Thermal Performance and Optimization of

international journal of refrigeration 65 (2016) 4254
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / i j r e f r i g
Thermal performance and optimization of

hyperbolic annular fins under dehumidifying
operating conditions analytical and numerical
solutions
S. Pashah, Abdurrahman Moinuddin, Syed M. Zubair *
Mechanical Engineering Department, KFUPM Box # 1474, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals,
Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
A R T I C L E
I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Article history:
The thermal performance of hyperbolic profile annular fins subjected to dehumidifying op-
Received 1 July 2015
erating conditions is studied. An analytical solution for completely wet fin is derived using
Received in revised form 4
an approximate linear temperaturehumidity relationship. A numerical solution using actual
November 2015
psychrometric relationship for completely and partially wet operating conditions is then
Accepted 6 January 2016
obtained to account for the actual temperaturehumidity ratio psychrometric relationship
Available online 3 February 2016
under both partially and fully wet operating conditions. An excellent agreement is observed between analytical and numerical solutions for completely wet fin. The fin optimization
Keywords:
is presented based on the analytical solution of completely wet fin. Finally, a finite element
Annular fin
formulation is used for studying the two-dimensional effects of orthotropic thermal con-
Hyperbolic profile
ductivity on the thermal performance of fin under partially and fully wet operating conditions.
Analytical solution
2016 Elsevier Ltd and International Institute of Refrigeration. All rights reserved.
Fin optimization
Finite element analysis
Orthotropic thermal conductivity
Mass transfer
Partially wet fin
Performance thermique et optimisation dailettes annulaires

hyperboliques sous conditions de fonctionnement
dshumidifiant solutions analytique et numrique
Mots cls : Ailette annulaire ; Profil hyperbolique ; Solution analytique ; Optimisation dailette ; Analyse dlment fini ; Conductivit
thermique orthotrope ; Transfert de masse ; Ailette partiellement humide
* Corresponding author. Mechanical Engineering Department, KFUPM Box # 1474, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran
31261, Saudi Arabia. Tel.: +966 13 860 3135; Fax: +966 13 860 2949.
E-mail address: smzubair@kfupm.edu.sa (S.M. Zubair).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2016.01.006
0140-7007/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd and International Institute of Refrigeration. All rights reserved.
Nomenclature
B
Bi
Co
cp
h
hD
h
ifg
k
L
Le
M
M0
m0
Patm
Q
Q*
q
qb
RH
r*
r
R
T
Ta
1.
t*
t
Parameter defined in Eq. (10) [C]

Biot number
constant defined in Eq. (33) [kgw/kga]
specific heat of incoming moist air stream
[J kg1 K1]
convective heat transfer coefficient [W m2 K1]
mass transfer coefficient [kg m2 s1]
equivalent heat transfer coefficient defined by
Eq. (69) [W m2 K1]
latent heat of evaporation for water [J kg1]
thermal conductivity [W m1 K1]
fin length [m]
Lewis number
parameter defined in Eq. (21) [m3/2]
parameter defined in Eq. (20) [m3/2]
parameter defined in Eq. (20) [m1]
atmospheric pressure [Pa]
dimensionless heat flow rate
heat flow rate [W]
heat flux [W m2]
specified heat flux [W m2]
relative humidity of air
fin radius [m]
dimensionless fin radius
annular fin radius ratio
temperature [C]
equivalent ambient temperature defined by Eq.
(70) [C]
Introduction
Extended surfaces are widely used to enhance the rate of heat

transfer between a solid and a surrounding fluid. In refrigeration and air conditioning equipment, if the fin surface
temperature is lower than the dew-point temperature of incoming moist air, then the condensation of water vapor occurs
on the fin surface such that heat and mass transfer occurs
simultaneously.
The major variables that influence the heat and mass transfer include, fin geometry, fin material and operating conditions.
The fin geometries that are commonly used in these heat transfer devices may be classified as (a) spines or pin fins (b)
longitudinal or straight fins, and (c) radial or annular fins, (Kraus
et al., 2001). The objective of a variable profile fins is to provide
high heat transfer capability for a given additional weight of
the fin or to provide a minimum weight for the required amount
of heat to be dissipated from the finned surface. The profiles
are classified as (a) rectangular, (b) triangular or trapezoidal,
(c) convex parabolic and (d) concave parabolic (Yovanovich,
2004). It is stated that among the whole family of annular fins
of tapered cross section, the annular fin of hyperbolic profile
is the foremost fin shape for usage in tubes of high performance heat exchange devices (Campo and Cui, 2008).
The performance of a fin is well described by its efficiency, defined as:
43
fin thickness [m]

dimensionless fin thickness
Greek symbols
efficiency
fin aspect ratio defined after Eq. (37)
dimensionless temperature
temperature difference defined by Eq. (16)

p
temperature value defined by Eq. (26)
parameter defined in Eq. set (32)
humidity ratio of air [kgw kga1]

Finite element matrices and vectors
{f } element load vector
[k ] element stiffness matrix
flux-temperature matrix
[B]
[D] material property matrix
[N ] shape function matrix
{T} nodal temperature vector
Subscripts and superscripts
a
ambient
base
b
convection
h
q
conduction
r
radial
t
tip
z
lateral
border between wet and dry region of a partially

wet fin
Q*
* ax
Qm
(1)
where Q is heat transfer rate through the fin and Q max is the
maximum possible heat transfer rate from the fin if the entire
fin surface is at the prime surface temperature and humidity
ratio.
High efficiency fins are desirable for effective heat transfer. For the case of dry operating conditions, the rate of sensible
heat loss can be increased by using force convection e.g. by
using a fan. However, for a given fin material and geometry,
the maximum value of convective heat transfer under dry operating conditions is governed by the dimensionless parameter
called Biot number. For a circular cross-section pin fin it is given
by:
Bi =
hr
k
(2)
h is the convective heat transfer coefficient, k is the thermal

conductivity and r is the fin radius. For metallic fin material,
a fin has high efficiency (>90%) values only in very low Biot
number range Bi 1 . For a given fin material, this condition
implies that low h values must be used to have high efficiency slender pin fins. This issue can be addressed by using
a fin material with orthotropic thermal conductivity; i.e. a pin
fin with different thermal conductivities kr and kz in radial and
44
Table 1 Polymer composite thermal conductivities

