Heat and Mass Transfer

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 251–263 | Cite as

Investigation of thermal performances of “S-shaped” enhancement elements by response surface methodology

  • Sendogan KaragozEmail author


Electronic equipment generally uses heat sinks as cooling devices in order to effectively control heat arising from them. The heat sinks are commonly installed in the restricted space of the systems and their thermal performance can be improved both by enhancing the heat transfer rate and by reducing the friction factor. In the present work, a study is made to investigate the thermal performance characteristics of “S-shaped” enhancement elements. Response surface methodology is used to plan and analyze the experiments. The element height, the transverse pitch, the element radius, and the Reynolds number are chosen as variables to study the thermal performance in terms of the Nusselt number and the friction factor. In order to verify the adequacy of the model used, confirmation experiments are performed on the experimental setup. The experimental results indicate that the model used in this study is reasonable and accurate and can be used for determining the Nusselt number and the friction factor with the limitations of the factors analyzed.


Nusselt Number Response Surface Methodology Friction Factor Heat Transfer Rate Thermal Performance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Tahat M, Kodah ZH, Jarrah BA, Probert SD (2000) Heat transfers from pin–fin arrays experiencing forced convection. Appl Energy 67(4):419–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sara ON, Pekdemir T, Yapıcı S, Yılmaz M (2001) Enhancement of heat transfer from a flat surface in a channel flow by attachment of rectangular blocks. Int J Energy Res 25:563–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    El-Sayed SA, Mohamed MS, Abdel-latif AM, Abouda AE (2002) Investigation of turbulent heat transfer and fluid flow in longitudinal rectangular-fin arrays of different geometries and shrouded fin array. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 26:879–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Park K, Choi DH (2004) Shape optimization of a plate–fin type heat sink with triangular-shaped vortex generator. KSME Int J 18(9):867–876Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park K, Choi DH, Lee KS (2004) Optimum design of plate heat exchanger with staggered pin arrays. Numer Heat Transf Part A 45:347–361CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Park K, Choi DH, Lee KS (2004) Numerical shape optimization for high performance of a heat sink with pin–fins. Numer Heat Transf Part A 46:909–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Park K, Moon S (2005) Optimal design of heat exchangers using the progressive quadratic response surface model. Int J Heat Mass Transf 48:2126–2139CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chiang KT (2007) Modeling and optimization of designing parameters for a parallel-plain fin heat sink with confined impinging jet using the response surface methodology. Appl Therm Eng 27:2473–2482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chiang KT, Chou CC, Liu NM (2009) Application of response surface methodology in describing the thermal performances of a pin–fin heat sink. Int J Therm Sci 48:1196–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sahin B, Demir A (2008) Thermal performance analysis and optimum design parameters of heat exchanger having perforated pin fins. Energy Convers Manag 49:1684–1695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sahin B, Demir A (2008) Performance analysis of a heat exchanger having perforated square fins. Appl Therm Eng 28:621–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jubran BA, Al-Salaymeh AS (1996) Heat transfer enhancement in electronic modules using ribs and “film-cooling-like” techniques. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 17(2):148–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rodriguez JF, Renaud JE, Wujek BA, Tappeta RV (2000) Trust region model management in multidisciplinary design optimization. J Comput Appl Math 124:139–154CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Madsen JI, Langyhjem M (2001) Multifidelity response surface approximations for the optimum design of diffuser flows. Optim Eng 2:453–468CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kansal HK, Singh S, Kumar P (2005) Parametric optimization of powder mixed electrical discharge machining by response surface methodology. J Mater Process Technol 169:427–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Naceur H, Ben-Elechi S, Batoz JL, Knopf-lenoir C (2007) Response surface methodology for the rapid design of aluminum sheet metal forming parameters. Mater Des 29(4):781–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Choori W, Pattthanamanee W, Manurakchinakorn S (2008) Use of response surface method for the determination of demineralization efficiency in fermented shrimp shells. Bioresour Technol 99(14):6168–6173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xiarchos I, Jaworska A, Traznadel GZ (2008) Response surface methodology for the modeling of copper removal from aqueous solutions using micellarenhanced ultrafiltration. J Membr Sci 321(2):222–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Acherjee B, Misra D, Bose D, Venkadeshwaran K (2009) Prediction of weld strength and seam width for laser transmission welding of thermoplastic using response surface methodology. Opt Laser Technol 41(8):956–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang G, Zhao G, Li H, Guan Y (2011) Research on optimization design of the heating/cooling channels for rapid heat cycle molding based on response surface methodology and constrained particle swarm optimization. Expert Syst Appl 38:6705–6719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khalajzadeh V, Heidarinejad G, Srebric J (2011) Parameters optimization of a vertical ground heat exchanger based on response surface methodology. Energy Build 43:1288–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Subasi A (2010) Heat exchanger optimization with the helping of response surface method. MS Thesis, Mechanical Engineering Department, Ataturk University, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Box G, Wilson K (1951) On the experimental attainment of optimum condition. J R Stat Soc Ser B 13(1):1–45zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Montgomery DC (1997) Design and analysis of experiment, 4th edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Myers RH, Montgomery DH (1995) Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen TY, Shu TH (2004) Flow structures and heat transfer characteristics in fan flows with and without delta-wing vortex generators. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 28(4):273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ozisik MN (1985) Heat transfer: a basic approach. McGraw-Hill Int Ed, BostonGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kline SJ, McClinctock FA (1953) Describing uncertainties in single sample experiments. Mech Eng 75:3–8Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sara ON, Pekdemir T, Yapici S, Yilmaz M (2001) Heat-transfer enhancement in a channel flow with perforated rectangular blocks. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 22:509–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Engineering FacultyAtatürk UniversityErzurumTurkey

Personalised recommendations