Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

AN INVESTIGATION OF
HEAT TRANSFER IN THE LIQUID DEFICIENT REGIME

by

DC. GROENEVELD

Revised by

E.O. MOECK

Chalk River, Ontario

December 1968
Revised August 1969
December 1969 AECL-3281
 AN INVESTIGATION OF 11EAT TRANSFER IN

THE LIQUID DEFICIENT REGIME

by

D.C. Groeneveld

Revised by E . O . '-loeck

ABSTRACT

He.-il t r a n s f e r data w e n 1 obtained for forced COUVYII -'ii steam

watei flow in a 0.760" O.D. , 0.600" 1.1), a n n u l u s a t p r e s s u r e s b e t w e e n
6 2
600 a n d 1200 psia andmass v e l o c i t i e s u p t o 3.0 x 10 Ibm/h.ft .

A literature survey of stable film boiling heat transfer

covered several fluids at a wide range of pressures and the existing
theories on film boiling were reported. A variety of c o r r e l a t i o n s
wa.-i c o m p a r e d with theavailable world data. Three new correlations
were developed - lor L u b e s , a n n u l i , a n d tubes a n d annuli combined.
The R M Serror w a srespectively 11.57,., 6.97., a n d 12 . 4 Z .

Advance Engineering Branch

Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories
December,1968
Revision 1 August,1969
Revision 2 D e c e m b e i , 19ft>

AECL-32 81
 Etude du transfert thermique dans un rgime dficient en liquide

par D.C. Groeneveld

rvis par E.O. Moeck

Rsum

Des donnes concernant le transfert thermique ont t

obtenues pour un coulement de vapeur et d'eau en convection force
dans un anneau de 0.760 in. de diamtre extrieur et de 0.600 in. de.

diamtre intrieur entre 600 et 1 200 psia et a des vitesses massiques

fi ?
allant jusqu' 3.0 x 10 lbm/h.ft .

Une enqute effectue dans la littrature en ce qui concerne

le transfert thermique de films stables en ebullition pour plusieurs
fluides soumis toute une gamme de pressions et les thories
actuelles sur l'bullition des films font l'objet d'un commentaire.
Toute une srie de mises en corrlation ont t compares avec les
donnes actuellement disponibles dans le monde. Trois nouvelles mises
en corrlation ont t dveloppes pour tubes, anneaux ainsi que tubes
et anneaux combins. L'erreur RMS a t respectivement de 11.57,
6.97 et 12.47...

L'Energie Atomique du Canada, Limite

Centre de Chalk River
Dcembre 1968
Premiere rvision en aot 19b9
Deuxime rvision en dcembre 1969

AECL-3281
 - i -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pa ^e

ABSTRACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS i

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Hi

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Definitions I

1.2 Film Boiling 1

?.. 0 LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 Theories of Film Boiling

2.1.1 ANL Studies 3

2.1.2 Quinn1s Film Boiling Model 4

2.1.3 MIT S t u d i e s 7

2.1.4 AERE Studies 8

2.2 Experimental Studies

2.2.1 Film Boiling Experiments with
Steam-Water Mixtures 9
2.2.1.1 Tubes 9
2.2.1.2 Annuli 9
2.2.1.3 Multi-rod Bundles 10
2.2.1.4 In-reactor Experiments 12
2.2.2 Film B o i l i n g Experiments with Other Fluids 12

3.0 EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS

3 . 1. Test Section 12
3.2 Heaters 1 *

4.0 EXPERIMENTAL DATA i^>

5.0 ANALYSIS OF AVAILABLE FILM BOILING DATA

5.1 Outline oE t h e Study !?

l7
5.2 Description of the Analysis
 - il -

Page

6.0 DISCUSSION
6.1 General 29
6.2 Range of Application of the Equations 29
6.3 Radiative Heat Transfer in Film Boiling 29
6.4 Film Boiling in Fluids Other Than Water 30
6.5 Effect of System Describing Parameters

6.5.1 Pressure 30
6.5.2 Mass V e l o c i t y 32

6.5.3 Quality 32
6.5.4 Geometry , 35
6.5.4.1 Tubes and Annuli 35
6.5.4.2 Complex Geometries 35
6.5.5 Heat Flux 38
6.5.6 Orientation 38
6.6 Augmentation of Film Boiling Heat Transfer 40

7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 41

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 44

REFERENCES 45

NOMENCLATURE 50

APPENDIX I 52

APPENDIX II 55
 - iii -

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure p a ge

1 Regimes of Two-Phase Flow 2

2 Modes of Heat Transfer in Film Boiling 5

3 Film Boiling Regions According to Quinn 6

A Film Boiling Regions According to Hench 11

5 Test Section With Heaters 13

6 Typical Sheath Temperature Plot Obtained

from FLARE Dryout Test 16

7 Comparison between h e x p and h c a ^ c for tubes

and annuli using Miropol1 skiy' s equation 23

8 Comparison between h 1 and h , for tubes

using equation 5.5 26

n
9 Comparison between h,exp and c a [c for annuli
using equation 5.7 27

10 Comparison between h e x p and h , for tubes

and annuli using equation 5.9 28

11 Effect of Pressure and Quality on h 31

12 Effect of Heat Flux and Mass Velocity on h_ n

(P = 1000 psia X = 60Z) 33
13 Steam Quality vs h in an Annulus 34
FB
14 Steam Quality vs h p B in a Three-rod Test
Section Thermocouples Located Opposite
Heated and Unheated Walls 36

15 . Comparison between h g and h c a ^ c for muJti-rod

bundles using equation 5.9 37

16 Effect of Test Section Orientation on the

Wall Temperature 39
 - iv -

Figure Page

17 Variation of Specific Heat with Temperature

and Pressure 42

18 Variation of Steam Thermal Conductivity

with Temperature and Pressure 43
1 .0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Definitions

To ensure that t h e r e a d e r is familiar with the terms u s e d in

this report the following definitions are offered:

Dryout (or DNB (Departure from Nucleate Boiling)) occurs when the
liquid film covering the heater surface in t w o - p h a s e annular flow
breaks down. It c a u s e s s m a l l but rapid rises in s u r f a c e temperature
corresponding to the appearance ana disappearance of t h e d r y p a t c h e s

Critical Heat Flux (CHF) is that heat f l u x at w h i c h d r y o u t occurs.

Burnout refers to the failure of t h e h e a t i n g surface due t o high

surface temperatures caused by the poor heat transfer through the
vapour film which covers the heater beyond dryout.

Liquid Deficient Regime (LDR) is t h e r e g i m e where Insufficient liquid

is a v a i l a b l e at the heater surface to completely wet it.

Transition Boiling* is t h e p h e n o m e n o n of intermittent wetting of t h e

heater surface which occurs at t h e o n s e t of t h e liquid deficient
regime .

Scable Film Boiling is a h e a t transfer mode i n u h i c n t h e l i q u i d 's

carried in a d i s p e r s e d flow of entrained droplets In a central core.
Heat transfer coefficients are low but steady. This type of heal
transfer will be referred t o a s film boiling.

1 .2 Film Boiling

Consider a f1 o w o f s u b c o o l e d liquid into the b o t t o m ot H l o n g

u n i f t>rnly h e a t e d vertical tube (Figure 1), T h e flow c h a n g e s from t h e
liquid phase at A (Figure !) to a two-phase mixture where tho liquid

*Some authors refer to this as Partial Film Boiling

 - 2 -

ELQW HEAT TRANSFER

REGION'S REGIONS
STEAM

SINGLE CONVECTIVE HEAT

PHASE TRANSFER TO
STEAM SUPERHEATED STEAM

G LIQUID DEFICIENT REGION

WALL
TEMP

VAPOUR
TEMP ~

SPRAY OR
LIQUID
DISPERSED FORCED CONVECTIVE
REGION HEAT TRANSFER
THROUGH LIQUID FILM

ANNULAR
c FLOW

-j-
D SLUG, CHURN
O f t ^ R Q I H FLOW
NUCLEATE
BOILING
C BUBBLE OR
Ol FROTH FLOW
B

A 4
SINGt E
SUB-COOLED BOILING

CONVECTIVE HEAT
PHAS TRANSFER TO WATER
WATER

TEMP QUALITY

FIGURE 1: Regimes of Two-Phase Flow (7)

 - 3 -

is distributed over the walls in the form of a thin relatively slow

moving liquid film at E. Further along the tube the vapour velocity

becomes so high that the friction forces at the vapour-liquid inter-

face cause the liquid droplets to entrain in the vapour stream

(Section F in Figure 1). Due to this entrainment and the evaporation

at the interface, the liquid film is disrupted and carried away by

the flow. Upstream of this transition region the heat transfer coef-

ficient is high and the wall temperature low; downstream the heat

transfer coefficient is low and the wall temperature high.

(1-8)*
Many correlations have been suggested for the heat

transfer coefficient in the liquid deficient region but they do not

agree well with each other (.see Section 5 . 2 ) . In this study film

boiling correlations are derived, based on consistent experimental

data, some of which have been obtained at AECL.

