0
Research Papers: Forced Convection

Heat Transfer Characteristics of Liquid Flow With Micro-Encapsulated Phase Change Material: Numerical Study

[+] Author and Article Information
R. Sabbah, J. Seyed-Yagoobi

 Mechanical, Materials, and Aerospace Engineering Department, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, ILsabbram@iit.edu

S. Al-Hallaj

 Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, ILsah@uic.edu

J. Heat Transfer 133(12), 121702 (Oct 06, 2011) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004450 History: Received July 01, 2010; Revised June 18, 2011; Accepted June 20, 2011; Published October 06, 2011; Online October 06, 2011

This numerical investigation fundamentally explores the thermal boundary layers’ characteristics of liquid flow with micro-encapsulated phase change material (MEPCM). Unlike pure liquids, the heat transfer characteristics of MEPCM slurry cannot be simply presented in terms of corresponding dimensionless controlling parameters, such as Peclet number. In the presence of phase change particles, the controlling parameters’ values change significantly along the tube length due to the phase change. The MEPCM slurry flow does not reach a fully developed condition as long as the MEPCM particles experience phase change. The presence of MEPCM in the working fluid slows the growth of the thermal boundary layer and extends the thermal entry length. The local heat transfer coefficient strongly depends on the corresponding location of the melting zone interface. The heat transfer characteristics of liquid flow with MEPCM are presented as well.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Heat transfer coefficient versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 25%, V· = 50, 100, 150, and 200 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

2D axisymmetric computational domain

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

MEPCM specific heat derived from the DSC test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Thermal boundary layer growth along the tube for φ = 0%, 5%, 15%, and 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Local heat transfer coefficient versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 0%, 5%, 15%, and 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Wall dimensionless temperature versus nondimensional tube length, φ = 0%, 5%, 15%, and 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

MEPCM liquid fraction versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 0%, 5%, 15%, and 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Peclet number versus dimensionless tube length for φ = 0%, 5%, 15%, and 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Average heat transfer enhancement, average reduction in wall temperature, and average Peclet number increase factor versus inlet temperature, φ = 25%, V· = 200 ml/min, and q" = 1460, 3650, 7300, and 10950 W/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Dimensionless wall temperature versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 25%, V· = 50, 100, 150, and 200 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Average heat transfer enhancement, wall temperature reduction, Peclet enhancement, and effective thermal conductivity enhancement versus flow rate, φ = 25%, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Melting interface along the tube (top figure), temperature difference between tube inner wall temperature and mean flow temperature, heat transfer enhancement, and Peclet number increase factor for φ = 0% and 5%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Radial temperature profile at different cross sections along the tube, φ = 0% and 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 7300 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Local heat transfer versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 3650 W/m2 , and Tin  = 15, 21, 24, and 30 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Dimensionless wall temperature versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 3650 W/m2 , and Tin  = 15, 21, 24, and 30 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Heat transfer coefficient versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 2190, 3650, 10949, and 14599 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Dimensionless wall temperature versus dimensionless tube length, φ = 25%, V· = 100 ml/min, q" = 2190, 3650, 10949, and 14599 W/m2 , and Tin  = 24 °C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Average heat transfer coefficient enhancement, average wall temperature reduction factor, average Peclet number increase factor, and average increase in effective thermal conductivity versus heat flux, φ = 25%, V· = 300 ml/min, and Tin  = 24 °C

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