920 Words4 Pages

Table. 1 Design Consideration
Parameter Rectangular fin Triangular fin Trapezoidal fin
Length of the fin 150 mm 150 mm 150 mm
Breadth of the fin 75 mm 75 mm 75 mm
Base Thick. of the fin 3 mm 3 mm 3 mm
Tip Thick. of the fin 3 mm 0.5 mm 1.5 mm
Material Aluminium
Height of notch 20 mm 20 mm 20 mm
Length of notch 30 mm 30 mm 30 mm
Table. 1, gives the design dimentions of the three types of fins used in the experiment. For the present experiment four fins are arranged in an array format and the heat transfer rates for these fin arrays are calculated. The experimental result is then compared with the CFD result odtained by the ANSYS software.
4. Experimental Setup
The earlier studies have proved that there is better improvement in the fin performance*…show more content…*

Here five thermocouples are used to measure the heat from the fin to the temperature indicator. After some time natural convection takes place in the fin arrays. The temperatureT1, T2, T3, T4, T5 are calculated, where T1 indicate the base plate temperature, T2, T3, T4, T5 are the fin tip temperatures. One end of the thermocouple is connected to the fins and other end is connected to the thermal indicator. The heater tempetureand the base temperature is maintained as 333K (60º C). This experiment is done for all the three type of fin arrays and the corresponding tempetature values are noted. The average value is taken for the three fin structures and the heat transfer coefficient is calculated. After that the result is compared with the CFD result. 4.2 Meshed Model Relevance centre: Fine Min. Edge length: 2.0906e-004 m Nodes: 36659 Elements: 17704 Figure. 6 Meshed model Next all the three types of fin arrays are designed and simulated in the ANSYS CFD software. The meshing of the fin arrays in the ANSYS softwatre is shown in Fig. 6. The simulated results are then compared with the experimental results. 5. Results And Validation 5.1 Temperature Distribution In Rectangular Fin Figure. 7 Temperature distribution in rectangular fin Value : Temperature Maximum : 60º C Minimum : 43.896 º*…show more content…*

9 shows the temperature distribution on the trapezoidal fin array system. From the above results the fin tip temperature was found to be nearly 43 º C. Figure. 10 Experimental heat transfer Figure. 11 Computational heat transfer coefficient values for three fins coefficient values for three fins The experimental values of the three fin arrays are given in the graph above (Fig. 10). Triangular cross section fin array has the maximum heat transfer coefficient, followed by the trapezoidal and then the regular rectangular fin array. The ANSYS results shown in Fig. 11 done using the CFD coreleates the experimental results analysis. The comparison of both the experimental and computational results are given in the Fg. 12. Figure. 12 Comparision of heat transfer coefficient 6. Concluion From the above software analysis and experimental results we can conclude that the heat transfer coefficient is maximum in case of triangular fins, followed by trapezoidal fins and last followed by rectangle fins with triangular notch. The above results are verified by both experimental and computational procedure. The same methodology of experimental investigation and computational analysis can be used for further studies of different types of fins and

Here five thermocouples are used to measure the heat from the fin to the temperature indicator. After some time natural convection takes place in the fin arrays. The temperatureT1, T2, T3, T4, T5 are calculated, where T1 indicate the base plate temperature, T2, T3, T4, T5 are the fin tip temperatures. One end of the thermocouple is connected to the fins and other end is connected to the thermal indicator. The heater tempetureand the base temperature is maintained as 333K (60º C). This experiment is done for all the three type of fin arrays and the corresponding tempetature values are noted. The average value is taken for the three fin structures and the heat transfer coefficient is calculated. After that the result is compared with the CFD result. 4.2 Meshed Model Relevance centre: Fine Min. Edge length: 2.0906e-004 m Nodes: 36659 Elements: 17704 Figure. 6 Meshed model Next all the three types of fin arrays are designed and simulated in the ANSYS CFD software. The meshing of the fin arrays in the ANSYS softwatre is shown in Fig. 6. The simulated results are then compared with the experimental results. 5. Results And Validation 5.1 Temperature Distribution In Rectangular Fin Figure. 7 Temperature distribution in rectangular fin Value : Temperature Maximum : 60º C Minimum : 43.896 º

