Modeling of Heat Transfer in Microchannel Gas Flow

Due to the existence of a velocity slip and temperature jump on the solid walls, the heat transfer in microchannels significantly differs from the one in the macroscale. In our research, we have focused on the pressure driven gas flows in a simple finite microchannel geometry, with an entrance and an outlet, for low Reynolds (Re<200) and low Knudsen (Kn<0.01) numbers. For such a regime, the slip induced phenomena are strongly connected with the viscous effects. As a result, heat transfer is also significantly altered. For the optimization of flow conditions, we have investigated various temperature gradient configurations, additionally changing Reynolds and Knudsen numbers. The entrance effects, slip flow, and temperature jump lead to complex relations between flow behavior and heat transfer. We have shown that slip effects are generally insignificant for flow behavior. However, two configuration setups (hot wall cold gas and cold wall hot gas) are affected by slip in distinguishably different ways. For the first one, which concerns turbomachinery, the mass flow rate can increase by about 1% in relation to the no-slip case, depending on the wall-gas temperature difference. Heat transfer is more significantly altered. The Nusselt number between slip and no-slip cases at the outlet of the microchannel is increased by about 10%.

Resistive polymer versus forced-air warming: comparable heat transfer and core rewarming rates in volunteers

BACKGROUND: Mild perioperative hypothermia increases the risk of several severe complications. Perioperative patient warming to preserve normothermia has thus become routine, with forced-air warming being used most often. In previous studies, various resistive warming systems have shown mixed results in comparison with forced-air. Recently, a polymer-based resistive patient warming system has been developed. We compared the efficacy of a standard forced-air warming system with the resistive polymer system in volunteers. METHODS: Eight healthy volunteers participated, each on two separate study days. Unanesthetized volunteers were cooled to a core temperature (tympanic membrane) of 34 degrees C by application of forced-air at 10 degrees C and a circulating-water mattress at 4 degrees C. Meperidine and buspirone were administered to prevent shivering. In a randomly designated order, volunteers were then rewarmed (until their core temperatures reached 36 degrees C) with one of the following active warming systems: (1) forced-air warming (Bair Hugger warming cover #300, blower #750, Arizant, Eden Prairie, MN); or (2) polymer fiber resistive warming (HotDog whole body blanket, HotDog standard controller, Augustine Biomedical, Eden Prairie, MN). The alternate system was used on the second study day. Metabolic heat production, cutaneous heat loss, and core temperature were measured. RESULTS: Metabolic heat production and cutaneous heat loss were similar with each system. After a 30-min delay, core temperature increased nearly linearly by 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.91-1.04) degrees C/h with forced-air and by 0.92 (0.85-1.00) degrees C/h with resistive heating (P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Heating efficacy and core rewarming rates were similar with full-body forced-air and full-body resistive polymer heating in healthy volunteers.