2.0 LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 Theories of Film Boiling

2.1.1 A N L * * _tud_ie^

Parker studied the film boiling heat transfer charac-

teristics of a dispersed flow of vapour and liquid droplets, flowing

vertically in a tube. He noticed 1) that at high qualities the

heat transfer coefficient decreased slowly once the CHF was exceeded,

and 2) that a considerable superheating of the vapour occurred, even

in the presence of liquid droplets. This resulted in a significant

difference ber.ween the actual vapour quality and the thermodynainic

(equilibrium) quality. In his model he assumed that if the wall

* Numbers in brackets refer to references listed at the end of this

report

* * A N L - Argonne JMational l a b o r a t o r y
 - 4-

temperature was below the Leidenfrost point all the droplets striking

the wall were evaporated, but if the temperature was above the

Leidenfrost point no wetting of the wall occurred and all the heat

was transferred directly from the wall to the superheated vapour

film*.

This model predicted a heat transfer coefficient that was

three to six times higher than that for dry steam at the same con-

ditions, except when the wall temperature exceeded the Leidenfrosl

point; then the heat transfer coefficient was approximately the same

as for dry steam.

2.1.2

In references ( 2 ) , ( 1 6 ) , ( 2 6 ) , (40) Quinn presented a theo-

retical analysis of film boiling in tubes and annuli. He considered

film boiling to be either space dependent film boiling (a function of

the distance from the dryout location) or fully developed film boiling

(Figure 3 ) . A method of determining a maximum and a minimum film

boiling heat transfer coefficient (h ) was described . The

minimum h fer annuli was found by assuming a non-homogeneous

FB
mixture (all the liquid is present in the liquid film on the unhealed

wall, nc droplets appear in the superheated vapour annulus and

thermal equilibrium does not exist) while for the maximum the h
FB
mixture was assumed to be homogeneous and in thermal equilibrium
(X = X T = T ). The analysis
J recommends the Sieder-Tate
E A b sat
equation for the evaluation of the heat transfer coefficient for the

superheated vapour layer at the wall ' . An expression for the

*It is the author's opinion that some of the heat is transferred

directly from the wali to the dispersed liquid droplets. This heat
transfer is sometimes referred to as Leidenfrost heat transfer
(Figure 2 ) .
 ENTRAINED
o * LIQUID
3 DROPLETS
- IN HIGH
C
VELOCITY
1
VAPOUR
CORE HEAT TRANSFER FROM WALL
TO SUPERHEATED VAPOUR

HEAT TRANSFER ^ROivi

SUPERHEATED VAPOUR TO
LIQUID

IEIDENFROST HEAT TRANSFER

FROM WALL TO LIQUID

FILM OF
SUPERHEATED
VAPOUR

i w

SAT

DISTANCE FROM WALL

FIGURE 2: Modes o f Hent T r r n s L-V i n K 1 I n; !'>.': i n : j ;

 - 6 -

EXTREME POSITIONS OF FLOW

WALL LIQUID FILM _ ~ "" "
* *
DRY WALL '

ONSET OF STABLE
FILM BOILING

MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE
FLUCTUATION

SPACE DEPENDENT
FILM BOILING
FULLY-DEVELOPED

FILM BOlLiNG
TRANSITION
BOILING

FIGURE 3: Film B o i l i n g Regions According t o Quinn ( 2 )

 - 7 -

heat t r a n s f e r to the d i s p e r s e d droplets in t h e superheated boundary

1 . .(8)(40)
layer was p r e s e n t e d

Quinn's film b o i l i n g model seems very promising but further

study of the droplet size, velocity and d i s t r i b u t i o n is needed.

2 1.3 MTT*_Studies_

At M I T an e x p e r i m e n t a l study into the mechanisms of film

boiling heat transfer has been IP progress since 19^9 They have
adopted the two-step he-?t t r a n s f e r model i.e. it w a s a s s u m e d tlntt ;i 1 1
of the heat was transferred from the wall to the s u p e r h e a t e d vapour
layer, then from the v a p o u r to the liquid in t h e core

The first study was performed by K r u g e r who investigated

film b o i l i n g for a s t r a t i f i e d f l o w of F r e o n - 1 1 3 inside horizontal
t u b e s at low q u a l i t i e s . A method of c a l c u l a t i n g the temperature
distribution along the c i r c u m f e r e n c e of the tube was presented.

Dougall studied film boiling heat transfer of Freon-113

flowing upwards in v e r t i c a l tubes He n o t i c e d that at qualities
greater than 1.0"X. t h e h e a t transfer improved. The r e s u l t i n g decrease
in w a l l temperatures for h i g h e r qualities was interpreted as a
transition from a flow r e g i m e with vapour at the w a l l s and liquid in
the core towards a flow regime of liquid droplets dispersed in a
predominantly vapour flow at the h i g h e r qualities.

The departure oi thermal equilibrium between a dispersed

(18) J
liquid and its vapour was described by F o r s l u n d - who used liquid

nitrogen in h i s investigation. He f o u n d differences of up to 5 0 %

between the actual quality and the therinodynamic (equilibrium)
quality. The fluid p r o p e r t y , mainly responsible for t h i s non-

*MTT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology

 - 8 -

equilibrium is the vapour thermal conductivity, k . Fortunately the

non-equilibrium in steam is relatively small due to the high k of

steam (seven times that of nitrogen).

Laverty investigated film boiling over the entire range

of vapour qualities. He used the modified Dittus-Boelter equation*

to calculate the local heat transfer coefficient between the wall and

the superheated vapour. He also found expressions for the size,

acceleration and heat transfer characteristics o the dispersed

droplets. An overall heat transfer correlation for the liquid

deficient regime of nitrogen was presented in ( 1 0 ) .

2.1.4

Kearsey developed a semi-theoretica4 method of calcu-

lating the surface temperature startin,'; from the known conditions

at the dryout point. He assumed that no wetting of the w a l l s occurred

once the CHF was exceeded. The heat transfer coefficient for the

wall-vapour film was calculated from the known dry steam heat

transfer correlations.

To obtain the bulk steam temperature four differential

equations were solved. These equations calculated the gradient of

the quality, droplet velocity, droplet diameter and bulk steam temp-

erature along the tube length. The results of Rearsey's method

agree with experimental data.

* Nu
g
= 0.023 JL vv 0 ' 8 Pr
0.4
g
g c

**AERE - Atomic Energy Research Establishment, Harwell, U.K.

 - 9 -

2.2 Experimental Studies

2.2.1 J?iJ;m_B^i

2.2.1.1 Tubes

Mostfilm boiling experiments were done in directly heated

t'41)
tubes. kearsey reports film boiling experiments at 1000 psia in

a 48 inch long stainless steel tube in which wall temperatures up to

o (54)
1200 F were readied. Bennett obtained film boiling data from a
19 foot long tube. Bertoletti et al. ' reported experiments in

the Liquid deticient region at 1000 psia with several tube diameters

Collier^
Collier derived a film boiling correlation from Bertoletti's data

(Table 1 ) .

Bishop et al. obtained h at high pressures (2420 to

FB

31?0 p s i a ) . The coolant entered the test sections as subcooled

liquid and during certain runs left as superheated steam. Their

recommended heat transfer correlations ' are presented in Table 1

More film boiling experiments at high subcritical pressures
(4)
were reported in ( 4 ) , (1.3) and (20). Miropol 1 skiy' s experimentb

covered pressures from 300 to 3200 psia. His heat transfer corre-

lation assumes a homogeneous model.

2.2.1.2 Annuli
?
(1 451 o
Polomikv ' measured h 's between 800-1600 B t u / h . f t - F
FB
at pressures of 800, 1100 and 1400 psia, Three empirical correla-

tions ' given in Table 1 were found to give satisfactory predictions

for nis data.

Quinn ' investigated the effect of small fins and ridges

on the heated surface temperature in an annular test section. He

found that a finned surface produced a large reduction in the rnagni-

 - 10 -

tude of film boiling temperature fluctuations and improved the heat

transfer coefficient. However it also caused a reduction in the CHF

of up to 25%. Quinn also reported that a change in heat flux of only

67o was required to pass completely through the transition boiling at

constant quality.
( 25)
Bennett et ai. reported h ' s at high qualities (90-100%)
FB
which were up to 40% higher than those to be expected from steam only.
This suggested that most of the heat transferred was used to superheat
the steam rather than to evaporate the liquid droplets.

2.2.1.3 Multi-rod bundles

(14 Ie 34)
Hench ' "' investigated transition and film boiling in
a two-rod test section at 600, 1000 and 1400 psia. He plotted the
heat flux against the wall temperature and noticed that the resulting
curve consisted basically of two straight lines, the nucleate boiling
line and the film boiling line (Figure 4 ) . The slope of the film
boiling line, d0/dl was called the effective heat transfer coefficient
and several correlations to evaluate d0/dT were suggested in (14).
Transition boiling was described as an oscillation between nucleate
boiling and film boiling as shown in Figure 4.

Film boiling experiments with a three-rod geometry were con-

(21 29)
ducted by Kunsemiller ' at 600, 1000 and 1400 psia. As predict
by single rod tests, a finned surface was found to increase the h
FB
by 15% or more.

Some heat transfer coefficients beyond dryout were measured

(22)
at Columbia University in a 19-rod test section at 1000 psia.
These data however were obtained in the transition region. Recently
some fully developed h 's in a 19-rod bundle were obtained at
ra
Columbia University.
 - 11 -

NUCLEATE BOILING,

fut
- HEAT FLUX

FIGURE 4 : F i l m B o i l i n g R e g i o n s A c c o r d i n g t o Hench
 - 12 -

2.2.1.4 In-reactor Experiments

Experiments in the liquid deficient region have been done at

Chalk River (ref. 33 and more recent unpublished experiments). Data

on single rod, 2-rod and 18-rod geometries were obtained. Due to the

thermocouple location, the measured wall temperatures may have been

in error.

