## T Ty 020

The resulting normalized temperature profile is shown in Figure 12. The normalized temperatures are defined as shown in equations (21 a, b).

we we

The solid line in Figure 12 is the normalized temperature of the cones at the given height, the dashed line is the normalized temperature of the fluid at the given height, and the dotted line is the normalized velocity (u/Ue) of the fluid at the given height.

The fin efficiency of the cone element was determined to be 44.97%. The Erosion Cone surface results were analyzed to determine that the heat transfer from the cones accounted for 69.4% of the total Stanton number. If the contribution from the cones is decreased by the efficiency of the cone treated as an extended surface, the result is an average surface Stanton number of 0.0034. Thus, temperature change along the roughness element is responsible for some of the difference between the measured and the predicted Stanton numb er for the Erosion Cone surface and the Erosion 2 surface. Since the temperature profile is also changed depending on heat transfer from the cones, the full effect of temperature loss along the roughness elements cannot be evaluated unless the complete conjugate heat transfer problem is analyzed.

## Post a comment