Desalination, 36 (1981) 113-128

© Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam - Printed in the Netherlands

AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION

O . MIYATAKE, T . TOMIMURA, Y . IDE AND T . FUJ!1

Research Institute of Industrial Science, Kyushu University 86,

Hakozaki, Higashi •k u, Fukuoka 812 (Japan)

(Received January 7, 1981)

SUMMARY

An experimental study has been conducted on spray flash evaporation

occurring in a superheated water jet injected through a circular tube nozzle
into a low-pressure vapor zone . The effects of superheat, flow rate and noz-
zle diameter on spray flashing were pursued at 60 ° C jet inlet temperature .
From the experimental results, an empirical equation suitable for predicting
the variation of liquid temperature with residence time was deduced .

SYMBOLS

specific heat of liquid

7 diameter of nozzle
F coefficient in Eq . (23) (see Eq . (24))
h static liquid level
h coefficient in Eq . (9)
L latent heat of vaporization
M evaporation mass flux
Re Reynolds number defined by Eq . (1)
s -d(ln 6)/dt
(si d )ma, - asymptote of s td at large values of AT, (see Eq . (12))
To - temperature of liquid at the nozzle exit
TS temperature of external vapor
T. temperature of liquid in the center of jet
t time
I mean residence time of liquid in the flash chamber (MSF)
to time lag of the initiation of flashing
u mean velocity of liquid in the nozzle
We Weber number defined by Eq . (2)
z vertical distance from the nozzle exit

0011 .9164181/0000-0000/$02 .50 © 1981 Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company



114 O. MIYATAKE et al .

zo - uto
6Ts superheat defined by Eq . (3)
0 - dimensionless temperature of liquid in the center of jet defined
by Eq . (4)
Be dimensionless temperature of liquid at the flash chamber exit
(MSF)
V - kinematic viscosity of liquid
p density of liquid
a surface tension

Subscripts
1 - early evaporation period
2 - late evaporation period
i - intermediate between the early and the late evaporation periods .

INTRODUCTION

It may be expected that the most violent flash evaporation occurs when a
superheated liquid jet is injected into a vapor zone, because the jet is shatter-
ed into a spray by rapid bubble growth within it, without the suppression of
evaporation by the static pressure rise due to the liquid depth .
In an attempt to clarify the flash evaporation phenomena occurring in
such a process, an experimental study was conducted on a superheated water
jet issuing downward from a circular tube nozzle into a low-pressure vapor
zone .
There has, to date, been a reasonable amount of study made on the mech-
anism of spray formation from a superheated jet injected into the atmosphere
by applying high pressure [ 1-6] .
However, considerably less inforamtion is available on the rate of flash
evaporation of superheated liquid jets . The only experimental work known
to the authors is the work of Tokmantsev and Chernozubov [7] , which deals
with the change in the temperature of liquid along the length of superheated
water outflow through a 60 mm dia sharp-edged round apperture .

EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS

The experimental apparatus is shown schematically in Fig . 1 . Distilled

water, used as a working fluid, is pumped from the storage tank (1) through
the electric heater (4) and heated up to 60 ° C . After leaving the heater, the
heated water is injected downward through the circular tube nozzle (6) into
the flash chamber (7) 80 cm X 80 cm X 60 cm (length X width X height)
having two transparent sides, where a portion of it flashes off as vapor, and
the remaining water returns to the storage tank .


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 115

t0 Tank
• Pnp
• Volt Slider
4Q Heater
• Flow Meter
• Nozzle
• Flash Chamber
() Manometer
• Condenser
® Ejector
• Thermocouple

Fig. 1 . Schematic of experimental apparatus .

