Line sizing calculations

Link: Line Sizing calculations

This tool was developed for process engineers to quickly estimate line pressure drops (single-phase gas
or liquid) estimate equivalent length for pipelines, and access a list of standards checklists on site. As a
part of a larger project to develop what is similar to Carl Branan’s book “process engineers Pocket
Handbook” these tools would allow a process engineer to quickly calculate/estimate equipment
efficiencies or sizing using standardized calculations

The aim here is to take little-known data from the field (flow, pressures, temperatures,
compositions..etc.) and use it as input for a rough estimation without having to return to the office to
use commercial software or calculations Excel sheets to validate or to calculate. Additionally, These tools
may also serve as a gathered data validation tool.

Nomenclature

T Absolute Temperature (K) P Absolute Pressure (kg/cm.2a)

K (Cp/Cv) Ratio of specific heats, Cp/Cv Pr Reduced pressure (psia)
Z Compressibility factor Tr Reduced temperature (R)
Q Volume Flow rate (std.m3/hr) Pc Critical pressure (psia)
Ꝭ Density (kg/m3) Tc Critical temperature (R)
Re Reynold’s number M.wt Molecular weight (g / g. mol)
D Pipe diameter (in) y Component composition mol fraction
Pv Vapor pressure (kg/cm2.a) H Elevation (m)

Input Required
Table 1: Note 1: Input required depending on the case

Gas pressure drop Calculations Liquid pressure drop calculations

Flow rate [note 1] STD.m3/hr P1 Kg/cm2.g
Upstream pressure [note 1] Kg/cm2.a T o
C
o 3
average temperature C Q m /hr
[note 1]
Downstream pressure Kg/cm2.a Density Kg/m3
M.Wt / K (Cp/Cv) / Z Cp
- /-/-/ kgm-3 / cP
factor/Density and Viscosity
Viscosity
Alternative option:
Vol% or mol%
Composition
L m
D In
Head [note 1] m
Vapor pressure [note 1] Kg/cm2.a

Output Obtained

Gas pressure drop Calculations Liquid pressure drop calculations

 Upstream/Downstream Kg/cm2.a Downstream Kg/cm2.g
pressure pressure
Flow rate STDm3/hr – Nm3/hr – Kg/cm2
pressure drop
m3/hr
Dp% to Upstream pressure % velocity m/s
dp/100 m Kg/cm2/100 m Reynlods number
friction factor/E - friction factor
Reynolds number - assumed roughness mm
Out velocity / Sonic velocity m/s NPSHa[note 1] m
Out Mach number -
ꝬV^2 Kg/m.s2
1/sqrt(k) -
viscosity cP
M.Wt / K (Cp/Cv) / Z factor -

Pressure drop calculations

1.1 Liquid pressure drop calculations
1.1.1 Nelson (Using fanning friction factor) [6]
Fanning’s equation (Originally derived for turbulent flow) for flow in circular conduit is:
0.323 ∗ 𝑓 ∗ 𝑠 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿
∆𝑃𝑓 =
𝑑
7738 ∗ 𝑑 ∗ 𝑢 ∗ 𝑠
𝑅𝑒 =
𝑍
Where:
∆𝑃𝑓 : pressure drop (psi)

s: specific gravity
u: average velocity (ft/s)
L: Equivalent length (ft)
d: pipe diameter (in)
f: fannings friction factor (equals ¼ moody’s friction factor)
𝑅𝑒 : Reynold’s number
Z: viscosity (cP)
Note: fannings equations isn’t valid for gases when pressure drop is larger than 10% of
downstream pressure
Total equivalent length = actual length + fittings estimated length
Nelson’s fittings equivalent length[6]
Equivalent length table P.396

Calculations of equivalent length through nomographs and K p. 397

 𝒖𝟐
𝒉=𝑲∗ (ft of fluid pressure drop)
𝟔𝟒.𝟒

Fanning’s friction factor chart P.398[6]

 1.1.2 Darcy equation [2]
𝑓 ∗ 𝜌 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗
2∗𝑑
Where: ∆𝑃𝑓 : pressure drop (kg/cm2)
F: moody’s friction factor
𝜌: Liquid density (kg/m3)
L: equivalent Length (m)
D: pipe inside diameter (m)

Reynold’s number
𝝆𝒗𝒅
𝑹𝒆 =
𝝁
μ: Viscosity (kg/m.s) or 0.001*cP
v: fluid velocity (m/s)
Darcy friction factor
You either opt to use the famous moody’s chart or use the Colebrook-white
equation
Laminar flow
𝟔𝟒
𝒇=
𝑹

Turbulent flow
Colebrook-White equation
𝟏 𝒆 𝟐. 𝟓𝟏
= −𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 ( + )
√𝒇 𝟑. 𝟕𝑫 𝑹√𝒇

Where: f: Darcy friction factor

D: pipe inside diameter, in (or mm)
e: absolute pipe roughness, in (or mm)[4]
Pipe material Roughness (in) Roughness (mm)
Riveted steel 0.035-0.35 0.9-9
Commercial steel/welded steel 0.0018 0.045-0.05
Cast iron 0.01 0.26
Galvanized iron 0.006 0.15
Asphalted cast iron 0.0047 0.12
Wrought iron 0.0018 0.045
PVC, drawn tubing, glass 0.000059 0.0015
Concrete 0.0118-0.118 0.3-3.0
Moody’s chart
Estimation of equivalent length (Other than nelson’s)
1. JGC Quick Estimation

When the piping layout is not available, the equivalent length (Le) of the piping will be
estimated based on the straight length (Ls) as follows:

1. Process area: 3.0 times Ls

2. Common area: 1.5 times Ls
3. Offsite area: 1.3 times Ls

Note that Ls is the sum of XYZ coordinate length. For large size or high pressure piping, it is
recommended to estimate the number of elbows tees and valves and evaluate the equivalent
length, assuming piping layout. [5]

2. GPSA table[1]:
This table is the table used to estimate your equivalent length in the tool developed

Figure 1: Source: GPSA databook P. 17-6

 1.1.3 Hazen-Williams equation [3]
the hazen-williams equation take a different approach. It’s based on the head loss
in 10-year-old pipe and on actual testing of arious sie pipes of different degrees of
roughness. These test were conducted in the first part as the last century and
were limited to a relatively narrow range of pipe diamteres. The tables should not
be used for pipe diameters less than 200 mm (8 in) nor for diameters greater
thatn 915 mm (36 in). their values mus be adjusted for pipe age and materials,
through the use of correction factors. The hazen-williams calculations are strictly
designed for water at ambient temperatures and are not applicable to other
liquids. These tables are base on the following formula[7]:

16 𝑄 1.852 𝑆. 𝑔
∆𝑃𝑓 = 0.98066 ∗ 1.1101 ∗ 10 ∗( )
𝐶 𝐷4.87
Where: ∆𝑃𝑓 : frictional pressure drop (kg/cm2)

Q: flow rate (m3/hr)

D: pipe inside diameter (mm)

S.gr: Liquid specific gravity

C: Hazen-williams C factor

Hazen-williams C factor
Pipe material Hazen-williams C factor
Smooth pipes (all metals) 130-140
Cast iron (old) 100
Iron (worn/pitted) 60-80
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) 150
Brick 100
Smooth wood 120
Smooth masonry 120
Vitrified clay 110
Note: This equation is yet to be utilized in our tool
 1.2 Gases pressure drop calculations
Several equations are available that relate the gas flow rate with gas properties, pipe diameter and
length, and upstream and downstream pressures. These equations are listed as follows:
1. General Flow equation
2. Weymouth equation
3. Panhandle A equation
4. Panhandle B equation

Other equations which aren’t discussed here: Oliphant, Fritzsche, Muller, IGT, Spitzglass high, Spitzglass
low [4]

General flow equation [3]

The steady-state, isothermal flow behavior of gas in pipelines is defined by a general energy equation of
the form:
0.5
11.4946 ∗ 10−4 𝑇𝑏 𝑃12 − 𝑒 𝑠 𝑃22
𝑄= ∗ ( ) ∗ 𝐷2.5
24√𝑓 𝑃𝑏 𝐺 𝑇𝑓 𝐿𝑒 𝑍
And the elevation adjustment term s is given by:
0.0684𝐺(𝐻2 − 𝐻1)
𝑠=
𝑇𝑓 𝑍
𝐿(𝑒 𝑠 − 1)
𝐿𝑒 =
𝑠

Where:
Q: gas flow rate (stdm3/hr)
Tb: base temperature K (15.5556 oC +273.15 in tool)
Pb: Base pressure kPa (101.325 Kpa in tool)
Tf: average flow temperature K
P1: Upstream pressure kPa
P2: Downstream pressure kPa
L: Pipe length (km)
Le: Equivalent length of pipe (km)
H1: Upstream elevation (m)
H2: Downstream elevation (m)
G: gas gravity (air =1)
f: Darcy’s friction factor
D: pipe inside diameter, mm.
Z: Gas compressibility

The equivalent length, Le, and the term 𝑒 𝑠 take into account the elevation difference
between the upstream and downstream ends of the pipe segment. The parameter s depends upon the
gas gravity, gas compressibility factor, the flowing temperature, and the elevation difference.
𝑷𝒃 𝑮𝑸
𝑹𝒆 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟏𝟑𝟒 ∗ 𝟐𝟒 ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎 ∗ ∗
𝑻𝒃 𝝁𝑫
𝝁: viscosity in cP
Z is determined based on average P where:
𝟐 𝑷𝟏𝑷𝟐
𝑷𝒂𝒗𝒈. = (𝑷𝟏 + 𝑷𝟐 − )
𝟑 𝑷𝟏 + 𝑷𝟐

1.2.2 Weymouth equation [3]

This formula is generally used for short pipelines and gathering systems. Like the Panhandle equations,
this equation also uses an efficiency factor. The equation cannot be generally applied to any variety of
diameters and roughness, and in the flow region of partially developed turbulence, it is not valid. The
Weymouth Equation may be used to approximate fully turbulent flow by applying correction factors
determined from the system to which it is to be applied. The Weymouth equation is used for high
pressure, high flow rate, and large diameter gas gathering systems. [4]

Figure 2: API 14E

0.5
−3
𝑇𝑏 𝑃12 − 𝑃22
𝑄 = 3.7435 ∗ 10 ∗ 24 ∗ 𝐸 ∗ ( ) ∗ 𝐷2.667
𝑃𝑏 𝐺 𝑇𝑓 𝐿𝑒 𝑍

Where: E: Pipeline efficiency, a decimal value less than 1.0

remaining units are the same for the general flow equation

Pipleline efficiency E
Note: API RP 14E doesn't use E for the Weymouth equation.

1.2.3 Panhandle A equation [3]

The Panhandle A Equation was developed for use in natural gas pipelines, incorporating an efficiency
factor for Reynolds numbers in the range of 5 to 11 million. In this equation, the pipe roughness is not
used. [4] This equation was intended to reflect the flow of gas through smooth pipes. When “adjusted”
with an efficiency factor, E, of about 0.90, the equation is a reasonable approximation of the partially
turbulent flow equation. The equation becomes less accurate as flow rate increases. Many users of the
Panhandle A Equation assume an efficiency factor of 0.92. [1]

Figure 3: source: API 14E

0.5394
𝑇𝑏 1.0788
𝑃12 − 𝑃22
𝑄 = 4.5965 ∗ 10−3 ∗ 24 ∗ 𝐸 ∗ ( ) ( ) ∗ 𝐷2.6182
𝑃𝑏 𝐺0.8539 𝑇𝑓 𝐿𝑒 𝑍

remaining units are the same for the general flow equation

1.2.4 Panhandle B equation [3]

The Panhandle B equation, also known as the revised Panhandle equation, is used in large diameter,
high pressure transmission lines. In fully turbulent flow, it is found to be accurate for values of Reynolds
number in the range of 4 to 40 million. [4] this revised equation is only slightly Reynolds number
dependent. Therefore, it more nearly approximates fully turbulent flow behavior. The equation can be
adjusted through the use of an efficiency term that makes it applicable across a relatively limited range
of Reynolds numbers. Other than this, however, there are no means for adjustment of the equation to
correct it for variations in pipe surface. Adjusted to an average flowing Reynolds number, the equation
will predict low flow rates at low Reynolds numbers, and high flow rates at high Reynolds numbers, as
compared to a fully turbulent flow equation. Efficiencies based on the Panhandle B equation decrease
with increasing flow rate for fully turbulent flow. The efficiency factor, E, used in the Panhandle B
equation generally varies between about 0.88 and 0.94.[1]
0.51
−2
𝑇𝑏 1.02
𝑃12 − 𝑃22
𝑄 = 1.002 ∗ 10 ∗ 24 ∗ 𝐸 ∗ ( ) ( 0.961
) ∗ 𝐷2.53
𝑃𝑏 𝐺 𝑇𝑓 𝐿𝑒 𝑍

The successful application of these transmission line flow equations in the past has largely involved
compensation for discrepancies through the use of adjustment factors, usually termed “efficiencies.”
These efficiencies are frequently found in practice by determining the constant required
to cause predicted gas equation behavior to agree with flow data. As a result, the values of these factors
are specific to particular gas flow equations and field conditions and, under many circumstances, vary
with flow rate in a fashion that obscures the real nature of flow behavior in the pipe. The Reynolds
number dependent equations, such as the Panhandle equations, utilize a friction factor expression
which yields an approximation to partially turbulent flow behavior in the case of the Panhandle A
equation, and an approximation to fully turbulent behavior in the case of the Panhandle B.

These equations suffer from the substitution of a fixed gas viscosity value into the Reynolds number
expression, which, in turn, substituted into the flow equation, results in an expression

with a preconditioned bias. Regardless of the merits of various gas flow equations, past

practices may dictate the use of a particular equation to maintain continuity of comparative capacities
through application of consistent operating policy. A summary of comparisons between transmission
factors used in the above gas equations are shown in Fig. 17-7. [4]

Example from Gas Hydraulics book, sashi menon. [4]

In Figure 2.5, we consider a pipeline 100 mi long, NPS 16 with 0.250 in. wall thickness, operating at a
flow rate of 100 MMSCFD. The gas flowing temperature is 80°F. With the upstream pressure fixed at
1400 psig, the downstream pressure was calculated using the different flow equations. By examining
Figure 2.5, it is clear that the highest pressure drop is predicted by the Weymouth equation and the
lowest pressure drop is predicted by the Panhandle B equation. It must be noted that we used a pipe
roughness of 700 μin. for both the AGA and Colebrook equations, whereas a pipeline efficiency of 0.95
was used in the Panhandle and Weymouth equations. Figure 2.6 shows a comparison of the flow
equations from a different perspective. In this case, we calculated the upstream pressure required for
an NPS 30 pipeline, 100 miles long, holding the delivery pressure constant at 800 psig. The upstream
pressure required for various flow rates, ranging from 200 to 600 MMSCFD, was calculated using the five
flow equations. Again it can be seen that the Weymouth equation predicts the highest upstream
pressure at any flow rate, whereas the Panhandle A equation calculates the least pressure. We
therefore conclude that the most conservative flow equation that predicts the highest pressure drop is
the Weymouth equation and the least conservative flow equation is Panhandle A.
Remaining calculations
Liquid Calculations
NPSHa = Psuction – Pv = P1 - ∆𝑃𝑓 + H – Pv
(P1 and Pv variables in kg/cm2.a and P1, Pv & - ∆𝑃𝑓 converted to m.liq by *10/S.Gr)

Gas Calculations
𝑷𝒃 (𝒌𝒈/𝒄𝒎𝟐 ) (𝟏. 𝟎𝟑𝟑) 𝑻 (°𝑲)
𝑸𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍 = 𝑸𝒔𝒕𝒅𝒎𝟑 /𝒉𝒓 × ×
𝑷 (𝒌𝒈/𝒄𝒎𝟐 ) 𝑻𝒃 (°𝑲)(𝟏𝟓. 𝟓𝟔 °𝑪)
Similarly, 𝑸𝒏𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒂𝒍 (𝒏𝒎𝟑/𝒉𝒓) can be calculated at T = 0 +273.15 K and P=Pb
𝑸𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍
𝑽𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 =
𝑨𝒄𝒓𝒐𝒔𝒔 𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍

𝟗. 𝟖𝟏 ∗ 𝒌 ∗ 𝑹 ∗ 𝑻
𝑺𝒐𝒏𝒊𝒄 𝒗𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒗𝒔 = √
𝑴𝒘𝒕
𝒗
𝒎𝒂𝒄𝒉 𝒏𝒖𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓 =
𝒗𝒔
𝑪𝒆
𝑬𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒗𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑽𝒆 =
√𝝆
Table 2: Source: JGC

Ce Services
180-240 Solid-free fluids where corrosion is not anticipated or when corrosion is controlled by
inhibition or by employing corrosion resistant alloys, continuous.
300 Same as above but intermittent
120 Solids and/or corrosives are expected
Table 3: C = 100 for continous and C=125 for itermittent services are conservative [8]

Where:
R: gas constant 847.9 (kgf/m2)(m3)/(kg-mole)(°K)

K: Cp/Cv

Ve: erosional velocity (m/s)

Pm: Homogeneous density (kg/m3)

Ce: Empirical constant

If [5]:
1 The flow is subsonic
Mach number <
√𝑘
1 The flow is sonic
Mach number =
√𝑘
1 The flow is supersonice
Mach number >
√𝑘

Compressibility factor Z [3]

First, Tr and Pr are calculated as follows (T and P are absolute values):

𝑛

𝑇𝑐 = ∑ 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑇𝑐𝑖
𝑖=1
𝑛

𝑃𝑐 = ∑ 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑃𝑐𝑖
𝑖=1

𝑇 𝑃
𝑇𝑟 = , Pr =
𝑇𝑐 𝑃𝑐
Where Tci and Pci are each component’s critical temperature and pressure

Naturally, The Standing and Katz method is applied where Z is obtained as a function of Tr and Pr
through the famous chart (figure no. ). Alternatively, Dranchuk, Purvis, and Robinson method is used. In
this method the Benedict-Webb-Rubin equation of state is used to correlate the Standing-Katz Z
factor chart. Eight coefficients A1, A2, etc., are used in this equation as shown [1]:
 𝑨𝟐 𝑨𝟑 𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟔 𝝆𝒓 𝟓 𝑨𝟕 𝝆𝒓 𝟑
𝒁 = 𝟏 + (𝑨𝟏 + + ) 𝝆𝒓 + (𝑨𝟒 + ) 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 + +
𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝟑 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝟑 (𝟏 + 𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )𝒆𝒙𝒑(−𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )

Where:
𝟎. 𝟐𝟕 ∗ 𝑷𝝆𝒓
𝝆𝒓 =
𝒁𝑻𝝆𝒓

𝑨𝟏 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟏𝟓𝟎𝟔𝟐𝟑𝟕 𝑨𝟐 = −𝟏. 𝟎𝟒𝟔𝟕𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟎

𝑨𝟑 = −𝟎. 𝟓𝟕𝟖𝟑𝟐𝟕𝟐𝟗 𝑨𝟒 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟑𝟓𝟑𝟎𝟕𝟕𝟏
𝑨𝟓 = −𝟎. 𝟔𝟏𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟎𝟑𝟐 𝑨𝟔 = −𝟎. 𝟏𝟎𝟒𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟏𝟑
𝑨𝟕 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟖𝟏𝟓𝟕𝟎𝟎𝟏 𝑨𝟖 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟖𝟒𝟒𝟔𝟓𝟒𝟗
NOTE: Through trial and errors Z is assumed and then calculated until error is within tolerance.

K (Cp/Cv) [1]
𝐶𝑝 𝑀𝐶𝑝
𝑘= = , 𝑅 = 1.986 𝐵𝑡𝑢/(𝑙𝑏𝑚𝑜𝑙 ˚𝐹)
𝐶𝑣 𝑀𝐶𝑝 − 𝑅
∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑀𝐶𝑝
𝑘=
(∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑀𝐶𝑝) − 1.986

MCp values at different temperatures for a variety of compounds are found in figure 1 [1]
Figure 4: Mcp, Tc and Pc values [1]

Figure 5: Calculations of Average M.wt and k [1]

 Figure 6: Standing-Katz Chart [1]

Gas Viscosity [1]

Figures 23- 22, 23-23 and 23-24 present data on hydrocarbon gases. To correct for pressure, adjust the
gas viscosity from Fig. 23-22 from atmospheric pressure using Fig. 23-24, or read directly from Fig. 23-
23. Figure 23-24 is better when the reduced temperature is greater than 1.0.
The method of Dean and Stiel41 is best for calculating the viscosity of a gaseous mixture with large
amounts of non-hydrocarbons. This method is particularly useful for handling natural gas with high CO2
content. Compared to 30 CO2-N2 mixtures, this method has an average deviation of 1.21% at pressures
up to 3525 psia. The method uses a factor, ξ, defined as [1]:
Figure 7source 1. GPSA Engineering Data Book Section 23 2nd edition p. 23-31
Figure 8: source 1. GPSA Engineering Data Book Section 23 2nd edition p. 23-32
Figure 9: source 1. GPSA Engineering Data Book Section 23 2nd edition p. 23-33
Calculations Examples using commercial software, hand written calculations and the tool developed:

Example No.1: Liquid pressure drop calculations (Units converted to match table units)

Computer Methods for chemical engineers (2nd edition Page no. 37) (input highlighted)
Table 4: Note: Software pgk utilized is PR, using ASME stem is recommended though for this particular case as fluid is Water!

Hand Calculations Tool Developed

Property Unit Commercial software[Note]
in book (Darcy’s)
P1 (Kg/cm2.g) 1.033 1.033 1.033
T (oC) 25 25 25
Q (m3/hr) 8 - 8
Density Kg/m3 1007 1000 1007
Viscosity (Cp) 0.8904 1 0.8904
L (m) 10 10 10
D (in) 1 1 1
P2 Kg/cm2.g 0.303 - 0.282
pressure drop 0.73 0.54 0.751
velocity m/s 3.948 4 3.98
Reynlods number 119062 1.06 * 10^5 120117
friction factor - 0.0176 0.0245
assumed m 0.0000457 0.0
0.00005
roughness

Manual calculations:
𝑄 8∗4
𝑣= = = 4 𝑚/𝑠
𝐴 3600 ∗ 3.14 ∗ 0.02662
𝜌𝑣𝑑 1007 ∗ 4 ∗ 0.0266
𝑅= = = 120333.33
𝜇 0.8904 ∗ 0.001
𝜀 0.00005
The relative roughness of the smooth pipe is =
𝑑 0.0266

Turbulent flow, Iterate through the following function to obtain f using the goal
seek function in excel or use moody’s chart
Colebrook-White equation
1 𝑒 2.51
= −2 log10 ( + )
√𝑓 3.7𝐷 𝑅√𝑓

f = 0.0245
 𝑓 ∗ 𝜌 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗ 0.0245 ∗ 1007 ∗ 42 ∗ 10
−5
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10 ∗ =
𝑑2 0.0266 ∗ 2
= 0.751 𝑘𝑔/𝑐𝑚2
P2 = P1 - ∆𝑃𝑓 = 0.282 kg/cm2
Calculations Examples using commercial software, hand written calculations and the tool developed:

Example No.2: Gas pressure drop calculations (Units converted to match table units)

Computer Methods for chemical engineers (2nd edition Page no. 43) (input highlighted)

Hand Tool
Commercial
Property Unit Calculations Developed
software[Note]
in book (NiqSim)
P1 Kg/cm2 3.518 3.518 3.518
P2 Kg/cm2 3.384 3.334 3.376
o
T C 25 25 25
L m 20000 20000 20000
D m 0.154 0.154 0.154
flow_rate Std_m3/hr 424.1 363 kg/hr 424.1
Composition Vol% 85 CH4 15 CO2 85 CH4 15 CO2 85 CH4 15 CO2
flow_rate Nm3/hr - - 402.02
Actual_flow_rate m3/hr - - 133.99
Dp% to % 3.8
Upstream 4.022
pressure
dp/100 m Kg/cm2/100m 0.00067 - 0.0007
friction factor/E - 0.024 -
Reynolds 70480 71400
71670
number
Out velocity m/s 1.98 1.98 1.99
Sonic Velocity m/s 398.8 - 399.24
Out Mach 0.005 -
0.005
number
ꝬV^2 - - 11.527
mol.weight 20.24 - 20.238
z 0.9931 - 0.993
k 1.308 - 1.30
1/root(k) - - 0.876
viscosity cP 0.0118 0.012 0.0116
Table 5: Note: Gas pipe for compressible gases were used, adiabatic pipe could also be used with similar results
Manual Calculations
General gas equation
K, Pr and Tr calculations
Carbon
Gas Methane dioxide total
Mol wt 16.043 44.01 Tc 207.59 K
Pc 667 1070 Pc 51.144952 kg/cm2.a
Tc -116.66 87.76 M.wt 20.23805 g/gmol
0F 8.23 8.38
50 F 8.42 8.7 T1 298.15 K
60 F 8.46 8.76 76.37 F
100 F 8.65 9 P1 3.518 kg/cm2.a
150 F 8.95 9.29
200 F 9.28 9.56
250 F 9.64 9.81
300 F 10.01 10.05
mol fraction 0.85 0.15 1
Tc -85.997 F P1
Pc 727.45 Psia Tr 1.436
M.wt 20.23805 g/gmol Pr 0.068
P1 MCp 8.505

K1 1.304648

Viscosity calculations
Viscosity at 1 atm µa (cP) Fig. 32.-22 0.0104
Viscosity addition due to CO2 15 mol% Fig. 32.-22 0.0008
Total µa (cP) 0.0112
µ/µa at Pr = 0.068 and Tr = 1.54 Fig. 32.-24 1.05
µ (cP) 1.05*0.0112 0.01176
Z calculations

Iterate through the following equation or use katz chart at Tr and Pr

𝑨𝟐 𝑨𝟑 𝑨𝟓 𝟐
𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟔 𝝆𝒓 𝟓 𝑨𝟕 𝝆𝒓 𝟑
𝒁 = 𝟏 + (𝑨𝟏 + + ) 𝝆 + (𝑨𝟒 + )𝝆 + +
𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝟑 𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝟑 (𝟏 + 𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )𝒆𝒙𝒑(−𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )

Where:
𝟎. 𝟐𝟕 ∗ 𝑷𝝆𝒓
𝝆𝒓 =
𝒁𝑻𝝆𝒓

Till Error < 0.001 for instance.

For both P1 & T1: Tr and Pr (obtained above)

(Use the Goal seek function in an Excel Sheet, Change your assumed Z till ABS(Z_assumed –
Z_calculated)*1000 = 0 for instance)

Z = 0.992

𝑤𝑡 20.24
𝐺 = 𝑀. = = 0.698
29 29
𝑷𝒃 𝑮𝑸 𝟏𝟎𝟏.𝟑𝟐𝟓 𝟎.𝟔𝟗𝟖∗𝟒𝟐𝟒.𝟏
𝑹𝒆 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟏𝟑𝟒 ∗ 𝟐𝟒 ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎 ∗ ∗ = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟓𝟑𝟒 ∗ 𝟐𝟒 ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎 ∗ ∗ =70714
𝑻𝒃 𝝁𝑫 𝟐𝟕𝟑+𝟏𝟓.𝟓𝟓𝟔 𝟎.𝟎𝟏𝟏𝟕𝟔∗𝟏𝟓𝟒

Turbulent flow, Iterate through the following function to obtain f using the goal seek function in excel or
use moody’s chart
Colebrook-White equation
1 𝑒 2.51
= −2 log10 ( + )
√𝑓 3.7𝐷 𝑅√𝑓

f = 0.0206
0.5
11.4946∗ 10−4 𝑇𝑏 𝑃12 −𝑒 𝑠 𝑃22
𝑄= ∗ ( ) ∗ 𝐷2.5 , where s = 0 as no elevation change assumed
24√𝑓 𝑃𝑏 𝐺 𝑇 𝑓 𝐿𝑒 𝑍

0.5
11.4946 ∗ 10−4 273 + 15.56 3.5182 − 𝑃22
424.1 = ∗ ( ) ∗ 1542.5
24√0.0206 101.325 0.698 ∗ (273.15) ∗ 20000 ∗ 0.992

Solving for P2, P2 would equal ≈ 3.374 kg/cm2.a

A Quick take on Line sizing

Line sizing is an essential aspect of designing chemical plants. It involves determining the appropriate
diameter of pipes to transport fluids (gases, liquids, or multiphase mixtures) within a chemical plant.
Proper line sizing ensures that the plant operates efficiently, safely, and with minimal maintenance
while meeting the desired process parameters.

Main concerns in line sizing:

1. Pressure drop: A key consideration is minimizing pressure drop across the pipeline. High
pressure drops can lead to insufficient flow rates, increased energy consumption, and reduced
plant efficiency. Engineers use various correlations and models to calculate pressure drops and
select appropriate pipe diameters.
2. Flow regime: The flow characteristics (laminar, turbulent, or transitional) depend on the fluid's
properties, flow rate, and pipe diameter. Engineers should ensure that the desired flow regime
is maintained to avoid issues such as poor heat and mass transfer, increased pressure drop, or
flow instabilities.
3. Velocity limits: Fluid velocities in pipes should be maintained within specific limits to avoid
issues such as erosion, noise, and vibration. Higher velocities can cause erosion and damage to
pipes, while low velocities can lead to sedimentation or other issues.
4. Economic factors: The cost of piping and installation should also be considered when sizing
pipelines. Larger diameter pipes are more expensive and may require more support structures,
while smaller pipes may be cheaper but can result in higher pressure drops and energy
consumption.

Limitations of line sizing:

1. Accuracy of models and correlations: The models and correlations used for pressure drop
calculations and flow regime predictions are often based on empirical data and may not
accurately represent the specific conditions of a plant. Engineers must exercise judgment when
applying these tools and may need to consult experimental data or conduct simulations to
validate their assumptions.
2. Complexity of multiphase flows: In cases where multiple phases (gas, liquid, solid) are
present, predicting flow behavior and pressure drops can be more challenging. Engineers may
need to rely on experimental data, simulations, or specialized models for multiphase flow
systems.
3. Changes in operating conditions: Plant operating conditions can change over time due to
factors such as equipment wear, fouling, or changes in feedstock properties. These changes can
affect the flow behavior and pressure drops in pipelines, potentially requiring adjustments to
pipe diameters or other design parameters.

In summary, line sizing in chemical plants involves balancing various factors such as pressure drop, flow
regime, velocity limits, and economic considerations. Engineers must also consider the limitations of the
models and correlations used for line sizing, and be prepared to adapt to changing operating conditions.
Proper line sizing ensures that chemical plants operate safely, efficiently, and with minimal
maintenance. The basic principle to determine the line sizes shall be based on economical aspects, i.e.,
minimizing the sum of operational costs and investment costs. However, line sizes should not
exceed the limitations. In some instances, the process requirements will take precedence over
the economical aspects; for example, in the case of pump suction lines where the NPSH is the
main concern. [5]

References
1. GPSA Engineering Data Book Section 23 (Physical properties) and section 17 (fluid flow and
piping).
2. Computer methods for chemical engineering, Second Edition, Chapter 2: Fluid flow in pipes.
3. Piping Calculations manual, E. Shashi Menon. Chapter 7 Gas piping system (equations Q units
were converted to stdm3/hr instead of stdm3/day).
4. Gas Hydraulics, E. Shashi Menon. Chapter 2 pressure drop due to friction.
5. JGC Hydraulics standard JGS 210-120-1-37E
6. Petroleum refinery Engineering, W. L. Nelson.
7. American national standard for rotodynamic pumps for pump piping ANSI/HI 9.6.6 -2009
8. API RP 14E fifth edition, recommended practice for design and installation of offshore
production platform piping systems

Other Recommended Readings

1. JGC Hydraulics standard JGS 210-120-1-37E (focuses on calculations and the economic aspect of
line sizing, presents shortcut calculations and charts for quick calculations and line size
estimation)
2. Elements of chemical process engineering Chapter 1 P. 49: 1.10 Hydraulic analysis of a system (If
you are interested in a complete pumping system hydraulic analysis and you don’t mind US
Customary units)
3. Line sizing guidelines for worley parsons PTD-DGS-130 (thorough guidelines for various cases in
line sizing)
4. Chemical process engineering by A. Kayode Coker (present the manual calculations of pressure
drop in different cases and compares results with commercial software. Overall the an excellent
book, worth checking out and should be added to your library)
5. Chemical process design and simulation by Juma Hayday. Chapter 4: Pressure changing
equipment. (Basic calculations and correlations used in commercial software along with aspen
plus and aspen hysys case studies)
 Pump hydraulic system analysis and specifications

Link: https://processpocket.streamlit.app/

This tool was developed for process engineers to quickly estimate pump system analysis on-site
or check your pump specs. As a part of a larger project to develop what is similar to Carl
Branan’s book “process engineers Pocket Handbook” these tools would allow a process
engineer to quickly calculate/estimate equipment efficiencies or sizing using standardized
calculations

The aim here is to take little-known data from the field (flow, pressures, temperatures,
compositions..etc.) and use it as input for a rough estimation without having to return to the
office to use commercial software or calculations Excel sheets to validate or to calculate.
Additionally, these tools may also serve as a gathered data validation tool.

