Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Flow Structure in The Louvered Fin Heat Exchanger Geometry
Flow Structure in The Louvered Fin Heat Exchanger Geometry
Address correspondenceto Professor Ralph L. Webb, Departmentof Mechanical Engineering, The PennsylvaniaState University, University1Park, PA
16802.
0894-1777/91/$3.50
205
Bose S u r f a c e
I I 111
L = 0.81 mm
0'1 : ~
~
Line
FalLp
~ (deg)
260
29
2.66
2o
4.11
29
z
c
.
. . . . . . .
Duct FLow~
_
6')
0"01
10
SECTION
A--A
F'IN
GEOMETRY
PER
TUBE
ROW
Itlnll
100
I I Ill
1000
R e y n o l d s N u m b e r - ReLp
C~
~5
0.6
0.s
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
,
0.0
10
100
, ,
1000
ReLp
Figure 5. Mean flow angle dependence in a louvered fin array.
(From Achaichia and Cowell [11].)
their analysis will probably not accurately predict the effects
of these eddies on the heat transfer coefficient and friction
factor.
Recently, Howard [14] performed flow visualization experiments on a 10:1 scale model of a two-dimensional louvered
fin array using a dye injection technique. Howard observed
that flow instabilities (i.e., vortex shedding) commenced at a
Reynolds number based on fin thickness of approximately
Re t = 30 (ReLp = 900) and that the instabilities progressed
upstream (from the exit end of the array) as the velocity was
increased. He characterized the flow structure as being either
"efficient" or "inefficient." The flow was considered to be
efficient if it was approximately parallel to the louvers.
L=160
Fp=15
Lp=lO
207
~=26
ReL=500
208
Lp = 10
e=26'
ReL = 500
had two tabs at each end (as shown in Fig. 8), which allowed
the louver to be mounted on support plates, thus preventing
the louvers from moving during the experiment. The position
of the holes in the support plates fixed the desired louver
angle. Top and base support plates were made from 3.18 mm
Lexan.
The flow visualization tests were conducted in a closed-circuit, open water channel. The channel was approximately 5
m long, 0.3 m wide, and 0.46 m deep. Figure 9 shows a
schematic plan view of the flow visualization test section.
Water was pumped from a reservoir and through the channel
using one of two pumps for different flow rate ranges. A
metal screen at the upstream end of the channel provided a
uniform water velocity. A bank of drinking straws was placed
15 mm upstream from the model to serve as a flow straightener. The flow rate was measured with two calibrated orifices
connected to a manometer. For a given flow rate, the depth of
the water in the channel was adjusted by raising or lowering a
gate at the downstream end. The height of the water channel
was adjusted to be just above the top support plate. Water
temperature was measured with a thermometer located downstream of the test section. The width of the model varied
depending on which fin pitch was being tested. A contraction
INLET DEFLECTIONLOUVER
Lp
Fp
Model
(deg)
(mm)
(ram)
(mm)
1
2
20.0
30.0
15.0
15.0
0.635
0.635
11-30
11-30
Figure 8.
=ii
.,~
llr
=-
Q,
':,
/-7
BASESUPPORT
PLATE
array tested.
209
D = (t/2
- s)tano
O)
1.0
0.9
D
[]
0.8
0.7
[]
- - 1 4 - - 1
.....
[2
0.6
g-
"
[]
Symbol
0
0.5
Lp/Fp
049
0.56
0.66
0.79
0.98
131
z~
0.4
0
0.3
02
0:20
Ol
O0
1000
3OO
ReLp
(a)
as
N
*/ = D
1.0
m-
(1)
,11
[3
0.9
0.8
&
0 0
Symbol
Lp/Fp
0.49
0.56
0.66
0.79
[]
0.98
1.31
0.7
0.6
~"
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
=>
0=30"
0.i
0.0
300
I000
Re
------
IDEAL
ACTUAL
STREAMLINE
STREAMLINE
Lp
Co)
Figure 11. (a) Flow efficiency versus Reynolds number for
0 = 20". Co) Flow efficiency versus Reynolds number for 0 =
30".
23
(4)
(3)
Lp/Fp,
(5)
Lp/Fp = 0.56
0.9
0.8
0.7
//
0.6
/
///
0.5
//
o
Lp/Fp
0.56
1.31
Symbol
0.4
0=30
0.3
0.2
0.i
0.0
300
1000
Rehp
(a)
Lp/Fp = 0.56,
O.
