4.7 Article

Proximity effects of straight and wavy fins and their interruptions on performance of heat sinks utilized in battery thermal management

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121259

关键词

Battery thermal management; Heat sinks; Straight and wavy fins; Interruptions; Occupied space

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of combining different geometries of straight and wavy fins on the performance of MHS, showing that the wavy structure enhances thermal performance, and interruptions are more effective on straight fins.
Miniature heat sink (MHS) is a fluid-based cooling technique for battery thermal management. This paper takes a new look at the performance enhancement of MHS by combining different geometries of integral and interrupted straight and wavy fins. To this end, four general designs are considered as basic models: Case 1: straight-straight-straight (SSS), Case 2: wavy-wavy-wavy (WWW), Case 3: straight-wavy-straight (SWS), and Case 4: wavy-straight-wavy (WSW). Then, in order to achieve simultaneous reduction in pressure loss and base temperature, four different interruption arrangements are applied to proposed models as Class 1, Class 2, Class 3, and Class 4. Moreover, the synergy principle is applied to evaluate the thermal performance of proposed geometries. The results show that employing the wavy structure enhances the thermal performance. Among the basic models, WWW has the lowest base temperature and the highest occupied space. However, the interruption is more effective when it is performed on MHS with straight fins. All things considered, the interruption has higher effects on both thermal and hydrodynamic performances of SWS and WSW compared to SSS and WWW. Excluding WWW, the interruption can improve the overall performance of the studied cases. The considered performance index discloses that the best interruption class for the WWW, SWS, and WSW is identical. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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