Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(1991) Convective Heat Transfer by Impingement of Circular Liquid Jets
(1991) Convective Heat Transfer by Impingement of Circular Liquid Jets
J. H. Lienhard V
Mem. ASME
The impingement of circular, liquid jets provides a convenient method of cooling
surfaces. Here, jet impingement cooling of uniformly heated surf aces is investigated
analytically and experimentally for stable, unsubmerged, uniform velocity laminar
J. S. Lombara1 jets in the absence of phase change. Analytical and numerical predictions are de-
veloped for a laminar radial film flow. Experiments using undisturbed laminar jets
were performed to determine local Nusselt numbers from the stagnation point to
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
radii of up to 40 diameters. Turbulent transition in the film flow is observed ex-
Cambridge, MA 02139 perimentally at a certain radius. Beyond this transition radius, a separate turbulent
analysis is constructed. Integral method results are compared to numerical results,
and Prandtl number effects are investigated. The predictions are found to agree well
with the measurements for both laminar and turbulent flow. Predictive formulae
are recommended for the entire range of radii.
Introduction
Cooling a surface with an impinging liquid jet is an attractive deny the presence of a similarity region. However, no conclu-
technique because of its high efficiency and unsophisticated sive evidence showed that the dropped, buoyant cork actually
hardware requirements. Applications of jet impingement cool- moved at the liquid surface speed. Since the experimental ap-
ing are varied, and include processing of both metals and proach of Azuma and Hoshino is clearly more accurate, we
molded plastics, cooling of high-efficiency (aircraft) generator are inclined to give their conclusions greater weight. For the
coils, and cooling of certain electronic modules. Such jets lend details of Watson's flow field, the reader is referred to his
themselves to either convective boiling or to nonevaporative paper. His expressions, and those of a later independent study
convection, but in both situations the cooling efficiency varies by Sharan (1984), are quoted hereinafter when needed.
with the radial distance from the point of impact. In this study, Azuma and Hoshino measured the turbulent transition ra-
we consider the impingement of a circular, unsubmerged, lam- dius in their system (which used an annular orifice mounted
inar liquid jet on a surface of uniform heat flux. Convective on the plate, rather than an actual impinging jet) and also
transport, without change of phase, is analyzed theoretically measured the subsequent velocity profiles. The turbulent film
and experimentally, taking account of both the initial laminar was well characterized by standard boundary layer results, but
flow and the downstream turbulent flow. it did appear to show relaminarization farther downstream as
An axisymmetric, laminar impinging jet spreads into a thin, the film slowed and its stability increased.
laminar liquid film when it impacts a plane surface normal to Using Watson's similarity solution, Chaudhury (1964) ana-
its axis (Fig. 1). The hydrodynamics of this film have previously lyzed the heat transfer from an isothermal wall in terms of a
been studied theoretically by Watson (1964) and experimentally series solution for the similarity region and an integral solution
by Azuma and Hoshino (1984a, 1984b, 1984c, 1984d) and by for the boundary layer region; Carper (1989) has also presented
Olsson and Turkdogan (1966). Watson divided the flow ra- a solution to that problem. Liu and Lienhard (1989) developed
dially into a stagnation region, a boundary layer region with predictions of the Nusselt number for uniform heat flux using
surface velocity equal to jet speed, and a region of viscous an integral method and presented limited comparisons to ex-
similarity with decreasing surface velocity; he noted that the
film flow would be terminated by a hydraulic jump at a location
independently controlled by downstream conditions. The
thickness of the film initially decreases and then increases with
radius as viscous wall effects slow the spreading film. Watson
employed both viscous similarity and momentum integral so-
r^cx
lutions.
Watson's theoretical expressions for the laminar boundary
layer and similarity region velocity profiles and film thickness
were experimentally verified by Azuma and Hoshino (1984b,
1984c) using laser-Doppler measurements. This is in contrast
to the results of Olsson and Turkdogan (1966), who measured
the surface velocity by dropping bits of cork onto the liquid.
