He Book

P1: IML/OVY P2: IML/OVY QC: IML/OVY T1: IML
GRBT056-28 Kutz-2103G GRBT056-Kutz-v4.cls July 20, 2005 11:6
Source: Heat-Transfer Calculations
Chapter
Energy Recovery from an

28
Industrial Clothes Dryer
Using a Condensing
Heat Exchanger
David Naylor
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
P. H. Oosthuizen
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Queen’s University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Description of the Problem

A heat recovery system for an industrial clothes dryer is shown in
Fig. 28.1. Warm moist air at a temperature of 45◦ C and relative hu-
midity of 90 percent is exhausted from the clothes dryer at flow rate
of 0.13 m3 /s. The total pressure is assumed to be 100 kPa. The build-
ing cold-water supply enters a thin-walled copper tube (D = 1.0 cm) at
8◦ C and at a flow rate of 6 L/min. The water supply makes nine passes
across the exhaust duct, before going to the building’s hot-water heater.
The total length of piping inside the duct is L = 1.7 m. The intent of the
system is to recover latent heat by the formation of condensation on the
outer surface of the tube. This will serve to preheat the cold water and
reduce the energy demand at the water heater.
28.1
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Energy Recovery from an Industrial Clothes Dryer Using a Condensing Heat Exchanger
Figure 28.1 Side view and front view of the heat recovery system.
28.2


Energy Recovery from Industrial Clothes Dryer 28.3
The following calculation illustrates a method to estimate the amount

of energy that can be recovered with this design. The heat exchanger is
analyzed as a combined heat/mass-transfer problem using the log mean
temperature-difference (LMTD) method.
Solution Procedure
The thermal resistance diagram for this problem, shown in Fig. 28.2,
has three resistances: Ri is the thermal resistance associated with the
convection inside the pipe, Rcond is the thermal resistance associated
with the condensate film, and Rmass is the effective resistance associated
with the mass transfer of vapor to the pipe wall. The thermal resistance
across the pipe wall is neglected.
The resistance Rmass requires further discussion. When noncondens-
able gases (air in the present case) are present in the flow, the concen-
tration of these “noncondensables” builds up at the pipe surface. This
effect reduces the partial pressure of vapor at the vapor-liquid interface.
As a result, there can be a substantial temperature difference between
the freestream dew-point temperature (T1,dp ) and the interface temper-
ature (Ti ). It should be kept in mind that Rmass is not actually a thermal
resistance, but it will be treated as such for the purpose of this iterative
method.
For a thin-walled pipe (Ai ≈ Ao ), the overall heat-transfer coefficient
U can be calculated as
µ ¶−1
1 1 1
U= (Rmass + Rcond + Ri )−1 = A Rmass + + (28.1)
A hcond hi
where hcond and hi are the average convective heat-transfer coefficients

produced by condensation on the outside of the pipe and forced convec-
tion on inside of the pipe.
Figure 28.2 Thermal resistance diagram.


28.4 Heat Exchangers
Mass-transfer resistance
The mass transfer of water vapor to the surface of the pipe is driven by
the vapor concentration gradient. This gradient can be estimated using
a heat/mass-transfer analogy, combined with an empirical correlation
for forced convection over a cylinder. Forced convection from a cylinder
in crossflow can be calculated from the correlation by Hilpert [1]:
hD
Nu = = CRem
D Pr
1/3
(28.2)
k
The Chilton-Colburn analogy [1] can be used to get an expression for

the average Sherwood number. This analogy is applied by replacing the
Nusselt number with the Sherwood number and the Prandtl number
with the Schmidt number:
gm D
Sh = = CRem
D Sc
1/3
(28.3)
rd
where gm is the mass-transfer conductance, r is the mean density, d is

the binary diffusion coefficient (water vapor diffusing into air), and Sc
is the Schmidt number (Sc = n/d).
To initiate the iterative solution procedure, it is necessary to assume
a value for the mean temperature on the outside of the condensate film.
In the first iteration, the mean vapor-condensate interface temperature
will be arbitrarily taken to be Ti = 15◦ C. This is just an initial guess,
which will be corrected as the calculation proceeds.
The air and mass-transfer properties are obtained (from Ref. 1) at
an approximate film temperature Tf = (T1 + Ti )/2 = 30◦ C: d = 2.667 ×
10−5 m2 /s, m = 1.861 × 10−5 N s/m2 , Sc = 0.61. Since the concentration
of vapor is low, the dynamic viscosity is approximated as that of dry air.
The density of the vapor and air can now be calculated at the free-
stream conditions and at the interface conditions. For a relative hu-
midity of f1 = 90 percent at T1 = 45◦ C, the partial pressure of water
vapor at the inlet is
Pv,1 = f1 Psat,1 = 0.9(9593 Pa) = 8634 Pa (28.4)
where the saturation pressure is obtained from steam tables. Using this
vapor pressure, the vapor density in the freestream can be calculated
from the ideal-gas equation of state:
Pv,1 Mv (8634)(18)
r v,1 = = = 0.0587 kg/m3 (28.5)
RT1 (8314)(318)


