TWO-PHASE GAS-LIQUID CONVECTION

HEAT TRANSFER
A Correlation
E. J. DAVIS AND . M. DAVID1
Department of Chemical Engineering, Gonzaga University, Spokane, Wash.

A slip model, previously developed, has been used to develop an empirical correlation for two-phase gas-
liquid heat transfer data. The data of many major investigators have been analyzed to determine and to
extract those for which nucleate boiling did not occur. These experimental data have been compared
with the results predicted from the proposed correlation. The data in the purely convective heat transfer
region (no nucleate boiling) have been predicted within an average absolute error of 6 to 7% over a wide
1

range of tube sizes, flow rates, pressures, and heat fluxes, and for vapor mass fractions from about 0.10
to the dry-wall or liquid-deficient condition. The data correlated by the proposed equation generally
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

correspond to annular or mist-annular flow conditions. The results for the steam-water system are in good
agreement with those for the air-water system that have been published.

hefrequent occurrence of two-phase gas-liquid flow in assumed that the eddy diffusivities for hj^t transfer and
Downloaded via SHANGHAI LBRY on April 7, 2021 at 03:04:17 (UTC).

industrial heat exchange equipment and recent interest in
thin film cooling have prompted a large number of investiga-
tions in two-phase heat transfer since the 1930’s. The literature
surveys of Collier (5) and David (6) include the work up to
1957, but Shrock and Grossman (30), Sani (29), Kvamme (22),
Groothuis and Hendal (77), Davis and David (S), Parker and
Grosh (28), Bennett et al. (3), Silvestri et al. (31), Dukler (72),
Chen (-!), and Anderson, Haselden, and Mantzouranis (7, 2)
have made noteworthy contributions to the knowledge of two-
phase heat transfer since that time.
Early investigators in the field were concerned with heat
exchange in evaporators and reboilers and reported only
average values or over-all heat transfer coefficients. To
complicate any critical analysis of the data, some authors
failed to distinguish between nucleate boiling and convection
heat transfer, which both occurred in the equipment. Unless
point heat transfer coefficients are reported, the data are of
little use in designing equipment to operate in a range other
than that studied by the investigator.
The first author to present a comprehensive and complete
experimental investigation of two-phase heat transfer was
Dengler (10, 7 7), who measured point coefficients in a vertical
jacketed tube under the conditions summarized in Table I.
He recognized the existence of a nucleate boiling zone and a
convection-controlled zone, and also found that a dry-wall
condition occurred at high vapor fractions. Introducing a
nonvolatile radioactive tracer into the liquid stream, he deter-
mined that a liquid-deficient region occurred, as evidenced by
an increased count at the wall due to deposition of the salt on
the wall He also applied a radioactive tracer technique to
measure liquid holdup.
Anderson, Haselden. and Mantzouranis (7) tabulated the
results of many of the correlations that have been proposed for
calculating heat transfer coefficients in long tube evaporators.
Little agreement exists among the various correlations. They
also developed a theory for upward, annular flow· of a gas-
liquid mixture in a vertical tube using the treatment of von
Karman in applying the analogy between momentum transfer
and heat transfer. Von Karman’s universal velocity profile
was assumed to apply to the liquid film, and the authors
1
Present address, Department of Chemical Engineering. Uni-
versity of Washington, Seattle 5, Wash.
momentum transfer are equal. The authors attempted to
substantiate their theory with the data of Dengler (10) and
Lee (23), but the data were too inaccurate to confirm the theory.
Anderson, Haselden, and Mantzouranis (2) published the
results of a more accurate experimental study in which they
measured point heat transfer coefficients for the evaporation
of water in a vertical tube. Qualitatively the results were
similar to Dengler’s. The theory developed in the earlier
paper did not predict film temperature drops accurately, so
the authors proposed an empirical correlation to account for the
discrepancy. Dengler’s results Were not correlated by the
proposed equation.
Chen (4) recently compared the correlations of Dengler and
Addoms (77), Guerrieri and Tally (18), Bennett et al. (3), and
Shrock and Grossman (30) with the experimental results of
those investigators and the data of Sani (29). He found
existing correlations to be unsatisfactory and proposed a
correlation for the heat transfer coefficient which is based upon
macroconvective and microconvective effects. The macro-
convective term is a modified Dittus-Boelter equation, and the
microconvective term is based on the Forster-Zuber formulation
for pool boiling (16). The correlation, included in Table
II, predicts the data with an average deviation of ± 11%.
Hewitt (19) has analyzed cocurrent upw'ard flow of two-
phase gas-liquid mixtures using Dukler’s approach (72),
Using Deissler’s equation (9) for the shear stress in the liquid
film near the wall and von Karman’s expression for the shear
stress farther from the wall, he developed a relationship for the
liquid film thickness in terms of the von Karman dimensionless
velocity and dimensionless distance parameters. The ap-
proach is extended to flow-- with heat transfer similar to the
work of Anderson and Dukler; however, Hewitt did not
compare results of his analysis with experimental data.
The application of the von Karman universal velocity
profile to the annular film is questionable. Dukler (13) first
applied it in developing his theory of film thickness in thin film
flow. For the case of negligible gas flow the film thickness was
predicted accurately. However, the assumption has not been
tested under conditions of considerable interfacial shear between
the vapor core and the annular film. A further difficulty,
mentioned by Anderson, is that of the very substantial ripples
that occur on the liquid surface. Considering these difficult
problems it is not unreasonable that Anderson’s theory failed

