0263±8762/99/$10.00+0.

00
€ Institution of Chemical Engineers
Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999

A MODIFICATION TO THE EQUILIBRIUM MODEL

FOR CONDENSATION OF VAPOURS OF IMMISCIBLE
LIQUIDS
D. R. WEBB (FELLOW) and J. S. KIM*
Department of Chemical Engineering, UMIST, Manchester, UK
*University of Ulsan, Korea

T
he equilibrium approach of Silver1 and Bell and Ghaly2 , is widely used in the industrial
design of condensers because it usually gives acceptable accuracy, though it is
acknowledged to be less reliable than the ® lm model approach developed by Colburn
et al.3 ,4 . It fails to describe wet wall de-superheating of superheated vapour mixtures but has
been successfully modi® ed by McNaught5 for this case. This work shows that Silver-Bell also
fails to describe the condensation of vapour mixtures forming immiscible condensates with
acceptable accuracy. A new modi® cation, similar to that of McNaught, is proposed and shown
to give good predictions of experimental data, measured in a shell and tube condenser of
industrial scale.
Keywords: condenser behaviour; immiscible condensates; industrial design

The condensation of vapours of immiscible liquids is

INTRODUCTION
The equilibrium method of Silver1 or its development
presented by Bell and Ghaly2 has been widely used in
industrial design practice because of its simplicity. A
serious dif® culty is met when the method is applied to
the condensation of superheated vapours because the mode
of heat transfer may be misrepresented in this instance.
The equilibrium method forces the occurrence of dry wall
de-superheating, (i.e. without condensation), until the
temperature of the vapour falls to the dew point, when
condensation starts. In reality, wet wall de-superheating (i.e.
with condensation) should take place because the wall
temperature reaches the dew point well before the bulk
vapour phase, thereby initiating condensation. Without
allowing for wet wall de-superheating, the equilibrium
method assigns a low heat transfer coef® cient as in gas
cooling, and condensers are oversized.
Miropolsky et al.6 have suggested that an effective heat
transfer coef® cient can be used in the region of wet wall
de-superheating for the condensation of pure steam inside a
tube. They de® ned the effective coef® cient by interpolating
non-linearly between the single-phase gas coef® cient and
the condensing coef® cient, and assessed the method by
comparison with their experimental data. Later models
are based on a more realistic modelling of the physical
behaviour.
McNaught5 has modi® ed the equilibrium method to
describe de-superheating more rigorously. His modi® cation
is based on the ® lm model, which allows a physically
realistic description of de-superheating. The same author,
on the basis of data available at that time, has concluded that
the equilibrium method is not signi® cantly poorer provided
that the mass transfer correction of Ackermann7 is applied,
and that proper allowance is made for de-superheating.
encountered in many industrially important processes such
as steam distillation. Much of the early work on this subject
was concerned with the determination of the heat transfer
coef® cients of the mixed condensate. Most notable among
these are the works of Akers and Turner8 and Bernhardt
et al.9 . A review of such methods is to be found in the latter
and more recently in the work of Polley and Calus1 0 .
The process of condensation of vapours forming
immiscible liquids differs from the case of miscible liquids.
Sardesai and Webb1 1 have presented a description of the
different modes of condensation of vapours forming
immiscible liquids and developed criteria for their predic-
tion. These are used to develop a ® lm method for condenser
design, which is applied as the ® lm method in this work.
Sardesai1 2 has presented data for condensation of binary
vapours forming immiscible liquids inside a single vertical
tube. Deo1 3 , Spiliotis1 4 and Papaioannou1 5 have extended
the work to other geometries and systems.
Webb and Kim1 6 have pointed out that the equilibrium
method fails when it is used to describe condensation of one
phase alone from a vapour mixture of immiscible liquids.
They have con® rmed experimentally that the equilibrium
approach works very poorly in this case and the problem has
been explained by comparison with the ® lm method, which
is successful in modelling all the same data. The failure
occurs because the equilibrium method demands that the
full vapour mixture attains azeotropic composition before
condensation of both phases begins. In practice this occurs
somewhat sooner when the interface temperature becomes
azeotropic. In the case of condensation of one phase alone,
the other components behave as non-condensing gases, the
overall heat transfer coef® cient is small, and the effect on
design rather serious. The similarity with the case of wet
wall de-superheating is clear.

