2023
DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.2c04105
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Study on a Numerical Model of Hydrate Bed Critical Velocity in Solid–Liquid Two-Phase Flow Pipelines

Abstract: A hydrate bed critical velocity model is developed, including a hydrate bed limit deposition velocity model and a hydrate bed suspension velocity model. The innovation of this paper is to consider the hydrate bed pressure and liquid bridge force on hydrate particles when building the limit deposition velocity model and to modify Dai’s model by using hydrate experimental and simulation data when building the suspension velocity model. The hydrate bed critical velocity model is negatively correlated with the par… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
1

Year Published

2024
2024
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 46 publications
(78 reference statements)
0
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although models based on the three-layer concept are sometimes employed in hydrate studies, , our images of hydrate-slurry flow do not appear to match the three-layer model of Doron and Barnea, which does not consider the cohesive force between particles. This model assumes cubic packing (52% of the solid concentration) for bedding layers: under this assumption, 3.7 vol % of hydrate can only occupy about 7.1 vol % (≈ 3.7 vol %/0.52) of the system.…”
Section: Results and Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%
“…Although models based on the three-layer concept are sometimes employed in hydrate studies, , our images of hydrate-slurry flow do not appear to match the three-layer model of Doron and Barnea, which does not consider the cohesive force between particles. This model assumes cubic packing (52% of the solid concentration) for bedding layers: under this assumption, 3.7 vol % of hydrate can only occupy about 7.1 vol % (≈ 3.7 vol %/0.52) of the system.…”
Section: Results and Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%