Sagar Report

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION
Gas–gas and gas–liquid heat exchangers find wide applications in fields such as
HVAC, refrigeration, electronics cooling, food processing, automotives, petroleum,
aerospace, and spaceflight. The total thermal resistance for such kind of heat
exchangers is comprised of three parts, the gas-side convective thermal resistance, the
wall conductive thermal resistance and the liquid-side convective thermal resistance.
The heat transfer coefficient on the gas-side is typically low due to its thermo-physical
properties. Thus the gas-side thermal resistance is the dominant part of the overall heat
transfer process and efforts to improve the performance of these heat exchangers
should focus on the gas-side surfaces. The overall performance of heat exchangers is
often limited by low heat transfer coefficients on the gas side, which results in a
corresponding low efficiency of energy utilization. This limitation and the desire to
improve energy performance with reduced volume and manufacturing costs continues
to motivate research in gas-side heat transfer enhancement.
Now-a-days a significant number of thermal researchers are seeking for new heat
transfer enhancing methods between surfaces and surrounding fluids. The technique or
method implemented to improve heat transfer performance is referred to as heat
transfer enhancement. For well over a century, efforts have been made to produce
more efficient heat transfer devices by employing various methods of heat transfer
enhancement. The study of enhanced heat transfer has gained serious momentum
during recent years, however, due to increased demands by industry for heat exchange
equipment that is less expensive to build and operate than standard heat exchange
devices. Savings in materials and energy use also provide strong motivation for the
development of improved methods of enhancement. Enhancement devices are
necessary for the high heat duty exchangers found in power plants (i.e. air-cooled
condensers, nuclear fuel rods). These applications, as well as numerous others, have
led to the development of various enhanced heat transfer surfaces. The improvements
in the performance of the heat transfer devices have attracted many researchers for a
long time as they are of great technical, economical, and not the least, ecological
importance. The heat transfer can be increased by different Augmentation Techniques.
Generally, heat transfer enhancement methods are classified into three broad
categories.

(a) Active method: This method involves external power input for enhancement of
heat transfer. Examples of active methods include induced pulsations by cams and
reciprocating plungers, the use of a magnetic field to disturb seeded light particles in a
flowing stream, stirring the fluid, vibrating the surface etc.
(b) Passive method: This method involves the use of surface or geometrical
modifications to the flow channel by incorporating inserts or additional devices such
as inserts, rough surfaces, treated surfaces, extended surfaces, swirl flow device,
displacement enhancement device, coiled tube etc. Passive methods do not require
external power to maintain enhancement of heat transfer characteristics.
(c) Compound methods: It is a combination of both active and passive methods.
1.1 Passive heat transfer augmentation methods
These techniques generally use surface or geometrical modifications to the flow

channel by incorporating inserts or additional devices. They promote higher heat
transfer coefficients by disturbing or altering the existing flow behavior (except for
extended surfaces) which also leads to increase in the pressure drop. The biggest
advantage of passive heat transfer enhancement methods is it does not require any
external power input. Hence it is most popular. This method is based on the principle
of convective heat transfer. In convective heat transfer, one technique of enhancement
of heat transfer is to increase the effective surface area and residence time of heat
transfer fluids.
Use of this technique causes the swirl in the bulk of the fluids and disturbs the actual
boundary layer so as to increase effective surface area, residence time and
consequently heat transfer coefficient in the existing system. Increasing the surface
area is effective but results in an increased material cost and an increased mass for the
heat exchanger. Another possible method is to use surface or geometrical
modifications to the flow channel by incorporating inserts or additional devices. Heat
transfer augmentation by these techniques can be achieved by reducing boundary layer
thickness by passive vortex generation. In this technique the flow field is altered by an
obstruction to generate a vortex oriented in the direction of the flow.

1.2 Vortex system
Vortex generators are kind of passive heat transfer enhancing device which are
attached to the duct walls or fin surfaces and protrude into the flow at an angle of
attack to the flow direction. The basic principle of vortex generators is to induce
secondary flow, particularly longitudinal vortices, which disturb or cut off the thermal
boundary layer developed along the wall and remove the heat from the wall to the core
of the flow by means of large-scale turbulence. Vortex generation is a new and
innovative strategy of enhancing air-side heat transfer. Vortex generators such as
wings and winglets can introduce vortices into the flow field causing heat transfer
enhancement. Vortex generators incorporated wings on the fins which produced
vortices that helped to increase the turbulence of the air. By increasing air turbulence,
the convective heat transfer coefficient associated with the air is increased. An
increase in this value causes the thermal resistance associated with the air to be
reduced. Therefore, this configuration is more beneficial than any other passive heat
transfer enhancement techniques. Some parameters that affected the performance of
the vortex generators are angle of attack, aspect ratio, and the ratio of vortex generator
area to heat transfer area. Figure 1.1 shows that air side convective heat transfer is
increased by vortex generators.
Figure 1.1: Vortex generators increase convective heat transfer [4]

1.3 Types of vortex generators
Vortex can be divided into two categories based on the axes of these vortices
transverse vortices and longitudinal vortices. Longitudinal vortices have their axes
parallel to the main flow direction and transverse vortices have their axes
perpendicular to the main flow direction. Longitudinal vortex generators generate
higher heat transfer enhancement for the same pressure penalty than transverse vortex
generators [4].Longitudinal vortex generators generate higher heat transfer
enhancement for the same pressure penalty than transverse vortex generators [4].
Passive heat transfer enhancement includes developing boundary layers, swirl and
flow destabilization. Longitudinal vortex generators can generate all the three
mechanisms for heat transfer enhancement. Longitudinal vortex generator can be made
of different geometries and shape such as delta wing, rectangular wing, delta winglet,
trapezoidal wing etc. Figure 1.2 shows different geometries of longitudinal vortex
generator.
Figure 1.2: Types of vortex generators [4]

1.4 Problem Statement
In gas-gas or gas-liquid heat exchanger there are three modes of heat transfer one is
conduction between tube walls and fins and two mode of convection from which one
is due to the coolant flowing in the tube and another one is caused by the air flowing
through the heat exchanger. Each type of heat transfer is associated with thermal
resistance. Thermal resistance caused by the convective heat transfer associated with
air is comprises over 75% of total thermal resistance [3]. The second largest thermal
resistance is caused by convective which is associated with the fluid. Together these
resistances comprises of over 97% of the total thermal resistance [3]. Since there is
large thermal resistance associated with air, increased heat transfer cannot be
observed. So there is need of heat transfer enhancement method which can reduce the
thermal resistance associated with air.
1.5 Objectives
Experimental investigation of heat transfer enhancement from vortex generator in
turbulent zone.
1) To investigate the performance of the test plate with rectangular vortex generator,
delta vortex generator, trapezoidal vortex generator at same angle of attack 450 and at
varying height of 20mm, 15 mm and 10mm and no. of pairs of vortex generator.
2) To investigate the performance of the test plate with different vortex generator from
Reynolds Number varying from 9000 to 16000.
3) To investigate friction factor of the test plate with different vortex generators at
same angle of attack 450 and at varying height of 20mm, 15 mm and 10mm and no. of
pairs of vortex generator.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
There has been a considerable amount of research in the area of heat transfer
enhancement available both in the form of experimental results and as predictions of
the numerical investigation. In this, a summary of these findings is presented in order
to put the present problem in the right perspective.
Guobing Zhou et al [1] has experimentally investigate and compare a pair of curved
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator with different types of vortex generators such as
rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex generator by using
dimensionless factors that is j/j 0 , f/f 0 and R = (j/j 0 )/(f/f 0 ). To compare the thermal and
flow performance of these VGs, the tests are conducted under the same attack angle (b
= 45.0), front edge pitch (S1 =20 mm) and placement (S2 = 170 mm downstream the
inlet of the test section) with Re ranged from 700 to 26,800 covering the laminar,
transitional and turbulent region.
The experimental setup and measurement are validated by comparing the obtained
values of Nusselt number and friction factor of the smooth channel with the empirical
correlations of Hausen,Sieder and Tate and Shah for fully developed laminar flow
regions and Dittuse-Boelter , Gnielinski , Petukhov , and Blasius for turbulent flow
regions, respectively. The heat transfer and friction factor data obtained for each
vortex generator is compared with the data obtained from smooth plate under similar
geometric and flow conditions.
The results showed that delta winglet pair is the best in laminar and transitional flow
region, while curved trapezoidal winglet pair (CTWP) has the best thermohydraulic
performance in fully turbulent region due to the streamlined configuration and then the
low pressure drop, which indicates the advantages of using this kind of vortex
generators for heat transfer enhancement. Parametric study on CTWP showed that
smaller attack angle (β= 0 and150), larger curvature (b/a =1/2) and larger angle of
inclination (α=200) gives better thermohydraulic performance under the present
conditions. An appropriate spacing between the leading edges of a pair of CTW VG
should be considered for different flow regions.

C.B. Allison et. al. [2] studied the effect of delta winglet vortex pair on the
performance of a tube fin heat exchanger. The winglets are arranged in flow-up
configuration and placed directly upstream of the tube. In addition to vortex generation
the flow is guided onto the tube surface increasing the localized velocity gradients and
Nusselt Numbers in this region. The study includes dye visualization and full scale
heat transfer performance measurements. The results are compared to a standard
louvre fin surface. It was found that the winglet surface had 87% of the heat transfer
capacity but only 53% of the pressure drop of the louvre fin surface. Various delta
configurations were trialed using flow visualization. Finally a flow-up delta winglet
pair positioned immediately in front of each tube was chosen. A prototype coil was
fabricated and experimentally assessed on a purpose built coil test rig.
Mirazel et. al. [3] analyzed heat transfer augmentation in plate finned tube heat
exchangers with vortex generators (winglets).They compared the performances of
round and flat tubes. Heat transfer augmentation and pressure loss penalty caused by
vortex generators (VGs) are numerically studied by them for finned flat/round tube
heat exchangers and compared with available experimental results. The simulations
are performed with the steady three-dimensional incompressible conditions and a
RNGK-ε turbulence model is used. The Reynolds numbers based on the bulk velocity
and the height of channel are selected from 600 to 4050. To compare the effectiveness
of VGs on the round and flat tubes for tube-fin heat exchangers, two different
configurations are investigated with two and four delta winglet vortex generators for
each tube. The streamlines, vorticity, the averaged Nusselt number, the friction factor
and the performance factor (JF) are provided to evaluate the effectiveness of VGs for
the heat exchangers employed. It is found that the flat tube with VGs provides better
thermal performance than the round one, especially at the lower Reynolds numbers.
Maniar et. al. [4] studied heat transfer enhancement in a rectangular channel using
vortex generator in a laminar flow. This research involves the numerical analysis of
heat exchange enhancement in a rectangular channel using different types of
longitudinal vortex generators (LVG) for a laminar flow. A computational fluid
dynamics software package was used to compute the 3-D steady viscous flows with
heat transfer. The effects of Reynolds number ranging from 500 to 1000 (laminar
flow) are shown from different attack angles of the vortex generators (30˚ and 45˚).