9 shows the temperature distribution on the trapezoidal fin array system. From the above results the fin tip temperature was found to be nearly 43 º C. Figure. 10 Experimental heat transfer Figure. 11 Computational heat transfer coefficient values for three fins coefficient values for three fins The experimental values of the three fin arrays are given in the graph above (Fig. 10). Triangular cross section fin array has the maximum heat transfer coefficient, followed by the trapezoidal and then the regular rectangular fin array. The ANSYS results shown in Fig. 11 done using the CFD coreleates the experimental results analysis. The comparison of both the experimental and computational results are given in the Fg. 12. Figure. 12 Comparision of heat transfer coefficient 6. Concluion From the above software analysis and experimental results we can conclude that the heat transfer coefficient is maximum in case of triangular fins, followed by trapezoidal fins and last followed by rectangle fins with triangular notch. The above results are verified by both experimental and computational procedure. The same methodology of experimental investigation and computational analysis can be used for further studies of different types of fins and

Related

## Fluid Flow Literature Review

1095 Words | 5 PagesRahul Kharat, Nitin Bhardwaj*, R.S. Jha have developed a correlation of heat transfer coefficient for helical coil heat exchanger to take into account of experimental and CFD results of different functional dependent variables such as gap between the concentric coil, tube diameter and coil diameter which strongly effects the heat treansfer within error band of 3-4%. The heat transfer coefficient is validated for a wide range of Reynolds number from 20,000 and 1,50,000 and specific ratio is from 0.55 to 2.25 that covers the most engineering helical coil heat exchanger

## Directive Heat Transfer Lab Report

828 Words | 4 PagesQ_conv=hA*(T_wire-T_∞ ) Where Qconv is the rate of heat transfer, Twire -T∞ denote the temperature difference between the wire and its surroundings, A, is surface area of the wire, and h is the coefficient of heat transfer (Armstrong p.5). The latter varies depending on the interaction between the surrounding air and the heated surface, and varies from 0.5 – 1000 W/m2K in air (forced and free). Radiative Heat Transfer The energy emitted, Eb, varies proportionately with the fourth power of temperature, T, of the radiator’s surface, as follows: E_b = ∂T^4 Where: Ԑ is the emissivity of the material, which indicates how a material compares to a “blackbody”; ∂ = 5.67e-8W/m2K4= Stefan-Boltzmann constant. Thus, equation [8] can be rewritten as: E_b = ԐT^4 The rate of radiative heat loss also varies proportionately with the surface area, A, of the radiating surface, and is expressed as follows: Q_rad = Ԑ*Ϭ*A(T_wire-T_∞^4 ) Equation [11] below illustrates the final energy balance equation that describes the temperature of the wire a function of varied parameters. mc dT/dt=i^2 R- ∂ԐA_s (T_wire^4-T_∞^4 )-hA_s

## Steam Ejector

1742 Words | 7 PagesWhen Te = 15 °C, the cooling capacity decreased first and then increased with the generating temperatures ranging from 40 °C to 70 °C. This variation tendency is similar to that when Te = 10 °C. The worst performance occurred when the generating temperature was 65 °C, which was 720.3 W. In Fig. 5, it also can be seen that the critical condensing temperature when Te = 15 °C is a little higher than that when Te = 10 °C in most cases. The maximum difference between the two conditions is 3.7 °C when Tg = 55

## Calorimetry Lab Report

747 Words | 3 PagesI. Introduction This experiment uses calorimetry to measure the specific heat of a metal. Calorimetry is used to observe and measure heat flow between two substances. The heat flow is measured as it travels from a higher temperature to a lower one. Specific heat is an amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one gram of anything one degree Celsius.

