Progress In Nuclear Energy. Vol. 2, pp. 183-197.
0010
C)Pcrgamon Press Ltd, 1978. Printed in Great Britain
MODELS FOR ESTIMATION OF CRITICAL FLOW IN
TWO-PHASE SYSTEMS
JOEL WEISMAN and ADRIAN TENTNER*
University of Cincinnati, Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45221, U.S.A.
(Receiced 16 February 1978)
INTRODUCTION
The discharge of a liquid or liquid-vapor mixture at
high temperature and pressure to a containment
system at low pressure is a situation frequently en-
countered in the safety analysis of nuclear power
plants. The discharge flow-rate largely determines the
decompression rate of the reactor system, the pres-
surization rate of the containment and the forces on
the reactor vessel, structure and accompanying pip-
ing. Hence the accurate evaluation of blowdown
flow-rate is essential for the determination of system
response during a hypothetical loss-of-coolant acci-
dent. During most of the blowdown transient,
critical flow occurs and limits the rate of discharge of
the two-phase mixture to a maximum value depend-
ent on the conditions in the upstream vessel and/or
local conditions. Critical flow in two-phase systems
therefore continues to be of considerable interest.
Reviews of two-phase critical flow have been pro-
vided previously by Hsu 1, Henry et al.', Smith an,
and Simon ab. In 1976, Ardron and Furness a¢ com-
pared the critical flow models in common use with a
variety of experimental data. They found that agree-
ment existed only over a restricted range of condi-
tions. There have, however, been a number of recent
developments which warrant a further examination
of this subject,
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SONIC VELOCITY
AND CRITICAL FLOW
A sudden rupture of a pipe will generate a rare-
faction wave which travels through the system, away
from the break, at sonic velocity relative to the flow.
Simultaneously, the pressure differential accelerates
the fluid toward the break. When the fluid velocity
* Present address: Argonne National Laboratory,
gAS Division, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, Illinois
60439, U.S.A.
183
0079-653017810801-0183505.
at some point becomes equal and opposite to the
sonic velocity, the wave becomes stationary with res-
pect to an observer. We then have "critical" or
"choked" flow at this point and the downstream
pressure signals can no longer be transmitted to the
upstream fluid. Thus, the critical flow-rate is deter-
mined by the upstream and/or local conditions, but
not by the downstream conditions.
In single-phase flow the sonic velocity, a, and
critical mass flow-rate are simply related. The sonic
velocity, a, is determined by:
a z = gcvZ/(dv/dP),, (1)
where v is the specific volume and the subscript s
indicates the derivative is evaluated at constant
entropy. The critical mass flow-rate Gc is then com-
puted from:
G 2 = a2p 2 = gd(dv/dP)s. (2)
In a two-phase homogeneous mixture the sonic
velocity and critical flow are again determined by the
change in specific volume with pressure. However,
the relationship between sonic velocity and critical
flow is more complex in a two-phase mixture than in
a single-phase fluid. The change in specific volume
depends on the relative volumes of vapor and liquid
and the amount of vaporization which occurs during
the wave passage. A small, sharp pressure pulse moves
through the fluid so rapidly that essentially no phase
change takes place. In a continuous acoustic wave
of relatively low frequency, there is time for appre-
ciable heat and mass transfer and hence a lower
propagation velocity may be expected than for a sharp
pressure pulse.t This makes the sonic velocity
"t"Hsu t suggests that one should always distinguish
between the propagation velocity of a pressure pulse and
a sound wave of given frequency. This distinction appears
to be correct since Ardron and Duffey4 show that the speed
of sound becomes a function of frequency when thermal
non-equalibriumeffects are taken into account.
184 JOELWEaSMXNand ADRL~*4TENTNER
dependent on the frequency of the pressure signal,
When critical flow occurs, we have a standing wave
and the pressure change with distance is much less
sharp than at the front of a pressure pulse. There may
therefore be time for appreciable vaporization in the
vicinity of the wave front and the change in specific
volume with pressure can become much greater than
observed in the propagation of a pressure pulse. Thus,
the critical flow-rate computed as gc/(dv/dP)~, with
(dc/dP)= estimated assuming thermal equilibrium,
may be close to that observed. The value so computed
is significantly smaller than the value obtained from
a2p 2, where "a" equals the pressure pulse propaga-
tion velocity. The latter value---a2pZ--is approached
in the limit of very high signal frequencies and is
characteristic of so called "frozen flow" situations
(no phase change at wave front). It is therefore neces-
sary to consider critical flow and sonic pulse propaga-
tion velocities separately,
Since a standing wave is present, there is obviously
a pressure discontinuity at the location of the critical
flow. For fluids whose properties are not strongly
dependent on pressure, the change in specific volume
with pressure is roughly the same at the upstream
(location 1) and downstream (location 2) locations
d(~) _,-~(d._~) _,~
1 2' a i az
and eq. (2) holds in this form. However, for two-phase
flow and compressible fluids, whose properties can
vary significantly across the wave front, the behavior
downstream and upstream of the front are quite
different. The critical flow is determined by the
behavior upstream of the discontinuity. Equation (2)
then becomes:
G2¢ = gc/(dv/dP)l,
where the subscript I indicates that only the proper-
ties of the fluid immediately upstream of the point
with critical flow should be considered.
FACTORS INFLUENCING CRITICAL FLOW
Critical flow in two-phase systems is influenced by
two characteristic effects, not encountered in single-
phase systems.
(a) Thermal non-equilibrium
A pressure change in a two-phase mixture will
cause a change in the local void fraction. However,
we have observed that because of the finite rate at
which the void fraction can change, the actual void
fraction will not equal the equilibrium value c o r t e s -
ponding to the local pressure. This discrepancy will
go to zero as the rate of pressure change goes to zero
and will become more significant as the rate of
pressure change increases.
(b) Unequal velocities o f the two phases
Although in a single-phase mixture the sonic
velocity and critical flow-rate are not dependent on
the velocity of the fluid, the situation is more complex
in the two-phase mixture case. Here, the critical
flow-rate for the mixture is affected by the slip between
the two phases s since this influences the ratio of
vapor volume to liquid volume.
Both thermal non-equilibrium and unequal phase
velocity effects can be influenced by the mixture flow
pattern (e.g. annular flow, stratified, dispersed or
homogeneous flow, etc.). However, critical mass
flow-rates are generally quite high and under most
situations dispersed (homogeneous) flow will be
encountered. In this case, thermal non-equilibrium
effects may differ when considering a dispersion of
liquid droplets in vapor or bubbles of v a p o r dis-
persed in a liquid. Critical flow predictions based on
the assumption of a given flow pattern may be inade-
quate when applied to a substantially different flow
pattern 6.
A classification of the models predicting the values
of critical flow-rates, based on the foregoing ideas, is
presented in Fig. 1.
HOMOGENEOUS EQUILIBRIUM MODELS
FOR CRITICAL FLOW
The homogeneous equilibrium model is the
simplest analytical model which can be postulated.
The model assumes that:
(1) both phases move at the same velocity;
(2) the fluid is in thermodynamic equilibrium;
(3) flow is isentropic and steady.
no sup
1"-(HOUOOEnEOUS)
• THERMAL
EQUILIBRIUM /
t_=. SLIP
CRmCALFLOW
MOOELS
r - ' - so sup
THERMAL ._J
I
NON-EQUILIBRIUM /
,---sHp
Fig. 1. Classification of critical flow models.
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems 185

