Sie sind auf Seite 1von 23

Shell-Side Pressure Drop Measurement in a Collins-Type 4.

5K-2K
Heat Exchanger
Nusair Hasan, Peter Knudsen
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
Newport News, VA 23606

Abstract

Fin-tube heat exchangers were designed and developed by Jefferson Lab for the cryo-modules
at the Facility of Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) at Michigan State University. The heat exchanger
assembly consists of an inner shell (mandrel), outer shell and helical fin-tube coil. Shell-side
pressure drop in the heat exchangers was measured for a wide range of flow. The experiments
were performed using gaseous nitrogen at room temperature. Reynolds number (Re) range
considered in this study varies from 50 to 2500. Measurements from the present study indicate a
typical power law relationship between the friction factor (f) and Reynolds number (Re) in the
‘laminar’ regime. Also, transitions in the friction factor similar to that in a laminar-turbulent
transition were observed. Effect of using sealing rope (to minimize shell and mandrel
bypass/leakage flow) on the friction factor was also investigated. Correlations based on the present
experimental data are proposed for predicting friction factor (f) for the shell-side flow.

1. Introduction

Cryogenic process efficiency can be improved by minimizing mass flow through the load. In
some applications this can be accomplished by a properly designed heat exchanger. For this
purpose, the MSU-FRIB cryogenic system includes a Joule-Thompson (J-T) heat exchanger in
each of its cryo-modules for transferring heat from the liquid helium supply to the returning low
pressure helium vapor, sub-cooling the liquid to just above lambda by recovering refrigeration
from the return helium vapor, before it expands through a downstream J-T valve. This process
minimizes the flash vapor generated by J-T process. A helical coil fin-tube type design is used as
the J-T heat exchanger. Here, the tube (usually made of copper) is closely wrapped with an edge-
wound helix of copper ribbon which is soldered or brazed to the outside of the tube. This and
helically coiling the fin-tube greatly increases the heat transfer surface and minimizes axial heat
conduction [1].

One of the major factors controlling the effectiveness of the heat exchanger is the flow
distribution of each stream. The high pressure side flow is in the tube and thus naturally eliminates
this issue. Sealing ropes are wrapped around the fin-tube coil along the outer and inner diameters
to force the sub-atmospheric flow over the fin-tube coil, rather than bypassing through the annular
gap adjacent to the mandrel and outer shell. Without the sealing rope, the heat transfer from the
high pressure stream will be greatly reduced. As such it is crucial for proper heat exchanger
performance to verify that the sealing rope has been properly installed. However, the sealing rope
increases the pressure drop across the shell-side of the heat exchanger.

Fin-tube cryogenic heat exchangers were extensively used by S. C. Collins in his helium
liquefier [2] and later studied in detail by several other researchers [3–7]. Gupta et al. described a
detailed methodology for design and optimization of fin-tube heat exchangers for cryogenic

1
systems [5] and also presented experimental measurements of shell-side pressure drop in the
laminar flow regime (up to only Re = 150) [7]. However, shell-side pressures drop characteristics
from these earlier studies show large discrepancies and presently there is no exhaustive
experimental data available in literature for calculating the shell side friction factor for these heat
exchangers [7].

In the present study, shell-side pressure drop in the MSU-FRIB J-T heat exchanger is
characterized over a wide range of flow conditions. Non-dimensional variables (friction factor, f
and Reynolds number, Re) were used to generalize the results for similar geometries. Effect of
shell-side flow transition (laminar - turbulent) on the friction factor is investigated. Contribution
of the bypass leakage flow on the overall shell-side pressure drop is also studied. Measurements
presented in this paper can be utilized as benchmark data for this specific heat exchanger design
and also for specifying the fabrication test requirement.

2. Heat Exchanger Design

A helical coil fin-tube heat exchanger consists of an inner shell (mandrel), outer shell and
finned tube coil. Cross-section of a typical fin-tube coil heat exchanger is shown in figure 1. When
employed as a J-T heat exchanger, the high pressure 4.5 K helium flows through the inside of the
tube, while the sub-atmospheric (nominally) 2.0 K helium flows across the fins and over outside
the tube.

Fig. 1: Cross-section of a typical fin-tube heat exchanger (single pass, single wrap) [4]

In the present study, pressure drop characteristics in heat exchangers built from two different
designs were evaluated. These are the ‘Prototype’ and the ‘Final’ heat exchanger designs. Heat
exchanger cross-sections for these two designs are shown in figure 2. Both of these designs employ
helical fin-tube coils (obtained from Energy Transfer - MDE). However, the methods of fin
attachment to the tube are different. The Prototype design has soldered fins while the Final design
has brazed fins. Figure 3 shows the schematic diagram of the helical fin-tube coil construction and
as-built photographs of the finned tube coil.

2
Fig. 2: Cross-section of the prototype heat exchanger (top) and the final heat exchanger (bottom)

Fig. 3: Manufacturer model (left) and as-built photographs of fin-tube coil with (middle) and
without (right) the sealing rope.

Overall length of the Prototype heat exchanger is around 27.5 inches while that of the Final
heat exchanger is around 24.5 inches. Both of these designs utilize solid braid sealing ropes (nylon
for Prototype design and PET for Final design) to minimize the diametric bypass leakage flow.
Shell to rope overlap for the Prototype heat exchangers and the Final heat exchangers are 0.0825
inches and 0.0725 inches respectively. Four different heat exchangers (HX 1, HX 2, HX 3 and HX

3
4) fabricated from these two designs were considered. Moreover, pressure drop characteristics in
HX 4 were evaluated with and without the sealing rope. HX 4 without sealing rope is designated
as HX 5. This was done to investigate the effect of the sealing rope on the pressure drop and also
to ensure that the rope has been installed properly. Geometrical parameters for the heat exchangers
used are given in table 1.