LOW ReLp
e =30 deg.
b.
ReLp> ReLp
/
!
Lp/Fp= 1.31, O =30deg.
c.
LOW ReLp
/ / / /
d.
ReLp> Re'~p
/ / / /
(b)
Figure 12. (a) Flow pattern map for 0.56 < L p / Fn < 1.31. Co)
Defined flow patterns for (a).
taken from Fig. l lb. Figure 12b shows the flow patterns
associated with the symbols a, b, c, d on Fig. 12 a. Sketches
a and b of Fig. 12 b show the flow pattern for small Lp/Fu
at small and high ReLp, respectively. Similarly, sketches c
and d show the corresponding flow patterns for high Lp/Fp
(smaller fin spacing). Purely laminar flow on the louvers and
in the wakes was observed for ReLp < 500-600 at all Lp/Fp
and at both louver angles. However, separated flows were
observed at wide fin pitches (small Lp/Fp), as discussed
below.
Sketch a of Fig. 12 b shows the flow pattern observed for
wide fin spacing at low ReLp. A recirculation zone was
observed at the inlet detection louver and at the first two full
louvers. Eddies were shed at the downstream side of the
louvers. As Re L_ is increased, the flow angle increases and
the extent of th~ separated flow decreases. At the higher
ReLp, the trailing wakes rapidly mix the dye, and it was
difficult to perceive very small separated flow zones. For
ReL~ > 1200, 7/ = 0.82, for which the flow angle is 25
compared to the 30 louver angle. We were unable to discern
flow separations, although trailing vortices may have existed.
For a smaller fin spacing, Lp/F. = 1.31, the flow can
more easily approach the louver ang(e, as shown in sketches
211
1.0
q~
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
0.9
0.8
0.7
~ / / / / I -
~,4gD*
i/
0.5
//
/
0.3
//
0,2
Legend:
0 Offi20(exp)
----
0.8
effi20O(pre)
effi30(pre)
//
o.1
Lp/Fp=2/3
10
100
1000
ReLp
F i g u r e 13. Comparison of measured flow efficiency with that
predicted by Achaichia and Cowell [11].
212
,.ooo
........
~f-louv
........
';-
/f-
~.~
"~
, , r 1.000
o.
efficiency-0.600
~'~_~,.,,.~
(ReL~ ~
0.010
. . . . . . . .
10
"
0.200
~
. . . . . .
100
oo
~
,,I
- - IO UV
=,
0.000
1000
Relp
VARIANT14VS.OSFWITHFLOWEFFICIENCY
.......
4.000
3.5003.000"
2.5002.000-
,I
. . . .
,~'low
efficiency
0.7
0.800
0.6
0.600
~"
0.5
KEY:
0.4
~ /
0.400
--
0.2
0.200
........
'.
100
........
1000
, ,
0ffi30*
0.0
0.000
Relp
14.2
Lp=1.0 m m
0.1
10
FPI=
- - FPIffi20O
.... FPI=33.0
0.3
j ~ / / ~ . . ~ , ~
1 .ooo.
0.500
...-'"
0.9
1.000
08
~f-louv
~-osf
~
j-louv
1.5oo-
. . . . . . . .
1.0
213
10
15
20
25
30
Ufr(m//s)
Figure
Figure
(4) and (5) were used to prepare Fig. 16, which shows the
flow efficiency versus the air frontal velocity (at 20"C) with
FPI (fins/in.) shown as a parameter. This figure shows that
the flow efficiency for the 14 fins/in, geometry begins to drop
rapidly for air velocities less than 13 m/s. The figure also
indicates that lower flow efficiencies will occur for fewer than
14.2 fins/in. Below 0.45 flow efficiency, there should be
significant deterioration of the louver performance, as suggested in the previous section. This occurs at approximately 4
m / s for the 14.2 fins/in, geometry.
In general, reducing the louver pitch will increase the FPI
required to meet a specific flow efficiency. Conversely, increasing the louver pitch will reduce the required FPI to meet
a specified flow efficiency. Also, reducing the louver pitch
will increase the air frontal velocity required to meet a
specific flow efficiency and vice versa.
