Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
University of South FloridaScholar Commons
Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School
2009
Analysis of mass transfer by jet impingement andstudy of heat transfer in a trapezoidal microchannelEjiro Stephen OjadaUniversity of South Florida
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd
Part of the American Studies Commons
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GraduateTheses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Scholar Commons CitationOjada, Ejiro Stephen, "Analysis of mass transfer by jet impingement and study of heat transfer in a trapezoidal microchannel" (2009).Graduate Theses and Dissertations.http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/2123
i
Analysis of Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement and Study of Heat Transfer in a
Trapezoidal Microchannel
by
Ejiro Stephen Ojada
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of South Florida
Major Professor: Muhammad M. Rahman, Ph.D.
Frank Pyrtle, III, Ph.D.
Rasim Guldiken, Ph.D.
Date of Approval:
November 5, 2009
Keywords: Fully-Confined Fluid, Sherwood number, Rotating Disk,
Gadolinium, Heat Sink
©Copyright 2009, Ejiro Stephen Ojada
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ii
LIST OF SYMBOLS v
ABSTRACT viii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW 1
1.1 Introduction (Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement ) 1
1.2 Literature Review (Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement) 2
1.3 Introduction (Heat Transfer in a Microchannel) 7
1.4 Literature Review (Heat Transfer in a Microchannel) 8
CHAPTER 2: ANALYSIS OF MASS TRANSFER BY JET IMPINGEMENT 15
2.1 Mathematical Model 15
2.2 Numerical Simulation 19
2.3 Results and Discussion 21
CHAPTER 3: ANALYSIS OF HEAT TRANSFER IN A TRAPEZOIDAL
MICROCHANNEL 42
3.1 Modeling and Simulation 42
3.2 Results and Discussion 48
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION 65
REFERENCES 67
APPENDICES 79
Appendix A: FIDAP Code for Analysis of Mass Transfer by Jet
Impingement 80
Appendix B: FIDAP Code for Fluid Flow and Heat Transfer in a
Composite Trapezoidal Microchannel 86
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1a Confined liquid jet impingement between a rotating disk and
an impingement plate, two-dimensional schematic. 18
Figure 2.1b Confined liquid jet impingement between a rotating disk and
an impingement plate, three-dimensional schematic. 18
Figure 2.2 Mesh plot for a grid spacing of 20 x 500 in the axial and radial
directions. 21
Figure 2.3 Dimensionless interface temperature distributions for different
number of elements in r and z directions (Rej=1000,
Rer=2310, =1.0, and Sc=2315). 22
Figure 2.4 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration for
different jet Reynolds numbers (=1.0, Rer=2310, nickel disk,
and Sc=2315). 26
Figure 2.5 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration for
different rotational Reynolds numbers (=1.0, nickel disk,
Rej=800, and Sc=2315). 27
Figure 2.6 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration for
different dimensionless heights (Rej=1500, Rer=2310, and
Sc=2315). 28
Figure 2.7 Average Sherwood numbers with jet Reynolds numbers at
various rotational Reynolds numbers (=1.0, nickel disk, and
ferricyanide electrolyte and Sc=2315). 29
Figure 2.8 Average Sherwood number with jet Reynolds number at
different dimensionless nozzle to target spacing (Rer=2310,
and Sc=2315). 32
Figure 2.9 Average Sherwood number with jet Reynolds number at
different Schmidt number (=1.15, nickel disk, ferricyanide
electrolyte, and Rer=5082). 33
iii
Figure 2.10 Dimensionless concentration for different electrolytes -
NaOH, HCl, 3
6Fe(CN) (Rej=650, Rer=0, and =1.0). 34
Figure 2.11 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration
over dimensionless radial distance for different impingement
plate geometries, nickel disk with ferricyanide electrolyte
(Rej=1000, Rer=5082, =1.15, and Sc=2315). 35
Figure 2.12 Average Sherwood number comparison with the experimental
results obtained by Arzutuğ et al. [13] under various jet
Reynolds and Schmidt numbers (left: =1.0, Sc=2315,
Rer=2310; right: (=1.0, Rej=1000, and Rer=5082). 37
Figure 2.13 Average Sherwood number comparison with other studies
within the core region for various Schmidt numbers ( =1.0,
Rej=800, Rer=2310). 38
Figure 2.14 Comparison of predicted average Sherwood number using
Equation 17 with present numerical data. 39
Figure 3.1 Schematic of the trapezoidal microchannel. 46
Figure 3.2 Average dimensionless interface temperature over the
dimensionless axial coordinate for different grid sizes
(magnetic field = 5T, Re =1600, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 49
Figure 3.3 Variation of peripheral average Nusselt number along the
channel dimensionless axial coordinate for different Reynolds
number (Magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 50
Figure 3.4 Variation of peripheral average dimensionless interface
temperature along the channel dimensionless axial coordinate
for different Reynolds number and different magnetic fields
(D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 51
Figure 3.5 Variation of Nusselt number along the channel dimensionless
axial coordinate for different heat generation rates (Re = 1600,
2400, 3000, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 52
Figure 3.6 Variation of peripheral average dimensionless interface
temperature along the channel dimensionless axial coordinate
for different thickness of the magnetic slab (Re= 1600,
Magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 54
iv
Figure 3.7 Variation of Nusselt number along the channel dimensionless
axial coordinate for different depths of the channel (Magnetic
field =5T, Constant velocity). 55
Figure 3.8 Average dimensionless interface temperature numbers with
Reynolds numbers at various channel depths (Magnetic field
=5T, 1000 < Re < 3000). 56
Figure 3.9 Variation of Nusselt number over the dimensionless axial
coordinate for different spacing between the channels (Re =
2400, magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 57
Figure 3.10 Comparison between simulation and standard convection
relation (Dh=154μm, Magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3
cm). 59
Figure 3.11 Variation of dimensionless pressure difference between inlet
and outlet of the channel with Reynolds number (Magnetic
field = 5T, L=2.3 cm). 60
Figure 3.12 Variation of the Nusselt numbers for different working fluids
(Magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm). 61
Figure 3.13 Variation of dimensionless pumping power for different
Reynolds numbers (Magnetic field = 5T, L=2.3 cm). 63
Figure 3.14 Average Nusselt number comparison with the experimental
results obtained by Wu and Chen [38] under various jet
(Magnetic field = 5T, 40 < Re < 200, D=150 μm, L=4.0 cm). 64
v
LIST OF SYMBOLS
b Height of gadolinium slab, m
B Substrate width, m
Bc Channel width, m
Bs Half of channel width (at bottom), m
Cavg Average interface concentration, kg/m3,
dr
02d
drrCr
2
Cp Constant pressure specific heat, J/kg-K
C Solute concentration, kg/m3
dn Diameter of nozzle, m
dd Diameter of rotating disk, m
D Diffusion coefficient, m2/s
Dp Dimensionless pump power
Dh Hydraulic diameter, m
g Acceleration due to gravity, m/s2
go Heat generation rate within the solid, W/m3
G Mass flux, kg/m2.s
h Heat transfer coefficient, qint / (Tint−Tb), W/m2K
H Distance of the nozzle from the rotating disk, m
H Height of substrate, m
k Thermal conductivity, W/m K; or
Turbulent kinetic energy, m2/s
2
K Mass transfer coefficient, G/ (Cint–Cj), m/s
L Channel length, m
Nu Nusselt number
P Pressure, N/m2
vi
Pd Dimensionless pressure
Pp Pumping power
Prt Turbulent Prandtl number
q Heat flux, W/m2
Q Dimensionless Concentration, 2(Cint – Cj) / (Gdn)
r Radial coordinate, m
R Radius of rotating disk, m
Re Reynolds number, (Vjdn)/ or /μ.D.uρ hinf
Sh Sherwood number, (kdn)/D
S Spacing between channels, m
T Temperature, ⁰C
ΔT Temperature difference between inlet and outlet, °C
Vj Jet velocity, m/s
Vr, z, Velocity component in the r, z and –direction, m/s, in cylindrical coordinate
u Velocity component in x-direction, m/s
v Velocity component in y-direction, m/s
w Velocity component in z-direction, m/s
z Axial coordinate, m
Greek Symbols
α Thermal diffusivity, m2/s
Dimensionless nozzle to target spacing, H/dn
ϵ Dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy, m2/s
3
Dynamic viscosity, kg/m–s
Kinematic viscosity, m2/s
νt Eddy diffusivity, m2/s
Angular coordinate, rad
Dimensionless interface temperature
Density, kg/m3
Angular velocity, rad/s
vii
Subscripts
b Bulk
avg. Average
f Fluid
g Gadolinium
i Species i
in Inlet
int Interface
j jet inlet
max Maximums
si Silicon
s Solid
viii
Analysis of Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement and Study of Heat Transfer in a
Trapezoidal Microchannel
Ejiro S. Ojada
ABSTRACT
This thesis numerically studied mass transfer during fully confined liquid jet
impingement on a rotating target disk of finite thickness and radius. The study involved
laminar flow with jet Reynolds numbers from 650 to 1500. The nozzle to plate distance
ratio was in the range of 0.5 to 2.0, the Schmidt number ranged from 1720 to 2513, and
rotational speed was up to 325 rpm. In addition, the jet impingement to a stationary disk
was also simulated for the purpose of comparison. The electrochemical fluid used was an
electrolyte containing 0.005moles per liter potassium ferricyanide (K3(Fe(CN6)),
0.02moles per liter ferrocyanide (FeCN6-4
), and 0.5moles per liter potassium carbonate
(K2CO3). The rate of mass transfer of this electrolyte was compared to Sodium
Hydroxide (NaOH) and Hydrochloric acid (HCl) electrochemical solutions. The material
of the rotating disk was made of 99.98% nickel and 0.02% of chromium, cobalt and
aluminum. The rate of mass transfer was also examined for different geometrical shapes
of conical, convex, and concave confinement plates over a spinning disk. The results
obtained are found to be in agreement with previous experimental and numerical studies.
ix
The study of heat transfer involved a microchannel for a composite channel of
trapezoidal cross-section fabricated by etching a silicon <100> wafer and bonding it with
a slab of gadolinium. Gadolinium is a magnetic material that exhibits high temperature
rise during adiabatic magnetization around its transition temperature of 295K. Heat was
generated in the substrate by the application of magnetic field. Water, ammonia, and FC-
77 were studied as the possible working fluids. Thorough investigation for velocity and
temperature distribution was performed by varying channel aspect ratio, Reynolds
number, and the magnetic field. The thickness of gadolinium slab, spacing between
channels in the heat exchanger, and fluid flow rate were varied. To check the validity of
simulation, the results were compared with existing results for single material channels.
Results showed that Nusselt number is larger near the inlet and decreases downstream.
Also, an increase in Reynolds number increases the total Nusselt number of the system.
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1 Introduction ( Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement)
Jet impingement is a technique used in the industry to enhance heat and/or mass
transfer processes. It provides the opportunity to control temperature and/or concentration
to the desired needs. A few examples are paper drying process, material removal in steel
mills, tempering of glass, cooling of high temperature gas turbines and electronic
fabrication of printed wiring board components. The rotation of a disk also plays a role in
enhancing the heat and mass transfer by inducing a secondary flow. The rotating disk
enhances the wall jet effect at the interface which adds more complexity to the flow field
and more mixing with the impinging jet flow.
2
1.2 Literature Review (Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement)
An early research work on mass transfer from a rotating disk was performed by
Kreith et al. [1] who studied the effect of a shroud on the mass transfer rate from a
rotating disk in the laminar regime, having rotational Reynolds numbers ranging from
70000–140000. The correlation obtained did not account for the distance between the
disk and the shroud. Nakoryakov et al. [2] studied theoretically and experimentally the
hydrodynamics and mass transfer of a submerged liquid jet impinging onto a horizontal
plane. They measured the wall shear stress and local mass transfer coefficients by an
electro-diffusion method for a wide range of liquid flow rates. Chin and Tsang [3] studied
the mass transfer from an impinging jet to the stagnation region on a circular disk
electrode using the method of perturbation. They found out that within the radius, r/dd,
from 0.1 to 1.0 turbulent nozzle flow and from 0.1 to 0.5 for laminar nozzle flow, the
electrode has a “uniform accessibility” to the diffusion ions. The mass transfer rate begins
to decrease beyond the uniform accessibility region. The impingement of two
dimensional slot jet flows for high speed selective electroplating was studied by Alkire
and Ju [4]. They measure local mass transfer coefficient for the system when it is
submerged and when it is not. They also developed correlations for three regions:
impingement, transition and wall jet flow regions. Chin and Agarwal [5] studied the
local mass transfer rate of a submerged oblique impinging slot jet by electrochemical
limiting current technique for the reduction of ferricyanide ion at isolated microelectrodes
on the impinged surface. An electrochemical probe was used to measure the mass
transfer coefficient. Moreno et al. [6] studied the mass transfer of an impinging liquid jet
3
confined between two parallel plates theoretically and by experiments. The mass transfer
rate was characterized by an etching method in a cupric chloride etching solution and jet
instability on the etching rate within the central impingement zone was discussed. Chen
et al. [7] investigated experimentally the mass transfer between an impinging jet and a
rotating disk. The naphthalene sublimation technique was used in the experiment. The
experimental results showed that heat/mass transfer are divided into three regions which
are the impingement dominated region, the mixed region and the rotation dominated
region. It was concluded that the Sherwood number of a rotating disk with jet
impingement was the sum of two components governed by the impinging jet and the
rotating disk. Pekdemir and Davies [8] studied the mass transfer behavior of an
isothermal system when a rotating circular cylinder is exposed to a two dimensional slot
jet of air with a laminar flow. In the impingement dominated regime, they observed that
the rotation of disk did not influence heat transfer characteristics of the system, while the
jet impingement had a strong effect on the local heat transfer of the rotating disk. Chen
and Modi [9] investigated the mass transfer characteristics of a turbulent slot jet
impinging normally on a target wall with a confinement plate placed parallel to the target
plate examined using numerical simulations. The flow was modeled using a k-w
turbulence model. The Reynolds number simulated ranged from 450 to 20000, Prandtl or
Schmidt numbers from 0 to 2400 and the slot jets varied between 2 and 8 times the width
of the slot jet. Chen et al. [10] conducted experiment on mass and heat transfer for high
Schmidt numbers with a laminar jet impingement flow onto rotating and stationary disks.
The experiment used naphthalene sublimation technique where three regimes where
4
observed, namely the impingement dominated regime, the mixed regime and the rotation
dominated regime. Using a conical shaped impingement plate, Miranda and Campos [11]
investigated mass transfer in a laminar by impinging jet. The distance between the nozzle
and the plate was less than one nozzle diameter, the laminar flow was less than 1600, and
the Schmidt was up to 50000. Oduoza [12] worked on mass transfer on a heated
electrode by simulating high speed wire plating with simultaneous heat transfer in the
laminar region. The working fluid used for the study was ferricyanide. In the simulation,
it showed a distinct effect of thermally driven natural convection at a lower Reynolds
number and but as the Reynolds number increased, it merged with the Leveque solution.
