0 Suka0 Tidak suka

30 tayangan12 halamanApr 06, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

© All Rights Reserved

30 tayangan

© All Rights Reserved

- AME 3253 Aerodynamics Practice v03.0
- Fasddd
- Ce203-e s3dec18 Ktuweb
- 256753812-Forced-convection-lab-report.pdf
- Experimental Investigation (STHE)
- Tugas Perpindahan Panas (SUprapto)
- untitled.pdf
- SU, Flow Analysis and Design of Three-Dimensional Contraction
- AERODYNAMICS
- Heat Ex Changers
- 21712_07a.pdf
- 299
- 11-BL-introduction-2
- 11-BL-introduction-2.pdf
- Convection
- JNTUK - Academics & Planning - M.tech (Mechanical Engineering) - Thermal Engineerign Syllabus
- Transient Free Convective Flow over a Vertical Cone Embedded in a Thermally Stratified Medium
- Design and experimental analysis of pipe in pipe heat exchanger
- sm8-116
- Abstract SCLI Warwick 2

Anda di halaman 1dari 12

4259-G3-33-402, Nagatsuta-cho,

Midori-ku, Yokohama,

Kanagawa 226-8502, Japan

e-mail: itoyu110@00.alumni.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Naoya Inokura

Tokyo Institute of Technology,

4259-G3-33-402, Nagatsuta-cho,

Midori-ku, Yokohama,

Kanagawa 226-8502, Japan

Takao Nagasaki

Tokyo Institute of Technology,

4259-G3-33-402, Nagatsuta-cho,

Midori-ku, Yokohama,

Kanagawa 226-8502, Japan

e-mail: tnagasak@es.titech.ac.jp

in Air-to-Refrigerant Airfoil

Heat Exchangers

A light and compact heat exchange system was realized using two air-to-refrigerant airfoil heat exchangers and a recirculated heat transport refrigerant. Its heat transfer performance was experimentally investigated. Carbon dioxide or water was used as a

refrigerant up to a pressure of 30 MPa. Heat transfer coefficients on the outer air-contact

and inner refrigerant-contact surfaces were calculated using an inverse heat transfer

method. Correlations were developed for the Nusselt numbers of carbon dioxide and

water on the inner refrigerant-contact surface. Furthermore, we proposed a method to

evaluate a correction factor corresponding to the thermal resistance of the airfoil heat

exchanger. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4027554]

Keywords: Nusselt number, supercritical carbon dioxide, gas turbine, airfoil heat

exchanger, intercooler, recuperator

Introduction

Intercooled, recuperated aviation gas turbines (IR gas turbines)

have the strong potential to reduce fuel consumption in aviation.

Intercoolers and recuperators enhance the gas turbine cycle efficiency from a thermodynamic point of view. Wilfert et al. constructed an IR gas turbine components demonstrator that had the

potential to achieve a 17% reduction in fuel consumption compared with a baseline gas turbine. However, they noted that adapting recuperators, in particular, for a practical aviation gas turbine

remained a future challenge [1]. Conventional IR gas turbines are

too heavy for use as aviation gas turbines because they use a type

of tube matrix air-to-air heat exchanger [2] or a type of primary

surface air-to-air heat exchanger [3]. Although both types have

high temperature effectiveness, they are heavy. Furthermore, hot

and cold air must be collected at the heat exchanger. Therefore,

long and heavy air connecting ducts are required.

To overcome these problems, a heat exchange system using a

heat transport liquid or supercritical refrigerant (abbreviated in

this paper to refrigerant) may be used, as shown in Fig. 1. In

this system, the refrigerant transports heat from the hot section to

the cold section. Therefore, the hot and cold sections can be installed at separate sites. In the intercooling system, heat exchanger

A works as an air cooler, and heat exchanger B works as a radiator. Conversely, in the recuperating system, heat exchanger A

works as a heat absorber, and heat exchanger B works as an air

heater. In addition, heat transport liquid and supercritical refrigerants have higher densities and greater specific heat values than air.

Therefore, the refrigerant connecting tubes require a much smaller

diameter than air connecting ducts. Although an additional recirculation pump is needed, it must only drive the refrigerant against

the pressure loss of the refrigerant loop. Ito proposed an IR aviation gas turbine that uses this heat exchange system in the form of

heat exchangers installed in already equipped components in a

baseline aviation gas turbine, to reduce its weight [4]. In the intercooling system of this design, fixed stators and vanes in the compressor are used as the air cooler, and vanes in the bypass duct are

used as the radiator. In the recuperating system, vanes in the combustor are used as the air heater, and vanes in the core nozzle are

used as the heat absorber. Here, the working airflow path can

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the

JOURNAL OF HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received October 28, 2013; final manuscript

received April 7, 2014; published online May 21, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Giulio

Lorenzini.

Therefore, there is no additional pressure loss in the working airflow. Because vanes are used as heat exchangers, this type of heat

exchanger is hereafter referred to as an airfoil heat exchanger.

An airfoil heat exchanger is physically similar to the vanes of conventional air-cooled high-pressure turbines (HPTs) [5]. These

were in use prior to those of the current air-film-cooled HPTs,

although the HPT vanes are not heat exchangers. In this paper, the

heat transfer performance of an airfoil heat exchanger will be discussed compared with that of air-cooled HPT vanes.

However, it is difficult to evaluate the heat transfer performance

of real heat exchanger components. Bejan developed the constructal theory of design for cooling fins [6], and Lorenzini and his colleague energetically applied this theory to optimize Y-shaped and

I-shaped fins [7]. In addition, they conducted computer fluid dynamics calculations of the heat transfer for arrays of Y-shaped, Ishaped, and T-shaped fins, and optimized the results [8]. Moreover, the optimized results were compared with the constructal

theorys results [9,10]. Similarly, modern compressor stators and

guide vanes are three-dimensional airfoils optimized by computer

fluid dynamics; however, a three-dimensional airfoil is too complex to use in experiments. Therefore, we chose a twodimensional NACA65-(12A2I8b)10 airfoil. An NACA65 series

airfoil is a traditional two-dimensional airfoil for a compressor

stator. The estimated heat transfer rates are more suitable than

those of a simpler plane for realizing the airfoil heat exchanger.

We prepared a cascade of three NACA65-(12A2I8b)10 airfoils,

each of which had five inner refrigerant channels, as shown in Fig.

2, as a test model of the airfoil heat exchanger. This cascade was

installed in a subsonic wind tunnel at Mach 0.550.62. On the airfoil surfaces, as described by Nishiyama [11], a developing

boundary layer changes from a laminar boundary layer to a turbulent boundary layer across the minimum pressure point XSmax, i.e.,

the maximum point of pressure coefficient S. This is because the

boundary layer is stable in regions with favorable pressure gradients but unstable in those with adverse pressure gradients.

To obtain the heat transfer coefficients on the outer and inner

surfaces, Turner employed a heat conduction numerical analysis

using 31 discrete surface temperatures measured in experiments

[12]. In contrast, we used an inverse heat transfer method. It was

conducted under conditions that included the pressure distribution

around an airfoil already reported by Dunavant et al. [13] and our

experimentally measured temperatures at four points. This was

easier than Turners method because it is difficult to accurately

C 2014 by ASME

Copyright V

heat from hot section to cold section

Furthermore, Turner used air as the inner cooling fluid, whereas

we used a refrigerant. Lorenzini and Moretti pointed out that a liquid always performs better than air if the focus is exclusively on

heat removal maximization [14]. Their figure seemed that there

was a greater change in the temperature distribution in the fins

when using a liquid than when using air. This difference may

affect the heat transfer performance of an airfoil heat exchanger.

An additional contribution of our study involves the use of either

supercritical carbon dioxide or compressed water as the inner cooling fluid for an airfoil heat exchanger, rather than the use of air.

Liao and Zhao experimentally investigated the heat transfer coefficient of supercritical carbon dioxide in the range of 7.412 MPa

[15]. Our study extended Liao and Zhaos pressure range up to

30 MPa for carbon dioxide, and we also considered compressed

(but not supercritical) water at pressures up to 30 MPa.