110
 EQUILIBRIUM MODEL FOR CONDENSATION OF VAPOURS OF IMMISCIBLE LIQUIDS 111

change involved in cooling the condensing components

from the gas to interface temperatures. In this case, the
effect of mass transfer is accounted for by the alternative
term f1 (e), which is known as the Ackermann correction
factor. Equation (6) is also written in an abbreviated form,
equation (7) by de® ning a modi® ed heat transfer coef® cient
by equation (8).
qÇ g ag Tg Ts 7
e
e
ag ag e
8
e 1
The heat ¯ ux to the coolant, qÇ o , is given by continuity of
energy at the interface as,
qÇ o a·g Tg Ts nÇ T D hÄ vf Ts 9
Figure 1. Film model of the gas ® lm. In order to maintain consistency with previous work the
treatment of condensate sub-cooling has not been included.
The treatment of the overall heat transfer and from the
In this present paper, a modi® cation is proposed to
condensate surface to the coolant is conventional. A local
improve the equilibrium method for predicting the condensa-
overall heat transfer coef® cient, Uo , and a composite heat
tion of mixed vapours of immiscible liquids, and the modi® ed
transfer coef® cient, ao including the effect of condensate,
model is evaluated by comparison with experimental data.
wall and coolant ® lms and any dirt or fouling layer are
The data is for the system commercial hexane-water as
de® ned by equations (10) and (11).
described by Webb and Kim1 6 .
qÇ o U o Tg To 10
THEORY AND ANALYTICAL METHODS ao T s To 11
The Film Method
Combining equations (3), (10) and (11), Uo can be written
Figure 1 shows the gas ® lm in a ® lm model of condensation, as,
as described by Colburn et al.3 ,4 and Ackermann 7 . The energy 1 1 qÇ s /Çqo
equation, with terms describing conduction and convection 12
may be written, U o ao a·g
dT
qÇ s lg nÇ i cÄ p fi T Ts 1
ds The Silver-Bell Equilibrium Method
where nÇ i is the molal ¯ ux of condensationand cÄ p fi is the molar In the equilibrium model, as presented by Silver1 and
heat capacity of vapour component i. This may be integrated Bell and Ghaly2 , the mass transfer process in the gas ® lm is
over the ® lm with the boundary conditions in Figure 1, to not described, the temperature pro® le across the gas ® lm
give the sensible heat transfer ¯ ux at the interface, qÇ s . becomes linear, Figure 1, and there is no distinction between
eee qÇ s and qÇ g . In consequence, the sensible heat ¯ ux is
qÇ s ag e T Ts 2
e 1 g calculated by equation (13). Based on their point of view,
Tg and Ts are the bulk gas and condensate surface equation (14) should be used for calculating the overall heat
temperatures and the effect of mass transfer is accounted transfer coef® cient,
for by the term f(e). Equation (2) is usually written in the qÇ g ag Tg Ts 13
abbreviated form of equation (3) by de® ning a modi® ed heat
transfer coef® cient by equation (4). The factor e is the ratio 1 1 qÇ g /Çqo
14
of the heat transfer rates with and without mass transfer and Uo ao ag
is given by equation (5). In the usual formulation of the industrial design approach
qÇ s a·g Tg Ts 3 the equations are applied over ® nite increments and the ratio
of ¯ uxes is replaced by a ratio of heat loads.
eee
a·g ag 4
ee 1
The Improved Silver-Bell Method
S nÇ i cÄ p fi nÇ T cÄ pf
e 5 McNaught1 7 has corrected the equilibrium method to
ag ag allow for the mass transfer ¯ ux in the gas ® lm. Based on the
The heat ¯ ux at the gas side of the ® lm is different from that de® nition of qÇ g , the sensible heat ¯ ux from the bulk gas
transferred to the interface and may be evaluated as, phase given by equations (7) and (8), he de® nes Uo as,
ee 1 1 qÇ g /Çqo
qÇ s ag e T Ts 6 15
e 1 g U o ao ag
The heat ¯ ux on the gas side of the ® lm is smaller than that At ® rst sight this may seem to be in con¯ ict with equation
at the interface because it does not include the sensible heat (12). However they are in fact identical because qÇ s and

Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999

112
ag are both ee times larger than qÇ g and ag . It has become
normal practice to use ag in applying the Silver-Bell approach
and McNaught1 7 has shown that this gives generally better
results. Equation (15) is found to give a higher gas side
resistance than equation (14) by the Ackermann factor of
(ee 1)/e. In consequence, the modi® cation makes the
equilibrium model with the correction safer in design. The
modi® cation becomes more important where higher con-
densation ¯ ux, nÇ T , is involved. This modi® cation has
become accepted and in the remainder of the paper the
Silver-Bell method, modi® ed in this manner, will be
referred to as Silver-Bell (wMT), (i.e. with Mass Transfer).
Recently, Webb et al.1 8 have explained more clearly the
relationship between the ® lm and equilibrium models and it
is clear that the application of ag does not resolve the
discrepancy between the models.
McNaught Model of De-superheating
The equilibrium approach was developed for the case
where the bulk gas-vapour mixture is taken to follow the
saturation curve. As explained in the introduction, it
fails for the case of superheated vapours. McNaught5
recti® ed this by a simple modi® cation to the equilibrium
model, which allows condensation to occur before de-
superheating is complete giving the so-called wet wall de-
superheating process. Its inception occurs when the wall
temperature in de-superheating alone falls below the dew
point, Ts # Td ,
ao
Ts Tg Tg To
ao ag
Equation (15) is still used to calculate the overall heat
transfer coef® cient but qÇ o and qÇ g are calculated as follows,
qÇ o ag Tg Td ag T d Ts nÇ T D hÄ vf Ts
Uo Td To
qÇ g ag Td Ts
More correctly, these equations should be written in terms
of qÇ s because the method does not account for the additional
sensible heat to cool the condensing species to the interface
temperature, though this is negligible compared with the
total heat ¯ ux. Also, it is only of the same magnitude as the
neglected sub-cooling term.
The de-superheating model requires that the change of
gas temperature is followed. It may be predicted by the
equation of downstream development from the ® lm model,
a differential energy balance over an element of the
condenser area. This is given by either of,
dTg
qÇ s ee NÇ g cÄ pg 20
dA
dTg
qÇ g NÇ g cÄ pg 21
dA
where NÇ g and cÄ pg are the local molal ¯ owrate and mean
molar heat capacity of the vapour mixture respectively.
Again the difference between qÇ s and qÇ g arises from the
cooling of the condensing vapour from gas to the condensate
surface. In the remainder of the paper this model will be
referred to as Silver-Bell (wDS), with de-superheating.
WEBB and KIM
Modi® ed Equilibrium Model for Vapours of Immiscible
Liquids
The present paper considers the application of the above
equations to the case of condensation of the vapours of
immiscible liquids. In general, three different modes of heat
transfer are required to describe this process. For generality
it is assumed that the vapours are superheated at the inlet to
the condenser.
It is helpful to consider Figure 2, which is the cooling
curve that is appropriate for the process. It shows how these
three modes of heat transfer are assumed to occur in the
modi® ed equilibrium approach. The feed, at a temperature
Tg , is superheated, i.e. above the saturation temperature, Td .
If the surface temperature, Ts , lies above Td then no
condensation will take place but the gas will be cooled (de-
superheated) following the path shown in Region 1. The
surface temperature will fall and eventually reaches the dew
point Td , which marks the end of Region 1.
In Region 2, the surface temperature lies between the dew
point and the azeotropic temperature, Tu . This is a region
where condensation produces a single-phase condensate.
The dew point temperature falls through this region as the
composition changes, and there is an approach towards
azeotropic conditions. The gas may be saturated or super-
heated but in either case a considerable sensible heat load is
involved. The end of the region is reached when the surface
temperature becomes azeotropic. This region should be
described by the improved Silver-Bell method, (wMT), if
the vapour is saturated or the McNaught de-superheating
model, Silver-Bell (wDS), if the vapour is superheated.
Region 3 shows the surface temperature less than the
16
azeotropic temperature and condensation will produce both
liquid phases. The failure of the established methods
described above arises because they prolong Region 2
until the gas saturation temperature reaches Tu (along the
17 dotted line in Figure 2). The new model proposed below,
which is an extension of Silver-Bell (wDS), gives an
18 improved treatment of Region 3. In the new model, the
azeotropic temperature is the appropriate dew point and
19
there is therefore a discontinuity in assumed saturation
Figure 2. Modi® ed equilibrium approach.
Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999
 EQUILIBRIUM MODEL FOR CONDENSATION OF VAPOURS OF IMMISCIBLE LIQUIDS 113

