1971-Paper 4 PDF

ANNUAL
REVIEWS Further
Quick links to online content
Copyright 1971. All rights reserved
BOILING 8009
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
WAHREN M. ROHSENOW
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1971.3:211-236. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
The process of evaporation associated with vapor bubbles in a liquid is

called boilin g. Here attention will be focused on boiling at solid heated sur
faces of interest in engineering applications.
When a pool of liquid at saturation temperature T. is heated by an elec
trically heated wire or flat plate at temperature Tw, data for the rate of heat
transfer per unit area qjA vs AT= (Tw- T.) usually appear as shown by the
lower solid curve in Figure 1. As AT increases, the initial natural circulation
regime A-B changes to the nucleate boiling regime. The a p pearance of the
first bubble at B requires a significant finite superheat.
As AT or heat flux is increased, more and more nucleation sites become
active producers of bubbles. A peak nucleate boiling heat flux (called crit
ical heat flux) is reached when bubbles stream forth from so many nucleation
sites that the liquid is unable to flow to the heat surface. With electric heat
ing (qjA the independent variable) the operating condition at point C of Fig
ure 1 changes rapidly to point E', which is at a very much higher temper
ature. If point E' is above the melting point of the solid surface, a "burnout"
occurs. If i t is below, then operation can be maintained along the curve E-D
which is called the film-boiling regime, because a layer of vapor contin
uall y blankets the surface, and li quid does not contact the surface.
If the heat flux is reduced below point D, at the minimum point on the
curve, the operating condition reverts to nucleate boiling at point F. Then
power again must be increased to point C before the process can revert to
film boiling.
To operate in the transition region C-D between nucleate and film boiling,
the surface temperature should be the in depe ndent variable, which is accom
plished by means of a condensing vapor, etc. In this region the process may
be alternating between nucleate and film boiling, with the liquid touching the
surface intermittently.
The dashed line shown for pool boiling of a subcooled liquid lies near the
curve for saturated liquids; it may lie either to the left or right depending on
different natural-convection effects resulting from different surface geom
etries.
Experimental data for forced convection-inside of ducts or across wires
and plates-when plotted on the same coordinates appear as shown in Fig-
211
212 ROHSENOW
FORCloD CONVECTION
SURFACE BOILING
=
P CONSTA NT
E
I
FalCD CONVECTION
I
I o
F I
NUCLEATE B O ILING POOL.. BOIUNG
I
SUBCOOlED I POOL BOILING
POOlBOIU V
FIGURE 1. Regimes in boiling heat transfer.
ure 1. If the liquid temperature Tb is subcooled, the heat flux is represented

by
(q/Aheforeboiling = h[(T.. - T.) + (T. - Tb)] 1.
where h is the coefficient of heat transfer. At high heat flux, the forced con
vection curves for a particular pressure and at various subcoolings and ve
locities appear to merge on log-log plots into a single curve called the fully
developed boiling curve. For some systems this fully developed region lies
approximately on an extension of the pool-boiling line for the same surface.
The literature on boiling heat transfer is now quite voluminous. For ref
erences in addition to those discussed here the reader is referred to the quite
complete collection of annotated biblioraphy assembled by Gouse (1966).
Nucleation.-In carefully cleaned test systems, heating of pure liquids

can produce high superheat at temperatures up to a limit of stability where
homogeneous nucleation, vapor formation, takes place. For the case of heat
transfer associated with boiling at solid heating surfaces, observed wall tem
peratures are very much lower than these. Further observations of nucleate
boiling show bubble streams emerging at single spots on the surface. Mi
croscopic observation of these spots (Westwater & Strenge 1959) reveals a
scratch or a cavity where a bubble forms. Earlier, Corty & Foust (1955),
Bankoff (1956), and others developed the postulate that bubbles at a heat-
BOILING 213
FIGURE 2. The formation of bubbles of vapor over cavities in a heated surface.
ing surface emerge from cavities in which a gas or vapor phase pre exists (Fig
- .
2). As heat is added, more vapor forms in the cavity (Fig. 2a), and a bubble
emerges and departs (Fig. 2b), after which liquid closes in over the cavity,
trapping vapor that is the source of the next bubble. Surveys of nucleation
phenomena are found in Rohsenow (1966) and Griffith (1965).
To put these notions on a quantitative basis, consider the equilibrium
and growth of a spherical bubble in a large body of liquid. The vapor pres
sure and liquid pressure are related by the equilibrium condition
20-
P - P I =
2.
r
where 0- is the surface tension and r the radius. As a good approximation the
vapor in the bubble is saturated relative to p. At equilibrium or for growth
TI Tw; therefore the liquid is superheated relative to PI. Combining this
equation with the Clausius-Clapeyron relation
dT Tv,.
--=--
3.
dp hiD
gives the necessary liquid superheat for bubble growth as
via 20-
TI- T.at = -- 4.
hlg r
The above equation represents an approximate expression for the superheat

required for equilibrium of a bubble of radius r. Nuclei of radius greater than
r from Equation 4 should become bubbles and grow; those of smaller radius
should collapse.
214 ROHSENOW
If inert gas molecules are present in the liquid and, hence, in the bubble,
Equations 2 and 4 are modified as follows:
p_ - p =- 20-
r
- PD 5.
-- (20- )
R.T2
T - T.at = - - PD 6.
phlg r
where Rv is the gas constant. This shows that the superheat required for a
given size bubble to grow is decreased by the presence of the gas partial
pressure pg.
It is generally accepted that bubbles form on heated surfaces at cavities
in the surface ( Rohsenow 1970) and that there exists a distribution of cavity
sizes. Boiling at a cavity results from pre-existing vapor or gas in the cavity.
For most cavities it is shown by many different experiments that Equation
4, with r the cavity radius, predicts the required superheat for bubble growth
in a uniformly superheated system.
At a nonisothermal heating surface the following procedure was devel
oped by Bergles ( Bergles & Rohsenow 1964) bas ed on a suggestion of Hsu &
Graham (1961) . In this flow inside the tube the expression for heat flux is
-Aq = h(Tw - Tlig) = - kz

(-T )
a
7.
ay IIO
Here the heat-transfer coefficient h is a function of the geometry, the fluid

properties, and the flow rate ; kz is the liquid thermal conductivity. For a
given liquid temperature, both the temperature gradient (aT/aY)l/=o and the
wall temperature Tw increase as the heat flux increases. A series of curves
representing the temperature distribution very near the heated wall is shown
for increasing heat flux in Figure 3. Also shown in Figure 3 is a curve labeled
Tg*, which is a plot of Equation 4 with the radius of the cavity plotted as the
distance from the heated surface. A possible theory: Nucleation takes place
when the temperature curve in the liquid is tangent to the curve representing
Equation 4. The implication is that the surface contains cavities of various
sizes, and when the temperature at the outer surface of the bubble reaches
the critical value given by Equation 4 the bubble grows at the cavity whose
radius is represented by the distance between the wall and the point of inter
section.
In commercially prepared surfaces a wide range of cavity sizes can be ex
pected. Incipient boiling, then, should be independent of surface condition
for most commercially finished surfaces. The present analysis should, there
fore, be valid in most practical applications. It is noted, however, that the
BOILING 215
t*
9
------
T
b
TI ------
, and r
FIGURE 3. Initiation of bubble growth in forced-convection

surface boiling (Bergles & Rohsenow 1964).
position and slope of the remainder of the boiling curve should be dependent
on the size range of active nuclei.
Comparison with much data shows that measured superheats for incip
ient boiling either agree with these predictions or are slightly greater. For
convection situations in which h is low or for liquids that have high magni
tudes of kz (liquid metals) the slope of the temperature curve (dotted lines of
Fig. 3) is very s mall so the point of tangency occurs beyond the size where
,
cavities exist, requiring superheats higher than those predicted.

