This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]

On: 15 March 2015, At: 14:50

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnst20

Advanced Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-

shaped Fins
a b c a
Nobuyoshi TSUZUKI , Yasuyoshi KATO , Konstantin NIKITIN & Takao ISHIZUKA
a
Research Laboratory for Nuclear Reactors , Tokyo Institute of Technology , 2-12-1 O-
okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo , 152-8550 , Japan
b
MCX Institute Inc. , 7-1-11-204 Ikegami, Ota-ku, Tokyo , 146-0082 , Japan
c
Paul Scherrer Institut , OVGA/327, 5232 , Villigen , PSI , Switzerland
Published online: 19 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Nobuyoshi TSUZUKI , Yasuyoshi KATO , Konstantin NIKITIN & Takao ISHIZUKA (2009) Advanced
Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-shaped Fins, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 46:5, 403-412, DOI:
10.1080/18811248.2007.9711547

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/18811248.2007.9711547

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Journal of NUCLEAR SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 46, No. 5, p. 403–412 (2009)

ARTICLE

Advanced Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-shaped Fins

Nobuyoshi TSUZUKI1;
, Yasuyoshi KATO2 , Konstantin NIKITIN3 and Takao ISHIZUKA1
1
Research Laboratory for Nuclear Reactors, Tokyo Institute of Technology,
2-12-1 O-okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan
2
MCX Institute Inc., 7-1-11-204 Ikegami, Ota-ku, Tokyo 146-0082, Japan
3
Paul Scherrer Institut, OVGA/327, 5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
(Received November 6, 2008 and accepted in revised form January 20, 2009)

Fin shape effects on thermal-hydraulic characteristics were studied for a Microchannel Heat Exchanger
(MCHE) with S-shaped fins using 3D-CFD and changing the fin parameters: fin angle, overlapping length,
fin width, fin length, and edge roundness. The fin angle effect on the pressure drop is consistent with the
equation obtained experimentally by Weisbach for a circular bent tube: the pressure drop in the S-shaped
fin configuration results from bent flow. The overlap of fins with those located immediately downstream at
the offset position provides a guide wing effect that reduces the pressure drop remarkably. The overlap
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

was changed by changing the fin radial position and arc length. The pressure drop was minimized when
the downstream fins are placed in the middle of the bent flow channels formed by the fins upstream, which
differs from Ito’s configuration obtained from experiments with a single bent duct. Regarding arc length,
the pressure drop is minimized at the standard overlapping length, which was formed to have the longest
arc without a change in channel width. Shorter arc lengths from the optimum value by 30 and 50%, re-
spectively, give 2.4 and 4.6% decreases in the heat transfer rate and 17 and 13% increases in the pressure
drop. Thinner fins show better thermal-hydraulic performance for fin widths of 0.2–0.8 mm. However, the
pressure drop reduced by the longer fin and heat transfer rate was also reduced. Rounded fins with 0.1 mm
radius increased the pressure drop by about 30% compared with that of the fin designed with no roundness.
KEYWORDS: microchannel heat exchanger, computer simulation, computational fluid dynamics,
heat transfer performance, pressure drop performance, parametric survey, heat exchanger optimi-
zation

1  Dh  100 mm), mesochannel (0:1  Dh  1 mm), com-

I. Introduction
Heat exchangers are critical components of energy-related
plants. Miniaturization and improved efficiency are crucial
for plant cost reduction. Miniaturization has been attained
historically in plate-fin-type heat exchangers by increasing
the heat transfer surface area through improvement of the
fin shape and configuration.1) The surface area increment is
limited by manufacturing costs and pressure drop increases.
An MCHE is a kind of heat exchanger with a small flow
channel size. Usually, the flow channels are chemically etch-
ed on a metal plate. The metal plates including the flow
channel are stacked and diffusion-bonded to produce a single
heat exchanger. The small channels do not affect manufac-
turing costs when the flow channel is formed by chemical
etching. Therefore, MCHE is preferred to produce a compact
and high-performance heat exchanger.
Heat exchangers with small channels are classifiable
into some categories, but no clear definition for the classifi-
cation exists. For example, Kim et al. categorized such
heat exchangers as microchannel (hydraulic diameter, Dh ;