(Bahadur and Bar-Cohen, 2007).
Filler
Matrix
Parallel
to fiber
(W/m K)
Normal
to fiber
(W/m K)
Continuous carbon fiber

Discontinuous carbon fiber
Graphite
Polymer
Polymer
Epoxy
330
10100
370
310
310
6.5
axial directions, respectively. The thermal conductivity of the

polymer composite materials is significantly higher in fiber axis
direction whereas the thermal conductivity in the orthogonal direction can be significantly lower. The thermal
conductivities of some polymer composite are summarized in
Table 1.
The effect of orthotropic thermal conductivity on fin performance under dry operating conditions is presented in Fig. 1.
The orthotropic property is defined by the thermal conductivity ratio krz = kr kz . It is obvious that orthotropic fins have
high efficiency in the range 0.5 < Bi < 1 whereas an isotropic
fin would be practically not useful in this range.
The existing work for orthotropic material is mainly covering dry operating conditions (Kundu and Lee, 2011). The heat
conduction in an anisotropic material is studied by Traiano et al.
(1997). The analytical solution for cylindrical spines of
orthotropic material is derived by Bahadur and Bar-Cohen (2007).
The solution provides expressions for temperature profile and
heat transfer rate. A dimensionless closed form solution for
orthotropic material, cylindrical spines is derived by Zubair et al.
(2010). An axisymmetric thermal non-dimensional finite
element method has been used to study the performance of
orthotropic material spines by S. Pashah et al. (2011). Mustafa
et al. (2011) derived a closed-form analytical solution to study
0.8
= 0.005
kk*
rz
kk*
rz = 0.01
0.7
= 0.03
kk*
rz
0.6
= 0.1
kk*
rz
0.5
= 1
kk*
rz
L/r =10
0.9
0.4
0.3
2.
0.2
0.1
0
the thermal performance of orthotropic material annular fins

with a contact resistance.
There are many studies available for isotropic fin performance under combined heat and mass transfer whereas not
much work has been done with orthotropic material. Regarding orthotropic fins under combined heat and mass transfer;
Kundu and Lee (2011) developed a semi-analytical model for
predicting the fin efficiency of orthotropic fin-and-tube heat
exchangers for square and equilateral arrays of tubes. However
to decrease the complexity of semi-analytical solution, a linear
relationship between the specific humidity at the fin surface
and the fin surface temperature is considered, whereas it is
well known that a linear approximation is not valid for this
relationship because the psychrometric correlation between
the two parameters is non-linear (Hyland and Wexter, 1983a,
1983b; Kloppers and Krger, 2005). The correlation also includes some other parameters like wet bulb temperature;
consequently, the non-linear correlation is not suitable for a
closed form solution. Thus, the polynomial (linear, quadratic
and cubic) relationships between temperature (dry bulb) and
humidity ratio have commonly been used for closed form analytical solutions. An excellent review of the available polynomial
relationships and limitations of some approaches are discussed by Kundu (2009). An approximate cubic polynomial
relationship is given by Liang et al. (2000). The relationship is
obtained by regression analysis over the temperature range 0
to 30C. The approximate cubic relationship is suitable for the
closed form solution with an acceptable range of accuracy.
The preceding discussion shows that there is a potential
of major contribution in the area for combined heat and mass
transfer for orthotropic fin material. The limited amount of work
available in open literature is approximate in nature due to simplifying assumptions to decrease complexity of a semianalytical solution. However, numerical methods like finite
element method are capable of incorporating complexities
related to material properties and geometry with relative ease,
particularly for two-dimensional problems. Therefore, a general
finite element formulation that is capable of modelling combined heat and mass transfer can provide solution with an
acceptable accuracy level. Therefore, the first objective of the
present study is to evaluate the effect of using a linear
temperature-humidity ratio relationship on the accuracy of a
hyperbolic profile annular fin by comparing its results with a
numerical solution based on actual non-linear psychrometric relationship. The second objective is to study the effects of
orthotropic thermal conductivity using a finite element formulation considering the non-linear psychrometric relationship.
Bi r
10
Fig. 1 Orthotropic pin fin efficiency under dry operating

conditions as a function of radial Biot number Bir and
thermal conductivity ratio for fin aspect (length to radius)
ratio = 10 (Pashah et al., 2011).
Annular fin with hyperbolic profile
It is very common to make certain assumptions for simplifying one-dimensional analysis of the fins. The assumptions
considered in the present study are:
(a) The thermal conductivity of the fin, heat transfer coefficient and latent heat of condensation of the water vapor
are constant;
(b) The heat and mass transfer are under steady-state
condition;
(c) The thermal resistance associated with the presence of

thin water film due to condensation is small and may
be neglected; and
(d) The effect of air pressure drop due to airflow is ignored.
These are some of the classical assumptions that have been
commonly used by many researchers for the analysis of
conducting-convecting finned surfaces.
2.1.
We consider an annular fin of hyperbolic profile with base thickness of t b * and temperature Tb . The temperature at tip is Tt ,
which for fully wet situation, should be less than the dew point
temperature of the ambient air at temperature Ta and humidity ratio a .The length of the fin is L . The fin geometry and
operating conditions are depicted in Fig. 2.
Applying the energy balance on the infinitesimal circular
ring of width dr* , which has an average thickness of t* , at a
radius of r* from the center of the tube
(3)
where qr* is the conduction heat transfer rate in the radial direction. It can be expressed as,
qr* = 2 r *t (r * ) k
dT
dr *
(4)
Note that t (r* ) shows the variable thickness of the fin along
its length, given by:
r*
t (r * ) = t * b b
r*
qr *
dr *
r *
(6)
therefore;
d2 T
dT
dt (r * ) dT
qr * + dr * = qr * + k 2 r *t (r * )
+ 2 t (r * )
+ 2 r *
dr *
dr *2
dr *
dr * dr *
(7)
The heat and mass transfer coefficients are related as

