Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

Available online at www.sciencedirect.


Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579

Experimental study of non-boiling heat transfer

from a horizontal surface by water sprays
Nitin Karwa *, Sunil R. Kale, P.M.V. Subbarao
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, New Delhi 110 016, India

Received 18 February 2007; received in revised form 21 June 2007; accepted 22 June 2007


The results of an experimental study on non-boiling heat transfer from a horizontal surface by a pressure atomized water spray are
presented here. A vertical circular copper cylinder was electrically heated from below; its top surface was spray cooled and sides were
insulated. The target surface diameter was 20 mm. The spray was produced from a nozzle supplied with distilled water from a pump.
The heat ux to the surface was 3585 W/cm2 and the surface temperature was maintained below 95 C. The water mass ux varied from
2.6 to 9.9 kg/m2 s, which gives spray Reynolds number of 65285 based on the target surface diameter. Under steady state conditions, the
heat transfer coecient was between 9000 and 24,000 W/m2 K; increasing with the increase in the mass ux. The results of the study have
been utilized to develop an empirical correlation, which relates the average Nusselt number to the spray Reynolds number. The exper-
iments show that even for non-boiling conditions with a spray, heat transfer coecients are signicantly larger than for forced
2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Spray; Non-boiling regime; Heat transfer; Mass ux; Water; Nozzle

1. Introduction Liquidvapor phase change and liquid cooling by

impinging jets or sprays are attractive cooling options for
Thermal control is a key issue in the design of electronic removing high heat uxes because of the higher heat trans-
equipment because the reliability of the electronic compo- fer coecients associated with them. Spray and jet cooling
nents is highly dependent on their operating temperature. techniques are considered as competing options for this
At present their cooling is accomplished by means of heat application. The reliability of microelectronic devices
sinks attached to them and by blowing air with fans. How- demands the near elimination of all spatial temperature
ever, higher transistor integration densities and faster elec- variations [2]. Unlike jets, sprays provide better tempera-
tronic chips have increased the chip level heat uxes that ture uniformity across the heat-dissipating surface [3].
may reach the range of 50100 W/cm2 in near future [1]. Based on experiments using air-assisted full-cone water
The conventional methods are not adequate to remove sprays, Oliphant et al. [4] noted that spray cooling provides
such large heat uxes, and need to be replaced or supple- the same heat transfer rates as a jet at a substantially lower
mented by other high performance and compact cooling mass ux.
technologies. Besides electronics, spray cooling of surfaces Most of the earlier studies on spray cooling have been
also occurs in several phenomenon, e.g. hot rolling, heat carried out in the nucleate, transition and lm-boiling
treatment, and cement manufacturing. regimes to understand boiling heat transfer and critical
heat ux for full-cone sprays using single nozzle [410] or
multiple nozzles [11,12]. The temperatures encountered in
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 934 241 7170. these applications are quite elevated and the cooling occurs
E-mail address: (N. Karwa). with phase change. Since a large amount of latent heat is

0894-1777/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
572 N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579


d32 Sauter mean diameter (lm) Greek symbols

do nozzle orice diameter (lm) Dp pressure drop across nozzle (Pa)
D target surface diameter (m) DT temperature dierence (C)
G mass ux (kg/m2 s) Dz axial step size (m)
h heat transfer coecient (W/m2 K) l dynamic viscosity (Pa s)
H nozzle-surface spacing (mm) q density (kg/m3)
k thermal conductivity (W/mK)
p r surface tension (N/m)
L length scale for NuL [= (pD2/4)] (m)
Nu Nusselt number (= hD/k) Subscripts
NuL Nusselt number (= hL/k) g gas
q00 heat ux (W/cm2) f uid
Re spray Reynolds number (= GD/l) s surface
T temperature (C)
v theoretical mean droplet velocity (m/s)
We Weber number (= qv2d32/r)
z axial coordinate (m)

