Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Logarithmic mean temperature difference

The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) is a logarithmic average of the temperature differences between the hot and cold fluids at the two ends of a heat exchanger, serving as the effective temperature driving force for calculating heat transfer rates in steady-flow systems.^[1]^[2] It is essential in thermal engineering for analyzing configurations where the temperature difference varies nonlinearly along the exchanger length, providing a more accurate alternative to the arithmetic mean when fluid temperatures change significantly.^[3] The LMTD is mathematically defined as \Delta T_{lm} = \frac{\Delta T_1 - \Delta T_2}{\ln(\Delta T_1 / \Delta T_2)}, where \Delta T_1 and \Delta T_2 represent the temperature differences between the fluids at the inlet and outlet ends, respectively.^[1]^[2] This formula derives from integrating the local heat transfer rate dQ = U \, dA \, \Delta T over the exchanger area, assuming a constant overall heat transfer coefficient U and yielding Q = U A \Delta T_{lm}.^[1] For parallel-flow exchangers, \Delta T_1 is the inlet difference and \Delta T_2 the outlet; in counterflow, the temperature differences are defined at the respective ends where the fluids enter and exit oppositely.^[3] Key assumptions underlying the LMTD method include steady-state operation, constant specific heats and thermal properties of the fluids, negligible heat loss to the surroundings, and a constant overall heat transfer coefficient.^[1] Limitations arise in multipass or cross-flow designs, where correction factors F are applied such that the effective mean is F \cdot \Delta T_{lm} (with counterflow LMTD as reference), and it is less suitable when the temperature differences at the two ends are nearly equal, as this leads to an indeterminate form in the formula (though the limiting value equals the arithmetic mean).^[2]^[3]^[4] In practice, LMTD is widely applied in the design and performance evaluation of double-pipe, shell-and-tube, and plate heat exchangers across industries such as power generation, chemical processing, and HVAC systems, often complemented by the effectiveness-NTU method for complex scenarios.^[1]^[2] The value of LMTD is always less than or equal to the arithmetic mean, ensuring conservative estimates of heat transfer capacity.^[3]

Concept and Definition

Definition

The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD), denoted as \Delta T_{lm}, serves as the effective average temperature driving force for heat transfer in heat exchangers where the fluid temperatures change along the length of the device, with the fluid temperatures varying exponentially along the length of the device due to convective heat transfer. It represents the logarithmic average of the temperature differences between the hot and cold fluids at the inlet and outlet ends, providing a more accurate measure than the arithmetic mean for processes involving exponential decay in the temperature profile due to the nature of convective heat transfer.^[1] The standard formula for LMTD is:

\Delta T_{lm} = \frac{\Delta T_1 - \Delta T_2}{\ln \left( \frac{\Delta T_1}{\Delta T_2} \right)}

where \Delta T_1 and \Delta T_2 are the local temperature differences between the hot and cold streams at the two ends of the heat exchanger. This expression arises from integrating the differential heat transfer equation under steady-state conditions with constant specific heats and heat transfer coefficients.^[1] For illustration, consider a parallel-flow heat exchanger with the hot fluid entering at 100°C and exiting at 60°C, and the cold fluid entering at 20°C and exiting at 50°C. The end temperature differences are \Delta T_1 = 100^\circ \text{C} - 20^\circ \text{C} = 80^\circ \text{C} and \Delta T_2 = 60^\circ \text{C} - 50^\circ \text{C} = 10^\circ \text{C}. Substituting into the formula yields \Delta T_{lm} = (80 - 10) / \ln(80/10) \approx 33.7^\circ \text{C}. In heat transfer calculations, the LMTD is incorporated into the overall energy balance as Q = U A \Delta T_{lm}, where Q is the heat transfer rate, U is the overall heat transfer coefficient, and A is the surface area, enabling straightforward determination of exchanger size or performance.^[1]