The model has usually been developed for the I I I I I I

situation where the fluid initially contained in a large
reservoir is discharged through a pipe having a dia- • I ~oo tb,/i..z 1
meter much smaller than the reservoir diameter. The ~EF t.~S9 ~ k./,. 2 3
fluid drops in pressure, vaporizes and increases in . Iioo B,,/tb. l
velocity as it flows through the pipe. Since the in- h~F L~Z.~ZG)tOSj/k~.J
creased kinetic energy of the fluid must result in a . i~ooo tb./=.,z-~
decrease in fluid enthalpy, we find by application of ioo --- GREF t*SSZ k~.z=-mZJ -=
foregoing assumptions to the continuity and energy
conservation equation that the mass flow-rate, G, is ~
related to enthalpy and specific volume by T: ~ ~ i ~ 0
G = [2#cJ" (ho - h)/v2]½, (3) ~'°
r
ho = upstream reservoir enthalpy,
h = local enthalpy= hs + xh:g, x"

h t , h:~ = enthalpy of saturated liquid and vapor- ~"

ization enthalpy respectively,
xvg,fluid
v = local+ x)vt ~_'~ ~'~/~x~~
specific volume -----(1 --

J = thermal energy to mechanical energy ~,

conversion factor,
x = quality.
For fixed stagnation conditions (upstream reser-
voir pressure and enthalpy fixed) the critical mass
flow-rate is obtained by finding the downstream
pressure for which G exhibits a maximum. The results
of these calculations for steam-water systems are
presented in Fig. 2.
It is to be expected that thermal equilibrium is
approached during blowdown in long pipes, while in
short pipes thermal non-equilibrium effects could
become significant. Accordingly, the equilibrium
models should yield better results when predicting
the results of long pipe blowdown experiments,
Moody 8 has considered the available data for blow-
down in long pipes. After comparison with non-
equilibrium behavior during depressurization he
concluded that if the pipe length is over 4 in. and there
are appreciable voids at the break location, equili-
brium states may be expected. He found that the
available data on the blowdown of reservoirs through
pipes of lengths greater than about 4 in. and with
substantial exit voids were predicted by Fig. 2 when
calculations were based on reservoir conditions. The
conclusions of Sozzi and Suthertand 9, Caraher and
De Young's ~° evaluation of semi-scale blowdown
data and Edwards '~ ~ observations tend to support
the above. As expected, it was found that the homo-
geneous equilibrium model underestimates the data
from short pipes and orifices, where non-equilibrium
effects can be significant,
Moody s points out also that although homogene-
ous theory using reservoir conditions provides a good
oJ E- .s
STAGNATION PRESSURE, Po/PREF ,0.25
I I I I I ]
°.°~ o z 4 s s ~o ~2 ~4
STAGNATmONENT,ALPV.%/hREF
Fig. 2. Critical mass flux for steam-water system based on
homogeneous equilibrium model.
prediction of critical flow-rates, it provides a poor
prediction of the pressure at the exit of the blowdown
pipe. He concludes that the mass fluxes are limited by
homogeneous choking near the pipe entrance, but
that a transition to slip flow occurs prior to reaching
the exit. He postulates that the choked flow condition
is produced at the exit and concludes that, if critical
flow-rates are to be evaluated on the basis of local
conditions near the pipe exit, a slip flow model must
be used. This is based on the fact that he found the
homogeneous model to underpredict the data when
using the local exit conditions to estimate reservoir
enthalpies. Although the use of a slip model moves the
prediction upward, in the right direction, it has been
suggested s that much of the observed discrepancy
is due to non-equilibrium effects rather than slip flow.
SIMPLE SLIP FLOW MODELS
Several models incorporating slip in the descrip-
tion of two-phase flow have been formulated and
used for the prediction of critical flow-rates. Fauske t 2
developed an equilibrium slip model for long pipes
which could be used with exit conditions. Fauske
assumed:
186 JOELWF.tSM.~ and ADRIANTE~rNER

(I) Average velocities of different magnitude exist for
each phase (i.e. slip flow is considered),
(2) The vapor and liquid are in phase equilibrium
throughout the flow path.
(3) Critical flow is attained where the flow-rate is no
longer increased with decreasing downstream
static pressure (i.e. [dG/dP]Ho = 0).
(4) The pressure gradient attains a maximum value
for a given flow-rate and quality,
If friction is negligible, the momentum equation for
isentropic, annular flow can be written as:
G 2 dv d P
g'-~ d"-z+ ~zz -- 0 (4)
A related approach has been used by Zivi t a who
concluded that the work of accelerating the two
phases to their final velocities is a significant part of
the total flow work. By assuming a thermal equili-
brium in an annular flow and by neglecting the wall
friction, he obtained the maximum exit flow rate by
maximizing E, the exit kinetic energy of the flow
G(OV v O V t )
dE 2Vv x + 2Vl - ~ (1 - x) = 0. (13)
0"~" =
The maximum kinetic energy is obtained when the
slip ratio, S, is calculated as

or
G2
s=g=
V. ( Pp°/
l~'. (14)

_ \do/,'
(dP~ (5) Equation (14) agrees with the result of Cruver and
where the mean specific volume v is obtained from Moulton t4, who used the criterion of maximum
x2vo + (1 - x)2vt system entropy to determine the critical flow condi-
v= , (6) tions. A theoretical formulation for slip ratio based
ce 1- ~ on interphase momentum exchange was incorporated
where x is quality, v~ and vz are the specific volumes in another model for two-phase critical flow-rate,
of the vapor and liquid, respectively, and a is the void proposed by Levy t s. Models employing either
fraction. When we introduce the slip ratio S, which is (pdpg)÷, (pdpg)~' or Levy's slip ratio predict nearly the
defined as: same critical blowdown flow-rate for given values of
Vo x 1 - ~ vt local pressure and quality t6.
S --- Vt 1 - x *t v~ (7) By the use of the assumptions employed in devel-
oping the homogeneous equilibrium model, except
eq. (6)becomes: that of equal phase velocities, Moody ~ developed
[(1 -- x)viS + xvv][l -- x(S - 1)] a simple slip model in terms of the stagnation proper-
v -- S (8) ties. From the energy conservation equation Moody
obtained:
The maximization of the pressure gradient
(assumption 4) is achieved by varying the slip ratio G2 = $2"2gc • J ' ( h o - hf - hfa )
while all other quantities are kept constant. We then IS(1 - x)v z + xvo]2[(S 2 - 1)x + 1] (15)
obtain:
__ ( v v ) Equation (15) is maximized with respect to the
0v = ( x - x 2) vt--~-~ = 0 . (9) slip ratio when
os s = ~o,/p~)÷. (16)
By setting the right parentheses equal to zero, the
slip ratio becomes: This agrees with the results of Zivi t a and Cruver
S = (vdvl) ½ = (pl/pv) ~. (10) andM°ult°nt*'Aftereqs(15)and(100arec°mbined'
the critical flow-rate is found by choosing successively
The mass flow-rate is then calculated by substitu- lower downstream pressures until the calculated G
tion of eq. (8) into eq. (5) exhibits a maximum. The predictions of the model are
G 2 -- - gc present in Figs 3 and 4. This model is relatively simple
~p to use and has been widely employed for critical flow
{[(1 - x)vtS + xvvJ[1 + x(S -- 1)I/S} estimation.
(11)
By making use of the fact that the term dvddp is negligible, the mass flow-rate can be written as:

G2 = -go . (12)
dvo dx
[(1 - x + Sx)x] - ~ + Iv,(1 + 2Sx - 2x) + v~(2xS - 2S - 2xS 2 + $2)] d'~
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems 187

