Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
V. K. Dhir
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, University of California,
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
KEY WORDS: nucleate boiling, maximum heat flux, transition boiling, film boiling, minimum
heat flux, pool boiling, flow boiling
ABSTRACT
This review examines recent advances made in predicting boiling heat fluxes,
including some key results from the past. The topics covered are nucleate boiling,
maximum heat flux, transition boiling, and film boiling. The review focuses on
pool boiling of pure liquids, but flow boiling is also discussed briefly.
INTRODUCTION
Boiling is a phase change process in which vapor bubbles are formed either on a
heated surface or in a superheated liquid layer adjacent to the heated surface. It
differs from evaporation at predetermined vapor/gas-liquid interfaces because it
also involves creation of these interfaces at discrete sites on the heated surface.
Nucleate boiling is a very efficient mode of heat transfer. It is used in various
energy conversion and heat exchange systems and in cooling of high-energy
density electronic components. Pool boiling refers to boiling under natural
convection conditions, whereas in forced flow boiling, liquid flow over the
heater surface is imposed by external means. Forced flow boiling includes
external and internal flow boiling. In external boiling, liquid flow occurs over
unconfined heated surfaces, whereas internal flow boiling refers to flow inside
tubes.
This review is a follow-up to Rohsenows (1971) similar review in this series.
Reviews covering different aspects of boiling have appeared elsewhere (e.g.
Kenning 1977, Dhir 1991, Fujita 1992). This review focuses on pool boiling
of pure liquids. Flow boiling is described only briefly.
Boiling is a complex and elusive process. As such, we often rely on dimen-
sionless groups and empirical constants when correlating data. Concurrent with
the development of correlations useful for engineering applications, progress
365
0066-4189/98/0115-0365$08.00
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
366 DHIR
to which the contribution of various mechanisms to total heat flux changes with
wall superheat and heater geometry.
Figure 1 shows, qualitatively, the boiling curve (i.e. dependence of the wall
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Figure 1 Typical boiling curve, showing qualitatively the dependence of the wall heat flux, q,
on the wall superheat, 1T, defined as the difference between the wall temperature, Tw, and the
saturation temperature, Tsat, of the liquid. Schematic drawings show the boiling process in regions
IV. These regions and the transition points AE are discussed in the text.
The maximum or critical heat flux, qmax, sets the upper limit of fully developed
nucleate boiling for safe operation of equipment. After maximum heat flux is
reached, most of the surface is rapidly covered with vapor. The surface is nearly
insulated, and the surface temperature rises very rapidly. When the rate of heat
input is controlled, the heater surface passes quickly through regions IV and
V (see Figure 1) and stabilizes at point E. If the temperature at E exceeds the
melting temperature of the heater material, the heater will fail (burn out). The
curve ED (region V) represents stable film boiling, and the system can be made
to follow this curve by reducing the heat flux.
In stable film boiling, the surface is covered with vapor film, and liquid
does not contact the solid. On a horizontal surface the vapor release pattern is
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
368 DHIR
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
NUCLEATE BOILING
Preexisting Nuclei
Vapor/gas trapped in imperfections such as cavities and scratches on the heated
surface serve as nuclei for bubbles. Bankoff (1958) was the first to provide
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
soidal cavity. For the spherical and conical cavities, min occurs at the mouth
of the cavity and is equal to the cavity-mouth angle, m, as measured from the
heater surface. Ward & Forest (1976), while analyzing the relation between
platelet adhesion and roughness of a synthetic material, obtained the same cri-
terion for stability of a vapor/gas nucleus in a long narrow fissure. Although
Bankoffs criterion provides a necessary condition for vapor/gas entrapment in
a wedge, Equation 2 provides a sufficient condition.
Inception
Several approaches have been proposed for determining the incipient wall su-
perheat for boiling from preexisting nuclei. This review discusses two of the
most commonly used approaches. In the first approach, as originally proposed
by Hsu (1962), an embryo will become a bubble if the temperature of the
liquid at the tip of the embryo (the farthest point from the heated wall) is at
least equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to vapor pressure in the
bubble. Thus, Hsus criterion requires that the embryo should be surrounded
everywhere by superheated liquid.
In the second approach, boiling incipience is proposed to correspond to
a critical point of instability of the vapor-liquid interface. The interface is
considered to be stable or quasi-stable if the curvature of the interface increases
with an increase in vapor volume (see e.g. Mizukami 1977, Forest 1982, Nishio
1985). Wang & Dhir (1993a) studied the instability of the vapor-liquid interface
in a spherical cavity and showed that nucleation occurs when nondimensional
curvature of the interface attains a maximum value. They obtained the following
relation between wall superheat and diameter, Dc, of a nucleating cavity:
4 Tsat
1T = K max , (3)
v h f g Dc
1 A distinction must be made between an advancing and a receding contact angle. Generally, the
advancing contact angle is greater than the receding contact angle. Because of the large uncertainties
associated with determination of advancing and receding contact angles, a static contact angle, ,
was used in this work.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
370 DHIR
where
K max = 1 for 90
= sin for > 90
In Equation 3, is the interfacial tension, Tsat is the saturation temperature,
v is the density of vapor, hfg is the latent heat of vaporization, and Dc is the
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
According to Equation 3, few preexisting vapor/gas nuclei are found for well
wetting liquids such as R-113 and FC-72. For these liquids, the expected wall
superheat at nucleation should approach the homogeneous nucleation temper-
ature ('90% of critical temperature). The observed inception superheats for
these liquids, although much higher than those observed for partially wetting
liquids, are much smaller than those corresponding to homogeneous nucleation
temperature (see Barthau 1992). Gases dissolved in these liquids may initi-
ate the nucleation, and as a result, the observed superheat is smaller than that
corresponding to homogeneous nucleation. In many instances gas is added by
external means to the wetting liquids to reduce the inception temperature and
to minimize the hysteresis.
Na 1T m 1 , (4)
where m1 varies between 4 and 6. Cornwell & Brown (1978) found that the
proportionality constant in Equation 4 increased with surface roughness, but
the exponent was independent of surface roughness. Bier et al (1978) obtained
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
shape, and mouth angle of activities present on a polished copper surface and
then used Equation 2 to determine the fraction of those cavities that will trap
vapor/gas. Most of the cavities that could trap vapor/gas were of reservoir type.