Nomenclature

T Temperature (oC) P Pressure (kg/cm2)

ṁ Mass Flow rate (kg/hr) µ Viscosity (Pa.s)

ρ Density (kg/m3) A Cross sectional Area (m2)

Di Tube inside diameter (mm) SG Specific gravity

Do Tube outside diameter (mm) h Head loss (m)

Re Reynold’s number u, v Velocity (m/s)

Q Volume flow rate (m3/hr) f Friction factor

L Length (m) Cv Control valve Cv (gpm/psi)

K Resistance coefficient NPSH Net positive suction Head (m)

SS Pump specific speed SSS Pump suction-specific speed

Input Required

Hydraulic system Calculations Pumps Specs Checking

Flow rates (main or branches) m3/hr Pump Type List of HI pumps

Density kg/ m3 Suction / Discharge Lines D In

Viscosity cP Pump speed rpm

Vapor Pressure Kg/cm2.a Rated Capacity m3/hr

Operating conditions Suction/Discharge Pressures Kg/cm2.g

Suction/ Discharge Vessel Pressures Kg/cm2.g Vapor pressure Kg/cm2.a

Suction/ Discharge Vessel Elevations m Specific Gravity -

Fittings Viscosity c.St

List input of fittings - NPSHa m

Diameters/ d/D for reducers In/ In./In. MCSF m3/hr

Pump service List of applications

Output Obtained

Summary Table Summary table

Differential pressure kg/cm2 NPSHa – NPSH3 m

Differential Head m Calculated NPSHa m

Hydraulic power Kw Common NPSHr – JGC Charts m

NPSHa m Specific speed -

Suction/Discharge velocities m/s US Specific speed -

Suction/Discharge Reynold’s number US Suction Specific speed -

Suction/Discharge pipe DP kg/cm2 Suction Specific speed -

Suction/Discharge pipe DH m HI calculated Eff. %

Suction/Discharge pressure kg/cm2.g Eff. Reduction due to SS %

Pump calculations datasheet Eff. Normal Deviation %

Hydraulic system analysis HI Min. – Max. Calculated power

JGC charts Eff %

Branan Calculated Eff. %

Min. – Max. Calculated power kW

Corrected BHP kW

Max. Rated Output kW

Selected motor/motor η kW / %

Min. – Max Accepted BEP m3/hr

POR for BEPmin – BEP max m3/hr

MCSF at max. impeller diameter m3/hr

Pump System Calculations

i. Suction, Discharge pressures and NPSHa calculations

ii. Pipes pressure drop calculations
iii. Fittings pressure drop calculations
iv. Control valves pressure dop calculations
v. How and Why to draw the hydraulic gradient
vi. How and Why to draw the system resistance curve
vii. Key points to take into consideration when specifying a centrifugal pump
1. Suction below CL (Center Line)

Static Suction Lift = Ls Pump Suction Diam = Ds

Static Discharge Head = Ld Pump Discharge Diam = Dd
Total Static Head Ltot = Ls + Ld
Friction Head = Hfs and Hfd
Inlet and Discharge Nozzle Losses = Hi and Ho
Velocity Head = V2/2g
Pump Suction and Discharge Nozzle Elevations = Lns and Lnd
Suction Pressure Head = Ps [if open tank = 0]
Discharge Pressure Head = Pd [if open tank = 0]
Pin = Ps - Ls - Hfs - Hi + Lns = Hs - Vs2/2g + Lns
Pout = Pd + Ld + Hfd + Ho - Lnd = Hd - Vd2/2g - Lnd
Total Dynamic Suction Lift Hs = Ps - Ls - Hfs - Hi - Vs2/2g
Total Dynamic Discharge Head Hd = Ld + Pd + Hfd + Ho + Vd2/2g
Total Dynamic Head Htot = Hd - Hs
 NPSHa(abs) = Ps + Patm - Ls - Hfs - Hi + Vs2/2g - Pvap [where
Closed Tank: Pvap = Vapor Pressure(abs)]
or = Pamb - Ls - Hfs - Hi + Vs2/2g - Pvap
Open Tank: [NPSHa should exceed NPSHr by at least 0.5 m]
Dynamic Suction Lift (req'd) Hs(r) = Ps - Ls - Hfs - Hi
Dynamic Discharge Head (req'd) Hd(r) = Ld + Pd + Hfd + Ho
Dynamic Head (req'd) Htot(r) = Hd(r) - Hs(r)
NPSHa(req'd) NPSHa(r) = NPSHa - Vs2/2g

2. Suction Above CL (Center Line)

Static Suction Head = Ls Pump Suction Diam = Ds

Static Discharge Head = Ld Pump Discharge Diam = Dd
Total Static Head Ltot = Ls + Ld
Friction Head = Hfs and Hfd
Inlet and Discharge Nozzle Losses = Hi and Ho
Velocity Head = V2/2g
Pump Suction and Discharge Nozzle Elevations = Lns and Lnd
Suction Pressure Head = Ps [if open tank = 0]
Discharge Pressure Head = Pd [if open tank = 0]
Pin = Ps + Ls - Hfs - Hi - Lns = Hs - Vs2/2g + Lns
Pout = Pd + Ld + Hfd + Ho - Lnd = Hd - Vd2/2g - Lnd
Total Dynamic Suction Head Hs = Ls + Ps - Hfs - Hi - Vs2/2g
Total Dynamic Discharge Head Hd = Ld + Pd + Hfd + Ho + Vd2/2g
Total Dynamic Head Htot = Hd - Hs
NPSHa(abs) = Ps + Patm - Ls - Hfs - Hi + Vs2/2g - Pvap
Closed Tank:
[where Pvap = Vapour Pressure(abs)]
or = Pamb - Ls - Hfs - Hi + Vs2/2g - Pvap
Open Tank:
[NPSHa should exceed NPSHr by at least 0.5 m]
Dynamic Suction Head (req'd) Hs(r) = Ls + Ps - Hfs - Hi
Dynamic Discharge Head (req'd) Hd(r) = Ld + Pd + Hfd + Ho
Dynamic Head (req'd) Htot(r) = Hd(r) - Hs(r)
NPSHa(req'd) NPSHa(r) = NPSHa - Vs2/2g
Liquid pressure drop calculations (Hfs and Hfd) [1]

For pipe segments

• Use Darcy equation (check previous calculations documentation for liquid pressure
drop)

𝑓 ∗ 𝜌 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗
2∗𝑑
Where: ∆Pf : pressure drop (kg/cm2)

f: moody’s friction factor

ρ: Liquid density (kg/m3)

L: equivalent Length (m)

D: pipe inside diameter (m)

Reynold’s number
ρvd
Re =
μ
μ: Viscosity (kg/m.s) or 0.001*cP

v: fluid velocity (m/s)

Laminar flow
64
f=
R
Turbulent flow
Colebrook-White equation
1 e 2.51
= −2 log10 ( + )
√f 3.7D Re√f
Where: f: Darcy friction factor
D: pipe inside diameter, in (or mm)
e: absolute pipe roughness, in (or mm) (0.045-0.05 for commercial steel)
• Convert ∆P to head loss
𝑛 10
ℎ𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 (𝑚) = ∑ ∆P𝑖 ∗
𝑖=0 𝑆. 𝐺

For numerous fittings [2]

• Use Equivalent lengths mentioned in previous documentation or

• Use crane K factor or
• Use Hooper 2K factors equation (this is the used method in our tool)
 𝐾1 1 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ
𝐾= + 𝐾∞ (1 + )
𝑅𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑛

Fitting K1 Kꚙ
Elbow, 90°, Standard (R/D = 1), Screwed 800.0 0.40
Elbow, 90°, Standard (R/D = 1), Flanged/welded 800.0 0.25
Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 800.0 0.20
Elbow, 90°, Mitered (R/D = 1.5), 1 weld (90° angle) 1000.0 1.15
Elbow, 90°, Mitered (R/D = 1.5), 2 weld (45° angle) 800.0 0.35
Elbow, 90°, Mitered (R/D = 1.5), 3 weld (30° angle) 800.0 0.30
Elbow, 90°, Mitered (R/D = 1.5), 4 weld (22.5° angle) 800.0 0.27
Elbow, 90°, Mitered (R/D = 1.5), 5 weld (18° angle) 800.0 0.25
Elbow, 45°, Standard (R/D = 1), All types 500.0 0.20
Elbow, 45°, Long-radius (R/D 1.5), All types 500.0 0.15
Elbow, 45°, Mitered (R/D=1.5), 1 weld (45° angle) 500.0 0.25
Elbow, 45°, Mitered (R/D=1.5), 2 weld (22.5° angle) 500.0 0.15
Elbow, 45°, Standard (R/D = 1), Screwed 1000.0 0.70
Elbow, 180°, Standard (R/D = 1), Flanged/welded 1000.0 0.35
Elbow, 180°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 1000.0 0.30
Elbow, Used as, Standard, Screwed 500.0 0.70
Elbow, Elbow, Long-radius, Screwed 800.0 0.40
Elbow, Elbow, Standard, Flanged/welded 800.0 0.80
Elbow, Elbow, Stub-in type branch 1000.0 1.00
Tee, Run, Screwed 200.0 0.10
Tee, Through, Flanged or welded 150.0 0.05
Tee, Tee, Stub-in type branch 100.0 0.00
Valve, Gate, Full line size, Beta = 1 300.0 0.10
Valve, Ball, Reduced trim, Beta = 0.9 500.0 0.15
Valve, Plug, Reduced trim, Beta = 0.8 1000.0 0.25
Valve, Globe, Standard 1500.0 4.00
Valve, Globe, Angle or Y-type 1000.0 2.00
Valve, Diaphragm, Dam type 1000.0 2.00
Valve, Butterfly, 800.0 0.25
 Valve, Check, Lift 2000.0 10.00
Valve, Check, Swing 1500.0 1.50
Valve, Check, Tilting-disc 1000.0 0.50
• Convert K to head loss
𝑛 𝑣𝑖2
ℎ𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 (𝑚) = ∑ 𝐾𝑖 ∗
𝑖=0 2𝑔
For control valves

Given control valve diameter (Used in our tool)

• Given the control valve diameter and if the control valve Cv isn’t available, use Fisher’s
table for approximate Cv estimation[3]:

Valve Valve Plug Flow Port Dia. Rated Cv Fl Xt Fd

Size Style Characteristic (in.) Travel
(NPS) (in.)
0.5 Post-Gulded Equal-Percentage 0.38 0.5 2.41 0.9 0.54 0.61
0.75 Post-Gulded Equal-Percentage 0.56 0.5 5.92 0.84 0.61 0.61
1 Cage-Guided Linear 1.125 0.75 20.6 0.84 0.64 0.34
1 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 1.125 0.75 17.2 0.88 0.67 0.38
1.5 Cage-Guided Linear 1.875 0.75 39.2 0.82 0.66 0.34
1.5 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 1.875 0.75 35.8 0.84 0.68 0.38
2 Cage-Guided Linear 2.3125 1.125 72.9 0.77 0.64 0.33
2 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 2.3125 1.125 59.7 0.85 0.69 0.31
3 Cage-Guided Linear 3.4375 1.5 148 0.82 0.62 0.3
3 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 3.4375 1.5 136 0.82 0.68 0.32
4 Cage-Guided Linear 4.375 2 236 0.82 0.69 0.28
4 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 4.375 2 224 0.82 0.72 0.28
6 Cage-Guided Linear 7 2 433 0.84 0.74 0.28
6 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 7 2 394 0.85 0.78 0.26
8 Cage-Guided Linear 8 3 846 0.87 0.81 0.31
8 Cage-Guided Equal-Percentage 8 3 818 0.86 0.81 0.26

• Calculate Ktotal and estimate △Psizing

 ∑ 𝐾 = 𝐾1 + 𝐾2 + 𝐾𝐵1 + 𝐾𝐵2 For an inlet reducer
2
𝑑2
Where, 𝐾1 = 0.5 ( )
𝐷1 2
K1 = Resistance coefficient of upstream
For an outlet reducer
K2 = Resistance coefficient of downstream
2
fittings 𝑑2
𝐾2 = 1.0 ∗ ( )
𝐷2 2
KB1 = Inlet Bernoulli coefficient
For a valve installed between identical reducers
KB2 = outlet Bernoulli coefficient
(assumed in tool)
𝑑 4 2
𝐾𝐵1 = 1 − ( ) 𝑑2
𝐷1 𝐾1 + 𝐾2 = 1.0 ∗ ( 2 )
𝐷
𝑑 4
𝐾𝐵2 = 1 − ( )
𝐷2

−1/2 𝑞
∑ 𝐾 𝐶𝑣 2 𝐶𝑣 =
𝐹𝑃 = [1 + ( ) ]
𝑁2 𝑑2 ∆𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔
𝑁1 𝐹𝑃 √
𝜌1 /𝜌𝑜

Where N1 = 1.0 and N2 = 890, ρ0 is 1000 kg/m3 and Q in m3/hr

d is control valve size in in and D is line size in inch

From the Cv equation estimate △Psizing in bar

• Convert △Psizing to hloss in m

hloss = △Psizing *1.01972*10/SG

Control valve diameter not given (not used in our tool)

• Estimate △Psizing using the following guideline [4]:

“the sum of the following pressure drops at maximum flow may be used for this purpose:

1. 20% of the friction drop in the circuit (excluding the valve). (A circuit generally includes
all equipment between the discharge of the pump, compressor or vessel and the next
point downstream of which pressure is controlled. In most cases this latter point is a
vessel)
2. 10% of the static pressure of the vessel into which the circuit discharges up to the
pressure of 200 psig, 20 psig from 200 psig to 400 psig, and 5% above 400 psig.”

𝑆. 𝐺
𝐶𝑣 = 𝑄𝐿 √
△𝑃
 Where:
QL : liquid flow in gpm
△ 𝑃 : pressure drop across the valve in psi
“In order to ensure that the valve is in a controlling position at maximum flow rate, the valve Cv
is the maximum process value determined above divided by 0.8. The reasons for using this
factor are that:

1. It is not desirable to have the valve fully open at maximum flow since it’s not then in a
controlling position.
2. The valves supplied by a single manufacturer often vary as much as 10-20% in Cv.
3. Allowance must be made for pressure drop, flow rate, etc, values which differ from
design.”

Control valve sizing[4]

After estimating valve Cv, valve sizing can be estimated using the following equations:
𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 𝐶𝑣 1 Single-seated valves
𝑆 (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = ( )2
9
𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 𝐶𝑣 1 Double-seated valves
𝑆 (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = ( )2
12
𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 𝐶𝑣 1 Butterfly valve sizes
𝑆 (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = ( )2
20
Opening percentage = Cv desired / Cv max. for the valve

Estimating Pump Hydraulic power and Efficiency [5]

𝑄∗𝐻∗𝑆𝐺
𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 = 367.46
, Q in m3/hr and H in m

Branan efficiency equation[5]

η= 80 – 0.2855F+3.78*10-4-FG-2.38*10-7FG2 + 5.39*10-4*F2-6.39*10-7*F2G+4*10-10*F2G2

Where:
η: pump percentage efficiency
F: developed head (ft)
G: flow (GPM)
Range of applicability:
F: 50 – 300 ft
G: 100 – 1000 GPM

For G: 25 – 99:
η= η (at G=100 GPM) – 0.35% * G * (100-G)
BHP = hydraulic power / ηestimated
Drawing the Hydraulic Gradient [6]

Effect of elevation

There are situations where the ground elevation may have drastic peaks and valleys that require
careful consideration of the pipeline topography. In some instances, the total pressure required
to transport a given volume of liquid through a long pipeline may depend more on the ground
elevation profile than on the actual frictional pressure drop. If we calculated the total pressure
required for a flat pipeline as 825 psi and an uphill pipeline to be 1002 psi. In the uphill case the
static elevation difference contributed to 17 percent of the total pressure required. Thus the
frictional component was much higher than the elevation component.

Tight line operation

When there are drastic elevation differences in a long pipeline, sometimes the last section of
the pipeline toward the delivery terminus may operate in an open-channel flow. This means that
the pipeline section will not be full of liquid and there will be a vapor space above the liquid.

Such situations are acceptable in ordinary petroleum liquid (gasoline, diesel, and crude oil)
pipelines compared to high vapor pressure liquids such as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and
propane. To prevent such open-channel flow or slack line conditions, we must pack the line by
providing adequate back pressure at the delivery terminus as illustrated in Fig. 6.15.

Hydraulic Gradient

The graphical representation of the pressures along the pipeline, as shown in Fig. 6.16, is the
hydraulic gradient. Since elevation is measured in feet, the pipeline pressures are converted to
feet of head of liquid and plotted against the distance along the pipeline superimposed on the
elevation profile. If we assume a beginning elevation of 100 ft, a delivery terminus elevation of
500 ft, a total pressure of 1000 psi required at the beginning, and a delivery pressure of 25 psi at
the terminus, we can plot the hydraulic pressure gradient graphically by the following method.

Drawing the required system curve

Single pipe System

The system curve is a function of elevation – or static head

and the major and minor losses in the system and can be
expressed by:
hsys = h + hL = dh + kQ2
where:
hsys: system head (m)
h = h2-h1 = elevation (static head) difference between the inlet
and outlet in the system (m)
hL: major and minor head loss in the system (m)
a generic expression of major and minor head loss is:
hL = kQ2 where:
Q: flow rate
k: constant describing the total system characteristics –
including all major and minor losses
Branch systems [7]

The first example of a branched pipe system is a circulation system. In such a case Hstat = 0. The
volume flow Qp, which
passes through the pump, is divided at the branch point. Continuity dictates that

Qp=Qa+Qb

Both branches A and B have their own system curves, the sum of which determines the
resultant system curve. The intersection point of the resultant system curve and the pump curve
determines the pump’s optimum operating point.

Figure 9.2a also shows how large a portion of the pump flow

flows through each respective branch. The division of flow

depending upon the magnitude of the losses in each respective

branch. In this example it is assumed that the branch point is

near to the pump i.e. that flow losses between the pump and

the branch point can be neglected.

The next example, figure 9.2b, also takes into consideration

the losses in the main pipeline up to the branch point. This is Figure 1: h is the difference between Pb and Pa in meters

done by reducing the pump curve by the magnitude of the losses up to the branch point. The
“reduced” curve is then matched to the remaining system curve as before.

In the third example the pump curve is first reduced to the branch point. Thereafter the system
curves A+B are added to the resultant system curve Hsyst A+B. The intersection point between
the reduced pump curve and the resultant system curve determines the pump operational
point, as shown in figure 9.2c.

In the fourth example there is a level difference (in this example a supply head) between the
supply vessel on the suction side and the branch point. The system curve for the supply pipeline
exhibits therefore, a static head (Hstat < 0).

The method is the same as in the previous examples. First reduce the pump curve with the
supply line curve up to the branch point. Then determine the system curves for the branches
A+B from the branch point. The resultant branch curve is then matched to the pump's reduced
curve as shown in figure 9.2d.

This method can be applied in principle to calculate any pipework system, however complicated
and containing any number of branch points. The first step is to determine the resultant system
curve for the branch furthest from the pump in relation to the furthest branch point. The next
step is to deal with the next branch point and so on until the branch point nearest to the pump
is reached.

A common problem is to dimension a piping network with many branches and many tapping
points in such a way as to guarantee a predetermined capacity at each tapping point.
Dimensioning is carried out so that the pipeline requiring the most pressure, usually the pipeline
to the furthest tapping point, is dimensioned first. The branch lines are then calculated on the
basis of the excess pressure available at the branch points. The excess pressure at the branch
points can be such that it is necessary to equip a branch line with extra throttling to prevent it
from "stealing" capacity from the other tapping points.

Figures 9.2a and 9.2b

 Figures 9.2c and 9.2d

Read more on the subject:

1. Pump handbook: Sectio 8.2 BRANCH-LINE PUMPING SYSTEMS

2. Pump and System Curves for Multi-branched Systems , modern pumping today
3. Reference 7: Pumpbook, Process Contact Scandinavia Chapter 9: Pump system

System Analysis of a Centrifugal pump[8]

The first step toward the goal of selecting the proper pump for a service involves four areas of
analysis:

1. Pump flow boundary conditions

2. Flow requirements
3. Fluid specifications
4. Criticality of a system
Pump flow boundary conditions

Pump boundary conditions must be defined clearly and with as much certainty as is possible. A
comprehensive knowledge of all boundary parameters is essential to correct user specifications
and vendor bid preparation.

1.1 Suction conditions

NPSHa should be determined as well as the margin between NPSHa and NPSHr. The following
questions to be considered:

• Does the calculated value for NPSHa allow for increases in system resistance in the
suction piping due to fouling?
• Where suction is from a vessel, was the minimum possible operating level used in
calculating NPSHa? The minimum level at which maximum flow is expected should
provide the limiting guidelines here.
• What margin between NPSHa and NPSHr is considered as acceptable?
• Has the maximum expected flow been used to set NPSHa?

Where NPSHa is minimal, and may increase in value will incur

a major additional cost. Pump which has an unrealistically low
NPSHr curve will result in a heavy maintenance burden and
Unreliable operation. Bearing and seal life will be reduced.
Impeller erosion will lead to lower head/flow relationship
And fall-off in efficiency
Suction specific speed should be estimated afterwards:
𝑁∗√𝑄𝐵𝐸𝑃
𝑆𝑠 = (𝑁𝑃𝑆𝐻𝑟 0.75
𝐵𝐸𝑃 )
As a general rule, Ss values above 11,000 are to be avoided
Pumps which develop high stage heads of greater than 650 ft and high Ss require greater than
normal NPSH margins. Where very high Ss pumps are are necessary to the fit the applications, a
suction backflow recirculation insert for the suction nozzle may be reviewed with the vendor.
This can avoid cavitation surge which results when high Ss pumps are operated at flows much
below BEP (normally less than 70% BEPm but dependent on new NPSH (NPSHa – NPSHr) and Ss
combinations.
The system resistance curve must be clearly defined. How much static head is built into the
pump discharge in terms of downstream pressure in a receiving vessel, or height which is
considerably in excess of normal flow? Control valve sizing of pump. A larger than normal
control valve may be be required to provide the artificial head loss at rated and minimum flow,
while still accommodating the low loss it must provide at maximum expected flow. The effect if
system resistance on maximum possible flow and required control valve head loss is shown in
figure 5. In new installations, pipe size may be increased to flatten a steeply rising system
resistance curve to accommodate greater flow flexibility.
The differential pressure which the pump will see be derived
From the system resistance curve. This must be converted to
Differential or total head (H). in arriving at H, the range of SG
Expected must be reviewed, as any lowering in SG will require
Additional pump head to meet required discharge pressure
Conditions. Accordingly, Max. Head requirement should be set
To the lowest expected SG.
While defining system resistance to accommodate normal and 1
Changing conditions, it’s also important not to be overly
conservative. Imposing too high head values on a pump
specification
for given flows will result in the pump operating much below its
BEP point, and in the lower efficiency region when these heads
prove to be lower than expected. Reliability and maintenance
costs will suffer likewise.
The static component of the discharge system resistance can also
limit maximum capacity. Where the possibility exists of an
increase in the pressure of the receiving downstream vessel, these
must be looked at in determining rated conditions.

1.2 Flow requirements

Min./Normal/rated flow should be determined. The rated flow should reflect the maximum flow
the system can envisage under current consideration, but must also consider the long range
outlook. Minimum flow requirements can conflict with rated requirements and recirculation
facilities may be required.

When determining these design flows, care must be taken to avoid an extremely conservative
approach. Higher than expected flow will result in a larger than required pump as in head
consideration. A more simple single stage, overhung pump application may require a double-
suction between bearings design under increased flow requirements.

While it’s of prime importance to define maximum and minimum flow requirements properly,
it’s also important to clarify the percentage of time at which the pump will operate at minimum,
normal and rated (or maximum) flows. Where a pump is used for two different services, the
lower flow may require excellent turndown while the higher flow will impose more stringent
NPSHa restrictions. Long term operation at lower flow can mean higher maintenance costs due
to higher bearing loads and shaft deflections.

Where complete shutoff (isolation) of a pump is an expected occasional occurrence, provision

must be made to recycle flow to prevent vapor locking , due to overheating of the trapped
liquid. Where shutoff will be for mins rather than hours, a recycle flow of 10% of BEP will suffice.
For MCF, a total flow of 30-40% of BEP is more realistic , although this can be much higher for
high Ss and/or high head (H)

The percentage of BEP flow at which discharge and suction

recirculation within the impeller geometry.

the points of low flow cavitation and high temperature rise are
only valid considerations where extremely low flows are
considered probable for short periods which may cause severe
cavitation and eventual vapor locking of the pump. Such events
will lead to to mechanical seal failure and require protection
against even short duration of one or two minutes, where
volatile
liquids close to their vapor points being pumped.
1.3 Fluid specifications
System analysis must include a clear definition of the fluid to be
pumped and show all variations expected in fluid quality.
Fluid temperature variations must be defined. This will assist in
Specifying the NPSHa and must include heating and cooling
which may occur between the vessel or drum being drawn from
the
pump suction, in the case of vapor-liquid interface.
Higher temperatures will necessitate bearing housing cooling
and
require that mechanical seal arrangements be suitably designed.
Corrosion due to chemical due to chemical attack or oxidation
Must be considered. Compatibility of materials to resist
electrolytic reaction is important.
Erosion due to high percentage of particulate matter may
cause a premature performance decline. Large particles may
necessitate an open faced impeller. It may prove necessary to
specify wear plates or a hard coating to prolong life. Wear ring
flushing from an external source may be required.
Fluid toxicity may dictate the use of dual seals as may very high
temperatures, high flammability, and/or high vapor pressures.
Carcinogenic, strongly acid or strongly alkaline fluid impose
similar needs for more elaborate sealing and often required an
external clean fluid supply.
Entrained gases may cause cavitation and may have a very
negative effect on pump’s ability to produce the required
differential pressure.
1.4 Criticality of the service
Check if pump is spared or un-spared?
Loss of flow process debits (where a specific time can be tolerated for pump outage for
maintainability needs and reparability)
Safety Consideration (where fluid is toxic, highly flammable or carcinogenic special care may be
required in materials, mechanical seals and structural areas)
Continuous operation is normally viewed as the prime criteria for sparing, but intermittent
operation may also demand a spare pump. The definition of intermittent is important. A pump
may be required to operate one week in four, but 24-hout service during that may be crucial,
requiring a spare for high reliability of service.
Liquid specification In addition to the parameters outlined in API 610 datasheet,
comment must be made on solids content, toxicity & setup
temperature
Operating and site conditions Define min., normal and maximum flows. Remember to add a
table of time of which these flows are expected to operate in
Suction pressure min., normal and maximum

The maximum discharge pressure The max. pressure that will be encountered under conditions of
max. flow and min. suction pressure
Site conditions These would influence items such as electrical or steam tracing
requirements, lubricant quality, type of lubrication, motor
protection, etc..
Performance Important performance variables such as specific speed, suction
specific speed, NPSHr, MCF, POR, AOR.

The minimum flow Whether its stable of thermal is to be specified

2. Specifications Checking

1. Desired BEP Range

2. Predicted Operating Regions (POR & AOR)
3. Predicted Efficiency
4. Predicted Motor
5. Predicted MCSF
6. Predicted NPSHr
7. Predicted/required Head rise to shutoff

1. Desired BEP range

API 610

“Rated flow shall be within the region of 80% to 110% of the best efficiency flowrate of the
pump as furnished.”

“the BEP flowrate for the pump as furnished should preferably be between the rated point and
the normal point”

Expected BEP range accordingly is from 0.91* Qrated to 1.25 * Qrated

2.1 Predicted operating regions

HI preferred operating region POR (ANSI_HI 9.6.3-2012)

Specific Speed Preferred Operating Region

Metric US customary (POR)

< 87 < 4500 Between 70% & 120% of BEP

> 87 > 4500 Between 80% & 120% of BEP

For slurry pumps handling high concentrations of abrasive solids, the generally acceptable range
of rates of flow is primarily determined by wear considerations of the wear components. Refer
to ANSI/HI 12.1-12.6 Rotodynamic (Centrifugal) slurry pumps for nomenclature, definitions,
Applications, and Operation for information.

API 610

“pumps shall have a preferred operating region of 70% to 120% of the best efficiency flowrate
of the pump as furnished.” Rated flow shall be within the region of 80% to 110% of the best
efficiency flowrate of the pump as furnished.

HI Allowable operating region AOR (ANSI_HI 9.6.3-2012)

AOR depends on a large number of factors, some of which are application-specific. This
discussion is limited to thos factors related to operating rates of flow and pump design. For the
purpose of this guideline it’s assumed that the pumped liquid is a Newtonian pure liquid with no
vapor, gas, suspended solids or abrasives.
Certain fluid mixtures may have other characteristics that affect the AOR. for example, the
minimum rate of flow when pumping a fluid that contains entrained gasses may be limited bt
gas accumulation at the eye of the impeller. These considerations are outside the scope of this
guideline;

Factors such as proper equipment selection, installation, maintenance and operation which also
greatly affect pump reliability are not factors in defining the AOR.

Bearing life will be reduced and noise, vibration and components stresses will be increased
when a pump is operated outside its POR. As a result, service life of a pump operated within the
AOR may be lower than within the POR. While the predicted bearing life will vary significantly
over the AOR. It’s recommended that the calculated bearing life be a minimum of two years of
operation in this range (basic rating life L10 equal to or greater than 17500 hours)

End suction Cent. Pumps (ASME B31.1-2012)

AOR: MCF in ANSI table below () to 120% of the flow at the best efficiency point (BEP)

Vertical in-line centrifugal pumps (ASME B73.2-2016)

AOR: MCF in ANSI table below () to 120% of the flow at the best efficiency point (BEP)

2.3 Predicted Efficiency

2.3.1 HI Predicted Efficiency (ANSI/ HI 20.3)

Steps
1. Select your pump type from the following table
2. Calculate Q (m3/s) and obtain optimum attainable efficiency
 3. Calculate Specific speed and obtain Efficiency reduction due to specific speed
𝒑𝒖𝒎𝒑 𝒔𝒑𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒙 𝑸𝟎.𝟓 (𝒎𝟑 /𝒔)
Specific speed ns =
𝑯𝟎.𝟕𝟓
4. Obtain Deviation from normally attainable efficiency
Example

Determine the normally attainable efficiency of an API-type, single-stage, end suction process
pump driven by a 50 Hz motor when pumping clear water at 30 oC given Q equals 700 m3/hr or
0.19 m3/s. H equals 130 m, NPSHa equals 7.5 m, and the customer has specified a maximum
pump rotational speed of 1500 rpm.

Assuming a speed of 1500 rpm, calculate ns:

1470 ∗ 0.190.5
𝑛𝑠 = = 17
1300.75
Because this calculated value is already below the specific speed for optimum efficiency, no
consideration will be given to selections at speeds below 1500 rpm.

* Selected pump type: F

From chart, at 0.19 m3/s and curve F, efficiency corresponding to the optimum specific speed for
API end suction process type pumps = 85.1%

Efficiency correction (reduction due to specific speed) from figure 20.3b = 3%

Predicted efficiency = optimum efficiency – efficiency reduction

Predicted efficiency = 85.1 – 3 = 82.1%

From chart (fig. 20.e) at 0.19 m3/s, the normal deviation is ±3%

Predicted Efficiency = [82.1-3 , 82.1 +3] = [79.1-85.1]

Other methods to quickly estimate efficiency

JGC Charts for Centrifugal pumps

𝑟𝑝𝑚 ∗ 𝑄𝑔𝑝𝑚 0.5

𝑆𝑆 =
𝐻𝑓𝑡 0.75
4. Predicted motor

After calculating BHP estimated for your pump at max Q multiply it by one of the following
factors mentioned in API 610

Nameplate Rating Percentage of rated pump power

Kw HP

< 18.5 < 25 125

22-55 30-75 115

> 75 > 100 110

Estimate motor efficiency from the following table and Calculate rated motor output

Motor output = BHPmax * API factor/motor efficiency

Select the nearest motor to you calculated motor output

5. Predicted MSCF

5.1 Minimum flow rate at max. impeller to avoid suction circulation (ANSI/HI 9.6.3-2012)

After calculating suction specific speed & estimating BEP obtain result from the following curve

𝒑𝒖𝒎𝒑 𝒔𝒑𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒙 𝑸𝟎.𝟓 (𝒎𝟑 /𝒔)

𝑆𝑆𝑆 =
𝑵𝑷𝑺𝑯𝒓𝟎.𝟕𝟓

Other Method to estimate MCSF at rated impeller

Horizontal End Suction Centrifugal pumps (ASME B73.1-2012)

1. Check Approximate Hydraulic coverage table from the ASME standard and select the
appropriate pump
2. Check MCSF percentage for your selected pump in MCF table using affinity laws
𝑄𝐵𝐸𝑃_𝑛𝑒𝑤
𝑀𝐶𝐹% 𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑 = 𝑀𝐶𝐹% ∗
𝑄𝐵𝐸𝑃 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑔

Note: This tool trims the impeller diameter to achieve the rated head, QBEP here is QBEP
for the pump after adjusting pump head for rated head not Q rated in specs input
Vertical in-line centrifugal pumps (ASME B73.2-2016)
6. Predicted/required NPSHr

• Obtain NPSH margin recommended

NPSHr Desired is either NPSHa/NPSH margin ratio or NPSHa – NSPH margin (or whichever
greater)

7. Predicted/required Head rise to shutoff

As per API 610, if the parallel operation is specified and the pumps are not individually flow
controlled, Head rise from rated point to shutoff shall be at least 10%.