Three different types of vortex generators are studied: a delta wing with finite
thickness, a trapezoidal delta wing and a delta winglet pair (also called half delta wing)
for a common flow down configuration The results show that the average surface
Nusselt number ratio for a delta wing at attack angles of 30˚and 45˚ shows that the
heat transfer enhancement takes place to some extent and a higher attack angle
produces higher heat augmentation but at the cost of pressure loss. The average
surface Nusselt number ratio for a trapezoidal delta wing is much higher than that of
delta wing at the same attack angles and same chord length of the wing. The only
advantage is that the trapezoidal wing has a sharp leading edge which helps in the
early generation of primary vortices and, thus, has higher average surface Nusselt
number than the delta wing.
S.Eiamsa et. al. [5] this research has been performed to study the influences of
multiple twisted tape vortex generators (MT-VG)on the heat transfer and fluid friction
characteristics in a rectangular channel. The experiments conducted using the twisted
tapes with three different twist ratios (y/w=2.5, 3.0 and 3.5) for generating different
swirl and turbulent intensities in the channel. The twisted tapes are assembled to
obtained the MT-VG with three different free-spacing ratios, s/w=1.66 (5 tapes),
s/w=1.25 (7 tapes) and s/w=1.0 (9 tapes). The results for the Reynolds number ranged
from 2700 to 9000 at constant Prandtl number, Pr=0.7, using air as the test fluid, are
examined. In the studied range, the presence of channel with MT-VG leads to increase
in heat transfer rate over the use of smooth channel around 10.3 to 169.5%. The
channel with the smaller twist ratio(y/w) and free-spacing ratio (s/w) provides higher
heat transfer rate and pressure loss than those with the larger of twist ratio and free-
spacing ratio under similar operation conditions. In addition, correlations of Nusselt
number (Nu) and friction factor (f) have been developed and the thermal enhancement
index at constant pumping power is also determined. With the utilization of twisted
tapes, the Nusselt numbers increase in the range of 10% and 170% in comparison with
the values in the smooth channel while the friction factors are in the range of 1.45 and
5.7 times of those for the smooth channel. Over the range investigated, enhancement
indices are found to be around 0.94 to 1.4.

Michael J. Lawson et. al. [6] investigated the use of delta winglets as a means to
increase tube wall heat transfer in louvered fin heat exchangers. Tests were performed
using a scaled louvered fin geometry that accurately modeled the flat landing along the
tube wall onto which delta winglets and winglet piercings were incorporated. By
comparing the results to past studies which used simplified louvered fin geometry
where the flat landing was ignored, it was demonstrated that the three-dimensionality
of louvered fins and the transition between the louvers and the tube wall must be
accounted for to make accurate tube wall heat transfer measurements. Overall, this
study found that delta winglets including simulated piercings are a promising means of
augmenting heat transfer in louvered fin heat exchangers, providing up to 24%
augmentation over the tube wall surface. For a final conclusion to be reached on the
practicality of implementing delta winglets into louvered fin heat exchanger designs,
overall heat exchanger performance must be measured where all winglet and piercing
effects are accounted for using a realistic louvered fin geometry.
A.Joardar et al. [7] studied includes the experimental evaluation of potential of

winglet type vortex generator (VG) arrays for air-side heat transfer enhancements by
full-scale wind-tunnel testing of a compact plain-fin-and-tube heat exchanger. In this
study the effectiveness of a 3VG alternate-tube inline array of vortex generators is
compared to a single-row vortex generator design and the baseline configuration. The
winglets are placed in a common-flow-up orientation for improved tube wake
management. The overall heat transfer and pressure drop performance are assessed
under dry-surface conditions over a Reynolds number range based on hydraulic
diameter of 220<Re<960. It is found that the air-side heat transfer coefficient increases
from 16.5%to 44% for the single-row winglet arrangement with an increase in
pressure drop of less than 12%.For the three-row vortex generator array, the
enhancement in heat transfer coefficient increases with Reynolds number from 29.9%
to 68.8% with a pressure drop penalty from 26% at Re = 960 to 87.5% at Re = 220.
The results indicate that vortex generator arrays can significantly enhance the
performance of fin-tube heat exchangers with flow depths and fin densities typical to
those used in air-cooling and refrigeration applications.

Ya-Ling He et al. [8] investigated the heat transfer enhancement and pressure loss
penalty for fin-and-tube heat exchangers with rectangular winglet pairs (RWPs) were
numerically investigated in a relatively low Reynolds number flow. The RWPs were
placed with a special orientation for the purpose of enhancement of heat transfer. The
numerical study involved three-dimensional flow and conjugate heat transfer in the
computational domain, which was set up to model the entire flow channel in the air
flow direction. The effects of attack angle of RWPs, row-number of RWPs and
placement of RWPs on the heat transfer characteristics and flow structure were
examined in detail. It was observed that the longitudinal vortices caused by RWPs and
the impingement of RWPs-directed flow on the downstream tube were important
reasons of heat transfer enhancement for fin-and-tube heat exchangers with RWPs.
The results showed that the rectangular winglet pairs (RWPs) can significantly
improve the heat transfer performance of the fin and- tube heat exchangers with a
moderate pressure loss penalty. They found that the rectangular winglet pairs (RWPs)
is one promising heat transfer enhancement technique. The RWP generated vortices
can enhance the thermal mixing of the fluid, delay the boundary layer separation, and
reduce the size of tube wake. The longitudinal vortices generated by RWPs rearrange
the temperature distribution and the flow field, and as a consequence significantly
enhance the heat transfer performance of the fin-and-tube heat exchanger. Due to the
“common-flow-up” orientation of the RWPs, a constricted nozzle-like passage is
created between the RWPs and the aft region of the tube and hence the fluid is
accelerated in this region.
The accelerated flow cannot only further delay the boundary layer separation and
reduce the tube wake, but also impinge directly on the downstream tube, which
resulting in significant augmentation of local heat transfer. The staggered-RWPs array
in the fin-and-tube heat exchangers can augment the heat transfer as good as the
inline-RWPs array. In addition, compared with the inline-RWPs array, the staggered-
RWPs array can further reduce the pressure loss penalty due to the asymmetric
arrangement of the vortex generators.

Y.L. He et al. [9], Proposed the numerical analysis of heat-transfer enhancement by
punched winglet type vortex generator arrays in fin and tube heat exchanger. The
potential of punched winglet type vortex generator arrays is use to enhance air side
heat transfer performance of finned tube heat exchanger. The array is composed of two
delta winglet pairs with two layout modes of continuous and discontinuous winglets.
For the punched Vortex generator cases, the effectiveness of the main vortex to the
heat transfer enhancement is not fully dominant while the “corner vortex” also shows
significant effect on the heat transfer performance. Two kinds of VG arrays and a
conventional VG configuration in common flow up arrangement are performed in this
numerical study. The designs parameters such as punching effects, attack angle and
placement locations of delta winglet on the flow and heat transfer characteristics were
examined.
Jiong Li et al. [10], Proposed the numerical analysis of a slit fin and tube heat
exchanger with longitudinal vortex generator. A 3D numerical simulation is performed
on laminar heat transfer and flow characteristics of a slit fin and tube heat exchanger
with longitudinal vortex generator. Heat transfer enhancement of novel slit fin
mechanism is investigated by examining the effects of strips and the longitudinal
vortices. Slit fins are same like some pieces of strips are punched from the fin sheet.
Henk Huisseune et. al. [11]
Louvered fin and round tube heat exchangers are widely used in air conditioning
devices and heat pumps. In this study the effect of punching delta winglet vortex
generators into the louvered fin surface in the near wake region of each tube was
numerically investigated using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). The delta
winglets serve to reduce the size of the tube wakes. They cause three important
mechanisms of heat transfer enhancement. First, due to the swirling motion of the
generated vortices, hot air is removed from the tube wake to the mainstream regions
and vice versa. Second, the induced wall-normal flow locally thins the boundary layer,
which also enhances the heat transfer. Third, the size of the wake zones is reduced
because the flow separation from the tube surface is delayed. This also results in a
reduced form drag of the tube surface.

The net core pressure drop, however, increases when adding delta winglets to the
louvered fins because of increased friction and flow blockage. For the same heat duty
and pumping power, the louvered fin heat exchanger with delta winglets is more
compact than when no delta winglets are present.
S.M. Pesteei et al. [12]
This paper present local heat transfer coefficients were measured on fin-tube heat
exchanger with winglets using a single heater of 2 inch diameter and five different
positions of winglet type vortex generators. The measurements were made at Reynolds
number about 2250. Flow losses were determined by measuring the static pressure
drop in the system. Results showed a substantial increase in the heat transfer with
winglet type vortex generators. It has been observed that average Nusselt number
increases by about 46% while the local heat transfer coefficient improves by several
times as compared to plain fin-tube heat exchanger. The maximum improvement is
observed in the re-circulation zone.
CONCLUSIONS FROM LITERATURE REVIEWS
Author Year Title of Configurati Result

journal on of vortex
paper generator
Guobing 2011 “Experimental Curved Curved trapezoidal
Zhou et. al. investigation of trapezoidal winglet pair (CTWP) has
thermal and winglet the best thermohydraulic
flow performance in fully
characteristic of turbulent region due to
curved the streamlined
trapezoidal configuration and then
winglet type the low pressure drop
vortex
generator”
C.B. 2007 “Effect of a Delta winglet Winglet surface had 87%
Allison et. delta winglet of the heat transfer
al. vortex pair on capacity but only53% of
the performance the pressure drop
of a tube-fin compared to the louvered
heat exchanger” fin surface.
Mirazel et. 2013 “Heat transfer Delta winglet The flat tube with vortex
al. augmentation in generators shows better

plate finned thermal performance
tube heat than the round one,
exchangers with especially at lower
vortex Reynolds numbers.
generators”
Maniar et. 2012 “Heat transfer Delta and 1. Higher attack angles
al. enhancement in Trapezoidal result in enhanced heat
a rectangular winglet transfer but at the cost of
channel using higher pressure loss for
vortex generator delta winglet.
in a laminar 2. Trapezoidal wings
flow” produce primary vortices
and thus have Higher
surface Nusselt number
than delta wing.
S.Eiamsa 2010 “Study on Twisted tape With the utilization of
et. al. thermal and VG twisted tapes, the Nusselt
fluid flow numbers increase in the
characteristics range of 10% and 170%
in turbulent while the friction factors
channel flows are in the range of 1.45
with twisted and 5.7 times of those for
tape type VG” the smooth channel.
“Heat transfer Delta winglets 1. When all of the
Michael J. 2007 augmentation winglets were aimed
Lawson et. along the tube towards the wall in the
al. wall of a VG-F configuration, the
louvered fin average heat transfer
heat exchanger enhancements were
using delta VG” typically very low.
2. When the winglet
direction and orientation
were alternated on every
other louver, maximum
augmentation of 25%
was recorded.
3. When all winglets
were placed in the VG-B
orientation with
alternating direction,
results improved yielding
augmentations of up to
33%.
A.Joardar 2007 “Heat transfer Winglet For Reynolds numbers
et. al. enhancement by between 220 and 960,
winglet type which corresponds to
vortex face velocities between
generators array 0.7 m/s and 1.8m/s, the
in plain fin and air-side heat transfer

tube heat coefficient was shown to
exchanger” increase by 16.5–44%
for single VG pair and
30–68.8% for 3VG array
arrangement
Ya-Ling 2013 “Analysis of Rectangular The staggered-RWPs
heat transfer winglet vortex array in the fin-and-tube
He et. al. generator
and pressure heat exchangers can
drop for fin- augment the heat transfer
and-tube heat as good as the inline-
exchangers with RWPs array. In addition,
rectangular compared with the
winglet-type inline-RWPs array, the
vortex staggered-RWPs array
generators ” can further reduce the
pressure loss penalty due
to the asymmetric
arrangement of the
vortex generators.
Y.L. He et. 2012 “Numerical Punched For the punched Vortex
al. analysis of heat winglet type generator cases, the
transfer vortex effectiveness of the main
enhancement by generator vortex to the heat
punched transfer enhancement is
winglet type not fully dominant while
vortex generator the “corner vortex” also
arrays in fin and shows significant effect
tube heat on the heat transfer
exchanger.” performance.
Jiong Li et. 2011 “Numerical Longitudinal Heat transfer
al. analysis of a slit enhancement of novel
fin and tube slit fin mechanism is
heat exchanger investigated by
with examining the effects of
longitudinal strips and the
VG” longitudinal vortices.
HenkHuiss 2013 “Performance Delta winglet The net core pressure

eune et. al. enhancement of drop, however, increases
a louvered fin when adding delta
heat exchanger winglets to the louvered
by using delta fins because of increased
winglet vortex friction and flow
generators” blockage. For the same
heat duty and pumping
power, the louvered fin

heat exchanger with delta
winglets is more compact
than when no delta
winglets are present.
S.M. 2005 “Experimental Winglet It has been observed that

