Hwang2012 PDF
Hwang2012 PDF
Hwang2012 PDF
www.springerlink.com/content/1738-494x
DOI 10.1007/s12206-012-0702-2
CFD analysis of fin tube heat exchanger with a pair of delta winglet
vortex generators†
Seong Won Hwang1, Dong Hwan Kim1, June Kee Min2 and Ji Hwan Jeong1,*
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, Pusan National University ,30 Jangjeon-Dong, Geumjeong-Gu, Busan 609-735, Korea
2
Rolls-Royce University Technology Center, Pusan National University, 30 Jangjeon-Dong, Geumjeong-Gu, Busan 609-735, Korea
(Manuscript Received June 19, 2011; Revised March 29, 2012; Accepted April 16, 2012)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract
Among tubular heat exchangers, fin-tube types are the most widely used in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. Efforts to en-
hance the performance of these heat exchangers included variations in the fin shape from a plain fin to a slit and louver type. In the con-
text of heat transfer augmentation, the performance of vortex generators has also been investigated. Delta winglet vortex generators have
recently attracted research interest, partly due to experimental data showing that their addition to fin-tube heat exchangers considerably
reduces pressure loss at heat transfer capacity of nearly the same level. The efficiency of the delta winglet vortex generators widely varies
depending on their size and shape, as well as the locations where they are implemented. In this paper, the flow field around delta winglet
vortex generators in a common flow up arrangement was analyzed in terms of flow characteristics and heat transfer using computational
fluid dynamics methods. Flow mixing due to vortices and delayed separation due to acceleration influence the overall fin performance.
The fin with delta winglet vortex generators exhibited a pressure loss lower than that of a plain fin, and the heat transfer performance was
enhanced at high air velocity or Reynolds number.
Keywords: Fin-tube heat exchanger; Plate and fin tube; Delta winglet; Vortex generators; Flow separation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10% increase of the f-factor for the 2, 4, and 5-row heat ex-
changers. For the 3-row heat exchanger, however, the f-factor
dramatically decreased by 30%–50%. This was attributed to
the effects of vortices, which were produced at the first row of
the tube but did not reach the fourth and fifth rows.
Kwak et al. [8] investigated the effect of the number of
DWVG rows, as well as measured the heat transfer capacity
and pressure drop of staggered array fin-tube heat exchangers
that were identical except for the number of DWVG rows.
(a) (b) The heat exchanger with a single DWVG row experienced
10%–30% larger heat transfer capacity and 34%–55% less
Fig. 1. Vortex generator configuration: (a) common flow up; (b) com-
pressure drop than the heat exchanger without the DWVG.
mon flow down.
For the heat exchanger with two DWVG rows, however, heat
transfer capacity and the pressure drop increased by 6%–15%
Jacobi and Shah [5] reviewed previous works until the early and by 61%–117%, respectively, compared with the heat ex-
1990s. They explained physical phenomena and vortex char- changer with a single DWVG row. The DWVG in the second
acteristics associated with vortex generators on a fin as well as row obstructed and decelerated the air flow to produce an
introduced experiments and analysis on the performance of additional pressure drop.
heat exchangers with vortex generators. They categorized Recently, Joardar and Jacobi [9] investigated the effect of
active and passive methods of vortex generation. Active the number of DWVG rows in the inline array fin-tube heat
methods generate vortices using external energy, such as elec- exchangers. Single and three DWVG fin tube heat exchangers
tric or acoustic fields, mechanical device, or surface vibration. were compared with a plain fin tube heat exchanger. The
Passive methods generate vortices through structures and ad- DWVG was placed in a common flow up configuration. For
ditional fluids. Regardless of method, vortex generators en- the single DWVG, the heat transfer coefficient was enhanced
hance heat transfer and simultaneous pressure drop due to by 16.5%–44% as pressure drop increased by less than 12%.