Generally if specified, pump head curve shall be continuously rising from rated point to shutoff.
 HI (ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2012)

Application Margins

Petroleum (Hydrocarbon) process pumps Min. margin ratio of 1.1 or a margin of 1 m

within AOR

Chemical process pumps SSS < 210 metric or 11000 US units SSS >= 210 metric

Min. margin ratio of 1.1 or a margin of 0.6 m Pumps operating within POR

Min. margin ratio of 1.1 or a

margin of 0.6 m

Pumps operating Outside POR

Min. margin ratio of 1.2 or a

margin of a m

Electric power plant pumps Power (kW/Stage) POR NPSH Ratio AOR NPSH ratio/Margin

Boiler feed < 225 1.1 (ratio) 1.3 (ratio)

Boiler feed > 225 and < 500 1.2 (ratio) 1.5 (ratio)

Condensate All 1 (ratio) 1 (ratio)

Cooling Tower All 1.1 (ratio) 1.3 (ratio)

Circulating cooling water All 1.05 (ratio) 1.0 m

Nuclear power plant pumps Power (kW/Stage) POR NPSH Ratio AOR NPSH ratio/Margin
 (1.0 m minimum ) (1.5 m minimum )

Waste water (cast iron impeller) <45 1.1 (ratio) 1.2 (ratio)

Waste water (stainless steel impeller) <45 1.05 (ratio) 1.1 (ratio)

Waste water (cast iron impeller) > 45 1.2 (ratio) 1.3 (ratio)

Waste water (stainless steel impeller) > 45 1.1 (ratio) 1.2 (ratio)

Water (stainless or Al-Bronze impeller) < 75 1.05 (ratio) 1.1 (ratio)

Water (stainless or Al-Bronze impeller) > 75 1.1 (ratio) 1.2 (ratio)

Pulp and paper stock pumps SSS < 145 metric or 7500 US units SSS > 145 metric

Min. margin ratio of 1.1 throughout AOR Min. margin ratio of 1.2 or a
margin of 1.0 m

Building Services SSS < 145 metric or 7500 US units SSS > 145 metric

Min. margin ratio of 1.0 throughout AOR Min. margin ratio of 1.1 or a
margin of 0.6 m

Slurry pumps Pumps operating within AOR

Min. margin ratio of 1.1 or a margin of 0.6 m

Oil and Gas industry pumping applications

Pipeline pumps Application specific!

water injection pumps Application specific! Typical margins are set

 based on :

a) Pump NPSH3 at max. expected flow

b) Min. NPSHa expected at max.
expected flow

General industrial pumping applications Pumps operating within POR Pumps operating within AOR

Min. margin ratio of 1.05 or a margin of 0.6 Min. margin ratio of 1.1 or a
m margin of 1.0 m

ASME B73.1-2012 / ASME B73.2-2016

An operating NPSH margin is necessary to ensure satisfactory operation. A minimum margin of 3 ft (0.9m) or a margin ratio of 1.2 (whichever
yields a higher NPSH requirement) should be made available. This margin should be increased if variables exist that will increase the NPSHR of
the pump
JGC NPSHr Charts[9]

NPSHr for Centrifugal pumps

NPSHr for Sundyne pumps
 Hydraulic analysis for a pump system Example (2 branches) [4]
Elements of chemical process engineering (Page 49)
Calculate pump discharge pressure for the following case:
Parameter Units (converted)

Rated Capacity m3/hr 262.027

Density Kg/ m3 900
Viscosity cP 1.08
Vapor pressure Kg/cm2.a 0
Flow Rate (branch 1) m3/hr 96.3234
Supply vessel pressure Kg/cm2.g -0.98
Supply vessel static head m 13.716
Delivery pressure (branch 1) Kg/cm2.g 3.45
Delivery vessel static head(branch 1) m 0
Delivery pressure (branch 2) Kg/cm2.g -0.98
Delivery vessel static head(branch 2) m 13.716
Fittings:
Line Fitting Diameter Length Estimated Elevation Count d/D
(in) (m) Dp (m) of
Fittings
Suction Pipe Segment 10 13.715 0 0 1 0
Suction Pipe Segment 10 12.2 0 0 1 0
Discharge Pipe Segment 8 5.5 0 5.5 1 0
Discharge Pipe Segment 8 19.5 0 0 1 0
Discharge Misc./ Equipment DP 8 0 0.55 0 1 0
Discharge 1 Misc./ Equipment DP 6 0 0.41 0 1 0
Discharge 1 Pipe Segment 6 5.4 0 -5.4 1 0
Discharge 1 Pipe Segment 6 33 0 0 1 0
Discharge 1 Control Valve 4 0 0 0 1 0
Discharge 2 Pipe Segment 6 8.22 0 22 1 0
Discharge 2 Pipe Segment 6 28.65 0 0 1 0
Discharge 2 Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 6 0 0 0 4 0
Discharge 2 Valve, Gate, Full line size, Beta = 1 6 0 0 0 2 0
Discharge 2 Control Valve 3 0 0 0 1 0
Discharge 1 Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 6 0 0 0 10 0
Discharge 1 Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 6 0 0 0 8 0
Discharge 1 Valve, Gate, Full line size, Beta = 1 6 0 0 0 6 0
Discharge 1 Tee, Through, Flanged or welded 6 0 0 0 1 0
 Output
Summary Table Units Book Tool
3
Flow rate m /hr 262.03 262.03
2
Differential pressure Kg/cm 6 5.64
Differential head m 66.67 62.71
Hydraulic power kW - 40.3
NPSHa m - 14.14
Suction velocity m/s -
1.43
Suction Re - 303499.42
2
Suction pipe DP Kg/cm 0.058 0.02
Suction pipe DH m 0.64 0.17
Suction pressure Kg/cm2.g 0 0.24
Pump discharge pressure 6 5.88
Density Kg/ m3 900.0 900.0
Viscosity cP 1.08 1.08
Vapor pressure Kg/cm2.a - 0.0
Flow rate (branch 1) m3/hr 96.32 96.32
Flow rate (branch 2) m3/hr 165.7 165.7
Control Valve Cv 1 176.8 92.3
Control Valve Cv 2 91.2 118.4
 Solution
Suction pressure calculations
Pressure drop calculations
𝐷2 (25.4∗0.001∗10)2
𝐴=𝜋 4
= 3.14 ∗ 4
=0.05064

v = 𝑄⁄𝐴 = (262/3600)/5.064 =1.431

ρvd 900∗1.43∗0.254
Re = μ
= 1.08∗0.001
=304168.5

Using moody’s Chart, At Re =304168.5 , f = 0.01607

𝑓 ∗ 𝜌 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿
−5
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10 ∗
2∗𝑑
0.01607 ∗ 900 ∗ 1.432 ∗ 25.908
= 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗ = 0.0153
2 ∗ 0.254
Psuction = Pvessel - ∆𝑃𝑓 +Helevation = 0.0532 – 0.0153 + 1.2375 = 1.2754 kg/cm2.a = 0.24 kg/cm2.g
NPSHa = Psuction – Pvapor = 14.14 – 0 = 14.14 m

Discharge pressure (branch 1) calculations

Control valve
For a control valve 4” Cv = 236
42
∑ 𝐾 = 1.5 (1 − 2 ) = 0.47
6
𝐶𝑣 = 0.8 ∗ 236 = 188.8
−1/2
∑ 𝐾 𝐶𝑣 2 0.47 18808 2 −1/2
𝐹𝑝 = [1 − ( 2) ] = [1 − ( 2 ) ] = 0.996
𝑁2 𝑑 890 4
𝑣2
h=𝑘∗ = 3.57 m
2𝑔
0.9
∆𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 = 3.57 ∗ 10 = 0.321 Kg/cm2
Fittings pressure drop
Line Fitting Diameter Count K1 𝑲∞ K
(in) of
Fittings
Discharge 1 Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 6 10 800 0.2 2.376
Discharge 1 Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 6 8 800 0.2 1.901
Discharge 1 Valve, Gate, Full line size, Beta = 1 6 6 300 0.1 0.71
Discharge 1 Tee, Through, Flanged or welded 6 1 150 0.05 0.06
∑ 𝑘 = 2.376 + 1.901 + 0.71 + 0.06 = 5.047
𝑣2 1.4312
∑ℎ = 𝑘 ∗ = 5.047 ∗ = 0.527
2𝑔 2 ∗ 9.81
 0.9
∆𝑃𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 = 0.527 ∗ = 0.047
10
Pressure drop calculations

𝐷2 (25.4∗0.001∗6)2
𝐴=𝜋 = 3.14 ∗ = 0.018232
4 4

v = 𝑄⁄𝐴 = (96.32/3600)/ 0.1524 = 1.47

ρvd 900∗1.47∗0.0254∗6
Re = μ
= 1.08∗0.001
=310618.2
Using moody’s Chart, At Re = 310618.2, f = 0.0178
𝑓 ∗ 𝜌 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗ =
2∗𝑑
−5
0.0178 ∗ 900 ∗ 1.472 ∗ 43.8
= 1.01972 ∗ 10 ∗ = 0.0505
2 ∗ 0.1524
Pressure at tee point
△P total= Pfittings + ∆𝑃𝑓 +∆𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 + Helevation + ∆𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑐 =0.047+0.0505+ 0.321 -
(5.4*0.9/10)+0.41=0.3425

Discharge pressure (branch 2) calculations

Control valve
For a control valve 4” Cv = 148
42
∑ 𝐾 = 1.5 (1 − 2 ) = 0.263
6
𝐶𝑣 = 0.8 ∗ 148 = 118.4
−1/2
∑ 𝐾 𝐶𝑣 2 0.47 118.4 2 −1/2
𝐹𝑝 = [1 − ( 2) ] = [1 − ( ) ] = 0.998
𝑁2 𝑑 890 42
𝑣2
h=𝑘∗ = 26.8 m
2𝑔
0.9
∆𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 = 26.8 ∗ 10 = 2.412 Kg/cm2
Fittings pressure drop
Line Fitting Diameter Count K1 𝑲∞ Ktotal
(in) of
Fittings
Discharge 2 Elbow, 90°, Long-radius (R/D = 1.5), All types 6 4 800 0.2 0.94
Discharge 2 Valve, Gate, Full line size, Beta = 1 6 2 300 0.1 0.235
∑ 𝑘 = 1.175
𝑣2 1.472
∑ℎ = 𝑘 ∗ = 1.175 ∗ ( ) = 0.37 𝑚
2𝑔 2 ∗ 9.8

∆𝑃𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 = 0.033 Kg/cm2

Pressure drop calculations
𝐷2 (25.4∗0.001∗6)2
𝐴=𝜋 4
= 3.14 ∗ 4
=0.018232 m2

v = 𝑄⁄𝐴 = ((262 − 96.32)/3600)/0.008103 = 2.524225 m/s

ρvd 900∗5.68∗0.0254∗4
Re = μ
= 1.08∗0.001
=534294.2
Using moody’s Chart, At Re = 534294.2, f = 0.0168

𝑓 ∗ 𝜌 ∗ 𝑢2 ∗ 𝐿
−5
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10 ∗ =
2∗𝑑
0.0168 ∗ 900 ∗ 2.5242 ∗ 36.82
= 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗ = 0.125
2 ∗ 0.1524
Pressure at tee point
△P total= Pfittings + ∆𝑃𝑓 +∆𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑒 + Helevation + ∆𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑐 =
0.033+0.125+2.412+(13.72*0.9/10) + (8.22*0.9/10)= 4.55 Kg/cm2

Check the highest calculated junction point pressure

The highest pressure drop is for branch 2 and so is the calculated junction point, meaning that
branch 1 should have a higher than calculated pressure drop to equalize the estimated pressure
at junction point due to branch 2
The control valve of branch 1 should decrease its opening
Estimated pressure drop that would be added to the control valve
∆𝑃𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 = 𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑗𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛− 𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐ℎ 2 − 𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑗𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛− 𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐ℎ 1 = (4.55-
0.98+1.235)-(3.45-0.3425+0) = 4.805 – 3.11=1.695 Kg/cm2
∆𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔 = ∆𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔 +1.695= 2.016 Kg/cm2
𝑄
𝑁𝑒𝑤 𝐶𝑣 = = 92.3 Notes: the book approach for
∆𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔 calculating fittings pressure
𝑁1 𝐹𝑝 √ drops is using “the equivalent
𝜌1 /𝜌𝑜
length” for every fitting
Opening percentage = New Cv / valve 100% Cv = 92.3/188.4*1.25=39.3%
Also, the book approach for
Discharge pressure (at pump discharge flange) calculations
Sizing control valves is the
Pressure drop calculations
𝐷2 (25.4∗0.001∗8)2
second method we
𝐴 = 𝜋 4 = 3.14 ∗ 4
= 0.032413 m2 mentioned earlier
v = 𝑄⁄𝐴 = (262/3600)/0.032413= 2.245338 m/s
ρvd 900∗∗0.0254∗8
Re = μ = 1.08∗0.001 =475263.2
Using moody’s Chart, At Re =475263.2 , f = 0.017
𝑓∗𝜌∗𝑢2 ∗𝐿 0.017∗900∗2.245∗25
∆𝑃𝑓 = 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗ 2∗𝑑 = 1.01972 ∗ 10−5 ∗ =0.048386
2∗0.0254
Pdischarge = Pmeeting point + ∆𝑃𝑓 + ∆𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑐 + Helevation = 4.805+0.05+0+0.55+(5.5*0.9/10)=5.9
Kg/cm2.g
Hpump_head = (5.9- 0.24)*10/0.9 = 62.88 m
Pump efficiency estimation using branan equation
η= 80 – 0.2855F+3.78*10-4-FG-2.38*10-7FG2 + 5.39*10-4*F2-6.39*10-7*F2G+4*10-10*F2G2

substituting for
F = 206 ft
G = 1153.7 gpm
Gives, η = 59.95 %
Power Calculations
𝑄∗𝐻∗𝑆𝐺 262∗62.88∗0.9
Hydraulic power = 367.46 = 367.46 = 40.35 Kw
Rated power = Hydraulic power/pump efficiency = 40.35/0.5995 = 67.306 Kw

How the Tool works

1. Select number of Discharges and Complete the tables below
2. Add at least one pipe segment to the suction line and each discharge
3. If 2 or 3 discharges are selected add at least one pipe segment for the main discharge
and one segment for each branch
4. add a Control valve for each branch (or a Control valve for the main discharge in case of
1 discharge) add fittings in their order!

How

A. Using the template Excel sheet

B.
Keep in mind the requirements/ possible inputs for each fitting:

1. Pipe segments: [Diameter, Length, Elevation Change, Count of fitting]

2. Misc. / Equipment DP: [Estimated DP, Count of fittings]
3. Control Valve: [Diameter]
4. Entrance/Exit Nozzle: [Diameter, Count of fittings]
5. Reducers/Enlargements: [Diameter, D1/D2,Count of fittings]
6. Any other fittings: [Diameter, Count of fitting]

B. Using input form

NOTE:

You can remove any entry simply by selecting it and clicking “remove selected entry”
5. Check your calculations output or download the Calculations sheet
E
6. Go to the “Pump specs Checking” Tab and fill out the table below or click on “Use
pump system data” to auto fill
 7. Check your output table

Note 1: you can skip the first tab and directly use the pump specs checking tab if you already have your pump
specifications
References

1. Piping calculations manual, E. Shashi Menon. Chapter 6, Oil piping systems

2. Hooper, William B. “Calculate Heads loss cause by change in pipe size” Chemical
engineering 95, no. 16,”The 2K method predicts Head losses in pipe fittings” Chem. Eng.,
p. 97.
3. Control valve Handbook fifth edition, Fisher, p. 109
4. Elements of chemical process engineering chapter 1, Basic Process Engineering
principles
5. Process Engineers Pocket Handbook, chapter 2: pumps and motors
6. Piping calculations manual, E. Shashi Menon. Chapter 6, Oil piping systems, Effect of
elevation
7. Pumpbook, Process Contact Scandinavia Chapter 9: Pump system
8. Centrifugal pump specification and selection – a system approach by stan T. Shiels
9. JGC standard practice (JGS 210-120-1-27E) : Pumps
Compressors efficiency calculations

Link: Compressor calculations

This tool was developed for the APRCO process team to quickly estimate compressor efficiency and its
anticipated power consumption. As a part of a larger project to develop what is similar to Carl Branan’s
book “process engineers Pocket handbook” these tools would allow a process engineer to quickly
calculate/estimate equipment efficiencies or sizing using standardized calculations

The aim here is to take little-known data from the field (flow, pressures, temperatures,
compositions..etc.) and use it as input for a rough estimation without having to return to the office to
use commercial software or calculations excel sheets to validate or to calculate. Additionally, These
tools may also serve as a gathered data validation tool.

Link to Centrifugal pump evaluation tool

Link to Heater Efficiency calculations tool

Nomenclature

T Absolute Temperature (K) P Absolute Pressure (kg/cm.2a)

K (Cp/Cv) isentropic exponent, Cp/Cv Pr Reduced pressure (psia)
n polytropic exponent Tr Reduced temperature (R)
ƞ𝑎𝑑 Adiabatic efficiency in decimals Pc Critical pressure (psia)
ƞ𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑦 Polytropic efficiency in decimals Tc Critical temperature (R)
BHP Brake horse power (Kw) M.wt Molecular weight (g / g. mol)
Z Compressibility factor y Component composition mol fraction
G Flow rate (kg/hr)

Input Required

Flow rate Nm3/hr

Suction pressure Kg/cm2.g
o
Suction temperature C
Discharge pressure Kg/cm2.g
o
Discharge temperature C
M.Wt / K (Cp/Cv) / Z factor -
Alternative option: Composition

Output Obtained

M.Wt / K (Cp/Cv) / Z factor -

Polytropic exponent -
Adiabatic Efficiency %
Polytropic Efficiency %
Brake horsepower Kw
Calculations

Polytropic exponent
1
𝑛=
ln 𝑇𝑑/𝑇𝑠
1−
ln 𝑃𝑑/𝑃𝑠
Adiabatic Temperature [1]
𝑘
𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1
𝑇𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 = 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥 ( )
𝑃𝑠
Adiabatic Efficiency [1]
𝑘
𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1
𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥 (( 𝑃𝑠 ) − 1)
ƞ𝑎𝑑 =
𝑇𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 − 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

Polytropic Efficiency [derived from ref. 1]

𝑃𝑑
𝑘−1 ln 𝑃𝑠
ƞ𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑥
𝑘 𝑇𝑑
ln 𝑇𝑠

Brake horsepower [2]

𝑘
1 𝑘 𝑍𝑅𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1
𝐵𝐻𝑃 = ∗𝐺∗ ∗( ) ∗ (( ) − 1)
(ƞ𝑎𝑑 ∗ 36) 𝑘−1 𝑀. 𝑤𝑡 𝑃𝑠

Physical properties calculations

Average Molecular weight [1]

𝑛

𝑀. 𝑤𝑡 = ∑ 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑀. 𝑤𝑡𝑖
𝑖=1

K (Cp/Cv) [1]
𝐶𝑝 𝑀𝐶𝑝
𝑘= = , 𝑅 = 1.986 𝐵𝑡𝑢/(𝑙𝑏𝑚𝑜𝑙 ˚𝐹)
𝐶𝑣 𝑀𝐶𝑝 − 𝑅
∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑀𝐶𝑝
𝑘=
(∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑀𝐶𝑝) − 1.986

MCp values at different temperatures for a variety of compounds are found in figure 1 [1]
Compressibility factor Z [3]

First, Tr and Pr are calculated as follows (T and P are absolute values):

𝑛

𝑇𝑐 = ∑ 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑇𝑐𝑖
𝑖=1
𝑛

𝑃𝑐 = ∑ 𝑦𝑖 ∗ 𝑃𝑐𝑖
𝑖=1

𝑇 𝑃
𝑇𝑟 = , Pr =
𝑇𝑐 𝑃𝑐
Where Tci and Pci are each component’s critical temperature and pressure

Naturally, The Standing and Katz method is applied where Z is obtained as a function of Tr and Pr through the
famous chart (figure no. ). Alternatively, Dranchuk, Purvis, and Robinson method is used. In this method the
Benedict-Webb-Rubin equation of state is used to correlate the Standing-Katz Z
factor chart. Eight coefficients A1, A2, etc., are used in this equation as shown [1]:

𝑨𝟐 𝑨 𝟑 𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟔 𝝆𝒓 𝟓 𝑨𝟕 𝝆𝒓 𝟑
𝒁 = 𝟏 + (𝑨𝟏 + + ) 𝝆𝒓 + (𝑨𝟒 + ) 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 + +
𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝟑 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝟑 (𝟏 + 𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )𝒆𝒙𝒑(−𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )

Where:
𝟎. 𝟐𝟕 ∗ 𝑷𝝆𝒓
𝝆𝒓 =
𝒁𝑻𝝆𝒓

𝑨𝟏 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟏𝟓𝟎𝟔𝟐𝟑𝟕 𝑨𝟐 = −𝟏. 𝟎𝟒𝟔𝟕𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟎

𝑨𝟑 = −𝟎. 𝟓𝟕𝟖𝟑𝟐𝟕𝟐𝟗 𝑨𝟒 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟑𝟓𝟑𝟎𝟕𝟕𝟏
𝑨𝟓 = −𝟎. 𝟔𝟏𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟎𝟑𝟐 𝑨𝟔 = −𝟎. 𝟏𝟎𝟒𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟏𝟑
𝑨𝟕 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟖𝟏𝟓𝟕𝟎𝟎𝟏 𝑨𝟖 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟖𝟒𝟒𝟔𝟓𝟒𝟗
NOTE: Through trial and errors Z is assumed and then calculated until error is within tolerance.
Figure 1: Mcp, Tc and Pc values [1]

Figure 2: Calculations of Average M.wt and k [1]

 Figure 3: Standing-Katz Chart [1]

Calculations Examples using commercial software, hand written calculations and the tool developed:

Example No.1: Unknown composition, Known physical properties and operating conditions

AICHE standard [4] example (Page no. 43) (input highlighted)

Property Unit AICHE Tool

(converted Units)
Capacity Nm³ /hr 9610.1 9610.1
Mass Capacity kg/hr 18867.31 18867.315
Suction pressure kg / cm²_g 3.164 4.1976
Suction temperature °C 23.05 23.05
Discharge Pressure kg / cm²_g 11.71 12.774
Discharge temperature °C 110.2 110.2
Discharge temperature (adiabatic) °C - 91.132
 Power consumption Kw 390 395.05
Gas Molecular weight g / g. mol 44.01 44.01
Z - 0.9771 0.9759
K (Cp/Cv) - 1.2709 1.2709
Compressor Pressure ratio - 2.633 2.6395
Compressor Temperature Ratio - 1.28 1.2942
The Polytropic constant - 1.3422 1.3618
The Polytropic efficiency % 83.43 80.21
Isentropic (adiabatic) Efficiency % - 78.12

Hand Calculations

𝑻𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 𝟐𝟑. 𝟎𝟓 + 𝟐𝟕𝟑. 𝟏𝟓 = 𝟐𝟗𝟔. 𝟐 𝑲

𝑻𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒆 = 𝟏𝟏𝟎. 𝟐 + 𝟐𝟕𝟑 = 𝟑𝟖𝟑. 𝟑𝟓 𝑲
𝑲𝒈
𝑷𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 𝟒. 𝟏𝟗𝟕𝟔 + 𝟏. 𝟎𝟑𝟑𝟐𝟑 = 𝟓. 𝟐𝟑𝟎𝟖𝟑
𝒄𝒎𝟐𝒂
𝑲𝒈
𝑷𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒆 = 𝟏𝟐. 𝟕𝟕𝟔 + 𝟏. 𝟎𝟑𝟑𝟐𝟑 = 𝟏𝟑. 𝟖𝟎𝟗𝟐𝟑
𝒄𝒎𝟐𝒂
𝑷𝒅 𝟏𝟑. 𝟖𝟎𝟗𝟐𝟑
𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = = = 𝟐. 𝟔𝟑𝟗
𝑷𝒔 𝟓. 𝟐𝟑𝟎𝟖𝟑
𝑻𝒅 𝟑𝟖𝟑. 𝟑𝟓
𝑻𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = = = 𝟏. 𝟐𝟗𝟒𝟐
𝑻𝒔 𝟐𝟗𝟔. 𝟐
1 1
𝑛= = = 1.3619
ln 𝑇𝑑/𝑇𝑠 ln 1.2942
1− 1−
ln 𝑃𝑑/𝑃𝑠 ln 2.639
𝑘
𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1 1.2709
𝑇𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 = 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥 ( ) = 296.2 𝑥(2.639)0.2709 − 273.15 = 91.1322 𝐶
𝑃𝑠
𝑘
𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1 1.2709
𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥 (( 𝑃𝑠 ) − 1) 296.2𝑥 ((2.639)0.2709 − 1)
ƞ𝑎𝑑 = = 𝑥 100% = 78.12%
𝑇𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 − 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 383.35 − 296.2
𝑃𝑑
𝑘−1 ln 𝑃𝑠 0.2709 0.9704
ƞ𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑥 = 𝑥 𝑥 100% = 80.21%
𝑘 𝑇𝑑 1.2709 0.2578
ln 𝑇𝑠
𝑘
1 𝑘 𝑍𝑅𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1
𝐵𝐻𝑃 = ∗𝐺∗ ∗( ) ∗ (( ) − 1)
(ƞ𝑎𝑑 ∗ 36) 𝑘−1 𝑀. 𝑤𝑡 𝑃𝑠
1 1.2709 0.9759𝑥8.3143𝑥296.2 1.2709
= 𝑥 100 𝑥 𝑥 𝑥 ((2.639)0.2709 − 1)
78.12 𝑥 36 0.2709 44.01
= 395.05 𝐾𝑤
Tool input and Output
 Example No. 2 : known composition, unknown physical properties and operating conditions

Computer Methods for chemical engineers (2nd edition Page no. 78) (input highlighted)

Composition Mol. (Volume) %

Methane 80
Ethane 10
Carbon dioxide 5
Nitrogen 5

Property Unit Commercial Hand Calculations Tool

software in book
Capacity Nm³ /hr - - 116.89
Mass Capacity kg/hr 100 100 101.38223731228456
Suction pressure kg / cm²_g 2.026 300 Kpa 2.0259186389337844
Suction temperature °C 30 30 30
Discharge Pressure kg / cm²_g 9.164 1000 Kpa 9.163932129779282
Discharge temperature °C 144.5 144.4 144.4
Discharge temperature (adiabatic) °C 118.1 - 115.64785528190123
Power consumption Kw 6.54 6.69 6.619462274189613
Gas Molecular weight g / g. mol 19.44 19.4 19.44257
Z - 0.9926 1 (assumed) 0.9930121050499339
K (Cp/Cv) - 1.2662 (Isen. Exponent)* 1.31 1.26051842489981
Compressor Pressure ratio - 3.33 3.33 3.333333333333333
Compressor Temperature Ratio - 1.37 - 1.3773709384793007
The Polytropic constant - 1.3632 - 1.362274188171721
The Polytropic efficiency % 77.707 - 77.71706331465492
Isentropic (adiabatic) Efficiency % 75 75 (assumed) 74.8670063652983
NOTE: Isentropic mentioned in commercial software in performance tab
Hand Calculations

𝑻𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 𝟑𝟎 + 𝟐𝟕𝟑. 𝟏𝟓 = 𝟑𝟎𝟑. 𝟏𝟓 𝑲

𝑻𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒆 = 𝟏𝟒𝟒. 𝟒 + 𝟐𝟕𝟑 = 𝟒𝟏𝟕. 𝟓𝟓 𝑲
𝑲𝒈
𝑷𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 𝟐. 𝟎𝟓𝟗 + 𝟏. 𝟎𝟑𝟑𝟐𝟑 = 𝟑. 𝟎𝟗𝟐𝟐𝟑
𝒄𝒎𝟐𝒂
𝑲𝒈
𝑷𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒆 = 𝟗. 𝟏𝟔𝟑𝟗 + 𝟏. 𝟎𝟑𝟑𝟐𝟑 = 𝟏𝟎. 𝟏𝟗𝟕𝟏𝟑
𝒄𝒎𝟐𝒂
𝑷𝒅 𝟏𝟎. 𝟏𝟗𝟕𝟏𝟑
𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = = ≈ 𝟑. 𝟑𝟑
𝑷𝒔 𝟑. 𝟎𝟗𝟐𝟐𝟑
𝑻𝒅 𝟑𝟖𝟑. 𝟑𝟓
𝑻𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = = = 𝟏. 𝟑𝟕𝟕
𝑻𝒔 𝟐𝟗𝟔. 𝟐
1 1
𝑛= = = 1.362
ln 𝑇𝑑/𝑇𝑠 ln 3.33
1− 1−
ln 𝑃𝑑/𝑃𝑠 ln 1.377
K, Pr and Tr calculations

Gas Methane Ethane Nitrogen Carbon dioxide total

Mol wt 16.043 30.07 28.0134 44.01 Tc 190.27528 K
Pc 667 706.6 492.5 1070 Pc 47.97656 kg/cm2.a
Tc -116.66 89.92 -232.53 87.76 M.wt 19.44257 g/gmol
0 8.23 11.44 6.95 8.38
50 8.42 12.17 6.95 8.7 Tsuction 303.15 K
60 8.46 12.32 6.95 8.76 Tdischarge 417.55 K
100 8.65 12.95 6.96 9 Psuction 3.09223 kg/cm2.a
150 8.95 13.78 6.96 9.29 Pdischarge 10.19713 kg/cm2.a
200 9.28 14.63 6.97 9.56
250 9.64 15.49 6.98 9.81
300 10.01 16.34 7 10.05
mol fraction 0.8 0.1 0.05 0.05
Tc -91.5745 F Suction
Pc 682.385 Psia Tr 1.593218013
M.wt 19.44257 g/gmol Pr 0.064452933
Suction MCp 9.3505 Discharge
Ksuction 1.269672 Tr 2.19445219
Discharge
MCp 9.7135 Pr 0.212544002
Kdischarge 1.257004
Average K 1.263338
 𝑘
𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1 1.26
𝑇𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 = 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥 ( ) = 303.15 𝑥(3.33)0.26 − 273.15 = 115.6 𝐶
𝑃𝑠
𝑘
𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1 1.26
𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥 (( 𝑃𝑠 ) − 1) 303.15𝑥 ((303.15)0.26 − 1)
ƞ𝑎𝑑 = = 𝑥 100% = 74.8%
𝑇𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 − 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 417.55 − 303.15
𝑃𝑑
𝑘−1 ln
ƞ𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑥 𝑃𝑠 = 0.26 𝑥 1.2039 𝑥 100% = 77.71%
𝑘 𝑇𝑑 1.26 0.3199
ln
𝑇𝑠
Z calculations

Iterate through the following equation

𝑨𝟐 𝑨 𝟑 𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟓 𝑨𝟔 𝝆𝒓 𝟓 𝑨𝟕 𝝆𝒓 𝟑
𝒁 = 𝟏 + (𝑨𝟏 + + ) 𝝆𝒓 + (𝑨𝟒 + ) 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 + +
𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝟑 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝑻𝒑𝒓 𝟑 (𝟏 + 𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )𝒆𝒙𝒑(−𝑨𝟖 𝝆𝒓 𝟐 )

Where:
𝟎. 𝟐𝟕 ∗ 𝑷𝝆𝒓
𝝆𝒓 =
𝒁𝑻𝝆𝒓

Till Error < 0.001 for instance.

For both suction and discharge Tr and Pr (obtained above) then average your result

(Use the Goal seek function in an Excel Sheet, Change your assumed Z till ABS(Z_assumed –
Z_calculated)*1000 = 0 for instance)

Z = 0.993
𝑘
1 𝑘 𝑍𝑅𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑃𝑑 𝑘−1
𝐵𝐻𝑃 = ∗𝐺∗ ∗( ) ∗ (( ) − 1)
(ƞ𝑎𝑑 ∗ 36) 𝑘−1 𝑀. 𝑤𝑡 𝑃𝑠
1 1.26 0.993𝑥8.3143𝑥303.15 1.26
= 𝑥 100 𝑥 𝑥 𝑥 ((3.33)0.26 − 1) = 6.62 𝐾𝑤
74.8 𝑥 36 0.26 19.44
Tool input and output
References:

1. GPSA Engineering Data Book Section 13 (Compressors).

2. Computer methods for chemical engineering, Second Edition, Chapter 2: Fluid flow in pipes.
3. Piping Calculations manual, E. Shashi Menon. Chapter 7 Gas piping system.
4. AICHE equipment testing procedure: Centrifugal compressors: A guide to performance
Evaluation and Site testing

Other Recommended Readings

1. JGC Compressors standard JGS 210-120-1-28E (Calculations using Schultz method and PROII)
2. Elements of chemical process engineering Chapter 5: Compressors (If you are interested in
specifying compressors and you don’t mind US Customary units)
3. PTC-10: Performance test code on compressors and exhausters (A more detailed calculations,
examples and test parameters using the Schultz method that the commercial software are
using)
 Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Calculations

Link: Heat Exchanger Calculations

This tool was developed for process engineers to quickly estimate heat exchangers (single-phase gas or
liquid) efficiencies and create preliminary designs using kern, bell Delaware and NTU methods, and
access a list of useful tables on site. As a part of a larger project to develop what is similar to Carl
Branan’s book “process engineers Pocket Handbook” these tools would allow a process engineer to
quickly calculate/estimate equipment efficiencies or sizing using standardized calculations

The aim here is to take little-known data from the field (flow, pressures, temperatures,
compositions..etc.) and use it as input for a rough estimation without having to return to the office to
use commercial software or calculations Excel sheets to validate or to calculate. Additionally, these tools
may also serve as a gathered data validation tool.

Nomenclature

T Temperature (oC) P Pressure (kg/cm2.a)

ṁ Mass Flow rate (kg/hr) R Heat capacity ratio
ρ Density (kg/m3) S Temperature efficiency
Re Reynold’s number Ft Correction factor
Di Tube inside diameter (mm) µ Viscosity (Cp)
Do Tube outside diameter (mm) K Thermal conductivity (W/m.K)
L Tube Length (m) Cp Heat Capacity (Kg/Kcal.hr. oC)
U Overall Heat transfer coefficient A Exchanger Area (m2)
W/m2.K
Q Heat Duty (W and Kcal/hr) Ds Shell Diameter
Leff Effective length (m) Nt Number of tubes
De Equivalent Diameter (mm) h Heat transfer coefficient
W/m2.K
PT pitch size (mm) LMTD Logarithmic mean temperature difference

B baffle spacing (mm) Gs cross flow mass velocity m/m2.s

Np Number of tube passes C Clearance (mm)
Nb Number of baffles
Input Required
Table 1: Note 1: Input required depending on the case

Kern & Bell Delaware Rating Calculations Kern & Bell Delaware Preliminary Calculations
Flow rates kg/hr Flow rates kg/hr
o o
Inlet/outlet temperatures C Inlet/outlet temperatures C
Inlet/outlet pressures Kg/cm2.a Inlet/outlet pressures Kg/cm2.a
Average Densities [1] Average Densities [1]
Average Heat Capacities [1] Kcal/kg. oC Average Heat Capacities [1] Kcal/kg. oC
Average Heat Thermal Conductivities[1] W/m. °C Average Heat Thermal W/m. °C
Conductivities[1]
Average Viscosities [1] cP Average Viscosities [1] cP
Alternative option: Alternative option:
Liquid/gas: Composition Liquid/gas: Composition Vol% or
Vol% or mol%
Liquid oil fraction: SG. & temperatures Liquid oil fraction: SG. & mol%
- /°C
temperatures - /°C
Fouling factors W/m. K Fouling factors W/m. K
Exchanger Geometry Desired features in the design
Tube Diameter & thickness mm Bell Delaware
Pitch type and pitch -/mm Pitch type and pitch ratio -/-
Shell diameter mm Kern
Number of tubes / number of passes Assumed Uservice W/m2. °C
Tube Length mm Length mm
Baffle spacing mm Pitch type and pitch ratio -/-
Baffle cut %
Output Obtained

Kern and Bell Delaware Calculations NTU calculations

Duty KCal/hr Q W
∆TLMTD UA W/K
Ft Cr W/K
Corrected LMTD Cmin W/K
Surface Area m² Cmax W/K
Tube Heat transfer Coef. W/m²-°C effectiveness
Shell Heat transfer Coef. W/m²-°C NTU
Uclean W/m²-°C Thi °C
Udirty W/m²-°C Tho °C
Uservice W/m²-°C Tci °C
Over Design % Tco °C
Over Surface %
Shell Reynolds Number
Tube Reynolds Number
Tube Velocity m/s
Shell Velocity m/s
Shell D mm
Baffle Spacing mm
Number of baffles
Do mm
Di mm
Length mm
Number of tubes
Number of passes
Tube pitch mm
pitch type
baffle cut %
Heat Exchangers calculations

1. Shell and tube heat exchangers’ rating

Shell and tube heat exchanger rating is an essential process in evaluating the performance and
efficiency of a shell and tube heat exchanger. Heat exchanger rating involves determining the actual
heat transfer rate, pressure drop, and overall thermal performance of the heat exchanger based on
its operating conditions and design specifications.

During the rating process, several key factors are taken into account. These include the inlet and
outlet temperatures of both the hot and cold fluids, the flow rates of the fluids, the physical
properties of the fluids (such as density, specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, and viscosity),
and the heat exchanger's geometric and design parameters (such as tube diameter, tube length,
shell diameter, and number of tube passes).

The rating process typically involves two main calculations:

1. Heat Transfer Calculation: This calculation estimates the actual heat transfer rate occurring in
the heat exchanger.
2. Pressure Drop Calculation: This calculation determines the pressure drop experienced by the
fluids as they flow through the heat exchanger.