Pesteei et. study of the average Nusselt number
al. effect of winglet increases by about 46%
location on heat while the local heat
transfer transfer coefficient
enhancement improves by several
and pressure times as compared to
drop in fin-tube plain fin-tube heat
heat exchanger. The increase
exchangers“ in pressure drop for the
existing situation was of
the order of 18%.

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Experimental Set up
Experimental setup comprises four sections such as air channel, test section, water
channel and control panel section
3.1.1 Air channel

Air channel consist of blower and flow metering section. It consists of a circular cross
section PVC pipe having diameter 0.105m which connect the blower with the test
section. Flow metering section consists of orifice meter having diameter 0.052m for
measuring the air flow rate. Orifice is connected to the U- tube manometer attach to
the control panel. It is located on the PVC pipe after the blower and before the test
section. There are two T- type thermocouples embedded in hole at the inlet and outlet
of air channel for measuring the inlet and outlet of the air channel. Blower is selected
by taking maximum Re = 40,000 for the experimentation so the volume flow rate
obtained is 3.64 m3/s which is the maximum volume flow rate required for the
experimentation. Hence the volume flow rate of the blower should be 3.64 m3/s.
Specifications of blower used for experimentation are as follows.
Power: 1 HP; Single phase
Figure 3.1 Air Channel

3.1.2 Test section
Test section is a rectangular box made of epoxy resin and having dimensions
700mm×150mm and thickness of 10mm as shown in Figure 3.2. A copper plate of
dimension 700mm×150mm and thickness of 6mm is placed in the test section with
opening from upper portion for placing vortex generator. A hole of diameter 105mm is
introduced at the inlet of test section for the entering of PVC pipe which connect air
channel and test section. Similar hole is also introduced at the outlet of test section for
the air removal. Inclined manometer is used to measure the pressure drop across the
test section. Two pressure taps are inserted on the top portion of the test section for
connecting test section with the inclined manometer.
Figure 3.2 Test section
3.1.3 Water Channel
Water channel of dimension 600×150mm is fixed with the copper plate from
downward portion. A sandwich configuration is used for the heat transfer section (test
section) where the air and water are separated by a copper plate. Water channel consist
of inlet and outlet for the hot water. Water channel is well prevented from leakage. Hot
water from a temperature controlled heater is pumped into the water channel through
rotameter which is used for measuring water flow rate and the outlet of water channel
is connected with the heater.

So water is continuously circulated in the water channel. Inlet and outlet temperatures
of water channel are measured by a pt100 RTD (resistance temperature detector).
3.1.4 Control Panel

Temperature indicator display in control panel is used to display temperature measured
by thermocouple at the different locations on test plate. Control panel have different
ports, it means it can give reading for different locations by rotating knob. Blower
speed can be change by rotating knob on the control Panel. Heater, blower and pump
are connected to the control panel. All the thermocouples and pt100 RTD (resistance
temperature detector) are connected with the control panel. Figure 3.3 shows the
actual photo of the control panel.
Figure 3.3 Control panel

Blower Pressure tap
Test section
Rotameter
Heater
Pump
Figure 3.4 Experimental setup
The experiment is conducted in test section which is heated by hot water with counter-
flow arrangement. Air drawn by blower flows from air channel to the test section and
passes through the vortex generator attaches to the copper plate which is placed inside
the test section and then it is exhausted from test section. Figure 3.4 shows the actual
photo of experimental setup. Test section is a closely packed rectangular box made up
of epoxy resin having opening from upward portion for placing vortex generator. Test
section and water channel both are attached to the copper plate.
3.1.5 Insulation
For reducing heat losses from water channel and test section silicon wool insulation is
used. The insulation is wrapped around the test section and water channel every time
while performing experimentation.

3.1.6 Thermocouples
The thermocouple is used to measure temperature. They are nothing but temperature
sensors. Ten T- type thermocouples having temperature range of 150 to 2000C are
used for the experimentation out of which eight thermocouples are utilized for
measuring the wall temperature of plate and two thermocouples are used for
measuring the inlet and outlet temperature of air channel. To measure output of
individual thermocouple single selector switch is used, which facilitate temperature
measurement. Figure 3.5 shows the positions of thermocouples on the copper plate.
10mm ER
700mm Air channel
Thermocouple hole Copper plate

150mm
100mm 150mm 150mm 150mm 150mm

6mm
Water channel
Figure.3.5 Arrangements of thermocouples on copper plate
3.2 Vortex Generators
Three vortex generators (VGs) are selected for comparative test, rectangular winglet
(RW), trapezoidal winglet (TW), delta winglet (DW) as shown in Figure 3.6. These
vortex generators are fixed vertically on the copper plate using silica gel.
Figure 3.6 Vortex Generators

To compare the thermal and flow performance of these vortex generators, the tests are
conducted under the attack angle (β= 45o), front edge pitch (x =20 mm) and placement
(y = 100 mm downstream the inlet of the test section). Three conditions of vortex
generator are considered for experimentation, single pair of each vortex generator
having length 40mm 1nd height 20mm, four pairs of each vortex generator having
length 20mm and height 15mm and four pair of each vortex generator having
length15mm and height 10mm. The position of single pair of vortex generators is
shown in figure 3.7.
Copper plate
Vortex generator
X=20mm β=450
150mm
Y=100mm
700mm
Figure 3.7 Position of single pair of vortex generator on copper plate
. The distance between each pair of vortex generator is kept same (100mm) for perfect
comparison. The positions of four pairs of vortex generator are shown in figure 3.8.
Copper plate
700mm
20mm β=45 VG
150mm
100mm 100mm 100mm 100mm
Figure 3.8 Position of four pairs of vortex generator on copper plate

Table 3.1 Geometric dimensions and test conditions of vortex generators
(For single pair)
Type of α β a H x y Re
vortex (degree) (degree) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
generator
Rectangular - 45 40 20 20 100 9000-16000
Trapezoidal 20 45 40 20 20 100 9000-16000
Delta - 45 40 20 20 100 9000-16000
Table no. 3.2 Geometric dimensions and test conditions of vortex generators
(For four pairs)
Type α β a h x y Re
(degree) (degree) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Rectangular - 45 20,15 15,10 20 100 9000-16000
Trapezoidal 20 45 20,15 15,10 20 100 9000-16000
Delta - 45 20,15 15,10 20 100 9000-16000

3.3 Test procedure
Experiment is carried out in following steps:
1. The pump, heater and blower are switch on after filling the water loop.
2. Zero point is verified for U- Tube manometer, inclined manometer and water
flow rate meter before each test run.
3. The blower was switched on to let a predetermined rate of air flow through the
test channel.
4. The water heater temperature is then set to 900C constant supply.
5. A constant water flow rate 400LPH is maintained throughout the
experimentation by using rotameter.
6. To collect relevant heat transfer and flow friction data test runs were
conducted under steady state condition which is assumed to be reached when
the inlet and outlet temperature of air and water at a point does not change for
about 15 minutes.
7. Eight values of Reynolds number were used for each set at fixed heater
temperature.
8. Once the steady state occurs, the observed parameters such as inlet and outlet
temperature of water and air, wall temperatures of copper plate, water flow
rate, air velocity and pressure loss are recorded for 3 minutes of intervals.
9. Then, the air velocity is changed and another condition is measured for the
same VG pair.
10. After the test on one VG pair is finished, the blower is closed and another VG
pair is installed.
11. During Experimentation the following parameters were measured:
a. Pressure difference across the orifice meter.
b. Temperature of air at inlet and outlet of the test section.
c. Pressure drop across the test section
d. Wall temperature of copper plate

3.4 Theoretical analysis
Steady state value of the plate and air temperatures in the channel, at various locations
for given water heater temperature and mass flow rate of air, is used to determine the
values of performance parameters. The theoretical analysis is done for the plates with
the different vortex generator on the basis of experimental findings. The geometrical
specifications of the test plates are as follows.
Table No 3.3 Test plate Performance parameters
Sr. Parameter Dimension /Range

No.
1 Reynolds number range 9000 to 16000
2 Vortex generator length 40mm,20mm&15mm
3 Vortex generator height 20mm,15mm&10mm
4 Test plate length 700 mm
5 Test plate width 150 mm
6 Test plate thickness 6 mm
7 Angle of attack for vortex generator 450
8. Orifice diameter 52mm
9. Test section diameter 105mm
3.5 Data Reduction
Reynolds number is given by:

ρa x Va x Dh
Re = (1)
µ
Convective heat transfer coefficient is :
𝑄
h = (2)
𝐴p ∆𝑇𝑙𝑚
Air side heat transfer rate can be calculated by:
𝑄 = 𝑐𝑝 ρa Va 𝐴c (𝑇0 − 𝑇𝑖 ) (3)
Logirithimic mean temperature difference between the wall of the copper plate and the
air is given by:
(𝑇𝑤𝑚 − 𝑇𝑖 ) − (𝑇𝑤𝑚 − 𝑇0 )
∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 = (𝑇 −𝑇 )
(4)
𝑙𝑛 (𝑇𝑤𝑚−𝑇𝑖 )
𝑤𝑚 0

The average wall temperature pf copper plate can be calculated as:
∑8𝑖=1 𝑇𝑤𝑖 𝐴i
𝑇𝑤𝑚 = (5)
𝐴p
Nusselt number:
ℎ𝐷ℎ
𝑁𝑢 = (6)
𝑘
Colburn factor from the value of Nusselt number is given by:
𝑁𝑢
𝑗= (7)
𝑅𝑒 × 𝑃𝑟 1/3
Friction factor from values of pressure drop across test rig:

2 × ∆𝑝 × 𝐷ℎ
𝑓 = (8)
𝜌𝑎 × 𝐿 × 𝑣 2
Theoretical Nusselt number and friction factor can be calculated by using following
correlations.
𝑁𝑢𝑡ℎ = 0.0239 × 𝑅𝑒 0.8 × 𝑃𝑟 0.4 … … … … 𝐷𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑢𝑠 𝐵𝑜𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛.