More recently Moody s and Alleman et al. 1 • have SOPHISTICATED SLIP MODELS
observed that all of the foregoing slip models tend to It has been argued by Moody s that both Fauske's i s
overpredict two-phase vessel blowdown flow-rates and his own earlier work 16 as well as Levy's tS were
when measured vessel enthalpies are used for ho. As based on either energy or momentum conservation,
previously noted, Moody concludes that this is due but not both, and hence are not consistent. Moody
to a choked condition occurring near the pipe en- argued that a more consistent approach must take
trance where homogeneous conditions prevail, into account all of the conservation laws. He there-
fore, formulated a new slip model s based on the
mass, momentum and energy conservation laws and
,4ooo I I I I I l the second law of thermodynamics, concluding that
Po.3ZoGzp=, CRIT'CALPRESSURE
7 the critical flow is given by the determinantal equa-
-7 ~2ooo - /
.~ / ~o~oX/ tion: ] ']
ae /~ bl 012 a13
moss g.STAG,AT~0.. ~, \ \ y\
...so.E \ / \_~,\~'~ ~ b2 a22 a231 -- 0 (17)

~ ~ \~ b3 032 a33l
i 6ooo ~°~'~ ~ X ~ and the maximum stable, slip ratio S by:

i 4ooo a21 a22 b2 =0 (18)

o- - where
0
[
200
I
400
[
600
I
s~
[
loss
I
Izoo i4oo a 11
= (G/gc)Vm ' al 2 = (G2]gc) aVm/aZ '
STAGNATION ENTHALPY, h0 (.Stullb m)
a t s = (G2/gc) av.lOS, a21 = (G/gc)v 2,
Fig. 3. Maximum steam-water flow-rates and local stag-
nation properties for steam-water based on Moody a22 = (G2/2g¢)(av2/aZ) + a H / a z ,
model.
fl23 = (G2/2gc) aT2/OS, fl33 = 0,

I I I I I I a32 = &lax, = - [(GZlgc)(av=/aP) + 1],

PO=3206.2 psio CRITICAL PRESSURE
b2 = --[(G212O~)(OvZ/aP) + ahlae],

. - ~
"J-"
b3 =
0[~_~- 1 (mY' + "'SYu° - u'~2 d P 1 ,
~-~..-J600
-~ IO0O .~...~I 2o0 \~
uv = v ' G , v* = Xv,, + (1 - Z)Svz,
L.___ toss
=0 /-~ 6oo ~ A = Ao + A~ = area,
a L.__._ 600 ~
•oo I~ Z = flowing quality = u,,A,,/%GA,
u ~~_______ sou ,o
I~ s = entropy, u~ = velocity of liquid,
~ ~oo I~ vo v~ = specific volumes o f v a p o r and liquid,
~n tO0
91 z respectively,
-, I=

. ~1
0o
~~
,
v.=v* ('-.)
z-
s '
...(.
v, = - •
I
/ . . ~ s ~ , , ~ ,STAGNATION~R;SSURZ~l T = absolute temperature,
,o I I I I I I role, rues = vaporization and condensation
too 4O0 6OO SO0 ~000 ,too t4oo rates.
STAGNATION ENTHALPY, hO (Btu/|b m)

Fig. 4. Local static pressure and stagnation properties at t Maximum stable value of S is defined as maximum
critical steam-water flow-rates based on Moody model, value of S possible while ds/dp remains greater than zero.
188
Moody's results 8 are shown in Fig. 5 for both the
maximum stable slip value and a slip value of unity,
Moody concludes that the experimentally observed
critical flow-rate in long pipes agree with the predic-
tions of the slip model (with maximum S) when the
predictions are based on measured pipe discharge
properties. He argues that at the pipe exit a choked
slip flow exists. He concludes that when reservoir
enthalpies are used, the homogeneous model can be
used to predict the critical flow since a choked homo-
geneous flow exists at the pipe entrance. However, the
homogeneous model should not be used to predict the
pressure at the exit since the vapor is accelerated in its
passage through the pipe to the maximum stable slip
ratio,
Examination of Fig. 5 shows that extrapolation of
the slip model to S = 1 leads to flow-rates that are
generally higher than those computed using Moody's
maximum stable slip ratio. Tentner and Weisman 5
have pointed out that this is not realistic. Fauske ts
and Moody himself a have recognized that homo-
geneous flow (S = 1) leads to critical discharge rates
below those predicted by the slip model.
Glut and Fritte t9 have used an approachsimilarto
that of Moody s to obtain critical flow-rates. They
conducted a parametric study of the effect of the slip
ratio and found that based on pipe exit conditions
they could predict the observed critical flow provided
high slip ratios were used. They also found that their
i i ~lllu[ ~ ~ I llJ.j
MAXIMUM SLIP RATIO
.... 1.0 SLIP RATIO
(Ioo t~,/i,. 27
PREF = ~/.609.5 kN/m2j?
ilO0 0 t h i n / s , f t 2 2
GRE~"/.4ssz kg~/s-m2~
~ ~ : -
) I0 ~;~ '--~'~-'--"~--~ ~
~"
i
~ ~ d ~'~
r-
o 03 I I I Illl,I I Jlllllt]
0.001 0.01 O.t
QUALITY
Fig. 5. Critical flow-rate from revised Moody slip model.
JOEL W~LSMANand ADRIANTF.NTNER
model did not reduce to the homogeneous equili-
brium model when S ----1. This was apparently due
to the fact that slip derivatives were different from
zero even when S = 1.
The foregoing models have all used either a limiting
value for slip or conducted a parametric study to
evaluate the slip ratio which led to agreement with
experimental data. However, the slip ratios so ob-
tained are far in excess of those which are experi-
mentally observed in high velocity flow but under
non-critical flow conditions. It is now generally
recognized that, under non-critical flow conditions
the slip ratio approaches one as the mass velocity
approaches the high values seen under most critical
flow conditions. Tentner and Weisman s and Jones
and Saha 2° have pointed out that the assumption of
high slip ratios at critical flow conditions appears to
be inconsistent with what is now known about two-
phase flow.
The unrealistic nature of the slip ratios used in
several slip models is also indicated by an analysis of
the characteristics of the conservation equations.
Liczowski 2 t, Tentner and Weisman s and Tremble
and Turner 22 have shown that unrealistically high
values of the slip ratio lead to imaginary characteris-
tics and hence render the system of conservation
equations ill-posed. Tentner and Weisman s have
shown that, over much of the range of interest, the
slip ratios used in Moody's later slip model s lead to
imaginary characteristics. Tremble and Turner 22
have shown that both F a u s k e ' s ' a and Moody's early
I i I lll,[ modeit 6 exhibit imaginary characteristics for a sig-
nificant portion of the flow, quality and pressure
domain in the range of interest.
In addition to determining conditions where the set
of convervation equations is ill-posed, the method of
characteristics may be used to predict critical flow
conditions. The prediction of critical flow is based on
the magnitude of the characteristic slopes. Critical
flow is predicted when the smallest characteristic
slope,dz/dt,becomesequaltozero.Thiscorresponds
~,~, P/PREF to one of the criteria for critical flow, viz. that a
pressure pulse cannot propagate upstream. Tentner
and Weisman 5 used this approach for critical flow
predictions. They wrote the conservation equations as:
i Mass conservation:
(~ta2)OP+(QtSua2)uP au
ot
Ou Oct
J I ,1o.25 +[otpgS+(1-oOpl]-~-2+(p~-pl)-~-;,
t/~ U¢
1.0
+ (p,Su - p l u ) ~
oz = 0. (20)
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems 189

Momentum conservation: Solution of the last two equations in (25) yields

three sets of values of AI and ,~
0P
(¢tSua2) ~t + (1 + ~tS2u2fl2)
oz J = 2, 3.
Ou Substitution of these values in the first equality of (25)
+ [otpeS + (1 - ~)p 1] 0"~- gives for the characteristic directions:

+ + 2(I - \dr/ - + (26)

0ct To compute values of critical flow, pressure and

+ (pgSu - ptu) ~-~ void fraction are held constant and the value of the
flow-rate is increased until a slope of zero is obtained.
+ (pgS2u 2 - plu 20ot
) ~z -'c'w
A (21) Tentner and Weisman TM used slip ratios which
they considered to be in accord with current know-
Energy conservation: ledge. They therefore used Hughmark's 25 relation-
aP ship between X and a. This correlation correctly
[cta2Eg - I + n2~p9 + m2(l - ct)pl] • a--t" shows S decreasing toward unity as mass velocity
increases and is widely accepted as providing a good
0P representation of much of the available experimental
+ [°tuSEga2 + n2°tpguS + m2(1 - °t)PlU] ~ z data. Based on the finding of Husain and Weisman 26
0u that homogeneous flow existed at mass velocities
•+ [otpaS2u "1- (1 - g)pl u'] ~ - above 2 × 10 6 Ibm/hr ft 2, the Hughmark correlation
was modified so that slip ratios of unity were used for
+ [otpeSEg + txp~u2S a + (1 - or)piE 1 G ~ 2.2 x 106 lb.,/hr ft 2 and for 1.8 x 106 ~ G
Ou 0~t _< 2.2 × 106 lb,dhr ft 2 the slip ratio was taken as
the weighted average of one and that predicted by the
+ (1 - ~)ptu 2] ~z + (pgEg - paEt) Ot Hughmark correlation. The slip ratios calculated by
this procedure were shown to lead to real charac-
ar~ = q'w
+ (p,uSE, -- I, xu~.x) ~z -A ' (22) teristics over the entire range of interest 2..
Use of this procedure led to critical flow predic-
where tions which were very close to those obtained from
the homogeneous equilibrium model. This is n.ot
dp~ = a2 dhg n2 dhe _- rn2. (23) surprising, since at the large mass flow-rates generally
encountered under critical flow conditions the slip
Each of these equations are in the form: ratio is predicted to be at or close to unity. These
OP OP Ou Ou ~ results indicate that a correctly posed single fluid
A~a ~ - + A~2 ~-z + A~a ~ " + A~,, ~z + A~s Ot equilibrium model which includes all of the conser-
vation equations does extrapolate to the homogene-
d~ ous equilibrium model when there is no slip between
+ Ai6 "~z + A~7 = O, (24) phases. It is interesting to note that although
the Tentner-Weisman calculations disagreed with
i = 1, 2, 3. Moody's a when S = 1 was used, both models
After introduction of the unknown constants AI and yielded the same results when Moody's maximum
A2 and some algebraic manipulation, it can be shown slip values were used.
that It would appear that use of high slip ratios under
dz A12,~.1 + A2222 + Aa 2 critical flow conditions is unrealistic, even though
= this assumption allows improved predictions of
dt Axl)'l + A21"]'2 + Aal critical flow when properties at the break are used.
AI,L).l + A 2 , , A ~ + A a , , An alternative explanation of this apparently
,41321 -I- ,42322 + A33 anomalous behavior is required. Many investigators
believe that thermal non-equilibrium effects provide
= ,41621 + ,42621 "1-,436 '(25) the explanation. The data of Henry zT'~a where
Als21 + A2~2z + A a s " pressure distributions were measured in the axial
190 .JOELW ~ S ~ N and ADRIANTENTNER

direction show a very sharp pressure gradient at the
exit. Malnes 29 points out that this is what theory
would predict. The sharp pressure gradient at the
pipe exit may be expected to lead to departures from
equilibrium and hence to void fractions which are
lower than would be computed from homogeneous
equilibrium theory,
SIMPLE NON-EQUILIBRIUM MODELS
Non-equilibrium effects should be considered
when predicting critical flow through short pipes or
nozzles, predicting the discharge of a liquid which
was substantially subcooled initially and whenever
conditions at the break form the basis for the flow
estimate. Non-equilibrium arises because of the finite
rate of vapor generation during depressurization,
These effects can appreciably increase critical flow-
rates and velocity of propagation of a rarefaction
wave. The variation in behavior between homogene-
ous equilibrium prediction and that obtained assure-
ing zero vaporization (frozen model) is illustrated in
Fig. 6 for typical conditions,
Thermodynamic non-equilibrium plays a particu-
lady important role during the discharge through
short pipes. In a relatively long pipe line, where there
is adequate time for bubble nucleation and growth,
500 I I I I
,oo
~"
E 300
thermodynamic equilibrium may be closely ap-
proached at some point in the line. This apparently
does not occur in very short pipes or nozzles. Steam-
water critical flow-rates in varying lengths of pipe
have been determined by Zaloudek 3°, Fauske 3 t and
Uchida and N a n •a t-32 . The se studies indicate that the
critical flow-rate increases rapidly as the pipe length
decreases. The flow increase is greatest when the
upstream fluid is substantially subcooled, since the
fluid may then be subcooled until just upstream of the
break. The flow-rates in these cases significantly
exceed the predictions of the homogeneous model, or
the slip models of Fauske ~z, Moody s or Levy t 5.
Early studies of non-equilibrium phenomena in-
elude the work of Benjamin and Miller aa, Burnell a4,
Hodkinson as and Silver and Mitchell a6. Each of
these authors recognized the possibility of a meta-
stable liquid state and attempted an explanation or
correlation of the behavior seen. Burnell a4 assumed
that the water surface tension retarded the formation
of vapor bubbles and hence the delay in bubble for-
mation should be a function of surface tension. He
correlated the flow of flashing water discharging
through square edge orifices by
Gcrit = x/2gcpl[Pupstream -- (1 -- C)Psat'l, (27)
where C is directly related to the bubble delay time.
The recommended value for C is given in Fig. 7. The
magnitude of C determines the pressure undershoot
at the exit due to superheating of the liquid.
Zaloudek 3° visually observed choking behavior in
short pipes. He observed that an upstreana choke can
- form at a v e n a c o n t r a c t a , and a downstream choke
can form as the back pressure is built up at the exit
edge by flashing. He found that when choking
occurred at the vena c o n t r a c t a the critical mass
velocity was given by

/ _NO
~
VAPOR
Z,AT
O
,N
PREDICT,ONASSUMING Oedt = ClX/2gcpl[(Pupstr,am - Psat)'l, (28)

0.32 I I I | I

ZOO 0.30

o~='`
u /
o.zs
u 0.26
~ _
HOMOGENEOUS 0.24
100- EQUILIBRIUM /
PREDICTION / 0.2Z - -

0.18 I I I I I
1 I I o 2oo 400 600 8oo tooo 12oo
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 P o t ' psia
VOID FRACTIONQ Fig. 7. Pressure coefficient for Burncll critical flow equa-
Fig. 6. Effect of non-equilibrium on critical velocities, tion.
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems 191