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
The data, consistent with their model, showed a 20-fold reduction in number
density of active sites as the contact angle was decreased from 90 to 18 .
Although Wang & Dhir showed how the developed criterion could be used to
determine theoretically the number density of active sites, the procedure used
in determining the size, shape, and mouth angle of cavities is tedious and time
consuming and cannot be used readily in a practical application.
Wang & Dhir did not consider the thermal interference between sites or
the seeding and deactivation of sites in the neighborhood of an active cavity.
Kenning (1989) noted that thermal and flow conditions in the vicinity of a
heated surface can lead to activation of inactive sites and deactivation of active
sites. Sultan & Judd (1983) studied the bubble growth pattern at neighboring
sites during nucleate pool boiling of water on a copper surface. They found that
elapsed time between the start of bubble growth at two neighboring active sites
increased as the distance separating the two sites increased. They proposed
that thermal diffusion in the substrate in the immediate vicinity of the boiling
surface may be responsible for this behavior. Their work suggests that some
relation may exist between distribution of active nucleation sites and bubble
nucleation phenomenon.
Judd & Chopra (1993) reported results of interactions between neighboring
sites that lead to activation of inactive sites and deactivation of active sites. They
noted that for separation distances between nucleation sites less than one bubble
diameter at departure, the formation of a bubble at the initiating site promotes
the formation of bubbles at the adjacent sites (site seeding). For separation
distances between one and three bubble diameters at departure, formation of
a bubble at the initiating site inhibits the formation of bubbles at the adjacent
site (deactivation of sites). For distances greater than three bubble diameters at
departure, nucleation at one location is not influenced by activation at another
site. Kennings and Judds studies indicate that thermal interference and site
seeding or deactivation can alter the local active-site density and distribution
at low heat fluxes or in partial nucleate boiling. However, the significance of
these processes with respect to heat transfer during well-established nucleate
boiling on thick heaters is expected to be small.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
372 DHIR
Bubble Dynamics
After inception, a bubble continues to grow (in a saturated liquid) until forces
causing it to detach from the surface exceed those pushing the bubble against
the wall. After departure, cooler liquid from the bulk fills the space vacated
by the bubble, and the thermal layer at and around the nucleation site reforms
(transient conduction). When the required superheat is attained at the tip of
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
the vapor bubble embryo or the interface instability criterion is met, a new
bubble starts to form at the same nucleation site, and the bubble growth process
repeats. Wall heat transfer in nucleate boiling results from natural convection on
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
the heater surface areas not occupied by bubbles and from transient conduction
and evaporation at and around nucleation sites. Bubble dynamics include the
processes of bubble growth, bubble departure, and bubble release frequency,
which includes time for reformation of the thermal layer (waiting period). The
following sections describe each of these processes.
BUBBLE GROWTH The literature highlights two points of view with respect to
bubble growth on a heated surface. One group of investigators has proposed
that the growth of a vapor bubble occurs as a result of evaporation all around the
bubble interface. The energy for evaporation is supplied from the superheated
liquid layer that surrounds the bubble after its inception. Some bubble growth
models are similar to that proposed for growth of a vapor bubble in a sea of
superheated liquid (see Plesset & Zwick 1954). The bubble growth process on
a heater surface, however, is more complex because the bubble shape changes
continuously during the growth process, and superheated liquid is confined to a
thin region around the bubble. Mikic et al (1970) obtained an analytical solution
for the bubble growth rate by using a geometric factor to relate the shape of a
bubble growing on the heater surface to a perfect sphere and accounting for the
thermal energy stored in the superheated liquid layer prior to bubble inception.
Since the initial energy content of the superheated liquid layer surrounding the
bubble depends on the waiting time, the model shows the dependence of bubble
growth rate on waiting time.
The second point of view is that most of the evaporation occurs at the base
of the bubble in that the microlayer between the vapor-liquid interface and
the heater surface plays an important role. Snyder & Edwards (1956) were
the first to propose this mechanism for evaporation. Moore & Mesler (1961)
deduced the existence of a microlayer under the bubble from the oscillations in
the temperature measured at the bubble release site. Cooper & Lloyd (1969)
not only confirmed the existence of a microlayer underneath isolated bubbles
formed on glass or ceramic surfaces but also deduced the thickness of the
microlayer from the observed response of the heater surface thermocouple.
They noted that an expression for local thickness, , of the microlayer could be
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
written as
p
l tg , (5)
where l is the kinematic viscosity of the liquid, and tg is the bubble growth time.
It was further demonstrated that bubble growth was mostly due to evaporation
from the microlayer. Although Cooper & Lloyds work proved the importance
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
of microlayer evaporation at low pressures, their work was limited in scope. Lee
& Nydahl (1989) calculated the growth of spherical bubbles with a microlayer.
For microlayer thickness, they used Cooper & Lloyds formulation. They came
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
374 DHIR
simulation of both bubble growth and departure while properly accounting for
the adhesion forces and interfacial tension.
bubble diameter at departure and bubble release frequency. One of the most
comprehensive correlations of this type is given by Malenkov (1971).
the validity of Equation 6 when the third term on the right-hand side of the
equation was not included.
Judd & Hwang (1976) matched the heat fluxes predicted from Equation 6
with those observed in the experiments in which dichloromethane was boiled
on a glass surface. In doing so, they relied on the measured values of microlayer
thickness to evaluate h ev and on the assumption that K2 was 1.8. Experimentally
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
measured values of active nucleation site density and bubble release frequency
were used in the model. Figure 3 shows Judd & Hwangs data and predictions.
At the total measured heat flux of 6 w/cm2, about one third of the energy is
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
dissipated through evaporation at the bubble base. The data plotted in Figure 3
Figure 3 Relative contribution of various mechanisms to nucleate-boiling heat flux (Judd &
Hwang 1976). qM, measured heat flux; qP, predicted heat flux; qME, microlayer evaporation heat
flux; qNC, natural convection heat flux.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
376 DHIR
show that at high heat fluxes or in fully developed nucleate boiling, most of
the energy from the heater is removed by evaporation. This observation is in
general agreement with Gaertners (1965) finding that after the first transition
(partial to fully developed nucleate boiling), evaporation is the dominant mode
of heat transfer.