The air density in the freestream is

PA,1 MA (100,000 − 8634)(29)
r A,1 = = = 1.002 kg/m3 (28.6)
RT1 (8314)(318)
At the vapor-condensate interface, the vapor pressure will correspond
to the saturation pressure at the assumed interface temperature (for
Ti = 15◦ C, Pv,i = 1705 Pa). So, the vapor density at the interface is
Pv,i Mv (1705)(18)
r v,i = = = 0.0128 kg/m3 (28.7)
RTi (8314)(288)
Similarly, the air density at the interface is
PA,i MA (100,000 − 1705)(29)
r A,i = = = 1.191 kg/m3 (28.8)
RTi (8314)(288)
Now, the mass fraction of vapor can be calculated in the freestream
r v,1 0.0587
m1 = = = 0.0553 (28.9)
r v,1 + r A,1 0.0587 + 1.002
and at the interface
r v,i 0.0128
mi = = = 0.0106 (28.10)
r v,i + r A,i 0.0128 + 1.191
In the present problem the mean freestream velocity is Q/Ac =
(0.13 m3 /s)/(0.2)2 m2 = 3.25 m/s. So, the Reynolds number for the ex-
ternal flow is
rV D (1.13)(3.25)(0.01)
Re D = = = 1973 (28.11)
m 1.861 × 10−5
where the density in the Reynolds number has been evaluated as the
mean of the total density (r v + r A) in the freestream and at the inter-
face. At this Reynolds number the constant and exponent for Hilpert’s
correlation are C = 0.683 and m = 0.466. Evaluating the average Sher-
wood number, we obtain
Sh = 0.683 (1973)0.466 (0.61)1/3 = 19.88 (28.12)
Using this result, the convective mass-transfer conductance gm is
r Sh d (1.13)(19.88)(2.667 × 10−5 )
gm = = = 0.0599 kg/m2 s (28.13)
D 0.01
The convective mass transfer is driven by the difference in the
mass fraction of vapor in the freestream and at the vapor-condensate


interface. The mass-transfer rate, which is equal to the condensation

rate, is given by
ṁv = gm A(mv,1 − mv,i ) (28.14)
The total surface area of the pipe is A = p DL = p(0.01)(1.7) =

0.0534 m2 . Applying Eq. (28.14) and the results from Eqs. (28.9), (28.10),
and (28.13) gives the condensation rate:
ṁv = (0.0599)(0.0534)(0.0553 − 0.0106) = 1.43 × 10−4 kg/s (28.15)
The latent heat-transfer rate required to condense vapor at this rate is
q = ṁv h f g = (1.43 × 10−4 )(2,466,000) = 353 W (28.16)
where h f g is the latent heat of vaporization, evaluated at the interface

temperature.
The dew-point temperature corresponding to Pv,1 = 8.364 kPa is
T1,dp = 43.0◦ C. For the assumed vapor-condensate interface tempera-
ture, the effective thermal resistance due to mass transfer can be cal-
culated as
T1,dp − Ti 43.0 − 15.0

Rmass = = = 0.0793◦ C/W (28.17)
q 353
Condensation heat transfer

The heat-transfer coefficient on the outer surface of the condenser coil
(hcond ) can be estimated using relations for laminar film condensation on
vertical tube bundles. For the first iteration it is necessary to make an
initial guess for the temperature drop across the vapor film. Initially,
it will be assumed that Ti − T S = 2◦ C, where T S is the mean surface
temperature of the pipe. Again, an improved estimate will be made for
this quantity, later in the calculation.
The outer heat-transfer coefficient can be estimated from a theoreti-
cal relation for laminar film condensation on a bank of horizontal cylin-
ders [2]. For n cylinders of diameter D, which are stacked vertically, the
average Nusselt number is
· ¸1/4
hcond (nD) gh f g r ` (r ` − r v )(nD)3
Nucond = = 0.729 (28.18)
k` m` k` (Ti − T S)
In this equation, the properties of the liquid film are evaluated at mean
temperature of the condensate film (T S + Ti )/2. For the first iteration
we will evaluate the liquid water properties at 14◦ C: k` = 0.592 W/m K,


