Bubble Formation and Dynamics in Gas

Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27
www.elsevier.com/locate/ces
Bubble formation and dynamics in gasliquidsolid uidizationA review

G.Q. Yang, Bing Du, L.S. Fan
Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
Available online 25 August 2006
Abstract
Current worldwide commercial activities in converting natural gas to fuels and chemicals, or gas-to-liquids technology use slurry bubble
column reactors with column sizes considerable larger than those currently in practice. Such commercial activities have prompted further
fundamental research interest in uid and bubble dynamics, transport phenomena and the scale up effects of three-phase uidization systems.
The fundamental behavior of particular relevance to these activities is associated with the elevated temperature and pressure conditions.
This review attempts to summarize the salient characteristics of liquid, bubbles, and particles and their interactive behavior and dynamics in
the process of bubble formation and bubble rising in gasliquidsolid uidization systems. Measurement techniques including both intrusive
techniques such as the probes, and non-intrusive techniques such as tomography, that are used to study uid and bubble properties in gasliquid
and gasliquidsolid systems, are illustrated. Governing mechanisms of bubbleparticle collision and bubble breakup are discussed. The stateof-the-art computational techniques, that consider both the discrete and the continuum approaches for movement of the particle and bubble
phases along with the discrete simulation results, are presented. Of particular emphasis is the effect of pressure and temperature on the uid
and bubble dynamics in three-phase uidization.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Bubble formation; Bubble dynamics; Measurement techniques; Gasliquidsolid uidization; Pressure; Computational uid dynamics (CFD);
Bubbleparticle collision; Bubble breakup
1. Introduction
Gasliquidsolid uidization systems have been applied
extensively in industry for physical, chemical, petrochemical
and biochemical processing (Shah, 1979; LHomme, 1979;
Ramachandran and Chaudhari, 1983; Fan, 1989). Current
worldwide commercial activities in converting natural gas to
fuels and chemicals, or gas-to-liquids technology use slurry
bubble column reactors with column sizes considerable larger
than those currently in practice (Sookai et al., 2001). Such commercial activities have prompted further fundamental research
interest in uid and bubble dynamics, transport phenomena,
and the effects due to scale up of three-phase uidization
systems. The fundamental behavior of particular relevance to
these activities is associated with the elevated temperature and
pressure conditions.
In gasliquidsolid uidization systems, bubble dynamics
plays a key role in dictating the transport phenomena and
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 614 688 3262.
E-mail address: fan@chbmeng.ohio-state.edu (L.S. Fan).

0009-2509/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ces.2006.08.021
ultimately affects the overall rates of reactions. It has been recognized that the bubble wake, when it is present, is the dominant
factor governing the system hydrodynamics (Fan and Tsuchiya,
1990). In general, consideration of the ow associated with the
bubble wake near the bubble base, whether laminar or turbulent, is essential to characterize the complete behavior of the
rising bubble, including its motion. Conversely, examining the
shape, rise velocity, and motion of a bubble can provide an indirect understanding of the dynamics of the liquidsolid ow
around the bubble.
Most of the three-phase processes with considerable
commercial interest are conducted under high pressure
and high temperature, for example, methanol synthesis (at
P = 5.5 MPa and T = 260 C), resid hydrotreating (at
P = 5.521 MPa and T = 300425 C), FischerTropsch synthesis (at P = 1.55.0 MPa and T = 250 C), and benzene
hydrogenation (at P = 5.0 MPa and T = 180 C) (Fox, 1990;
Jager and Espinoza, 1995; Saxena, 1995; Mills et al., 1996;
Peng et al., 1999). Fundamental study of bubble dynamics in
these gasliquidsolid uidization systems, particularly under
high-pressure and high-temperature conditions, is thus crucial.
G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27
This review describes the ow behavior of liquid, bubbles,

and particles in gasliquidsolid uidization systems. The
mechanisms of the bubble formation, bubble instability, and
bubble rise dynamics along with pertinent forces governing
such mechanisms are illustrated. The review also surveys measurement techniques that are used to quantify the ow and
bubble properties in gasliquid and gasliquidsolid systems.
These techniques include both the intrusive ones such as the
probes, and non-intrusive ones such as tomography. Salient
bubbling phenomena, related to bubbleparticle collision and
the hydrodynamic similarity rules, are also discussed. The
state-of-the-art computational techniques that consider both
the discrete and the continuum approaches for the particle and
bubble phases as well as some discrete simulation results are
presented. Of particular emphasis in this review are the pressure and temperature effects on the uid and bubble dynamic
properties in three-phase uidization.
2. Measurement techniques
The quantication of bubble characteristics in gasliquid
solid uidized beds is normally made through direct visualization or by employing instruments. To visually observe bubble
behavior in three-phase uidization systems, a two-dimensional
(2D) uidized bed is commonly used (e.g., Chen et al., 1989,
1994; Fan and Tsuchiya, 1990; Kim and Kim, 1990; Fan et al.,
1992; Tzeng et al., 1993; Kluytmans et al., 2001, 2003; Bech,
2005; Vandu et al., 2005; Zaruba et al., 2005). By analyzing the
data obtained by the photography or video images, the dynamic
behavior of bubbles, including bubble shape, bubble wake,
bubble size and bubble rise velocity, is quantied. The bubble
ow behavior in a 2D uidized bed is treated as a vertical slice
of the three-dimensional (3D) system. Chen et al. (1994) found
that there were some similarities between the ow structures
of 2D and 3D beds. However, the direct visualization only
provides limited information regarding bubble dynamics in 3D
systems.
On the other hand, a large number of measurement techniques, including intrusive and non-intrusive methods, have
been developed to investigate the bubble ow behavior in
the 3D uidized bed systems. A comprehensive review of
measurement techniques in gasliquid and gasliquidsolid
reactors can be found in Boyer et al. (2002). In the following,
some measurement techniques that quantify bubble characteristics, along with recent advances in measurement techniques
for gasliquid and gasliquidsolid uidization research are
discussed.
2.1. Intrusive techniques
Considerable intrusive techniques have been developed to
study bubble behavior in gasliquid and gasliquidsolid uidized systems. These intrusive techniques include impedance
(conductivity or resistivity) probes, optical ber probes, ultrasound probes, endoscopic probes and hot lm anemometry.
A brief summary of these techniques is given below.
The impedance probe has been applied to measure the bubble volume fraction, bubble length and bubble rise velocity in
three-phase uidized beds with relatively high liquid conductivity. The method utilizes the difference in conductivity between
the liquid and the gas phase. For the three-phase uidized beds
with low liquid conductivity, the addition of some salts into the
system is required (Boyer et al., 2002). Hills and Darton (1976)
investigated the bubble rising velocity in a bubble column by
an impedance probe. Matsuura and Fan (1984) studied the bubble size and bubble rise velocity in three-phase uidized beds
under three different ow regimes by using a dual electrical resistivity probe. Tang and Fan (1989) applied a dual-resistivity
probe to study the bubble size distribution and the axial distribution of gas volume fraction. Liu (1993) used a dual-sensor
resistivity probe to measure the bubble size, bubble rise velocity
and bubble frequency in the bubble column. Chen et al. (1998)
applied a dual-resistivity probe to measure the axial and radial
distributions of bubble diameter, bubble rise velocity, bubble
frequency and gas volume fraction in a three-phase uidized
bed. Zenit et al. (2001) applied a dual impedance probe to study
the gas volume fraction, bubble velocity and bubble collision
in a vertical channel. To obtain accurate bubble volume fraction using the impedance probe technique, the interaction between bubbles and the probe must be considered (Zenit et al.,
2003). Based on the statistical, fractal, chaos and wavelet analyses, the conductivity bubble probe signal can be analyzed to
discern the local ow structure of the three-phase uidized bed
(Briens and Ellis, 2005).
The optical ber probe utilizes the principle that the light
transmits in liquid medium and is reected by the gas medium
or bubbles. The optical probe is not effective, however, when
the difference in the refraction index between the gas and liquid phases is small. Lee et al. (1986) and Lee and De Lasa
(1987) measured the local gas volume fraction and bubble frequency in a three-phase uidized bed using the U shape optical
ber probe. Yu and Kim (1988) applied the U shape optical
ber probe to study the radial distributions of the bubble size,
bubble rise velocity and bubble volume fraction in three-phase
uidized beds. Frijlink (1987) developed a four-point probe to
improve the detection of the direction of the movement and the
shape of the bubble. Chabot and de Lasa (1993) measured the
axial and radial distributions of the bubble chord length, bubble
rise velocity and gas volume fraction in a bubble column at high
temperature by using the refractive optical probe. Xue et al.
(2003) applied the four-point optical ber probe to investigate
the bubble size and bubble rise velocity in gasliquid systems.
They found that a precise calibration of the probe by a CCD
camera was needed to obtain the accurate measurement on the
bubble size and bubble rise velocity. Shoukri et al. (2003) measured the gas volume fraction, bubble size, bubble rise velocity,
bubble frequency and interfacial area in a large scale bubble
column using a dual optical probe. One of the advantages for
the optic ber probe technique is that it can also be effectively
applied to high-pressure and high-temperature conditions for
the bubble property measurement (Luo et al., 1997, 1998b).
Stolojanu and Prakash (1997) obtained the solids concentration and bubble volume fraction in a three-phase uidized bed
using the ultrasonic technique. Al-Masry et al. (2005) studied

the bubble frequency and bubble size distribution in bubble
columns using the statistical analysis of acoustic signals. The
ultrasonic techniques are not suitable for use under high gas
holdup conditions because of the signicant acoustic attenuation due to reection on gas bubbles (Broering et al., 1991).
Peters et al. (1983) studied the particle ejections by the bubble
eruption at the surface of a bubbling gassolid uidized bed
using an image system carrying a ber optic probe or an endoscopic probe. Such a probe was also used by Kumar et al.
(1992) in the study of the solid concentration effects on the heat
transfer in bubbly liquidsolid systems. Wang and Ching (2001)
measured the multiple bubble velocities in the gasliquid ow
using a dual-probe hot-lm anemometry. However, the hotlm probe is so fragile that it can only be used for low solids
concentration conditions. Furthermore, hot-lm anemometry
measurement requires uniform temperature distribution in the
measured volume.
The probe measures the point properties. One of the disadvantages for intrusive probe techniques is the probe interference with the ow eld and hence the bubble dynamics. The
bubble could be disintegrated, accelerated or elongated by the
immersed probe (Rowe and Masson, 1981; Chabot et al., 1992;
Kiambi et al., 2003; Zenit et al., 2003; Julia et al., 2005). Although reducing the probe size could reduce the interfering
effect, the probe could also easily be damaged. The accurate
conversion of the chord length distribution to the bubble size
distribution is another challenging area as the bubble shape and
the size distribution vary with time and the location.
2.2. Non-intrusive techniques
The non-intrusive technique has the advantage of no measurement interference with the ow eld. The information
provided by the non-intrusive techniques varies from the crosssectional bed density prole to the particle trajectory map
(Chaouki et al., 1997; Chen et al., 1999; Seeger et al., 2003;
Hubers et al., 2005; Warsito and Fan, 2005). The non-intrusive
techniques that were used to measure the three-phase uidized
bed properties include pressure transducer, visualization technique, particle image velocimetry (PIV), X-ray, -ray, positron
emission tomography (PET), radioactive particle tracking
(RPT), ultrasonic tomography, nuclear magnetic resonance
imaging (NMR), laser techniques and electrical tomography.
Some measurement examples in three-phase uidized beds are
described below.
The pressure drop measurement together with the statistical analysis techniques has been used to study the bubble ow
behavior in the bubble column and three-phase uidized beds
(Drahos et al., 1991, 1992; Johnsson et al., 2000; Kluytmans
et al., 2001; Briens and Ellis, 2005; Chilekar et al., 2005). The
pressure transducer is usually positioned on the wall of the bed.
The pressure uctuation signal is a reection of the overall hydrodynamic behavior in the column. That is, the signals are
contributed from such sources as bubble ow, bubble coalescence and bubble breakup, bubble burst at the top surface, and
bubble formation at the distributor.
Direct visualization is also useful for property measurement