Arzutuğ et al. [13] compared the mass transfer distribution from a jet to a plate between a
submerged conventional impinging jet (CIJ) and multichannel conventional impinging jet
(MCIJ). Electrochemical limiting diffusion current technique (ELDCT) was used to
measure the local mass transfer coefficients. The values that were obtained for the mean
mass transfer coefficients over the surface for CIJ and MCIJ were found to be relatively
close to each other with MCIJ having slightly higher values. Quiroz et al. [14] also used
the electrochemical limiting diffusion current technique (ELDCT) to measure the mass
transfer between parallel disk cells with the help of the Levique relation. Sedahmed et al.
[15] studied the rate of mass transfer between two immiscible liquids, an aqueous layer
and a mercury pool upon which an axial jet was impinging under turbulent flow
conditions and measured by electrochemical limiting diffusion limiting current technique
(ELDCT).
5
Sara et al. [16] measured the mass transfer coefficient using the ELDCT method
of an electrochemical system from an impinging liquid jet to a rotating disk in a fully
confined environment. The study used a rotational Reynolds number of up to 120000,
and a jet Reynolds number of up to 53000 with a non-dimensional jet-to-disk spacing of
2-8. They found out that the jet impingement had a considerable effect on the
enhancement of the mass transfer compared to the case of the rotating disk without jet.
The effects on mass/heat transfer on rotation by impingement jet were also studied by
Hong et al. [17]. Their research covered a wide range of rotational Reynolds numbers
(400 to 10,000) including laminar, turbulent and transitional regimes. Hong et al. [18]
investigated the mass transfer characteristics on a concave surface for rotating impinging
jets. A jet with Reynolds number of 5,000 was applied to the concave surface and a flat
surface. They found out that compared to flat surface, the heat/mass transfer on the
concave surface is enhanced with increasing the span-wise direction due to the curvature
effect, providing a higher averaged Sherwood value.
Research has also been done involving heat transfer in jet impingement processes.
Lallave et al [19] studied the characterization of conjugate heat transfer for a confined
liquid jet impinging on a rotating and uniformly heated solid disk of finite thickness and
radius. The study showed that the plate materials with higher thermal conductivity had a
more uniform temperature distribution at the solid–fluid interface, and the local heat
transfer coefficient increased with an increasing in Reynolds number which reduced the
wall to fluid temperature difference over the entire interface. Lallave and Rahman [20]
6
worked on conjugate heat transfer characterization of a partially–confined liquid jet
impinging on a rotating and uniformly heated solid disk of finite thickness and radius.
Even though a number of publications have considered the heat/mass transfer rate
effect of numerous parameters, not enough research has been done on mass transfer
during laminar jet impingement on a rotating disk in a fully confined environment using
an electrolyte. The intent of this research is to investigate the mass transfer effect in a
uniform laminar flow from the jet nozzle onto a rotating disk in a fully confined space.
The study parameter includes five jets Reynolds numbers, five rotational Reynolds
numbers and stationary disk, five heights measured from the nozzle to the target disk,
five Schmidt numbers, and different confinement plate shapes such as conical, convex,
and concave.
Present results offer a better understanding of the fluid mechanics and mass
transfer behavior of liquid jet impingement under confinement on top of a spinning target
because of the incorporation of the varying parameters. Even though no new numerical
technique has been developed, results obtained in this investigation are entirely new. The
numerical results showing the quantitative effects of different parameters as well as the
correlation for average Sherwood numbers will be practical guides for enhancement of
mass transfer during the electrolyte synthesis and etching processes.
7
1.3 Introduction (Heat Transfer in a Microchannel)
Microchannels of trapezoidal cross section are widely used in silicon-based
microsystems. The study of fluid flow and heat transfer is critical to the development of
these microsystems. This thesis presents a systematic analysis of fluid flow and heat
transfer processes during the magnetic heating of a magnetocaloric material which is
bonded to the substrate. The substrate has an array of trapezoidal channels through which
heat is transferred to the working fluid. When a magnetic field is imposed on a
magnetocaloric material, heat is generated. This results in increase in temperature of the
material. Similarly, the temperature drops during demagnetization when the field is
removed. The purpose of this thesis is to study the effects of change in different
geometrical and thermal parameters on fluid flow and heat transfer when a magnetic field
is applied to the substrate material.
8
1.4 Literature Review (Heat Transfer in a Microchannel)
Wu and Little [31] measured the friction factors of laminar gas flow in the
trapezoidal silicon/glass microchannels, and found that the surface roughness affected the
values of the friction factors even in the laminar flow, which is different from the
conventional macrochannel flow. Harley et al. [32] presented experimental and
theoretical results of low Reynolds number, high subsonic Mach number, compressible
gas flow in channels. Nitrogen, helium, and argon gases were used. Detailed data on
velocity, density and temperature distributions were obtained. The effect of the Mach
number on profiles of axial and transversal velocities and temperature were revealed.
Chen and Wu [33] investigated the microchannel flow in miniature TCDs (thermal
conductivity detectors). Effects of channel size and boundary conditions were examined
in details. It was found that the change in heat transfer rate in the entrance region depends
primarily on the thermal conductivity change in the conduction-dominant region. Qu et
al. [34] investigated heat transfer characteristics of water flowing through trapezoidal
silicon microchannels. A numerical analysis was carried out by solving a conjugate heat
transfer problem.
Rahman [35] presented new experimental measurements for pressure drop and
heat transfer coefficient in microchannel heat sinks. Tests were performed with devices
fabricated using standard Silicon <100> wafers. Channels of different depths (or aspect
ratios) were studied. Tests were carried out using water as the working fluid. The fluid
flow rate as well as the pressure and temperature of the fluid at the inlet and outlet of the
device, and temperature at several locations in the wafer were measured. These
9
measurements were used to calculate local and average Nusselt number and coefficient of
friction in the device. Toh et al. [36] studied the fluid flow and heat transfer in a
microchannel by number computation. The results of the numerical computations where
compared to experimental data for validation. Their research revealed that heat input
lowers frictional losses at mostly lower Reynolds numbers since an increase in
temperature leads to a decrease in viscosity thereby leading to smaller frictional losses.
Qu and Mudawar [37] also investigated the heat transfer behavior in a rectangular
microchannel. They observed that when the thermal conductivity of a substrate is
increased in which the fluid flows through while keeping all parameters constant, the
temperature at the base surface of the heat sink reduces. They concluded that a higher
laminar Reynolds number at 1400 will not be a fully developed flow in a microchannel
and as a result will lead to enhanced heat transfer. Wu and Cheng [38] observed the same
behavior of an approximate linear correlation between the Nusselt number and Reynolds
number at Re < 100. They studied what effect the surface roughness of the microchannel
and surfaces’ affinity for water (hydrophilic property) has on the Nusselt number. The
investigation showed that there is an increase in the laminar Nusselt number when the
surface roughness or hydrophilic property is increased. The apparent friction constant
also increased with an increase in the surface roughness.
Wu and Cheng [39] measured the friction factor of laminar flow of deionized
water in smooth silicon micro-channels of trapezoidal cross-section. The experimental
data were found to be in agreement within ±11% with an existing analytical solution for
an incompressible, fully developed, laminar flow under the no-slip boundary condition. It
10
was confirmed that Navier–Stokes equations are still valid for the laminar flow of
deionized water in smooth micro-channels having hydraulic diameter as small as 25.9
μm. For smooth channels with larger hydraulic diameters of 103.4–291.0 μm, transition
from laminar to turbulent flow occurred at Re = 1500–2000. Li et al. [40] conducted a
numerical simulation on a silicon-based microchannel heat sink. The finite difference
numerical code developed to solve the governing equations was the Tri-Diagonal Matrix
Algorithm. The behavior flow and the heat transfer were investigated to observe how the
geometric parameters of the channel and thermo-physical properties affect them. The
outcome of this study revealed that the thermo-physical properties of the liquid used in
the analysis can considerably affect both flow and heat transfer in the microchannel heat
sink. Mo et al. [41] studied the flow of nitrogen gas in a rectangular channel by forced
convection. The different parameter varied during the study showed considerable effect
on the heat transfer characteristic in the channel. The main parameters were temperature,
hydraulic diameter, and aspect ratio. The research revealed that heat addition had the
most influence on the system, followed by the channel aspect ratio, Reynolds number
which is a function of the hydraulic diameter, and Prandtl number.
Owhaib and Palm [42] experimentally investigated the heat transfer
characteristics of single-phase forced convection flow through circular microchannels.
The results were compared to correlations for heat transfer in macroscale channels. The
results showed good agreement between classical correlations and experimentally
measured data. Wu and Cheng [43] carried out a series of experiments to study different
boiling instability modes of water flowing in microchannels at various heat flux and mass
11
flux with the outlet of the channels at atmospheric pressure. Eight parallel silicon
microchannels with an identical trapezoidal cross-section were used in this experiment.
Morini et al. [44] investigated the rarefaction effects on the pressure drop for an
incompressible flow through silicon microchannels having a rectangular and trapezoidal
cross section. The roles of Knudsen number and the cross-section aspect ratio on the
friction factor reduction due to the rarefaction were pointed out. Chen and Cheng [45]
performed a visualization study on condensation of steam in microchannels etched in a
silicon <100> wafer that was bonded by a thin Pyrex glass plate from the top. Saturated
steam flowed through these parallel microchannels, whose walls were cooled by natural
convection of air at room temperature. Stable droplet condensation was observed near the
inlet of the microchannel. It was predicted that the droplet condensation heat flux
increases as the diameter of the microchannel is decreased. The experimental
investigation of heat transfer in a rectangular microchannel was also performed by Lee et
al. [46]. They explored the validity of classical correlations based on conventionalized
channels for predicting the thermal behavior in a single-flow. This study also showed
that at a given flow rate within the laminar region, the heat transfer coefficient will
increase with a decreasing channel size. In applying a uniform heat flux to a trapezoidal
microchannel, Cao et al. [47] showed the effect of velocity slip on the Nusselt number
and friction coefficient of the system. It was discovered that values of Nusselt number
for a slip flow was larger than that of a no-slip flow and an increase in aspect ratio will
result in an increase in fully Nusselt number. Hetsroni et al. [48] compared experimental
result based on theoretical and numerical results for heat transfer in a microchannel at
12
small Knudsen numbers. The effect of the geometric and axial heat flux parameters on
the system was analyzed. The thermal conduction through the working fluid, channel
walls and energy dissipation was observed with regards to the parameters.
Zhuo et al. [49] also studied the heat transfer behavior in both triangular and
trapezoidal microchannel by numerical and experimental processes. The intersection
angle between the temperature and velocity gradient was observed and the synergy for
Reynolds numbers below 100 was much better. The field synergy principle was
confirmed with an almost linear relationship between the Reynolds number and their
corresponding Nusselt number for Re < 100. Li et al. [50] showed through studies that
Nusselt number and heat transfer coefficient will reduce along the flow of a microchannel
with the least values at the outlet. Husain and Kim [51] used numerical methods in order
to optimized microchannel heat sink using a surrogate analysis and evolutionary
algorithm. In the optimization, the objective functions of thermal resistance and pumping
power in the microchannel where formulated to evaluate the performance of the heat
sink. Rahman et al. [52] investigated the convective heat transfer related to a magnetic
field in a circular microchannel with rectangular substrate. The heat source was from
gadolinium, a magnetocaloric material that generates heat within a magnetic field and
different parameters where varied to see the influence on the heat transfer coefficient. Li
and Kleinstreuer [53] compared the thermal conductivity model for nanofluids; one
involved the application of a model based on the Brownian motion induced micro-mixing
and the other was based on Navier-Stokes. The study was done on the flow of nanofluids
pure water and CuO-water through a trapezoidal microchannel. Their research revealed
13
that nanofluids improved thermal performance of microchannel mixture flow but with a
pressure drop.
Hooman [54] presented investigation on the convective characteristics of a
rectangular microchannel with a porous medium while factoring parameters such as
temperature jump, velocity profile, duct geometry, friction factor and slip coefficient.
Their influence on the Nusselt number was analyzed. Hasan et al. [55] studied the effect
of channel geometry on a microchannel heat exchanger. Numerical simulations were
carried out to solve developing flow and conjugate heat transfer. The shapes investigated
include square, rectangular, trapezoidal and iso-triangle. Their investigation showed that
with the parameters used, when the volume of a channel is decreased or the number of
channels are increase, heat transfer increases, pressure drops and pumping power
increases. This study within the parameters used showed the circular channel having the
most effective thermal efficiency. Hsieh and Lin [56] performed experiment to
determine the thermal characteristics of a fluid in rectangular microchannel. The fluids
used in the experiments were deionized water, methanol and ethanol solutions. The
parameters were aspect ratio, hydraulic diameter, Reynolds numbers, surface conditions,
thermal properties and the different fluids. From within the extent of these parameters, it
was observed that the hydrophilic surfaces had higher local heat transfer coefficients than
that of hydrophobic for all test fluids. Chen et al. [57] studied the thermal behavior of
heat transfer in different shapes of microchannels. These shapes include trapezoidal,
rectangular and triangular shapes. In the study, the Nusselt number was seen to be
highest at the inlet of the heat sink and least at the outlet. In comparison with the
14
different shapes of microchannel that were studied, it was observed that the triangular
shaped model had the most thermal efficiency.
DeGregoria et al. [58] tested an experimental magnetocaloric refrigerator
designed to operate within a temperature range of about 4 to 80 K. Helium gas was used
as the heat transfer fluid. A single magnet was used to charge and discharge two in-line
beds of magnetocaloric material. Zimm et al. [59] investigated magnetic refrigeration for
near room temperature cooling. Water was used as the heat transfer fluid. A porous bed
of magnetocaloric material was used in the experiment. It was found that using a 5T
magnetic field, a refrigerator reliably produces cooling powers exceeding 500W at
coefficient of performance 6 or more. Pecharsky and Gschneidner [60] discussed new
magnetocaloric materials with respect to their magnetocaloric properties. Recent progress
in magnetocaloric refrigerator design was reviewed.
The objective of the present investigation is to take a step ahead in study of
micro-channels of trapezoidal cross section by investigating composite trapezoidal
channels. A composite trapezoidal microchannel structure is formed by bonding a slab of
gadolinium with silicon wafer where microchannels of trapezoidal cross section have
been etched out of the silicon substrate. The study presents different parametric variations
and its effect on the fluid flow and heat transfer characteristics of the channel.