Olsson and Turkdogan found poor agreement with Watson's
predictions, observing a constant surface velocity lower than
the jet speed, and their results have sometimes been used to
Nomenclature
r = radius measured from
point of jet impact Tm = measured temperature on
c„ = heat capacity rh = hump radius, at which the back of the heater
Cc = jet contraction coefficient turbulence is fully devel- Tsf = free surface temperature
= 0.611 oped TSat — liquid saturation tempera-
friction factor r0 = radius at which 5 reaches ture
d contracted jet diameter = the surface of the liquid Tw = wall temperature on the
•Jc~c x (diameter of ori- sheet liquid side of the heater
fice) r-i = radius where thermal u(r,y) radial velocity distribution
f'(ri) = similarity function, equa- boundary layer reaches in liquid film
tion (24) the free surface for uf = velocity of impinging jet
h = local thickness of liquid Pr > 1 local maximum film ve-
sheet rT,i = location of the initial locity (liquid free surface
hr] = liquid sheet thickness at temperature profile given velocity), equal to Uj in
the position where ther- rm = radius where thermal regions 2, 21, and 3/
mal boundary layer boundary layer reaches y = distance normal to the
reaches the free surface the free surface for wall
h, = liquid sheet thickness at Pr < 1 distance between nozzle
transition point from rUii = location of the initial ve- and target plate
laminar to turbulence locity profile given 5 = viscous boundary layer
hrn — liquid sheet thickness at r, = radius at transition point thickness
fro from laminar to turbulent 8, thermal boundary layer
k = thermal conductivity of flow thickness
the liquid R = Reynolds number defined A S/h
kw — thermal conductivity of by Watson = 2Q/dv = AT0 A at /Yo
the heater (TT/2) Red- (t/d);e2 is the order of
Nu d = Nusselt number = qwd/ Red = Reynolds number of the radial to vertical conduc-
k(Tw-Tf) jet = Ufd/v tion in the heater sheet
Nu r = Nusselt number based on St = Stanton number = q„/ V = similarity variable
r, = qwr/k(T„-Tf) = PCpWmax ( T„ - Tsf) nondimensional tempera-
Nurf (r/d) t = heater sheet thickness ture
Pr Prandtl number T(r, y) = liquid temperature distri- dynamic viscosity
wall heat flux bution kinematic viscosity
Q volume flow rate of jet = Tf = jet temperature at im- density
ufitd /4 pingement 5/6,
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
0.407 R e y 3 P r 1 / 3 [ - ]
r^Q Nu d = - (3)
0.1713(H) + ^47Z
\r/ Redd
where
1/2
0.267(d/r 0 )
(4)
0.1713 (H) + ^
(a)
Nu„ (5)
1
PP V1-^) il\ +0.130^+0.0371^
PrRed\ r V \dj d d
where h is given by equation (20) below. Note that region 4
will occur only for Pr less than a critical value near five3;
otherwise, the thermal boundary layer does not grow fast
enough to reach the surface of the liquid film, which thickens
at increasing radius owing to viscous retardation. This Prandtl
number prediction is of particular interest, and we shall explore
it further using numerical solutions for the viscous flow regime
below. Regions 3 and 4 correspond to Watson's self-similar
viscous flow regime.
2.2 Integral Solutions for the Heat Transfer: Pr < 1. As
noted in our previous paper, the region map changes for small
Prandtl number (see Fig. 2b):
Region 11. The stagnation zone.
Region 11 Region 21. 5,<h region: Neither the thermal nor viscous
Region 1/ Region 3/ boundary layer reaches the free surface; surface temperature
(b) and velocity, Tsf and umax, are the inlet temperature and
Fig. 2 Development oJ the thermal boundary layer: (a) Pr > 1; (b) Pr < velocity, 7} and uf.
1 (not to scale) Region 31. 8, = h and8<h region: The thermal boundary layer
has reached the free surface. The surface temperature in-
creases with radius, but the velocity outside the viscous
boundary layer is still the jet velocity, uj.
2 Predictions From the Laminar Theory Region 41. 8 = h, bt = h, and Tw<Rsa, region: In this region, the
2.1 Integral Solutions for the Heat Transfer: Pr > 1. In viscous boundary layer has reached the surface of the liquid
aprevious study (Liu and Lienhard, 1989), we obtained integral sheet, and the velocity of the liquid surface decreases with
solutions for the heat transfer in the boundary layer and sim- radius.
