KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Dicle Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Mühendislik Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 17 Sayı: 3

Numerical Investigation of Flow Direction and Inlet–Outlet Configuration Effects on Thermo-Hydraulic Performance in T-Junction Tubes

Ali Gürcan(İSTANBUL GELİŞİM ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İSTANBUL GELİŞİM MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0002-2745-1413
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-10-17
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

PEC değerlendirmesi, K1'in incelenen tüm çalışma koşullarında daha iyi performans gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu çalışma, T-şekilli bir boruda akış yönünün ve giriş-çıkış düzeninin termohidrolik performans üzerindeki etkilerini nicelleştirmeyi amaçlamıştır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Dört konfigürasyon analiz edilmiştir: ayrışan tek giriş/iki çıkış durumları (K1 ve K2) ve yakınlaşan iki giriş/tek çıkış durumları (K3 ve K4).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:PEC değerlendirmesi, K1'in incelenen tüm çalışma koşullarında daha iyi performans gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Akış yönü · Termal performans · Giriş-çıkış konfigürasyonu

Özet

Bu çalışma, T-şekilli bir boruda akış yönünün ve giriş-çıkış düzeninin termohidrolik performans üzerindeki etkilerini nicelleştirmeyi amaçlamıştır. Simetrik T şeklinde bir boruda çalışma akışkanı olarak su kullanılmıştır. Dört konfigürasyon analiz edilmiştir: ayrışan tek giriş/iki çıkış durumları (K1 ve K2) ve yakınlaşan iki giriş/tek çıkış durumları (K3 ve K4). Bu çalışma, 5000, 10000 ve 15000 Reynolds sayıları ile 313, 333 ve 353 K giriş sıcaklıklarını incelemiştir. K1 en yüksek ortalama Nusselt sayısını ve en düşük basınç düşüşünü üretirken, K2 genel olarak K1'e en yakın performansı göstermiştir. K3, daha güçlü birleşme kayıpları nedeniyle genellikle en yüksek statik basınç düşüşünü vermiştir (K4, K3'ten biraz daha düşüktü). PEC değerlendirmesi, K1'in incelenen tüm çalışma koşullarında daha iyi performans gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Buna karşılık, K3 ve K4 genellikle K1'in altında kalmıştır çünkü statik basınç düşüşü dezavantajları ısı transferi kazanımlarından daha ağır basmıştır. Bu bulgular, optimum bir T-birleşme noktası tasarımının, ısı transferi iyileştirmesi ile yerel kayıplardan kaynaklanan hidrolik kayıplar arasında bir denge kurulmasını gerektirdiğinin altını çizmektedir.

Abstract

Direct comparisons of diverging and converging T-junction configurations under identical operating and boundary conditions remain limited, restricting the design-oriented selection of suitable flow arrangements. This study numerically investigates the effects of flow direction and inlet–outlet topology on the thermo-hydraulic performance of a symmetric equal-diameter T-junction with water as the working fluid. Four configurations were examined: axially fed and branch-fed diverging flows (K1 and K2) and opposing-stream and orthogonal-stream merging flows (K3 and K4). Three-dimensional steady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes simulations were performed in ANSYS Fluent using the standard k"-" ε turbulence model with Enhanced Wall Treatment at Reynolds numbers of 5000, 10000, and 15000 and inlet temperatures of 313, 333, and 353 K. The configurations were compared under identical geometry, total mass flow rate, and wall-temperature conditions using the average Nusselt number, static pressure drop, and a common thermo-hydraulic performance criterion (PEC). K1 consistently provided the highest average Nusselt number and the lowest pressure drop, while K2 was the closest alternative. Relative to K1, the PEC values of K3 and K4 were lower by 43.3–53.4% and 45.0–53.5%, respectively. The results show that stronger local flow interaction in converging configurations does not necessarily yield superior overall performance and provide a quantitative basis for selecting equal-diameter T-junction topologies in water-based thermal and process-piping applications.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Gürcan, A. (2026). Numerical Investigation of Flow Direction and Inlet–Outlet Configuration Effects on Thermo-Hydraulic Performance in T-Junction Tubes. Dicle Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Mühendislik Dergisi, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 3. https://doi.org/10.24012/dumf.1952820

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (46)