𝑁𝑢𝑡ℎ = 0.0214 × (𝑅𝑒 0.8 − 100) × 𝑃𝑟 0.4 . . … 𝐺𝑛𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑘𝑖 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛.
𝑓𝑜 = 0.085 𝑋 𝑅𝑒 −0.25 … …… …… ……...Blasius correlation
𝑓𝑜 = (1.82𝑙𝑜𝑔10𝑅𝑒 − 1.64)−0.25 … … … … … … … … … … … 𝑃𝑒𝑡𝑘ℎ𝑜𝑣 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTAL
RESULTS AND
VALIDATION

4. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND VALIDATION
Experimental work was carried out to investigate the heat transfer rate, friction factor
and thermal performance from vortex generators. The material used for test plate is
copper and plate is tested with three types of vortex generators rectangular winglet,
trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet. The inlet temperature, outlet temperature and
averaged plate surface temperature is used to calculated the heat loss. Heat transfer
rate and friction factor are validated from available correlations.
4.1 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND VALIDATION OF TEST PLATE

4.1.1 Experimental results of test plate
As shown in figure 4.1 experimental Nusselt number of test plate is increases with
increase in Reynolds number. The experimental value of Nusselt number is increases
by 60.28 % from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. As Colburn factor is directly
proportional to Nusselt number, it also increases with increase in Reynolds number.
Values of Nusselt number of test plate ranges from 23.6 to 59.43. Value of Colburn
factor is increases by 33.36% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000.
Figure 4.2 shows the variation of Colburn factor as a function of Reynolds number
for test plate. Values of Colburn factor of test plate ranges from 0.00255 to 0.00368.
Pressure drop across the test channel is measured by inclined manometer. As velocity
of air flowing through test channel increases, pressure drop across the test channel also
increases. Pressure drop across the test plate is increases with increase in Reynolds
number. As frictional factor is directly proportional to the pressure drop and inversely
proportional to the square of velocity of air flowing through the test channel, friction
factor of test plate is decreases with increase in Reynolds number.
Value of friction factor is decrease by 13.47% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000.
Figure 4.3 shows the variation of friction factor as a function of Reynolds number for
test plate. Values of friction factor of test plate ranges from 0.0325 to 0.02910. Table
4.1 shows the experimental results of test plate.

Nusselt number Vs Reynolds number plot for test plate
70
60
50
Nusselt number
40
30
Nu0(exp)
20
10
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.1 Variation of Nusselt number as function of Reynolds number for test
plate
Colburn factor Vs Reynolds number plot for test plate

0.0045
0.004
0.0035
0.003
Colburn factor
0.0025
0.002
j0(exp)
0.0015
0.001
0.0005
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.2 Variation of Colburn factor as a function of Reynolds number for test
plate

Friction factor Vs Reynolds number plot for test plate
0.033
0.0325
0.032
0.0315
Friction factor 0.031
0.0305
0.03
0.0295 f0(exp)
0.029
0.0285
0.028
0.0275
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.3 Variation of friction factor as a function of Reynolds number for test
plate
Table 4.1 Effect of Re, V, T in on h, f 0 , j 0
V h
Re T in T out ∆P (Pa) f0
(m/sec) (W/m2K) Nu 0 J0
(0C) (0C)
9670.12 1.56 37 40 5.17 23.6 0.00255 0.3147 0.0325
10785.9 1.74 37 41 7.95 36.29 0.0034 0.3921 0.0310
11839.7 1.91 37 41 8.83 40.31 0.0035 0.4617 0.0305
12769.5 2.06 38 42 9.77 44.6 0.00364 0.524 0.03025
13637.3 2.2 38 42 10.64 48.57 0.00367 0.5909 0.02990
14381.2 2.32 38 42 11.24 51.31 0.003682 0.6395 0.02910
15311.0 2.47 39 43 12.24 55.87 0.003766 0.7099 0.0285
16054.8 2.59 39 43 13.02 59.43 0.003827 0.77024 0.02812

4.1.2 Validation of heat transfer and pressure drop for flat plate
For the validation of the setup and measurement, experimental Nusselt number and
friction factor values of the test plate are compared with the empirical correlations of
Dittuse-Boelter (Nu), Gnielinski (Nu), Petukhov (f) and Blasius (f) for turbulent flow
regions, respectively. The Dittus-Boelter equation and Gnielinski eqvation for Nusselt
number is valid for the Reynolds number range above 3000 and petkhov and Blasius
correlations for friction factor are valid for turbulent region.
Figure 4.4 shows that the Nusselt number for the test plate is in reasonable conformity
with both the correlations in turbulent region with an average difference of 16.5% and
±7.5%. Figure 4.5 shows that friction factor for the test plate is in reasonable
agreement with Petukhov and Blasius correlation in turbulent region with an average
difference of 18.57% and 17.4% respectively. Table no. 4.2 shows the theoretical and
experimental values of Nusselt number and friction factor of the test plate.
70
60
50
Nusselt number
Nu0(exp)
40
30 Nu(Dittus- Boeleter
correlation)
20
Nu(Gnielinski
10 correlation)
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.4 Variation of Nusselt number as a function of Reynolds number for flat
plate, Dittus –Boelter and Gnielinski correlation

0.033
0.032
0.031
Friction factor
0.03 f0(exp)
f (Petkhov correlation)
0.029
f (Blasius correlation)
0.028
0.027
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.5 Variation of friction factor as a function of Reynolds number for flat
plate, Petkhov and Blasius correlation
Table 4.2 Theoretical and experimental values of Nusselt number and friction
factor
Nu
Nu f (Petkhov f (Blasius
Re f0 (Dittus –
Nu 0 (Gnielinski correlation) correlation)
Boelter
correlation)
correlation)
9670.12 23.6 0.0325 34.15 29.72 0.0317 0.0319
10785.9 36.29 0.0310 37.27 32.62 0.0307 0.0310
11839.7 40.31 0.0305 40.16 35.30 0.0300 0.03033
12769.5 44.6 0.03025 42.66 37.63 0.02938 0.02976
13637.3 48.57 0.02990 44.97 39.78 0.02887 0.02927
14381.2 51.31 0.02910 46.92 41.59 0.02846 0.0288
15311.0 55.87 0.0285 49.33 43.84 0.02799 0.0284
16054.8 59.43 0.02812 51.24 45.61 0.02764 0.0281

4.2 Experimental results for single pair of rectangular winglet, delta winglet and
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator 40mm×20mm (length×height)
Nusselt number for each pair of vortex generator is increases with increase in
Reynolds number. Rectangular winglet vortex generator shows good heat transfer
enhancement results as compare to the delta winglet vortex generator and trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator because it has largest area facing the air flow and it induces
the strongest longitudinal vortices. Table 4.3 shows the analysis of Nusselt number,
Colburn factor and friction factor for single pair of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal
winglet and delta winglet vortex generator (40mm×20mm).
Table 4.3 Analysis of Nusselt number, Colburn factor and friction factor for
single pair of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex
generator (40mm×20mm)
Rectangular winglet Trapezoidal winglet Delta winglet
Re
Nu R1 j R1 f R1 Nu T1 j T1 f T1 Nu D1 j D1 f D1
51.63 0.0055 0.0335 31.63 0.0034 0.0331 40.44 0.0043 0.0330

9670.12
71.12 0.0068 0.0328 45.15 0.0042 0.0325 54.64 0.0051 0.0323

10785.9
81.21 0.0068 0.0318 49.71 0.0043 0.0315 60.53 0.0052 0.0313

11839.7
86.32 0.0069 0.0315 54.28 0.0043 0.0313 66.60 0.0053 0.0311

12769.5
92.71 0.0070 0.0314 58.70 0.0044 0.0311 71.49 0.0053 0.0309

13637.3
98.38 0.0070 0.0311 62.31 0.0044 0.0309 75.73 0.0053 0.0307

14381.2
106.9 0.0072 0.0308 67.93 0.0045 0.0306 83.04 0.0054 0.0303

15311.0
112.7 0.0073 0.0305 71.58 0.0046 0.0303 87.56 0.0055 0.0300

16054.8

Figure 4.6 shows the comparison of Nusselt number values for each pair of vortex
generator with the Nusselt number values for test plate. The average percent increase
in Nusselt number of the test plate for single pair of rectangular winglet vortex
generator is 49%. The Nusselt number obtained from this single pair of rectangular
winglet vortex generator ranges from 51.63 to 112.76 for Reynolds number 9000 to
16000. Trapezoidal winglet vortex generator shows less heat transfer enhancement as
compared to the rectangular and delta vortex generator because it has less area facing
the air flow. Average percent increase in Nusselt number of the test plat for single pair
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is 18.91%.
Nusselt number obtained for single pair trapezoidal winglet vortex generator ranges
from 31.63 to 71.58 for Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Delta winglet vortex
generator shows good heat transfer enhancement than trapezoidal vortex generator.
Average percent increase in the value of flat plate for single pair delta winglet vortex
generator is 32.49%. Values of Nusselt number for single pair of rectangular winglet
vortex generator are greater than single pair of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
and delta winglet vortex generator with an average of 38.45% and 22.95%
respectively.
120
100
80
Nusselt number
NuR1
60
NuT1
40 NuD1
Nu
20
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.6 Variation of Nusselt number as a function of Reynolds number for

single pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(40mm×20mm)

Figure 4.7 shows the comparison of Colburn factor values for each pair of vortex
generator with the Colburn factor values for test plate. Colburn factor is directly
proportional to Nusselt number. The values of Colburn factor constantly increases
with Reynolds number for each pair of vortex generator.
The average percent increase in the Colburn factor of test plate for single pair of
rectangular winglet vortex generator is 48.91%. Trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
has minimum Colburn factor. The average percent increase in the Colburn factor of
test plate for single pair of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is 17.99%.
Average percent increase in the value of Colburn factor of test plate for single pair
delta winglet vortex generator is 33.79%. Values of Colburn factor for single pair of
rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than single pair of trapezoidal winglet
vortex generator and delta winglet vortex generator with an average of 37.45% and
23.96% respectively. Values of Colburn factor for single pair of delta winglet vortex
generator are greater than single pair of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator with an
average of 17.63%.
0.008
0.007
0.006
Colburn factor
0.005
jR1
0.004
jT1
0.003 jD1
j0
0.002
0.001
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.7 Variation of Colburn factor as a function of Reynolds number for

single pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(40mm×20mm)

Figure 4.8 shows the comparison of friction factor values for each pair of vortex
generator with the friction factor values for test plate. Friction factor for each vortex
generator is decreases with increase in Reynolds number. Rectangular winglet vortex
generator has maximum friction factor as compared to the trapezoidal and delta
winglet vortex generator because of its structure. Average percent increase in the
friction factor for the single pair rectangular winglet vortex generator is 4.75%. The
maximum value obtained for the friction factor for single pair rectangular winglet
vortex generator is 0.0335. Delta winglet vortex generator has minimum friction factor
than rectangular winglet and trapezoidal vortex generator. The average percent
increase in the friction factor of test plate for single pair of delta winglet vortex
generator is 3.93%. Average percent increase in the value of friction factor of test plate
for single pair trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is 4.58%. Values of friction factor
for single pair of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than single pair of
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex generator with an
average of 0.98% and 1.49% respectively. Values of friction factor for single pair of
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator are greater than single pair of delta winglet vortex
generator with an average of 0.75%.
0.034
0.033
0.032
Friction factor
0.031 fR1
0.03 fT1
fD1
0.029
f0
0.028
0.027
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.8 Variation of friction factor as a function of Reynolds number for single
pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(40mm×20mm)

