Heat transfer by nucleate pool boiling—general correlation based on thermodynamic similarity

Leiner, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/0017-9310(94)90114-7

Cited by 35 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The cumulative maximum error in the value of the heat transfer coefficient was found to be only ±3.98 %. Both features are consistent and in agreement with investigations reported in the literature [11,12]. This can be explained as follows: at a given pressure, an increase in heat flux increases wall superheat, DT w which, in turn, reduces the value of the minimum radius of curvature of nucleation sites on the tube, as can be seen from the following equation:…”

Section: Data Reductionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Enhanced Boiling of Methanol on Copper Coated Surface

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an experimental investigation on nucleate pool boiling of saturated methanol on uncoated as well as copper-coated mild steel heating tubes of various thicknesses at atmospheric and subatmospheric pressures. It also includes the effect of heat flux, pressure and coating thickness on the boiling heat transfer coefficient of coated tube surfaces. Heat flux was progressively increased from 15,670.20 to 43,151.57 W/m 2 in six steps and pressure from 23.02 to 98.68 kN/m 2 in five steps. Boiling characteristics on such surfaces are compared with those on uncoated ones. Also, a criterion for enhanced boiling of methanol on copper-coated tubes is described.

show abstract

Section: Data Reductionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Enhanced Boiling of Methanol on Copper Coated Surface

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several good correlations [33][34][35][36] In Figure 4 and the corresponding Table 3 Figure 4(c). The present data, with only a few C h data points for each surface, are all included in the plots.…”

Section: Effect Of Surface Roughness On Heat Transfer Coefficientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleate boiling from smooth and rough surfaces – Part 2: Analysis of surface roughness effects on nucleate boiling

McHale

Garimella

2013

Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of surface roughness on nucleate boiling heat transfer is not clearly understood.This study is devised to conduct detailed heat transfer and bubble measurements during boiling on a heater surface with controlled roughness. This second of two companion papers presents an analysis of heat transfer and bubble ebullition in nucleate boiling with new measures of surface roughness: area ratio, surface mean normal angle, and maximum idealized surface on the boiling curves and bubble behaviors suggests that the relative "roughness" of a surface should be quantified in a manner different from existing approaches to date in the literature.Several recent studies have reported attempts to develop surface characterization methods that relate more directly to boiling physics. Qi et al.[2] applied a digital "filtering" operation on 2-D surface scan data to examine potential nucleation sites in terms of cavity mouth radius and cone angle. They did not elaborate on the details of the algorithm; predictions of nucleation site density based on their analysis produced mixed results. ANALYSIS OF SURFACE ROUGHNESSIn the companion paper to this work [1], six borosilicate glass substrates were roughened by abrading with diamond compound to impart microscopic-scale roughness features, then annealed to control roughness characteristics at the nanoscale. One substrate (test piece 1) was not abraded or annealed. All seven substrates were coated conformally with an electrically conductive ITO layer, from which a 400 µm wide × 25 mm long heater/sensor device was patterned on each substrate. Each test piece was fixed at the base of a thermally controlled chamber that allowed saturated nucleate boiling heat transfer to be measured while recording 5 high-speed videographic visualizations from beneath the test surface and from the side simultaneously.Test pieces 4, 6, and 7 were abraded with the same diamond compound such that R a values (and therefore microscopic-scale roughness features) would be similar. These three surfaces, however, were exposed to different annealing conditions of temperature and soak period as shown in Table 1 [1] such that the roughness characteristics at the nanoscale are very different.Boiling performance for the three surfaces differed as described in and is valid for contact angles up to roughly 150°. The Fritz departure diameter meets the criteria above, including fluid properties and wetting characteristic. Filtered vertical roughness parametersAfter the filtering operation, new values of R a for the test substrates were calculated by the method described in [1], and are listed in Table 2. For each surface, there was little to no difference between the values calculated for different interrogation window sizes; the lowest values are reported here. After the filtering operation, the average roughness values of surfaces 6 and 7 (abraded with 100-µm particles and annealed more aggressively) fell below that of surface 3 (abraded with 30-µm particles). Indeed, surface 7 appears to be similar in roug...

show abstract

“…Recent research efforts are focused on boiling heat transfer with a more complex surface exhibiting multiscale roughness [7], surface roughness accompanying a wettability change [8], and roughness in complex geometries [9]. A few attempts have been made to develop more accurate correlations between heat transfer coefficient h and roughness parameters [10][11][12]; these correlations were tabulated and compared with experimental data by Jones et al [13]. Even though there are many correlations available, based on extensive experimentation with a variety of fluids over a range of pressures, they do not all have a simple physical reasoning, unlike the Rohsenow correlation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%