Sessile Drop Evaporation in Relation to Leidenfrost Phenomenon

A thesis Submitted to Department of Mechanical Engineering

Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology by Md. Zahabul Islam (Student No: 0510030) Shuvra Banik (Student No: 0510094)

Under the supervision of

Dr. Aloke Kumar Mozumder

In partial fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering. February, 2011 i

DECLARATION
This to certify that the presented paper is the outcome of the accomplishment of the project and thesis on Sessile Drop Evaporation in Relation to Leidenfrost Phenomenon carried out by the students of Mechanical Engineering Department, BUET, Dhaka under the supervision of Dr. Aloke Kumar Mozumder, Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, BUET, Dhaka and it has not been submitted anywhere for any award of degree or diploma, nor it has been published in any technical journal.

Name

Student Number

Signature

1. Md. Zahabul Islam 2. Shuvra Banik

0510030 0510094

SUPERVISOR

----------------------------------------------Dr. Aloke Kumar Mozumder Associate Professor Dept. of Mechanical Engineering BUET, Dhaka-1000.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to Dr. Aloke Kumar Mozumder, Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka for his guidance, close supervision, inspiration and constructive suggestions to attain the desired experimental goal.

The authors also acknowledge their gratitude to the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) for providing necessary financial aid and other facilities to conduct the research. The authors also express their thankfulness to the personnel of different shops and laboratories for their help during the fabrication of the experimental setup.

iii

CONTENTS

Declaration Acknowledgements List of Tables List of Figures Abstract Nomenclature 1 Introduction

ii iii viii ix xii xiv 1-3

Literature Review 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Experiment Conducted by Leidenfrost Stability of Leidenfrost phenomenon Momentum, Heat and Mass transfer processes Application Boiling and Leidenfrost Effect

4-11 4 5 6 6 7

Development of Model

12-23

Experimental setup and procedure 4.1 4.2 Introduction Schematic diagram of experimental setup 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6 4.3 Metal Blocks Stand Heater Thermocouple Variac Syringe

24-30 24 24 25 26 27 27 28 28 29

Working Fluids

iv

4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4

Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol

29 29 29 29 29

Experimental Procedure

Results and Discussions 5.1 5.2 Analysis of Theoretical model Analysis of Experimental data 5.2.1 Liquid Variation 5.2.1.1 5.2.1.2 5.2.1.3 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.3 Effect of latent heat of vaporization Effect of specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of liquid Effect of boiling temperature of liquid

31-82 31 38 38 38 39 39 39 46 52 53 55 57 59 61 62 63 64 66

Diameter Variation Material Variation

Experimental Boiling Curve 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 Experimental Boiling curve of water Experimental Boiling curve of methanol Experimental Boiling curve of ethanol

5.4 5.5

Inverse boiling curve Engineering Correlation of experimental data 5.5.1 5.5.2 5.5.3 Experimental Correlation for Aluminum Experimental Correlation for Brass Experimental Correlation for Copper

5.6

Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental result 5.6.1 5.6.2 5.6.3

Comparison curve for distilled water on different 66 metal surfaces Comparison curve for methanol on different metal 71 surfaces Comparison curve for ethanol on different metal 75 surfaces

Conclusions 6.1 6.2 6.3 Conclusions Further Work Recommendations

80-82 80 81 81

REFERENCE

83-84

APPENDICES A Saturation Properties of Liquid A.1 A.2 A.3 B Saturation Properties of Methanol Saturation Properties of Ethanol Saturation Properties of Water

85-107 86 86 87 88 89 Evaporation time of Distilled water on Aluminum 89 Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Aluminum 90 Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Aluminum Surface 90 Evaporation time of Methanol on Aluminum Surface Evaporation time of Distilled water on Brass Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Brass Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Brass Surface Evaporation time of Methanol on Brass Surface 91 91 92 92 93

Experimental Data B.1 B.2 B.3 B.4 B.5 B.6 B.7 B.8 B.9 B.10 B.11 B.12 B.13 B.14 B.15

Evaporation time of Distilled water on Copper 93 Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Copper 94 Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Copper Surface 94 Evaporation time of Methanol on Copper Surface 95

Evaporation time of Distilled water on Mild Steel 95 Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Mild Steel 96 Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Mild Steel Surface 96
vi

Evaporation time of Methanol on Mild Steel 97 Surface Summary of Theoretical and Experimental Result 98 B.16 C.1 C.2 C.3 Comparison for small diameter liquid droplet Comparison for large diameter liquid droplet Comparison of Leidenfrost point temperature for for different liquid droplets (small and large diameter) 98 99 100

Program Code D.1 D.2 Estimation of theoretical time Engineering Correlation of experimental data

101 101 103

different liquid droplets

vii

LIST OF TABLES

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15 B16

Evaporation time of Distilled water on Aluminum Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Aluminum Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Aluminum Surface Evaporation time of Methanol on Aluminum Surface Evaporation time of Distilled water on Brass Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Brass Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Brass Surface Evaporation time of Methanol on Brass Surface Evaporation time of Distilled water on Copper Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Copper Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Copper Surface Evaporation time of Methanol on Copper Surface Evaporation time of Distilled water on Mild Steel Surface Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Mild Steel Surface Evaporation time of Ethanol on Mild Steel Surface Evaporation time of Methanol on Mild Steel Surface

89 90 90 91 91 92 92 93 93 94 94 95 95 96 96 97

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 2.2

A Leidenfrost drop in cross section (a) A bubble forms in the crevice of a scratch along the bottom of a pan of water. (bf ) The bubble grows, pinches off, and then ascends through the water

4 8

2.3 2.4 3.1 3.2

Boiling curve for water Drop lifetimes on a hot plate Geometry of sessile droplet for the model Determination of radiation shape factor at side surface of liquid droplet

9 11 12 19

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 5.1

Schematic diagram of the experimental setup Metal Block Stand Heater K type thermocouple meter. Variac Syringes used in the experiment Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for small diameter Methanol on Copper surface

24 26 26 27 27 28 28 32

5.2

Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for small diameter Methanol on Aluminum surface

32

5.3

Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for large diameter Methanol on Aluminum surface

33

5.4

Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for small diameter Ethanol on Brass surface

35

5.5

Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for large diameter Ethanol on Brass surface

36

5.6

Experimental evaporation time and model predicted large diameter

36

ix

Leidenfrost time for Ethanol on Mild steel surface 5.7 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Aluminum surface 5.8 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Brass surface 5.9 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Copper surface 5.10 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Mild steel surface 5.11 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distilled water on four different surfaces 5.12 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of NaCl solution on four different metal surfaces 5.13 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of Methanol on four different surfaces 5.14 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of Ethanol on four different 51 surfaces 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 Boiling curve of Water on different material surfaces Boiling curve of Methanol on different material surfaces Boiling curve of Ethanol on different material surfaces Schematic of a typical Inverse boiling curve and boiling curve of a Liquid 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Aluminum surface Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Brass surface Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Copper surface Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Mild steel surface Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of water on Aluminum surface 5.24 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of water on Brass surface 5.25 Comparison graph for total evaporation time () of Water vs surface
x

40

42

44

45

47

49

50

54 56 58 59

62 63 64 65 67

68

69

temperature ( ) on Copper surface 5.26 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of water on Mild steel surface 5.27 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of methanol on Aluminum surface 5.28 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of methanol on Brass surface 5.29 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of Methanol on Copper surface 5.30 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs. surface temperature ( ) of methanol on Mild steel surface 5.31 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Aluminum surface 5.32 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Brass surface 5.33 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Copper surface 5.34 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () vs surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Mild steel surface 79 78 77 76 74 73 72 71 70

xi

ABSTRACT

A model for the prediction of evaporation time in film boiling region of a sessile drop of liquid on a hot metallic surface has been developed in the present study. The droplet is assumed to have a stable vapor film formed beneath the droplet and is supported by the excess vapor pressure of the film. Heat is assumed to be transferred to the liquid droplet by conduction and radiation through vapor film. The model develops an iterative process for the refinement of calculated mass transfer rate from the bottom surface of the droplet. Sessile drop of four different liquids such as distilled water, saturated NaCl solution, methanol and ethanol having two different diameters (2.5 and 2.75mm) were used to conduct an experiment for a wide range of solid surface temperatures (60-400 oC) which verifies the proposed model at Leidenfrost point. Four solid surfaces copper, aluminum, brass and mild steel were used to conduct the experiment. The Leidenfrost time (complete evaporation time corresponding to Leidenfrost temperature) predicted from the proposed model has been compared with the experimental value; the predicted time is 50-80 % of the experimental one in most of the cases. In the present study heat flux has been determined. Using these heat fluxes, boiling curves have been generated for each liquid on different material surfaces. By using experimental data correlation constants have been developed for four different metal surfaces (aluminum, copper, mild steel and brass) considering four liquids on each metal surfaces. A comparison has been made above Leidenfrost temperature between experimental data and correlated data using these correlation constants; correlated time is 80-95% of the experimental one in most of the cases.

xii

NOMENCLATURE:
A Al Ap As C1 C2 cp C D Fpl g hg h* kv mb Projected base area of droplet Bottom surface area of liquid Test surface area Side surface area of liquid Correlation constant from experimental data Correlation constant from experimental data Specific heat of vapor Concentration of liquid Diffusivity of liquid Non dimensional radiation shape factor between test surface and liquid Gravitational acceleration Latent enthalpy of vaporization of liquid droplet Reduced latent heat of vaporization Thermal conductivity of vapor Evaporation rate of mass from bottom surface of the liquid ms Evaporation rate of mass from side surface of the liquid M p Molecular mass of liquid Pressure at the bottom of the droplet (Kg/mol) (Pa) (Kg/s) (m2 ) (m2 ) (m2 ) (m2 ) [-] [-] (J. Kg 1 . K 1 ) (Kg/m3 ) (m2 /s) [-] (m/s 2 ) (J/Kg) (J/Kg) (W. m1 . K 1 ) (Kg/s)

xiii

po ps q QCb (p l)

Atmospheric pressure Saturation pressure of liquid Time averaged heat flux Heat flux from test surface to bottom surface of liquid by conduction

(Pa) (Pa) (W/m2 ) (W/m2 )

QRb (p l)

Heat flux from test surface to bottom surface of liquid by radiation

(W/m2 )

QRs (p l)

Heat flux from test surface to side surface of liquid by radiation

(W/m2 )

Qb

Total heat flux from test surface to bottom surface of liquid

(W/m2 )

Qs

Total heat flux from test surface to side surface of liquid

(W/m2 )

ro
ro

Initial radius of liquid droplet Radius of spherical liquid droplet considering spherical coordinate

(m) (m)

rp r R T TL Tp Ts

Radius of test surface Radius of liquid droplet at any time Universal gas constant Variable temperature Leidenfrost point Temperature Test surface temperature Saturation temperature of liquid
xiv

(m) (m) (J. mol1 . K 1 ) (C) (C) (C) (C)

T u U v V Vo Z

= ( Tp Ts ) Average radial velocity of vapor Radial velocity of vapor Vertical velocity of vapor Volume at any time Initial volume of the liquid droplet Vertical coordinate

(C) (m/s) (m/s) (m/s) (m3 ) (m3 ) (m)

Greek symbols

Vapor film thickness at the bottom Total evaporation time of liquid droplet Density of liquid Density of vapor Viscosity of vapor Non dimensional emissivity of liquid Non dimensional emissivity of test surface Stefan-Boltzmann constant
= +0.5 *T

() () (/3 ) (/3 ) (. /2 )

( . 2 . 4 )
(J/Kg)

xv

Subscripts B C L P R S V Bottom surface of liquid droplet Conduction heat transfer Liquid phase Plate or test surface Radiation heat transfer Saturation phase of liquid droplet Vapor phase

xvi

CHAPTER INTRODUCTION

When a sessile drop of liquid comes into contact with a very hot metal surface, nucleate boiling is not usually found because a thin vapor film at the contact surface of the droplet and hot metal surface is formed instantly. The higher the metal surface temperature, the thicker is the vapor layer and at a certain temperature a stable vapor film is formed. This stable film impedes the conductive heat transfer through it as its thermal conductivity is much lower compared to that of the liquid. So the evaporation time reaches to a maximum. This phenomenon was first investigated by Johann Gottlob Leidenfrost [1] in 1756 and is named the Leidenfrost phenomenon in honor of him. The temperature at that point is known as Leidenfrost temperature and the corresponding evaporation time is known as Leidenfrost time. After Leidenfrost temperature, the heat transfer rate to the liquid droplet again increases with the increase in temperature because radiation heat transfer starts to dominate which in turn decrease the evaporation time considerably. This point is practically significant because it states that a higher metal surface temperature doesnt guarantee the higher amount of heat transfer to the liquid which can be utilized in the design of boiler, cooling tower and many other heat addition and removal equipments. Since Leidenfrost published the phenomenon, a numerous number of research papers and technical notes have been published. Gottfried et al. [2] investigated the behavior and evaporation rate of small droplet of liquid on a hot flat surface experimentally with no evident of bouncing, spitting or hissing. They developed an analytical model to predict evaporation rate of droplets. In their model they assumed the liquid droplet to be separated from the heating surface by a vapor film which also provided the excess vapor pressure to support the liquid mass. Starov and Sefiane [3] proposed a theoretical description of evaporation of sessile drop. They described linear dependency of evaporation rate on droplets base radius. Their analysis showed that most of the evaporation was concentrated near the contact line.
1

