Investigation of dimpled fins for heat transfer enhancement in compact heat exchangers

• Published in: International journal of heat and mass transfer Vol. 51; no. 11; pp. 2950 - 2966
• Main Authors: Elyyan, Mohammad A., Rozati, Ali, Tafti, Danesh K.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Elsevier Ltd 01.06.2008; Elsevier
• Subjects: Applied sciences; Compact heat exchangers; Devices using thermal energy; Dimples; Energy; Energy. Thermal use of fuels; Exact sciences and technology; Heat exchangers (included heat transformers, condensers, cooling towers); LES; Compact heat exchangers; Dimples; LES; Nusselt number; Large eddy simulation; Pipe flow; Pressure drop; Heat exchanger; Vorticity; Compact heat exchanger; Numerical simulation; Indentation; Modeling; Turbulence structure; Heat transfer
• ISSN: 0017-9310; 1879-2189
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2007.09.013

Direct and Large-Eddy simulations are conducted in a fin bank with dimples and protrusions over a Reynolds number range of Re H = 200 to 15,000, encompassing laminar, transitional and fully turbulent regimes. Two dimple-protrusion geometries are studied in which the same imprint pattern is investigated for two different channel heights or fin pitches, Case 1 with twice the fin pitch of Case 2. The smaller fin pitch configuration (Case 2) develops flow instabilities at Re H = 450, whereas Case 1 undergoes transition at Re H = 900. Case 2, exhibits higher Nusselt numbers and friction coefficients in the low Reynolds number regime before Case 1 transitions to turbulence, after which, the differences between the two decreases considerably in the fully turbulent regime. Vorticity generated within the dimple cavity and at the dimple rim contribute substantially to heat transfer augmentation on the dimple side, whereas flow impingement and acceleration between protrusions contribute substantially on the protrusion side. While friction drag dominates losses in Case 1 at low Reynolds numbers, both form and friction drag contributed equally in Case 2. As the Reynolds number increases to fully turbulent flow, form drag dominates in both cases, contributing about 80% to the total losses. While both geometries are viable and competitive with other augmentation surfaces in the turbulent regime, Case 2 with larger feature sizes with respect to the fin pitch is more appropriate in the low Reynolds number regime Re H < 2000, which makes up most of the operating range of typical compact heat exchangers.