CFD ANALYSIS OF HEAT TRANSFER

AUGMENTATION FOR FLOW THROUGH A TUBE

USING WIRE COIL INSERTS
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

Bachelor of Technology
In
Chemical Engineering

Submitted By

Shalini Patra

109CH0089

Under the guidance of

Dr. Satish Kumar Agarwal

Department of Chemical Engineering

National Institute of Technology
Rourkela
2013
 National Institute of Technology, Rourkela

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “CFD ANALYSIS OF HEAT TRANSFER
AUGMENTATION FOR FLOW THROUGH A TUBE USING WIRE COIL INSERTS”,
submitted by Miss. Shalini Patra, Roll no. 109CH0089, in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the award of degree of Bachelor of Technology in Chemical Engineering at National Institute
of Technology, Rourkela is an authentic work carried out by her under my supervision and
guidance.

To the best of my knowledge, the matter embodied in the report has not been submitted to any
other University / Institute for the award of any Degree or Diploma.

Date: Dr.S.K.Agarwal
Place: Rourkela Department of Chemical Engineering
National Institute of Technology
Rourkela – 769008

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I express my sincere gratitude to Prof. S.K.Agarwal for providing me an opportunity to work on

this project and for his constant guidance and timely suggestions throughout. I am also thankful
to Prof. H.M.Jena and Prof. R.K.Singh (Project Co-ordinators) for their valuable guidance and
advice.
I would also like to thank M.Tech student Mr. T.Dhani Babu, and PhD scholar Mr. Akhilesh
Khapre, for their help and guidance.
Finally I thank my parents, brother and friends for their support and encouragement without
which this project would not have been possible.

Date: Shalini Patra

109CH0089
Department of Chemical Engineering
National Institute of Technology, Rourkela

ii
 ABSTRACT
The need to increase the thermal performance of heat transfer equipment (for instance, heat
exchangers), thereby effecting energy, material, and cost savings as well as a consequential
mitigation of environmental degradation has led to the development and use of many heat
transfer enhancement techniques. These methods are referred to as
augmentation or intensification techniques. This project deals with the analysis of heat transfer
augmentation for fluid flowing through pipes using CFD. Using CFD codes for modeling the
heat and fluid flow is an efficient tool for predicting equipment performance. CFD offers a
convenient means to study the detailed flows and heat exchange processes, which take place
inside the tube. Friction factor and Nusselt number for water flowing through the specified pipe
(internal diameter = 0.022 m, length = 2.5 m) were obtained first for the smooth pipe and then
for the pipe with a wire coil insert in the Reynolds number range of 250 to 25,000 and Prandtl
number of 6.97. Three wire coils with pitch 0.033 m, 0.044 m and 0.0484 m, and coil diameter
0.00154 m, 0.00187 m and 0.002 m respectively were considered. Calculated values (obtained
from empirical equations available in literature) were compared with CFD values. Comparisons
were also made between the smooth tube results and the coiled wire results to establish the heat
transfer augmentation due to the use of insert. It was seen that the friction factor increment i.e.
fc/f0 varied between 1.2 to 8.5 with coil 1 giving the maximum value of 8.5 at Reynolds number
2250. Similarly, the Nusselt number increment i.e. Nuc/Nu0 varied in the range of 1.3 to 4.9,
again with coil 1 giving the maximum value of 4.9 at the same Reynolds number of 2250.
Simulations were carried out using commercial CFD software ANSYS 13.0.

Keywords: Heat transfer augmentation, CFD, Friction factor, Nusselt number, wire coil inserts.

iii
 CONTENTS
Chapter Topic Page no.

Abstract iii

List of figures v

List of tables vi

Nomenclature vii

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

Chapter 2 Literature Review 4

2.1 Classification of Augmentation Techniques 5

2.2 Performance Evaluation Criteria 7

2.3 Wire Coil inserts 10

Chapter 3 Computational Fluid Dynamics 12

3.1 Definition 13

3.2 Applications and advantages of CFD 13

3.3 CFD Procedure 14

Chapter 4 Numerical and CFD investigations 17

4.1 Problem statement 18

4.2 Smooth tube 19

4.3 Tube with wire coil insert 23

Chapter 5 Results and Discussion 31

5.1 Smooth Tube Results 32

5.2 Results for tube with wire coil insert 32

Chapter 6 Conclusions 39

References 41

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES
Fig No. Name of figure Page No.
2.1 Classic twisted tape insert 8
2.2 Perforated twisted tape insert 8
2.3 Notched twisted tape insert 8
2.4 Jagged twisted tape insert 8
2.5 Square cut circular ring insert 9
2.6 Micro-fins incorporated in a tube 9
2.7 Conical ring inserts 9
2.8 Wire insert 9
4.1 Geometry of smooth tube 20
4.2 Mesh generated for smooth tube 21
4.3 Geometry of tube with coiled wire 24
4.4 Mesh generated for tube with coiled wire 25
5.1 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (laminar flow) 32
5.2 Nusselt number vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (laminar flow) 32
5.3 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (turbulent flow) 33
5.4 Nusselt number vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (turbulent flow) 33
5.5 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number for Coil 1 34
5.6 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number for Coil 2 34
5.7 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number for Coil 3 35
5.8 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number (Comparison between different 35
coils)
5.9 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number for Coil 1 36
5.10 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number for Coil 2 36
5.11 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number for Coil 3 37
5.12 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number (Comparison between different 37
coils)

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table no. Name of table Page

no.
4.1 Specifications of the wire coils used 18
4.2 Friction factor and Nusselt number for Laminar region for smooth tube 22
4.3 Friction factor and Nusselt Number for Turbulent Region for smooth tube 23
4.4 Wire coil specifications 25
4.5 Friction factor and Nusselt number for coil 1 26
4.6 Friction factor and Nusselt number for coil 2 27
4.7 Friction factor and Nusselt number for coil 3 28
4.8 Friction factor comparison of the three coils with smooth tube (based on 29
CFD values)
4.9 Nusselt number comparison of the three coils with smooth tube (based on 30
CFD values)