By performing heat transfer and pressure drop calculations, the rating process allows engineers to
evaluate the actual performance of the heat exchanger and compare it against the design
specifications.

Additionally, heat exchanger rating also provides valuable insights into the heat exchanger's thermal
performance over time, considering factors like fouling, scaling, or degradation. This information
aids in determining maintenance schedules, cleaning intervals, and potential efficiency
improvements.

Rating Procedures: [4]

1. Calculate the required overall coefficient

2. Calculate the clean overall coefficient
3. Check if Uc > Ureq (If not then the exchanger isn’t suitable)
4. Calculate the dirty overall coefficient by adding shell and tube fouling factors
5. Check if Ud > Ureq (If not then the exchanger isn’t suitable)
1.1 Heat exchangers rating (Kern’s Method)[1]

Where

T1, T2: inlet/outlet of hot stream

T1, t2: inlet/outlet of cold stream

Duty (for single-phase heat exchangers)
Hot stream = ṁ.Cp(T1-T2)

Cold stream = ṁ.Cp(t2-t1)

The logarithmic mean temperature difference

𝑇 −𝑇
R=
𝑡 −𝑡
𝑡 −𝑡
S=
𝑇 −𝑡
R: Heat capacity ratio

S: Or P, Temperature efficiency

Using Fig. 18 in reference [1]. We get the correction factor Ft or from [2]

√𝑅 + 1 ∗ ln( )
𝐹𝑡 =
( √ )
(𝑅 − 1) ∗ ln
( √ )

(𝑇1 − 𝑡2) − (𝑇2 − 𝑡1)

𝐿𝑀𝑇𝐷 = ( )
ln
( )
 𝐶𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐿𝑀𝑇𝐷 = 𝐹𝑡 ∗ 𝐿𝑀𝑇𝐷
Heat Exchanger area (m²)
Area = N ∗ πD L ∗ n
Nt: no. of tubes

Do: tube outer diameter (m)

L: tube Length (m)

n: no. of units

Overall Heat transfer coefficient (required or service)

Q calculated (Kcal / ℎ𝑟)
U (kcal / m². hr. °C) =
A (m ) ∗ corrected LMTD

Overall Heat transfer coefficient

Calculated overall heat transfer coefficient
1
𝑈=
+ 𝑟𝑜 + 𝑟𝑤 + 𝑟𝑖 ∗ +( ∗ )

U = Calculated overall heat transfer coefficient (fouled) (Kcal/h-m¹C)

ho = Shellside film coefficient (Kcal/h-m¹C)
hi = Tubeside film coefficient of fluid inside tubes (Kcal/h-m¹C)
ro= Shellside fouling resistance on outside of tubes (h-m². C/Kcal)
ri = Tubeside fouling resistance on inside of tubes (h-m². C/Kcal)
rw = Resistance of tube wall referred to outside surface of tube (h-m². C/Kcal)
Ao/Ai = Ratio of outside to inside surface tubing

Shell side heat transfer coefficient & pressure drop

Equivalent diameter
4 × 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎
𝐷 =
𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟
 /
𝐷 = , for square pitch

𝐷 = , for triangular pitch

/

Bundle cross flow area

𝐷 𝐶𝐵
𝐴 =
𝑃
Ds: Shell inside diameter m C: Clearance m

PT: pitch size m B: baffle spacing m

Shell Reynold’s number & friction factor

𝑓 = exp(0.576 − 0.19 ln 𝑅𝑒)
Where

400 < 𝑅𝑒 < 1,000,000

Shell side heat transfer coefficient [1]
.
𝐷𝑒 𝐷𝑒. 𝐺𝑠 𝐶𝑝. µ µ .
ℎ ∗ = 0.36 . .( )
𝑘 µ 𝑘 µ
for

2,000 < 𝑅𝑒 < 1,000,000

ho: shell side heat transfer coefficient (W/m2.K)
De: equivalent diameter (m)
k: thermal conductivity (W/m.K)
µ: Viscosity (N.s/m2)
Gs: shell side mass velocity (kg/s.m2) 𝐺 =
̇

Cp: heat capacity (j/kg.K)

µ : viscosity at wall temperature (N.s/m2)
Shell side pressure drop
𝑓𝐺 (𝑁 + 1)𝐷
∆𝑝 = 𝑛.
2⍴𝐷 𝜙
µ𝑠 0.14
Where 𝜙 = ( ) ,𝑁 = − 1 (Number of baffles) and (𝑁 + 1) is the number
µ𝑠,𝑤

of times the shell fluid passes the tube bundle. n number of units in series.
Tube side
𝜋𝑑 𝑁
𝐴 = ×
4 𝑁
Nt: no. of tubes
Np: no. of passes
Fluid mean velocity
𝑚̇
𝑈 =
𝜌 ×𝐴
ρ: fluid density kg/m3

𝑅 = , µ in N.s/m2
µ

For laminar flow

ṁ
𝐺 = (dimensionless)

Where graetz number between 10 and 10,000

 µ .
𝑁𝑢 = 2 ∗ (𝐺 ) .( )
µ
For graetz number less than 10 assume N u=4.36 for uniform surface heat flux or
3.66 for constant surface temperature [1]
For Re > 2300
(𝑓/2)(𝑅 − 1000)𝑃
𝑁𝑢 =
1 + 12.7 (𝑃 − 1)

𝑓 = (1.58 ln 𝑅 − 3.28)
Pr: Prandtl number Cpµ/k
𝑁𝑢 . 𝑘
ℎ =
𝑑
Tube side pressure drop [3]

4𝑓𝐿𝑁 ⍴𝑢
∆𝑝 = 𝑛. + 4𝑁
𝑑 2
n: number of units in series
1.2 Heat exchangers rating (Bell-Delaware Method) [note]
In Bell Delaware method, the fluid flow in the shell is divided into a number of individual
streams. Each of these streams introduces a correction factor which is used to correct heat
transfer coefficient and pressure drop across the shell. This article gives step-by-step guidance on
doing heat exchanger rating analysis based on Bell-Delware method.
Note:
This section is mostly the Che Guide article with minor clarifications Link

a. Shell Side Heat Transfer Coefficient, hs

Cross flow area, Sm in m2 is the minimum flow area in one baffle space at the center of the tube
bundle. It is calculated by following equation:
DotL = Ds - (12.5+( Ds /200))
Sm = B[(Ds - DOTL) + (DOTL - Do)(PT - Do)/PT,eff ]*10-6

where, PT is tube pitch, B is central baffle spacing, DOTL is outer tube limit diameter, Ds is shell
diameter and Do is tube outside diameter. (all units in mm)

PT,eff = PT for 30° and 90° layouts

PT,eff = 0.707*PT for 45° layout

Shell side cross flow mass velocity, GS (kg/m².s) is defined as:

GS = 𝑚 /Sm ∗ 3600

where, mS is shell side mass flow rate. Shell side Reynolds number Re S is then calculated from
ReS = Do.GS / μS *10

where, μS is the shell side fluid dynamic viscosity at average bulk temperature in cP.

Shell side Prandtl number PrS is calculated as following:

PrS = CP,S . μS*1.163 / kS ∗ 3.6 ∗ 10

where, CP,S is the shell side fluid specific heat (kcal/kg.oC) and kS is the shell side fluid thermal
conductivity (W.m/k).

Colburn j-factor for an ideal tube bank is defined as:

1.33
𝑗=𝑎 . (𝑅𝑒 )

𝑎
𝑎=
1 + 0.14(𝑅𝑒 )

where a1, a2, a3 and a4 are the correlation constants listed below.
The ideal tube bank based coefficient (W/m2.k) is calculated from –

µ .
ℎ = 1.163 ∗ 𝑗. 𝐶 , . 𝐺 . (𝑃𝑟 ) . ( )
µ,

where, μS,W is shell side fluid viscosity at wall temperature.

a.1 Correction factor for Baffle Window Flow, JC

The factor JC accounts for heat transfer in the baffle windows. It has a value of 1.0 for exchanger
with no tubes in the windows.

JC = 0.55 + 0.72FC
FC = 1 - 2FW
FW = (θCTL - Sin(θCTL))/2π
θCTL = 2cos-1(Ds(1 - 2*Bc/100)/DCTL)
DCTL = DOTL - Do
where, Bc is segemental baffle cut in %. Fc is Fraction of tubes in cross flow. Fw is Fraction of tubes in
windows flow. Dctl is central tube limit diameter in mm (the diameter of the circle that passes through the
centers of the outermost tubes in the bundle)
Figure 1: Baffle geometry used for calculating the fraction, Fw, of tubes
in one baffle window
a.2 Correction factor for Baffle Leakage, JL

The correction factor JL considers the effects of the tube-to-baffle and shell-to-baffle leakage
streams on heat transfer.
DSB = 3.1+0.004* Ds
JL = 0.44(1-rS) + (1-0.44(1-rS))exp(-2.2rL) LTB = 0.4 mm
𝑟 = Ssb /(Ssb + Stb) If the longest unsupported
𝑟 = (Ssb + Stb)/ Sm
Ssb = Ds*DSB(π - 0.5θDS)*10 tube length is < 3 ft,
Stb = (π/4)((Do+LTB)2 - Do2)Nt(1-FW)*10 otherwise: 0.8 mm
θDS = 2cos-1(1 - 2Bc/100)
Figure 2: Ssb Shell-to-baffle leakage
area.
Where, Nt is number of tubes, DSB is diametral clearance between shell & baffle and LTB is
diametral clearance between tube and baffle (mm). rS is ratio of shell-baffle to total area and rL is
ratio of leakage to cross flow. θDS is Baffle window angle, Ssb is Shell to baffle leakage area and
Stb is Tube to baffle leakage area. (m2)

a.3 Correction factor for Bundle Bypass effects, J B

Bundle bypass correction factor JB accounts for the bundle bypass stream flowing in the gap
between the outermost tubes and the shell. The number of effective rows crossed in one cross
flow section, Ntcc between the baffle tips is provided by following equation.

Ntcc = (Ds/Pp)(1 - 2Bc/100)

Pp = PT 30.5/2 for 30° layout
Pp = PT / 20.5 for 45° layout
Pp = PT for 90° layout

Ratio of sealing strips to tube rows rss is provided by 𝑁𝑡𝑐𝑐 [11]

Nss = 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟
6
rss = Nss/ Ntcc

where Nss is number of sealing strips (pairs) in one baffle.

The bundle bypass flow area, Sb (m2) is defined as the area between the outermost tubes and the shell
at the shell centerline in one central baffle space. It is part of the cross-flow area , Sm.
Sb = B(Ds - DOTL - Do/2)*10

where, B is central baffle spacing. Correction factor J B is then calculated as following -

JB = exp(-Cj(Sb / Sm)(1 - (2rss)1/3)) for rss < 0.5

JB = 1 for rss >= 0.5
Cj = 1.35 for ReS < 100
Cj = 1.25 for ReS >= 100

a.4 Correction factor for adverse temperature gradient, J R

The factor JR accounts for the decrease in the heat transfer coefficient with downstream distance
in laminar flow.
Ntcw = (0.8/Pp)(Ds(Bc/100) - (Ds-(DOTL-Do))/2 )
NB = 1 + int((L - 2Ls - LBIn - LBOut)/B)
NC = (Ntcw + Ntcc)(1 + NB)
JRL = (10/NC)0.18
JR = 1, ReS > 100
JR = JRL + (20-ReS)(JRL - 1)/80, ReS <= 100, ReS > 20
JR = JRL, ReS <= 20
where, L is tube length, Ls is tubesheet thickness, LBIn is inlet baffle spacing and LBOut is outlet baffle
spacing. All units in mm. Ntcw is the number of tube rows crosses, NB is number of baffles and Nc is Tube
rows crossed in entire exchanger.
Ls ~ DS √P/C (mm)
a.5 Correction factor for unequal baffle spacing, J S P : Design pressure (kPa or
Kg/cm2G) of shell or tube
n1 = 0.6, ReS >= 100 side, whichever is greater.
n1 = 1/3, ReS < 100 C : Constant (578 for kPaG,
JS = ((NB-1)+(LBIn/B)1-n1 + (LBOut/B)1-n1)/((NB-1)+(LBIn/B) + (LBOut/B)) 58.3 for Kg/cm2G)
Or whichever greater than:
Shell side heat transfer coefficient is calculated as Ls = 50 mm Ds ≥ 500mm
Ls = 0.1* Ds for Ds < 500mm
hs = hIdeal(JC.JL.JB.JS.JR)
LBIn , LBOut is assumed = B
b. Shell Side Pressure Drop, ΔPs

Friction factor for ideal tube bank is calculated as following:

1.33
𝑓=𝑏 . (𝑅𝑒 )

𝑏
𝑏=
1 + 0.14(𝑅𝑒 )

where b1, b2, b3 and b4 are correlational constants listed below.

Pressure drop for an ideal tube bank is calculated from

ΔPIdeal = 2f(GS²/ρS)(μS/μS,W)0.14 Ntcc

b.1 Correction factor for Baffle Leakage, RL

RL = exp(-1.33(1+rS)rLp)
p = 0.8 - 0.15(1+rS)

b.2 Correction factor for Bundle Bypass effect, R B

RB = exp(-Cr(Sb / Sm)(1 - (2rss)1/3)) for rss < 0.5

RB = 1 for rss >= 0.5
Cr = 4.5 for ReS < 100
Cr = 3.7 for ReS >= 100

b.3 Correction factor for unequal baffle spacing, RS

RS = 0.5((B/LBIn)2-n + (B/LBOut)2-n)
n = 0.2, ReS >= 100
n = 1.0, ReS < 100

1. Pressure drop for window section, ΔPW

Following terms are calculated as -

SWG = (Ds²/8)(θDS - Sin(θDS))*10
SWT = Nt.FW(πDo²/4)*10
SW = SWG - SWT
GW = mS/3600*(Sm.SW)0.5
DW = 4.SW *10 /(π.Do.Nt.FW + θDS.Ds)
SWG Gross window area m2, SWT Window area occupied with tubes m2, SW Net Cross flow area m2, Gw Mass
velocity baffle window Kg/m².s, Dw Hydraulic diameter baffle window in m.

Pressure drop for laminar and turbulent flow is calculated.

ΔPW, Turb = NB.RL(2+0.6*Ntcw).GW²/(2.ρS)

26. 𝐺W. 𝐶 Ntcw 𝐵 𝐺W²
ΔPW, Laminar = NB.RL( + + )
ρS PT − D o D w ² ρS
ΔPW = ΔPW, Turb , ReS ≥ 100
ΔPW = ΔPW,Laminar , ReS < 100

2. Pressure drop in Central Baffle spaces

ΔPC = (NB - 1)ΔPIdeal.RL.RB

3. Pressure drop in entrance & exit baffle spaces

ΔPE = ΔPIdeal(1 + Ntcw/Ntcc).RB.RS

Shell side pressure drop in bar is calculated as following -

ΔPS = ΔPW + ΔPC + ΔPE

c. Tube Side Heat Transfer Coefficient, ht

vt =mt/(⍴t*at*3600)
Reynold's number and Prandtl number are calculated as following -
at = 10-6*Nt* π. ∗
ReT = 𝐷 .v.ρt/μt ∗ 10 Pn: number of passes
PrT =1.163* Cp,t.μt/kt

where, Di is tube inside diameter mm, v is velocity m/s, ρ t is density, μt is viscosity in cP, kt is
thermal conductivity W/m.K and Cp,t is specific heat for fluid on tube side kcal/kg.oC.

For laminar flow, ReT < 2300, Sieder and Tate correlation is used for Nusselt's nubmer.

Nu = 1.86(ReT.PrT.Di/Leff)1/3
Leff = L - 2*Ls , where Leff is effective tube length in mm for fixed tube sheet, see [2] for others

For turbulent flow, ReT > 10,000, following equation developed by Petukhov-Kirillov can be
used.

f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2

Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))
For transient flow, Nusselt number can be interpolated from Nu Laminar & Nu Turbulent.

Heat transfer coefficient ht in (W/m2.k) is calculated as following - For floating head

Le = L – 2xTS- XLZ [1]
ht = Nu.(kt/Di*1000)(μt/μt, w)0.14 For U-Tube
Le = L –TS+XU[2] [3] [nozzle at/after U-bend]
d. Tube Side Pressure Drop, ΔPt Le = L –TS-50 mm [4] [nozzle before U-bend]
[1] XLZ: floating head dead space (for S or T
Tube side pressure drop in bar is calculated by following equation - type)
[2] XU: U-bend length
ΔPt = (4.f.Leff.Np/Di + 4.Np)ρt.v²/2 [3] the U-bend is included in the effective
length.
where, Np is number of tube passes. [4] 50 mm: distance between TL and the
last baffle
e. Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient, U UX = 1/3 Dotl

XLZ: obtained from table in ref [3] P. 15

Resistance due to tube wall m2.k/W is calculated as following

Rtube = Do*0.001/(2.ln(Do/Di).ktube)

where, ktube is thermal conductivity of tube material W/m.k. Overall clean heat transfer
coefficient, UClean is calculated as per below equation

UClean = 1/hS + Do/(Di.ht) + Rtube)

Overall dirty heat transfer coefficient, UDirty is calculated as per below expression

UDirty = 1/(1/UClean + fshell + ftube)

where, fshell & ftube are fouling factors for shell and tube side in m2.k/W.

Heat transfer coefficient required, URequired is calculated as following

URequired = Q /(A x LMTDcorrected)

where, Q is heat duty in W, A is heat transfer area and LMTD corrected is corrected logarithmic
mean temperature difference.

Over Surface, % = (UClean/URequired - 1)*100

Over Design, % = (UDirty/URequired - 1)*100

Accuracy of Correlations Between Kern’s Method and the Bell–Delaware’s Method [4]
Heat exchangers designs have been arrived at using the Kern’s, Tinker’s, or the Bell’s method. The
suitability and accuracy of these have been reviewed in the literature. Kern’s method cannot be applied
to a TEMA type T floating head heat exchanger without sealing strips or with unsealed pass partition
lanes. Whitley presented a study of the errors found in heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop
predictions obtained with the Kern and Bell methods. Palen and Taborek show that the Bell–Delaware
method allows the prediction of shell-side film coefficients in the range from 50% lower to 100% higher
than the real values. Table below shows a comparison of the Kern, Bell–Delaware, and the Tinker’s
methods.
Kern Bell-Delaware Tinker
1. Ease of use Simple More involved More involved
2. Resultant design Very conservative Not conservative Not conservative
3. Cost of equipment Very high Relatively low Relatively low
4. Does it account for
a. By pass and leakage streams No Yes Yes
b. Inlet and outlet baffle
spacing being different than
the central one No Yes Yes
c. Number of tube rows being
different in inlet and outlet zones
than in the center. No Yes No
d. Seal strips No Yes Yes
e. Different tube layouts and
baffle cuts No Yes Yes
f. Effectiveness of tube rows in
window by a separate
calculation. No Yes Yes
Original plots
extended.
Method remains Δp calculated lam Method remains
g. Laminar flow unchanged. differently. unchanged.
Accounts for it by
Assumes shell full number of tubes in Accounts for it by mean
h. Size of tube bundle of tubes cross flow bundle width.
i. Pressure drop in the nozzle. Yes No No
Yes (takes an
j. Δp due to gradual fouling of average
heat exchanger working unit) No Yes
5. Basis of Reynolds number Equivalent
calculation diameter Tube O.D. Tube O.D.
Cross-flow mass velocity
Geometric mean of multiplied by a factor
Cross flow over the cross-flow and for tubes in baffle
6. Which mass velocity used? tube bundle window flow. window.
Source: Petroleum Refining Design and applications, vol. 4, A. Kayode coker

1.3 NTU Method

The NTU (Number of Transfer Units) method is a widely used approach for rating shell and tube heat
exchangers. It is a simplified yet effective method for evaluating the heat transfer performance of such
heat exchangers.

The NTU method is based on the concept of heat transfer effectiveness, which represents the ratio of
the actual heat transfer in the heat exchanger to the maximum possible heat transfer. It takes into
account the temperature difference between the hot and cold fluids, the heat exchanger configuration,
and the fluid flow rates.

In the NTU method, the heat exchanger is typically represented as a series of heat transfer units.
Each heat transfer unit consists of a hot fluid stream and a cold fluid stream. The NTU value
represents the number of these heat transfer units in the heat exchanger

The NTU method involves the following steps:

1. Determining the NTU Value: The NTU value is calculated based on the heat exchanger geometry,
flow rates, and heat transfer characteristics. It can be determined using equations or graphical
methods.
2. Calculating the Heat Transfer Effectiveness: The effectiveness ( ε) of the heat exchanger is
determined using the NTU value and the heat exchanger configuration. The effectiveness
represents the ratio of the actual heat transfer to the maximum possible heat transfer. It is a
measure of how efficiently heat is transferred between the hot and cold fluids.
3. Estimating the Heat Transfer Rate: Once the effectiveness is known, the heat transfer rate in the
heat exchanger can be calculated. This involves multiplying the maximum possible heat transfer
rate (which is determined by the temperature difference between the hot and cold fluids) by the
effectiveness.
4. Estimating outlet temperatures by simple heat balance in shell and tube

It should be noted that the NTU method assumes certain simplifications and may not account for all
complex factors, such as fouling or non-uniform fluid flow distribution. In such cases, more detailed
analysis and modeling may be required.

Capacity ratio
ṁ
Capacity ratio=
ṁ

Number of transfer units

𝑈𝐴
NTU =
𝐶
Cmin: stream with the lowest mCp
Overall temperature range & Effectiveness
Overall temperature range = T −t
QMax = CMin.(THot In - TCold In)
Q=ε*Cmin *(Th1 -t c1 )
THot Out = THot In - Q /( ṁH.CpH)
TCold Out = TCold In + Q /( ṁC.CpC)
Heat Exchanger Rating Assessment [8][9]

Applications of rating can be for operational performance, for

changes in process conditions, or in process design. There are three fundamental
points in determining if a heat exchanger performs well for given operating
conditions or for a new service:
(1) What actual coefficient UA value can be “performed” by the two fluids as the
result of their flow rates, individual film coefficients ht and hs, and fouling
resistance?
(2) From the heat balance: Q =( ṁ .𝐶𝑝 ) (T1-T2)= ( ṁC .𝐶𝑝 )(t2-t1), for given area A,
and actual temperatures, required U value (UR) can be calculated.
(3) The operating pressure drops for the two streams passing through the existing
heat exchanger.
The criteria can be established for the suitability of an existing exchanger for
given or new services as two necessary and sufficient conditions:
(a) UA must exceed UR to give desired overdesign (%OD) so that the heat
exchanger can meet changing process conditions for a reasonable period of
service continuously. While UA denotes the capability of the exchanger based
on its dimension and geometry, UR indicates the requirement from the process heat
transfer.
(b) Operating pressure drops on both sides must be less than allowable pressure
drops.
When these two conditions are fulfilled, an existing exchanger is suitable for the
process conditions for which it was rated. When the process conditions undergo
significant changes, a rating should be performed to make sure the exchanger can perform the task
satisfactorily under the new conditions. You could also check design R f against Rf calculated to check
your current fouling resistance.
the simple U value analysis is backed up with pressure drop information to confirm that the
performance loss is fouling related.
Actual heat exchanger Pressure Drop[8]
As the tube wall thickness increases with fouling deposits, pressure drop measurement
must be conducted and used as the basis for pressure drop rating calculations. In
doing so, the tube wall thickness including fouling deposits are assumed and iterated
until the calculated pressure drops from the rating software converges with the
measured ones.
Typical fouled exchanger pressure drops are 1.3–2 times that of clean exchangers
(Barletta, 1998). For extreme cases, fouled exchanger pressure drops are much
higher than that of clean exchangers.
It is recommended that hydraulic calculations should be conducted in an
exchanger rating software (e.g., HTRI) as the rating software is more rigorous in
pressure drop calculations than flowsheet simulation software.
Instrumentation and Data Access[9]
Most refineries have sophisticated plant data historians that record detailed plant
operating conditions with high resolution. Electronically accessible temperature and
flow data are crucial for effective exchanger performance monitoring. Manual temperature
data entry for monitoring most exchangers is feasible in principle. However, a great
deal of effort is required to collect field temperature readings from local temperature
indicators or “temperature guns.” Manual monitoring is very difficult to maintain at any
meaningful frequency level. The most frequent surveys of this type that the authors have
seen were completed every 3 months, and then only when a team from a corporate
engineering support group provided the staff.
Ideally, data should be available for each exchanger’s shell-side and tube-side outlet
temperature and each fluid’s temperature as it first enters the heat exchanger network.
Inlet temperatures for all other exchangers can be set equal to the outlet of an upstream
connected exchanger without appreciable loss in accuracy. The exchanger outlet
temperatures must be adjusted for any bypasses. Exchangers can also be modeled by
grouping identical exchangers and identifying common configurations (two series/one
parallel, two series/two parallel, etc.). Note, however, that in such groupings some
resolution is lost as to the exact location of any fouling.
Exchanger grouping for monitoring may also be determined by the availability of
bypass and isolation valves to allow online exchanger isolation and removal from
service. In general, though, monitoring resolution should be determined by available
temperature instrumentation.
Crude feed, product rundown, and tower pump-around flow rates are generally well
measured. Ideally, flow rates should be corrected for flowing density versus design for
each meter and an overall mass balance check should be performed across the unit to
ensure flow meter consistency.
Flow splits are usually less well measured unless the splits are actively manipulated
by operators. Temperatures around an associated mixer can be used to estimate an
unmetered flow split. This is especially useful around a controlled bypass. Failing this,
valve position in conjunction with valve flow characteristics can sometimes be used to
estimate flow distribution between branches. However, this is complicated by the
unequal pressure resistance on different branches, particularly when fouling is involved.
Finally, in the absence of any of these, bypasses should be assumed closed and other flow
splits to have an equal distribution.
Alternatively, data reconciliation can be used to find best-fit flow split data, though
data reconciliation then becomes a more difficult nonlinear optimization exercise. This
can also introduce more uncertainty as the model now has extra optimization variables.
Rigorous calculation of film heat transfer coefficients requires thermal and physical
data about each stream. Distillation data and liquid specific gravities are sufficient to
synthesize the required liquid properties of density, heat capacity, thermal conductivity,
and viscosity at flowing conditions in each heat exchanger. The best approach is to use
rigorous physical property simulation to calculate these properties from composition or
crude assay information. However, standard shortcut methods can also be used in
spreadsheets.
If available, electronically sourced laboratory data should be used to characterize
crude and oil product properties. It is important to include all components when
characterizing the whole crude oil stream. Different distillation types and light ends
analysis can be combined in the process simulation and the result checked against the
crude unit material balance.

Data Quality and Data Reconciliation

Exchanger tube-side heat duties (Qt) and shell-side heat duties (Qs)
are calculated independently and compared for consistency. Shell- and tube-side heat
imbalances are not uncommon. It is rare that raw plant data give
reliable (±5%) heat balance closures for all exchangers, especially with larger preheat
train systems that may have up to 60 exchangers excluding product and pump-around
coolers.

With the right tools it may be possible to manually adjust exchanger outlet temperatures to come up
with acceptable heat balances across the preheat train system; however, this is not a trivial undertaking
due to the complexity of interactions between exchangers. The final solution is also subjective as it
involves a set of sequential decisions as to which exchanger to start with and whether to adjust the
tube- or shell-side temperature in order to achieve a heat balance. There are many possible heat
balance solutions. The question is: Which is the most representative solution?
Mathematical data reconciliation can effectively answer this question. It is a vital
component of any successful fouling monitoring application. Reconciliation is a least squares
optimization process where the objective function minimizes the deviation between reconciled, heat
balanced data and the raw plant data. Temperature, fluid flow, and flow split data can be included in the
data reconciliation model. The relative weight the reconciliation model places on different data types is
governed by assigning trust factors or typical errors to each plant measurement. Occasionally, though
not often, it may be necessary to include local exchanger bypasses in the reconciliation problem.
Given that local bypass flows are never measured, bypasses must be estimated and thus very low trust
factors (or high typical errors) should be assigned to these variables.
A measure of “acceptability” should be established for any optimized solution, to determine whether to
accept or reject the current data set. If reconciled plant data deviations on a particular plant
measurement are consistently higher than expected instrumentation errors, the flow meter or
temperature indicator should be checked.

Heat Exchanger fouling monitoring [10], read more on [8] [9]

To track the amount of fouling in an exchanger one can calculate Uo frequently (weekly) and plot Uo versus
time. The pattern of the fouling curve will usually repeat itself after each cleaning. 1/Uo = R= RCLEAN +RDIRT
If conditions have changed significantly from design condition, h i and ho can be adjusted to current
conditions using the equations from the Natural Gasoline Processing Handbook summarized in
Key Formulas. RCLEAN can then be recalculated. The current RDIRT can be compared to the design RDIRT.
Many heat exchange services are regulated by instrumentation to provide a stream to a downstream
process at a consistent temperature. This temperature is accomplished by bypassing part of the
exchanger feed around the exchanger and mixing this bypassed material with the exchanger effluent.
The degree of bypassing is regulated by a temperature controller which senses the downstream mixture
temperature. When the exchanger is clean, the maximum amount of feed is bypassed; and when the
exchanger is fouled to the maximum, no feed is bypassing the exchanger. By recording the clean
bypassing condition (percent of feed bypassed), you can easily estimate the amount of exchanger
fouling by observing the amount of feed bypassed with the partially fouled exchanger.
The following equations which can be readily derived from the
above and are often quoted in the literature:
Fraction dirty = rn/rd = (Ud / UN)[UC – Un ] / (UC – Ud )
where:
rd = RDIRT design
rn = RDIRT current (now)
UC = Clean U with no fouling factors
UD = Design U which includes fouling factors
Un = Current U (now)
 3. Shell &Tube Preliminary sizing

The preliminary sizing stage focuses on establishing initial estimates and configurations before
proceeding to detailed design calculations. During preliminary sizing, several key parameters need to be
considered. These include the heat duty or the amount of heat to be transferred, the temperature
difference between the two fluids, the flow rates of the fluids, and the physical properties of the fluids,
such as density and specific heat capacity.

The goal of preliminary sizing is to determine the approximate size and layout of the shell and tube heat
exchanger, including the number of tubes, tube diameter, tube length, and shell diameter. This is
achieved by employing empirical correlations, design guidelines, and engineering experience to estimate
the required surface area for heat transfer.

Additionally, factors like pressure drop, fouling, material selection, and construction constraints are also
taken into account during the preliminary sizing phase.

The results obtained from preliminary sizing serve as a foundation for detailed design and analysis,
where more precise calculations and considerations are made to optimize the heat exchanger's
performance, efficiency, and cost.

In preliminary sizing of shell and tube heat exchangers, there are certain aspects and considerations that
are generally not accounted for. These may include:

1. Vibration Analysis
2. Detailed Pressure Drop Calculations.
3. Thermal Stress Analysis

While preliminary sizing may not incorporate these detailed analyses and considerations, it is important
to note that they are crucial in the subsequent stages of design and engineering to ensure the heat
exchanger's reliability, performance, and longevity.

3.1 Bell-Delaware Preliminary Design: Polley et al.[4][6]

G. T. Polley developed rapid design algorithms for the design of both shell and tube heat exchangers and
compact heat exchangers. These algorithms are based on the full use of allowable pressure drops of
both of the streams being contacted as the design objective and a set of simultaneous equations. In the
case of a shell and tube heat exchanger, they assumed that the best shell-side performance can be
gained by making baffle window flow velocities and bundle cross-flow velocities equal. This in turn
results in a “similarity concept” that can be used for the derivation of simple performance equations
from shell-side models. They determined the exchanger geometry
from values as follows:
1. The tube-side film heat coefficient can be directly related to the tube-side velocity and thus to
the exchanger tube count.
2. From the tube count and total surface area, the tube length can be determined.
3. The shell diameter can be calculated from the tube count.
4. Finally, with the shell diameter known, and the shell-side velocity being determined from the
shell-side film coefficient, the number of baffles and baffle spacing required within the
 exchanger can be determined. They inferred that the rapid design algorithm avoids the need to
evaluate much potential geometry while ensuring the full use of the allowable pressure drop.
The only restrictions are:
The pressure drop (ΔP) referred to is that associated with flow through the exchanger bundle, as no
account is taken of any nozzle or header pressure drops. Allowance for these drops must be made ahead
of design and checked after design. However, this restriction is not considered to adversely affect the
design. Kern correlations are generally considered too inaccurate for use in modern exchanger design.
Their methodology started with a consideration of the Bell-Delaware Method as described earlier and
proceeded to consider current state-of-the-art commercial methodologies.
The algorithms used in the design have been tested with data from literature, which show that in the
case of the shell and tube heat exchanger algorithm, there appears to be the first one which makes full
use of both allowable pressure drops and thereby identifies the smallest exchanger for a given duty.
Alternatively, in the case of compact heat exchangers, a major use of such an algorithm would be the
identification of the best surface combination for a specific duty. The research showed that the basic
algorithm can be applied using the Bell-Delaware method for shell and tube
exchangers, as the approach can be further extended to even more sophisticated methods through the
use of geometrical similarity (e.g., 25% baffle cut, baffle spacing equal to shell diameter).