Baumeister et al. [4] analyzed water droplets of volume 0.05 to 1 cc. In this volume range, they suggested an analytical model based on flat disk geometry. The droplet was assumed to be in a steady state condition and using momentum, energy, continuity equation along with boundary conditions, they derived a formula to find the droplet evaporation time. Chatzikyriakou et al. [5] used CFD simulations of both sessile droplets resting upon a vapor cushion and droplets bouncing off a hot solid surface. Experimentally they found that the droplet can rebound from the vapor layer. A good agreement with the experimental observations was found with their simulation. Wachters et al. [6] developed an theoretical model for heat transfer from hot horizontal plate to sessile water drops in spheroidal state. They neglected radiation heat transfer in their model and only put concentration on conduction heat transfer to the bottom surface of liquid through the vapor film. Xie and Zhou [7] conducted a theoretical analysis for liquid droplet impinging on a solid wall near Leidenfrost point. They divided the evaporation process into two stages recoil stage and spherical stage and built heat transfer models on both stages respectively. The maximum contact radius was also calculated by a theoretical model. Crafton and Black [8] observed and quantified the evaporation rates of small liquid droplets of Water and n-Heptane on Aluminum and Copper surfaces. From the measured quantities, they calculated contact angle and evaporation rate. They used these results to predict the heat transfer on surface and compared it with experimental results. Nguyen and Avedisian [9] presented a numerical solution for the problem of film evaporation of a liquid droplet on a horizontal surface. They assumed the horizontal surface having a constant surface temperature which was considered to be isolated from the ambience. There are many other scientists and researchers who conducted experiment on this phenomenon [10-12]. Yao and Cai [13] studied the dynamics of water drops impacting at small angles on hot surfaces. The Experiments were conducted using a monosize droplet stream and a rotating disk. When the impact angle was decreased, the Leidenfrost temperature was found to be reduced. Correlations were established for the description of this behavior. Nagai and Nishio [14] studied Leidenfrost temperature on a very smooth surface. The Leidenfrost temperature was measured on singlecrystal and metal plates. The maximum surface roughness of the former was 0.03 m, and that of the latter was 1.25 m. Results of the experiment showed that the Leidenfrost temperatures on these two surfaces did not differ from each other as long as the surfaces were the same in wettability and thermal conductivity (or thermal diffusivity). Based on the theory of Baumeister
2

et al. [4], I. Michiyoshi, K. Makino [16] determine time averaged heat flux. They studied the heat transfer characteristics of evaporation of a single droplet of pure water placed on smooth surfaces of copper, brass, carbon steel and stainless steel at temperature ranging 80C to 450C .They analyzed heat transfer characteristics by correlating heat flux with T=( ). In the present study, an analytical model will be proposed for the prediction of sessile drop evaporation time at Leidenfrost temperature on hot solid surface. The model will be verified with some experimental data. In the proposed model, conduction and radiation heat transfer along with mass diffusion have been successfully included. It was roughly observed in the experiment that for small droplet diameter, the liquid droplet usually flattens on the hot metal surface having a thin vapor cushion beneath it. In the proposed model, it is considered that the liquid droplet on the heated surface to have an almost cylindrical shape with a very little height. The vapor layer thickness is considered to be uniform during the entire vaporization process and the vertical velocity of the vapor leaving the bottom surface of the droplet has been considered to be uniform. Heat is assumed to be transferred at the bottom surface of the liquid by conduction and radiation. The side surface is assumed to get the heat energy by radiation only. Mass diffusion is also considered from side surface of droplet in the analysis. A correlation was developed in reference [18] considering only the heat is transferred from the hot surface to the droplet by conduction through the vapor film and by radiation. Mass of the droplet is removed by evaporation and diffusion. The droplet evaporation time of a specific liquid on different plates depends upon the thermo-physical properties of the corresponding plate. Evaporation times of different liquids on different solid surfaces are compared in this dissertation by graphical presentation. The experimental data has been correlated in terms of dimensionless groups resulting from the analytical model by Lee. In the present study heat transfer characteristics of evaporation of small droplets of distilled water, saturated NaCl solution, methanol and ethanol settled on aluminum, copper, mild steel and brass surface with temperature ranging from 60 to 400C will be studied. The experimental data has been plotted to obtain evaporation time () versus surface temperature (Ts ) curve, which has an inverse trend of a typical boiling curve and can be called as Inverse Boiling Curve. By determining heat flux, boiling curve for different liquids (water, methanol and ethanol) has been generated.

CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Experiment Conducted by Leidenfrost

Figure 2.1 A Leidenfrost drop in cross section

Leidenfrost conducted his experiments with an iron spoon that was heated red-hot in a fireplace. After placing a drop of water into the spoon, he timed its duration by the swings of a pendulum. He noted that the drop seemed to suck the light and heat from the spoon, leaving a spot duller than the rest of the spoon. The first drop deposited in the spoon lasted 30 s while the next drop lasted only 10 s. Additional drops lasted only a few seconds.

Leidenfrost misunderstood his demonstrations because he did not realize that the longer-lasting drops were actually boiling. When the temperature of the plate is less than the Leidenfrost point, the water spreads over the plate and rapidly conducts energy from it, resulting in complete vaporization within seconds.

When the temperature is at or above the Leidenfrost point, the bottom surface of a drop deposited on the plate almost immediately vaporizes. The gas pressure from this vapor layer
4

prevents the rest of the drop from touching the plate (Fig. 4). The layer thus protects and supports the drop for the next minute or so. The layer is constantly replenished as additional water vaporizes from the bottom surface of the drop because of energy radiated and conducted through the layer from the plate. Although the layer is less than 0.1 mm thick near its outer boundary and only about 0.2 mm thick at its center, it dramatically slows the vaporization of the drop.

2.2 Stability of Leidenfrost Phenomenon

The question of the stability of the Leidenfrost phenomenon usually quickly reduces to a discussion of the Leidenfrost point and how it was determined, since most workers are agreed that film boiling becomes increasingly stable relative to nucleate and mixed modes at increasing surface temperatures. However, very little agreement exists between various workers on the true value of the Leidenfrost point for any given set of conditions.

Baumeister [4] report maintaining stable film boiling for small droplets in air down to a surface temperature less than a degree above saturation, while Wachters [20] found a similar for water droplets in film boiling in dry air at a surface temperature as low as 75C. In fact, Wachters argues that the absolute minimum surface temperature for the Leidenfrost phenomenon is equal to the wet-bulb temperature of the surrounding atmosphere; to quote his explanation When the drop bottom temperature has a value below the boiling point, the narrow layer under the drop contains a mixture of vapor and air. In this mixture the vapor concentration is in equilibrium with the drop bottom temperature. However, at the outer rim of the drop bottom the dry surroundings. This is a one-way diffusion which involves a drift velocity of the gas mixture and generates a radial pressure gradient, higher than the atmospheric pressure.

The explanation appears plausible, but the quantitative expressions have not been worked out. Baumeister and Wachters both emphasize the need for extremely smooth surface and suppression of disturbances in the droplet to achieve these extremely low temperatures. The
5

droplets are initially deposited on quite hot surfaces which are then cooled to low temperatures. Too rapid cooling of the surface leads to premature collapse, presumably because the droplet oscillations have not been adequately damped out in this time. With care, a wire can be inserted into the droplet to damp out the oscillations; the droplet is then partially supported by surface tension on the wire, and the unconstrained force balance is upset. Both of these workers also used test surfaces that were slightly concave underneath the droplet, and this undoubtedly contributed to droplet stabilization.

2.3 Momentum, Heat and Mass transfer processes

A number of attempts have been made to analyze quantitatively the momentum, heat and mass transfer processes during the Leidenfrost phenomenon. Several of these contain errors of assumption or execution. All of these analyses assume that vapor is generated on the lower surface of the drop by heat conduction through the vapor layer, that the vapor is in laminar flow under the droplet, and that the integrated product of the local excess pressure (above atmospheric) and the horizontal projection of the droplet lower surface is equal to the droplet weight.

2.4 Application
Failure of tube walls of steam boiler is a common problem. In a nuclear reactor with boiling coolant, the transition from nucleate to film boiling occurs at constant heat flux and can be accompanied by a very large increase in wall temperature, most descriptively called burnout. Conversely, once a reactor has had a coolant flow failure and surface has become very hot, film boiling will occur, and one way to make a small amount of coolant contact a large amount of surface is to spray it in as a fog. This technique, spray or fog cooling, has been tested, and it is a variant of the convective Leidenfrost phenomenon in that major interest is attached to the impact characteristics of the droplets on the surface.

Several other applications of the phenomenon are closely related in basic mechanism to those above

The use of a water spray to cool steel billets or the rolls in rolling mill operations. Water spray during continuous casting.

The design of quick response steam generators by spraying liquid on a hot surface.

The stable operation of a steam iron with a changing water inventory.

Film cooling of a rocket nozzle, either by breakdown of a continuous liquid film or direct spray injection.

Cool-down of cryogenic liquid storage tanks and transfer lines during filling. An interesting corollary problem is the possibility of minimizing cryogenic liquid loss by deliberate production of a vapor film next to the wall by film boiling.

Use of air-dropped solutions to control forest fires.

2.5 Boiling and Leidenfrost Effect

Let us consider a pan where water to be heated from below by a ame or electric heat source. As the water warms, air molecules are driven out of solution in the water, collecting as tiny bubbles in crevices along the bottom of the pan (Fig. 1a). The air bubbles gradually inate, and then they begin to pinch off from the crevices and rise to the top surface of the water (Figs. 1b f ). As they leave, more air bubbles form in the crevices and pinch off, until the supply of air in the water is depleted. The formation of air bubbles is a sign that the water is heating but has nothing to do with boiling.

Figure 2.2 (a) A bubble forms in the crevice of a scratch along the bottom of a pan of water. (bf ) The bubble grows, pinches off, and then ascends through the water

Water that is directly exposed to the atmosphere boils at what is sometimes called its normal boiling temperature TS . For example, TS is about 100C when the air pressure is 1 atm. Since the water at the bottom of your pan is not directly exposed to the atmosphere, it remains liquid even when it superheats above TS by as much as a few degrees. During this process, the water is constantly mixed by convection as hot water rises and cooler water descends.

Figure 2.3 Boiling curve for water. If the pans temperature is continuing to increase, the bottom layer of water begins to vaporize, with water molecules gathering in small vapor bubbles in the now dry crevices, as the air bubbles do in Fig. 1. This phase of boiling is signaled by pops, pings, and eventually buzzing. The water almost sings its displeasure at being heated. Every time a vapor bubble expands upward into slightly cooler water, the bubble suddenly collapses because the vapor within it condenses. Each collapse sends out a sound wave. Once the temperature of the bulk water increases, the bubbles may not collapse until after they pinch off from the crevices and ascend part of the way to the top surface of the water. This phase of boiling is labeled isolated vapor bubbles in the boiling curve.

If the pans temperature is more increased, the clamor of collapsing bubbles rst grows louder and then disappears. The noise begins to soften when the bulk liquid is sufficiently hot that the vapor bubbles reach the top surface of the water. There they pop open with a light splash. The water is now in full boil. If the pans temperature is further increased the vapor bubbles next become so abundant and pinch off from their crevices so frequently that they coalesce, forming columns of vapor that violently and chaotically churn upward, sometimes meeting previously detached slugs of vapor.

The production of vapor bubbles and columns is called nucleate boiling because the formation and growth of the bubbles depend on crevices serving as nucleating sites (sites of formation). If the pans temperature is raised past the stage of columns and slugs, the boiling enters a new phase called the transition regime. Then each increase in the pans temperature reduces the rate at which energy is transferred to the water. The decrease is not paradoxical. In the transition regime, much of the bottom of the pan is covered by a layer of vapor. Since water vapor conducts energy about an order of magnitude more poorly than does liquid water, the transfer of energy to the water is diminished. The hotter the pan becomes, the less direct contact the water has with it and the worse the transfer of energy becomes.

At this stage, the whole of the bottom surface is covered with vapor. Then energy is slowly transferred to the liquid above the vapor by radiation and gradual conduction. This phase is called lm boiling.

Jearl Walker of Cleveland State University performed an experiment for finding an elementary relationship between lifetime of drops and pan temperature. Drops of water having uniform size were released from a syringe to the hot plate and the survival time of the drop was measured. The data was plotted and the graph shows a curious peak.

10

Figure 2.4 Drop lifetimes on a hot plate

When the plate temperature was between 100 and about 200C, each drop spread over the plate in a thin layer and rapidly vaporized. When the plate temperature was about 200C, a drop deposited on the plate beaded up and survived for over a minute. At even higher plate temperatures, the water beads did not survive quite as long. The temperature corresponding to the peak in a graph is generally known as the Leidenfrost point.

11

CHAPTER DEVELOPMENT OF MODEL

Considering a droplet of liquid to be a sphere and of radius, , when dropped very gently on a solid surface from a syringe, it takes heat from the solid surface and evaporates. For the proposed model it is considered that the droplet becomes flattened when it falls on the hot test surface. So the liquid droplet on the metal surface will be considered as a cylinder with a very little height. It will be assumed that this flattened liquid will occupy a contact surface area equal to the projected area of the initial spherical droplet. A schematic view of the geometry for the proposed model is given in Fig. 3.1.

Total surface area = 42 ro

Projected area = 2 z Profile of u r ro

( )

v u

Thin vapor film

Hot test surface ( ) + ( )

Fig. 3.1 Geometry of sessile droplet for the model

12

Heat transfer from a hot surface to a liquid is a very complex process and several physical processes occur simultaneously. For simplicity of analysis, the following assumptions are made throughout the theoretical development. i. Heat is transferred to the bottom surface of the liquid droplet by conduction and radiation through the vapor film. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. The side surface of the droplet is heated by radiation heat transfer only. The vapor flow at the bottom of the droplet is laminar and viscous. A stable vapor layer of uniform thickness is considered throughout the theory. Mass diffusion from the droplet has been considered only on the side surface. As the vapor layer is very thin, it is assumed that the vertical velocity will not influence the heat transfer to the bottom of the liquid droplet. Vertical velocity has been considered to be constant in the analysis. vii. Though actually the bottom surface of the liquid is not completely flat, for simplicity of analysis it has been considered as a flat surface. viii. As the vapor layer is considered to have an extreme radius at r = it is considered that at this point the pressure will be the atmospheric pressure, . Now, conduction heat transfer through bottom surface of the liquid can easily be found by considering the steady state one dimensional Fouriers heat conduction equation
2 2

=0

(3.1)

By integrating and putting boundary conditions at z=0, T=Tp, and at z=, T=Ts, the temperature profile beneath the droplet is found. Substitution of this temperature profile in the differential conduction heat transfer formula yields in conduction heat flux through the bottom surface, Integrating, ( )=0.