Most of the vapor generated in the flash chamber condenses in the con-
denser (9) and returns to the storage tank, but the rest of it is ejected by the
water ejector (10) . Thus, the system operates semi-closed loop .
The pressure in the flash chamber was measured both with the U-tube
manometer (8) and the Fortin's barometer, and by way of precaution a closed
U-tube manometer was also used . The temperatures were measured with six-
teen sets of 0 .5 mm OD chromel-alumel sheathed thermocouples (T) . Four
of them were used for checking steady-state conditions and twelve for measur-
ing the temperatures of liquid jet, which were installed in each place of the
test loop and in the flash chamber, respectively .
Each of the twelve thermocouples was fixed on the top surface of a teflon
cylindrical piece, 14 mm long and 4 mm in diameter, which was laid on a
movable horizontal bar, in order to measure the temperature of liquid film
formed by the colliding droplets .
The nozzles used were made of glass tube, and had internal diameters of
0 .346, 0 .502 and 0 .815 cm_ The lengths were 12, 25 and 25 cm, respectively .
The liquid was substantially deaerated by submitting it to more than three
hours' preliminary flashing .
The experiments were conducted under the conditions of the nozzle dia-
meter, d, and the mean velocity of liquid in the nozzle, u, as shown in Table
1, by changing the superheat, AT., to the widest possible range for the tem-
perature of liquid at the nozzle exit T o = 60 °C .
The values of the Reynolds number, Re, and the Weber number, We, de-
fined by the following equations are also given in Table I .
116 0 . MIYATAKE et al .

TABLE I
EXPERIMENTAL REGIONS

Symbol d cm u curls Re we

O 0 .346 908 0 .66 X 10S 65_1

O 0.346 1170 0 .86 x 13 5 33.9
• 0 .346 1380 1 .02 x 10 5 99 .3
Is 0 .502 960 1 .02 X 10 5 83 .0
a 0 .502 1150 1 .23 X 10 5 99.4
0.815 592 1 .02 X 10 5 65.2
A 0 .815 762 1 .32 x 10' 83 .9
0 .815 898 1 .55 X 10 5 98.9

ud
Re = (1)
We= (dp)1,1
u a (2)

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DERIVATION OF EMPIRICAL EQUATIONS

The superheat, AT, and the dimensionless temperature of liquid in the

center of jet, 0, are defined respectively as,
A T' = TO - TS (3 )

T2 -
0 = To TS (4)
-T4
where To is the temperature of liquid at the nozzle exit, T.. the temperature
of liquid in the center of jet and TS the temperature of external vapor which
can be regarded as the saturation temperature corresponding to the vapor
pressure in the flash chamber, the differences between the two being within
±0 .19 ° C and *_0 .08° C in average for a range of experiments .
The residence time of jet in the flash chamber from z = 0 to 2 =z is calcu-
lated from
z
t=- (5)
u
on an assumption that the velocity of jet is equal to u.
The relations between 0 and t (or z) and the corresponding photographs
for various superheats in the race of We ~5 84 are shown in Figs. 2 and 3,
respectively .


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 117

1 .0

05
Q>

01

0.05

I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I l 1 1 1 I I 1 I
• 0.01 002 t s 0.03
11 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I l 1 1 I 1 I 1, 1 1 1
• 10 20 30 z cm 40

10

I I ,
0 .5
m

0 .1

0 .05

I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I. I I I 1
• 0.01 0.02 t s 0.03
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I . I I I I I I I I I
• 10 20 30
z cm

1 .0

05
0

0 .1

0 .05

I I 11 1 1 I I 11 1 1 1 1 t I I I
0 0.010.02 t s 003
L I I I I I I I I I I I t I
0 10 20 x cm
Fig. 2 . Variation of dimensionless temperature of liquid in the center of jet 0 with time t.


E 5
u

"10

15 - O O
(2) ®
oTs < 0 °C 3 .7 °C 7.7 °C 11 70C 15 .9 °C 19 .6 °C 21,9°C
d=0 .346 cm
0

N
10

15 - O ©
S 40
< 0 °C 3 .9 °C 7.8 °C 11 .9 °C 15 .0 °C 17 .9 °C <0°C 3 .7°C 7.5°C 11 5°C
Js
d =0 .502 cm d=0815 cm
To = 60 °C We= 83 - 84

Fig . 3 . Spray flash evaporation phenomena, (Encircled numbers correspond to those in Fig . 2) .