Physical Significance

The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) serves as an effective representation of the average driving force for heat transfer in processes where the temperature difference between fluids varies exponentially along the flow path, such as in steady-state heat exchangers. This variation arises from the fundamental nature of convective heat transfer, where the local rate is proportional to the instantaneous temperature difference, leading to an exponential decay in that difference as heat is exchanged. Unlike simpler averages, the LMTD captures this nonlinear profile accurately, ensuring that the calculated total heat transfer reflects the integrated effect over the entire length without under- or overestimating the driving force.^[1]^[5] Graphically, the physical significance of the LMTD is evident in the temperature profiles of heat exchangers, where plots of fluid temperatures versus position or heat transferred reveal a logarithmic curvature in the difference between the hot and cold streams. The LMTD corresponds geometrically to the equivalent constant temperature difference that would produce the same total heat transfer area under the actual varying curve when divided by the exchanger length, providing an intuitive measure of the mean driving force. This visualization underscores how the LMTD integrates the diminishing temperature gradient, particularly pronounced in counterflow arrangements where the profiles approach each other asymptotically.^[1]^[6] In practice, the LMTD enables engineers to directly apply the relation for total heat transfer rate, Q = U A ΔT_lm, where U is the overall heat transfer coefficient and A is the surface area, simplifying the sizing and performance evaluation of heat exchangers without requiring numerical integration of differential equations along the flow path. This approach is particularly valuable in design workflows, allowing for rapid assessment of required exchanger dimensions based on inlet and outlet conditions. The LMTD is expressed in standard temperature units, such as degrees Celsius or Kelvin, and remains consistent regardless of absolute temperature scale shifts, as the logarithmic form inherently cancels additive constants in the differences.^[5]^[6]

Mathematical Foundation

Derivation for Steady-State Heat Transfer

The derivation of the logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) begins with the fundamental energy balance for steady-state heat transfer between two fluids in a heat exchanger, assuming no phase changes and negligible heat losses to the surroundings.^[7]^[8] For an infinitesimal heat transfer element, the heat transfer rate dQ from the hot fluid to the cold fluid is given by dQ = -\dot{m}_h c_{p,h} dT_h, where \dot{m}_h is the mass flow rate of the hot fluid, c_{p,h} is its specific heat capacity, and dT_h is the differential temperature change (negative for cooling). Similarly, for the cold fluid, dQ = \dot{m}_c c_{p,c} dT_c, with \dot{m}_c and c_{p,c} defined analogously, and dT_c positive for heating.^[7]^[9] These expressions equate the heat lost by the hot fluid to the heat gained by the cold fluid under steady-state conditions, where fluid properties such as specific heats and the overall heat transfer coefficient U are constant along the exchanger.^[8] The local heat transfer across the exchanger surface is expressed as dQ = U \, dA \, \Delta T, where dA is the differential area and \Delta T = T_h - T_c is the local temperature difference between the fluids.^[7] Substituting the energy balance into this yields the differential equation dA = \frac{dQ}{U \Delta T}. To integrate, consider the change in temperature difference: d(\Delta T) = dT_h - dT_c = -\frac{dQ}{\dot{m}_h c_{p,h}} - \frac{dQ}{\dot{m}_c c_{p,c}} = -dQ \left( \frac{1}{\dot{m}_h c_{p,h}} + \frac{1}{\dot{m}_c c_{p,c}} \right). Rearranging gives \frac{d(\Delta T)}{\Delta T} = - \frac{U \, dA}{\dot{m}_h c_{p,h}} - \frac{U \, dA}{\dot{m}_c c_{p,c}} = -U \left( \frac{1}{C_h} + \frac{1}{C_c} \right) dA, where C_h = \dot{m}_h c_{p,h} and C_c = \dot{m}_c c_{p,c} are the heat capacities.^[9]^[7] Integration from the inlet (\Delta T_1, A = 0) to the outlet (\Delta T_2, A = A) of the exchanger produces \int_{\Delta T_1}^{\Delta T_2} \frac{d(\Delta T)}{\Delta T} = -U \left( \frac{1}{C_h} + \frac{1}{C_c} \right) \int_0^A dA, simplifying to \ln \left( \frac{\Delta T_2}{\Delta T_1} \right) = -U A \left( \frac{1}{C_h} + \frac{1}{C_c} \right). The total heat transfer Q relates to the integrated area via Q = U A \Delta T_m, where \Delta T_m is the mean temperature difference. Solving for A yields A = \frac{Q}{U} \cdot \frac{\ln(\Delta T_2 / \Delta T_1)}{\Delta T_2 - \Delta T_1}, assuming \Delta T_1 > \Delta T_2.^[7]^[9] Rearranging defines the LMTD as \Delta T_{lm} = \frac{\Delta T_1 - \Delta T_2}{\ln(\Delta T_1 / \Delta T_2)}, such that the overall heat transfer equation becomes Q = U A \Delta T_{lm}. This form arises directly from the exponential nature of the temperature profiles under the stated assumptions of steady-state operation, constant fluid properties, constant U, and constant heat capacities without external losses.^[8]^[7]