=c1

= c1z
13

T=c1z+c2

(3.a)

Boundary conditions, at z=0, T=Tp, and at z=, T=Ts For, z=0, Tp=0+c2 i.e. c2= Tp So, from equation (a), T=c1z+ Tp And, from equation (3.b) For z=, T=c1+ Tp, c1=

(3.b)

Now, from equation (b), T=

+Tp (3.c)

So, conduction heat transfer from hot metal surface to bottom surface of liquid is Qcb(pl)=-kv Qcb(pl)=-kv Qcb(pl)=-kv Qcb(pl)=kv
Q Cb (p l)

+Tp)

[from eqn (3.c)]

= kv

( ) = kv

(3.2)

We will consider this initial heat flux will continue up to last for the ease of calculation. Now, radiation heat flux from hot metal surface to bottom of liquid droplet may be expressed by the following equation [15], QRb(pl)= 1p

+
1 1 +

( ) = 1p

4 4 ) (

1 1 +

14

 ( ) = 1p

4 4 ) (

1 1 +

( )

= 1p

4 4 ) (

1 1 +

= 1

4 4

1 1 +

(3.3)

We will consider this initial heat flux will continue up to last for the ease of calculation. Radiation shape factor for bottom surface, can be found using formula of shape factor between two parallel coaxial disks given by reference [15],
2 4 2
1 2 2 2 1

(3.4)

2) 1+(1+2 2 1

Where, 1 =

, 2 =

and =

As the droplet is of very little volume, these two heat fluxes ( ) and

will be

considered to retain their value to be constant up to the complete vaporization of the droplet. So, total heat flux at bottom, = kv

+ 1

4 4 ) (

1 1 +

(3.5)

From Eq. (5), it is evident that total heat flux at the bottom of the droplet is only a function of vapor layer thickness, . This vaporizes the liquid at bottom and superheats the vapor at an average temperature of
+ 2

. So,
+ 2

= + (

- )
15

 = + ( =

( +

2 2

= ( +

) ) ) ) (3.6)

= ( +

( +

= ( +

Again, we will consider this initial heat flux will continue up to last for the ease of calculation. Eqs. (5) and (6) yield,
4 ( 4 ) 1 1 + + ( + ) 2

+ 1

(3.7)

Now, simplified from of Navier-Stokes equation for cylindrical vapor layer at bottom, is given by,

= 2

By integrating twice and considering no slip condition at the bottom vapor layer (Fig. 3.1), average velocity can be obtained as follows, By Integrating, ( ) =
1

+3

Again integrating,

16

1 2 2

+3 +4 (3.d)

Boundary condition at the vapor layer Here, = (, ) At no lip condition, , 0 = 0 (3.e) , = 0 (3.f) For condition (e), using equation (3.d) 0=
1 02 2

+3 . 0 +4

4 =0 =
1 2 2

+3 (3.g)

For condition (3.f), using equation (3.g) 0=

1 2 2

+3

3 =-

3 =- 2

So from equation (3.g) =

1 2 2 1

=2

( )

Now average velocity can be obtained from the above equation as follows = 0 = 0
1 1 2 1

17

 = 2 = 2

1 1 3

[ 3 [ 3

2 2 3 2

] 0

1 1 3

] (3.8)

= - 12

Balance of flow rate at bottom gives, 2 = 2 Substitution of in it from Eq. (3.8) and integration using boundary conditions at r=0, pressure is and at r = pressure is yield in, 2 ( 12
2

)= 2

6 3 6 3

= =

3 3

( 2 2 ) (3.9)

3 3

(2 2 )

This is the pressure distribution of vapor film at the bottom. Force balancing at bottom at initial condition gives,
( )2 = 0

3 Here, =3 =Initial droplet volume

= 0

3 3

(2 2 ) 2
3 3
0 r(2 2 )

3 3 =2

18

3 3 2

=4

= [ 8

9 1

]3

(3.10)

This is the final expression of vapor film thickness, . It can be determined by iterations using a computer program. Now, radiation heat flux from hot metal surface to side surface of liquid droplet can be expressed by the following Eqn. [3.15] ( ) =1p
4 4 ) ( 1 1 +

(3.11)

Radiation shape factor for side surface, can be found using formula of shape factor [3.15] between two finite, coaxial cylinders and two parallel, coaxial disks.
Imaginary surface used for finding Radiation shape factor for side surface, 4 3 2 3 3 4 2 Vapor surface Hot test surface Liquid surface

Fig. 3.2 Determination of radiation shape factor at side surface of liquid droplet

Figure 3.2 provides required configuration for determination of desired shape factor. For lower half of the image, considering symmetry and reciprocal relation, the following relation can be obtained, 12 = 22 (1 4 42 )
1 2

(3.12)

19

Here, 42 = 1 (
1 1 1 2

[2 + 4 4 2 + 4]2 1

+ 1 ( )

} (3.13)

Where, = , = , = 2 + 2 1 and = 2 2 + 1 and

2 = 2 , 1 = ( 2 2 ) Again for complete image [Fig. 3.2] 122 = 22 (1 44

2 1

) 22 44 22

(3.14)

122 can be found by using the Eq. (3.13)

+ 4
4 3

Where, =

, =

, = 2 + 2 1 , = 2 2 + 1 and 44 = 2 ( + ),
3

22 = 2 ( + 3 ) Here, 3 is the height of the liquid droplet on the test surface as the volume of the initial spherical liquid droplet is equal to the volume of the cylindrical shaped droplet on the test surface. And, finally, = 122 12 Where 122 and 12 can be found using Eqs. (3.14) and (3.12) respectively. So, total radiation heat transfer from hot metal surface to side surface of liquid droplet, (3.15)
4

20

 = ( ) =
1 p 4 4 ) (

1 1 +

(3.16)

For mass diffusion from side surface of liquid droplet steady state mass diffusion equation for cylindrical coordinate could be used. For simplicity of calculation spherical coordinate has been used with an equivalent cylindrical surface area.

Now, for spherical coordinate, steady state mass transfer equation

2 = 0

(3.17)

Having boundary conditions At = , =

and at = , = 0

By integrating, 2 =5
5 2

Again integrating, =
5

+ 6 (3.h)

From equation (3.21) for the second boundary condition,

5 0= + 6

6 = 0 Putting the value of 6 in equation (3.h) =

5

(3.i)
21

Now, from equation (3.22) at the first boundary condition,

= 5

5 =

So, from equation (3.i), we get =

So, rate of mass transfer from the side surface of the liquid to atmosphere is = =
= ( ) =

= =

(3.18)

Now we will develop a relationship between cylindrical coordinate and spherical coordinate as follows 2 3 = 4 =
2 3 4
2

So, from eqn (3.18) =

3 2

(3.19)

For a refined value of , total heat balance should be considered as, + = ( +

+ +
2

( )) +

( )

(3.20)
22

Again balancing the total evaporation rate,

= +

Now integrating, =

Which gives, =

+

(3.21)

Writing a computer program, total vaporization time, can be found from Eq. (3.21). Value of and can be found using Eqs. (3.20) and (3.19) respectively.

23

CHAPTER EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND PROCEDURE

4.1 Introduction
The sessile drop apparatus was used to study the evaporation characteristics of droplet on a heated surface. In particular, the liquid-solid interface temperature corresponding to the Leidenfrost Temperature was determined from droplet evaporation curve for different materials of different liquid.

4.2 Schematic diagram of experimental setup

Syringe Thermocouple Cartridge heater Stand Test surface

Variac AC supply Insulator

Fig. 4.1 Schematic diagram of the experimental setup

24

The experimental setup is shown in Figure 4.1 which consists of the following components Metal blocks Stand Heater Variac Thermocouple Dropper The working liquids that are used in the in the experiment are as follows Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol

4.2.1 Metal Blocks Four different metal blocks are used to nd out the Leidenfrost Temperature and variation of drop evaporation time. They are as follows Mild steel Copper Aluminum Brass

25

(a) Top view

(b) Side view

Figure 4.2 Metal Block

Each block has same dimension. The height and diameter of the blocks were 3 in and 3.5 in respectively. A thermocouple was installed 2 mm below the test surface. Two cartridge heaters were used. The first one is located 1 inch beneath and second one was 4 inch beneath the test surface of each block. The test surfaces of the blocks are polished by emery paper (1200 grade (000) and 1600 grade (0000)).

4.2.2 Stand
A supporting structure shown in Figure 4.2 is used in experiment to hold the metal blocks above the earth surface. The dimensions of the stand are 1 ft 1 ft 3 ft. Stand hold the block above 2 ft from the earth surface. Four glass plates of 1 ft 1 ft are attached with the stand to protect from the air ow over the test surface.

Figure 4.3 Stand

26

4.2.3 Heater
Heater is used for heating the metal blocks. 500 Watt cartridge (Figure 4.4) heater is used. Heater is placed 1 in beneath the test surface by drilling the block.

Figure 4.4 Heater

4.2.4 Thermocouple
K-type thermocouple is used (Figure 4.5) to determine the center temperature of the testing surface. A thermocouple was installed 5 mm in below the test surface. But we should installed the thermocouple at the center of the test surface where liquid droplet falls. We installed the thermocouple at the center of the test surface, heat may conduct with the thermocouple wire and evaporation time should vary and we will not get correct evaporation temperature.

Figure 4.5 K type thermocouple meter.

27

4.2.5 Variac
The heat supplied to the metal block through joule heating. A cartridge heater is tted in the blocks. Regulated electrical energy is supplied to the heater during the experiment. The resistance element that output is controlled by variac connected to the 220 Volt laboratory power.

Figure 4.6 Variac

4.2.6 Syringe
A couple of syringes were used to drop gently the liquid droplets on the test surface. Two different types of needles were used with the syringe to produce two different droplet diameters; 2.50 mm and 2.75 mm. The syringe was held perpendicular to the horizontal test surface and droplets were released from about two inches from the surface.

Figure 4.7 Syringes used in the experiment 28

4.3 Working Fluids

The working uids used in this experiment are Water(H2O), NaCl solution(H2O+NaCl), Methanol(CH3OH) and Ethanol(C2H5OH). Fluid is heated up on the test surface, boils and evaporate. and we measure the drop evaporation time. Some important properties of working uids are mentioned below.

4.3.1 Water
Water is available in nature. But natural water is not pure. Many salts are dissolved in natural water. Water used in experiment is distilled water from BUET boiler lab. It boils at 373.15 K at 101.325 kPa.

4.3.2 NaCl Solution

We use NaCl solution in experiment. We add (2 0.01) gm NaCl salt in 100 ml distilled Water.

4.3.3 Methanol
Methanol is a colorless, flammable liquid. Pure methanol melts at 175.2 K, boils at 327.85 K and molecular weight is 32. The commercial use of methanol has sometimes been prohibited. Large amount of it are used in the synthesis of formaldehyde. Methanol is often called wood alcohol because it was once produced mainly as a byproduct of destructive distillation of wood. Methanol is also used as a solvent for varnishes and lacquers as antifreeze and as gasoline extender in the production of gasohol.

4.3.4 Ethanol
Ethanol can be produced by formation of carbohydrates, which occur naturally and abundantly in some plants like sugarcane and from starchy materials like potato and corn. It boils at 351.3 K. Ethanol and methanol both also used as fuels in SI engines.

4.4 Experimental Procedure

As seen from the Fig. 4.1, the test surface was heated from the bottom by using two cartridge heaters. The power supply to the block was regulated using the variac to reach desired surface temperature of the test surface. When the temperature reached at a predetermined value, a droplet of working liquid was dropped gently to the center of the heating surface with a syringe; complete evaporation time was measured using a stopwatch. The droplet temperature was equal to the
29

room temperature (30C5%) when it was dropped. The surface temperature was sensed by the thermocouple, whose bead was located 3 mm beneath the center of the test surface and the digital temperature reading was taken from the meter. Few numbers of observed phenomena during the droplet evaporation was captured using a video camera. The droplets initial diameter was calculated from the total measured volume of 30 droplets at room temperature considering each droplet to be a little sphere. To reduce error, this was done three times and the average diameter was taken. When the plate temperature reached at steady state the syringe was filled with liquid and mounted. Bottom end of the syringe was pressed slowly and a droplet formed on the tip of the needle of the syringe until the droplet weight becomes sufficient to detach from the tip. The stopwatch was used to record the time of evaporation of droplets and its accuracy was 0.01sec. To minimize the measured time error, three evaporation times were recorded for each temperature and then averaged together. The experiment conducted for the test surface temperature with an increment of 10C up to ten surface temperature of 100C and later the increment was changed to 25 C up to the test surface temperature 400C.

30

CHAPTER RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Analysis of Theoretical model

Experimental droplet vaporization time (taken for complete evaporation) has been investigated as a function of test surface temperature for four test metal surfaces, four different liquid and two different droplet diameters (2.5mm and 2.75 mm). A numerous number of graphs have been found within a temperature range from 60 to 400 oC. Resulting graphs are found to have shapes just opposite of a typical boiling curve, as expected which is defined as the Inverse Boiling Curve in the present study. It is because in typical boiling curve, heat flux is plotted as a function of temperature difference. And in this experiment, evaporation time has been plotted as a function of test surface temperature. The droplet getting higher heat flux will evaporate quickly, and so the time and heat flux relationship is just opposite and it has become an evident in the experimental graphs. Leidenfrost temperatures are easily determined from the graphs where maximum vaporization time is required in the film boiling region. Based on the prescribed model, a computer program has been generated. Theoretical Leidenfrost time has been estimated from this program. For comparison purposes some experimental and theoretical (at Leidenfrost point) times have been presented in graphs from Figs. 5.1-5.6. The lower temperature than the Leidenfrost point in the boiling curve has not been included in the present model. This is because the theory has been developed considering a stable vapor film beneath the liquid droplet. But, before the Leidenfrost temperature, the film developed is not in a stable condition and gradually increases in thickness of the vapor film with the increase in time up to Leidenfrost point.

31

Methanol (Small diameter) on Copper surface

40

Vaporiztion time (sec)

35

Theoritical Methanol Copper 2.50 mm

Experimental

30
25 20 15

10
5 0

100 200 300 400 Temperature (C) Methanol (Small diameter) on Aluminum surface
Fig. 5.1 Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for small diameter Methanol on Copper surface

25

Vaporiztion time (sec)

Theoritical

Experimental

20
15 10 5 0

Methanol Aluminum 2.50 mm

100

200 300 400 Temperature (C)

500

Fig. 5.2 Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for small diameter Methanol on Aluminum surface
32

Methanol (Large diameter) on Aluminum surface

30
Vaporiztion time (sec)
Theoritical Experimental

25 20

Methanol Aluminum 2.75 mm

15
10 5

0
0 100 200 300 Temperature (C) 400

Fig. 5.3 Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for large diameter Methanol on Aluminum surface Figure 5.1 shows experimental vaporization time of Methanol for do = 2.5 mm on copper surface along with theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time. The resulting graph with experimental data has a shape just opposite of a typical boiling curve and the reason has been described earlier. For surface temperature around 100 oC, the evaporation time is very small might be because of nucleate boiling. With the increase of temperature, the vapor layer develops and the heat flux to the droplet falls eventually. As a result, total vaporization time increases. It expresses the partial film boiling (transition boiling from nucleate to stable film boiling) region (From temperature about 100 to 175 oC). A stable vapor layer forms at around 175 oC and it is the Leidenfrost temperature where the vaporization time is the maximum. After 175 oC, the radiation heat transfer becomes dominating mode which increases the heat flux and decreases the total vaporization time. So the region in the graph from 175 to about 400 oC is film boiling region. The Leidenfrost time from experiment as shown in the Fig. 5.1 is around 33 sec whereas, this value is about 17 sec as predicted from the analytical solution [Eqn. 21]. The theoretical value is about 50% of the experimental one.