At low heat fluxes, or in partial nucleate boiling, the relative contribution
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
Figure 4 Nucleate boiling data of Nishikawa et al (1974) on plates oriented at different angles to
the horizontal.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
378 DHIR
Heat fluxes predicted from Equation 7 agreed well with the data. In fact,
good agreement with Gaertner & Westwaters (1960) data was also seen when
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
number density of active sites reported by Gaertner & Westwater was used.
This approach needs to be verified further with data from other sources.
Heat Transfer Correlations
Because mechanistic models are lacking for several parameters (e.g. Na, Dd,
f, h ev ), prediction of heat flux from Equation 6 requires adjustment of several
empirical constants embedded in these parameters. As a result, Equation 6, pre-
sumably obtained on mechanistic arguments, cannot be readily used to predict
the dependence of nucleate-boiling heat flux on wall superheat. Most often,
correlations reported in the literature have been used for this purpose. These
correlations generally are valid for both partial and fully developed nucleate
boiling. For example, Rohsenows (1952) correlation has been used widely,
even though it is not based on correct physics. Stephan & Abdelsalam (1980)
developed a comprehensive correlation for saturated nucleate pool boiling of
different liquids. Their correlation is based on both fluid and solid properties,
but no consideration is given to heater geometry.
Cooper (1984a,b) proposed a simple correlation for saturated nucleate pool
boiling. His correlation uses reduced pressure, molecular weight, and surface
roughness as the correlating parameters. His correlation for a flat plate can be
written as
0.120.21 log10 R p
(q)1/3 p p 0.55
= 55.0 log10 M 0.50 . (8)
1T pc pc
In Equation 8, the roughness, Rp, is measured in microns, M is the molecular
weight, p is the system pressure, pc is the critical pressure, 1T is measured
in degrees K, and q is given in W/m2. Cooper suggested that for application
of the correlation to horizontal cylinders, the lead constant on the right-hand
side should be increased to 95. Equation 8 accounts for roughness but does not
account for variations in degree of surface wettability. These correlations should
be used with caution, as large deviations between actual data and predictions
can occur when the conditions under which the correlation was developed are
not duplicated.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
proved wettability suppresses nucleation and, as a result, shifts the boiling curve
to the right. Physicochemical changes on the surface can take place because of
deposition of inert matter contained in the host liquid, slow chemical reaction
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
of the surface with the gases dissolved in the liquid or with the vapor, and strong
chemical reaction of the metal with the concentrated solutions of electrolytes.
Generally, the effect of surface contamination is to enhance the wettability and
thereby reduce the nucleate-boiling heat flux for a given wall superheat.
As noted from Figure 4, partial nucleate-boiling heat fluxes generally are
higher on a downward-facing surface, but in fully developed nucleate boiling
the surface orientation has little effect. Thus, the geometry of the surface can
have an effect on partial nucleate-boiling heat fluxes. The rate of convective
heat transfer increases with liquid subcooling. As a result, liquid subcool-
ing influences the inception and partial nucleate boiling regions of the boiling
curve. On the wall heat flux vs wall superheat plots, convective and partial
nucleate-boiling heat fluxes for subcooled liquids lie higher than those for sat-
urated boiling. However, at high nucleate-boiling heat fluxes, the subcooled
and saturated boiling curves almost overlap. Similarly, flow velocity enhances
convective and partial nucleate-boiling heat fluxes but has little effect on fully
developed nucleate boiling.
The magnitude and direction of gravitational acceleration with respect to
the heater surface influences the hydrodynamic and thermal boundary layers
and bubble trajectory. In partial nucleate boiling, heat transfer by convection
represents a major fraction of the total heat transfer rate. Thus, gravity plays
an important role in this mode of boiling. However, Mertes (1988) centrifuge
data and Zell et als (1989) low-gravity data showed that the magnitude of
gravity has little effect on fully developed nucleate boiling. With an increase
in system pressure, the incipience superheat decreases and the nucleate boiling
curve shifts to the left.
The nucleate-boiling heat transfer data collected by Stephan & Abdelsalam
(1980) suggested that thermophysical properties of the solid can have a weak
effect on nucleate-boiling heat fluxes. The boiling curve can be affected by
the manner in which the heat flux is imposed on the surfacesteady state or
transient. Sakurai & Shiotsus (1977a,b) experiments on platinum wires sub-
merged in a pool of saturated water showed that for exponential heating periods
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
380 DHIR
The size of equipment needed for a given heat load can be reduced if already
high nucleate-boiling heat fluxes can be further enhanced. Many research ef-
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
forts have been made in this direction. Recent advances in enhancing nucleate-
boiling heat flux have included the development of heater surfaces with high-
density interconnected artificial cavities of the re-entrant type. Figure 5 shows
a reentrant-type cavity and the structures of two of the commercially available
surfaces. The cavities on these surfaces nucleate at very low superheats. The
nucleate-boiling heat fluxes are enhanced not only by the high density of active
nucleation sites at low superheats but also by the evaporation of a thin liquid
film formed on the cavity walls. The film results from the liquid that is pushed
into the cavity after a bubble leaves. The enhanced surfaces have led to an
order of magnitude increase in already high nucleate-boiling heat transfer co-
efficients. However, enhancement is much less at high wall superheats or near
the maximum heat flux condition.
Figure 5 Reentrant cavity and commercially available enhanced surfaces. (a) Cross-section of
reentrant-type cavity. (b) Thermal excel-E surface. (c) Gewa-T surface.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
Mechanisms
Kutateladze (1948) and Zuber (1959) proposed two early models for prediction
of maximum heat flux on large horizontal surfaces. Both models are based
on the hydrodynamics of vapor outflow. Kutateladze developed dimensionless
groups from the equations governing the flow of vapor and liquid. Zuber, in
contrast, proposed that the maximum heat flux occurs when velocity in the vapor
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
jets issuing from the surface reaches a critical velocity. The critical velocity is
the velocity at which vapor jets become Kelvin-Helmholtz unstable. Zuber also
assumed that the jet diameter was half of the jet spacing that was bounded by
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
382 DHIR
critical velocity of vapor in the jets. Lienhard & Dhir (1973) summarized the
methodology for evaluating f (l 0 ) for various heater geometries. Predictions
from Equation 10 agree with a large set of maximum heat flux data obtained
with different liquids and heater geometries.
