Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Next: Contents
Contents
i. Nomenclature
ii. List of Figures
iii. List of Tables
1. INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS
1.1. Definitions
1.2. Flow Patterns
1.3. Pool Boiling
1.4. Flow Boiling
1.5. Condensation
2. FLOW PATTERNS AND FLOW-PATTERN TRANSITIONS
3. MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE DROP
3.1. Homogeneous Equilibrium Model
3.2. Separated Flow Model
3.3. Two-Fluid Model
3.4. Pressure Drop in a Closed Conduit
3.5. Void Fraction Prediction with the Drift Flux Model
4. SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL FLOW
6.1. Objectives
6.2. Regions of Heat Transfer
6.3. Single-Phase Liquid Heat Transfer
6.4. The Onset of Nucleate Boiling
6.5. Subcooled Boiling
6.6. Saturated Boiling and the Two-Phase Forced Convection Region
7. BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL HEAT FLUX
contents
NOMENCLATURE
at Thermal Diffusivity
A Area
c Sound speed
D Diameter
Dh Hydraulic diameter
Fr Froude number
f Friction factor
G Mass velocity
Gr Grashof number
g Gravitational acceleration
k Thermal conductivity
L Length
Nu Nusselt number
P Pressure
Pe Pecklet number
Pr Prandtl number
Re Reynolds number
r Variable radius
Ro Gas constant
R Pipe Radius
St Stanton number
s Specific entropy
T Temperature
t Time
V Velocity
Vr Relative velocity
We Weber number
X Flow quality
Specific volume
Greek Symbols
Void fraction
Difference (out-in) of X
Film thickness
Wavelength
Dynamic viscosity
Kinematic viscosity
Wetted perimeter
Stress tensor
Shear stress
Mass density
Surface tension
Contact angle
Subscripts
d Dispersed phase
e External
f Liquid phase
g Gaseous phase
i Internal or interface
m Mixture
r Relative
w Wall
cr Critical value
nb Nucleate boiling
SP Single phase
TP Two Phase
sub Subcooled
sat Saturated
List of Figures
Available Models
Figure 6.6. Convective Boiling Factor, F
Figure 6.7. Nucleate Boiling Suppression Factor, S
Figure 7.1. Parametric Effect of CHF with Variation of Initial and Boundary Conditions
Figure 7.2. Burnout in Cross Flow over Tubes
Figure 7.3. Critical Quality Compared to Proportional Power to Outer Surface
Figure 7.4. Comparison of "Local" versus "Integral" Hypotheses for CHF
Figure 7.5. Comparison of Uniform to Non-Uniform Heating Effect on CHF
Figure 7.6. Bounds of the Critical Heat Flux
Figure 7.7. CHF Mechanisms
Figure 7.8. CHF Mechanisms as a Function of the Quality and Mass Flux
Figure 7.9. Counter Flow Critical Heat Flux
Figure 7.10. Conceptual Picture of CHF as Function of Length for Non-Uniform Heating
Figure 7.11. Subchannel Concepts Used with CHF Correlations
Figure 8.1. Post-CHF Variation of Temperature and Quality as a Function of Axial Length
Figure 8.2. Iloeje's Dispersal Flow Model
Figure 9.1. Flow of a Laminar Film over an Inclined Surface
Figure 9.1.1.
Figure 9.2. The Air-Vapor Boundary Layer in Condensation
Next: INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS Up: Title Page Previous: List of Figures
List of Tables
Table 2.1. Flow Pattern Maps for Horizontal Two-Phase Flow Systems Based on Generalized Coordinate
Parameters
Table 2.2. Flow Pattern Transitions for Horizontal Two-Phase Flow Systems Based on Different
Coordinate Parameters
Table 2.3. Flow Pattern Maps for Vertical Upward Two-Phase Flow Systems Based on Generalized
Coordinate Parameters
Table 2.4. Flow Pattern Transitions for Vertical Upward Two-Phase Flow Systems Based on Different
Coordinate Parameters
Table 3.1. Important Dimensionless Variables in Multiphase Flow
Table 3.2. Homogeneous Equilibrium Model Governing Equations
Table 3.3. Separated Flow Model Governing Equations
Table 3.4. Two Fluid Model Governing Equations
Table 3.5. HEM Pressure Gradient Model
Table 3.6. Separated Flow Pressure Gradient
Table 3.7. Drift Flux Suggested Values
Table 7.1. Specific CHF Correlations
Table 7.2. Kirby Correlation for Non-Uniformly Heated Round Tubes
Table 8.1. Groneveld Empirical Post-Dryout Correlations
Table 9.1. Theoretical and Experimental Investigations in Condensation
Table 9.2. Summary of Previous Investigations in Condensation
1.1. Definitions
1.2. Flow Patterns
1.3. Pool Boiling
1.4. Flow Boiling
1.5. Condensation
Next: Flow Patterns Up: INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS Previous: INTRODUCTION AND
CONCEPTS
1.1. Definitions
To model multi-phase flows one is sometimes required to describe properties averaged over the phase
both spatially and temporally. A certain familiarity is required with these definitions before we discuss
specific phenoma. The multiple phases (and/or components) are usually distinguished by numerical
subscripts (1,2...) or for two-phases by subscripts f and g for a liquid-gas system of f and s for a
liquid-solid system. (The second phase, component, is usually chosen as the dispersed phase.) For
illustration, consider a two-phase air-water flow in a vertical pipe. The total mass flow rate is
with volumetric flowrate given by
Every part of the multiphase flow is occupied by one phase or another. One can consider the symbol ,
as the fraction of an element of volume which is occupied over some time interval by phase i. Obviously,
if the volume element and the time interval is chosen to be small enough (infinitesimal) would be 0
and 1 at any instant. However, in actual practice is an average quantity over some macroscopic
volume (e.g., channel cross-sectional area) and time interval, and is the "volume fraction" of
. For a gas the term void fraction is used. It can also be defined over a
cross-sectional area or chord length. Another average flow quantity of interest particularly in boiling or
condensation applications is the mass fraction of phase i
where, for liquid-gas flows, is called the "quality". This quantity should not be confused with the
thermodynamic quality, the ratio of the vapor mass (not mass flow rate) to the total mass. Only if the
velocity of the phases are equal do the two definitions become the same; e.g., this is done in the
homogeneous equilibrium model. One can also define a mass flux or mass velocity, G, by
With these definitions one can derive a number of useful physical quantities, e.g., the relation between
Next: Flow Patterns Up: INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS Previous: INTRODUCTION AND
CONCEPTS
Next: Flow Boiling Up: INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS Previous: Flow Patterns
Next: Flow Boiling Up: INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS Previous: Flow Patterns
1.5. Condensation
Condensation is the reverse process of evaporation; i.e., the process of conversion of vapor back into
liquid. It occurs when a wall (or the vapor near a wall) is cooled to a temperature which is below the
saturation temperature corresponding to the vapor pressure. This temperature is commonly called the
dew point. A common example of condensation occurs when steam condenses on the walls of the shower
in a bathroom (Figure 1.4). Initially the water which condenses nucleates as droplets on the cold wall. As
the population of these droplets grow or the rate of condensation increases the droplets coalesce into a
film which flows down the wall. The first type of condensation is termed "dropwise" condensation and
the second is termed "film" condensation. When the rate of condensation is low (e.g., a noncondensible
gas is present) or when the liquid does not "wet" the wall, dropwise condensation occurs. In most
engineering components where condensation is a required part of an industrial process film condensation
is expected, because of the large mass flux of condensed liquid per unit length of wetted area.
Consider the temperature distribution through the vapor and liquid during condensation as shown in
Figure 1.4. The temperature decreases in the vapor as one approaches the wall; appreciably if the vapor is
superheated or if noncondensibles are present. There is a slight decrease at the liquid-vapor interface due
to the difference in pressure driving the mass transfer. Also, there is a temperature drop in the liquid due
to its thermal resistance to heat transfer. If one were to plot the heat transfer coefficient as a function of
distance down the wall one finds an interesting behavior. Initially the heat transfer coefficient would
decrease because more liquid accumulates as a film and acts as a thermal resistance. However, at some
liquid flow-rate the film becomes wavy and eventually turbulent. This surface roughness actually reduces
the thermal resistance in the flowing liquid film. At this point and beyond the heat transfer increases as
the liquid flow increases, with the Prandtl number having a second-order effect. There are other effects
which will be discussed later.
References
J.N. Al-Sheikh, D.E. Saunders and R.S. Brodkey, "Prediction of Flow Patterns in Horizontal Two-Phase Pipe Flow," Can J Chem Engng, 48,
pp 21-29, 1970.
G.E. Alves, "Cocurrent Liquid-Gas Flow in a Pipeline Contractor," Chem Engng Prog, 50, pp 449-456, 1954.
D. Baker, "Simultaneous Flow of Oil and Gas," Oil and Gas J, 53, pp 183-195 1954.
O.P. Bergelin, and C. Gazley, Jr., "Cocurrent Gas-Liquid Flow, I. Flow in Horizontal Tubes," Proc Heat Transfer and Fluid Mech. Inst., pp
5-18, Berkeley CA, 1949.
C.C. Chu, "TEXAS-A 1-D Model for Fuel-Coolant Interactions," UWRSR-36, University of Wisconsin, 1986.
C.C. Chu et al, "TEXAS Computer Code Manual," http://www.engr.wisc.edu, 1996.
B.A. Eaton, D.E. Andrews, C.R. Knowles, I.H. Sillberberg and K.E. Broon, "The Prediction of Flow Patterns, Liquid Holdup and Pressure
Losses Occurring During Continuous Two-Phase Flow in Horizontal Pipelines," J. Petrol Technol, 19, pp 815-828, 1967.
W.C. Galegar, W.B. Stovall and R.L. Huntington, "More Data on Two-Phase Vertical Flow," Petroleum Refiner, 33, pp 208-217, 1954.
G.W. Govier, and K. Aziz, "The Flow of Complex Mixtures in Pipes," Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1972.
G.F. Hewitt and D.N. Robertson, "Studies of Two-Phase Flow Patterns by Simultaneous X-ray and Flash Photography," Rept AERE-M2159,
UKAEA, Harwell, 1969.
C.S. Hoogendorn, "Gas-Liquid Flow in Horizontal Pipes," Chem Engng Sci, 9, pp 205-217, 1959.
C.J. Hoogendorn, and A.A. Beutelaar, "Effect of Gas Density and Gradual Vaporization on Gas-Liquid Flow in Horizontal Lines," Chem
Engng Sci, 16, pp 208-215, 1961.
H.A. Johnson, and A. H. Abou-Sabe, "Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop for Turbulent Flow of Air-Water Mixtures in a Horizontal Pipe,"
Trans ASME, 74, pp 977-987, 1952.
C.R. Knowles, The Effects of Flow Patterns of Pressure Loss in Multiphase Horizontal Flow," M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas, Austin,
1965.
S.I. Kosterin, "An Investigation of the Influence of Diameter and Inclination of a Tube on the Hydraulic Resistance and Flow Structure of
Gas-Liquid Mixtures," Izvest. Akad, Nauk. USSR, 12, pp 1824-1830, 1949.
B.K. Kozlov, "Forms of Flow of Gas-Liquid Mixtures and Their Stability Limits in Vertical Tubes," Zhur Tech Fig 24, pp 2285-2288, 1954.
L.Y. Krasiakova, "Some Characteristics of Movements of Two-Phase Mixtures in a Horizontal Pipe," Zhur Tech Fig 22, p 656, AERE
Lib/Trans 695, 1952.
J.M. Mandhane, C.A. Gregory and K. Aziz, "A Flow Pattern Map for Gas-Liquid Flow in Horizontal Pipes," Int J Multiphase Flow, 1(4), pp
537-554, 1974.
K. Nishigawa, K. Sekoguchi and T. Fukano, "On the Pulsation Phenomena in Gas-Liquid Two-Phase Flow," Bull. JSME, 12, pp 1410-1416,
1969.
T. Oshinowa and M.E. Charles, "Vertical Two-Phase Flow, 1: Flow-Pattern Correlations", Can J Chem Engng, 52, pp 25-35, 1974.
S.Z. Rouhani and M.S. Sohel, "Two-Phase Flow Pattern: A Review of Research Result," Progress in Nuclear Energy, 11, pp 217-259, 1983.
H.H. Schicht, "Flow Patterns for Adiabatic Two-Phase Flow of Water and Air Within a Horizontal Tube", Verfahrenstecknik, 3, pp 153-172,
1969.
D. Scott, "Properties of Co-Current Gas-Liquid Flow," Advances in Chemical Engineering, 4 pp 199-277, Academic Press, New York, 1963.
H.C. Simpson, D.H. Rooney, E. Gratton and F. Al-Samarrel, "Two-Phase Flow in Large Diameter Horizontal Lines," Paper H6, European
Two-Phase Flow Group Meeting, Grenoble, 1977.
P.L. Spedding, and J.J.J. Chen, "A Simplified Method of Determining Flow Pattern Transition of Two-Phase Flow in a Horizontal Pipe," Int J
Multiphase Flow, 7(6), pp 729-731, 1981.
P.L. Spedding, and V.T. Nguyen, "Regime Maps for Air-Water Two-Phase Flow," Chem Eng Sci, 35, pp 779-793, 1980.
T. Ueda, "Studies of the Flow of Air-Water Mixtures," Bull. JSME 1(2), pp 139-145, 1958.
J. Weisman, D. Duncan, J. Gibson and T. Crawford, "Effects of Fluid Properties and the Pipe Diameter on Two-Phase Flow Pattern in
Horizontal Lines," Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 5, pp 437-452, 1979.
J. Weisman and S.Y. Kang, "Flow Pattern Transitions in Vertical and Upwardly Inclined Lines," Int J Multiphase Flow, 7, pp 271-280, 1981.
P.D. White, and R.L. Huntington, "Horizontal Co-Current Two-Phase Flow of Fluid in Pipe Lines," The Petroleum Engineer, 27(9), p 40,
Next: Homogeneous Equilibrium Model Up: No Title Previous: FLOW PATTERNS AND
FLOW-PATTERN
Next: Homogeneous Equilibrium Model Up: No Title Previous: FLOW PATTERNS AND
FLOW-PATTERN
Next: Separated Flow Model Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE Previous:
MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE
The multiphase transport properties of viscosity and thermal conductivity ( , k) are another matter,
because it is not clear how one should average their effect in an area-average, mass average or
volume-average sense. In many situations such as for pressure drop calculations the mixture transport
properties have been arbitrarily averaged on a volume average or mass average basis, e.g.,
However, these averaging schemes are not exact and are usually empirically corrected by fitting
coefficients to a set of experimental data. In other situations the effect of multiphases are neglected and
the liquid or gas property values for viscosity on the thermal conductivity are used, e.g., when the
amount of liquid in the channel is large (low quality or void fraction), the viscosity can be taken to be
that of the liquid.
Next: Separated Flow Model Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE Previous:
MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE
Next: Pressure Drop in a Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE Previous: Separated
Flow Model
The two-fluid model equations are given in Tables 3.4. One should note that when a two-fluid model is
used a number of interfacial transport coefficients ( , , , ) are defined and require constitutive
relation models to complete the overall model. This approach has an advantage in that the actual
transport processes can be rigorously defined, however, the disadvantage is that one is required to model
these kinetic processes in detail, which implies a much greater depth of experimental data and insight.
The usual method of modelling pressure differences between the fluids is to assume that the pressure is
equal in both phases (Tables 3.4, Eq. 6). If, as previously discussed, one finds that pressure
nonequilibrium between the phases is important one must introduce a local constitutive relation which
accounts for this pressure difference due to dynamic and interfacial effects. For example, in research
done with explosive boiling a local momentum equation (e.g., Rayleigh momentum equation) is used to
model this difference in the pressure of the two fluids; this allows for dynamic pressure differences as
well as the effect of surface tension and mass transfer.
The other required constitutive relations for interfacial transfer ( , , ) are complicated functions of
the fluid velocities and their local properties. These kinetic models are also a strong function of the
multiphase flow pattern. The model one would develop for the interfacial shear stress or heat flux is
significantly different for a dispersed flow pattern in contrast to a stratified flow pattern. In fact, the
interfacial models would be different if one had gas bubbles in a liquid versus liquid droplets in a gas.
For example in the former case one would find that the stable characteristic size of gas bubbles at low
void fractions might be near the Taylor critical wavelength (dimensionless length-D/A 2 , Table 3.1)
where as in the latter case the diameter would be determined from the critical Weber number (We
7-12, Table 3.1) which is only partly related to Taylor instabilities.
The final point to make about all the multiphase models is how turbulence is included in the analysis.
