International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1189–1194

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / i c h m t

Numerical studies on flow and heat transfer in membrane helical-coil heat exchanger
and membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger☆
Zhenxing Zhao, Xiangyu Wang, Defu Che ⁎, Zidong Cao
State Key Laboratory of Multiphase Flow in Power Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 14 July 2011 The flow and heat transfer characteristics of synthesis gas (syngas) in membrane helical-coil heat exchanger
and membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger under different operating pressures, inlet velocities and
Keywords: pitches are investigated numerically. The three-dimensional governing equations for mass, momentum and
Flow and heat transfer heat transfer are solved using a control volume finite difference method. The realizable k-ε model is adopted
Membrane helical-coil heat exchanger to simulate the turbulent flow and heat transfer in heat exchangers. There flows syngas in the channels
Syngas
consisting of the membrane helical coils or membrane serpentine tubes, where the operating pressure varies
Tangential velocity
from 0.5 to 3.0 MPa. The numerically obtained heat transfer coefficients for heat exchangers are in good
agreement with experimental values. The results show that the syngas tangential flow in the channel
consisting of membrane helical coils is significant to the heat transfer enhancement to lead to the higher
average heat transfer coefficient of membrane helical-coil heat exchanger compared to membrane
serpentine-tube heat exchanger. The syngas tangential velocity in the membrane helical-coil heat exchanger
increases along the axial direction, and it is independent of the gas pressure, increasing with the axial velocity
and axial pitch rise and decreasing with the radial pitch rise.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Helical coils have been widely used in heat transfer applications,
for example, heat recovery systems, chemical reactors, power
generation, etc. Recently, the membrane helical-coil heat exchanger
is used for the waste heat recovery system in integrated gasification
combined cycle (IGCC) system due to its high overall heat transfer
coefficient and compact configuration.
There is a considerable amount of work reported on the flow and
heat transfer of fluid inside helically coiled tubes. A review on heat
transfer and friction coefficient correlations in helical or curved ducts
was presented by Vashisth et al. [1]. The experimental studies on
residence time distribution in helical coils for single phase laminar
flow with different cross-sectional geometrics and flow situations
have been reported by Saxena and Nigam [2].
Guo et al. [3] have developed correlations for estimation of Nusselt
number for steady state and pulsating turbulent flow in helical coils.
However, this correlation does not include coil parameters (such as
curvature ratio) and is applicable only to their setup. Lin [4] applied the
k-ε model to study the developing turbulent heat transfer in helical coil
of definite pitch for a constant wall temperature case. Kumar [5] used
☆ Communicated by P. Cheng and W.Q. Tao.
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: zhao.zhenxing@stu.xjtu.edu.cn (Z. Zhao),
wang.xy@stu.xjtu.edu.cn (X. Wang), dfche@mail.xjtu.edu.cn (D. Che),
pro_cao@163.com (Z. Cao).
the renormalization group (RNG) k-ε model to model the turbulent flow
and heat transfer in the tube-in-tube helically coiled heat exchanger and
developed the new empirical correlations for hydrodynamic and heat-
transfer predictions in the outer tube of this heat exchanger.
In addition, considerable investigations on the flow and heat
transfer of the flow across tube banks and finned tubes by means of
either experiments or numerical computations have been carried out.
Beale [6] conducted a detailed numerical study on fluid flow and heat
transfer in tube banks and obtained a potential flow solution. Later
Beale and Spalding [7] extended the previous work for laminar fully-
developed cross flow and heat transfer in tube-bank heat exchangers
and obtained a wide range of results for inline square, rotated square
and equilateral triangle configurations. A series of investigations of
the herringbone wavy fin patterns based on commercially available
samples was conducted by Wang et al. [8,9]. The effects of fin spacing,
number of tube rows, wave height, and edge corrugation were
systematically examined. They presented the correlations applicable
to larger diameter tubes and smaller diameter tubes. Paul et al. [10]
used PIV (Particle Image Velocimetry) method to conduct detailed
velocity measurements in turbulent flow in the staggered tube bundle
at different Reynolds numbers.
Most of these above-mentioned investigations were concerned
with helically coiled tubes, characterized by curvature for the interior
flow and circular cylinders and finned tubes for the external flow. For
membrane helical-coil heat exchanger in IGCC, the flow and heat
transfer characteristics of syngas flow outside membrane helical coils
are very important. However, to the best of our knowledge, few

