The pseudo-homogeneous flow regime in large-scale bubble columns: experimental benchmark and computational fluid dynamics modeling

Abstract

A precise prediction of the fluid dynamics in bubble columns is of Fundamental importance to correctly design “industrial-scale” reactors. It is known that the fluid dynamics in bubble columns is related to the prevailing bubble size distribution existing in the systems. In this respect, multiphase computational fluid dynamic simulations, in the Eulerian multi-fluid framework, are able to predict the local bubble size distributions and, thus, the global fluid dynamics from the fluid flow conditions and by applying modeling closured. In particular, in in “industrial-scale” reactors, owing to the large gas sparger openings, the “pseudo-homogeneous” flow regime—characterized by a wide spectrum of bubble sizes—is typically observed. Unfortunately, reliable predictions of the “pseudo-homogeneous” flow regime are limited up to now: one important drawback concerns the selection of appropriate models for the coalescence and break-up. A set of closure relations was collected at the Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf that represents the best available knowledge. Recently, the Authors have extended the validation of this set of closure relations to the “pseudo-homogeneous” flow regime, by comparing the numerical predictions to a comprehensive experimental dataset (gas holdup, bubble size distributions and local flow measurements). Unfortunately, the previous study suffers from some limitations; in particular, in the previous experimental dataset, the bubble size distributions concerned only one axial position and a detailed characterization of the gas sparger was missing. This study contributes to the existing discussion and proposed a step ahead in the study of the “pseudo-homogenous” flow regime. To this end, we propose an experimental study, to improve the comprehensive dataset previously obtained. The novel dataset—obtained for two gas velocities—concerns bubble size distributions at different axial and radial positions and a precise characterization of the gas sparger. The comprehensive bubble size distribution dataset may serve as basis to improve the coalescence and break-up closures; conversely, the precise characterization of the gas sparger served as an improved input to the numerical simulations. The numerical results, with two different lift force implementations, have been compared with the whole dataset and have been critically analyzed. Reasons for the discrepancies between the numerical results and the experimental data have been identified and may serve as basis for future studies.

Keywords

CFD / Bubble column / Large-scale / Bubble size distribution / Coalescence and break-up / Validation

References

[1] Y.T. Shah, B.G. Kelkar, S.P. Godbole, W.D. Deckwer, Design parameters estimations for bubble column reactors, AIChE J. 28 (3) (1982) 353-379.

[2] G. Besagni, F. Inzoli, Comprehensive experimental investigation of countercurrent bubble column hydrodynamics: holdup, flow regime transition, bubble size distributions and local flow properties, Chem. Eng. Sci. 146 (2016) 259-290.

[3] G. Besagni, F. Inzoli, T. Ziegenhein, D. Lucas, Computational Fluid-Dynamic modeling of the pseudo-homogeneous flow regime in large-scale bubble columns, Chem. Eng. Sci. 160 (2017) 144-160.

[4] P.M. Wilkinson, A.P. Spek, L.L. van Dierendonck, Design parameters estimation for scale-up of high-pressure bubble columns, AIChE J. 38 (1992) 544-554.

[5] G. Besagni, F. Inzoli, The effect of liquid phase properties on bubble column fluid dynamics: gas holdup, flow regime transition, bubble size distributions and shapes, interfacial areas and foaming phenomena, Chem. Eng. Sci. 170 (2017) 270-296.

[6] G. Besagni, F. Inzoli, The effect of electrolyte concentration on counter-current gas-liquid bubble column fluid dynamics: gas holdup, flow regime transition and bubble size distributions, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 118 (2017) 170-193.

[7] G. Besagni, F. Inzoli, G. De Guido, L.A. Pellegrini, The dual effect of viscosity on bubble column hydrodynamics, Chem. Eng. Sci. 158 (2017) 509-538.

[8] K. Akita, F. Yoshida, Gas holdup and volumetric mass transfer coefficient in bubble columns. Effects of liquid properties, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 12 (1) (1973) 76-80.