Three dimensionless factors of j/j 0 , f/f 0 and r = (j/j0)/(f/f0) were used to describe the
heat transfer enhancement, flow resistance and thermohydraulic performance of vortex
generator pairs. Here, j 0 and f 0 are the Colburn factor and friction factor from the
measured data of test plate (without vortex generators) used as reference values, and j
and f are the corresponding performance factors of test plate mounted with vortex
generators. Table 4.4 shows the analysis of Colburn factor ratio, friction factor ratio
and r/r 0 for single pair of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet
vortex generator (40mm×20mm).
Table 4.4 Analysis of Colburn factor ratio, friction factor ratio and r/r 0 for single
pair of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex

Re
j R1 /j 0 f R1 /f 0 r R1 /r 0 j T1 /j 0 f T1 /f 0 r T1 /r 0 j D1 /j 0 f d1 /f 0 r d1 /r 0
2.15 1.03 2.08 1.33 1.01 1.31 1.77 1.01 1.75

9670.12
2 1.03 1.94 1.25 1.02 1.22 1.51 1.02 1.48

10785.9
1.95 1.04 1.87 1.23 1.03 1.19 1.5 1.02 1.47

11839.7
1.93 1.04 1.85 1.21 1.034 1.17 1.47 1.028 1.42

12769.5
1.91 1.05 1.81 1.21 1.04 1.16 1.45 1.03 1.4

13637.3
1.91 1.06 1.8 1.2 1.06 1.13 1.459 1.05 1.38

14381.2
1.9137 1.08 1.77 1.21 1.07 1.13 1.46 1.06 1.37

15311.0
1.89 1.08 1.75 1.2 1.07 1.12 1.44 1.07 1.34

16054.8

Figure 4.9 shows the comparison of each vortex generator on the basis of
dimensionless factor j/j 0 . It shows that rectangular winglet vortex generator pair has
the best heat transfer enhancement followed by delta winglet and trapezoidal winglet
pair. Value of j/j 0 for each vortex generator is decreases with increase in Reynolds
number because Colburn factor for test plate and each vortex generator is increases
with increase in Reynolds number. Values of Colburn factor ratio decreases by
12.09% and 18.64% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000 for single pair of
rectangular winglet and delta winglet vortex generator respectively. Values of Colburn
factor ratio for single pair of trapezoidal vortex generator decreases by 9.77% from
Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of Colburn factor ratio for single pair of
23.03% respectively.
2.5
1.5
jR1/j0
j/j0
jT1/j0
1
jD1/j0
j0/j0
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.9 Variation of Colburn factor ratio as a function of Reynolds number

for single pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(40mm×20mm)

dimensionless factor f/f 0 . It shows that rectangular winglet vortex generator pair has
the high flow resistance followed by trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet pair. Value
of f/f 0 for each vortex generator is increases with increase in Reynolds number
because friction factor for test plate and each vortex generator is decreases with
increase in Reynolds number. Values of friction factor ratio are increased by 4.62%
and 5.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000 for single pair of rectangular winglet
and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator respectively.
Values of friction factor ratio for single pair of delta vortex generator increases by
5.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of friction factor ratio for single
pair of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than single pair of trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex generator with an average of 1.02%
and 1.45% respectively. Values of friction factor ratio for single pair of trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator are greater than single pair of delta winglet vortex generator
with an average of 0.85%.
1.09
1.08
1.07
1.06
1.05
fR1/f0
f/f0
1.04
fT1/f0
1.03
fd1/f0
1.02 f0/f0
1.01
0.99
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.10 Variation of friction factor ratio as a function of Reynolds number

for single pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(40mm×20mm)

dimensionless factor r/r 0 . It shows that rectangular winglet vortex generator pair has
the maximum thermohydraulic performance followed by delta winglet and trapezoidal
winglet pair. Value of r/r 0 for each vortex generator is decreases with increase in
Reynolds number Values of r/r 0 are decreased by 15.86% and 14.50% from Reynolds
number 9000 to 16000 for single pair of rectangular winglet and trapezoidal winglet
vortex generator respectively. Values of r/r 0 for single pair of delta vortex generator
are increases by 22.85% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of r/r 0 for
single pair of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than single pair of
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex generator with an
average of 37.16% and 15.86% respectively.
2.5
1.5
rR1/r0
r/r0
rT1/r0
1
rd1/r0
r0/r0
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.11 Variation of r/r 0 as a function of Reynolds number for single pair of
rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator (40mm×20mm)

4.3 Experimental results for four pairs of rectangular winglet, delta winglet and
Four pairs of each vortex generator having length 20mm and height 15mm is
considered for experimentation. Experimental results for this condition show that heat
transfer enhancement is increased and friction factor is decreased from the heat
transfer and friction factor obtained for the first condition (single pair of vortex
generator with 40mm length and 20mm height). Table 4.5 shows the analysis of
Nusselt number, Colburn factor and friction factor for four pairs of rectangular
winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex generator (20mm×15mm).
Table 4.5 Analysis of Nusselt number, Colburn factor and friction factor for four
pairs of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex

Re
61.40 0.0066 0.0331 40.99 0.0044 0.0330 49.71 0.0056 0.0327

9670.12
79.06 0.0074 0.0321 55.78 0.0052 0.0319 65.37 0.0061 0.0318

10785.9
87.28 0.0076 0.0315 61.44 0.0053 0.0313 72.08 0.0062 0.0311

11839.7
95.64 0.0077 0.0312 67.61 0.0054 0.0310 79.29 0.0064 0.0308

12769.5
102.6 0.0077 0.0309 72.54 0.0054 0.0306 85.59 0.0064 0.0304

13637.3
108.8 0.0078 0.0307 76.93 0.0055 0.0304 90.75 0.0065 0.0301

14381.2
118.6 0.0080 0.0304 84 0.0056 0.0300 99.15 0.0066 0.0299

15311.0
125.1 0.0080 0.0302 88.56 0.0056 0.0299 104.5 0.0067 0.0297

16054.8

Experimental results show that rectangular vortex generator shows good heat transfer
results followed by delta winglet and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator. Figure
4.12 shows the comparison of Nusselt number values for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
each vortex generator with the Nusselt number values for test plate. The result shows
that Nusselt number for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator increases
with increase in Reynolds number. The average percent increase in Nusselt number of
the test plate for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator is
53.68%. The Nusselt number obtained from four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular
winglet vortex generator ranges from 61.40 to 125.1 for Reynolds number 9000 to
16000 which are greater then range obtained for the single pair of rectangular winglet
vortex generator. For four pairs (20mm×15mm), trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
shows less heat transfer enhancement as compared to the rectangular and delta vortex
generator because it has less area facing the air flow. Average percent increase in
Nusselt number of the test plat for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of trapezoidal winglet
vortex generator is 31.07%. Delta winglet vortex generator shows good heat transfer
enhancement than trapezoidal vortex generator. Average percent increase in the value
of flat plate for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of delta winglet vortex generator is 44.53%.
140
120
Nusselt number
100
80 NuR2
60 NuT2
NuD2
40
Nu
20
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

four pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(20mm×15mm)

Figure 4.13 shows the comparison of Colburn factor values for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator with the Colburn factor values for test plate.
Colburn factor is directly proportional to Nusselt number. The values of Colburn
factor constantly increases with Reynolds number for this condition. The average
percent increase in the Colburn factor of test plate for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
rectangular winglet vortex generator is 54.26%. Trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
has minimum Colburn factor. The average percent increase in the Colburn factor of
test plate for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is 33.27%.
Average percent increase in the value of Colburn factor of test plate for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of delta winglet vortex generator is 45.6%. Values of Colburn factor
for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than
values obtained for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet
vortex generator with an average of 31.14% and 18.36% respectively. Values of
Colburn factor for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of delta winglet vortex generator are
greater than values obtained for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator with
an average of 17.63%.
0.009
0.008
0.007
0.006
Colburn factor
0.005 jR2
0.004 jT2
0.003 jD2
j0
0.002
0.001
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

(20mm×15mm)

Figure 4.14 shows the comparison of friction factor values for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator with the friction factor values for test plate.
Friction factor for each vortex generator is decreases with increase in Reynolds
number. Rectangular winglet vortex generator has maximum friction factor as
compared to the trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator because of its structure.
Friction factor results shows that friction factor obtained for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator is less than friction factor obtained for single
pair (40mm×20mm) of each vortex generator. Average percent increase in the friction
factor for four pairs of rectangular winglet vortex generator is 3.82%. The maximum
value obtained for the friction factor for single pair rectangular winglet vortex
generator is 0.0331. Delta winglet vortex generator has minimum friction factor than
rectangular winglet and trapezoidal vortex generator. The average percent increase in
the friction factor of test plate for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of delta winglet vortex
generator is 1.82%. Average percent increase in the value of friction factor of test plate
for four pairs (20mm×15mm) trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is 2.81%. Values of
friction factor for four pairs of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than
vortex generator with an average of 0.96% and 1.33% respectively.
0.034
0.033
0.032
Friction factor
0.031 fR2
0.03 fT2
fD2
0.029
f0
0.028
0.027
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.14 Variation of friction factor as a function of Reynolds number for four
(20mm×15mm)

The comparison of each vortex generator is done on the basis of three dimensionless
factors of j/j 0 , f/f 0 and r = (j/j0)/(f/f0) which are used to describe the heat transfer
enhancement, flow resistance and thermohydraulic performance of vortex generator
pairs. Table 4.6 the analysis of Colburn factor ratio, friction factor ratio and r/r 0 for
four pairs of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex
generator (20mm×15mm).
Table 4.6 Analysis of Colburn factor ratio, friction factor ratio and r/r 0 for four

Re
2.58 1.01 2.55 1.72 1.01 1.70 2.21 1 2.21

9670.12
2.2 1.01 2.17 1.55 1.01 1.53 1.81 1 1.81

10785.9
2.17 1.03 1.93 1.53 1.02 1.5 1.79 1.01 1.77

11839.7
2.13 1.03 2.01 1.51 1.02 1.48 1.78 1.01 1.76

12769.5
2.11 1.03 1.88 1.49 1.02 1.46 1.76 1.01 1.74

13637.3
2.11 1.05 2 1.49 1.04 1.43 1.76 1.03 1.70

14381.2
2.12 1.06 2 1.5 1.05 1.42 1.77 1.04 1.70

15311.0
2.1 1.07 1.96 1.48 1.06 1.39 1.75 1.05 1.66

16054.8

dimensionless factor j/j 0 . It shows that four pairs (20×15mm) of rectangular winglet
vortex generator have the best heat transfer enhancement followed by delta winglet
and trapezoidal winglet pair. This result shows that Colburn factor ratio obtained for
four pairs (20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator is greater than Colburn factor
obtained for single pair (40mm×20mm) of each vortex generator. Value of j/j 0 for
each vortex generator is decreases with increase in Reynolds number. Values of
Colburn factor ratio decreases by 18.60% and 20.81% from Reynolds number 9000 to
16000 for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular winglet and delta winglet vortex
generator respectively. Trapezoidal winglet vortex generator shows minimum heat
transfer enhancement. Values of Colburn factor ratio for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
trapezoidal vortex generator decreases by 13.95% from Reynolds number 9000 to
16000. Values of Colburn factor ratio for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular
winglet vortex generator are greater than value obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm)
of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex generator with an
average of 38.15% and 24.08% respectively.
2.5
jR2/j0
j/j0
1.5
jT2/j0
1 jD2/j0
jo/jo
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

for four pair of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator
(20mm×15mm)