General Formula and Variations

The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD), denoted as \Delta T_{lm}, provides the effective temperature driving force for heat transfer in heat exchangers under steady-state conditions with known inlet and outlet temperatures. For a general counterflow configuration, it is calculated using the inlet and outlet temperatures of the hot fluid (T_{h1} and T_{h2}) and the cold fluid (T_{c1} and T_{c2}) as follows:

\Delta T_{lm} = \frac{(T_{h1} - T_{c2}) - (T_{h2} - T_{c1})}{\ln \left( \frac{T_{h1} - T_{c2}}{T_{h2} - T_{c1}} \right)}

where \Delta T_1 = T_{h1} - T_{c2} and \Delta T_2 = T_{h2} - T_{c1} represent the temperature differences at the two ends of the exchanger.^[1] This form arises from integrating the local temperature difference along the heat transfer area, assuming constant overall heat transfer coefficient and specific heats.^[1] Variations of the LMTD formula adapt to specific operating conditions, such as when the capacity rates (product of mass flow rate and specific heat) of the two fluids are equal, leading to parallel temperature profiles and a constant \Delta T along the exchanger. In this balanced case, \Delta T_1 = \Delta T_2, and the LMTD simplifies to the arithmetic mean temperature difference, \Delta T_{lm} = \Delta T_1.^[10] Another common adaptation occurs when one fluid maintains a constant temperature, as in condensers or evaporators during phase change (e.g., steam condensing or refrigerant evaporating). Here, the formula reduces to:

\Delta T_{lm} = \frac{\Delta T_1 - \Delta T_2}{\ln \left( \frac{\Delta T_1}{\Delta T_2} \right)}

with \Delta T_1 and \Delta T_2 defined relative to the isothermal fluid temperature and the inlet/outlet temperatures of the varying fluid.^[11] For numerical computation, the LMTD relies on the natural logarithm, which requires \Delta T_1 \neq \Delta T_2 to avoid division by zero; however, when \Delta T_1 \approx \Delta T_2, the expression approaches the arithmetic mean through the limit \lim_{\Delta T_2 \to \Delta T_1} \Delta T_{lm} = \Delta T_1, ensuring continuity and physical consistency.^[10] The LMTD method relates to the effectiveness-NTU (number of transfer units) approach by expressing the heat transfer rate Q = UA \Delta T_{lm}, where effectiveness \epsilon can be derived from LMTD for cases with unknown outlet temperatures, though NTU often simplifies iterative calculations.^[12]