[9] T. Otake, S. Tone, K. Nakao, Y. Mitsuhashi, Coalescence and breakup of bubbles in liquids, Chem. Eng. Sci. 32 (4) (1977) 377-383.

[10] C. Cao, L. Zhao, D. Xu, Q. Geng, Q. Guo, Investigation into bubble size distribution and transient evolution in the sparger region of Gas liquid external loop airlift reactors, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48 (12) (2009) 5824-5832.

[11] T. Tate, On the magnitude of a drop of liquid formed under different circumstances, Lond., Edinb., and Dublin Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 27 (181) (1864) 176-180.

[12] G. Besagni, A. Di Pasquali, L. Gallazzini, E. Gottardi, L.P.M. Colombo, F. Inzoli, The effect of aspect ratio in counter-current gas-liquid bubble columns: experimental results and gas holdup correlations, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 94 (2017) 53-78.

[13] M. Ishii, T. Hibiki, Thermo-fluid Dynamics of Two-phase Flow, Springer-Verlag New York, 2011.

[14] T. Ziegenhein, Fluid Dynamics of Bubbly Flows, Technische Universität Berlin, 2016.

[15] T. Ziegenhein, R. Rzehak, D. Lucas, Transient simulation for large scale flow in bubble columns, Chem. Eng. Sci. 122 (2015) 1-13.

[16] T. Ziegenhein, D. Lucas, R. Rzehak, E. Krepper,Closure relations for CFD simulation of bubble columns, in:8th International Conference on Multiphase Flow. ICMF 2013, 2013. Jeju (Korea).

[17] R. Rzehak, S. Kriebitzsch, Multiphase CFD-simulation of bubbly pipe flow: a code comparison, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 68 (2015) 135-152.

[18] R. Rzehak, E. Krepper, C. Lifante, Comparative study of wall-force models for the simulation of bubbly flows, Nucl. Eng. Des. 253 (2012) 41-49.

[19] R. Rzehak, E. Krepper, Y. Liao, T. Ziegenhein, S. Kriebitzsch, D. Lucas, Baseline model for the simulation of bubbly flows, Chem. Eng. Technol. 38 (11) (2015) 1972-1978.

[20] R. Rzehak, E. Krepper, Closure models for turbulent bubbly flows: a CFD study, Nucl. Eng. Des. 265 (2013) 701-711.

[21] D. Lucas, R. Rzehak, E. Krepper, T. Ziegenhein, Y. Liao, S. Kriebitzsch, P. Apanasevich, A strategy for the qualification of multi-fluid approacheds for nuclear reactor safety, Nucl. Eng. Des. 299 (2016) 2-11.

[22] Y. Liao, R. Rzehak, D. Lucas, E. Krepper, Baseline closure model for dispersed bubbly flow: bubble coalescence and breakup, Chem. Eng. Sci. 122 (2015) 336-349.

[23] J. Liao, T. Ziegenhein, R. Rzehak, Bubbly flow in an airlift column: a CFD study, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 91 (2016) 2904-2915.

[24] R. Rzehak, E. Krepper, CFD modeling of bubble-induced turbulence, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 55 (2013) 138-155.

[25] M. Pourtousi, J.N. Sahu, P. Ganesan, Effect of interfacial forces and turbulence models on predicting flow pattern inside the bubble column, Chem. Eng. Process: Process Intensif. 75 (0) (2014) 38-47.

[26] M. Ishii, N. Zuber, Drag coefficient and relative velocity in bubbly, droplet or particulate flows, AIChE J. 25 (5) (1979) 843-855.

[27] D. Lucas, H.M. Prasser, A. Manera, Influence of the lift force on the stability of a bubble column, Chem. Eng. Sci. 60 (13) (2005) 3609-3619.

[28] A. Tomiyama, H. Tamai, I. Zun, S. Hosokawa, Transverse migration of single bubbles in simple shear flows, Chem. Eng. Sci. 57 (11) (2002) 1849-1858.

[29] J. Lu, S. Biswas, G. Tryggvason, A DNS study of laminar bubbly flows in a vertical channel, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 32 (6) (2006) 643-660.