VOL. 3 NO. 2 MAY 19 64 111

 Table 1. Variables Studied by Investigators of Two-Phase Convection Heat Transfer
Mass Flow Rate, Heat Flux,
Pressure, Lb./Hr.-Sq. Ft. Vapor Mass B,t.u./Hr.-Sq. Ft. Tube Diameter, Tube
System P.S.I.A. X 70-= Fraction X 70-= Ft. Orientation
Anderson et al. Steam-water 20-120 32.8-656 0.01-0.60 3.7-97.0 0.0387 Vertical
Bennett et al. Steam-water 15-35 51.5-217 0-0.546 63-158 0.0203 (equiv. Vertical (an-
diam.) nulus)
Davis Steam-water 25-150 50-600 0.30-0.90 50-260 0.0324 (equiv. Horizontal (rec-
diam.) tangular
duct)
Dengler and Lee Steam-water 7-40 44-1010 0.07-0.90 0-200 0.0833 Vertical
Fikry Steam-water 15-25 41.4-74.7 0.02-0.82 6.0-30 0.0208 Horizontal
Groothuis and Air-water 14.7 112-621 0-0.20 Not reported 0.0460 Vertical

Kvamme Steam-water 18-87 52-182 0-1.00 9.4-50.2 0.0208 Horizontal

Mumm Steam-water 45-200 252-1008 0-0.60 50-250 0.0387 Horizontal
Parker and Grosh Steam-water 49-61 37-73 0.89-0.99 3.0-20.7 0.0833 Vertical
Silvestri et al. Steam-water 15-75 73.6-162 (steam) 0.25-1.00 0-1427 0.0164 Vertical
51 .5—332 (water)

to agree with the experimental findings. Because of the nu- deficient condition was reached depended upon the heat flux.
merous assumptions required to predict the thickness of liquid Visual observation of the flow pattern indicated that annular
films in two-phase vapor-liquid flow, and because of the and annular-mist flow occurred up to the point at which the
complexities of the mathematical model for heat transfer to heat transfer coefficient reached a maximum, began to fluc-
such flow, an alternative and empirical approach to the study tuate widely, then dropped sharply. Little liquid, if any,
of two-phase convection heat transfer is needed for design could be observed on the wall at that point.
purposes. Such an approach is developed in this paper. For most of the runs of the authors, the temperature difference
The data of the major investigators are analyzed and correlated between the wall and bulk fluid was maintained low enough
over a wide range of conditions by means of a previously to prevent nucleate boiling; but, at low vapor fractions
developed model (8). and high heat fluxes a nucleate boiling contribution occurred.
For each operating condition of fixed pressure, total flow rate,
Heat Transfer Mechanisms and Regimes and quality, the heat flux was varied to determine the de-
Several investigators (2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, pendence of the heat transfer coefficient on the heat flux.
For most of the data the heat transfer coefficient was in-
26-31) have measured point heat transfer coefficients in the
dependent of the heat flux. It was concluded by analogy
study of heat transfer to vapor-liquid mixtures flowing in ducts.
with single-phase flow that the coefficient is only a function of
The systems and variables studied are listed in Table I, and
the fluid properties and the dynamics of the system, but not
the proposed correlations for heat transfer coefficients are
the heat flux. The heat transfer coefficient is defined as:
listed in Table II.
Dengler’s data (10) are typical of the results obtained by the q/A q/A
h =
(1)
investigators. At low flow rates and low vapor fractions the At
heat transfer coefficient was found to depend upon the heat
flux and the temperature difference between the wall and the The data were tested and smoothed by plotting heat flux
bulk stream (assumed to be the saturation temperature in a against the temperature difference on a log-log plot for a fixed
single-component system). At higher vapor fractions and pressure, quality, and total flow rate. In the convection
the of the line the data points is unity,
higher mass flow rates the heat transfer coefficient was found region slope through
to be independent of the heat flux, which is similar to the indicating that the heat transfer coefficient is independent of
situation found in single-phase flow. Dengler correctly the film temperature difference—i.e.,
interpreted the dependence of the coefficient on the heat flux hAt =
q/A
to mean that nucleate boiling made some contribution to the
total heat transfer. At very high vapor fractions (60 to 90% log h + log At =
log q/A (2)
vapor and above) a dry-wall condition occurred and the heat
McAdams (25) states and several investigators (5) show that
transfer coefficient decreased to a value of the magnitude of a
in nucleate boiling the heat flux is a function of the temperature
single gas-phase coefficient.
difference:
Bennett’s findings (3) are in agreement with Dengler’s,
except that the heat transfer coefficient was found to depend,
to a small extent, on the heat flux in the convective region. -á
=
KAtn (3)
A
In an earlier paper (8) the present authors published the
results of an investigation of. heat transfer to high quality
mixtures flowing in an electrically heated, horizon- Then log =
log K + (n) log At (4)
-