vi
 NOMENCLATURE

Cp Specific heat of fluid, J/kg.K

D, d Diameter of pipe, m
e Diameter of wire coil, m
f Fanning friction factor, Dimensionless
Gz Graetz Number, Dimensionless
K Thermal conductivity, W/m.K
L Length of pipe, m
Nu Nusselt Number, Dimensionless
Pr Prandtl number, dimensionless
p Pitch of wire coil, m
Re Reynolds Number, Dimensionless
v Flow velocity, m/s
Greek symbols:
α Helix angle of wire coil, degrees
ρ Density of the fluid, kg/m3
μ Viscosity of the fluid, N s/m2
Subscripts:
Di Internal diameter of pipe, m
f0 Friction factor for smooth tube, Dimensionless
fc Friction factor for tube with wire coil insert, Dimensionless
Nu0 Nusselt Number for smooth tube, Dimensionless
Nuc Nusselt Number for tube with wire coil insert, Dimensionless
μb Viscosity of fluid at bulk temperature, N s/m2
μw Viscosity of fluid at wall temperature, N s/m2

vii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1
 INTRODUCTION
The conversion, utilization, and recovery of energy in industrial, commercial, and domestic
application usually involve a heat transfer process. Improved heat exchange, over and above that
in the usual or standard practice, can significantly improve the thermal efficiency in such
applications as well as the economics of their design and operation. The need to increase the
thermal performance of heat based equipments (for instance, heat exchangers), thereby effecting
energy, material, and cost savings as well as a consequential mitigation of environmental
degradation has led to the development and use of many heat transfer enhancement techniques.
These methods are referred to as augmentation or intensification techniques.

Enhancement techniques essentially reduce, for example, the thermal resistance in a

conventional heat exchanger by promoting higher convective heat transfer coefficient with or
without surface area increases (as represented by fins or extended surfaces). As a result, the size
of a heat exchanger can be reduced, or the heat duty of an existing exchanger can be increased,
or the exchanger’s operating approach temperature difference can be decreased. The latter is
particularly useful in thermal processing of biochemical, food, plastic, and pharmaceutical
media, to avoid thermal degradation of the end product. On the other hand, heat exchange
systems in spacecraft, electronic devices, and medical applications, for example, may rely
primarily on enhanced thermal performance for their successful operation.

In the present work, heat transfer enhancement for fluid flowing through a pipe with wire coil
inserts is to be analyzed using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD).

The impressive improvements in computer performance, matched by developments in numerical

methods, have resulted in a growing confidence in the ability of CFD to model complex fluid
flows. CFD techniques have been applied on a broad scale in the process industry to gain insight
into various flow phenomena, examine different equipment designs or compare performance
under different operating conditions.
The report is divided into the following chapters:
Chapter 2 deals with the literature review that has been done with the various techniques used for
enhancement and work carried out on CFD analysis of such methods.

2
Chapter 3 provides a general background to CFD, including its applications, advantages, CFD
analysis procedure, and methodology.
Chapter 4 is regarding the present work carried out, i.e. numerical/theoretical calculation of
friction factor and Nusselt number for the specified problem and comparison with values
obtained from CFD using ANSYS 13.0 software.
Chapter 5 deals with the results obtained and their discussion and analysis followed by some
suggestions to improve the results obtained.
Chapter 6 contains the concluding remarks.

3
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

4
 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Classification of Augmentation Techniques:

The various enhancement techniques [1,2] can be classified broadly

as passive and active techniques. Passive techniques do not require direct input of external
power, unlike active techniques. They generally use surface or geometrical modifications to the
flow channel, or incorporate an insert, material, or additional device. Except for extended
surfaces, which increase the effective heat transfer surface area, these passive schemes promote
higher heat transfer coefficients by disturbing or altering the existing flow behavior. This,
however, is accompanied by an increase in the pressure drop. In the case of active techniques,
the addition of external power essentially facilitates the desired flow modification and
improvement in the rate of heat transfer. The use of two or more techniques (passive and/or
active) in conjunction constitutes compound augmentation techniques.

The effectiveness of any of these methods is strongly dependent on the mode of heat transfer
(single-phase free or forced convection, pool boiling, forced convection boiling or condensation,
and convective mass transfer), and type and process application of the heat exchanger.

2.1.1 Passive techniques:

 Treated surfaces are heat transfer surfaces that have a fine-scale alteration to their finish
or coating. The alteration could be continuous or discontinuous, where the roughness is
much smaller than what affects single-phase heat transfer, and they are used primarily for
boiling and condensing duties.

 Rough surfaces are generally surface modifications that promote turbulence in the flow
field, primarily in single-phase flows, and do not increase the heat transfer surface area.
Their geometric features range from random sand-grain roughness to discrete three-
dimensional surface protuberances.

 Extended surfaces, more commonly referred to as finned surfaces, provide an effective

heat transfer surface area enlargement. Plain fins have been used routinely in many heat
exchangers. The newer developments, however, have led to modified finned surfaces that

5
 also tend to improve the heat transfer coefficients by disturbing the flow field in addition
to increasing the surface area.

 Displaced enhancement devices are inserts that are used primarily in confined forced
convection, and they improve energy transport indirectly at the heat exchange surface by
“displacing” the fluid from the heated or cooled surface of the duct with bulk fluid from
the core flow.

 Swirl flow devices produce and superimpose swirl or secondary recirculation on the axial
flow in a channel. They include helical strip or cored screw-type tube inserts, twisted
ducts, and various forms of altered (tangential to axial direction) flow arrangements, and
they can be used for single-phase as well as two-phase flows.

 Coiled tubes are what the name suggests, and they lead to relatively more compact heat
exchangers. The tube curvature due to coiling produces secondary flows, which promote
higher heat transfer coefficients in single-phase flows as well as in most regions of
boiling.

 Surface tension devices consist of wicking or grooved surfaces, which direct and improve
the flow of liquid to boiling surfaces and from condensing surfaces.

 Additives for liquids include the addition of solid particles, soluble trace additives, and
gas bubbles in single-phase flows, and trace additives, which usually depress the surface
tension of the liquid, for boiling systems.

 Additives for gases include liquid droplets or solid particles, which are introduced in
single-phase gas flows in either a dilute phase (gas–solid suspensions) or dense phase
(fluidized beds).

2.1.2 Active techniques:

 Mechanical aids are those that stir the fluid by mechanical mean or by rotating the
surface. The more prominent examples include rotating tube heat exchangers and
scraped-surface heat and mass exchangers.

6
  Surface vibration has been applied primarily, at either low or high frequency, in single-
phase flows to obtain higher convective heat transfer coefficients.

 Fluid vibration or fluid pulsation, with vibrations ranging from 1.0 Hz to ultrasound, used
primarily in single-phase flows, is considered to be perhaps the most practical type of
vibration enhancement technique.

 Electrostatic fields, which could be in the form of electric or magnetic fields, or a

combination of the two, from dc or ac sources, can be applied in heat exchange systems
involving dielectric fluids. Depending on the application, they can promote greater bulk
fluid mixing and induce forced convection (corona “wind”) or electromagnetic pumping
to enhance heat transfer.

 Injection, used only in single-phase flow, pertains to the method of injecting the same or
a different fluid into the main bulk fluid either through a porous heat transfer interface or
upstream of the heat transfer section.

 Suction involves either vapor removal through a porous heated surface in nucleate or film
boiling, or fluid withdrawal through a porous heated surface in single-phase flow.

 Jet impingement involves the direction of heating or cooling fluid perpendicularly or

obliquely to the heat transfer surface. Single or multiple jets (in clusters or staged axially
along the flow channel) may be used in both single-phase and boiling applications.

Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, any two or more of these techniques (passive and/or active)
may be employed simultaneously to obtain enhancement in heat transfer that is greater than that
produced by only one technique itself. This simultaneous utilization is termed compound
enhancement.

2.2 Performance Evaluation Criteria:

Besides the relative thermal–hydraulic performance improvements brought about by the

enhancement devices, there are many factors [2] that should be considered to evaluate the
performance of particular heat transfer equipment. They include economic (engineering
development, capital, installation, operating, maintenance, and other such costs),

7
manufacturability (machining, forming, bonding, and other production processes), reliability
(material compatibility, integrity, and long-term performance), and safety, among others. The
assessment of these factors, as well as the enhanced convection performance, is usually
application driven. In most practical applications of enhancement techniques, the
following performance objectives, along with a set of operating constraints and conditions, are
usually considered for optimizing the use of a heat exchanger:

1. Increase the heat duty of an existing heat exchanger without altering the pumping power (or
pressure drop) or flow rate requirements.

2. Reduce the approach temperature difference between the two heat-exchanging fluid streams
for a specified heat load and size of exchanger.

3. Reduce the size or heat transfer surface area requirements for a specified heat duty and
pressure drop.

4. Reduce the process stream’s pumping power requirements for a given heat load and exchanger
surface area.

It may be noted that objectives 1, 2, and 4 yield savings in operating (or energy) costs, and
objective 3 lends to material savings and reduced capital costs. These objective functions and
constraints have been described by many different performance evaluation criteria (PEC) in the
literature.

Below are some of the inserts [4] used for augmentation commonly:-

Fig 2.1 Classic twisted tape Fig 2.2 Perforated twisted tape

Fig 2.3 Notched twisted tape Fig 2.4 Jagged twisted tape

8
Fig 2.5 Square cut circular ring insert Fig 2.6 Micro-fins incorporated in a tube

Fig 2.7 Conical ring inserts Fig 2.8 Wire insert

The quick development of numerical techniques and software, such as CFD codes, has improved
the ability of engineers to solve highly sophisticated engineering problems. Using CFD codes for
modeling the heat and fluid flow is an efficient tool for predicting equipments performance. The
CFD offers a convenient means to study the detailed flows and heat exchange processes, which
take place inside the tube. Many efforts have been undertaken to use the CFD modeling for
designing heat transfer enhancement devices.
Eiamsa-ard et al. [3] carried out an experimental investigation on heat transfer and friction factor
characteristics in a double-pipe heat exchanger fitted with regularly spaced twisted tape insert.
Two types of tube inserts consisting of a full-length typical twisted tape at different twisted ratios
and a twisted tape with various free space ratios were used in their experiments. Their results
showed that the heat transfer coefficient increased by decreasing the twist ratio. However, they
illustrated that decreasing the free space ratio can increase both the heat transfer coefficient and
friction factor.

9
Rahimi et al. [4] carried out a CFD modeling in order to find the heat transfer in a tube equipped
with different modified inserts fabricated based on a twisted tape insert. The operational
performances of these inserts were compared experimentally and theoretically with that obtained
from the classic twisted tape insert. The CFD predicted results have been used to explain the
experimental observations.
S. Eiamsa-ard et al. [5] reported the details of the turbulence modeling to help in understanding
of the behaviors of the incompressible swirl flows for tube fitted with the loose-fit twisted tapes
in comparison with those for a tube equipped with tight-fit twisted tapes. In this work, the
standard k–ε turbulence model, the Renormalized Group (RNG) k–ε turbulence model, the
standard k–ω turbulence model, and the Shear Stress Transport (SST) k–ω turbulence model,
were performed to study the phenomena of flow field (velocity vector and streamline),
temperature field, pressure field and turbulent intensity (TKE) in a tube with twisted tape inserts.
Similar works were carried out with different inserts. Heat transfer enhancement in a channel due
to the presence of a triangular prism was obtained using numerical simulation [6]. The order of
enhancement was about 15%. However, as expected, the augmentation was associated with
enhanced skin friction.
Zhang et al. [7] investigated the heat transfer characteristics of a helically baffled heat exchanger
combined with a finned tube experimentally and theoretically. Commercial Fluent 6.0 CFD code
was used for predicting its fluid flow and heat transfer performances. The authors reported a
good agreement between the modeling and experimental results.
2.3 Wire Coil inserts:
Garcia, Vicente and Viedma [8] carried out experiments with six different helical wire coils
fitted inside a round tube to establish their thermohydraulic performance in laminar, transition
and turbulent flow. Experimental correlations of Fanning friction factor and Nusselt number as
functions of flow and system parameters were proposed. It was seen that wire coil inserts offer
their best performance within the transition region where they show a considerable advantage
over other enhancement techniques.
Kumar et al. [9] experimentally investigated the heat transfer enhancement by wire coil inserts
inside a double pipe heat exchanger with engine oil flowing in the inner tube and steam in the
annulus. Two empirical correlations were developed for predicting heat transfer enhancement of
these inserts in the laminar region.

10
Numerical simulations of laminar flow in pipes with coil wire inserts were carried out by
Esparza and Rojas [10]. Three-dimensional numerical simulations of the incompressible laminar
flow in smooth round pipes of diameter, d, with wire coil inserts of helical pitch, p, and diameter,
e, were accomplished with the finite volume method. The effect of pitch on the friction factor
was addressed by performing a parametrical study with a pitch-periodic computational domain
showing that the increase of the non-dimensional pitch, p/d, decreases the friction factor.

