Performance evaluation of ducts with non-circular shapes: Laminar

fully developed ow and constant wall temperature

Valentin M. Petkov
a
, Ventsislav D. Zimparov
a,
*
, Arthur E. Bergles
b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Gabrovo, 4 Hadji Dimitar Str., 5300 Gabrovo, Bulgaria
b
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 13 October 2012
Received in revised form
13 December 2013
Accepted 13 December 2013
Available online 19 February 2014
Keywords:
Performance evaluation criteria
Single-phase laminar ow
Non-circular ducts
Entropy generation
a b s t r a c t
Extended performance evaluation criteria (ExPEC) have been used to assess the performance charac-
teristics of single-phase fully developed laminar ow through bundle of ducts with non-circular shape e
rectangular, isosceles triangular, elliptical, trapezoidal and hexagonal. The bundle of circular tubes has
been used as a reference heat transfer unit. Constant wall temperature has been selected as the thermal
boundary condition. The performance characteristics of the bundles with non-circular ducts have been
evaluated and compared to those of the reference unit for different objectives and constraints imposed.
As a common constraint, the hydraulic diameter of the duct has been specied.
The results clearly show that the rectangular, trapezoidal or hexagonal duct conguration can
compete, in some cases, with the circular tube conguration. The choice of the tube shape and
geometrical details depends on the constraints imposed and the objectives pursued. The results obtained
from the present study revealed that they differed from those obtained with a common constraint of
specied cross sectional area.
2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The importance of the non-circular ducts to the practical design
of a variety of compact heat exchangers cannot be overstated.
Because of size and volume constraints in applications for aero-
space, nuclear, biomedical engineering and electronics, chemical
and process industries, it may be required to use non-circular ow-
passage geometries. There has been considerable work on laminar
forced-convective heat transfer in non-circular ducts reported in
the literature. Shah and London [1], and Shah and Bhatti [2] give
extended reviews of a large number of these studies. In the more
recent literature, several different owcross-section geometries for
newer compact heat exchanger applications have been studied.
They include double-sine [3], circular segment [4], semi-circular [5]
and several other unusual duct shapes.
Duct geometries as single- and double-trapezoidal (hexagonal)
represent ow channels of a variety of compact heat exchangers.
The double-trapezoidal duct shape is encountered in lamella
type compact heat exchanger, which nd extensive usage in
chemical industry [6e8]. Plate heat exchangers are also used in a
wide range of applications including food and chemical processing,
refrigeration, and waste-heat recovery [9]. The single-trapezoidal
channel is employed in plate-n heat exchangers [8], and micro-
channel electronic cooling modules [10].
Due to smaller system dimensions, the hydraulic diameter of
owchannels in such heat exchangers are small and the length-to-
diameter ratio, L/D
h
is relatively large. Due to these length scales
and the viscous nature of the uids being handled, the ow is
usually laminar with fully developed conditions. It is therefore
important to investigate the performance characteristics of
different ducted ows, particular in the laminar regime.
In most of the heat exchangers in service, especially in shell and
tube type, circular duct is used. The primary objective of the heat
exchanger designer is to use duct geometries that yield: (i) a high
value of heat transfer area to volume ratio, (ii) a high value of heat
transfer coefcient and (iii) a corresponding value of friction factor.
Offering maximum compactness, i.e., highest surface area to vol-
ume ratio, however, is not enough for selection of duct geometry. A
designer should also take into consideration the overall thermal
hydraulic behavior of the ow through the ducts.
The performance of conventional heat exchangers, for single-
phase ows in particular, can be substantially improved by many
augmentation techniques, resulting in the design of high-
performance thermal design systems. On the basis of the rst-law
analysis Webb [11] and Webb and Bergles [12] have proposed
performance evaluation criteria (PEC) that dene the performance
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: ventsi.zimparov@gmail.com, vdzim@tugab.bg (V.D. Zimparov).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Thermal Sciences
j ournal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ i j t s
1290-0729/$ e see front matter 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2013.12.005
International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228
benets of an exchanger having augmented surfaces, relative to
standard exchanger with smooth surfaces subject to various ob-
jectives and design constraints.
On the other hand, it is well established that the minimization of