steam-water
tal duct. Their results were similar to Dengler’s in that a
nucleate boiling region, a purely convection-controlled region,
and a liquid-deficient condition occurred as the steam quality
was increased from 30% to 90%. The point at which nucleate
boiling was suppressed and the quality at which the liquid-
Experimentally this was shown to be the case at low qualities
and high heat fluxes, for the slopes of the curves of log q/A
vs. log At were found to be greater than unity. Figure 1 shows
a sample of the data obtained by Davis (7).

112 l&EC FUNDAMENTALS

 Table II. Proposed Correlating Equations
Authors
£ - ·«
er ( m:
Bennett et al.

Chen h —
hxnae H“ ^mic

»*, = 0.023 (Rei)0·8 (PrL)0·4

^ F

KL UpL *
h míe
n · —
0 00122
U.UU1ZZ X
( /)0·24 A
,6µ10.29 .24 0.24
( )0·75 5
where F and S areempirically correlated fac-
tors. (5=0 when nucleate boiling is totally
suppressed)

Dengler
HD Dpgüg\os Z
Fikry Mj / \
kg
where C 0.84 0.4 < = < 0.5
C 0.887 0.55 < = < 0.65
C 0.904 0.70 < = < 0.80
Guerrieri and
Talty
Groothuis and
Hendal £=»-(^+^ ¥ * /m» heat transfer coefficient. In this region the coefficients are a
y·14
XMhV magnitude lower than those obtained in annular or annular-
-

* mist flow, and this liquid-deficient condition can lead to

Kvamme
Al
= i s (1
XI -

RJy·8 burnout in electrically heated systems. The stripping of the

where Rg = steam void fraction calculated film from the wall has been studied by van Rossum (33) and
from Martinelli-Lockhart Warner and Reese (34). Knuth (27) developed a theoretical
correlation
treatment, but it is not yet possible to predict accurately the
conditions under which liquid deficiency occurs. Vander-
Mumm
T
=

[4.3
+
5.0 10-(^)
/
·“/DG\o
] m water (32) proposed a model for predicting burnout in vapor-
q y·48»
\g\) XmW liquid flow assuming a droplet diffusion mechanism for droplet
transfer from the core to the wall with a re-entrainment func-
where Vl0 =
specific volume increase upon
vaporization tion accounting for dispersal of liquid from the film into the
Shrock and core. The utility of Vanderwater’s treatment is limited by
Grossman £ - ™
[ft + 1.5 X 10-
(i)"'] X
Re0·8 Pr1/3
lack of information on the droplet transfer coefficient and
entrainment function.
Parker and Grosh (28) used a model similar to that of
where 5o
Q) (¿)
=