associated with the phase change, such sprays are capable coecient on the product of mass ux and mean droplet
of removing high heat uxes from a surface [8]. velocity. However, they report a negligible eect of droplet
Sprays have also been used [4,8,9,1117] for thermal diameter on the heat transfer coecient. Fabbri et al. [20]
management at relatively lower surface temperatures where compared the single-phase heat transfer rates for sprays
thin lm nucleate boiling and single-phase convective heat from HAGO nozzles, jet arrays, and array of microjets at
transfer are dominant heat transfer modes. In the lower two water ow rates (2.87 and 4.63 kg/m2 s). They observed
superheat region, the heat transfer is mainly by convection that heat transfer rates for sprays were better than any jet
and evaporation from the surface of the liquid lm though conguration at ow rate of 2.87 kg/m2 s, while at the ow
slight nucleate boiling may exist. rate of 4.63 kg/m2 s jet arrays performed as well as the
For the most part, electronic components must operate at spray. However, highly populated microjets were seen to
temperatures below 80 C [15]. For surface temperature be better than the jet arrays and sprays at higher ow rates.
below 100 C, ooded water-cooling [4,8,9,11] and organic They also comment that these results are limited to HAGO
uids with saturation temperature well below 100 C nozzles which produce ne droplets (size <44 lm), and it
[7,10,12,15,1719] have been used. Proper selection of an may be possible that there may exist other nozzle designs
organic uid can give very high heat transfer coecients cor- that may perform better at higher ow rates.
responding to CHF even at surface temperatures of the order From the above, it is seen that the majority of studies on
of 80 C or lower. However, organic uids require a closed spray impingement heat transfer are in boiling regimes and
loop hermetically sealed system, which becomes complex their results are useful for the applications involving high
and costly. Hence, water is a coolant of choice not only temperature and high heat ux conditions. Only a limited
due to the simplicity of the system but also due to its superior number of studies on water spray impingement heat trans-
thermophysical properties, abundance, and low cost [3]. fer in non-boiling regimes have been carried out and most of
For generation of sprays both hydraulic [9,11,20] and them used air-assisted sprays where the spray consists of
pneumatic nozzles [4,8,12,13,19] have been used. Atomiza- water droplets and the atomizing air/gas ow as well, both
tion is achieved with compressed air or gas in the latter that of which participate in heat and mass transfer. Studies in the
makes it complex and costly [21] and by pressurized liquid non-boiling regime using hydraulic nozzles with water have
in the former. been carried out either at a very high mass ux range of
Isachenko et al. [11] performed an experimental study in 880 kg/m2 s [9] or at two ow rates only for a particular
the non-boiling regime at a vertical plate using an array of nozzle design [20]. Hence, the present experimental investi-
water pressure nozzles with maximum heat ux of 14 W/ gation focussed on water spray cooling of a surface main-
cm2. They concluded that heat transfer is governed by tained below the saturation temperature of water at
two factors, viz., transport of heat by the freely owing tur- atmospheric pressure with mass ux in the intermediate
bulent lm of water and the disturbing eect of the impact- range of 210 kg/m2 s. The work included design and devel-
ing droplets. Ciofalo et al. [9] performed experiments using opment of an experimental setup followed by experimenta-
water sprays in the mass ux range of 880 kg/m2 s and tion. The results of the study have been presented as
showed strong dependence of single-phase heat transfer correlations.
N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579 573