temperature at the beginning of Region 3. The usual cooling Table 1. Predictions of Condensation of Superheated Vapours.
curve, which is pre-determined, is used and the condensa-
Superheat (°C) 0 10 20 30 40
tion of the second phase is still delayed until the vapour
composition reaches azeotropic. However, the vapour Condensed (%)
side resistance is modi® ed as though both phases were Film Method 83.6 80.1 76.2 72.2 67.9
condensing. The gas temperature must be calculated from Silver-Bell (wDS) 81.0 77.7 74.2 70.6 67.1
Silver-Bell 82.2 49.3 31.3 19.2 10.1
either equation (20) or (21). In Region 4, all methods predict
condensation to produce both condensate phases, i.e. Pressure Drop (kPa)
Film Method 0.572 0.618 0.667 0.721 0.779
azeotropic condensation. Silver-Bell (wDS) 0.590 0.625 0.661 0.698 0.735
Silver-Bell 0.584 0.994 1.191 1.314 1.401

Dry Wall De-superheating (Region 1)

Equation (16) is used to determine whether dry or wet
wall de-superheating occurs. Dry wall de-superheating
occurs only if the wall temperature, Ts , is higher than the
dew point temperature, Td . This mode is evaluated as for a
single-phase heat transfer calculation from simpli® cations
to equations (2) and (12),
1 1 1 always close to saturated. A hypothetical example is taken
Uo ao ag
qÇ o qÇ s ag Tg Ts
The gas temperature does not have to follow the equilibrium
curve but may be predicted by equation (20), [with e 0].
Condensation with a Single Phase Condensate (Region 2)
This mode of condensation, which involves the
condensation of a single phase, begins when the surface
temperature falls below the dew point, as predicted by
equation (16). Either the Silver-Bell (wMT) method or the
Silver-Bell (wDS) method is used with the overall heat
transfer coef® cient calculated by equation (15). This mode
will terminate when the condensate surface temperature Ts
reaches the azeotropic temperature, which is obtained
by,
U o Tg To
Ts To
ao
Condensation with Two Phase Condensates expected
(Regions 3 and 4)
This process occurs when Ts falls below the azeotropic
temperature as given by equation (24). It can be modelled in
a manner similar to Silver-Bell (wDS) but equations (25) to
(27) must be used with equation (12) for the overall heat
transfer coef® cient.
qÇ o a·g Tg Tu a·g Tu Ts nÇ T D hÄ vf Ts
Uo Tu To
qÇ s a·g Tu Ts
It should be noted that a major departure from physical
reality is realized in Region 3 where the pre-determined
cooling curve forces condensation of a single phase. The
new method compensates for this by reducing the gas side
resistance. It will be referred to as Silver-Bell (wIV), i.e.
with vapours of Immiscible Liquids. Region 4 shows
azeotropic condensation and equations (25) to (27) apply.
EVALUATION OF THE MODEL
Application to De-superheating
No data are available in the study reported by Webb and
Kim1 6 to evaluate the de-superheating part of the model for
a shell and tube condenser because the vapour feed was
22
to compare the Film, unmodi® ed Silver-Bell and Silver-Bell
(wDS) methods. For this purpose, Run 8 of the system of
23 hydrocarbons condensing alone, reported in Webb and
Kim1 6 , is supposed to be superheated by various tempera-
tures of up to 40o C at the inlet. The predictions of thermal
and pressure drop performance obtained by various models
are summarized in Table 1.
The Silver-Bell (wDS) model gives predictions that are
very close to the ® lm method. Somewhat surprisingly it
predicts a smaller pressure drop than the ® lm method even
though the overall condensation rate predicted is smaller and
the uncondensed vapour ¯ owrate higher. This is explained by
the fact that it has a tendency to predict a somewhat higher
condensation rate over the earlier part of the condenser,
(though less overall). With pressure drop proportional to
almost the vapour ¯ owrate squared, the inlet region with
high vapour ¯ owrate has a disproportionate effect on
pressure drop. This tendency becomes more pronounced
when inlet superheat is higher. It is encouraging that the
24 vapour temperature pro® les obtained with Silver-Bell
(wDS) and the ® lm method are almost indistinguishable.
The unmodi® ed Silver-Bell method gives very poor
predictions. The method assigns a large part of the
condenser as a gas cooling zone, and hence gives very
poor predictions of both the thermal performance and
pressure drop compared to the ® lm method. The effect of
mass transfer can be seen in the ® rst column of Table 1
because the Silver-Bell (wDS) method simpli® es to the
Silver-Bell (wMT) method when there is no superheat. The
unmodi® ed Silver-Bell gives slightly better predictions than
Silver-Bell (wMT) but the effect is small and is not regarded
25 as signi® cant.
26 It is not possible to say without an experimental study of
de-superheating that Silver-Bell (wDS) is always a good
27 description of cooling of superheated vapours, but it is
expected that this model is not signi® cantly poorer than the
® lm model.
Condensation from Vapours of Immiscible Liquids
The application of the new method is considered in detail
for a single representative run, Run number 11 of the

Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999

114 WEBB and KIM
experimental data presented in Webb and Kim1 6 , which is
the same run used as example in that paper.
The temperature pro® les predicted by Silver-Bell, either
(wDS) or (wIV), are shown in Figure 3 as `equilibrium’
curves. In this case, the heat load is under-predicted by
7% while the pressure drop is over-predicted by 20% by
Silver-Bell (wIV). This is not as precise as the ® lm method
which predicts heat load within 4%, (under-predicted), and
pressure drop within 12%, (over-predicted). However, a
good improvement is obtained over Silver-Bell (wDS)
where heat load is under-predicted by 23% and pressure
drop is over-predicted by 48%.
The temperature pro® les, both for gas, Tg , and surface, Ts ,
predicted by the Silver-Bell methods as applied in this work,
are very similar to those obtained by the ® lm method, which
are included in Figure 3 for comparison purposes. It is
con® rmed that the gas temperature pro® le predicted by the
use of equation (20) in the Silver-Bell approach gives good
agreement with the ® lm method predictions. Further, the
condensate surface temperature in the Silver-Bell method
approximates the interfacial temperature of the ® lm model.
Figure 3 also shows the measured temperature pro® le. At
inlet and outlet these temperatures are measured in the
vapour feed and vent nozzles. The good agreement at
the inlet shows the feed is saturated and the agreement at
the outlet shows the success of all models in predicting the
temperature pro® le. Intermediate temperatures in the
condenser are measured by thermocouples inserted into
the tube bundle at each baf¯ e window. They are subject to
the in¯ uence of gas ¯ ow and condensate dripping through
the bundle. The excellent agreement of the experimental
temperatures with the azeotropic temperature over most of
the area is taken to indicate that the values given correspond
to the saturation temperature of the condensate, which is not
physically unreasonable.
Figure 3 highlights the reason for the poor performance of
the Silver-Bell (wDS) method. The saturation temperature
of the gas phase, the `dew’ curve in Figure 3, does not reach
azeotropic until after about 50% of the condenser area,
whereas the surface temperature falls to azeotropic in about
25%, as predicted and con® rmed by the experimental
temperatures.
Figure 3. Cooling curves comparison.
Figure 4. Comparison of heat loads.
Figure 4 presents the predictions of the overall heat load
for all the experimental work. The new method, Silver-Bell
(wIV) labelled `modi® ed’ , always predicts the experimental
heat loads within 10%. These are acceptable though
somewhat poorer than the ® lm model, where the predictions
were within 6 5%. The measure of improvement, achieved
by use of Silver-Bell (wIV), is shown by including the
predictions, labelled `unmodi® ed’ , given by Silver-Bell
(wDS), as proposed by McNaught.
The predictions of pressure drop given by Silver-Bell
(wIV) are shown in Figure 5. In all experimental runs but
one the new method gives agreement within + 30%. On
comparing the new method with the ® lm model as presented
in Webb and Kim1 6 , it is found that the precision of Silver-
Bell (wIV) is only slightly poorer, perhaps 5% on average,
than the ® lm model. This is associated with the different
predictions of thermal performance and not with the
calculations of pressure drops, which are carried out in the
same way.
Finally the new method, Silver-Bell (wIV), is discussed on
the basis of the predicted heat transfer resistances, Figure 6,
to understand how it gives the improvement. Three distinct
regions are observed in Figure 6, which correspond to
Regions 2 to 4 of Figure 2. Their boundaries are ® xed by the
relative values of the temperatures of the condensate sur-
face, Ts , the saturated vapour mixture, Td , and azeotrope Tu .
Figure 5. Pressure drop predictions.
Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999
 EQUILIBRIUM MODEL FOR CONDENSATION OF VAPOURS OF IMMISCIBLE LIQUIDS
Figure 6. Heat transfer resistances.
The ® rst region of Figure 6 shows both the surface and the
gas saturation temperatures greater than azeotropic and
represents condensation of one component alone from the
mixture. This zone ends where Ts becomes equal to the
azeotropic temperature. Silver-Bell (wDS) and (wIV)
methods are identical in this region. The gas side resistance
predicted by the ® lm method is also shown in Figure 6. The
prediction given by the Silver-Bell methods is not too
different from that given by the ® lm method with the former
safer in design.
In the second region, the surface temperature falls below
but the gas saturation temperature is greater than the
