826898

DESIGN OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE HEAT TRANSFER CHANNELS
ENABLED BY ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES
OF
MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
BY
HAKAN UYSAL
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
AUGUST 2023
Approval of the thesis:

submitted by HAKAN UYSAL in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering, Middle East Technical
University by,
Prof. Dr. Halil Kalıpçılar

Dean, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences
Prof. Dr. M. A. Sahir Arıkan

Head of the Department, Mechanical Engineering
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Supervisor, Mechanical Engineering, METU
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay

Co-Supervisor, Mechanical Engineering, Bilkent University
Examining Committee Members:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ulaş Yaman

Mechanical Engineering, METU
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay

Mechanical Engineering, Bilkent University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ali Karakuş

Assist. Prof. Dr. Mehdi Mehrtash

Mechanical Engineering, Atılım University
Date: 10.08.2023
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and
presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also
declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and
referenced all material and results that are not original to this work.
Name and Surname : Hakan Uysal
Signature :
iv
ABSTRACT

Uysal, Hakan
Master of Science, Mechanical Engineering
Supervisor : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç
Co-Supervisor: Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay
August 2023, 104 pages
Rapid developments in the field of power electronics led to an increasing need for
high-performance cooling systems. Advances in additive manufacturing provided
means for implementing innovative and complex cooling channels with ease;
therefore, using microgrooves, static mixers, baffles, and lattice structures to
promote mixing in thermal management systems has become more feasible.
Mixing the flow through such vortex generators offers an efficient route in the
laminar regime with a relatively low-pressure drop. This thesis aims to explore the
potential of such structures enabled by additive manufacturing in enhancing heat
transfer performance. For this purpose, the thesis investigates the cooling
performance of 3D-printed chevron-type static mixers in a mini-channel
configuration. A series of simulations were performed using the finite volume
method in the laminar regime to identify the optimum geometrical parameters,
including the angle of attack and optimum pattern spacing. A generic mini-channel
was considered as the heat sink, with the operational parameters chosen to
represent a reference power electronic system’s cooling needs. The results show
v
that the utilization of chevron-type static mixers can enhance the heat transfer by
206% while increasing the pressure drop by only 334% relative to the empty
channel. Our results not only display the great potential of 3D printed heat
exchangers for the thermal management of next-generation power electronics but
also present a strong numerical platform for the design of mini-channels for the
thermal management of high flux systems.
Keywords: Convective Heat Transfer, Additive Manufacturing, Mini Channels,

Finite Volume Method, Static Mixers
vi
ÖZ
EKLEMELİ İMALAT İLE SAĞLANAN YÜKSEK PERFORMANSLI ISI

TRANSFERİ KANALLARININ TASARIMI
Uysal, Hakan
Yüksek Lisans, Makina Mühendisliği
Tez Yöneticisi: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç
Ortak Tez Yöneticisi: Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay
Ağustos 2023, 104 sayfa
Güç elektroniği alanındaki hızlı gelişmeler, yüksek performanslı soğutma

sistemlerine olan ihtiyacın artmasına neden olmuştur. Eklemeli imalattaki
gelişmeler, yenilikçi ve karmaşık soğutma kanallarının kolaylıkla uygulanmasını
sağladı; bu nedenle, termal yönetim sistemlerinde karıştırmayı teşvik etmek için
kullanılan mikro oluklar, statik karıştırıcılar, bölmeler ve kafes yapılarının
kullanımı daha uygun hale gelmiştir. Bu tür girdap üreteçlerle akışın karıştırılması,
basınç düşüşünün nispeten daha az olması sebebi ile laminar rejimde verimli bir
yol sunmaktadır. Bu tez eklemeli imalat ile mümkün hale gelen bu yapıların ısı
transfer performansını arttırmadaki potensiyelini keşfetmeyi planlamaktadır. Bu
amaçla, tez, 3D ile üretilen chevron tipi statik karıştırıcıların mini-kanal
konfigürasyonunda soğutma performansını araştırmaktadır. Sonlu hacim yöntemi
kullanılarak yapılan bir dizi simülasyon ile optimum saldırı açısı ve optimum desen
aralığı gibi geometrik parametreler belirlenmiştir. Jenerik bir mini kanal referans
olan bir güç elektroniği sisteminin soğutma ihtiyaçlarını temsil etmek için
belirlenen operasyonel parametrelerle ısı emici olarak kabul edildi. Sonuçlar,
chevron tipi statik karıştırıcıların kullanımının, boş kanala göre 206% oranında ısı
vii
transferini artırabildiğini, basınç düşüşünü ise sadece 334% oranında artırdığını
göstermektedir. Sonuçlarımız, yalnızca yeni nesil güç elektroniğinin termal
yönetimi için 3 boyutlu baskılı ısı eşanjörlerinin büyük potansiyelini göstermekle
kalmıyor, aynı zamanda yüksek ısı akışlı sistemlerin termal yönetimi amacıyla mini
kanalların tasarımı için güçlü bir sayısal platform sunuyor.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Konvektif Isı Transferi, Eklemeli İmalat, Mini Kanallar, Sonlu
Hacim Metodu, Statik Karıştırıcılar
viii
To my family,
ix
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to express his deepest gratitude to his supervisor Assoc. Prof.
Dr. Sezer Özerinç and co-supervisor Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay for
their guidance, advice, criticism, encouragement, and insight throughout the
research.
I would also like to extend my gratitude to Prof. Dr. Cüneyt Sert for his valuable
suggestions and comments.
I would also like to thank ASELSAN Academy and Çağıl Merve Tanık for their
support and input.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. v
ÖZ .............................................................................................................................. vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................... x
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ xi
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... xiv
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................... xxi
LIST OF SYMBOLS ............................................................................................... xxii
CHAPTERS
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1
1.1 Overview................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Heat Transfer Enhancement Methods .................................................... 3
1.2.1 Conventional Approaches ............................................................... 5
1.2.2 Approaches Enabled by Additive Manufacturing ......................... 12
1.2.2.1 An Overview of Additive Manufacturing Technologies .......... 13
1.2.2.2 Example Uses of Additive Manufacturing in Heat Transfer

Enhancement ........................................................................................... 13
1.3 Problem Definition ............................................................................... 19
1.4 Thesis Objectives .................................................................................. 20
2 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 21
xi
2.1 Overview of the Numerical Approach .................................................. 21
2.2 Governing Equations ............................................................................. 22
2.3 Numerical Model .................................................................................. 25
2.3.1 Modeling of the Fluid Domain ...................................................... 28
2.3.1.1 Model Verification .................................................................... 31
2.3.1.2 Mesh Independence Study ........................................................ 36
2.3.2 Modeling of the Channel Taking into Account the Wall

Thickness ..................................................................................................... 37
2.3.2.1 Model Verification .................................................................... 40
2.3.2.2 Mesh Independence Study ........................................................ 40
3 RESULTS & DISCUSSION ....................................................................... 43
3.1 Numerical Model Verification .............................................................. 43
3.1.1 Verification by Using Literature .................................................... 43
3.1.2 Model of the Fluid Domain Mesh Independency Study ................ 47
3.1.3 Model of the Channel with Thickness Mesh Independency Study 49
3.1.4 Verification of Flow Regime Assumption for the Model of the

Fluid Domain ............................................................................................... 51

Channel with Thickness .............................................................................. 54
3.2 Effect of Change in Geometry .............................................................. 57
3.3 Effect of Static Mixer Shape ................................................................. 59
3.4 Array Distance Selection....................................................................... 69
3.5 Upgrading Heat Transfer Performance by DFAM Approach ............... 76
3.6 Manufacturability of Chevron Type Static Mixer with AM ................. 85
4 CONCLUSION & FUTURE WORK ......................................................... 87
xii
4.1 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 87
4.2 Future Work .......................................................................................... 88
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 91
A. Appendix A ........................................................................................................ 97
B. Appendix B ...................................................................................................... 101
C. Appendix C ...................................................................................................... 103
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES
Table 1. Channel type classification. Table is taken from [11]. ............................... 3

Table 2. Pure aluminum properties (default of the Ansys FLUENT). ................... 27
Table 3. Ethylene glycol 50% and water 50% mixture properties at 65°C. ........... 28
Table 4. Selected Pr=1 fluid properties for model verification. ............................. 33
Table 5. Results of steady and transient solution for confined chevron ................. 53
Table 6. Comparison of steady-state and transient results for the model of the
channel with the thickness. ...................................................................................... 56
Table 7. Chevron with different heights comparison by the model of the channel
with the thickness. ................................................................................................... 58
Table 8. Average Nu, friction factor, overall max temperature, and performance
factor results of the D=1 mm Cylinder, H=2 mm Chevron and Empty channel. .... 69
Table 9. Average Nu, friction factor, pressure drop, maximum temperature, and
performance factor comparison of the chevroned channels with 7.5 mm distance. 73
performance factor comparison of the different array distances and numbers. ...... 75
performance factor comparison of the alternative chevron placements of 3
chevrons-7.5mm distance. ....................................................................................... 77
chevrons-4 mm distance. ......................................................................................... 79
chevrons-3 mm distance. ......................................................................................... 83
Table 14. 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance clockwise arrangement bad manufacturing
scenario results ........................................................................................................ 86
xiv
D=1 mm Cylinder ................................................................................................. 100
performance factor comparison of the 3 Cylinders (D=1 mm), and 3 Chevrons
(H=2 mm) with 7.5 Distance ................................................................................ 102
Table 17. Overall results ...................................................................................... 103
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES
Figure 1. Heat flux trend for power electronic systems over the year. Figure is
taken from [9]. ........................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2. Rectangular strip fin, square pin, and circular pin. Figure is taken from
[21]. ........................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3. Fluid flow difference strip fins and solid ones. Figure is taken from [21].
................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 4. Dimple, Cylindrical groove, and Low fin surface. Figure is taken from
[22]. ........................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 5. Streamlines by velocity contour of the flow around the secondary oblique
channel and rectangular ribs. Figure is taken from [28]. ........................................... 9
Figure 6. Open ring pin-fins micro-channel design, effect of secondary flow, and
Nu increase relative to Re. Figure is taken from [30]. ............................................ 10
Figure 7. Schematic of one microchannel, a) Bidirectional Rib b) Vertical Rib and
c) Spanwise Rib. Figure is taken from [31]. ............................................................ 11
Figure 8. Conventional heat exchanger surfaces. Figure is taken from [36]. ......... 14
Figure 9. VC-PF and BCC-PF designs as lattice units, single-pin fins, and heat
sinks. Figure is taken from [43]. .............................................................................. 17
Figure 10. Chevron model front view. ................................................................... 26
Figure 11. Chevron design top view. ...................................................................... 26
Figure 12. Chevron design inlet view. .................................................................... 26
Figure 13. Fluid domain for the numerical model. ................................................. 27
Figure 14. Boundary conditions of the model of the fluid domain. ....................... 30
Figure 15. Scheme of the computational domain of verification model. Figure is
taken from [56]. ....................................................................................................... 31
Figure 16. Given parabolic velocity profile at inlet Umax=0.15 m/s for Re=100
with Pr=1 fluid. ........................................................................................................ 32
xvi
Figure 17. Confined cylinder model verification and conversion of the model from
2D to 3D .................................................................................................................. 35
Figure 18. Mesh structure view of the channel cross-section. ............................... 36
Figure 19. The cold plate is constructed by channels (3 x 3 x 31 mm) with
chevrons, highlighting the worked domain and its model. ..................................... 37
Figure 20. Selected wall type of the model of the channel with a thickness ......... 39
Figure 21. The mesh structure of the model of the channel with thickness. .......... 41
Figure 22. A cross-section of the channel that shows the mesh structure.............. 41
Figure 23. Temperature contour comparison for the same temperature range,
however, not at the same time at the period (time was not mentioned in the paper)
[56]. ......................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 24. Variation of the instantaneous Nusselt number in the stream-wise
direction within a period of vortex shedding for Pr=1.0. Figure is taken from [56].
................................................................................................................................. 44
Figure 25. Verification of the analysis and the paper on Nu vs. x/d graphics. ...... 45
Figure 26. Temperature contour of the constructed 3D model in a period. ........... 46
Figure 27. Maximum temperature change of the fluid domain model relative to cell
number. ................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 28. Pressure drop change of the fluid domain model relative to cell number.
................................................................................................................................. 48
Figure 29. The mesh independence works of the channel with thickness:
Maximum temperature on the heated wall, pressure drop, and average temperature
vs. cell number graphs. ........................................................................................... 50
Figure 30. Average temperature comparison on the heated wall between a-1)
Steady-state and a-2) Transient solution for a model of the fluid domain. ............. 52
Figure 31. Maximum temperature comparison on the heated wall between a-1)
Steady-state and a-2) Transient solution for a model of the fluid domain. ............. 52
Figure 32. Pressure drop comparison between a-1) Steady-state and a-2) Transient
solution for a model of the fluid domain................................................................. 53
xvii
Figure 33. Upgraded model maximum temperature on the heated wall: a-1)
Steady-state and a-2) Transient results. ................................................................... 54
Figure 34. Upgraded model pressure drop : a-1) Steady-state and a-2) Transient
results. ...................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 35. Upgraded model average temperature on heated wall: a-1) Steady-state
and a-2) Transient results. ....................................................................................... 55
Figure 36. Chevron with different heights: a)2.5 mm, b)2 mm, c)1.5 mm, and d)1
mm. .......................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 37. Temperature distribution of the H=2 mm chevron channel a) isometric
view, b) front and inlet side view together. ............................................................. 59
Figure 38. Velocity contour at y=0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 31 mm of H=2 mm
chevron model. ........................................................................................................ 60
Figure 39. Velocity vector colored by velocity magnitude around H=2 mm
chevron. ................................................................................................................... 60
Figure 40. Velocity vector at y=8 mm plane of H=2 mm chevron model. ............ 61
Figure 41. Streamline profiles by particle ID bottom view. ................................... 62
Figure 42. The velocity contour of the D=1 mm cylinder in the channel .............. 63
Figure 43. D=1 mm cylindered channel streamline velocity contour. ................... 63
Figure 44. Velocity vectors at the middle section of the channel top view. ........... 64
Figure 45. Velocity vectors at the middle section of the channel front view. ........ 65
Figure 46. Temperature contour of the channel with D=1 mm cylinder. The max
temperature is arranged the same as the max temperature of the chevron case. ..... 66
Figure 47. Data planes and lines to calculate Nu. .................................................. 66
Figure 48. Calculated Nu results for the H=2 mm Chevron, D=1 mm Cylinder, and
Empty channel. ........................................................................................................ 67
Figure 49. Average pressure graph on data planes throughout the D=1 mm
cylinder, H=2 mm chevron, and empty channel...................................................... 68
Figure 50. Models of the 2 and 3 H=2 mm chevrons placed with 7.5 mm distances.
................................................................................................................................. 70
xviii
Figure 51. Comparison of the Nusselt number in a chevron, 2 chevrons, and 3
chevrons placed into the channel. ........................................................................... 70
Figure 52. Pressure drop of one chevron, 2 chevrons, and 3 chevrons placed into
channel. ................................................................................................................... 71
Figure 53. Temperature distributions of the fluid at planes in 3 Chevron-7.5 mm
distance case in the range 65°C and 80°C. ............................................................. 72
Figure 54. Comparison of the Nusselt number of the different array distances and
numbers. .................................................................................................................. 73
Figure 55. Comparison of the pressure drop of the different array distances and
numbers. .................................................................................................................. 74
Figure 56. Alternative placement models: a-1) 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-
middle one on the top wall and a-2) 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-clockwise. ...... 76
Figure 57. Comparison of the Nusselt number of the alternative chevron
placements in 3 chevrons-7.5mm distance. ............................................................ 77
Figure 58. Alternative placement models: a-1) 6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-One on
bottom one on top in an order (case1) and a-2) 6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-
clockwise (case2). ................................................................................................... 78
placements in 6 chevrons-4 mm distance. .............................................................. 79
Figure 60. Temperature contour of case 2. ............................................................ 80
Figure 61. Velocity vectors on the middle section on the zy plane of case 2. ....... 81
Figure 62. Alternative placement model: 8 Chevrons-3 mm distance-clockwise. 81
placements in 8 chevrons-3 mm distance. .............................................................. 82
Figure 64. Temperature and velocity contours of 8 chevrons-3 mm distance-
clockwise model. ..................................................................................................... 83
Figure 65. Temperature contour of the 8 chevrons-3 mm clockwise arrangement.
................................................................................................................................. 84
Figure 66. Model of 3 Chevrons- 7.5 mm distance-clockwise possible (worst)
manufacturing case ................................................................................................. 85
xix
Figure 67. Chevron H=2.0 mm residuals ............................................................... 97
Figure 68. Chevron H=2.0 mm maximum temperature on heated wall ................. 97
Figure 69. Chevron H=2.0 mm pressure drop. ....................................................... 98
Figure 70. Chevron H=2.0 mm average temperature on heated wall ..................... 98
Figure 71. D=1mm Cylinder in channel steady and transient solution results: a-1)
Maximum face temperature steady-state solution, b-1) Maximum face temperature
transient solution, a-2) Pressure drop steady state solution and b-2) Pressure drop
transient solution ..................................................................................................... 99
Figure 72. Nu and pressure graphs of the 3 Cylinders (D=1 mm), and 3 Chevrons
(H=2 mm) with 7.5 Distance ................................................................................. 101
Figure 73. Nu performance is relative to empty channel comparison. ................. 104
xx
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ABBREVIATIONS
AM Additive Manufacturing
BC Boundary Conditions
BCC-PF Body-Centered Cubic Pin Fin
BR Bidirectional Rib
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
DMLS Direct Metal Laser Sintering
EBM Electron Beam Melting
FDM Fused Deposition Modeling
HEX Heat Exchanger
LCM Lithography-Based Ceramic Manufacturing
LENS Laser Engineered Net Shaping
LOM Laminated Object Manufacturing
MCHE Mini Channel Heat Exchanger
MJM Multjet Modeling
PIV Particle Image Velocimeter
RA Roughness Average
SLA Strero-Lithography
SLM Selective Laser Melting
SLS Selective Laser Sintering
SR Spanwise rib
VC-PF Vertex Cubic Pin Fin
VR Vertical Rib
2D Two Dimensional
3D Three Dimensional
xxi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
SYMBOLS
D Diameter
Dh Hydraulic Diameter
𝑝 Perimeter
∆𝑃 Pressure Drop
𝑄 Heat
Nu Nusselt Number
Nuavg Average Nusselt Number
Nu0 Nusselt Number of Empty Channel
H Height
𝑇𝑤 Temperature of Wall
𝑇𝑏 Bulk Temperature
t Time
Re Reynolds Number
𝑝𝑓 Performance Factor
𝜕𝑡 Time Derivative
𝑢 Velocity in x Direction
𝑈𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 Mean Velocity
𝑣 Velocity in y Direction
𝑤 Velocity in z Direction
𝜏 Shear Stress
Pr Prandtl Number
E Energy
1 Frequency
𝜏
𝐾 Thermal Conductivity
ρ Density
cp Specific Heat
k Thermal Conductivity
xxii
𝜇 Dynamic Viscosity
𝑣 Momentum Diffusivity
𝛼 Thermal Diffusivity
°C Celsius Degree
Pgauge Gauge Pressure
𝑞" Heat Flux
𝑓 Friction Factor
𝑓0 Friction Factor of Empty Channel
g Gravitational Force
P Pressure
xxiii
CHAPTER 1
1 INTRODUCTION
Power electronic systems reveal excessive heat dissipation, increasing daily with
the developing technology [1]. The cooling devices and available cooling areas
become smaller, such as the case for microchips [2] . Cooling devices are a well-
known and long-standing topic, with thousands of papers on the subject. However,
the topic is constrained by manufacturing technology. Numerous numerical studies
in the literature show excellent results; however, manufacturing some of them is
not feasible or even impossible with conventional manufacturing approaches. With
the developing technologies, Additive Manufacturing (AM) has shown promising
results in manufacturability [3]. AM became popular for heat transfer devices,
especially after metal additive manufacturing techniques were developed. In the
last decades, aluminum alloys, steels, copper, titanium, and these kinds of metals
have been to be manufactured precisely by the AM [4]. Even ceramic products
have been accurately manufactured using AM [5]. AM has become popular for
manufacturing heat transfer devices because of its vast advantages over
conventional and non-conventional manufacturing methods [6], including design
flexibility, one-piece production, less material waste, time efficiency, and ease of
producing prototypes [7]. Manufacturing complicated geometries have become
feasible, so the design language of heat transfer devices started to change because
heat transfer performance can be enhanced by using intricate designs [8].
In summary, developing power electronic systems requires high-performance
thermal management systems. AM is an opportunity to manufacture innovative
heat transfer devices through its design flexibility and various materials.
1
1.1 Overview
The development of power electronic technology reveals new challenges and