2.2.2 i!m_Bi:L.i,ng_Exper,imnt_s_wi_th. Other. F_lu.ids_

Film boiling experiments on nitrogen and Freon-113, conducted

( 1 0 > 1 2 j l 8 > 2 3
at M I T \ were referred to in Section 2.1. Bromley^

investigated film boiling of ethyl alcohol, n-hexane, carbon-tetra-

(9)
chloride and benzene flowing across a heater tube. Chi reported
film boiling in hydrogen and presented a film boiling correlation
which is valid for most liquids.

3.0 EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS

This experiment was reported internally in (53) but the data

were not analysed at that time.

3.1 Test Section

The experiments were performed in a recirculation loop called

FLARE, which is described in references 42 and 53. The schematic
design of the 'double-ended1 test section ia shown in Figure 5.

The flow tube is a l" Schedule 80 pipe made of SS 304, with

a bore of 0.760" - 0.002. The tolerance is verified at the ends, but
probably increases to + 0.005 over the whole length. Stralghtness is
1 in 120C, the same tolerance as is required of the heaters (0.600"
- 0.005 O.D.). Each heater is located concentrically in the flow
tube with the aid of centralizers or 'warts', three spaced approxi-
 - 13 -

REFERENCE ELEVATION (ZERO)

IN DATA REDUCTION PROGRAM

DOWNSTREAM
HEATEO
LENGTH
LH = I 3 5 "
UNHEATEO BRIDGE LENGTH
=15 WITH HEATERS
FULLY EXPANDED
UPSTREAM
HEATEO LENGTH
L H = 19.5"

FLOW TUBE
0.760" ID

WATER SPRAYED
INTO STEAM
FLOW AT THIS
POINT

SAFETY WELDED
COLLAR
HEAD BLOCK WITH
CONAX FITTINGS

FIGURE 5: Test Section with Heaters

 - 14 -

mately 120 apart every 9" axially. As a safety measure, a small

collar 0.350" 0. D. by 0.25" long is welded to each heater just below
the head block Conax fitting, to prevent the heater leaving the test
section in the event of a seal failure.

Water and steam enter the mixer from the bottom, the water
being sprayed through four small holes into the steam flow, and
directly impinging on the upstream unheated part of the heater. The
location of these holes define the upstream end of the test section,
which extends to the exit branch pipe 'see Figure 5 ) .

Four pressure taps are provided, only three of which are

used. The absolute pressure is read at the downstream end of the
heated length, and two pressure drop readings are taken, (a) across
the heated length, ana (b) from the mixer to the upstream end of the
heated length. Thermocouple TE-17 (Figure 5) measures the water
temperature at the mixer inlet, and IE-18 measures the twj-phase
temperature in the exit line.

3.? Heaters

The ideal heater for this experiment is one with a long

heated length, high flux capability and a good internal electrical
insulator with a high coefficient of thermal conductivity to permit
high surface temperatures without destroying the heater. The heater
was designed and manufactured at AECL to meet these criteria. Heat
is generated electrically (A-C) in a helically wound Kanthal ribbon
(0.250" by 0.015") insulated from a 0.6" 0.D. Monel sheath by a
0.040" thick boron nitride sleeve.

Boron nitride was chosen as an insulator sii'ce it was found

to be the cnly suitable material having a relatively high thermal
conductivity (8 Btu/h.ft - F ) . This enabled the heaters to operate
 - 15 -

r 2

at high heat fluxes (to 1.0 x 10 Btu/h.ft ) and to reach sheath

surface temperatures up to 1200 F.

Each heater was instrumented with a number of 0.020" iron-

constantan, SS-sheathed, alumina-insulated, ungrounded thermocouples.

These thermocouples were embedded in the surface of the heater, leaving

a smooth sheath surface.

4.0 EXPERIMENTAL DATA

Data were obtained in the form of thermocoup Le tract's and data

sheets. The data were processed with a special computer program ,ind

the results are presented in Appendix I.

Thermocouples were considered to be in film boiling when the

wall temperatures were much greater than the saturation temperatures

but steady with time as displayed by the traces. A typical thermo-

couple trace obtained from earlier FLARE experiments is shown in

(33)
Figure 6 . Note the surface temperature fluctuations in the

transition r e g i o n , due to discontinuous rewetting of the heated

surface by the liquid film.

Since
the thermocouples were embedded in the wall a correction
(24)
must be applied. This correction was incorporated in the data

reduction program.

The following ranges were covered in the experiment:

Pressures 6 0 0 , 1000, 1200 (psia)

f 2
Mass velocity 1.0 to 3.0 (10 lbm/h.ft )
ft 2
Heat flux 0.0067 to 0.6 (10 Btu/h.ft )
Inlet quality 0% to 4 0 %

Heater failures occurred at zero inlet quality and at a heat

2
flux of approximately 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 Btu/h.ft .
 CALCULATED SHEATH TEMPERATURE USING ClSE DATA

500

--CALCULATED SHEATH TEMPERATURE USING G E "DATA

E.,
UJ
a:

4OO
S- UJ
s? a.
r- oo S
r^ 06 tJ5 UJ
a
<x> *n t*-
<

o
a.
u

IE M-

i
300

TIME

FIGURE 6: Typical Sheath Temperature Plot

Obtained from FLARE Dryout Tesr
 - 17 -

5 .0 ANALYSTS OF AVAILABLE FILM BOILING DATA

51 Outline of the Study

Eleven heat transfer correlations forihe liquid deiicii-nt

region were found in a l i t e r a t u r e survey. These equations (see
Table 1) a r e basically the single phase heat transfer equation

C
Nu = a ( R e ) \ p r ) ... S .1

modified by m u l t i p l i e r s to account f.<r specific iiv phase tl>'.-

effects. Although most o| thesi' e q u a t i o n s were derived i> om a
limited range oi experimental data, they h.-ivi h con e v t r ,ip 1 .. t <. i! i
conditions nut specified by the experiments. The objeiiive i>L 1 ti i s
study was to apply data from the diiierent sources to each equali m
and determine which parameters such as R e , Pr should he used in our
final analysis. A computer program w as used to e v a l u a t e those eon-
stants (a) and exponents (b,c) wliich r e n d e r e d a minimum RMS etr.u ,
Obviously, such an equation is >n1 y a n e x p e d i e n t lnr the prediction
of the h and the ultimate goal must still b . a l u n d a m e n t n l analysis
to p r o d u c e a satisfactory mode 1. The equation;: presented ian h.-wcvir
predict h 's w i t h much grc.it or reliability than previously nscrl
F B
correlations (since they were derived from a nnu c v a r i e d s e l e c t ior >'|
data) and should prove useful in p r e d i c t i n g heater surface tempratures

5 ,2 Description of the Analysis

The experimental heal, t r a n s f e r data, obtained from an exten-

sive literature survey (Table 2 ) , were arranged into three geometrical
categories; round tubes, annuli and m u l t i - r o d bundles.

All data points were considered individually. Many wen-

discarded because:

(a) the temperature measurement method wasi n c i - r r c i t (ttie t h e r m ^ -

( 3 3)
couple was protruding from the surface o r it w a s l o c a t e d
 TABLE 1

Range of Appl lcjib 1 1 i t y for EquttIon Equation agrees

V G x !0 X (Geometry utth data from Comments
psla lb/h.ft2 l reterence

1. Nu ^ 0 . 0 0 1 36 R 800 0.75 40 Equations 1 - 3 based

f \ a / 'f
to l c *0 Annul us il, on Colburn equation.
Prfn
Poloolk ce a l . ( 1 ) 1400 I .8 70 Modified to account for

steam v e l o c i t y .

Exponent obtained from

X least error procedure

P o l o a U cr a i . ( 1 ) using data from (I)

Polonik e? j l . (1) oo
i
o.u
4, Nu 1000 0.5 -55 Annulus Qulnn (2) Modified Sleder-Tate
b 0 . 0 2 31 ~" i
[UJ Fr
b i[Re bX11 a
1000 0 . 5 - 1.0 30 - 40 Sorlle (2) equation. Computes
r 2/3l
iioo 1.1 - L . i 45 - 53 Polonlk (1) heat transfer from wall
a l 1 0; f J 1000 1 .4 -70 2-rod Hench (14) to bulk steam.
quinn (2) 1000-1400 7.0 34 - 38 3-rod Kunsrmlller (21)
.0.14 0.8
5. Hufc . 0.0231j Rt 1000 0.B5 72-79 Tuber Bennett (12) Sane as equation 4
bX) Pr
b/3

r i 0 6

Qulnn ( 2 )

6. Nu - 0 . 0 2 3 Be 1 ~ B ~ 1 Pr"4 Dispersed flow Tubes DougaU (23)

K 1 Bsi A
8
L \ c /jj K
K
transfer coefficient
Doagsll et s i . (23) betueen the wall and the
vapour.
 TABLE 1 (Cont'd.)
Range of Applicability for Equation Equation agreea
Equation a n i i Re ference P G 10"6 X Ge one t r y with data from Comment a
pu La lb/h.ft2 7.

