1

2























3























4























5






















6

CONTENTS

Declaration
Certificate
Acknowledgement
Contents
List of Figures
Nomenclature
Abstract

NOMENCLATURE ...................................................................................................... 10
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 14
DIRECT AND INDIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEM .............................. 14 1.1
1.1.1. ADVANTAGES OF INDIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS ............ 15
1.1.2. DISADVANTAGES OF INDIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS ...... 16
1.2. NATURAL CIRCULATION LOOPS ............................................................. 16
1.2.1. ADVANTAGES OF NCL ........................................................................ 17
1.2.2. DISADVANTAGES OF NCL .................................................................. 17
1.3. NANOFLUIDS ............................................................................................... 18
1.3.1. ADVANTAGES OF NANOFLUID ......................................................... 19
1.3.2. DISADVANTAGE OF NANOFLUIDS ................................................... 19
1.4. OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................. 19
1.5. APPROACH ................................................................................................... 20
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 21


7

2.1. NANOFLUIDS: .............................................................................................. 21
2.2. NANOFLUIDS BASED NATURAL CIRCULATION LOOP: ....................... 23
3. MODELS FOR TURBULENCE ANALYSIS-TRANSPORT EQUATIONS.......... 25
3.1. TRANSPORTATION EQUATIONS FOR STANDARD K- MODEL: ......... 25
3.2. MODELLING TURBULENT VISCOSITY: ....................................................... 25
3.3. RNG k- EQUATIONS: ...................................................................................... 26
3.4. k- MIXTURE TURBULENCE MODELS ..................................................... 28
3.5. k- DISPERSED TURBULENCE MODELS .................................................. 29
3.6. STANDARD k- MODEL:............................................................................. 30
3.7. Transport Equations for the SST k- Model .................................................... 31
3.8. TRANSPORT EQUATIONS FOR THE k-kl- MODEL: ............................... 32
4. DESCRIPTION OF MULTIPHASE MODELS ...................................................... 33
4.1. THE MIXTURE MODEL ............................................................................... 33
4.1.1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................ 33
4.1.2. LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................ 34
4.1.3. CONTINUITY EQUATION .................................................................... 35
4.1.4. MOMENTUM EQUATION ..................................................................... 36
4.1.5. ENERGY EQUATION ............................................................................ 36
4.1.6. RELATIVE SLIP VELOCITY AND THE DRIFT VELOCITY ............... 37
4.1.7. GRANULAR PROPERTIES .................................................................... 38
4.1.8. KINETIC VISCOSITY ............................................................................ 38
4.1.9. GRANULAR TEMPERATURE .............................................................. 38
4.1.10. INTERFACIAL AREA CONCENTRATION .......................................... 39
4.2. EULERIAN MODEL ...................................................................................... 41


8

4.2.1. LIMITATION OF EULERIAN MODEL ................................................. 42
4.2.2. VOLUME OF FRACTION EQUATION ................................................. 42
4.2.3. EQUATIONS IN GENERAL FORM ....................................................... 43
4.3. VOLUME OF FLUID (VOF) MODEL THEORY ........................................... 47
4.3.1. OVERVIEW OF THE VOF MODEL: ...................................................... 47
4.3.2. LIMITATIONS OF THE VOF MODEL: ................................................. 47
4.3.3. STEADY-STATE AND TRANSIENT VOF CALCULATIONS: ............. 47
4.4. HOW TO CHOOSE A RIGHT MODEL? ....................................................... 51
5. PHYSICAL MODEL OF NCL ............................................................................... 53
5.1. PHYSICAL MODEL ...................................................................................... 53
5.2. GEOMETRIC AND MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE MODE ....... 53
5.3. GRID GENERATION ..................................................................................... 54
6. RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 55
6.1. COMPARITIVE STUDY OF DIFFERENT TURBULENT MODELS ............ 55
6.1.1. VALIDATION ......................................................................................... 58
6.1.2. INFERENCES ......................................................................................... 60
6.2. SIMULATIONS OF WATER BASED NANOFLUIDS (Results) ................... 61
6.2.1. ENHANCEMENT OF THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY AND HEAT
TRANSFER RATE. ............................................................................................... 61
6.2.2. VISCOSITY ............................................................................................. 62
6.2.3. MASS FLOW RATE VARIATION ......................................................... 62
6.2.4. VALIDATION ......................................................................................... 63
7. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 66
8. FUTURE WORKS ................................................................................................. 67


9


List of Figures
Fig 1: Indirect refrigeration system with forced circulation type secondary loop
Fig 2 : Rectangular NCL
Fig 3 : Which model chose
Fig.4 : Schematic of the Natural Circulation Loop employed in the model
Fig 5: Meshing of a cross section
Fig 6: Variation of heat transfer rate w.r.t temperature (

)
Fig 7: Variation of mass flow rate w.r.t temperature (

)
Fig 8: Variation of Turbulent intensity rate w.r.t temperature (

)
Fig 9 : Variation of turbulent kinetic energy transfer rate w.r.t temperature (

)
Fig 10 : Variation of Turbulent dissipation rate w.r.t temperature (

)
Fig 11 : Reynolds number v\s

for various turbulence models

Fig 12: Specific heat variation of Co2 with Temperature
Fig 13 : Variation of Viscosity of Various nanofluids with Volume fraction
Fig 14 :Variation of the mass flow rate with Volume fraction
Fig 15 : Validation of Simulation results with Vijayans correlation(CuO)
Fig 16 : Validation of Simulation results with Vijayans correlation(Al2O3)
Fig 17 : Validation of Simulation results with Vijayans correlation(TiO2)






10

NOMENCLATURE

generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to mean velocity gradients

Ai,j cell face area of the u-control volume
CO2 carbon dioxide
d dimensionless channel gap width
D

cross-diffusion term
F
length
empirical correlation that controls the length of the transition region
G
b
Generaration of turbulent kinetic energy due to buoyancy
g
i
component of the gravitational vector in the i
th
direction
k
L
laminar kinetic energy
k
T
turbulent kinetic energy
P
k
is the production of kinetic energy
P
m
dimensionless head pressure
Pr Prandlt number
Pr
t
turbulent Prandtl number for energy (default value of Pr
t
is 0.85)
Ra Rayleigh number
Re
c
critical Reynolds number
R
t
transition Reynolds number
S modulus of the mean rate-of-strain tensor


11

S
k
and S

are the source terms

T temperature, K
U dimensionless velocity along X
V dimensionless velocity along Y
W loop width, m
X, Y dimensionless coordinates, X, Y
Y
k
,Y

dissipation of k and due to turbulence

thermal diffusivity, m
2
s
-1

thermal expansion coefficient, K
-1

k
and

effective diffusivity for k and due to turbulence

dimensionless temperature difference
dimensionless time
inverse turbulent scale
vorticity magnitude

momentum source term

12

ABSTRACT
The growing popularity of nanofluid applications in diverse fields has drawn
attention of researchers to exploit its uses extensively. It is required to overcome the
drawbacks of conventional fluids in terms of heat and mass transfer, and explore this
field in order to find a working fluid having very good transport behaviour along with
sustainability. Stable suspension of nanofluids offers favourable features such as high
thermal conductivity at very low concentrations of nanoparticles. Nanoparticles do not
settle down quickly or damage the setup as in the case of micro-particle substrates, hence
overcomes the disadvantages of the latter. Nanofluids find applications in
microelectronics, nuclear reactor coolant and space technology as well.
This work presents the investigation of the behaviour of water based nanofluid
with cupric oxide and alumina as nanoparticles, which operates in a natural circulation
loop with isothermal source and sink under various operating conditions. This is
simulated in a commercial CFD software ANSYS (Fluent 14.5). The ability of
nanoparticles to drastically change the thermo-physical properties of fluids is utilized in
obtaining the desirable properties for the base fluid. The water based nanofluid is
operated in the natural circulation loop at different source and sink temperatures. Effect
of temperature variation on thermo physical properties of base fluid as well as
nanoparticles have been considered and suitable correlations
[1]
are used to find thermo
physical properties of nanofluids. Boussinesq approximation has been employed in
energy equation to consider buoyancy effect caused by temperature difference. The K-
turbulence model is employed to catch the turbulence effects within the loop. Further
investigations are done on the effect of change in concentration of nanoparticles in the
base fluid. The results of the parameters such as heat transfer rate, friction factor and
pressure drop are noted and compared at every stage. Results show that there is increase
in heat transfer rate with increase in volume concentration of nanoparticles.


