0
Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications | Volume 3 | Issue 2 | Research Paper
Research Papers

Transient Heat Exchanger Response With Pressure Regulated Outflow

[+] Author and Article Information
P. Regulagadda

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,  University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON, L1H 7K4, CanadaPrashant.Regulagadda@uoit.ca

G. F. Naterer

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,  University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON, L1H 7K4, CanadaGreg.Naterer@uoit.ca

I. Dincer

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,  University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON, L1H 7K4, CanadaIbrahim.Dincer@uoit.ca

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 3(2), 021008 (Jul 29, 2011) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004009 History: Received November 23, 2010; Revised April 01, 2011; Published July 29, 2011; Online July 29, 2011
Article
References
Figures

This paper analyzes the thermal performance of a co-current flow heat exchanger with transient gas outflow. The temperature distributions of the working fluid, heating fluid, and the wall over the length of the heat exchanger are predicted by an integral formulation. The heat transfer rates are determined at various stages of the heat exchanger operation. An integral formulation of the nondimensionalized governing equations is solved numerically, using a time-marching algorithm. The temperature distributions of the working fluid and the wall have an exponential increase from the inlet to the outlet of the heat exchanger. The heating fluid shows an initial decrease and subsequent increase of temperature. A base model for the step change in the mass flow of the working fluid is developed and compared against past data for purposes of validation. In addition, results are presented and discussed for the time-varying performance, during pressure regulated gas outflow from the heat exchanger.
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Nojumi, H., Dincer, I., and Naterer, G. F., 2009, “Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment of Hydrogen and Kerosene-Fuelled Aircraft Propulsion,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 34 , pp. 1363–1369.  [CrossRef]
2
Das, S. K., and Murugesan, K., 2000, “Transient Response of Multipass Plate Heat Exchangers With Axial Thermal Dispersion in Fluid,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 43 , pp. 4327–4345.  [CrossRef]
3
Abdhelghani-Idrissi, M. A., Bagui, F., and Estel, L., 2001, “Analytical and Experimental Response Time to Flow Rate Step Change Along a Counterflow Double Pipe Heat Exchanger,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 44 , pp. 3721–3730.  [CrossRef]
4
Dincer, I., 1995, “Transient Heat Transfer Analysis in Air Cooling of Individual Spherical Products,” J. Food Eng., 26 , pp. 453–467.  [CrossRef]
5
Naterer, G. F, and Lam, C. H., 2006, “Transient Response of Two-Phase Heat Exchanger With Varying Convection Coefficient,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 128 , pp. 953–962.  [CrossRef]
6
Al-Nimir, M. A., 1998, “Transient Response of Finite Wall Capacitance Heat Exchanger With Phase Change,” Heat Transfer Eng., 19 (1), pp. 42–52.  [CrossRef]
7
Dilsiz, R., and Devres, Y. O., 2008, “Graphical Solution of the Transient Heat Transfer Problem,” "Proceedings of Numerical Analysis and Applied Mathematics, International Conference", pp. 855–858
8
Yin, J., and Jensen, M. K., 2003, “Analytical Model for Transient Heat Exchanger Response,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 46 , pp. 3255–3264.  [CrossRef]
9
Armstrong, A., Haseen, F., Marnoch, I., Weston, J., Naterer, G. F., Lu.L., and RosenM. A., 2008, “Thermodynamic Optimization and Control of a Marnoch Thermal Energy Conversion Device,” Technical Report No. 08-2008, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Canada.
10
Marnoch, I., Naterer, G. F., Rosen, M. A., and Weston, J., 2008, “Engine Performance for Multiple Pressure Vessel Configurations,” "International Conference on Efficiency, Cost Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems", Istanbul, Turkey.
11
Jang, J. H., and Yan, W. M., 2004, “Transient Analysis of Heat and Mass Transfer by Natural Convection Over a Vertical Wavy Surface,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 47 , pp. 3695–3705.  [CrossRef]
12
Kang, K. H., and Chang, S. H., 2009, “Experimental Study on the Heat Transfer Characteristics During the Pressure Transients Under Supercritical Pressures,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 52 , pp. 4946–4955.  [CrossRef]
13
Malinowski, L., and Bielski, S., 2009, “Transient Temperature Field in a Parallel-Flow Three-Fluid Heat Exchanger with the Thermal Capacitance of the Walls and the Longitudinal Walls Conduction,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 29 , pp. 877–883.  [CrossRef]
14
Al-Nimr, M. A., 1998, “Dynamic Thermal Behaviour of Cooling Towers,” Energy Convers. Manage., 39 (7), pp. 631–636.  [CrossRef]
15
Alkam, M., and Al-Nimr, M. A., 1999, “Solar Collectors with Tubes Partially Filled With Porous Substrate,” ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng., 121 , pp. 20–24.  [CrossRef]
16
Alkam, M. K., and Al-Nimr, M. A., 1999, “Improving the Performance of Double-Pipe Heat Exchangers by Using Porous Substrates,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 42 , pp. 3609–3618.  [CrossRef]
17
Al-Nimr, M. A., Maqapleh, A. M., Khadrawi, A. F., and Ammourah, S. A., 2009, “Fully Developed Thermal Behaviors for Parallel Flow Microchannel Heat Exchanger,” Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer, 36 , pp. 385–390.  [CrossRef]
18
Roetzel, W., and Lou, X., 2003, “Dynamic Behaviour of Multistream Plate-Fin Heat Exchangers,” "International Conference on Energy and Environment", Shanghai, Vol. 1 , pp. 869–876.
19
Cui, G., Ma, H., Li, M., Luo, X., and Roetzel, W., 2003, “Analytical and Experimental Research on Transient Response Characteristics of Heat Exchangers,” "International Conference on Energy and Environment", Shanghai, Vol. 1 , pp. 916–921.
20
Roetzel, W., Li, M., and Luo, X., 2002, “Dynamic Behaviour of Heat Exchangers,” Comput. Studies, 4 , pp. 451–460.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
+Schematic of the heat exchanger
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Schematic of the heat exchanger
Figure 1