Figure 4.16 shows the comparison of each vortex generator for second condition on
the basis of dimensionless factor f/f 0 . It shows that for four pairs (20mm×15mm),
rectangular winglet vortex generator pairs have the high flow resistance followed by
trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet pair. This result shows that friction factor ratio
obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator is less than friction
factor obtained for single pair (40mm×20mm) of each vortex generator. The value of
f/f 0 for each vortex generator is increases with increase in Reynolds number. Values of
friction factor ratio are increased by 3.62% and 4.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to
16000 for four pairs of rectangular winglet and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
respectively. Values of friction factor ratio for four pairs of delta vortex generator
increases by 4.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of friction factor
ratio for four pairs of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than four pairs
of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex generator with an
average of 1.01% and 1.34% respectively. Values of friction factor ratio for four pairs
of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator are greater than four pairs of delta winglet
vortex generator with an average of 0.75%.
1.08
1.07
1.06
1.05
1.04 fR2/f0
f/f0
1.03 fT2/f0
1.02 fd2/f0
1.01 f0/f0
1
0.99
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

(20mm×15mm)

dimensionless factor r/r 0 . This result shows that r/r 0 ratio obtained for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator is more than r/r 0 obtained for single pair
(40mm×20mm) of each vortex generator. It shows that for four pairs (20mm×15mm),
rectangular winglet vortex generator pair has the maximum thermohydraulic
performance followed by delta winglet and trapezoidal winglet pair. Value of r/r 0 for
each vortex generator is decreases with increase in Reynolds number Values of r/r 0 are
decreased by 14.86% and 13.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000 for single
pair of rectangular winglet and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator respectively.
Values of r/r 0 ratio for four pairs of delta vortex generator are increases by 21.85%
from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of friction factor ratio for single pair of
14.75% respectively.
2.5
rR2/r0
r/r0
1.5
rT2/r0
rd2/r0
1
r0/r0
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.17 Variation of r/r 0 as a function of Reynolds number for four pair of
rectangular, trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator (20mm×15mm)

4.4 Experimental results for four pairs of rectangular winglet, delta winglet and
Four pairs of each vortex generator having length 15mm and height 10mm is
considered for experimentation. Experimental results for this condition show that heat
transfer enhancement is decreased and friction factor is increased from the heat
transfer and friction factor obtained for the first condition (single pair of vortex
generator with 40mm length and 20mm height) and second condition (four pairs of
vortex generator with 20mm length and 15mm height). Table 4.7 the analysis of
Nusselt number, Colburn factor and friction factor for four pairs of rectangular
winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex generator (15mm×10mm).
Table 4.7 Analysis of Nusselt number, Colburn factor and friction factor for four

Re
39.76 0.0042 0.035 23.96 0.0025 0.0342 31.04 0.0033 0.0335

9670.12
53.73 0.0050 0.0342 36.15 0.0034 0.0332 44.32 0.0042 0.0327

10785.9
59.02 0.0051 0.0338 39.9 0.0034 0.0329 48.84 0.0042 0.0322

11839.7
65.28 0.0052 0.0334 43.87 0.0035 0.0327 53.86 0.0043 0.0319

12769.5
69.93 0.0052 0.0329 47.06 0.0035 0.0324 57.65 0.0043 0.0315

13637.3
74.13 0.0053 0.0327 49.80 0.0035 0.0319 61.12 0.0043 0.0311

14381.2
80.89 0.0054 0.0324 54.14 0.0036 0.0315 65.96 0.0044 0.0308

15311.0
85.27 0.0054 0.0322 57.43 0.0036 0.0310 70.89 0.0045 0.0304

16054.8

Experimental results show that rectangular vortex generator shows good heat transfer
results followed by delta winglet and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator. Figure
4.18 shows the comparison of Nusselt number values for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
each vortex generator with the Nusselt number values for test plate. The result shows
that Nusselt number for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of each vortex generator increases
with increase in Reynolds number. The average percent increase in Nusselt number of
the test plate for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator is
47.16%.
The Nusselt number obtained from four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet
vortex generator ranges from 39.76 to 85.27 for Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. For
four pairs (15mm×10mm), trapezoidal winglet vortex generator shows very less heat
transfer enhancement as compared to the rectangular and delta vortex generator.
Nusselt number obtained for trapezoidal winglet vortex generator (15mm×10mm) is
less than Nusselt number obtained for test plate. Average percent increase in Nusselt
number of the test plat for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex
generator is ±10.06%. Average percent increase in the value of flat plate for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of delta winglet vortex generator is 34.34%.
90
80
70
Nusselt number
60
50 NuR3
40 NuT3
30 NuD3
20 Nu
10
0
9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000 15000 16000 17000
Reynolds number

(15mm×10mm)

Figure 4.19 shows the comparison of Colburn factor values for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of each vortex generator with the Colburn factor values for test plate.
The average percent increase in the Colburn factor of test plate for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator is 44.16%. Trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator has minimum Colburn factor. Colburn factor obtained for
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator (15mm×10mm) is less than Colburn factor
obtained for test plate. The average percent increase in the Colburn factor of test plate
for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is 14.27%.
Average percent increase in the value of Colburn factor of test plate for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of delta winglet vortex generator is 35.32%. Values of Colburn factor
for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than
vortex generator with an average of 41% and 15.36% respectively. Values of Colburn
factor for single pair of delta winglet vortex generator are greater than values obtained
for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator with an average of 27.93%.
0.006
0.005
0.004
Colburn factor
jR3
0.003
jT3
0.002 jD3
j0
0.001
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

(15mm×10mm)

Figure 4.20 shows the comparison of friction factor values for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of each vortex generator with the friction factor values for test plate.
Friction factor for each vortex generator is increases with increase in Reynolds
number. Rectangular winglet vortex generator has maximum friction factor as
compared to the trapezoidal and delta winglet vortex generator because of its structure.
Average percent increase in the friction factor for four pairs of rectangular winglet
vortex generator is 10.89%. The maximum value obtained for the friction factor for
single pair rectangular winglet vortex generator is 0.035.
Delta winglet vortex generator has minimum friction factor than rectangular winglet
and trapezoidal vortex generator. The average percent increase in the friction factor of
test plate for single pair of delta winglet vortex generator is 2.95%.Average percent
increase in the value of friction factor of test plate for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet
vortex generator (15mm×10mm) is 3.81%. Values of friction factor for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than values
obtained for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex
generator with an average of 0.99% and 1.89% respectively. Values of friction factor
for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator (15mm×10mm) are greater than
single pair of delta winglet vortex generator with an average of 0.79%.
0.049
0.046
0.043
Friction factor
0.04
fR3
0.037
fT3
0.034
fD3
0.031
f0
0.028
0.025
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.20 Variation of friction factor as a function of Reynolds number for four
(15mm×10mm)

The comparison of each vortex generator is done on the basis of three dimensionless
factors of j/j 0 , f/f 0 and r = (j/j0)/(f/f0) which are used to describe the heat transfer
enhancement, flow resistance and thermohydraulic performance of vortex generator
pairs. Table 4.8 the analysis of Colburn factor ratio, friction factor ratio and r/r 0 for
four pairs of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex
generator (15mm×10mm).
Table 4.8 Analysis of Colburn factor ratio, friction factor ratio and r/r 0 for single
pair of rectangular winglet, trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet vortex

Re
1.68 1.07 1.57 1.01 1.05 0.96 1.31 1.03 1.29

9670.12
1.495 1.10 1.35 1 1.07 0.93 1.23 1.05 1.17

10785.9
1.47 1.10 1.33 0.99 1.07 0.92 1.21 1.05 1.15

11839.7
1.46 1.10 1.32 0.985 1.08 0.91 1.212 1.05 1.15

12769.5
1.44 1.10 1.30 0.97 1.08 0.89 1.18 1.05 1.12

13637.3
1.44 1.10 1.30 0.97 1.09 0.88 1.19 1.06 1.12

14381.2
1.44 1.12 1.28 0.96 1.10 0.87 1.18 1.08 1.09

15311.0
1.43 1.14 1.25 0.96 1.1 0.87 1.18 1.08 1.09

16054.8

dimensionless factor j/j 0 . It shows that four pairs (15×10mm) of rectangular winglet
vortex generator have good heat transfer enhancement followed by delta winglet and
trapezoidal winglet pair. Value of j/j 0 for each vortex generator is decreases with
increase in Reynolds number. Values of Colburn factor ratio decreases by 16.50% and
19.76% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000 for four pairs of rectangular winglet
and delta winglet vortex generator respectively.
Trapezoidal winglet vortex generator shows very poor heat transfer enhancement.
Values of Colburn factor ratio for four pairs of trapezoidal vortex generator decreases
by 12.75% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of Colburn factor ratio for
four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than
value obtained for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
and delta winglet vortex generator with an average of 38.15% and 24.78%
respectively. Values of Colburn factor ratio for four pairs of delta winglet vortex
generator are greater than four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator with an
average of 29.32%.
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1 jR3/j0
j/j0
0.8 jT3/j0
0.6 jD3/j0
0.4 j/j0
0.2
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

(15mm×10mm)

Figure 4.22 shows the comparison of each vortex generator for second condition on
the basis of dimensionless factor f/f 0 . It shows that for four pairs (15mm×10mm),
rectangular winglet vortex generator pairs have the high flow resistance followed by
trapezoidal winglet and delta winglet pair. The value of f/f 0 for each vortex generator
is increases with increase in Reynolds number. Values of friction factor ratio are
increased by 6.62% and 8.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000 for four pairs of
rectangular winglet and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator respectively. Values of
friction factor ratio for single pair of delta vortex generator increases by 5.70% from
Reynolds number 9000 to 16000. Values of friction factor ratio for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of rectangular winglet vortex generator are greater than four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and delta winglet vortex
generator with an average of 1.68% and 1.54% respectively. Values of friction factor
ratio for four pairs of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator are greater than four pairs
of delta winglet vortex generator with an average of 0.98%.
1.16
1.14
1.12
1.1
1.08 fR3/f0
f0/f0
1.06 fT3/f0
1.04 fd3/f0
1.02 f0/f0
1
0.98
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number

(15mm×10mm)

dimensionless factor r/r 0 . It shows that for four pairs (15mm×10mm), rectangular
winglet vortex generator pair has the maximum thermal performance followed by delta
winglet and trapezoidal winglet pair. Value of r/r 0 for each vortex generator is
decreases with increase in Reynolds number Values of r/r 0 are decreased by 13.86%
and 10.60% from Reynolds number 9000 to 16000 for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
rectangular winglet and trapezoidal winglet vortex generator respectively. Values of
r/r 0 ratio for four pairs of delta vortex generator are increases by 13.55% from
Reynolds number 9000 to 16000.
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1 rR3/r0
r/r0
0.8 rT3/r0
0.6 rd3/r0
0.4 r0/r0
0.2
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.23 Variation of thermal performance as a function of Reynolds number