It is expected that this will help to clarify a more suitable

method for estimating the heat transfer coefficients when designing airfoil heat exchangers.

Experimental Setup

To experimentally estimate the heat transfer performance in a

high-speed compressible flow, the Reynolds, Mach, and Prandtl

numbers should match those of the real gas and refrigerant flows.

If scale-model experiments are conducted, all of the viscosity,

thermal conductivity, specific heat, and sound speed ratios of the

tested fluids should be the same as those of the real gas and refrigerant. However, rather than using such fluids in scale-model

experiments, it is easier to prepare a real gas, real refrigerant, and

real-size airfoil heat exchanger under real conditions.

Wind Tunnel. A closed-return wind tunnel at the Tokyo Institute of Technology was employed to produce a subsonic airflow. A

BE-H125 Roots blower (made by ANLET Co. Ltd.) was used as

the continuous air source. The nozzle outlet size was 60 30 mm.

Its Mach number capabilities ranged from 0 to 0.8, and Mach numbers of 0.550.62 were chosen for testing the airfoil heat exchanger

in an aviation gas turbine. The inlet airflow was sufficiently turbulent because the inlet Reynolds number Reair,nozzle, whose representative length was the hydraulic diameter of the nozzle outlet,

ranged from 3.92 105 to 4.52 105. In addition, the roots blower

generated a turbulent airflow. Although this airflow condition

involved no wakes from the preceding airfoils, unlike in a practical

axial gas turbine, it was sufficient for the time-averaged airflow

condition to be applied to the design of airfoil heat exchangers.

Airfoil Heat Exchangers. NACA 65-(12A2I8b)10 airfoils with

inner refrigerant channels were employed as test models, as

shown in Fig. 2. The airfoils were made of SUS304 because its

thermal conductivity is 16 W/Km, which is almost the same as

the thermal conductivity of the materials used for practical compressors or vanes; for example, approximately 20 W/Km for

081703-2 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014

model

alloy. The chord length was 44 mm, and the width was 28 mm.

These are average sizes for the stators or vanes in the compressor

section of middle or large class aviation gas turbines.

Four type-K thermocouples with a diameter of 0.5 mm were installed in four taps with a 0.7 mm inner diameter and used to measure the temperature distribution of each airfoil heat exchanger.

All were located at midspan. As seen in Fig. 2, the airfoil was

deployed at an incidence n 0 (i.e., a flow direction angle from

the airfoil camber line at its leading edge, corresponding to an

angle-of-attack a 9.47 deg, i.e., an inlet flow direction angle

from the airfoil chord). x and y axes were defined in the horizontal

and vertical directions. Thermocouples Ti and Tii were located on

the camber line at x 3 and 41 mm, respectively. Thermocouples

Tiii and Tiv were located 1.2 mm below and above the camber line

at x 22 mm, respectively. Here, to enhance the temperature measurement accuracy and detect temperature differences smaller

than 1 K among TiTiv, the potential differences between them

were measured directly. This measurement method enhances the

accuracy when detecting small temperature differences. To calibrate all thermocouples, considering the digital voltage meter

error, all of the thermocouples tips were placed in ice water at a

constant temperature of 273.15 K. We developed data acquisition

PC software to cancel out temperature drifts from 273.15 K.

Therefore, an accuracy of 60.025 K was achieved for the temperature differences among all of the thermocouples.

Test Section Configurations for Cascade of Airfoil Heat

Exchangers. Figure 3 shows the configurations of a cascade of

three NACA65-(12A2I8b)10 airfoil heat exchangers. Three airfoils

were deployed at the same positions as some of those tested by

airfoils

NACA65-(12A2I8b)10 airfoils were previously investigated in

detail by Erwin et al. [16] and Dunavant et al. [13]. In our study,

the solidity r LC/LG was set at 1.5, where LC and LG are the airfoil chord and tangential spacing between the airfoils leading

edges, respectively. In addition, the flow direction angle from perpendicular to airfoil row b was varied from 45 deg to 70.5 deg,

depending on a in the range of 0 deg25.5 deg. To remove the

boundary layer from the inlet flow, two inlet guide vanes were

used (with the distance between them being 58 mm or less), which

could be moved to fit into the cascade position. Likewise, two slits

(the distance between slits was 28 mm) mounted on the side walls

were used. The whole test section was deployed in a sufficiently

large box with a width of 830 mm, depth of 825 mm, and height of

1400 mm. This was to allow the outlet air from the cascade to

leave in the appropriate direction, depending on the flow turning

angle h.

Recirculation System With Carbon Dioxide or Water as Refrigerant. The refrigerant flow loop is shown in Fig. 4. The recirculation pump was a magnetic-coupling-driven sealed pump head,

GLHH21.PFS.E-N1CH50 (made by Micropump, Inc.), connected

to an inverter-controlled ac motor. The refrigerant cooler section

was submersed in a TRL-N11L cooling bath (made by Thomas

Kagaku Co. Ltd.). This was maintained at an arbitrary temperature

between 253 and 353 K (20 to 80 C), with an accuracy of 0.1 K.

A pressure gauge, KDM30-35MPaG-E (made by Krone), was installed upstream of the airfoil heat exchangers. The refrigerant

flowed inside the five serially connected stainless tubes in the airfoil heat exchanger with u-turn sections from the trailing to

exchanger. The five stainless tubes and airfoil heat exchanger

were bonded by DM4030LD/F890 thermally conductive adhesive

(made by Diemat, Inc.) with a thermal conductivity of 15 W/Km.

A structural analysis of the airfoil heat exchanger with the five

stainless tubes was conducted using ANSYS11. The maximum stress

was 32 MPa in the airfoil heat exchanger when the tubes inner

pressure was 35 MPa. The 0.2% proof stress is 32 MPa at 1400 K

under a strain rate of 1.0%/s for SUS304 [17]. Therefore, the

structural integrity of the airfoil heat exchanger could be maintained. Two thermocouples Tref,C and Tref,J were installed

upstream and downstream of the center airfoil heat exchanger.

The potential difference between Tref,C and Tref,J was also measured directly. The whole refrigerant flow loop was thermally insulated, and it could withstand a pressure of 34.4 MPa. Therefore,

supercritical carbon dioxide or compressed liquid water could be

used as the refrigerant. The refrigerant was pumped up into the refrigerant flow loop via an 8800 series plunger pump (made by L.

TEX Corporation).

The experimentally obtained data alone were not sufficient to

enable us to determine the air and refrigerant heat transfer coefficients hair and href. This was because the surface temperature distributions on the outer air-contact surfaces and inner refrigerantcontact surfaces should be known to accurately evaluate hair and

href. However, these were not measured. Therefore, in order to

find the best combination of hair and href, an inverse heat transfer

method and a least square method were used to explain the experimentally obtained data.

Airfoil Heat Exchanger Temperature. There were only four

thermocouples in the airfoil heat exchanger, and these were not

located on the surfaces. Therefore, the inverse heat transfer method

was applied to estimate hair and href. Figure 5 shows the twodimensional control volumes of the airfoil heat exchanger used to

perform the inverse heat transfer method by a numerical analysis of

the heat conduction in the airfoil heat exchanger. For each control

volume j, the finite control volume method was employed. Namely,

the steady state basic equation in an integrated form is

Qconduction;j Qref;j Qair;j

(1)

Here, the left-hand term means the heat conduction rate of the

solid part of the airfoil heat exchanger. The right-hand terms

as refrigerant) and piping around airfoils

on numerical analysis of heat conduction in airfoil heat

exchanger and applied boundary conditions

indicate the heat transfer rates through the inner refrigerantcontact surfaces (along the five bigger circular regions in Fig. 5)

and outer air-contact surfaces (along the peripheral region in Fig.