Corresponding authors, E-mail: ntsuzuki@nr.titech.ac.jp

Atomic Energy Society of Japan
403
pact (1  Dh  6 mm), and conventional (Dh > 6 mm).2)
Kandlikar et al. showed that a conventional heat transfer
analysis technique is applicable to those of Dh > 3 mm.
Consequently, a heat exchanger with 200 mm < Dh <
3 mm would be classified as a compact heat exchanger.3)
In our study, several MCHEs were designed and manufac-
tured. The hydraulic diameters of the heat exchangers are
approximately one millimeter. The hydraulic diameter is suf-
ficiently less than that of conventional heat exchangers. Con-
sequently, these heat exchangers are designated as Micro-
channel Heat Exchangers (MCHEs).
Reduction of the hydraulic diameter enables decreased
active flow length L or a smaller heat exchanger at the same
Colburn j factor, Pr, and N condition, as shown in the fol-
lowing equation:4)
Dh 2=3
j¼ Pr N; ð1Þ
4L
where N = number of thermal units (NTU)
= ðTout  Tin Þ=
TM .
As described above, when the flow channels are milled by
chemical etching, the hydraulic diameter reduction is not
limited by the manufacturing cost increment. However, the
 404
(a)
wall
flow channel
(c) (d)
Fig. 1 Developing procedures of new flow channel configuration
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015
pressure drop will increase with a small hydraulic diameter;
the limitation of pressure drop will become a new criterion.
A conventional MCHE has a set of continuous zigzag flow
channels, as presented in Fig. 1(a).5) Each flow channel is re-
garded as a small pipe with many bends. In a bent pipe, swirl
flows, reversed flows, and eddies are formed around a bend
corner, thereby increasing the pressure drop. The pressure
drop depends on the bend angles, their number, and their
curvature; pressure drop decreases concomitantly with the
angle and the curvature enlargement. If those swirl flows,
reversed flows, and eddies could be eliminated, the pressure
drop would be reduced.
A sine curve flow channel model (Fig. 1(b)) is obtained
when the sharp corners of the conventional zigzag flow
channels (Fig. 1(a)) are rounded. The sine curve model (b)
realizes a very low pressure drop, but the heat transfer per-
formance calculated by CFD calculation is 16% less than
that of the zigzag model. In the sine curve model, stagnant
flow areas exist around the bend corners, where heat transfer
is restrained. To improve the heat transfer performance with
reduced pressure drop, continuous fins are cut at the bent
corners (see Fig. 1(c)), and fins in the immediate down-
stream area are moved to the center of the channel to form
an offset configuration (Fig. 1(d)). The head and tail of the
fins are sharpened and the fins are elongated to produce over-
lapping (Fig. 1(e)). The offset fin configuration promotes
turbulence and enhances heat transfer.
The fin depicted in Fig. 1(e) was designated as an ‘S-shap-
ed fin.’ The thermal-hydraulic performance of MCHE with
S-shaped fins was calculated using 3D-CFD. The pressure
drop was reduced to one-seventh at the S-shaped fin model
compared with zigzag model while retaining almost identi-
cal heat transfer performance.6)
The heat transfer and pressure drop performance of the
S-shaped fin model were confirmed experimentally: dimen-
sionless empirical correlation equations were proposed.7)
By taking advantage of the low pressure drop, MCHEs with
N. TSUZUKI et al.
(b)
(e)
S-shaped fins were applied to recuperators of a supercritical
gas turbine cycle and hot water suppliers applied in another
field: a residential heat pump system with a supercritical
CO2 cycle. In the hot water supplier, the water side channel
must be sufficiently large to avoid flow channel blockage by
water scale deposition from city water. The microchannel
hot water supplier attained equivalent heat transfer perfor-
mance at 1/3.3 the volume of an existing heat exchanger
while giving less pressure drop for both CO2 and water
sides.8)
The Nusselt number and pressure drop correlations were
obtained experimentally while changing the Reynolds num-
ber and Prandtl number ranges widely.9) The standard devi-
ation (1) of the heat transfer coefficient between the calcu-
lation result and experimental results was 2:3%; the stand-
ard deviation of the pressure drop was 16:6%. From that
result, we infer that the thermal-hydraulic performance pre-
diction using CFD might have sufficient accuracy to design
the MCHE with S-shaped fins.
In a previous study,6) the geometrical parameters of the
S-shaped fin were determined from a sine curve shape to
guide the flow stream smoothly. A fin angle survey was con-
ducted; the optimal fin angle was found. However, other
parameters of the fin shape had not been studied paramet-
rically. Therefore, parametric studies of all geometrical pa-
rameters of fins were examined to elucidate fin shape effects
upon thermal-hydraulic performance of the MCHE with S-
shaped fins.
II. Calculation Model
The inlet conditions of fluid were determined from a su-
percritical CO2 gas turbine cycle. The inlet conditions are:
hot side, 280 C, 2.5 MPa; cold side, 108 C, 7.4 MPa. The
flow rate is 64.7 kg/h for 96 channels (hot) or 44 channels
(cold). From these values, the mass flux (hot, 34.15 kg/sm2 ;
cold, 74.49 kg/sm2 ) was calculated for optimized configura-
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
 Advanced Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-shaped Fins 405