(15mm×10mm)

4.5 Comparative analysis of performance of rectangular, trapezoidal and delta
winglet vortex generator for three different conditions.
Three conditions of vortex generator were considered for experimentation, single pair
of each vortex generator having length 40mm and height 20mm, four pairs of each
vortex generator having length 20mm and height 15mm and four pair of each vortex
generator having length15mm and height 10mm. To perform the comparative analysis
of these three conditions three dimensionless factors of j/j 0 , f/f 0 and r = (j/j0)/(f/f0) are
used to describe the heat transfer enhancement, flow resistance and thermal
performance of vortex generator pairs. Here, j 0 and f 0 are the Colburn factor and
friction factor from the measured data of test plate (without vortex generators) used as
reference values, and j and f are the corresponding performance factors of test plate
mounted with vortex generators.
4.5.1 Comparative analysis of performance of rectangular vortex generator for

three different conditions
Figure 4.24 shows the variation of Colburn factor ratio of rectangular winglet vortex
generator for three different conditions.
2.5
Colburn factor ratio
2
jR1/j0
1.5
jR2/j0
1 jR3/j0
j0/j0
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.24 Variation of Colburn factor ratio of rectangular winglet vortex

generator as a function of Reynolds number for three different conditions

It shows that Colburn factor ratio obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
rectangular vortex generator is greater than Colburn factor ratio obtained for single
pair (40mm×20mm) of rectangular vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
rectangular vortex generator. The average percent increase in the Colburn factor ratio
of rectangular vortex generator for four pairs (20mm×15mm) is 16.66% and 34.88%
from single pair (40mm×20mm) of rectangular vortex generator and four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of rectangular vortex generator respectively.
Colburn factor ratio of rectangular winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) is very less compare to the other two conditions. The average percent
increase in the Colburn factor ratio of rectangular vortex generator for single pair
(40mm×20mm) is 22.7% from four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular vortex
generator. The results shows that four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular winglet
vortex generator has best heat transfer enhancement followed by single pair
(40mm×20mm) of rectangular vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
rectangular vortex generator.
Figure 4.25 shows the variation of friction factor ratio of rectangular winglet vortex
1.16
1.14
1.12
Friction factor ratio
1.1
1.08 fR1/f0
1.06 fR2/f0
1.04 fR3/f0
1.02 f0/f0
1
0.98
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.25 Variation of friction factor ratio of rectangular winglet vortex

generator as a function of Reynolds number for three different conditions.

It shows that friction factor ratio obtained for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular
vortex generator is greater than friction factor ratio obtained for single pair
rectangular vortex generator. The average percent increase in the friction factor ratio
(20mm×15mm) of rectangular vortex generator respectively. Friction factor ratio of
rectangular winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) is very
less compare to the other two conditions.
The average percent increase in the friction factor ratio of rectangular vortex generator
for single pair (40mm×20mm) is 1.91% from four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular
vortex generator. The results shows that four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular
winglet vortex generator has high flow resistance followed by single pair
rectangular vortex generator.
Figure 4.26 shows the variation of thermal performance of rectangular winglet vortex
2.5
rR1/r0
1.5
r/r0
rR2/r0
1 rR3/r0
r0/r0
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.26 Variation of thermal performance of rectangular winglet vortex

generator as a function of Reynolds number for three conditions

It shows that thermal performance obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
rectangular vortex generator is greater than thermal performance obtained for single
pair (40mm×20mm) of rectangular vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
rectangular vortex generator. The average percent increase in the thermal performance
(15mm×10mm) of rectangular vortex generator respectively.
Thermal performance of rectangular winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs
increase in the thermal performance of rectangular vortex generator for single pair
(40mm×20mm) is 24.51% from four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular vortex
generator. The results shows that four pairs (20mm×15mm) of rectangular winglet
vortex generator has best thermal performance followed by single pair (40mm×20mm)
of rectangular vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of rectangular vortex
generator.
4.5.2 Comparative analysis performance of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator

for three different conditions
Figure 4.27 shows the variation of Colburn factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex
2
1.5
jT1/j0
1
jT2/j0
0.5 jT3/j0
j0/j0
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.27 Variation of Colburn factor ratio trapezoidal winglet vortex


It shows that Colburn factor ratio obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is greater than Colburn factor ratio obtained for
single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator. The average percent increase
in the Colburn factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) is 22.67% and 41.27% from single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex
generator respectively.
Colburn factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs
increase in the Colburn factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator for single
pair (40mm×20mm) is 6.60% from four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet
vortex generator. The results shows that four pairs (20mm×15mm) of trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator has good heat transfer enhancement followed by single pair
(40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm)
of trapezoidal winglet generator.
Figure 4.28 shows the variation of friction factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex
1.12
1.1
1.08
1.06 fT1/f0
1.04 fT2/f0
fT3/f0
1.02
f0/f0
1
0.98
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.28 Variation of friction factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex


It shows that friction factor ratio obtained for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator is greater than friction factor ratio obtained for single pair
(40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and four pairs (20mm×15mm)
of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator. The average percent increase in the friction
factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator for four pairs (15mm×10mm) is
3.82% and 3.85% from single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex
generator and four pairs (20mm×15mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator
respectively.
Friction factor ratio of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) is very less compare to the other two conditions. The results shows
that four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator has high flow
resistance followed by single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex
generator and four pairs (20mm×15mm) of trapezoidal winglet generator.
Figure 4.29 shows the variation of thermal performance of trapezoidal winglet vortex
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1 rT1/r0
r/r0
0.8 rT2/r0
0.6 rT3/r0
0.4 r0/r0
0.2
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.29 Variation of thermal performance of trapezoidal winglet vortex


It shows that thermal performance obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
trapezoidal winglet vortex generator is greater than thermal performance obtained for
single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator and four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator. The average percent increase
in the thermal performance of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) is 23.45% and 42.27% from single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal
winglet vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex
generator respectively.
Thermal performance of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs
that four pairs (20mm×15mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex generator has best thermal
performance followed by single pair (40mm×20mm) of trapezoidal winglet vortex
generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet generator.
4.5.3 Comparative analysis of delta vortex generator for three different

conditions
Figure 4.30 shows the variation of Colburn factor ratio of delta winglet vortex
2.5
2
1.5
jD1/j0
jD2/j0
1
jD3/j0
j0/j0
0.5
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.30 Variation of Colburn factor ratio of delta winglet vortex generator as
a function of Reynolds number for three conditions

It shows that Colburn factor ratio obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of delta
winglet vortex generator is greater than Colburn factor ratio obtained for single pair
(40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
delta winglet vortex generator. The average percent increase in the Colburn factor ratio
of delta winglet vortex generator for four pairs (20mm×15mm) is 19.10% and 39.81%
from single pair (40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of delta winglet vortex generator respectively. Colburn factor ratio of
delta winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs (15mm×10mm) is very less
compare to the other two conditions.
The average percent increase in the Colburn factor ratio of delta winglet vortex
generator for single pair (40mm×20mm) is 25.98% from four pairs (15mm×10mm) of
delta winglet vortex generator. The results shows that four pairs (20mm×15mm) of
delta winglet vortex generator has good heat transfer enhancement followed by single
pair (40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and four pairs (15mm×10mm)
of delta winglet generator.
Figure 4.31 shows the variation of friction factor ratio of delta winglet vortex
1.09
1.08
1.07
1.06
1.05
fd1/f0
1.04
fd2/f0
1.03
1.02 fd3/f0
1.01 f0/f0
1
0.99
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.31 Variation of friction factor ratio of delta winglet vortex generator as
a function of Reynolds number for three conditions

It shows that friction factor ratio obtained for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of delta
winglet vortex generator is greater than friction factor ratio obtained for single pair
delta winglet vortex generator. The average percent increase in the friction factor ratio
of delta winglet vortex generator for four pairs (15mm×10mm) is 2.82% and 2.85%
from single pair (40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of delta winglet vortex generator respectively.
Friction factor ratio of delta winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs
that four pairs (15mm×10mm) of delta winglet vortex generator high flow resistance
followed by single pair (40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and four
pairs (20mm×15mm) of delta winglet generator.
Figure 4.32 shows the variation of thermal performance of delta winglet vortex
2.5
1.5
rd1/r0
r/r0
1 rd2/r0
rd3/r0
0.5 r0/r0
0
9000 11000 13000 15000 17000
Reynolds number
Figure 4.32 Variation of thermal performance of delta winglet vortex generator

as a function of Reynolds number for three conditions

It shows that thermal performance obtained for four pairs (20mm×15mm) of delta
winglet vortex generator is greater than thermal performance obtained for single pair
delta winglet vortex generator. The average percent increase in the thermal
performance of delta winglet vortex generator for four pairs (20mm×15mm) is 20.32%
and 40.14% from single pair (40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and
four pairs (15mm×10mm) of delta winglet vortex generator respectively. Thermal
performance of delta winglet vortex generator obtained for four pairs (15mm×10mm)
is very less compare to the other two conditions. The results shows that four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of delta winglet vortex generator has high thermal performance
followed by single pair (40mm×20mm) of delta winglet vortex generator and four
pairs (15mm×10mm) of trapezoidal winglet generator.

CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION

5. CONCLUSIONS
Three vortex generators (VGs) were selected for comparative test, rectangular winglet
(RW), trapezoidal winglet (TW), delta winglet (DW). Three conditions of vortex
generator were considered for experimentation, single pair of each vortex generator
having length 40mm and height 20mm, four pairs of each vortex generator having
length 20mm and height 15mm and four pair of each vortex generator having
length15mm and height 10mm. Heat transfer enhancement obtained for four pairs
(20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator is greater than heat transfer enhancement
obtained for single pair (40mm×20mm) of each vortex generator and for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of each vortex generator. Flow resistance obtained for four pairs
(15mm×10mm) of each vortex generator is greater than flow resistance obtained for
single pair (40mm×20mm) of each vortex generator and for four pairs (20mm×15mm).
Thermohydraulic performance of four pairs (20mm×15mm) of each vortex generator
is greater than thermohydraulic performance obtained for single pair (40mm×20mm)
of each vortex generator and for four pairs (15mm×10mm) of each vortex generator.
Rectangular vortex generator has best heat transfer enhancement for all three
condition.
This is due to the fact that rectangular winglet vortex generator has the largest area
facing the air flow inducing the strongest longitudinal vortices. Rectangular winglet
vortex generator also has the highest flow resistance followed by delta and trapezoidal
vortex generator. Delta winglet vortex generator pairs (20mm×15mm) has good heat
transfer enhancement for all three conditions (less than rectangular winglet vortex
generator) but it has lowest flow resistance as compared with the rectangular and
trapezoidal vortex generator. So delta winglet vortex generator pairs (20mm×15mm)
can be successfully used for the heat transfer enhancement where less flow resistance
is required.

FUTURE SCOPE
The present work is carried out to evaluate the performance of the three vortex
generator which is used to increase the heat transfer rate. The Thermohydraulic
performance depends on Nusselt number and friction factor is improved by these
vortex generators. Other vortex generator to improve the turbulence in flow can also
be investigated.