13

Results obtained from simulation have been validated with published
experimental data
[2]
and demonstrate good agreements. The results are compared for
different Rayleigh number and concentration of nano particles.
Keywords: Nanofluid, Natural circulation loop,CFD, Turbulence modelling.



















14

1. INTRODUCTION
Due to an unprecedented improvement in technology, there has been rapid
industrial growth across the globe. This has also given rise to new concerns. In the
current scenario, global warming and ozone depletion have emerged as major source of
concern. Also the rising oil prices are a constant area of worry. The excess use of fossil
fuels is leading to their rapid exhaustion. Considering all these factors there is an urgent
need to make all the system energy efficient. Thermal systems like refrigerators consume
large amount of power. So, there is a large scope for development of nature friendly and
efficient refrigerants. Synthetic refrigerants are being phased out worldwide to combat
the twin menace of ozone layer depletion and global warming. The objective to attain
holistic environmental safety has facilitated the emergence of natural refrigerants as the
more benign working fluids in refrigeration and heating systems. Several natural
refrigerants are regaining their importance and are on a path of revival. However, many
of these natural refrigerants are either toxic or flammable or both. The rapid advances in
nano technology have led to new types of heat transfer fluids called nanofluids.
In such cases, it is desirable to reduce the amount of refrigerant used in the system
and restrict the refrigerant to the plant room. The addition of a secondary fluid loop to
transfer heat between the refrigeration plant and the refrigerated space fulfils both these
purposes. Reduction in the amount of refrigerant used also leads to faster pump-down and
defrost. Secondary fluid loops are widely used in various refrigeration, air conditioning
and heating applications [1]. A recent spurt in the universal interest to study alternatives
to the conventional direct refrigeration systems and use of natural refrigerants as
secondary fluids has been visible. Traditionally used secondary fluids are water, brines,
glycols, alcohols, etc.

DIRECT AND INDIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEM 1.1
Refrigeration systems can be broadly classified into direct and indirect systems. The
difference between direct systems and indirect systems, also known as secondary loop
systems, lies in the physical separation between the primary loop, where the cooling


15

effect is produced, and the secondary loop, where cooling takes place. An indirect
cooling system incorporates two different refrigerants (primary and secondary) to provide
cooling. In all these systems, the primary loop is a conventional refrigeration system that
uses a phase changing fluid as primary refrigerant, which is restricted to the plant room.
A separate fluid (secondary refrigerant) circulates in the secondary loop and transports
thermal energy between the refrigerated space and the refrigeration plant. An additional
heat exchanger is required to transfer heat between the conditioned space and plant room
via the secondary loop. The fluid used in the secondary loop is normally a safe and
environmentally benign fluid that does not undergo any phase change during the process
of heat transfer. However, it is possible to build indirect systems in which the secondary
fluid may also undergo phase change. A secondary loop integrated with a conventional
refrigeration system is shown in Fig. 1. As mentioned before, the indirect systems require
an additional heat exchanger (HHX) and a secondary refrigerant pump. This may result in
increased first cost and energy requirements compared to equivalent direct systems.
However, employing a NCL with suitable secondary fluid can eliminate the use of
secondary fluid pump.


Fig 1: Indirect refrigeration system with forced circulation type secondary loop

1.1.1. ADVANTAGES OF INDIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS
Since primary refrigerant is confined to the plant room, a flammable and/or toxic
but eco-friendly fluid can be used as primary refrigerant.


16

Less refrigerant charge in the primary loop: reduces capital cost and refrigerant
leakage.
Smaller primary cooling loops further benefit in maintenance and checking
operations.
A secondary loop system is also simpler to modify.

1.1.2. DISADVANTAGES OF INDIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS

Additional heat exchanger and circulating pump increase initial cost.
An added temperature difference may result in lower efficiency.
Selection of a suitable secondary fluid requires additional investigation

1.2.NATURAL CIRCULATION LOOPS
Heat transfer loops (secondary loops) are classified into two groups: forced
circulation loop (FCL) in which an external pump is used to drive the flow, and a natural
circulation loop (NCL). In NCLs circulation of fluid is maintained due to the buoyancy
effect caused by thermally generated density gradient, so that a pump is not required. In a
NCL, the heat sink is located at a higher elevation than the heat source which establishes
an unstable density gradient in the system and hence, under the influence of gravity,
lighter (warmer) fluid rises up and heavier (cooler) fluid comes down. Hence thermal
energy can be transported from high temperature source to low temperature sink without
direct contact with each other and also without using any prime mover.



17



Fig 2 : Rectangular NCL

1.2.1. ADVANTAGES OF NCL
The main advantage of NCL is its simplicity and low cost. This is due to the fact that
pumps are eliminated. Also this is comparatively safer. With NCL there is improved flow
distribution and better two phase characteristics are observed.

1.2.2. DISADVANTAGES OF NCL
In a NCL, the driving head is low. Hence lower maximum power is available per
channel. There is also a high prevalence of instabilities. Specific start up procedure may
also be required.
i. Selection of working fluids for natural circulation loops
Selection of working fluid (secondary fluid) for NCLs are typically carried out based
on the following properties:
Low freezing point
Low viscosity
High volumetric expansion coefficient
High volumetric heat capacity
High specific heat
High thermal conductivity


18

High density
Chemically stable, non-toxic, non-corrosive nature
Environment friendliness
Cost, availability etc.

Low freezing point is the first criterion for selecting a secondary fluid for
refrigeration applications, and it should be well below the operating temperature of the
system. For the optimum design of secondary refrigeration system, it is essential to find
the right balance between viscosity, specific heat and thermal conductivity.

1.3.NANOFLUIDS
Suspension of nanomaterial in colloidal form in the range of 1-100nm in a carrier
fluid is known as nanofluids [2]. The nanoparticles used in nanofluids are typically made
of metals, oxides, carbides, or carbon nanotubes. Common base fluids include
water, ethylene glycol and oil.
Currently nanofluids are being intensely researched upon. The low thermal
conductivity of conventional heat transfer fluid has been a serious obstacle for
improvement of performance and compactness of the system. Studies on micro-meter
sized particles encountered a host of problems such as rapid settling of particles, clogging
and increased pressure drop in the fluid [2].
The nanofluids received intense scientific attention after large enhancement in
thermal conductivity of copper based nanofluids was reported at very low volume
fractions. After detailed investigations by a number of researchers, Brownian motion
induced convection and conduction through percolating nanoparticle paths are considered
to be the most probable causes for the increased value of thermal conductivity [3], [4] and
[5]. Some very recent works indicate conduction through the formation of agglomerates
as another significant factor [6], [7].




19

1.3.1. ADVANTAGES OF NANOFLUID
High specific surface area and therefore more heat transfer surface between
particles and fluids.
High dispersion stability with predominant Brownian motion of particles.
Reduced pumping power as compared to pure liquid to achieve equivalent heat
transfer intensification.
Reduced particle clogging as compared to conventional slurries, thus
promoting system miniaturization.
Adjustable properties, including thermal conductivity and surface wettability,
by varying particle concentrations to suit different applications.
1.3.2. DISADVANTAGE OF NANOFLUIDS
Poor long term stability
Increased pressure drop
Lower Specific heat compared to base fluid
High production Cost of nanofluids

1.4. OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the present work are:
Comparative study of different turbulence models for the simulation of single
phase carbon-di-oxide in a rectangular natural circulation loop.
Steady state analysis employing a 3-Dimensional CFD model of water based
nanofluids (Alumina (Al
2
O
3
), Cupric Oxide (CuO)) in rectangular NCL with
isothermal heat source and sink as end heat exchangers.
To investigate their thermal performance by studying Thermal Conductivity (k),
Heat Transfer Rate (Q), Specific Heat (C
p
).
To study the physical properties such as Viscosity, Density (), Volumetric
expansion ().
To compare results of Turbulent and Laminar flows for the given nanofluids.


20

To understand the Multi-Phase Models available in FLUENT and selecting the
most appropriate one.
Further results are to be validated using previous works.

1.5.APPROACH
For carrying out this work FLUENT is used to model the given problem. The
simulation involves an understanding of the various turbulence models and the multi-
phase models available in FLUENT. The best model is identified for the given case
from previous research work carried out in this area. Also, many physical properties
are to be found out from available data to run the simulations.

