4.7 Article

Flow boiling heat transfer, dry-out vapor quality and pressure drop of propane (R290): Experiments and assessment of predictive methods

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER
Volume 126, Issue -, Pages 1236-1252

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.06.069

Keywords

Propane; R290; Flow boiling; Pressure drop; Dry-out

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents two-phase flow boiling heat transfer coefficient, pressure drop and dry-out incipience vapor quality data for refrigerant R290 (propane) in a circular channel. The test section consists of a single, horizontal, circular stainless steel tube whose internal and external diameters are 6.0 mm and 8.0 mm, respectively, whereas its heated length is 193.7 mm and the heat is provided through Joule effect with DC current directly applied to the tube. The experiments are performed by changing the mass flux from 150 to 500 kg/m(2) s, the heat flux from 2.5 to 40.0 kW/m(2) and the saturation temperature, which has been fixed to 25, 30 and 35 degrees C. The effect of all the operating parameters on the experimental data is investigated and discussed. An assessment of predictive methods concerning two-phase heat transfer coefficient, pressure drop and dry-out vapor quality is then performed. The correlation of Bertsch et al. (2009) better fits the heat transfer coefficient data, with a Mean Absolute Error of 30%. The experimental dy--ut vapor qualities arefairlyfitted with the predictive methods-of Kim-and Mitclawar-(2013), with a Mean Absolute Error of 5.7%, whereas the separated flow method of Friedel (1979) returns the best predictions for the frictional pressure gradient, with a calculated Mean Absolute Error of 20.8%. Finally, a new flow boiling heat transfer coefficient prediction tool is proposed by modifying the correlation of Wojtan et al. (2005) to match with the present experimental database, obtaining a calculated Mean Absolute Error of 8.2% and a Mean Relative Error of -6.0%. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available