Proceedings of the ASME 2010 10th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis

ESDA2010
July 12-14, 2010, Istanbul, Turkey
Proceedings of the ASME 2010 10th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis
ESDA2010
July 12-14, 2010, Istanbul, Turkey

ESDA2010-
ESDA2010-24362

IMPINGING JET COOLING OPTIMIZATION FOR OBTAINING UNIFORM HEAT FLUX

Farshad Kowsary Hamed Gholamian

Professor, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, M.S. Student, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Tehran, University of Tehran,
Tehran, Iran Tehran, Iran

Mehran Rajaeeian Hoonejani

Ph.D. Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of California, Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara, CA

ABSTRACT H i* separation distance between the exit plane of the jets

In this study obtaining a uniform heat flux over a target and the design plate
surface was investigated by means of using characteristics of k Thermal conductivity of the air
jet impingement heat transfer. Conjugate Gradients Method L1 Design surface length
(CGM) was utilized to minimize the objective function defined Non-dimensional design surface length
on the basis of the squared differences between the target heat L*1
flux and the calculated ones. Design variables were taken to be L2 Isothermal bottom wall length
jets’ Reynolds numbers, separation distance between the exit Non-dimensional Isothermal bottom wall length
L*2
plane of the jets and the target plate, as well as inter-jet
spacing. Air single phase jets were used in this study. The N Number of nodes on design surface
problem was solved for the cases of 4 and 6 jets. Temperature Nu Design surface Nusselt number
difference between the jet exit and the target plate is 100ºC, and p Local pressure
a steady state condition was assumed. The Finite Volume p∞ Operating pressure (kPa)
Method and an unstructured mesh were used for direct solution
P* Non-dimensional local pressure
of the jet impingement heat transfer problem for a laminar jets
Pr Prandtl number
impingement to a flat plate with constant temperature.
qd Desired heat flux on the design surface
r
NOMENCLATURE qc Calculated surface heat flux vector
r
D Design variables vector qcn Calculated surface heat flux on i’th node
Dh Hydraulic Diameter Re Reynolds number
erms The root mean square of relative error of estimated T Static temperature
heat flux TW Static Temperature of bottom wall
f Objective function u,v Velocity component in x and y directions
G Inter jet spacing U * ,V * Non-dimensional velocity component in x and y
G * Non-dimensional inter jet spacing directions
Convective heat transfer coefficient V0 Characteristic velocity
h
H The upper wall height W The jet width
* Non-dimensional upper wall height x, y Horizontal and vertical coordinate
H
Hi separation distance between the exit plane of the jets X * , Y * Non-dimensional horizontal and vertical coordinates
and the design plate