(Chilton and Colburn, 1934):
Fully wet fin model
qr * = qconvection + qcondensation + qr * + dr *
qr * + dr * = qr * +
45
(5)
also:
2
h
= c pLe 3
hD
(8)
where
hDi fg = hB
(9)
and
B=
i fg
(10)
c pLe 3
The parameter B can be considered as constant, because

over the practical range of air temperature and relative humidity, the variations are not significant for the latent heat of
water condensation ( i fg ), Lewis number ( Le ) and specific heat
of incoming moist air ( c p ). Therefore, its value is within 1.6%
of the average value of 2433 C (Sharqawy and Zubair, 2007).
Substituting all the above terms in Eq. (3) and simplifying, we
get:
d2 T 1 dT
1 dt (r * ) dT
2h
2hD
+
+
+
(Ta T ) +
i fg ( a ) = 0
dr *2 r * dr * t (r * ) dr * dr * kt (r * )
kt (r * )
(11)
subject to the following boundary conditions:
at
r = rb,
T = Tb
and = b
(12)
The other boundary condition, which is at the fin tip, can

be either
at
r = rt ,
dT
=0
dr
for insulated tip
(13)
or
at r = rt , k
2.1.1.
dT
= h (Ta T ) + hDi fg ( a ) for convective tip
dr
(14)
Analytical solution for fully wet fin
Equation (11) can be written in terms of temperature difference as:
d2
r*
= mo 2
[ + B ( a )]
dr *2
rb *
Fig. 2 Schematic of a completely wet hyperbolic annular
fin.
where the temperature difference is,
(15)
46
= Ta T
(16)
Now we need a relation between the temperature difference and humidity ratio to solve the above equation. In
this regard, we will use the same relation as that of Sharqawy
and Zubair (2007), expressed as
= a2 + b2 T
Ai and Bi are their respective derivatives.

The actual rate of heat transfer from the fin is given
by:
Q * b = Ab k
= Abk ( b + p ) M2 3
(17)
23 23
23 23
Ai M rt * Bi M rb * + Ai M rb * Bi M rt *
23 23
23 23
Ai
M
r
Bi
M
*
r
*
Ai
M
r
*
Bi
M
r
*
t
t
b
b
The constants a2 and b2 are defined as follows:
a2 = b
b2 =
dew b
Tb
Tdew Tb
dew b
Tdew Tb
M0
m 2
= 0
rb *
(19)
with
2h
m0 =
kt * b
M = M0 (1 + b2 B)
2
(20)
(21)
we get after some manipulation,
d2
M2 r * = M02 r *B ( a )
dr *2
(22)
The boundary conditions are:
at
r * = rb *, = b
At
r * = rt *,
d
=0
dr
= b
(23)
for insulated tip
(24)
and
The closed-form analytical solution is expressed in terms

of Airy functions, expressed as
2 2
2 2
Ai M 3 rt * Bi M 3 r * Ai M 3 r * Bi M 3 rt *
+ p
=
b + p
23 23
23 23
Ai M rt * Bi M rb* Ai M rb* Bi M rt *
where Ab is the fin base area.

The maximum heat transfer, which is the heat transfer from
the fin surface if the entire fin is at the base temperature and
base humidity ratio, is expressed as,
Q *max = m02kAs (1 + b2 B) ( b + p )
2 2
2 2
Ai M 3 rt * Bi M 3 rb * + Ai M 3 rb * Bi M 3 rt *
A
(31)
= b M 4 3
As
23 23
23 23
Bi
M
r
Ai
M
r
Bi
M
r
Ai
M
r
*
*
*
*
t
t
b
b
2.1.2.
Numerical solution for fully wet fin
Although the assumption of linear relationship (cf. Eq. (17)) simplifies the analytical solution of the differential Eq. (34), it does
not account for the actual non-linear psychrometric correlations of an air-water vapor mixture. Therefore, we will obtain
a numerical solution using the actual non-linear psycrometric
relationship.
Normalizing Eq. (11) using the following relations:
r=
r*
T T
, = a
,
L
Ta Tb
a
a b
(32)
And substituting:
(25)
b
Co = B a
Ta Tb
(33)
We get
B ( a a2 b2 Ta )
(1 + b2B)
(26)
It is important to note that Airy functions are related to

modified Bessel functions of the fractional order by the following equations (Abramowitz and Stegun, 1964).
Ai ( X ) =
(30)
where As is the fin surface area. Therefore, the fin efficiency

can be written as,
where;
p =
(29)
(18)
Substituting the above expressions in Eq. (15) and

introducing.
d
dr* r * = rb *
1 1
2
XK1 3 X3 2
3
d2
r
= (mo L )2 [ + Co ]
dr 2
rb
at
r = rb, = 1
and
=1
(35)
and
(27)
at
1 2 3 2
2
Bi ( X ) =
X I1 3 X
+ I X3 2
1 3 3
3 3
(34)
(28)
or
r = rt ,
d
=0
dr
for insulated tip
(36)
r = rt ,
d
= (mo L )2 ( + Co )
dr
47
(37)
where = (t b * 2) L is the fin aspect ratio.

The heat transfer to the fin is the summation of heat transferred by convection and condensation, which can be estimated
in the dimensionless form as,
rt
Q *fin
= 2 (m0 L )2 ( R 1) ( + Co ) rdr
2 rb *k (Ta Tb )
rb
Q=
(38)
R = rt * rb * denotes the radius ratio of tip to base of the fin.