11
 CHAPTER 3

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID
DYNAMICS

12
 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS

3.1 Definition:
[11] Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is the use of computer-based simulation to analyze
systems involving fluid flow, heat transfer and associated phenomena such as chemical reaction.
A numerical model is first constructed using a set of mathematical equations that describe the
flow. These equations are then solved using a computer programme in order to obtain the flow
variables throughout the flow domain.
Since the advent of the digital computer, CFD has received extensive attention and has been
widely used to study various aspects of fluid dynamics. The development and application of
CFD have undergone considerable growth, and as a result it has become a powerful tool in the
design and analysis of engineering and other processes. In the early 1980s, computers became
sufficiently powerful for general-purpose CFD software to become available.

3.2 Applications and advantages of CFD:

Many developments in the field of CFD along with its ability to model complex phenomena and
growing popularity of such softwares have widened the range of application of CFD. It is applied
in a wide range of industries including mechanical, process, petroleum, power, metallurgical,
biomedical, pharmaceutical and food industries. CFD techniques have been applied on a broad
scale in the process industry to gain insight into various flow phenomena, examine different
equipment designs or compare performance under different operating conditions. Examples of
CFD applications in the chemical process industry include drying, combustion, separation, heat
exchange, mass transfer, pipeline flow, reaction, mixing, multiphase systems and material
processing. CFD has also been applied to a number of food processing operations such as drying,
refrigeration, sterilization, mixing and heat exchangers. CFD has also been successfully used in
modelling various multiphase flow systems, particularly gas-solid mixtures, although some
limitations still exist. Multiphase CFD models can help understand the complex interactions

13
between the different phases and provide detailed 3-D transient information that experimental
approaches may not be able to provide. These applications, amongst others, demonstrate the
potential of CFD to simulate complex flows and therefore the possibility of utilizing it to
investigate a wider range of processes.
3.3 CFD procedure:
All commercial CFD packages involve sophisticated user interfaces to input parameters and to
examine the results. Hence all the codes consist of three main elements:
 Pre-processor
 Solver
 Post-processor
Pre-processing is the input of a flow problem to a CFD program by means of an operator-
friendly interface and the subsequent transformation of this input into a form suitable for use by
the solver. The steps involved in this are:
 Definition of geometry.
 Grid generation.
 Selection of the phenomena or system to be modeled.
 Definition of fluid properties.
 Boundary conditions specification.
Solver involves the following steps:
 Approximation of the unknown flow variables by means of simple functions.
 Discretization by substitution of the approximations into the governing flow equations.
 Solution of algebraic equations.
Post-processor- All the leading CFD packages are equipped with versatile data visualization
tools. These include:-
 Domain geometry and grid display
 Vector plots
 Line and shaded contour plots
 Color postscript output
The mathematical modelling of a flow problem is achieved basically through three steps:
 developing the governing equations describing the flow;
 discretization of the governing equations; and

14
  solving the resulting numerical equations.
Governing equations:
 Unsteady state 3-D equation of continuity:-

where ρ is the fluid density, t is time, and u is velocity.

 Momentum equation:-

where P is pressure, μ is fluid viscosity, x is the coordinate and the subscript i indicates
the Cartesian coordinates.
 Energy equation:-

where k is the thermal conductivity, T is the temperature, is the dissipation term and S
is the source term.

The governing equations shown above are partial differential equations (PDEs). Since
digital computers can only recognize and manipulate numerical data, these equations
cannot be solved directly. Therefore, the PDEs must be transformed into numerical
equations containing only numbers and no derivatives. This process of producing a
numerical analogue to the PDEs is called ‘numerical discretization’. Various techniques
used for discretization are the finite difference method, the finite element method, and the
finite volume method.

 Finite Difference method describes the unknowns of the flow problem by means of point
samples at the node points of a grid co-ordinate lines. Taylor series expansions are used
to generate finite difference approximations of derivatives in terms of point samples at
each grid point and its immediate neighbors. Those derivatives appearing in the
governing equations are replaced by finite differences yielding an algebraic equation.
 Finite Element Method uses piecewise functions valid on elements to describe the local
variations of unknown flow variables. Here also a set of algebraic equations are
generated to determine unknown co-efficients.

15
 Finite Volume method is probably the most popular method used for numerical
discretization in CFD. This method is similar in some ways to the finite different
method. This approach involves the discretisation of the spatial domain into finite
control volumes. The governing equations in their differential form are integrated over
each control volume. The resulting integral conservation laws are exactly satisfied for
each control volume and for the entire domain, which is a distinct advantage of the finite
volume method. Each integral term is then converted into a discrete form, thus yielding
discretised equations at the centroids, or nodal points, of the control volumes.
The commercial CFD software used for the current project is ANSYS 13.0.

16
 CHAPTER 4

NUMERICAL AND CFD

INVESTIGATIONS

17
4.1 Problem statement:

(a) A smooth copper pipe 2.5 m in length and 0.022 m internal diameter is considered. Water
flows through it with inlet temperature 25˚C. Wall temperature is assumed constant at 100˚C.
Properties of water at 25˚C are as follows:

Density, ρ = 995.7 kg/m3

Thermal conductivity, K = 0.618 W/m.K

Viscosity, µ = 801.2x10-6 kg/m.s

Specific heat, Cp = 4.174 kJ/kg.K

Nusselt number and friction factor values were calculated from empirical equations taking
different velocity values in the laminar and turbulent regions. These were then compared with
the values obtained from CFD simulation.