5). As an example, we focus on control volume j whose neighbor

control volumes are p, q, r, and s. The discretized heat conduction

rate Qconduction,j is

mref

uref;AB 3

(2)

qref;D Dref;DE 2

uref;DE ;

qref;A Dref;AB

DPloss;AB 0:1582

of course, the number of neighbor control volumes can be any

number instead of four. For example, the heat conduction rate

Qconduction,jp between control volume j and control volume p is

Qconduction;jp Ajp ksolid

(4)

and the refrigerant, href,j is the local heat transfer coefficient, and

Tref(n) is the refrigerant temperature of the nth section in contact

with control volume j. Here, n is any location from E to I in

Fig. 4. Similar procedures

(5)

Qair;j Aair;j hair;j DTair;j Aair;j hair;j Tair;adiabatic;j Tj

should be applied for control volume j in contact with air, where

Tair,adiabatic,j is the adjacent local adiabatic air temperatures in contact with control volume j. It depends on the air boundary layer

condition, namely, whether this is laminar or turbulent.

calculated using the procedures reported in Refs. [18,19] for carbon dioxide and [20] for water. The properties had accuracies of

62% across the critical point. In the other regions, the accuracies

were better. Figure 4 shows the refrigerant tubes length Lref and

inner diameter Dref. The refrigerant flow is usually turbulent

through the airfoil heat exchanger in new IR aviation gas turbines

because a large heat flow rate per unit flow rate is preferable to a

small pressure loss. Here, as shown in Fig. 4, each position is

named to facilitate the discussion as follows: A, inlet pressure sensor; B, cross fitting; C, inlet thermocouple; D, beginning point of

flow rate meter by differential pressure; E, its ending point just

upstream of the center airfoil heat exchanger; F, ending point of

the first u-bend section; G, that of the second; H, that of the third;

I, that of the fourth; and J, outlet thermocouple. Section DE was

the flow rate meter, which was made of a smooth tube. The refrigerant pressure loss DPloss,DE was measured. The refrigerant velocity uref,DE was calculated using the DarcyWeisbach equation and

Blasius friction coefficient in a smooth tube for turbulent conditions as follows:

"

uref;DE

D1:25

ref;DE

DPloss;DE

0:75 0:25 L

0:1582qref;D lref;D ref;DE

1

#1:75

(6)

0:25

1:75

q0:75

ref;A lref;A Lref;AB uref;AB

(8)

D1:25

ref;AB

dTsolid

T p T j

(3)

Ajp ksolid

djp

dz

airfoil heat exchanger, z is a local coordinate along the line that

goes through the centers of control volumes j and p, djp is the distance between the centers of control volumes j and p, and Ajp is

the projection area of the interfacial surface area on a plane normal to the z axis. In the case of the control volume next to a refrigerant or air boundary, the right-hand terms in Eq. (1) have values;

otherwise they are 0. When control volume j contacts the refrigerant, for example, the discretized heat transfer rate is as follows:

(7)

Qconduction;js

4

uref;BC

qref;D Dref;DE 2

uref;DE ;

qref;B Dref;BC

DPloss;BC 0:1582

0:25

1:75

q0:75

ref;B lref;B Lref;BC uref;BC

(9)

D1:25

ref;BC

and similar considerations apply for sections CD, EF, FG, GH,

HI, and IJ.

Therefore, the total pressure at each point from A to J is as

follows:

1

Ptot;ref;A Pref;A qref;A u2ref;AB ;

2

Ptot;ref;B Ptot;ref;A DPloss;AB ; ; and

Ptot;ref;J Ptot;ref;I DPloss;IJ

(10)

Then, the measured Pref,A is known. Pref,B and Pref,J are found as

follows:

1

Pref;B Ptot;ref;B qref;B u2ref;AB ; and

2

(11)

1

Pref;J Ptot;ref;J qref;J u2ref;IJ

2

At point C, temperature Tref,C is measured and enthalpy Href,C

is defined as follows:

Tref;C TC and Href;C Href Tref;C ; Pref;C

(12)

At each point from A to E, each refrigerant tube is adiabatic.

Therefore, the total enthalpy Htot,ref at each point from A to E is

the same. Thus, the enthalpy Href at each point from A to E is

found as follows:

Href;A

u2ref;AB

u2ref;AB

u2ref;BC

Href;B

Href;C

2

2

2

u2ref;CD

u2ref;DE

Href;D

Href;E

2

2

(13)

Therefore, temperature Tref at each point from A to E can be calculated by using Href and Pref.

On the other hand, in each section from EF to IJ, heat inflows

from the airfoil heat exchangers. The steady state basic equation

in an integrated form for section EF, for example, is as follows:

Qconvection;EF Qref;EF

(14)

rate Qconvection,EF is

Qconvection;EF mref Htot;ref Tref F; Pref;F ; uref;EF

Htot;ref Tref;E ; Pref;E ; uref;DE

(15)

and the refrigerant heat gain rate Qref,EF in section EF from the

airfoil heat exchanger is

EF

EF

Qref;EF R Qref;j R Aref;j href;j Tref;E Tj

j

(16)

where Qref,j was described in Eq. (4), and the summation of Qref,j

at all of the control volumes j in contact with the refrigerant in

section EF is used. Similar procedures can be applied for sections

FG, GH, HI, and IJ.

Adiabatic Air Temperature. Although the airfoil heat

exchanger surfaces are rigorously nonadiabatic, the air temperature in a boundary layer of a high-speed compressible airflow on a

solid surface is close to the adiabatic air temperature. Recently,

Pinilla et al. investigated the effects of the adiabatic temperature

on the heat load of the blades of a gas turbine [21]. They mentioned that the adiabatic temperature plays a role in determining

the heat flux through the air-contact surfaces.

On the outer air-contact surfaces, the adjacent local static air

pressure can be calculated using the adjacent local pressure coefficient Sj as follows:

1

Pair;j Ptot;air;in Sj qair;in u2air;in

2

(17)

decrease in Sj implies an adverse pressure gradient, and vice versa.

Thus, the adjacent local air Mach number and the adjacent local

static air temperature are found as follows:

v

(

)

u

c1

u 2

c

Ptot;air;in

Ttot;air;in

1 ; Tair;j

(18)

Mair;j t

c1

Pair;j

1 c1

2 Mair;j

The adjacent local adiabatic air temperatures Tair,adiabatic,j in the

airs laminar or turbulent boundary layer is formulated [22] as

(19)

Tair;adiabatic;j Tair;j Ttot;air;in Tair;j rj

where rj is the adjacent local recovery coefficient. Each rj represents a laminar or turbulent boundary layer as follows:

Pr1=2 for air laminar boundary layer

rj

(20)

Pr1=3 for air turbulent boundary layer

If a pure air laminar flow enters the system, a transition to a turbulent boundary layer occurs across the maximum S point

XSmaxLC, i.e., Reair,transition XSmaxReair, in a cascade of airfoils.

In the present test setup, there may be many main flow instabilities. Thus, the transition may occur slightly upstream of XSmaxLC.

However, it probably occurs not far from XSmaxLC, as shown in

Fig. 6.

heat exchangers

Here, Tair,adiabatic,j was determined using only the airflow conditions, i.e., air Reynolds, Prandtl, and Mach numbers, and can be

substituted into Eq. (5).

The following procedure was conducted for the assumed hair,j and

href,j to calculate the distribution of solid temperatures T(j) in the

airfoil heat exchanger, as well as to calculate the refrigerant temperatures Tref(F)Tref(J).

First, we calculated the already determined values according to

the experimental conditions before using an inverse heat transfer

method. The already determined values were the distribution of

the adiabatic air temperatures Tair,adiabatic,j around the airfoil heat

exchanger, and the refrigerant temperatures Tref,ATref,E. The distribution of Tair,adiabatic,j around the airfoil heat exchanger was

given in the Adiabatic Air Temperature subsection when the air

inlet conditions and cascade configuration were determined. Tref,ATref,E were given in the Refrigerant Temperature subsection

when the refrigerant inlet conditions were determined.