Haramura & Katto (1983) have questioned the validity of the assumption of
instability of large vapor jets used in the hydrodynamic theory as originally pro-
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
posed by Zuber and its subsequent augmentation by Lienhard & Dhir (1973).
This questioning is based on the fact that visual observations show the presence
of large vapor mushroom-type bubbles on the heater surface rather than tall
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Figure 6 shows the steady-state peak heat flux data obtained by Liaw & Dhir
(1986). Saturated water at 1 atm pressure was the test liquid. The data are
plotted as a function of contact angle and were taken on a 6.3-cm wide and
10.3-cm high copper plate. Also plotted are the data obtained with R-113,
which wets the polished copper surface well. The dotted lines in Figure 6 show
the predictions obtained from Equation 9 using the value of C suggested by
Zuber (for an infinite horizontal plate) and that suggested by Lienhard & Dhir
for a vertical plate. The data obtained with R-113 and with water at a contact
angle of 18 are within a few percent of the prediction based on hydrodynamic
theory. However, water data covering a range of contact angles from 27 to
107 are much lower.
For a contact angle of 90 (polished copper, distilled water), the observed
maximum heat flux is only about 55% of that given by Lienhard & Dhir (1973).
The reduction of maximum heat flux noted by Costello & Frea (1965) when
distilled water was used instead of tap water can thus be attributed to the reduced
wettability. Lienhard & Dhir explained these data by considering the number
of vapor jets that the heater accommodated. Since the available buoyancy
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
384 DHIR
force can sustain a vapor removal rate corresponding to the maximum heat
flux for an 18 contact angle, the hydrodynamics of the vapor outflow cannot
determine the maximum heat flux on partially wetted surfaces. In contrast,
because the maximum heat flux data appear to be correlated with the surface
wettability (surface property), the upper limit of heat removal is likely set by the
surface.
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
Further evidence that hydrodynamics does not control the maximum heat flux
on partially wetted surfaces is obtained from the void fraction profiles. The void
fraction on partially wetted surfaces at maximum heat flux is less than unity
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
everywhere normal to the surface; thus, flow paths are available for the liquid
to reach the heater surface. Dhir & Liaw (1989) explained the occurrence of
maximum heat flux on partially wetted surfaces on the basis of evaporation area
available at the stem interface. For a contact angle of 90 , the vapor stems merge
at the wall when the wall void fraction attains a value of /4. For contact angles
less than 90 , the merger occurs away from the wall. After merger, the stem
circumference in contact with liquid decreases rapidly. The higher the interface
area available for evaporation at a given superheat, the higher the heat flux (Dhir
& Liaw 1989). Thus, a maximum in the interfacial area corresponds to onset
of the maximum heat flux condition, or the maximum rate of evaporation at the
stems sets the upper limit of nucleate-boiling heat flux. For partially wetted
surfaces, the merger of vapor stems signals a degradation in heat removal rate
or onset of transition boiling. In some respects, this mechanism for maximum
heat flux is similar to Rohsenow & Griffiths (1956) proposal that onset of
the maximum heat flux condition is due to packing of bubbles, which leads to
coalescence of isolated bubbles at the heater surface.
For surfaces with contact angles less than 90 , maximum void fraction occurs
slightly away from the wall. At maximum heat flux on well-wetted surfaces
(maximum heat fluxes approaching those predicted from the hydrodynamic
theory), the void fraction away from the wall reaches a value of unity. At a
void fraction equal to unity, an obstruction to the flow of liquid to the wall can
develop. Since in steady state the vapor production rate must equal the vapor
removal rate, this condition appears to be analogous to what has been assumed
in the past with respect to the hydrodynamically controlled boiling crisis in
pool boiling. The hydrodynamic theory proposed by Zuber (1959) assumed
that the maximum heat flux occurs when vapor escape velocity and vapor flow
area fraction reach their critical values. A void fraction of unity slightly away
from the heater is an alternative form of the same criterion.
Thus, Dhir & Liaw (1989) have proposed different mechanisms for maximum
heat flux on partially wetted and well-wetted surfaces. For partially wetted
surfaces the mechanism depends on the evaporation rate at the surface, whereas
for well-wetted surfaces the mechanism depends on the vapor removal rate or
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
Unified Approach
Dhir & Liaw also provided a framework for a unified model for nucleate and
transition pool boiling on partially wetted surfaces. In their model the maxi-
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
mum heat flux condition was not considered as a disjoint process but rather as
a transition point in the continuously evolving q 1T curve encompassing the
three modes of boiling (i.e. nucleate boiling, transition boiling, and film boil-
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
ing). Since heat removal on both the wet and dry areas contributes to the overall
heat transfer from the surface, an expression for the time- and area-averaged
heat flux may be written as follows:
q = ql (1 w ) + qv w
h l (1 w )1T + h v w 1T. (12)
In Equation 12, ql and h l are the time- and area-averaged heat flux and heat
transfer coefficient, respectively, over the liquid-occupied region. Similarly, qv
and h v are the time- and area-averaged heat flux and heat transfer coefficient,
respectively, on the dry region.
In Equation 12, the temperature over the dry and wet areas is assumed to be
the same. Such an assumption is true for thick copper plates. However, for
thin heaters made out of low-conductivity materials, a significant difference in
temperature between dry and wet areas may exist. In evaluating the heat flux
from Equation 12, Dhir & Liaw (1989) calculated h l by knowing the energy
removal rate by evaporation at the periphery of vapor stems. The heat transfer
coefficient, h v , over the dry region was obtained from Bui & Dhirs (1985a)
data for film boiling on a vertical surface, and experimentally measured values
of wall void fraction were used. As discussed earlier, Wang & Dhir (1993a,b)
and Lay & Dhir (1995a) provided a theoretical basis for prediction of number
density of active sites and the diameters of the vapor stems, respectively. If the
number density and the dry area underneath a vapor stem are known, the wall
void fraction can be determined.
Although Dhir & Liaw used the unified model to predict nucleate and transi-
tion boiling on partially wetted surfaces, the approach can be applied to surfaces
on which maximum heat flux is determined by the vapor removal limit (e.g.
well-wetted surfaces). However, implementation of the model requires knowl-
edge of the variation in wall void fraction with wall superheat after the vapor
removal limit has been reached. To have a totally predictive model for post
critical heat flux, one needs to have models for wall void fraction and the shape
of the interface near the heater surface.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
386 DHIR
product of density, specific heat, and thickness of the heater material (Houchin
& Lienhard 1966, Tachibana et al 1967).
Bar-Cohen & McNeil (1992), Carvalho & Bergles (1992), and Golobic &
Bergles (1992) analyzed a large body of critical heat flux data on heaters of
different materials and thickness. They correlated the critical heat flux with
conpacitance (the product of the heater thickness and of the square root of the
product of the thermal conductivity, specific heat, and density of the heater
material). For thick heaters, the critical heat flux appeared to asymptotically
approach the hydrodynamic limit. From such a correlation of the data, Carvalho
& Bergles found the thickness of the heater material required to achieve at least
90% of the asymptotic value of the critical heat flux.
The maximum heat flux increases with liquid subcooling. Zuber et al (1961)
extended Equation 9 to a subcooled liquid by accounting for heat lost to the
liquid in a transient manner during growth of a bubble. Elkassabgi & Lienhard
(1988) investigated maximum heat fluxes during subcooled pool boiling on
horizontal cylinders. They identified three subcooling regimes. For low sub-
coolings, the maximum heat flux varies linearly with subcooling in a manner
similar to that observed by Zuber et al. At moderate subcoolings, bubbles sur-
rounded the heater without detaching. For these subcoolings, the maximum
heat flux varied slightly nonlinearly with liquid subcooling and was determined
by natural convection from the outer edge of the bubble boundary layer. At
high subcoolings, the maximum heat flux was independent of liquid subcooling
and was limited by the evaporation rate at the heater surface (i.e. molecular
effusion limit) and not by the rate at which energy could be removed by natural
convection from the outer edge of the bubble boundary layer.
The flow velocity enhances the maximum heat flux and is discussed later.
According to Equation 9, the maximum heat flux should scale as 4 g. However,
for very low gravities (g), the functional dependence of maximum heat flux
on gravity is weaker than that obtained from Zubers hydrodynamic analysis.
The reasons for weaker dependence of maximum heat flux on gravity under
microgravity conditions are not clearly understood. Questions also remain
about the stability of boiling. Merte (1994) reported that subcooled boiling
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
during long periods of microgravity is unstable and that the surface alternately
wets and dries out prior to occurrence of critical heat flux.
The effect of system pressure on maximum heat flux is built into the hy-
drodynamic model (Equation 9). With increase in system pressure, the critical
heat flux attains a maximum value near a reduced pressure of about 0.35. The
magnitude of the maximum heat flux is affected if the heat input to the heater
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
is increased rapidly. Sakurai & Shiotsu (1977a,b) found that for exponential
heating periods less than 100 ms, the transient maximum and DNB heat fluxes
increase as the exponential time decreases. The DNB heat flux is defined as
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
TRANSITION BOILING
Transition boiling is characterized by a reduction in surface heat flux with an
increase in wall superheat. As a result, the process is inherently unstable. In
transition boiling, periods of liquid-solid and vapor-solid contact occur alterna-
tively at a given location on the heated surface. Conditions similar to nucleate
boiling and film boiling prevail during wet and dry periods respectively. The
variation in heat flux with wall superheat is a result of change in the fraction
of time each boiling mode is present on a given area. Reviews on transition
boiling have been presented (e.g. Dhir 1991, Auracher 1992), and major points
from these reviews and some recent results are included here.
Since Witte & Lienhard (1982) asserted that Berensons (1962) transition
boiling data showed hysteresis, several studies on the issue have appeared in
the literature. Bui & Dhir (1985b) showed from their experiments on a vertical
surface that different transition boiling curves were obtained depending on
the side of the curve from which the boiling was accessed (i.e. the nucleate
boiling side or the film boiling side). Bui & Dhir (1985b) and Liaw & Dhir
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
388 DHIR
when liquid wetted the surface well (i.e. nearly zero contact angle).
Ramilison & Lienhard (1987) recreated Berensons apparatus in which steam
was condensed on the underside of a copper disc while boiling occurred on
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
the top of the disc. In this experiment, although thermal resistance of the
copper heater was reduced, not all points in transition boiling were accessible.
Ramilison & Lienhard conjectured that the shift from film-transition boiling
to nucleate-transition boiling was a result of the change from an advancing
contact angle to a receding contact angle. Thus, they implied that hysteresis
was a result of differences in advancing and receding contact angles.
Haramuras (1991) data, also obtained on an apparatus similar to that of
Berenson, showed that for R-113, some hysteresis existed even though the data
were obtained under steady-state conditions. Auracher (1992) developed a
feedback system so that in electrically heated systems, steady-state transition
boiling data could be obtained. He found that no hysteresis existed during tran-
sition boiling of R-113 when data were obtained under steady-state conditions
under either increasing or decreasing temperature conditions. From this obser-
vation, Auracher concluded that hysteresis observed in transition boiling was
due to the transient nature of the data obtained in previous studies and that no
hysteresis existed when the data were obtained under steady-state conditions.
The issue is far from being resolved since Auracher did not provide any steady-
state transition boiling data with liquids having contact angles vastly different
from zero, and a majority of the transition boiling data showing hysteresis were
obtained by other investigators only under relatively slow transient conditions.
Equation 12 has been used to correlate the dependence of wall heat flux
on wall superheat in transition boiling. Generally, empirical expressions for
dependence of ql , qv , and w on 1T are used so that predicted heat fluxes match
the transition boiling data and the maximum and minimum heat fluxes at the
upper and lower end of the transition boiling data. A few semi-mechanistic
approaches (e.g. Shoji 1992) have been proposed for prediction of transition
boiling heat fluxes. Although these models agree with the data reasonably well,
independent verification of different submodels that contribute to the overall
model is lacking.
To facilitate mechanistic modeling of transition boiling, several experimental
studies have measured the wet area fraction during nucleate boiling (see Dhir
1991) and heat transfer associated with liquid contacts (see Chen & Hsu 1995).
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
Using a microthermocouple probe, Chen & Hsu (1995) measured the transient
surface heat fluxes when a liquid droplet lands on a hot, initially dry, surface.