2. Spray parameters 2Dp
v 4
At low liquid mass ux, and for low degrees of super-
heat or surface temperatures slightly below the saturation Vapors from a heated surface tend to decelerate the drop-
temperature, the lm evaporation regime is characterized lets, and the above relationship does not take this into ac-
by long evaporation time. Heat is transferred from the sur- count. However, the deceleration is signicant only when
face through the liquid lm and dissipated by evaporation boiling takes place because then a large amount of liquid
at liquidvapor interface and by sensible heating of the is evaporated and also when the nozzle-to-surface spacing
uid. An increase in the liquid ow results in an increase is large.
in the convective heat transfer to the liquid and the evapo- Based on the droplet diameter and velocity, a dimen-
rative heat transfer decreases due to the formation of a sionless number known as Weber number is dened [20]
thicker lm [19]. The spray droplets impinging on the as
liquid lm produce turbulence that enhances convective qv2 d 32
heat transfer, mixing and evaporation. In general, the heat We 5
transfer characteristics of sprays are strong functions of the
type of coolant and its subcooling, mass ux and spray The Weber number is a measure of the relative strengths of
characteristics. the competing eects of droplets kinetic energy and their
Sprays are characterized by the droplet diameter, veloc- surface energy.
ity and the spray pattern. The Sauter mean diameter d32 of
the droplets in the spray is dened as the diameter of the 3. Experimental set-up
drop with a volume-to-surface area ratio that equals the
volume-to-surface area ratio of the entire spray [7] A schematic of the experimental set-up is shown in
P 3 Fig. 1. The major components of the set-up include a hea-
ni d
d 32 P i2 1 ter-target assembly and spray generation system. A recip-
ni d i rocating plunger pump supplies high-pressure water to
where ni represents the number of drops in the size class i the nozzle. A 5 lm water lter is employed on the pump
and di is the middle diameter of this class. suction to maintain a clean water supply to the nozzle.
Mudawar and Estes [7] measured drop diameters for full On the delivery side, a pneumatic pulsation damper of
cone spray nozzles using FC-72 and water with the help of a about 800 cm3 in volume, a pressure relief valve, a pressure
phase-Doppler particle analyzer (PDPA). They reduced the gauge, a ow control valve and the nozzle are placed in
full cone spray data according to the following equation: that order. The pulsation damper ensured a uniform water
" # supply to the nozzle. The pressure relief valve was adjusted
3=2 0:259 to the required pressure. The water ow rate has been var-
d 32 q1=2
g Dpd o
3:07 2 ied in the range of 50190 ml/min by changing the nozzle
do r1=2 lf
inlet pressure in the range of 1.4415 kg/cm2. This works
with a mean absolute error of 12.4%. In Eq. (2), do is the out to a mass ux range of 2.649.94 kg/m2 s for the
diameter of the nozzle orice and Dp is pressure drop 20 mm diameter target surface. The spray chamber was
across the nozzle. maintained at the atmospheric pressure throughout the
The mean droplet velocity v impacting the surface is study. Water with very little hardness and impurity is
given by the following equation of Ghodbane and Holman supplied from a 300 l PVC tank. The water ow rate was
[15] developed from simple energy balance considerations measured by collecting water several times over a period
around the nozzle of 14 min to minimize the uncertainty in the measure-
ment, which was estimated to be less than 2.2%. The
2Dp 12r heater-target assembly is mounted on an adjustable stand
v v21  3 for accurate positioning. The top surface of the block
q d pq
was kept horizontal to ensure that water drains equally
where v1 is mean velocity of water entering the nozzle and in all radial directions and a uniform uid lm is formed
dp is termed as mass median droplet diameter [15]. Only the on the surface.
second term on the right side of Eq. (3) is signicant; omis- Fig. 2 shows details of the heater-target assembly. It con-
sion of the other two terms introduces a negligible error sists of a cylindrical copper block whose upper part is 20 mm
[22]. The above equation does not take account of the inev- in diameter and 100 mm long. A 60 taper in the middle of
itable dissipation of mechanical energy due to viscous ef- the block provides a gradual change from the upper part
fects. Ciofalo et al. [9] found from measured velocity data to the lower one. The lower part of the block is made larger
that the computed mean velocities are somewhat lower in diameter to accommodate four cartridge type heaters
than the theoretical eux velocity (the velocity defect in- each of 330 W, 160 mm long, and 16 mm in diameter. The
creases with increasing pressure and varies with nozzle heaters are connected in parallel and capable of supplying
type) more than 1000 W to the top surface of the upper part of
574 N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579

Heater target
assembly Pressure relief valve
Pressure gauge
Nozzle Pulsation damper


enclosure Stop valve

5 m filter
Drain Flow control Discharge non-
valve return valve

Copper piping

Plunger pump
Motor and
Drain tank gear box
Suction non-return

Fig. 1. Experimental set-up.