  1. C. Evrim and E. Laurien, “Effect of the Reynolds and Richardson numbers on thermal mixing characteristics,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 169, p. 120917, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.120917.
  2. Z. Nan, X. Zhao, Y. Li, K. Zhang, and N. Wang, “Thermal mixing in T-junctions with different incident angle of branch pipe,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 181, p. 121834, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121834.
  3. C. Evrim, X. Chu, F. E. Silber, A. Isaev, S. Weihe, and E. Laurien, “Flow features and thermal stress evaluation in turbulent mixing flows,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 178, p. 121605, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121605.
  4. Z. Nan, M. Gu, Y. Li, K. Zhang, and N. Wang, “Effects of the incident angle of branch pipe on the thermal mixing of impinging jets in T-junctions,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 185, p. 122433, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.122433.
  5. Z. Lin, L. Yang, J. Tao, X. Li, and X. Zheng, “Thermal mixing characteristics of T-junction incident along central axis based on Large-Eddy simulations,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 221, p. 119756, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2022.119756.
  6. M. Zhou, J. Li, Z. Qiu, and N. Zhang, “Numerical investigation of thermal-mixing characteristics at vertically oriented T-junction pipelines,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, vol. 106, p. 109292, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2024.109292.
  7. J. Yu et al., “Unsteady flow behavior and fluid-induced noise characteristics of T-junction pipe with a closed main branch,” Ocean Eng., vol. 351, p. 124328, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2026.124328.
  8. I. Joksimović, T. Čorbo, J. Hussong, and S. Jakirlić, “Secondary flow and thermal field dynamics in a T-junction with an upstream elbow: A POD-aided, eddy-sensitized Reynolds-stress modeling study,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, vol. 104, p. 109226, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2023.109226.
  9. J. Duan and X. Huang, “An unsteady RANS study of thermal striping in a T-junction with sodium streams mixing at different temperatures,” Front. Energy Res., vol. 10, p. 991763, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.991763.
  10. S. Rimza, P. Chaudhuri, B. K. Yadav, and S. Mukherjee, “A case study of thermal mixing behavior of hot and cold fluid in T-junction with/without mixing jets,” Case Stud. Therm. Eng., vol. 50, p. 103417, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2023.103417.
  11. M. Nuruzzaman, W. Pao, F. Ejaz, and H. Ya, “A Preliminary Numerical Investigation of Thermal Mixing Efficiency in T-Junctions with Different Flow Configurations,” Int. J. Heat Technol., vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 1590–1600, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.18280/ijht.390522.
  12. T. A. Baranova, Y. V. Zhukova, A. D. Chorny, A. Skrypnik, and I. A. Popov, “Non-Isothermal Vortex Flow in the T-Junction Pipe,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 21, p. 7002, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14217002.
  13. Md Nuruzzaman, William Pao, Hamdan Ya, Md Ragibul Islam, Mohammad Ayub Adar, and Faheem Ejaz, “Simulation Analysis of Thermal Mixing Characteristics of Fluids Flowing Through a Converging T-junction,” CFD Lett., vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 28–41, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.37934/cfdl.13.9.2841.
  14. B. Su, K. Huang, M. Lin, and Q. Wang, “Experimental investigation on the flow patterns in a T-junction under steady and rolling motion conditions using PLIF,” Chem. Eng. J., vol. 465, p. 142772, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2023.142772.
  15. B. Su, B. Wang, Z. Zhu, M. Lin, and Q. Wang, “Experimental investigation on thermal mixing characteristics in a T-junction under rolling motion condition using TC-PLIF,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 252, p. 127440, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2025.127440.
  16. T. Yamagata, K. Munemura, K. Kawaguchi, R. Morita, and S. Watanabe, “Experimental investigation on mass and momentum transfer characteristics in T-junction,” Heat Mass Transf., vol. 62, no. 4, p. 34, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.1007/s00231-026-03670-z.
  17. H. Kepekçi̇ and E. Aslan, “Investigation of the Effect of Hot Fluid on Deformation in T-Shaped Pipes by FSI Method Using Different Material,” Sak. Univ. J. Sci., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 643–659, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.16984/saufenbilder.1255815.
  18. S. Rimza, P. Chaudhuri, B. K. Yadav, and S. Mukherjee, “Thermal Mixing and Flow Characteristics Study in a T-Junction,” Heat Transf. Eng., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 91–106, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1080/01457632.2023.2295085.
  19. S. Shah and A. K. Parwani, “Temperature Profile Estimation Downstream to T-Junction for Thermal Mixing of Fluids,” Heat Transf. Eng., vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 601–614, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1080/01457632.2024.2332110.
  20. Y. Li, D. Wan, R. Wang, B. Ni, D. Hu, and C. Jiang, “A self-adaptive Gaussian process regression approach for temperature fluctuation predictions in T-junction pipes of sodium-cooled fast reactors,” Sci. China Technol. Sci., vol. 69, no. 1, p. 1120102, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.1007/s11431-025-3077-y.
  21. C. Zhi, Y. Zhang, C. Zhu, and Y. Liu, “Numerical analysis and artificial neural network-based prediction of two-phase flow pressure drop of refrigerants in T-junction,” Int. J. Refrig., vol. 137, pp. 34–42, May 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2022.02.005.