The first point one should notice is that the multiphase governing equations do not seem to directly
include the time-averaging due to local turbulent velocity fluctuations. This is somewhat misleading
because when one looks into the complete derivation as performed by Ishii (1974) one finds that
constitutive relations for and inherently include turbulence effects. The important question then is
how is turbulence modelled in these relations. At the present time turbulence modelling is rather
phenomenological when compared to the detailed formulations for single phase flow. The inherent
assumption in modelling and is that one can use simple turbulence models (e.g., empirical friction
factors, mixing length scales) developed for single phase applications at the local level of the multiphase
system and then correct for effects of multiple phases by a combination of phenomenological models
averaging techniques for the bulk flow, and using empirical correlations from specific data. The
following sections considering pressure drop and critical flow models are good examples of these
techniques. More fundamental approaches to include turbulence have begun, but are not discussed in
detail here.
Next: Pressure Drop in a Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE Previous: Separated
Flow Model
Next: Void Fraction Prediction with Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE
Previous: Two-Fluid Model
where in this equation we have assumed the channel flow area is constant and we have substituted the
constant mass velocity, G, from the mass balance into the acceleration pressure drop term. Note that this
equation is not valid for the case of multiphase flow of a liquid and solid where the solid adheres to the
wall. Now the model used for is based on the assumption that we have liquid flowing alone, fo, in the
channel and correct for this by using a two-phase multiplier, , (this technique can be extended to
more than two phases in a straight forward manner),
where the channel can be represented by the hydraulic diameter, . By inspection one sees that the
two-phase multiplier, , is equal to
where the first phase is a liquid, f, and the second phase is a gas, g. Now consider that the two-phase
friction factor, has the same empirical function form as single phase, and this yields
where one now must use an averaging scheme for the transport property viscosity (e.g., see Eq. 9 for
). The value of the exponent, m, would depend whether one was in a laminar or turbulent flow regime.
When these constitutive models are substituted into the original momentum balance the total pressure
gradient results (Table 3.5). One should remember that the mass fraction is a thermodynamic property
and therefore is a function of two other independent properties, here we have chosen the mixture
enthalpy, i, and pressure P, because they are the 'natural' variables calculated for a steady flow. This
dependence of on i and P results in partial derivatives with respect to enthalpy and pressure in the
acceleration pressure drop term. The enthalpy dependence is found from the energy balance while the
pressure effect is directly found by the momentum equation by back substitution.
The final observation that one should make concerns the term in the denominator of the total pressure
gradient. If one evaluates the quantity in brackets (say for steam-water flow) the result indicates that the
value lies between zero and one. Consider the case when the term approaches zero. In this case the
change in specific volume (density) as a function of pressure is negligible. This suggests that one can
treat the multiphase system as an incompressible fluid. Now as the term in brackets approaches unity the
denominator approaches zero and the pressure gradient approaches infinity. Physically when the pressure
gradient approaches infinity it implies the existence of shock wave or acoustic wave (weak shock). In the
present example the only way this is created is because the variation of the density with pressure is large,
this implies the flow , is traveling fast enough that it has equaled the speed of pressure perturbations
in the fluid mixture, i.e., the 'sound speed' of that homogeneous mixture . Thus, the HEM model
Mach number is approximately given by the term in brackets and has the same physical significance as in
single phase flow (see Table 3.1). This is detailed in the following section.
For the separated flow model, the original definition for the two-phase friction multiplier is used except
now one replaces the analytical model for by an empirical correlation based on data. Probably the
most widely used model is that by Martinelli and Nelson (Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3) in which pressure
gradients for air-water flows at low pressure and steam-water flows at high pressure were correlated as a
function of flow regime (e.g., turbulent flow) as well as properties. The resulting correlation for the
two-phase friction multiplier, , is given in Figure 3.2 as a function of the dimensionless Martinelli
parameter, , where
Also the void fraction of the gas phase was correlated as a function of the Martinelli parameter (Figure
3.3). In this case one would use this empirical result along with the basic constitutive relation for ,
and (Table 3.3, Eq. 10) to find the velocity ratio.
Finally, in a similar manner one would determine the dimensionless Mach member for the separated flow
model. Table 3.6 presents the complete pressure gradient term for the separated flow model. Since the
void fraction is a function of the velocity difference as well as the quality, both void and quality appear
as function of the enthalpy and pressure at any location in the channel. The quality variation is found by
the energy balance and the void fraction must be obtained by a separate model or empirical data (such as
Martinelli's data). We consider a phenomenological void model in the next section, that can be used in
separate flow models; i.e., drift flux model. As for the two-phase friction multiplier, a number of
investigators have developed a data-base and associated correlations (e.g., Thom, 1984, Barozcy, 1966,
Chisholm, 1973, and Friedel, 1979). Based on a comparison to a proprietary data bank of HTFS, it was
found that :
1. The Homogeneous Equilibrium model is moderately acceptable over a wide-range of data
comparisons as an initial estimator.
2. The Martinelli-Nelson correlation is a better predictor and should be used for and
.
A recommendation of which model is most suitable depends upon the application. The important
consideration that one must remember is the relative density ratios (Atwood ratio) and the influence of
the gravitational potential field (Froude number) on causing a drift or allowing a relative velocity to exist
between the phases. If these differences are large then one should separate the flow model. For example,
for air-water flows at ambient pressure the density ratio is large ( , Atwood Ratio 1)
therefore a separated flow model may be dictated. As the density ratio approaches one then a
homogeneous model becomes more appropriate for a wide range of applications.
Next: Void Fraction Prediction with Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE
Previous: Two-Fluid Model
Next: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE
Previous: Pressure Drop in a
Now consider the gas velocity, , that can vary across the channel. An expression for the weighted mean
gas velocity may be expressed as
Taking now a reference frame moving with the velocity of the center of the volume of the fluid one can
define the gas or vapor phase drift velocity by
where j is the volumetric flux of the two-phase flow. This is the velocity of the center of volume of the
mixture, and is given by
where and are the volumetric flux of the liquid and gas phases, respectively, given by
Using Eqs. 3.10 and 3.13 in Eq. 3.9, the weighted mean velocity of the gas or vapor phase can be expressed
as:
where is the weighted mean drift velocity of the gas phase, and Co is the
distribution parameter defined by
Therefore, Co depends on the form of the velocity and concentration (flow-pattern) profiles. For a given
flow pattern, the extensive study of Zuber and Wallis suggest that Co depends on pressure, channel
geometry and perhaps the flow rate.
The form of Eq. 3.15 suggests a plot of the data in plane. There are two important characteristics of
this plane representation. First, when Co and are constant Eq. 3.15 shows that a linear relation exists
between and ;SPMlt;j;SPMgt;. The slope of such a line gives the value of distribution parameter, Co,
whereas the intercept with the axis gives the drift velocity, . Thus, these two parameters can be easily
determined from experiments even when the measured profiles required for the direct calculation of Co are
not available. The second important characteristic of the plane pertains to any abrupt measured
changes in the value of Co and ; these indicate a change of flow-pattern in the conduct of the
experiment.
The average void fraction at a given location in the flow channel can now be obtained by
rearranging Eq. 3.15 giving:
This equation shows that can be determined if Co, and the average gas or vapor volumetric flux
are known for a given flow regime; i.e., bubbly slug churn-turbulent. Noting that and Co are
flow-pattern dependent quantities then any void fraction predictions based on Eq. 3.17 would reflect the
flow-pattern effects on the void fraction.
Suggested expressions for Co and and other flow-pattern dependent void fraction correlations are
<>P
REFERENCES
● C.J. Barozcy, "A Systematic Correlation for Two-Phase Pressure Drop," Chem. Engr. Proj. Symp,
Vol 62, No 44, pp 232-249, 1966.
● A.E. Bergles, et al., Two Phase Flow and Heat Transfer in the Power and Process Industries,
Hemisphere, New York, 1981.
● R. Bird, et al., Transport Phenomena, Wiley, New York, 1960.
● D. Chisholm, "The Pressure Gradient Due to Friction During the Flow of Boiling Water," Engr &
Boiler House Rev, Vol 73, No 8, pp 252-256, 1966.
● J.G. Collier, Convective Boiling and Condensation, McGraw-Hill, 2nd Edition, New York, 1981.
● L. Friedel, "Improved Friction Pressure Drop Correlations for Horizontal and Vertical Two-Phase
Pipe Flow," Proc European Two-Phase Group Mtg., JRC-Ispra, 1979.
● Y.Y. Hsu, H. Graham, Transport Processes in Two-Phase Boiling Systems, Hemisphere, New York,
1977.
● M. Ishii, Thermo-Fluid Dynamic Theory of Two-Phase Flow, Eyrolles, France, 1974.
● M. Ishii, "One-Dimensional Drift-Flux Model and Constitutive Equations for Relative Motion
Between Phases in Various Two-Phase Flow Regimes," Argonne National Lab Report, ANL 77-47 ,
October 1977.
● M. Ishii, N. Zuber, "Drag Coefficient and Relative Velocity in Bubbly, Droplet or Particulate
Next: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Up: MULTIPHASE FORMULATION AND PRESSURE
Previous: Pressure Drop in a
Next: Single Phase Critical Flow Up: No Title Previous: Void Fraction Prediction with
Next: Single Phase Critical Flow Up: No Title Previous: Void Fraction Prediction with
Next: Homogeneous Equilibrium Model for Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: SOUND
SPEED AND CRITICAL
where the specific entropy, s, is considered to be constant in the process. Let us consider a perfect gas as
a representative single phase fluid where
Based on the sound speed definition we find that for a perfect gas
Now we can use this definition of the sound speed and incorporate it into the energy balance with mass
continuity for the fluid to find the mass flowrate as a function of the Mach number.
where the subscript, o, denotes the stagnation condition where the velocity is approximately zero.
This shows that, for a given Mach Number, the flow is proportional to the stagnation pressure and
inversely proportional to the square root of the stagnation temperature. For this reason, flow test data on
compressors and turbines, or indeed on any flow passage which operates over a wide range of pressure
and temperature levels, are usually plotted for as the flow variable. In this way the results of a
given test become applicable to operation at levels of temperature and pressure different from the
original test conditions. To find the condition of maximum flow per unit area, we could compute the
derivative and set this derivative equal to zero. From this we would find that the critical pressure
ratio is given by
An equivalent procedure would be to differentiate Eq. 6 with respect to M and set this derivative equal to
zero. At this condition, we would find that the maximum flow occurs at M = 1.
However, neither of these procedures is necessary inasmuch as we have discussed quite generally that the
cross-sectional area for isentropic flow passes through a minimum at Mach Number unity. Therefore, to
find , we need only set M = 1 in Eq. 6. Thus we find
For a given gas, therefore, the maximum flow per unit area depends only on the ratio . For given
values of the stagnation pressure and stagnation temperature and for a passage with a given minimum
area, Eq. 8 shows that the maximum flow which can be passed is relatively large for gases of high
molecular weight and relatively small for gases of low molecular weight. Doubling the pressure level
doubles the maximum flow, whereas doubling the absolute temperature level reduces the maximum flow
by about 30 percent.
As Figure 4.2 indicates for a converging nozzle the Mach number reaches unity at the point where the
critical pressure ratio, , is given by equ IX.7 ( - .53 for air, - 1.4), which also coincides with the
point of minimum area. This is the condition of critical flow or "choking" that was mentioned previously.
One should note that the effect of friction and heat transfer can be considered but requires an iterative
analytical solution or numerical solution to the one-dimensional problem depending on the complexity of
the wall models, since the flowrate directly affects the frictional pressure drop. We consider this later
under advanced models.
Next: Homogeneous Equilibrium Model for Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: SOUND
SPEED AND CRITICAL
Next: Homogeneous Frozen Flow Model Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Single
Phase Critical Flow
where is the specific volume of the mixture and the reciprocal of the mixture density for the HEM
formulation. We have already evaluated this partial derivative when considering the HEM pressure drop
as
where the partial derivatives are at constant enthalpy under frictionless conditions.
One can use this expression to find the HEM mixture sound speed by multiplying by the mixture specific
volume and taking the square root
Figure 4.3 illustrates how this sound speed varies with gas content for an air-water system at atmospheric
pressure. Notice that the mixture sound speed falls dramatically to less than 100 m/s with a small amount
of gas present. One must keep in mind that this is an idealized model and that transmission of pressure
waves may occur at higher speeds in the real system but at lower amplitudes, because the actual flow is
not completely homogeneous and each phase has a characteristic sound speed which is higher.
In using this expression to find the critical mass velocity it is necessary to evaluate the indicated partial
derivatives at the outlet conditions (e.g., pressure, quality) where "choking" occurs. One must then work
back from the outlet conditions to the stagnation conditions. Usually this involves an iterative procedure
even though it is analytical, or numerical integration. A straight forward procedure is presented below for
a two-phase liquid-vapor system.
To find the critical mass velocity, , and the associated critical pressure ratio, , at and below
which it occurs one could produce the complete curve of (Figure 4.4). Since the flow is
isentropic the entropy at the outlet equals the stagnation entropy. Thus one chooses a downstream outlet
pressure, , which determines the saturation entropies, and . The equilibrium thermodynamic
quality at the outlet is then
which then defines the enthalpy and specific volume at the outlet
One simply reduces the outlet receiver pressure from until the maximum G is calculated at . For all
pressures below this critical pressure the flow is choked as is the case for single phase flow. One should
note that is not a simple function of the thermodynamic state of the system as for a perfect gas and can
vary widely for any particular set of stagnation conditions.
The accuracy of the HEM model will be discussed later in comparison to some particular data. In general
though, let us simply say that the HEM critical flow model has similar limitations as the HEM pressure
drop model when the density ratio is large (low pressure when relative velocity is important) and also at
low quality (when the nonequilibrium effect is important). As the stagnation pressure and quality
increases the HEM prediction improves. Also as the outlet pipe length to diameter ratio increases the
HEM model prediction improves, allowing more time for attainment of equilibrium; however one must
then include the effect of pipe friction. One should also remember that the stagnation conditions ought to
be representative of a homogeneous geometry (dispersed well-mixed) for the HEM model to successfully
estimate the outlet flow. If the initial stagnation condition is better represented by stratified phases rather
than co-dispersed phases, one might expect the HEM model not to initially give a reliable estimate until
flashing and its induced mixing disperses the phases. More likely depending on the location of the pipe
single phase flow would first occur followed by flashing and then the two-phase flow. For stratified
conditions with short tubes nonequilibrium might be considered. A bounding nonequilibrium model is
discussed in the next section.
Next: Homogeneous Frozen Flow Model Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Single
Phase Critical Flow
Next: Separated Flow Model for Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Homogeneous
Equilibrium Model for
Under these assumptions one can write down the energy balance
One can observe the difference between the two models as compared to steam-water data at high and low
pressures [5,6] in Figures 4.5 to 4.7. In all cases the critical pressure ratio is underpredicted by this model
but the critical mass velocity is better predicted at relatively low stagnation qualities. Both models are in
error at very low qualities. The ability to predict the flowrate under these conditions is questionable for
most models. As we shall discuss in the next section the final model assumption to consider is that of
relative velocity between the phases. This along with nonequilibrium effects combined help explain some
of the current discrepancies between model and data.
Next: Separated Flow Model for Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Homogeneous
Equilibrium Model for
Next: Fluids Other Than Water Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Homogeneous Frozen
Flow Model
where S is the ratio of . The expression for acceleration pressure drop (equ. 4.9) is in general
If we eliminate the void fraction, , from this expression using equ. 4.22 we arrive at the general
expression for the critical mass velocity
One should note that for equal phase velocities, (S = 1) we simplify to the HEM expression. The flow
quality at this "choking" condition can be found from the energy balance and equ. 4.22 as
Now if one can specify the critical slip ratio at the "choking" condition then one can use equ's 24 and 25
to find X and (2 equs and 2 unknowns).
Based on some theoretical arguments and empirical matching of experimental data there are two widely
utilized models [8-10] for the critical velocity slip ratio, . Both models assume that the slip ratio at
"choking" conditions is equal to the inverse density ratio to an exponent, m
where Fauske [8,9] assumes and Moody uses . The only real justification for either
exponent is comparison to data and matching of the exponent and the critical pressure ratio. Over a wide
range of data Fauske's empirical value shows somewhat better agreement. In addition the Fauske model
has been solved parametrically and a convenient graphical solution is available (Figure 4.6 and 4.7) with
the effect of geometry also empirically included. Therefore, we discuss this model results below,
primarily as an example of this class of semi-empirical models.
Fauske Model
One interesting note should be made. Because in Fauske's model the exponent is empirically "fit" to data
the isentropic flow assumption becomes somewhat of a moot point. One might consider that frictional
effects, if important are indirectly accounted for in the empirical part of the model. However, this is only
correct for similar L/D ratios. If one uses the model outside of its range of data then additional frictional
effects may have to be included. As one will see in the graphical results this would be in the range of
pipe length to diameter ratio of 15 or greater. Let us discuss the model results in general and then
examine the effect of geometry.
Figure 4.6 is a plot of the choked mass velocity as a function of stagnation enthalpy at various critical
pressures for steam-water mixtures. For any enthalpy and choked pressure one can immediately locate
the choked mass velocity.