form loss. The vortex generator has the interesting characteris- For the case of three DWVG rows, the heat transfer coeffi-
tic of having a small pressure loss compared with other inter- cient was augmented by 29.9%–68.8% as the pressure drop
rupted fin designs. As such, most previous works focused on penalty increased 26% at Re = 960 and 87.5% at Re = 220.
quantifying the improvement of heat transfer performance and DWVG arrays can significantly enhance the performance of
additional pressure drop characteristics. fin tube heat exchangers with flow depths and fin densities
Fiebig et al. [6] experimentally studied heat transfer per- typical of those used in air-cooling and refrigeration applica-
formance in a channel with vortex generators in a common tions.
flow down configuration. The DWVG increases convective Allison and Dally [10] similarly examined the performance
heat transfer by developing a boundary layer, swirl, or vortices, of the DWVG in flat fin tube heat exchangers, and compared
as well as through flow destabilization or turbulence intensifi- the performance of two fin types. The first is a plain fin with a
cation. The delta winglet enhances heat transfer more than a DWVG and the second is a louvered fin. The DWVG were
rectangular winglet. The highest heat transfer coefficient was installed in a common flow up configuration. The j- and f-
obtained at a 45° attack angle, which is defined as the angle factors of the heat exchanger with the DWVG were 87% and
between the flow direction and vortex generators. The effects 53%, respectively, of the heat exchangers with a louver fin.
of the vortex generators on fin-tube heat exchangers were Researchers also investigated the performance of DWVG fins
similarly experimentally investigated. The DWVG were in- through numerical analyses.
stalled onto 3-row fin-tube heat exchangers in a common flow Min and Xu [11] numerically evaluated and compared the
down configuration. The staggered and inline effects of tube performances of a plain, DWVG, and louver fins incorporated
arrays on the thermal-hydraulic performance of the DWVG in a flat tube heat exchanger. When compared with the heat
were compared. At nearly the same heat transfer coefficient, t exchanger with a plain fin, that with a louver fin had a heat
he f-factor of the staggered array was smaller than that of the transfer capacity of about 114.1%–139.1% with a pressure
inline array in a range of Re > 1300. The DWVG can reduce drop penalty of 163.9%–171.7%. In the case of the DWVG fin
the size and mass of a heat exchanger for a given heat load. heat exchangers, heat transfer capacity was about 46.5%–
Kwak et al. [7] measured the heat transfer coefficient and 74.1% and the pressure drop was 46.1%–49.7%. The signifi-
pressure drop in 2, 3, 4, and 5-row fin-tube heat exchangers cant variation in pressure drop could be attributed to the lou-
with a common flow up configuration DWVG in a range of ver fin undergoing flow decay at each slit, whereas the winglet
280 < Re < 2400. The DWVG were only mounted on the first fin had no flow decay.
row. Compared with heat exchangers with plain fins, those The above brief review shows that previous research mainly
with DWVG fins showed a 10% increase in heat transfer per- focused on the quantitative and qualitative effects of vortex
formance of the j-factor for all heat exchangers, and a 0%– generators on pressure drop and heat transfer performance,
S. W. Hwang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 26 (9) (2012) 2949~2958 2951
through either experimental or numerical approach. Vortex Table 1. Heat exchanger geometric data.
generators were verified to enhance heat transfer. However,
Notation Meaning Value
the pressure drop penalty was less consistent, reflecting a lack
L Length (m) 0.0254
of phenomenological understanding of how vortex generators
W Width (m) 0.021
influence the heat transfer performance and pressure drop,
because few research investigated this underlying mechanism. D Tube diameter (m) 0.008
Thus, the present work aims to deepen the understanding on tth Fin thickness (m) 0.0015
H Fin pitch (m) 0.00123
the DWVG enhancement of heat transfer performance with a
Wl Winglet length (m) 0.00565
relatively small, or even reduced, pressure drop penalty. In-
formation on the fluid flow and heat transfer in a fin-tube heat Wh Winglet height (m) 0.011
exchanger with DWVG was obtained through computational a Attack angle (°) 15
fluid dynamics (CFD). b Central angle (°) 110
Distance between tube and
g 0.001
2. Numerical modeling and analysis winglet (m)
∂
( ρ ui ) = 0 (1)
∂xi
where m& , Ac, Afin, Tin, Tout, Tc, and Q represent the mass flow
rate, fin collar area, fin surface area, maximum velocity, inlet
air temperature, outlet air mean temperature, fin collar tem-
perature, and total heat transfer rate, respectively. Tin is con-
stant because we set it as a boundary condition at the entrance.