33

Figure 5.2 shows experimental vaporization time of Methanol for do = 2.5mm on Aluminum surface along with the theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time. The shape of the graph is opposite to the shape of boiling curve as described earlier. Here the nucleate boiling region is again at the vicinity of 100 oC. The region between 100 to 225 oC is partial film boiling region. The Leidenfrost temperature here is around 225 oC. The graph between 225 to 400 oC shows the film boiling region where radiation heat transfer is dominating. The Leidenfrost time from experiment as shown in the Fig. 5.2 is around 22 sec whereas, this value is about 17 sec as predicted from the analytical solution [Eqn. 21]. The theoretical value is about 80% of the experimental one. Figure 5.3 shows experimental vaporization time of Methanol for do = 2.75mm on Aluminum surface along with theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time. As shown in the Fig. 5.3, the Leidenfrost temperature is here also 225oC. This reveals that the size of sessile drop does not have any influence on Leidenfrost temperature (both are around 225 oC as shown in the Figs. 5.2 and 5.3) though it effects the Leidenfrost time (for do = 2.5mm, Leidenfrost time is about 22 sec as shown in the Fig. 5.2 and for do = 2.75 mm Leidenfrost time is around 26 sec as shown in the Fig. 5.3. The Leidenfrost time for larger droplet is more than that of smaller one. It is expected because a larger droplet will require more heat and time to fully evaporate. The temperature range for nucleate boiling, partial film boiling and film boiling for large diameter Methanol droplet on Aluminum surface are almost same as those of small diameter Methanol droplet on Aluminum surface as shown in Fig. 5.2. The Leidenfrost time as measured in the experiment (as shown in the Fig. 5.3) is approximately 25 sec and on the other hand this value is around 20 sec as predicted from the model [Eqn. 21]. The predicted value from the proposed model is around 80% of the experimental measured value. If it is compared Figs. 5.1-5.3; Fig. 5.2 and 5.3 show a fair agreement between the Leidenfrost time predicted from the proposed model and the experimental data. Figure 5.1 shows that the agreement between the experimental Leidenfrost time and the theoretical Leidenfrost time is not as good as compared to the other two as shown in the Figs. 5.2 and 5.3. It can be explained by thermal conductivity of the test surface. Thermal conductivity of Copper is almost double than that of Aluminum. A metal having higher thermal conductivity has higher capability to supply intense heat to the liquid droplet on its surface. As a result a thicker vapor blanket will generate
34

instantly which will impede the conduction heat transfer to the liquid and in turn a higher Leidenfrost time should be found. It is evident from Fig. 5.1. The Leidenfrost time for Methanol on Copper surface (as shown in the Fig. 5.1) is more than the Leidenfrost time for the same liquid and same droplet diameter on Aluminum surface (Fig. 5.2). For simplicity, thermal conductivity of test metal surface has not been incorporated in present theoretical model. As a result the experimental Leidenfrost time is higher than the theoretical prediction of the Leidenfrost time on the copper surface. In future study, the solid surface materials conductivity will be tried to include which will hope to more close agreement of the experimental data with the model.

Ethanol (Small diameter) on Brass surface

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0

Theoritical Ethanol Brass 2.50 mm

Experimental

Vaporiztion time (sec)

100 200 300 Temperature (C)

400

Fig. 5.4 Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for small diameter Ethanol on Brass surface

35

Ethanol (Large diameter) on Brass surface

Vaporiztion time (sec)

50 40 30 20 10

Theoritical Ethanol Brass 2.75 mm

Experimental

0
0 100 200 300 400 Temperature (C) Ethanol (Large diameter) on Mild steel surface
Fig. 5.5 Experimental evaporation time and model predicted Leidenfrost time for large diameter Ethanol on Brass surface

35

Vaporiztion time (sec)

Theoritical

Experimental

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0

Ethanol Mild stel 2.75 mm

100 200 300 Temperature (C)

400

Fig. 5.6 Experimental evaporation time and model predicted large diameter Leidenfrost time for Ethanol on Mild steel surface

36

Figure 5.4 shows experimental vaporization time of Ethanol for do = 2.5 mm on Brass surface along with theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time. Leidenfrost temperature here is around 150 oC and the Leidenfrost time is about 43 sec for the experimental case and around 17 sec predicted from the model. Figure 5.5 represents the experimental time of Ethanol for do = 2.75 mm on Brass surface along with the theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time, the Leidenfrost temperature here is around 150 oC. Here the experimental Leidenfrost time value is more or less 46 sec and the predicted value is about 20 sec. Again it is an evident from these two figures (Figs. 5.4-5.5) that droplet size does not have any influence on the Leidenfrost temperature. Experimental Leidenfrost time as shown in the Fig. 5.4 is less than that of as shown in the Fig. 5.5. This again depicts that the larger the droplet size, the larger the Leidenfrost time. Figure 5.6 expresses comparison between experimental vaporization times of Ethanol with do = 2.75mm on Mild steel surface along with the theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time. Here the Leidenfrost temperature is about 175oC, the experimental Leidenfrost time is about 30 sec and the predicted value is around 20 sec. For all the three conditions (Fig. 5.4-5.6), the deviations of the model predicted time values from the experimental times vary from 40 to 65 %. Here, among the three conditions (Figs. 5.4-5.6), the agreement for the Leidenfrost time between the model predicted and the experimental is better for the case of mild steel as it has the lower thermal conductivity. Sessile drop evaporation on a hot metal surface is a very complex phenomenon. The droplet on the hot metal surface goes through dancing and jumping or in another way touching and detaching of the droplet on the metallic surface. When the vapor beneath the droplet makes floating the droplet (due to reaction force of the vapor) on hot metallic surface, there forms a vapor layer which results in drop of heat transfer. In this way, when the heat transfer reduces, the vapor pressure no longer remains able to sustain the weight of the droplet on the solid surface. Once the droplet touches the hot solid surface, a large amount of heat transfer occurs and the vapor pressure again floats the droplet. So the heat transfer to the droplet occurs in an

interrupted way. This continues until the weight of the droplet is reduced due to evaporation and it is then balanced by the vapor pressure beneath the droplet (vapor pressure is almost not reducing practically because it may be assumed that the solid surface temperature remains more or less constant during the evaporation of the droplet). It is to be mentioned here that the heat capacity of the experimental solid block is infinite compared to liquid droplet. At Leidenfrost
37

temperature a stable vapor film is formed below the droplet. Based on this stable film layer, present model has been developed. For simplicity of the model, the dancing and bouncing phenomena have been discarded. The effect of radiation heat transfer has been successfully inserted into the theory and has also been taken in account at the final calculation and the theoretical approximation of Leidenfrost time has been found fair enough compared to the experimental Leidenfrost time.

5.2 Analysis of Experimental data

The experimental total vaporization time results are shown in (Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.14). The mean point are plotted and the range of experimental results. The temperature which gives maximum evaporation time is presumed to be the minimum heat ux at which stable lm boiling can exist and is termed as Leidenfrost temperature. The Leidenfrost temperature is not a strong function of size, as has been noted over a much wider size range. In the present study, complete evaporation time of a sessile droplet of liquid as a function of test surface temperature of four different materials for four different liquids with two different droplet diameters are analyzed. A numerous number of graphs having different combinations are obtained here due to involvement of various experimental parameters. The representative characteristics among all the experimental conditions will be described here.

5.2.1 Liquid variation

In this experiment we have plotted evaporation time of different liquids on a specific metal surface (Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.10). Different liquids on a specific metal surface took different time to evaporate. The factors that affect the evaporation time of a liquid droplet are as follows

5.2.1.1 Effect of latent heat of vaporization A liquid having a higher latent heat of vaporization should take more time to evaporate. This phenomenon is verified in our experiment (Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.10). Water has the maximum heat of vaporization compared to methanol and ethanol so it takes the highest time to evaporate among the all liquids for different metal surfaces (Aluminum, Brass, Copper and Mild steel).
38

5.2.1.2 Effect of specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of liquid Evaporation time and Leidenfrost point temperature of the liquid depends on the specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of the liquid as shown in the model of Henry [17]. Higher the specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of the liquid Leidenfrost temperature will also be higher as we observe in the experiment (Figure 5.9). Droplet evaporation time is maximum for copper and minimum for mild steel (Figure 5.8 and Figure 5.9). 5.2.1.3 Effect of boiling temperature of liquid Evaporation time also depends on boiling temperature of the liquid. The liquid which has higher boiling point will take more time to evaporate. In this experiment we observe this phenomenon as water has highest boiling point (100C) comparing to methanol (64.7C) and ethanol (78.3C) so water takes highest time to evaporate (Figure 5.11 and Figure 5.13).

5.2.2 Diameter variation

For a specific liquid, larger diameter droplet should take more time to evaporate. This phenomenon is verified in our experiment (Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.14). As diameter increases volume and mass of the liquid also increases due to this total amount of heat required by larger diameter liquid droplet to evaporate is higher than the smaller diameter liquid droplet. Although the evaporation time for larger diameter liquid droplet is higher than smaller diameter liquid droplet but Leidenfrost point temperature remain same for both diameters as Leidenfrost point temperature is independent of diameter. This phenomenon has been also proved by experimental data (as shown in Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.10).

39

120
Diameter: 2.50 mm
Aluminium:Dist water:Sd Aluminium:NaCl sol:Sd Aluminium:Ethanol:Sd

100 80

Aluminium:Methanol:Sd

Time(s)

60 40 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(a)

140
Diameter: 2.75 mm
Aluminium:Dist water:Ld Aluminium:NaCl sol:Ld Aluminium:Ethanol:Ld Aluminium:Methanol:Ld

120 100

80

Time(s)

60 40 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.7 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Aluminum surface
40

Droplet evaporation time curve of water on Aluminum surface shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 200 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter is around 55sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 65 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of NaCl solution on Aluminum shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 225 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 45sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 55 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of methanol on Aluminum shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 225 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 20sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 25 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of ethanol on Aluminum shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 200 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 25sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 30 sec.

41

140
Diameter: 2.50 mm
Brass:Distill water:Sd Brass:NaCl solution:Sd Brass:Ethanol:Sd
Brass:Methanol:Sd

120 100

Time(s)

80 60 40 20 0 0 100 200 300 400

Temperature(C)
(a)

140
Diameter: 2.75 mm
Brass:Distill water:Ld Brass:NaCl solution:Ld Brass:Ethanol:Ld Brass:Methanol:Ld

120

100

Time(s)

80

60
40

20
0 0 100 200 Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.8 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Brass surface
42

300

400

Droplet evaporation time curve of water on Brass surface shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 175 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter is around 110sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 120 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of NaCl solution on Brass shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 200 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 60sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 70 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of methanol on Brass shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 150 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 40sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 45 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of ethanol on Brass shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 150 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 43sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 47sec.
120
Diameter: 2.50 mm

100 80

Copper:dist water sd Copper:NaCl sol sd Copper:Ethanol:sd Copper:Methanol:sd

Time(s)

60 40 20 0

50

100

Temperature (C)

150

200

250

300

350

400

(a)

43

120
Diameter: 2.75 mm Copper:Dist Water:Ld
Copper:NaCl sol:ld Copper:Ethanol:Ld Copper:Methanol:Ld

100 80

Time (s)

60 40
20 0 0 100

Temperature( C)

200

300

400

(b) Fig. 5.9 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Copper surface

Droplet evaporation time curve of water on Copper surface shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 200 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter is around 70sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 80 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of NaCl solution on Copper shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 225 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 60sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 65 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of methanol on Copper shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 175 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 34sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 40 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of ethanol on Copper shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 175 C and corresponding time for smaller

44

diameter droplet is around 35sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 40 sec.
80
Mild steel:Distill water:Sd

70 60

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Mild steel:NaCl solution:Sd Mild steel:Ethanol:Sd Mild steel:Methanol:Sd

Time(s)

50
40 30 20 10

0
0 100 200 300 400

Temperature(C)

(a)
90

80
70

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Mild steel:Distill water:Ld Mild steel:NaCl solution:Ld Mild steel:Ethanol:Ld Mild steel:Methanol:Ld

60

Time(s)

50 40 30 20 10 0

100

Temperature(C)

200

300

400

(b) Fig. 5.10 Comparison curve of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distill Water, NaCl solution, Methanol, Ethanol on Mild steel surface

45

Droplet evaporation time curve of water on Mild steel surface shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 250 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter is around 50sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 55 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of NaCl solution on Mild steel shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 275 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 40sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 45 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of methanol on Mild steel shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 200 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 22sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 24 sec. Droplet evaporation time curve of ethanol on Mild steel shows that the both droplet takes maximum time to evaporate completely at a temperature of 175 C and corresponding time for smaller diameter droplet is around 25 sec. The complete evaporation time for larger diameter droplet is around 30 sec.

5.2.3 Material variation We kept the liquid fixed and changed the metal surfaces while plotting Fig. 5.11 to Fig. 5.14. For each liquid, we have plotted the total droplet vaporization time as a function of surface temperature of four different metal surfaces. We find a general trend that, vaporization time required for a specific liquid at a specific temperature is different for different metal surfaces. It happens due to different values of specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of the metal. For all cases, according to the model of Henry [17] if specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of metal is high Leidenfrost point temperature will be low. From Fig. 5.9 and Fig. 5.10 we observe that Leidenfrost time for methanol on copper surface is 150C and on mild steel surface is 200C (as copper has the highest density and thermal
46

conductivity while mild steel has the lowest among these four metals). In this experiment, brass takes the maximum time, then copper, aluminum and mild steel respectively. The effect of diameter of liquid droplet is also verified from experimental results and graphs.
140 120 100
Time(s)
Diameter: 2.50mm
Distilled water:copper:sd Dist water:Mild steel:sd Dis water:Aluminum:sd Dist water:Brass:sd

80 60

40
20 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

temperature(C)

(a)
140 120
Diameter: 2.75mm
Dist water:copper:LD Distwater:Mild steel:Ld Dist water:Aluminum:Ld Dist water:Brass:Ld

100

Time(s)

80 60 40

20
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature()

(b) Fig. 5.11 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of Distilled water on four different surfaces

47

For both water droplets (small and large diameter) Figure 5.11(a-b) shows that, water droplet evaporation time is maximum for Brass surface. Droplet evaporation time decreases in the order of copper, aluminum and Mild steel. According to the model of Henry [17] if specific heat, thermal conductivity and density of metal is high Leidenfrost point temperature will be low. From Fig. 5.11 we observe that Leidenfrost temperature for distilled water on copper surface is 150C and mild steel surface is 200C (as copper has the highest density and thermal conductivity while mild steel has the lowest among these four metals).

120
Diameter: 2.50mm
NaCl sol:copper:sd NaCl sol:Mild steel:sd NaCl sol:Aluminum:sd

100 80

NaCl sol:Brass:Sd

Time(s)

60 40 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature()
(a)

48

140
120 100
Diameter: 2.75mm
NaCl sol:copper:Ld NaCl:Mild steel:Ld NaCl sol:Aluminum:Ld NaCl sol:Brass:Ld

Time(s)

80 60 40 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature()
(b) Fig. 5.12 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of NaCl solution on four different metal surfaces For both NaCl solution droplets (small and large diameter) Figure 5.12(a-b) shows that, NaCl solution droplet evaporation time is maximum for Brass surface. Droplet evaporation time decreases in the order of copper, aluminum and Mild steel. From Figure 5.12(a-b) we observe that Leidenfrost temperature for NaCl solution on copper surface is 200C and mild steel surface is 275C (as copper has the highest density and thermal conductivity while mild steel has the lowest among these four metals).

