This article was downloaded by: [Texas State University - San Marcos]

On: 28 April 2013, At: 19:31

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Experimental Heat Transfer: A Journal of Thermal

Energy Generation, Transport, Storage, and Conversion
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueht20

SPRAY COOLING OF HIGH TEMPERATURE METALS USING

HIGH MASS FLUX INDUSTRIAL NOZZLES
a b
H. M. Al-Ahmadi & S. C. Yao
a
Damman College of Technology, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, USA
Version of record first published: 17 Jan 2008.

To cite this article: H. M. Al-Ahmadi & S. C. Yao (2008): SPRAY COOLING OF HIGH TEMPERATURE METALS USING HIGH MASS
FLUX INDUSTRIAL NOZZLES, Experimental Heat Transfer: A Journal of Thermal Energy Generation, Transport, Storage, and
Conversion, 21:1, 38-54

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08916150701647827

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Experimental Heat Transfer, 21:38–54, 2008
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0891-6152 print/1521-0480 online
DOI: 10.1080/08916150701647827

SPRAY COOLING OF HIGH TEMPERATURE METALS

USING HIGH MASS FLUX INDUSTRIAL NOZZLES

H. M. Al-Ahmadi1 and S. C. Yao 2

1 Dean, Damman College of Technology, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Systematic experiments were conducted for the spray cooling of high-temperature stainless
steel using three different types of industrial sprays: full cone and flat hydraulic nozzles
and a flat air-mist nozzle. In the present study, a wide range of mass flux (1.5–30 kg/m2 sec)
is covered, which has never been thoroughly investigated before. Orientations with respect
to gravity and spray angle were also explored.
The data have been analyzed and correlated. The results of this study will be impor-
tant to the product quality control in industries by providing a good estimation of heat flux
at different mass flux, spray types, and surface temperatures, especially for spray cooling
of stainless steel and other metals with similar thermal properties.

Keywords spray cooling, high temperature cooling, spray heat transfer, cooling hot metals,
nozzles

INTRODUCTION
Water spray cooling, which removes heat from a hot subject by spraying water
droplets onto the surfaces, has been used extensively in numerous types of applications,
such as metallurgy, microelectronics, nuclear safety, and aerospace engineering. Water
sprays are used very effectively for heat extraction from solidification in continuous
casting processes. Due to the very different thermal requirements of different processes,
a large number of spray nozzles, including both hydraulic and air-mist, are used under
a variety of conditions. Hydraulic spray nozzles can be classified into several different
categories based on their spray pattern, such as hollow cone, full cone, and flat sprays.
Air-mist spray nozzles, which generally produce droplets of smaller size and higher
velocity, can be classified based on design configuration as internal or external mixing,
and both are capable of producing conical and flat patterns.
No data were found about heat transfer from flat air-mist spray nozzles in the open
literature and the only study about the hydraulic flat nozzle was for low spray-mass
fluxes. Relevant previous investigations can be divided into two categories: individual
droplet cooling and spray cooling of hot surfaces. Various experimental studies have
been conducted for individual droplet cooling. Dependence of droplet dynamics and heat
transfer on droplet Weber number, surface temperature, liquid subcooled temperature,

Accepted 5 February 2007.

Address correspondence to Shi-chune Yao, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon
University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. E-mail address: scyao@cmu.edu

38
 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 39

NOMENCLATURE
G mass density (kg/m2 s) qmin-r the radiative component of heat flux at
Ts hot surface temperature the Leidenfrost point
Tled the Leidenfrost temperature qmin-c the convective component of heat flux
T1 cooling fluid temperature at the Leidenfrost point
T temperature (Kı ) t time (sec.)
q heat flux (kW/m2 ) " emissivity, D 0.97 in this case
qmin total heat flux at the Leidenfrost  Stefan-Boltzmann constant 5.670*10 8
point (W/m2
K4 )
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