1 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Greek symbols
α Thermal diffusivity of the fluid
µ Viscosity
ν Kinematic Viscosity
θ *
Non-dimensional temperature
ρ Density
Subscripts
d Relative to the desired condition
i Relative to the number of the jet
j Relative to the jets
n Relative to the number of the node on design surface
INTRODUCTION
One of the main objectives in industrial heating or cooling
processes is achieving a spatially uniform heat flux over the
cooled or the heated surface. Temperature Uniformity Control
(TUC) as well as Heat Flux Uniformity Control (HFUC) has
received considerable attention in recent years. Inverse heat
transfer techniques provide an efficient procedure to design
configuration which lead to achieving such goals.
In the most investigations the heat transfer mode used to
obtain uniform temperature or heat flux distribution, is
radiation. S. M. Hoseini Sarvari and S. H. Mansouri [1] studied
the Inverse design of a two-dimensional heat source
distribution, having the desired temperature and heat flux
profiles for a design surface of an irregular enclosure with
participating media. The other approach to these types of
problems is the shape design problems. K.J. Daun, D.P.
Morton, J.R. Howell [2] presented an optimization
methodology for designing radiant enclosures containing
specularly-reflecting surfaces. The optimization process works
by making intelligent perturbations to the enclosure geometry
at each design iteration using specialized numerical algorithms.
P.J. Timans [3] Studied the evolution of RTP (Rapid Thermal
Processing) system design to include concepts such as wafer
rotation, axisymmetric heater design and multiple point
dynamic temperature control. The problem with use of radiative
heat transfer for achieving heat flux uniformity is the fact that it
can not be readily used for cooling application.
Pourshaghaghy et al. [4] studied the inverse radiative
design problem in which the objective is to determine the
spatial distribution of heat source strengths which produces a
desired temperature and heat flux distribution on the design
surface. Birla et al. [5] in 2004 studied the uniform heating of
fruits by means of radio frequency treatments. Using a
particular mathematical method Zareifard et al. [6] in 2006
designed an oven to achieve the goal of uniform heat flux to
minimize the Losses of bakery products.
Few investigations were carried out to obtain uniform
temperature or heat flux focus on conduction heat transfer
mode. For instance, Heat flux uniformity at thin, electrically
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
heated metallic foils is investigated in 1986 by C.K. Carlson
and E.M. Sparrow [7].
Some studies were performed to achieve the uniform heat
flux in the case of convective heat transfer. W. Roetzel and M.
Newman [8] performed an investigation in which a uniform
heat flux among the surface of the drum in a paper dryer is
desirable. To obtain this goal, a specific wall profile was
developed. On the other hand, S. Chander and A. Ray [9]
experimentally studied characteristics of three interacting
methane/air flame jets arranged in a triangular configuration
impinging normally on a flat surface to obtain uniform heat
flux. N. Radifi and W. Blasiak [10] experimentally investigated
the various modes of heat transfer and the effect of the HiTAC
flame characteristics on heat transfer intensity and uniformity
inside a semi-industrial test furnace using various industrial
regenerative burners and various flame configurations namely;
single-flame, twin-flame counter, twin-flame parallel and twin-
flame stagger.
As mentioned most of the previous researches on achieving
heat flux uniformity have utilized the radiation heat transfer
mode. In the present work for the first time by using a classical
optimization technique the optimal arrangement of jets are
determined in order to achieve heat flux uniformity over a
design surface. Using jet impingement techniques one can
attain potentially high heat fluxes for both heating as well as
cooling. As this is a preliminary study of the sort, laminar jets
are taken into consideration for simplicity; even though low
speed (i.e., laminar) jets by themselves are potentially useful in
applications where there is limitation on the pressure exerted by
jets upon the design surface.
DESIGN SURFACE AND JETS GEOMETRY
The schematic of two-dimensional impinging jets and
design surface for both cases of 4 and 6 jets and the symmetry
line are shown in Fig. 1. In these configurations, design surface
with the length of L1 and bottom surface with the length of L2
are kept at a constant temperature of Th. The locations of jet
outlets are shown. The left vertical wall is symmetry line and
the right vertical wall is outlet. Jets vertical walls and the
remaining parts of the upper horizontal wall are insulated as
shown in Fig. 1.
2 Copyright © 2010 by ASME
 DIRECT PROBLEM FORMULATION
The system is considered to be two dimensional, steady a)
and laminar with air as the working Newtonian fluid. The
continuity, Navier-Stokes and energy equations for
incompressible fluid without considering the radiation and free
convection heat transfer modes can be described in the
Cartesian coordinate system as follows

∂U * ∂V *
+ =0 (1)
∂X ∂Y
∂U * ∂U * 1 ⎛⎜ ∂ 2U * ∂ 2U * ⎞⎟
∂P *
U* +V * =− + + (2)
∂X *
∂Y *
∂X Re ⎜⎝ ∂X * 2 ∂Y * 2 ⎟⎠
*

b)
∂V * * ∂V
*
∂P * 1 ⎛⎜ ∂ 2V * ∂ 2V * ⎞⎟
U* + V = − + + (3)
∂X * ∂Y * ∂Y * Re ⎜⎝ ∂X * 2 ∂Y * 2 ⎟⎠
∂θ * ∂θ * 1 ⎛⎜ ∂ 2θ * ∂ 2θ * ⎞⎟
U* +V * = + (4)
∂X *
∂Y * Re Pr ⎜⎝ ∂X * 2 ∂Y * 2 ⎟⎠
The governing equations listed above are non-
dimensionalized with the following parameters. The definition
of characteristic velocityV0 differs for the case of 4jets to that of
the case of 6 jets.
For the case of 4 jets