in the systems with relatively low gas holdup and solids loading. Jiang et al. (1995), Luo et al. (1998a) and Yang et al. (2000)
utilized the visualization technique to study the bubble characteristics and bubble formation behavior in a largely transparent
apparatus operated at high-pressures (up to 20 MPa) and hightemperatures (up to 220 C). They also developed visualization
techniques for in situ measurement of the physical properties
of reacting or non-reacting uids, such as dynamic surface tension, and uid density and viscosity at high pressure and high
temperature (Lin and Fan, 1997).
The X-ray technique has been widely used to investigate the
bubble ow behavior including bubble shape, bubble size, bubble rise velocity, bubble growth and bubble breakage in the
gassolid or gasliquidsolid uidized beds. The X-ray technique consists of the X-ray source to generate the X-ray beam
to pass through the uidized bed, an image intensier to produce an image, a CCD video camera to capture the image, and
the image analysis system. Fournier and Jeandey (1993) measured the void fraction in the gasliquid two-phase ow using
the X-ray attenuation technique. The X-ray computer assisted
tomography (CAT) was developed to investigate the uidization
characteristics (Kumar et al., 1997). The X-ray CAT technique
is able to provide rather high spatial resolution (1%), while its
temporal resolution is low. Seeger et al. (2003) measured the
local solids velocity and local solids holdup in a three-phase
uidized bed by using the X-ray based particle tracking velocimetry (XPTV). Hubers et al. (2005) applied the X-ray CT
technique to measure the phase holdups in the three-phase uidized bed.
The -ray density gauge technique has been applied to study
the bubble size, bubble frequency and bubble coalescence in a
uidized bed. The voidage between the radiation source and
detector in the bed is obtained by relating the ionization of
gas to the amount of radiation received by the detector. Seville
et al. (1986) studied the jet and bubble behavior above the
distributor of a gassolid uidized bed by the -ray tomography technique. The system included a -ray source and a NaI
detector, which rotated along the axis of the uidized bed. The
total scan time was up to 7.5 h. The same measurement technique can be extended to the liquid system. Kumar et al. (1995)
measured the voidage distribution in the bubble column using
the -ray tomographic scanner. Veera and Joshi (2000) used the
-ray tomography to investigate the radial distributions of
the gas holdup in a bubble column. Jin et al. (2005) studied the
phase holdups in a pressurized bubble column using the -ray
densitometry. Due to long scanning time, the -ray tomography
technique is only suitable for studying the time-averaged ow
properties. It is not suitable for the measurement of bubble
formation and bubble dynamics in the bed.
Non-intrusive laser techniques are also widely used to study
bubble behavior, including the PIV, laser Doppler anemometry
(LDA), phase Doppler anemometry (PDA) and laser Doppler
velocimetry (LDV). Chen and Fan (1992) and Reese et al.
(1995, 1996) investigated the bubble characteristics in the slurry
bubble column using the 2D and 3D PIV techniques. Lee et al.
(1999) studied the bubble size distribution in the bubble column
and slurry bubble column using the gas disengagement technique together with PIV technique. Vial et al. (2001) studied
the liquid velocity and turbulence in the bubble columns with
different distributors by using the LDA technique. Kulkarni et
al. (2004) applied the LDA technique to study the bubble size
distribution in the bubble columns. Braeske et al. (1998) measured the size, velocity and holdup of bubble and solid phases in
the three-phase uidized beds using the PDA technique. Brenn
et al. (2002) applied the PDA technique to measure the velocities of liquid and bubbles in the bubble column. Cui and Fan
(2004, 2005) investigated the turbulence energy distribution in
bubble columns and three-phase uidized beds by measuring
the liquid velocity using the LDV technique. For all the laser
techniques, the laser beam needs to penetrate the ow system.
Thus, the laser techniques limited only to the low gas holdup
conditions.
Some other non-intrusive techniques are used for tracking
the particle movement, and/or mapping the instantaneous or
time-averaged, local or cross-sectional averaged, phase holdups
and phase velocities. They include PET (e.g., Bemrose et al.,
1988; Stein et al., 2000; Dechsiri et al., 2005; Hoffmann et al.,
2005), and RPT (e.g., Cassanello et al., 1995; Larachi et al.,
1996, 1997; Chaouki et al., 1997; Chen et al., 1999; Kiared
et al., 1999; Nedeltchev et al., 2003), ultrasonic tomography
(e.g., Wolf, 1988; Xu et al., 1997; Warsito et al., 1999; Utomo
et al., 2001), nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (NMR or
MRI) (e.g., Gladden, 1994, 2003; Chaouki et al., 1997; Leblond
et al., 1998; Le Gall et al., 2001; Lim et al., 2004; Sederman
and Gladden, 2005; Gladden et al., 2005), electrical impedance
tomography (EIT) (George et al., 2001; West et al., 2001; Kim
et al., 2005) and electrical capacitance tomography (ECT)
(Warsito and Fan, 2001, 2003). The details of each of these
techniques and the specic hydrodynamic parameters they
measure can be found in the corresponding references.
The MRI technique has been widely used in medical applications. This technique, however, has also been used for the
measurement of multiphase ow systems such as the xed beds
and trickle beds (Gladden, 1994, 2003; Chaouki et al., 1997;
Leblond et al., 1998; Le Gall et al., 2001; Lim et al., 2004;
Sederman and Gladden, 2005; Gladden et al., 2005). Lim
et al. (2004) applied the ultra-fast MRI technique to investigate the hydrodynamics in the trickle bed reactors. The 2D
images of the trickle bed can have a higher spatial resolution
of 351 m 351 m with a slow acquisition time of 6.4 s,
or a low spatial resolution of 1.4 mm 2.8 mm with a relatively fast acquisition time of 20 ms. The MRI can also be
used to quantify the ow eld in bubble column systems. The
relatively high cost of the technique and certain uid property requirements, however, may hamper widespread usage
of the MRI as a process tomography technique. The ECT
is developed to image the multiphase media with dielectric
properties. It can be used to quantify the dynamic bubble
ow behavior in the gasliquid and gasliquidsolid threephase uidized beds. Compared to the CT, the ECT technique
has a relatively low spatial resolution but a relatively high
temporal resolution. The ECT is suitable for process tomography applications for various multiphase ow systems. The
recent development of the 3D ECT or electrical capacitance

volume tomography (ECVT) with geometrically congured
sensor design and the neural network image reconstruction
technique has further advanced the imaging technique and allows the dynamic 3D multiphase ow behavior to be captured
(Du et al., 2005; Warsito and Fan, 2005). The ECVT with a
spatial resolution of 5 5 5 mm3 and a temporal resolution of 80 Hz has revealed the bubble formation process and
bubble dynamics in three-phase uidized beds (Warsito and
Fan, 2005). Fig. 1 shows the 3D bubble swarms obtained from
the ECVT along with corresponding video images. The images
in the gure represent one cycle of the circular motion of the
spiral rising bubble plume, showing the consecutive motions
of the central bubble plume on the image plane. The direction
of the circular motion is not constant, and is mixed with a high
frequency back and forth dancing motion of bubble swarm.
3. Single bubble behavior
In the following, the phenomena related to single bubble
behavior are discussed, which include bubble formation from
a single orice, bubble shape, single bubble rise velocity and
bubble induced liquid ow. Experimental studies of the single
bubble behavior have been extensively reported, and the theoretical account and CFD simulation have provided detailed
information on single bubble properties.
3.1. Bubble formation
The fundamental study of the bubble formation behavior
from orices is important for understanding the bubble size
variation in the system, particularly for the case of a low gas
velocity or a single orice gas injector. In these situations, the
behavior of bubble formation from the distributor mainly determines bubble characteristics. There are two typical mechanical
arrangements for bubble formation from a single orice; that
is with the orice connected or not connected to a gas chamber. For bubble formation from a single orice without a gas
chamber, the gas ow rate through the orice is always constant, which is referred to as constant ow conditions. The phenomenon of bubble formation from a single orice connected
to a gas chamber varies with gas injection conditions, which are
characterized by the dimensionless capacitance number Nc dened as 4Vc gl /Do2 P (Kumar and Kuloor, 1970; Tsuge and
Hibino, 1983). When Nc is smaller than 1, the gas ow rate
through the orice is almost constant during the bubble formation process, similar to the rst mechanical arrangement. When
Nc is larger than 1, the gas ow rate through the orice is not
constant, and it is dependent on the pressure difference between
the gas chamber and the bubble. Such bubble formation conditions are characterized as variable ow conditions by Yang
et al. (2000) or as constant pressure and intermediate conditions
by Tsuge and Hibino (1983).
Numerous experimental and modeling studies have been conducted over the past decades on bubble formation from a single orice or nozzle submerged in liquids, mostly under ambient conditions (Kupferberg and Jameson, 1969; Kumar and
Fig. 1. Snapshots of the 3D volume images of bubble plumes compared with photographs: Ug = 0.02 m/s (from Warsito and Fan, 2005).
Kuloor, 1970; Azbel, 1981; Lin et al., 1994; Ruzicka et al.,

1997; Kulkarni and Joshi, 2005; Zhang et al., 2005; Xiao and
Tan, 2006). A few studies were conducted at elevated pressures (La Nauze and Harris, 1974; Idogawa et al., 1987; Tsuge
et al., 1992; Wilkinson and van Dierendonck, 1994). These
studies indicated that an increase in gas density reduces the size
of bubbles formed from the orice.
Bubble formation in liquids with the presence of particles, as
in slurry bubble columns and three-phase uidized bed systems,
is different from that in pure liquids. The experimental data
of Massimilla et al. (1961) in an airwaterglass beads threephase uidized bed revealed that the bubbles formed from a
single nozzle in the uidized bed are larger in size than those in
water, and the initial bubble size increases with the solids concentration. Yoo et al. (1997) investigated bubble formation in
pressurized liquidsolid suspensions. They used aqueous glycerol solution and 0.1-mm polystyrene beads as the liquid and
solid phases, respectively. The densities of the liquid and the
particles were identical, and thus, the particles were neutrally
buoyant in the liquid. The results indicated that initial bubble

size decreases inversely with pressure under otherwise constant
conditions, that is, gas ow rate, temperature, solids concentration, orice diameter, and gas chamber volume. Their results
also showed that the particle effect on the initial bubble size is
insignicant. The difference in the nding regarding the particle effect on the initial bubble size between Massimilla et al.
(1961) and Yoo et al. (1997) is possibly due to the difference
in particle density.
Bubble formation in a hydrocarbon liquid and liquidsolid
suspension with signicant density difference between the liquid and solid phases was investigated by Luo et al. (1998a)
and Yang et al. (2000) under various gas injection conditions.
A mechanistic model was developed to predict the initial bubble size in liquidsolid suspensions at high-pressure conditions.
The model considers various forces induced by the particles,
and is an extension of the two-stage spherical bubble formation
model developed by Ramakrishnan et al. (1969) for liquids. In
the two-stage spherical bubble formation model, bubbles are as-
FI,m
FC
s= 0.3
Key P(MPa)
0.1
2.0
8.0
VB106 (m3)
FB
FM
FBA
0.1
FI,g
FD
0.01
0.01
0.1
10
Qg106 (m3/s)
Fig. 3. Effect of pressure on initial bubble volume (from Yoo et al., 1997).
ro
this model can be written as

uo
Fig. 2. The balance of all the forces acting on a growing bubble (from Luo
et al., 1998a).
sumed to be formed in two stages, namely, the expansion stage

and the detachment stage. The bubble expands with its base attached to the nozzle during the rst stage. In the detachment
stage, the bubble base moves away from the nozzle, although
the bubble remains connected with the nozzle through the neck.
The shape of the bubble is assumed to remain spherical during
the entire bubble formation process. It is also assumed in this
model that a liquid lm always exists around the bubble. During the expansion and detachment stages, particles collide with
the bubble and stay on the liquid lm. The particles and the
liquid surrounding the bubble are set in motion as the bubble
grows and rises.
The steady-state initial bubble size is of interest and importance in the hydrodynamic characterization of the bubble
ow system. The volume of the bubble at the end of the rst
stage and during the second stage can be described by considering a balance of all the forces acting on the bubble if the
instantaneous gas ow rate, Qo , or the instantaneous gas velocity, uo , through the orice, is known. The forces induced by
the liquid include the upward forces (effective buoyancy force,
FB , and gas momentum force, FM ), and the downward resistance (liquid drag, FD , surface tension force, F , bubble inertial force, Fl,g , and Basset force, FBA ) as shown in Fig. 2. It is
assumed that the particles affect the bubble formation process
only through two additional downward forces on the bubble,
that is, the particlebubble collision force, FC , and the suspension inertial force, Fl,m . The suspension inertial force is due
to the acceleration of the liquid and particles surrounding the
bubble. Therefore, the overall force balance on the bubble in
FB + FM = FD + F + FBA + FI,g + FC + FI,m .
(1)
The expansion stage and the detachment stage follow the same
force balance equation, although the expression for the same
force in the two stages may be different due to different bubble
moving velocities in the two stages. The expressions for all the
forces under two stages are given in Table 1.
The effect of pressure on the initial bubble volume is shown
in Fig. 3. Under relatively low pressures (less than 2.0 MPa),
the pressure effect on the initial bubble volume is seen to be
signicant; however, under relatively high pressures, the effect
of pressure on the initial bubble volume becomes insignicant
(Yoo et al., 1997).
The effect of wetting conditions on bubble formation at a very
low gas ow rate was recently investigated by Gnyloskurenko
et al. (2003, 2005). The wetting conditions were varied via
coating the orice plate by vacuum silicon grease or by parafn. In their experiments, the equilibrium contact angles were
changed from 68 to 110 (the higher contact angle, the poorer
wettability). It was found that the nal bubble size detached
from the orice increased signicantly as the wetting condition
worsened, i.e., a higher contact angle.
3.2. Bubble shape
The characteristics of a rising bubble can be described
in terms of the shape, rise velocity, and motion of the bubble. These rise characteristics are closely associated with the
behavior of the bubble wake, and the ow and physical
properties of the surrounding medium (mainly viscosity and
the presence/absence of solid particles) as well as the interfacial properties of the bubble surface (i.e., presence/absence of
surfactant). In this section, the bubble shape and the single bubble rise velocity in both liquids and liquidsolid suspensions
are described.
Table 1
Expressions for the forces involved in the bubble formation process
Forces
FB
FM
Expansion stage

