Churn turbulent flow: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:27, 23 January 2020

Churn turbulent flow is a two-phase gas/liquid flow regime characterized by a highly-agitated flow where gas bubbles are sufficient in numbers to both interact with each other and, while interacting, coalesce to form larger distorted bubbles with unique shapes and behaviors in the system. This flow regime is created when there is a large gas fraction in a system with a high gas and low liquid velocity. It is an important flow regime to understand and model because of its predictive value in nuclear reactor vessel boiling flow.

Occurrence

A flow in which the number of bubbles is low is called ideally-separated bubble flow. The bubbles don’t interact with each other. As the number of bubbles increase they start colliding each other. A situation then arises where they tend to coalesce to form cap bubbles, and the new flow pattern formed is called churn turbulent flow. The bubbles occurring in such a flow can be classified in small, large, and distorted bubbles. The small bubbles are generally spherical or elliptical and are encountered in a major concentration in the wake of large and distorted bubbles and close to the walls. Large, ellipsoidal or cap bubbles can be found in the core region of the flow as well as the distorted bubbles with a highly deformed interface.

Churn turbulent flow is commonly encountered in industrial applications. A typical example is boiling flow in nuclear reactors.

Numerical simulation of bubble column flows in churn turbulent regime

Numerical simulations of cylindrical bubble columns operating in the churn-turbulent regime have been carried out using an Euler–Euler approach incorporated with the RNG k–ε model for liquid turbulence^{[citation needed]}. Several approaches have been carried out, including single-sized bubble modeling, double-sized bubble modeling, and the multiple sizes group modeling (MUSIG).

Breakup mass conserved formulations and coalescence rates mass conserved formulation was used in the computation of bubble size distributions. For single size modelling the Schiller–Naumann drag force was used, and for the modelling of MUSIG the Ishii–Zuber drag force was used. An empirical drag formulation was used for the double size bubble model. The simulation results of time-averaged axial velocity and gas holdup obtained with the three models were compared with reported experimental data in the resulting literature. After the comparison of all the three results it gets very clear that only MUSIG models with some lift force can replicate the measured radial distribution of gas holdup in the fully developed flow regime. The inhomogeneous MUSIG model gives a little better result than other models in the prediction of axial liquid velocity. For all the simulations the RNG k–ε model was used, and the results showed that this version of k–ε model did yield comparatively high rate of turbulence dissipation and high bubble breakup and, hence, a rational bubble size distribution formed. Here the ad hoc manipulation of the breakup rates was ignored. Mutual effects of drag force, mean bubble sizes, and turbulence characteristics profound from the simulation results. A decrease in the relative velocity between two phases is encounters due to an increase in the drag force, and this could result in decrease in k and ε. Low breakup rates results a large Sauter diameter which was directly connected to the dissipation rates of turbulence. Drag force is directly influenced by the change of Sauter diameter.

References

Montoya, G.; Liao, Y.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E. "Analysis and Applications of a Two-Fluid Multi-Field Hydrodynamic Model for Churn-Turbulent Flows", 21st International Conference on Nuclear Engineering – ICONE 21. China (2013)
Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E. "A Generalized Multi-Field Two-Fluid Approach for Treatment of Multi-Scale Interfacial Structures in High Void-Fraction Regimes", MIT Energy Night 2013. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (2013)

•Montoya, G.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.; Hänsch, S.; Baglietto, E. Analysis and Applications of a Generalized Multi-Field Two-Fluid Approach for Treatment of Multi-Scale Interfacial Structures in High Void-Fraction Regimes 2014 International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants – ICAPP 2014. USA (2014) •Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.; Hoehne, T. Comparative Analysis of High Void Fraction Regimes using an Averaging Euler-Euler Multi-Fluid Approach and a Generalized Two-Phase Flow (GENTOP) Concept 22nd International Conference on Nuclear Engineering – ICONE 22. Czech Republic (2014)

Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.