The maximum dimensionless heat transfer rate Q max would
exist if the entire fin surface were at the fin base temperature and humidity ratio. It can be written as,
Q max =
Q max
*
= (m0 L )2 ( R + 1) (1 + Co )
2 rb *k (Ta Tb )
(39)
Therefore, the fin efficiency can be expressed as,

rt
2 ( R 1) ( + Co ) rdr
rb
(40)
(R + 1) (1 + Co )
Note that for a fin subjected to combined heat and mass

transfer, the total heat transfer comprises both the sensible
as well as the latent heat transfer caused by the temperature
difference and mass transfer, respectively. Therefore, the efficiency of a fully wet fin depends on the distribution of
temperature as well as humidity ratio on the fin surface.
2.2.
Partially wet fin model
A partially wet fin condition exists when the fin base temperature is lower, but the fin tip temperature is higher than
the dew point of air. Under such situation, there is a radius,
r = r , where the surface temperature equals the dew point of
the air, i.e. T ( r ) = Tdew . The fin is then divided into two regions:
a wet region for rb r r , with the surface temperature lower
than Tdew and a dry region from r r rt , with the surface temperature higher than Tdew (see Fig. 3). In this regard, separate
governing differential equations must be written for each region.
For rb r r
d2
r
= (mo L )2 [ + Co ]
dr 2
rb
Fig. 3 Schematic of a partially wet hyperbolic annular fin.
For the convective tip:
at
r = rt ,
d
= (mo L )2
dr
(44)
The actual dimensionless heat transferred to the fin surface,

is the summation of the heat transferred in the wet and dry
regions that can be calculated by,
rt
r
Q = 2 (m0 L )2 ( R 1) ( + Co ) rdr + rdr

rb
(45)
Therefore, the fin efficiency can be expressed as,

rt
r
2 ( R 1) ( + Co ) rdr + rdr
rb
r
=
(R + 1) [1 + Co ]
(46)
(41)
3.
Results and discussion
and for r r rt
d2
r
= (mo L )2 [ ]
dr 2
rb
(42)
The boundary conditions that differ from completely wet

case are as follows,
At the section separating the fully wet and fully dry regions
at
r = r , = dew
(43)
The one-dimensional mathematical models, developed in the

previous section, are solved numerically for both completely
wet and partially wet fins with insulated tip boundary conditions. The governing differential equations and the
corresponding boundary conditions are written in finitedifference form and are solved using either successive overrelaxation (SOR) or under relaxation method as per requirement
(Patrick, 1998). In order to calculate the humidity ratio corresponding to wet fin surface temperature using actual
48
0.8
Table 2 Grid independence test data for fin efficiency.

Case
Number of nodes
Fin efficiency
51
61
71
81
91
101
111
0.8257
0.8253
0.8251
0.8249
0.8247
0.8246
0.8245
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
m 0 L=0.2
m 0 L=0.6
m 0 L=1
0.6
0.4
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
RH = 0.6
R=4
0.2
psychrometric relationships, the method is implemented in EES

(Klein, 2015) that has built-in psychrometric property calculator. The solution has been obtained in an iterative manner
with the convergence criterion of 1 1006 .
Grid independence is described as the improvement in numerical results upon successive reduction in the cell size. As
the grid is refined, grid cells become smaller, the number of
cells in the domain grows, and the spatial discretization error
asymptotically approaches zero (excluding the round-off error).
For our case, we have discretized the one-dimensional fin
domain into 51 nodes as the starting point, thereafter increasing it to 111 nodes in the step interval of 10 nodes. The grid
independence test results for fin efficiency are shown in Table 2.
Looking at the table, we can say that 101 nodes provide satisfactory accurate results without consuming unacceptable
amount of time.
To evaluate the effect of approximate linear relationship
between temperature and humidity ratio; the analytical solution is compared with the numerical solution (based on actual
psychrometric relation) in Fig. 4. Since the analytical solution
is valid for completely wet conditions, therefore, the geometric and operating conditions are selected to ensure completely
wet operating conditions. The graph depicts that there is very
good agreement between two results. It can be noted that the
numerical solution gives slightly higher efficiency than the analytical solution, nevertheless the maximum difference in
efficiency values is 2% that corresponds to m0 L = 0.5. The difference of surface temperature over the dimensionless fin length
Analytical
Numerical
0.8
0.6
0.4
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
RH = 0.6
R=4
0
0.5
1.5
m 0L
2.5
3.5
Fig. 4 A comparison of completely wet fin efficiency: from

analytical and numerical solutions.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fig. 5 Fin surface temperature difference between

analytical and numerical solutions.
is presented in Fig. 5; that shows that the maximum temperature difference is approximately 0.7C (at fin tip) that
corresponds to m0 L = 1 . For practicality, the fin will be operating in the range m0 L 0.6 , and the maximum temperature
difference is 0.2C. So this shows that the approximate linear
relation given by Sharqawy and Zubair (2007) has provided a
reasonable accurate non-iterative analytical solution for the
case of hyperbolic fin under considered operating conditions.
Now the fin performance is studied using a numerical approach because it covers both fully wet and partially wet
operating conditions. The results for different radii ratio are
presented in Fig. 6. The fin base and the ambient temperature values are the same for all cases whereas the RH values
have been varied from 0.2 to 1. The fin is fully dry for RH = 0.2
over the considered range of fin parameter m0 L .The fins are
fully wet for high RH and low m0 L values. Moreover, the fin
efficiency decreases with increasing wet portion of the fin, thus
the completely dry fin condition has the highest efficiency and
the highest relative humidity has always the lowest efficiency.
The effect of radius ratio on the fin efficiency for RH = 0.6
is shown in Fig. 7. It shows that the lower radius ratio has higher
fin efficiency. This can be explained by the fact that a low radius
ratio fin can be obtained by truncating tip portion of a high
radius ratio fin, since the tip portion is obviously less effective than the fin base portion due to low temperature difference
between the fin surface and ambient air.
4.
0.2
0
Fin optimization
The optimum fin dimensions can be obtained by using an optimization techniques, for example in a recent paper Huang
and Chung (2014) developed an inverse design algorithm using
the conjugate gradient method (CGM) to estimate the optimum
shape for fully wet annular fins. Optimization of fins can be
described as a process through which we find the optimum
dimensions of a fin for a required amount of heat transfer, or
determining the maximum possible heat transfer if the
49
1.0
RH=0.2 (Fully dry)
RH=0.2 (Fully dry)
RH=0.4 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.0)
0.8
(a)
RH=0.6 (P.W. for m0 L 1.5)
RH=1.0 (P.W. for m 0 L 3.5)
0.6
0.6
(b)
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.5
RH=1.0 (P.W. for m0 L 3.0)
0.4
0.2
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
R=2
0
RH=0.4 (P.W. for m0 L 1.0)
0.8
RH=0.6 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.5)
1.5
2.5
3.5
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
R=3
m 0L
0.5
1.5
3.5
RH=0.2 (Fully dry)

