Etd

ABSTRACT
KIRAN, THIRUMARAN. Optimization of Air Flow and Heat Transfer in a Convective Heat Shrink
Oven. (Under the direction of Dr. Stephen D. Terry.)
The optimization of the flow and heat transfer characteristics inside a convective heat shrink
oven poses a complex flow field problem. The plenum blower wheel used to recirculate the air
creates a flow field that is highly non-uniform along the length of the oven. This causes uneven
heating of the bulk air flow resulting in reduced quality of wrapped product. In the initial part of
this thesis the different flow regions that directly affect the performance of the oven are throughly
studied by experimental data collection. A computer model of the baseline oven is built with an
implicit model of a blower using CFX [ANSYS] and the flow is visualized. The simulation is verified
with the experimental results and is used as a tool to analyze design modifications. The experimental
data together with computer simulations give us a good understanding of the nature of the flow and
its coupling with the heat transfer characteristics inside the oven. This knowledge is used to develop
design modifications and retrofits to create a uniform flow and temperature along the length of
the oven. Various modifications to the design are developed and their effects on the flow field are
predicted by the computer model. The most viable of these options are taken to the experimental
stage where they are a built and tested on the oven. Separate design modifications have been built
and tested to tackle the various aspects of the oven performance. In this process a CFD model was
developed that could give insight into the flow dynamics of the oven and can be used as a tool. In
the final part of the thesis a new oven design with cross-flow fan at its core is put forward and its
various advantages over a centrifugal blower are discussed.
© Copyright 2014 by Thirumaran Kiran
All Rights Reserved

Optimization of Air Flow and Heat Transfer
in a Convective Heat Shrink Oven
by
Thirumaran Kiran
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of

North Carolina State University
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Degree of
Master of Science
Mechancial Engineering
Raleigh, North Carolina
2014
APPROVED BY:
Dr. Alexei V. Saveliev Dr. Herbert M. Eckerlin
Dr. Stephen D. Terry

Chair of Advisory Committee
DEDICATION
To all the people and places in my life.
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Kiran Thirumaran was born and raised in Chennai,India. He was a curios kid and became a fan
of the scientific method at a very young age. This continued throughout his teens which made
him take up engineering. He graduated in 2012 with his Bachelor of Engineering in Aeronautical
Engineering from Anna University. In order to further his education and get a global exposure he
decided to attend graduate school in Mechanical Engineering at North Carolina State University.
There he learned a great deal in his work with the Industrial Assessment Center and was able to
obtain invaluable practical knowledge.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would first like to thank Mr.Adam Duncan, Design Engineer at Axoncorp for providing me the
freedom and necessary assistance to carry out this project.
I would also like to thank Prithwish Kundu, doctoral candidate at North Carolina State Univer-
sity for his assistance with computational tools and all my colleague at the Industrial Accessement
Center for their continued support throughout the course of the thesis.
Finally, and most importantly, I would like to thank Dr. Stephen Terry for giving me the oppor-
tunity to work at the Industrial Assessment Center and on this project. The practical knowledge he
has imparted has given me the confidence to take on any engineering task.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
CHAPTER 1 Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Basic Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Tunnel Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.1 Outer Shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.2 Upper Blower Wheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.3 Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.4 Lower Blower Wheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.5 Inner Shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.6 Heating Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.3 Product Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.3.1 Dimensional Correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.3.2 Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.3.3 Fan Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.3.4 Heating Coils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.4 Oven Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
CHAPTER 2 Shrink Oven Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.1 Analysis Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.1.1 Experimental Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.1.2 Computational Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2 Flow Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.2.1 Quantitative Analysis of the Jet Stream. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.2.2 Qualitative Analysis of the Flow in the Inner Shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.2.3 Quantitative Analysis at Fan Inlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.2.4 Qualitative Analysis of the Flow in the Tunnel Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.3 Heat Transfer Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2.3.1 Heat Transfer Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
2.3.2 Heat Transfer Coefficient - Experimental Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
2.4 Design Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
CHAPTER 3 Design Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

3.1 Turbulator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.2 Inner Shell Re-Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.2.1 Effect on flow Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.2.2 Effect on Heat Transfer Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3 Plates with Slits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.4 Plenum Redesign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.5 Cross-flow Fans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.5.1 Fan Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
v
3.5.2 Scope of the Tangential Oven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Appendix A Additional Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Mesh Properties of Various Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Table 2.2 Velocity at the Outlet of each cross section of the Blower Blade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Isometric ,Longitudinal and Transverse section of the Heat Shrink Oven . . . . . . . 2
Figure 1.2 The Front View of the Heat Shrink Oven with . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 1.3 Panel with slots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 1.4 Inlet and Outlet Velocity Vectors for a Backward Curved Centrifugal Blower Blade 7
Figure 1.5 Inlet and Outlet Velocity triangles for a Backward Curved Centrifugal Blower Blade 8
Figure 1.6 Inlet and Outlet Velocity triangles for a Backward Curved Centrifugal Blower Blade 10
Figure 1.7 Heating Coils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Figure 2.1 AccuSense F900 Sensors [F90] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Figure 2.2 Thermocouple - Type T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 2.3 2 - 20 Amp split-core AC current sensor - CTV-A [Ct] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 2.4 H22 Energy Logger and FlexSmart Analog Module [Ene] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 2.5 Temperature distribution along the length of the slots (Left Panel and Right Panel) 25
Figure 2.6 Velocity distribution at the slots - Left Panel and Right Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Figure 2.7 Dependence of Temperature with Mean Velocity at the slots of the Left panel . . . 27
Figure 2.8 Turbulence fluctuation with time at the start of the front slot (Near Tunnel Entrance) 29
Figure 2.9 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 2/3r d the length of the front slot . . . . . . . . . 29
Figure 2.10 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 1/3r d the length of the rear slot . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 2.11 Turbulence fluctuation with time at the end of the rear slot (Tunnel Exit) . . . . . . 31
Figure 2.12 Dependence of Mean Velocity with turbulence strength along the slots of the Left
panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Figure 2.13 Dependence of Temperature with turbulence strength along the slots of the Left
panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Figure 2.14 Inner Shell with given boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Figure 2.15 Streamlines along the XZ plane at various heights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Figure 2.16 Comparison of Computational and Experimental results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Figure 2.17 Flow properties at the Plenum Opening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure 2.18 Simulation Setup of the Tunnel Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure 2.19 Flow of Cold ambient air through the Tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Figure 2.20 Tempertaure Distribution at various cross-sections along the length of the tunnel 46
Figure 2.21 Power Drawn by the heating coil with the oven set at 140 F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 3.1 Effect of Rib Turbulator on the flow field in the Inner Shell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Figure 3.2 Rib Turbulator - Configuration B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Figure 3.3 Effects of Rib turbulators on the temperature of the jet stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Figure 3.4 Redesigned Inner Shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Figure 3.5 Effect of gradually reducing hydraulic diameter on the flow field in the Inner Shell. 61
Figure 3.6 Temperature and Turbulence Intensity distribution along the length of the front
slot of the Left Panel for the Redesigned Inner Shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Figure 3.7 Various Slit Configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Figure 3.8 Comparison of the Mean velocity at the slots of the left panel for various slit
configuration with the baseline values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
viii
Figure 3.9 Various Plenum Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Figure 3.10 Flow of Cold Ambient Air through the Redesigned Tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Figure 3.11 Effect of the new plenum design on the temperature distribution in the tunnel
section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Figure 3.12 Cross-Flow or Tangential Fan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Figure A.1 Dependence of Temperature with Mean Velocity at the slots of the Right panel . . 79
Figure A.2 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 1/2 of the length of the front slot . . . . . . . . . 80
Figure A.3 Turbulence fluctuation with time at end of the front slot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Figure A.4 Turbulence fluctuation with time at start of the rear slot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Figure A.5 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 1/2 of the rear slot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
ix
CHAPTER
Design
A Heat Shrink Tunnel is a convective heat oven that uses impinging streams of hot air to shrink-wrap
label films around bottles. Axon Corp, a pioneer in manufacturing convection based heat shrink
ovens make a product that has been in the market for over 20 years. The product has undergone
continuous improvements throughout its lifetime in the market and is time-tested and successful.
The company always on the lookout for further optimization opportunities have brought NCState
on-board to help with Research and Development.
This project is an attempt at that very objective and concentrates on the study of the fluid and
thermal characteristics of the oven. The flow properties as well as its interaction with the heating
elements are first studied and then matched with the requirements of the oven. The goal is to
develop a design for a heat shrink tunnel that is optimized to its functions and provide Axon with a
competitive edge in the market.
1.1 Basic Design
Axon’s heat shrink tunnels are designed to work with both tamper evident bands and sleeve labels.
The basic design consist two concentric shells one inside the other, the air flow through these shells
1
1.1. BASIC DESIGN CHAPTER 1. Design
are independent and are driven by a two separate blower wheel that are mounted on the same shaft.
The inner shell houses the heating coils that are placed symmetric on either of its side columns. A
tunnel section that runs throughout the length of the oven defines the working area through which
the product to be shrink wrapped is sent by means of a conveyor, the direction of which defines the
entrance and exit of the tunnel. The inner shell supplies the hot air needed for the shrinking process
as impinging jet streams discharges into the tunnel section through slots in the panels mounted
onto the inner shell.
Figure 1.1 Isometric ,Longitudinal and Transverse section of the Heat Shrink Oven
2
1.2. TUNNEL COMPONENTS CHAPTER 1. Design
Figure 1.2 The Front View of the Heat Shrink Oven with
1.2 Tunnel Components
The tunnel components whose design defines the characteristics of the flow and the heat transfer
in the system include,
1. Outer Shell.
2. Inner Shell.
3. Panel.
4. Upper Blower Wheel.
5. Lower Blower Wheel.
6. Heating Coils.
7. Plenum
3
The Inner shell, lower wheel blower and the heating coils are discussed in detail as they are respon-
sible for the flow in the tunnel section.
1.2.1 Outer Shell
The Outer Shell houses the upper blower wheel that cools the electronics on top of it. The outer shell
is 53.34 cm in height and 44.45 cm wide and could be 91.4 cm or 61 cm long depending upon the
model. The only differences between the two models of the oven is the length of the tunnel section
while all the other dimensions and the components remain the same.
1.2.2 Upper Blower Wheel
The Upper Blower Wheel draws air at ambient condition from the room through the openings in
the electronic housing. The openings are covered with filters that prevent dust from affecting the
electronics. The air flows over the electronics, into the fan and is dispersed radially into the columns
of the outer shell. The air flows through the columns further cooling the inner shell before being let
out through various slots on the front, back and along the sides. The flow through the outer shell
never directly affects the flow in the inner shell, Though it indirectly affects the flow by removing
energy from it in the form of heat. Thus the flow through the outer shell can be seen to serve two
purposes,
1. Remove heat from the electronics.
2. Prevent over heating of the oven.
1.2.3 Panel
The Panels are fit onto the Inner Shell on either sides and provide slots for the impinging jet streams.
The slot design shown in Figure 1.3 is the most commonly used design and would be the one used
for majority of the analysis. There can be two or more pairs of slots in each panel based on the size
and shape of the product to be shrink wrapped but most slot designs have an inclined slot that
is modified according to the product to be wrapped and horizontal slots at the bottom which are
present in most panel design.
The most common slot design used in the 91.4 cm model of the tunnel has horizontal slots that run
for 80.6 cm while the inclined panels start 20.32 cm from the entrance and run for 62.9 cm. The slots
are 1 cm in thickness and thus the slots have a cross sectional area of 143.5c m 2 on each panel. The
4
mean velocity of the jet stream as measured at the slot is 4.41 m/s (Will be discussed in detail in
Chapter 2).
Figure 1.3 Panel with slots
The mass flow rate (ṁ ) through the inner shell is calculated to be
ṁ = ρAV (1.1)
Where,
ρ - Density in k g /m 3
A - Cross sectional area in m 2
V - Velocity of the flow in m /s
For the preliminary calculations of the flow the heater is switched off and only the air flow through
the various components is studied.Thus the air flow would be at room conditions throughout the
oven and the density of air is constant at 1.204 k g /m 3 .Thus the Mass Flow Rate is given by,
kg m