and surface properties have been discussed in detail. While the reported information is
valuable for a basic understanding, the results describe only single-droplet heat transfer
rate at very low liquid-mass flux.
On the other hand, some researchers have studied the laboratory-produced, mono-
dispersed spray cooling of hot surfaces, which is next in complexity to a single droplet
impinging on a hot surface. Yao and others [2, 3] studied heat transfer of mono-size
sprays for spray density in the range G D 0:3–2 kg/m2
sec. Maximum heat flux of 2 
106 W/m2 was reported at the surface temperature of a copper test piece in the range
of 140ı C–160ıC and the Leidenfrost temperature around 250ıC. Air influence was also
discussed in that study. Furthermore, in [1], results of low mass-flux mono-size sprays
with very large drop size were obtained. A parametric comparative study was carried out
to correlate his work with previous studies. Correlations for a wide range of spray heat
transfer are presented.
Most of the industrial spray nozzles are poly-dispersed, with a wide range of droplet
sizes and velocities. This, added to the complex droplet-surface interactions due to large
number of impacting drops, makes the performance of industrial spray difficult to predict
based on the single drop or mono-dispersed spray results.
There are limited heat transfer studies in the open literature about industrial spray
nozzles [4–10]. Most of the authors used commercial hydraulic full-cone nozzles or flat
nozzles at a lower mass flux. Other types of nozzles, such as an air-atomized fan, were
not covered, and for most of them, the mass fluxes are in the low range. For any given
nozzle, the measured heat transfer rate is a function of wall and fluid temperatures, local
spray mass-flux, droplet velocity and size, and nature and finishing of the cooled surface.
Correlating the results of different sprays creates wide differences among these results.
Gaugler [4] studied a copper rod under an industrial full cone nozzle spray. The
following relation for heat transfer rate in the film-boiling region was suggested:

qw (W/m2 / D 4500.Tsurf Tsat /G 1=3 (1)

at
250 < Tsurf < 450ı C, and 0:7 < G < 3:7 kg/m2 s:

In two separate studies by Hoogendoorn [5] and Mizikar [6] for hydraulic full cone
nozzles, mass flux was up to 20 kg/m2s. Both used a stainless steel test sample. Horizontal
and vertical downward sprays were included in the first study, while two angles of attack
but only vertical downward spray were covered in the second. It was concluded that
 40 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO

the heat transfer coefficient is a linear function of water mass flux. Furthermore, the
horizontal spray has a lower maximum heat flux, and the angle of spray has a negligible
effect on heat transfer rate.
Extensive review of water spray cooling up to the late 1970s has been provided by
Bolle and Moreau [7]. In the same article, the authors reported spray cooling for stainless
steel using three hydraulic nozzles for mass flux below 7 kg/m2
s. The following corre-
lation was suggested for heat transfer coefficient in film boiling for surface temperature
900 K < Tsurf < 1200 K:

h(W/m2 K/ D 423  G 0:556 (2)

Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

at
1 < G < 7(kg/m2 s/:

The effects of droplet velocity and induced transverse airflow were also discussed.
In a series of articles [8–9], experimental studies of both copper and aluminum test
pieces, which have high thermal conductivities, were reported. The spray densities varied
from 0.6–9.9 kg/m2 s. Results and correlations for heat flux and temperatures at both
wetting and non wetting regimes were presented.
The objectives of the present study are to:

1. Establish an experimental database of the overall cooling process covering a wide

range of mass flow rates for different types of spray nozzles.
2. Characterize the effect of gravitational orientation and spray angle for the full
cone nozzle on heat transfer rate through downward, horizontal, center, and side
sprays.
3. Establish the correlations for the film boiling heat transfer, Leidenfrost tempera-
ture, minimum film boiling heat flux, critical heat flux and its temperature, and
heat transfer at nucleate boiling for three different spray nozzles under different
operating conditions.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND DATA REDUCTION