limitations. One of them is increasing heat fluxes due to the demand for high-
power output and small cooling areas. Jafari et al. [9] showed that the maximum
chip heat fluxes could increase to 190 W/cm2 around 2020 (Figure 1). So, the
systems require high-thermal performance cooling systems. Manufacturing
compact and efficient cooling equipment became possible with non-conventional
manufacturing techniques. Among the non-conventional manufacturing processes,
additive manufacturing is promising with the ability to efficiently manufacture
intricate designs with ease, low cost, low weight, and customization [3].
Figure 1. Heat flux trend for power electronic systems over the year. Figure is
taken from [9].
AM is feasible when the model is designed using the design for additive
manufacturing (DFAM) concept [10]. The concept is to use selected AM methods'
advantages and not stick up to conventional ones when redesigning or creating new
designs. Thus, we first need to understand the conventional enhancement methods
to get high-performance heat transfer channels. Then, there is a need to design new
heat transfer channels considering the DFAM. Therefore, in this section, heat
2
transfer enhancement methods are investigated, which are conventional approaches
and approaches enabled by AM.
1.2 Heat Transfer Enhancement Methods
Mini and microchannel heat exchangers are very popular for cooling power
electronic systems due to their reduced dimensions without compromising thermal
performance. Although the pressure drop is a major concern, these channels are
used to cool high thermal flux systems. A mini and micro prefix of channels gives
information on channel dimensions. There is a channel size classification made by
Kandlikar and Grande [11]. Classification states that the mini channel is a channel
that has a hydraulic diameter between 0.2 mm and 3 mm, and the microchannel is
between 0.2 mm and 10 µm, as shown in the table.
Table 1. Channel type classification. Table is taken from [11].
Channel Type Hydraulic Diameter (𝐃𝐡 )

Conventional channels Dh > 3 mm
Minichannels 3 mm ≥ Dh > 200 µm
Microchannels 200 µm ≥ Dh > 10 µm
Transitional channels 10 µm ≥ Dh > 0.1 µm
Molecular nanochannels 0.1 µm ≥ Dh
Using mini and microchannels in thermal management devices increases the

surface-to-volume ratio, which can lead to the enhancement of heat transfer [12].
The mini and micro-channels, unlike conventional ones, also offer size drops in
heat exchangers and sinks. However, a decrease in channel dimension results in
different challenges to overcome. The surface roughness of the channel is one of
the significant concerns at small sizes because the effect of roughness increases
when channels become mini and micro sizes [13]. The increase in surface
roughness directly affects flow and pressure drop [14]. It is necessary to optimize
3
both these channels and the manufacturing methods for each distinct situation in
order to achieve high-performance thermal management systems.
Cooling equipment's heat transfer performance depends on pressure drop and heat
transfer rate. These dependencies are obtained from system needs. Pressure drop is
related to pump selection, and the heat transfer capacity is directly related to the
cooling rate. These parameters must be considered to get high-performance thermal
management devices. There are some functions used to measure the performance
of thermal management channels. Kirsch and Thole state that there are three main
functions to find an optimized heat transfer channel [15]. They are:
𝐽1 = min(∆𝑃) (1)
𝐽2 = max(𝑄) (2)
𝑄
𝐽3 = max ( ) (3)
∆𝑃1/3
A pressure drop represents a loss of energy. In fact, it may decrease the total mass
flow rate. That is, high-pressure drop results in a higher pump power need for
systems. Therefore, the J1 function aims to minimize the pressure drop to increase
performance. Another aim is to maximize the overall heat transfer of the channel. If
heat transfer increases with constant boundary conditions, this leads to a decrease
in the temperature of the components. Therefore, the J2 function aims to maximize
heat transfer from source to fluid. There is a J3 function that shows the thermal
performance of channels to compare the overall performance of the thermal
system. It shows that increasing the total heat transfer is more important than
decreasing the pressure drop. However, both physical properties are correlated, and
increasing pump power and flow velocity also result in enhanced total heat transfer.
The final aim is to enhance the thermal performance and maximize the J3 function.
This J3 function is derived from a very common thermal performance comparison
equation derived by [16].
4
𝑁𝑢/𝑁𝑢0
𝑝𝑓 = (4)
(𝑓/𝑓0 )1/3
In the last decades, additive manufacturing has become more popular in

manufacturing high-performance cooling systems. Traditional thermal management
devices are concerned again by using additive manufacturing design due to the
competence, design flexibility, and size advantages of AM [17]. Although there are
some concerns, high-performance devices can be obtained by making some
optimizations depending on the AM type. So, AM become a hot topic in the heat
transfer area. Accordingly, this thesis aims to develop high-performance heat
transfer channels enabled by additive manufacturing.
1.2.1 Conventional Approaches
There are some ways studied in literature to get high-performance heat transfer
devices. These can be listed as extending surfaces, treating surfaces, using rougher
surfaces, using some inserts, using nanofluids and additives, and using porous
media can enhance thermal performance [18].
Extending the surface and increasing the surface-to-volume ratio is a popular

method. One of the methods to increase the surface-to-volume ratios is decreasing
channel size, such as microchannel usage [19]. Moreover, placing various fin
structures inside to channel increases the surface-to-volume ratio, affecting heat
transfer [20]. Al-Sallami et al. [21] take a unique approach to fin structures. Strip
fins, square, and circular pins are designed differently than the standard plane and
pin structures. Figure 2 illustrates the design of pins with cavities.
5
Figure 2. Rectangular strip fin, square pin, and circular pin. Figure is taken from
[21].
Especially strip fins having a higher aspect ratio than 2 show promising results. It
disturbs and breaks the thermal boundary layer and increases the surface-to-volume
ratio of fins. Moreover, the flow in the cavities behaves like a jet due to the
pressure difference between the inlet and outlet. At the outlet side, there is a
recirculation zone that increases the pressure difference between the inlet and outlet
of the cavity (Figure 3). It is based on Bernoulli’s equation; pressure increases if
velocity decreases on streamline, or vice versa. The jet-like behavior also increases
convective heat transfer. As a result, the design increases heat transfer and pressure
losses. The benefit of using this strip structure is obtaining less pressure drop than
the solid ones.
6
Figure 3. Fluid flow difference strip fins and solid ones. Figure is taken from [21].
Treating the surface is another way to disturb the thermal boundary layer. Treating
surface is making some changes on the surface, such as adding mini dimples, ribs,
low fin structures, and grooves. Bi et al. [22] worked on dimple surfaces,
cylindrical groove surfaces, and low-fin structured surfaces and compared each
other in a turbulence regime close to the critical Reynolds number. Water is used as
a cooling fluid. Paper states using dimples shows a higher performance factor than
the others by comparing numerical results. Moreover, increasing dimple depth
affects the thermal boundary layer more.
Figure 4. Dimple, Cylindrical groove, and Low fin surface. Figure is taken from
[22].
7
Furthermore, the channel shape can be changed to increase the surface-to-volume
ratio and enhance mixing at the thermal boundary layer. Mohammed et al. [23]
compare straight and wavy micro-channel heat sinks. The paper states that the
temperature increases if the channel's amplitude decreases; however, the maximum
temperature is always lower than the straight channel. In addition, pressure drop
and friction factor increase proportionally with the amplitude increase. A work
gathers a wavy channel concept and cylindrical vortex generator by Brodnianska
and Kotsmid [24]. This work claims that adding inline cylindrical vortex
generators can enhance heat transfer further. They state that using a wavy channel
design increased the Nusselt number 1.98 times more than the straight channel.
Inserting cylindrical vortex generators into the wavy channel also enhances 3.18
times the mean Nusselt number relative to the wavy channel. Through experiments,
they state that using cylindrical vortex generators in wavy channels decreases
thermal boundary layer thickness, leading to increased heat transfer. In addition,
cylinders cause recirculation zones, and this helps heat transfer enhancement.
Using some inserts to the conventional channels is another alternative method that
develops heat transfer. This insert works as a vortex creator and also, if they are
thick enough, increases the wetted surface that transfers heat. Twisted tape is a
promising one. There is much work on heat transfer augmentation by twisted tape
inserts gathered by a review paper [25]. The combination of the surface shape-
changing and using inserts has the potential to boost heat transfer. Eiamsa et al.
worked on three starts spirally twisted tube geometry to develop heat transfers and
combine with the twisted tape inserts to increase the channel performance [26]. The
reason behind this combination, there are multi-swirling actions of fluid that
improve fluid mixing by placing twisted tape insert. It boosts heat transfer and
causes a higher pressure drop. The thermal performance of the combination
increases with the decreasing Reynolds number. They work Reynolds numbers
between 4000 and 16000 in turbulent regimes using water as a fluid.
Surface roughness significantly impacts heat transfer, especially for mini and
microchannels. The surface roughness has a significant role in micro-channels
8
since high Ra may cause adverse flow effects. Kandlikar et al. worked on the
surface roughness effect at low Reynolds numbers (500-2600) in small-size
channels. They worked on stainless 316 steel channels with 1.067mm and 0.62mm
diameters. To increase the Ra of the channel surfaces, the etching method is used
with an acid solution. They state that an increase in 𝜀/𝐷 ratio increases heat
transfer and pressure drop in mini-channels rather than conventional channels. The
surface roughness above 0.00355 may affect the transition regime for a small
diameter channel (0.62) [27].
Designing and optimizing ribs are a practical approach to increase the surface and
create vortexes. Ghani et al. [28] worked on secondary oblique channel placement
and rectangular ribs and tried to optimize geometry in 300µm channel thickness by
numerical works. The paper claims that the secondary oblique channel and
rectangular ribs can increase the overall performance factor (𝑝𝑓) by 1.98 at
Reynolds 500 in the microchannel.
Figure 5. Streamlines by velocity contour of the flow around the secondary oblique
channel and rectangular ribs. Figure is taken from [28].
By optimizing, they reduce pressure drop by about 50% from the initial model and
state that secondary oblique channels increase advection and mixing at the main
9
channels. The augmentation in mixing enhances heat transfer. As a result, in this
paper, even the surface-to-volume ratio is increased, and a flow-mixing enhancer
feature is added. Another study related to secondary channels was carried out by
Japar et al. [29]. They also work with secondary channels and ribs, stating that
secondary channel contributes to flow mixing and relatively reduces pressure drop.
To manufacture innovatively designed pins, various non-conventional

manufacturing techniques may be used. For example, Zeng et al. [30] worked on
open ring pin-fins microchannel to enhance heat transfer performance. The laser
writing process is used to manufacture these innovative and optimized geometries
shown in Figure 6 on a pure copper plate. Compared with rectangular
microchannels, the innovative design shows inline and staggered ones show 1.42-
2.54 and 1.5-2.75 overall performance factors in the laminar regime (Re=150-700).
Figure 6. Open ring pin-fins micro-channel design, effect of secondary flow, and
Nu increase relative to Re. Figure is taken from [30].
10
Wang et al. [31] conducted analytical and experimental research on ribs as
elements that disrupt the thermal boundary layer within the microchannel. Work is
focused on three different rib models shown in Figure 7, which are bidirectional rib
(BR), vertical rib (VR), and spanwise rib (SR). They placed the ribs on the heated
wall and focused on the recirculation zone. By investigating thermal boundary
layer thickness at the recirculation zone, they claim that the BRs result in a smaller
thermal boundary layer since recirculation behind BRs both in spanwise and
vertical directions. Recirculation in different directions enhances mixing more. As
a result, BRs lead to higher Nusselt numbers on four walls.
Figure 7. Schematic of one microchannel, a) Bidirectional Rib b) Vertical Rib and

c) Spanwise Rib. Figure is taken from [31].
Micromachining techniques are used to manufacture these channels. These cause