0735-1933/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2011.06.014
1190 Z. Zhao et al. / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1189–1194

the distance between the two coils (radial pitch) is expressed by s1.
Nomenclature
The heat exchanger had a length of L.
Fig. 1c illustrates the investigated membrane serpentine-tube heat
Af the outer surface area (m 2)
exchanger. Similarly, serpentine tube has a diameter of d, a length of L
d external diameter of helically coiled tube ( mm)
(x-direction) and a width of W (z-direction). The axial pitch is
D diameter of the inner helical coil (mm)
expressed by s2, and the radial pitch is expressed by s1.
ht surface heat transfer coefficient (W/m 2 K)
For membrane helical-coil heat exchanger and membrane ser-
I turbulence intensity (%)
pentine-tube heat exchanger, the hot syngas flows outside the coils
L length of the heat exchanger (mm)
and tubes, respectively.
M molecular weight (g/mol)
n iterations
2.1. Mathematical formulation
Nu Nusselt number
P gas pressure (MPa)
In the present study, the flow is considered to be steady, and CO
Q rate of heat transfer (W)
and H2 are mixed at a molar ratio of 2:1 to simulate the syngas. The
Re Reynolds number
pressure variations in heat exchangers are so small and Mach number
s1 radial pitch (mm)
of syngas is so low that the syngas flow can be considered to be
s2 axial pitch (mm)
incompressible ideal gas, which is similar to the previous work [13],
T temperature (K)
The viscosities of each pure gas and syngas were calculated using
△tm logarithmic temperature difference (K)
Chung's law in Eq. (1), and the other detailed equations used for this
u velocity (m/s)
calculation can be seen in ref. [14].
V volume (cm 3/mol)
W width of the heat exchanger (mm) 0:5 0:5
Fc ðMT Þ 26:69Fcm ðMm T Þ
x spatial position (mm) μ = 40:785 and μm = ð1Þ
2=3
Vc ⋅ Ωv σm Ωv

Heat conductivity and specific heat were calculated by the fifth

Greek letters
order polynomials of temperature, the thermal parameters (except
ε turbulent energy dissipation
viscosity) of syngas were calculated using the mass-weighted mixing
k turbulent kinetic energy
law.
ρ density of fluid (kg/m 3)
At the inlet, syngas with temperature T0 enters the heat exchanger
μ dynamic viscosity (kg/m s)
at the velocity of u0. Turbulent flow and heat transfer develop
σ collision diameter (0.1 nm)
simultaneously downstream in the heat exchanger. The flow is
σk diffusion Prandtl number for k
assumed to be steady. For the turbulent flow and heat transfer
σε turbulent Prandtl number for ε
simulation, the realizable k-ε model is used in this study because the
Ω collision integral
performance of the realizable k-ε model has been found to be
substantially better than that of the standard k-ε model for channel
and boundary layer flows, and separated flows. In this simulation, the
Subscripts
governing equations are N-S equations of which form are well known
0 inlet conditions
and not given in this paper.
c critical state
The two-layer based non-equilibrium wall function [5] was used
m mixture
for the near-wall treatment in the given geometry. This function is
out outlet conditions
recommended for complex flows because of the capability to partly
t tangential
account for the effects of pressure gradients and departure from
w wall condition
equilibrium.
In addition, the constant wall temperature condition is widely
used and validated by the classical models [4], so no slip and
isothermal wall boundary conditions are applied on the coils and
related studies have been reported in the literature. The present
tubes wall.
authors have carried out the experimental investigations on the heat
The uniform profiles at the inlet boundary condition and the
transfer characteristics of membrane helical coils [11,12]. The
diffusion fluxes at the outlet are as follows:
experimental results show that the average heat transfer coefficient
of the membrane helical coil outer surface is higher than that of the ui = u0 ; T = T0 ; k = k0 ; ε = ε0 ⋅ ð2Þ
membrane serpentine tube under the same conditions. However, the
heat transfer enhancement mechanism has not been understood. The ∂
objective of this paper is to numerically study the heat transfer and ðu ; p; T; k; εÞ = 0: ð3Þ
∂n i
flow in the heat exchangers consisting of the membrane helical coils
and membrane serpentine tubes in order to elucidate the mechanism
of heat transfer enhancement for membrane helical coils. 2.2. Numerical computation

2. Description of heat exchangers Three-dimensional numerical simulations of flow and heat

The studied heat exchangers consist of three membrane helical
coils or membrane serpentine tubes. Fig. 1a shows the geometrical
configuration of membrane helical coil, and the geometry considered
for membrane helical-coil heat exchanger is illustrated in Fig. 1b. The
coiled tube has a diameter of d, and is coiled at a diameter D. The
distance between the two turns (axial pitch) is expressed by s2, and
transfer in heat exchangers are obtained using a finite volume based
commercial CFD package (FLUENT 6.3). The SIMPLEC algorithm was
used to resolve the coupling between velocity and pressure. The
convection terms and diffusion terms in the governing equations were
modeled with the bounded second-order upwind scheme.
The unstructured grid system is used in 3-D computational
domain. Fig. 2 depicts the local grid topology on membrane helical
 Z. Zhao et al. / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1189–1194 1191