  22. M. Zhang, Y. Cui, W. An, H. Wang, L. Wang, and S. Liu, “Investigation of the Effect of Side Arm Orientation of the T-Junction on Gas–Liquid Stratified Flow,” Processes, vol. 11, no. 10, p. 2949, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.3390/pr11102949.
  23. L. Cai et al., “Investigation of flow characteristics in T-junction gas–liquid separator based on pressure balance,” Chem. Eng. Res. Des., vol. 226, pp. 499–514, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.cherd.2026.01.018.
  24. Y. Tian, T. Tian, G. Ren, and J. Zhang, “Numerical Simulation of Hydrogen Mixing Process in T-Junction Natural Gas Pipeline,” Materials, vol. 18, no. 8, p. 1879, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.3390/ma18081879.
  25. Y. A. Çengel and J. M. Cimbala, Fluid mechanics: fundamentals and applications, Fourth edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education, 2018.
  26. Y. A. Çengel and A. J. Ghajar, Heat and mass transfer: fundamentals & applications, Sixth edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education, 2020.
  27. G. Y. Chuang and Y. M. Ferng, “Experimentally investigating the thermal mixing and thermal stripping characteristics in a T-junction,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 113, pp. 1585–1595, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.10.157.
  28. Ansys, Ansys Fluent Theory Guide. Canonsburg: Ansys Inc., 2025.
  29. R. L. Webb and N.-H. Kim, Principles of Enhanced Heat Transfer, 2nd ed. Garland Science, 2004. doi: 10.1201/b12413.
  30. F. Z. Sierra-Espinosa, C. J. Bates, and T. O’Doherty, “Turbulent flow in a 90° pipe junction,” Comput. Fluids, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 215–233, Feb. 2000, doi: 10.1016/S0045-7930(99)00005-5.
  31. B. D. Gajbhiye, H. A. Kulkarni, S. S. Tiwari, and C. S. Mathpati, “Teaching turbulent flow through pipe fittings using computational fluid dynamics approach,” Eng. Rep., vol. 2, no. 1, p. e12093, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1002/eng2.12093.
  32. A. M. F. El-Shaboury, H. M. Soliman, and S. J. Ormiston, “Laminar forced convection in two-dimensional impacting tee junctions,” Heat Mass Transf., vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 815–824, Nov. 2003, doi: 10.1007/s00231-002-0394-8.
  33. M. Hirota and H. Nakayama, “Turbulent Flow and Mixing Characteristics in T-Junction,” J. Fluid Sci. Technol., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 598–613, 2011, doi: 10.1299/jfst.6.598.
  34. L. Lampunio, Y. Duan, and M. D. Eaton, “The effect of inlet flow conditions upon thermal mixing and conjugate heat transfer within the wall of a T-Junction,” Nucl. Eng. Des., vol. 385, p. 111484, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2021.111484.
  35. M. Georgiou and M. V. Papalexandris, “Direct numerical simulation of turbulent heat transfer in a T-junction,” J. Fluid Mech., vol. 845, pp. 581–614, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.1017/jfm.2018.256.
  36. A. M. F. El-Shaboury, H. M. Soliman, and S. J. Ormiston, “Laminar forced convection in two-dimensional equal-sided and reduced branching ducts,” Numer. Heat Transf. Part Appl., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 487–512, Oct. 2002, doi: 10.1080/10407780290059666.
  37. E. M. Sparrow and R. G. Kemink, “Heat Transfer Downstream of a Fluid Withdrawal Branch in a Tube,” J. Heat Transf., vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 23–28, Feb. 1979, doi: 10.1115/1.3450923.
  38. D. A. Wesley and E. M. Sparrow, “Circumferentially local and average turbulent heat-transfer coefficients in a tube downstream of a tee,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 1205–1214, Oct. 1976, doi: 10.1016/0017-9310(76)90155-1.
  39. E. Muhammad, H. Shahid, S. M. Qureshi, and M. Babar Ramzan, “Numerical study of flow and heat transfer in circular T-shaped junction of different cross-sections,” PLOS One, vol. 20, no. 10, p. e0334236, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0334236.
  40. A. De Tilly and J. M. M. Sousa, “An experimental study of heat transfer in a two-dimensional T-junction operating at a low momentum flux ratio,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 51, no. 3–4, pp. 941–947, Feb. 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2007.10.012.
  41. N. P. Costa, R. Maia, M. F. Proença, and F. T. Pinho, “Edge Effects on the Flow Characteristics in a 90deg Tee Junction,” J. Fluids Eng., vol. 128, no. 6, pp. 1204–1217, Nov. 2006, doi: 10.1115/1.2354524.
  42. A. P. Doherty, A. Murphy, and P. L. Spedding, “Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction: I single‐phase flow and experimental,” Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 420–423, Jul. 2009, doi: 10.1002/apj.163.
  43. J. Štigler, R. Klas, and O. Šperka, “Characteristics of the T-junction with the equal diameters of all branches for the variable angle of the adjacent branch,” EPJ Web Conf., vol. 67, p. 02110, 2014, doi: 10.1051/epjconf/20146702110.
  44. H.-C. Yang et al., “Effect of diameter ratio and velocity bias on the resistance characteristics of converging tees in nuclear facility ventilation systems,” J. Build. Eng., vol. 113, p. 114202, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2025.114202.
  45. M. D. Bassett, D. E. Winterbone, and R. J. Pearson, “Calculation of steady flow pressure loss coefficients for pipe junctions,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci., vol. 215, no. 8, pp. 861–881, Aug. 2001, doi: 10.1177/095440620121500801.
  46. A. M. F. El-Shaboury, H. M. Soliman, and S. J. Ormiston, “Performance evaluation of branching and impacting tee junctions for laminar forced-convection applications,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 713–723, Jul. 2003, doi: 10.1016/S1290-0729(03)00039-5.