(b) Same procedure was repeated for pipe with wire coil insert in it. Three different wires were
considered for the calculations and simulations with different pitch and wire diameters as shown
below:

Table 4.1 Specifications of the wire coils used:

Coil Pitch Coil Tube p/d e/d p/e p2/ed

no. p(m) diameter e diameter
(m) d (m)
1 0.0330 0.00154 0.022 1.5 0.0700 21.43 32.143
2 0.0440 0.00187 0.022 2.0 0.0850 23.53 47.059
3 0.0484 0.00200 0.022 2.2 0.0909 24.20 53.240

18
4.2 Smooth tube:

4.2(a) Equations used:-

 Reynold’s number, Re = ρvDi/µ

 Friction factor, f:
 Laminar flow: f = 16/Re
 Turbulent flow: f = 0.079(Re)-0.25 (Blassius equation)
 Nusselt Number, Nu:
 Laminar flow(Re<2100):

For Gz<100, Hausen’s equation is used:

Nu = 3.66 + [0.085Gz/(1 + 0.047Gz2/3)](µb/µw)0.14

where Gz = Re.Pr.(D/L)

Pr = Cpµ/K

For Gz>100, Sieder Tate equation is used:

Nu = 1.86Gz1/3(µb/µw)0.14

 Transition region (2100<Re<10000):

Nu = 0.116(Re2/3-125)Pr1/3[1 + (D/L)2/3] (µb/µw)0.14

 Turbulent flow (Re>10000):

Sieder Tate equation is used:

Nu = 0.023Re0.8Pr1/3(µb/µw)0.14

19
4.2(b) CFD Modelling:

Geometry:

The geometry i.e smooth cylindrical smooth tube of required dimensions was created using
ANSYS Design Modeler as shown below:-

Fig 4.1 Geometry of smooth tube

20
Meshing:

After creation of geometry, meshing was done. A section of the mesh generated is shown
below:-

Fig 4.2 Mesh generated for smooth tube

For laminar flow, the viscous (laminar) model was used whereas the k-Є turbulence model with
enhanced wall treatment was used for turbulent flow. The SIMPLE scheme with first order
UPWIND method was used as the solution method.

21
4.2(c) Tabulation:

Table 4.2 Friction factor and Nusselt number for Laminar region for smooth tube:

v(m/s) Re f(calc) f(CFD) %diff Nu(calc) Nu(CFD) %diff

0.01 250 0.064 0.0659 -2.96875 4.785562 3.595173 24.8746
0.015 375 0.042667 0.0439 -2.89063 5.231271 4.546115 13.09731
0.02 500 0.032 0.0329 -2.8125 5.632918 5.328742 5.399964
0.025 625 0.0256 0.0263 -2.73438 6.000755 6.016348 -0.25987
0.03 750 0.021333 0.0219 -2.65625 6.341427 6.608824 -4.21668
0.035 875 0.018286 0.0188 -2.8125 6.659594 7.175464 -7.74626
0.04 1000 0.016 0.0165 -3.125 6.958697 7.706479 -10.746
0.045 1125 0.014222 0.0146 -2.65625 7.241372 8.250873 -13.9407
0.05 1250 0.0128 0.0132 -3.125 7.509697 8.715061 -16.0508
0.055 1375 0.011636 0.0119 -2.26563 7.765349 9.148839 -17.8162
0.06 1500 0.010667 0.0109 -2.1875 8.762357 9.554552 -9.04088
0.065 1625 0.009846 0.0101 -2.57812 8.999292 9.934233 -10.3891
0.07 1750 0.009143 0.0094 -2.8125 9.224367 10.28982 -11.5504
0.075 1875 0.008533 0.0088 -3.125 9.438963 10.623 -12.5441
0.08 2000 0.008 0.0082 -2.5 9.644222 10.93544 -13.3885
0.085 2125 0.007529 0.0077 -2.26563 9.841097 11.22859 -14.099

Basis of % diff calculation: calculated values,

e.g. for friction factor, % diff = [(f(calc)-f(CFD))/f(calc)]*100

Similarly, for Nusselt number, % diff = [(Nu(calc)-Nu(CFD))/Nu(calc)]*100

22
Table 4.3 Friction factor and Nusselt Number for Turbulent Region for smooth tube:

v(m/s) Re f(calc) f(CFD) %diff Nu(calc) Nu(CFD) %diff

0.1 2500 0.012124 0.01509 -24.4639 22.96981 23.62 -2.83063
0.2 5000 0.009655 0.01111 -15.0699 39.99277 41.63 -4.09381
0.3 7500 0.008545 0.00966 -13.0486 55.31647 58.23 -5.26702
0.4 10000 0.00787 0.0088 -11.817 69.63145 73.9 -6.1302
0.5 12500 0.0074 0.00811 -9.59459 83.24026 88.59 -6.42687
0.6 15000 0.007046 0.00759 -7.72069 96.31156 102.43 -6.35276
0.7 17500 0.006767 0.00725 -7.13758 108.9522 115.75 -6.23925
0.8 20000 0.006538 0.00694 -6.14867 121.2354 129.03 -6.42931
0.9 22500 0.006345 0.0067 -5.59496 133.2145 142.29 -6.8127
1 25000 0.00618 0.00648 -4.85437 144.9297 155.35 -7.1899

4.3 Tube with coiled wire insert:

4.3(a) Equations used [8,9]:-

 Friction factor, f:
 Laminar flow:

f = 16.8/(Re)0.96

 Turbulent flow:

f = 9.35(p/e)-1.16(Re)-0.217

 Nusselt Number, Nu:

 Laminar flow:

Nu = 0.91(tanα Re[0.29(tanα)^-0.21]Pr0.33(µb/µw)0.14 (1.0<p/d<1.8)

Nu = 1.63(tanα)Re[0.26(tanα)^-0.37] Pr0.33(µb/µw)0.14 (1.8<p/d<2.65)

Where α is the helix angle in degrees.

23
  Turbulent flow:

Nu = 0.132(p/d)-0.372Re0.72Pr0.37

4.3(b) CFD Modelling:

Geometry:

Following geometry was created in the ANSYS Design Modeler. The coil was drawn by
specifying the pitch in twist specification option under “sweep” operation.

Fig 4.3 Geometry of tube with coiled wire

Meshing:

Tetrahedron, patch independent mesh was generated as shown below:-

24
Fig 4.4 Mesh generated for tube with coiled wire

Three such geometries were generated with the various pitch and diameter specifications given
below. The models used for simulation were the same as that in case of smooth tube.