r ` = 1000 kg/m3 , and m` = 1.18 × 10−3 N s/m2 . The latent heat is eval-
uated at the interface temperature, h f g = 2466 kJ/kg K.
The density of the air-vapor mixture is about 1000 times lower than
the density of the liquid film. So, in Eq. (28.18), the term r ` (r ` − r v ) will
be approximated as r `2 . In the current design, there are nine stacked
pipes (n = 9). Evaluating Eq. (28.18), we obtain
· ¸
(9.81)(2466 × 103 )(1000)2 (9 × 0.01)3 1/4
Nucond = 0.729 = 1374
(1.18 × 10−3 ) (0.592) (2.0)
(28.19)
The average condensation heat-transfer coefficient is then
Nucond k` (1374)(0.592)
hcond = = = 9037 W/m2 K (28.20)
nD 9(0.01)
Internal pipe flow (forced convection)

The properties of the water inside the pipe are evaluated at the mean
bulk temperature. For the first iteration, the properties are evaluated
at Tw,i = 8◦ C: kw = 0.584 W/m K, c p,w = 4196 J/kg K, r w = 1000 kg/m3 ,
mw = 1.377 × 10−3 N s/m2 , and Prw = 9.93. The mass flow rate in the
pipe is 6 L/min or ṁw = 0.1 kg/s. Now the internal Reynolds number
can be calculated:
r wV D 4ṁw 4(0.1)
Re D = = = = 9246 (turbulent)
mw p Dm p(0.01)(1.377 × 10−3 )
(28.21)
There are many correlations in the literature for turbulent fully de-
veloped forced convection in circular pipes. In a review of empirical
correlations, the most recent edition of the Handbook of Heat Transfer
[3] recommends the equation by Gnielinski [4]:
¡ ¢ 0.4
Nui = 0.012 Re0.87
D − 280 Pr 1.5 ≤ Pr ≤ 500 3 × 103 ≤ Re D ≤ 106
(28.22)
Evaluating Eq. (28.22), we obtain
Nui = 0.012 [(9246)0.87 − 280] (9.93)0.4 = 76.4 (28.23)
Evaluating the average heat-transfer coefficient, we obtain
Nui kw 76.4(0.584)
hi = = = 4462 W/m2 K (28.24)
D 0.01


Overall heat-transfer rate

The overall heat-transfer coefficient is now calculated using Eq. (28.1):
U = [(0.0534)(0.0793) + 1/9037 + 1/4462 ]−1 = 219 W/m2 K (28.25)
Using an LMTD analysis, the total heat-transfer rate q the heat ex-
changer can be expressed as
 
(T1,dp − Tw,i ) − (T1,dp − Tw,o )
 µ ¶ 
q = FUA1Tlm = FUA  T1,dp − Tw,i 
ln
T1,dp − Tw,o
= ṁw c p,w (Tw,o − Tw,o ) (28.26)
where Tw,i and Tw,o are the inlet and outlet temperatures of the domestic
cold water. Note that this situation can be treated as a pure counter-
flow, since the temperature on the outside of the condensate film is
essentially constant. So, the correction factor is unity (F ≈ 1).
Solving Eq. (28.26) for the domestic water outlet temperature Tw,o ,
we have
µ ¶
UA
Tw,o = T1,dp − (T1,dp − Tw,i ) exp − (28.27)
ṁw c p,w
Evaluating Eq. (28.27) yields

µ ¶
(219)(0.0534)
Tw,o = 43.0 − (43.0 − 8.0) exp − = 8.96◦ C (28.28)
(0.1)(4196)
Using this result, we can now get an improved estimate of the total
heat-transfer rate to the condenser coils:
q = ṁw c p,w (Tw,o − Tw,i ) = (0.1)4196(8.96 − 8.0) = 403 W (28.29)
Now a better estimate of the interface temperature Ti can be made.

