Development of a Thin-Film Evaporative Cooling System for a High Energy Thulium Holmium: Lutetium Lithium Fluoride Solid-State Laser

Oscillator Crystal

A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty by Brian K. Stewart

In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering

Georgia Institute of Technology December, 2004

Development of a Thin-Film Evaporative Cooling System for a High Energy Thulium Holmium: Lutetium Lithium Fluoride Solid-State Laser Oscillator Crystal

Approved by:

Dr. S. Mostafa Ghiaasiaan, Advisor George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering Dr. Sheldon M. Jeter George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering Dr. Said I. Abdel-Khalik George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering

Date Approved: December 2, 2004

Acknowledgements

The scope of this project is large, and I have benefited from the input and counsel of numerous individuals. While it is impossible to list every contributor, I will attempt to formally acknowledge as many as possible.

First, I would like to express tremendous gratitude to my advisor Dr. S. Mostafa Ghiaasiaan. His expert guidance, balanced with his patience as my thought and development evolved, made this research and thesis quite enjoyable. I would also like to thank Muhammad K. Akbar for his contribution to the two-phase hydrodynamic problem. Thanks are also in order for Dr. Sheldon Jeter and Dr. Said Abdel-Khalik for serving as members of the thesis review committee.

Resources to support the research and development activity came from multiple individuals within NASA Langley Research Center. Component and contract funding was provided by Dr. Jirong Yu of the 2-Micron Laser project office. In-house manpower resources were provided by Dr. Dennis Bushnell, NASA Langley Chief Scientist. Thanks to Dr. Brian Walsh for continually fielding my questions regarding the physics of Lanthanide crystals. Thanks are due to Mulegeta Petros for numerous lively discussions about the 2-micron laser system. Thanks are due also to Edward Modlin for fabrication and logistics support.

iii

I am especially grateful to Dr. Roger Woodward for his enthusiasm as he helped me understand the intricacies of interfacial phenomena and the associated test techniques; even while he battled serious illness himself.

Finally, I would like to thank my wife Connie for her understanding and patience in spite of the many missed dinners and numerous late nights that always seemed to accompany this project.

iv

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ..................................................................................iii List of Tables ............................................................................................. x List of Figures .......................................................................................... xi Nomenclature ......................................................................................... xiv Summary .............................................................................................. xviii

1. Introduction and Objectives... 1

1.1. Laser Oscillator Subsystem Description. 2 1.2. Baseline Cooling System Designs.. 5 1.3. Thin-Film Evaporative Cooling Concept....9 1.4. Objectives of This Investigation. 9 1.5. Outline of Thesis..9

2. Thin-Film Evaporative Cooling Concept: Design Issues and Potential Solutions.. 12

2.1. Candidate Flow Geometries.. 12 2.1.1. Co-Current Axial Flow 13 2.1.2. Counter-Current Axial Flow 14 2.1.3. Radial Flow.. 14 2.2. Heat Load Estimate... 16 2.3. Technological Risk Areas. v 18

2.3.1. Entrance and Exit Fluid Velocities.. 18 2.3.2. Self-Regulation and Transport Limits. 21 2.3.3. Heat Transfer Phenomena... 22 2.3.4. Nucleate Boiling Suppression. 23 2.3.5. Fluid Electromagnetic Energy Absorption.. 31 2.3.6. Electrostatic Enhancement.. 31 2.3.7. Fluid Containment... 32

3. Research Scope and Objectives 33

3.1. Bulk Fluid Flow Modeling33 3.2. TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energies... 34 3.3. Fluid Containment Concept and Modeling... 35 3.4. Scope of Detailed Analysis and Research.... 36

4. Bulk Fluid Flow Model. 37

4.1. One-Dimensional Two-Fluid Flow Model... 40 4.2. One-Dimensional Model Results...... 44 4.2.1. Co-Current Axial Flow Results... 45 4.2.2. Counter-Current Axial Flow Results... 47

vi

5. TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energies. 51

5.1. Wetting and Interfacial Performance 51 5.2. Sessile Drop Test Technique 56 5.3. Surface Energy Models. 58 5.4. Electrostatic Enhancement of Surface Energy.. 61 5.5. Surface Energy Experimental Design... 64 5.6. TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Test Results..66

6. Fluid Containment Design 68

6.1. Candidate Seal Types 68 6.2. Anodic Bonding 69 6.3. Joint Design Parameters 71 6.4. TmHo:LuLiF4 Physical Properties....74 6.4.1. Orthotropic Thermal Expansion...74 6.4.2. Other Mechanical Properties78 6.5. Metal Properties and Selection. 79 6.6. Interfacial Thermal Strain Models 80 6.7. Interfacial Thermal Stress Models 89 6.7.1. Normal Stresses Due to Radial Strains 90 6.7.2. Stresses Due to Axial Strains... 93 6.8. Combined Stress States at the Interface 94 6.8.1. Rod Combined Stresses... 96 6.8.2. Sleeve Combined Stresses... 99

vii

6.8.3. Sleeve Thickness Optimization..100 6.9. Anodic Bonding Experimental Design... 104 6.9.1. Specimen Design... 104 6.9.2. Assembly Apparatus Design.. 107 6.9.3. Specimen Joining Process.. 112 6.9.4. Specimen Test Methodology. 113

7. Remarks and Observations........ 115

7.1. Concept Feasibility Assessment..... 115 7.2. Bulk Fluid Flow Analysis Remarks.... 116 7.3. TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energy Experimental Results... 116 7.4. Fluid Containment Design Remarks... 117

8. Conclusions and Recommendations .. 118

8.1. Conclusions 118 8.2. Recommendations... 119

Appendix A: Ceramic-Nickel Joint Study Documentation.... 120 A.1 Program Flow Chart.... 121 A.2 Sample Intermediate Outputs... 124 A.3 MatLab m-files. 126

viii

Appendix B: TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Experimental Documentation... 137 B.1 Contact Angle Testing Images and Plots.... 138 B.2 Numerical Experimental Data and Data Reduction. 142

Appendix C: Modeling of Thin Film Evaporative Cooling.... 146

Appendix D: Users Manual for the Two-Fluid Computer Code.... 197

References..... 210

ix

List of Tables

Table 2.1 : Vapor Average Exit Velocities .............................................. 21 Table 5.1 : Common Surface Energy Models ...... 59 Table 5.2 : Test Fluid Surface Tensions and Components ... 65 Table 5.3 : TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Experimental Values... 66 Table 5.4 : TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Test Results (Wu Harmonic Mean Model Excluded) . 67 Table 6.1: TmHo:LuLiF4 Thermal Expansion Curve Fits...... 76 Table 6.2 : TmHo:LuLiF and Nd:YLF Mechanical Properties 79

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 : Simplified Electron Excitation and Decay in TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal 2 Figure 1.2 : Physical Arrangement of Laser Diodes and LuLiF4 Crystal Rod .. 3 Figure 1.3 : 2-m Laser Oscillator Crystal/Diode Cross-section ..... 4 Figure 1.4 : 3-Node Conductively Cooled Oscillator Crystal ....7 Figure 1.5 : 3-Node Conductively Cooled Crystal Temperature Profiles from Side- Pumped Laser Volumetric Heating ...... 8 Figure 2.1 : Co-Current Single-Inlet Axial Flow (Flow Model A) .. 13 Figure 2.2 : Counter-Current Double-Inlet Axial Flow (Flow Model B) ........ 15 Figure 2.3 : Radial Double-Inlet Flow (Flow Model C) .. 16 Figure 2.4 : Liquid Entrance Velocity vs. Inlet Film Thickness for Three Different Inlet Flow Geometries .. 20 Figure 2.5 : Maximum Micro-bubble Size in a Thin Film of Fluid .26 Figure 2.6 : ONB Film Thickness Threshold R507A ... 28 Figure 2.7 : ONB Film Thickness Threshold R508B ... 29 Figure 4.1 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Film Thickness Distribution ..... 45 Figure 4.2 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Pressure Drop 46 Figure 4.3 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Liquid Velocity . 46 Figure 4.4 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Vapor Velocity . 47

xi

Figure 4.5 : Counter-Current Axial Flow: Film Thickness Distribution . 48 Figure 4.6 : Counter-Current Axial Flow: Pressure Drop ... 49 Figure 4.7 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Liquid Velocity . 49 Figure 4.8 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Vapor Velocity .. 50 Figure 5.1 : Three-Phase Line and Contact Angle . 52 Figure 5.2 : Digitization of Optical Contact Angle Profile .. 56 Figure 5.3 : Sessile Drop Profile TmHo:LuLiF4 Wetted by Methylene Iodide.. 57 Figure 5.4 : Electrocapillary Curves for Mercury: Adsorption of Anions .. 62 Figure 6.1: Anodic Bonding Arrangement (Adapted for Cylindrical Joint) 70 Figure 6.2 : LuLiF4 Crystal-Metal Sleeve Test Specimen Geometry .. 72 Figure 6.3 : TmHo:LuLiF4 Thermal Expansion Data ... 77 Figure 6.4 : Undoped LuLiF4 Thermal Expansion Data ..... 78 Figure 6.5 : Nickel, Invar and A-286 Thermal Expansion Compared with HT:LuLiF4 ... 80 Figure 6.6 : Cylindrical Joint Cross-Section Geometry 81 Figure 6.7 : Axial Displacement Model ...87 Figure 6.8 : Thick-Walled Cylinder Nomenclature .. 91 Figure 6.9 : Interfacial Stress Element Nomenclature .. 95 Figure 6.10 : Joint Component Stress Ratios as a function of Joint Thickness Ratios ... 102 Figure 6.11 : Joint Component Stress Ratios for Large Thickness Ratios... 103

xii

Figure 6.12 : Specimen Components and Assembly .. 106 Figure 6.13 : Coupon Assembly . 107 Figure 6.14 : Heater Assembly Design. 109

xiii

Nomenclature
Upper Case A B1 CVM E
2 area m

term defined in equation 6.13 virtual mass coefficient

N modulus of elasticity 2 m

F I M

force [ N ] invariants, defined in equation 6.34

kg molar mass kmol

N pressure 2 m J universal gas constant 8314 kmol K N tensile ultimate strength 2 m N tensile yield strength 2 m

Su

Sy S T

stress ratio
0 temperature [ K ] , C

m velocity s m average velocity s

xiv

Lower Case a b c d thick-walled cylinder inner radius [ m] , [ mm] thick-walled cylinder outer radius [ m] , [ mm] sleeve outer radius [ m] , [ mm] diameter [ m] , [ mm] J enthalpy kg
W thermal conductivity mK N linear stiffness m

joint length [ m ]
kg mass flux s

 m
q
q

heat transfer rate [W ]

W linear heat transfer rate m W surface heat flux 2 m

p r r* t

power [W ] radius [ m] , [ mm] critical bubble radius for ONB [ m] , [ mm] sleeve thickness [ m] , [ mm]

xv

potential energy [ J ]

Greek

void fraction
m coefficient of thermal expansion 0 m C

thickness ration, defined in equation 6.44

N interfacial tension , surface energy m kg evaporation rate 3 m s J 2 m

liquid film thickness [ m] , [ mm] displacement [ m] , [ mm]

m strain m

efficiency angular displacement [ rad ] Poissons ratio

kg density 3 m N normal stress 2 m N shear stress 2 m

xvi

Subscripts/Superscripts a c d f g i ls lv o p r s sv t z A B C L S LW +,LuLiF4 crystal optical orientation direction LuLiF4 crystal optical orientation direction dispersive liquid phase gas phase inner liquid-solid liquid-vapor outer polar radial direction surface solid-vapor tangential direction z-direction superscript for flow geometry A (Section 2.3.1) superscript for flow geometry B (Section 2.3.1) superscript for flow geometry C (Section 2.3.1) liquid solid Lifshitz-van der Waals electron accepting,donating

xvii

Summary

The feasibility and critical design parameters for the development of a thin-film evaporative cooling concept for a high energy, pulsed solid-state laser oscillator were investigated. The scope of the investigation was necessarily broad, and produced a thesis that is divided into two distinct analytical segments. The first segment (Chapter 2) is an engineering analysis aimed at identifying and quantifying the trends of key design parameters. The second segment (Chapters 4, 5 and 6) targeted three distinct topical areas in need of further development and refinement.

The engineering analysis in Chapter 2 supports the general feasibility of the concept, but reveals a need for better understanding of the parameters that suppress the onset of nucleate boiling (ONB). In particular, the ONB analysis reveals that ultra-thin liquid films- thicknesses approaching 1 m- may be necessary to suppress nucleate boiling. This segment also provides guidance to the areas worthy of more exacting analysis; bulk fluid hydrodynamic analysis (Chapter 4), wetting and interfacial phenomena (Chapter 5), and development of design parameters and analytical schemes for a robust hermetic seal (Chapter 6).

The hydrodynamic analysis made use of a one-dimensional two-fluid flow model. The analysis indicates that reasonable fluid velocities and pressure drops are possible with the flow morphologies that were studied. Additional analytical work is required to study

xviii

system performance with the ultra-thin flows indicated by the ONB analysis. This additional work may be accomplished by modifications to the equations [17] developed to solve the ODEs that govern the one-dimensional flow model.

The study of interfacial performance between the fluid and the solid surface is hindered by the fact that very little is known about the nature of the surface energy of the crystalline LuLiF4 rod. Chapter 4 outlines the key parameters to be investigated, and offers explanations as to the importance of key knowledge gaps. The potential of electrostatic enhancement is discussed. The treatment then finishes with a specific experimental design to determine the value, and the nature of, the crystal surface energy.

When the subject of the development of a strong hermetic seal between the rod and a metallic support structure was first considered, the anisotropic thermal expansion of the LuLiF4 crystal rod was an immediate area of concern. The historical problems of thermal expansion rate mismatch between ceramic materials and metals led to significant concern. Current literature is rich with studies of metal-glass joints and current MEMS technologies requiring silicon-glass joints [2],[18],[22],[23], but no data were found regarding the performance of lanthanide crystals and cylindrical joint geometry. The seal design investigation starts with a thorough analysis of the expansion characteristics of the LuLiF4 crystal material. The treatment then moves to selection of a candidate material for the metal component of the joint. Next, a mathematical model to predict the thermally induced stresses and the operational strength of each component is developed. The conclusion is that the thermally induced stresses are naturally low for the specific

xix

materials and joint geometry that was examined, and that system structural performance will be dominated by fluid pressures and not by thermally-induced stresses. Finally, a system for assembling and testing actual crystal-metal components was developed and constructed to help further study of the joint assembly and sealing problem.

All of the areas investigated support the practicality of the concept. Most trends and results investigated are favorable to system performance, with no indicators yet to the contrary. There are, however, numerous areas that require additional detailed studies, analysis, research, development and testing prior to the fabrication of a working prototype system.

xx

1.

Introduction

There are several research groups developing high-power LIDAR (Light Distance and Ranging) systems for space-based atmospheric measurements. One such system is the 2Micron solid-state LIDAR under development as part of the NASA Langley Research Centers Laser Risk Reduction Program [25]. This instrument is designed to project an intense, narrow beam at a wavelength of 2-m toward the surface of the earth. Doppler shifts are measured from returns of particle and aerosol species that are suspended in the atmosphere at an altitude of 0-2 miles. Such returns reveal the velocity of surface and low-altitude wind patterns with remarkable accuracy, provided the incident beam is of sufficient power and monochromatic quality. Recently, the NASA Langley Research team successfully tested the first-ever 1-Joule pulse energy output from such a device [25]. As the laser energy outputs increase, the physical arrangement of components within the laser oscillator package leads to difficult and unique thermal management problems. The temperature of the crystal, and the distribution of thermal gradients within the crystal are important factors affecting beam intensity and beam chromatic uniformity. This thesis explores the feasibility and relevant parameters for a new concept to efficiently cool the luminescent crystal, within the constraints of the 2-micron laser package. The topic is developed within the broad context of a system development, with several key technology areas explored in greater detail.

1.1.

Laser Oscillator Subsystem Description

The 2-m laser system relies upon the luminescent properties of specially designed lanthanide crystals doped with rare-earth ions. The most current systems use a host crystal of Lutetium Lithium Flouride, LuLiF4, doped with very small quantities of Thulium and Holmium rare earth ions. Small, cylindrical rods made of the doped crystals are pumped with laser diodes at a wavelength of 792 nm, and emit pulses at 2-m.

2
2 m lasing

1
Tm Ho

Figure 1.1 : Simplified Electron Excitation and Decay in TmHo:LuLiF Crystal

The wavelength conversion requires multiple energy transitions between the Tm and Ho dopant ions. The electron transitions employed in the conversion are depicted in Figure 1.1. The 792 nm incident energy boosts the electrons within the Tm from its ground state

through multiple bands to some higher level. The electrons then decay to an intermediate energy level shared with the Ho ions. Ion exchange takes place between the Tm and Ho ions within that manifold. Some of the electrons decay further from the elevated Ho state to its ground state. It is this Holmium electron transition to ground state that emits photons at a wavelength of 2 microns. The crystal is illuminated via a radial arrangement of laser diodes surrounding a polished rod of TmHo:LuLiF4 material, and the 2-micron beam is stimulated in the axial direction with the aid of full and partial mirrors. The current oscillator system uses a 4mm diameter x 20mm long polished TmHo:LuLiF4 rod illuminated by 6 laser diodes (Figure 1.2 and Figure 1.3 ).

Laser Diode 6 Total in Array (792 nm wavelength input @ 6W each) TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Rod 2 m Output Beam Wavelength

Figure 1.2 : Physical Arrangement of Laser Diodes and LuLiF4 Crystal Rod

Laser diodes 2 Arrays of 3 diodes 792 nm illumination pattern

2 m output Crystal

Fluid containment

Figure 1.3 : 2-m Laser Oscillator Crystal/Diode Cross-section

Of critical concern to LIDAR developers is the emission of high energy pulses at a monochromatic wavelength. The measurement of Doppler shifts relies upon a fixed and known output wavelength. Transmission and return requires two trips through nearly the entire thickness of the earths atmosphere. This requires a high-power beam. The uniformity of the output wavelength is affected by the bulk crystal temperature. The output power is proportional to the energy gap between the first level and the ground state in the Ho atoms (Figure 1.3). Lower crystal temperatures increase this energy gap [29]. These two desired outputs lead to some critical thermal management requirements: 1) Lower crystal temperatures lead to higher optical efficiencies.

2) Uniform angular temperature gradients (concentric isotherms) within the crystal improve monochromatic output.

Although lower crystal temperatures improve optical performance, there is no consensus for an optimal surface temperature. For now, a target crystal surface temperature of 50oC is a reasonable goal and is supported by the 2-m project team [26]. Concentric isotherms can be achieved by maintaining a constant temperature condition on the surface of the crystal. Current cooling technologies have not achieved both goals simultaneously. Given the inherent nature of current cooling schemes, it is unlikely that further design optimization is capable of producing both goals concurrently, without significant power consumption.

1.2.

Baseline Cooling System Designs

In order to appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of the thin-film concept, it is helpful to study current cooling technologies. There are two existing cooling schemes used for prototype systems. The first is a single phase forced convection cooling arrangement. The crystal is enclosed in a sealed transparent containment. Water is pumped through the annulus to flow over the crystal surface. The diode beams are projected through the flowing water onto the outer diameter of the crystal rod. The heat generated within the crystal is conducted to the crystal surface, where it is carried away via forced convection. The single-phase cooling scheme produces nearly uniform surface temperatures, and therefore satisfies the desire for uniform angular temperature

distribution in the crystal. While very successful for benchtop proof-of-concept lasers, the water-cooled scheme suffers from several shortcomings: 1) 2) Temperatures are limited to approximately ambient. The single phase water system is not suitable for space (although other fluids could be investigated) 3) The sensible heat capacity of single phase requires large mass flow rates for reasonable fluid temperature rises.

The large mass flow rates translate into high pump power. While suitable for groundbased systems, the high pumping power of a single-phase system would be a significant drain on satellite bus power for a space-based system.

The second concept is a conductively-cooled arrangement, shown in Figure 1.4. In this concept, the crystal is suspended by three radial supports, known as three-node conductive cooling. The heat is transported via thermal conduction into these support structures. The heat is then transported from the support structures via conventional ammonia or ethane heat pipes. While totally passive, this scheme suffers from several heat transfer limitations: 1) Conduction through the supports requires large potentials to drive significant heat flux. This translates into large temperature gradients between the crystal and the coolant to remove the required heat.

2)

Conduction is limited by high contact resistances between the crystal and the metallic supports. Such contact resistances are difficult to predict, and may vary over the life of the system due to thermal expansion.

3)

Conduction occurs only at three discrete angular positions. This produces non-uniform angular temperature profiles, degrading beam monochromatic quality.

Figure 1.4 : 3-Node Conductively Cooled Oscillator Crystal

Figure 1.5 shows a typical temperature profile maintained in the crystal with a 3-node conductively cooled arrangement.

Figure 1.5 : 3-Node Conductively Cooled Crystal Temperature Profiles from SidePumped Laser Volumetric Heating (Images courtesy NASA Langley Research Center)

Even with its limitations, the conductively cooled system is the current state-of-theart for the space-based LIDAR system design. To date, no other technology has emerged that operates better in a microgravity environment. The most recent design iteration of the 2-m conductively-cooled system predicts crystal surface temperatures at the support structure interface of 4C, with heat rejection via ammonia heat pipe to a 1m2 blackbody radiator panel radiating at -40C (233K) into deep space.

1.3.

Thin-Film Evaporative Cooling Concept

To overcome the shortcomings of the both the single phase and conductively-cooled systems, the thin-film evaporative cooling concept was proposed. The system is intended to use a two-phase capillary-pumped loop, with a fluid that evaporates at or near the desired surface temperature of 50C. The advantages of this concept are:

1) 2) 3)

High heat transfer per unit mass flow rate Nearly isothermal heat exchange at the crystal surface Control of evaporation temperature by selection of fluid type and the operating pressure

4)

Low (or zero) power consumption

It should be noted that even if a totally passive system cannot be realized, the lower mass flow rates associated with a phase change scheme will require significantly less pump power than a single phase coolant. There are numerous flow geometries possible, and these are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2.

1.4.

Objectives of This Investigation

While the concept of thin-film evaporation promises to solve a major thermal management hurdle for high-power pulse lasers, the technological feasibility of such a novel system is unknown. This study will approach the technological uncertainty by a deliberate approach. First, the most significant relevant technology hurdles will be discussed and subjected to a preliminary assessment. Some items will be eliminated as

potential problem areas, and some will be deferred to later stages of development work. A select few items will be then be investigated further through analysis and experimentation as a part of this study. The overarching goal is not a fully operational design at this point. Rather, the development of a conceptual design and system design rules are the intended outcome. Among the basic goals are: 1. 2. Evidence that the concept is indeed practical. Fundamental design and development rules can be created to guide further work. 3. Identification of fundamental research areas suitable for future efforts.

The conclusions and recommendations will include assessments of the practicality of this novel concept, and specific ideas where future efforts will have the greatest impact.

1.5.

Outline of Thesis

The development of this thesis required a multi-disciplinary approach. Very little literature was found that provided much of the data normally associated with a design and development problem such as this. With little guidance available on design parameters, a non-conventional approach was required to develop the thesis. The overall approach was to initially assume several critical performance parameters. Then through searches of available literature, analysis and experimentation; to refine or correct these initial assumptions. The thesis begins with a small amount of background, mainly since the design requires the use of new materials and new techniques. The assumed factors are discussed, with appropriate approximations to support or refute them. Finally, several areas are explored with increased analytical detail, and some experimentation.