A = area (m2)
d = tube diameter (m)
Ds = shell diameter (m)
Ft = ΔTLMTD correction factor (non-counter-current flow)
h = film heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 oK)
K = dimensional constant, solely dependent on physical properties, volumetric flow rate, and a
single
characteristic dimension.
R = fouling resistance (m2 K/W)
Δp = pressure drop (kPa)
Subscripts
i = inside surface
o = outside surface
s = shell side
t = tube side
Source 7: Rapid Design Algorithms for Shell-and-tube and Compact Heat Exchangers, G. T. Polley
 Walkthrough

a. Initialization
a. Assume an exchanger with shell diameter Ds = 387 mm baffle cut = 25%, 6 m length, 2 passes, same
tube diameter and same pitch ratio and type as specified.
b. Estimate the number of tubes that could fit in your shell diameter
c. Estimate shell Reynold’s number

θDS = 2cos-1(1 - 2Bc/100)

θCTL = 2cos-1(Ds(1 - 2*Bc/100)/DCTL)
FW = (θCTL - Sin(θCTL))/2π
SWG = (Ds²/8)(θDS - Sin(θDS)) *10
SWT = Nt.FW(πDo²/4)*10
SW = SWG - SWT
Based on the assumption that baffle spacing is the same as baffle cut area
Sm = SW
GW = mS/3600*(Sm.SW)0.5
GS = mS/Sm
ReS = Do.GS / μS*10
d. Calculate shell heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop
Sm = B[(Ds - DOTL) + (DOTL - Do)(PT - Do)/PT,eff ]*10
PT,eff = PT for 30° and 90° layouts Di = Do – 2*thickness
PT,eff = 0.707*PT for 45° layout Ltb = 0.4
GS = mS/3600*Sm
Ls= 0.1* Ds
ReS = Do.GS / μS*10
PrS = 1.163*CP,S.μS / kS Dsb = 3.1+0.004* Ds
Leff = L- 2* Ls
Dotl= Ds - (12.5+( Ds/200))
1.33
𝑗=𝑎 . (𝑅𝑒 )
𝑃
𝐷𝑜
𝑎
𝑎=
1 + 0.14(𝑅𝑒 )

µ .
ℎ = 1.163 ∗ 𝑗. 𝐶 , . 𝐺 . (𝑃𝑟 ) . ( )
µ,

where, μS,W is shell side fluid viscosity at wall temperature.

a.1 Correction factor for Baffle Window Flow, JC

JC = 0.55 + 0.72FC
FC = 1 - 2FW
FW = (θCTL - Sin(θCTL))/2π
θCTL = 2cos-1(Ds(1 - 2*Bc/100)/DCTL)
DCTL = DOTL – Do
a.2 Correction factor for Baffle Leakage, JL
JL = 0.44(1-rS) + (1-0.44(1-rS))exp(-2.2rL)
rS = Ssb /(Ssb + Stb)
rL = (Ssb + Stb)/ Sm
Ssb = Ds*DSB(π - 0.5θDS)*10
Stb = (π/4)((Do+LTB)2 - Do2)Nt(1-FW)*10
θDS = 2cos-1(1 - 2Bc/100)

a.3 Correction factor for Bundle Bypass effects, J B

Ntcc = (Ds/Pp)(1 - 2Bc/100)
Pp = PT 30.5/2 for 30° layout
Pp = PT / 20.5 for 45° layout
Pp = PT for 90° layout
rss = Nss/ Ntcc
Sb = B(Ds - DOTL - Do/2)*10
JB = exp(-Cj(Sb / Sm)(1 - (2rss)1/3)) for rss < 0.5
JB = 1 for rss >= 0.5
Cj = 1.35 for ReS < 100
Cj = 1.25 for ReS >= 100

a.4 Correction factor for adverse temperature gradient, J R

Ntcw = (0.8/Pp)(Ds(Bc/100) - (Ds-(DOTL-Do))/2 )
NB = 1 + (int)(L - 2Ls - LBIn - LBOut)/B
NC = (Ntcw + Ntcc)(1 + NB)
JRL = (10/NC)0.18
JR = 1, ReS > 100
JR = JRL + (20-ReS)(JRL - 1)/80, ReS <= 100, ReS > 20
JR = JRL, ReS <= 20

a.5 Correction factor for unequal baffle spacing, J S

n1 = 0.6, ReS >= 100
n1 = 1/3, ReS < 100
JS = ((NB-1)+(LBIn/B)1-n1 + (LBOut/B)1-n1)/((NB-1)+(LBIn/B) + (LBOut/B))

Shell side heat transfer coefficient is calculated as

hs = hIdeal(JC.JL.JB.JS.JR)

1.33
𝑓=𝑏 . (𝑅𝑒 )
𝑃
𝐷𝑜

𝑏
𝑏=
1 + 0.14(𝑅𝑒 )

ΔPIdeal = 2f(GS²/ρS)(μS/μS,W)0.14 Ntcc

b.1 Correction factor for Baffle Leakage, RL

RL = exp(-1.33(1+rS)rLp)
p = 0.8 - 0.15(1+rS)
b.2 Correction factor for Bundle Bypass effect, R B
RB = exp(-Cr(Sb / Sm)(1 - (2rss)1/3)) for rss < 0.5
RB = 1 for rss >= 0.5
Cr = 4.5 for ReS < 100
Cr = 3.7 for ReS >= 100

b.3 Correction factor for unequal baffle spacing, RS

n = 0.2, ReS >= 100
n = 1.0, ReS < 100
RS = 0.5((B/LBIn)2-n + (B/LBOut)2-n)

1. Pressure drop for window section, ΔPW

Following terms are calculated as -

SWG = (Ds²/8)(θDS - Sin(θDS)) *10

SWT = Nt.FW(πDo²/4)*10
SW = SWG - SWT
GW = mS/3600*(Sm.SW)0.5
DW = 4.SW /(π.Do.Nt.FW + θDS.Ds)
SWG Gross window area, SWT Window area occupied with tubes, SW Net Cross flow area, Gw Mass velocity baffle
window, Dw Hydraulic diameter baffle window in m.

Pressure drop for laminar and turbulent flow is calculated.

ΔPW, Turb = NB.RL(2+0.6*Ntcw).GW²/(2.ρS)
26. 𝐺W. 𝐶 Ntcw 𝐵 𝐺W²
ΔPW, Laminar = NB.RL( + + )
ρS PT − D o D w ² ρS
ΔPW = ΔPW, Turb , ReS ≥ 100
ΔPW = ΔPW,Laminar , ReS < 100

2. Pressure drop in Central Baffle spaces

ΔPC = (NB - 1)ΔPIdeal.RL.RB

3. Pressure drop in entrance & exit baffle spaces

ΔPE = ΔPIdeal(1 + Ntcw/Ntcc).RB.RS

Shell side pressure drop in bar is calculated as following -

ΔPS = ΔPW + ΔPC + ΔPE

e. Calculate tube heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop

ReT = Di.v.ρt/μt*10
PrT = 1.163*Cp,t.μt/kt

For laminar flow, ReT < 2300, Sieder and Tate correlation is used for Nusselt's nubmer.

Leff = L - 2*Ls , where Leff is effective tube length 𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑚

Nu = 1.86(ReT.PrT.Di/Leff)1/3
 For turbulent flow, ReT > 10,000, following equation developed by Petukhov-Kirillov can be
used.

f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2

Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))

For transient flow, Nusselt number can be interpolated from Nu Laminar & Nu Turbulent.

ht = Nu.(kt/Di)(μt/μt, w)0.14

a. Tube Side Pressure Drop, ΔPt

ΔPt = (4.f.Leff.Np/Di + 4.Np)ρt.v²/2

f. Calculate shell and tube constants from the following equations

.
∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ ℎ
.
∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ ℎ

b. Solving for the allowable pressure drops

1. Solve the following non-linear equations to obtain the desired heat transfer coefficients for both
shell and tube and the required area (hs,ht and A) that can achieve your allowable pressure drops for
both shell and tubes

𝐴= Q /( LMTDcorrected)*(1/(1/hS + Do/(Di.ht) + Rtube)) + fshell + ftube)

.
∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ ℎ
.
∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ ℎ
Where ∆𝑃 and ∆𝑃 are shell and tube allowable pressure drops

Solve the following equations to obtain tube Reynold’s number and friction factor

f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2

Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))
where Nu = ℎ /.(kt/Di)(μt/μt, w)0.14
after obtaining Re iterate this Re till ht calculated = ht solved from the previous step.

𝑣 = Di.Re.ρt/μt
at = mt/(⍴t*vt*3600)
*
Nt = at/ π. ∗

Leff =A/(tn. π.Do*10 )

For laminar flow, ReT < 2300, Sieder and Tate correlation is used for Nusselt's nubmer.
Leff = L - 2*Ls , where Leff is effective tube length
Nu = 1.86(ReT.PrT.Di/Leff)1/3

For turbulent flow, ReT > 10,000, following equation developed by Petukhov-Kirillov can be
used.

Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))
f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2

For transient flow, Nusselt number can be interpolated from Nu Laminar & Nu Turbulent.

ht = Nu.(kt/Di)(μt/μt, w)0.14
if ht = ht.solved stop iteration, else change Re accordingly and start over.

Now you’ve calculated Tube length, Number of baffles, Ret and Vt and tube count.

c. Iterate!
1. Estimate Shell diameter from the tube count. If it didn’t change proceed, if changed repeat from
initialization with a new shell diameter accordingly.
2. Calculate ∆𝑃 If it didn’t change from your allowable shell pressure drop proceed, if it changed repeat
from initialization with a new baffle cut accordingly.
3. If no baffle cut % achieved ∆𝑃 start from initialization with a new number of passes.

If A, ht and ∆𝑃 as assumed/calculated then hs and ∆𝑃 should match your assumptions/requirement.

3.2 Kern Preliminary Design[4]:

1. Establish physical properties of fluids at the caloric or arithmetic mean temperature, depending
upon the temperature range and order of magnitude of the properties.
2. Establish the heat duty of the exchanger.
3. Estimate or assume a specific unit and define its size and characteristics, based upon reasonable
values of overall U and ΔTLMTD.
4. Determine the ΔTLMTD with correction if needed.
5. Assume Uservice
6. Calculate the area required.
Q calculated Kcal ℎ𝑟
A (m ) =
U kcal m . hr. °C ∗ corrected LMTD
7. Calculate number of tubes from
N = Area / πDoL ∗ n
8. Calculate the tube-side velocity based upon the calculated number of tubes per pass and the
heat balance.
9. Determine the tube-side film coefficient.
𝐷
ℎ = ℎ ∗ ( )
𝐷

10. Determine the shell-side film coefficient for an assumed baffle spacing.
 a. Calculate De and Gs.
b. Calculate the Reynolds number, Re, expressed as
𝑅𝑒 = 𝐷 .𝐺 S / 𝜇

c. Calculate ho from
.
𝐷𝑒 𝐷𝑒. 𝐺𝑠 𝐶𝑝. µ µ .
ℎ ∗ = 0.36 . .( )
𝑘 µ 𝑘 µ

d. If ho appears too low, assume closer baffle spacing, up to 1/5 of the shell diameter and
recalculate Gs and ho. If this second trial is obviously too low, then a larger shell size
may be indicated; therefore, return to step 3, re-evaluate the assumed U to be certain
that is attainable.
11. If the ho appears to have possibilities of satisfying the design, continue to a conclusion by
assuming the tube-side and shell-side fouling and calculate U overall.
12. Compare values calculated in steps 10 and 5. If the calculated Uoverall is too small, re-assume a
new lower U for step 5 or try closer baffle spacing in step 9 but do not get baffles closer than 1/5
the shell I.D.
13. Calculate the percent of over Design. A reasonable figure is 10–20%.
14. Calculate the shell-side pressure drop. If p is too high, reassume U (step 3).
15. Calculate the tube-side pressure drop.

If the tube-side pressure drop exceeds a critical allowable value for the process system, then recheck by
either lowering the flow rate and changing the temperature levels or reassuming a unit with fewer
passes on tube-side or more tubes per pass. The unit must then be rechecked for the effect of changes
on heat transfer performance. The following figure illustrates the influence of various geometrical
parameters on heat exchanger heat transfer and pressure drop.
 Need to Increase U

Increase hi and ho Increase A

Decrease Increase Ds with Employ multiple

Increase number Increase L appropriate shells in series or
of tubes. baffle spacing
number of tubes parallel
Decrease Do or baffle cut

Increase F

Use counter flow configuration

Use multiple shell configuration

Need to reduce pressure drop

Tube side Shell side

Decrease Increase Do Decrease L Use

and Increase Increase Increase
number of Increase double or
Ds and baffle tube
tube passes
baffle cut triple
number of spacing pitch
segmental
tubes
baffles

Source 4: Petroleum refining Design and applications handbook, vol 4

Source 4: Petroleum refining Design and applications handbook, vol 4
Quick notes on Heat exchangers’ Sizing [7] Tube Design
Construction  A good design will make full use of
1. Fixed tubesheet allowable pressure drop as this
 Low cost will yield the highest heat transfer
coefficient.
 Leakage of shell-side is minimum
 h = 0.027(DGs/μ)0.8(Cp.μ)0.33(k/D)
 Bundle is fixed into shell and can’t be
removed; the outside of the tubes can’t  h α μ-0.47
be cleaned mechanically.  h α k0.67
 Limited to clean services  h α Gs0.8
 Not suitable for large temperature  ∆P α Gs2
differentials between the tubes and  Increasing mass velocity increases
shell. h but rapidly also increases ∆P
2. U-Tube  Very high velocity may lead to
 The lower cost for the single tube-sheet erosion, liquid min velocity 1 m/s
is offset by the bending of the tubes and while max. is 2.5-3 m/s.
larger shell diameter.  If number of passes is increased
 Insides of tubes can’t be cleaned from 2 to 4 (doubled), velocity
effectively. also doubles ∆P2 = ∆P1*23
 Should not be used for dirty tube  With an increase in the number of
services inside tubes tube passes, h increases but tube-
3. Floating Head side pressure drop rises steeply.
 most versatile and costliest  Other options is to increase ht is to
 permits free expansion of tubes increase number of tubes,
 can be used for both shell and tube dirty decrease tubes diameter decrease
services tube length while increasing shell
diameter and number of tubes.
 prone to leakage, limited where shell-
side is non-hazardous and non-toxic with  Tubes smaller than ¾“ shouldn’t
moderate pressure and temperatures be used for fouling services. The
use of smaller diameter ½” only
warranted for small shell areas 20-
30 m2 .
 Step-wise calculations for viscous liquids arrangement where a large
temperature cross can be achieved.
 When the variation in tube-side
inlet/outlet viscosity is pronounced, a  TEMA J: a divided-flow shell
single point calculation for ht and ∆Pt wherein the shell-side fluid enters
gives unrealistic results. the shell at the center and divides
into two halves, one flowing to the
 Particularly true when variation in cases
left and the other to the right and
where a combination of turbulent and
leaving separately, they’re then
laminar flow (Re variation hence ht
combined into a single stream( J 1-2
variation).
shell). Alternatively, the stream
 In such cases it’s advised to perform
may split into two halves that enter
step-wise calculations.
the shell at the two ends, flow
Shell-side Design toward the center and leave as a
Shell selection single stream ( J 2-1 shell)
 TEMA G: shell is a split-flow shell.
 TEMA E: most common, shell-side enters
This construction is usually
from one end and leaves from the other.
employed for horizontal thermo-
 TEMA F: two-pass shell that has a syphon reboilers. There is only a
longitudinal baffle that divides shell into central support plate and no
two passes, shell-side fluid enters at one baffles.
end, traverses the entire length of the
 Can’t be used with heat exchangers
exchanger through one-half the shell
with tube lengths higher than 3 m,
cross-sectional area, turns around and
since this would exceed the
flows through the second pass, then
maximum unsupported tube length
finally leaves at the end of the second
limit specified by TEMA.
pass.
 TEMA H: When larger tube length is
 Used for temperature-cross
needed.
situations – that is, the cold stream
 Basically two G shells placed side by
leaves at a temperature higher than
side, so that there are two full
the outlet temperature. If two-pass F
support plates. Described as double
shell has only two tube passes, this
split configuration as the flow is
becomes a true countercurrent
split twice and recombined twice.
  Invariably employed for horizontal  Rotated triangular pattern offer
thermosyphon reboilers. no valuable advantage over a
 Pressure drop is drastically less and there triangular pattern
are no cross baffles for both H and G.  Square pattern is typically
 TEMA X: pure cross-flow shell where the employed for dirty services.
shell side fluid enters, flows across the  Produces less turbulence hence
tubes and exits from the opposite side of lower hs. when Re is less than 2,000
the shell. rotated square is employed as it
 Pressure drop is extremely low. offers higher turbulence
 Employed for cooling or condensing vapors
Tube pitch
at low pressure, particularly vacuum. Full
support plates can be located if needed for  For triangular pattern, minimum
structural integrity. pitch ratio recommended by
 TEMA K: employed for kettle reboilers. TEMA is 1.25.
 Has an integral vapor-disengagement  For square pattern, minimum
space embodied in an enlarged shell. pitch ratio recommended by
 Full support plates can be located if TEMA is 1.25 or pitch = OD + 6
needed for structural integrity. mm whichever larger.
 Minimizing tube pitch minimizes
Tube layout patterns shell diameter and higher tube
 Triangular (or rotated triangular) will pitch reduce shell side pressure
accommodate more tubes than square (or drop.
rotated square.
Baffling
 Triangular pattern produces more
turbulence hence higher hs. Baffle spacing
 However, at typical tube pitch ratio of 1.25  Minimum baffle spacing specified
it doesn’t permit mechanical cleaning of by TEMA is 1/5 shell diameter or
tubes, since access lanes are available. 2” (50.8 mm) whichever greater.
 Triangular pattern is limited to clean shell-  Closer baffling causes poor bundle
side services but may used for dirty shell- penetration by the shell-side fluid,
side services provided that chemical difficulty in mechanical cleaning
cleaning is suitable and effective. and poor stream distribution.
 Baffle cut
 Maximum baffle spacing is shell  Baffle cut can vary between 15 -
inside diameter. Higher baffle 45 % of the shell inside diameter.
space leads to predominantly  It’s recommended to employ
longitudinal flow, which is less baffle cut between 20 and 35%.
efficient than cross flow, and  Horizontal baffle cut is
larger unsupported tube spans, recommended for single phase
which makes the exchanger prone fluids on shell-side as this
to tube failure due to flow- minimizes accumulation of
induced vibration. deposits at the bottom of the shell
 hs α v0.6-0.7 for Re > 1,000 and also prevents stratification.
 ∆P α v1.7-2.0  In case of two pass shell (TEMA F),
 hs α v0.33for Re < 1,00 a vertical cut is preferred for ease
 ∆P α v1.0 of fabrication and bundle
 When a baffle space in reduced, assembly.
higher velocity resulted leads to
Equalize cross-flow and window
reduction in pressure drop higher
velocities
than the ratio of heat transfer
increase.  The window velocity and cross-
 Optimum ration of baffle cut to velocity should be as close as
shell inside diameter is between possible – preferably within 20%
0.3 and 0.6 of each other.
 If they differ more than that ,
repeated acceleration and
deceleration take place along the
length of the tube bundle,
 resulting in inefficient conversion following parameters will affect
of pressure drop to heat transfer stream analysis and therby the
shell-side performance:
Shell-side stream analysis
1. Baffle spacing and baffle cut
2. Tube layout angle and tube
pitch
3. Number of lanes in the flow
direction and lane width
4. Clearance between the tube
and the baffle hole.
5. Clearance between the shell ID
and the baffle
 Stream A: fairly efficient, because 6. Location of sealing strips and
the shell side is in contact with the sealing rods
tubes.  Very low baffle spacing (or low
 Stream B: highly effective (main baffle cut%) tends to increase the
stream) leakage and by-pass streams as it
 Stream C: Fairly efficient, as increases resistance to main
stream C is in contact with the stream B.
peripheral tubes around the
Reducing ∆Ps by modifying baffle
bundle.
design
 Stream F: Fairly efficient, as
stream F is in contact with the Single pass shell and single
tubes along the pass-partition segmental baffles
lanes.  If ∆Ps is too high even after
increasing baffle space and baffle
 Stream E: Almost encounters no
cut% to highest values
heat transfer at all since stream
recommended, double segmental
flows along the shell wall where
baffles should be considered.
there are no tubes.
 Since the flow fraction depend Single pass shell and double
strongely upon the path segmental baffles
resistances, varying any of the
 Shifting from single segmental  Offers 4% reduction of an identical
baffle to double segmental baffle single pass exchanger but also
directly reduce cross flow velocity 40% reduction in hs.
to half, because shell flow is
No-tube-in-window segmental
divided into two parallel flows,
baffle
this greatly reduces ∆Pc.
 However, ∆Pw can’t be reduced  As baffle spacing increases to
appreciably (assuming that reduce ∆Ps, the heat exchanger
maximum recommended baffle becomes more prone to tube
cut is already reached for the failure due to flow-induced
single segmental baffle cut. But vibration.
overall there is a significant  Double segmental baffles are less
reduction in ∆Ps. likely to experience such
 There will be also a reduction in hs problems.
as cross velocity decreases but a  If these problems persist, No-
reduction lower than ∆Ps. tube-in-window segmental baffle
could be used so that the
Divided-flow shell and single- unsupported span is the baffle
segmental baffles
spacing.
 If allowable ∆Ps can’t be reached  The tube-in-window requires a
even with double segmental larger shell diameter for a given
baffles. A divided flow shell (TEMA number of tubes, escalating the
J) with single segmental baffles cost by 10%.
should be considered next, it  The higher cost is offset by the
should have approx. 1/8 ∆Ps of an higher hs since pure cross flow (no
identical single pass exchanger parallel co-current) is more
(1/23). efficient.
 Offers larger reduction in ∆Ps than
double segmental baffle as
velocity is reduced both in
window and in cross flow.
Divided-flow shell and double-
segmental baffles
 Cross flow shell since there are no other
parameters that can be modified.
 When ∆Ps is very low TEMA X is
used where pure cross flow is Mean Temperature difference
employed with very low velocities.
 Ft for pure countercurrent flow =1,
 Support plates will be needed to
1-2 shell and tube heat exchanger
meet TEMA requirements and
is normally lower as some of flow
prevent any induced tube
is co-current.
vibration and since they’re parallel
 Ft is recommended to be not less
to shell-side flow ∆Ps isn’t increase
than 0.8.
Increasing Tube pitch  Increasing number of shells
 As far as thermal hydraulics are increase Ft, multipule shells must
concerned, The optimum tube- be used if temperature cross
pitch-to-tube-diameter ratio for exists (cold steam outlet is higher
conversion of pressure drop to than hot stream outlet).
heat transfer is 1.25-1.35 for  It’s important to realize that LMTD
turbulent flow and 1.4 for laminar and Ft factor concept assumes
flow. that there is no significant
 Increasing tube pitch to reduce variation in the overall heat-
∆Ps isn’t generally recommended transfer coefficient along the
as: length of the shell. However,
1. It increases shell diameter there are some services where
(additional cost) this is not true (e.g.: cooling of a
2. Reducing ∆Ps by increasing viscous liquid, phase change
baffle spacing, baffle cut or applications…etc.) in this case, the
changing shell type will result simplistic overall MTD approach
in a cheaper design. “End points” will be inaccurate
and the exchanger must be
 In case of X shells, it may be
broken into several sections and
necessary to increase the tube
the calculations performed zone-
pitch above the TEMA minimum
wise “weighted average”.
to meet pressure drop limitations,
 Temperature profile distortion  Since each of the shell-side
streams has a different
 effectiveness for heat transfer, an empirical equation was
and since mixing developed for δ of the form:
of these streams in the shell is
incomplete, each stream exhibits a
different temperature profile
along the exchanger.
Where,
 The cross-flow stream (B) is the
Ta = inlet temperature of shell-
most effective for heat transfer,
side fluid
and therefore its temperature
profile lies closest to that of the Tb = outlet temperature
tube-side fluid, resulting in the shellside fluid
lowest driving force Ta = inlet temperature of tube-
for heat transfer. The least side fluid
effective stream for heat transfer mE/mo = fraction of stream E
is the shell-to-baffle leakage ReB = Reynold’s number for the
stream (E), which also experiences B stream
the least amount of mixing with  Conditions favoring high
the other streams. Hence, it leakage flow rates and low
experiences the largest driving Reynolds numbers (hence,
force for heat transfer. low δ) are high shell-side fluid
 The net result of these different viscosity and small baffle
temperature profiles is that the
spacing.
mean temperature difference in
the exchanger can be less than  The effect of temperature
that calculated using the profile distortion can be
logarithmic mean temperature mitigated by using multiple
difference (LMTD) correction shells in series because the
factor, which does not take shell-side fluid becomes well
account of these effects. This mixed as it exits one shell and
phenomenon is referred to as enters the next.
temperature profile distortion.  The minimum recommended
△Tmean = δF(△Tln)cf δ is 0.75. Below this, two or
δ ranges from 0 to 1.0. more shell in series must be
Q = UAδF(△Tln)cf employed
Other factors
“β” is the baffle cut factor, which accounts for non-crossflow patterns
caused by too small or too large a baffle cut. If the baffle cut is not
adequacy, the fraction of crossflow is decreased. It is recommended that β
is more than 0.9, and it should be checked by the HTRI program.
Another two corrections hereunder are considered. Refer to HTRI Design
Manual.
(*1) tube row effect, accounts for number of tube rows in crossflow.
(*2) boundary layer overlap correction in single-phase laminar flow for
finned tubes.
 Useful tables for your trials[5]
r2 = (f). r1[2] ∆P2 = (f). ∆P2[2]
Variable[1] Flow Regime
Shell (f) Tube (f) Shell (f) Tube (f)
0.27
Viscosity Turbulent (μ2 /μ1) (μ2 /μ1)0.47 (μ2 /μ1) 0.15
(μ2 /μ1)0.2
Viscosity bulk to 𝜇 𝜇 .
Streamline . (μ2 /μ1)
wall correction 𝜇 𝜇
Thermal
Turb. Or Streamline (k1 /k2)0.67 (k1 /k2)0.67
conductivity
Sp. heat Capacity Turb. Or Streamline (Cp1 /Cp2)0.33 (Cp1 /Cp2)0.33
Mass velocity or ṁ Turbulent (G1 /G2)0.6 (G1 /G2)0.8 (G2 /G1)1.85 (G2 /G1)1.8
Streamline (G1 /G2)0.6 (G1 /G2)0.33 (G2 /G1)
Density Turb. Or Streamline (ρ1/ ρ2) (ρ1/ ρ2)
Tube diameter Turbulent (Do2 / Do1)0.4 (Di2 / Di1)0.2 (Do1 / Do2)0.15 (Di1 / Di2)1.2
Tube diameter Streamline (Di2 / Di1)0.33 (Di1 / Di2)2
Tube length Streamline (L2 /L1)0.33
Tube passes Turb. Or Streamline (Np2/ Np1)

No. baffle spaces Turb. Or Streamline SP2/SP1

No. tube rows
RC2/RC1
crossed[3]
Source 9: GPSA section 9: heat exchangers

[1] Use consistent units for any one variable in both cases
[2] F is the ratio of the new value to the old value for a given variable. The overall f is the
product of the individual fs.
[3] Number of rows of tubes exposed to cross flow (as opposed to parallel flow). This
Number is determined by baffle and bundle geometry.
[4] (hi/h2) = r2/ r1
.
ℎ 𝑟 𝜇 . 𝑘 . 𝐶 𝐺 . 𝐷 .
= = . . . .
ℎ 𝑟 𝜇 𝑘 𝐶 𝐺 𝐷
. . .
∆𝑃 𝜇 𝜌 𝑁 𝐺 𝐷
== . . . .
∆𝑃 𝜇 𝜌 𝑁 𝐺 𝐷

Note: Check for the lowest h in your calculations it should be the dominating factor
and the most factor that would influence your overall U.
 Methods to improve the flow fraction
To increase “B” fraction, “A”, “C”, “E” and “F” fractions should be decreased by the following methods:
Method ＼ Fraction A C E F
Enlargement of baffle spacing Effective Effective
Increasing baffle cut Effective Effective
Decreasing tube-to-baffle clearance(*1) Effective
Installation of sealing strips Effective
Installation of seal rods Effective
Change of tube passes arrangement Effective
Change of baffle cut orientation Effective
NOTE(*1): Refer to TEMA RCB-4.2 with regard to standard its clearance
The recommended limitation about flow fractions are shown hereunder:
B stream : For turbulent flow; Min. 50%, For laminar flow; Min. 40%
C stream : Max. 10%
E stream : Max. 15%
F stream : Max 20%, preferably 15% or below
Guidelines to be kept in mind
The dynamic head, ρV2(*1), is a limitation to prevent or minimize erosion of the tube bundle,
and is used as a guideline for the necessity for impingement protection devices. Impingement
protection devices should be provided when ρV2 through the inlet nozzle exceeds the
following:
Non corrosive, non-abrasive, single-phase fluid: 2230 (kg/m-sec 2)
All other liquids, including a liquid at its bubble point: 740 (kg/m-sec 2)
Note(*1): ρ is the fluid density, and V is the linear velocity of fluid. For two-phase fluid, the
mean density should be calculated assuming a homogeneous vapor-liquid mixture.
The allowable baffle cut range for each baffle style is as follows:
Segmental: 10～49% (single phase: recommended 25%, 10-15 accepted)
Double segmental: 10～30%
Triple segmental: 10～40%
Segmental NTIW: 15～30%
Minimum spacing[2]
Segmental baffles normally should not be spaced closer than 1/5 of the shell inside diameter, or
50 mm, whichever is greater. This is the design practice specified by TEMA.
Max. spacing[2]
Baffle or support plates should be spaced such that the unsupported tube span does not exceed
the values
Table: TEMA Maximum Unsupported Tube Spans

Tube materials and temperature limits (°C)

Carbon Steel / Other alloy (400) Aluminum, Aluminum alloys
Tube O.D. Low alloy (455) Copper, Copper alloys
Copper-Nickel (316) Titanium, Titanium alloy
Nickel (454), Ni-Cr-Fe Alloy (538) (at code max. allow temp.)
19.0 or 19.05mm 1,525 mm 1,320 mm
25.0 or 25.4 mm 1,880 mm 1,625 mm
The effective temperature difference △TLMTD[2]
The effective temperature difference should be greater than 5.6 "C (10°F)
Minimum temperature approach
Recommended minimum temperature approach for shell and tube exchangers is 10 oC
Cooling water (Cooling tower water and sea water) [2]
(a) Cooling water is usually routed through the tube side of an exchanger
(b) The velocity of the cooling water in the shell side should be 0.6m/sec or more. A
higher velocity is desirable, but exchangers should be designed without causing flow-
induced vibration problems.
Tube Material Cooling Tower Water (CTW) Sea Water (SW)
Carbon steel Stainless steel 0.9~ Not used
Admiralty brass Aluminum brass 0.9∼2.4 0.9∼2.4 (*1)
Aluminum bronze Not used 0.9∼3.0
Copper-nickel 70 - 30 0.9∼4.6 0.9∼2.9
Copper-nickel 90 - 10 0.9∼3.7 0.9∼2.0
Monel 1.8∼ 1.8∼
Titanium 1.2∼ 1.2∼
Table 1: Recommended Cooling Water Velocity in Tubes (m/sec)

NOTE(*1): If sea water is not treated with an effective iron ion, the maximum water
velocity should be less than the following conditions: 1.2m/sec for admiralty brass,
1.8m/sec for Aluminum brass. Engineers should confirm the sea water supply
conditions.
(c) To reduce the tendency to foul, the maximum allowable outlet temperature for
cooling water is limited as follows:
SW: 50°C
CTW: 60°C
(d) Another important criterion is the film temperature on the tube surface including a
fouling layer. If the film temperature exceeds the following conditions, severe fouling
could result.
SW: 65°C
CTW: 70°C
Slurry handling[3]
25.0 mm O.D. or larger tubes should be used to prevent plugging of the tubes with
slurry “chunks”, and not less than 12 BWG thickness because of the possibility of
erosion that may occur at the higher velocities.

Velocity limitations (m/sec)

Max. Min
2.44 1.37
Tube side velocities[3]
 Tube side velocity for most materials and services should be held between 1.3 – 2.5
m/s
 Belo 1 to 1.2 m/s fouling may be excessive, much above 2.5 m/s erosion can become
a problem
Design margin[3]
10% design margin is recommended

4. Tool assumptions
1. Flow is steady and isothermal, and fluid properties are independent of time.
2. Fluid density is dependent on the local temperature only or is treated as constant
3. The pressure at a point in the fluid is independent of direction.
4. There are no energy sinks or sources along the streamline; flow stream mechanical
energy dissipation is idealized as zero.
5. The friction factor is considered constant with passage flow length.
6. Tube wall temperature viscosity effect is negligible.
7. Single phases for both shell and tube (two phases to be added soon)

For Bell-Delaware method:

1. Leff = L - 2*Ls , where Leff is effective tube length in mm for fixed tube sheet
2. Ls = 0.1* Ds
𝑁𝑡𝑐𝑐
3. Nss = 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟
6
4. DSB = 3.1+0.004* Ds
5. LTB = 0.4 mm
6. DotL = Ds - (12.5+( Ds /200))
References
1. Process Heat transfer, Kern.
2. JGC standard practice “Shell & tube Exchangers” JGS 210-120-1-24E
3. TOTAL process engineering design manual
4. Petroleum Refining Design and applications, vol. 4, A. Kayode Coker
5. GPSA Engineering Data Book Section 9 (Heat exchangers)
6. Rapid Design Algorithms for Shell-and-tube and Compact Heat Exchangers, Graham
Polley.
7. Effectively design shell-and-tube heat exchanges, Rajiv Mukherjee.
8. Energy and Process Optimization for the Process Industries, Frank Zhu.
9. Energy Management and Efficiency for the Process Industries, Alan P. Rossiter, Beth P.
Jones.
10. Applied Heat Transfer and Heat Exchangers, Aramco Engineering Encyclopedia
11. Process Heat Transfer Principles and Applications, Robert W. serth.
Other Recommended Readings and resources

1. Chemical process engineering by A. Kayode Coker vol 2 (present the manual calculations
of heat exchangers in different cases and compares results with commercial software.
Overall, an excellent book, worth checking out and should be added to your library)
 2. Monitoring the Thermal Efficiency of Fouled Heat Exchangers: A Simplified Method, M.
A. S. Jerónimo et al
3. Data Reconciliation and Fouling Analysis in Heat Exchanger Network, Ahmad Nuruddin
bin Abdul Aziz.
4. Optimization of operating conditions for mitigating fouling in heat exchanger networks,
C. Rodriguez and R. Smith.
Resources
1. Bell-Delaware Calculations excel sheet
2. Kern Calculations excel sheet
3. NTU calculations excel sheet
 Preliminary Design Example
Kern Method [4] page: 291
Use Kern’s Method to obtain a preliminary design for the following conditions
Kerosene API 42, 25,000 kg/hr (Shell side)
Crude oil API 34, 85,000 kg/hr (Tube side)
Kerosene Inlet Average Outlet
o
Temperature C 200 145 90
o
Specific heat kJ/kg. C 2.72 2.47 2.26
Thermal conductivity W/m. oC 0.13 0.132 0.135
Density Kg/m3 690 730 770
-2
Viscosity mNsm 0.22 0.43 0.8
Crude Oil
o
Temperature C 79 59.5 40
Specific heat kJ/kg. oC 2.09 2.05 2.01
o
Thermal conductivity W/m. C 0.133 0.134 0.135
Density Kg/m3 800 820 840
-2
Viscosity mNsm 2.4 3.2 4.3
Assumptions:
Uservice = 350 W/m2. oC
Length = 5000 mm, Do = 19.05 mm, Di = 14.83 mm, triangular pitch 30o, pitch ratio = 1.25
Allowable ∆Ps = 0.9 bar, ∆Pt = 0.9 bar,
Output
Table: input for tool was only S.G and temperatures.