Table 1: Heat exchanger geometrical parameters (dimensions are in inches)

Design Prototype Final


HX ID HX 1 HX 2 HX 3 HX 4 / HX 5
Coil Diameter, Dc 5.625 5.625 3.375 5.625

Mandrel Outside Diameter, Dmo 4.500 4.500 2.500 4.500

Shell Inside Diameter, Dsi 6.750 6.750 4.260 6.760

Fin Density, n 9 12 12 12

Fin-Tube Diameter, df 1.125 1.125 0.875 1.125

Tube Diameter, do 0.500 0.500 0.375 0.500

Fin Thickness, t 0.018 0.018 0.025 0.025

Number of Coils, Nc 16 16 21 16

3. Experimental Setup

A schematic diagram of the experimental setup used to measure the shell-side pressure drop in
the heat exchanger is shown in figure 4. The setup is equipped with a relief valve (1 IPS, 75.0 psig
set point) to protect the heat exchanger and instrumentation from any accidental over-
pressurization. Inlet flow of the gas is first passed through a set of flow straighteners to remove
any lateral/swirling motion. An outlet valve is placed at the downstream of the venturi meter to
keep air and moisture out of the test section while the setup is not in operation.

Pressure drop across the heat exchanger (shell-side) is measured using a differential pressure
gage (Dwyer Series 2000 Magnehelic Differential Pressure Gage, Range: 0-5 in. of water,
accuracy: ± 2% of full scale). Mass flow rate through the heat exchanger is measured using a
venturi meter tube (Veris Inc., 1 IPS Sch. 10, throat diameter: 0.320 in.) connected downstream of
the heat exchanger. A differential pressure transmitter (Rosemount 1151 Differential Pressure
Transmitter, range: 0-750 in. of water, accuracy: ± 0.2% of full scale) is used for the measurement
of venturi pressure drop. Inlet temperature is measured with thermocouples (K Type, Omega TC
Datalogger Thermometer). Both the inlet and outlet pressures are monitored using pressure gages
(range: 100 psig, accuracy: 0.25% of full scale).

4
Gaseous nitrogen (GN2) at ambient temperature was used for the experiment. The setup is
purged with nitrogen to get rid of residual air and moisture before each test.

Fig. 4: Schematic diagram (left) and physical arrangement (right) of the pressure drop test setup.

4. Measurement and Calculation

4.1 Flow Measurement using Venturi


Mass flow rate though the heat exchanger (shell-side) was measured with a cylindrical venturi.
For measurements with higher flow rates, sonic conditions were experienced at the venturi throat.
Analytical methods for calculating the theoretical mass flow through a sonic venturi (based on
measured upstream pressure and temperature) are provided by ASME Performance Test Code
(PTC) 19.5. However, the discharge coefficient (Cd) correlation provided in the PTC is not valid
for the Reynold’s number range observed in the test. Also, the design of the test venturi differs
slightly from that required by the ASME PTC for a sonic venturi. To quantify this difference, flow
in the test venturi is numerically simulated with ANSYS CFX (Release 16.1). The discharge
coefficient is then calculated by taking the ratio of this calculated ‘actual’ mass flow to the
theoretical mass flow (refer to ASME PTC 19.5).

4.1.1 Numerical Model and Results


The flow and thermal transport processes in the venturi is modeled by the hydrodynamic
description for an isotropic, Newtonian, compressible and dissipative (viscous and heat-
conducting) fluid. Compressible forms of the mass, momentum and energy equations are
simultaneously solved. The numerical scheme for solving the governing equations is based on the
finite element method. The continuity, momentum and energy equations are discretized using the

5
second order upwind scheme. At the experiment condition (up to 25 psig and ambient
temperature), nitrogen exhibits nearly ideal gas behavior and hence the Ideal Gas law is considered
as the equation of state describing the -p-T relation. Fourth order polynomials are employed in
this study to represent the thermal conductivity, dynamic viscosity and specific heat as a function
of temperature (only) using data provided by the NIST Standard Reference Database 23.

Fig. 5: Section of the simulation domain with boundaries.

Figure 5 shows the section of the simulation domain with the boundaries. The total pressure
1  2
( p0  ps   u ) at the inlet boundary is specified, while the static pressure is specified at the
2
outlet boundary. A symmetry boundary condition is applied along the axis of symmetry, i.e.
X
 0 , where X is the variable being solved (velocity, pressure or temperature) and n is the
n
direction perpendicular to the axis of symmetry. Along the wall, a no-slip boundary is used for the
 T
velocity (i.e. u  0 ) and an adiabatic boundary (  0 ) is used for the temperature. The inlet
n
temperature of the fluid is also specified. Computed mass flow through the inlet section is obtained
from the following equation -

m CFD    u dA … (1)
A

Theoretical mass flow rate through the sonic venturi is calculated from ASME PTC 19.5; using
the following equation -

* *
p0 A Ci
m theo  … (2)
ZRT 0

Here, p0 and T0 are the stagnation pressure and temperature at inlet respectively. A* is the throat
(  1)

 2  (  1 )
area and Ci* is the critical flow function given by    . Z is the compressibility factor of
 1
the fluid. The specific heat ratio (γ) and the compressibility factor (Z) at the inlet condition are

6
obtained from NIST Standard Reference Database 23. The inlet Mach number is considered to be
very small; hence the static condition is taken to be equal to the stagnation condition at that
location. The critical pressure ratio for a diatomic gas like nitrogen is approx. 0.5283. Therefore,
the simulations were performed at a pressure ratio equal to this or lower; namely, with inlet
pressure ranging from 14 psig to 25 psig. The coefficient of discharge of the venturi for these flow
conditions was calculated using the following definition -

m CFD
Cd  … (3)
m theo

Contours of Mach number in the venturi for an inlet pressure of 14 psig (outlet pressure 0.0
psig) are shown in figure 6. The location of the shock wave moves further downstream as the inlet
pressure is increased. However, the mass flow remains choked and changes only with inlet
condition of the fluid, as would be expected.