Main flow direction

Hot outlet
Cold outlet
Cold inlet
Hot inlet
Hot side
One period of
Cold side double banking
Hot side

H
C
H
H
C
H
H Simulated
C
H
part
H Main flow direction
C
H
Fig. 4 Fin shape in the S-shaped fin configuration
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

Fig. 2 Plate configuration designated as ‘double-banking’

Periodic condition

Hot flow Cold flow

inlet inlet

Lz (= 4.8 mm)

Ly (≈ 10 mm)
Lx ( ≈ 120 mm)

Main flow direction

Fig. 3 Simulation model

tion in the previous study.6) The mass flux was used in all
calculation models.
The hot-side pressure (2.5 MPa) is about one-third of the
cold-side pressure (7.4 MPa). The CO2 mass flow rates are
the same between the hot and cold sides. Therefore, the vol-
ume flow rates of the hot and cold sides are different. To pro-
duce the same order of velocity between the hot and cold
sides, the number of hot plates was set as twice that of the
cold plates. The plate configuration is presented in Fig. 2.
A plate configuration of this kind is designated as a double
banking configuration, which was applied to all calculation
models.
The calculation geometry consists of one cold plate and
two hot plates in a sandwich structure, as depicted in
Fig. 3. The size of the calculation geometry is about
Lx  Ly  Lz ¼ 120  10  4:8 (mm) considering the calcu-
lation time and flow development in the model. The hot flow
and cold flow enter the MCHE from the x and +x direc-
tions, and exit in the +x and x directions, respectively.
Periodic boundary conditions were applied to the outer sur-
faces of the front and back sides and adiabatic condition to
the outer surfaces of the top and bottom sides.
The parameters of the S-shaped fin are portrayed in Fig. 4.
The fin angle is defined as angle ’, the tangent angle of the
sine curve. The fin length is defined as lf , and the fin width as
df . The channel depth and fin gap dy were fixed, respective-
ly, as 0.94 and 2.7 mm. The standard values for changing
parameters were determined as ’ ¼ 52 , lf ¼ 4:8 mm, and
df ¼ 0:8 mm. These values were referred from a previous
study.6)
The simulation calculations were examined using com-
mercial 3D-CFD code, FLUENT.10) The mesh data were
generated using GAMBIT code, varying the mesh size from
the wall surface to the central flow region. At the vicinity of
the wall surfaces, five rows of fine mesh were allocated.
A small mesh size yields more accurate results, but it
simultaneously demands more computer resources and time.
In consideration of the channel width and properties of CO2 ,
the reference mesh size is taken as the minimum size of
0.015 mm at the vicinity of the wall surfaces, and 0.2 mm

VOL. 46, NO. 5, MAY 2009

 406
(a)
1 mm
Fig. 5 Mesh distributions: (a) mesh size 0.2 mm, (b) mesh size 0.1 mm
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015
Fig. 6 Geometry of bent circular tube
for the distant fluid area from the channel walls. To check
the adequacy of the mesh size, a calculation was examined
using the half mesh size model (minimum mesh size of
0.0075 mm at the vicinity of the wall surfaces, 0.1 mm for
the distant fluid area from the wall surfaces); the result
was compared with the reference mesh size model described
above. Generated meshes for S-shaped fin model are pres-
ented in Figs. 5(a) and 5(b). The former, panel (a), shows
the reference mesh size model, the latter, panel (b), shows
the half mesh size model. These horizontal meshes are swept
along the z axis to make three-dimensional models.
Judging from the results of calculations, the difference in
heat transfer performance between the reference and half
mesh size was less than 0.1%; the difference in pressure
drop was approximately 3%. Because those differences are
considered to be sufficiently small, the reference mesh size
model (minimum mesh size of 0.015 mm at the vicinity of
the wall surfaces, 0.2 mm for the distant fluid area from
the wall surfaces) is applied to all calculations in this study.
The flow stream in an MCHE is regarded as the turbulent
flow. Therefore, a turbulence model was applied for the
calculations in this study. Current CFD codes have various
turbulence models, of which the k-" model is frequently
chosen because of its fast calculation speed and lower use
of memory resources. The code FLUENT mainly has three
N. TSUZUKI et al.
(b)
1 mm
k-" models: a standard k-" model, the Renormalization
Group (RNG) k-" model, and the Realizable k-" model.
The standard k-" model is used only for rough estimations.
Therefore, two other turbulent models, the RNG k-" model
and Realizable k-" model, were compared to make thermal-
hydraulic performance predictions.
The channels of an MCHE have many bent corners.
Therefore, the Darcy-Weisbach formula for a bent duct (that
geometry is depicted in Fig. 6) was used to compare results
obtained using the RNG and Realizable k-" models. The
pressure drop data are expressed as the Darcy-Weisbach
formula, shown below.


