Flow Boiling Enhancement through Porous Coating

The phase change heat transfer is a lucrative process to exchange a large amount of heat. Therefore,
phase change heat transfer is selected in many industrial applications, such as during thermal
generation of electricity, desalination, metallurgy, electronics cooling, and food processing.
Boiling is one of the efficient phase change heat transfer method to remove or transfer a large
amount of heating load attributed to the large amount of heat of vaporization involved in the
process. There are two types of boiling process: (i) flow boiling, associated with flow of liquid
along hot surface and (ii) pool boiling, associated with heating of a stagnant pool of liquid. Flow
2boiling performance can be augmented either by coating micro-porous structure inside or outside
the tube or by changing the tube geometry by introducing various types of inserts and attachment.
Tube geometry can also be changed by micro-fin inside the tubes or introducing dimples inside
the tubes. But the foremost problems associated with the flow boiling phenomenon are pressure
drop along the tube and flow instabilities. The main challenge of the flow boiling heat transfer
enhancement is not only enhancing heat transfer coefficient (HTC) and critical heat flux (CHF)
but also curbing pressure drop and flow instabilities. Flow boiling can be divided into two broad
categories depending on the application: (i) Boiling over tube bundles and, (ii) inside tube boiling.
The focus of this review paper is on enhancement in inside tube boiling. Inside tube boiling can
be divided based on geometrical configuration i.e., horizontal and vertical tubes. Vertical tube
boiling is used in thermosiphon reboilers, steam generators; but horizontal tubes can be used in
many applications e.g., air separation plant, natural gas liquefication, distillation of aqueous
solution. Convective boiling and nucleate boiling are two heat transfer regimes in flow boiling that
has attract the researcher. Nucleate flow boiling characterized by repeated bubble generation, and
its growth on and withdrawal from a heating surface and, in convective boiling convection across
liquid film is the main mechanism that transfer heat from heated wall to the working fluid. The
subcooled and saturated nucleate boiling is superior than single-phase convection boiling. So, our
goal should be to reduce the convective boiling part and make onset of nucleate boiling (ONB)
earlier.
Channels can be classified into four categories according to the size of the channel: (i)
Microchannel (1–100 µm) (ii) Mesochannel (100 µm–1 mm) (iii) Compact Channel (1–6 mm) and
(iv) Conventional channel (>6 mm) [1]. A large number of studies have been done on these
channels. Our review is limited to only flow boiling inside conventional channel as large number
of data cannot be reviewed in a single paper. Boiling enhancement can be done by mainly two
ways: Active and Passive method. Active method requires consumption of direct power i.e. the
enhancement is done by using direct external source of power. But passive method does not require
any external means. The main aim of this paper is to review the enhancement of flow boiling inside
tube with the help of passive technique. Passive technique includes enhancement through porous
coating, enhanced tubes, inserts, nanofluids. In this paper, we are focusing on flow boiling
enhancement through porous coating.
Heat Transfer Coefficient Calculation Method:
The procedure for experimentation includes heating the test specimen by some electrodes (mainly
Cu electrode) and thus heating the boiling liquid (DI water or refrigerants). The boiling liquid then
feed to condenser and then a constant temperature reservoir. Sometimes the liquid needs to be
preheated by preheater depending on the liquid subcooling is needed. The exit enthalpy is
calculated using the equation
𝑞𝐴
𝐻𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡 = 𝐻𝐼𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 + (1)
𝑊
Where 𝐻𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡 = Exit Enthalpy (J/kg-K)
𝐻𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 = Inlet Enthalpy (J/kg-K)
𝑞 = heat flux (W/m2-K
A= Heated Area (m2)
W= Flow Rate (m3/s)
From this equation we can calculate the exit vapour quality
𝐻𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡 − 𝐻𝑓
𝑥𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡 = (2)
𝐻𝑔 − 𝐻𝑓
𝐻𝑔 and 𝐻𝑓 are the saturated vapour and liquid enthalpy respectively.

Friction factor can be calculated from the equation below

∆𝑃 𝑔𝑐
𝑓= (3)
𝐿 𝐺2
(𝐷) (2𝜌)

Where ∆𝑃 = frictional pressure-drop

L = Length tap to tap
D = inside tube diameter
G = mass flux (kg/m2-s)

Now heat transfer coefficient (HTC) h can be determined by following set of equation,
𝑞 𝑄
ℎ= = (4)
𝑡𝑖𝑤 − 𝑡𝑓 𝐴(𝑡𝑖𝑤 − 𝑡𝑓 )

𝑡𝑓𝑖 + 𝑡𝑓𝑜
𝑡𝑓 = (5)
2

𝑑𝑜
𝑄𝑙𝑛 (
)
𝑑𝑖 (6)
𝑡𝑖𝑤 = 𝑡𝑜𝑤 −
2𝜋𝐿𝐾
Where Q total heat flux can be calculated as 𝑄 = 𝑉𝐼. Where V is applied voltage and I is current.
𝑡𝑖𝑤 = Inner wall temperature
𝑡𝑓 = Fluid temperature that is average of Inlet and Outlet Fluid temperature.