15
CHAPTER 2
ANALYSIS OF MASS TRANSFER BY JET IMPINGEMENT
2.1 Mathematical Model
The diagram of figure 2.1 is a schematic of the problem being analyzed. It
involves an axi-symmetric feature with the ejection of liquid jet from the nozzle which
impinges on a rotating disk. Figure 2.1a and 2.1b are the 2D and 3D schematics
respectively. The nozzle diameter, dn is 0.15cm which is kept as a constant function of
Rej used in simulation and calculations of local and average Sherwood number in
equations (13 and 14). The rotating disk has a diameter, dd of 1.5cm where a 10 to 1 ratio
with dn was intended. Dimensionless height, is calculated H/dn. In analysis, is made
to vary to observe the effect it has on the mass transfer rate. The numerical model
parameters include a Newtonian fluid with constant properties, an incompressible flow
under laminar and steady state conditions. As part of this computational analysis, the
system under study was under isothermal conditions neglecting the heat transfer effects
of the energy equation. The equations describing the conservation of mass, momentum
(r,, and z directions respectively) can be written as [28].
0z
V
r
V
r
V Zrr
(1)
2
r
2
r
2
r
2
r
2
f
rZ
2
θrr
r
V
z
V
r
V
r
1
r
Vν
r
p
ρ
1
z
VV
r
V
r
VV (2)
16
2
θ
2
θ
2
θ
2
θ
2
θ
Z
θrθ
rr
V
z
V
r
V
r
1
r
Vν
z
VV
r
VV
r
VV (3)
2
Z
2
Z
2
Z
2
f
ZZ
Zr
z
V
r
V
r
1
r
Vν
z
p
ρ
1g
z
VV
r
VV (4)
The mass transport equation of momentum accommodates the chemical species in
the following form:
2
i
2
22
i
2
iiz
iθ
ir
z
C
θr
C
r
Cr
rrD
z
CV
θr
CV
r
CV (5)
In addition, the ion mass flux (moles/area-time) which involves the transfer of
ions between an electrolyte and the electrode is defined by:
)cK(cN int (6)
Where N is ion mass flux, which is related to the mass transfer coefficient, K, c∞ is the
concentration of ions in the bulk fluid and cint is the concentration of ions on the
interface. The following boundary conditions were used.
0r
fC
0,r
zV
0,r
Vθ
V:Hz00,rAt
(7)
atmd pp:δz0,rrAt (8)
rΩθ
V0,z
Vr
V:d
rr00,zAt (9)
jT
fT0,
θV
rV,
jV
zV:
2
dr0H,zAt (10)
0z
C0,
zV
rV
θV:
prr
2
dH,zAt f
(11)
The boundary conditions applied to the flow is a no–slip condition where the
velocity parallel to the walls and on the wall is zero. The formula used to determine the
17
average mass transfer coefficient has the same form that the average heat transfer
coefficient equation used by Rahman and Lallave [20].
drd
r
0j
Cint
CrK
jC
intC2
dr
2
avK
(12)
Where Cint is the average concentration at the solid–liquid interface, Cj and Cint are the jet
and interface concentrations, respectively. The local and average Sherwood numbers are
calculated according to the following expressions:
D
dKSh n
(13)
D
dKSh nav
av
(14)
18
Figure 2.1a Confined liquid jet impingement between a rotating disk and an
impingement plate, two-dimensional schematic.
Figure 2.1b Confined liquid jet impingement between a rotating disk and an
impingement plate, three-dimensional schematic.
19
2.2 Numerical Simulation
In calculating the numerical computation, a few conditions have to be met which
include the continuity equation (1), momentum, mass transport, and ion flux equations
(2-6), and boundary conditions (7–11). The above equations were solved using the
Newton–Raphson method through a finite element program, FIDAPTM
[26]. This
numerical analysis method helped to accommodate the non–linearity of the velocity and
concentration computations. The finite element analysis was done using four node
quadrilateral elements. Even though temperature did not play a big role in this simulation,
an approximate value close to the room temperature and inlet velocity was assigned at the
jet nozzle which corresponds to several Reynolds numbers. In addition, the velocity,
pressure, and concentration were factored into the computations of each element; taking
into account the boundary conditions for the electrolyte concentration at the jet nozzle.
To enhance the accuracy of the numerical model the mesh elements of the electrolyte
region close to the solid interface were smaller than those above in the bulk region. Since,
it is an electrolyte used in the simulation; the electrochemical system is best used in a
controlled system of etching. The one-electron model as seen in equation (15) was used
in the simulation as part of the cation’s concentration distribution at the spinning disk
(cathode) as presented by Moreno et al. [6].
4
6
3
6 Fe(CN)eFe(CN) (15)
An additional assumption made as part of this numerical study includes the
absence of chemical reaction in the bulk fluid. The species of electrolyte in the system are
assumed to be independent of one another in the fluid and therefore the system is
uncoupled for the simulation. This uncoupling implies that the cathodic reaction of the
20
rotating disk is independent of the flow or diffusion of the fluid and because of this
assumption, the etch rate or chemical reaction can be ignored in the analysis. The
properties of the following electrolytes (NaOH), K3[Fe(CN)6], and HCl, were obtained
from Moreno et al.[6], Sara et al. [16], Quiroz et al.[14], Guggenheim [21] and Fary
[22]. For this simulation, the Soret effect is negligible therefore, the flow was assumed
to have only a mass transfer by convection and a mass transfer by diffusion which is as a
result of a concentration gradient which can best be described by Fick’s law.
ii CDG (16)
During the iteration, the values begin to converge relative to their previous values
and the residuals are summed up for each variable which is less that 10-6
. To verify that
the conservation of mass was met, the flow rate at the outlet was compared with the
flowrate at the nozzle of the jet to make sure their sum is zero. The suitable number of
element to be used in the simulation was determined by an independent systematic pick.
A graph of the best of meshes can be seen in figure 2.3. The most accurate mesh of model
shows a grid size of 20 x 500 divisions of elements in the axial (z) and radial (r)
directions, respectively. Numerical results for this grid compared to the others gave
almost identical results with an average margin error of 1.2%. The result of the
electrolyte interface concentration distribution obtained from the finite element analysis
is used to calculate the mass transfer coefficient, local and average Sherwood numbers.
21
2.3 Results and Discussion
The mesh used for simulation can be seen in figure 2.2 and figure 2.3 which
shows the best of all meshes plotted together. Figure 2.3 facilitates the process of
choosing an optimum mesh with the lowest number of percentage difference. The mesh
used is the 20x500 mesh grid spacing having the smallest number of divergence when
compared to the others at an average of 1.21%. The amount of grid spacing in the vertical
direction was made denser under the jet nozzle to accommodate the mass transport
equation. The Schmidt number focused on in this study results in a thin boundary layer
and for this reason, the closer the grid spacing was to the interface the smaller grids got in
the horizontal direction to facilitate the transport equation of the ions.
Figure 2.2 Mesh plot for a grid spacing of 20 x 500 in the axial and radial directions.
22
Figure 2.3 Dimensionless interface temperature distributions for different number of
elements in r and z directions (Rej=1000, Rer=2310, =1.0, and Sc=2315).
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Inte
rfa
ce C
on
cen
trati
on
, C
int (g
/cm
3)
Dimensionless Radial Distance, r/R
NZ x NR = 10 x 280
NZ x NR = 20 x 500
NZ x NR = 30 x 290
NZ x NR = 35 x 320
NZ x NR = 40 x 340
.
23
Figure 2.4 plots the dimensionless radial distance, r/R versus local Sherwood
number and dimensionless concentration. This figure involved analysis at jet Reynolds
numbers limited to the laminar region ranging from 600 to 1500 with a spin rate of 125
rpm and = 1.0. Figure 2.4 shows that Sh is highest at the stagnation point and then it
quickly decreases as r/R increases. The local Sherwood becomes almost a constant at r/R
= 0.2 after the rapid drop but continues to decrease. This corresponds approximately to
the boundary between the impingement dominated and mixed region. A similar behavior
was reported by Arzutuğ et al. [13] for impinging jet on a rotating disk and by Metzger et
al. [27]. The dynamics that affect the behavior of the local Sherwood number include the
geometry of the system, flow factor such as the shape of the nozzle, Reynolds number,
turbulence or laminar level at the jet nozzle, jet-to-impinging surface gap and rotation of
the disk. The plot in figure 2.4 shows the highest Reynolds number 1500 with the highest
local Sherwood number at the stagnation point and continues like that to r/R = 1.0. The
lower the Reynolds number, the lower the local Sherwood numbers from the stagnation
point to the outer limit of r/R. This shows that an increase in velocity at the nozzle
increases the mass transfer rate of the species. For the behavior of the interface
concentration, one can see three regions which are the impingement dominated, mixed
region where the jet impingement and rotational effect of the disk have equal influence
on the flow and then rotational dominated region where the expansion of the fluid takes
place as r/R increases away from the center of the disk. The impingement dominated
region has the slightly average positive slope until approximately r/R = 0.075, the mixed
region starts with a sudden steep average positive slope up to approximately r/R = 0.18,
24
and the rotational region also has a steep slope but not as much as the mixed region. The
lowest Reynolds number 600 has the highest concentration at the center of the stagnation
point and continues like that to r/R = 1.0 because the lower the velocity of the flow over
the disk or lower the Reynolds number at the nozzle, the more species component interact
with the rotating disk interface. Also, the velocity of the fluid as it flows out reduces
which leads to an increase in concentration on the outer edge of the disk.
Figure 2.5 is a plot of the local Sherwood number and interface dimensionless
concentration which reflect the behavior of the rotational Reynolds number, Rer as the
disk rotates. The range of the rotational Reynolds is from 0 to 6007, zero being a
stationary disk. It was plotted with Rej = 800, = 1.0 and Sc = 2315. This figure shows
that the changes to the rotational Reynolds number do not have a significant effect on the
mass transfer rate. It can be seen from the plot of the dimensionless interface
concentration, the different rotational condition depicts the existence of three regions as
pointed out by Sara et al. [16]. It can further be deduced that the dimensionless
concentration in figure 2.5 has an expansion region that begins when Θ ≈ 0.2 because up
to that point, they all lie on the same curve and begin to expand thereafter; this is where
the different plots of rotational Reynolds diverge from each other. As stated by Miranda
and Campos [11], the velocity profile inside the mass boundary layer explains this
behavior where they are linear along the impingement and mixed regions but deviate
from linearity at the expansion region. From the data collected, the lower the jet Reynolds
number the more pronounced the deviation of the rotational Reynolds for the
concentration would be. When the disk is stationary at Rer = 0, it has the highest
25
concentration at the outer radius of the disk compared to when the disk is rotating. The
velocity can once again be used to explain this action. An increase in velocity as a result
of the rotational speed leads to less concentration of the species on the disk. Therefore,
the increment of spinning rate or rotational Reynolds number (Rer) will decrease the
dimensionless concentration, (Θ) as seen in figure 2.5.
The distance between the nozzle and the rotating disk is simulated at different
heights. Figure 2.6 shows the result of this action on the local Sherwood number and
dimensionless concentration over the dimensionless radial distance for = 0.5 to 20. The
conditions applied to the simulation include Rej = 1500 and Rer = 2310. From the data,
the highest dimensionless height = 2.0 has the higher mass transfer rate than when =
0.5 at the center of the disk, but towards the end of the disk, = 0.5 has a higher mass
transfer rate than when it is 2.0. This occurs because of the difference in the length of
their potential core and the characteristics of the jet. The graph shows that an increment
of the dimensionless height () will cause the species concentration on the disk to
increase along the dimensionless radial distance (r/R). The rotation dominated region on
the concentration data begins at a point that corresponds with proportionality to the
dimensionless height () at the dimensionless radial distance of r/R 0.2. The local
Sherwood number shows the same behavior at figure 2.4 and 2.5 but as the dimensionless
height increases, the local Sherwood number increases for each radius in the expansion
region. The axis of the disk has the highest local Sherwood value which decreases rapidly
with a very steep slope and when c/C ≈ 2.2, there is a rapid change to a gentle slope
which is as a result of the increase in thickness of the mass boundary layer in the mixed
26
region. As the flow begins to expand, a minimum value of local Sherwood number is
reached.
Figure 2.4 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration for different jet
Reynolds numbers (=1.0, Rer=2310, nickel disk, and Sc=2315).
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Dim
ensi
on
less
Co
nce
ntr
ati
on
, Q
(C
int/
Cj)
Lo
cal
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
h
Dimensionless Radial Distance (r/R)
Sh, Re = 650
Sh, Re = 800
Sh, Re = 1000
Sh, Re = 1250
Sh, Re = 1500
Q, Re = 750
Q, Re = 800
Q, Re = 1000
Q, Re = 1250
Q, Re = 1500
Sh, Rej= 650
Sh, Rej=800j
Sh, Rej=1000j
Sh, Rej=1250j
Sh, Rej=1500
Q, Rej=650
Q, Rej=800j
Q, Rej=1000j
Q, Rej=1250j
Q, Rej=1500
27
Figure 2.5 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration for different
rotational Reynolds numbers (=1.0, nickel disk, Rej=800, and Sc=2315).
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0
130
260
390
520
650
780
910
1040
1170
1300
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0D
imen
sio
nle
ss C
on
cen
tra
tio
n,
Q (
Cin
t/C
j)
Lo
cal
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
h
Dimensionless Radial Distance, (r/R)
0
2310
4158
5082
6006
c0
c2310
c4158
c5082
c6006
Q, Rer= 0
Q, Rer = 2310j
Q, Rer = 4159j
Q, Rer = 5083
Q, Rer = 6007
Sh, Rer= 0Sh, Rer = 2310Sh, Rer = 4159Sh, Rer = 5083Sh, Rer = 6007
28
Figure 2.6 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration for different
dimensionless heights (Rej=1500, Rer=2310, and Sc=2315).
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Dim
ensi
on
less
Co
nce
ntr
ati
on
, Q
(C
int/
Cj)
Lo
cal
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
h
Dimensionless Radial Distance (r/R)
Sh, ß = 0.5
Sh, ß = 0.75
Sh, ß = 1.0
Sh, ß = 1.5
Sh, ß = 2.0
H/d =0.5c
H/d =0.75c
H/d =1.0c
H/d =1.5c
H/d =2.0c
Sh, = 0.5Sh, = 0.75Sh, = 1.0Sh, = 1.5Sh, = 2.0
Q, = 0.5
Q, = 0.75Q, = 1.0Q, = 1.5Q, = 2.0
`
29
Figure 2.7 Average Sherwood numbers with jet Reynolds numbers at various
rotational Reynolds numbers (=1.0, nickel disk, and ferricyanide electrolyte and
Sc=2315).