Experimental setup
An experimental setup (Figure 1) was established using three Spraying Systems
Co. industrial spray nozzles (Table 1). Two 303 stainless steel cylindrical plates, one
10.5 cm in diameter and 2.5 cm thick, and one 5 cm in diameter and 3.8 cm thick, as
shown in Figure 2, were employed for temperatures up to 1,100ıC (the melting point is
around 1,400ı C). Four k-type grounded sheathed thermocouples were accurately installed
through the back-side at two different depths at four locations in the first plate. The top
thermocouple has 1.58 mm diameter and is at 2.54 mm from the surface, as shown in
Figure 2. A closer distance would strongly affect the heat conduction near surface and
induce large error. A very small amount of high temperature thermally conductive cement
was used to ensure good contact between the tip of the thermocouples and the steel plate.
A second plate with 5 cm diameter was used to test the thin sprays of the flat nozzles.
The side thermocouples were used to evaluate the error of assuming the heat con-
duction could be treated as one-dimensional. This error was found to be small. These
 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 41
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 1. Experimental setup. 1—Unitrust frame, 2—Furnace, 3—Rail, 4—Cooling box, 5—Nozzle, 6—Test
plate, 7—Flexible pipe, 8—Pressure gauge, 9—Flowmeter, 10—Filter, 11—To Computer, 12—Water tank,
13—Valves, 14—Pump.

thermocouples were connected to a personal computer equipped with data acquisition

boards and LabTECH software to monitor the temperatures in the plates during the
cooling process.
Prior to heat transfer measurements, a separate study was conducted to find the spray
mass flux for a nozzle-to-plate distance of 152.4 mm (6 in) at the center of the spray and
at 50.8 mm (2 inches) off center. These were the same locations where the heat transfer
tests were subsequently conducted. Water mass fluxes were collected and measured for
different nozzles at different pressures. The water mass flux distribution was measured

Table 1. Tested nozzles

Flux range Lit./min.

Nozzle # Type G (kg/m2
s) range Commercial name

1 Hydraulic 1.7–6.8 4–12 1/4 HHX-12 FullJet

full cone
2 Hydraulic fan 5–27.6 1.5–7 H1/4VV-11010 VeeJet
3 Air mist fan 20.6–29.6 6–15 Water 19930-200-BrassC3/8CJL-5-120SS
CasterJet
 42 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 2. Test plates details.

with 11 tubes arranged in line. The tips of the tubes are tapered to prevent droplet
bouncing, and the collected water of each tube goes to individual collection bottles.
Before any heat transfer test, the pump is switched on and the regulator valves are
adjusted for the desired water pressure, and the air pressure is adjusted if the air-mist
nozzle is used. These valve positions are saved then, only another on/off valve is used
later on. The test plate is heated in the furnace to a temperature of 900ıC–1,100ıC.
Then the plate is moved from the furnace to an exact location under the spray and
the on/off valve is opened, this starts the spray cooling and the data are recorded. The
data are sampled at a rate of 10 or 20 readings per second until the plate temperatures
fall below 100ıC. The total sampling durations were three to five minutes.
A total of 38 tests, classified into 8 groups, have been performed, as shown in Table
2. Two orientations were tested for the first full cone nozzle: vertical down spray with
horizontal test disk position, and horizontal spray with vertical test disk position. For
center tests, the sprays impact the plate at a 90ı angle. For side tests, a 50.8 mm (2 in)
spray-center to disk-center lateral distance was maintained, resulting in a nominal 72ı
spray angle of impact. All air-mist nozzle tests were performed at an air pressure of

Table 2. Test groups

Group # of Spray density

# Nozzle Orientation Location tests G (kg/m2
s)

1 #1 hydraulic full cone Vertical down Center 9 4.8–6.8

2 Horizontal Center 5 4.8–6.8
3 Vertical down Side 4 1.8–3.3
4 Horizontal Side 4 1.7–6.8
5 #2 hydraulic fan Vertical down Side 3 5–24
6 Vertical down Center 5 5.1–27.6
7 #3 air-mist fan Vertical down Side 3 20.6-27.1
8 Vertical down Center 5 20.6–29.6
 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 43

310 kPa (45 psi) except for two cases, where the air pressures of 207 and 550 kPa are
applied to reveal the effect of air pressure on heat transfer.