ilarity regions for Prandtl number greater than the unity. The The integral energy equation may be used to estimate the
regions identified and results found are as follow (see Fig. 2a): Nusselt number:
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
1_ + 2 lufdl
Nurf =
£***© ( * ^ 4**)" (9) where
" max
~ 5 hr
(19)
In region 31,8, = h and the temperature of the liquid surface, dzT (P + P)dT
Pr/' (22)
TSf, is an increasing function of r. The temperature profile in dt " rL dr
this region is Here, the velocity similarity profile is (Watson, 1964)
^ ~ Av = ( 7 j / —
Tw) (14) 2VI (23)
2h 2\h p/'O0 = V3 + l-
\+cn[V M l - r / ) ]
Atrn, the beginning of region 3/, N u d = Nudj7-0, # = hT0, where en is a Jacobi elliptic function, c = 1.402, the similarity
and 5 = 5 r o , where h and 5 can be computed from Sharan's coordinate is
equations (1984):
y_ 3V3gr
Vo.1251-) +1.005 (^—,\ (15) V ' h 2v2v(P + l\ -y (24)
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
dissipating honeycomb was used to create a pressurized liquid
supply free of disturbances from the incoming flow. The jets
studied were produced at the bottom of the plenum. The sta-
bility of liquid jets is very sensitive to the' type of nozzle pro-
ducing the jet. Pipelike nozzles provide turbulent liquid to the
jet when the Reynolds number exceeds a relatively small value
(2000-4000); this turbulence generally leads to disturbances in
the liquid surface, which are unstable and which are strongly
amplified when the jet impacts a flat surface (Errico, 1986).
In the present experiments, carefully machined sharp-edged
orifice plates were used, rather than pipelike nozzles. Sharp-
edged orifices yield laminar, undisturbed jets of high stability.
Thus, splattering was entirely suppressed in the present ex-
periments.
The liquid supply was chilled by a mechanical refrigerator
before being pumped to the plenum. The water was cooled to
near 4°C. This cooling served two purposes. The first was to
ensure that the liquid free-surface temperature would not be-
come high enough to produce significant evaporative heat loss
at any point along the heater surface (Liu and Lienhard, 1989).
The second was to increase the accuracy of the experiments:
The requirement of low evaporative loss necessitates relatively
low heat fluxes and consequently small differences between
wall and inlet temperatures. Subcooling the liquid supply max-
imized the measured AT, without creating evaporative loss,
and thus decreased the uncertainty in the measured Nusselt
number.
The liquid jets impinge on a heater made of 0.10-mm-thick,
Fig. 3 Experimental apparatus: 1. Freon line; 2. chilled water tank; 3. 15.2-cm-wide stainless steel sheet. The sheet is stretched over
pump; 4. water supply line; 5. pressure transducer; 6. digital voltmeter; the open top of a 15.2 cm by 17.7 cm plexiglass insulation box
7. pressure gage; 8. momentum dissipating plate; 9. honeycomb; 10. and over 2.54-cm-dia. copper rods, which serve as electrodes;
sharp-edged orifice plate; 11. plenum; 12. steel heater sheet; 13. ther-
mocouple leads; 14. pressurized plastic box; 15. ammeter; 16. voltmeter;
springs maintain the tension in the sheet as it expands thermally
17. 30 kW generator; 18. compressor; 19. heat exchanger; 20. cooling and prevent its vibration or deflection. The insulation box
water; 21. throttling valve; 22. evaporator keeps water away from the underside of the heater sheet, and
restricts underside heat losses to a negligible natural convection
loss. The box is slightly pressurized with compressed air to
prevent liquid inflow. A 15 V, 1200 amp generator powers the
sheet directly; the generator was run at up to 20 percent of
This approximation is valid for low liquid surface temperatures full power.
(Liu and Lienhard, 1989). The wall temperature distribution is measured by 0.076 mm
The numerical integration begins at f = 1 (r = r0). The J-type thermocouples attached to the underside of the sheet
temperature profile at this station is the initial condition for and electrically insulated from it by high-temperature Kapton
the solution; tests (see below) show that the initial profile is tape. Starting at the stagnation point of the jet, the thermo-
quickly damped and has little influence on the Nusselt number couples are placed at radial increments of 1.27 cm along the
downstream. The following initial profile was employed: arcs of circle centered at the stagnation point, within a sector
T-Tf , 3. l/A3 of very small angle. The azimuthal symmetry of the flow is
very high, and the mechanical convenience of this arrangement
^w> = 1_
2«; + AV y b
~' (31)
was found to introduce no error.
= 0 d,sy<S (32) Radial conduction in the heater sheet may be shown to be
which again satisfies the boundary conditions (no surface flux of order e2 = (t/l)2 relative to vertical conduction, where / is
and matching to T„). The wall temperature and boundary layer the length scale associated with radial changes in the heat
thickness were selected to match those of the upstream bound- transfer coefficient. For the jets, /is essentially the jet diameter,
ary layer as calculated from the integral solution. The differ- d, so that e2 « 0.001. Radial conduction is thus negligible in
ential equation was integrated using the Crank-Nicholson comparison to vertical conduction; a formal perturbation so-
procedure. lution of the heat equation substantiates this conclusion.