too much effort and waste of time because so many processes are masking,
covering, coating, heating, and electroplating.
Baffles are another type of vortex creator. At the laminar regime, there is staggered
and inline baffled channels work was done by Wang et al. [8]. Using baffles causes
11
enhanced mixing of the core fluid and the fluid near the wall. The baffles may
convert flow from steady to unsteady periodic flow. The baffle geometry and
where it is placed have a significant role. They numerically claim that using baffles
causes enhancement in heat transfer and an increase in pressure drop. The
mentioned techniques to increase heat transfer performance may be mixed to
achieve higher convection. In the literature, a work combines baffles and
nanoparticles to increase heat transfer. Heshmati et al. indicated that SiO2(20nm)
presented the highest performance between Al2O3, CuO, ZnO, and pure water.
Moreover, optimizing the inclined slotted baffle shows 167% and 255% increased
performance at 400 Reynolds number compared to the pure water used case and
pure water and empty channel case. That is, both using baffles and using 4% SiO 2
show enhanced results [32].
1.2.2 Approaches Enabled by Additive Manufacturing
The methodologies mentioned in section 1.2.1 were related to the conventional

approach. The conventional manufacturing approach constrains the performance of
thermal management devices. The innovative designs show promising results in
numerical studies; however, some are impossible to manufacture. The mixing
performance of the flow disturbers is very dependent on the shape. The recent
development of AM technologies in the last decade revealed new possibilities.
Gibson et al. [10] mentioned AM capabilities. These developments made it
possible to manufacture intricate designs with ease. One of the obstacles in front of
the development of high thermal performance heat transfer devices is overcome.
This resulted in revising numerous numerical designs done by the conventional
approach. Furthermore, innovative new designs occur with the usage of the DFAM.
As a result, different shapes that increase the surface-to-volume ratio and mixing
can be produced as one part by AM. There is no need for such metal inserts that
mix flow because they can easily be printed as a part of the channel. Assembly is
not a concern with AM. Arranging surface roughness is possible by changing the
12
parameters of the AM method. Complex-shaped vortex generators and swirl
motion enhancers can be manufactured using design freedom. Especially static
mixers, micro grooves, and channels with different shapes became popular due to
the vast advantages of the AM.
1.2.2.1 An Overview of Additive Manufacturing Technologies
AM methods can be grouped into laser-based, extrusion, material jetting, adhesive,

and electron beam technologies. Most known ones can be listed as
Stereolithography (SLA), Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), Selective Laser Melting
(SLM), Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS), Laser Engineered Net Shaping
(LENS), Direct Metal Deposition (DMD), Electron Beam Manufacturing (EBM),
Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM), Multijet Modelling (MJM) and Laminated
Object Manufacturing (LOM) To manufacture mini-microchannels, generally,
powder bed fusion methodologies are used with the development of the usage of
metal powders. This technology splits up into solid-state sintering, liquid-phase
sintering, chemically induced sintering, and melting. The background is based on
splitting powders on the bed and sintering and melting specified shapes of
crosssection to connect powders [33]. Powder bed AM types can be listed in three
sub-categories which are selective laser sintering (SLS), selective laser melting
(SLM), and electron beam melting (EBM) [34]. These methods are accurate and
precise for manufacturing mini-micro thermal management channels.
1.2.2.2 Example Uses of Additive Manufacturing in Heat Transfer

Enhancement
Numerous studies in the literature show a solid enhancement in the thermal

performance of the channels. For example, [35] works on an SLM-printed multi-
layer Ti-6Al-4V oscillating heat pipe and states that the thermal conductivity of the
channel is 400-500% higher than the solid one. A reliable comparison [36]
13
compares the 22 optimized manifolds manufactured in conventional techniques and
microchannels manufactured by additive manufacturing. There are some examples
in Figure 8.
Figure 8. Conventional heat exchanger surfaces. Figure is taken from [36].
They state a significant increase in performance with AM, such as a 60% heat
transfer performance increase compared to a wavy finned surface. The study [37]
works on the enhancement of aircraft oil coolers. To make a comparison between
AM and traditional manufacturing, they manufacture the same HEX by laser-based
powder bed fusion process with AlSi10Mg powder. AM'ed one shows a 10%
higher heat dissipation performance. However, it doubles the pressure drop at the
air side because of the surface roughness differences in manufacturing methods.
This study shows that even the same geometry manufactured with AM can show
different results than traditional ones.
The surface roughness problem of the AM can be used as a benefit in heat transfer
devices. The surface roughness may cause heat transfer increase if it is optimized.
Ventola et al. [38] work on flat and single-finned plates. As expected, the surface
of DMLS-used parts is rougher than the machined parts. Between 3500-15000
Reynolds number, the flat plate manufactured by DMLS shows 63% thermal
14
enhancement due to machined one. In addition, DMLS one shows 35% better
performance for finned versions due to its surface roughness. However, a direct
relationship between the surface roughness of additive manufactured parts and
thermal performance could not be found. Even though there are rougher parts, the
max performance of a single fin is observed on a fin with 23.9µm Ra. [39] also,
coupon manufactured by direct metal laser sintering shows higher pressure drop
than simple channel due to high roughness. It results in a drop in mass flow rate
and heat dissipation. The mass flow rate decreases more than heat dissipation. The
friction factor is higher than in other channels, and augmentation increases when
the hydraulic diameter decreases.
The pressure drop and friction factor increase depend on the manufacturing method
and printing parameters because these change the surface roughness. There are
some methods to control; for example, there is a study for SLM parameters
optimization [40]. Arfan et al. investigate the relationship between hatch distance,
power density, scan speed, overlap rate, and surface roughness. They state that
increased laser power and hatch distance increase surface roughness, and the
overlap rate and scan speed correlate negatively. [41] states that the laser scanning
speed affects the thermal conductivity of 316 steel. If the laser scanning speed is
faster than the optimum one, the bulk thermal conduction of the part is decreased
by about %10 percent due to less time at elevated temperatures. Build direction is
another parameter for additive manufacturing. [42] worked the effect of build
orientation on internal channels shaped cylindrical by DMLS. The vertical printed
channels generally have a lower friction coefficient than others. Increasing friction
factor leads to a decrease in mass flow and heat transfer rate. However, the
reduction in mass flow rate is higher than the heat transfer rate. It compensates for
heat transfer loss. They state that if this surface roughness, mass flow, and heat
transfer relation may be arranged positively, more efficient channels can be
obtained by additive manufacturing. In addition, build direction is very likely to
affect the shape of the channel. Computed X-ray tomography shows This on a
horizontal printed teardrop, cylindrical, and diamond channels.
15
Of course, the benefit of additive manufacturing is the ease of manufacturing
complex shapes. That is, manufacturing, placing into mini and microchannels some
features, changing channel types, adding manipulators, and so on are key points of
view to consider. [15] worked on wavy channels and the wavelength effect on
performance parameters by additive manufacturing. They work on 0.1L and 0.4L
and investigates the effects on the j1,j2, and j3 function. They do computational
analysis and experiments with the part that DMLS manufactures. Although
computational research shows three functions' enhancement, experiments show
different outputs. Investigations show that using a wavy channel does not decrease
pressure drop but enhances heat transfer by manipulating the flow. The
conservation of shape explains the discrepancy. As mentioned, additive
manufacturing results in high surface roughness and is inaccurate. As a result, the
shape optimization relative to the J3 function could not be achieved. There is a
need for much work to understand.
As previously stated, additive manufacturing increases design flexibility. Instead of

regular pins being used to increase heat transfer of thermal management devices,
the lattice structured pins got attention due to their lightweight nature and
remarkable increase in surface-to-volume ratio. Wang et al. [43] worked on square
solid pin fin, vertex cubic pin fin (VC-PF), and body-centered cubic pin fin (BCC-
PF) and compared each other numerically (Figure 9). Instead of solid bulk pins,
using lattice structured ones causes less pressure drop due to decreased collision
surface with the flow. The maximum pressure drop reduction observed in the VC-
PF structure is about 11.4%. The BCC-PF structure shows the best Nu performance
compared to each other, especially in the laminar regime with high velocity and the
turbulent regime with low flow velocity. Moreover, both lattice structured pin fin
shows solid volume reduction of 17.5% (VC-PF) and 14.6% (BCC-PF). That is,
new designs are lighter than the others. They state that it can be manufactured with
AM. However, the manufacturing time is an issue.
16
Figure 9. VC-PF and BCC-PF designs as lattice units, single-pin fins, and heat
sinks. Figure is taken from [43].
Static mixers result in swirl motion in flow. Research done in the literature shows
that the swirl motion caused by swirl creator features can enhance Nusselt number
by about 100% with a 500% pressure drop increase [44], [45], [46]. As a swirl
creator feature, Kwon et al. [47] worked on static mixers manufactured by AM
numerically and experimentally. They focused on twisted tape and chevron-type
static mixers and selected fluid domain as water. They optimized static mixer
geometries in the 20x20x400 mm channel. An essential parameter for the twisted
tape is the twisting ratio, and for the chevron is the angle of attack. The twist ratio
is selected as 1.5, and the angle of attack is selected as 27° by considering
performance. As a result, both of them show at least a 2-fold heat transfer
coefficient in a low Re regime (Re<1000).
There are alumina HEX works in literature besides the metal ones. Strero-
lithography (SLA) is an additive manufacturing type that uses the
photopolymerization principle [48]. Photo-sensitive polymer is exposed to UV
radiation layer by layer, and that causes crosslinking. The manufacturing of
alumina is possible by using the SLA method. This process is called lithography-
based ceramic manufacturing (LCM). LCM allows the manufacturing of alumina
and zirconia heat exchangers in complex shapes with some additional post-
processes. This lithograph method has a high resolution so that high surface-quality
alumina HEXs can be manufactured with a high surface-to-volume ratio [49].
17
There are also polymer thermal management devices in the literature. Low melting
point and processing temperature lead to cost drop. The major challenge of 3D-
printed polymer heat exchangers is leakage due to improper connection between
layers. [50] states that it can be remedied by in-situ infusion of an epoxy layer
during the printing process. Another disadvantage of polymeric heat exchangers
(HEX) is that polymers have low thermal conductivities. To overcome that
problem, composite structures and metal-filled polymers become a new topic. [51]
states to minimize wall resistance, metal fiber fins that touch hot and cold liquid
can be used. It results in performance enhancement of up to 220% compared to
common plate fin HEXs. [52] states that polymer conductivity is essential at low
percentage filler material. The filler percentage, thermal conductivity, size, and
orientation change the total thermal conductivity of the channel. Interaction
between filler and polymer is also an important parameter. By increasing the
interaction, overall conductivity can be increased [53].
Another advantage of AM is the ability to produce thermal management products;

there is no need for assembly anymore. [54] worked on a mini-channel heat
exchanger (MCHE). The exchanger is designed to work with air on one side and oil
or water on the other side. Instead of manufacturing separately and gluing and
welding each other, they were manufactured as one peace. Manufacturing as one
piece also eliminates the leakage problem of assemblies [55]. It is also beneficial in
terms of the total assembly time of the end product. In addition, gaskets have a
lifetime that directly decreases the total lifetime of the product, and AM eliminates
it.
18
1.3 Problem Definition
Electrical drive units are becoming increasingly important due to the electrification
trends in the automotive industry. Cooling these units is crucial for the reliable and
efficient operation of the vehicle's traction system. An increase in power need and a
decrease in heat transfer area reveals the new cooling performance and size
requirements. These requirements make the design of small and high-performance
heat transfer devices challenging by conventional approaches. Additive
manufacturing provides a novel route to enhancing the performance of these
cooling systems.
This thesis focused on a well-defined problem of cooling the motor driver unit.
There are three units together in the electric drive unit: the electric motor, the motor
driver unit, and the gear. The cooling of the motor driver unit is critical. It has
IGBT components composed of diodes and MOSFETs. These are the mini-power
electronic components that cause excessive heat dissipation. These types of
equipment have junction temperatures and limits of efficient working temperature.
The working efficiency decreases above this temperature limit. Moreover,
technological development causes a decrease in size and that results in high heat
flux. The heat transfer performance of cold plates should be enhanced to keep the
temperature within limits in small sizes. The design freedom is limited with the
conventional manufacturing methods, so heat transfer enhancement in small sizes
is a problem in this manner. Non-conventional manufacturing techniques, except
for additive manufacturing, can manufacture some intricate designs. However, it
results in a high cost per product and requires too much work. Additive
manufacturing shows promising results in this industry with the new developments
in using metals. So, there is a need to understand better the heat transfer
enhancement approaches enabled by additive manufacturing. These heat transfer
devices can be upgraded relative to the system's needs by using additive
manufacturing.
19
1.4 Thesis Objectives
This thesis aims to investigate the potential of heat transfer enhancement through
mixer geometries enabled by additive manufacturing. Toward this aim, the thesis
focuses on the following:
1. Understanding the capability of a novel heat transfer geometry enabled by

additive manufacturing in enhancing heat transfer.
2. Designing a chevron-type static mixer by considering design for additive
manufacturing concepts.
3. Investigating chevron-type static mixer’s efficiency in improving heat
transfer metrics.
4. Investigating the effect of the chevron-type static mixer on the internal fluid
flow in a laminar regime.
5. Determining the geometrical parameters influencing a chevron’s
performance in mixing the flow.
6. Determining the array distance influencing the heat transfer performance in
mixing the flow.
7. Conducting a numerical analysis of a practical and well-defined problem of
cooling the motor driver unit.
20
CHAPTER 2
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Overview of the Numerical Approach
In this thesis, high-performance heat transfer channels are developed by numerical

analysis. Before constructing the model, the chevron-type static mixer is designed
using Siemens NX. The Ansys FLUENT 21 is used as a Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) program. The flow and heat transfer cases were simulated.
Numerical model constructed to simulate a real-life problem. That is, boundary
conditions represent an actual cooling system of power electronics.
Model construction is started with model verification. First, a very well-known

flow over confined cylinder 2D problem is selected from the literature, and the
model is constructed and corrected [56]. The paper works on flow over the cylinder
and also the effect of the cylinder location on the heat transfer rate. The problem
was dimensionless, so the dimensions were selected to simulate mini-channel
dimensions. Then, the same model was converted into 3D and verified with the
literature. After these verification processes, some boundary conditions changed to
simulate real-life problems, and the designed chevron was placed where the
cylinder was. This model is called the model of the fluid domain because
verification work just simulated the fluid domain. The steady-state assumption
verification is done to make the process time-efficient. Then, the mesh
independence works are done with the constructed model of the fluid domain by
investigating selected parameters. This fluid domain model is just used for
preliminary works and verification of the constructed fluid model. After, another
model is constructed, which includes the channel wall thickness, and some of the
boundary conditions are updated to make the simulation closer to real life. Another
mesh independence and steady state validation are carried out. By using the model,
21
geometry optimization, array distance selection, and upgrading heat transfer
performance by DFAM works are done. The flow and heat transfer were
investigated. Ultimately, the highest performance of geometry and the array are
tried to be selected.
2.2 Governing Equations
The Navier-Stokes equation can explain the flow dynamics in the channel, and the
solution methods are written in CFD programs based on these equations. Navier
Stokes Equations can be written as:
Continuity
𝜕𝑝 𝜕(𝑝𝑢) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑤)

+ + + =0
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 (5)
X-momentum
𝜕(𝑝𝑢) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢2 ) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑤)

+ + +
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
(6)
𝜕𝑝 1 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑥 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑧
=− + [ + + ]
𝜕𝑥 𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
Y-momentum
𝜕(𝑝𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣 2 ) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣𝑤)

+ + +
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
𝜕𝑝 1 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑧 (7)
=− + [ + + ]
𝜕𝑦 𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
Z-momentum
𝜕(𝑝𝑤) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑤) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣𝑤) 𝜕(𝑝𝑤 2 )

+ + +
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
(8)
𝜕𝑝 1 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑧 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑧 𝜕𝜏𝑧𝑧
=− + [ + + ]
𝜕𝑧 𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
22
Energy
𝜕(𝐸𝑇 ) 𝜕(𝑢𝐸𝑇 ) 𝜕(𝑣𝐸𝑇 ) 𝜕(𝑤𝐸𝑇 )

+ + +
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
𝜕(𝑝𝑢) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑤)
=− − −
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑡
1 𝜕𝑞𝑥 𝜕𝑞𝑦 𝜕𝑞𝑧
− [ + + ]
𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝑃𝑟𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
1 𝜕 (9)
+ [ (𝑢𝜏𝑥𝑥 + 𝑣𝜏𝑥𝑦 + 𝑤𝜏𝑥𝑧 )
𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥
𝜕
+ (𝑢𝜏𝑥𝑦 + 𝑣𝜏𝑦𝑦 + 𝑤𝜏𝑦𝑧 )
𝜕𝑦
𝜕
+ (𝑢𝜏𝑥𝑧 + 𝑣𝜏𝑦𝑧 + 𝑤𝜏𝑧𝑧 )]
𝜕𝑧
Some of the works done in the thesis are carried out at the steady state. With the
steady state assumptions, equations become:
Continuity
𝜕(𝑝𝑢) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑤)