## Mole Ratios In A Chemical Reaction Lab

775 Words | 4 Pages3. Plot your data to create two lines with an intersection on a graph. Repeat any measurements that do not fall near the best-fit line. From the intersection, calculate the mole ratio of the reactants. Data Table: Experiment ml NaClO ml Solution B Temperature of Precipitate (degrees) 1 5 45 27.0 2 15 35 35.0 3 25 25 44.0 4 30 20 49.0 5 35 15 52.0 6 40 10 46.5 7 50 0 24.0 8 45 5 22.0 9 43 7 21.0 Graph: I eliminated the last two data points because it was making my graph weird.

## Thermometer Essay

1195 Words | 5 Pagesiii. The readings of the two thermometers should, as far as possible, be taken simultaneously, and it should be ascertained that the wet bulb is receiving a sufficient water supply (WMO, 2008). The relative humidity was calculated using the following formulae by de Laaat and Savenije (2015); es = 0.6108e(17.27Ta)/(237.3+Ta) ed = es – γ(Tdry-Twet) Where es Saturation vapour pressure for air temperature at 2m height in kPa Ta 24 hour mean temperature in 0C γ is the psychometric constant = 0.067kPa.0C-1 at sea level The sling or whirl psychrometer A small portable type of whirling or sling psychrometer consists of two mercury-in-glass thermometers mounted on a sturdy frame, which is provided with a handle and spindle,

## 6.03 Calorimetry Lab

848 Words | 4 Pages41.7 °C and 40.2 ° C 40-50 °C 4. 50 °C and 48 ° C 50-60 °C Average temperatures: (37.8+36.3)/2=37.05 °C (41.7+40.2)/2=40.95 °C (50+48)/2=49 °C Table 1 -The values of experiment Temperature (°C) Density (kg/m3) 26.5 995 37.05 992.5 40.95 991 49 990 70 984.856 80 982.524 90 980.272 100 977.93 Table 2. The values in steam table Temperature (°C) Density (kg/m3) 26.5 997 37.05 993 40.95

## Fp Emulsion Lab Report

813 Words | 4 Pages2.5.2 Apparent properties of FP emulsion The apparent properties of the FP emulsion were determined via simple observations and tests. 2.5.3 Zeta potential and particle size Zetasizer Nano ZS particle size analyzer (Malvern, UK) was used to measure the zeta potential, particle size, and the distribution of the FP emulsion. The particle size range of the microsphere was 5– 10 µm, and the microspheres should have good stability in the emulsion without coagulation. 2.5.4 Thermal property analysis 5 mg FP emulsion film sample was weighted, and the thermal property was analyzed using a Q500 thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA) (TA Co., USA), in the temperature range 30–80 °C at a heating rate of 10 °C/min in nitrogen atmosphere. 2.5.5 Atomic force probe scanning microscope (AFM) observation Small amount of FP

## Paraffin Wax Lab Report

1752 Words | 8 PagesSpecific heat of the paraffin wax (Cp₁) = 2.14 kJ/kg K 3. Paraffin wax melting temperature (T₁) = 60°C 4. Latent heat of melting (H) = 190 kJ/kg Specifications: 1. Room temperature (T₂) = 20°C 2. Heat transfer coefficient (h) = 5 W/ (m2K) 3.

## Calorimeter, Metals

819 Words | 4 PagesWe then take the sample out of the water and immediately wipe it thoroughly, after which it is placed in the calorimeter with tap water. We then stir the water around the sample in order to quickly attain thermal equilibrium. We record the final temperature once thermal equilibrium of water and the sample together is attained. We then repeat the said steps but then with the other

### Fluid Flow Literature Review

1095 Words | 5 Pages### Directive Heat Transfer Lab Report

828 Words | 4 Pages### Steam Ejector

1742 Words | 7 Pages### Calorimetry Lab Report

747 Words | 3 Pages### Mole Ratios In A Chemical Reaction Lab

775 Words | 4 Pages### Thermometer Essay

1195 Words | 5 Pages### 6.03 Calorimetry Lab

848 Words | 4 Pages### Fp Emulsion Lab Report

813 Words | 4 Pages### Paraffin Wax Lab Report

1752 Words | 8 Pages### Calorimeter, Metals

819 Words | 4 Pages