3.

2 Cryogenic Convection Heat Transfer

Involves process of heat transfer between q

solid material and adjacent cryogenic fluid
T f = Tmean
Classic heat transfer problem (Newtons law)
m& f
q(kW/m2) = h (Ts Tf)
Configurations of interest
Internal forced flow (single phase, T f = Tmean)

q
Free convection (single phase, T f = T )
Internal two phase flow
Pool boiling (two phase)
Understanding is primarily empirical leading to
correlations based on dimensionless numbers
Issue is relevant to the design of: Liquid
Heat exchangers Tf
Ts
Cryogenic fluid storage
Superconducting magnets
Low temperature instrumentation

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 1

 Single phase internal flow heat transfer

Forced & Tf
m,
Convection
Ts D

Classical fluid correlations

Q
The heat transfer coefficient in a classical fluid system is generally
correlated in the form where the Nusselt number,
where, Nu D hD k and D is the characteristic length
f
For laminar flow, NuD = constant ~ 4 (depending on b.c.)
For turbulent flow (ReD > 2000)
f Cp
Nu D = f (Re D , Pr) = C Re Pr n
D
m
and Pr (Prandtl number)
kf
Dittus-Boelter Correlation for classical fluids (+/- 15%)
4 2
Nu D = 0.023 Re Pr 5 5

Note that fluid properties should be Ts + T f

computed at Tf (the film temperature): Tf
2
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 2
 Johannes Correlation (1972)

Improved correlation
specifically for helium
(+/- 8.3%)
0.716
Ts
Nu D = 0.0259 Re Pr
4 2
5 5
T D
f
Last factor takes care of
temperature dependent
properties
Note that one often does
not know Tf, so iteration
may be necessary.

Example
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 3
 Application: Cryogenic heat exchangers

Common types of heat exchangers used

in cryogenic systems P1, T1

P2, T2
Forced flow single phase fluid-fluid
E.g. counterflow heat exchanger in
refrigerator/liquefier

Forced single phase flow - boiling liquid

(Tube in shell HX)
E.g. LN2 precooler in a cooling circuit
m

Static boiling liquid-liquid

E.g. Liquid subcooler in a magnet system

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 4

 Simple 1-D heat exchanger

Ts D & Tf
m,

Differential equation describing the temperature of the fluid in

the tube:

+ hP (T f TS ) = 0
dT f
m& C
dx
For constant Ts, the solution of this equation is an exponential

hP Ts - Tf .
Ts T f = (Ts T f ) 0 exp x Increasing m
m& C

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 5

 He (Ti = 300 K) He (Tf = 80 K)
Liquid nitrogen precooler

Ts D & Tf
m,

Assumptions & givens

Ts is a constant @ 77 K (NBP of LN2) LN2 (Ts = 77 K)
Helium gas (Cp = 5.2 kJ/kg K; = 15 x 10-6 Pa s; = 0.3 kg/m3, k = 0.1
W/m K)
Allowed pressure drop, p = 10 kPa Properties are average values
Helium mass flow rate = 1 g/s between 300 K and 80 K
Find the length and diameter of the HX (copper tubing)
Total heat transfer:
( )
Q = m& C p Tin Tout = 1 g/s x 5.2 J/g K x 220 K
= 1144 W
Log mean T:
T f (x = 0 ) T f (x = L )

Tlm = (300-77) (80-77) K

T ( x = 0 ) =
ln f
T f ( x = L )
ln [(300-77)/(80-77)]

= 51 K
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 6
 Liquid nitrogen precooler (continued)
UA = hDL = Q = 1144 W/51 K = 22.4 W/K
Tlm
The heat transfer coefficient is a function of ReD and Pr = 0.67
Assuming the flow is turbulent and fully developed, use the Dittus Boelter
correlation
hD 4m&
Nu D = = 0.023 Re 0D.8 Pr 0.3 and Re D =
kf D
Substituting the ReD and solving for h
0 .8
k f 4 m& 0.0247 x 0.1 W/m K x (10-3 kg/s)0.8
h = 0.023 Pr 0 .3
=
D D (15 x 10-6 Pa s)0.8 x D1.8
= 0.07/D(m)1.8

hDL = 0.224 x (L/D0.8) = 22.4 W/K

or L/D0.8 = 100 m0.2 1 equation for two unknowns

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 7

 Liquid nitrogen precooler (continued)
Pressure drop equation provides the other equation for L & D
2
L m&
p = f ; Aflow = D2/4 and f ~ 0.02 (guess)
2 D A flow
4m&
Re D =
D
4 x 0.001 kg/s
Substituting for ReD and f x 0.0062 m x 15 x 10-6 Pa s

m& 2 L ~ 13,700
p 0.016 0.016 x L
(10-3 kg/s)2
= 5
D5 0.3 kg/m3 D
L 2nd equation for
p= 5.33 x 10 5
-8
two unknowns
Substitute: D
Eq. 1: L = 100 D0.8 p= 5.33 x 10-6/D4.2 with p = 10,000 Pa
D = [5.33 x 10-6/p]1/4.2 = 6.2 mm and L = 100 x (0.0062 m)0.8 = 1.7 m