V0 = v j1 + v j 2 (5) Figure 1. SCHEMATIC CONFIGURATION OF THE PROBLEM

And for the case of 6 jets The boundary conditions, shown in Fig. 1, are defined as
follows:
V0 = v j1 + v j 2 + v j 3 ●On the jets inlet walls
(6)
V * = −V J , U * = 0 , θ * = 0 (9)
The following parameters are defined for the cases of 4 and
●For the adiabatic walls
6 jets with the corresponding V0
∂θ *
x y p − p∞ V* =0 , U* = 0 , =0 (10)
Dh = 2W , X * = , Y* = , P* = , ∂Y *
Dh Dh ρV02 ●On the bottom wall and design surface
T − Tj u v ρV D
θ* = , U* = ,V * = , Re = 0 h , V * = 0 , U* = 0 , θ * =1 (11)
TW − T j V0 V 0 µ
ρv jiW ν (7) ●On the symmetry line
Rei = , Pr = ,
µ α ∂V * ∂θ *
U* = 0 , =0 , =0 (12)
h X Dh ∂θ * ∂X * ∂X *
Nu = ∝− *
k ∂n Design Surface
●On the right wall

P* = 0
The geometric dimensionless parameters are defined as (13)
if U < 0 (inflow) → θ * = 1 , V * = 0
*

, H i = i ( i = 1,2,3) , L*1 = 1
H H L
H* = *
Where p∞ = 101.3 kPa considered as operating pressure.
Dh Dh Dh
(8) ●Other variables on the right wall (outlet) are extrapolated
L2 G from inside.
L*2 = , G* =
Dh Dh

3 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 BENCHMARKING OF THE DIRECT SOLUTION flux on the design surface is qd. Therefore surface is discretized
Single phase air jets were used in this study. The Finite into N nodes and their corresponding heat fluxes resulting from
Volume Method with an unstructured mesh using commercial direct solution are represented by a vector
CFD code, FLUENT, was applied for direct solution of the
laminar confined jets impingement heat transfer to a flat plate
r
with constant temperature. The obtained results were compared qc = [qc1 qc 2 L qcN ]T (16)
with the previous literature [11] this comparison was presented
in [12] and because of space limitations it is not discussed here. A
Selection of the appropriate grid size is essential due to the 20
large number of direct problems to be solved in the course of 18
nonlinear search procedure. The grid independency test was 16
performed for a benchmark problem described in reference [11] 14
and results are shown in table 1 and Fig. 2a. So the optimum 12
grid size of 55 × 170 was chosen. The utilized grid is shown in 10

Nu
40x100
Fig. 2b. 8 45x120
6 55x170
4 65x200
INVERSE PROBLEM FORMULATION 2
The formulation of the inverse problem is described by 0
referring to Fig. 1. As it is desirable to have a specific spatially
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
uniform heat flux on the design surface, the design variables for Dimensionles Position X
the inverse problem are jets’ Reynolds numbers, separation
distance between the exit plane of the jets and the design B
surface as well as inter-jet spacing. For the case of 4 jets the
design variables vector is given as
r
D = ⎡⎣ Re1 Re2 H 1* H 2* G * ⎤⎦ T (14)
,

and for the case of 6 jets the design variables vector is defined
by
r
D = ⎡⎣ Re1 Re2 Re3 H 1* H 2* H 3* G * ⎤⎦ T (15)

The corresponding constrains are

●For the jets’ Reynolds number
0 ≤ Re j ≤ 1000
●For the separation between the exit plane of the jets and Figure 2. REPRESENTATIVE GRID FOR THE BENCHMARK
PROBLEM
design surface
0.6 ≤ H *j ≤ 3
●For the inter-jet spacing In order to estimate the design variables, the temperature
of design surface is set to be the actual boundary condition of
0.05 ≤ G * ≤ 1
the direct problem. Then by assuming an initial guess for the
design variables, heat flux distribution on the design surface is
The optimization problem is defined to determine the r
calculated. The calculated values of qc are then compared with
design variables such that it satisfies the desired conditions on
the design surface and mentioned constraints. The required heat the desired value of the heat flux on the design surface, and if