Convective backloss, via natural convection below the heater,
is likewise negligible relative to the convective cooling at the
3 Experiments upper surface of the heater; the back is essentially adiabatic.
Experiments were performed to determine the wall temper- At the stagnation point, backloss is less than 0.2 percent of
ature distribution and Nusselt number that actually occur in the total flux, owing to the very high liquid-side Nusselt num-
jet impingement cooling. The experimental arrangement is • ber. The backloss increases downstream, as the Nusselt number
shown in Fig. 3. The apparatus is in three primary parts: a declines, but even in the worst case, at the largest radius, this
water jet loop, a refrigerating system, and an electrical heating loss is less than 4 percent. Because the backloss is so small,
system. the temperature drop through the 0.06 mm thick Kapton tape
In our previous paper, the experimental jets showed signif- (which electrically isolates the thermocouples) was entirely neg-
icant disturbances and sometimes splattered. To prevent splat- ligible and required no temperature correction.
tering, a new apparatus was built specifically to produce The vertical conductive temperature drop through the elec-
uniform velocity-profile, laminar jets free of the surface dis- trical heater, however, can be appreciable in regions where the
turbances that produce splattering (Vasista, 1989). A large surface heat transfer coefficient becomes large, principally the
plenum with an inlet momentum-breakup plate and turbulence stagnation zone. Solution of the heat equation, through terms
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
1.0
polynomial differential
equation
il^--.^ constant
integral
0.5 0.5 uation
linear ^ ^ ^
06 OS
0.1 i ( i
0.1
20
X
ro
Fig. 4 Effect of initial conditions on the solution of the differential
equations in the viscous similarity region for Pr = 4 (a)
1.0 0.1
0.5
0.05
(NXJ
0.1
OS
0.05
T o.oi
constant T,
0.005
0.01
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
300
Jat a (inlet condition)
Re d (xl0" 4 ) Pr
o 8.35 10.8
A 7.11 11.2
D 6.43 11.3
200 ao A 4.84 11.4
e 3.60 8.80
A C*. n\ o —- hump correlation
o>
• O 0& A
\ .
\ i
100 a \ D
A \ C
D
. \ n
A\ ^
V\ I
A
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
10 400
prediction Re d =3.06xl0 4
5 (inle
° Pr=10.3 °
——— ®VL aminar prediction
c
UK*-5 turbulent prediction
c c
transition prediction
1
present data
ni i
600
1000 4 Red=8.55xl04
O Re d =2.72xl0 Pr= 11.0 (inlet) ^9- N
Pr=l 1.5 (inlet)
® Re d =5.61xl0 4 Pr=10.9
laminar prediction
£> Re d =8.35xl0 4 Pr=10.8
turbulent prediction
laminar prediction 400
500
•transition prediction
I 300
200
200
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
and probably outweigh any finer adjustments of the Prandtl
Nu rf =0.15Rer 3 Pr 0 - 38 (36) number exponents. Best agreement with experimental data was
obtained when the values of viscosity (i.e., Red) and Pr used
Since a turbulent transition and a hydraulic jump usually occur in the equations were those corresponding' to temperatures at
downstream, the latter equation is more useful. However, nei- the radial midpoint of the film.
ther correlation is reliably accurate in the range 1 < r/r0 <
2.5; this range is important in practice, and we recommend 4.2 Turbulent Transition. The preceding analyses are based
use of the theoretical prediction, equation (3), in region 3. The on laminar flow and consider neither surface waves nor tur-
integral prediction for region 2 is equation (2). For laminar bulent transition. Plainly, it is important to know the location
flow, equations (2) and (3) can be used to estimate the local of transition from laminar to turbulent flow. If, in addition,
Nusselt number. These predictions are compared with our ex- turbulence significantly raises the Nusselt number above the
perimental data below. laminar prediction, a separate analysis of the turbulent trans-
The preceding results do not mean that the identification of port is necessary.