6

4
Detachment stage
db3 (l g )g
Same as expansion stage
Do2 g u2o
db2
u2
l b
2

CD =
24
Re

FD
CD
F
Do cos
FI,g
d 3
d ub

dt g 6 b
FBA
Not applicable
t
3 2
dt d
d l l 0 du/
t
2 b
FC
FI,m
Do2 (1 + e)s s u2e
d(

m um V )
dt
4
=
d 3

d ub
dt m 6 b
The shape of bubbles moving in Newtonian liquids can generally be identied as spherical, oblate ellipsoidal and spherical/ellipsoidal cap. The observed bubble shape is a result of an
intricate balance among forces acting on the rising bubble, including surface tension, viscous, and buoyancy forces. As the
dominant forces change with increasing bubble size, the bubble
shape undergoes changes from spherical, ellipsoidal to spherical cap shape.
When the bubble size, db , is small, e.g., less than 1 mm
in water, and the shape is spherical, viscous forces and surface tension forces dominate. At low Reynolds numbers (i.e.,
Re = l ub db /l < 1), the HadamardRybczynski theory and
the Stokes theory apply to spherical bubbles of mobile and
immobile (rigid) surfaces, respectively. In practice, especially
when bubbles in low viscosity liquids, the Reynolds number
easily exceeds unity and the inertial term is no longer negligible. Levich (1962) obtained an equation for bubble rise velocity based on the boundary layer theory for spherical bubbles at
higher Reynolds numbers. All these theories result in an identical analytical expression with different constants accounting for
different bubble surface conditions (Fan and Tsuchiya, 1990).
For bubbles of an intermediate size, both the surface tension
and the inertia (buoyancy) force are important in dictating the
shape uctuation and the dynamics of motion of the bubble.
The wake forms and undergoes a complex shedding process for
an intermediate size of bubbles, which is also the case when the
bubble size is large. For large bubbles, the inertia force dominates and the effects of the surface tension, viscosity, and purity
of the liquid media on bubble dynamics are negligible. A large
bubble rising in water is of a spherical cap shape whereas it is
of an ellipsoidal shape for an intermediate bubble (Clift et al.,
1978; Fan and Tsuchiya, 1990).
In slurry bubble columns and gasliquidsolid uidized
beds of small and light particles, bubble behavior has often
been observed to resemble that in viscous liquids (Stewart and
Davidson, 1964; Oestergaard, 1973; Dayan and Zalmanovich,
db2 s s u2
1982). This resemblance is based on the premise that the

liquidsolid mixture in such systems can be regarded as a
pseudo-homogeneous medium of higher apparent viscosity
compared to the liquid. On the other hand, in three-phase uidized beds of large and/or heavy particles, gas bubbles behave
differently.
Although the attening of the bubble with increasing bubble
size can be explained qualitatively (Fan and Tsuchiya, 1990),
quantitative predictions are difcult, especially the variations in
the physical properties of the surrounding medium are involved.
In this regard, the state-of-the-art knowledge on bubble shapes
in various liquids is established mainly from experimental observations. Three dimensionless groups, the Reynolds number
(Re), the Etvs number (Eo), and the Morton number (Mo),
are commonly used to characterize the bubble shape and rise
behavior (Grace, 1973; Bhaga and Weber, 1981). They are dened as
Re =
db ub l
,
l
(2a)
Eo =
gdb2
,

(2b)
Mo =
g4l
2l 3
where = l g .
(2c)
For bubbles in low Mo liquids (Mo < 103 ), Vakhrushev

Efremovs (1970) formula given below can be used to predict
the bubble aspect ratio:
1,
Ta < 1,
{0.81 + 0.206 tanh[2(0.8 1 Ta 39.8,

h/b =
(3)
log10 Ta)]}3 ,
0.24,
39.8 Ta.
Here, Ta(=Re Mo0.23 ) is the Tadaki number.
The bubble characteristics in 2D systems were studied

by many researchers (e.g., Henriksen and Ostergaard, 1974;
Tsuchiya and Fan, 1988; Song, 1989; Tsuchiya et al., 1990).
The experimental study in a 2D uidized bed for the waterglass beads system indicated that, for a given particle size, the
variation in bed voidage (l = 1 s ) has a minimal inuence
on the bubble aspect ratio over the range 0.5 < l 1 (Tsuchiya
et al., 1990). The effect of particle size is also not signicant for most particles; however, at higher Reynolds numbers
(Re > 3000) the bubbles atten less for larger particles (1 mm
glass beads with a terminal velocity of 0.17 m/s).
The effect of particle wettability on the bubble shape was
investigated by Tsutsumi et al. (1991a). Comparing the bubble shapes in systems with normal glass beads (wettable) and
identical sizes of Teon-coated glass beads (non-wettable), it is
found that the effect of particle wettability on the bubble aspect
ratio is insignicant. The same qualitative dependence of the
bubble aspect ratio on the particle size and the solids holdup
was observed for both types of particles.
3.3. Bubble rise velocity
The rise velocity of a single gas bubble depends on its size:
for small bubbles, the rise velocity also strongly depends on
liquid properties such as surface tension and viscosity; for large
bubbles, the rise velocity is insensitive to liquid properties (Fan,
1989; Kulkarni and Joshi, 2005). Under limited conditions, the
rise velocities of single bubbles in liquidsolid suspensions
were found to be similar to those in highly viscous liquids
(Massimilla et al., 1961; Darton and Harrison, 1974).
Liquidsolid suspensions can thus be characterized as Newtonian homogeneous media, but they often exhibit the nonNewtonian or heterogeneous behavior (Tsuchiya et al., 1997).
Differences in uidizing media, pressure, and temperature lead
to different bubble rise characteristics. This section focuses
on the bubble rise characteristics in liquids and liquidsolid
suspensions at elevated pressure and temperature.
3.3.1. Single bubble rise velocity in liquids
In most applications of three-phase uidization systems, the
liquid phase is a hydrocarbon based medium. The physical
properties of hydrocarbon liquids (e.g., Paratherm NF heat
transfer uid) vary dramatically with pressure and temperature.
Lin and Fan (1997) and Lin et al. (1998) developed various
in situ techniques to measure the physical properties of the
reactive and non-reactive uid at elevated pressures and temperatures. The hydrostatic weighing method, the falling-ball
technique, and the emerging-bubble technique were used to
measure in situ liquid density, viscosity, and surface tension, respectively. Based on their measurements of Paratherm NF heat
transfer uid, the liquid and interfacial properties were found
to change signicantly with pressure and temperature. For example, at room temperature, as the pressure increases from 0.1
to 20 MPa, the liquid density increases by approximately 5%,
the liquid viscosity increases by 65%, and the surface tension
decreases by 25%. Therefore, it is important to note that vari-
ations of such physical properties, particularly the liquid viscosity and surface tension, be included in the analysis of data,
empirical correlation, theory and model developments and numerical simulations.
Since the bubble rise velocity depends on liquid properties,
the pressure and temperature thus affect the bubble rise characteristics. Krishna et al. (1994) studied the pressure effect on
the bubble rise velocity and found that the single bubble rise
velocity does not depend on the gas density over the range of
0.130 kg/m3 . The conclusion is limited to a narrow range of
pressures. Lin et al. (1998) measured the rise velocity of single bubbles of known sizes in the Paratherm NF heat transfer
uid at various pressures and temperatures. The pressure ranges
from 0.1 to 19.4 MPa. For a given bubble size, ub tends to decrease with increasing pressure at both temperatures. The effects of pressure and temperature, or more directly, the effects
of the physical properties of the gas and liquid phases on the
variation of ub with db can be predicted by the FanTsuchiya
equation (Fan and Tsuchiya, 1990), the modied Mendelsons
wave-analogy equation (Mendelson, 1967) by Maneri (1995)
and a correlation proposed by Tomiyama et al. (1995).
The FanTsuchiya equation, generalized for high-pressure
systems, can be written in a dimensionless form:
n
1/4

l
Mo1/4 5/4 2

u b = ub
=
db
g
Kb
l

n/2 1/n
2c
db
+ +
,
(4)
db
l
2
where the dimensionless bubble diameter is given by
db = db (l g/)1/2 .
(5)
Three empirical parameters, i.e., n, c, and Kb in Eq. (4), account

for the contamination level of the liquid phase, the dynamic
effects of the surface tension, and the viscous nature of the
surrounding medium, respectively.
The modied Mendelson equation is valid only under the
inviscid condition and has limited predictive capability at
the low temperature. The FanTsuchiya equation applied for
the given liquid, a pure, multicomponent, and organic solvent,
provides good overall predictions except for the sharp peak
existing under the high temperature condition. The equation
by Tomiyama et al. (1995) also has good general applicability,
especially around the peak point occurring near db = 2 mm
at 78 C; however, it tends to underestimate the bubble rise
velocity over the rest of the bubble size range (Lin et al., 1998).
3.3.2. Single bubble rise velocity in liquidsolid suspensions
Much progress has also been made regarding single bubble
rise characteristics in liquidsolid suspensions at high pressure
and high temperature. Fig. 4 shows the effect of pressure on the
bubble rise velocity in a uidized bed with Paratherm NF heat
transfer uid and 0.88-mm glass beads at two different temperatures (Luo et al., 1997). At both temperatures, the bubble
rise velocity decreases with an increase in pressure for a given
solids holdup. The extent of the reduction is as high as 50%
10
The effective viscosity of liquidsolid suspensions is estimated

by

Ks
m
,
(7)
= exp
l
1 (s /sc )
with two parameters correlated by Luo et al. (1997):
3.1 1.4 tanh[0.3(10 102 ut )]

(8a)
sc = {1.3 0.1 tanh[0.5(10 102 ut )]}s0 ,
(8b)
K=
and
Fig. 4. Effect of pressure on bubble rise velocity in a uidized bed of 0.88-mm

glass beads at (a) 26.5 C and (b) 87.5 C (solids holdups for +, open, and
lled symbols are 0, 0.384, and 0.545, respectively; from Luo et al., 1997).
from 0.1 to 17.3 MPa. A more drastic reduction in ub , however,

arises from the addition of solid particles. While the particle
effect is small at a low solids holdup (s < 0.4), the effect is
appreciable at a high solids holdup (s = 0.545), especially for
high liquid viscosity [Fig. 4(a)]. A comparison of bubble rise
velocity at 26.5 and 87.5 C, for the same solids holdup, indicates that the viscosity effect appears to be signicant. It was
also found that the extent of decrease in bubble rise velocity
with increasing solids holdup is much smaller in a uidized
bed containing smaller particles.
In the presence of solid particles, as a rst approximation,
it can be assumed that the particles modify only homogeneous
properties of the surrounding medium. Based on this homogeneous approach, the FanTsuchiya equation, Eq. (4), can be extended to liquidsolid suspensions by replacing the liquid properties, l and l , with the effective properties of the liquidsolid
suspension, m and m , respectively (Tsuchiya et al., 1997).
The effective density can be estimated by
m = l (1 s ) + s s .
(6)
where ut is in units of m/s.

The FanTsuchiya equation with constant values of m estimated from Eq. (7) predicts reasonably well the general trend
of bubble rise velocity variation in liquidsolid suspensions
as shown in Fig. 4. However, a detailed match between the
experimental results and predictions appears to be difcult
to attain by assigning a constant value of m for each condition.
A more elaborate analysis is required to account for the effect
of bubble size on interactions of the bubble with the surrounding medium (non-Newtonian approach) or with individual particles (heterogeneous approach).
The effect of particle wettability on the bubble rise velocity
was examined by Tsutsumi et al. (1991a,b). Non-wettable particles have a larger contact angle compared to wettable particles;
that is non-wettable particles favor contact between bubbles and
solids. Tsutsumi et al. (1991a,b) observed that particleparticle
aggregates and particlebubble aggregates are formed at low
gas velocities with non-wettable particles. Consequently, the
bubble rise velocity is smaller than that for wettable particles.
Further, the liquid velocity for minimum uidization is lower
and the liquid velocity for transition to the transport regime
is higher for wettable particles compared to those for nonwettable particles. On the other hand, a negligible effect of
particle wettability was observed on the rise velocity of large
bubbles (db > 15 mm). For large bubbles with a circular cap
shape, the attachment of particles to the bubbles occurs only at
the bubble base, and was not observed on the bubble roof due
to the uid shear effects caused by the fast rising bubbles.
3.4. Bubble induced liquidsolid ow
A major factor contributing to the complexity of the
liquidsolid ow in the vicinity of the rising bubbles is the
instability induced by the wakes behind the bubbles. Through
this instability, the wake ow becomes unsteady and interactive
with the external ow. The phenomenon is often characterized
by a cycle of vortex formation and shedding and, for free rising
bubbles, it is intimately related to oscillatory bubble motion.
Various transport phenomena taking place in gasliquidsolid
systems are closely associated with the wake ow behavior. In
the following section, the pressure distribution around a bubble in liquids and liquidsolid suspensions is discussed along
with particle entrainment and drift effect associated with rising
bubbles.
3.4.1. Wake pressure

Pressure distribution in the wake is critical and is closely
associated with the uid motion, solids concentration in the bulk
phase, and the size of the wake, or more generally, the wake
structure. The pressure eld around a large circular cap bubble
was studied in water and liquids of different viscosities (Lazarek
and Littman, 1974; Bessler and Littman, 1987). The pressure
distribution around the bubble in liquids showed a symmetric
minimum in the primary wake. A sharp minimum followed
by localized recovery of the pressure immediately beneath the
bubble base was also observed, but only for liquids with low
viscosity. In these studies, the bubble wake, even for water, was
closed laminar in structure in spite of the large bubble size (up
to 10 cm wide). The closed laminar wake was possibly caused
by the delayed onset of the vortex shedding from the wall
stabilized large bubble. Raghunathan et al. (1992) studied the
pressure distribution around a bubble in a water-163-m glass
bead suspension. They found that the pressure distribution in
the liquidsolid mixture is qualitatively similar to those in water
(Lazarek and Littman, 1974). However, the pressure recovery
is nearly complete in the liquidsolid suspension indicating a
smaller secondary wake compared to that in water.
11
effect, however, is conned to the vicinity of the bed surface.