Development and Analysis of a CMFD Generalized Multi-Field Model for Treatment of Different Interfacial Scales in Churn-Turbulent and Transitional Flows CFD4NRS-5 – Application of CFD/CMFD Codes to Nuclear Reactor Safety Design and their Experimental Validation. Switzerland (2014)

https://www.hzdr.de/db/!Publications?pSelTitle=18077&pSelMenu=-1&pNid=3016
Shuiqing Zhan, Mao Li, Jiemin Zhou, Jianhong YangYiwen Zhou Applied Thermal Engineering 2014, 73, 803–816 [CrossRef]
T. T. DeviB. Kumar Thermophysics and Aeromechanics 2014, 21, 365–382 [CrossRef]
R.M.A. MasoodA. Delgado Chemical Engineering Science 2014, 108, 154–168 [CrossRef]

^[1]

×M. Pourtousi, J.N. SahuP. Ganesan Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification 2014, 75, 38–47 [CrossRef]

^ • Lijia Xu, Zihong Xia, Xiaofeng Guo, and Caixia Chen Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2014, 53 (12), 4922-4930 [ACS Full Text ] [PDF (1741 KB)] [PDF w/ Links (526 KB)]

[1] • Lijia Xu, Zihong Xia, Xiaofeng Guo, and Caixia Chen Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2014, 53 (12), 4922-4930 [ACS Full Text ] [PDF (1741 KB)] [PDF w/ Links (526 KB)]