2 
l v
dP ¼  ð2Þ
Dh 2
This turbulent model comparison was executed with air,
with a flow rate of 0.01 kg/s. The pressure drop coefficient
 in Eq. (2) against the bend angle is depicted in Fig. 7.
The pressure drop coefficients calculated using the RNG
k-" model show better agreement with Eq. (2), especially
when the bend angle is smaller than 60 . The S-shaped fin
configuration has smooth flow channels. No sharp corner
exists in the configuration; the bend angle is not so large.
Furthermore, the RNG k-" model uses the effective Prandtl
number calculated from the RNG theory, although other k-"
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
 Advanced Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-shaped Fins 407

Q/V

Q/V, (MW/m3); δ P, (kPa/m)

1.6 125 1250
δP

Overall HTC, (W/m 2K)

Pressure drop coefficient

1.4 Weisbach experiment OHTC

FLUENT k-ε RNG Enh. wall treatment
100 1000
1.2 FLUENT RSM Wall b.c. from
k eq, Enh. wall treatment 75 750
1.0

0.8 50 500

0.6 25 250
0.4
0 0
0.2 0 20 40 60
Fin angle, (degree)
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Fig. 8 Pressure drop and heat transfer performance with fin angle,
Angle ’: Q=V = heat transfer rate per unit volume, P = pressure drop
per unit length. The dotted line shows Weisbach’s experimental
Fig. 7 Elbow pressure drop coefficient as a function of the bend result.
angle
45, 48, 52, 54, and 57 , while maintaining df ¼ 0:8 mm
models use a constant as the Prandtl number. That mode of and lf ¼ 4:8 mm. These df and lf values were taken from a
usage enables the RNG k-" model to provide more accurate previous study.6)
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

calculation for heat transfer than other k-" models. From
these results, the RNG k-" model is selected to simulate
the thermal-hydraulic performance of MCHEs.
Other calculation methods are described as follows: the
governing equations considered are the continuity, momen-
tum, and energy equations. Turbulence was incorporated
into the RNG k-" model and wall function. All equations
were solved using second-order upwind discretization for
convection. The Semi Implicit Method Pressure Linked
Equation (SIMPLE) algorithm was used to resolve the cou-
pling of the velocity and pressure.
Thermodynamic properties of CO2 (density, viscosity,
specific heat, and thermal conductivity) were calculated us-
ing PROPATH, a database for the thermo-physical proper-
ties of fluids.11) The fluid is assumed to be in local equilib-
rium for thermodynamic and transport properties. Free
convection, viscous dissipation, and compressive work are
neglected in this simulation. The thermal properties of solid
(specific heat and thermal conductivity) are defined as stain-
less steel using the database of FLUENT. This simulation
used a calculation time of about one and half days for
3000 iterations using four processors (3.2 GHz Xeon; Intel
Corp.).
III. Results and Discussion
1. Fin Angle Effect
The forms of the S-shaped fin are derived from a sinuous
curve (see Fig. 4). The sinuous curve is defined using two
parameters of amplitude and frequency. For the S-shaped
fin, those two parameters are changed via fin parameters of
fin angle ’ and fin length lf . These two parameters and an-
other—fin width df —are necessary to define the S-shaped
fin shape.
The fin angle is the most important parameter determining
the MCHE performance. The definition of ’ was provided in
Fig. 4. To obtain the fin angle effect on thermal-hydraulic
performance, the fin angle is changed as ’ ¼ 0, 20, 30, 42,
Pressure drop per unit length, P, is calculated as
Pin  Pout
P ¼ ; ð3Þ
Lx
where Pin and Pout , respectively, signify the inlet and outlet
pressures, and Lx represents the calculation model length in
the x direction.
The heat transfer rate per unit volume, Q=V, is calculated
as
Q
Q=V ¼ ; ð4Þ
L x  Ly  Lz
where Q is the heat transfer rate, Ly and Lz , respectively,
signify the lengths in the y and z directions as defined in
Fig. 3, and Lz is 4.8 mm in all cases.
The results are summarized in Fig. 8, which portrays
Q=V, P, and overall heat transfer coefficient (OHTC)
against ’. The angle effect on the pressure drop is greater
than that on OHTC. The pressure drop P rises more steeply
when ’ is greater than 52 . Consequently, the design value
of ’ was determined as 52 .
An angle effect on pressure drop was investigated by
Weisbach experimentally for a circular bent tube. The fol-
lowing empirical correlation was obtained.12)
v2 &
dP ¼ ð5Þ
2
In the equation shown above, the following pertains.