RH=0.4 (P.W. for m 0 L 0.5)
0.8
RH=0.4 (P.W. for m 0 L 0.5)
0.8
RH=0.6 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.0)
RH=0.6 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.0)

0.6
0.6
RH=1.0 (P.W. for m 0 L 3.0)
(d)
0.4
0.2
2.5
RH=0.2 (Fully dry)
(c)
m 0L
0.4
0.2
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
R=4
0
0.5
RH=1.0 (P.W. for m 0 L 2.5)
1.5
m 0L
2.5
3.5
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
R=5
0
0.5
1.5
m 0L
2.5
3.5
Fig. 6 Effect of relative humidity on fin efficiency. (a) R = 2, (b) R = 3, (c) R = 4, and (d) R = 5.
dimensions of the fin are known (Ullmann and Kalman, 1989).

In the following, we will follow the latter approach for the
optimization.
In this regard, we define following new dimensionless parameters (Sharqawy and Zubair, 2007):
R=2 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.5)

R=3 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.5)
0.8
R=5 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.0)
0.4
0.2
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
RH = 0.6
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
m 0L
Fig. 7 Effect of radius ratio on the fin efficiency for a
hyperbolic annular fin.
2hrb *
k
(47)
v=
2 t b *rb * (rt * rb * )
V
=
rb *3
rb *3
(48)
w=
rb *
tb *
(49)
where u is the fin heat transfer parameter i.e. modified

version of mo L , v is the dimensionless fin volume and wis
the dimensionless fin-base radius. We observe the
following:
R=4 (P.W. for m 0 L 1.0)

0.6
u=
v=
2 rt *
1
w rb *
(50)
1
2w ( R 1 )
(51)
m0 L = u ( R 1 ) w
(52)
rb =
1
R1
(53)
50
R
R1
(54)
R = vw + 1
(55)
Analytical Solution
where , m0 L , rb , rt and R are all functions of u, v and w.

So by keeping u and v constant, and considering w as the only
independent variable, the maximum heat dissipated from the
fin can be obtained. This basically would mean that we have
a finite quantity of material, which implies that we know
thermal properties of the material. Moreover, we have prior
knowledge of the working environment in which we are going
to employ the fin, thus completely defining u. Finally, we find
the dimensions of the fin that will give us maximum heat transfer rate for the chosen thermal-geometric conditions.
The heat transfer given by Eq. (29) can be written in the following non-dimensional form:
u (1 + b2 B)
Qb =
10
23
Ai (C1 ) Bi (C2 ) + Ai (C2 ) Bi (C1 )

Ai (C ) Bi (C ) Ai (C ) Bi (C )
1
2
2
1
Numerical Solution
0.5
1.0
2.0
0
10
-1
10
0.01
0.1
Numerical Solution
(56)
u =2.0
(57)
u =1.0
Q [-]
u =0.5
-1
C2 = u w (1 + b2 B)
23
10
Analytical Solution
1 + vw
10
23
v [-]
10
where
C1 = u w (1 + b2 B)
u =0.25
10
w [-]
rt =
10
u =0.25
(58)
So by differentiating Eq. (56) with respect to w and equating to zero, for fixed values of u and v we can find out that
particular value of w, which will give us the maximum Q .
The resulting analytical expression is rather complex therefore the outcome is presented in a graphical form in Fig. 8,
where the numerical results are presented in terms of dimensionless fin-base radius ( w) and heat transfer rate ( Q ) as a
function of dimensionless volume ( v ) and fin heat transfer parameter ( u). The results are also compared with the numerical
solution. It can be seen that the numerical results are in good
agreement with the analytical solutions such that the numerical solution gives higher Q than analytical solution but lesser
value of w. It is worth noting that the analytical results are
based on an approximate linear temperaturehumidity ratio
relationship given by Sharqawy and Zubair (2007) whereas the
numerical solution is based on the corresponding actual psychrometric relationship. A salient feature of presenting the
results in a graphical format is: although we started with a
known volume of fin material and found the maximum heat
transfer rate, now we can go in the reverse direction, i.e. for a
given heat transfer rate we can find the minimum required fin
material.
The above optimization results are also presented in terms
of fitted regression equations (within 1% to the actual numerical data) as:
w = c1 vn1
(59)
Q = c2 vn 2
(60)
c1 = 1.78863 u0.599547
(61)
-2
10
0.01
0.1
v [-]
10
Fig. 8 Dimensionless optimal dimensions and heat

transfer for a hyperbolic profile annular fin; comparison
with numerical solution (a) Fin base versus fin volume (b)
Heat loss versus fin volume.
c2 = 0.78741 u1.2158
(62)
and the exponents n1 and n2 are
n1 = 0.681613 + 0.0169324 ln (u) 0.00385546 u ln (u)
(63)
n2 = 0.376657 0.0186014 ln (u)
(64)
It is important to emphasize that the regression equations

