Library Subscription: Guest

ISSN Online: 2379-1748

7th Thermal and Fluids Engineering Conference (TFEC)
SJR: 0.152 SNIP: 0.14 CiteScore™:: 0.5

Indexed in

Clarivate CPCI (Proceedings) Scopus
May, 15-18, 2022 , Las Vegas, NV, USA

A NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF SWEEPING AIR JET IMPINGEMENT COOLING FROM A FLUIDIC OSCILLATOR

Get access (open in a dialog) pages 97-113
DOI: 10.1615/TFEC2022.aer.041320

Abstract

Utilizing sweeping jet fluidic oscillators is becoming more popular as a promising candidate in heat transfer enhancement applications such as in gas turbine cooling, electronic component cooling, materials drying, heat exchanger efficiency augmentation, etc. This is due to their unique advantages of having no moving parts, large lateral jet spreading, a wide range of oscillation frequencies, easiness of manufacture, long lifetimes, and being functional for both water and gases as working fluids. This paper presents a 2D numerical analysis to investigate the fluid flow behavior and cooling characteristics caused by an air sweeping jet ejected from a fluidic oscillator. An unsteady Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes (URANS) simulation accompanied with the k-ω SST turbulence model is used in this study. The study has been conducted for a target wall with a constant heat flux of 3,000 W/m2, jet-to-wall distance of 4, and a jet Reynolds number of 2,500. The difference between confined and unconfined air impingement cooling schemes has been investigated. In addition, the conventional approach for the purpose of significantly reducing computational time by using a confined domain with a slip upper wall instead of an unconfined domain is evaluated. The results show that the overall average cooling performance of the sweeping jet is better in the confined impingement scheme compared to that of the steady jet, while the steady jet is slightly better in the unconfined sweeping impingement scheme. Using a confined scheme with a slip upper wall does not reveal the complete thermal and flow behaviors, and the wall heat transfer distribution is very different from the unconfined domain.