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
0 2000 4000 6000
Av
era
ge
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
ha
vg
Rotational Reynolds, Rer
650
J800
J1000
J1250
1500
Rej = 650
Rej = 800
Rej = 1000
Rej = 1250
Rej = 1500
30
In figure 2.7, the average Sherwood number was plotted for different values of jet
Reynolds at = 1.0 against rotational Reynolds’ values. The average Sherwood number
increases with a relatively small difference when the rotational speed is increased which
points out the fact that it has little effect on the outcome of the average Sherwood
number. The result of the average Sherwood number shows that the effect of the mass
transfer influenced by the rotational Reynolds is relatively trivial compared to the
influence by the jet Reynolds. This shows that the impingement on the disk dominates the
flow of the fluid with the spin rates that were used for the simulations and that the critical
velocity of the rotational speed was not attained. Figure 2.7 also shows that the jet
Reynolds greatly affects the results of the Shavg. The results obtained in figure 2.7 are
similar to those of previous works. It is quite obvious that the three regions of flow
previously mentioned can no longer be observed because the curves are smoother since
average Sherwood number is now cumulative, and the rapid changes are attenuated by
the sum of the previous values.
Figure 2.8 shows the investigation of how affects Shavg for 1500Re600 j
where rad/s 13.09 . The length of the potential core has an effect on the local
Sherwood and as a result it has an influence on the average Sherwood number because as
increases, Shavg decreases. Another factor causing the decrease in Shavg is the increased
decay in average velocity as height of the nozzle from the rotating disk increases. As the
nozzle to target spacing increases, there are more instances where there is mixing of
induced turbulence occurs and the fluid does not expand as much as when the spacing is
smaller. With the increasing distance with the nozzle of the jet, a large portion of the
31
disk will stay inside the low velocity region of the jet. Therefore, the mass transfer rate
will decrease with an increasing distance from the nozzle of the jet.
Figure 2.9 shows the investigation of how 1.15β for Schmidt numbers
2472Sc1720 affects Shavg over 1500Re600 j at rad/s 13.09 . It depicts Shavg
increasing with Sc. The Schmidt number can be used to optimize the kinematic viscosity
or diffusion coefficient needed for a system. It can also be interpreted as the average
Sherwood number increasing with an increase in kinematic viscosity or decrease in
diffusion coefficient which is suitable in simulating fluids at specific properties. The
lower the Schmidt number the less the local Sherwood number over the radial direction
will be and therefore lead to a decline in the average mass transfer rate over the disk.
Figure 2.10 is a comparison between electrolytes. These electrolytes are
potassium ferricyanide (K3[Fe(CN)6] ) being replaced with Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)
and the other is Hydrochloric acid (HCl). Their properties from Fary [22] and
Guggenheim [21] give us Sc = 791 and 655 at 25deg ⁰C for HCl and NaOH respectively
because of their much larger diffusion coefficient. The difference in Sc between
K3[Fe(CN)6 at 2315 and the other two electrolytes being compared to it is very different
from the ferricyanide having the highest concentration distribution followed by
Hydrochloric acid and then Sodium Hydroxide. The trend seen from this figure shows
that the lower the Schmidt number, the lower the distribution of concentration.
32
Figure 2.8 Average Sherwood number with jet Reynolds number at different
dimensionless nozzle to target spacing (Rer=2310, and Sc=2315).
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00
Av
era
ge
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
ha
vg
Dimensionless Nozzle to Target Spacing,
J650
J800
J1000
J1250
J1500
Re = 650
Re = 800
Re = 1000
Re = 1250
Re = 1500
33
Figure 2.9 Average Sherwood number with jet Reynolds number at different Schmidt
number (=1.15, nickel disk, ferricyanide electrolyte, and Rer=5082).
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
43
45
1700 1900 2100 2300 2500
Av
era
ge
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
ha
vg
Schimdt Number, Sc
J650J800J1000J1250J1500
Rej = 650
Rej = 800
Rej = 1000
Rej = 1250
34
Figure 2.10 Dimensionless concentration for different electrolytes - NaOH, HCl,
3
6Fe(CN) (Rej=650, Rer=0, and =1.0).
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Lo
cal
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
h
Dimensionless Radial Distance (r/R)
Conc, Ferricyanide
Conc, Hydrochloric Acid
Conc, Sodium Hydroxide
Q, Ferricyanide
Q, Hydrochloric Acid
Q, Sodium Hydroxide
35
Figure 2.11 Local Sherwood number and dimensionless concentration over
dimensionless radial distance for different impingement plate geometries, nickel disk
with ferricyanide electrolyte (Rej=1000, Rer=5082, =1.15, and Sc=2315).
0
50
100
150
200
250
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Dim
ensi
on
less
Co
nce
nct
rati
on
, Q
(Cin
t/C
j)
Lo
cal
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
h
Dimensionless Radial Distance, r/R
Sh, Parallel
Sh, Conical
Sh, Concave
Sh, Convex
Q, Parallel
Q, Conical
Q, Concave
Q, Convex
36
The graph in fig. 2.11 shows the distribution of mass transfer of local Sherwood
numbers and dimensionless concentration (Θ) over r/R for different confinements plates
at Rej = 1000 and Sc = 2315. The change in geometries is only with the confinement
plate which are conical, convex and concave shaped relative to the rotating disk. Figure
2.11 plot shows the three geometries being compared to the parallel confinement plate
used in this study. For the range of parameters used, the values of the Sh coincide for
most part of the disk except for the range 025.0R/r0 where the conical shaped
impingement plate starts with highest local Sherwood number and the parallel begins
with the lowest. The dimensionless radial distance of r/R = 0.025 is equivalent to a radius
0.035cm. When comparing a parallel confinement plate to a conical plate, Miranda and
Campos [11] study showed that lower Reynolds and Schmidt numbers create a clear
distinction of local Sherwood number results at the expansion region.
At the outer edge of the disk, the mass transfer rates are still almost the same with
the parallel disk still having the lowest Sherwood numbers and the convex confinement
plate having the highest. The conical shape had the highest Shavg followed by the concave
with the parallel impingement plate having the lowest. For the dimensionless
concentration part of the graph, the behavior is very much different. Starting with the
impingement region, they all start out alike and this can be explained by the fact that they
approximately have the same impingement plate shape within this region. At the region
that is dominated by rotation, the interface concentration begin to behave differently and
at this region the shape on the confinement plate begins to play a big role on the
concentration distribution on the disk. From the various confinement plate geometries
37
that were examined, the conical shaped showed the best mass transfer rate which agrees
with a previous study done by Miranda and Campos [11].
Figure 2.12 Average Sherwood number comparison with the experimental results
obtained by Arzutuğ et al. [13] under various jet Reynolds and Schmidt numbers (left:
=1.0, Sc=2315, Rer=2310; right: (=1.0, Rej=1000, and Rer=5082).
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100
Schmidt Number, Sc
Av
era
ge
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
ha
vg
Jet Reynolds Number, Re
Present results
Arzutug et al. [8]
Sc Present results
Sc Arzutug et al. [8]
rrrbrbrbrbrg
rrrbrbrbr
Present results
- Arzutuğ et al. [13]
Sc Arzutuğ et al. [13] [13]
38
Figure 2.13 Average Sherwood number comparison with other studies within the core
region for various Schmidt numbers ( =1.0, Rej=800, Rer=2310).
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
360
1700 1900 2100 2300 2500
Av
era
ge
Sh
erw
oo
d N
um
ber
, S
ha
vg
Schmidt Numbers, Sc
Present Study
Chin & Tsang[1]
Sara[12]
Wang[27]
39
Figure 2.14 Comparison of predicted average Sherwood number using Equation 17
with present numerical data.
0
20
40
60
80
0 20 40 60 80
Act
ua
l A
ver
ag
e S
her
wo
od
Nu
mb
er,
Sh
av
g
Predicted Average Sherwood Number, Shavg
40
Figure 2.12 shows two different average Sherwood number comparison for a
range of jet Reynolds and Schmidt numbers. The right plot shows a varying jet Reynolds
number and the left shows a range of Schmidt number. This is an attempt to show how
close the present result obtained comes close to the correlation gotten by Arzutuğ et al.
[13]. The results of the plot on the left side were obtained for 1500Re800 j with Sc =
2315 at rad/s 13.09 . The average difference with the results from this plot was an
absolute 4.9% with a maximum of 10.3%. On the right graph, the comparison was done
at Rej = 1000 and Rer = 5082. The average difference here was 0.6% with the highest
deviation of 1% from Arzutuğ et al. [13].
The illustrations shown in fig. 2.13 are used to discuss the behavior of the average
Sherwood number within the impingement dominated zone. Figure 2.13 shows the
average Sherwood data in the impingement zone of present study, correlations obtained
by Chin and Tsang [3], Sara et al. [16], and Wang et al. [25] on a flat surface. The
Sherwood number is used to show the mass transfer in a dimensionless parameter versus
the Schmidt number of the electrolyte. The thicker line shows the finite element analysis
results of present study. The computations involved had a jet Reynolds number (Rej=800)
with a range of 24721720 Sc . In this impingement zone with the parameters used, the
Sherwood number were close to being proportional the square root of Rej while being
proportional to the cubic root of the Sc. The average Sherwood number in the core region
compared to Chin and Tsang [3], Sara et al. [16], and Wang et al. [25] shows an absolute
difference that range from 1 to 17% and had an average absolute difference of 7.73%.
41
A correlation for the average Sherwood number developed used the following
parameters Rej, Rer, , and Sc as variables. In this correlation, various parameters were
used and the data point employed corresponded with the electrolyte having a Sc =
2315(where =0.01275 cm2/s). The Prandtl number exponent of 0.4 from Martin’s
equation [23] for a single confined liquid jet impingement was kept constant as part of
present numerical correlation. The least square curve-fitting technique was adopted to
develop the correlation and the least square fit of the corresponding logarithmic equation.
The behavior of the average Sherwood number with the various parameters determined
the signs for the exponents. The correlation obtained for the present study can be seen in
equation (17) and illustrated in figure 2.14.
Shavg = 0.404.Rej
0.286Rer
0.0074
-0.714Sc
0.33 (17)
The highest absolute percentage difference between the actual Shavg and the
predicted results was 10.20% with an average absolute percentage difference of 3.89%.
The data of dimensionless parameters used for the correlation of this study take into
account jet Reynolds number 1500Re650 j , rotational Reynolds number, 6007Re0 r
, dimensionless height, 0.25.0 , Schmidt number, 2472Sc1720 , and geometrical
confinement plates: conical, convex, and concave layout. The present study correlation of
a liquid jet impingement on a rotating disk in a fully confined space can help in
predicting the mass transfer rates during the electrolyte synthesis as a process, especially
for etching processes.
42
CHAPTER 3
ANALYSIS OF HEAT TRANSFER IN A TRAPEZOIDAL
MICROCHANNEL
3.1 Modeling and Simulation
The physical configuration of the system used in the present investigation is
schematically shown in figure 3.1. A slab of gadolinium is placed on the top of the
channel and bonded with the silicon wafer in such a way that a part of heat generated in
gadolinium is directly dissipated to the working fluid whereas part is conducted through
the silicon structure. Neglecting the effects of inlet and outlet plenums, it was assumed
that the fluid enters the channel with a uniform velocity and temperature. The applicable
differential equations for the conservation of mass and momentum in the Cartesian
coordinate system are [61],
0z
w
y
v
x
u
(18)
])[(x
utvv
xx
p
ρ
1
z
uw
y
uv
x
uu
])[(])[(z
utvv
zy
utvv
y
(19)
])[(x
vtvv
xy
p
ρ
1
z
vw
y
vv
x
vu
])[(])[(z
vtvv
zy
vtvv
y
(20)
])[(x
wtvv
xz
p
ρ
1
z
ww
y
wv
x
wu
])[(])[(
z
wtvv
zy
wtvv
y
(21)
43
The k-ε model was used for the simulation of turbulence. In this model, equations
governing the conservation of turbulent kinetic energy and its rate of dissipation were
solved. These equations can be expressed as,
ε2
y
w2
x
w2
z
v2
x
v2
z
u2
y
u
tv
z
k
kζ
tvv
zy
k
kζ
tvv
yx
k
kζ
tvv
xz
kw
y
kv
x
ku
])()()()()()[(
])[(])[(])[(
(22)
k
2ε
2C
2
y
w2
x
w2
z
v2
x
v2
z
u2
y
u
tvk
ε
1C
z
ε
εζ
tvv
zy
ε
εζ
tvv
yx
ε
εζ
tvv
xz
εw
y
εv
x
εu
])()()()()()[(
])[(])[(])[(
(23)
/ε2
kμCtv (24)
The empirical constants appearing in equations (22)-(24) are given by the following
values, Cμ=0.09, C1=1.44, C2=1.92, σk=1.0, σε=1.3. These values hold good for high
Reynolds numbers. For low Reynolds number the values of constants are [62],
)3λ
0.008yλ
0.01yexp(1μC (24a)
Where, 2/1)//(
kyy (24b)
)10/exp(1.14.1
yk
(24c)
)10/exp(0.13.1 y (24d)
44
The energy equation in the fluid region is
])[(2
z
fT
2
2y
fT
2
2x
fT
2
tPr
tvα
z
fT
wy
fT
vx
fT
u
(25)
The equation for steady state heat conduction for gadolinium is [63],
0
gk
0g
2z
gT
2
2y
gT
2
2x
gT
2
(26a)
The equation for steady state heat conduction for silicon is [63],
02
z
sT
2
2y
sT
2
2x
sT
2
(26b)
To complete the physical model equations (18) – (26) are subjected to following
boundary conditions,
At z=0, at fluid inlet, u=0, v=0, w=win, T= Tin (27)
At z=0 on solid surfaces of silicon and gadolinium
0z
Ts
, 0
z
Tg
(28)
At z=L, at fluid outlet, p=0 (29)
At z=L, on solid surfaces of silicon and gadolinium,
0
z
Ts, 0
z
Tg (30)
At x=0, (H-D)<y<H, 0<z<L, u=0, 0x
v
, 0
x
w
, 0
x
fT
(31)
45
At x=0, 0<y<(H-D), 0<z<L, 0x
Ts
(32)
At x=0, H<y<(H+Hg), 0<z<L, 0x
Tg
(33)
At x=B, 0<y<H, 0<z<L, 0x
Ts
(34)
At x=B, H<y<(H+Hg), 0<z<L, 0x
Tg
(35)
At y=0, 0<x<B, 0<z<L, 0y
Ts
(36)
At y=H, 0<x<Bc, 0<z<L, u=0, v=0, w=0, y
Tk
y
Tk
g
gf
f
(37)
At y=H, Bc<x<B, 0<z<L, y
Tk
y
Tk s
s
g
g
(38)
At y=(H+Hg), 0<x<B, 0<z<L, 0y
Tg
(39)
At y = (H-D), 0<x<Bs, 0<z<L, u=0, v=0, w=0, Tf = Ts, y
Tk
y
Tk s
sf
f
(40)
At the inclined channel surface between fluid and silicon, 0<z<L,
u=0, v=0, w=0, Tf = Ts, n
Tk
n
Tk s
sf
f
(41)
47
The governing equations along with the boundary conditions were solved by
using the Galerkin finite element method. Four-node quadrilateral elements were used. In
each element, the velocity, pressure, and temperature fields were approximated which led
to a set of equations that defined the continuum. The successive substitution algorithm
was used to solve the nonlinear system of discretized equations. An iterative procedure
was used to arrive at the solution for the velocity and temperature fields. The solution
was considered converged when the field values did not change from one iteration to the
next by 0.05%.
