Cryogenics 44 (2004) 439444 www.elsevier.

com/locate/cryogenics

Low cost and high performance screen laminate regenerator matrix

Uri Bin-Nun *, Dan Manitakos
FLIR Systems, 16 Esquire Road, North Billerica, MA 01862, USA

Abstract A laminate screen matrix regenerator with 47 elements has been designed, analyzed, fabricated and tested. The laminate was fabricated from stainless steel screen sheets that were stacked on top of each other at certain angular orientation and then bonded at high temperature and pressure environment utilizing a sintering process. This laminate is a porous structure media with highly repeatable properties that can be controlled by varying mesh size, weave type, wire size and laminate sheet to sheet orientation. The ow direction in relation to the weave plan can be varied by cutting a cylindrical or rectangular laminate element along or across the weave. The regenerator ow resistance, thermal conductance losses, dead volume, surface area and heat transfer coecient are analyzed. Regenerator cost and performance comparison data between the conventional widely used method of stacked screens and the new stacked laminate matrix regenerator is discussed. Also, a square stainless steel screen laminate was manufactured in a way which permits gas to ow along the screen wire instead of across it. 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords: Convection (C); Heat transfer (C); Regenerators (E); Stirling (E); Thermal conductivity (C)

1. The common Stirling cycle regenerator The common Stirling cycle regenerator is a one way bidirectional heat exchanger in which thermal energy ows in and out of the matrix and to or from the working uid. The heat exchanging media (matrix) is usually made of light felt like mass of ne wire stacked in a well insulated tube as shown in Fig. 1. The ne wire mesh is commonly obtained in a form of woven screen at variety of wire sizes, weave structures, mesh density and materials. Other types of regenerator matrix are also used such as spheres made of stainless steel, bronze, lead and erbium to name a few. The common Stirling cycle regenerator matrix usually has large thermal capacity, large surface area, low ow impedance, small void volume and large axial thermal resistance which are all essential to achieving high regenerator eectiveness. Cooler performance is very sensitive to regenerator eectiveness. A regenerator is considered 100% eective when the temperature of the working uid exiting the regenerator is equal to the temperature of working uid entering it. If the temperature of the gas leaving the

regenerator at the compressor end is colder than the entering gas it indicates that not enough thermal energy was remove from the regenerator matrix. This causes the regenerator to be warmer than it could have been and thus reducing the pre-cooling of the incoming gas prior to it entering the expansion space.

2. Screen laminate sintering process Sintering is the fundamental processing step for all porous metal products. This means bonding of powder particles by diusion process at high pressure and temperature just below the melting point of the sintered metal. After the sintering process is complete, no physical limits exist at the boundaries of the original particles and they become fused at the contact points. Similarly screen laminate is manufactured by a sintering process in which the powder particles are replaced with woven stainless steel screen sheets as the base material. The screen sheets are placed on top of each other at 45 (any other angle is possible) alternating angle relative to wire weave direction. The stack of screens is then placed in an environmental chamber at high pressure and temperature just below the melting point. The laminate is kept in this heated and compressed state for a certain period of time until a bond is

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-978-901-8242; fax: +1-978-9018441. E-mail address: uni.binnun@ir.com (U. Bin-Nun). 0011-2275/$ - see front matter 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.cryogenics.2004.03.015

440

U. Bin-Nun, D. Manitakos / Cryogenics 44 (2004) 439444

Nomenclature e f dk h regenerator eectiveness, none friction factor, none hydraulic diameter, ft (m) matrix convection coecient, W/in.2 C, (W/ m2 K) oP =oX pressure drop per unit length, psi/in. (N/m3 ) As regenerator matrix surface area, in.2 (m2 ) c Cp =Cv specic heat ratio, none q uid local density, lb s2 /ft4 (N s2 /m4 ) b porosity, none l viscosity, lb s/ft2 (N s2 /m2 ) DQ refrigeration loss per cycle, BTU (J) Re Pe Pr Q Rpf T2 T3 u V3 V4 the ow Reynolds number, none Peclet number, none Prandtl number, none ideal refrigeration per cycle, BTU (J) regenerator performance factor, W/C psi/in. (W m3 /N) temperature, R (K) temperature, R (K) uid velocity, ft/s (m/s) volume, in.3 (m3 ) volume, in.3 (m3 )

