WATER & WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
Matt Hale explains which type of heat exchanger is best for wastewater treatment
wastewater; materials which have a high fouling risk, are viscous, or which contain fibres and solid materials. However, in many situations the performance of a corrugated tube heat exchanger is equal to or better than that of a spiral design. Not only that, but corrugated tube designs provide a number of additional advantages in terms of day-to-day operation and maintenance. Proponents of spiral heat exchangers (sometimes known as shell and coil heat exchangers) cite the following advantages as making them suitable for handling challenging fluids: good thermal performance; the spiral design and use of a single channel is claimed to prevent fouling and be ‘self cleaning’; compact design makes them suitable for installations where space and/or access is restricted; and the counter-current flow provides an effective way to recover waste heat.
S HRS tube-in-tube heat exchangers
SPIRAL TUBE?
OR
ince the first spiral heat exchanger was proposed back in the 19th century, they have become synonymous with the treatment of slurries and
Spiral heat exchangers are difficult to service
Based on such claims, it would seem that spiral heat exchangers are the ideal option for high-fouling wastewater and sludge situations. However, given how frequently clients choose to replace their existing spiral heat exchangers (SHEs) with corrugated tube units, some of these claims need closer inspection.
THERMAL PERFORMANCE Tere is no doubt that in theory SHEs offer greater thermal efficiency than conventional smooth surface tubular designs due to their large surface area and true counter-current flow. However, this assumes that the barrier between the product and service fluids is kept clean and operates efficiently at all times. In practice, fouling frequently occurs, interfering with thermal transfer. Where the heat exchanger is used for sludge-to-sludge applications, this fouling layer can create a double barrier to efficient heat transfer. Although these comparisons hold true for smooth tube heat exchangers, they do not always apply to corrugate tube heat exchangers. For example, like SHEs, the tube-in-tube HRS DTI Series is a true
52
www.engineerlive.com
counter-current heat exchanger with the product flowing through the inner tube, and the service fluid flowing through the surrounding shell. Te use of HRS corrugation technology increases heat transfer and operational efficiency, while also minimising fouling.
NON-FOULING AND ‘SELF CLEANING’ DESIGNS Te design of SHEs can create turbulent flow inside the exchanger. In turn this is claimed to reduce the likelihood of fouling, and that where blockages do start to occur, product flow speeds up; creating a ‘scrubbing’ effect that dislodges the blockage (so-called ‘self cleaning’). Tis is fine in theory, but in our experience is unlikely in many real-world situations, particularly where SHEs are used with sludge. In fact, when you read further into manufacturers’ brochures, ‘self cleaning’ often becomes ‘virtually no fouling and clogging’ – two very different claims. Newer designs do not have the same support framework to separate the coils as some older models, as such structures were ideal at picking up rags and fibres from the
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