the entropy generation in any process leads to the conservation of
useful energy. A thermodynamic basis to evaluate the merit of
augmentation techniques by second-law analysis has been pro-
posed by Bejan [13,14] who developed the entropy generation
minimization (EGM) method. This method has been used as a
general criterion for estimating and minimizing the irreversibilities
and optimum-design method for heat exchangers. The method has
been extended by Zimparov [15,16] including the effect of uid
temperature variation along the length of a tubular heat transfer
unit, and newinformation has been added assessing two objectives
simultaneously. The EGM method combined with the rst law
analysis provides the most powerful tool for the analysis of the
thermal performance of any augmentation technique.
In many instances, the designer is faced with existing equip-
ment, where the space occupied by the cooling passage is at a
premiumand the heat and mass owrates are limited by the size of
an existing or retrot pump or fan. In these situations, the designer
may ask the question: Is there an optimal cross-sectional area and
optimal length for the coolant passage that minimizes entropy
generation and allows for the best performance?
A number of studies have been focused on the calculation and
minimization of entropy generation in fully-developed laminar
ows in non-circular ducts [17e25]. The objective of all these
studies is the minimization of entropy generation of the ow in
single duct by optimization of the regime and geometrical
parameters.
Circular ducts are generally used in tubular heat exchangers and
most of the augmentation techniques have been applied to such
tubes. As to the ducts with non-circular cross section the
improvement of the performance of one geometry with respect to
another depends on the duct geometry, inlet-to-wall temperature
ratio and the operating Reynolds number for a given uid and a
certain duct length. Most of the analyses related to non-circular
cross sections (namely, square, equilateral triangle, rectangular,
sinusoidal, etc.) and with single-phase laminar ow have been
conducted on the basis of the second law analysis.
In a recent paper, Chakraborty and Ray [26] have evaluated the
performance of a square duct with rounded corners, for single-
phase laminar ow using the PEC identied by Webb [11] and
Webb and Bergles [12] taken as objective functions for each case,
and second law analysis in an attempt to nd out an optimal
operating point, i.e., a particular radius of curvature for the corners,
which is advantageous from both rst and second law analyses. In
this paper, for the rst time performance characteristics of a non-
circular duct have been compared to those of the circular duct us-
ing PEC. This study is further evidence of the statement that the
rst and second law analyses should be used simultaneously to
assess the thermal performance of any heat transfer unit.
For any duct with non-circular shape, the size is determined by
either the hydraulic diameter D
h
, or the cross-sectional area A
f
,
since these parameters are related through the shape factor
c 4A
f
=D
2
h
. In this regard, two different common constraints can
be imposed e specied cross-sectional area A
*
f
1, or specied
hydraulic diameter of the ducts, D* 1. Performance evaluation of
laminar fully-developed ow in ducts with non-circular shapes
subjected to H1 boundary condition and common constraint
A
*
f
1 have been recently presented in Refs. [27,28]. The results of
performance evaluation criteria for fully-developed laminar ow
through bundle of rectangular, isosceles triangular and elliptical
ducts, subjected to constant wall temperature boundary condition
and common constraint A
*
f
1 can be found in Ref. [29].
The rationale of the present study is to evaluate the thermal
performance of laminar fully-developed ow in a bundle with
different non-circular ducts as rectangular, isosceles triangular,
elliptical, trapezoidal and double trapezoidal (hexagonal). Fig. 1
presents the geometrical details of trapezoidal and double trape-
zoidal (hexagonal) duct [30]. The boundary condition is constant
wall temperature with a common constraint, D* 1. In this case, the
cross-sectional area of the duct is a consequence, A
*
f
c
*
. The
bundle of circular tubes has been used as a reference heat transfer
unit. Using the rst and second laws simultaneously, the perfor-
mance characteristics of bundle with non-circular ducts have been
evaluated for different objectives and constraints imposed and
compared to those of the reference bundle with circular tubes.
2. Equations based on the entropy production theorem
Consider the energy and entropy balance of the general internal
ow conguration, where uid ows through a duct with a cross
sectional area A
f
, a perimeter p, and hydraulic diameter D
h
4A
f
/p.
The shape of the cross section is arbitrary but constant over the
entire length of the duct. The ow is single-phase, fully developed,
incompressible, and Newtonian. Following the model developed by
Zimparov [15], for fully-developed laminar ow in a tube bundle,
the rate of entropy generated in the heat unit can be expressed as
_
S
gen

