P. 1


|Views: 23|Likes:
Published by VIBHAV

More info:

Published by: VIBHAV on May 26, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less






Boiling and Condensation
3.1 3.2 Boiling ..................................................................................3-1
Pool Boiling ● Flow Boiling

Condensation ....................................................................3-31
Fundamentals of Condensation ● Condensation on Flat Surfaces ● Condensation on and in the Tubes ● Effects of Noncondensable Gases and Other Secondary Effects ● Direct Contact Condensation ● Enhanced Condensation ● Surface Promoter for Dropwise Condensation ● Electric Field Enhanced Condensation

S.G. Kandlikar
Rochester Institute of Technology

J.N. Chung
University of Florida

3.1 Boiling
S.G. Kandlikar
3.1.1 Pool Boiling
A change of phase from liquid to vapor across a liquid–vapor interface is called evaporation. Boiling refers to heat transfer-induced evaporation associated with vapor bubbles. The nature of the specific liquid–vapor system gives rise to different types of boiling: 1. Pool boiling refers to the boiling process in which the liquid is essentially quiescent and vapor bubbles rise as a result of buoyancy forces induced by gravity or other body forces. 2. Flow boiling refers to the boiling process in which the liquid and the resulting vapor phase are subjected to a flow field. In the literature, additional terminology is employed to identify specific configurations; thin-film evaporation or falling-film evaporation refers to evaporation across the liquid–vapor interface of a thin liquidfilm that is formed on a heater surface. The term convective flow boiling refers to a change of phase from liquid to vapor during internal flow, while external flow boiling refers to a change of phase from liquid to vapor during external flow such as flow over tube banks. Pool boiling is also of interest from the perspective of understanding the boiling phenomenon. Some of its applications include kettle reboilers, batch-type vaporizers, liquid immersed electronic component cooling, and quenching of metals in metallurgical processes. Flow boiling is employed in many applications, such as steam generators and refrigeration evaporators, and is being considered for high-flux cooling of electronic components. Introduction to Pool Boiling Although a number of investigators have observed different regions of pool boiling heat transfer, Nukiyama (1934) conducted a systematic study on pool boiling over electrically heated nichrome and


© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC


Multiphase Flow Handbook

Vapor film Periodic dry patches 106 Vapor columns and mushrooms C q″ (W/m2) D (q ″CHF) F

Periodic liquid contact

105 Discrete bubbles A″ 104


A′ E Leidenfrost point (q ″MHF)


O 1

Natural convection 5

Nucleate boiling 10 30

Transition boiling 120

Film boiling 1000

∆TSat =TW –TSat (°C)

FIGURE 3.1 Boiling curve showing different regions in pool boiling.

platinum wires and presented a boiling curve. Figure 3.1 shows a boiling curve that incorporates a number of additional features that have been identified by later investigators. The heat flux qЉ at the heater surface is plotted against the wall superheat (∆TSat ϭTHeater Ϫ TSat). The nature of bubble or vapor film surrounding the heater is also depicted in Figure 3.1. The pool of water is held at its saturation temperature of TSat corresponding to the system pressure (hence the term saturated pool boiling). In the region O–A in Figure 3.1 with small ∆TSat, heat is transferred by natural convection. At location AЈ corresponding to a certain value of ∆TSat ϭ ∆TSat,ONB, bubble nucleation is initiated on cavities present on the heater surface. This condition is called onset of nucleate boiling (ONB). With the inception of nucleation, the heater surface temperature drops to AЉ for a given imposed heat flux. This hysteresis effect shown by the dotted lines AAЈAЉ disappears during repeated boiling cycles with increasing and decreasing values of heat flux. The slope of the curve beyond the ONB point increases at higher ∆TSat values as the bubbles grow and depart more rapidly (region AЉ–B), more nucleation sites become active and fully developed nucleate boiling ensues (region B–C). At higher heat fluxes, the heater surface becomes overcrowded with bubbles at various stages of growth. In addition, the intense evaporation near the bubble bases leads to periodic dry patches on the heater surface that are rewetted by the surrounding liquid, resulting in a reduction in the slope of the boiling curve (the heat transfer coefficient begins to decrease). At higher wall superheat, liquid is unable to rewet the heater surface, causing a sudden formation of a dry patch that eventually covers a large region of the heater surface. A thin film of vapor separates the liquid from the heater surface, causing a large temperature excursion of the heater surface (drastic reduction in the heat transfer coefficient). The heat flux corresponding to this condition at location D, q CHF Љ , which represents the maximum heat flux sustained under the nucleate boiling condition, is called the critical heat flux (CHF). As the heat flux is further increased, the heater temperature jumps to point F. The ensuing mode of heat transfer at a higher heat flux in which the heater is blanketed with a thin vapor film is called film boiling. Through experimental investigation, Nukiyama (1934) observed that the high temperature following the CHF point leads to physical burnout of the nichrome wires, while platinum wires were able to withstand the higher temperatures.

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Boiling and Condensation


The dotted region D–E in Figure 3.1 following the CHF represents the transition boiling region. This region is not accessible with an electrical heater providing a constant heat flux boundary condition; it can only be traced under stable conditions by employing a constant temperature boundary condition on the heated wall. In the transition region, the formation of dry patches and the rewetting of the dry regions occur very rapidly. Eventually, the rewetting cannot be sustained at the Leidenfrost condition represented by E, and the heater is surrounded by a stable vapor film. The heat flux at E is called the minimum heat flux, q Љ MHF. The region E–F is the film boiling region in which heat is transferred by combined radiative and convective modes. In studying boiling phenomena, the nucleation characteristics and bubble behavior are of great importance. Some of the early investigators, including Moissis and Berenson (1963), Gaertner (1965), and Johnston et al. (1966), have employed high-speed photography to reveal the bubble behavior. Gaertner obtained still and video images at 3000 frames/sec identifying various boiling regions, such as the discrete bubble region, first transition region (vapor columns are observed), and second transition region (stems of vapor column become unstable with the formation of local dry patches). Additional regions based on bubble shapes at departure have been proposed by later investigators (e.g., Williamson and El-Genk, 1991). The actual mechanism is still a subject of active research, as the Helmholtz instability in the second transition region is used as the basis of some of the CHF models (Zuber, 1959; Haramura and Katto, 1983), while the interpretation of photographs and the presence of a thin liquid layer (macrolayer) still remain inconclusive (see, e.g., Williamson and El-Genk, 1991). Onset of Nucleate Boiling

Bankoff (1958) showed that the presence of nucleating cavities on a heater surface leads to nucleation at lower superheats (heterogeneous nucleation) compared to the homogeneous nucleation in which vapor embryos are formed in a highly superheated liquid. Cavities trap vapor and gases and act as nucleation sites for bubbles on a heater surface. A certain amount of wall superheat is needed to activate the cavities depending on various factors: (1) cavity size and shape; (2) fluid properties, including surface tension and contact angles; and (3) temperature profile in the liquid immediately surrounding the heater surface. Consider a vapor bubble of radius Rb in a pool of liquid at a temperature T and pressure pL as shown in Figure 3.2. The pressure inside the bubble is pG. Taking a diametric section reveals the forces due to pressure difference and the surface tension along the circumference. At equilibrium, equating these two forces yields 2σ pG Ϫ pL ϭ ᎏ Rb



pSat, T G pG L pL T pL pG

FIGURE 3.2 Metastable liquid and vapor conditions for a bubble growing in a pool of liquid.

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Sat and Equations (3. The liquid state L lies in a metastable condition corresponding to pL and T.Sat.2.T L b 2σ (3.3-4 Multiphase Flow Handbook The liquid and vapor states corresponding to the above condition are shown as L and G.vL.4) (3. As the wall temperature rises.T 2σ pL ϭ pSat. the liquid–vapor interface moves out toward the mouth of the cavity.3 Growth of a vapor bubble nucleating from a cavity. The residual vapor or gas in the cavity activates the cavity.3 shows the growth of a bubble inside and over a cavity.T Ϫ pL ϭ ᎏ ΂ vᎏᎏ Ϫv ΃ R vL G. Eventually. LLC . The metastable equilibrium liquid line in the saturation dome represents the equilibrium over a curved interface.Sat G. The lowest pressure point on this curve corresponds to the homogeneous nucleation condition. Hsu (1962) and Hsu and Graham (1961) postulated that a vapor bubble will grow. 1999): pSat.Sat. if the temperature in the liquid at the top of the hemispherical bubble cap exceeds the L y = RC G RC FIGURE 3.3) simplify as follows: For low reduced pressures. The vapor state G is in the superheated region corresponding to pG and T. The saturation pressure pSat.T Ϫ ᎏ Rb (3. vG. The minimum radius of the bubble occurs when the bubble assumes a hemispherical shape with a radius Rb equal to the cavity’s mouth radius RC. assumed to be circular for the purpose of this analysis. in Figure 3. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.5) Figure 3. respectively. (PrϽ pG ϭ pSat.2) ᎏ ΂ vᎏᎏ Ϫv ΃ R vG.T L b 2σ (3. the bubble becomes anchored on the cavity’s mouth as the contact angle adjusts from the inner cavity surface to the heater surface.T Ϫ pG ϭ pSat.2) and (3.T over a planar interface corresponding to T can be expressed in terms of pressures pL and pG by equating the molar Gibbs free energies for the two phases (Fujita. thus initiating nucleate boiling.3) Ͻ1).

Sat (ϭ TSat) is the saturation temperature (in K) corresponding to the liquid pressure pL.9). © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.1) becomes 2σ (3. (3. the equilibrium temperature of the vapor in the hemispherical bubble on the bubble mouth. dp/dT ϭ hfg/(vfgTSat). (3. Since there is a temperature gradient in the liquid normal to the heated wall.7) as TG. On the other hand. (3. the minimum heat flux and the critical radius. are obtained by drawing a line with a slope given by Eq. Using this temperature T in Eq. Eq.10) Bubble nucleation further depends on the availability of cavities in the range between RC.6) pG Ϫ pL ϭ ᎏ RC Applying the Clausius–Clapeyron equation.Sat ϭ ᎏ hfgRC (3. Graphically. Thus qЉ dT Tw Ϫ TL ᎏ ϭᎏ ϭ ᎏ (3.Sat ϭ ᎏ hfgRC (3.4 shows the plots of Eqs.4 Nucleation criterion for the activation of a cavity in pool boiling. Introducing ∆TSatϭTwϪTSat at system pressure pL.8) and (3. Rmin and Rmax. defined as the radius of the first cavity to nucleate under a given heat flux q Љ.8) and (3. (3. for which TL Ͼ TG at y ϭ RC. LLC . Eq. the following range is obtained by solving Eqs. where y is the distance normal to the heater surface. (3. and assuming vfg ≈ vG.crit TG Temperature Tw Tw.9): ∆TSatkL RC. critical Nucleating bubble on a heated wall TL 2 GTSat = TSat + y = Rc R c RCRfg Tw dT Tw – TL q ″ = = dy y kL Vapor at TG RC.min and RC. Under this condition.min ϭ ᎏ Ϯ qЉ ᎏ๶ Ϫ ᎏᎏ Ί๶ ΂๶ h qЉ qЉ ΃๶๶๶๶ 2 fg ∆TSatkL 8σ TSatvG kL (3.max.6) becomes 2σ TSatvG T Ϫ TL. resulting in TwϭTw.9) that is tangent to the curve for TG.8) where TL. if cavities of all sizes are present.7) where T is the temperature of the liquid surrounding the bubble. max Distance from heater surface y or cavity radius RC FIGURE 3. the minimum liquid temperature adjacent to the bubble interface occurs at y ϭ RC.max over the heater surface.9) kL dy y The liquid temperature TL at y ϭ RC can be found from Eq. critical RC. Figure 3. Eq.Boiling and Condensation 3-5 saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure pG inside the bubble.9). (3. The intersection points of these two plots yield the range of the cavity radii.7) becomes 2σ TSatvG TG Ϫ TL. The liquid temperature profile in the vicinity of the heater surface can be approximated by applying the heat conduction equation in the liquid.RC. (3. min RC. (3.

1. the temperature of the heater wall and the liquid adjacent to the cavity begin to rise until the nucleation criterion is met. eventually the forces tending to push the bubble away from the heater surface become greater than the retaining forces.10) to zero: ∆TSat. For a given wall superheat. a range of nucleation cavities are activated. 1974).1 Bubble Nucleation Bubble nucleation is closely related to the size and shape of the cavity holding gases or vapors. As the wall superheat increases. LLC .3 Bubble Dynamics in Nucleate Pool Boiling A bubble on a heater surface goes through an ebullition cycle consisting of the following four stages during nucleate boiling.3. their shape and size ranges. the active cavity size range increases as the liquid temperature distribution line moves higher in Figure 3. 1997). (iii) Bubble departure — as the bubble grows. Equations (3. a bubble forms on the cavity mouth.3-6 Multiphase Flow Handbook as shown in Figure 3. A bubble is then formed. and (v) transient conduction effects due to liquid renewal (Marcus and Dropkin.2 Growth Period The bubble continues to grow due to evaporation occurring at expanding the liquid–vapor interface on the bubble and.10)–(3. (3. on the onset of nucleation are beyond the scope of the present work. the critical radius Rcrit at ONB is given by RC.12) The nucleation criterion has been further investigated by researchers to include (i) the effect of cavity shape (Lorentz et al. Davis and Anderson. (ii) the effect of contact angles. 1966). and contact angle. 1965). 3. Inertia-controlled growth occurs in the early stages of bubble © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.. presence of dissolved gases. boiling history. (3. (iv) stagnation temperature at the leading face (Kandlikar et al.3.12) provide reasonable estimates of ONB conditions and are used extensively in practical applications. Reentrant cavities are able to trap the gases or vapor left behind from a previously departed bubble.9). The presence of dissolved gases leads to early nucleation before the local saturation conditions corresponding to a pure liquid are reached.crit ϭ ΄ 2σ TSatvG kL ᎏᎏ hfgq Љ ΅ 1/2 (3. and the ebullition cycle continues. As the liquid temperature increases. Murphy and Bergles (1972) used the partial pressure of vapor in a gas–vapor mixture inside a vapor bubble for developing the nucleation criterion under these conditions.crit ϭ ΄ 8σ TSatvG q Љ ᎏᎏ hfgkL ΅ 1/2 (3. and the bubble leaves the heater surface. The growth period is divided into two regions. except that the bubbles are generated as a result of lowering the pressure. liquid properties.1. including reentrant cavities.2. Cavitation is similar to nucleation in boiling. liquid metals. local temperature profile in the liquid near the wall (dependent on the wall superheat and liquid subcooling). surfactants. and binary mixtures.4.1. Bubble nucleation also depends on the availability of cavities. the solubility of a dissolved gas decreases and it begins to come out of the liquid at nucleation sites on the heater surface. resulting in bubbles that are of different shapes when compared with the hemispherical shape at the critical condition (Hsu and Graham.1.1. rather than increasing the temperature. 3. Further effects of dissolved gases. (iii) subcooling. (ii) Growth period — relaxation of liquid superheat around the liquid–vapor interface due to evoporation causes the bubble to grow. (iv) Waiting period — as the cooler liquid from the bulk rushes to take the place of the departed bubble. and cavity shapes. 3. also from the thin film left behind on the heater surface. Equating the slope dTG/dR to the slope given by Eq. The presence of a vapor phase in the cavity is essential for the activation of a cavity.1. 1961.. according to some models. (i) Bubble nucleation — when the temperatures of the wall and liquid in the vicinity of a cavity reach conditions conducive to nucleation.11) The wall superheat at the ONB is then obtained by setting the term under the radical in Eq. hysteresis effects.

1.13) The growth rate is linear in the early stages as seen from Eq. The following correlations by Jensen and Memmel (1986) were developed from a data bank of 504 data points for 15 fluids. Superheated liquid provides the thermal energy for rapid evaporation at the interface in this region.13).16) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. evaporation is limited by conduction heat transfer from the surrounding liquid to the interface. the buoyancy force helps or opposes the bubble removal. and (3) buoyancy force — depending on the orientation and geometry. ΂ ΃ Ά ᎏᎏᎏ · ρ h 1/2 G fg 2[TL Ϫ TSat(pL)]cp. The entire growth cycle including the inertia.13) in the inertia-controlled region for small values of t. As a result of all these forces. (2) inertia force — as the bubble grows.19(1.14) where αL is the thermal diffusivity of the liquid. The bubble shape also undergoes considerable changes. while the bubble is pulled away during the later part. LLC . (3. For the case when wall superheat is available. including water. Mikic et al.3. Thus. Additionally. A wide variation in Db.14) in the thermally controlled region for large values of t.and thermally controlled regions are covered: 2 Rϩ ϭ ᎏ (tϩ ϩ 1)3/2 Ϫ (tϩ)3/2 Ϫ 1 3 where R(t)A Rϩ ϭ ᎏ .8 ϩ 105K1)2/3 [g(ρL Ϫ ρG)Db (3. Rayleigh (1917) analyzed the growth process and derived the following equation for the bubble growth rate: 2 TL Ϫ TSat(pL) hfg ρg R(t) ϭ ᎏ ᎏᎏ ᎏ TSat(pL) ρL 3 Ά ΄ ΅ · 1/2 t (3. 2 /σ]1/2 ϭ 0.Boiling and Condensation 3-7 growth. The correlations were compared with 12 other correlations and were found to perform consistently better than other correlations available in the literature. (3. and to Eq. up to 50%. a bubble departs the heater surface after attaining a certain size. Before applying any correlation. Plesset and Zwik (1954) derived the following equation for bubble growth in this region: 2∆TSatkL 3t R(t) ϭ ᎏ ᎏ hfg ρG παL ΂ ΃ 1/2 (3. there are viscous forces as well as forces due to Marangoni convection in the liquid around the bubble. 3.15) Ά ᎏᎏᎏ · ρ T (p ) L Sat L 2[TL Ϫ TSat(pL)]hfg ρG 1/2 . bubble growth is thermally controlled. (3. (3.3 Bubble Departure Diameter As the bubble grows. Subsequent to the initial rapid growth. (1970) derived the following equation by incorporating the shape of a bubble growing in the vicinity of a heated surface. such as nucleation site interactions and convection currents that are statistical in nature. The above equations for bubble growth are derived for the case of uniformly heated liquid over a spherical bubble.15) reduces to Eq.1. B2 Aϭ tA2 tϩ ϭ ᎏ B2 12αL Bϭ ᎏ π ΄ ΅ (3. it should be realized that Db depends on a number of additional variables. but the bubble growth is limited by the inertia of the surrounding liquid. from the predicted value is not uncommon.L ρL In the limit. it experiences the following forces: (1) surface tension force — holds down the bubble on the heater surface through the contact angle. The departure bubble diameter Db is of great interest in boiling studies and has been extensively studied. boiling on mostly horizontal plates and wires over a wide range of pressures. the acceleration and deceleration of the interface introduce inertia forces that push the bubble onto the heater surface during the earlier part of the growth period. Eq.