Fig. 1. Single screen mesh stacked regenerator made of 650 screen disks.

formed at the contact points between the screen wires. The bonding is achieved by diusion of material at the point of contact resulting in a fused solid structure at the contact boundaries of the screen wires. The screen laminate is then laser cut, electro discharge machined (EDM), or die cut to form a cylindrical shape. The cylindrical laminate elements are usually oriented so that the ow is vertical to weave plan (Fig. 2). In order to resolve cost and yield issue involving regenerator manufacturing FLIR SystemsBoston developed a new regenerator matrix element (Fig. 2) as described in the following paragraph. The laminate element can be cut from a thick laminate screen stock, such that the ow axis is parallel or normal to the weave plan (along the wire axis) as shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Laminate screen block.

The nal parts are solid, rigid and relatively thick porous structures having more surface area and less dead volume per unit length than a stack of individual single screens. The laminate screen element thermal conductance is much higher than an equivalent stack of single screen disks causing a larger heat loss along the regenerator axis. To remedy this problem, the laminate thickness was reduced. This resulted in an increase of the number of laminate screens and thus increasing thermal contact resistances along the regenerator axis thus reducing heat loss. The nal product thickness was optimized to achieve minimum number of laminates (Fig. 2) while minimizing heat ow, maximizing surface area, reducing dead volume and maximizing rigidity.

3. Refrigeration losses due to regenerator eectiveness The equation which determines refrigeration loss as a function expansion ratio V4 =V3 , temperature ratio T2 =T3 , specic heat ratio, c Cp =Cv and regenerator eectiveness, e is shown below [1].

Fig. 2. Screen laminate element.

U. Bin-Nun, D. Manitakos / Cryogenics 44 (2004) 439444

441

DQ Qideal

1e c1



T 2 =T 3 1 lnV4 =V3

 1

For example: e 0:99 regenerator eectiveness c 1:67 specic heat ratio Cp =Cv T2 540 R (300 K) rejection temperature T3 140 R (77.7 K) cold end temperature V4 =V3 1:24 expansion ratio e regenerator eectiveness T2 rejection temperature T3 cold end temperature V3 volume of expansion space at beginning of expansion process V4 volume of expansion space at end of expansion process A cryo-cooler with 1.24 expansion ratio operating between 540 R (300 K) rejection temperature and 140 R (77.7 K) cold end temperature, using Helium as a working uid will lose 20% of its refrigeration power if the regenerator eectiveness is 99% instead of 100%. This example emphasizes the critical role of the regenerator in Stirling cycle refrigerators performance and eciency.

Fig. 4. Single screen elements.

Void volume can vary greatly among regenerators due to wire size tolerances, stacking pressure, screen element size, screen disk atness, regenerator tube internal diameter manufacturing tolerances and the presence of folded or bent screens. Flow rate varies due to stacking pressure variations caused by regenerator ll error, screen to screen weave alignment and all the variables controlling surface area and void volume mentioned previously. Thermal contact resistance value depends on stacking pressure, total number of screens in the tube, screen to screen orientation and screen wire surface nish. Any variation in the above stacking parameter will result in refrigeration loses. 4.1. Analysisregenerator performance In general the regenerator performance is directly proportional to the matrix surface area and convection coecient and inversely proportional to pressure drop per unit length of the regenerator matrix. The relationship between these three matrix design parameters is the Regenerator Performance Factor and dened as follows: Rpf As h op =ox 2