Table
Core
1
3
4
5
6
7
11
13
14
15
L ~ / F,,
Re~
,1"
0.69
085
0.67
0.69
0.65
0.82
0.51
0.51
0.51
0.51
25.5
255
21.5
28.5
25.5
25.5
300
28.0
22.0
22.0
210
230
200
200
145
145
185
200
195
270
0.43
0.47
0.38
0.39
0.36
0.40
0.38
0.38
0.35
0.40
CONCLUSIONS
1. A flow visualization study of the louvered fin was performed to determine the influence of the louver surface
geometry and Reynolds number on the flow structure.
2. Correlations have been developed (based on the Table 1
geometries) to predict flow efficiency as a function of
louver geometry and Reynolds number.
3. The condition of laminar flow in the wake region is
generally not realized over the Reynolds number range of
practical interest.
4. The study provides insight to understanding the requiremerits for design of more efficient louvered surface geometries.
5. Comparison of the heat transfer and friction of Achaichia
and Cowell [6] with the present correlation for ~ suggests
that the j factor will begin to drop below a log-linear
behavior at Ret. p corresponding to 0.35 < ~ < 0.45. For
Ret. p below this value, the j / f ratio is reduced.
6. Equations (4) and (5) can be used to define the air
velocity, FPI, and louver pitch combinations that will
result in low flow efficiency, and possibly low j and low
j / f performance.
This work was performed under the sponsorship of The International
Copper Association. Mr. Paul Trauger performed the flow visualization
experiments and contributed greatly to the interpretation, of the results
and preparation of this manuscript.
214
Greek Symbols
c~ mean flow angle, deg
flow efficiency, ratio of minimum flow area and frontal
area, dimensionless
0 louver angle, deg
a contraction ratio (minimum flow area-to-frontal area)
of louver array, dimensionless
v kinematic viscosity of fluid, m 2/s
REFERENCES
1. Mori, Y., and Nakayama, W., Recent Advances in Compact Heat
Exchangers in Japan, in Compact Heat Exchangers- History,
Technological Advancement and Mechanical Design Problems,
R. K. Shah, C. F. McDonald, and C. P. Howard, Eds., ASME
Syrup. Vol. HTD-Vol 10, pp. 5-16, ASME, 1980.
2. Shah, R. K., Heat Exchangers, in Handbook of Heat Transfer
Applications, 2nd ed., W. M. Rohsenow, J, P. Hartnett, and E. N.
Ganic, Eds., pp. 4-225-4-227, McGraw-Hill,New York, 1985.
3. Kays, W. M., and London, A. L., Compact Heat Exchangers, 3rd
ed., McGraw-Hill,New York, 1984.
4. Davenport, C. J., Heat Transfer and Flow Friction Characteristics
of Louvered Heat Exchanger Surfaces, in Heat Exchangers: Theory and Practice, J. Taborek, G. F. Hewitt, and N. Afgan, Eds.,
pp. 397-412, Hemisphere, Washington,D.C., 1983.
5. Davenport, C. J., Correlations for Heat Transfer and Flow Friction
Characteristics of Louvered Fin, Heat Transfer- Seattle 1983,
AIChE Symp. Ser., No. 225, Vol. 79, pp. 19-27, 1983.
6. Achalchia,A., and CoweU, T. A., Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop
Characteristics of Flat Tube and Louvered Plate Fin Surfaces, Exp.
Thermal Fluid Sci., 1, 147-157, 1988.
7. Smith, M. C., Gas Pressure Drop of Louvered Fin Heat Exchangers, ASME Paper 68-HT-27, 1968.
8. Smith, M. C., Performance Analysis and Model Experiments for
Louvered Fin Evaporator Core Development, SAE Paper No.
720078, 1978.
9. Howard, P., An Analytical Model for Heat Transfer and Friction
Characteristics of a Multi-LouveredFin Heat Exchanger, Masters
Paper, The PennsylvaniaState University, 1987.
10. Kajino, M., and Hiramatsu, M., Research and Development of
Automotive Heat Exchangers, in Heat Transfer in High Technology and Power Engineering, W. J. Yang and Y. Mori, Eds., pp.
420-432, Hemisphere, Washington,D.C., 1987.