Re 0.068 580-3120 0.5-2.5 7-100 Tube a Bishop ( 3 )

7. Mu - 0.0193 f'8 Pr" 1j .
Miropol'akiy
r -, -0.68
I a + (l-a;
L B J
Biahop a t a l . ( 3 )
0.197
0.80 1 . 2 5 ^K 580-3120 0.5-2.5 7-100 Tubea Bishop ( 3 )
8. Hu - 0 . 0 3 3 Re Pr ' -*
f w w Oj
, p, i -0.738 Hlropol'akly
a + ( l-Q)
J
I g
Blahop et al . (3)

R I0'8
9. Su - 0 . 0 2 3
g j g X- y (i x)
t - !
S8O-32OO 0.3-1.5 6-lon Round
tubes
Miropol'kly
(4)
Svenaon ( 1 3 ) emplrleal 1 y I

Pr 8
V

Y - 1 - 0.1 1 1
c
i B
M l r c p o l ' a k i ) <4

.0. [ D . - 2 / C X - 8 ] - 0.0137AT0-'21 ' a 1000 40-100 Round B e r t o l e t t l (6) T -T

w aat
> 360r or
tubea
Collier ( 7 ) G < 0 . 7 4 x 10*
r -i
0 .2i
AT 0.7'. < b 40-70 Round B e r t o l e c t l (*)
- C t 1000
1.8 tubea
G < 3.0

25 <;/io S
300
6
n - I 2&U- 0 4 C / 1 0

Colllr (7)
 TABLE 2 Film Boiling Data Used in This Study

Range

Pressure e> x 10" 5 G x 10" 6 Local X

Data Source Geometry Remarks
(psia) Btu/h.ft 2 lb/h.ft 2 %

Polotnik et al. 800 1.9 0. 75 15 Annulus two heated sections

rf. (1) 1100 to to to D e = 0.011 vertical flow
1961 UOO 7.0 1.9 90 0.005'

S.C. Abraham 600 1.6 1 .0 10 Annuli vertical flow

rf. (53) 1000 to to to D e = 0.0133'
1966 1200 4.4 3.0 50

Bishop et al 2'* 20 2.0 0 "i 10 Round tubes near critical pressures

ret. i. "*) to to ro to D e = 0.0833' vertical flow
1965 311 S 6 5 2. 5 90 0.0167'

Swenscn et al. 3000 0.9 0.7 20 Round tubes near critical pressures
rf. .13) to to to D e = 0.0 34' vertical flow
1961 1.8 1 0 90

Schmidt 3125 1 0 0 55 10 Round tubes vertical and hori-

ret (20) * to to D e = 0.0260' zontal flow
1959 2. 1 90 near critical pressures

Bertoletti et a\. 1000 0. 35 0.74 40 Round tubes vert ic al flow

vet. (6, 19) to to to D e = 0.0164'
1964 5.0 3.0 90 0.0301'

Bennet t et al. j 1000 0. 75 0.21 25 Round tubes 19 ft. long tube

ref. (54) to to to D e = 0.04151 vertical flow
196? 4.0 1.4 90
 TABLE 2 : (Cont1d.)

Range
-6
Data Source Pressure 0 X 10~ G x 10 Local X Geometry Remarks
(psia) Btu/h f t 2 lb/h f t 2 X

Hench 600 1.0 0.5 20 2 rod vertical flow

rf. (14, 15) 1000 to to to De = 0.0 34* data for thermo-
1964 1400 6.0 1 .95 90 couples opposite
heated & unheated
sections

Kunsemiller 600 1. 7 0.25 30 3 rod data for thermo-

rf. (21) 1000 t0 0.50 to De = 0.0368' couples opposite
1965 1400 3.1 1.0 70 heated & unheated
wal Is
vertical flow

Columbia 1000 2.5 0.5 17 19 rod transition boiling

University to to to De = 0.0316' vertical flow
rf. (22) 7.4 2.0 60
1963

Private communi- 1000 1 .0 vl .6 40 round Lubes vert ica1 flow

cation from CISE to to D e = 0 01963' effect of spacers
within the AECL- i* .0 90 Ann u 1 i was investigated
CISE agreement D e = 0.006/'
on two-phase 0 O162 1
heat transfer

Bennett 500 0.2 -0 6 80 Anna 1 us vertical flow

rf. U5) to to D e = 0 OJ08'
1964 1 .4 90
 - 22 -

close to a flow disturbance)

(b) it was doubtful whether fully developed film boiling was

reached ( 1 ' 1 9 ' 2 5 ' 5 3 ' 5 4 )
(c) data points were obtained at qualities below 10% or above 90%
(at these qualities/ the flow regime might be different or a
significant thermal non-equilibrium was present)

(d) data points were taken too close to the inlet (due to extra
turbulence h 's obtained close to the inlet were found to be
(1)
higher than usual )

(e) the gap between shroud and rod was sometimes only 0.030"
(2)
where probably the flow pattern is seriously affected (see
Section 6.5.4.1)
(53)
(f) h 's obtained just downstream of a spacer were unreliable
FB
(spacers disturbed the flow pattern and caused extra turbulence)
If two h 's were obtained in a particular geometry at identical con-
FB
ditions, the lower h was always used. This method of selecting data
FB
points tended to reject those h_ 's which were higher than the bulk of
FB
the data.
The data of each geometry were applied to all equations of
Table 1. Miropol'skiy's equation (Figure 7)
0.8
1 Pr- 8 Y

where
Nu = 0.023 I Re
I g
X + -* (1-X)
w
... 5.2

Y - 1 - 0.1 [ ^ - l ] (1 X ) 0 " 4

gave the best overall correlation for tubes and annuli; its RMS error
was 36.9% on 704 points.
 - 23 -

RMS ERROR NO. OF POINTS

QErrerr REF. 54 .1B773 70
0 I 9 C P REF. 3 .39174 61
BERTOLETTI REF. 6, 19 .33007
REF. 13 .Z31Z4
3CW1IDT REF. 2 0 .S31ZZ
PRIUOTE CatlMCDTlON .143BZ
QEMCTT REF. 2 5 .21352
REF. S3 .16073
POLOrllK REF. 1 .2*021
PRIUPTC arttfSICRTICN .11304
OUEROLL

Hau

FIGURE 7: Comparison between h and h for tubes

exp calc
and annuli, using Miropol'skiy's equation
 Our next step was to find a new correlation for each geomet-

r i c a l category which would reduce the RMS e r r o r . The following

equation probably includes a l l those system describing parameters and

dimensionless groups which may be important in film boiling heat

transfer:

k D
a. Re X + U-X)
calc

a + -= ( i - a ) l 5.3

[
Optimum values of a, b ... j, minimizing Lhe RMS error, were
obtained from a computer analysis. An example of the method used is
given in Appendix II. Steam and water properties were evaluated from
equations published in the 1967 ASME Steam Tables

It is unlikely that all the factors in'equation 5.3 are needed

for the new correlation. Therefore the reduction in the RMS error due
to each factor was investigated by setting its exponent equal to zero
e.g. j = 0. New optimum values of a,b ... i were obtained and the
previous RMS error was compared with the new one. If the difference
was less than O.IZ, the contribution of the factor with the exponent
j was considered negligible and this factor did not' appear in the
final correlation. Similarly, the contribution of the factors with
the exponents b,c ... i were tested.

Our final correlations had the form of equation 5.3 with the
exponents f,g,i,j equal to zero. Six sets of best-fit constants
a,b,c,d,e were obtained - for tubes, annuli, tubes and annuli combined -
with and without heat flux dependence (that is, e 4 0 and e set delib-
erately equal to zero). Tables 3 and 4 summarize the results.
 - 25 -

TABLE 3

Best-i.it Constants to Equat ion 3.3 witl-i C =8 _ * j = o

Geometry a b c d
No. of PMS Equat ion
e
points error Ne> .
-4
Tubes 1.85 X 10 1.00 1 .57 -1 .12 0. 131 438 10.1% 5 4
-3
1.09 X 10 0.989 1.41 -1 .15 0 438 11 . 57. 5 5
i.
Annuli 1. 30 X 10 0.664 1.68 -1 .12 0. 133 266 6. IX 5 6
5. 20 X 10- . 0.688 1 .26 -1 .06 0 266 6 .9% 5 7
Tubes and 7.75 X 10-4 0,902 1 .47 * -1 .54 0. 112 704 11 . 67= 5 8
Annuli 3. 27 X 10-3 0.901 1.32 -1 .50 0 704 12 .47. 5 9

TABLE 4

Range of Application of Best-Fit Constants

Geometry Tube Annulus

Flow direct ion vert ical and hor izontal vert ical

De inche s r 0.20 to 1.00 0 .06 to 0.25

P, psia 1000 to 3125 500 to 1400

e, mill ion lb/h.ft 2 0.21 to 3.0 0.6 to 3.0

x, % by weight 10 to 90 10 to 90
thousand Btu/h. ft2 35 to 650 140 to 700
Nu 95 to 1770 160 to 640

R( ]Jx + ^ L ^
/ IA Y
A\J1
j 6.6 x 10 4 to 1.3 x 10 6 1 0 x io5 to 3.9 x 10 5

Pr, 0.88 to 2.21 0 .91 to 1.22

Y 0.706 to 0.976 0.610 to 0.963

Figures 8, 9 and 10 compare h and h calculated from

equations 5.5, 5.7 and 5.9.

Lack of consistent experimental data prevented us from finding

a reliable correlation for complex geometries. Section 6.5.4 discusses

the multi-rod bundle data.

