Modeling Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop For Liquid-Vapor Flows in The Elongated-Bubble Flow Regime

Modeling Heat Transfer and Pressure
Drop for Liquid-Vapor Flows in the

Elongated-Bubble Flow Regime
Anthony M. Jacobi
Richard W. Kritzer Distinguished Professor of Mechanical Engineering
Co-Director ACRC
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University
University of
of Illinois
Illinois
Motivation – A vapor-compression system
University of Illinois
22
Motivation – Heat exchangers
33
Motivation – Integrated as the ‘IMCC’
44
Motivation – Personal cooling systems
55
Outline
Statement of goals
Summary of a heat transfer model
Background for modeling
Focus on the physical model
Review some validation
Pressure drop modeling
How is two-phase pressure-drop modeling approached?
A directly mechanistic model is superior
There are problems with our mechanistic models.
Some ideas for modeling…rather loose ideas that you might shoot down.
Field and Hrnjak 2007, ACRC TR-271
66
Statement of goals
Shamelessly promote the heat transfer model?

The apparent success of the model might say something about physics.
Present a loose overview of pressure-drop models.
Their apparent success might not say something about physics
Identify problems in our mechanistic descriptions
There appear to be obvious weakness in our descriptions of the flows
Propose some ideas that might improve our models.
Backward boundary layers and surface tension
Relate back to application
To show that everything I presented might be meaningless
77
Flow regime observations
Observations of flow regimes in microchannel flows (modified from Qu et al. (2005) – elongated bubble flow and annular flow
dominate.
88
A two-zone model of heat transfer
to elongated-bubble flow (Jacobi and Thome 2002)
LP
q L L
V L
U
D
δο
Initial bubble growth per Plesset’s theory gives the time required to generate a
“pair”, with ∆Teff prescribed. With this period known, initial conditions on the
pair geometry are determined for a known mass flux. An energy balance is
applied to the pair, and heat transfer is modeled as thin-film evaporation through
δo;
99
The following non-linear algebraic equation set holds at any instant
Pair geometry
Void fraction definition
Mass flux definition
Quality definition
1010
Conservation of energy yields coupled ODE’s for pair geometry
dLV qD( LV (t ) + LL (t ))
=
dt ρV ( R − δ ) 2 λ
With pair geometry known at all times (locations), a thin-film

evaporation model is used to calculate heat transfer coefficient.
−1
 qL p (t ) 
h( s; t ) = k L  δ o − 
 4λ ρLU (t ) 
1111
20000
o
∆T =30 C ∆T =38 o C
eff
eff
15000
h (W/m2K)
o
∆Teff=45 C
10000
5000
0
40000 80000 120000 160000 200000
q (W/m2)
q (W/m 2)
1212
20000
∆T=30 o C
h (W/m2K)
15000
o
10000
∆T=38 C
o
∆T=45 C
5000
0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450
G (kg/m2s)
2
m (kg/m s)
1313
20000 A simple thin-film heat

Current Model transfer model predicts
Data of Bao et al. (2000) the observed trends. It is
h (W/m2K)
15000 unnecessary--probably
wrong--to extrapolate
conventional-scale data
10000 interpretations to the
mesoscale. The success
of this model suggests
5000 nucleate boiling might
not dominate.
0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000
q
2
q (W/m )
(W/m2) University of Illinois

1414
A three-zone model of heat transfer
to elongated-bubble flow (Thome et al. 2004)
1515
Initial conditions
Down the tube…
Pair length and velocity evolve G  x 1− x 

Lp =  + 
f  ρv ρl 
1616
Two or three zones?
Motivated by Moriyama and Inoue (1996):
The constant Cδo is left as a free parameter
1717
Two or three zones?

Minimum film thickness, δmin, left as adjustable parameter
1818
Two or three zones?
If
tdry , film > tv tdry , film < tv
Then t film = tv t film = t filmdry tdry = tv − t filmdry
1919
The temporally averaged, local heat transfer coefficient
But closure requires

nf
1    p    nq
f = = q α q  sat   
τ    pcrit   

2020
Modeling of the physics is overly simplified, neglecting

complexities in flow regime, advection in the film, and realities
of instability, etc. The model has several adjustable parameters
that simplify τ, δo and δmin.
2121
to elongated-bubble flow (Dupont et al. 2004)
Okay…but the model does a
reasonable job.
With source-specific
parameters, 90% of the
data predicted within
30%; with general
parameters 70% predicted
within 30%.
1591 measurements from 5
labs (none were ours)
2222
Predicting frictional pressure drop
See paper for more extensive review

Modeling has not undergone the same level of validation
Lee and Mudawar, 2005

R134a flowing through a copper block
Channels 231 µµ ξ 715 µµ, ρουγηνεσσ νοτ γιϖεν
Ηεατ φλυξ 31.6 93.8 Ω/χµ2
Θυαλιτψ 0.001 0.25 ινλετ; 0.43 συπερηεατεδ

ουτλετ
Μασσ φλυξ 127 654 κγ/µ2σ
2323
Homogeneous flow models

(Lee and Mudawar, 2005)
2424

2525

2626
Separated-flow models
2727
2828
2929
Modifying an empirical approach

(e.g., Lee and Mudawar, 2005)
LL
LT
3030
New separated-flow model

3131
Prefer a more directly mechanistic
model?
What does this mean and how will it generalize?
2.16 Re0.047 We 0.60

1
ϕ f = 1+
fo fo
+ 2
X X
It is easier to understand, and therefore perhaps more useful if we see forces directly…shear, surface
tension… In that way, from a more direct mechanistic model, we hope we obtain an ability to generalize
and control.
3232
Garimella and co-workers, 2005

R134a flowing through a copper tube
Hydraulic diameter 0.5–4.91 mm, roughness not given
Mass flux 150 – 750 kg/m2s
Condensation
‘entire quality range’
3333
Overview of pressure drop predictions
A more directly mechanistic approach

(e.g., Garimella and co-workers, 2002, 2005)
3434

Laminar or …
3535

3636

(e.g., Garimella and co-workers)
3737

3838
Prefer a more directly mechanistic
model?
What does this mean and how will it
generalize?
3939
Pressure Drop
Is this pathological physics?

