Enhancement of heat transfer in forced convection by using dual low-high frequency ultrasound

Abstract

Combined sonication with dual-frequency ultrasound has been investigated to enhance heat transfer in forced convection. The test section used for this study consists of a channel with, on one hand, heating blocks normal to the water flow, equipped with thermocouples, and, on the other hand, two ultrasonic emitters. One is facing the heating blocks, thus the ultrasonic field is perpendicular, and the second ultrasonic field is collinear to the water flow. Two types of ultrasonic waves were used: low-frequency ultrasound (25 kHz) to generate mainly acoustic cavitation and high-frequency ultrasound (2 MHz) well-known to induce Eckart's acoustic streaming. A thermal approach was conducted to investigate heat transfer enhancement in the presence of ultrasound. This approach was completed with PIV measurements to assess the hydrodynamic behavior modifications under ultrasound. Sonochemiluminescence experiments were performed to account for the presence and the location of acoustic cavitation within the water flow. The results have shown a synergetic effect using combined low-and-high-frequency sonication. Enhancement of heat transfer is related to greater induced turbulence within the water flow by comparison with single-frequency sonication. However, the ultrasonically-induced turbulence is not homogeneously distributed within the water flow and the synergy effect on heat transfer enhancement depends mainly on the generation of turbulence along the heating wall. For the optimal configuration of dual-frequency sonication used in this work, a local heat transfer enhancement factor up to 366% was observed and Turbulent Kinetic Energy was enhanced by up to 84% when compared to silent regime.

Fig. 1

Test section design.

Fig. 2

Scheme of the six experimental configurations.

Fig. 3

Temperature profile (a) and Turbulent Kinetic Energy (b) in silent conditions.

Fig. 4

Influence of low-frequency ultrasound on heat transfer coefficients along heating wall (f = 25 kHz, P_US = 105 W).

Fig. 5

(a), (b), (c): Results for configuration n°1 (f = 25 kHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 105 W)// (d), (e), (f): Results for configuration n°5 (f = 25 kHz, collinear to the water flow, P_US = 105 W).

Fig. 6

Influence of high-frequency ultrasound on heat transfer coefficients along heating wall (f = 2 MHz, P_US = 105 W).

Fig. 7

(a), (b), (c): Results for configuration n°2 (f = 2 MHz, collinear to the water flow, P_US = 105 W)// (d), (e), (f): Results for configuration n°4 (f = 2 MHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 105 W).

Fig. 8

Influence of dual low-high frequency ultrasound on heat transfer coefficient (f = 25 kHz, P_US = 105 W + f = 2 MHz, P_US = 105 W).

Fig. 9

(a), (b), (c): Results for configuration n°3 (f = 25 kHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 105 W + f = 2 MHz, collinear, P_US = 105 W) // (d), (e), (f): Results for configuration n°6 (f = 2 MHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 105 W + f = 25 kHz, collinear, P_US = 105 W).

Fig. 10

Heat Transfer Enhancement Factor for each configuration.

Fig. 11

Results for configuration n°3a (f = 25 kHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 31.5 W + f = 2 MHz, collinear, P_US = 73.5 W).

Fig. 12

Results for configuration n°3b (f = 25 kHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 52.5 W + f = 2 MHz, collinear, P_US = 52.5 W).

Fig. 13

Results for configuration n°3b (f = 25 kHz, perpendicular to the water flow, P_US = 73.5 W + f = 2 MHz, collinear, P_US = 31.5 W).

Fig. 14

Heat Transfer Enhancement Factor for each power distribution per emitter, total power is constant P_US = 105 W.