 - 26 -

iii i i i i M MIiiir
W E ERROR ro. or POINTS
BEf*CIT BET. 5 1 .11139 TO
PlShOP RET. 3 .11106 61
OEBTOLCTTI BET. 6 , . 11631 65
StCPSOn RET. 13 .05133 BO
SCHMDT RET. TO .1106) 7%
PRIUOTC .00013 B?
OUCRPLL IISJ3 438

1
D
\ -
a

ISO? TWot
Hcetc

FIGURE 8: Comparison between h and h for tubes

exp calc
using equation 5.5
 - 27 -

i I
rS ERROR NO. POINTS
o BDCCTT RET. 2S .0G9T a
- r F \ 33
hCT. 1
.O7CP3
..PSSS?
143
bG
.X'3 4B
OJERflL- .06860 266

g-
I

"3500

FIGURE 9: Comparison between h and h for annuli

* exp cak
using e q u a t i o n 5.7
 - 28 -

RMS ERROR no. OF

a OCTCTT RET. S4 .'5140
A O1SHCP REF. 3 .11334
aMrxtrri KEF. 6, ia
. .Mjki-14 REF. 13
D SCM11DT REF. 20

U- RET 2 5
RDRfW-Tt RTF S3
POLOnjK RE> . J
PRju-irE coTUij ;
(JJERFLL

3DB
Haxc

FIGURE 10: Comparison between h and h , for tubes

exp calc
and annul! using equation 5.9
 - 29 -

6 .0 DISCUSSION

6 .1 General

The proposed empirical correlations are based on exper itnent a i

data from many laboratories. In our analysis only those data points

obtained in the fully developed film boiling region were used. I

suspect that some investigators have derived empirical correlations

partially based on unreliable data (Section 5 . 2 ) .

6 . 2 Range of Application of the Equations

The constants in Table 3 are based on data obtained in fully

developed film boiling of high-pressure steam and water. The range

of the data is limited, as shown in Tables 2 and 4. The behaviour

of equations 5.4 to 5.9 was not investigated outside of this range.

N o t e , for e x a m p l e , that at 71 psia and X = 107, Y = 0 and equations

5.4 to 5.9 would predict Nu = while Miropol'skiy's equation 5.2

g
would predict Nu = 0.
g

Direct extrapolation to different geometries (e.g. multi-rod

bundles) should be avoided although it is expected that the equations

will be useful in those areas as discussed in Section 6.5.4.2.

6.3 Radiative Heat Transfer in Film Boiling

The amount of heat radiated directly from the heated surface

to the liquid in the core may be estimated from

0 = 1.71 x 1 0 " 9 ( T 4 - T^ ) ... 6. !

r w w sat

r
-<} " 2 2 3
h = = e 1-71 x 10 * (T + T T + T T + T )
r T -T w w s at w sat sal
w sat
... 6.2
 - 30 -

where = temperature in degrees Rankine

1 = emissivity of the wall

w
o
Evaluating equation 6.2 for e = 0.20, I = 1500 R and
w , w
I = 1000R results in h = 2.78 Btu/h.ft -F. h varies between
sat 2 o r
500 and ?000 Btu/h.ft -F hence the effect ot radiation on h may
rD
be neglected.

6.4 Film Boiling in Fluids Other Than Water

The bulk of the film boiling investigators use water as the

experimental fluid, This has the disadvantage of a high latent heat
of vaporization, requiring high heat fluxes i.up to 10 Btu/h.ft'") to
obtain stable film boiling. These high heat fluxes are often accom-
panied by heater failures. Therefore some investigators
have turned to low heat flux film boiling experiments in which
hydrogen, nitrogen or Freon was used as the .experimental fluid. Due
to the lower operating temperature and pressure, it was relatively
simple for them to observe the film boiling phenomena. However, the
low values of C , A. and k of these fluids may cause a significant
p v
non-equilibrium and high superheats at the walls have been observed.
Hence caution must be exercised in using results obtained from these
fluids to predict the film boiling heat transfer, coefficient for water.

6.5 Effect of System Describing Parameters

6.5.1 _Pre s_s ure_

In the range 600-1500 psia (the operating range for power

reactors) h 's are essentially pressure independent other variables
held constant. However, as pressure increases from 2500 psia to the

critical pressure (3204 psia) the h_ is greatly increased and much

rB
lower wall temperatures occur (Figure 1 1 ) . This is due to an increase
 X 3100 psia
Btu
2400 psia
hr ft 2 o F
0 1100 psia
5000 -

4000 *****' x

3000
G = l.5x|0 6 Ib/hr f t 2
0 =3.9xlO 5 Btu/hr f t 2
2000 ^ ^

* ^
0
1000
i i 1 1 1
20 30 40 50 60 70 80

FIGURE 1 1 : Effect of Pressure and Quality on

 - 32 -

in steam thermal conductivity and specific heat and a decrease in the

liquid-vapour surface tension.

6.5.2

The effect of mass velocity is shown in Figure 12. The

increase in heat transfer (at given quality and pressure) is due to
the Increased velocity of the vapour film adjacent to the wall,
causing a more effective cooling. The effect of mass velocity is
identical for single phase and film boiling heat transfer correla-
tions (the exponent of the Reynold's number is approximately 0.8 in
both cases).

6.5.3 JHaUty^

Flow regimes are quality dependent and have important effects

on the heat transfer. At high qualities,> 90%, the flow is charac-
terized by a surface layer of superheated steam enclosing a core of
liquid droplets in saturated vapour. The heat transfer coefficient
is very close to that predicted by a single phase equation for super-
heated steam. At lower qualities the net steam velocity and h are
lower, the latter decreasing to a minimum between 35% and 55%
(Figure 13). Also the droplets tend to coalesce .and evaporation
decreases. However this effect is not important at low qualities

(10-30%) and h increases due to the availability of water, i.e.

FB
appreciable heat goes into evaporation. The flow pattern has changed
from a dispersed liquid core to a more continuous liquid core with a
vapour film in contact with the heater surface. Below 10% steam
quality, the flow pattern alters and is not accounted for in these
correlations. It is important to realize that due to the superheated
vapour at the wall, the actual quality is lower than that calculated
by the heat balance. This causes the net steam velocity to be lower
resulting in lower heat transfer coefficients.
 - 33 -

u
o
0)

in
tn
JE
a s-s
c o
:
- i ><;

4J CO
Cfl --I
01 t/1

0 o
o
4-1 r - l
U
01 II

U3

oi
o
M
bu

QQ H-
 'FB
BT
-T4R-FT2-'

1600

1400

1200

1000
G(IO"*) L B / F T 2 HR

1.12
800 I .50
I 88

600
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
STEAM wt. FRACTION

FIGURE 13: Steam Quality vs h in an Annulus

 - 35 -

6.5.4 Ge ome_t r_y

6.5.4.1 Tubes*and Annuli

There are two basic geometries, the round tube and the anr.ulus,
the principal difference bing the presence of an unheated wall in the
annulus where the liquid can accumulate. Since the abundance of liquid
against an unheated wall leads to greater superheating of the vapour at
the heated surface and causes the actual quality for annuli to be lower
than for round tubes at the same conditions, different correlations were
expected for the two geometries. The correlation for round tubes was
found to predict heat transfer coefficients slightly higher than experi-
mental values when applied to data from an annulus.

It was found that some of the data obtained by Polomik from

an annulus (D = 0.0051) do not correlate well. It was felt that the

e
small gap between shroud and heater, 0.030", affected the flow regime.
For instance the thickness of the vapour film may not be small when
compared to the gap size and the superheating effects may be more
pronounced. His quality, calculated from the heat balance, may there-
fore be too high.

6.5.4.2 Complex Geometries

Little experimental information on film boiling in complex

geometries is available. It can be said in general that, due to
entrainment, the proximity of an unheated surface has a positive
effect on the heat transfer coefficient in multi-rod bundles. This
is illustrated in Figure 14 where thermocouples facing the unheated
shroud showed much lower temperatures than the thermocouples facing
(29)
a heated surface

The experimental h for 2-, 3- and 19-rod bundles has been

plotted in Figure 15 against the h calculated from equation 5.9
FB
 Btu
hrft 2 F OPPOSITE WALL HEATED
900 UNHEATED
G= I.Ox I 0 Ib/hr f t 2
6

A OPPOSITE WALL HEATED

800 M UNHFATED
G=0.5xl0 Ib/hr ft 2
6

P = 1000 psia
700

600

500

400

300
30 40 50
QUALITY , %
FIGURE 1 4 : Steam Quality vs h in a Three Rod Test Section
FB (21)
Thermocouples Located Opposite Heated and Unheated Walls
 - 37 -

RT6 ERROR NO. OF KJINTS

M X GEBP-47-T1 .19B40 70
D HCH GCRP-4431: .06390 1SZ
KUTSETIILLER GECT. 1 .31350 58
KLNSQIILLER GEOM 2 .371 IB 1^
C0LLTD1Q fFB-Xl 11-2-B3 .77479 37
COLUtS Ifl 1967 OPTR .43BZ7 13

Hca.c

FIGURE 15: Comparison between h and h , for

exp calc
multi-rod bundles, using equation 5.9
 - 38 -

(G, X and D substituted in equation 5.9 were evaluated for a multi-

rod bundle cross section; no individual subchannels were considered).
The only conclusion which can be drawn from this plot is that the h
for ICunsemiller ' s 3-rod bundles and Columbia's 19-rod bundle* is much
higher than the one for tubes and annuli. This was to be expected
since each subchannel going irto film hoiling will experience a much
smaller dP/dC in that channel (due to the viscosity at a dry wall, p. ,
being much .smaller than M_ of a wet wall). This will increase the
mass flow and h2nce increase the h for that subchannel. Figure 15
ID

also shows that Hench' s data agree with equation 5.9. This was
expected since his 2-rod geometry has two symmetric subchannels and
hence no subchannel crossflow will occur.