Table 4.4 Wire coil specifications

Coil Pitch Coil Tube p/d e/d p/e p2/ed

no. p(m) diameter e diameter
(m) d (m)
1 0.0330 0.00154 0.022 1.5 0.0700 21.43 32.143
2 0.0440 0.00187 0.022 2.0 0.0850 23.53 47.059
3 0.0484 0.00200 0.022 2.2 0.0909 24.20 53.240

25
4.2(c) Tabulation:

Table 4.5 Friction factor and Nusselt number for coil 1:

v(m/s) Re fc1(calc) fc1(CFD) %diff Nuc1(calc) Nuc1(CFD) %diff

0.01 250 0.083808 0.08225 1.859327 6.586951 4.73 28.19136
0.02 500 0.043082 0.04568 -6.02982 8.194244 8.51 -3.85338
0.03 750 0.029191 0.03215 -10.1363 9.3106 11.08 -19.0041
0.04 1000 0.022147 0.02494 -12.6126 10.19374 12.85 -26.0578
0.05 1250 0.017876 0.02042 -14.23 39.51465 36.7928 6.888215
0.06 1500 0.015006 0.01731 -15.3547 45.05767 43.94604 2.467113
0.07 1750 0.012942 0.01504 -16.2131 50.34663 45.61573 9.396643
0.08 2000 0.051347 0.06045 -17.729 55.42741 46.94639 15.30112
0.09 2250 0.050051 0.0596 -19.0785 60.33293 58.03086 3.815608
0.1 2500 0.04892 0.05803 -18.6231 65.08783 73.13027 -12.3563
0.2 5000 0.042088 0.04715 -12.0267 107.2115 121.1613 -13.0114
0.3 7500 0.038543 0.04185 -8.57937 143.5579 163.5772 -13.9451
0.4 10000 0.036211 0.03635 -0.3848 176.5969 202.6457 -14.7504
0.5 12500 0.034499 0.03275 5.069816 207.3759 238.9396 -15.2205
0.6 15000 0.033161 0.03015 9.079322 236.466 273.1727 -15.523
0.7 17500 0.03207 0.0282 12.067 264.2228 305.9435 -15.7899
0.8 20000 0.031154 0.0266 14.61753 290.8872 336.9805 -15.8458
0.9 22500 0.030368 0.02525 16.85263 316.6317 366.4965 -15.7485
1 25000 0.029681 0.02415 18.63574 341.5858 395.7205 -15.8481

26
Table 4.6 Friction factor and Nusselt number for coil 2:

v(m/s) Re fc2(calc) fc2(CFD) %diff Nuc2(calc) Nuc2(CFD) %diff

0.01 250 0.083808 0.084101 -0.34929 9.890042 7.5542 23.61812
0.02 500 0.043082 0.046859 -8.76645 12.48373 11.3678 8.939047
0.03 750 0.029191 0.03018 -3.38767 14.30576 13.6817 4.362291
0.04 1000 0.022147 0.024485 -10.5582 15.75761 14.8056 6.041581
0.05 1250 0.017876 0.019196 -7.38289 35.50887 28.62404 19.38906
0.06 1500 0.015006 0.014493 3.417905 40.48996 35.45233 12.44169
0.07 1750 0.012942 0.013381 -3.39411 45.24276 41.86387 7.468349
0.08 2000 0.046062 0.047524 -3.17357 49.80848 42.98521 13.69902
0.09 2250 0.0449 0.046587 -3.7577 54.2167 43.89676 19.03462
0.1 2500 0.043885 0.04475 -1.97131 58.48958 67.19429 -14.8825
0.2 5000 0.037756 0.039582 -4.83497 96.34298 111.9157 -16.1638
0.3 7500 0.034576 0.035448 -2.5208 129.0048 151.5947 -17.5109
0.4 10000 0.032484 0.033639 -3.55595 158.6944 187.7474 -18.3075
0.5 12500 0.030948 0.031436 -1.57544 186.3532 221.5045 -18.8627
0.6 15000 0.029748 0.030893 -3.84937 212.4943 253.7522 -19.416
0.7 17500 0.028769 0.029336 -1.96993 237.4374 283.9901 -19.6063
0.8 20000 0.027948 0.028596 -2.32006 261.3986 312.6507 -19.6069
0.9 22500 0.027242 0.028003 -2.79219 284.5333 341.1351 -19.8928
1 25000 0.026627 0.027343 -2.6907 306.9577 370.1271 -20.5792

27
Table 4.7 Friction factor and Nusselt number for coil 3:

v(m/s) Re fc3(calc) fc3(CFD) %diff Nuc3(calc) Nuc3(CFD) %diff

0.01 250 0.083808 0.086341 -3.02205 9.60436 7.220761 24.81789
0.02 500 0.043082 0.043685 -1.39914 12.22438 13.04487 -6.71188
0.03 750 0.029191 0.029899 -2.42505 14.07689 17.06022 -21.1931
0.04 1000 0.022147 0.025063 -13.168 15.55913 19.85513 -27.6108
0.05 1250 0.017876 0.018659 -4.3789 34.2698 28.13174 17.91099
0.06 1500 0.015006 0.016531 -10.1634 39.07707 35.09291 10.19566
0.07 1750 0.012942 0.015112 -16.7694 43.66402 41.61837 4.684975
0.08 2000 0.044602 0.043343 2.82214 48.07042 42.83706 10.88687
0.09 2250 0.043476 0.042246 2.829585 52.32482 43.83198 16.231
0.1 2500 0.042493 0.041071 3.347493 56.44859 63.53851 -12.5599
0.2 5000 0.036559 0.036433 0.345643 92.98111 105.7519 -13.7348
0.3 7500 0.03348 0.033003 1.425049 124.5032 143.2044 -15.0207
0.4 10000 0.031454 0.031192 0.832792 153.1568 177.5037 -15.8967
0.5 12500 0.029967 0.029001 3.224082 179.8504 209.1767 -16.3059
0.6 15000 0.028805 0.028036 2.668658 205.0794 239.1566 -16.6166
0.7 17500 0.027857 0.027143 2.563436 229.152 267.7214 -16.8313
0.8 20000 0.027061 0.026493 2.100716 252.2771 294.535 -16.7506
0.9 22500 0.026379 0.025412 3.664286 274.6046 320.5969 -16.7486
1 25000 0.025782 0.024928 3.313626 296.2464 346.6331 -17.0084