azeotropic value. In the ® lm model the region is one of
condensation of both phases but this cannot be incorporated
into the equilibrium methods based as they are on a pre-
determined cooling curve. The second region is treated
differently in the new method, Silver-Bell (wIV), from
Silver-Bell (wDS), through the use of the azeotropic rather
than the dew temperature to calculate qÇ g /Çqo . This causes an
abrupt discontinuity followed by a decreasing trend in the
gas side resistance over region 2. In the Silver-Bell (wDS)
method the curve showing the gas side resistance is
continued and assumes much greater values. The modi® ca-
tion therefore signi® cantly decreases the gas side resistance
and it has been shown above that this greatly improves the
prediction of experimental results. The gas side resistance
predicted by the ® lm method is quite closely approximated
by the new method, Silver-Bell (wIV), with the latter
sometimes safe and sometimes unsafe if applied in design.
The last region starts when the dew point temperature of
the vapour falls to the azeotropic temperature. Here both
condensate phases appear together irrespective of the model
used. The new model is again identical to Silver-Bell (wDS)
and agreement with the ® lm method is very good.
In summary, the only major difference in heat transfer
resistance predicted by the ® lm and Silver-Bell methods lies
in the gas phase. The new method, Silver-Bell (wIV), is
different from Silver-Bell (wDS) only in the second region
of Figure 6 but it does show much better agreement there
with the heat transfer resistance derived from the ® lm
model. The major remaining discrepancy with physical
reality and the ® lm method is that no Silver-Bell based
method shows azeotropic condensation of both phases in
this region even though the surface temperature falls below
the azeotropic temperature.
Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999
115
FURTHER DISCUSSION
It has been shown that the Silver-Bell (wIV) method for
condensation involving immiscible condensates developed
in this work is successful in predicting the overall behaviour
found in the experimental study giving good predictions of
heat load, within 10%, and pressure drop, within 30%.
The experimental data in this work are for a mixture of
water and hexane from which water condenses ® rst in
Region 2 of Figure 2. Water as condensate gives a much
better heat transfer coef® cient than hexane and the delayed
appearance of the hydrocarbon species will have given a
low estimate of condensate resistance compared to the ® lm
method. This is the probable reason why the gas phase
resistance appears to be underestimated relative to the ® lm
model in Figure 6.
In general, the Silver-Bell equilibrium model tends to
give conservative predictions of gas side resistance during
condensation of saturated water vapour and this is observed
in the present study, where water condenses ® rst. To some
extent this compensates for the low estimates in the region
of Figure 6 where the new model applies. However this
cannot be generalized to all mixtures and uncertainty
remains as to whether the Silver-Bell method is safe in
design.
Although the modi® ed Silver-Bell method developed in
this study describes the commercial hexane-water mixture
successfully, further work is required to fully validate the
method. Firstly, the present work shows water condensing
® rst and data are required for a mixture in which
hydrocarbons condense ® rst. Secondly, studies are required
under reduced pressure, where the single-phase mode of
condensation is likely to be more important.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Silver-Bell method, as modi® ed to describe wet wall
de-superheating involved in condensation of superheated
vapour mixtures, has been shown to give much better
agreement with the ® lm model for the conditions of the
present experimental work.
2. Based on the concept of the Silver-Bell wet wall de-
superheating model, a new modi® cation has been developed
for condensation of vapours of immiscible liquids. The
modi® ed method has been evaluated by experimental work
with commercial hexane-water mixtures. This model has
proved very successful in describing the overall behaviour
found in the experimental study giving good predictions of
heat load, within 10%, and pressure drop, within 30%.
NOMENCLATURE
cp speci® c heat capacity
D hÄ v molar latent heat
nÇ molal ¯ ux of condensation
NÇ molal ¯ owrate
p pressure
qÇ heat ¯ ux
T temperature
Uo overall heat transfer coef® cient
Greek symbols
ag gas heat transfer coef® cient
ao overall liquid side heat transfer coef® cient
l thermal conductivity
e ratio of sensible to conductive heat ¯ ux
116 WEBB and KIM

Subscripts
d dew point value
eff effective
f relating to ® lm
g relating to gas
i component number
s relating to interface
o overall (for heat transfer coef® cients)
o relating to coolant (for temperatures)
T total
u azeotropic value
Superscripts
~ molar quantity
· rate
· high ¯ ux correction by equation (4)
* high ¯ ux correction by equation (8)
REFERENCES
1. Silver, L., 1947, Gas cooling with aqueous condensation, Trans
IChemE, 25: 30-42.
2. Bell, K. J. and Ghaly, M. A., 1972, An approximate generalised design
method for multi-component partial condensers, AIChE Symp Ser, 69,
No 131: 72±79.
3. Colburn A. P. and Hougen O. A., 1934, Design of cooler condensers for
mixtures of vapours with non-condensing gases, Ind Eng Chem, 26:
1178±1182.
4. Colburn, A. P. and Drew, T. B., 1937, The condensation of mixed
vapours, Trans AIChemE, 33: 197±215.
5. McNaught, J., 1981, Assessment of design methods for condensation of
vapours from a non-condensing gas, ICHMT Seminar, Dubrovnik.
6. Miropolsky, Z. L., Shneerova, R. I. and Ternakova, L. M., 1974, Proc
5th Int Heat Trans Conf Tokyo, Vol 3: 246±249.
7. Ackermann, G., 1937, Combined heat and mass transfer in the same
® eld at high temperature and partial pressure differences, Forsch
Ingenieurwes, 8 (832): 1±16.
8. Akers, W. W. and Turner, M. M., 1962, Condensation of vapours of
immiscible liquids, AIChEJ, 5: 587±589.
9. Bernhardt, S. H., Sheridan, J. J., and Westwater, J. W., 1972,
Condensation of immiscible mixtures, AIChEJ Symp Ser, 68, No
118: 21±37.
10. Polley, G. T. and Calus, W. F., 1978, The effect of condensate pattern
on heat transfer during the condensation of binary mixtures of vapours
of immiscible liquids, 6th Int Heat Transfer Conf Toronto, Vol 2, Paper
CS-16.
11. Sardesai, R. G. and Webb, D. R., 1982, Condensation of binary vapours
of immiscible liquids, Chem Eng Science, 37 (4): 529±537.
12. Sardesai, R. G., 1979, Studies in condensation, PhD Thesis, (University
of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, UK).
13. Deo, P. V., 1979, Condensation of mixed vapours, PhD Thesis,
(University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, UK).
14. Papaioannou, I. K., 1984, Condensation of binary vapour mixtures on a
horizontal tube bank, PhD Thesis, (University of Manchester Institute
of Science and Technology, UK).
15. Spiliotis, X., 1983, Immiscible condensation, PhD Thesis, (University of
Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, UK).
16. Webb, D. R. and Kim, J. S., 1989, Condensation of hydrocarbon-water
vapour mixtures in a shell-and-tube condenser, Chem Emg Res Des, 67:
87±95.
17. Mc Naught, J., 1979, Mass transfer correction terms in design methods
for multicomponent partial condensers, 18th National Heat Transfer
Conf, San Diego, (ASME-AIChE).
18. Webb, D. R., Fahrner, M. and Schwaab, R., 1996, The relationship
between the ® lm and equilibrium methods of condenser design, Int J
Heat and Mass Transfer, 39 (15): 147±3156.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work has received support from The Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow
Service (HTFS), a Teaching Company Scheme supported by the
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and Hick Hargreaves & Co.
Ltd., Bolton, Lancashire.
ADDRESS
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Dr D. R.
Webb, Department of Chemical Engineering. UMIST, PO Box 88,
Manchester M60 1QD, UK.
The manuscript was received 6 April 1998 and accepted for publication
after revision 15 February 1999.

Trans IChemE, Vol 77, Part A, March 1999