6.5.5 _Heat_Mux

The effect of heat flux manifests itself indirectly through

the relationship AT = fl/h; a change in AT causes C , k anO u to
Pw w w
change accordingly. Our analysis showed that an extra heat flux term
in the correlation was necessary. The effect of the heat flux on the
h was demonstrated in Figure 12.
Fa
6.5.6 _Or_i eji ta tJ. on

Schmidt ' h a s c o m p a r e d film b o i l i n g in h o r i z o n t a l tubes

with film b o i l i n g in v e r t i c a l t u b e s . He i n v e s t i g a t e d film b o i l i n g at
approximately 3 1 0 0 psia LT\ an 8 m m tube. F i g u r e 16 shows h i s com-
parison in h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l tubes at a m a s s flux of 0 52 x 10
2
lb/h.ft , D u e to the high e x p e r i m e n t a l p r e s s u r e s , the l a t e n t heat
of v a p o r i z a t i o n is very small and film b o i l i n g is m o r e likely to occur
in the subcocled r e g i o n . T h e m a x i m u m w a l l t e m p e r a t u r e for a h o r i z o n t a l

*It is doubtful whether all Columbia's h 'a were obtained in fully

F
developed film boiling.
 - 39 -

De s 8 mm
P = 220 a?m
G = 70gr/cm z -sec

600-

500-

400

TWO-PHASE = 5>H0 5 Keel/m 2 s

= 4XI05 Kcol/m2s
= 2.5x|0 5 Kcal/m 2 s
TUBE HORIZONTAL
300- - TUBE VERTICAL

400 500 600 700

ENTHALPY KCAL/KG
( 20)
FIGURE 1 6 : Effect of Test Section Orientation on the Wall Temperature
 - 40 -

tube is approximately 30C (54F) higher than the corresponding

maximum temperature of a vertical tube. This is probably due to flow
stratification and the difference should disappear for mass flows

about. 10 lb/h.ft . It should be mentioned that caution is needed

using film boiling data at 2500-3200 psia for calculations at 1000

psia, since thermal propi
properties such as C , ii, k, etc. change rapidly

near the critical point.

6.6 Augmentation of Film Boiling Heat Transfer

Several CHF and film boiling experiments have been conducted

on smooth and finned single rod and three-rod geometries ' '
Small fins with heights varying from 0.002 to 0.004 inch were
attached ~o the heated rods, causing a 9% decrease in CHF. This
undesirable decrease was compensated for by a 307, increase in the
film boiling heat transfer coefficient and a 40% decrease in tempera-
(21)
ture fluctuations as compared with smooth rods . Increases in
h up to 44% were reported in (26).
FB
The purpose of the fins was 'to break up the laminar vapour
layer, to introduce turbulence and to increase the heated surface
area.
The effect of film tripper attached to the unheated wall was
investigated by Hench^ ' . Besides increasing the critical heat
flux, the trippers improved heat transfer in the liquid deficient region
by generating turbulence and removing the liquid from the unheated
wall.
Several other methods such as (a) adding a wetting agent,
(b) introducing subcooled liquid beyond dryout, or (c) special
turbulence promoter8 may also increase the heat transfer in the liquid
deficient region.
 - 41 -

7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

(. 1 ) It i s a n t i c i p a t e d that t h ep e r m i s s i b l e sheath temperature , i ,-t

fuel r o dw i l l be raised t o permit film boiling. A s i1 1 u s t r a t i d
in F i g u r e 11, h at pressures up t c 1100 p s iis r e l a t i v e l y l o w
r D

Raising t h ep r e s s u r e t o above 2500 psia causes an increase in h .

resulting in a much lower d r ysheath temperature t o r t h e same
mass flow a n d quality

('2) Many advantages m a yb e g a i n e d by increasing t h er e a c t o r <. l a m

pressure from subcritical to supercritical (above 3204 psia)

(a) a n i n c r e a s e in C_ a n dk ( f i g u r e s 1 7 a n d 1 8 )r e s u l t s in m
Pv v
important increase i n t h eh ; ( h )since a supercrit ical mixture
is h o m o g e n e o u s , n o critical heat flux exists a n dd r y o u i ur (low
instabilities d o notoccur; (c) d u e t o t h e h i g h e r outlei temper.t-
tures after t h eb o i l e r , t h ethermal efficiency 77 = ( - T V'l
\ + m a x nun IIMX

of t h e t u r b i n e is much higher; ( d )s i n c e supercritical s L e a m lias

a much higher density thnn subcritical l o wp r e s s u r e steam t h e size
of a s u p e r c r i t i c a l power plant will be a fraction of t h esize of .>
power plant operating at 1000 psia while delivering t h e s.imo ani.uint
of e n e r g y . Several conventional supercritical power plants h.ive
already been built in E n g l a n d , Germany a n d Russia
(3) T h ee m p i r i c a l equations which a r en o w u s e d in film b o i l i n g lack

a sound theoretical basis. it i s f e l t that the fundamental

approach a s described in relerentes (Hi, 1 8 , 2 3 ,5 4 )m a y r e n d e r

better correlations.
(4) T h ep r o p o s e d correlations a r ed e s i g n e d fortubular a n d nnnulnr
test section geometries. When applied to mulli-rod bundles ilirM1
correlations predict heater temperatures w h i i h a r eh i g h e r than
the experimental observed tempratures. Application ot t h e equa-
tions recommended in t h i s report t e.-ich s u b c h . m n e l m a y result
in m o r e accurate surface temperature predictions.
 - 42 -

40
30
A
r 20
CD {1250 ITM
10
[-44

a.
I HA
u
iy I \
4
Ui Vo\
X
WATER
I 1
! ! %
1 1
u
tat
a
1
-WA TER s
1
I 1 ATM
a2
OS ===== !a*
0.4
32 200 400 600 CRITICAL 900
TtMP
TEMPERATURE , F

FIGURE 17: Variation of Specific Heat with Temperature

(32)
and Pressure
 - 43 -

3
m

o
u
-I
4
ac
UJ
x

200 400 600 8001000 1200

TEMPERATURE,F

FIGURE 18: Variation of Steam Thermal Conductivity

(32)
with Temperature and Pressure
 - 44 -

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to thank S.C. Abraham for providing and

compiling experimental data for use in this study. Gratitude
should also be expressed to Mrs. A. Serdula for writing the
computer program and to Miss E. Gehlert for typing this report.
 - 45 -

REFERENCES

1. E.E. Polomik et al., "Heat Transfer Coefficients with Annular

Flow During Once-through Boiling of W a t e r to 100 percent
. Quality at 800, 1100 and 1400 p s i , " GEAP-37O3, 1961.

2. E.P_ Quinn et al., "Transition Boiling Heat Transfer Program,"

Twelfth Quarterly Progress Report, October - December 1965,"
GEAP-5081

3. A.A* Bishop et al , "Forced Convection Heat Transfer at High

Pressure After the Critical Heat Flux," ASME 6 5 - H T - 3 1 , 1965.

4,. Z.L Miropcl' skiy, "Heat Transfer in Film Boiling of a Steam-

Water Mixture in Steam Generating Tubes," Teploenergetika,

Vol. 10, No. 5, pp 4 9 - 5 3 , 1963.

5. L_S. Tong, "Boiling Heat Transfer and Two-Phase Flow,"

John Wiloy i> S o n s , 1965.

6. S. Bertoletti et al., "Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop with

Steam-Water Spray," CISE R-36, 1961.

7. J.G, Collier, "Heat Transfer and F l u i d Dynamic Research as

Applied t o Fog C o . l e d Power Reactors," AECL 1 6 3 1 , 1962.

8. "Transition Boiling Heat Transfer Program," Fourteenth

Quarterly Progress Report, April - June 1966, GEAP-5191.

9. J,W.H. Chi, "Slug and "iim B o i l i n g of Hydrogen," ASME 65-WA/HT-32

10. W.F, Laverty a n d W.M, Rohsrnow, "Film Boiling of Saturated

Nitrogen Flowing in a Vertical Tube," Journal of Heat Transfer,
ASME, Vol. 89C, No. 1, pp 9 0 - 9 8 , 1967.

11. J.D. Parker and R J . G r o s h , "Heat Transfer to a Mist Flow,"

ANL-6291 1962.
 - 46 -

12. R.A. Kruger aad W.M. Rohsenow, "Film Boiling Inside Horizontal
Tubes," Proceedings International Heat Transfer Conference,
Chicago, 1966.

13. H.S. Swenscn et al., "The Effects of Nucleate Boiling Versus

Film Boiling on Heat Transfer in Power Boiler Tubes,"
ASME 61-WA-201, 1961.

14. J.E. Hench, "Transition and Film Boiling Data at 600, 1100 and
1400 psi in Forced Convection Heat Transfer to Water," GEAP-4492,
1964.