regions 3 and 4 is unimportant. In region 4, liquid surface Figure 8 shows measurements of the turbulent transition
temperature increases rapidly with radius, and evaporation can radius in the present system. The transition point is easily
become very significant. Conversely, in region 3, evaporation identified, since the laminar liquid sheet is smooth and trans-
can be less important for low initial liquid temperature. Thus, parent, while the turbulent liquid sheet has a rough surface,
for lower Prandtl numbers, the surface temperature should which reflects light and appears bright. The associated surface
always be estimated, and, if necessary, the adiabatic surface waves are described by Azuma and Hoshino (1984a) as "lattice-
condition should be dropped in favor of an evaporating surface shaped" waves. A curve fit of our data (Gabour, 1991) gives
condition. Surface evaporation was carefully suppressed in the the transition radius as
present experiments by cooling the incoming liquid and by
limiting the heat flux, but in engineering applications, evap- R Re£ 422 =1.2xl0 3 (37)
oration will almost always occur. Evaporation will tend to V/
raise Nurf (Liu and Lienhard, 1989), since it offers an additional In their own system, Azuma and Hoshino measured
heat sink, unless it leads to film dryout downstream, in which
case Nud will drop disastrously. (-,)Re!P15 = 0.73xl0 3 (38)
The numerical solutions with constant Prandtl number sug- Vv
gest Nusselt number is proportional to Prandtl number to the which shows a slightly weaker dependence on Reynolds num-
0.38 power over Prandtl number from 1 to 100. However, ber, but turbulent transition points normally depend on the
most liquids of high Prandtl number show a rapid decrease in disturbances present in a specific system. Equation (37) sug-
Prandtl number with increasing temperature. Streamwise var- gests a coordinate of (r/d) Re^422. Using this coordinate, some
iations in Pr, as bulk temperature rises, are certainly important of the present heat transfer data are shown in Fig. 9. At the
transition point, the figure shows a clear shift in the slope of
the Nusselt number, which becomes more pronounced at higher
uu Reynolds number. The Nusselt number increases above the
laminar trend, as direct comparisons (below) illustrate. Note
that the abscissa here is chosen to illustrate the turbulent tran-
© sition, not the functional dependence of Nud on Red and Pr;
v
t> e thus, the curves do not collapse to a single line. Moreover, the
• V streamwise changes in the Red and Pr dependencies make it
00
m • m
® • impossible to present all of our data, for many different con-
ditions, on a single graph. In this and following figures, we
HI m
m d = l / 8 inch present enough data to illustrate the general behavior without
e d = l / 4 inch attempting to be exhaustive.
O d=3/8 inch The Nusselt numbers show a hump downstream of the tur-
10 ' bulent transition point. This hump corresponds to the point
at which the turbulence has become fully developed (see heat
1, transfer predictions below). As the Reynolds number increases,
2xl04 3xl04 5xl04 lxlO5 the hump becomes more pronounced and occurs after shorter
Re d distance. The transition and hump radii are shown as a function
Fig. 14 Measured stagnation point Nusselt number compared to pre- of jet Reynolds number in Fig. 10. The data for the hump
diction for Pr > 3: data for several diameters of orifice position can be correlated as
Table 1 Suggested formulae for local Nusselt number for Pr > 0(1)
Region Range Nuj
Stagnation zone 0 < r/d < 0.787, 0.15 < Pr < 3 " 0.715 Re;j /2 Pr 0 - 4
Pr> 3 0.797 ReV'Pr 1 / 3
173
Transition: stagn. to b.l 0.787 < r/d < 2.23
b.l. region (2) 2.23 < r/d < 0.1773 ReJ 73 0.632 R e y 2 P r 1 / 3 ( ? jrr
0.407 R e y 3 P r ' / 3 ( g ) a ' ' 3
Similarity region (3 &; 4) 0.1773 Re 1 / 3 < r/d < 1200 ReJ
H ^ f + ^ r [i(i)
(r0/d < r/d < r,/d) I c3 = o-^Wm)1/' ^ _ 1 (my
Transition: laminar/turb 1200ReT 0 4 2 2 < r/d < 2.86 X 10 4 Re7 N u h m ( r Q + [Nu„ r i(rQ - N u ^ r , IEH
) ] ^
Turbulent region r/d > 2.86 X 10" ReT 0 ' 6 8HejPr/(G',;PFr
9(Vr)(r/<l)+28(r/cQV(C,,Pr)
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
The skin friction coefficient is calculated from the Blasius law
Re°/S- 2.86 XlO 4 (39) / \ 1/4 // \\ 1/4
0.53898Pr04 0.15<Pr<3.0
m (48)
G(Pr, 3) =
primary difference is that turbulent transition, as deduced from (0.6010Pr1/3-0.05085 Pr>3.0
their friction coefficient measurements, occurs in the boundary
The value of B = 2du/dr at the stagnation point of an inviscid
layer region (region 2). Their data show a single peak rather
impinging liquid jet was calculated approximately by Schach
than the pair of features seen here. This suggests that the sheet (1935)s
has become turbulent before surface waves can contribute sig-
nificantly to the heat transfer. They attribute the peak to waves
rather than turbulent transition. However, for their Reynolds 5=1.76 "/ (49)
