Single-phase fluid flow distribution and heat transfer in microstructured reactors

Single-phase microreactors and micro-heat-exchangers have been widely used in industrial and scientific applications over the last decade. In several cases, operation of microreactors has shown that their expected efficiency cannot be reached either due to non-uniform distribution of reactants between different channels or due to flow maldistribution between individual microreactors working in parallel. The latter problem can result in substantial temperature deviations between different microreactors resulting in thermal run away which could arise from an exothermicreaction. Thus advances in the understanding of heat transfer and fluid flow distribution continue to be crucial in achieving improved performance, efficiency and safety in microstructured reactors used for different applications. This paper presents a review of the experimental and numerical results on fluid flow distribution, heat transfer and combination thereof, available in the open literature. Heat transfer in microchannels can be suitably described by standard theory and correlations, but scaling effects (entrance effects, conjugate heat transfer, viscous heating, and temperature-dependent properties) have often to be accounted for in microsystems. Experiments with single channels are in good agreement with predictions from the published correlations. The accuracy of multichannel experiments is lower due to flow maldistribution. Special attention is devoted to theoretical and experimental studies on the effect of a flow maldistribution on the thermal and conversion response of catalytic microreactors. There view concludes with a set of design recommendations aimed at improving the reactor performance. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Effect of Turbine Inlet Temperature on Rotor Blade Tip Leakage Flow and Heat Transfer

One of the most critical gas turbine engine components, the rotor blade tip and casing, is exposed to high thermal load. It becomes a significant design challenge to protect the turbine materials from this severe situation. The purpose of this paper is to study numerically the effect of turbine inlet temperature on the tip leakage flow structure and heat transfer. In this paper, the effect of turbine inlet temperature on the tip leakage flow structure and heat transfer has been studied numerically. Uniform low (LTIT: 444 K) and high (HTIT: 800 K) turbine inlet temperature, as well as non-uniform inlet temperature have been considered. The results showed the higher turbine inlet temperature yields the higher velocity and temperature variations in the leakage flow aerodynamics and heat transfer. For a given turbine geometry and on-design operating conditions, the turbine power output can be increased by 1.33 times, when the turbine inlet temperature increases 1.80 times. Whereas the averaged heat fluxes on the casing and the blade tip become 2.71 and 2.82 times larger, respectively. Therefore, about 2.8 times larger cooling capacity is required to keep the same turbine material temperature. Furthermore, the maximum heat flux on the blade tip of high turbine inlet temperature case reaches up to 3.348 times larger than that of LTIT case. The effect of the interaction of stator and rotor on heat transfer features is also explored using unsteady simulations. The non-uniform turbine inlet temperature enhances the heat flux fluctuation on the blade tip and casing.

A note on the prediction of liquid hold-up with the stratified roll wave regime for gas/liquidco-current flow in horizontal pipes.

This note presents a simple model for prediction of liquid hold-up in two-phase horizontal pipe flow for the stratified roll wave (St+RW) flow regime. Liquid hold-up data for horizontal two-phase pipe flow [1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6] exhibit a steady increase with liquid velocity and a more dramatic fall with increasing gas rate as shown by Hand et al. [7 and 8] for example. In addition the liquid hold-up is reported to show an additional variation with pipe diameter. Generally, if the initial liquid rate for the no-gas flow condition gives a liquid height below the pipe centre line, the flow patterns pass successively through the stratified (St), stratified ripple (St+R), stratified roll wave, film plus droplet (F+D) and finally the annular (A+D, A+RW, A+BTS) regimes as the gas rate is increased. Hand et al. [7 and 8] have given a detailed description of this progression in flow regime development and definitions of the patterns involved. Despite the fact that there are over one hundred models which have been developed to predict liquid hold-up, none have been shown to be universally useful, while only a handful have proven to be applicable to specific flow regimes [9, 10, 11 and 12]. One of the most intractable regimes to predict has been the stratified roll wave pattern where the liquid hold-up shows the most dramatic change with gas flow rate. It has been suggested that the momentum balance-type models, which give both hold-up and pressure drop prediction, can predict universally for all flow regimes but particularly in the case of the difficult stratified roll wave pattern. Donnelly [1] recently demonstrated that the momentum balance models experienced some difficulties in the prediction of this regime. Without going into lengthy details, these models differ in the assumed friction factor or shear stress on the surfaces within the pipe particularly at the liquid–gas interface. The Baker–Jardine model [13] when tested against the 0.0454 m i.d. data of Nguyen [2] exhibited a wide scatter for both liquid hold-up and pressure drop as shown in Fig. 1. The Andritsos–Hanratty model [14] gave better prediction of pressure drop but a wide scatter for liquid hold-up estimation (cf. Fig. 2) when tested against the 0.0935 m i.d. data of Hand [5]. The Spedding–Hand model [15], shown in Fig. 3 against the data of Hand [5], gave improved performance but was still unsatisfactory with the prediction of hold-up for stratified-type flows. The MARS model of Grolman [6] gave better prediction of hold-up (cf. Fig. 4) but deterioration in the estimation of pressure drop when tested against the data of Nguyen [2]. Thus no method is available that will accurately predict liquid hold-up across the whole range of flow patterns but particularly for the stratified plus roll wavy regime. The position is particularly unfortunate since the stratified-type regimes are perhaps the most predominant pattern found in multiphase lines.