0
Research Papers

Effects of Hole Arrangements on Local Heat/Mass Transfer for Impingement/Effusion Cooling With Small Hole Spacing

[+] Author and Article Information
Hyung Hee Cho

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 120–749, Korea

Dong Ho Rhee

 Korea Aerospace Research Institute, Daejeon 305–333, Korea

R. J. Goldstein

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455

J. Turbomach 130(4), 041003 (Jun 24, 2008) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2812325 History: Received July 26, 2004; Revised May 09, 2007; Published June 24, 2008

The present study investigates the local heat (mass) transfer characteristics of flow through perforated plates. Two parallel perforated plates were placed, relative to each other, in either staggered, in line, or shifted in one direction. Hole length to diameter ratio of 1.5, hole pitch to diameter ratio of 3.0, and distance between the perforated plates of 1–3 hole diameters are used at hole Reynolds numbers of 3000 to 14,000. For flows through the staggered layers and the layers shifted in one direction, the mass transfer rates on the surface of the effusion plate increase approximately 50% from impingement cooling alone and are about three to four times that with effusion cooling alone (single layer). The high transfer rate is induced by strong secondary vortices formed between two adjacent impinging jets and flow transition so that heat/mass transfer coefficient in the midway region is as high as stagnation heat/mass transfer coefficient. The mass transfer coefficient for the in-line arrangement is approximately 100% higher on the target surface than that of the single layer case. In overall, the staggered hole arrangement shows better performance than other cases.

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

Schematic view of experimental apparatus and test section: (a) experimental apparatus and (b) test section for the staggered hole arrangement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Three different hole arrangements: (a) staggered arrangement, (b) shifted arrangement, and (c) in-line array

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Vector plots on the injection and effusion planes for staggered arrangement at H∕d=1.0 and Red=13,500; (a) injection plane (x∕d=1.5) and (b) effusion plane (x∕d=0.0)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Contour plots of Sh on the effusion surface for staggered layers with various gap distances at Red=13,500: (a) H∕d=1.0, (b) H∕d=2.0, and (c) H∕d=3.0.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Local Sh for staggered arrangement on the effusion surface at Red=13,500 and H∕d=2.0

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of Sh with other results (P∕d=6.0, (10)) for staggered hole arrangement with H∕d=2.0 at different Reynolds numbers

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of Sh on the effusion surface for different gap distances at Red=13,500

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of Sh along x∕d=1.5 on the effusion surface for staggered hole arrangement at H∕d=2.0.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Contour plots of Sh on the effusion surface for shifted arrangement at Red=13,500: (a) H∕d=1.0, (b) H∕d=2.0, and (c) H∕d=3.0

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Local Sh on the effusion surface for shifted arrangement at H∕d=2.0 and Red=13,500

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Contour and local plots of Sh on the effusion surface for in-line arrangement at Red=13,500 (H∕d=1.0 for contour plot)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Comparison of Sh on the effusion surface for various hole arrangements at H∕d=2.0 and Red=13,500: (a) x∕d=1.5 and (b) x∕d=0.6

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Area-averaged Sh for impingement/effusion cooling with various hole arrangements at H∕d=2.0

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Contour plots of calculated Nusselt number for various hole arrangements at H∕d=1.0 and Red=13,500: (a) staggered arrangement, (b) shifted arrangement, and (c) in-line arrangement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Comparison of area-averaged Nusselt number with experimental data for various hole arrangements at H∕d=1.0 and Red=13,500

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Contour plot of turbulent kinetic energy on the injection plane (x∕d=1.5) for staggered arrangement at H∕d=1.0 and Red=13,500

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Vector plots on the injection and effusion planes for shifted arrangement at H∕d=1.0 and Red=13,500: (a) injection plane (x∕d=1.5) and (b) effusion plane (x∕d=0.0)

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