Figure 3.2 shows a grid independence study carried out to determine the optimum
grid size. In order to ensure that an accurate solution was obtained, the number of
elements that were used to mesh the geometry had to be deemed adequate. This was done
by performing computations for several combinations of elements in all directions. The
interface temperature plot was obtained. It was noted that the numerical simulation
became grid independent at 18*18*90 elements. Computation with 18*18*90 elements
produced results that were very close to the results produced by 24*24*110 and 8*8*42
elements. The difference between the values obtained with 24*24*110 and 18*18*90
elements was 0.36%. Therefore, 18*18*90 elements were chosen for the simulation.
48
3.2 Results and Discussion
For all the configurations studied the length of the microchannel (L) was kept
constant at 23 mm. Magnetic field was varied from 2.5T to 10T. Reynolds number used
was between 1000-3000. Height of the gadolinium slab was varied between 1.5 mm to 5
mm and the depth of the channel was varied between 100 μm to 300 μm. The roughness
of microchannel surfaces was neglected in the turbulent analysis.
Figure 3.3 shows the variation of peripheral Nusselt number with dimensionless
axial coordinate for different Reynolds number for magnetic field of 5T. Nusselt number
is seen to be increasing with increase in Reynolds number. The temperature difference
between fluid and solid is more at higher Reynolds number. Thus higher heat transfer
coefficient is obtained at higher Reynolds number. Fluid gets heated as it passes through
the channel. The temperature difference between fluid and solid decreases as one moves
along the length of the channel. Thermal boundary layer grows until fully developed flow
is established. Therefore, the Nusselt number is higher at the entrance and decreases
downstream. The variation is larger at the entrance because of the rapid development of
thermal boundary layer near the leading edge.
Figure 3.4 shows variation of peripheral dimensionless interface temperature for
different Reynolds number and different magnetic fields. The solid-fluid interface
temperature increases as the fluid moves downstream due to the development of thermal
boundary layer starting with the entrance section as the leading edge. Interface
temperature values increase with increase in magnetic field. It can be seen that, as
Reynolds number increases, the interface temperature decreases. For low Reynolds
49
number fluid remains in contact with the solid for longer time. Thus, high dimensionless
interface temperature values are obtained at lower Reynolds number.
Figure 3.2 Average dimensionless interface temperature over the dimensionless axial
coordinate for different grid sizes (magnetic field = 5T, Re =1600, D=150 μm, L=2.3
cm).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
u
Dimensionless Axial Coordinate, z/L
x * y * z = 8 * 8 * 42
x * y * z = 12 * 12 * 72
x * y * z = 18 * 18 * 90
x * y * z = 24 * 24 * 110
50
Figure 3.3 Variation of peripheral average Nusselt number along the channel
dimensionless axial coordinate for different Reynolds number (Magnetic field = 5T,
D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
u
Dimensionless Axial Coordinate, z/L
Re = 1000
Re = 1600
Re = 2400
Re = 3000
51
Figure 3.4 Variation of peripheral average dimensionless interface temperature along
the channel dimensionless axial coordinate for different Reynolds number and different
magnetic fields (D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm).
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Dim
ensi
on
less
In
terf
ace
Tem
per
atu
re,
Θ
Dimensionless Axial Coordiate, z/L
2.5T, Re = 1600 2.5T, Re = 2400 2.5T, Re = 3000
5.0T, Re = 1600 5.0T, Re = 2400 5.0T, Re = 3000
10.T, Re = 1600 10.T, Re = 2400 10.T, Re = 3000
52
Figure 3.5 Variation of Nusselt number along the channel dimensionless axial
coordinate for different heat generation rates (Re = 1600, 2400, 3000, D=150 μm, L=2.3
cm).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
u
Dimensionless Axial Coordinate, z/L
5T, Re = 1600
5T, Re = 2400
5T, Re = 3000
10T, Re = 1600
10T, Re = 2400
10T, Re = 3000
53
Figure 3.5 shows variation of Nusselt number for different magnetic fields for
Reynolds number of 1600, 2400 and 3000. Nusselt number at a particular cross section in
the channel remains almost the same for different magnetic fields.
Figure 3.6 shows variation of dimensionless interface temperature along the
length of the channel for different thickness of magnetic slab. Reynolds number of fluid
is 1600 and magnetic field is 5T. As shown in figure 1, the slab of magnetic material is
placed on top of the microchannel. As thickness of the slab increases, more heat is
generated in the magnetic material for the same magnetic field. The part of generated
heat is directly dissipated to the working fluid from gadolinium whereas; part is
conducted through the silicon structure and reaches the working fluid. It can be seen that
interface temperature values increase with increase in slab thickness. It was found that
Nusselt number at a particular cross section in the channel remains almost the same for
different thickness of magnetic material slab.
Figure 3.7 shows the dimensionless axial coordinate distribution of the Nusselt
number for different channel depth and constant inlet velocity whose combined effect
changes the Reynolds number. In all these plots, the local Nusselt number is large near
the entrance and decreases downstream due to the development of thermal boundary
layer. For the channel depth > 250 μm, the effect of channel depth on Nusselt number is
less significant. At channel depth lower than 250 μm, the Nusselt number increases with
channel depth over the entire length of the channel. For the channel depth of 250 μm and
300 μm the height of silicon wafer was used were 300μm and 350μm respectively.
54
Figure 3.6 Variation of peripheral average dimensionless interface temperature along
the channel dimensionless axial coordinate for different thickness of the magnetic slab
(Re= 1600, Magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm).
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Dim
ensi
on
less
In
terf
ace
Tem
per
atu
re,
Θ
Dimensionless Axial Coordinate, z/L
Re = 1600, b = 0.05mm
Re = 1600, b = 1.5mm
Re = 1600, b = 2.5mm
Re = 1600, b = 5mm
55
Figure 3.7 Variation of Nusselt number along the channel dimensionless axial
coordinate for different depths of the channel (Magnetic field =5T, Constant velocity).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
u
Dimensionless Axial Coordinate, z/L
D = 100 μm
D = 150 μm
D = 200 μm
D = 250 μm
D = 300 μm
56
Figure 3.8 shows the variation of the total average dimensionless interface
temperature of the system for different Reynolds number and different channel depths for
a magnetic field of 5T. It can be seen that as the Reynolds number increases, the average
temperature decreases. A faster moving fluid carries heat at the faster rate, presenting
lower values of average dimensionless interface temperature. For the same Reynolds
number, as the depth of the channel increases, average temperature decreases.
Figure 3.8 Average dimensionless interface temperature numbers with Reynolds
numbers at various channel depths (Magnetic field =5T, 1000 < Re < 3000).
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
750 1250 1750 2250 2750 3250
Av
era
ge
Dim
ensi
on
less
In
terf
ace
Tem
per
atu
re,
Θavg
Reynolds Number, Re
D = 161 μm
D = 400 μm
D = 1820 μm
57
Figure 3.9 Variation of Nusselt number over the dimensionless axial coordinate for
different spacing between the channels (Re = 2400, magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm,
L=2.3 cm).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
u
Dimensioless Axial Coordinate, z/L
S = 2.7mm
S = 2.8mm
S = 2.9mm
S = 3.0mm
58
Figure 3.9 shows variation of Nusselt number along the length of the channel for
different spacing between the channels. The results show that increasing the solid path
decreases the local Nusselt number along the channel degrading the thermal performance
of the heat sink. The temperature gradient in the solid increases and the average solid
temperature is slightly increased.
Figure 3.10 shows the comparison between the standard convection correlation
and the present simulation model. Nusselt number for laminar flow in a smooth pipe is
calculated by [64],
3/2)/.Pr.(Re4.01
)/.Pr.(Re0668.066.3Nu
LD
LD
h
h
(42)
Nusselt number for turbulent flow in a pipe is calculated by [64],
4.00.8 Pr.0.023ReNu (43)
The values of average Nusselt number for a circular channel with Dh=154μm
were compared to that of the standard convection correlation for a trapezoidal channel
with Dh=154μm. As the average Nusselt number values for circular channel were
compared to those for the trapezoidal channel, there was a difference of 2.23% to 6.52%
between the simulation results and the correlation results.
Figure 3.11 shows variation of dimensionless pressure difference between inlet
and outlet of the channel for different Reynolds numbers. It can be seen that the value of
dimensionless pressure difference between the inlet and outlet of the channel increases as
Reynolds number increases. This is expected because the velocity of the flow increases
with Reynolds number. High velocity fluid creates higher pressure difference between
inlet and outlet. For the same Reynolds number, as the depth of the channel increases,
59
velocity of the flow decreases. This results in lower values of dimensionless pressure
difference between inlet and outlet of the channel.
Figure 3.10 Comparison between simulation and standard convection relation
(Dh=154μm, Magnetic field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm).
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Av
era
ge
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
uavg
Reynolds Number, Re
Simulation
Standard Convection Correlation [66]
60
Figure 3.11 Variation of dimensionless pressure difference between inlet and outlet of
the channel with Reynolds number (Magnetic field = 5T, L=2.3 cm).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
800 1300 1800 2300 2800 3300
Dim
ensi
on
less
Pre
ssu
re D
iffe
ren
ce, ∆
Pd
Reynolds Number, Re
D = 100 μm
D = 150 μm
D = 200 μm
D = 250 μm
61
Figure 3.12 Variation of the Nusselt numbers for different working fluids (Magnetic
field = 5T, D=150 μm, L=2.3 cm).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
u
Dimensionless Axial Coordinate, z/L
Water
Helium
FC-72
62
Figure 3.12 shows variation of average Nusselt number along the dimensionless
axial coordinate of the channel for different working fluids. Thermal conductivity of
water (~ 0.6 W/m-K) is higher than that of helium (~ 0.15 W/m-K) and FC-72 (~ 0.057
W/m-K). This results in better Nusselt number values for water as compared to helium
and FC-72.
Figure 3.13 shows variation of dimensionless pumping power required to pass
the fluid through the channel for different Reynolds numbers. Pumping power is
calculated from volumetric flow rate and pressure difference between inlet and outlet of
the channel. As Reynolds number of fluid increases, the volumetric flow rate and
dimensionless pressure difference increases. For the same Reynolds number, as the depth
of the channel increases, velocity of the flow decreases. Thus, fluid flowing at a higher
velocity requires more pumping power than fluid flowing at a lower velocity.
Figure 3.14 shows two different data of average Nusselt number comparison for a
range of jet Reynolds. This is an attempt to show how close results of simulation from the
present study come close to the experimental data gotten by Wu and Cheng [38]. The
results of the plot were obtained for 200Re40 , L=4cm, Bc=79μm and D=200μm.
The average difference between the results from this plot was 7.17% with a maximum of
13.32%.
63
Figure 3.13 Variation of dimensionless pumping power for different Reynolds
numbers (Magnetic field = 5T, L=2.3 cm).
0.0E+00
5.0E+05
1.0E+06
1.5E+06
2.0E+06
2.5E+06
3.0E+06
750 1250 1750 2250 2750 3250
Dim
ensi
on
less
Pu
mp
ing
Po
wer
, D
p
Reynolds Number, Re
D = 100 μm
D = 150 μm
D = 200 μm
D = 250 μm
64
Figure 3.14 Average Nusselt number comparison with the experimental results
obtained by Wu and Chen [38] under various jet (Magnetic field = 5T, 40 < Re < 200,
D=150 μm, L=4.0 cm).
0
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.8
2.1
0 50 100 150 200 250
Av
era
ge
Nu
ssel
t N
um
ber
, N
uavg
Reynolds Number, Re
Simulation
Wu & Chen [8]
65
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION
Analysis of impinging jet on a rotating disk was performed. The parameters
utilized include Reynolds number, nozzle height to diameter ratio, rotational speed,
geometry, and fluid property by various Schmidt numbers. The CFD simulation
presented here could be a great tool in understanding the character of a flow in
engineering applications involving jet impingement especially for in etching processes.
The behavior of local and average mass transfer through the dimensionless parameter
Sherwood was investigated using finite element analysis.
The conclusion of this investigation is that the local Sherwood number decreases
with an increasing radius of a rotating or stationary disk which is also the rate of mass
transfer decreasing towards the edge of the disk. An increase in rotational speed of the
disk or Reynolds number at the jet nozzle will lead to an increase in mass transfer rate but
the jet Reynolds has more of an impact. Therefore the results from the investigation for a
low rotational speed of a rotating disk can be approximately equivalent to that of a
stationary disk. Also, with the Reynolds numbers been dealt with, an increase in the
nozzle to target spacing will reduce the mass transfer rate of the species. One of the most
important engineering applications that this study can lend itself is to wet process
equipments and the analysis from this study can be used in design when trying to
determine etching rates.
66
For the microchannel, the simulation was performed by varying the channel
aspect ratio, Reynolds number, heat generation rate and spacing between channels. At a
smaller flow rate outlet temperature increased as the low velocity fluid remained in
contact with the solid for longer time. Heat transfer coefficient and Nusselt number at a
particular cross section in the channel remains almost the same for different heat
generation rates. The peripheral average heat transfer coefficient and Nusselt number
decreases along the length of the channel due to the development of thermal boundary
layer. Large variation in the Nusselt number near the entrance can be attributed to large
growth rate of thermal boundary layer near the leading edge. It is seen that the
temperature in the channel drops down as the hydraulic diameter decreases. For the same
channel, the maximum temperature decreases as the Reynolds number increases. The
pressure drop in the channel increases as the Reynolds number increases. It is also seen
that, as the Reynolds number increases, the power required for pumping the fluid through
the channel increases. Nusselt number increases as the depth of the channel is increased.
For the same channel, Nusselt number increases with Reynolds number.
67
REFERENCES
[1] F. Kreith, J. H. Taylor, and J. P. Chong, “Heat and Mass Transfer from a Rotating
Disk,” Journal of Heat Transfer 81 (1959) 95–104.
[2] V.E. Nakoryakov, B.G. Pokusaev, and E.N. Troyan, “Impingement of an
axisymmetric liquid jet on a barrier,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 21 (1978) 1175–1184.
[3] D.T. Chin, and C.H. Tsang, “Mass Transfer to an Impinging Jet Electrode,”
Journal of the Electrochemical Soc. Electrochemical Science and Technology 125
(9) (1978) 1461–1470.
[4] R. Alkire, and J. Ju, “High Speed Selective Electroplating with Impinging Two–
Dimensional Slot Jet Flow,” Journal of the Electrochemical Society 134 (2)
(1987) 294–299.
[5] D.T Chin and M. Agarwal, “Mass Transfer from an Oblique Impinging Slot Jet,”
Journal of the Electrochemical Society 138 (1991) 2643–2650.
68
[6] O.A. Moreno, R.H. Katyl, J.D. Jones, and P.A. Moschak, “Mass Transfer of an
Impinging Jet Confined between Parallel Plates,” IBM J. Res. Develop. 37 (2)
(1993) 143–154.