0
0
’ ’
 ¼ 0:946 sin2 þ 2:047 sin4 ð6Þ
2 2
Therein, ’0 is the bend angle.
The dotted line in Fig. 8 shows the pressure drop calcu-
lated from the above correlations when v ¼ 2:0 m/s and
 ¼ 20 kg/m3 , indicating fairly good coincidence with re-
sults of the MCHE with S-shaped fins. This fact shows that
the pressure drop in the S-shaped fin model results from a
change in the flow direction at the bend. In the zigzag fin

VOL. 46, NO. 5, MAY 2009

 408
model, the energy loss occurs because of the swirl flow,
reversed flow, and eddy formation. The energy loss brings a
large pressure drop, resulting in a 6–7 times greater pressure
drop relative to the S-fin model.6)
2. Guide Wing Effect
Madison and Parker found that the pressure drop can be
reduced effectively by placing crescent-shaped guide wings
at the center of the bend in a bent duct.13) The guide wings
suppress flow separation at the corner and secondary flows;
the wings contribute to producing a uniform flow distribu-
tion in the downstream of the corner. This effect is desig-
nated as the guide wing effect. An array of S-shaped fins
downstream is partially inserted into flow channel regions
upstream, as presented in Fig. 1. Therefore, the heads of
the downstream fins function as guide wings to reduce the
pressure drop.
A more precise investigation of the guide wing effect was
carried out by Ito and Imai.14) Their results show that the
pressure drop is minimized when the guide wing is placed
not at the center but at a radial position, as
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015
rs ¼ ðRo Ri Þ1=2 ; ð7Þ
where rs is the curvature radius of the guide wing, and Ro
and Ri are the outer and inner radii of the bend corner.
The S-shaped fin configuration was designed in a previous
study with ’ ¼ 52 , lf ¼ 4:8 mm, and df ¼ 0:8 mm. From
the geometry measurements, Ri was 1.60 mm and Ro was
calculated as 2.91 mm from the average channel width of
1.31 mm. Using Eq. (7), rs was calculated as 2.16 mm, which
is shifted outward by about 0.1 mm from the center.
To confirm the applicability of the empirical correlation
expressed as Eq. (7) to S-shaped fin configuration, the pres-
sure drop was calculated while changing Ri . As depicted in
Fig. 9, P is minimized when the fins are placed in the mid-
dle of the bend. The pressure drop difference between the
case in which the guide wings are placed in the middle of
the corner and at the position given by Eq. (7) is about 3%.
Because the S-shaped fin configuration is wavy, the optimal
fin position to reduce the pressure drop is in the middle of
the channel, unlike that given by Eq. (7) for a single-bend
duct.
The S-shaped fin includes an almost straight part in the
middle and arc shaped parts in the head and tail. The fin
(A) (B)
Fig. 10 Flow channel view changing arc length of S-shaped fin
N. TSUZUKI et al.
110
Q/V
δP
–
Ratio, (%)
OHTC
105 Y-shift +
100
95
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Y-shift, (mm)
Fig. 9 Pressure drop and heat transfer performance changing the
radial position to the neighboring fin: Q=V = heat transfer rate
per unit volume, P = pressure drop per unit length
arc length determines the circumferential position of a guide
wing. The fin arc length was changed as presented in
Figs. 10(A)–10(C). The model shown in panel (A) is the
reference model (’ ¼ 52 ; lf ¼ 4:8 mm; df ¼ 0:8 mm) and
the models presented in panels (B) and (C), respectively,
have shorter arc lengths, by 30 and 50%, than that of model
(A). A model with longer arc length than model (A) cannot
be created because a longer arc length provides an insuffi-
cient area for flow mixing.
Figure 11 shows results of the arc length effect on
thermal-hydraulic performance. The values of Q=V in model
(B) and model (C) were decreased, respectively, by about
2.4 and 4.6%, whereas the heat transfer area decreased by
about 1.3 and 1.8%. Reductions of Q=V in model (B) and
model (C) were greater than the reduction of the heat trans-
fer area. Furthermore, P values of model (B) and model (C)
were about 17 and 13% higher, respectively, than that of
model (A), although the flow channel volumes of model
(B) and model (C) were, respectively, 12 and 20% larger
than that of model (A). Both the heat transfer performance
and pressure drop performance worsened with the shortening
of the arc length. Velocity vectors of models (A)–(C) at the
center of the channel are shown in Figs. 12(A)–12(C). Flow
stagnation exists at the wake in the case presented in panels
(B) and (C) although the case in (A) does not make any stag-
nation. Fins with shorter arc length cannot realize a uniform
flow velocity profile and both the heat transfer performance
(C)
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
 Advanced Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-shaped Fins 409

