Sie sind auf Seite 1von 18

CORRELATING EVAPORATION HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT OF REFRIGERANT R-134a IN A PLATE HEAT EXCHANGER

Vincent D. Donowski and Satish G. Kandlikar

Mechanical Engineering Department Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester, NY

ABSTRACT

The present study deals with developing a predictive methodology for evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a flowing in a plate heat exchanger. Correlation schemes proposed by Yan and Lin (1999b) for modeling the heat transfer coefficient in both a single- phase water-to-water experiment and a two-phase evaporation experiment with refrigerant R- 134a in a plate heat exchanger are found to result in large discrepancies with their own experimental data. In the present study Yan and Lin’s plate heat exchanger data is used to develop improved correlations for single-phase heat transfer coefficient of water as well as two- phase evaporation heat transfer coefficients of refrigerant R-134a. Two schemes are presented for correlating the two-phase data, and they are compared with the correlating schemes available in literature (Yan and Lin, 1999b; and Kandlikar, 1991). It is found that the new correlation schemes developed in this work provide an accurate fit to the experimental data, and a final correlation sche me is proposed for future use in modeling the evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger configuration.

1

NOMENCLATURE

Bo

Boiling number, eq. (18)

Co

Convective number, eq. (17)

c p

specific heat, J/kgK

D h

hydraulic diameter, m

D i

tube inside diameter, m

f

friction factor

F fl

fluid-dependent parameter

G

mass flux, kg/m 2 s

h LG

enthalpy of vaporization, J/kg

Nu

Nusselt number, dimensionless, eq. (5)

Pr

Prandtl number, dimensionless

q w

imposed wall heat flux, W/m 2

Re

Reynolds number, dimensionless

x

vapor quality

Greek Symbols

a

heat transfer coefficient, W/m 2 K

h

viscosity, N s/m 2

l

thermal conductivity, W/m K

r

density, kg/m 3

Subscripts

eq

equivalent all- liquid number

G

vapor phase

L

liquid phase

m

average value for the two phase mixture or between the inlet and exit

r

refrigerant, two-phase

TP

two-phase

w

water

wall

wall/fluid near the wall

2

1.

INTRODUCTION

Plate heat exchangers have been a popular choice for use in chemical and food processing applications since the 1930s (Hewitt et al., 1994). Within a compact design, plate heat exchangers offer low fabrication costs, ease of cleaning, adaptability, and high thermal efficiency. Introduction of plate heat exchangers as evaporators and condensers in refrigeration and air conditioning applications has gained most of its interest in the last 20 years (Yan and Lin, 1999b). To date, most studies about plate heat exchanger applications in published literature focus on the single-phase liquid-to-liquid heat transfer. As a result, limited data resources are available for plate heat exchangers used as evaporators in two-phase flow boiling applications. With public awareness of environmental safety concerns in recent years, degradation of the ozone layer in the atmosphere through the use of CFC refrigerants has been of great concern. In response to these issues, new HFC refrigerants such as R-134a, R-143a, and R-125 have been developed as substitute chemicals for use in refrigeration and air conditioning systems. An excellent example of this conversion to new refrige rants is the introduction of refrigerant R-134a into automobile air conditioning systems, in place of the traditional CFC refrigerant system. In order to improve the design of heat exchange systems utilizing these new refrigerants, it is necessary to first gain an understanding of the fluid heat transfer characteristics through experimentation and data collection. For these new refrigerants, the majority of published works have focused on single-phase liquid-to- liquid heat transfer. One recent study (Yan and Lin, 1999b), involves two-phase evaporation heat transfer of the new refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger. The present work analyzes the experimental data of Yan and Lin (1999b) and proposes two new correlation schemes for the evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger. These new correlation schemes are compared with the original experimental data and other correlation schemes available in literature.

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In this section previously published studies by other investigators are briefly reviewed to provide relevant information to the present work.