Fig. 1. Geometry for membrane helical coil (a), Membrane helical-coil heat exchanger (b) and membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger (c).

coil. As shown in Fig. 2, y + adaptive grid refinement is used in this
simulation. In the present study, the y +on the wall was taken in the
range of 30–100. In order to obtain the satisfactory solutions for
membrane helical-coil heat exchanger, the grid independence is
carried out by different computational grid consisting of 650,000,
900,000, 1,350,000, and 1,750,000 volumes. The grid independence
test indicated that the amount of grid of 1,350,000 ensures a
satisfactory and converged solution. This is verified by the fact that
the difference of outlet syngas temperature and heat transfer rate is
within 0.5% between grid of 1,350,000 and grid of 1,750,000.
At the inlet, the syngas with temperature T0 (873 K) enters heat
exchangers. The wall temperature of membrane coils and tubes are
assumed to be uniform, Tw (313 K). Geometry and flow parameters
for heat exchangers are given in Table 1. The numerical computation
is considered to be convergent when the residual summed over all the
computational nodes at the nth iteration is no more than 10 −6.

2.3. Calculation of heat transfer coefficient

The surface heat-transfer coefficient, ht, was calculated from the

inlet and outlet temperature data and the flow rates, using the
following equation:

Q
ht = ð4Þ
Af Δtm

Table 1
Geometrical and flow parameters for heat exchangers.

Case s1/d s2/d L/d W/d D (mm) d (mm) u0 (m/s) P (MPa)

Case 1 1.6 2 20 150 10 2.36 0.5–3.0

Case 2 2 2 20 150 10 2.0 0.5–3.0
Case 3 1.6 2 20 25 10 3.48 0.5–3.0
Case 4 2 2 20 25 10 3.125 0.5–3.0
Case 5 1.6 2 20 150 10 2.0–2.7 0.5–3.0
Fig. 2. The local grid on membrane helical coil.
1192 Z. Zhao et al. / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1189–1194

where Δtm is the logarithmic temperature difference. The surface heat

transfer rates were based on the outer surface area, Af, of the
membrane helical coil or membrane serpentine tube. The Δtm was
calculated based on the syngas inlet temperature, T0, the syngas outlet
temperature, Tout, and the wall temperature, Tw.

T0 −Tout
Δtm = ð5Þ
ln½ðT0 −Tw Þ = ðTout −Tw Þ

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Model validation

In order to verify the present numerical work, the model validation

is conducted at first. Experiments have been carried out to study the
heat transfer of the membrane helical-coil heat exchanger. The heat
exchanger used for the experiments has the same geometrical
parameters as Case 1 or Case 5 listed in Table 1. The gas mixture
(molar ratio N2: He= 2:1) serves as the working fluid. The gas pressure
varies from 0.5 MPa to 3.0 MPa, and gas inlet velocity varies from
1.5 m/s to 3.0 m/s. The uncertainties of the average Nusselt number and
Rayleigh number were less than 4.2% and 3.4%, respectively. The heat
transfer correlation of the membrane helical-coil heat exchanger is
obtained. Fig. 3a shows the comparison between the present numerical
values and the predicted results by the experimental heat transfer
correlation at s1/d = 1.6 for membrane helical-coil heat exchanger
under the operating pressures from 0.5 MPa to 3.0 MPa. It can be seen
that the maximum deviation between the simulated prediction and
experimental correlation prediction is less than 5%. Therefore, the
simulation results are in a good agreement with the predicted results by
experimental correlation.

3.2. Heat transfer coefficient

Fig. 3b and c show the numerically obtained average heat transfer

coefficients, ht, of the inner coil, the intermediate coil, the outer coil
and the heat exchangers at s1/d = 1.6 and s1/d = 2.0. From the figures
it can be observed that ht increases with the increase of the operation
pressure under the same inlet syngas velocity. It demonstrates that
higher operation pressure can improve heat transfer, which is
attributed to the difference in syngas mass flow rate.