10

Relevant literature is discussed within the context each of the sections. This is also a non-conventional approach as one would expect the literature review to appear in summary form near the beginning of the thesis. This too is an artifact of the multidisciplinary nature of the problem. To assist the reader in understanding the arrangement, a brief outline is presented below:

Chapter 1 provides a short introduction to the laser crystal physics, introduces the thinfilm cooling concept, and provides some comparisons between the new concept and the current state-of-the-art in laser crystal cooling techniques. Chapter 2 has characteristics similar to a trade study, with the goals of bounding the overall problem, identifying key technology concerns, and providing a first-order analysis of some assumed performance parameters. Chapter 3 uses the results of Chapter 2 to formally outline three key areas to be explored in chapters 4,5 and 6, respectively. Chapter 4 provides a 1-dimensional two-fluid model with performance analysis of two candidate flow configurations. Chapter 5 starts with a treatment of interfacial phenomena, and then proceeds to the design and execution of experimental interfacial measurements of the crystal material. Chapter 6 develops design rules and approximate analytical techniques to predict the response of the seal boundary to the detrimental effects of thermally induced stresses.

11

2.

Thin-Film Evaporative Concept: Design Issues and Potential Solutions

Prior to embarking on a full-scale concept development, it is useful to understand and analyze key fundamental parameters that dictate the overall performance of this concept. While not intended as definitive and rigorous quantitative analyses, the results of this chapter are intended to provide overall system parameters, to indicate areas most worthy of detailed study, and to provide guidance for overall system development. Once the knowledge gaps are identified, they can be studied in more detail to estimate the utility of the concept. This chapter serves to bound the overall problem and provides an excellent guide to efficiently engage resources toward detailed analyses and experimental efforts. To limit the scope of the study, two commercially available refrigerants, R507A and R508B, were used for analysis. Both are low surface tension azeotropes specially designed for low saturation temperatures, high latent heat, low surface tension, low ozone depletion, low warming potential and non-toxicity. R507A has a boiling point of -47.1C . R508B has a boiling point of -88.1C. Both could evaporate well below the target of -50C with reasonable system pressures, and are considered to be excellent candidates for initial studies.

2.1.

Candidate Flow Geometries

Two axial flow configurations and one radial flow configuration are considered. These different configurations are named co-current axial flow, counter-current axial flow, and radial flow, respectively.

12

2.1.1. Co-Current Axial Flow

Co-current flow assumes inlet flow from one end of the crystal, with flow evaporating along the entire crystal length (Figure 2.1). The vapor flow is in the same direction as the liquid flow, minimizing interfacial shear stresses. Axial flow is expected to be more susceptible to thinning and dryout than the others, but these effects may be offset by lower interfacial shear stresses. This configuration has an advantage in that the inlet mass flow may exceed the evaporation rate, if excess liquid is collected at the far end of the crystal. This may lead to a more robust system, but analysis shows that excess fluid will reduce overall heat transfer and increase the risk of bubble nucleation.

Net vapor flow

evaporation

Flowing liquid thickness distribution

Inlet Flow (z)

Crystal rod

r = 2 mm

L=20 mm

Figure 2.1 : Co-Current Single-Inlet Axial Flow (Flow Model A)

13

2.1.2. Counter-Current Axial Flow

Counter-current flow (Figure 2.2) assumes flow from both ends of the crystal, toward the middle of the rod length. This flow pattern produces vapor flow opposing the liquid flow, resulting in greater interfacial shear stresses. In addition, it may be more susceptible to flooding as the liquid mass flow rate in must exactly balance the vapor mass flow rate out. For a given mass flow rate and inlet film thickness, double-inlet flow will have one-half the inlet velocity of co-current axial flow. While it is geometrically possible to pump inlet flow from the center of the rod, with flow toward the ends, it is unwise to relinquish active doped crystal length for reasons of optical efficiency. Given this constraint, a co-current double inlet axial flow model is not favorable.

2.1.3. Radial Flow

Radial flow (Figure 2.3) can be made possible by the inclusion of three axial fluid transport structures that run the length of the crystal. These structures are similar in cross section to the conductively cooled system support structures, and are acceptable to 2-m system technologists. Each of these transport structures may have two ports, yielding six possible fluid inlet locations. The increased inlet flow area means that the average flow velocities for radial flow will be significantly lower than either axial configuration for a given inlet film thickness. A comparison of inlet flow velocities for each of the candidate configurations in the future will help compare the three alternatives.

14

Flowing liquid thickness distribution Net vapor flow Inlet Flow evaporation Net vapor flow Inlet Flow (z)

Crystal rod

r = 2 mm

L=20 mm

Figure 2.2 : Counter-Current Double-Inlet Axial Flow (Flow Model B)

15

Inlet Flow

inlet
Flowing liquid film

evaporation

Inlet Flow

Inlet Flow

Figure 2.3 : Radial Double-Inlet Flow (Flow Model C)

2.2.

Heat Load Estimate

In order to estimate the crystal heat load, the input power and laser crystal optical conversion efficiencies must be known. The basic measure of energy conversion within the crystal is optical efficiency, 3,2 . Optical efficiency measures the conversion of laser pump (diode) power (p3) to final output power (p2);

3,2 =

p3 p2

(2.1)

16

Solid state diode-pumped lasers typically have low optical efficiencies of .02 3,2 .03 . For the purposes of thermal engineering analysis, it is then safe to assume that all of the optical energy is converted to heat. Such an assumption is not only slightly conservative from a system standpoint, but introduces negligible errors. The system being investigated has the following heat load requirements: Single Laser Diode Optical Output: pi = 6 W Number of Diodes: n = 6 Total Crystal Heat Load;

q = pi = 36 W
n

(2.2)

Crystal surface Area: As = 0.00025 m 2 Surface heat flux;

q =

p
As

 150, 000

W W = 15 2 m cm 2

(2.3)

Surface flux of this magnitude is well within the expected performance limits of a phasechange system.

17

The crystal can be modeled as a cylinder of uniform thermal conductivity, k , with an internal line heat source, q . Although the crystal heats volumetrically, the flux at the surface is assumed to be a constant value driven by a line heat source at the center of the crystal. The heat source value would then be;

q =

q 36 W W = = 1800 l .02 m m

(2.4)

To estimate the temperatures experienced by the crystal, a simple model can be created by applying the linear heat source at the center of the crystal, applying a uniform temperature boundary condition on the crystal outside diameter, and solving for the crystal temperature profile.

2.3.

Technological Risk Areas

Several technology areas are explored to help determine parameters and risk areas for system development.

2.3.1. Entrance and Exit Fluid Velocities

A first order analysis of bulk fluid velocities at the entrance and exit regions will help determine whether fluid mass flow rates, fluid velocities and the required film thicknesses are reasonable for the required heat removal. Simple 1-D mass and energy conservation equations are used for estimates.

18

Coolant mass flow rate;

= m  q h fg

(2.5)

Co-current axial liquid entrance flow area (Flow model A);

d d A = + 2 2 = ( d + )
A inlet

(2.6)

Counter-current axial liquid entrance flow area (Flow model B);

d d A = 2 + 2 2 2 = 2 ( d + )
B inlet

(2.7)

Radial liquid entrance flow area (Flow model C);

C Ainlet = nribs l

= 0.12

(2.8)

Liquid Entrance velocity;

19

Uf =

 m f Ai

(2.9)

The liquid entrance velocities for R507A at atmospheric pressure, using various inlet models, were tabulated as a function of inlet film thickness (Figure 2.4).

Liquid Entrance Velocity vs. Entrance Film Thickness R507-A Psat = 101.3 kPa

11.0000 9.0000 V liquid (m/s) 7.0000 5.0000 3.0000 1.0000 -1.0000 1

Co-Current Axial Flow Counter-Current Axial Flow Radial Flow

10 Entrance Liquid Thickness, 0 (m icrons)

100

Figure 2.4 : Liquid Entrance Velocity vs. Inlet Film Thickness for Three Different

Inlet Flow Geometries The results indicate that for film thicknesses greater than 10 about microns, the inlet velocity is insensitive to flow configuration. For film thicknesses less than 10 microns, the inlet velocities for the radial flow configuration are much lower than either axial flow model, with both axial flow models becoming asymptotic. This will be shown later to be a significant consideration when onset of nucleate boiling (ONB) is considered.

20

In a similar manner, calculations for the vapor exit velocity in the annular region between the rod and the containment were performed (Table 2.1). The flow area was assumed to be the entire annulus. This is a reasonable approximation since the liquid film flow area is small compared to the total annulus area.

Table 2.1 : Vapor Average Exit Velocities

Vapor Exit Velocities, Psat=101.3 kPa Psat Fluid R507A R508B hfg mass flux (kg/s) 0.000183 0.000221 Avapor (m2) vapor (kg/m3) 5.58 6.6 Uvapor (m/s) 2.60 2.66

Tsat (0C) (kPa) (kJ/kg) -47.1 -88.3 101.3 196.7 101.3 163

0.0000126 0.0000126

The vapor velocities are reasonable values for an engineering system, and are far enough below sonic velocity that the exit flow may be considered incompressible for initial calculations.

2.3.2. Self-Regulation and Transport Limits

The operation of the thin-film evaporative system borrows heavily from the fundamental concepts employed in conventional heat pipes [32] and other capillary-pumped cooling schemes. As in the case of a heat pipe, the goal is to develop a self-controlling, stable system that adjusts coolant mass flow in response to input heat flux. Heat flux limitations, similar to those in other capillary-pumped systems, can be expressed in terms 21

of coolant mass transport limitations. Among them are the capillary limit, viscous limit, sonic limit of vapor, and possibly boiling limit (although nucleate boiling is discussed below). This list is not totally inclusive, and the solution of the hydrodynamic problem is expected to yield insight into the nature of many transport limitations. From a system perspective, transport limits are local problems with system-wide implications, each limit in itself providing another boundary for overall system performance. A rigorous treatment of the composite transport limit envelope is beyond the scope of this thesis, however, and is a subject more suitable for later stages of development.

2.3.3. Heat Transfer Phenomena

The fact that most of the heat removed in micro-grooved heat pipes takes place as convective evaporation in the thin-film meniscus region [32] supports the feasibility of the thin-film cooling concept proposed here. Simple conduction analysis suggests that since the film is so thin, its conductive resistance is low. Also, since intimate contact between the crystal and coolant liquid can be ensured by choosing a highly wetting fluid, the contact resistance between the crystal and the liquid is likewise very low. The result is a low thermal resistance flux path from the crystal surface to the surface of the liquid, yielding high heat transfer rates. Thin evaporating films should then be capable of supporting extremely high heat fluxes, with the heat energy for vaporization readily transported to the fluid surface. The question becomes one of balancing the lower film thickness for heat transfer with other system limitations. One of the key parameters to be carefully studied then is the bulk fluid thickness distribution across the surface of the crystal. There is a singular thickness where the wall superheat for the necessary flux is

22

equal to the wall superheat for nucleate boiling. Estimation of wall superheat for a given heat flux requires the casting and solution of continuity, momentum and energy equations. The wall superheat and the maximum size of entrained micro-bubbles are both dependent upon the film thickness. Therefore, the wall superheat and film thickness can be used within an incipience model to predict the film thickness required to suppress the onset of nucleate boiling (ONB). Both the bulk fluid flow and ONB problems are developed in greater detail in the next section.

2.3.4. Nucleate Boiling Suppression

Nucleate boiling would be detrimental to this system performance for several reasons: 1. Bubble formation would scatter the incident 792 nm diode illumination, seriously degrading optical efficiency 2. There is no buoyant mechanism to help bubbles detach from the surface in a -g environment. Stagnant attached bubbles would create local hot spots. Gas pockets could grow and create an insulating layer between the crystal and liquid, seriously reducing the overall heat transfer rate. 3. Eruption of bubbles near the surface may spray liquid onto the containment, leaving liquid droplets that would likewise scatter incident illumination.

It is therefore critical that all phase change take place in the evaporative flow region, free of nucleation. There are several factors that help to suppress nucleation:

23

1.

Smooth solid surfaces

The crystal surface is highly polished to improve optical performance. Nucleation sites will be extremely small. Optical grading of the crystal material precludes flaw sizes as small as 0.5 m. Accordingly, contribution of minute surface flaws will be minimal and it is unlikely further improvements in surface quality are attainable. Therefore, the surface condition is favorable for evaporative convection, and high surface quality is considered a fixed quantity in this study

2.

Highly wetted surface

Wetting is promoted if the surface tension of the fluid is low, the surface energy of the crystal is high, and the natures of the interfacial forces are similar. The need for lower surface tension fluid acts in opposition to the higher surface tension need for bubble suppression. This is another indicator that film thicknesses will be smaller than originally assumed. In order to arrive at some initial performance estimates, knowledge of the interfacial properties of both the fluid and the solid would be helpful. Hydrocarbon refrigerants typically have low surface tensions, and are highly dispersive in nature. Surface tension data for most candidate fluids is readily available. The surface properties of the ThHo:LuLiF crystal, however, are entirely unknown. It would be very useful to investigate both the magnitude of the crystal free surface energy, and the nature of that surface energy. Since the thermal expansion of the crystal is orthotropic, it is possible that the surface energies vary with surface orientation as well. Measurement of the

24

orthotropy of surface energy will determine if simple 1-D wetting models will suffice, or if more elaborate models are required.

3.

Contaminant free

In general, any system requiring phase change needs to be free of contaminants, including particles and dissolved non-condensable gasses. In particular, this system is likely to be especially susceptible to contaminant-induced performance problems. Noncondensable gasses could increase wall superheat requirements. Dissolved gasses could also facilitate nucleation and bubble growth. A rugged, hermetic seal capable of aggressive cleaning, bakeout, and thermal cycling is needed. Design of a seal concept early in the development process is considered crucial for this system.

Heterogeneous Nucleation

Due to the optical quality surface finish, it is unlikely that viable nucleation sites will exist on the crystal surface. It is more likely that entrained micro-bubbles, induced by flow or inertial disturbances, will be present in the flowing film. In order to define some upper bound on the film thickness, it should be possible to estimate wall superheats required to promote nucleation based upon the relationship between maximum bubble size and the film thickness. To obtain a first-order estimate of this nucleation potential relationship, a simple model was devised to investigate the potential for ONB due to entrained micro-bubbles. The model assumes that the fluid film thickness will determine the largest micro-bubble that the fluid flow can entrain (see Figure 2.5).

25

Entrained micro-bubble Psat, Tsat r Pg, Tg Tw Liquid film

Figure 2.5 : Maximum Micro-bubble Size in a Thin Film of Fluid

The wall superheat required to support bubble growth given a finite-sized vapor bubble as a nucleation site is estimated by Collier [19] by combining the Clasius-Clapeyron equation and the ideal gas law into an equation to predict the wall superheat requirement;

(T

Tsat ) =

R TsatTg 2 v f ln 1 + 1+ * vg M h fg p r f

(2.10)

For the thin-film system shown in Figure 2.5, the critical bubble radius, r *  equation can then be cast explicitly in terms of film thickness, , becoming;
R TsatTg 4 v f ln 1 + 1+ M h fg p f vg

. The the

(T

Tsat ) =

(2.11)

26

If vg  v f and Tg  Tsat , then the relation that predicts wall superheat to initiate ONB as a function film thickness reduces to;

(T

Tsat ) =

RTsat 2 4 ln 1 + Mh fg pf

(2.12)

The necessary wall superheats required to support heterogeneous boiling were computed and plotted as a function of film thickness for R507A and R508B.1 The results are shown graphically in Figures 2.6 and 2.7.

Fluid properties for R507-A, except for surface tension data for temperatures below -53.15 C, were extracted from Engineering Equation Solver (EES) version V7.173-3D. Properties in EES were fitted to Martin-Hou equation of state (A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 1:142, 1955) based on data from the NIST REFPROP 6 program, 1995. Surface tension data for temperatures below -53.15C were computed using data from Froba [21]. Properties for R-508B were extracted from Engineering Equation Solver V7-173-3D using properties obtained from Technical Information supplied by DuPont in Technical Information T-95-Eng, Thermodynamic Properties of SUVA 95 Refrigerant, R-508B (46/54). Transport data for R-508B was obtained form DuPont Product Information ART-32, Transport Properties of SUVA 95 Refrigerant. 27

Wall Superheat Required for Heterogeneous Nucleation as a Function of Film Thickness R507-A 100.00

Wall Superheat [K]

10.00

1.00

0.10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
[microns]
Tsat = -47C Tsat = -60C Tsat = -80C

Figure 2.6 : ONB Film Thickness Threshold R507A

28

Wall Superheat Required for Heterogeneous Nucleation as a Function of Film Thickness R508-B 100.00

Wall Superheat [K]

10.00

1.00

0.10

0.01 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
[microns]

Tsat = -47C Tsat = 20 -60C 18 Tsat = -80C Tsat = -100C Tsat = -120C

Figure 2.7 : ONB Film Thickness Threshold R508B

In general, the trends for both fluids suggest that:

1. 2. 3.

Nucleation is suppressed by extremely thin films ( 1 m ). Higher surface tension fluids suppress bubble growth. Lower saturation pressures (and hence lower saturation temperatures) inhibit bubble growth.

The data suggest that the two fluids examined will require very thin film thicknesses, and lead to a desire to examine a much larger array of candidate fluids.

29

The tendency of thinner films to retard ONB is consistent with the goal of improved heat transfer, with both the mechanism for bubble suppression and that for improved heat transfer improved by thinner bulk liquid flows.

Bubble suppression is improved by higher surface tension fluids. This is in opposition to spontaneous wetting, which is improved by lower fluid surface tension. This will require more careful analysis to determine an optimal value of interfacial tension. This particular trend serves as an impetus to better understand the surface energy of the crystal, and the need to ultimately test interfacial forces between the crystal and the candidate fluids. This could also provide motivation to improve wetting via electrostatic means.

The data also suggest that measures to prevent the inclusion of entrained bubbles into the flow, and methods to prevent non-condensable gases from entering the system, may be necessary for successful operation of this system. Once again, the need for a robust hermetic seal is reinforced. Also, the design specifications for liquid inlet flow geometry should include a requirement to minimize the generation and passage of micro-bubbles.

The results also suggest that film thicknesses on the order of 1m may be needed. From the earlier discussion regarding liquid entrance velocities, this makes the radial flow model more attractive than indicated by earlier assumptions.

30

2.3.5. Fluid Electromagnetic Energy Absorption

Since the 792-nm pump energy must transmit through the fluid, it is critical that the fluid does not absorb radiation near the 792 nm wavelength. Although a serious concern, either handbook data, or spectrographic analysis of the absorption spectra of candidate fluids, would be relatively simple to obtain. At this time, absorption potential is considered a low-risk item. Determination of the impact is simple. Remediation is likewise considered simple and it is determined that this study is better suited for later stages of development.

2.3.6. Electrostatic Enhancement

Since interfacial forces are due to electron interactions at the molecular level, it is plausible to think that electrostatic fields could be exploited to enhance the wetting of the fluid, or to even help transport the fluid across the crystal surface via electro-osmosis. While an interesting supposition, there are too many variables at play for meaningful estimates at this juncture. Even so, it may be possible to apply electrical potentials to the crystals during surface energy testing to obtain some qualitative data. This topic is addressed by Adamson [11]. Specific manipulations via electric fields is worthy of separate research, and this topic is discussed further in Chapter 5.

31

2.3.7. Fluid Containment

As noted earlier, fluid containment is a critical requirement to prevent coolant loss and to maintain fluid purity. Due to the thermal expansion behavior and low mechanical strength of the crystal material, special care is needed to develop seal design rules. This is considered a major risk area worthy of early attention. Insufficient data exist for any sort of initial analysis, and the problem requires a detailed analysis. Much effort was expended on development of analytical expressions to support a containment concept. The requisite modeling and analysis has received a thorough treatment and is the subject of Chapter 6.

The fluid containment system design must not only incorporate the cooling needs of the crystal, but must account for differences between pre-launch conditions, launch loads, and orbital temperatures and pressures. For instance, an extremely low boiling point fluid may be desirable for operation in space, but may have a critical temperature well below ambient at pre-launch conditions. For even very low operating pressures, the fluid will be totally vaporized pre-launch, and will likely subject the containment to very high pressures. Management of the high pressures needed to contain the fluid in the pre-launch state requires additional analysis and design to manage that aspect, adds another complicating factor to the overall system design, and likely adds weight to the vehicle. Although this study focuses on the orbital operating conditions, these other considerations must be managed to minimize the potential for technology risk factors from developing in later work.

32

3.

Research Scope and Objectives

In spite of the numerous technology risk areas, it was determined that development of three critical technologies was central to the feasibility of this system. Solutions to these three problems are deemed to be necessary, but not sufficient requirements to solve the overall problem. They do represent initial hurdles that must be cleared before more detailed work can progress. In light of their crucial role, work on these areas represents a pivotal first step toward system analysis and testing.

3.1.

Bulk Fluid Flow Modeling

The bulk flow of the evaporating liquid over the surface takes place over a region with high heat transfer, mass transfer and momentum transfer. It is necessary to cast and solve the governing equations for flow in this region. Constitutive and closure relations will be included as needed to form a complete set of differential equations that may then be solved to determine the profile of film thickness, bulk flow velocity field, pressures and other important parameters. The role of boundary conditions is considered very important, and will have a tremendous impact on the physical design of the system. The expectation is that an initial set of equations for a basic hydrodynamic model can be written, and then further refined as system development progresses. Development will take place using two distinct methodologies. First, a one-dimensional two-fluid model will be cast and developed. Solution of the 1-D flow model will produce an initial approximation of the flow field, and will greatly simplify numerical solutions. The solution will be numeric, but the underlying ordinary differential equations and boundary

33

conditions will shed insight on the parameters that drive the process. A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model can be used to validate the assumptions in the 1-D fluid model as part of later efforts. The 1-D model likewise can later be modified by the inclusion of additional terms, such as adding Marangoni and electrostatic forces to the force terms in the momentum equation; or by re-casting the system as a 2-D or 3-D model. Either way, the 1-D two fluid model should serve as an excellent, and necessary, initial step. For initial estimates, only the steady-state case is considered. It s recognized that the issues of stability and transient performance (such as startup dynamics) are important, but are of limited utility until the steady-flow case is understood. Although no conclusions about the choice of working fluid has been made, two candidate fluids have emerged as strong early candidates to limit the scope of the investigation. R507-A and R508-B have many of the desired thermodynamic, thermophysical and transport properties. Therefore, these fluids will be used in the baseline hydrodynamic two-fluid model calculations. The 1-D hydrodynamic model was developed and solved as part of a collaborative effort [17] and is outlined in Chapter 4.

3.2.

TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energies

Interfacial phenomena are absolutely central to system performance. There must be a strong natural affinity for the fluid to wet the crystal surface. There is no indication at this point that a new fluid should be engineered specifically for this task and existing fluids should be available for the needs of this system. When existing fluids are analyzed their interfacial fluid properties, such as surface tension and the nature of surface

34

tensions, will be known. What is not known yet is the surface energy of the crystal. Quantification and characterization of the crystal surface energies of TmHo:LuLiF4 have not been performed or reported in the literature. While the system hydrodynamics will be analyzed with R507A and R508B, there is no presumption that these will be the final fluid choices. In addition, the low boiling points of these two fluids makes interfacial testing difficult. To make the analyses more general, a method must be employed to help estimate interfacial performance between the crystal and numerous candidate fluids. It will be shown that it is possible to characterize the crystal surface energies using common fluids that remain liquid at room temperature. The sessile drop method will be used, with analysis using one or more of the common surface energy estimation models. Detailed descriptions of the technique and its associated analytical models are provided in Chapter 5.

3.3.

