangers. erants.In Proceedings of the 4th IMechE UK National Heat
Transfer Conference, Manchester, 1995, pp. 369373.
It was found that the fin type affects the heat transfer
4. Abu-Madi, M., Johns, R. A. and Heikal, M. R. The per-
and friction factor, whilst the number of tube rows have formance of air conditioning evaporators in hot, humid
negligible effect on the friction factor. The number of environments with non-ozone depleting refrigerants. In
tube rows effect was found to be influenced by the fin Proceedings of the 1st UAE Conference on Air Condition-
and tube geometries as well as the Reynolds number. The ing in the Gulf, Al-Ain, UAE, 1996, pp. 7484.
5. McQuiston, F. C., Correlation of heat, mass and momen-
j factor increased with the decrease of fin thickness. The tum transport coefficients for platefintube heat transfer
fin thickness has negligible effect on the friction factor. surfaces with staggered tubes. ASHRAE Trans., 1978,
84(1), 294308.
6. Rich, D. G., The effect of the number of tube rows on heat
Acknowledgements transfer performance of smooth plate fin-and-tube heat
exchangers. ASHRAE Trans., 1975, 81(1), 307317.
The authors acknowledge the provision of heat exchangers 7. El Mahdy, A. H. and Biggs, R. C., Finned tube heat
and data from ACR Heat Transfer Manufacturing Ltd. exchanger: correlation of dry surface heat transfer data.
ASHRAE Trans., 1979, 85(2), 262273.
8. Gray, D. L. and Webb, R. L. Heat transfer and friction
Appendix A correlations for plate finned-tube heat exchangers having
plain fins. In Proceedings of the Eighth International
    Heat Transfer Conference, Vol. 6, San Francisco, 1986,
dt d SS d2 2d S
R2 do 1 f 2 t r o f t pp. 27452750.
di dt Sf pSf 2Sf pSf Nr 9. Zukauskas, A. Heat Transfer from Tubes in Cross Flow.
(A1) Academic Press, New York, 1972, pp. 93160.
10. Wang, C. C., Chang, Y. J., Hsieh, Y. C. and Lin, Y. T.,
  Sensible heat and friction characteristics of plate fin-and-
do d SS d2 2df St
R3 1 f 2 t r o (A2) tube heat exchangers having plane fins. International Jour-
di Sf pdi Sf 2di Sf pdi Sf Nr nal of Refrigeration, 1996, 19(4), 223230.
11. Briggs, D. E. and Young, E. H., Convective heat transfer
Sf St and pressure drop of air flowing across triangular pitch
R4 (A3) banks of finned tube. Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp. Ser., 1963,
(St do )(Sf df ) 59(41), 110.
  12. Schmidt, T. E., Heat transfer calculations for extended
d surfaces. Refrigerating Engineering, 1949, 57, 351.
pNr do 1 f   13. Achaichia, A. The performance of louvred tube-and-plate
Sf N pd 2 2d
R5 r 2Sr o f (A4) fin heat transfer surfaces. Ph.D. thesis, University of
St Sf 2St Nr Brighton, 1987.
14. Achaichia, A. and Cowell, T. A., Heat transfer and pres-
4Sr Nr sure drop characteristics of flat tube and louvered plate fin
R6 (A5) surface. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 1988,
R5 1(2), 147157.
15. Yu, L. C. A. Performance characteristics of round tube and
1 plate fin heat transfer surfaces. Ph.D. thesis, University of
R7 (A6)
2pdo (Sf df ) Brighton, 1992.
1 16. McQuiston, F. C., Heat, mass and momentum transfer data
4S d
4St Sr pdo2 t f for five platefintube heat transfer surfaces. ASHRAE
Nr Trans., 1978, 84(1), 266293.