where C1 is an empirically determined constant N ffi x J0.14 for x, g 0.14,

which ranged from about 0.61 to 0.64. When down-
stream choking was observed, the critical flow-rate
agreed with the correlation ofBurnel134.
Edwards I ~ examined non-equilibrium effects dur-
ing a blowdown and concluded that, when the liquid
is initially subcooled, there is delay between the time
the saturation pressure is reached and the time vapor
bubbles are formed. He concluded that for high
pressure water the delay time varied from about 1.5
msec at 350°F down to about 0.3 msec at 650°F.
Schrock et al. 37 used an approach somewhat
related to that suggested by Edwards~ ~ in the analysis
of their experimental data on flow of subcooled
water through convergent-divergent nozzles. They
assumed that the liquid becomes increasingly super-
heated as it moves in the convergent nozzle. When the
limit of metastability is reached, the vapor phase
appears suddenly and a two-phase equilibrium situa-
tion is instantaneously reached. It was also assumed
that further evaporation was precluded due to the
short residence time in the nozzle. To estimate the
limit of metastability they assumed that minute
bubbles of gas of radius Ro were present in the sub-
cooled liquid. The pressure difference and associated
superheat is thus obtained by the force balance
R o ffi 2 a / ( P ~ - Pi),
where:
o ----surface tension,
Pz = pressure of liquid phase (system pressure at
= given location),
N = 1 for x~ :> 0.14.
As did Schrock et al. 3~, Henry and Fauske ~8
argued that there could be little vaporization after
the throat. They also assumed the flow to be homo-
geneous and isentropic up to the throat and vapor
compressibility at the throat to follow a polytropic
process. With these assumptions they obtained for a
dispersed flow at the throat:
z = F~oVv _ (v v _ rio) ~(l -- Xo)N dx~
G¢ L nP [ sv~ - st~ d P
XoCprQ,nX:ttlT,xa3--i_
tLk/l_~_~x/)lg/
(31)
P(svo - sin) J]
where:
Xo = quality at stagnation conditions,
n = isentropic exponent for vapor com-
pression,
~ / = isentropic exponent for vapor com-
pression = Cp/Co,
Cp, Co----specific heats of vapor at constant
pressure and volume, respectively,
So,, s~~ = entropy under equilibrium conditions of
vapor and liquid, respectively,
(29) Soo,Sto = entropy at stagnation conditions of
vapor and liquid.
Equation (31) is coupled with the momentum equa-
tion describing the pressure history in order to obtain
a solution in terms of stagnation conditions

P~ = vapor pressure of fluid. (1 -- Xo)Vlo(Po - Pt) + Xo7....._~'(Porto _ Ptvo,)

Reasonable agreement with the data could be ob- 7'-- I
tained when Ro was taken to be between 1 × 10-4 ['(1 - Xo)Vl + XoV~t]z 2 (32)
and 2.5 x l0 s cm and both phases were assumed to -- 2 Go"
move at equal velocities (S = 1). The homogeneous
equilibrium model gave critical flows far below the Substitution of this equation into eq. (31) and re-
experimentally observed flows, arrangement leads to an expression for the ratio of
Henry and Fauske 38 have developed a somewhat throat pressure, Pt, to stagnation pressure, Po.
more elaborate non-equilibrium model for the dis-
charge of initially subcooled water from a nozzle, fl-- 1117"1~'- 1
They described the non-equilibrium behavior in 0eft° ( 1 - 3,/)-I- ,J-~--_'1
- - r e _

terms of an empirical parameter N, which related the ~ = Pt/Po = --1- 7'

actual change in quality with "pressure, dx/dP, to 2Pgtz - 7 ' -
dxe/dP, the rate of change occurring under equili- (33)
brium conditions: where
dx__ NdX~ ['(1 - X o ) N P t d s , i 1
d'-P dP" (30) ]/-- [(l/n) + (1 - Vlo/V~t)] LXo(S~-S~-~ ~ _ ] t

On the basis of the experimental data of Starkman _ Cp[~(l/n) - (1/7')'1

et al. ~9 they concluded that (Svo - Sto)
192 JOELWF.IS~,~Nand ADRIXNTENTNER

Z0V~o ZoVoo x,r = Nxe, (35)

~o (1 - - •o)Vto + ~foVoo (1 -- ;f)Vlo + ZoV~t where x, = thermodynamic equilibrium quality at
vvt = Vvo(t/-1/~) exit and
N=20xe 0<xe<0.05,
and the subscript t indicates throat conditions.
Once ,~ is obtained by solution of the transcen- N = 1 0.05 < x¢.
tial equation, G¢ is obtained from eq. (32).
The correlation given for N is stated to hold only For tubes having a length to diameter ratio (LID)
for a dispersed mixture of vapor and liquid which is less than 12, he assumed vapor generation could be
expected at a nozzle throat. In the discharge of a neglected. For longer tubes, he assumed that the
saturated or subeooled liquid through an orifice or actual exit quality xcx exponentially approached the
short tube, Henry and Fauske expect a separated long tube value. That is
flow pattern to be observed. The proposed correla-
tion for N is not applicable under these conditions, x,~ = XLT{1 -- e x p [ - - B ( L / D - a)]}, (36)
The model may, therefore, not be applicable to a where:
blowdown during a LOCA.
a = 12 for tubes with sharp entrance and 0 for a
smooth inlet,
NON-EQUILIBRIUM EFFECTS IN B----0.0523.
LONG PIPES
When the liquid in the upstream reservoir is suffi- With the assumption of isothermal behavior, the
ciently subcooled so that very low qualities are ob- critical mass flow is calculated, assuming slip is
served at the break, non-equilibrium effects become unity, as
significant even in long pipe lines. Discharge flows are 2 1
found to be substantially higher than predicted by the Ge = Fxvv "1 (37)
homogeneous equilibrium model on the basis of - ( v v - V~o)N dxZ]
reservoir conditions. The degree of non-equilibrium
LP dP1c~
decreases as the stagnation enthalpy increases, where the subscript "ex" indicates all quantities are
Tong and Bennett 4° suggest that when the liquid evaluated at the exit conditions. To do so, the exit
upstream of the break is subcooled, the Burnell pressure Pc, is required. This is obtained from:
model 3. (eq. 27)) may be used to predict the critical
flow-rate. When the quality of the fluid just upstream --=Pc" 1 G2 vt° + xcx(vv.e,, - Vto), (38)
of the break is low, they suggest a weighted average of r / = Po Po 2c2
the homogeneous and Burnell predictions, i.e.
where c is the contraction coefficient at the pipe exit.
x By using eqs (36)-(38) iteratively Gc may be evalua-
Gc = G, + (Gn - G,), (34)
Xtrans ted.
where: All of the foregoing non-equilibrium models allow
calculation of critical flow at the break but would not
G, = critical flow-rate predicted by Burnelrs allow estimation of choked flow at internal area
model (eq. (27)), changes. Tentner and Weisman s suggested that this
G , = critical flow-rate predicted by homo- could be done approximately by treating the fluid as
geneous equilibrium model, a homogeneous mixture and making use of the rela-
x = quality upstream of break, tionship between sonic velocity and critical flow given
Xt,o,~ = transition quality above which equili- by eqs (1) and (2). At low void fractions (a ~= 0.15)
brium may be expected (stated to be experimental observation of sonic velocity show it to
increase rapidly with decreasing void fractions,
approximately 0.02). although the homogeneous equilibrium model calls
Henry" ~ devised a simple model for tubes of inter- for it to continue to decrease until the system is all
mediate lengths. He described the non-equilibrium liquid. Tentner and Weisman 5 suggested that the
behavior in terms of the parameter N defined by homogeneous equilibrium G¢ be used for a greater
eq. (30). On the basis of long tube data he concluded than 0.15 but that at lower values of a a curve derived
that the actual exit quality XLT at the break of a from the value of the sonic velocity " a " at low fre-
long tube was given by quencies be used.
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems 193

THEORETICAL FORMULATION OF THE ~( ~ h , ) D p

PROBLEM O F NON-EQUILIBRIUM -- 1 -- cp= -- P= tv[J Dt
While the previously described approaches are
useful calculational tools, none of them provide a _ V~ c f\P~vPm
_ _ P= dp ) Oz 1 xq°,
Pm A h"
I°Fo '
fundamental description of actual behavior involved, pm p~,
The critical mass flow-rate may be calculated in a (42)
natural way by the method of characteristics if F, where
the actual mass rate of vapor generation, is known, I-
The procedure used is similar to that used when ht* = h'v + LVm + ½(1 - 2c~ V. ] V~
thermodynamic equilibrium is assumed. However, in k~_c] om.j 1 -- C (43)
addition to the conservation of mixture mass, momen- A = cross-sectional area,
turn and thermal energy, the conservation of vapor
mass must be considered. K r o e g e r ' " writes these c = vapor concentration (static quality),
equations as: ~, --- e/(1 - c),
r -- volumetric vapor generation rate,
Conservation of mixture mass:
• . -- wall shear,
10pmDht
__ + 10pmDP Pm C t. OVa,
__ p = perimeter,
Pm ~ht D t Pm ~P D t PIo D t az P - pressure,
dlnA II. = velocity of mixture center of mass,
= Vm d z (39) Vw. = vapor drift velocity = Vv -- I'm,
Conservation of vapor mass: V. = velocity of vapor,
D
10p. aVg,.~ ah t dP Dt
- - = substantial derivative with respect to Vm,
C VomPm ~ + - - ~ f ~ -- fl " ~ h,o ----difference between vapor and liquid enthal-
(v.. l Op., OVom~OP Dc pies(notnecessarilyequaltohtg).
+ c \ o Pm Op + -'~-p,] ~ + "Dr If the vector Y is defined as

+ 7, or. oz
=1 F - cVm dlnA (40) Y=
p= g dz " (44)
Conservation of mixture momentum: V=

i dpm dVom\ c~hl then the set of conservation equations can be written
7 Vo~ p'-~=Oh'---~+ 2V°" - ~ l ) ~z symbolically as

