FLOW MALDISTRIBUTION

AND HEADER DESIGN

One of the common assumptions in basic heat exchanger design theory is that
fluid be distributed uniformly at the inlet of the exchanger on each fluid side and
throughout the core. However, in practice, flow maldistribution is more common
and can significantly reduce the desired heat exchanger performance.
A. GEOMETRY-INDUCED FLOW MALDISTRIBUTION
DEFINITION

One class of flow maldistribution, which is a result of geometrically nonideal fluid flow
passages or nonideal exchanger inlet/outlet header/tank/manifold/nozzle design. Geometry-
induced flow maldistribution is related to mechanical design-induced flow nonuniformities
such as (1) entry conditions, (2) bypass and leakage streams, (3) fabrication tolerances, (4)
shallow bundle effects, and (5) general equipment and exchanger system effects

Passage-to-passage flow Manifold-induced flow

Gross flow maldistribution
maldistribution (nonuniform maldistribution (due to
(at the inlet face of
flow in neighboring flow inlet/outlet
the exchanger)
passages) manifold/header design)
1. Gross Flow Maldistribution
The major feature of gross flow maldistribution is that nonuniform flow occurs at the
macroscopic level (due to poor header design or blockage of some flow passages during
manufacturing, including brazing or operation).
EFFECT
(1) a significant increase in the exchanger pressure drop
(2) some reduction in heat transfer rate.

CAN OCCUR IN

1. one dimension across the free-flow area (perpendicular to the flow direction) as in
single-pass counterflow and parallelflow exchangers,
2. two or three dimensions as in single- and multipass crossflow and other exchangers.
The following additional idealizations are introduced to quantify the influence of flow
nonuniformity caused by gross flow maldistribution on each subexchanger and the
exchanger as a whole.

1. Total heat transfer rate in a real heat exchanger is equal to the sum of the
heat transfer rates that would be exchanged in N subexchangers connected in
parallel for an idealized N-step inlet velocity distribution function.

2. The sum of the heat capacity rates of the respective fluid streams for all
subexchangers is equal to the total heat capacity rates of the fluids for the
actual maldistributed heat exchanger.
1.1 Counterflow and Parallelflow Exchangers

TEMPERATURE EFFECTIVENESS

knowing individual NTU and heat

capacity rate ratio

The reduction in the temperature

effectiveness
Free-flow Area and Heat Capacity Rate Ratio
1.2 Crossflow Exchangers.
Mixed–Unmixed Crossflow Exchanger with Nonuniform Flow on the Unmixed Side.

TEMPERATURE EFFECTIVENESS
TOTAL HEAT EXCHANGER
Unmixed–Unmixed Crossflow Exchangers
When flow maldistribution is present on only one fluid side, the following general
conclusions have been obtained.

1. For flow maldistribution on the Cmax fluid side, the exchanger thermal
performance deterioration factor "* approaches a single value of 0.06 for all C* < 1
when NTU approaches zero. The performance deterioration factor decreases as NTU
increases. For a balanced heat exchanger (C* ¼ 1), the exchanger thermal
performance deterioration factor Increases continually with NTU.

2. For flow maldistribution on the Cmin fluid side, the thermal performance
deterioration factor first increases and then decreases as NTU increases.

3. If flow nonuniformities are present on both sides, the performance deterioration

factor can be either larger or smaller than that for the case where flow
nonuniformity is present on only one side, and there are no general guidelines about
the expected trends.
1.3 Tube-Side Maldistribution and Other Heat
Exchanger Types.
Tube-side maldistribution in a 1–1 TEMA E shell-and-tube counterflow heat exchanger studied
by Cichelli and Boucher (1956) led to the following major conclusions:

1. For Cs=Ct small, say Cs=Ct ¼ 0:1, the performance loss is negligible for large
flow nonuniformities for NTUs < 2.

2. For Cs=Ct large, say Cs=Ct >1, a loss can be noticed but diminishes for NTUs >2.

3. Cs=Ct ¼ 1 is the worst case at large NTUs

2. Passage-to-Passage Flow Maldistribution
Compact heat exchangers with uninterrupted (continuous) flow passages, while designed
for nonfouling applications, are highly susceptible to passage-to-passage flow maldistribution.
That is because the neighboring passages are geometrically never identical, due to imperfect
manufacturing processes. It is especially difficult to control the passage size precisely when
small dimensions are involved. Since differently sized and shaped passages exhibit different
flow resistances and the flow seeks a path of least resistance, a nonuniform flow through the
matrix results. This phenomenon usually causes a slight reduction in pressure drop, while the
reduction in heat transfer rate may be significant compared to that for nominal (average) size
passages. For a theoretical analysis for passage-to-passage flow maldistribution, the actual
nonuniform surface is idealized as containing large, small, and/or in-between size passages (in
parallel) relative to the nominal passage dimensions.