Fluid Containment Concept and Modeling

Development of the fluid containment begins with an understanding of the origin of interfacial mechanical strains between the crystal and the metal support structure. There are two primary sources of interfacial stresses; thermally induced stresses and mechanical stresses from pressure difference or inertial loading. Due to the small size of the components, it is unlikely that mechanical loads will dictate the design. Rather, it is more likely that thermally-induced stresses will produce the largest stress components. Due to the orthotropic expansion rates of the crystal, a simple model to predict thermallyinduced stress would help formulate seal design rules. Such a model is developed in Chapter 6. In addition to the analytical model, specimens were designed to

35

experimentally verify the joining technique. The proposed specimens, assembly and testing processes likewise are described in detail at the end of Chapter 6.

3.4. Scope of Detailed Analysis and Research

The scope of the detailed analysis and research is outlined below:

Scope of Bulk Fluid Flow Modeling

1. Presentation of 1-Dimensional Two-Fluid Model.

Scope of TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energy Research

1. 2. 3. Drop-shape testing experimental design. Drop-shape testing between common fluids and ThHo:LuLiF4 crystal bars. Surface energy analysis using common surface energy models.

Scope of Fluid Containment Concept and Modeling

1. 2. 3. 4. Closed-form thermally-induced displacement analyses. Thermally-induced stress analyses. Anodically bonded seal experimental design. Anodically bonded seal test plan.

36

4.

Bulk Fluid Flow Model

Having determined some conditions for the establishment of a stable bulk flow field, the differential equations describing liquid and vapor flow, and the evaporation of liquid to vapor, may now be discussed. In order to make the problem manageable, it is beneficial to adopt some simplifying assumptions:

1.

The flow field is assumed one-dimensional, with the independent variable along the axial direction, z.

2.

The flow regime is assumed to be stratified flow with a smooth interphase boundary and no entrainment of droplets.

3.

The system is assumed to operate as a quasi-steady system. The complete solution can be determined through a series of discrete steps over the independent variable, z.

4.

The laser pulse frequency is sufficiently high, and thermal conduction through the crystal sufficiently low that the heat source can be assumed steady.

5.

Heat conduction from the crystal is assumed one-dimensional and all heat transferred from the crystal is in the radial direction.

6.

The surface of the crystal remains wet at all times. The question of crystal wetting is considered a problem of stability, and will not appear directly in the steady-state fluid model.

7.

The pressure drop in the flow passage is small copared to the saturation pressure.

37

8.

The vapor is always saturated.

The use of the above assumptions carries with them some penalties in scope, accuracy and the range of applicability. Some of the ramifications of each assumption are listed below:

Assumption 1 allows the use of ODEs to solve the system, and is reasonable when both the liquid and vapor flows are primarily in the axial direction.

Assumption 2 implies that interfacial shearing forces are small, that wave instability is not a concern, and that there is no nucleate boiling- a point that is pivotal to system performance. Since boiling constitutes a system failure mode, stratified flow assumption in the two-fluid model is very reasonable.

Assumption 3 is reasonable for most systems, transient or steady-state. The use of a quasi-steady assumption allows the solution of highly non-linear systems of ODEs by assuming steady behavior over sufficiently small steps of the independent variable, z.

Assumption 4 allows the energy generation and heat transfer through the crystal to be decoupled from the heat transfer to the fluid. The result is a steady wall heat flux at the crystal-liquid boundary. A coupled model would require inclusion of the crystal interior heat generation within the crystal, its associated volumetric heating behavior, and the conduction through the crystal. Such a detailed model may be necessary in later analyses

38

to relax the constant wall heat flux boundary condition, but the current model should serve as a good initial estimate.

Assumption 5 is reasonable due to the heat production mode, and the mode of heat transfer to the crystal surface.

The ramifications of Assumption 6 are significant. The ability of the surface to remain wet is essentially a question of stability. A cursory look at film stability is developed and some interfacial testing for the liquid-solid interface is outlined, but a detailed account of wettability is reserved for later work.

Assumption 7 is valid as long as the system pressure is reasonably high. Some results in Chapter 2 indicate that lower fluid pressures help suppress nucleate boiling. If very low system pressures are actually necessary, the pressure drop may be a high percentage of the average system pressure, and assumption 7 may no longer hold.

Assumption 8 is valid for as long as the liquid layer insulates the vapor from the heat source, and there is minimal absorption of incident diode energy at the 792 nm wavelength.

39

4.1.

One-Dimensional Two-Fluid Flow Model

Akbar, et al. [17] developed a one-dimensional two-fluid model based upon the geometry and flow morphology of an external annular evaporating flow. The governing equations for the two-fluid flow model are restated below;

Vapor mass conservation

d ( gU g ) = dz
where,

(4.1)

= 1

2 Ri + 2 = volume fraction of vapor phase Ro 2 Ri 2

g = density of vapor phase

U g = average velocity of vapor phase

= liquid evaporation rate

Liquid mass conservation

d ([1 ] f U f ) = dz
where,

(4.2)

[1 ] =

2 Ri + 2 = volume fraction of liquid phase Ro 2 Ri 2

f = liquid phase density

40

U f = liquid phase average velocity

Liquid momentum
d d f [1 ]U f 2 + [1 ] ( P + P ) = dz dz dU g dU f CVM U g U f U i + Fi FWL + F W + F i dz dz

(4.3)

where,

f = liquid phase density

P = pressure gradient due to interfacial forces (  0 for this system) CVM = virtual mass constant = Ca (1 ) f (1 ) + g Ca = virtual mass coefficient ( = 1 for this system) Ui =

1 (U f + U g ) , interphase velocity 2

Fi = interfacial drag + friction force, per unit volume FWL = wall friction force, per unit volume F W = net liquid-wall interfacial forces, per unit volume F i = net liquid-vapor forces due to varying surface tension, per unit volume

Vapor momentum

41

d dP gU g 2 + = dz dz dU g dU f CVM U g U f dz dz

+ U i Fi FWg F i

(4.4)

where,

FWg = vapor, outer wall friction force, per unit volume

Mixture Energy Conservation Equation d 1 2 1 2 f [1 ] h f + U f U f + g hg + U g U g = [1 ] q dz 2 2 where,

q = wall heat transfer into the liquid phase

(4.5)

Equations (4.1) and (4.2) are not independent of each other, resulting in a system of four independent, nonlinear, first-order ODEs in terms of four state variables. The four state variables to be determined by the solution to this system are;

P {Y } = U f U g

(4.6)

In matrix form , this system of ODEs can be cast in the form;

42

[ A]

dY = { B} dz

(4.7)

where,

[ A] = a 4x4 matrix of the coefficients of the state variables in the system

{B} =
a vector of the sums of residual terms in each equation

equations

In order to solve the system of ODEs, the first derivatives of each state variable must be isolated explicitly. The explicit form of the first order ODEs is computed by premultiplying both sides by the inverse of matrix [ A] resulting in a properly conditioned first-order ODE system;
1 dY = [ A] { B} dx

(4.8)

This system of non-linear ODEs can then be numerically solved for the state vector,

{Y } as a function of axial position,

z.

Note that is a more relevant state variable than for determination of system performance. By manipulation of the definition of in equation, (4.1), can be obtained by solving for the real positive root of the equation;

2 + 2 Ri + ( 1) ( Ro 2 Ri 2 ) = 0

(4.9)

43

Therefore, the more useful state vector will be;

P {Y } = U f U g

(4.10)

where is computed by the solution of equation (4.9).

4.2.

One-Dimensional Model Results

Solutions to the above set of ODEs for R-507A and R-508-B working fluids were obtained for the Co-current axial flow and Counter-current axial flow morphologies, with the results depicted in the graphs that follow. Each graph consists of a series of plots for varying values of the term Factor. Factor is defined as;
Factor =  fg mh  q

(4.11)

Factor then represents excess coolant injection.

44

4.2.1. Co-Current Axial Flow Results

P Plots of four state variables, from [17] are included in Figures 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 U f U g
respectively. The computations assume an initial value of film thickness, inlet = 500 m , and inlet temperature, Tinlet = Tsat = 50 0 C at z = 0 .

Figure 4.1 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Film Thickness Distribution [17]

45

Figure 4.2 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Pressure Drop [17]

Figure 4.3 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Liquid Velocity [17]

46

Figure 4.4 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Vapor Velocity [17]

In general, the results for co-current axial flow show reasonable values of velocities for both phases, and very low pressure drop along the length. In light of the ONB predictions in Chapter 2, the solutions do have a rather thick entrance film thickness. Subsequent computations with film thicknesses approaching 1 m are needed for direct comparisons with the ONB model results from Chapter 2.

4.2.2. Counter-Current Axial Flow Results

The computations for counter-current flow assumed the same initial value of film thickness, inlet = 500 m , and inlet temperature, Tinlet = Tsat = 50 0 C at z = 0 . Note that computations were generated for half the length due to flow symmetry. It should

47

also be noted that excess fluid flow is limited to 5% since there is no mass transport path for excess fluid flow in this configuration. The resulting film thickness, pressure drop, liquid velocity and vapor velocity are shown in Figures 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 respectively.

Figure 4.5 : Counter-Current Axial Flow: Film Thickness Distribution [17]

48

Figure 4.6 : Counter-Current Axial Flow: Pressure Drop [17]

Figure 4.7 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Liquid Velocity [17]

49

Figure 4.8 : Co-Current Axial Flow: Vapor Velocity [17] In similar fashion as co-current flow, the counter-current flow model has reasonable values of velocities for both phases, and very low pressure drop along the length. The same critique of film thicknesses also applies and solutions of the counter-current model with film thicknesses approaching 1 m are also needed to compare with the ONB model results from Chapter 2.

50

5.

TmHo:LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energies

Determination of the magnitude and the nature of the crystal surface energy are necessary to make predictions regarding the wetting potential of candidate working fluids. This chapter outlines the fundamental theories regarding wetting and the need for measurement of surface energies, progresses through a test plan and analysis matrix for experimental studies, reports surface energy data from early stage TmHo:LuLiF4 interfacial testing, and concludes with some notes on electrostatic enhancement of surface energy.

5.1.

Wetting and Interfacial Performance

The establishment of a thin, flowing film across the exterior surface of the crystal represents a significant technology hurdle, and emerges as the single largest risk factor for this system. The interfacial phenomena, wetting, adhesion, and the related topics of surface tension, surface energy, etc. must be understood to determine if a thin film can be transported across the given material.

The spontaneous wetting of the crystal surface by the coolant is central to the operation of this system. In order to assess the physical feasibility of this scheme, numerous unknown parameters must be considered. The first is how to promote contact between the solid and liquid. It begins with an understanding of the nature of the forces between different phases. The three-phase line (Figure 5.1), usually illustrated by the concept of

51

contact angle and the use of the Young equation, is used to describe the relationship between phases [9];

sv = ls + lv cos
Where,

(5.1)

sv is the interfacial tension between the solid and the vapor (surface energy) lv is the interfacial tension between the liquid and vapor (surface tension) ls is the interfacial tension between the liquid and the solid

Optical contact angle measurements can be readily made, and the data can be manipulated to yield much information about the relationship between the components. Aggressive spontaneous wetting occurs when the contact angle, , approaches zero. Therefore, a near-zero contact angle is the desired case for this system.

Figure 5.1 : Three-Phase Line and Contact Angle

52

Electrostatic forces drive the interfacial behavior between molecules. The tendency for molecules to attract or repel one another can be described by the energy required to move them closer or farther from one another. Intermolecular forces can be broadly categorized into three classes: Dispersion (or van der Waals) forces, Polar forces and Pauli Exclusion forces. The following relation [10] models the relative potential energy between two molecules separated by a distance R;

u=

A B rn rm

(5.2)

The integer value of n is dependent upon repulsive forces (Pauli exclusive), and m is dependent upon attractive forces (dispersive, polar). A and B are constants depending upon the molecules being considered.

Attractive forces are divided generally into dispersive or polar in nature. The van der Walls forces can further be sub-divided into Keesom, Debye and London Dispersion forces. The van der Walls forces are dominant in non-polar molecules and are always attractive. Dispersion forces, while weaker than polar forces, are long-range electrostatic forces. Most oils are non-polar, and dispersion forces dominate the interfacial behavior of oils. Dispersive potential energies are of the order of m = 6 .

Polar forces prevail in molecules that have electron configurations with asymmetric charge distribution. Water is the classic model of a highly polar molecule. Unlike

53

dispersion forces, polar bonds tend to be stronger, and lead to cohesion behavior over adhesion. The measure of a molecules polar nature is described by its dipole moment. Polar forces can be attractive or repulsive. Intermolecular polar energies are of the order
m = 3.

Exclusion forces are always repulsive, are dependent strongly upon the molecule size, and effectively limit the proximity of any two molecules. For exclusion forces,
9 n 15 .

A simplified model for understanding the role of intermolecular energies in determining intermolecular distances is to sum the attractive energies between molecules with the repulsive energies. A plot of the resulting potentials for varying vales of r will depict the behavior of two molecules. This is the basis of the Lennard-Jones model. Because of the difference in the power n between attractive and repulsive potentials, the shorter distances are dominated by repulsive forces, and longer distances by attractive forces. Since the attractive forces are longer range, there is a stable distance at which the two forces will be in balance. Moving the molecules closer or further would require energy input. This produces a potential energy well, and describes a state of stability.

Materials with similar bond types are attracted to each other; dispersion-to-dispersion and polar-to-polar. This relationship is probably manifested in specific values of the constants A and B. It is therefore advantageous to use materials with similar electrostatic forces if wetting is desired. Spontaneous spreading is nothing more than adhesion of a low-surface

54

energy fluid with a higher surface energy solid. In other words, adhesion is stronger than cohesion. Wetting is promoted then if the surface tension of the liquid lv is lower than the surface energy of the solid sv . For this reason, low surface tension fluids promote spontaneous spreading. Since most oils have much lower surface tensions than water, they tend to spread better over most solid substrates. Hydrocarbon-based fluids are likely first candidates for this system due to this fact.

Since similarity of intermolecular forces between solid and fluid promotes wetting, it is important to determine the nature of the crystal surface. The nature of the crystal could be determined by contact angle measurements with known polar and known dispersive fluids[30]. Using this strategy, the nature of the crystal (dispersive or polar) could be determined with common fluids at ambient conditions. This would be used to identify the class of fluids most compatible with this system.

The next experimental study would be to determine the wetting behavior of actual candidate fluids on the crystal surface. The difficulty here is the low saturation temperature desired ( Tsat 50 0 C ). Tests with actual candidate fluids will require a special chamber for tests at the low saturation temperatures. Such chamber tests, with numerous fluids, will be expensive and time-consuming. To arrive at improved estimates, it can be shown that similar classes of fluids (say alkenes, HCFCs, nparrafins, etc.) will have similar wetting behavior on the same substrate, but with different boiling points[30]. Therefore, a similar fluid with a boiling point above ambient

55

can be used to more finely screen classes of fluids. Once again, room temperature tests can help narrow the list of candidate fluids.

5.2.

Sessile Drop Test Technique

There are numerous ways to measure contact angle data. One of the simplest to apply is the sessile drop method, where a sample of fluid is carefully placed on a solid surface. The drop is illuminated such that the drop profile can be easily visualized. Contact angle measurements can be taken by direct measurement with a goniometer scale, or by digitizing the profile (Figure 5.2).

Figure 5.2 : Digitization of Optical Contact Angle Profile

56

The selected test apparatus is an FTA-125 Contact Angle Tester, manufactured by First Ten Angstroms, Inc. The FTA-125 uses video capture of a drop silhouette to digitize the profile. The profile can be fit to either a spherical drop shape model, or a non-spherical model. The three-phase point is calculated by the intersection of the digitized profile with the horizon line to compute the contact angle at the three-phase point. Nonspherical geometry models are used where the sample is large, and the effects of gravity distort the spherical profile. Figure 5.3 shows a spherical drop shape image and profile analysis using TmHo:LuLiF4 wetted by methylene iodide.

Figure 5.3 : Sessile Drop Profile TmHo:LuLiF4 Wetted by Methylene Iodide (Note image analysis traces on drop and needle)

57

Regardless of the apparatus used , contact angles of less than 3 degrees are difficult to measure.

5.3.

Surface Energy Models

The wetting behavior of a liquid on a solid surface can be described by recasting the familiar Young Equation with unknown quantities on the lefthand side and known or measured quantities on the right-hand side;

sv ls = lv cos

(5.3)

The liquid surface tension, lv , is known for the common fluids used in surface energy testing. The contact angle, , is measured directly via sessile drop analysis.

Hence the entire right-hand side is known after experimental measurements. This leaves the difference, sv ls as the unknown quantity. In order to isolate the contribution of each term on the left-hand side, another equation is required. There are five common approximations to separate the two terms. These approximations all begin with some assumption as to the nature of the liquid-solid interaction. In this sense, the interfacial behavior is assumed a priori. Each of the approximations varies in sophistication, difficulty and in the number of fluids needed to converge. Five common surface energy models are listed in Table 5.1. 58

Table 5.1 : Common Surface Energy Models [15] Surface Energy Model Zisman critical wetting tension Girifalco, Good, Fowkes, Young combining rule Owens-Wendt geometric mean Wu harmonic mean Acid-base theory Minimum No. of Fluids 2 1 2 2 3

Each model has its own inherent strengths and weaknesses. An exhaustive treatment of these and other models are detailed by Sharma [15]. A brief synopsis of the five types used is included here.

The Zisman theory approximates the total surface energy via the concept of critical contact angle, c If the surface tension and contact angles for various fluids are plotted together, the locus of points approximates a straight line. The line can be extrapolated to the point where cos = 1 , defining where = 0. The critical surface tension is defined at this point, and the criteria for spontaneous spreading by different fluids can be estimated. The Zisman theory measures only the total surface energy, and does not delineate between polar and dispersive components. To establish a line, two fluids are required for testing.

59

Fowkes developed the surface component approach, whereby the surface energy could be divided into two parts- dispersive and non-dispersve. In this model, the dispersive component is strictly due to London dispersion forces, and the non-dispersive includes all
d d other forces, = d + h . He proposed the relation, SL = S + L 2 S L for solid-

liquid interfaces subject to dispersion forces only. As such, the Fowkes model is not considered reliable for highly polar solid-liquid pairs. Since only the dispersive components are revealed, only a single fluid is required to converge upon a value.

The Owens-Wendt model is an extension of Fowkes model to include hydrogen bonding interactions as well. They used a geometric mean to combine the dispersive and polar
d d h h components, SL = S + L 2 S L 2 S L . The Owens-Wendt model requires

testing of a polar liquid, and a dispersive liquid to compute the two contributions.

Wu employed a harmonic mean to combine the dispersive and polar components of solidliquid surface energies and produced the following relation,

SL = S + L 4

d d S L Sp Lp + . As in the Owens-Wendt model, one polar fluid d d p p S + L S + L

and one dispersive fluid is needed for convergence.

The Lifshitz-van der Waals Acid-base approach further divides the polar component of surface energy into electron accepting, + , and electron-donating, terms,

60

 SL =

LW SLW L

) + 2(
2

+ + S L

)(

S L . Since three parameters are

established, 3 fluids are required, with one of them dispersive and the other two increasingly polar.

The surface energy data that will be obtained to support the current system analysis is to be considered preliminary and will serve as a qualitative measure to predict system performance. The FTA-125 system provides automated data reduction using any or all of the 5 models above

5.4.

Electrostatic Enhancement of Surface Energy

Much thought has gone into determining spontaneous wetting between the crystal and the fluid. To this point, little has been studied about artificial enhancement of wetting. Since interfacial forces are a direct result of electrostatic forces over molecular length scales, it is natural to assume that wetting can be promoted or retarded by some type of externally applied electric field. Adamson employed the principles of the electric double layer and other tools of electrostatic phenomena have been used to measure interfacial tension of some mercury-electrolyte systems [11]. Figure 5.3, borrowed from Adamson[11], depicts some experimental measurements. The data suggest that there is a particular voltage magnitude and polarity that produces a maximum value of interfacial tension. The exact value is dependent upon the exact mercury-electrolyte pair, but the trend is similar for all mercury-electrolyte systems studied.

61

Figure 5.4 : Electrocapillary Curves for Mercury: Adsorption of Anions (From Adamson [11], Figure V-10(a))

This suggests that dielectric manipulation between the crystal and fluid may be possible in order to promote wetting. This could be especially helpful to counter the destabilizing effects on the fluid film caused by inertial loads, interfacial waves and laser energy spikes. Some thought has gone into possible ground-based tests of the effect on this system. The strength of any stabilizing effect could be measured by the delay of drop formation on a horizontally-oriented crystal in a normal gravity environment, or the resistance to flow in a vertical-oriented crystal in a gravity field. At this point, however,

62

modeling, analysis and test techniques are only speculative and are candidate topics for future efforts.

Likewise, much recent work has been done on the use of electrostatic fields to obtain fine control of fluid drops on solid substrates [12]. Some of this work is specifically targeted at lowering voltages necessary to obtain fine control[14]. Most current research targets precise control of liquid drops for MEMS systems and electrowetted displays [13]. For the thin-film evaporative cooling system, fine position control is not needed. Rather, potential energy waves across the crystal surface could be used to promote flow. It may actually be easy to establish cyclic voltages superimposed on a constant bias voltage, to obtain very precise control over flow rate and direction. One exciting possibility is that this could be on the plant output side of a closed-lop active control system. Such a closed-loop system could minimize inherent system instabilities that further research may reveal.

Walsh, et.al., developed precise dopant quantities for 2-m lasers [20] and suggest that nominal voltages (<100V) would have minimal effect on the crystal luminescence. In addition, laser developers have suggested that thin metallic coatings may be possible without degrading laser performance [26]. This is of course predicated on the requirement that the metals not absorb at the 792 nm input wavelength. Such coatings could be applied in a vapor deposition process. An anecdotal observation is that the laser developers are interested in internal reflection as a means of increasing optical efficiency. The current conductively-cooled laser has highly polished support structures to reflect

63

light energy back into the crystal. A novel concept would be to tailor the metallic coating to be transparent at 792 nm, but reflective at 2-mm. At this point, however, such thoughts are highly speculative.

Within the scope of this thesis, we will attempt to obtain at least qualitative data on the change in surface energy due to measured potentials. Knowing that an apparent increase in crystal surface energy promotes wetting, the magnitude and polarity of the applied voltage could shed insight into any potential electrical enhancements.

5.5.

Surface Energy Experimental Design

An examination of the five surface energy models above shows that a minimum of three different fluids are needed to obtain complete surface energy data. Recalling that the nature, as well as the magnitude of surface energy is important, it is advantageous to use three distinct fluids. One fluid should be highly dispersive, one highly polar, and the third exhibit a combination of polar and dispersive behavior. In this way, both the total surface energy, the dispersive contribution and the polar contribution can be determined. The fluids used must be liquid at room temperature, be readily available and generally safe to work with. The specific fluids that will be used are listed in Table 5.2.

64

Table 5.2 : Test Fluid Surface Tensions and Components

Fluid Formula total (mJ/m2) dispersive d (mJ/m2) polar + (mJ/m2) - (mJ/m2) 0 15.1 34.2 0 6 19

Methylene Iodide CH12I2 Ethylene Glycol Water C2H6O2 H2O

50.8 48 72.8

50.8 29 21.8

The solid specimen is a doped, TmHo:LuLiF4 crystal bar. Prior to testing, the bar must have at least one surface polished and be free of surface contaminants.

Solid Specimen TmHo:LuLiF4

Form 5.5mm x 5.5mm x 30mm bar

Initial tests were conducted on a single bar, with no specific orientation; to arrive at an early estimate of surface energy, and to prove the test technique on the available samples. Later testing will then conducted on polished crystal bars with multiple trials on both the a-surfaces and the c-surfaces to test for anisotropy of surface energy. If possible, electrical potentials will be applied during later-stage tests to determine the effect of applied surface potentials. Surface energies and constitutive components will be later computed for non-energized and energized surfaces.