3

2.1

Early Correlation Schemes

Many early literature studies focus on the single-phase heat transfer of fluids flowing in a smooth tube to develop correlation schemes to model the heat transfer coefficients in other geometries. The most widely used single-phase correlation in a pipe is the well-known Dittus- Boelter equation (Dittus and Boelter, 1930) and is given by

Nu = 0.023 Re

0.8

Pr

0.4

(1)

where Re represents the fluid Reynolds number, Pr is the Prandtl number, and Nu is the Nusselt number. Other noteworthy equations are the Sieder-Tate equation (Incropera and Dewitt, 1981),

Nu = 0.023 Re 0.8 Pr 1/3 (h m /h wall ) 0.14

and the Gnielinski correlation (Gnielinski, 1976),

Nu

=

 

(

f

/ 2

)(

Re

-

)

1000 Pr

 

1

+

12.7

12.7

f

/ 2

(

Pr

2/3

-

1

)

[

1

+

(

D

i

/

L

)

2 / 3

](

Pr/ Pr

w

)

0.11

 

(2)

.

(3)

The concept of modeling the two-phase heat transfer coefficient can be traced back to the 1960s. Studies of two-phase phenomenon can likely be traced back earlier; however, Bergles and Rohsenow (1964) made a significant contribution to this area by suggesting an additive model for convective and nucleate boiling components. Chen (1966) is also noted for suggesting an additive model for saturated boiling, using a nucleate boiling term based on a pool boiling equation by Foster and Zuber (1955), and a convective contribution utilizing the Dittus-Boelter (1930) equation noted earlier. Both of these models present an ideal that flow boiling can be separated into a nucleate boiling term as characterized by still fluid being boiled by heat applied directly at nucleation sights, and a convective boiling term to characterize heat transferred to the moving fluid. When these terms are brought together in the additive model, the dominant

4

contributing term is decided based on the liquid Reynolds number, a dimensionless number characterized by liquid mass flow and viscosity.

2.2 Experimentation With Smooth Tubes

Kattan et al. (1998a, 1998b, 1998c) conducted smooth tube experimentation for flow boiling of several refrigerants, including refrigerant R-134a. Data from Kattan et al.’s work shows that the heat transfer coefficient will continue to increase with vapor quality, but will show a sudden drop at a qua lity of approximately 0.85. For very low mass flux the heat transfer coefficient shows little change as vapor quality increases. Yan and Lin (1998) show similar results to Kattan et al. (1998b) for the evaporation of refrigerant R-134a in a small pipe. Little change is seen in the heat transfer coefficient as vapor quality increases for low values of heat and mass flux. Higher heat transfer values are seen for higher mass flux, or lower saturation temperature. For higher heat flux, higher values of heat transfer are seen; however, the heat transfer coefficient decreases as vapor quality increases. Gungor and Winterton (1986) perform an extensive review of a large flow boiling data base to propose a correlation for two-phase flow boiling based on the two component model suggested by Chen (1966). The flow boiling correlation by Kandlikar (1990) was developed with over 10,000 data points and provides an accurate representation of parametric trends for qualities up to 0.7-0.8. It has been tested with R- 134a data as well. Since the augmentation techniques employed in tubes, compact evaporators, and other enhanced geometries delay the transition to dryout beyond a quality of 0.8, the present work focuses on improving the correlation in this range.

2.3 Augmented Surfaces

Augmented surface tubes are designed to provide better heat transfer than smooth tubes through the use of enhanced surfaces. Some examples of enhanced surfaces include fins, coil springs, twisted tape, and helical ribs. These specialized surfaces serve to increase the heat transfer area in fluid flow, thereby adding significant enhancement to the liquid heat exchange capabilities, as well as improvements resulting from an increase in the local heat transfer coefficient.