Fig. 2. Heater-target assembly.

the block which is the target. Power to the heaters is via a To determine temperature variation along the axis of the
servo voltage stabilizer of 2 kVA rating with a voltage out- upper part of the copper block, three calibrated K-type
put of 230 V 1% followed by a variac to adjust the power thermocouples are inserted in 1 mm diameter holes as
output. A multimeter was used for measuring the voltage shown in detail A of Fig. 2. The measured values of these
and an ammeter of 010 A with an accuracy of 0.5% of full temperatures were utilized to estimate average surface heat
scale was used for current measurement. The target surface ux and temperature of the target surface as suggested by
is machined smooth and is then polished using ne grade various researchers [13,17,23,24]. The output of the ther-
emery paper. mocouples was fed to a 6-channel temperature indicator
N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579 575

(0200 C) of omega make with an accuracy of 0.1% of

full scale.
The heater-target assembly is enclosed in an 18-gage gal-
vanized iron sheet enclosure of 280 mm diameter. A 21 mm
diameter hole in the center of the top of the enclosure
accommodates the target surface of the block. The entire
copper block is insulated, except the crown, by glass wool
packed between the heater-target assembly and enclosure.
This ensures one-dimensional heat ow through the copper
block. The space between the heated target surface and the
iron enclosure was sealed using Araldite (a commercial
sealant) followed by M-seal to prevent water leakage along
the copper block. The top surface of the iron enclosure was
given a 4 radially outward slope to allow the water to ow
to the periphery of the surface where an arrangement for its
collection has been made. A simple heat transfer analysis
indicated that the heat loss from the copper block in the
radial direction is less than 1% of the supplied heat ux.
Thus, the assumption of one-dimensional heat ow in the Fig. 3. Spray generated by Danfoss #2 nozzle at 15 bar.
upper part of the copper block is valid.
Mudawar and Estes [7] studied the eect of nozzle-to- study are given in Table 1. A close inspection, using photo
surface distance on CHF with FC72 and FC87 full-cone imaging, was carried out for each nozzle used in the present
sprays. They found that the maximum CHF value is study to select correct operating pressure to obtain full-
obtained when the spray impact area just inscribes the cone sprays. Fig. 3 depicts the appearance of a typical
heated surface. Since the spray cone angle varies with nozzle spray. The calculated droplet size and droplet velocity var-
type and operating pressure, the nozzle-target spacing H ies with the pressure of the uid as depicted in Table 1. The
was adjusted between 15 and 29 mm so that whole of the Sauter mean diameter was estimated using Eq. (2), the cor-
spray falls on the heated target surface. It was also ensured relation of Estes and Mudawar [6], and was found to vary
that the nozzle axis was always normal to the surface. between 76 and 149 lm. Using Eq. (4), the theoretical
Pressure swirl nozzles of dierent designs and ratings droplet velocity was estimated to vary in the range of
were tried at various pressures to select nozzles that give 16.854.4 m/s. Droplet size and velocity cannot be varied
full cone sprays. In the lower ow rate range, it was found independently because both are functions of pressure [15].
that such nozzles exclusively designed for water were not Experimental determination of the droplet size distribution
available, hence, oil burner nozzles (manufactured by Dan- is a complex task, involving either the direct examination
foss and Monarch) have been used to generate a spray at of photographic/video recordings of the spray or optical
ow rates of 2.64.7 kg/m2 s. Since these nozzles generate techniques based on laser scattering and laser interferome-
full-cone sprays at relatively higher pressures, they produce try. As these facilities were not available, their direct mea-
high velocity ne droplets. For higher ow rates, full-cone, surements could not be performed.
swirl-spray pressure nozzle (Unijet Series TG0.3 of Spray-
ing Systems Inc.) was used. The pressure nozzle was oper- 4. Experimental procedure
ated at lower pressures compared to oil burner nozzles to
generate ow rates from 6.2 to 9.9 kg/m2 s. Some of the The water was allowed to ow through the piping with-
operating parameters of the nozzles used in the present out the nozzle for some time before each experiment to

Table 1
Operating parameters
Nozzle Operating pressure Mass ux, G Orice diameter, Sauter mean Theoretical mean droplet Nozzle-to-surface
number (kg/cm2) (kg/m2 s) do (lm) diameter, d32 (lm) velocity, v (m/s) spacing, H (mm)
Danfoss #1 10 2.64 400 81.4 44.4 18
Danfoss #2 15 3.5 430 76.1 54.4 18
Monarch #1 7 4.49 470 113.9 37.1 15
Monarch #1 7.5 4.68 470 111.9 38.4 15
Unijet #1 1.44 6.21 510 149.2 16.8 29
Unijet #1 2 7.32 510 137.1 19.9 20
Unijet #1 3 8.78 510 123.4 24.3 18
Unijet #1 3.5 9.42 510 118.6 26.3 20
Unijet #2 1.86 9.15 510 139 19.1 23
Unijet #2 2.2 9.94 510 133.7 20.8 23
576 N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579

