0
Research Papers: Electronic Cooling

Spray Cooling With Ammonia on Microstructured Surfaces: Performance Enhancement and Hysteresis Effect

[+] Author and Article Information
Huseyin Bostanci1

 Rini Technologies, Inc. (RTI), 582 South Econ Circle, Oviedo, FL 32765huseyin.bostanci@rinitech.com

Daniel P. Rini

 Rini Technologies, Inc. (RTI), 582 South Econ Circle, Oviedo, FL 32765dan@rinitech.com

John P. Kizito

Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, NC 27411jpkizito@ncat.edu

Louis C. Chow

Department of Mechanical, Materials and Aerospace Engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816lchow@mail.ucf.edu

1

Corresponding author.

J. Heat Transfer 131(7), 071401 (May 05, 2009) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3089553 History: Received April 01, 2008; Revised December 15, 2008; Published May 05, 2009

Experiments were performed to investigate spray cooling on microstructured surfaces. Surface modification techniques were utilized to obtain microscale indentations and protrusions on the heater surfaces. A smooth surface was also tested to have baseline data for comparison. Tests were conducted in a closed loop system with ammonia using RTI’s vapor atomized spray nozzles. Thick film resistors, simulating heat source, were mounted onto 1×2cm2 heaters, and heat fluxes up to 500W/cm2 (well below critical heat flux limit) were removed. Two nozzles each spraying 1cm2 of the heater area used 96ml/cm2min(9.7gal/in.2h) liquid and 13.8ml/cm2s(11.3ft3/in.2h) vapor flow rate with only 48 kPa (7 psi) pressure drop. Comparison of cooling curves in the form of surface superheat (ΔTsat=TsurfTsat) versus heat flux in the heating-up and cooling-down modes (for increasing and decreasing heat flux conditions) demonstrated substantial performance enhancement for both microstructured surfaces over smooth surface. At 500W/cm2, the increases in the heat transfer coefficient for microstructured surfaces with protrusions and indentations were 112% and 49% over smooth surface, respectively. Moreover, results showed that smooth surface gives nearly identical cooling curves in the heating-up and cooling-down modes, while microstructured surfaces experience a hysteresis phenomenon depending on the surface roughness level and yields lower surface superheat in the cooling-down mode, compared with the heating-up mode, at a given heat flux. Microstructured surface with protrusions was further tested using two approaches to gain better understanding on hysteresis. Data indicated that microstructured surface helps retain the established three-phase contact lines, the regions where solid, liquid, and vapor phases meet, resulting in consistent cooling curve and hysteresis effect at varying heat flux conditions (as low as 25W/cm2 for the present work). Data also confirmed a direct connection between hysteresis and thermal history of the heater.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of the experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

RTI’s 1×2 vapor atomized nozzle array (a), 1×2 heater (b), and entire nozzle array-heater assembly (c)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Schematics and SEM images of micro-i (top) and micro-p (bottom) surfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Surface superheat as a function of time as heat flux changes in steps of 100 W/cm2 every 5 min from 0 to 500 then back to 0 W/cm2 for smooth and microstructured surfaces in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Surface superheat as a function of heat flux for smooth and microstructured surfaces in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Heat transfer coefficients as a function of heat flux for smooth and microstructured surfaces in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Enhancement factor as a function of heat flux for smooth and microstructured surfaces in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Surface superheat as a function of time as heat flux changes in steps of 25–50 W/cm2 every 3 min for micro-p surface in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Surface superheat as a function of heat flux for micro-p surface in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Surface superheat as a function of heat flux for micro-p surface in heating-up and cooling-down modes (a close-up view of Fig. 9)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Surface superheat as a function of time as heat flux changes in steps of 100 W/cm2 every 3 min for micro-p surface in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Surface superheat as a function of heat flux for micro-p surface in heating-up and cooling-down modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Surface superheat as a function of heat flux for micro-p surface in heating-up and cooling-down modes (a close-up view of Fig. 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Normalized heat transfer coefficients at constant heat fluxes as a function of maximum heat flux in heating-up mode indicating quantitative change in heat transfer due to hysteresis effect

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