Data Reduction
In the data reduction, data smoothing was applied. Averaged results were then used
for heat transfer calculations. Two-step heat transfer solutions are needed to obtain heat
flux and temperature at the test plate surface. As shown in Figure 2, direct heat conduction
takes place between T1 and T2 thermocouples locations. The direct conduction solution
gives the heat flux at plane T1 . Iterative implicit method was used to solve for this
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

temperature field. The inversed conduction problem was solved with the Weber method
[11] in the region between plan T1 and the plate surface where spray impinges. The linear
transient conduction is reformulated as:

@2 T @T @2 T
˛ D C ; (3)
@x 2 @t @t 2
where is a small non negative constant, equals 0.01, to make Eq. (3) as a perturbation of
the conventional diffusive conduction equation. In inversed heat conduction, the surface
heat flux at time t depends on the interior temperatures at times both before and after t.
For this reason, the numerical solution was obtained for all time steps at a given spatial
node before any temperature values were computed at the next spatial node.
.n/ .n/ .n/
.Ti C1 2Ti C Ti 1/
D
.x/2
" .nC1/ .n 1/
#
Ti Ti .nC1/ .n/ .n 1/
.1=˛/  C .T 2Ti C Ti / (4)
2  T t 2 i

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Spray Density
Because spray density distributions are not symmetric around spray center, two
axes—A-A and B-B—that pass through spray’s center are defined for the three nozzles.
The full cone nozzle has a pair of swirling vanes in the nozzle and the A-A axis is in line
with the vanes at their downstream end. For the hydraulic fan nozzle and the air-mist fan
nozzle, the A-A axes are in line with the narrow nozzle slots. The B-B axes are at right
angle from the A-A axies. The full cone nozzle spray density distribution on horizontal
surface is shown in Figure 3 along the A-A axis. Increasing the pressure will increase
mass flux as well as change the distribution pattern. There are two vanes in the nozzle
to induce the swirling of the water, and the liquid flux is affected by the guidance of
the vanes to induce non uniform mass flux distribution. When the pressure changes, the
distribution of mass flux also rotates. As a result, for a fixed location, the mass flux could
vary significantly when the nozzle pressure changes.
The distribution along the center B-B axis across the thickness of the second nozzle
(hydraulic flat) is shown in Figure 4. When pressure increases, the mass flux is increased;
 44 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 3. Local spray density along the A-A axis for 1st nozzle.

Figure 4. Local spray density along the center B-B axis for the 2nd nozzle.

however, the normalized local distribution pattern does not change. At a fixed location,
the mass flux could vary significantly when the nozzle pressure changes. Uncertainty of
the mass flux measurements are estimated as within 10%.

Boiling Curves
The spray boiling heat transfer curve is similar to that of pool boiling heat transfer
and has the distinctly boiling regimes. There is a significant increase in the film boiling
heat transfer of the spray as compared to pool boiling because when the forced impinging
 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 45
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 5. Surface heat flux versus surface temperature for four different tests.

flow pushes the droplets closer to the hot surface and thereby increases the heat flux in
the film boiling regime significantly. However, this is not the case for the critical heat
flux.
Figure 5 presents the surface flux versus surface temperature for four different
tests. Table 3 shows these test conditions. At low mass flux, in tests #15 and #45,
the heat flux curve experiences a minimum heat flux at the Leidenfrost point. This
is not the case for higher mass flux, tests #253 and #306. Different explanations are
possible for this phenomenon. One might be because the duration of the cooling time
is shorter for high mass flux that there is not enough time for heat flux to develop
into a typical boiling curve. High heat flux causes the temperature of the plate to drop
quickly. Another explanation, reported in the literature [10], is that at high mass flux, the
cooling curve does not experience a minimum point due to the absence of stable film
boiling. Instead, the cooling curve goes through a gradual increase, followed by a rapid
increase at the Leidenfrost point. It is believed that at high mass flux the boiling curve
is difficult to obtain through the transient cooling of the test plate that has low thermal
conductivity. Metal with higher thermal conductivity may achieve better results. In all

Table 3. Four different typical tests

Spray density
# Nozzle G (kg/m2
s) Orientation Location

15 1 6.75 Vertical down Center

45 1 6.75 Horizontal Center
253 2 9.7 Vertical down Center
306 3 20.6 Vertical down Side
 46 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO

the reported studies, the spray heat flux from copper, which has a much higher thermal
conductivity, is always much higher than the heat flux from steel under similar spray
conditions.