Parameter Units Coker’s [1] Commercial Tool Tool

software kern Polley
Surface Area m2 77.64 50.2 82.85 54.84
hs coefficient 1325.69 1510.3 1237.35 1857.4
ht coefficient 1555 1543.8 901.1 2489.5
Uservice W/m2. oC 350 736.2 315.87 561.760
Uclean W/m2. oC 508.9 472.27 413.26
Udirty W/m2. oC 440 508.2 365 420.88
Over Design % 25.7 1 13.53 -1.8
Over surface % 45 49.51 33.4
∆Ps Kg/cm2 0.7 bar 0.74 0.4 0.86
∆Pt Kg/cm2 0.96 bar 0.329 0.41 0.93
Length mm 5000 4876.8 5000 7159
Number of tubes - 260 181 213 128
Tube diameter mm 19.05 19.05 25.4 19.05
Tube thickness mm 2.11 2.11 2.11 2.11
Tube pitch mm 23.81 23.81 31.75 23.81
Ds mm 522 438.15 627 348.3
Number of passes - 4 6 4 2
Baffle spacing mm 104.32 215.9 125.4 79.67
Baffle cut % 25 38.04 25 14
Q = ṁCp∆T =(25,000/3600)*247(200-90) = 1886.8 kw
∆TLMTD = = 80.34 ˚𝐶
( )

P= = 0.2437, R = = 2.82
F = 0.8673 , ∆TCMTD= F * ∆TLMTD = 69.43
Q=UA∆TCMTD , A = Q/U∆TCMTD = 1886.8 x 103/(350x69.43) = 77.64 m2
Nt = A/πDoL = 77.64/(3.14x0.01905x5) = 259.46 (Say 260)
Tube cross sectional area = Ac = πDi2/4 = π(0.01483)2/4 = 0.0001727 m2
Area per pass = Nt/pnAc =(260/2x0.0001727)= 0.02246 m2
Gs = Wh/ρ = 85,000/3600*820= 0.02879 m3/s
Tube velocity = ut = 0.02879/0.02246 = 1.28 m/s
Estimate Shell diameter
From table 8.46 for two passes K1 = 0.249 , n1 = 2.207
.
𝐷 =𝐷 ∗ = 19.05 ∗ = 444 mm
.
Clearance is between 50 to 80 mm for split-ring floating head
Choose C= 56 mm, Ds = 444 +56 = 500 mm
∗ . ∗ .
𝑅 = = = 4864
. ∗
. ∗ ∗ . ∗
Pr= Cpμ/k = =48.96
.
Re= 4864, L/di =5000/14.84 = 337, from figure 8.55 the friction factor Jh
Jh = 3.5 x 10
Nu = Jh Re Pr 0.33(μ/μw)0.14
.
= 𝐽 𝑅𝑒𝑃𝑟 .
, assume negligible μ/μw
ℎ = 3.5 x 10 (0.134/0.01483)(4864)(48.96)0.33=555.48 W/m2. oC
In order to increase hi , tube passes is doubled, this will halve cross sectional area and double
the tube velocity.
ut = 2 x 1.28 = 2.56 m/s
Re = 2 x 4864 = 9728, Jh = 4.9 x 10
hi= 4.9 x 10 (0.134/0.01483)(9728)(48.96)0.33= 1555 W/m2. oC √√
From table 8.46 for two passes K1 = 0.175 , n1 = 2.285
.
𝐷 =𝐷 ∗ = 19.05 ∗ = 465.6 mm
.
Ds = 465.6 +56 = 521.6 mm
Baffle spacing trials
B = Ds/5 = 521.6/5 = 104.32
( ) . .
Shell flow area = = 𝑥522𝑥144 = 10853.04 mm2 =0.01853 m2
.
.
Equivalent shell diameter = De = (𝑝 − 0.913𝑑 ) =13.53 mm
Gs = Wh/ρ = 25,000/3600*730= 0.00951 m3/s
Shell velocity = us = 0.00951/0.01853 = 0.51 m/s
∗ . ∗ .
𝑅 = = = 11,714
. ∗
. ∗ ∗ . ∗
Pr= Cpμ/k = = 8.17
.
-3
jh= 5.8 x 10
.
Nu = = 𝐽 𝑅𝑒𝑃𝑟 .

ho= 5.8 x 10 (0.132/0.01353)(11,714)(8.17)0.33= 1325.69 W/m2. oC

Uclean and Udirty
𝑑
1 1 𝑑 𝑑 ln 1
𝑑
= + +
𝑈 ℎ 𝑑 2𝑘 ℎ
19.05
1 1 19.05 1 19.05 0.001905 ln 1
=( + 0.00035) + + 14.83 +
𝑈 1555 14.83 ℎ 14.83 2 ∗ 55 1325.69

𝑑
1 1 𝑑 1 𝑑 𝑑 ln 1
𝑑
= + + + +𝑅
𝑈 ℎ 𝑑 ℎ 𝑑 2𝑘 ℎ
19.05
1 1 19.05 1 19.05 0.001905 ln 1
= + 0.00035 + + 14.83 + + 0.0002
𝑈 1555 14.83 ℎ 14.83 2 ∗ 55 1325.69
= 440 W/m2. oC
Over Design = ∗ 100% = 25.7%
Pressure drops
Tube pressure drop
𝐿 μ ρv
∆Pt = 𝑁 8𝐽 + 2.5
𝐷 μ 2
=4[8x4.8x10 x337.15+2.5]820x2.56 /2 =96443.9 N/m2 = 0.96 bar
-3 2

Shell pressure drop

𝐿 𝐿 ρv μ .
∆Ps = 8𝑗 8𝐽
𝐷 𝐵 2 μ
=8[4.8x10 x(522/13.75)(5000/104)(730x0.512/2)] =66537.87 N/m2 = 0.7 bar
-2
Bell Delaware (Polley’s Method) [6]
Use Bell Delaware’s Method to obtain a preliminary design for the following conditions

Parameter Unit Shellside Tubeside

Flow rate Kg/hr 22.4*3600 77.96*3600
Fluid density Kg/m3 740 1000
Heat Capacity J/kg.K 2407 4187
Viscosity cP 0.494 1
Thermal conductivity W/m.K 0.105 0.61
o
Inlet temperature C 100 7.1
o
Outlet temperature C 42.5 16.6
Allowable ∆P kPa 13.7 11.66
Dirt factor K.m2/W 0.0 0.0
Wall resistance K.m2/W 0.00003
Heat duty kW 3100

Geometry Unit Polley’s Tool

Do mm 16 15.88
Di mm 13.5 13.4
Tube layout Degree 30 30
Tube pitch mm 20.8 20.64
Baffle/shell clearance mm 5.5 5.366
Tube/baffle clearance mm 0.5 0.4 “assumed”
Bundle/shell clearance mm 10 15.33
Output
Parameter Units Polley’s Tool
Geometry
Ds mm 563 566.6067
Tube length mm 1815 1721.38016
Baffle cut % 29.3 26
Baffle spacing mm 253 190.57
No. of baffles - 6 8
No. of tubes - 574 677
No. of tube passes - 2 2
Installed area m2 52.3 58.14
Required area m2 52.3 50.55
Performance
Shellside Re - 21,398 27,211.4
Shellside ∆P kPa 13.7 15.95
Tubeside ∆P kPa 11.69 19.6
Shellside Coeff. W/m2. oC 1406 2124.5
Tubeside Coeff. W/m2. oC 6641 6380.67
Udirty W/m2. oC 1088 982
1. Initialization
Assume exchanger with shell diameter Ds = 387 m, baffle cut=25%, 6 m length, 2 passes for the
following heat exchanger:
Geometry Unit Value
Do mm 16
Di mm 13.5
Tube layout Degree 30
Tube pitch mm 20.8
Baffle/shell clearance mm 5.5
Tube/baffle clearance mm 0.5
Bundle/shell clearance mm 10

a. Estimate the number of tubes that could fit in your shell diameter
b. Estimate shell Reynold’s number
θDS = 2cos-1(1 - 2Bc/100)
θCTL = 2cos-1(Ds(1 - 2*Bc/100)/DCTL)
FW = (θCTL - Sin(θCTL))/2π
SWG = (Ds²/8)(θDS - Sin(θDS))
SWT = Nt.FW(πDo²/4)
SW = SWG - SWT
Based on the assumption that baffle spacing is same as baffle cut area
Sm = SW
GW = mS/(Sm.SW)0.5
GS = mS/Sm
ReS = Do.GS / μS
c. Calculate shell heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop
Sm = B[(Ds - DOTL) + (DOTL - Do)(PT - Do)/PT,eff ] Di = Do – 2*thickness
PT,eff = PT for 30° and 90° layouts Ltb = 0.4
PT,eff = 0.707*PT for 45° layout
Ls= 0.1* Ds
GS = mS/Sm
ReS = Do.GS / μS Dsb = 3.1+0.004* Ds
PrS = CP,S.μS / kS Leff = L- 2* Ls
Dotl= Ds - (12.5+( Ds/200))
1.33
𝑗=𝑎 . (𝑅𝑒 )
𝑃
𝐷𝑜
𝑎
𝑎=
1 + 0.14(𝑅𝑒 )

µ .
ℎ = 𝑗. 𝐶 , . 𝐺 . (𝑃𝑟 ) . ( )
µ,

where, μS,W is shell side fluid viscosity at wall temperature.

a.1 Correction factor for Baffle Window Flow, JC
JC = 0.55 + 0.72FC
FC = 1 - 2FW
FW = (θCTL - Sin(θCTL))/2π
θCTL = 2cos-1(Ds(1 - 2*Bc/100)/DCTL)
DCTL = DOTL - Do

a.2 Correction factor for Baffle Leakage, JL

JL = 0.44(1-rS) + (1-0.44(1-rS))exp(-2.2rL)
rS = Ssb /(Ssb + Stb)
rL = (Ssb + Stb)/ Sm
Ssb = Ds*DSB(π - 0.5θDS)
Stb = (π/4)((Do+LTB)2 - Do2)Nt(1-FW)
θDS = 2cos-1(1 - 2Bc/100)

a.3 Correction factor for Bundle Bypass effects, J B

Ntcc = (Ds/Pp)(1 - 2Bc/100)
Pp = PT 30.5/2 for 30° layout
Pp = PT / 20.5 for 45° layout
Pp = PT for 90° layout
rss = Nss/ Ntcc
Sb = B(Ds - DOTL - Do/2)
JB = exp(-Cj(Sb / Sm)(1 - (2rss)1/3)) for rss < 0.5
JB = 1 for rss >= 0.5
Cj = 1.35 for ReS < 100
Cj = 1.25 for ReS >= 100

a.4 Correction factor for adverse temperature gradient, J R

Ntcw = (0.8/Pp)(Ds(Bc/100) - (Ds-(DOTL-Do))/2 )
NB = 1 + (int)(L - 2Ls - LBIn - LBOut)/B
NC = (Ntcw + Ntcc)(1 + NB)
JRL = (10/NC)0.18
JR = 1, ReS > 100
JR = JRL + (20-ReS)(JRL - 1)/80, ReS <= 100, ReS > 20
JR = JRL, ReS <= 20

a.5 Correction factor for unequal baffle spacing, J S

n1 = 0.6, ReS >= 100
n1 = 1/3, ReS < 100
JS = ((NB-1)+(LBIn/B)1-n1 + (LBOut/B)1-n1)/((NB-1)+(LBIn/B) + (LBOut/B))

Shell side heat transfer coefficient is calculated as

hs = hIdeal(JC.JL.JB.JS.JR)

1.33
𝑓=𝑏 . (𝑅𝑒 )
𝑃
𝐷𝑜

𝑏
𝑏=
1 + 0.14(𝑅𝑒 )
ΔPIdeal = 2f(GS²/ρS)(μS/μS,W)0.14 Ntcc

b.1 Correction factor for Baffle Leakage, RL

RL = exp(-1.33(1+rS)rLp)
p = 0.8 - 0.15(1+rS)

b.2 Correction factor for Bundle Bypass effect, R B

RB = exp(-Cr(Sb / Sm)(1 - (2rss)1/3)) for rss < 0.5
RB = 1 for rss >= 0.5
Cr = 4.5 for ReS < 100
Cr = 3.7 for ReS >= 100

b.3 Correction factor for unequal baffle spacing, RS

n = 0.2, ReS >= 100

n = 1.0, ReS < 100
RS = 0.5((B/LBIn)2-n + (B/LBOut)2-n)

1. Pressure drop for window section, ΔPW

Following terms are calculated as -

SWG = (Ds²/8)(θDS - Sin(θDS))

SWT = Nt.FW(πDo²/4)
SW = SWG - SWT
GW = mS/(Sm.SW)0.5
DW = 4.SW /(π.Do.Nt.FW + θDS.Ds)
SWG Gross window area, SWT Window area occupied with tubes, SW Net Cross flow area, Gw Mass velocity
baffle window, Dw Hydraulic diameter baffle window.

Pressure drop for laminar and turbulent flow is calculated.

ΔPW, Turb = NB.RL(2+0.6*Ntcw).GW²/(2.ρS)
26. 𝐺W. 𝐶 Ntcw 𝐵 𝐺W²
ΔPW, Laminar = NB.RL( + + )
ρS PT − D o D w ² ρS
ΔPW = ΔPW, Turb , ReS ≥ 100
ΔPW = ΔPW,Laminar , ReS < 100

2. Pressure drop in Central Baffle spaces

ΔPC = (NB - 1)ΔPIdeal.RL.RB

3. Pressure drop in entrance & exit baffle spaces

ΔPE = ΔPIdeal(1 + Ntcw/Ntcc).RB.RS

Shell side pressure drop is calculated as following

ΔPS = ΔPW + ΔPC + ΔPE
d. Calculate tube heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop
ReT = Di.v.ρt/μt
PrT = Cp,t.μt/kt
 For laminar flow, ReT < 2300, Sieder and Tate correlation is used for Nusselt's nubmer.
Nu = 1.86(ReT.PrT.Di/Leff)1/3
Leff = L - 2*Ls , where Leff is effective tube length

For turbulent flow, ReT > 10,000, following equation developed by Petukhov-Kirillov
can be used.

Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))
f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2

For transient flow, Nusselt number can be interpolated from Nu Laminar & Nu Turbulent.
ht = Nu.(kt/Di)(μt/μt, w)0.14

a. Tube Side Pressure Drop, ΔPt

ΔPt = (4.f.Leff.Np/Di + 4.Np)ρt.v²/2

ΔPs = 0.47 Kg/cm2, ΔPt =0.5159 Kg/cm2, hs =1061 W/m².°C, ht =7071

W/m².°C, A=48.147 m2

e. Calculate shell and tube constants from the following equations

.
∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ ℎ
.
∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ ℎ

ks = 1.912 , kt= 0.906

1. Solving for the allowable pressure drops

1. Solve the following non-linear equations to obtain the desired heat
transfer coefficients for both shell and tube and the required area (h s,ht
and A) that can achieve your allowable pressure drops for both shell and
tubes

𝐴= Q /( LMTDcorrected)*(1/(1/hS + Do/(Di.ht) + Rtube)) + fshell + ftube)

∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ ℎ .
→ 11.66 = kt*(ht )3.5→ ht = 908 W/m².°C

∆𝑃 = 𝑘 ∗ ℎ .
→ 13.7 = ks*(hs )4.412→ hs = 6335 W/m².°C

A = 64.74 m2

Where ∆𝑃 and ∆𝑃 are shell and tube allowable pressure drops

Solve the following equations to obtain tube Reynold’s number and friction
factor
Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))
f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2
where Nu = ℎ /.(kt/Di)(μt/μt, w)0.14
after obtaining Re iterate this Re till ht calculated = ht solved from the
previous step.
𝑣 = Di.Re.ρt/μt
at = mt/(⍴t*vt*3600)
Nt = at/ π. ∗

Leff =A/(tn. π.Do)

For laminar flow, ReT < 2300, Sieder and Tate correlation is used for Nusselt's nubmer.

Nu = 1.86(ReT.PrT.Di/Leff)1/3
Leff = L - 2*Ls , where Leff is effective tube length

For turbulent flow, ReT > 10,000, following equation developed by Petukhov-Kirillov
can be used.

Nu = (f/2)ReT.PrT/(1.07+12.7(f/2)0.5(PrT2/3-1))
f = (1.58 ln(ReT) - 3.28)-2

For transient flow, Nusselt number can be interpolated from Nu Laminar & Nu Turbulent.

ht = Nu.(kt/Di)(μt/μt, w)0.14
if ht = ht.solved stop iteration, else change Re accordingly and start over.

Re = 21866.32, ht =6376.52 W/m².°C , vt =1.631 m/s, at=0.047 m2/s,Leff =

1.72 m, Nt = 677
2. Iterate!
1. Estimate Shell diameter from the tube count. If it didn’t change proceed,
if changed repeat from initialization with a new shell diameter
accordingly.
Ds = 566.60
2. Calculate ∆𝑃 If it didn’t change from your allowable shell pressure drop
proceed, if it changed repeat from initialization with a new baffle cut
accordingly.
3. If no baffle cut % achieved ∆𝑃 start from initialization with a new
number of passes.

Baffle cut% = 26%

∆𝑃 = 0.196 Kg/cm2

NTU Method
For the previous example:
Fluid Data Hot Cold
Flowrate kg/s 22.4 78.0
Inlet Temperature °C 100.0 7.1
Specific Heat kJ/kg.°K 2.407 4.19

Exchanger Data
Heat Exchanger Type Shell & Tube - 1 Shell - 2,4, .. Tube Passes
Heat Transfer Coefficient kW/m².°K 1.09
Area m² 52.30
Solution
UA = 52.3*1.088 = 56.9 kW/°C
Cmin = 22.4*3600*2.407* 0.239006*1.163 = 53952.94 W/oC
Cmax = 78*3600*4.19*0.239006 *1.163 = 327039.1 W/ oC
Cr = Cmin/Cmax = 0.1652
NTU = UA/Cmin = 56.9/53.95 = 1.06
Qmax = Cmin(T1-t1) = (22.4*3600*2.407* 0.239006) * (100-7.1) = 4309741 kCal

2
𝜀= = 0.6177
1 + exp (−𝑁𝑇𝑈 1 + 𝐶 )
1+𝐶 + 1+𝐶
1 − exp (−𝑁𝑇𝑈 1 + 𝐶 )

Q = ε Qmax = 0.6177 * 4309741= 2662323 Kcal/hr

T2 = T1 -Q/m.Cp = 100 – 2662323/ 46391.18 = 42.6 oC

t2 = t1 +Q/m.Cp = 7.1 + 2662323/281203 = 16.6 oC

hence, exchanger would achieve the desired outlet temperatures.

 Oil fractions’ properties [Notes] Valid in the range of 50-300 F, otherwise
1. Density you may take viscosity at point 37.38 C and
Liquid [4] use the following one-point approximation
ρ = sg*1000*(1-α*((t*1.8+32)-60)) 2. From 1 viscosity point [7]
α: Thermal expansion coefficient c = -0.8696
API α ( oC-1) b= log10(µ37.38 ˚C; 1 atm )-c
14.9 0.00035 s = 0.2008*b+1.6180
34.9 0.0004 Log(µ) = (b/(1+((T-Tanalysis)/310.93))**s)+c
50.9 0.0005 µ: Viscosity in c.St
63.9 0.0006
3. From 2 viscosity points
78.9 0.0007
Solve the two points using the logarithmic
88.9 0.0008
93.9 0.00085 function
100 0.0009 A = (z2 – z1) / (x2 – x1)
Vapor B = z1 – a * x1
Molecular weight [1] x1, x2: temperature points
1⁄𝑀 = 0.0001644 ∗ 𝐴𝑃𝐼 − 0.000972 z1, z2: log of viscosity points
16.018463 ∗ 𝑚_𝑤𝑡 ∗ 𝑝 ∗ 14.7 µ = 10a (t+273.15) +b
⍴=
10.732 ∗ 𝑧 ∗ (𝑡 + 459.67) Vapor [7]
P: atm. ,t in o F ⍴: kg/m3 µOg=-0.0092696 +T0.5(0.001383-5.9712x10-5M0.5)+1.1249x10-5M
2. Heat Capacity, Latent Heat & Thermal T: temperature in oK
conductivity [Note 1] Note: The reliability of this equation is about 6%

Cp = (1/ 𝑠𝑔))*(0.388+0.00045*(t*1.8+32)) µg=10-4A[exp(B x ρC)]

Cv = Cp-(0.09/sg) A = [(12.6 + 0.021M) T 1.5] / (116 + 10.6M + T)
HLatent = (1/sg)*(110.9-0.09*(t*1.8+32)) * B = 3.45 + 0.01M+ ((548/T)
0.555927 C = 2.4 -0.2 B
k = (0.813/sg)*(1-0.0003*((t*1.8+32)-32)) ρ: Density in kg/m3
*0.1442279 Hydrocarbon mixtures
-
kgas =( -0.000500777+1.0906*10 1. Density
5
*(t*1.8+32)+0.061137256/√M.wt + liquid
0.000158966*(t*1.8+32)/√M.wt)*1.730735 GPSA (page 23-24) [2]
Cp and Cv in Kcal/kg.oC 1. Calculate C3+ Density using table
HLatent in Kcal/Kg
23-16
k and kgas in W/m.oC
2. Calculate wt% C2 in mixture in C2+
3. Viscosity
3. Calculate Density of CO2+
Liquid
4. Calculate wt% in total
1. From no viscosity points[5]
5. Use fig 23.14 for pseudo-density
API Equation
mixture at 60F and 14.7 psia
34 3.518-0.01591*t+1.734*10-5t2
30 5.804-0.029831*t+1.2485*10-5*t2 6. Use fig. 23-15 for pressure
20 9.21-0.0469*t+3.167*10-5*t2 correction
10 18.919-0.1322*t+2.431*10-5*t2 7. Use fig 23-17 for temperature
correction
 8. Calculate density at operating 2. Soave-Redlich-Kwong
pressure and temperature 3. Peng-Robinson
⍴= , [6] where: 2. Viscosity of liquids/gases
∑
⍴ Liquid
⍴: Density of the mixture [kg/m3]  The Orrick-Erbar and Letsou-Stiel methods
⍴ : Density of component i are recommended for estimating the liquid
𝑤 : Weight fraction of component i viscosity. [4] [Notes]
Elbro et al [6] [Notes] Ludwig’s [3] [Notes]
µG = A+ BT + CT2
𝑉 = 𝑛 .△𝑉
Simple Methods [6]
△ 𝑉 = 𝐴 + 𝐵 ∗ 𝑇 + 𝐶 ∗ 𝑇 , Where: Method 1: If only one viscosity datum is
Vm is the molar volume of liquid, ni is the available, viscosity at other temperatures
number of group i, and △Vi is the molar can be approximately extrapolated by the
group volume equation:
Example: µµ0tt233
Estimate the liquid density of isopropyl Method 2: If two pairs of temperature-
viscosity data are available, it is often a
acetate at 20C.
good approximation to assume
µ1 is linear, reciprocal to absolute
temperature:
ln µL = ln A + B/T
Liquid mixtures[6]
Vm = V (CH3COO) + V (CH) + 2V (CH3)
At 20C, or 293.15 oK µ = ∑𝑥 .µ , for liquid hydrocarbons mixtures
V (CH3COO) = 42.820 - 20.50×10-3 (293.15) +
16.42×10-5 (293.15)2 = 50.92 ln µ = ∑ 𝑥 . ln µ , for liquid non-hydrocarbons
V (CH) = 6.297 - 21.92×10-3 (293.15) = -0.13 mixtures , xi is weight fraction
V (CH3) = 18.960 + 45.58×10-3 (293.15) = 32.32 Vapor viscosity
Vm = 50.92 - 0.13 + 2 (32.32) = 115.44 cm3/mol  The Reichenberg method is recommended.[4][Notes]
The molecular weight is 102.133, then
Ludwig’s [3]
⍴= 102.133/115.44 = 0.885 g/cm3
µG = (A + BT + CT2) x 10 -4
Ludwig’s [3]
Gas mixtures[6] (Herning Zipperer)
⍴ = 𝐴𝐵 ( )
∑ .µ .
A, B & n: constants µ = ∑
, yi is mole fraction
.
Hydrocarbon gas density Saturated Liquid viscosity
Ludwig’s [3] Ludwig’s [3]
ρideal = Mwt *Vm=Mwt.P/RT Log µL = A + (B/T) + CT + DT2
ρ = Mwt *Vm=Mwt.P/ZRT µL : cP, T: oK
where Vm is the molar volume L/g.mol GPSA
R: Universal gas const. 8.314 Use previous documentation (Line sizing)
kPa.dm3/mol.k Use fig. 23-21 to 23-29
P: Gas pressure in kPa 3. Thermal conductivity
T: Gas temperature in oK Gas Thermal conductivity
Other methods (EOS) [2] : Ludwig’s [3] [Notes]
1. Van der Waals Kgas = A+ BT + CT2
Kgas: W/m.K ∑ . .( )
𝑘 = , for gas mixtures
Stiel-Thodos Method[Notes] ∑ .( )

𝜔 = 𝑦𝜔 GPSA[2]
Using Charts
𝑍 = 0.291 − 0.08𝜔
1. Use fig 23-31 at operating
𝑀 = 𝑦𝑀 temperature to find KA
𝑇 =𝑇 2. Calculate Tr and Pr
3. Use fig. 23-32 to find thermal
𝑇 = (𝑇 𝑇 )
conductivity ratio
𝑉 =𝑉
4. K = ratio * KA
(𝑉+𝑉 )  Stiel and thodos Method is recommended
𝑉 =
8 For mixtures of simple gases, it doesn’t
∑ ∑ 𝑦𝑦𝑉 𝑇 apply to mixtures containing high CO2[2]
𝑇 =
𝑉  Miscellaneous gases can be obtained from
𝑉 = 𝑦𝑦𝑉 fig 23-33 and hydrocarbon gases from fig
23-34
𝑃 =𝑍 𝑅𝑇 /𝑉
/ Liquid Thermal conductivity
𝑇 𝑀 Ludwig’s [3] [Notes]
𝛤 = 210
𝑃 KL = A+ BT + CT2
𝑃 = 𝑉 /𝑉 KL: µcal/s.cm.oC
For organic compounds, the correlation for thermal
if ρrm<0.5: conductivity of
liquid as a function of temperature is [2]:
(λ−λ∘)ΓZcm5=1.22×10−2[exp(0.535ρr)−1] log10 kliq
if 0.5< ρrm <2.0: Thermal conductivity for liquid mixtures
(λ−λ∘)ΓZcm5=1.14×10−2[exp(0.67ρrm)−1.069] ∑ . .
if 2.0< ρrm <2.8: = ∑
or = ∑𝑤 , where
.
(λ−λ∘)ΓZcm5=2.6×10−3[exp(1.155ρrm)−2.016] Xi: Mole fraction of component i
Wi: weight fraction of component i
Tcm, Pcm, Zcm, Vcm are critical temperature, Mi: molecular weight of component i
pressure, compressibility factor and specific From graph 23-35 liquid paraffin
volume of mixture in oK, bar, -, cm3/mol hydrocarbons
Vm, Mm, λ, λ∘ are specific volume at 1 atm,  The Sato-Riedel and Missenard methods
molecular weight of mixture g/mol, are-recommended.[6] [Notes]
thermal conductivity and thermal Missenard method
conductivity at 1 atm in W/m.k k/k∗=1+QPr0.7
yi, yj are mol. Fractions of mixture k*: k at low pressure (W/m.K)
components
𝛤 is the reduced, inverse thermal
conductivity in [W/m.K]-1

Thermal conductivity for gas mixtures

 Sato-Riedel Method [Notes] R: gas constant 8.3145 J mol-1 K-1
1.1053 3 + 20(1 − 𝑇𝑟) / CPL: J mol-1 K-1
𝑘= k is total the number of different kinds of
√𝑀𝑊 3 + 20(1 − 𝑇𝑏𝑟) / groups
Tr: reduced temperature oK
Tbr: reduced boiling temperature oK at 1 Vapor Heat capacity Cpv
atm Ludwig’s [3]
Kgas: W/m.K Cp = A + BT + CT2 + DT3+ET4
4. Heat capacity Cp Cp: joule/mol. K
Liquid Heat Capacity Benson method is recommended for ideal
Ludwig’s [3] [Notes] gas Cp [6]
Cp = A + BT + CT2 + DT3 Harrison-Seaton method, is much simpler
Cp: joule/mol. K than Benson method and gives only slightly
GPSA inferior results. [6]
Use table (fig 23-2) in P. 23-2 for specific Heat Capacity for gas or liquid mixtures
heats at 60 oF and 14.696 psia for gases and Cp = 𝑥 . Cp
liquid
xi is components weight fraction
 The Chueh-Swanson method is
References
recommended for estimation of liquid heat
[1] Bureau of standards report 1929: Thermal
capacity at 20C, and for temperature
dependency the Missenard method is properties of petroleum products
recommended. [6] [Notes] [2] GPSA Engineering Databook, Section 23.
The assumption is made that various groups [3] Ludwig’s applied process design for
in a molecule contribute a definite value to chemical and petrochemical plants, vol. 1
the total molar heat capacity. (chapter 3 and Appendix C)
Example:
[4] Petroleum Refinery Engineering, W. L.
Estimate the liquid heat capacity of 1,4-
pentadiene at 20C. Nelson
[5] Petroleum Refining Design and applications,
vol. 1, A. Kayode coker
[6] JGS 210-120-1-11E “Estimation of physical
properties”
[7] Prediction of the viscosity of crude oil
CpL = 2 (CH2=) + 2 (-CH=) + (-CH2-) +
fractions from a single measurement, A.
corrections noted in Table 4.2.3
= 2 (5.20) + 2 (5.10) + 7.26 + 4.5 + 2.5 Miadonye and V.R. Puttagunta
= 34.9 cal/mol･K Notes
The observed value is 35.1cal/mol･K. 1. It’s worth mentioning that the most
accurate method to obtain oil fractions
Method of Ruzicka and Domalski[Notes] properties is oil characterization
𝑇 𝑇 calculations if ASTM assay or Tb are
𝐶 =𝑅 𝐴+𝐵 +𝐷
100 100 available. For more on that topic the
following references are recommended:
𝐴= 𝑛 .𝑎 ,𝐵 = 𝑛 .𝑏 ,𝐷 = 𝑛 .𝑑
A. Characterization and Properties of
T: temperature in oK Petroleum Fractions, M. R. Riazi
 B. Petroleum Refining Design and liquids, Bruce E. Poling et al, fifth edition P.
Applications Handbook, Volume 1, 6.19 and its constants in P. 6.20
chapter 3 10.The Chueh-Swanson method and Missenard
C. Petroleum Refinery Engineering, method are described in The properties of
Nelson, chapter 5 gases and liquids, Bruce E. Poling et al,
D. Petroleum Refinery Process fourth edition P. 137 and its constants in P.
Modeling: Integrated Optimization 138-13
Tools and Applications, Y A Liu, Ai- 11.Reichenberg method is described in The
Fu Chang, Chapter 1. properties of gases and liquids, Bruce E.
2. kgas equation was obtained through regressing Poling et al, fifth edition P. 9.12
Maxwell databook chart “Thermal conductivity
of hydrocarbons” P. 215 Section 12 Flow of Heat
Or from fig 23-36
3. Ludwig’s equation constants can be found
in reference [3] Appendix C pages 827-862
4. For Elbro Method constants A, B and C,
refer to The properties of gases and liquids,
Bruce E. Poling et al, fifth edition P. 4.41
5. Orrick and Erbar Method is described in
Viscosity of Liquids, Theory, Estimation,
Experiment and Data P. 315
𝜂 𝐵
ln =𝐴+
𝜌𝑀 𝑇
η: Liquid viscosity in cP
ρ: density at 20 oC
M: molecular weight
T: absolute temperature in oK
A and B are constants in table 4.30 P. 315 As
mentioned above.
6. Missenard Method is described in The
properties of gases and liquids, Bruce E.
Poling et al, fifth edition P. 10.54
7. Sato- Riedel Method is described in The
properties of gases and liquids, Bruce E.
Poling et al, fourth edition P. 550
8. Stiel and thodos method is described in The
properties of gases and liquids, Bruce E.
Poling et al, fifth edition P. 10.35 and its
constants in Apenddix A
9. Method of Ruzicka and Domalski is
described in The properties of gases and
 Examples
Calculate water properties (Density, Viscosity, Thermal conductivity and heat capacity) at 50 oC
Ludwig’s
Substituting the coefficients (As, Bs, Cs, Ds, and Es) from Appendix C
𝒏
⍴𝑳 = 𝑨𝑩 (𝟏 𝑻𝒓 )
A = 0.347, B = 0.274, n = 0.286, Tc = 647.4 oK (from table C-1 in appendix C)
Tr = (273+50)/647.4 = 0.498
ρ = 0.347*0.286-(1-0.498)^0.286=1004 kg/m3
Log µL = A + (B/T) + CT + DT2
A = -10.73 , B =18.28, C=0.01966, D= -0.00001466 (from table C-3 in appendix C)
Log µL = -10.73 +(18.28/323) +0.01966*323 -0.00001466*3232
KL = A+ BT + CT2
A = -916.62, B = 12.547 and C = -0.015212
KL = -916.62 + 12.547*(50+273) -0.015212*3232 =1549.54 µcal/s.cm.oC
Cp = A + BT + CT2 + DT3
A = 0.6741, B=0.002825, C=-0.000008371, D =8.601*10-9 (from table C-5 in appendix C)
Cp = 0.6741+0.002825*323 -0.000008371*323 2 +8.601*10-9*3233 = 1.003 Kcal/kg.oC
heat capacity of 1-butene at a temperature of 200 oC (473.15 K).
using coefficients from table C-4 in appendix C
Cp = 24.915+ (0.20348*473.15)+(5.9828*10-5*473.152)+(-1.4166*10-7*473.153)+(
4.7053*10-11*473.154)=123.36 j/mol. K
Example 23-2 - Calculate the density of the following gas mixture at:
Temperature=100o F
Pressure =1000 psia
Component yi [%] Tci [R] Tpc [R] Pci [psia] Pci [psia] MW
CH4 83.19% 343.0 285.3 666.4 554.4 16.043
C2H6 8.48% 549.6 46.6 706.5 59.9 30.070
C3H8 4.37% 665.7 29.1 616.0 26.9 44.097
i-C4H10 0.76% 734.1 5.6 527.9 4.0 58.123
n-C4H10 1.68% 765.3 12.9 550.6 9.3 58.123
i-C5H12 0.57% 828.8 4.7 490.4 2.8 72.150
n-C5H12 0.32% 845.5 2.7 488.6 1.6 72.150
C6H14 0.63% 913.3 5.8 436.9 2.8 86.177
100.00% 392.7 661.6 20.426
Tr (100+459.67)/392.7=1.425
Pr 1000/661.6=1.512
Z-factor 0.86 (from Fig.23-4 with Pr and Tr)
Density 20.426*1000/10.732/0.86/559.67=3.95 lbm/ft 3
Example 23-2 - Calculate the density of the following liquid mixture at:
Temperature=120o F
Pressure =1760 psia

Density
Volume
Component Mole fraction Mol wt Weight, lb (60F),
, cu ft
lb/cf
Methane 0.20896 16.043 3.352 - -
Carbon dioxide 0.39730 44.010 17.485 51.016 0.3427
Ethane 0.01886 30.070 0.567 - -
Propane 0.02387 44.097 1.053 31.619 0.0333
n-Butane 0.03586 58.123 2.084 36.423 0.0572
n-Pentane 0.02447 72.150 1.766 39.36 0.0449
n-Hexane 0.01844 86.177 1.589 41.4 0.0384
n-Heptane 0.02983 100.204 2.989 42.92 0.0696
n-Octane 0.02995 114.231 3.421 44.09 0.0776
n-Decane 0.18208 142.285 25.907 45.79 0.5658
n-Tetradecane 0.03038 198.394 6.027 47.85 0.1260
Total 1.00000 66.241

Calculate density of C3+ = 44.836/1.0128=44.275 lbm/ft3

Weight % C2 in C2+ = 100*0.567/(0.567+44.836)=1.25% Wt %
Density of CO2+ = (45.403+17.485)/(45.403/44+0.3427)=45.75 lbm/ft3
Wt % CH4 in Total = 100*3.352/66.241=5.1% Wt %
(at 60F and 14.7
Pseudo-density of mixture = 42.9 lbm/ft3
psia, Fig 23-14)
Pressure correction = 0.7 lbm/ft3 (from Fig 23-15)
Density at 60F and 1,760
= 42.9+0.7=43.6 lbm/ft3
psia
Temp correction to 120F
= -1.8 lbm/ft3
from Fig. 23-17
Density at 60F and 1,760
= 43.6-1.8=41.8 lbm/ft3
psia
Viscosity
Example 23-9/10 Calculation of gas mixture viscosity.
Given:
Pressure = 1,000 psia
Temperature = 100 degF
MW = 22.0 lb/lb-mole
Tc = 409 deg R
Pc = 665 psia
Gid = 22/28.9625=0.760 dimensionless
μA = 0.0105 cP (from Fig. 23-22 at 100
deg F)
 Tr = (100+459.7)/409=1.37 dimensionless
Pr = 1000/665=1.50 dimensionless
μ/μA = 1.21 dimensionless (from Fig. 23-24)
μ = 1.21*0.0105=0.0127 cP

Given:
Pressure = 300 psia
Temperature = 50 deg F
Methane = 80 mol %
Nitrogen = 15 mol %
Carbon dioxide = 5 mol %

Component yi MW Pci, Tci, deg R Vci, ft3/lb Vci • MWi • yi Zci • yi

psia
CH4 0.80 16.043 667.0 343.0 0.0988 1.27 0.2306
N2 0.15 28.013 492.5 227.2 0.0510 0.21 0.0434
CO2 0.05 44.010 1,069. 547.4 0.0342 0.08 0.0137
5
Mixture 1.00 19.237 335.9 1.558 0.2877

Solution
Steps
Tcm = 335.9 deg R (from Table above)
3
Vcm = 1.558 ft /lb (from Table above)
Pcm = 0.2877*10.73*335.9/1.558=665.6 psia
Zcm = 0.2877 dimensionless
5.4402*(335.9)0.1666/(665.60.6666)/(19.23)0.5
ξ = dimensionless (from Eq. 23-20)
=0.043
Tr = 1.518 dimensionless
ξμA = 0.000489 dimensionless (from Eq. 23-21)
μA = 0.000489/0.043=0.014 cP (from Eq. 23-22)

Thermal Conductivity
Example 23-12 Find the thermal conductivity of a natural gas.
Given:
Pressure = 700 psia
Temperature = 300 deg F
Tc = 440 deg R
Pc = 660 psia
Solution Steps
kA = 0.0248 Btu/[(hr-sq.ft.-deg (from Fig.23-35)
F)/ft]
Tr = (300+459.67)/440=1.73 dimensionless
 Pr = 700/660=1.06 dimensionless
k/kA = 1.15 dimensionless (from Fig.23-36)
k = 1.15*0.0248=0.0285 Btu/[(hr-sq.ft.-deg
F)/ft]

Example 23-13 -- Find the thermal conductivity of the gaseous mixture shown in Fig. 23-41 at
200°F and one atmosphere.