11. Achaichia, A., and Cowell, T. A., A Finite Difference Analysisof
Fully Developed Periodic Laminar Flow in InclinedLouvre Arrays,
Proc. 2nd UK National Heat Transfer Conference, Glasgow,
Vol. 2, pp. 883-888, 1988.
12. Beauvais, F. N., An AerodynamicLook at AutomobileRadiators,
SAE Paper No. 650470, 1965.
13. Wong, L. T., and Smith, M. C., Air-Flow Phenomena in the
Louvered Fin Heat Exchanger, SAE Paper No. 730237, 1973.
14. Howard, P., PreliminaryReport on Flow VisualizationStudies on a
Two-DimensionalModel of a Louvered Fin Heat Exchanger, Penn
State Project Report, 1987.
15. Mueller, T. J., Flow Visualizationby Direct Injection, in Fluid
Mechanics Measurements, R. J. Goldstein, Ed., pp. 352-355,
Hemisphere, Washington,D.C., 1983.
16. Manglik, R. M., and Bergles, A. E., The Thermal-HydraulicDesign of the Rectangular Offset-Strip-FinCompact Heat Exchanger,
in Compact Heat Exchangers: A Festschrift for A. L. London,
R. K. Shah, A. Kraus, and D. E. Metzger, Eds., pp. 123-149,
Hemisphere, Washington,D.C., 1990.
WRITTEN DISCUSSION
Webb has presented the results of an experimental study of the
flow-directing properties of louver arrays. He has defined a
"flow efficiency" parameter as the ratio of the lateral
displacement of the flow over the first bank of louvers relative
to the ideal lateral displacement, that is, the lateral displacement that would have occurred if the flow had become fully
aligned with the louvers immediately upon entry to the array.
Correlating equations relating the experimentally determined
"flow efficiency" to Reynolds number and the array geometric parameters are presented. Webb quotes experimental data
on the performance of louvered plate fins from the literature
[6] and relates his flow efficiency parameter to the flattening of
Stanton number curves that was observed with these surfaces at
low Reynolds numbers. He aims to show how his correlating
equations can be used as predictors of curve flattening. The
paper raises a number of points that are worthy of further
discussion,
Flow Efficiency
The definition given in the paper suffers from the drawback
that the flow-alignment process can be gradual over the first
few louvers. The number of louvers required for fully
developed periodic flow is a function of Reynolds number and
(6)
, .%
-----;,&~
c-"
identifiers
.4 ~
"6
. . . . . . .
"0---
.,..~"-% ~ " j . ~ / . ~
.....
0"~
experiment
- I
200
.----e
, = --;-0_-:--_'
"o-~ / ~ ~ ~ _ ~ . ~ ,
--
curve fit
I
400
1-31
0-56
(~/~9
g = 20"
I
600
Re/ll~
1(100
number
ReLp
(5).
215
Sample
Re~*
7/*
1
2~
3
4
5
6
7
8t
9*
l0 t
11
12 t
13
14
15
210
136
230
200
200
145
145
167
173
194
185
211
200
195
270
0.43
0.29
0.47
0.38
0.39
0.36
0.40
0.30
0.35
0.27
0.38
0.30
0.38
0.35
0.40
c~*/0
0.89
0.80
0.91
0.86
0.90
0.86
0.88
0.82
0.85
0.74
0.87
0.75
0.86
0.82
0.84
c~*/C~mx
0.95
0.92
0.96
0.94
0.94
0.93
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.94
0.95
0.93
0.95
0.94
0.95
* Omitted by Webb.
c~/0 can thus be considered a flow efficiency of similar
nature to that defined by Webb. It is a ratio of angles, whereas
Webb's parameter is a ratio of tangents of angles. The term
was deliberately introduced to the correlation procedure to
accommodate the curve-flattening behavior, and yielded an
equation valid down to a Reynolds number of 75. Achaichia
and Cowell presented the following equation to fit their
numerically obtained flow efficiency results in the region of
interest
ct = 0.936 - 243/ReLp -- 1.76 Fp/L, + 0.9950
0
0
(7)
216
Ralph L. Webb
AUTHOR'S REBUTTAL
I am appreciative of the additional material provided by Drs.
Cowell and Achaichia (C & A). The motivations for the
present work were the photographs of Kajino and Hiramatsu
[10], which showed that the flow does not necessarily follow
the louver angle, and the numerical predictions of Cowell and
(8)
217