review · Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry
Shell and tube heat exchangers are widely investigated to improve heat transfer rates while reducing equipment size and operational costs. A systematic review of existing research categorises enhancement techniques across passive methods, air injection, nanofluids, and compound approaches. Passive techniques require no external power and offer lower operating costs, representing nearly half of the examined literature. Air bubble injection demonstrates the highest improvement in the overall heat transfer coefficient ratio, reaching up to 452 percent compared to plain water flow. Among passive hardware modifications, wire coil inserts, corrugated tubes, and swirl vanes achieve substantial gains. For nanofluids, titanium dioxide provides the greatest heat transfer increase over conventional fluids. Combining air injection with passive augmentation provides an effective route for performance gains, though further research is required into tube surface geometry, material coatings, empirical formulations, and numerical simulations.
Industrial processes rely heavily on shell and tube heat exchangers for thermal management. Improving their efficiency allows systems to become more compact and consume less energy. Understanding which enhancement techniques offer the greatest gains, such as air injection or specific tube inserts, helps engineers identify the most cost-effective methods to lower operational costs and improve thermal performance without requiring excessive external power.
This work informs thermal engineers and equipment manufacturers designing industrial shell and tube heat exchangers. The findings benchmark practical modifications such as wire coil inserts, corrugated tubes, and titanium dioxide nanofluids. Because the review synthesises experimental and numerical research that still requires standardised empirical formulations and deeper simulation work, these enhancement techniques appear to be at an applied testing stage rather than ready for immediate off-the-shelf industrial adoption.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Abstract A wide range of studies was conducted to increase the heat transfer rate and reduce the size and cost of shell and tube heat exchangers (STHE). The paper’s contributions lie in its ability to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date, and systematic overview of the various methods available for heat transfer enhancement in STHEs, making it an essential resource for researchers, engineers, and practitioners in the field of heat transfer. The studies that researched the overall heat transfer coefficient ( U ), number of transfer units, exergy efficiency, pressure drop, and thermal–hydraulic performance were reviewed. There are some advantages of the passive method such as no external needed power and lower operating cost compared to the active methods. The studies broadly support the view that heat transfer enhancement in STHE is heading toward considerable progress. A total of 47.8% of studies have focused on the passive approach, the air injection method, enhancing heat transfer utilizing nanofluids, and compound methods have percentages of studies 20.2, 22.3, and 9.7%, respectively. The air bubble injection causes the rise of the U ratio where the maximum value was indicated at 452% compared to only water flow. Swirl vane, corrugated tube, and wire coil insert have U ratio values of 130, 161, and 264%, respectively. Nanofluid results in a growth in the heat transfer where the TiO 2 has the maximum U ratio (175.9%) compared to traditional fluid. The combination of air injection and passive heat augmentation methods, which was shown to be a substantial solution to several issues, needs to be the focus of more work in the future. Geometrical changes in tube surfaces in STHE are too required in the future with the use of materials coating to enhance heat transfer. The theoretical analysis of heat transfer techniques still needs to be improved, especially for pertinent empirical formulations. Also, since there aren’t many relevant numerical simulations, more attention is required.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1007/s10973-023-12265-3
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
