Condensation Heat Transfer in the

E. M. SPARROW Presence if a ioocosifcisalle Gas

Assoc. Mem. ASME
A theory has been devised for predicting condensation heat transfer in the presence of a
S. H. LIN noncondensable gas. The analysis is based on the conservation laws alone and does not
Heat Transfer Laboratory, utilize empirical data. It is shown that the presence of a very small amount of non-
University of Minnesota, condensable gas in the bulk of the vapor can cause a large buildup of the noncondensable
Minneapolis, Minn. at the liquid-vapor interface. A consequence of this buildup is that the partial pressure
of the vapor at the interface is reduced. This, in turn, lowers the temperature at which
the vapor condenses and diminishes the effective thermal driving force. Heat-transfer
reductions of well over fifty percent may be brought about- by the presence of the non-
condensable. The predictions of the analysis are compared with condensation heat-
transfer measurements for steam with air as noncondensable. The agreement between
theory and- experiment is satisfactory.

Introduction
I T IS well k n o w n that the presence of noncondensable
gases in a vapor can have a significant effect on condensation heat
transfer. F o r instance, experiments involving steam, reference W
Yvn
[I], 1 have shown that the heat transfer m a y be reduced b y fifty
percent or more due t o small amounts of air ( a few p e r c e n t b y
volume). W h i l e the practical importance of noncondensable
gases has been clearly established b y experiment, the analytical - I , W„
prediction of these effects has p r o v e n to be a difficult problem.
I t appears that there has not y e t been devised a fully predictive
theory which is based on the conservation laws alone. Various
semiempirical analyses and calculation methods have been p r o -
p o s e d ; for instance, see references [2 and 3] or standard heat- Fig. 1 S c h e m a t i c of t h e p h y s i c a l system

transfer texts.
T h e aim of this paper is to formulate a fully predictive theory
based solely on the mass, m o m e n t u m , and energy conservation
principles. Numerical evaluation of the theory is carried through
to p r o v i d e heat-transfer results and to furnish insights into the
mechanism b y which the noncondensables inhibit the heat flow.
T h e predictions of the theory are subjected to a comparison with
the heat-transfer measurements of Othmer [1], which appear to
comprise the most systematic experimental s t u d y presently
available on the effects of noncondensables. T h e agreement b e -
tween theory and experiment is quite satisfactory, and thus lends
support to the analytical model.
1 Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper.
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division and presented at the
Winter Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, Pa., November 17-22, 1963,
o f T H E A M E R I C A N S O C I E T Y OF M E C H A N I C A L E N G I N E E R S .
received at A S M E Headquarters, July 9, 1903.
49.
T h e present s t u d y relates to film condensation on a cooled
vertical surface immersed in a large b o d y of v a p o r which m a y
contain a noncondensable gas. A thin film of condensed liquid
runs d o w n w a r d along the plate under the action of gravity.
M o t i o n s in the vapor m a y be induced b y the m o t i o n of the liquid
or b y natural convection resulting f r o m temperature and c o n -
centration differences; there is no forced-convection flow. There
m a y also be heat and mass transfer (i.e., diffusion) in the v a p o r
due to temperature and concentration differences. These various
processes in the v a p o r arc b y n o means of equal importance and
this will be considered in constructing the theory. In particular,
as an a d d e n d u m to a study, reference [4), of the effects of super-
heating on film condensation, it has been established that v a p o r
motions induced b y the liquid motion alone are insufficient as a
basis for a theory involving noncondensables.
Manuscript
Paper No. 6 3 — W A - A schematic diagram of the p r o b l e m under s t u d y is shown in
Fig. 1. T h e cooled vertical surface is at a uniform temperature

"Nomenclature"
C„ = specific heat, constant pressure R = universal gas constant p — density
c = constant, equation (11a) Sc = S c h m i d t number, v/D <p = mass fraction difference, equation
1) = binary diffusion coefficient T = temperature (116)
f = dimensionless stream function, u = longitudinal v e l o c i t y — stream function
equation (116) V = normal v e l o c i t y
(1 = acceleration gravity IF = mass fraction Subscripts
H - height of surface X = longitudinal coordinate
'J noncondensable gas
j = diffusive mass flux = normal coordinate 'J
interface, y = 8
k = thermal c o n d u c t i v i t y Z = compressibility factor
L = liquid
M = molecular weight a = thermal diffusivity, k/pcp
v = vapor
m = condensation rate/area 8 = condensate layer thickness
Pr Prandtl number, cpfx/k similarity variable, equation (11a) w = wall
= V =

V = pressure \ = latent heat of condensation bulk

Q = overall heat-transfer rate M = absolute viscosity Unsubscripted properties for vapor-gas
'i = local heat-transfer rate/area V = kinematic viscosity mixture