49

45 40 35 30
Methanol:Copper:sd

Diameter: 2.50mm

Methanol:Mild steel:sd Methanol:Aluminum:sd Methanol:Brass:sd

Time(s)

25 20 15 10 5 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature()
(a)

50 45 40
Diameter: 2.75mm
Methanol:Copper:Ld Methanol:Mild steel:Ld Methanol:Aluminum:Ld Methanol:Brass:Ld

35

Time(s)

30 25 20 15

10 5
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature()
(b) Fig. 5.13 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of Methanol on four different surfaces
50

For both Methanol droplets (small and large diameter) Figure 5.13(a-b) shows that, Methanol droplet evaporation time is maximum for Brass surface. Droplet evaporation time decreases in the order of copper, aluminum and Mild steel. From Figure 5.13(a-b) we observe that Leidenfrost temperature for methanol on copper surface is 175C and mild steel surface is 200C (as copper has the highest density and thermal conductivity while mild steel has the lowest among these four metals).
50 45 40 35
Ethanol:copper:Sd

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Ethanol:Mild steel:sd Ethanol:Aluminum:sd Ethanol:Brass:sd

Time(s)

30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0 50 100 150 200 250

300

350

400

Temperature()

(a)
50 45 40 35
Diameter: 2.75mm
Ethanol:copper:Ld Ethanol:Mild steel:Ld Ethanol:Aluminum:Ld Ethanol:Brass:Ld

Time(s)

30 25
20 15 10

5 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature()

(b) Fig. 5.14 Comparison of Droplet Evaporation Time of Ethanol on four different surfaces
51

For both Ethanol droplets (small and large diameter) Figure 5.14(a-b) shows that, Ethanol droplet evaporation time is maximum for Brass surface. Droplet evaporation time decreases for copper, aluminum and Mild steel respectively. From Figure 5.14(a-b) we observe that both for copper and mild steel surfaces Leidenfrost temperature of ethanol is identical and its value is 175C. Leidenfrost temperature values were obtain for water, NaCl solution, methanol and ethanol on aluminum, copper, brass and mild steel surface. The Leidenfrost temperature is nearly identical for aluminum, brass and mild steel surfaces but is slightly higher for the copper surface [Bernardin and Mudawar, 1999]. The higher Leidenfrost value of copper surface is speculated to be the result of surface roughening which accompanied large amounts of surface oxidation during heating. The higher drop evaporation value of copper surface is speculated to be the result of higher conductivity than other metal. Higher conductivity means higher heat transfer through the metal. It means, when liquid touch the metal, large amount vapor will produce due to higher heat transfer rate and surface is completely covered by a vapor blanket and then heat transfer from the surface to the liquid occurs by conduction through vapor. Droplet was supported by the vapor lm slowly boil away.

5.3 Experimental boiling curve

Boiling curve of water, methanol and ethanol on four metal surfaces (aluminum, brass, copper, mild Steel) as a function of test surface temperature are presented in Figure 5.15 to Figure 5.17. Michiyoshi, Makino [16] have simplified the time averaged heat flux based on the theory of Baumeister et. al [4]. Combining heat balance and time averaged heat transfer coefficient, time averaged heat flux can be determined. According to Baumeister et al. [4] heat transfer coefficient is = 1.11.5(
3 1 1 3

)4

(5.22)

Here, h*= [1 + (20 ) ( )]3

52

From the heat balance the following equation can be obtained,

= (V) A (V) T

(5.23)

The resulting equation for the time averaged heat flux is q=

1.5
l 1.813 3 Vo 3

hg

(5.24)

By inserting complete droplet evaporation time in Eqn (5.24), heat flux is determined and by plotting this heat flux with respect to surface temperature boiling curve is obtained.

5.3.1 Experimental Boiling curve of water By using Eqn (5.24), heat flux during sessile drop evaporation has been estimated as shown in the Figure 5.15(a-b) (for all the experimental conditions, the working pressure remain constant as of atmospheric pressure. The experiments were started from 60C of test surface for all the cases and the experiment were conducted up to 400C. Depends on the wall superheat (=surface temperature liquid saturation temperature) different mode of heat transfer could be obtained.
1.E+08
Boiling curve of distilled water(diameter: 2.50mm)
ALUMINUM

1.E+07
Heat flux (W/m2)

BRASS COPPER MILD STEEL

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Surface Temperature (C)

(a)

53

Boiling curve of water (diameter: 2.75 mm)

1.E+07
Aluminum Brass Copper

Heat flux (W/m2)

Mild Steel

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04 0 100 200 300 400

Temperature(C)

(b) Fig. 5.15 Boiling curve of Water on different material surfaces

Immediate after the 60C of test surface temperature and before 100C, convection boiling can be predicted as the dominating mode of heat transfer for water evaporation as shown in Figure 5.15(a-b). Above 100C of test surface temperature, nucleate boiling becomes the dominating mode and consequently sharp increase of heat flux is observed for all the materials (aluminum, brass, copper and mild steel). At around 105-130C (5-30C of wall superheat for water) the heat flux reaches the maximum value (it is defined as critical heat flux). In the transition boiling region all curves deviates from each other. This can be explained by considering thermal diffusivity. We consider the two cases mild steel and copper as the former has lowest thermal diffusivity and the later one has the maximum thermal diffusivity. The film boiling region starts at the Leidenfrost point temperature; at this point heat flux is minimum. Above this temperature heat flux increases as radiation heat transfer gradually dominates, this is true for all liquids for different material surface. If the thermal diffusivity of
54

the material is high Leidenfrost point temperature TL will start at low T. Leidenfrost point temperature depends on material. The higher the thermal diffusivity of material lower the Leidenfrost temperature which has already established in our experimental graph. We have noticed in our experimental graph that the Leidenfrost point temperature of higher thermal diffusivity material (copper, aluminum) is lower and ranging between 200-225C, and for lower thermal diffusivity material (mild steel) is higher (>225C).

5.3.2 Experimental Boiling curve of methanol

1.E+08 Boiling curve of methanol(diameter: 2.50mm)

ALUMINUM

1.E+07
Heat flux (W/m2)

BRASS
COPPER MILD STEEL

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Surface Temperature (C)

(a)

55

1.E+08

Boiling Curve of Methanol(diameter: 2.75 mm)

Aluminum

1.E+07

Brass

Heat flux(W/m2)

Copper Mild Steel

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04 0 100 200 300 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig.5.16 Boiling curve of Methanol on different material surfaces

In the nucleate boiling region Figure 5.16(a-b) we find that the curve linearly increases for all the material and they almost merges (not perfectly) to each other. The maximum heat flux is obtained at a temperature above 25-40C above the saturation temperature. Material with higher thermal diffusivity has critical heat flux (CHF) at lower surface temperature (for copper ~90C), similarly material with lower thermal diffusivity has CHF at higher surface temperature (for Mild steel ~100C). CHF is maximum for mild steel surface and the numerical value is approximately 15.26 MW/2 . In the transition boiling region all curves deviates from each other. This can be explained by considering thermal diffusivity. We consider the two cases mild steel and copper as the former has lowest thermal diffusivity and the later one has the maximum thermal diffusivity. The curve for mild steel deviates at higher T ranges than for copper plate.

56

The film boiling region starts at the point where heat flux is minimum is known as Leidenfrost point temperature. Above this temperature heat flux also increases as radiation heat flux gradually dominates, this is true for all liquids for different material. The higher the thermal diffusivity the lower T at TL . We know that Leidenfrost point temperature depends on material surface. The higher the thermal diffusivity of material lower the Leidenfrost temperature which has been also established in our experimental graph. We noticed in our experimental graph that Leidenfrost point temperature of higher thermal diffusivity material (such as copper) is lower and ranging between 175-200C, and for lower thermal diffusivity material (such as mild steel) is higher (200-225C).

5.3.3 Experimental Boiling curve of ethanol

1.E+08 Boiling curve of ethanol(diameter : 2.50 mm)

ALUMINUM

1.E+07
Heat flux (W/m2)

BRASS COPPER

MILD STEEL

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Surface Temperature (C)

(a)

57

1.E+08

Boiling Curve of Ethanol(diameter: 2.75 mm)

Aluminum

1.E+07

Brass

Heat flux(W/m2)

Copper Mild Steel

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04 0 100 200 300 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.17 Boiling curve of Ethanol on different material surfaces

Starting at the nucleate boiling region we find that the curve Figure 5.17(a-b) linearly increases for all the material and they almost merges to each other. The maximum heat flux (CHF) is obtained at a temperature above 20-30C above the saturation temperature. CHF is maximum for mild steel surface and the numerical value is approximately 10.55 MW/2 . In the transition boiling region all curves deviates from each other as happen in the previous cases. This can be explained by considering thermal diffusivity. Considering two cases mild steel and copper as the former has lowest thermal diffusivity and the later one has the maximum thermal diffusivity. The curve for mild steel deviates at higher T ranges than for copper plate. The film boiling region starts at the Leidenfrost point temperature; at this point heat flux is minimum. Above this temperature heat flux also increases as radiation heat flux gradually dominates, this is true for all liquids for different material surface. The higher the thermal diffusivity the lower T at TL .Leidenfrost point temperature depends on material. The higher the thermal diffusivity of material lowers the Leidenfrost temperature which has been also
58

established in our experimental graph. We noticed in our graph that Leidenfrost point temperature of higher thermal diffusivity material is lower and ranging between175-200C, and for lower thermal diffusivity material is higher (200-225C).

5.4 Inverse boiling curve

In this experiment we have plotted evaporation time versus metal surface temperature thus we have obtained curves (Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.10) which is inverse of boiling curve may be called as inverse boiling curve. A typical inverse boiling curve Figure 5.18 is classified into four regimes film evaporation, nucleate boiling, transition boiling and film boiling.

Typical inverse boiling and boiling curve

Inverse boiling curve Boiling curve

a
Time / Heat flux

c
Surface temperature( C)
Fig. 5.18 Schematic of a typical Inverse boiling curve and boiling curve of a Liquid The region a-b is known as film evaporation region which is below the saturation temperature of liquid. As point b is the saturation temperature, below this temperature there is no boiling,
59

liquid droplet evaporates at atmospheric pressure. Gradually less time required for boiling when the temperature approaches to the saturation point. This is due to the increase in heat flux as temperature increases. The trend of the graph in this region is downward as shown in Figure 18. The region b-c is known as nucleate boiling region. This region starts from saturation point up to the point at which heat flux is maximum. As the surface temperature is increasing above saturation point heat flux also increases due to the combined effect of liquid entrainment and evaporation. In this region evaporation time gradually decreases and reaches a minimum value at CHF (critical heat flux). This region is the most desirable region in boiling phenomenon. The region c-d is transition boiling region also known as unstable film boiling. In this region heat flux decreases for further increase in temperature due to the large fraction of heater surface is covered by vapor film. As heat flux in this region in decreasing order so evaporation time must be in increasing order which has been already established by experimental data. The region above d is known as film boiling region. The point d is known as Leidenfrost point at which heat flux is minimum. At this point metal surface is completely covered by vapor film. As heat flux at this point is minimum so evaporation time at this point is maximum which is undesirable. So during boiling this point must be avoided. Above point d heat flux is increasing as the surface temperature is increasing. The heat transfer rate increases with increasing excess temperature above saturation point as a result of heat transfer from the heated surface to the liquid through the vapor film by radiation heat transfer which become significant at higher temperature. In our experimental curve (which is similar to Figure 5.18), we notice that from saturation temperature up to temperature at which heat flux is maximum, the required vaporization decreases. This happens due to the less vapor bubble or absence of vapor film under the droplet. So, the total heat is transferred to the droplet from the hot metal surface by conduction. As the temperature increases, a vapor layer is formed beneath the droplet and increases in thickness and consequently the vaporization time also increases. This happens up to the Leidenfrost point. At Leidenfrost point, the film thickness reaches to its maximum value and this lessens the conductive heat transfer rate to its minimum value. So the time required for vaporization reaches to its maximum value. After this point radiation heat transfer starts to dominate which gradually decrease the vaporization time as heat flux increases.
60

5.5 Engineering Correlation of experimental data

The theoretical development in reference [2] is purely analytical. It does not require any experimental data (except physical properties) in the prediction for droplet evaporation time. Due to the complicated iterative computations to obtain the correct values for droplet evaporation time, it is necessary in engineering calculations relatively simple equation which would imply the correct functional dependence upon variables and allow a prediction for droplet evaporation time without any time consuming iteration. In order to obtain such an empirical correlation of the experimental data, a functional equation between the dependent variables and the independent variables must be obtained. From the theoretical development, we find in reference [2] that heat is transferred from the plate to the droplet by conduction and radiation, neither one of which may be neglected in general. The evaporation rate per unit area for a spherical droplet is on the order of L / and this quantity is equal to the sum of the heat transferred by conduction and radiation divided by . Functional arguments are developed in detail in reference [18], but the resulting equation is

= C1 [

( ) 1

]2 + C 2 [

4 4

] .. (25)

Where, C1 and C2 are constants to be evaluated from the experimental data. The first and second part of the above equation represents the conduction and radiation heat transfer respectively.

61

5.5.1 Experimental Correlation for Aluminum

Correlation curve for Aluminum(Diameter 2.50 mm) 0.12 water methanol ethanol equation

0.1

Calculated value

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0 0

0.02

0.04

0.06 Obseved value

0.08

0.1

0.12

(a)
Correlation curve for Aluminum(diameter: 2.75 mm) 0.12 water methanol ethanol equation

0.1

Calculated value

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0 0

0.02

0.04

0.06 Obseved value

0.08

0.1

0.12

(b) Fig. 5.19 Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Aluminum surface
62

In both cases, twenty three data points representing the full range of experimental condition were selected for aluminum and used to calculate C1 and C2 by least squares fitting. The resulting correlation for four liquids on aluminum is ( ) 1
4 4

= 0.0206[

]2 +1215 [

] (26)

5.5.2 Experimental Correlation for Brass

0.09 0.08 0.07 water methanol ethanol equation Correlation curve for Brass(Diameter 2.50 mm)

Calculated value

0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Obseved value 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09

(a)
Correlation curve for Brass(Diameter 2.75 mm) 0.09 0.08 0.07 water methanol ethanol equation

Calculated value

0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Obseved value 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09

(b) Fig. 5.20 Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Brass surface
63

In both cases, twenty seven data points representing the full range of experimental condition were selected for brass and used to calculate C1 and C2 by least squares fitting (Fig. 5.13). The resulting correlation for four liquids on brass is ( ) 1
4 4

= 0.0169[

]2 + 500[

] (27)

5.5.2 Experimental Correlation for Copper

Correlation curve for Copper( Diameter 2.50 mm) 0.09 0.08 0.07 water methanol ethanol equation

Calculated value

0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Obseved value 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09

(a)
Correlation curve for Copper(Diameter: 2.75 mm) 0.09 0.08 0.07 water methanol ethanol equation

Calculated value

0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Obseved value 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09

(b) Fig. 5.21 Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Copper surface
64

Twenty five data points representing the full range of experimental condition were selected for copper and used to calculate C1 and C2 by least squares fitting (Fig. 5.12). The resulting correlation for four liquids on copper is ( ) 1
4 4

= 0.0160[

]2 + 1170[

] (28)

5.5.3 Experimental Correlation for Mild Steel

Correlation curve for Mild Steel(Diameter 2.50 mm) 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 water methanol ethanol equation

Calculated value

0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Obseved value 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

(a)
Correlation curve for Mild Steel(diameter: 2.75 mm) 0.12 water methanol ethanol equation

0.1

Calculated value

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0 0

0.02

0.04

0.06 Obseved value

0.08

0.1

0.12

(b) Fig. 5.22 Empirical correlation of total evaporation time for Mild steel surface
65

In both cases, twenty three data points representing the full range of experimental condition were selected for mild steel and used to calculate C1 and C2 by least squares fitting. The resulting correlation for four liquids on mild steel is ( ) 1
4 4

= 0.0158 [

]2 + 1440[

] (29)

5.6 Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental Result

Finally a comparison has been made for surface temperature above the Leidenfrost point between data points obtained from correlation and data points obtained from experiment. This comparison has been shown by plotting curve (Fig. 5.14 and Fig. 5.15). Correlated Equations (Eqn 26 to Eqn 29) give very accurate time ranging maximum error limit 20 percents, in most of the cases less than 10 percents.