number range, the turbulent transition is a more likely expla-
nation. This value should be applicable for reasonably large jet Reyn-
4.3 Prediction of Turbulent Heat Transfer. The Nusselt olds numbers.
number turbulent flow may be calculated using the thermal ' From these results
law of the wall. The Stanton number is defined as '0.715 R e y 2 Pr 0 - 4 0.15<Prs3
Nu r f = , WzpPr'
rl/3 T r>>. ^3 ( 5 °)
Qw 0.797 Rey P
St = -
Figure 14 compares the data to the above equations, illustrating
and the law of the wall may be written in the standard internal- generally good agreement. The data appear to fall below the
flow form
C/2
St = = / ( C / , Pr) (41) "Schach's Figs. 9 and 10 are a bit garbled. This often-quoted value is obtained
1.07 + 1 2 . 7 ( P r 2 / 3 - l ) V c y 2 from his dv/dz and continuity.
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
prediction at lower Reynolds numbers. This behavior may be r, and rh, we tentatively recommend a line fit between the
related to a decrease in the stagnation zone velocity gradient laminar predictions at r, and the turbulent prediction at rh.
owing to viscous effects, but further study is required. This fit is shown in Figs. 13 (a, b) and can be seen not to
Nakoryakov et al. (1978) measured the Nusselt number for account properly for the wave effects that occur in that region
mass transfer beneath an impinging jet at high Schmidt number at larger Reynolds number. With the exceptions of this line fit
with uniform wall concentration. They did not directly test a and the correlation for r,/d, all equations in Table 1 are an-
relation for the stagnation zone transport. Instead, they used alytical predictions; each is substantiated by experiment.
a relation for Nu (equation (1)) to calculate their jet velocities. 4.6 Additional Studies Required. In jet impingement cool-
The relation they used seems to be quite close to that suggested ing applications, turbulent incoming jets are likely to be pro-
above, although its origin remains obscure (it does not appear duced, since upstream disturbances are not usually damped
in the reference they cite). Nakoryakov et al. also measured and the jets often issue from pipes. While turbulence may
wall shear stress in the stagnation zone, but the calibration of enhance stagnation point heat transfer, it is damped sharply
their stress probe was similarly based on an assumed value of as the film spreads. We are currently conducting experimental
du/dr. studies of turbulent jet heat transfer.
Stevens and Webb (1989) used a pipe-type nozzle producing Impinging jets will splatter if the jet surface is even slightly
turbulent incoming jets, and their measured Nusselt numbers disturbed or the thin liquid sheet is disturbed beyond a certain
are in the same general range, although a bit higher, than the magnitude. Disturbances to the incoming jet are often caused
present data. They represented their stagnation zone results by irregularities in the orifice or by turbulence in the liquid
by a correlation that accounts for the Reynolds number de- supply. Roughness of the target surface can also disturb the
pendence of the stagnation velocity gradient with a dimensional liquid film. Splattering removes liquid from the liquid film,
correlating factor of u//d and thus lowers the Nusselt number; Liu and Lienhard (1989)
/ \ - 1/30 / \ - 1/4
estimated reductions of 20 percent or more. We are also in-
Nurf = 2.67Re2'57R) R) Pr 04 (51) vestigating the role of splattering in jet impingement cooling.
W W Finally, the behavior of the stagnation zone at lower Reyn-
where z is the distance of their nozzle from the heater. This olds number will be further investigated, owing to surface
correlation shows a somewhat different dependence on jet tension effects and a possible viscous decrease of the stagnation
diameter and velocity than is found for the present laminar velocity gradient as Red becomes smaller.
jets. Stevens and Webb present a second correlation for the
radial variation Nud, which does not represent the present data Conclusions
well at the large radii of interest to us, although it does represent Convective heat removal by liquid jet impingement has been
their own data very well for r/d less than about 5. investigated for uniform wall flux and circular, laminar jets.
The size of the stagnation zone may be estimated by cal- Both theoretical and experimental results are given.
culating the radius at which the stagnation boundary layer and 8
The radial distribution of Nusselt number is accurately
the region 2 boundary layer have the same thickness (i.e., predicted by the formulae in Table 1 for Prandtl numbers of
2.107rfRey2 = 2.679 (rrf/Red)1/2; White, 1974; Sharan, 1984). order unity or greater.
The result is 9
Laminar heat transfer in the film for Pr a O(l) may
be calculated from equation (2) in the boundary layer region
^7 = 0.787 (52) (region 2) and by equation (3) in the laminar portion of the
d similarity region (regions 3 and/or 4). These regions are de-
Similarly, Stevens and Webb found the stagnation region be- scribed in Section 2.1.