65

5.6.

TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Test Results

To arrive at initial experimental values of the TmHo:LuLiF4 polished crystal surface, the sample of TmHo:LuLiF4 was subjected to contact angle tests. All three fluids listed in Table 5.1 were used. Therefore, 5 of the common surface energy models could be compared, and the relative contributions of dispersive and polar surface energy could be discerned. The experimental surface energy values are summarized in Table 5.3. More detailed data is provided in Appendix B

Table 5.3 : TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Experimental Values

Surface Energy [mN/m] Total Dispersive

Model

Polar

Fluid(s)

21.39 GGFY (1 Fluid) 32.87 26.70 Zisman (2 Fluid) 34.39 36.03 Owens-Wendt (2 Fluid) 27.62 41.52 Wu (2 Fluid) 28.82 Lewis Acid-Base (3 Fluid) 34.05 Mean 31.49 Std Dev 5.97

------------32.87 21.34 34.17 15.11 32.87 27.27 8.56

------------3.16 6.279 7.35 13.71 1.19 6.34 4.80

Water MI EG Water/MI Water/MI Water/EG Water/MI Water/EG Water/EG/MI

The data show a strong dispersive nature, with the Wu Harmonic Mean values representing potential outliers in several categories of data. With the Wu Harmonic Mean data excluded, the standard deviation of each category improves (Table 5.4).

66

Table 5.4 : TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Experimental Values (Wu Harmonic Mean Model Excluded)
Surface Energy [mN/m] Total Dispersive

Model

Polar

Fluid(s)

21.39 GGFY (1 Fluid) 32.87 26.70 Zisman (2 Fluid) 34.39 36.03 Owens-Wendt (2 Fluid) 27.62 Lewis Acid-Base (3 Fluid) 34.05 Mean 30.44 Std Dev 5.32

------------32.87 21.34 32.87 29.03 6.66

------------3.16 6.279 1.19 3.54 2.57

Water MI EG Water/MI Water/MI Water/EG Water/EG/MI

Further investigations will help determine the most appropriate model to define the surface energy of the crystal. Models that capture accurately the nature and values of highly dispersive solids will be the most accurate and useful. In particular, the Lewis Acid-Base model has a strong correlation with the Owens-Wendt mode, when the Owens-Wendt model is based upon data from a strong polar fluid and a purely dispersive fluid.

67

6.

Fluid Containment Design

The Thin-Film evaporative system relies upon a very thin fluid film to flow over the crystal and evaporate at its vapor temperature, maintaining a small degree of wall superheat over the entire crystal surface. The thin film allows for high heat transfer in the evaporative convection heat transfer region, and does not require nucleate boiling for effective heat transfer. While the high latent heat capacity of a phase-change system is tremendous, two-phase systems rely on high fluid purity and require a hermetic seal to operate properly. The integrity of the system thus relies upon the creation of a complete and contaminant-free seal between the crystal rod and the instruments support structure. Such a seal must be able to withstand large temperature cycles, the high vacuum environment of space, bakeout purification processes, short-term exposure to cleaners and solvents, long-term exposure to the working fluid, and launch loads.

6.1.

Candidate Seal Types

The available technologies for a robust hermetic seal for lanthanide crystals are few. Elastomeric seals such as gaskets and o-rings have been successfully used for groundbased single-phase cooled prototypes. Their use, however, requires that undoped crystals be fused to each end of the active, doped crystal segment. This additional operation is expensive, technically difficult, increases the packaging envelope and decreases the optical efficiency of the system. Elastomeric seals are also susceptible to outgassing in

68

the vacuum environment of space. In addition, it may be necessary to operate the fluid side at a saturation pressure well below the vapor pressure of available elastomers, making the seal material itself a source of system contamination. Metallic seals, such as metallic C-rings and Conflat seals used in high vacuum applications, would likely damage the soft ceramic crystal rod material. Rigid metallic seals would likely introduce intolerable stresses during the inevitable thermal cycling of the system. Fusing the crystal directly to a metal by locally melting the crystal is impractical as the high temperatures and local melting would degrade the optical performance of the crystal.

To overcome the shortcomings of currently available seal technologies, a lowtemperature, direct ceramic-metal seal is proposed. This chapter outlines the relevant parameters necessary to develop a seal to join the TmHo:LuLiF4 crystal rod used in highenergy laser solid-state systems directly to a metallic sleeve using the technique of anodic bonding.

6.2.

Anodic Bonding

The technique of anodic (or Mallory) bonding between amorphous glass sheets and metal sheets was first proposed by Wallis and Pomerantz[1]in 1969. The goal is to adapt the technique for cylindrical geometry (Figure 6.1). The technique uses electrostatic forces to promote ionic exchange at temperatures well below the melting point of the glass. The electric field is applied at potentials up to 3000V, with the metal held positive with respect to the ceramic. Temperatures from 200-600oC are common in anodic bonding, well below the 750-800oC softening point of most glasses.

69

Use of the technique has expanded to include glass-silicon and ceramic-silicon joints for the development of new and novel electronic and MEMS devices. In metallic-glass joints, as well as silicon-glass joints, the anodic bonding process relies upon the availability of electrolytically generated oxygen being available at the metal-glass interface to permit the formation of the high strength bond [2]. It is the formation of the metal-oxide ionic bond that is then central to the technique. The electrostatic field then serves the dual role of (a) releasing sufficient negative ions from the ceramic to bond with positive ions in the metal, and (b) producing substantial contact pressure to minimize the detrimental effect of surface imperfections.

Metallic Sleeve

LuLiF Crystal Rod

Figure 6.1: Anodic Bonding Arrangement (Adapted for Cylindrical Joint)

70

In a similar fashion, the use of electrostatic fields should electrolytically release fluorine ions within the LuLiF crystal, making them available for ionic bonding with nickel ions at the interface. The primary hurdle is then to create conditions that will release a sufficient quantity of fluoride ions to create a strong bond while the two materials are held in intimate contact.

To date, the only known geometries tested have been pairs or series of flat surfaces. No literature that described application to cylindrical joints was found. In addition, no literature was found describing joints with any lanthanide-based crystal material. The application of anodic bonding to this particular material, and joint geometry, appears to be unique.

6.3.

Joint Design Parameters

LuLiF4 crystals exhibit many metallic mechanical behaviors. They possess numerous isotropic physical properties such as elastic modulus, Poissons ratio, and tensile strength. One notable exception to their general metallic behavior is thermal expansion, which is distinctly orthotropic. The directional thermal expansion parallels the lanthanide crystals highly directional luminescent properties. The tetragonal crystal structure leads to two identical orthogonal axes (named a), with a third orthogonal axis (named c), and is thus defined as an a-a-c oriented crystal. The relationship between the crystal orientations and the LuLiF4 oscillator rod axes are depicted in Figure 6.2.

71

Metallic Sleeve LuLiF Crystal Rod

0.062 in

c y a x a z

1.00 mm
Metal-Ceramic Joint Length

4.00 mm

Figure 6.2 : LuLiF4 Crystal-Metal Sleeve Test Specimen Geometry

As shown, a cylindrical seal would enclose a circular boundary with continually varying thermal expansion rates around the periphery.

In the design of amorphous glass-metal joints, the thermal expansions of both components are isotropic. As an amorphous crystal, glass possesses nearly isotropic thermal expansion behavior, albeit with a linear expansion rate much lower than most metals. Likewise, most metals possess linear isotropic thermal expansion. Most glassmetal seals take advantage of a family of nickel alloys specially developed to match the

72

thermal expansion behavior of glasses. For most temperature ranges, these materials (Invar, Kovar) are the material of choice for metal-glass seals.

For the laser crystal-metal joint, no singular material selection can eliminate thermally induced stresses. Because metals expand isotropically, a LuLiF4-metal joint will produce thermally induced stresses over even the smallest temperature excursion. Some previous researchers suggest that the effect of differing expansion rates is minimized if the metal is in the form of a thin foil[1],[3]. This particular approach actually relies upon a low metal/ceramic stiffness ratio. If the metal is very compliant relative to the crystal, the crystal expansion is nearly unconstrained. This suggests the use of a thin-walled sleeve dramatically minimizes detrimental effects of thermal mismatch. The small sleeve diameter coupled with low working fluid pressure needed for the thin-film cooling system suggest that a thin-walled metallic sleeve is indeed practical and thus forms the basic premise for the sleeve geometry constraints. With the crystal material and crosssection fixed for the 2m system (4mm TmHo:LuLiF4 rod), the only variables remaining to alter are the sleeve material, sleeve reference internal diameter, and sleeve wall thickness.

For all analyses, it is assumed that the system is at a uniform temperature throughout. The effect of internal temperature gradients and unsteady temperature effects is beyond the scope of this analysis.

73

6.4.

TmHo:LuLiF4 Physical Properties

Lutetium Lithium Flouride , Lu3+Li1+F1-4, (LuLiF4) has been successfully used to boost the optical efficiency of 2m solid-state lasers pumped by 792nm laser diodes. LuLiF4 has many characteristics similar to another lanthanide crystal material, Yttruim Lithium Flouride, Y3+Li1+F1-4 (YLF). Both have a tetragonal crystal structure, and are labeled a-ac crystals. Many physical properties of LuLiF4 are similar to corresponding physical properties of YLF. Both exhibit isotropic mechanical behaviors, with the exception of thermal expansion. Thermophysical properties; including specific heat, thermal diffusivity, thermal conductivity, and thermal expansion for doped and undoped LuLiF4 crystals were measured in recent laboratory tests [5]. To date, most other mechanical properties have not been measured for LuLiF4.

6.4.1. Orthotropic Thermal Expansion

The measured thermal expansion data [5] depict distinct orthotropic expansion, but with nearly linear behavior in each of the respective crystal directions (a and c directions). This suggests that an average coefficient of thermal expansion for each orthogonal direction could be determined over the desired temperature range, greatly simplifying subsequent thermal expansion analyses. To support this belief, first and second-order regression analyses were performed on the raw data from [5]. The following polynomials describing thermal expansion behavior were computed from the data:

74

HoTm:LuLiF (doped) crystal : linear least squares fit

a = 1.51 105 T 2.83 104 c = 1.13 105 T 2.33 104

HoTm:LuLiF (doped) crystal : quadratic least squares fit

a = 8.30 109 T 2 + 1.39 105 T 2.83 104

c = 1.88 109 T 2 + 1.10 105 T 2.33 104

LuLiF (undoped) crystal : linear least squares fit

a = 1.57 105 T 2.52 104 c = 1.15 105 T 2.36 104

LuLiF (undoped) crystal : linear least squares fit

a = 1.57 108 T 2 + 1.33 105 T 2.52 104 c = 3.06 109 T 2 + 1.10 105 T 2.36 104

Comparing the leading coefficients of the 1st and 2nd order polynomial curve fits for both LuLuF4 and HoTm:LuLiF4, the quadratic coefficients appear relatively weak compared to the linear coefficients. A quantitative error analysis, Table 6.1, shows the maximum error magnitude to be 8.2% when comparing the linear approximation to the measured data for HoTm:LuLiF4.

75

Table 6.1 : HoTm:LuLiF4 Thermal Expansion Curve Fits

(Tref = 200C)

TmHo:LuLiF4 - Measured Data Compared with Curve Fits

a
Linear Fit Temp [oC] 200 -50 Measured Value 2.83E-03 -9.59E-04 linear fit error Quadratic Fit quad fit error
0.04%

2.74E-03 3.3% 2.83E-03

-1.04E-03 -8.2% -9.57E-04 0.18%

c
Linear Fit Temp [oC] 200 -50 Measured Value 2.05E-03 -7.79E-04 linear fit error Quadratic Fit quad fit error
0.48%

2.03E-03 1.2% 2.04E-03

-7.98E-04 -2.4% -7.78E-04 0.09%

Consistent with the above results, a linear approximation should be sufficiently accurate for engineering analysis. The linear regression fits are plotted along with the measured data in figure 4 for the doped crystal. Note that different CTE values for doped and undoped crystals were measured. Doped crystals only will be used in prototype and production apparatus, therefore the values for the TmHo:LuLiF4 crystal will give the best

76

comparison with sample assemblies and future flight hardware. As a result, the dopedcrystal values of a = 15.1 106 and c = 11.3 106 are used throughout the analyses of thermally induced stresses. The comparisons between the raw data and linear curve fits for doped and undoped LuLiF4 materials are shown in Figures 6.3 and 6.4 respectively.

x 10

-3

HoTm:LuLiF Thermal Expansion(Reference State = 20 C) HT:LuLiF-A Data HT:LuLiF-A Linear Fit HT:LuLiF-C Data HT:LuLiF-C Linear Fit

2.5

1.5 Linear Expansion [ L/L0 ]

0.5

A =1.5137e-005 C =1.1306e-005

-0.5

-1

-1.5 -50

-25

25

50

75 Temperature [ C ]
0

100

125

150

175

200

Figure 6.3 : TmHo:LuLiF4 Thermal Expansion Data and Linear Curve Fits

77

x 10

-3

Undoped LuLiF: Thermal Expansion (Reference State = 20 C) LuLiF-A Data LuLiF-A Linear Fit LuLiF-C Data LuLiF-C Linear Fit

2.5

1.5 Linear Expansion [ L/L0 ]

0.5

A =1.5651e-005 C =1.1457e-005

-0.5

-1

-1.5 -50

-25

25

50

75 Temperature [ C ]
0

100

125

150

175

200

Figure 6.4 : Undoped LuLiF4 Thermal Expansion Data and Linear Curve Fits

6.4.2. Other Mechanical Properties

Aside form thermophysical data, most of the mechanical properties of HoTh:LuLiF4 have not been measured. In order to proceed with stress analyses, some meaningful estimates of the mechanical properties of this material must be adopted. TmHo:LuLiF4 shares numerous chemical and structural similarities with another lanthanide crystal, Neodymuim doped Yttruim Lithium Flouride (Nd:YLF). For the purposes of this analysis, the physical properties of Nd:YLF [8] were assumed to be valid substitutes for any unknown physical properties of TmHo:LuLiF. The properties of both materials are listed in Table 1 for comparison.

78

Table 6.2 : TmHo:LuLiF and Nd:YLF Mechanical Properties (Values in bold italic text used for analyses)
Properties Density [g/cm3] Hardness [Mohs] Elastic Modulus [N/m2] Strength [N/m2] Poisson's ratio Thermal conductivity [W/cm-K] Thermal Expansion Coefficient [oC-1] Specific Heat [J/g-C] Melting Point [oC] a-axis: c-axis: TmHo:LuLiF [5] 6.10 0.05 15.1x10 11.3x10-6 0.50 850
-6

Nd:YLF [8] 3.99 4-5 7.5x1010 3.3x107 0.33 0.06 13x10-6 8x10-6 825

6.5.

Metal Properties and Selection

As a starting point for metal selection, the thermally induced strains for TmHo:LuLiF4, and several candidate metals were plotted together in Figure 6.5 for comparison. The candidate metals investigated were Invar, commercially pure nickel, and A-286 alloy. Invar was examined because of its typical low expansion rate and wide use in metalglass seals. Nickel was examined as pure nickel is resistant to high temperatures, and thin-walled nickel components can be readily and accurately produced by electroforming. A-286 was included due to its widespread use in low temperature applications.

Surprisingly, the thermal expansion of pure nickel falls nearly symmetrically between each of the respective HT:LuLiF4 curves. Nickel has an expansion coefficient
0 -1 nickel 13.8 C over the desired range of temperatures. This fact showed that not

only was nickel a very close match for each of the respective TmHo:LuLiF4 orientations,

79

but could lead to interesting design solutions employing pre-stressed states, such as shrink-fitting, to bias the contact stresses in a preferred manner. In particular, it may be possible to design a joint such that the contact pressure between the crystal rod and the metallic sleeve would always be compressive, eliminating the possibility of the two materials peeling apart at the interface.

x 10

-3

Thermal Expansion from Reference State (20 C) HT:LuLF-A HT:LuLF-C Pure Nickel Invar 36 A-286

2.5

1.5 Linear Expansion [ L/L0 ]

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5 -50

-25

25

50

75 Temperature [ C ]
0

100

125

150

175

200

Figure 6.5 : Nickel, Invar and A-286 Thermal Expansion Compared with HT:LuLiF4 (Metals data from [4])

6.6.

Interfacial Thermal Strain Models

In order to arrive at an optimal design, it is highly desirable to produce a closed-form mathematical model of joint strains and stresses due to differential thermal expansion. 80

Using a closed-form model, numerous combinations of joint variables could then be analyzed, and a more optimal solution could be rapidly determined. The utility and veracity of such a model can be later be validated through the use of finite-element modeling (FEM) and specimen testing.

The approach to the closed-form solution is mechanistic in nature. There are two displacements to be considered; radial displacement, and axial displacement.

Unrestrained Radial Thermal Strain Analysis

c
Joint Boundary

a x
c Metallic Sleeve

LuLiF Crystal Rod

Figure 6.6 : Cylindrical Joint Cross-Section Geometry

81

The metal-ceramic joint is formed at radius b, as shown in figure 6.6. Given a cylindrical boundary of reference radius, b and orthogonal thermal expansion coefficients, a c , the challenge is to develop concise expressions for radial displacement and contact pressure around the periphery as a function of the geometric variable, , and state variable, T ;

r = r ( , T )

(6.1)

Components of radial displacement in the a and c directions can be described by,

r ,a = b a T cos

(6.2)

r ,c = b c T sin

(6.3)

Summing the two individual component contributions

r ( , T ) = r ,a 2 + r ,c 2 = bT a 2 cos 2 + c 2 sin 2

(6.4)

note that the expression,

a 2 cos 2 + c 2 sin 2

could be considered an

equivalent radial expansion coefficient, ( ) , that describes the radial expansion rate as a function of angular position. Therefore, the above expression can be written;

82

 r ( , T ) = bT ( )
where,

(6.5)

( ) = a 2 cos 2 + c 2 sin 2

(6.6)

For a c this describes an elliptical displacement profile. For a = c = , ( ) = and the thermal expansion assumes the familiar isotropic form, r ( , T ) = bT .

Contact Pressure due to Radial Strain

Beginning with the classical isotropic problem of contact forces versus strains of a cylindrical shrink or press fit[6] , the classic isotropic case is modified to allow for both the orthotropic thermal expansion, a c , and for a solid rod, a = 0 . In a classical shrink fit analysis, the initial outer diameter of the cylinder is larger that the inner diameter of the sleeve by some amount, . The assembly of the two parts takes place ether by (1) pressing the rod into the undersized hole using significant mechanical force (press fit), or (2) heating the sleeve to expand it, and/or cooling the shaft to compress it prior to assembly (shrink fit). The classic shrink fit solution assumes that a uniform contact pressure exists between the mating parts, consistent with an isotropic material assumption. For orthotropic thermal expansion, the displacements and contact pressure will vary around the periphery. The equations relating the interaction of the relative component geometries, material

83

properties, component radial strains, the combined system radial strains, and contact pressure for a classical isotropic system are:

Increase in the radius of the outer member (sleeve) from shrink fit;

r ,o =

bp c 2 + b 2 2 2 + o Eo c b

(6.7)

Decrease in the radius of the inner member (rod) from shrink fit;

r ,i =

bp b 2 + a 2 bp + i = (1 i ) 2 2 Ei b a Ei

(6.8)

Total system deformation;

r = r , o r ,i =

bp bp c 2 + b 2 2 2 + o + (1 i ) Eo c b Ei

(6.9)

This equation can be solved for the contact pressure as a function of temperature;

p (T ) =

r (T )
1 c 2 + b2 1 b 2 2 + 0 + (1 i ) Ei E0 c b

(6.10)

84

For the case of orthotropic crystal expansion, the non-uniform radial displacements in turn lead to varying contact pressures. Inspecting the equation above, it is apparent that the only term affected by this variation is the displacement term in the numerator. In order to adjust for non-uniform expansion, the uniform radial displacement, (T ) , is replaced with the angular-dependent displacement ( , T ) from equation (6.5). This produces a contact pressure in terms of both angular position and temperature, p ( , T ) ;

p ( , T ) =

r ( , T )
1 c + b2 1 b 2 2 + 0 + (1 i ) Ei E0 c b
2

(6.11)

where, r ( , T ) is determined from the free-expansion states of the two components as the temperature varies from the reference state, or ( , T ) = o i .

Note that the term;

1 c 2 + b2 1 b 2 2 + 0 + (1 i ) Ei E0 c b

is invariant for any particular rod-sleeve pair. The above relation can then be simplified to;

85

p ( , T ) =

r ( , T )
B1

(6.12)

where,

1 c2 + b2 1 B1 = b 2 2 + 0 + (1 i ) Ei E0 c b

(6.13)

This approach might be described as a linear local deformation analysis. Given the properties and reference state of each component (reference diameter, reference temperature), it is now possible to use relatively simple relations to compute radial displacement and contact pressures resulting from temperature excursions.

It is also possible to include an initial displacement, r , Tref

) ,and contact pressure,

pr ( , Tref ) at the reference condition by employing some initial shrink fit. As the prestressed system then reacts to temperature excursions, a temperature-dependent displacement will be superimposed on top of the initial deformations. By carefully controlling the amount of initial shrink fit, it may be possible to ensure that the joint is always in a compressive state.

Axial Strain Analysis The differing expansion rates in the axial direction will produce strains in the z-axis as well. Each member tends to expand to a different free length as a result of temperature excursions. The unrestrained (free) expansions of the sleeve and rod respectively are:

86

For the sleeve,

z ,o = l o T = lT

(6.14)

and for the rod,

z ,i = l i T = l a T

(6.15)

o
ko
Sleeve

( o )

ki
Rod

lTref lT

( i )

Figure 6.7 : Axial Displacement Model

Since the two components are constrained to move together, they will be in equilibrium at an intermediate composite displacement z (T ) . To model the virtual displacement to 87

move each respective component to this new, constrained location, the components can be modeled as individual springs with an equal and opposite force, F , acting on each. From Figure 6.7, the virtual displacements would be,

virtual displacement for the sleeve, z ,o z

virtual displacement for the rod, z z ,i

The spring constants for the rod and sleeve can be written;

sleeve spring constant,

2 2 Ao Eo Eo c b ko = = l l

(6.16)

rod spring constant,

ki = Ai Ei Ei b 2 = l l

(6.17)

For geometric continuity, an equal and opposite force, Fz , will act on each of the respective components. Using the sign convention above, the sleeve will be compressed a distance ( o ) , while the rod will be extended ( i ) . The force, Fz , required to create these virtual displacements can written in terms of the known properties and free displacements:

88

For the sleeve,

Fz = ko ( z ,o z )

(6.18)

and for the rod,

Fz = ki ( z z ,i )

(6.19)

This system of equations can be readily solved for ( Fz , z ) ;

Fz (T ) =

k o ki ( z , o z ,i ) k o + ki

(6.20)

z (T ) =

ko z ,o + ki z ,i k o + ki

(6.21)

6.7.

Interfacial Thermal Stress Models

Having established expressions for thermally induced strains, contact pressures and axial forces, it is now possible to predict stresses of each component at the interface due to thermal excursions. In a fashion similar to the strains, the thermally induced stresses are developed for the rod and sleeve in terms of components due to radial strains, and those due to axial strains.

