Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

DISCUSSION (FAIZ IRFAN BIN ROZAHI, 2017924325)

Based on the result, it can be seen that the counter flow has a better heat exchanger
factor comparing to parallel flow. As the volumetric flow rate is increase from 1.667 x 10-5
𝑚3 ⁄𝑠 to 6.667 x 10-5 𝑚3 ⁄𝑠 it can be seen that the power emitted by the counter flow is lesser
than the parallel. In term of power absorbed and power lost, basically counter flow make used
of every power that is emitted for each flow making the power loss of each of the volumetric
flow rate to be lesser than the power loss of parallel flow. In industry, basically saving more
money will be a top priority of each of them hence a product that can consume fewer intakes
such as the power or electricity will be selected in order to save more money meanwhile having
the good quality. So in this experiment, a counter flow is a better choice rather than parallel
flow.

Meanwhile the overall efficiency again is more favorable in counter flow. Counter flow
has a greater efficiency comparing to the parallel flow which the highest overall efficiency
calculated is 58.98% for a counter flow and 28.08% for parallel flow. For parallel flow, when
the volumetric flow rate is increased, the efficiency is increased linearly meanwhile for counter
flow, the efficiency of the system increased, and then decreased partially when the volumetric
flow rate in increased. In term of the logarithmic mean temperature, a counter flow has a higher
value comparing to parallel flow. Counter flow has a range of 16.37 to 16.91℃ meanwhile for
parallel flow the range of the logarithmic mean temperature is between 12.33 until 14.59℃. In
this case, a smaller value is needed than a larger value so that the overall heat transfer
coefficient will be greater as based on the formula to obtain the heat transfer coefficient; the
power absorbed will be divided by the logarithmic mean temperature to obtain the heat transfer
coefficient. Hence, the value for the heat transfer coefficient for counter flow is greater than
the parallel flow. The heat transfer coefficient increased linearly for both of the flow when the
volumetric flow rate is increased.

The may be a few factors that contribute to the error of the experiment which is the
systematic error and the human error. Systematic error is an error caused by the equipment
itself meanwhile for human error is caused by the human theirselves. So, the systematical error
happened in this experiment is when the adjusting the initial temperature of the flow. The
temperature keep on rising during the experiment during the parallel flow that may influence
the data recorded and calculated. Meanwhile for human error is during adjusting the volumetric
flow rate. In order to obtain the exact value is maybe quite hard as the eyes may not be in
perpendicular to the scale.
CONCLUSION (FAIZ IRFAN BIN ROZAHI, 2017924325)

Based on the experiment, it can be concluded that;

1) Increasing the volumetric flow rate will increase the power emitted and absorbed for
both counter flow and parallel flow that will surely affect in decrease of the power lost
for each of the volumetric flow rate.
2) The efficiency for a counter flow is greater than parallel flow making the counter flow
is a better option for a heat exchanger system. Besides, heat transfer coefficient is also
change when the volumetric flow rate is increased.
3) Overall counter flow has a better heat exchanger performance factor when it comes to
compare with parallel flow.

Log Mean Temperature Difference Method is suitable in this experiment because all the
temperature value needed is obtained from the experiment. For recommendation, use another
type of flow which is series in order to compare the heat exchanger performance factor when
the volumetric flow rate is changed.