[1]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+'''Churn turbulent flow''' is a [[Two-phase flow|two-phase]] gas/liquid [[flow regime]] characterized by a highly-agitated flow where gas [[Bubble (physics)|bubbles]] are sufficient in numbers to both interact with each other and, while interacting, coalesce to form larger distorted bubbles with unique shapes and behaviors in the system. This flow regime is created when there is a large gas fraction in a system with a high gas and low [[liquid]] velocity. It is an important flow regime to understand and model because of its predictive value in [[nuclear reactor]] vessel [[Boiling|boiling flow]].
-{{cleanup-reorganize|date=November 2014}}
-== Introduction ==
+== Occurrence ==
+A flow in which the number of bubbles is low is called ideally-separated bubble flow. The bubbles don’t interact with each other. As the number of bubbles increase they start colliding each other. A situation then arises where they tend to coalesce to form cap bubbles, and the new flow pattern formed is called churn turbulent flow. The bubbles occurring in such a flow can be classified in small, large, and distorted bubbles. The small bubbles are generally spherical or elliptical and are encountered in a major concentration in the wake of large and distorted bubbles and close to the walls. Large, ellipsoidal or cap bubbles can be found in the core region of the flow as well as the distorted bubbles with a highly deformed interface.
+Churn turbulent flow is commonly encountered in industrial applications. A typical example is boiling flow in nuclear reactors.
-In Fluid dynamics, many a times we encounter bubble flow. Initially the number of bubbles in the flow is low, this we call as ideally-separated bubble flow. In this type of flow the bubbles don’t interact each other directly or indirectly but as the number of bubbles increase they started colliding each other and their size get reduced. Suddenly a situation comes when they tend to coalesce to form cap bubbles, and the new flow pattern formed is called churn turbulent flow. The bubbles occurring in such a flow can be classified in small, large, and distorted bubbles. The small bubbles are generally spherical or elliptical and are encountered in a major concentration in the wake of large and distorted bubbles and close to the walls. Large, -ellipsoidal or cap bubbles can be found in the core region of the flow as well as the distorted bubbles with a highly deformed interface.
-Churn-turbulent flow has a high application in industries. It is commonly encountered in industrial applications, and so there is a necessity to understand the physics behind it, and model it in a much efficient and accurate manner. A typical example of churn turbulent flow is boiling flow in nuclear reactors. Especially for many accident scenarios, boiling may lead to high void portion including churn-turbulent flow. Its flow structure may have a strong impact on the safety. For all these reasons, consistent predictions of such flows are an important and major issue for safety analyses.
+== Numerical simulation of bubble column flows in churn turbulent regime ==
-== Contents ==
+[[Computational fluid dynamics|Numerical simulations]] of cylindrical bubble columns operating in the churn-turbulent regime have been carried out using an Euler–Euler approach incorporated with the [[K-epsilon turbulence model|RNG k–ε model]] for liquid turbulence{{Citation needed|date=October 2017}}. Several approaches have been carried out, including single-sized bubble modeling, double-sized bubble modeling, and the multiple sizes group modeling (MUSIG).
-* 	Introduction
-* 	Numerical Simulation of Bubble Column Flow In Churn-Turbulent Regime
+Breakup mass conserved formulations and [[Coalescence (physics)|coalescence]] rates mass conserved formulation was used in the computation of bubble size distributions. For single size modelling the Schiller–Naumann drag force was used, and for the modelling of MUSIG the Ishii–Zuber [[drag force]] was used. An empirical drag formulation was used for the double size bubble model. The simulation results of time-averaged axial velocity and gas holdup obtained with the three models were compared with reported experimental data in the resulting literature. After the comparison of all the three results it gets very clear that only MUSIG models with some lift force can replicate the measured radial distribution of gas holdup in the fully developed flow regime. The inhomogeneous MUSIG model gives a little better result than other models in the prediction of axial liquid velocity. For all the simulations the RNG k–ε model was used, and the results showed that this version of k–ε model did yield comparatively high rate of turbulence dissipation and high bubble breakup and, hence, a rational bubble size distribution formed. Here the ad hoc manipulation of the breakup rates was ignored. Mutual effects of drag force, mean bubble sizes, and turbulence characteristics profound from the [[simulation]] results. A decrease in the relative velocity between two phases is encounters due to an increase in the drag force, and this could result in decrease in k and ε. Low breakup rates results a large [[Sauter mean diameter|Sauter diameter]] which was directly connected to the dissipation rates of turbulence. Drag force is directly influenced by the change of Sauter diameter.
-== Numerical Simulation of Bubble Column Flows in Churn-Turbulent Regime ==
+==References==
