Evaporation from a plane liquid surface into a turbulent boundary layer

Abstract

A new analytic solution is presented for predicting evaporation rates from plane liquid surfaces into a neutral turbulent boundary layer. Conditions of passive dispersion are assumed. Molecular diffusivity is incorporated into the boundary conditions. Both smooth and rough surfaces are considered. A comparison with a wide variety of experimental data is made; this tends to reveal inadequacies and inconsistencies in the data, rather than test the theory. The effects of a roughness change at the boundary of the liquid surface and of high vapour pressures can be included for practical purposes by simple formulae. A criterion is derived for the validity of the neglect of buoyancy effects.

Accidents involving liquids: A step ahead in modeling pool spreading, evaporation and burning

“…From a detailed literature analysis, it is possible to observe that the attention was devoted to investigate separately: the spreading Subscripts 10 referred to the wind speed measured at ten meters height ∞ asymptotic value a air c combustion ev evaporative L liquid phase s surface beneath the pool T turbulent V vapor phase w water of liquids onto water [5,7,8], onto either smooth surfaces [9] or rough surfaces [10]; the evaporation of pools [11,12]; the burning of pools [13][14][15][16]. On the other hand, some models describe only a class of substances, for example liquefied natural gas [3,15,17] or oil [5,7].…”

“…The only work on this topic is that of Quest Consultants and reported by ABSG Consulting Inc. [17], but it is not recommended because waves were modeled as stationary objects. Brighton [12] regarded the roughness length on water as a universal constant that describes the existence of waves. Brighton did not model the waves directly, but he assumed that the roughness length could somehow account for them [21].…”

“…The correlations by Sutton, Raj and Kawamura reported by Engelhard [23] to evaluate the evaporative flux share the same Schmidt number. According to Brighton [12], the exponent of the Schmidt number is still under discussion and there is not any sound basis for up-scaling the results, which are derived from laboratory experiments. Moreover, the use of a dimensional constant is not recommended, due to possible misinterpretations when changing the units of measure.…”

“…Moreover, the use of a dimensional constant is not recommended, due to possible misinterpretations when changing the units of measure. On the contrary, Webber's model is based on the work of Brighton [12] for modeling the evaporation from a liquid surface into the atmospheric turbulent boundary layer. The functional form is similar to the previous one and is based on the chemical and physical properties of the involved substances, the meteorological variables and the characteristics of the surface onto which the pool lies.…”

Review of the ALOHA code pool evaporation model

“…Ground-to-pool heat flux is calculated using Fourier's law of heat conduction, with the ground temperature profile characterized by one-dimensional, constant temperature boundary, constant temperature initial condition, semi-infinite slab heat conduction. Brighton's solution of the advection-diffusion equation (Brighton 1985) is used to model the evaporative mass transfer fiom the pool. Reynolds (1992) provides a detailed overview of these models as used in the ALOHA pool evaporation algorithm.…”