0
Research Papers: Techniques and Procedures

Analysis of Inverse Method Applied on Sandwich Probes

[+] Author and Article Information
Emna Berrich

Département Systèmes Énergétiques
et Environnement,
École des Mines de Nantes,
GEPEA UMR-CNRS 6144,
4 rue Alfred Kastler - BP20722,
44307 Nantes Cedex 03, France;
Département de Physique,
Faculté des Sciences et des Techniques,
Université de Nantes,
2 rue de la Houssinière BP92208,
44322 Nantes, France

Fethi Aloui

ENSIAME, Laboratoire TEMPO EA 4542,
Université de Valenciennes et
du Hainaut-Cambrésis,
DF2T, Le Mont Houy,
F-59313 Valenciennes Cedex 9, France
e-mail: Fethi.Aloui@univ-valenciennes.fr

Jack Legrand

CNRS, GEPEA, UMR6144, CRTT,
Lunam Université,
BP 406, 44602
Saint-Nazaire Cedex, France

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received February 24, 2011; final manuscript received October 15, 2012; published online December 21, 2012. Assoc. Editor: Meng Wang.

J. Fluids Eng 135(1), 011401 (Dec 21, 2012) (8 pages) Paper No: FE-11-1087; doi: 10.1115/1.4007888 History: Received February 24, 2011; Revised October 15, 2012

Parallel plate disks (PPD) are often used for analyzing the effect of small amplitude oscillations with different frequencies. These devices allow the imposing of a well-known flow kinematics. Mass transfer problems and, particularly, convection-diffusion problems relating wall shear rate to mass transfer can thus be studied. Mass transfer signals can be determined from a sandwich electrodiffusion (ED) sensor frequency response. The experimental database constructed was used to check the inverse method. Indeed, the inverse method (Rehimi et al., 2006, “Inverse Method for Electrochemical Diagnostics of Flows,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 49, pp. 1242–1254) applied on a sandwich ED sensor was analyzed by comparing its instantaneous numerical wall shear rates to the known local and instantaneous experimental wall shear rate. Oscillatory flows amplitudes, frequencies effects, and flow direction effect have been studied in order to test the robustness of the inverse method to such effects. The little difference between experimental and numerical results is probably caused by the sensitivity of the sandwich sensor to such flow directions or to the neglecting of the insulating gap effect on the inverse method.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Effect of insulating gap—diffusion effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Mathematical concept schema of a sandwich probe composed of two rectangular segments separated by an isolated gap. (a) Global view. (b) View of the two segments separated by the isolated gap.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Time evolution of the Sherwood number obtained by the direct method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 67, A = 40%, F = 4 Hz, and θ = 0 deg. (b) Time evolution of the wall shear rate obtained by the inverse method compared to the experimental one for Pe = 67, A = 40%, F = 4 Hz, and θ = 0 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

(a) Time evolution of the mass transfer obtained by the direct method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 67, A = 20%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 0 deg. (b) Time evolution of the wall shear rate obtained by the inverse method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 67, A = 20%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 0 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) Time evolution of the mass transfer obtained by the direct method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 2234, A = 60%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 90 deg. (b) Time evolution of the wall shear rate obtained by the inverse method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 2234, A = 60%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 90 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

(a) Time evolution of the mass transfer obtained by the direct method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 2234, A = 40%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 180 deg. (b) Time evolution of the wall shear rate obtained by the inverse method and compared to the experimental one for Pe = 2234, A = 40%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 180 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Experimental installation (r is the probe position (m), h is the gap thickness between the two disks (m), R is the disk radius (m))

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Sampling of diagrams of the current intensities of each segment of the double probe for polarization voltage Up (25 mol/m3 of ferri-ferrocyanide of potassium, 230 mol/m3 of K2SO4, S = 22 s−1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Frequency response of a sandwich sensor to sinusoidal harmonic flow fluctuations: sampling of current intensities of each segment of the double probe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Sampling of dimensionless primary experimental instantaneous Sherwood number and filtered one for Pe = 67, A = 20%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 0 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sampling of dimensionless primary experimental instantaneous wall shear rate and filtered one for Pe = 67, A = 20%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 0 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Phase lag between experimental instantaneous mass transfer and wall shear rate for Pe = 67, A = 20%, F = 8 Hz, and θ = 0 deg

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In