0
Research Papers: Forced Convection

An Experimental Investigation of Performance and Exergy Analysis of a Counterflow Vortex Tube Having Various Nozzle Numbers at Different Inlet Pressures of Air, Oxygen, Nitrogen, and Argon

[+] Author and Article Information
Volkan Kırmacı

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Bartın University, 74100 Bartın, Turkey

Onuralp Uluer

Department of Mechanical Education, Faculty of Technical Education, Gazi University, Teknikokullar, 06503 Ankara, Turkey

Kevser Dincer

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Selcuk University, 42075 Selcuklu, Turkey

J. Heat Transfer 132(12), 121701 (Sep 17, 2010) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002284 History: Received August 08, 2009; Revised July 15, 2010; Published September 17, 2010; Online September 17, 2010

An experimental investigation has been carried out to determine the thermal behavior of cooling fluid as it passes through a vortex tube and the effects of the orifice nozzle number and the inlet pressure on the heating and cooling performance of the counterflow type vortex tube (RHVT). Experiments have been performed using oxygen (O2), nitrogen (N2), and argon (Ar). Five orifices have been fabricated and used during the experimental study with different nozzle numbers of 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. The orifices used at these experiments are made of the polyamide plastic material. The thermal conductivity of polyamide plastic material is 0.25W/mK. To determine the energy separation, the inlet pressure values were adjusted from 150 kPa to 700 kPa with 50 kPa increments for each one of the orifices and each one of the studied fluids. The vortex tube that was used during the experiments has L/D ratio of 15 and the cold mass fraction was held constant at 0.5. As a result of the experimental study, it is determined that the temperature gradient between the cold and hot exits is decreased depending on the orifice nozzle number increase. Exergy analyses have been realized for each one of the studied fluids under the same inlet pressures with the experiments (Pi=150700). The exergy efficiency of the vortex tube is more affected by inlet pressure than nozzle number.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

The schematic representation of a parallel flow vortex tube principle (9)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

The schematic representation of a counterflow vortex tube principle (10)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Energy separation of counterflow vortex tube (11)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Orifices used in the experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

The schematic diagram of the experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

The schematic diagram of counterflow vortex tube for energy analysis (24)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

The temperature gradient versus nozzle numbers and inlet pressures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Total inlet exergy results versus inlet pressure and nozzle numbers

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Total outlet exergy results versus inlet pressure and nozzle numbers

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

The total lost exergy results versus inlet pressure and nozzle numbers

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

The exergy efficiency of vortex tube

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In