Referring to the thermal resistance diagram in Fig. 28.2, the improved
interface temperature is
Ti = Tdp,1 − q Rmass = 43.0 − (403)(0.0793) = 11.0◦ C (28.30)
This is significantly different from the initial guess of Ti = 15◦ C. So, at

least one more iteration will be required.
To proceed with the next iteration, an improved estimate of the tem-
perature drop across the condensate film is also needed. This quantity
can be obtained using the improved heat-transfer rate estimate and the


TABLE 28.1 Various Quantities after First Three Iterations and for Converged
Solution
Iterations
Converged
Quantity First Second Third solution
Heat-transfer rate q, W 404 380 378 378
Vapor-condensate interface 11.0 10.7 10.6 10.6
temperature Ti , ◦ C∗
Temperature difference 0.84 0.65 0.61 0.59
across condensate
Ti − T S, ◦ C†
Condensation heat-transfer 9037 10,978 11,675 11,932
coefficient hcond , W/m2 K
Internal convection 4462 4195 4195 4195
coefficient hi , W/m2 K
Condensation rate ṁv , kg/s 1.43 × 10−4 1.52 × 10−4 1.53 × 10−4 1.53 × 10−4
∗ Initial assumed value Ti = 15◦ C.
† Initial assumed value Ti − TS = 2◦ C.
condensation heat-transfer coefficient (hcond ), as follows:

q 403
Ti − Ts = = = 0.835◦ C (28.31)
hcond A (9037)(0.0534)
Improved values have now been calculated for all the parameters
that were “guessed” in the first iteration. So, the procedure can be re-
peated until convergence. Of course, an alternate method for solving
this set of equations is to use commercial equation solving software
which has built in functions for vapor properties (e.g., Engineering
Equation Solver [5]).
Table 28.1 shows some of the key parameters after the first three
iterations and the final converged solution. The converged value for the
total heat-transfer rate is q = 378 W. It can be seen from the table that
the solution converges quickly, in about three iterations.
Conditions after the coil

The flow rate and inlet conditions for this problem are based on an
industrial electrical clothes dryer with a rated power of 20 kW. So, for
this application, 378 W is a relatively low quantity of heat to recover. To
be practical, more coils would likely have to be added. In this case, the
analysis would follow along the same lines, with the outlet conditions
of the first coil becoming the inlet conditions for the second coil, and so
on. The conditions at state 2 (after the coil) can be calculated using the
condensation rate ṁv on the first coil, as follows:
ṁv
w2 = w1 − (28.32)
ṁA


where w1 and w2 are the values of specific humidity before and after the
coil. Specific humidity w is the mass fraction of vapor per kilogram of
dry air. The specific humidity before the coil can be calculated, assuming
ideal-gas behavior as
Pv,1 V Mv /RT1 Mv Pv,1 Pv,1
w1 = = = 0.622 (28.33)
PA,1 V MA/RT1 MA PA,1 PA,1
Evaluating Eq. (28.33), the specific humidity at the inlet is

8.634
w1 = 0.622 = 0.05878 (28.34)
100 − 8.634
The mass flow rate of dry air is
PA,1 MA (100 − 8.634)29
ṁA = r A Q = Q= 0.13 = 0.13 kg/s (28.35)
RT (8.314)(318)
Evaluating Eq. (28.32), using the condensation rate for the converged
solution, we obtain
ṁv 1.53 × 10−4

w2 = w1 − = 0.05878 − = 0.0576 (28.36)
ṁA 0.13
Equation (28.33) can be written at state 2 (after the coil) as follows:
Pv,2
w2 = 0.622 (28.37)
Patm − Pv,2
Solving Eq. (28.37) for Pv,2 gives
Patm w2 (100)(0.0576)
Pv,2 = = = 8.47 kPa (28.38)
0.622 + w2 0.622 + 0.0576
Since the heat transfer to the pipe is assumed to be all sensible heat,
the temperature of the flow can be assumed to remain at 45◦ C. So,
relative humidity after the first coil is
Pv,2 8.47
f2 = = = 88.3% (28.39)
Psat,2 9.593
This outlet condition could be used as the inlet condition for the next
condenser coil, if one existed.
Concluding Remarks
It should be noted that the current analysis probably underestimates
the total heat-transfer rate. The main reason is the conservative as-
sumption that the heat transfer to the coil occurs by condensation only.


