0
Research Papers

Effect of Bend Geometry on Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop in a Two-Pass Coolant Square Channel for a Turbine

[+] Author and Article Information
Sumanta Acharya

e-mail: acharya@tigers.lsu.edu
Turbine Innovation and Energy Research (TIER) Center,
Mechanical Engineering Department,
Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, LA 70803

1Corresponding author

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received September 19, 2011; final manuscript received January 10, 2012; published online November 8, 2012. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 135(2), 021035 (Nov 08, 2012) (12 pages) Paper No: TURBO-11-1210; doi: 10.1115/1.4006665 History: Received September 19, 2011; Revised January 10, 2012

This paper presents a comparative numerical study of turbulent flow inside a two-pass internal cooling channel with different bend geometries. The goal is to find a geometry that reduces the bend related pressure loss and enhances overall heat transfer coefficient. A square channel with a round U-bend is taken as a baseline case and the heat transfer and pressure drop for nine different bend geometries are compared with the baseline. Modifications for the bend geometry are made along the channel divider wall and at the end wall of the 180 deg bend. The bend geometries studied include: (1) a turning vane geometry, (2) an asymmetrical bulb, (3) three different symmetrical bulbs, (4) two different bow shaped geometries at the end wall, (5) a bend with an array of dimples in the bend region, and (6) finally a combination of bow geometry and dimples. The solution procedure is based on a commercial finite volume solver using the Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equation and a turbulence model. A two equation realizable k-ɛ model with enhanced wall treatment is used to model the turbulent flow. It was found that the bend geometry can have a significant effect on the overall performance of a two-pass channel. The modified bend geometries are compared with the baseline using Nusselt number ratios, friction factor ratios, and thermal performance factors (TPF) as the metrics. All the modified bend geometries show increase in the TPF with the symmetrical bulb configuration showing nearly a 40% reduction in friction factor ratio and a 30% increase in thermal performance. The highest TPF (41% increase over baseline) is observed for the symmetrical bulb combined with a bow along the outer walls and surface dimples.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the bend geometries studied

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Tetrahedral mesh with prism layers (baseline geometry)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Nu/Nu0 comparison with experimental data

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Grid independence study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Velocity profile on different planes for baseline case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the baseline case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Velocity profiles on different planes for turning vane case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the turning vane case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Velocity profile on different planes for asymmetrical bulb case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the asymmetrical bulb case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Streamline profile on symmetry plane for the symmetrical bulbs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Secondary velocity profile on planes perpendicular to the streamwise flow for symmetrical bulb cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the symmetrical bulb case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Streamline profile on symmetry plane for the bow design cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Secondary velocity profile on planes perpendicular to the streamwise flow for bow design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the bow design cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the dimple case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Comparison of secondary velocity profile with dimple case and without dimple case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Nu/Nu0 contour map for the bow and dimple case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Zone averaged Nu/Nu0 for all the configurations

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