28
Table 4.8 Friction factor comparison of the three coils with smooth tube (based on CFD values):

v(m/s) Re f0 fc1 fc2 fc3 fc1/f0 fc2/f0 fc3/f0

0.01 250 0.0659 0.08225 0.084101 0.086341 1.248103 1.276191 1.310182
0.02 500 0.0329 0.04568 0.046859 0.043685 1.38845 1.424286 1.327812
0.03 750 0.0219 0.03215 0.03018 0.029899 1.468037 1.378082 1.365251
0.04 1000 0.0165 0.02494 0.024485 0.025063 1.511515 1.483939 1.51897
0.05 1250 0.0132 0.02042 0.019196 0.018659 1.54697 1.454242 1.413561
0.06 1500 0.0109 0.01731 0.014493 0.016531 1.588073 1.329633 1.516606
0.07 1750 0.0094 0.01504 0.013381 0.015112 1.6 1.423511 1.60766
0.08 2000 0.0082 0.06045 0.047524 0.043343 7.371951 5.79561 5.285732
0.09 2250 0.007 0.0596 0.046587 0.042246 8.514286 6.655286 6.035143
0.1 2500 0.01509 0.05803 0.04475 0.041071 3.845593 2.96554 2.721736
0.2 5000 0.01111 0.04715 0.039582 0.036433 4.243924 3.562736 3.279298
0.3 7500 0.00966 0.04185 0.035448 0.033003 4.332298 3.669565 3.41646
0.4 10000 0.0088 0.03635 0.033639 0.031192 4.130682 3.822614 3.544545
0.5 12500 0.00811 0.03275 0.031436 0.029001 4.038224 3.876202 3.575956
0.6 15000 0.00759 0.03015 0.030893 0.028036 3.972332 4.070224 3.693808
0.7 17500 0.00725 0.0282 0.029336 0.027143 3.889655 4.046345 3.743862
0.8 20000 0.00694 0.0266 0.028596 0.026493 3.832853 4.120461 3.817435
0.9 22500 0.0067 0.02525 0.028003 0.025412 3.768657 4.179552 3.792836
1 25000 0.00648 0.02415 0.027343 0.024928 3.726852 4.219599 3.846914

29
Table 4.9 Nusselt number comparison of the three coils with smooth tube (based on CFD
values):

v(m/s) Re Nu0 Nuc1 Nuc2 Nuc3 Nuc1/Nu0 Nuc2/Nu0 Nuc3/Nu0

0.01 250 3.595 4.73 7.5542 7.220761 1.315716 2.101307 2.008557
0.02 500 5.329 8.51 11.3678 13.04487 1.596922 2.133196 2.447901
0.03 750 6.609 11.08 13.6817 17.06022 1.676502 2.070162 2.581361
0.04 1000 7.706 12.85 14.8056 19.85513 1.667532 1.921308 2.576581
0.05 1250 8.715 36.7928 28.62404 28.13174 4.221779 3.284456 3.227967
0.06 1500 9.555 43.94604 35.45233 35.09291 4.599272 3.710343 3.672727
0.07 1750 10.29 45.61573 41.86387 41.61837 4.433016 4.068403 4.044545
0.08 2000 10.935 46.94639 42.98521 42.83706 4.293223 3.930975 3.917426
0.09 2250 11.859 58.03086 43.89676 43.83198 4.893402 3.701556 3.696094
0.1 2500 23.62 73.13027 67.19429 63.53851 3.096116 2.844805 2.69003
0.2 5000 41.63 121.1613 111.9157 105.7519 2.910431 2.688343 2.54028
0.3 7500 58.23 163.5772 151.5947 143.2044 2.809156 2.603378 2.45929
0.4 10000 73.9 202.6457 187.7474 177.5037 2.742161 2.540561 2.401945
0.5 12500 88.59 238.9396 221.5045 209.1767 2.697139 2.500333 2.361177
0.6 15000 102.43 273.1727 253.7522 239.1566 2.66692 2.477323 2.33483
0.7 17500 115.75 305.9435 283.9901 267.7214 2.64314 2.453478 2.312927
0.8 20000 129.03 336.9805 312.6507 294.535 2.611645 2.423085 2.282686
0.9 22500 142.29 366.4965 341.1351 320.5969 2.575701 2.397463 2.253123
1 25000 155.35 395.7205 370.1271 346.6331 2.547284 2.382537 2.231304

30
 CHAPTER 5

RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION

31
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 Smooth Tube Results:

5.1(a) Laminar region:

f vs Re_smooth tube (laminar)

200 2000
0.05

f vs Re(calc)
f

f vs Re (CFD)

0.005
Re

Fig 5.1 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (laminar flow)

Nu vs Re_smooth tube (laminar)

100
Nu

10
Nu vs Re(calc)
Nu vs Re (CFD)

1
200 2000
Re

Fig 5.2 Nusselt number vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (laminar flow)
32
5.1(b) Turbulent Region:

f vs Re_smooth tube(turbulent)
0.05
2000 20000

f vs Re (calc)
f

f vs Re (CFD)

0.005
Re

Fig 5.3 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (turbulent flow)

Nu vs Re_smooth tube(turbulent)
200
Nu

Nu vs Re (calc)
Nu vs Re (CFD)

20
2000 20000
Re

Fig 5.4 Nusselt number vs Reynolds number for smooth tube (turbulent flow)

Thus, as can be seen from the plots, the calculated values and CFD values are more or less in
agreement with each other except for some deviations ranging from -3.125 to -2.18% for friction
factor and -14.1 to 24.8% for Nusselt number. These deviations can be further narrowed down by
increasing the number of elements during meshing. However that would lead to higher

33
computational time. It was also seen that changing the solution method during simulation didn’t
affect the result much. So, using the same models and methods, simulations for the tube with
wire coil insert were carried out.

5.2 Results for tube with wire coil insert:

f vs Re_coil 1
200 2000 20000
0.05

f vs Re_smooth(CFD)
f

f vs Re_coil1(calc)
f vs Re_coil1(CFD)

0.005
Re

Fig 5.5 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number for Coil 1

f vs Re_coil 2
200 2000 20000

0.05

f vs Re_smooth(CFD)
f

f vs Re_coil2(calc)
f vs Re_coil2(CFD)

0.005
Re

Fig 5.6 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number for Coil 2

34
 f vs Re_coil 3
200 2000 20000

0.05

f vs Re_smooth(CFD)
f

f vs Re_coil3(calc)
f vs Re_coil3(CFD)

0.005
Re

Fig 5.7 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number for Coil 3

f vs Re
250 2500 25000

0.05

f vs Re_smooth
f vs Re_coil1
f

f vs Re_coil2
f vs Re_coil3

0.005
Re

Fig 5.8 Friction factor vs Reynolds Number (Comparison between different coils)

35
 Nu vs Re_coil 1
1000

100
Nu

Nu vs Re_smooth(CFD)
Nu vs Re_coil1(calc)
10
Nu vs Re_coil1(CFD)

1
200 2000 20000
Re

Fig 5.9 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number for Coil 1

Nu vs Re_coil 2
1000

100
Nu

Nu vs Re_smooth(CFD)
Nu vs Re_coil2(calc)
10
Nu vs Re_coil(CFD)