4. Single screen disk regenerator matrix The current regenerator design and assembly methods make it extremely dicult and costly to manufacture regenerators in production environment that meet high eectiveness requirements consistently and in reasonable yield. Regenerator eectiveness is depended on and extremely sensitive to variations in surface area, void volume (also known as dead volume), ow rate, stacking pressure, mesh placement/orientation, screen contamination and more. These variables are aected by workmanship, process control and manufacturing tolerances. Also, it is extremely dicult to fabricate screen elements of thin wire due to required die tolerances. Most of these manufacturing problems (discussed below) are due to the fact that the current regenerator matrix element (Fig. 4) is very small, light and can be easily bent or damaged during the ll process. The regenerator tube ll process requires the technician to handle 850 elements or more per tube, making the task time consuming, dicult to control and inconsistent. Stacking errors are practically unavoidable resulting in low manufacturing yield and low performance. Surface area of a lled regenerator is proportional to the number of screen elements in the regenerator tube. The number of screens in the tube can vary greatly due to the wire diameter of the screen and the technicians ability to maintain the required stacking pressure.

where Rpf regenerator performance factor, W/(C psi/ in.); As regenerator matrix surface area, in.2 ; h matrix convection coecient, W/in.2 C; oP =oX pressure drop per matrix unit length, psi/in. The matrix Rpf value is calculated at a given volumetric ow rate and it is the ratio between the energy ow per C, DT and the matrix local pressure gradient. The goal is to maximize this value by increasing surface area, convection coecient and minimizing pressure gradient. As , regenerator matrix surface area calculations: surface area of a given matrix is simply the total eective area of the screen wires making direct contact with the uid. This value can be calculated or obtained from the manufacturer. The area is dependent on wire size, weave type, mesh density (wire weaved per in.) and total number of screen elements in the matrix.

442

U. Bin-Nun, D. Manitakos / Cryogenics 44 (2004) 439444

oP =oX , pressure gradient calculations: the calculation of pressure drop in porous media is given by the following equation [2,3]: op f q u2 ox d h 2 3

Prandtl which can be calculated using the following equations: Pe RePr Prandtl number is a function of uid viscosity l, thermal conductivity k and specic heat Cp of the working uid and can be calculated using the following equation: Pr Prandtl number Pr lCp =k 9

where f friction factor; q uid local density; dk hydraulic diameter; u uid velocity. dh hydraulic diameter and friction factor calculations: the hydraulic diameter is the matrix wire diameter modied by the porosity and it allows us to determine the local Reynolds number of the ow by simulating it as a simplied case of ow across a cylindrical body. The end result is that the drag produced by ow in porous media of certain wire diameter is equivalent to drag produced by free ow over a cylinder with diameter dk . The hydraulic diameter equation is [2]: dh b dw 1b 4

We are now able to calculate the convection coecient and the regenerator performance factor using Eqs. (3) and (7) and the total surface area As .

5. Test program Using the above analysis model we calculated the Regenerator Performance Factor for a variety of laminate and single screen lled regenerators which were constructed from dierent types of mesh. Two regenerators were lled with single screen disk elements 400 mesh 0.0012 twill weave (FLIR Systems standard production regenerator matrix) and the second one was lled with a 400 mesh 0.0009 wire diameter plain weave. Both regenerators were lled according to FLIRs manufacturing methods and processes. Three additional regenerators were lled with dierent laminates. The rst regenerator was lled with 400 mesh 0.0012 twill weave laminate to 2/3 of the standard length in order to maintain adequate ow rate. The second regenerator was lled to the entire length with a 325 mesh 0.0014 wire laminate. And the third one was lled to the entire length with a mix of dierent laminates made from 400, 200, and 325 mesh in order to maximize Rpf number. Additional laminates were tested and are identied in Table 1. The Rpf number was calculated at room temperature using Helium as a working uid and at a ow velocity of 2.58 ft/s. The analysis results of few mesh types are summarized at the Table 1. Few regenerators were built (Table 2) and integrated into the same integrated cooler Dewar assembly (IDCA) (Table 3). The cooling power was measured at 77 at 300 K ambient (Fig. 5) using a Dewar with active heat load and a temperature diode mounted on the cold tip of the Dewar. The test results are summarized in the Table 2.