The results are obtained by running simulations for the following cases:
Different Nanofluids (Al
2
O
3
, CuO)
Particle Size variation
Different Volume Fractions
Turbulent and Laminar flows














21

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1.NANOFLUIDS:
Pastoriza-Gallego et al. (2010) analysed stability and dispersion of nanofluids
obtained by dispersing CuO nanoparticles in water. They found out that the particle size
has subtle but not negligible influence in density. The deviations from the ideal behaviour
increases with the nanofluid concentration. The differences in the viscosities are large
and must be taken into account for practical application. They described the differences
in the viscosities by considering the describing either the aggregation state or the particle
size distribution of nanofluid. They found out that the viscosity increases as the particle
size decreases.
Yu et al. (2009) measured the thermal conductivity and viscosity of ZnO
nanoparticles in ethylene glycol. It was found out that the setting time has no effect on
the thermal conductivity of the nanofluid. The thermal conductivity increased with
increase in temperature. The thermal conductivity of the nanofluid increased nonlinearly
with the particle concentration. The results were consistent with prediction values by the
Maxwell and Bruggeman models. It was also found out that the low particle
concentration nanofluids demonstrate Newtonian behaviour, and the high particle
concentration nanofluid demonstrate shear-shinning behaviour.
Hwang et al. (2005) measured thermal conductivities of nanofluids by hot wire
method. It was demonstrated that the effective thermal conductivity of nanofluid in base
fluid is much higher than that of the pure fluid. The thermal conductivity increases
linearly with the particle concentration. The thermal conductivity of nanofluid was found
to be function of thermal conductivities of both the nanoparticles and the base fluid.
Hwang et al. (2006) examined the effect of adding different nanoparticles in base
fluid on lubrication and thermal conductivity. They measured kinematic viscosity and
thermal conductivity to study thermo physical properties of nanofluids. It was found out


22

that with increase in particle volume fraction the thermal conductivity of nanofluid
increases. They found out that the stability of nanofluids is influenced by the
characteristics between nanoparticles and the base fluid.
Xuan et al. (1999) demonstrated a method to prepare nanofluid by using
nanoparticles and base metal. They carried out theoretical study on the conductivity of
prepared nanofluids using hot wire method and proposed a model to describe thermal
conductivity and heat transfer number.
Chopkar et al. (2006) prepared a nanofluid by dispersing

nanocrystalline
particles in ethylene glycol. They characterized the size of nanoparticles by transmission
electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction, and measured thermal conductivity of
nanofluids using a purpose-built thermal comparator. The results showed that thermal
conductivity of nanofluids is around two times performance of the nanofluids. They also
derived some correlations for predicting Nusselt that of base fluid. Heat removal rate of
nanofluid was found to be better than base fluid. Hence, use of nanofluids was
recommended for automobiles.
Xuan et al. (2000) investigated the mechanism for heat transfer of nanofluids. They
derived the heat transfer correlation of the nanofluid by using two different approaches.
Chandrasekar et al. (2009) presented friction factor and heat transfer characteristics
of

nanofluid flowing through horizontal tube. The nusselt number was

found to be increased for nanofluid compared with base fluid. The pressure loss was
found to be almost equal for nanofluid and base fluid. The correlations developed for
friction factor and Nusselt number was found to be in accordance with the experimental
data.
Chandrasekar et al. (2009) in another paper reported theoretical determination and
experimental investigations of viscosity and thermal conductivity of

nanofluid. They measured viscosity and thermal conductivity of nanofluid at different
volume concentrations. It was found out that thermal conductivity increase was


23

substantially lower than the increase in viscosity. They proposed models to predict
viscosity and thermal conductivity which showed good agreement with the experimental
results.
Yu et al. (2010) investigated the effect of addition Aluminium nitride nanoparticles
in the thermal conductivity of conventional heat exchange fluids. They carried out the
study for two types of base fluids, for ethylene glycol and propylene glycol. The
enhancement in thermal conductivity was found out to be slightly more for propylene
glycol. The temperature had a negligible effect on the conductivity enhancement ratio.
The two nanofluids behaved as Newtonian fluid at lower volume concentrations. While
the nanofluids exhibited shear-shinning behaviour at higher volume concentrations.
Suresh et al. (2010) investigated friction factor and convective heat transfer
characteristics of CuO/water nanofluid in a dimpled tube. They determined the effect of
nanofluids and dimples on the Reynolds number and Nusselt number. They investigated
effect of nanoparticles inclusion on viscosity, thermal conductivity, heat transfer
enhancement and pressure loss. Though the use of nanoparticles increased the heat
transfer, there was negligible increase in friction factor. Also the pressure drop was found
to be slightly increased with the addition of nanoparticles. This implied the nanofluid
may be suitable for practical application. The viscosity of the nanofluid increased with
increase in particle concentration.
Suresh et al. (2012) in another paper investigated the friction factor and convective
heat transfer characteristics of

nanofluid in circular tube under turbulent

flow. The circular tube had spiraled rod inserts. They encountered enhancement in heat
transfer increases with the increase in particle volume fraction. The pressure drop was
found to be more with spiralled rod insert.
2.2. NANOFLUIDS BASED NATURAL CIRCULATION LOOP:
Nayak et al.(2008) investigated the natural circulation behaviour in a rectangular
loop experimentally with water and different concentration of

nanofluids. They


24

found out that flow rates increased and flow instabilities decreased in the case of
nanofluids as compared with water. These two activities were found to depend upon the
nanoparticles volume fraction. They measured flow rate at different power. The initial
conditions of the loop and the rate of power rise were similar in all the cases. In the case
of nanofluids the flow rates were found to be higher than that in the case of water.
Nayak et al. (2011) studied the stability and transient behaviour of a boiling two-
phase natural circulation loop with water based

nanofluid and water. The natural

circulation flow behaviour with rise in power is similar with

nanofluid and water

in single-phase condition. However, for same operating conditions nanofluid had higher
buoyancy induced flow rates than with water alone. In addition, with nanofluid, the
boiling induced type 1 flow instabilities are found to be at much lower level. It was found
out that the operating pressure has very little effect on single-phase natural circulation,
both for nanofluid and water.
Namburu et al. (2007) investigated experimentally rheological properties of copper
oxide nanoparticles suspended in water and ethylene glycol and mixture. It was revealed
that as the fluid temperature increases the viscosity diminishes exponentially. Also the
viscosity was found to be increasing with the increase in concentrations of nanofluids
possess. The change in relative viscosity over temperature is minimal at lower volume
fractions of nanofluid. Xuan el al. (2003) found that a nanofluid at low volume fractions
had higher the heat transfer coefficient even though there was not much pressure loss.
Misale et al. (2012) presented an experimental study focused on the macroscopic
effects on the thermal performance of a mini-loop. They carried out the experiments for
two fluids:

and distilled water. The difference between hot heat

exchanger and cold heat exchanger was similar for water and nanofluid. Overall heat
transfer coefficient and the average fluid temperature also similar for both the fluids.
They compared their results of experimental data with Vijayans correlation, developed
for large scale loops. It was similar for water. It showed good agreement even in the case
of nanofluid.


25

3. MODELS FOR TURBULENCE ANALYSIS-
TRANSPORT EQUATIONS

3.1.TRANSPORTATION EQUATIONS FOR STANDARD K- MODEL:
For turbulent kinetic energy k

()

[(

(3.1.1)
For dissipation ,

()

[(

(3.1.2)
3.2. MODELLING TURBULENT VISCOSITY:
Turbulent viscosity is modelled as:

Production of k

Where S is the modulus of the mean rate-of-strain tensor, defined as:

Efficiency of buoyancy

26

Where Pr
t
is the turbulent Prandtl number for energy and g
i
is the component of
the gravitational vector in the i
th
direction. For the standard and realizable models, the
default value if Pr
t
is 0.85.The coefficient of thermal expansion B, is given as

Model constants
C
1c
=1.44, C
2c
=1.92, C
3c
=-0.33, C =0.99,
k
=1.0,
c
=1.