1
200 2000 20000
Re

Fig 5.10 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number for Coil 2

36
 Nu vs Re_coil 3
1000

100
Nu

Nu vs Re_smooth(CFD)
Nu vs Re_coil3(calc)
10
Nu vs Re_coil3(CFD)

1
200 2000 20000
Re

Fig 5.11 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number for Coil 3

Nu vs Re
1000

100
Nu vs Re_smooth
Nu

Nu vs Re_coil1
10 Nu vs Re_coil2
Nu vs Re_coil3

1
200 2000 20000
Re

5.12 Nusselt Number vs Reynolds Number (Comparison between different coils)

37
 The CFD values follow the same trend as the values obtained from the empirical
equations available in literature with deviations varying in the range of + 18% for friction factor
and -20 to 28 % for Nusselt number. The deviation of the CFD values from the calculated ones
can be due to a few reasons. Firstly, the correlations used for calculation are not universal laws
or formulae, rather they are the empirical correlations developed by a particular group of
researchers based on their experimental investigations. So, the values calculated may not be the
true values. Secondly, CFD calculates the values by iteratively solving the discretized energy and
momentum equations by the finite volume method. So, the accuracy depends on the number of
iterations. Increasing the number of iterations would increase the accuracy. Another method to
get better results would be to go for higher order meshing. However, increasing the number of
elements during meshing can lead to very high computation time. Moreover, the commercial
CFD software used for the current work did not simulate the model for very high order meshing.
Hence, overcoming these problems could lead to even better results.

As can be seen, the wire coils provide moderate friction factor increase for pure laminar
flow but in the transition and turbulent regions, much higher increment was observed. The
increment is maximum in the transition region and again drops as Re increases and flow
becomes more turbulent. Similar observations were made for Nusselt number also. The plots also
indicate an early onset of turbulence at Reynolds number around 750 to 1000 due to the use of
wire coils. Higher the pitch, lower is the roughness and higher the coil diameter, higher is the
roughness. The wire coils used are in increasing order of pitch as well as coil diameter. This
leads to counter acting effect on roughness because of which there’s not much difference in the
increment of friction factor and Nusselt number for the three coils. The dimensionless number
p2/ed is a measure degree of roughness. Lower its value, higher is the roughness. Thus, coil 1
having the lowest p2/ed value i.e. 32.143 has highest roughness and hence, as expected the
friction factor values for coil 1 are slightly higher than the other coils.

38
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS

39
 CONCLUSION

Heat transfer analysis for water flowing through a smooth tube as well as a tube with a wire coil
insert was done by calculation of friction factor and Nusselt number at the specified conditions
using the empirical equations available in literature. CFD simulations were carried out for the
same problem using commercial CFD software ANSYS 13.0. Results revealed that in laminar
flow, wire coils mostly behave as a smooth tube with moderate increase in friction factor and
Nusselt number values. However in turbulent flow, considerable increase in friction factor and
Nusselt number are observed, especially for coil 1 with lowest p2/ed ratio, i.e highest degree of
surface roughness. Moreover use of wire coils gives the advantage of early onset of turbulence
(at Reynolds number around 750 to 1000). It was seen that the friction factor increment i.e. fc/f0
varied from 1.2 to 8.5 with coil 1 giving the maximum value of 8.5 at a Reynolds number of
2250. Similarly, the Nusselt number increment i.e. Nu c/Nu0 varied in the range of 1.3 to 4.9,
again with coil 1 giving the maximum value of 4.9 at the same Reynolds number of 2250.

Scope for future work:

Further detailed studies can be carried out in this area either through experiments or with the aid
of softwares. Nusselt number and friction factor values can be obtained for wire coils with the
same pitch at different coil diameters and similarly for coils with the same diameter and different
pitch in order to study the effect of coil diameter and pitch respectively on Nusselt number and
friction factor. Some other inserts may be used and similar investigations can be done and the
values compared to those of wire coil inserts.

40
 REFERENCES
[1] Bergles, A.E. Techniques to augment heat transfer, Handbook of Heat Transfer Applications
(Ed.W.M. Rosenhow), 1985, Ch.3 (McGraw-Hill, New York).
[2] Bergles, A.E., Bunn R.L and Junkhan G.H, Extended performance evaluation criteria for
enhanced heat transfer surfaces, Letters in Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 1, Issue
2, November–December 1974, Pages 113-120.
[3] S. Eiamsa-ard, C. Thianpong, P. Promvonge, Experimental investigation of heat transfer and
flow friction in a circular tube fitted with regularly spaced twisted tape elements, Int. Commun.
Heat Mass Transfer 33 (2006) 1225–1233.
[4] Rahimi M, Shabanian S.R. and Alsairafi A.A, Experimental and CFD studies on heat transfer
and friction factor characteristics of a tube equipped with modified twisted tape inserts, Chemical
Engineering and Processing 48 (2009) 762–770.
[5] Eiamsa-ard S, Wongcharee K, and Sripattanapipat S, 3-D Numerical simulation of swirling
flow and convective heat transfer in a circular tube induced by means of loose-fit twisted tapes,
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 36 (2009) 947–955.
[6] Chattopadhyay H, Augmentation of heat transfer in a channel using a triangular prism,
International Journal of Thermal Sciences 46 (2007) 501–505.
[7] Zhang Z, Ma D, Fang X, and Gao X, Experimental and numerical heat transfer in a helically
baffled heat exchanger combined with one three-dimensional finned tube, Chem. Eng. Process.
47 (2008) 1738–1743.
[8] Garcia A, Vicente P.G, and Viedma A, Experimental study of heat transfer enhancement with
wire coil inserts in laminar-transition-turbulent regimes at different Prandtl numbers,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 48 (2005) 4640–4651.
[9] Akhavan-Behabadi M.A, Kumar R, Salimpour M.R, and Azimi R, Pressure drop and heat
transfer augmentation due to coiled wire inserts during laminar flow of oil inside a horizontal
tube, International Journal of Thermal Sciences 49 (2010) 373–379.
[10] Munoz-Esparza D, and Sanmiguel-Rojas E, Numerical simulations of the laminar flow in
pipes with wire coil inserts, Computers & Fluids 44 (2011) 169–177.
[11] Versteg H. and Malasekara W, An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics, (2nd
edition, year of publication-2007), Pearson Publications.

41