[7] Y.M. Chen, W.T. Lee, and S.J. Wu, “Heat/Mass Transfer between an Impinging
Jet and Rotating Disk,” Heat and Mass Transfer 34 (1998) 195–201.
[8] T. Pekdemir, and T.W. Davies, “Mass Transfer from Rotating Circular Cylinders
in a Submerged Slot Jet of Air,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
41 (1998) 3441–3450.
[9] Q. Chen and V. Modi, “Mass transfer in turbulent impinging slot jets,”
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 42 (1999) 762–776.
[10] M. Chen, R. Chalupa, A. C. West, V. Modi, “High Schmidt Mass Transfer in a
Laminar Impinging Slot Jet Flow,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 43 (2000) 3907–3915.
[11] J. M. Miranda, and B.L.M. Campos, “Impinging Jets Confined by a Conical Wall
- High Schmidt Mass Transfer Predictions in Laminar Flow,” 44 (2001) 1269–
1284.
69
[12] C.F. Oduoza, “Electrochemical Mass Transfer at a Heated Electrode in a Vertical
Annular Flow Cell,” Chemical Engineering and Processing 43 (2004) 921–928.
[13] M. E. Arzutuğ, S. Yapici, and M.M. Kocakerim, “A comparison of Mass Transfer
between a Plate and Submerged Conventional and Multichannel Impinging Jets,”
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 32 (2005) 842–854.
[14] M.A. Quiroz, U.A. Martinez-Huitle, and C.A. Martinez-Huitle, “Mass Transfer
Measurement in a Parallel Disk Cell Using the Limiting Current Technique,”
Journal Mex. Chem. Soc 49 (3) (2005) 279–283.
[15] G.H. Sedahmed, M.S. Abdo, M.S. Hassan, A.H. Konsowa, “Intensification of
mass transfer controlled processes at the interface between two immiscible liquids
by an axial turbulent submerged jet,” Chemical Engineering and Processing 46
(2007) 10–16.
[16] O.N. Şara, J. Erkmen, S. Yapici, and M. Çopur, “Electrochemical Mass Transfer
between an Impinging Jet and a Rotating Disk in a Confined System,”
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 35 (2008) 289–298.
70
[17] S. K. Hong, D. H. Lee and H. H. Cho, “Heat/Mass transfer measurement on
concave surface in rotating jet impingement,” Journal of Mechanical Science and
Technology 22 (2008) 1952–1958.
[18] S. K. Hong, D.H. Lee, and H.H. Cho, “Effect of Jet Direction on Heat/Mass
Transfer of Rotating Impingement Jet,” Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009)
2914–2920.
[19] J. C. Lallave, M. M. Rahman, A. Kumar, “Numerical analysis of heat transfer on
a rotating disk surface under confined liquid jet impingement,” International
Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 28 (2007) 720–734.
[20] J. C. Lallave, and M. M. Rahman, “Heat Transfer from a Spinning Disk during
Semi–Confined Axial Impingement from a Rotating Nozzle,” International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 51 (2008) 4400–4414.
[21] E.A. Guggenheim, “The Diffusion Coefficient of Sodium Chloride,” Dept. of
Chemistry, The University, Reading 1 (1954) 1048 – 1049.
[22] A.D. Fary, Jr., “The Diffusional Properties of Sodium Hydroxide,” The Institute
of Paper Chemistry, Appleton, Wisconsin, Doctor's Dissertation, January (1966)
73 -74.
71
[23] H. Martin, “Heat and Mass Transfer between Impinging Jets and Solid Surfaces,”
Academic Press, New York, Advances in Heat Transfer 13 (1977) 1–60.
[24] C.O. Popiel, and L. Boguslawski, “Local Heat Transfer from a Rotating Disk in
an Impinging Round Jet,” Journal of Heat Transfer 108 (1986) 357–364.
[25] X.S. Wang, Z. Dagan, and L.M. Jiji, “Heat Transfer between a Circular Free
Impinging Jet and a Solid Surface with Non-uniform Wall Temperature or Wall
Heat Flux–2. Solution for the Boundary Layer Region,” International Journal
Heat Mass Transfer 32 (1989) 1361.
[26] FIDAP Theoretical Manual, Fluid Dynamics International, Inc., Evanston, IL,
(1991).
[27] D.M. Metzger, R.S. Bunker, and G. Bosch, “Transient Liquid Crystal
Measurement of Local Heat Transfer on a Rotating Disk with Jet impingement,”
Turbomachinery 113 (1991) 52–59.
[28] A. Bejan, “Convection Heat Transfer, second edition,” Wiley, New York, 1995
pp. 1–17, pp. 595–600.
72
[29] V.L. Okulovl, S. Martemianov, and T.O. Murakhtina1, “Generalization of the
Leveque Problem for Mass Transfer in Swirling Flows in the Entrance Region of
a Cylindrical Section,” Doklady Physics 47(9) (2002) 685–689. Translated from
Doklady Akademii Nauk 386 (1) (2002) 51–55.
[30] S.Z. Shuja, B.S. Yilbas, M. Rashid, “Confined Swirling Jet Impingement onto an
Adiabatic Wall,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 46 (2003)
2947–2955.
[31] P.Y. Wu and W.A. Little, “Measurement of friction factors for the flow of gases
in very fine channels used for microminiature Joule-Thomson refrigerators,”
Cryogenics 24 (1983) 273-277.
[32] J.C. Harley, Y. Huang, H.H. Bau and J.N. Zewel, “Gas flow in micro-channels,”
Journal of Fluid Mechanics 284 (1995) 257-274.
[33] K. Chen and Y. Wu, “Thermal analysis and simulation of the microchannel flow
in miniature thermal conductivity detectors,” Sensors and Actuators 79 (2000)
211-218.
[34] W. Qu, G. M. Mala and D. Lee, “Heat transfer for flow in trapezoidal silicon
microchannels,” Int. Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 21 (2000) 3925-36.
73
[35] M.M. Rahman, “Measurements of heat transfer in microchannel heat sinks,”
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 27 (1) (2000) 495-506.
[36] K.C. Toh, X.Y. Chen and J.C. Chai, “Numerical computation of fluid flow and
heat transfer in microchannels,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
45 (2002) 5133–5141.
[37] W. Qu and I. Mudawar, “Analysis of three-dimensional heat transfer in micro-
channel heat sinks,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 45 (2002)
3973–3985.
[38] H.Y. Wu and P. Cheng, “An experimental study of convective heat transfer in
silicon microchannels with different surface conditions,” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 46 (2003) 2547–2556.
[39] H.Y. Wu and P. Cheng, “Friction factors in smooth trapezoidal silicon micro-
channels with different aspect ratios,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 46 (2003) 2519-2525.
[40] J. Li, G.P. Peterson, and P. Cheng, “Three-dimensional analysis of heat transfer in
a micro-heat sink with single phase flow,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 47 (2004) 4215–4231.
74
[41] H.L. Mo, Y.X. Zhou, T.Y. Zhu and T.W. Guo, “Forced convection of low
temperature nitrogen gas in rectangular channels with small aspect ratio,”
Cryogenics 44 (2004) 301–307.
[42] W. Owhaib and B. Palm, “Experimental investigation of single-phase convective
heat transfer in circular microchannels,” Experimental Thermal and Fluid
Sciences 28 (2004) 105-110.
[43] H.Y. Wu and P. Cheng, “Boiling instability in parallel silicon microchannels at
different heat flux,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 47 (2004)
3631-3641.
[44] G.L. Morini, M. Spiga and P. Tartarinic, “The rarefaction effect on the friction
factor of gas flow in microchannels,” Superlattices and Microstructures 35 (2004)
587-599.
[45] Y. Chen and P. Cheng, “Condensation of steam in silicon microchannels,”
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 32 (2005) 175-183.
[46] P. Lee, S. V. Garimella and D. Liu, “Investigation of heat transfer in rectangular
microchannels,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 48 (2005) 1688–
1704.
75
[47] B. Cao, G. W. Chen and Q. Yuan, “Fully developed laminar flow and heat
transfer in smooth trapezoidal microchannel,” International Communications in
Heat and Mass Transfer 32 (2005) 1211–1220.
[48] G. Hetsroni, A. Mosyak, E. Pogrebnyak and L.P. Yarin, “Heat transfer in micro-
channels: Comparison of experiments with theory and numerical results,”
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 48 (2005) 5580–5601.
[49] L. Zhuo, T. Wen-Quan and H. Ya-Ling, “A numerical study of laminar
convective heat transfer in microchannel with non-circular cross-section,”
International Journal of Thermal Sciences 45 (2006) 1140–1148.
[50] Z. Li, X. Huai, Y. Tao and H. Chen, “Effects of thermal property variations on the
liquid flow and heat transfer in microchannel heat sinks,” Applied Thermal
Engineering 27 (2007) 2803–2814.
[51] A. Husain and K. Kim, “Optimization of a microchannel heat sink with
temperature dependent fluid properties,” Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008)
1101–1107.
76
[52] M. M. Rahman, A. A. Gari and S. Shevade, “Heat transfer in circular
microchannels during volumetric heating with magnetic field,” Heat Mass
Transfer 44 (2008) 463–472.
[53] J. Li and C. Kleinstreuer, “Thermal performance of nanofluids flow in
microchannels,” International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 29 (2008) 1221–
1232.
[54] K. Hooman, “Heat and fluid flow in a rectangular microchannel filled with a
porous medium,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 51 (2008)
5804–5810.
[55] M.I. Hasan, A.A. Rageb, M. Yaghoubi and H. Homayoni, “Influence of channel
geometry on the performance of a counter flow microchannel heat exchanger,”
International Journal of Thermal Sciences 48 (2009) 1607–1618.
[56] S. Hsieh and C. Lin, “Convective heat transfer in liquid microchannels with
hydrophobic and hydrophilic surfaces,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 52 (2009) 260–270.
77
[57] Y. Chen, C. Zhang, M. Shi and J. Wu, “Three-dimensional numerical simulation
of heat and fluid flow in noncircular microchannel heat sinks,” International
Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 36 (2009) 917–920.
[58] A.J. DeGregoria, L.J. Feuling, J.F. Laatsch, J.R. Rowe, J.R. Trueblood and A.A.
Wang, “Test results of an active magnetic regenerative refrigerator,” Advances in
Cryogenic Engineering 37 (1992) 875-882.
[59] C. Zimm, A. Jastrab, A. Sternberg, V. Pecharsky, K. Gschneidner, M. Osborne
and I. Anderson, “Description and performance of a near-room temperature
magnetic refrigerator,” Advances in Cryogenic Engineering 43 (1998) 1759-1766.
[60] V.K. Pecharsky and K.A. Gschneidner, “Magnetocaloric effect and magnetic
refrigeration,” Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 200 (1999) 44-56.
[61] K.K. Ambatipudi and M.M. Rahman, “Analysis of conjugate heat transfer in
microchannel sinks,” Numerical Heat Transfer 37 (A) (2000) 711-731.
[62] Hwang C.B. and Lin C.A., “A low Reynolds number two equation model to
predict thermal fields,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 42 (2000)
3217-3230.
78
[63] M.N. Ozisik, “Heat Conduction”, 2nd
edition, Wiley (1993) 403-420.
[64] A. Bejan, “Convection Heat Transfer”, 2nd
edition, Interscience (1994) 797-857.