Table 1. CONVERGENCE OF MEAN NUSSELT NUMBER IN THE DESIGN SURFACE WITH DECREASING THE GRID SIZE
nodes in Y direction nodes in X direction Mean Nusselt number on design surface
40 100 12.3233
45 125 12.2291
55 170 12.1331
65 200 12.0624

4 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 necessary, the design variables is varied and the procedure is counter as i = 1 .
Table 2. DESIGN VARIABLES AT INITIAL AND FINAL RESULTING POINT AS WELL AS CORRESPONDING erms FOR THE CASE OF 4 JETS.
Desired Uniform Nusselt = 8.333 Desired Uniform Nusselt = 11.667 Desired Uniform Nusselt = 15
Parameter Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final
Re1 215.06 163.43 477.90 194.36 645.17 201.52
Re 2 645.17 201.36 716.85 713.68 645.17 488.13

H1* 1.8 1.3216

2
1.1147 0.9 0.7503

H 2* 1.8 2.0981
2
2.0566 0.9 1.1044
* 0.2 0.0501 0.0502 0.1 0.0500
G 0.5
erms 45.11 9.90 46.42 7.85 57.84 10.95

repeated until sufficient proximity between the “calculated” and
the “desired” value of the heat flux is reached. This procedure
is performed by considering an objective function f
( ) ∑ (q
r N
f D = d − qcn )2
n=1
r 4)
The problem is then to find the vector V which minimizes
the function f.
The optimal point of function f corresponds to the solution
r 6)
D of the problem. The computational algorithm of this
procedure consists of two main parts; the direct problem
solving and the optimization procedure. As explained, for the
first part the FVM is employed in this work, while for latter
part the Conjugate Gradients Method (CGM) is used as the
main optimization method to minimize function f. Details of
this algorithm is not discussed here; interested readers are
referred to Ref. [13] for CGM details. In the CGM method for
obtaining the optimum step size λ the Golden Section
algorithm is employed.
The iterative algorithm for finding design variables can be
described as follows:
r square of relative error of estimated heat flux is depicted in Fig.
1) Start with an initial guess of D1 and set the iteration
2) Calculate the gradient of the objective function and
r
− ∇f D1 ( )
assume the
( )
r as the first search vector.
∇f D1
3) Calculate the optimum step size for the current search
(17) vector by means of golden section method.
Check the new point for optimality, if it is the optimal
point, terminate the iteration. otherwise continue to the
next step.
5) Calculate the gradient of the objective function and
normalize it.
Find the new search vector according to CGM.
7) Consider the iteration counter to be i = i + 1 then go
to step 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In the cases of 4 and 6 jets the problem is solved for three
different desired Nusselt numbers. The required Nusselt
numbers on the design surface for both cases are 8.333, 11.667
and 15. The initial guess and the final solution for each case as
well as objective function and related errors, are reported in
table 2 and 3. Local Nusselt number distribution on the design
surface as well as the convergence history for the root mean
3 and 4. The latter parameter is defined as

Table 3. DESIGN VARIABLES AT INITIAL AND FINAL RESULTING POINT AS WELL AS CORRESPONDING erms FOR THE CASE OF 6 JETS.
Desired Uniform Nusselt = 8.333 Desired Uniform Nusselt = 11.667 Desired Uniform Nusselt = 15
Parameter Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final
Re1 215.06 64.96 322.59 136.79 322.59 192.62
Re 2 215.06 50.62 322.59 303.28 322.59 572.18
Re3 215.06 127.83 322.59 327.35 322.59 458.43