The drift effect can be distinctly seen when low-density calcium
alginate particles (1.2 mm in diameter and 1.02 g/cm3 in density) are used (Tsuchiya et al., 1992). The particle displacement
caused by the drift effect is thus relatively insignicant in the
case of large bubbles and/or heavy particles. In a recent study of
high pressure bubble columns, Lau et al. (2005) indicated that
the liquid entrainment rate increases with system pressures and
gas velocities. The same behavior would hold for solid particle
entrainment in high pressure three-phase uidized beds.
4. Multi-bubble behavior
Behavior of multi-bubbles in the three-phase uidization system is complex. In this section, several fundamental aspects of
multi-bubble behavior are presented, which include bubble coalescence (small bubbles merging into a large bubble), bubble
breakup (a large bubble breaking into small bubbles), and bubble size distribution due to dynamic bubble coalescence and
breakup.
4.1. Bubble coalescence
3.5. Particle entrainment and drift effect

The bubble wake behavior directly affects the particle entrainment in the operation of a three-phase uidization system
and may be signicant if the freeboard region is not sufciently large. The problem appears to be more pertinent for
beds of small and/or light particles than those of large and/or
heavy particles. Furthermore, these particles yield appreciably different axial solids holdup distributions in the freeboard
region.
The fundamental mechanisms for particle entrainment and
de-entrainment in the transitional region of the freeboard were
revealed by Page and Harrison (1974). The particles are drawn
from the upper surface of the uidized bed into the freeboard
mainly by the wake behind the bubble and the vortices containing the particles are shed from the wake in the freeboard.
Particle entrainment normally decreases with a decrease in bubble size and bubble frequency, and with an increase in liquid
velocity and particle size. A model, developed by El-Temtamy
and Epstein (1980) to predict the solids holdup distribution in
the freeboard, indicates the central roles played by the bubble
wake in particle entrainment and the wake shedding in particle de-entrainment. Mechanics and phenomena of the wake
entrainment and particle penetration through the bubble have
been thoroughly discussed and described by Fan and Tsuchiya
(1990).
Some physical insight into the mechanisms of particle entrainment can be gained by closely following the time evolution of the particle ow around a single bubble (Miyahara
et al., 1989). When a single bubble emerges from the free surface of a bed, a mantle of particles that cover the roof of the
bubble drain away and rush into the near-wake of the bubble.
Overall, the particles move upward due to this near-wake capture as well as due to the drift effect (Darwin, 1953). The drift
For gasliquid systems, the experimental results available

in the literature indicate that an increase of pressure retards
the bubble coalescence (Sagert and Quinn, 1977, 1978). There
are three steps in the bubble coalescence process (Vrij, 1966;
Chaudhari and Hoffmann, 1994): (1) approach of two bubbles
to form a thin liquid lm between them; (2) thinning of the
lm by the drainage of the liquid under the inuence of gravity
and suction due to capillary forces; and (3) rupture of the lm
at a critical thickness. The second step is the rate-controlling
step in the coalescence process and the bubble coalescence rate
can be approximated by the lm-thinning rate (Vrij, 1966). The
lm thinning velocity can be expressed as (Sagert and Quinn,
1977, 1978)
dl
32 l 3
=
,
dt
3Rd2 l db
(9)
where the parameter is a measure of the surface drag or velocity gradient at the surface due to the adsorbed layer of the gas.
It is known that surface tension decreases and liquid viscosity increases with increasing pressure. In addition, increases
with pressure. As can be seen from Eq. (9), all of these variations contribute to the reduction of the lm thinning velocity,
and hence the bubble coalescence rate, as pressure increases.
As a result, the time required for two bubbles to coalesce is
longer and the rate of overall bubble coalescence in the bed
is reduced at high pressures. Moreover, the frequency of bubble collision decreases with increasing pressure. An important
mechanism for bubble collision is the bubble wake effect (Fan
and Tsuchiya, 1990). As the bubble size and the rise velocity
reduce at high pressures, the likelihood of small bubbles being
caught and trapped by the wakes of large bubbles decreases.
Therefore, bubble coalescence is suppressed by the increase in
12
pressure, due to the longer bubble coalescence time and the

smaller bubble collision frequency.
The presence of pulp even at very low pulp consistencies
(0.1%) in the column leads to enhanced bubble coalescence
and hence a narrowing of the gas velocity for the dispersed
bubble regime as the pulp consistency increases (Reese et al.,
1996). Bubble coalescence inhibitors such as inorganic salts
(e.g., sodium chloride and sodium phosphate dibasic) and organic compounds (e.g., ethanol, n-pentanol, iso-amyl alcohol,
and benzoic acid) can be effectively applied to the liquid at
concentrations up to 200 ppm to inhibit bubble coalescence behavior in three-phase uidization (Briens et al., 1999). With
the addition of the bubble coalescence inhibitor, the bed hydrodynamics at low gas velocities are signicantly different from
those without the inhibitor and the inuence of the gas distributor becomes distinct (Nacef et al., 1995).
4.2. Bubble breakup
Bubble breakup has been investigated theoretically and experimentally. This section will discuss bubble breakup due to
bubbleparticle collision and bubble instability.
4.2.1. Bubble breakup due to bubbleparticle collision
In a three-phase uidization system, bubble size variation is
intimately related to bubbleparticle collisions. The collisions
can yield two different consequences: the particle is ejected
from the bubble surface, or the particle penetrates the bubble
leading to either bubble breakage or non-breakage.
Bubbleparticle collisions generate perturbations on the bubble surface. After the bubbleparticle collision, three factors
become crucial in determining the breakage characteristics of
the bubble (Clift et al., 1978):
(1) shear stress, which depends on the liquid velocity gradient
and the relative bubbleparticle impact speed, and tends to
break the bubble;
(2) surface tension force, which tends to stabilize the bubble
and causes it to recover the bubbles original shape;
(3) viscous force, which slows the growth rate of the surface
perturbation, and tends to stabilize the bubble.
There are three criteria that are required for particle penetration through a bubble. These criteria were developed by neglecting the shear effects due to the liquid ow (Chen and Fan,
1989). The particle will penetrate the bubble when any of the
following three criteria is satised. The three criteria are given
as follows:
(1) the acceleration of the particle is downward;
(2) the particle velocity relative to the bubble is downward;
(3) the particle penetration depth is larger than the deformed
bubble height.
When none of these criteria are satised, the particle will be
ejected from the bubble surface upon contact with the bubble.
By extending Boys instability analysis (Boys, 1959), a criterion

for bubble breakage after penetration can be obtained. When the
particle diameter (dp ) is larger than the height of the doughnutshape bubble (Hd ), the bubble will breakup, that is,
dp > Hd .
(10)
Hong and Fan (1994) conducted experiments to elucidate

the effects of ow eld and liquid viscosity on the bubble
breakage. The system in their study included a freely rising
bubble colliding with a falling copper ball with a density of
8.7 g/cm3 . Particles of three different sizes (0.92, 1.22, and
1.53 cm in diameter) were used, with the volume equivalent
diameter of a spherical cap bubble xed at 1.97 cm. Eighty
wt.% aqueous glycerine solution and pure water were used as
the liquid phase. The surface tensions of these two liquids are
comparable (solution = 65.9 mN/m vs. water = 72.6 mN/m);
however, the viscosities differ greatly (solution = 52.9 mPa s
vs. water = 1.0 mPa s). Experiments by Hong and Fan (1994)
also showed that the bubble breakage mechanism in water and
glycerine solution was different. Although the only signicant
difference in conditions between these two cases is the liquid
viscosity, the consequences of the particle penetration are opposite: in the glycerine solution, the bubble recovers its original
shape; while in water, the bubble is broken down into pieces.
In water the particle Reynolds number is 1.2 104 and the
liquid ow around the particle is turbulent, while in the glycerine solution the particle Reynolds number is less than 500
and the ow is laminar. Hence, the bubble in water is disintegrated by the surface perturbations induced by the turbulent
shear stress when the particle penetrates. The numerical simulation by Hong et al. (1999) shows bubble elongation and tiny
bubble generation upon particle collision, which are in a good
agreement with the experimental observation by Hong and Fan
(1994). Their simulation also shows a large resulting pressure
oscillation, which could also contribute to bubble surface instability leading to its breakage.
4.2.2. Bubble breakup due to bubble instability
The second cause of bubble breakup is due to bubble instability. The upper limit of the bubble size is set by the maximum
stable bubble size, Dmax , above which the bubble is subjected
to breakup and hence unstable. Several mechanisms have been
proposed for the bubble breakup phenomenon and based on
these mechanisms theories have been established to predict the
maximum bubble size in gasliquid systems. In this section,
the mechanisms of bubble breakup and the theories to predict
the maximum bubble size are discussed.
Hinze (1955) proposed that the bubble breakup is caused by
the dynamic pressure and the shear stresses on the bubble surface induced by different liquid ow patterns, e.g., shear ow
and turbulence. When the maximum hydrodynamic force in the
liquid is larger than the surface tension force, the bubble disintegrates into smaller bubbles. This mechanism can be quantied by the liquid Weber number. When the Weber number
is larger than a critical value, the bubble is not stable and disintegrates. This theory was adopted to predict the breakup of
13
bubbles in gasliquid systems (Walter and Blanch, 1986). Calculations by Lin et al. (1998) showed that the theory underpredicts the maximum bubble size obtained by experiments and
could not predict the effect of pressure on the maximum bubble
size.
A maximum stable bubble size exists for bubbles rising freely
in a stagnant liquid without external stresses, e.g., rapid acceleration, shear stress, and/or turbulence uctuations (Grace
et al., 1978). The RayleighTaylor instability has been regarded
as the mechanism for bubble breakup under such conditions. A
horizontal interface between two stationary uids is unstable to
disturbances with wavelengths exceeding a critical value if the
upper uid has a higher density than the lower one (Bellman
and Pennington, 1954):

c = 2
.
(11)
g(l g )
the centrifugal force to be equal to the dynamic pressure induced by the gas moving at the bubble rise velocity, that is,
kf g u2b /2 (kf 0.5), and proposed a simple equation to calculate the maximum stable bubble size:
Grace et al. (1978) modied the RayleighTaylor instability

theory by considering the time available for the disturbance to
grow and the time required for the disturbance to grow to an
adequate amplitude. Batchelor (1987) pointed out that the observed size of air bubbles in water was considerably larger than
that predicted by the model of Grace et al. (1978). Batchelor
(1987) further took into account the stabilizing effect of the liquid acceleration along the bubble surface and the non-constant
growth rate of the disturbance. In Batchelors model, the magnitude of the disturbances is required to predict maximum bubble
size; however, the magnitude of the disturbances is not known.
The models based on the RayleighTaylor instability predict an
almost negligible pressure effect on the maximum bubble size;
in fact, Eq. (11) implies that the bubble is more stable when
the gas density is higher.
The KelvinHelmholtz instability is similar to the Rayleigh
Taylor instability, except that the former allows a relative velocity between the uids, ur . Using the same concept of Grace
et al. (1978), Kitscha and Kocamustafaogullari (1989) applied
the KelvinHelmholtz instability theory to model the breakup
of large bubbles in liquids. Wilkinson and van Dierendonck
(1990) applied the critical wavelength to explain the maximum
stable bubble size in high-pressure bubble columns. Disturbances in the liquid with a wavelength larger than the critical
wavelength can break up a bubble. The critical wavelength decreases with an increase in pressure and therefore bubbles are
easier to break apart by disturbances at higher pressures. However, the critical wavelength concept alone cannot account for
the effect of pressure on the maximum bubble size.
All of the models mentioned above do not account for the
internal circulation of the gas. The internal circulation velocity
is of the same order of magnitude as the bubble rise velocity.
A centrifugal force is induced by this circulation, pointing outwards toward the bubble surface. This force can suppress the
disturbances at the gasliquid interface and thereby stabilize
the interface. Centrifugal force explains the underestimation of
Dmax by the model of Grace et al. (1978). On the other hand,
the centrifugal force can also break apart the bubble, as it increases with an increase in bubble size. Levich (1962) assumed
The criterion leads to a maximum stable bubble size expressed

by

Dmax 2.53
(for = 0.21)
(14a)
gg
Dmax
3.63
.

u2b 3 2l g
(12)
Eq. (12) severely under-predicts the maximum bubble size in

the airwater system, although it shows a signicant effect of
pressure on the maximum bubble size. Luo et al. (1999) considered that the bubble would break up when the centrifugal
force exceeds the surface tension force, especially at high pressures when gas density is high. They arrived at a criterion for
bubble instability:
8 4/3 E( 1 2 )
2
ub db
.
(13)
0.312
g
in liquids, and