5

For refrigerant R-134a, Singh et al. (1996) provide an experimental study of the flow boiling heat transfer coefficient in a microfin tube. Results show that the heat transfer coefficient is higher for higher heat flux and for higher mass flux. For low mass flux little change is seen in the heat transfer coefficient as vapor quality increases. Kandlikar (1991) proposes a model for correlating flow boiling heat transfer in augmented tubes based upon previous work (Kandlikar, 1990) with flow boiling in smooth tubes. Kand likar uses the additive model suggested by Bergles and Rohsenow (1964) as a basis for developing two-phase correlating schemes.

2.4 Compact Evaporators and Plate Heat Exchangers

Kandlikar (1991) suggested that heat exchangers, serving as compact evaporators in this particular study, can be treated similarly to augmented tubes for analysis. From previous work in correlating heat transfer coefficients in smooth tubes (Kandlikar, 1990), Kandlikar introduced augmentation factors to account for surface enhancements in augmented tubes and compact evaporators. Results from the Kandlikar (1991) study show the new model was able to predict the heat transfer coefficients within 10-15 percent. For evaporation heat transfer of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger, Yan and Lin (1999b) provide the only detailed published data in a usable form by other researchers. Yan and Lin first experimented with liquid-only, water-to-water heat transfer to analyze the uncertainty in experimentation, and to develop a single-phase correlation which can be adapted to the two-phase situation. The two-phase experiment is then employed for refrigerant R-134a to investigate the effects of mean vapor quality, mass flux, heat flux, and pressure on the evaporation heat transfer coefficient. A correlation scheme is introduced by Yan and Lin (1999b) for modeling the evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a in the plate heat exchanger.

2.5 Summary of Experimental Data and Related Correlation Work

Table 1 presents a brief summary of some of the more relevant studies discussed above. For the two-phase heat transfer of refrigerant R-134a, published studies have been focused

6

toward smooth and augmented surface tubes. The experimental ranges of the study by Yan and Lin (1999b) are also presented in this table.

2.6 Objectives of the Present Work

The objectives of the present work are as follows:

1. Develop a correlation scheme for predicting the evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger based on experimental data from the literature and the additive model concept for convective and nucleate boiling contribution terms.

2.

Compare the newly developed correlation scheme to other models proposed in the literature for similar situations.

3.

Propose the correlation scheme best suited for use in modeling the evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger.

3.

DATA ANALYSIS

Yan and Lin (1999b) provide experimental data for evaporation heat transfe r of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger, which serves as the data source for the present

work. Three plates of commercial SS-316 stainless steel formed the plate heat exchanger. Each plate surface had a corrugated sine shape and 60 degree of chevron angle to the plate vertical axis. The plates measured 500.0 mm in length by 120.0 mm in width, with corners rounded at a

25.0

mm radius. The thickness of the plates was 0.4 mm, with 3.3 mm pitch between plates and

10.0

mm pitch of the corrugation. Other dimensions show the connection ports to be spaced at

70.0

mm horizontally and 450.0 mm vertically, each port measuring 30.0 mm in diameter. When

the three plates were pressed together, two counter flow channels were formed. Contrary V shape corrugations on adjoining plates formed a lattice grid which forced flow to move along the groove. This lattice formation in plate heat exchangers causes a notably high Reynolds number and turbulent flow, which enhance heat transfer capabilities. For further details, authors are referred to Yan and Lin (1999b).

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

7

The single-phase data is first compared with the correlation developed by Yan and Lin (1999b). An improved single-phase correlation, Correlation I, is then developed and compared against the data. In the two-phase region, the correlation developed by Yan and Lin is first compared with their own experimental data. The first correlation scheme, Correlation II, developed here is based on the model by Kandlikar (1991). In the second correlation scheme, Correlation III, this model is further modified to provide a better fit especially in the higher quality range.

4.1 Yan and Lin Single-Phase Correlation

Yan and Lin (1999b) proposed the following single-phase correlation us ing water-to water data from their plate heat exchanger tests:

Nu = 0.2121 Re 0.78 Pr 1/3 (h m /h wall ) 0.14

.