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 8

 Single phase free convection heat transfer
g
g
Q L or Q Q

Compressible fluid effect: Heat transfer warms the fluid near the
heated surface, reducing density and generating convective flow.
Free convection heat transfer is correlated in terms of the
Rayleigh number,
gTL3
Nu L = f (Gr , Pr ) ~ CRa Ln where RaL Gr Pr =
Dth
where g is the acceleration of gravity, is the bulk expansivity, is
the kinematic viscosity (/) and Dth is the thermal diffusivity (k/C).
L (or D) are the scale length of the problem (in the direction of g)
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 9
 Free convection correlations
Free convection correlation for low
For very low Rayleigh temperature helium
number, Nu = 1
corresponding to pure
conduction heat transfer
For Ra < 109, the
boundary layer flow is
laminar (conv. fluids)

Nu L 0.59 RaL0.25
For Ra > 109, the
boundary layer is
turbulent

Nu L 0.1RaL0.33
Example

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 10

 Pool Boiling Heat Transfer (e.g. Helium)

Factors affecting heat

transfer curve
Surface condition
(roughness, insulators,
oxidation)
Orientation
Channels (circulation)
Time to develop steady
state (transient heating)
Liquid

Heated
Surface
Note: Other cryogenic fluids have basically
the same behavior, although the numerical
Q values of q and T are different.
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 11
 Nucleate Boiling Heat Transfer
Nucleate boiling is the principal heat transfer mechanism for
static liquids below the peak heat flux (q* ~ 10 kW/m2 for helium)
Requirements for nucleate boiling
Must have a thermal boundary layer of superheated liquid near the
surface
k f T
th = ~ 1 to 10 m for helium
q
Must have surface imperfections that act as nucleation sites for
formation of vapor bubbles.

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 12

 Critical Radius of Vapor Bubble

Pv
r
PL 2
Pv = PL + is the surface tension
r

Critical radius: For a given T, p, the bubble radius that determines

whether the bubble grows of collapses
r > rc and the bubble will grow
r < rc and the bubble will collapse
Estimate the critical radius of a bubble using thermodynamics
Clausius Clapeyron relation defines the slope of the vapor pressure line
in terms of fundamental properties

dp s h fg h fg p
= = If the gas can be approximated as ideal
dT sat v T (vv vL ) RT 2 and vv >> vL

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 13

 Critical radius calculation

Integrating the Clausius Clapeyron relation between

ps and ps + 2/r

rc =
ps
(
2 h fg T
e
RT 2
1) 1

2RTs2
h fg ps T

Example: helium at 4.2 K (NBP)

Empirical evidence indicates that T ~ 0.3 K
This corresponds to rc ~ 17 nm
Number of helium molecules in bubble ~ 10,000
Bubble has sufficient number of molecules to be treated as
a thermodynamic system
Actual nucleate boiling heat transfer involves
heterogeneous nucleation of bubbles on a surface. This is
more efficient than homogeneous nucleation and occurs
for smaller T.

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 14

 Nucleate Boiling Heat Transfer He I

Note that hnb is not constant because Q ~ T2.5

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 15

 Nucleate Boiling Heat Transfer Correlations

The mechanism for bubble formation and detachment is very complex

and difficult to model
Engineering correlations are used for analysis

Kutateladse correlation
0 .6 0 .125
h
1/ 2
qC pl l
1/ 2

2

3/ 2
p
0 .7

4
= 3 .25 10 g l
h fg v k l l (g )1 / 2
kl l
g l
g g l l

Rearranging into a somewhat simpler form,

0.3125

2
p
1.75 1.5
l C p
1.5

q = 1.90 10 g l kl
(Ts Tb )
9

3

2.5

l
v h fg

1/ 2

where = q (W / cm 2 ) = 5.8T 2.5 For helium at 4.2 K
g l
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 16
 Peak Heat Flux (theory)
Understanding the peak nucleate boiling heat flux is based on
empirical arguments due to instability in the vapor/liquid flow

Instability in the vapor-liquid boundary

vv vv
vL vL vv vL

vv vL

c

Instability due to balance between surface energy and kinetic energy

2 L v
c2 = (v v )2

( L + v ) ( L + v )2
v L

Transition to unstable condition when c2 = 0

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 17

 Peak Heat Flux Correlations

Zuber correlation:

( l v )g l
1 1
4 2
q Khfg v
*

2
v
l + v

Empirical based on Zuber Correlation

q 0.16h fg v 2 [g ( l v )]
1 1
* 4

~ 8.5 kW/m2 for He I at 4.2 K

Limits:
T Tc; q* 0 since hfg 0 and 0
T 0; q* ~ v1/2 (decreases)
q*max near 3.6 K for LHe

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 18

 Film Boiling

Film boiling is the stable condition when the surface is blanketed

by a layer of vapor
Film boiling heat transfer coefficient is generally much less that that
in nucleate boiling
Minimum film boiling heat flux, qmfb is related to the stability of the
less dense vapor film under the more dense liquid

liquid

vapor ~ 10 m

Taylor Instability governs the collapse of the vapor layer

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 19

 Film Boiling Heat Transfer Correlations
Factors affecting the process
Fluid properties: Cp, hfg, , l, v
Fluid state: saturated or pressurized (subcooled)
Heater geometry (flat plate, cylinder, etc.)
Breen-Westwater correlation

v (Ts Tb )
1/ 8 1/ 4

1/ 2

h fb 3 = 0.37 + 0.28
g ( l v ) kv v (l v )g ' gD ( l v )
2

Where,
' =
[h fg + 0.34C pv (Ts Tb )] 2

h fg
Simplified form for large diameter

g ( l v ) k v ( l v )g '
1/ 8 1/ 4
3
h fb = 0.37 q (Ts T f )
v 3

v (Ts Tb )
4

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 20

 Minimum film boiling heat flux
LHe @ 4.2 K
Minimum film boiling heat Q/S, W/cm2

Transition boiling
Nucleate boiling
flux is less than the peak

Film boiling
heat flux
0.9
Recovery to nucleate
boiling state is associated
with Taylor Instability.
0.3
1
g ( l v ) 4 qmfb
qmfb = 0.16h fg v 2
(l + v )
Dimensionless ratio:
1 4 (Ts-Tb), K
1
qmfb v 2
~ 0.36 for LHe @ 4.2 K
= ~ 0.1 @ 2.2 K
q*
l + v
~ 1 @ Tc = 5.2 K
~ 0.09 for LN2 @ 80 K where q* ~ 200 kW/m2

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 21

 Prediction of Nucleate/Film Boiling for Helium

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 22

 Experimental Heat Transfer (Helium)

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 23

 Prediction of Nucleate/Film Boiling for Nitrogen

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 24

 Experimental Heat Transfer (Nitrogen)

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 25

 Internal two phase flow

Heat transfer depends on

various factors Ts D m& 2 ,T f

Mass flow rate

Orientation w/r/t gravity
Q
m& ,T
Flow regime 2 f

Quality () g
Void fraction ()
Total heat transfer rate
D
QT = Q fc + Qb
Ts
where: Qfc is convective and Qb is
gravity enhanced boiling. Q

Depending on factors above, either

contribution may dominate

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 26

 Horizontal flow two phase heat transfer

Ts D m& 2 ,T f

Q
Consider the case where gravitational effects are negligible
Horizontal flow at moderate Re so that inertial forces dominate
Correlation based on enhanced Nusselt number
0.1 0.5
Nu 2 L v
where tt = 1 x
0.9

= f ( tt )
Nu L x v L
m& (1 x )
and Nu L = 0.023 Re 0.8 0.4
Pr ; Re L =
L L L A flow
Typical correlation (de la Harpe):

Nu 2
A tt m 1 for tt large
Nu L
with m ~ 0.385 and A ~ 5.4

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 27

 Vertical channel heat transfer
m& 2 ,T f

Main difference between

this problem and pool boiling
is that the fluid is confined
within channel
g D
At low mass flow rate and
self driven flows (natural Ts
circulation) the heat Q
transfer is governed by
buoyancy effects
Process is correlated against
classical boiling heat
transfer models
In the limit of large D the
correlation is similar to pool
boiling heat transfer
(vertical surface)
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 28
 Vertical channel maximum heat flux

Critical flow in an evaporator

Empirical observations g c ln[1 + c ( 1)]
1
w h fg v l
2
q =
*
1 =
q* ~ w for small w c ( 1)
1 v

z 2
q* ~ z-1/2 for w/z < 0.1
c = mv m&
q* ~ constant for w/z and
& Critical quality
>> 1 max ~ 0.3 for helium

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 29

 Example: Cryogenic Stability of Composite
Superconductors (LTS in LHe @ 4.2 K)