20) and Db is the departure bubble diameter. development of the superheated liquid layer.L/k) is the Prandtl number.3-8 where Ja K1 ϭ ᎏ PrL Multiphase Flow Handbook where Ja (ϭρLcp.1.4 Heat Transfer Mechanisms During Nucleate Pool Boiling Heat transfer in nucleate pool boiling is a result of a number of interacting mechanisms: 1.97 ϫ 104 ᎏ pcr pcr M where K (ϭ1.3.17) ΂ ΃ ΂ ΃ ΂ ΃ where Vb ϭ ΄ Db g(ρL Ϫ ρG) 2σ ᎏᎏ ϩ ᎏᎏ 2(ρL ϩ ρG) Db(ρL ϩ ρG) ΅ 1/2 (3.g. Evaporation of this liquid film is believed to contribute to heat transfer at higher heat fluxes (Judd and Hwang. in spite of these developments. 2. bulk liquid rushes over the heater surface surrounding the nucleating cavity.18) Db ϭ 2.500 kPa. 3.7 to 13. Enhanced convection. and heat transferred during each bubble ebullition cycle.1.4 Bubble Frequency The frequency of bubbles being released from cavities depends on a number of factors. Although such an approach is being pursued by researchers (e. contact angle.L∆TSat/(ρGhfg)) is the Jakob number. release of the liquid sensible energy in the form of evaporation at the bubble interface. is left below an expanding bubble during the bubble growth period. 3. called a microlayer. Microlayer evaporation. A thin layer of liquid. However. 1976). 3. 1999). In principle. Hewitt (1998) provides a good overview of the developments in this field. and interaction with neighboring bubbles. p Ϫ1. The wall thermal properties also play a role during the transient heat conduction process. 3. The liquid undergoes a transient heat conduction process. LLC . The periodic nature of liquid flow in the bubble ebullition cycle. fluid thermal properties. complete analytical treatments have not yet been developed for practical design applications. (3. and the wall superheat is given by ∆TSatϭTwϪTSat. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. The superheated liquid moves away into the bulk during bubble growth and departure. The bubble ebullition cycle introduces convective currents that contribute to the heat transfer during nucleate pool boiling. The average deviations for Eqs.19) f Db ϭ Vb/π 1 Ϫ ᎏᎏ 1 ϩ VbρGhfg/qЉ ΂ ΃ Ά΄ ᎏᎏ ΅΄ gᎏᎏ µ (ρ Ϫ ρ ) ΅ · 2 2 L L G g(ρL Ϫ ρG) σ 3/2 Ϫ1 (3. Dhir. cavity size.1..1. and subscript “cr” refers to the critical point for the fluid. For cases where wall superheat is not available. active nucleating cavity site density (per unit heater surface area).16) and (3. the contributions from each mechanism are still not conclusively proven and continue to be topics of current research interest.5 Models and Correlations for Nucleate Pool Boiling It has been recognized that the heat transfer during nucleate pool boiling is closely related to the bubble activity over a heater surface. when compared with 30 data sources covering 15 different fluids at pressures from about 4. respectively. An empirical correlation by Malenkov (1971) takes into account the interaction between the bubble departure diameter and bubble departure frequency and is recommended: 1 (3.1. Pr (ϭµcp.09 KTcr 1/3 ᎏ (3. M the molecular weight. including wall superheat.18) were 44 and 52%. the heat transfer rate can be predicted by knowing the bubble frequency.38 ×10Ϫ23 J/K) is the Boltzman constant. The superheated liquid also contributes to the evaporation at the bubble interface. Transient conduction.1. and evaporation from the microlayer have all been extensively studied in the literature. As a bubble departs.

the Stephan and Abdelsalam (1980) correlation is recommended.5 4.007 0.0 1.0130 0. By varying the surface finish.1 for different surface treatments. Water (mean absolute error ϭ11. [3.0130 0.006 0. θ ϭ 45° (3.22 X4Ϫ1.0 1.673 1. By carefully carrying out a regression analysis of the data.7 1.0060 0.013 is recommended as an initial guess.21]) Fluid–Surface Combination Water–Copper Scored Polished Lapped Water–Brass Water–Stainless Steel Chemically etched Mechanically polished Ground and polished Teflon-pitted Water–platinum Water–nickel Benzene–chromium Carbon tetrachloride polished copper Ethanol–chromium Isopropanol–copper n-Butanol–copper n-Pentane–chromium n-Pentane–copper Polished Emery-rubbed copper Lapped Csf 0.0 1. In case the constant Csf is not available for a given fluid–surface combination.886.0 1. This trend is also seen in Table 3.7 1. the following correlations were developed.67 X 8 X4 for 5.101 0.7 1. they obtained different contact angles and showed that the contact angle and Csf decreased as the surface was made smoother. Rohsenow (1952) developed a semiempirical model by using the liquid Reynolds number in the vicinity of a bubble.22) Hydrocarbons (mean absolute error ϭ 12.0027 0.21) The values of Csf and n for different heater materials and surface finishes are given in Table 3.1 Values of Csf and n in the Rohsenow Correlation (Eq.Boiling and Condensation 3-9 A number of empirical and semiempirical correlations are available in the literature.3%): 0.0025 0.0130 0.0 1. Stephan and Abdelsalam conducted a dimensional analysis and arrived at eight nondimensional groups to represent the nucleate pool boiling phenomenon.7 1.7 1. Two of the more successful correlations are given below.015 0.0 1.7 ϫ 10Ϫ3 Յ p/pcr Յ 0. (1968).0074 0.33 0. These values are derived from Rohsenow (1952) and Vachnon et al. Rohsenow introduced an empirical constant Csf to account for the fluid–surface effect on nucleate boiling and proposed the following correlation: qЉ cp.33 n PrL (3. The influence region was considered to be twice the diameter of the departure bubble diameter.0546(X 5 (3.1. a value of 0.0154 0.46 ϫ 106X 1 for 10Ϫ4 Յ p/pcr Յ 0.013 0.0049 n 1.7 1.003 0. The ranges of reduced pressures p/pcr and contact angles θ are listed for different fluids.23) TABLE 3.7 1. LLC .0 1.006 0.0 1. It is based on 5000 data points derived from 72 published sources. Liaw and Dhir (1989) established a clear dependence of the constant Csf and the contact angle during pool boiling of water on copper surfaces.0 1. θ ϭ 35° Nu ϭ 0.58 X 3 X8 Nu ϭ 2.26 5.248 X1)0.7 1.0147 0.0 1.9.L∆TSat ᎏ ϭ Csf ᎏ µLhfg hfg Ά Ί๶· σ ᎏᎏ g(ρL Ϫ ρG) 0.0068 0.0058 0. Among other empirical correlations.7 © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.2%): 0.

and nondimensional groups X1-X8 are given below: qЈd 2σ Nu ϭ ᎏ . The reentrant cavities are manufactured by a variety of processes. (1991) studied the effect of subcooling on pool boiling heat transfer with water on a copper surface. Other techniques include the application of an electric field and vibrations. The electric field causes enlargement of the bubble base area. at low subcooling.7 Enhanced Surfaces Enhancement in nucleate boiling heat transfer is mainly accomplished by providing more active nucleation sites on the heater surface.6%): 0.374 X7 X5 X3 X 4Ϫ0. the wall superheat increases due to changes in the number of active nucleation sites and bubble departure frequency. Figure 3.145θ ᎏᎏ ∆TSatkL g(ρL Ϫ ρG) ΄ ΅ 1/2 q Љd X1 ϭ ᎏ . A reentrant shape that traps gases or vapors in the cavities is found to be most effective.533 X5 X6 for 3. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. such as machined tunnels with openings of predetermined shapes and sizes.1.73 0. and the subscripts S and L refer to the solid surface and liquid. d ϭ 0. the wall temperature begins to decrease as the natural convection heat transfer is able to accommodate higher heat fluxes.35 X5 X4 X8 X2 Nu ϭ 0. porous surfaces created through sintering or other techniques.3%): 0. structured surfaces.23X 1 for 10Ϫ4 Յ p/pcr Յ 0.25) All fluids (general correlation for all of the above fluids. thereby exposing more of the thin film underneath a bubble. d the equilibrium break-off bubble diameter as defined above.117 0.1. θ the contact angle in degrees (not in rad). air separation. 3.3-10 Cryogenic liquids (mean absolute error ϭ 14.97 (3. A number of enhanced geometries are commercially available.1. No single predictive equation is available to predict the comprehensive effect of subcooling on nucleate pool boiling. Their results indicate that first. θ ϭ 1° (3.82X 1 Multiphase Flow Handbook for 4. and chemical industries.5 shows a schematic of a reentrant cavity.6 Effect of Subcooling Judd et al.624 0. d. θ ϭ 35° Nu ϭ 207X 1 (3. They are routinely employed in cryogenic.26 MW/m2.745 0. A good survey of enhancement mechanisms is given by Bergles (1997). LLC .24) Refrigerants (mean absolute error ϭ 10.0 ϫ 10Ϫ3 Յ p/pcr Յ 0.674 0. the wall superheat varied from 24 K at the saturation condition to about 32 K at a subcooling of 60 K.3%): 0. mean absolute error ϭ 22. σd ρG X5 ϭ ᎏ ρL µL X6 ϭ ᎏ ρLαL (ρcpk)S cpLTsatd 2 X3 ϭ ᎏ . respectively.329 Nu ϭ 4.0 ϫ 10Ϫ3 Յ p/pcr Յ 0.78. including rolling of perforated fins protruding from the base.297 0.1. refrigeration. X7 ϭ ᎏ 2 (ρcpk)L αL ρL Ϫ ρG hfgd 2 X4 ϭ ᎏ . etc.581 0.26) The definitions of Nusselt number. For water with a heat flux of 1. For higher values of subcooling.97. kLTSat 2 αL ρL X2 ϭ ᎏ . The subcooling effect is more pronounced at higher heat fluxes. X8 ϭ ᎏ 2 ρL αL where α (ϭk /(ρ cp)) is the thermal diffusivity.371 Ϫ1. 3.257 0.

Enhancement of pool boiling with forced flow is covered under flow boiling heat transfer.8 Effect of Orientation Orientation affects the bubble removal process at low heat fluxes. Italy. Eds. ∆Tsat (K) FIGURE 3. G.Boiling and Condensation 3-11 Heater surface Trapped gas or vapor Cavity mouth FIGURE 3.. A horizontal surface provides the most efficient heat transfer geometry.. Reproduced with permission from Edizioni ETS.. in 2nd European Thermal-Sciences and 14th UIT National Heat Transfer Conference.6. heat transfer deteriorates systematically.1. Edizioni ETS. As the orientation angle changes to a vertical surface and then a downward facing surface.P. It is 106 = 1° = 5° = 10° = 15° = 30° = 45° = 90° Surface heat flux (W/m2) 105 104 103 1 10 100 1000 Wall superheat. A. Italy. and Mariani. Mechanical vibrations provide pressure fluctuations that are especially effective under subcooled boiling conditions. 3.. 1996. El-Genk (1996) presents an extensive overview of the effect of orientation on the entire pool boiling curve as shown in Figure 3. M. LLC ..5 Schematic representation of a reentrant cavity trapping gas or vapor. (From El-Genk.1. Celta. P.) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.6 Effect of orientation on the pool boiling curve. Di Marco.

The more volatile component is depleted at the interface. The hydrodynamic model does not represent the events leading to the CHF. It incorporates several key features of previous investigators and ~ /h ϩ x ~/ h )Ϫ1 (x 1 1 2 ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ hm ϭ ᎏ ~ ∆T ϩ x ~ᎏ x Tdp Ϫ Tbp 1 1 2∆T2 ᎏᎏ 1 ϩ 1 Ϫ exp Ϫ2. and water/ethylene glycol systems. Both the number of nucleation sites as well as bubble frequency increase. leaving a thin film of vapor underneath. As the heat flux is increased.1. ethanol/water. formulated their models based on the hydrodynamic instability theory.. The interface temperature therefore rises and heat transfer is degraded. The intense vapor–liquid interaction at the heater surface has prevented researchers from gaining clear visual access to the events occurring just prior to CHF. 3. Component 1 is the more volatile component with a lower boiling point.1. Tdp and Tbp are the dew point and bubble point temperatures. An extensive survey of the earlier work can be found in Kandlikar (1999). methanol/ethanol. ethanol/n-butanol. Kandlikar (1998a) presented a methodology to predict the interface concentration. h2. which are then analyzed for stability conditions based on Helmholtz or Taylor’s instability criteria. Estimation of the initial macrolayer thickness and the role of the rewetting phenomenon and contact angles are not adequately addressed by this model.8 shows a high-speed photographic sequence showing the vapor cutback under a liquid droplet placed on a flat heater surface (Kandlikar and Steinke. methanol/benzene. A number of researchers have studied the phenomena and presented detailed models. 3. respectively.2p Ϫ TSat. Kutateladze (1948) and Zuber (1959).1. The rapid evaporation occurring in this region introduces a force due to momentum change that causes the interface to retreat.g.10 Critical Heat Flux in Pool Boiling Critical Heat Flux (CHF) is defined as the highest heat flux that can be sustained under the nucleate boiling mode.9 Nucleate Boiling with Mixtures Nucleate boiling of mixtures of two liquids with different boiling points results in the preferential evaporation of the more volatile component at the evaporating liquid–vapor interface. and further. and TSat. Another model. In general. LLC . bubble activity increases dramatically over a heater surface.7 depicts the cutback phenomenon. Kandlikar (2001a) proposed a model based on the rapid evaporation of the liquid–vapor interface near the base of the liquid–vapor contact line at the heater surface. it does not address the interaction between the liquid–vapor interface and the solid heated surface during frequent rewetting occurring just prior to CHF. e.13. Early researchers. the heat transfer coefficient for the mixture is below the linear-averaged heat transfer coefficient obtained from the respective pure component values. which can be used in predicting the interface temperature. respectively.1. but the boiling curve is affected in almost every region.1p x 1⌬T1 ϩ x 2∆T2 Ά ΄ ΅·Ά · (3.1|p and TSat.3-12 Multiphase Flow Handbook important to note that at high heat fluxes all curves tend to merge.2|p refer to the saturation temperatures of the pure components at the total system pressure p. and Figure 3.28) where K is a constant equal to 0. Fujita et al.27) where h1. considers the depletion of a liquid macrolayer that exists under vapor mushrooms. 2002).8 ᎏᎏ ~ ~ TSat. The following equation was proposed by Zuber: qЉCHF ᎏᎏᎏ ϭK 1/2 hfgρ G [σ g(ρL Ϫ ρG)]1/4 (3. (1996) developed an empirical correlation from their own experimental data on methanol/water. benzene/n-heptane. developed by Haramura and Katto (1983). and the heat transfer is degraded as the more volatile component diffuses through the bulk of the liquid toward the interface. Figure 3. They assumed the presence of either a stable liquid–vapor interface or stable vapor columns. and ∆T1 and ∆T2 are the heat transfer coefficients and the wall superheat values with the two pure components. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.

1 msec interval between successive frames.G. 3771–3780. 2002. Int. This expression accounts for the contact angle and orientation.S. The final expression for CHF is given by 1 ϩ cos θr 1/2 qЉ ᎏ CHF ϭ hfgρG 16 ΂ ϩ ᎏ (1 ϩ cos θ )cos φ΅ ΃΄ ᎏ 4 π 2 r π 1/2 [σ g(ρL Ϫ ρG)]1/4 (3.G. Reproduced with permission from Elsevier.8 mm.S.7 Schematic representation of vapor cutback under liquid during rapid evaporation in the contact line region.29) reduces to the © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. and Steinke. Twϭ150°C. Heat Mass Transfer... J. 2002. droplet diameter 2. J.) The balance between the evaporation momentum force and the retaining surface tension force was used by Kandlikar (2001a) in deriving an expression for CHF.Boiling and Condensation Liquid–vapor interface Vapor Evaporating vapor 3-13 Liquid Motion of the interface A (a) Liquid–vapor interface Liquid Evaporating vapor pushing the interface in the contact line region (b) Vapor A FIGURE 3. S. The receding contact angle was introduced in the force balance for the retaining surface tension force. 45. Reproduced with permission. and Steinke. (From Kandlikar. Equation (3. 45. M.8 High-speed image sequence showing interface movement under a liquid droplet during rapid evaporation.) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) FIGURE 3. LLC . Heat Mass Transfer. M. S.29) where θr is the receding contact angle and φ the angle of orientation of the heater surface with respect to horizontal. (From Kandlikar. 3771–3780. Int.

31) The radiative component is approximated by using appropriate radiation correlations between the heater surface and the surrounding vapor film.c ϩ hF. r (3. Table 3. expression given by Kutateladze (1948) with K ϭ 0.186 0.1). With permission. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.c ϭ 0. 1071–1079. Heat Transfer. 3.13 for a horizontal surface with a receding contact angle of 57. S.178 0.5°.2 Variation of Equivalent K Factor (Product of the Two Bracketed Terms in Eq. The minimum heat flux q Љ MHF is predicted by a correlation developed by Zuber (1959): gσ (ρL Ϫ ρG) qЉ MHF ϭ CρGhfg ᎏᎏ (ρL ϩ ρG)2 ΄ ΅ 1/4 (3.0072 0 Source: Kandlikar.75 is used. Some empirical form of averaging techniques is employed between the CHF and MHF locations.G.c for a vertical flat plate of length L: 3 g(ρL Ϫ ρG)ρGk G hЈ fg hF.1.29).943 ᎏᎏᎏ LµG(Tw Ϫ TSat) ΄ ΅ 1/4 (3.3-14 Multiphase Flow Handbook Table 3. The emissivity of the liquid surface is generally taken as 1 and an empirical shape factor value of 0.425 Ά΄ 3 kG gρG(ρL Ϫ ρG)hЈ fg ᎏᎏᎏ µG(Tw Ϫ TSat) ΅΄ g(ρL Ϫ ρG) ᎏᎏ σ ΅· 1/2 1/4 (3. [3..32) where hЈ fg ϭ hfg(1 ϩ 0.c ϭ 0. the correlation by Berenson (1961) is used extensively: hF. The following correlation by Hsu and Westwater (1960) is recommended for hF.09 by Berenson (1961) based on his data for MHF for a flat plate.0317 0.1.0745 0.126 0. hF ϭ hF. The early work by Bromley (1950) provides an excellent insight into the film boiling phenomenon. and fully developed film boiling (E–F). 2001a. (3. LLC . J.33) where hЈ fg ϭ hfg(1 ϩ 0.30) The value of constant C was determined to be 0.G(Tw Ϫ TSat)/hfg).2 shows the variation of K with contact angle for a horizontal surface as predicted from Eq.G(Tw Ϫ TSat)/hfg) is the latent heat corrected for the vapor superheating. The film boiling heat transfer coefficient hF consists of the convective and radiative components.26] Receding Contact Angle (deg) 0 20 45 60 90 120 150 180 Equivalent K 0. minimum heat flux (MHF) condition in film boiling (point E).34cp.50cp. Heat transfer in the transition region depends on the rewetting characteristics of the heater surface. 123.150 0.11 Film Boiling The post-CHF region consists of transition boiling (D–E in Figure 3. For a horizontal flat plate.

The convective contribution continues to diminish. The heat transfer coefficient in the single phase is almost constant except for the variation due to property changes with increasing liquid temperature along the tube length. and eventually fully developed boiling (FDB) is established. A thin layer of bubbles is formed on the wall. as more nucleation sites are activated beyond ONB. while the single-phase convective contribution diminishes. the contribution to heat transfer from the nucleate boiling continues to rise. and high flux heat removal systems. Subsequently.1 Flow Boiling Introduction to Flow Boiling The process of flow boiling of a liquid heated in a confined passage is commonly encountered in many applications. At some location. This gives rise to a thermodynamic nonequilibrium condition with the liquid temperature falling below the equilibrium subcooled liquid temperature dictated by the local enthalpy. Flow beyond the x ϭ 0 location falls under the saturated flow boiling region.1. the layer becomes populated with more bubbles. This region is called the partial boiling region. whose sizes also increase with decreasing subcooling. Heat transfer following NVG is in the two-phase region. The first bubbles appear on the wall at a location identified as the ONB.Boiling and Condensation 3-15 3. LLC . As heat addition continues downstream. as more sites are activated.2. Figure 3.Sat)/hfg ϭϪcp∆TSub/hfg (3. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. distillation and other processes in chemical and petrochemical industries. The bubbles generated at the wall immediately following ONB cannot grow due to the condensation occurring at the bubble surface exposed to the subcooled liquid flow. identified as the point of net vapor generation NVG (also called OSV). Subcooled liquid enters the tube and is heated by single-phase convection. Further downstream.9 shows the flow boiling process in a uniformly heated circular tube. such as steam generators in power plants. the saturation condition (x ϭ 0) under thermodynamic equilibrium is reached. As the bulk liquid temperature increases in the flow direction.34) Dryout Bubbly flow Slug flow Annular flow Mist flow TW = Tsat ONB Single phase NVG Saturated flow boiling Subcooled flow boiling x<0 x>0 x=0 Post dryout region Single phase vapor x=1 FIGURE 3. the bubbles eventually detach from the wall and flow toward the liquid core.9 Flow boiling in a circular tube. The wall temperature begins to level off.2 3. Some bubbles condense along the way. The state of the subcooled liquid can be defined in terms of an equilibrium “quality” based on the liquid enthalpy relative to the saturation state: x ϭ (hL Ϫ hL. As the wall temperature reaches the saturation temperature. The vapor present in the subcooled flow following NVG is at the saturation temperature. the wall temperature remains almost constant in the FDB region until some point where the convective effects become important again due to the two-phase flow in the newly defined significant void flow region. evaporators in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment.1. nucleation does not occur immediately because a certain amount of wall superheat is needed to nucleate cavities existing on the wall.

the nucleation criterion suggested by Hsu and Graham (1961) has been confirmed by many later investigators.34) results in a negative quality in the subcooled region. Saturated flow boiling covers the region when the wall temperature exceeds the local saturation temperature of the liquid and the equilibrium thermodynamic quality (mass fraction of vapor) is between 0 and 1. The liquid temperature profile near the heater surface is obtained from the single-phase heat transfer coefficient prior to nucleation. LLC . boiling can occur depending on the tube surface characteristics and the operating conditions.ONB]2 (3.41) are evaluated at the saturation temperature and hL is determined from an appropriate single-phase correlation incorporating a wall temperature correction if necessary. The range of the active cavity radii in nondimensional form is then given by the following equation: 1 ∆T ∗ Sat ∗ R∗ Ϯ max.36) The range of active cavity radii were also presented by Hsu.41) The properties in Eqs.37) k h ∆T ᎏᎏ ΅ ΄ Ί1 ๶ϩ ๶๶๶ 2σ T v h L fg sub Sat fg L (3. In the single-phase region of the subcooled flow before any boiling is initiated.1.2. (3. As the wall temperature exceeds the local saturation temperature.35) The single-phase heat transfer coefficient hL is given by the appropriate single-phase heat transfer coefficient in the laminar or turbulent region.1. ϭ h (T Ϫ T ) ϭ h (∆T ϩ ∆T ) q L W L L Sat Sub (3. Heat transfer to a liquid flowing inside a tube is by the single-phase mode as long as the liquid and wall are both below the saturation temperature of the liquid at the local pressure. Additional factors such as dissolved gases and cavity geometry further affect the nucleation characteristics.ONB ϭ ᎏᎏ 1ϩ kLhfg and q ONB Љ ϭ [kLhfg/(8σ vfgTSat)][∆TSat.3-16 Multiphase Flow Handbook where ∆TSub (ϭTSatϪTL) is the liquid subcooling.2. A nondimensionalized form of these equations was presented by Kandlikar and Spiesman (1997) using the following parameters: Rc (3.36)–(3. the heat flux is expressed in terms of the single-phase liquid heat transfer coefficient and the wall-to-liquid temperature difference: .39) (3.1.2 Onset of Nucleate Boiling The condition for the ONB under flow conditions is obtained as an extension to the pool boiling analysis presented in Section 3. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Boiling under these conditions is called subcooled flow boiling. and Matsumura. R min ϭ ᎏ ᎏᎏ ∗ 2 ∆T ∗ Sat ϩ ∆T Sub ΄ Ϫ ᎏᎏ ᎏᎏ Ί๶΂๶ ๶ ∆T ϩ๶ ∆T ๶ (∆T ϩ ∆T ) ΅ ΃๶๶๶๶๶ 2 ∗ Sat ∆T ∗ Sat 1 ∗ Sub ∗ Sat ∗ Sub (3. The bulk liquid may still be in the subcooled region. In the absence of hysteresis effects. Bergles and Rohsenow (1964) described the nucleation criterion graphically in terms of the tangency condition and presented an empirical correlation for the ONB condition. Hsu (1962) and Sato and Matsumura (1964) presented equations for ∆ΤSat.ONB and qONB: 4σ TSatvlg hL ∆TSat. Equation (3.38) R∗ cϭ ᎏ δt ∆TSathfgδ t ∆T ∗ Sat ϭ ᎏᎏ 8σ TSatvfg ∆TSubhfgδ t ∆T ∗ Sub ϭ ᎏᎏ 8σ TSatvfg (3. Sato.40) where the single-phase thermal boundary layer thickness in the liquid is given by δ t ϭ kL/hL. 3.