Second, for the assumed values of hair,j and href,j, the solid temperatures T(j) and the refrigerant temperatures Tref(F)Tref(J) were

found numerically by solving Eqs. (1) and (14). Here, Eqs. (2),

(4), and (5) were substituted into Eq. (1) at all of the solid control

volumes in the airfoil heat exchanger, and Eqs. (15) and (16) were

substituted into Eq. (14) at all of the refrigerant sections. Thus, we

could generate simultaneous temperature equations for all the control volumes of the solid and refrigerant sections. To solve these,

all of the T coefficients were arranged for control volume j as

follows:

cj;j Tj cp;j Tp cq;j Tq cr;j Tr cs;j Ts

cj;E Tref;E cj;n Tref n cj;air Tair;adiabatic;j

(21)

where only Tref,E and Tair,adiabatic,j are known, and Tref(n), i.e.,

Tref(F)Tref(J), are unknown. Therefore, a large coefficient matrix

for all the airfoil temperatures for all the control volumes of the

solid and refrigerant sections was constructed. Then, this coefficient matrix was diagonalized. Finally, the distribution of the solid

temperatures T(j) in the airfoil heat exchanger and the refrigerant

sections temperatures Tref(F)Tref(J) were obtained for the

assumed href,j and hair,j.

Third, the heat removal rate from the hot air Qair,whole and the

input rate into the cold refrigerant Qref,whole were found as

follows:

Qair;whole

whole

X

Qair;j

(22)

Qref;whole mref;DE Htot;ref Tref;J ; Pref;J ; uref;IJ

Htot;ref Tref;E ; Pref;E ; uref;DE

(23)

Method. In the Calculation Procedure of Inverse Heat Transfer

Method subsection, a procedure was described for using the

assumed hair,j and href,j to calculate the solid temperatures T(j), refrigerant sections temperatures Tref(F)Tref (J), and heat removal

rate from the hot air Qair,whole. In the present subsection, we discuss how to find the best combination of hair,j and href,j. Here, the

calculation results for T(i), T(ii), T(iii), and T(iv) are expressed in

terms of the experimentally measured Ti, Tii, Tiii, and Tiv values to

facilitate the discussion. We divided the airfoil heat exchanger

into three parts: the front part forward of tube IJ, the rear part

behind tube EF, and the part between them, as shown in Fig. 6.

Additionally, as shown in Fig. 6, the space-averaged heat transfer

coefficients on the front part surface hair,front, rear part surface hair,rear, middle upper surface hair,middle,up, and middle lower surface

hair,middle,low were defined. href was locally determined based on

AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081703-5

the local adjacent refrigerant Reynolds number. However, the difference in the local refrigerant Reynolds numbers between the

inlet and outlet was negligible. Thus, the space-averaged href over

all of the refrigerant-contact surfaces in the airfoil heat exchanger

was considered.

In this study, the LevenbergMarquardt algorithm [23] was

used. It is one of the least square methods. In this algorithm, five

fitting functions [f(1) {T(i) Ti}/Ti, f(2) {T(ii) Tii}/Tii,

f(3) {T(iii) Tiii}/Tiii, f(4) {T(iv) Tiv}/Tiv, f(5) {Qair,whole

Qref,whole}/Qref,whole] were set. The best combination of five independent variables [hair,front, hair,middle,up, hair,middle,low, hair,rear,

href] was found to realize the minimum of [f(1)2 f(2)2 f(3)2

f(4)2 f(5)2]. In other words, we numerically found the calculation results that were the closest to the experimental results. This

numerical analysis was performed by a VisualBasic2010 code that

we developed using the LevenbergMarquardt algorithm package

provided by the ALGLIB Project [24].

the calculation results, an average refrigerant Nusselt number

Nuref and an average refrigerant modified Stanton number Stref are

obtained as follows:

Nuref

href Dref

Nuref 20Wfringe

; Stref

p 2

kref

qref 4 Dref uref CPref Reref Prref Dref

(24)

Here, Stref is a dimensionless number that measures the ratio of

the heat transferred to the refrigerant to the total heat capacity of

the refrigerant passing through the airfoil heat exchanger.

The average hair over all the surfaces is calculated using the

overall energy balance as follows:

Qair;whole

hair Paircontact

Aair;j DTair;j

j

(25)

outer air-contact surfaces. Then, an average air Nusselt number

Nuair and an average air modified Stanton number Stair are calculated as follows:

Nuair

hair LC

;

kair

Stair

hair LC W

Nuair

(26)

a unit of the airfoil heat exchanger. Here, the representative length

unit of the airfoil heat exchanger. Stair is a dimensionless number

that measures the ratio of the heat transferred to the air stream to

the total heat capacity of the air stream handled by a unit of the

airfoil heat exchanger.

Experimental Conditions. The carbon dioxide critical points

were TC,CO2 304.2 K and PC,CO2 7.38 MPa, whereas the water

critical points were TC,H2O 647.3 K and PC,H2O 22.12 MPa.

The refrigerant temperature Tref,E and refrigerant pressure Pref,E

were set to 315 K and 10, 20, and 30 MPa, respectively. They

were chosen to verify the effects of the supercritical carbon dioxide and compressed water. The condition at point E in the refrigerant tube corresponded to the inlet condition immediately upstream

of the airfoil heat exchanger inlet, as shown in Fig. 4. Refrigerant

Reynolds number Reref,E increased in proportion to the increasing

refrigerant mass flow rate mref,E for each refrigerant for each pressure because Reref,E depended only on the inlet velocity. Higher

Reref values of 8.3 104 at 10 MPa, 4.8 104 at 20 MPa, and

3.8 104 at 30 MPa for carbon dioxide were achieved at the same

mref,E of 5 g/s compared with an Reref of 0.4 104 at all pressures

for water. It is said that carbon dioxide has a better heat transfer

performance in comparison with water because the Nusselt number is generally larger in a case with a larger Reynolds number. At

10 MPa, the specific heat CPref,E of 6696 J/kgK for carbon dioxide

was much larger than that of water (4156 J/kgK). In contrast, the

density qref,E of 586.0 kg/m3 for carbon dioxide was much smaller

than the value of 995.8 kg/m3 found for the water. The heat

transport performance is proportional to qref,ECPref,E, i.e.,

qref,ECPref,E 3.92 106 for carbon dioxide and qref,ECPref,E

4.14 106 for water. This produced a better heat transfer performance (through a heat transfer surface) for carbon dioxide

compared with water, and almost the same heat transport performances (between different sites) at 10 MPa. Conversely, at 30 MPa,

the CPref,E of 1961 J/kgK for carbon dioxide was smaller than the

CPref,E of 4113 J/kgK for water. Moreover, the density qref,E

of 902.7 kg/m3 for carbon dioxide approached the qref,E of

1004 kg/m3 for water. The heat transport performance was

qref,ECPref,E 1.77 106 for carbon dioxide and qref,ECPref,E

4.13 106 for water. Thus, carbon dioxide has a better heat

transfer but less heat transport compared with water at 30 MPa.

Given these results, we can say that carbon dioxide is superior to

water as a heat transfer medium at all pressures, but the optimum

heat transport medium should be determined on a case-by-case

basis.

Figure 7 shows the air Prandtl number Prair,in, Mach number

Mair,in, and Reynolds number Reair,in for different values of a

within a range of 0 deg25.5 deg. Here, the values of Prair,in were

unrelated to the air temperature and pressure. Thus, the inlet air

Fig. 7 Experimental air Mach, Prandtl, and Reynolds numbers versus airflow direction angle from airfoil chord

Fig. 8 Comparison of temperature distributions of airfoil heat exchangers for large and small

air modified Stanton numbers

temperature could be maintained at a convenient value. Additionally, to conduct intercooling experiments, the adiabatic air temperature Tair,adiabatic had to be higher than the refrigerant temperature

Tref,E. Therefore, the target inlet air total temperature Ttot,air,in was

set to approximately 360 K. Mair,in became smaller in regions far

from a 10.5 deg. The airfoil incidence n was 0 at a 9.47 deg.

Thus, the air pressure loss in a closed wind tunnel increased in

those regions far from n 0. The same thing was true for Reair,in.

All of the experimental data were obtained after reaching

dynamic steady states and thermal equilibrium. The following

experimental results represent the results of inverse heat transfer

analyses, in which the corresponding experimental results were

used as boundary conditions and fitting parameters.