430 / a u g u s t 19 6 4 Transactions of the ASME

Copyright © 1964 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 T u l and the condensate film has a thickness 8 which m a y be a T o proceed, consideration must now lie given to the transport
function of position x along the plate. Far a w a y from the surface, processes in the vapor-gas b o u n d a r y layer.
the gas-vapor mixture has a prescribed temperature T m and a
prescribed concentration of noncondensable gas I F 0 „ (IF = mass
fraction). A t the liquid-vapor interface, the temperature rl\ and
Vapor-Gas Boundary Layer
gas mass fraction Woi are unknown and must be determined f r o m The Governing Equations. In general, one must consider the
the analysis. T h e total pressure of the system is p. simultaneous transport of heat, mass, and m o m e n t u m in the
vapor-gas b o u n d a r y layer, and the corresponding conservation
One m a y regard the problem as consisting of a pair of interact-
conditions may be applied. T h e local concentrations of gas (sub-
ing b o u n d a r y layers, an inner one consisting of the liquid ( c o n -
script g) and v a p o r (subscript v) are to be expressed here in terms
densate) phase and an outer one consisting of the vapor-gas m i x -
of their respective mass fractions W0 and Wv
ture. A two-phase b o u n d a r y layer m a y exist even in the absence
of noncondensables [5].
Tf'*0 = pjp, IF„ = pjp,
W„ + 1F„ = 1
Analysis P = Po + Pr, (6)

I t is convenient to begin the analysis b y separate consideration
of the liquid and of the vapor-gas b o u n d a r y layers. A later in-
terrelating of the b o u n d a r y layers will p r o v i d e the desired heat-
transfer results.
Inasmuch as there are two species involved, mass must be sepa-
rately conserved for each. Alternatively, it is equivalent t o re-
quire that mass be conserved for the mixture as a whole and for
only one of the species. T h e species conservation will take the
f o r m of a diffusion equation.

Liquid Boundary Layer T h e mathematical representation of the conservation equa-

tions m a y n o w be written. In formulating these equations, we will
There has been considerable analytical s t u d y of the liquid film, adopt the v i e w p o i n t of retaining fluid property variations only
ranging f r o m the simple force-balance, heat-conduction model where t h e y p l a y an essential role in establishing the transport
of Nusselt [6] to more recent elaborate theories, references [5, 7], processes. I t has been demonstrated in other heat-transfer
which have included inertia effects, interfacial shear, and sub- problems that the c o m p l e t e consideration of the fluid p r o p -
cooling of the liquid. T h e results of these more complete analyses erty variations does n o t alter the findings of the constant
indicate that the effects of inertia, interfacial shear, and subcool- p r o p e r t y analysis in an essential w a y . Actually, inclusion of
ing on heat transfer, are small in the operating range of practical the full p r o p e r t y variations would be highly restrictive in that
interest. Furthermore, these effects b e c o m e even smaller at the final numerical results would a p p l y to specific temperature
lower condensation rates. Therefore, at the diminished c o n d e n - and pressure conditions as well as to specific fluids. In this spirit,
sation rates b r o u g h t a b o u t b y the presence of noncondensable the conservation equations m a y be written as
gases, the aforementioned effects should be fully negligible.
T h e liquid layer m a y then be treated b y the Nusselt model, the bu dv d ' a IF. W , ,
o, u + » = D (7)
m o m e n t u m and energy equations for which are dx by dx by d,r-

0 + vL(dh,/di/-) = 0, d*T/dy* = 0 (1) bu bu

•v —
( -
P~\
— + (8)
T h e solution of these, subject to the b o u n d a r y conditions that
dx by pj by*
u = v = 0 and T = 2'„ at IJ = 0, and that du/dy = 0 and T = 7',-
bT bT b'T
at y = 8, can be carried o u t without difficulty. T h e results which u — + v — = a (9)
are needed in the forthcoming d e v e l o p m e n t m a y be stated as bx by-
follows:
Fluid properties w i t h o u t subscript correspond to average mixture
( « ) local rate of heat transfer per unit area q properties.
T h e first term on the right-hand side of equation ( 8 ) is the
T j A gx3
3
qx_ 'crdT{ - b u o y a n c y force which sets up a free-convection motion. To
(2)
XPL'R achieve a representation for the density ratio ( p „ / p ) , it will be
supposed that the vapor-gas mixture is an imperfect gas whoso
(b) thickness of condensate film 8 equation of state is p — p(R/M)TZ, in which Z is the c o m -
pressibility factor. T h e n , for essentially constant pressure p