Dmax 3.27

gg
(for = 0.3)
(14b)
in liquidsolid suspensions. Further, based on the Davies

Taylor equation, the rise velocity of the maximum stable
bubble is
1/4

1.6g
.
(15)
umax =
g
The comparison of experimental maximum bubble sizes and the
predictions by various instability theories indicates that bubble breakup is governed by the internal circulation mechanism
at high pressures over 1.0 MPa, whereas the RayleighTaylor
instability or the KelvinHelmholtz instability is the dominant
mechanism at low pressure.
4.3. Bubble size distribution
In multi-bubble systems, a mean bubble size is usually used
to describe the system. The mean bubble size is commonly
expressed through the Sauter, or volume-surface, mean. For a
group of bubbles with measured diameters, the Sauter mean is

3
ni dbi
dvs =
,
(16)
2
ni dbi
where ni is the number of bubbles in the class i with its volume
equivalent size dbi .
Some studies have been conducted to investigate pressure or
gas density effects on the mean bubble size and bubble size distribution in bubble columns (Idogawa et al., 1986, 1987; Jiang
14
bubble columns, the gas holdup can be related to the supercial gas velocity, Ug , and the average bubble rise velocity, ub ,
(based on bubble volume) by a simple equation:
Ug = g ub .
(17)
When the distributions of bubble size and bubble rise velocity

are taken into account, ub can be expressed as
db,max
Vb (db )f (db )ub (db ) ddb
d
ub = b,min
.
(18)
db,max
db,min Vb (db )f (db ) ddb
The outcome of Eq. (18) and the gas holdup strongly depend on the existence of large bubbles, because of their large
volume and high rise velocity. An experimental study by Lee
et al. (1999) revealed that, in the coalesced bubble regime, more
than 70% of the small bubbles are entrained by the wakes of
large bubbles and consequently have a velocity close to large
bubbles. It is clear that the large bubble behavior characterizes
the overall hydrodynamics due to their large volume, their high
rise velocity, and their large associated wakes.
Fig. 5. Visualization of bubbles emerging from the surface of a three-phase
uidized bed at (a) P = 0.1 MPa; (b) P = 3.5 MPa; (c) P = 6.8 MPa; (d)
P = 17.4 MPa (from Fan et al., 1999).
et al., 1995; Soong et al., 1997; Lin et al., 1998) as well as

in three-phase uidized beds (Jiang et al., 1992, 1997). Fig. 5
shows bubbles emerging from the surface of the three-phase
uidized bed of Paratherm NF heat transfer uid and 2.1-mm
glass beads over a wide range of operating conditions. As shown
in the gure, bubble size is drastically reduced as pressure increases. The most fundamental reason for the bubble size reduction can be attributed to the variation in physical properties
of the gas and liquid with pressure. According to these experimental studies, pressure has a signicant effect on the mean
bubble diameter. The mean bubble diameter decreases with increasing pressure; however, above a certain pressure, the bubble size reduction is not signicant. The effect of pressure on
the mean bubble size is due to the change of bubble size distribution with pressure. At atmospheric pressure, the bubble size
distribution is broad, while under high pressure, the bubble size
distribution becomes narrower (Luo et al., 1999). The bubble
size is mainly determined by three factors, that is, bubble formation at the gas distributor, bubble coalescence, and bubble
breakup. When the pressure is increased, the bubble size at the
distributor is reduced (Luo et al., 1998a), bubble coalescence is
suppressed (Jiang et al., 1995), and large bubbles tend to break
up (Luo et al., 1999). The combination of these three factors
causes the decrease of mean bubble size with increasing pressure.
The bubble size distribution can normally be approximated
by a log-normal distribution with its upper limit at the maximum stable bubble size. The contribution of bubbles of different sizes can be examined by analyzing the relationship between overall gas holdup and bubble size distribution. In slurry
5. Other bubble behavior

5.1. Gas jetting
One of important phenomena associated with plenum ow
behavior is gas jetting. Two main gas ow regimes can be identied for gas injection from a single orice, that is, bubbling
and jetting regimes. At low gas velocities, discrete bubbles are
formed from the orice, marking the single bubbling regime. At
high gas velocities, a coherent gas jet forms with small bubbles
split at the end of the jet, marking the jetting regime. The bubbles formed from a jet are of a wide size distribution. Between
the single bubbling and jetting regimes, a transition regime exists, which is known as doubling or coalesced bubbling regime
(Miyahara et al., 1983). In this regime, the bubble that is still
being formed at the orice coalesces with the preceding bubble. Bubble coalescence may occur among three or more bubbles with increasing gas velocity. This section will focus on
the transition from bubbling to jetting regimes. The transition
velocity from bubbling to jetting regimes is also referred to as
the onset velocity of gas jetting.
The transition from single bubbling or coalesced bubbling
to jetting regimes has an important practical implication for
the design and operation of industrial reactors, since industrial
reactors are often operated at high gas velocities in order to
yield high throughput. Experimental work has been reported
on the transition behavior from bubbling to jetting regimes in
liquids under ambient conditions. Some studies (Ozawa and
Mori, 1983; Chen and Richter, 1997) have indicated that a
sonic velocity at the exit of the orice is essential for the onset
of jetting. However, others have noted that a critical value of
the mass ux of gas or some dimensionless numbers have to
be reached for the onset of jetting. McNallan and King (1982)
observed that the transition from bubbling to continuous jet ow
is controlled by the mass ux of gas and occurs at a ow rate
of approximately 40 g/cm2 s. Leibson et al. (1956) studied the

mechanics of bubble formation at high gas ow rates and concluded that the regimes of gas injection are dictated by the gas
ow conditions through the orice. When the gas ow through
the orice is fully turbulent, that is, the orice Reynolds number (Reo = g Do uo /g ) is larger than 10,000, a continuous
gas jet is formed. Mersmann (1980) found that the transition
from bubbling to jetting regimes in the air/water system occurs
at a critical Weber number of 2, irrespective of orice diameter. The critical Weber number (W ecr ) increases with the liquid viscosity (Rabiger and Vogelpohl, 1982). Through studying
bubble formation at high gas ow rates with a high-speed camera, Miyahara et al. (1983) proposed an empirical correlation to
predict the transition point in the liquid using two dimensionless numbers, Weber and Bond numbers. The discrepancy of
the different criteria used to identify the bubblingjetting transition in the literature is possibly due to different experimental
and theoretical approaches used and different interpretations of
the concept of the gas jetting phenomenon.
The system pressure or gas density has a signicant effect on
the bubblingjetting transition. Ozawa and Mori (1986) studied the effects of the physical properties of gas and liquid on
the bubblingjetting transition in liquids. They found that the
bubblingjetting transition occurs at lower gas velocities when
they increased the ratio of gas to liquid densities. Idogawa
et al. (1987) studied the formation of gas bubbles in a bubble
column under system pressures of 0.115 MPa. The empirical
correlation they proposed indicated that the bubblingjetting
transition velocity in water and ethanol systems is proportional
to 0.8
. Luo et al. (1998b) studied gas jetting and bubble
g
formation in hydrocarbon liquids and liquidsolid suspensions
at high pressures (up to 17 MPa) using an optic ber probe.
They revealed signicant effects of the orice Reynolds number and the system pressure on the bubbling and jetting phenomena. Photographs of the gas ow through an orice in a
Paratherm NF heat transfer liquid (l =30 mPa s, =29 mN/m,
l = 868 kg/m3 at 0.1 MPa and 25 C) at a high pressure
for various Reo are shown in Fig. 6. At Reo = 1075, single
bubbles are formed from the orice. When Reo increases to
5321, bubbles being formed at the orice start to interact with
the preceding bubble. Bubble coalescence occurs between two
bubbles, sometimes involving more bubbles (Reo = 8809). At
Reo = 10, 243, frequent coalescence of successive bubbles is
observed, that is, the beginning of gas jetting. As Reo further increases, the jetting regime becomes more apparent and
bubbles break away from the top of the jet. Moreover, the jet
penetration depth increases with an increase in Reo . The onset
velocity of gas jetting or the bubblingjetting transition velocity can be identied based on photographs obtained from the
high-speed video camera and the analysis of the light intensity
signals from the optic ber probe (Luo et al., 1998b; Sundar and
Tan, 1999). The transition velocity was found to decrease with
an increase in pressure in both the liquid and the liquidsolid
suspension. In other words, the transition to the jetting regime
is accelerated. The acceleration of the transition to the jetting
regime at high pressures is mainly due to an increase in gas
momentum.
15
5.2. Liquid weeping

Another interesting plenum bubble behavior is liquid weeping at the orice, which can affect the distributor performance
signicantly. Liquid weeping is the downward liquid ow into
the plenum region through the orice after the bubble detaches
from the orice. The liquid leaking into the plenum region can
signicantly affect the pressure drop across the distributor, and
thus the performance of the distributor. Therefore, understanding the liquid weeping phenomenon is of critical importance to
the improvement of distributor design.
Liquid weeping at orices is mainly due to the pressure uctuations in the liquid phase above the distributor and in the gas
chamber underneath the distributor. To initiate the formation of
a bubble, the pressure in the gas chamber has to be higher than
the capillary pressure of the orice. As the bubble grows, the
pressure in the chamber decreases. When the bubble detaches
from the orice, the pressure in the chamber reaches a minimum
value. The minimum pressure can be signicantly lower than
the pressure of the liquid phase above the orice and thus, the
liquid weeping occurs immediately. A typical plenum pressure
uctuation is characterized by three basic regimes that make
up the overall bubbling period. A sudden pressure drop is observed as the bubble forms above the orice plate and grows,
which is followed by a sudden pressure increase upon bubble
detachment. During this period, weeping may occur as a new
gasliquid interface is reestablished along the underside of the
orice rim. Bridging follows this weeping period and is characterized by a slow pressure buildup that leads to another bubbling cycle. Any factors that affect the bubble formation process
and pressure uctuations in the chamber and the liquid phase
would affect the liquid weeping rate. The factors include orice
gas velocity, volume of the gas chamber, geometry of the orice (diameter and thickness), liquid-phase velocity, and physical properties of the liquid. The liquid weeping phenomenon is
more complicated in the multi-orice plate than in the singleorice plate. In addition to the factors affecting liquid weeping
in the single-orice case, the liquid weeping rate also depends
on the number of orices, the percentage of plate opening, and
the arrangement of the orices. In the following, the effects of
various factors on the liquid weeping rate will be discussed.
It is commonly accepted that a maximum weeping rate exists
when the orice gas velocity is increased from zero to the jetting velocity (McCann and Prince, 1969; Miyahara et al., 1984;
Akagi et al., 1987; Che and Chen, 1990). The weeping rate in
the jetting regime is believed to be negligible. Liquid weeping
can be minimized by adjusting the volume of the gas chamber, because the liquid weeping rate decreases as the chamber
volume increases, especially for small orices. The effect of
chamber volume on liquid weeping is related to the pressure
uctuation in the chamber. As the chamber volume increases,
the frequency and the magnitude of the pressure uctuation in
the chamber decrease, resulting in a smaller weeping rate. The
geometry of the orice also affects the liquid weeping rate.
In general, the liquid weeping ux (weeping rate per unit orice area) increases signicantly with an increase in the orice
diameter at a constant orice gas velocity when the orice
16
Fig. 6. A series of photographs showing the bubblingjetting transition at P = 4.24 MPa and T = 28 C for (a) uo = 0.27 m/s and Reo = 1075; (b) uo = 1.35 m/s
and Reo = 5321; (c) uo = 2.23 m/s and Reo = 8809; (d) uo = 2.60 m/s and Reo = 10, 243; (e) uo = 3.99 m/s and Reo = 15, 759; (f) uo = 6.42 m/s and
Reo = 25, 355 (from Luo et al., 1998b).
diameter is larger than 2 mm. Sometimes, simultaneous liquid

weeping and bubbling were observed for large orices and the
volume of a bubble formed at an orice with weeping is larger
than that without weeping (Miyahara et al., 1984; Miyahara
and Takahashi, 1984). Liquid weeping is not remarkable for
orices smaller than 2 mm if the liquid is quiescent and the
chamber volume is large, because the surface tension force is
dominant for small orices (Klug and Vogelpohl, 1983; Akagi
et al., 1987; Che and Chen, 1990).
Liquid weeping is also affected by a superimposed motion
of liquid around the orice. Klug and Vogelpohl (1983) found
that the velocity of the liquid, owing cocurrently with the
gas, inuences the liquid weeping. The weep point, dened as
the condition above which liquid weeping is negligible, moves
to higher gas ow rates with liquid motion. Among various
liquid properties, liquid viscosity is the main factor that possibly
affects ow resistance across the orice, and thus the weeping
rate. Akagi et al. (1987) found that the effect of viscosity on
the weeping rate is insignicant at low gas velocities, and the
weeping rate is reduced with increasing liquid viscosity at high
gas velocities. In their study, the liquid viscosity varied from
0.9 to 17 mPa s.
The operating pressure also has a signicant effect on the liquid weeping phenomenon (Peng et al., 2002). Higher pressure
or gas density contributes to the increased momentum force
and the smaller bubble size. Lower pressure uctuations across
the orice plate are also observed. This lower pressure drop
across the plate results from smaller bubbles invoking smaller
wakes upon bubble detachment and decreases mixing or turbulent effects around the orice. Therefore, the weeping rate
is reduced at high pressures. A maximum weeping rate is observed at low pressures as the orice gas velocity increases.
The weeping maximum also shifts toward lower gas velocities as the pressure increases. At high pressures, the weeping
maximum disappears. The existence of the maximum weeping
rate may be qualitatively explained based on the variations of
bubble growth rate and gas momentum force with orice gas
velocity (Peng et al., 2002).
5.3. Scaling rule