Extending this reasoning readily shows (Rohsenow 1970) that for nat
ural convection and for liquid metal, boiling data should be greatly influ
enced by surface finish (cavity-size distribution), but for higher forced con
vection of nonmetals, surface finish should have practically no effect on
th e curve of q/A vs AT.
216 ROHSENOW
Possible mechanisms of heat transfer in boiling.-As heat flux to a satu

rated liquid is increased beyond the incipient boiling point, the number of
spots on the surface from which bubble columns rise increases. Photographs
by Hsu & Graham (1961) suggest that: between successive bubbles in pool
boiling a thermal layer builds up and each bubble carries away with it the
liquid in a region 2Db, thus pumping away the liquid superheat. In the re
gion between the bubbles at the lower heat fluxes the heat transfer may be
of the order of that associated with natural convection. Calculations based
on this hypothesis were verified at low heat fluxes by Han & Griffith (1962).
As heat flux is increased the nucleation-site density increases and the
columns with discrete bubbles change to columns of continuous vapor (Mois

sis & Berenson 1.963). The zones between these vapor columns become "re
turn passages" bringing liquid to the heating surface where it is converted to
vapor in the columns. As heat flux is increased further, this situation becomes
unstable and the heating surface becomes starved for liquid, causing the
transition to film boiling (point C of Fig. 1).
Cooper (1969) and Cooper & Lloyd (1969) show that at low pressures
there is the possibility that a microlayer of liquid may be left under the
bubble during its initial rapid growth. At higher pressure (above atmos
pheric for water) this effect is probably not significant.
FACTORS AFFECTING POOLBOILING DATA
Here are presented the results of experimental observations showing the

effect on pool-boiling data (Fig. 1) of changing the magnitude of various
properties and conditions. Except as noted, all data discussed are for liquids
that wet the heating surface.
Effect of pressure.-Pool-boiling heat-flux data plotted vs wall superheat

result in curves as shown in Figure 4. At higher pressures the data lie at
lower superheat magnitudes. Of significance in explaining this shift to lower
wall superheat is the fact that for all fluids Equation 4 predicts lower f1 T
required t o activate given size cavities a s pressure i s increased.
Figure 4 shows typical results for the effect of pressure on the critical (or
peak) heat flux in pool boiling. This (qjA)orit typically goes through a max
imum at a pressure well below the critical pressure.
Effect of surfacefinish.-As expected, surface finish can shift the position

of theboiling CU1ve markedly, probably because changing surface finish
changes the cavity-size distribution curve (Fig. 5). The initial controlled ex
periments to study this effect were performed by Corty & Foust (1955). Fig
ure 6 is typical of ,experimental results. The data for the rougher surfaces lie
to the left at lower wall superheat, presumably because active cavity sizes
are smaller on the smoother surfaces.
Of significance is the observation from Figure 6 that surface finish does
BOILING 217
200 CRITICAL HEAT FLUX
100
.I:
...
50
"-
"
m
III
0
Z

VI 20
::>
0
e
10
.,.
n -PENTANE
5
100
(Tw -T.) (OF)
FIGURE 4. Effect of pressure on pool-boiling curve (Cichelli & Bonilla 1945).
not influence the position of the data in film boiling, nor does it affect the
position of the minimum heat flux in film boiling. The influence of surface
finish on the critical heat flux is shown in Figure 6 to be rather small-about
20% reduction in (qjA)crit for very smooth surfaces.
Aging.-Experience teaches that aged surfaces have higher required t:.T

for a given q/A. On metallic surfaces a scale or deposit may form from the
boiling liquid or a film may form from oxidation or other chemical reaction.
In either case the vapor-trapping cavity may shrink, necessitating higher
superheat for activation.
Surface coatings or deposits.-In addition to the effect described above in

connection with aging there obviously will exist a temperature drop asso
ciated with conduction across a surface coating or deposit. Since coatings
may be very thin and their properties not known, this additional temper-
!1.
<I
CAVITY DIAMETER
FIGURE 5. Cavity-size distribution.

218 ROHSENOW
EMERy 320
X EMERY 60
o LAP E
o MIRROR FINISH
;--::
<D

10'-r-------+---
<
....
CT
10 100 1000
tJ. T (OF)
FIGURE 6. Copper pentane test results, effect of roughness (Berenson 1960).
ature difference is usually included in the AT when plotting boiling data.

With this constant included, conduction resistance causes curves of q./A vs
AT to be farther to the right and at lower slopes than those for clean surfaces.
Curves for surfaces with various coatings are spread apart even farther than
those of Figure 6.
Effect oj gases.-Noncondensable gases dissolved in the water tend to

come out of solution at the hot surface. In general they tend to move the
curve of q./A vs AT to the left and to reduce the magnitude of (q./A)crit.
Figure 7 shows the results when fresh liquid containing the gas is contin
ually brought to the heating surface by forced convection. Gas bubbles may
app ear at temperatures well below the normal boiling point and additional
convection, probably induced by thermocapillarity, may produce the higher
heat fluxes as shown.
Hysteresis.-The overshooting of the wall temperature on increase of

q/A in natural convection and significant drop in AT when boiling begins
is known as a hysteresis effect. This overshooting is more pronounced with
BOILING 219
800 ---r----
EFFECT OF DISSOLVED
I
AIR
I 90 psio

I
WATER TEMP.' 270F
VELOCITY, I FT/SEC !
....
"'::
-/-,?
/1
o STEAM PRESSURIZED
O.3cc AIRIUTER 0
III
100
Ii>-J
..
Ii> AIR PRESSURIZED
69 cc AIRI LITER
0
/ I
Ii>
,l
F.V. FIRST VAPOR