Film Boiling
First of all, free cooling, i.e., room cooling by natural convection and radiation
without spray, was conducted to find plate surface emissivity. The calculations show that
emissivity is around unity. The surface is polished after each test to maintain the similar
surface condition and emissivity. After subtracting radiation component of the surface
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

heat flux, it was found that the heat flux due to water spray impaction increases linearly
with plate surface temperature.
Heat flux at film boiling is correlated with the minimum heat flux and surface
temperature. The radiative and convective heat fluxes are assumed to be separable. The
data show a linear dependency of convective boiling heat flux on temperature difference
ratio as follows:
 
Ts Tled
q.Ts ; qmin / D qmin-c
1 C 0:5
C qrad .Ts / (5)
Tled T1

qmin-c D qmin qmin-r (6)

qmin-r D "

..Tled /4 .T1 /4 / (7)

qrad .Ts / D "

..Ts /4 .T1 /4 / (8)

where

" D 0:97

The Leidenfrost Temperature

The Leidenfrost point is defined as the point where the film boiling curve experiences
the minimum flux. Below this temperature, surface wetting increases heat flux rapidly.
At low spray mass fluxes, this point can be easily located on the cooling curve, but this is
usually not the case for high mass flux conditions because of the short duration or even
non obvious film cooling. Alternatively, a different method was used. The Leidenfrost
point is identified from the surface temperature versus time plot at film boiling. This
happens at the moment when the negative slope of the cooling curve suddenly becoming
steeper, which means the cooling rate increases. This identifies the lowest heat flux in
the film boiling regime prior to a rapid increase of heat flux in transition boiling.
As shown in Figure 6, the Leidenfrost temperature has a general tendency to increase
with increasing mass flux. However, in the tests of low spray density, the Leidenfrost
temperature is generally higher in the side tests than for the centered tests, even though
the local mass flux at side tests are lower. This could be due to the combined effect of
mass deposition of spray and overflow from upstream liquid film. The overflow along
 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 47
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 6. The Leidenfrost temperature versus local spray density.

the plate causes sub-cooled transition boiling to start at a higher surface temperature.
The Leidenfrost temperature is found to be lower for horizontal spray tests than for
vertical downward sprays.

Minimum Heat Flux

The minimum heat flux is the lowest heat flux in the film boiling regime. In some
tests, the minimum heat flux is hard to be identified: it is taken as the heat flux at
the time of the Leidenfrost point. Figure 7 presents the data of minimum heat flux,
which show a very clear trend of increasing with mass flux. At low spray density, this
minimum heat flux is higher for the vertical down spray than for the horizontal spray
tests. Also, at low spray density, the minimum heat fluxes at the side location are higher
than that at the center location of a downward spray. It is believed that this shift in trend
lines is also due to the combined spray deposition and liquid overflows. The cross flow
from the center of plate causes quenching at the side location at a higher heat flux and
temperature. These observations of orientation and angle of attack (center versus side)
effects do not appear in high spray density tests, since the spray impingement is the
dominant factor.

Critical Temperature
Figure 8 shows the temperature at the maximum heat flux for all tests. Significantly
less effects are observed from the angle of attack (side tests) and orientation, and there
is a general trend for the critical temperature to increase with increasing mass flux.
 48 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 7. Minimum heat flux versus local spray density.

Figure 8. Critical temperature versus local spray density.

 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 49
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 9. Maximum heat flux versus local spray density.

Maximum Heat Flux

Maximum (critical) heat flux is the highest heat flux in the boiling curve, as shown in
Figure 9. There is a very clear trend of maximum heat flux increases with increasing mass
flux. Significantly less effects from the spray angle (side versus center) and orientations
are observed. For low spray density, heat flux is higher for the vertical down spray than
for the horizontal spray tests.