remove any loose matter inside the piping. The surface was to the pre-impingement temperature of the water. Following
cleaned before each experiment; it was polished with emery the procedure of Kline and McClintock [25], the estimated
paper followed by cleaning with acetone to produce a fresh uncertainties in the various parameters are: heat ux
oxide-free surface which improves the wettability of the 2.6%, heat transfer coecient 4.3%, mass ux 2.4%,
surface. All readings were noted under steady state condi- Reynolds number 2.45%, and Nusselt number 4.32%.
tion, which was assumed to be obtained when various tem-
peratures did not deviate over a period of 1530 min. The 6. Results and discussion
steady state for each run was obtained in about 45 h.
Experiments were conducted for a total of 10 dierent The variation of the heat transfer coecient h with mass
ow rates giving mass ux range of 2.649.94 kg/m2 s. ux G is shown in Fig. 4. Even though the spray parame-
The mass ux was varied by changing the injection pressure ters, viz., droplet diameter and velocity vary, mass ux
and/or the nozzle. For each mass ux, multiple readings has been found to be the dominant factor that inuences
were taken to check the repeatability and reliability of the heat transfer. Under steady state conditions, the heat trans-
readings. The maximum heat ux was about 85 W/cm2 fer coecient is 900024,000 W/m2 K, and it increases with
while keeping the surface temperatures below 95 C. increasing mass ux. In the mass ux range of the present
study, Oliphant et al. [4] using air-assist spray impingement
5. Data analysis cooling observed a strong dependence of the heat transfer
coecient on mass ux in the non-boiling regime.
The target surface temperature was calculated by At surface temperatures below the saturation tempera-
extrapolating the temperature gradient from the tempera- ture of uid, the heat is transferred by the sensible heating
ture distribution measurements in the target zone of the of the uid owing over the surface and as latent heat due
copper block as suggested in [4,13,17,23,24]. The gradients to the evaporation of the uid. The rate of evaporation is
were found to vary by an average of 6%. A three-dimen- higher when the surface temperature is close to the satura-
sional heat diusion model using FLUENT showed that tion temperature of the uid and a thin uid lm is formed.
the surface temperature was very close to that inferred At higher mass ux, a thicker liquid lm is formed on the
using one-dimensional heat conduction between the planes target surface causing reduction in the evaporation from
of the thermocouples and the target surface. the free surface of the liquid [12]. The surface temperature
The average surface heat ux q00 is calculated from the in the present study was maintained below 95 C. Thus, it
one-dimensional heat conduction equation can be concluded that evaporation does not signicantly
contribute to heat transfer and the major portion of heat
q00 k 6 is transferred by single-phase convection to the water ow-
Dz ing over the surface. This explains the dependence of the
where z is axial distance measured from the crown surface. heat transfer coecient on the mass ux.
The average heat transfer coecient is calculated from The droplets impinging upon the liquid lm alter its
the surface heat ux q00 , surface temperature Ts, and the dynamics. Besides enhancing mixing, they create turbu-
spray water temperature Tf lence in the lm and thus enhance the heat transfer rate
q00 compared to a lm of the same thickness owing over
h 7 the surface without droplet impingement. The degree of
T s  T f
enhancement depends on the mass ux as indicated by
The spray water temperature was measured with a thermo- the droplet number ux, velocity and diameter. The
couple just upstream of the nozzle.
The heat transfer data have been normalized in terms of
non-dimensional groups. The length scale for Nusselt num-
ber is the diameter D of the heated target. 25000