_
Q
N
t
w
o
T
i
T
o

8W
2
fRem
N
2
t
r
2
pD
3
h
L
t
T
w
; (1)
where:
_
Q N
t
_
Q
t
, W _ m
t
N
t
, A pL
t
N
t
, w
o
w
i
exp(NTU).
Following Bejan [13,14], the augmentation entropy generation
number N
S
can be presented as
N
S

_
S
gen
_
S
gen;circle

N
S;T
f
o
N
S;P
1 f
o

1
1 f
o
_
N
S;T
f
o
N
S;P
_
;
(2)
where [15]
N
S;T

Q
*
N
*
w
o
w
o;c
T
o;c
T
o

Q
*
w
*
N
*
T
*
o
; (2a)
Fig. 1. Coordinate system and geometrical details of: a) trapezoidal duct and b) hex-
agonal duct.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 221
T
*
o

_
T
i;c
T
o;c

Q
*
W
*
_
1
T
i;c
T
o;c
__
; (2b)
w
*
o
exp
_
NTU
c
_
1
St
St
c
L
*
D
*
__
; (2c)
N
S;P

W
2
*
L
*
fRe
*
N
2
*
p
*
D
3
*
T
w;c
T
w
hP
*
; (2d)
f
o

8 _ m
c
mL
c
pr
2
D
4
c
c
p
T
i;c
T
o;c
w
o;c
T
o
T
i

c
T
w
fRe
c
: (2e)
The numerical value of the irreversibility distribution ratio
f
o

_
S
gen;DP
=
_
S
gen;DT

c
, describes the thermodynamic mode in
which the circular tube passage is meant to operate. This mode
can be expressed also by the value of Bejan number,
Be
_
S
gen;DT
=
_
S
gen

c
or Be 1/(1 f
o
). The PEC as suggested by
Webb [11] and Webb and Bergles [12] characterize nearly all the
PEC. Some of them will be considered below, namely, FG-1a, VG-1
and VG-2a, Table 1. The other cases as FG-1b, FG-2b, FG-3, FN-1, and
FN-2 can be found in Ref. [31].
The equations are developed for ducts with different cross
sectional shape and the equations (in dimensionless form) for in-
side fully developed laminar ow are:
A
*
p
*
L
*
N
*
c
*
D
*
N
*
L
*
; (3)
P
*

W
2
*
L
*
fRe
*
N
2
*
c
*
D
4
*
; (4)
Q
*
W
*

*
w
*
i
; (5)
W
*
Re
*
p
*
N
*
Re
*
c
*
D
*
N
*
; (6)
where c* p*/D*.
3. Performance evaluation criteria
The performance evaluation criteria considered in this study are
listed in Table 1. These criteria are based on the use of rst and
second law analyses in the pursuit of two objectives simulta-
neously. It means that the benet is available only if the both ob-
jectives are reached. In this study, the geometrical and regime
parameters of the reference channel (smooth circular tube) are
selected to fulll the requirement of 4L
c
/(D
c
RePr) 1, correspond-
ing to the fully-developed laminar ow in tube.
The performance characteristics of the bundles with non-
circular tubes, such as rectangular, isosceles triangular, elliptical,
trapezoidal and hexagonal shapes are compared to the reference
bundle with circular tubes. The values of the shape factor c, friction
factor f and Nusselt number Nu of non-circular ducts are taken and
calculated from Shah and London [1] and Sadasivan et al. [30].
While obtaining the augmentation entropy generation number, the
irreversibility distribution ratio for the circular conguration, f
o
,
varies in the range 10
3
f
o
10
3
(0.001 < Be < 0.999).
3.1. Fixed geometry criteria (FG)
These criteria involve a replacement of circular tubes by tubes
with non-circular shape of equal length and hydraulic diameter.
The FG-1 cases seek increased heat duty for constant exchanger
ow rate and heat transfer area. The FG-2 criteria have the same
objective as FG-1, but requires that the non-circular tube design to
operate at the same pumping power.
3.1.1. Case FG-1a
The objective functions of the case FG-1a are increased heat rate
Q* > 1, decreased entropy generation number N
S
< 1, and simul-
taneous effect of the both of them as a general performance crite-
rion N
S
/Q* < 1. The constraints imposed are: W* 1, w
*
i
1, A* 1,
L* 1, and D* 1. Following the constraints, Eqs. (2)e(6) yield
Table 1
Performance evaluation criteria.
Fixed Objective
Case A* D* L* W* P* Q* w
*
i
FG-1a 1 1 1 1 e e 1 Q* > 1
VG-1 e 1 e 1 1 1 1 A* < 1
VG-2a 1 1 e 1 1 e 1 Q* > 1
Fig. 2. The variation of Q* with c* for bundle with: a) isosceles, rectangular and
elliptical ducts.
Fig. 3. The variation of Q* with c* for bundle with hexagonal ducts.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 222
Q
*