(4)

Using the definition of the Nusselt number, Nu, as

 

Nu = a D h /l L

,

(5)

equation 4 can be rearranged to provide the following equation for the heat transfer coefficient.

a w = 0.2121 Re 0.78 Pr 1/3 (h m /h wall ) 0.14 l L /D h

.

(6)

It should be noted that the single-phase correlation proposed by Yan and Lin (1999b) shows striking similarity to the Sieder-Tate equation (Incropera and Dewitt, 1981) provided in eq. 2, which is known to provide reliable results in modeling single-phase liquid heat transfer in smooth tubes. Here the single-phase model is applied to the plate heat exchanger, with an increased multiplier to account for surface enhancement through the use of corrugated plates. Two assumptions must be made in plotting the proposed correlation. Firstly, it is assumed that

8

the bulk fluid temperatures are 95 C for the hot side inlet and 15 C for the cold side inlet. Second, it is assumed that the viscosity ratio raised to such a low power can be taken as 1.0. When Yan and Lin’s correlation is plotted on the same plot with the experimental data, as shown in Fig. 1, large deviations are noted. This was extensively investigated by contacting the authors, but the error could not be resolved. Their correlation seems to be off from the data by a fixed multiplier. To correct this situation, an improved correlation is developed in the present work as described in the following section.

4.2 Correlation Scheme I – Improved Single-Phase Correlation

Noting the similarity between the Yan and Lin (1999b) proposed correlation and the Sieder-Tate equation, it seems logical to begin the development of a new correlation using smooth tube equations as the basis. Starting with the well-known Dittus-Boelter (eq. 1) and Sieder-Tate (eq. 2) equations, the improved correlation begins to take the form

a w = E 1 Re E2 Pr E3 l L /D h

(7)

Here the variables E 1 , E 2 , and E 3 can be varied to fit the data. According to the Dittus-Boelter and Sieder-Tate equations, and eq. (6), the variable E 2 becomes 0.78 or 0.8, and the variable E 3 takes on the value of 1/3 or 0.4. Combinations of these variables are used, and the multiplier E1 varied using a spreadsheet solver to develop an improved correlation to best fit the data. The new Correlation Scheme I results in

a w = 0.2875 Re 0.78 Pr 1/3 l L /D h

(8)

A comparison of the single-phase Correlation I (eq. 8) to the Yan and Lin’s correlation (eq. 6) and the experimental data is provided in Fig. 1. As seen from this figure, the improved correlation provides an excellent fit to the experimental data for the single-phase water-to-water heat transfer in the plate heat exchanger. This equation will be used in the next phase of the present work for developing an improved two-phase correlation scheme.

9

4.3

Yan and Lin’s Two-Phase Correlation Scheme

Yan and Lin (1999b) proposed the following correlation in modeling their own two-phase data for evaporation heat transfer of refrigerant R-134a,

 

a r = 1.926 Re eq Pr 1/3 Re -0.5 Bo eq l L / D h

 

(9)

where,

 

Re eq = G eq D h / h L

 

(10)

Bo eq = qw / (G eq h LG )

(11)

G eq = G [(1

x m ) + x m (r L / r G ) 0.5 ]

.

(12)

The terms Re eq and Bo eq are, respectively, the equivalent Reynolds number and equivalent Boiling number as proposed by Akers (1958). The Reynolds number, Re, and Prandtl number, Pr, are defined for all liquid flow:

Re = G D h / h L

(13)

Pr = h L c p / l L .

(14)

Fluid properties used in testing the correlation are taken from the REFPROP (NIST, 1999) refrigerant property computer program. Results of using the Yan and Lin correlation vs. experimental data can be found in Fig. 2 through Fig. 11. Again for the two-phase scenario, significant discrepancy is found between the Yan and Lin’s correlation and their experimental data. Extensive checks were performed to resolve the discrepancy but it was clear that there is a major error in their correlation as published in the literature. For purposes of the present work it is desirable to accept that a discrepancy exists in their correlation, and to develop an improved model to fit the experimental data set.

4.4 Other Two-Phase Correlation Schemes

10

Two-phase correlation schemes were proposed in the works of Kattan et. al. (1998c), Gungor and Winterton (1986), and Kandlikar (1991). A brief review of these works was presented in section 2 of this paper, and in Table 1. Here the importance of these studies to the present work is evaluated for development of an improved model. Kattan et al. (1998c) developed a two-phase model for various refrigerants based on data from previous works (Kattan et al., 1998a; and Kattan et al., 1998b). The proposed correlation scheme utilizes the study of boiling flow pattern as a basis for the proposed model. While the Kattan flow pattern model provides excellent results in the referenced work, the proposed model is complex and limited at this point to flow in horizontal tubes. Based on an early general correlation proposed by Chen (1966), Gungor and Winterton (1986) developed an additive model for two-phase boiling in tubes and annuli. This model takes into account the contributions of pool boiling and convective boiling, which are brought together in determining the heat transfer coefficient. The results provided in the literature for the Gungor and Winterton model show an uncertainty of +40 %, which is larger than desired for this study. An additive model was also suggested by Kandlikar (1991) for flow boiling applications. The Kandlikar work is based on an additive model suggested by Bergles and Rohsenow (1964), consisting of convective and nucleate boiling components. Kandlikar takes a previous model (Kandlikar, 1990) for flow boiling in smooth tubes and extends it to augmented tubes and compact evaporators. Results in the Kandlikar (1991) study show the Kandlikar correlation scheme to provide a reliable fit to data, with an uncertainty of +15 %.

4.5 Kandlikar Two -Phase Correlation Scheme

For the present work, it is desirable to find a best- fit correlation for the evaporation heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant R-134a. The Kandlikar (1991) correlation noted above has been shown in the literature to be adaptable to augmented surface systems while maintaining reasonable accuracy in results. Kandlikar suggests the following correlation scheme to model flow boiling for augmented tubes:

a TP,NBD = 0.6683 Co -0.2 (1 – x) 0.8 a L E CB

+ 1058.0 Bo 0.7 (1 – x) 0.8 F fl a L E NB

11

(15)

and

a TP,CBD = 1.1360 Co -0.9 (1 – x) 0.8 a L E CB

+ 667.2 Bo 0.7 (1 – x) 0.8 F fl a L E NB

.

(16)

Equations 15 and 16 solve for the heat transfer coefficient for the nucleate boiling dominant, and

convective boiling dominant cases, respectively. The actual heat transfer coefficient is the larger

of the two values. The factors E CB and E NB are the enhancement factors to be applied to the

convective boiling contribution and nucleate boiling contribution, respectively. The convective number, Co, and the boiling number, Bo, are defined as

Co = (r G / r L ) 0.5 ((1 – x) / x) 0.8

(17)

Bo = q/ (G h LG )

(18)

A fluid-dependent parameter, F fl , is used in the correlation to account for varying fluid

characteristics. For stainless steel surfaces, Kandlikar (1991) suggests that this fluid-dependent parameter is equal to 1 for all fluids. The term a L is the all- liquid heat transfer coefficient for the

single-phase situation. Correlation I (eq. 8) was introduced earlier as an improved fit to the single-phase experimental data, and can be employed here as the all- liquid heat transfer coefficient for refrigerant R-134a. For the plate heat exchanger, fluid flow is turbulent even at very low Reynolds numbers. As a result, it is assumed that the heat transfer will rely dominantly on the convective boiling contribution. Hence, eq. 16 will be used for comparison with the experimental data. Fluid properties are again taken from the REFPROP program. Employment of the Kandlikar correlation here predicts the data with an uncertainty of +20 % for mean vapor quality between 0.2 and 0.8. Fitting the Kandlikar correlation to the data to minimize absolute error results in the correlation values E CB = 0.659 and E NB = 0.006 for the augmentation effects of the heat exchanger, giving the final equation as

a TP,CBD = 1.1360 Co -0.9 (1 – x) 0.8 a L E CB

where,

+ 667.2 Bo 0.7 (1 – x) 0.8 F fl a L E NB

12

,

(19)

E CB = 0.659 E NB = 0.006 .