3.3. Tangential velocity

It is shown in Fig. 3b that ht of membrane helical-coil heat exchanger

is higher than that of membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger under
the same heat transfer condition, which is consistent with the
experimental results [11]. To clarify the mechanism of this phenomenon,
the effects of flow field within both heat exchangers on heat transfer
were considered by numerical methods. Fig. 4 shows the syngas
tangential velocity, ut, distribution with different cross sections for
Case1 and Case 3 with the same operation pressure (3.0 MPa),
Fig. 3. Nusselt number as function of Reynolds number (a) and heat transfer coefficients
respectively. From the figures, ut in the annular channel consisting of versus operating pressure: (b) Case 1 and Case 3; (c) Case 2 and Case 4.
membrane helical coils is significantly higher than that in the membrane
serpentine-tube parallel channel, while ut in the parallel channel almost
approaches zero. In addition, ut in the membrane helical-coil heat
exchanger increases along the axial direction, whereas ut in the flow and the tangential flow. Therefore, the syngas of the main flow may
membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger is independent of the axial enter the tangential flow continuously, resulting in the velocity rise of
direction. In this simulation, the syngas density is mainly influenced by the tangential flow.
the syngas temperature due to the small pressure variations in heat For the membrane helical-coil heat exchanger, there is a helical
exchangers. As the syngas temperature decreases along the axial groove in the annular channel, and thus makes fluid near the wall
direction, its density increases by about 30% accordingly. Because the generate revolving flow which can promote disturbance of the
syngas tangential flow is near the membrane helical coils, the drop of the thermal boundary layer and reduce the thermal boundary layer
tangential flow temperature is faster than that of the main flow resistance [15]. As shown in Fig.4, the maximum tangential velocity in
temperature; thus it leads to the pressure difference between the main membrane helical-coil heat exchanger is up to 2.3 m/s, valuing about
 Z. Zhao et al. / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1189–1194
Fig. 4. Tangential velocity distribution for membrane helical-coil heat exchanger (a)
and membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger (b).
30% of the axial average velocity. Therefore, the tangential flow plays
an important role in heat transfer. In addition, ut peaks at the
membrane. The tangential flow can increase the flow velocity and
turbulence intensity in the wake region of coil, thus, the local heat
transfer coefficients on the membrane helical coil are enhanced.
Moreover, the tangential flow cannot only improve heat transfer
condition of the wake region, but also decrease the influence of wake
region on downstream coil so as to enhance heat transfer of helically
coiled tube. So, the tangential flow is of great importance upon heat
transfer enhancement for the membrane helical coil.
3.3.1. Effects of operating pressure and inlet velocity on tangential
velocity
The tangential velocity distributions at x = 100 in Case 1 with
different working pressures, i.e.0.5 MPa, 2.0 MPa and 3.0 MPa, are
shown in Fig.5a. From the figures it can be observed that ut in annular
channel is independent of the increase of the operation pressure,
which demonstrates that higher operation pressure cannot change
the velocity field in heat exchanger but can improve heat transfer due
to the increase of the syngas mass flow rate.
Calculations for the heat transfer and flow of the membrane
helical-coil heat exchanger for different syngas inlet velocity were
performed. Fig. 5b shows the tangential velocity distribution at
x = 100 mm under the syngas pressure of 3.0 MPa for the different
syngas inlet velocity. It is found that ut increases with the inlet velocity
(axial velocity) rise under the same radial pitch. The flow resistance in
the channel is proportional to the square of syngas velocity, and the
axial flow resistance in channel increases with the syngas axial
velocity rise, thus, there is more syngas tangentially flow through the
helical groove in the channel. Obviously, the higher the tangential
velocity is, the more remarkable the heat transfer enhancement
grows, which can explain the experimental results [12] that the
average heat transfer coefficient of membrane helical coil increases
faster than that of the membrane serpentine tube with the increase of
inlet velocity.
3.3.2. Effects of radial pitch and axial pitch on tangential velocity
Fig. 5c shows the tangential velocity distribution for the different
radial pitch and axial pitch for membrane helical-coil heat exchanger
under the syngas pressure of 3.0 MPa. As shown in Fig. 5c, ut increases
1193
Fig. 5. Tangential velocity distribution.
with the decrease of radial pitch or the increase of axial pitch. The
radial pitch rise reduces the axial flow resistance, leading to the
reduction in the tangential flow accordingly. The heat transfer