The scaling rules based on hydrodynamic similarity are useful for the purposes of experimental design and reactor design
and scale up. For the commercial size of a reactor at 10 m in diameter for the FischerTropsch synthesis (Sookai et al., 2001),
a scaling rule would undoubtedly be helpful. There are several
hydrodynamic scaling rules reported that have limited usage
(Fan et al., 1999; Safoniuk et al., 1999; Krishna et al., 2001;
Krishna and van Baten, 2001, 2003; van Baten and Krishna,
2004; Zhang and Zhao, 2006). Fan et al. (1999) studied the
hydrodynamics and transport phenomena in the high-pressure
bubble columns and slurry bubble columns. They proposed the
hydrodynamic similarity based on the gas holdup matching and
arrived at the following dimensionless groups, Ug /umax , Mom ,
and g /m . Safoniuk et al. (1999) arrived at the following dimensionless groups, Mo, Eo, Re, g /L , and Ug /UL by considering parameters affecting the equilibrium bubble size and
shape. The scale-up of effects were also elucidated by the use
of computational uid dynamics (Krishna et al., 2001; Krishna
and van Baten, 2001, 2003; van Baten and Krishna, 2004). As
the scale up is a complex and important issue and all the approaches indicated above require further work.
6. Computational uid dynamics

The CFD is a viable means for describing the uid dynamic and transport behavior of gasliquid or gasliquidsolid
ow systems. There are three basic approaches commonly
employed in the CFD for the study of multiphase ows: the
EulerianEulerian (EE) method, the EulerianLagrangian
(EL) method, and direct numerical simulation (DNS) method.
In the EE method (Anderson and Jackson, 1967; Joseph and
Lundgren, 1990; Sokolichin and Eigenberger, 1994, 1999;
Zhang and Prosperetti, 1994, 2003; Mudde and Simonin,
1999; Matonis et al., 2002), both the continuous phase and the
dispersed phase, such as particles and bubbles, are treated as
interpenetrating continuous media, occupying the same space

with different velocities and volume fractions for each phase.
In this method, the closure relationships such as the stress and
viscosity of the particle phase need to be formulated. In the
EL method, or discrete particle method (DPM) (e.g., Tsuji
et al., 1993; Lapin and Lbbert, 1994; Hoomans et al., 1996;
Delnoij et al., 1997), the continuous uid phase is formulated
in the Eulerian mode, while the position and the velocity of
the dispersed phase, particles or bubbles, is traced in the Lagrangian mode by solving Lagrangian motion equations. The
grid size used in the computation for the continuous phase
equations is typically much larger than the object size of the
dispersed phase, and the object in the dispersed phase is treated
as a point source in the computational cell. With this method,
the coupling of the continuous phase and the dispersion phase
can be made using the particle-source-in-cell method (Crowe
et al., 1977). The closure relationship for the interaction forces
between phases is required to be provided in the EL method.
In the DNS (Unverdi and Tryggvason, 1992; Feng et al.,
1994; Sethian and Smereka, 2003), the grid size is commonly
much smaller than the object size of the dispersed phase, and
the moving interface can be represented by implicit or explicit
schemes in the computational domain. The velocity elds of
the uid phase are obtained by solving the NavierStokes equation, considering the interfacial forces such as surface tension
force or soliduid interaction force. The motion of the object of the dispersed phase is represented in terms of a timedependent initial-value problem. With the rapid advances in the
speed and memory capacity of the computer, the DNS approach
has became important in characterizing details of the complex
multiphase ow eld.
In the following, the front capturing and front tracking methods that highlight the DNS are described. It is followed by
an account of application examples using the level-set method
(Sussman et al., 1994) for the 3D DNS of gasliquidsolid uidization.
6.1. Front capturing and front tracking methods
In the DNS of multiphase ow problems, there are various
methods available for predicting interface position and movement, such as the moving-grid method, the grid-free method
(Scardovelli and Zeleski, 1999) and the xed-grid front tracking/front capturing method. In the moving-grid method, which
is also known as the discontinuous-interface method, the interface is a boundary between two sub-domains of the grid
(Dandy and Leal, 1989). The grid may be structured or unstructured and even near-orthogonal, moving with the interface (Hirt
et al., 1974). It treats the system as two distinct ows separated
by a surface. When the interface moves or undergoes deformation, new, geometrically adapted grids need to be generated or
re-meshed. The re-meshing can be a very complicated, timeconsuming process, especially when it involves a signicant
topology change, and/or a 3D ow. Methods in which grids
are not required include the marker particle method (Harlow
and Welch, 1965) and the smoothed particle hydrodynamics
method (Monaghan, 1994).
17
The xed-grid method, which is also known as the

continuous-interface method, employs structured or unstructured grids with the interface cutting across the xed grids. It
treats the system as a single ow with the density and viscosity varying smoothly across a nite-thickness of the interface.
The numerical techniques used to solve the moving interface
problem with xed, regular grids can be categorized by two
basic approaches: the front tracking method (e.g., Harlow and
Welch, 1965; Peskin, 1977; Unverdi and Tryggvason, 1992;
Fukai et al., 1995) and the front capturing method (e.g., Osher
and Sethian, 1988; Sussman et al., 1994; Kothe and Rider,
1995; Bussmann et al., 1999). For a 3D multiphase ow problem, the xed-grid method is the most frequently used due to
its efciency and relative ease in programming.
The front tracking method explicitly tracks the location
of the interface by the advection of the Lagrangian markers
on a xed, regular grid. The marker-and-cell (MAC) method
developed by Harlow and Welch (1965) was the rst front
tracking technique applied in DNS. The front tracking method
developed by Unverdi and Tryggvason (1992) and Tryggvason
et al. (2001) leads to many applications in the simulation of
droplet or bubble ow. In this method, the location of the
interface is expressed by discrete surface-marker particles.
High-order interpolation polynomials are employed to ensure
a high degree of accuracy in the representation of the interface.
An unstructured surface grid connecting the surface-marker
particles is introduced within a volumetric grid to track the bubble front within the computational domain. Thus, discretization
of the eld equations is carried out on two sets of embedded
meshes: (a) the Eulerian uid grid, which is 3D, cubical, staggered structured, and non-adaptive; and (b) the Lagrangian
front grid, which is 2D, triangular, unstructured, and adaptive
(Unverdi and Tryggvason, 1992). The innitely thin boundary
can be approximated by a smooth distribution function of a nite thickness of about three to four grid spacing. The variable
density NavierStokes equations can then be solved by conventional Eulerian techniques (Unverdi and Tryggvason, 1992).
This method can be numerically stiff as the density ratio of the
two uids increases, and may pose difculties when the appearance, the connection, the detachment, and the disappearance of
the gasliquid interface are encountered. Such interface behavior occurs in the coalescence, breakup or formation of bubbles
and droplets in an unsteady ow. The front tracking method
is therefore computationally intensive. Agresar et al. (1998)
extended the front tracking method with adaptive rened grids
near the interface to simulate the deformable circulation cell.
Sato and Richardson (1994) developed a nite-element method
to simulate the moving free surface of a polymeric liquid. The
immersed boundary method (IBM) proposed by Peskin (1977)
in studying the blood ow through heart valves and the cardiac
mechanics also belongs to the class of front tracking techniques. In the IBM method, the simulation of the uid ow
with complex geometry was carried out using a Cartesian grid,
and a novel procedure was formulated to impose the boundary
condition at the interface. Some variants and modications of
this method were proposed in simulating various multiphase
ow problems (Mittal and Iaccarino, 2005). An example of the
18
Fig. 7. Simulation results of air bubble formation from a single nozzle in water (nozzle size 0.4 cm I.D. and nozzle gas velocity 10 cm/s) (from Ge and Fan, 2006).
front tracking method as applied to three-phase uidization is

presented by van Sint Annaland et al. (2005).
The front capturing method, on the other hand, is the Eulerian treatment of the interface, in which the moving interface is implicitly represented by a scalarindicator function
dened on a xed, regular mesh point. The movement of the
interface is captured by solving the advection equation of the
scalarindicator function. At every time step, the interface is
generated by piecewise segments (2D) or patches (3D) reconstructed by this scalar function. In this method, the interfacial
force, such as the surface tension force, is incorporated into the
ow momentum equation as a source term using the continuum surface force (CSF) method (Brackbill et al., 1992). This
technique includes the volume of uid (VOF) method (Hirt
and Nichols, 1981; Kothe and Rider, 1995), the marker density
function (MDF) (Kanai and Miyata, 1995), and the level-set
method (Osher and Sethian, 1988; Sussman et al., 1994).
In the VOF method, an indicator function is dened as: 0 for
a cell with pure gas, 1 for a cell with pure liquid, and 0 to 1 for a
cell with a mixture of gas and liquid. An interface exists in those
cells that give a VOF value of neither 0 nor 1. Since the indicator function is not explicitly associated with a particular front
grid, an algorithm is needed to reconstruct the interface. This
is not an easy task, especially for a complex dynamic interface
requiring 3D calculation. The VOF method was used to simulate the liquid droplet collision with solid surface (e.g., Karl
et al., 1996; Bussmann et al., 1999, 2000; Harvie and Fletcher,
2001a,b). Mehdi-Nejad et al. (2003) also used the VOF method
to simulate the bubble entrapment behavior in a droplet when
it impacts a solid surface. The VOF was also used in the 2D
discrete phase simulation of bubble motion in gasliquid and
gasliquidsolid ows (Li et al., 1999, 2001; Zhang et al., 2000;
Dijkhuizen et al., 2005). In the approach of Li et al. (1999), the
Eulerian volume-averaged method, the Lagrangian DPM, and
the VOF volume-tracking method were employed to describe
the motion of liquid, solid particles, and gas bubbles, respectively. A bubble induced force (BIF) model, a CSF model, and
Newtons third law are applied to account for the couplings
of particlebubble, bubbleliquid, and particleliquid interactions, respectively. A close distance interaction (CDI) model is
included in the particleparticle collision analysis, which considers the liquid interstitial effect between colliding particles
(Zhang et al., 1999). Other front capturing methods include the
constrained interpolation prole (CIP) method (Yabe, 1997),
and the phase-eld method (Jamet et al., 2001).
In the level-set method, the moving interface is implicitly represented by a smooth level-set function (Sethian and Smereka,
2003). The level-set method has proved capable of handling
19
Fig. 8. Simulation results of bubble formation and rising in Paratherm NF heat transfer uid with and without particles (nozzle size 0.4 cm I.D., liquid velocity
0 cm/s, gas velocity 10 cm/s, and particle density 0.896 g/cm3 ): (a) no particle; (b) 2000 particles; (c) 8000 particles; (d) 8000 particles (from Ge and Fan, 2006).
20
problems in which the interface moving speed is sensitive to the

front curvature and normal direction. A signicant advantage
of the level-set method is that it is effective in 3D simulation of
the conditions with large topological changes, such as bubble
breaking and merging, droplet-surface collisions with evaporation. While similar to the VOF method, the level-set method
also uses an indicator function to track the gasliquid interface
on the Eulerian grid. Instead of using the marker particles or
points to describe the interface, a smooth level-set function is
dened in the ow eld (Sussman et al., 1994). An example of
the front capturing method as applied to three-phase uidization is presented by Chen and Fan (2004).
6.2. Simulation examples
The ows in a gasliquid or gasliquidsolid uidized bed
are represented by the bubble dispersed and bubble coalesced
regimes. In the bubble dispersed regime, there is little variation
of bubble sizes. The ow structure in the bubble coalesced
regime is complex due to substantial coalescence and breakup
of bubbles. Both the EE and the EL methods have proven
to be more effective in modeling the bubble dispersed regime
than the bubble coalesced regime of gasliquid ow. In the
simulation of the bubble coalesced regime of gasliquid ows
using either the EE or the EL method, the challenge lies in
the establishment of an accurate closure relationship for the
interphase momentum exchange. The interphase momentum
exchange is induced through the drag force that liquid exerts
on the bubble surface, the virtual mass force due to the bubble
and liquid inertial motion, and the lift force caused by the
shear ows around the bubbles. In the following simulation
examples, deformable bubble behavior in the gasliquid bubble columns and gasliquidsolid uidized systems are illustrated based on the level-set method. Newtons second law and
the locally averaged NavierStokes equations (Anderson and
Jackson, 1967; Jackson, 2000) are used to describe the particle
motion and the liquid phase ow, respectively. The detailed
model formulation is given in Chen and Fan (2004). In the following, the simulation results for bubble formation from a single nozzle in liquids and liquidsolid suspensions are presented
(Ge and Fan, 2006).
6.2.1. Bubble formation in liquid
Fig. 7 shows the simulated air bubble formation and rising
behavior in water. For the rst three bubbles, the formation
process is characterized by three distinct stages of expansion,
detachment and deformation. In comparison with the bubble
formation in the airhydrocarbon uid (Paratherm) system, the
coalescence of the rst two bubbles occurs much earlier in the
airwater system. This is due to the fact that, compared to that
in the airParatherm system, the rst bubble in the airwater
system is much larger in size and hence higher in rise velocity
leading to a shorter time for its coalescence with the second
bubble. Beginning with the third bubble, the formation and rising behavior of air bubbles in water shows strongly asymmetric
behavior. As is evident from the gure, the bubble rises in a
spiral path or a zigzag path.
6.2.2. Bubble formation in liquidsolid suspension