H1* 0.75 0.6901 0.9 0.8412 0.9 0.6625

H 2* 0.75 0.8026 1.2 1.2082 1.2 1.0843

H 3* 0.75 0.7982 1.5 1.4898 1.5 1.4391

* 0.1 0.0584 0.15 0.0500 0.15 0.0505
G
erms 75.08 3.49 35.06 5.69 24.45632 9.77

5 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 2 geometric parameters are assumed
1
N
⎛ qci − qd ⎞
erms =
N ∑ ⎜⎜
i =1 ⎝
qd
× 100 ⎟⎟
⎠
(18)
W = 0.05 m , H * = 3 , L*1 = 2 , L*2 = 8 (19)
As it is seen in Fig. 3 and 4 left columns, almost in all
Moreover, stream lines and temperature contours for all of
cases the method converges in less than 10 steps and the
the six cases at final answer points are presented in Fig. 6.
resulting erms is less than 10% which is acceptable for most
For the both cases the following fixed non-dimensional

A)
50 14
12
40
10
erms

30 8

Nu
20 6
Iteration 1
4 Iteration 5
10 Iteration 10
2
Desired Nusselt (8.33)
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Iteration Dimensionless Position X

B)
50 20
18
40 16
14
30
12
erms

Nu

20 10
8 Iteration 1
10 Iteration 4
6
Iteration 9
4 Desired Nusselt (11.667)
0
2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Iteration
Dimensionless Position X

C)
70 32

60 28

50 24
40 20
erms

Nu

30 16
20 12 Iteration 1
Iteration 6
10 8 Iteration 9
Uniform Nusselt (15)
0 4
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Iteration Dimensionless Position X
Figure 3. CONVERGENCE HISTORY (ON THE LEFT COLUMN) AND LOCAL NUSSELT DISTRIBUTION (ON THE RIGHT COLUMN) FOR
DIFFERENT OBJECTIVE NUSSELT NUMBERS IN CASE OF 4 JETS WITH ࡴ‫ כ‬ൌ ૛, ࡸ૚‫= כ‬2 AND ࡸ૛‫= כ‬8 (A) Nu=8.33 , (B) Nu=11.667 , (C) Nu=15.

6 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 engineering applications.
Due to the nonlinear behavior of the problem, during the
study it is observed that the number of the iterations and the
resulting erms depend on the initial guess point of the algorithm.
Also it can be seen from tables 2 and 3 that for most of cases,
by increasing the desired Nusselt number the error variance
increases.
Table 3 and 4 show that by using 6 jets instead of 4 jets the
purpose of the problem is achieved more accurately. This is due
A)
80
70
60
to increasing the number of design variables that allows the
CGM method to fine tune them more effectively.
Almost in all cases it is seen from Fig. 5 that the separation
occurs on the bottom isotherm wall that causes distortion on
isotherms. But in Fig. 5f the isotherms are not distorted and the
flow is not separated.
Also the left column of the Fig. 5 Shows that by increasing
the desired Nusselt number, the isotherms become denser above
the design surface. The temperature gradients decrease away
20
15

50

Nu
10
erms

40
30
Itration 1
20 5 Itration 4
Itration 9
10 Uniform Nusselr (8.333)
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Iteration Dimensionless Position X

B)
40 30
35
25
30
25 20

20
Nu
erms

15
15 Iteration 1
10 Iteration 4
10 Iteration 9
5 Desired Nusselt (11.667)
5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Iteration Dimensionless Position X
C)
30
20
25

20 15
erms

15
Nu

10
10 Iteration 1
Iteration 4
5 Iteration 7
5 Desired Nusselt (15)

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Iteration Dimensionless Position X

Figure 4. CONVERGENCE HISTORY (ON THE LEFT COLUMN) AND LOCAL NUSSELT DISTRIBUTION (ON THE RIGHT COLUMN) FOR
DIFFERENT OBJECTIVE NUSSELT NUMBERS IN CASE OF 6 JETS WITH ࡴ‫ כ‬ൌ ૛, ࡸ૚‫= כ‬2 AND ࡸ૛‫= כ‬8 (A) Nu=8.333 , (B) Nu=11.667 , (C) Nu=15.