shown above are applicable only in the range of numerical data
presented in these figures. However, by including a correction factor similar to Sharqawy and Zubair (2007), the
dimensionless fin parameter u and heat transfer parameter Q,
these regression equations can be used to a wide range of operating conditions provided the fin is completely wet.
5.
Finite element formulation
The objective of this section is to develop a generalized finite

element formulation with combined heat and mass transfer.
The element should be capable of modeling conduction phenomena with convection and condensation boundary conditions
for a two-dimensional orthotropic fin material. The main advantage of this formulation is that it can be used for any
arbitrary fin shape, specified heat flux boundary condition,
specified temperature boundary condition and composite fin
materials (e.g. a coating layer), without any additional mathematical complexity. Some of the advantages of the finite
element method over finite difference method are (Peir and
Sherwin, 2005):
a. The finite difference (FDM) uses the differential form of the
governing equations whereas the finite element method
(FEM) is based on integral formulation. The use of integral
form in FEM provides a more natural treatment of Neumann
boundary condition (i.e. imposed heat flux in case of fin
problem) than the FDM.
b. FEM is better suited than FDM to deal with the complex geometries in two-dimensional problems because the integral
form does not depend on the special mesh structure.
Based on the above discussion, the finite element formulation can be used to extend the present study for other fin
shapes, boundary conditions and composite fins.
The governing differential equation for steady state heat
conduction with no internal heat generation in an orthotropic
material can be expressed as (Lewis et al., 2004).
kx
2 T
2 T
2 T
+ ky 2 + kz 2 = 0
2
x
y
z
(65)
T = Tb
T
kx
l + ky
x
T
kx
l + ky
x
T
+ kz
m
y
T
+ kz
m
y
on S1
T
n + qb = 0
on S2
z
(66)
T
n + h (Ta T ) + hDi fg ( a ) = 0 on S3
z
where, kx, ky , and kz are the thermal conductivities in orthogo , and n are
nal directions, qb is the specified heat flux and l, m
the surface normals. The boundary conditions are very common
in heat transfer problems and are called boundary conditions of first, second and third kinds, respectively (Lienhard and
Lienhard, 2011). In the context of fin application, if the prime
surface is at constant temperature, the surface S1 will be the
fin base. Alternatively, a fin can receive a constant heat flux
from a prime surface to its base. For such cases, the surface
S2 would be the fin base. It is worth mentioning that both
boundary conditions cannot occur simultaneously at the fin
base. The surface S3 would be the remaining fin surface through
which heat transfer occurs between the fin and the surrounding environment.
To solve Eq. (65) with boundary conditions (66), an additional equation for is required. The psychrometric correlation
between and T is non-linear, therefore following linear relationship is used:
The details about the justification of using the linear relationship and corresponding values of coefficient a and b are
presented in Appendix.
Therefore, by using the relationships in Eq. (67), the last
boundary condition in Eq. (66) becomes:
kx
T
T
T
+ kz
l + ky
m
n + h (Ta T ) = 0
x
y
z
(67)
(68)
where h (Ta T ) is the combined heat transfer due to convection and condensation. Therefore h and Ta are the
corresponding equivalent heat transfer coefficient and equivalent ambient temperature given by:
h = h (1 + Bb)
Ta =
(69)
Ta + B ( a a)
1 + Bb
5.1.
(70)
The variational principle
Variational principle is used here for deriving the finite element

formulation. The variational principle specifies a scalar quantity (functional ), defined by an integral form for a continuum
problem. The solution of the continuum problem is a function that makes stationary with respect to arbitrary changes
in it (Zienkiewicz and Taylor, 2000).
For no internal heat generation, the functional for heat transfer problem is (Logan, 2007):
= U + q + h
(71)
The functional has three terms that are associated with internal energy (U ) , heat conduction ( q ) and heat convection
(h ) . For the governing equation (65) with associated boundary conditions (66), the terms are (Logan, 2007):
U=
2
2
T 2
1
T
T
kx + ky + kz dV
y
z
2 V
x
q = qbTdS
(72)
S2
1
h = h (Ta T )2 dS
2
S3
Therefore, for the case of equivalent heat transfer h (Ta T )
(cf. Eq. (68)) the functional becomes:
2
2
T 2
1
T
T
+
k
k
x
y
y + kz z dV qbTdS
V
S2
5.2.
1
h (Ta T )2 dS
2
S3
(73)
The finite element formulation
Minimization of Eq. (73) with respect to T yields:
T
T
[B] [D][B] dV + hTa [N ] [N ] dS {T}
S3
V
= [ N ] qbdS + hTa [N ] dS
T
= a + bT
51
S2
S3
(74)
52
where,
X = 1 + b2 B
and
1 + ( B Ta ) ( a a2 )
=
1 + b2 B
FEA
(75)
The equation (74) is of the form:
Numerical
0.8
0.6
k {T} = {f }
(76)
0.4
Therefore, the element stiffness matrix and load vectors may

be deduced as follows:
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
0.2
RH = 0.6
R=4
[k ] = [kq ] + [k h ] with
[kq ] = [B]T [D][B] dV