+ + =0 (10)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
X-momentum
𝜕(𝑝𝑢2 ) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑤) 𝜕𝑝 1 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑥 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑧

+ + =− + [ + + ]
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑥 𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 (11)
Y-momentum
𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑣) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣 2 ) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣𝑤) 𝜕𝑝 1 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑧

+ + =− + [ + + ]
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑦 𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 (12)
Z-momentum
𝜕(𝑝𝑢𝑤) 𝜕(𝑝𝑣𝑤) 𝜕(𝑝𝑤 2 ) 𝜕𝑝 1 𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑧 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑧 𝜕𝜏𝑧𝑧

+ + =− + [ + + ]
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑧 𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 (13)
23
Energy
𝜕(𝑢𝐸𝑇 ) 𝜕(𝑣𝐸𝑇 ) 𝜕(𝑤𝐸𝑇 )

+ +
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
1 𝜕𝑞𝑥 𝜕𝑞𝑦 𝜕𝑞𝑧
=− [ + + ]
𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝑃𝑟𝑟 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
1 𝜕
+ [ (𝑢𝜏𝑥𝑥 + 𝑣𝜏𝑥𝑦 + 𝑤𝜏𝑥𝑧 )
𝑅𝑒𝑟 𝜕𝑥 (14)
𝜕
+ (𝑢𝜏𝑥𝑦 + 𝑣𝜏𝑦𝑦 + 𝑤𝜏𝑦𝑧 )
𝜕𝑦
𝜕
+ (𝑢𝜏𝑥𝑧 + 𝑣𝜏𝑦𝑧 + 𝑤𝜏𝑧𝑧 )]
𝜕𝑧
The friction factor can be calculated in laminar flow numerically by the equation:
∆𝑃𝐷ℎ
𝑓= (15)
2𝜌𝑈 2 𝐿
L is the channel length from the inlet to the outlet. U is the mean velocity.
The flow on streamline can be investigated by the Bernoulli equation with the
steady state assumption:
𝑈22 𝑃2 𝑈12 𝑃1
+ + 𝑍2 = + + 𝑍1
2𝑔 𝑝𝑔 2𝑔 𝑝𝑔 (16)
Where:
g : gravitational force,
U : velocity
z : height
P : pressure
24
2.3 Numerical Model
After the confined cylinder wall verification studies (3.1.1 section), a chevron-type
static mixer is designed and added to the same channel almost where the cylinder
was. The chevron-type static mixer is designed to be able to be manufactured with
additive manufacturing with no support structures. It can be manufactured
vertically or in a little tilted way because the overhanging surface is not higher than
45-50°. The tilted version is preferable because there is a need for temperature and
hot point control in EBM, and SLM, which are powder bed fusion techniques due
to decreased residual stresses, surface porosity, print accuracy, and kind of positive
effects. That is the chevron-type static mixer designed by considering the DFAM
concept. Removing support structures is hard, and removing support structures may
damage the surface by increasing roughness. That damage may result in
unexpected flow regimes, directly affecting heat transfer and pressure drop in
small-size channels since the design is made to be able to be manufactured without
support.
To increase thermal performance, as we mentioned, there are two main factors:

increasing heat transfer and decreasing pressure drop, so an innovative design is
made by considering these. The chevron does not have as much blockage ratio as a
cylinder or other conventional pin versions at a cross-section parallel to the inlet, so
it is designed to result in less pressure drop. Moreover, the chevron is designed to
work with the flow, not against the flow. Instead of just splitting and blocking flow,
it directs flow and mixes so the hot and cold fluids face each other.
Chevron starts 3.5 mm away from the inlet, and it starts from the edges. It seems
like the fin of a shark tilted to direct flow. The other corner is placed at a 5.5 mm
away from the inlet. The chevron tip is placed 8.5 mm away from the inlet, 1 mm
away from the left wall, and H high from the bottom wall (Figures 10, 11, and 12).
H will be selected by design optimization. This asymmetricity is for enhancing
flow mixing, and further DFAM concerns will be explained. The chevron thickness
is selected as 200 µm, which can be manufactured easily with AM techniques.
25
H
8.5 mm
Figure 10. Chevron model front view.
3.5 mm
5.5 mm
Figure 11. Chevron design top view.
1 mm
Figure 12. Chevron design inlet view.
Some assumptions and arrangements must be made to work with the CFD problem.
First, the inlet velocity is selected to stay in the laminar regime. That is, the
Reynolds number is lower than 2300. The laminar regime is chosen due to
considering both the benefits of the AM's surface roughness and the static mixer's
performance attributes. The flow is also considered in a steady state due to the
analysis cost. The time before the flow reaches a steady state is outside the scope of
the thesis. The validation of the steady state assumption is done in upcoming
sections. The fluid selected is incompressible and Newtonian (viscosity is
constant). Furthermore, the walls also show no-slip condition. There is no
gravitational force and compressibility. These analyses do not consider wall
26
roughness since it depends on the AM technique and parameters. The dimension of
the fluid domain (3 x 3 x 31 mm) is analyzed as shown in Figure 13.
31 mm
3 mm
3 mm
Figure 13. Fluid domain for the numerical model.
The hydraulic diameter of the channel is 3 mm, and it is calculated by using the
equation:
4 × 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎
𝐷ℎ = (17)
𝑝
Case design:
Some of the borders are selected as walls. The material of the mini-channel is
selected as pure aluminum, which is the default selection in ANSYS Fluent, and
the material properties are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Pure aluminum properties (default of the Ansys FLUENT).
Density Specific Heat Thermal Conductivity

[kg/m3] [kJ/kg.K] [W/m.K]
2719 871 202.4
Fluid is selected as 50%-50% water and ethylene glycol at 65°C (Table 3).
27
Table 3. Ethylene glycol 50% and water 50% mixture properties at 65°C.
Thermal Dynamic Viscosity

Temperature Density Specific Heat
Conductivity x10-3
[oC] [kg/m3] [kJ/kg.K]
[W/m.K] [N.s/m2]
65 1051 3466 0.402 1.397
The Prandtl number of the mixture can be calculated by the equation:
𝜇
𝑣 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑢𝑚 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 ⁄𝜌 𝑐𝑝 𝜇
𝑃𝑟 = = = = (18)
𝛼 𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑘⁄𝑐 𝜌 𝑘
𝑝
The calculated Prandtl number of the mixture is 3.65 for 65°C.
Two numerical models are constructed, which are the model of the fluid domain
and the model of the channel with thickness. The fluid domain model is used for
verification with benchmarks in literature and preliminary works. The model that
considers channel wall thickness is used to simulate a more realistic cooling
channel model.
2.3.1 Modeling of the Fluid Domain
After the verification studies (mentioned in section 2.3.1.1) carried on, the designed
chevron was placed where the cylinder was. This work was necessary to work on
the verified model. After several trials, some boundary conditions are changed to
simulate the cooling system. The walls are not modeled in this model, so the
analysis just focused on the fluid domain. The outer zones of the fluid domain,
except for inlet and outlet, are selected as the wall with 0 thickness. The reason was
verification model from the literature also does not consider channel thicknesses.
Boundary conditions carry an essential role in doing correct analysis. Inlet velocity
is a 3D polynomial derived from the 2D cylindric problem used for verification. It
is not a fully developed profile; however, it is very close.
28
2 2
z2 x2
𝑈𝑥 = 𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 = 𝑈𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∗ (1 − ) ∗ (1 − ) (19)
0.0015 0.0015
𝑈𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1.33 𝑚/𝑠
𝑈𝑦 = 𝑈𝑧 = 0
The inlet velocity is determined to fix the Reynolds number as 2000. The Reynolds
number can be calculated using the formula:
𝜌𝑣𝐷ℎ
𝑅𝑒 = (20)
𝜇
It is calculated using the hydraulic diameter of the inlet to make it easier to control
because the wetted area changes for every design. The velocity is kept constant
instead of changing velocity input relative to geometry, so channel Reynold's also
does. The mean velocity is used in the formula, which is 2/3 of the maximum
velocity of the given profile.
The temperature of the inlet fluid is selected as 65°C, and the backflow temperature
at the outlet will be chosen iteratively by considering the average temperature of
the fluid at the inlet. There is no backflow in a single chevroned model; however, it
is crucial in array models to cause backflow at the outlet. That is, as a boundary
condition, it is also constant. Outlet gauge pressure is selected as 0.
The top surface heat flux is constant. The heat flux selected to simulate an actual
motor driver is as follows:
𝑞"𝑡𝑜𝑝𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 200,000 𝑊/𝑚2
It is taken from an actual electric motor drive unit. Only one wall is selected to give
heat flux to the fluid domain. The channel is assumed as part of the cold plate
designed to cool diodes and MOSFETs. The remaining walls have zero heat flux.
𝑞" = 0
29
Giving heat flux zero makes fluid-solid regions an insulated wall. So, there is a
heat flux just a given plane. There is no other heat transfer with the fluid domain.
Figure 14. Boundary conditions of the model of the fluid domain.
As a convergence criterion, all residuals have to drop below 10−6.
The solution method scheme is selected as coupled because the pressure-based

solver works well in single-phase steady-state problems and gives robust results.
Moreover, Least Squares Cell Based is used for gradient selection. Its accuracy is
comparable with node-based gradients where the skewness and cell quality are
issues. In addition to this, it is less costly than node-based. The chevron has a
curved free surface, so at the connection with the channel, there are skewness and
cell quality issues, and as a less expensive default method, least squares cell based
is selected. The pressure, density, and momentum equations were selected as
second order and upwind. The flow of the problem is one-directional, and using
second order can supply enough accuracy to our problem.
30
2.3.1.1 Model Verification
First, a generic confined cylinder problem is benchmarked to construct a verified

model. The reference work is taken from Cheraghi et al. [56]. They worked on
confined cylinders in 2D. The scheme of the computational domain is shown in
Figure 15.
Figure 15. Scheme of the computational domain of verification model. Figure is

taken from [56].
They worked with dimensionless parameters. For all simulations, the Reynolds
number is kept constant at 100 and is calculated by using bulk velocity and
cylinder diameter. They worked on different Prandtl numbers varying from 0.1 to
10; however, pr is kept constant at 1 for model verification. The model was
constructed as unsteady, and the inlet velocity was fully developed with the
implementation of parabolic formula to the inlet. The maximum velocity equals 1.5
Umean by this input. Constant heat flux q" = 1.0 is given on channel walls. Also,
the zero Neumann BCs are used for the inlet and outlet. Cheraghi et al. used the
Piso algorithm, a second-order upwind scheme for momentum and energy
31
equations. Moreover, second-order Crank-Nicolson is used for energy terms by
using the OpenFOAM code. These selections were given in the paper.
ANSYS Fluent 2020 is used to verify the model. D dimension (Figure 15) was
selected as 1 mm to construct the simulation, so the channel dimensions became 3
mm x 31 mm in 2D. The exact boundary conditions and the same computational
methods are used.
The parabolic velocity profile at the inlet is arranged to achieve Re=100 with pr=1
unknown fluid (Figure 16).
Figure 16. Given parabolic velocity profile at inlet Umax =0.15 m/s for Re=100
with Pr=1 fluid.
The fluid properties are selected constant as Table 4 to get pr=1.
32
Table 4. Selected Pr=1 fluid properties for model verification.
Thermal Dynamic Viscosity

Density Specific Heat
Conductivity x10-3
[kg/m3] [kJ/kg.K]
[W/m.K] [N.s/m2]
998.2 1100 1.1033 1.003
The heat flux is selected as 1000 W/m2 due to D=1 mm selected. The paper states
that the independent mesh for the numerical analysis is 4 × 104 constructed with
triangular and quadrilateral meshes. The analyses are done in the same cell number
with triangular and mostly square meshes. Mesh dimensions are selected as
0.05 mm × 0.05 mm. Moreover, to get accurate results, meaningful time step
selection is essential. The time step selected by the equation to catch the details:
𝑀𝑒𝑠ℎ 𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒
≥4 (21)
𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 × 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝
The Umean is selected as 0.1m/s, so the first trials are done with 0.000125 s time
step size. Then, a series of transient analyses are done, and the time step is selected
relative to the maximum velocity in the fluid domain.
Model verification is done by comparing the channel's max temperature and

Nusselt number. There are different Nu calculation methods in the literature.
However, the paper states the method used. The bulk temperature data is necessary
to calculate Nu. There is also bulk temperature formulation given in the article. The
bulk and wall temperature are used, and Nu calculations are done through the
channel. After, the average Nu is also calculated. The given equations in the article
can be listed as follows:
𝑞"𝐻
𝑁𝑢(𝑥, 𝑡) = (22)
𝐾(𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑏 )
𝐻/2
∫ 𝑈𝑇𝑑𝑦
𝑇𝑏 = −𝐻/2 ⁄ 𝐻/2 (23)
∫−𝐻/2 𝑈𝑑𝑦
33
1 𝜏
̅̅̅̅(𝑥) = ∫ 𝑁𝑢(𝑥, 𝑡)𝑑𝑡
𝑁𝑢 (24)
𝜏 0
The verification results are shown in the results and discussion section.
The final aim is simulating an actual case so the model converted into 3D with
exact dimensions and the same boundary conditions. Just side walls were selected
as symmetry to simulate confined cylinder in 3D.
The inlet velocity profile is selected as a 3D version of Figure 16. The velocity
profile is very similar to Equation 19. There is no y variable due to the simulate
confined cylinder.
2
z2
𝑈𝑥 = 𝑈𝑖𝑛 = 0.15 m/s ∗ (1 − ) (25)
0.0015
The same benchmark is also done with the 3D model of the confined cylinder
(Figure 17). The channel dimensions became 3 𝑚𝑚 × 3 𝑚𝑚 × 31 𝑚𝑚.
Conversion of the mesh size from 2D to 3D is 0.05 𝑚𝑚 × 0.05 𝑚𝑚 × 0.05 𝑚𝑚.
This results in at least 2,376,000 mesh. This is too much for the transient solution.
It is optimized by increasing cell dimensions to the 0.1 𝑚𝑚 × 0.1 𝑚𝑚 × 0.1 𝑚𝑚.
That results in a 297,000 mesh number without considering inflation layers. As a
result of the optimization, the selected time step is doubled.
34
Figure 17. Confined cylinder model verification and conversion of the model from
2D to 3D
The given equations for the calculations were updated to work on the 3D model.
Another dimension is added to equations as follows:
𝑞"𝐻
𝑁𝑢(𝑥, 𝑧, 𝑡) = (26)
𝐾(𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑏 )
∬𝑆 𝑈𝑇𝑑𝑦𝑑𝑧
𝑇𝑏 = ⁄ (27)
∬𝑆 𝑈𝑑𝑦𝑑𝑧
𝐻/2 𝐻/2
𝑇𝑤 = ∫ 𝑇𝑑𝑧⁄∫ 𝑑𝑧 (28)
−𝐻/2 −𝐻/2
1 𝜏
̅̅̅̅(𝑥) = ∫ 𝑁𝑢(𝑥, 𝑧, 𝑡)𝑑𝑡
𝑁𝑢 (29)
𝜏 0
The wall temperature was a point data, which can be calculated with line data in
3D. The bulk temperature is calculated with a line and turned into a plane.
The verification results are shown in the results and discussion section. These
verification works are done to construct a verified model first. Then, by making
some BCs changes, the numerical model is arranged to simulate the actual system.
35
2.3.1.2 Mesh Independence Study
Poly-hexacore mesh is used. At the close region to the wall and critical region this
mosaic meshing uses polyhedral mesh type to increase accuracy. Mosaic meshing
enables the hexahedral mesh type in the bulk region, it causes a reduction in total
face count. The reduction helps to decrease solution time. However, in the critical
areas, it uses polyhedral. There is a curved section since the other mesh types
weren’t used to achieve accuracy because polyhedral works better at curved
regions. The conversion between polyhedral to different mesh types can be seen
clearly in Figure 18.
Figure 18. Mesh structure view of the channel cross-section.
The inflation layer is used to see the effect of flow mixing action on the thermal
boundary layer. A buffer layer is also used to achieve smooth conversion between
the polyhedral to hexahedral.
The minimum mesh size, inflation layer number, size, and growth rate are changed
and tried to construct a mesh-independent model. The results are shown in the
results and discussion section.
36
2.3.2 Modeling of the Channel Taking into Account the Wall Thickness
The second model is built by considering heat transfer between side walls and the
fluid domain because heat transfer enhancement does not just occur on the heated
wall. The model is constructed by assuming it is part of cold plates. . The model of
the fluid domain is used for model verification with literature and preliminary
analysis by examining just increased heat transfer on the top wall and overall
pressure drop.
The constructed model presents one of the channels of the cold plate, as shown in
Figure 19. The figure is a non-completed design, just a draft.
Figure 19. The cold plate is constructed by channels (3 x 3 x 31 mm) with

chevrons, highlighting the worked domain and its model.
The channel thickness is 0.5 mm (thicker than a chevron), which can be

manufactured by additive manufacturing techniques easily. Surface roughness is
not included in models because it is highly dependent on the process and parameter
as investigated.
The same assumptions are made with the model of the fluid domain: no slip on the
wall, steady state, continuous, incompressible fluid, and no gravitational effects.
Chevron model stays the same just wall thickness is implemented to see the effect
of heat transfer of side walls, which makes the model closer to the real-life
problem. As a result, the H=2 mm chevron looks like Figure 19.
37
Heat flux is given from the external bottom wall (𝑞"𝑡𝑜𝑝𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 200,000 𝑊/𝑚2 )
because the preliminary works carried on the model of the fluid domain shows that
chevron performs better on the bottom wall where the chevron is placed. In
addition, we assume that the channel is a part of the cold plate. So, outer side wall
boundary conditions are selected as symmetric Figure 20. This simulates the same
heat transfer that occurs in side channels and some boundary conditions are valid.
Also, there is no interaction with each other since the use of a symmetry wall aims
to assume zero flux off all quantities across the wall. The external top wall of the
channel is assumed to be insulated due to unknown environmental conditions. That
is, if the environment is below the top wall temperature, the model simulates the
worst-case scenario in this manner. Moreover, the fluid and channel touch walls are
selected as coupled walls due to obtaining non-insulated walls. Therefore, there is
heat transfer between the fluid domain and the channel at side walls.
The same fluid and the wall material are used as in the model of fluid domain
work. In the upgraded model, inlet velocity was selected as uniform flow, and the
volumetric flow rate decreased to half of the first model. The velocity at the inlet in
the y and z directions are taken as zero.
𝑈𝑥 = 𝑈𝑖𝑛 = 0.44307 m/s
𝑈𝑦 = 𝑈𝑧 = 0
The reason to select velocity as 0.44307 m/s is to guarantee the laminar flow
assumption because it is much smaller than Rec . We can calculate the Reynolds
number of flow as:
1051(𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 ) ∗ 0.44307(𝑚/𝑠) ∗ 0.003(𝑚)