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 11.9

1 .0! I 1 i I I I I
I 1 1
, t, 4
To = 60 °C
aTs = 14 9 °C
d =0346 cm
~A .
Re = 1 02x105

0 .1

0.05 i
1 1 II I P I I I I I I i i--i I I

0 0.01 0.02 t 5 0.03

Fig . 4 . Typical relation between B and t .

With the increase of AT, the flashing becomes more violent, and the liquid
column which is seen near the nozzle exit becomes shorter, letting 0 drop
faster . For example, as 0 = 0 .1 at z = 20 cm in the case of AT, = 15 °C and d
= 0 .502 cm, the temperature of jet decreases from 60 °C to 46 .5° C within
the interval of approximately 21 milliseconds . The photographs of cold jets
injected into the atmosphere (AT, < 0) are also shown in Fig . 3 for reference,
and from these it can be seen that the jets continue to flow without being
atomized*, in actuality, as far as the flash chamber floor at z = 40 cm . Thus,
the disintegration of the liquid column is caused by the effect of superheat .
In the case of lower superheats, although the droplets splash from the liquid
surface, the liquid column remains in the core of jet and consequently, 0 de-
creases slowly .
When the superheat increases to some extent, however, violent spray flash-
ing begins to occur, causing the liquid column to disintegrate in the early
period of evaporation, after which slower evaporation of generated droplets
is induced . As the spray flash evaporation undergoes two exponential decay-
ing processes, as shown in Fig . 4, the relation between 0 and t can be repre-
sented by the curve with the following two asymptotes .
0 1 =exp l -si (t - to )} (t o <t<ti) (6)
62=Bi exp{-s 2 (t-ti )} (ti<t) (7)
where t o is the time lag of the initiation of flashing, B i and ti are the values
of 0 and t at the intersection of Eqs . (6) and (7), respectively .
* The atomization occurs even in the case of cold flow for pg (u' dI2a) > S 11 1, where pg
is the density of gas phase surrounding jet . In the present experimental regions, the value
is less than 0 .7 . (It is less than 6 even in the case of injection of jet into the atmosphere .)


120 0 . MIYATAKE et al .

In the following, to deduce the general relation between 0 and t, the

characteristics of s, , S2, Bi, to and ti will be examined individually .

a) On s 1
Since the superheated liquid jet is found to be shattered into a spray grad-
ually with generating droplets from its surface, here is introduced a simple
physical model, where the diameter and the temperature of the liquid jet are
assumed to be equal to d and Tz , respectively in the early period of evapora-
tion . Based on this model, the evaporation mass flux, rh, can be derived as,
Cp pd dTz
rit = - - (8)
4L dt
On the other h-and, by taking the driving force for flash evaporation as Tz
-Ts , rh is expressed as,
rh=h(T~-TS ) ( 9)
Combining Eqs . (8) and (9) and carrying out the integration with Tz =To
at t = t o lead to
01 = exp -sl (t -
{
t04 (10)
where
4Lk
s, = CPpd (11)

Accordingly, Eqs . (6) and (10) are identical, and from Eq . (11) it can be
deduced that s t d depends both on the physical properties and the coefficient,
k, in Eq . (9) . The relation between st d and AT, for all of the data is shown in
Fig . 5 .
As can be seen clearly from this figure, s t d increases with the increase of
AT,, with a tendency to approach the following asymtote (sid)max, which is
independent of both nozzle diameters and flow rates .
(s l d) m ~ = 52 exp (0.053 ATs ) (12)
However, the relation between st d and AT, is rather complicated, and s td
approaches Eq . (12) at different values of AT, depending both on nozzle dia-
meters and flow rates .
When the values of st d/(si d)m . are plotted against (We/Re 1 /s)exp(MT'/
35) 2 for all of the data, they almost fall on a single curve, as shown in Fig . 6,
and the following criterion is obtained as the recommendable operating con-
ditions
We
35 :,~> 24 (13)
Re1ls exp
l- S)2


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 121

100
N
C
V

10

0 5 10 15 &Ts 20 25
dc

Fig . 5 . Plot of s I d versus superheat LET, . (See Table I for list of symbols) .