80
Appendix A: FIDAP Code for Analysis of Mass Transfer by Jet Impingement
TITLE( )
JET IMPINGMENT ON ROTATING DISK R1550/W13.09/FLUX
FI-GEN( ELEM = 1, POIN = 1, CURV = 1, SURF = 1, NODE = 0, MEDG = 1,
MLOO = 1,
MFAC = 1, BEDG = 1, SPAV = 1, MSHE = 1, MSOL = 1, COOR = 1, TOLE =
0.0001 )
WINDOW(CHANGE= 1, MATRIX )
1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000
0.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000
0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000
-10.00000 10.00000 -7.50000 7.50000 -7.50000
7.50000
//ADD POINTS
//POINTS 1,2,3,4,5,6
POINT( ADD, COOR )
0, 0
-0.01, 0
-0.16, 0
-0.16, 0.075
-0.16, 1.5
-0.16, 1.85
-0.01, 1.85
0, 1.85
0, 1.5
0, 0.075
-0.01, 0.075
-0.01, 1.5
-0.01, 1.5
//CONNECT POINTS WITH LINES
//LINES 1,2,3,4,5,6
POINT( SELE, ID )
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
POINT( SELE, ID )
2
11
12
7
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
POINT( SELE, ID )
12
81
Appendix A: (Continued)
9
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
//USE CORNER POINTS TO MAKE SURFACE
//
POINT( SELE, ID = 1 )
POINT( SELE, ID = 3 )
POINT( SELE, ID = 8 )
POINT( SELE, ID = 6 )
SURFACE( ADD, POIN, ROWW = 2, NOAD )
//CREATE MESH EDGES
//CREATE MESH EDGES
//MEDGE 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
CURVE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 10, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 2 )
MEDGE( ADD, LSTF, INTE = 20, RATI = 4, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 3 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 30, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 4 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 460, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 5 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 10, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 6 )
MEDGE( ADD, FRST, INTE = 20, RATI = 4, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 7 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 10, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 8 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 10, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 9 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 460, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 10 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 30, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 11 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 30, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 12 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 460, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 13 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 10, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 14 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 10, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
//MAKE A LOOP OUT THE LINES
//LOOP 1
CURVE( SELE, ID )
1
11
12
14
9
10
MLOOP( ADD, MAP, VISI, NOSH, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 2, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 2 )
//LOOP 2
CURVE( SELE, ID )
82
Appendix A: (Continued)
14
13
7
8
MLOOP( ADD, MAP, VISI, NOSH, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 1, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 1 )
//LOOP 3
CURVE( SELE, ID )
2
3
4
5
6
13
12
11
MLOOP( ADD, MAP, VISI, NOSH, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
//ADD A FACE
//FACE 1
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 1 )
MFACE( ADD )
//FACE 2
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 2 )
MFACE( ADD )
//FACE 3
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 3 )
MFACE( ADD )
//ADD MESH
//MESH 1
MFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
ELEMENT( SETD, QUAD, NODE = 4 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, NOSM, ENTI = "nickel" )
//MESH 2
MFACE( SELE, ID = 2 )
ELEMENT( SETD, QUAD, NODE = 4 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, NOSM, ENTI = "water" )
//MESH 3
MFACE( SELE, ID = 3 )
ELEMENT( SETD, QUAD, NODE = 4 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, NOSM, ENTI = "water" )
//MESH MAP ELEMENT ID
//
ELEMENT( SETD, EDGE, NODE = 2 )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "outside" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 2 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "axis" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 3 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "inflow" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 4 )
83
Appendix A: (Continued)
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 5 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "stationary disk" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 6 )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 7 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "wall" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 8 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "outflow" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 9 )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 10 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "bottom" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 11 )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 12 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "interface" )
END( )
FIPREP( )
//FLUID AND SOLID PROPERTIES
//PROPERTIES OF FLUID @ 25 deg Celcius
DENSITY( ADD, SET = "water", CONS = 1.085 )
CONDUCTIVITY( ADD, SET = "water", CONS = 0.001434034 )
VISCOSITY( ADD, SET = "water", CONS = 0.013832 )
SPECIFICHEAT( ADD, SET = "water", CONS = 0.999521 )
SURFACETENSION( ADD, SET = "water", CONS = 72 )
//PROPERTIES OF SOLID
DENSITY( ADD, SET = "nickel", CONS = 8.88 )
CONDUCTIVITY( ADD, SET = "nickel", CONS = 0.144979459 )
SPECIFICHEAT( ADD, SET = "nickel", CONS = 0.109869112 )
//DEFININING ENTITIES
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "outside", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "axis", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "inflow", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "stationary disk", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "wall", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "outflow", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "bottom", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "interface", ESPE = 1, ATTA = "water", NATT =
"nickel" )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "water", FLUI )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "nickel", SOLI )
//VELOCITY BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
BCNODE( ADD, URC, ENTI = "axis", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, URC, ENTI = "inflow", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, UZC, ENTI = "inflow", CONS = 127.48 )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ZERO, ENTI = "stationary disk" )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ZERO, ENTI = "wall" )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ZERO, ENTI = "bottom" )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ZERO, ENTI = "interface" )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ZERO, ENTI = "outside" )
/DETERMINES THE CONCENTRATION OF THE ELECTROLYTE AT THE INFLOW
BCNODE( SPEC = 1, CONS = 0.07734, ENTI = "inflow" )
//THERMAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
BCNODE( ADD, TEMP, CONS = 20, ENTI = "inflow" )
/BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, CONS = 2.9855, ENTI = "bottom" )
84
Appendix A: (Continued)
//MASS FLUX
BCFLUX( ADD, SPEC = 1, ENTI = "interface", CONS = 0.0001624 )
//THIS BOUNDARY CONDITION IS EQUIVALENT TO 1436 RPM
BCNODE( UTHE, POLY = 1, ENTI = "nickel" )
0, 13.09, 0, 1, 0
BODYFORCE( ADD, CONS, FX = 981, FY = 0, FZ = 0 )
PRESSURE( ADD, MIXE = 1e-11, DISC )
DATAPRINT( ADD, CONT )
EXECUTION( ADD, NEWJ ) PRINTOUT( ADD, NONE, BOUN )
OPTIONS( ADD, UPWI )
UPWINDING( ADD, STRE )
PROBLEM( ADD, CYLI, INCO, TRAN, LAMI, NONL, NEWT, MOME, ISOT, FIXE,
SING,
SPEC = 1 )
/PROBLEM( ADD, CYLI, INCO, TRAN, LAMI, NONL, NEWT, MOME, ENERGY, FIXE,
SING, SPECIES = 1 )
SOLUTION( ADD, N.R. = 50, KINE = 20, VELC = 0.0001, RESC = 0.0001 )
TIMEINTEGRATION( ADD, BACK, NSTE = 301, TSTA = 0, DT = 1e-05, VARI,
WIND = 1,
NOFI = 10 )
POSTPROCESS( NBLO = 2 )
1, 95, 47
95, 301, 1
CLIPPING( ADD, MINI )
0, 0, 0, 0, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0.07734
ICNODE( ADD, URC, ENTI = "water", CONS = 10 )
ICNODE( ADD, UTHE, ENTI = "water", CONS = 5 )
//ADDED FOR MASS TRANSFER AND DIFFUSION COEFFICIENTS RESPECTIVELY
//SPTRANSFER( ADD, SET = 1, CONSTANT = 0.0000002029, POWER=1.0,
TEMPERATURE )
DIFFUSIVITY( SET = 1, CONS = 5.508e-06, ISOT, TEMP )
CAPACITY( CONS = 1 )
END( )
CREATE( FISO )
RUN( FISOLV, BACK, AT = "", TIME = "NOW", COMP )
/ File closed at Fri Aug 7 18:01:35 2009.
/ File opened for append Fri Aug 7 18:48:23 2009.
FIPOST( )
TIMESTEP( STEP = -1 )
TIMESTEP( STEP = 95 )
LINE( SPEC = 1, ENTI = "interface" )
END( )
END( )
FIPOST( )
DEVICE( POST, FILE = "MESHPLOT" )
MESH( )
END( )
END( )
FIPOST( )
DEVICE( POST, FILE = "VECTPLOT" )
VECTOR( VELO, FACT = 50 )
85
Appendix A: (Continued)
END( )
END( )
/ File closed at Sun Aug 23 19:15:27 2009.
/ File opened for append Mon Aug 24 01:39:20 2009.
FIPOST( )
DEVICE( POST, FILE = "VECT3PLOT" )
VECTOR( VELO, FACT = 50 ) END( )
FIPOST( )
DEVICE( POST, FILE = "STRM3PLOT" )
CONTOUR( STRE, AUTO = 40 )
END( )
86
Appendix B: FIDAP Code for Fluid Flow and Heat Transfer in a Composite
Trapezoidal Microchannel
TITLE( )
MICROCHANNEL
FI-GEN( ELEM = 1, POIN = 1, CURV = 1, SURF = 1, NODE = 0, MEDG = 1,
MLOO = 1,
MFAC = 1, BEDG = 1, SPAV = 1, MSHE = 1, MSOL = 1, COOR = 1, TOLE =
0.0001 )
WINDOW(CHANGE= 1, MATRIX )
1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000
0.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000
0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000
-10.00000 10.00000 -7.50000 7.50000 -7.50000
7.50000
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
/ COORDINATES FOR POINTS
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
POINT( ADD, COOR )
0, 0, 0
0.305, 0, 0
0.305, 0.01, 0
0.305, 0.025, 0
0.305, 0.525, 0
0, 0.525, 0
0, 0.025, 0
0, 0.01, 0
0.3006, 0.01, 0
0.29, 0.025, 0
0, 0.01, 2.3
0.305, 0.025, 2.3
0, 0, 0.5
0.305, 0, 0.5
0.305, 0.01, 0.5
0.305, 0.025, 0.5
0.305, 0.525, 0.5
0, 0.525, 0.5
0, 0.025, 0.5
0, 0.01, 0.5
0.3006, 0.01, 0.5
0.29, 0.025, 0.5
0, 0, 1
0.305, 0, 1
0.305, 0.01, 1
0.305, 0.025, 1
0.305, 0.525, 1
0, 0.525, 1
0, 0.025, 1
0, 0.01, 1
0.3006, 0.01, 1
0.29, 0.025, 1
0, 0, 1.5
0.305, 0, 1.5
87
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.305, 0.01, 1.5
0.305, 0.025, 1.5
0.305, 0.525, 1.5
0, 0.525, 1.5
0, 0.025, 1.5
0, 0.01, 1.5
0.3006, 0.01, 1.5
0.29, 0.025, 1.5
0, 0, 2
0.305, 0, 2
0.305, 0.01, 2
0.305, 0.025, 2
0.305, 0.525, 2
0, 0.525, 2
0, 0.025, 2
0, 0.01, 2
0.3006, 0.01, 2
0.29, 0.025, 2
0, 0, 2.3
0.305, 0, 2.3
0.305, 0.01, 2.3
0.305, 0.025, 2.3
0.305, 0.525, 2.3
0, 0.525, 2.3
0, 0.025, 2.3
0, 0.01, 2.3
0.3006, 0.01, 2.3
0.29, 0.025, 2.3
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
/ CONNECTING POINTS WITH LINES
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
//PART ONE
/LINES 1 - 8
POINT( SELE, ID )
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 9
POINT( SELE, ID )
9
3
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 10 - 11
POINT( SELE, ID )
7
88
Appendix B: (Continued)
10
4
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 12
POINT( SELE, ID )
9
10
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 13
POINT( SELE, ID )
8
9
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 14
POINT( SELE, ID )
8
11
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 15
POINT( SELE, ID )
4
12
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
//PART TWO
/LINES 16 - 23
POINT( SELE, ID )
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
13
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 24
POINT( SELE, ID )
21
15
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 25 - 26
POINT( SELE, ID )
19
22
16
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 27
POINT( SELE, ID )
21
22
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
89
Appendix B: (Continued)
/LINES 28
POINT( SELE, ID )
20
21
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
//PART THREE
/LINES 29 - 36
POINT( SELE, ID )
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
23
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 37
POINT( SELE, ID )
31
25
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 38 - 39
POINT( SELE, ID )
29
32
26
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 40
POINT( SELE, ID )
31
32
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 41
POINT( SELE, ID )
30
31
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
//PART FOUR
/LINES 42 - 49
POINT( SELE, ID )
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
33
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
90
Appendix B: (Continued)
/LINES 50
POINT( SELE, ID )
41
35
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 51
POINT( SELE, ID )
39
42
36
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 53
POINT( SELE, ID )
41
42
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 54
POINT( SELE, ID )
40
41
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
//PART FIVE
/LINES 55 - 62
POINT( SELE, ID )
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
43
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 63
POINT( SELE, ID )
51
45
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 64
POINT( SELE, ID )
49
52
46
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 66
POINT( SELE, ID )
51
52
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 67
POINT( SELE, ID )
91
Appendix B: (Continued)
50
51
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
//PART SIX
/LINES 68 - 75
POINT( SELE, ID )
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
53
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 76
POINT( SELE, ID )
61
55
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 77
POINT( SELE, ID )
59
62
56
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 79
POINT( SELE, ID )
61
62
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
/LINES 80
POINT( SELE, ID )
60
61
CURVE( ADD, LINE )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/
//CREATING SURFACES
CURVE( SELE, ID )
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
SURFACE( ADD, WIRE, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
CURVE( SELE, ID )
16
92
Appendix B: (Continued)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
SURFACE( ADD, WIRE, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
CURVE( SELE, ID )
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
SURFACE( ADD, WIRE, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
CURVE( SELE, ID )
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
SURFACE( ADD, WIRE, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
CURVE( SELE, ID )
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
SURFACE( ADD, WIRE, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
CURVE( SELE, ID )
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
SURFACE( ADD, WIRE, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 3, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 3 )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///
//CREATING MESH EDGES
CURVE( SELE, ID = 1 )
93
Appendix B: (Continued)
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 18, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 2 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 6, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 3 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 8, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 4 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 4, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 5 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 18, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 6 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 4, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 7 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 8, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 8 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 6, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 9 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 9, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 10 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 9, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 11 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 9, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 12 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 8, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 13 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 9, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 14 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 90, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 15 )
MEDGE( ADD, SUCC, INTE = 90, RATI = 0, 2RAT = 0, PCEN = 0 )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////
//CREATING LOOPS
/LOOP 1
CURVE( SELE, ID )
1
2
9
13
8
MLOOP( ADD, MAP, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 1, EDG3 = 2, EDG4 = 1 )
/LOOP 2
CURVE( SELE, ID )
12
13
7
10
MLOOP( ADD, MAP )
/LOOP 3
CURVE( SELE, ID )
12
11
3
94