In order to calculate the critical pressure at the choked plane, it is necessary to refer to Figure 4.6 Here
the choked pressure ratio is shown as a function of the L/D of the test section [9]. The choked flow is
calculated using several different equations depending on the length to diameter ratio of the outlet pipe
section.
1. L/D - O - Sharp edged orifice. There is no choked flow. The following equation should be used
just as it is shown below. This is essentially the orifice equation for single phase incompressible
flow as an estimate for an orifice.
Next: Fluids Other Than Water Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Homogeneous Frozen
Flow Model
Next: The Physical Basis of Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Separated Flow Model
for
Next: Advanced Computational Models Up: Fluids Other Than Water Previous: Fluids Other Than
Water
Measurements of void made by Fauske and reported in Reference 8 show that the velocity ratio is very
different from that calculated from Equation 4.26. If comparison is made with other models, they still do
not show the behavior indicated by the data of Figure 4.17. Clearly, no simple velocity ratio expression
has the needed properties to fit the range of data.
Thermodynamic equilibrium cannot exist for the data of Figure 4.17, for, if it did, the pressure drop
would not be large enough to pass the flow. Thermodynamic equilibrium does not exist for L/D's less
than (12) either, as it would not be necessary to distinguish between the L/D's and the longer ones.
Therefore, one can say that none of the assumptions listed earlier are really true under all the conditions
of interest.
Next: Advanced Computational Models Up: Fluids Other Than Water Previous: Fluids Other Than
Water
Next: Observations Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: The Physical Basis of
where is the wall shear stress and q' is the linear heat addition rate, both externally imposed. In addition
one also has the equation of state for the fluid
As an example for an ideal gas one can substitute the algebraic expressions for pressure, p, and enthalpy,
i, into the balance equations and we write eqns 28-30 in matrix form
with , and
Notice that the frictional, heat addition and area change terms appear as external sources in the
expression on the right-hand side. Reocreux [23] used this example to indicate that the momentum and
heat transfer relations are algebraic and not included in the derivative terms. The solution to this matrix is
found by inverting the matrix B. This can only be done if the determinant of B is non-zero.
Mathematically, when the determinant is zero this is a condition when the pressure gradient is infinite
and we have reached the critical flow condition, and solve for the velocity which it achieves. For the case
of an ideal gas we recover the same results as discussed previously (eqns 4.5 to 7).
This suggests the difficulties that arise when two phases occupy the channel. In single phase flow dA/A,
and q' were imposed externally upon the fluid. In two phase flow consider how these quantities will be
partitioned between the two phases; i.e., how will the flow area be occupied by the two phases and how
will the shear forces be distributed among the two phases? This last consideration will determine the void
fraction. Also how energy will be distributed between the two phases; a thermal equilibrium
consideration? Thus we can sense that mechanical and thermal non-equilibrium considerations will be
important in relation to two-phase critical flow.
Giot and Meunier [24] have shown that the Moody and Fauske models outlined above are equivalent to
requiring that the determinant of the three mixture conservation equations, augmented by a fourth
condition involving a linear combination of the space derivaties of S, p, X, and vanishes. Thus they
find again the relationship between critical flows and the vanishing determinant of the conservation
equations for single-phase compressible flows.
In non-equilibrium models, one needs a mechanistic description of the mass and energy exchanges
between the two phases. For example, one can use the theory of heat transfer limited bubble growth to
arrive at a vapor generation law needed to close the system of equations in this case [21, 22]. Many
models addressing the various aspects briefly touched upon above have appeared in the literature over
the years. There is yet no model that gives perfect agreement with all the data and there will probably be
none in the future either. Indeed, certain non-equilibrium aspects, such as nucleation on the walls and
flow-pattern dependent velocity ratios depend on secondary variables (such as wall roughness and gas
content of the liquid in the case of nucleation) and are difficult or impossible to quantify in general.
Non-equilibrium models can be either empirical, mechanistic (i.e. based on a phenomenological
description of the vapor generation mechanisms), or based on two-fluid models incorporating
automatically the interfacial heat and mass exchange mechanisms.
In empirical models non-equilibrium vapor generation is handled by introducing, for example, a
coefficient that allows only a fraction of the equilibrium vapor generation to occur. Relaxation models
for phase change have also been proposed by several authors; in this case the actual vapor generation is
proportional to the difference between the actual quality and the equilibrium quality.
Mechanistic models attempt to model the mechanisms of nucleation and interfacial phase change. There
are inherent difficulties, however, in all critical flow models that become evident when this approach is
used. For example, the rate of nucleation depends on the roughness and other properties of the walls as
well as on the amount of dissolved air in the system; such effects are very difficult to quantify, as already
mentioned. Introducing a grid in the flow area promoted nucleation and lowered the superheating of the
liquid with significant impact on the critical flow characteristics during the Moby-Dick experiments [25].
Often the realism introduced into the model by modeling of the physical phenomena is shadowed by
totally unreasonable values of certain parameters that must be used to fit the experimental data.
The six-equation formulation provides automatically the features necessary for describing departures
from mechanical and thermal non equilibrium. The methodology that can be used to detect the presence
of critical flow conditions when the six equations are being integrated is well understood [20, 24, 26-28].
In a way quite analogous to the one shown previously for single-phase gas flows, one finds that critical
flow occurs when the determinant of the coefficients of the solution variables becomes zero at a certain
location. Regarding modeling of the physics, however, there are difficulties with this approach also since
we do now know yet the correct form of certain terms that enter into the conservation equations and
influence the results significantly; the virtual mass terms have such an effect as well as the mass
exchange rate [22].
In spite of the fact that the two-fluid 6-equation models are capable of predicting the occurrence of a
critical flow condition, for several practical reasons (computational speed, singularity of the solutions
near the critical point, not knowing a priori the location of the choking point, fine nodalization
requirements, the numerical schemes used, etc.) a separate choking model is necessary.
This separate critical flow criterion is derived from an analysis of the characteristics of the governing; if
the real part of all the characteristics is non-negative, no information can propagate upstream, and the
exit pressure cannot affect any more the flow upstream from the break. The critical velocity is thus
calculated from an algebraic equation obtained by requiring that the largest characteristic velocity be
equal to zero. For system calculations, the critical flow condition derived in this fashion is applied at the
choking point whose location is known a priori.
The NRC computer codes (RELPA5/MOD2, TRAC/BF1 and TRAC-PFI/MOD1) use a simplified
two-phase choking criterion that is based on the assumption of thermal equilibrium between the phases,
at variance with the physics reality. The so-called "RELAP5 two-phase choking criterion" (used also in
TRAC-BF1) [22] is derived from such a formulation (4-equation, thermal equilibrium) with additional
simplifications for obtaining an explicit expression for the characteristic roots; choking occurs when a
hybrid mixture velocity becomes equal to the homogeneous equilibrium (HE) sound velocity. In this
model, the arbitrary simplifications needed to arrive at the final mixture velocity have no justification
other than the fact that they yield good results.
A different approach is used in CATHARE where the critical condition is derived from the basic
thermal-hydraulic model. CATHARE [30] uses a full 6-equation model and the critical condition is
found by solving a sixth-degree polynomial that retains all the terms (velocity and temperature difference
between the phases are both considered). The code has also the capability, however, of integrating the
conservation equations all the way through a critical flow condition. One should note, however, that
CATHARE uses a fully implicit numerical scheme that allows use of very fine meshes near the break
without consequence on the time step.
Next: Observations Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: The Physical Basis of
Next: POOL BOILING Up: SOUND SPEED AND CRITICAL Previous: Advanced Computational
Models
10. F.J. Moody, "Maximum Flow Rate of a Single Component Two-Phase Mixture," Jnl Heat
Transfer, Tran ASME Series C, V87, No 1, p 134 (Feb 1965).
11. M.M. Bolstad, R.C. Jordan, "Theory and Use of the Capillary Tube Expansion Device," Jnl. of
ASRE, Vol 6, p 518 (1948).
12. H.K. Fauske, "Two Phase Critical Flow with Application to Liquid-Metal Systems (Mercury,
Cesium, Rubidium, Potassium, Sodium, and Lithium, ANL 6779 (October 1963).
13. R.V. Smith, "Choking Two-Phase Flow Literature Summary and Idealized Design Solutions for
Hydrogen, Nitrogen, Oxygen and Refrigerants 12 and 11," NBS Tech. Note 179, Supt. of
Documents, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office (1967).
14. R.E. Henry, M.A. Grolmes, H.K. Fauske, "Pressure-Pulse Propagation in Two-Phase One and
Two-Component Mixtures," ANL 7792 (March 1971).
15. F.R. Zaloudek, "The Low Pressure Critical Discharge of Steam-Water Mixtures from Pipes,"
Report HW-68934, Rev. General Electric Co. (1961).
16. R.E. Henry, "A Study of One and Two-Component Two-Phase Critical Flows at Low Qualities,"
ANL 7430 (March 1968).
17. P. Griffith, "MIT Critical Two-Phase Notes," Cambridge, MA (1976).
18. P. Saha, "A Review of Two-Phase Steam-Water Critical Flow Models with Emphasis on Thermal
Non-Equilibrium," NUREQ/CR-0417, Brookhaven Nat Lab (Sept 1978).
19. R.R. Schultz, et al., "Marvihen Critical Flow Data: A Summary of Results and Code Assessment
Applications," Nuclear Safety, V25, No 6 (Dec 1984).
20. J.A. Boure, et al., "Highlights of Two-Phase Critical Flow," Int'l Jnl Multiphase Flow, V3 pp 1-22
(1978).
21. M.N. Hutcherson, Numerical Evaluation of the Henry-Fauske Critical Flow Model,
MDC-N9654-100, McDonnell Douglas Co, (July 1980).
22. V.K. Ransom, et al., RELAP5/MOD2 Code Manual, NUREG/CR-5273, EGG-2555 (1987).
23. M. Reocreux, "Contribution a l'etude des debits critiques en ecculement disphasique eau-vapeur,"
doctoral thesis, L'Univ. Scientifique et Medicale de Grenoble (1974) . Also: Contribution to the
Study of Critical Flow Rates in Two-Phase Water Vapor Flow," NUREG-Tr-0002 (1977).
24. M. Giot and A. Fritte, "Modeling in Critical Flow," Proc. of the NATO Advanced Research
Workshop on the Advances in Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer, Spitzingsee, FRG, 31 Aug.-3
Sept. (1982). M. Giot and D. Meunier "Methodes de Determination du Debit Critique en
Ecoulements Monophasiques et Diphasiques a un Consituant," Energie Primaire, 4, No. 102, 23
(1968).
25. M. Reocreux, "Experimental Study of Steam-Water Choked Flow," in Transient Two-Phase Flow
- Proceedings of the CSNI Specialists Meeting, August 1976, Atomic Energy of Canada, 2,
637-6669. (1977)
26. J. Boure, A.A. Fritte, M. Giot and M.L. Rocreux, "Highlights of Two-Phase Critical Flow: On the
Links Between Maximum Flow Rates, Sonic Velocities, Propagation and Transfer Phenomena in
Single and Two-Phase Flows," Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 3, 1-22.
27. C.W. Hirt and N.c. Romero, "Application of a Drift-Flux Model to Flashing in Straights Pipes,"
1st CSNI Spec. Meet. on Transient Two-Phase Flow, Toronto, (1976).
28. D. Durack and B. Wendroff, "Relaxation and Choked Two-Phase Flow," 2nd CSNI Spec. Meeting
on Transient Two-Phase Flow, Paris, France, (1978).
29. G. Yadigaroglu and M. Andreani, "Two-Fluid Modeling of Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena for
Best-Estimate LWR Safety Analysis," pp. 980-996 in NURETH-4, Proceedings Fourth Int.
Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal-Hydraulics, Karlsruhe, 10-13 Oct. 1989, U. Mueller,
K. Rehme and K. Rust (editors), G. Braun, Karlsruhe.
30. A. Forge, R. Pochard, A. Porracchia, J. Miro, H.G. Sonnenburg, F. Steinhoss and V. Teschendorff,
Comparison of Thermal-Hydraulic Safety Codes for PWR Systems, Graham and Trotman eds,
(1988).
5. POOL BOILING
When a liquid is in contact with a surface maintained at a temperature above the saturation temperature
of the liquid, boiling will eventually occur at that liquid-solid interface. Conventionally, based on the
relative bulk motion of the body of a liquid to the heating surface, the boiling is divided into two
categories; pool boiling and convective boiling.
Pool boiling is the process in which the heating surface is submerged in a large body of stagnant liquid.
The relative motion of the vapor produced and the surrounding liquid near the heating surface is due
primarily to the buoyancy effect of the vapor. Nevertheless, the body of the liquid as a whole is
essentially at rest. Though the study on the boiling process can be traced back to as early as the eighteen
century (the observation of the vapor film in the boiling of liquid over the heating surface by Leiden in
1756), the extensive study on the effect of the very large difference in the temperature of the heating
surface and the liquid, , was first done by Nukiyama (1934). However, it was the experiment by
Farber and Scorah (1948) that gave the complete picture of the heat transfer rate in the pool boiling
process as a function of . Applying the Newton's law of cooling, , the heat transfer
coefficient, h, was used to characterize the pool boiling process over a range of by Farber and Scorah
as illustrated by the boiling curve in Figure 5.1.
Farber and Scorah conducted their experiments by heating the water at various pressures with a heated
cylindrical wire submerged horizontally under the water level. From the results, they divided the boiling
curve into 6 regions based on the observable patterns of vapor production. Region I, is so small that
the vapor is produced by the evaporation of the liquid into gas nuclei on the exposed surface of the
liquid. Region II, is large enough that additional small bubbles are produced along the heating
surface but later condense in the region above the superheated liquid. Region III, is enough to
sustain "nucleate boiling", with the creation of the bubbles such that they depart and rise through the
liquid regardless of the condensation rate. Region IV, an unstable film of vapor was formed over the
heating surface, and oscillates due to the variable presence of the film. In this region, the heat transfer
rate decreases due to the increased presence of the vapor film. Region V, the film becomes stable and the
heat transfer rate reaches a minimum point. In Region VI, the is very large, and "film boiling" is
stable such that the radiation through the film becomes significant and thus increases the heat transfer
rate with the increasing .
This behavior as described above occurred when the temperature of the wire was the controlled
parameter, . If the power is the controlled variable then the increase in the power
(or heat flux, q") in Region III results in a jump in the wire surface temperature to a point in Region VI,
(Figure 5.2). This point of transition is known as the critical heat flux and occurs due to hydrodynamic
fluid instabilities as discussed later. This results in the stable vapor film being formed, and the wire
surface temperature increases as the heat transfer resistance increases for a fixed input power. If the
power is now decreased, the vapor film remains stable in Region VI and the decreases to the
minimum point for film boiling within Region V. At this point the vapor film becomes unstable and it
collapses, with "nucleate boiling" becoming the mode of energy transfer. Thus, one passes quickly
through Region IV and III to a lower wire surface temperature. This "hysteresis" behavior is always seen
when the power (or heat flux) is the controlled parameter.
On the effect of the pressure, Farber and Scorah suggested that increasing the pressure, for the same
temperature difference, would result in the decreasing of the size of the bubbles. At the same time, the
film becomes thinner and less circulation would be observed. This effect is counter balanced by the
increased density of the vapor and the attendant increase in its enthalpy. Thus, the increase in pressure
initially increased the heat transfer rate in pool boiling. The objective of this section is to present an
overall picture of the pool boiling process with an emphasis on the practical models used (1) to identify
the transition between natural convection and nucleate boiling, as well as nucleate and film boiling, and
(2) to estimate the heat flux during nucleate and film boiling given the difference between the heater
surface temperature and the bulk liquid. First, we consider the process of bubble nucleation and then
begin to "construct" the conceptual picture of the pool boiling curve with suggested quantitative models.
Next: Bubble Growth and Nucleate Up: POOL BOILING Previous: POOL BOILING
where is the interfacial surface tension and r is the bubble radius of curvature. If the liquid is also in
thermal equilibrium with the vapor, , which then implies . If one uses simple
thermodynamics, combining equation 5.1 with the equality of local temperatures, one finds the needed
liquid superheat for the vapor bubble to exist
One can now relate the superheat required within the bulk of the liquid or at a solid-gas-liquid interface
to the size of nuclei.