Nu 8
h (W/m2K)

k 20000

and the spray Reynolds number is calculated from

Re 9
where G is the mass ux of water based on the unit area of
the target surface.
The Weber number has been calculated from Eq. (5),
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
using the values of Sauter mean diameter and mean droplet
G (kg/m2s)
velocity from Eqs. (2) and (4), respectively. The thermophys-
ical properties of water used in the calculations correspond Fig. 4. Variation of heat transfer coecient with mass ux.
N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579 577

discrete and random nature of the droplet impingement Ciofalo et al. [9], from their studies on water sprays at
also creates a mixing eect that introduces low temperature comparatively much higher mass ux (880 kg/m2 s),
droplets as discontinuities in the warm liquid lm on the showed strong dependence of single-phase heat transfer
surface. Hence, steady boundary layer eect does not pre- coecient on product of mass ux and mean droplet veloc-
vail. Due to the entrance of air with the spray and unstead- ity (Gv). The results of present study for Gv = 175248
iness in the lm, the rate of evaporation may be somewhat (corresponding to the mass ux of 8.89.9 kg/m2 s and
enhanced. Thus, the combined eect of mixing, an mean droplet velocity of 1926 m/s) have been found to
unsteady boundary layer and enhanced evaporation rate be 2.334% higher than those from correlation of Ciofalo
causes enhancement in the heat transfer rate. et al. for single-phase heat transfer. It is to note that the
One can expect a dependency of the heat ux on Weber rms deviation of the experimental data from the correlation
number which characterizes the impacting dynamics of the is reported by Ciofalo et al. to be approximately 1956
droplet. In the present study, droplet expulsion rates were W/m2 K. Further, the droplet size generated with TG0.3
seen to be high, i.e., a large numbers of the drops were sim- nozzle used in the present study is dierent from that gen-
ply thrown away from the surface. The expelled droplets erated with TG1 nozzle in the experiment of Ciofalo et al.
were mainly due to the splashing between the impacting [9]. It must also be noted that the study of Ciofalo et al.
droplet and the liquid lm. Since the diameter of the refers to a vertical target.
expelled droplet is larger than the incoming droplet because
it gains mass from the lm as reported by Jia and Qiu [26], 7. Comparison with jet impingement
there is a poor utilization of water. The droplets with
higher Weber number are able to enter into the lm easily Both spray cooling and jet impingement cooling work
but also lead to a higher splatter rate. Thus, the enhance- on the principle of impingement and give high heat transfer
ment in heat transfer rate with Weber number must be a rates. A comparison of their performance has been made
tradeo between these two eects. using the correlation for multiple-jet liquid impingement
In the present study, the Weber number is 22173174 for heat transfer given by Pan and Webb [27], which is
Danfoss and Monarch nozzles operated at the mass ux 2=3
Nud 0:225Red Pr1=3 e0:095s=d j 10
range of 2.64.7 kg/m2 s, while for the Unijet nozzles (mass
ux range of 6.29.9 kg/m2 s) the Weber number is 594 where Nud is the array module average Nusselt number and
1148. Liquid mass ux ranging from 0.23.5 kg/m2 s is Red is the liquid jet Reynolds number based on the jet
regarded as the boundary condition between the dilute diameter dj, and s is the center-to-center spacing of the jets
and dense sprays [24]. In the case of dilute sprays, heat in the array. The correlation is valid for 2 6 s/dj 6 8.
transfer increases with Weber number and this dependency For comparison with spray heat transfer data, a 4-jet
is reported to diminish when Weber number is higher than array has been considered. The jets are assumed to be
350 [13]. In case of dense spray, droplet Weber number placed at the centroid of the area equal to the fraction
does not aect heat transfer signicantly [13]. Since most of the total heated surface area corresponding to the num-
of the results of the present study are above mass ux of ber of liquid jets. In the present case, it is a quarter of the
3.5 kg/m2 s and the Weber number is quite high, its eect circular area. The inter-jet spacing s was calculated to be
on heat transfer must be marginal. 8.4 mm. For the limiting case of s/dj = 8, the jet diameter
The eect of increase in the wall temperature from 55 C is 1.05 mm. For a heat transfer coecient of 24,000 W/
to 95 C, with nearly constant incoming water temperature m2 K, the mass ux for the jet impingement has been esti-
(31 C to 34 C), on the heat transfer coecient has been mated to be about 29 kg/m2 s, which is almost 3 times the
found to be about 1015% in the mass ux range of 2.6 mass ux for the spray cooling in the present study. Thus,
4.7 kg/m2 s, and this eect of wall temperature was seen to spray cooling provides the same heat transfer rate as a jet
decrease with increasing mass ux. This behaviour may be at a substantially lower mass ux. This observation is sim-
attributed to the greater eect of evaporation with increas- ilar to that made by Oliphant et al. [4] for air-assisted
ing temperature from a thin lm [20]. The observed behav- sprays. They attributed this primarily to the unsteady
iour is in line with that of Graham and Ramadhyani [19] boundary layer resulting from droplet impact and second-
who obtained surface heat uxes as high as 60 W/cm2 with arily from evaporative cooling. The comparison aptly
surface temperatures maintained at 70 C and 80 C with proves the advantage of using sprays over jets. Besides
air-assisted methanol and water sprays, respectively. At a this, the non-uniform spatial distribution of heat transfer
surface temperature of 60 C, heat ux values are reported coecient with jets is a major drawback compared to the
to be of the order of 30 W/cm2 for air/water, and 50 W/ sprays.
cm2 for air/methanol. Thus, the results of the present study
are better than that of Graham and Ramadhyani. Heat 8. Correlation
transfer coecient values obtained in the present study are
in excellent agreement (within 10%) with those of Fabbri The Nusselt number correlation has been developed
et al. [20] reported for mass ux of 2.87 and 4.63 kg/m2 s using the denition of average Nusselt number and spray
for HAGO hydraulic nozzles in the non-boiling regime. Reynolds number, Eqs. (8) and (9), respectively.
578 N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579