Boiling and Condensation Flow Patterns


The distribution of liquid and vapor phases in the tube plays an important role in the pressure drop and heat transfer during flow boiling. Figure 3.9 shows the flow patterns observed in a horizontal tube. The major flow patterns are: (1) bubbly flow – discrete bubbles – exist in the flow field with continuous liquid phase, generally observed at low vapor qualities; (2) slug or plug flow – as vapor quality increases, bubbles start to coalesce and fill the entire tube with liquid and vapor flowing alternately in the channel; (3) annular flow — at higher vapor qualities, the vapor forms a continuous core with liquid flowing around the periphery as a smooth or wavy film; and (4) mist flow — it consists of liquid droplets flowing in a continuous vapor phase, this flow pattern occurs beyond the “Dryout” location (see Figure 3.9). There are additional flow patterns, such as a stratified flow pattern, that occurs at low flow rates. The transitional flow patterns, such as bubbly–slug and annular–mist also appear as the flow patterns change with increasing quality along the evaporator length. All flow patterns, except for the mist flow and single-phase vapor, can be classified under wetted a wall condition, which is desirable from a heat transfer perspective. Heat transfer and pressure drop are closely related to the existing flow patterns. The flow patterns described in Figure 3.9 refer to flow boiling in a horizontal tube. Figure 3.10 shows the flow patterns in a vertical tube. The major differences are the existence of a churn flow pattern, in which the liquid and vapor flow as an agitated mixture, the distortion of the vapor plugs due to buoyancy forces, and the absence of a stratified flow. Vertical upflow and downflow have some differences, mainly at low flow velocities. Numerous attempts have been made in the literature to identify flow patterns existing under a given set of operating conditions — liquid- and vapor-phase properties, tube diameter, and mass flux. Flow pattern maps developed for adiabatic flows are generally used for flow boiling, although such an approach introduces significant errors at higher heat fluxes. The influence of boiling on flow patterns becomes important at higher heat fluxes as the rapidly evaporating liquid–vapor interface of a growing bubble or a vapor plug introduces additional forces. In the studies conducted on the conventional channels (Ͼ 3 mm hydraulic diameter), the effect of heat flux has been ignored and researchers have used the adiabatic flow pattern maps for flow boiling as well. As the heat flux increases, the rapid expansion at a nucleating bubble causes major changes in the flow patterns, particularly for small hydraulic diameter channels (Dh Ͻ 3 mm). This aspect has been extensively discussed by Kandlikar (2003) for flow boiling in microchannels.

Bubbly flow

Slug or plug flow

Churn flow

Annular flow

Mist flow

FIGURE 3.10 Flow patterns during flow boiling in a vertical tube.

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

3-18 Subcooled Flow Boiling Heat Transfer

Multiphase Flow Handbook

Kandlikar (1998a) proposed that the nucleate boiling term in the nucleate boiling region of the saturated flow boiling correlation by Kandlikar (1990) (see Eq. [3.56]) should be able to represent the fully developed boiling in a subcooled flow since the convective contribution is negligible. One of the features of this correlation, as reported by Kandlikar (1991a), is its ability to predict the trends in h vs. x in the lowquality region, explaining the reasons for increasing or decreasing h for different cases. The heat transfer coefficient h∗ in the FDB region is thus given by the following equation derived from the nucleate boiling dominant region of the Kandlikar correlation. h∗ ϭ 1058.0Bo0.7FFIhLO (3.42)

Note that h∗ is based on the wall superheat with q Љϭh∗∆TSat. The boiling number is defined as BoϭqЉ/(Ghfg), with G (kg/m2 sec) being the total mass flux, Ffl the fluid–surface parameter that accounts for the different nucleation characteristics of different surface–fluid combinations, and hLO the singlephase heat transfer coefficient for all flow in the liquid phase at the saturation temperature obtained from appropriate equations for the laminar flow — Nu ϭ constant for fully developed laminar flow; or for the turbulent flow — Gnielinski (1976) and Petukhov and Popov (1963) correlations along with the following property correction factor recommended by Petukhov (1970): NuLO ϭ NuLO, cp(µB/µw)0.11 (3.43)

where NuLO,cp is the Nusselt number with constant properties obtained from the following equations, and the subscripts b and w refer to the properties at bulk and wall temperatures, respectively. Petukhov and Popov (1963), for 0.5 Յ Pr Յ 2000 and 104 Յ ReLO Յ 5ϫ106, obtained ReLO PrL (f /2) NuLO, cp ϭ ᎏᎏᎏᎏ 2/3 [1.07 ϩ 12.7(Pr L Ϫ 1)(f /2)0.5] and Gnielinski (1976), for 0.5 Յ Pr Յ 2000 and 2300 Յ ReLO Ͻ 104, obtained (ReLO Ϫ 1000)(f /2)PrL NuLO, cp ϭ ᎏᎏᎏ [1 ϩ 12.7(Pr 2/3 Ϫ 1)(f /2)0.5] where f is the friction factor given by the following equation: f ϭ [1.58 ln(ReLO) Ϫ 3.28]Ϫ2 (3.46) (3.45) (3.44)

The location of where the fully developed boiling begins, corresponding to q FDB,i Љ , is obtained by first locating the heat flux q int Љ at the intersection of the extended single-phase line and the fully developed boiling curve given by Eq. (3.42): 1058FFl(G hfg)Ϫ0.7 q int Љ Ϫ qint Љ0.3 Ϫ 1058hLOFFl(G hfg)Ϫ0.7 ∆TSub ϭ 0 A model proposed by Bowring (1962) is then used to obtain the location where FDB begins: q FBD,i Љ ϭ 1.4q Љ int (3.48) (3.47)

A comparison of the predicted heat flux in the fully developed boiling region using Eq. (3.42) with experimental data of Bergles and Rohsenow (1964) is shown in Figure 3.11. The other three prediction methods by Shah (1977), Thom et al. (1965), and Mikic and Rohsenow (1969) are also shown in Figure 3.11. It is seen that the present model is able to predict the trend as well as actual values in the FDB region accurately. Heat transfer in the partial boiling region, from x ϭ 0 to the beginning of the fully developed region, is obtained by interpolation between the two end locations. Further details of the interpolation method are described by Kandlikar (1998a, 1999).

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Boiling and Condensation
100 Experimental data for water from Bergles and Rohsenow (1964) Heat flux q (MW/m2)


Kandlikar (1998a) 10 Shah (1977) Thom et al. (1965) Mikic and Rohsenow (1969) 1 1 10 Wall superheat ∆Tsat (K) 100

FIGURE 3.11 Comparison of the predictions from Eq. (3.42) in the fully developed boiling with experimental data of Bergles and Rohsenow (1964). (From Kandlikar, S.G., J. Heat Transfer, 120, 395–401, 1998a. Reproduced with permission from ASME.)

The partial boiling region is identified as the region between the onset of nucleate boiling ONB and the onset of fully developed boiling FDB. Heat transfer in this region is calculated by a procedure outlined by Kandlikar (1998a) as follows. Љ at ONB is obtained from Eq. (3.37). The heat flux q FDB Љ at FDB is obtained from Eq. (3.48), and q ONB For the heat flux q PB Љ in the partial boiling region, the following equation is employed: q PB Љ ϭ a ϩ b(Tw Ϫ TSat)m The constants a and b are obtained from the known heat fluxes at FDB and ONB as follows: Љ q FDB Љ Ϫ qONB b ϭ ᎏᎏᎏ (∆TSat,FDB)m Ϫ (∆TSat,ONB)m and a ϭ qONB Љ Ϫ b(∆TSat,ONB)m The exponent m is allowed to vary linearly with heat flux as follows: m ϭ n ϩ pq PB Љ (3.52) (3.51) (3.50) (3.49)

where the constants n and p are obtained by matching the slopes of m ϭ 1 at ONB to m ϭ 1/0.3 at FDB: p ϭ (1/0.3 Ϫ 1)/(q Љ FDB Ϫ q Љ ONB) and n ϭ 1 Ϫ pq ONB Љ (3.54) (3.53)

The above procedure assures smooth transitions from the single-phase region to the partial boiling region, and then to the FDB region. The gradual increase in the exponent m also reflects the fact that more nucleation sites are activated as the wall superheat increases. A comparison of the present model with the experimental data of McAdams et al. (1949) is shown in Figure 3.12. Equations (3.47)–(3.54) are used in the predictive model. It is seen from this figure that the agreement is quite good in the partial boiling region.

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

There are a large number of correlations available in the literature on flow boiling of saturated liquids. with some refrigerants with low density ratios and with high heat fluxes. The hconv and hnucl are obtained from a combination of earlier models published in the literature.22 m/sec 1E+06 Multiphase Flow Handbook 1E+05 1 10 Wall superheat (K) 100 FIGURE 3. 1991b) is developed from a large data bank consisting of over 10. (1949). Shah (1982) proposed a correlation in a chart form that worked well with many fluids. yielding an increasing trend in hTP with increasing x for fluids with low boiling number (Bo ϭ q Љ/(Ghfg)) and high liquid-to-vapor density ratio (ρL/ρG).1. employ an asymptotic model in which hn TP ϭ h conv ϩ h nucl with n ϭ 2 and 3. for example. In contrast. The Chen (1966) correlation was developed on an additive model with convective enhancement and nucleate boiling suppression due to two-phase flow.000 data points and different fluids.G. These models work well in some cases. The presence of nucleate boiling and convective boiling modes in flow boiling has long been recognized. The correlation by Kandlikar (1990. and cryogens. Heat transfer in this mode is thus a combination of the nucleation phenomena and enhanced convection. refrigerants. Reproduced with permission from ASME. Heat Transfer. As the bubbles grow and depart.8 K Pressure = 4. the vapor quality in the flow increases and two-phase flow ensues. Also. (3. because of their highly empirical nature.12 Comparison of predictions from Eqs. 1998a. (From Kandlikar.. representative of the nucleate-boiling-dominant (NBD) region. respectively. such as those used by Liu and Winterton (1991) and Steiner n n and Taborek (1992). In particular.) 3.2 mm Heat flux (W/m2) Velocity = 1. 120.54) in the partial boiling region with experimental data of McAdams et al. each being influenced by the other mode.47) – (3. S. it has been shown to predict the variation in hTP well. The higher specific volume of the vapor causes the flow velocity to increase. The flow boiling correlation © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.3-20 1E+07 McAdams et al. with water at low pressure and low Bo. (1949) Subcooling = 27. Heat transfer in saturated flow boiling is thus a combination of the convective heat transfer from the wall to liquid and subsequent film evaporation at the liquid–vapor interface. It works reasonably well with low-pressure water data. however. it becomes difficult to identify the role of different mechanisms in studying the parametric effects.2. representative of the convective-boiling-dominant (CBD) region. 395–401. because of their exponentially averaged form. a decreasing trend is predicted for high Bo and low-density ratio.14 bar Dh = 13. and nucleate boiling at the wall. they do not correctly represent the trends of hTP vs. but yields significantly higher errors with high-pressure water data and refrigerants. LLC . for example. nucleate boiling initiates the process of vapor generation during flow boiling. x.5 Saturated Flow Boiling Heat Transfer As liquid flows inside a heated tube surface. It is also able to accurately predict the parametric trends. J. Gungor and Winterton (1987) combined the Chen model and the Shah model. Other recent correlations. including water.

and available cavity sizes and their distribution on the heater surface.2 provides the values of FFl obtained from Kandlikar (1990.5 (3.5((1 Ϫ x)/x)0. For stainless-steel tubes. it accounts for the nucleation characteristics of a given surface through a fluid–surface parameter FFl.13 shows a comparison of the Kandlikar (1990) correlation with the experimental data of Schrock and Grossman (1962). and flow boiling in microchannels and minichannels (Kandlikar and Steinke.07 ϩ 12. FFl should be taken as 1. Table 3.8f2(FrLO)hLO ϩ 667.56) where Co (ϭ(ρG / ρL)0.0 with all fluids.7(PrL Ϫ 1)(f /2)0. CBD ϭ 1.5 Յ PrL Յ 2000 and 104 Ͻ ReLO Յ 5 ϫ 106: ReLO PrL(f /2)(kL/D) hLO ϭ ᎏᎏᎏᎏ 2/3 1.0Bo0.5 Յ PrL Յ 2000 and 2300 Ͻ ReLO Յ 104: (ReLO Ϫ 1000)PrL(f /2)(kL/D) hLO ϭ ᎏᎏᎏ 2/3 1 ϩ 12. In addition. Kandlikar and Balasubramanian. 1998a).58) The single phase all liquid heat transfer coefficient hLO is obtained from the Gnielinski (1976) correlation in the range 0.8FFlhLO and hTP.61) (3. LLC . © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.58 ln(ReLO) Ϫ 3.Boiling and Condensation 3-21 has been successfully extended to subcooled flow boiling (Kandlikar. It has been recognized that the nucleation characteristics and associated heat transfer depend on contact angle. f2 (FrLO) is given by the following equation: f2(FrLO) ϭ (25FrLO)0. Gaertner (1965) noted that …analytical treatments of nucleate boiling that do not consider the nature of the surface cannot accurately predict heat transfer relationships… The flow boiling model is thus able to account for the different nucleation characteristics of different fluid–surface combinations through the incorporation of FFl.5 The friction factor f is given by the following equation: f ϭ [1. 1999) and Melin (1996) for different fluids. this constant needs to be obtained from the experimental data. binary mixtures (Kandlikar. Introduction of FFl in the nucleate boiling term is an important aspect of the Kandlikar correlation. surface tension.4.60) FFl is a fluid–surface parameter that depends on the fluid and the heater surface characteristics.55) where hTP in the respective regions are given by the following equations: hTP. 1991b) correlation is given by hTP ϭ larger of Άh hTP Έ CBD TP Έ NBD (3.9(1 Ϫ x)0. 2003. The correlation is able to predict correctly the increasing trend in hTP with x for the low-pressure data (large values of ρL/ρG). The Froude number multiplier f2 (FrLO) is 1 for vertical tubes and for horizontal tubes with FrLO Ն 0.6683CoϪ0.2Bo0. 2003).4. Table 3. 1991b.8f2(FrLO)hLO ϩ 1058. NBD ϭ 0.28]Ϫ2 (3.57) (3. The Kandlikar (1990.3 (3.7(1 Ϫ x)0.59) The Petukhov and Popov (1963) correlation is employed for 0. and a decreasing trend for the high-pressure data (low values of ρL/ρG). However. 1998c). For FrLO Յ 0.7(1 Ϫ x)0.136CoϪ0.8) is the convection number. These values should be considered as representative for commercial tubing.3 lists the FFl values for several fluids in copper tubes.7(PrL Ϫ 1)(f /2)0.8FFlhLO (3. Bo (ϭqЉ/(Ghfg)) is the boiling number and FrLO (ϭG 2/(ρ L gD)) is the Froude number with all flow as liquid.2(1 Ϫ x)0. Figure 3.

15 Note: For stainless-steel tubes. in Handbook of Phase Change. S.2 ×10–4.24 2.8. the use of NuLOϭ constant is recommended for calculating hLO instead of the single-phase turbulent flow correlations.K.30 1. 1999.4 0. Taylor & Francis.P. V. D = 3 mm 0 0. Water Run 293. it is found that hTP falls entirely in the NBD region and is given © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.30 1.G. PA..50 1. Eds. for microchannels. and Celata.88 1.27 1.74 2..3 0.488 2.20 1.00 1.G. As the all-liquid flow Reynolds number enters the laminar region. Philadelphia.2 Quality. L/ G L/ G = 110. Boiling and Condensation. G.. Bo = 3.3-22 Table 3.13 Comparison of Schrock and Grossman’s experimental data with the Kandlikar (1990) correlation. At higher qualities. use FFl ϭ 1.39 1.3 FFl Values in the Kandlikar Correlation Fluid Water R-11 R-12 R-13B1 R-22 R-32a R-113 R-114 R-125a R-134a R-142ba R-143aa R-152a R-32/R-132 60–40% (by wt) Butanea Kerosene Propanea a Multiphase Flow Handbook FFl 1. LLC .1 0. S.31 2. Dhir. Values obtained by Melin (1996). Reprinted with permission from Taylor & Francis. Kandlikar. Furthermore. (From Kandlikar.50 0. 150 h TP ×10–3 (W/m2K) 100 50 Schrock and Grossman's data.0 for all fluids..0 0. local dryout may occur with a significant reduction in the heat transfer coefficient. D = 6 mm = 210. The Kandlikar (1990. x 0.63 1.) The Kandlikar correlation is recommended in the wetted wall region below a quality of about 0. Run 156.5 FIGURE 3.10 3. Bo = 1. 1991b) correlation was extended to microchannels (10 µm Ͻ Dh Յ 200 µm) and minichannels (200 µm Ͻ Dh Յ 3 mm) by Kandlikar and Steinke (2003) and Kandlikar and Balasubramanian (2003).1×10–3..30 1.

1991a. x plot in the NBD region.7 ϭqЉ(FFl)1/0. including water and refrigerants. hTP / hLO Modified boiling number. (3. These parametric trends have been confirmed for a number of fluids. Depletion of the more volatile component raises the local saturation temperature at the liquid–vapor interface. LLC . Reproduced with permission from ASME.6 Flow Boiling Map The main parameters governing flow boiling heat transfer can be represented in terms of the following four nondimensional groups: 1.14 Flow boiling map for subcooled and saturated flow boiling. Bo∗ ϭ Bo(FFl)1/0. The flow boiling heat transfer mechanisms in these geometries are discussed in detail by Kandlikar (2003).. 113. J. ASME. 20 Saturated region Nondimensionalized heat transfer 15 coefficeint.2 0. which essentially displays a decreasing trend in an hTP/hLO vs.1. process. x 0.Boiling and Condensation 3-23 by Eq. 2.6 0. including chemical.0 0. The magnitude of Bo∗ governs the nucleate boiling contribution.2.56) without the Froude number correction (use f2 (FrLO) ϭ 1). 190–200. 4. ρL/ρG Vapor quality.7/(Ghfg) Density ratio. x The parametric trends of hTP with various operating parameters was represented by Kandlikar (1991a) in terms of a flow boiling map.8 FIGURE 3. 3.4 Quality.) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.2. (From Kandlikar. x plot in the CBD region. Nondimensionalized heat transfer coefficient. which gives rise to an increasing trend in an hTP/hLO vs.G. The difference in boiling points of the pure components in a mixture causes preferential vaporization of the more volatile component across liquid–vapor interfaces at the nucleating bubbles. 3. near an annular film or around a vapor slug. This also results in the diffusion of the more volatile component in the liquid phase toward the interface. Density ratio is seen as an important factor governing the role of the convective contribution.14. Heat Transfer.7 Flow Boiling of Binary Mixtures Flow boiling of mixtures is encountered in many practical applications.1. as shown in Figure 3. and refrigeration industries. 3. The net result is the lowering of the heat transfer coefficient for the mixture below the average value obtained from the linear mass. S. Trans. petrochemical.or mole-fraction-averaged interpolation between the pure component values. hTP /hLO L/ G = 1000 Bo* = 10–3 10 L/ G = 100 5 L/ G = 10 Bo* = 10–4 0 0.

and 1.8f2(FrLO)hLO ϩ 667. Bennett and Chen (1980).L V1 ϭ ᎏ hfg (y Ϫ x )Έ ΂ ΃΂ ΃ Έ ᎏ dx 0.1782 ϫ 10 µL. Takamatsu © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. with mixture properties. (3. LLC . 1. and later extended it to flow boiling.03 Ͻ V1 Ͻ 0.9(1 Ϫ x)0. and Kandlikar (1998c).57).4 shows the mean deviations between the predicated values using the Kandlikar (1998c) correlation described above and the experimental data of Jung et al. Table 3. One of the main difficulties encountered in modeling binary flow boiling is the uncertainty in predicting the interfacial concentration at the nucleating bubble interface.03 Ͻ V1 Ͻ 0.67) ∼ are respective molar concentrations of components 1 and 2.5 α ᎏ D12 dT 1 1 (3.2Bo0. with mixture properties. Vm the molar volume in m3/kg mol.0 for unassociated solvents. In the Kandlikar (1998c) model. Eqs. CBD ϭ 1.2. Region II: Moderate diffusion-induced suppression region. Eq. Three regions in binary flow boiling are identified based on the value of V1 Region I: Near-azeotropic region.7(1 Ϫ x)0. 1. 0. M the molecular weight.2 and Bo Ͻ 1E-4. a volatility parameter V1 is defined as cp.L FD ϭ 0. Jung (1988). µL the liquid viscosity.5 for ethanol. (1973). and x1 and y1 are the liquid and vapor mass fractions of the more volatile component 1.62) 1 where α is the thermal diffusivity of the liquid. Region III: Severe diffusion-induced suppression region. The diffusivity D12 is calculated from the following equation: 0 x x ) (D 0 D12 ϭ (D12 21) 2 ∼ ∼ 1 (3. and D 0 and D 0 are indi∼ and x where x 12 21 1 2 vidual component diffusivities at very low concentrations given by the following Wilke–Chang correlation: (φ M2)1/2T Ϫ16 ᎏᎏ (3.2. Hihara et al.64) The heat transfer is entirely in the CBD region.1 where φ is the association factor for the solvent (2.03: hTP Έ CBD (3. Among the more successful ones are Calus et al. Use the pure component correlation in the NBD region. methane. D12 the mass diffusivity of component 1 in a mixture of components 1 and 2. (1988).57). and T the temperature in K. 1.678 1 ϩ ᎏ hfg ΄ ΂ ΃΂ ΃ Έ 0.65) A diffusion-induced suppression factor FD is introduced in the nucleate boiling term to reflect the reduction in heat transfer coefficient due to the mass diffusion resistance present at the interface.56) and (3. V1 Ͻ0.2Vm.136CoϪ0.9 for ethylene glycol.26 for water.63) hTP ϭ larger of hTP Έ NBD Ά Use pure component correlations.9 for methanol.5 α ᎏ D12 dT ᎏ (y1 Ϫ x1) dx1 Έ΅ Ϫ1 (3. and dT/dx1 corresponds to the slope of the bubble point curve at a liquid-phase concentration of x1. FD is given by the following equation: cp. including benzene. and refrigerants). hTP. Kandlikar (1998b) used a control volume approach to obtain the interfacial concentration in pool boiling.68) D0 12 ϭ 1. (1989). (a) for 0. and (b) V1 Ͼ 0. and Bo Ͼ 1E-4: hTP ϭ hTPCBD (3.8FFlhLOFD (3. (3.66) The equilibrium phase mass concentrations are calculated at the total system pressure.3-24 Multiphase Flow Handbook A number of researchers have provided useful correlations to predict the heat transfer coefficients in a binary (two components in both liquid and vapor phases) system.