Used in large magnets where flux jumping and other small disturbances
are possible and must be arrested
General idea: in steady state ensure that cooling rate exceeds heat
generation rate (Q > G)
Achieved by manufacturing conductor with large copper (or aluminum)
fraction and cooling surface
Lower overall current density G/S
Potentially high AC loss (eddy currents) I2R/S

Current Fully
Sharing normal
Composite Conductor
Tb (K) Tcs (K) Tc (K) T (K)
Copper/Aluminum stabilizer
Insulating spacer (G-10)
NbTi/Nb3Sn Icu
Isc

V=IcuRcu

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 30

 Cryogenic Stability (LHe @ 4.2 K)

Case 1: Unconditional stability, recovery to fully superconducting state

occurs uniformly over length of normal zone
Case 2: Cold End recovery (Equal area criterion): Excess cooling capacity
(area A) > Excess heat generation (area B)

Q/S is the LHe boiling heat

Q/S transfer curve for bath cooling
or A normalized per surface area
G/S 2
B
1 G/S is the two part heat generation
Curve for a composite superconductor
Tcs is the temperature at which Top = Tc

Tb (K) Tcs (K) Tc (K) Tx (K)

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 31

 Transient Heat Transfer
Heat transfer processes that occur on time scale short compared to
boundary layer thermal diffusion. Why is this important in cryogenics?
(Dth (copper) ~ 10-4 m2/s @ 300 K; ~ 1 m2/s @ 4 K)
Normal liquid helium has a low thermal conductivity and large heat
capacity
kf
Df= ~ 3 x 10-8 m2/s (LHe @ 4.2 K)
q
C

T(x)
th = (D t )
f
1
2 ~ 3 x 10-4 t1/2 [m] for LHe @ 4.2 K
2 ~ 1.5 t1/2 [m] for copper @ 4.2 K
th
hL
Lumped capacitance condition: Bi = << 1 ~ 10L [m]
k
Note that this subject is particularly relevant to cooling
superconducting magnets, with associated transient thermal processes
Important parameters to determine
E = q t* (critical energy)
T surface temperature during heat transfer
USPAS Shorts Course

Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 32
 Transient Heat Transfer to LHe @ 4.2 K

Time evolution of the temperature difference following a step heat input:

Steady state is reached after ~ 0.1 s

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 33

 Critical Energy for Transition to Film Boiling

Hypothesis: The critical energy is determined by the amount of

energy that must be applied to vaporize a layer of liquid adjacent
to the heated surface.
Energy required

E = l h fg th
q*
LHe
Layer thickness determined by diffusion

th = (D t )
f
1
2
th
2
Critical flux based on heat diffusion:
1
kl 2
q = l h fg
*

*
2 l Ct
~ 0.09 t-1/2 [W/cm2] @ 4.2 K

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 34

 Surface Temperature (Transient HT)
During transient heat transfer, the surface temperature will be higher
than the surrounding fluid due to two contributions:
Fluid layer diffusion: transient conduction in the fluid layer will result in a
finite temperature difference
Kapitza conductance: At low temperatures, there can be a significant
temperature difference, Tk, due to thermal impedance mismatch (more on
this subject later). This process is dominant at very low temperatures, but
is small above ~ 4 K, so is normally only important for helium systems.
Fluid layer diffusion equation:
2 T f 1 T f k
= ; Df =
x 2 D f t C p
Boundary conditions:
Tf (x,0) = 0; initial condition Solution is a standard second order
Tf (infinity, t) = 0; isothermal bath differential equation with two
q = -kf dTf/dt)x=0 ; heat flux condition spatial and one time boundary
condition.
Solid is isothermal (Bi = hL/k << 1)

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 35

 Transient diffusion solution
Tf
Integrating the diffusion equation:

q Df t
12
x2 x
q
T f = 2 exp xerfc
kf 2(D t )
1 2
4D f t f

Evaluating at x = 0 (surface of heater) x

12
2q t
T f ( x = 0 ) =
C p k f

The transient heat transfer coefficient can then be defined

C p k f
12
q
h= =
T f 2 t
0.1
h ; kW/m2K for helium near 4 K
t

At t = 10 s; h ~ 30 kW/m2 K and for q = 10 kW/m2; Tf ~ 0.3 K

Note: this value of h >> hnb (nucleate boiling HT coefficient)
USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 36
 Summary Cryogenic Heat Transfer

Single phase heat transfer correlations for classical fluids are

generally suitable for cryogenic fluids
Free convection
Forced convection
Two phase heat transfer also based on classical correlations
Nucleate boiling
Peak heat flux
Film boiling
Transient heat transfer is governed by diffusive process for T
and onset of film boiling

USPAS Short Course Boston, MA 6/14 to 6/18/2010 37