The airParathermsolid uidized bed system with solid particles of 0.08 cm in diameter and 0.896 g/cm3 in density is simulated. The solid particle density is very close to the liquid density (0.868 g/cm3 ). The boundary condition for the gas phase
is inow and outow for the bottom and the top walls, respectively. Particles are initially distributed in the liquid medium in
which no ows for the liquid and particles are allowed through
the bottom and top walls. Free slip boundary conditions are
imposed on the four side walls. Specic simulation conditions
for the particles are given as follows: case (b) 2000 particles
randomly placed in a 4 4 8 cm3 column; case (c) 8000
particles randomly placed in a 4 4 8 cm3 column; and
case (d) 8000 particles randomly placed in the lower half of
the 4 4 8 cm3 column. The solids volume fractions are
0.42%, 1.68% and 3.35%, respectively, for cases (b), (c) and (d).
Case (a) is free of particles.
The bubble formation process at different solids concentrations is shown in Figs. 8(b)(d) and is compared with that
without particles as shown in Fig. 8(a). For the rst 0.3 s, little change is observed in the bubble formation process for the
three solids concentrations used in this simulation. After 0.4 s,
however, signicant changes can be found for the cases with
high solids concentrations. This can be seen from the rst bubble in each case. When the solid concentration is low or no
solids are present, the rst bubble grows on the orice and connects to the second bubble. For the high solids concentration
cases, the rst bubble is not well connected to the second bubble. This is particularly true for case (d) when the bubble rises
into the solids-free region or freeboard region of the bed. The
solid particle entrainment is clearly observed in case (d).
7. Summary
Bubble dynamics in gasliquidsolid three-phase uidized
bed systems have been studied extensively over the past years.
Considerable recent research in this eld has been focusing on
the effects of pressures and temperatures due to the renewed
interest in the FischerTropsch synthesis in the commercial development of large-scale slurry reactors for gas-to-liquids technology. Further, the industrial three-phase uidization systems
are commonly operated under elevated pressure and temperature conditions. The temperature and pressure play the key role
in dictating the physical properties of the gas and liquid phases
and hence the bubble behavior. The high pressure decreases
the bubble size, delays the ow regime transition from the dispersed to the coalesced regime, and reduces liquid weeping
from the distributor. The liquidsolid suspension through which
gas bubbles rise can be characterized as a pseudo-homogenous
medium under some operating conditions. Most distinct phenomena associated with the bubbly ow include bubble instability, bubble wake enhanced transport properties and coherent
large-scale vortical structure.
The results from the computational uid dynamics provide
valuable insights into the complex ow eld of three-phase
uidization systems. The direct numerical simulation has been
attempted in the literature. Numerical examples based on the
level-set interface tracking approach are presented, which account for the bubble, particle and liquid interactive behavior
and the ow structure in three-phase ows. Challenges on CFD
remain, however, with respect to improving computational accuracy, as well as incorporating reaction kinetics and transport
phenomena properties into uid dynamics calculations, and the
micro-scale ow properties into simulation of a large scale
three-phase reactor. The formulation of closure relationships
for the Eulerian computation is also in need of further work.
Notation
b
c
CD
db
db
dp
dvs
Dmax
Do
e
E( 1 2 )
Eo
f (db )
FB
FBA
FC
FD
FI,g
FI,m
FM
F
g
h
Hd
K
Kb
l
Mo
n
ni
Nc
P
Qg
Q0
ro
Rd
Re
bubble breadth
parameter in FanTsuchiya equation reecting surface tension effect
drag coefcient
volume equivalent bubble diameter
dimensionless bubble diameter
particle diameter
Sauter mean bubble diameter
maximum stable bubble size
orice diameter
restitution coefcient
complete second kind Elliptic integral
Etvs number based on bubble diameter
probability density function of bubble size
effective buoyancy force; buoyancy force
Basset force
particlebubble collision force
liquid drag force
bubble inertial force
liquidsolid suspension inertial force
gas momentum force
surface tension force
gravitational acceleration
bubble height; particle penetration depth
height of a doughnut-shape bubble
proportionality constant for calculating the
effective viscosity of liquidsolid suspensions
parameter in FanTsuchiya equation reecting viscous nature of surrounding medium
thickness of the liquid lm between two coalescing bubbles
Morton number based on liquid properties
parameter in FanTsuchiya equation reecting system purity
number of bubbles
dimensionless capacitance number
system pressure
volumetric gas ow rate into the gas chamber
volumetric gas ow rate through the orice
radius of orice
radius of acontacting circle between two bubbles
bubble Reynolds number based on liquid
properties
Reo
t
T
Ta
u
ub
ub
ue
um
umax
uo
ut
ub
Ug
Ul
Up0
Vb
Vc
Wecr
21
orice Reynolds number

time
temperature
Tadaki number
rise velocity of bubble base
bubble rise velocity relative to the liquid phase
dimensionless bubble rise velocity; observed absolute bubble rise velocity
bubble expansion velocity
suspension velocity
rise velocity of maximum stable bubble
supercial gas velocity through the orice
particle terminal velocity in liquid
average bubble rise velocity
supercial gas velocity
supercial liquid velocity
initial descending velocity of a particle
bubble volume
volume of gas chamber
critical Weber number
Greek letters

g
l
s
sc
s0
c
g
l
m
g
l
m
s

aspect ratio of bubble

contact angle between bubble and orice surface; heat capacity ratio
density difference between liquid and gas phases
gas holdup
liquid holdup
solids holdup
critical solids holdup
solids holdup at incipient uidization
coefcient of suspension inertial force
critical wavelength for bubble breakup
gas viscosity
liquid viscosity
effective viscosity of liquidsolid suspension
gas density
liquid density
density of liquidsolid suspension
solids density
surface tension
dimensionless form of time
particle sphericity; parameter reecting the surface drag in the equation calculating lm thinning velocity
Acknowledgment
The work was supported by the National Science Foundation
Grant CTS-0207068.
References
Agresar, G., Linderman, J.J., Triggvason, G., Powell, K.G., 1998. An adaptive,
cartesian, front-tracking method for the motion deformation adhesion of
circulation calls. Journal of Computational Physics 143, 346380.
22
Akagi, Y., Okada, K., Kosaka, K., Takahashi, K., 1987. Liquid weeping
accompanied by bubble formation at submerged orices. Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research 26, 15461550.
Al-Masry, W., Ali, E., Aqeel, Y., 2005. Determination of bubble characteristics
in bubble columns using statistical analysis of acoustic sound measurement.
Chemical Engineering Research and Design 83, 11961207.
Anderson, T.B., Jackson, R., 1967. A uid mechanical description of
uidized beds. Equation of motion. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Fundamentals 6, 525539.
Azbel, D., 1981. Two-Phase Flows in Chemical Engineering. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Batchelor, G.K., 1987. The stability of a large gas bubble rising through
liquid. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 184, 399422.
Bech, K., 2005. Dynamic simulation of a 2D bubble column. Chemical
Engineering Science 60, 52945304.
Bellman, R., Pennington, R.H., 1954. Effect of surface tension and viscosity
on Taylor instability. Quarterly of Applied Mathematics XII, 151162.
Bemrose, C.R., Fowles, P., Hawkesworth, M.R., ODwyer, M.A., 1988.
Application of positron emission tomography to particulate ow
measurement in chemical engineering processes. Nuclear Instruments and
Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers,
Detectors, and Associated Equipment A 273, 874880.
Bessler, W.F., Littman, H., 1987. Experimental studies of wakes behind
circularly capped bubbles. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 185, 137151.
Bhaga, D., Weber, M.E., 1981. Bubbles in viscous liquids: shapes, wakes
and velocities. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 105, 6185.
Boyer, C., Duquenne, A.M., Wild, G., 2002. Measuring techniques in
gasliquid and gasliquidsolid reactors. Chemical Engineering Science
57, 31853215.
Boys, C.V., 1959. Soap Bubble and the Forces which Mould Them. Doubleday
Anchor Book.
Brackbill, J.U., Kothe, D.B., Zemach, C., 1992. A continuum method for
modeling surface tension. Journal of Computational Physics 100, 335354.
Braeske, H., Brenn, G., Domnick, J., Durst, F., Melling, A., Ziema, M., 1998.
Extended phase-Doppler anemometry for measurements in three-phase
ows. Chemical Engineering Technology 21, 415420.
Brenn, G., Braeske, H., Durst, F., 2002. Investigation of the unsteady twophase ow with small bubbles in a model bubble column using phaseDoppler anemometry. Chemical Engineering Science 57, 51435159.
Briens, C.L., Ibrahim, Y.A.A., Margaritis, A., Bergougnou, M.A., 1999.
Effect of coalescence inhibitors on the performance of three-phase inverse
uidized-bed columns. Chemical Engineering Science 54, 49754980.
Briens, L.A., Ellis, N., 2005. Hydrodynamics of three-phase uidized bed
systems examined by statistical, fractal, chaos and wavelet analysis
methods. Chemical Engineering Science 60, 60946106.
Broering, S., Fischer, J., Korte, T., Sollinger, S., Luebbert, A., 1991. Flow
structure of the dispersed gas phase in real multiphase chemical reactors
investigated by a new ultrasound-Doppler technique. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering 69, 12471256.
Bussmann, M., Mostaghimi, J., Chandra, S., 1999. On a three-dimensional
volume tracking model of droplet impact. Physics of Fluids 11,
14061417.
Bussmann, M., Mostaghimi, J., Chandra, S., 2000. Modeling the splash of a
droplet impacting a solid surface. Physics of Fluids 12, 31213132.
Cassanello, M., Larachi, F., Marie, M.N., Guy, C., Chaouki, J., 1995.
Experimental characterization of the solid phase chaotic dynamics in threephase uidization. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 34,
29712980.
Chabot, J., de Lasa, H.I., 1993. Gas holdups and bubble characteristics in a
bubble column operated at high temperature. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research 32, 25952601.
Chabot, J., Lee, S.L.P., Soria, A., De Lasa, H.I., 1992. Interaction between
bubbles and ber optic probes in a bubble column. Canadian Journal of
Chaouki, J., Larachi, F., Dudukovic, M.P., 1997. Noninvasive tomographic and
velocimetric monitoring of multiphase ows. Industrial and Engineering
Chaudhari, R.V., Hoffmann, H., 1994. Coalescence of gas bubbles in liquids.
Reviews in Chemical Engineering 10, 131190.
Che, D.F., Chen, J.J.J., 1990. Bubble formation and liquid weeping at an
orice submerged in a liquid. Chemical Engineering Technology 62,
947949.
Chen, C., Fan, L.S., 2004. Discrete simulation of gasliquid bubble column
and gasliquidsolid uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 50, 288301.
Chen, J., Kemoun, A., Al-Dahhan, M.H., Dudukovic, M.P., Lee, D.J., Fan,
L.S., 1999. Comparative hydrodynamics study in a bubble column using
computer-automated radioactive particle tracking (CARPT)/computed
tomography (CT) and particle image velocimetry (PIV). Chemical
Chen, J.J.J., Jamialahmadi, M., Li, S.M., 1989. Effect of liquid depth on
circulation in bubble columns: a visual study. Chemical Engineering
Research and Design 67, 203207.
Chen, K., Richter, H.J., 1997. Instability analysis of the transition from
bubbling to jetting in a gas injected into a liquid. International Journal of
Multiphase Flow 23, 699712.
Chen, R.C., Fan, L.S., 1992. Particle image velocimetry for characterizing
the ow structures in three-dimensional gasliquidsolid uidized beds.
Chemical Engineering Science 47, 36153622.
Chen, R.C., Reese, J., Fan, L.S., 1994. Flow structure in a three-dimensional
bubble column and three-phase uidized beds. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 40,
10931104.
Chen, Y.M., Fan, L.S., 1989. Bubble breakage mechanisms due to collision
with a particle in a liquid medium. Chemical Engineering Science 44,
117132.
Chen, Z., Zheng, C., Feng, Y., Hoffmann, H., 1998. Local bubble behavior
in three-phase uidized beds. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering
76, 315318.
Chilekar, V., Warnier, M., van der Schaaf, J., Kuster, B., Schouten, J., van
Ommen, J., 2005. Bubble size estimation in slurry bubble columns from
pressure uctuations. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 51, 19241937.
Clift, R., Grace, J.R., Weber, M.E., 1978. Bubbles Drops, and Particles.
Academic Press, New York.
Crowe, C.T., Sharma, M.P., Stock, D.E., 1977. The particle-source-in-cell
method for gas and droplet ow. Journal of Fluids Engineering 99,
325332.
Cui, Z., Fan, L.S., 2004. Turbulence energy distributions in bubbling
gasliquid and gasliquidsolid ow systems. Chemical Engineering
Science 59, 17551766.
Cui, Z., Fan, L.-S., 2005. Energy spectra for interactive turbulence elds
in a bubble column. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 44,
11501159.
Dandy, D.S., Leal, L.G., 1989. Buoyancy-driven motion of a deformable drop
through a quiescent liquid at intermediate Reynolds numbers. Journal of
Fluid Mechanics 208, 161192.
Darton, R.C., Harrison, D., 1974. The rise of single gas bubbles in liquid
uidised beds. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical Engineers 52,
301306.
Darwin, C., 1953. Note on hydrodynamics. Proceedings of the Cambridge
Philosophical Society 49, 342354.
Dayan, A., Zalmanovich, S., 1982. Axial dispersion and entrainment
of particles in wakes of bubbles. Chemical Engineering Science 37,
12531257.
Dechsiri, C., Ghione, A., van de Wiel, F., Dehling, H.G., Paans,
A.M.J., Hoffmann, A.C., 2005. Positron emission tomography applied to
uidization engineering. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 83,
8896.
Delnoij, E., Kuipers, J.A.M., Van Swaaij, W.P.M., 1997. Computational uid
dynamics applied to gasliquid contactors. Chemical Engineering Science
52, 36233638.
Dijkhuizen, W., van den Hengel, E.I.V., Deen, N.G., van Sint Annaland,
M., Kuipers, J.A.M., 2005. Numerical investigation of closures for
interface forces acting on single air-bubbles in water using volume
of uid and front tracking models. Chemical Engineering Science 60,
61696175.
Drahos, J., Zahradnik, J., Puncochar, M., Fialova, M., Bradka, F., 1991. Effect
of operating conditions on the characteristics of pressure uctuations in a
bubble column. Chemical Engineering and Processing 29, 107115.