Feature of Airfoil Heat Exchanger. Figure 8 shows the temperature distributions for large and small values of Stair under the

same airflow conditions: a 10.5 deg and Mair,in 0.60. The

left-hand figure in Fig. 9 shows the local air pressure coefficient S

distribution plotted from data taken from Ref. [13]. The others in

Fig. 9 show the corresponding local air Mach number and adiabatic

air temperature distributions on the air-contact surfaces plotted by

using Eqs. (17)(20) under the same conditions as those shown in

Fig. 8. In this case, an air turbulent boundary layer formed over

almost the entire lower surface. However, on the upper surface, the

air boundary layer transitioned from laminar to turbulent flow at

X 0.6, causing the adiabatic air temperature to increase discontinuously. This adiabatic air temperature was used to conduct the

inverse heat transfer analysis shown in Fig. 8. In Fig. 8, the black

indicates a high temperature, whereas the white indicates a low

temperature. The highest temperatures were found in those regions

near the leading and trailing edges. This was because the heat

entered with the hot air and flowed out into tubes IJ and EF. In the

part between them, however, the heat flowed in from the aircontact surfaces and flowed out into the nearest refrigerant tubes.

Figure 10 shows the air Nusselt number Nuair for each part versus the air modified Stanton number Stair. Each part has a front,

upper middle, lower middle, or rear corresponding to each hair in

Fig. 6. In each experiment, the largest was Nuair,middle,low, followed, in order, by Nuair,middle,up, Nuair,front, and Nuair,rear. On the

lower surface, the minimum pressure coefficient Smax was found

at the leading edge for a 0, and gradually shifted to X 0.2 for

a 25.5 deg. Thus, on the lower middle surface, there was an

adverse pressure gradient, and the air boundary layer switched to

a turbulent one near the leading edge. Therefore, Nuair,middle,low

was large. On the upper surface, Smax was located at X 0.50.6

for a 13.5 deg, and swiftly shifted at X 00.05 for

a 16.5 deg. Thus, on the upper middle surface at a 13.5 deg,

there was a favorable pressure gradient, the airflow accelerated,

and the air boundary layer became thin, although it remained laminar. On the upper middle surface at a 16.5 deg, a turbulent transition occurred. Therefore, Nuair,middle,up was almost equal to or

was slightly smaller than Nuair,middle,low. On the rear surfaces, the

air boundary layers were turbulent. However, the boundary layer

thickness became much larger, and Nuair,rear was the smallest air

Nusselt number.

Without cooling the airfoil heat exchanger, the temperature on

the middle air-contact surfaces would become the air adiabatic

temperature. Their temperature profiles would be smooth in the

airflow direction. Nuair would be determined by the airflow conditions. If the refrigerant cooled the airfoil heat exchanger only

slightly, in right-hand figure in Fig. 8, the temperature gradient

(which is indicated by the distance from the gray dotted line to the

gray solid and dashed lines) became small. The heat flow rate

(Stair) between the middle surfaces and the refrigerant tubes also

became small. Thus, the temperature profiles (which are the gray

solid and dashed lines for Stair 0.00198) remain smooth. Nuair

would be nearly the same as those when there is no refrigerant

cooling. If, on the other hand, the refrigerant cooled the airfoil

heat exchanger considerably, the temperature gradient (which is

indicated by the distance from the black dotted line to the black

solid and dashed lines in right-hand figure in Fig. 8) became large.

The heat flow rate (Stair) between the middle surfaces and the refrigerant tubes also became large. Then, the airfoil heat exchanger

temperature varied widely depending on the distance from each

refrigerant tube along each heat flow path. Therefore, there were

Fig. 9 Distributions of air pressure coefficient, air local Mach number, and adiabatic air temperature corresponding to experimental results shown in Fig. 8 (air pressure coefficient data were taken from Ref. [13])

air modified Stanton number

many temperature fluctuations on the middle surfaces in the airflow direction, such as the black solid and dashed lines for

Stair 0.00348. Thus, strong thermal entrance effects may occur

in the air boundary layers on the middle surfaces, making Nuair

larger, and the temperature gradient larger. Namely, there may be

a positive feedback effect until the temperature on the middle

surfaces approaches the air adiabatic temperature. This is why

Nuair,middle,low and Nuair,middle,up increase with an increase in Stair,

as shown in Fig. 10. This conclusion will be confirmed if transient

experiments are performed in the future. However, the front and

rear parts of the airfoil heat exchanger resemble forcedconvection fins. Thus, a uniform temperature gradient forms, so

that there are no temperature fluctuations along the airflow direction. Therefore, Nuair,front and Nuair,rear are determined depending

on the airflow condition but independently of Stair.

Figure 11 shows the average air Nusselt number versus air

Reynolds number at the outlet. The solid lines are from Ref. [12],

summarizing the correlations of the air-cooled airfoil data

obtained by Ainley [25], Fray and Barnes [26], Hodge [27], Wilson and Pope [28], Bammert and Hahnemann, and Andrews and

Bradley [29], as well as data obtained by Turner himself. In addition, the dashed line is the correlation of the liquid-cooled airfoil

data obtained by Freche and Diaguila [30]. Experiments were conducted in which the average airfoil temperature was held constant

at 220 F (378 K). The symbols in the figures indicate the results of

our study, indicating a wide range of air Nusselt numbers even for

the same air Reynolds number. In the air-cooled gas turbine, the

cooling airflow rate was almost proportional to the main airflow

rate. This was because the cooling air was bled from the compressor, such that the ratio of the airflow rates was almost constant.

Thus, the temperature effectiveness and airfoil temperature did

not vary significantly. However, in the airfoil heat exchangers, the

cooling refrigerant flow rate could be set independent of the main

transfer performance than air. Lorenzini and Moretti conducted

computer fluid dynamics calculations for fins in a liquid or air

flow [14]. Their results seemed that the temperature distribution

of the structure in a liquid varied over a wider range than that in

air. The temperature distribution of the refrigerant-cooled airfoil

heat exchanger varied over a wider range. Therefore, the air Nusselt numbers are affected not only by the air Reynolds and Prandtl

numbers but also by the temperature fluctuations of the airfoil

surfaces, as mentioned above. Freche and Diaguila also conducted

other experiments while allowing the average airfoil temperature

to vary widely by altering the refrigerant flow rate [30]. They

found that the air Nusselt numbers were scattered even at the

same air Reynolds number, although they suggested that experimental error caused this phenomenon. The reason for this scattering of the air Nusselt numbers found by Freche and Diaguila is

likely to be the same as that found in our study. Basically, the air

Nusselt number of a refrigerant-cooled airfoil heat exchanger cannot be determined using only the air Reynolds and Prandtl

numbers.

Moreover, the right-hand figure in Fig. 11 shows the distribution of the average of all the Nuair values for each angle-of-attack

a in the left-hand figure. The average in ranges far from

a 9.47 deg corresponding to n 0 may be higher than those in

ranges close to a 9.47 deg. It was found that a larger absolute n

was preferred, unless a large separation occurred, from a heat

transfer performance point of view.

Design Method for Airfoil Heat Exchanger (Refrigerant

Nusselt Number). Figure 12 shows the refrigerant Nusselt number for a range of carbon dioxide refrigerant turbulent flows. It

compares the refrigerant Nusselt numbers estimated according to

DittusBoelter, LiaoZhao, and our proposed correlations. The

LiaoZhao correlation [15] is

Nuref

0:3

0:128Re0:8

ref;wall Prref;wall

CPref;bulk

CPref;wall

0:411

for

Grref

Re2ref;bulk

!0:205

!0:437

CO2

(27)

bulk and wall temperatures, respectively. It covers carbon dioxide

flow up to 12 MPa. In Fig. 12, the values calculated by the

DittusBoelter correlation were underestimated. The thermal entrance regions through the airfoil heat exchanger in the refrigerant

boundary layers and secondary Dean flows due to u-turn sections

may have affected the enhancement of the refrigerant turbulent

Nusselt number. On the other hand, the values calculated by the

LiaoZhao method were overestimated. Their method evaluates

the buoyancy effect in a horizontal tube; however, our refrigerant

tubes were set vertically. Therefore, our studys buoyancy effect

in the radial direction may be smaller than the LiaoZhao estimation. Our correlation results for the carbon dioxide refrigerant

Nusselt number were obtained as follows:

0:300

Nuref;turbulent 0:0231Re0:823

ref Prref

Fig. 11 Average air Nusselt number versus air Reynolds number at outlet at various angles-of-attack a

qref;bulk

qref;wall

for

CO2

(28)

Nuref,turbulent. This correlation converged to within 25% and

50%, relative to the experimental results. The average values of

the current results were located between the DittusBoelter and

LiaoZhao correlations. The DittusBoelter correlation was acceptable, although there were slight differences in the constants

compared with our correlation.