In reality, there will also be a component of sensible-heat transfer, due

to convection and radiation. These effects could be added quite easily
to the current method.
In addition, the effects of vapor shear have been neglected. The flow
in the duct can be expected to thin the condensate film on the upstream
side of the tube, thereby enhancing the heat-transfer rate. However,
in the present case, mass-transfer effects are the main “resistance” to
condensation. So, improvements to the condensation model would not
be expected to greatly improve the estimated heat-transfer rate.
As a final comment, one should take note of the need to include the
effects of noncondensable vapors in this type of calculation. As shown
in Table 28.1, the high concentration of air suppresses the tempera-
ture of the vapor-condensate interface far below the freestream dew-
point temperature. In fact, if this analysis is repeated with the inter-
face temperature at the saturation temperature corresponding to the
freestream vapor pressure (i.e., a standard Nusselt-type analysis), the
heat-transfer rate is overpredicted by a factor of more than 10. This
general result has been shown before. For example, the reader is re-
ferred to the finite-volume numerical study of the forced convection on
a flat plate with condensation by Chin et al. [6].
References
1. Incropera, F. P., and D. P. DeWitt, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, 4th ed.,
Wiley, New York, 1996.
2. Oosthuizen, P. H., and D. Naylor, Introduction to Convective Heat Transfer Analysis,
WCB/McGraw-Hill, New York, 1999.
3. Ebadian, M. A., and Z. F. Dong, “Forced Convection, Internal Flow in Ducts,” in Hand-
book of Heat Transfer, 3d ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1999, chap. 5.
4. Gnielinksi, V., “New Equations for Heat and Mass Transfer in Turbulent Pipe and
Channel Flow,” Int. Chem. Eng., 16, 359–368, 1976.
5. Engineering Equation Solver, F-Chart Software, Madison, Wis., 2004.
6. Chin, Y. S, Ormiston, S. J., and Soliman, H. M., “Numerical Solution of the Complete
Two-phase Model for Laminar Film Condensation with a Noncondensable Gas,” Pro-
ceedings of 10th International Heat Transfer Conference, Brighton, U.K., 1994, vol. 3,
pp. 287–292.


He Book

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

He Book

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

P1: IML/OVY P2: IML/OVY QC: IML/OVY T1: IML

GRBT056-28 Kutz-2103G GRBT056-Kutz-v4.cls July 20, 2005 11:6

Source: Heat-Transfer Calculations

Energy Recovery from an

Description of the Problem

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Energy Recovery from Industrial Clothes Dryer 28.3

The following calculation illustrates a method to estimate the amount

where hcond and hi are the average convective heat-transfer coefficients

Figure 28.2 Thermal resistance diagram.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

28.4 Heat Exchangers

The Chilton-Colburn analogy [1] can be used to get an expression for

where gm is the mass-transfer conductance, r is the mean density, d is

Pv,1 = f1 Psat,1 = 0.9(9593 Pa) = 8634 Pa (28.4)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Energy Recovery from Industrial Clothes Dryer 28.5

The air density in the freestream is

Sh = 0.683 (1973)0.466 (0.61)1/3 = 19.88 (28.12)

Using this result, the convective mass-transfer conductance gm is

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

28.6 Heat Exchangers

interface. The mass-transfer rate, which is equal to the condensation

ṁv = gm A(mv,1 − mv,i ) (28.14)

The total surface area of the pipe is A = p DL = p(0.01)(1.7) =

ṁv = (0.0599)(0.0534)(0.0553 − 0.0106) = 1.43 × 10−4 kg/s (28.15)

The latent heat-transfer rate required to condense vapor at this rate is

q = ṁv h f g = (1.43 × 10−4 )(2,466,000) = 353 W (28.16)

where h f g is the latent heat of vaporization, evaluated at the interface

T1,dp − Ti 43.0 − 15.0

Condensation heat transfer

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Energy Recovery from Industrial Clothes Dryer 28.7

Internal pipe flow (forced convection)

Nui = 0.012 [(9246)0.87 − 280] (9.93)0.4 = 76.4 (28.23)

Evaluating the average heat-transfer coefficient, we obtain

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

28.8 Heat Exchangers

Overall heat-transfer rate

U = [(0.0534)(0.0793) + 1/9037 + 1/4462 ]−1 = 219 W/m2 K (28.25)

= ṁw c p,w (Tw,o − Tw,o ) (28.26)

Evaluating Eq. (28.27) yields

q = ṁw c p,w (Tw,o − Tw,i ) = (0.1)4196(8.96 − 8.0) = 403 W (28.29)

Now a better estimate of the interface temperature Ti can be made.

Ti = Tdp,1 − q Rmass = 43.0 − (403)(0.0793) = 11.0◦ C (28.30)

This is significantly different from the initial guess of Ti = 15◦ C. So, at

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Energy Recovery from Industrial Clothes Dryer 28.9

condensation heat-transfer coefficient (hcond ), as follows:

Conditions after the coil

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

28.10 Heat Exchangers