Numerical Study of Slot Jet Impingement on a Cylinder …
261
Fig. 4 Comparison between
the variations of pressure
distribution on the cylinder
surface for h/S = 8, S/D = 0.1 and Re S = 19,300. The pressure distributions obtained
from the numerical simulations were compared with experimental results of Brahma
et al. [11]. It was observed that Standard k–ω model predicts the pressure distribution
on the cylinder accurately compared to other two-equation model as shown in Fig. 4.
Similar study was carried out to recognize suitable RANs turbulence model for
turbulence slot jet on a heated cylinder. The numerical results are calculated from
RANs turbulence model validated with experimental data [5]. Figure 5 shows the
comparison of calculated numerical results with the experimental results of [5].
Figure 5 shows the local Nu distribution from the stagnation point to along the
circumferential position θ = 0° to 180° by using two-equation different turbulence
models and the experimental data for Re D = 6000 and 20,000. All turbulence models
overpredict the local Nusselt number distribution in the region θ = 50°.
However, the predictions of the Standard k–ε and Realizable k–ε models are
closure to the experimental results at stagnation point. Compared to the experimental value, the stagnation point Nusselt number overpredicted by Standard k–ε
and Realizable k–ε models is 30% as shown in Fig. 5a, b.
4 Summary
The present work was carried out to recognize suitable RANs turbulence model for
simulating turbulence slot jet on a heated cylinder. Based on the present study, the
following conclusions were drawn:
1. Standard k–ω turbulence model predicts better results for pressure distribution
on the cylinder.
2. Standard k–ε and Realizable k–ε models predict the accurate stagnation Nusselt
number distribution.
261
Fig. 4 Comparison between
the variations of pressure
distribution on the cylinder
surface for h/S = 8, S/D = 0.1 and Re S = 19,300. The pressure distributions obtained
from the numerical simulations were compared with experimental results of Brahma
et al. [11]. It was observed that Standard k–ω model predicts the pressure distribution
on the cylinder accurately compared to other two-equation model as shown in Fig. 4.
Similar study was carried out to recognize suitable RANs turbulence model for
turbulence slot jet on a heated cylinder. The numerical results are calculated from
RANs turbulence model validated with experimental data [5]. Figure 5 shows the
comparison of calculated numerical results with the experimental results of [5].
Figure 5 shows the local Nu distribution from the stagnation point to along the
circumferential position θ = 0° to 180° by using two-equation different turbulence
models and the experimental data for Re D = 6000 and 20,000. All turbulence models
overpredict the local Nusselt number distribution in the region θ = 50°.
However, the predictions of the Standard k–ε and Realizable k–ε models are
closure to the experimental results at stagnation point. Compared to the experimental value, the stagnation point Nusselt number overpredicted by Standard k–ε
and Realizable k–ε models is 30% as shown in Fig. 5a, b.
4 Summary
The present work was carried out to recognize suitable RANs turbulence model for
simulating turbulence slot jet on a heated cylinder. Based on the present study, the
following conclusions were drawn:
1. Standard k–ω turbulence model predicts better results for pressure distribution
on the cylinder.
2. Standard k–ε and Realizable k–ε models predict the accurate stagnation Nusselt
number distribution.