8
neath a turbulent jet to reach to roughly r/d = 0.75. Our Laminar heat transfer predictions for Pr < 1 are de-
crude estimate shows that the stagnation zone is very small. veloped in Section 2.2.
8
Its primary importance is that it possesses the maximum local Comparison of the integral predictions to numerical so-
heat transfer coefficient (lowest wall temperature) in the flow. lutions in the similarity region supports conclusions previously
It contributes little, however, to overall heat removal or down- drawn from the integral approach for Pr > 1 as well as the
stream Nusselt numbers as may be seen from the full integral new results for Pr < 1.
8
result for region 2 (Liu and Lienhard, 1989), which does not Turbulent transition occurs at a radius given by equation
neglect the stagnation zone heat flow as does equation (2): (37). Turbulence becomes fully developed at a radius given by
/ 27 r\ m equation (39). Turbulent heat transfer in the film is given by
/ — Re d Pr- equation (46).
80 8 8
The stagnation point Nusselt number is reasonably well
Nu d = — — (53)
represented by equation (50).
- f - l +C,
Acknowledgments
with 6 = 2.679 (rd/Red)l/1. At r = rm, the Nusselt number The authors are grateful to Ms. Laurette A. Gabour for her
should equal the stagnation zone Nusselt number; thus, measurements of the turbulent transition radius and to Mr.
C2= -0.2535 (54) Vittal K. Vasista for construction of the flow loop. This project
The error in Nu,/ caused by neglecting the stagnation zone is was supported by grants from the A. P. Sloan Foundation and
less than 10 percent for r/d > 2.23. the National Science Foundation (grant No. CBT-8858288).
4.5 Recommendations for Nusselt Number Estimation. References
Table 1 summarizes the suggested relations for estimating local Azuma, T., and Hoshino, T., 1984a, "The Radial Flow of a Thin Liquid
Nusselt number for impinging, circular, free liquid jets. For Film, Part 1: Laminar-Turbulent Transition," Trans. Japan Soc. Mech. Engrs.,
most regions, deviations are less than 10 percent. For laminar Vol. 50, p. 974.
Azuma, T., and Hoshino, T., 1984b, "The Radial Flow of a Thin Liquid
convection in the similarity region, however, waves can en- Film, Part 2: Film Thickness," Trans. Japan Soc. Mech. Engrs., Vol. 50, p.
hance the heat transfer, and Nu^ may exceed the estimate by 902.
up to 20 percent; as the waves are damped, the heat transfer Azuma, T., and Hoshino, T., 1984c, "The Radial Flow of Thin Liquid Film,
goes back down. The wavy region is relatively small, however, Part 3: Velocity Profile," Trans. Japan Soc. Mech. Engrs., Vol. 50, p. 1126.
Azuma, T., and Hoshino, T., 1984d, "The Radial Flow of Thin Liquid Film,
because it is limited by subsequent turbulent transition. In the Part 4: Stability of Liquid Film and Wall Pressure Fluctuation," Trans. Japan
region of transition from laminar to turbulent flow, between Soc. Mech. Engrs., Vol. 50, p. 1136.
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Carper, H. J., 1989, "Impingement Cooling by Liquid Jet," presented at the Schlichting, H., 1979, Boundary-Layer Theory, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill, New
ASME Winter Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA. York.
Chaudhury, Z. H., 1964, "Heat Transfer in a Radial Liquid Jet," J. Fluid Sharan, A., 1984, "Jet-Disc Boiling: Burnout Predictions and Application to
Mech., Vol. 20, pp. 501-511. Solar Receivers," Master's Thesis in Mechanical Engineering, University of
Errico, M., 1986, " A Study of the Interaction of Liquid Jets With Solid Houston, TX.
Surfaces," Doctoral Thesis, University of California at San Diego. Stevens, J., and Webb, B. W., 1989, "Local Heat Transfer Coefficients Under
Gabour, L. A., 1991, "Heat Transfer to Turbulent and Splattering Impinging an Axisymmetric, Single-Phase Liquid Jet," Heat Transfer in Electronics—1989,
Liquid Jets," S. B. Thesis in Mechanical Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, MA. ASME HTD-Vol. I l l , pp. 113-119.
Ishigai, S., Nakanishi, S., Mizuno, M., and Imamura, T., 1977, "Heat Trans- Vasista, V. K., 1989, "Experimental Study of the Hydrodynamics of an
fer of the Impinging Round Water in the Interference Zone of Film Flow Along Impinging Liquid Jet," Bachelor's Thesis in Mechanical Engineering, MIT,
the Wall," Bulletin of the JSME, Vol. 20, No. 139. Cambridge, MA.