Our correlation results for the water refrigerant Nusselt number

were obtained as follows:

Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 12 Comparison of experimental refrigerant Nusselt number with DittusBoelter, LiaoZhao, and our proposed correlations for carbon dioxide turbulent flows

0:300

Nuref;turbulent 0:0230Re0:808

ref Prref

for

H2 O

(29)

by the same method as that used for carbon dioxide. Our correlation is within 10% and 50% compared with the experimental

results. The values estimated by the DittusBoelter correlation

were also underestimated for the previously given reason. However, the DittusBoelter correlation was acceptable, although

there were also slight differences in the constants compared with

our correlation.

Design Method for Airfoil Heat Exchanger (Thermal

Resistance). The air Nusselt number Nuair for the refrigerantcooled airfoil heat exchanger had a wide range, so it was difficult

to predict Nuair by a correlation using only Reair and Prair. Instead,

the relationships between the heat transfer rate Qwhole, a logarithmic mean temperature difference DTlm,whole, and the refrigerant

Nusselt number Nuref were used to estimate Nuair.

Temperature changes in the air and refrigerant through the airfoil heat exchanger were evaluated by the temperature effectiveness /air and /ref as follows:

/air

Tair;adiabatic;in Tair;adiabatic;out

Tref;J Tref;E

; /ref

Tair;adiabatic;in Tref;E

Tair;adiabatic;in Tref;E

(30)

Based on the heat balance of the airfoil heat exchanger, the relationships of /air and /ref are found as follows by using the ratio of

the refrigerant heat capacity rate to air heat capacity rate eRA:

/air eRA /ref ; eRA

mref CPref

mair CPair

(31)

Eq. (30) as follows:

Qwhole mref CPref Tref;J Tref;E

(32)

mref CPref /ref Tair;adiabatic;in Tref;E

The logarithmic mean temperature difference DTlm,whole for a

counter-flow heat exchanger was derived by its definition as

follows:

DTlm;whole U Tair;adiabatic;in Tref;E

Journal of Heat Transfer

(33)

/ /air

i

U 1 for eRA 1; U refh

1/air

ln 1/

for

eRA 6 1

ref

coefficient g is

1

(34)

g 1

1 Aref

href

hair Aair

if the heat exchanger is an ideal counter-flow heat exchanger without thermal resistance in the airfoil heat exchangers solid material. Furthermore, the correction factor w is the ratio of the

practical heat transfer rate Qwhole to the ideal heat transfer rate,

which includes thermal resistance of the airfoil heat exchangers

solid material, as follows:

Qwhole wgAref DTlm;whole

(35)

Generally, the overall heat transfer coefficient includes thermal resistance by using the term d/k in its denominator, where d is the

thickness of the solid material, and k is the thermal conductivity.

However, it is difficult to define the value of d because there is no

constant thickness in the airfoil heat exchanger. Therefore, the

correction factor w is introduced instead of d/k. Equations (32)

and (33) were substituted into Eq. (35). Thus, the practical overall

heat transfer coefficient wg is as follows:

wg

Aref

U

(36)

Therefore, from Eqs. (34) and (36), the air heat transfer coefficient is obtained by using the refrigerant heat transfer coefficient

href derived from Eqs. (24), (28), and (29) as follows:

hair

Aref

1

Aair mArefCw /U h1

ref Pref

ref

(37)

ref

The values of correction factor w are obtained using a least

square method for all experimental w as follows:

0:12360:02093jnj 1

1 for

/ref exp0:5eRA

(38)

AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081703-9

Fig. 13 Example of correction factor for heat transfer with refrigerant temperature effectiveness /ref and the ratio of refrigerant heat capacity rate to that of air eRA at a 5 10.5 deg, i.e.,

n 5 1.03 deg

heat exchange system. The Reynolds and Mach numbers of the airflow were in the ranges of 4.3 1055 105 and 0.550.62, respectively. Carbon dioxide or water was used as a refrigerant up to a

pressure of 30 MPa. Thus, the carbon dioxide was supercritical, and

the water was a compressed liquid over its critical pressure.

The heat transfer coefficients on the outer air-contact and inner

refrigerant-contact surfaces were calculated using an inverse heat

transfer method. The inverse heat transfer calculations were conducted under conditions that included our experimentally measured

temperatures at four points and another researchers already

reported pressure distribution around an airfoil. The correlation of

the carbon dioxide Nusselt number on the inner refrigerant-contact

Pr0:300

surface was Nuref,turbulent 0.0231 Re0:823

ref

ref , and that

of the water Nusselt number was Nuref,turbulent 0.0230 Re0:808

ref

Pr0:300

ref . Their correlations were very close to the DittusBoelter

correlation. Furthermore, we proposed a method to evaluate a correction factor corresponding to the thermal resistance of the air-torefrigerant airfoil heat exchanger. The correction factor increased

with an increase in the absolute incidence, which was the angle of

the flow direction from the airfoil camber line at its leading edge.

The correction factor increased and asymptotically approached a

certain value close to unity with a decrease in the refrigerant temperature effectiveness. Conversely, the correction factor drastically

approached zero with an increase in the refrigerant temperature

effectiveness. This indicates the existence of a maximum permissible temperature effectiveness for each ratio of the refrigerant heat

capacity rate to that of air. On the other hand, the correction factor

increased with a decrease in the ratio of the refrigerant heat

capacity rate to that of air, and vice versa.

These correlations and correction factor can be used for designing airfoil heat exchangers.

Acknowledgment

estimated values calculated by our proposed method

angle from the airfoil camber line at its leading edge. Under constant /ref and eRA, obviously, the correction factor w increases

with an increase in absolute incidence n in Eq. (38). Figure 13

shows a profile example of w. Under constant n and eRA, w

increases and asymptotically approaches a certain large value as

/ref decreases; conversely, w drastically approaches zero as /ref

increases. Please note that the value of w estimated by Eq. (38)

would be inappropriate at a value greater than /ref that results in

w 0. This indicates the existence of a maximum permissible /ref

for each eRA. On the other hand, under constant n and /ref, w

increases as eRA decreases and vice versa. In Eq. (38), w implicitly

contains the effects of Reair and Prair. Basically, w should explicitly include the Reair and Prair terms. However, the effects cannot

be expressed because experiments in small ranges of Reair and

Prair were conducted in this study.

To verify the adequacy of w, we can estimate Nuair from w,

Nuref, and Qwhole by using these relations. Figure 14 compares the

experimental values of Nuair with values estimated using this procedure. These estimations are sufficiently accurate within 610%.

When practically designing airfoil heat exchanger, conversely,

Qwhole can be estimated by using Nuref, w, and Nuair if Nuair will

be obtained by an appropriate method.

Conclusions

The heat transfer performance of two air-to-refrigerant airfoil

heat exchangers and a recirculated heat transport refrigerant was

081703-10 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014

The authors gratefully thank Professor Emeritus Toshio Nagashima, Professor Takehiro Himeno, and Professor Koji Okamoto

at the University of Tokyo, who gave us useful advice. This work

was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. 22760622.

Nomenclature

A

c

CP

d

D

Gr

h

H

k

L

LC, LG

m

M

Nu

P

Pr

Q

r

Reair

Reair,channel

Reair,nozzle

Reref

area

constant number

isobaric specific heat

distance between control volume centers

refrigerant tube inner diameter

Grashof number

heat transfer coefficient

enthalpy

thermal conductivity

refrigerant tube length

airfoil chord length, tangential spacing between airfoils leading edges

mass flow rate

Mach number

Nusselt number

pressure

Prandtl number

heat flow rate

recovery coefficient

air Reynolds number whose representative length is

airfoil chord length

air Reynolds number whose representative length is

air inlet height handled by the unit airfoil

air Reynolds number whose representative length is

nozzle hydraulic diameter

refrigerant Reynolds number whose representative

length is circular tube diameter

Transactions of the ASME

S pressure coefficient, S Ptot;air;in Pair;local =

h

i

qair;in u2air;in =2

St

T

u

W, Wfringe

x, y, z

X

temperature

velocity

airfoil width, airfoil width with both side fringes

coordinates

position to airfoil chord length, leading edge is at

X 0, trailing edge is at X 1

Parentheses

(j) variable to be calculated at jth control volume of

solid

(n) variable to be calculated at nth refrigerant section

next to jth control volume (n is either E or I)

(T, P, u) function of T, P, and u

Greek Symbols

a angle-of-attack in degrees, flow direction angle

from airfoil chord

b inlet angle in degrees, flow direction angle from

perpendicular to airfoil row

c specific heat ratio

DPloss pressure loss

DT, DTlm temperature difference, logarithmic mean temperature difference

eRA ratio of refrigerant heat capacity flow rate to air

heat capacity flow rate

g ideal overall heat transfer coefficient

h turning angle in degree

l viscosity

n incidence in degrees, flow direction angle from airfoil camber line at its leading edge

q

r

R

/air

density

solidity LC/LG

summation

air temperature

effectiveness,

/air Tair;adiabatic;in

Tair;adiabatic;out =

Tair;adiabatic;in Tref;E

/ref refrigerant

temperature

effectiveness,

/ref Tref;J Tref;E = Tair;adiabatic;in Tref;E

U variable, U 1 for eRA 1, U /ref /air =

lnf1 /air g=f1 /ref g for eRA 6 1

w correction factor of practical overall heat transfer

coefficient compared with g

Subscripts

A to J points in refrigerant flow tube in Fig. 4

adiabatic adiabatic temperature on air-contact surface in

high-speed airflow

air air or outer air-contact surface

C critical point

CO2 carbon dioxide

front front part of airfoil surface

H2O water

in inlet

i, ii, iii, iv thermocouple number

j jth control volume of solid

low lower (concave) surface

max maximum

middle middle part of airfoil surface

n nth refrigerant section next to jth control volume (n

is either E or I)

p, q, r, s neighbor control-volumes index

Journal of Heat Transfer

rear

ref

Smax

solid

tot

transition

up

whole

refrigerant or refrigerant-contact surface

maximum point of pressure coefficient S

airfoil material

total

transition point from laminar to turbulent flows

upper (convex) surface

whole airfoil

References

[1] Wilfert, G., Kriegl, B., Wald, L., and Johanssen, O., 2005, CLEANValidation of a GTF High Speed Turbine and Integration of Heat Exchanger Technology in an Environmental Friendly Engine Concept, Proceedings of 17th

International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines ISABE 2005, Munich,

ISABE-2005-1156.

[2] McDonald, C. F., Massardo, A. F., Rodgers, C., and Stone, A., 2008,

Recuperated Gas Turbine Aeroengines. Part III: Engine Concepts for Reduced

Emissions, Lower Fuel Consumption, and Noise Abatement, Aircr. Eng.

Aerosp. Technol., 80(4), pp. 408426.

[3] Rolt, A. M., and Baker, N. J., 2009, Intercooled Turbofan Engine Design and

Technology Research in the EU Framework 6 NEWAC Programme, Proceedings of 18th International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines ISABE 2009,

Montreal, ISABE-2009-1278.

[4] Ito, Y., and Nagasaki, T., 2011, Suggestion of Intercooled and Recuperated Jet

Engine Using Already Equipped Components as Heat Exchangers, Proceedings of 47th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit,

San Diego, Paper No. AIAA-2011-6102.

[5] Nealy, D. A., Gladden, H. J., Mihelc, M. S., and Hylton, L. D., 1984,

Measurements of Heat Transfer Distribution Over the Surfaces of Highly

Loaded Turbine Nozzle Guide Vanes, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbine Power,

106(1), pp. 149158.

[6] Bejan, A., 1997, Constructal-Theory Network of Conducting Paths for

Cooling a Heat Generating Volume, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 40(4), pp.

799816.

[7] Lorenzini, G., and Moretti, S., 2009, A Bejans Constructal Theory Approach

to the Overall Optimization of Heat Exchanging Finned Modules With Air in

Forced Convection and Laminar Flow Condition, ASME J. Heat Transfer,

131(8), p. 081801.

[8] Lorenzini, G., and Moretti, S., 2008, Numerical Heat Transfer Optimisation in

Modular Systems of Y-Shaped Fins, ASME J. Heat Transfer, 130(8),

p. 081801.

[9] Lorenzini, G., and Moretti, S., 2007, A CFD Application to Optimize

T-Shaped Fins: Comparisons to the Constructal Theorys Results, ASME

J. Electron. Packag., 129(3), pp. 324327.

[10] Lorenzini, G., and Moretti, S., 2009, Numerical Performance Analysis of Constructal I and Y Finned Heat Exchanging Modules, ASME J. Electron.

Packag., 131(3), p. 031012.

[11] Nishiyama, T., 1998, Yokugata Nagare Gaku, Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun Ltd.

(Business & Technology Daily News), Tokyo, p. 23 (translated as Aerodynamics of Airfoil), (in Japanese).

[12] Turner, A. B., 1971, Local Heat Transfer Measurements on a Gas Turbine

Blade, J. Mech. Eng. Sci., 13, pp. 112.

[13] Dunavant, J. C., Emery, J. C., Walch, H. C., and Westphal, W. R., 1955,

High-Speed Cascade Tests of the NACA 65-(12A10)10 and NACA 65(12A2I8b)10 Compressor Blade Sections, National Advisory Committee for

Aeronautics, Washington, DC, Report No. NACA RM L55I08.

[14] Lorenzini, G., and Moretti, S., 2011, Bejans Constructal Theory Analysis

of Gas-Liquid Cooled Finned Modules, ASME J. Heat Transfer, 133(7),

p. 071801.

[15] Liao, S. M., and Zhao, T. S., 2012, Measurements of Heat Transfer Coefficients From Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Flowing in Horizontal Mini/Micro

Channels, ASME J. Heat Transfer, 124(3), pp. 413420.

[16] Erwin, J. R., Savage, M., and Emery, J. C., 1956, Two-Dimensional LowSpeed Cascade Investigation of NACA Compressor Blade Sections Having a

Systematic Variation in Mean-Line Loading, National Advisory Committee

for Aeronautics, Washington, DC, Report No. NACA TN 3817.

[17] Ju, D. Y., 2002, Residual Stress Formation during Casting: Continuous and

Centrifugal Casting Processes, Handbook of Residual Stress and Deformation

of Steel, G. Totten, M. Howes, and T. Inoue, eds., ASM International, Materials

Park, OH, pp. 372390.

[18] Span, R., and Wagner, W., 1996, A New Equation of State for Carbon

Dioxide Covering the Fluid Region from the Triple-Point Temperature to

1100 K at Pressures up to 800 MPa, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 25(6), pp.

15091596.

[19] Vesovic, V., Wakeham, W. A., Oichowy, G. A., Sengers, J. V., Watson, J. T.

R., and Millat, J., 1990, The Transport Properties of Carbon Dioxide, J. Phys.

Chem. Ref. Data, 19(3), pp. 763808.

[20] JSME Data Book, 1983, ThermoPhysical Properties of Fluids, Japan Society of

Mechanical Engineers, Tokyo.