Although the above scheme based on the Kandlikar correlation provides a reasonable fit to the data, this scheme results in a curve that does not match the shape of the data, especially in the high quality region as seen in Fig. 2 through Fig. 11 for various mass flux, heat flux and, pressure conditions. Therefore a new model development is undertaken to match the experimental data and the trends of heat transfer coefficient in the plate heat exchanger.

4.6 Improved Correlation II – Two -Phase With Augmentation Factors

With reasonable accuracy achieved by eq. (19) above, it is logical to develop an improved correlation scheme based on the same additive model. Using the same exact form as the Kandlikar (1991) correlation, the model is represented by

a r = [y1 Co y2 E CB + y3 Bo y4 F fl E NB ] (1 – x) y5 a L y6

.

(20)

Variables y 1 through y 6 , and the augmentation factors, E CB and E NB , are solved for in fitting the correlation to the experimental data. The fluid-dependent parameter, F fl , is again taken to be 1.0 for the stainless steel plates. In fitting the proposed correlation to the heat exchanger data using a spreadsheet solver, the following values are obtained for the constants in eq. (20):

y 1 = 2.312,

y 2 = -0.3,

y 3 = 667.3,

y 4 = 2.8,

y 5 = 0.003,

y 6 = 1,

E CB = 0.512, and E NB = 0.338 .

 

The final equation for the Correlation Scheme II is given by

 

a r = [2.312 Co -0.3 E CB + 667.3 Bo 2.8 F fl E NB ] (1 – x) 0.003 a L

 

(21)

where

E CB = 0.512,

13

E NB = 0.338.

Figures 2 through 11 show that Correlation II (eq. 21) provides a better fit than the original

Kandlikar (1991) correlation, with a maximum deviatio n of 17 % for all data points. It can be

seen that the experimental data trend is well matched by Correlation II in the entire range of

quality.

4.7

Improved Correlation III – Two-Phase Without Augmentation Factors

A second improved correlation has been developed in the present work by leaving out the

augmentation factors and the fluid-dependent parameter. This correlation then takes on the form

a r = [z 1 Co z2 + z 3 Bo z4 ] x m z5 a L z6 z 7

.

(22)

A multiplier z 7 has been added to the correlation scheme. Here only the variables z 1 through z 7

need to solved for in fitting the correlation to the experimental data. For the best fit curve for

evaporation of refrigerant R-134a in the plate heat exchanger, the resultant values are

z

1 = 1.056,

z 2 =

-0.4,

z 3 = 1.02,

z 4 = 0.9

5 = -0.12,

z

z 6 = 0.98, and

z 7 = 1.055

.

With these constants, Correlation III takes the following form.

a r = 1.055 [1.056 Co -0.4 + 1.02 Bo 0.9 ] x m -0.12 a L 0.98

.

(23)

Correlation III as suggested here provides an excellent fit with a maximum deviation of 16 %, as

seen in Fig. 2 through Fig. 11. As can be seen, the data is well represented in the entire range of

quality.

4.7

Discussion of Results

14

Figures 2 through 11 show the results of the two-phase correlation schemes discussed in this study. Alternate figures show the predicted heat transfer coefficient plotted against the experimental heat transfer coefficient with 20% error bounds. It is easily seen from the figures that the Yan and Lin correlation (eq. 9) yields a large discrepancy, and the Kandlikar correlation (eq. 16) yields a different curve form the experimental data. The newly developed correlations, Correlation II (eq. 21) and Correlation III (eq. 23) both provide an excellent fit to the data set. Correlation III however is developed specifically for the present data set. It lacks the theoretical basis, and the improvement over Correlation II is quite small, about 1 percent. Therefore Correlation II represented by eq. (21) is recommended as the final correlation in the present work.

5.

CONCLUSIONS

The experimental data for evaporation of refrigerant R-134a in a plate heat exchanger obtained by Yan and Lin (1999b) is used in developing two-phase flow boiling correlation in this study. As a result of the present work, the following observations can be made:

A single-phase correlation, Correlation I (eq. 8), is developed for the single-phase heat

transfer in the 60 degree chevron plate heat exchanger with D h =6.6 mm.

This correlation is

able to represent the experimental single-phase data to within 3 percent. The Kandlikar (1991) scheme for augmented tubes and compact evaporators resulted in a reasonable overall accuracy, but the trend in the high quality region was not correctly represented. The original correlation was intended for qualities below 0.8.

Two modified correlaions, Correlations II and III were developed to represent the two-phase data for R-134a in plate heat exchanger obtained by Yan and Lin (1999b). In Correlation II, the basic form of the Kandlikar (1991) correlation is retained, but the exponents for Bo, Co, and (1-x), and the constants in the correlation are re-evaluated from the best fit to the experimental data. Correlation II is able to correlate the data within 17 percent mean error. It is also able to represent the variation of heat transfer coefficient with quality accurately in the entire range of quality for all mass flux, heat flux and pressure conditions.

15

Correlation III is developed as a simplified form as given by eq. (23). It is obtained as the

best fit to the data, resulting in a mean error of 16 percent. However, since the correlation

lacks a theoretical basis, and the improvement over Correlation II is not significant, it is not

recommended.

Correlation II, given by eq. (21) , is recommended for correlating the flow boiling heat

transfer coefficient for R-134a in the 60 degree chevron plate heat exchanger investigated by

Yan and Lin (1999b).

6. REFERENCES

Akers, W. W., Deans, H. A., and Crosser, O. K., 1958, “Condensation heat transfer within horizontal tubes,” Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 54, pp. 89-90. Bergles, A. E., and Rohsenow, W. M., 1964, “The Determination of Forced Convection, Surface Boiling Heat Transfer,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 86, pp. 365-372. Chen, J. C., 1966, “Correlation for Boiling Heat Transfer to Saturated Fluids in Convective Flow,” Ind. Engng Chem. Proc. Des. Dev., Vol. 5, pp. 322-329.

Dittus, F. W. and Boelter, L. M. K., 1930, “Heat Transfer in Automobile Radiators of the Tubular Type,” Publications in Engineering, Vol. 2, p. 443, University of California, Berkeley. Foster, H. K., and Zuber, N., 1955, “Dynamics of Vapour Bubbles and Boiling Heat Transfer,"”A. I. Ch. E. Jl, Vol. 1, pp. 531-535. Gnielinski, V., 1976, “New Equations for Heat and Mass Transfer in Turbulent Pipe and Channel Flow,” International Chemical Engineering, Vol. 16(2), pp. 359-367. Gungor, K. E., and Winterton, R. H. S., 1986, “A General Correlation for Flow Boiling in Tubes and Annuli,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 351-

358.

Hewitt, G. F., Shires, G. L., and Bott, T. R., 1994, Process Heat Transfer, CRC Press, Florida, pp. 201-203, 327-363. Incropera and Dewitt, 1981, Fundamentals of Heat Transfer, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 399-407. Incropera, F. P., and Dewitt, D. P., 1990, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, Third Edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 504-505. Kandlikar, S. G., 1990, “A General Correlation for Saturated Two-Phase Flow Boiling Heat Transfer Inside Horizontal and Vertical Tubes,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 112, pp. 219-228. Kandlikar, S. G., 1991, “A Model for Correlating Flow Boiling Heat Transfer in Augmented Tubes and Compact Evaporators,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 113, pp.

966-972.

Kattan, N., Thome, J. R., and Favrat, D., 1998a, “Flow Boiling in Horizontal Tubes: Part 1-Development of a Diabatic Two-Phase Flow Pattern Map,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.120, pp. 140-147.

16

Kattan, N., Thome, J. R., and Favrat, D., 1998b, “Flow Boiling in Horizontal Tubes: Part 2-New Heat Transfer Data for Five Refrigerants,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.120, pp.

148-155.

Kattan, N., Thome, J. R., and Favrat, D., 1998c, “Flow Boiling in Horizontal Tubes: Part 3-Development of a New Heat Transfer Model Based on Flow Pattern,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.120, pp. 156-165. Singh, A., Ohadi, M. M., and Dessiatoun, S., 1996, “Flow Boiling Heat Transfer Coefficients of R-134a in a Microfin Tube,” Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 118, pp. 497-499. Yan, Y.-Y., and Lin, T.-F., 1998, “Evaporation Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop of Refrigerant R-134a in a Small Pipe,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 41, pp. 4183-4194. Yan, Y.-Y., and Lin, T.-F., 1999a, “Condensation Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop of Refrigerant R-134a in a Small Pipe,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 42, pp. 697-708. Yan, Y.-Y., and Lin, T.-F., 1999b, “Evaporation Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop of Refrigerant R-134a in a Plate Heat Exchanger,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 121, pp.

118-127.

17

Table I - Summary of the Experimental Data and Rele vant Correlations

Investigator

Experimental

Test Fluid/

Experimental

Results

System

Parameters

Uncertainties

Gungor and

Vertical and

Data taken from 28 authors for 7 fluids for saturated and subcooled boiling

Used +40 % for experimental uncertainty

Developed an

Winterton,

horizontal tubes

additive

(1986)

and annuli

model based

 

on Chen

(1966)

Kandlikar

Augmented

Data taken from literature for refrigerants R-11, R-22, R-113

+15 % used for experimental uncertainty

Developed an

(1991)

tubes and

additive

compact

model to

evaporators

 

account for

 

surface

enhancements

Kattan,

Horizontal tubes, Smooth surface, Copper, D i : 10.92 – 12.00 mm

R-134a, R-123,

Accuracy; T: +0.10 o C G: +0.2 % P: +0.5 %

Developed

Thome, and

R-402A, R-404A,

two-phase

Favrat

R-502;

model based

(1998c)

G: 100 –

on flow

500

kg/s m 2

h: +7.2 %

pattern

 

T sat : -1.3 – 10.3 o C

X: 0.04 – 1.0 q: 0.44 –

36.54

kW/m 2

Yan and

Small pipe, Smooth surface, D i = 2.0 mm

R-134a;

Uncertainties; A: +1 % T: +1 o C P: +0.001 MPa G: +2 % q: +0.5 % X: +0.03

Developed a

Lin, (1998)

T sat : 5 – 31 o C q: 5 – 20 kW/m 2 G: 50 –

two-phase

additive heat

 

transfer

200

kg/s m 2

model, similar

X: ~0.05 – 0.95

to that

proposed by

h

r : +6 %

Kandlikar

 

(1990)

Yan and

Plate heat exchanger, 60 deg chevron, D h = 6.6 mm, Single pass, Three plates, Stainless steel

R-134a;

Accuracy; A: +7e-05 m 2 T: +0.2 K P: +0.002 MPa G: +2 %

Developed a

Lin, (1999b)

X: 0.1 – 0.9 P: 0.675 – 0.8 MPa q: 11 –

correlation to

model two-

phase

evaporation

15

kW/m 2

X: +0.03

heat transfer

G: 55 –

h

r : +15 %

coefficient of

 

70

kg/s m 2

 

refrigerant

T sat : 25.5 – 31 o C

R-134a

18