Vanderwater in an attempt to predict the onset of mist flow,

Silvestri et al. Graphical correlation of but were unable to substantiate their theory because of lack of
A /^ DG, information on droplet diffusion. However, they were able
At/AT Re0·8 Mrp to predict qualitatively the longitudinal tube wall temperature
where Mrp =
XMr + (1 —

x) Ml profile.
In the analysis of data for this paper the simple criterion
used to extract data in the convection-controlled annular or
annular-mist flow region was to plot the data at a fixed flow
rate and pressure as the heat transfer coefficient vs. the vapor
The suppression of nucleate boiling is a complex phenomenon
mass fraction. Only data below the point of the maximum
that depends upon the surface characteristics of the heating
heat transfer coefficient were used.
element, the surface tension, other physical properties of the
liquid, and the flow characteristics of the system. Hsu (20) Model
offered a very commendable theoretical analysis of the factors
involved and Chen (4) developed an empirical correlation to The results of all of the investigators mentioned indicate that
account for boiling suppression, but there is not yet a generally a convection heat transfer region exists in two-phase gas-liquid
accepted method to predict the suppression of nucleate boiling flow heat transfer. In an earlier paper the authors developed
a correlating equation based upon the following assumptions:
accurately.
Because of the difficulty in predicting the thickness of the Nucleate boiling does not occur.
thermal boundary layer used in Hsu’s analysis, the simple Heat transfer occurs from the wall to an annular liquid film.
method of plotting the data, discussed above, has been used to The heat transfer coefficient can be predicted from an
analyze the data of other investigators for this paper, where equation similar to the Dittus-Boelter equation for single-phase
there is doubt about the region in which the data were taken. flow in which the properties of the liquid are used for che
physical properties.
The upper limit of the two-phase convection heat transfer A slip model can be used to relate the average liquid velocity
is the liquid-deficient region beyond the point of the maximum to the average vapor velocity—i.e.,

VOL. 3 NO. 2 MAY 1964 1 13

 w /DpiMiV Incorporating Equation 9 into Equation 8 and determining
_

/c>y (5)
¿i \ PL / \ k )l the constant by fitting the data, the following correlating
was
equation developed:
Defining the slip ratio as:
fhD DGaV- (C^Y*
0.060 |
—

ill)
a ~
Üg
—

ÜL
(6) W. Pe PL ) v
and writing the liquid mass velocity plül Gl in terms of the =
Analysis of Data and Correlation of Results
vapor mass velocity and the slip ratio, the following is obtained: The data of the authors are plotted in Figure 2 for the range
of variables listed in Table I. The data are predicted to
Gl = ~

G, (7) within an average absolute error of 8% by Equation 11, which

pea
is about the average reproducibility and experimental error in
Assuming that at high vapor fractions the vapor occupies the data. Only data in the convection heat transfer region
nearly all of the duct, the superficial gas mass velocity can be are plotted. The points at very high flow rates (high vapor
written as: mass velocities) are badly scattered because the experimental
error was highest in this range where temperature differences
Gg —

xGt (8)
as low as 3.6° F. occurred.
Then Equation 5 becomes: In many of Dengler’s runs the temperature difference was
small enough to exclude nucleate boiling. Data he reported
íhD\ B /DGtx » (CJly to be in the convection-controlled region are compared with
=
(9)
Vi / °?\ PL Pg ) \ k JL Equation 11 on Figure 3. The data are predicted to within
In general the slip ratio should be a function of the vapor an average absolute error of 17%, which is approximately
and liquid flow rates, the system geometry, the physical proper- the reproducibility of the data. Points 1 and 2 correspond to
runs in which the temperature difference was enough to cause
ties of the system, and the flow pattern. For the range of
one to suspect nucleate boiling, and point 3 is from a run at
conditions studied the authors empirically determined the
a quality of 0.707, which might be beyond the point of the
terms B/aa of Equation 9 to be a function of the liquid-vapor
maximum heat transfer coefficient. The correlation predicts
density ratio (7, 8):
results as well as that which Dengler proposed for the convec-
B tion heat transfer region. Kvamme (22) studied heat transfer
-
=
S' (10)
a to steam-water mixtures at high qualities as listed in Table I.