Fig. 6: Contours of mach number in the venturi for pi = 14.0 psig (po = 0.0 psig)

Figure 7 shows the ANSYS CFX calculated coefficient of discharge (Cd) and that obtained
from ASME PTC 19.5. As can be seen, the Reynold’s number for the simulated cases is at least
an order of magnitude higher than the coefficient of discharge from the PTC and, a fairly constant
discharge coefficient (Cd ~ 0.993) is obtained. However, even spanning over several orders of
magnitude, the variation between the PTC data and the simulation results is less than 0.5%.

7
Fig. 7: Sonic venturi coefficient of discharge (Cd) vs. reynolds number (Red) obtained from
ASME PTC 19.5 and the CFD analysis

Note that the Reynolds number (Red) mentioned in this section is related to the flow through
the venturi and is defined as 4 m /  d , where d is the venturi throat diameter. It should not be
confused with the heat exchanger shell-side Reynolds number (Re(I) or Re(II)) discussed in the
following sections.

4.2 Calculation of Friction Factor


The characterization of the shell-side pressure drop with respect to the (measured) mass flow
rate is according to the usual non-dimensional relationship of the (Fanning) friction factor (f) vs.
the Reynold’s number (Re). However, the definitions of the hydraulic radius (or diameter), used
in the Reynold’s number and flow resistance, and (‘free’ or ‘projected’) flow cross-sectional area,
used in the mass flux, vary considerably in the literature. In the present paper, friction factors are
calculated following two different studies - Method I (based on CTI [4]) and Method II (based on
Gupta et al. [6,7]). Both of these methods use projected area for calculating the flow cross area.
However, the finned tube surface area calculation is approached differently. These methods are
described in the following sections -

4.2.1 Calculation Using Method I


The following applies to the shell side with a single wrap -
For the Euler number (i.e., stagnation pressure), the projected cross-sectional area is used for the
mass flux

8
𝐴𝑐(𝑝) = 𝜋𝐷𝑐 ∙ (𝑑𝑓 − 𝑑𝑜 ) ∙ (1 − 𝑛 ∙ 𝑡) … (4)
This is the free flow cross-sectional area as if the coil had no helix angle, cut through the tube
center line (by an imaginary plane perpendicular to the coil axis). So, the mass flux used for the
𝑚̇ 𝐺(𝑝) 2
Euler number is 𝐺(𝑝) = 𝐴 and the Euler number is 𝐸𝑢(𝑝) = . However, the volume averaged
𝑐(𝑝) 2𝜌
flow cross-sectional area is used for the hydraulic radius and the mass flux used for the Reynolds
number,
𝐴𝑐(𝑣) = 14𝜋 2 𝐷𝑐 ∙ (𝑑𝑓 2 − 𝑑𝑜 2 ) ∙ (1 − 𝑛 ∙ 𝑡)/𝑑𝑓 … (5)
This is the annular volume between the circular fins for one coil divided by the fin outside
diameter. The heat transfer surface area per unit length along the coil axis (which can also be
known as the average heated perimeter) is taken as
𝑛
𝐴𝑠(𝐼) ′ = 𝜋 2 𝐷𝑐 ∙ [ 2 (𝑑𝑓2 − 𝑑𝑜2 ) + 𝑑𝑜 ] /𝑑𝑓 … (6)
This is the tube surface outside diameter and both sides of the fin faces; so, it includes the fin base
area (which it should not) and does not include the fin tip area (which it should). It also treats the
𝐴𝑐(𝑣)
coil length as 𝜋𝐷𝑐 . So, the hydraulic radius is 𝑟ℎ(𝐼) = 𝐴 ′ and the Reynold’s number is found as
𝑠(𝐼)
𝐺(𝑣) ∙(4𝑟ℎ(𝐼) ) 4∙𝑚̇
𝑅𝑒(𝐼) = = 𝜇∙𝐴 ′ … (7)
𝜇 𝑠(𝐼)
𝑚̇
Where the mass flux used for the Reynolds number is 𝐺(𝑣) = 𝐴 .
𝑐(𝑣)
p
Shell-side friction factor is obtained from f(I )  , where, 𝐿 is the axial length of
 
Eu ( p)
 L 
rh ( I )
 
the helical coil and Δp is the measured shell-side pressure drop across the heat exchanger.

4.2.2 Calculation using Method II

This method is mainly based on the work by Gupta et al. as described in [6] and [7]. However,
there are some discrepancies present in the definition of the average heated perimeter. In [6], coil
pitch (df) is used as the characteristic length for the calculation of average heated perimeter while
in [7], overall length of the shell (Ls) is used. In the present study, coil pitch (df) was chosen as the
characteristic length. The following applies to the shell side with a single wrap -
The flow cross-sectional area used for the mass flux 𝐺(𝑝) is the same as in equ. 4, and is
associated with the Euler number 𝐸𝑢(𝑝) , Reynolds number and hydraulic radius.
The heat transfer surface area per unit length along the coil axis (which can also be known as the
average heated perimeter) is taken as

𝑛 2
𝐴𝑠 ′ = 𝜋 2 𝐷𝑐 ∙ [ 2 (𝑑𝑓 − 𝑑𝑜 ) + 𝑑𝑜 (1 − 𝑛 ∙ 𝑡) + 𝑑𝑓 ∙ 𝑛 ∙ 𝑡] /𝑑𝑓 … (8)