𝑑𝑜 and 𝑑𝑖 are the outer and inner tube diameter and K is the thermal conductivity of the tube
material.
Enhancement through Porous Coating on Inside Tube:
Porous coating enhances not only HTC by shifting the boiling curve to the left but also delays
CHF. CHF enhancement depends on various porous coating parameters i.e., thickness, porosity,
mean porous diameter and porous material. Several porous coating techniques were used over the
years to enhance the nucleate boiling heat transfer. In 1977, Albertson [2] used electroplating
coating technique at high current density instead of sintering used by Milton [3], that had damaging
effect on tube strength. Janowski et al. [4] improvised porous coating technique by introducing
organic foam layer then followed by plating a thin metal coating on the foam substrate. They find
that pyrolization of foam helps in improving heat transfer characteristics. In 1980, Shum [5] made
a new approach to coating porous microstructure as the coating involved in plating the tube by
conductive graphite powder. This approach is done to finned tube by dipping the tube in the
solution of copper sulfate and powdered graphite followed by agitating in air and electrically
connecting the tube with the current source.
Trepp et al. [6] used galvanization process to produce porous coated surface (grooves and
peaks) on copper tube of 60 mm length and inner diameter of 14 mm. The tube is heated by a
coaxial copper heater. Boiling performance were observed in four surfaces: smooth surface,
surface coated with copper plasma spray and surface produced by sandblasting and galvanizing,
and surface produced by galvanizing the cut threaded piece. They observed that bubble frequency
and speed increased and bubble size decreased for porous coating resulting envelope of bubble
surrounding the coated surface. They concluded that in order to grow bubble rigorously from a
coated surface the coating material should have enough thermal conductivity to counteract heat
resistance. Ikuechi et al. [7] reported the boiling characteristics of two horizontal tubes: one coated
with copper porous material inside the tube, and the other tube having a twisted insert is also coated
inside with same porous material and compared it with plain tube and plain tube with uncoated
inserts. It was observed that for complete evaporation HTC of porous coated surface enhanced by
factor 3 in comparison with plain tube. For incomplete evaporation the augmentation was 5 times.
In porous coated tube insert the enhancement is about 2 times for incomplete and almost no
enhancement for complete evaporation compared with tube with uncoated insert. The used tubes
they used are all of diameter 17.05 mm but Czik et al. [8] used tubes of inner diameter 14.5 mm
for same refrigerant R-22. Ikuechi et al. obtained the HTC by averaging for entire tube and they
found reduction at vapour quality higher than 80%. The drop was explained by partial dry-out of
the upper half of the tube resulting reduced effective area for nucleate boiling.
 In 1998, Wadekar [9] coated the cupronickel tube of 19 mm inner diameter with a
composition of copper (98.4%) and phosphorus (1.6%). The 3 m tube is divided into three portions:
upper and bottom 1 m coated portion each and middle section is plain tube. Particle size varies
between 44–150 µm. They observed that for the first portion of the tube the wall temperature trend
is same for different mass flux, heat flux and pressure also. But for last portion the wall temperature
is fluctuating with increasing the variables and the most possible reason is the local dry-out
followed by rewetting of surface followed by severe dry-out leading to steep increase in wall
temperature. The HTC data are more haphazard in nature as the wall temperature associated with
it is very small. The HTC for first and last sections are almost same; but for high heat flux surface
the HTC is about more than 10 times the uncoated portion. From the data points it is evident that
the HTC is independent of vapour quality but increases with heat flux. As discussed earlier in Czik
et al. [8] the heat transfer correlation of pool boiling can be fitted into flow boiling data the same
is done by Wadekar [9] and the data are in reasonable agreement.
Ammerman and You [10] experimented with a closed-loop flow boiling facility with a
heated rectangular test section of 8 cm heated length and 8 mm wide. The heater was coated with
DOA used by Chang and You [11]; but instead of MEK (methyl-ethyl-ketone) ethanol is used as
carrier with particle size of 8-12 µm and thickness of 100 µm. At velocity around 3.15 m/s the
nucleate boiling begins to be more relevant than convection boiling. By comparing with Chang
and You [11] data of pool boiling of FC-87 it is observed that the data is in agreement with
convective boiling data of Ammerman and You [12]. It has also been observed that porous coating
enhances not only HTC but also CHF and the enhancement is about two times the value obtained
in plain tube at 20 W/cm2 and 0.31 m/s velocity. Figure 1 shows the variation of heat flux with
wall superheat at different velocities for coated surface. It has been noted that with decreasing
velocity heat transfer performance increases. Pressure drop seems to have very less effect at 15
and 24 °C subcooling but at 3 °C subcooling the pressure drop is much higher for coated surface
than uncoated one at low heat flux region. The reason for this is the increased void fraction at low
heat flux that increase the pressure drop. So, with increasing subcooling the pressure drops
decreases. Rainey et al. [13] studied the effect of micro-porous coating in FC-72 for different fluid
velocities (0.5, 2 and 4 m/s) and different subcooling (4, 10 and 20 K). They used ABM
(Aluminum particles/Devcon Brushable Ceramic epoxy/Methyl-Ethyl-Ketone) coating on the
tantalum titanium nitride heater surface previously developed by O’Connor and You [14]. The
porous coating was 0.1–1 µm size porous cavity and 50 µm thick. In flow boiling, they observed
for plain surface higher wall temperature in downstream location but they did not observe any
significant variation in incipient superheat with fluid velocity and inlet subcooling. For
microporous structure, boiling performance deteriorate at convection region than plain surface due
to added conductive thermal resistance offered by the microporous coating. But in nucleate boiling
region at low velocity and subcooling the flow boiling performance is much higher than plain
surface. The conductive thermal resistance of coating plays the same role in high velocity and
subcooling that affect the heat transfer performance and as a result the slope of curve HTC vs wall
superheat reduces at high heat flux region. El-genk et al. [15] and Schoesse et al. [16] both the
work has been on vertical annuli under low flow condition of water under the atmospheric pressure
in order to have a better understanding on CHF characteristics under low flow condition. It was
observed by Collier and Thome [17] that unlike at high flow, at low flow condition CHF is
independent of inlet subcooling and increase in CHF is much lower in high flow condition than at
low flow condition. Li et al. [18] worked on aluminum metal foam of 20 and 40 PPI (pores per

50

40
Heat Flux (kW/m )
2

30

20

10
V=1.25 m/s
V=3.15 m/s
V=0.31m/s
0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Wall Superheat (K)

Figure 1: Variation of Heat Flux with Wall Superheat at Different Velocities [10]

inch) porosity and they non-linearity in HTC and wall superheat. They also noticed that ligaments
of aluminum foam help to ebullate the bubbles. Similar work is done by Zhao et al. [19] with
copper foam as a porous coated metal in horizontal tubes. Sarwar et al. [20] studied the effect of
alumina (d< 01 µm) and titanium di-oxide (d< 5 µm) micro-porous coatings on CHF enhancement
and the experiment was done at low mass flux (100-300 kg/m2s) and inlet subcooling of 50–75 °C.
They used the same coating technique devised by O’Connor and You [14]. It has been seen that
the enhancement in CHF is 20 % for TiO2 coated tube against 25 % for Al2O3 coated tube. It was
also seen that the trend of CHF with mass flux is almost linear. Figure 2 and figure 3 shows the
variation of heat flux with wall superheat at different mass flux and from the graph it is really
visible that Al2O3 coating is superior in heat transfer performance than TiO2 coating.
 900

800

700

600
Heat Flux (kW/m )
2

500

400

300

200
2
G=100 kg/m s
100 2
G=200 kg/m s
2
0 G=300 kg/m s

-100
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Wall Superheat (K)

Figure 2 : Variation of Heat Flux with Wall Superheat on Al2O3 Coated Porous Surface [20]

800

700

600
Heat Flux at G=100 (kW/m )
2

500

400

300

200
2
G= 100 kg/m s
2
100 G= 200 kg/m s
2
G= 300 kg/m s
0

40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Wall Superheat (K)

Figure 3: Variation of Heat Flux with Wall Superheat on TiO2 Coated Porous Surface [20]
 Ammerman and You (Uncoated)
Ammerman and You (Porous)
85 Rainey
80 Li 2011 (40 PPI)
75 Li 2011 (20 PPI)
70
65
60
55
Heat flux (W/m )

50
2

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Wall Superheat (K)

Figure 4: Variation of Heat Flux with Wall Superheat

Conclusion:
It was seen from the figure 4 that from uncoated surface [10] the wall superheat is needed is far
less than the Rainey et al. [13] and Li et al. [18] because of the fact that the letter used DI water as
working fluid whereas Ammerman and You [10] used FC-87 as working fluid. The porous coated
surface for the FC-87 shows superior quality than other surfaces. Rainey et al [13] used Aluminum
particle and Li et al [18] used aluminum foam as porous coating. It has been seen from the graph
ABM coated surface gives better results than aluminum metal foam coated surface of 20 PPI but
40 PPI surface gives better results than ABM coated surface. The reason is that for flow boiling
Rainey et al. [13] shows that the exponent of ΔT is 1.02 but for aluminum coated surface the
exponent is 1.33. The reason is difference in coating method leading to different porosity in the
surface. 40 PPI surface has more surface area density hence flow mixing than 20 PPI surface and
ABM coated surface. The increased number of pores cause more bubble generation at low heat
flux.
References:
1. Kandlikar, S., Garimella, S., Li, D., Colin, S., & King, M. R. (2005). Heat transfer and
fluid flow in minichannels and microchannels. elsevier.
2. Albertson, C. E. (1977). U.S. Patent No. 4,018,264. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office.
3. Milton, R. M. (1968). U.S. Patent No. 3,384,154. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office.
4. Janowski, K. R., Shum, M. S., & Bradley, S. A. (1978). U.S. Patent No. 4,129,181.
Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
5. Shum, M. S. (1980). U.S. Patent No. 4,182,412. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office.
6. Trepp, C. H., & Hoffmann, T. V. (1980). Boiling heat transfer from structured surfaces to
liquid nitrogen. Wärme-und Stoffübertragung, 14(1), 15-22.
7. Ikeuchi, M., Yumikura, T., Fujii, M., & Yamanaka, G. (1984). Heat-transfer characteristics
of an internal microporous tube with refrigerant 22 under evaporating conditions.
ASHRAE transactions, 90(1A), 196-211.
8. Czikk, A. M., Gottzmann, C. F., Ragi, E. G., Withers, J. G., & Habdas, E. P. (1970).
Performance of advanced heat transfer tubes in refrigerant-flooded liquid coolers.
ASHRAE Trans, 76, 96-107.
9. Wadekar, V. V. (1998). A comparative study of in-tube boiling on plain and high flux
coated surfaces. Journal of Enhanced Heat Transfer, 5(4).
10. Ammerman, C. N., & You, S. M. (2001). Enhancing small-channel convective boiling
performance using a microporous surface coating. Journal of Heat Transfer, 123(5), 976-
983.
11. Chang, J. Y., & You, S. M. (1997). Boiling heat transfer phenomena from microporous
and porous surfaces in saturated FC-72. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
40(18), 4437-4447.
12. Ammerman, C. N., & You, S. M. (1998). Enhanced convective boiling of FC-87 in small,
rectangular, horizontal channels: heat transfer coefficient and CHF. ASME-
PUBLICATIONS-HTD, 357, 225-233.
13. Rainey, K. N., Li, G., & You, S. M. (2001). Flow boiling heat transfer from plain and
microporous coated surfaces in subcooled FC-72. Journal of heat transfer, 123(5), 918-925.
14. You, S. M., & O'Connor, J. P. 1998,'Boiling Enhancement Paint,' U. S. Patent No.
5814392.
15. El-Genk, M. S., Haynes, S. J., & Sung-Ho, K. (1988). Experimental studies of critical heat
flux for low flow of water in vertical annuli at near atmospheric pressure. International
journal of heat and mass transfer, 31(11), 2291-2304.
16. Schoesse, T., Aritomi, M., Kataoka, Y., Lee, S. R., Yoshioka, Y., & Chung, M. K. (1997).
Critical heat flux in a vertical annulus under low upward flow and near atmospheric
pressure. Journal of nuclear science and technology, 34(6), 559-570.
17. Collier, J. G., & Thome, J. R. (1994). Convective boiling and condensation. Clarendon
Press.
18. Li, H. Y., & Leong, K. C. (2011). Experimental and numerical study of single and two-
phase flow and heat transfer in aluminum foams. International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, 54(23-24), 4904-4912.
19. Zhao, C. Y., Lu, W., & Tassou, S. A. (2009). Flow boiling heat transfer in horizontal metal-
foam tubes. Journal of Heat Transfer, 131(12), 121002.
20. Sarwar, M. S., Jeong, Y. H., & Chang, S. H. (2007). Subcooled flow boiling CHF
enhancement with porous surface coatings. International journal of heat and mass transfer,
50(17-18), 3649-3657.