114 I & E C FUNDAMENTALS


Figure 3. Comparison of Dengler's data with Equation 1 1
By maintaining small temperature differences he suppressed
nucleate boiling in most of his runs. Kvamme includes the
data of Yamazaki, who worked primarily in the low quality,
nucleate boiling area. Some of Kvamme’s data were badly
scattered (as high as ±40% in a few runs) either because of
fluctuations in the wall temperature or error in the measure-
ment of the smaller temperature differences, but the data have
been smoothed by calculating the average heat transfer co-
efficient over his short (9.23-inch) test section; however, the
smoothed data can be considered to be point coefficients be-
cause the steam quality and pressure changes across the test
section were small.
Kvamme attempted to correlate his data by means of a void
fraction model using the Lockhart-Martinelli correlation (24)
for void fractions, but the scatter in the data prevented ade-
quate verification of the correlation. The smoothed data are
plotted on Figure 4, and are correlated by Equation 11 within
an average absolute error of 12%.
Groothuis and Hendal (77) published a significant paper on
heat transfer to air-water and air-oil mixtures. Their con-
tribution is a complete and consistent study in convection-
controlled two-phase heat transfer. No nucleate boiling
occurred, for the tube wall was maintained at a temperature
below the boiling point of the liquid in all runs. Their results
indicated that the air-oil system behaved analogously to
laminar flow of single-phase systems, and the air-water system
behaved analogously to turbulent flow of single-phase systems.
Although they studied low vapor mass fractions, the data are
similar to those of the present authors. Using a Seider-Tate
type equation for the correlation of the air-water data they
proposed the following correlation:
-
%
=
0.029 (Res)"^ Pr>« (12)
where Re Pj-MlD PeܫD
2 Re'£ +· Re'g
ß ß«
The air-oil data were correlated by an equation similar to those
for laminar flow of single phases.
In the Groothuis-Hendal correlation the viscosity ratio term
was included because the investigators worked with large
3000
k
-
0.060 I 1 II
\ /L
V
kL \ 9/ / \ R /L
Figure 4. Comparison of Kvamme's data with Equation 1
temperature differences between the wall and the bulk stream.
Equations 11 and 12 predict values for the Nusselt group that
are in good agreement at all but very low vapor mass fractions.
Figure 5 compares Equations 11 and 12 for the steam-water
system at a pressure of 50 p.s.i.a. for qualities from 10 to
80% for a tube diameter of 0.5 inch. Equation 12 predicts
Nusselt numbers 10 to 15% lower than Equation 11 for the
data of Davis, and in general Equation 12 predicts Nusselt
numbers 10 to 25% lower than Equation 11 at vapor fractions
greater than 0.20. At very low vapor fractions the equations
deviate considerably, for Equation 11 is not valid when the
liquid fills a substantial portion of the duct. As the quality
approaches zero, the Reynolds number in the Groothuis-
Hendal correlation approaches that for a single phase, and the
liquid Reynolds number predominates. At high vapor frac-
tions the vapor Reynolds number predominates, and the
equation has a form much like Equation 11.
The principal difference in the results of Groothuis and
Hendal and the authors is that the liquid-deficient condition
occurred at much lower vapor fractions in the air-water system
than in the steam-water system. The data of Groothuis in-
dicate that a dry-wall condition occurred at vapor mass
fractions below' 0.20.
Anderson et al. found convection heat transfer to occur in the
upper portion of their vertical tube. Data from their paper
in which the steam mass fraction exceeded 0.10 have been
plotted on Figure 6 to compare with Equation 11. The data
are those for the top position in the tube, corresponding to
section 13 in their work. Except for run 16, which might
have been near the dry-wall condition, the Nusselt numbers
are predicted to within an average absolute error of 10% for all
of the data, in the specified vapor mass fraction range.
Bennett et al. (3) have reported data for heat transfer to
steam-water mixtures flowing in annuli. The results are
similar to those of other investigators except for a slight de-
pendence of the heat transfer coefficient on the heat flux even
in the purely convective region. Liquid deficiency occurred
at about 0.65 mass fraction steam in their vertical section.
Fable II lists their correlation for the convection-controlled
region, which is a modified Guerrieri and Talty equation (18).
The dependence of the heat transfer coefficient on the heat
flux is in disagreement with the results of the authors, but such
VOL. 3 NO. 2 MAY 1964 115
slight dependence can probably be correlated by considering
a similar situation in single-phase flow. Bennett used the
Dittus-Boelter equation for calculating hi, the heat transfer
coefficient based upon liquid flow alone. If the Seider-Tate
equation were used, the factor (µ6/µ )0·14 would be introduced
to allow for the large difference in viscosity between the bulk
liquid temperature and the wall temperature. This factor
could account for the increase in heat transfer coefficient as the
heat flux (and hence temperature difference) increases.
The limited data tabulated by Bennett have been compared
with Equation 11, and the results are given in Table III. The
average absolute error for this sampling of data is 5.2%.
When the rather drastic assumptions involved in developing
Equation 11 from the naive model are considered, it is interesting
that such a wide range of data is correlated. The empirical
expression for the slip ratio (Equation 10) could not be ex-
pected to hold for such widely varying conditions. Other
data bear out this consideration. The data of Fikry (75) and
Mumm (26, 27) deviate greatly from the values predicted by
Equation 11, but they do fit an equation of the same form:
where AT" is a constant specific to the system geometry.
Fikry investigated the steam-water system over a narrow
range of total mass flow rates listed in Table I. The tempera-
ture differences between wall and bulk stream were very small
for most of his runs (2° to 30° F.), so nucleate boiling did not
occur. Figure 7 shows that Fikry’s data are correlated very
well (6% average absolute error), except for two points at
vapor mass fractions of about 0.20, by letting A 0.024 in =