Given:
Component Mole Thermal conductivity, MW MW-3 (yi)MW-3 (yi)(ki)MW-3
Fraction Btu/(hr-ft-degF)
CO2 0.10 0.0127 44.01 3.530 0.3530 0.00448
H2S 0.20 0.0136 34.076 3.242 0.6483 0.00882
N2 0.05 0.0175 28.013 3.037 0.1518 0.00266
CH4 0.60 0.0258 16.043 2.522 1.5131 0.03904
C2H6 0.05 0.0176 30.07 3.109 0.1555 0.00274
Total 1.00 2.8218 0.05773
Solution
km = 0.05773/2.8218=0.0205 Btu/[(hr-sq.ft.-degF)/ft]

Calculate Naphtha properties (S.G =0.727) at 25oC and vapor naphtha at 2 kg/cm2.a & 150o C
density 0.727*1000*(1-0.0005*((25*1.8+32)-60)) 720.8 Kg/m3
Cp = (1/ 𝑠𝑔))*(0.388+0.00045*(t*1.8+32)) 0.49569 Kcal/kg.C
Cv Cp-(0.09/sg) 0.3719 Kcal/kg.C
thermal conductivity = (0.813/sg)*(1-0.0003*((t*1.8+32)-32)) *0.1442279 0.15911 W/m.k
viscosity 3.518-0.01591*t+1.734*10-5t2 2.39574 cP
Mol. Weight 1/(0.0001644 ∗ 𝐴𝑃𝐼 − 0.000972) 106.29846 -
16.018463 ∗ 𝑚_𝑤𝑡 ∗ 𝑝 ∗ 14.7 5.92723 Kg/m3
Gas Density =
10.732 ∗ 𝑧 ∗ (𝑡 + 459.67)
Gas thermal ( -0.000500777+1.0906*10-5*(t*1.8+32)+0.061137256/√M.wt + 0.02316 W/m.k
conductivity 0.000158966*(t*1.8+32)/√M.wt)*1.730735
=-0.0092696 +T0.5(0.001383-5.9712x10-5M0.5) 0.00771 cP
Gas Viscosity +1.1249x10-5M
 Source 1: Bureau of standards report

Report Conclusions
Specific volume of vapor: The data given in Table 9 for products of gravity 50°
to 150° A. P. I. appear to be sufficiently reliable for most industrial purposes. The
data given for products of gravity 20° to 50° A. P. I. are admittedly approximate and
are included mainly for the benefit of those users of petroleum products who have no
information at hand as to the source or the volatility of these products. Additional
experimental data on molecular weights of products of gravity 10° to 40° A. P. I.
appear desirable.
Thermal conductivity: The data given in Table 10 appear to be sufficient for all
practical uses of such data.
Specific heat: The data given in Tables 12 and 13 appear to be sufficiently
reliable for all practical applications wherein only moderate pressures (less than 50
lbs. /in.2) are involved. Additional experimental data on petroleum vapors and also
on petroleum liquids at high temperatures and pressures are desirable.
Heat content: The data given in Tables 16 to 19 should provide simplicity and
convenience in calculations of the quantities of heat involved in the heating and
cooling of petroleum products.
Figure 23-15: Density
correction for
compressibility of
hydrocarbon liquids
Figure 23-14: Pseudo Density of mixtures
Figure 23-17: Density Correction for Thermal Expansion of Hydrocarbon Liquids
 FIG. 23-33
Thermal Conductivity
of Miscellaneous
Gases
at One Atmosphere

FIG. 23-32 Thermal Conductivity Ratio for Gases

FIG. 23-34
Thermal Conductivity
of H.Cs Gases
at One Atmosphere
Figure 23-4: Standing-Katz Chart
Figure 23-4: Standing-Katz Chart
Supplementary Material

Metal Composition(%) Properties sat 293 K(20◦C)

Cp k α × 105
(J/kg·K) (W/m·K) (m2 /s)
Aluminum 94-96A1,3-
Duralumin 5Cu,traceMg 833 164 6.676
Silumin
Copper 87A1,13Si 871 164 7.099
Aluminum 95Cu,5A1 410 83 2.330
bronze
Bronze 75Cu,25Sn 343 26 0.859
Red brass 85Cu,9Sn,5Zn 385 61 1.804
Brass 70Cu,30Zn 385 111 3.412
German silver 62Cu,15Ni,22Zn 394 24.9 0.733
Constantan
Iron 60Cu,40Ni 410 22.7 0.612
Castiron ∼4C 420 52 1.702
Wrought iron
Steel 460 59 1.626
Carbon steel 1C 473 43 1.172
1.5C 486 36 0.970
Chromesteel 1Cr 460 61 1.665
5Cr 460 40 1.110
10Cr 460 31 0.867
Chrome-nickel 15Cr,10Ni 460 19 0.526
steel 20Cr,15Ni 460 15.1 0.415
Nickel steel 10Ni 460 26 0.720
20Ni 460 19 0.526
40Ni 460 10 0.279
60Ni 460 19 0.493
Nickel-chrome 80Ni,15Cr 460 17 0.444
steel 60Ni,15Cr 460 12.8 0.333
40Ni,15Cr 460 11.6 0.305
20Ni,15Cr 460 14.0 0.390
Manganese 1Mn 460 50 1.388
steel 5Mn 460 22 0.637
Silicon steel 1Si 460 42 1.164
5Si 460 19 0.555
Stainless steel Type304 461 14.4 0.387
Type347 461 14.3 0.387
Tungsten steel 1W 448 66 1.858
5W 435 54 1.525
Source: Process Heat Transfer Principles and Applica ons
Fluids U (W/m2 K)
Water to water 1300-2500
Ammonia to water 1000-2500
Gases to water 10-250
Water to compressed air 50-170
Water to lubricating oil 110-340
Light organics (µ < 5 X 10^-4 Ns/m2) to water 370-750
Medium organics (5 x 10^-4 < µ < 10x10^-4 Ns/m2 to
240-650
water
Heavy organics (µ > 10 X 10^-4 Ns/m2 to lubricating oil 25-400
Steam to water 2200-3500
Steam to ammonia 1000-3400
Water to condensing ammonia 850-1500
Water to boiling Freon-12 280-1000
Steam to gases 25-240
Steam to light organics 490-1000
Steam to medium organics 250-500
Steam to heavy organics 30-300
Light organics to light organics 200-350
Medium organics to medium organics 100-300
Heavy organics to heavy organics 50-200
Light organics to heavy organics 50-200
Heavy organics to light organics 150-300
Crude oil to gas oil 130-320
Plate heat exchangers: water to water 3000-4000
Evaporators: steam/water 1500-6000
Evaporators: steam/other fluids 300-2000
Evaporators of refrigeration 300-1000
Condensers: steam/water 1000-4000
Condensers: steam/other fluids 300-1000
Gas boiler 10-50
Oil bath for heating 30-550
Source: Petroleum Refining Design and applica ons, vol. 4, A. Kayode coker
 Typical film heat
Fluid Fluid condition transfer coefficients
(W/m2.K)

Water Liquid 5,000-7,500

Ammonia Liquid 6,000-8,000

Light organics Liquid 1,500-2,000

Medium organics Liquid 750-1,500

Heavy organics Liquid

Heating 250-750
Cooling 150-400
Very heavy
Liquid
organics
Heating 100-300
Cooling 60-150

Gas 1-2 bar abs 80-125

Gas 10 bar abs 250-400

Gas 100 bar abs 500-800

Condensing Heat
Transfer
Steam, ammonia No noncondensable 8,000-12,000
Pure component, 0.1 bar abs, no
Light organics 2,000-5,000
noncondensable

Light organics 0.1 bar, 4% noncontensable 750-1,000

Medium organics Pure or narrow condensing range, 1 bar abs 1,500-4,000

Heavy organics Narrow condensing range, 1 bar abs 600-2,000 .

Light
multicomponent
Medium condensing range, 1 bar abs 1,000-2,500
mixture, all
condensable
Medium
multicomponent
Medium condensing range, 1 bar abs 600-1,500
mixture, all
condensable
Heavy
multicomponent
Medium condensing range, 1 bar abs 300-600
mixture, all
condensable
Vaporizing Heat
Transfer

Water Pressure <5 bar abs, dT = 25 K 5,000-10,000

Water Pressure 5-100 bar abs, dT = 20 K 4,000-15,000

Ammonia Pressure <30 bar abs, dT = 20 K 3,000-5,000

Pure component, pressure < 30 bar abs, dT = 20

Light organics 2,000-4,000
K

Narrow bolling range, pressure 20-150 bar abs,

Light organics 750-3,000
dT at 15-20

Narrow boiling range, pressure < 20 bar

Medium organics 600-2,500
abs,dTmax = 15 K

Narrrow boiling range, pressure <20 bar abs,

Heavy organics 400-1,500
dTmax = 15 K
Source: Petroleum Refining Design and applica ons, vol. 4, A. Kayode coker
Stream fouling factors
Natural gas 0.0002–0.0004
Column verhead products 0.0002
Lean oil 0.0004
Rich oil 0.0002
Natural gasoline and liquefied petroleum gases 0.0002
Atmospheric tower overhead vapors 0.0002
Light Naphtha 0.0004
Vacuum overhead vapors 0.0008
SALT Crude oil 0 to 120°C velocity m/s <0.6 0.0005
SALT Crude oil 0 to 120°C velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0004
SALT Crude oil 0 to 120°C velocity m/s <1.2 0.0004
SALT Crude oil 120°C to 180°C velocity m/s <0.6 0.0009
SALT Crude oil 120°C to 180°C velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0007
SALT Crude oil 120°C to 180°C velocity m/s <1.2 0.0007
DRY Crude oil 0 to 120°C velocity m/s <0.6 0.0005
DRY Crude oil 0 to 120°C velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0004
DRY Crude oil 0 to 120°C velocity m/s <1.2 0.0004
DRY Crude oil 120°C to 180°C velocity m/s <0.6 0.0005
DRY Crude oil 120°C to 180°C velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0004
DRY Crude oil 120°C to 180°C velocity m/s <1.2 0.0004
SALT Crude oil 180°C to 230°C velocity m/s <0.6 0.001
SALT Crude oil 180°C to 230°C velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0009
SALT Crude oil 180°C to 230°C velocity m/s <1.2 0.0007
SALT Crude oil 230°C and more velocity m/s <0.6 0.0012
SALT Crude oil 230°C and more velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.001
SALT Crude oil 230°C and more velocity m/s <1.2 0.001
DRY Crude oil 180°C to 230°C velocity m/s <0.6 0.0007
DRY Crude oil 180°C to 230°C velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0005
DRY Crude oil 180°C to 230°C velocity m/s <1.2 0.0004
DRY Crude oil 230°C and more velocity m/s <0.6 0.0009
DRY Crude oil 230°C and more velocity m/s 0.6-1.2 0.0007
DRY Crude oil 230°C and more velocity m/s <1.2 0.0007
Gasoline 0.0004
Naphtha and light distillates 0.0005
Kerosene 0.0005
Light gas oil 0.0005
Heavy gas oil 0.0005–0.0008
Heavy fuel oils 0.0008–0.0012
Vacuum tower bottoms 0.002
Atmosphere tower bottoms 0.0014
Cracking and coking units - Overhead vapors 0.0004
Cracking and coking units - Light cycle oil 0.0004
Cracking and coking units - Heavy cycle oil 0.0005–0.0007
Fuel oil no. 2 0.0004
Fuel oil no. 6 0.0009
Transformer oil 0.0002
Engine lube oil 0.0002
Quench oil 0.0007
Refrigerant liquids 0.0002
Hydraulic fluids 0.0002
Industrial organic heat transfer media 0.0002
Molten salts 0.00009
Ammonia, liquid 0.0002
Ammonia, liquid (or bearing) 0.0005
Calcium chloride solutions 0.0005
Manufactured gas 0.002
Diesel engine exhaust gas 0.002
Steam (nonoil bearing) 0.00009
Exhaust team (oil bearing) 0.004
Compressed air 0.002
Refrigerant vapors in refrigerant cycle condensers 0.004
Ammonia vapor 0.0002
CO vapor 2 0.0002
Chlorine vapor 0.0004
Coal fuel gas 0.002
Natural gas flue gas 0.0009
MEA and DEA solutions 0.0004
DEG and TEG solutions 0.0009
Stable side draw and bottom products 0.0002
Caustic solutions 0.0004
Vegetable oils 0.0005
Acid gases 0.0004
Solvent vapors 0.0002
Stable overhead products 0.0002
Crude and vapor unit gases and vapors 0.0002
Atmospheric tower overhead vapors 0.0002
Overhead vapors - Cracking and coking unit streams 0.0004
Light-cycle oil - Cracking and coking unit streams 0.0004
Heavy-cycle oil - Cracking and coking unit streams 0.0005–0.0007
Light coker gas oil - Cracking and coking unit streams 0.0005–0.0007
Heavy coker gas oil - Cracking and coking unit streams 0.0007–0.0009
Bottom slurry oil (minimum 4.5 ft/s) - Cracking and coking unit
streams 0.0005
Light liquid products - Cracking and coking unit streams 0.0005
Feed - Naphtha hydrotreater 0.0005
Effluent - Naphtha hydrotreater 0.0004
Naphtha - Naphtha hydrotreater 0.0004
Overhead vapors - Naphtha hydrotreater 0.0003
Overhead vapor- Visbreaker 0.0005
Visbreaker bottoms- Visbreaker 0.0020
Source: Petroleum Refining Design and applica ons, vol. 4, A. Kayode coker & TEMA 9th edi on
Tubesheet type and no. of
passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

Fixed Tubes One-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ 33 69 105 135 193 247 307 391 481 553 663 763 881 1019 1143 1,269

Fixed Tubes One-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ 33 57 91 117 157 217 277 343 423 493 577 667 765 889 1007 1,127

Fixed Tubes One-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ 33 53 85 101 139 183 235 287 355 419 495 587 665 765 865 965

Fixed Tubes One-Pass 1 in. on ¼ in. ∆ 15 33 57 73 103 133 163 205 247 307 361 427 481 551 633 699

Fixed Tubes One-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ 17 33 45 65 83 111 139 179 215 255 303 359 413 477 545 595

Fixed Tubes Two-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ 32 58 94 124 166 228 300 370 452 528 626 734 846 964 1088 1,242

Fixed Tubes Two-Pass ¾ in. on 1 in. ∆ 28 56 90 110 154 208 264 326 398 468 556 646 746 858 972 1,088

Fixed Tubes Two-Pass ¾ in. on 1 in ◽ 26 48 78 94 126 172 222 280 346 408 486 560 644 746 840 946

Fixed Tubes Two-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ 16 32 52 62 92 126 162 204 244 292 346 410 462 530 608 688

Fixed Tubes Two-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ 12 26 40 56 76 106 136 172 218 248 298 348 402 460 522 584

U Tubes Two-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ 8 34 64 94 134 180 234 304 398 460 558 648 768 882 1008 1,126

U Tubes Two-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ 8 26 60 72 108 158 212 270 336 406 484 566 674 772 882 1,000

U Tubes Two-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ 12 30 52 72 100 142 188 242 304 362 436 506 586 688 778 884

U Tubes Two-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX 8 26 42 58 84 120 154 192 234 284 340 396 466 532 610

U Tubes Two-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX 12 22 38 58 76 100 134 180 214 256 304 356 406 464 526

Fixed Tubes Four-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ XX 48 84 108 154 196 266 332 412 484 576 680 788 904 1024 1,072

Fixed Tubes Four-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ XX 44 72 96 134 180 232 292 360 424 508 596 692 802 912 1,024

Fixed Tubes Four-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ XX 48 72 88 126 142 192 242 308 366 440 510 590 688 778 880
Tubesheet type and no. of
passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

Fixed Tubes Four-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX 24 44 60 78 104 138 176 212 258 308 368 422 486 560 638

Fixed Tubes Four-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX 24 40 48 74 84 110 142 188 214 260 310 360 414 476 534

U Tubes Four-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ XX 28 56 84 122 166 218 286 378 438 534 622 740 852 976 1,092

U Tubes Four-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ XX 20 52 64 98 146 198 254 318 386 462 542 648 744 852 968

U Tubes Four-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ XX 24 44 64 90 130 174 226 286 342 414 482 560 660 748 852

U Tubes Four-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX XX 20 36 50 74 110 142 178 218 266 322 376 444 508 584

U Tubes Four-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX XX 16 32 50 66 90 122 166 198 238 286 336 384 440 500

Fixed Tubes Six-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ XX XX XX 80 116 174 230 294 372 440 532 632 732 844 964 1,106

Fixed Tubes Six-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ XX XX XX 66 104 156 202 258 322 388 464 548 640 744 852 964

Fixed Tubes Six-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ XX XX XX 54 78 116 158 212 266 324 394 460 536 634 224 818

Fixed Tubes Six-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX XX XX 34 56 82 112 150 182 226 274 338 382 442 514 586

Fixed Tubes Six-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX XX XX XX 44 66 88 116 154 184 226 268 318 368 430 484

U Tubes Six-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ XX XX XX 74 110 156 206 272 358 416 510 596 716 826 944 1,058

U Tubes Six-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ XX XX XX 56 88 134 184 238 300 366 440 518 626 720 826 940

U Tubes Six-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ XX XX XX 56 80 118 160 210 268 322 392 458 534 632 718 820

U Tubes Six-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX XX XX 30 42 68 100 130 168 206 252 304 356 426 488 562

U Tubes Six-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX XX XX XX 42 60 80 110 152 182 224 268 316 362 420 478
Tubesheet type and no. of
passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

Fixed Tubes eight-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ XX XX XX XX 94 140 198 258 332 398 484 576 682 790 902 1,040

Fixed Tubes eight-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ XX XX XX XX 82 124 170 224 286 344 422 496 588 694 798 902

Fixed Tubes eight-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ XX XX XX XX XX 94 132 174 228 286 352 414 490 576 662 760

Fixed Tubes eight-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX XX XX XX XX 66 90 120 154 190 240 298 342 400 466 542

Fixed Tubes eight-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX XX XX XX XX XX 74 94 128 150 192 230 280 334 388 438

U Tubes eight-Pass ¾ in. on 15/ 16 in ∆ XX XX XX 68 102 142 190 254 342 398 490 578 688 796 916 1,032

U Tubes eight-Pass ¾ in. on 1in. ∆ XX XX XX 52 82 122 170 226 286 350 422 498 600 692 796 908

U Tubes eight-Pass ¾ in. on 1in ◽ XX XX XX 48 70 106 146 194 254 306 374 438 512 608 692 792

U Tubes eight-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ∆ XX XX XX 24 38 58 90 118 154 190 238 290 340 404 464 540

U Tubes eight-Pass 1 in. on 1 ¼ in ◽ XX XX XX XX 34 50 70 98 142 170 206 254 300 344 396 456

TEMA P or S One-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 12 21 29 38 52 70 85 108 136 154 184 217 252 289 329 372

TEMA P or S Two-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 12 12 28 34 48 66 84 108 128 154 180 212 248 276 316 368

TEMA P or S Four-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 4 8 16 34 44 56 70 100 128 142 158 204 234 270 310 354
Tubesheet type and no.
of passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 0 12 18 24 48 50 80 96 114 136 172 198 236 264 304 340

U Tubes Two-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 4 12 26 36 44 60 82 100 128 154 176 212 242 280 324 358

U Tubes Four-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 4 8 20 28 44 60 76 100 120 148 172 204 240 280 312 352

U Tubes Six-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ◽ 6 12 12 15 32 56 79 100 120 130 160 198 234 274 308 350

TEMA L or M One-
Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 15 27 38 55 66 88 117 136 170 198 237 268 312 357 417 446

TEMA L or M Two-
Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 10 22 36 44 64 82 106 134 164 188 228 266 304 346 396 446

TEMA L or M Four-
Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 8 16 26 42 52 78 98 124 146 166 208 242 284 322 372 422

TEMA L or M Six-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 12 12 24 40 50 68 96 108 148 168 192 236 276 324 364 408

TEMA P or S One-
Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 13 18 33 38 57 81 100 126 159 183 208 249 291 333 372 425

TEMA P or S Two-
Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 10 20 26 44 58 72 94 120 146 172 206 238 282 326 368 412

TEMA P or S Four-
Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 4 8 26 34 48 62 86 116 132 150 190 224 262 298 344 394

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 0 12 18 24 44 68 80 102 132 148 180 220 256 296 336 384

U Tubes Two-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 6 14 28 34 52 72 90 118 148 172 200 242 282 326 362 416
Tubesheet type and no.
of passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

U Tubes Four-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 4 12 20 28 48 68 84 112 132 160 188 228 264 308 344 396

U Tubes Six-Pass 1.25 in. on 1 9/16 in ∆ 6 12 18 30 40 64 78 102 120 152 180 216 250 292 336 384

TEMA P or S One-
Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 55 88 140 178 245 320 405 502 610 700 843 970 1127 1288 1479 1647

TEMA P or S Two-
Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 48 78 138 172 232 308 392 484 584 676 812 942 1096 1250 1438 1604

TEMA P or S Four-
Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 34 62 112 146 208 274 352 442 536 618 742 868 1014 1172 1330 1520

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 24 56 100 136 192 260 336 424 508 600 716 840 984 1148 1308 1480

U Tubes Two-Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 52 90 140 180 246 330 420 510 626 728 856 998 1148 1318 1492 1684

U Tubes Four-Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 40 80 128 164 232 312 388 488 596 692 816 956 1108 1268 1436 1620

U Tubes Six-Pass 5/8 in. on 13/16 in ◽ 32 74 108 148 216 292 368 460 562 644 780 920 1060 1222 1388 1568

TEMA L or M One-
Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 64 85 122 151 204 264 332 417 495 579 676 785 909 1035 1164 1304

TEMA L or M Two-
Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 48 72 114 142 192 254 326 396 478 554 648 762 878 1002 1132 1270

TEMA L or M Four-
Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 34 52 94 124 166 228 290 364 430 512 602 704 814 944 1062 1200

TEMA L or M Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 24 50 96 112 168 220 280 348 420 488 584 688 792 920 1036 1168

TEMA P or S One-
Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 34 60 109 126 183 237 297 372 450 518 618 729 843 962 1090 1233
Tubesheet type and no. of
passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

TEMA P or S Two-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 32 62 98 120 168 228 286 356 430 498 602 708 812 934 1064 1196

TEMA P or S Four-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 16 52 78 106 146 202 258 324 392 456 548 650 744 868 990 1132

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 18 44 68 100 136 192 248 316 376 444 532 624 732 840 972 1100

U Tubes Two-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 32 64 98 126 180 238 298 370 456 534 628 736 846 978 1100 1238

U Tubes Four-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 24 52 88 116 160 224 280 352 428 500 600 696 812 928 1060 1200

U Tubes Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 15/16 in ∆ 24 52 78 108 148 204 262 334 408 474 570 668 780 904 1008 1152

TEMA P or S One-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 28 52 80 104 136 181 222 289 345 398 477 554 637 730 828 937

TEMA P or S Two-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 26 48 76 90 128 174 220 272 332 386 456 532 624 712 812 918

TEMA P or S Four-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 16 44 66 70 128 154 204 262 310 366 432 510 588 682 780 882

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 12 24 56 80 114 160 198 260 308 344 424 496 576 668 760 872

U Tubes Two-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 28 52 78 96 136 176 224 284 348 408 480 562 648 748 848 952

U Tubes Four-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 24 44 72 92 132 176 224 280 336 392 468 548 636 728 820 932

U Tubes Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ◽ 12 32 70 90 120 160 224 274 328 378 460 530 620 718 816 918

TEMA L or M One-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 42 73 109 136 183 237 295 361 438 507 592 692 796 909 1023 1155
Tubesheet type and no.
of passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

TEMA L or M Two-
Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 40 66 102 128 172 228 282 346 416 486 574 668 774 886 1002 1124

TEMA L or M Four-
Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 26 52 88 112 146 208 258 318 382 448 536 632 732 836 942 1058

TEMA L or M Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 24 44 80 102 148 192 248 320 372 440 516 604 708 812 920 1032

TEMA P or S One-
Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 31 56 88 121 159 208 258 320 400 450 543 645 741 843 950 1070

TEMA P or S Two-
Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 26 48 78 106 148 198 250 314 384 442 530 618 716 826 930 1052

TEMA P or S Four-
Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 16 42 62 94 132 182 228 290 352 400 488 574 666 760 878 992

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 12 40 68 88 132 180 220 276 336 392 468 556 648 740 856 968

U Tubes Two-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 32 52 84 110 152 206 266 330 400 472 554 648 744 852 974 1092

U Tubes Four-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 24 48 76 100 140 188 248 316 384 440 528 616 716 816 932 1056

U Tubes Six-Pass 3/4 in. on 1 in ∆ 24 40 74 98 136 182 234 296 356 424 502 588 688 788 908 1008

TEMA P or S One-
Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 17 30 52 61 85 108 144 173 217 252 296 345 402 461 520 588

TEMA P or S Two-
Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 12 30 48 56 78 108 136 166 208 240 280 336 390 452 514 572
Tubesheet type and no. of
passes tube size and pitch 8 10 12 13¼ 15¼ 17¼ 19¼ 21¼ 23¼ 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

TEMA P or S Four-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 8 16 42 52 62 104 130 154 194 230 270 310 366 432 494 562

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 12 18 24 50 64 96 114 156 192 212 260 314 368 420 484 548

U Tubes Two-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 14 30 44 60 80 104 132 172 212 244 290 340 400 456 518 584

U Tubes Four-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 8 24 40 48 72 100 132 168 204 240 284 336 384 444 504 576

U Tubes Six-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ◽ 6 12 32 44 74 100 120 148 198 230 274 328 372 440 502 566

TEMA L or M One-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 27 42 64 81 106 147 183 226 268 316 375 430 495 579 645 729

TEMA L or M Two-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 26 40 66 74 106 134 176 220 262 302 360 416 482 554 622 712

TEMA L or M Four-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 8 34 52 62 88 124 150 204 236 274 336 390 452 520 586 662

TEMA L or M Six-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 12 24 44 56 92 114 152 186 228 272 324 380 448 504 576 648

TEMA P or S One-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 18 33 51 73 93 126 159 202 249 291 345 400 459 526 596 672

TEMA P or S Two-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 14 28 48 68 90 122 152 192 238 278 330 388 450 514 584 668

TEMA P or S Four-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 8 16 42 52 78 112 132 182 216 250 298 356 414 484 548 626

TEMA P or S Six-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 12 18 44 44 76 102 136 172 212 240 288 348 400 464 536 608

U Tubes Two-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 14 28 52 64 90 122 152 196 242 286 340 400 456 526 596 668

U Tubes Four-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 12 24 40 56 80 112 140 180 224 264 320 380 436 504 572 636

U Tubes Six-Pass 1 in. on 1.25 in ∆ 6 24 40 52 78 102 136 176 216 246 300 352 414 486 548 614

Source : Source: Process Heat Transfer Principles and Applica ons & Petroleum Refining Design and applica ons, vol. 4, A. Kayode coker
Birmingham Wire Gage (inches) (mm)
BWG
7 0.180 4.572
8 0.165 4.191
9 0.148 3.759
10 0.134 3.404
11 0.120 3.048
12 0.109 2.769
13 0.095 2.413
14 0.083 2.108
15 0.072 1.829
16 0.065 1.651
17 0.058 1.473
18 0.049 1.245
19 0.042 1.067
20 0.035 0.889
21 0.032 0.813
22 0.028 0.711
23 0.025 0.635
24 0.022 0.559
25 0.020 0.508
26 0.018
27 0.016
28 0.014
29 0.013
30 0.012
31 0.010
32 0.009
33 0.008
34 0.007
35 0.005
36 0.004
Source: Heat Exchangers: Selec on, Ra ng, and Thermal Design
Source: Heat Exchangers: Selec on, Ra ng, and Thermal Design
Fired Heater Efficiency Calculations

Link: Fired Heater Efficiency Calculations

This tool was developed for process engineers to quickly estimate heaters efficiency using heat loss
simplified method and the infamous API 560 also indirect heat loss method and access a list of useful
tables on site. As a part of a larger project to develop what is similar to Carl Branan’s book “process
engineers Pocket Handbook” these tools would allow a process engineer to quickly calculate/estimate
equipment efficiencies or sizing using standardized calculations

The aim here is to take little-known data from the field (flow, pressures, temperatures, compositions..etc.)
and use it as input for a rough estimation without having to return to the office to use commercial
software or calculations Excel sheets to validate or to calculate. Additionally, these tools may also serve as
a gathered data validation tool.