a two-passage
a three-passage model an N-passage mode
model
2.1 Models of Flow Nonuniformity
Two-Passage Model HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS
PRESSURE DROP

RATIO MASS FLOW RATE

NUMBER TRANSFER UNIT

THE NUMBER OF FLOW PASSAGES
N-Passage Model

CHANNEL DEVIATION PARAMETER NUMBER TRANSFER UNIT

2.2 Passage-to-Passage Flow Nonuniformity
Due to Other Effects.
Finally, passage-to-passage flow nonuniformity for very compact surfaces may be induced by
brazing and/or fouling in addition to manufacturing imperfection. Both controlled
atmosphere brazing and vacuum brazing have a negligible effect on j and f data if the
plates/tubes/primary surface is clad and fins are unclad, and the ratio of the joint area to free-
flow area is less than 10%.
3. Manifold-Induced Flow Maldistribution
Whereas manifolds are integral in plate heat exchangers due to construction features, manifolds
are common and attached separately in many other applications. In the PHEs, the fluids enter
and exit the manifolds laterally and flow within the core axially
A few general conclusions from these studies for more uniform flow through manifold systems and some design
guidelines for manifolds are as follows:
1. Flow maldistribution is insignificant in PHEs with less than 20 flow channels on a given fluid pass

2. Flow maldistribution in the PHEs due to the manifold system (U- or Z-flow) increases with increasing flow rate,
increasing the number of plates in a given pass and decreasing the liquid viscosity.

3. In a U-flow manifold system, the maximum flow occurs through the first port, and in the Z-flow manifold system
through the last port. Neither arrangement provides uniform flow through the PHE or lateral branches. However,
flatter (relatively more uniform) flow distribution is obtained with the U-flow manifold system than with the Z-flow
system (see Fig. 12.7e).

4. To minimize flow maldistribution in a PHE, the flow area of the inlet manifold (area of the actual or simulated
pipe before lateral branches) should be larger than the flow area of the lateral branches (heat exchanger core). The
larger the port diameter, the more uniform flow through the heat exchanger core. Alternatively, flow maldistribution
in a PHE plate pack (core) increases as the fraction of the total pressure drop in the manifold becomes significant.

5. The flow area of a combining-flow manifold in Fig. 12.12b (the outlet manifold/ pipe in Fig. 12.7a and b) should
be larger than that for the dividing-flow manifold in Fig. 12.12a (the inlet manifold/pipe in Fig. 12.7a and b) for a
more uniform flow distribution through the core in the absence of heat transfer within the core. If there is heat
transfer in lateral branches (core), the flow areas should be adjusted first for the density change and then the flow
area of the combining manifold should be made larger than that calculated previously.

6. Flow reversal is more likely to occur in a Z-flow system, which is subjected to poor flow distribution.

7. Based on the limited tests, a 2-pass 2-pass Z-flow arrangement can be treated as if each pass were in a separate
exchanger.
B. OPERATING CONDITION–INDUCED FLOW
MALDISTRIBUTION
Operating conditions (temperature level, temperature differences, multiphase flow conditions,
etc.) inevitably influence thermophysical properties (viscosity, density, quality) and/or process
characteristics (such as the onset of oscillations) of the exchanger fluids, which in turn may
cause various flow maldistributions, both steady and transient in nature.

Viscosity-Induced Flow
Maldistribution
1. Viscosity-Induced Flow Maldistribution
Viscosity-induced flow instability and maldistribution are results of large changes in fluid
viscosity within the exchanger as a result of different heat transfer rates in different tubes
(flow passages)

Flow Instability with Liquid Flow Maldistribution When

Coolers. No Flow Instability Present
1.1 Flow Instability with Liquid Coolers.
If a viscous liquid stream is cooled, depending on the liquid flow rate and the length of the
tube, the liquid local bulk temperature Tm may or may not reach the wall temperature Tw
along the flow length L. If it reaches the constant wall temperature, the liquid temperature
and hence its viscosity remains constant farther downstream, dependent on Tw
In the preceding region, the viscosity will be a function of the local bulk temperature,
1.2 Flow Maldistribution When No Flow Instability
Present
When the flow rate (in reality, each tube or flow passage should have the flow rate
greater than ), there is no flow instability. However, there will be passage-to-passage flow
However, there will be passage-to-passage flow maldistribution, due to the viscosity change in
different flow passages in parallel. In that case, the pressure drop in individual flow passages can
be determined.