OV,.\ I aP A + B (45)
+ ~ v?.p-:I ~-
~p.
T- ~ 2 v , . ~ - ) + ~ 0z ~ ~= "
: , 2,v,. a "l ac With this notation the characteristic slopes, dz/dt,
+ c. + -Pv/Pt
- ~Vom+ "--~'c] az are obtained by solution of the determinantal equa-
tion
DV. +
+-6;- 2~V,.-~=
OV,. OV,~ I ~.
~ = -g~-7~7
Ix - B dz/dt I = O. (46)
The fourth-order determinant generally yields a
2 dlnA (41) fourth-order polynomial in dz/dt. Although the
- y V~= dz " equation is generally too complex to obtain a simple
Conservation of mixture thermal energy, where analytical solution, numerical solutions via the
the vapor mass conservation equation multiplied by method of characteristics are readily obtained for
h~, has been subtracted, is given by specific conditions. Four characteristic slopes are
obtained and when the lowest of these becomes zero
Dh t eVomdhl downstream disturbances can longer no propagate
(1 -- c) ~ -- ~'z upstream and the flow is choked. Kroeger "2 used this
194 JoFi WrasMxNand AD~,N TEI~T~
approach to determine critical mass velocities for
steam-water mixtures,
A very similar approach has been taken by Hilt and
Romero "3 in the SOLA-DF program. They write a
similar set of four conservation equations and assume
one-dimensional flow within the pipe and two-di-
mensional flow on the region outside the pipe. Their
conservation equations allow for non-equilibrium
phase transition rates and slip between the phases.
No special constraints are imposed in the flow at the
opening of the pipe but choking occurs naturally
when the downstream pressure signal can no longer
be transmitted upstream,
If the drift flux is taken to be zero (slip ratio = 1)
theandOthe vapor
f generation
f o rate, rI', is assumed
m to be
dP
F = p,,j8 -~- + F o ,
where p,, --- mixture density, then an expression for
the polynomial resulting from eq. (46) can be deter-
mined. The characteristic slopes are then found to be,
in order of increasing value,
~/ 1 model, I" would initially be lower than r , , then
dz/dtl. 4 -- V,, __. a o 1 - R~Sp,,ao '
dz/dt2,3 --- Vm,
where:
ao = "frozen" (no vaporization) homogeneous
velocity of sound
R = p~ + hi° (Op.~
p~ (1 -- ~ \0-~fJp
1 1 1 derivatives of the dependent variables. They found
--- + that such terms were required to give real character-
Pie Po Pl
hi, h/~ -----enthalpy of saturated liquid and vaporiza-
tion, respectively. When fl corresponds to the value
for homogeneous equilibrium conditions, dz/dt:.4
reduce (as expected) to VM 4- as, where ah, is the
homogeneous-equilibrium sonic velocity. Since cur-
rent opinion appears to conclude that S ~ 1 at the
high mass flows typical oferitical conditions, eq. (48)
should provide a good estimate of critical flow-rates
for a given set of conditions if ~ can be evaluated,
Various models have been proposed for the predic-
tion of non-equilibrium vapor production. A group
of these are of the "relaxation" type. In a typical
model of this type, there is no vapor generation until
a critical enthalpy,/I,, which is above the enthalpy
of saturated liquid, is reached. At that point, vapor
generation begins at a rate higher than the equili-
brium rate and then relaxes to the equilibrium state
by
F ----FtNl(xc - x),
where
x - actual quality,
x e -- t h e r m o d y n a m i c equilibrium quality
(calculated from h.), (49)
N 1 ----relaxation time constant (function of
pressure).
The thermodynamic equilibrium vapor generation
rate, F. (in the absence of external heat addition) is
given by
Ft -- Pm ( 0 ~ ) dP_~., (50)
(47) where (Ox/?P)s = change in quality with pressure at
constant entropy. Bauer et al.'" used this general
approach but replaced I't N1by p,,/Y, where "f is an
empirical time constant. Jones 45 has provided a
theoretical justification for eq. (49). Both Jones'5 and
Bauer 44 concluded that vaporization should begin as
soon as saturation is reached (h~-----h,,0. In this
exceed the equilibrium rate and finally relax towards
(48) the equilibrium rate.
It should be noted that eq. (47) can be put in the
form ofeq. (50). The quantity ~ would be (~x/OP),N t
(xs -- x) and Fo would be taken as the volumetric
vapor generation rate due to external heat addi-
tion.
The form of the vapor generation rate equation
(eq. (47)) agrees with the view, expounded by Bour~ "~
and Reocreux 47, that this equation should include
istics under all conditions.
Kroeger 42 examined relaxation models very similar
to that given in eq. (47) except that the driving force
was expressed in terms of c, the vapor concentration
or static quality. In one case he assumed that there
was a threshold value of c below which no vaporiza-
tion occurred while in the second, no such limit was
applied. He found that he could reasonably fit the
transcient data of Edwards and O'Brien "s with either
model. The data was not sufficiently precise to allow
him to determine which of the models were preferable.
Other authors "9-52 have followed a more mechan-
istic approach. The work of Edwards": along these
lines has been mentioned previously. Malnes 29
developed a model based on the gas dissolved in the
liquid. He assumed that the vapor generation per unit
volume was given by
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems
(a~ a_.~'~ (51)
F = po ~'i + V Oz/'
where a ----void fraction. He further assumed that
the number of bubbles per unit volume remained
constant during the transient and was only a function
of (gpdo) where ¢ is surface tension. After combining
the vaporization due to bubble growth and droplet
flashing, he obtained
~ ~(Cp.lktp~)
F = Ro p~ F + r l } ~ By using Plesset and Zwick's ss equation for bubble
P~
[(1 - 0t)t(T, - T~.t)2], (52)
where:
T~, T..t = liquid and saturation temperatures, res-
pectively,
Ro, RI = empirical constant,
F = 1 -- 2a (a <~ 0.5),
F = 0 (a > 0.5),
Cp.t = specific heat of liquid,
htg = latent heat of vaporization,
Malnes applied this model to the data of Henry et
al. sa which were taken with a nitrogen cover gas as
the pressurization for the upstream reservoir. He
needed a fairly large gas content to explain the void
fractions observed before saturation was reached,
This is reasonable in view of the N2 cover gas. Low
dissolved gas contents gave agreement for Fauske,sS4
long tube data but for lengths below 5 cm the predic-
tions were lower than the data. This was attributed to
the delayed flashing phenomenon which was not
included in the model,
Wolfert 49, Rivard and Torrey s° and Friz et aL sl
all developed models in which the vaporization rate
is a function of T~ -- T,t) and the number of bubble
nuclei per unit volume originally present. All of these
approaches could be made to fit some of the transient
data available. However, the bubble densities needed
to obtain agreement with the data varied widely and
depended strongly on the model used.
RohatgiandReshotkoS2triedtoavoidtheassump_
tion of a constant, arbitrary number of bubble nuclei
per unit volume. They concluded that the rate of
production of nuclei in the liquid was given by
dN, ~/--~¢ [" --16~03 KOTJ
d"t' = Nh ~ exp L3(P - P,) 2 , (53)
where:
N: ----bubble nuclei per unit volume of liquid,
195
Nh ----number of heterogeneous nucleation sites
per unit volume,
Po --- vapor pressure at liquid temperature, T~,
P~ -----liquid pressure,
mo -----molecular weight of vapor,
K = Boltzman constant,
~ -----[(2 cos 0)(I + cos 0)2]/4,
0 -----contact angle.
growth and following the bubbles from the point of
nucleation, they were able to calculate the void frac-
tion, a, as a function of axial position. Although N~
is no longer assigned arbitrarily, empirical values of
Nj and 0 are needed. Rohatgi and Reshotko s2 used
data for nitrogen vaporization to obtain estimates of
these quantities. The model was not compared with
steam-water data.
Jones and Saha s~ provide an excellent review of the
various non-equilibrium vapor generation models
which have been proposed. They conclude that none
of the models provides a general correlation which
can be applied to the blowdown situation with
confidence.
More recently, Ardron 5~ has devised a promising
non-equilibrium model for the blowdown of satur-
ated or subeooled water. He assumes that bubble
growth does not begin until a critical superheat, 0c,
is reached and that the number of bubble nuclei
depends on the initial number of heterogeneous
nucleation sites, N,, per unit mass. Bubble growth
rates are assumed to follow Plesset and Zwick's s s
relationship. Critical flow-rates are computed by
assuming a flow and numerically integrating the set
of conservation equations beginning at the pipe
entrance region where flow velocities are low. Critical
flow is assumed to occur when the pressure gradient
becomes arbitrarily large ( > 5 0 bar/ram) at the pipe
exit. Ardron found that he could fit a wide variety of
experimental data by choosing 0c = 3.0°C and
Ns ---- 103/kg. Calculations made for a variety of
pipe sizes and lengths indicate that pipe lengths in
excess of 500 mm are required for critical flows to
closely approach those predicted by the homogene-
ous-equilibrium model.
CONCLUSIONS
There is now general agreement that critical mass
flow-rates through long pipes can be calculated using
a homogeneous-thermal equilibrium model based on
stagnation properties providing the exit quality is
substantial. Discrepancies are observed when this
196 JOELW F ~ , N and ADRIANTEN'rNEg
model is used to compute the pressure at the pipe exit. 2. Hem'y R. E., Grohncs M. A. and Fauske H. K. (1975)
Although slip flow models appear to provide reason- Pressure drop and compressible flow of cryogenic
vapor mixture, in Heat Transfer at Low Temperatures
able predictions of the pressure drop, the slip ratios (Ed. Frost W.) Plenum Press, New York.
which must be used are unrealisticallyhigh. It appears 3a. Smith R. V. (1973) Critical flow for cryogenic fluids,
that the actual slip ratios under most critical flow con- National Bureau of Standards, NBSTech. Note. 633.
ditions are near unity. Thermodynamic non-cquili- 3b. Simon J. (1973) Topical meeting on water reactor