89

6.7.1. Normal Stresses Due to Radial Strains

The techniques developed to analyze thick-walled cylinders [7] are adapted to the problem with the following proviso: 1. The internal radius of the inner cylinder (rod) is zero 2. The internal pressure of the inner cylinder (rod) is zero 3. The external pressure of the outer cylinder (sleeve) is zero 4. The non-linear effects of the orthotropic radial strains are negligible

For a classic thick-walled cylinder subjected to uniform radial pressures , Popov [7] , as shown in Figure 6.8 gives;

Tangential normal stress,

pi ri 2 po ro 2 ri 2 ro 2 ro ri
2 2

( po pi )
r2

t =

(6.22)

Radial normal stress,

pi ri 2 po ro 2 + ri 2 ro 2 ro ri
2 2

( po pi )
r2

r =

(6.23)

90

Figure 6.8 : Thick-Walled Cylinder Nomenclature

Crystal Rod Normal Stresses

For the crystal rod subject to the above proviso;

ri = 0 r0 = b pi = 0 po = p ( , T )

0r b

the classical thick-walled cylinder equations then reduce to;

91

tangential stresses through rod;

t ,i ( r , , T ) = p ( , T )

(6.24)

radial stresses through rod;

r ,i ( r , , T ) = p ( , T )

(6.25)

Therefore, both radial and tangential stresses in the rod are constant across the entire cross-section.

Sleeve Normal Stresses

For the sleeve, with;

ri = b r0 = c pi = p ( , T ) po = 0

b r (b + t )

the classical thick-walled cylinder equations become;

tangential stresses through sleeve;

b + t 2 b 2 1 + r p ,T t ,o ( r , , T ) = ( ) t ( 2b + t )

(6.26)

radial stresses through sleeve;

92

 b + t 2 b 2 1 r p ,T r ,o ( r , , T ) = ( ) t ( 2b + t )

(6.27)

Both tangential and radial stresses in the sleeve are absolute maximums at r = b , resulting in;

t ,o

max

2b 2 + 2bt + t 2 p ( , T ) = t (2b + t )

(6.28)

r ,o max = p ( , T )

(6.29)

6.7.2. Stresses due to Axial Strains

Interfacial Shear Stress

The force required for continuity at the interface is produced at the interfacial boundary and can be most simply modeled as a shear stress acting over the joint length, l . The shear stress acting on the sleeve is equal and opposed to that on the rod.

The shear stress at the interface is given by;

Fz (T ) 2 bl

(6.30)

93

Rod Axial Normal Stress

The interfacial force produces equal and opposite loads on the rod and sleeve respectively. The normal stresses induced by these strains can be modeled as simple tensile stresses acting uniformly over the entire element cross section. For the sleeve, this is likely an accurate estimate. For the rod, it is likely that there will be some error by using such a simple estimate. The axial normal stress in the rod is estimated by;

z ,i =

Fz (T )

b2

(6.31)

Sleeve Axial Normal Stress

In a similar manner, the axial normal stress in the sleeve is given by;

z ,i =

t ( 2b + t )

Fz (T )

(6.32)

6.8.

Combined Stress States at the Interface

After establishing the stress components for each element at the interface, it is now possible to describe a combined stress state for both the crystal rod and the metallic sleeve at the bond line. Once the total stress state is described for each component, appropriate combinations of stresses, consistent with the most relevant failure theories for each material, are possible. A generalized interface stress element is shown in Figure 6.9.

94

t z r

Figure 6.9 : Interfacial Stress Element Nomenclature

Both the rod and the sleeve have similar geometry for the stress element at the boundary. For simplicity, the radial component of normal stress will be considered as acting orthogonal to the tangential component. The general stress tensor for the elements of this system can be described by;

r ,k k = i i

t ,k
i

0 z ,k

(6.33)

95

The three principal stresses and maximum shear stresses are found by solving for the real roots of the equation;

3 I1 2 + I 2 I 3 = 0
where the invariants, I1 , I 2 , I 3 are defined for this geometry by;
I1,k = r ,k + t ,k + z , k I 2,k = r , k t ,k + r ,k z ,k + t ,k z , k 2 I 3,k = r ,k t , k z ,k t ,k 2

(6.34)

(6.35)

The roots of equation (6.34) produce three values of principal stress. If the resulting

1,k principal stress vector terms, 2,k , are ordered such that 1,k 2,k 3,k , then the 3,k
maximum shear stress is given by;

max,k =

1,k 3, k
2

(6.36)

The in-situ performance of the component can be evaluated by first adopting the most relevant failure theory for the particular material. The maximum principal stress and/or the maximum shear stresses, depending upon the failure theory being used, are then compared to tensile specimen strength values.

6.8.1. Rod Combined Stresses

The stress components acting on the rod side of the interface are summarized below;

96

 t ,i ( r , , T ) = p ( , T ) r ,i ( r , , T ) = p ( , T )
z ,i = =
Fz (T )

Rod tangential normal stress, from eq.(6.24) Rod radial normal stress, from eq. (6.25)

b2

Rod axial normal stress, from eq. (6.31)

Fz (T ) 2 bl

Interfacial shear stress, from eq (6.30)

The resulting rod stress tensor is;

r ,i 0 i = i t ,i 0 i i z ,i

(6.37)

The LuLiF4 rod is a single crystal ceramic, and should exhibit failure modes typical of other highly-ordered crystals. Much industrial ceramic failure theory is based upon the performance of sintered ceramic materials. Strengths for industrial ceramics are often based upon Wiebull distributions of 3-point bending specimens, where the statistical data captures the influence of flaw sizes on the sudden brittle failure[33]. As a highly ordered single crystal, LuLiF4 will have minimal internal flaws, no grain boundaries and no structural inclusions. In this regard, it is quite unlike many typical engineered ceramics. Therefore, the typical flaw crack propagation analyses used for engineered ceramic materials have limited use for this material. Optical performance demands high-fidelity optical inspection of the LuLiF4 crystals. Specimens with even the smallest physical flaws such as voids, bubbles, grain boundaries or dislocations are eliminated as a result of these inspections. Laser crystal designers indicate that a flaw 0.5 m would be cause

97

for rejection of a crystal rod. Therefore, as an engineering material LuLiF4 is very highquality, and initial flaws for brittle fracture mechanisms are unlikely. In addition, the only strength values available for LuLiF4 are simple tensile strength values. Considering the quality of the material, and the lack of sufficient statistical strength data based upon statistical flaw distributions, a maximum normal stress model will be adopted to initially determine rod structural performance. Although more elaborate analyses may be needed in future work, a maximum normal stress model should be sufficient for early system strength assessments.

The invariants for the rod are;

I1,i = r ,i + t ,i + z ,i I 2,i = r ,i t ,i + r ,i z ,i + t ,i z ,i 2 I 3,i = r ,i t ,i z ,i t ,i 2

(6.38)

The resulting maximum principal stress, 1,i is computed by the solution of equation (6.34) and then compared with the tensile strength of the rod, Su ,i to produce a measure of the structural performance. A normalized rod stress ratio is defined as an appropriate index of merit and is computed by; Si =

1,i
Su ,i

(6.39)

Using this definition of stress ratio, LuLiF4 rod failure is predicted when Si 1 .

98

6.8.2. Sleeve Combined Stresses

In a manner similar to that of the rod, stresses acting on the sleeve side of the interface are summarized as follows;

t ,o max =

2b 2 + 2bt + t 2 p ( , T ) t (2b + t )

Sleeve tangential normal stress, from eq. (6.28)

r ,o max = p ( , T )
z ,i = t ( 2b + t )
Pz (T )

Sleeve radial normal stress, from eq. (6.29)

Sleeve axial normal stress, from eq. (6.32)

Pz (T )

2 bl

Interfacial shear stress, from eq (6.30)

The resulting metal sleeve stress tensor is;

r ,o 0 o = i t ,o 0 i i z ,o
And the sleeve invariants are given by;
I1,o = r ,o + t ,o + z ,o I 2,o = r ,o t ,o + r ,o z ,o + t ,o z ,o 2 I 3,o = r ,o t ,o z ,o t ,o 2

(6.40)

(6.41)

Although a similar tri-axial stress state can be determined for the sleeve, the failure mechanism will more likely be that of a ductile metal. A maximum shear theory model is widely accepted for ductile materials[6], and will be applied to the nickel sleeve in this

99

case. The maximum shear stress is computed by the average difference of the two extreme principal stress values;

max,o =

1,o 3,o
2

(6.42)

The maximum shear stress is then compared to one-half of the tensile yield strength of the material to produce the appropriate measure of structural performance for the metallic sleeve. The stress ratio as an index of merit is given by;
So =

max
S y ,o 2

(6.43)

Using this definition of stress ratio, metal sleeve failure is predicted if So 1 .

6.8.3. Sleeve Thickness Optimization

Given the appropriate failure criteria, material data, reference conditions and temperature excursions, the indices of merit of both the rod and sleeve can be computed. To produce the most generalized result, the dimensionless indices of merit for each component can be plotted as a function of a dimensionless sleeve thickness ratio, where the sleeve thickness ratio is defined by;

t b

(6.44)

Comparison of the normalized strengths for each component can then be compared and the optimal sleeve wall thickness determined for the given system. The procedure is as follows: 1. Compute free expansion of rod and sleeve.

100

2. 3. 4. 5.

Compute restrained expansion of the rod and sleeve Compute the contact pressure and axial force between the rod and sleeve. Compute individual stress components of the rod and sleeve. Compute the normalized strengths of each part based upon their individual failure criteria.

6.

Plot structural index of merit, S x , versus thickness ratio, , to determine the sleeve wall thickness that minimizes the probability of structural failure due to thermal expansion.

A series of calculations for a temperature excursion of +2000C were performed using a 4mm diameter LiLiF4 rod and nickel sleeve thicknesses from 0.02mm through 2.00mm; representing values from = 0.01 through = 1.00 . The results are shown in Figure 6.10. These results show low stresses compared to the respective material strengths. The trends show that thinner sleeve walls decrease the stresses in the crystal, while increasing the stresses in the sleeve. This result quantifies the relationship between thinner sleeve walls and lower crystal stresses at the interface. The results also quantify the strength penalty that is placed upon the nickel sleeve as a result of wall thinning.

101

Figure 6.10 : Joint Component Stress Ratios as a function of Joint Thickness Ratios

Inspection of Figure 6.10 shows a tendency for steady values of both stress ratios as the thickness ration increases. Additional analyses were conducted for very large wall thickness ratios, estimating the results for an infinite outer cylinder thickness. The results of the sleeve thickness ratio of 10.0 are plotted in Figure 6.11, and reveal distinct asymptotes for both material strength ratios.

102

Figure 6.11 : Joint Component Stress Ratios for Large Thickness Ratios

Even for very large sleeve wall thickness, the stress ratios of both components are very low. This result is contrary to the original assumption that thermal stresses would be the limiting factor for sleeve wall thickness. The thermal analysis results show that in fact, the sleeve wall thickness has a very small impact on thermal stresses. This result means that sleeve wall thickness criteria will be established by fluid pressures, inertial loads and manufacturing considerations.

103

6.9.

Anodic Bonding Experimental Design

In order to prove the assembly method, specimens, an assembly apparatus and an assembly process are required. The goals of the apparatus are to test process parameters (time, temperature, voltage, etc.) with a relatively inexpensive system. A survey of available equipment failed to produce an existing system capable of such a process. The solution was to develop a specific apparatus capable of producing a nickel-LuLiF4 anodic bonded cylindrical joint.

6.9.1. Specimen Design

The joint specimens consist of three individual components:

1. 2. 3.

Crystal sample Sleeve sample Specimen fixture

Crystal sample: The growth of LuLiF4 crystals is an extremely expensive process. A crystal boule is grown over a period of weeks from molten TmHo:LuLiF4 material. Once grown, the boule is cut into numerous bars. The material has limited use, except for laser physics, and is produced by special order in a batch operation. Because of the time and expense, samples of TmHo: LuLiF4 are quite rare and highly prized by laser researchers. The initial assessment was that LuLiF4 would not be available for specimens since the material would be lost to laser researchers during the assembly and testing process. YLF

104

material, on the other hand, is much more available and much less expensive. The original plan was to source YLF material, and have the 4mm rods ground for test specimens.

Some LuLiF4 material was ultimately located with minor optical defects that rendered it useless for use in laser instruments. Mechanically, the material was still sound. The optically imperfect material consisted of (10) 5.5mm x 5.5 mm x 30 mm bars. Eight of these were sent to be fabricated into(16) 4mm x 15mm rods for anodic bonding specimens. The remaining two bars were set aside for interfacial testing.

Sleeve sample: As mentioned earlier, nickel is an attractive sleeve material from a fabrication standpoint. It is easily fabricated into very precise thin-walled parts by the process of electroforming. It is highly likely that a system prototype will use some sort of electroformed bellowstype structure to relieve gross axial thermal expansion. It is logical then to fabricate sleeve samples using the exact same process.

The resulting sleeve geometry consists of a 4mm diameter socket to receive the crystal sample, and a wall thickness of .010 (0.25mm). The other end is sized as a 1/16 tube to provide an industry standard tube end for maximum assembly flexibility. The sample construction is shown in Figure 6.11.

Specimen fixture:

105

A standard 1/16 Swagelock fitting will receive the sleeve-crystal assembly. This fitting provides sufficient surface to hold the sample in a vertical or horizontal position in the heater, and allows for direct attachment to apparatus for structural and leak testing.

Rod Sleeve

Specimen Holder

Exploded View

Assembled View

Figure 6.12 : Specimen Components and Assembly

Modeling of the chemistry involved in the joining process is difficult, and there is great concern about wasting scarce crystal rod specimens using simple trial-and-error methods to determine time, temperature , and voltage combinations required for a sound joint. In addition to actual test specimens, the use of some simple test coupons is planned. These

106

may be fabricated from nickel rod and thin slices from LuLiF4 bars. The coupons will be assembled as shown in Figure 6.12, and can be tested in a conventional tensile tester. It is hoped that the use of coupons will improve estimates of optimal variable combinations needed to produce well-formed, strong joints.

0.50 Nickel Rod

0.9mm x 0.9mm x 2mm LuLiF Slice

0.50 Nickel Rod

Figure 6.13 : Coupon Assembly

6.9.2. Assembly Apparatus Design

Any assembly apparatus has the following requirements:

107

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Capable of heating samples up to 600oC. Maintain setpoint temperature for extended periods. Allow for up to 3000VDC potential applied between the metal and crystal. Prevent oxidation of the metal due to elevated temperatures. Allow for thermal expansion of assembly components without transmitting loads to the specimen.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Be thermally isolated from the lab table. Be electrically isolated from the lab table. Allow for rapid setup and specimen retrieval. Use a minimum of lab space. Minimize cost.

An illustration of the heater system as designed is shown in Figure 6.13.

108

RTD Port

Mica Foam

Cylindrical Heater Anode Strain Relief 150 mm Specimen Assembly

Mica Foam

Mica Foam Anode Cathode Purge Tube

Figure 6.14 : Heater Assembly Design

Cutaway to Show Specimen and Conductor Placement

Heater: To heat the sample, a 700W cylindrical radiant heater was selected. The cylindrical design provides uniform heating around the specimen periphery, and produces a compact arrangement.

Temperature control: An Omega CN8201-DC1 PID controller with temperature input from a 100 platinum 3wire RTD was selected for temperature measurement.

109

High Voltage: A Power Designs model 3K-40, 3000 VDC, 40mA, high voltage regulated DC power supply was located at and available for use.

Oxidation: To negate the need for testing in a vacuum chamber, an input port for a shield gas (argon or helium) is provided. A small amount of shield gas continuously pumped into the test chamber will displace the ambient air and prevent oxidation.

Structural isolation: To prevent thermal expansion form transmitting mechanical loads to the specimen, special care was taken to allow unrestrained thermal growth of all support, structural and electrical components within the chamber.

Rapid setup and retrieval: The assembly is small and individual components are easily arranged. The specimen holders were designed such that individual specimens are easily set up and removed from the heater assembly.

Electrical isolation: The mica foam also has very high electrical resistance. In addition, special care has been taken to insure that electrical flow paths cannot energize the lab table surfaces.

110

Thermal Isolation: 2 thick mica foam insulation boards were used as thermal insulation. They are rigid, have very high thermal resistance, and can withstand very high temperatures.

Minimize lab space: The entire system- heater, controller, power supply, consumes only 8 square feet of lab table space.

Minimize cost: While the heater system is custom, all components of the system are commercially available off the shelf (COTS) hardware.

111

6.9.3. Specimen Joining Process

While the fundamentals of the anodic bonding problem are well understood, it is difficult to predict exact time, temperature and voltage combination that are optimal. Due to the limited number of rod specimens available, further study of the stochiometry and the effect of various parameters are needed before attempting actual joints. Some preliminary tests assemblies made of nickel rod and slices cut from crystal bars could be assembled. These simpler specimens could then be tested in a conventional tensile tester as initial proof-of-process coupons. Using this technique will add time to the joining attempt, but will help prevent wasting scarce LuLiF4 crystal material.

Regardless of whether actual sleeve-rod or test coupons are being fabricated, the process will require several distinct steps: 1. Cold assembly of the crystal and nickel specimens. For cylindrical test articles the diameter tolerance band is very small, and some nominal force may be required to initially assembly the two parts. An axial overlap of 1mm is desired on cylindrical specimens. 2. Setup in Assembly Apparatus. This will require adjustment of the anode strain relief, and continuity checks of the high voltage circuits. 3. 4. 5. Purge the system with argon gas to displace oxygen in the chamber. Set temperature of heater system and engage. After temperature is steady, initialize high voltage circuit.

112

6. 7. 8. 9.

After designated time, de-energize high-power circuit and ground system. De-energize heating system. Allow system to cool inside closed chamber. After temperature is about 25oC, remove specimen from chamber.

It is expected that one specimen can be assembled in a single 8-hour shift. Actual time, temperature, voltage matrices will be determined after results are obtained from preliminary coupon tests.

6.9.4. Specimen Test Methodology

The efficacy of the seal is determined both by the strength of the joint and the seal integrity obtained by the joining method. It is advantageous to determine some measure of each of the two figures of merit.

Seal integrity can be tested by use of a pressurized fluid. Similarly, some measure of joint strength could be determined by hydrostatic pressure as well. Using a hydrostatic test would be simple, easy to measure, and leakage could be easily observed. Pressure values where seal integrity is compromised, and where catastrophic failure occurs could be determined from the same test specimen.

As in tensile testing, the challenge is to draw correlations between the actual stress state in operation, and the specimen test stress state. For conventional metal tensile test specimens, the strength data is correlated to the actual stress state by use of appropriate

113

failure theories, depending upon the nature of the material. Similar to tensile test correlations, some sort of failure theory will need to be adopted, or developed, and applied to this particular geometry and test technique. Development of such a correlation is beyond the scope of this work and is a candidate subject for future study and modeling. Even in the absence of such a correlation, there is no obstacle to fabricating and testing specimens, and then developing appropriate correlations at a later date.

114

7.

Remarks and Observations

Due to the broad nature of this investigation, there are multiple results, each at different levels of detail. Each of the important results will be addressed separately.

7.1.

Concept Feasibility Assessment

The first goal of this thesis was to determine if there are fundamental physical constraints make the development and subsequent operation of this concept impossible or unlikely. The feasibility questions addressed in Chapter 2 show no contraindications of the concepts feasibility. Fundamental issues of heat transport limits, fluid velocities, flow morphologies, suppression of ONB, interactions with incidence laser radiation, and fluid containment were each addressed in turn. The results support the belief that solutions to potential problems in each area are within the grasp of currently available technologies. In addition, the results point to guidance criteria for future analysis, investigation and design. Among these future criteria are:

1. 2.

Liquid film flows may need to approach thicknesses of 1 m. Ultra thin flows may dictate the flow morphology.

The potential need for ultra-thin flows was an unexpected result. Prior thought was that flows would be on the order of 50-1000 m, and hydrodynamic modeling was performed with the initial thickness estimate in mind. Nevertheless, the feasibility results of Chapter

115

2 serve not only as an excellent guide for later chapters within this thesis, but will continue to guide the development into later phases.

7.2.

Bulk Fluid Flow Analysis Remarks

The one-dimensional evaporating flow model shows that relevant system analysis can be performed on this system and we may obtain reasonable engineering results. The model and subsequent solutions indicate that low fluid velocities, pressure drops and predictions of film thickness distributions may be obtained. The results of Chapter 4 do not yet reveal the behavior of flows as the film thickness approaches the potential 1 m limit, but the analysis tools provided by [17] provide a platform that may be manipulated for future investigations with multiple flow thicknesses, differing fluids, and multiple saturation pressures. With these tools and the guidance of other criteria, we are now prepared for future investigations into the unexpected ultra-thin flow regime.

7.3.

LuLiF4 Crystal Surface Energy Experimental Results

The surface energy experimental results show that the HoTh:LuLiF4 polished bars are highly dispersive in nature, and show a surface energy of approximately 30

mN . Of the m

total surface energy, approximately 89% is dispersive, with the remaining 11% due to polar electron interactions. The results are a positive indicator for hydrocarbon-based coolant fluids, which themselves are highly dispersive.

116

7.4.

Fluid Containment Design Remarks

One of the most exciting developments is the result of a lengthy investigation into the mechanical interactions at the metal-crystal joint interface. The potential problems associated with developing a joining method, differing expansion rates, orthotropic behavior of the crystal, and techniques for generalized analysis loomed as large impediments to system development. The results of Chapter 6 produced the following very encouraging results: 1. The joint could be modeled with closed-form analysis, lending insight into the factors that drive joint stresses. 2. The LuLiF4 crystal material, while thermally orthotropic, possesses many isotropic metallic mechanical behaviors, with both thermal expansion rates close to those of many metals. 3. Joint stresses due to thermal expansion are low for the LuLiF4-Nickel joint combination and the cylindrical joint geometry. The low stresses seem to be a function of the basic design, material behaviors, and the low ratio of sleeve stiffness to rod stiffness.. 4. A simple system for fabricating anodically bonded joint specimens has been fabricated.

117

8.

Conclusions and Recommendations

8.1.

Conclusions

The results of this investigation lend support to the following conclusions about the thinfilm evaporative cooling concept: 1. While numerous engineering hurdles remain, the concept is technologically sound. 2. A robust, hermetic seal between the LuLiF4 crystal and nickel sleeve should result in stresses well below the failure limits of both materials. 3. More investigative work must be performed in the future to more accurately determine the interfacial interactions between the LuLiF4 crystal and potential coolant fluids. 4. Film flows approaching 1 m may be necessary to suppress ONB. Additional analysis or testing to determine the ONB phenomena as a function of film thickness is needed. 5. The bulk fluid model must be modified and used to analyze ultra-thin flows indicated by the ONB model. 6. Joint development and testing should proceed with the use of test specimens and test coupons.

118

8.2.

Recommendations

The results and conclusions lead to the following recommended areas for future investigation and testing: 1. Manipulation and solution of the one-dimensional two-fluid model to produce results with ultra-thin flows. 2. 3. 4. Additional CFD validation of selected solutions. Extension of the one-dimensional model to include the radial flow morphology. Additional crystal surface energy studies to investigate electrostatic enhancement of wetting and electro-osmosis. 5. Fabrication and testing of crystal-metallic anodically bonded joint specimens.

119

Appendix A LuLiF-Nickel Joint Study Documentation

120

A.1
Notes:

Program Flow Chart

Prior to program execution, the input variables must be manually set in the function , initialize.m

The following files must all reside in the same directory: joint_stress.m initialize.m radial_free.m axial_force.m contact_pressure.m radial_stress.m axial_stress.m triax.m

1. Run program script Script command: Joint_Stress Input: null Outputs: 1. { } 2. plot of

{Si } and {So }

vs { }

Joint_Stress.m executes a loop for each increment of { } and computes the strength index of merit for both the rod {Si } and the sleeve {So } , and plots the results to a figure window.