They noted that the process of heat transfer during a short period of liquid
contact is very complex but found that the average heat flux increases with wall
superheat. During contact periods the droplets that initially had a subcooling of
80 C yielded average heat fluxes as high as 107 W/m2 at high wall superheats.
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
More systematic studies similar to that of Chen & Hsu (1995) are needed
to understand the physics of heat transfer during transient liquid-solid contacts
before credible models for transition boiling can be developed. These studies
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
FILM BOILING
Film boiling is amenable to straightforward analysis; however, in carrying out
the analysis, many simplifications with respect to the matching of interfacial
conditions and the shape of the interface are made. As a result, empirical
constants must be used to match predictions with the data.
Semi-Mechanistic Models
Sakurai et al (1990a,b) developed comprehensive correlations for saturated and
subcooled film boiling on horizontal cylinders. In developing the correlations,
which include the effect of radiation, the functional form of the correlations was
obtained by solving the conservation equations for a two-layered configuration
of subcooled film boiling. Sakurai et al also developed a database that covered
a large range of system variables such as heater diameter, wall superheat, liquid
subcooling, and pressure. The correlations agreed well with the data, including
that obtained for cryogenic liquids.
Sakurai & Shiotsu (1992) extended their correlations to include a vertical
surface and a sphere. By measuring the size of the bubble departing a heater
under saturated film boiling conditions and bubble release frequency, Sakurai &
Shiotsu also developed an expression for minimum heat flux on horizontal cylin-
ders. In addition, they showed that Lienhard & Wongs (1964) semi-mechanistic
correlation tends to overpredict the effect of system pressure, and that the col-
lapse of vapor film is influenced by the heater surface temperature rather than
the heat flux. For saturated film boiling, the minimum film boiling tempera-
ture increased with pressure and asymptotically approached the homogeneous
nucleation temperature. In correlating the minimum film boiling temperature,
Sakurai & Shiotsu (1992) accounted for the reduction in the heater surface tem-
perature that occurs upon spontaneous contact of the liquid with the surface.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
390 DHIR
Mechanistic Studies
Studies have also focused on understanding the structure of the vapor-liquid
interface in film boiling. Bui & Dhir (1985a) investigated saturated film boiling
on a vertical surface. They noted that both long and short waves exist on
the interface. The long waves evolve into large bulges, and vapor from the
intervening thin-film region feeds the large bulges. As a result, the flow path
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
length is shortened, and higher average heat transfer rates occur than those
predicted for a continuous flow path. They also noted that a significant variation
in local heat transfer coefficient occurs with time as large bulges and thin-film
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
regions sweep over the heated surface. In a study of subcooled film boiling
on a vertical surface, Vijaykumar & Dhir (1992a) noted that, as in saturated
film boiling, two types of waves (termed ripples and large waves) exist on the
interface.
Figure 7 shows photographs of the frontal view of film boiling on a vertical
surface. The waves tend to form at a short distance downstream of the leading
edge. The amplitude of the long waves controls the interface velocity. Based
on the amplitude-to-wavelength ratio, the interface behavior in subcooled film
boiling was divided into two regimes. In the low subcooling regime, three-
dimensional waves exist on the interface. The flows that result from the de-
veloping liquid boundary layer and from the rapid acceleration of the interface
merge downstream of the leading-edge vapor layer. The fluid in the merged
region is entrained by the moving interface.
Figure 8 shows profiles of axial velocity in the liquid boundary layer when
water had a subcooling of 6.7 K. At the top of the first wave peak downstream
of the leading edge, the velocity profile in the liquid shows a steep gradient.
In the valley behind the first peak, flow expands and velocities decrease in the
boundary layer. A local minimum and a maximum in velocity profile can be
noted in the boundary layer. Flow contracted and expanded at the succeeding
wave peaks and valleys, respectively. At higher subcoolings, wave structure
degenerates into two-dimensional waves. The liquid boundary layer thins, but
the phenomenon of expansion and contraction of the flow in the valleys and at
the peaks, respectively, persists.
Using a holographic technique, Vijaykumar & Dhir (1992b) also obtained
temperature profiles and heat fluxes in the liquid layer adjacent to the vapor
film. Figure 9 shows the interface shape and the heat flux into the liquid at
the interface for water subcooling of 1.6 K. A relatively large heat flux exists
at the frontal region of the leading-edge layer (location a). The rate of heat
transfer decreases to a minimum value (location f) and thereafter remains fairly
constant in the valley region. At the frontal region of the first peak, the heat
flux increases gradually, reaching a maximum at the top of the peak before
decreasing again.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
From information such as that shown in Figure 9, Vijaykumar & Dhir (1992b)
concluded that liquid-side heat transfer over each wavelength shows a cyclic
behavior with the highest heat flux occurring at the peaks and the minimum
occurring in the wave valleys. Invariably, the highest heat flux exceeds the heat
flux by conduction through the vapor bulge. High local liquid-side heat flux
at the peaks suggests the possibility of local condensation. Evaporation in the
valleys and condensation at the peaks results in little increase in the substrate
film thickness in the vapor flow direction. The average liquid-side heat transfer
is enhanced both by the cyclic behavior and by the increased interfacial area.
Thus, Vijaykumar & Dhir were able to explain that the underprediction of
subcooled film boiling heat transfer by the two-layer models that assume a
plane interface is largely the result of the underprediction in the liquid-side heat
flux.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
392 DHIR
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Figure 8 Velocity profiles of the component of the velocity (1T = 207 K, 1Tsub = 6.7 K) along
the vertical plate.
Figure 9 Liquid-side heat transfer as a function of distance along the vertical plate for 1T = 160
K, 1Tsub = 1.6 K.
394 DHIR
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Figure 10 Prediction of film boiling on a horizontal surface. (a) Evolution of the interface.
(b) Heat transfer coefficient as a function of position and time. (c) Nusselt number based on
area-averaged heat transfer coefficient.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
Figure 10 (Continued )
396 DHIR
FLOW BOILING
External Flow Boiling
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Two of the most often studied geometries under external flow conditions are
those of a liquid jet impinging on a horizontal surface and of flow normal to
a horizontal cylinder. In these two cases, the flow can be along the direction
of gravity, against the direction of gravity, or normal to gravity. Fully devel-
oped nucleate boiling data obtained under forced flow conditions represent an
extension of the pool boiling curve. However, in partial nucleate boiling, the
functional dependence of the boiling heat flux on wall superheat is weaker under
forced flow condition.