-The numerical simulations of cylindrical bubble column operating in the churn-turbulent regime have been simulated using Euler–Euler approach incorporated with the RNG k–ε model for liquid turbulence. Here we will see single-sized bubble modelling, double-sized bubble modelling, and the multiple sizes group modelling (MUSIG), including the homogeneous and inhomogeneous discrete methods are employed in the simulations. Breakup mass conserved formulations and coalescence rates mass conserved formulation was used in the computation of bubble size distributions. For single size modelling the Schiller–Naumann drag force was used, and for the modelling of MUSIG the Ishii–Zuber drag force was used. An empirical drag formulation was used for the double size bubble model. The simulation results of time-averaged axial velocity and gas holdup obtained with the three models were compared with reported experimental data in the resulting literature. After the comparison of all the three results it gets very clear that only MUSIG models with some lift force can replicate the measured radial distribution of gas holdup in the fully developed flow regime. The inhomogeneous MUSIG model gives a little better result than other models in the prediction of axial liquid velocity. For all the simulations the RNG k–ε model was used, and the results showed that this version of k–ε model did yield comparatively high rate of turbulence dissipation and high bubble breakup and, hence, a rational bubble size distribution formed. Here the ad hoc manipulation of the breakup rates was ignored. Mutual effects of drag force, mean bubble sizes, and turbulence characteristics profound from the simulation results. A decrease in the relative velocity between two phases is encounters due to an increase in the drag force, and this could result in decrease in k and ε. Low breakup rates results a large sauter diameter which was directly connected to the dissipation rates of turbulence. Drag force is directly influenced by the change of Sauter diameter.
+{{Reflist}}
-Computational modelling of the flow is done using an Eulerian multi-fluid approach using ANSYS software package CFX, while for generating the mesh ICEM CFD is generally utilized. The preliminary point which is based on already existing models for bubbly flows comprise turbulent dispersion, drag force, bubble induced turbulence. Some examples of these are the particle induced turbulence model done by Rzehak (Rzehak and Krepper, 2012), the bubble-bubble interaction model done by Liao (Liao et al, 2011), and the inhomogeneous MUSIG (MUltiple SIze Group) approach established by Krepper (Krepper et al., 2008). The last one allows us to define many different bubble sizes groups with different velocity fields for both large as well as small bubbles. For the simulation of the churn-turbulent flows, the gas phase is showed by three different gas fields corresponding to the three types of bubbles mentioned above. This multi size group technique allows us creating a more realistic approximation of the churn-phenomenon.
+*Montoya, G.; Liao, Y.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E. "Analysis and Applications of a Two-Fluid Multi-Field Hydrodynamic Model for Churn-Turbulent Flows", ''21st International Conference on Nuclear Engineering – ICONE 21''. China (2013)
+*Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E. "A Generalized Multi-Field Two-Fluid Approach for Treatment of Multi-Scale Interfacial Structures in High Void-Fraction Regimes", MIT Energy Night 2013. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (2013)
-<ref>•	Montoya, G.; Liao, Y.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.
+•Montoya, G.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.; Hänsch, S.; Baglietto, E.
-Analysis and Applications of a Two-Fluid Multi-Field Hydrodynamic Model for Churn-Turbulent Flows
-st International Conference on Nuclear Engineering - ICONE 21. China (2013)
-</ref>
-<ref>•	Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.
-A Generalized Multi-Field Two-Fluid Approach for Treatment of Multi-Scale Interfacial Structures in High Void-Fraction Regimes
-MIT Energy Night 2013. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (2013)
-</ref>
-<ref>•	Montoya, G.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.; Hänsch, S.; Baglietto, E.
 Analysis and Applications of a Generalized Multi-Field Two-Fluid Approach for Treatment of Multi-Scale Interfacial Structures in High Void-Fraction Regimes
-International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants - ICAPP 2014. USA (2014)
+International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants – ICAPP 2014. USA (2014)
+•Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.; Hoehne, T.
-</ref>
-<ref>•	Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.; Hoehne, T.
 Comparative Analysis of High Void Fraction Regimes using an Averaging Euler-Euler Multi-Fluid Approach and a Generalized Two-Phase Flow (GENTOP) Concept
-nd International Conference on Nuclear Engineering - ICONE 22. Czech Republic (2014)
+nd International Conference on Nuclear Engineering – ICONE 22. Czech Republic (2014)
+*Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.
-</ref>
-<ref>•	Montoya, G.; Baglietto, E.; Lucas, D.; Krepper, E.
 Development and Analysis of a CMFD Generalized Multi-Field Model for Treatment of Different Interfacial Scales in Churn-Turbulent and Transitional Flows
-CFD4NRS-5 - Application of CFD/CMFD Codes to Nuclear Reactor Safety Design and their Experimental Validation. Switzerland (2014)
+CFD4NRS-5 – Application of CFD/CMFD Codes to Nuclear Reactor Safety Design and their Experimental Validation. Switzerland (2014)
+*https://www.hzdr.de/db/!Publications?pSelTitle=18077&pSelMenu=-1&pNid=3016
-</ref>
+*Shuiqing Zhan, Mao Li, Jiemin Zhou, Jianhong YangYiwen Zhou Applied Thermal Engineering 2014, 73, 803–816 [CrossRef]
-<ref>•	https://www.hzdr.de/db/!Publications?pSelTitle=18077&pSelMenu=-1&pNid=3016</ref>
+*T. T. DeviB. Kumar Thermophysics and Aeromechanics 2014, 21, 365–382 [CrossRef]
-<ref>•	Shuiqing Zhan, Mao Li, Jiemin Zhou, Jianhong YangYiwen Zhou Applied Thermal Engineering 2014, 73, 803-816 [CrossRef]</ref>
-<ref>•	T. T. DeviB. Kumar Thermophysics and Aeromechanics 2014, 21, 365-382 [CrossRef]</ref>
+*R.M.A. MasoodA. Delgado Chemical Engineering Science 2014, 108, 154–168 [CrossRef]
-<ref>•	R.M.A. MasoodA. Delgado Chemical Engineering Science 2014, 108, 154-168 [CrossRef]</ref>
 <ref>•	Lijia Xu, Zihong Xia, Xiaofeng Guo, and Caixia Chen Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2014, 53 (12), 4922-4930 [ACS Full Text  ] [PDF (1741 KB)] [PDF w/ Links (526 KB)]</ref>
-<ref>•	M. Pourtousi, J.N. SahuP. Ganesan Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification 2014, 75, 38-47 [CrossRef]</ref>
+*×M. Pourtousi, J.N. SahuP. Ganesan Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification 2014, 75, 38–47 [CrossRef]
-==References==
-{{Reflist}}
+[[Category:Flow regimes]]
-{{uncategorized|date=November 2014}}
+[[Category:Turbulence models]]