5.6.1 Comparison curve for distilled water on different metal surfaces

80 70 60 50
40 30
Correlation: Al-dist water

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Experimental: Al-dist water

Time(s)

20 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(a)
66

80 70 60 50
40 30
Correlation: Al-dist water Experimental: Al-dist water

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

20 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.23 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of water on Aluminum surface

120 100
Correlation: Brass -Dist water Experimental: Brass-Dist water

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Time(s)

80 60 40
20 0 0

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)
67

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
0

Time(s)

Correlation: Brass -Dist water Experimental: Brass-Dist water

Diameter: 2.75 mm

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.24 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of water on Brass surface

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0

Time(s)

Correlation: Copper -Dist water Experimental: Copper-Dist water

Diameter: 2.50 mm

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(a)
68

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0

Time(s)

Correlation: Copper -Dist water Experimental: Copper-Dist water

Diameter: 2.75 mm

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.25 Comparison graph for total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of Water on Copper surface

60 50
Correlation: Steel -Dist water

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Time(s)

40 30 20 10 0 0

Experimental: Steel-Dist water

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)

69

70

60 50

Correlation: Steel Dist water

Experimental: Steel-Dist water

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

40 30
20

10
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.26 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of water on Mild steel surface

Comparison curves above the Leidenfrost point for distilled water on four different material surfaces (Aluminum, Brass, Copper and Mild steel) have shown in Figure 5.23 to Figure 5.26. Above the Leidenfrost point experimental data and correlated data are well matched as shown in Figure 5.23 to Figure 5.26. For Aluminum and Brass, variation between experimental data and correlated data are 10% in both cases above the transition region. For Copper, variation between experimental data and correlated data are 15% in both cases above the transition region. But for Mild steel variation is higher than other three metal surfaces and it is within 20%.

70

5.6.2 Comparison curve for methanol on different metal surfaces

30
25
Correlation: Almethanol Experimental: Al-methanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Time(s)

20 15
10

5 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(a)

30
25
Correlation: Almethanol Experimental: Al-methanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

20 15
10

5 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.27 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of methanol on Aluminum surface
71

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0

Time(s)

Correlation: Brass Methanol Experiment al: Brass Methanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0

Correlation: Brass Methanol Experimental : Brass Methanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.28 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of methanol on Brass surface
72

45
40

35

Time(s)

30

25
20

Correlation: Copper Methanol Experimental: Copper Methanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

15
10

5
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0

Time(s)

Correlation: Copper Methanol Experimental: Copper Methanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.29 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of Methanol on Copper surface
73

35 30 25
Correlation: Steel - Methanol Experimental: Steel -Methanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Time(s)

20 15 10 5 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)

30 25
Correlation: Steel - Methanol Experimental: Steel -Methanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

20
15 10

5 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b)
Fig. 5.30 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of methanol on Mild steel surface

74

Comparison curves above the Leidenfrost point for methanol on four different material surfaces (Aluminum, Brass, Copper and Mild steel) have shown in Figure 5.27 to Figure 5.30. Above the Leidenfrost point experimental data and correlated data are well matched as shown in Figure 5.27 to Figure 5.30. For Aluminum and Brass, variation between experimental data and correlated data are within10% in both cases above the transition region which is similar to distilled water. For Copper and Mild steel, variation between experimental data and correlated data are 15% in both cases above the transition region. Above Leidenfrost point as temperature increases accuracy for both Copper and Mild steel increase.

5.6.3 Comparison curve for ethanol on different metal surfaces

30
25
Correlation: Al-ethanol Experimental: Al-Ethanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Time(s)

20

15 10 5
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(a)

75

80
70

60

Correlation: Al-ethanol Experimental: Al-Ethanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

50

40 30 20 10
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.31 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Aluminum surface

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0

Time(s)

Correlation: Brass Ethanol Experiment al: Brass Ethanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)
76

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0

Correlation: Brass -Ethanol Experimental: Brass -Ethanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.32 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Brass surface.

40 35

30

Time(s)

25 20 15
10 5 0 0

Correlation: Copper Ethanol Experimental: Copper Ethanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)
77

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0

Time(s)

Correlation: Copper Ethanol Experimental : Copper Ethanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.33 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Copper surface.

35

30
25

Correlation: Steel -Ethanol Experimental: Steel -Ethanol

Diameter: 2.50 mm

Time(s)

20 15 10 5
0 0

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(a)
78

35

30
25

Correlation: Steel -Ethanol Experimental: Steel -Ethanol

Diameter: 2.75 mm

Time(s)

20 15 10 5
0 0

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Temperature(C)
(b) Fig. 5.34 Comparison graph of total evaporation time () with surface temperature ( ) of ethanol on Mild steel surface.

Comparison curves above the Leidenfrost point for ethanol on four different material surfaces (Aluminum, Brass, Copper and Mild steel) have shown in Figure 5.31 to Figure 5.34. Above the Leidenfrost point experimental data and correlated data are well matched as shown in Figure 5.31 to Figure 5.34. For Aluminum, Brass and Copper, variation between experimental data and correlated data are within 5% in all cases above the transition region. For Mild steel, variation between experimental data and correlated data are within 10% above the transition region. Above Leidenfrost point as temperature increases accuracy for all metal surfaces increases.

79

CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Conclusions Leidenfrost phenomenon is a very complex matter due to involvement of numerous numbers of physical parameters. This makes the analysis of the most intrinsic details difficult. Here a model has been proposed and verified with experimental results. From the experimental results, several key conclusions concerning the influential parameters (Leidenfrost Temperature) can be drawn. The fundamental understandings are summarized below:

1. The major contribution to the heat transfer is the conductive and radiative mode. Conduction heat transfer mode is dominant below the Leidenfrost point and radiation heat transfer becomes dominant above the Leidenfrost point. 2. Radiation heat transfer has been successfully included in the theoretical model and using an iterative computer program, radiation effects on the droplet evaporation time has been incorporated. 3. A stable layer of vapor has been considered beneath the droplet and the weight of the droplet is balanced with the pressure beneath the droplet. 4. Size of droplet has been found to have no influence on the Leidenfrost temperature. 5. Data are well correlated, allowing prediction of total vaporization time to within 20 percent. The comparison has been made between actual graph obtain in the experiments and those obtained by correlation. 6. The heat ux is inversely proportional to the evaporation time. Heat flux increases after the Leidenfrost point so evaporation time decreases.

80

7. The experimental curve (evaporation time versus temperature) curve is opposite to boiling curve as heat flux is inversely related to the evaporation time. 8. Droplet size has been found to influence the Leidenfrost time. The larger the droplet size; the higher is the total evaporation time.

6.2 Further Work

In this science era, faster growing technology promotes mankind to augment their standard of living. The prerequisite for this technological development is the research and development in the sector of science and technology. Human beings are eagerly waiting for the latest invention which leads to the consequence that research and development are an endless job. In this context, the research work delineated in this dissertation may serve as a primary foundation for some of the phenomena which will lead to some future study : 1. The Leidenfrost phenomenon for two-component solutions. 2. The Leidenfrost phenomenon for cryogenic fluids. 3. The Leidenfrost phenomenon for various liquids on composite material. 4. The role played by heating surface conditions at the Leidenfrost point.

5.3 Recommendations

1. Instead of the four uids used in the experiment other uids can be chosen having larger specic heat. 2. Detailed theoretical and experimental studies are needed to accurately predict the behavior of the Leidenfrost Temperature.

81

3. During the evaporation period droplet always vibrated a little at their fundamental frequency. In order to increase the accuracy this oscillation phenomenon should take in to account. 4. Instead of 25C, temperature should be increased by 5C during the experiment for accurate prediction of droplet evaporation time. 5. If the surface roughness of the metal is changed, detail behavior of the Leidenfrost Temperature will be obtained.

82

REFERENCES

[1] J. G. Leidenfrost, De Aquae Communis Nonnullis Qualitatibus Tractatus, (A Tract About Some Qualities of Common Water), Duisburg on Rhine (1756) [2] B.S. Gottfried, C.J. Lee and K.J. Bell, The leidenfrost phenomenon: film boiling of liquid droplets on a flat plate, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 9, Issue 11, November 1966, pp. 1167-1188 [3] Victor Starov and Khellil Sefiane, On evaporation rate and interfacial temperature of volatile sessile drops, Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, Volume 333, Issues 1-3, 5 February 2009, pp.170-174 [4] Baumeister, K. J., Hamill, T. D., Schoessow, G. J., Schwartz, F. L., Film boiling heat transfer to water drops on a flat plate, Jan 1, 1965 ,Technical report, NASA-TM-X-52103 [5] D. Chatzikyriakou, S.P. Walker, G.F. Hewitt, C. Narayanan and D. Lakehal, Comparison of measured and modeled droplethot wall interactions, Applied Thermal Engineering, Volume 29, Issue 7, May 2009, pp. 1398-1405 [6] L. H. J. Wachters, H. Bonne and H. J. van Nouhuis, The heat transfer from a hot horizontal plate to sessile water drops in the spheroidal state, Chemical Engineering Science, Volume 21, Issue 10, October 1966, pp. 923-936 [7] Heng Xie, Zhiwei Zhou, A model for droplet evaporation near Leidenfrost point, Technical Note, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 50, Issues 25-26, December 2007, pp. 5328-5333 [8] Elyssa F. Crafton, W. Z. Black, Heat transfer and evaporation rates of small liquid droplets on heated horizontal surfaces, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 47, Issues 6-7, March 2004, pp. 1187-1200

83

[9] T. K. Nguyen, C. T. Avedisian, Numerical solution for film evaporation of a spherical liquid droplet on an isothermal and adiabatic surface, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 30, Issue 7, July 1987, pp. 1497-1509 [10] K.E. Nicholds, Leidenfrost, Cryogenics, Volume 10, Issue 1, February 1970, pp. 45-47 [11] George S. Emmerson, The effect of pressure and surface material on the leidenfrost point of discrete drops of water, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 18, Issue 3, March 1975, pp. 381-386 [12] J. Kistemaker, The spheroidal state of a waterdrop: The leidenfrost phenomenon, Physica, Volume 29, Issue 2, February 1963, pp. 96-104 [13] Shi-Chune Yao, and Kang Yuan Cai, The dynamics and leidenfrost temperature of drops impacting on a hot surface at small angles, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, Volume 1, Issue 4, October 1988, pp. 363-371 [14] Niroh Nagai, Shigefumi Nishio, Leidenfrost temperature on an extremely smooth surface, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, Volume 12, Issue 3, April 1996, pp. 373-379 [15] J. P. Holman, Heat Transfer, 8th Edition, McGraw-Hill, INC., International Edition 1997, Chapter 8, pp. 405 -413
[16] I. Michiyoshi, K. Makino, Heat transfer characteristics of evaporation of liquid droplet on

heated surfaces, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Vol. 21, pp 605-613 [17] Henry, R. E. [1974], A Correlation for the Minimum Film Boiling Temperature, Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp. Ser 70, 8190. [18] C. J. Lee, A Theoretical and. Experimental Investigation of the Leidenfrost Phenomenon for Small. Droplets.Ph.D. Thesis, Oklahoma State University (1965). [19] Hosler, E. R., and Westwater, J. W., "Film Boiling on a Horizontal Plate," ARS J., April 1962, pp. 553-558. [20] Wachters, L. H. J., H. Bonne, and H. J. van Nouhuis, Chem. Eng. Sci., 21, 923-936 (1966).

84

APPENDICES

85

APPENDIX

SATURATION POROPERTIES OF LIQUID

A.1 Saturation Properties of Methanol
Chemical formula CH3OH Molecular weight 32.00 Critical temperature 513.15 K Critical Pressure 7950 kPa Critical density 275 kg/m3 Table A.1 Saturation properties of methanol

86

A.2 Saturation Properties of Ethanol

Chemical formula CH3CH2OH Molecular weight 46.1 Critical temperature 516.25K Critical Pressure 6390 kPa Critical density 280 kg/m3

Table A.2 Saturation properties of ethanol

87

A.3 Saturation Properties of Water

Chemical formula H2O Molecular weight 18.0156 Critical temperature 647.3 K Critical Pressure 22,129 kPa Critical density 351kg/m3

Table A.3 Saturation properties of water

88

APPENDIX EXPERIMENTAL DATA

Table B.1 Evaporation time of Distilled water on Aluminum Surface Small diameter Large diameter Temperature(C) t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 73.24 73.05 71.10 72.46 108.2 107.10 110.20 108.50 80 69.21 68.94 67.52 68.56 75.12 77.31 78.22 76.88 90 43.42 44.23 45.12 44.26 58.19 59.22 59.39 58.93 100 17.85 16.09 17.56 17.17 17.12 18.97 18.25 18.11 125 0.47 0.47 0.45 0.46 1.37 1.30 1.25 1.31 150 1.57 1.90 1.65 1.71 2.11 2.36 2.21 2.23 175 22.40 23.50 22.9 22.93 26.32 25.38 25.91 25.87 200 55.89 56.70 56.30 56.29 65.84 67.21 66.81 66.62 225 55.81 55.10 55.09 55.33 67.52 67.19 67.92 67.54 250 51.39 47.89 53.95 51.08 58.12 63.29 60.22 60.54 275 46.99 47.19 45.64 46.61 56.21 59.99 60.19 58.80 300 42.29 41.49 37.54 40.44 49.87 51.58 52.81 51.42 325 38.12 35.23 36.45 36.6 44.52 48.15 43.25 45.31 350 32.99 31.59 34.69 33.09 42.91 40.92 39.86 41.23 375 29.98 31.01 32.80 31.26 41.12 37.92 38.82 39.29 400 30.04 29.14 28.34 29.17 36.21 34.06 33.82 34.70

t1, t2, t3= Droplet evaporation time = Average value of t1, t2 and t3

89

Table B.2 Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Aluminum Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 108.60 104.90 107.10 106.86 132.19 128.98 129.54 80 69.23 70.64 70.21 70.03 86.21 84.34 90.61 90 45.81 51.23 50.19 49.08 61.42 58.23 57.19 100 27.98 28.86 29.68 28.84 33.78 34.91 34.31 125 0.51 0.48 0.42 0.47 0.50 0.47 0.44 150 0.75 0.97 0.61 0.78 1.22 1.07 1.1 175 23.05 22.89 22.95 22.96 23.21 24.12 21.84 200 40.15 40.56 40.29 40.33 50.20 48.49 52.55 225 47.59 48.69 46.15 47.48 54.22 54.58 55.19 250 44.98 46.89 45.69 45.85 52.11 54.51 51.18 275 42.12 43.01 42.44 42.52 47.58 51.19 52.22 300 36.59 38.10 39.99 38.23 40.11 43.59 44.95 325 35.95 36.86 35.42 36.08 38.84 39.55 42.11 350 31.18 32.51 29.45 31.05 33.94 37.86 36.84 375 30.05 28.22 28.5 28.92 29.84 31.14 30.99 400 22.98 24.54 25.83 24.45 25.87 29.95 26.88