x L J (3) across the b o u n d a r y layer

XPr,, Vl;v
AU T_
( c ) local rate of condensation m (10)
j\I TCO Z CO
til = q/\ (4)
Information on the compressibility factor for gas-vapor mixtures
( d ) longitudinal v e l o c i t y at interface us is almost c o m p l e t e l y absent. H o w e v e r , considering the fact that
condensation processes occur at moderately low pressures, it is n o t
USX „,(?',. -
cpI.(1 r j W g s ' V / '
(5) unreasonable to take Z/Z„ ~ 1. Additionally, if the bulk t e m -
I'L XPr 7j J W / perature T„ corresponds t o the saturation temperature of the
v a p o r at its bulk partial pressure, then in typical applications the
Inspection of the foregoing relations indicates t h a t the results
temperature difference across the b o u n d a r y layer will be small
would be fully determined provided t h a t the temperature T( at
relative to the temperature level. N o t i n g that absolute temper-
the liquid-vapor interface were known. H o w e v e r , the value of 7\-
atures are involved, it follows that T/T„ should typically bo v e r y
is not k n o w n a priori, b u t rather, it is the end result of the inter-
close to unity. T h e same statement continues to apply for small
p l a y between the transport processes in the gas-vapor b o u n d a r y
superheating. On the other hand, if appreciable effects of non-
layer with those in the liquid boundary layer. T h e action of the
condensable gases are present, there will be large concentration
noncondensable gases in the vapor is to decrease and b y this,
differences across the b o u n d a r y layer. Consequent^', Mm/M
t o diminish the temperature difference (7'; — Tw) which is the
should differ appreciably f r o m unity. Therefore, t o the first
driving force for heat transfer across the condensate layer.
order, we write
A c c o r d i n g to equation ( 2 ) , the boat flux will decrease correspond-
ingly q ~ (7\ - TJ". pjp = MJM (10 a )

Journal of Heat Transfer august 1 96 4 / 4 3 1

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 T h e n , b y applying the usual mixture rules, one finds while the diffusive transports of vapor and gas are, respectively,
j, and j0. However, since
M. - M.
(IF, - IF„„) (106)
1 P M, (M, - MV)W, }, = n —d W
-pD —' , h = -pD (17)
oy
As a consequence of the foregoing representation of the
b u o y a n c y term, the temperature enters o n l y through the energy it follows f r o m the last of equations ( 6 ) that jv + j„ = 0. There-
equation (9). However, it has been demonstrated, reference [4], fore only the convective c o m p o n e n t contributes. Thus
that even with very large superheat (011 the order of hundreds of
m = [pu(d5/<fa) — pw]„-5 = 3 ficx '^/(O) (18)
degrees), the condensation heat transfer is slightly affected. As
implied in the preceding discussion, the present s t u d y is c o n - T h e mass conservation condition (6) at the interface m a y be a p -
cerned with saturation or near-saturation conditions in the bulk plied b y equating the m from equations (18) and ( 4 ) , f r o m which
of the vapor-gas mixture. Therefore, the effect of superheat on
•A M, - M.
the condensation heat transfer will be fully negligible and the (PM) L
m =
energy equation need n o t be further considered in the following _ PM . L M„ - (M„ - Mv)WcJ
development.
T h e equations of continuity, diffusion, and m o m e n t u m ( 7 ) and
'cpdl\ - TJ
X (19)
(8), m a y be reduced to more tractable forms b y the following Prr.X
similarity transformation:
Condition ( c ) is evaluated f r o m the first of equations ( 1 2 ) as
( a ) similarity variable
/' — 0 as ->- c° (20)
g(M. - M,)/4v*
r] = c(y — 8)/x1^, c = (llo) The foregoing equations (15), (19), and (20) provide three
M. (M, -
b o u n d a r y conditions on the v e l o c i t y f u n c t i o n / .
(6) stream function and mass fraction In applying condition (rf), account is taken of b o t h convective
and diffusive contributions to the interfacial flux of the n o n c o n -
= ivcz'/'fW, W„ - W„„ = <p(v) (H6) densable gas

F r o m these, the v e l o c i t y c o m p o n e n t s u and v m a y be derived to {[p„u(dS/dx) - p0v] - jju-s = 0 (21)

satisfy the continuity equation
W h e n this is evaluated utilizing equations ( 1 7 ) and (6), and the
^ 1 2 Wlt'f \ new variables introduced f r o m equation (11), there follows
M= — = /!/'(??), v = - — = -TT; (12)
di/ da; a; x '*
¥>'(0)/hp(0) + IF, J = — 3/(0)Sc (22)
in which the primes denote differentiation with respect to rj.
Finally, the condition of prescribed W0 in the bulk, when ex-
Additionally, b y transforming the diffusion and m o m e n t u m
pressed in terms of <p, becomes
equations, one finds
<p -*• 0 as rj • (23)
/ " ' + 3//" - 2(/')2 + ^ = 0 (13)
F r o m an inspection of the boundary conditions (15), (19), (20),
99" + 3Sc/p' = 0 (14)
(22), and (23), several interesting features m a y be noted. First of
in which Sc represents the S c h m i d t number. In f o r m , these all, f r o m equation (22), it is seen that there is a coupling between
equations resemble those typically encountered in thermal the v e l o c i t y and concentration fields through the b o u n d a r y con-
natural convection. H o w e v e r , the b o u n d a r y conditions are ditions. This is in addition to the coupling already existing in the
drastically different f r o m those typical of thermal convection. differential equations ( 1 3 ) and (14). Second, a large number of
parameters are in evidence:
The Boundary Conditions. In order to complete the formulation of
the problem, it is necessary to p r o v i d e five b o u n d a r y conditions.
M„ M„ IF„to, Sc, (pnh/pp, c,dT, - 7V)/XPrL (24)
F o r the v e l o c i t y / - f u n c t i o n , the following physical conditions sug-
gest themselves: T h e last of these parameters is somewhat special inasmuch as the
( а ) v e l o c i t y continuity at interface, y = S interface temperature T { is one of the unknowns of the problem.
( б ) mass conservation at interface, y = 8 However, at this stage, it is convenient to treat cpL(Ti — Tw)/-
( c ) vanishing longitudinal v e l o c i t y in the bulk, y —>• <*> X P r t as a parameter whose values m a y be prescribed.
Additionally, for the concentration ^ - f u n c t i o n , the following Solutions. In appraising any plan for numerical evaluation of
conditions are appropriate: the foregoing analysis, cognizance must be taken of the existence
(rf) interface impermeable t o noncondensable gas of the six independent parameters. E v e n a minimal exploration
(e) prescribed value of IF„ in the bulk involving two values of each parameter woidd require considera-
tion of sixty-four separate cases. This situation suggests that
T h e mathematical representation of the foregoing will n o w b e instead of seeking direct numerical solutions of the differential
derived. equations (13) and (14), the problem be reformulated approxi
T h e velocity continuity condition ( a ) is evaluated b y equating mately b y the Karman-Polilhausen method. B y this standard
the first of equations (12) t o equation ( 5 ) at y = 5; i.e., 77 = 0, approach, m o m e n t u m and species conservation are satisfied o n l y
giving on the average across the b o u n d a r y layer (instead of locally), and
-'A the velocity and concentration profiles are written as pol}'-
M, - AT. ~ TJ
/'(O) = i r nomials. Such an approximate analysis was, in fact, carried o u t
2 L>/„ - (ilf, - MJIF^J Pr,X and numerically evaluated. These results were compared with
(15) numerical solutions of the differential equations ( 1 3 ) and ( 1 4 ) and
were found to be of marginal accuracy. Therefore the K a r m a n -
I n calculating the interfacial mass flux in connection with (6),
Pohlhausen method was abandoned in favor of numerical solu-
one m a y begin b y including b o t h c o n v e c t i v e and diffusive c o n -
tions of the differential equations.
tributions. T h e convective transport through the interface is
F o r computational purposes, it was convenient to rephrase the
(66) differential equations (13) and (14) into integral equations as in-

432 / august 1964 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 dioated in the A p p e n d i x . T h e boundary conditions are included 1.0
1 !/ /
directly in the integral equations. T h e solution method was one W,OJ=/O5/O y ai/ .02/ //
of iteration. A reasonable guess was made for the / ' (i.e., v e - • /•• / / / X I/ /
locity) profile and / was calculated b y integration in accordance
with equation (27). This, in turn, was used to determine a <p- P"/P A\ Vv/N/X/
X / V N
/ =
profile f r o m equations ( 2 9 ) and (30). W i t h <p and / as input, a new .. \y SC -.5
/ ' - p r o f i l e was calculated f r o m equations ( 2 6 ) and (28). T h i s p r o - / VXX X "X" > C /X / l>XTSc=.6
cedure was repeated until convergence was achieved. The ij^rr150 -
numerical work was performed on a Control D a t a 1604 digital V / v / V \

\ \ \ \ -
computer at the Numerical Analysis Center of the University of
//yy
" W /,
Minnesota.
Although, in principle, there is no limitation on the values of ^ W „=V05\O4\
vA\
9
the parameters selected for the numerical solutions, there is a
\ \ 1 X i > i\ i X >-
practical limit on the a m o u n t of numerical work which is feasible. O .002 .004 .006 .008
In this investigation, values of the parameters appropriate to Cpi_(Tj —T„)
steam-air mixtures were selected. T h i s is in recognition of the x PrL
fact that steam, with air as noncondensable, is the v a p o r -
Fig. 2 Interfaciai concentration of noncondensable gas and partial pres-
gas mixture of greatest practical interest and is additionally the
sure of vapor {(PIALIPIA 1 ^ = 150
only mixture for which careful experiments appear to exist.
Corresponding t o the aforementioned choice, M a = 28.97 and
ilf„ = 18.02. S c h m i d t numbers for steam-air mixtures ranging
f r o m 0.49 to 0.61 were found in the literature, with no systematic
dependence on temperature and pressure. T h e bulk of the
numerical solutions was carried out for Sc = 0.5, b u t sufficient
solutions were obtained for S c = 0.6 to indicate the trend. T h e
[(PM)l/PM]' ; ' 2 ratio was assigned values of 150, 300, and 600.
This is e x p e c t c d to approximately cover the temperature range
f r o m 212 F to 120 deg F, b u t there is s o m e uncertainty in the
viscosity values for the mixture. Values of W „ a , which represent
the air mass fraction in the bulk of the vapor, were assigned as
0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.04, and 0.05. Finally, values of cpL(T{ -
Tw)/\PrL were chosen to p r o v i d e sufficiently detailed results for
graphical presentation in the range between 0 and a m a x i m u m
corresponding to Wsi = 1. F o r the foregoing, a b o u t 180 separate
cases were considered. S o m e additional solutions were obtained .0005 .001 .0015 .002 .0025 .003
to check experimental data. CpLCi-TJ
Attention m a y n o w be directed to the results. x Pr,
Fig. 3 Interfacial concentration of noncondensable gas and partial

Results pressure of vapor [(ftu)/./pM]'/ 2 = 300

T h e results relating to the heat-transfer characteristics of the

system are to be presented first. T h e heat-transfer predictions of
the theory will then be compared with experiment. In a final
w9= o=AQ5^A/OT>/ . 0 2 //
, x i ,
section, representative v e l o c i t y and concentration profiles will be
shown and discussed. Vs /
Concentration and Partial Pressure at Interface. T h e concentration • P./P
X / / 5c - , 5 ~
of the noncondensable gas at the interface Wgi and the corre-
.6
sponding partial pressure of the v a p o r pvi are intimately related /2
w x x . X >
= 600 —
to the heat-transfer performance of the system. In fact, these / / W \ [ S j
quantities control the heat-transfer rate since the temperature 2',- ///V^K r X ' x \
wgi / / / / y \ \
at the interface is determined b y the partial pressure of the v a p o r / y V \ \ \
s —
at that location. Results for Wai and pvi h a v e been determined
f r o m the numerical solutions of equations ( 1 3 ) and (14). This \ A \ - \ \
X \
information is presented in Figs. 2, 3, and 4, which correspond, Ws w \ \ .03\ \ ' > \
respectively, to [ ( p / x ) t / p ^ ] ' ^ - v a l u e s of 150, 300, and 600. On i ! | \ i \
each one of the figures, there are t w o families of curves; those 0 .0002 . 0 0 0 4l \ 1 \. 0 0 0 6 .0008 .0010 .0012
sloping upward t o the right represent W g i } while those sloping CpL(T - T J
downward t o the right represent p„i/p. Corresponding curves in x PrL
these families are related t o each other through the expression
Fig. 4 Interfaciai concentration of noncondensable gas and partial
pressure of vapor [ M L / P H ] ' / " - = 600
M,
pjp = [1 - WJ . 1 - 1 - W„ (25)
M,
increases with increasing values of cpL(T— Tw)/\PrL; and this
Individual curves are parameterized b y W „ „ , the mass fraction of is accentuated when the bulk concentration of the noncondensa-
the noncondensable gas in the bulk of the vapor. T h e solid lines ble is greater. Corresponding to the buildup of the n o n c o n -
are for a S c h m i d t number of 0.5, while the dashed lines are for a densable, the partial pressure of the v a p o r at the interface m a y b e
Schmidt number of 0.6. T h e abscissa is cpL{Ti — Tw)/\PrL. reduced significantly. There will be a consequent reduction of the
F r o m a consideration of the figures, it is seen that v e r y high interface temperature 7',- and a corresponding decrease in heat
concentrations of noncondensable gas m a y build up at the inter- transfer since the thermal driving force (Tt — Tw) is decreased.
face even when there are v e r y small amounts of noncondensable in T h u s the reason for the significant reduction in heat transfer due
the bulk. T h e interfacial mass fraction of the noncondensable t o the presence of small amounts of noncondensable in the bulk is

Journal of Heat Transfer august 1 96 4 / 433

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 clearly established. This effect is accentuated at higher con- I.Or T" T
centrations of noncondensable in the bulk. TV Wgoo | j
It is worthwhile to explore the mechanism b y which the 'co, r EXPTS., REE ( I )
buildup of the noncondensable occurs. The noncondensable gas
PRESENT ANALYSIS
is transported from the bulk to the interface b y the same con- 212°-
0.0170
vective flow which carries the vapor which is to be condensed.
230 0.0311 - E X P T S . , REF (I)
However, since the interface is impermeable to the noncondensa- 0.0457
ble, it must be removed from the interface at the same rate at .6- PRESENT ANALYSIS
which it arrives in order to preserve steady-state conditions. The
removal is accomplished, at least in part, b y a diffusive flow from
Qo
the interface back to the bulk. A diffusive flow can occur only
from a region of higher concentration to a region of lower con- .4 Wgoo
-0.0226' -0.0170 J
centration. Thus, the concentration of noncondensable at the
interface must achieve a level sufficiently high to produce a dif- ~0.0546~ -0.0311
fusive flow which counterbalances the convective flow into the -0.0457 '
.2-
interface.
With the foregoing, the upsloping trend of the IF^-curves in
Figs. 2, 3, and 4 may readily be explained. The abscissa of the
_L
figures is directly related to the condensation rate m, see equations 12 16 20 24
(2) and (4), and larger values of the abscissa correspond to higher
T'oo - T'w I °F
1
condensation rates. However, a higher condensation rate re-
quires a higher convective inflow which brings both more vapor Fig. 5 Comparison of analytically predicted heat-transfer reductions
with experiments
and more noncondensable from the bulk to the interface. T o
achieve a diffusive outflow of noncondensable to counterbalance
this larger convective inflow, a higher interfacial concentration of new guess for Tt and repeats the procedure; ami so forth until
noncondensable is required. the guessed value of T( equals the saturation temperature cor-
There are additional trends which are worthy of note. First of responding to pvi. Experience indicates that the finding of 7',- is
all, a larger buildup of the noncondensable is indicated at higher a matter of a few minutes.
Schmidt numbers. This may be made plausible b y interpreting Once Ti has been found, the local heat flux per unit area q is
an increase in Schmidt number as being due to a decrease in dif- calculated by evaluating equation (2). The overall rate of heat
fusion coefficient D. However, the diffusive flow ja is proportional transfer Q for a surface of height II (and unit width) is obtained
to D, equation (12). Thus, to maintain the diffusive outflow of by integrating equation (2); thus
the noncondensable when D is lower, it is necessary that there be
a higher concentration at the interface. gjp !
4K, (26)
A second interesting point is that there is a larger buildup of V/. 3 L
noncondensable for larger values of [(PAOL/PM! 1//j at a fixed
c pL('l'j — r j / X P r , . . Correspondingly, the abscissa range in which has essentially the same form as equation (2) except for
Figs. 2, 3, and 4 is successively smaller. This may be made the multiplying factor 4 A-
plausible b y employing arguments (similar to those of foregoing It is thus seen that by utilizing the results of the analysis, the
paragraphs) relating to the higher interfacial concentration of computation of heat-transfer rates in the presence of noncondensa-
noncondensable required to produce a diffusive outflow to balance ble gases can be carried through without difficulty. The predic-
an augmented convective inflow. tions of the present analysis will now be compared with the data
A final point of interest is that the results indicate definite upper of Othmer [1],
limits for the range of cpI,(Ti ~ Tw)/XPrL within which steady- Comparison With Experiment. A systematic experimental study
state operation is possible (1F01- ^ 1). The present analysis would of the effect of noncondensable gases has been carried out b y
suggest that operation at higher values of cpL(7\ — T,r)/Wi'L Othmer utilizing a cooled horizontal cylinder situated in a cham-
would not be consistent with steady laminar flow. ber containing steam with small amounts of air. The tempera-
Having discussed the transport mechanisms with the aid ol ture in the chamber T„ was the saturation temperature cor-
Figs. 2, 3, and 4, we will now describe their application to heat- responding to the vapor pressure of the steam. Tests were car-
transfer calculations. ried out for 2'o-values of 212 and 230 dog F for various con-
Heat-Transfer Results. In computing heat-transfer rates, the in- centrations of air in the entering stream. Additional tests were
formation given in Figs. 2, 3, and 4 is used in conjunction with performed for condensation in the absence of noncondensables.
the vapor-pressure properties of the vapor. The particular Overall lieat-transfer rates were measured for a range of wall
propert}' which is involved is the relationship between the vapor temperatures.
pressure and the saturation temperature, for example, Tables 1 The physical situation studied b y Othmer is different from that
and 2 of Keenan and Keyes' Steam Tables, reference [8]. These under consideration here and a direct comparison of heat-transfer
quantities, respectively, correspond to the pvi and T{ of this rates would not be meaningful. However, from the experimental
analysis. data, one can form the ratio of the heat transfer Q with noncon-
The calculation procedure will now be described. Suppose that densables to the heat transfer Qo in the absence of noncondensa-
the wall temperature Tw is prescribed, and it is desired to com- bles. Such a ratio can also be formed from the analytical results.
pute the heat-transfer rate corresponding to a given total pressure It is believed that a comparison of the Q/Qo ratios from the two
p and a given concentration TFso) of noncondensable in the bulk. investigations is of considerable interest-
One would begin b y guessing an interface temperature 2',- and, Such a comparison is shown in Fig. 5. The analytical curves
with this, would compute c]lL(rJ\ — TJ)/\Pr£. Then, entering have been calculated on the basis of Sc = 0.5 and [{pp.)L/pp.]1//2
the appropriate among Figs. 2, 3, and 4 (depending on the pp. = 150. The values of W p „ correspond to those of Othmer's ex-
ratio) with this cpL( 1\ — '/'„.)/WrL ,one can immediately read periments. Inspection of the figure immediately reveals the
Vri/p from the ordinate. Then, for this p,-,-, one can find the decisive role of the noncondensable gas in decreasing the heat-
saturation temperature from the Steam Tables. If this satura- transfer rates. Reductions of Q to less than fifty percent of Qo are
tion temperature is equal to the initial guess for Tit then this in evidence. The analytically predicted reductions in heat trans-
phase of the calculation is completed. If not, then one makes a fer are generally in accord with the findings of the experiment.

434 / august 1 964 Transactions of the ASSV1E

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 0 1 2 3 4 5
TI V
Fig. 6 Representative profiles of noncondensable mass fraction Fig. 7 Representative profiles of noncondensable mass fraction
[(PIX)L/PIA= 150 [(PM)L/PM]'/= = 600

There are some deviations, but these are within the usual range
of scatter which one finds among experiments on condensation
heat transfer. Indeed, if one excludes only a single point, then
the agreement between theory and experiment would appear to be
remarkably good, especially in view of the differences in the
physical systems considered in the two investigations.
It is the belief of the authors that the aforementioned com-
parison with experiment lends strong support to the analytical
model of the present investigation.
For the sake of completeness, other experimental investigations
may be mentioned. The effect of noncondensable gases in forced-
convection situations has been investigated by Votta and Walker,
reference [9], and by Furman and Hampson, reference [10], The
first of these is related to a vapor flowing through a tube; while
the second was concerned with a crossflow of vapor over a cylin-
der. These data are not appropriate for comparison with the pre-
dictions of the present analysis which is based on gravity-induced
flow. On the other hand, Baer and McKelvey, reference [11],
have investigated the condensation of methane under gravity-flow
conditions in the presence of small amounts of air. Unfortu-
nately, not enough of the original data are given in their paper to
permit comparison with the present theory.
R e p r e s e n t a t i v e C o n c e n t r a t i o n a n d V e l o c i t y P r o f i l e s . The solutions of
equations (13) and (14) provide concentration and velocity
V
profiles for the vapor-gas boundary layer. It may be of some in-
Fig. 8 R e p r e s e n t a t i v e v e l o c i t y profiles [(pp)/,/pju]'A — 150
terest to illustrate the typical appearance of such profiles. T o
this end, Figs. 6 through 9 have been prepared. The first two of
these are for the concentration profiles and the last two are for the rate cpIi'l\ — ?'„,)/XPr L . Fig. 7 has the same structure as
velocity profiles. All figures are for a Schmidt number of 0.5. Fig. 6 and differs from it only in that [(pp)L/pp}'/° is now 600.
Fig. 6 shows profiles of the noncondensable concentration IF, The only effect of changing this parameter is seen to be a lowering
corresponding to Kpp)jJpp]'^2 = 150. The invariable is pro- of the level of C p L ( T ; — Tu,)/XPrL, which parameterizes the
portional to the distance normal to the wall, with r] = 0 corre- curves.
sponding to the interface. Two groups of curves are shown, one Representative velocity profiles corresponding to [{pp)iJppY^2
for IV a „ = 0.01 and the second for JK„a = 0.05. The curves are = 150 are shown in Fig. S for bulk conditions = 0.01 and
parameterized by cpiX'i\ — Tu,)/\FrL; this parameter is pro- 0.05. These profiles differ from those of conventional thermal
portional to the condensation rate. In the neighborhood of the free convection in that the velocity is not zero at the inner edge
interface and extending some distance into the boundary layer, of the boundary layer, ij — 0. This velocity is due to the drag-
both IT,, and — c)lF„/di; are greater for higher condensation rates. ging action of the condensate flowing down the cooled surface and
This is consistent with the discussion of Figs. 2, 3, and 4. How- increases with increasing condensation rate; i.e., increasing
ever, as indicated by the crossing of the curves, these trends are Cp/X'A' — T„)/XPtL. On the other hand, the velocity maximum
reversed at larger ?;; i.e., near the outer edge of the boundary is due to natural convection. The magnitude of the velocity
layer. This is connected to a similar reversal in the relative mag- maximum relative to that at ?? = 0 is an index of the importance
nitudes of the convective velocities which will be demonstrated of free convection relative to that of the dragging action of the
later. The trends are not altered with changes in the bulk con- liquid. From the figure, it is seen that free convection is relatively
centration lF„.ri, which only affects the level of the condensation more important when the bulk concentration IF„„ of the non-

Journal of Heat Transfer august 1 96 4 / 4 3 5

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 condensable is higher. A n o t h e r interesting point relates to the 1 I ' i ' I
crossing of the curves: F o r a given bulk concentration, the curves

\Y
with higher CPL(TI — TJ/XPTL, lie lower in the region a w a y f r o m .10-

-1 /
I A-W.00035

i/\
the interface; while the opposite trend applies in the neighbor-
hood of the interface.
Wgoo=O.OI
Fig. 9 contains v e l o c i t y profile information for [(PM)L/PM1'/'2 =
600. T h e characteristics of this figure are similar t o those of the .08 Wg„ = 0.05

preceding one, with one exception; namely, that the dragging

[ ( f ) L / w ] l / 2 = 600
velocity a t = 0 is n o w smaller and the free convection appears
to be generally more important.
1 \W
x
v \ x

Concluding Remarks jj j \ \ \/.0002=cpL(i;-TJ/XPrL

f/Avv.00045\ \ \
T h e foregoing analytical formulation, based o n l y on the con-
servation laws, appears to b e capable of predicting the effects of
noncondensable gases on heat-transfer rates. A l t h o u g h numerical
results were obtained for steam with air as noncondensable, other
vapor-gas combinations m a y be treated with equal facility.

References
1 D. F. Othmer, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, vol. 21,
1929, pp. 577-583.
2 A. P. Colburn and T. B. Drew, Trans. AIChE, vol. 33,
1937, pp. 197-208. 2 3
3 E. F. M . Van der Held, Physica, vol. 1, 1934, pp. 1153-1160.
4 E. M. Sparrow and E. R. G. Eckert, AIChE Journal, vol. 7, V
1961, pp. 473-477. Fig. 9 R e p r e s e n t a t i v e velocity profiles KPM)L/PM]1/2 ~ 600
5 J. C. Y . ICoh, E. M. Sparrow and J. P. Hartnett, International
Journal of Ileal and Mass Transfer, vol. 2, 1961, pp. 69-82.
6 W. Nusselt, Zeitschrift Vereines Deutscher Ingenieur, vol. 60,
1916, pp. 541 and 569. f = " f'drj + /(0) (28)
7 M. M. C h e n , JOURNAL OF H E A T T R A N S F E R , TRANS. ASME, Jo
vol. 83, Series C, 1961, pp. 48-54.
8 J. H. Keenan and F. G. Iveyes, Thermodynamic Properties of
Steam, John Wiley & Sons, New York, N. Y., 1936.
9 F. Yotta, Jr., and C. A. Walker, AIChE Journal, vol. 4,
+ Jo e (Jo [2(/')2 ~ **
Ci = —
1958, pp. 413-417. r- - f f ^
10 T. Furman and II. Hampson, Proceedings of the Institution of drj
Mechanical Engineers, vol. 173, no. 5, 1959, pp. 147-169. Jo
11 E. Baer and J. M. McICelvey, AIChE Journal, vol. 4, 1958, (29)
pp. 218-222.
-fjsscfda •
J d-q
A P P E N D I X <P = ¥>(0)
r
Jo
(30)

The Integral Equations f

Jo
e
-/ 0 ' 3Se.ffi
' drj

C - f n ' 3 f d n \ C' f i 3/a?

r - J o e -jJo wr--<p)cJO dv\dv r™ - ft? sscfdj
3 / ( 0 )Sc W,Jm c J o dij
<p( 0) Jo
(31)
+ C, f
Jo
" -fo'W
d v + f W (27) 1 - 3/(0)Sc
r
Jo
e
- iJsSc./dr,
J0 dv

436 / august 1 964 Transactions of the ASSV1E

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use