100 1000

Q/V, (MW/m 3); δ P, (kPa/m)

Q/V, (MW/m3); δ P, (kPa/m)

Overall HTC, (W/m2K)

120 (A) (B) (C) 1200

Overall HTC, (W/m2K)

80 800
100 1000
Q/V
80 Q/V 800 60 δP 600
δP OHTC
60 OHTC 600 40 400
40 400
20 200
20 200

0 0 0 0
(A) (B) (C) 0.0 0.5 1.0
Model Fin Width, (mm)

Fig. 11 Normalized pressure drop and heat transfer rate to the ref- Fig. 13 Pressure drop and heat transfer performance with fin
erence model with arc length: Q=V = heat transfer rate per unit width: Q=V = heat transfer rate per unit volume, P = pressure
volume, P = pressure drop per unit length drop per unit length

(A) (B) (C)

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

stagnation

stagnation

Fig. 12 Velocity vector plots of models changing arc length at the center of channel depth. Arrow length shows the
velocity magnitude.

and pressure drop performance worsen. Consequently, the Evaluations of fin width df effects on heat transfer per-
model depicted in panel (A) is concluded to have optimal formance of the S-shaped fin configuration were performed
arc length. while changing df from the reference design values of
0.8 mm to 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 1.0 mm. Figure 13 shows the re-
3. Fin Width Effect sult of calculation. The value of Q=V increased with smaller
Narrower fins lead to more heat transfer area per unit df . The heat transfer area increase was more effective than
volume if the integrity of diffusion bonding is ignored at the fin efficiency decrease for the S-shaped fin configuration
the interface between the fin upper surface of the lower with 0.2–0.8 mm of df . The pressure drop P decreased
plate and under the surface of the upper plate. However, slightly with decreased df with the same fin gap (channel
fin efficiency  is defined for a plate fin heat exchanger as width). The bend angle of the stream in the narrower fin
follows. model is smaller than that in the wider fin model when flow
Z Af streams are divided at the head of the fin.
dA The value of df was optimized as 0.8 mm considering
¼ 0 ð8Þ the fin depth (0.94 mm) and material strength of steel. The
 b Af necessary fin width claimed by material strength will be
Therein,  is the temperature difference between the fin and changed if its channel depth is changed. For example, the
the surrounding fluid; b is the temperature difference be- fin width for the MCHE hot water supplier was selected as
tween the fin base and the surrounding fluid. 0.4 mm because its channel depth was 0.47 mm, which was
Gardner calculated the fin efficiency of plate-fin heat only half of that in this study.8,9)
exchangers while changing the fin thickness.15) Fujikake
also obtained the fin efficiency numerically for corrugated 4. Fin Length Effect
fin heat exchangers.16) In these two studies, longer or nar- The fin length effect was also investigated, while changing
rower fins showed lower fin efficiency. Because narrower the fin length lf from the reference design value of 4.8 mm to
fins increase the heat transfer area of a heat exchanger at the 2.4, 7.2, and 9.6 mm. Regarding the case with lf ¼ 2:4 mm,
expense of decreased fin efficiency, the heat transfer perfor- the fin length is too short to produce a uniform flow profile
mance will not always increase as the fin width narrows. (see Fig. 14(a)), although other cases realized a uniform

VOL. 46, NO. 5, MAY 2009

 410 N. TSUZUKI et al.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

Fig. 14 Velocity vector plots of models with different fin lengths: (a) 2.4 mm, (b) 4.8 mm, (c) 7.2 mm, and (d) 9.6 mm at
the center of channel depth. Arrow length represents the velocity magnitude.