130.24 87.05 58.95 34.33 0.47 1.13 23.06 50.41 54.66 52.60 50.33 42.88 40.17 36.21 30.65 27.57

Table B.3 Evaporation time of Ethanol on Aluminum Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 7.37 7.83 6.92 7.37 9.39 9.83 8.83 80 4.31 4.19 4.83 4.44 5.73 5.23 4.82 90 1.65 1.70 1.43 1.59 1.92 1.53 2.21 100 0.34 0.37 0.35 0.35 0.56 0.47 0.43 125 0.84 0.85 0.82 0.84 1.37 1.65 1.51 150 2.52 2.48 2.51 2.50 2.49 2.72 2.61 175 11.65 12.47 12.15 12.09 12.78 12.31 12.56 200 24.33 25.00 25.19 24.84 28.12 29.02 28.93 225 22.39 22.52 22.19 22.37 26.45 26.86 25.23 250 22.3 18.55 19.45 20.10 22.12 23.54 23.82 275 15.65 17.10 18.12 16.96 21.01 20.86 21.54 300 13.99 15.11 14.25 14.45 17.88 15.59 18.11 325 13.15 14.21 13.24 13.53 16.11 15.21 14.55 350 13.21 9.41 12.55 11.72 14.20 12.55 13.12 375 9.55 10.52 10.11 10.06 12.31 10.80 10.50 400 7.88 8.11 9.95 8.65 9.56 10.12 8.95

9.35 5.26 1.89 0.49 1.51 2.61 12.55 28.69 26.18 23.16 21.14 17.19 15.29 13.29 11.20 9.54

90

Table B.4 Evaporation time of Methanol on Aluminum Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 60 4.82 4.31 4.90 4.68 6.39 5.98 6.21 70 2.74 2.52 2.83 2.70 4.96 4.83 4.63 80 1.66 1.54 1.31 1.50 1.85 1.97 1.73 90 1.27 1.19 0.99 1.15 1.52 1.32 1.79 100 0.25 0.40 0.31 0.32 0.25 0.25 0.38 125 1.12 1.32 1.04 1.16 1.62 1.84 1.32 150 3.21 2.98 3.45 3.21 3.56 3.86 3.99 175 10.99 10.96 10.31 10.75 13.86 14.15 14.40 200 20.12 20.43 20.84 20.46 21.02 22.12 21.54 225 21.58 21.83 21.02 21.48 25.56 25.74 24.86 250 18.54 18.12 17.89 18.18 22.23 22.56 21.86 275 15.19 16.21 16.11 15.84 19.26 20.39 18.51 300 12.81 12.54 13.856 13.07 16.59 15.23 17.46 325 10.54 11.32 12.5 11.45 13.21 15.64 14.44 350 8.51 8.84 9.86 9.07 12.54 13.66 14.11 375 9.12 7.64 8.45 8.40 11.54 10.68 11.25 400 6.86 7.20 7.66 7.24 10.86 8.65 9.95

6.19 4.81 1.85 1.54 0.29 1.59 3.80 14.14 21.56 25.39 22.22 19.39 16.43 14.43 13.44 11.16 9.82

Table B.5 Evaporation time of Distilled water on Brass Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 119.56 118.57 117.23 118.45 123.01 122.45 119.24 80 78.96 77.65 78.99 78.53 82.55 84.23 86.11 90 40.01 42.21 39.99 40.74 45.21 46.53 48.21 100 4.15 4.58 5.95 4.89 5.21 5.68 4.89 125 39.89 41.52 42.52 41.31 43.22 44.56 47.86 150 81.19 80.12 82.34 81.22 88.21 89.45 86.25 175 110.42 108.56 107.68 108.89 119.21 118.59 117.56 200 79.98 80.12 78.98 79.69 84.55 83.21 88.99 225 65.21 66.58 67.28 66.35 67.54 68.59 69.84 250 55.12 56.89 57.65 56.55 59.21 58.63 61.12 275 46.82 45.21 47.38 46.47 49.84 46.86 51.89 300 43.21 42.89 41.26 42.45 46.12 45.22 46.52 325 39.22 37.84 40.21 39.09 40.12 39.86 42.21 350 35.52 34.26 32.81 34.20 36.78 37.96 38.11 375 31.12 33.54 32.99 32.55 34.22 35.21 37.12
91

121.57 84.29 46.65 5.26 45.21 87.97 118.45 85.58 68.66 59.65 49.53 45.95 40.73 37.62 35.52

Table B.6 Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Brass Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 80 90 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 110.12 69.11 30.45 0.52 5.11 26.34 45.29 61.10 55.89 48.22 45.27 41.23 38.96 36.53 30.40 108.54 107.39 68.42 66.89 32.3 31.26 0.62 0.49 5.69 4.89 25.42 26.89 44.26 43.87 62.89 59.46 54.67 55.16 47.69 49.59 46.32 44.22 40.25 42.26 36.84 39.92 38.82 35.12 33.21 32.25 108.68 68.14 31.34 0.54 5.23 26.22 44.47 61.15 55.24 48.50 45.27 41.25 38.57 36.82 31.95 113.21 112.45 112.54 75.23 74.22 76.21 38.82 39.91 40.3 0.72 0.78 0.88 6.30 6.49 7.12 29.2 28.62 30.40 48.21 44.56 49.12 68.12 69.52 67.86 60.22 61.35 62.22 52.26 54.34 50.84 48.02 47.76 48.95 42.22 41.15 43.11 40.44 41.56 37.89 36.92 38.12 38.82 35.59 34.32 34.99

112.73 75.22 39.68 0.79 6.64 29.41 47.29 68.50 61.26 52.48 48.24 42.16 39.96 37.95 34.97

Table B.7 Evaporation time of Ethanol on Brass Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 6.21 6.39 5.89 6.16 8.04 8.32 8.49 80 3.09 3.19 3.42 3.23 4.31 4.51 3.92 90 1.21 1.79 2.21 1.74 2.64 2.54 2.78 100 0.51 0.52 0.49 0.51 0.79 0.82 0.93 125 14.16 12.29 13.21 13.22 17.52 16.86 18.12 150 43.19 45.23 41.15 43.19 46.93 47.12 45.98 175 34.22 36.95 35.21 35.46 38.12 37.23 39.22 200 31.24 32.15 30.99 31.46 34.54 33.22 35.15 225 26.59 24.43 27.11 26.04 29.33 30.4 31.12 250 22.88 24.56 23.12 23.52 26.88 25.43 27.66 275 22.62 21.13 23.65 22.47 24.21 23.56 24.82 300 18.78 19.96 20.26 19.67 21.30 22.34 20.86 325 18.82 16.52 17.45 17.60 19.98 19.53 20.86 350 15.82 16.93 14.12 15.62 19.42 18.52 17.12 375 11.96 13.56 12.45 12.66 15.42 18.46 16.86

8.28 4.25 2.65 0.85 17.50 46.68 38.19 34.31 30.28 26.66 24.20 21.50 20.12 18.35 16.91

92

Table B.8 Evaporation time of Methanol on Brass Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 60 5.64 5.24 5.42 5.43 7.11 7.19 6.60 70 4.51 4.29 4.11 4.30 5.75 5.53 5.21 80 1.24 1.39 1.58 1.40 1.92 2.01 1.83 90 1.18 0.92 0.93 1.01 1.83 1.45 1.51 100 0.40 0.42 0.49 0.44 0.67 0.79 0.59 125 12.71 11.98 13.42 12.70 14.83 13.21 15.23 150 39.18 40.22 38.45 39.28 44.23 45.89 44.85 175 30.99 31.24 32.86 31.70 38.21 39.12 37.54 200 27.89 25.32 26.22 26.48 31.12 32.23 33.42 225 24.86 22.13 25.86 24.28 29.98 30.44 28.45 250 22.83 21.45 24.44 22.91 28.01 27.05 26.98 275 19.86 18.92 21.45 20.08 23.45 24.52 22.12 300 18.72 19.24 17.92 18.63 20.54 21.23 19.82 325 15.69 14.23 16.32 15.41 18.82 17.64 16.98 350 11.63 12.87 13.14 12.55 16.62 15.42 14.23 375 9.50 10.55 11.10 10.38 11.99 12.45 13.86

6.97 5.50 1.92 1.60 0.68 14.42 44.99 38.29 32.26 29.62 27.35 23.36 20.53 17.81 15.42 12.77

Table B.9 Evaporation time of Distilled water on Copper Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 98.23 96.54 98.99 97.92 110.23 108.74 106.54 80 78.25 80.23 75.44 77.97 84.56 86.23 87.23 90 54.12 56.22 59.42 56.59 60.22 62.45 63.11 100 32.13 31.12 34.12 32.46 49.23 48.15 50.23 125 40.32 39.73 41.51 40.52 55.12 56.31 54.23 150 46.95 48.33 49.13 48.14 63.22 66.18 64.37 175 61.11 63.43 65.43 63.32 70.13 69.35 68.13 200 70.13 70.79 71.93 70.95 79.87 83.12 80.90 225 59.10 61.15 58.24 59.50 65.43 67.84 70.26 250 50.92 49.85 51.41 50.73 60.35 59.87 58.85 275 47.34 45.13 44.21 45.56 57.36 54.33 55.83 300 40.13 41.13 42.27 41.18 50.41 49.81 47.90 325 38.13 37.35 36.56 37.35 43.13 42.22 40.95 350 33.14 34.91 35.16 34.40 35.60 37.83 36.92 375 28.72 29.10 27.63 28.48 30.13 31.95 29.24

108.50 86.01 61.93 49.20 55.22 64.59 69.20 81.29 67.84 59.69 55.84 49.37 42.10 36.78 30.44

93

Table B.10 Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Copper Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 90.12 89.85 86.99 88.99 105.66 106.21 104.44 80 70.12 69.89 71.12 70.38 80.22 81.11 81.19 90 52.12 49.53 50.11 50.59 54.23 56.81 59.12 100 35.63 34.93 33.17 34.58 38.36 40.16 39.9 125 8.42 9.33 10.16 9.30 9.84 11.16 13.18 150 14.16 15.99 13.23 14.46 19.16 20.11 21.5 175 50.13 52.32 51.31 51.25 55.13 57.95 58.14 200 59.73 58.82 60.18 59.58 63.13 64.93 65.81 225 51.32 54.23 52.31 52.62 59.18 57.83 56.97 250 45.16 46.33 44.19 45.23 52.19 52.96 51.12 275 43.59 42.11 42.05 42.58 51.24 50.86 51.65 300 39.54 40.21 39.86 39.87 49.11 48.11 47.33 325 34.31 33.99 36.11 34.80 41.26 43.25 40.21 350 35.13 34.36 32.23 33.91 38.95 37.26 35.10 375 30.12 29.29 28.29 29.23 30.16 31.27 32.94

105.44 80.84 56.72 39.47 11.39 20.26 57.07 64.62 57.99 52.09 51.25 48.18 41.57 37.10 31.46

Table B.11 Evaporation time of Ethanol on Copper Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 4.51 4.19 3.99 4.23 4.74 4.93 5.11 80 4.04 3.70 3.65 3.80 4.25 4.42 4.11 90 1.73 1.42 1.39 1.51 2.31 2.59 2.05 100 1.05 0.89 0.78 0.91 1.31 1.49 1.79 125 5.11 4.95 6.36 5.47 6.12 5.95 6.35 150 14.95 15.16 13.24 14.45 17.23 19.36 18.43 175 36.93 34.82 35.18 35.64 39.32 40.53 41.95 200 34.11 33.28 31.13 32.84 37.38 36.43 35.93 225 30.17 32.16 29.32 30.55 33.26 31.19 32.92 250 26.33 24.56 25.93 25.61 28.33 27.56 26.93 275 23.14 22.23 20.94 22.10 25.44 23.24 22.11 300 19.86 17.93 18.34 18.71 20.26 21.96 19.98 325 17.3 16.82 15.91 16.68 17.31 18.46 16.13 350 13.21 13.59 14.99 13.93 14.17 15.93 16.12 375 10.13 11.13 12.92 11.39 13.16 12.16 11.49

4.93 4.26 2.32 1.53 6.14 18.34 40.60 36.58 32.46 27.61 23.60 20.73 17.30 15.41 12.27

94

Table B.12 Evaporation time of Methanol on Copper Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 60 70 80 90 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 5.47 4.91 1.61 0.41 0.54 1.01 8.45 31.13 29.85 26.26 24.31 20.14 18.16 16.46 13.18 10.16 4.83 3.98 1.79 0.31 0.47 1.12 8.93 33.56 28.76 27.36 23.23 19.27 17.26 15.31 12.96 9.87 5.29 4.01 1.93 0.48 0.63 0.95 7.96 34.92 29.31 24.35 21.15 19.97 17.99 14.36 12.32 11.34 5.19 4.30 1.78 0.40 0.55 1.03 8.45 33.20 29.31 25.99 22.90 19.79 17.80 15.38 12.82 10.46 8.35 5.11 2.32 0.62 0.74 1.32 9.55 35.78 30.15 27.12 24.39 21.23 19.39 17.52 14.34 11.82 7.91 5.49 2.14 0.71 0.89 1.49 10.11 39.24 31.26 28.24 23.26 20.23 18.98 16.81 14.54 10.92 7.61 4.89 2.93 0.98 0.63 1.53 11.21 40.21 32.46 25.93 25.53 23.21 17.93 18.33 15.1 12.25 7.96 5.16 2.46 0.77 0.75 1.45 10.29 38.41 31.29 27.10 24.39 21.56 18.77 17.55 14.66 11.66