PRESSURE DROP RATIO MASS FLOW RATIO

C. MITIGATION OF FLOW MALDISTRIBUTION
Any action to prevent flow maldistribution must be preceded by an identification of possible reasons
that may cause the performance deterioration and/or may affect the mechanical characteristics of
the heat exchanger.
Possible consequences from the performance
viewpoint
1. deterioration in heat exchanger effectiveness and increase in pressure drop

2. fluid ‘‘freezing,’’ as in viscous flow coolers

3. fluid deterioration

4. enhanced fouling

5. mechanical and tube vibration problems due to flow instabilities, wear, fretting, erosion, and
corrosion and mechanical failure
No generalized recommendations can be made for preventing the negative consequences of flow
maldistribution. Most problems must be solved by intelligent designs and diagnosis on
an individual basis
A few broad guidelines for shell-and-tube heat exchangers are:

1. Gross flow maldistribution may be induced at inlet nozzles on the shell side. Placing
an impingement perforated baffle about halfway to the tubesheet will break up the
inlet jet stream

2. The shell inlet and exit baffle spaces are the regions prone to gross flow
maldistribution. An appropriate design of the baffle geometry (e.g., the use of double
segmental or disk-and-doughnut baffles) may reduce this maldistribution.

3. Passage-to-passage flow maldistribution may be reduced by improved control of

the manufacturing process (tolerances and gaps).

4. Manifold-induced maldistribution may be controlled by careful control of the area

ratio and lateral flow resistance. These parameters may be fixed in many systems by
requirements other than these considerations. In such cases, the relative length of
the manifold, the friction factors, and the orientation between the manifolds may
be used as factors that may reduce flow maldistribution

5. Operating condition–induced flow maldistribution is difficult to control. For the

laminar flow maldistribution, a design must be such as to allow sufficient pressure
drop to prevent maldistribution or to resort to multipassing.
D. HEADER AND MANIFOLD DESIGN
Headers and manifolds are fluid distribution elements connecting the heat exchanger core and
the inlet and outlet fluid flow lines. An inlet header is the transition duct joining the inlet face of
the heat exchanger core or matrix to the inlet pipe for each fluid. Basically, a manifold is a flow
channel/duct with one (side or central) inlet and multiple sidewall outlets to the heat exchanger
core, or vice versa.
MAJOR TYPES OF MANIFOLDS
NORMAL & TURNING HEADERS
Two important requirements may be identified for header and/or manifold design. They should
be designed so that they result in

(1) uniform distribution of the fluid stream within a heat exchanger core, and

(2) minimal pressure drop within the header/manifold, since in general we do not get any heat
transfer for that pressure drop expenditure.
1. Oblique-Flow Headers
In an oblique-flow header, the fluid inlet flow direction with respect to the core face is at an angle
different from 908 (i.e., normal flow, as in a normal-flow header). A special class of oblique-flow
headers has an inlet flow direction parallel to the core face area. The main feature of this type of
header is the minimization of header volume and flow separation.
2. NORMAL FLOW HEADERS
Normal-flow headers are characterized as having the flow direction perpendicular to the heat
transfer core. The design of a normal-flow header follows the design of a diffuser with a large
increase in the free-flow area from the inlet pipe to the heat exchanger core face. This type of
header design is qualitatively discussed by Wilson (1966). The pressure drop, flow separation, and
recirculation (if any) depend on the diffuser geometry, which includes the type (two dimensional
vs. three dimensional, rectangular vs. conical, etc.), included angle, aspect ratio (diffuser throat to
length ratio), and flow type. For a heat exchanger, the diffuser (inlet normal header) is followed
bytheheat exchangercorehaving finitepressure drop. Hence,the designinformation for a diffuser
having no downstream flow resistance will be conservative for a heat exchanger.
3. MANIFOLDS MAJOR TYPES OF MANIFOLDS

Modeling a manifold requires determination of both axial and lateral velocity and static pressure
distributions. Available solutions of the manifold flow models may be either analytical or numerical
The key problem in analytical modeling is the difficulty in identifying a relevant streamline on
which to calculate energy and pressure drop losses and apply the Bernoulli equation. The state-of-
the-art design procedures utilize commercial and/or proprietary CFD codes. Still, simple analytical
modeling has merit for assessment purposes