In a bulk liquid, thermal fluctuations always exist as a small but finite cluster of molecules can take on
higher than macroscopic average energies (i.e., temperature). As the bulk liquid increases in its superheat
these molecule clusters can take on "vapor-like" energies with increasing probability, and possibly form a
stable "vapor nucleus." This process of vapor bubble nucleation is referred to as "homogeneous
nucleation." One can use a thermodynamics approach to estimate the degree of liquid superheat
necessary to form a stable vapor nucleus; e.g., for atmospheric pressures. However, a
statistical mechanics approach (Blander 1975, Skripov, 1970) provides a more complete picture of the
nucleation rate as
the free energy of formation for the vapor nucleus of radius, r, given by
Only a small fraction of all cavities become effective sites for vapor nucleation, because one must
consider the balance between the required superheat for a cavity of radius, , and the temperature
gradient from the wall, , to the bulk liquid at saturation, ; as depicted by Hsu (1962) Figure 5.4
gives a conceptual picture of the model. As the heat flux at the wall is increased, the wall temperature,
which is probably representative of the vapor bubble and local liquid temperature, exceeds the saturation
temperature. The liquid will locally vaporize and the vapor nuclei in the cavity will grow toward the
cavity throat at the heater surface. If one assumes that the liquid temperature gradient from the wall to the
bulk is approximately linear, then the requirement for mechanical and thermal stability of a vapor
nucleus at the cavity exit is that the whole bubble should be in a liquid region of boundary layer size,
where the temperature is at least above a value of which satisfies the equilibrium condition of
equation 5.2, for . If there is a sufficiently large array of cavity sizes this "onset of nucleation" will
first occur when the liquid temperature profile is tangent to the line of thermal and mechanical
equilibrium (Figure 5.4). One can algebraically eliminate the cavity radius, , from the two equations by
equality of temperature and slope and find the relation between the heat flux, , at
which the "onset of nucleate boiling", ONB, occurs
where all properties are evaluated at . Now if there are no cavities at this size the heat flux must
increase so that the superheat temperature increases to a point where a cavity first exists and the
temperature profile intersects the equilibrium curve in Figure 5.4.
One should notice that this model only provides a stability line where the "onset of nucleate boiling" may
first occur. To find the particular heat flux and superheat pair one must look for the intersection of this
stability line with natural convection mode of heat transfer that would exist prior to boiling (Figure 5.5)
and Gr is the liquid Grashof number for and Pr is the liquid Prandtl number. For water at
atmospheric pressure this model predicts an "onset of nucleate boiling" for a superheat less than C,
which corresponds to a cavity size of about 50 microns. In practice the superheat may be as high as C
for very smooth, clean metallic surfaces, which indicates larger cavities were not available on the
surface. As a very rough guide (Brown, 1967) aqueous fluids seem to have active sites ;SPMlt; 10
microns, organic ;SPMlt; 5 and cryogens ;SPMlt; 1.5 microns.
Next: Bubble Growth and Nucleate Up: POOL BOILING Previous: POOL BOILING
Next: Pool Boiling Critical Heat Up: POOL BOILING Previous: Bubble Nucleation and Onset
where R is the bubble radius and is found by the initial superheat . If heat transfer to the
vapor-liquid interface controls the rate of vaporization then the bubble is small and growth is
controlled by the rate of heat transfer through the liquid across the liquid superheat and the second
stage of growth is estimated by
where , and are the latent heat, thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of the liquid. Mikic
et al., (1971) developed a complete spherical bubble growth model giving
where Ja is the Jacob and b is a constant that depends if the spherical bubble is near a
surface or an infinite medium (2/3). This model asymptotically reverts to the inertial or thermal models
for very small or very large times.
At some diameter the buoyancy of the vapor bubble at the surface overcomes the restraining effects of
the surface tension attaching the bubble to the heater surface. A force balance on the bubble (Figure 5.3)
results in the following form to estimate this departure diameter
The proportionality constant depends on the bubble contact angle and stochastic processes; i.e., in
actuality the observed bubble departure diameter has a statistical distribution around some mean given by
Equ 5.11. Also the frequency of these bubbles departing the surface is important to know to estimate the
energy carried away by bubble nucleation. This has been observed by a number of researchers to be
governed by the growth rate (like Equ 5.10) and the waiting time for the vapor to reemerge from a
surface cavity, i.e., the "waiting time." In fact for aqueous fluids, the waiting time is considered to be
about equal to the bubble growth time at its departure diameter; i.e., from Equ 5.10. A
number of investigators have correlated this time (or inverse frequency) to be given by the bubble
diameter divided by the bubble rise velocity in a liquid
In either case the actual frequency is also statistically distributed about some correlated average; e.g.,
20-50 for aqueous liquids.
With this background one can estimate the nucleate boiling heat flux as being the energy carried away by
vaporizing bubbles on the heater surface
where (n/a) is the number of active cavity sites per unit area; i.e., a function of heater surface-liquid
combination. Rohsenow (1962) suggested the following correlation based on this concept
where is the empirical constant linked to the fluid-surface combination ( for water and
commercial steel - Vachon et al., 1965 and the exponent, m, on the Prandtl number, , is 1.0 for water
and 1.7 otherwise. Also note that is the superheat between the heater wall and the liquid saturation
temperature, with properties evaluated at saturation conditions. This model for nucleate pool boiling is
also shown in Figure 5.5. Notice that the heat flux increases with the cube of the liquid superheat,
therefore .
This correlation is one of many (e.g., Forster, Zuber, 1955; Lienhard, 1976) which shows similar
behavior of the heat flux being a strong function of the liquid superheat; , m = 2 - 3.
Rohsenow suggested that these correlations all need to be empirically "normalized" by test data for any
particular liquid-heater combination for a set of initial conditions, although the functional dependencies
are quite general. As Figure 5.5 indicates the nucleate boiling curve needs to be joined to the natural
convection region. In practice, the presence of mixed heat transfer modes (i.e., natural convection and
nucleate boiling) is real and the most straight forward way is to interpolate between these regions;
.
Next: Pool Boiling Critical Heat Up: POOL BOILING Previous: Bubble Nucleation and Onset
Next: Film Boiling and the Up: POOL BOILING Previous: Bubble Growth and Nucleate
where is that critical superficial velocity preventing the liquid flow. A simple force balance on the
liquid as droplets, , is given by
where is assumed to determined by the characteristic Taylor wavelength (Equ 5.11), which results in
a velocity of
Combining these relations one obtains a general expression for CHF in pool boiling
where the constant, Co, is found to be in the range of 0.12 to 0.18; e.g., Zuber (1958) theoretically
estimated , Kutateladze (1951) correlated data for Co = 0.13, and Lienhard (1976) correlated
data for Co = 0.15.
All of these previous discussions focused on the case where the liquid pool was at its saturation
temperature. If the stagnant pool is maintained at a temperature below saturation, subcooled, the vapor
bubbles can condense before they get very far from the heater surface. Thus, the heater power can go into
directly heating the liquid and actual vapor superficial velocity is decreased; thus increasing the
allowable heat flux before CHF occurs. Ivey and Morris (1962) correlated this subcooling effect as a
multiplicative correlation to ,
The final point to emphasize is the location of the CHF point on the pool boiling curve of Figure 5.5.
Critical heat flux appears as a horizontal line of the pool boiling curve and its intersection with the
nucleate boiling curve indicates the temperature at which CHF occurs.
Next: Film Boiling and the Up: POOL BOILING Previous: Bubble Growth and Nucleate
Next: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Up: POOL BOILING Previous: Pool Boiling Critical Heat
where is the difference in temperature between the heater wall and the saturation temperature.
Bromley also considered the film boiling heat transfer coefficient for a vertical wall.
This simplest of solutions is obtained assuming the vapor film is laminar and that the temperature
distribution through the film is linear. For a vertical flat surface various boundary conditions may be
imposed:
(1) zero interfacial shear stress ( = 0)
(2) zero interfacial velocity ( = 0)
(3) zero wall shear stress ( = 0)
For the first of these boundary conditions, the local heat transfer coefficient h(z) at a distance z up the
surface from the start of film boiling is given by
The average coefficient h(z) over the region up to a distance z is given by:
If one defines
Note the analogy with natural convection. The values of C for the first of the above boundary conditions
is 0.943 and for the second is 0.667. This thin vapor film over a horizontal surface is unstable and large
bubbles form and break away. The characteristic spacing of these bubbles ( ) is determined by a
balance of surface tension and gravitational forces and is given by:
where one substitutes this length scale, ( ), for the tube diameter or wall length.
The final point to discuss is what happens if one decreases the heat flux while in film boiling. Once the
continuous vapor film is formed it is hydrodynamically stable even if the heat flux decreases below the
critical heat flux. In fact, this hystersis effect persists until the heat flux decreases to a point where the
superficial velocity of the vapor formed at the heater surface is too low to "levitate" the liquid above the
"continuous" film; in fact the film oscillates substantially and this physical picture may only be
qualitatively correct. Zuber (1958) developed the expression for the minimum film boiling heat flux
based on the concept of minimum superficial vapor velocity in a saturated pool and resulted in
Notice that this expression is similar in form to the CHF model except the density in the velocity term is
the liquid density and comes about from a force balance on vapor bubbles leaving the interface. This
minimum film boiling heat flux can be combined with the heat transfer coefficient to predict the
minimum film boiling for a saturated liquid pool. Note that once again it is the intersection of a
horizontal stability line and the film boiling regime.
Wu (1989) considered the more complicated effects of subcooling and curved heater surfaces on the
and . It was found a simple model was not found that was universally acceptable, thus one
should look into this theoretical model. Dhir and Purohit (1978) developed a purely empirical fit to data
for in water for steel or copper spheres. This is a widely used correlation but has limited
applicability.
References
● M. Blander, J.L. Koltz, "Bubble Nucleation in Liquids," AIChE Journal, Vol 21, No. 5, p 833,
1975.
● B.P. Breen, J.W. Westwater, "Effect of Diameter of Horizontal Tubes on Film Boiling Heat
Transfer," Proc Nat'l Heat Transfer Conf, Houston TX, 1962.
● L.A. Bromley, "Heat Transfer in Stable Film Boiling," Chem Engr. Progress, Vol 46, p 221, 1950.
● W.T. Brown, "A Study of Flow Surface Boiling," PhD Thesis, MIT Mechanical Engr Dept, 1967.
● J.G. Collier, Convective Boiling and Condensation, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1981.
● F.A. Farber, R.L. Scorah, "Heat Transfer to Water Boiling Under Pressure," Transaction ASME,
Vol 79, p 369, 1948.
● H. Forster, N. Zuber, "Bubble Dynamics and Boiling Heat Transfer," AIChE Journal, Vol 1, p
532, 1955.
● C.Y. Han, P. Griffith, "The Mechanism of Heat Transfer in Nucleate Pool Boiling P + I: Bubble
Imitation, Growth, Departure," Int'l Jul Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 8, p 887, 1965.
● Y.Y. Hsu, "On the Size of Range of Active Nucleation Cavities on a Heating Surface," Trans
ASME Journal Heat Transfer, Vol 84, p 207, 1962.
● H.J. Ivey, D.J. Morris, "On the Relevance of the Vapor Liquid Exchange Mechanism for
Subcooled Boiling Heat Transfer at High Pressure, AEEW-R Report 137, 1962.
● S.S. Kutateladze, "A Hydrodynamic Theory of Changes in the Boiling Process Under Free
Convection," Akod. Nauk SSSR Tech Nauk, Vol 4, p 529, 1951.
● J.H. Lienhard, "Correlation of the Limiting Liquid Superheat," Chem Engr Science, Vol 31, p 847,
1976.
● J.J. Lorentz, B. Mikic, W. Rohsenow, "The Effect of Surface Conditions on Boiling
Characteristic," Proc Int'l Heat Transfer Conf, Tokyo, JP, 1974.
● B. Mikic, W. Rohenow, P. Griffith, "On Bubble Growth Rates," Int'l Jol Heat Mass Transfer, Vol
13, p 657, 1970.
● S. Nukiyama, "The Maximum and Minimum Values of the Heat "Q" Transmitted from Metal to
Boiling Under Atmospheric Pressure," Inst Jul Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 9, p 1419, 1994.
● W. Rohsenow, "A Method of Correlating Heat Transfer Data for Surface Boiling of Liquids,"
Trans ASME, Vol 74, p 969, 1952.
● V.P. Skirpov, P.A. Pavlov, "Teplo. Vsyo. Temp," Vol 8, No. 4, p 833, 1970.
● R. Vachon, "Evaluation of Constants for the Rohsenow Pool Boiling Correlation," Nat'l Heat
Transfer Conf, Seattle, August 1967.
● L.K. Wu, "A Theoretical Model for the Minimum Film Boiling Point," PhD Thesis, University of
Wisconsin-Madison, 1987.
● N. Zuber, "On the Stability of Boiling Heat Transfer," Trans ASME, Vol 80, P 711, 1958.
Next: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Up: POOL BOILING Previous: Pool Boiling Critical Heat
6.1. Objectives
6.2. Regions of Heat Transfer
6.3. Single-Phase Liquid Heat Transfer
6.4. The Onset of Nucleate Boiling
6.5. Subcooled Boiling
6.6. Saturated Boiling and the Two-Phase Forced Convection Region
Next: Regions of Heat Transfer Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous: FLOW BOILING
HEAT TRANSFER
6.1. Objectives
One of the many applications of multiphase heat-transfer is to be able to predict the temperature of the
wall of a boiling surface for a given heat flux or the variation of wall heat flux for a known wall
temperature distribution. In this section we focus on the methodology to estimate the wall temperature or
the wall heat flux depending on the appropriate boundary condition. We focus on describing the regions
of heat transfer, locating the onset of nucleate boiling and finally estimating the wall condition.
Next: Single-Phase Liquid Heat Transfer Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous:
Objectives
The transition between regions B and C, the subcooled nucleate boiling region and the saturated nucleate
boiling region, is clearly defined from the thermodynamic viewpoint. It is the point at which the liquid
reaches the saturation temperature (thermodynamic equilibrium quality, = 0) found on the basis of a
simple energy balance calculation. Vapor generated in the subcooled region is present at the transition
between regions B and C ( = 0); thus, some of the liquid must be subcooled to ensure that the liquid
bulk (mixing cup) enthalpy equals that of saturated liquid. This effect occurs as a result of the transverse
temperature profile in the liquid and the subcooled liquid flowing in the center of the channel will only
reach the saturation temperature at some distance downstream of the point, = 0. In the regions C to G,
a variable characterizing the heat transfer mechanism is the thermodynamic mass "quality" ( ) of the
fluid. The "quality" of the liquid-vapor mixture at a distance, z, is given on a thermodynamic basis as:
As the quality increases in the saturated nucleate boiling region a point may be reached where transition
in the heat transfer mechanism occurs. The transition occurs between the process of "boiling" and the
process of "evaporation". This transition is preceded by a change in the flow pattern from bubbly or slug
flow to annular flow (regions E and F). In the latter regions the thickness of the thin liquid film on the
heating surface is often such that the effective thermal conductivity is sufficient to prevent the liquid in
contact with the wall being superheated to a temperature which would allow bubble nucleation. Heat is
carried away from the wall by forced convection in the film to the liquid film-vapor core interface, where
evaporation occurs. Since nucleation may be completely suppressed, the heat transfer process may no
longer be called "boiling". The region beyond the transition has been referred to as the two-phase forced
convective region of heat transfer (Regions E and F).
For the example described above the critical heat flux condition occurs at some critical value of the
quality, where the complete evaporation of the liquid film occurs. This particular CHF transition is
known as "dryout" and is accompanied by a rise in the wall temperature for channels operating with a
controlled surface heat flux. The area between the dryout point and the transition to saturated vapor
(Region H) has been termed the liquid deficient region (corresponding to the drop flow pattern) (Region
G), where post-CHF heat transfer occurs. This condition of "dryout" often puts an effective limit on the
amount of evaporation which can be allowed to take place in a channel at a particular heat flux.
It is also useful to qualitatively describe the progressive variation of the local wall surface temperature
(or local heat transfer coefficient) along the length of the tube for this prescribed heat flux boundary
condition. The local heat transfer coefficient can be established by dividing the surface heat flux
(constant over the tube length) by the difference between the wall temperature and the bulk fluid
temperature. Typical variations of these two temperatures with length along the tube are shown in Figure
6.1. The variation of heat transfer coefficient with length along the tube for the conditions represented in
Figure 6.1, is given in Figure 6.2 (curve(i), solid line). In the single-phase convective heat transfer
region, the wall temperature is displaced above the bulk fluid temperature by a relatively constant
amount, (the heat transfer coefficient is approximately constant) and is modified only slightly by the
influence of temperature on the liquid physical properties. In the subcooled nucleate boiling region the
temperature difference between the wall and the bulk fluid decreases linearly with length up to the point
where x = 0. The heat transfer coefficient, therefore, increases linearly with length in this region. In the
saturated nucleate boiling region the temperature difference and, therefore, the heat transfer coefficient,
remains constant. Because of the reduced thickness of the liquid film in the two-phase forced convective
region the difference in temperature between the surface and the saturation temperature decreases and the
heat transfer coefficient increases with increasing length or mass quality. At the CHF point the heat
transfer coefficient decreases dramatically from a very high value in the forced convective region in a
value near to that expected for heat transfer by forced convection in saturated steam. As the quality
increases through the liquid deficient region, so the vapor velocity increases and the difference in
temperature between the surface and the saturation value decreases with a corresponding rise in the heat
transfer coefficient. Finally, in the single-phase vapor region ( ) the wall temperature is once
again displaced by a constant amount above the bulk fluid temperature and the heat transfer coefficient
levels out to that corresponding to convective heat transfer of a single-phase vapor flow.
Now consider the other boundary condition of a vertical tube heated by a uniformly constant temperature
along its length with an inlet subcooled liquid flow. The situation once again will cause the entering
liquid to 1) nucleate on the heated wall, 2) reach saturation at some downstream axial location, and 3)
begin bulk boiling. The difference in this case is that the heat flux will vary along the channel, although
the overall multiphase flow regimes would the same (Figure 6.3). The realistic situation may become
more complex for a horizontal flow orientation or for the heating surface becoming non-uniformly heated
or with rod bundles. Nevertheless, the general methodology does not change. Throughout our discussion
here we focus on an approximately one-dimensional flow orientation.
The above comments have been restricted to the case of a relatively low uniform heat flux supplied to the
tube wall. The effect of progressively increasing the surface heat flux while keeping the inlet flow-rate
constant, can now be considered with reference to Figures 6.2a and 6.2b. Figures 6.2a shows the heat
transfer coefficient plotted against mass quality with increasing heat flux as a parameter (curves (i,ii)).
6.2b shows the various regions of two-phase heat transfer in forced convective boiling on a
three-dimensional diagram with heat flux, mass quality and temperature as co-ordinates-"the boiling
surface," Curve (i) relates to the conditions shown in Figure 6.1 for a low heat flux being supplied to the
walls of a tube. The temperature pattern shown in Figure 6.1 will be recognized as the projection
(temperature-quality co-ordinates) of curve (i). Curve (ii) shows the influence of increasing the heat flux.
Subcooled boiling is initiated sooner, the heat transfer coefficient in the nucleate boiling region is higher
but is unaffected in the two-phase forced convective region. Dryout CHF occurs at a lower mass quality.
Curve (iii) shows the influence of a further increase in the heat flux. Subcooled boiling is initiated earlier
and the heat transfer is again higher in the nucleate boiling region. As mass quality increases, before the
two-phase forced convective region is initiated, and while bubble nucleation is still occurring, a large
reduction in the cooling process takes place. This transition is essentially similar to the critical heat flux
phenomenon in saturated pool boiling and has been termed "departure from nucleate boiling" (DNB).
Next: Single-Phase Liquid Heat Transfer Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous:
Objectives
Next: The Onset of Nucleate Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Regions of Heat
Transfer
and where q;SPMquot; is the heat flux, Per is the heated perimeter, G is the mass velocity, A is the flow
area and is the liquid specific heat. Also is the temperature difference between the wall surface
and the mean bulk liquid temperature at a given length z from the tube inlet, h is the heat transfer
coefficient to single-phase liquid under forced convection. The liquid in the channel may be in laminar or
turbulent flow, in either case the laws governing the heat transfer are well established; for example, heat
transfer in turbulent flow in a circular tube can be estimated by the well-known Dittus-Boelter equation.
This relation is valid for heating in fully developed vertical upflow in z/D > 50 and Re > 10,000.
where is the hydraulic diameter, is the liquid viscosity and is the liquid thermal conductivity.
For the case of a given constant wall temperature, the temperature difference will decrease, as well as the
heat flux. From an energy balance this is represented by a logarithmic decrease in the temperature
difference.
Next: Subcooled Boiling Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Single-Phase Liquid
Heat Transfer
We can arrange this energy balance to emphasize the necessary superheat above saturation for the onset
of nucleate boiling
Now that we have a relation between and we must provide a stability model for the onset of
nucleate boiling. In a manner similar to the pool boiling situation one can formulate this model based on
the metastable condition of the vapor nuclei ready to grow into the world. There are a number of
correlation models for this stability line of . Using this approach, Bergles and Rohsenow (1964)
obtained an equation for the wall superheat required for the onset of subcooled boiling. Their equation is
valid for water only, given by
where q;SPMquot; is the surface heat flux in and p is the system pressure in bar. An alternative
expression by Davis and Anderson (1966) valid for all fluids is:
where is the liquid-vapor surface tension, Equations (10) and (11) are in good agreement with each
other for the case of high pressure water flows. Frost and Dzakowic (1967) have extended this treatment
to cover other liquids. In their study nucleation was assumed to occur when the liquid temperature, T (y)
was matched to the temperature for bubble equilibrium, , at a distance where rather
We would recommend this final general expression to be used with the energy balance to determine
and for a specified uniform heat flux. In the case of a known wall temperature one can find
the heat flux at the onset of nucleate boiling as well as its corresponding location.
Next: Subcooled Boiling Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Single-Phase Liquid
Heat Transfer
Next: Saturated Boiling and the Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous: The Onset of
Nucleate
There are two ways to handle this region. Consider the boundary condition of a uniform heat flux on the
heater surface. First, for conditions where this is a small actual length relative to the total heater wall
axial length, one may neglect this length and its effect on heat transfer and pressure drop. If the
subcooled boiling length is appreciable relative to the total heater wall length, then we need to locate the
point where the vapor bubbles detach and boiling bubbles are stable in the flow as well as the associated
vapor mass fraction and void fraction in this subcooled region.
Figure 6.5 depicts the order of magnitude of the vapor void fraction and mass fraction for a steam-water
system, as well as lists the various models available for estimating values for this region. The typical
approach is to determine the amount of vapor superheat necessary to support the vapor
bubble departure from the heater wall surface (Point B on Figure 6.4). Once this is determined one can
find the axial location where this would occur. From this point on one can then calculate the vapor void
fraction and mass fraction in the channel.
As Figure 6.5 indicates there are only a few complete models developed for the subcooled region. In
these notes we focus on the models developed by Levy (1967) and Zuber (1968) based on relatively good
agreement with published data, and the relative ease in applying the subcooled boiling model. These
models, although developed and checked with primarily steam-water data, can be applied to other fluids.
The first objective is to determine the amount of superheat necessary to allow vapor bubble
departure and then the axial location where this would occur. A force balance was used by Levy (1967)
and Staub (1967) to estimate the degree of superheat necessary for bubble departure.
where is the radius of vapor bubble at departure, and where the first term represents the buoyancy
force (destabilizing force), the second term represents the drag force (destabilizing force), and final force
term is due to surface tension (stabilizing force); where , and are proportionality constants. In
this conceptual model the bubble radius , is assumed to be proportional to the distance to the tip of the
vapor bubble, , away from the heated wall. One can then calculate this distance
where the constant is based on empirical data and the buoyancy force was found to be negligible. Levy's
fundamental assumption was that the temperature at the tip of bubble, with size , should be at least
the saturation temperature, . This superheat temperature, , was then found by using the
universal temperature profile relation between and .
Now using the local energy balance one can relate the local bulk temperature, , to the superheat
temperature difference at location B,
Then the energy balance along the length of the channel can be used to find the axial location of bubble
departure, ,
The final term in the Levy model for and to determine is tw given by
where the single phase friction factor is used for this estimate. Zuber proposed an empirical relation to
determine given by
Once the location of vapor bubble departure is determined, one then knows the subcooled boiling region
and the total subcooled boiling length; onset of nucleate boiling ( Point A, Figure 6.4), vapor bubble
departure, ( , Point B) and saturated boiling point ( , Point C). The next step is to model the
axial variation in quality and void fraction. Levy used an semi-empirical approach to estimate the
non-equilibrium variation in void and quality. It was assumed that the "true" mass fraction, x(z), is related
to the thermodynamic equilibrium quality, , by the relationship
where is the thermodynamic equilibrium quality at the point of bubble departure (Point B of
Fig. 6.4), given by Eqn (6.1). This simple empirical relationship satisfies the following physical
boundary conditions:
1. as then X' = 0 as well as ;
2. at point B is also 0:
3. for .
where is the one-dimensional average inlet velocity of the liquid, Co is the drift flux distribution
parameter ( 1.1 chosen by Levy), and is the drift velocity given by
One should note that since the void in subcooled boiling is near the wall, the common concept of Co is
questionable for this application.
Zuber took a similar approach in which an axial liquid temperature distribution was arbitrarily chosen
between the point of zero void fraction, , and the point where the non-equilibrium effects become
negligible, (Point D). Based on the logic presented previously one could take (Point A) and
(Point B). The "true" quality is given by
Zuber also used the drift flux model to predict the void fraction and used a constant of 1.41 instead of
1.18 in expression for drift velocity.
Either model gives a complete estimate of the subcooled boiling region for location, quality and void.
With this description one can then calculate the two-phase pressure drop in the subcooled region and
modify the single phase heat transfer coefficient in the energy balance (Eqns. 6.2 - 6.4) to determine the
wall temperature given the heat flux. In the following section we discuss how to do this with the
two-phase heat transfer coefficient. The treatments of Levy and Zuber fit the experimental data
reasonably, and both can be applied to other fluids than water.
Next: Saturated Boiling and the Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous: The Onset of
Nucleate
Next: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous:
Subcooled Boiling
Following the suggestion of Martinelli, many workers have correlated their experimental results for heat
transfer rates in the two-phase forced convection region in the form:
where (and ) is the value of the single-phase liquid heat transfer coefficient based on the total (or
liquid component) flow and is the Martinelli parameter for turbulent-turbulent flow. A number of
relationships of the form of this equation have been proposed and have been extended to cover the
saturated nucleate boiling region. These correlations do, however, have a high mean error ( 30 Chen
(1966) has proposed a correlation which has been generally accepted as one of the best available. The
correlation covers both the saturated nucleate boiling region and the two-phase forced convection region.
It is assumed that both nucleation and convective mechanisms occur to some degree over the entire range
of the correlation and that the contributions made by the two mechanisms are additive:
where is the contribution from nucleate boiling and the contribution from convection through the
liquid film. An earlier, very similar approach which has been used successfully for design in the process
The parameter F is a function of the Martinelli parameter, (Figure 6.6). The equation of Forster and
Zuber (1974), was taken as the basis for the evaluation of the "nucleate boiling" component, . Their
pool boiling analysis was modified to account for the thinner boundary layer in forced convective boiling
and the lower effective superheat that the growing vapor bubble sees. The modified Forster-Zuber
equation becomes:
where S is a suppression factor defined as the ratio of the mean superheat seen by the growing bubble to
the wall superheat is represented as a function of the local two-phase Reynolds number
(Figure 6.7).
Curve fits to the functions shown in these figures and F and S respectively are:
This correlation fits the available experimental data remarkably well (with a standard deviation of 11 To
calculate the heat transfer coefficient , for a known heat flux (q), mass velocity and quality the
proposed steps are as follows:
1. calculate which is given by:
The correlation developed by Chen is the best available for the saturated forced convective boiling region
in vertical ducts and is recommended for use with all single component non-metallic fluids.
The final point to emphasize with the Chen correlation is that it can be used over the whole region of
saturated nucleate boiling and two-phase forced convection. In fact because it has the proper asymptotic
limits as X approaches zero or one, one can extend its use into the subcooled boiling region with X'
substituted for . In this way the original energy balance for the one-dimensional flow in the channel can
be consistently used from subcooled single phase heat transfer to saturated nucleate boiling and two-phase
forced convection. Consistency in the predictive methodology is a key benefit of such an approach.
References
● A.E. Bergles and W.M.Rohsenow, "The Determination of Forces Convection Surface Boiling Heat
Transfer," Trans. ASME, J. of Heat Transfer, 86c, 365 , 1964.
● E.J. Davis and G.H. Anderson, "The Incipience of Nucleate Boiling in Forced Convection Flow,"
AIChE Journal, 12 (4), 774-780, 1966.
● W. Frost and G.S. Dzakowic, "An Extension of the Method of Predicting Incipient Boiling on
Commercially Finished Surfaces." Paper presented at ASME AIChE Heat Transfer Conf. Paper
67-HT-61, Seattle, 1967.
● W.M. Rohsenow, "A Method of Correlating Heat Transfer Data for Surface Boiling of Liquids,"
Trans. ASME, 74,969, 1952.
● W.M. Rohsenow and J.A. Clark, "Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop Data for High Heat Flux
Densities to Water at High Sub-critical Pressure," Heat Transfer and Fluid Mechanics Institute,
Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1951.
● F.Kreith and M. Summerfield, "Heat Transfer to Water and High Flux Densities With and Without
Surface Boiling." Trans. ASME, 71(7), 805-815, 1949.
● E.L Piret and H.S. Isbin, "Two-Phase Heat Transfer in Natural Circulation Evaporators," A.I.Ch.E.
Heat Transfer Symposium, St. Louis, Chem, Engng, Prog. Symp. Series, 50(6), 305, 1953.
● W.M. Rohsenow, "Heat Transfer With Evaporation," Heat Transfer. A symposium held at the
University of Michigan during the summer of 1952. Published by University of Michigan Press,
101-150, 1952.
● R.W. Bowring, "Physical Model Based on Bubble Detachment and Calculation of Steam Voidage in
the Subcooled Region of a Heated Channel," OECD Halden Reactor Project Report. HPR-10, 1962.
● J.G. Collier, "Convective Boiling and Condensation." Published by McGraw Hill Book Co. (UK)
Ltd, 1972.
● J.C. Chen, "Correlation for Boiling Heat Transfer to Saturated Liquids in Convective Flow." Int.
Eng. Chem. Process Design and Development, 5,322, 1966.
● J.R. Fair, "What You Need to Design Thermosyphon Reboilers," Petroleum Refiner. 39(2),
105-124, 1960.
● P. Foster and N. Zuber, "Point of Vapor Generation and Vapor Void Fraction." 5th Int. Heat
Transfer Conf, 1974.
● P. Griffith, J.A. Clark and W.M. Rohsenow, "Void Volumes in Subcooled Boiling Systems'. Paper
58-HT-19", ASME-AIChE Heat Transfer Conference, Chicago, August 1958; also Technical Report
No. 12 (MIT).
● R.W. Bowring, "Physical Model Based on Bubble Detachment and Calculation of Steam Voidage in
the Subcooled Region of a Heated Channel." OECD Halden Reactor Project Report HPR-10, 1962.
● F.W. Staub, "The Void Fraction in Subcooled Boiling-Prediction of the Initial Point of Net Vapour
Generation." Paper presented at the 9th National Heat Transfer Conference, Seattle, preprint,
ASME 67-HT-36, Aug. 1967.
● S. Levy, "Forced Convection Subcooled Boiling Prediction of Vapour Volumetric Fraction." Int. J.
Heat Mass Transfer, 10, 951-965, 1967.
● P.G. Kroeger and N. Zuber, "An Analysis of the Effects of Various Parameters on the Average Void
Fractions in Subcooled Boiling," Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 11, 211-233, 1968.
● J.R.S. Thom, W.W. Walker, T.A. Fallon and G.F.S. Reising, "Boiling in Subcooled Water During
Flow up Heated Tubes or Annuli." Paper 6 presented at the Symposium on Boiling Heat Transfer in
Steam Generating Units and Heat Exchangers held by Inst. Mech. Engrs. Manchester (England)
15-16, Sept. 1965.
Next: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Up: FLOW BOILING HEAT TRANSFER Previous:
Subcooled Boiling
Next: Introduction and Objectives Up: No Title Previous: Saturated Boiling and the
Next: Effect of System Parameters Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: BURNOUT AND
THE CRITICAL
Next: Correlation Methods for CHF Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Introduction and
Objectives
(2) By making the outer channel wall transparent, it is sometimes possible to view the processes
occurring on the inner (heated) surface, illustrating the CHF mechanism.
Most of the data obtained have been for the case where the inner surface is heated. However, more
recently, data has appeared where both surfaces are heated and the fraction of the power input to, say, the
outer surface is varied. Typical of this latter data is that of Jensen and Mannov (1974), some of which is
illustrated in Figure 7.3. For a fixed inlet subcooling, the critical quality (quality at burnout) initially
increases as the fraction of power on the outer surface is increased. In this region, CHF occurs first on the
inner surface. As the fraction of power on the outer surface is further increased, a maximum burnout
quality is reached, and beyond this point burnout begins to occur first on the outer surface and the critical
quality decreases with increasing fractional power on that surface.
Next: Correlation Methods for CHF Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Introduction and
Objectives
Next: Limits on the Critical Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Effect of System
Parameters
which is equivalent to
where is the hydraulic diameter, G the mass flux, the latent heat of evaporation, the local
thermodynamic quality and q" the heat flux. If the critical heat flux is related to the quality of CHF by the
expression:
for the given hydraulic diameter and mass flux, it follows, therefore, that:
The vast majority of correlations for critical heat flux fall into either of these two categories. Although
these correlations are equivalent for uniformly heated channels, they give quite different results when the
heat flux is nonuniform. The question obviously arises as to which of the two forms is best suited to the
prediction of CHF with nonuniform heating, the case which occurs most often in practical applications.