Several investigators have developed semi-theoretical correlations for the
maximum heat flux obtained with impinging jets. Monde (1987) extended Hara-
mura & Kattos (1983) critical liquid-layer model, whereas Sharan & Lienhard
(1985) used the mechanical energy stability criterion initially proposed by Lien-
hard & Eichhorn (1979). According to this criterion, the maximum heat flux
occurs when the rate at which kinetic energy added to the coolant (as a result of
evaporation) exceeds the rate at which energy is consumed in the formation of
new droplets. During jet impingement cooling, substantially higher maximum
heat fluxes are obtained at relatively low jet velocities.
Lay & Dhir (1995b) showed that macro- or micro-modification of the surface
can enhance twofold to threefold the maximum or critical heat flux during jet
impingement cooling. The macro-modification is in the form of radial channels,
which help retain the liquid on the surface. The micro-modifications, in contrast,
provide a high density of active nucleation sites at low wall superheats.
Lienhard (1988) reviewed the area of prediction of maximum heat flux
on cylinders. He also gave correlations applicable to gravity-influenced and
gravity-free data. Jensen & Hsu (1988) showed that for upflowing cross-flow
over tube bundles, nucleate-boiling heat transfer coefficients are influenced by
the location of the tube in the bundle. Because of an accumulation of vapor
along the flow direction, flow regimes change. A liquid film with vapor core
is observed on tubes far away from the inlet. Thus, different types of critical
heat flux mechanisms can prevail in the lower and upper parts of a tube bundle.
Jensen (1988) reviewed cross-flow boiling on horizontal tube bundles.
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
followed by subcooled boiling at the wall, which in turn gives way to saturated
or bulk boiling. After initiation of bulk boiling, the addition of vapor along
the tube axis causes flow regimes to change from bubbly flow, to slug flow, to
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
398 DHIR
Look-up tables (see e.g. Groenveld & Lueng 1989) have been developed that
require less computing time and that can be updated easily as new data become
available.
Mechanistic models for critical heat flux in tubes have also been developed.
These models, however, use empirical constants to match the predictions with
the data. Several competing mechanisms for critical heat flux have been pro-
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
posed. Two of the most commonly proposed mechanisms for critical heat flux
are (a) the inability of the core flow to remove vapor generated at the wall,
and (b) the formation of a persistent dry patch underneath a bubble attached to
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
the wall or resulting from dryout of the thin liquid film between the wall and
a large bubble. Katto (1994) and Celata et al (1994) provided comprehensive
reviews of correlations and models for critical heat flux. Efforts similar to those
described earlier for film boiling are currently being made to predict critical
heat flux by carrying out complete numerical simulation of the process (see e.g.
Lahey 1996).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author appreciates the support from the NASA Microgravity Fluid Physics
Program, with Dr. David Chao as Project Scientist. The author is also grateful
to Ms. Cindy Gilbert for skillfully typing the manuscript.
Literature Cited
Auracher A. 1992. Transition boiling in natural mination of forced convection surface boiling
convection systems. See Dhir & Bergles, pp. heat transfer. J. Heat Transfer 86:36572
21936 Bier K, Gorenflow D, Salem M, Tanes Y. 1978.
Bankoff SG. 1958. Entrapment of gas in the Pool boiling heat transfer and size of active
spreading of liquid over a rough surface. nucleation centers for horizontal plates with
AIChE J. 4:2426 different surface roughness. Proc. Int. Heat
Bar-Cohen A, McNeil A. 1992. Parametric ef- Transfer Conf., 6th, Toronto, 1:15156
fects on pool boiling critical heat flux in di- Bui TD, Dhir VK. 1985a. Film boiling heat
electric liquids. See Dhir & Bergles, pp. 171 transfer on an isothermal vertical surface. J.
76 Heat Transfer 107:76471
Barthau G. 1992. Active nucleation site den- Bui TD, Dhir VK. 1985b. Transition boiling
sity and pool boiling heat transferan ex- heat transfer on a vertical surface. J. Heat
perimental study. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer Transfer 107:75663
33:27178 Buyevich YA, Webber BW. 1996. Towards
Berenson PJ. 1961. Film boiling heat transfer a new theory of nucleate pool boiling.
form a horizontal surface. J. Heat Transfer Presented at Eur. Thermal-Sciences Conf.,
83:35158 Rome, Italy
Berenson PJ. 1962. Experiments on pool boil- Carvalho RDM, Bergles AE. 1992. The effects
ing heat transfer. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer of heater thermal conductance/capacitance
5:98599 on the pool boiling critical heat flux. See Dhir
Bergles AE, Rohsenow WM. 1964. The deter- & Bergles, pp. 21924
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
Celata GP, Cumo M, Mariani A. 1994. Assess- cleate pool boiling on a horizontal surface.
ment of correlations and models for the pre- ASME J. Heat Transfer 87:1729
diction of CHF in water subcooled flow boil- Gaertner RF, Westwater JW. 1960. Population
ing. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 33:23755 of active sites in nucleate boiling heat trans-
Chen JC. 1963. A correlation for boiling heat fer. Chem. Engr. Prog. Symp. Ser. 56:3948
transfer to saturated fluids in convective flow. Golobic I, Bergles AE. 1992. Effects of thermal
ASME Pap. 63-HT-34 properties and thickness of horizontal verti-
Chen JC, Hsu KK. 1995. Heat transfer dur- cally oriented ribbon heaters on the pool boil-
ing liquid contact on superheated surfaces. ing critical heat flux. See Dhir & Bergles, pp.
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
Cooper MG. 1984a. Heat flow rates in saturated Int. Heat Transfer Conf., 8th, San Francisco
nucleate pool boilinga wide-ranging exam- 4:19952000
ination using reduced properties. Adv. Heat Groenveld DC, Leung LKH. 1989. Tabular ap-
Transfer 16:155239 proach for predicting critical heat flux and
Cooper MG. 1984b. Saturation nucleate post dryout heat transfer. Proc. Int. Topical
boilinga simple correlation. IChemE Meet. Nuclear Reactor Thermal-Hydraulics,
Symp. Ser. 86:78693 4th, Karlsruhe. 1:109114
Cooper MG, Judd AM, Pike RA. 1978. Shape Hahne E, Diesselhorst T. 1978. Hydrodynamic
and departure of single bubbles growing at and surface effects on the peak heat flux in
a wall. Proc. Int. Heat Transfer Conf., 6th, pool boiling. Proc. Int. Heat Transfer Conf.,
Toronto, 1:11520 6th, Toronto, 1:20919
Cooper MG, Lloyd AJP. 1969. The microlayer Haramura Y. 1991. Steady state pool transi-
in nucleate pool boiling. Int. J. Heat Mass tion boiling heat with the condensing steam.
Transfer 12:895913 Proc. ASME/JSME Thermal Eng. Joint Conf.,
Cornwell K, Brown RD. 1978. Boiling surface Reno, NV. 2:5964
topography. Proc. Int. Heat Transfer Conf., Haramura Y, Katto YA. 1973. A new hydrody-
6th, Toronto, 1:157161 namic model of critical heat flux applicable
Costello CP, Frea WJ. 1965. A salient non- widely to both pool and forced convection
hydrodynamic effect in pool boiling burnout boiling on submerged bodies in saturated liq-
of small semi-cylinder heaters. Chem. Eng. uids. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 26:38999
Prog. Symp. Ser. 61:25868 Hosler ER, Westwater JW. 1962. Film boiling
Dhir VK. 1991. Nucleate and transition boil- on a horizontal plate. ARS J. 32:55358
ing heat transfer under pool and external flow Houchin WR, Lienhard JH. 1966. Boiling
conditions. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 12(4): burnout in low thermal capacity heaters.
290314 ASME Pap. 66-WA/HT-40
Dhir VK, Bergles AE, eds. 1992. Proc. Eng. Hsu YY. 1962. On the size range of active nu-
Found. Conf. Pool Extern. Flow Boil. ASME cleation sites on a heating surface. J. Heat
Pub. Transfer 84:20716
Dhir VK, Liaw SP. 1989. Framework for a uni- Hsu YY, Graham RW. 1976. Transport Process-
fied model for nucleate and transition pool ing in Boiling and Two Phase Systems. Wash-
boiling. J. Heat Transfer 111:73945 ington, DC: Hemisphere
Elkassabgi Y, Lienhard JH. 1988. The peak pool Jensen MK. 1988. Boiling on the shellside
boiling heat flux from horizontal cylinders in of horizontal tube boilers. In Two Phase
subcooled liquids. J. Heat Transfer 110:479 Heat Exchangers, ed. S Kakac, pp. 70746.
86 Boston: Kluwer
Forest TW. 1982. The stability of gaseous nu- Jensen MK, Hsu JT. 1988. A parametric study
clei at liquid-solid interfaces. J. Appl. Phys. of boiling heat transfer in a horizontal tube
53:6191201 bundle. J. Heat Transfer 110:97681
Forster DE, Greif R. 1959. Heat transfer to a Judd RL, Chopra A. 1993. Interaction of the
boiling liquidmechanism and correlation. nucleation process occurring at adjacent nu-
J. Heat Transfer 81:4353 cleation sites. J. Heat Transfer 115:95562
Fritz W. 1935. Maximum volume of vapor bub- Judd RL, Hwang KS. 1976. A comprehen-
bles. Physik Zeitschr. 36:37984 sive model for nucleate boiling heat trans-
Fujita Y. 1992. The state of the artnucleate fer including microlayer evaporation. J. Heat
boiling mechanism. See Dhir & Bergles, pp. Transfer 98:62329
8398 Katto Y. 1994. Critical heat flux. Int. J. Multi-
Gaertner RF. 1965. Photographic study of nu- phase Flow 20:5390
P1: ARS/ary P2: ARK/plb QC: MBL/bsa T1: MBL
November 13, 1997 13:18 Annual Reviews AR049-13
400 DHIR
Kenning DBR. 1977. Pool boiling. In Two by the quenching method. Proc. Int. Heat
Phase Flow and Heat Transfer, ed. D. Butter- Transfer Conf., 7th, Munich, 4:15560
worth, GF Hewitt, pp. 12852. Oxford: Ox- Malenkov IG. 1971. Detachment frequency as a
ford Univ. Press function of size of vapor bubbles (translated).
Kenning DBR. 1989. Wall temperatures in nu- Inzh. Fiz. Zhur. 20:99
cleate boiling. Proc. Eurotherm. Semin. Adv. Maracy M, Winterton RHS. 1988. Hysteresis
Pool Boiling Heat Transfer, 8th, Paderborn, and contact angle effects in transition pool
Germany, pp. 19 boiling of water. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer
Klimenko VV. 1981. Film boiling on a horizon- 31:144349
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
tal platenew correlation. Int. J. Heat Mass Merte H. 1988. Nucleate pool boiling: high
Transfer 24:6979 gravity to reduced gravity; liquid metals
Kocamustafaogullari G, Ishii M. 1983. Interfa- to cryogenics. Trans. Symp. Space Nuclear
cial area and nucleation site density in boiling Power Systems, 5th, Albuquerque, NM, pp.
systems. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 26:1377 43742
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Ramilison JM, Lienhard JH. 1987. Transition stability with application to film boiling and
boiling heat transfer and the film transition wetting. Proc. Japan-U.S. Semin. Two Phase
regime. J. Heat Transfer 109:74652 Flow Dynamics, pp. 3019
Rohsenow WM. 1952. A method of correlat- Stephan K, Abdelsalem M. 1980. Heat trans-
ing heat transfer data for surface boiling of fer correlations for natural convection boil-
liquids. Trans. ASME 74:96976 ing. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 23:7887
Rohsenow WM. 1971. Boiling. Annu. Rev. Sultan M, Judd RL. 1983. Interaction of the nu-
Fluid Mech. 3:21136 cleation phenomena at adjacent sites in nu-
Rohsenow WM, Griffith P. 1956. Correlation of cleate boiling. J. Heat Transfer 105:39
Access provided by University of Texas - El Paso (Library - Serials Dept) on 08/28/17. For personal use only.
maximum heat flux data for boiling of sat- Tachibana F, Akiyama M, Kawamura H. 1967.
urated liquids. Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp. Ser. Non-hydrodynamic aspects of pool boiling
52:4749 burnout. J. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 4:12130
Sakurai A, Shiotsu M. 1977a. Transient pool Vijaykumar R, Dhir VK. 1992a. An experimen-
boiling heat transfer. Part 1: incipience tal study of subcooled film boiling on a verti-
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1998.30:365-401. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org