0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

CFD for Jet Impingement Heat Transfer With Single Jets and Arrays

[+] Author Affiliations
Mounir B. Ibrahim, Bejoy J. Kochuparambil

Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH

Srinath V. Ekkad

Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA

Terrence W. Simon

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN

Paper No. GT2005-68341, pp. 359-373; 15 pages
doi:10.1115/GT2005-68341
From:
  • ASME Turbo Expo 2005: Power for Land, Sea, and Air
  • Volume 3: Turbo Expo 2005, Parts A and B
  • Reno, Nevada, USA, June 6–9, 2005
  • Conference Sponsors: International Gas Turbine Institute
  • ISBN: 0-7918-4726-8 | eISBN: 0-7918-3754-8
  • Copyright © 2005 by ASME

abstract

CFD experiments were conducted for heat transfer with jet impingement over solid surfaces. The parameters include: 1) Jet Reynolds number from 3,000 to 23,000, 2) Jet-to-target-plate spacing (z/d), from 2 to 14 (single jet), d is jet diameter, 3) Target plate shape: 3a) flat, 3b) concave, 3c) convex, (single jet), 4) One row of seven jets impinging on a flat surface, the channel has one end closed (at 24d away from the most upstream jet axis), 5) Three rows of seven jets each in-line arrangement impinging on a flat surface, the channel has one end closed (at 24d away from the most upstream jet axis). Four CFD models (utilizing FLUENT commercial code) have been considered: 1) laminar flow (no turbulent transport), and turbulent flow with turbulence modeling by 2) the standard k–ε model, 3) the k–ω model, and 4) the v2 –f model. The predictions of Nu number for each case were compared with experimental data available from the literature. It is shown that the v2 –f model gives the best overall performance, though the k–ω model gives good predictions for most of the flow, with the exception of near the stagnation zone for some cases. The models are in much better agreement (with the data) as z/d grows and at larger radial locations from the jet axis, as expected. For multiple jets in one row (z/d = 2), again the v2 –f showed the best overall agreement with the experimental data. The k–ω model is not as good while k–ε clearly overpredicts the Nusselt numbers. For multiple jets in three inline rows (z/d = 5), all the three models were in overall agreement with the experimental data. However, k–ε and k–ω exhibit an important phenomenon, reported by the experiments: a decrease of the stagnation Nu from the upstream jet to the downstream ones. The v2 –f model did not reproduce this feature.

Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In