1000 in the data of Oliphant et al. [4] (their data were correlated
with an average error of 12% as against 2.53% in this
Nu = 20.344 Re study).
Nusselt number, Nu.

9. Conclusions
An experimental study has been carried out for the cool-
ing of a 20 mm diameter heated copper surface placed hor-
400 izontally by pressure-atomized full-cone water sprays.
Nozzles of various ratings and designs have been used,
200 and heat transfer in the non-boiling regime was studied.
The maximum heat ux in the study was 85 W/cm2 with
the target surface temperature below 95 C. The water
0 mass ux has been varied in the range of 2.69.9 kg/m2 s,
0 100 200 300
which gives spray Reynolds number of 65285. The heat
Spray Reynolds number, Re
transfer coecient is 900024,000 W/m2 K and increases
Fig. 5. Nusselt number correlation. with the mass ux. The eect of increase in the wall temper-
ature from 55 C to 95 C, with nearly constant incoming
Fig. 5 shows the average of the Nusselt number data at water temperature, on the heat transfer coecient has been
each mass ux value plotted against the spray Reynolds found to be about 1015% in the lower mass ux range of
number. The correlation obtained is present study. This eect was found to decrease with
increasing mass ux. A comparison with jet impingement
Nu 20:344Re0:659 11 cooling shows that spray cooling provides the same heat
transfer rates as a jet at a substantially lower mass ux.
The absolute mean error is 2.53% with a standard deviation An empirical correlation has been developed which relates
of 2.44%. All results are within 7.73% of the correlation. the average Nusselt number to the spray Reynolds number.
This correlation is valid for the spray Reynolds number
range of 65285. The Weber number from the experimental Acknowledgements
data of the present study is 5943174.
Oliphant et al. [4] presented Nusselt number correlation, The authors thank Spraying Systems Inc., USA for
NuL = 32.5 Re0.51 valid for 10 6 Re 6 1000, for pneumatic donating the Unijet Series full-cone spray nozzles. The
nozzles with length scale L equal to square root of the authors would like to thank Srinivas Polisetty for his assis-
heated target area for the Nusselt number calculation. tance in the carrying out the simulations.
Hence, for comparison with Oliphant et al., L instead of
D has been used as length scale in Fig. 6. In general, the
Nusselt number values from the present study are on the
higher side which can be attributed to the signicantly [1] C.H. Amon, J. Murthy, S.C. Yao, S. Narumanchi, C.-F. Wu, C.-C.
higher Weber number values in the present study. How- Hsieh, MEMS-enabled thermal management of high-heat-ux devices
ever, it must be noted that there was a considerable scatter EDIFICE: embedded droplet impingement for integrated cooling of
electronics, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 25 (2001) 231
800 [2] A.M. Kiper, Impinging water jet cooling of VLSI circuits, Interna-
tional Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 11 (1984) 517526.
Present study [3] I. Mudawar, Assessment of high-heat-ux thermal management
schemes, in: International Society Conference on Thermal Phenom-
600 ena, 2000, pp. 120.
Nusselt number, NuL