Strengths
Robust
Economical
reasonably accurate;
long accumulated performance data.
Weaknesses
Mediocre results for complex flows with severe pressure gradients,
Strong streamline curvature, swirl and rotation.
Predicts that round jets spread 15% faster than planar jets whereas in actuality
they spread 15% slower

3.3. RNG k- EQUATIONS:
The RNG model was developed using Re-Normalisation Group (RNG) methods
by to renormalize the Navier-Stokes equations, to account for the effects of smaller
scales of motion. In the standard k-epsilon model the eddy viscosity is determined from a
single turbulence length scale, so the calculated turbulent diffusion is that which occurs
only at the specified scale, whereas in reality all scales of motion will contribute to the


27

turbulent diffusion. The RNG approach, which is a mathematical technique that can be
used to derive a turbulence model similar to the k-epsilon, results in a modified form of
the epsilon equation which attempts to account for the different scales of motion through
changes to the production term.
There are a number of ways to write the transport equations for k and epsilon, a
simple interpretation where buoyancy is also included.

()

[(

(3.2.1)

()

[(

(3.2.2)
Where

With the turbulent viscosity being calculated in the same manner as with the
standard k- model.
P
k
is the production of kinetic energy

Constants:
It is interesting to note that the values of all of the constants (except ) are derived
explicitly in the RNG procedure. They are given below with the commonly used values
in the standard k-epsilon equation in brackets for comparison:
Cu = 0.0845(0.09) ,
k
= 0.7194(1.0) ,
c
= 0.7194(1.30) , C
e1
= 1.42(1.44) , C
e2
=
1.68(1.92) ,
0
= 4.38 and = 0.012 (derived from experiment).




28

3.4. k- MIXTURE TURBULENCE MODELS
The mixture turbulence model is the default multiphase turbulence model. It
represents the first extension of the k- model, and it is applicable when phases separate,
for stratified (or nearly stratified) multiphase flows, and when the density ratio between is
close to 1.
The k and equations describing this model are as follows:
(

) (

(3.2.4)
And
(

) (

)

Where the mixture density and velocity,

and

are computed from

And

The turbulent viscosity,

, is computed from

And the production of turbulence kinetic energy, G
k,m
is computed from

29

3.5.k- DISPERSED TURBULENCE MODELS
The model is applicable when there is clearly one primary continuous phase and the
rest are dispersed dilute secondary phases. Time and length scales that characterize the
motion are used to evaluate dispersion coefficient, correlation functions, and the turbulent
kinetic energy of each dispersed model.
The characteristic particle relaxation time connected with inertial effects acting on a
dispersed phase p is defined as

)
The Lagrangian integral time scale calculated along particle trajectories, mainly affected
by the crossing trajectory effect is defined as

)

Where

|

And

Where is the angle between the mean particle velocity and the mean relative
velocity.
The ratio between these two characteristic times is written as

30

Strengths
Good for moderately complex behaviour like jet impingement
separating flows
swirling flows
secondary flow
Weakness
Subjected to limitations due to isotropic eddy viscosity assumption.
3.6. STANDARD k- MODEL:
Kinematic Eddy Viscosity

Turbulence Kinetic Energy

[(

]
Specific Dissipation Rate

[(

]
Closure Coefficient and Auxiliary Relations
=5/9, =3/40,
*
=9/100, =1/2, *=1/2, =
*
k
Strength
Behaviour of k-omega model in the logarithmic region is superior than k-epsilon
in equillibrium adverse pressure gradient flows.



31

Weaknesses
Away from the wall k-w model depicts strong sensitivity to the free stream values
K-w model does not accurately represent k and epsilon distribution in agreement
with DNS data.

3.7.Transport Equations for the SST k- Model
The SST k- model has a similar form to the standard k- model:

()

And

()

In these equations,

represents the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due

to mean velocity gradients, calculated from G
k
and defined in Eq.1 under Modelling the
Turbulent Production, G
k
represents the generation of , calculated as described for the
standard k- model in Modelling the Turbulence Production.
k
and

represents the
effective diffusivity for k and due to turbulence, Y
k
andY

represent the dissipation of

k and due to turbulence, calculated as described in Modelling the Turbulence
Dissipation. D

represents the cross-diffusion term, calculated as described below, S

k
and
S

are user-defined source terms.

Strength
Functions as k-omega near the wall and k-epsilon away from the wall
Weakness
Fails to predict velocity profiles in severe adverse pressure gradient flow.


32

3.8.TRANSPORT EQUATIONS FOR THE k-kl- MODEL:
The k-kl- model is considered to be the three-equation eddy-viscosity type, which
includes transport equations for turbulent kinetic energy (k
T
), laminar kinetic energy (k
L
),
and the inverse turbulent scale ()

[(

[(

]
The inclusion of the turbulent and laminar fluctuations on the mean flow and
energy equations via the eddy viscosity and thermal diffusivity is as follows:

Strength
Able to predict laminar to turbulent transition

Weakness
Grid dependency and over-prediction of turbulence in transition zones if not
correctly handled.



33

4. DESCRIPTION OF MULTIPHASE MODELS

4.1.THE MIXTURE MODEL
The mixture model is designed for two or more phases (fluid or particulate). As in
the Eulerian model, the phases are treated as interpenetrating continua. The mixture
model solves for the mixture momentum equation and prescribes relative velocities to
describe the dispersed phases. Applications of the mixture model include particle-laden
flows with low loading, bubbly flows, sedimentation, and cyclone separators. The
mixture model can also be used without relative velocities for the dispersed phases to
model homogeneous multiphase flow.

4.1.1 OVERVIEW
The mixture model is a simplified multiphase model that can be used in different
ways. It can be used to model multiphase flows where the phases move at different
velocities, but assume local equilibrium over short spatial length scales. It can be used to
model homogeneous multiphase flows with very strong coupling and phases moving at
the same velocity and lastly, the mixture models are used to calculate non-Newtonian
viscosity.
The mixture model can model n phases (fluid or particulate) by solving the
momentum, continuity, and energy equations for the mixture, the volume fraction
equations for the secondary phases, and algebraic expressions for the relative velocities.
Typical applications include sedimentation, cyclone separators, particle-laden flows with
low loading, and bubbly flows where the gas volume fraction remains low.

The mixture model is a good substitute for the full Eulerian multiphase model in
several cases. A full multiphase model may not be feasible when there is a wide
distribution of the particulate phase or when the interphase laws are unknown or their
reliability can be questioned. A simpler model like the mixture model can perform as


34

well as a full multiphase model while solving a smaller number of variables than the full
multiphase model.
The mixture model allows you to select granular phases and calculates all
properties of the granular phases. This is applicable for liquid-solid flows.

4.1.2. LIMITATIONS
The following limitations apply to the mixture model in ANSYS FLUENT:

Pressure-based solver is to be used. The mixture model is not available with the
density-based solver.

Only one of the phases can be defined as a compressible ideal gas. There is no
limitation on using compressible liquids using user-defined functions.

When the mixture model is used, stream wise periodic flow is not to be modelled
with specified mass flow rate.

Solidification and melting are not to be modelled in conjunction with the mixture
model.

The Singhal et al. cavitation model (available with the mixture model) is not
compatible with the LES turbulence model.

The relative formulations in combination with the MRF and mixture model are
not to be used. The mixture model does not allow for inviscid flows.

The shell conduction model for walls is not allowed with the mixture model.

When tracking particles in parallel, do not use the DPM model with the mixture
model if the shared memory option is enabled.






35

The mixture model, like the VOF model, uses a single-fluid approach. It differs from
the VOF model in two respects:

The mixture model allows the phases to be interpenetrating. The volume fractions

and

for a control volume can therefore be equal to any value between 0 and
1, depending on the space occupied by phase q and phase p.

The mixture model allows the phases to move at different velocities, using the
concept of slip velocities.

The mixture model solves the continuity equation for the mixture, the momentum
equation for the mixture, the energy equation for the mixture, and the volume fraction
equation for the secondary phases, as well as algebraic expressions for the relative
velocities (if the phases are moving at different velocities).

4.1.3. CONTINUITY EQUATION
The continuity equation for the mixture is

) (

)

where

is the mass-averaged velocity:

and

is the mixture density:

where

is the volume fraction of k.

36

4.1.4. MOMENTUM EQUATION
The momentum equation for the mixture can be obtained by summing the
individual momentum equations for all phases. It can be expressed as

) (

)]

Where n is the number of phases, F is a body force, and

is the viscosity of the

mixture:

is the drift velocity for secondary phase k :

4.1.5. ENERGY EQUATION
The energy equation for the mixture takes the following form:

where

is the effective conductivity, where

is the turbulent thermal conductivity

defined according to the turbulence model being used. The first term on the right-hand


37

side represents energy transfer due to conduction

includes any other volumetric heat

sources.