*
; (7)
and
N
S

c
*
1 f
o
_
Q
*
w
*
o
T
*
o
f
o
fRe
*
_
; (8)
The calculated values of Q* by Eq. (7), are shown in Figs. 2 and 3.
As seen, the bundle with isosceles triangular or elliptical ducts,
Fig. 2, cannot reach the rst objective Q* > 1.0, whereas the bundle
with rectangular ducts, Fig. 2, can achieve some benet of order
Q* 1.023, if c* > 1.5. The performance characteristics of bundle
with trapezoidal and hexagonal ducts are very similar, and due to
limitations only some of the characteristics of bundle with hexag-
onal ducts will be presented hereafter, Fig. 3. For smaller values of
c* (c* < 5), Q* depends on c* and the bigger the q, the greater Q* is
(the best performance with q 75

). When c* increases, Q* ach-

ieves almost constant value of Q* 1.022e1.026. The difference
between two bundles is that for bundle equipped with trapezoidal
ducts the highest value of Q* is achieved for c* > 5, whereas for the
bundle with hexagonal ducts it is reached for c* > 3.
The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
as a
parameter is shown in Figs. 4e7: for the bundle with rectangular
ducts, Fig. 4; with isosceles triangular ducts, Fig. 5; with elliptical
ducts, Fig. 6, and with hexagonal ducts, Fig. 7. The conclusions that
can be derived from these gures are as follows:
(i) the design of a bundle of ducts with isosceles triangular
shape, Fig. 5, is completely inefcient since N
S
/Q* > 1 for all
values of c* and f
o
and this performance becomes worse
with the increase of c* and decrease of f
o
.
(ii) the design of bundle with elliptical ducts, Fig. 6, is also
inefcient since N
S
/Q* > 1 for the values of c* > 1, and this
inefciency increases with the increase of c* and f
o
.
(iii) the performance of bundle with rectangular ducts, Fig. 4, and
c* z 1.55 does not depend on the value of f
o
: all curves
intersect in one point. The benet, N
S
/Q* < 1 can only be
achieved if c* > 2 and f
o
< 10
1
(0.9 < Be<1). In this case
(c* > 2), the two objectives Q* > 1.0 and N
S
/Q* < 1 are ach-
ieved and some benet can be obtained. The benet in-
creases with the increase of c* and decrease of f
o
. The heat
unit with c* > 3 (aspect ratio a/b > 8, Ref. [1]) realizes the
greatest efciency. For f
o
1 (0 < Be 0.5) the circular tube
conguration performs better.
Fig. 4. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for rectangular ducts.
Fig. 5. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for isosceles trian-
gular ducts.
Fig. 6. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for elliptical ducts.
Fig. 7. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for hexagonal ducts.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 223
(iv) the bundle with hexagonal ducts, Fig. 7, is inefcient when
f
o
> 10
1
despite the values of c* and q. Benets can be only
obtained for small values of f
o
(f
o
< 10
1
), and the smaller
the value of f
o
, the greater benet is. When the benet is
available (f
o
< 10
1
), the curve of general criterion N
S
/Q*
possesses a minimum and an optimal value c*
,opt
exists (the
maximum thermodynamic efciency). With the increase of
q, the value of c*
,opt
decreases (the point moves to the left),
and the benet increases. All curves of the general criterion
intersect in one point. With the increase of q, the place of this
point moves to the left to the smaller values of c*.
The results for bundle with trapezoidal ducts, compared with
those for bundle with hexagonal ducts are similar, however, the
benet is a little smaller.
3.2. Variable geometry cases (VG)
The criteria VG are applicable when the heat exchanger is
sized for a required thermal duty with specied ow rate.
3.2.1. Case VG-1
The objective functions of the case VG-1 are lower heat transfer
area A* < 1, decreased entropy generation number N
S
< 1, and the
simultaneous effect of both of them N
S
A* < 1. The constraints
imposed are: Q* 1, W* 1, P* 1, w
*
i
1, D* 1. Following the
constraints Eqs. (2)e(6) yield:
A
*
Nu
1
*
; (9)
since Q*1 and DT
*
m
1, and
N
S

1
1 f
o
__
Nu
*
c
2
*
fRe
*
_
1=3
f
o
_
: (10)
The calculated values of A* by Eq. (9) are shown in Figs. 8 and 9.
As seen, the bundles with isosceles triangular or elliptical ducts,
Fig. 8, cannot reach the rst objective A* < 1.0. The use of bundle
with rectangular ducts, Fig. 8, can be protable if c* > 1.7 and the
maximum benet is A* 0.654 for c* 3.22. The use of bundles
with trapezoidal or hexagonal ducts, Fig. 9, can bring some prot
that depends on c* and q, and the greatest values are: a) for bundle
Fig. 8. The variation of A* with c* for bundle with rectangular, isosceles triangular or
elliptical ducts.
Fig. 9. The variation of A* with c* for bundle with hexagonal ducts.
Fig. 10. The variation of the general criterion N
S
A* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
rectangular ducts.
Fig. 11. The variation of the general criterion N
S
A* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
isosceles triangular ducts.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 224
with trapezoidal ducts, A* 0.498 for c* 32.2 (g 0.01) and
q 75

; b) for bundle with hexagonal ducts, A* 0.501 for c* 16.4

(g 0.02) and q 60

.
Figs. 10e13 present the variation of N
S
A* with c* and f
o
as a
parameter for bundles with rectangular, Fig. 10, isosceles triangular,
Fig. 11, elliptical, Fig. 12, and hexagonal ducts, Fig. 13. As seen, the
bundle with isosceles triangular or elliptical ducts cannot bring any
benet compared to the bundle with standard circular tubes. The
use of rectangular ducts can be protable only for f
o
> 10 and
c* >1.5. The benet increases with the increase of c* and f
o
, and its
maximum is N
S
A* 0.655 for c* 3.22 and f
o
10
3
. The use of
bundle with trapezoidal or hexagonal ducts can bring a benet
again if f
o
> 10, and the maximumvalue is (for trapezoidal ducts):
N
S
A* z0.505 for f
o
10
3
and c* 32.2 (g 0.01). The bundle with
hexagonal ducts, Fig. 13, behaves in the same way compared to the
bundle with trapezoidal ducts and the benet is almost one and the
same. The only difference is that the prot N
S
A* < 1 appears for
smaller values of c*.
3.2.2. Case VG-2a
The objective functions of the case VG-2a are increased heat
duty Q* > 1, decreased entropy generation number N
S
< 1, and the
simultaneous effect of both of them N
S
/Q* < 1. The constraints
imposed are: W* 1, w
*
i
1, P* 1, A* 1, D* 1. Due to the
constraints, Eqs. (2)e(6) yield:
Q
*