𝑅𝑒 = = 1000
0.001397(𝑘𝑔/𝑚𝑠)
Hydraulic diameter can be calculated as Equation 30. The hydraulic diameter is not
constant throughout the channel due to the chevron shape.
38
𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟
𝐷ℎ = (30)
𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
The maximum hydraulic diameter is calculated to check whether the maximum Re

is in the laminar region. The wetted perimeter is found to be less than 1.5 times the
size of the square cross-section. As the fluid cross-sectional area decreases, the 1.5
times factor is considered the upper limit for the maximum hydraulic diameter.
Moreover, preliminary results show that the maximum average velocity around the
chevron is 0.5m/s. So, the calculated maximum Re around the chevron structure is
below 2000, which is the critical Re.
Additionally, we conducted runs using turbulence models to assess whether the

turbulence intensity remains below 5%. The preliminary outcomes of these runs
show no indication of exceeding this threshold. As a result, the flow inside the
channel is assumed as in a laminar regime.
The gauge pressure at the outlet is selected as zero, and the backflow temperature is
selected iteratively.
Figure 20. Selected wall type of the model of the channel with a thickness
39
The rest (solution method) is the same as the first model because nothing has
changed in the fluid domain.
The convergence criteria (10−6 ) is changed for the model because the maximum
temperature and average temperature of the heated wall graphs don’t stabilize when
solution is done. The convergence criteria for the all equations became 10−9.
2.3.2.1 Model Verification
As mentioned, to verify the fluid domain, the model of the fluid domain is used.
There is no need for such work because the same fluid domain is used for the
channel with thickness model. Just the channel thickness is added, and some
boundary conditions are adjusted logically to simulate a portion of the cold plate.
2.3.2.2 Mesh Independence Study
Instead of a poly-hexacore mesh structure, the polyhedral volume mesh structure is

used by considering preliminary works carried out on the model of the fluid
domain. The difference is that polyhedral contains just a polyhedral mesh type; on
the other hand, poly-hexacore combines polyhedral and other mesh types for
solution time concerns. From preliminary work, it is found that working in a steady
state is valid and saves much time. Therefore, analyses done by using polyhedral
mesh type do not cost excessive time. In addition, there were skewness issues in
poly-hexacore meshing around inflation and the buffer layer close to the chevron
and wall connection edge. So, the polyhedral mesh type is selected for this model.
40
Figure 21. The mesh structure of the model of the channel with thickness.
The inflation layer just placed fluid and wall interfaces. It can be clearly observed
in Figure 22. The optimization of the number of inflation layers is done. In
addition, there is no buffer layer as a mosaic mesh type.
Figure 22. A cross-section of the channel that shows the mesh structure
The critical parameters are the maximum temperature on the heated area and the
pressure drop for the power electronic systems cooling devices. As mentioned,
performance parameters are dependent on these parameters.
41
The minimum mesh size, inflation layer number, size, and growth rate are changed,
and we tried to construct a mesh-independent model that is the same as the fluid
domain model. The results are shown in the results and discussion section.
42
CHAPTER 3
3 RESULTS & DISCUSSION
3.1 Numerical Model Verification
The model verification process is crucial to ensure any numerical simulation's

reliability and accuracy. To begin the verification, a well-known confined cylinder
problem is constructed to place the chevron into the verified model. The problem is
compared with the existing data from the mentioned paper. The model is changed
from 2D to 3D to work on the more realistic domain. Again, the key parameters are
compared with the confirmed data from the literature. After, the designed geometry
was inserted into the channel, and some boundary conditions changed to represent
a part of the actual motor driver cooler. This results in a need for mesh
independence works. Furthermore, as another verification part, steady state
validation is made by comparing with constructed proper transient models.
Overall, the section presents a comprehensive approach to model verification,

verification of the model by literature, the mesh independence work, and validation
of the steady-state assumption.
3.1.1 Verification by Using Literature
The section shows the results of the verification mentioned in section 2.3.1.1. The
temperature contours are investigated to compare the generated model and the
paper. The color range is arranged in the same values of 25 to 25.7 °C. The
temperature contours of the paper and results found with the same temperature
contour range are shown in Figure 23. The article does not mention the time of the
contour in the period; however, the resembled contour was selected and compared
in the figure.
43
Figure 23. Temperature contour comparison for the same temperature range,
however, not at the same time at the period (time was not mentioned in the paper)
[56].
Almost the same temperature distribution at the flow can be seen in Figure 23. The
maximum temperature change of the channel is found the same as paper, which is
0.7 °C. The contour seems the same; however, it is not enough to verify the
constructed model. A graph that shows the Nusselt number distribution of the
confined cylinder and straight channel that compares with data from the literature
(Figure 24).
Figure 24. Variation of the instantaneous Nusselt number in the stream-wise

direction within a period of vortex shedding for Pr=1.0. Figure is taken from [56].
44
There is a need to compare the Nu results from the paper to verify the model. The
related bulk temperature and Nu calculations are done in vertical lines on the
constructed channel model. The Nu is calculated in section vise, so about 20
sections on the channel are selected to get data using Equations 22, 23, and 24. The
flow is unsteady and periodic, so the average Nusselt Number is calculated by
taking the integral over the period. These calculations are done in the result section
of Ansys FLUENT by implementing the equations into the program. There is also
simple channel data in the reference paper, so a model of the empty channel is also
constructed and worked on with the same boundary conditions. After a series of
analyses are done with a confined cylinder problem and straight channel, the results
get closer, as shown in Figure 25. Our results closely agree with the reference
results; hence, our model is valid.
40
D=1mm Cylinder Cheraghi et al.
35
Straight Channel Cheraghi et al.
30
D=1mm Cylinder Analysis
25
Straight Channel Analysis
Nu
20
15
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
x/d
Figure 25. Verification of the analysis and the paper on Nu vs. x/d graphics.
45
To verify the 3D model, looked into the observed temperature change in the
channel. The max temperature change was found as 0.7 °C, the same as the 2D
model and the paper. Moreover, the temperature distribution is quite similar.
Figure 26. Temperature contour of the constructed 3D model in a period.
Some of the average Nusselt on points at a determined time is also compared and
verified that they are the same in determined sections. In the 2D model, the wall’s
temperature was assumed to be a point; however, in 3D, it was considered the
average of the line on the wall in the z dimension. The bulk temperature domain is
changed from line to plane, and the Nusselt Number also does. Due to the post-
processing of the transient solution, this is too time-consuming (average Nusselt
number calculation for each point in a period), so graphs are not printed. There are
other works such as mesh independence, which are made to achieve more accurate
solutions, so other verifying steps such as comparing whole graph were not done
for this 3D model.
46
3.1.2 Model of the Fluid Domain Mesh Independency Study
All mesh independence works are done in a steady state due to the cost of analysis.
The steady-state and transient solutions are compared in section 3.1.4, and a
steady-state assumption is made. The analyses were done on the generated
analytical model.
The critical parameters are the maximum temperature on the heated wall and the
pressure drop for the power electronic systems cooling devices. As mentioned,
performance is dependent on these parameters. These parameters are selected due
to confirm both hydrodynamic and thermal mesh independence. The pressure drop
presents hydrodynamic mesh independence, and the maximum temperature
presents thermal independence.
The mesh independency study is done by changing volume mesh sizes, inflation
layer number and size, and surface mesh size. The whole element’s size is reduced
to get finer mesh simultaneously. The inflation layer is selected as the smooth
layer. That is program arranges that the inflation layer’s last layer thickness equals
the volume thickness. The chosen growth rate was 1.2. The inflation layer number
is increased when the mesh number is increased.
The results are shown in Figures 27 and 28.
47
Maximum Temperature on Top Wall 200
180
160
(°C)
140
120
0 1 2 3 4
Cell Number Millions
Figure 27. Maximum temperature change of the fluid domain model relative to cell
number.
460
450
Pressure Drop (Pa)
440
430
420
410
400
0 1 2 3 4
Cell Number Millions
Figure 28. Pressure drop change of the fluid domain model relative to cell number.
48
The selected cell number is 2.3M, where both percentage differences of the
parameters are below 1%. The error equation is used:
𝑃2 − 𝑃1
𝑒% = | | × 100 (31)
𝑃1
P represents any parameter.
Maximum volume mesh size and surface mesh size were selected as 0.07 mm. The
inflation layer number is optimized at 13 layers. These mesh sizes are small for
numerical analysis. All walls other than the top wall are modeled as insulated
bodies on our numerical model. Therefore, the temperature on the edge of the
heated top wall increases rapidly. This fact also leads to sharp gradients, which
need to be simulated finely by the numerical model. Therefore, fine meshing is
vital for the credibility of our numerical simulations.
Our results show that thermal stability is achieved earlier than mechanical stability,
reflected in the maximum temperature and pressure drop variations. Therefore, we
can postulate that thermal mesh independence is obtained with a lower cell
compared to hydraulic mesh independence. To make problems fully mesh-
independent, a 2.3M cell number is selected, and the rest of the analysis is done
with the same number.
3.1.3 Model of the Channel with Thickness Mesh Independency Study
All mesh independence works are done in a steady state due to the cost of analysis.
The comparison of steady and transient solutions is done in section 3.1.5. The
analysis was done on a generated analytical model.
In addition to the first model, there is channel thickness. An increase in cell number
as a result of the mesh independence study is expected.
49
99
Maximum Temperature on
98
Heated Wall (°C)
97
96
95
94
93
92
0 5 10 15
Cell Number x 100000
234
232
Pressure Drop (Pa)
230
228
226
224
222
0 5 10 15
91
Average Temperature on
90
Heated Wall (°C)
89
88
87
86
0 5 10 15
Figure 29. The mesh independence works of the channel with thickness:
Maximum temperature on the heated wall, pressure drop, and average temperature
vs. cell number graphs.
50
Graphics compares the results. In the graph, error bars are arranged to the 1%.
As a result, 497,290 cell numbers can be used for both hydrodynamic and thermal
mesh-independent models. 293,438 cell numbers are used in the fluid region, and
the rest is for channel thickness and chevron model. The selected dimensions for
the fluid and channel thickness domains are 0.125 mm. 3 inflation layers are used
due to this flow in the laminar regime.
In summary, the differences in the mesh independence of each model are caused by
the hot spots and the thermal gradients caused by the insulated walls. In this model,
there are no such high gradients, so the mesh-independent cell number is less than
the model of the fluid domain.
3.1.4 Verification of Flow Regime Assumption for the Model of the Fluid
Domain
After the cylindrical model is validated, the steady state and transient solution are
compared to see if the results are the same. This work is done to reduce simulation
costs. The worked boundary condition simulated the confined chevron. The
selected heat flux from the top was the same:
𝑞"𝑡𝑜𝑝𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 200,000 𝑊/𝑚2
The inlet flow is fully developed for confined problem. The inlet velocity profile
was:
2
z2
𝑈𝑥 = 𝑈𝑖𝑛 = 1.33 m/s ∗ (1 − )
0.0015
𝑈𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ≅ 0.89𝑚/𝑠
𝑈𝑦 = 𝑈𝑧 = 0
51
Side walls are assumed as symmetry regions. All the other parameters and
assumptions are the same as the main analytical model investigated. In this model,
steady state and transient trials are done. The time step was selected by using
Equation 21 to catch details.
The comparison parameters are selected as average temperature, the maximum

temperature on the top wall, and total pressure drop. The result graphs are shown in
Figures 30, 31, and 32.
a-1) a-2)
Figure 30. Average temperature comparison on the heated wall between a-1)
Steady-state and a-2) Transient solution for a model of the fluid domain.
a-1) a-2)
Figure 31. Maximum temperature comparison on the heated wall between a-1)
Steady-state and a-2) Transient solution for a model of the fluid domain.
52
a-1) a-2)
Figure 32. Pressure drop comparison between a-1) Steady-state and a-2) Transient
solution for a model of the fluid domain.
Results are shown in Table 5. The flow is periodic at the Re=2000 condition;
however, it reaches a steady state afterward. Figures 30, 31, and 32 show the
critical parameters converge. The results are close to each other.
Table 5. Results of steady and transient solution for confined chevron
Parameters Steady Transient
Maximum temperature on the heated wall (°C) 227 215-220
Average temperature on the heated wall (°C) 117 118
Pressure drop (Pa) 148 128-165
Convergence of transient solution takes about 2-3 weeks. Conversely, a steady

solution takes about 7-10 hours. As we can see in the figures, the pressure plot
converges faster than the temperature plots.
This is the most challenging boundary condition used in the analysis series, so, as a
result, all comparison works are done by assuming steady-state conditions at
Re=2000 and 200,000 W/m2 for fluid domain.
53
Channel with Thickness
As mentioned in the upgraded model section, the inlet mean velocity is selected as
half of the fluid domain model is constructed (Re became 1000). So, there is a need
to check if working in steady state conditions is valid. The heat flux is given from
the outside of the bottom wall where a chevron is placed. The rest of the problem is
as defined in the previous section. In transient solution, 0.1 mm cell size is selected
for fluid, 0.15 mm is selected for channel domain, and 3 inflation layers are used
by considering the cost of the solution.
The time step selection is made to fluid passes a mesh at equal or more than 4
steps. So,
𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑚𝑒𝑠ℎ 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 0.1 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 ≤ = 𝑚 = 5.64 × 10−5 𝑠
𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 × 4 0.44307 𝑠 × 4
For this problem, mean velocity is used to calculate time step, and it is selected as
5.5 × 10−5 since, the flow is much lower than the critical Reynolds number, and
the laminar flow assumption is made.
The pressure drop, max temperature, and average temperature are selected as
critical parameters to compare each result.
a-1) a-2)
Figure 33. Upgraded model maximum temperature on the heated wall: a-1)
Steady-state and a-2) Transient results.
54
a-1) a-2)
Figure 34. Upgraded model pressure drop : a-1) Steady-state and a-2) Transient
results.
The pressure drop graph converges directly, and there is no oscillation, so we can
conclude that there is no periodic flow with these boundary conditions.
a-1) a-2)
Figure 35. Upgraded model average temperature on heated wall: a-1) Steady-state
and a-2) Transient results.
It clearly can be seen the analysis converges around 3rd seconds after the
simulation starts. The results are shown in Table 6.
55
channel with the thickness.
Parameters Steady State Solution Transient Solution