Applications in Heat Exchangers

Counterflow Configurations

In counterflow heat exchangers, the hot and cold fluids flow in opposite directions, with the hot fluid entering at one end and the cold fluid at the other, thereby maximizing the logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) across the exchanger for specified inlet and outlet temperatures. This opposite-flow arrangement sustains a larger and more uniform temperature gradient along the exchanger length compared to other configurations, enhancing overall heat transfer performance.^[13] The LMTD in counterflow is determined using the general LMTD expression with terminal temperature differences defined as \Delta T_1 = T_{h,\text{in}} - T_{c,\text{out}} and \Delta T_2 = T_{h,\text{out}} - T_{c,\text{in}}. For instance, consider a counterflow shell-and-tube heat exchanger where engine oil enters at 160°C and exits at 100°C while heating water from 15°C to 85°C; the resulting LMTD is 79.9°C, but using a correction factor F ≈ 0.87 for the multipass arrangement gives an effective mean of about 70°C, enabling effective heat transfer of approximately 732 kW with a surface area of about 30 m² assuming a typical overall heat transfer coefficient of 354 W/m²·K. In another representative case involving steam condensation at 120°C heating water from 17°C to 80°C, the LMTD calculates to 66.6°C, compared to an arithmetic mean of 71.5°C, underscoring the LMTD's accuracy in accounting for the logarithmic profile and yielding a heat transfer rate of 474 kW.^[14]^[13] Counterflow configurations provide superior efficiency over parallel flow setups for the same surface area and terminal temperatures, as the LMTD is consistently higher—often by 20–30% in typical operating scenarios—allowing greater heat transfer rates or reduced exchanger size. This stems from the ability of counterflow to achieve cold fluid outlet temperatures exceeding hot fluid outlet temperatures, maximizing effectiveness up to unity under balanced flow conditions.^[13]^[15] Due to these benefits, counterflow designs are preferred in most industrial applications, such as boilers, condensers, and process heaters, where compact size and high thermal performance are critical for energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness.^[13]

Parallel Flow Configurations

In parallel flow configurations, the hot and cold fluids enter the heat exchanger at the same end and proceed in the same direction to the outlet. The temperature difference at the inlet is \Delta T_1 = T_{h,in} - T_{c,in}, while at the outlet it is \Delta T_2 = T_{h,out} - T_{c,out}. This arrangement results in a monotonically decreasing temperature difference along the exchanger length, with \Delta T_1 > \Delta T_2 always holding due to the co-directional flow.^[1] A key constraint in parallel flow is the absence of temperature cross, meaning the cold fluid outlet temperature cannot exceed the hot fluid outlet temperature, as dictated by the second law of thermodynamics. This limitation prevents achieving the higher heat transfer rates possible in counterflow setups and caps the overall effectiveness. The LMTD, applied via the standard formula, thus yields a smaller value for equivalent terminal temperatures, necessitating larger surface areas for the same heat duty.^[1] For instance, consider a parallel flow exchanger heating air from 0°C to 20°C using hot water from 80°C to 60°C; here, \Delta T_1 = 80^\circC and \Delta T_2 = 40^\circC, yielding an LMTD of approximately 57.7°C—lower than the 60°C LMTD for counterflow under the same conditions, highlighting the efficiency gap.^[3] Parallel flow designs are selected for their simpler piping requirements and ease of maintenance, though they offer lower thermal performance than counterflow alternatives. They find application in condensers and evaporators within refrigeration systems, as well as in processes involving viscous fluids where rapid initial heating reduces flow resistance.^[16]^[17]^[18]

Assumptions, Limitations, and Extensions

Key Assumptions

The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) method for analyzing heat transfer in exchangers is predicated on several foundational assumptions that facilitate the integration of the differential energy balance equations, leading to a closed-form expression for the mean temperature driving force. A primary assumption is that the overall heat transfer coefficient U is constant throughout the exchanger. This requires that the individual convective heat transfer coefficients, wall conduction resistance, and fouling factors remain uniform, independent of local temperature or flow variations, allowing the heat flux to be directly proportional to the local temperature difference.^[8]^[19] The specific heats c_p of both fluids are assumed to be constant, implying that thermophysical properties such as density and viscosity do not vary significantly across the operating temperature range, which simplifies the energy balance to linear relations between heat transfer and temperature change.^[8]^[20] No heat losses to the surroundings are considered, ensuring that the heat exchanger is perfectly insulated and all thermal energy released by the hot fluid is absorbed by the cold fluid, with no external dissipation or generation.^[8]^[19] Axial conduction along the flow direction is neglected, meaning heat transfer is dominated by convection between the fluids and conduction across the separating wall, without significant longitudinal diffusion that could alter the temperature profiles.^[8]^[19] The operation is steady-state, with constant mass flow rates and no transient effects; additionally, changes in kinetic and potential energy of the fluids are deemed negligible compared to the enthalpy changes due to temperature.^[8]^[20] These assumptions result in linear temperature profiles for each fluid along the exchanger, derived from the first-law energy balance under constant capacity rates \dot{m} c_p.^[8]^[19] The flow is modeled as one-dimensional, averaging properties over the cross-section and ignoring radial or circumferential variations. Phase changes in the fluids are excluded unless explicitly specified, as they would violate the constant c_p condition and require alternative formulations.^[8]^[20] Collectively, these assumptions ensure the mathematical tractability of the LMTD approach, though deviations can affect prediction accuracy.^[8]

Limitations and Special Cases

In counterflow heat exchangers, the LMTD becomes undefined when a temperature cross occurs, meaning the outlet temperature of the cold fluid exceeds that of the hot fluid, resulting in temperature differences of opposite signs at the ends (ΔT₁ and ΔT₂). This condition leads to a logarithm of a negative or zero value in the LMTD formula, rendering it mathematically invalid.^[8] In such cases, alternative methods like numerical integration of the differential heat transfer equation or the effectiveness-NTU (ε-NTU) method are employed to accurately predict performance, as these approaches handle the non-monotonic temperature profiles without relying on endpoint differences. The standard LMTD method assumes constant fluid properties, such as specific heat capacity (c_p) and overall heat transfer coefficient (U), but significant variations with temperature—common in high-temperature or viscous flows—can introduce errors. When properties vary, the method over- or underestimates heat transfer rates, necessitating segmented LMTD approaches where the exchanger is divided into multiple zones with locally evaluated properties and LMTDs summed accordingly.^[21] For more pronounced variations, full simulations using finite difference or volume-averaging techniques provide precise solutions by resolving property gradients spatially.^[22] For multi-pass heat exchangers, such as 1-2 or 2-4 shell-and-tube configurations, the flow arrangement deviates from pure counterflow, reducing the effective temperature driving force; thus, the LMTD for counterflow must be multiplied by a correction factor F (typically 0.6–1.0) derived from configuration-specific charts. These charts, originally developed for common geometries, account for the mixed parallel and counterflow effects, ensuring the heat transfer rate Q = U A F ΔT_{lm} remains accurate.^[23] In heat exchangers involving phase changes, like condensers or evaporators, the LMTD remains applicable when one fluid stream is isothermal (constant temperature during phase transition), simplifying the calculation as the temperature difference varies linearly along the length. However, if U varies due to changing phase fractions or non-uniform condensation/evaporation, adjustments via zone-wise averaging or modified correlations are required to maintain accuracy.^[7] Since the early 2000s, advancements have extended beyond analytical LMTD limitations through computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and finite difference methods, which model complex geometries, multiphase flows, and transient behaviors in intricate designs like microchannel or compact exchangers. More recent developments as of 2025 include artificial intelligence and machine learning integration for predictive optimization, additive manufacturing for customized geometries, and advanced nanomaterials to enhance thermal performance in non-ideal conditions.^[24]^[25]^[26]

Comparison with Arithmetic Mean

The arithmetic mean temperature difference (AMTD) is defined as the simple average of the inlet and outlet temperature differences between the two fluids in a heat exchanger, expressed as \Delta T_{am} = \frac{\Delta T_1 + \Delta T_2}{2}.^[27] This measure is exact only for scenarios where the temperature difference remains constant along the exchanger length, such as during complete condensation or evaporation of one fluid.^[27] However, in cases with varying temperature profiles, the AMTD overestimates the effective driving force for heat transfer compared to the LMTD. For example, with \Delta T_1 = 100^\circ\mathrm{C} and \Delta T_2 = 10^\circ\mathrm{C}, the AMTD yields 55°C, while the LMTD is approximately 39.1°C, representing an overestimation of about 41%; in more extreme imbalances, this error can exceed 50%.^[27] Such discrepancies arise because the AMTD assumes a linear temperature variation, ignoring the exponential decay inherent in counterflow or parallel flow configurations. The AMTD produces negligible error—less than 1%—when \Delta T_1 and \Delta T_2 differ by no more than 40%, making it suitable for preliminary estimates in nearly uniform temperature scenarios.^[27] Prior to Wilhelm Nusselt's introduction of the LMTD method in 1915, engineering practices often relied on the AMTD, which contributed to oversized heat exchanger designs to account for inaccuracies in non-uniform conditions.^[28] In general, the LMTD is the preferred approach for accurate design unless temperature differences are essentially uniform.^[27]

Logarithmic Mean Pressure Difference

The logarithmic mean pressure difference (LMPD) is a logarithmic average used to represent the average pressure driving force in systems where pressure varies exponentially, analogous in form to the LMTD but applied to pressure gradients. It is defined mathematically as

\Delta P_{\text{LM}} = \frac{\Delta P_1 - \Delta P_2}{\ln \left( \frac{\Delta P_1}{\Delta P_2} \right)},

where \Delta P_1 and \Delta P_2 represent the pressure differences at the inlet and outlet, respectively.^[29] This provides a more accurate average than the arithmetic mean for processes with non-linear pressure decay, such as in flow distribution analysis.^[30] The derivation parallels that of LMTD, arising from integrating differential equations assuming steady-state conditions and exponential variations due to friction or transfer processes. LMPD is primarily applied in specialized contexts within chemical and thermal engineering, such as modeling flow maldistribution in parallel channels of plate heat exchangers and as a driving potential in mass transfer operations like gas absorption columns.^[30]^[29] It has seen use since its introduction as a concept in 2012, particularly for improving accuracy in friction factor calculations under variable flow rates.^[30] For instance, in a scenario with an inlet pressure difference of 10 bar and an outlet of 1 bar, the LMPD approximates 3.91 bar, compared to an arithmetic mean of 5.5 bar; this illustrates how LMPD captures the effective driving force in decaying profiles.^[29] Unlike the LMTD, which is central to heat transfer analysis, LMPD remains a niche tool, often employed in mass transfer for dilute solutes in stagnant films or in heat exchanger design for pressure-related flow issues.^[29]^[30]

References

[1]
18.5 Heat Exchangers - MIT
The concept of a logarithmic mean temperature difference is useful in the analysis of heat exchangers. We will define a logarithmic mean temperature difference ...
[2]
Logarithmic Mean Temperature Difference - LMTD - Nuclear Power
LMTD is a logarithmic average of the temperature difference between the hot and cold feeds at each end of the heat exchanger.
[3]
Arithmetic and Logarithmic Mean Temperature Difference
The mean temperature difference in a heat transfer process depends on the direction of fluid flows involved in the process. The primary and secondary fluid in ...
[4]
[PDF] Heat Transfer equipment – (Chpt. 22)
Log-mean temperature difference. Important Assumptions: U constant. No heat losses to ambient environment. Can be used with U calculated at average conditions ...
[5]
Heat Transfer Equipment - processdesign
There are three mechanisms of heat transfer: conduction, convection, and radiation. In most heat exchangers, convection will be the dominant mechanism.
[6]
[PDF] Heat Transfer - Heat Exchangers - LMTD Method - MSubbu
Sep 25, 2019 · LMTD = Log Mean Temperature Difference. This final relation is same as that cocurrent. ... Suppose one of the two interacting fluids is undergoing ...
[7]
[PDF] Correction of Log Mean Temperature Difference Method and ...
This paper proposes modified LMTD method and effectiveness-NTU relations to remove the restriction of constant temperature phase change in the original ...
[8]
Derivation of LMTD in Counter-Current Heat Exchangers - Studocu
Rating 5.0 (2) Derivation of Logarithmic Mean Temperature Driving Force (LMTD) for counter-current flow. Assuming that the overall heat transfer coefficient remains ...
[9]
[PDF] DOE Fundamentals Handbook Thermodynamics, Heat Transfer, and ...
A precise temperature change between two fluids across the heat exchanger is best represented by the log mean temperature difference (LMTD or ∆Tlm), defined in ...
[10]
[PDF] Heat Transfer Fundamentals & Equipment (Supplemental Chapter 9)
Nov 13, 2017 · temperature difference is the LMTD (Log Mean Temperature Difference) ... LMTD? ▫ Since the steam has a constant temperature it does not matter ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
[11]
Heat Exchangers
(7) 1. Logarithmic Mean Temperature Difference (LMTD) Method. The differential heat-transfer rate dq across the surface area element dA can also be expressed ...
[12]
None
Summary of each segment:
[13]
None
### Summary of Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger Example
[14]
(PDF) Effect of Flow Arrangement on Heat Exchanger Performance
Aug 6, 2025 · ... parallel oblique, counterflow, quasi-counterflow oblique, and crossflow. ... 20% greater than that of the parallel flow heat exchanger. Hence ...
[15]
What is a parallel flow heat exchanger? Examples & pros/cons
Oct 8, 2025 · Simpler design and maintenance: The straightforward layout often means easier cleaning, fewer pressure drops, and reduced mechanical complexity.Missing: piping condensers
[16]
Predicting the flow distribution in compact parallel flow heat ...
Parallel flow heat exchangers have multiple applications such as evaporators and condensers in refrigeration units, solar energy collectors and cooling ...Missing: simpler | Show results with:simpler
[17]
HEAT EXCHANGERS - Thermopedia
In cocurrent flow heat exchangers, the streams flow parallel to each other and in the same direction as shown in Figure 2, This is less efficient than ...Indirect Heat Exchangers · Direct Contact · Thermal Analysis
[18]
[PDF] 5. Heat Exchangers - WBUTHELP.COM
we will make the following assumptions: • No external losses from the heat exchanger. • Negligible conduction along the tube length;. • Changes in kinetic and ...
[19]
[PDF] Heat Exchangers: Design, Operation, Maintenance and Enhancement
4.1 LMTD-Method. Assumptions. • Steady state flow (mh,mc). • Constant overall heat transfer coefficient (U). • Constant specific heat (Cph,Cpc). • negligible ...
[20]
(PDF) A Generalized Mean Temperature Difference Method for ...
Aug 9, 2025 · Unlike the LMTD method, the GMTD method allows the performance analysis of heat exchangers with distributed physical properties. GMTD is ...
[21]
(PDF) Explicit Calculation Method for Heat Exchanger Considering ...
... 900 ℃,. segmented LMTD was applied in the heat transfer design to avoid imprecision. Guo[13]-[14]. investigated the improvement brought by variable property ...
[22]
Mean Temperature Difference Paper 1940 - JaysToolbox
May 7, 2023 · This is the classic paper that presents the analytical relationships that are used to create the "Correction Factor" curves for shell-and-tube and crossflow ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[23]
Modelling of Heat Exchangers with Computational Fluid Dynamics
May 27, 2021 · Overall, CFD modelling gave a promising outlook for design and optimization of heat exchangers. Keywords: Shell-and-tube heat exchanger, Heat ...
[24]
[PDF] HEAT EXCHANGERS - eecl-course
When T1 differs from T2 by no more than. 40 percent, the error in using the arithmetic mean temperature difference is less than 1 percent. But the error ...
[25]
Heat Transfer | SpringerLink
Jan 12, 2022 · In 1915, Nusselt ... This average temperature difference is called logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD), as described earlier.
[26]
[PDF] Modelling and Experimental Validation of Water Vapor Absorption ...
The pressure driving potential is defined as the. Logarithmic mean pressure difference. ∆PLM P D = ∆P1 − ∆P2 ln. ∆P1. ∆P2. (3.13) where, ∆P1 and ∆P2 are ...