0
Errata

Erratum: “Water-Heated Pool Boiling of Different Refrigerants on the Outside Surface of a Horizontal Smooth Tube” [ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, 2012, 134, 021502] OPEN ACCESS

J. Heat Transfer 134(9), 097001 (Jul 02, 2012) (3 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006484 History: Received March 15, 2012; Revised March 21, 2012; Published July 02, 2012; Online July 02, 2012
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE

In the paper [1], the author presented heat transfer coefficients during pool boiling of five different refrigerants (R123, R245fa, R236fa, R134a, and R22) on the outside surface of a horizontal smooth tube. The boiling heat transfer coefficients were derived from the measured overall water-refrigerant heat transfer coefficients, with the water-side single-phase convection heat transfer coefficients calculated by using the Sieder-Tate correlation [2] Display Formula

NuD=0.027ReD0.8Pr1/3(μμwall)0.14
(1)
in which NuD , ReD , and Pr are, respectively, the Nusselt number, Reynolds number, and Prandtl number of the fluid; μ and μwall are the dynamic viscosities of the bulk fluid and the fluid near the wall. According to Bejan [3], the Petukhov and Popov correlation [4] seems to be a more accurate correlation, which has been recommended through the author’s communication with the Technical Editor. The Petukhov and Popov correlation is reproduced in Eq. 2Display Formula
NuD=(f/2)ReDPr1.07+900/ReD-0.63/(1+10Pr)+12.7(f/2)1/2(Pr2/3-1)
(2)
for the flow conditions of 4 × 103  ≤ ReD  ≤ 5 × 106 and 0.5 ≤ Pr ≤106 . The friction factor in Eq. 2 is estimated by using the correlation f=0.078ReD-1/4 for ReD  < 8 × 104 .

This discussion aims to provide the boiling heat transfer coefficients when the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used to calculate the water-side convection heat transfer coefficients. For each refrigerant, the water-side flow conditions are kept nearly the same during the experiments, which covers a range of Reynolds numbers of 30,000 < Re < 58,000 and Prandtl numbers of 5.6 < Pr < 9.5; under these flow conditions, the predictions from the Petukhov and Popov correlation are 10.3–14.3% higher than those from the Sieder-Tate correlation. As a result, the boiling heat transfer coefficients derived by using the Petukhov and Popov correlation are lower than those derived by using the Sieder-Tate correlation by a degree that depends on the refrigerants due to their different boiling heat transfer coefficients on the outside surface. Figure 1 shows the comparison for the five refrigerants, where ho_PP and ho_ST are, respectively, the boiling heat transfer coefficients when the Petukhov and Popov correlation and the Sieder-Tate correlation are used. It is noted that the largest disparities, approximately 22%, are for R22 or R134a at the highest heat fluxes. For refrigerants R236fa and R245fa, the disparities are much smaller due to their lower boiling heat transfer coefficients in relation to those of R22 and R134a. For the refrigerant R123 that has the lowest boiling heat transfer coefficients, the disparity is less than 5% due to the dominance of overall heat transfer resistance on the refrigerant side.

Figure 2 shows the boiling heat transfer coefficients of the five refrigerants when the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used to calculate the water-side convection heat transfer coefficients. Also plotted in the figure are the predictions from the correlation proposed on the basis of the electrically heated boiling data by Jung et al.  [5]. A comparison indicates that the electrically heated boiling correlation underpredicts the water-heated boiling performances by 25–40% depending on the refrigerant and the heat flux. Figure 3 is plotted to compare with the predictions from the Cooper correlation [6]. Except for R123, the Cooper correlation predicts reasonably well the boiling heat transfer coefficients for other refrigerants (+3% to +24% for R245fa, −3% to −5% for R134a, −13% to +13% for R236fa, and +10% to +18% for R22). For R123, the Cooper correlation overpredicts by 17–77%; larger disparities occur at lower heat fluxes. Table 1 shows the disparities between the predictions from four other commonly used boiling correlations [7-10] and the present measurements. When the Sieder-Tate correlation was used, the predictions from the Gorenflo correlation and the measurements have a consistent disparity of 30% over entire heat fluxes for all the five refrigerants. In the case when the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used, the magnitude of disparities at higher heat fluxes for R134a and R22 are less than 30% (Table 1). As in Ref. [1], an attempt is also made here to multiply the predictions from the Gorenflo correlation by a constant to fit the measurements. A trial-and-error procedure led to a multiplier constant of 1.31. Figure 4 shows the predictions from the modified Gorenflo correlation (that is, the Gorenflo correlation multiplied by 1.31) and the measurements, with the disparities given in Fig. 5 for the five refrigerants. In Fig. 5, ho_pred denotes the boiling heat transfer coefficients predicted by the modified Gorenflo correlation, and ho_meas denotes the measured boiling heat transfer coefficients. The predictions from the modified Gorenflo correlation agree with the present measurements within ±20%.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Dr. Zahid Ayub for bringing this issue to the author’s attention. The author greatly appreciates the advice and help graciously offered by Professor Terry Simon and Professor Louis Chow with this discussion.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
This article is only available in the PDF format.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Comparison between the boiling heat transfer coefficients of the five refrigerants derived from the measurements by using the Petukhov and Popov correlation and the Sieder-Tate correlation to calculate the water-side convection heat transfer coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Predictions from the correlation proposed on the basis of electrically heated boiling data by Jung [5] and their comparison with the present measurements (the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used for the water-side convection heat transfer)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Comparison of the predictions from the Cooper correlation with the present measurements (the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used for the water-side convection heat transfer)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The predictions from the modified Gorenflo correlation (the Gorenflo correlation multiplied by 1.31) and the present measurements (the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used for the water-side convection heat transfer)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Disparities (within ±20%) between the predictions from the modified Gorenflo correlation and the present measurements (the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used for the water-side convection heat transfer)

Tables

Table Grahic Jump Location
Table 1
The disparities between the predictions from four commonly used pool boiling heat transfer correlations and the present measurements (the Petukhov and Popov correlation is used for the water-side convection heat transfer); “−” denotes that the correlations underpredict the boiling performances

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In