Table B.13 Evaporation time of Distilled water on Mild Steel Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 80 90 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 70.12 50.22 20.12 2.23 1.15 4.14 8.15 11.13 14.35 49.89 44.23 39.24 34.17 29.33 22.15 69.86 54.11 23.46 2.19 1.11 4.35 8.85 11.63 15.15 49.32 45.15 40.23 33.96 29.63 22.65 68.98 53.21 22.42 2.35 1.32 4.49 7.92 10.56 14.35 50.01 44.21 42.21 34.52 29.12 21.38 69.65 52.51 22.00 2.26 1.19 4.33 8.31 11.11 14.62 49.74 44.53 40.56 34.22 29.36 22.06 74.53 54.53 26.98 4.88 2.21 5.15 9.35 13.27 17.44 55.17 49.18 41.25 36.26 30.16 25.14 76.55 55.61 25.45 4.79 2.31 5.32 9.23 13.22 17.21 55.39 50.23 41.33 36.56 30.58 26.36 73.82 58.79 26.01 4.99 2.49 5.31 9.56 13.59 17.56 56.32 50.62 41.93 35.91 31.23 25.39 74.97 56.31 26.15 4.89 2.34 5.26 9.38 13.36 17.40 55.63 50.01 41.50 36.24 30.65 25.63

95

Table B.14 Evaporation time of NaCl Solution on Mild Steel Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 63.11 64.23 62.1 63.15 65.42 66.46 66.11 80 41.23 42.22 40.19 41.21 49.12 48.25 47.12 90 16.12 14.99 15.21 15.44 22.99 23.56 23.01 100 1.66 1.69 1.81 1.72 3.88 3.79 3.98 125 0.37 0.32 0.41 0.37 0.59 0.62 0.55 150 0.79 0.89 0.65 0.78 0.99 1.25 1.05 175 1.81 1.32 1.66 1.60 2.53 2.45 2.96 200 8.52 7.95 7.88 8.12 10.11 9.86 9.72 225 12.11 13.01 12.56 12.56 13.98 13.52 14.02 250 19.25 19.23 19.54 19.34 22.21 22.58 22.69 275 40.1 40.55 41.23 40.63 45.32 45.62 45.98 300 37.83 37.62 37.12 37.52 39.27 39.37 39.03 325 32.54 32.56 32.33 32.48 36.34 36.54 36.51 350 27.15 27.89 27.48 27.51 29.95 29.33 29.3

65.99 48.16 23.19 3.88 0.59 1.10 2.65 9.90 13.84 22.49 45.64 39.22 36.46 29.53

Table B.15 Evaporation time of Ethanol on Mild Steel Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 70 2.56 2.46 2.72 2.58 3.77 3.95 3.99 80 1.45 1.61 1.31 1.46 2.36 2.29 2.59 90 0.38 0.42 0.32 0.37 0.46 0.48 0.38 100 0.37 0.34 0.31 0.34 0.41 0.45 0.49 125 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.55 0.62 0.67 150 18.47 18.52 18.69 18.56 19.9 19.36 19.81 175 26.12 25.86 26.02 26.00 29.86 30.12 29.54 200 23.54 24.11 22.86 23.50 24.12 23.89 24.51 225 18.19 18.69 18.42 18.43 18.93 18.51 17.65 250 15.76 15.45 15.78 15.66 17.37 17.52 16.89 275 13.73 13.58 13.69 13.66 15.25 15.69 15.98 300 11.58 11.23 11.53 11.45 12.43 12.89 11.99 325 10.12 10.23 10.69 10.35 11.99 11.56 11.59 350 9.73 9.36 9.56 9.55 10.25 10.21 10.39

3.90 2.41 0.44 0.45 0.61 19.69 29.84 24.17 18.36 17.26 15.64 12.44 11.71 10.28

96

Table B.16 Evaporation time of Methanol on Mild Steel Surface Temperature(C) Small diameter Large diameter t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 60 2.85 2.77 2.62 2.75 4.91 5.02 7.61 70 1.16 1.10 1.29 1.18 2.52 2.43 4.89 80 0.87 0.81 0.78 0.82 1.09 1.32 2.93 90 0.27 0.21 0.32 0.27 0.31 0.49 0.98 100 0.33 0.31 0.28 0.31 0.37 0.39 0.63 125 2.52 2.62 2.39 2.51 2.20 2.12 1.75 150 13.21 12.86 12.54 12.87 14.12 14.86 14.34 175 20.12 19.87 20.45 20.15 20.98 21.01 21.14 200 22.98 22.86 23.01 22.95 23.56 23.84 23.42 225 17.13 17.32 17.83 17.43 16.15 16.01 17.21 250 13.25 13.78 13.23 13.42 15.58 15.39 15.01 275 11.13 11.24 11.85 11.41 13.27 13.87 12.87 300 9.83 9.37 9.85 9.68 10.19 10.25 10.20 325 8.12 8.31 8.29 8.24 9.63 9.99 9.12 350 7.67 7.63 8.31 7.87 8.11 8.01 8.36

5.85 3.28 1.78 0.59 0.46 2.02 14.44 21.04 23.61 16.46 15.33 13.34 10.21 9.58 8.16

97

APPENDIX SUMMARY OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULT

C.1 Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental Result for small diameter liquid droplet Leidenfrost time(sec) Liquids Al Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol 56.29 47.48 21.48 24.84 Experimental Brass 108.89 61.15 39.28 43.19 Cu 70.95 59.58 33.20 35.64 MS 49.74 40.63 22.95 26.00

Leidenfrost time(sec) Liquids Al Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol 67.95 24.42 24.22 Theoretical (from correlation) Brass 96.99 45.08 39.64
98

Cu 83.50 40.07 34.70

MS 44.45 29.42 32.22

C.2 Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental Result for large diameter liquid droplet

Leidenfrost time(sec) Liquids Al Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol 67.54 54.66 25.39 28.69 Experimental Brass 118.45 68.50 44.99 46.68 Cu 81.29 64.62 38.41 40.60 MS 55.63 45.64 23.61 29.84

Leidenfrost time(sec) Liquids Al Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol 72.99 26.86 26.05 Theoretical (from correlation) Brass 94.43 43.28 37.99 Cu 93.10 44.07 38.08 MS 43.61 25.26 25.47

99

C.3 Comparison of Leidenfrost point temperature for different liquid droplets (small and large diameter)

Leidenfrost temperature(C) Liquids Al Water NaCl solution Methanol Ethanol 200 225 225 200 Experimental Brass 175 200 150 150 Cu 200 200 175 175 MS 250 275 200 175

100

APPENDIX PROGRAM CODE

C.1 Estimation of theoretical time clear all; close all; clc %Constants sigma=5.669e-8; g=9.81; pi=3.1416; Ru=8.3145; %Temperature and pressure Tp_dummy=(150+273.15); %Metal surface temperature for i=19 Tp(i)=Tp_dummy+25;%Tp(1)=125 deg centigrade,....Tp(12)=400 deg centigrade. Tp_dummy=Tp(i); end

for i=19 %Rest temperature and pressure Ts=(78.3+273.15); %Liquid saturation temperature Tv=(Tp(i)+Ts)/2; %Average vapor temperature Ps=101.3e3; %Partial pressure of diffusing vapor M=46e-3; %Molecular weight of water %Radius ro=1.23e-3; rp=.0889;

%Initial droplet radius %Metal surface radius

%Area Ap=pi*rp^2;%Metal surface area Alb=pi*ro^2;%Flat liquid droplet bottom surface area Ap_ring=pi*(rp^2-ro^2);%Ring shaped metal surface area Als=2.67*pi*ro*ro;%Cylindrical liquid droplet side surface area %Volume
101

Vo=(4*pi*ro^3)/3; %Emissivity ep=.26; %Metal surface emissivity (of copper) el=0.07; %Properties at Ts (of water) rhol=757; kv_sat=19.9e-3; rhov_sat=1.435; hg=963e3; cpv_sat=1.83e3; muv_sat=10.4e-6; D=.119e-4; %Properties at Tv (of water) kv=kv_sat*(Tv/2); rhov=rhov_sat*(2/Tv); cpv=cpv_sat*(Tv/2); muv=muv_sat*(Tv/2);

%Vapor layer thickness delta=1e-3; %let %Iteration for delta while 1 %Shape factor from metal surface to flat bottom of liquid droplet Fbpl=Fb(ro,rp,delta); %Shape factor from metal surface to cylindrical side surface of liquid droplet Fspl=Fs(ro,rp,delta); Qcbflux(i)=kv*((Tp(i)-Ts)/delta);%Conduction heat flux from metal surface to flat bottom of liquid droplet Qrbflux(i)=(sigma*(Tp(i)^4-Ts^4))/(((1-ep)/ep)*(Alb/Ap)+Alb/(Ap*Fbpl)+(1el)/el);%Raidation heat flux from metal surface to flat bottom of liquid droplet Qbflux(i)=Qcbflux(i)+Qrbflux(i);%Total heat flux at the flat bottom of liquid droplet v(i)=(Qbflux(i))/(rhov*(hg+.5*cpv*(Tp(i)-Ts)));%Vertical velocity at flat bottom of liquid droplet delta_new=((9*muv*v(i)*ro)/(8*rhol*g))^(1/3); if abs(delta_new-delta)<1e-6 delta=delta_new; break; end delta=delta_new;

102

end delta_matrix(i)=delta; Qcsflux=(kv*(Tp(i)-Ts))/delta;%(May be discarded)Conduction heat flux from metal surface to cylindrical side of liquid droplet Qrsflux(i)=(sigma*(Tp(i)^4-Ts^4))/(((1-ep)/ep)*(Als/Ap_ring)+Als/(Ap_ring*Fspl)+(1el)/el);%Radiation heat flux from metal surface to cylindrical side of liquid droplet mpr_s(i)=(sqrt(2)*D*Als*Ps*M)/(Ru*Ts*ro);%Total mass flow rate from cylindrical droplet side mpr_b(i)=(Qbflux(i)*Alb+Qsflux(i)*Als-mpr_s(i)*hg)/(hg+.5*cpv*(Tp(i)-Ts));%Total mass flow rate from flat droplet bottom mpr(i)=mpr_b(i)+mpr_s(i);%Total mass flow rate from droplet t(i)=(rhol*Vo)/mpr(i); %Total vaporization time end disp('Theoritical result for distilled water on copper surface'); final_value_table=[t']; disp(' Tp t'); disp(final_value_table); plot((Tp-273.15),t); %Tp has taken in degree by -273.15 xlabel('Temperature of metal surface(Degree centigrade)'); ylabel('Vaporization time, t');

C.2 Engineering Correlation of experimental data

% Code for correlation constants clear all; close all; clc y=[0.0209,0.0213,0.0231,0.0253,]; %observed value x1=[0.7634,0.8489,0.9251,0.9940,]; %observed value,, x2=1e-4.*[0.0180,0.0293,0.0448,0.0654,]; %observed value p=(sum(x1.*x1)); q=(sum(x1.*x2)); r=(sum(x2.*x2)); A=[p q;q r]; C=[sum(x1.*y);sum(x2.*y)]; B=inv(A)*C;

%constants
103

for i=1length(y); Y(i)=B(1)*x1(i)+B(2)*x2(i); end

% Code for correlation graph y1=y(1,18);y2=y(1,915);y3=y(1,1623); Y1=Y(1,18);Y2=Y(1,915);Y3=Y(1,1623); sumY=sum(Y); sumy=sum(y); m=sumY/sumy; x11=1length(Y); x11=x11*max(y)/length(Y); y11=x11*m; y12=x11*1; figure (2); axis tight plot(y1,Y1,'ro') hold all plot(y2,Y2,'bs') hold all plot(y3,Y3,'mv') hold all plot(x11,y12,'g') xlabel('Obseved value'); ylabel('Calculated value'); legend('water','methanol','ethanol','equation')

% Code for plotting heat flux graph clear all; close all; clc r=1.23e-3; v=(4*pi*r^3)/3; Ta=[70,80,90,100,125,150,175,200,225,250,275,300,325,350,375]; Tb=[70,80,90,100,125,150,175,200,225,250,275,300,325,350,375]; Tc=[70,80,90,100,125,150,175,200,225,250,275,300,325,350,375]; Ts=[70,80,90,100,125,150,175,200,225,250,275,300,325,350,375]; ta=[72.46333,68.55667,44.25667,17.16667,]; %Observed time
104

tb=[118.4533,78.53333,40.73667,4.893333,]; %Observed time tc=[97.92,77.97333,56.58667,32.45667,]; %Observed time ts=[69.65333,52.51333,22,2.256667,]; %Observed time pl=1000; hg=2256.7e3; disp('HEAT FLUX OF WATER ON ALUMINUM') qa=(4.921332e-3*pl*hg)./ta; disp(qa) plot(Ta,qa,'ko') hold all; xlabel('surface Temperature(degree C)'); ylabel('heat flux(Watt per meter square)'); disp('HEAT FLUX OF WATER BRASS') qb=(4.921332e-3*pl*hg)./tb; disp(qb) plot(Tb,qb,'k*') hold all; xlabel('surface Temperature(degree C)'); ylabel('heat flux(Watt per meter square)'); disp('HEAT FLUX OF WATER ON COPPER') qc=(4.921332e-3*pl*hg)./tc; disp(qc) plot(Tc,qc,'kv') hold all; xlabel('surface Temperature(degree C)'); ylabel('heat flux(Watt per meter square)'); disp('HEAT FLUX OF WATER ON MILD STEEL') qs=(4.921332e-3*pl*hg)./ts; disp(qs) plot(Ts,qs,'k+') hold all; xlabel('surface Temperature(degree C)'); ylabel('heat flux(Watt per meter square)'); legend('Heat flux on AL','Heat flux on BR','Heat flux on Cu','Heat flux on MS'); plot(Ta,qa,'k',Tb,qb,'k',Tc,qc,'k',Ts,qs,'k')

105

%Code for comparison of theoretical (correlated) and experimental graph clear all; close all; clc r=1.23e-3; ea=.05;eb=.09;ec=.045;es=.1; pl=958.3 ; pv=.597; kv=25e-3; Ts=100; u=12.55e-6; s=5.669e-8; h=2256.7e3; cp=2.03e3; Tp=[150,175,200,225,250,275,300,325,350,375,400]; dT=Tp-Ts; h1=h+0.5*cp.*dT; disp('water-al') x1a=sqrt((kv*g*pv*(pl-pv).*dT.*r)./(u*h1)); x2a=((s*ea*(Tp.^4-Ts^4))./h1); xa=x1a.*0.0197+x2a.*1280.5; ta=(pl.*r)./xa; disp('correlated value of ta ') disp(ta) disp('water-br') x1b=sqrt((kv*g*pv*(pl-pv).*dT.*r)./(u*h1)); x2b=((s*eb*(Tp.^4-Ts^4))./h1); xb=x1b.*0.0169+x2b.*501.9980; tb=(pl.*r)./xb; disp('correlated value of tb ') disp(tb) disp('water-cu') x1c=sqrt((kv*g*pv*(pl-pv).*dT.*r)./(u*h1)); x2c=((s*ec*(Tp.^4-Ts^4))./h1); xc=x1c.*0.0160+x2c.*1171.9; tc=(pl.*r)./xc; disp('correlated value of tc') disp(tc) disp('water-st') x1s=sqrt((kv*g*pv*(pl-pv).*dT.*r)./(u*h1)); x2s=((s*es*(Tp.^4-Ts^4))./h1);
106

xs=x1s.*0.0143+x2s.*1483.4; ts=(pl.*r)./xs; disp('correlated value of ts') disp(ts)

107