safety, Salt Lake City, USAEC Report CONF-73034,
brium in a portion of the pipeline would appear to p. 172.
provide a more acceptable explanation. Further appli- 3c. Ardron K. H. and Furncss R. A. (1976) Nucl. Engng
cation of non-equilibrium models to this problem Des. 39, 257.
would be desirable. 4. Ardron K. H. and Duffey R. B. (1977) A two-fluid
Non-equilibrium effects must be considered when continuance model for acoustic wave propagation in a
non-equilibrium liquid-vapor flow, Berkeley Nuclear
estimating critical mass flow-rates through nozzles, Lab., RD-B-N3915.
short pipes or long pipes under conditions where the 5. Tentner A. and Weisman J. (1978) The use of the
exit quality is low. Empirical models (eqs (27) or method of characteristics for examination of two-phase
(34)) or semi-empirical models (eqs (31) or (36)) flow bchavior, Nucl. Technol. 37, 19.
would now appear to provide the most reliable flow 6. Henry R. E., Grolmes M. A. and Fauske H. K. (1971)
Pressure pulse propagation in two-phase one-and-two-
estimates for these situations, component mixtures, ANL-7792, March.
The tools for correctly dealing with non-equili- 7. Tong L. S. and Weisman J. (1970) Thermal Analysis
brium effects are now being developed. The use of a of Pressurized Water Reactors, American Nuclear
set of four conservation equations (mixture energy, Society.
mass, momentum and vapor mass) in conjunction 8. Moody F. J. (1975) Maximum discharge rate of
liquid-vapourmixtures from vessels,in Non-Equilibrium
with the method of characteristics, or one of its Two-PhaseFlows (Eds Lahey R. and Wallis G. B.)
variants, provides a mathematically rigorous compu- ASME, New York.
tational method. Choking at the break or at internal 9. Sozzi G. L. and Sutherland W. A. (1975) Critical flow
area change may be computed in this manner. The of saturated and subcooled water at high pressure, in
Non-Equilibrium Two-Phase Flows, (Eds Lahey R. and
approach "3 wherein the flow within the pipe is taken Wallis G. B.) ASME, New York.
as one-dimensionaland the flow outside the pipe to be 10. Caraher D. L. and DeYoung T. L. (1975) Interim
two-dimensional would seem to be most desirable report on the evaluation of critical flow models, Aero-
since it allows two-dimensional effects to be con- ject Nuclear Co.
sidered. As noted by Malnes 29, such two-dimensional 11. Edwards A. R. (1968) Conduction controlled flashing
of a fluid and the production of critical flow rates in a
effects tend to limit the pressure gradient at the one-dimensional system, UKAEA Report AHSB(R)
exit. 147, Risley, England.
The major difficulty in developing reliable non- 12. Fauske H. K. (1962) Contribution to the theory of
equilibrium estimates of critical flow is that of two-phase, one-component critical flow, USAEC
Report ANL-6633, Argonne National Laboratory.
properly estimating the volumetric rate of vapor 13. Zivi S. M. (1964) Estimation of steady-state steam
generation. Current work on various relaxation type void fraction by means of the principle of minimum
models is likely to lead to approximate expressions entropy production, J. Heat Transfer 86, 247.
which, by appropriate fitting to experimental data, 14. Cruver J. E. and Moulton g. W. (1967) Critical flow
of liquid-vapor mixture, A.I.Ch.E.J. 13, 53.
will provide satisfactory results under some condi- 15. Levy S. (1965) Prediction of two-phase critical flow
tions. However, it is not clear that such models can rate, J. Heat Transfer 87.
satisfactorily account for effects which may arise due 16. Moody F. J. (1965) Maximum flow-rate of a single
to such factors as variation in dissolved gas, change in component two-phase mixture, J. Heat Transfer 87,
flow pattern, etc. Models which attempt to describe 134.
the actual physical process of vaporization during a 17. AIlemanR.T.etal.(1920)Experimentalhighenthalpy
water blowdown from a vessel through bottom outlet,
transient have been proposed but none of these have BNWL-1411, Battelle Northwest l.ah., Richland,
as yet received general acceptance. Further work in Washington.
this area, particularly carefully controlled experi- 18. Fauske H. K. (1967) Propagation of pressure distur-
ments which can be used to check proposed models, bances in two-phase flow, Proe. Syrup. Two-Phase Flow
Dynamics, Eindhoven, Netherlands, Sept.
is greatly needed. 19. Giot M. and Fritte A. (1971) Two-phase two-and-one
component critical flows with the variable slip model,
Prog. Heat Transfer 6, Proc. Int. Symp. Two-Phase
REFERENCES Systems, Haifa, Israel.
1. Hsu Y. Y. (1972)Reviewofcriticalflow, propagation 20. Jones O. C. and Saha P. (1977) Non-equilibrium
of pressure pulse and sonic velocity, NASA Report aspects of water reactor safety, BNL-NUREG-23143,
NASA TND.6814. July.
 Models for estimation of critical flow in two-phase systems
21. Liczowski K. W. (1975) Stability analysis of RELAP-4
with slip, Trans. Am. nucl. Soc. 22, 278.
22. Tremble G. D. and Turner W. J. (1977) Characteristics
oftwo.phaseone-componentflowwithslip, NucI.Engng
Des. 42.
23. Fauske H. K. (1962) Contribution to the theory of
two-phase, one component critical flow, ANL-6633.
24. Tenmer A. M. and Weisman J. (1976) Characteristic
equations for a single fluid model incorporating slip,
Trans. Am. nucl. Soc. 23.
25. Hughmark G. A. (1962) Hold-up in gas--liquid flow,
Chem. EngngProg. 62.
26. Husain A. and Weisman J. (1975) Application of the
homogeneous model to two-phase pressure drop in
pipes and across area changes, WRC Report, COO-
2152-15.
27. Henry R. E. (I 970) Experimental study of low quality
steam-water critical flow at moderate pressures, ANL-
7740.
28. Henry R. E. (1968) Study of one- and two-component
critical flow at low qualities, ANL-7430.
29. Malnes D. (1975) Critical two-phase flow based on
non-equilibriumeffects, in ASME Symposium Volume
Non-Equilibrium Two-PhaseFlows (Eds Lahey R. T. and
Wallis G. B.)ASME, New York.
30. Zaloudek F. R. (1963) The critical flow of hot water
through short tubes, Hanford Atomic Products Opera-
tion, Interim Report HW-77594.
31. Fauske H. W. (1965) The discharge of saturated
water through tubes, Chem. Engng Prog. Symp. Ser.
61.
32. Uchida, H. and Nariai H. (1966) Discharge of satur-
ated water through pipes and orifices, Proc. 3rd Inter-
national Heat Transfer Conference, Vol. V.
33. Benjamin M. W. and Gaud-Miller J. (1941) Trans.
Am. Soc. mech. Engrs 63, 419.
34. Burnell J. G. (1947) Flow of boiling water through
nozzles, orifices and pipes, Engineering, Lond. 164,
572.
35. Hodkinson B. (1937) Engineering, Lond. 43, 629,
36. Silver R. S. and Mitchell J. A, (1945) Discharge of
saturated water through nozzles, Trans. NE. Cst lnstn
Engrs Shipbldrs 62, 51.
37. SchrockV.E.,StarkmanE. S.andBrownR.A.(1977)
Flashing flow of initially subcooled water in convergent-
divergent nobles, J. Heat Transfer 99, 263.
38. Henry R. E. and Fauske H. K. (1971) The two-phase
critical flow of one-component mixtures in nozzles,
orifices and short tubes, J. Heat Transfer 93, 179.
39. Starkman E. S., Schrock V. E., Neuscn K. F. and
Maneely D. J. (1964) Expansion of very low quality
two-phase fluid through a convergent nozzle, J. b a s .
Engng 86, 267.
40. Tong L. S. and Bennett G. L. (i 977) NRC water reac-
tot safety research progress, NucL Saf 18, 1.
41. Henry R. E. 0970) Nucl. Sci. Enfln.q41, 36.
19"/
42. Krocger P. G. (1977) Application of non-equilibrium
drift flux model to two-phase blowdown experiments,
8NL-NUREG-21506-R (1977) also Proc. OECD/NEA
Specalists Meeting on Transient Two-Phase Flow,
Pergamon, Oxford (1978).
43. Hirt C. W. and Romero N. C. (1975) Application of a
drift flux model to flashing in straight pipes, NRC
Report LA-6OO5-MS, Los Alamos Scientific Lab.
44. Bauer G. R. and Houdayer Surean H. M. (1978) A
non.equilibrium axial flow model and application to
loss-of coolent accident analysis, Proc. OECD/NEA
Specialists Meeting on Transient Two-Phase Flow,
Pergamon, Oxford.
45. Jones O. C. (1977) Light water reactor thermal hy-
draulic development program, Quarterly Report for
period Jan-Mar. 1977, Reactor Safety Research Pro-
grams, BNL-NUREG-50661, Brookhaven National Lab.
46. Bour~ J., Fritte A., Giot M. and Reocreux M. (1973)
Choking flows and propagation of small disturbances,
European Two-Phase Flow Group Meeting, Brussels
(June).
47. Reocrcux M. (1977) Contribution to the study of
critical flow rates in two-phase water vapor flow,
NUREG-tr-O002,Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
48. Edwards A. R. and O'Brien P. (1970) Studies of
phenomenon connected with the depressurization of
water reactors, J Br. nucL Energy Soc. 9, 125.
49. Wolfert K. (1978) Simulation of blowdown processes
with consideration ofthermaldynamic non-equilibrium
phenomenon, Proc. OECD]NEA Specialists Meeting
on Transient Two-Phase Flow, Pergamon, Oxford.
50. Rivard W. C. and Torrcy M. D. (1975) Numerical
calculations of flashing from long pipes using a two-field
model, LAMS-NUREG-6330, Los Alamos National
Lab.
51. Friz G., Riebold W. and Schulze W. (1978) Studies on
thermodynamic non-equilibrium in flashing water,
Proc. OECD/NEA Specialists Meeting on Transient
Two-Phase Flow, Pergamon, Oxford.
52. Rohatgi V. S. and Reshotko E. (1975) Non-equili-
brium one dimensional two-phase flow in variable area
channels, in Non-Equilibrium Two-Phase Flows (Eds
Lahey R. T. and WaUis G.) ASME, New York.
53. Henry R., Fauske H. and McComas S. (1970) Nucl.
Sci. Engng 41, 79.
54. Fauske H. (I 965) Discharge of saturated water through
tubes, Chem. Engng Prog. Symp. Ser. 61 (59), 210.
55. Plesset M. S. and Zwick S. A. (1954) Growth of
bubbles in superheated liquids, J. appl. Phys. 25, 493.
56. Jones O. C. and Saha P. (1977) Non-equilibrium
aspects of water reactor safety, BNL-NUREG-23143,
Brookhaven National Lab.
57. Ardron K. H. (1977) A one dimensional two-fluid
model for the critical flow of initially saturated or sub-
cooled liquids in a pipe, Central Electricity Generating
Board, RDIB/N3967, Berkeley Nuclear Lab., U.K.