Liu, X., and Lienhard V, J. H., 1989, "Liquid Jet Impingement Heat Transfer Wang, X. S., Dagan, Z., and Jiji, L. M., 1989a, "Heat Transfer Between a
on a Uniform Flux Surface," Heat Transfer Phenomena in Radiation, Com- Circular Free Impinging Jet and a Solid Surface With Nonuniform Wall Tem-
bustion, and Fires, ASME HTD-Vol. 6, pp. 523-530. perature or Wall Heat Flux—1. Solution for the Stagnation Region," Int. J.
Lombara, J. S., 1990, "An Experimental Investigation of Liquid Jet Im- Heat Mass Transfer, Vol. 32, No. 7, pp. 1351-1360.
pingement Heat Transfer Theories," S. B. Thesis in Mechanical Engineering, Wang, X. S., Dagan, Z., and Jiji, L. M., 1989b, "Heat Transfer Between a
MIT, Cambridge, MA. Circular Free Impinging Jet and a Sohd Surface With Nonuniform Wall Tem-
Nakoryakov, V. E., Pokusaev, B. G., andTroyan, E. N., 1978, "Impingement perature or Wall Heat Flux—2. Solution for the Boundary Layer Region," Int.
of an Axisymmetric Liquid Jet on a Barrier," Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Vol. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Vol. 32, No. 7, pp. 1361-1371.
21, pp. 1175-1184. Wang, X. S., Dagan, Z., and Jiji, L. M., 1989c, "Conjugate Heat Transfer
Olsson, R. G., and Turkdogan, E. T., 1966, "Radial Spread of a Liquid Between a Laminar Impinging Liquid Jet and a Solid Disk," Int. J. Heat Mass
Stream on a Horizontal Plate," Nature, Vol. 211, No. 5051, pp. 813-816. Transfer, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 2189-2197.
Schach, W., 1935, "Umlenkung eines kreisformigen Flussigkeitsstrahles an Watson, E. J., 1964, "The Radial Spread of a Liquid Over a Horizontal
einer ebenen Platte senkrecht zur Stromungsrichtung," Ing.-Arch., Vol. 6, pp. Plane," J. Fluid Mech., Vol. 20, pp. 481-499.
51-59. White, F. M., 1974, Viscous Fluid Flow, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Downloaded 29 Jun 2009 to 18.80.1.33. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
CORRECTIONS OF LAMINAR IMPINGING JET EQUATIONS
J.H. LIENHARD V
The equation for C3 is a bit complicated, and it has repeatedly carried typographical
errors of one sort or another. These errors appear in: Liu and Lienhard (1989, eq. 16);
Liu, Lienhard and Lombara (1991, eq. 4); Lienhard (1995, Table 5); and Lienhard (2006,
eq. 36).
The correct equation for C3 is:
0.267(d/r0 )1/2 1 r0 2
(1) C3 = h i2 −
1/2 2 d
0.1713 (d/r0 )2 + (5.147 r0 /Red d) Red
Equation (78) and Table 5 in Lienhard (1995) give an incorrect expression for Nud . The
correct expression is:
qw d 8 Red Pr f (Cf , Pr)
(2) Nud = =
k(Tw − Tf ) 49 (hr/d2 ) + 28 (r/d)2 f (Cf , Pr)
References
[1] X. Liu and J.H. Lienhard V, 1989, “Liquid Jet Impingement Heat Transfer on Uniform Heat Flux
Surface,” Heat Transfer Phenomena in Radiation, Combustion, and Fires, ASME HTD, Vol.106, pp.523-
530. (26th ASME/AIChE National Heat Transfer Conference, Philadelphia, Aug. 6-9, 1989)
[2] X. Liu, J.H. Lienhard V, and J.S. Lombara, 1991, “Convective Heat Transfer by Impingement of Circular
Liquid Jets,” J. Heat Transfer, Vol. 113, No. 3, pp. 571-582.
[3] J.H. Lienhard V, 1995, “Liquid Jet Impingement,” Annual Review of Heat Transfer, C.L. Tien ed.,
Vol. 6, Chpt. 4. New York: Begell House, pp. 199-270.
[4] J.H. Lienhard V, 2006, “Heat Transfer by Impingement of Circular Free-surface Liquid Jets,” in S.C.
Mishra, B.V.S.S.S. Prasad, and S.V. Garimella (eds.), Heat and Mass Transfer 2006. New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill, pp. 211–226. (Proc. 18th Natl. and 7th Intl. ISHMT-ASME Heat and Mass Transfer
Conf., Guwahati, India 4–6 Jan. 2006).