Appendix B: (Continued)
9
MLOOP( ADD, MAP )
/LOOP 4
CURVE( SELE, ID )
4
5
6
10
11
MLOOP( ADD, MAP, EDG1 = 1, EDG2 = 1, EDG3 = 1, EDG4 = 2 )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//////
//CREATING FACE FOR MESH
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 1 )
MFACE( ADD )
//CREATING FACE FOR MESH
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 2 )
MFACE( ADD )
//CREATING FACE FOR MESH
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 3 )
MFACE( ADD )
//CREATING FACE FOR MESH
SURFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
MLOOP( SELE, ID = 4 )
MFACE( ADD )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////
//CREATING SOLID FOR THE MESH
MFACE( SELE, ID = 1 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 14 )
MSOLID( PROJ )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 2 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 14 )
MSOLID( PROJ )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 3 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 15 )
MSOLID( PROJ )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 4 )
CURVE( SELE, ID = 15 )
MSOLID( PROJ )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////
//CREATION OF THE MESH AND ASSIGNING CONTINUOUS ENTITIES
MSOLID( SELE, ID = 1 )
ELEMENT( SETD, BRIC, NODE = 8 )
MSOLID( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "SILICON" )
MSOLID( SELE, ID = 2 )
ELEMENT( SETD, BRIC, NODE = 8 )
MSOLID( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "SILICON" )
95
Appendix B: (Continued)
MSOLID( SELE, ID = 3 )
ELEMENT( SETD, BRIC, NODE = 8 )
MSOLID( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "FLUID" )
MSOLID( SELE, ID = 4 )
ELEMENT( SETD, BRIC, NODE = 8 )
MSOLID( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "GADOLINIUM" )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////
//ASSIGNING ENTITIES TO VARIOUS BOUNDARIES
MFACE( SELE, ID = 3 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Fin" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 15 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Fout" )
/MFACE( SELE, ID = 12 )
/MFACE( SELE, ID = 17 )
/MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "HF" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 8 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Fbot" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 17 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Ftop" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 16 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Faxis" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 14 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Fleft" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 6 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Sbot" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 7 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Saxis" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 19 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Gaxis" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 20 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Gtop" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 21 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Gleft" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 13 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Sleft1" )
MFACE( SELE, ID = 10 )
MFACE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "Sleft2" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 23 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "RTedge" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 22 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "RBedge" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 24 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "LTedge" )
MEDGE( SELE, ID = 21 )
MEDGE( MESH, MAP, ENTI = "LBedge" )
END( )
FIPREP( )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////
//PROPERTY OF SILICON
CONDUCTIVITY( ADD, SET = "SILICON", CONS = 0.29637, ISOT )
96
Appendix B: (Continued)
DENSITY( ADD, SET = "SILICON", CONS = 2.329 )
SPECIFICHEAT( ADD, SET = "SILICON", CONS = 0.16778 )
//PROPERTY OF FLUID
CONDUCTIVITY( ADD, SET = "FLUID", CONS = 0.0014435, ISOT )
DENSITY( ADD, SET = "FLUID", CONS = 0.9974 )
SPECIFICHEAT( ADD, SET = "FLUID", CONS = 0.9988 )
VISCOSITY( ADD, SET = "FLUID", CONS = 0.0098 )
//PROPERTY OF GADOLINIUM
CONDUCTIVITY( ADD, SET = "GADOLINIUM", CONS = 0.0250956, ISOT )
DENSITY( ADD, SET = "GADOLINIUM", CONS = 7.895 )
SPECIFICHEAT( ADD, SET = "GADOLINIUM", CONS = 0.054971 )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////
//DEFINING ENTITIES
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "SILICON", SOLI )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "GADOLINIUM", SOLI )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "FLUID", FLUI )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Fin", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Fout", PLOT )
/ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "HF", PLOT, ATTA = "FLUID", NATTA = "GADOLINIUM" )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Fbot", PLOT, ATTA = "FLUID", NATT = "SILICON" )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Ftop", PLOT, ATTA = "FLUID", NATT = "GADOLINIUM" )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Faxis", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Fleft", PLOT, ATTA = "FLUID", NATT = "SILICON" )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Sbot", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Saxis", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Gaxis", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Gtop", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Gleft", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Sleft1", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "Sleft2", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "RTedge", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "RBedge", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "LTedge", PLOT )
ENTITY( ADD, NAME = "LBedge", PLOT )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////
//INITIAL AND BOUNDARY CONDITION
BCNODE( ADD, UX, ENTI = "Fin", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, UY, ENTI = "Fin", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, UZ, ENTI = "Fin", CONS = 1425.34 )
BCNODE( ADD, TEMP, ENTI = "Fin", CONS = 20 )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ENTI = "Fbot", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ENTI = "Ftop", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, VELO, ENTI = "Fleft", ZERO )
BCNODE( ADD, UX, ENTI = "Faxis", ZERO )
/BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "HF", CONS = 14.49 )
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Sbot", CONS = 0 )
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Saxis", CONS = 0 )
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Gaxis", CONS = 0 )
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Gtop", CONS = 0 )
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Gleft", CONS = 0 )
97
Appendix B: (Continued)
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Sleft1", CONS = 0 )
BCFLUX( ADD, HEAT, ENTI = "Sleft2", CONS = 0 )
SOURCE( ADD, HEAT, CONS = 6.080715996, ENTI = "GADOLINIUM" )
ICNODE( ADD, TEMP, CONS = 20, ENTI = "SILICON" )
ICNODE( ADD, TEMP, CONS = 20, ENTI = "GADOLINIUM" )
ICNODE( ADD, TEMP, CONS = 20, ENTI = "FLUID" )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
//IF THE FLOW IT TURBULENT AND K-E MODEL IS USED, ADD THE FOLLOWING
//LINES OF CODES
/VISCOSITY( ADD, SET = "FLUID", TWO-, CONS = 0.0098 )
/ICNODE( KINE, CONS = 0.003, ALL )
/ICNODE( DISS, CONS = 0.00045, ALL )
/BCNODE( KINE, CONS = 0.001, ENTI = "Fin" )
/BCNODE( DISS, CONS = 0.00045, ENTI = "Fin" )
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////
//EXECUTION COMMANDS
DATAPRINT( ADD, CONT )
EXECUTION( ADD, NEWJ )
PRINTOUT( ADD, NONE, BOUN )
PROBLEM( ADD, 3-D, INCO, STEA, LAMI, NONL, NEWT, MOME, ENER, FIXE, SING
)
SOLUTION( ADD, SEGR = 10, PREC = 21, ACCF = 0, PPRO )
END( )
CREATE( FISO )
RUN( FISOLV, BACK, AT = "", TIME = "NOW", COMP )
END( )
FIPOST( )
PRINT( PRES, POIN, FILE = "comb.txt", SCRE )
324
0.3006, 0.01, 0
0.301088889, 0.01, 0
0.301577778, 0.01, 0
0.302066667, 0.01, 0
0.302555556, 0.01, 0
0.303044444, 0.01, 0
0.303533333, 0.01, 0
0.304022222, 0.01, 0
0.304511111, 0.01, 0
0.305, 0.01, 0
0.305, 0.025, 0
0.303333333, 0.025, 0
0.301666667, 0.025, 0
0.3, 0.025, 0
0.298333333, 0.025, 0
0.296666667, 0.025, 0
0.295, 0.025, 0
0.293333333, 0.025, 0
0.291666667, 0.025, 0
0.29, 0.025, 0
98
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.291326715, 0.023126213, 0
0.29265343, 0.021252426, 0
0.293980145, 0.019378639, 0
0.29530686, 0.017504853, 0
0.296633575, 0.015631066, 0
0.29796029, 0.013757279, 0
0.299287005, 0.011883492, 0
0.3006, 0.01, 0.5
0.301088889, 0.01, 0.5
0.301577778, 0.01, 0.5
0.302066667, 0.01, 0.5
0.302555556, 0.01, 0.5
0.303044444, 0.01, 0.5
0.303533333, 0.01, 0.5
0.304022222, 0.01, 0.5
0.304511111, 0.01, 0.5
0.305, 0.01, 0.5
0.305, 0.025, 0.5
0.303333333, 0.025, 0.5
0.301666667, 0.025, 0.5
0.3, 0.025, 0.5
0.298333333, 0.025, 0.5
0.296666667, 0.025, 0.5
0.295, 0.025, 0.5
0.293333333, 0.025, 0.5
0.291666667, 0.025, 0.5
0.29, 0.025, 0.5
0.291326715, 0.023126213, 0.5
0.29265343, 0.021252426, 0.5
0.293980145, 0.019378639, 0.5
0.29530686, 0.017504853, 0.5
0.296633575, 0.015631066, 0.5
0.29796029, 0.013757279, 0.5
0.299287005, 0.011883492, 0.5
0.3006, 0.01, 1
0.301088889, 0.01, 1
0.301577778, 0.01, 1
0.302066667, 0.01, 1
0.302555556, 0.01, 1
0.303044444, 0.01, 1
0.303533333, 0.01, 1
0.304022222, 0.01, 1
0.304511111, 0.01, 1
0.305, 0.01, 1
0.305, 0.025, 1
0.303333333, 0.025, 1
0.301666667, 0.025, 1
0.3, 0.025, 1
0.298333333, 0.025, 1
0.296666667, 0.025, 1
0.295, 0.025, 1
0.293333333, 0.025, 1
99
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.291666667, 0.025, 1
0.29, 0.025, 1
0.291326715, 0.023126213, 1
0.29265343, 0.021252426, 1
0.293980145, 0.019378639, 1
0.29530686, 0.017504853, 1
0.296633575, 0.015631066, 1
0.29796029, 0.013757279, 1
0.299287005, 0.011883492, 1
0.3006, 0.01, 1.5
0.301088889, 0.01, 1.5
0.301577778, 0.01, 1.5
0.302066667, 0.01, 1.5
0.302555556, 0.01, 1.5
0.303044444, 0.01, 1.5
0.303533333, 0.01, 1.5
0.304022222, 0.01, 1.5
0.304511111, 0.01, 1.5
0.305, 0.01, 1.5
0.305, 0.025, 1.5
0.303333333, 0.025, 1.5
0.301666667, 0.025, 1.5
0.3, 0.025, 1.5
0.298333333, 0.025, 1.5
0.296666667, 0.025, 1.5
0.295, 0.025, 1.5
0.293333333, 0.025, 1.5
0.291666667, 0.025, 1.5
0.29, 0.025, 1.5
0.291326715, 0.023126213, 1.5
0.29265343, 0.021252426, 1.5
0.293980145, 0.019378639, 1.5
0.29530686, 0.017504853, 1.5
0.296633575, 0.015631066, 1.5
0.29796029, 0.013757279, 1.5
0.299287005, 0.011883492, 1.5
0.3006, 0.01, 2
0.301088889, 0.01, 2
0.301577778, 0.01, 2
0.302066667, 0.01, 2
0.302555556, 0.01, 2
0.303044444, 0.01, 2
0.303533333, 0.01, 2
0.304022222, 0.01, 2
0.304511111, 0.01, 2
0.305, 0.01, 2
0.305, 0.025, 2
0.303333333, 0.025, 2
0.301666667, 0.025, 2
0.3, 0.025, 2
0.298333333, 0.025, 2
0.296666667, 0.025, 2
100
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.295, 0.025, 2
0.293333333, 0.025, 2
0.291666667, 0.025, 2
0.29, 0.025, 2
0.291326715, 0.023126213, 2
0.29265343, 0.021252426, 2
0.293980145, 0.019378639, 2
0.29530686, 0.017504853, 2
0.296633575, 0.015631066, 2
0.29796029, 0.013757279, 2
0.299287005, 0.011883492, 2
0.3006, 0.01, 2.3
0.301088889, 0.01, 2.3
0.301577778, 0.01, 2.3
0.302066667, 0.01, 2.3
0.302555556, 0.01, 2.3
0.303044444, 0.01, 2.3
0.303533333, 0.01, 2.3
0.304022222, 0.01, 2.3
0.304511111, 0.01, 2.3
0.305, 0.01, 2.3
0.305, 0.025, 2.3
0.303333333, 0.025, 2.3
0.301666667, 0.025, 2.3
0.3, 0.025, 2.3
0.298333333, 0.025, 2.3
0.296666667, 0.025, 2.3
0.295, 0.025, 2.3
0.293333333, 0.025, 2.3
0.291666667, 0.025, 2.3
0.29, 0.025, 2.3
0.291326715, 0.023126213, 2.3
0.29265343, 0.021252426, 2.3
0.293980145, 0.019378639, 2.3
0.29530686, 0.017504853, 2.3
0.296633575, 0.015631066, 2.3
0.29796029, 0.013757279, 2.3
0.299287005, 0.011883492, 2.3
0.3006, 0.008333333, 0
0.301088889, 0.008333333, 0
0.301577778, 0.008333333, 0
0.302066667, 0.008333333, 0
0.302555556, 0.008333333, 0
0.303044444, 0.008333333, 0
0.303533333, 0.008333333, 0
0.304022222, 0.008333333, 0
0.304511111, 0.008333333, 0
0.305, 0.008333333, 0
0.305, 0.15, 0
0.303333333, 0.15, 0
0.301666667, 0.15, 0
0.3, 0.15, 0
101
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.298333333, 0.15, 0
0.296666667, 0.15, 0
0.295, 0.15, 0
0.293333333, 0.15, 0
0.291666667, 0.15, 0
0.257777778, 0.025, 0
0.259104493, 0.023126213, 0
0.260431208, 0.021252426, 0
0.261757923, 0.019378639, 0
0.263084638, 0.017504853, 0
0.264411353, 0.015631066, 0
0.265738068, 0.013757279, 0
0.267064783, 0.011883492, 0
0.3006, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.301088889, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.301577778, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.302066667, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.302555556, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.303044444, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.303533333, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.304022222, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.304511111, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.305, 0.008333333, 0.5
0.305, 0.15, 0.5
0.303333333, 0.15, 0.5
0.301666667, 0.15, 0.5
0.3, 0.15, 0.5
0.298333333, 0.15, 0.5
0.296666667, 0.15, 0.5
0.295, 0.15, 0.5
0.293333333, 0.15, 0.5
0.291666667, 0.15, 0.5
0.257777778, 0.025, 0.5
0.259104493, 0.023126213, 0.5
0.260431208, 0.021252426, 0.5
0.261757923, 0.019378639, 0.5
0.263084638, 0.017504853, 0.5
0.264411353, 0.015631066, 0.5
0.265738068, 0.013757279, 0.5
0.267064783, 0.011883492, 0.5
0.3006, 0.008333333, 1
0.301088889, 0.008333333, 1
0.301577778, 0.008333333, 1
0.302066667, 0.008333333, 1
0.302555556, 0.008333333, 1
0.303044444, 0.008333333, 1
0.303533333, 0.008333333, 1
0.304022222, 0.008333333, 1
0.304511111, 0.008333333, 1
0.305, 0.008333333, 1
0.305, 0.15, 1
0.303333333, 0.15, 1
102
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.301666667, 0.15, 1
0.3, 0.15, 1
0.298333333, 0.15, 1
0.296666667, 0.15, 1
0.295, 0.15, 1
0.293333333, 0.15, 1
0.291666667, 0.15, 1
0.257777778, 0.025, 1
0.259104493, 0.023126213, 1
0.260431208, 0.021252426, 1
0.261757923, 0.019378639, 1
0.263084638, 0.017504853, 1
0.264411353, 0.015631066, 1
0.265738068, 0.013757279, 1
0.267064783, 0.011883492, 1
0.3006, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.301088889, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.301577778, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.302066667, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.302555556, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.303044444, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.303533333, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.304022222, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.304511111, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.305, 0.008333333, 1.5
0.305, 0.15, 1.5
0.303333333, 0.15, 1.5
0.301666667, 0.15, 1.5
0.3, 0.15, 1.5
0.298333333, 0.15, 1.5
0.296666667, 0.15, 1.5
0.295, 0.15, 1.5
0.293333333, 0.15, 1.5
0.291666667, 0.15, 1.5
0.257777778, 0.025, 1.5
0.259104493, 0.023126213, 1.5
0.260431208, 0.021252426, 1.5
0.261757923, 0.019378639, 1.5
0.263084638, 0.017504853, 1.5
0.264411353, 0.015631066, 1.5
0.265738068, 0.013757279, 1.5
0.267064783, 0.011883492, 1.5
0.3006, 0.008333333, 2
0.301088889, 0.008333333, 2
0.301577778, 0.008333333, 2
0.302066667, 0.008333333, 2
0.302555556, 0.008333333, 2
0.303044444, 0.008333333, 2
0.303533333, 0.008333333, 2
0.304022222, 0.008333333, 2
0.304511111, 0.008333333, 2
0.305, 0.008333333, 2
103
Appendix B: (Continued)
0.305, 0.15, 2
0.303333333, 0.15, 2
0.301666667, 0.15, 2
0.3, 0.15, 2
0.298333333, 0.15, 2
0.296666667, 0.15, 2
0.295, 0.15, 2
0.293333333, 0.15, 2
0.291666667, 0.15, 2
0.257777778, 0.025, 2
0.259104493, 0.023126213, 2
0.260431208, 0.021252426, 2
0.261757923, 0.019378639, 2
0.263084638, 0.017504853, 2
0.264411353, 0.015631066, 2
0.265738068, 0.013757279, 2
0.267064783, 0.011883492, 2
0.3006, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.301088889, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.301577778, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.302066667, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.302555556, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.303044444, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.303533333, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.304022222, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.304511111, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.305, 0.008333333, 2.3
0.305, 0.15, 2.3
0.303333333, 0.15, 2.3
0.301666667, 0.15, 2.3
0.3, 0.15, 2.3
0.298333333, 0.15, 2.3
0.296666667, 0.15, 2.3
0.295, 0.15, 2.3
0.293333333, 0.15, 2.3
0.291666667, 0.15, 2.3
0.257777778, 0.025, 2.3
0.259104493, 0.023126213, 2.3
0.260431208, 0.021252426, 2.3
0.261757923, 0.019378639, 2.3
0.263084638, 0.017504853, 2.3
0.264411353, 0.015631066, 2.3
0.265738068, 0.013757279, 2.3
0.267064783, 0.011883492, 2.3
END( )
FIPOST( )
WINDOW( CHAN = 0, FRON )
CONTOUR( UX, AUTO = 50 )
CONTOUR( TEMP, AUTO = 50 )
CONTOUR( TEMP, AUTO = 25 )
CONTOUR( TEMP, AUTO = 10 )
CONTOUR( TEMP, AUTO = 15 )