Equation 13.
A few data in the convection-controlled region of two-phase
heat transfer can be extracted from Mumm’s work. He
measured heat transfer coefficients to the steam-water system
at very high total mass velocities. The data have been ana-
lyzed by preparing log-log plots of heat flux vs. temperature
difference to determine what data were in the convection

Table III. Comparison of Bennett's Sample Data

Equation 1 1
Annulus D = 0.623 inch
Do =
0.866 inch
G =
170,000 lb./hr. sq. ft.

\ k
(hD\
\ k , cd X t,
0
/-'.

199 175 0.152 236.0

210 194 0.168 235.1
222 210 0.184 234.2
Figure 5. Comparison of Groothuis-Hendal correlation 236 224 0.201 233.3
with Equation 1 1
250 242 0.217 232.3
262 258 0.234 231 .0
268 272 0 250 229.5

Figure 6. Comparison of Anderson and coworkers' Figure 7. Comparison of Fikry's data with
data with Equation 1 1 Equation 3 1

116 l&EC FUNDAMENTALS

 reasonably close to that predicted by Equation 11 ; however,
-1 TT nothing further can be concluded about the reliability of
o G, =255,000 lb/hr-ft2
......
, xn 0.3 0 Equation 11 from these data.
+ G,
=
765,000 , x = 0.0 6
V G, =255,000 " ....., x —
0.2 0 Conclusions
—
a G,
=
255,000 , x= 0.1 2
=
382,000
" '
", = The empirical slip ratio model that has been proposed was
G, 9-05 / found to correlate the data of the major investigators of two-
PRESSURE =
45psia
Tv
¡A-/Á y w phase flow heat transfer, who have reported extensive data in
A/J the convection heat transfer region. The data of Dengler,
AA Davis, Kvamme, and Anderson, and samples of Bennett’s
A/ SL OPE > data were correlated generally to within an average absolute

> G'
w/
// -
/
r
A
error of 17% for vapor mass fractions above 0.10 by the
following equation:
A
'
/ /
/ fhD Pl\0·28 /DGtxy'a7
0.060
Ui.
_

/ Pt) V Pl / Cpp\j *
A The equation was shown to be in good agreement with one
developed by Groothuis and Hendal for the air-water system.
The data of Fikry were very well correlated by an equation

2· 4 —I—I— .
4
1 1

6
IIII------
8 10 20 40 60
I I
of the same form as the above, except that the constant was
0.024 instead of 0.060. Mumm’s data were found to be
80 100

AT=(VTsot>-<eF> poorly correlated by an equation of the above form, but the

scarcity of his data in the convection heat transfer region
Figure 8. Sample test of Mumm's data prevents adequate testing of the equation. The data corre-
lated generally correspond to annular or mist-annular flow
patterns in either vertical or horizontal flow.

Acknowledgment
The authors are grateful to R. J. Grosh for his careful reading
of the manuscript and his constructive comments and to G. F.
Hewitt, who brought the attention of the authors to the large
amount of work being carried out at Harwell, England.