.!!
/ OF.V.
V
O
/ F.II
10 100
AT ,oF I
FIGURE 7. Effect of dissolved gas on boiling curve (McAdams et aI 1959).
liquid metals, particularly alkali metals, which wet practically all solid sur
faces extremely well. This tends 'to deactivate cavities.
With liquid nonmetals this overshooting occurs less frequently since cav
ities such as those of Figure 2d are usually present and remain active cav
ities even after a system is cooled down. In nonmetals, if some of the cavitieo
become deactivated, the hysteresis overshoot can occur (Corty & Foust
1955); however, when the heat flux is reduced in the nucleate boiling region
the data follow smoothly down the boiling curve to natural convection.
Size and orientation of heating surface .-There appears t o be very little

effect of size of wire or of orientation on the curve of (q/A) vs tlT in the nu
cleate boiling region. This geometry effect, however, is pronounced in the
nonboiling natural-convection region, which is the left asymptote of the
curve and is predicted by the normal single-phase natural-convection data.
Also, in the film-boiling regime geometry influences the data, curves for
. smaller wire diameter lying to the left.
The critical heat flux appears to be influenced more pronouncedly by
geometry. There may be as much as a 2 5% variation in critical heat flux in
flat-plate data-values being less for vertical than for horizontal heaters
(Bernath 1955, 1960). The difference may be more for larger heater sizes.
Critical heat flux appears to increase with wire size (Bernath 1960) from
220 ROHSENOW
0.01 up to 0.05 to 0.1 inch and to level off beyond that size. For sizes below
0.01 down to 0.003 inch the magnitude of critical heat flux levels off again
(Pitts & Leppert 1966). In the range where critical heat flux changes with D,
the bubble sizes are of the order of the wire diameter. Houchin & Lienhard
(1966) measured reduced critical heat-flux magnitudes for thin ribbon heat
ers, of thickness down to as low as 0.00035 inch. Data for various thicknesses
of aluminum, nickel, silver, tantalum, and stainless steel were correlated with
the product pel; where 0 is the ribbon thickness, with one side insulated.
Agitation.-The effect of agitation such as with a propeller is quite sim

ilar to the velocity effect shown in Figure 1. Curves for greater rpm are
higher up on the graph. Also the critical heat flux increases with increasing
rpm. No attempt to correlate this information is made, since the effect is
greatly influenced by shape, size, and position of the agitation.
Subcooling.-The effect of subcooling appears to depend on the geometry

for convection. For a horizontal tube (Bergles & Rohsenow 1964) the q/A
vs flT curves lie farther to the right for increased subcooling. For boiling on
a horizontal flat heater surface they move to the left (Duke & Schrock 1961).
Presumably the difference is due to different convection effects. Critical heat
flux increases markedly as subcooling increases.
Nonwet surfaces.-When the liquid does not wet the heating surface, very
large vapor bubbles form and cover much larger portions of the heating sur
face (Jakob & Fritz 1931, Averin 195 4). The net result is that very greatly
increased magnitUdes of (T", - T.) are required to transfer a given q/A. The
critical heat is also very much reduced, by factors of 10 to 20.
Gravitationalfield.-At the NASA laboratories, a ribbon heater immersed

in a beaker of water was photographed during free-fall conditions, and the
results were repolted by Siegel & Usiskin (1959). In each case the heat fluxes
were in the nucleate boiling range under a normal gravity field. In the free
fall condition wit.h the lower heat fluxes, bubbles grew while remaining at
tached to the ribbon. At the higher heat fluxes a very large vapor volume
formed around the ribbon. This suggests that nucleate boiling is essentially
nonexistent under zero-g conditions.
Subsequently, Siegel & Usiskin added a small amount of friction to the
free-fall system, raising g to approximately 0.09. They reported verbally
that under these conditions nucleate boiling appeared to continue through
out the fall. This indicates that only a small g field is needed to maintain
nucleate boiling.
Merte & Clark (1959) report the results of tests on a heated surface at
the bottom of a pool. The system was placed in a centrifuge and rotated so
that the resultant: acceleration field was normal to the surface. Their boiling
BOILING 221
tests covered a range of 1 to 21 g. There seems to be very little effect on the
position of the curves of q/A vs (Tw- T,) at the higher heat fluxes. The dis
placement of the curves at the lower heat fluxes is probably due to the effect
of superimposed natural-convection effects.
CORRELATION OF POOLBOILINC HEATTRANSFER DATA
Attempts have been made by various people to correlate pool-boiling

heat-transfer data. The logic leading to the various forms of the correlations
will be omitted here and the suggested equations presented along with com
ments on their applicability.
Referring to Figure 6, one must inescapably conclude that any correla
tion equation that embodies only properties of the fluid (liquid or vapor)
cannot be a "universal" correlation for all fluids or, for that matter, for any
particular fluid. As a minimum the coefficient (and possibly even the expo
nents) must change in magnitude as the character of the solid surface chan
ges, since the data for, say, Figure 6 are all for the same fluid co nditions ,
only the solid-surface c onditio n having changed. This point cannot be over
emphasized. This has led to a great deal of confusion among boiling-heat
transfer researchers and users. At the present moment there is no satisfac
tory way to include quantitatively the effect of the solid surface in any cor
relation equation; in spite of this, some researchers present correlation equa
tions with a fixed magnitude for the coefficient. The best that can be accom
plished is to correlate the effect of pressure for a given fluid and solid surface.
Many of the proposed correlations were developed by analyzing a sim
plified model of boiling leading to some dimensionless groups of quantities.
Various forms of bubble Nusselt numbers, bubble Reynolds numbers, and
Prandtl numbers appear in these equations. One of the early correlations
( Rohsenow 1952) employed such groups with the characteristic dimension
D of bubble diameter. The equation proposed is
where h,g is the latent heat of vaporization and J.LI the viscosity of the liquid.
Here C., should be a function of the particular combination of fluid and heat
ing surface. From Figures Sa or Sb the exponent r is found to be 0.33. A cross
plot of c"AT/h/u vs Prandtl number Pr for constant values of the ordinate
shows s = 1.0 for water, but s = 1. 7 for all other fluids. The final correlation
is shown in Figure Sc which results in C.,= 0.013 with a spread of approxi
mately 20%. This process was repeated for other data with the results as
shown in Table 1.
It should be emphasized that accurate values of fluid properties are essen
tial in obtaining a correlation or in using Equation S. Also, the heating sur
face should be clean. The presence of a contamination or deposit on the heat-
222 ROHSENOW
o 14.7 poio
A 383 psia
o 770psio
A 1205 psio
" 1602 psio
" C 2465 pSlo
o

lit9
(T -
w
T
sot
) .
[1"2}O.33
A f q/A
o A Ol3l "t9 gt/l-p.U
a (";Iro
POOL BOILING PLATINUM

WIRE-WATER 0.024-in. diom.
001 0.1 0.01 10
6;r.
htg x
(b)
FIGURE 8. Correlation of nucleate-boiling data for water (Rohsenow 1952).
ing surface can shift the relative position and slope of the curve, thus chang
ing rand s in addition to C.I. It should also be noted that Equation 8 in
cludes a gll6 term that came from the expression for D. As noted previously,
there appears to be no effect of g on the position of the boiling curve ; there
fore Equation 8 should be used with igl = Igo I.
Later Forster & Zuber (1955) used similar dimensionless groups, but with
RR as the velocity times characteristic dimension in the Reynolds number
and 2o/t:.p as the characteristic dimension in the Nusselt number.
TABLE 1. Parameters in Equation 8 with r:::: 0.33
Surface-fluid combination Source of data C'I s
Water -nickel Rohsenow & Cl ark 1951 0.006 1.0