This is both sides of the fin faces and the tube surface area adjacent to the fins and the fin tip area.
𝐴𝑐(𝑝)
It also treats the coil length as 𝜋𝐷𝑐 . The hydraulic radius is 𝑟ℎ(𝐼𝐼) = . The Reynold’s number
𝐴𝑠 ′
is found as,
𝐺∙(4𝑟ℎ(𝐼𝐼) ) 4∙𝑚̇
𝑅𝑒(𝐼𝐼) = = 𝜇∙𝐴 ′ … (9)
𝜇 𝑠

9
p
Shell-side friction factor is obtained from f ( II )  , where, 𝐿 is the axial length of
 
Eu ( p)
 L 
r h ( II )
 
the helical coil and Δp is the measured shell-side pressure drop across the heat exchanger.

5. Results and Discussion

Pressure drop measurements in the four different heat exchangers (as presented in section 2)
are discussed in this section. Out of these four, both the Prototype design heat exchangers (HX 1
and HX 2) have similar dimensions, but Prototype HX 2 has a higher fin density (12 fpi) than
Prototype HX 1 (9 fpi). Final design heat exchangers (HX 3 and HX 4) have different shell sizes
(and hence different aspect ratio). The Final design heat exchangers are around 3 inches shorter
and the shell diametrical tolerance is slightly less (tighter) than the Prototype versions. All of these
factors affect the pressure drop characteristics of the heat exchangers. Variation of the friction
factor (f) over a wide range of Reynolds number (Re) for each of these heat exchangers are
presented in the present section. The measured data and calculated parameters are included in the
appendix section.

(a)

10
(b)

Fig. 8: Variation of friction factor (f) over a wide range of Reynolds number (Re) for the
prototype design calculated using (a) method I [4] and (b) method II [6,7].

Figure 8 shows the variation of friction factor (f) as a function of Reynolds number (Re) for
the Prototype design calculated using both the methods described in section 4.2. A typical power
law relationship between these two parameters is observed at low Reynolds numbers. Both the
Prototype heat exchangers (HX 1 and HX 2) provided similar values of friction factor for the same
Reynolds number. At higher Reynolds numbers, a discontinuity similar to the laminar-turbulent
transition is observed. For HX 2, this transition occurs at a relatively lower Reynolds number (ReI
≈ 550, ReII ≈ 1200) than in HX 1 (ReI ≈ 600, ReII ≈ 1300). This is mainly due to the higher fin
density in HX 2 as compared to that in HX 1 affecting the hydraulic radius (rh) of the flow. In the
turbulent regime, the friction factor varies slightly with increasing Reynolds number (Re).
However, there is not enough data to quantify the friction factor vs. Reynolds number relationship.

The following power law fits for the data (laminar flow regime) were obtained -
 0 . 6904
f ( I )  7 . 5862 Re (I) … (10)
Here, Re(I) ≤ 550
 0 . 6962
f ( II )  25 . 943 Re (II) … (11)
Here, Re(II) ≤ 1200

11
Figure 9 shows the variation of friction factor (f) as a function of Reynolds number (Re) for
the Final design heat exchangers. For the sake of comparison, values obtained from Prototype HX
2 are also repeated here. Both the Final heat exchangers (HX 3 and HX 4) provided similar values
of friction factor for the same Reynolds number. However, around 30% decrease in the friction
factor from the Prototype (HX 2) was observed. This can be due to the combination of several
factors - smaller overlap between the sealing rope and shell (see section 2), dimensional differences
between the shell and fin-tube coil, different fin thicknesses, different types of ropes (Nylon vs.
PET) used, different fabrication process used for fin attachment (soldered vs. brazed) and
difference in overall manufacturing / assembly process for the heat exchangers.

For Final HX 4, the observed critical Reynolds numbers (using both Methods I and II) are
similar to that observed for the Prototype design (HX 1 and HX 2). However, for Final HX 3, it is
significantly higher. Critical Reynolds number is ReI ≈ 550 and ReII ≈ 1200 for HX 4 as compared
to ReI ≈ 1100 and ReII ≈ 2200 for HX 3. The laminar-turbulent transition is possibly governed by
the ratio of fin-tube to tube diameter (df / do). Turbulent friction factors for HX 4 varies slightly
within the measured range while that for HX 3 demonstrates significant deviation with increasing
Reynolds number (Re). There is not enough data in this regime to quantify the friction factor vs.
Reynolds number relationship.

(a)

12
(b)
Fig. 9: Variation of friction factor (f) over a wide range of Reynolds number (Re) for the final
design calculated using (a) method I [4] and (b) method II [6,7].

The following power law fits for the data (laminar flow regime) were obtained. Most of the
experimental values of friction factor can be predicted within ±5% error band with this equation.

 0 . 5269
f ( I )  1 . 6542 Re (I) … (12)
Here, Re(I) ≤ 1100 (HX 3)
Re(I) ≤ 550 (HX 4)
 0 . 5569
f ( I )  5 . 5583 Re (II) … (13)
Here, Re(II) ≤ 2200 (HX 3)
Re(II) ≤ 1200 (HX 4)

Effect of the sealing rope on the pressure drop characteristics was also studied. The Final
design HX 4 was chosen for this investigation. Pressure drop characteristics in this heat exchanger
with and without the sealing rope are shown in figure 10. The modified heat exchanger (i.e. without
the sealing rope) is denoted as No-Rope HX 5. Without the sealing rope, a higher bypass/leakage
flow ensues in the heat exchanger resulting in a much reduced friction factor in the shell-side.
Depending on the flow, the friction factor can be reduced by a factor of 2-3 when the sealing rope
is excluded. However, the laminar-turbulent transition (i.e. critical Reynolds number) is not
affected by the existence of the sealing rope.

13
(a)

(b)
Fig. 10: Effect of sealing rope on the friction factor (f) over a wide range of Reynolds number
(Re) for the final design calculated using (a) method I [4] and (b) method II [6,7].

14
For the sake of clarity, the measured pressure drop (Δp) in the heat exchangers (HX 4 and HX
5) as a function of the mass flow ( m ) through the shell-side is shown in figure 11. It was observed
that, for a nominal flow of 5.0 g/s (GN2 at ambient temperature) - the sealing rope contributes to a
significant portion (about 1/3rd) of the overall pressure drop in the heat exchanger. This is an
indication of the appropriate installation of the sealing rope. For cryogenic applications (saturated
helium vapor at 2.0 K), at ReII = 800 - the overall pressure drop in HX 4 would be insignificant
(less than 1.0 Pa), which indicates a minimal loss of flow exergy in the process stream.

Figure 11: Variation of pressure drop in HX 4 and HX 5 (with and without sealing rope) over a
wide range of GN2 flow.

A total of 36 HX-3 type heat exchangers and 18 HX-4 type heat exchangers were fabricated
as part of the MSU-FRIB cryo-modules. Shell-side friction factor values in each of these heat
exchangers were obtained for quality control (QC) purposes and compared with the correlation
provided in eqns. (12) and (13). The comparison is shown in figure 12. It is observed that, friction
factor in these manufactured units are within ±10% of the values predicted by the correlation
(Eqns. 12 and 13). In a majority of the units (49 out of the 54 heat exchangers built), the friction
factor is higher (but within 10% of the prediction) than the value predicted by the correlation,
which indicates proper installation of the sealing rope.

15
(a)

16
(b)
Fig. 12: Shell-side friction factor (f) values in manufactured heat exchangers (HX-3 and HX-4
type) compared with correlations obtained using (a) method I [4] and (b) method II [6,7].

6. Conclusions

Shell-side pressure drop characteristics in helical fin-tube coil heat exchangers were
investigated experimentally for a wide range of flow conditions. Laminar-turbulent flow transition
and its effect on the pressure drop characteristics were observed. The effect of bypass leakage flow
on the overall shell-side pressure drop was also studied.

The results obtained from present investigation for shell-side pressure drop in the low flow
regime exhibits a typical power law relationship. Correlations for estimation of shell-side friction
factors in helical fin-tube coils are proposed. These correlations predict the experimental values
within maximum ±5% error band. At higher Reynolds numbers, a discontinuity in the measured
friction factor similar to the laminar-turbulent transition was observed. However, more
investigation in the transitional flow regime is needed to characterize this behavior. The bypass
leakage flow in the shell-side was found to affect the pressure drop characteristics significantly.
For the nominal operating flow (approx. 5.0 g/s), using the sealing rope to minimize bypass leakage
flow was found to contribute to around a third of the overall shell-side pressure drop.

7. Acknowledgement

The authors would like to express their appreciation and thanks to the TJNAF and FRIB
management and to their colleagues for their support. This work was supported by Jefferson
Science Associates, LLC under the U.S. Department of Energy contract no. DE-AC05-
06OR23177. This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy Office
of Science under Cooperative Agreement DE-SC0000661. Michigan State University designs and
establishes FRIB as a DOE Office of Science National User Facility in support of the mission of
the Office of Nuclear Physics. The FRIB/JLab collaboration is supported by Work for Others
Agreement No. JSA 2012W003 between JSA and MSU.

8. Nomenclature

Variable Description
𝑑𝑜 Outside diameter of tube
𝑑𝑓 Diameter of fin-tube (to tip of fin); also, the coil pitch
ℎ𝑓 Height of fin, = (𝑑𝑓 − 𝑑𝑜 )/2
𝐷𝑐 Coil diameter (coil axis to tube center)
𝐷𝑚 Mandrel diameter, = 𝐷𝑐 − 𝑑𝑓
𝑛 Fin density (number of fins per unit length along tube)
𝑡 Fin thickness
𝐴𝑐 Flow cross-sectional area
𝐴𝑠 ′ Heat transfer surface area per length along coil axis
𝐿 Coil axial length, = 𝑁𝑐 ∙ 𝑑𝑓

17
𝑁𝑐 Number of coils
𝐷ℎ Hydraulic diameter, = 4𝑟ℎ
𝑟ℎ Hydraulic radius
𝐺 Mass flux
𝜌 Fluid density
𝜇 Fluid dynamic viscosity
𝐸𝑢 Euler number (stagnation pressure)
𝑅𝑒 Reynolds number
𝑓 Fanning friction factor, = 𝜁 ⁄(𝐿⁄𝑟ℎ )
𝜁 Flow resistance, = ∆𝑝⁄𝐸𝑢
∆𝑝 Pressure drop

References

[1] Scott R. Critical Components of Liquefiers. Cryog. Eng. 1st ed., Princeton, NJ: D. Van
Nostrand Company, Inc.; 1963, p. 18–20.
[2] Collins SC. A Helium Cryostat. Rev Sci Instrum 1947;18:157–67. doi:10.1063/1.1740913.
[3] Croft AJ, Tebby PB. The design of finned-tube cryogenic heat exchangers. Cryogenics
1970;10:236–8. doi:10.1016/0011-2275(70)90108-6.
[4] Ganni V. Appendix E: Fin Tube Heat Exchanger Analysis. Des. Optim. Helium Refrig. Liq.
Syst. 1st ed., Tucson, AZ: Cryogenic Society of America; 2009.
[5] Gupta PK, Kush PK, Tiwari A. Design and optimization of coil finned-tube heat exchangers
for cryogenic applications. Cryogenics 2007;47:322–32.
doi:10.1016/j.cryogenics.2007.03.010.
[6] Gupta PK, Kush PK, Tiwari A. Experimental research on heat transfer coefficients for
cryogenic cross-counter-flow coiled finned-tube heat exchangers. Int J Refrig 2009;32:960–
72. doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2008.10.015.
[7] Gupta PK, Kush PK, Tiwari A. Experimental studies on pressure drop characteristics of
cryogenic cross-counter flow coiled finned tube heat exchangers. Cryogenics 2010;50:257–
65. doi:10.1016/j.cryogenics.2010.01.012.