Nomenclature
a =
exponent in Equation 5
A = constant
b =
exponent in Equation 5
B = constant in Equation 5
Cp
=
heat capacity, B.t.u./lb.-0 F.
D = tube diameter, ft.
G =
mass velocity, lb./hr.-sq. ft.
h = heat transfer coefficient, B.t.u./hr.-sq. ft.-0 F.
k =
thermal conductivity, B.t.u./hr.-ft.-0 F.
K =
constant in Equations 3 and 4
=
constant in Equations 3 and 4
p =
pressure, p.s.i.a.
Figure 9. Comparison of Mumm's data with Pr = Prandtl number, dimensionless
Equation 1 3 q/A = heat flux, B.t.u./hr.-sq. ft.
Re =
Reynolds number, dimensionless
0
t =
temperature, F.
region. As Mumm indicates, most of his data are in the ü =
average velocity, ft./sec.
nucleate boiling region. Figure 8 is a sample of his data. Xlt = Martinelli parameter, dimensionless
The Nusselt numbers are about 50% higher than the values
Subscripts
predicted by Equation 11, and Figure 9 shows that the data
are poorly correlated by Equation 13. The data do not cover g =
gas properties
L =
liquid properties
a wide enough range to draw any conclusions about the slip
sat = saturation condition
ratio model. Furthermore, most of the data are for qualities t = total flow
below 30% steam, which is the range in which the use of TP =
two-phase “property”
Equation 12 is very questionable. w =
property at wall
The only other extensive data on two-phase flow heat transfer Greek Letters
that are not in the nucleate boiling region are those of Parker
and Grosh (28), who studied the liquid-deficient condition for
a =
slip ratio, dimensionless
At =
temperature difference between wall and bulk stream.
the steam-water system at vapor mass fractions above 0.89. °
F.
The values of the heat transfer coefficient at the entrance to µ =
viscosity, lb./hr.-ft.
their test section were very high in many runs, indicating that p
=
density, lb./cu. ft.
liquid deficiency did not occur immediately at the inlet.
=
vapor mass fraction, dimensionless
=
heat of vaporization, B.t.u./lb.
Although the scatter in the data is very bad, calculations = surface tension, lb.¡/it.
indicate that the data scatter about a mean value that is =
vapor pressure, lb.//sq. in.