Water-platinum Addoms 1948 0.013 1.0
Water-copper Addoms 1948 0.013 1.0
Water-brass Cryd er & Finalborgo 1937 0.006 1.0
,
CCl -copper Piret & Isbin 1953 0.013 1.7
Benzene-chromium Cichelli & Bonilla 1945 0.010 1.7
n- Pentane-chromium Cichelli & Bonilla 1945 0.015 1.7
Ethyl alcohol-chromium Cichelli & Bonilla 1945 0.0027 1.7
Isopropyl alcohol-copper Piret & Isbin 1953 0.0025 1.7
35% K.C03-copper Piret & Isbin 1953 0.0054 1.7
50% K.CO,-copper Pilet & Isbin 1953 0.0027 1.7
n-Butyl alcohol-copper Piret & Isbin 1953 0.0030 1.7
BOILING 223
Forster & Greif (1958) modified the Forster-Zuber equation by not lin
earizing the t:.p vs t:.T relationship and suggested the following equation:
9.
where at is the thermal diffusivity. Here C2 was suggested to be 0.0012 from

data for water at 1 and 50 atm, n-butyl alcohol at 50 psia, analine at 35 psia,
and mercury at 1 and 3 atm. Equation 9 in the following form approximates
the data:
10.
For this limited amount of data K'I was suggested to be 43 X 10-6 Re

cently this equation was compared with other data. For ethanol-chromium
data of Cichelli & Bonilla (1945) it was found that K'f should be 82 X 10-6
and for water-platinum data of Addoms (1948), K'I 142 X 10-6 Obviously
=
the coefficient does indeed change in magnitude for various surface-fluid com
binations. Equation 10 needs more extensive comparison with data.
Equation 10 is identical to the earlier Forster-Zuber equation, except
that t:.p and t:.T are related by Equation 3. Also Equation 10 yields a vary
ing exponent of q/A vs t:.T, increasing with t:.T in the range from 2 to 4. In
many cases the curve cuts across natural boiling data at a lower slope.
Other correlations have been suggested by Gilmour (1958), McNeilly
(1953), and Levy (1959). The Gilmour correlation contains a size effect not
verified by experiment. The Levy procedure is dimensional and employs an
empirical curve around which data scatter by a factor of 5 or more, which
is about the same variation observed in C'I of Table 1. (Readers of the Levy
paper as originally published should note that the ordinate of its Fi g u re 4
should read multiplied by 10-6 instead of 10-6.) Various Russian workers
have suggested other correlation equations (Kutateladze 1963).
Equation 8 has correlated the pressure effect for a variety of pool-boiling
data. The state of our knowledge is such that the coefficient C'I must be de
termined from limited data for each fluid-surface combination. This, of
course, is true for any of the other pool-boiling correlations.
It should also be emphasized that the actual metal of the surface is per
haps less important than the surface character as represented by the cavity
size distribution of Figure 5, which is unknown for practicaHy all of the sur
faces tested.
Mikic & Rohsenow (1969) have attempted to show how the cavity-size
distribution for any surface influences the position of the q/A vs t:.T boiling
curve in pool boiling. Starting with the description of the boiling process as
224 ROHSENOW
previously outlined and assuming that the number of cavities of radius
n = (,.)m
greater than r is expressible by
-;
C1 " 11.
where rB is the radius of the largest cavity present and CIt r., and m are de
termined from cavity-size distribution measurements, Brown & Bergles

(1967) obtained the following expressions:
q _ Anc ( q) (q) +
12.
A A A nc A b
where Anc/A is the fraction of the area where bubbles are not being formed,
('1./A)nc is the natural-convection heat transfer at this area, and ('1/ Ah is
given by
13.
14.
15.
Here C2= 0.00015 for water and 0.000465 for other fluids and Ca0.6; CI,
rB, and m are to be determined from the cavity-size distribution, Equation 11.
Note that B is solely a function of cavity-size distribution and is a function
of fluid properties, except for the exponent m. Further, if the cavity-size
distribution has a slope of m then the curve of '1/A vs t:.. T should have a slope
of m+1.
For most fluids ('1/A)nc is much smaller than ('1/Ah in Equation 12 and
may be neglected.
Cavity-size distribution has not been measured for most surfaces for which
data are available. In these cases the boiling data may be used to determine
m and B. Mikic & Rohsenow (1969) show that Equation 13 used in this way
does correlate existing boiling data.
CORREloATION OF CRITICAL HEAT FLux, POOL BOILING
As heat flux is increased in nucleate boiling, more nucleation sites become

active. Equations for correlating the critical flux data emerge from models
that suggest (a) as nucleation sites increase, a critical "bubble packing" is
BOILING 225
reached to produce vapor blanketing (Rohsenow & Griffith 1956), (b) as nu

cleation sites increase, the liquid flow to the heating surface is restricted
sufficiently to produce vapor blanketing (Zuber, Tribus & Westwater 1961),
and (c) as heat flux and number of nucleation sites increase, bubbles in a
column overtake each other, producing a vapor column in which there are
liquid droplets that fall back to the surface if it is horizontal. When the
vapor velocity is sufficient to carry these liquid droplets away from the sur
face, vapor blanketing occurs. Regardless of the model used, all correlations
thus far proposed contain the relation between (q/A)crit!PvhJo, an average
vapor velocity normal to the surface, and some function of, or measure of,
pressure level. The following are some correlations that have been proposed
for liquid nonmetals.
[U(PI po)ggoJ1/4[ PI J1/2

Zuber et al (1961) (modified):
(q/A)crit
PI pv
-
= 0 .1 3 --
16.
pvhJg
---
Pv2 +
Here 0 18 agrees better with the data than the 0.13 originally suggested by
.
Zuber. Other equations have been recommended by Kutateladze (1952),

Chang & Snyder (1960), Rohsenow & Griffith (1956), and Lienhard &
Schrock (1963).
For liquid metals Noyes & Lurie (1966) suggest
(q/A)crit = 0.16pok/g
[U(PI - pv)ggo]l/4 + KNL 17.
Po2
where KNL=400,000 for data on sodium (0.2 to 22 psia). Here KNL is a

constant that perhaps has different magnitudes for each fluid. Data of Balz
heiser et al (1963) for potassium (0.15 to 22 psia) are correlated by Equation
17 with KNL =300,000. In terms of pressure in psia, these equations become:
Sodium: (q/ A)crit = (4.0 + 1.7SpO.(57) X 105

18.
Potassium: (q/A)crit = (3.0 + 1.00pO.444) X 105
The above equations apply to saturated liquid. For subcooled liquids

Zuber et al (1961) modified Equation 16 as follows:
(q/ A)crit sub 5.3 [U(PI ]

- po)ggo -l/8
Po v'kIPICI
__
----- = 1 + --
(q/A)crit sat k/o Po2
. [g(PI - po)]l/4(T.at - Tuq)

19.
gou
which was tested and agreed with data for water and ethyl alcohol at pres
sures below 142 psia.
226 ROHSENOW
100 r---- --
-r-----r-----,
.. 10
E
'"
..
0