2. Initialize system variables in workspace Function call: initialize Input: null Output: { } , {T } , [ ro ] , [ ri ] , {mat _ i} , {mat _ o} , a, b, t , l

121

Output: [ ri ]

3. Compute unrestrained thermal expansions Function call: radial_free Input: { } , {T } , [ ri ] , {mat _ i}

Output: [ ro ]

Function call: radial_free Input: { } , {T } , [ ro ] , {mat _ o}

4. Calculate total interference Function call: n/a [ r ] = [ ro ] [ ri ]

5. Compute radial contact pressures Function call: contact_pressure Input: [ r ] , {mat _ i} , {mat _ o} , a, b, t

Output: [ Pr ]

6. Compute contact pressure-induced stresses Function call: radial_stress Input: [ Pr ] , b, t

Output: t ,i , r ,i , t ,o , r ,o

7. Compute axial force Function call: axial_force Input: {mat _ i} , {mat _ o} , { } , {T } , b, t , l

Output: [ pz ] , [ z ]

8. Compute axial force-induced stresses Function call: axial_stress Input: [ pz ] , b, t , l Output: z ,i , z ,o , [ ]

122

9. Compute principal stresses Function call: triax Input: r ,i , t ,i , z ,i , [ ]

Output: 1,i , 2,i , 3,i , max,i Function call: triax Input: r ,o , t ,o , z ,o , [ ] Output: 1,o , 2,o , 3,o , max,o

10. Compute rod strength index of merit Function call: n/a max = max 1,i Si =

max,i u ,rod

11. Compute sleeve strength index of merit Function call: n/a max = max max,o So =

2 max,o

y , sleeve

123

A.2

Sample Intermediate Outputs

Sample run parameters:

0 Tref = 20 0 C , b = 2 mm , t = 0.40 [ mm ] , T = {50, 20, 200} C , 0 2

Sample interference output:

Sample data for 10 angle increments, 1st quadrant only: Contact pressure, [ N ]
pr = 1.0e+004 * -0.5272 -0.4873 -0.3710 -0.1881 0.0446 0.3035 0.5590 0.7774 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.3530 1.2506 0.9520 0.4827 -0.1144 -0.7789 -1.4347 -1.9953

124

0.9255 0.9780

0 0

-2.3755 -2.5105

Radial normal stress, inner member (rod), [ Pa ]

s_ri = 1.0e+004 * 0.5272 0.4873 0.3710 0.1881 -0.0446 -0.3035 -0.5590 -0.7774 -0.9255 -0.9780 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1.3530 -1.2506 -0.9520 -0.4827 0.1144 0.7789 1.4347 1.9953 2.3755 2.5105

Tangential normal stress, inner member (rod), [ Pa ]

s_ti = 1.0e+004 * 0.5272 0.4873 0.3710 0.1881 -0.0446 -0.3035 -0.5590 -0.7774 -0.9255 -0.9780 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1.3530 -1.2506 -0.9520 -0.4827 0.1144 0.7789 1.4347 1.9953 2.3755 2.5105

Interfacial shear stress, [ Pa ]

tau = 1.0e+004 * 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0.6855 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628 -1.7628

125

A.3

MatLab m-files
Joint_Stress.m

% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %

Joint_Stress.m Author: Brian K. Stewart Date: September, 2004 Latest revision: November 1, 2004 Joint_Stress.m is the main MatLab script file that computes the stress state and joint strength of a pair of cylinders joined at the periphery and subjected to thermally induced stresses. The program allows for orthotropic thermal expansion coefficients of both members, varying material sizes and any number of temperatures from the reference state. Inputs: null Outputs: 1. plots of normalized component strengths printed to screen 2. time duration for solution printed to screen The following functions must reside in the same directory: initialize.m radial_free.m axial_force.m contact_pressure.m radial_stress.m axial_stress.m triax.m

clear tic b1=2; %reference rod radius [mm] t_start=.01; %initial thickness value [mm] t_end=20; %final thickness value [mm] num=200; %number of beta increments beta_incr=(t_end-t_start)/(b1*num); %beta increment value beta_start=t_start/b1; %initial beta value beta=zeros(num,1); %initialize {beta} vector Si=zeros(num,1); %initialize {Si} vector So=zeros(num,1); %initialize {So} vector for i=1:num+1 beta(i)=(i-1)*beta_incr + beta_start; %Initialize system variables for current thickness [Tref,theta,T,ri,ro,mat_i,mat_o,a,b,t,l]=initialize(beta(i)); %compute unrestrained radial thermal expansions [ri]=radial_free(theta,ri,T,Tref,mat_i); %rod [ro]=radial_free(theta,ro,T,Tref,mat_o); %sleeve %compute interference dr=ri-ro; %compute contact pressure pr=contact_pressure(dr,mat_i,mat_o,a,b,t); %compute stresses due to contact pressure [s_ti,s_ri,s_to,s_ro]=radial_stress(pr,b,t); %compute axial loads [Pz,dz]=axial_force(mat_i,mat_o,b,t,l,T,Tref,theta); %compute axial stresses [s_zi,s_zo,tau]=axial_stress(Pz,b,t,l);

126

%compute principal stresses [s1_i,s2_i,s3_i,tmax_i]=triax(s_ri,s_ti,s_zi,t); %rod [s1_o,s2_o,s3_o,tmax_o]=triax(s_ro,s_to,s_zo,t); %sleeve %compute rod strength index of merit, Si smax=max(max(s1_i)); %extract maximum normal stress value Si(i)=smax/mat_i(5); %index = max normal stress/tensile ultimate %compute sleeve strength index of merit, So tmax=max(max(tmax_o)); %extract maximum tensile stress So(i)=2*tmax/mat_o(6); %index = 2*max shear stress/tensile yield end %plotting routine clf plot(beta,Si,'r',beta,So,'b--','LineWidth',2) legend('LuLiF_4 rod: S_i=\sigma_{1,i} / \sigma_{ult}', 'Ni sleeve S_o=2\tau_{max,i} / \sigma_{y}') xlabel('\bfThickness Ratio, \beta') ylabel('\bfComponent Stress Ratio, S_k') title('\bf (T-T_{ref}) = 180 ^0C') toc

127

Initialize.m
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % Initialize.m MatLab function that initializes critical parameters for the program Joint_Stress.m Author: Brian K. Stewart Date: September, 2004 Latest revision: November 1, 2004 Initialize.m is MatLab function that initializes key variables for the program Joint-Stress.m Inputs: null Outputs: mat_i internal cylinder material properties mat_o external cylinder material properties theta vector of angular positions T vector of steady-stae temperature values Tref reference temperature to compute temperature excursions a interior nominal radius of inner cylinder b exterior nominal radius of inner cylinder delta_ref interference at Tref (initial press fit) l joint length t outer cylinder thickness ri matrix of inner member od (row=theta, col=T) ro matrix of outer member id (row=theta, col=T)

function [Tref,theta,T,ri,ro,mat_i,mat_o,a,b,t,l]=initialize(beta) %################################################################### %########## Input variables ################################### %################################################################### %Material properties %mat_x = [ E nu cte_a cte_c Su Sy ] % [Pa] [1/C] [1/C] [Pa] [Pa] mat_i = [ 85.0E6 0.33 15.10E-6 11.36E-6 3.3E7 0.0 ];% <<<<< INPUT HT:LuLiF rod mat_o = [ 206.8E6 0.3 13.79E-6 13.79E-6 3.4E8 1.1E8];% <<<<< INPUT Nickel sleeve % Angular increments (1st quadrant) theta=linspace(0,pi/2,10)'; % <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< INPUT % Temperature inputs Tref=20; % reference temperature [C] <<<<<<<<<<<<<< INPUT T=[-50 20 200]'; % service temperature vector [C] <<<<<<<<<< INPUT % Rod Geometry at reference state a = 0; % inner rad, a [mm] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< INPUT b = 2; % outer rad, b [mm] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< INPUT % Sleeve Geometry at reference state delta_ref = 0; % initial interference at ref state [mm] <<<<<<<< INPUT % t = .25; % sleeve thickness [mm] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< INPUT % Joint length l=1; %joint length [mm] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< INPUT

128

%################################################################### %################################################################### %################################################################### %length conversions: [mm] > [m] a=a/1000; b=b/1000; l=l/1000; delta_ref=delta_ref/1000; %compute t t=beta*b; n=length(theta); m=length(T); ri=zeros(n,m); ro=zeros(n,m); ri(:,:)=b; ro(:,:)=b; %number of angular increments (rows) %number of temperature increments (cols)

% Plots for debugging %clf %plot(rod(:,1).*cos(theta)*1000, rod(:,1).*sin(theta)*1000,'b-') %axis square %axis([0 rod_init(1,2)*1.25*1000 0 rod_init(1,2)*1.25*1000]) %hold on %plot(sleeve(:,1).*cos(theta)*1000, sleeve(:,1).*sin(theta)*1000,'k-') return

129

radial_free.m

function [r]=radial_free(theta,r,T,Tref,mat_i) % radial_free.m % MatLab substitution function that computes the free thermal expansion of a cylindrical % component due to a thermal excursion vector, {T} % % Author: Brian K. Stewart % Date: September, 2004 % Latest revision: November 1, 2004 % % % Inputs: % theta vector of angular positions % r matrix of member od (row=theta, col=T) % T vector of steady-stae temperature values % Tref reference temperature to compute temperature excursions % mat_x cylinder x material properties % % Outputs: % r updated matrix of member od (row=theta, col=T) % cte_a=mat_i(3); % CTE in the A-direction (theta=0 deg) [m/m*C] cte_c=mat_i(4); % CTE in the C-direction (theta=90 deg) [m/m*C] %cte_a=1.500E-5; %cte_c=1.126E-5; n=length(theta); %number of rows (theta) in r-matrix m=length(T); %number of columns (T) in r-matrix % Copy initialized rod matrix

% populate full rod matrix based on theta, T vectors for i=1:n % row number increment (theta) for j=1:m %column number increment (T) dx=(cte_a)*(T(j)-Tref)*r(i,1)*cos(theta(i)); dy=(cte_c)*(T(j)-Tref)*r(i,1)*sin(theta(i)); dR=sqrt(dx^2 + dy^2)*sign(T(j)-Tref); r(i,j)=r(i,j)+dR; %radii at T-values [m] end end % debugging lines %rmag %clf % Plot shape at T1 % plot(r(:,1).*cos(theta),r(:,1).*sin(theta),'r--') % hold on %Plot shape at T2 % plot(rmag(:,2).*cos(theta),rmag(:,2).*sin(theta),'b-') %Plot shape at T3 %plot(rmag(:,3).*cos(theta),rmag(:,3).*sin(theta),'k-') %axis square

130

%axis([0 r0*1.5 0 r0*1.5]) %L1=['HT:LuLiF @ T_{0} = ',num2str(T(1)),' ^{o}C ']; %L2=['HT:LuLiF @ T_{f} = ',num2str(T(2)),' ^{o}C ']; % L3=['HT:LuLiF @ T_{f} = ',num2str(T(3)),' ^{o}C ']; % legend(L1,L2,L3) % xlabel('Radius : A-axis [m]');ylabel('Radius : C-Axis [m]'); % grid on return

131

contact_pressure.m
function p=contact_pressure(delta,mat_i,mat_o,a,b,t) % contact_pressure.m % MatLab function that computes the contact pressure due to restrained % thermal expansion of a pair of cylinders over a thermal excursion vector, {T} % % Author: Brian K. Stewart % Date: September, 2004 % Latest revision: November 12, 2004 % % % % Inputs: % delta matrix of interferences % mat_i inner member properties % mat_o outer member properties % a inner member reference ID % b inner member reference OD % t outer member thickness % % Output: % p radial contact pressure matrix % %extract modulus and Poisson's ratio from rod and sleeve Ei=mat_i(1,1); mui=mat_i(1,2); Eo=mat_o(1,1); muo=mat_o(1,2); c=b+t; t1=(c^2+b^2)/(c^2-b^2); B1=b*((1/Eo)*(t1+muo)+(1/Ei)*(1-mui)); p=delta/B1; return

132

radial_stress.m
function [s_ti,s_ri,s_to,s_ro]=radial_stress(pr,b,t) % radial_stress.m % MatLab function that computes the radial and tangential normal stresses % due to contact pressure between two cylinders subjected to a % non-isotropic interference fit % % Author: Brian K. Stewart % Date: September, 2004 % Latest revision: November 1, 2004 % % % % Inputs: % Pr matrix of contact pressure % b inner member reference OD % t outer member thickness % % Output: % s_ti matrix of inner meber tangential normal stresses % s_ri matrix of inner mmber radial normal stresses % s_to matrix of outer memebr tangential normal streses % s_ro matrix of outer memebr radial normal stresses % %tangential stress in rod s_ti=-pr; %radial stress in rod s_ri=-pr; %tangential stress in sleeve s_to=pr * (2*b^2+2*b*t+t^2)/(t*(2*b+t)); %radial stress in sleeve s_ro=-pr; return

133

axial_force.m
function [Pz,dz]=axial_force(mat_i,mat_o,b,t,l,T,Tref,theta) % axial_force.m % MatLab function that computes the axial load on a % pair of components restrained to move together, but % with varying thermal expansion coefficients, subjected % to a thermal excursion vector, {T} % % Author: Brian K. Stewart % Date: September, 2004 % Latest revision: November 1, 2004 % % Inputs: % mat_i inner cylinder material properties % mat_o outer cylinder material properties % b exterior nominal radius of inner cylinder % l joint length % t outer cylinder thickness % T vector of steady-stae temperature values % Tref reference temperature to compute temperature excursions % theta vector of angular positions % % Outputs: % Pz axial force % dz constrained axial displacement c=b+t; %unrestrained axial growth of each component %dz(T)=alpha(a)*l*(T-Tref) dzi = mat_i(1,3)*l*(T-Tref); dzo = mat_o(1,3)*l*(T-Tref); %axial stiffness of rod %ki = pi * Ei *(b^2)/l ki = pi * mat_i(1,1)*(b^2)/l; %axial stiffness of sleeve %ki = pi * Ei *(c^2-b^2)/l ko = pi * mat_o(1,1)*(c^2-b^2)/l; %n= # of angles m= # of temperatures n=length(theta); %number of angle increments (rows) m=length(T); %number of tempertaure values (cols) %Note that even though Pz=Pz(T),- no dependemce upon angular position%Pz is re-written as Pz=Pz(theta,T) by copying each value into n rows %for compatibilty with radial pressure and radial stress matrices %which are angle dependent %initialize axial load and axial desiplacement matrices Pz=zeros(n,m); dz=zeros(n,m); %populate axial load and axial displacement matrices for ii=1:m Pz(:,ii)=(ko*ki)/(ko+ki)*(dzo(ii)-dzi(ii)); dz(:,ii)=(ko*dzo(ii)+ki*dzi(ii))/(ko+ki); end return

134

axial_stress.m

function [s_zi,s_zo,tau]=axial_stress(Pz,b,t,l) % axial_stress.m % MatLab function that computes the axial stress on a % pair of components restrained to move together, but % with varying thermal expansion coefficients, subjected % to an axial load % % Author: Brian K. Stewart % Date: September, 2004 % Latest revision: November 1, 2004 % % Inputs: % Pz axial force % b exterior nominal radius of inner cylinder % t outer cylinder thickness % l joint length % % Outputs: % s_zi rod normal stress in the axial direction, z % s_zo sleeve normal stress in the axial direction, z % tau interfacial shear stress %rod axial normal stress s_zi=Pz/(pi*b^2); %sleeve axial normal stress s_zo=Pz/(pi*t*(2*b+t)); %interfacial shear stress; tau=Pz/(2*pi*b*l); return

135

triax.m
function [s1,s2,s3,tmax]=triax(sr,st,sz,t) % triax.m % MatLab function that computes the principal normal stresses % and maximum shear stresses at the interface between a rod % and sleeve subjected to a multiaxial stress state induced % by varying CTE's and temperature excursions % % Author: Brian K. Stewart % Date: September, 2004 % Latest revision: November 1, 2004 % % Inputs: % sr radial normal stress matrix % st tangential normal stress matrix % sz axial normal stress matrix % t xz plane shear stress matrix % % % % % % Outputs: s1 s1 s1 tmax

Principal normal stress 1 Principal normal stress 2 Principal normal stress 3 Maximum shear stress

%compute invariants I1, I2, I3 I1=sr+st+sz; I2=sr.*st+sr.*sz+st.*sz-t.^2; I3=sr.*st.*sz-st.*t.^2; [n,m]=size(sr); s1=zeros(n,m); s2=zeros(n,m); s3=zeros(n,m); tmax=zeros(n,m); for i=1:n for j=1:m f=[1 I1(i,j) I2(i,j) I3(i,j)]; %polynomial for each stress tensor r=real(roots(f)); %find roots of cubic polynomial %arrange roots in descending order s1>s2>s3 y=r; %create dummy varaible y y(1)=max(r); %replace y(1) with maximum value in r y(3)=min(r); %replace y(3) with minmum value in r r=y; %copy y back to r %build principal stress and max shear stress matrices s1(i,j)=r(1); %Principal stress, s1, matrixvalue s2(i,j)=r(2); %Principal stress, s2, matrix value s3(i,j)=r(3); %Principal stress, s3, matrix value tmax(i,j)=(s1(i,j)-s3(i,j))/2; %maximum shear stress value end end return

136

Appendix B TmHo:LuLiF4 Surface Energy Experimental Documentation

137

Appendix B.1 Contact Angle Testing Images and Plots

Micrometer Syringe

Laptop (Win 2000)

Dispensing Needle USB CCD Camera Specimen Stage FTA-125 Analyzer

Figure B.1 : Interfacial Experimental Setup

138

Figure B.2 : Water/TH:LuLiF4 Sessile Drop Sample Image (run 0001, frame 25)

25 Figure B.3 : Water/TH:LuLiF4 Contact Angle and Sessile Volume vs. Time

139

Figure B.4 : Methylene Iodide /TH:LuLiF4 Sessile Drop Image (run 0008, frame 6 )

Figure B.5 : Methylene Iodide/TH:LuLiF4 Contact Angle and Sessile Volume vs. Time

140

Figure B.6 : Ethylene Glycol/TH:LuLiF4 Sessile Drop Image (Run 0016, frame 15 )

Figure B.7 : Ethylene Glycol/TH:LuLiF4 Contact Angle and Sessile Volume vs. Time

141

Appendix B.2 Numerical Experimental Data And Data Reduction

142

Table B.1 : Fluid Properties Database

11/8/2004 2:26:12 PM

Index H2O 0.0011 H3CON CH2I2 C2H6O2 C3H7O3 0.7800 0.6600 18.43 0 21.70 0 0 0 1.2600 64.00 34.00 30.00 1.1100 48.00 29.00 19.00 3.3200 50.80 50.80 0 0 1.920 3.920 0 0 1.1300 58.00 39.00 19.00 2.280 0 0 0 0 0 39.60 0 47.00 57.40 0 0 0.9982 72.80 21.80 51.00 25.50 25.50

Liquid

Formula Density IFTension

Dispersive

Polar

Acid

Base

RefAngle 112.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RefEnergy 18.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Water

Air

Formamide

Methylene Iodide (MI)

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

143
C6H14

Glycerol

Isopropyl Alcohol (IPA) C3H8O

Hexane

Table B.2 : Contact Angles Summary for Each Run (Run# = Index)
11/8/2004 2:26:12 PM

Index

Test Liquid

Sample

Angle

IFTension

Dispersive

Polar

Acid

Base

VaporPress

RefAngle

RefEnergy

Comment 0001 0003 0002 0004 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010 0011 0012 0013 0014 0015 0016 0017 0018 39.50 58.60 59.48 59.37 48.00 48.00 48.00 48.00 63.19 48.00 62.13 48.00 47.91 50.80 47.49 50.80 50.80 50.80 29.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 52.36 50.80 50.80 53.97 50.80 50.80 0 0 0 0 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 53.19 50.80 50.80 0 54.16 50.80 50.80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.920 1.920 1.920 1.920 1.920 1.920 58.46 50.80 50.80 0 0 83.20 72.80 21.80 51.00 25.50 86.08 72.80 21.80 51.00 25.50 89.97 72.80 21.80 51.00 25.50 25.50 25.50 25.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47.00 47.00 47.00 47.00 47.00 47.00 83.64 72.80 21.80 51.00 25.50 25.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82.99 72.80 21.80 51.00 25.50 25.50 0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Water

Water

Water

Water

Water

144

Methylene Iodide (MI)

Methylene Iodide (MI)

Methylene Iodide (MI)

Methylene Iodide (MI)

10

Methylene Iodide (MI)

11

Methylene Iodide (MI)

12

Methylene Iodide (MI)

13

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

14

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

15

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

16

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

17

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

18

Ethylene Glycol (EG)

Table B.3 : Surface Energy Data Reduction Results and Method of Computation

11/8/2004 2:26:12 PM

Index

Method

Sample

ContactAngles (by Index)

IFT (Energy)

Dispersive

Polar

Acid

Base

Comment 1,2,3,4,5, 6,7,8,9,10,11,12 1,2,3,4,5, 6,7,8,9,10,11,12 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 13,14,15,16,18 41.52 34.39 26.70 34.05 17.06 27.62 28.82 36.03 32.87 21.39 0 0 32.87 34.17 0 0 32.87 0 21.34 15.11 0 0 3.160 7.347 0 0 1.187 0 6.279 13.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.951E-2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.065 0 0 0

3.GGFY

LuLiF:H20

3.GGFY

LuLiF:MI

6.Owens

LuLiF:MI:H2O

145
1,2,3,4,5,13,14,15,16,18 1,2,3,4,5,13,14,15,16,18 1,2,3,4,5,13,14,15,16,18

5.Wu

LuLiF:MI:H2O

2.Zisman

LuLiF:MI:H2O

3.GGFY

LuLiF:EG

7.AcidBase

LuLiF:H2O:MI:EG 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,18

2.Zisman

LuLiF:H2O:EG

6.Owens

LuLiF:H2O:EG

10

5.Wu

LuLiF:H2O:EG

Appendix C Modeling of Thin Film Evaporative Cooling

146

Final Report

Modeling of Thin Film Evaporative Cooling

Prepared for:

NASA Langley Research Center

M. K. Akbar and S. Mostafa Ghiaasiaan G.W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332-0405 Brian K. Stewart NASA Langley Research Center

September 2004

147

PROJECT SUMMARY

The objective of this investigation was to provide mathematical models and/or computational simulations for a thin-film evaporative cooling system for the 2-m SpaceBased Wind Light Distance and Ranging (LIDAR) system under development at NASA Langley Research Center. According to the current design, the crucial component in the aforementioned system is a cylindrical Thulium:Holmium-Lutetium Lithium Flouride (ThHo:LuLiF) crystal and undergoes intense volumetric heating. The cooling system must dispose of the heat generated in the crystal, and should ideally maintain its surface at a low and uniform temperature, preferably at 50 C. Two evaporative film cooling configurations, both assumed to be axi-symmetric, were modeled. In one configuration, the liquid film was assumed to flow from one end of the crystal, cocurrently with the generated vapor, while the generated vapor and remaining liquid in the film are collected from the other end of the crystal. In the second configuration, liquid films are injected parallel to the surface of the crystal from both ends, and flow countercurrently with the generated vapor. The thermal hydraulics of both configurations was modeled mechanistically. One-dimensional mass, momentum, and energy conservation equations were accordingly derived using the Two-Fluid Modeling (2-F) method, and constitutive and appropriate closure relations were selected. Computer programs were then developed, tested, and verified for the numerical solution of the aforementioned conservation equations for both cocurrent and countercurrent configurations. A computational fluid mechanics (CFD) based modeling was also attempted, in order to remedy the shortcomings associated with the assumed one-dimensional flow in the aforementioned 2-F modeling. The intention was to model the flow filed associated with the evaporating liquid film in axi-symmetric two-dimensional fashion, using the Volume of Fluid (VOF) capability of the Fluent computer code for liquid-vapor interphase tracking. A number of parametric simulations were performed for both configurations, whereby the liquid film behavior, and profiles of various important parameters were predicted using several candidate refrigerants that have properties which make them

148

suitable as working fluids. Based on the obtained results, recommendations were made for future follow-up studies.

149

Table of Contents
Nomenclature 1. 2. 3. Introduction General Remarks Co-current Flow Cooling System 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 4. 5. Modeling Approach Two-fluid Model Equations Closure Relations 151 154 155 157 157 158 161 168 170 170 172

Counter-current Flow Cooling System Some Observations About Stability 5.1. 5.2. Notes on ONB and Dryout Notes on Flow Morphology

150

Nomenclature
A a B b Ca Ceff Cff Cfg CVM
C

Coefficient matrix defined in Eqn. (10) Parameter defined in Eqn. (31) Matrix defined in Eqn. (10) Parameter defined in Eqn. (31) Virtual mass force coefficient Coefficient defined in Eqn. (34) Coefficient defined in Eqn. (45) Coefficient defined in Eqn. (30) Virtual mass constant Parameter defined in Eqns. (27, 31) Diameter (m) Hydraulic diameter (m) Electric potential (V/m) Externally-imposed electric potential (V/m) Fundamental electric charge Force term (N); Faradays constant Mass flux (Kg/m2-s) Enthalpy (J/Kg); Plancks constant Thermal conductivity (W/m2-K) Boltzmanns constant Length of the crystal (m) Mass flow rate (Kg/s) Nusselt number

D DH EP Ez e F G h k kB L

 m
Nu

151

n0
nT

Number density of ions in liquid (m-3) Total number density of liquid molecules (liquid

molecules/volume) P Pressure (Pa) Total heat generated inside the crystal (W) Heat flux (W/m2) Universal gas constant Radius of the outer surface of the crystal (m) Radius of the annular channel enveloping the crystal (m) Temperature (C) Velocity (m/s) Mass fraction of vapor in the mixture Vector defined in Eqns. (10) and (11) Axial coordinate of the crystal (m); Valance of ions

 q

q
R Ri Ro T U x Y z

Greek

Void fraction Liquid film thickness (m) Liquid dielectric constant Vacuum permittivity (C/V-m) Evaporation rate (Kg/m3-s) Surface charge density Debye length

152

Density (Kg/m3) Surface tension (N/m) Shear stress (N/m2) Constant defined in Eqn. (38) Zeta potential between the surface and the liquid

Subscript 0 c f fg g H i sat TP w Inlet Crystal center line Liquid Vapor-liquid two phase Vapor Hydraulic Interphase Saturated Two phase Wall Surface tension

153

1.

INTRODUCTION
High power LIDAR (Light Distance and Ranging) systems for space-based

atmospheric measurements are under development. Included among these systems is the 2-m solid-state LIDAR, under development at NASA Langley. The 2-m LIDAR will project an intense 2- m wavelength laser beam. The beam will be used for mapping the particles in the atmosphere. The crucial component of the 2-m solid-state LIDAR is a cylindrical Thulium:Holmium doped Lutetium Lithium Fluoride crystal. This cylindrical crystal is designed to be 4 mm in diameter, and 20 mm in length. The crystal undergoes intense
" volumetric heating, and requires the deposal of q w = 1.5 10 5 W m 2 heat flux, to remain

cool. For optimal operation, furthermore, the crystal must remain at a very low and approximately uniform temperature (i.e., temperature non-uniformities should be minimized). The target surface temperature for the crystal is in fact -50oC. The design of an efficient and rugged cooling system for the 2-m solid-state LIDAR is a crucial step. The confined available space, microgravity conditions, and the aforementioned technical specification, make the design of the cooling system challenging. Thin evaporating liquid films are known to provide highly efficient cooling for surfaces that are subject to high heat fluxes.. A cooling system based on the flow and evaporation of a thin liquid film is therefore among the candidate designs for the 2-m LIDARs crystal. The design of such a system is tricky, however, and major technical challenges must be overcome.

154

This document reports on a study focused on the mechanistic modeling of the flow and heat transfer associated with the evaporation of the thin liquid film in the 2-m LIDAR system. The study was performed over a short period of time. The models should therefore be considered as developmental. They are, however, flexible and should be improved and enhanced in the future. The outline on the remainder of this report is as follows. Some important general remarks are provided in Chapter 2. In Chapter 3 the conservation equations and closure relations for a co-current cooling system configuration are presented and discussed. The conservation equations and closure relations for a countercurrent cooling system configuration are then presented and discussed in Chapter 4. Some general, and mostly qualitative observations dealing with the stability of the liquid films will be presented in Chapter 5. The results of preliminary parametric simulations are provided in Chapter 6. Appendix A is a Users Manual for the CoCurrent.f computer code, which models the co-current evaporative liquid film system. Appendix B contains the Users Manual for the CounterCurrent.f computer code, which addresses the counter current evaporative liquid film cooling system.

2.

GENERAL REMARKS
The simplified schematic of the system is shown in Fig. 2.1. the crystal cylinder

is subject to pulsating volumetric heat generation. A thin liquid film is provided to maintain the surface of the crystal wet, and provided with evaporative cooling. The heated length of the crystal is L = 20 mm. The flow passage is an annulus with R = 2 mm
i

155

and R = 3 mm, with R representing the radius of the outer surface of the crystal. The
o i

annular channel is meant to provide a passage for the evaporating liquid film, as well as the vapor generated as a result of liquid film evaporation. Critical issues that must be addressed include the following: 1. Pumping system for liquid. It should be able to maintain the correct flow rate, without flooding the flow passed, and without allowing liquid starvation. 2. Liquid film stability and coherence. The liquid flow must remain in the form of a film. In other words, a stratified flow pattern is expected. An instability causing the development of wave on the liquid surface may cause two-phase flow regime change and result in flowing liquid droplet entrainment is in principle an issue, but is unlikely without interfacial waves. 3. Avoidance of onset of nucleate boiling (ONB), and avoidance of film dryout. These issues evidently related to Item #2 above. The dryout can be caused by a combination of thermal and hydrodynamic effects. The system will operate in zero or micro gravity. Also, in principle a co-current flow design (as depicted in Fig. 2.1), or a countercurrent design (displayed in Fig. 2.2) are possible. In the latter case, liquid is injected simultaneously from both ends, at equal and carefully adjusted and controlled flow rates. The vapor generated in this way flows countercurrent to the liquid. Comparison between Figs. 2.1 and 2.2, makes it clear that the design and control of the co-current scheme is much simpler, and definitely more practical. This system can operate even when the liquid flow rate is larger than the evaporation rate, provided that

156

either the excess liquid is sucked out from the other end, or the control system of the device prevents flooding of the annular passage by the liquid.

3.
3.1

COCURRENT FLOW COOLING SYSTEM

Modeling Approach The models will be based on a number of reasonable simplifying assumptions.

These assumptions are: (a) The system operates in quasi-steady state, and the pulse frequency is large enough to justify the assumption of a constant and uniform volumetric

 in the crystal. heat generation rate q

(b) The crystal surface remains wet with a thin liquid film at all times, providing a uniform convective wall heat flux. (c) Consistent with assumption (b), heat conduction in the crystal is assumed to be 1-D and in the radial direction. (d) The flow field in the flow passage is 1-D, and steady state. (e) The flow regime is idealized stratified (smooth interphase, no entrainment). (f) The pressure in the flow passage is approximately uniform. Assumption (a) is reasonable when power pulse frequency is reasonably high and can be verified later on. Assumptions (b) - (e) are evidently valid if the perfectly 157

desirable operating conditions can be obtained. The results of such an analysis can be used to derive operational thresholds for the system, which represent conditions when one or more of the aforementioned assumptions is violated. Assumption (b) is evidently an approximation, but is reasonable since the evaporative film cooling provides an extremely large wall heat transfer coefficient. Assumption (f) is valid when the flow field operates under relatively high pressure, whereby the pressure drop in the passage is small in comparison with the flow passage average pressure. Also, we will make the flowing assumptions: a) The effects of electric and magnetic fields, etc., on all thermophysical properties, are negligible, except for the surface tension. b) The vapor is always saturated.

3.2.

Two-fluid Model Equations Vapor Mass:

d g U g = dz

(1)

Liquid mass:
d [ f (1 )U f ] = dz

(2)

= volumetric evaporation rate Liquid Momentum: 158

d d (P + P ) = f (1 )U 2 f + (1 ) dz dz dU g dU f CVM U g d U f dz U i + Fi Fwf + Fw + F i z

(3)

where,
Ui = 1 (U f + U g ) 2

(interphase velocity)

(4)

Pf = pressure of liquid phase

FWL = wall friction force per unit mixture volume Fi = interfacial drag + friction force, per unite volume Fw = net liquidwall interfacial force term, per unit mixture volume Fi = net interfacial force caused by variations in surface tension, per unit mixture
volume
CUM = C a (1 ) f (1 ) + g (Virtual mass force coefficient)

(5)

Ca = 1
Note: The virtual mass force is negligibly small and is included here for

improved numeric.
P =

Di + 2

(6)

P = vapor phase pressure

159

Note: For our geometry, P o Vapor Momentum:

dU f dU g d dP 2 + = CVM gU g U U g f dz dz dz dz + U i Fi Fwg F .i

(7)

Note: Wall-gas interfacial force effect has been neglected. Mixture Energy: 2R d 1 1 2 f (1 ) h f + U 2 U g U g = 2 i 2 q" f U f + g h g + dz 2 2 R0 Ri Eqns. (1) & (2) can be added to get (mixture mass conservation):
d [ f (1 )U f + gU g ] = 0 dz

(8)

(9) Final Form of ODES The equations that need to be solved are Eqns. (3), (7), (8) & (9), and either (1) or (2) (but not both). To get the final form of ODEs, we will do the following: a) Algebraically solve Eqn. (1) for and substitute of it into Eqns. (3) & (7), to get Eqns (3) & (7). b) Expand Eqns. (3), (7), (8) & (9), assuming all fluid properties are constant. c) Recast the expanded equations into the following form

[A][dY dz ] = [B ]

(10)

160

where:

[A] is a 4 4 coefficient matrix, and:

P [Y ] = U f U g

(11)

The state variables in the system of ODEs are P, , U f , and U g the formal solution of Eqn. (10), which provides us with the values of the derivatives of the state variables, is
dY 1 = [A] [B ] dz

(11-a)

3.3. Closure Relations Liquid Film Thickness

(Ri + )2 Ri 2 =1 (Ro2 Ri2 )

2 Ri + 2 1 2 = Ro Ri2

(12)

Crystal surface temperature with volumetrically-uniform heating quasi-steadystate, and 1-D (radial) conduction, the temperature distribution in the crystal will be:
T (r ) Twi 2 = 1 (r / Ri ) Tc Twi

(13)

Tc = crystal centerline temperature.

161

Twi = the crystal outer surface temperature (annular flow passage inner surface temperature) Since the liquid film is likely to remain smooth and laminar, then the heat flux at the surface of the crystal will be:
q" =  Ri q T Tsat = k f wi 2

(14)

Eqn. (14) can be used for estimating Twi , should it be needed.

Force Terms

Fwf = 2

(Ro2 R12 ) Ro wg

Ri wf

(15)

Fwg = 2

(Ro2 Ri2 )

(16)

Fi = 2 [(Ri + )] i (Ro2 Ri2 ) = 2(Ri + ) i (Ro2 Ri2 )

(17) (18)

G G Note: All ' s are actually .e z with e z being a unit vector along z. Fs are z
components of force vectors.
fw = EO + z R o R i
2 R 2 i 2 1 R Ri o

F w

(19)

EO = Wall shear representing the electro-osmosis mechanism

162

 fw = Liquid-solid interfacial tension Axial variation in interfacial tension can be

caused by surface charges, if the fluid (liquid) is an ionic conductor, the solid is an electric conductor, as shown in Fig. 3.1. Thus, if a

potentiometer is attached to the crystal and the liquid, such that the negative terminal goes to the crystal then from Lippmanns equation [1,2]:

d fw dE P

(20)

= surface charge density

Thus, a non-uniform charge distribution on the solid surface can cause changes in

fw and cause flow. Eqn. (20) can alternatively be cast as [2]:

d 2 fw dE P
2

= c

(21)

c = differential electric capacitance. Equation (20) can be solved to get [2]:

fw = fw,o E P

(22)

where, fw,o is the interfacial tension at the reference condition where there is no external potential imposed on the system. A reference E P ,o can be similarly defined. The effect of non-uniform surface change can now be modeled by writing:
fw / = E P

(23)
d dz

or,

fw z

= dE P dz E P

(23-a)

163

The parameter E ,o

can be estimated using the Debye-Huckel linear

approximation to the Paission-Boltzmann relation. Furthermore, we approximate the potential in the diffuse layer as linear; Therefore [2]: E ,o o

E D z

(24)

E z = Externally-imposed electric potential (V/m) in z direction

= zeta potential between the surface and the liquid

o = Debye length
The Debye length is [2]
o k B T D = 8n z 2 e 2 o 2
1

(25)

where:
o = 8.854 10 12 C (vacuum permitivity) Vm

k z = Boltzmanns constant
= liquid dielectric constant
z = valance of ioins

e = fundamental electric charge

no = number density of ions in liquid (m-3)

Note that no depends on the degree of dissociation of the ionizable materials. For a completely ionized salt in water with a salt concentrative of C, we can write [2]:

164

 RT 2 D = o 2 2 2F z C

(26)

R = universal gas const. F = Faradays constant

For electro-osmotic-affected flows expressions for effective wall friction factor, Nu etc., have been derived in the recent past. The essence of there models is similar to what we have done in the above analysis. Electro-osmosis causes an apparent slip between the liquid film and thin solid (crystal) surface. The electric double layer near the solid surface interacts with an externally-imposed electric field, and leads to the apparent slip. Electro-osmosis effect can be utilized only if a contiguous film is designed to cover the entire crystal surface, and be partially sucked out from the end of the crystal, as shown schematically in Fig. 3.2. If the double layer results in the concentration of negative charge in the solid, then the above arrangement helps establish a net liquid flow.
Interfacial Shear Stresses

In selecting relevant models and correlations, we must note that the systems hydrodynamics are complicated due to the very strong evaporation at the interphase. This evaporation influences the velocity profile in the liquid film. A detailed numerical model, using volume of fluid method (VOF), would better elucidate such details. For now, we will use rather simple correlations. Since typically U g >> U f , we will assume that vapor flow resembles the flow in an annular channel with (Ri + ) and Ro as inner and outer radii.

165

Define [3]:
Reg =

gU g DH ,2 1 g C

(27)

DH , g

4 R02 (Ri + ) = = 2(Ro Ri ) 2 (Ro + Ri + )

2

(28)

wg = C fg

1 2 gU g 2

(29)

C fg =

16 Re g

(30)

C =

(a b )2 (a 2 b 2 )
a 4 b 4 ( a 2 b 2 )2 / ln a b

a = Ro b = Ri +

(31)

Define i as

i = C fg

1 g U g U i (U g U i ) 2

(32)

Note that i can now be positive or negative depending on the sign of U i

Alternative Method for Finding wg & wf

An alternative way for modeling wg and wf is now described. We can treat the mixture as a stratified two-phase channel flow. In this care, first define an average effective w and calculate it from:

166

 w = Ceff

G2 2H

(33)

where:
x 1 x = + g f
1

(33-a)

x=

gU g g U g + f U f (1 )

(33-b)

G = g U g + f U f (1 )

(33-c)

Find Ceff from:

C eff =

16 Re TP

(34)

Re TP =

GDH TP C

(34-a)

DH = 2(Ro Ri )

(34-b) (34-c)

TP = H g + (1 H )(1 + 2.5 H ) f

H =

U g + U f (1 )

U g

(34-d)

We can find C from Eqn. (31), by writing

a = Ro b = Ri

167

The above method is in accordance with the correlation of Beatti and Whally for two-phase frictional pressure loss. Now we can distribute the wall friction effect between the two-phase following the standard method, by writing:
Fwg =

w (2 )(Ri + R0 ) (Ro2 Ri2 )

(35)

Fwf =

(1 ) w (2 )(Ri + Ro )
(Ro2 Ri2 )

(36)

Note that while Fwg and Fwf are calculated from Eqns. (35) and (36), Fi should be found from Eqn. (32). It is also assumed that F i = 0 .

4.

Countercurrent Flow Cooling System

The two-fluid conservation equations presented in Chapter 3 are in generic form,

and are applicable to both co-current countercurrent flow, provided that U f and U g have proper signs depending on their orientation with respect to the coordinate z . schematic of the system is shown in Fig. 5. At z = 0 , therefore, U f ,0 > 0 and U g ,0 < 0 . Some adjustments to the energy equations, and to certain constitutive relations are needed, however, which will be explained later since counter flow configuration is symmetric axially, we only need to model half the length of the crystal. Also, the counter flow system requires an accurate control system. It must have (see Fig. 4.1):
 g ,0 = m  f ,0 m

(37)

168

Any imbalance between vapor and liquid flow rates will cause either dryout or flooding. Therefore, we will use the following scheme:

" L  f , 0 = 2Ri q w m h fg 2 1.0

The phasic velocities at z = 0 now can be calculated from:
 f , 0 f (Ri + ) Ri2 U f ,0 = m
2

(38)

{ [

}
]}

(39) (40)

 g , 0 g Ro2 (Ri + ) 2 U g ,0 = m

{ [

The vapor kinetic energy term in the mixture energy conservation equation (Eqn. 8) need to be recast, in order to account for the sign of U g . In co-current flow, this term has the form
d 1 3 3 2 dU g Ug = Ug dz 2 dz 2

(41)

In countercurrent flow, however, we have:

1 d Ug Ug 2 dz

( )= 1 U 2
2

2 g

dU g

dU g +Ug U g dz dz

(42)

The wall friction is also modified, as follows. Instead of Eqn. (33), we write:

wg = C fg

1 g U g U g 2

(43)

The coefficient C fg is found from Eqn. (30-31).

169

To find wf , assume a wall friction for a fully-liquid channel flow, with the same channel mean velocity as the liquid film (U f ) . Therefore,

wg = C ff
16 Re f

1 f Uf Uf 2

(44)

C ff =

(45)

Re f =

f U f DH f

(46)

where,

DH = 2( Ro Ri )

(47)

5.

Some Observations About Stability

5.1. Notes on ONB and Dryout

Dryout would require completed evaporative of the liquid, and the failure of liquid to rewet the dried surface. Dryout may thus occur not because of liquid

starvation, but due to local rapid evaporation of film. Another phenomenon to avoid is boiling. Boiling would start with ONB, and may end in CHF. For ONB, two processes are possible. 1. Heterogeneous bubble nucleation on microscopic crevices on the crystal surface. The mechanism in this would be similar to conventional boiling systems. We

170

need to calculate the liquid film superheat, and compare it liquid with the minimum liquid superheat needed for bubble stability. The relevance of this mechanism depends on the crystal surface characteristics. Should it be optically smooth, thin heterogeneous nucleation is unlikely. We should then worry about: a) Approaching the working fluids spinodal T limit which would cause spontaneous evaporative and boiling. b) Explosive growth of entrained vapor microbubbles in the liquid film. The latter mechanism may indeed cause much trouble. Entrainment of

microbubbles as very likely. Given the very high wall heat fluxes of interest, we must expect very large Tw Tsat implying that a highly-superheated meta-stable thin liquid layer will be present next to the heated surface. Furthermore, given the low liquid velocities expected the superheated liquid layer will have a long residence time, implying that there will be ample time for nucleation. On the other hand, given that we do not expect a thick liquid film, there will be little space for the formation of sizable vapor bubbles. We can use the following, as a conservative criterion for avoiding homogeneous nucleation. 2. Homogeneous nucleation: The liquid superheat needed for homogeneous nucleation inside a large, uniform-temperature liquid is (Cole [4]):

(T

Tsat )n

T = sat g h fg

16 3 3kTL ln (nT k B T f / h )

1/ 2

(48)

= surface tension
171

k B = Boltzmanns contant
h = Plancks constant

nT = Total number density of liquid molecules (liquid molecules per unit volume)
We can conservatively argue that homogeneous nucleation will not occur as long as
Tw < (T f

(49)

Where
Tw = crystal outer surface average temperature.

However, we must note that entrainment of microbubbles that may act as nucleation sites is a possibility.

5.2.Notes on Flow Morphology

A basic tenet of the film evaporation technique is the assumption that a stratified (film of liquid + pure vapor) holds. This may not always be true. Flow regime upset can occur due to: 1. Condensation on the dry and cool surfaces. 2. Disruption of film and droplet ejection due to explosive growth of entrained vapor microbubbles in the liquid film.

172

3. Most importantly, any sudden shaking of the system would disperse the liquid film, and lead to the sticking of droplets to the surface of the flow channel. Absence of gravity will make the re-establishment of the ideal regime tricky. It is unlikely to re-establish itself, and we may eventually need to come up with some ideas to help the liquid to leave the outer surfaces of the annular flow channel, and re-establish the desire stratified regime. This may be

possible, and indeed be rather straightforward, with electro-hydrodynamic means. We should worry about these issues in the future, however, at this stage, we will base our analysis on an assumed (nominal) stratified flow.

173

6. PRELIMINARY CALCULATION RESULTS

6.1 Parametric Calculations for R-507a and R-508b Fluids

Some preliminary parametric calculation results are provided in the attachment to this report. The plotted results are for two refrigerants (R507a and R508b), and assume pressures that lead to a saturation temperature of 50 C. In these calculations a film thickness of 0.5 mm at inlet is assumed everywhere. The only flow mechanism in the simulations is pressure, and surface tension-dependent pumping parameters have not been activated. Furthermore, the parameter Factor is defined as: Factor = m h fg / q m = coolant inlet flow rate q = total thermal load

In other words, Factor>1 implies excess coolant injection. Factor>1 is evidently fine with cocurrent flow configuration. For counter current flow, we chose a value only slightly larger than one. In the figures, delta is actually the film thickness, and UL and Ug represent average liquid and vapor intrinsic velocities. Please also note that the counter flow simulations only consider half the length (0.01 cm).

The depicted results evidently show that the computer codes are consistent, and correctly solve the model equations. It is also encouraging to see that pressure gradients needed for stting up the flows are small and manageable. When conduction through the thin liquid film is assumed for the estimation of wall (i.e., crystal surface) temperature, these results also imply that, unless the film is considerably thinner that what we have used, the wall temperature would be quite high. A next step should therefore be parametrics with a different fluid, which has a saturation temperature considerably lower than 50 C, and using a considerably thinner liquid film at inlet (perhaps, of the order of 100 m).

174

It should be mentioned that the calculation results for countercurrent flow configuration should be considered as rough estimates of what would be expected. These calculations are not realistic near the crystal half-length (z L/2) , where Ug 0, Uf 0, and the onedimensional flow assumption is crude at best.

The following are the default parameters assumed for the forthcoming figures:

Crystal Length = 0.02 m Inlet delta in m = 0.0005 m Heat Flux = 80000.0 W/m2 Inner Radius = 0.002 m Outer Radius = 0.003 m

Inlet Pressure for R507a = 87990.0 Pa (for Tsat = -50 C) Inlet Pressure for R508b = 587100.0 Pa (for Tsat = -50 C)

175

Fig 6.1: Co-current flow -- Delta vs. z

176

Fig 6.2: Co-current flow (Pin-P) vs. z

177

Fig 6.3: Co-current flow -- UL vs. z

178

Fig 6.4: Co-current flow -- Ug vs. z

179

Fig 6.5: Counter-current flow -- Delta vs. z

180

Fig 6.6: Counter-current flow (Pin-P) vs. z

181

Fig 6.7: Counter-current flow -- UL vs. z

182

Fig 6.8: Counter-current flow -- Ug vs. z

183

6.2 Parametric Calculations for Other Fluids

The results in the previous section indicated that, with R-507a and R-508b, it is unlikely that a crystal surface temperature as low as 50 C can be secured while a reasonable coolant pressure is maintained. We should thus look for fluids that, under a pressure that for convenience is not too much different than atmospheric, has a saturation temperature in the range 150 C to 80 C. A search in the REFPROP data base indicated that several refrigerants indeed satisfy the above requirements. Some of these refrigerants are highlighted in Table 6.1 It should be mentioned, however, that the final choice of the working fluid must consider other fluid properties as well. With respect to thermal properties alone, the selected fluid must have high thermal conductivity and high latent heat of vaporization. Notwithstanding, parametric calculations were performed for the fluids highlighted in Table 6.1. A summary of the results can be found in Table 6.2. Representative predicted profiles are also shown in Figures 6.9 through 6.18. The approximate nature of all the results dealing with countercurrent flow configuration should be emphasized. As mentioned before, the one-dimensional flow assumption becomes unrealistic near the half-length of the crystal, where the vapor velocity is very low, and the liquid is close to stagnant. The following default parameters were used for the forthcoming parametric calculation results: Crystal Length = 0.02 m Inlet delta = 0.00025 m Heat Flux = 150000.0 W/m2 Inner Radius = 0.002 m Outer Radius = 0.003 m = 1.25 (for co-current) 1.025 (for counter-current) is the excess flow multiplier

184

Table 6.1: Choice of Refrigerants*

Refrigerant
R116 R13 R14 R23 R41 R508B R503 R410B R410A R402B

hfg (J/kg)
123787 164070 147046 264041 516706 185494 197226 287660 299320 230746

kf (W/m-K)
0.07667 0.09984 0.1191 0.1618 0.2768 0.1179 0.1204 0.1635 0.1692 0.1261

Tsat (K)
177 158 119 159 175 154 154 185 185 187

Tsat (C)
-96.15 -115.15 -154.15 -114.15 -98.15 -119.15 -119.15 -88.15 -88.15 -86.15

Psat (Pa)
34340 10670 10120 10140 28980 10290 10740 10260 10310 10290

* All of the above fluids have good low Tsat for a Psat range of 0.1 ~ 5 bars. Based on the high hfg and kf as well as low Tsat, R14, R23, R41, and R410A are better candidates for the present application.

185

Table 2: Summary of Results

Refrigerant Inlet Saturation Temperature (C) R14 -149.15 Inlet Saturation Pressure (Pa) 17150.0 Co-current Ave. Wall Temperature (C) -106.76 Counter-Current Ave. Wall Temperature (C) 681.16

R23 R41 R401A

-109.15 -94.15 -84.15

15560.0 38170.0 13930.0

-84.93 -75.25 -63.08

495.74 257.32 490.11

Fig 6.9: Co-current flow -- Delta vs. z

186

Fig 6.10: Co-current flow (Pin-P) vs. z

187

Fig 6.11: Co-current flow -- Tw vs. z

188

Fig 6.12: Co-current flow -- UL vs. z

189

Fig 6.13: Co-current flow -- Ug vs. z

190

Fig 6.14: Counter-current flow -- Delta vs. z

191

Fig 6.15: Counter-current flow (Pin-P) vs. z

192

Fig 6.16: Counter-current flow -- Tw vs. z

193

Fig 6.17: Counter-current flow -- UL vs. z

194

Fig 6.18: Counter-current flow -- Ug vs. z

195

7. REFERENCES

1. J.T. Davis and E.K. Rideal, Interfacial Phenomena, Academic Press, New York, 1963. 2. C.H. Haman, A. Hamnett and W. Vielstich, Electrochemistry, Wiley-VCH, New York, 1998. 3. F.M. White, Viscous Fluid Flow, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991. 4. R. Cole, Boiling Nucleation, Adv. Heat Transfer, Vol. 10, pp. 85-166, 1974.

196

Appendix D Users Manual for the Two-Fluid Computer Code

197

GTL-LIDAR: A Two-Fluid Model for Film Evaporation and Stability Analysis of the 2-Micormeter LIDAR System

Users Manual

Authors: M. K. Akbar S. M. Ghiaasiaan B. K. Stewart

Submitted by: G.W.Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332-0405

Submitted to: Brian Stewart September 20, 2004

198

Table of Contents
Section Page

1. Code Structure 2. Description of Subroutines and Functions 3. Input and Output 4. Sample Input and Output 4.1 Sample Input 4.1.1 Sample Input for Co-current Flow 4.1.2 Sample Input for Counter Current Flow 4.2. Sample Output 4.2.1. Sample Output for Co-current Flow 4.2.2. Sample Output for Counter Current Flow

200 201 203 205 205 205 205 206 206 208

199

Section 1 Code Structure

The main program is CoCurrent.f for the co-current flow, or CounterCurrent.f for the counter current flow models. One (only) of these two main programs, DVODE.F, and one of refrigerant property routines (R14.F, or R23.F, R41.F, or R401a.F)- total 3 routines have to be added in the project work space. In addition to that, the variable file, VARIABLE.F, must be in the same directory that is hosting the above mentioned three routines. Once all these files, as well as data input files are in the same working directory, compilation and execution of the code should be done without any error. Compaq Visual Fortran 6.1 version was used to compile and execute the code. As execution of the code starts, the data are read, preparatory minor calculations are done, and model parameters for the ODE solver are set. After that the ODE solver DVODE.F is called for a value of the independent variable (z) for which ODEs are needed to be solved. The subroutine FUNC.F is called from the DVODE.F to get the ODE equations. In the process of defining the coefficient matrix, FUNC.F calls the property interpolation functions for the related refrigerant. Matrix inversion subroutine INVER.F is then called to invert the coefficient matrix. The ODEs are sent back to DVODE.F in such a form that the derivative of each ODE is on the left hand side and the source terms are on the right hand side. DVODE.F then internally solves the ODEs for the given value of z and return to the main program. A series of calls to DVODE.F is thus completed for all the values of z before the program finishes the main calculation process. The outputs are written each time after DVODE.F returns with a solution for a value of z. .

200

Section 2 Description of Subroutines and Functions

This section contains a description of each subroutine and function in this computer code. As mentioned in Section 1, the main program is CoCurrent.f or CounterCurrent.f. In addition to that, DVODE.F, and ONLY one of R14.F, R23.F, R41.F, and R401a.F depending on the choice of refrigerant, have be included in the work space. The include file Variable.f, which defines the variables needed for the program, must be in the same directory that hosting the code.

SUBROUTINES:
CoCurrent CounterCurrent DVODE FUNC INVER POLINT R14/R23/R41/R401a
main program for the co-current flow. main program for the counter current flow. variable-coefficient Ordinary Differential Equation (ODE) solver, with fixed-leading coefficient implementation. Called from the main program. defines the ODEs. Called from DVODE. inverts the coefficient matrix of the system of ODEs. Called from FUNC. interpolates between thermodynamic property values. This is a Lagrangian interpolation routine, called from all property interpolation functions. contains all the refrigerant property interpolation functions described in the Functions subsection.

FUNCTIONS:
TEMP DENSF DENSG VISCF VISCG
saturation temperature interpolation functions. Given the saturation pressure, it returns the saturation temperature t in K. liquid density interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the liquid density rhof in Kg/m3. gas density interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the gas density rhog in Kg/m3. liquid viscosity interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the liquid viscosity muf in Kg/m-s. gas viscosity interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the gas viscosity mug in Kg/m-s.

201

ENTHF ENTHG CONDF

liquid enthalpy interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the liquid enthalpy hf in J/Kg. gas enthalpy interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the gas enthalpy hg in J/Kg. liquid thermal conductivity interpolation functions. Given the saturation temprature, it returns the liquid thermal conductivity in W-m-1-K-1.

INCLUDE FILE:
VARIABLE.F
defines most of the variables needed in the code.

202

Section 3 Input and output

This section describes the input parameters necessary to run this computer code and an explanation of all the associated output.

INPUT:
Input file name is COC*.DAT for co-current, and COU*.DAT for counter current flow. The Asterisk sign should be replaced by the code(R14, R23, R41, or R401a) of the refrigerant. The parameters for both data files are as follows:

Parameters PIN UFIN UGIN CLEN DELTA QDD RI RO MULTI CHARGED EP EPS ZETA EZ LAMDAD KB NO

units Pa m/s m/s m m W/m2 m m

Description Inlet pressure Inlet liquid velocity Inlet gas velocity Length of the crystal Inlet film thickness Heat flux Inner (or crystal) radius of the chamber Outer radius of the chamber Make-up factor Electric charge density Electric potential Epsilon term in electro-osmosis Zeta term in electro-osmosis Ez term in electro-osmosis Lamda_d term in electro-osmosis Boltzmann constant No term in the electro-osmosis

203

OUTPUT:
Six output files are generated from the code. The description of the files is as follows (The Asterisk sign should be replaced by the code(R14, R23, R41, or R401a) of the refrigerant): For co-current flow: COC*.OUT

Contains the input variable values, tabulated values of pressures, void fractions, liquid and gas velocities, and liquid film heights (delta) at various z locations (along the crystal length). It also contains the mass and energy rates, and percentage errors. COC*D.OUT Contains the tabulated data of liquid film heights (delta) at various z locations. COC*P.OUT Contains the tabulated data of pressure losses (P-Pinlet) at various z locations. COC*TW.OUT Contains the tabulated data of temperatures (wall and saturation) at various z locations. COC*UG.OUT Contains the tabulated data of vapor velocities at various z locations. COC*UL.OUT Contains the tabulated data of liquid velocities at various z locations. For counter current flow: COU*.OUT Contains the input variable values, tabulated values of pressures, void fractions, liquid and gas velocities, and liquid film heights (delta) at various z locations (along the crystal length). It also contains the mass and energy rates, and percentage errors. COU*D.OUT Contains the tabulated data of liquid film heights (delta) at various z locations. COU*P.OUT Contains the tabulated data of pressure losses (P-Pinlet) at various z locations. COU*TW.OUT Contains the tabulated data of temperatures (wall and saturation) at various z locations. COU*UG.OUT Contains the tabulated data of vapor velocities at various z locations. COU*UL.OUT Contains the tabulated data of liquid velocities at various z locations.

204

Section 4 Sample Input and Output

4.1 Sample Input
4.1.1 Sample Input for Co-current Flow
COCR14.DAT ()
'Inlet Pres. Pa ' 17150.d0 'Inlet Uf. m/s ' 0.02d0 'Inlet Ug m/s ' 0.000005d0 'Crystal Length m ' 0.02d0 'Inlet delta m ' 0.00025d0 'Heat Flux W/m^2 ' 150000.d0 'Inner Radius m ' 0.002d0 'Outer Radius m ' 0.003d0 'Make-up factor ' 1.25d0 'Electric Charge density ' 0.d0 'Electric Potential ' 0.d0 'Epsilon term in electro-osmosis ' 1.d0 'Epsilon0 term in electro-osmosis' 0.0 'Zeta term in electro-osmosis ' 100.d0 'Ez term in electro-osmosis ' 0.0d0 'Lamdad term in electro-osmosis ' 0.d0 'Boltzmann constant ' 0.d0 'N_o term in electro-osmosis ' 0.1d0

4.1.2 Sample Input for Counter Current Flow

COUR14.DAT
'Inlet Pres. Pa ' 17150.d0 'Inlet Uf. m/s ' 0.02d0 'Inlet Ug m/s ' 0.000005d0 'Crystal Length m ' 0.02d0 'Inlet delta m ' 0.00025d0 'Heat Flux W/m^2 ' 150000.d0 'Inner Radius m ' 0.002d0 'Outer Radius m ' 0.003d0 'Make-up factor ' 1.025d0 'Electric Charge density ' 0.d0 'Electric Potential ' 0.d0 'Epsilon term in electro-osmosis ' 1.d0 'Epsilon0 term in electro-osmosis' 0.0 'Zeta term in electro-osmosis ' 100.d0

205

'Ez term in electro-osmosis ' 0.0d0 'Lamdad term in electro-osmosis ' 0.d0 'Boltzmann constant ' 0.d0 'N_o term in electro-osmosis ' 0.1d0

4.2 Sample Output

4.2.1 Sample Outputs for Co-current Flow
COCR14.OUT
Inlet Pres. Pa 17150.0000000000 Inlet Uf. m/s 2.000000000000000E-002 Inlet Ug m/s 5.000000000000000E-006 Crystal Length m 2.000000000000000E-002 Inlet delta m 2.500000000000000E-004 Heat Flux W/m^2 150000.000000000 Inner Radius m 2.000000000000000E-003 Outer Radius m 3.000000000000000E-003 Make-up factor 1.25000000000000 Electric Charge density 0.000000000000000E+000 Electric Potential 0.000000000000000E+000 Epsilon term in electro-osmosis 1.00000000000000 Epsilon0 term in electro-osmosis 0.000000000000000E+000 Zeta term in electro-osmosis 100.000000000000 Ez term in electro-osmosis 0.000000000000000E+000 Lamdad term in electro-osmosis 0.000000000000000E+000 Boltzmann constant 0.000000000000000E+000 N_o term in electro-osmosis 0.100000000000000 i z(cm) P(pa) Alpha Uf(cm/s) Ug(cm/s) delta(cm) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 0.000 17150.000 0.7875 5.700 0.001 0.0250 2 0.004 17149.969 0.7923 5.822 2.834 0.0245 .. 501 2.000 16948.078 0.9812 12.895 1147.739 0.0023 Mass flow in = 3.255154130696008E-004(kg/s) Mass flow out = 3.237338688179463E-004(kg/s) Heat flux removal = 149797.283602014 (W/m^2) Heat flux applied = 150000.000000000 (W/m^2) % Error in mass balance= 0.55E+00 % Error in energy balance= 0.14E+00

206

Average Wall Temperature (Deg C) = -106.670343296702

COCR14D.OUT
z(m) Delta(m) =========================== 0.000E+000 2.500E-004 4.000E-005 2.445E-004 2.000E-002 2.341E-005

COCR14P.OUT
z(m) P_Loss(P-P_inlet)(Pa) ============================ 0.000E+000 0.000E+000 4.000E-005 3.072E-002 0.200E-01 201.922

COCR14TW.OUT
z(m) T_Wall(Deg C) T_Sat(Deg C) ==================================== 0.00E+000 177.79 -149.15 4.00E-005 170.63 -149.15 0.200E-01 -118.67 -149.26

COCR14UG.OUT
z(m) V_Gas(m/s) ======================= 0.00E+000 5.00E-006 4.00E-005 2.83E-002 0.200E-01 11.48

COCR14UL.OUT
z(m) V_Liquid(m/s) ======================== 0.00E+000 5.70E-002 4.00E-005 5.82E-002 0.200E-01 0.13 207

4.2.2 Sample Outputs for Counter Current Flow

COUR14.OUT
Inlet Pres. Pa 17150.0000000000 Inlet Uf. m/s 2.000000000000000E-002 Inlet Ug m/s 5.000000000000000E-006 Crystal Length m 2.000000000000000E-002 Inlet delta m 2.500000000000000E-004 Heat Flux W/m^2 150000.000000000 Inner Radius m 2.000000000000000E-003 Outer Radius m 3.000000000000000E-003 Make-up factor 1.02500000000000 Electric Charge density 0.000000000000000E+000 Electric Potential 0.000000000000000E+000 Epsilon term in electro-osmosis 1.00000000000000 Epsilon0 term in electro-osmosis 0.000000000000000E+000 Zeta term in electro-osmosis 100.000000000000 Ez term in electro-osmosis 0.000000000000000E+000 Lamdad term in electro-osmosis 0.000000000000000E+000 Boltzmann constant 0.000000000000000E+000 N_o term in electro-osmosis 0.100000000000000 i z(cm) p(pa) alpha uf(cm/s) ug(cm/s) delta(cm) -----------------------------------------------------------------------1 0.000 17150.00 0.7875 2.337 -730.474 0.0250 2 0.002 17150.11 0.7860 2.316 -730.465 0.0252 .. 501 1.00 17189.85 0.0204 0.012 -727.804 0.0983 Net mass in = 1.369171055576891E-004 Net mass out = 1.367291505843424E-004 Heat flux removal = 149974.936735584 Heat flux applied = 150000.000000000 % Error in mass balance= 0.14E+00 % Error in energy balance= 0.17E-01 Average Wall Temperature = 681.165900435403

COUR14D.OUT
z(m) Delta(m) =========================== 0.00E+000 2.50E-004 2.00E-005 2.52E-004 208

 0.100E-01

9.83E-004

COUR14P.OUT
z(m) P_Loss(P-P_inlet)(Pa) ============================ 0.00E+000 0.00E+000 2.00E-005 -0.113 0.100E-01 -39.85

COUR14TW.OUT
z(m) T_Wall(Deg C) T_Sat(Deg C) ==================================== 0.00E+000 177.79 -149.15 2.00E-005 180.47 -149.14992 0.100E-01 1136.51 -149.13

COUR14UG.OUT
z(m) V_Gas(m/s) ======================= 0.00E+000 -7.3047 2.00E-005 -7.3046 0.100E-01 -7.278

COUR14UL.OUT
z(m) V_Liquid(m/s) ======================== 0.00E+000 2.34E-002 2.00E-005 2.32E-002 0.100E-01 1.24E-004

209

References

[1]

Wallis, George and Daniel J. Pomerantz (1969) Field Assisted Glass-Metal Sealing, Journal of Applied Physics. Vol. 40, No. 10. Sept. 1969. pp 39463949. Rogers, Tony (1992) Considerations of anodic bonding for capacitive type silicon/glass sensor fabrication, J. Micromechanical Engineering. Vol 2. pp 164-166. Stockman, Norman (2000) Electrostatic Bonding, The Welding Institute World Centre for Materials Joining Technology. Available online at http://www.twi.co.uk/j32k/protected/band_3/ksnrs002.html Touloukian, Y.S, R.K Kirby, R.E. Taylor, P.D. Desai Thermal ExpansionMetallic Elements and Alloys, Thermophysical Properties of Matter, Vol 12. Thermophysical Properties Research Center (TPRC), Purdue Research Foundation. 1975. Taylor, D.L, J. Gembarovic, R.E Taylor (2002) Thermophysical Properties of Laser Rod Materials- A Report to NASA Langley Research Center, Thermophysical Properties Research Laboratory (TPRL) Report 2857. October 2002. Shigley, J.E. , L.D.Mitchell Mechanical Engineering Design 4th Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co. New York, 1983. Popov, E.P. Mechanics of Materials, 2nd Ed., Prentice Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, 1976. Koechner, Walter Solid-State Laser Engineering, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heildelberg, 1999. Butt, Hans Jurgen, Karlheinz Graf, Michael Kappl Physics and Chemistry of Interfaces, Wiley-VCH GmbH & Co., Weinheim, 2003.

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10] Jaycock, M.J., G.D.Parfitt Chemistry of Interfaces, Ellis Horwood, Ltd., Chichester, 1981. [11] Adamson, Arthur W. Physical Chemistry of Interfaces 2nd Ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York 1982.

210

[12] Shapiro, Benjamin, et al., Modeling of Electrowetted Surface Tension for Addressable Microfluidics Systems: Dominant Physical Effects, Material Dependencies and Limiting Phenomena, DARPA Grant FCPO.0205GDB191, 2003. [13] Lee, Junhoon, Hyejin Moon, Jesse Fowler, Thomas Schoellhammer, Chang-Jin Kim, Electrowetting and electrowetting on-dielectric for microscale fluid handling, Sensors and Actuators A (95), pp.259-268, 2002. [14] Moon, Hyejin, Sung Kwon Cho, Robin L. Garrell, Chang-Jin Kim, Low voltage electrowetting-on-dielectric, Journal of Applied Physiscs, vol. 92, number 7, pp. 4080-4087, October, 2002. [15] Sharma, P.K., K. Hanumantha Rao, Analysis of different approaches for evaluation of surface energy of microbial cells by contact angle goniometry, Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, vol 98, pp. 341-463, 2002. [16] Jones, Thomas B., On the Relationship of Dielectrophoresis and Electrowetting, Langmuir, vol 18, pp. 4437-4443, 2002. [17] Akbar, M.H., S.Mostafa Ghiaasiaan, Brian K. Stewart, Modeling of Thin-Film Evaporative Cooling, Report to NASA Langley Research Center, September, 2004. [18] Corman, Thierry, Vacuum-Sealed and Gas-Filled Micromachined Devices, PhD Dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 1999. [19] Collier, John G., John R. Thome, Convective Boiling and Condensation, 3rd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996. [20] Walsh, Brian M, Norman P. Barnes, Mulegaet Petros, Jirong Yu, Upendra Singh, Spectroscopy and modeling of solid state lanthanide lasers: Application to trivalent Tm3+ and Ho3+ in YLiF4 andLuLiF4, Journal of Applied Physics, Vol.95, No.7, pp.3255-3271, April 2004. [21] Froba, A.P.., S. Will, A. Leipertz, Thermophysical Properties of Binary and Ternary Fluid Mixtures From Dynamic Light Scattering, Presented to the Fourteenth Symposium on Thermophysical Properties, Boulder, CO, June 2000. [22] Blom, M.T., et al, Local Anodic Bonding of Kovar to Pyrex aimed at highpressure, solvent resistant microfluidic connections, Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, Vol. 11, pp 382-385, 2001.

211

[23] Shing, Tai-Kang, Analysis of Anodic Bonding and Packaging Effects in Micro Sensors, Material Reseacrh Lab, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Taiwan, ROC. [24] Burlatsky, S.F., A.M. Cazabat, M.Moreau, G. Oshanin, and S. Villette, Spreading of Molecularly Thin Wetting Films on Solid Surfaces, 1996. [25] Peri, Frank, Jr., Michael J Kavaya, Upendra N. Singh. Status of the Laser Risk Reduction Program at NASA Langley Research Center [26] Petros, Mulegeta ( Interview). Laser Physics and Opto-Electrical Branch, NASA Langley Research Center. September 8, 2003 [27] Shapiro, Benjamin, Hyejin Moon, Robin L. Garrell, Chang-Jin CJ Kim, Equilibrium Behavior of Sessile Drops Under Surface Tension, Applied External Fields, and Material Variations. Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 93, Number 9, May 2003. [28] Stokes, Robert J and D. Fennell Evans. Fundamentals of Interfacial Engineering.Wiley-VCH, Inc, 1996. [29] Walsh, Brian M., Norman P. Barnes, Baldssare Di Bartolo, The Temperature dependences of energy transfer between the Tm 3F4 and Ho 5I7 manifolds of Tmsensitized Ho luminescence in YAG and YLF, Journal of Luminescence, Vol 90, pp 39-48, 1999. [30] Woodward, Roger P. (Interview). First Ten Angstroms,Inc., Portsmouth, Virginia. May 4, 2004. [31] Woodward, Roger P. Surface Tension Measurements Using the Drop Shape Method. First Ten Angstroms, Inc. Portsmouth, VA. [32] Faghri, Amir, Heat Pipe Science and Technology, Taylor & Francis, Ltd., Washington, D.C., 1995. [33] Wachtman, John B., Mechanical Properties of Ceramics, John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.., 1996.

212