Maximum temperature on the
93.43 93.57
fluid side of the heated wall (°C)
Average temperature on fluid
87.93 87.97
side of the heated wall (°C)
Pressure drop (Pa) 230.03 231.25
As a result, the steady solution and transient solution show almost the same results.
We see no fluctuation in transient graphs; so we can postulate that the flow is not
periodic. In conclusion, the steady state assumption is valid for the model. A
steady-state solution will be used to optimize the model by considering time cost.
56
3.2 Effect of Change in Geometry
In this section, H parameter is changed, and the effects on flow and temperature are
investigated to find the best performance of chevron geometry. H parameter
directly affects the blockage ratio and flow direction in the channel. There are no
certain results such that heat transfer or thermal performance increases if the
blockage ratio increases. So, optimization of chevron height is done in this section.
To make the comparison, chevrons with different H heights are tried, which are 1,
1.5, 2, and 2.5 mm (Figure 36). The heat flux is given from the bottom wall where
the chevron is placed because preliminary results are done with the model of the
fluid domain showing that the best performance is obtained in this way.
Figure 36. Chevron with different heights: a)2.5 mm, b)2 mm, c)1.5 mm, and d)1
mm.
The runs are done in a steady-state solution. It is proved that the steady state
assumption shows the same result as the transient one. Moreover, the same mesh
size is used for each model. The size selected is mentioned in the mesh
independence section. The results are shown in Table 7.
57
Table 7. Chevron with different heights comparison by the model of the channel
with the thickness.
Max Temperature on Avg. Temperature on

Pressure
H (mm) Inside of Heated Wall Inside of Heated Wall
Drop (Pa)
(°C) (°C)
2.5 100.0 91.9 448.1
2.0 93.4 88.0 230.0
1.5 99.2 91.5 192.4
1.0 101.5 92.4 178.2
The average heat transfer can be calculated using the heated wall's average
temperature. The average temperature on the heated wall gives a clue about the rest
of the channel. The temperature difference on this wall is 26.9, 23.0, 26.5, and 27.4
in height order from tall to small. The temperature difference is smaller in the
H=2.0 mm case due to more heat transfer with this particular geometry.
The other important parameter is pressure drop. As the height of the chevron rises,
the pressure drop also increases. This change in pressure drop is connected to the
blockage ratio. Notably, there is a notable surge in pressure drop when moving
from 2 mm to 2.5 mm heights since the blockage ratio calculated from the cross-
section increases around the region close to the chevron tip.
Maximum temperature is another important parameter, as mentioned, due to the

junction temperature of electronic devices. Chevron H=2.0 mm shows the best
performance with 93.4 °C inside the heated wall.
The results show that the increasing blockage ratio and heat transfer are not directly
correlated. Results claim there are other factors besides blockage ratio, such as
flow directing of features, mixing thermal boundary region, channel size, shape,
and flow velocity. As a result of this section, the chevron with H=2.0 mm shows
the best performance. The other works are done with this geometry.
58
3.3 Effect of Static Mixer Shape
In this section, the effect of the chevron shape is investigated. The residuals and
convergence graphs of the model are shown in Appendix A.
The temperature distribution of the chevron model is shown in Figure 37.
Figure 37. Temperature distribution of the H=2 mm chevron channel a) isometric

view, b) front and inlet side view together.
As mentioned, heat flux is given from the bottom. The maximum temperature is
found at 93.8°C at the bottom of the channel. The chevron tip is colder than the rest
of the channel, and it gradually increases from the tip to the base of the chevron.
59
Figure 38. Velocity contour at y=0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 31 mm of H=2 mm
chevron model.
Chevron directs the fluid, and this causes swirl motion behind it through the
channel. It pressures the flow, and that causes an increase in local velocity.
Although the given mean inlet velocity is 0.44307m/s, it locally increases to
0.721m/s. The velocity magnitude difference along the parallel planes of the
channel's inlet proves that the flow mixing is indeed achieved (Figure 38). As
mentioned, the flow velocity almost becomes a zero behind the chevron at a point.
There is a recirculation zone shown with the number 1 in Figure 39. This
recirculation zone causes a decrease in thermal boundary layer thickness and
enhances mixing. The pressure around the chevron changes, and velocity increases.
An increase in velocity also improves convective heat transfer locally.
Figure 39. Velocity vector colored by velocity magnitude around H=2 mm

chevron.
60
The flow at the Zone 2 (Figure 39) shows a flow trend upward of the channel. At
the top side of Zone 2, flow is directed toward the outlet and faster than the rest of
the channel. The contact point of these two flows causes mixing at the flow.
Figure 40. Velocity vector at y=8 mm plane of H=2 mm chevron model.
There are 2 swirl motions behind the chevron. The left one is bigger than the right
one. The swirl motions just behind the chevron can be clearly seen in Figure 40.
This motion disturbs the thermal boundary layer close to the bottom wall and
significantly impacts mixing. These swirls are, in fact, not short. From Figure 38,
the swirl effects can easily be observed at y=12 mm and 16 mm. Between y=16-20,
the effect decreases, and flow tends to be fully developed. There is little effect on
the flow at the top of the chevron in Figure 40; only the speed of the fluid
increases. Moreover, the flow direction changes sharply where the flow contacts
with the chevron. This also enhances mixing.
61
Figure 41. Streamline profiles by particle ID bottom view.
Every feature placed in the channel causes the affected region behind it. The size of
the affected region close to the wall can be observed from streamlines. The affected
region close to the heated wall can be seen in Figure 41. The region is around 6-8
mm long behind the chevron. After this region, the mixing effect on the wall
decreases. The array distance optimization work will be done relatively.
The effect of the chevron can be investigated by comparing it with the empty and
D=1 mm cylinder in the channel. These channels are also in the exact dimensions.
Moreover, the boundary conditions and the assumptions are the same as the
constructed numerical model.
In the upcoming section, the effect of the cylinder with a 1 mm diameter on the
flow is investigated.
62
Figure 42. The velocity contour of the D=1 mm cylinder in the channel
The maximum temperature of the channel with a D=1 mm cylinder is slightly

higher than the chevron. There is no such mixing motion as the channel with a
chevron. The flow velocity is high around the cylinder due to the high blockage
ratio, which disturbs the thermal boundary layer around the cylinder.
Figure 43. D=1 mm cylindered channel streamline velocity contour.
63
Behind the cylinder, there is a recirculation zone, as we expected. The velocity
contour is shown to investigate recirculation behavior in Figure 44.
Figure 44. Velocity vectors at the middle section of the channel top view.
It can be seen that there are fluid velocity vectors towards the inlet side at about 4-5
mm long behind the cylinder. There is no feeding flow for Zone 1 in Figure 44 in
the top view. That means there is another recirculation zone in the other view. It
can be seen in Figure 45 that flow comes through the middle and turns toward the
inlet at the middle of the channel.
64
Figure 45. Velocity vectors at the middle section of the channel front view.
There are 2 other recirculation zones just behind the cylinder, shown as Zone 1 and
2 in Figure 45. Moreover, 2 small recirculation zones with no feeding flow are
shown in the front view of Zones 3 and 4. That also means that there is another two
recirculation in the front view. All of these are the proof of the enhancement
mixing of the flow, which disturbs the thermal boundary layer and mixes cold and
hot fluid. As a result, convective heat transfer is enhanced.
After a point, around 6 mm after the cylinder, mixing reduces around the fluid
region close to the walls. Then, it starts to become a fully developed flow. That is,
the effect of the mixing range is not as long as in the chevron case.
Transient and steady-state solutions of the channel with D=1 mm cylinder are
compared in Appendix A.
65
Figure 46. Temperature contour of the channel with D=1 mm cylinder. The max
temperature is arranged the same as the max temperature of the chevron case.
The difference in the temperature distribution of the channel is apparent when

looking at Figure 37 and Figure 46.
The heat transfer rate of the cylinder and chevron-type static mixer can be
compared by the Nusselt number. So, 16 different planes are created with a 2 mm
distance in the longitudinal axis except for the one for the outlet, and to calculate
the average temperature of walls, 64 different lines are created, as shown in Figure
47, by using the results part of the FLUENT. These data points are used to see
enhancing heat transfer regions in the channel.
Figure 47. Data planes and lines to calculate Nu.
66
First, bulk temperature is calculated by Equation 27 on planes, and average wall
temperatures are calculated by Equation 28 on lines. Wall heat flux was obtained
from the simulation results at the line data points. The thermal conductivity of pure
aluminum was selected to calculate Nu. Nu is calculated by Equation 26.
0.45
H=2 mm Chevron
0.40
D=1 mm Cylinder
0.35
Empty channel
0.30
0.25
Nu
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Longitudinal Axis(mm)
Figure 48. Calculated Nu results for the H=2 mm Chevron, D=1 mm Cylinder, and
Empty channel.
Figure 48 shows that the effect of the chevron can be observed behind the feature,
and its effects last longer. In fact, we observe that the mixing effect of the chevron
enhances convective heat transfer until the outlet observed an increase in Nu. At
the channel's beginning, the cylinder does much work on heat transfer. A
significant increase in heat transfer at around 4 mm distance from the inlet is
caused by a sharp velocity increase around the cylinder. There is a sharp increase
due to the high blockage ratio. In addition to increased velocity, several
recirculation zones are behind the cylinder. These result in augmentation of heat
transfer. Some of the zones directly disturb the thermal boundary layer. The flow
67
through the cylinder stabilizes close to the wall at around 4 mm before the cylinder.
The Nu graph supports this comment by stabilizing higher Nu than the empty
channel. Moreover, given inlet velocity is the reason for the decreasing trend of the
three channels. The flow tries to be fully developed, so higher convection at the
beginning is expected.
The pressure drop of the D=1 mm cylinder is 259.3Pa, the H=2 mm chevron is
230.0Pa, and the empty channel is 169.3Pa throughout the channel. It is shown in
Figure 49. Negative pressure is around 6 mm from the inlet behind the cylinder.
300.0
H=2 mm Chevron
250.0
D=1 mm Cylinder
200.0 Empty channel
Pressure(Pa)
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
-50.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 49. Average pressure graph on data planes throughout the D=1 mm
cylinder, H=2 mm chevron, and empty channel.
Each channel's performance factor (pf) is calculated relative to the empty channel
using Equation 4. Average Nusselt numbers are calculated by taking the average of
the Nu calculated at the data plane. The overall results and performance factors are
shown in Table 8.
68
Table 8. Average Nu, friction factor, overall max temperature, and performance
factor results of the D=1 mm Cylinder, H=2 mm Chevron and Empty channel.
Design 𝑵𝒖𝒂𝒗𝒈 𝒇 ∆𝑷(𝐏𝐚) 𝑻𝒎𝒂𝒙 (°𝐂) 𝑷𝒇

D=1 mm Cylinder 0.169 0.243 259.3 101.6 0.96
H=2 mm Chevron 0.203 0.215 230.0 93.8 1.19
Empty Channel 0.153 0.158 169.3 103.0 1.00
The calculated performance factor of the cylinder is the lowest, so we can conclude
that while the Nuavg is enhanced, the cylinder causes an excessive pressure drop in
the simulated channel. The cylinder in the channel results in an increased heat
transfer of about 110% and also a pressure drop of 153%. On the other hand, the
chevron shows better results even on Nuavg and ∆P than cylinder. The chevron
increases heat transfer by about 132% and also pressure drop by 135% relative to
the empty channel. Overall, the heat transfer performance enhanced by about
119%.
3.4 Array Distance Selection
This section investigates optimum array distance. The approach and findings are
discussed in a detailed manner. All the works are done by H=2 mm chevron
geometry. The high-performance performed region of the chevron is discussed in
section 3.3. As mentioned, the highly affected region is the 6-8 mm interval behind
the chevron placed. So, the first tried spacing distance is selected as 7.5 mm. The
two and three chevrons are placed with a 7.5 mm distance between them Figure 50.
69
Figure 50. Models of the 2 and 3 H=2 mm chevrons placed with 7.5 mm distances.
The reason for investigating increasing chevron numbers in the channel is to see
the pressure drop relation and check whether chevrons block each other or enhance
heat transfer.
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
Nu
0.15
0.10 H=2 mm Chevron

2 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance
0.05
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 51. Comparison of the Nusselt number in a chevron, 2 chevrons, and 3

chevrons placed into the channel.
70
Figure 51 shows that the Nusselt number changes through the channels of the one
chevron, 2 chevrons, and 3 chevrons placed at 7.5 mm spacing. The 2 chevrons
placed in a channel affect the convection the same as the one chevron version until
the second chevron. Placing the second chevron 7.5 mm away does not affect the
convection of the previous chevron. The start of the second chevron is placed at 11
mm. The second chevron enhances heat transfer at the region is between 12-18
mm. At the rest of the channel, the 2 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance case shows
augmentation in heat transfer. However, the enhancement in heat transfer decreases
in the region close to the outlet. Placing the 3rd chevron at 18.5 mm also enhances
heat transfer at the region from 20 mm to the end.
A common thing while adding a new chevron at 7.5 mm away is the slight decrease
in heat transfer at the recirculation zone of the previous chevron. A slight decrease
is observed at 10-12 mm and 18-20 mm.
350.0
H=2 mm Chevron
300.0
250.0 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance
Pressure Drop (Pa)
200.0
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 52. Pressure drop of one chevron, 2 chevrons, and 3 chevrons placed into
channel.
71
Figure 52 shows that after every chevron, there is a sharp decrease in pressure
drop. That results in velocity gradient differences in these areas. Overall, the
channel with 3 chevrons shows the highest pressure drop. The 2-chevron one is
slightly higher than the one chevron channel. All show the same pressure at the
outlet because the gauge pressure at the outlet selected is zero.
Figure 53. Temperature distributions of the fluid at planes in 3 Chevron-7.5 mm

distance case in the range 65°C and 80°C.
The temperature distribution of the fluid at the data planes is shown in Figure 53.
The contour legends are arranged to show the mixture of hot and cold liquids.
The friction factor of the channels is calculated by using Equation 15. The friction
factor of the channel with one H=2 mm chevron is 0.216, the 2 chevrons is 0.238,
and the 3 chevrons is 0.272. The performance factor is also calculated and shown
in Table 9.
72
performance factor comparison of the chevroned channels with 7.5 mm distance.

H=2 mm Chevron 0.203 0.215 230.0 93.8 1.19
2 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance 0.213 0.238 253.3 92.1 1.27
As a result, 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance shows the best performance with a 47%

increase in heat transfer and 71% increase in pressure drop relative to the empty
channel. 7.5 mm array distance works well because every other chevron does not
affect the heat transfer enhanced zone of the previous one.
The comparison of the 3 chevrons and 3 cylinders is also made in Appendix B.
Some works are carried out to find the optimum array number and distance
between chevrons. So worked on 4 chevrons-5 mm distance, 6 chevrons-4 mm
distance and 8 chevrons with 3 mm distance.
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
Nu

0.10 4 Chevrons-5 mm distance

8 Chevrons-3 mm distance
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 54. Comparison of the Nusselt number of the different array distances and
numbers.
73
Figure 54 shows the Nu comparison. When looking at the 4 chevron-5 mm distance
line, there is no such Nu increase behind the second and fourth chevron as done in
3 chevron with 7.5 mm case. It is a sign that the flow around the chevron does not
behave as in the previous cases. Nevertheless, Nu is the same around the first
chevron of the 3 and 4 chevron cases. However, Nu around the first chevron of the
others decreases with the decreasing spacing distance because the chevrons start to
disturb the previous chevron’s recirculation region. 6 chevron-4 mm distance
shows the best Nu performance. The Nu is almost higher than the 8-chevron one at
every location on the channel. This is because the 8-chevron one does not
significantly disturb the thermal boundary layer.
600.0
Pressure(Pa)
300.0
200.0
100.0
0.0
-100.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 55. Comparison of the pressure drop of the different array distances and
numbers.
There is a sharp increase in pressure drop between 4 chevrons-5 mm distance and 6

chevrons-4 mm distance case. A disturbance of the recirculation zone causes it.
Furthermore, the pressure drop of the 6-chevron case is less than the 8-chevron
74
one. The increasing chevron numbers after 6 causes the start to behave like the
solid object placed in the channel. Behaving like a solid object in the flow is also
caused by a short spacing distance. Figure 54 claims that with Nu performance
drop in 3 mm spacing.
performance factor comparison of the different array distances and numbers.