Nomenclature

T Temperature (oF) P Pressure (psia)

ρ Density (kg/m3) Cp Heat Capacity (BTU/lb.oF)
Pv Vapor pressure (psia) ha Air Heat Correction (BTU/lb)
hl Fuel LHV (BTU/lb) hf Fuel Heat Correction (BTU/lb)
hs Stack heat correction(BTU/lb) hm atomizing medium heat correction
η Fired Heater Efficiency (%) hr radiant section Heat Loss(BTU/lb)
Required Input
Table 1: Note 1: Input required depending on the case

Simple Equation API Gas API fuel oil

O2 percent in Flue gas O2 percent in Flue gas O2 percent in Flue gas
Stack temperature oC Stack temperature oC Stack temperature oC
Gas composition in vol% Fuel oil specific gravity
Atomizing steam & Ts Fuel oil LHV [optional]
Datum design T/ Humidity % Fuel oil CH ratio [optional]
ambient T [optional] Atomizing steam & Ts/ ambient T [optional]
Fuel Temp [optional] Datum design T/ Humidity %/ Fuel Temp [optional]
Obtained Output

Simple Equation API Gas API fuel oil

Simpilified Efficiency % Simpilified Efficiency % Simpilified Efficiency %
Thermal efficiency Thermal Efficiency
Fuel Efficiency Fuel Efficiency
API spread sheet API spread sheet
Flue gases heat content table Flue gases heat content table
Gas LHV Fuel oil LHV/ CH

1. Simplified Equation[2]

𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑂2 %∗91.2

Excess Air (EA)% = , when O2 analysis is Dry
20.95−𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑂2 %

𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑂2 %∗111.4

Excess Air (EA)% = , when O2 analysis is Wet
20.95−𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑂2 %
 (0.0237+0.000189∗𝐸𝐴%)(𝑇𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑐𝑘 −𝑇𝑎𝑚𝑏. )∗100
Efficiency η = 100 −
100+𝑄𝐿

Where ambient is assumed 80 oF, QL is Casing heat loss% and assumed 2%

2. API 560 Annex G Method[1]

2.1 Fuel Gas

1. Collect data

Fluids properties

• Fuel composition (S.G., CH ratio & LHV if fuel, Complete composition & LHV if gas)
• Air & Fuel inlet conditions (humidity% and T)
• Calorific values (preferred for fuel oil but can be calculated for gas)

Furnace process data

• Key temperatures (ambient, fuel, air and stack temperatures)

• Flows (not a necessity)
• Flue gas composition (% O2, %CO2)

2. Calculate The following Using API spreadsheet:

a. Dry Air formed (lbs)/lb of fuel

b. CO2 formed (lbs)/lb of fuel
c. H2O formed (lbs)/lb of fuel
d. SO2 formed (lbs)/lb of fuel
e. N2 formed (lbs)/lb of fuel

𝑚 = ∑𝑛𝑖=0 𝑥𝑖 . 𝑚𝑖 where:

m: amount formed or required of a flue gas (Air, N2, H2O, CO2 or SO2) per lb fuel.
xi : mass fraction of fuel gas component.
mi: amount formed by the fuel gas component per lb fuel.
n: number of fuel gas components.

f. Gas mixture LHV BTU/lb (hl)

𝑛

𝐿𝐻𝑉 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑏 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 = ∑ 𝑥𝑖 . 𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑖

𝑖=0

3. Calculate pounds of moisture per pound of fuel = Pounds of wet air per pound of fuel
- Air required:

a. Moisture in Air

𝑃𝑣𝑎𝑝 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 ℎ𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑦% 18

Moisture in air = × × (Pounds of moisture per pound of wet air)
14.696 100 28.85
 Where:
Pvapor = vapor pressure of water at ambient temperature in psia from steam tables or from
the following equation:
Note: Water vapor pressure calculated per Wagner and Pruss (1993)
T in °K and
ln(Psat/Pc) = (a1τ + a2τ1.5 + a3τ3 + a4τ3.5 + a5τ4 + a6τ7.5)Tc/Ta P in kPa
Tc = 647.1 pc = 22,064.0 a1 = -7.8595 a2 = 1.8441
a3 = -11.7866 a4 = 22.6807411 a5 = -15.962 a6 = 1.8012
τ =1−T/Tc = 0.5813 ln(Psat/Pc) = -10.657

b. Calculate Pounds of wet air per pound of fuel required

𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑
Pounds of wet air per pound of fuel required=
1−𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑖𝑟

c. Calculate Pounds of moisture per pound of fuel

= Pounds of wet air per pound of fuel - Air required per pound of fuel

d. Calculate Corrected Pounds of H2O per pound of fuel

Pounds of H2O per pound of fuel

= H2O formed + Pounds of moisture per pound of fuel + atomizing steam

4. Calculate Excess Air percent

a. Calculate Pounds of dry excess air per pound of fuel

𝑁2 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑂2 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑑 𝐻2𝑂 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑑
(28.85 ×𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑂2)( 28
+ 44
+ 18
)
Pounds of dry excess air per pound of fuel = 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐻2𝑂
20.95−𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑂2 ((1.6028×𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑)+1)

𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙

Percent excess air % = × 100
𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑

5. Calculate total pounds of H2O per pound of fuel (corrected for excess air)
𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑖𝑟
Total lbs of H2O /lb of fuel (corrected for excess air) = 100
× 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙

6. Calculate Stack Heat loss

a. From formed flues gases per lb fuel calculate enthalpies then heat content for each flue
gas enthalpies can be estimated using Figure G.6 and Figure G.7 or by the following
approximation N2.
 Component Composition Enthalpy Heat
Wet Dry
lb/lb mol/lb mol% mol% Btu/lb Btu/lb
Nitrogen, N2 12.95 0.46 59.03 71.34 56.98 738
Carbon dioxide, CO2 2.42 0.05 7.01 8.47 52.33 126
Water, H2O 2.43 0.14 17.26 100.77 245
Excess O2 0.88 0.03 3.50 4.23 53.17 47
Excess N2 2.90 0.10 13.21 15.96 56.98 165
Total per 21.58 0.78 100.00 100.00 1,322

HN2 =-19.929903 + 0.25445255 *Ts+ 5.5727103*10-6* Ts2+ 3.1572172*10-9* Ts 3 -1.4298137*10-12* Ts4

HH2O =-18.059441 + 0.22117674* Ts + 5.638387*10-5* Ts2 -4.3167144*10-8* Ts 3+ 1.5150613* 10-11*Ts4
HH2O =-11.245005 + 0.30633377* Ts + 2.6291631*10-4* Ts2 -1.4045071*10-7* Ts 3+ 3.0355352*10-11* Ts4
HO2 =-19.19339 + 0.25924657* Ts -8.4198438*10-5* Ts2+ 8.7932994*10-8* Ts 3 -2.5240497*10-11* Ts4
HSO2 = -4*10-6 *Ts 2 + 0.208 *Ts - 23.292
Heat Content = Enthalpy * mflue gas/mfuel
Where Enthalpy in Btu/lb and Ts is T stack in oF (approximated for figures G.6 and G.7 in Ref. 1)
b. Sum of heat content represents hs (Stack heat loss)

7. Calculate radiant section Heat Loss (Assume 2% heat loss of total LHV)
hr = 2*0.01*hl
8. Calculate hf Fuel sensible Heat correction BTU/lb of fuel
hf = Cpf.(Tf – Td)
where Cpf is fuel heat capacity, Tf: fuel temperature and Td design datum temperature
9. Calculate ha air sensible heat correction BTU/lb of fuel
ha = Cpair (Tambient – Td).ma/mf
ma/mf is total air per lb fuel
10. Calculate atomizing medium heat correction hm BTU/lb of fuel
hm = Cpm(Tm – Td).mm/mf or mm/mf . ∆Hm
where Cpm is steam heat capacity, Tf: steam temperature and Td design datum temperature
11. Calculate Efficiencies
a. Net Thermal Efficiency
𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑈𝑠𝑒𝑑
𝜂=
𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡
((𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝐴𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑚 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡)‐ (𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠 + 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠))
=
(𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝐴𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑚 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡)
(ℎ𝐿 + ℎ𝑎 + ℎ𝑓 + ℎ𝑚 ) − (ℎ𝑟 − ℎ𝑠 )
=
ℎ𝐿 + ℎ𝑎 + ℎ𝑓 + ℎ𝑚

b. Fuel Efficiency

𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝐴𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 (ℎ𝐿 + ℎ𝑎 + ℎ𝑓 + ℎ𝑚 ) − (ℎ𝑓 − ℎ𝑠 )

𝜂𝑓 = ∗ 100 =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 ℎ𝐿
2.2 Fuel Oil
1. Obtain CH ratio and LHV analysis of fuel oil or estimate them

API = 141.5/SG -131.5

CH =0.0022 API2 – 0.1296 API + 9.1398, approximated from Maxwell Databook P. 186-188
LHV = -0.3726 API2 – 57.429 API + 16797 (btu/lb), approximated from Maxwell Databook P. 180

2. Use Carbon ratio and other Oil content (H2O, ash, sulfur, Sodium and others) to estimate C% and
H% and other contents

Component Mol Mass Air CO2 H2O N2 SO2

Mass % lb/lb
Carbon, C 12.0 88.50 11.51 3.66 0.00 8.85 0
Hydrogen, H2 2.016 11.50 34.29 0.00 8.94 26.36 0
Sulfur, S 32.1 0.00 4.31 2.00 0.00 3.31 2
Inerts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
Total per lb of fuel 100.00 14.13 3.24 1.03 10.86 0
3. Input calculated volume percent in API spreadsheet and Repeat Gas calculations steps from 1 to 10

References
1. API 560 ANNEX G.
2. Aramco stds: calculating process heater thermal efficiency

Recommended Readings
1. Aramco stds: calculating process heater thermal efficiency (extended document on the
various methods of estimating thermal efficiencies (direct & indirect methods)
2. Correctly Modeling and Calculating Combustion Efficiencies In Fired Equipment,
David Schmitt
3. Get the most from your fired heater, ashutosh Garg and H. Ghosh chemical engineering.
4. Optimize fired heater operations to save money , A. Garg, Hydrocarbon processing.
 Column Column Column Column
Column 1 Column 2 3 4 Column 5 Column 6 Column 7 Column 8 Column 9 Column 10 Column 11 12 Column 13 14

Net SO2
Heating Dry Air H2O N2
Heating CO2 formed formed
Fuel Component total Value required Dry Air CO2 formed H2O formed
Volume value (pounds of N2 formed (pounds
M.Wt weight (british (pounds of required formed (pounds of formed (pounds
fraction (british CO2 per (lbs) of SO2
(lbs) thermal air per (lbs) (lbs) H2O per (lbs) of N2 per
thermal pound) per
units) pound) pound) pound)
units) pound)

Carbon 12 0.00 0 0.00 11.51 0.00 3.66 0 8.85 0 0

Hydrogen 73.98 2.016 1.49 51600 76958.14 34.29 51.14 0 0 8.94 13.33344 26.36 39.314274 0

Oxygen 32 0.00 0 0.00 -4.32 0.00 0 0 0 0 -3.32 0 0

Nitrogen 2.79 28 0.78 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 1 0.7812 0

Carbon monoxide 28 0.00 4345 0.00 2.47 0.00 1.57 0 0 0 1.9 0 0

Carbon dioxide 44 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Methane 5.42 16 0.87 21500 18644.8 17.24 14.95 2.74 2.376128 2.25 1.9512 13.25 11.4904 0

Ethane 3.72 30.1 1.12 20420 22864.68 16.09 18.02 2.93 3.28078 1.8 2.015496 12.37 13.8509364 0

Ethylene 28.1 0.00 20290 0.00 14.79 0.00 3.14 0 1.28 0 11.36 0 0

Propane 4.36 44.1 1.92 19930 38320.61 15.68 30.15 2.99 5.749052 1.63 3.134099 12.05 23.169258 0

Propylene 42.1 0.00 19690 0.00 14.79 0.00 3.14 0 1.28 0 11.36 0 0

Butane 4.89 58.1 2.84 19670 55884.24 15.46 43.92 3.03 8.608503 1.55 4.40369 11.88 33.7521492 0

Butylene 56.1 0.00 19420 0.00 14.79 0.00 3.14 0 1.28 0 11.36 0 0

Pentane 3.93 72.1 2.83 19500 55253.84 15.33 43.44 3.05 8.642267 1.5 4.250295 11.78 33.3789834 0

Hexane 0.23 86.2 0.20 19390 3844.26 15.24 3.02 3.06 0.606676 1.46 0.28946 11.71 2.3216246 0

Benzene 78.1 0.00 17270 13.27 3.38 0.69 10.2 0 0

Methanol 32 0.00 8580 6.48 1.38 1.13 4.98 0 0

Ammonia 17 0.00 8000 6.1 0 1.59 5.51 0 0

Sulfur 32.1 0.00 0 0.00 4.31 0.00 0 0 0 3.31 0 2

Hydrogen Sulfide 0.68 34.1 0.23 6550 1518.81 6.08 1.41 0 0 0.53 0.122896 4.68 1.0851984 1.88

Water 18 0 0 0 1 0 0

Total 100.00 12.28708 273289.38 206.05 29.26 29.50 159.14

Total per pound of fuel 100.00 1.00 22242.01763 16.7696231 2.381641 2.40094 12.9521469
EXCESS AIR AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY WORKSHEET

Atomizing steam:
0 Pounds per pound of fuel (assumed or measured)

CORRECTION FOR RELATIVE HUMIDITY

𝑃𝑣𝑎𝑝 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 ℎ𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑦 18

Moisture in air = × ×
14.696 100 28.85

= 0.076328 50% 18
14.696 100 28.85

= -0.000016 Pounds of moisture per pound of wet air

where:
Pvapor = vapor pressure of water at ambient temperature in psia (from steam tables)

Pounds of wet air per pound of fuel required 𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑

=
1−𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑖𝑟

16.76962
1 -0.000016

16.770

Pounds of moisture per pound of fuel = Pounds of wet air per pound of fuel - Air required
 = 16.770 -16.7696
= 0.00027

Pounds of H2O per pound of fuel = H2O formed + Pounds of moisture per pound of fuel +
atomizing steam

= 2.400944 +0.00027 +0
= 2.401

CORRECTION FOR EXCESS AIR

Pounds of dry excess air per pound of fuel

𝑁2 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑂2 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑑 𝐻2𝑂 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑑
(28.85 ×𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑂2)( + + )
28 44 18
= 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐻2𝑂
20.95−𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑂2 ((1.6028× )+1)
𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 Percent
O2 Wet%
3.5
= 100.975 (0.462577 +0.054128 +0.133401)
20.95 -3.50009
= 3.761878

𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑖𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙

Percent excess air = × 100
𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑

= 3.761878
16.76962

= 22.43%
EXCESS AIR AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY WORKSHEET

total pounds of H2O per pound of fuel (corrected for excess air)

𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑖𝑟

= × 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
100

= 22.43% 0.000272 2.40

= 2.401

NOTE: All values used in the calculations above shall be on per-pound-of-fuel basis. Numbers in parentheses indicate values to be
taken from the "total per pound fuel" line of the combustion work sheet, and letters in parentheses indicate values to be taken
from the corresponding line of this work sheet.
 FLUE GAS WORK SHEET
150 C
302 F

Exit flue gas temperature, Tc:

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6 Column 7

Enthalpy at
Component pounds of
Tc (Btu per Heat Content (BTU per pound of
Wet Mol. % Wet Wt% component T/year
pound fuel)
formed/hr
pounds of component formed per formed)
pound of fuel
Carbon
dioxide 2.38 6.93% 11.1% 17482.30 62936.29 52.81542 125.7874
water vapor 2.40 17.07% 11.2% 17626.44 63455.17 101.6308 244.0436
Nitrogen 15.92 72.77% 74.0% 116889.47 420802.09 57.49809 915.6013
Oxygen 0.79 3.16% 3.7% 53.63188 42.36888
Air 3.76 27613.86 99409.89
SO2 0.0355 0.07% 0.2% 39.15918 1.389333
total 21.53 100.00% 100.00% 179612.07 - 1327.801
Design Basis
Design datum temperature, Td = 60 oF
Ambient air temperature, Ta,a = 28 oF
Air temperature, Ta = 28 oF
Relative Humidity = 50% %

Stack gas Oxygen content vol % = 3.5

Radiation massic heat loss, lower massic heat value of fuel, hr =
2.5 %

Fuel:

Lower massic heat value of the fuel burned, hL = 22,242 Btu/lb

Fuel temperature, Tf = 100 o
F
Atomizing-medium temperature, Tm = 0 o
F

Heat loss calculations

Radiation massic heat loss, lower massic heat value, hr = 556 Btu/lb

Exit flue-gas temperature, Te = 150 oC

Stack massic heat loss, see next sheet 'Combustion', hs = 1,328

Av specific heat capacity of the air, over dataum cpa = 0.24 Btu/lb.oF
Air sensible massic heat correction, Δha = -158 Btu/lb
Av specific heat capacity of the fuel, over datum cpf = 0.48 Btu/lb.oF
Fuel sensible massic heat correction, Δhf = 19.2 Btu/lb
Steam temperature 0.0
Atomizing medium sensible massic heat correction, Δhm = 0.00 Btu/lb

Efficiency calculations
Net thermal efficiency, expressed as a %, e
% = 91.5%
Gross thermal efficiency, expressed as a %, eg

Fuel efficiency, expressed as a %, ef % = 90.9%

=[(hL+Δha+Δhf+Δhm)-
(hf+hs)]/hL
Fuel efficiency, industry practice, expressed as a %, e % = 91.5%
=(hL-hf-hs)/hL
 Heater Maximum skin temperature

Link: https://processpocket.streamlit.app

This tool was developed for process engineers to quickly estimate Heaters’ maximum skin temperature
using the method described in API 530 and ISO 13704 on site. As a part of a larger project to develop
what is similar to Carl Branan’s book “process engineers Pocket Handbook” these tools would allow a
process engineer to quickly calculate/estimate equipment efficiencies or sizing using standardized
calculations.
The aim here is to take little-known data from the field (flow, pressures, temperatures,
compositions..etc.) and use it as input for a rough estimation without having to return to the office to
use commercial software or calculations Excel sheets to validate or to calculate. Additionally, these tools
may also serve as a gathered data validation tool.

Nomenclature

T Temperature (oC) P Pressure (kg/cm2.g)

ṁ Mass Flow rate (kg/hr) µ Viscosity (Pa.s)
ρ Density (kg/m3) λ Thermal conductivity (W/m.K)
Di Tube inside diameter (mm) Cp Heat Capacity (Kg/Kcal.hr. oC)
Do Tube outside diameter (mm) A Total Exposed surface Area (m2)
Q Heat Duty (W and Kcal/hr) h Heat transfer coefficient
W/m2.K
Np Number of tube passes 𝑞𝑚𝐴 flow mass velocity m/m2.s
FL FT
Re Reynold’s number Fcir
Q Volume flow rate (m3/hr) or (Nm3/hr) Pr Prandtl’s number
𝛿 Thickness (mm)
Input Required
Table 1:
Max. Tube wall Calculations
Oil Specific gravity -
Flow rate (Light ends) Nm3/hr
Flow rate (Oil) m3/hr
o
Inlet/outlet temperatures C
Average pressure Kg/cm2.a
Heater Geometry Data
Tube Spacing mm
Outside Diameter mm
Tube Thickness mm
Number of passes -
Exposed Surface Area m2
Coke decomposition mm
Coil Geometry -
Light Ends option:
Light ends: Composition Vol% or mol%
Output Obtained

Summary Table
o
Max. Skin temperature C
o
Mean bulk temperature C
Total mass flow rate Kg/hr
Heat Duty Kcal/hr
Heat Transfer coefficient W/m.k
Max heat flux W/m2
Vapor fraction -
Average Heat Capacities Kcal/kg. oC
Average Heat Thermal Conductivities W/m. °C
Average Viscosities cP
Reynold’s number -
Prandtl Number -

Heater Maximum skin temperature

1. Calculating max. heat flux density

Radiant heat flux

̂ = ṁ𝐶𝑝 ∆𝑡 , 2nd term if no phase change present in heater inlet/outlet
𝑄𝑅,𝑎𝑣𝑔 = ṁ. ∆𝐻

The maximum heat flux density at any point in a coil can be estimated as follows:

𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝐹𝑐𝑖𝑟 𝐹𝐿 𝐹𝑇 𝑄𝑅,𝑎𝑣𝑔 + 𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣

Where

Qmax is the maximum radiant heat flux density in W/m2

Fcir is the factor accounting for circumferential heat-flux-density variations

FL is the factor accounting for the effect of tube metal temperature on the radiant heat flux density

FT is the factor accounting for the effect of tube metal temperature on the radiant heat flux density

QR, avg is the average heat flux density in W/m2

Qconv is the average convective heat flux density in W/m2

The circumferential variation factor, Fcir, is given as a function of tube spacing and coil geometry in
Figure 2. The factor given by this figure is the ratio of the maximum local heat flux density at the fully
exposed face of a tube to the average heat flux density around the tube. This figure was developed from
considerations of radiant heat transfer only.

As mentioned above, influences such as conduction around the tube and flue gas convection act to
reduce this factor. Since these influences are not included in this calculation, the calculated value will be
somewhat higher than the actual maximum heat flux density.
The longitudinal variation factor, FL, is not easy to quantify. Values between 1 .0 and 1.5 are most often
used. In a firebox that has a very uniform distribution of heat flux density, a value of 1.0 can be
appropriate. Values greater than 1.5 can be appropriate in a firebox that has an extremely uneven
distribution of heat flux density (for example, a long or a tall, narrow firebox with burners in one end
only).

FL = c10 x (1 + H / c11)

Where H = Inside firebox height, feet (mm) c10 = 1.00 and 1.10 for fuel gas and fuel oil/combination
firing, respectively c11 = 100 and 30500 for H in feet and mm, respectively

The tube metal temperature factor, FT, will be less than 1.0 near the coil outlet or in areas of maximum
tube metal temperature. It will be greater than 1.0 in areas of lower tube metal temperatures. For most
applications, the factor can be approximated as follows:
4 4
𝑇𝑔,𝑎𝑣𝑔 − 𝑇𝑡𝑚
𝐹𝑇 = ( 4 4 )
𝑇𝑔,𝑎𝑣𝑔 − 𝑇𝑡𝑚,𝑎𝑣𝑔
∗
𝑇𝑔,𝑎𝑣𝑔 : is the average flue-gas temperature, expressed in kelvins (degrees Rankine), in the radiant
section
∗
𝑇𝑡𝑚 : is the tube metal temperature, expressed in kelvins (degrees Rankine), at the point under
consideration
∗
𝑇𝑡𝑚,𝑎𝑣𝑔 : is the average tube metal temperature, expressed in kelvins (degrees Rankine), in the radiant
section.

The convective heat flux density in most parts of a radiant section is usually small compared with the
radiant heat flux density. In the shock section, however, the convective heat flux density can be
significant; it should therefore be added to the radiant heat flux density when the maximum heat flux
density in the shock section is estimated.

Calculating maximum tube temperature

In addition to the heat-transfer coefficient and the maximum heat flux density, the temperature profile
of the fluid in the coil is necessary for calculating the maximum tube metal temperature in the radiant
section of the heater. This profile, which is often calculated by the heater supplier, defines the variation
of the bulk fluid temperature through the heater coil. For operation at or near design, the design profile
can be used. For operation significantly different from design, a bulk temperature profile shall be
developed. Once the bulk fluid temperature is known at any point in the coil, the maximum tube metal
temperature can be calculated as follows:

𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑇𝑏𝑓 + ∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 + ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 + ∆𝑇𝑡𝑤

𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐷𝑜
∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 = ( )
ℎ𝑓 𝐷𝑖 − 2𝛿𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒
𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝛿𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 𝐷𝑜
∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 = ( )
𝜆𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 𝐷𝑖 − 𝛿𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒
 𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝛿𝑡,𝑎𝑣𝑔 𝐷𝑜
∆𝑇𝑡𝑤 = ( )
𝜆𝑡𝑚 𝐷𝑜 − 𝛿𝑡,𝑎𝑣𝑔

𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum tube metal temperature, expressed in degrees Celsius

Tbf is the bulk fluid temperature, expressed in degrees Celsius

∆Tff is the temperature difference across the fluid film, expressed in degrees Celsius

∆Tcoke is the temperature difference across coke or scale, expressed in degrees Celsius

∆Ttw is the temperature difference across the tube wall, expressed in degrees Celsius

QR,max is the maximum radiant heat flux density, in W/(m2-K) for the outside surface

hf is the fluid-film heat-transfer coefficient, in W/(m2-K)

Do is the outside diameter, expressed in meters, of the tube;

Di is the inside diameter, expressed in meters , of the tube;

𝛿𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 is the coke and/or scale thickness, expressed in metres

𝜆𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 is the thermal conductivity of coke or scale, in W/(m2-K)

𝛿𝑡,𝑎𝑣𝑔 is the average tube thickness, expressed in metres

𝜆𝑡𝑚 is the thermal conductivity, in W/(m-K) of the tube metal. (from figure 1)

Heat transfer Coefficient iteration

A value necessary for calculating the maximum tube metal temperature is the fluid heat-transfer
coefficient at the inside wall of the tube. Although the following correlations are extensively used and
accepted in heater design, they have inherent inaccuracies associated with all simplified correlations
that are used to describe complex relationships.

For single-phase fluids, the heat-transfer coefficient is calculated by one of the two equations below, in
which Re is the Reynolds number and Pr is the Prandtl number. No correlation is included for the heat-
transfer coefficient in laminar flow, since this flow regime is rare in process heaters. There is inadequate
information for reliably determining the inside coefficient in laminar flow for oil in tube sizes that are
normally used in process heaters.

for liquid flow with Re > 10000:

0.14
𝜆𝑓,𝑇𝑏 𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏
ℎ𝑙 = 0.023 ∗ ( ) ∗ 𝑅𝑒0.8 ∗ 𝑃𝑟0.33 ∗ ( )
𝐷𝑖 𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑤

for vapour flow with Re >15000:

𝜆𝑓,𝑇𝑏 𝑇𝑏 0.5
ℎ𝑣 = 0.021 ∗ ( ) ∗ 𝑅𝑒0.8 ∗ 𝑃𝑟0.4 ∗ ( )
𝐷𝑖 𝑇𝑤
 𝐷𝑖 ∗ 𝑞𝑚𝐴
𝑅𝑒 =
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏
𝐶𝑝 𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏
𝑃𝑟 =
𝜆𝑓,𝑇𝑏

hL is the heat-transfer coefficient, in W/(m2-K) for the liquid phase

hv is the heat-transfer coefficient, in W/(m2-K) for the vapor phase

𝜆𝑓,𝑇𝑏 is the thermal conductivity, in W/(m-K) of fluid at bulk temperature

Di is the inside diameter, expressed in meters of the tube

𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏 is the absolute viscosity, in Pa-s of fluid at bulk temperature

𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑤 is the absolute viscosity, in Pa-s of fluid at wall temperature;

Tb is the absolute bulk temperature, expressed in kelvins of vapor

Tw is the absolute wall temperature, expressed in kelvins (degrees Rankine), of vapor

𝑞𝑚𝐴 is the mass flow flux, in kg/(m2-s) of the fluid = ṁ/(A*Np)

Cp is the specific heat capacity, in J/(kg-K) of the fluid at bulk temperature.

For two-phase flows, the heat-transfer coefficient can be approximated using the following equation:

hf = hv * wv + hL * wL

hf is the heat-transfer coefficient, in W/(m2-K), for two phases

wL is the mass fraction of the liquid

wv is the mass fraction of the vapor.

The liquid and vapor heat-transfer coefficients, hL and hv, should be calculated using the mixed-phase
area mass flow rate but using the liquid and vapor material properties, respectively.

Iteration part

Assume for liquid

0.14
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏
( ) = 1.1
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑤

Assume for vapor

𝑇𝑏 0.5
( ) = 0.91
𝑇𝑤
1. Solve for hL and hv
2. Calculate ∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 , ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 and ∆𝑇𝑡𝑤
3. Calculate mean tube wall temperature & oil film temperature & maximum tube temperature
 Tfilm =Tb + ∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 (estimate μfilm at Tfilm)
∆𝑇𝑡𝑤
Tm = Tb + ∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 +
2
Tmax = Tb + ∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 + ∆𝑇𝑡𝑤 + ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒
0.14
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏 𝑇 0.5
4. Calculate ( ) , ( 𝑏) and calculate your error percentage in assumptions
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑤 𝑇𝑤
0.14 0.5
𝜇 𝑇
5. Re-assume (𝜇 𝑓,𝑇𝑏 ) , (𝑇𝑏 ) accordingly until your assumption matches your calculated
𝑓,𝑇𝑤 𝑤
values!
6. Check mean tube temperature calculated against temperature assumed for tube thermal
conductivity
Calculating total mass flow rate of feed and light gases

Light gases
𝑚

𝑀𝑤𝑡 = ∑ 𝑀𝑤𝑡𝑖 ∗ 𝑦𝑖
1

ṁ𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 = 0.044 ∗ 𝑀𝑤𝑡 ∗ 𝑄𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠

𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 = ṁ𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 /𝑀𝑤𝑡

𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑠 = 𝑛 ∗ 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑠 𝑓𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠

Oil

ṁ𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝜌𝑜𝑖𝑙 ∗ 𝑄𝑜𝑖𝑙

𝑚

𝑀𝑤𝑡𝑜𝑖𝑙 = ∑ 𝑀𝑤𝑡𝑖 ∗ 𝑦𝑖
1

𝑛𝑂𝑖𝑙 = ṁ𝑜𝑖𝑙 /𝑀𝑤𝑡𝑜𝑖𝑙

𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝑛𝑂𝑖𝑙 + 𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠

𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑠
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝑓𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 =
𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙
NOTE: from composition calculated physical properties could be calculated for both light ends and oil
fractions. Oil characterization is beyond the sope of this document thought (sorry)
Figure 1: GPSA metal thermal conductivity
 Figure 2: Fcir as function of tube spacing/D

1. Curve 1 = double row against wall, triangular spacing

2. Curve 2 = double row with equal radiation from both sides and two diameters between rows,
equilateral spacing
3. Curve 3 = single row against wall
4. Curve 4 = single row with equal radiation from both sides
These curves are valid when used with a tube-centre-to-refractory-wall spacing of 1,5 times the nominal
tube diameter. Any appreciable variation from this spacing should be given special consideration.
ISO 13704/API 530 -2008 Example

In the heater under consideration, the medium-carbon-steel tubes are in a single row against the wall. Other
aspects of the heater configuration are as follows:

Tube spacing is 203,2 mm ( 0,667 ft 8,0 in).

Do = 114,3 mm ( 0,375 ft 4,5 in);
𝛿 t,ave = 6.4 mm ( 0.020 8 ft 0.25 in);
Di = 101.6 mm ( 0.333 ft 4.0 in);
𝛿 f = 0 mm (0 in);
𝜆 tm = 42.2 W/(m K) [24.4 Btu/(h ft °F)] at an assumed tube metal temperature of 380 °C (720 °F).

The flow in the tubes is two-phase with 10 % mass vapour. Other operating conditions are as follows:
Flow rate (total liquid plus vapour) is 6.3 kg/s
Tb = 271 °C
qR.ave = 31 546 W/m2

The properties of the liquid at the bulk temperature are as follows:

µf.T b = 2 * 10-3 Pa s
𝜆 f,T b = 0.1163 W/(m K)
Cp,f 2 847 J/(kg K)

The properties of the vapour at the bulk temperature are as follows:

µv,T b 7.0 10-6 Pa.s
𝜆 v,T b 0.034 6 W/(m K)
Cp,v 2 394 J/(kg K)

From the inside diameter, the flow area is equal to 8.107 10 3 m2 (0.087 3 ft2). Using the total flow rate:
qmA = 6.3/(8.107 x 10-3),
qmA 777.1 kg/(m2 s).

The Reynolds number [Equation (B.2)] is calculated as follows:

For liquid:
(0,1016) (777.1)
𝑅𝑒 = = 3.95 𝑥 104
0.002
For vapor
(0.1016) (777.1)
𝑅𝑒 = = 1.13 𝑥 107
7 𝑥 10−6
The Prandtl number [Equation (B.3)] is calculated as follows:
For liquid:
(2 847) (0.002)
𝑃𝑟 = = 49
0.1163
For vapor:
(2 395) (7 𝑥 10−6 )
𝑃𝑟 = = 0.485
0.0346

Assume that for the liquid:

0.14
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏
( ) = 1.1
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑤
Assume that for the vapour:
𝑇𝑏 0.5
( ) = 0.91
𝑇𝑤
These assumptions will be checked later. Calculating hl and hv:
0.1163
ℎ𝑙 = 0.023 ∗ (0.1016) ∗ (3.94 ∗ 104 )0.8 ∗ (49)0.33 ∗ 1.1 = 497 W/m2.K

0.0346
ℎ𝑣 = 0.021 ∗ (0.1016) ∗ (1.12 ∗ 107 )0.8 ∗ (0.486)0.33 ∗ 0.91 = 2126 W/m2.K

The two-phase heat-transfer coefficient can then be calculated:

hf = 0.9*497 +0.1*2126 = 659.9 W/m2.K

The ratio of tube spacing to tube diameter is as follows:

203.2 / 114.3 = 1.78

From Figure 2, Fcir 1.91.

Assume that for this heater, FL 1.1
FT 1.0, and qconv 0 (that is, there is no convective heat-flux density at this point).

Calculating max. heat flux:

qR,max = (1.91)(1.1)(1.0)(31 546) = 66278 W/m2

The temperature difference through each part of the system can now be calculated for the
fluid film:
𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐷𝑜 66278 114.3
∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 = ( )= ( ) = 113 𝐾
ℎ𝑓 𝐷𝑖 − 2𝛿𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 659.9 101.6

for the tube wall:

𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝛿𝑡,𝑎𝑣𝑔 𝐷𝑜 66278 ∗ 6.4 114.3
∆𝑇𝑡𝑤 = ( )= ( ) = 11 𝐾
𝜆𝑡𝑚 𝐷𝑜 − 𝛿𝑡,𝑎𝑣𝑔 42.2 114.3 − 6.4
the maximum tube metal temperature is as follows:
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑇𝑏𝑓 + ∆𝑇𝑓𝑓 + ∆𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑘𝑒 + ∆𝑇𝑡𝑤 = 271 + 113 + 11 = 395 o C

Checking the assumed viscosity ratio, at the oil-film temperature calculated above, 271+ 113 = 384 °C, the viscosity is 1.1
mPa.s. So, for the liquid:
0.14
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑏 0.002 0.14
( ) =( ) = 1.820.14 = 1.09
𝜇𝑓,𝑇𝑤 0.0011
For the vapour:
𝑇𝑏 0.5 270 + 273 0.5
( ) = ( ) = 0.91
𝑇𝑤 384 + 273
Both values are close to the values assumed for the calculation of Kl and Kv. so no additional work is needed.

The mean tube wall temperature is as follows:

270 + 113 + 11/2 = 388 oC

This is close to the temperature assumed for the tube conductivity, so no additional work is required.
Fabricated Example to explore differences between a commercial software and tool

parameters Units Input for both

Feed S.G - 0.733
Feed flow m3/hr 23.487
hydrogen flow Nm3/hr 30980
temperature in oC 250
temperature out oC 290
Pressure Kg/cm2.g 4
Tube spacing mm 450
Outside Diameter mm 203.2
Thickness mm 6.02
Number of passes - 1
Exposed Surface Area m2 8.9
Coke decomposition mm 0
Fc 1.686 -
Fl 0.955 -
Ft 1.0 -

ASTM D86 Assay Temperature oC

0 201.920182
10 227.714783
30 229.657141
50 232.126014
70 234.027408
90 238.276357
100 243.0963
Hydrogen comp% 100

Commercial
Parameter Tool Units
software
o
Max Skin Temperature 408.557 380 C
o
Mean Bulk temperature 399.507 363 C
Total Mass flow rate 19964.63 20,000 kg/hr
Heat Duty 819933 824150 Kcal/hr
Heat transfer coefficient 1339.157 1404.1 W/m oC
Max Heat Flux 126555.7 122200 W/m oC
o
Inlet Temperature 250 250 C
o
Outlet Temperature 290 290 C
Inlet Pressure 4 4 Kg/cm2.g
Vapor Fraction 1 1 -
Reynold's Number V/L [3124642.0, 'NA'] -
 Prandtl Number V/L [0.273, 'NA'] 0.46 -
Viscosity V/L [0.012, 'NA'] 0.0221 cP
Cp 1.04 1.0479 Kcal/kg. oC
Thermal Conductivity V/L [0.188, 'NA'] 0.2239 W/m.K
Metal Thermal Conductivity 43.375 W/m.C
Fc 1.686 1.678 -
Fl 0.955 0.9551 -
Ft 1 1 -

References

1. API 530, 6th edition 2008

2. ISO 13704: 2001
3. GPSA Engineering Databook Section 8: Fired Heaters