[30] J. Lu, G. Tryggvason, Effect of bubble size in turbulent bubbly downflow in a vertical channel, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (11) (2007) 3008-3018.

[31] J. Lu, G. Tryggvason, Dynamics of nearly spherical bubbles in a turbulent channel upflow, J. Fluid Mech. 732 (2013) 166-189.

[32] C. Santarelli, J. Fröhlich, Direct Numerical Simulations of spherical bubbles in vertical turbulent channel flow. Influence of bubble size and bidispersity, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 81 (2016) 27-45.

[33] R.M. Wellek, A.K. Agrawal, A.H.P. Skelland, Shape of liquid drops moving in liquid media, AIChE J. 12 (5) (1966) 854-862.

[34] G. Besagni, F. Inzoli, Bubble size distributions and shapes in annular gap bubble column, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 74 (2016) 27-48.

[35] D. Lucas, A. Tomiyama, On the role of the lateral lift force in poly-dispersed bubbly flows, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 37 (9) (2011) 1178-1190.

[36] S. Hosokawa, A. Tomiyama, S. Misaki, T. Hamada, Lateral migration of single bubbles due to the presence of wall, in: ASME 2002 Joint US-european Fluids Engineering Division Conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2002, pp. 855-860.

[37] A. Tomiyama, A. Sou, I. Zun, N. Kanami, T. Sakaguchi, Effects of Eötvös number and dimensionless liquid volumetric flux on lateral motion of a bubble in a laminar duct flow, in: A.S.F. Bataille (Ed.), Multiphase Flow 1995, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1995, pp. 3-15.

[38] A.D. Burns, T. Frank, I. Hamill, J.-M. Shi,The Favre averaged drag model for turbulent dispersion in Eulerian multi-phase flows, in:5th International Conference on Multiphase Flow, ICMF’ 04 Yokohama (Japan), 2004.

[39] G. Mougin, J. Magnaudet, The generalized Kirchhoff equations and their application to the interaction between a rigid body and an arbitrary timedependent viscous flow, Int. J. Multiphas. Flow 28 (11) (2002) 1837-1851.

[40] E. Krepper, D. Lucas, T. Frank, H.-M. Prasser, P.J. Zwart, The inhomogeneous MUSIG model for the simulation of polydispersed flows, Nucl. Eng. Des. 238 (7) (2008) 1690-1702.

[41] Y. Liao, D. Lucas, A literature review on mechanisms and models for the coalescence process of fluid particles, Chem. Eng. Sci. 65 (10) (2010) 2851-2864.

[42] Y. Liao, D. Lucas, A literature review of theoretical models for drop and bubble breakup in turbulent dispersions, Chem. Eng. Sci. 64 (15) (2009) 3389-3406.

[43] D. Pfleger, S. Gomes, N. Gilbert, H.G. Wagner, Hydrodynamic simulations of laboratory scale bubble columns fundamental studies of the EulerianeEulerian modelling approach, Chem. Eng. Sci. 54 (21) (1999) 5091-5099.

[44] A. Sokolichin, G. Eigenberger, Applicability of the standard keε turbulence model to the dynamic simulation of bubble columns: Part I. Detailed numerical simulations, Chem. Eng. Sci. 54 (13-14) (1999) 2273-2284.

[45] R.F. Mudde, O. Simonin, Two-and three-dimensional simulations of a bubble plume using a two-fluid model, Chem. Eng. Sci. 54 (21) (1999) 5061-5069.

[46] K. Ekambara, M.T. Dhotre, J.B. Joshi, CFD simulations of bubble column reactors: 1D, 2D and 3D approach, Chem. Eng. Sci. 60 (23) (2005) 6733-6746.

[47] Y. Waghmare, C. Dorao, H. Jakobsen, F.C. Knopf, R. Rice, Bubble size distribution for a bubble column reactor undergoing forced oscillations, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48 (4) (2009) 1786-1796.

[48] N. Zuber, J.A. Findlay, Average volumetric concentration in two-phase flow systems, J. Heat Tran. 87 (4) (1965) 453-468.