where b porosity, porosity dened as: void volume/ total matrix volume; Re the ow Reynolds number equation is [2]: Re qudh =l 5

where dk hydraulic diameter, calculated using Eq. (4); l viscosity; f friction. Darcy-type friction factor calculation: the equation for calculating the friction factor is based on Ergun equation (Table 2) which was modied to better track observed test data. The equation is [2]: f 129=Re 2:91Re0:103 6

where Reynolds number is determined by Eq. (5). We are now ready to calculate the pressure drop using Eq. (3) by substituting the values of f , friction factor and dk , hydraulic diameter. To calculate the regenerator performance factor Rpf , we will have to determine the convection coecient h. h convection coecient. The convection coecient h, is a function of Nusselt number, the uid conductivity k and the hydraulic diameter dk . It can be calculated using the following equation [2]: h Nuk dh 7

Nusselt number is a function of Peclet number Nu and the porosity b and calculated using the following equations [2]: Nu 1 0:99Pe0:66 b1:79 8

6. Summary A new type of regenerator matrix (Fig. 6) has recently been developed at FLIR SystemsBoston. The alternate design is essentially a woven screen laminate fabricated by bonding screen sheets using a sintering

where b porosity; Pe Peclet number. Peclet number can be calculated using the Reynolds number which has been determined previously and

U. Bin-Nun, D. Manitakos / Cryogenics 44 (2004) 439444 Table 1 Regenerator matrix details summary dk , in. (m) b dw , in. (m) op=ox, psi/in. (N/m3 ) h, W/in.2 /C (W/m2 /K) As , in2 (m2 )

443

Rpf , regenerator performance factor, W in./C psi (W m3 /K N) 25.4 (9.4E)05) 43.9 (1.62-04) 66.6* (2.45E)04) 46.5 (3.84E)04)

Laminate 400 mesh 0.0012 twill Laminate 325 mesh 0.0014 twill Laminate 200 mesh 0.0021 twill Mixed laminates (4) 400 mesh 0.0012 (26) 325 mesh 0.0014 (17) 200 mesh 0.0021 Laminate 280 mesh 0.0013 plain Laminate 325 mesh 0.0011 plain Laminate 250 mesh 0.0014 plain Laminate 230 mesh 0.0014 plain Single screen element 400 mesh 0.0012 twill Single screen element 400 mesh 0.0009 plain

0.0014 (3.56E)05) 0.00177 (4.5E)05) 0.003 (7.62E)05) n/a

0.54 0.56 0.59 n/a

0.0012 (3.05E)05) 0.0014 (3.56E)05) 0.0021 (5.33E)05) n/a

0.0018 (4.52E)05) 0.00158 (4.01E)05) 0.0021 (3.05E)05) 0.00236 (5.99E)05) 0.0017 (4.32E)05) 0.0015 (3.81E)05)

0.583 0.59 0.598 0.63 0.59 0.63

0.0013 (3.30E)05) 0.0011 (2.79E)05) 0.0014 (3.56E)05) 0.0014 (3.56E)05) 0.0012 (3.05E)05) 0.0009 (2.29E)05)

3.30 (3.73E)01) 2.15 (2.43E)01) 0.782 (8.83E)02) 1.75 (8.83E)02) Length weighted average 2.04 (2.30E)01) 2.66 (3.01E)01) 1.58 (1.79E)01) 1.24 (1.40E)01) 2.25 (2.54E)01) 2.83 (3.2E)01)

3.12 (2.01E)03) 2.92 (1.88E)03) 2.45 (1.58-03) 2.82 (1.82E)03) Surface area weighted average 3.11 (2.01E)03) 3.42 (2.21E)03) 3.03 (1.95E)03) 3.1 (2.00E)03) 3.27 (2.11E)03) 3.92 (2.53E)02)