6. REFERENCES
[1] Guobing Zhou, Qiuling Ye, (2012) Experimental investigations of thermal and
flow characteristics of curved trapezoidal winglet type vortex generators Applied
Thermal Engineering 37 241-248
[2] C.B. Allison, B.B. Dally, Effect of a delta-winglet vortex pair on the
performanceof a tube-fin heat exchanger, International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer50 (25-26) (2007) 5065-5072.
[3] M Mirazael and A Sohankar , "Heat transfer augmentation in plate finned tube heat
exchangers with vortex generators: a comparison of round and flat tubes." IJST,
Transactions of Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 37,(2013) No. M1, pp 39-51
[4] NC Maniar, "Heat transfer enhancement in a rectangular channel using vortex
generator in a laminar flow." M.Sc Thesis submitted to the University of Texas at
Arlington December 2012
[5] S. Eiamsa-ard, Study on thermal and fluid flow characteristics in turbulent channel
flows with multiple twisted tape vortex generators, International Communications in
Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (6) (2010) 644-651.
[5] A. Valencia, M. Sen, Unsteady flow and heat transfer in plane channels with
spatially periodic vortex generators, International Journal of Heat and MassTransfer 46
(17) (2003) 3189-3199.
[6] M.J. Lawson, K.A. Thole, Heat transfer augmentation along the tube wall of a
louvered fin heat exchanger using practical delta winglets, International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 51 (9e10) (2008) 2346-2360.
[7] A. Joardar, A.M. Jacobi, Heat transfer enhancement by winglet-type
vortexgenerator arrays in compact plain-fin-and-tube heat exchangers, International
Journal of Refrigeration 31 (1) (2008) 87-97.
[8] Ya-Ling He, Pan Chu, Wen-Quan Tao, Yu-Wen Zhang, Tao Xie, Analysis of heat
transfer and pressure drop for fin-and-tube heat exchangers with rectangular winglet-
type vortex generators. Applied Thermal Engineering 61 (2013) 770-783
[9] Y.L. He, H. Han, W.Q. Tao and Y.W. Zhang. Numerical analysis of heat-transfer
enhancement by punched winglet type vortex generator arrays in fin and tube heat
exchanger. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 55 (2012)5449-5458

[10] Jiong Li, Shuangfeng Wang, Jinfang Chen and Yong- Gang Lei. Numerical
analysis of a slit fin and tube heat exchanger with longitudinal vortex generator.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 54 (2011)1743-1751.
[11] Henk Huisseune , Christophe T’Joen, Peter De Jaeger, Bernd Ameel, Sven De
Schampheleire , Michel De Paepe, Performance enhancement of a louvered fin heat
exchanger by using delta winglet vortex generators, International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer 56 (2013) 475–487
[12] S.M. Pesteei, P.M.V. Subbarao, R.S. Agarwal, Experimental study of the effect of
winglet location on heat transfer enhancement and pressure drop in fin-tube heat
exchangers. Applied Thermal Engineering 25 (2005) 1684–1696

APPENDICES
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
1. To Find Maximum Flow Rate of Blower
𝟏
𝛑 𝟐 × 𝐠 × 𝐡𝐚 𝟐
𝐦𝐚 = 𝐂𝐝 × � � × 𝐝𝟎 × 𝛒𝐚 × � �
𝟒 𝟏 − 𝛃𝟒
Where,
C d = Discharge Coefficient =0.635
d o = Diameter of Orifice =0.052 m
ρ a = Air Density = 1.27 kg/m3
ρ w = Density of water =1000 kg/m3
g = Acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/s2
h a = Air Height
β = Ratio of Bore Diameter to pipe diameter= 0.052/0.105= 0.495
Substituting all the values in equation (i) we get m a as:-
m a = 7.547 x10-3 x h a 1/2
2. To Find Height of Air h a

𝜌𝑎 x 𝑔 𝑥 ℎ𝑎 = 𝜌𝑤 x 𝑔 x ℎ𝑤
𝛒𝐰 𝐱 𝐡𝐰
𝐡𝐚 = 𝛒𝐚
R
Calculations:
Keeping valve fully open we had obtainedh w as 0.11 m.
Using equation (iii), we get h a = (1000 X 0.11) /1.225
= 89.79 m.
Substituting value of h a in equation (ii), we get mass flow rate of blower as,
m a = 7.547 x10-3 x (89.79)1/2 = 0.0715 kg/s.
Hence max mass flow rate of our blower is 0.0715 kg/s.

 TO FIND MAXIMUM REYNOLDS NUMBER FOR BLOWER
𝐦𝐚 = 𝛒𝐚 𝐱 𝐕𝐚 𝐱 𝐀 𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭
(iv)
𝐦𝐚
𝐕𝐚 = (v)
𝛒𝐚 𝐱 𝐀𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭
A duct = 0.0225 m2
Substitute values in equation (4) we get,
𝑉𝑎 = ma /(1.225 × 0.0225)
Reynolds Number is
𝛒𝐚 𝐱 𝐕𝐚 𝐱 𝐃𝐡
𝐑𝐞 =
𝛍
D h = Hydraulic diameter = 0.105
μ = Coefficient of Viscosity = 2.075 x 10-5
Substituting above values in equation (6) we get
𝐑𝐞 = 𝟔𝟏𝟗𝟖. 𝟕𝟗 𝐱 𝐕𝐚
Calculations
From equation (v) we get V a as
V a = 0.0715 / (0.0225×1.225)
V a = 2.59 m/s.
From equation (vii) we get Re as
Re = 6198.79x 2.59
Re= 16054.86
Hence maximum Reynolds Number of we taken is 16054.86
For flat plate Heat Transfer Rate Calculation:-
𝑸 = 𝒄𝒑 𝛒𝐚 𝐕𝐚 𝑨𝐜 (𝑻𝟎 − 𝑻𝒊 )
Q = air side heat transfer rate
C p = Specific heat at constant at pressure
𝜋
A c = air side heat transfer area = 4 × 𝐃𝐡 𝟐
T in = Inlet Temperature of air in duct = 370C

T out = Outlet Temperature of air from duct = 400C
Hence heat transfer rate can be found out by using this eqvation

To Calculate Practical and Theoretical Nusselt Number for flat plate
h can be found out by
𝑸
𝐡 =
𝑨𝐩 ∆𝑻𝒍𝒎
where logirithimic mean temperature can be calculated as
(𝑻𝒘𝒎 − 𝑻𝒊 ) − (𝑻𝒘𝒎 − 𝑻𝟎 )
∆𝑻𝒍𝒎 = (𝑻 −𝑻 )
𝒍𝒏 (𝑻 𝒘𝒎−𝑻 𝒊 )
𝒘𝒎 𝟎
Average wall temperature can be calculated as

∑𝟖𝒊=𝟏 𝑻𝒘𝒊 𝑨𝐢
𝑻𝒘𝒎 =
𝑨𝐩
(𝒉 𝐱 𝐃𝐡)
Practical Nusselt Number = 𝑵𝒖𝒑𝒓 =
𝒌
2
h = 33.34 W/m k
D h = Hydraulic Diameter = 0.105
k = Coefficient of conduction of air = 27 x 10-3
Nu pr = 23.6
j- factor can be calculated as
𝑵𝒖
𝒋=
𝑹𝒆 × 𝑷𝒓𝟏/𝟑
Calculation of friction factor.
∆𝐩 × 𝐃𝐡
𝐟 =
𝟐 × 𝛒𝐚 × 𝐋 × 𝐯 𝟐
Where,
ΔP = pressure drop across the test section
v = mean air velocity of the channel.
D h = Hydraulic diameter in mm
ΔP can be found out by
𝚫𝒑 = 𝝆𝒂 𝒙 𝒈 𝒙 𝒍𝟏 𝒙 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝟏. 𝟐𝟓) 𝒙 𝟏𝟑. 𝟓
1.25 is the inclination of inclined manometer.
Friction factor for dimpled plate is 0.0325

Calculation for thermal enhancement factor
𝒋
𝒋𝒐
𝒓=
𝒇
�𝒇𝒐�
Theoretical Nusselt number and friction factor can be calculated by using following
correlations.
𝑵𝒖𝒕𝒉 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟑𝟗 × 𝑹𝒆𝟎.𝟖 × 𝑷𝒓𝟎.𝟒 … … … … 𝑫𝒊𝒕𝒕𝒖𝒔 𝑩𝒐𝒆𝒍𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏.

𝑵𝒖𝒕𝒉 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟏𝟒 × (𝑹𝒆𝟎.𝟖 − 𝟏𝟎𝟎) × 𝑷𝒓𝟎.𝟒 . . … 𝑮𝒏𝒊𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒔𝒌𝒊 𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏.
𝒇𝒐 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟖𝟓 𝑿 𝑹𝒆−𝟎.𝟐𝟓 … …… …… ……...Blasius correlation
𝒇𝒐 = (𝟏. 𝟖𝟐𝒍𝒐𝒈𝟏𝟎𝑹𝒆 − 𝟏. 𝟔𝟒)−𝟎.𝟐𝟓 … … … … … … … … 𝑷𝒆𝒕𝒌𝒉𝒐𝒗 𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏

Sagar Report

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sagar Report

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CHAPTER 1

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 1

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 2

(c) Compound methods: It is a combination of both active and passive methods.

1.1 Passive heat transfer augmentation methods

These techniques generally use surface or geometrical modifications to the flow

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 3

Figure 1.1: Vortex generators increase convective heat transfer [4]

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 4

Figure 1.2: Types of vortex generators [4]

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 5

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 6

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 7

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 8

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 9

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 10

A.Joardar et al. [7] studied includes the experimental evaluation of potential of

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 11

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 12

Henk Huisseune et. al. [11]

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 13

S.M. Pesteei et al. [12]

CONCLUSIONS FROM LITERATURE REVIEWS

Author Year Title of Configurati Result

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 14

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 15

HenkHuiss 2013 “Performance Delta winglet The net core pressure

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 16

S.M. 2005 “Experimental Winglet It has been observed that

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 17

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 18

3.1 Experimental Set up

3.1.1 Air channel

Power: 1 HP; Single phase

Figure 3.1 Air Channel

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 19

Figure 3.2 Test section

3.1.3 Water Channel

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 20

3.1.4 Control Panel

Figure 3.3 Control panel

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 21

Figure 3.4 Experimental setup

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 22

700mm Air channel

Thermocouple hole Copper plate

100mm 150mm 150mm 150mm 150mm

3.2 Vortex Generators

Figure 3.6 Vortex Generators

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 23

Figure 3.7 Position of single pair of vortex generator on copper plate

100mm 100mm 100mm 100mm

Figure 3.8 Position of four pairs of vortex generator on copper plate

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 24

(For single pair)

Rectangular - 45 40 20 20 100 9000-16000

Trapezoidal 20 45 40 20 20 100 9000-16000

Delta - 45 40 20 20 100 9000-16000

(For four pairs)

Rectangular - 45 20,15 15,10 20 100 9000-16000

Trapezoidal 20 45 20,15 15,10 20 100 9000-16000

Delta - 45 20,15 15,10 20 100 9000-16000

Sinhgad Academy of Engineering, Kondhwa (Bk) Page 25

Experiment is carried out in following steps: