See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/223593202

Experimental heat transfer in supercritical water flowing inside

channels (survey)

Article  in  Nuclear Engineering and Design · November 2005

DOI: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2005.05.034

CITATIONS READS
172 325

2 authors:

Igor Pioro Romney B. Duffey

University of Ontario Institute of Technology
249 PUBLICATIONS   2,366 CITATIONS   
251 PUBLICATIONS   2,471 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Submarine warafre View project

CSAU Methodology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Igor Pioro on 01 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

Experimental heat transfer in supercritical water

flowing inside channels (survey)
Igor L. Pioro ∗ , Romney B. Duffey
Chalk River Laboratories, AECL, Chalk River, Ont., Canada K0J 1J0

Received 2 December 2004; received in revised form 11 May 2005; accepted 27 May 2005

Abstract

This literature survey is for heat transfer to supercritical water flowing in channels. The objectives are to assess the work that
was done and to understand the specifics of heat transfer at these conditions. Our exhaustive literature search, which included
over 450 papers, showed that the majority of experimental data were obtained in vertical tubes, some data in horizontal tubes
and just a few in other flow geometries including bundles. In general, the experiments showed that there are three heat transfer
modes in fluids at supercritical pressures: (1) normal heat transfer, (2) deteriorated heat transfer with lower values of the heat
transfer coefficient (HTC) and hence higher values of wall temperature within some part of a test section compared to those of
normal heat transfer and (3) improved heat transfer with higher values of the HTC and hence lower values of wall temperature
within some part of a test section compared to those of normal heat transfer. The deteriorated heat transfer usually appears at
high heat fluxes and lower mass fluxes. Also, a peak in HTC near the critical and pseudo-critical points was recorded. Due to
the limited number of publications that are devoted to heat transfer in bundles cooled with water at supercritical pressures, more
work is definitely needed to provide the additional information for design purposes.
© 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction 1930s. Schmidt and his associates (Schmidt, 1960;

Schmidt et al., 1946) investigated free convection
The first works devoted to the problem of heat trans- heat transfer to fluids at the near-critical point,1 with
fer at supercritical pressures started as early as the the objective of developing a new effective cool-
ing system for turbine blades in jet engines. They
Abbreviations: AECL, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited; HTC, found that the free convection heat transfer coeffi-
heat transfer coefficient; ID, inside diameter; NIST, National Institute cient (HTC) of fluid at the near-critical state was quite
of Standards and Technology (USA); St. st., stainless steel; TS, test
section
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 613 584 8811x4805;

fax: +1 613 584 8213. 1 The near-critical point is actually a region around the critical

E-mail addresses: pioroi@aecl.ca (I.L. Pioro), duffeyr@aecl.ca point where all thermophysical properties of a pure fluid exhibit rapid
(R.B. Duffey). variations.

0029-5493/$ – see front matter © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.nucengdes.2005.05.034
2408 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

Nomenclature Non-dimensional numbers

Grashof number ( gβ TD
3
Gr ν2
)
Aflow flow area (m2 )
Grashof number ( g(ρb −ρµw2 )ρb D )
3
cp specific heat at constant pressure Gr∗
b
(J/(kg K)) µc
Pr Prandtl number ( k p )
D inside diameter (m)
Re Reynolds number ( GDµ )
Dhy hydraulic-equivalent diameter (m)
G mass flux (kg/(m2 s))
g acceleration due to gravity (m/s2 )
H bulk fluid specific enthalpy (J/kg)
k thermal conductivity (W/(m K)) high, and decided to use this advantage in single-
L heated length (m) phase thermosyphons with the intermediate work-
p pressure (MPa) ing fluid at the near-critical point (Pioro and Pioro,
q heat flux (W/m2 ) 1997).
R radius (m) In the 1950s, the idea of using supercritical
s pitch (m) steam-water appeared to be rather attractive for
T temperature (K) steam generators to increase the thermal efficiency of
t temperature (◦ C) fossil-fired power plants. At supercritical pressures,
u axial velocity (m/s) there is no liquid–vapor phase transition; therefore,
V volume (m3 ) critical heat flux or dryout does not occur. Dete-
rioration in heat transfer may occur only within a
Greek letters narrow range of parameters; this deterioration is
β volumetric thermal expansion gradual, and does not result in the dramatic drop in
coefficient (K−1 ) heat transfer that is associated with dryout in boiling
 difference fluids.
δ thickness (m) Intensive work on this subject was mainly done in
µ dynamic viscosity (Pa s) the USA and in the former USSR in the 1950s–1980s.
ξ friction coefficient The most investigated flow geometry at supercritical
ρb bulk fluid density (kg/m3 ) pressures is circular tube with water as the coolant.
ρw fluid density evaluated at wall Currently, using supercritical water in fossil-fired
temperature (kg/m3 ) power plants is the largest industrial application of flu-
υ kinematic viscosity (m2 /s) ids at supercritical pressures.
At the end of the 1950s and the beginning of
Subscripts
the 1960s, some studies were conducted to investi-
b bulk
gate the possibility of using supercritical water as
cr critical
coolant in nuclear reactors. Several concepts of nuclear
dht deteriorated heat transfer
reactors were developed (Oka, 2000). However, this
ext external
idea was abandoned for almost 30 years, and then
HT heat transfer
regained momentum in the 1990s as a means to
hy hydraulic
improve the performance of water-cooled nuclear
in inlet
reactors.
max maximum
The main objectives of using supercritical water in
OD outside diameter
nuclear reactors are to increase the efficiency of modern
pc pseudo-critical
nuclear power plants, which is currently 33–35%, to
w wall
circa 40% or more, and to decrease the operational and
capital costs by eliminating steam generators, steam
separators, steam dryers, etc.
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2409

After the 30-year break, several countries started Technology (USA) (NIST) software (NIST Reference,
to work on the concepts of supercritical water-cooled 2002; NIST/ASME Steam Properties, 2000).
reactors, including Canada (Khartabil et al., 2005),
Germany (Squarer et al., 2003), Japan (Yamaji et al.,
2004; Squarer et al., 2003; Oka and Koshizuka, 2000), 3. Forced convection heat transfer to water at
Korea (Bae et al., 2004), Russia (Gabaraev et al., supercritical pressures
2004, 2003a,b; Baranaev et al., 2004; Kuznetsov and
Gabaraev, 2004; Filippov et al., 2003; Silin et al., There are more than 100 published papers devoted
1993) and USA (Buongiorno, 2004). These concepts to original experiments and analysis of heat trans-
are not expected to be implemented in practice before fer to water at near-critical and supercritical pres-
2015–2020 (for their review, see Duffey and Pioro, sures flowing inside different types of test sections
2005b; Duffey et al., 2005; Pioro and Duffey, 2003; (TS). Therefore, the major findings from these papers
Oka, 2000). were combined into sections based on flow geom-
One of the advantages of using supercritical water etry: (a) vertical and (b) horizontal circular tubes,
in nuclear reactors is the low coolant mass-flow (c) annuli and (d) bundles. An additional section is
rates that are required. This improvement is due devoted to enhanced heat transfer in tubes. All lit-
to the considerable increase in specific enthalpy erature sources available in the current paper are
at supercritical conditions. Therefore, close-pitch listed in Tables 1–5 in chronological order. However,
fuel bundles are more acceptable in supercritical due to limited space, only selected papers that are
pressure reactors than in other types of reactors. These relevant to supercritical water-cooled nuclear reac-
compact bundles have a larger pressure drop, which tor operation range are discussed in the following
in turn may enhance the hydraulic stability of the sections.
flow. A comparison of various supercritical heat-transfer
Therefore, the objectives are to assess the work that correlations is presented in Pioro et al. (2003) and Pioro
was done and to understand the specifics of heat transfer and Duffey (2003), and hydraulic resistance of fluids
at these conditions. flowing inside channels at supercritical pressures is pre-
sented in Pioro et al. (2004).
It is very difficult to provide the exact definitions
2. Thermophysical properties of fluids near the of various heat-transfer modes (see further in the text):
critical and pseudo-critical points2 the so-called “normal”, “deteriorated” or “improved”,
which can be recorded at critical and supercritical
Heat transfer near the critical and pseudo-critical pressures. Normal heat transfer can be characterized
points is influenced by the significant changes in ther- in general with HTCs similar to those of subcritical
mophysical properties. This is especially important convective heat transfer far from critical or pseudo-
for the creation of generalized correlations in non- critical regions, which are calculated according to
dimensional form, which allows the experimental data the Dittus–Boelter type correlations. Deteriorated heat
for several working fluids to be combined into one transfer is characterized with lower values of the HTC
set. More detailed discussion on this issue is pre- and hence higher values of wall temperature within
sented in Pioro et al. (2003) and Pioro and Duffey some part of a test section or within the entire test sec-
(2003). tion at high heat fluxes and low mass fluxes compared
The thermophysical properties of water at different to those at the normal heat-transfer mode. Improved
p and t, including the supercritical region, can be cal- heat transfer is characterized with higher values of the
culated using the National Institute of Standards and HTC and hence lower values of wall temperature within
some part of a test section or within the entire test
section compared to those at the normal heat-transfer
2 Pseudo-critical point (p mode. In our opinion, the improved heat-transfer mode
pc and tpc ) is the point where at given
pressure (ppc > pcr ), temperature (tpc > tcr ) corresponds to a maximum includes peaks or “humps” in the HTC near the critical
value of specific heat. or pseudo-critical regions.
 2410
Table 1
Range of investigated parameters for experiments with water flowing in circular tubes and coils at supercritical pressures
Reference p (MPa) t (◦ C) (H in kJ/kg) q (MW/m2 ) G (kg/(m2 s)) Flow geometry
Tubes (vertical)
Randall (1956) 27.6–55.2 tb = 204–538; tw = 204–760 0.31–9.44 2034–5425 Hastelloy C vertical tube (D = 1.27,
1.57, 1.9 mm; L = 203.2 mm)
Miropol’skii and Shitsman 0.4–27.4 tb = 2.5–420; tw = 2.5–420 0.42–8.4 170–3000 Stainless steel (St. st.) tube (D = 7.8,
(1957, 1958) 8.2 mm; L = 160 mm), upward flow
Armand et al. (1959) 23–26.3 tb = 300–380 0.17–0.35 450–650 St. st. and nickel tubes (D = 6, 8 mm;

I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430
L = 250, 350 mm), upward flow
Doroshchuk et al. (1959) 24.3 tb = 100–250 3.06–3.9 3535–8760 Silver tube (D = 3 mm; L = 246 mm),
downward flow
Goldmann (1961), Chalfant 34.5 tb = 204–538; tw = 204–760 0.31–9.4 2034–5424 Tubes (D = 1.27–1.9 mm;
(1954), Randall (1956) L = 0.203 m), upward flow
Shitsman (1962) 22.8–26.3 tb = 300–425; tw = 260–380 0.291–5.82 100–2500 Vertical and horizontal copper and
carbon steel tubes (D = 8 mm;
DOD = 46 mm; L = 170 mm), upward
and horizontal flows
Shitsman (1963) 22.6–24.5 tb = 280–580 0.28–1.1 300–1500 St. st. tube (D = 8 mm; L = 1.5 m)
Swenson et al. (1965) 23–41 tb = 75–576; tw = 93–649 0.2–1.8 542–2150 St. st. tube (D = 9.42 mm;
L = 1.83 m), upward flow
Smolin and Polyakov 25.4, 27.4, 30.4 tb = 250–440 0.7–1.75 1500–3000 St. st. tube (D = 10, 8 mm; L = 2.6 m),
(1965) upward flow
Vikhrev et al. (1967) 24.5, 26.5 Hb = 230–2750 0.23–1.25 485–1900 St. st. tube (D = 7.85, 20.4 mm;
L = 1.515, 6 m)
Shitsman (1967) 24.3–25.3 tin = 300–320 0.73–0.52 600–690 Vertical and horizontal tubes (D = 8,
16 mm; L = 1.5, 1.6 m), upward and
horizontal flows
Bourke and Denton (1967) 23.0–25.4 tb = 310–380 1.2–2.2 1207, 2712 Tube (D = 4.06 mm; L = 1.2 m)
Styrikovich et al. (1967) 24 Hb = 1260–2500 0.35–0.87 700 Tube (D = 22 mm; L was not
provided in the original paper)
Krasyakova et al. (1967) 23 Hin = 837–2721 0.23–0.7 300–1500 Vertical and horizontal tubes
(D = 20 mm; L = 2.8 m), upward and
horizontal flows
Shitsman (1968) 10–35 tb = 100–250 0.27–0.7 400 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tube
(D/L = 3/0.7, 8/0.8, 8/3.2,
16/1.6 mm/m), upward, downward
and horizontal flows
Krasyakova et al. (1968) 15, 18.8, 23 Hin = 840–1890 0.23–0.7 300–2000 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tube
(D = 20 mm; L = 2.2 m), upward,
downward and horizontal flows
Alferov et al. (1969) 14.7–29.4 tb = 160–365 0.17–0.6 250–1000 St. st. tube (D/L = 14/1.4,
20/3.7 mm/m)
Kamenetsky and Shitsman 24.5 Hb = 80–2300 0.19–1.33 50–1750 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tube
(1970) (D = 22 mm; L = 3 m), non-uniform
circumferential heat flux, upward and
horizontal flows
Ackerman (1970) 22.8–41.3 tb = 77–482 0.126–1.73 136–2170 Smooth (D = 9.4, 11.9 and 24.4 mm,
L = 1.83 m; D = 18.5 mm, L = 2.74 m)
and ribbed (D = 18 mm (from rib
valley to rib valley), L = 1.83 m,
helical six ribs, pitch 21.8 mm) tubes
Ornatsky et al. (1970) 22.6, 25.5, 29.4 Hin = 420–1400 0.28–1.2 450–3000 Five st. st. parallel tubes (D = 3 mm;
L = 0.75 m), upward stable and

I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430
pulsating flows
Barulin et al. (1971) 22.5–26.5 tb = 50–500; tw = 60–750 0.2–6.5 480–5000 Vertical and horizontal tubes (D = 3,
8, 20 mm; L/D < 300), upward,
downward and horizontal flows
Belyakov et al. (1971) 24.5 Hb = 420–3140 0.23–1.4 300–3000 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tube
(D = 20 mm; L = 4–7.5 m), upward
and horizontal flows
Ornatskiy et al. (1971) 22.6, 25.5, 29.7 Hb = 100–3000 0.4–1.8 500–3000 St. st. tube (D = 3 mm; L = 0.75 m),
upward and downward flows
Yamagata et al. (1972) 22.6–29.4 tb = 230–540 0.12–0.93 310–1830 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tubes
(D/L = 7.5/1.5, 10/2 mm/m), upward,
downward and horizontal flows
Glushchenko et al. (1972) 22.6, 25.5, 29.5 Hb = 85–2400 1.15–3 500–3000 Tubes (D = 3, 4, 6, 8 mm;
L = 0.75–1 m), upward flow;
D = 3 mm, downward flow
Malkina et al. (1972) 24.5–31.4 tb = 20–80 0.47–2.3 u = 7–10 m/s St. st. tubes (D = 2, 3 mm; L = 0.15 m)
Chakrygin et al. (1974) 26.5 tin = 220 q was not provided 445–1270 St. st. tube (D = 10 mm; L = 0.6 m),
upward and downward flows
Lee and Haller (1974) 24.1 tb = 260–383 0.25–1.57 542–2441 St. st. tubes (D = 38.1, 37.7 mm;
L = 4.57 m), tube with ribs
Alferov et al. (1975) 26.5 tb = 80–250 0.48 447 Tube (D = 20 mm; L = 3.7 m), upward
and downward flows
Kamenetskii (1975) 23.5, 24.5 Hin = 100–2300 1.2 50–1700 Steel tubes (D = 21, 22 mm; L = 3 m),
non-uniform circumferential heat
flux
Alekseev et al. (1976) 24.5 tin = 100–350 0.1–0.9 380, 490, 650, 820 St. st. tube (D = 10.4 mm; L = 0.5,
0.7 m), upward flow
Ishigai et al. (1976) 24.5, 29.5, 39.2 Hb = 220–800 0.14–1.4 500, 1000, 1500 Vertical and horizontal st. st. polished
tubes
(D/L = 3.92/0.63 mm/m—vertical;
D/L = 4.44/0.87 mm/m—horizontal)
Harrison and Watson 24.5 tb = 50–350 1.3, 2.3 940, 1560 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tubes
(1976) (D = 1.64, 3.1 mm; L = 0.4, 0.12 m)
Treshchev and Sukhov 23, 25 Hin = 1331 0.69–1.16 740–770 Tubes (L = 0.5–1 m), stable and

2411
(1977) pulsating upward flows
 2412
Table 1 (Continued )
Reference p (MPa) t (◦ C) (H in kJ/kg) q (MW/m2 ) G (kg/(m2 s)) Flow geometry

I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430
Krasyakova et al. (1977) 24.5 tb = 90–340 0.11–1.4 90–2000 Tube (D = 20 mm; DOD = 28 mm;
L = 3.5 m), downward flow
Smirnov and Krasnov 25, 28, 30 tw = 250–700 0.25–1 500–1200 St. st. tube (D = 4.08 mm; L = 1.09 m),
(1978, 1979, 1980) upward and downward flows
Kamenetskii (1980) 24.5 Hb = 100–2200 0.37–1.3 300–1700 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tubes
with and without flow spoiler
(D = 22 mm; L = 3 m)
Watts and Chou (1982) 25 tb = 150–310; tw = 260–520 0.175–0.44 106–1060 Tubes (D = 25, 32.2 mm; L = 2 m)
with upward and downward flows
Selivanov and Smirnov 26 tin = 50–450 0.13–0.65 200–10 000 St. st. tube (D = 10 mm;
(1984) DOD = 14 mm; L = 1 m)
Kirillov et al. (1986) 25 tin = 385 0.4, 0.6 1000 St. st. tube (D = 10 mm;
DOD = 14 mm; L = 1 m)
Razumovskiy et al. (1990) 23.5 Hin = 1400, 1600, 1800 0.657–3.385 2190 Tube (D = 6.28 mm; L = 1440 mm),
downward flow
Coils
Miropolskiy et al. (1966) 0.2–29.5 Hb = 600–3000 0.58, 1.16 800 Tube coils (D = 8 mm; Rbend = 43, 90,
260 mm), bend location vertical
Miropol’skii et al. (1970) 24.5 Hb = 651–2394 0.018–0.27 200–5700 Tube coils (D = 8, 16 mm; Rbend = 43,
275 mm), bend location vertical
Kovalevskiy and 23.3–25.3 tb = 20–386 0.116–2.68 200–5700 St. st. coils (D = 15.8, 8.3, 8.25 mm;
Miropol’skiy (1978) Rbend = 43, 46, 135, 275, 525 mm)
Breus and Belyakov (1990) 25 Hb = 1200–2400 0.3–0.7 1000–1500 St. st. helical coils (D = 20, 24 mm;
L = 7.5 m; Rbend = 115, 455 mm; pitch
between spirals, respectively, 90 and
310 mm), upward flow
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2413

Table 2
Range of investigated parameters for experiments with water flowing in horizontal circular tubes at supercritical pressures
Reference p (MPa) t (◦ C) (H in kJ/kg) q (MW/m2 ) G (kg/(m2 s)) Flow geometry
Chakrygin and Lokshin 22.5–24.5 tin = 190 0.2–0.44 300–800 St. st. tube (D = 29 mm)
(1957)
Dickinson and Welch (1958) 24, 31 tb = 104–538 0.88–1.82 2170–3391 St. st. tube (D = 7.62 mm; L = 1.6 m)
Shitsman (1962) 22.8–26.3 tb = 300–425 0.29–5.8 100–2500 Horizontal and vertical copper and
carbon steel tubes (D = 8 mm;
L = 170 mm)
Domin (1963) 22.3–26.3 tb ≤ 450; tw ≤ 560 0.58–4.7 1210–5160 Inconel tubes (D = 2, 4 mm;
L = 1.075, 1.233 m)
Vikhrev and Lokshin (1964) 22.6–29.4 tb = 200–500 0.35–0.7 400, 700, 1000 St. st. tube (D = 8 mm; L = 2.5 m)
Shitsman (1966) 9.8–24.5 tb = 310–410 0.33–0.45 375 St. st. tube (D = 16 mm; L = 1.6 m)
Shitsman (1967) 24.3–25.3 tb = 300–400 0.73–0.52 600–690 Horizontal and vertical tubes
(Dext = 8, 16 mm)
Krasyakova et al. (1967) 23 Hin = 837–2721 0.23–0.7 300–1500 Horizontal and vertical tubes
(D = 20 mm)
Shitsman (1968) 10–35 tb = 100–250 0.27–0.7 400 St. st. tube (D/L = 3/0.7, 8/0.8, 8/3.2,
16/1.6 mm/m)
Krasyakova et al. (1968) 15, 18.8, 23 Hin = 840–1890 0.23–0.7 300–2000 Horizontal and vertical st. st. tubes
(D = 20 mm; L = 2.2 m)
Kondrat’ev (1969) 22.6, 24.5, 29.4 tb = 105–540 0.12–1.2 Re = 105 Polished st. st. tube (D = 10.5 mm;
L = 0.52 m)
Vikhrev et al. (1970) 23–27 Hb = 920–2680 232–928 500–1500 St. st. tubes (D = 19.8, 32.1 mm;
L = 6 m)
Kamenetsky and Shitsman 24.5 Hb = 80–2300 0.19–1.33 50–1750 Horizontal and vertical st. st. tubes
(1970) (D = 22 mm; L = 3 m), non-uniform
circumferential heat flux, horizontal
and upward flows
Zhukovskiy et al. (1971) 24.5 Hb = 630–3100 0.232–1.39 300–3000 St. st. tube (D = 20 mm; L = 4 m)
Barulin et al. (1971) 22.5–26.5 tb = 50–500; 0.2–6.5 480–5000 Horizontal and vertical tubes (D = 3,
tw = 60–750 8, 20 mm; L/D < 300)
Belyakov et al. (1971) 24.5 Hb = 420–3140 0.23–1.4 300–3000 Horizontal and vertical st. st. tubes
(D = 20 mm; L = 4–7.5 m)
Yamagata et al. (1972) 22.6–29.4 tb = 230–540 0.12–0.93 310–1830 Horizontal and vertical st. st. tubes
(D/L = 7.5/1.5, 10/2 mm/m)
Vikhrev et al. (1973) 23.3–27.4 Hb = 25.1–3056 0.23–1.16 500–1900 Horizontal and inclined (angle 15◦
from horizontal) tubes (D = 19.8 mm;
L = 6 m)
Kamenetskii (1974) 24.5 tb = 50–400 0.37–1.3 240–1700 St. st. tubes with non-uniform
circumferential heating
(D = 21.9 mm; L = 3 m)
Solomonov and Lokshin 22.5–26.5 Hb = 252–3066 0.23–1.16 500–1900 Horizontal and inclined st. st. tubes
(1975) (D = 20 mm; L = 6 m)
Ishigai et al. (1976) 24.5, 29.5, 39.2 Hb = 220–800 0.14–1.4 500, 1000, 1500 Horizontal and vertical st. st. polished
tubes (D = 4.44 mm; L = 0.87 m)
Kamenetskii (1980) 24.5 Hb = 100–2200 0.37–1.3 300–1700 St. st. tube with and without flow
spoiler (D = 22 mm; L = 3 m)
Robakidze et al. (1983) 23.2–24 tb = 359–797 – 0.7–70 St. st. tube (D = 16 mm; L = 3.7 m)
2414 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

Table 3
Range of investigated parameters for experimental heat transfer in water at supercritical pressures flowing in vertical and horizontal tubes with
flow turbulizers
Reference p (MPa) t (◦ C) (H in kJ/kg) q (MW/m2 ) G (kg/(m2 s)) Flow geometry
Shitsman (1967) 24.3–25.3 tb = 300–400 0.09–0.73 600–690 Horizontal and vertical tubes
(Dext = 16 mm) with twisted tapes
Ackerman (1970) 22.8–41.3 tb = 77–482 0.13–1.73 136–2170 Vertical smooth (D = 9.4, 11.9 and
24.4 mm, L = 1.83 m; D = 18.5 mm,
L = 2.74 m) and ribbed tubes (D = 18 mm
(from rib valley to rib valley), L = 1.83 m,
helical six ribs, pitch 21.8 mm)
Kamenetsky and Shitsman 24.5 Hb = 100–600 0.19–1.3 540 St. st. tube (D = 22 mm; L = 3 m) with
(1970) and without twisted tape (δw = 0.8 mm,
spiral shape with relative pitch s/D = 15),
non-uniform circumferential heat flux
Lee and Haller (1974) 24.1 tb = 260–383 0.25–1.57 542–2441 Vertical st. st. tubes (D = 38.1, 37.7 mm;
L = 4.57 m), tube with ribs
Kamenetskii (1980) 24.5 Hb = 100–2200 0.37–1.3 300–1700 Vertical and horizontal st. st. tubes
(D = 21.1, 21.9 mm; L = 3 m) with and
without twisted tape (δw = 0.8 mm, spiral
shape with relative pitch s/D = 12–15),
non-uniform circumferential heat flux

Table 4
Range of investigated parameters for experiments with water flowing in annuli at supercritical pressures
Reference p (MPa) t (◦ C) (H in kJ/kg) q (MW/m2 ) G (kg/(m2 s)) Flow geometry
McAdams et al. (1950) 0.8–24 tb = 221–538 0.035–0.336 75–224 Gap 1.65 mm, Drod = 6.4 mm,
Dtube = 9.7 mm, L = 0.312 m,
upward flow, internal heating
Glushchenko and Gandzyuk 23.5, 25.5, 29.5 tb = 150–375 1.15–2.96 650–3000 Gap 1 mm, Drod = 6–10 mm,
(1972) L = 0.6 m, upward flow,
external and internal heating
Glushchenko et al. (1972) 23.5, 25.5, 29.5 Hb = 85–2400 1.8–5.4 650–7000 Gap 0.3, 0.7, 1, 1.5 mm;
Drod = 6–10 mm;
L = 0.115–0.6 m; upward
flow; external and internal
heating
Ornatskiy et al. (1972) 23.5 Hb = 400–2600 1.2–3.0 2000, 3000, 5000 Gap 0.7 mm, Drod = 10.6 mm,
Dtube = 12 mm, L = 0.28 m,
external heating

3.1. Heat transfer in vertical circular tubes and transfer experimental data of water flowing inside ver-
coils tical circular tubes are listed in Table 1. Ranges of
investigated parameters for selected experiments with
Water3 is the most investigated fluid in near-critical water in circular tubes at supercritical pressures that
and supercritical regions. All4 primary sources of heat are relevant to supercritical water-cooled nuclear reac-
tor operation range are shown in Fig. 1.
3 For heat transfer to other fluids, see Pioro and Duffey (2003) and
Swenson et al. (1965) found that HTC has a peak
Duffey and Pioro (2005a).
when the film temperature is within the pseudo-critical
4 “All” means all sources found by the authors from 450 references temperature range (Figs. 2 and 3). This peak in HTC
including 282 Russian publications and 168 Western publications. decreases with increase in pressure and heat flux.
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2415

Table 5
Range of investigated parameters for experiments with water flowing in bundles at supercritical pressures
Reference p (MPa) t (◦ C) (H in kJ/kg) q (MW/m2 ) G (kg/(m2 s)) Flow geometry
Dyadyakin and Popov (1977) 24.5 tb = 90–570; Hb = 400–3400 <4.7 500–4000 Tight bundle (7 rods (6 + 1),
Drod = 5.2 mm, L = 0.5 m),
each rod has 4 helical fins
(fin height 0.6 mm,
thickness 1 mm, helical
pitch 400 mm), pressure
tube hexagonal in
cross-section
Silin et al. (1993) 23.5, 29.4 Hb = 1000–3000 0.18–4.5 350–5000 Vertical full-scale bundles
(Drod = 4 and 5.6 mm, rod’s
pitch 5.2 and 7 mm)

Vikhrev et al. (1971, 1967) conducted experiments but at various inlet temperatures (enthalpies). Later,
in supercritical water flowing in a vertical tube (Fig. 4). these data were combined into one curve. However, this
To be able to cover a wide range of bulk fluid enthalpies method is not the perfect one, because entrance and/or
(see Fig. 4c and d), experiments were conducted in the exit (i.e., deteriorated heat transfer at the exit) effects do
same flow geometry, same mass flux and heat flux, not allow matching properly two or several series in one
plot (for details, see original figures in Vikhrev et al.,
1967). Therefore, it is important to perform supercrit-
ical heat transfer experiments in one sufficiently long
heated test section. They found that at a mass flux of
495 kg/(m2 s), two types of deteriorated heat transfer
existed (Fig. 4a): the first type appeared in the entrance
L
region of the tube ( D ≤ 40–60) and the second type
appeared at any section of the tube, but only within a

Fig. 1. Ranges of investigated parameters for selected experiments

with water in circular tubes at supercritical pressures (for details, see
Table 1). Fig. 2. Effect of pressure on HTC (Swenson et al., 1965).
2416 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

as a peak (“hump”) in HTC near the pseudo-critical

point is clearly shown in this figure. Unfortunately,
authors did not provide with the tube diameter and
heated length.
Shiralkar and Griffith (1970) determined both the-
oretically (for supercritical water) and experimentally
(for supercritical carbon dioxide) the limits for safe
operation, in terms of maximum heat flux for a partic-
ular mass flux. Their experiments with a twisted tape
inserted inside the test section showed that heat trans-
fer was improved by this method. Also, they found that
at high heat fluxes deteriorated heat transfer occurred,
when the bulk fluid temperature was below and the wall
temperature above the pseudo-critical temperature.
Ackerman (1970) investigated heat transfer to water
at supercritical pressures flowing in smooth vertical
tubes with and without internal ribs within a wide range
of pressures, mass fluxes, heat fluxes and diameters.
He found that a pseudo-boiling phenomenon5 could
Fig. 3. Effect of heat flux on HTC (Swenson et al., 1965). occur at supercritical pressures. The pseudo-boiling
phenomenon is thought to be due to the large differ-
certain enthalpy range. In general, the deteriorated heat ences in fluid density below the pseudo-critical point
transfer occurred at high heat fluxes. (high-density fluid, i.e., “liquid”) and beyond (low-
The first type of deteriorated heat transfer observed density fluid, i.e., a near-perfect “gas”). This heat trans-
was due to the flow structure within the entrance region fer phenomenon was affected by pressure, bulk fluid
of the tube. However, this type of deteriorated heat temperature, mass flux, heat flux and tube diameter.
transfer occurred mainly at low mass fluxes and at high The process of pseudo-film boiling (i.e., low-density
heat fluxes (Fig. 4a and b) and eventually disappeared fluid prevents high-density fluid from “rewetting” a
at high mass fluxes (Fig. 4c and d). heated surface) is similar to film boiling, which occurs
The second type of deteriorated heat transfer at subcritical pressures. Pseudo-film boiling leads to
occurred when the wall temperature exceeded the the deteriorated heat transfer. However, pseudo-film
pseudo-critical temperature (Fig. 4). According to boiling phenomenon may not be the only reason for
Vikhrev et al. (1967), the deteriorated heat transfer the deteriorated heat transfer. Ackerman noted that
appears when Gq > 0.4 kJ/kg (where q is in kW/m2 and unpredictable heat transfer performance was some-
G is in kg/(m2 s)). This value is close to that suggested times observed when the pseudo-critical temperature
by Styrikovich et al. (1967) ( Gq > 0.49 kJ/kg). of the fluid was between the bulk fluid temperature and
However, the above definitions of two types of dete- the heated surface temperature.
riorated heat transfer are not enough for their clear Ornatsky et al. (1970) investigated the appearance
identification. of deteriorated heat transfer in five parallel tubes with
Krasyakova et al. (1977) did not find the deteriorated
heat transfer within the entrance region of the vertical
tube with downward flow (Fig. 5), which is typical for 5 Pseudo-boiling is a physical phenomenon similar to subcritical

upward flow (see above). Also, they noticed that varia- nucleate boiling, which may appear at supercritical pressures. Due
tions in wall temperature along the heated length of the to heating of supercritical fluid with bulk fluid temperature below
downtake tube were more smooth compared to those tpc (high density fluid, i.e., “liquid”), some layers near a heating
surface may be heated to temperatures above tpc (low density fluid,
in the rising tube. i.e., “gas”). This low-density gas leaves the heating surface in the
Results of Styrikovich et al. (1967) are shown in form of bubble-shaped volumes. During pseudo-boiling, the HTC
Fig. 6. Improved and deteriorated heat transfer as well usually increases (improved heat-transfer mode).
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2417

Fig. 4. Temperature profiles (a) and (b) and HTC values (b) and (c) along heated length of a vertical tube (Vikhrev et al., 1967): HTC values
were calculated by the authors of the current paper using the data from the corresponding figure; several test series were combined in each curve
in (c) and (d) (for details, see the text).

stable and pulsating flow. They found that the dete- region of steep variations in thermophysical properties,
riorated heat transfer in the assembly at supercritical i.e., critical or pseudo-critical regions. The beginning
pressures depended on the heat flux to mass flux ratio of the heat transfer deterioration was usually noticed
and flow conditions. At stable flow conditions, heat in certain zones along the tube, in which tw +t
2 = tmax .
b

transfer deterioration occurred at values of the ratio They also established the possibility of the simultane-
q
G = 0.95–1.05 kJ/kg and at inlet bulk water enthalpies ous existence of several local zones of deteriorated heat
of Hin = 1330–1500 kJ/kg. In pulsating flow, deterio- transfer along the tubes.
rated heat transfer occurred at lower ratios, i.e., Gq ≥ Some researchers suggested that the variations in
0.68–0.9 kJ/kg. Flow pulsations usually occurred at the thermophysical properties near critical and pseudo-
regimes where the outlet water enthalpy was in the critical points resulted in a maximum value of HTC.
2418 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

Fig. 5. Temperature profiles (a) and HTC values (b) along heated length of a vertical tube (D = 20 mm) with downward flow (Krasyakova et al.,
1977): HTC values were calculated by the authors of the current paper using the data from (a); several test series were combined in each curve
(for details, see explanation of Fig. 4c and d).

Thus, Yamagata et al. (1972) found that for water flow- Similar results were recorded by Swenson et al. (1965)
ing in vertical and horizontal tubes, the HTC increases (Figs. 2 and 3).
significantly in the pseudo-critical region (Fig. 7). The Al’ferov et al. (1973) also performed forced convec-
magnitude of the peak in the HTC decreases with tive experiments in supercritical water. They recorded
increasing heat flux and pressure. The maximum HTC the reduction in heat transfer with increasing heat flux
values correspond to a bulk fluid enthalpy, which is in turbulent flow of a coolant at supercritical pressures.
slightly less than the pseudo-critical bulk fluid enthalpy. Kruzhilin (1974) found considerable deterioration
of heat transfer to turbulent water flow at supercriti-
cal pressure in the pseudo-critical temperature range
and at large heat fluxes. In this temperature range,
a drastic decrease in density occurs, with a conse-
quent rapid expansion of this low-density layer at the
wall. Both these effects, it was argued, gave rise to
a flow velocity component normal to the wall. With
this flow pattern, heat transfer could be considered to
be similar to that occurring under the conditions of
liquid injection into turbulent flow through a porous
wall.
The findings of Lee and Haller (1974) are presented
in Fig. 8. They also combined several test series in
one graph (see explanation of Fig. 4c and d). Due to
deteriorated heat-transfer region at the tube exit (one
set of data) and entrance effect in another set of data,
experimental curves discontinue (see Fig. 8b and c).
In general, they found heat flux and tube diameter to
Fig. 6. Variations in HTC values of water flowing in a tube be the important parameters affecting minimum mass-
(Styrikovich et al., 1967). flux limits to prevent pseudo-film boiling. Multi-lead
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2419

Fig. 7. HTC vs. bulk fluid enthalpy for a vertical tube with upward flow at various pressures (Yamagata et al., 1972): (a) p = 22.6 MPa; (b)
p = 24.5 MPa; (c) p = 29.4 MPa. Several test series were combined in each curve (for details, see explanation of Fig. 4c and d).

ribbed tubes were found to be effective in preventing and with the entrainment of individual volumes of the
pseudo-film boiling. low-density fluid into the cooler (below pseudo-critical
Kafengaus (1975) and Kafengauz (1986), analyz- temperature) core of the high-density flow, where these
ing data of various fluids (water, ethyl and methyl low-density volumes collapse, with the generation of
alcohols, heptane, etc.), suggested a mechanism for pressure pulses. At certain conditions, the frequency
“pseudo-boiling” that accompanies heat transfer to liq- of these pulses can coincide with the frequency of the
uids flowing in small-diameter tubes at supercritical fluid column in the tube, resulting in resonance and
pressures. The onset of pseudo-boiling was assumed to in a rapid rise in the amplitude of pressure fluctua-
be associated with the breakdown of a low-density wall tions. This theory was supported by the experimental
layer that was present at an above-critical temperature, results.
2420 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

Fig. 8. Temperature profiles and HTC values along a 38.1 mm ID smooth vertical tube at different mass fluxes (Lee and Haller, 1974):
p = 24.1 MPa, Hpc = 2140 kJ/kg; (a) and (b) G = 542 kg/(m2 s) and (c) G = 1627 kg/(m2 s). HTC values were calculated by the authors of the
current paper using the data from the corresponding figure. Several test series were combined in each curve (for details, see explanation of
Fig. 4c and d).

Alekseev et al. (1976) conducted experiments in a temperatures, the wall temperature increased smoothly
circular vertical tube cooled with supercritical water along the tube. Beyond this value, the deterioration
and found that at Gq < 0.8 kJ/kg, normal heat transfer in heat transfer occurred (see Fig. 9, the rest of the
occurred. However, recalculation of their data showed curves). With heat flux increase, a hump (Fig. 9a, inlet
that this value should be around Gq < 0.92 kJ/kg temperature 100 ◦ C) or a peak (Fig. 9b, inlet tempera-
(see Fig. 9a, q = 0.27 and 0.35 MW/m2 , and Fig. 9b, ture 300 ◦ C) in the wall temperature occurs and moves
q = 0.35 MW/m2 ). For all mass fluxes and inlet flow towards the tube inlet as the heat flux increases.
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2421

Fig. 9. Temperature profiles along heated length of vertical circular tube (D = 10.4 mm) with upward flow (natural circulation) at various heat
fluxes (Alekseev et al., 1976): (a) tin = 100 EC and (b) 300 EC.

Kirillov et al. (1986) conducted research into a radial was found at G = 300–1000 kg/(m2 s) and within the
cross-section temperature profile in water flowing in a investigated range of enthalpies (Hb = 840–2520 kJ/
circular tube at subcritical and supercritical pressures. kg). The temperature difference was directly propor-
They found that inside the turbulent flow core, the tional to increases in heat flux values. The effect of
radial cross-section temperature profile is logarithmic mass flux on the temperature difference is the oppo-
at supercritical pressures and at temperatures close to site, i.e., with increase in mass flux, the temperature
the pseudo-critical temperature. difference decreases. Deteriorated heat transfer was
Yoshida and Mori (2000) stated that supercritical also observed in a horizontal tube. However, the tem-
heat transfer is characterized by rapid variations of perature profile for a horizontal tube at locations of
physical properties with temperature change across the deteriorated heat transfer differs from that for a verti-
flow. These property variations result in a peak of HTC cal tube, being smoother for a horizontal tube compared
near the pseudo-critical point at low heat flux and a to that of a vertical tube with a higher temperature
peak reduction with an increase in heat flux. increase on the upper part of a tube than on the lower
part.
3.2. Heat transfer in horizontal test sections
3.3. Correlations for determining the starting
All primary sources of experimental data for heat point of deteriorated heat transfer
transfer of water flowing in horizontal test sections are
listed in Table 2. The literature search turned up several correlations
Krasyakova et al. (1967) found that in a horizontal related to determining the starting point of deteriorated
tube, in addition to the effects of non-isothermal flow heat transfer.
that is relevant to a vertical tube, the effect of gravi- Thus, Kondrat’ev (1971) proposed the following
tational forces is important. The latter effect leads to correlation to calculate the maximum heat flux at which
the appearance of temperature differences between the max ):
deteriorated heat transfer occurs (qHT
lower and upper parts of a tube. These temperature dif-

p 4.5
ferences depend on flow enthalpy, mass flux and heat qHT
max
= 5.815 × 10−17 Re1.7 , (1)
b
flux. A temperature difference in a tube cross-section 0.101325
2422 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

where qHT max is in kW/m2 and p is in MPa. 1000–1750 kg/(m2 s), Hb = 1000–3300 kJ/kg (tb =
Eq. (1) was stated as valid within the following 20–550 ◦ C) and q = 0–1.8 MW/m2 .
range: p = 23.3–30.4 MPa, Reb = (30–100) × 103 and
q = 116.3–1163 kW/m2 . 3.4. Heat transfer enhancement in vertical and
Protopopov et al. (1973) discussed the problems of horizontal tubes
heat transfer (mainly deterioration of heat transfer) in
the supercritical region. As the result of their analysis All primary sources of heat transfer experimental
of the experimental data for the sections with the dete- data of water flowing in vertical and horizontal tubes
riorated heat transfer, they proposed a non-dimensional with flow turbulizers are listed in Table 3.
number Results of Kamenetskii (1980) are presented in
Fig. 10. This figure shows that a horizontal tube with
C(ρb − ρw )4 ρb Prb
K= , twisted tape has much smaller temperature difference
√
∗ 0.23
(2)
µb G ξ GrRe 3
between the tube top and tube bottom compared to a
tube without tape.
which approach the value of Kcr ≈ 1.35 × 104 within Ackerman (1970) investigated heat transfer of water
the sections with the deteriorated heat transfer. at supercritical pressures flowing in smooth vertical
In Eq. (2), constant C = 8 × 10−14 for water and tubes and tubes with internal ribs over a wide range of
C = 1 × 10−14 for carbon dioxide, ρb and ρw are the pressures, mass fluxes, heat fluxes and diameters. The
fluid density at bulk and wall temperatures, respecti- experiments with a ribbed tube showed that pseudo-
vely. film boiling was suppressed. This suppression permit-
Protopopov and Silin (1973) proposed a correla- ted operation at higher heat fluxes, compared to oper-
tion to calculate the starting point of deteriorated heat ation with smooth tubes as might be expected for a
transfer in a tube with supercritical flow of fluid at “single-phase” fluid when turbulence is enhanced.
tb < tpc < tw . This method was based on the following Lee and Haller (1974) conducted experiments with
correlation: a multi-lead ribbed tube (twisted ribs) in supercritical

q water and found that the ribbed tube was very effi-
1.3
=

1.3 . (3) cient in suppressing temperature peaks encountered in
Ḡ dht
(tpc − tb )cpb 8ξ υw
υpc
smooth tubes. They explained this by suggesting that
the ribbed tubes caused the flow to spin. Therefore, cen-
Kirillov et al. (1990) showed that the role of free trifugal forces caused the lower temperature and denser
convection in heat transfer at the near-critical point can fluid to move to the heated wall. These tubes were tested
Gr at much higher heat fluxes up to 50–100% than smooth
be taken into account through Re 2 or
  tubes without any signs of deteriorated heat transfer.
ρw Gr
k∗ = 1 − , (4)
ρb Re2 3.5. Heat transfer in annuli
 ρw  3
g 1− ρ D All primary sources of the heat transfer experimen-
where Gr = υb2
b
and ρb and ρw are the fluid
tal data of water flowing in annuli are listed in Table 4.
densities at bulk and wall temperatures, respectively. In general, forced convective heat transfer in an
Gr
For k* < 0.4 or Re 2 < 0.6, deteriorated heat transfer annulus is different from a circular tube even at subcrit-
exists. At larger values of these terms, improved heat ical pressures. In an annulus, three heating modes can
transfer occurs. exist: (i) outer surface heated, (ii) inner surface heated
Koshizuka and Oka (2000) found that the heat flux and (iii) both surfaces heated.
at which deteriorated heat transfer occurs is McAdams et al. (1950) conducted experiments
qdht = 200G1.2 . (5) with an upward flow of water in a vertical annuli
with internal heating. The objective was to estimate
This correlation is based on numerical studies only local HTCs for turbulent flow inside an annulus. Four
and can be used within the following range: G = chromel–alumel thermocouples, spaced at 76.2 mm
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2423

Fig. 10. Temperature profiles (a) and HTC values (b) along horizontal tubes with and without twisted tape (non-uniform circumferential heat
flux) (Kamenetskii, 1980): HTC values were calculated by the authors of the current paper using the data from (a).

intervals, were installed inside a heated rod. These mea- 3.6. Heat transfer in bundles
sured temperatures were used to calculate local HTCs
along the heated rod. The experiments showed that for The two primary sources of heat transfer to water
given Reynolds and Prandtl numbers, a value of the flowing in bundles are listed in Table 5.
local Nusselt number always decreased as a value of Dyadyakin and Popov (1977) conducted experi-
L
Dhy increased, regardless of the temperature at which ments with a tight-lattice seven-rod bundle (finned
the physical properties were evaluated. rods). They tested five bundles with different flow areas
The results of Glushchenko and Gandzyuk (1972) and hydraulic diameters:
are presented in Fig. 11. Their results showed that
TS no. 1 2 3 4 5
with heat flux increasing deteriorated heat transfer may Aflow (mm2 ) 112 134 113 121 102
appear at the outlet section or at inlet and outlet sections Dhy (mm) 2.35 2.77 2.38 2.53 2.15
of an annulus.
Glushchenko et al. (1972) conducted experiments The HTC was measured with a movable thermo-
with an upward flow of water in annuli with external couple installed in the central rod. However, the data
and internal one-side heating. In general, the results of reduction, in terms of the HTC, was based on heat trans-
the investigation showed that variations in wall tem- fer through the rod wall without taking into account
perature of a heated tube and of an annulus, when the internal heat generation (heating due to electrical cur-
tubes and annuli are fairly long, were similar. However, rent passing through the wall). They found that at
in annuli with normal and deteriorated heat transfer, no mass fluxes greater than or equal to 2000 kg/(m2 s)
decrease in temperature (past the zone of deteriorated with Hbin = 1000–1800 kJ/kg, and at high heat fluxes,
heat transfer) was noticed in their experiments. significant pressure oscillations occurred (±5 MPa
Ornatskiy et al. (1972) investigated normal and dete- with frequency of 0.04–0.033 Hz). Similar pressure
riorated heat transfer in a vertical annulus (Fig. 12). The oscillations were recorded at G = 2000 kg/(m2 s) and
deteriorated heat transfer zone was observed visually q = 1.2 MW/m2 when the inlet bulk temperature was
as a red-hot spot, appearing in the upper section of the 305 ◦ C. At G = 2000 kg/(m2 s) and q = 2.3 MW/m2 , the
test tube. The hot spot elongated in the direction of the pressure oscillations appeared at an inlet bulk tempera-
annulus inlet with increasing heat flux. ture of 260 ◦ C and resulted in burnout of the test section.
2424 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

Fig. 11. Temperature profiles (a) and HTC values (b) along heated rod in annulus (inner rod heating, gap 1 mm, L = 0.6 m) (Glushchenko and
Gandzyuk, 1972): Hpc = 2126.9 kJ/kg: HTC values were calculated by the authors of the current paper using the data from (a).

In experiments with G = 3800 kg/(m2 s) and inlet bulk was created in the Russian Scientific Centre (RSC)
temperature of 280 ◦ C, the pressure oscillations were “Kurchatov Institute” (Moscow). Experimental heat
recorded at q = 3.5 MW/m2 . At the same flow and at an transfer data were satisfactorily described by correla-
inlet bulk temperature of 370 ◦ C, the pressure oscilla- tions obtained for water flow in tubes at supercritical
tions were recorded at q = 2.3 MW/m2 . pressures and for the normal heat transfer regime. The
Silin et al. (1993) reported that a large database for most important difference between water behaviour
water flowing in large bundles at supercritical pressures inside tubes and water behaviour inside bundles was

Fig. 12. Temperature profiles (a) and HTC values (b) along heated length of annulus (external tube heating, Drod = 10.6 mm, Dtube = 12 mm, gap
0.7 mm, L = 0.28 m) (Ornatskiy et al., 1972): HTC values were calculated by the authors of the current paper using the data from (a).
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2425

that there was no heat transfer deterioration in the at the inlet of test section did not significantly affect
multi-rod bundles, within the same test parameter range heat flux value at which auto-oscillations started. How-
for which heat transfer deterioration occurred in tubes. ever, within the same range of operational parameters,
increase in unheated length downstream of the test sec-
tion outlet narrows the stable flow region.
4. Flow stability at near-critical and Stewart et al. (1973) conducted heat transfer mea-
supercritical pressures surements in supercritical-pressure water (p = 25 MPa)
flowing through horizontal tubes (D = 1.524 and
For near-critical and supercritical pressure single- 3.1 mm, L = 0.203 and 0.61 m, respectively). They
phase heat transfer, as well as for subcritical pressure investigated high-frequency oscillations, which
two-phase heat transfer, flow oscillations can occur. occurred spontaneously in water at supercritical
These flow oscillations can significantly narrow the pressures. These oscillations were measured, and it
region with stable flow, affect heat transfer and reli- was shown that they were associated with pressure
ability of heat transfer equipment. oscillations in the test section resulting from a standing
For two-phase flows at subcritical pressures, the pressure wave between the entry and the exit. Several
appearance of flow pulsations and thermo-acoustic modes of standing waves were identified.
oscillations are described in book by Gerliga and Chakrygin et al. (1974) performed experiments for
Skalozubov (1992). Papers related to water flow insta- defining the limits of hydrodynamically unsteady flow
bility at supercritical pressures are listed below in the regimes in heated tubes (for investigated ranges, see
chronological order. Table 1). Their results showed that within the inves-
Krasyakova and Glusker (1965) investigated flow tigated range, the experimental data on limits of ape-
stability in parallel plain-tube coils. They investigated riodic instability are in agreement with the calculated
three types of coils (U-, ∩- and N-type) and found values.
that these coils can work in the normal regime, i.e., Dashkiyev and Rozhalin (1975) examined the sta-
without flow stagnation. Flow stagnation is possi- bility of operation of a system of parallel steam-
ble at mass fluxes below 300 kg/(m2 s), heat fluxes generating tubes in the presence of thermohydraulic
below 80 kW/m2 and subcooled enthalpies more than stratification. They proposed an analytical method,
420 kJ/kg. which is based on two equations: (1) the equation
Kafengauz and Fedorov (1968) investigated heat of compatibility and (2) the equation of state. Their
transfer for surface boiling (p < pcr ) and pseudo-boiling generalized results were presented in the form of nomo-
(p > pcr ) regimes. They found that these regimes are grams.
related with the corresponding natural oscillations. An Shvarts and Glusker (1976) proposed a method for
increase in the frequency of these oscillations prevented determining minimum permissible flows with respect
a rise in the temperature of the cooled surface. to conditions of stability in ∩- and U-shaped elements
Zuber (1966) analyzed thermally induced flow at supercritical pressures. This method is also based on
oscillations in the near-critical and supercritical solving several equations such as an empirical equa-
regions. In his comprehensive analysis, three mecha- tion of state and pressure drop correlations. The final
nisms responsible for inducing thermohydraulic oscil- product is nomograms for ∩- and U-shaped elements.
lations were distinguished and discussed. He found Sevast’yanov et al. (1980) conducted a theoretical
that low-frequency oscillations were most prevalent in and experimental study of heat transfer in a turbulent
supercritical pressure systems. In his work, the condi- liquid flow at supercritical pressure under conditions of
tions leading to aperiodic and periodic flow oscillations high-frequency oscillations. Equations were obtained
were investigated and stability maps and stability cri- for the secondary dynamic and thermal flows in a stand-
teria were proposed. ing pressure wave, allowing for variability of the flow
Treshchev et al. (1971) investigated flow oscilla- parameters and thermophysical properties of the liquid
tions in water flowing in a heated channel at super- along the channel. By numerically solving a system
critical pressures (p = 30.4 MPa, t up to 600 ◦ C). They of differential equations, it was possible to find the
found that in the investigated range, flow throttling local and mean heat transfer coefficients as functions
2426 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

of the amplitude, i.e., the frequency characteristics of tov Institute”, Institute of Nuclear Reactors, Moscow,
the oscillations. The experimental results showed sat- Russia) for their valuable comments and advice for this
isfactory agreement with the theory. paper.

5. Final remarks and conclusions References

1. The majority of the experimental studies deal Ackerman, J.W., 1970. Pseudoboiling heat transfer to supercritical
with heat transfer of supercritical water in vertical pressure water in smooth and ribbed tubes. J. Heat Transfer,
and horizontal circular tubes. A few studies were Trans. ASME 92 (3), 490–498 (Paper No. 69-WA/HT-2, pp. 1–8).
Alekseev, G.V., Silin, V.A., Smirnov, A.M., Subbotin, V.I., 1976.
devoted to heat transfer in annuli and bundles. Study of the thermal conditions on the wall of a pipe during the
2. In general, experiments showed that there are three removal of heat by water at a supercritical pressure. High Temp.
modes of heat transfer in fluids at supercritical pres- 14 (4), 683–687.
sures: (1) normal heat transfer, (2) deteriorated heat Al’ferov, N.S., Balunov, B.F., Rybin, R.A., 1973. Reduction in heat
transfer with lower values of the HTC within some transfer in the region of supercritical state variables of a liquid.
Heat Transfer-Soviet Res. 5 (5), 49–52.
part of a test section compared to those of normal Alferov, N.S., Balunov, B.F., Rybin, R.A., 1975. Calculating heat
heat transfer and (3) improved heat transfer with transfer with mixed convection. Therm. Eng. 22 (6), 96–100.
higher values of the HTC compared to those of nor- Alferov, N.S., Rybin, R.A., Balunov, B.F., 1969. Heat transfer with
mal heat transfer. Also, a peak in HTC near the turbulent water flow in a vertical tube under conditions of appre-
critical and pseudo-critical points was recorded. ciable influence of free convection. Therm. Eng. 16 (12), 90–95.
Armand, A.A., Tarasova, N.V., Kon’kov, A.S., 1959. Investigation
3. The deteriorated heat transfer usually appears at of heat transfer from wall to steam near the critical point. In:
higher heat fluxes and lower mass fluxes. This phe- Heat Transfer at High Heat Fluxes and Other Special Conditions.
nomenon can be suppressed or significantly delayed Gosenergoizdat Publ. House, Moscow–Leningrad, Russia, pp.
by increasing the turbulence level with flow obstruc- 41–50 (in Russian).
tions and other heat-transfer enhancing devices. Bae, Y.-Y., Joo, H.-K., Jang, J., Jeong, Y.-H., Song, J.-H., Yoon, H.-
Y., Yoo, J.-Y., 2004. Research of a supercritical pressure water
4. There are very few publications, which are devoted cooled reactor in Korea. In: Proceedings of the International
to heat transfer in bundles cooled with water at Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP’04),
supercritical pressures. Therefore, more work is Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 13–17, Paper #4247.
needed to provide reliable information for design Baranaev, Yu.D., Kirillov, P.L., Poplavskii, V.M., Sharapov, V.N.,
purposes. 2004. Supercritical-pressure water nuclear reactors. At. Energy
96 (4), 345–351.
5. Heat transfer at supercritical pressures can be Barulin, Yu.D., Vikhrev, Yu.V., Dyadyakin, B.V., et al., 1971. Heat
accompanied by flow oscillations and other instabil- transfer during turbulent flow in vertical and horizontal tubes
ities at some operating conditions. However, exper- containing water with supercritical state parameters. J. Eng. Phys.
imental data on these aspects are still very limited. 20 (5), 665.
Belyakov, I.I., Krasyakova, L.Yu., Zhukovskii, A.V., Fefelova, N.D.,
1971. Heat transfer in vertical risers and horizontal tubes at super-
critical pressure. Therm. Eng. 18 (11), 55–59.
Acknowledgements Bourke, P.J., Denton, W.H., August 1967. An Unusual Phenomenon
of Heat Transfer Near the Critical Point, Memorandum AERE-M
We would like to express our great appreciation to 1946. Chemical Engineering and Process Technology Division,
Dr. M.A. Gotovsky (Polzunov Central Boiler and Tur- U.K.A.E.A. Research Group, Atomic Energy Research Estab-
lishment, Harwell, Berkshire, 9 pp.
bine Institute, St.-Petersburg, Russia), Professor J.D. Breus, V.I., Belyakov, I.I., 1990. Heat transfer in helical coils at
Jackson (University of Manchester, Manchester, UK), supercritical pressure. Therm. Eng. 21 (1), 189–191.
Professor P.L. Kirillov (State Scientific Center “Insti- Buongiorno, J., 2004. The supercritical water cooled reactor: ongo-
tute of Physics and Power Engineering”, Obninsk, Rus- ing research and development in the U.S. In: Proceedings of the
sia), Dr. V.A. Kurganov (Institute of High Temperatures International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants
(ICAPP’04), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 13–17, Paper 4229.
Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia), Pro- Chakrygin, V.G., Agafonov, M.B., Letyagin, I.P., 1974. Experimental
fessor Yu.N. Kuznetsov (NIKIET, Moscow, Russia) determination of the limits of aperiodic instability at very high
and Dr. V.A. Silin (Russian Research Center “Kurcha- and supercritical pressures. Therm. Eng. 21 (1), 17–22.
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2427

Chakrygin, V.G., Lokshin, V.A., 1957. Temperature regime of Glushchenko, L.F., Kalachev, S.I., Gandzyuk, O.F., 1972. Deter-
horizontal steam generating tubes at supercritical pressures mining the conditions of existence of deteriorated heat transfer
(p = 230–250 ata). Therm. Eng. 4 (10), 27–30 (in Russian). at supercritical pressures of the medium. Therm. Eng. 19 (2),
Chalfant, A.I., June 1954. Heat Transfer and Fluid Friction Experi- 107–111.
ments for the Supercritical Water Reactor. Report PWAC-109. Goldmann, K., 1961. Heat transfer to supercritical water at 5000 psi
Dashkiyev, Yu.G., Rozhalin, V.P., 1975. Thermo-hydraulic stabil- flowing at high mass flow rates through round tubes. In: Inter-
ity of a system of steam-generating channels with super-critical national Developments in Heat Transfer: Papers Presented at the
pressure. Heat Transfer-Soviet Res. 7 (5), 102–110. International Heat Transfer Conference, Part III, January 8–12.
Dickinson, N.L., Welch, C.P., 1958. Heat transfer to supercritical ASME, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA, pp. 561–568,
water. Trans. ASME 80, 746–752. Paper 66.
Domin, G., 1963. Wärmeübergang in kritischen und überkritischen Harrison, G.S., Watson, A., 1976. An experimental investigation of
Bereichen von Wasser in Rohren. Brennstoff-Warme-Fraft forced convection to supercritical pressure water in heated small
(BWK) 15 (11), 527–532 (in German). bore tubes. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 190 (40), 429–435.
Doroshchuk, V.E., Lel’chuk, V.L., Modnikova, V.V., 1959. Heat Ishigai, S., Kadgi, M., Nakamoto, M., 1976. Heat transfer and friction
transfer to water at high pressure. In: Heat Transfer at High for water flow in tubes at supercritical pressures. In: Teplo-
Heat Fluxes and Other Special Conditions. Gosenergoizdat Publ. massoobmen (Heat-Mass-Transfer)—V, Proceedings of the Vth
House, Moscow–Leningrad, Russia, pp. 30–40 (in Russian). All-Union Conference on Heat Mass Transfer, vol. 1, Part 1,
Duffey, R.B., Pioro, I.L., 2005a. Experimental heat transfer of super- Minsk, Belarus, May, pp. 261–269 (in Russian).
critical carbon dioxide flowing inside channels. Nucl. Eng. Des. Kafengaus, N.L., 1975. The mechanism of pseudoboiling. Heat
235 (8), 913–924 (survey). Transfer-Soviet Res. 7 (4), 94–100.
Duffey, R.B., Pioro, I.L., 2005b. Supercritical water-cooled nuclear Kafengauz, N.L., 1986. About some peculiarities in fluid behaviour
reactors: review and status. Encyclopedia of Life Support Syst. at supercritical pressure in conditions of intensive heat transfer.
(EOLSS), in press. Appl. Therm. Sci. 8 (5), 6–10 (in Russian).
Duffey, R.B., Pioro, I.L., Khartabil, H.F., 2005. Supercritical water- Kafengauz, N.L., Fedorov, M.I., 1968. Interrelation of temperature
cooled pressure channel nuclear reactors: review and status. In: of cooled surface and frequency of natural pressure oscillations
Proceedings of the International Conference GLOBAL 2005 in turbulent heat transfer. J. Eng.-Phys. 15 (3), 825–828.
“Nuclear Energy Systems for Future Generation and Global Sus- Kamenetskii, B.Ya., 1974. Special features of heat transfer with
tainability”, Tsukuba, Japan, October 9–13. mixed convection in horizontal tubes. Therm. Eng. 21 (6), 84–87.
Dyadyakin, B.V., Popov, A.S., 1977. Heat transfer and thermal resis- Kamenetskii, B.Ya., 1975. Heat-transfer characteristics of a nonuni-
tance of tight seven-rod bundle, cooled with water flow at super- formly circumferentially heated pipe. High Temp. 13 (3),
critical pressures. Trans. VTI (11), 244–253 (in Russian). 613–616.
Filippov, G.A., Avdeev, A.A., Bogoyavlenskiy, R.G., Bykov, V.P., Kamenetskii, B.Ya., 1980. The effectiveness of turbulence promoters
Dvoynishnikov, E.A., Leppik, P.A., 2003. Vessel microfuel in tubes with nonuniformity heated perimeters under conditions
nuclear reactor with supercritical pressure of light-water coolant of impaired heat transfer. Therm. Eng. 27 (4), 222–223.
for one-loop NPP. In: International Scientific-Engineering Kamenetsky, B., Shitsman, M., 1970. Experimental investigation
Conference “Nuclear Power Engineering and Fuel Cycles”, of turbulent heat transfer to supercritical water in a tube with
Moscow–Dimitrovgrad, December 1–5. circumferentially varying heat flux. In: Proceedings of the 4th
Gabaraev, B.A., Ganev, I.Kh., Davydov, V.K., et al., 2003a. Vessel International Heat Transfer Conference, vol. VI, Paris, Versailles,
and channel fast reactors cooled by boiling water or water with France. Elsevier Publ. Company, Paper B 8.10.
supercritical parameters. At. Energy 95 (4), 655–662. Khartabil, H.F., Duffey, R.B., Spinks, N., Diamond, W., 2005.
Gabaraev, B.A., Ganev, I.Kh., Kuznetsov, Yu.N., et al., 2003b. The The pressure-tube concept of Generation IV supercritical water-
three-target channel-type uranium water fast reactor with direct cooled reactor (SCWR): overview and status. In: Proceedings of
flow of supercritical water to solve the problem of weapon- the International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants
plutonium and power generation at high efficiency. In: Proceed- (ICAPP’05), Seoul, Korea, May 15–19, Paper 5564.
ings of the 11th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering Kirillov, P.L., Kolosov, A.A., Petrova, E.N., et al., 1986. Temper-
(ICONE-11), Tokyo, Japan, April 20–23, Paper #36021. ature Distribution in Turbulent Flow of Water at Supercritical
Gabaraev, B.A., Vikulov, V.K., Yermoshin, F.Ye., et al., 2004. Pres- Pressures (Circular Tube). IPPE-1766, Institute of Physics and
sure tube once-through reactor with supercritical coolant pres- Power Engineering, Obninsk, Russia, 10 pp. (in Russian).
sure. In: Proceedings of the International Scientific-Technical Kirillov, P.L., Yur’ev, Yu.S., Bobkov, V.P., 1990. Handbook of
Conference “Channel Reactors: Problems and Solutions”, Thermal-Hydraulics Calculations (in Russian), Energoatomizdat
Moscow, Russia, October 19–22, Paper #42. Publ. House, Moscow, Russia, “3.2. Flow hydraulic resistance of
Gerliga, V.A., Skalozubov, V.I., 1992. Nucleate Boiling Flows in the working fluids with significantly changing properties”, pp.
Power Equipment of Nuclear Power Stations Energoatomizdat, 66–67, “8.4. Working fluids at near-critical state”, pp. 130–132.
Moscow, Russia, 430 pp. (in Russian). Kondrat’ev, N.S., 1969. Heat transfer and hydraulic resistance with
Glushchenko, L.F., Gandzyuk, O.F., 1972. Temperature conditions supercritical water flowing in tubes. Therm. Eng. 16 (8), 73–77.
at the wall of an annular channel with internal heating at super- Kondrat’ev, N.S., 1971. About regimes of the deteriorated heat trans-
critical pressures. High Temp. 10 (4), 734–738. fer at flow of supercritical pressure water in tubes. In: Transac-
2428 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

tions of the IVth All-Union Conference on Heat Transfer and Miropol’skii, Z.L., Shitsman, M.E., 1958. Investigation of heat trans-
Hydraulics at Movement of Two-Phase Flow inside Elements of fer to water and steam at pressures up to 280 ata. In: Dollezhal’,
Power Engineering Machines and Apparatuses, Leningrad, Rus- N.A. (Ed.), Investigation of Heat Transfer to Steam and Water
sia, pp. 71–74 (in Russian). Boiling in Tubes at High Pressures. Atomizdat Publ. House,
Koshizuka, S., Oka, Yo., 2000. Computational analysis of deteri- Moscow, Russia, pp. 54–70 (in Russian).
oration phenomena and thermal–hydraulic design of SCR. In: NIST Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport Properties—
Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Supercriti- REFPROP, August 2002. In: Lemmon, E.W., McLinden, M.O.,
cal Water-Cooled Reactor Design and Technology (SCR-2000), Huber, M.L. (Eds.), NIST Standard Reference Database 23 (on
Tokyo, Japan, November 6–8, Paper 302. Diskette: Executable with Source), Version 7.0. U.S. Department
Kovalevskiy, V.B., Miropol’skiy, V.B., 1978. Heat transfer and drag of Commerce.
in the flow of water supercritical pressure in curved channels. NIST/ASME Steam Properties, March 2000. In: Harvey, A.H.,
Heat Transfer-Soviet Res. 10 (4), 69–78. Peskin, A.P., Klein, S.A. (Eds.), NIST Standard Reference
Krasyakova, L.Yu., Belyakov, I.I., Fefelova, N.D., 1977. Heat trans- Database 10 (on Diskette: Executable with Source), Version 2.2.
fer with a downward flow of water at supercritical pressure. U.S. Department of Commerce.
Therm. Eng. 24 (1), 9–14. Oka, Yo., 2000. Review of high temperature water and steam
Krasyakova, L.Yu., Glusker, B.N., 1965. Investigated flow stabil- cooled reactor concepts. In: Proceedings of the 1st International
ity in parallel serpentine tubes with upward–downward flow of Symposium on Supercritical Water-Cooled Reactor Design
medium at subcritical and supercritical pressure. In: Transactions and Technology (SCR-2000), Tokyo, Japan, November 6–8,
of TsKTI “Boiler-Turbine Engineering”, Issue 59, Leningrad, Paper #104.
Russia, pp. 82–89 (in Russian). Oka, Yo., Koshizuka, S., 2000. Design concept of once-through cycle
Krasyakova, L.Yu., Raykin, Ya.M., Belyakov, I.I., et al., 1967. Inves- supercritical-pressure light water cooled reactors. In: Proceed-
tigation of temperature regime of heated tubes at supercritical ings of the 1st International Symposium on Supercritical Water-
pressure. Soviet Energy Technol. (1), 1–4 (in Russian). Cooled Reactor Design and Technology (SCR-2000), Tokyo,
Krasyakova, L.Yu., Raykin, Ya.M., Belyakov, I.I., et al., 1968. Japan, November 6–8, Paper #101.
Temperature regime of vertical and horizontal heated tubes at Ornatskiy, A.P., Glushchenko, L.F., Gandzyuk, O.F., 1972. An exper-
supercritical pressure. In: Transactions of TsKTI “Boiler-Turbine imental study of heat transfer in externally-heated annuli at super-
Engineering”, Issue 90, Leningrad, Russia, pp. 105–118 (in Rus- critical pressures. Heat Transfer-Soviet Res. 4 (6), 25–29.
sian). Ornatskiy, A.P., Glushchenko, L.F., Kalachev, S.I., 1971. Heat trans-
Kruzhilin, G.N., 1974. Heat transfer from wall to steam flow at super- fer with rising and falling flows of water in tubes of small diameter
critical pressures. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Heat at supercritical pressures. Therm. Eng. 18 (5), 137–141.
Transfer Conference, vol. II, Tokyo, Japan, September 3–7, pp. Ornatsky, A.P., Glushchenko, L.P., Siomin, E.T., et al., 1970. The
173–176, Paper FC4.11. research of temperature conditions of small diameter parallel
Kuznetsov, Yu.N., Gabaraev, B.A., 2004. Channel type reactors with tubes cooled by water under supercritical pressures. In: Pro-
supercritical water coolant. Russian experience. In: Proceedings ceedings of the 4th International Heat Transfer Conference, vol.
of the International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power VI, Paris, Versailles, France. Elsevier Publ. Company, Paper
Plants (ICAPP’04), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 13–17, Paper B 8.11.
4232. Pioro, I.L., Duffey, R.B., April 2003. Literature Survey of the Heat
Lee, R.A., Haller, K.H., 1974. Supercritical water heat transfer devel- Transfer and Hydraulic Resistance of Water, Carbon Dioxide,
opments and applications. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Helium and Other Fluids at Supercritical and Near-Critical Pres-
Heat Transfer Conference, vol. IV, Tokyo, Japan, September 3–7, sures. Report AECL-12137/FFC-FCT-409. Chalk River Labora-
pp. 335–339, Paper B7.7. tories, AECL, ISSN 0067-0367, 182 pp.
Malkina, L.I., Maksimova, G.P., Kafengauz, N.L., Fedorov, M.I., Pioro, I., Duffey, R., Dumouchel, T., 2004. Hydraulic resistance of
1972. Heat transfer to water with pseudoboiling. Heat Transfer- fluids flowing in channels at supercritical pressures, (survey).
Soviet Res. 4 (5), 23–26. Nucl. Eng. Des. 231 (2), 187–197 (survey).
McAdams, W.H., Kennel, W.E., Addoms, J.N., 1950. Heat transfer Pioro, I.L., Khartabil, H.F., Duffey, R.B., 2003. Heat transfer at super-
to superheated steam at high pressures. Trans. ASME 72 (4), critical pressures. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Con-
421–428. ference on Nuclear Engineering (ICONE-11), Shinjuku, Tokyo,
Miropol’skii, Z.L., Pikus, V.Yu., Kovalevskii, V.B., 1970. Heat trans- Japan, April 20–23, 13 pp., Paper No. 36454.
fer with a flow of medium at supercritical pressure in curvilinear Pioro, L.S., Pioro, I.L., 1997. Industrial Two-Phase Thermosyphons.
channels. Therm. Eng. 17 (11), 101–104. Begell House, New York, NY, USA, p. 4.
Miropolskiy, Z.L., Picus, V.J., Shitsman, M.E., 1966. Regimes of Protopopov, V.S., Kuraeva, I.V., Antonov, A.M., 1973. An approach
deteriorated heat transfer at forced flow of fluids in curvilinear to the determination of the conditions of occurrence of deterio-
channels. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Heat Transfer rated heat transfer regimes at supercritical pressures. High Temp.
Conference, vol. 2, Chicago, IL, USA, August 7–12, pp. 95–101. 11 (3), 529–532.
Miropol’skii, Z.L., Shitsman, M.E., 1957. Heat transfer to water and Protopopov, V.S., Silin, V.A., 1973. Approximate method of calculat-
steam at variable specific heat (at near-critical region). J. Tech. ing the start of local deterioration of heat transfer at supercritical
Phys. XXVII (10), 2359–2372 (in Russian). pressure. High Temp. 11 (2), 399–401.
 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430 2429

Randall, D.G., November 1956. Some Heat Transfer and Fluid Fric- Transactions of TsKTI “Boiler-Turbine Engineering”, Issue 57,
tion Experiments with Supercritical Water. Report NDA 2051 Leningrad, Russia, pp. 130–137 (in Russian).
(also TID-7529, Part 3, November, 1957). Solomonov, V.M., Lokshin, V.A., 1975. Temperature conditions and
Razumovskiy, V.G., Ornatskiy, A.P., Maevskiy, Ye.M., 1990. Local heat transfer in horizontal and inclined tubes of steam generators
heat transfer and hydraulic behaviour in turbulent channel flow at supercritical pressure under conditions of joint free and forced
of water at supercritical pressure. Heat Transfer-Soviet Res. 22 convection. Therm. Eng. 22 (7), 74–77.
(1), 91–102. Squarer, D., Schulenberg, T., Struwe, D., Oka, Y., Bittermann, D.,
Robakidze, L.V., Miropol’skii, Z.L., Khasanov-Agaev, L.R., 1983. Aksan, N., Maraczy, C., Kyrki-Rajamäki, R., Souyri, A., Dumaz,
Heat transfer to a medium of supercritical parameters with mixed P., 2003. High performance light water reactor. Nucl. Eng. Des.
convection in horizontal tubes. Therm. Eng. 30 (6), 368–369. 221, 167–180.
Schmidt, E., 1960. Wärmetransport durch natürliche konvection in Stewart, E., Stewart, P., Watson, A., 1973. Thermo-acoustic oscilla-
Stoffen bei Kritischen zustand. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1 (1), tions in forced convection heat transfer to supercritical pressure
92–101 (in German). water. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 16, 257–270.
Schmidt, E., Eckert, E., Grigull, V., April 1946. Heat Transfer by Styrikovich, M.A., Margulova, T.Kh., Miropol’skii, Z.L., 1967.
Liquids Near the Critical State, AFF Translation, No. 527. Air Problems in the development of designs of supercritical boilers.
Materials Command, Wright Field, Dayton, OH, USA. Therm. Eng. 14 (6), 5–9.
Selivanov, V.M., Smirnov, A.M., 1984. Experimental Investigation Swenson, H.S., Carver, J.R., Karakala, C.R., 1965. Heat transfer to
of Heat Transfer of Water in a Tube Under Supercritical Pres- supercritical water in smooth-bore tubes. J. Heat Transfer, Trans.
sure, IPPE-1602. Institute of Physics and Power Engineering, ASME, Ser. C 87 (4), 477–484.
Obninsk, Russia, 16 pp. (in Russian). Treshchev, G.G., Sukhov, V.A., 1977. Stability of flow in heated
Sevast’yanov, V.V., Sinitsin, A.T., Yakaitis, F.L., 1980. Study of heat- channels in the supercritical region of parameters of state. Therm.
exchange process in supercritical region of parameters under Eng. 24 (5), 68–71.
conditions of high-frequency pressure oscillations. High Temp. Treshchev, G.G., Sukhov, V.A., Shevchenko, G.A., 1971. Flow
18 (3), 433–439. autooscillations in a heated channel at the supercritical state
Shiralkar, B.S., Griffith, P., 1970. The effect of swirl, inlet conditions, parameters. In: Transactions of the IVth All-Union Con-
flow direction, and tube diameter on the heat transfer to fluids ference on Heat Transfer and Hydraulics at Movement
at supercritical pressure. J. Heat Transfer, Trans. ASME 92 (3) of Two-Phase Flow inside Elements of Power Engineer-
(August), 465–474. ing Machines and Apparatuses, Leningrad, Russia, pp. 167–
Shitsman, M.E., 1962. Investigation of heat transfer at water cooling 175.
in near critical region. Therm. Eng. 9 (1), 83–86 (in Russian). Vikhrev, Yu.V., Barulin, Yu.D., Kon’kov, A.S., 1967. A study of heat
Shitsman, M.E., 1963. Impairment of the heat transmission at super- transfer in vertical tubes at supercritical pressures. Therm. Eng.
critical pressures. High Temp. 1 (2), 237–244. 14 (9), 116–119.
Shitsman, M.E., 1966. The effect of natural convection on temper- Vikhrev, Yu.V., Kon’kov, A.S., Lokshin, V.A., et al., 1971. Tempera-
ature conditions in horizontal tubes at supercritical pressures. ture regime of steam generating tubes at supercritical pressure. In:
Therm. Eng. 13 (7), 69–75. Transactions of the IVth All-Union Conference on Heat Transfer
Shitsman, M.E., 1967. Temperature conditions of evaporative sur- and Hydraulics at Movement of Two-Phase Flow inside Elements
faces at supercritical pressures. Electric. Stations 38 (2), 27–30. of Power Engineering Machines and Apparatuses, Leningrad,
Shitsman, M.E., 1968. Temperature conditions in tubes at supercrit- Russia, pp. 21–40 (in Russian).
ical pressures. Therm. Eng. 15 (5), 72–77. Vikhrev, Yu.V., Kon’kov, A.S., Sinitsin, I.T., 1970. Temperature
Shvarts, A.L., Glusker, B.N., 1976. A method of determining per- regime of horizontal tubes at supercritical pressure. Electric. Sta-
missible flows with respect to conditions of stability in ∩- and tions (7), 35–38 (in Russian).
U-shaped elements at supercritical pressures. Therm. Eng. 23 (7), Vikhrev, Yu.V., Kon’kov, A.S., Solomonov, V.M., Sinitsyn, I.T.,
16–20. 1973. Heat transfer in horizontal and inclined steam-generating
Silin, V.A., Voznesensky, V.A., Afrov, A.M., 1993. The light water tubes at supercritical pressures. High Temp. 11 (6), 1183–
integral reactor with natural circulation of the coolant at super- 1185.
critical pressure B-500 SKDI. Nucl. Eng. Des. 144, 327–336. Vikhrev, Yu.V., Lokshin, V.A., 1964. An experimental study of tem-
Smirnov, O.K., Krasnov, S.N., 1978. An investigation of unsteady perature conditions in horizontal tubes at supercritical pressures.
heat transfer to water at supercritical pressures. Therm. Eng. 15 Therm. Eng. 11 (12), 105–109.
(5), 70–72. Watts, M.J., Chou, C.T., 1982. Mixed convection heat transfer to
Smirnov, O.K., Krasnov, S.N., 1979. Tube hot spots developing under supercritical pressure water. In: Proceedings of the 7th Interna-
transient loads and flow of supercritical water. Heat Transfer- tional Heat Transfer Conference, vol. 3, Munchen, Germany, pp.
Soviet Res. 11 (3), 122–124. 495–500, Paper 6-10.
Smirnov, O.K., Krasnov, S.N., 1980. Investigation of unsteady heat Yamagata, K., Nishikawa, K., Hasegawa, S., et al., 1972. Forced
transfer to supercritical water. Heat Transfer-Soviet Res. 12 (2), convective heat transfer to supercritical water flowing in tubes.
135–140. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 15 (12), 2575–2593.
Smolin, V.N., Polyakov, V.K., 1965. Experimental investigation of Yamaji, A., Kamei, K., Oka, Y., Koshizuka, S., 2004. Improved
heat transfer to water in tubes at supercritical pressure. In: core design of high temperature supercritical-pressure light
 2430 I.L. Pioro, R.B. Duffey / Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (2005) 2407–2430

water reactor. In: Proceedings of the International Congress on Zhukovskiy, A.V., Krasyakova, L.Yu., Belyakov, I.I., Phephelova,
Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP’04), Pittsburgh, PA, N.D., 1971. Heat transfer in horizontal tube at supercritical pres-
USA, Paper #4331. sures. Soviet Energy Technol. (2), 23–26 (in Russian).
Yoshida, S., Mori, H., 2000. Heat transfer to supercritical pressure Zuber, N., 1966. An Analysis of Thermally Induced Flow Oscil-
fluids flowing in tubes. In: Proceedings of the 1st International lations in the Near-Critical and Super-Critical Thermodynamic
Symposium on Supercritical Water-Cooled Reactor Design and Region. Report NASA-CR-80609. Research and Development
Technology (SCR-2000), Tokyo, Japan, November 6–8, Paper Center, General Electric Company, Schenectady, NY, USA, May
106. 25, 159 pp.

View publication stats