[4] K. Oliphant, B.W. Webb, M.Q. McQuay, An experimental compar-

ison of liquid jet array and spray impingement cooling in the non-
boiling regime, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 18 (1998)
400 110.
Oliphant et al. [4]
[5] I. Mudawar, W.S. Valentine, Determination of local quench curve for
spray-cooled metallic surfaces, Journal of Heat Treating 7 (1989)
[6] K.A. Estes, I. Mudawar, Correlation of Sauter mean diameter and
critical heat ux for spray cooling of small surfaces, International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (1995) 29852996.
0 [7] I. Mudawar, K.A. Estes, Optimizing and predicting CHF in spray
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 cooling of a square surface, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 118
Spray Reynolds number, Re (1996) 672679.
[8] J. Yang, L.C. Chow, M.R. Pais, Nucleate boiling heat transfer in
Fig. 6. Comparison of NuL data of present study with Oliphent et al. [4]. spray cooling, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 118 (1996) 668671.
N. Karwa et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32 (2007) 571579 579

[9] M. Ciofalo, I. Di Piazza, V. Brucato, Investigation of the cooling of [18] W.M. Grissom, F.A. Wierum, Liquid spray cooling of a heated
hot walls by liquid water sprays, International Journal of Heat and surface, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 24 (1981)
Mass Transfer 42 (1999) 11571175. 261271.
[10] D.P. Rini, R.-H. Chen, L.C. Chow, Bubble behavior and nucleate [19] K.M. Graham, S. Ramadhyani, Experimental and theoretical studies
boiling heat transfer in saturated FC-72 spray cooling, ASME of mist jet impingement cooling, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 118
Journal of Heat Transfer 124 (2002) 6372. (1996) 343349.
[11] V.P. Isachenko, V.I. Kushnyrev, S.V. Gorin, Experimental study of [20] M. Fabbri, S. Jiang, V.K. Dhir, A comparative study of cooling of
heat transfer in cooling of a vertical surface by a liquid spray, Heat high power density electronics using sprays and microjets, ASME
Transfer Soviet Research 11 (4) (1979) 142145. Journal of Heat Transfer 127 (2005) 3848.
[12] L. Lin, R. Ponnappan, Heat transfer characteristics of spray cooling [21] I. Stewart, J.D. Massingham, J.J. Hagers, Heat transfer coecient
in a closed loop, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 46 eects on spray cooling, Spraying Systems Co., USA, 1995, Bulletin
(2003) 37373746. No. 428, pp. 312.
[13] K.J. Choi, S.C. Yao, Mechanism of lm boiling heat transfer of [22] Y.M. Qiao, S. Chandra, Spray cooling enhancement by addition of a
normally impacting spray, International Journal of Heat and Mass surfactant, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 120 (1998) 9298.
Transfer 30 (1987) 311318. [23] C. Bonacina, S. Del Giudice, G. Comini, Dropwise evaporation,
[14] C.F. Ma, Y.Q. Tian, Experimental investigation on two-phase two- ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 101 (1979) 441446.
component jet impingement heat transfer from simulated microelec- [24] J.D. Bernardin, I. Mudawar, Film boiling heat transfer of droplet
tronic heat sources, International Communications in Heat and Mass streams and sprays, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
Transfer 17 (1990) 399408. 40 (1997) 25792593.
[15] M. Ghodbane, J.P. Holman, Experimental study of spray cooling [25] S.J. Kline, F.A. McClintock, Describing uncertainties in single
with Freon-113, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 34 sample experiments, Mechanical Engineering 75 (1953) 38.
(1991) 11631174. [26] W. Jia, H.-H. Qiu, Experimental investigation of droplet dynamics
[16] Pankaj, Spray impaction cooling of electronics components, M. Tech. and heat transfer in spray cooling, Experimental Thermal and Fluid
Dissertation, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, 2003. Science 27 (2003) 829838.
[17] J.R. Rybicki, I. Mudawar, Single-phase and two-phase cooling [27] Y. Pan, B.W. Webb, Heat transfer characteristics of arrays of free-
characteristics of upward-facing and downward-facing sprays, Inter- surface liquid jets, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 117 (1995) 878
national Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 49 (2006) 516. 883.