18
Appendix: Shell-Side Pressure Drop - Measured and Calculated Parameters

Prototype HX 1
Venturi HX Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet Mass
Venturi Pressure Pressure Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure Flow Rate
No. Flow Drop Drop Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReII fI fII
o
[ C] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [g/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
1 302.95 0.00 3.45 0.05 2.27 79.12 170.05 0.46 0.86
2 302.85 0.00 11.04 0.10 4.06 141.48 304.07 0.29 0.55
3 302.85 0.00 24.55 0.15 6.04 210.67 452.79 0.20 0.39
4 302.85 0.00 37.36 0.20 7.44 259.54 557.83 0.18 0.35
Sub-Sonic

5 302.95 0.25 48.21 0.25 8.48 295.65 635.44 0.16 0.31


6 303.15 0.25 64.96 0.30 9.84 342.90 736.99 0.15 0.28
7 303.35 0.50 81.71 0.35 11.03 383.97 825.27 0.14 0.26
8 303.55 0.75 101.43 0.40 12.27 427.14 918.05 0.13 0.25
9 303.95 1.25 139.57 0.50 14.36 499.49 1073.56 0.12 0.23
10 304.25 2.50 202.32 0.55 17.23 598.52 1286.40 0.10 0.19
11 304.45 3.75 231.23 0.60 18.35 637.14 1369.39 0.10 0.20
12 304.95 14.00 - 0.85 23.23 804.92 1730.01 0.14 0.27
Sonic

13 305.35 15.75 - 0.90 24.63 852.55 1832.38 0.14 0.27


14 305.35 21.00 - 1.00 28.88 999.42 2148.04 0.13 0.26

Prototype HX 2
Venturi HX Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet Mass
Venturi Pressure Pressure Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure Flow Rate
No. Flow Drop Drop Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReII fI fII
o
[ C] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [g/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
1 294.15 0.00 4.69 0.10 2.69 73.63 162.99 0.42 0.83
2 294.15 0.00 13.20 0.20 4.50 123.41 273.19 0.31 0.60
3 294.25 0.00 23.60 0.30 6.01 164.77 364.73 0.27 0.52
4 294.45 0.25 37.09 0.40 7.55 206.75 457.66 0.22 0.42
Sub-Sonic

5 294.55 0.40 49.49 0.50 8.71 238.61 528.19 0.20 0.40


6 294.75 0.50 66.29 0.60 10.08 275.84 610.60 0.18 0.36
7 294.95 0.75 84.70 0.70 11.38 311.30 689.10 0.17 0.33
8 295.15 1.00 108.82 0.80 12.88 352.30 779.84 0.16 0.30
9 295.25 1.40 137.62 0.90 14.47 395.56 875.61 0.14 0.28
10 295.45 2.25 185.71 1.00 16.76 458.01 1013.84 0.12 0.24
11 295.65 4.50 241.70 1.10 19.00 518.87 1148.56 0.12 0.23
12 295.95 15.50 - 1.50 24.81 676.56 1497.63 0.15 0.29
Sonic

13 295.95 18.00 - 1.60 26.87 732.52 1621.51 0.15 0.29


14 295.75 22.25 - 1.70 30.38 828.36 1833.66 0.14 0.27

19
Final HX 3
Venturi HX Mass Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet
Venturi Pressure Pressure Flow Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure
No. Flow Drop Drop Rate Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReII fI fII
[oC] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [g/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
1 291.25 0.00 2.08 0.10 1.80 102.93 209.66 0.15 0.27
2 291.25 0.00 6.76 0.20 3.24 185.46 377.78 0.09 0.17
3 291.25 0.25 15.73 0.40 4.94 282.90 576.28 0.08 0.15
4 291.25 0.25 25.50 0.60 6.29 360.20 733.74 0.07 0.14
5 291.25 0.25 35.82 0.80 7.46 426.91 869.63 0.07 0.13
6 291.25 0.50 47.93 1.00 8.62 493.47 1005.21 0.07 0.12
7 291.15 0.50 59.86 1.20 9.63 551.71 1123.86 0.06 0.12
8 291.15 0.75 75.51 1.40 10.81 619.20 1261.34 0.06 0.11
9 291.05 0.75 94.11 1.60 12.07 691.57 1408.76 0.06 0.10
10 291.05 1.00 116.51 1.80 13.42 768.93 1566.35 0.05 0.09
11 290.95 1.50 142.98 2.00 14.85 850.97 1733.46 0.05 0.09
12 290.95 2.25 185.18 2.20 16.87 966.40 1968.59 0.04 0.08
13 290.85 3.50 223.60 2.40 18.48 1058.74 2156.70 0.04 0.08
14 290.95 0.00 1.85 0.10 1.70 97.20 198.00 0.17 0.31
15 290.95 0.00 5.38 0.20 2.89 165.69 337.52 0.12 0.21
16 290.95 0.25 13.08 0.40 4.51 258.31 526.19 0.10 0.18
17 290.95 0.25 23.08 0.60 5.99 343.13 698.97 0.08 0.15
Sub-Sonic

18 290.95 0.25 34.47 0.80 7.32 419.34 854.21 0.07 0.13


19 290.95 0.50 47.01 1.00 8.54 489.35 996.83 0.07 0.12
20 290.95 0.50 59.73 1.20 9.63 551.60 1123.62 0.06 0.12
21 290.95 0.75 75.45 1.40 10.81 619.50 1261.94 0.06 0.11
22 290.95 0.75 93.24 1.60 12.02 688.67 1402.85 0.06 0.10
23 290.85 1.00 113.65 1.80 13.26 760.10 1548.36 0.05 0.10
24 290.85 1.50 142.56 2.00 14.83 850.09 1731.67 0.05 0.09
25 290.85 2.25 179.84 2.20 16.62 952.78 1940.84 0.04 0.08
26 290.85 3.50 221.27 2.40 18.38 1053.21 2145.43 0.04 0.08
27 290.85 4.50 241.23 2.50 19.14 1096.74 2234.11 0.04 0.08
28 292.25 0.00 1.94 0.10 1.73 98.97 201.60 0.16 0.29
29 292.15 0.00 6.32 0.20 3.13 178.62 363.87 0.10 0.18
30 292.05 0.00 11.63 0.30 4.24 242.28 493.53 0.08 0.15
31 292.05 0.25 16.59 0.40 5.07 289.52 589.76 0.08 0.14
32 292.05 0.25 20.73 0.50 5.66 323.63 659.25 0.08 0.14
33 291.95 0.25 26.33 0.60 6.38 364.90 743.31 0.07 0.13
34 291.95 0.25 31.17 0.70 6.95 397.02 808.74 0.07 0.13
35 291.85 0.25 35.80 0.80 7.45 425.67 867.11 0.07 0.13
36 291.85 0.50 41.28 0.90 7.99 456.76 930.43 0.07 0.13

20
Venturi HX Mass Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet
Venturi Pressure Pressure Flow Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure
No. Flow Drop Drop Rate Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReII fI fII
o
[ C] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [g/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
37 291.85 0.50 47.65 1.00 8.58 490.74 999.65 0.07 0.12
38 291.75 0.50 60.50 1.20 9.67 553.20 1126.89 0.06 0.12
39 291.65 0.75 75.26 1.40 10.78 616.83 1256.50 0.06 0.11
Sub-Sonic

40 291.55 0.75 94.28 1.60 12.07 690.68 1406.95 0.06 0.10


41 291.55 1.00 117.05 1.80 13.44 769.03 1566.54 0.05 0.09
42 291.45 1.50 144.73 2.00 14.93 854.29 1740.22 0.05 0.09
43 291.45 2.25 182.49 2.20 16.73 957.25 1949.96 0.04 0.08
44 291.35 3.50 225.49 2.40 18.54 1060.88 2161.06 0.04 0.08
45 291.25 4.50 245.26 2.50 19.29 1103.93 2248.75 0.04 0.08
46 291.35 14.50 - 3.10 24.18 1382.86 2816.93 0.05 0.09
47 291.25 17.50 - 3.20 26.67 1525.51 3107.51 0.05 0.09
48 291.35 22.25 - 3.30 30.61 1749.59 3563.99 0.04 0.08
49 290.95 14.00 - 3.10 23.78 1361.58 2773.59 0.05 0.09
Sonic

50 290.85 17.50 - 3.20 26.69 1528.18 3112.97 0.05 0.09


51 290.95 22.50 - 3.30 30.84 1764.52 3594.38 0.04 0.08
52 290.95 14.25 - 3.10 23.99 1373.43 2797.73 0.05 0.09
53 290.85 17.75 - 3.20 26.90 1540.04 3137.12 0.05 0.09
54 290.85 22.50 - 3.30 30.84 1765.29 3595.96 0.04 0.08

Final HX 4
Venturi HX Mass Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet
Venturi Pressure Pressure Flow Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure
No. Flow Drop Drop Rate Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReII fI fII
o
[ C] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [g/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
1 285.05 0.00 8.86 0.10 3.75 105.30 229.05 0.16 0.31
2 284.95 0.25 16.60 0.15 5.13 144.23 313.73 0.13 0.25
3 284.95 0.25 26.00 0.20 6.42 180.50 392.63 0.11 0.21
4 284.95 0.50 39.63 0.25 7.92 222.68 484.39 0.09 0.18
5 284.85 0.50 52.70 0.30 9.14 256.90 558.83 0.08 0.16
Sub-Sonic

6 284.85 0.50 61.34 0.35 9.86 277.16 602.90 0.08 0.16


7 284.85 0.75 74.42 0.40 10.85 305.07 663.60 0.08 0.15
8 284.85 0.75 84.01 0.45 11.53 324.13 705.06 0.08 0.15
9 284.85 1.00 106.66 0.50 12.98 364.95 793.87 0.07 0.14
10 284.85 1.25 134.31 0.55 14.56 409.24 890.21 0.06 0.12
11 284.85 1.50 147.77 0.60 15.26 428.95 933.08 0.06 0.12
12 284.85 2.25 180.99 0.65 16.85 473.72 1030.47 0.06 0.11
13 284.85 3.25 205.59 0.70 17.91 503.50 1095.25 0.06 0.11