[21] Pinilla, V., Solano, J. P., Paniagua, G., and Anthony, R. J., 2012, Adiabatic

Wall Temperature Evaluation in a High Speed Turbine, ASME J. Heat Transfer, 134(9), p. 091601.

[22] Holman, J. P., 2009, Heat Transfer of International Edition, McGraw-Hill,

New York, pp. 2637.

[23] Marquardt, D. W., 1963, An Algorithm for Least-Squares Estimation of Nonlinear Parameters, J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math., 11(2), pp. 431441.

[24] ALGLIB, 2013, (www.alglib.net), Sergey Bochkanov.

[25] Ainley, D. G., 1953, An Experimental Single-Stage Air-Cooled Turbine, Part

II. Research on the Performance of a Type of Internally Air-Cooled Turbine

Blade, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 167, pp. 351370.

[26] Fray, D. E., and Barnes, J. F., 1965, An Experimental High-Temperature

Turbine (No. 126), Part IThe Cooling Performance of a Set of Extruded

Air-Cooled Turbine Blades, Vol. 3405, Aeronautical Research Council,

London.

[27] Hodge, R. I., 1960, A Turbine Cascade Studies, Part I and II, Vols. 492, 493,

Aeronautical Research Council, London.

[28] Wilson, D. G., and Pope, J. A., 1954, Convective Heat Transfer to Gas Turbine

Blade Surfaces, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 168, pp. 861876.

[29] Andrews, S. J., and Bradley, P. C., 1957, Heat Transfer to Turbine Blade, Vol.

294, Aeronautical Research Council, London.

[30] Freche, J. C., and Diaguila, A. J., 1950, Heat-Transfer and Operating Characteristics of Aluminum Forced-Convection Water-Cooled Single-Stage

Turbines, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, DC,

Report No. NACA RM E50D03a.

- AME 3253 Aerodynamics Practice v03.0Diunggah olehjfishryan
- FasdddDiunggah olehAvijit Karmakar
- Ce203-e s3dec18 KtuwebDiunggah olehArunima Minnu
- 256753812-Forced-convection-lab-report.pdfDiunggah olehAshtiGosine
- Experimental Investigation (STHE)Diunggah olehachmadh_2010
- Tugas Perpindahan Panas (SUprapto)Diunggah olehSuprapto To
- untitled.pdfDiunggah olehany name
- SU, Flow Analysis and Design of Three-Dimensional ContractionDiunggah olehAhmed Sabry
- AERODYNAMICSDiunggah olehPradeep Kumar
- Heat Ex ChangersDiunggah olehnagendra03
- 21712_07a.pdfDiunggah olehGaettan Katamba
- 299Diunggah olehAmit Shah
- 11-BL-introduction-2Diunggah olehmeenamanoj
- 11-BL-introduction-2.pdfDiunggah olehMd Rafid Alim
- ConvectionDiunggah olehVikneshwaran Balakrishnan
- JNTUK - Academics & Planning - M.tech (Mechanical Engineering) - Thermal Engineerign SyllabusDiunggah olehRajeswari Machiraju
- Transient Free Convective Flow over a Vertical Cone Embedded in a Thermally Stratified MediumDiunggah olehBONFRING
- Design and experimental analysis of pipe in pipe heat exchangerDiunggah olehIJMER
- sm8-116Diunggah olehSadie Hnatow
- Abstract SCLI Warwick 2Diunggah olehAnurag Sharma
- Circular CylindersDiunggah olehorz
- Me ThermalDiunggah olehFaisal Shabir
- Chapter 5 FinaleDiunggah olehMuhammad Ashman
- Lect - 17 Heat Exchanger Lecture 1 of 4 ve1.pptxDiunggah olehVivaan Sharma
- perpindahan panasDiunggah olehtogik
- Experimental Investigation of the Refrigerator CondenserDiunggah olehRoykster
- HT-UNIT-8Diunggah olehMiguel Angel Carranza Olvera
- HE163(A4)Diunggah olehRadhesh Sirohiya
- Experimental and Simulation Investigation of Pipe Tube Heat ExchangerDiunggah olehIJSTE
- OrvDiunggah olehiqtorres

- The Red SariDiunggah olehkharman101
- Land of Five Rivers - Khushwant SinghDiunggah olehrajeevkokane9211
- Alonzo Fitz - Mark TwainDiunggah olehJesus David Osuna Leyva
- 30000 BequestDiunggah olehandrij193
- Pluto Files Neil TysonDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- AutoCADDiunggah olehPanutup Botol
- A Dog's Tale - Mark TwainDiunggah olehStatusquo Statusqvo
- An Introduction to the Science of CosmologyDiunggah olehAndreea Banaga
- Maths HotsDiunggah olehAshish Sethi
- Basic Definitions of UncertaintyDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Splitting the Second, The Story of Atomic Time - T. Jones (IOP, 2000).pdfDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- IES-General-Ability-2016.pdfDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Design of an Input Filter for the Six-Pulse Bridge-libreDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Instrumentation EngineeringDiunggah olehRahul CP
- Additive Reinforced ManufacturingDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Feasibility of LipmmDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Laser Induced Plasma Micro MachiningDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- LASER INDUCED PLASMA MICROMACHININGDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- comparitive study of the religionstoday.pdfDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Reciprocating Masses 1Diunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- BoilersDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- ConclusionDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- PumpDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- In TCC the Major Product is Caustic SodaDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- ValvesDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- CompressorDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- In Plant TrainingDiunggah olehMohammed Ashique
- Abstract(Timer in Linux)Diunggah olehMohammed Ashique

- [2012] Venturi Orifice in Kaji-Semoga ID.pdfDiunggah olehWan Norain Awang Long
- G0146_02Diunggah olehwellbeingempire
- Us 4709900Diunggah olehKroze
- Introduction to Fundamental Concepts of Chemistry for Class XIDiunggah olehJaf Shah
- AttachmentDiunggah olehTarek Hareedy
- Technical Bulletins ListDiunggah olehsyed jeelani ahmed
- Us5808157 Process for Producing AromaticDiunggah olehPaulo Sérgio
- SOLUTIONS_MANUAL_Fluid_Mechanics_for_Eng.pdfDiunggah olehyuki asuna
- __ OPTION ENGG __ Liquified Petroleum GasDiunggah olehatiyorockfan9017
- Chemical ReactorsDiunggah olehSandeep Suresh
- Total Well ManagementDiunggah olehDaniel Lopez Fidalgo
- Pfeifer PumpDiunggah olehJPushkarH
- Exergy analysis of synthetic natural gas production method from biomass.pdfDiunggah olehmohammadjm2008
- QS RBI10 ReliaSoftDiunggah olehalikhanimaryam
- Board exam6.docxDiunggah olehMJ Pineda
- 21.5-Simple Kinetic Molecular Model of Matter-cie Igcse Physics Ext-Theory-msDiunggah olehmrstalib
- VELOCITY PROFILE OF NATURAL GAS.pdfDiunggah olehEuler Cauchi
- textbook-of-thermodynamic---by-epsteinpaul-s-.thuvienvatly.com.5daa9.44186.pdfDiunggah olehcuongdvo
- Chance ImageryDiunggah olehChristoph Cox
- V2 Materials Technology 2.docDiunggah olehLiya Nur Sholihah
- 10C-0043-0053 Rev B _Manual_Diunggah olehpokemon02
- Vortex Gas Separator PsDiunggah olehcesardario90
- Subject Guide - Stem - (7) General Chemistry 1 & 2Diunggah olehYlreveb Sta Ana
- 228.pdfDiunggah olehNorman Iskandar
- Dynsim LNG Main Cryogenic Heat Exchanger ValidationDiunggah olehAshok S. Pathak
- Gen Air TestDiunggah olehlrpatra
- syllabusDiunggah olehiuhgihugriouherw
- Two-Phase Flow Behavior and Spinner Data Analysis in Geothermal Wells.pdfDiunggah olehWisnu Ardhi
- Absorción de CO2Diunggah olehLaura RD
- Ch 01-02 Res Sim Overview OverheadsDiunggah olehPomto Jaya

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.