Heat Exchanger Rating Assessment [8][9]
Applications of rating can be for operational performance, for
changes in process conditions, or in process design. There are three fundamental
points in determining if a heat exchanger performs well for given operating
conditions or for a new service:
(1) What actual coefficient UA value can be “performed” by the two fluids as the
result of their flow rates, individual film coefficients ht and hs, and fouling
resistance?
(2) From the heat balance: Q =( ṁ .𝐶𝑝 ) (T1-T2)= ( ṁC .𝐶𝑝 )(t2-t1), for given area A,
and actual temperatures, required U value (UR) can be calculated.
(3) The operating pressure drops for the two streams passing through the existing
heat exchanger.
The criteria can be established for the suitability of an existing exchanger for
given or new services as two necessary and sufficient conditions:
(a) UA must exceed UR to give desired overdesign (%OD) so that the heat
exchanger can meet changing process conditions for a reasonable period of
service continuously. While UA denotes the capability of the exchanger based
on its dimension and geometry, UR indicates the requirement from the process heat
transfer.
(b) Operating pressure drops on both sides must be less than allowable pressure
drops.
When these two conditions are fulfilled, an existing exchanger is suitable for the
process conditions for which it was rated. When the process conditions undergo
significant changes, a rating should be performed to make sure the exchanger can perform the task
satisfactorily under the new conditions. You could also check design R f against Rf calculated to check
your current fouling resistance.
the simple U value analysis is backed up with pressure drop information to confirm that the
performance loss is fouling related.
Actual heat exchanger Pressure Drop[8]
As the tube wall thickness increases with fouling deposits, pressure drop measurement
must be conducted and used as the basis for pressure drop rating calculations. In
doing so, the tube wall thickness including fouling deposits are assumed and iterated
until the calculated pressure drops from the rating software converges with the
measured ones.
Typical fouled exchanger pressure drops are 1.3–2 times that of clean exchangers
(Barletta, 1998). For extreme cases, fouled exchanger pressure drops are much
higher than that of clean exchangers.
It is recommended that hydraulic calculations should be conducted in an
exchanger rating software (e.g., HTRI) as the rating software is more rigorous in
pressure drop calculations than flowsheet simulation software.
Instrumentation and Data Access[9]
Most refineries have sophisticated plant data historians that record detailed plant
operating conditions with high resolution. Electronically accessible temperature and
flow data are crucial for effective exchanger performance monitoring. Manual temperature
data entry for monitoring most exchangers is feasible in principle. However, a great
deal of effort is required to collect field temperature readings from local temperature
indicators or “temperature guns.” Manual monitoring is very difficult to maintain at any