ṁ = 1.204 × 143.5 × 10−4 (m 2 ) × 4.41
m3 s
kg
= 0.076
s
This is the mass flow rate through all the slots in one panel.
5
1.2.4 Lower Blower Wheel
Even though the lower and upper blower wheels are driven by the same motor they are independent
in terms of the fluid flow they handle. The lower blower wheel draws in air through the openings in
the plenum which are at the roof of the tunnel section and moves the air at an angle to the sides
of the inner shell. A plate on top of the wheel prevents the air to seep into the upper blower. Using
the mass flow rate calculated in the previous section, the dimensions of the fan and the properties
on the suction side of the fan, the flow properties at the outlet of the fan is calculate using velocity
triangles.
From the Conservation of Mass we have,
ρAV F a n = 2 [ρAV Sl o t s ]
Thus the flow through the fan is 0.152 kg/s. The velocity of the air at the inlet side of the fan blades
Vf 1 can be calculated thus,
m F˙a n
Vf 1 = (1.2)
ρ f a n A F a n I nl e t
The fan is 20.57 cm in diameter at the inlet side and 10.79 cm in breadth giving a cross sectional
area of 697 c m 2 .
The air through the slots is mixed with some air at atmospheric conditions and recirculated to
the inner shell through the fan. Thus the air temperature at the inlet side would be below the tem-
perature of the jet streams depending on the amount of outside air during the actual operation
of the oven. For this calculation however, the heater is turned off and thus the fan inlet is at room
conditions. Substituting the values in Eq. 1.2 we get a velocity at the inlet side of the fan blades to be
1.8 m/s.
1.2.4.1 Velocity Triangles
The velocity vector at the inlet side of the fan blade is radial at any point along its circumference
while the velocity at the outlet is displaced angularly depending on the blade angle and the angular
velocity of the blower wheel. Thus we need the velocity triangles to find the flow properties at the
outlet side of the blower wheels.
The Figure 1.4 gives the Inlet and Outlet Velocity Vectors for a typical Backward Curved Centrifu-
gal Blower Blade [DG]. The V1 (V1 = Vf 1 ) and V2 refer to the absolute velocity at the inlet and outlet of
6
Figure 1.4 Inlet and Outlet Velocity Vectors for a Backward Curved Centrifugal Blower Blade
the blades, this is the velocity observed from a stationery reference plane. U1 and U2 are the angular
velocity of the blade at its entrance and the exit. The Vr 1 and Vr 2 are the relative velocities which
refer to the velocity that the blade sees while rotating with an angular velocity. β2 is angle of the
rotor blade at the outlet while α is the angle between the absolute velocity and the plane of rotation.
The magnitude of radial component of the outlet velocity can be calculated by writing the continuity
equation between the inlet and outlet side of the blower wheel or between the outlet side of the
blower wheel and the slots[BRMy ]. The outlet diameter of the fan is 23.18 cm. The density remains
the same across the fan as the pressure drop is small and there is minimal temperature rise or drop.
Further the breadth of the blower wheel is the same on either side. Thus using known data the
velocity at the outlet of the fan blades Vf 2 can be calculated from the continuity equation as
Vf 1 D1
Vf 2 =
D2
1.8 m /s × 20.57 m
=
23.18 m
= 1.6 m /s .
7
Vf decreases from inlet to the outlet as the tip of the fan has a greater rotational velocity compared
to the hub. Thus a lot more of the radial component of velocity is converted to whirl or angular
component.
The blower wheels run at the maximum speed of 1475 RPM. Thus the angular velocity is calculated
by,
rev r a d 1 m i n 0.2057
U1 = 1475 2π m
mi n r e v 60 s e c 2
U1 = 15.87m/s
Similarly, U2 = 17.89 m /s
“U" gives the angular velocity of the blades and “Vf 2 " gives the magnitude of the radial component of
the output velocity. Now the magnitude of the whirl velocity “Vw 1 " needs to be calculated to define
the outlet flow. The whirl velocity and the radial velocity are the resolved components of the actual
outlet velocity “V2 ". For this calculation the inlet and outlet velocity triangles are formed using the
velocity vectors.
Figure 1.5 Inlet and Outlet Velocity triangles for a Backward Curved Centrifugal Blower Blade
The Figure 1.5 represents the inlet flow conditions. The value of “β1 " is calulated from the radial
and angular velocity as,
Vf 1

β1 = a r c t a n
U1
Knowing “β1 " the relative velocity for the inlet flow can be calculated from the absolute and angular
velocity.
8
Vr 1 = U1 c o s β1
Solving the above equations we get the relative velocity at the inlet to be 15.75 m/s.
The outlet triangle is a little different compared to the inlet as the rotation of the fan and the
blade angle add a whirl velocity to the flow. But similar calculation can be made for the outlet flow
as well knowing the blade angle and using the outlet velocity triangles.
The blades in the lower blower wheel are symmetrically curved backwards and kept at an angle such
that a tangent drawn to the blade at the inlet is perpendicular to the direction of rotation while it is
almost parallel to the direction of rotation at the outlet of the blower wheel. The tangent drawn to
any point on the blade represents the direction of the flow relative to the blade at that cross section.
Thus the angle the tangent forms with the direction of rotation of the blade gives the blade angle.
Thus from the discussion the blade angle is 90◦ at the inlet and 0◦ at the outlet and is between these
two values at any point in between.
A more in depth analytical model of the fan is developed in Chapter 2 when the fan is to be simulated.
For the preliminary calculations let us take an arbitrary blade angle, say 10◦ to proceed with the
calculation. This represents a point in the blade that is closer to the outlet and can be assumed to
be rotating at 17.89 m/s which is rotational velocity at the outlet.
U2 − Vw 2
cot β2 =
Vf 2
In the above equation the whirl component of the velocity Vw 2 is the only unknown and is calculated
as 8.82 m/s.The radial and whirl component define the outlet flow of the lower wheel blower.The
magnitude of the absolute velocity and its direction can be calculated as
tan α2 = Vf 2 /Vw 2
2
V2 = Vf22 + Vw22
An absolute velocity of 8.93 m/s is calculated at the outlet of the lower wheel which is which is at
an angle of 10.28 ◦ to the axis of rotation. This represents the flow properties at the outlet for an
arbitrary cross section of the blade where the blade angle is 10◦ .
9
1.2.5 Inner Shell
The Inner shell is 43.2cm in height, 31.75cm wide and 91.4cm in length, a 19.05cm x 30.48cm tunnel
section runs right through the center of the shell throughout its length. The tunnel section splits
the shell into two columns on either sides. The panels are fixed to the inner shell and together they
form the flow area that houses the heating coils and the lower blower wheel.The shell opens to the
tunnel section through the slots in the panel. In-order to be consistent the standard inclined outlet
panel is considered for all the calculation.
Figure 1.6 Inlet and Outlet Velocity triangles for a Backward Curved Centrifugal Blower Blade
In this preliminary analysis of the inner shell we try to quantify the approximate pressure drop in the
shell. This is the pressure against which the lower blower wheel is operating against. If the pressure
drop is increased by adding resistance, the flow across the fan is reduced. Knowing the size of the
slots, the velocity of flow through the column and slots the major and minor losses for the inner
shell can be calculated. To find the pressure drop in the system a streamline is drawn from the fan
outlet to the slots. The pressure drop can be written from the Bernoulli equation along the stream
line.
∆P V 2 F l X

= + k
ρg 2g Dh
∆P X
= hf + hmi no r
ρg
Where,
10
∆P - Pressure Drop
hmi no r - Minor head loss in m
h f - head loss due to friction m .
Lets consider a cross sectional plane near the mid section of the tunnel length where the flow can
be considered to be one dimensional for the purpose of calculating the losses.The streamline is
drawn along this cross section. Head loss due to minor losses is calculated from the equation:
kV 2
hmi no r =
2g
Where,
k - Minor Loss Co-efficient
V 2 - Velocity of the flow in m /s
g - Acceleration due to gravity in m /s 2
The flow exits the inner shell through either the inclined slots or the horizontal slots that have a
similar minor head loss associated with them.Note that the air stream exits through either one of
the slots and hence the minor loss at the outlet is not to be doubled for the system. The minor loss
coefficient for such an outlet is 2.8 [Min] and the velocity through it 4.41 m/s, the mean velocity at
the slots. This gives a minor head loss of 2.78m due to the slots.
Another minor loss is associated with the 90◦ bend in the inner shell. The radial velocity Vf 2 at
the outlet side of the fan discussed in the previous section is used to calculate this loss. This is purely
a theoretical value calculated using the continuity equation. In reality the velocity coming out of
the centrifugal blower wheel has a radial and whirl component making the flow two dimensional.
Analytical calculation of the minor losses in two dimensional flow is difficult and since the most
significantly loss in this system is due to the slots this effect can be safely ignored.
The minor loss coefficient for a sharp 90◦ bend is 1. Thus a velocity of 1.6 m/s through this bend
would give a minor loss head of 0.13m.
For the same stream line of the flow the major losses are considered. The major losses are due
to the friction in the duct. Friction to the flow is given by the walls of the column where the flow
11
velocity is calculated knowing the mass flow through the column to be 0.076 k g /s and the cross
section area to be 580.64 c m 2 to be 1.08 m/s The head loss associated with friction is calculated
using the Darcy-Weisbach equation given by,
L V2
h f = fD
Dh 2g
Where,
fd - Darcy friction coefficient.
L - Length of Duct.
Dh - Equivalent Hydraulic Diameter - 4(Area)/Perimeter
V 2 - Velocity of the flow in m /s
g - Acceleration due to gravity in m /s 2
The hydraulic diameter of the duct is calculated to be 0.119m while its length is 0.3048m, the height
of the column.
The Darcy friction coefficient is calculated from the Colebrook equation given by,
ε/Dh

1 2.51
p . = −2.0l o g + p
fd 3.7 R e fd
Where,
ε - Surface Roughness m .
R e - Reynolds Number - V .Dh /ν
The flow velocity through the column is 1.08m/s and the kinematic viscosity is 15.11 × 10−6 m 2 /s (ν
for air at 20◦ C).This gives a Reynolds number of 8510 corresponding to that of a turbulent flow. (The
flow is laminar up to Re = 2300 for flow through a duct).
Thus knowing the Reynolds number and taking the surface roughness for aluminum to be 0.001 ×
10−3 m the friction factor is calculated to be 0.0323 from the Colebrook formula.
Substituting the known values into the Darcy-Weisbach equation we get the head loss due to friction
12
to be 0.005m.Thus we see how the major head loss and in fact even the minor loss due to the bend is
negligible compared to the minor loss due to the slot. This minor loss at the slot is purely a function
of the velocity through the slots. This velocity was got by averaging the values got from experiment.
Thus we see that not including the complexities of the flow inside the inner shell will not cause
much change to the total pressure drop.
The head loss due to the minor losses is 2.91 m while that due to friction is 0.005 m. The pres-
sure drop in the inner shell is calculated from the Bernoulli equation. 2.91 m of air flow head loss
corresponds to 34 Pa. This is the pressure the fan must operate against and is commonly used in
association with the fan curves to find the optimum range of operation for a fan. Unfortunately the
fan curves for a separate blower wheel is not available and thus such a analysis was not possible.
1.2.6 Heating Element
Tubular heaters are used to provide the necessary temperature rise to the jet steam. They are housed
at the lower half of the inner shell on both sides. The heater consist of a helical resistance coil, made
out of an alloy of 80% Nickel and 20% chromium, which is stretched and centered in a magnesium
oxide metal sheath.
Figure 1.7 Heating Coils
13
The element is bent as shown in the Figure 1.7 to fit into the inner shell of the oven. With a length
of 48.2 cm and a bend radius of 2 cm the total heated length is 211 cm.The element is 1.2cm in
diameter, uses 3kW and operates at 480V.Knowing the dimensions and the power used, the watt
density of the heater element can be calculated.
Watt/Density( i nWc h 2 ) is defined as the heating element power divided by the actively heated surface
area of the element.
Element Wattage
Watt Density(q̇ ) =
π(Element Diameter) x (Element Heated Length)
3000W
=
π(0.475)(4(19) + 3(0.787π))
W
= 24
i nc h2
W
= 3.6
c m2
Watt density governs the element sheath and internal resistance wire temperature and is a useful
measure for predicting relative heating element temperature when comparing different alternatives.
This has to be matched with the velocity of the fluid flow to prevent overheating of the heating
element. The operating temperature of the element is an important consideration for heat transfer
efficiency and life. The velocity of air has to be matched with the watt density of the element to
avoid element overheating.
Let us proceed to calculate the capacity of the tubular heating coils.The amount of kW of heat
needed to be provided to an air stream at a particular velocity to raise its temperature by δT is given
by
1.08 × C F M × ∆T
Q r e q ui r e d (k W ) = (1.3)
3413 B T U /k W h
Where,
CFM - Cubic feet per minute.
∆ T - Temperature Rise (F)
Knowing the kW we can calculate the temperature rise the heating coil is expected to give for the
calculated flow of air. The mean velocity of the air flow over the heating coil can be calculated by
using the continuity equation between the slots and the cross section of the inner shell where the
14
1.3. PRODUCT TESTING CHAPTER 1. Design
coils are attached. This gives a velocity value of 1.08 m/s across the heating coil. Air at 1.08 m/s
passes through the inner shell area which is 6.35 cm width and 91.4 cm in length. This gives a air
flow of 226 m 3 /h r or 133 CFM. Thus the temperature rise is calculated from Eq. 1.3 to be 69 F.
1.3 Product Testing
Before the establishment of the baseline performance it is good practice to test the system for
its proper functioning. Each component of the oven was tested for its proper functioning before
experiments where carried out. The following steps were undertaken towards testing the product.
1.3.1 Dimensional Correctness
The oven was measured to check if it was in accordance to the design parameters. The length, breath
and height of the tunnel section, the outer cover and the panels where measured and found to be as
discussed in the tunnel design in Chapter 1.
1.3.2 Alignment
Improper alignment is a factor that could potential cause a huge error in the experimental data if
not corrected. This is true especially in the heat shrink oven which is highly sensitive to the flow
properties. The two centrifugal fans are responsible for the flow through oven, they were adjusted to
be perpendicular to the floor. The heating element is mounted in the center of the main body and
is shorter in length than the main tunnel body. The coils had to be symmetrically placed on each
column of the inner shell so that air would pass over the same cross section of the heating coils
yielding symmetric temperature on both sides.
1.3.3 Fan Operation
The oven design dictates the fan rotates in the counter clockwise direction at a constant speed of
1450 rpm. The rotational direction fan was checked. Further the clearance of the fan was made as
small as possible to avoid spillage of air from the inner to the outer shell or vice versa.
1.3.4 Heating Coils
The Heating coils where first visually inspected for observable damage. This was followed by a
“Continuity Test” to test for proper functioning of the heating elements and to make sure they
operating properly. A multi-meter was used to get the resistance across the heating coil element.The
15
1.4. OVEN REQUIREMENTS CHAPTER 1. Design
heating coils used operate at 480V and though they are rated for 3000W ,measurements showed
that they draw 3500W when operated. Further The resistance measured across the heating element
read 65 Ω which agrees with the value calculated by Ohms Law.
V =IR , P =V I
Combining these two equations we have,
V2
R =
P
4802
=
3500
= 65.8 Ω
Both the coils had the same resistance of approximately 65 Ω which was in accordance to what was
calculated.
1.4 Oven Requirements
In order to recognize the critical parameters of the oven, the requirements for the proper shrinking
of the wraps is to be established. The requirement can be summarized as,
“The oven should be designed to produce impinging jet stream at a certain temperature that could
be directed at a certain velocity around the film label symmetrically for its proper shrinking.”
The major parameters for which the oven is to be designed for are set by this requirement. These
values vary with the product to be shrink wrapped and hence the oven should have the flexibility to
develop air jets for a wide temperature and velocity range. These parameters are listed below.
1. Temperature of the Jet Stream.
2. Mean Velocity of Jet Stream.
3. Turbulence of the Jet Stream.
An additional parameter that enhances the shrinking process and directly affects the efficiency of
the oven is also studied along with the major parameters.
• Temperature along the Tunnel Section.
16
CHAPTER
Shrink Oven Analysis
Understanding the flow physics is of prime importance in solving any fluid dynamics problem.
With this in mind, much time has been spent to get a clear picture of the flow before any design
modification was considered. In order to design a better model of the oven the existing model had
to be scrutinized. A three phase 480V unit was setup at the “Structures Lab” at North Carolina State
University to study its flow and heat transfer characteristics. The oven was analyzed through exten-
sive data collection and computer simulations. These go hand in hand while trying to understand
the behavior of flow in the oven and its interaction which the heating element. To develop air jets as
dictated by the requirements in Chapter 1, two characteristics of the oven needs to be studied.
1. The Flow Characteristics
2. The Heat Transfer Characteristics
Before moving forward to discuss the characteristics of the oven lets look at the tools and methods
used to study the oven.
17
2.1. ANALYSIS TOOLS CHAPTER 2. Shrink Oven Analysis
2.1 Analysis Tools
Various methods where employed to examine the oven and understand its flow and heat transfer
characteristic. Experiments where carried out to record data of the most significant parameters to
establish a baseline performance, computer simulations where used to study qualitatively the flow
field in the inner shell and the tunnel section while analytical models where used to recognize the
various parameters that affect the heat transfer characteristics.
2.1.1 Experimental Tools
A data acquisition system was setup using AccuSense F900 Air Velocity Sensor, Type-T and Type-K
thermocouples and 20A current transducers to measure the various parameters of the oven. The
Type T - Thermocouples was interfaced with Onset U12-014 data logger while the transducer and
the air velocity sensor were connected to the H22 Energy logger. The loggers records the data over a
period of time which could be readout using the HOBOware data logger software.
2.1.1.1 Anemomenter-AccuSense F900 Sensors
Figure 2.1 AccuSense F900 Sensors [F90]
18
The AccuSense F900 Sensors uses thermal anemometer technology, which measures heat loss
from a heated device. Two thermistors on the sensor head detect airflow and ambient temperature
simultaneously. The airflow reading is then compensated for temperature within the specified
calibration range, linearized, and made available at the output. Each sensor is individually calibrated,
which makes the F900 fully interchangeable. The F900 has a operating range of 50 to 140 F and has
an accuracy of 0.05 m/s up to 10 m/s.
2.1.1.2 Thermocouples
Figure 2.2 Thermocouple - Type T
A thermocouple is a temperature sensor that works based on “The Seebeck Effect” . It consists of
two dissimilar metals, joined together at one end. When the junction of the two metals is heated or
cooled a voltage is produced that can be correlated back to the temperature.
The Type T thermocouple has copper and constantan [an alloy of copper and nickel ] as its dissimilar
metals. Type T thermocouples have a range in the −250 to 350◦ C range [Dow10]. Type T thermocou-
ples have a sensitivity of about 43 µV /◦ C thus can measure temperature changes as small as 1◦ C.
19
The Type K thermocouple has chromel and alumel as its dissimilar metals.It has a wider measuremnt
range and is accurate from −200 to 1250◦ C and has a sensitivity of about 41 µV /◦ C. Type K was used
to measure the temperature on the walls of the heating coil for heat transfer coefficient calculations.
2.1.1.3 Current Transducer
Figure 2.3 2 - 20 Amp split-core AC current sensor - CTV-A [Ct]
Current transducer is a type of sensor that measures the magnetic flux of a power conductor to
sense drive motor currents for machinery and process equipment and transmits an analog milliamp
or voltage signal to control systems. ONSET 2 - 20 Amp split-core AC current sensor - CTV-A was
used analone with a U12 data logger to measure the power used by individual heating coils. The
heating coils are rated for 3KW and operate at 480V ,this gives a current range that is well suited to
be measured accurately by a 20A CT.
2.1.1.4 H22 Energy Logger and FlexSmart Analog Module
The HOBO Energy Logger is a modular, reconfigurable data logging system. The H22 gives the
flexibility for expansion up to three FlexSmart Modules and six Smart Sensors. During the initial
20
testing phase of the oven Onset Thermocouples that plug in straight into the smart sensor input
port of the H22 logger where used. Along with the data acquisition software this was used to monitor
simultaneously upto six temperature readings and three velocity readings at different location in
the tunnel.
Figure 2.4 H22 Energy Logger and FlexSmart Analog Module [Ene]
The FlexSmart Analog module is a DC signal-conditioning module for the Onset H22-001 HOBO
Energy Logger.The module features input protection and signal filtering, as well as delta-sigma
A/D conversion and factory calibration. Sensors/transducers are connected to the module via a
seven-pin Phoenix-style detachable screw terminal connector. Once the sensors/transducers are
connected, the module can then be configured using HOBOware Pro software.
2.1.2 Computational Tools
Computer simulations were used as an aid in visualizing the flow and provide a base to test design
modifications. A CFD model was developed to study qualitatively the flow field in the inner shell
and the tunnel section of the oven.A Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) solver was chosen as
21
it was predicted to be sufficient to capture the quality of the flow and provide useful solutions. The
ANSYS workbench provides a common interface for all components of the CFD analysis.
2.1.2.1 Designing Tool
ANSYS DesignModeler software allows the import of CAD models from other modeling software
while also providing tools for construction of geometry from the ground up. The ANSYS Design-
Modeler product is fully parametric in the sense it can, with parametric meshing and parametric
solver use the same geometry for multiple design variations. Most of the models where made using
the in-built tools in the DesignModeler for ease of connecting them with the other tools of the
workbench. The models where made to actual size to avoid scaling during the analysis.
2.1.2.2 Meshing
Meshing (also called grid generation) is the process of splitting flow domains into sub domains
which are primarily composed of triangles or quadrilaterals for 2D geometry or tetrahedral or
hexahedral in 3D geometry. Governing equations are discretized and solved in every single sub
domain. The sub domains are called cells or elements. Combined, they are collectively called mesh.
Mesh generation is one of the most critical aspects of engineering simulation. Too many cells may
result in long solver runs, and too few may lead to inaccurate results. The model was meshed using
ANSYS Meshing which provides a means to balance these requirements by automated algorithms.
The most common meshing techniques used include the “Curvature” advanced size function which
was used for the default domain and “element size" function for domains that need a finer mesh
based on the requirements of the simulation. Some of the domains that were fine meshed using the
sizing function include the fan, slots and the turbulators in the redesign stage.
Table 2.1 Mesh Properties of Various Designs
Geometry # of Nodes # of Elements Avg. Skewness

Inner Shell 1,069,997 5,948,649 0.217
Plates with slits 1,003,180 5,563,693 0.217
Tunnel Section 79,891 408,244 0.244
Plenum Redesign 160,409 861,452 0.222
The properties of the mesh is given in the table for various geometries that have been simulated
22
in this project. Best practice is to keep the skewness to be less than 0.85 and thus an average mesh
skewness of about 0.22 indicate the mesh to be of high quality. A grid dependency study was carried
out to obtain grid independent solutions. In a grid dependency study, a family of grids is created by
refining the previous grid and the solution is calculated until the solution stops changing.
2.1.2.3 Solver
The ANSYS workbench provides two flow solvers, CFX and Fluent.The CFX is a Reynolds-Averaged
Navier-Stokes (RANS) based solver while Fluent has the capability to run Large Eddy Simulations
(LES) in addition to RANS. Both models use the steady-state Navier-Stokes equations to predict the
velocity and the pressure fields in the laminar regime. They assume that the velocity field does not
vary with time, and get an accurate prediction of the flow behavior. However as the Reynolds number
increases, the flow field exhibits small eddies, and the timescales of the oscillations become so short
that it is computationally not feasible to solve the Navier-Stokes equations. In this flow regime,
the solver either uses a Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) formulation, which is based on
time-averaged equations of motion for fluid flow while the Large Eddy Simulation uses filtering to
separate the flow fluid, all flow scales larger than the filter size specified will be exactly calculated
and the scales smaller than filter size will be modeled. Thus the turbulence model determines how
the flow field is solved at high Reynolds Number.Thus deciding the best model is a key issue in fluid
flow simulations.
In order to get a accurate solution it is important to choose a solver best suited for the flow under
study. The flow in the inner shell, for which most of the simulation is done, is similar to a turbulent
flow in a duct where most of the fluid meanders at high speed through the core of the channel
while bumping into and rebounding from the walls. These collisions lead to the formation of slower
eddy-filled layers of fluid along both walls, these layers serve as “lubricant” for the relative motion
between the fast core fluid and the stationary walls. These type of flows have been studied using a
SST turbulence model [Men03] which is a RANS-based turbulence model. CFX has an inbuilt option
to choose SST model to solve for the turbulence.
The shear stress transport (SST) formulation [Men94] solves for k; the turbulent kinetic energy,
and epsilon (k−ε) in the free stream and solves for ω the specific rate of dissipation of kinetic energy
and k near the walls(k−ω). It does not use wall functions and tends to be most accurate when solving
the flow near the wall.The use of a k−ω formulation in the inner parts of the boundary layer makes
the model accurate near the walls and the switch to a k−ε behavior in the free-stream avoids the
23
2.2. FLOW CHARACTERISTICS CHAPTER 2. Shrink Oven Analysis
common k−ω problem that the model is too sensitive to the inlet free-stream turbulence properties.
The flow is very uneven along the length of the inner shell due to the whirl velocity of the fan. Though
the flow is chaotic it doesn’t change with time as could be seen in an uniform results got at the slots
with time. Thus a steady state simulation was good enough to analyze the flow.
2.2 Flow Characteristics
The flow of hot air throughout the oven is studied in this section. How this air is heated would be dealt
in the heat transfer characteristics section. The flow characteristics in the outer shell is neglected as
in does not affect the flow that is responsible for the shrinking of the wraps. The following where
identified to be the most important flows in the oven and were studied in detail.
1. Flow Characteristics in the Inner Shell
• Quantitative Analysis of the Jet Stream.

• Qualitative Analysis of the flow in the Inner Shell.
2. Flow Characteristics in the Tunnel Section.
• Quantitative Analysis at the fan inlet.

• Qualitative Analysis of the flow in the Tunnel Section.
2.2.1 Quantitative Analysis of the Jet Stream.
The impinging jet stream is the flow, out of the inner shell and is directly responsible for the film
label to shrink around the bottles. Three important parameters of this jet stream is studied, these
parameters form the baseline which would be improved upon in the redesign stage. They are,
1. Temperature of the Jet Stream.
2. Mean Velocity of Jet Stream.
3. Turbulence of the Jet Stream.
2.2.1.1 Temperature of the Jet Stream
The temperature of the air jet at the slots is one of the parameters for which the tunnel is to be
designed for. This temperature defines the temperature profile throughout the length of the tunnel
section. The main objective of the project is to come up with a uniform temperature profile across
24
the length of the tunnel section and having a symmetric temperature on either sides of the panels is
of paramount importance in achieving this. Thus establishing a baseline temperature distribution
at the slots was one of the most foremost things to be done.
240
220
200
Fahrenheit
180
160
Left Panel Right Panel

140
120
Slot Length
Figure 2.5 Temperature distribution along the length of the slots (Left Panel and Right Panel)
The plot in Figure 2.5 shows huge difference in temperature between the slots on the left and right
panels along the length of tunnel. This is not the temperature distribution you would expect given
the tunnel is symmetric in design along the lengthwise axis and similar heating coils are placed
on either sides of the panel. Further these heating coils where checked for proper functioning and
alignment during the product testing phase. A temperature difference along the symmetric axis
25
hints a variation of airflow across the coils. Correcting this temperature gradient would significantly
improve the efficiency of the tunnel and improve the quality of the shrink wrapping process.
2.2.1.2 Mean Velocity of Jet Stream
The velocity profile across the slots defines the second most important parameter for which the
tunnel is to be designed for. A minimum velocity is needed for the proper shrinking of the film. The
F900 anemometer was used to find the velocity profile across the slots on either sides. The readings
were taken over a period of sixty seconds and averaged to get the mean velocity at a given point.
4.5
3.5
m/s
2.5
Left Panel
Right Panel
2
1.5
Slot Length
Figure 2.6 Velocity distribution at the slots - Left Panel and Right Panel
26
It is seen from the plot in Figure 2.6 that the velocity distribution along the length is not uniform as
well. This is in-line with our theory that the temperature gradient across the length of the tunnel is
caused by a variation in the air flow across the coils. The heating coils are placed next to the slots
along its length inside the inner shell. Hence the flow properties at any given point in the slot can be
taken to be the flow property at the element cross section next to it. To visulazie this dependence
between the temperature and mean velocity of the jet stream they are plotted together for the slots
on the left panel in Figure 2.7.
240
4.5
220
4
200 3.5
Fahrenheit
m/s
3
180
2.5
160
Temperature Mean Velocity

140
1.5
120 1
Slot Length - Left Panel
Figure 2.7 Dependence of Temperature with Mean Velocity at the slots of the Left panel
It can be seen from Figure 2.7 that the velocity and the temperature are inversely related for
27
most of the regions of flow. Wherever there is a drop in the mean velocity there is a corresponding
increase in the temperature and vice versa. This is true in the case of the right panel as well (refer to
Appendix). For a specified cross section lower mean velocity implies lower volume of air that the
coil needs to heat up with the same power, this explains the inverse variation of temperature with
mean flow velocity.
2.2.1.3 Turbulence of the Jet Stream
Directionality is a important functionality of the jet stream that renders the tunnel to be flexible
to shrink wraps products of various configuration. Turbulence defines the extent to which the air
jet could be controlled. Thus the turbulence should be as low as possible to get a high quality jet
stream. Also the turbulence could potentially affect temperature of the jet stream at the slots which
is the major parameters of the oven design. Thus establishing a turbulence baseline is significant to
understand the performance of the oven. Turbulent eddies create fluctuations in velocity. If the flow
were steady and laminar then u = ū for all time (t), where the over-bar denotes a time average. For
turbulent flow, however, the velocity record includes both a mean and a turbulent component. We
decompose the flow as follows.
u (t ) = ū + u 0 t
Where,
ū - Mean Velocity.
u 0 - Turbulence fluctuation with time.
This is commonly called a Reynolds decomposition [Mul06]. Measurements of velocity were recorded
at various points along the four inclined slots for a period of sixty seconds to get an idea of the
turbulence levels. These readings are plotted for the same points on the left and right panel slots to
get an idea of the turbulence levels of the mixing stream. The turbulence level at a few locations
(marked in the slot representation below each plot) are shown to study its behavior. The Turbulence
fluctuation with time at a point near the tunnel entrance is shown in Figure 2.8. It can be seen
from the plot that the turbulence level at this point on either jet streams is fairly low. with very
low turbulence in the jet stream from the slot in the right panel.The left jet stream is a little more
turbulent when compared to the jet stream from the slots in the right panel. This might explain its
lower mean velocity and a higher temperature as seen in Figure 2.6 and Figure 2.5. In Figure 2.9
we see that the jet from the left panel is highly turbulent a little past the mid point of the front slot.
Again referring to the plots in Figure 2.6 and Figure 2.5 we find that the mean velocity at this point is
very low while the temperature at this point is at its peak for the given temperature setting. This
28
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5

2
1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure 2.8 Turbulence fluctuation with time at the start of the front slot (Near Tunnel Entrance)
4.5
3.5
Velocity (m/s)
2.5

1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure 2.9 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 2/3r d the length of the front slot
29
phenomenon could be explained by establish the relationship between turbulence level and the
heat transfer rate of convection. Turbulent flow promotes better mixing of the fluid compared to
laminar flow and thus have better heat transfer characteristics.
The effect of turbulence on the heat transfer can be explained in terms of heat transfer relations,
h = f (N u)
Nu = f (R e , P r )
Where,
h - Convective heat transfer coefficient of the fluid.
Nu - Nusselt number
Re - Reynolds number
Pr - Prandtl number
We know that the Reynolds number is large for a highly turbulent flow. Therefore
Higher Turbulence =⇒ Higher Re =⇒ Higher Nu =⇒ Better Heat transfer
Now lets look at the turbulence levels in the rear slots. The probe was placed at 1/3rd the length of
the rear slot which represents a location which is equidistant from the mid point of the tunnel and
opposite in direction as the location of the probe for the previous experiment whose characteristics
where discussed in Figure 2.9.
From the values plotted in Figure 2.10 it is seen that jet stream leaving the slots on right panel
have a higher turbulence at the rear end of the tunnel.They could be matched with the mean velocity
and turbulence values as was done in previous cases. The left jet stream has a very low turbulence
at this location. The switch in turbulence from the left side to the right from the front end to the
rear end might be due to the effect of the rotation of the fan affecting the flow. This effect will be
discussed in the next section when the quality of the flow is studied.
The plot in Figure 2.11 shows that the jet stream on the left and right side have almost the same mean
velocity and turbulence levels near the tunnel exit.This case further confirms the theory that the
flow characteristics, namely mean velocity and turbulence level, are responsible for the temperature
30
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5
2
1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure 2.10 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 1/3r d the length of the rear slot
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5
Left Panel
2
Right
Panel
1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure 2.11 Turbulence fluctuation with time at the end of the rear slot (Tunnel Exit)
31
gradient along the length of the slots as at this point near the exit of the tunnel the temperature of
the two stream are almost the same as seem in the Figure 2.5. Also this is the point in the tunnel
farthest from the fan and have the least fan effect. The front slots do not start at the entrance of
the tunnel and hence have more fan effect than the end of the rear explaining there higher turbulence.
The turbulence of the two stream that mix inside the tunnel section is different at every point(expect
at the entrance and exit ends) and flips its turbulence intensity at around the mid point of the tunnel.
The four examples where taken to explain this effect. The velocity fluctuations for other locations of
the slots are given in the Appendix.
2.2.1.4 Effect of Turbulence Strength on Flow Parameters of the Jet Stream
For ease of comparison and to better visualize the effects of this turbulence on the temperature of
the jet stream, the characteristics of the turbulence is calculated at each point of consideration.
The turbulent motion is approximately random and we need to use statistical concepts to charac-
terize them. In theory the velocity record is continuous and the mean can be evaluated through
integration. However, in practice the measured velocity records are a series of discrete points, u(i).
Below, an over-bar is used to denote a time average over the time interval (t), which is the 60 seconds
over which the readings where taken in our case.
Some of the main properties of a turbulence include [Nepll]

Z t
Mean Velocity ū = u (t ) dt continuous record
0
N
1 X
= ui discrete,equi-spaced points (2.1)
N i =1
Turbulence Fluctuation u 0t = u (t ) + ū continuous record

u 0i = u (i ) + ū discrete,equi-spaced points (2.2)
32
Æ
Turbulence Strength ur m s =
ū 0 (t )2 continuous record
v
N
u
u1 X
= t (u 0 )2 discrete,equi-spaced points (2.3)
N i =1 i
p
Turbulence Intensity = u r m s u (2.4)
The subscript “rms" stands for root-mean-square. The root mean square of the velocity defined in
Eq.2.4 can be extended for velocities in other directions, v(t) and w(t), as well. In this analysis we
are concerned only with the velocity along x-direction as the jet out of the slot is linear. To get an
idea of the turbulence at any other region of the tunnel where all three velocity components exist,
the analysis of the velocity components in all three directions is required.A larger u r m s indicates
a higher level turbulence. The relationship between the turbulence level in the air stream and its
mean velocity can be established by calculating the turbulence strength given by the statistical
method explained earlier. The turbulence strength was calculated by taking an time average for the
60 sec period of measurement at discreet points along the slot length using the relation below.
v
60
t1
u X
ur m s = (u 0 )2 discrete,equi-spaced points (2.5)
60 i =1 i
The results are plotted versus the temperature along the length of the slots.
It is seen from the Figure 2.12 that wherever there is a spike in the turbulence strength there is
a mean velocity drop. This velocity drop as seen in the previous section causes the temperature
to go up. Thus in order to get a uniform temperature distribution along the length of the slot the
reason for turbulence creation has to be found and corrected.
2.2.2 Qualitative Analysis of the Flow in the Inner Shell
The analysis of the experimental data has given us an idea of the relationship between the various
flow parameters of the jet stream. Though we where able to relate the turbulence levels and the
temperature of the jet stream, the reason behind the turbulence is not clearly understood. To
recognize the cause behind the turbulence creation we need a proper understanding of the quality
of the flow field in the inner shell. Computer simulations aid us in visualizing the flow and provide a
base to test design modifications.
33
0.6 6
0.5 5
0.4 4
Turbu;ence Intensity (m/s)
Mean Velocity
Mean Velocity (m/s)

Turbulence Strength
0.3 3
0.2 2
0.1 1
0 0
Slots Length
Figure 2.12 Dependence of Mean Velocity with turbulence strength along the slots of the Left panel
34
0.6
240
Temperature Turbulence Strength 0.5
220
0.4
200
Fahrenheit
m/s
0.3
180
0.2
160
0.1
140
120 0
Figure 2.13 Dependence of Temperature with turbulence strength along the slots of the Left panel
35
2.2.2.1 Simulation Setup - Inner Shell
The Design module and the CFD meshing tool available in ANSYS workbench was used to model
and mesh the geometry of the flow field in the inner shell. For the simulation of the flow in the inner
shell the blower provides the input boundary condition and thus it had to be modeled. The blower
wheel was implicitly modeled in CFX without actually having to include any of its geometry.
Analytically calculated data for the flow at the fan outlet was used as the boundary condition repre-
senting the blower. The flow velocity values where calculated and loaded into the CFX-Solver as inlet
velocity in cylindrical co-ordinates system. This allowed for the accounting of the whirl velocity at
the outlet of the fan. The radial and whirl velocity at each cross section of the blade was calculated.
The values were then averaged for the entire blade and was used as the inlet boundary condition for
the simulation.This calculation is shown in the Table 2.2.
Note that the rotational velocity and the blade angle change as one moves from the inlet side
to the outlet side of the blade. The rotational velocity is a function of the diameter at that cross
section while the blade angle is taken to change with a constant decrement as it is symmetric. The
calculation is the same as shown in chapter one.
Table 2.2 Velocity at the Outlet of each cross section of the Blower Blade
β2 D2 U2 Vf 2 c o t (β ) Vw 2 s i n(β ) Vr 2 V2 α2
6 0.2318 17.89 1.59 9.5144 2.78 0.1045 15.20 3.20 29.74
14 0.2294 17.71 1.61 4.0108 11.24 0.2419 6.67 11.35 8.17
22 0.2271 17.53 1.63 2.4751 13.49 0.3746 4.35 13.59 6.89
30 0.2247 17.34 1.65 1.7321 14.49 0.5000 3.30 14.58 6.49
38 0.2223 17.16 1.67 1.2800 15.03 0.6157 2.71 15.12 6.32
46 0.2199 16.98 1.68 0.9657 15.35 0.7193 2.34 15.44 6.26
54 0.2176 16.79 1.70 0.7266 15.56 0.8090 2.10 15.65 6.24
62 0.2152 16.61 1.72 0.5317 15.70 0.8829 1.95 15.79 6.26
70 0.2128 16.43 1.74 0.3640 15.80 0.9397 1.85 15.89 6.29
78 0.2105 16.25 1.76 0.2126 15.87 0.9781 1.80 15.97 6.33
86 0.2081 16.06 1.78 0.0699 15.94 0.9976 1.78 16.04 6.37
36
Figure 2.14 Inner Shell with given boundary conditions
The average values of the radial velocity was calculated to be 1.69 m/s while that of the whirl velocity
was found to be 14.14 m/s. These values serve as the inlet boundary conditions for the simulation
while the outlet is defined by a pressure boundary condition at the slots which is set at zero relative
pressure corresponding to the the atmospheric conditions.
The solver is set to “Steady State" analysis with no heat transfer or thermal radiations. Air at 25 0 C is
chosen to be the fluid in the domain from the materials library. The Shear Stress transport model
,discussed earlier , is set to solve for turbulence and a non-buoyant buoyancy model is chosen as
the simulation we are concern with is that of a fan driven flow. Advanced options dealing with mesh
37
deformation and domain motion are set to “none" as they are not necessary for our calculations
and the reference pressure is set to 1 bar.
2.2.2.2 Simulation Result - Inner Shell
The solver is run until the results converge. CFD-Post, a post processing interface is used to analyze
the output of the simulation. Studying the surface streamlines in various planes it is seen that the
large vortex are formed at the front left and the rear right end of the inner shell. This is found to be
due to the nature of the fan flow and its interaction with the walls of the inner shell.
The rotation of the fan creates a whirl velocity much greater than its radial velocity, this implies that
more air leaves the fan tangentially than radially. The direction of rotation of the fan along with the
geometry determines the region which would receive this higher tangential air flow. These regions
have a steady flow of air through them while the areas that are void of the supply air become regions
of low pressure with chaotic flows associated with them.
The discharge of the fan can be visualized from the streamlines in the left most model in Figure 2.15.
This shows the surface streamlines along a XZ plane at the very top of the inner shell where the fan
is housed. The color of the streamlines represent the velocity in x-direction. Considering the lower
half of the figure it can be seen that, due to the whirl velocity and the geometrical constrains, most
of the streamlines migrate towards the lower right. This is the section on the right at the entrance
of the tunnel and it has a steady stream of air passing through it. The flow through this section is
congruent to the left section at the exit of the tunnel where all the air leaving the other side of the
fan in the tangential direction flows through.
This nature of the flow can be matched with the experimental results which showed that the slots
in these regions had a high mean velocity and low turbulence. It can also be seen from the other
two models in Figure 2.15 how the flow is in regions that don’t get sufficient air (bottom left and
top right). A low pressure is created in these regions due to insufficient air supplied to it making
the tangential air hitting the front and rear panels and the steady air supplied to the top left and
bottom right regions to rush towards towards them creating a chaotic flow leading to the formation
of large vortices. A vortex is created wherever the two opposites streams meet. The picture at the
right shows the flow streamlines along a plane that is at the slot openings while the picture in the
middle is of the streamlines along the XZ plane a little above it.
38
Figure 2.15 Streamlines along the XZ plane at various heights
The accuracy of the computer model is checked by comparing the velocity at the slots with
their corresponding experimental values. While the turbulence fluctuation at the slots could not be
captured in the model as that would require a transient simulation. The non uniform mean velocity
profile caused due to the inherit turbulence in the inner shell is captured in the model as shown in
Figure 2.16. The profiles match almost perfectly while the magnitude of the velocity got through
computer simulation is lower and could be explained by the fact that density variations where not
accounted for in the model. The “Air at 25 0 C" fluid was used for the simulation while the experiment
was carried at a set value of 60 0 C (140 0 F) . The higher temperature implies a lower density and thus
a higher velocity for the same mass flow rate by continuity.
39
4.5
4
Mean Flow Velocity - m/s
3.5
2.5
2
Left Panel - Experimental
Left Panel - Computational
1.5
Slot Length
Figure 2.16 Comparison of Computational and Experimental results.
2.2.3 Quantitative Analysis at Fan Inlet
The blower wheel creates a negative pressure at the inlet that causes air to be drawn into the fan from
the tunnel section through the plenum box. This suction affects the flow in tunnel section and it is
useful to establish a baseline for this flow velocity.The plenum box has a circular opening of diameter
of 19cm through which the air is drawn in. The velocity at different points at the opening section
of the plenum box was measured using the velocity sensor.The turbulence at the points where
calculated using data measured over a period of 60 seconds as for the jet streams.The turbulence
strength and the mean velocity are plotted along the radius of the opening in Figure 2.17.
The flow at the suction side of the fan is studied to modify the flow in the tunnel section. Scope for
40
improving the flow exists by the redesign of the plenum box.Hence the values of the flow where
calculated at the entrance of the plenum.The velocities and temperature at the slots on the other
hand are definite parameters that need to be met by the oven and thus they where measured without
the plenum in place to negate its effects and study the effect of the fan and inner shell separately.
It is seen that the velocity is maximum at the center of the circular passage, this is expected given
Velocity
3
2.5
2
Mean Velocity (m/s)
1.5
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Radius of Opening (inch)
Figure 2.17 Flow properties at the Plenum Opening
that the centrifugal fan creates a pressure difference at the suction side in bands that decrease
with the radius.The turbulence at the tip of the passage is possible due to the flows interaction
with the plenum box creating eddies. The turbulence for this flow is not a significant factor and
the main parameter to be measured out of this experiment is the mean velocity across the plenum
41
passage.This was calculated to be approximately 2.12 m/s. This value can also be calculated from
the continuity equation between the fan inlet and the slot as they form the inlet and outlet of the
inner shell. The average temperature at the slots is 144 0 F and the average temperature measured at
the fan inlet is 158 0 F, their corresponding densities are used in the equation below.
(ρAv )Sl o t s = (ρAv )F a n I nl e t

(ρAv )Sl o t s
vF a n I nl e t =
Aρ P a n e l O p e ni ng
0.996 × 0.01435 × 4.41
=
0.0332 × 1.029
= 1.845m /s .
Thus the Velocity at fan inlet has been measured by experiment and has been calculated analytically.
• Experimental Value = 2.12 m/s
• Analytical Value = 1.85 m/s
Thus the error calculated for the velocity at the fan inlet calculated between the experiment and
analytical model is 12%. This parameter is helpful to verify the computer simulation that will be
used to study the nature of the flow in the tunnel section.
2.2.4 Qualitative Analysis of the Flow in the Tunnel Section
The nature of the flow in the Tunnel Section is a direct indication of the performance of the tunnel.
Getting uniform temperature and velocity profiles along the entire tunnel in all three directions is
one of the criteria of a good design and was the target set for the project. A thorough understanding
of the flow field in the tunnel section and the factors affecting it is important towards designing a
oven that has a uniform flow properties in its tunnel section. A uniform temperature and velocity
distribution would improve the quality of the wrapping and reduce the total energy usage by allow-
ing the oven to be operated at a lower temperature for the same operation.
Three flows interact inside the tunnel section and their interaction define the nature of flow in
tunnel. They are the impingement jet stream of air that enter the tunnel from the slots on both sides,
the air being drawn into the plenum by the fan and the outside makeup air that enters the tunnel
section through the blinds. The properties of these flows can be studied by the measurement of the
following parameters.
1. Flow Characteristics of the Jet Stream.
42
2. Flow Properties at Fan Inlet
3. Flow Properties of the Outside makeup air.
The flow Characteristics of the jet stream and the flow properties at the fan inlet have already been
discussed in much detail. Along with this the flow property of the make up air that enters the tunnel
from outside define the flow in the tunnel section. To study qualitatively the interaction of these
flows the tunnel section is modeled on CFX.
2.2.4.1 Simulation Setup - Tunnel Section
The design module and the CFD meshing tool available were used to model and mesh the geometry
of the flow field in the inner shell. The boundary conditions used for the simulations where calculated
from the experimental values of the flow rate. While the slots served as the “Outlet Boundary
Condition" for the inner shell simulations it is the “Inlet Boundary Condition" for the simulation
of the tunnel section. While it is possible to use the output flow at the slots got in the previous
simulation as the input to simulate the tunnel section, it was not used due to fact that the flow was
uneven and we wanted to model the flow in an ideal tunnel section. This was done so that the effects
of the plenum design could be studied without the turbulence effects of the flow that needs to be
rectified. The total pressure of the flow had to calculated to define the inlet boundary condition
1
P0 = P + ρv 2 (2.6)
2
Where,
P - Static pressure,
P0 - Total pressure which is constant along any streamline
ρ - Density.
v - Flow Velocity.
The “Total Pressure" was calculated from Eq. 2.6 using the mean velocity got through experiments
(4.41 m/s) and was given as the inlet boundary condition. The flow velocity at the plenum inlet
calculated through analytical methods and verified by experiment in the previous section was
used as the outlet boundary conditions for the simulation. This is considered a “Robust" boundary
condition for CFX analysis where the static pressure at the outlet and the mass flow rate at the inlet
are part of the solution. The entrance and exit of the tunnel section where modeled as openings
43
with air free to move in or out based on the flow conditions inside the tunnel section. An ideal
tunnel section where the velocity and temperature profiles of the mixing jet streams are uniform is
symmetric along the longitude axis. This symmetry is made use of to bring down the computational
demand. Only the right half of the tunnel was modeled and the center plane was given a “Symmetric
Plane" boundary condition.
Figure 2.18 Simulation Setup of the Tunnel Section
2.2.4.2 Simulation Result - Tunnel Section
The solver is run until the results converge and the flow is studied in CFD-Post. It is seen from
3D streamlines drawn from the “Opening" boundary condition to the “Outlet” in Figure 2.19 that
there is a significant outside air that is drawn into the tunnel section. The path this air flow takes is
dependent on the velocity and direction of the jet stream.
The hot air jet gets discharged through the slots and the streams from opposite sides collide. This
44
make them to change direction and form a vortex as shown for various cross section along the
tunnel length in Figure 2.20. A low pressure region is created in areas enclosed by this vortex through
which the outside air transverse through the length of the tunnel section. The cold outside air is
responsible for the cold spots in the tunnel section and it could be observed that these spots, seen
as blue regions in Figure 2.20, are created almost throughout the length of the tunnel. If the cold
makeup air is not allowed to transverse into the center of the tunnel section, where it is eventually
drawn into the tunnel, the area of cold spots in the tunnel can be reduced.
Figure 2.19 Flow of Cold ambient air through the Tunnel
45
2.3. HEAT TRANSFER CHARACTERISTICS CHAPTER 2. Shrink Oven Analysis
Figure 2.20 Tempertaure Distribution at various cross-sections along the length of the tunnel
2.3 Heat Transfer Characteristics
In order to optimize the heat transfer between the tubular heating elements and the air flowing past
it we need to understand the heat transfer mechanism in the oven. While computational simulation
46
and experimental results where used to analyze the flow characteristics in the oven, analytical tools
along with experiment results are used to analyses the heat transfer characteristics.
2.3.1 Heat Transfer Relations
In this section we try to establish the relationship between the various parameters that affect the heat
transfer characteristics. The aim of this analytical study is to find out the controllable parameters
that affect the temperature of the bulk air flow. Once these are identified we can look into changing
the design to make better the heat transfer in the oven.
All three heat transfer mechanisms are present in the oven design. The helical resistance coil is
heated by resistance to the electric current and it conducts the heat to the metal sheath. The sheath
transfers its heat to the air stream by convection and to the walls of the inner shell through radiation.
The outer walls of the inner shell are cooled by the air forced over it by the upper blower wheel
through convection while the inner walls have there heat transfered to the tunnel section. Thus all
the heat produced is either dissipated through convection or radiation.
Qp r o d u c e d = Q c o n v e c t i v e + QR a d i a t i v e (2.7)
Radiation heats up the walls of the inner shell while heat transfered by convection heats up the bulk
air stream. Though the heated walls transfer some of this heat back to the air stream the rest of it is
lost to the environment. While it may seem common sense that in an optimized design most of the
heat produced is carried away by convection and the radiation component is kept at a minimum,
it may not prove to be the best way to heat by the bulk air because of the coupled nature of the
two modes of heat transfer. Let us look at the convective and radiative heat transfer equations to
understand this better.
Q c o n v˙e c t i o n = h A (Tw − Tb ) (2.8)
Where,
q̇ - Q̇ /A - Heat flux - Heat transfer per unit time per unit area.
Q̇ - Heat transferred per unit time by convection.
A - Heat transfer area of the surface
Tw - Temperature of the element.
Tb - Bulk Temperature of the air stream.
47
h - Convective heat transfer coefficient
QR = εσ(Tw − Ts )4 (2.9)
Where,
QR - Heat transferred per unit time by radiation.
ε - Emissivity
σ - Stefan-Boltzmann constant = 5.67108 W m 2 K 4 .
Tw - Temperature of the element.
Ts - Temperature of the side walls.
We see that the element temperature Tw couples the two modes of heat transfer. The side walls
of the inner shell are constantly being cooled by the air flow through the outer shell and heat
dissipation to the environment. Thus the surface temperature of the side walls Ts can be assumed
to be independent of the Radiative heat transfer.
QR ∝ Tw 4 (2.10)
We see that the radiation component of heat transfer is proportional to the wall temperature raised
to its fourth power. Thus to have minimum heat dissipated by radiation we need to keep the element
temperature low. But this would also mean a low temperature of the bulk air flow whose relation
can be deduced from Eq. 2.8
q̇
=⇒ Tb = Tw − (2.11)
h.
We see that higher the element temperature higher is the bulk temperature. Thus to get a higher air
temperature at the slots we need to keep the element hot and deal with the unavoidable radiation. In
fact it is seen from experiments that the heating coils are heated to a very high temperature and glow
red almost throughout the operation of the oven. This implies that the amount of airflow across the
coils is not enough to remove the heat produced by convection alone and that significant radiation
is present.
The element temperature Tw and the heat flux q̇ are functions of the power supplied to it, the
only controllable parameter independent of the power supplied in Eq. 2.11 is the convective heat
transfer coefficient. This unlike the coefficients of other modes of heat transfer is not a function of
the material alone but also depends on the flow properties and by changing the design of the flow
48
area the flow field could be controlled.
While increasing the convective heat transfer coefficient should increase the bulk temperature
of the flow by equation Eq. 2.11 it is also to be noted that increasing the convective heat transfer
coefficient also decreases the element temperature. Thus it becomes a trade off between the param-
eters and it is possible to know the results of a heat transfer enhancement method only through
experimentation. Further the value of “h" is very difficult to analytical measure for a complex flow
such as in the inner shell thus making experimentation to find which parameter affects the heat
transfer characteristics the most is the only viable option. It is useful however to know the flow
parameters that affect the convective heat transfer coefficient. For this, let us look at the convective
heat transfer mechanism closer to known these parameters.
2.3.1.1 Mechanism of Convective Heat Transfer
The general concept of convection is that near the heating element wall there is a thin layer in which
heat is transferred basically by conduction. Outside of this region is high mixing. The thickness
of the layer is not a fluid property and it depends on velocity (Reynolds number) and structure of
the wall surface. Generally this thickness δ is not known and it is customary to calculate the heat
transfer using k f l ui d /δ . This quantity is what is termed as the convective heat transfer coefficient.
The heat transfer coefficient “h" depends upon flow properties and is calculated from established
empirical relations for Nusselt number. In heat transfer at a boundary within a fluid, the Nusselt
number (Nu) is the ratio of convective to conductive heat transfer across the boundary. For forced
convection in turbulent pipe flow the Nusselt number is given by the Dittus-Boelter equation. It is a
explicit function for calculating the Nusselt number and is tailored for smooth pipes. For a flow in
which the fluid is heated it is given by
4/5
N u D = 0.023R eD P r 0.4
Most functions of Nusselt number are written for fully developed flows where the boundary layer
extends to the centerline. Inside the inner shell where the air comes in contact with the heating coils,
the flow is not fully developed. The manner in which the Nusselt decays from inlet to fully developed
conditions depends on the nature of thermal and velocity boundary layer development in the entry
region, as well as the surface thermal condition. While a averaged Nusselt number is calculated for a
laminar flow these effects of entry and surface thermal conditions are less pronounced for turbulent
flow and can be neglected. Also since the local convection coefficient varies around the periphery
49
of a tube, approaching zero at its corners, the Dittus-Boelter correlation may be used as a first
approximation with the hydraulic diameter, irrespective of the surface thermal condition.[Internal
Flow Heat Transfer Correlations Chapter 8].
The various parameters that affect this the heat transfer coefficient has been discussed in the
previous chapter, lets proceed to find by experiment the overall heat transfer coefficient for the
baseline model of the oven at an arbitrary operating condition.
2.3.2 Heat Transfer Coefficient - Experimental Result
In an effort to find the heat transfer coefficient an experiment was setup to record in 1 second
intervals the current drawn by the heating coil. The Heating coil is rated for 3 kW but it does not
operate at maximum power throughout. A temperature controller that monitors a thermocouple
and controls the power suppled to maintain the set temperature. A Type-T thermocouple was used
to read the temperature of the flow at various places of the inner shell while a Type-K thermocouple
was used to get the wall temperature of the heating elements as it was expected to be higher than
the operating range of a Type-T.
An electric heater is 100% efficient and all the power that goes into the element is converted to heat.
Thus the current drawn by the element averaged over a period of time will give the heat transfer rate
for this period. The oven was set to a “Set Value” of 140 0 F (60 0 C) and the reading of the temperature
and current where recorded when the oven was maintaining this set value. The current power drawn
by the element is shown in Figure 2.21 Heat transfer coefficient is the proportionality coefficient
between the heat flux and the thermodynamic driving force for the flow of heat (i.e. the temperature
difference, ∆T ). Thus the overall heat transfer coefficient can be written as,
Q
U= (2.12)
∆T
q̇ - Q̇ /A - Heat flux - Heat transfer per unit time per unit area.
Q̇ - Heat transferred per unit time.
A - Heat transfer area of the surface.
Tw - Temperature of the Element(F).
Tb - Bulk Temperature of the air stream.
50
5000
4000
3000
POWER (W)
2000
1000
-1000
18:05:20 18:05:24 18:05:28 18:05:33 18:05:37 18:05:41 18:05:46 18:05:50 18:05:54
TIME PERIOD
Figure 2.21 Power Drawn by the heating coil with the oven set at 140 F
51
2.4. DESIGN DEFECTS CHAPTER 2. Shrink Oven Analysis
U - Overall heat transfer coefficient.
Averaging the values in Figure 2.21 we get the power drawn to be 1723 W. This is the heat produced by
the coil to maintain the temperature of the oven at the set value of 140 0 F. The average temperature
of the air stream before the heating coil (inlet) is found to be 161 0 F. This value is an average of the
temperatures recorded at various points in the inner shell before the heating coil, while the set value
of temperature for the oven is maintained by a thermometer at a specific location. This may explain
why the set value at which the oven is supposed to be maintained is at a lower temperature than the
average value. This is used only as a reference and its inaccuracy does not affect the performance
of the oven. The temperature past the heating coil is given mean temperature at the slots. This
is calculated from the data plotted in Figure 2.5 as 177F. Now the average bult temperature of air
stream is given by,
Ti nl e t + To u t l e t
Tb =
2
= 169.
The wall temperature during this period was found to be 500F on an average giving an overall heat
transfer coefficient of 70.87W /m 2 F from Eq. 2.12.
2.4 Design Defects
The analysis of the Shrink Oven has helped us to identify the major defects of the design from the
standpoint of its flow characteristics. These defects are considered to be the setbacks to achieving a
uniform temperature through the tunnel length. These shortcomings in the design along with their
causes is listed below.
1. Non uniform flow properties along the length of the inner shell.
• Direction of the fan’s outflow.

• Interaction of the outflow with the walls of the inner shell.
2. Uneven Temperature distribution of the mixing Jet Streams.
• The Non-Uniform flow across the heating coils along its length resulting in different heat
transfer rates.
3. Cold Spots in the Tunnel Section
52
2.4. DESIGN DEFECTS CHAPTER 2. Shrink Oven Analysis
• Uneven Temperature Distribution of the mixing Jet Streams.

• Addition of cold outside air.
The ideas generated and the retrofits built to overcome these defects are discussed in Chapter-3.
53
CHAPTER
Design Modifications
The knowledge of the flow and thermal characteristics has given us the understanding necessary
to make modifications to the design to get the desired results. Our main priority is to make the
temperature profile more uniform throughout the length of the tunnel. From the analysis in the
previous chapter it was understood that the difference in flow field turbulence levels at the inner shell
is responsible for the difference in temperature and thus if we create uniform turbulence throughout
the inner shell the temperatures could be matched. Various retrofits have been experimented to
achieve this and will be discussed in this chapter. These include,
1. Turbulators.
2. Inner Shell Redesign.
3. Plates with Slits.
4. Cross-flow Fans
It is to be noted that the experiments on the retrofits where done on the 61 cm model due to ease
of manufacturing smaller retrofits. While the flow pattern remain the same, the value of the outlet
temperature and the turbulence level may vary and hence the baseline shown in this chapter will
vary with the initial data analyzed to study the performance.
54
3.1. TURBULATOR CHAPTER 3. Design Modifications
3.1 Turbulator
Various turbulators are experimented with to create turbulence in regions that corresponds to
lower temperature. It is known that turbulators in uniform flows generate secondary flow motions,
increase the degree of flow turbulence and change the mean velocity fields in velocity boundary
layers, which are responsible for the heat transfer augmentation [Tog13]. While extensive study has
been done for uniforms flows in air duct only few could be related to the complex flow motions
associated with the shrink oven.
A lot of research has been done on various configurations of the turbulators to enhance heat transfer
[Ala14]. Most of these are done for a uniform flow and may not work for the unique flow in the
inner shell. Thus based on the review of the currently available literature a few configurations for
creating a turbulence was experimented with. The first design considered was a basic rectangular
rib. The position of the rib was to be decided based on the region to be made turbulent. If we divide
the inner shell into four sections the flows at the front right and the rear left have steady flow. A 20
cm long rectangular rib made of aluminum was placed 6 cm above the heating coils on the front
right section of the inner shell. Before experimentation the effect of the ribs are visualized using
computer simulation.The results of the simulation are shown in Figure 3.1
The simulation on the left is of the baseline model without a rib. The flow velocity along verti-
cal direction is shown in the YZ plane. The flow from the fan hits the side walls and flows along it as
shown by the blue region along the side walls. It is seen that right next to it is the region in green
where the air is almost stagnant or moving up after hitting the lower plate. This creates vortices’s in
this region but as we have seen from experiment it is not good enough to give a high turbulence.
Now lets us examine the flow with a rib as shown in the simulation on the right. The YZ plane is
near the entrance of the tunnel and thus the column to the right represents the region where the
flow is stable. The turbulator is kept in this column, 6cm above the region where the heating coils
would be attached. The rib creates a low pressure region below it which cause vortex to form in this
region. This can be seen from the red region in the simulation result which represents a back flow at
this region. This flow pattern would mean a better mixing of the flow and more contact with the hot
tube of the heating coils and thus a higher temperature of the jet stream is expected with the the
turbulator.
The single rib model represents Configuration A and was the very first turbulator to be tested.
For the next setup, configuration B, an addition rib is added 9cm above this and on the opposite
55
Figure 3.1 Effect of Rib Turbulator on the flow field in the Inner Shell.
56
Figure 3.2 Rib Turbulator - Configuration B
57
wall. This rib is 30 cm long and extends beyond the first turbulator, the configuration was setup this
way to see the effects of the second turbulator in combination with the first turbulator and by itself
and can be seen in Figure 3.2.
The experiments where carried out and the temperature readings at the front slots are taken and
compared with the baseline. It is to be noted the baseline values don’t correspond with the values
discussed in the chapter 2 as all the retrofits where tested on a 61cm tunnel while the analysis in
Chapter 2 are done on the longer tunnel, the differences between the models have already been
discussed. The values are plotted in Figure 3.3
210
200
190
180
Temperature (F)
170
160
150
140 Right Panel Baseline

Left Panel Baseline
130 Right panel with Config A
Right Panel with Config B
120
Front Slot
Figure 3.3 Effects of Rib turbulators on the temperature of the jet stream
58
3.2. INNER SHELL RE-DESIGN CHAPTER 3. Design Modifications
The top red line represents the temperature of the left panel slot and is the target temperature
to be reached by the jet stream out of the slot in the right panel. The blue line at the bottom is the
baseline temperature of the slot in the right panel. The two lines in between are the temperatures
of jet stream out of the right panel slots with the given turbulator configuration. It is seen that
the turbulence creation enhances the heat transfer that is seen as a rise in temperature of the jet
stream. Also it could be noted that the temperature correspond to the length of the slots. The green
line which represents the single rib “configuration A” drops mid way through the length of the
slot , this is because the slot runs only to this length while the blue line that represents “configu-
ration B” is constantly above the baseline throughout as the ribs run throughout the length of the slot.
From the above results we see that the turbulators prove to be very useful tool to increase the
temperature where it is required. While this proves to be a viable option it has a few shortcomings
associated with it.
• It is difficult to design turbulators that would work for complex slot designs.
• By increasing the turbulence we compromise on the directionality of the jet stream.
Thus in the other retrofits considered an uniform temperature distribution is sorted by decreasing
the turbulence in regions of high turbulence instead of increasing the turbulence for steady flows.
3.2 Inner Shell Re-Design
The inner shell was redesigned to prevent the formation of large vortices in the flow field and reduce
the turbulence for the whole of the inner shell by gradually decreasing the flow cross section. It is
theorized that by reducing the flow cross section the flows would be restricted from transversing
across the length of the inner shell. This would break down the vortex and flatten out temperature
peaks that are caused by the high turbulence. The design is shown in Figure 3.4
59
Figure 3.4 Redesigned Inner Shell
3.2.1 Effect on flow Characteristics

v DH
ṁ = ρAV Re =
ν
The inner shell is redesigned such that the Reynolds number and effectively the turbulence of the
flow is brought down by decreasing the hydraulic diameter of the duct. But in order to satisfy the
continuity relations the velocity must increase with decrease in diameter to keep the mass flow rate
constant. In the inner shell however decreasing the diameter also increases the pressure drop in the
duct. This implies that the fan has to operate against a higher pressure and thus the mass flow rate
is decreased effectively decreasing the mean velocity through the duct [Ste].Thus it is theorized that
the Reynolds number would be reduced if the diameter reduces gradually. In fact it is noted during
60
the testing of this design that the mean velocity dropped from 2.98 to 2.65 m/s (Values got for 61 cm
oven) in the front slot of the left panel where the readings where taken.Thus the overall Reynolds
number is lowered by this redesign. A CFX simulation is done to visualize the flow in the new design
of the inner shell.
Figure 3.5 Effect of gradually reducing hydraulic diameter on the flow field in the Inner Shell.
It is seen from Figure 3.5 that the size of the vortex formed in the baseline has been greatly
reduced in the redesign. On the left column the blue regions represents the turbulent flow that is
defected from front panel. This flow causes the formation of vortices as it transverses along the
length of the tunnel until they are stopped by the steady flow from the other end. It is seen from
the simulation that in the redesign this flow traverses a lesser length before it collides with steady
61
upstream flow while it happens almost near the region of the fan in the baseline.
3.2.2 Effect on Heat Transfer Characteristics
To look at how the change in flow would affect the heat transfer characteristics lets recall the Dittus-
Boelter equation from Chapter-2.
4/5
N u D = 0.023R eD P r 0.4
It is seen that the Nusselt number varies with the Reynolds number raised to the power of 4/5.
Thus with the decrease in Reynolds number, the Nusselt number and effectively the heat transfer
coefficient would go down.Also recalling from Chapter-2 the equation for the temperature of the
bulk flow.
q̇
=⇒ Tb = Tw −
h
In the redesign of the inner shell we intend to decrease the value of Tb by reducing the Reynolds
number of the flow which in effect reduces the heat transfer coefficient by lowering the Nusselt
Number [PSG08]. The interaction of the various parameters has already been discussed and with an
increase in the static pressure of the system which reduces the mass flow rate through the inner
shell the complexities involved is increased. We need to depend on experimental testing to see how
the reduced turbulence would affect the heat transfer characteristics.
The reading are taken at the front slots of the left panel, one of the regions where the turbulence is
predominant.In Figure 3.6 The blue and the green give the baseline turbulence intensity and temper-
ature respectively. The red line represents the turbulence intensity of the redesigned inner shell. It
can be seen that the turbulence levels have gone down which in turn has reduced the temperature of
the impinging jet streams given by the purple line. But the drop in temperature is not as significant
as expected and the temperatures of the jet stream from the slots on the right panel are lower that this.
The aim of the redesign was to close the gap between the temperature profiles of the mixing jet
stream. Though a perfect match of the temperature profiles was not expected a bigger drop would
have made it possible to fine tune the design to make the temperatures even. Given there is still a
big temperature difference between the two mixing jet streams it is concluded that it is not possible
to achieve uniform temperature distribution along the slot length by this method. Though the tem-
62
0.6 210
200
0.5
190
0.4 180
Turbulence Intensity (m/s)
Temperature (F)
170
0.3
160
0.2 150
140
Turbulence - Baseline
0.1
Turbulence - Redesigned
130
Temperature - Baseline
Temperature - Redesigned
0 120
Front Slot - Left Panel
Figure 3.6 Temperature and Turbulence Intensity distribution along the length of the front slot of the Left
Panel for the Redesigned Inner Shell
63
3.3. PLATES WITH SLITS CHAPTER 3. Design Modifications
perature difference could not be corrected this redesign could still be used when high directionality
is needed as it significantly reduces turbulence intensity. During the design phase of the retrofit
an compromise had to be achieved between designing a shell that would be most optimized for
the flow and the economical feasibility of the design. While a aerodynamically optimum design
could be made with curved edges and the required length to prevent the formation of the vortex,
the dimensional and manufacturing constrains prevent such a design.
3.3 Plates with Slits
This retrofit is another attempt to make the flow across the heating coil and along the length of the
slots uniform. The plates are placed in the inner shell such that they split the inner shell into two
zones. The high pressure zone housing the blower is separated by the plates from the low pressure
zone which houses the heating coils. It is predicted that this will isolate the vortex formed in the
inner shell to the top blower zone creating a more uniform flow over the heating coils making the
temperature and the mean velocity at the slots uniform along its length. Air flows between the two
zones through the slits in the plates and it is to be noted that in order to create high pressure in the
top blower zone the slit area should be lesser than the area of the slots on the panel. If this area is
greater, there is no pressure differences created and the plates will only act as obstacles in the flow
creating turbulence. A couple of slit design models were made and the flow through them where
simulated, some of these designs are shown in Figure 3.7.
The computer model of the baseline effectively predicted the mean flow distribution along the
length of the slot and the slits were evaluated based on this criteria. It was found that the triple
slot design with three slots of width 0.5 cm each running 90 cm along the length created the most
uniform mean velocity distribution. The plate with a single slit created a high velocity steam that
ricochet of the base plate creating vortices, this made the mean velocity distribution non-uniform.
The results for the single slit configuration is largely chaotic and is plotted for different width (1
cm and 0.5 cm) in the plot in the Appendix. The double slits where found to create an uniform
flow but weren’t as effective as the three slit plate. The mean velocity profiles at the slots with
the double and triple slit plates are compared with that of the experimental results and are plot-
ted in Figure 3.8. It is seen that the mean velocity distribution is most uniform for the three slit model.
The computer model has been shown to predict the results of the baseline and other design mod-
ifications with a reasonable levels of accuracy. The only parameter in this simulation that may
cause the simulation to fail is the static pressure that the fan can operate against. This value is not
64
3.4. PLENUM REDESIGN CHAPTER 3. Design Modifications
known as the fan curves are not available. The backward curved blowers are made to operate at
high pressure and it can be assumed that the fan will not fail or drastically reduce its flow with the
introduction of the plates. Due to this possibility the true effects of the retrofit can be found only
through experiment but this analysis gives a good starting point for the experiments.
Figure 3.7 Various Slit Configurations
3.4 Plenum Redesign
The air in the tunnel section is drawn into the blower through a single circular opening below it.
Even in designs that has a plenum to house the third heating coil, the air is still drawn through
a same sized circular hole in the plenum box. This means that all the outside air drawn into the
tunnel needs to enter the blower through this opening. It was seen from the analysis of the tunnel
section in Chapter-2 that cold spots are formed in the tunnel section due to this cold ambient air as
it flows from the tunnel entrance/exit to the blower inlet. The plenum was redesigned such that
air is drawn evenly throughout the length of the tunnel section and not just through the opening
below the blower wheel. This creates a more uniform temperature distribution in the tunnel section
and would make the tunnel more efficient by reducing the cold spots. A couple of plenum design
models were made and the flow through them where simulated, some of these designs are shown in
Figure 3.9.
65
4.5
4
Mean Flow Velocity - m/s
3.5
2.5
Double Slit - Computational
Baseline - Computational
2
Triple Slit - Computational
1.5
Figure 3.8 Comparison of the Mean velocity at the slots of the left panel for various slit configuration with the
baseline values
66
Figure 3.9 Various Plenum Designs
The design that was most found to give the most uniform temperature distribution was “Plenum
Design 4" in Figure 3.9. The rectangular plenum slots draw in air from the whole width of the tunnel
section. The varying cross section of the plenum slots, with the smallest slot near the center and
the largest at the ends helps create a pressure distribution such that uniform air is drawn in along
the length. The flow of the cold ambient air through the tunnel is shown by the 3D streamlines in
Figure 3.10. It is seen that the cold air entering into the tunnel is drawn in through the outer plenum
slots and thus do not traverse through the tunnel section. This helps in reducing the cold spots of
the tunnel and gives a more uniform temperature distribution.
67
The temperature profiles for various cross sections along the length of the tunnel section with
the redesigned plenum box is compared with that of the baseline tunnel configuration in Figure 3.11.
It is seen that while the profile at the ends of the tunnel are fairly similar, the tunnel with a redesigned
plenum has a better temperature distribution as we approach the center. The size of the cold spot
decreases at a faster rate than with the baseline tunnel and it gradually vanishes near the center of
the tunnel.
Figure 3.10 Flow of Cold Ambient Air through the Redesigned Tunnel
68
Figure 3.11 Effect of the new plenum design on the temperature distribution in the tunnel section
69
3.5. CROSS-FLOW FANS CHAPTER 3. Design Modifications
3.5 Cross-flow Fans
The design modifications discussed above where efficient in optimizing the current model of the
convective heat oven. Exploring new ideas to put forward the best design for the tunnel led to the
consideration of cross flow fans to replace the centrifugal fans. This section discusses the concept
development and the consideration involved in developing a new design that would incorporate
the cross flow fan.
Most on the problems discussed in Chapter-2 is due to the unsymmetrical nature of the flow
of air caused by the centrifugal fan. Though these effects where mitigated by the design modifi-
cation developed they were not eliminated. The only way to totally avoid the problem caused by
turbulence is to create a new flow by replacing the centrifugal fan with a new setup for air circulation.
A cross-flow or tangential fan as shown in Figure 3.12 is usually long in relation to the diame-
ter, so the flow approximately remains two-dimensional away from the ends. Unlike the centrifugal
fan, the main flow moves transversely across the impeller, passing the blading twice. The flow within
a cross-flow fan may be broken up into three distinct regions: a vortex region near the fan discharge,
called an eccentric vortex, the through-flow region, and a paddling region directly opposite. Both the
vortex and paddling regions are dissipative, and as a result, only a portion of the impeller imparts
usable work on the flow. The cross-flow fans are compact, quiet and can provide high pressure
coefficient.
While a more detailed analysis is required to fully develop a heat shrink oven with tangential fans, a
few of the concepts of the design that might prove constructive to consider are discussed below. The
various retrofits developed for the ovens for flow control and heat transfer enhancement could be
avoided by developing the new product to encompass all these operation variations of the product
in the design.
3.5.1 Fan Sizing
A new tunnel is built around the cross-flow fan by using the data available for the requirements of
the shrinking tunnel. This allows for tailoring the oven design towards meeting these requirements.
The fan was sized such that the required velocity at the panel opening of 4.41 m/s is met. The mass
flow rate that needs to be achieved by the fan in order to get this velocity at the opening is given by
70
Figure 3.12 Cross-Flow or Tangential Fan
71
Continuity Equation.
(ρAv )Sl o t s = (ρAv )F a n D i s c h a r g e (3.1)

(ρAv )Sl o t s
=⇒ vF a n D i s c h a r g e = (3.2)
(ρA)F a n D i s c h a r g e
The density of air is not a constant and it varies with temperature. Air can be safely considered to be
ideal for our case of high temperature and low pressure (pressure change in cross-flow fan is low) as
intermolecular forces become important only at lower temperature or higher pressure. Thus the
Temperature vs Density relation can be derived from the Ideal gas equations.
The fan is to be sized for its peak load. From Eq. 3.2 it is seen that the velocity required at dis-
charge is inversely proportional to the density at that point. Thus the fan would need to discharge
more air when,
ρF a n D i s c h a r g e < ρSl o t s
This situation never occurs in our model as the heating coil is placed in between, thus for our model
the peak load on the fan would be when the air is flowing from the fan discharge to the panel opening
with very small or no temperature rise (Heating coils go off when the temperature throughout is at
the set value). Thus for peak load calculation the density of air is considered constant ,thus from
Eq. 3.2 we have
(Av )Sl o t s
vF a n D i s c h a r g e =
(A)F a n D i s c h a r g e
For the consideration of fan sizing the size of the model is kept unchanged and thus the areas
enclosed by the panels is the same as for the centrifugal fan model.For a cross flow fan the cross
section of flow is the same as its outlet discharge area (6.35 x 91.44 cm) , the outlet of the cross flow
fan would be discharges this cross sectional area, Thus A F a n D i s c h a r g e = 0.058m 2 and as calculated
in Chapter-1 A Sl o t s = 0.01435m 2
vF a n D i s c ha r g e = 0.01435 × 4.41/0.058
= 1.09m /s
72
The volume of air that need to be discharged by the cross-flow fan is given by,
Vf a n = vF a n d i s c h a r g e × C SF l o w
= 1.09 × 0.058
= 0.0632m 3 /s
A fan that provides this volume of air is to be chosen to provide the necessary airflow through the
oven as was provided by the centrifugal fan.It is to be noted during the selection of the fan that a
fan with this volume flow might come in different sizes and the one which would ideally fit into the
inner shell is to be chosen.
3.5.2 Scope of the Tangential Oven
An oven designed around a tangential fan has reduced turbulence and a more uniform mean velocity
distribution directionality. This new flow field provides for scope of the design that could be revisited
while taking this concept to the design stage. These are discussed below.
1. Finned heating coils could be considered. Though the finned elements have a lower element
temperature they enhance the heat transfer by increasing the cross sectional area exposed
to the flow when compared to tubular heaters. While the complexities involved in the heat
transfer optimization has been discussed in the thesis it would be interesting to study which
heating coil would be a best fit for the flow through a cross-flow fan.
2. Without a twin blower wheel setup the need for the outer shell powered by a separate cen-
trifugal fan becomes debatable. While the electronics could be housed separately the outer
panels should be “Safe to touch" for operators. The flow in the outer shell and the cooling it
provides has been largely been neglected in our analysis as it doesn’t directly affect the flow in
the tunnel section. Further study is required to make proper modification to the outer shell
to better fit the cross flow design. There is a huge scope of design improvement if its made
possible to bring down the outer temperature to an acceptable value by suitable insulation
without a need for air flow.
3. The new design concept gives an additional functionality to the oven. The air flow on each
side is independently controllable as they are provided by separate fans. The proper use of this
functionality to shrink labels onto complex contours is another area that should be analyzed.
73
3.6. CONCLUSION CHAPTER 3. Design Modifications
4. Now that the fan has been sized its optimum position inside the inner shell is to be determined.
Recirculation of hot air is a significant functionality of the oven given that it operates at high
temperatures. Thus the fans have to posited such that optimal amount of hot air is recirculated.
This was one of the primary reasons for a double tangential fan design as its difficult to
recirculate the air evenly by running the oven with a single tangential fan.
3.6 Conclusion
In an effort to develop a more preferable flow field for the convective heat shrink oven the nature of
the flow and its properties where scrutinized using analytical models and computer simulations.
This made it possible to identify the unique problems associated with the fluid and thermal char-
acteristics of the oven that hindered the optimized operation of its various components. Design
modifications ideas were developed to correct the flow field in the inner shell and the tunnel section
of the oven. These ideas were validated using the computer model and tested by experimentation.
While it was possible to bring down the non uniformity in the flow characteristics by making the
design modifications it was not possible to totally eradicate the problems associated with the oven
using the current setup to recirculate air. Thus in the final section of this thesis a conceptual model
of the oven that uses cross-flow fans to circulate the air is suggested. The inherent problems of the
oven are theorized to be overcome by this new setup because of the uniform nature of the outlet
flow in a cross flow oven.
While the design modifications where developed and tested on a heat shrink oven, the concept
behind them are universal and could be applied to any thermal setup that has similar needs. Hot air
jets are required for various applications such as the soldering of electronic components to printed
circuit boards and to bake food products. All of them use similar setup to create hot zones inside a
control space and the design modifications can be used in these ovens to get a more preferable flow
field.
74
REFERENCES
[Ct] 2 - 20 Amp split-core AC current sensor - CTV-A - User Manual. Onset Computer Corpo-
ration.
[F90] AccuSense F900 Air Velocity and Air Temperature Sensor - User Manual. DegreeC.
[Ala14] Alam, T. et al. “Heat and flow characteristics of air heater ducts provided with turbula-
torsŮA review”. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 31.C (2014), pp. 289–304.
[BRMy ] Bruce R. Munson Alric P. Rothmayer, T. H. O. W. W. H. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics.

Wiley, (May 15, 2012).
[Dow10] Dowell, D. “A Critical Look at Type T Thermocouples in Low-Temperature Measurement

Applications”. English. International Journal of Thermophysics 31.8-9 (2010), pp. 1527–
1532.
[DG] Dr. G.Biswas Dr. S.Sarkar, D. S. S. Module 7 - Fans and Blowers. Indian Institute of Tech-
nology Kanpur. URL: http://nptel.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-
KANPUR/machine/ui/Course_home-9.htm.
[Ene] HOBO Energy Logger - Data Logger & Modules - User Guide. Onset Computer Corpora-
tion.
[Men94] Menter, F. R. “Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applica-

tions”. AIAA Journal 32.8 (1994), pp. 1598–1605.
[Men03] Menter, F. R. et al. “Ten Years of Industrial Experience with the SST Turbulence Model”.
Ed. by Hanjalic, K. et al. Begell House, Inc., 2003.
[Min] Minor loss coefficient diagrams for air ductwork, bends, expansions, inlets and outlets
- SI units. URL: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-duct-minor-loss-
diagram-d_332.html.
[Mul06] Muller, P. The Equations of Oceanic Motions. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[Nepll] Nepf, H. Transport Processes in the Environment - Velocity profiles and turbulence. Mas-
sachusetts Institute of Technology. Fall 2008. URL: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/
civil-and-environmental-engineering/1-061-transport-processes-in-
the-environment-fall-2008.
[PSG08] Piyush Sabharwall, V. U. & Gunnerson, F. “Effect Of Mass Flow Rate On The Convec-
tive Heat Transfer Coefficient: Analysis For Constant Velocity And Constant Area Case”.
Nuclear technology A. 2009, vol. 166, nř 2, pp. 197-200 [4 pages] [bibl. : 6 ref.] (2008).
75
REFERENCES REFERENCES
[Ste] Stevens, M. AMCA Publication 201 - Fans and Systems. Air Movement and Control Asso-
ciation.
[Tog13] Togun, H. et al. “A CFD study of turbulent heat transfer and fluid flow through the channel
with semicircle rib”. Clean Energy and Technology (CEAT), 2013 IEEE Conference on.
2013, pp. 312–316.
76
APPENDIX
77
APPENDIX
ADDITIONAL PLOTS
78
APPENDIX A. ADDITIONAL PLOTS
250 6
5.5
230
210
4.5
4
190
Fahrenheit
m/s
3.5
170
3
2.5
150
2
Temperature Mean Velocity
130
1.5
110 1
Slot Length - Right Panel
Figure A.1 Dependence of Temperature with Mean Velocity at the slots of the Right panel
79
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5
Left Panel
2
Right
Panel
1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure A.2 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 1/2 of the length of the front slot
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5

1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure A.3 Turbulence fluctuation with time at end of the front slot
80
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5
2 Left Panel
Right Panel
1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure A.4 Turbulence fluctuation with time at start of the rear slot
5.5
4.5
4
Velocity (m/s)
3.5
2.5
Left Panel
2
Right
Panel
1.5
Time(s)
Probe
Figure A.5 Turbulence fluctuation with time at 1/2 of the rear slot
81

Etd

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Etd

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ABSTRACT

All Rights Reserved

A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of

Raleigh, North Carolina

Dr. Alexei V. Saveliev Dr. Herbert M. Eckerlin

Dr. Stephen D. Terry

To all the people and places in my life.

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

CHAPTER 2 Shrink Oven Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

CHAPTER 3 Design Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Table 2.1 Mesh Properties of Various Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Figure 2.1 AccuSense F900 Sensors [F90] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

1.1 Basic Design

1.2 Tunnel Components

4. Upper Blower Wheel.

5. Lower Blower Wheel.

1.2.1 Outer Shell

1.2.2 Upper Blower Wheel

1. Remove heat from the electronics.

2. Prevent over heating of the oven.

Figure 1.3 Panel with slots

A - Cross sectional area in m 2

V - Velocity of the flow in m /s

1.2.4 Lower Blower Wheel

1.2.4.1 Velocity Triangles

1.2.5 Inner Shell

hmi no r - Minor head loss in m

h f - head loss due to friction m .

k - Minor Loss Co-efficient

V 2 - Velocity of the flow in m /s

g - Acceleration due to gravity in m /s 2

fd - Darcy friction coefficient.

Dh - Equivalent Hydraulic Diameter - 4(Area)/Perimeter

V 2 - Velocity of the flow in m /s

g - Acceleration due to gravity in m /s 2

R e - Reynolds Number - V .Dh /ν

1.2.6 Heating Element

Figure 1.7 Heating Coils

CFM - Cubic feet per minute.

∆ T - Temperature Rise (F)

1.3 Product Testing

1.3.1 Dimensional Correctness

1.3.3 Fan Operation

1.3.4 Heating Coils

Combining these two equations we have,

1.4 Oven Requirements

1. Temperature of the Jet Stream.

2. Mean Velocity of Jet Stream.

3. Turbulence of the Jet Stream.

• Temperature along the Tunnel Section.

Shrink Oven Analysis

1. The Flow Characteristics

2. The Heat Transfer Characteristics

2.1 Analysis Tools

2.1.1 Experimental Tools

2.1.1.1 Anemomenter-AccuSense F900 Sensors

Figure 2.1 AccuSense F900 Sensors [F90]

Figure 2.2 Thermocouple - Type T

2.1.1.3 Current Transducer

Figure 2.3 2 - 20 Amp split-core AC current sensor - CTV-A [Ct]

2.1.1.4 H22 Energy Logger and FlexSmart Analog Module

2.1.2 Computational Tools

2.1.2.1 Designing Tool