0
Research Papers

Heat Transfer and Pressure Investigation of Dimple Impingement

[+] Author and Article Information
K. Kanokjaruvijit

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Naresuan University, Muang, Pitsanulok, 65000 Thailandkoonlaya@gmail.com

R. F. Martinez-Botas

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UKrmbotas@imperial.ac.uk

J. Turbomach 130(1), 011003 (Dec 14, 2007) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2220048 History: Received October 01, 2004; Revised February 01, 2005; Published December 14, 2007

Heat transfer and pressure results of an inline array of round jets impinging on a staggered array of dimples are reported with the consideration of various geometric and parametric effects; results are normalized against flat plate data. The heat transfer was measured by using transient wideband liquid crystal method. The geometrical configurations considered were crossflow (or spent-air exit) scheme, dimple geometries, and impinging positions. Three crossflow schemes were tested such as one-way, two-way, and free exits. These led to the idea of the coupling effects of impingement and channel flow depending on which one dominated. Hemispherical and cusped elliptical dimple shapes with the same wetted area were considered and found that both dimples showed the similarity in heat transfer results. Impinging positions on dimples and on flat portions adjacent to dimples were examined. Throughout the study, the pitch of the nozzle holes was kept constant at four jet diameters. The investigated parameters were Reynolds number (ReDj) ranged from 5000 to 11,500, jet-to-plate spacing (HDj) varied from 1 to 12 jet diameters, dimple depths (dDd) of 0.15, 0.25, and 0.29, and dimple curvature (DjDd) of 0.25, 0.50, and 1.15. The shallow dimples (dDd=0.15) improved heat transfer significantly by 70% at HDj=2 compared to that of the flat surface, while this value was 30% for the deep ones (dDd=0.25). The improvement also occurred to the moderate and high DjDd. The total pressure was a function of ReDj and HDj when HDj<2, but it was independent of the target plate geometry. The levels of the total pressure loss of the dimpled plates werenot different from those of the flat surface under the same setup conditions. Wall static pressure was measured by using static taps located across each plate. ReDj and HDj affected the level of the static pressure while the dimple depth influenced the stagnation peaks, and the crossflow scheme affected the shape of the peaks.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Experimental apparatus

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Crossflow schemes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Dimple geometries: (a) Hemispherical dimples and (b) Cusped elliptical dimples

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Streamwise average Nusselt number distribution of different dimple geometries compared to that of the flat surface H∕Dj=4, ReDj=11,500, maximum crossflow, impinging on dimples (Phase 1 in Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Normalized average Nusselt numbers of both dimple geometries for maximum crossflow scheme, ReDj=11,500 (Phase 1 in Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Streamwise average Nusselt numbers of dimples at H∕Dj=2 and ReDj=11,500 (Phase 2, Table 1). (a) d∕Dd=0.25. (b) d∕Dd=0.15.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Effect of crossflow scheme, ReDj=11,500, impinging on dimples

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Effect of dimple geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 26

Dimpled plate with imprinted diameter, Dj=40mm. Projected view of dimpled plates d∕Dd=0.15 and 0.25

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 27

Crossflow scheme effect on flat plate at ReDj=11,500, H∕Dj=2, streamwise direction

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 28

Surface static pressure measurements across the plate in streamwise direction along all rows at H∕Dj=4, ReDj=8000, d∕Dd=0.25, impinging on dimples

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 30

Surface static pressure along inline dimples at different jet-to-plate spacings, maximum crossflow, ReDj=11,500, d∕Dd=0.15

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 31

Surface static pressure along inline dimples at different dimple depths, maximum crossflow, H∕Dj=2, ReDj=11,500

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 32

Surface static pressure along inline dimples at different dimple curvature (Dj∕Dd), maximum crossflow, H∕Dj=2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Static pressure tapping on target plate

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Impinging positions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 29

Surface static pressure along inline dimples at different Reynolds numbers, maximum crossflow, H∕Dj=2, d∕Dd=0.15

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Total pressure for different setups, impinging on dimples

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Contour plots of different Dj∕Dd. (a) Dj∕Dd=0.25 (Phase 3, Table 1). Note that the pitch of the jet plate has become 8Dj. (b) Dj∕Dd=0.50 (Phase 2, Table 1). (c) Dj∕Dd=1.15 (Phase 4, Table 1). Note that the white filled circles represent dimple areas, which are not taken into account, and the filled rectangles are the inline dimples where the jets are impinging.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Streamwise average Nusselt number at H∕Dj=2, ReDj=11,500, impinging on dimples (see Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Overall average Nusselt numbers of dimpled plates of different dimple depths at H∕Dj=4 (Phase 2, Table 2 (5))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Cross section along inline dimples (underneath jets) of Nusselt number distribution at ReDj=11,500, H∕Dj=4 (Phase 2, Table 1(5))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Normalized overall average Nusselt numbers of hemispherical dimples, maximum crossflow scheme, Re=11,500 (Phase 1, Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Streamwise average Nusselt number of hemispherical dimples, maximum crossflow scheme, ReDj=11,500 (Phase 1, Table 1(4))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Effect of Reynolds number on hemispherical dimples, overall average Nusselt numbers at various H∕Dj values (Phase 1, Table 1(5))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Normalized streamwise average Nusselt numbers of hemispherical dimples, H∕Dj=8 (Phase 1, Table 1(5))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Normalized overall average Nusselt numbers of dimples with different depths at ReDj=11,500 (Phase 2, Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Normalized overall average Nusselt numbers of hemispherical dimples at different crossflow schemes, impinging on dimples, ReDj=11,500 (Phase 1 in Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Effect of impinging positions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Streamwise average Nusselt numbers for hemispherical dimples at H∕Dj=2, impinging on dimples (Phase 1 in Table 1(14))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparisons of overall average results of flat plate to literature—results of maximum crossflow scheme at various ReDj and H∕Dj (corresponding to Phase 2, Table 1◆ represents data obtained in the present work,—(11-12) (a) ReDj=11,500. (b) ReDj=8000. (c) ReDj=5000.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparisons of overall average results of flat plate to literature—consideration of crossflow scheme effect. (a) Minimum crossflow. (b) Intermediate crossflow. (c) Maximum crossflow.

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
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
Sign In