Skip to content

Co-current Validation

Overview

This page presents two co-current (parallel flow) test cases. Co-current exchangers are limited by the thermodynamic constraint that both outlet temperatures must converge toward the mean — for balanced flow (\(C_r = 1\)), effectiveness cannot exceed 50 %. The analytical \(\varepsilon\)-NTU formula for co-current flow is:

\[ \varepsilon = \frac{1 - \exp\!\bigl[-NTU\,(1 + C_r)\bigr]}{1 + C_r} \]

For \(C_r = 1\) the theoretical maximum is:

\[ \varepsilon_{\max} = \frac{1}{1 + C_r} = 0.50 \]

Both tests verify that the DWSIM solver respects this fundamental limit and that co-current effectiveness is always lower than the counterflow effectiveness at the same operating conditions.


Test 4: Balanced Flow — Co-current

Configuration: 50 plates, 3 mm spacing, 500 x 1000 mm, chevron angle 60°, \(\varphi = 1.17\), \(\dot{m}_{hot} = \dot{m}_{cold} = 1.0\) kg/s, \(T_{h,in} = 80\) °C, \(T_{c,in} = 20\) °C.

Check DWSIM \(\varepsilon\)-NTU Ref Error (%) Status
Heat duty \(Q\) (kW) 125.3 125.3 0.00 PASS
Hot outlet \(T_{h,out}\) (°C) 50.02 50.02 0.00 PASS
Cold outlet \(T_{c,out}\) (°C) 49.98 49.98 0.00 PASS
Effectiveness \(\varepsilon\) (%) 49.97 49.97 0.00 PASS
Overall \(U\) (W/(m²·K)) 545.6 545.6 0.00 PASS
MITA (°C) 0.04 PASS

Thermodynamic Limit: \(\varepsilon \leq 50\%\) for Co-current with \(C_r = 1\)

With balanced flow in co-current arrangement, both outlet temperatures must converge to the arithmetic mean of the two inlet temperatures:

\[ T_{h,out} \approx T_{c,out} \approx \frac{T_{h,in} + T_{c,in}}{2} = \frac{80 + 20}{2} = 50\,°\text{C} \]

The DWSIM result of \(T_{h,out} = 50.02\) °C and \(T_{c,out} = 49.98\) °C confirms this behaviour. The effectiveness of 49.97 % is just below the theoretical ceiling of 50 %, as expected for a finite-area exchanger. The MITA of only 0.04 °C shows that the exchanger is operating very close to its thermodynamic limit.

Comparison with Counterflow

At identical conditions (Test 1), the counterflow arrangement achieves \(\varepsilon = 82.38\%\) compared to \(\varepsilon = 49.97\%\) for co-current — a 65 % relative improvement. This confirms the well-known advantage of counterflow and validates that the DWSIM solver correctly distinguishes between the two flow configurations.


Test 5: Small Exchanger — Co-current

Configuration: 10 plates, 3 mm spacing, 152.4 x 406.4 mm, chevron angle 60°, \(\varphi = 1.17\), \(\dot{m}_{hot} = \dot{m}_{cold} = 0.315\) kg/s, \(T_{h,in} = 40\) °C, \(T_{c,in} = 25\) °C.

Check DWSIM \(\varepsilon\)-NTU Ref Error (%) Status
Heat duty \(Q\) (kW) 8.23 8.23 0.00 PASS
Effectiveness \(\varepsilon\) (%) 41.69 41.69 0.00 PASS
Overall \(U\) (W/(m²·K)) 1623.8 1623.8 0.00 PASS
\(Re_{hot}\) 1021 PASS
\(Re_{cold}\) 1064 PASS

Key Findings — Test 5

This test uses a physically small exchanger (152.4 x 406.4 mm plates, 10 plates only) at moderate temperatures (40 / 25 °C). Despite the compact geometry, the Reynolds numbers exceed 1000 on both sides, producing a high overall coefficient of 1623.8 W/(m²·K) — near the upper end of the typical water-water PHE range. The effectiveness of 41.69 % is well below the \(C_r = 1\) co-current limit of 50 %, consistent with the small heat transfer area.


Summary

Metric Test 4 Test 5 Max Error (%)
\(Q\) (kW) 125.3 8.23 0.00
\(\varepsilon\) (%) 49.97 41.69 0.00
\(U\) (W/(m²·K)) 545.6 1623.8 0.00

Aggregate Statistics

Both co-current tests pass with 0.00 % error on all thermal metrics. The results confirm that:

  • The \(\varepsilon \leq 50\%\) thermodynamic ceiling for \(C_r = 1\) is respected (Test 4: 49.97 %).
  • Both outlet temperatures converge toward the mean temperature as required by co-current theory.
  • Co-current effectiveness is always lower than counterflow at the same conditions (49.97 % vs. 82.38 %).
  • The overall coefficient range of 545.6 -- 1623.8 W/(m²·K) is consistent with published water-water PHE data (Perry and Green, 2008).