*
; (11)
and
N
S

1
1 f
o
_
Q
*
w
*
o
T
*
o
_
c
2
*
fRe
*
_
1=3
f
o
_
; (12)
The calculated values of Q* by Eq. (11), are shown in Figs. 14 and
15. As seen, the bundles with isosceles triangular and elliptical
ducts, Fig. 14, cannot reach the rst objective Q* > 1.0. The use of
bundle with rectangular ducts, Fig. 14, can be protable if c* > 1.7
but the benet is very small and reaches the value Q* 1.023 for
c* 3.22. Bundles with trapezoidal or hexagonal ducts, Fig. 15,
perform almost in the same way, and the maximum benet is
Q* 1.026. The use of bundle with hexagonal ducts is preferable.
Figs. 16e19 present the variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q*
with c* and f
o
for bundles with rectangular, Fig. 16, isosceles
Fig. 12. The variation of the general criterion N
S
A* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
elliptical ducts.
Fig. 13. The variation of the general criterion N
S
A* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
hexagonal ducts.
Fig. 14. The variation of Q* with c* for bundle with rectangular, isosceles or elliptical
ducts.
Fig. 15. The variation of Q* with c* for bundle with hexagonal ducts.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 225
triangular, Fig. 17, elliptical, Fig. 18 or hexagonal ducts, Fig. 19. As
seen, the use of bundles with isosceles triangular and elliptical
ducts cannot bring any benet, whereas the use of bundle with
rectangular ducts can be protable if f
o
1 and c* > 1.7. In this
case, the benet increases with the increase of c* and decrease of
f
o
. The variation of N
S
/Q* with c*, f
o
and q for bundles with trap-
ezoidal or hexagonal ducts, Fig. 19, is similar to that of the bundle
with rectangular ducts and a benet can be obtained even though
for great values of f
o
. This benet depends on the values of c* and q
and the best results can be obtained for the cases f
o
1 regardless
of the use of trapezoidal or hexagonal ducts in the bundle.
4. Concluding remarks
Extended performance evaluation criteria (ExPEC) have been
used to assess the performance characteristics of single-phase fully
developed laminar ow through bundle of ducts with non-circular
shape such as rectangular, isosceles triangular, elliptical, trape-
zoidal and hexagonal under different objectives and constraints
imposed. These performance characteristics have been compared
to those of the bundle with circular tubes. The constant wall
temperature has been selected as thermal boundary condition. The
results can be summarized as follows:
(i) For the case FG-1a, the bundles with isosceles triangular or
elliptical ducts are inefcient. For bundle with rectangular
ducts the benet, N
S
/Q* < 1, can be only achieved if c* > 2
and f
o
< 10
1
and it increases with the increase of c* and
decrease of f
o
. The bundle with c* > 3 (aspect ratio a/b > 8,
Ref. [1]) realizes the greatest efciency.
The bundle with trapezoidal or hexagonal ducts is inefcient
when f
o
> 10
1
despite the values of c* and q. Benets can be
obtained for small values of f
o
(f
o
< 10
1
), and the smaller the
value of f
o
, the greater benet is. The bundle with hexagonal ducts
performs a little better.
(ii) In the case VG-1, the bundle with isosceles triangular or
elliptical ducts cannot bring any benet. The use of rectan-
gular ducts can be protable only for f
o
> 10 and c* > 1.5.
The bundles with trapezoidal or hexagonal ducts behave in
the same way.
Fig. 16. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
rectangular ducts.
Fig. 17. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
isosceles triangular ducts.
Fig. 18. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
elliptical ducts.
Fig. 19. The variation of the general criterion N
S
/Q* with c* and f
o
for bundle with
hexagonal ducts.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 226
(iii) In the case VG-2a, the use of bundles with isosceles trian-
gular and elliptical ducts cannot bring any benet, whereas
the use of rectangular ducts can be protable if f
o
1 and
c* > 1.7. The variation of N
S
/Q* for bundle with trapezoidal or
hexagonal ducts is similar to that of the bundle with rect-
angular ducts and a benet can be obtained even though for
great values of f
o
. It is obvious that the best results can be
obtained for the cases f
o
1 regardless of the use of trape-
zoidal or hexagonal ducts in the bundle.
Figs. 20e22 present comparison of performance efciencies of
bundles with the most efcient duct shapes (rectangular and
hexagonal ducts) for the cases FG-1a, VG-1 and VG-2a. As seen, the