4.1.6. RELATIVE SLIP VELOCITY AND THE DRIFT VELOCITY
The relative velocity (also referred to as the slip velocity) is defined as the velocity of
a secondary phase (p) relative to the velocity of the primary phase (q):

The mass fraction for any phase (k) is defined as:

The drift velocity and the relative velocity (

) are connected by the following

expression:

While solving a mixture multiphase calculation with slip velocity, the following
formulations are available for the drag function:

Schiller-Naumann (the default formulation)

Morsi-Alexander

Symmetric

Constant

User-defined






38

4.1.7. GRANULAR PROPERTIES
Since the concentration of particles is an important factor in the calculation of the
effective viscosity for the mixture, we may use the granular viscosity to get a value for
the viscosity of the suspension. The volume weighted averaged for the viscosity would
now contain shear viscosity arising from particle momentum exchange due to translation
and collision.
The collisional and kinetic parts, and the optional frictional part, are added to give
the solids shear viscosity:

4.1.8. KINETIC VISCOSITY
ANSYS FLUENT provides two expressions for the kinetic viscosity:

Syamlal et al. (default)

Gidaspow et al.


4.1.9. GRANULAR TEMPERATURE
The viscosities need the specification of the granular temperature for the

solids phase. Here we use an algebraic equation from the granular temperature transport
equation. This is only applicable for dense fluidized beds where the convection and the
diffusion term can be neglected under the premise that production and dissipation of
granular energy are in equilibrium.

(

):

where ,
(

):

=the generation of energy by the solid stress tensor

39

the collisional dissipation energy

the energy exchange between the

fluid or solid phase and the

solid
phase.

The collisional dissipation of energy,

, represents the rate of energy dissipation

within the

solids phase due to collisions between particles. This term is represented

by the expression derived by Lun et al.

The granular temperature can be solved with the following options in ANSYS:
Algebraic formulation (the default)

Constant granular temperature-This is useful in very dense situations where the
random fluctuations are small.

UDF for granular temperature

4.1.10. INTERFACIAL AREA CONCENTRATION
Interfacial area concentration is defined as the interfacial area between two phases
per unit mixture volume. This is an important parameter for predicting mass, momentum
and energy transfers through the interface between the phases. In two-fluid flow systems,
one discrete (particles) and one continuous, the size and its distribut ion of the discrete
phase or particles can change rapidly due to growth (mass transfer between phases),
expansion due to pressure changes, coalescence, breakage and/or nucleation mechanisms.
The Population Balance model (see the Population Balance Module Manual)
ideally captures this phenomenon, but is computationally expensive since several
transport equations need to be solved using moment methods, or more if the discrete
method is used. The interfacial area concentration model uses a single transport equation
per secondary phase and is specific to bubbly flows in liquid at this stage.





40

The transport equation for the interfacial area concentration can be written as

)

Where

is the interfacial area concentration(

), and

is the gas volume

fraction.
The first two terms on the right hand side are of gas bubble expansion due to
compressibility and mass transfer (phase change).
Where,

is the mass transfer rate into the gas phase per unit mixture volume.

and

are the coalescence sink terms due to random collision and wake
entrainment, respectively.

is the breakage source term due to turbulent impact.

Two sets of models, the Hibiki-Ishii model and the Ishii-Kim model, exist for those,
source and sink terms for the interfacial area concentration, which are based on the works
of Ishii et al. According to their study, the mechanisms of interactions can be summarized
in five categories:
Coalescence due to random collision driven by turbulence.

Breakage due to the impact of turbulent eddies.

Coalescence due to wake entrainment.

Shearing-off of small bubbles from large cap bubbles.

Breakage of large cap bubbles due to flow instability on the bubble surface.





41

4.2. EULERIAN MODEL
The Eulerian multiphase model in ANSYS FLUENT allows for the modeling of
multiple separate, yet interacting phases. The phases can be liquids, gases, or solids in
nearly any combination. An Eulerian treatment is used for each phase, in contrast to the
Eulerian-Lagrangian treatment that is used for the discrete phase model.
With the Eulerian multiphase model, the number of secondary phases is limited
only by memory requirements and convergence behaviour. Any number of secondary
phases can be modeled, provided that sufficient memory is available. For complex
multiphase flows, however, you may find that your solution is limited by convergence
behaviour.
ANSYS FLUENTs Eulerian multiphase model does not distinguish between fluid-
fluid and fluid-solid (granular) multiphase flows. A granular flow is simply one that
involves at least one phase that has been designated as a granular phase.

The ANSYS FLUENT solution is based on the following:
A single pressure is shared by all phases.
Momentum and continuity equations are solved for each phase.
The following parameters are available for granular phases:
Granular temperature (solids fluctuating energy) can be calculated for
each solid phase. You can select either an algebraic formulation, a
constant, a user-defined function, or a partial differential equation.
Solid-phase shear and bulk viscosities are obtained by applying kinetic
theory to granular flows. Frictional viscosity for modeling granular flow
is also available.

Several interphase drag coefficient functions are available, which are appropriate
for various types of multiphase regimes.
All of the k- and k-w turbulence models are available, and may apply to all
phases or to the mixture.






42

4.2.1. LIMITATION OF EULERIAN MODEL
All other features available in ANSYS FLUENT can be used in conjunction with
the Eulerian multiphase model, except for the following limitations:

The Reynolds Stress turbulence model is not available on a per phase basis.

Particle tracking (using the Lagrangian dispersed phase model) interacts only with the
primary phase.

Streamwise periodic flow with specified mass flow rate cannot be modeled when the
Eulerian model is used (the user is allowed to specify a pressure drop).

Inviscid flow is not allowed.

Melting and solidification are not allowed.

When tracking particles in parallel, the DPM model cannot be used with the Eulerian
multiphase model if the shared memory option is enabled.

To change from a single-phase model to a multiphase model, you will have to do
this in a series of steps. You will have to set up a mixture solution and then a multiphase
solution. However, since multiphase problems are strongly linked, it is better to start
directly solving a multiphase problem with an initial conservative set of parameters (first
order in time and space). This is of course problem dependent. The modifications
involve, among other things, the introduction of the volume fractions
1
,
2
,
n
for the
multiple phases, as well as mechanisms for the exchange of momentum, heat, and mass
between the phases.

4.2.2. VOLUME OF FRACTION EQUATION
The description of multiphase flow as interpenetrating continua incorporates the
concept of phasic volume fractions, denoted here by
q
. Volume fractions represent the
space occupied by each phase, and the laws of conservation of mass and momentum are
satisfied by each phase individually. The derivation of the conservation equations can be


43

done by ensemble averaging the local instantaneous balance for each of the phases or by
using the mixture theory approach.

The volume of phase q, V
q
is defined by

Where

The effective density of phase q is

Where

is the physical density of phase q.

4.2.3. EQUATIONS IN GENERAL FORM
Conservation of Mass
The continuity of phase q is

) (

) (

Where

is the velocity of phase q and

characterises the mass transfer from

the p
th
and q
th
phase and

characterises the mass transfer from phase q to phase p.

44

Conservation of Momentum
The momentum balance for phase q yields

) (

)

Where,

is the q
th
phase stess-strain tensor

Here,

and

are the shear and bulk viscosity of phase q,

is an external
force,

is a lift force,

is the virtual mass force,

is an interaction force
between phases, and p is the pressure shared by all phases.

is the interphase velocity, defined as follows. If

> 0 (i.e.; phase p mass is

being transferred to phase q),

; . If

< 0 (i.e.; phase q mass is being transferred

to phase p),

; Likewise, if

> 0 then

, if

< 0 then

.

Continuity Equation
The volume fraction of each phase is calculated from a continuity equation:

) (

) (

)
Where

is the phase reference density, or the volume averaged density of the q

th
phase
in the solution domain.





45

Fluid-Solid Momentum Equations
The conservation of momentum for the s
th
solid phase is

) (

)

Where ps is the sth solid pressure, Kis =Ksi is the momentum exchange coefficient
between fluid or solid phase I and solid phase phase s, N is the total number of phases,
and

.

Maximum Packing Limit in Binary Mixtures
The packing limit is not a fixed quantity and may change according to the number
of particles present within a given volume and the diameter of the particles. Small
particles accumulate in between larger particles increasing the packing limit.

For a binary mixture with different diameters, the mixture composition is defined as:

Where,

As this is a condition for application of the maximum packing limit for the binary
mixtures.




46

The maximum packing limit of the mixture

is the minimum of the two

expressions.

(

] (

)
(

] (

)(

The packing limit is used for the calculation of the radial distribution function.

Granular Temperature
The granular temperature for the s
th
solid phase is proportional to the kinetic
energy of the random motion of the particles. The transport equation derived from the
kinetic theory takes the form

) (

)] (

(5.13)

Where,
(

=the generation of energy by the solid stress tensor

the diffusion energy (

is the diffusion coefficient)

= the collisional dissipation of energy

= the energy exchange between the i

th
fluid or solid phase and the s
th
solid
phase





47

4.3.VOLUME OF FLUID (VOF) MODEL THEORY
4.3.1. OVERVIEW OF THE VOF MODEL:
The VOF model can model two or more immiscible fluids by solving a single set of
momentum equations and tracking the volume fraction of each of the fluids throughout
the domain. Typical applications include the prediction of jet breakup, the motion of
large bubbles in a liquid, the motion of liquid after a dam break, and the steady or
transient tracking of any liquid-gas interface.
4.3.2. LIMITATIONS OF THE VOF MODEL:
The VOF model is not available with the density-based solver.
The VOF model does not allow for void regions where no fluid of any type is
present.
Only one of the phases can be defined as a compressible ideal gas. There is no
limitation on using compressible liquids using user-defined functions.
Stream wise periodic flow (either specified mass flow rate or specified pressure
drop) cannot be modeled when the VOF model is used.
The second-order implicit time-stepping formulation cannot be used with the
VOF explicit scheme.
4.3.3. STEADY-STATE AND TRANSIENT VOF CALCULATIONS:
A steady-state VOF calculation is sensible only when your solution is
independent of the initial conditions and there are distinct inflow boundaries for the
individual phases. The VOF formulation relies on the fact that two or more fluids (or
phases) are not interpenetrating. For each additional phase that you add to your model, a
variable is introduced: the volume fraction of the phase in the computational cell. In each
control volume, the volume fractions of all phases sum to unity. The fields for all
variables and properties are shared by the phases and represent volume-averaged values,
as long as the volume fraction of each of the phases is known at each location. Thus the
variables and properties in any given cell are either purely representative of one of the
phases, or representative of a mixture of the phases, depending upon the volume fraction


48

values. In other words, if the

fluids volume fraction in the cell is denoted as

then
the following three conditions are possible:

; The cell is empty (of the

fluid)

; The cell is full (of the

fluid)

; The cell contains the interface between the

fluid and one or more

other fluids. Based on the local value of

the appropriate properties and

variables will be assigned to each control volume within the domain.

Volume Fraction Equation:
The tracking of the interface(s) between the phases is accomplished by the
solution of a continuity equation for the volume fraction of one (or more) of the phases.
For the

phase, this equation has the following form:

) (

] (6.1)
Where

is the mass transfer from phase q to phase p and

is the mass
transfer from phase p to phase q.
The volume fraction equation will not be solved for the primary phase; the
primary-phase volume fraction will be computed based on the following constraint:

The implicit scheme:
When the implicit scheme is used for time discretization, standard finite-
difference interpolation schemes, QUICK, Second Order Upwind and First Order
Upwind, and the Modified HRIC schemes, are used to obtain the face fluxes for all cells,
including those near the interface.

) [

)] (6.2)


49

Since this equation requires the volume fraction values at the current time step
(rather than at the previous step, as for the explicit scheme), a standard scalar transport
equation is solved iteratively for each of the secondary-phase volume fractions at each
time step. The implicit scheme can be used for both time-dependent and steady-state
calculations.
The explicit scheme:
In the explicit approach, standard finite-difference interpolation schemes are
applied to the volume fraction values that were computed at the previous time step.

) [(

] (6.3)
Where,
n+1=index for new (current) time step
n=index for previous time step

=face value of the

volume fraction, computed from the first- or second-

order upwind, QUICK, modified HRIC, compressive, or CICSAM scheme
V=volume of the cell

=volume flux through the face, based on normal velocity

This formulation does not require iterative solution of the transport equation
during each time step, as is needed for the implicit scheme. When the explicit scheme is
used, a time-dependent solution must be computed. When the explicit scheme is used for
time discretization, the face fluxes can be interpolated either using interface
reconstruction or using a finite volume discretization scheme.




50

Material Properties
The properties appearing in the transport equations are determined by the
presence of the component phases in each control volume. In a two-phase system, for
example, if the phases are represented by the subscripts 1 and 2, and if the volume
fraction of the second of these is being tracked, the density in each cell is given by

(6.4)

All other properties (e.g., viscosity) are computed in this manner.

Momentum Equation
A single momentum equation is solved throughout the domain, and the resulting
velocity field is shared among the phases. The momentum equation, shown below, is
dependent on the volume fractions of all phases through the properties and .

() ( ) [(

)]

(6.5)
One limitation of the shared-fields approximation is that in cases where large
velocity differences exist between the phases, the accuracy of the velocities computed
near the interface can be adversely affected.

Energy Equation
The energy equation, also shared among the phases, is shown below.

() (( )) (

(6.6)
The VOF model treats energy,, and temperature, , as mass-averaged variables.
The properties and

(effective thermal conductivity) are shared by the phases. The

source term,

, contains contributions from radiation, as well as any other volumetric

heat sources.



51

As with the velocity field, the accuracy of the temperature near the interface is
limited in cases where large temperature differences exist between the phases. Such
problems also arise in cases where the properties vary by several orders of magnitude.
For example, if a model includes liquid metal in combination with air, the conductivities
of the materials can differ by as much as four orders of magnitude. Such large
discrepancies in properties lead to equation sets with anisotropic coefficients, which in
turn can lead to convergence and precision limitations.

4.4.HOW TO CHOOSE A RIGHT MODEL?







Fig 3:Choosing the right Model
Note:
The Stokes number is defined as a ratio of the particle response time to the
characteristic time of the flow.

(7.1)

(7.2)
The St gives a measure of temporal correlation between particle velocity and the fluid
velocity
If St <<1, the particle follows bulk macroscopic flow.
The particles are in quasi equilibrium with the surrounding flow.
Multiphase
flow
Dispersed Flow
(Eulerian tracking)
Eulerian,
mixture model
VOF Model
Yes
No


52

If St = 1, the particle tend to substantially modify the bulk macroscopic flow.
If St>>1, the particle motion is weakly affected by the motion.

To choose between the mixture model and the Eulerian model, you should
consider the following guidelines:
- If there is a wide distribution of the dispersed phases (i.e., if the particles vary in
size and the largest particles do not separate from the primary flow field), the mixture
model may be preferable (i.e., less computationally expensive). If the dispersed phases
are concentrated just in portions of the domain, you should use the Eulerian model
instead.
- If interphase drag laws that are applicable to your system are available (either
within ANSYS FLUENT or through a user-defined function), the Eulerian model can
usually provide more accurate results than the mixture model. Even though you can apply
the same drag laws to the mixture model, as you can for a non-granular Eulerian
simulation, if the interphase drag laws are unknown or their applicability to your system
is questionable, the mixture model may be a better choice. For most cases with spherical
particles, the Schiller-Naumann law is more than adequate. For cases with non-spherical
particles, a user-defined function can be used.
- If you want to solve a simpler problem, which requires less computational effort,
the mixture model may be a better option, since it solves a smaller number of equations
than the Eulerian model. If accuracy is more important than computational effort, the
Eulerian model is a better choice. Keep in mind, however, that the complexity of the
Eulerian model can make it less computationally stable than the mixture model.






53

5. PHYSICAL MODEL OF NCL

5.1.PHYSICAL MODEL
Figure 8.1. shows the schematic of a 3-D rectangular NCL which consists of an
isothermal sink, an isothermal source, left and right insulated pipes. The loop fluid is
heated sensibly in the isothermal heat source (TH) and is cooled sensibly in the
isothermal heat sink (TC). Circulation of the loop fluid is maintained due to the buoyancy
effect caused by heating at the bottom and cooling at the top.
The following simplifying assumptions are made in the analysis:
i. The loop fluids, CO2 and water, are in single-phase throughout the loop.
ii. The system is operating at steady-state.
iii. All external walls except the heat source and sink are perfectly insulated.
iv. Wall material is isotropic with constant thermal conductivity.


Fig.4 : Schematic of the Natural Circulation Loop employed in the model

5.2.GEOMETRIC AND MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE MODE
Internal diameter of the loop (d) = 15 mm
Length of isothermal sink or source (L) = 120 cm
Total width of the loop (

) = 146 cm


54

Total height of the loop (

) = 124.5 cm
Total length of the loop (

) = 545 cm
Insulated pipe length in horizontal pipe (2

) = 26 cm
Radius of curvature for bend (R) = 30 mm
Tube wall thickness = 2 mm
Material of the loop = copper

5.3. GRID GENERATION
Meshing of a three dimensional geometry has been carried out in Gambit 2.4.6.
Figure 8.2 shows the meshing (fluid part only) of a cross section of the loop which has a
minimum grid size of 0.2 mm in radial direction near the wall and increases to the
maximum grid size of 1.5 mm away from the wall. Coarse meshing is adopted in the
axial direction (5 mm grid size in horizontal pipes including bends and 10 mm for
vertical pipes). Mesh generation yielded a total of 235,552 nodes. The values of Y+ and
Y* have been checked for all the cases of turbulent flow to ensure optimal choice of
fineness of grid. Maximum Y+ and Y* values in the present study are 54.5 and 54.4,
respectively, which ensure that the grid is suitable for the assumption of standard wall
function near the wall (Launder and Spalding, 1974).

Where, u

is the friction velocity, defined as (

w
/).
w
is the
wall shear stress.

Fig 5 : Mesh generation
Where, k=turbulent kinetic energy, y= distance from the wall, C

=0.0845.


55

6. RESULTS

6.1. COMPARITIVE STUDY OF DIFFERENT TURBULENT MODELS
All the turbulence models are compared for various outputs such as heat transfer
rate in the heat exchangers, mass flow rate of CO
2
in the loop, Turbulence intensity,
turbulent kinetic energy, turbulent dissipation rate for various values of average
temperature of cold & hot heat exchanger. Also velocity contours at various cross
sections of the loop for different models are obtained. The plots obtained are shown
below:

310 315 320 325 330 335
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
T
o
t
a
l

H
e
a
t

T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r

R
a
t
e
,
Q

(
W
)
Temperature (K)
ke RNG
ke STD
kw STD
kw SST
k-kl w
Total heat transfer rate vs Temperature

Fig 6: Variation of heat transfer rate w.r.t temperature (

)

The total heat transfer showed a increasing trend upto certain temperature and
then decreases at higher temperatures. This can be explained due to the pseudo critical
point of carbon-di-oxide which is located at around 318K. Also the heat transfer rate
plots for all the models showed that the values are in good agreement except for the k-kl
w model.


56

310 315 320 325 330 335
0.045
0.050
0.055
0.060
0.065
0.070
0.075
0.080
M
a
s
s

f
l
o
w

R
a
t
e
(
k
g
/
s
)
Temperature (K)
ke RNG
ke STD
kw STD
kw SST
k-kl w
Mass Flow rate Vs Temperature

Fig 7: Variation of mass flow rate w.r.t temperature (

)

310 315 320 325 330 335
4
5
6
7
8
9
T
u
r
b
u
l
e
n
t

I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
(
%
)
Temperature (K)
ke RNG
ke STD
kw STD
kw SST
k-kl w
Turbulent Intensity vs. Temperature

Fig 8: Variation of Turbulent intensity rate w.r.t temperature (

)





57

310 315 320 325 330 335
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
F
1
Temperature (K)
ke RNG
ke STD
kw STD
kw SST
k-kl w
Turbulent kinetic energy vs. temperature

Fig 9 : Variation of turbulent kinetic energy transfer rate w.r.t temperature (

)

310 315 320 325 330 335
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
0.22
0.24
0.26
0.28
0.30
0.32
0.34
T
u
r
b
u
l
e
n
t

D
i
s
s
i
p
a
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
e

(
E
p
s
i
l
o
n
)

(
m
2
/
s
3
)
Temperature (K)
ke RNG
ke STD
kw STD
kw SST
k-kl w
Turbulent dessipation rate vs Temperature

Fig 10 : Variation of Turbulent dissipation rate w.r.t temperature (

)

Other parameters of turbulent modelling i.e turbulent intensity and turbulent
kinetic energy and turbulent dissipation rate also increases with the increase in average
loop temperature. And the mass flow rate in the loop decreases.



58

6.1.1. VALIDATION

1.60E+016 1.80E+016 2.00E+016 2.20E+016 2.40E+016 2.60E+016 2.80E+016 3.00E+016 3.20E+016 3.40E+016
180000
190000
200000
210000
220000
230000
240000
250000
260000
R
e
Grm*d/l
Vijayan_turb
Re Re vs Grm*d/l (ke RNG)
6.00E+0136.50E+0137.00E+0137.50E+0138.00E+0138.50E+0139.00E+0139.50E+013
200000
205000
210000
215000
220000
225000
230000
235000
240000
245000
250000
255000
R
e
Grm*d/l
Vijayan_turb
Re Re vs Grm*d/l (ke STD)


5.00E+013 6.00E+013 7.00E+013 8.00E+013 9.00E+013 1.00E+014
190000
200000
210000
220000
230000
240000
250000
260000
R
e
Grm*d/l
Vijayan_turb
Re Re vs Grm*d/l (kw STD)
5.00E+013 6.00E+013 7.00E+013 8.00E+013 9.00E+013 1.00E+014
190000
200000
210000
220000
230000
240000
250000
260000
R
e
Grm*d/l
Vijayan_turb
Re Re vs Grm*d/l (kw SST)



59

1.36E+0141.38E+0141.40E+0141.42E+0141.44E+0141.46E+0141.48E+0141.50E+014
260000
270000
280000
290000
300000
310000
320000
R
e
Grm*d/l
Vijayan_turb
Re
Re vs Grm*d/l (k-kl w)

Fig 11 : Reynolds number v\s

for various turbulence models

The results were plotted on Re v/s Gr*d/l and found that the results were in good
agreement with the Vijayans correlation.
Vijayans correlation:

Proposed correlation:

60

6.1.2. INFERENCES
In this study, water is employed as the external fluid in both CHX and HHX. Inlet
temperature of water in CHX is kept constant at 305 K and that in HHX is varied from
313 K to 353 K in steps of 10 K. Results are obtained for operating pressure of 90 bar.
Operating pressure of the system is defined at the centre of HHX.
The total heat transfer rate reaches a maximum at temperature of around 315K
which is because of unique property of carbon dioxide, whose specific heat
reaches a maximum value at temperature of 315K (Pseudo critical region) as
shown below in the graph, which increases the heat transfer rate at that operating
temperature


Fig 12: Specific heat variation of Co2 with Temperature

The transition k-kl- turbulence model is seen deviating from the other
models. This is because the transition from laminar to turbulence is over-
predicted by the model, i.e, the transitional term is overestimated.
The Turbulence Intensity, Turbulence kinetic energy increases with
increase in temperature.



61

6.2. SIMULATIONS OF WATER BASED NANOFLUIDS (Results)

6.2.1. ENHANCEMENT OF THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY AND HEAT
TRANSFER RATE.
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
T
h
e
r
m
a
l

C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
Volume Fraction
Cu
TiO2
Al2O3
CuO

Fig 13 :Variation of Thermal conductivity of Various nanofluids with volume
fraction
It is found after simulation of water based nanofluids with different nanoparticles
that the thermal conductivity as well as the heat transfer rate of the base fluid is enhanced
considerably. Further more the thermal conductivity increases linearly with the increase
in volume fraction of the nanoparticles in the base fluid. However there Heat transfer rate
in the CHX and HHX wall will increase upto a certain point after which it shows an
opposite trend which may be explained because of the settling and coagulation of
nanoparticles at higher volume fractions, the nanofluid tending to become a pure fluid.
And this Maximum point varies for different nanofluids which depends on the density of
the nanoparticles present.


62

6.2.2. VISCOSITY
Viscosity is found to increase with the increases in Volume fraction (Vf) of the
nanoparticles present in the nanofluid.
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
0.0008
0.0010
0.0012
0.0014
0.0016
0.0018
0.0020
0.0022
0.0024
0.0026
v
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y
vf
Cu
TiO2
Al2O3
CuO

Fig 13 : Variation of Viscosity of Various nanofluids with Volume fraction
6.2.3. MASS FLOW RATE VARIATION
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0.009
0.010
0.011
0.012
0.013
0.014
0.015
0.016
0.017
0.018
0.019
0.020
M
a
s
s

f
l
o
w

r
a
t
e
Volume fraction
Cu
TiO2
Al2O3
CuO

Fig 14 :Variation of the mass flow rate with Volume fraction


63

Mass flow rate increases with increase in volume fraction Increase in mass flow
rate increases heat transfer rate. The trend followed is very much similar to heat transfer
rate. So, heat transfer rate is highly influenced by the mass flow rate.
6.2.4. VALIDATION
In order to validate the results obtained from the CFD simulation, an additional
comparison was carried out employing the experimental data reported earlier by Vijayan
(2002), which was obtained on a water based NCL with an electrical heater (with
constant wall heat flux) and a heat exchanger in place of a constant temperature heating
pipe and cooling pipe respectively. In view of the dissimilarity between two physical
configurations, the comparison was made in terms of non-dimensional parameters
Reynolds number (Re) and modified Grashof number (Grm) which are calculated at the
bulk mean temperature (Tm) of the loop. Figure shows that the data trends agree
reasonably well with the previously reported measured dataas shown in Fig 15-17.

Vijayans correlation

Proposed correlation

64

0 6000000 12000000 18000000 24000000 30000000
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
R
e
y
n
o
l
d
s

N
u
m
b
e
r
Gr(d/L)
Re
Re(Vijayan)
Re(old)

Fig 15 : Validation of Simulation results with Vijayans correlation (CuO)
3000000 6000000 9000000 12000000 15000000
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
R
e
Gr d/L
Re Al2O3
old prposed
vijayan

Fig 16 : Validation of Simulation results with Vijayans correlation(Al2O3)



65

6000000 7200000 8400000 9600000 10800000 12000000
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
R
e
Gr d/L
Re TiO2
Old proposed
Vijayan

Fig 16 : Validation of Simulation results with Vijayans correlation (TiO2)

















66

7. CONCLUSION
The addition of metal oxide nanoparticles considerably increases the heat transfer
rate in condenser and evaporator
High thermal conductivity of the solid nanoparticles than that of the base fluid
water increases the overall heat transfer rate .
The heat transfer rate is more for nanofluid containing pure Cu nanoparticles than
containing metal-oxide nanoparticles
The heat transfer rate increases with increase in volume fraction of nanoparticles
in the base fluid upto a certain point after which it decreases due to coagulation
and settling of particles.
Viscosity of the nanofluid increases with increase in the volume fraction of
nanoparticle.
Mass flow rate inside the natural circulation loop increases upto a certain amount
of volume fraction after which it decreases due to settling of particles
The peak of heat transfer rate reached shifts towards left as the density of the
particle increases








67

8. FUTURE WORKS

Further studies in the opted field on the basis of the carried out work can be extended to:
The study of behaviour of other nanoparticles like Carbon Nano Tubes(CNT),
Silver, Graphene Nanoflex and composites.
An experimental approach to further validate the results and suggest appropriate
correlations.
Other base fluid and particle combinations like Ethylene Glycol and Propylene
Glycol with the above suggested nano particles can be studied.
The geometrical properties of the loop can also be varied for a given nanofluid.
Effect of different operating conditions on the behaviour of nanofluid can be
studied.












68

REFERENCES

[1] Chen K S, Chen Y Y, Shiao S W, Wang P C, An experimental study of steady
state behavior of a two phase natural circulation loop, Energy Conversion and
Management, V 31(6), pp. 553-569, 1991.
[2] P. Keblinski, R. Prasher, J. Eapen, Thermal conductance of nanofluids: is the
controversy over?, J Nanopart Res, 10 (2008), pp. 10891097.
[3] R. Prasher, P.E. Phelan, P. Bhattacharya, Effect of Aggregation Kinetics on the
Thermal Conductivity of Nanoscale Colloidal Solutions (Nanofluids), Nano Lett, 6
(2006), pp. 15291534.
[4] J. Philip, P.D. Shima, B. Raj, Enhancement of thermal conductivity in magnetite
based nanofluid due to chainlike structures, Appl Phys Lett, 91 (2007), p. 203108.
[5] J.W. Gao, R.T. Zheng, H. Ohtani, D.S. Zhu, G. Chen, Experimental Investigation
of Heat Conduction Mechanisms in Nanofluids. Clue on Clustering, Nano Lett, 9
(2009), pp. 41284132.
[6] J. Philip, P.D. Shima, B. Raj, Evidence for enhanced thermal conduction through
percolating structures in nanofluids, Nanotechnology, 19 (2008), p. 305706.
[7] M.J. Pastoriza-Gallego, C. Casanova, J.L. Legido, M.M. Pineiro, CuO in water
nanofluid: Influence of particle size and polydispersity on volumetric behaviour
and viscosity, Fluid Phase Equilibria 300 (2011) 188196.
[9] Wei Yu, Huaqing Xie, Lifei Chen, Yang Li, Investigation of thermal conductivity
and viscosity of ethylene glycol based ZnO nanofluid, Thermochimica Acta 491
(2009) 9296.
[10] Y.J. Hwang, Y.C. Ahn, H.S. Shin, C.G. Lee, G.T. Kim, H.S. Park, J.K. Lee,
Investigation on characteristics of thermal conductivity enhancement of nanofluids,
Current Applied Physics 6 (2006) 10681071.
[11] Y. Hwang, H.S. Park, J.K. Lee, W.H. Jung, Thermal conductivity and lubrication
characteristics of nanofluids, Current Applied Physics 6S1 (2006) 667671.


69

[12] Yimin Xuan, Qiang Li, Heat transfer enhancement of nanfuids, International
Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 21 (2000) 58-64.
[13] Manoj Chopkar, Prasanta K. Dasb and Indranil Manna, Synthesis and
characterization of nanofluid for advanced heat transfer applications, Scripta
Materialia 55 (2006) 549552.
[14] Yimin Xuan, Wilfried Roetzel, Conceptions for heat transfer correlation of
nanofluids, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 43 (2000) 3701-3707.
[15] M. Chandrasekar, S. Suresh, A. Chandra Bose, Experimental studies on heat
transfer and friction factor characteristics of

nanofluid in a circular pipe

under laminar flow with wire coil inserts, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 34
(2010) 122130.
[16] M. Chandrasekar, S. Suresh, A. Chandra Bose, Experimental investigations and
theoretical determination of thermal conductivity and viscosity of

nanofluids, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 34 (2010) 210-216.
[17] Wei Yu, Huaqing Xie, Yang Li, Lifei Chen, Experimental investigation on
thermal conductivity and viscosity of aluminum nitride nanofluid, Particulogy 9
(2011) 187191.
[18] S. Suresh, M. Chandrasekar, S. Chandra Sekhar, Experimental studies on heat
transfer and friction factor characteristics of CuO/water nanofluid under turbulent flow
in a helically dimpled tube, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 35 (2011) 542
549.
[19] S. Suresh, P. Selvakumar, M. Chandrasekar, V. Srinivasa Raman, Experimental
studies on heat transfer and friction factor characteristics of

nanofluid
under turbulent flow with spiraled rod inserts, Chemical Engineering and Processing
53 (2012) 2430.


70

[20] A.K. Nayak, M.R. Gartia, P.K. Vijayan, An experimental investigation of single-
phase natural circulation behavior in a rectangular loop with

nanofluids,
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 33 (2008) 184189.
[21] A.K. Nayak, P.P. Kulkarni, P.K. Vijayan, Study on the transient and stability
behaviour of a boiling two-phase natural circulation loop with

nanofluids,
Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1673-1681.
[22] Praveen K. Namburu, Devdatta P. Kulkarni, Debasmita Misra, Debendra K. Das,
Viscosity of copper oxide nanoparticles dispersed in ethylene glycol and water
mixture, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 397402.
[23] Y. Xuan, Q. Li, Investigation on convective heat transfer and flow features of
nanofluids, Journal of Heat Transfer 125 (2003) 151155.
[24] M. Misale, F. Devia, P. Garibaldi, Experiments with

nanofluid in a single-
phase natural circulation mini-loop: Preliminary results, Applied Thermal Engineering
40 (2012) 64-70.
[25] John Phillip, Sharma P.D., Thermal properties of nanofluids, advances in
colloidal and Interface Science, Volume 183-184, 15 November 2012, Pages 3045.