V
and
k h = X h [N ]T [N ] dS
(77)
S3
} , with:
{fq } = [N]T qbdS

S2
and
{fh } = hTa [N ]T dS
(78)
Finite element model validation
The two dimensional axisymmetric finite element formulation has been implemented using commercial software MATLAB
(2015). Four-node quadrilateral isoperimetric element has been
used for meshing the two-dimensional computational domain
of a hyperbolic profile annular fin. As before, the grid independence was verified by obtaining a series of solutions with
different mesh sizes. The mesh size was then selected after
which the grid independence was observed. It is worth mentioning that according to boundary conditions specified by Eq.
(66), the fin base corresponds to surface S1 (i.e. specified temperature), the fin surface corresponds to surface S3 (i.e.
convection and condensation) and the insulated tip corresponds to surface S2 (i.e. zero heat flux). The results of finite
element model for isotropic fin case are validated against the
numerical solution presented in section 2.1.2. The results are
shown in Fig. 9. A closed agreement is observed between the
two solutions. This shows that the presented finite element
formulation is capable of accounting for the non-linear relationship between temperature and humidity ratio with
acceptable engineering accuracy because the numerical solution of section 2.1.2 is based on actual psychrometric data.
6.
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
Fig. 9 Comparison of results for an isotropic material

hyperbolic fin obtained through finite element and
numerical solution based on finite difference method.
S3
It is worth mentioning that the factors X and are introduced due to the condensation heat transfer. For the unit values
of both parameters, the formulation will be transformed into
standard formulation (for sensible heat transfer only) available in many textbooks on finite element method. This situation
would occur for B = 0 (cf. Eq. (75)). The physical interpretation is that the latent heat of water condensation ( i fg ) (cf. Eq.
(10)) under dry operating conditions is zero.
5.3.
m 0L
Similarly,
{f } = {f } + {f
Effects of orthotropic thermal conductivity
The advantage of finite element formulation compared to standard finite difference approach is that it can be used for any
irregular geometry without any additional mathematical complexities. The objective of this section is to study the effects
of orthotropic thermal conductivity on thermal performance
of hyperbolic profile annular fins under dehumidifying operating conditions. The fin analyses presented in preceding
sections are one-dimensional, whereas the heat transfer in an
orthotropic annular fin is certainly a two-dimensional problem.
Thus, the axisymmetric form of the derived finite element formulation will be used in this section.
The study under dry operating conditions (Pashah et al.,
2011) has shown that the thermal conductivity has considerable effects when the thermal conductivity in fin longitudinal
direction is higher than the conductivity in lateral direction.
For the values given in Table 1, the thermal conductivity ratio
krz = kr kz ranges between 1 and 110, therefore the effect of
thermal conductivity ratio has been studied over the range
1 krz 300 , the reason to add the value 300 will be discussed in the following.
The results are presented in Fig. 10. It is obvious that for
practical reasons, the isotropic fin (i.e., krz = 1 ) will be useful in
the range m0 L 0.5 because after that, the fin efficiency drops
exponentially. This implies that for a fixed fin geometry and
material, the h values must be small (cf. Eq. (20)), because for
higher h values only base portion of the fin would be effective and tip portion would be at the same temperature as the
incoming ambient air stream. This means that a slender fin
operating under forced convection would have low efficiency.
However, increasing the thermal conductivity ratio starts increasing the fin efficiency for higher values of m0 L . For example
if the objective is to attain a minimum fin efficiency of 60%
then krz = 50 would give the same efficiency for m0 L = 3.5 (the
corresponding efficiency for an isotropic case ( krz = 1 ) would
be only 9%). Another important observation is that the fin is
partially wet for the isotropic fin case; increase in thermal conductivity ratio decreases the dry portion of the fin and increases
the fin efficiency simultaneously such that the fin becomes
completely wet over the considered range of m0 L for krz 20 .
krz =300
0.8
krz =100
krz =50
krz =30
0.6
0.4
krz =10
krz =5
krz =2
krz =20
PW
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
0.2
RH = 0.6
R=4
0
0.5
1.5
m 0L
2.5
3.5
Fig. 10 Effect of orthotropic thermal conductivity on fin

efficiency operating under dehumidifying conditions. The
partially wet region is below the curve PW.
It is also interesting to note that the gain in thermal performance is not linearly related to increase in thermal
conductivity ratio. The gain in fin efficiency against krz values
is presented in Fig. 11. It can be seen that with respect to isotropic fin at m0 L = 4 ; the gain in fin efficiency is 47% for krz = 50 ,
compared to 60% and 76% for krz = 100 and krz = 300 , respectively. It means that the gain in efficiency is much higher in
the range 2 krz 50 than it is in the range 50 krz 300 .
7.
1. The closed-form analytical solution for completely wet hyperbolic fin; based on an approximate linear temperature
humidity ratio provided excellent results when compared
to numerical solution. The results show a maximum 2% error
in fin efficiency value with respect to the numerical solution based on actual psychrometric relationship, for the
considered set of geometric and operating parameters.
2. A numerical solution is more convenient for partially wet
hyperbolic fin operating conditions due to non-linear actual
psychrometric relationship between the air temperature and
humidity ratio.
3. For completely wet fin conditions, regression equations
(based on analytical solution) have been developed to calculate the optimum fin geometry when the fin volume or
the heat transfer rate is specified.
4. The orthotropic thermal conductivity effects are studied
using a finite element formulation under fully and partially wet fin conditions. The results showed that the higher
thermal conductivity ratio results in better thermal performance of fins at higher values of fin parameter m0 L and
fully wet condition.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support
given by the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
for this research work from Budget Head SB131005. Syed Zubair
also acknowledges support from the King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals through the project IN121042.
Appendix: Piecewise linear relationship between

temperature and humidity ratio
Concluding remarks
The conclusions from the present work may be summarized

as,
The approximate cubic polynomial relationship between temperature and humidity ratio is (Liang et al., 2000):
= (3.7444 + 0.3078T + 0.0046T 2 + 0.0004T 3 ) 103
1.0
Tb = 7 C
Ta = 27 C
0.8
53
0 T 30C
(A1)
krz =300
RH = 0.6
R=4
krz =100
krz =50
0.6
In order to get a linear finite element formulation, the above

polynomial relationship has been approximated by thirty piecewise linear polynomials (each over a temperature interval of
1C) of the form:
krz =30
= a + bT
krz =20
0.4
krz =10
krz =5
0.2
krz =2
0.0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
m 0L
Fig. 11 Gain in fin efficiency with respect to isotropic
material fin; for different values of thermal conductivity
ratios.
(A2)
The coefficients a and b are obtained by a regression analysis on 100 data points, each over 1C temperature interval. The
coefficient values are considered with 20 decimal places. The
difference between temperature values obtained through Eq.
(A1) and Eq. (A2) are within 0.005C.
The piecewise linear polynomial is implemented by obtaining the finite element solution in iterative manner. A first
solution is obtained by assuming dry operating conditions and
then following iterative solution uses appropriate a and b values
based on preceding iteration temperature results. The solution is assumed to be converged when the maximum
54
temperature difference at any point on the fin surface for the

two successive iterations is less than 0.01C.
REFERENCES
Abramowitz, M., Stegun, I.A., 1964. Handbook of Mathematical

Functions: With Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables.
US Dept. of Commerce, NBS, Appl. Math Series 55, US Govt.
Printing Press, Washington DC.
Bahadur, R., Bar-Cohen, A., 2007. Orthotropic thermal
conductivity effect on cylindrical pin fin heat transfer. Int. J.
Heat Mass Transf. 50, 11551162.
Campo, A., Cui, J., 2008. Temperature/heat analysis of annular
fins of hyperbolic profile relying on the simple theory for
straight fins of uniform profile. J. Heat Transfer 130, 054501.
Chilton, T.H., Colburn, A.P., 1934. Mass transfer (absorption)
coefficients prediction from data on heat transfer and fluid
friction. Ind. Eng. Chem. 26, 11831187.
Huang, C.H., Chung, Y.L., 2014. The determination of optimum
shapes for fully wet annular fins for maximum efficiency.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 73, 438448.
Hyland, R.W., Wexter, A., 1983a. Formulations for the
thermodynamic properties of the saturated phases of H2O
from 173.15K to 473.15K. ASHRAE Trans. 89, 500519.
Hyland, R.W., Wexter, A., 1983b. Formulations for the
thermodynamic properties of dry air from 173.15K to 473.15K,
and of saturated moist air from 173.15K to 372.15K, at
pressures to 5 MPa. ASHRAE Trans. 89, 520535.
Klein, S.A., 2015. Engineering equation solver. academic
professional Version 9. <http://www.fchart.com/ees/>
(accessed 10.10.15.).
Kloppers, J., Krger, D., 2005. A critical investigation into the heat
and mass transfer analysis of counterflow wet-cooling
towers. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 48, 765777.
Kraus, A.D., Aziz, A., Welty, J., 2001. Extended Surface Heat
Transfer. Wiley, New York, pp. 723724.
Kundu, B., 2009. Approximate analytic solution for performances
of wet fins with a polynomial relationship between
humidity ratio and temperature. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48, 2108
2118.
Kundu, B., Lee, K.-S., 2011. Thermal design of an orthotropic flat
fin in fin-and-tube heat exchangers operating in dry and wet
environments. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 54, 52075215.
Lewis, R.W., Nithiarasu, P., Seetharamu, K.N., 2004. Fundamentals

of the Finite Element Method for Heat and Fluid Flow. John
Wiley & Sons, England.
Liang, S.Y., Wong, T.N., Nathan, G.K., 2000. Comparison of onedimensional and two-dimensional models for wet-surface fin
efficiency of a plate-fin-tube heat exchanger. Appl. Therm.
Eng. 20, 941962.
Lienhard, J.H., IV, Lienhard, J.H., V, 2011. A Heat Transfer
Textbook. Phlogiston Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts., p.
142.
Logan, D.L., 2007. A First Course in the Finite Element Method,
4th ed. Thomson, Toronto, Canada.
MATLAB, 2015. MATLAB version 7.10.0. The MathWorks, Inc.,
Natick, MA, USA. <http://www.mathworks.com/products/
matlab/online/>.
Mustafa, M., Zubair, S.M., Arif, A., 2011. Thermal analysis of
orthotropic annular fins with contact resistance: a closedform analytical solution. Appl. Therm. Eng. 31, 937945.
Pashah, S., Arif, A., Zubair, S.M., 2011. Study of orthotropic pin fin
performance through axisymmetric thermal nondimensional finite element. Appl. Therm. Eng. 31, 376384.
Patrick, J.R., 1998. Fundamental of Computational Fluid
Dynamics. Hermosa Publishers, Socorro, NM.
Peir, J., Sherwin, S., 2005. Finite difference, finite element and
finite volume methods for partial differential equations. In:
Handbook of Materials Modeling. Springer Netherlands, pp.
24152446.
Sharqawy, M.H., Zubair, S.M., 2007. Efficiency and optimization of
an annular fin with combined heat and mass transferan
analytical solution. Int. J. Refrigeration 30, 751757.
Traiano, F., Cotta, R., Orlande, H., 1997. Improved approximate
formulations for anisotropic heat conduction. Int. Commun.
Heat Mass Trans. 24, 869878.
Ullmann, A., Kalman, H., 1989. Efficiency and optimized
dimensions of annular fins of different cross-section shapes.
Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 32, 11051110.
Yovanovich, M.M., 2004. Heat balance method for spines,
longitudinal and radial fins with contact conductance and
end cooling. 37th AIAA Thermophysics Conference Portland,
Oregon: AIAA-20042569.
Zienkiewicz, O.C., Taylor, R.L., 2000. The Finite Element Method
Volume 1: The Basis, fifth ed. Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford.
Zubair, S.M., Arif, A.F.M., Sharqawy, M.H., 2010. Thermal analysis
and optimization of orthotropic pin fins: a closed-form
analytical solution. J. Heat Transfer 132, 031301-1031301-8.

Thermal Performance and Optimization of

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Thermal Performance and Optimization of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

international journal of refrigeration 65 (2016) 4254

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com