However, Tout varies over the cross-sectional plane at the exit
(a) because it is influenced by heat transfer and fluid flow. An
area average value was used in this work and is given as fol-
lows:
Tout =
∫ u TdA f
(7)
∫ u dA f
(a)
Fig. 4. Validation result with Wang et al.’s [17] correlation.
fv D
S= (10)
u
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. Velocity vector plot of vertical section (Re = 1295, Vmax = 8.07 m/s): (a) velocity vector plots nearby tube; (b) velocity vector plot on a cross
section with the DWVG.
(a) (b)
Fig. 7. Static pressure contour at mid-plane and the adverse pressure gradient point on the cylinder (Re = 1295, Vmax = 8.07 m/s): (a) Plain fin tube
heat exchanger; (b) DWVG fin tube heat exchanger.
(a) (b)
Fig. 8. Static pressure contour at mid-plane and the adverse pressure gradient point on the cylinder (Re = 5180, Vmax = 32.3 m/s): (a) Plain fin tube
heat exchanger; (b) DWVG fin tube heat exchanger.
m/s. Fig. 8(a) shows the case of the plain fin, where the ad- larly occurs at a smaller angle compared with that of air veloc-
verse pressure gradient point shifted to the front compared ity at 5 m/s depicted in Fig. 7(b). However, the size of wake
with that for a frontal air velocity of 5 m/s. The wake region region is smaller than that of the plain fin, proving that the
thus widened and elongated. Fig. 8(b) shows the case of a effect of DWVG is still advantageous.
DWVG fin, where the adverse pressure gradient point simi- Fig. 9 shows the temperature distribution of air when its
S. W. Hwang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 26 (9) (2012) 2949~2958 2955
(a) (b)
Fig. 9. Air temperature at mid-plane (Re = 1295, Vmax = 8.07 m/s): (a) Plain fin tube heat exchanger; (b) DWVG fin tube heat exchanger.
(a) (b)
Fig. 10. Fin surface temperature (Re = 1295, Vmax = 8.07 m/s): (a) Plain fin tube heat exchanger; (b) DWVG fin tube heat exchanger.
frontal velocity is 5 m/s. This plot represents the mid-plane Fig. 10 shows the surface temperature distributions of the
between two adjacent fins. Fig. 9(a) shows that in the plain fin DWVG and plain fins. Both corners of the front end show low
heat exchanger, the temperature of the wake region is signifi- temperatures due to the higher heat transfer rate, which is
cantly higher than that of the free-stream air flowing outside. caused by the higher velocity compared to the central region.
This indicates that the free-stream air and the air in the wake As the location becomes closer to the tube, the fin surface
region do not mix well, which is caused by the swirling char- temperature rises due to heat conduction through the fin itself.
acteristic of the wake as shown in the velocity vector plot of Moving away from the tube, the surface temperature declines
Fig. 5. When the DWVG are mounted on the plain fin, how- and the air velocity rises. As noted above, the heat transfer
ever, this high temperature region is reduced, as previously performance in the wake region is poor. Consequently, the fin
mentioned and shown in Fig. 9(b). The contour pattern of the surface temperature appears high at the rear of the heat trans-
air temperature distribution is quite similar to the velocity fer tubes.