Schematic of the heat exchanger

Grahic Jump Location
+Schematic for the analytical model of the heat exchanger
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Schematic for the analytical model of the heat exchanger
Figure 2

Schematic for the analytical model of the heat exchanger

Grahic Jump Location
+Validation results for (a) Tf*vs.x*forN1=700,N20=10,N30=1.0,γ=0.4 and (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=700,N20=10,N30=1.0,γ=0.4
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Validation results for (a) Tf*vs.x*forN1=700,N20=10,N30=1.0,γ=0.4 and (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=700,N20=10,N30=1.0,γ=0.4
Figure 3

Validation results for (a) Tf*vs.x*forN1=700,N20=10,N30=1.0,γ=0.4 and (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=700,N20=10,N30=1.0,γ=0.4

Grahic Jump Location
+Laminar flow results for (a) Tf*vs.x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Laminar flow results for (a) Tf*vs.x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4
Figure 4

Laminar flow results for (a) Tf*vs.x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4

Grahic Jump Location
+Turbulent flow results for (a) Tf* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4 (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,30=6.0,γ=0.4
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Turbulent flow results for (a) Tf* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4 (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,30=6.0,γ=0.4
Figure 5

Turbulent flow results for (a) Tf* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4 (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,N30=6.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=6.0,30=6.0,γ=0.4

Grahic Jump Location
+Laminar flow results for (a) Tf* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4, (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Laminar flow results for (a) Tf* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4, (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4
Figure 6

Laminar flow results for (a) Tf* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4, (b) Tw* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4, and (c) Th* vs. x*forN1=300,N20=9.0,N30=9.0,γ=0.4

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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 Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Completing the Picture
Air Engines> Chapter 11
Thermodynamic Performance
Closed-Cycle Gas Turbines> Chapter 6
Scope of Section I, Organization, and Service Limits
Power Boilers> Chapter 1
Pool Boiling
Thermal Management of Microelectronic Equipment, Second Edition
Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline Design & Construction: A Practical Approach, Third Edition> Chapter 3
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
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
Sign In