Heat Flux at the 200ı C Surface Temperature

In order to identify the heat transfer at nucleate boiling, heat flux at surface temper-
ature of 200ıC is presented in Figure 10. This heat flux is not a strong function of spray
mass flux or spray type, and little effects from the spray angle and spray orientation are
observed. The effect of spray density on heat flux is also not significant. This insensitive
to the spray conditions is fairly similar to the behavior of nucleate boiling heat transfer
at forced convection.

Correlation Equations
Through the experiments, errors can be induced from measurements and data reduc-
tion. Uncertainties can also be revealed from repeating tests. Among the various errors
of measurements, the dominant error comes from the uncertainty of the thermocouple
locations with respect to the surface where the spray impinges. The effect of the un-
certainty on thermocouple locations is amplified through the inversed conduction data
reduction. This uncertainty contributes about 10% error of the results. The numerical
 50 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 10. Surface heat flux at surface temperature of 200ı C versus local spray density.

evaluation of inversed conduction generally contributes another 2% error. Repeating tests

give relative small errors on the heat flux but larger errors on the temperatures. The
maximum error on temperatures at the max and min heat fluxes of the boiling curve
could be as much as 10%. The error bars of the heat fluxes are shown on all the data
points in Figures 6–10.
Correlation of the Leidenfrost temperature, minimum heat flux, critical temperature,
maximum heat flux, and heat flux at surface temperature of 200ıC using least square
fitting, are shown in dark trend lines for all the data in Figures 6–10, respectively.
Four subsets are also presented: first nozzle (conical) center tests, first nozzle side tests,
second nozzle (hydraulic flat) tests, and third nozzle (air-mist flat) tests in forms of gray
or dotted trend lines. Heat flux dependency on spray density diminishes with increasing
spray density. The minimum and maximum heat flux correlations show better accuracy
than the temperature correlations. The former are within ˙10% for 90% of the cases
while they are around ˙15% for 85% of cases for the later. The proposed correlation is
in the form of

T led.(C) D 536:8  G 0:116 (9)

q min(kW/m2 / D 161:6  G 0:64 (10)

T crit.(G) D 296:4  G 0:2 (11)

q max(kW/m2 / D 1316  G 0:17 (12)

q at Ts200(kW/m2 / D 778  G 0:094 (13)

 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 51
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 11. Reconstructed correlation results.

A reconstructed spray boiling curve in terms of piecewise lines connecting maximum

and minimum heat flux points using the above correlations is shown for a typical test in
Figure 11. The comparison with experimental result appears reasonable.

Comparison with Results of Previous Studies

Almost all the previous studies that used higher thermal conductivity metals, such as
copper or aluminum, gave much higher heat fluxes, as high as twice the current results
of stainless steel. However, the Leidenfrost and critical temperatures in those studies
were much lower than the present results: they are around 250ıC for the Leidenfrost
temperature and 140ı C for the critical temperature versus present results of 700ıC and
450ıC, respectively. This is possibly due to higher thermal conductivity metals will be
able to provide more heat to liquids at a same temperature.
Comparisons are made with limited published data on stainless steels. Figure 12
shows the heat flux at Leidenfrost point versus local spray density from different studies.
There is a good agreement between the present results and those previous results. The
proposed correlation presented in the previous section can predict these different results
with error of ˙15% for most cases.
Figures 13 and 14 show the maximum heat flux and Leidenfrost temperature versus
local spray density from different studies. There is also a good agreement between the
present results and those previous results. The proposed correlation presented in previous
section can predict these different results with error of ˙15%, except the Leidenfrost
temperatures of Miziker tests, which are off the general trend.
 52 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 12. Heat flux at the Leidenfrost point from results of previous studies of stainless steel test pieces.

Figure 13. Maximum heat flux from results of previous studies of stainless steel test pieces.