4 Chevrons-5 mm distance 0.237 0.305 325.5 88.4 1.32
Table 10 shows that the 6 chevrons-4 mm distance case shows the maximum
average Nu, pressure drop, and performance factor. The performance factor of the
6-chevron case and 3-chevron case are very close. There is a massive gap between
heat transfer augmentations; however, the pressure drop gap is also huge. So, if
there is a temperature issue, the 6-chevron case can be selected because the
maximum temperature is the minimum among tried cases. If the pressure drop is
also a major issue and mechanical performance needs to be high, the 3-chevron
case may be selected. It does not block the flow significantly but enhances mixing
by directing the flow.
As a result, an increase in array number and a decrease in distance do not mean a

certain increase in heat transfer. Unsurprisingly, after a point, the performance
starts to decrease.
75
3.5 Upgrading Heat Transfer Performance by DFAM Approach
The chevron is designed as asymmetric, and the starting points are at different
distances from the inlet. Moreover, there is a curved surface to direct flow
smoothly. It is also designed considering DFAM to get big swirl motions by
arranging the placement of the chevrons. Placing chevrons inline is not the best
way to take advantage of additive manufacturing. However, additive manufacturing
allows for placing chevrons on other surfaces aside from the linear configuration,
thanks to the chevron's well-thought-out design, as detailed in section 2.3. The
manufacturing of the cases tried and proved that arrangements can be manufactured
with the SLA method.
Initially, the different configurations of the 3 chevron-7.5 mm case are tried

because of the high performance shown in the array distance selection. As depicted
in Figure 56, the second chevron is positioned on the top wall, while the remaining
chevrons are placed on the bottom wall in one case, and in another case, they are
positioned in a clockwise direction.
Figure 56. Alternative placement models: a-1) 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-

middle one on the top wall and a-2) 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-clockwise.
76
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
Nu
0.10 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-middle

one on the top wall
0.05
3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-clockwise
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32

placements in 3 chevrons-7.5mm distance.
There is no noticeable increase in heat transfer because the 7.5 mm distance

spacing (in-line) was not affected by the previous chevron. However, there is a
noticeable increase in pressure drop, as shown in Table 11.
chevrons-7.5mm distance.

3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-
0.219 0.283 301.5 89.4 1.24
middle one on the top wall
0.215 0.290 308.9 91.6 1.21
clockwise
77
The performance factors of the two trials are less than the inline version. Also, the
Nu is less, and pressure drops are high. Inline versions of chevrons do not block the
previous chevron’s flow. That is, 7.5 mm spacing behaves as each chevron works
alone. Moreover, the recirculation zone behind the chevron is close to the heated
wall in the inline version. So, the results show that the different placing
arrangement does not increase performance in the 7.5mm spacing case.
Similar placements were attempted using six chevrons spaced 4 mm apart, as

depicted in Figure 58. These six chevrons were positioned with a 4 mm gap, with
one on the upper wall and another on the lower wall. This arrangement is referred
to as "case 1" for simplicity. Additionally, there is another configuration where the
six chevrons are positioned in a clockwise direction, referred to as "case 2."
Figure 58. Alternative placement models: a-1) 6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-One on

bottom one on top in an order (case1) and a-2) 6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-
clockwise (case2).
6 chevrons with 4 mm spacing was the best array spacing distance selection. It
shows excellent heat transfer improvement. However, the pressure drop is also
excessive, so the performance was not much higher. Case 1 and case 2 are designed
to benefit from the advantages of AM to enhance mixing.
78
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
Nu
0.20
0.10 6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-one on
0.05 bottom one on top in an order
6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-clockwise
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32

placements in 6 chevrons-4 mm distance.
There is no heat transfer increase in case 1 compared to the in-line version.

However, case 2 shows an increase after the 4th chevron. So, clockwise placement
causes heat transfer augmentation at the second half of the channel.
chevrons-4 mm distance.

Case 1 0.266 0.413 440.5 84.3 1.38
Case 2 0.284 0.434 462.5 83.8 1.47
There is no average Nusselt number, pressure drop, or performance factor increase

in case 1 compared to the in-line version. On the other hand, case 2 (clockwise
79
placement) enhances heat transfer by 3% and decreases pressure drop by 4.4%.
Overall, the performance factor increased from 1.39 to 1.47. However, an increase
in performance and heat transfer does not mean the maximum temperature is lower
in these cases. The table shows that case 2 has a higher maximum temperature than
the in-line version. The difference is 1.5°C; however, it must be considered in some
cases.
Figure 60. Temperature contour of case 2.
Figure 60 illustrates a region of maximum temperature at the bottom wall of the

channel. Following the recirculation zone created by the first chevron, wall
temperature gradually rises and falls until the second chevron is placed on the
bottom wall. It shows the fact that there is insufficient mixing.
80
1
Figure 61. Velocity vectors on the middle section on the zy plane of case 2.
The high temperature of the bottom wall can be explained with less mixing and
thermal boundary layer development. As shown in Figure 61, the flow stabilizes
under the high-temperature area (shown as zone 1 in the figure), and the mixing
decreases.
Another study was carried out with 8 chevron version because a high-temperature
zone occurred due to the stabilizing behavior of the fluid where it is close to the
bottom wall. Heat transfer may increase, and max temperature may decrease if this
zone becomes small. So, another model is constructed and investigated (Figure 62).
Figure 62. Alternative placement model: 8 Chevrons-3 mm distance-clockwise.
81
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
Nu
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05 8 Chevrons-3 mm distance-
clockwise
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32

placements in 8 chevrons-3 mm distance.
The Nu comparison for the 8 chevrons-3 mm distance clockwise and in-line is

shown in Figure 63. There is a significant improvement in the Nusselt number after
the first chevron.
The velocity and temperature contour of the clockwise case are shown in Figure
64. There are velocity differences, even just the plane data taken. The maximum
velocity observed was 0.88m/s. The one chevron case was observed as 0.71m/s, so
there is no significant difference. The velocity magnitude change in planes shows
the mixing action of the flow.
82
Figure 64. Temperature and velocity contours of 8 chevrons-3 mm distance-
clockwise model.
Temperature contour is another evidence of the mixing activity of hot and cold
fluid zones. That is also a sign of the disturbance of the thermal boundary layer.
chevrons-3 mm distance.

8 Chevrons-3 mm distance-
0.315 0.530 564.9 81.9 1.54
clockwise
83
Table 13 shows that the average Nu of the clockwise version is 24% higher than
the in-line version. The pressure drop is also 21% higher. As a result, the calculated
performance factor is also higher, 1.54. Overall, maximum performance is
observed in this configuration. Furthermore, the maximum temperature is obtained
as 81.9°C. It is the minimum value that has been reached.
Figure 65. Temperature contour of the 8 chevrons-3 mm clockwise arrangement.
The maximum temperature point is observed at the section until the first chevron is
placed. This can be effectively lowered by adjusting the distance of the first
chevron. However, the positioning of the first chevron remains unchanged in the
thesis, which means that the maximum temperature is confined to the highest value
occurring between the inlet and the first chevron.
As a result, the 8 chevrons-3 mm distance clockwise case shows 206%

augmentation in heat transfer compared to the empty 3x3x31 mm channel. The
pressure drop increased by about 334%. Under the same BCs, the 8 chevrons-3 mm
distance clockwise case, instead of the empty channel, results in a 21.1°C decrease.
It works well because this arrangement does not disturb the recirculation zone
behind the chevron and enhances mixing very well. All array results are shown in a
table in Appendix C.
84
3.6 Manufacturability of Chevron Type Static Mixer with AM
In this section, the manufacturability of the chevron is investigated. Although the

channel and the chevron thicknesses are selected relative to the literature,
manufacturing challenges can be encountered. However, it is a manufacturing type
dependent thing. Some manufacturing trials are done with the SLA method using a
Formlabs 3 machine and clear resin. It is manufactured with ease. However, SLA is
the most accurate one of the additive manufacturing methods. In the metal powder
bed fusion processes, the chevron feature may disturbed due to high temperature.
The powder below the chevron can be melted and solidified by excessive heat with
the metal EBM method. The excessive material can stick to the channel and
chevron. Excessive material may disturb the flow, and unexpected things may
happen thermally.
The study applies this scenario to a case where three chevrons are placed clockwise
to determine the potential outcomes in a worst-case scenario. The model used for
analysis assumes that the area beneath the chevron is fully filled with solidified
excess aluminum Figure 66.
Figure 66. Model of 3 Chevrons- 7.5 mm distance-clockwise possible (worst)

manufacturing case
Table 14 shows that there is not much difference between the 3 chevron-7.5 mm
clockwise placement case and the manufacturing case scenario.
85
Table 14. 3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance clockwise arrangement bad manufacturing
scenario results

0.215 0.290 308.9 91.6 1.21
clockwise
clockwise-worst 0.214 0.264 281.2 90.9 1.23
manufacturing case
The average Nusselt numbers (Nu) are nearly identical. The pressure drop in the
channel has decreased, likely due to the presence of a shorter recirculation zone. In
general, the maximum temperature and performance factor exhibit minimal
variation. This suggests that there is no adverse impact caused by the chevron
being filled from below due to the manufacturing method.
The influence of the manufacturing scenario strongly relies on the specific case.
Different results can be obtained for each case. In the thesis, just this case is
investigated as an example.
86
CHAPTER 4
4 CONCLUSION & FUTURE WORK
4.1 Conclusion
A numerical model of the generated mini-channel with the designed chevron-type

static mixer is presented in the thesis. The model is constructed with the
verification by literature. The boundary conditions are changed to represent the
actual cold plate of the electric motor driver unit. Critical parameters are selected,
and mesh independence works are carried out. Then, the state assumption is
corrected to work on the verified model.
Shape optimization works are done on the chevron designed by the considering
design for the additive manufacturing concept. H=2 mm chevron shows the best
results. Furthermore, the effect of the selected geometry on the flow and heat
transfer is investigated deeply. The comparison is made with a D=1 mm cylinder
placed channel, and the chevron showed almost the same heat transfer with the
lower pressure drop due to the innovative shape of the chevron.
Moreover, array distance selection works are carried out. Different distances and
array numbers are tried. 6 chevrons with a 4 mm spacing distance case showed the
best performance. 8 chevrons with 3 mm spacing start to behave like a solid
obstacle.
After, the designs are upgraded by the DFAM concept. Instead of placing chevrons
in-line, different arrangements are investigated to improve performance. The
findings show it works in 6 chevrons with 4 mm spacing and 8 chevrons with 3
mm spacing cases. Placing chevrons in a clockwise orientation leads to better
results.
87
In powder bed fusion processes, there is a risk of melting powders below the
chevron, and the excessive material may stick to the channel and chevron. The
possible manufacturing scenario was modeled and investigated briefly. There is no
such effect in 3 chevron clockwise placement.
In conclusion, results show that the development of high-performance heat transfer

channels by additive manufacturing is possible, and the 8 chevrons with 3 mm
spacing clockwise placed arrangement show the best results. It increases heat
transfer to 206% and pressure drop to 334% compared to the empty channel. The
calculated performance factor is 1.54. The maximum temperature on the channel is
reduced by 21.1°C.
4.2 Future Work
The chevron-type static mixer was designed by considering the design for the
additive manufacturing concept, and the results are promising. The chevron model
shows enhanced performance by CFD analysis driven with ANSYS FLUENT 20.
While the thesis includes numerical verification, validating the model through
practical experiments is essential. Correcting the assumptions is necessary, and one
approach is to match the velocity profile in the channel with experimental data. To
do this, the channel may be manufactured with transparent resin by SLA. The
experiments may be carried out with a simple setup. After the channel is produced
with the proper inlet and outlet ducts, there is a need to operate in a system with a
simple pump, pipes, and a high-speed camera. The velocity profile can be obtained
by using a Particle Image Velocimeter plane by plane by observing and tracing
particles. If the results match the meaningful error, the model is verified. This
validation method relies on the idea that if the continuous momentum equations
hold, the energy equation should also yield accurate or close results.
To further improve the simulations, relevant surface roughness data resulting from
the additive manufacturing process can be acquired and integrated into the
88
simulations. This step will bring the simulations closer to actual values. Moreover,
possible manufacturing error sources or advice can be obtained from
manufacturing programs. These possible sources may be implemented in the
analysis. Additionally, varying Reynolds numbers in a laminar regime can be
explored during simulations and experiments to identify the optimal performance
region.
89
REFERENCES
[1] R. C. Pfahl and J. McElroy, “The 2004 International Electronics