X 1 .0
m
E
ft low
4•
a ,b1%
Q
a H

,n 0.5
- e
t L
O

To = 60 •C
_ a o
0
I I, I t , 1 I I I I
015 20 25 30, 35
..
~xp`35/ (aTS C)

Fig . 6 . Plot of s,dl(s,d) . versus (WefRe' i " )exp(OTr 135) 2 . ( See Table I for list of sym-
bols) .


122 O . MIYATAKE et al.

0.4 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
N
A ® ∎o u To °60°C -
Eq .(14) A • b
0.2 G* 0 0 -
• s,d/(s,d) max - 0.55
0 l 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 l 1 1 r
0 5 10 15 20 25
ATS °C

Fig . 7 . Plot of s, /s, versus superheat AT. . (See Table I for list of symbols) .

An account will be added here for the reason why the Weber number, We,
defined by Eq . (2), beside the Reynolds number, Re, has been introduced .
Levich [8] proposed in his mathematical theory that the capillary pressure
which arose from the deformation of the free surface of liquid compensated
for the dynamic thrust of the approaching eddy . Applyingthis theory, Davies
and Ting [9] analysed the gas absorption into a turbulent jet of water**
suggesting that the turbulence of liquid near the free surface was more ab-
sorbed with decreasing We, and as a result, a thicker laminar layer was formed
there . In the present experimental regions, the cold flow is kept in a state of
liquid column as far as the flash chamber floor (z = 40 cm), as mentioned
before, and the disintegration of the liquid column is caused by the bubble
growth within it . The turbulence of liquid is thought to be as one of the
main factors of bubble nucleation . Thus, it may be reasonable to introduce
We from the extended Levich's theory which is concerned with the turbu-
lence of liquid .

b) On S2
A plot of 8 2 /s, against AT, for s,dl(s,d) m , > 0 .5 in Fig . 7 leads to the
following approximate correlation .

S2 = 0 .22 s, (14)

*" The analysis is developed based on the relation pap = 2a/R, where, uo is the charac-
teristic turbulence eddy velocity defined as (wall friction/p) '/' and R is the radius of cur-
vature of the deformation of the surface by approaching eddy . Substitution of the Blasius
equation into this relation gives,
d we ~'
= 0 .020
R Rei/°


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 123

c) On 6i
As O l = 6i at t = ti in Eq . (6) which contains sl , by makinga trial to arrange
8i with sl , it was found that Oi depended only on s i d for s,d/(s,d) max > 0 .5
as seen in Fig. 8, and the following correlation was obtained .

ei = exp ( - 0 .0156s,d) (15)

d) On to
The time lag of the initiation of flashing, to , corresponds to the time re-
quired for the jet to flow through the liquid column region near the nozzle
exit, where the temperature of liquid jet remains unchanged . The time to is
much longer than that predicted from the theory of bubble growth [10] , on
an assumption that the bubble growth starts soon after the injection of jet
from the nozzle (virtually, the liquid attains the superheated condition with-
in the nozzle) . It may be, therefore, presumed that t o is mainly the time re-
quired for the generation of bubble nuclei . This presumption is supported by
the fact that the liquid column almost disappears and the flashing is extremely
enchanced by the infection of artificial nuclei into jets by use of the electro-
lysis of liquid [11] . The length of the liquid column, z o , can be calculated
from

Zo = u to (16)

Fig . 8 . Plot of e, versus s,d . (See Table I for list of symbols) .



124 0. MIYATAKE et al .

Fig_ 9_ Plot of z o Id versus superheat AT, (See Table I for list of symbols) .

Fig . 9 shows the relation between z o/d and A71 for s,d/(s,d)m,, > 0 .5,
and t o is given by
zo u to 21 .9
(17)
d d (AT, ) it 3

e) On t;
Setting B, = 0 at t = ti in Eq . (6) and then identifying the result with Eq .
(15) lead to
t, - to = 0 .0156d (18)
Substitution of Eq . (17) into Eq . (18) gives the following expression for ti
for s,d/(s,d)m~ > 0 .5
d
t1 = 0 .0156 d + 21 .9 (19)
u (ATS) 1 / 3

f)On0
From the results obtained above, the variations of s i , 8 2 , 6i, to and tp con-
tained in Eqs. (6) and (7) with the experimental parameters, AT,, d, ii, Re
and We have been made clear, that is, from Eqs . (6) and (17),
d
B, =exp s, t-21 .9 (20)
ii (ATs) 1 /s ]
and from Eqs . (7), (14), (15) and (19),

0 =exp 0.22s, t-21 .9 u(QTs) + 0.055d (21)

I /3 d


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 125

These equations are applicable for the cases of s,dl(s,d) 3 0 .5 . From Eqs .
(12) and (13), s1 is given as,
( z
/8
s1 = 52 exp (0 .053 AT,,) for exp 24 (22)
[ 35s
In the cases of (We/Re i18 )exp(ATs /35) 2 < 24 (unrecommendable operating
conditions), the value of s, can be predicted by using Fig . 6 .
As a result of examining the transitional trend of experiments from 0 1 to
02, it was realized that 0 could be expressed well by the following equation .

B1
8-F (23)
[1-exp I -(01/02)2 11112
The coefficient F, which is added to satisfy the requirement of 0 = 1 at t =
to , is given by the following equation from Eqs . (14) and (15)

F= [1 -exp -9fl s=l s 1 1) ~] i/ 2 = [ 1 -exp 4 -exp (0 .0243s 1 d) J] 112 (24)

Thus, when the values of AT., d and ii are given, the relation between 0
and t can be predicted by using Eqs . (20)-(24) for the range of recommend-
able operating conditions expressed by Eq . (13). Fig . 10 shows a comparison
of Eq . (23) with the experimental results . The agreement between the two is
seen to be fairly good .

COMPARISONS OF SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION WITH FLASH EVAPORATIONS

OCCURRING IN OTHER SYSTEMS

From a performance standpoint, in Fig . 11, comparisons are made be-

tween the results of the present experiments and those of flashing of flowing
superheated liquid in conventional multi-stage flash (MSF) evaporators and
pool water exposed to a sudden pressure drop . The former data were taken
from the table in literature [ 12] which summarized all of the data presented
in OSW R&D Progress Reports and the latter were taken from literature [131 .
In this' figure, Be and I (both for MSF) are the dimensionless temperature of
liquid, 0, at the flash chamber exit and the mean residence time of liquid in
the flash chamber, respectively and h is the static liquid level .
As seen from the figure, the spray flash evaporation has not only higher
evaporation performance but also extremely faster evaporation rate than the
flash evaporations occurring in other systems .
Accordingly, in order to enhance the flash evaporation in conventional
MSF, it is essential that the entering superheated liquid should be exposed,
as it is, near the liquid surface in the same way as the spray flashing . By the
installation of a baffle plate in a flash chamber this can be fulfilled, and a


126 0 . MIV ATAKE et al .

1 .0

0.5

0.1

0 .05

1 .0

0.5
CZD

0 .1

0.05

Fig . 10 . Comparison of empirical Eq . (23) with experimental results . (See Table I for list
of symbols) .


SPRAY FLASH EVAPORATION 127

short flash chamber can have the same evaporation performance as a long
flash chamber [14-161 .

CONCLUSIONS

With regard to spray flash evaporation occurring in superheated water jets

of 60° C injected through a long circular tube nozzle into a low-pressure vapor
zone, experiements have been performed by changing nozzle diameter, flow
rate and superheat, and the following conclusions are obtained .
1 . With the increase of AT., the behavior of 0 shows a rapid decrease as
the time goes by . It is found that when AT, increases to some extent, the
spray flash evaporation undergoes two exponential decaying processes after
o
the elapse of time lag t , and the relation between 0 and t can be expressed
by Eqs . (6) and (7), respectively in each period of process .
2 . The product of s, and d seems to depend on the empirical parameter
(We/Re 1 B )exp (OTs/35)2 and its asymptote (s,d)max .
2
3 . The value of s is roughly proportional to that of s, .
4 . 0 f can be expressed by the function of s, d .
5 . The value of z o /d is related mainly to ATa .
6 . The difference between t i and to is related only to d .

1 .0~ I I 1 I I I I I I
m ∎ Pool water
x h=20cm .To=62-9°C cT =37°-
o •∎ + =10cm . =635°0 s
m t ∎
.5-
0

S +
x x x a x
O
X
d
X x x
x ,
x

Spray flash
+++++++++++
To =60 °C
Flowing liquid inMSFevaporators
• aTs=39°C h=31-55 cm
O without enhancer
∎ =3 .9°C T 52- 58°C
th enht ancer
with l °So==3 .1 -5l
I 1

I °F
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
t or i s

Fig . 11 . Comparison of spray flash evaporation with flash evaporations occurring in other
systems.


128 O . MIYATAKE et al .

7 . An empirical equation concerning the relation between 8 and t for the

recommendable operating conditions (We/Re 1 J 8 )exp(AT5/35) : 24 is corre-
lated well with the experimental results .
8 . The rate of flash evaporation of a liquid jet is extremely faster than
those of flowing superheated liquid in conventional MSF evaporators and
superheated pool water .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by Special Project Research Grants on Detec-

tion and Control of Environmental Pollution from the Ministry of Education,
Japan, for the fiscal years between 1975 and 1977 .
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance given by Itsuo Tanaka,
research assistant in the laboratory, in the construction of the experimental
apparatus .

REFERENCES

1. R . Brown and J .L . York, AIChE J ., 8 (1962) 149-

2. C .P . Armstrong and W-S . Harris, ASHRAE Trans_, 72 (1966)147-
3. J .H . Lienhard and J .M . Stephenson, Trans . ASME, Ser_ D, 88 (1966) 525 .
4. J-H . Lienhard, Trans . ASME, Ser . D, 88 (1966) 685 .
5. J .H . Lienhard and J .B . Day, Trans . ASME, Ser . D, 92 (1970) 515 .
6. S_ Suma and M . Koizunri, Trans . Japan Soc . Mech_ Engrs ., 43 (1977) 4608 .
7. N .K_ Tokmantsev and V .B . Chernozubov, Proc . 4th Int . Symp . on Fresh Water from
the Sea, 1 (1973) 497 .
8 . V .B . Levich, Physicochemical Hydrodynamics, (1962) Prentice-Hall .
9 . J.T_ Davies and S .T . Ting, Chem_ Eng_ Sci ., 22 (1967) 1539 .
10 . H_K . Forster and N . Zuber, J . Appl . Phys_, 25 (1954) 474 .
11 . O . Miyatake, T . Fujii, T . Hashimoto, T. Tomimura and I . Tanaka, Proc_ 1st Conf . of
Asian Pacific Confederation of Chem . Engrs ., (1978) 175 .
12 . O. Miyatake, T . Fujii, T . Tanaka and T. Nakaoka, The Reports of Research Institute
of Industrial Science, Kyushu Univ ., Fukuoka Japan, No . 61 (1975) 5-
13 . O . Miyatake, T . Fujii, T . Tanaka and T . Nakaoka, Heat Transfer Japanese Research,
6-2 (1977) 13 .
14 . T. Fujii, O . Miyatake, T . Tanaka, T . Nakaoka, H. Matsunaga and N . Sakaguchi, Heat
Transfer Japanese Research, 5-1 (1976) 84 .
15 . O . Miyatake, T . Fujii and T . Hashimoto, Heat Transfer Japanese Research, 6-2
(1977) 25-
16 . O . Miyatake and T . Hashimoto, Kagaku Kogaku Ronbunshu, 6 (1980) 536 .