Computation of gas-liquid flow in a square bubble column with Wray-Agarwal one-equation turbulence model

Tang, Kai-Liang; Ouyang, Yi; Agarwal, Ramesh K.; Chen, Jianming; Xiang, Yang; Chen, Jianfeng

doi:10.1016/j.ces.2020.115551

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The pressure velocity coupling was based on the SIMPLE phase-coupled method. The time step was set to 0.01 s. Tang et al 54 and Ouyang et al 53 works with the WA model have shown that the residuals of all equations less than 0.001 as the convergence criterion could accurately predict the gas−liquid flow behaviors in the rotating packed bed and bubble column, respectively, indicating the validity of this convergence criterion. Therefore, the convergence criterion in this work remained the same.…”

Section: Boundary Conditions and Solutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Wray–Agarwal (WA) one-equation turbulence model solving the transport equation of R ( R = k /ω) includes a cross diffusion term that allows the model to switch between the k –ε and k –ω models. Previous studies have demonstrated that the WA turbulence model has the advantages of high efficiency and low cost in the simulations of single-phase aerodynamics and some multiphase flows. − Ouyang et al succeeded in simulating a multiphase flow in a rotating packed bed and found that, compared to standard k –ε, realizable k –ε, SST k –ω, and RSM turbulence models, the WA turbulence model showed more accuracy and efficiency. Tang et al first successfully used the WA turbulence model to simulate the gas–liquid flow in a square bubble column, and the simulated results kept a good agreement with experimental data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have demonstrated that the WA turbulence model has the advantages of high efficiency and low cost in the simulations of single-phase aerodynamics and some multiphase flows. − Ouyang et al succeeded in simulating a multiphase flow in a rotating packed bed and found that, compared to standard k –ε, realizable k –ε, SST k –ω, and RSM turbulence models, the WA turbulence model showed more accuracy and efficiency. Tang et al first successfully used the WA turbulence model to simulate the gas–liquid flow in a square bubble column, and the simulated results kept a good agreement with experimental data. The above research has demonstrated that the WA turbulence model has the potential for high efficiency, low cost, and high accuracy under complex flow conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Numerical Simulation of Gas–Liquid Mass Transfer in Bubble Column Using the Wray–Agarwal Turbulence Model Coupled with PBM

Liang,

Li,

Feng

et al. 2023

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mechanism of the gas−liquid flow and mass transfer in the bubble column has always been the hotspot for scholars due to the complex gas−liquid interphase interaction. This work established a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics model for simulating the physical absorption of CO 2 to study the gas−liquid flow and mass transfer characteristics in a bubble column, combining the single equation Wray−Agarwal turbulence model, population balance model, and gas−liquid mass transfer model. Compared with the eddy cell model and the slip penetration model, the predicted values of the modified eddy cell mass transfer model were more consistent with the experimental results, and the errors were within ±10%. The flow field characteristics with and without mass transfer were studied, and the results showed that the gas holdup, bubble diameter, and gas−liquid interface area changed by more than 250, 100, and 120%, respectively. Furthermore, the effects of the gas flow rate and static liquid height on the gas−liquid flow field and mass transfer characteristics were analyzed. These results could provide a solid foundation for further research and development of the bubble column.

show abstract

Section: Boundary Conditions and Solutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Numerical Simulation of Gas–Liquid Mass Transfer in Bubble Column Using the Wray–Agarwal Turbulence Model Coupled with PBM

Liang,

Li,

Feng

et al. 2023

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Además de estos modelos, existen otros modelos, llamados modelos de ecuaciones, que se utilizan ampliamente en la simulación de turbulencias, de acuerdo con Zhang et al (2020). Algunos de estos modelos son el Spalart-Allmaras, Rahman-Agarwal-Siikonen, Wray-Agarwal y Xu-Zhang-Baimodel (RAHMAN et al, 2011;SPALART;ALLMARAS, 1994;TANG et al, 2020;XU et al, 2016;ZHANG et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Utilización Del Modelo Des, Con Base en El Modelo De Turbulencia Spalart-Allmaras en El Análisis Del Perfil S809

Treto

Campos

Ramírez

et al. 2020

jCEC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este trabajo brinda el estudio numérico de las características aerodinámicas del perfil S809 para un número de Reynolds de 300000. El perfil S809 es uno de los perfiles más utilizados en aerogeneradores de baja potencia y bastante estudiado experimentalmente por varios autores. Para el estudio se utilizó el programa FLUENT del paquete ANSYS donde se seleccionó el modelo de turbulencia Spalart-Allmaras. Durante el estudio se utilizaron ángulos de ataque que variaron desde 0° hasta 15,2° determinándose los coeficientes de arrastre y sustentación para cada posición. El comportamiento aerodinámico numérico del perfil seleccionado presentó excelentes resultados cuando comparados con resultados experimentales reportados en la literatura. Se determinó que el modelo de turbulencia utilizado representa adecuadamente el proceso físico, pero a partir de un ángulo de ataque de 10,2° comienza a desviarse levemente de los resultados experimentales, lo que puede ser explicado debido al aumento de la turbulencia por el aumento del ángulo de ataque.

show abstract

“…Thus, the use of CFD enables the user to perform accurate predictions on the detailed dynamics of two-phase flow without the need to invest in expensive in-situ experimental tests [19]. 3D CFD simulations are able to predict non-symmetric nature of the interface shape and are thus able to capture flow phenomenon which cannot be modelled by 1D techniques [20]. CFD models for multiphase flow are also continuously developed to include new features such as Fluid Structure Interaction [21] and more accurate prediction of the gas liquid interface [22].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Study of CFD and LedaFlow Models for Riser-Induced Slug Flow

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this study is to compare mainstream Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) with the widely used 1D transient model LedaFlow in their ability to predict riser induced slug flow and to determine if it is relevant for the offshore oil and gas industry to consider making the switch from LedaFlow to CFD. Presently, the industry use relatively simple 1D-models, such as LedaFlow, to predict flow patterns in pipelines. The reduction in cost of computational power in recent years have made it relevant to compare the performance of these codes with high fidelity CFD simulations. A laboratory test facility was used to obtain data for pressure and mass flow rates for the two-phase flow of air and water. A benchmark case of slug flow served for evaluation of the numerical models. A 3D unsteady CFD simulation was performed based on Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) formulation and the Volume of Fluid (VOF) model using the open-source CFD code OpenFOAM. Unsteady simulations using the commercial 1D LedaFlow solver were performed using the same boundary conditions and fluid properties as the CFD simulation. Both the CFD and LedaFlow model underpredicted the experimentally determined slug frequency by 22% and 16% respectively. Both models predicted a classical blowout, in which the riser is completely evacuated of water, while only a partial evacuation of the riser was observed experimentally. The CFD model had a runtime of 57 h while the LedaFlow model had a runtime of 13 min. It can be concluded that the prediction capabilities of the CFD and LedaFlow models are similar for riser-induced slug flow while the CFD model is much more computational intensive.

show abstract

Computation of gas-liquid flow in a square bubble column with Wray-Agarwal one-equation turbulence model

Cited by 14 publications

References 36 publications

Numerical Simulation of Gas–Liquid Mass Transfer in Bubble Column Using the Wray–Agarwal Turbulence Model Coupled with PBM

Numerical Simulation of Gas–Liquid Mass Transfer in Bubble Column Using the Wray–Agarwal Turbulence Model Coupled with PBM

Utilización Del Modelo Des, Con Base en El Modelo De Turbulencia Spalart-Allmaras en El Análisis Del Perfil S809

Comparative Study of CFD and LedaFlow Models for Riser-Induced Slug Flow

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About