Manufacturing Initiative (iNEMI) Technology Roadmaps,” in 2005
Conference on High Density Microsystem Design and Packaging and
Component Failure Analysis, Jun. 2005, pp. 1–7. doi:
10.1109/HDP.2005.251376.
[2] K. J. Kelly, “Assessment of Thermal Control Technologies for Cooling
Electric Vehicle Power Electronics”.
[3] I. Kaur and P. Singh, “State-of-the-art in heat exchanger additive
manufacturing,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 178, p. 121600, Oct. 2021, doi:
10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121600.
[4] W. E. Frazier, “Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Review,” J. Mater. Eng.
Perform., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 1917–1928, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1007/s11665-014-
0958-z.
[5] J. Sun et al., “A review on additive manufacturing of ceramic matrix
composites,” J. Mater. Sci. Technol., vol. 138, pp. 1–16, Mar. 2023, doi:
10.1016/j.jmst.2022.06.039.
[6] R. Neugebauer, B. Müller, M. Gebauer, and T. Töppel, “Additive
manufacturing boosts efficiency of heat transfer components,” Assem.
Autom., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 344–347, Jan. 2011, doi:
10.1108/01445151111172925.
[7] B. Durakovic, “Design for additive manufacturing: Benefits, trends and
challenges,” Period. Eng. Nat. Sci., vol. 6, no. 2, Art. no. 2, Dec. 2018, doi:
10.21533/pen.v6i2.224.
[8] M. H. Mousa, N. Miljkovic, and K. Nawaz, “Review of heat transfer
enhancement techniques for single phase flows,” Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev., vol. 137, p. 110566, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110566.
[9] D. Jafari and W. W. Wits, “The utilization of selective laser melting
technology on heat transfer devices for thermal energy conversion
applications: A review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 91, pp. 420–442,
Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.109.
[10] I. Gibson, D. Rosen, B. Stucker, and M. Khorasani, “Design for Additive
Manufacturing,” in Additive Manufacturing Technologies, I. Gibson, D.
Rosen, B. Stucker, and M. Khorasani, Eds., Cham: Springer International
Publishing, 2021, pp. 555–607. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-56127-7_19.
[11] S. G. Kandlikar and W. J. Grande, “Evolution of Microchannel Flow
Passages: Thermohydraulic Performance and Fabrication Technology,”
presented at the ASME 2002 International Mechanical Engineering Congress
91
and Exposition, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital
Collection, Jun. 2008, pp. 59–72. doi: 10.1115/IMECE2002-32043.
[12] O. N. Sara, T. Pekdemir, S. Yapici, and M. Yilmaz, “Heat-transfer
enhancement in a channel flow with perforated rectangular blocks,” Int. J.
Heat Fluid Flow, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 509–518, Oct. 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0142-
727X(01)00117-5.
[13] M. Q. Ansari and G. Zhou, “Influence of structured surface roughness peaks
on flow and heat transfer performances of micro- and mini-channels,” Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 110, p. 104428, Jan. 2020, doi:
10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2019.104428.
[14] G. Zhou and S.-C. Yao, “Effect of surface roughness on laminar liquid flow in
micro-channels,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 228–234, Feb. 2011,
doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.09.002.
[15] K. L. Kirsch and K. A. Thole, “Experimental Investigation of Numerically
Optimized Wavy Microchannels Created Through Additive Manufacturing,”
J. Turbomach., vol. 140, no. 021002, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1115/1.4038180.
[16] D. L. Gee and R. L. Webb, “Forced convection heat transfer in helically rib-
roughened tubes,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 1127–1136,
Aug. 1980, doi: 10.1016/0017-9310(80)90177-5.
[17] S. A. Niknam, M. Mortazavi, and D. Li, “Additively manufactured heat
exchangers: a review on opportunities and challenges,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol., vol. 112, no. 3, pp. 601–618, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s00170-020-
06372-w.
[18] Z. Guo, “Heat transfer enhancement − a brief review of 2018
literature,” J. Enhanc. Heat Transf., vol. 26, no. 5, 2019, doi:
10.1615/JEnhHeatTransf.2019031660.
[19] A. Dewan and P. Srivastava, “A review of heat transfer enhancement through
flow disruption in a microchannel,” J. Therm. Sci., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 203–
214, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11630-015-0775-1.
[20] J. F. Tullius, T. K. Tullius, and Y. Bayazitoglu, “Optimization of short micro
pin fins in minichannels,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 55, no. 15, pp. 3921–
3932, Jul. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2012.03.022.
[21] W. Al-Sallami, A. Al-Damook, and H. M. Thompson, “A numerical
investigation of thermal airflows over strip fin heat sinks,” Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transf., vol. 75, pp. 183–191, Jul. 2016, doi: 10.1016/
j.icheatmasstransfer.2016.03.014.
[22] C. Bi, G. H. Tang, and W. Q. Tao, “Heat transfer enhancement in mini-
channel heat sinks with dimples and cylindrical grooves,” Appl. Therm. Eng.,
92
vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 121–132, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.
2013.03.007.
[23] H. A. Mohammed, P. Gunnasegaran, and N. H. Shuaib, “Numerical
simulation of heat transfer enhancement in wavy microchannel heat sink,” Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 63–68, Jan. 2011, doi:
10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2010.09.012.
[24] Z. Brodnianská and S. Kotšmíd, “Heat transfer enhancement in the novel
wavy shaped heat exchanger channel with cylindrical vortex generators,”
Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 220, p. 119720, Feb. 2023, doi:
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2022.119720.
[25] Varun, M. O. Garg, H. Nautiyal, S. Khurana, and M. K. Shukla, “Heat
transfer augmentation using twisted tape inserts: A review,” Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev., vol. 63, pp. 193–225, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.
2016.04.051.
[26] S. Eiamsa-ard, P. Promthaisong, C. Thianpong, M. Pimsarn, and V.
Chuwattanakul, “Influence of three-start spirally twisted tube combined with
triple-channel twisted tape insert on heat transfer enhancement,” Chem. Eng.
Process. Process Intensif., vol. 102, pp. 117–129, Apr. 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.cep.2016.01.012.
[27] S. Kandlikar, S. Joshi, and S. Tian, “Effect of Surface Roughness on Heat
Transfer and Fluid Flow Characteristics at Low Reynolds Numbers in Small
Diameter Tubes,” Heat Transf. Eng. - HEAT Transf. ENG, vol. 24, pp. 4–16,
May 2003, doi: 10.1080/01457630304069.
[28] I. A. Ghani et al., “Heat transfer enhancement in microchannel heat sink using
hybrid technique of ribs and secondary channels,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.,
vol. 114, pp. 640–655, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.06.
103.
[29] W. M. A. A. Japar, N. A. C. Sidik, and S. Mat, “A comprehensive study on
heat transfer enhancement in microchannel heat sink with secondary
channel,” Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 99, pp. 62–81, Dec. 2018,
doi: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2018.10.005.
[30] L. Zeng, D. Deng, N. Zhong, and G. Zheng, “Thermal and flow performance
in microchannel heat sink with open-ring pin fins,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., vol.
200, p. 106445, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106445.
[31] G. Wang, N. Qian, and G. Ding, “Heat transfer enhancement in microchannel
heat sink with bidirectional rib,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 136, pp. 597–
609, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.02.018.
[32] A. Heshmati, H. A. Mohammed, and A. N. Darus, “Mixed convection heat
transfer of nanofluids over backward facing step having a slotted baffle,”
93
Appl. Math. Comput., vol. 240, pp. 368–386, Aug. 2014, doi:
10.1016/j.amc.2014.04.058.
[33] D. Dev Singh, T. Mahender, and A. Raji Reddy, “Powder bed fusion process:
A brief review,” Mater. Today Proc., vol. 46, pp. 350–355, Jan. 2021, doi:
10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.415.
[34] P. Stavropoulos and P. Foteinopoulos, “Modelling of additive manufacturing
processes: a review and classification,” Manuf. Rev., vol. 5, p. 2, 2018, doi:
10.1051/mfreview/2017014.
[35] S. M. Thompson, Z. S. Aspin, N. Shamsaei, A. Elwany, and L. Bian,
“Additive manufacturing of heat exchangers: A case study on a multi-layered
Ti–6Al–4V oscillating heat pipe,” Addit. Manuf., vol. 8, pp. 163–174, Oct.
2015, doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2015.09.003.
[36] M. A. Arie, A. H. Shooshtari, V. V. Rao, S. V. Dessiatoun, and M. M. Ohadi,
“Air-Side Heat Transfer Enhancement Utilizing Design Optimization and an
Additive Manufacturing Technique,” J. Heat Transf., vol. 139, no. 031901,
Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1115/1.4035068.
[37] D. Saltzman et al., “Experimental comparison of a traditionally built versus
additively manufactured aircraft heat exchanger,” Jan. 2017. doi:
10.2514/6.2017-0902.
[38] L. Ventola et al., “Rough surfaces with enhanced heat transfer for electronics
cooling by direct metal laser sintering,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 75, pp.
58–74, Aug. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2014.03.037.
[39] C. Stimpson, J. Snyder, K. Thole, and D. Mongillo, “Roughness Effects on
Flow and Heat Transfer for Additively Manufactured Channels,” J.
Turbomach., vol. 138, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1115/1.4032167.
[40] A. Majeed, A. Ahmed, A. Salam, and M. Z. Sheikh, “Surface quality
improvement by parameters analysis, optimization and heat treatment of
AlSi10Mg parts manufactured by SLM additive manufacturing,” Int. J.
Lightweight Mater. Manuf., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 288–295, Dec. 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.ijlmm.2019.08.001.
[41] J. C. Simmons et al., “Influence of processing and microstructure on the local
and bulk thermal conductivity of selective laser melted 316L stainless steel,”
Addit. Manuf., vol. 32, p. 100996, Mar. 2020, doi:
10.1016/j.addma.2019.100996.
[42] J. C. Snyder, C. K. Stimpson, K. A. Thole, and D. Mongillo, “Build Direction
Effects on Additively Manufactured Channels,” J. Turbomach., vol. 138, no.
051006, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1115/1.4032168.
[43] X. Wang, M. Chen, D. Tate, H. Rahimi, and S. Zhang, “Numerical
investigation on hydraulic and thermal characteristics of micro latticed pin fin
94
in the heat sink,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 149, p. 119157, Mar. 2020,
doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.119157.
[44] S. K. Saha, A. Dutta, and S. K. Dhal, “Friction and heat transfer
characteristics of laminar swirl flow through a circular tube fitted with
regularly spaced twisted-tape elements,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 44, no.
22, pp. 4211–4223, Nov. 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0017-9310(01)00077-1.
[45] P. Liu, N. Zheng, F. Shan, Z. Liu, and W. Liu, “An experimental and
numerical study on the laminar heat transfer and flow characteristics of a
circular tube fitted with multiple conical strips inserts,” Int. J. Heat Mass
Transf., vol. 117, pp. 691–709, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.
2017.10.035.
[46] S. Eiamsa-ard, C. Thianpong, P. Eiamsa-ard, and P. Promvonge, “Convective
heat transfer in a circular tube with short-length twisted tape insert,” Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 365–371, Apr. 2009, doi:
10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2009.01.006.
[47] B. Kwon, L. Liebenberg, A. M. Jacobi, and W. P. King, “Heat transfer
enhancement of internal laminar flows using additively manufactured static
mixers,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 137, pp. 292–300, Jul. 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.03.133.
[48] H. Bikas, P. Stavropoulos, and G. Chryssolouris, “Additive manufacturing
methods and modelling approaches: a critical review,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol., vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 389–405, Mar. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-
7576-2.
[49] U. Scheithauer, E. Schwarzer, T. Moritz, and A. Michaelis, “Additive
Manufacturing of Ceramic Heat Exchanger: Opportunities and Limits of the
Lithography-Based Ceramic Manufacturing (LCM),” J. Mater. Eng. Perform.,
vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 14–20, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11665-017-2843-z.
[50] B. Ahmadi and S. Bigham, “Performance Evaluation of hi-k Lung-inspired
3D-printed Polymer Heat Exchangers,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 204, p.
117993, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.117993.
[51] M. A. Arie, D. M. Hymas, F. Singer, A. H. Shooshtari, and M. Ohadi, “An
additively manufactured novel polymer composite heat exchanger for dry
cooling applications,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 147, p. 118889, Feb.
2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.118889.
[52] H. Chen et al., “Thermal conductivity of polymer-based composites:
Fundamentals and applications,” Prog. Polym. Sci., vol. 59, pp. 41–85, Aug.
2016, doi: 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2016.03.001.
95
[53] X. Huang, P. Jiang, and T. Tanaka, “A review of dielectric polymer
composites with high thermal conductivity,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol.
27, no. 4, pp. 8–16, Jul. 2011, doi: 10.1109/MEI.2011.5954064.
[54] M. Cardone and B. Gargiulo, “Design and experimental testing of a Mini
Channel Heat Exchanger made in Additive Manufacturing,” Energy Procedia,
vol. 148, pp. 932–939, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2018.08.092.
[55] C. Zhang, S. Wang, J. Li, Y. Zhu, T. Peng, and H. Yang, “Additive
manufacturing of products with functional fluid channels: A review,” Addit.
Manuf., vol. 36, p. 101490, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2020.101490.
[56] M. Cheraghi, M. Raisee, and M. Moghaddami, “Effect of cylinder proximity
to the wall on channel flow heat transfer enhancement,” Comptes Rendus
Mécanique, vol. 342, no. 2, pp. 63–72, Feb. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.crme.
2013.12.004.
96
APPENDICES
A. Appendix A
H=2.0 mm chevron steady state convergence study is investigated in this section.
Figure 67. Chevron H=2.0 mm residuals
Figure 68. Chevron H=2.0 mm maximum temperature on heated wall
97
Figure 69. Chevron H=2.0 mm pressure drop.
Figure 70. Chevron H=2.0 mm average temperature on heated wall
98
D=1 mm cylinder steady-state and transient solution comparison is shown in
Figure 71.
a-1) b-1)
a-2) b-2)
Figure 71. D=1mm Cylinder in channel steady and transient solution results: a-1)
Maximum face temperature steady-state solution, b-1) Maximum face temperature
transient solution, a-2) Pressure drop steady state solution and b-2) Pressure drop
transient solution
The comparison work is done in Re=1000 to find whether problem can be solved
by using steady-state or transient solution method. In transient work time step
selection was 0.00005s calculated by using Equation 21.
99
D=1 mm Cylinder
Parameters Steady State Solution Transient Solution

Maximum temperature on
101.26 101.24
fluid side of heated wall (°C)
Average temperature on fluid
93.20 93.19
side of heated wall (°C)
Pressure drop (Pa) 259.29 260.97
The results are shown in the table. The deviation between results is almost same.
100
B. Appendix B
3 cylinders (D=1 mm) and 3 chevrons (H=2 mm) with 7.5 distance comparison is
investigated in the section.
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
Nu
0.20
0.15
0.05
3 Cylinders (D=1 mm)-7.5 mm distance
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
500.0
400.0
300.0
Pressure(Pa)
200.0
100.0
0.0
-100.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 72. Nu and pressure graphs of the 3 Cylinders (D=1 mm), and 3 Chevrons
(H=2 mm) with 7.5 Distance
101
performance factor comparison of the 3 Cylinders (D=1 mm), and 3 Chevrons
(H=2 mm) with 7.5 Distance

3 Chevrons-7.5
0.225 0.272 290.4 89.2 1.36
mm distance
3 Cylinders-7.5
0.223 0.427 455.2 90.3 1.08
mm distance
3 Chevrons placed with 7.5 mm spacing shows almost the same heat transfer
enhancement with the 3 cylinders.
102
C. Appendix C
Overall results are shown in Table 17 and Figure 73.
Table 17. Overall results
Design 𝑵𝒖𝒂𝒗𝒈 𝒇 ∆𝑷 𝑻𝒎𝒂𝒙 𝑷𝒇
Empty Channel 0.153 0.159 169.3 103.0 1.00
H=2 mm Chevron 0.203 0.216 230.0 93.8 1.19

0.169 0.244
D=1 mm Cylinder 259.3 101.6 0.96
3 Chevrons-7.5 mm
0.225 0.272 290.4 89.2 1.36
distance
3 Cylinders-7.5 mm
0.223 0.427 455.2 90.3 1.08
distance
3 Chevrons-7.5 mm
distance-middle one on 0.219 0.283 301.5 89.4 1.24
the top wall
3 Chevrons-7.5 mm
0.215 0.290 308.9 91.6 1.21
distance-clockwise
6 Chevrons-4 mm
0.276 0.455 485.5 82.3 1.39
distance
6 Chevrons-4 mm
distance-one on bottom
0.266 0.413 440.5 84.3 1.38
one on top in an order
(case1)
6 Chevrons-4 mm
distance-clockwise 0.284 0.434 462.5 83.8 1.47
(case2)
8 Chevrons-3 mm
0.253 0.438 466.8 86.3 1.28
distance
8 Chevrons-3 mm
0.315 0.530 564.9 81.9 1.54
distance-clockwise
103
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
Nu/Nu0
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Longitudinal Axis (mm)
H=2 mm Chevron
D=1 mm Cylinder
3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-middle one on the top wall
3 Chevrons-7.5 mm distance-clockwise
6 Chevrons-4 mm distance-one on bottom one on top in an order
Figure 73. Nu performance is relative to empty channel comparison.
104

826898

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

826898

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DESIGN OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE HEAT TRANSFER CHANNELS

ENABLED BY ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

DESIGN OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE HEAT TRANSFER CHANNELS

submitted by HAKAN UYSAL in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Prof. Dr. Halil Kalıpçılar

Prof. Dr. M. A. Sahir Arıkan

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay

Examining Committee Members:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ulaş Yaman

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Alperen Günay

Assist. Prof. Dr. Ali Karakuş

Assist. Prof. Dr. Mehdi Mehrtash

Name and Surname : Hakan Uysal

DESIGN OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE HEAT TRANSFER CHANNELS

August 2023, 104 pages

Keywords: Convective Heat Transfer, Additive Manufacturing, Mini Channels,

EKLEMELİ İMALAT İLE SAĞLANAN YÜKSEK PERFORMANSLI ISI

Ağustos 2023, 104 sayfa

Güç elektroniği alanındaki hızlı gelişmeler, yüksek performanslı soğutma

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ xi

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... xiv

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. xvi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................... xxi

LIST OF SYMBOLS ............................................................................................... xxii

1.2 Heat Transfer Enhancement Methods .................................................... 3

1.2.1 Conventional Approaches ............................................................... 5

1.2.2 Approaches Enabled by Additive Manufacturing ......................... 12

1.2.2.1 An Overview of Additive Manufacturing Technologies .......... 13

1.2.2.2 Example Uses of Additive Manufacturing in Heat Transfer

1.3 Problem Definition ............................................................................... 19

1.4 Thesis Objectives .................................................................................. 20

2.2 Governing Equations ............................................................................. 22

2.3 Numerical Model .................................................................................. 25

2.3.1 Modeling of the Fluid Domain ...................................................... 28

2.3.1.1 Model Verification .................................................................... 31

2.3.1.2 Mesh Independence Study ........................................................ 36

2.3.2 Modeling of the Channel Taking into Account the Wall

2.3.2.1 Model Verification .................................................................... 40

2.3.2.2 Mesh Independence Study ........................................................ 40

3 RESULTS & DISCUSSION ....................................................................... 43

3.1 Numerical Model Verification .............................................................. 43

3.1.1 Verification by Using Literature .................................................... 43

3.1.2 Model of the Fluid Domain Mesh Independency Study ................ 47

3.1.3 Model of the Channel with Thickness Mesh Independency Study 49

3.1.4 Verification of Flow Regime Assumption for the Model of the

3.1.5 Verification of Flow Regime Assumption for the Model of the

3.2 Effect of Change in Geometry .............................................................. 57

3.3 Effect of Static Mixer Shape ................................................................. 59

3.4 Array Distance Selection....................................................................... 69

3.5 Upgrading Heat Transfer Performance by DFAM Approach ............... 76

3.6 Manufacturability of Chevron Type Static Mixer with AM ................. 85

4 CONCLUSION & FUTURE WORK ......................................................... 87

4.2 Future Work .......................................................................................... 88

B. Appendix B ...................................................................................................... 101

C. Appendix C ...................................................................................................... 103

Table 1. Channel type classification. Table is taken from [11]. ............................... 3

The development of power electronic technology reveals new challenges and

1.2 Heat Transfer Enhancement Methods

Table 1. Channel type classification. Table is taken from [11].

Channel Type Hydraulic Diameter (𝐃𝐡 )