7 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 from bottom surface.
Distribution of local Nusselt number on design surface,
depicted in right column of Fig. 3 and 4, shows that the error in
the beginning and ending parts of the design surface is higher
than middle parts.
Table 2 and 3 show that in final answer point of the various
cases the Reynolds number of the outer jet is more than others.
This way the outer jet decreases the horizontal velocity of the
inner jet near its point of impact, while boosting up the
momentum of its outer low the velocity part. This also leads to
A)
a uniform heat flux over the design surface. It is also seen that
in the final solution the outer jet heights are greater than those
of the interior ones.
CONCLUSION
In this paper by use of the computational fluid dynamics
and the conjugate gradients method a systematic procedure is
developed to achieve an optimal jet configuration for which a
uniform heat flux condition can be attained on an isothermal
surface. A variance error of 10% was reached for a low Nusselt

B)

C)

D)

E)

F)

Figure 5. ISOTHERMS (ON THE LEFT COLUMN) AND STREAMLINES (ON THE RIGHT COLUMN) FOR THE FINAL ANSWER POINT (A)4 JETS
Nu=8.333 (B) 4 JETS Nu=11.667 (C) 4 JETS Nu=15 (D) 6 JETS Nu=8.333 (E) 6 JETS Nu=11.667 (F) 6 JETS Nu=15.

8 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 number which can be reduced further by increasing the number
of jets. It was concluded that as the variance error increases
when the target Nusselt number increases. To remedy this
problem once again one can utilize larger number of jets.
REFERENCES
[1] Hosseini Sarvari, S.M. and Mansouri, S.H., 2004,“Inverse
design for radiative heat source in an irregular 2-D participating
media”, Numerical Heat Transfer Part B, 46(3), September, pp.
283–300.
[2] Daun, K.J., Morton, D.P. and Howell, J.R., 2003,
”Geometric optimization of radiant enclosures containing
specular surfaces”, ASME J. Heat Transfer, 125(5), October,
pp. 845–851.
[3] Timans, P.J., 1998, “Rapid thermal processing technology
for the 21st century”, Materials Science in Semiconductor
Processing 1 , 1(3-4), December, pp. 169-179.
[4] Pourshaghaghy, A., Pooladvand, K., Kowsary, F. and
Karimi-Zand, K., 2006,” An inverse radiation boundary design
problem for an enclosure filled with an emitting, absorbing, and
scattering media”, International Communications in Heat and
Mass Transfer, 33(3), March, pp. 381-390.
[5] Birla, S. L., Wang, S., Tang, J. and Hallman, G., 2004,
”Improving heating uniformity of fresh fruit in radio frequency
treatments for pest control”, Postharvest Biology and
Technology, 33(2), August, pp. 205-217.
[6] Zareifard, M.R., Marcotte, M. and Dostie, M., 2006, ”A
method for balancing heat fluxes validated for a newly
designed pilot plant oven”, Journal of Food Engineering, 76(3),
October, pp. 303-312.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/31/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
[7] Sparrow, E.M. and Carlson, C.K., 1987, “Experimental
investigation of heat flux uniformity of thin electrically heated
metallic foils”, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 30(3), March, pp.
601-604.
[8] Roetzel, W. and Newman, M., 1975, “Uniform heat flux in a
paper drying drum with a non-cylindrical condensation surface
operating under rimming conditions”, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer, 18(4), April, pp. 553-557.
[9] Chander, S. and Ray, A., 2007, “Heat transfer characteristics
of three interacting methane/air flame jets impinging on a flat
surface”, Int. J. Heat and Mass Transfer, 50(3), February, pp.
640-653.
[10] Radifi, N. and Blasiak, W., 2006, “Heat transfer
characteristics of HiTAC heating furnace using regenerative
burners”, Applied Thermal Engineering, 26(16), November,
pp. 2027-2034.
[11] Dagtekin, I. and Oztop, H.F., 2008,” Heat transfer due to
double laminar slot jets impingement onto an isothermal wall
within one side closed long duct”, International
Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 35(1), January,
pp. 65-75.
[12] Rajaeeian Hoonejani, M., 2009. “Impinging Jet Cooling
Optimization for Obtaining Uniform Heat Flux”. MS Thesis,
University of Tehran, Tehean, Iran, August.
[13] Ozisik, M.N. and Orlande, H.R.B., Inverse Heat Transfer,
Taylor and Francis, New York, 2000 chapters 2 & 5.
9 Copyright © 2010 by ASME