bundle with hexagonal (trapezoidal) ducts can bring about greater
benet.
The analysis of the performance of bundle with non-circular
ducts as heat transfer unit revealed that only the rectangular,
trapezoidal or hexagonal duct conguration can compete, in some
cases with the circular tube conguration for single-phase fully
developed laminar ow. The choice of the tube shape strongly
depends on the constraints imposed and the objectives pursued.
The results obtained in this study are restricted to general
constraint D* 1 and the benets can be completely different if the
constraint A
*
f
1 is imposed. These differences can be clearly seen
if the results of this study are compared to those shown up in a
recently published papers [29,32].
References
[1] R.K. Shah, A.L. London, Laminar ow forced convection in ducts, in: Advances
in Heat Transfer, Academic Press, New York, 1978.
[2] R.K. Shah, M.S. Bhatti, Laminar convective heat transfer in ducts, in: S. Kaka,
R.K. Shah, W. Aung (Eds.), Handbook of Single-phase Convective Heat Trans-
fer, Wiley, New York, 1987 (Chapter 3).
[3] R.M. Manglik, J. Ding, Laminar ow heat transfer to viscous power-law uids
in double-sine ducts, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 40 (1997) 1379e1390.
[4] R.M. Manglik, A.E. Bergles, Fully developed laminar heat transfer in circular-
segment ducts with uniform wall temperature, Numer. Heat Transfer Part A
26 (1994) 499e519.
[5] T.M. Harms, M.A. Jog, R.M. Manglik, Effect of temperature dependant viscosity
variations and boundary conditions on fully developed laminar forced con-
vection in a semicircular duct, J. Heat Transfer 120 (1998) 600e605.
[6] G. Walker, Industrial Heat Exchangers, Hemisphere, New York, 1990.
[7] E.A.D. Saunders, Heat Exchangers: Selection, Design and Construction, Long-
man, Harlow, UK, 1998.
[8] R.K. Shah, D.P. Sekulic, Fundamentals of Heat Exchanger Design, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, 2003.
[9] R.M. Manglik, Plate heat exchangers for process industry applications:
enhanced thermal-hydraulic characteristics of chevron plates, in:
R.M. Manglik, A.D. Klaus (Eds.), Process, Enhanced and Multiphase Heat
Transfer, Begell House, New York, 1996, pp. 267e276.
[10] S.M. Flockhart, R.S. Dhariwal, Experimental and numerical investigation into
the ow characteristics of channels etched in silicon, J. Fluids Eng. 120 (1998)
291e295.
[11] R.L. Webb, Performance evaluation criteria for use of enhanced heat transfer
surfaces in heat exchanger design, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 24 (1981) 715e
726.
[12] R.L. Webb, A.E. Bergles, Performance evaluation criteria for selection of heat
transfer surface geometries used in low Reynolds number heat exchangers, in:
S. Kakac, R.K. Shah, A.E. Bergles (Eds.), Low Reynolds Number Flow Heat Ex-
changers, Hemisphere Publ. Corp., Washington, D.C., 1983, pp. 735e742.
[13] A. Bejan, Entropy Generation through Heat and Fluid Flow, John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1982.
[14] A. Bejan, Entropy Generation Minimization, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1996.
[15] V.D. Zimparov, Extended performance evaluation criteria for enhanced heat
transfer surfaces: heat transfer through ducts with constant wall temperature,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 43 (2000) 3137e3155.
[16] V.D. Zimparov, Extended performance evaluation criteria for enhanced heat
transfer surfaces: heat transfer through ducts with constant heat ux, Int. J.
Heat Mass Transfer 44 (2001) 169e180.
[17] D.H. Richardson, D.P. Seculic, A. Campo, Low Reynolds number ow inside
straight micro channels with irregular cross-sections, Heat Mass Transfer 36
(2000) 187e193.
Fig. 20. Comparison of performance efciencies of bundles with rectangular and
hexagonal ducts, Case FG-1a.
Fig. 21. Comparison of performance efciencies of bundles with rectangular and
hexagonal ducts, Case VG-1.
Fig. 22. Comparison of performance efciencies of bundles with rectangular and
hexagonal ducts, Case VG-2a.
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 227
[18] S.Y. Wu, Y.R. Li, Y. Chen, L. Xiao, Exergy transfer characteristics of forced
convective heat transfer through a duct with constant wall temperature,
Energy 32 (2007) 2385e2395.
[19] H.F. Oztop, Effective parameters on second law analysis for semicircular ducts
in laminar ow and constant wall heat ux, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer
32 (2005) 266e274.
[20] H.F. Oztop, I. Dagtekin, A.Z. Sahin, Second law analysis of fully developed
laminar ow for rectangular ducts with semicircular ends, Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transfer 36 (2009) 725e730.
[21] D.P. Sekulic, A. Campo, J.K. Morales, Irreversibility phenomena associated with
heat transfer and uid friction in laminar ows through singly connected
ducts, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 40 (1997) 905e914.
[22] E.B. Ratts, A.G. Raut, Entropy generation minimization of fully developed in-
ternal ow with constant heat ux, ASME J. Heat Transfer 126 (2004) 656e
659.
[23] T.A. Jankowski, Minimizing entropy generation in internal ows by adjusting
the shape of the cross section, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 3439e3445.
[24] S. Jarungthammachole, Entropy generation analysis for fully developed
laminar convection in hexagonal duct subjected to constant heat ux, Energy
35 (2010) 5374e5379.
[25] V.D. Zimparov, V.M. Petkov, Second law analysis of fully developed internal
ows with different shape of the cross-section, Int. Rev. Chem. Eng. 3 (2)
(2011) 256e264.
[26] S. Chakraborty, S. Ray, Performance optimization of laminar fully developed
ow through square ducts with rounded corners, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 50 (2011)
2522e2535.
[27] V.M. Petkov, V.D. Zimparov, A.E. Bergles, Performance evaluation of laminar
fully developed ow through ducts with non-circular shapes subjected to H1
boundary condition. Part 1, Int. Rev. Chem. Eng. 5 (1) (2013) 1e15.
[28] V.M. Petkov, V.D. Zimparov, Performance evaluation of laminar fully devel-
oped ow through ducts with non-circular shapes subjected to H1 boundary
condition. Part 2, Int. Rev. Chem. Eng. 5 (2) (2013) 74e87.
[29] V.M. Petkov, V.D. Zimparov, A.E. Bergles, Performance evaluation of ducts with
non-circular shapes and laminar fully developed ow, Int. Rev. Chem. Eng. 4
(4) (2012) 379e391.
[30] R.S. Sadasivan, Raj M. Manglik, M.A. Jog, Fully developed forced convection
through trapezoidal and hexagonal ducts, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 42 (1999)
4321e4331.
[31] V.M. Petkov, V.D. Zimparov, Performance evaluation of ducts with non-
circular shapes: laminar fully developed ow subjected to T boundary con-
dition, Int. Rev. Chem. Eng. 5 (4) (2013) 265e279.
[32] V.M. Petkov, V.D. Zimparov, Performance evaluation of laminar fully devel-
oped ow through ducts with trapezoidal and hexagonal shapes subjected to
T boundary condition. Part 1, Int. Rev. Chem. Eng. 5 (5) (2013) 356e362.
Nomenclature
A: heat transfer surface area (m
2
)
A
f
: cross-sectional ow area (m
2
)
c
p
: specic heat capacity (J kg
1
K
1
)
D: reference circular tube diameter (m)
D
h
: hydraulic diameter, (m)
h: specic enthalpy (J kg
1
)
k: thermal conductivity (W m
1
K
1
)
L
t
: tube length (m)
_ mt : mass ow rate in tube (kg s
1
)
N
t
: number of tubes
P: pumping power (W)
p: wetted perimeter (m)
Dp: pressure drop (Pa)
_
Q: heat transfer rate (W)
_
Q
t
: tube heat transfer rate (W)
_
Sgen: entropy generation rate (W K
1
)
T: temperature (K)
V: duct volume (m
3
)
W: mass ow rate in heat unit (kg s
1
)
x: axial distance along the tube (m)
Greek symbols
a: heat transfer coefcient (W m
2
K
1
)
c: shape factor
w: temperature difference, T
w
T (K)
m: dynamic viscosity (Pa s)
r: uid density (kg m
3
)
Dimensionless groups
A
*
: dimensionless heat transfer surface, A/A
c
A
*
f
: dimensionless cross-sectional area, A
f
/A
f,c
D
*
: dimensionless tube diameter, D
h
/D
c
L
*
: dimensionless tube length, L
t
/L
t,c
f: Fanning friction factor
Nu: Nusselt number
Nu
*
: Nusselt number ratio, Nu/Nu
c
N
S
: augmentation entropy generation number
N
*
: ratio of number of tubes, N
t
/N
t,c
NTU: heat transfer units, 4StL
t
/D
Pr: Prandtl number
P
*
: dimensionless pumping power, P/P
c
Q
*
: dimensionless heat transfer rate,
_
Q=
_
Q
c
Re: Reynolds number
(fRe)
*
: ratio (fRe)/(fRe)
c
St: Stanton number
W
*
: dimensionless mass ow rate, W/W
c
w
*
i
: dimensionless inlet temperature difference, w
i
/w
i,c
w
*
o
: dimensionless outlet temperature difference, w
o
/w
o,c
c: shape factor, p/D
h
c
*
: ratio of shape factors, c/c
c

*
: ratio of heat exchanger effectiveness, /
c
s: dimensionless temperature difference, DT/T
f
o
: irreversibility distribution ratio
DT
*
m
: dimensionless mean temperature difference, DT
m
/DT
m,c
Subscripts
c: circular tube
f: uid
i: value at x 0
m: mean
o: value at x L
w: wall
V.M. Petkov et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 79 (2014) 220e228 228