Region III.V1 = 0.015–0. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.3 8.39 0. Heat transfer coefficients in multicomponent systems are even more difficult to predict.025–0.4 13. It follows the gradual depletion of liquid due to evaporation and entrainment of the liquid film.52–1.1 Hihara et al. overall) = 0. i.01–1. and Murata and Hashizume (1993). 120. boilers. There is no reliable general methodology available to make any recommendation for mixtures of three or more components.34 Mean Absolute Deviation (%) 8. and the binary flow boiling correlation scheme applied as a first approximation.5–77 47–61 37–60 19–76 9.05 V1 0.07 p = 0. (1993) Celata et al.1.064 0. The ranges of parameters are also included in Table 3.0 9.22 MPa..15 0.4 Comparison of the Binary Flow Boiling Correlation of Kandlikar (1998c) with Experimental Data from the Literature Data Source Jung et al.83 0. CHF condition represents the upper limit and subsequent sudden termination of (in heat flux controlled systems) or considerable degradation (in temperature-controlled systems) in nucleate boiling heat transfer (Kandlikar.1–0. It is suggested that the most volatile component be taken as component 1 and the rest of the mixture treated as component 2.. Heat Transfer.72 0. 2001b).15 shows a comparison of a data set obtained by Murata and Hashizume (1993) for R-134a/R-123 mixture in the severe suppressed region. LLC . (1993) Murata and Hashizume (1993) 4 Heat transfer coefficient (kW/m2 K) 3 R-134a/R-123 x1 (R-134a.45 0.8 1 2 1 0 FIGURE 3.15 Comparison of the Kandlikar (1998c) correlation with R-134a/R-123 flow boiling data of Murata and Hashizume (1993) in the severe diffusion-induced suppression region (Region III).33 0 0.52–1.06–0.04–1. (1988) Binary System R-12/R-152a R-12/R-152a R-22/R-114 R-500 R-12/R-22 R-22/R-114 R-22/R-114 R-12/R-114 R-134a/R-123 Bo (ϫ 10E-5) 6.84–0.2 0.91 0.3 10.G.4–88 20–185 Co 0.e.013–0.67 0.1–77 7.2 8. and cooling of high heat flux components and devices. (From Kandlikar. (1993). (1993).004–0.01–1.0006–0. refrigeration and cryogenic evaporators.0 11.2. (1989) Takamatsu et al.2 0.8–71 7. Figure 3.3 9.28–0.Boiling and Condensation 3-25 TABLE 3.64 0. 3. 388–394.01–1.4 Quality 0.54 0.07–0. Reproduced with permission from ASME.28–0.1–6.4 13. S.9 12.002 0. J.023–1.8 0.022 0. such as nuclear reactors. It is seen that the agreement is quite good in all three regions.4.6 0.8 Critical Heat Flux in Flow Boiling The heat transfer coefficient in flow boiling dramatically reduces as the liquid ceases to be in contact with the walls of the flow channel. Dryout condition represents the upper limit of the convective boiling heat transfer.83 0. 1998c.044 0.) et al. Knowledge of the conditions leading to CHF and the prediction of CHF for a given geometry under a given set of operating conditions are extremely important in the safe operation of flow boiling equipment.018–3. copper tube q = 10 kW/m2 G = 200 kg/m2sec Region III. Celata et al.

the reader is referred to the detailed treatise on this topic. They postulated that the CHF condition is reached when this superheated liquid layer attains a certain limiting enthalpy. (1999). and (4) with water and some other fluids. Liquid flow blockage model: Bergel’son (1980) proposed this model based on the assumption that the flow of liquid toward the heated surface is blocked by the outflow of vapor from the heater surface. The neighboring bubbles then cluster together to form a vapor layer between the bulk liquid and restrict the access of liquid to the heater wall. Collier and Thome (1994). this model is not being pursued by other researchers. 3. They assume that a layer of small bubbles flowing adjacent to the heater surface traps the liquid between the bubble layer and the heated surface.g. see e. Kandlikar et al. (3) liquid flow blockage model. and (5) liquid sublayer dryout model. LLC . The boiling mechanism is compared with the injection of a gas stream into the liquid flow through a permeable plate. The ejection of bubbles into the mainstream is postulated to be the cause of the boundary layer separation at the heater surface. If the vapor bubble is sufficiently long. This model does not provide a clear explanation of the CHF phenomenon other than stating the existence of a critical liquid enthalpy in the superheated liquid layer. This bubble layer separates the trapped superheated liquid layer from the mainstream. leading to the CHF condition. Understanding the mechanisms leading to CHF permit the development of techniques or operating procedures to increase the CHF for a given system configuration. Lang (1888) recognized the existence of severe heat transfer degradation through his experiments with high-pressure water. 2. Celata and Mariani (1999) summarize the previous models in the following five categories: (1) boundary layer ejection model.3-26 Multiphase Flow Handbook The risks associated with the catastrophic failures following the CHF condition have attracted significant research efforts worldwide for over 40 years. A dry patch forms on the heater surface after a bubble has departed. 2. the photographic study conducted by Mattson et al. Drew and Mueller (1937) provide an excellent summary of historical developments in this area. 1972): 1. A brief overview of CHF under subcooled and saturated flow boiling conditions in uniformly heated circular tubes is presented in this section. (2) critical enthalpy in the bubble layer model. Hewitt (1998). © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Boundary layer ejection model: This model was originally proposed by Kutateladze and Leont’ev (1966).2. A better CHF predictive ability allows the operation of a nuclear reactor with reduced safety margins. thereby increasing the output capacity of the nuclear power plant. the vapor flow away from the wall is not seen to be a limiting factor in subcooled flow boiling. (4) vapor removal limit and near-wall bubble crowding model. A slug flow is observed under certain conditions at low mass fluxes.8. 3. 3. The local temperature in some cases rises to a point where the water fails to rewet the surface. Boyd (1983a. (3) circumferentially uniform. Owing to inadequate evidence supporting this mechanism. This behavior may be feasible under very low mass flux conditions. (1966). 1. Earlier.1 CHF in Subcooled Flow Boiling The CHF in subcooled flow boiling is reached in one of the following three ways (Tong and Hewitt. Tong (1965). However. The liquid film surrounding the vapor bubble evaporates and dries out. Critical enthalpy in the bubble layer model: This model was proposed by Tong et al. with a short length of higher heat flux. Celata and Mariani (1999).1. Tong (1988). 2001b). but axially nonuniform heat flux. For more extensive coverage. 1983b). (1973) does not show any abrupt changes or high-velocity vapor ejection in the macroscopic structure of the flow near the CHF location. A thin layer of bubbles is formed on the wall at moderate heat and mass fluxes.. (2) uniform heat flux along a tube. However. and Tong and Tang (1997). A brief description of each of the mechanisms is given below (Kandlikar. Critical Heat Flux in subcooled and saturated flow boiling has been studied under a number of different conditions: (1) uniform heat flux along a channel length. Extensive experimental and numerical studies have been conducted since the 1960s on the CHF with water in nuclear reactors under safe operating as well as under accident conditions. the heater wall becomes heated during the passage of the bubble and leads to the CHF condition. where the liquid and vapor flow structure is similar to that in the case of pool boiling.

This model includes the two-phase flow considerations that are readily extendable to the saturated flow conditions as well. surface tension. Numerous vapor stems emerge on the heater surface through the liquid film. whereas the film thickness decreases along the flow direction due to evaporation. and vapor blanket length.2. and the vapor blanket length were calculated by considering the buoyancy and drag forces acting on the vapor blanket. liquid film flow rate. Liquid is fed into the film from the upstream end. CHF condition is reached when the heat supplied by the heater surface provides the necessary latent heat required to completely evaporate the liquid entering the film. Liquid sublayer dryout model: Katto and Yokoya (1968) proposed a preliminary model describing the macrolayer dryout as the mechanism leading to CHF in pool boiling. The resulting model has three adjustable empirical constants that are evaluated from the experimental data. Katto (1990a. (1994) eliminated the empirical constants in the Katto (1990a. His model uses several empirical constants in determining the thickness.8. The pool boiling model of Kandlikar (2001a) considers the evaporation momentum force experienced by an evaporating interface. enthalpies. 1990b) provided a detailed description of the model based on the macrolayer evaporation. 5. 3. However. Haramura and Katto (1983) completed the development of the model by introducing the mechanism for macrolayer formation.2 CHF in Low-Quality Saturated Flow Boiling CHF at low qualities in saturated flow boiling is similar to CHF in subcooled flow boiling. and inertia forces. Recently. Celata et al. both the liquid sublayer and the vapor film move in the flow direction. Kandlikar (2003) developed two nondimensional groups that compare the evaporation momentum. A major question that remains unanswered in the above models is the description of the mechanism that prevents rewetting of the dry patches.8. 3. and temperature of the liquid entering into the sublayer. This model is extended to flow boiling by considering a liquid film trapped between a bubble and the heater wall.Boiling and Condensation 3-27 4.2.. flow rate. and the crowding of bubbles preventing liquid access to the heated wall (Hebel et al. The sublayer mass velocity. and it is postulated that this force is responsible for pushing the liquid front away. Vapor removal limit and near-wall bubble crowding model: This model is based on the limit of turbulent interchange between the bubbly layer and the bulk of the liquid. 1990b) and Lee and Mudawar (1988) models by using the homogeneous flow model and introducing appropriate correlations from available literature to calculate the sublayer thickness. LLC . However. Weisman and Pei (1983) consider the existence of a bubbly layer adjacent to the wall at subcooled or low-quality conditions. 1981).1.3 Correlations for CHF in Subcooled Flow Boiling and Low-Quality Saturated Flow Boiling Numerous correlations specific to certain geometries and operating conditions are available in the literature and are recommended for use if they match the desired conditions. The mechanisms and correlations are therefore the same under these conditions. Under flow conditions. The recent models discussed in the preceding section present a considerable improvement over the earlier models by considering CHF as a local phenomenon. the basic features of the model are similar to that proposed by Lee and Mudawar (1988). Later. It is postulated that the CHF condition occurs when the volume fraction of vapor in the bubbly layer just exceeds the critical volume fraction at which an array of ellipsoidal bubbles can be maintained without significant contact between the bubbles. Bubble crowding and liquid film dryout under a growing bubble or a slug are the two main mechanisms leading to CHF in low-quality subcooled flow boiling. further improvements are needed to account for the effect of contact angle on CHF. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. The use of these new nondimensional groups in CHF prediction in flow boiling shows promising results. Lee and Mudawar (1988) considered the effect of velocity in the subcooled flow in terms of stretching the large bubble in the Haramura and Katto (1983) model to a vapor blanket of length equal to the critical Helmholtz wavelength. Weisman and Pei used the homogeneous flow model in the bubbly layer. its thickness. An extensive review of CHF correlations for different geometries and operating conditions is given by Tong and Tang (1997).1. The modeling resulted in a correlation scheme with three empirical constants that were determined from a large set of experimental data.

u ϭ 0.g. (1996).1 m/sec.71) All properties are evaluated at saturation condition.74) Groeneveld et al. The rates of evaporation as well as entrainment to some extent depend on the imposed heat flux. Re the Reynolds number and C ϭ 1.1 Ά10. u ϭ 2.4 MW/m2.5 MPa. mass flux. Note that this correlation is valid for water and cannot be extrapolated beyond the quoted ranges of parameters (it does not approach the pool boiling CHF as u → 0). ∆ and TSub.222x 2 exit (3.2–40 m/sec. Simple correlations are not available to predict the Dryout location. u ϭ 1. (1965) model. The liquid film dryout depends on the rates of its evaporation. This approach was originally developed by Doroshchuk et al. 1999). mass flux.6 (3.35.825 ϩ 0.. 1986.5–13.3-28 Multiphase Flow Handbook For general usage.433xexit ϩ 12.1 (3.1 to 20 MPa. p Յ 5. D ϭ 3–10 mm.4 CHF in Annular Flow Due to Liquid Film Dryout in Saturated Flow Boiling As quality increases. Smith.72) (recommended ranges are.1. The location of the dryout and the corresponding value of CHF at this location are of interest. (1968) for CHF with water in uniformly heated tubes is widely accepted: qЉ C CHF ᎏϭᎏ Ghfg Re 0. 3. mass flux up to 8000 kg/m2 sec.exit ϭ 11–39 K) where G is the mass flux.9 m/sec. (1994) extended the range of the proposed correlation to lower pressures by replacing C with C Ј given by the following correlation: CЈ ϭ (1.2. liquid entrainment in the vapor.68–5. The recent updated tables are published by Groeneveld et al. L/D ϭ 5–100.exit (3.76 Ϫ 7.4 – 11. void fraction evaluated using Thom et al. The correlation of Tong et al.33–15 mm) with ψ (in MPa) is given by the following equations: ψϭ for x ϽϪ0. 8 mm ᎏ 0. and ∆ and TSub.008 ΂ ΃ k (3. Celata et al. and deposition of liquid back from the vapor core into the film.5 qЉ CHF ϭ 7198u ∆TSub. Collier and Thome. the heat balance method requiring an iterative procedure is recommended (Celata and Mariani. and quality of Ϫ0.6 MPa.222x 2 exit)ψ (3. and ∆TSub. Elaborate methods are available in literature to predict the entrainment and deposition rates (e.5–12. q CHF Љ ϭ 0.0 at discrete values covering tube diameters from 3 to 25 mm. 1994). the CHF value for a different tube diameter under the same pressure. (1975). LLC .exit ϭ 15–190 K. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. and D ϭ 0. Other researchers proposed a value of k ϭϪ1/3 (Groeneveld et al.1 – 1. and quality at CHF. void fraction at CHF Ͻ 0. 1986). It is desirable to extend the dryout location to higher qualities as the heat transfer rate is dramatically reduced following the Dryout. and quality conditions is obtained by the following equation: D qЉ CHF ϭ q Љ CHF. the flow pattern changes to annular flow with its characteristic liquid film around the circumference and a central vapor core.exit ϭ 11–39 K).986x exit exit for 0 Ͼ xexit Ն 0.69) (recommended ranges are: p ϭ 0.8.70) (recommended ranges are p ϭ 5..433xexit ϩ 12.73) In evaluating CHF from the above equations. Using these tables.1 MPa.5 to 1. Gunther’s (1951) correlation should be used to provide a good approximation: 0. Another method that is widely followed consists of extensive tabulation of CHF data for a standardized circular tube of 8mm diameter as a function of pressure. (1996) recommends a value of k ϭϪ1/2 based on 22.76 Ϫ 7.946 data points for water covering the ranges of pressure from 0.

77]) for smaller diameter tubes.E–06 0.CHF is plotted against D in Figure 3. inertia forces.5E–03 Dh (m) FIGURE 3. These groups were obtained by considering evaporation momentum forces.5E–03 2.CHF K0.CHF 1.000 1. (3. Smith. K1 represents the ratio of evaporation momentum force to inertia force. the experimental data by Vandervort et al.G. a new parameter K2. (1994) for CHF are plotted as a function of tube diameter for three mass fluxes 0.5 in Eq. taking into consideration the original scatter in the experimental data points. quality. It is seen that this new parameter is able to account for both the diameter and the mass flux effects reasonably well. Reproduced with permission from ASME.CHF. (1994) were fitted by Kandlikar (2003) using two new dimensionless groups K1 and K2. (3. whereas K2 represents the ratio of evaporation momentum and surface tension forces: q K1 ϭ ᎏ Ghfg and q K2 ϭ ᎏ hfg ΂ ΃ᎏ ρ 2 G ρL (3. from –1/2 (Groeneveld et al.76) The pool boiling CHF equation given by Eq.000 G = 25. 1996) or –1/3 (Groeneveld et al. K2. and surface tension forces.000 G = 10.75) ΂ ΃ᎏ ρ σ 2 D G (3. which may be represented through Reynolds or Weber number.CHF with diameter for flow boiling CHF data of Vandervort et al.0E–03 1.5 to 2.0E–03 2. 1986) to –1/3. J. Using this parameter. respectively.16 Variation of K2. As a first attempt.77) for tube diameters is in the range 0. where φ and θr are the orientation of the heated wall and receding contact angle.29) can be stated as K2. 1986.15 mm for data sets of Vandervort et al. Heat Transfer.75 in Figure 3..77) where C is a constant.77) with Eq. and contact angle. The three plots fall on three separate lines. the data of Vandervort et al..) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Heat transfer in the post-CHF region depends on the extent of droplet deposition on the tube wall. (3. LLC . 2003.0E+00 5.CHF K 1.E–04 K2. (1994) for different values of G in kg/m2 sec. 125. Comparing Eq. (From Kandlikar. Correlations by Groeneveld (1973) and Nishikawa 1.0E–04 1. (3. Beyond a certain temperature.74). the heater surface may exceed the Leidenfrost temperature and the heat transfer rate by convection would reduce significantly.Boiling and Condensation 3-29 For small-diameter tubes. Thus. The actual CHF modeling for smaller diameter tubes needs to consider the additional effects of viscous forces.CHF ϭ C (3. it is seen that the exponent k ϭϪ1/3.E–05 G = 40. [3.17. Pool Boiling ϭ f (φ.75 1..16.5 (Eq. The absolute value of k is thus seen to decrease somewhat. θr). S. which is specific for the data set.

2.E–07 4.9 Flow Boiling in Compact Heat Exchangers Flow boiling in compact heat exchangers is extensively employed in chemical.g. a comprehensive review of various techniques for accommodating high heat fluxes is given by Bergles (1997).1.11 Enhancement of CHF in Flow Boiling The techniques to enhance the CHF in subcooled and low-quality saturated boiling regions can be divided into passive and active types.5 1.K 1. Among the methods employed. and louvered fins. where very small temperature differences are often employed in evaporation of air constituents during the separation processes. the role of nucleate boiling becomes more important in narrow channels found in compact heat exchanger passages when compared to conventional channels. These devices induce secondary radial and circumferential velocity components © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.000 8.CHF. Tubes of different microfin geometries have been studied in the literature (e.E–07 2.E–07 0.E+00 0. further enhancements are desired in a number of applications.0 0..G. 1991b.0 1. A detailed survey of this topic is presented by Kew and Cornwell (1999). They have reviewed a number of available correlations for offset-strip fins. 3. In general.5 FIGURE 3.000 6. 3.E–06 Multiphase Flow Handbook G = 40.CHF0. The flow boiling performance of these tubes can be predicted by a number of correlation schemes proposed in the literature (e. (1994) with the product K2.g.E–07 K2. J.1. geometries. Heat Transfer.0 2.2. microfin tubes. and Wieting (1975) are noteworthy. The correlation schemes presented by Feldman et al. and operating conditions. Detailed surveys of various enhancement techniques are presented by Celata and Mariani (1999) and Boyd (1985). LLC .75 Vendervort et al. 125. The use of plate-fin and plate heat exchangers is common in these applications. and refrigeration applications. contrary to the common expectation. also called grooved tubes in Japanese and Korean literature. 1986. Since these correlations are developed for specific fluids.. (1986) are recommended. Structured and porous surfaces that promote pool boiling heat transfer have been successfully applied for flow boiling enhancement as well.17 Effect of diameter on critical heat flux for small-diameter tubes. have proved to be quite attractive in flow boiling applications. perforated fins.75 G = 25. (1996). S. Kandlikar. Koyama et al.3-30 1. (From Kandlikar. and are now routinely applied in refrigeration evaporators.000 G = 10.CHF K1.) et al. 1995).10 Flow Boiling Augmentation Although the heat transfer coefficients during flow boiling are relatively high compared to the corresponding single-phase liquid flows. and extended surfaces. air-liquefaction.1.2. comparison of experimental data of 0.. 1997). 3.. surface roughness.CHF . it is found that. process. helically coiled tubes.. Khanpara et al. Kandlikar (1991b). Kandlikar and Raykoff. Reproduced with permission from ASME. The use of such surfaces is common especially in the air separation and cryogenic industries. 2003. extreme caution should be exercised while extending their applicability to parameter ranges beyond their parent database. 1987.5 Dh (mm) 2. Many augmentation techniques have been proposed in the literature. The passive devices consist of twisted tapes and swirl flow devices.

Chung 3.2. for the vapor phase. D the tube diameter. Thomson (1871) showed that the actual saturation pressure of the vapor.18 Schematic of a droplet embryo in a quiescent vapor environment. Pl Tg. 3.1 Fundamentals of Condensation Homogenous Nucleation Thermodynamically. Pg FIGURE 3. As shown in Figure. surrounding the droplet is increased due to surface tension as given by: pg ϭ po exp (2σ v1M/a∗RuTg) pg ≈ po(1 ϩ 2σ v1/a∗povg) (3. Љ smooth (3.82) Vapor Droplet Tl. CHF in the high-quality region resulting from dryout can be enhanced by effectively replenishing the heated surface with liquid.18.2.78) ϑ is the non-dimensional centrifugal acceleration given by π 2u2 ϑϭ ᎏ 2gD TTR (3.81) (3. (1992) correlation is recommended for the prediction of CHF enhancement with twisted tapes: q CHF Љ ϭ {1 ϩ 10Ϫ2ϑ exp[(Ϫ10Ϫ6p)2]}1/6 ᎏᎏ q CHF. depending on the specific enhancement technique. and TTR the twist ratio.2 Condensation J.1. Under the thermal equilibrium condition Tl ϭ Tg. These devices result in significantly higher pressure drop penalties compared with a smooth tube. Liquid retention in grooves and roughness structures effectively delays the dryout location.Boiling and Condensation 3-31 over the tube wall resulting in an increase in CHF. whereas the pressure drop increase is higher. pg. and σ is the surface tension coefficient. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.1 3. LLC .79) where u is the average flow velocity. The critical radius is defined by the Laplace–Young equation based on the mechanical equilibrium as follows : 2σ pl Ϫ pg ϭ ᎏ a∗ (3. The driving force for condensation is a subcooling of the vapor phase under a metastable condition. 3.N. The Nariai et al. The CHF enhancement is 1 to 3 times the corresponding smooth tube values under the same operating conditions. condensation is defined as a change of phase from vapor to liquid with the release of latent heat.80) where pl and pg are liquid and vapor phase pressures. respectively. assume that a droplet embryo is formed with a radius of a that is larger than the mechanical equilibrium radius or the critical radius a∗.

19 Pressure–temperature relationships at saturation.19.20 Thermodynamics of droplet initial growth.3-32 Multiphase Flow Handbook where po is the saturation pressure corresponding to Tg on a flat surface. it is clear that the vapor phase is supersaturated and subcooled because of pl Ͼ pg and TSat Ͼ Tg. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. The ratio. P Pl Pg Po t T Gibbs–Thompson effect Tsat Tg =Tl t FIGURE 3. As illustrated in Figure 3. LLC .20. is called the supersaturation ratio. If TSat is the saturation temperature corresponding to pg on a flat surface and pl Ͼ pg. pg/po. the initial growth of a droplet embryo is driven by the subcooling P Pl Saturation line for a flat surface Pg Po Tl = Tg Tsat T FIGURE 3. With the use of the Clausius–Clapeyron equation.83) The above equation provides the degree of subcooling and it is also called the Gibbs–Thompson condition. as shown in Figure 3. it can be shown that 2Tsatσ vl TSat Ϫ Tg ≈ ᎏ hfga∗ (3.

Ti the droplet initial temperature.85) ΄ ΅ (3.1. and Di the droplet initial diameter. For the case of a large Stefan number. respectively. a cyclic process from one droplet generation to the next. Therefore. The first and second timescales. As the growth continues. on a cold beer can. dR(t) 3p0 ᎏϭᎏ dt 8hfg ρl (T Ϫ T ) ᎏ๶ Ί΂ ๶๶ T M ΃ ๶๶๶๶๶ 3Ru g Sat g (3. Tanaka (1975). Dropwise condensation usually occurs when the condensate does not wet the surface and. Filmwise condensation prevails generally on wettable surfaces where a stable condensate removal mechanism is provided. which promotes coalescence among small droplets to form larger ones. 3.1 Condensation on Flat Surfaces Dropwise Condensation As stated above. For example. in general.83). there are two basic theoretical models: nucleation theory and filmrupture theory. Up to this point. the process is called heterogeneous nucleation. instead of spreading into a thin film. 3. Ford and Lekic (1973) derived an equation for the droplet radius growth rate using conduction and convection heat transfer theories. therefore. this type of surface is associated with high free energy. the induced convection effect becomes more relevant.l(TSat Ϫ Ti) η ϭ 1 ϩ ᎏᎏ Ϫ 1 hfg (3.2. There are basically two forms of heterogeneous condensation: dropwise and filmwise condensation.2. The nucleation theory was first introduced by Eucken (1937) and later further developed by Umur and Griffith (1965). Oswatitsch (1942) suggested a droplet growth equation for the rate of change of droplet radius with time.Boiling and Condensation 3-33 condition indicated by Eq. the transient temperature distributions of the vapor phase and the droplet phase. the process is highly transient and.2. Graham and Griffith (1973). then these embryos start to grow. it takes the shape of droplets.86) and Fo ϭ 4αlt/Di2 is the Fourier number.2 Heterogeneous Nucleation When the nucleation takes place on entrained particulate matter in a vapor environment or on a cold solid surface. According to the nucleation © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. the subcooling effect is dominating. two-phase flow and heat transfer in dropwise condensation are still in the developmental stage. dR(t) αη exp(Ϫπ 2Fo) ᎏ ϭ π 2 ᎏ ᎏᎏᎏ dt Di [1 Ϫ exp(Ϫπ 2Fo]1/2 where Cp. Lai (1999) found that the droplet growth is associated with three timescales. There are many controversial issues that need to be clarified in the future. the droplet gets larger and the degree of subcooling decreases. The Gibbs–Thompson effect actually suppresses the droplet growth and its effectiveness is diminished as time progresses. that are generally small. describe. αl is the liquid thermal diffusivity.2. which is based on the kinetic theory of gases for droplets smaller than 2 µm. when condensed droplets reach sizes that are large enough. Droplet embryos first form as a result of nucleation. The largest timescale controls the droplet growth process. which results in a faster droplet growth. If the density difference between the liquid and the vapor phases becomes larger. Cp. (3. dropwise condensation occurs on surfaces that are hard to wet. Usually. The transport mechanisms that govern the nucleation.84) For larger droplet growth in the continuum regime. and Rose (1988). from an individual droplet point of view. Sometimes dropwise condensation is just a precursor to film condensation. gravity force would overcome the surface tension such that droplets would be removed by sweeping down and leave a freshly wiped path for next generation of droplets to nucleate to start a new cycle. Then these larger drops are removed by external forces such as gravity or shear.2 3. which causes the growth rate to decrease.v(TSatϪTg)/hfg. LLC . In an analytical study.

8(5∆T ϩ 0. it would then rupture to form microdroplets. When the film reaches a critical thickness.5 Nu ϭ 1.89) (3. droplet–droplet interaction and coalescence produce larger droplets. The liquid film is laminar and two-dimensional.2. Thermal properties of the film are constant. For the development of a heat transfer correlation. Rose (1999) suggested the following general correlation that also takes the system pressure into consideration : .1 Laminar Film For Laminar film condensation on a vertical flat surface.91) 1. Tv the vapor temperature in Celsius. Rose (1999) indicated that because of improvements in experimental quality.63 Π1.8 ϫ 10Ϫ4 Յ Πk Յ 2.75 Յ Prl Յ 23. The model is based on the following assumptions : 1. The film-rupture theory was introduced first by Jakob (1936) and further developed by Welch and Westwater (1961). q is the heat flux in kW/m2.2.2. recent results from various countries are found to be in reasonably good agreement. Following this.2. LLC . © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Peterson and Westwater (1966) proposed h ϭ Nuρ lhfgkl(TSat Ϫ TW)/2σ TSat where 0. Silver (1964). a simplified model was first introduced by Nusselt (1916). For dropwise condensation of pure steam. q ϭ Tv0. the heat flux is given by q ϭ h∆T (3.6 2 ϫ 10Ϫ4 Յ Rel Յ 3 ϫ 10Ϫ2 7. Subcooling of the film is negligible. It is almost impossible to develop a general correlation for the dropwise condensation because of the strong surface property dependence and the condensate removal mechanisms.88) (3. For steam and ethylene glycol.3(∆T)2) (3.90) in which kl(TSat Ϫ Tw) Rel ϭ ᎏᎏ µlhfg 2σTSat ∂σ Πk ϭ Ϫ ᎏ ᎏ µ2 ∂T l hfg and with the following limited range : ΂ ΃ (3.46 ϫ 10Ϫ6 RelϪ1.92) .16 k Pr l (3. These droplets subsequently grow by condensing vapor on their surfaces with the latent heat transported to the surface by conduction. In the above equation. but the remainder of the surface stays dry. 3. ∆T the temperature difference between the vapor and the condenser surface in degrees K. 3. Heat flux is maximum at the vapor–liquid–solid contact line.2 Film Condensation 3.2. 2. The film-rupture theory claims that vapor condenses on a cold surface and forms microscale thin liquid films.3-34 Multiphase Flow Handbook theory.87) where q is the heat flux in kW/m2 and ∆Τ the temperature difference between the vapor and the condenser surface in degrees K. and Sugawara and Katsuta (1966). the dropwise condensation process starts with very thin liquid film layer and then it breaks up into droplets.65 ϫ 10Ϫ2 The above correlation was recommended only for the fluids with which it was developed.

94) h (TSat Ϫ Tw) . (1961) investigated this assumption further and found that the interfacial shear is indeed very small for most gases and liquids (Pr Ն 1).95) kl3hfg ρl(ρl Ϫ ρv)g sinθ hL ϭ 0. where ෆ q ෆL is the average heat flux over the entire plate.68A ϩ 0. Dhir and Lienhard (1971) introduced the concept of effective © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.25 Ͻ F Ͻ 0.l(TSat Ϫ Tw)/hfg] B ϭ [kl(TSat Ϫ Tw)/µlhfg] (3.l(TSat Ϫ Tw) hЈ fg ϭ hfg 1 ϩ (0. Many researchers have investigated the validity of the constant thermal property assumption. saturated and free of noncondensables. For laminar film condensation on geometries other than the vertical flat plate. 5.93) hx ϭ ᎏᎏ (TSat Ϫ Tw) . The local and average heat transfer coefficients for a plate of length L are given by Nusselt (1916) as kl3hfg ρl(ρl Ϫ ρv)g sinθ hx ϭ ᎏᎏᎏ 4(TSat Ϫ Tw)µlx ΄ ΅ 1/4 (3. For condensation of liquid metals. Momentum changes through the film are unimportant. One acceptable method of including the variation of thermal properties in the liquid film is to use a reference temperature Tr.6. The average condensation heat transfer coefficient over a plate of length L is given as .Boiling and Condensation 4.101) Also. This reference temperature is defined as Tr ϭ Tw ϩ F(TSat Ϫ Tw).228/Prl) ᎏᎏ hfg ΄ ΂ (3.31 (3. they discovered that the inclusion of the interfacial shear does cause a substantial reduction in heat transfer and suggested the following correction equation: 1 ϩ 0. 0.99) One of the assumptions in the Nusselt model allows the neglect of the interfacial shear between the liquid film and the ambient vapor.98) The above equation is limited for PrL Ͼ 0. to evaluate the thermal properties.15AB hNu ΂ ΃ (3. 7. cp.l(TSat Ϫ Tw) hЈ fg ϭ hfg 1 ϩ 0.02AB h ᎏ ϭ ᎏᎏ 1 ϩ 0.85B Ϫ 0. qx (3. where qx is the local heat flux and TSatϪTw the degree of subcooling.100) where A ϭ [cp. Interfacial shear is negligible.96) Rohsenow (1956) suggested an effective latent heat of condensation to compensate for the liquid subcooling. The heat transfer in the liquid film is dominated by conduction.68 ᎏᎏ hfg ΄ ΂ ΃΅ ΃΅ (3.97) Sadasivan and Lienhard (1987) introduced a different effective latent heat of condensation that is also a function of the Prandtl number. 3-35 The local condensation heat transfer coefficient is defined as follows : . Koh et al.943 ᎏᎏᎏ ෆ (TSat Ϫ Tw)µlL ΄ ΅ 1/4 (3. LLC . hNu is the heat transfer coefficient based on the Nusselt model. cp. The bulk of the vapor is stagnant.683 Ϫ 0. q ෆ ෆL ෆL ϭ ᎏᎏ (3. 6.

In order to gage quantitatively the three different regimes. Using the coordinates defined in Figure 3. geff is the effective gravity defined as x(gR)4/3 geff ϭ ᎏᎏ x g1/3R4/3 dx ͵ 0 (3.21. the smooth vapor–liquid interface gradually becomes wavy.103) The local Nusselt number is therefore given as geff ρl(ρl Ϫ ρv)hfg Ј x3 Nu ϭ ᎏᎏ 4µlkl(TSat Ϫ Tw) ΂ ΃ 1/4 (3. LLC . where δ is Condensote film R = Constant >> x=0 y=0 (x ) x=0 g (x ) R y (x) g (x) x FIGURE 3. which is equal to 4δ. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.2.785 ᎏ A where ΂ ΃ 1/4 (3.2.104) For example.2. a Reynolds number must be defined first.106) 3.102) In the above equation. The local Reynolds number that characterizes the liquid film flow is based on the mean liquid velocity and the hydrodynamic diameter of the two-dimensional liquid film. Turbulent Film As the film thickness increases.21 Coordinate system for effective gravity model. Dhir and Lienhard (1971) showed that the local film thickness may be determined by 4µlkl(TSat Ϫ Tw)x δ (x) ϭ ᎏᎏ ρ l(ρ l Ϫ ρv)hfg geff ΂ ΃ 1/4 (3.105) µlkl(TSat Ϫ Tw) A ϭ ᎏᎏ ρl(ρl Ϫ ρv)hЈ fg (3. but the bulk of the liquid film remains laminar. As the thickness increases further.2. is equal to gD3 Nu ෆ ෆD ϭ 0. D.3-36 Multiphase Flow Handbook gravity for an arbitrary axisymmetric body. the average Nusselt number for condensation on a sphere with diameter. the liquid film eventually becomes turbulent.

2.2 kl h h 3.109) 3. Labuntsov (1957) recommended ReD ෆ hL(v l2/g)1/3 ᎏᎏ ϭ ᎏᎏᎏᎏ 0.2. As shown in Figure 3. then the Reynolds number is in the following form: 4g ρ l(ρ l Ϫ ρv)δ 3 ReD ϭ ᎏᎏ 3µ l2 h (3.107) The three liquid film flow regimes are characterized by: 1.5 (ReD Ϫ 263) ϩ 8750 kl h h (3. Kutateladze (1963) proposed the following equation for this regime: ReDh hL(v l2/g)1/3 ෆ ϭ ᎏᎏ (3. h 2.3 Condensation on and in the Tubes 3.75 58 PrlϪ0. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. ReD Յ 30 (laminar film with smooth interface). 30 Յ ReD Յ 1800 (laminar film with wavy interface). For the turbulent film. the Nusselt solution mentioned above can be applied.22 1.08 ReD Ϫ 5. In this regime.22 the Annular flow Slug flow Bubbly flow Single phase liquid FIGURE 3.Boiling and Condensation 3-37 the film thickness. 1800 Յ ReDh (turbulent liquid film). the flow pattern is in reverse order as that of boiling.22 Schematic of condensing flow regimes in a vertical tube.1 Condensation in a Tube Condensation in circular tubes is strongly affected by the vapor inlet velocity and the orientation of the tube. For vertical tubes.3. LLC .108) ᎏᎏ 1. If the liquid film local mass flow rate is represented by the Nusselt model.

otherwise the stratified annular flow would take place because the gravity would tend to drain the liquid condensate in the direction perpendicular to the vapor flow. where δ is the liquid film thickness. they proposed that the heat transfer coefficient for the two-phase condensing flow. hl. the interfacial shear is negligible as a result of the large density difference between the vapor and the liquid phases. Heat transfer correlations for condensation in a horizontal tube with an annular flow pattern was first addressed by Ananiev et al. which is followed by slug flow and then bubbly flow.2 Annular Flow in Horizontal Tubes As mentioned above. can be correlated with the liquid single phase forced convection heat transfer coefficient.111) where hЈ fg is the effective latent heat of condensation to include the subcooling in the liquid film.68 ᎏᎏ hfg ΄ ΅ (3. the vapor-phase Reynolds number drops substantially such that gravity effects become a factor. Chato (1962) proposed a correlation based on Nusselt’s film condensation model. The physical meaning of Kc is that it is a provision to account for the accumulation of condensate on the bottom of the tube that changes the void fraction.1.3.3-38 Multiphase Flow Handbook annular flow pattern generally prevails. If the vapor flows upward against the gravity (countercurrent flow). when the inlet vapor Reynolds number is Ͼ 30. Based on the analogy between momentum and heat transport.728Kc ᎏᎏ µl(TSat Ϫ Tw)D ΄ ΅ 1/4 (3. as follows: ρl h ϭ hl ᎏ (3. Jaster and Kosky (1976) also recommended the following for the Nusselt number in the transition flow regime: F Ϫ 29 Nutr ϭ Nuan ϩ ᎏ (Nuan Ϫ NuStr) 24 (3.2. F.111) is identical to the classical Nusselt result for laminar film condensation on a vertical flat plate with height D if Kc is set to 1. 3. LLC . is defined as τw / ρlgδ.1 Stratified Annular Flow in Horizontal tubes For horizontal tubes. (1961) for single-component pure vapor and smooth tubes.110) The error associated with the above equation is of the same order of magnitude as those methods established for annular and stratified flows. which would thicken the liquid film along the gravity direction.2.76 based on the experimental data of R-113. annular liquid film flowing downward would experience substantial interfacial shear. Near the end of relatively long tubes. 3. Under this situation.000. the annular flow pattern would be maintained along most of the tube length.113) ρm Ί๶ © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. the annular flow would be maintained if the inlet vapor velocity is relatively high. when the inlet vapor Reynolds number is Ͻ 35. the liquid film is affected by the gravity and the stratified annular flow pattern would be present.l(TSat Ϫ Tw) hЈ fg ϭ hfg 1 ϩ 0. h. For horizontal tubes. the above stratified annular flow model would then describe flow and heat transfer more appropriately. (3. g ρl(ρl Ϫ ρv)kl3hЈ fg h ϭ 0.112) It is noted that Eq. which corresponds to a mass flow flux of 400 kg/m2 sec for a 1 cm tube.000. cp.3.295. Jaster and Kosky (1976) proposed the following criteria for the transition from initial annular flow to the stratified flow regime: F Ͼ 29 annular flow 29 Ն F Ն 5 transition flow FϽ5 stratified flow The stress ratio. Based on experimental results. Because of the effects of gravity. whereas for cocurrent flows.1. Chato (1962) suggested a value of 0.

Nut.823 RexϪ0. 3.1.024 and 0. For countercurrent vapor flow. 5000 Ͻ Ref ϭ ᎏ Ͻ 5000.3. decreases the heat transfer by thickening the liquid film.82 Pr l0.114) and hl is evaluated based on a correlation for convective-forced convection of single-phase liquid in a circular tube.l(Tv Ϫ TW)/hfg Ͻ 0.032 for steam condensing on carbon steel tubes and copper tubes.0344 Re l0.01 Ͻ µv /µl Ͻ 0.22 G(1 Ϫ x)D Rex ϭ ᎏᎏ µl For the turbulent film flow.4 Pr l0.120) (3.5 Ϫ 1)]0. (1987) found that nl ϭ 6 and n2 ϭ 2 resulted in the best fit to the reported data.118) (3. therefore. respectively.119) (3.00402 Re x (3. Based on the experiments.8 ᎏ l Pr f Prw ΂ ΃ ΂ᎏ D ΃ Kl (3. For the laminar wavy flow.115) where C ϭ 0.8 Ͻ Prl Ͻ 20.Boiling and Condensation where the equivalent mixture density. Chen et al. the interfacial shear retards the condensate flow and.65 Nut ϭ 0. (1987) recommended the Chun and Seban (1971) correlation. (1987) divided this problem into two categories: zero-shear (cocurrent flow) and high interfacial shear (countercurrent flow) processes.2. Nulw and Chen et al. 0. ρm.000. is defined as 1 1 1 ᎏ ϭ ᎏ (1 Ϫ x) ϩ ᎏ x ρm ρl ρv 3-39 ΂ ΃ ΂ ΃ 0. Cavallini and Zecchin (1974) offered the following correlation for saturated vapor inside tubes based on the Reynolds analogy concept and a multiple linear regression analysis: Nu ϭ 0. On the other hand.43 hl ϭ C Re 0. Nuo ϭ [(Nulw)n1 ϩ (Nul)n1]1/n1 for countercurrent flow. 0.25 (3. respectively.01 Ͻ Ja ϭ cp. LLC .1 Ͻ X Ͻ 0. for example. the Dittus–Boelter-type correlations.116) The above equation is suggested for the dimensionless groups and thermal property ratios in the ranges listed below: 10 Ͻ ρ l /ρv Ͻ 2000.9. Nux ϭ [(Nuo)n2 ϩ (Nuhs)n2]1/n2 (3. Boyko and Kruzhilin (1967) found Prf 0.35 (3. Chen et al. and Prf and Prw are the Prandtl numbers evaluated at the stream core and wall temperatures.1 G ρv GD 15 Ͻ Fr ϭ ᎏ Ͻ 4000. (1987) recommended the following correlation: 0.83[1 ϩ x((ρ l /ρv)0. They suggested the following: for cocurrent flow. the cocurrent vapor flow enhances the heat transfer.117) 1/3 where all the Nusselt numbers are defined as (h/kl)/(v 2 l/g) .121) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.2 where G is the total stream mass flux in kg/m2 sec and x is the vapor quality. 0.3 Annular Flow in Vertical Tubes Chen et al. µl gD ͙ෆ 0. Nulw ϭ 0.

All of the Nusselt assumptions. ethanol.252µl1. For the countercurrent flow.002 Ͻ pSat /pc Ͻ 0.177µv0. . 1 Ͻ Prl Ͻ 13.2. R-22.8 ϩ ᎏᎏ (pSat /pc)0.5(ReT Ϫ Rex)0.036 Pr l0. The mean deviation of Shah’s correlation with 474 data points used in the study is 15. Shah (1989) proposed an alternative formula based on experimental data reported in the literature that includes working fluids of water. the recommended local Nusselt number is Nux ϭ ΄΂ C Prl1.123) τi τ ෆi ϭ ᎏ ρ l(gvl)2/3 Chen et al.036 Pr 0. 3 m/sec Ͻ uv Ͻ 300 m/sec.7 Re x Nux ϭ 0.9 ᎏ Rex1.31Re Ϫ ϩ ᎏᎏ x 2.2 C ϭ ᎏᎏ D 2g 2/3ρv ρl0. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.8 Prl0. and organic compounds (methanol. the above equation simplifies to 0. 1/2 Nuhs ϭ 0.38 ΄ ΅ (3.9 Rex 1. Nuhs.04 Nu ϭ 0.122) (3.6 ΅ 1/2 (3.65τ ෆi (3. (1987) proposed the following general equation for the local heat transfer for a vertical cocurrent annular flow: Nux ϭ ΄΂ 2.3 l A ϩ ᎏ (ReT Ϫ Rex)1. This is accomplished by first addressing the liquid fluid dynamics. Seban and Hodgson (1982) further assumed that the tube radius is relatively large. refrigerants (R-11.000 Ͻ m(kg/m2 h) Ͻ 758. and inclined tubes with diameters ranging from 7 to 40 mm: 3.553ρv0.23.2 A0.129) The Shah correlation is valid for the following parameter ranges: 0.3.8 0. 21°C Ͻ TSat Ͻ 310°C.4 Prl3. and trichloroethylene) for vertical.8x 0.6 2.3 Rex2. horizontal.333 ΃ ΅ 1/2 (3.3-40 Multiphase Flow Handbook Finally. A schematic representation of the coordinates is shown in Figure 3.37 ϫ 1014 0.4 Pr l3. (1968) correlation.133µv0. Chen et al.023µl1.126) 0. toluene.125) (3. so the curvature effects were neglected.4 (1 Ϫ x)0.023 Rel0.000.4%. LLC .1 Laminar Film Condensation in a Vertical Tube with Upward Vapor Flow The goal of the mathematical model is to predict the liquid boundary layer thickness along the tube because it is directly related to the condensation rate.65 l (3. are applied except that the flow here is an axisymmetric two-dimensional flow that results in an annular flow pattern. 3.31 RexϪ1. for the vertical flat plate.2.78 where ReT is the film Reynolds number when a total condensation takes place. then the vapor flow and finally accounting for the interaction between each along the tube.128) The general correlations by Chen et al.76(1 Ϫ x)0. benzene. R-12.37 ϫ 1014 ΃ 1/3 Pr1.32 0. (1987) can be readily incorporated into a condensation model once the interfacial shear is known.2. and 39. for the Nusselt numbers for high shear flows.3.2 Mathematical Modeling of Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer in Tubes 3.32 ϩ ᎏᎏ Ϫ 771.156 A ϭ ᎏᎏ D 2g 2/3ρl0. (1987) proposed the Soliman et al.127) (3.4 771.124) For the case of annular flow in a horizontal tube. The following analytical model is based on Seban and Hodgson (1982). and R-113).44. 100 Ͻ Rel Ͻ 63.000. 0 Ͻ x Ͻ 1.

After integration. one obtains the velocity profile as Gp ρ l g y 2 τi u(y) ϭ ᎏ ᎏ Ϫ δ (x)y ϩ ᎏ y 2 µl µl ΂ ΃ (3. 3. 3 3 τi g N1 ϭ ᎏ ᎏ ρ l g vl2 (3.Boiling and Condensation 3-41 Vapor g x y FIGURE 3. 1 dp µl d2u ᎏᎏ 2 ϭ 1ϩ ᎏ ᎏ ρl g dy ρl g dx ΂ ΃ (3.133) The dimensionless velocity profile is therefore given as 2 y τi g ෆ ᎏ u ϭ G Ϫδ ෆy ෆ p ෆ ϩᎏ 2 ρl g ᎏ vl2 ΂ ΂ ΃ 1/3 y ෆ (3.130) After rearrangement.136) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.135) ΂ ΃ 1/3 (3. as follows: 1 δ Rel ϭ ᎏ u dy vl 0 ͵ δ ෆ2 δ ෆ3 ϭ N1 ᎏ Ϫ ᎏ . LLC .3.23 Coordinate system for condensation with an upward vapor flow.1. The above equation is nondimensionalized as g δෆ ϭ δ ᎏ vl2 ΂ ΃ 1/3 g .2.131) ϭGp It is noted that Gp is a constant.134) The local Reynolds number is defined by neglecting the pressure drop term. ෆ yϭy ᎏ vl2 ΂ ΃ ΃ 1/3 u . which is Gpϭ1. The momentum equation is dp d2u µl ᎏ Ϫ ᎏ Ϫ ρl g ϭ 0 dy 2 dx (3. ෆ uϭ ᎏ (vl g)1/3 (3.2.1 Liquid Layer.132) where τi is the interfacial shear stress and δ the liquid layer thickness.

ReVϭ4M V/πDЈµ V. The condensation mass flux at a local downstream position.139) and (3.140) one has cp. ϭ ᎏ (1 ϩ 1400F) ΂ᎏ 2΃ 2 cf cf E (3.144) . LLC .l (3.139) (3. The vapor Reynolds number is modified as .3. the single-phase friction factors specified by the above equations should be multiplied by a quantity which will then produce the effective friction factor (cf /2)E to include the liquid layer effects.137) .25 for ReV Ͻ 2000 for ReV Ͼ 4000 (3. In the above equation. The detailed velocity profile of the vapor layer is not required to solve the problem if an appropriate friction coefficient is used.l(TSat Ϫ Tw) kl N2 ϭ ᎏᎏ ᎏ hfg µlcp.9 (3. m chfg ϭ ᎏᎏ δ Equating Eqs. ReV (ϭ4M V /πDµ V) is the Reynolds number for the single-phase vapor. where DЈϭD Ϫ 2δ.143) then.3-42 The local liquid mass flow rate per unit film width is Γ ϭ ρ l u dy 0 Multiphase Flow Handbook ͵ δ (3. one has kl(TSat Ϫ Tw) . (3. the existence of the liquid layer must be accounted for. is the diameter of the tube and M V the total vapor mass flow rate. with interpolation. If the vapor were occupying the tube completely in a single-phase flow.33 ᎏϭᎏ 2 3050 for 2000 Յ ReV Յ 4000 (3.142) (3. First evaluate the friction coefficient of the vapor.138) ΄ ΅ (3. m c ϭ µl ᎏ ϭ µl ᎏ dx δ for later use.140) (3. From an energy balance at the vapor–liquid interface.2.2. For the turbulent vapor flow. mc (x). the friction coefficient for a fully developed flow would be and cf ᎏ ϭ 2 Ά 8 ᎏ ReV 0. and is defined as 2(Γ/µl)1/2 ͙ෆ FЈ ϭ ᎏᎏ (vV/vl)(ρl /ρV)1/2 ReV0. where D . mc ϭ ᎏ dx which is expressed as d(Γ/µl) N2 . is d(Γ) . one has cf (ReV)0. For condensation two-phase flow.146) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.145) The value for F is related to FЈ .141) 3.2 Vapor Layer.04 ᎏ (ReV)0.1.

(3. can now be linked to the vapor friction coefficient. (3. the corresponding condensate flow rate per unit film width. For the current case of upward vapor flow in a tube. (3. the liquid layer has the following relationship: d(Γ/µl) N2 ᎏϭᎏ dx δ ෆ ෆ ෆ and using Eq.147) (3.152) with Eq. LLC . one obtains the governing equation for the liquid film thickness: N2 ᎏᎏᎏ dδ ෆ δ ෆ dN1 ᎏ ϭ N ϩᎏ ᎏ ᎏᎏ Ϫδ ෆ δ ෆ2 dx 1 ෆ 2 dx ෆ ΂ ΃ (3.Boiling and Condensation 3-43 When the liquid flow is laminar. Equation (3.151) ᎏ ᎏ ϭϪ ᎏ Ϫ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏ ρl g dx vl ρl dx πDЈµV D ෆЈ ΂ ΃΂ ΃ ΂ ΃ In general.137). Ϫτi F ϭ FЈ 1 Ϫ exp ᎏ ρl gδ ΄ ΂ ΃΅ ϪN ϭ FЈ΄1 Ϫ exp΂ ᎏ − δ ΃΅ 1 (3.153) Combining Eq. (3. M V. Seban and Hodgson (1982) concluded that the pressure drop term is negligibly small. (3. The shear stress is cf τi ϭ ᎏ 2 ΂ ΃ ρ (u l E V .δ) ෆl.149) where uV is the mean vapor velocity based on the total vapor mass flow rate. .148) Fϭ0 for ReV Ͻ 2000 The interfacial shear. which can be obtained from Eq. (3. (3. one has By differentiating Eq. For a given vapor inlet mass flow rate. at the same point can be obtained based on an overall mass balance for a steady condition.. The condensation causes a mass flux into the liquid layer and the interfacial shear stress is affected. in which the momentum flux term is approximated using uv as the vapor velocity at the interface instead of uv Ϫ ul.0 /π D © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. For low vapor velocities.139). Ϫ ulδ)2 ϩ mc(uV Ϫ ulδ) (3.150) If the body force on the vapor flow is neglected (ρV ϭ ρl).δ and show that .152) δ d(Γ/µl) ෆ dN1 ᎏ ϭ N1 ϩ ᎏ ᎏ Ϫ δ ෆ δ ෆ dδ 2 dδ ෆ ෆ ΂ ΃ (3. 4N1 1 dp vV 2 ρV d 4M V (3.134). τi.155) Γ0 ϭ M V.135) with respect to δ (3. based on heat and mass transfer coupling and applying Eq. ulδ is the liquid velocity at the edge of the liquid film.154) The solution procedure is outlined as follows: .0. at the pipe bottom edge indicated as the starting point of the x coordinate in Figure 3. Seban and Hodgson (1982) used the integral vapor momentum balance equation. which supports the earlier assumption that GPϭ1.149) can be nondimensionalized using Eqs. i. 1. (3. and (3.133). which means all the vapor is condensed.136). the factor F must be corrected further since the vapor flow is no longer fully turbulent. ⌫0.141): cf N1 ϭ ᎏ 2 (u ΂ ΃ ΂ᎏ ρ ΃ ෆ E l ρV V N2 2 Ϫu (ෆ uV Ϫ ෆ ul.23. F ϭ FЈ.e. (3.153).δ) ϩ ᎏ δ ෆ (3.

(3.0 Ϫ π D(Γ0 Ϫ Γ1) (3.135) and (3.1 and δ ෆ reaches zero. the film is generally in the turbulent or.2. one can find N1. at least.0 and ⌫0 known. (3.3. Therefore.24 Schematic and coordinate system for turbulent film condensation in a tube. Some of these cases were for an inlet pressure of 900 psia and are related to the operating condition of an industrial steam generating unit.2. The inertia of the liquid film is small. The film is thin with a smooth interface. The entrainment of vapor by the liquid film is neglected. From time-averaged turbulence modeling. 4. First choose a small ∆ x ෆ and then find the condensate flow rate per unit film width.152).at this new location by using ෆ)∆ x Γ1 ϭ µl(N2/δ ෆ ϩ Γ0 3. 3.3-44 Multiphase Flow Handbook . © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.0 and δ ෆ0 at the bottom edge through an iterative procedure. Eqs. Repeating steps 1 to 3 until δ Seban and Hodgson (1982) made several sample calculations for specific vapor inlet conditions.156) . 2.150) are used to find the corresponding N1. Γ1.l(αl ϩ εh) ᎏ dy (3.2 Turbulent Film Theory For annular film flow to take place. . 3. It was reported that for these cases.24. 2. They investigated both downward and upward liquid film flow cases.158) where εm is the eddy diffusivity for momentum transport. M V.159) r x g v u dx Ti y FIGURE 3.157) (3.1 and Γ1. The next step is to march upward using Eq.1 ϭ M V. LLC . the vapor velocity must be high. Following the same procedure as given in Step 1. q (y) ϭϪρlcp. a complete condensation occurs within a very short height up the tube. Repeat Step 2 and march upward to another ∆ x ෆ . With M V. . The basic assumptions are: 1. ෆ1 with known M V. The schematic representation of the coordinate system is shown in Figure 3. The corresponding vapor mass flow at this new location is then calculated as . The heat flux is governed by the following equation: ෆ dT . The following is a summary of the theory. nonlaminar state. the shear stress is defined as du ෆ τ(y) ϭ ρl(vl ϩ εm) ᎏ dy (3.

160) The dimensionless shear stress and heat flux equations become . Using the conventional nondimensional scheme. vl ρ lcp. LLC . ᎏ 1ϩ ᎏ ϭ ᎏϩᎏ ᎏ ᎏ . q w /(ρlcp.161) becomes kl͙ෆ τw ෆ /ρෆl ᎏ ϭ hvl 1 ͵ 1ᎏᎏ dy ϩ Pr ε /v δ 0 (3.168) εm/vl ϭ κ 2(yϩ)2 For the turbulence. where h ϭ qw /(TSatϪTw). After integration and using the boundary conditions.l(αl ϩ εh) ᎏ ∂y ∂y ΄ ΅ (3. ϩ q Pr v vl dy dyϩ w l l ΂ ΃ ΂ ΃ (3. With the above information. (3. it may be shown that κkl͙ෆ τwෆ /ρ lෆ hϭ ᎏ 2vlI ᎏ Ί๶ Pr Prl t (3.169) (3. Next. l ϭ κ y dy Έ Έ (3.l . Carey adopted similar concepts from the general approach for liquid film turbulence: κ 2(yϩ)2/Prt for 0 Յ yϩ Յ δϩ/2 εm ᎏϭ vl Prt κ 2(δϩ Ϫ yϩ)2/Prt for δϩ/2 Յ yϩ Յ δϩ Ά (3. On the basis of a mass conservation of the liquid film flow. the heat flux is therefore constant in the liquid film. This leads to the velocity profile of u ෆ ϭ y in the liquid film.l ϭ ᎏᎏ µl (3. the model proposed by Carey (1992) has been used. the dimensionless film thickness is found to be δϩ ϭ ᎏ Re Ί๶ 2 1 1/2 D.166) . with a no-slip condition at the ϩ ϩ wall.161) For the portion where the film is very thin. the von Karman’s mixing length model is adopted for εm: du εm ϭ l 2 ᎏ . (3.171) © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. GD(1 Ϫ x) dReD. one has u ϩ u . one has TSat Ϫ Tw ϭ ᎏᎏ .165) l h l ͵ 0 δϩ 1 ᎏᎏ dyϩ 1 ϩ (Prl /Prt)(εm/vl) (3.167) (3. qw Ί๶ τw ᎏ ρl (3.lαl) Following rearrangement.160).l(Tw Ϫ T ෆ) T ෆϩ ϭ ᎏᎏ .Boiling and Condensation 3-45 where εh is the eddy diffusivity for thermal transport.170) The equation for the δϩր2 Յ yϩ Յ δ ϩ region is based on the experimental finding that the eddy diffusivity should approach zero as (δ Ϫ y)2.162) Using the velocity profile. ϩ q 1 εh dT εm du ෆϩ ෆ ϭ 1. ෆ ϭ ᎏ ͙ෆ τwෆ /ρෆl y ͙ෆ τw ෆ /ρ lෆ yϩ ϭ ᎏ . it is assumed that εm /νl ϭ 1. Eq. the following dimensionless equation is obtained as GD(1 Ϫ x) ᎏᎏ ϭ 4µl ͵ 0 δϩ ϩ ϩ u ෆ dy (3.163) The heat flux is constant across the liquid film so ∂T ∂ ϭ0 ᎏ ρl cp.164) Based on Eq.

5 psia to 14.175) 1Ϫx ᎏ x ΂ ΂ ΃΂ ΃΂ G(1 Ϫ x)D f ϭ 0. the laminar condensation on the outside of a horizontal tube can be estimated by the Nusselt theory with the effective gravity modification of Dhir and Lienhard (1971). To assess exclusively the effects of noncondensable gases. (3.173) ΂ ΃ (3. χtt ϭ ᎏ ρl µl ᎏ µV ΃ 0.3-46 where Multiphase Flow Handbook ෆෆ rlෆ /Pෆ rtκδϩ/2 I ϭ tanϪ1 ͙P ≈ π/2 for large Prl ΂ ΃ (3.9 . The decrease in heat transfer is attributed tion heat transfer coefficient for the N tubes is ෆ hD.3 Condensation on a Tube ΄ ΅ (3. The first comprehensive and detailed study that quantitatively addressed the role of noncondensables was presented by Minkowycz and Sparrow (1966).178) For a vertical tier of N horizontal tubes. one has ෆෆ rlτෆ ෆ ρෆ vl h ϭ 0.134φf ͙ෆ fl ᎏᎏ ͙P ෆෆ rl µl 3.4 and Prt ϭ 0.1 Ϫ0. LLC . the coupled boundary layer equations describing continuity. τw. It is based on the model of Nusselt (1916) except that the environment is a mixture of condensing vapor and noncondensables. the Nusselt number may be written as hD Nu ϭ ᎏ kl G(1 Ϫ x)D ϭ 0.2. Because the vapor–gas phase can no longer be neglected and decoupled from the liquid phase. The resulting set of coupled nonlinear ordinary equations was solved numerically. Incropera and DeWitt (2002) suggest that the average condensahDN Ϫ1/4. is determined from a force balance : dp π Dτw ϭϪ ᎏ πD2/4 dx f The pressure drop due to friction at the wall for two-phase pipe flows is (see Chapter 2) dp 2flG 2(1 Ϫ x)2 Ϫ ᎏ ϭ φf2 ᎏᎏ dx f Dρl where 20 1 φf ϭ 1 ϩ ᎏ ϩ ᎏ 2 χtt χtt l (3.176) With the wall shear stress known.4 Effects of Noncondensable Gases and Other Secondary Effects In most of the condensation processes. momentum.7 psia. they used the saturated steam–air system with the mixture pressure ranging from 0.174) ΂ ΃ ΃ (3.05΂ ᎏᎏ ΃ µ 1/2 1/2 0.3. 3.172) Using commonly accepted values of κ ϭ 0.729 ᎏᎏ µl(TSat Ϫ Tw)D ΄ ΅ (3. and energy for both phases were formulated and transformed into similarity variables. noncondensables are usually present such as air for those operating in the atmospheric environment.134kl͙P w/ l /ෆ The wall shear stress. The results that are based © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. For a horizontal tube.2.9.N ϭ ෆ to the increase in the film thickness for the downstream tubes. the average heat transfer coefficient follows Incropera and DeWitt (2002): Ј gρl(ρl Ϫ ρV)kl3hfg ෆ hD ϭ 0.2 l ρv .177) As discussed above.

The mixture pressure has a strong influence. 300. LLC .5%. In general.2. condensation on drops. They concluded that all these effects are of second-order importance. The theory is based on the binary convective–diffusive transport in the mixture phase. cold liquid drops are sprayed into a chamber of saturated or superheated vapor. except that the ambient is composed of pure vapor only. the reduction in heat transfer is about 3 to 10% for the same wall subcooling range and noncondensable gas bulk mass fraction. the reductions in heat transfer are 55. 47. a mechanism must be established to remove them at the same rate as that of arrival during the steady state. diffusion thermo. The reduction becomes substantial at about 40 to 55% for the noncondensable gas bulk mass fraction of 10%. the reduction in condensation heat transfer is only about 2 to 5% for the wall subcooling ranging from 2 to 40° R at a noncondensable gas bulk mass fraction of 0. for the pure vapor case. the condensation driving force. For example.5% and a wall subcooling of 10° R. thus resulting in a forced-convection laminar boundary layer. show that the air has a decisive effect in reducing the condensation heat transfer rates. and variable property when noncondensables are present. For the drop condenser. The effects of noncondensables discussed above are pertinent to a quiescent mixture of vapor and noncondensable gases. which is the saturation temperature of the condensing vapor. This removal mechanism is basically a diffusion process that sends the noncondensable back to the bulk through a very steep concentration gradient because the diffusion process is much less efficient than the convective process. In general. The requirement for a steep concentration gradient of the noncondensables results in a high noncondensable mass fraction at the liquid–gas interface that drastically reduces the partial pressure of vapor at the interface. the heat transfer decreases with increasing wall subcooling except at very small degrees of wall subcooling and large noncondensable bulk mass fractions.Boiling and Condensation 3-47 on comparisons with the Nusselt model. (1967) investigated the case where a net forced flow field is maintained for the mixture phase. Therefore. For mixture pressure of 1 atm. 200. with the noncondensable gas bulk mass fraction at 0. 43. when compared with the pure steam condition. thus preventing them from accumulating at the interface. it is concluded that the forced convection drastically mitigates the noncondensable gas effects on the heat transfer. Since the noncondensables do not condense. At a given value of noncondensable bulk mass fraction. The reduction in the vapor pressure at the interface correspondingly decreases the liquid surface temperature. Minkowycz and Sparrow (1966) also examined the effects of superheating the mixture phase. for example. The net consequence is that the temperature difference between the liquid surface and the wall.5%. and 400° R. thermodiffusion.5 psia.5 psia. A typical case shows that under 1 atmosphere. a set of coupled nonlinear ordinary different equations was solved numerically and by an integral method. The other trends remain similar to those of the quiescent ambient case. where the pure vapor occupies the surroundings. For a bulk pressure of 0. During a main coolant © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. the enhancement in heat transfer due to superheating is more appreciable. and 37% for superheating of 100. Sparrow et al. Minkowycz and Sparrow (1966) systematically examined the effects of interfacial resistance. Their results were presented in terms of heat transfer reduction based on the identical system conditions. One such design is associated with the emergency cooling system of the nuclear reactor containment. The net convection flow is moving toward the wall bringing both the vapor and noncondensables to the liquid surface. is reduced when compared to the pure vapor case. respectively. a reduction in condensation heat transfer ranging from 35 to 60% for a wall subcooling of 2 to 40° R was found for the air bulk mass fraction as small as 0. The effect of superheating decreases with decreasing mixture pressure. when the bulk noncondensable mass fraction increases the condensation heat transfer decreases monotonically. 3. The physics explains why a small amount of noncondensables have such a detrimental effect on the condensation heat transfer is interesting.5 Direct Contact Condensation Direct contact condensation usually refers to vapor condensing on liquid heat sinks that are not attached to a solid surface. the reduction in heat transfer is from 67 to 83% compared to 35 to 60% for 1 atm. For the low-pressure mixture of 0. whereas for the case of noncondensables. liquid jets and sheets. the superheating only causes the heat transfer to increase by about 1% at 100° Rankine to 5% at 400° R. Again.

motion of drop. The main results from the experiment are quantified by thermal utilization defined as Qz εϭ ᎏ (3. 2 dDi (3. .182) 0 i i sat i where Ri and Ti are initial radius and temperature of the drop.2. M is mass flow rate of the spray. Sundararajan and Ayyaswamy (1984. Later. 2 M ξ Dm 6 ϕDi . They concluded that direct condensation is a highly efficient way of condensing pure steam. and r and Tr.179) QT where Qz represents the quantity of heat absorbed per unit time by the spray from nozzle outlet to distance z and QT is the maximum amount of heat per unit time that can be absorbed by the spray. (1964a) presented a theoretical analysis for vapor condensing on laminar jets. Di and Dm are drop initial diameter and maximum diameter. ε measures the percentage of maximum heat removal capacity.3-48 Multiphase Flow Handbook pipe rupture accident. 1985b) and Huang and Ayyaswamy (1987a. They included the effects of internal circulation and noncondensable gases. and ξ and ϕ are the spray distribution parameters for uniformity and skewness. From the same group. Liquid Sheets. Their experimental results show that the thermal utilization ranges from 0. Taitel and Tamir (1969) extended the study of direct contact condensation by examining the effects of noncondensable gases. The model predictions compared well with the experimental results.2.987 for spray distances of 42 to 356 mm from the nozzle. They introduced the concept of coolant capacity utilization and produced its relationship with the Graetz number for different noncondensable mass fractions. (1984a. 1987b) have published theoretical and numerical results that address the internal flow field and external boundary layer in addition to the effects of noncondensable gases.1 Condensation on Drops Lekic and Ford (1980) published a complete study of vapor condensation on a spray of subcooled droplets. (D3 Ϫ Di3) dn (3. The following equation provides .783 to 0. respectively. Chung et al. Hasson et al. 1985a. The model is capable of predicting the average spray temperature as a function of the given spray length. Most of the theoretical and analytical investigations were focused on a single droplet. respectively.180) .2 Condensation on Liquid Jets. Jacobs and Cook (1978) developed a mathematical model based on pure conduction in the droplet and thin liquid condensate film formed on the droplet surface.i i (3. respectively. 1984b) used asymptotic analysis and numerical methods to evaluate the condensation on droplets in the small Reynolds number regime. Hasson et al. and Liquid Films Condensation on jet and sheets has been used in special type condensers. (1964b) experimentally investigated the condensation of steam on laminar water sheets. a relationship between n and Di: . where n is the number of drops per unit time generated by the nozzle. Jacobs and Nadig (1987) included the resistance in the condensate that was not addressed in previous work. The droplet radius history. They developed a mathematical model that includes the drop size distribution.i are the radial coordinate and temperature at the radial location r. Rt . For a more complete analysis. LLC .5. is given as R(t) 3 ᎏ ϭ 1ϩ ᎏ Ri Ja ΄ r (T Ϫ T ) ͵ ΂ᎏ ᎏᎏ dr R ΃ R (T Ϫ T ) ΅ 1 2 r. Therefore. The experimental investigation was also performed where they used three full cone nozzles with different pressure drops. the percent coolant capacity utilized drops from 100 to 55% for the Graetz number increasing © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. cold water droplets are sprayed into the vapor-filled containment to reduce pressure and temperature by condensing steam. 3. The heat transfer Qz is obtained from π Qz ϭ ᎏ ρlhfg 6 ͵ 0 Dm .181) dn ϭ ᎏ ᎏ ᎏᎏ ᎏ 3 exp Ϫξ ln ᎏ Dm Ϫ Di ρl ͙ෆ π Di (Dm Ϫ Di) πDi ΄ ΂ ΃΅ where D is the drop diameter. and heat transfer rate. For intermediate and high Reynolds number flows. 3.5. For example.

2. In most engineering applications. 3. It was pointed out that condensate flooding significantly affects the finned tube performance. polished metal surfaces that are generally wettable by most liquids are usually used for condensers. 3. LLC .6 Enhanced Condensation The enhancement of condensation heat transfer is generally based on the following principles. It was found that screen electrodes placed parallel to the cold plate generated the largest heat transfer enhancement. When using metals of high thermal conductivities. 6.0005. Internal mixing of condensate liquid.1. corrugated. Increasing the effective condenser surface area such as fluted. As the ratio of the surface tension to density of the working fluid is increased. Because the major heat transfer resistance is associated with the condensate layer. In cases where the fin shape is important. there are two types of promoters.Boiling and Condensation 3-49 from 0 to 60 at the noncondensable mass fraction of 0. Nucleation sites provided by ions. Condensate film surface wave destabilization. They used Freon-113 vapor condensing on a vertical copper plate. tall and thin fins are more beneficial.2. In general. Fin spacing has been considered as an important parameter. the optimal fin spacing also increases.7 Surface Promoter for Dropwise Condensation In Section 3. On the theoretical side. the fin height and the fin base thickness. thinning of the condensate film and creating turbulence in the film would accomplish the goal. Controllable and reproducible increases of 150% were achieved. Electrostatic pumping of condensate. One is called the additive agent that is sprayed onto the condensing surface or into the vapor phase. Promoters are required to induce the nonwetting condition for dropwise condentation. Corona wind to drive ions to heat transfer surfaces. but the magnitude of the heat transfer enhancement decreases. Melcher (1966) was the first to introduce the electrohydrodynamic (EHD) induction pumping based on the electrostatic shear stress at the two-phase interface. Marto (1988) gave a complete review of the progress made on the enhancement of condensation heat transfer on horizontal integral-fin tubes. The other is coating or plating the condenser surface with thin layer of materials with high free energy. 3. Nonuniform electric fields to collect condensate. The idea of using an electric field to enhance the condensation heat transfer was then attempted by Velkoff and Miller (1965). 3.2. it was mentioned that dropwise condensation relies on a relatively nonwetting condition between the condensate and the condenser surface for the drops to grow to larger sizes without spreading to liquid films. 4. Kedzierski and Webb (1990) proposed a new family of high-performance fin profiles for surface tension-drained condensers that offer improvement over existing commercial fin shapes.8 Electric Field Enhanced Condensation Gerstman and Choi (1962) were the first to perform an experiment to demonstrate the enhancement of condensation on a vertical plate by thinning the liquid film with an electrical stress. 2. finned. Heat transfer enhancements are more substantial than the surface area enhancement by adding more fins. Various electrode geometries and strengths were investigated. improvement in the condensate removal may be useful for providing additional heat transfer enhancement. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. The percent coolant capacity utilized changed from 100 to 30% for the same Graetz number range at the noncondensable mass fraction of 0.2.2. or wire-wrapped tubes would also enhance the condensation heat transfer. Melcher and Taylor (1969) gave a comprehensive review of the EHD-driven convection by a DC or AC field. They also discussed the effects of interfacial instability waves due to the electric field. there is an associated small degree of condensate flooding. Jones (1978) further summarized the progress in EHD-enhanced condensation heat transfer. For working fluids of high surface tensions. On the basis of the suggestions by Velkoff and Miller (1965). 5.1. They specified each design in terms of the fin tip radius. Jones (1978) generalized the following possible mechanisms of EHD-driven condensation: 1.

(3. W/m2 °C Heat transfer coefficient for the liquid at the saturation point. LLC . W/m2 °C Two-phase heat transfer in the convective boiling dominant region. k (ϭ 1.26) Tube diameter.Sat hm hTP hTP\CBD hTP\NBD h∗ Ja K K1 K1.16) New nondimensional groups defined by Eqs.15) Boiling number (ϭq Љ/(Ghfg)) Specific heat constant. Eq.49) Constants in Eq. J/kg °C Convection number (ϭ(ρ G /ρL)0. W/m2 °C Single-phase heat transfer coefficient for all flow in the liquid phase at saturation temperature. kg/m2 sec Nusslet number Nusslet number with all flow as liquid Nusslet number with constant properties and all flow as liquid Number of drops per unit time Pressure. (3. (3. Eq. (3. W/m2 °C Two-phase heat transfer in the convective boiling dominant region. (3. Eqs. (3. FFl Gravitational acceleration.33).b A. (3.3-50 Multiphase Flow Handbook Nomenclature a. (3.8) Fluid-surface effect constant. cp LO.21) Bubble diameter. W/m2 °C Heat transfer coefficient using TSat as the fluid temperature in the subcooled flow boiling. n p pcr Constants in Eq.19) Friction factor. m Mass diffusion coefficient of species 1 in a mixture of 1 and 2 Equilibrium break-off bubble diameter. N/m2 Critical pressure. N/m2 © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. W/m2 °C Two-phase heat transfer coefficient. Eq. J/kg Latent heat corrected for vapor superheating. m. J/kg Heat transfer coefficient for the liquid. (3.B Bo cp Co Cs. K2 kL l M .57) Diffusion-induced suppression parameter. cp . W/m °C Mixing length Molecular weight Total mass flux. defined by Eq.66).76) Thermal conductivity.32)and (3. Eqs. W/m2 °C Latent heat of vaporization.5 ((1Ϫx)/x)0. m Hydraulic diameter.56) and (3. m Nu NuLO NuLO. (3. W/m2 °C Heat transfer coefficient for the mixture.38 ϫ 10Ϫ23 J/K) Parameter in Eq.75) and (3. W/m2 °C Jakob number Boltzman constant. m/sec2 Mass flux. m Fluid-surface parameter accounting for nucleation characteristics of different fluid surface combinations in Kandlikar (1990) correlation Fourier number Froude number Froude number with all flow as liquid (ϭG2/(ρ 2 L gD)) Bubble departure frequency. kg/m2 sec Heat transfer coefficient.f Db Dh D12 d D FFl Fo Fr FrLO f f f2(FrLO) FD g G h hfg hЈ fg hL hLO hL. (3.44)–(3.46) Froude number multiplier in Eqs.

respectively. LLC . °C or K Saturation temperatures of the pure components at the total system pressure.62) Bubble volume. x2 ∼ x y y1. (3. nondimensional Single-phase thermal boundary layer thickness Eddy diffusivity for momentum transport Eddy diffusivity for heat transport © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. (3. respectively. N/m2 Pressure of the liquid. m Cavity mouth radius. °C Nondimensional wall superheat. in the liquid phase of a mixture of species 1 and 2 Molar concentration in Eq. W/m2 Heat flux at initial point of fully developed boiling.TSat. p. °C Liquid subcooling (TSat Ϫ TL). W/m2 Heat flux in the partial boiling region.27) The distance normal to the heater surface to the center of the bubble. (3. W/m2 Radius Radius of a bubble. N/m2 Prandtl number Prandtl number for liquid Heat transfer rate. sec Tape twist ratio for twisted tapes Velocity.2|p t TTR u v V Vb Vm X1–8 x x1. W Heat flux. (3. N/m2 Saturation pressure over a planar interface. m3/ kg mol Nondimensional groups defined in Eqs. W/m2 Heat flux at intersection of the extended single-phase line and the fully developed boiling curve.Boiling and Condensation pG pL pSat.1|p. W/m2 Heat flux at onset of nucleate boiling. R max T TSat. m/sec Specific volume. RC.26) Equilibrium quality Mass fractions of 1 and 2. W/m2 Critical heat flux.22)–(3. m3 Volatility parameter. (3. in the vapor phase of a mixture of species 1 and 2 Greek Letters α Γ ∆TSat ∆T ∗ Sat ∆TSat. m Reynolds number Bubble growth rate function Nondimensional cavity radius Minimum and maximum radii of active cavities Temperature.Min Re R(t) R∗ c ∗ R∗ min. °C Time.20) Molar volume. m Cavity radius at the ONB Minimum and maximum cavity radii available on a surface.Crit RC. m Mass fractions of 1 and 2.T Pr PrL q qЉ qЉ CHF qЉ FDB. y2 3-51 Pressure of the gas inside bubble. W/m2 Minimum heat flux. defined by Eq. Eq.i qЉ int qЉ MHF qЉ ONB qЉ PB R Rb RC RC. °C Liquid subcooling (TSat Ϫ TL). Eq.39) Wall superheat at the ONB.ONB ∆TSub ∆T ∗ Sub δT εm εh Thermal diffusivity(ϭ k/(ρcp)m2/sec) Liquid mass flow rate per unit film width Wall superheat (TWallϪTSat).Max.

kg/m3 Surface tension. r Fl fl fg i int L LO G MHF max min NBD NVG Nu nucl 0 ONB PB Annular flow Species 1 and 2 Bubble Bubble point Critical state Critical heat flux Convective boiling dominant region Convective boiling component Critical point for the fluid Dew point Exit section Stream core Initial point of fully developed boiling Convective component of film boiling Radiative component of film boiling Fluid-surface-dependent parameter in Kandlikar (1990) correlation Fluid Latent quantity (vapor property – liquid property) At the interface or initial state Intersection of the extended single-phase line and the fully developed boiling curve given by Eq. N/m2 Parameter in Eqs. N sec/m2 Viscosity of the liquid. (3. i F. (3. (3. N sec/m2 Spray distribution parameter for uniformity Contact angle.68) Spray distribution parameter for skewness Mixing length constant Viscosity of the bulk liquid.3-52 φ φ ϕ κ µB µL µW ξ θ θr ϑ ρ σ ψ Multiphase Flow Handbook Angle of orientation of the heated surface with respect to the horizontal. Eqs.c F. 2 b bp c CHF CBD conv crit. (3. deg Nondimensional centrifugal acceleration.73) Subscripts an 1. LLC . cr dp exit f FDB.78) and (3.72) and (3. N sec/m2 Viscosity of the fluid at the wall temperature.41) Liquid All flow as liquid Gas Minimum heat flux Maximum Minimum Nucleate-boiling-dominant region Point of net vapor generation Nusselt-type solution Nucleate boiling component On a flat surface Onset of nucleate boiling Partial boiling region © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. deg Association factor in Eq.79) Density. deg Receding contact angle.

1983a..G. The determination of forced convection surface boiling heat transfer. 1983b. 27.. 1958. 7.68) References Ananiev. 10. Heat transfer enhancement — the encouragement and accommodation of high heat fluxes. Physical Model of Bubble Detachment and Void Volume in Subcooled Boiling. 1967..D. 1950. 454–461.N. J. 365–372. 8–19. Fusion Technol. 290.D. Bankoff. Film Boiling heat transfer from horizontal surfaces. J.. J.N.r F. 1980. Bromley. Trans.D. Part II. 1961. average over the entire length or dimensionless quantity Dimensionless quantity Exponent in Eq. 46.. 1964. and Kruzhilin. 7. R.. and correlational aspects.. A review of microconvective.52) Constant in Eq. 1997. Heat transfer in stable film boiling. W. Prog..D. E. Heat transfer in the presence of steam condensation in a horizontal tube..B. OECD Halden Reactor Project Report HPR-10. Burnout under conditions of subcooled boiling and forced convection.. Subcooled flow boiling critical heat flux (CHF) and its application to fusion energy components. G. B. A. (3. L. A review of fundamentals of CHF and related data base. 24–26. G. Heat Transfer. AIChE J. Eqs. J. and Chen. 7. Heat Transfer Conf. Bowring. 1985. 7–30. 1961.R.E. Proceedings. 1980. Thermal Eng.51) Constant in Eq. Heat Mass Transfer.. AIChE J. LLC . Part II.E. A review of fundamentals of CHF and related data base. A. 119. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Bergel’son. experimental. Heat Transfer. 86.. 26. Bennett.D. 48–50...Boiling and Condensation r F.c Sat Smooth str Sub t tr T TP v W δ Receding Radiative component of film boiling Convective component of film boiling Saturation point Smooth tube value Stratified flow Subcooling Turbulent flow Transition flow Thermal layer Two phase Vapor phase Wall Edge of liquid film 3-53 Superscripts Ϫ ϩ m n p ∗ 0 Averaged.. Berenson. L. First Int. D.L.C. R.52) Nondimensional form Pure component value at infinite dilution. 83. Boyd.. Subcooled flow boiling critical heat flux (CHF) and its application to fusion energy components. and Kruzhilin. 7–30.P. J. Fusion Technol.67) and (3.. Part I.A. (3. 31–51.. Subcooled flow boiling critical heat flux (CHF) and its application to fusion energy components. Fusion Technol. Boyko. Forced convective boiling in vertical tubes for saturated pure components and binary mixtures. 1962. Boyko. 4. Bergles.M. L. Bergles. Entrapment of gas in the spreading of liquid over a rough surface.R. S. Boyd. Int. Chem. Eng. 351–358.. R. Heat Transfer.. (3. W. and Rohsenow. ASME.. Part I. (3... 221–227. Heat transfer and hydraulic resistance during condensation of steam in a horizontal tube and in a bundle of tubes. P. 361. Boyd.

A. Celata. Fluid Mech. 251–264. M. K. A.. M.. Eng. Series C. Eds. Chem... J. P. Heat transfer of binary mixtures in nucleate pool boiling.. Nucleate boiling... V. Heat Mass Transfer.P. ASME... and Lienhard. A correlation for boiling heat transfer to saturated fluids in convective flow.S. and Tsutsui. 1994. 1966. ASHRAE J.G.B. Int. 1966.P.H. J.. F. Chen. Heat Mass Transfer.K. Condensation nucleation theory. R. Gnielinski. 93. Laminar condensation on a moving drop. 1975.. Celata. IMechE. Photographic study of nucleate pool boiling on a horizontal surface. PA. Philadelphia. Chem.L. 1965. Eds.. 93.G. Ayyaswamy. Boiling and Condensation.M.. 3rd ed. Proc. 62.. J. and Choi. 1973. L. Bristol. J. and Mariani. New equations for heat and mass transfer in turbulent pipe and channel flow. 1984a. Process Des. 1993. Feldman. D.P. Industrial Eng. El-Genk. A. J. 322–329. CHF and post-CHF (post-dryout) heat transfer. Eucken... N. General film condensation correlation. S. 1994.. PA. 93. S. V. Eds. 1999.. Y.B. Fujita. Chen. Ayyaswamy..N.P. Report 62-3.. 1976. A. 1639–1646. A.. G.. A. and Seban. Convective Boiling and Condensation. Eng. M. S. Int. Naturwissenschaften. J. J.K... and Tien. 1973. 1962. Dev. Heat Transfer Conference.N. Chung.. V.. A. 61.R. PA. W. T.P. 1971. Int. Exp. 1996. Celata. 25. V. M. Fujita. Dhir. 1937. M. Singular perturbation technique. M..H. Carey.. and Sadhal. Dhir. 449–4715... 1992.. J. An experimental study of boiling in plate-fin heat exchangers. A.. Assessment of correlations and models for the prediction of CHF in subcooled flow boiling. P. Heat Transfer. Gerner.J.G. 17–29.S.. and Shoji. and Katz. Y. 237–255.. S.. 1984b. Boiling and Condensation. in Handbook of Phase Change. AIChE J..P. Heat transfer to evaporating liquid film. Liquid-Vapor Phase-Change Phenomena. Chung. V. J. PA. Marvillet. 1974.. H. 661. and Shoji.... Italy.Y. Philadelphia.R. G. Forced convective boiling in binary mixtures.. Chem... Chem. M. 2nd National UK Heat Transfer Conference.. 139.K. A review of pool boiling from inclined and downward-facing flat surfaces.F. V.E. J.. Int. P. G. Tokyo. Drew. A dimensionless correlation for heat transfer in forced convention condensation.. A. Celata. S. F. S. Levitan. in Handbook of Phase Change — Boiling and Condensation . Numerical solutions. J. Bai..C. Q. 1999. Engr. and Kenning. Prog. Cavallini.. G... Trans.S. R. Di Marco. and Lekic. J. ASME Publication 75-WA-HT-22.. Heat Mass Transfer.. Kandlikar. Heat Transfer. ASME J.R.. and Lantzman. Taylor & Francis.S. Eds..L. 309–313. 12. J. Dropwise condensation.. 1. Heat Transfer. and Mariani. and Mariani.. E.K. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Fluid Mech. R. Kandlikar. LLC . Laminar film condensation on plane and axisymmetric bodies in nonuniform gravity... 1971. 105. in Handbook of Phase Change. J. 2nd European Thermal-Sciences and 14th UIT National Heat Transfer Conference 1996.. Gaertner. A. 1937.. 36. D. 1996. Taylor & Francis.6. 3299–3309. Dhir.... Department of Mech.C. di Montegnacco. Sections 4. and Thome. T. 45.H. Ford. Vapor liquid equilibrium properties. J. 16.. Edizioni ETS.. C. Laminar condensation on a moving drop. 12. Part 1. and Setaro.G. and Zecchin. Part 2. Electrohydrodynamics Effects in Condensation. Eng.. McGraw-Oxford University Press.. Kandlikar..3-54 Multiphase Flow Handbook Calus. Chun. 3. Chato. 209.. C. 87.D. Laminar condensation inside horizontal and inclined tubes. New York. Cumo. Tufts University. 139. Philadelphia. 774–780. 391. Eds. and Lebouche. Chap. Di Marco. 16. A. 1257–1268.F. 359–368. 1949... 2nd European Thermal Science and 14th UIT National Heat Transfer Conference. 5th Int. and Muller.P.. and Mariani. Celata. Fatica. Binary Liquid Mixtures. G. 1987.. P. 6. Gerstman.1–4. Dhir. and Shoji.. V. 97. Cumo. 37. Part II. Rate of growth of drops during condensation. V. M. Taylor & Francis. 2. The incipience of nucleate boiling in forced flow. Doroshchuk. 1996.. 131. and Anderson. Boiling. Dhir. Investigation into Burnout in Uniformly Heated Tubes. Heat Transfer..L. 1962. 16. J. Heat transfer in a natural circulation single tube reboiler. G.. Davis. 5. ASME J. 33..L. Taylor & Francis. Collier. 1999. and Sadhal. Trans.

2002. 73.Boiling and Condensation 3-55 Graham. Groeneveld.. 1987.R.W... and Winterton.. and Katto.S... Int. Heat Transfer. E. 1987a. Can. Forced convective boiling experiments of binary mixtures. 3..E.S. AIChE J. An Analytical and Experimental Study of the Thermal Boundary Layer and Ebullition Cycle in Nucleate Boiling. Eng.. 46–62. and Navon. 1961. Y.P. Luss. 7. 1987. S. 387–399. 98.. 7.B. 109. D. Trans. Jaster. and Peck. 148–156. 32. 1978.. Hebel.... D. 95. Kirillov. and Kosky.J. Heat Mass Transfer. P. Bobkov.. Heat Transfer 1986. Heat Transfer Conference. Hasson. 983.. J. 1976. G.P. Luss. A comprehensive model for nucleate boiling heat transfer including microlayer evaporation. 1003..G. 1983. OH. 115–123. P. 1964a. Detavernier. Hasson.C. Nucl. S. A. 163. pp.. Heat Mass Transfer.P. 1013.A.. 3rd ed. D. and Ayyaswamy. 969.. 1986.C. De La Pena. 433–445.C. W.. Int.L. M. Hartnett. 1976. R.P. Canada. Toronto.. Tanida. P. 26.. ASME J. Eng. Symp. Bubble shapes in nucleate boiling. P. Haramura. A new hydrodynamic model of CHF applicable widely to both pool and forced convection boiling on submerged bodies in saturated liquids. 1973. 107... Chem. T. and Decreton. Film rupture theory of dropwise condensation. G. ASME J. Jensen. H. Trans. Jacobs. NASA Lewis Research Center. New York. and DeWitt. Judd. D. Hsu. and Royer. 7. 337. L. 16. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Approximate theory for film boiling on vertical surfaces. AECL-UO critical heat flux lookup table. 1951. Photographic study of surface-boiling heat transfer to water with forced convection. 623–629. Des. Y. Hewitt. 98–106.. 1966. Wiley. Jacobs. AIChE Chem. R. 1981. Prog. Gunther. J.. 1907–1912.. Huang. J. 65. 334–348. Vinogradov.Y. Pena. San Francisco. Heat and mass transfer associated with a spray drop. Post-dryout heat transfer at reactor operating conditions. Drag coefficient associated with a moving drop experiencing condensation. 1989. Boiling.. 207–216. J.. 12. D. 14. Vol.. Cheng. and Hwang. Eng. 58. 389.. Drop size distribution and heat transfer in dropwise condensation. and Westwater. 1987b. Proceedings of the Int.. ASME.. in Handbook of Heat Transfer. W. Smogalev. J. JSME Int. P. Eds. Gungor.J. T.W. D. 1936. 1964b. J.F. Incropera..L..H.H. Y.M. and Cook.B. Simplified general correlation for saturated flow boiling and comparisons of correlations with data. 1–23.S.. Leung.. Heat Mass Transfer. Int. J. 1978. Groeneveld. NASA TND-594.C. and Cho. Heat Transfer. and Graham. F. Huang. Nucl.K.. 729. 1986. Jakob. New York. Heat Mass Transfer..I.. 84. An experimental study of steam condensing on a laminar water sheet. II.. Heat Transfer... and Mesler. 30. Int.Y. Mech. C.C. D. ASME. Int.Y. J.. A contribution to the hydrodynamics of boiling crisis in a forced flow of water. F.P. X.J. and Ayyaswamy..R and Nadig. 1960.. Int.. Groeneveld. V. K. K. 109. and Griffith. Theoretical analysis of vapor condensation on laminar jets. 19.. Condensation heat transfer in a mixed flow regime. 30. J. AECL-4513.. 1998. Hsu. I. H. Ser. R. Eng. H.. Des. LLC . Hihara. McGraw-Hill. V. and Saito. R. 15–24. a fully transient analysis. Jr.... J. Cleveland. Rohsenow. 64. Condensation on coolant jets and sheets including the effects of noncondensible gases. J. Evaluation of bubble departure diameter correlations. Huang. p.. and Memmel. M... V. Fundamental of Heat and Mass Transfer. D.C. Jones. Hsu. Heat Transfer Eng. J. On the size range of active nucleation cavities in a heating surface. R. Heat Transfer.K. Electrohydrodynamically enhanced heat transfer in liquids — a review. J. 881. R. Ser..N. 1962.. E. Y. Heat Mass Transfer. Adv. 1973. Proceedings of the Sixth International Heat Transfer Conference. Heat Transfer. Direct contact condensation on a non-circulating drop.S. L. Eng. Heat Mass Transfer. D.. Y. K. M. Y. The 1995 lookup table for critical heat flux in tubes. M. Johnston. L.. 1996. and Doan..S.C.

. J. S. 1990a.G. Boiling heat transfer in binary systems.G. and Yokoya... Germany. 2003. PA.G. 388–394. A physical approach to critical heat flux of subcooled flow boiling in round tubes. M. Kandlikar. J. Ed.3. D.S.. 33. S. S. Radermacher. Heat Mass Transfer. P. and Spiesman. Int. Boiling and Condensation. Philadelphia.. 1990. 1988. S. 131–145. 113.. Kandlikar. Katto. M. J. April 24-25.G.. S.. 109.G. Kandlikar.. and Ulucakli. S. Kandlikar. J. S..S. 2003. Y. ASME Proceedings of the 32nd National Heat Transfer Conference.S. Taylor Francis. Heat Transfer. and Shoji. 611–620. Kandlikar. 380–387. Kandlikar. M. Heat Mass Transfer. 1991b. 1999. 190–200.G. J. Heat Transfer. 113. 120. May 18–25. 8–16. Contact angles and interface behavior during rapid evaporation of liquid on a heated surface.G. J. Enhanced Heat Transfer. dissertation.1–15. J. Heat Mass Transfer.L. McLinden. 33. J. Mizo. Kandlikar.. 2001b. Extending the applicability of the flow boiling correlation to low reynolds number flows in parallel flow microchannels. Heat transfer mechanisms during flow boiling in microchannels. Part II — Flow boiling.. Y.. 123. Kandlikar.G. H.. and Steinke. M. S. 120. J.G. Jung.G. S.K. S. Bubble nucleation and growth characteristics in subcooled flow boiling. Vol. Ph. R. S. Irsee. D.3-56 Multiphase Flow Handbook Judd. 1998a. Eds.. 11. Y. A model for predicting the two-phase flow boiling heat transfer coefficient in augmented tube and compact heat exchanger geometries. 1997. Katto. 1968. 2004. ASME. 1998b. Taylor & Francis. fully developed boiling.. and Ikenze. 342. T.. 112. Int.G. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. Kandlikar. ASME. J. 993–1002.. Heat Transfer. Kandlikar.G. 2001a. Cartwright. 1991a.. 120. A theoretical model to predict pool boiling CHF incorporating effects of contact angle and orientation.... Heat Transfer. University of Maryland. Kandlikar..S. 1921–1928. Prediction of critical heat flux of subcooled flow boiling in round tubes. S. J. Jung. Variation of superheat with subcooling in nucleate pool boiling. and Raykoff. 1991. Part I — Pool boiling. S. 13. V. 3771–3780.G. Kandlikar. Kandlikar.. E. Boiling heat transfer with binary mixtures. and Didion. 1998c. in Handbook of Phase Change. ASHRAE Trans. and Steinke. Heat Transfer. Dhir.. Dhir. 1071–1079. Engineering Foundation Conference on Convective and Pool Boiling. R. 32.G. 11–18. P. Heat Transfer. Predicting heat transfer during flow boiling in minichannels and microchannels. 395–401.. HTD-Vol.G. Kandlikar. Critical heat flux in subcooled flow boiling — an assessment of current understanding and future directions for research. R. S. G. M. S. Multiphase Sci. 15. Heat Mass Transfer. 219–228. 257–268. Kandlikar. Heat Transfer. D..K. Kandlikar. 603–608..D. Predicting flow boiling heat transfer of refrigerants in microfin tubes. and Balasubramanian. 1990b... Int. Heat Mass Transfer.G. 667–676.. and Celata.. Philadelphia..E. 4. Technol. Kandlikar. Development of a flow boiling map for subcooled and saturated flow boiling of different fluids in circular tubes. Handbook of Phase Change — Boiling and Condensation . Kandlikar.G. and significant void flow regions of subcooled flow boiling. Effect of surface characteristics on flow boiling heat transfer. 2002.G. J. Horizontal Flow Boiling Heat Transfer Using Refrigerant Mixtures. 113. Principal mechanism of boiling crisis in pool boiling. M. Int. 4. Secs. Katto.. 1999. 201–208. 966–972. Int.P.. Heat Transfer. V. LLC . Heat transfer and flow characteristics in partial boiling. First International Conference on Microchannels and Minichannels... 45.. A general correlation for two-phase flow boiling heat transfer coefficient inside horizontal and vertical tubes..H. Merte. 1988. Flow boiling in circular tubes. 125. 207–232. J. Horizontal flow boiling experiments with a mixture of R-22/R-114. PA. S. S. S. S. 1997. Heat Transfer.. S. Trans. Kandlikar. J. 1997.G.

S. 1989. 632. 14. A. 87. 2759–2765. 68. 1973. ASME. Measured temperature profiles within the superheated boundary layer above a horizontal surface in saturated nucleate pool boiling of water. 1966. 6. Banff. A. 1999. and Hartnet.D.S. 23.. 1988. and Honda. 1966. Fiz. 34. J.. Chalmers University of Technology. 1945–1963.G. J. Boiling and Condensation in Heat Transfer Equipment. of Heat Transfer. P.. 1963. and Dropkin. Vol 32. Labuntsov. Kew. 1971. S. ASME J.J... Yu.. M. 1957.. Proceedings of 5th International Conference. H.. 1. 1888. R. Heat Transfer. W. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. A. Augmentation of R-113 in-tube evaporation in microfin tubes. The two-phase boundary in laminar film condensation. pp. P. G... and Mudawar. 111. 1987. Int. J. 1965. On the transition to film boiling under natural convection. Detachment frequency as a function of size of vapor bubbles. Liaw. 1996.. K. Hemisphere.I.. 1531.J.. Heat Mass Transfer. Kutateladze. Sweden. Heat Mass Transfer. Department of Heat and Power Technology.. Heat transfer in film condensation on vertical surfaces and horizontal tubes. Academic Press. E. 69. Measurements and Modelling of Convective Vaporization for Refrigerants in a Horizontal Tube. Melcher. Z. 111.. and Leont’ev. Khanpara. D. Pate. Carl.B.A.. Liu. 1961. Koh.D. F.. 2. 16. Heat transfer at high rates to water with surface boiling. Boiling and Condensation. Heat Transfer... S. 731–738.. Kutateladze.2. W. J. 1287–1305.. J. NY. 506–524. Fuji. A. Momoki. D. J..Boiling and Condensation 3-57 Kedzierski. 333–341. 1995. Kutateladze. Translated Inzh. C. 711–728...M. Lorentz. A mechanistic critical heat flux model for subcooled flow boiling based on local bulk flow conditions. S. Trans. Hammitt.A. 1991.. V. J. Vol. 35–46. Void fraction measurement during saturated pool boiling of water on partially wetted vertical surfaces. and Winterton. A. McAdams. Multiphase Flow. A photographic study of the Subcooled Flow Boiling Crisis in Freon-113. M. 479–485.R.. Teploenergetika.S. 4.S. Melin.E. J. ASME. Philadelphia. and Bergles. Picornell. J.R. Flow boiling in compact heat exchangers.. 1990. Fundamental of Heat Transfer. 1949.C. C. 279–295. 1980. Vol. Ph.. April 30-May 5. An evaluation of film condensation on horizontal integral-fin tubes. I.. Kotloturbostroenie.G. 1988. R. Göteborg. Proceedings of the 3rd International Heat Transfer Conference. Vol 3. 1969. P. ASHRAE Trans. Practical fin shapes for surface tension drained condensation.D. J.M. 2373–2378.. 8 pp. Engineering Foundation Conference on Convective Flow Boiling.H. J.. J. S. Taylor & Francis. 20. 1995.S. Pate. Marcus. HT-39.. Int. Local Evaporation Heat Transfer in a smooth tube and a microfin tube using refrigerants 22 and 113. Int.. Lekic. M.E. Fluids. J. Vol. Zhur.. 121. 1986. Ind.M.. PA. Heat Mass Transfer. Chem. 9. Heat Transfer.E. Heat Transfer. ASME. Minden.I.S.. and Rohsenow. NY. ASME HTD. 112. 72. and Webb.. 1974..P. 1999.P. Sparrow. Mattson. C.B. B.. Electrohydrodynamics-a review of role of interfacial shear stress. Transactions of Institute of Engineers and Shipbuilders. Melcher. 10–12. Traveling wave induced electro-convection. Eng. Direct contact condensation of vapor on a spray of subcooled liquid droplets. B. I.. 1948. 110.L. 41. T. pp...H. Marto. Paper No.J. Malenkov.Y. and Taylor. and Cornwell. Lee. and Tong. Phys.K. 99. D.. and Dhir. in Handbook of Phase Change. Int. and Ford.C. thesis. J. C. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. Lang.L. J. Forced convective flow boiling of pure refrigerants inside a horizontal microfin tube.E. Scotland. R. LLC . Lai.B. R. 92. Canada. A general correlation for saturated and subcooled flow boiling in tubes and annuli based on nucleate pool boiling. Koyama.. The effect of surface conditions on boiling characteristics.. Khanpara. and Bergles. pp.. J. S. Some applications of the asymptotic theory of the turbulent boundary layer. Mikic. 5.S. 1548. and Dew. New York. L. Gibbs–Thomson effect on droplet condensation.H. Sec. J..

6. Prog. Rohsenow. 69–83. Part I. 680–689.W.A. Forced convection boiling of nonazeotropic refrigerant mixtures inside tubes. 1645. W. U. 1964. 37. Heat Transfer. Murata.J. J. Heat Mass Transfer. 1. Rohsenow.. R. Oswatitsch. Rose.M. J. 479.W. 1963. Heat transfer and temperature distribution in laminar film condensation.. The growth of vapor bubbles in superheated liquids. Chem. 12. 35.A. Appl. W. On bubble growth rates.B. W. Trans.. 1962. Sadasivan.. 1291. J. Chart correlation for saturated boiling heat transfer: equations and further study. Some aspects of dropwise condensation theory. Phys.. Int. H. 474–481. W. Theoretical calculation of heat exchange in turbulent flow in tubes of an incompressible fluid with variable physical properties. 94–98. 1917.. 1992. Nishikawa.. Int. Heat Mass Transfer. Mech. Ser.. S. Rayleigh. Heat Mass Transfer. 1954. and Griffith. K. Z. F. ASME J. 367. 185–196. K... J.. J. Minkowycz. Forced convection boiling in tubes. 1970.. S.J. 135–142. Die Oberflachenkondensation des Wasser dampfes.M. 493–500. Bull. 29. 1916. 1956. A.W. Philos Mag. Trans.. C. CA..B.. K. and Ishiguro. 13.. 400–416. Mikic. A. K. L... P.. interfacial resistance. 1970. Stanford University Press. 1988. 1986. Seban. Dropwise condensation of ethylene glycol. H.. Rose. 1966.S. 1972..E.. Sato. 15. Fujita. Rate of droplet growth in condensation. San Francisco.E. Fujisaki. V. Post-dryout heat transfer to Freon in a vertical tube at high subcritical pressures. 1982. 1983. J. 1125.M.H. Sci. E.. in Advances in Heat Transfer. Plesset. Condensation heat transfer in the presence of noncondensables. and Zwik. R. 449. Math.. and Takamatsu.. M. 7.. 25. Condensation heat transfer.. High Temp. B.. Petukhov. 1. 1999. and Lienhard. and Westwater. Am.. Inasaka. 1934. D. 1969.. J. Angew. and Berenson. B.C. J. Sensible heat correction in laminar film boiling and condensation. 1982. J. 9. On the pressure developed in a liquid during the collapse of a spherical cavity. 1966. Z.M. Y. V. Int. B. 541. Int.. ASME. 88. Nukiyama. M. Critical heat flux of subcooled flow boiling in tubes with internal twisted tapes... Murphy. Yoshida. Symp. 1993. LLC . Heat Transfer. and Hashizume. 1963. ASME.C. A method of correlating heat transfer data for surface boiling of liquids.S. and Ohta. and Matsumura. 392–398. Commun. T. 1942. 38–46. Peterson.. 503–564. New correlation of pool boiling data including the effect of heating surface characteristics.. Schrock. K. On the conditions of incipient subcooled boiling with forced convection...S. 91. J. Conf. and diffusion.. Uchida.N. H. Mech. J... 657–666. Nusselt. Nishikawa. W.A. H. S.. J. Moissis. Petukhov. and Hodgson. J. 85. Vereins deutscher Ininuere. Heat Transfer. 60. Proceedings of ANS Winter Meeting (THD). and Grossman. Int. Nariai. Laminar film condensation in a tube with upward vapor flow. Trans. 969–976. Maximum and minimum values of heat transmitted from metal to boiling water under atmospheric pressure. 74. P.. and Bergles. 79. and Sparrow. Heat Mass Transfer J. 109.S. Soc. W. R. J. Shah. Proceedings of Heat Transfer and Fluid Mechanics Inst. 1245–1251. Stanford. JSME.. Heat Transfer. ASME-JSME Thermal Eng. 545. Air Conditioning Eng. 1. superheating. variable properties..M. 34. Effect of heating surface orientation on nucleate boiling heat transfer. Soc. H. J. and Popov. Rohsenow.. Refrig. Heat Mass Transfer. Heat transfer and friction in turbulent pipe flow with variable physical properties. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. W. and Rohsenow. S. Nucl. B. 25. J.. 62. Heat Mass Transfer. Subcooled flow boiling of fluorocarbons — hysteresis and dissolved gas effects on heat transfer. Trans..M.3-58 Multiphase Flow Handbook Mikic. 241–250. Eng. On the hydrodynamic transitions in nucleate boiling. Ser. 129–136. J. 115. Eng. J. 1987. Mori. November.W. Eng.M.. 1952. H. Heat. 221–229. ASME. 22.

M. ASME J. Overall Viewpoint of Flow Boiling Mechanisms. 13. DC. M. 1993. New York. 1965. Umur. Walker.R. 1965.. ASME J. and Berenson. Tong. 547. L. T.. An evaluation of the departure from nucleate boiling in bundles of reactor fuel rods. Sundararajan. P.K.. A. S.J. 179. London: Engineering Science Data Unit International. 267. 72. Heat transfer correlation for natural convection boiling.S.. Principles of Design Improvement for Light Water Reactors. Mag. G. Philos.. 22. 689. Tanaka. 87. 90. and Tang. Boiling Inside Tubes: Critical Heat Flux for Upward Flow in Uniformly Heated Tubes. Sundararajan. J. and Fujii.. Tong. W. J.. Int.. Fluid Mech. A general heat transfer correlation during film condensation inside pipes.. Silver. p. A theoretical study on dropwise condensation. 1965. 1992. London. 33.. J. 1997. Int.H. J. J. Heat Transfer.. P. Vachnon. M.R. Thom. and Reising. Numerical evaluation of heat and mass to a moving drop experiencing. Sci. Bergles. 1969. 7–15. ASME Winter Annual Meeting.R.E. Condensation in the presence of a noncondensible gas in direct contact. 36.S. Heat Transfer.. 1989.. 107. Minkowycz.A. Sundararajan. Tong.. U. 1965. Sugawara.. Mech. An experimental study of critical heat flux in very high heat flux subcooled boiling.M. Boiling in subcooled water during flow up heated tubes or annuli. ASME J. ASME. Y. C. 1968. 1977. and Abdelsalam. 1984.43–69. R. © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group.. Heat Mass Transfer.A.B. and Tanger. W. A. Heat Transfer.. and Taborek. Part 1. H. and Tamir. Tong L. Heat Transfer Eng. John Wiley. A. Heat and mass transfer associated with condensation on a moving drop: solution for intermediate Reynolds numbers by a boundary layer formulation.. ESDU Data Item No. 1994. J.E. 1988. 1966. 1975. ASME J.F. and Miller. Heat Transfer.. Smith. and Saddy. P. G. 1985a. 1968.. 339.H. and Katsuta. Evaluation of constants for the Rohsenow pool-boiling correlation. New York.S. Taitel.S. L. ASHRAE Trans. H.. Schuster. E. Heat Transfer. 1986. 149. A.S. 239. 10. Steiner. Hydrodynamics and heat transfer associated with condensation on a moving drop: solution for intermediate Reynolds numbers.J. Nucl. J. 37 (Suppl. ASME Paper 72-HT-54. A correlation for forced convection boiling heat transfer of nonazeotropic refrigerant mixture of HCFC22/CFC114 in a horizontal smooth tube. Y.. Condensation of vapor on a vertical plate with a transverse electrostatic field. Proc.. and Ayyaswamy. 1968. Heat Transfer. 161–173... and Jensen. Int. J. 3555–3563.A. An approach to a general theory of surface condensers. Sparrow... 1972. 197. Heat Mass Transfer.. P.S. Int.. and Bishop. T. W.. Part 1. Inst. 1871. A general heat transfer correlation for annular flow condensation. Numer. L. J. 8.I. 86032. T. Institute of Mech. J. and Griffith. Int. Heat Mass Transfer. S.A. 275.. L.S. Vol.S. 1157. and Ayyaswamy.. Manchester.S. H. Thomson. Boiling Heat Transfer and Two-Phase Flow... Tong. Fallon. 1967.M. R. Fundamental study on dropwise condensation. A Photographic Study of Subcooled Boiling and DNB of Freon-113 in a vertical channel. Heat Mass Transfer. Efferding. M. T. 448. 354. Heat Mass Transfer.. P. M. Tong. 87..S. Curin.S. and Thorp.S. Mechanism of dropwise condensation. and Ayyaswamy. Takamatsu. L. Int. Nix. G.. 12. Vandervort. 33. H.S.. G.. 97. ASME J. A.. 1985b.. Momoki. 205–215. and Hewitt. M... J.. T. 15–16. Eng. ASME Paper 66-WA/HT-39..S. Heat Transfer. Flow boiling heat transfer in vertical tubes correlated by an asymptotic model. 1829. Shah. Eng. D. LLC . paper presented at the Symposium on Boiling Heat Transfer in Steam Generating Units and Heat Exchangers. Heat Mass Transfer. Velkoff... 1964.Boiling and Condensation 3-59 Shah. A general correlation for heat transfer during subcooled boiling in pipes and annuli. R. 23.G. K. 1980. Hemisphere. New York. Washington. Forced convection condensation in the presence of noncondensables and interfacial resistance. 409. 42.. Taylor & Francis.F. Boiling Heat Transfer and Two-Phase Flow. Proceedings of the Third International Heat Transfer Conference.E. Eng. 90. Stephan.L. Soliman. K. 2. J. 1). 1966. Sept.M. 73–87.M. 83. Chicago.. L.

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group. B. and El-Genk. Heat Transfer. J. Paper 91-WA-HT-8. 1463–1477. Heat Transfer..R. Microscopic study of dropwise condensation. LLC . ASME Winter Annual Meeting. 97. CA. Empirical correlations for heat transfer and flow friction characteristics of rectangular offset fin plate heat exchangers. High-Speed Photographic Analysis of Saturated Nucleate Pool Boiling at Low Heat Flux.S. 1983.A. J. 488–490. ASME. Williamson. ASME Int. J. R. Ph.W. Zuber. Los Angeles. Hydrodynamic Aspects of Boiling Heat Transfer...3-60 Multiphase Flow Handbook Weisman. 1975.D.. Heat Mass Transfer. Prediction of critical heat flux in flow boiling at low qualities. 1959. Welch. 1961. N. University of California..S. C. thesis. Atlanta. 1991. J. Part II. and Westwater. 26. Dev.F. J. Int. and Pei. Wieting. M.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->