21
Venturi HX Mass Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet
Venturi Pressure Pressure Flow Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure
No. Flow Drop Drop Rate Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReII fI fII
o
[ C] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [g/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
14 284.35 0.00 8.78 0.10 3.74 105.15 228.73 0.16 0.31
15 284.25 0.25 16.87 0.15 5.18 145.85 317.27 0.13 0.24
16 284.15 0.25 28.06 0.20 6.68 188.19 409.36 0.10 0.19
17 284.05 0.50 34.16 0.25 7.37 207.58 451.54 0.11 0.20
18 284.05 0.50 46.42 0.30 8.59 241.98 526.37 0.09 0.18
19 284.05 0.50 58.93 0.35 9.68 272.64 593.07 0.09 0.17
20 284.05 0.75 68.83 0.40 10.45 294.44 640.49 0.09 0.16
21 283.95 0.75 80.03 0.45 11.27 317.64 690.95 0.08 0.16
22 283.85 1.00 99.26 0.50 12.55 353.65 769.29 0.08 0.15
23 283.85 1.25 127.01 0.55 14.18 399.76 869.58 0.07 0.13
24 283.95 1.50 144.64 0.60 15.12 426.11 926.89 0.06 0.12
25 283.95 2.25 181.98 0.65 16.93 476.95 1037.48 0.06 0.11
Sub-Sonic

26 283.95 3.25 218.11 0.70 18.48 520.71 1132.68 0.06 0.11


27 284.55 0.00 4.17 0.05 2.57 72.44 157.57 0.17 0.33
28 284.55 0.00 11.38 0.10 4.25 119.57 260.10 0.13 0.24
29 284.55 0.25 18.58 0.15 5.43 152.86 332.51 0.12 0.22
30 284.55 0.25 30.72 0.20 6.99 196.55 427.55 0.09 0.18
31 284.45 0.50 42.02 0.25 8.17 229.81 499.90 0.09 0.17
32 284.45 0.50 54.72 0.30 9.32 262.25 570.47 0.08 0.15
33 284.45 0.50 66.93 0.35 10.31 290.04 630.91 0.08 0.15
34 284.45 0.75 76.95 0.40 11.04 310.77 676.00 0.08 0.15
35 284.45 0.75 86.50 0.45 11.71 329.49 716.72 0.08 0.15
36 284.45 1.00 109.74 0.50 13.18 370.85 806.70 0.07 0.13
37 284.35 1.25 127.71 0.55 14.21 399.96 870.01 0.07 0.13
38 284.35 1.50 152.84 0.60 15.53 437.23 951.09 0.06 0.12
39 284.25 2.25 188.77 0.65 17.23 485.11 1055.23 0.06 0.11
40 284.15 3.25 221.49 0.70 18.62 524.26 1140.40 0.05 0.11
41 284.15 14.50 - 1.00 24.49 689.07 1498.90 0.07 0.14
42 284.15 17.75 - 1.10 27.22 765.71 1665.62 0.07 0.14
43 284.05 22.25 - 1.20 31.00 872.21 1897.28 0.07 0.13
44 284.75 14.50 - 1.00 24.46 687.21 1494.85 0.07 0.14
Sonic

45 284.85 17.50 - 1.10 26.97 757.43 1647.59 0.07 0.14


46 284.85 22.00 - 1.20 30.75 863.20 1877.68 0.07 0.14
47 283.95 14.75 - 1.00 24.71 695.59 1513.09 0.07 0.14
48 284.05 17.50 - 1.10 27.01 760.16 1653.54 0.07 0.14
49 284.05 22.50 - 1.20 31.21 878.11 1910.11 0.07 0.13

22
No-Rope HX 5
Venturi HX Fanning
Venturi Inlet Inlet Mass
Venturi Pressure Pressure Reynolds Number Friction
Temperature Pressure Flow Rate
No. Flow Drop Drop Factor
Regime Tvi Pi ΔPVenturi ΔPHX ṁ ReI ReI fI fII
[oC] [psig] [inH2O] [inH2O] [kg/s] [--] [--] [--] [--]
1 288.15 0.25 14.24 0.05 4.73 131.69 286.45 0.05 0.10
2 287.95 0.50 35.12 0.10 7.42 206.84 449.93 0.04 0.08
3 287.85 0.75 61.15 0.15 9.79 272.86 593.53 0.04 0.07
4 287.65 1.00 99.13 0.20 12.45 347.46 755.82 0.03 0.06
5 287.65 1.75 156.61 0.25 15.62 435.80 947.98 0.03 0.05
6 287.25 4.00 231.83 0.30 18.91 527.89 1148.30 0.02 0.05
7 287.75 0.25 15.30 0.05 4.90 136.74 297.45 0.05 0.09
8 287.55 0.50 34.23 0.10 7.33 204.57 444.98 0.04 0.08
Sub-Sonic

9 287.35 0.75 58.67 0.15 9.59 267.86 582.66 0.04 0.07


10 287.35 1.00 101.30 0.20 12.60 351.71 765.07 0.03 0.06
11 287.25 1.75 160.09 0.25 15.81 441.40 960.16 0.02 0.05
12 286.95 4.00 224.77 0.30 18.62 520.49 1132.19 0.02 0.05
13 287.95 0.25 11.89 0.05 4.32 120.44 261.99 0.06 0.11
14 287.85 0.50 38.21 0.10 7.74 215.84 469.51 0.04 0.07
15 287.75 0.75 56.74 0.15 9.43 262.95 571.98 0.04 0.07
16 287.55 1.00 94.61 0.20 12.17 339.60 738.72 0.03 0.06
17 287.55 1.75 166.78 0.25 16.12 449.93 978.71 0.02 0.05
18 287.15 4.00 236.59 0.30 19.10 533.52 1160.55 0.02 0.04
19 287.15 14.75 - 0.45 24.57 685.68 1491.54 0.03 0.06
Sonic

20 287.25 17.25 - 0.50 26.65 743.52 1617.35 0.03 0.06


21 287.15 22.50 - 0.55 31.04 865.99 1883.74 0.03 0.06

23