"'I<t
1.0 I-----
--- -i----H'J
HOGE a
BRICK'NED__iI
1000
FIGURE 9. Experimental nucleate and film pool bo il ing of oxygen at 1 atm com
pared with the predictive correlations of Kutateladze and Breen & Westwater
(Bre ntani & Smith 1964).
Cryogenicfluids, pool b o iling.-C r yog eni c fluids-liquid oxygen, nitrogen,

hydrogen, helium, etc-in pool boiling behave like noncryogenic fluids. The
position of the curve of q/A vs (Tw-T.) depends strongly on the nature of
the solid surface. A survey of such data is presented by Clark (196 8). Figure
9shows a composite plot of a wide variety of pool-boiling and also film-boil
ing data for oxygen. Brentani & Smith (1964) attempted to correlate all
these data with a modified equation of Kutateladze
q
4.87 X 10-11
[ Cpl J1.5 [ kIPl1.282PL75J (Tw - T8)2.5
-- 20.
(To. 906J-110. 626
- =
A hfgpv
that represents the solid line through the central portion of the data. Quite
obviously the coefficient of the equation must vary by a factor of 10 or so to
accommodate a.ll of the data. Similar composite data for ni tro gen , h yd rog en ,
and helium exist (Brentani & Smith 1964).
Data for criitical heat flux of the various cryogens are shown to be cor
related (Clark 196 8) rather well by Equation 16 except at pressures ap
proaching the critical pressure where the data fall significantly below the
predictions.
Clark (196 8) shows that a modified form of Equation 8 also correlates
the cryogenics boiling data:
BOILING 227
q/A
hfoiJ.1
[ (PIgo-O' P.) Jl/2 =
3. 5
2 X
lOS [CP1tlT (T/Tc)1;J2.89
hfo Prl Jff
21.
g
Here Equation 8 was modified by including an additional pressure effect
empirically in the form of TIT the exponent on the Prandtl number was
changed. and a single magnitude of Csf was selected.
FORCED CONVECTION
Forced convection here refers to flow inside of tubes, annuli, and parallel
plates, outside of rod bundles, etc. It is a two-phase flow of liquid and its
vapor. Usually liquid enters subcooled and boiling takes place at the wall,
called local boiling. At some place along the tube the liquid reaches the sat
uration point. Beyond this point the process is called bulk boiling. At low
quality (below 5-8%) and in the subcooled region, the flow is bubbly. At
higher qualities the flow becomes annular with a thin liquid layer on the wall
and a vapor core, which may or may not contain significant amounts of liquid
droplets. in the center. In the annular flow regime there may or may not be
nucleate boiling. If the liquid film on the wall is thin enough, heat is trans
ferred by conduction through the liquid and vaporization occurs at the li
quid-vapor interface. Under these conditions the wall temperature is below
that required for nucleation or activation of the cavities. At higher heat
fluxes nucleation will take place under these thin liquid layers at the wall.
At some point down the channel the heated wall may become dry. Be
yond this point, the wall temperature usually rises significantly for a par
ticular heat flux. This is the critical condition. The cause of the dryout may
be intensive nucleation if in the nucleation regime, or tearing off of the liquid
film by high velocity of the vapor. which increases progressively down the
channel.
We separate our discussion of forced-convection boiling into the low
quality and subcooled regions (essentially bubbly flow) and the high-quality
regions (essentially annular flow). The region beyond the critical condition
is a mist-flow, dry-wall regime and is handled separately. This may be called
film boiling in forced convection.
Low-quality and subcooled forced convection.-Data in this regime typ

ically follow a pattern as shown in the upper left corner of Figure 1. No boil
ing occurs to the left of the incipient boiling line, determined as discussed in
connection with Figure 3. This curve is applicable for any velocity and sub
cooling. Beyond this line nucleate boiling occurs and the curves, regardless of
velocity or subcooling, appear to merge into a fully developed boiling curve.
the location of which is quite insensitive to the magnitude of ei ther velocity
or subcooling.
There are two suggestions for drawing the forced convection boiling
curve for a particular velocity and subcooling. On a graph of qlA vs
228 ROHSENOW
STAINLESS STEEL O.O!H 10

/
on.
p' 22 III, IIn" ....

V 17 ft lsec

a V 11.0 ftlHe.
o 1/ 6 8 "/lee
Tb 125- F
10'
(o/A)
Eq.22
(q/A)
-
---:
,
D
.
:: J

a;

i!
a
10'
FIGURE llO. Recommended procedure for construction of curve for

forced-convection surface boiling.
(TID- T,) (Figure 10), draw the forced-convection nonboiling curve (q/A)Jlc
for a particular velocity and subcooling (Eq. 1). Then from the procedure of
Figure 3, locate the point of incipient boiling. Then draw the fully developed
boiling curve, (q/A)B if known, at a slope of 3. This may be approximated by
the pool-boiling curve, if known, for the same surface. Locate the magnitude
(qjA)Bi immediately below the incipient boiling point. Revising a suggestion
of Kutateladze (1961), Bergles & Rohsenow (1964) suggest the following
)]
interpolation equation:
J!!./A) = [1 + (q/ A)B (1 _ (q/ A)Bi 2 1/2

22.
(q/ A)JlC (q/ A)FC (q/A)B
which is a curve asymptotic to the (qjA)Jlc curve at the incipient boiling
point and asymptotic to the (q/A)B at high heat flux. An alternative sug
gestion (Bergles: & Rohsenow 1964) is a simple additive or superposition
equation having: the same asymptotes
BOILING 229
(q/A) (q/A)FC (q/A)B - (q/A)Hi

= + 23.
Either equation follows the data reasonably well.

Based on the assumption that surface characteristics do not influence
significantly the position of the fully developed boiling curve in forced con
vection, the following equation has been proposed for subcooled and low
((q/A)1/2
quality forced convection of water by Thorn et al (1965):
Tw _ T. =
/1260 106
eP
24.
which appears to be in good agreement with data.
-
High-quality forced convection. Farther along a flow passage, at qual
ities above 5 to 10%, the flow regime becomes annular. As more vapor is
generated along the tube the vapor velocity progressively increases down the
tube, thus increasing the heat-transfer coefficient. The effect is more pro
nounced at the higher mass-flow rates. At high flow rates, high qualities, and
lower heat flux, the liquid layer on the waH may be thin enough to keep the
wall temperature below the nucleation temperature. Then no actual boiling
takes place. Heat is transferred by conduction across the liquid layer and
evaporation takes place at the liquid-vapor interface (Hewitt et al 1963).
Evidence of suppressed nucleation is shown in Figure 11 by Bennett, Collier,
Pratt & Thornton (1961). The data to the left are low quality and are in
the nucleation regime. The right-hand portion of the data for higher quality
is in the no-nucleation regime and appears to be correlated by the Lockhart
Martinelli two-phase flow parameter X tt.
A large number of correlation equations have been suggested. The fol
lowing two are recommended.
For the lower-quality region Chen (1963) developed the following equa
tions:
kIO.79CIO.46pl49gcO.26
h = h mic + hmac = 0.00122 (AT)o.24(Ap)O.75S + hLOF 25.
IjO.5fl.IO.29h O. 24p 0.24
,g
with
go = 32.2(3600)2
and S and F given in Figures 12 and 13, and
hLO = 0.023 -( )
kl
D
GD O.S
-
fl.1
Prlo.4 26.
100 ' r
------ ---------- ------ _r ------ .,
---------- ,_
------ -r------ -,-----------r--------
w
o
TEST SECTION, ANNlLUS (INTERNALLY HEATED)

HEATER,0.375 In. 0.0. x29 in. LONG
FLOW TUBE, O.B66 In. 1.0.
PRESSURE,25 psio
MASS VELOCITY ,1.0-2.0 It 10' Iblhrft2
10
e5
ffitTl
.r.'3 Z
}: o
:e
MASS
VELOCITY, HEAT
Ib/hr ftt. Btu Ihr ftt.
0 1.0 It 10' 1 .25 It 10'
'
1.0 X 10' 0.62 It 10
V 2.0 x 10 : 1.25 X 10

A 2.0 It 10 0.62 It 10
IL,
0.1
__
I
__
10 100
(lC I
0.1 P. o.a 0.'
l<tt - r=x) (t) L.J

_
FIGURE t"l. Variation of heat-transfer-coefficient ratio with Lockhart-Martinelli parameter.

From Bennett, Collier, Pratt & Thornton (1961).
BOILING 231
PPROXIMATE REGION
OF DATA
10'
I (X o.s P ( ( 0.' 0.'
Tn' I-X ) 1v-) ;)

FIGURE 12. Reynolds number {actor F.
For the higher-quality region Dengler & Addoms (1956) developed the
following equations:
-
h
= 3 5 ( )0.5
-
1
27.
hLO . Xtt
for c onvective region only: 0.25<Xu < 70. To take into account nucleation
{CIJ.T IJ.Ti) [() DJ } 0.1

multiply by F:
F = 0.67 _
5T sat a Tw
28.
if F>1. For F<l use F= 1. Also IJ.T;= 1O(V)o.3where Vis, in ft!sec,
v = Gv/3600 GVI/3600(1 - )
a
where a is the void fraction given by Lockhart & Martinelli (1949) and Gis
the mass velocity. Also
232 ROHSENOW
1.0 ,--'-""T""-...---r--.--r""-T'"T-r----,---.---.r--r-r-T"'"'r-1
0.8
FIGURE 13. Suppression factor S.
_=(
1 _X
)O.9()O.5(f.')O.1 29.
Xtt 1 - x p. J.ll
where x is the quality.
Critical heat Jux in forced convection.-Our ability to predict and de

scribe the conditiions at the critical heat flux is far inferior for boiling with
forced convection than for pool boiling. Most test data are taken with uni
formly heated test sections for flow inside round tubes, rectangular channels,
and annuli; and some data are taken for flow along rod bundles. Some data
are available for nonuniform heating-cosine distribution and discontinuous
distributions.
At low flow rate it is possible for vapor to form at stray nucleation sites
and, because the heat flux is low, to establish annular flow where evapora
tion can continue at the liquid-vapor interface by pure conduction through
the annular liquid film without nucleate boiling. As the quality increases
down the channel, the vapor velocity may become large enough to "tear"
the liquid off the wall. At sufficiently high heat flux, the wall is dry, and a fog
flow exists in the core, called film boiling.
At higher flow rates, the critical heat flux can occur at very low exit-vapor
quality, in which case the mechanism is similar to that associated with pool
boiling burnout. Here, the core may be primarily liquid in bubbly flow with
a vapor film sepamting the liquid from the wall.
These two cases perhaps represent extremes of all possible flowing con
ditions at the critical heat flux that might occur in nuclear reactors. In the
low-flow case, it is possible that no nucleate boiling ever really exists, and
the critical heat flux is in fact not a departure from nucleate boiling. Also,
the heat fluxes under these flow conditions would be low enough to result in
BOILING 233
a wall temperature that would be well below the melting point of the wall ;
hence, no physical burnout would result. At the other extreme, high flow
rate, the critical heat flux would represent a condition just below a departure
from nucleate boiling. Also the heat flux would be rather high, causing the
wall temperature to be well above the melting point of the wall : hence,
physical burnout would result.
In the light of the above discussion, terms such as burnout, departure from
nucleate boiling, maximum heat flux, and so forth should be discarded in favor
of the more noncommittal critical heat flux, defined as the heat flux just below
the point where the wall temperature begins to rise sharply.
In the preceding discussion we identify the point that we would like to

call the "critical-heat-flux point. " Detecting and measuring the corresponding
critical heat flux (q/A ) crit is quite another matter. Some detectors respond
to amplitude of temperature oscillation of a temperature-measuring device
usually placed on the outside surface of the test section and close to the exit;
others respond to rate of rise of such a temperature indicator; still others
respond to rate of rise of the ratio of the voltage drop over the last quarter
of the electrically heated test section to the voltage drop over the entire test
section. Clearly, each of these detectors, set to be tripped at various mag
nitudes of temperature oscillation or various magnitudes of rate of rise of
temperature or voltage ratio, can indicate widely differing magnitudes of
(q/A ) crit for a particular test condition. The possible variation is not known,
but a 10% variation is not unreasonable to expect.
The magnitude of (q/A ) crit seems to be seriously affected by the system
dynamics of the entire test loop. It was demonstrated early in the testing
programs (Rohsenow & Clark 1 95 1 ) that even with subcooled liquids intro
duced at the inlet it is necessary to place a well-throttled valve just ahead
of the test section in order to obtain reproducible results for (q/A ) crit. More
recently (Bertoletti et al 1 965), the quantitative reduction of (q/A ) crit due
to insufficient inlet throttling was measured in a particular system. In the
late 1950s, data appeared for test sections with inlet conditions in the quality
regime (Bertoletti et al 1965, Bennett, Collier & Lacey 1961, Silvestri 1 961,
Bennett et al 1963) by mixing liquid and vapor streams. Also, compressible
volumes (Aladyev et al 1961) were intentionally introduced at the test-sec
tion inlet. In both these latter cases, system dynamics of instabilities were
found to influence significantly the magnitude of measured (q/A)cr it.
The heat-transfer mechanism associated with the (q/A ) crit is intimately
related to the kind of two-phase flow regime existing at its occurrence.
All of these complicating effects have made it virtually impossible to de
scribe adequately the conditions existing when (q/A ) crit occurs and to ob
tain adequate correlations of the data for (q/A ) crit. Some correlation equa
tions have been suggested for particular fluids (primarily water) , specific
geometries, and for limited ranges of operating conditions.
234 ROHSENOW
Various empirical correlations of data, primarily for water, are assembled

by Tong (1965) .
Beyond this critical condition the tube wall is considered to be dry. When
the critical condition occurs at qualities of 5 to 10% or more, the flow is a
fog of liquid droplets in the vapor. In this region heat is transferred primarily
from the wall to the vapor with a smaller amount going directly from the
wall to the liq uid droplets. The vapor becomes well superheated and trans
fers heat to evaporate the drops. This two-step process results in highly
superheated vapor carrying liquid droplets. Predictions of the heat-transfer
performanc'e in this region are given by Forslund & Rohsenow (196 8).
BOILING 235
LITERATURE CITED
Addoms, J. N. 1948. Heat transfer at high CicheIIi, M. T. , Bonilla, C. F. 1945. Trans.
rates to water boiling outside cylinders. AIChE J. 41 :755-87
DSc thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Clark, J. A. 1968. Heat Transfer. In Cryo
Technology, Cambridge, Mass. genic Technology, ed. R. W. Vance. New
Aladyev, 1. T., Miropolsky, Z. 1., Borosh York: Wiley
chuk, V. E., Styrikovich, M. A. 1961. Cooper, M. G. 1 969. Microlayer and Bubble
Int. Develop. Heat Transfer. Vol. II Growth in Nucleate Pool Boiling. Int.
Averin, E. K. 1954. AERE Lib /Trans. J. Heal Mass Transfer 1 2 :9 1 5-33

562. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR (OTN) Cooper, M . G., Lloyd, J. P. 1969. Transient
3 :1 16-22 Local Heat Flux in Nucleate Boiling.
Balzheiser, R. E. et al. 1963. Investigation Int. Heat Transfer Conf. 3Td, 193-203;
of Liquid Metal Boiling Heat Transfer. also Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1 2 :895-913
Wright-Pallerson A .F. Base Rep. RTD Corty, C., Foust, A. S. 1955. Surface
TDR-63-4130 Variables in Nucleate Boiling. Chern.
Bankoff, S. G. 1956. Heat Transfer &> Fluid Eng. Progr. Symp. Ser. 1 7 : 5 1
Mechanics Institute, 1-13. Stanford, Cryder, D. S., Finalborgo, A. C. 1937.
Calif. : Stanford Univ. Press Heat Transmission from Metal Surfaces
Bennett, A. W., Collier, J. G., Lacey, to Boiling Liquids : Effect of Tempera
P. M. C. 1961. A ERE-R3804 ture of the Liquid on Film Coefficient.
Bennett, A. W., Collier, J. G., Lacey, Am. Inst. Chem. Eng. 33 : 346
P. M. C. 1 963. A ERE-R3934. Pt. III Dengler, C. E., Addoms, J. N. 1956. Chern.
Bennett, J. A. R., Collier, J. G., Pratt, Eng. Progr. Ser. 18, 5 2 :95-103
H. R. C., Thornton, J. D. 1961. Heat Duke, E. E., Schrock, V. E. 1961. Heat
Transfer to Two-Phase Gas-Liquid Sys Transfer & Fluid Mechanics Institute,
tems, Pt. 1. Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 1 30-45. Stanford, Calif. : Stanford Univ.
(London) 39:1 1 3-26 Press
Berenson, P. 1960. Transition boiling heat Forslund, R., Rohsenow, W. M. 1968.
transfer from a horizontal surface. ScD Dispersed Flow Film Boiling. A SME J.
thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Tech Heat Transfer 90C:4:399-407
nology, Cambridge, Mass. Forster, K., Greif, R. 1958. Heat Transfer
Bcrgles, A. E., Rohsenow, W. M. 1964. to a Boiling Liquid : Mechanism and Cor
ASME J. Heat Transfer 86:365-72 relations. Progr. Rep. 7, Dep. Eng.
Bernath, L. 1955. Prediction of Heat Trans UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif.
fer Burnout. Heat Transfer Symp. A IChB Forster, K., Zuber, N. 1 95 5 . A IChE J. 1 :
Nat. Meet. Louisville, Kentucky 531-35
Bernath, L. 1960. A Theory of Local Gilmour, C. H. 1958. Nucleate Boiling-A
Boiling Burnout and Its Application to Correlation. Chem. Eng. Progr. 10, 54 :
Existing Data. Chem. Eng. Progr. Symp. 77-79
SeT. 30, 56:95-1 1 6 Gouse, S. W. 1966. An Index to Two-Phase
Bertoletti, S . , Gaspari, G . P . , Lombardi, C., GasLiquid Flow Literature. MIT Rep.
Peterlongo, G., Silvestri, M . , Tacconi, 9. Cambridge, Mass : MIT Press
F. A. 1965. Heat Transfer Crisis in Griffith, P. 1 965-66. Nucleation and Bubble
Steam-Water Mixtures. Energ. Nucl. Formation in Boiling. Symp. Boiling
Vol. 12, No.3 Heat Transfer Prot. Inst. Mech. Eng. Vol.
Brentani, E. G., Smith, R. V. 1964. Nucleate 180, Pt. 1, 3C
and Film Pool Boiling Design Correla Han, C. Y., Griffith, P. 1962. Mechanism
tions for 02, N2, HI and He. Int. A dvan. of Heat Transfer in Nucleate Pool Boil
Cryogenic Eng. 1 0 :325-41 ing. MIT Heat Transfer Lab. Rep. 19
Brown, W. T., Bergles, A. E. 1967. Study of Hewitt, G. F., Kearsey, H. A., Lacey,
flow surface boiling. PhD thesis (Brown) . P. M. C., Pulling, D. J. 1963. Burnout
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Nucleation in Climbing Film Flow.
Cambridge, Mass. Heat Transfer Lab. UK Rep. A ERER 4374
Rep. Houchin, W. R., Lienhard, J. H. 1966.
Chang, Y. P., Snyder, N. W. 1960. Heat Boiling Burnout in Low Thermal Capacity
Transfer in Saturated Boiling. Chem. Heaters. ASME Paper 66-WA/HT-40
Eng. Progr. Symp. Ser. 30, 56 :25-38 Hsu, Y. Y., Graham, R. W. 1961. NASA
Chen, J. C. 1963. A Correlation for Boiling Tech. Note TNP594
Heat Transfer to Saturated Fluids in Con Jakob, M . , Fritz, W. 1931. Forsch. Geb. Ing.
vective Flow. ASME Paper 63-HT-34 2 :434
236 ROHSENOW
Kutateladze, S. S. 1952. Heat Transfer in Pitts, C. C., Leppert, G. 1966. Int. J. Heat
Condensation allid Boiling. USA EC Rep. Mass Transfer 9 :365-77
A EC-tr-3770 Rohsenow, W. M., Clark, J. A. 1951. Heat
Kutateladze, S. S. 1961. Boiling Heat Trans Transfer and Pressure Drop Data for
fer. Int. J. Heat 1.dass Transfer 4 :31-45 High Heat Flux Densities to Water at
Kutateladze, S. S. 1963. Fundamentals of High Sub-Critical Pressures. Heat Trans
Heat Transfer. New York : Academic. fer & Fluid Mechanics Institute, 193-207.
362 pp. Stanford, Calif. : Stanford Univ. Press
Levy, S. 1959. Generalized Correlation of Rohsenow, W. M. 1952. A Method of Cor
Boiling Heat Transfer. Trans. ASME relating Heat Transfer Data for Surface
Ser. C, J. Heat TJ'ansfer 81 :37-42 Boiling of Liquids. A SME Trans. 74 :969-
Lienhard, J. H., Schrock, V. E. 1963. Trans. 76
ASME Ser. C, J. Heat Transfer 85 :265-72 Rohsenow, W. M., Griffith, P. 1956. Cor
Lockhart, R. W., Martinelli, R. C. 1949. relation of Maximum Heat Transfer Data
Proposed Correlation of Data for Iso for Boiling of Saturated Liquids. Chem.
thermal Two-Phase Two-Component Eng. Progf'. Symp. Ser. 18, 52 :37
Flow in Pipes. Chem. Eng. Progr. 45 :39- Rohsenow, W. M . 1966. Nucleation with
48 Boiling Heat Transfer. Ind. Eng. Chem.
McAdams, W. H., Kennel, W. E., Minden, 58:1
C. S., Rudolf, C., Dow, J. E. 1959. Heat Rohsenow, W. M. 1 9 70. Nucleation with
Transfer at High Rates to Water with Boiling Heat Transfer. ASME Paper 70-
Surface Boiling. Ind. Eng. Chem. 41 :1945 HT-18. Role" of Nucleation in Boiling
McNeilly, M. J. 1953. A Correlation of the and Cavitation Symposium, ASME
Rates of Heat Tlransfer to Nucleate Boil Siegel, R., Usiskin, C. 1959. Photographic
ing Liquids. J. Imp. Call. Chem. Eng. Soc. Study of Boiling in Absence of Gravity.
7 :1 8-34 ASME J. Heat Transfer 31 :3
Merte, J., Jr., Clalrk, J. A. 1959. Study of Silvestri, M . 1961. Two Phase Flow and
Pool Boiling in an Accelerating System. Heat Transfer, Int. Heat Transfer Conf.
Univ. Michigan Rep. 2646-21-T, Tech. Paper No. 39. Boulder, Colo.
Rep. 3 Thorn, J. R. S., Walker, W. M . , Fallon,
Mikic, B. B., Rohsenow, W. M. 1969. New T. A., Reising, G. F. S. 1965-66. Boiling
Correlation of Pool Boiling Data Including in Subcooled Water During Flow in
the Effect of Heating Surface Character Tubes and Annuli. Proe. Inst. Meeh.
istics. A SME J. Heat Transfer 91 :245-50 Eng. 180 :226-46
Moissis, R., Berenson, P. J. 1963. Hydro Tong, L. S. 1965. Boiling Heat Transfer ana
dynamic Transitions in Nucleate Boiling. Two-Phase Flow. New York: Wiley. xiii,
ASME J. Heat Transfer 85C:3 :221-29 242 pp.
Noyes, R. C., Lurie, H. 1966. Boiling So Westwater, J. W., Strenge, P. H. 1959.
dium Heat Transfer. Int. Heat Trans. Chem. Eng. Progr. Symp. Ser. 29:95
Conf. 3rd, V:92-100 Zuber, N:, Tribus, M., Westwater, J . W.
Piret, E. L., Isbin, H. S. 1953. Two-Phase 1961. The Hydrodynamic Crisis in Pool
Heat Transfer in Natural Circulation Boiling of Saturated and Subcooled
Evaporators. A IChE Heat Transfer Symp. Liquids. Int. Develop. Heat Transfer
St. LoUis, Mo. 1 1 :230-36

1971-Paper 4 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1971-Paper 4 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANNUAL

Copyright 1971. All rights reserved

The process of evaporation associated with vapor bubbles in a liquid is

FIGURE 1. Regimes in boiling heat transfer.

ure 1. If the liquid temperature Tb is subcooled, the heat flux is represented

Nucleation.-In carefully cleaned test systems, heating of pure liquids

FIGURE 2. The formation of bubbles of vapor over cavities in a heated surface.

The above equation represents an approximate expression for the superheat

-Aq = h(Tw - Tlig) = - kz

Here the heat-transfer coefficient h is a function of the geometry, the fluid

FIGURE 3. Initiation of bubble growth in forced-convection

cavities exist, requiring superheats higher than those predicted.

Possible mechanisms of heat transfer in boiling.-As heat flux to a satu

columns with discrete bubbles change to columns of continuous vapor (Mois

FACTORS AFFECTING POOLBOILING DATA

Here are presented the results of experimental observations showing the

Effect of pressure.-Pool-boiling heat-flux data plotted vs wall superheat

Effect of surfacefinish.-As expected, surface finish can shift the position

200 CRITICAL HEAT FLUX

FIGURE 4. Effect of pressure on pool-boiling curve (Cichelli & Bonilla 1945).

Aging.-Experience teaches that aged surfaces have higher required t:.T

Surface coatings or deposits.-In addition to the effect described above in

FIGURE 5. Cavity-size distribution.

FIGURE 6. Copper pentane test results, effect of roughness (Berenson 1960).

ature difference is usually included in the AT when plotting boiling data.

Effect oj gases.-Noncondensable gases dissolved in the water tend to

Hysteresis.-The overshooting of the wall temperature on increase of

FIGURE 7. Effect of dissolved gas on boiling curve (McAdams et aI 1959).

Size and orientation of heating surface .-There appears t o be very little

Agitation.-The effect of agitation such as with a propeller is quite sim

Subcooling.-The effect of subcooling appears to depend on the geometry

Gravitationalfield.-At the NASA laboratories, a ribbon heater immersed

Attempts have been made by various people to correlate pool-boiling

POOL BOILING PLATINUM

001 0.1 0.01 10

FIGURE 8. Correlation of nucleate-boiling data for water (Rohsenow 1952).

TABLE 1. Parameters in Equation 8 with r:::: 0.33

Surface-fluid combination Source of data C'I s

Water -nickel Rohsenow & Cl ark 1951 0.006 1.0

where at is the thermal diffusivity. Here C2 was suggested to be 0.0012 from

For this limited amount of data K'I was suggested to be 43 X 10-6 Re

previously outlined and assuming that the number of cavities of radius

termined from cavity-size distribution measurements, Brown & Bergles

CORREloATION OF CRITICAL HEAT FLux, POOL BOILING

As heat flux is increased in nucleate boiling, more nucleation sites become

reached to produce vapor blanketing (Rohsenow & Griffith 1956), (b) as nu

[U(PI po)ggoJ1/4[ PI J1/2

Zuber. Other equations have been recommended by Kutateladze (1952),

where KNL=400,000 for data on sodium (0.2 to 22 psia). Here KNL is a

Sodium: (q/ A)crit = (4.0 + 1.7SpO.(57) X 105

The above equations apply to saturated liquid. For subcooled liquids

(q/ A)crit sub 5.3 [U(PI ]

(q/A)crit sat k/o Po2

. [g(PI - po)]l/4(T.at - Tuq)

Cryogenicfluids, pool b o iling.-C r yog eni c fluids-liquid oxygen, nitrogen,

Low-quality and subcooled forced convection.-Data in this regime typ

STAINLESS STEEL O.O!H 10

p' 22 III, IIn" ....

FIGURE llO. Recommended procedure for construction of curve for

J!!./A) = [1 + (q/ A)B (1 _ (q/ A)Bi 2 1/2

(q/A) (q/A)FC (q/A)B - (q/A)Hi

Either equation follows the data reasonably well.

which appears to be in good agreement with data.