VOL. 3 NO. 2 MAY 19 6 4 117

References
(1) Anderson, G. H., Haselden, G. G., Mantzouranis, B. G.,
Chem. Eng. Sci. 16, 222 (1961).
(2) Ibid., 17, 751 (1962).
(3) Bennett, J. A. R., Collier, J. G., Pratt, H. R. C., Thornton,
.1. D., Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs. (London) 39, 113 (1961).
(4) Chen, J. C., “Correlation for Boiling Heat Transfer to Satu-
rated Fluids in Convective Flow,” A.S.M.E.-A.I.Ch.E. Heat
Transfer Conference, Boston, 1963.
(5) Collier. J. G., At. Energy Res. Estab. (G. Brit.), Rept.
AERE CE/R 2496 (1957).
(6) David, . M., “Literature Survey on Boiling in Closed
Channel Flow Systems at High Vapor Fractions,” report to
Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Wash., 1957.
(7) Davis, E. J., Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington, 1960.
(8) Davis, E. J., David, . M., Can. J. Chem. Eng. 39, 99 (1961).
(9) Deisslcr, R. G.. Natl. Advisory Comm. Aeronaut. Tech. Notes
2129 (1950), 2138 (1952), 3145 (1959).
(10) Dengler. C. E.. Ph.D. thesis, Mass. Institute of Technology,
1962.
(11) Dengler. C. Eh. Addoms, J. N., Chem. Eng. Progr. Symp. Ser.
52, 95 (1956).
(12) Dukler, A. E., Ibid., 56, 1 (1959).
(13) Dukler. A. E., Ph.D. thesis, University of Delaware, 1951.
(14) Dukler. A. E., Bergelin, O. P., Chem. Eng. Progr. 48, 557
(1952).
(15) Fikrv, . M.. Ph.D. thesis. Imperial College, London, 1953.
(16) Forster. . K., Zuber, N., A.I.Ch.E. J. 1, 531 (1955).
(17) Groothuis, H., Hendal, W. P., Chem. Eng. Sci. 11, 212 (1959).
PROFILE RELAXATION IN NEWTONIAN JETS
STANLEY
An approximate mathematical model is formulated from which the decaying velocity profile, and the diam-
eter, of a laminar Newtonian jet ejected into air from a long circular tube may be obtained as a function of
distance from the tube exit. From this solution, the distance required for the diameter to become almost
constant may be predicted. The theoretical results are in good agreement with experimental observations.
The liquid jet is a valuable research tool in investigations
* of interest to the chemist and chemical engineer. Because
the jet presents a continually renewed and relatively pure
surface, it has found use as a system for the study of surface
tension (7, 9). Because its surface is usually well defined
geometrically, it lends itself to the measurement of the kinetics
of absorption and reaction at liquid surfaces (4, 10).
The stability of liquid jets has received much attention lately
because of its importance as a controlling factor in some
rocket combustion systems (8).
More recently, liquid jets have been used in fundamental
rheological studies, particularly in attempts to develop tech-
niques for the measurement of normal stresses in polymer
solutions (2. 5, 7), and in attempts to measure stress relaxation
in polymer solutions (3, 6).
The primary virtue of the liquid jet lies in the fact that it
projects a very short lifetime (the order of 10"~2 second)
over a relatively large space (the order of one foot) thus lending
itself to the study of such rapid processes as absorption and
stress relaxation in liquids.
In most situations, the jet is formed by ejecting fluid from
an orifice or tube. The fluid leaves with a nonuniform
velocity profile, and, if ejection is into an “inviscid” medium
such as air, this profile is free to relax to uniformity. The
relaxation process gives rise to a number of effects. In
particular, the surface velocity differs from the average bulk
118 I & E C FUNDAMENTALS
(18) Guerrieri. S. A., Talty. R. D,, Chem. Eng. Progr. Symp. Ser.
52, 69 (1956).
(19) Hewitt. G. F., At. Energy Res. Estab. (G. Brit.) Rept.
AERE-R-3680 (1961).
(20) Hsu, Y. Y., Trans. A.S.M.E. 84, 207 (1962).
(21) Knuth, E. L., “Evaporation from Liquid Wall Films into a
Turbulent Gas Stream,” p. 173, Heat Transfer and Fluid
Mechanics Institute, Stanford Univ., 1953.
(22) Kvamme, A., M.S. thesis, University of Minnesota, 1959.
(23) Lee, G., M.S. Thesis, Mass. Institute of Technology, 1952.
(24) Lockhart, R. W.. Martinelli. R. C.. Chem. Eng. Progr. 45,
39 (1949).
(25) McAdams, W. H., “Heat Transmission.” 3rd ed., McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1954.
(26) Mumm, J. F.. Argonne Natl. Lab. Rept. ANL-5276 (1954).
(27) Ibid., BNL-2446 (1955).
(28) Parker, J. D., Grosh, R. J., Ibid., ANL-6291 (1961).
(29) Sani, R. L., UCRL Rept. UCRL 9023 (1960).
(30) Shrock, V. E., Grossman, L. M.. Nuclear Sci. Eng. 12, 474
(1962).
(31) Silvestri, M., Finzi, S., Roseo, L., Schiavon, M., Zavattarelli,
Z., Pros. Second UN Intern. Conf. Peaceful Uses At. Energy 7 (1958).
(32) Vanderwater. R. G.. Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota,
1957.
(33) van Rossum, J. J., Chem. Eng. Sci. 11, 35 (1959).
(34) Warner, C. F,, Reese, B. A., Jet Propulsion 27, 877 (1957).
Received for review April 24, 1963
Accepted October 5, 1963
MIDDLEMAN, University of Rochester, Rochester, N. Y.
velocity of fluid. Hence, if the average velocity is used to
calculate the “age” of the jet, this age is different from the
surface age. Since the surface age must be known in order to
measure, for example, the rate of absorption at the surface,
one must either minimize the effect, or, as in the work of
Hansen (4), account for it by some correction factor.
Profile relaxation is generally accompanied by a slight
diameter change of the jet (7). Since surface area is often of
prime importance, it is essential that this diameter variation
be recognized and accounted for.
Finally, in the viscous and viscoelastic fluids of rheological
interest, profile relaxation gives rise to secondary normal
stresses. Whether these stresses are of a magnitude comparable
to the stresses of primary interest is. at present, an unanswered
question.
Bohr (7) recognized the existence of a nonuniform velocity
profile and developed an estimate for its rate of relaxation.
He concluded that relaxation occurred within a short distance
of the jet exit. But if one is considering dynamic phenomena —
such as stress relaxation or the growth of surface disturbances—
then these phenomena occur primarily in the exit region, and
the possibility of interaction with profile relaxation must be
considered.
The points raised in this discussion have prompted ex-
amination in some detail of the dynamics of viscous jets in
the exit region. This paper is concerned with the problem