CONCLUSION
1. In general, the Leidenfrost temperature, minimum film boiling heat flux, critical
temperature, and maximum heat flux are strongly dependent on local spray mass
flux. Other spray parameters such as droplet size, velocity, and the type of the
nozzle play a less significant role.
2. Correlation for the Leidenfrost temperature, minimum heat flux, critical tem-
perature, maximum heat flux, and heat flux at 200ıC surface temperature with
local spray mass flux were obtained. Clear trends are observed for most of these
parameters with spray mass flux.
 SPRAY COOLING OF METALS AT HIGH TEMPERATURE 53
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

Figure 14. The Leidenfrost temperature from results of previous studies of stainless steel test pieces.

3. At low spray mass fluxes, the minimum heat flux of side tests have a higher value
than center tests. It is not likely due to the angle of impingement effect, but rather
from the effects of sub-cooled liquid film overflow from the center of the plate.
The results of Mizikar’s study [6] support this conclusion.
4. Spray film boiling heat transfer was found to increase linearly with surface
temperature, in addition to the radiation heat transfer. Correlations are presented.
5. Heat flux showed weak dependence on spray density for the wetting region of
the cooling curve.
6. By changing air pressure for the third nozzle (air-mist flat) while keeping water
pressure constant at 413.6 kPa (60 psi), it was demonstrated that the air pressure
effect is not as strong as water mass flux. Yao [2, 3] has concluded that too.
7. The results of this study are in substantial agreement with results from the previous
studies of stainless steel by Hoogendoorn [5], Mizikar [6], and Bolle and Moureau
[7] for the partially overlapped range of spray density.
8. It is believed that at higher spray density, the effect of droplet size or orientation
on heat transfer is minimal. The droplet velocity, on the other hand, may have
important effect.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The financial and technical supports of Ken Kasperski and Kristy Tanner at Spraying
Systems Co. are greatly appreciated.

REFERENCES
1. T. Cox, Heat Transfer Experiments and General Correlation for Sprays of Very large Droplets
Impinging on a Heated Surface, Doctoral thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1998.
2. K. J. Choi and S. C. Yao, Heat Transfer Mechanisms of Horizontally Impacting Spays, Int. J.
Heat Mass Transf., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 1291–1296, 1987.
 54 H. M. AL-AHMADI AND S. C. YAO

3. S. Deb and S. C. Yao, Analysis on Film Boiling Heat Transfer of Impacting Sprays, Int. J.
Heat and Mass Transf., vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 2099–2112, 1989.
4. R. E. Gaugler, Experimental Investigation of spray Cooling of High Temperatutre Surfaces,
Doctoral thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1966.
5. C. J. Hoogendoorn and R. D. Hord, Leidenfrost Temperature and Heat Transfer Coefficients
for Water Sprays Impinging on a Hot Surface, Proceedings of the Fifth Int. Heat Transf. Conf.,
vol. 4, pp. 135–138, 1974.
6. E. Mizikar, Spray Cooling Investigation for Continuous Casting of Billets and Blooms, Iron
and Steel Engineer, pp. 53–70, June, 1970.
7. L. Bolle and J. C. Moureau, Spray Cooling of Hot Surfaces, Multiphase Science and Technol-
ogy, Hemisphere, 1982.
8. I. Mudawar and W. S. Valentine, Determination of Local Quench Curve for Spray–cooled
Downloaded by [Texas State University - San Marcos] at 19:31 28 April 2013

metallic Surfaces, J. Heat Treating, vol. 7, no. 2, pp 107–121, 1989.

9. W. P. Klinzing, J. C. Rozzi, and I. Mudawar, Film and Transition Boiling Correlations for
Quenching of Hot Surface with Water Sprays, J. Heat Treating, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 91–103,
1992.
10. I. Stewart and J. D. Massingham, Heat Transfer Coefficient Effects on Spray Cooling, Iron
and Steel Engineer, pp. 17–23, July, 1996.
11. C. F. Weber, Analysis and solutions of ill-posed inverse heat conduction, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transf., vol. 24, pp. 1783–1792, 1981.