15. JCE. Hench, Multi-Rod (Two Rod) Transition and Film Boiling in
Forced Convection to Water at 1000 psia," GEAP-4721, 1964.
J
16. E.P. Quinn, "Physical Model of Heat Transfer Beyond the
Critical Heat Flux," GEAP-5093, 1966.
17. G.B. Wallis and J.G. Collier, "Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer,"
Summer Course Notes, Vol. Ill, Dartmouth College, 1966.

18. R.P. Forslund and W.M. Rohsenow, "Thermal Non-Equilibrium in

Dispersed Flow Film Boiling in a Vertical Tube," MIT Report
75312-44, 1966.

19. S. Bertoletti et al., "Heat Transfer to Steam-Water Mixtures,"

CISE R-78, 1964.

20. K.R. Schmidt, "Thertnodynamic Investigations of Highly Loaded

Boiler Heating Surfaces," AEC-tr-4033, 1960.

21. D.F. Kunserailler, "Multi-rod, Forced Flow Transition and Film

Boiling Measurements," GEAP-5073, 1965.

22. B. Matzner, "Basic Experimental Studies of Boiling Fluid Flow

and Heat Transfer at Elevated Pressures," Columbia University
Monthly Progress Report, MPR-XIII-2-63, February 1963.
 - 47 -

23. R.S. Dougall and W.M Rohsenow, "Film Boiling on the Inside of
Vertical Tubes with Upward Flow of the Fluid at Low Qualities,"
MIT Report 9079-26, 1963.

24. J.G. Collier et al., "The Effect of Certain Geometrical Factors

on Dryout for High Quality Steam/Water Mixtures Flowing in a
Vertical Internally Heated Annulus at 1000 psia," AECL-1788,
1963.

25. A.W. Bennett et al., "Heat Transfer to Mixtures of High

Pressure Steam and Water in an Annulus," AERE-R4352, 1964.

26. E.P. Quinn, "Forced Flow Transition Boiling Heat Transfer from

Smooth and Finned Surfaces," GEAP-4786, 1965.

27. "Transition Boiling Heat Transfer Program," Quarterly Report

No. 16, October - December 1966, GEAP-5426.

28. E.P. Quinn, "Transition Boiling Heat Transfer Program,"

Eighth Quarterly Progress Report, October - December 1964,
GEAP-4769.

29. "Transition Boiling Heat Transfer Program," Eleventh Quarterly

Progress Report, July - September 1965, GEAP-4963.

30. J. Hilsenrath et al., "Tables of Thermal Properties of Gases,"

National Bureau of Standards, Circ. 564, 1955.

31. Anonymous, "Supercritical Boiler for Drakelow-C Power Station,"

The Engineer, Vol. 2 8 ; pp 697-700, 1.964.

32. E.R. Eckert and R.M. Drake, "Heat snd Mass Transfer," 2nd Ed.,

McGraw-Hill, 1959.

33. A.D. Lane and J.G. Collier, "Thermal and Irradiation Performance

of Experimental Fuels Operating in Steam-Water Mixtures,"

AECL-2016, 1964.
 - 48 -

34. J.E. Hench, "Forced-Flow Transition Boiling Experiments in a

Two Rod Test Section at High Pressures," ASME 64-WA/HT-44.

35. J.G. Collier, "The Problem of Burnout in Liquid Cooled Nuclear

Reactors," AERE-R-3698, 1961.

36. National Engineering Laboratory, "Suppl. to Steam Tables," 1964.

37. L.A. Bromley et al., "Heat Transfer in Forced Convection Film

Boiling," Industiial & Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 45, No. 12,
pp '639-2646, 1952.

38. A.S. Kon'kov, "Experimental Study of the Conditions under which

Heat Exchange Deteriorates when a Steam-Water Mixture Flows in
Heated Tubes," Teploenergetika, Vol. 13, pp 53-57, 1966.

39. J.G. Collier et al., "First Experimental Irradiation of Fog

Cooled Fuel," AECL-1819, 1963.

40. E.P. Quirin, "Forced Flow Heat Transfer to High-Pressure Water

Beyond the Critical Heat Flux," ASME 66-WA/HT-36.

41. H.. Kearsey, "Steam Water Heat Transfer - Post Burnout Con-
ditions," Chemical & Process Engineering, Vol. 46, pp 455-459,
1965.

42. E.R.C. Ayers, "FLARE Loop Revised Operating Manual," APPE-37,

1965 (AECL unpublished report).

43. M.L. Pomerantz, "Film Boiling on a Horizontal Tube in Increased

Gravity Fields," ASME 63-HT-17.

44. L.H. McEwen et, al., "Heat Transfer Beyond Burnout for Forced
Convection Bulk Boiling," ASME 57-SA-49.

45. E.E.,Polomik et al., "Film Boiling in Steam Water Mixtures in

Annular Flow at 800, 1100 and 1400 psia," ASME 62-WA-136.
 - 49 -

46. S.W. Gouse and P. Griffith, "Two Phase Gas Liquid Flew and Heat
Transfer," Summer Course, M.I.T., July 1967.

47. G.F. Hewitt and D.C. Leslie, "Two Phase Flow and Heat Transfer,"
The Engineer, Vol. 31, pp 298-302, 1967.

48. Y.Y, Hsu and J.W. Westwater , "Film Boiling From Vertical Tubes,"
ASME 57-HT-24.

49. M. Uchida and S. Yamaguchi, "Hear. Transfer in Two Phase Flow of

Refrigerant 12 Through Horizontal Tubes," Proceedings Inter-
national Heat Transfer Conference, Chicago, 1966.

50. P.G. Barnett, "The Scaling of Forced Convection Boiling Heat

Transfer," AEEW-R134, 1963.

51. E.A. Okazaki and J.K. Fowler, "Library Programs for the AECL
G-20 Computer," AECL-1744 (Part A ) , 1963.

52. D.C. Groeneveld, "Review of Scaling Methods as Applied to Dryout

in High Pressure Water," CRNL-33, 1967 (AECL unpublished
report).

53. S.C. Abraham, "Preliminary Post-Dryout Da*~.a for Vertically Upward

Steam Water Annular Flow," APPE-43, 1967 (AECL unpublished
report).

54. A.W, Bennett et al., "Heat Transfer to Steam-Water Mixtures

Flowing in Uniformly Heated Tubes in Which the Critical Heat
Flux has been Exceeded," AERE-R5373, 1967.

55. C.A. Meyer, R.B. McClintock, G.J. Silvestri and R.C, Spencer,

"Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Steam," ASME,

New York, 1967.
 - 50 -

NOMENCLATURE

A Flow area

C Specific heat Btu/lb F

P
D Hydraulic equivalent diameter ft
e
D Heated equivalent diameter ft
H
2
G Mass velocity lb/h.[
j 0
h Heat transfer coefficient Btu/h .ft"-

H Enthalpy Btu/ l b

k Thermal conductivity Btu/ ft-h- F

Nu Nusselt number hD / k
e

P Pressure psia

Pr Prandtl number

Re Reynolds number

RMS Root mean square

T Temperature F
3

V Specific volume ft /lb

X Vapour quality

Y Miropol 1 skiy 1 s two-phase flow factor (see Table 1)

AT Difference in temperature
r between wall and
sat
o
saturation temperature F
 - 51 -

Greek

Q Mean steam void fraction

Emissivity

0 Heat flux Btu/h,ft"

|i Viscosity * lb/ft-h

p Density lb/ft

V Latent heat of vaporization Btu/lb

Subscript s

A Actual

b Vapour properties at bulk temperature

c Core

calc. Calculated value

E Eiuilibrium

exp Experimental value

FB Film boiling

f Vapour properties at film temperature -

mean o wall and saturation temperature

g Saturated steam

JL Saturated liquid

r Radiative

sat Saturation conditions

w Wall
 - 52 -

APPENDIX I

F i l m B o i l i n g Data O b t a i n e d a t AECL on 0 . 1 6 0 i n c h Annulus

F = 600 psia
Run No. Mass Flow Quality Heat Flux Wall Temp. Heat Transfer
(lb/h.ft2) (Btu/h.ft 2 ) Coefficient
JC 10-6 x lu"5 Btu/h.ft2-F