vector plot shown in Fig. 5. The similarity is because the air Fig. 11 shows that this high temperature region extends to-
temperature is directly associated with convective heat trans- ward the rear end of the fin. The temperature levels around the
fer, which is controlled by the air flow itself. Early research second row tubes of the plain and DWVG fin are quite similar.
proved that the convective heat transfer is a function of Rey- However, those around the first row tubes are largely different
nolds number (Re) and Prandtl number (Pr), which explains due to the DWVG influence. The temperature level at the
the greater uniformity of the air temperature distribution of the back of the first row tube of the DWVG fin is lower than that
DWVG fin heat exchanger in Fig. 10(b), compared with that of the plain fin, because the DWVG reduced the wake region
of the plain fin heat exchanger. Fig. 11 provides a clear illus- and facilitated air mixing, causing an enhanced heat transfer.
tration through the plot of the temperature and velocity varia- Considering these observations, the DWVG can enhance con-
tion along the central line and across the second row of the vective heat transfer over a fin by reducing the wake region.
tube. Fig. 11 shows that the DWVG causes a flatter tempera- Fundamental thermodynamic variables, the values of which
ture and velocity profiles at the rear of the heat transfer tube. are obtained via CFD analyses, are related with system pa-
2956 S. W. Hwang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 26 (9) (2012) 2949~2958
Fig. 11. Temperature and velocity of air along the line between the Fig. 13. Comparison of f-and j-factor ratios.
tubes of the 2nd row.
Acknowledgement
Fig. 14. Comparison of area goodness factor.
This work was supported by a 2-year research grant from
the Pusan National University.
Nomenclature------------------------------------------------------------------------
a : Attack angle (°)
Ac : Area of fin collar (m2)
Amin : Area of minimum air flow (m2)
Af : Area of frontal air flow (m2)
Afin : Area of fin (m2)
b : Central angle (°)
Cf : Friction coefficient
Cp : Static pressure specific heat (kj/kg*K)
D : Tube diameter (m)
Fig. 15. Comparison of volume goodness factor. Dc : Characteristic length (m)
f : Fanning friction factor
represented by the heat transfer rate and pumping power per fv : Vortex shedding frequency (Hz)
unit area, and is expressed as: g : Between tube and winglet gap (m)
h : Heat transfer rate (w/m2*k)
St H : Fin pitch (m)
Volume goodness factor = . (12)
f 1/ 3 j : Colburn j factor
k : Conductivity (W/m*K)
In Fig. 15, a high volume goodness factor needs a small L : Length of heat exchanger (m)
volume to show the same performance in terms of heat trans- P : Pressure (pa)
fer rate [18]. Using the DWVG causes a high volume good- Q : Total heat flow (w)
ness factor. Consequently, a smaller volume is required for the t : Time (s)
same pumping power. tth : Thickness (m)
T : Temperature (K)
Tc : Temperature of fin collar (K)
4. Concluding remarks Tin : Inlet mean temperature (K)
In the past decade, numerous studies investigated the effect Tout : Outlet mean temperature (K)
of vortex generators on the heat transfer of fins. While the u : Velocity of x-axis (m/s)
vortex generators were consistently reported to enhance the U : Frontal fluid velocity (m/s)
heat transfer performance, the pressure loss measurements did v : Velocity of y-axis (m/s)
not yield agreement. Despite significant research in this area, a Vin : Frontal inlet velocity (m/s)
lack of understanding remains on the mechanisms contribut- Vmax : Maximum velocity (m/s)
ing to heat transfer augmentation and a limited increase in W : Width of heat exchanger (m)
pressure loss. In the present work, the air flow and heat trans- Wh : Winglet height (m)
fer in a fin-tube heat exchanger were analyzed using the CFD Wl : Winglet length (m)
to obtain a better phenomenological understanding of the ef- α : Thermal diffusivity (m2/s)
fects of the delta winglet vortex generator on fin performance. µ : Dynamic viscosity (N*s/m2)
2958 S. W. Hwang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 26 (9) (2012) 2949~2958