120 1200
Q/V, (MW/m3); δ P, (kPa/m)

Overall HTC, (W/m2K)

100 1000

80 800
Q/V
60 δP 600
OHTC
40 400

20 200

0 0 Manufactured Designed fin shape

0 2.4 4.8 7.2 9.6 12 fin shape
Fin Length, (mm)

Fig. 15 Pressure drop and heat transfer performance with fin

length: Q=V = heat transfer rate per unit volume, P = pressure Fig. 16 Comparison of the S-shaped fin, as manufactured and as
drop per unit length designed

flow profile (Figs. 14(b)–14(d)). A summary of calculation geometry. The rounded edge increases the pressure drop of
results is presented in Fig. 15. The values of Q=V are almost the S-shaped fin configuration. The effect of roundness on
independent of the fin length. However, OHTC and p are thermal-hydraulic performance was studied by numerically
lower for longer fins except for fin length of 2.4 mm. Longer changing the fin roundness, as shown in Fig. 17. The model
fins decrease the number of bend corners resulting in a lower presented in panel (a) is the designed geometry with no
pressure drop. Thus, OHTC was also reduced by fin length- fin roundness. The model depicted in panel (c) is the actual
ening. The optimized lf was determined as 4.8 mm because shape obtained by etching. Other models shown in panels
Q=V was highest among them. (b), (d), and (e), respectively, have radii of 0.05, 0.2, and
0.36 mm roundness.
5. Fin Roundness Effect In fact, Fig. 18 shows that the fin roundness does not
Flow channels of MCHE are milled by chemical etching. substantially affect the heat transfer performance, but it
Figure 16 shows a comparison of the designed geometry does strongly affect the pressure drop. In the case shown
and the manufactured geometry using chemical etching. in panel (c), the pressure drop increased by about 30%
The head and tail edge are rounded in the manufactured compared with that of the designed geometry. For the case

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

 Advanced Microchannel Heat Exchanger with S-shaped Fins 411

120 1200

Q/V, (MW/m3); δ P, (kPa/m)

(e) (d) (c) (b) (a) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

Overall HTC, (W/m2K)

100 1000

80 800

60 600

40 400

20 200
Q/V δP OHTC
0 0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Roundness Radius, (mm)
Fig. 17 Shapes of fin ends
Fig. 18 Pressure drop and heat transfer performance with round-
ness of fin ends: Q=V = heat transfer rate per unit volume,
P = pressure drop per unit length

(a) (b) (c)

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

(d) (e)

stagnation

Fig. 19 Velocity vector plots of models changing fin roundness at the center of channel depth. Arrow length shows the
velocity magnitude.

(d), p was lower than that of model (c) although the
roundness of the model (d) is larger than that of the model
(c). The reason is explained using the velocity vector plot
of the fluid around their fin ends, as in Fig. 19. In the case
presented in panel (d), the stream collided with the fin at
the center of its roundness. Being divided without large
reverse flow, the stream suppresses the pressure drop in-
crease. In the case presented in panel (c), the stream was
not divided smoothly and a large reverse flow exists; it
caused the pressure drop to increase. Flow stagnation oc-
curred in the wake of fins when the roundness is as large
as case (e). Therefore, the pressure drop presented in panel
(e) is the highest, although the stream is smoothly divided
at the heads of fins.
IV. Conclusions
Numerical parametric surveys were conducted to eluci-
date how the fin shape affects the thermal-hydraulic charac-
teristics of the MCHE with S-shaped fins. The fin angle
effect, guide wing effect, fin width effect, fin length effect,
and fin roundness effect were studied.