enhancement reduces with the decrease of the syngas tangential
flow due to the radial pitch rise, thus, Fig. 3b and c revealed that the
heat transfer coefficient difference between membrane serpentine
tube and membrane helical coil at s1/d = 1.6 is greater than that at
s1/d = 2.0 for the same inlet velocity.
The axial pitch rise not only brings higher axial flow resistance, but
also decreases the tangential flow resistance, leading to the increase in
the tangential velocity of syngas. A bigger axial pitch can enhance the
heat transfer on the membrane surface. However, because the
increase of the axial pitch may lower the compactness of the whole
heat exchanger, the smaller axial pitch (s2/d ≤ 2.5) is usually adopted
in engineering practice, which also can lead to the reduction of
pressure loss.
4. Conclusions
Numerical studies on the flow and heat transfer characteristics of
the high-pressure syngas in the heat exchangers consisting of
membrane helical coils and membrane serpentine tubes were
performed under various operating pressures, inlet velocities and
pitches. The numerically obtained heat transfer coefficients for heat
exchangers were verified by experimental data. The major findings
are summarized as follows:
(1) The gas tangential flow in membrane helical-coil heat
exchanger is significant to heat transfer enhancement, thus,
the average heat transfer coefficient of membrane helical-coil
heat exchanger is higher than that of membrane serpentine-
tube heat exchanger under the same conditions.
(2) The syngas tangential velocity in the membrane helical-coil
heat exchanger increases along the axial direction. The syngas
tangential velocity in the membrane serpentine-tube heat
exchanger is independent of the axial direction and approaches
zero.
1194 Z. Zhao et al. / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1189–1194
(3) Operation pressure do not exert any influence on the velocity
field in heat exchangers, however high pressure can improve
heat transfer through the increase of the syngas mass flow rate.
(4) The syngas tangential velocity in membrane helical-coil heat
exchanger is independent of the gas pressure, increasing with
the axial velocity and axial pitch rise and decreasing with the
radial pitch rise.
References
[1] S. Vashisth, V. Kumar, K.D.P. Nigam, A review on the potential applications of
curved geometries in process industry, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Research 47 (10) (2008) 3291–3337.
[2] A.K. Saxena, K. Nigam, Effect of coil pitch and cross-sectional ellipticity on RTD for
diffusion-free laminar flow in coiled tubes, Chemical Engineering Communica-
tions 23 (4) (1983) 277–289.
[3] L. Guo, X. Chen, Z. Feng, B. Bai, Transient convective heat transfer in a helical coiled
tube with pulsatile fully developed turbulent flow, International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer 41 (19) (1998) 2867–2875.
[4] C. Lin, M. Ebadian, Developing turbulent convective heat transfer in helical pipes,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 40 (16) (1997) 3861–3873.
[5] V. Kumar, B. Faizee, M. Mridha, K. Nigam, Numerical studies of a tube-in-tube
helically coiled heat exchanger, Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process
Intensification 47 (12) (2008) 2287–2295.
[6] S. Beale, Fluid flow and heat transfer in tube banks, Imperial College, London,
1992.
[7] S. Beale, D. Spalding, Numerical study of fluid flow and heat transfer in tube banks
with stream-wise periodic boundary conditions, Transactions of the CSME 22 (4A)
(1998) 397–416.
[8] C. Wang, W. Fu, C. Chang, Heat transfer and friction characteristics of typical wavy
fin-and-tube heat exchangers, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 14 (2)
(1997) 174–186.
[9] C. Wang, Investigation of wavy fin-and-tube heat exchangers: a contribution to
databank, Experimental Heat Transfer 12 (1) (1999) 73–89.
[10] S. Paul, M. Tachie, S. Ormiston, Experimental study of turbulent cross-flow in a
staggered tube bundle using particle image velocimetry, International Journal of
Heat and Fluid Flow 28 (3) (2007) 441–453.
[11] Z. Yang, Z. Zhao, Q. Guo, Convective heat transfer characteristics of high-pressure
gas in annular channel heat exchanger with membrane spiral tubes, Journal of
Xi'an Jiaotong University 44 (11) (2010) 17–22.
[12] Z. Zhao, Z. Yang, H. Liu, Heat transfer characteristics of different heat transfer
structures in gasification convective syngas cooler, Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong
University 45 (01) (2011) 10–14.
[13] A. Safwat Wilson, M. Khalil Bassiouny, Modeling of heat transfer for flow across
tube banks* 1, Chemical Engineering and Processing 39 (1) (2000) 1–14.
[14] T. Chung, L. Lee, K. Starling, Applications of kinetic gas theories and multiparameter
correlation for prediction of dilute gas viscosity and thermal conductivity, Industrial
& Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals 23 (1) (1984) 8–13.
[15] M. Yilmaz, Ö. Çomakli, S. Yapici, Enhancement of heat transfer by turbulent
decaying swirl flow, Energy Conversion and Management 40 (13) (1999)
1365–1376.