27.0 (1.74E)02) 32.3 (2.08E)02) 21.2 (1.37E)02) 28.9 (1.86E)02) Total surface area 34.75 (2.24E)02) 40.59 (2.62E)02) 31.45 (2.03E)02) 29.72 (1.92E)02) 35.83 (2.31E)02) 44.24 (2.85E)02)

53.0* (1.95E)04) 52.3 (1.92E)04) 60.5* (2.22E)04) 74.4* (2.74E)04) 52.1 (1.92E)04) 61.4 (2.26E)04)

Table 2 Cooling power test results summary Regenerator type description 400 Mesh twill 0.0012, (31) laminates 325 Mesh twill 0.0014, (48) laminates Mesh twilla 0.0012, (650) single screen disks 400 Mesh plain 0.0009, (850) single screen disks Mixed laminate matrix regen (4) 400 Mesh 0.0012 wire dia. twill laminate (26) 325 Mesh 0.0014 wire dia. twill laminate (17) 200 Mesh 0.0021 wire dia. twill laminate 325 Mesh plain weave (49) laminate sand blasted 325 Mesh four layer laminate 325 And 400 mesh mixed 66 and 150 4 layer laminates
a

Regenerator performance coe. W in./K/psi (W m3 /K N) 25.4 (9.4E)05) 43.9 (1.62E)05) 52.07 (1.92E)04) 61.36 (2.26E)04) 46.45 (3.84E)04)

Cooling power test (mW) 350 386 420 466 400

52.3 (1.92E)04) 64.8 (2.38E)04) 64.6 (2.37E)04)

430 469 478

Baseline design.

Table 3 Cost analysisscreen disk vs. laminate matrix Item Laminate Screen disk Delta Unit material cost $1.00 0.070 Units required 50 850.0 Material cost total $50.0 $59.5 )$9.5 Labor hours 0.3 3.0 Hourly rate $35 $35 Labor cost total $10.5 $105.0 )$94.5 Total regenerator cost $60.5 $164.5 )$104.5

Total savings: $104.5 per unit ($209,000 per year at current production rate).

process. Three laminate and two screen disk regenerators were analyzed, built and tested. The cooling power was measured, summarized in Table 2 and plotted as a function of the Regenerator Performance Factor Rpf .

The performance plot clearly demonstrates that the correlation between the calculated Performance Factor and Cooling Power is strong and linear. In general, regenerators with high Rpf always performed better. We

444

U. Bin-Nun, D. Manitakos / Cryogenics 44 (2004) 439444

We plan to further optimize the design by using different mesh laminates in a regenerator to match the temperature gradient along it. This allows us to take advantage of the change in viscosity of He as a function of temperature. Also, we plan to test laminate fabricated in a variety of orientations.

7. Conclusions So far, the performance of the new laminate regenerator is equal or better than the average standard single screen lled matrix regenerator currently in production. The correlation between the calculated Rpf and cooling power is good. The potential for higher performance laminate is signicant. The reduction in the number of matrix elements per regenerator provides more than 63% reduction in cost. The ability to design a regenerator with mixed laminates provides an additional system optimization method. Fabrication of ultra ne mesh disks will not be practical with out the use of laminates.

Fig. 5. IDCA cooling power vs. regenerator performance factor.

Fig. 6. Screen laminate regenerator.

managed to reduce conductive losses by increasing the laminate surface roughness. The cooling power of the standard matrix regenerator currently in production is in the range of 380440 mW with an average 410 mW, while the laminate design regenerator was able to produce 400478 mW with an average 440 mW of refrigeration depending on the laminate type (Table 2). The measured cooling power shows that the laminate regenerator performance is similar or better than the average single screen disk regenerator and cost 63% less to manufacture.

References
[1] Flynn TM. Cryogenic engineering. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.; 1997. p. 327. [2] Gedeon D. Baseline Stirling modeling. Athens, OH: Gedeon Associates; 1999. [3] Macdonald IF, El-Sayed MS, Mow K, Dullien FAL. Flow through porous media-Ergun equation revisited. Ind Eng Chem Fundam 1979;(18):199208.