Figure 7.5 shows a comparison between data for uniform heating and a nonuniform axial (cosine
distribution) heating where local values of CHF and CHF quality are given by Alekseev (1964). As will
be seen later, there is a considerable difference in critical heat flux at a given local quality for the uniform
and nonuniform heated tubes respectively. Note that, with the nonuniform heating, CHF could occur first
upstream of the end of the channel. Remember that this is only an example of nonuniform heating in the
axial direction. One may also have circumferential variation of the flux or variable flux within a rod
bundle. These must also be handled based on empirical data.
Next: Limits on the Critical Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Effect of System
Parameters
Next: Mechanisms of Critical Heat Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Correlation
Methods for CHF
where h is the single phase heat transfer coefficient. If we set the wall temperature equal to the fluid
saturation pressure we find the minimum critical heat flux for any axial location in the uniformly heated
channel, given by
The upper bound on the critical heat flux is that uniform heat flux which would cause the fluid to
completely evaporate . Once again we can use the one-dimensional energy balance for the fluid
and set the thermodynamic equilibrium quality to one and solve for the maximum CHF for a given axial
location
One can conceptually visualize these two bounds on the critical heat flux by looking at their variation as
a function of the axial location in the channel and the inlet subcooling when one computes the critical
heat flux from correlation for uniform heating it should be within these bounds (Figure 7.6).
Next: Prediction of CHF in Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Limits on the Critical
down the channel wall due to gravity as vapor, produced along its length, flows upward (Figure 7.9). In
this situation one holds up the liquid flow into the whole channel due to the production of vapor along
the whole channel length. This liquid holdup can be likened to a flooding phenomenon at the entrance of
the channel causing film dryout lower in the channel. Oscillatory behavior of the CHF dryout may also
occur in this situation.
Next: Prediction of CHF in Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Limits on the Critical
Next: Correlations for CHF With Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Mechanisms of
Critical Heat
Next: Correlations for CHF With Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Mechanisms of
Critical Heat
Next: CHF With a Nonuniform Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Prediction of CHF in
Next: Correlation of Burnout for Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Correlations for
CHF With
where is the distance from the channel inlet to the point at which the burnout flux is being
predicted and is given by the empirical expression:
where G is in .
Nonuniform heating experiments have been investigated in the past, primarily for axial variation of the
heat flux. Each of these studies have resulted in an empirical correlation for CHF with nonuniform
heating. The basic assumption in directly correlating the CHF data from such tests is that one correlates
the CHF values for the actual local conditions (e.g., G, , P). Kirby (1966) used some of the past data
and more recent data from Harwell to develop such a correlation (Table 7.2). This is suggested for the
conditions listed for nonuniform axial heating situations as an alternative for the F-factor.
Table 7.2. Kirby Correlation for Non-Uniformly Heated Round Tubes
CorrelationEquation
Next: CHF Estimates for Nonaqueous Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: CHF With a
Nonuniform
Next: Observations Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: Correlation of Burnout for
where
From such a set of groupings comes a suggested dimensionless form for the critical heat flux
One should be cautious in applying these estimates particularly if data is limited to check the predictions
under particular conditions.
Next: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: CHF
Estimates for Nonaqueous
7.11. Observations
We have presented a summary of CHF with an emphasis on the fundamental mechanisms of CHF. It is
important to remember that one must use empirical correlations only within their range of applicability,
and if correlations do not exist to use available data in a manner suggested to develop the engineering
correlations. One area which has little data to support development is transient critical heat flux (e.g.,
Moxon and Edwards (1967)). The general observation from this limited data is that under transient
conditions tends to be larger than CHF under similar steady-state conditions. It is therefore recommended
that consideration of CHF being exceeded under transients (flow or power) be based on local conditions
and employing appropriate steady state correlations.
References
● G.V. Alekseev, "Burnout Heat Fluxes Under Forced Flow," Proc. of Third Int'l Conference on
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, Geneva, August 1964.
● F. Biancone, et al., "Forced Convection Burnout and Hydrodynamic Instability Experiments for
Water at High Pressure Pt. I." EUR 2490e, 1965.
● R.W. Bowring, "A Simple But Accurate Round Tube, Uniform Heat Flux, Dryout Correlation
Over the Pressure Range 0.7-17 MN/M2." AEEW-R789, 1972.
● J.E.Casterline, "Burnout in Long Vertical Tubes With Uniform and Casine Heating Using Water at
1000 Psia," Topical Rep No. 1. Task XVI Columbia University 1964 (TID 2103) also Topical Rep
No. 5 , "Second Experimental Study of Dryout in a Long Vertical Tube With a Cosine Heat Flux."
● J.G. Collier, "Convective Boiling and Condensation," McGraw Hill Publishers, NY, 1972.
● M.P. Fiori and A.E. Bergles, "Model of Critical Heat Flux in Sub-Cooled Flow Boiling." MIT
Report - DSR70281-56, 1968.
● G.P. Gaspari, A. Hassid and F. Lucchini, "A Rod Centered Sub-channel Analysis With Turbulent
(enthalpy) Mixing for Critical Heat Flux Prediction in Rod Clusters Cooled by Boiling Water."
Proc. 5th Int Heat Transfer Conf., 4, 295-299, 1974.
● A.Jensen and G. Mannov, "Measurements of Burnout, Film Flow Film," 1974.
● G.J.Kirby, "A New Correlation of Non-Uniformly Heated Round Tube Burnout Data."
AEEW-R500, 1966.
● J.F. Kirby, R. Staniforth and L.H. Kinneir, "A Visual Study of Forced Convective Boiling." Part
II: Flow Patterns and Burnout for a Round Test Section," AEEW-R506, 1967.
● D.H. Lee and J.D. Obertelli, "An Experimental Investigation of Forced Convection Burnout in
High Pressure Water - Pt. II." AEEW-R309, 1963.
● D.H. Lee, "An Experimental Investigation of Forced Convection Burnout in High Pressure Water -
Pt. III," AEEW-R355 , 1965.
● D.H.Lee, "An Experimental Investigation of Forced Convection Burnout in High Pressure Water -
Pt. IV." AEEW-R479, 1966.
● J.H.Lienhard and R. Eichhorn, "Peak Boiling Heat Flux on Cylinders in a Cross Flow." Int J Heat
Mass Transfer, 19, No. 20, 1135-1141, 1976.
● D. Moxon and P.A.Edwards, "Dry Out During Flow and Power Transients." AEEW-R553, 1967.
● G.F. Stevens and G.J. Kirby, "A Quantitative Comparison Between Burnout Data for Water at
1000 lb/ and Freon 12 at 155 lb/ (abs) and by Water at 1000 lb/ in Vertical Upflow."
AEEW-R327, 1964.
● G.F. Stevens and R.W. Wood, "A Comparison Between Burnout Data for 19 Rod-Cluster Test
Sections Cooled by Freon 12 at 155 lb/ (abs) and by Water at 1000 lb/ in Vertical Upflow."
AEEW-R468, 1966.
● H.S. Swenson, R.J. Carver and C.R.Kakarala, "The Influence of Axial Heat Flux Distribution on
the Departure From Nucleate Boiling in a Water-Cooled Tube." Paper presented to the Winter
Annual Meeting of the ASME, Nov 1962, New York. Paper 62-WA-297, 1962.
● H.S. Swenson, et al., "Non-Uniform Heat Generation Experimental Programme." QPR Nos. 4, 5,
6, 7 and 8, BAW-3238, 1964.
● N.E Todreas and W.M. Rohsenow, "The Effect of Non-Uniform Axial Heat Flux Distribution,"
M.I.T.-9843-37; see also paper to 1966 Int. Heat Transfer Conf., Chicago, paper 89, 1965.
● L.S. Tong and G.F. Hewitt, "Overall View Point of Film Boiling CHF Mechanisms," ASME Paper
No. 72-HT-54, 1972.
● L.S. Tong, H.B. Currin and T.S. Larsen, "Influences of Axially Non-Uniform Heat Flux on DNB."
WCAP-2767. Published in CEP Symp Ser, 62 (64), 1966.
Next: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Up: BURNOUT AND THE CRITICAL Previous: CHF
Estimates for Nonaqueous
Next: Post-CHF Heat Transfer Models Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: POST-CHF
HEAT TRANSFER
Next: Empirical Correlations Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Introduction and
Objectives
Next: Non-Equilibrium Empirical Models Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Post-CHF
Heat Transfer Models
and the coefficients a, b, c and d are given in Table 8.1, together with the ranges of independent variables
on which the correlations are based.
Next: Semi-Theoretical Models Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Empirical Correlations
Consider the case of a constant heat flux. Now in this non-equilibrium approach we assume that the heat
flux can be divided into two portions; one directly heating the vapor, q"g , and one directly into the
liquid, q"f , causing it to evaporate.
where we define e as
and it is assumed for simplicity that e = f(Z). If we realistically consider the temperature difference of
and , then one must realize that e is actually a function of position; for a constant e we get
Now from a one-dimensional energy balance on the channel the thermodynamic quality is given by
Now we can use the same energy balance method to find X'(z)
where once again we only use the portion of the total heat flux which goes into evaporation. The location
where X'(Z) = 1 is defined as and is given by
where we can correlate e based on measurements of these quantities. Once we have a correlation for e we
can derive an expression for the heat transfer coefficient from it definition. Note that the heat transfer
coefficient would be different between the wall-vapor and wall-liquid. Groeneveld has suggested such a
correlation for e given by
This approach is not necessarily recommended compared to others, because although it includes some
degree of realism it still remains quite empirical for the key variable.
Next: Semi-Theoretical Models Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Empirical Correlations
Next: Transition Boiling Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Non-Equilibrium Empirical
Models
for the liquid then heat will be transferred, first by conduction until a temperature boundary layer is built
up sufficiently to satisfy the conditions necessary for bubble nucleation. Bubbles will grow within the
droplet Rao (1974) ejecting part of the liquid back into the vapor stream. The remaining liquid is
insufficient in thickness to support nucleation and therefore, remains until it is totally evaporated. The
surface heat flux transfered by this mechanism can be arrived at by estimating the product of the heat
transferred to a single drop and the number of droplets per unit time and per unit area which strike the
wall. Iloeje et al., attempted to quantify the various mechanisms identified above and finally arrive at a
somewhat complex expression for the droplet-wall contact heat flux ( ).
The droplet mass flux to the wall can be estimated from one of a number of turbulent deposition models
Hutchinson (1971). It is important to appreciate that at very low values of the heat flux (
) predicted from the Iloeje model must coincide with the droplet deposition flux contribution of the
Hewitt film flow model of critical heat flux. The trends with vapor quality and mass velocity appear
qualitatively correct but a rigorous quantitative comparison with, for example, the prediction of Whalley
et al., (1973) is needed for a range of working fluids.
Two basic approaches have been taken to estimate the heat flux ( ) to droplets entering the thermal
boundary layer but which do not touch the wall. This heat flux can be estimated as the product of the heat
flux that would occur across a vapor film separating the droplet from the heating surface and the
fractional area covered by such droplets. This approach has been adopted with slight modifications by
Iloeje (1974), Groenveld (1974), Plummer (1974) and Course (1974). All of these approaches follow the
original treatment by Bennett. Thus, one should begin here for such a theoretical approach.
Next: Transition Boiling Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Non-Equilibrium Empirical
Models
Next: Transition to Film Boiling Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Semi-Theoretical
Models
This, in turn, was revised to cover both transition and film boiling regions
This equation was derived from 1442 data covering a pressure of 1000 psia, G from 0.28x106 to
3.86x106 lb/hr.ft2 and = from 65 to 985°F. A similar but separate equation was
proposed for low pressure situations.
Next: CONDENSATION Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Transition to Film Boiling
8.8. Observations
The post-CHF heat transfer regime has been summarized with three different approaches to estimate the
heat transfer coefficient. We would recommend the empirical equilibrium or non-equilibrium approach
for an estimate of post-CHF heat transfer rates. However, if the wall temperature and degree of superheat
(or heat flux for the other boundary condition) are of crucial importance of semi-theoretical approach
might be considered for detail analysis. This latter recommendation will require new data for specific
geometries to determine the droplet-gas and droplet-wall heat transfer rates accurately.
References
● H. Amm and G. Ulrych, "Comparison of Measured Heat Transfer Coefficients During Reflooding
a 340-rod Bundle and Those Calculated From Current Heat Transfer Correlations." Paper E7,
European Two-Phase Flow Meeting, Harwell, 1974.
● A.W. Bennett, "Heat Transfer to Mixtures of High Pressure Steam and Water in an Annulus."
AERE-R4352, 1964.
● R.G. Bressler, "A Review of Physical Models and Heat Transfer Correlations for Free Convection
Film Boiling." Adv Cryogenic Engr, 17, 382-406, 1972.
● L.D. Clements and C.P. Colver, "Natural Convection Film Boiling Heat Transfer," Indstr. Engr
Chem 62(9), 26-46, 1970.
● A.F. Course and H.A. Roberts, "Progress With Heat Transfer to a Steam Film in the Presence of
Water Drops - a First Evaluation of Winfrith SGHWR Cluster Loop Data," AEEW-M1212. Paper
presented at European Two-Phase Flow Group Meeting, Harwell, 1974.
● G.C. Gardner, "Evaporation and Thermophertic Motion of Water Drops Containing Salt in a High
Pressure Steam Environment." Paper presented at European Two-Phase Flow Conference,
Harwell, England, 1974.
● E.M. Greitzer and F.H. Abernathy, "Film Boiling on Vertical Surfaces." Int J Heat Mass Transfer,
15, 475-491, 1972.
● D.C. Groeneveld, "Effect of a Heat Flux Spike on the Downstream Dryout Behaviour," J of Heat
Transfer, 121-125, 1974.
● D.C. Groenveld, "Post-Dryout Heat Transfer at Reactor Operating Conditions." AECL-4513.
Paper presented at the Nat Topical Meeting on Water Reactor Safety, ANS, Salt Lake City UT,
1973.
● Y.Y. Hsu, "Review of Film Boiling,"Adv in Cryogenic Engr 17, 361-381, 1972.
● P. Hutchinson, G.F Hewitt and A.E. Dukler, Chem Eng Sci 26, 419, 1971.
● O.C. Iloje, D.N Plummer, W.M. Rohsenow, P. Griffith, "A Study of Wall Rewet and Heat
Transfer in Dispersed Vertical Flow."MIT Dept of Mech Engr Report , 72718-92,1974.
● D.N. Plummer, O.C. Iloeje, W.M. Rohsenow, P. Griffith and E. Ganic, "Post Critical Heat
Transfer to Flowing Liquid in a Vertical Tube." MIT Dept of Mech Engr Report 72718-91, 1974.
● P.S. Rao and P.K. Sarma, "Partial Evaporation Rates of Liquid Particles on a Hot Plate Under Film
Boiling Conditions," Con J of Chem Engr, 52 (3), 415-419, 1974.
● L.S. Tong, "Film Boiling Heat Transfer at Low Quality of Subcooled Region." Proceedings 2nd
Joint USAEC-EURATOM Two-Phase Flow Meeting, Germantown. Report CONF-640507, p 63,
1974.
● G.B. Wallis and J.G. Collier "Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer." Notes for a Summer Course,
July 15-26, Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA. III, 33-46,
1968.
● P.B Whalley, P. Hutchinson and G.F. Hewitt, "The Calculation of Critical Heat Flux in Forced
Convection Boiling," AERE-R7520, 1973.
Next: CONDENSATION Up: POST-CHF HEAT TRANSFER Previous: Transition to Film Boiling
9. CONDENSATION
Condensation phenomena occur in many industrial applications. In this section the focus is on the
determination of the condensation heat transfer coefficient and the overall energy balance is left to the
reader. There are two idealized models of condensation (i.e., filmwise and dropwise). The former occurs
on a cooled surface which is easily wetted. The vapor condenses in drops which grow by further
condensation and coalesce to form a film over the surface, if the surface-fluid combination is wettable; if
the surface is non-wetting rivulets of liquid flow away and new drops then begin to form. This review
and discussion will mainly deal with filmwise condensation. The phenomena of dropwise condensation
results in local heat transfer coefficients which are often an order of magnitude greater than those for
filmwise condensation. Even though condensation phenomena can be classified into these categories of
dropwise and film condensation the initial period of condensation would evolve into a film and probably
would not affect the overall pressure-temperature response unless drop condensation is promoted
(Slaughterbeck, 1970). Rates of heat transfer for film condensation can be predicted as a function of bulk
and surface temperatures, total bulk pressure, surface and liquid film characteristics, bulk velocity and
the presence of noncondensible gases. Even though film condensation has been investigated extensively,
the majority of these studies were devoted to laminar film condensation (laminar bulk flow and laminar
film). Since the vapor flow in heat exchange equipment may be turbulent, models and recent data are
also reviewed for the condensation flux with a turbulent mixture flow. A simple engineering correlation
or model is preferred many times for use in engineering design studies and with existing computer
system analyses (Schmitt, et al., 1970; Tagami, 1965).
Previous theoretical and experimental investigations are reviewed, in particular, the effects of the
presence of noncondensable gases and of the vapor velocity. These effects along with the effects of
geometry and scale are of major interest at this time. Because the flow regime for the condensation heat
transfer is well defined (stratified flow), the reader will find a much greater propensity for detailed
mathematical analyses for simple geometries. Condensation on a vertical or horizontal flat plate, which
can be extended to any arbitrary geometry, is the main focus of this discussion, because of its generality.
The detailed review for film condensation outside a tube can be found in the work of Lee (1982). The
usual modification is to replace the length scale, L, by tube diameter, D, with a slight change in the
proportionality constant. Table 1 is provided as a summary of the work on condensation at the present
time.
9.5. Observations
where R is the vapor gas constant and is the surface tension between the liquid and vapor. With the
local condition of mechanical equilibrium for the liquid droplet and its pressure, ,
One can also use the Clausius-Clapeyron relation to calculate for this simple situation the saturation
temperature, , of the droplet above the vapor temperature for maintaining this equilibrium
Analogous to boiling, the rate of nucleation of these liquid droplets depends on whether one considers
homogeneous nucleation or heterogeneous nucleation processes. For homogeneous nucleation the rate
expression, dn/dt, is quite similar to that for boiling,
where r* can be found either from Eq.2 or 3. The term, , is the number of vapor molecules per unit
volume and is a collision frequency for vapor collisions given by
where m is the mass of one vapor molecule. One should note that in a similar fashion to boiling this
nucleation rate is altered if it occurs on solid surfaces since the work required to form a critical size
nuclei (r*) is reduced due to wetting of the solid surface.
Now in reference to the more stable situations of a vapor condensing on a planar surface covered by its
own liquid one must consider the local mass transfer situation. Consider a pure saturated vapor at a
pressure, , and a temperature, , condensing on its own liquid phase whose surface temperature is
. The phenomenon of such an interface mass transfer can be viewed from the standpoint of kinetic theory
as a difference between two quantities; a rate of arrival of molecules from the vapor space towards the
interface and a rate of departure of molecules from the surface of the liquid into the vapor space. When
condensation takes place the arrival rate exceeds the departure rate. During evaporation the reverse
occurs, and during an equilibrium the two rates are equal and there is no net mass transfer.
From kinetic theory it can be shown that, in a stationary container of molecules, the mass rate of flow (of
molecules) passing in either direction (to right or left) through an imagined plane is given by
where = flux of molecules (mass per unit time per unit area) M =molecular weight R = universal gas
constant P and T = pressure and temperature related by the saturation line. Equation 7 is the starting point
for many theories of interfacial phase change.
In general it can be stated that the net molecular flux through an interface is the difference between these
fluxes in the directions from gas to liquid and vice-versa,
Since the condition close to the surface is not one of static thermal equilibrium, for any significant rate of
evaporation or condensation, it is really not meaningful to make use of the thermostatic pressure and
temperature on each side of the interface. Rather there is a concentration and therefore, a temperature
difference, , across this interface which drives the mass transfer. Strictly speaking one should solve
the Boltzman transport equation with appropriate boundary conditions and asymptotes which are
conditions of thermal equilibrium at several mean free path distances from the interface. However, some
considerable success for engineering purposes has been achieved by using simplified kinetic theory
techniques and applying correction factors to the resulting predictions of this mass transfer and the
associated temperature difference. In most practical situations the energy removal rate from this interface
controls the condensation rate. Only in the presence of noncondensable gases (continuum) or at low
pressure (non-continuum) is this temperature difference, , important to consider. We will investigate
the case of the presence of noncondensable gases during condensation; one can get a physical feeling of
the magnitude of this temperature difference.
One should note here that for a tube, L is replaced by the tube diameter, D, and 0.943 becomes 0.725.
This model had been extended to include the effects of Nusselt's assumptions. In particular, Bromley
(1952) considered the effects of subcooling within the liquid film and Rohsenow (1956) also allowed for
a non-linear distribution of temperature through the film due to energy convection. The results indicated
that the latent heat of vaporization, , in Eq. (9) should be replaced by
However, it should be noted that in most engineering applications, the value of is small (typically
less than 0.001) and can be neglected.
Sparrow and Gregg (1959) removed assumption (4) and included inertia forces and a convection term
within the condensate film by using a boundary layer treatment for the condensate film. For common
fluids with Prandtl numbers around and greater than unity, inertia effects are negligible for values of
less than 2.0 For liquid metals with very low Prandtl numbers, however, the heat transfer
coefficient falls below the Nusselt prediction with increasing when is greater than 0.001.
Poots and Miles (1967) have looked at the effect of variable physical properties (assumption 2) on
vertical plates. More recently Koh et al. (1961) and Chen (1961) included the influence of the drag
exerted by the vapor on the liquid film. Both results show that the interfacial shear stress can reduce heat
transfer due to the effect of "hold up" of the condensate film for low values of Pr, but this effect is small
and steadily decreases with increasing Pr for Prandtl number greater than unity.
As a conclusion for pure steam-water condensation (Pr ;SPMgt; 1), Nusselt's assumptions can be
accepted for a stationary vapor without noncondensable gas in practical engineering situations.
Moving Pure Vapor
The effects of vapor velocity and its associated drag on the condensate film have been found to be
significant in many practical problems. For the case of vapor flow parallel to a horizontal flat plate, Cess
(1960) presented uniform property boundary layer solutions, obtained by means of similarity
transformations by neglecting the inertia and energy convection effects within the condensate film and
assuming that the interfacial velocity was negligible in comparison with the free stream vapor velocity.
Shekriladze and Gomelauri (1966) simplified the problem and also considered the case of an isothermal
vertical plate with similar assumptions (1973). Mayhew et al. (1966, 1987) attempted to expand Nusselt's
simple approach to take account of vapor friction as well as momentum drag. South and Denny (1972)
proposed an interpolation formula for the interfacial shear stress in a simplified manner as Mayhew.
However, such an interpolation formula only led to a small difference in the heat transfer rate.
Jacobs (1966) used an integral method to solve the boundary layer by matching the mass flux, shear
stress, temperature and velocity at the interface. The inertia and convection terms in the boundary layer
equations of the liquid film were neglected. The variation of the physical properties and the thermal
resistance at the vapor-liquid interface were also neglected. Since Jacobs used an incorrect boundary
condition for the vapor boundary layer, Fujii and Uehara (1972) solved the same problem with the
correct boundary condition. In addition, the velocity profile in the vapor layer was taken as a quadratic.
They presented the numerical results and their approximate expressions for the cases of free convection,
forced convection, and mixed convection. The results show good agreement with numerical calculations
and with Cess' approximate solution (1960).
The current recommendation in this area is the model developed by this latter work as a best estimate.
One should be cautious as the Nusselt number increases because this implies a higher vapor and film
flow with accompanying film turbulence, not accounted for in these models. For design purposes the
recommendation is to use Nusselt laminar film model (Equ. 9.9), since it will predict a slightly lower
heat transfer coefficient, with a thicker condensate film.
Stationary Vapor with a Noncondensable Gas
A noncondensable gas can exist in a condensing environment and leads to a significant reduction in heat
transfer during condensation. A gas-vapor boundary layer (e.g., air-steam) forms next to the condensate
layer and the partial pressures of gas and vapor vary through the boundary layer as shown in Fig. 9.2.
The buildup of noncondensable gas near the condensate film inhibits the diffusion of the vapor from the
bulk mixture to the liquid film and reduces the rate of mass and energy transfer. Therefore, it is necessary
to solve simultaneously the conservation equations of mass, momentum and energy for both the
condensate film and the vapor-gas boundary layer together with the conservation of specied for the
vapor-gas layer. At the interface, a continuity condition of mass, momentum and energy has to be
satisfied.
For a stagnant vapor-gas mixture, Sparrow and Eckert (1961) and Sparrow and Lin (1964) solved the
mass, momentum and energy equations for laminar film condensation on an isothermal vertical plate by
using a similarity transformation. Sparrow and Eckert (1961) considered the notion of the vapor-gas
mixture from the downward motion of the condensate film, whereas Sparrow and Lin (1964) included
free convection arising from density differences associated with composition differences. These analyses
indicated that the condensing rate is dependent on the bulk gas mass fraction, the vapor-gas mixture
Schmidt number, and . The numerical calculations show that the effect of the
noncondensable gas increases with increasing Schmidt number and increasing value of . Since
free convection arises from both the temperature and the concentration difference in a boundary layer, it
is important when the vapor and the noncondensing gas have significantly different relative molecular
weights and that its importance increases with increasing bulk gas mass fraction and increasing values of
. Minkowycz and Sparrow (1965, 1966) also included free convection arising from
temperature differences. In addition, the effect of interfacial resistance, superheating, thermal diffusion
and property variation in the condensate film and in the vapor-gas mixture were considered and
concluded to be less important except for superheating.
To reduce the computation time, Rose (1969) presented an approximate integral boundary layer solution
assuming uniform properties except for density in the buoyancy term. Plausible velocity and
concentration profiles for the vapor-gas boundary layer were used and it was assumed that these two
layers had equal thickness. The results showed quite good agreement with those of Minkowycz and
Sparrow and this is recommended for use.
Moving Vapor with a Noncondensable Gas
For a laminar vapor-gas mixture case, Sparrow, et al. (1967) solved the conservation equations for the
liquid film and the vapor-gas boundary layer neglecting inertia and convection in the liquid layer and
assuming the stream-wise velocity component at the interface to be zero in the computation of the
velocity field in the vapor-gas boundary layer. Also a reference temperature was used for the evaluation
of properties. The results showed that the effect of noncondensable gas for the moving vapor-gas mixture
case is much less than for the corresponding stationary vapor-gas mixture. A moving vapor-gas mixture
is considered to have a "sweeping" effect, thereby resulting in a lower gas concentration at the interface
(compared to the corresponding stationary vapor-gas mixture case). Also, the ratio of the heat flux with a
noncondensable gas to that without a noncondensable gas was calculated to be independent on the bulk
velocity. The computed results reveal that interfacial resistance has a negligible effect on the heat transfer
and that superheating has much less of an effect than in the corresponding free convection case.
Koh (1962) and Fujii et al. (1977) solved this problem without the simplifying assumptions used by Rose
(1969) except for uniform properties and showed good agreement with the approximate analysis. Instead
of solving a complete set of the conservation equations, Rose (1980) used the experimental heat transfer
result for flow over the flat plate with suction (1979). Denny et al. (1971, 1972) also considered the case
of downward vapor-gas mixture flow parallel to a vertical flat plate. They presented a numerical solution
of similar mass, momentum and energy equations for a vapor-gas mixture by means of a forward
marching technique. Interfacial boundary conditions at each step were extracted from a locally valid
Nusselt type analysis of the condensate film. Local variable properties in the condensate film were
evaluated by means of the reference temperature concept, while those in the vapor-gas layer were treated
exactly. Asano et al. (1978) treated the condensate film as in the Nusselt analysis but assumed the
interfacial shear stress was the same as that for single-phase flow over an impermeable plate.
The analytical model described above was solved using only a laminar vapor-gas (or pure vapor)
boundary layer except for Mayhew (1966). Whitley (1976) proposed a simple model, which uses the
analogy between heat and mass transfer for forced convection condensation of a turbulent mixture
boundary layer by neglecting the interfacial velocity and treating the surface of the condensate film to be
smooth. Kim (1990) improved on Whitley's approach for forced convection and natural convection
applications by extending it to a wavy/turbulent film. By using well accepted correlations for a flat plate
geometry, the solution procedure is simplified to computing the condensate film thickness and the local
Reynolds and Sherwood numbers in the downstream direction. This leads to a computationally efficient
solution, which can be easily expanded to include more detailed models of the condensate film. Total
heat flow is controlled by the gas phase heat transfer and the heat flow through the condensate film.
Therefore, the total condensation heat transfer coefficient can be written as:
Gas phase heat transfer consists of convection heat transfer and the latent heat released as a result of
mass transfer. Radiation heat transfer can be neglected in the temperature range of interest (30- C).
Hence hgas is given by
The analogy between momentum-heat-mass transfer is used in order to find the heat and mass transfer
coefficients along the plate. The friction factor and Stanton number are correlated by
For a smooth surface, the local skin friction factor can be correlated with the local Reynolds number, and
a result like Whitley is obtained
By substituting equation 15 into equation 14, the local Nusselt number is obtained,
Utilizing Reynold's analogy between heat and mass transfer, equation 16 is modified to obtain the local
Sherwood number:
The turbulent Prandtl and Schmidt numbers in these equations can be replaced with the equations derived
by Jischa and Rieke (Kim, 1990). They derived the following results from transport equations of
turbulent kinetic energy, heat flux and mass flux, as
where coefficients and were fitted to experimental data. The recommended values are given in the
following table. Finally, the local Nusselt and Sherwood numbers for a smooth surface can be obtained
by substitution of equations 18 and 19 in equations 16 and 17,
Heat and mass transfer coefficients can now be solved from 20 and 21, respectively. The condensation
heat transfer coefficient hcond can then be obtained by substituting the following definition into equation
13,
The droplets or waves that form on the condensate interface can increase the shear stress and lead to
enhanced turbulent mixing at the interface. The effective surface area of the interface is also increased
due to droplets and waves. The case where waves and droplets are present was modelled as a rough
surface (Kim, 1990). Kim integrated the non-dimensional temperature profile and expressed the resulting
Stanton number as a function of the turbulent Prandtl number, friction factor and a roughness parameter,
The Sherwood number can be obtained utilizing the Reynold's analogy and equations 31 and 32,
In the aforementioned equations, the effect of the condensate interface structure is included in the surface
roughness parameter . In Kim's original model the interfacial waves were considered to influence the
roughness parameter. A condensate film Reynolds number of 100 was used as a critical threshold value
for wave formation. Kim used Wallis' correlation to account for waviness of the interface by linking it to
the condensate film thickness .
The current recommendation in this area would be to use this simple engineering correlation of Kim as
an estimate for most situations. If more exact estimates are necessary then other more detailed fluid
mechanics analyses could be used for the bulk gas flow.
Next: Separate Effects and Large Up: Condensation Previous: Theoretical Developments of
Condensation
steam-argon and steam-neon showed satisfactory agreement with the predicted theoretical values of
Sparrow but for steam-helium showed a lower value than the theoretical values.
Recently, DeVuono and Christensen (1984) reported their experiment of natural convection of a
steam-air mixture at pressures above atmospheric to 0.7 MPa to investigate the effect of pressure. The
experiments were performed on a horizontal copper tube with 7.94 cm O.D. by 1.22 m of active
condensation length. The tube was mounted in a cylindrical pressure vessel 1.52 m O.D. by 3.35 m long.
Saturated steam was supplied by an external source and allowed to diffuse to the tube resulting in
steady-state, natural convection conditions. An expression, which is a function of , percent
noncondensable gas by volume (Y
where MPa
Even though this experiment was done over a large range of pressure for a containment analysis and
showed a significant effect of pressure, the pipe geometry and length scale make it questionable to apply
this correlation to a large scale system. Unfortunately, the experiment results were not compared with
any other theoretical model.
Moving Vapor with a Noncondensable Gas
Rauscher, Mills and Denny (1974) performed experiments of filmwise condensation from steam-air
mixtures undergoing forced flow over 0.74 in. O.D. horizontal tube. The heat transfer coefficient at the
stagnation point was reported for bulk air mass fractions 0 - 7
Next: Separate Effects and Large Up: Condensation Previous: Theoretical Developments of
Condensation
Similar tests were also conducted by Dehbi. Heat transfer rates were measured at three different pressures (0.15, 0.275 and 0.45 MPa).
The noncondensible gas mass fraction in the tests ranged from 25 to 90 percent. The experimental apparatus consisted of a three meter
and one half long cooled tube (0.038 m Dia) in a pressure vessel. The motivation behind using a relatively large vertical dimension was
to simulate the length scale of internal containment structures. Surprisingly narrow pressure vessel was used (L/D = 10). This led to
difficulties to establish homogeneous test conditions in the vessel. In the tests, the mass ratio of air was 8-33 percent greater in the upper
part of the vessel than in the lower part. Secondly, the flow field created by the natural convection may have been affected by the
sidewalls. Therefore, the results by Dehbi have some unspecified uncertainty. He confirmed the observations of Robinson that heat
transfer rate increases with system pressure.
Condensate Film Structure
Several studies have been done to address the effect of condensate film characteristics on the heat transfer rates. The condensate film
characteristics depend on its flow field and the nature of the condensing surface, e.g. roughness, wetting and orientation.
Forced flow induces interfacial instabilities that increase the heat transfer rates by reducing the thickness of gas phase laminar sublayer
and enhancing the mixing of both the liquid (condensate film) and gas phase. Barry (1987) studied the effects of interfacial structure
caused by shear. Since the condensation length was relatively short, a film injection system was used to produce a condensate film that
was sufficiently thick for measurements. The qualitative results suggested that enhanced mixing, which is caused by the interfacial film
structure, somewhat compensated for the effect of the noncondensable gas.
The surface finish has a major effect on the mode of condensation for a downward facing surface and it is the wetting characteristics of
the surface that ultimately determine this. Dropwise condensation is likely to exist on non-wetting surfaces and filmwise condensation is
likely on wetting surfaces. In dropwise condensation mode with polished metal surfaces, the heat transfer characteristics are likely to
change due to oxidation of the surface or tarnishing. Thus, one cannot precisely know the wetting characteristics as surface aging occurs.
Gerstmann and Griffith (1967) studied the condensation of pure, stagnant Freon-113 and water vapor at atmospheric pressure. Heat
transfer measurements and visual observations of the interfacial behavior were made. Gerstmann and Griffith observed several distinct
flow regimes in the condensate film depending on the angle of inclination. Unstable condensate film with pendant drops and lengthwise
ridges existed at the horizontal position. The characteristic length scale of these formations was on the order of the Taylor wavelength.
The ridge formation was associated with the presence of a noncondensable gas. When the surface was tilted, the condensate waves
developed into "roll waves." The waves were fully developed at about 20 degrees of inclination. The influence of the condensate film on
the heat transfer rates was successfully analyzed using an assumption of quasi-steady state with force and energy balance equations.
Generally, heat transfer rates were found to decrease with increasing inclination angle. The presence of lengthwise ridge waves induced
by noncondensable gas was also reported by Spencer et al. (1970). However, no discussion of the effect of the ridge waves on the heat
transfer rates was given.
Tagami:
where W is defined as the mass fraction of noncondensable gas. The geometrical aspects and the effect of velocity field were ignored.
Therefore, caution should be used to extrapolate results from the correlations for the long sections of structural walls. Unfortunately, it is
quoted and used in safety analyses.
The CVTR test series was conducted using a full scale structure of a decommissioned nuclear power plant (Schmitt, 1970). The steam
was injected through a diffuser (0.25 meters dia and 3 meters in height) located three meters above the operating floor. Three tests were
conducted. The heat transfer rates into the wall were computed from the measured temperature profiles in the wall using the inverse
conduction method. The velocity field was measured by ultrasonic anemometers. The experimental data from the CVTR test were used
by Kim (1990) as one data set to benchmark his condensation model. The major conclusion from the analysis of these tests was that
local gas velocities were needed to accurately predict the data.
Historically, integral tests have been used to find simple correlations that would predict the heat transfer rates. These correlations have
gained wide acceptance and are regularly used in safety analyses. In this light, it is surprising to find out that until recently, most of the
data from these integral tests have been based on a very limited number of measurements of the prevailing conditions. Therefore, these
correlations generally have a very limited value in making accurate predictions of heat transfer rates through different geometries.
9.5. Observations
Condensation phenomena can be classified by the presence of noncondensable gas, the gas mixture
velocity, the flow characterization (laminar or turbulent) of the gas mixture and the condensate film and the
interface condition as shown in Table 9.1, which presented the summary of the theoretical and
experimental investigations discussed.
For all cases with a simple geometry except the turbulent gas mixture boundary layer and the wavy
interface of both the pure vapor and the vapor-air mixture case, it is seen that numerical solutions of the
conservation equations and more approximate analytical solutions of the conservation equations agree well
with the corresponding experimental work.
As the geometry of the condensing surface becomes more complex more prototypic experiments must be
performed. Examples of these cases are provided in the previous section for integral containment tests. The
presence of a turbulent gas mixture (natural or forced convection) or a wavy/turbulent film interface
complicates the analysis even for simple geometries. Examples of separate effect tests and correlations
under a variety of conditions were also presented in the previous section. In these situations theoretical
analysis of this turbulent condition is still needed as is consideration of the effect of geometric scale. This
may require multi-dimensional, multi-fluid modelling of the condensation process both near the wall and
gas boundary layers as well as in the bulk gas mixture. If this approach is taken then one must address the
appropriate scaling of these calculations to produce scaling of these calculations to produce useful
condensation heat transfer design correlations or procedures.
References
● W.W. Akers, S.H. Davis, Jr and J.E. Crawford, "Condensation of a Vapor in the Presence of a
Noncondensing Gas," Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series, No 30, Vol 56, pp
139-144, 1960.
● H.K. Al-Diwany and J.W. Rose, "Free Convection Film Condensation of Steam in the Presence of
Noncondensing Gases," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 16, pp 1359-1369 1973.
● K. Almenas and U. Lee, "A Statistical Evaluation of the Heat Transfer Data Obtained in the HDR
Containment Tests," University of Maryland, 1984.
● K. Asano and Y. Nakano, "Forced Convection Film Condensation of Vapors in the Presence of
Noncondensable Gas on a Small Vertical Flat Plate," J of Chem Engr of Japan , 1978.
● J.J. Barry, "Effects of Interfacial Structure on Film Condensation," PhD Thesis, University of
Wisconsin, 1987.
● L.A. Bromley, "Effect of Heat Capacity of Condensate," Ind. Eng. Chem., Vol 44, pp. 2966-2969,
1952.
● R.D. Cess, "Laminar Film Condensation on a Flat Plat in the Absence of Body Force," Zeitschrift fur
Angewandte und Physik, 11, pp 426-433, 1960.
● M.M. Chen, "An Analytical Study of Laminar Film Condensation Part I-Flat Plates," J. Heat
Transfer, Vol 83, Series C, pp 48-55, 1961.
● D.C. Cho and R.P. Stein, "Steam Condensation on the Underside of a Horizontal Surface,"
Proceedings of Third International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Power Plant Thermal Hydr. and
Operations, Nov 1988.
● J.G. Collier, "Convective Boiling and Condensation," 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill Book Company,
London, 1981.
● H. Dallmeyer, "Stoff-und Warmeubertragung beider Kondensation eines Dumpfes aus einem
Gemisch mit einem licht kondensierenden Gass in Laminarer und Turbulenter
Stromungsgrenzschicht," VDI-Forschungsheft 539, pp 5-24, 1970.
● A.A. Dehbi, "Analytical and Experimental Investigation of the Effects of Noncondensable Gases on
Steam Condensation under Turbulent Natural Convection Conditions," PhD Thesis, Dept of Nuclear
Engineering, MIT, Jan 1991.
● V.E. Denny and V.J. Jousionis, "Effects of Noncondensable Gas and Forces Flow on Laminar Film
Condensation," Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 15, pp 315-326, 1972.
● V.E. Denny and V. South III, "Effects of Forced Flow, Noncondensable and Variable Properties on
Film Condensation of Pure and Binary Vapors at the Forward Stagnation Point of a Horizontal
Cylinder," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 15, pp 2133-2142, 1972.
● V.E. Denny, A.F. Mills and V.J. Jusionis, "Laminar Film Condensation from a Steam-Air Mixture
Undergoing Forced Flow Down a Vertical Surface," J Heat Transfer, Vol 93, pp 297-304, 1971.
● A.C. DuVuono and R.N. Christensen, "Experimental Investigation of the Pressure Effects on Film
Condensation of Stem-Air Mixtures at Pressure Above Atmospheric, Fundamentals of Phase
Change; Boiling and Condensation," The Winter Annual Meeting of ASME, New Orleans, Louisiana,
HTD-Vol 38, 1984.
● H.W. Emmons and D.C. Leigh, "Tabulation of the Blasius Function with Blowing and Suction, Fluid
Motion Sub-committee," Aeronaut Res Coun, Report No. FM 1915, 1953.
● T. Fujii and H. Uehara, "Laminar Filmwise Condensation on a Vertical Surface," Int J Heat Mass
Transfer, Vol 15, pp. 217-233, 1972.
● T. Fujii, H. Uehara, K. Mihara and Y. Kato, "Forced Convection in the Presence of
Non-condensables-A Theoretical Treatment for Two-Phase Laminar Boundary Layer" (In Japanese),
University of Kyushu Research Institute of Industrial Science, Report No 66 pp 53-80, 1977.
● J. Gerstmann and P. Griffith, "Laminar Film Condensation on the Underside of Horizontal and
Inclined Surfaces," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 10, pp 567-580, 1967.
● J.H. Goodykoontz and R.G. Dorsch, "Local Heat Transfer Coefficients for Condensation of Steam in
Vertical Down Flow Within a 8-May inch Diameter Tube," NASA TN D-3326, 1966.
● J.H. Goodykoontz and R.G. Dorsch, "Local Heat Transfer Coefficients and Static Pressures for
Condensation in High-Velocity Steam Within a Tube," NASA TN D-3953, 1967.
● H. Hampson, "The Condensation of Steam on a Metal Surface," Proc General Disc on Heat
Transfer, Inst of Mech Engrs and ASME, New York, pp 58-61, 1951.
● C.L. Henderson and J.M. Marchello, "Film Condensation in the Presence of a Noncondensable Gas,
Transactions of ASME," J Heat Transfer, Vol 91(3), pp 447-50, 1969.
● M. Jacob, S. Erk and H. Erk, "Verbasserte Messungen und Berechnungen des Warmeuberganges
beim Kondensieren Stromenden Dampfes in einem Vertikalen Rohr," Phys Z 36(3), pp 73-84, 1935.
● H.R. Jacobs, "An Integral Treatment of Combined Body Force and Forced Convection in Laminar
Film Condensation," Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 9, pp 637-648, 1966.
● D.H. Jubb, "Condensation in a Reactor Containment Vessel," Nuclear Engineering, pp 431-434, Dec
1959.
● M.H. Kim and M.L. Corradini, "Modelling of Condensation Heat Transfer in a Reactor
Containment," Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol 118, 1990.
● J.C. Koh, E.M. Sparrow and J.O. Hartnett, "The Two-Phase Boundary Layer in Laminar Film
Condensation," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, pp 69-82, 1961.
● J.C.Y. Koh, "Laminar Film Condensation of Condensable Gases and Gaseous Mixture on a Flat
Plate," Proc 4th USA Nat Cong Appl Mech, 2, pp 1327-1336, 1962.
● A. Kolflat, "Results of 1959 Nuclear Power Plant Containment Tests," SL-1800, March 1960. D.G.
Kroger and W.M. Rohsenow, "Condensation Heat Transfer in the Presence of Non-condensable
Gas," Int J Heat Transfer Conference, Vol 11, pp 15-26, 1968.
● H. Kutsuna, K. Inoue and S. Nakanishi, "Filmwise Condensation of Vapor Containing
Noncondensable Gas in a Horizontal Duct," Int. Symposium on Heat Transfer, Beijing 1987.
● W.C. Lee, "Filmwise Condensation on a Horizontal Tube in the Presence of Forced Convective and
Non-condensing Gas," PhD. Thesis, Univ. of London, 1982.
● F. Legay-Desesquelles and B. Prunet-Foch, "Dynamic Behaviour of Boundary Layer with
Condensation along a Flat Plate: Comparison with Suction," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 28, No
12, pp 2363-2370, 1985.
● Y.R. Mayhew and J.K. Aggarwal, "Laminar Film Condensation with Vapor Drag on a Flat Surface,"
Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 16, pp 1944-1949, 1973.
● Y.R. Mayhew, D.J. Griffith and J.W. Phillips, "Effect of Vapor Drag on Laminar Film Condensation
on a Vertical Surface," Proc. Instn Mech Engrs, Vol 180, Part 3J, pp 280-289, 1965-1966.
● Y.R. Mayhew, Comments on the Paper, "Theoretical Study of Laminar Film Condensation of
Flowing Vapor," (by I.G. Shekriladze and V.I. Gomelauri), Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 10, pp
107-108, 1987.
● W.H. McAdams, "Heat Transmission," 3rd Ed, McGraw-Hill, 1954.
● A.F. Mills and R.A. Seban, "The Condensation Coefficient of Water," Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol
10, pp 1815-1827, 1967.
● W.J. Minkowycz and E.M. Sparrow, "Condensation Heat Transfer in the Presence of
Noncondensables, Interfacila Rersistance, Variable Properties and Diffusion," Int J Heat Mass
Transfer, Vol 9, pp 1125-1144, 1966.
● W.J. Minkoycz, "Laminar Film Condensation of Water Vapor on an Isothermal Vertical Surface,"
PhD Thesis, University of Minnesota, 1965.
● W.A. Nusselt, "The Surface Condensation of Water Vapor," Zieschrift Ver. Deut. Ing., Vol. 60, pp.
541-546, 1916.
● D.F. Othmer, "The Condensation of Steam, Ind Eng and Chem," Vol 21, No 6, pp 577-583 1929.
● G. Poots and R. Miles, "Effects of Variable Physical Properties on Laminar Film Condensation of
Saturated Steam on a Vertical Flat Plate," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 10, pp 1677-1692, 1967.
● J.W. Rauscher, A.F. Mills and V.E. Denny, "Experimental Study of Film Condensation from
Steam-Air Mixtures Flowing Downward over a Horizontal Tube," J. Heat Transfer, Vol 96, pp.
83-88, 1974.
● J.A. Robinson and S.R. Windebank, "Measurement of Condensation Heat Transfer Coefficients in a
Steam Chamber Using a Variable Conductance Heat Pipe," Proc 2nd UK National Conference on
Heat Transfer, Vol 1, pp 617-637, Sept 1988.
● W.M. Rohsenow, "Heat Transfer and the Temperature Distribution in Laminar Film Condensation,"
Trans. ASME, Vol 78, pp. 1645-1648, 1956.\ J.W. Rose, "Condensation of a Vapor in the Presence
of a Noncondensing Gas," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 12, pp 233-237, 1969.
● J.W. Rose, "Approximate Equations for Forced Convection Condensation in the Presence of a
Noncondensing Gas on a Flat Plate and Horizontal Tube," Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 23, pp
539-546, 1980.
● J.W. Rose, "Boundary Layer Flow with Transpiration of an Isothermal Flat Plate," Int J Heat Mass
Transfer, Vol 22, pp 1243-1244, 1979.
● R.C. Schmitt, G.F. Bingham and J.A. Norberg, "Simulated Design Basis Accident Tests of Carolinas
Virginia Tube Reactor Containment-Final Report," Idaho Nuclear Corp., IN-1403, 1970.
● R.C. Schmitt, G.F. Bingham and J.A. Norberg, "Simulated Design Basis Accident Tests of Carolinas
Virginia Tube Reactor Containment-Final Report," Idaho Nuclear Corporation, IN-1407, 1970.
● I.G. Shekriladze and V.I. Gomelauri, "Theoretical Study of Laminar Film Condensation of Flowing
Vapor," Int. J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 9, pp. 581-591, 1966.
● D.C. Slaughterbeck, "Review of Heat Transfer Coefficients for Condensing Steam in a Containment
Building Following a Loss of Coolant Accident," Idaho Nuclear Corp., IN-1388, 1970.
● L. Sleger and R.A. Seban, "Nusselt Condensation of n-butil Alcohol," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol
12, pp 237-239, 1969. L. Sleger and R.A. Seban, "Laminar Film Condensation of Steam Containing
Small Concentrations of Air," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 13, pp 1941-1947, 1970.
● L. Slegers and R.A. Seban, "Laminar Film Condensation of Steam Containing Small Concentrations
of Air," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 13, pp 1941-1947, 1970.
● V. South III and V.E. Denny, "The Vapor Shear Boundary Condition for Laminar Film
Condensation," Trans. ASME, 94, pp 248-249, 1972.
● E.M. Sparrow and J.L. Gregg, "A Boundary Layer Treatment of Laminar Film Condensation," J.
Heat Transfer, Vol 21, Series C, pp. 13-18, 1959.
● E.M. Sparrow and E.G. Eckert, "Effects of Superheated Vapor and Noncondensable Gases on
Laminar Film Condensation," AIChE J, 7,3, pp 473-477, 1961.
● E.M. Sparrow and S.H. Lin, "Condensation Heat Transfer in the Presence of a Noncondensable
Gas," J Heat Transfer, Vol 86, pp 430-436, 1964.
● E.M. Sparrow, W.J. Minkowycz and M. Saddy, "Forced Convection in the Presence of
Noncondensables and Interfacial Resistance," Int J Heat Mass Transfer, Vol 10, pp 1829-1845, 1967.
● D.L. Spencer, K.I. Chang and H.C. Moy, "Experimental Investigation of Stability Effects in Laminar
Film Condensation on a Vertical Cylinder," 4th International Heat Transfer Conference, Paris, Vol
6, Paper Cs 2.3, 1970.
● T. Tagami, "Interim Report on Safety Assessment and Facilities Establishment Project for June
1965," No. 1, Unpublished work, 1965.
● T. Tagami, "Interim Report on Safety Assessments and Facilities Establishment Project for June
1965," No. 1, Unpublished work, 1965.
● H. Uchida, A. Oyama and Y. Togo, "Evaluation of Post-Accident Cooling Systems of LWR's," Proc
Int Conf Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, 13, pp 93-102, 1965.
● R.H. Whitley, "Condensation Heat Transfer in a Pressurized Water Reactor Dry Containment
Following a Loss of Coolant Accident," MS Thesis, University of California at Los Angeles, 1976.