VOL. 46, NO. 5, MAY 2009

 412 N. TSUZUKI et al.

A fin angle was the most effective parameter on the b : temperature difference between fin base and surrounding fluid
thermal-hydraulic performance of the MCHE. The pressure [K]
drop change with the fin angle agreed with Weisbach’s : Darcy-Weisbach friction coefficient [dimensionless]
experimental result for a circular bent tube. Consequently, : density [kg/m3 ]
’: fin angle [deg]
practically speaking, the pressure drop for S-shaped fin con-
’0 : bend angle [deg]
figuration occurred at the bend corner.
Subscripts
The guide wing effect was studied while changing the in: inlet
radial position and circumferential fin arc length. The radial out: outlet
position of least pressure drop was in the middle of the
corner, unlike Ito’s study of a single bend. The arc length
of the fins was designed as the longest to maintain the stream Acknowledgement
mixing area because 30 and 50% shorter arcs increase the This work was partially supported by KAKENHI
pressure drop to more than 10%. (18206101).
Narrower fins produce more heat transfer area per unit
volume but worsen the fin efficiency more than the wider
fins. In the S-shaped fin model, the narrowest fins showed References
the largest heat transfer rate. However, the optimal fin width 1) J. E. Hesselgreaves, Compact Heat Exchangers, Selection, De-
was determined considering the material strength. sign and Operation, Pergamon, 1–2 (2001).
A longer fin length reduces the stream bend and pressure 2) M. H. Kim et al., Advances in Heat Transfer, 37, 297–429
drop that occurs because of the stream bend. The fin length (2003).
effect was less than the other fin effects if uniform flow was 3) S. G. Kandlikar et al., ‘‘Evolution of microchannel flow pas-
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:50 15 March 2015

realized in the channel. sages—Thermohydraulic performance and fabrication tech-

Fin roundness at the head and tail edge of the fins mini- nology,’’ Heat Transfer Eng., 24, 3–17 (2003).
4) J. E. Hesselgreaves, Compact Heat Exchangers, Selection,
mally affect the heat transfer performance but greatly affect
Design and Operation, Pergamon, 126–128 (2001).
the pressure drop performance. From the real fin shape man-
5) ibid, 35–38.
ufactured by chemical etching, the pressure drop is increased 6) N. Tsuzuki, Y. Kato, T. Ishizuka, ‘‘High performance heat
by about 30%. Lesser fin roundness is preferred to reduce exchanger,’’ Appl. Therm. Eng., 27, 1702–1707 (2007).
the pressure drop. 7) Y. Kato et al., ‘‘Design of recuperator for the supercritical CO2
The geometric parameters of the fin shape were opti- gas turbine fast reactor,’’ Proc. ICAPP 2005, Seoul, Korea,
mized; thermal-hydraulic characteristics were found for 5196 (2005).
MCHE with S-shaped fins. This information will facilitate 8) T. L. Ngo et al., ‘‘New printed circuit heat exchangers with
the redesign of the MCHE for other applications. S-shaped fins for hot water supplier,’’ Exp. Therm. Fluid
Sci., 30, 811–819 (2006).
9) T. L. Ngo et al., ‘‘Heat transfer and pressure drop correlations
Nomenclature of microchannel heat exchangers with S-shaped and zigzag
fins for carbon dioxide cycles,’’ Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 32,
Dh : hydraulic diameter [m] 560–570 (2007).
df : fin width [m] 10) Fluent, Inc., Fluent 6.1 User’s Guide, Fluent Inc., Lebanon,
j: Colburn j factor [dimensionless] NH (2003).
L: active flow length [m] 11) T. Ito et al., PROPATH: A Program Package for Thermo-
l: pipe length [m] physical Properties of Fluids, Version 10.2, Corona Publish-
lf : fin length [m] ing Co., Tokyo (1990).
Lx ; Ly ; Lz : model length in the x-, y-, and z directions [m] 12) J. Weisbach, Die Experimental Hydraulik, Freiberg, 149
N: number of thermal units [dimensionless] (1855).
P: pressure [Pa] 13) R. D. Madison, J. R. Parker, ‘‘Pressure losses in rectangular
dP: pressure drop [Pa] elbows,’’ Trans. ASME, 58, 167–176 (1936).
P: pressure drop per unit length [Pa/m] 14) H. Ito, K. Imai, ‘‘Pressure losses in vaned elbows of a circular
Q: heat transfer rate [W] cross section,’’ Trans. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., Ser. D, 88, 684–
T: temperature [K] 685 (1966).

TM : log-mean temperature difference [K] 15) K. A. Gardner, ‘‘Efficiency of extended surface,’’ Trans. Am.
V: model volume [m3 ] Soc. Mech. Eng., 67, 621–631 (1945).
v: velocity of fluid [m/s] 16) K. Fujikake, ‘‘Study of air cooled heat exchanger with corru-
Greek symbols gated fin surfaces: First report, fin efficiency and overall effi-
: fin efficiency [dimensionless] ciency of straight fin surfaces,’’ Nihon-kikai-gakkai ronbun-
: temperature difference between fin and surrounding fluid shu (Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng.), 42, 1224–1232 (1976),
[K] [in Japanese].

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY