ENG. ANDREW OMWENGA
Chemical & Process Simulation Engineer • Thermodynamic Specialist
Heat Exchanger Design & Rating (Aspen EDR)
Section 1.0 — Simulation & Facility Metadata
Section 2.0 — Executive Summary
Rigorous thermal & mechanical design rating of TEMA E-type shell-and-tube heat exchangers in Aspen EDR, optimizing baffle cut, tube layout, acoustic vibration, and pressure drop.
Section 3.0 — Problem Statement & Operating Bottlenecks
Sub-optimal exchanger sizing in chemical process plants leads to excessive tube-side pressure drops, shell-side flow maldistribution, and destructive acoustic resonance vibration.
Section 4.0 — Objectives & Rigorous Simulation Methodology
Integrated Aspen EDR sizing linked directly to Aspen HYSYS flowsheet stream data. Evaluated 19.05 mm OD BWG 16 stainless steel tubes on a 23.81 mm triangular pitch.
Section 5.0 — Simulation Results & Thermodynamic Findings
Increasing baffle spacing from 200 mm to 320 mm with a 30% single-segmental baffle cut eliminated flow-induced tube vibration without sacrificing thermal performance.
Section 6.0 — Core Engineering Takeaways
Section 7.0 — Model Assumptions & Future Recommendations
Calculations based on clean fluid heat transfer correlation; long-term biological fouling rates omitted.
Plate-and-frame exchanger rating comparison for high NTU low-approach temperature duties.
Section 8.0 — Consultant Conclusion & Verification Sign-off
Coupling Aspen EDR with HYSYS flowsheets guarantees mechanical integrity and optimal heat transfer efficiency prior to fabrication.