R
4040
Pressure Drop
What is a backward boundary layer?
∂u ∂v ∂u ∂u µ ∂ 2u
+ =0 u +v =
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ρ ∂y 2
The “forward” boundary layer is conventional

u (0, y ) = U u ( x, 0) = 0 u ( x, ∞) = U v( x, 0) = 0
(0, y ) = 0 boundary
Theu“backward = Uhas unusual
u ( x, 0)layer u ( x, ∞boundary
)=0 v ( x, 0) = 0
conditions
4141
Pressure Drop
What is a backward boundary layer?

The “forward” boundary layer is conventional
y
U
x
The “backwardx boundary layer has unusual boundary

conditions
U
4242
Pressure Drop
A proposal.
y x
Y
r r ∂ r r r r r
Fs + Fb − ∫C∀ arf ρ d ∀ = ∂t C∫∀VXYZ ρ d ∀ + CS∫ VXYZ ρ (VXYZ − VXYZ ,CS ) ⋅ dA
4343
Pressure Drop
A proposal.
(say ρλ>>ρϖ ανδ ΧΣ ατταχηεδ το α µατεριαλ ποιντ, ανδ Ξ ονλψ)
∂
Fsx + Fbx − ∫
C∀
arf , x ρ d ∀ = ∫
∂t C∀
VX ρ d ∀ + ∫ VX ρ (VX − VX ,CS )dA
CS
0 0, CS=V
∆pAc − Pσ (cos θ f + cos θ b ) − Fshear −

dU p d
( ρl Ll + ρ v Lv ) Ac = U p ( ρ l Ll + ρ v Lv ) Ac 
dt dt
4444
Pressure Drop
A proposal.  Lv ρv µvU 3p
Lp
ρl µlU 3p 
Fshear = C1 P  ∫ dx + ∫ dx 
0 x x 
 Lv

Then
∆p 8σ 4U p 3 / 2
: +  ( ρ v µv − ρl µl ) Lv + ρ l µl Ll  +
L p DL p DL p  
dU p  Ll Lv 
2U p  ρ l + ρv 
dz  Lp Lp 
4545
Pressure Drop
Surface tension: 8σ σ
∝ (cos θ)
DLp DL p
Shear: 4U p 3 / 2 L
 ( ρv µv − ρl µl ) Lv + ρl µl Ll  ∝ p
DL p   D
Growth and acceleration

dU pof theLltriplet:Lv 
2U p  ρl + ρv  ∝ yuk
dz  L p Lp 
4646
Pressure Drop
Will it work?
σ U p1/ 2
ϕl = C +C  ( ρ v µ v − ρ l µ l ) L v + ρ l µ l Ll  +
0 4µl LpU p 1 8µl L p  
D dU p  Ll Lv 
 ρl + ρv 
16µl dz  L p Lp 
4747
Outline
Statement of goals
Summary of a heat transfer model
Background for modeling
Focus on the physical model
Review some validation
Pressure drop modeling
How is two-phase pressure-drop modeling approached?
A directly mechanistic model is superior
There are problems with our mechanistic models.
Some ideas for modeling…rather loose ideas that you might shoot down.
Field and Hrnjak, 2007 ACRC TR-261.
4848
Field and Hrnjak, 2007, ACRC TR-261
4949
5050
5151
5252
5353
5454
5555
5656
5757
5858
5959
Mechanistic “Adjusted” S.F.
6060

Modeling Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop For Liquid-Vapor Flows in The Elongated-Bubble Flow Regime

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Modeling Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop For Liquid-Vapor Flows in The Elongated-Bubble Flow Regime

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Modeling Heat Transfer and Pressure

Drop for Liquid-Vapor Flows in the

Shamelessly promote the heat transfer model?

The following non-linear algebraic equation set holds at any instant

Void fraction definition

Mass flux definition

Conservation of energy yields coupled ODE’s for pair geometry

With pair geometry known at all times (locations), a thin-film

20000 A simple thin-film heat

(W/m2) University of Illinois

Down the tube…

Pair length and velocity evolve G  x 1− x 

Two or three zones?

Motivated by Moriyama and Inoue (1996):

The constant Cδo is left as a free parameter

Two or three zones?

Two or three zones?

The temporally averaged, local heat transfer coefficient

But closure requires

Modeling of the physics is overly simplified, neglecting

See paper for more extensive review

Lee and Mudawar, 2005

Ηεατ φλυξ 31.6 93.8 Ω/χµ2

Θυαλιτψ 0.001 0.25 ινλετ; 0.43 συπερηεατεδ

Μασσ φλυξ 127 654 κγ/µ2σ

Homogeneous flow models

Homogeneous flow models

Homogeneous flow models

Modifying an empirical approach

New separated-flow model

2.16 Re0.047 We 0.60

Garimella and co-workers, 2005

A more directly mechanistic approach

A more directly mechanistic approach

A more directly mechanistic approach

A more directly mechanistic approach

A more directly mechanistic approach

Is this pathological physics?

What is a backward boundary layer?

The “forward” boundary layer is conventional

What is a backward boundary layer?

The “backwardx boundary layer has unusual boundary

∆pAc − Pσ (cos θ f + cos θ b ) − Fshear −

Growth and acceleration

Mechanistic “Adjusted” S.F.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen