4.5 Article

The effects of wall curvature and adverse pressure gradient on air ducts in HVAC systems using turbulent entropy generation analysis

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REFRIGERATION
卷 113, 期 -, 页码 21-30

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2020.01.014

关键词

Turbulent boundary layer; Wall curvature; Adverse pressure gradient; Entropy generation; HVAC systems

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study, entropy generation analysis of turbulent boundary layer was carried out to examine the effects of the wall curvature and adverse pressure gradient (APG) on air distribution ducts in HVAC systems considering both individual and simultaneous effects of these parameters and using the empirical data. Six walls, including straight wall (A), convex curved wall (B1), concave curved wall (B2), straight wall with APG (D), convex curved wall with APG (C1), and concave curved wall with APG (C2) were investigated. The air distribution ducts can be divided into various geometries, including straight duct (A*), curved duct (B*), straight diffuser (D*), and curved diffuser (C*). Furthermore, for walls with APG (D, Cl, and C2), the divergence angle was chosen in such a way that no flow separation occurred in the range under consideration. The findings showed that the entropy generation resulted from turbulence dissipation was highly important in the regions near the boundary layer edge, so that the ratio of the entropy generation rate due to the turbulence dissipation to the total entropy generation rate in the regions near the boundary layer edge approximates 0.9. In fact, in these regions, a large portion of the total entropy generation rate was related to turbulence dissipation. Consequently, the turbulence dissipation in these regions was too large to be ignored. Thus, in order to achieve a more precise criterion of the dissipation of air distribution ducts in HVAC systems, the turbulence dissipation should be taken into account. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据