4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Experimental Investigation of Heat Transfer and Resistance Characteristics of a Finned Oval-Tube Heat Exchanger With Different Air Inlet Angles

Journal

HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING
Volume 35, Issue 6-8, Pages 703-710

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/01457632.2013.837780

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. International Cooperation and Exchanges Project of NSFC of China [51120165002]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51025623, 51276139]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The air inlet flow direction is not orthogonal to the heat exchanger surface in many cases. To study the performance of the heat transfer and pressure drop of a heat exchanger with different air inlet angles, this paper shows the experimental system about a finned oval-tube heat exchanger inclined toward the air incoming flow direction. The heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of four air inlet angles (90 degrees, 60 degrees, 45 degrees, and 30 degrees) are studied separately for the Reynolds number ranging from 1300 to 13000 in this study. The experimental correlations of Nusselt number and resistance coefficient of the air side are acquired. The results show that the overall heat transfer coefficients become smaller and smaller with the decrease of the air inlet angles, while the pressure drops have significant changes. The heat transfer performances of the heat exchanger under the three inclined air inlet angles are worse than that at 90 degrees. Among the three inclined angles, the performance at 45 degrees is the best under identical mass flow rate criterion and at low Reynolds number under identical pressure drop criterion; that at 60 degrees is the best at large Reynolds under identical pressure drop criterion. Finally, some conclusions are attained about the effects of the air inlet angles on the heat transfer and pressure drop performance of the finned oval-tube heat exchanger.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available