27-03-47 1.079 .465 1.650 774.0 575.9

27.03-46 1.079 .464 1.650 753.9 619.4
27.04.47 1.079 ,472 1.810 799.7 580,0
27.04.46 1.079 .471 1.S10 781.0 617,0
27-05-47 1.079 .482 2.046 B37.8 584,2
27-05*46 1.079 481 2.046 R37.1 585.5
27-05-39 1.079 .460 2.046 82R.2 602,1
27-06-47 1.079 486 2.123 859.4 571.1
27.06-46 1.079 .485 2,123 861.4 568,2
27.06*39 1,079 .463 2.123 860,2 571.0
27-07-47 1.079 .499 2.428 905,7 581.2
27.07.46 1.079 .498 2.428 911.9 572,9
27.07.40 1.079 .477 2.42R 909.4 577,0
27.07-38 1.079 .469 2.428 907.3 580,3
27.08-47 1.079 .512 2.724 954.7 583.6
27.08.46 1.079 ,511 2.724 961.4 575,4
27.08.40 1.079 .487 2,724 974.7 560.4
1.079 .528 3,085 1002.5 599,2
27.09-47 589,5
27.09.46 1.079 ,526 3,085 1011.0
1.079 .500 3,085 1024.5 575.5
27.09.40 1019.3 581.5
27.09.38 1.079 .4*9 3.085
3.298 .194 3,085 1180,0
28.03.47 e 1114.9
20.03.46 3.298 .193 3.085 768,2
2.102 .358 1.968 920,4
30.12-47 704.9 906,3
30-12-40 2.102 .347 1.968 709,4
30.12-39 2.102 .345 1.968 920.9
706.2 872.1
30.13.41 2.102 .365 2.276 751,8
30.13.4( 2.102 ,354 2.276 869,5
753,9 872,5
30.13.39 2.102 .351 2.276 753.2
30.14.47 2.102 .371 2.577 862,0
790,3 877.8
30.14.40 2.102 .358 2.577 786,2
30.14.39 2,102 .355 2,577 867,1
790,1 859,7
30.15.47 2.102 .376 2.797 816.8
30.15-40 2.102 .362 2.797 818.6 58.1
30.15.39 2.102 .359 2.797 324,1 844.6
30.16*47 2.102 .379 2.942 842,0 838.8
30.16.40 2.102 .365 2,942 842,9 839,8
30.16.39 2.102 .361 2.942 851.3 820,7
30.17-47 2.102 .387 3.296 872.5 865,1
30.17.46 2.102 .396 3.296 865,6 881,1
30.17.40 ?.1O2 370 3.296 882.0 846,a
30.17-39 2.102 .367 3.296 890.4 829.6
30.18.47 2*102 .400 3.975 944 3 877,9
30.18-46 2.102 .399 3.975 939.9 387.6
30.18.40 2.102 .381 3.975 954.9 861,4
30.18-39 2.102 .377 3.9T5 970.3 834.0
30.18.38 2.102 .374 3,975 964.8 844,1
30.19-47 2.102 .406 4.237 981.4 866,0
30.19.46 .404 873,6
30.19-40 2.102 4,237 977.2
2.102 .385 4.237 994.1 846.4
30-19-39 817.4
30-19-38 2.102 380 4.237 1012*2
2*102 377 4.237 988.0 857,9
 - 53 -

APPENDIX I (Cont'd.)

P = 1000 psla

Run No. Mass Flow Quality Heat Flux Wall Temp. Heat Transfer
(lb/h.ft2) (Btu/h.ft 2 ) Coefficient
x 10 -6
5
x 10 " Btu/h.ft 2 -F

23-15-47 2.014 .477 2.797 785.2 1162.7

20.15-46 2.014 .474 2.797 BIB.6 1021.S
20.15.39 2.014 .458 2.797 78-6.4 1160.0
20>15.38 2.014 .456 2.797 B04.7 1078,8
20.16.47 2.014 .4B6 3,156 B21.2 1141.6
20.16.46 2.014 .483 3.156 059.8 1002,2
20.16.39 2.014 .465 3.156 830.3 1108.0
20-16-38 2.014 .462 3.156 038.5 1077,2
20-17-47 2.014 ,494 3,504 889,4 1017.4
20-17.39 2.014 .471 3.504 666.7 1091.3
20-17-36 2.014 .468 3.504 881.4 1043.9
20-18-47 2.014 .502 3.B42 926.9 1006.1
20-18-39 2.014 .477 3.842 900*3 1083.6
20-13-38 2.014 .473 3.842 919.7 1027.7
20-19-47 2.014 .510 4.172 960.5 1004.4
20-19-39 2.014 .4R2 4.172 939.B 1058.9
20-19-38 2.014 .479 4.172 956. 1015.5
21-04-47 976*6 763.2
2.010 240 3.Z96 758,8
21-94-46 2.010 239 3.?96 979.1
21-05-47 983.5 767.1
2.010 3.366 763.9
21-05-46 2.010 -241 3.366 985.4
?1-06-47 1024.9 744.2
2.010 .247 3.572 732.5
21-06-46 2.010 .245 3.572 1032.5
23-04-47 601.9
1.040 .453 1=968 632.4
23-04-46 .452 856.9
23-05-47
l040 1.96B 986*6 584.9
1.040 .4B5 582.5
23-05-46 2.577 988.4
23-05-40 1.040 2.577 611.7
1.040 458 967.5 608.4
23-05-39 .452 2.577 969.8
23-06-47 1.040 2.577 586.6
1.040 .499 1035.3 588.5
23-06-46 1.040 .497 2.B70 1033* 576,4
23-06-40 1.040 469 2.870 1044*3 569.4
23-06-39 1*040 2.970 1050*4 994.9
463 2.870
24-05-47 3.121 918*4 1056.6
24-05-46 3*121 190 3.708 896,7 937.6
24-06-47 3.121 .200 3.708 1011*9 985.6
24-06-46 3*121 4.366 989.3 1042.3
24-06-40 3.121 4*166 966*0 991.4
24-06-39 3.121 160 4*366 987.7
4.366
 - 54 -

APPENDIX I (Cont'd.)

P = 1200 psia
Run No. Mass Flow Quality Heat Flux W a l l Temp. Heat Transfer
(lb/h.ft2) (Btu/h.ft 2 ) Coefficient
x 10~6 x 10~5 F Btu/h.t2-F

16-16-10 1.955 .415 3.019 791,1 1355.0

16.17.10 1.955 .418 3.391 849.4 1207,2
16-17- 9 i.955 .418 3.391 30,9 1292.7
16.17. 8 1.955 .403 3.391 824.4 1326,4
16.18.10 1.955 .421 3.736 88J.9 1191.7
16.18. 9 1.955 .421 3.736 A68.3 1245,8
16.18- 8 1.955 .405 3.736 B84.O 1184,7
16.19-10 1.955 .424 4,057 921. 1147.8
16.19. 9 1,955 .424 4,057 919.7 1154.8
16.20-10 1,955 .425 4.359 965.9 1097.7
16.20. 9 1,955 .425 4,359 969,3 1088.4
14.04.47 1,010 .433 1.650 75,9 60,8
14.04-46 1.010 431 1.650 75?. 3 891,3
14-05-47 1*010 .443 1.R10 814*4 732.2
14-05-46 1.010 440 l.10 813*4 735.4
14-06-47 1.010 457 2.(146 847*9 728.8
14-06-46 1*010 453 2046 ft462 733.3
14-07-47 1*010 474 2.352 905*0 696.4
14-07-46 1*010 470 2.352 902.2 702.2
14-06-47 1*010 .482 2.503 927. B '94,0
14-08-46 1*010 .478 25O3 922.fi 703.9
14-08-38 1*010 444 2.503- 920.3 709,3
14-09-47 1.010 482 2.503 925.9 697.8
14-09-46 1*010 .478 2.503 915.6 718.4
14-09-39 1*010 448 2.503 918*6 712.6
14-09-38 1*010 444 2.503 032.1 686,3
14.10-47 1.010 .506 2.942 1007.3 668,6
14.10.46 1.010 .501 2.042 999.9 680.1
14.10.39 1.010 .466 2.942 1021.7 647.7
14-10-38 1.010 .461 2.042 1036.6 627.1
15.04-47 1.937 .246 3.085 937.S 33,2
15-04-46 1.937 .243 3.085 940.3 27,8
15-05-47 1.937 .256 3.435 997.1 799,6
15.05-46 1.937 .252 3.435 994.0 05,6
15.06-47 1.937 .264 3,775 1052.6 778,7
15.06-46 1.937 .261 3.775 1055,0 775,0
16.13.39 1.955 .436 1.730 692.5 13B1.8
16.13.38 1.955 .434 1.730 699,1 1313.1
16.14.39 1.955 .441 1.96A 72n,7 1382.4
16.14.38 1.955 .440 1,06 726,2 1239 0
16-15-39 1.955 .445 2.123 737,0 1252.8
16-15-38 1.955 443 2.123 743.1 1209.2
16-16-39 1*955 451 242 759.4 1264.6
16-16-38 1.955 449 2.42R 766*0 1223.0
16-17-39 1.955 459 2.797 807*4 U66.7
16-17-3* 1*955 456 2.797 806*6 1170.7
16-18-39 1*955 467 3.156 837*8 1167.5
16-18-30 1.055 4*4 3.156 839.8 H 59.1
16-19-39 1.955 474 3*504 894*2 107J.8
16-19-38 1.955 471 1*504 885.O 1103.3
16-20-39 1.955 40 3*842 947.5 1012.0
16-20-38 1*955 476 3.84? 924*3 1078.0
 - 55 -

APPENDIX II

This appendix describes an example of the method used Lu

evaluate the exponents of equation 5.3.

Problem: Find the best fits of the parameters a, b and c in the

correlatIon :

k b c
h = a Re Pr
exp D
e

k. b c
Solution: The equation h = a Re Pr may be written as
cale D
e

H = A + log + b log Re + c log Pr

e

where H = log h and A = log a

c ca 1 c

) 2

i
= t
i
where H
e
= log h
exp

Hence
1=1 " 1=1

!
where n is total number of h s
exp

Minimizing E with respect to A, b and c results

Z 2 (H - H ) = 0
e c
... (II. 0

1=1

2 (H - H ) log Re = 0 ... (II.2)

e c
1=1
 - 56 -

2 (H - H ) log Pr = 0 ... (II.3)

e c

a, b and c can now be found directly from equations II.1 - II.3

 Additional copies of this document
may be obtained from
Scientific Document Distribution Office
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Chalk River, Ontario, Canada

Price - $1.50 per copy .

129-70