Drahos, J., Bradka, F., Puncochar, M., 1992. Fractal behavior of pressure
uctuations in a bubble column. Chemical Engineering Science 47,
40694075.
Du, B., Warsito, W., Fan, L.-S., 2005. Transient 3-dimensional behavior
of gassolid uidization measured using electrical capacitance volume
tomography (ECVT). A.I.Ch.E. Annual Meeting, Conference Proceedings,
Cincinnati, OH, USA.
El-Temtamy, S.A., Epstein, N., 1980. Rise velocities of large single twodimensional and three-dimensional gas bubbles in liquids and in liquid
uidized beds. Chemical Engineering Journal 19, 153156.
Fan, L.-S., 1989. GasLiquidSolid Fluidization Engineering. Butterworth,
Stoneham, MA.
Fan, L.-S., Tsuchiya, K., 1990. Bubble Wake Dynamics in Liquids and
LiquidSolid Suspensions. Butterworth-Heinemann, Stoneham, MA.
Fan, L.-S., Tzeng, J.W., Bi, H.T., 1992. Flow structure in a two-dimensional
bubble column and three-phase uidized bed. Fluidization VII. Engineering
Foundation, New York. pp. 399406.
Fan, L.-S., Yang, G.Q., Lee, D.J., Tsuchiya, K., Luo, X., 1999. Some
aspects of high-pressure phenomena of bubbles in liquids and liquidsolid
suspensions. Chemical Engineering Science 54, 46814709.
Feng, J., Hu, H.H., Joseph, D.D., 1994. Direct simulation of initial value
problems for the motion of solid bodies in a Newtonian uid. Part 1:
Sedimentation. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 261, 95134.
Fournier, T., Jeandey, C., 1993. Optimization of an experimental setup for
void fraction determination by the X-ray attenuation technique. Measuring
Techniques in GasLiquid Two-Phase Flows. Springer, New York. pp.
199228.
Fox, J.M., 1990. FischerTropsch reactor selection. Catalysis Letters 7,
281292.
Frijlink, J., 1987. Physical aspects of gassed suspension reactors. Ph.D. Thesis,
Delft University of Technology.
Fukai, J., Shiiba, Y., Yamamoto, T., Miyatake, O., 1995. Wetting effects on
the spreading of a liquid droplet colliding with a at surface: experiment
and modeling. Physics of Fluids 7, 236247.
Ge, Y., Fan, L.S., 2006. 3-D direct numerical simulation of gasliquid and
gasliquidsolid ow systems using the level-set and immersed boundary
methods. Advances in Chemical Engineering, in press.
George, D.L., Shollenberger, K.A., Torczynski, J.R., OHern, T.J., Ceccio,
S.L., 2001. Three-phase material distribution measurements in a vertical
ow using gamma-densitometry tomography and electrical-impedance
tomography. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 27, 19031930.
Gladden, L.F., 1994. Nuclear magnetic resonance in chemical engineering:
principles and applications. Chemical Engineering Science 49, 33393408.
Gladden, L.F., 2003. Recent advances in MRI studies of chemical reactors:
ultrafast imaging of multiphase ows. Topics in Catalysis 24, 1928.
Gladden, L.F., Anadon, L.D., Lim, M.H.M., Sederman, A.J., Stitt, E.H., 2005.
Insights into the mechanism of the trickle-to-pulse transition in trickle-bed
reactors. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 44, 63206331.
Gnyloskurenko, S., Byakova, A., Raychenko, O., Nakamura, T., 2003.
Inuence of wetting conditions on bubble formation at orice in an inviscid
liquid. Transformation of bubble shape and size. Colloids and Surface, A:
Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 218, 7387.
Gnyloskurenko, S., Byakova, A., Nakamura, T., Raychenko, O., 2005.
Inuence of wettability on bubble formation in liquid. Journal of Material
Science 40, 24372441.
Grace, J.R., 1973. Shapes and velocities of bubbles rising in innite liquids.
Transactions of the Institute of Chemical Engineers 51, 116120.
Grace, J.R., Wairegi, T., Brophy, J., 1978. Break-up of drops and bubbles in
stagnant media. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 56, 38.
Harlow, F.H., Welch, J.E., 1965. Numerical calculation of time-dependent
viscous incompressible ow of uid with free surface. Physics of Fluids
8, 21822189.
Harvie, D.J.E., Fletcher, D.F., 2001a. A hydrodynamic and thermodynamic
simulation of droplet impacts on hot surface. Part I: Theoretical model.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 44, 26332642.
Harvie, D.J.E., Fletcher, D.F., 2001b. A hydrodynamic and thermodynamic
simulation of droplet impacts on hot surface. Part II: Validation and
applications. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 44,
26432659.
23
Henriksen, H.K., Ostergaard, K., 1974. Characteristics of large twodimensional air bubbles in liquids and in three-phase uidized beds.
Chemical Engineering Journal 7, 141146.
Hills, J.H., Darton, R.C., 1976. The rising velocity of a large bubble in a
bubble swarm. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers 54,
258264.
Hinze, J.O., 1955. Fundamentals of the hydrodynamic mechanism of splitting
in dispersion processes. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 1, 289295.
Hirt, C.W., Nichols, B.D., 1981. Volume of uid (VOF) method for the
dynamics of free boundaries. Journal of Computational Physics 39,
201225.
Hirt, C.W., Amsden, A.A., Cook, J.L., 1974. An arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian
computing method for all speeds. Journal of Computational Physics 14,
227253.
Hoffmann, A.C., Dechsiri, C., Van de Wiel, F., Dehling, H.G., 2005. PET
investigation of a uidized particle: spatial and temporal resolution and
short term motion. Measurement Science and Technology 16, 851858.
Hong, T., Fan, L.-S., 1994. Bubble breakup due to bubbleparticle collisions,
unpublished work.
Hong, T., Fan, L.-S., Lee, D.J., 1999. Force variations on particle induced
by bubble-particle collision. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 25
(3), 477500.
Hoomans, B.P.B., Kuipers, J.A.M., Briels, W.J., van Swaaij, W.P.M., 1996.
Discrete particle simulation of a two-dimensional gas-uidized bed: a hard
sphere approach. Chemical Engineering Science 51, 99118.
Hubers, J.L., Striegel, A.C., Heindel, T.J., Gray, J.N., Jensen, T.C., 2005.
X-ray computed tomography in large bubble columns. Chemical
Idogawa, K., Ikeda, K., Fukuda, T., Morooka, S., 1986. Behavior of bubbles
of the airwater system in a column under high pressure. International
Idogawa, K., Ikeda, K., Fukuda, T., Morooka, S., 1987. Formation and ow of
gas bubbles in a pressurized bubble column with a single orice or nozzle
gas distributor. Chemical Engineering Communications 59, 201210.
Jackson, R., 2000. The Dynamics of Fluidized Particles. Cambridge University
Press, New York.
Jager, B., Espinoza, R., 1995. Advances in low temperature FischerTropsch
synthesis. Catalysis Today 23, 1728.
Jamet, D., Lebaigue, O., Coutris, N., Delhaye, J.M., 2001. The second gradient
method for the direct numerical simulations of liquidvapor ows with
phase-change. Journal of Computational Physics 169, 624651.
Jiang, P., Arters, D., Fan, L.-S., 1992. Pressure effects on the hydrodynamic
behavior of gasliquidsolid uidized beds. Industrial and Engineering
Jiang, P., Lin, T.J., Luo, X., Fan, L.S., 1995. Visualization of high pressure
(21 MPa) bubble column: bubble characteristics. Chemical Engineering
Research and Design 73, 269274.
Jiang, P., Luo, X., Lin, T.J., Fan, L.-S., 1997. High temperature and
high pressure three-phase uidizationbed expansion phenomena. Powder
Technology 90, 103113.
Jin, H., Yang, S., Guo, Z., He, G., Tong, Z., 2005. The axial distribution of
holdups in an industrial-scale bubble column with evaluated pressure using
-ray attenuation approach. Chemical Engineering Journal 115, 4550.
Johnsson, F., Zijerveld, R.C., Schouten, J.C., Van den Bleek, C.M., Leckner,
B., 2000. Characterization of uidization regimes by time-series analysis
of pressure uctuations. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 26,
663715.
Joseph, D.D., Lundgren, T.S., 1990. Ensemble averaged and mixture theory
equations for incompressible uid-particle suspensions. International
Journal of Multiphase Flow 16, 3542.
Julia, J.E., Harteveld, W.K., Mudde, R.F., Van den Akker, H.E.A., 2005. On
the accuracy of the void fraction measurements using optical probes in
bubbly ows. Review of Scientic Instruments 76, 035103/1035103/13.
Kanai, A., Miyata, H., 1995. Numerical simulation of bubbles in a
boundary layer by Maker-Density-Function. In: Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Multiphase Flow, Lion, France.
Karl, A., Anders, K., Rieber, M., Frohn, A., 1996. Deformation of liquid
droplets during collisions with hot walls: experimental and numerical
results. Particle & Particle Systems Characterization 13, 186191.
24
Kiambi, S.L., Duquenne, A.M., Dupont, J.B., Colin, C., Risso, F., Delmas, H.,
2003. Measurements of bubble characteristics: comparison between double
optical probe and imaging. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 81,
764776.
Kiared, K., Larachi, F., Chaouki, J., Guy, C., 1999. Mean and turbulent
particle velocity in the fully developed region of a three-phase uidized
bed. Chemical Engineering Technology 22, 683689.
Kim, J.O., Kim, S.D., 1990. Bubble breakage phenomena, phase holdups and
mass transfer in three-phase uidized beds with oating bubble breakers.
Chemical Engineering and Processing 28, 101111.
Kim, M.C., Kim, K.Y., Kim, S., 2005. Improvement of impedance imaging
for two-phase systems with boundary estimation approach in electrical
impedance tomography. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 83,
5563.
Kitscha, J., Kocamustafaogullari, G., 1989. Breakup criteria for uid particles.
International Journal of Multiphase Flow 15, 573588.
Klug, P., Vogelpohl, A., 1983. Bubble formation with superimposed liquid
motion at single-hole plates and sieve plates. Ger. Chem. Engineering 6,
311317.
Kluytmans, J.H., van Wachem, B.G.M., Kuster, B.F.M., Krishna, R., Schouten,
J.C., 2003. 2D slurry bubble column hydrodynamic phenomena claried
with a 3D gasliquid model. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering
81, 456464.
Kluytmans, J.H.J., van Wachem, B.G.M., Kuster, B.F.M., Schouten, J.C.,
2001. Gas holdup in a slurry bubble column: inuence of electrolyte
and carbon particles. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 40,
53265333.
Kothe, D.B., Rider, W.J., 1995. Comments on modeling interfacial ows
with volume-of uid methods. Los Alamos National Laboratory Research
Report, LA-UR-94-3384.
Krishna, R., van Baten, J.M., 2001. Scaling up bubble column reactors with
the aid of CFD. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 79 (A3),
283309.
Krishna, R., van Baten, J.M., 2003. A strategy for scaling up the
FischerTropsch bubble column slurry reactor. Topics in Catalysis 26,
2128.
Krishna, R., de Swart, J.W.A., Hennephof, D.E., Ellenberger, J., Hoefsloot,
C.J., 1994. Inuence of increased gas density on hydrodynamics of bubble
column reactors. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 40, 112119.
Krishna, R., van Baten, J.M., Urseanu, M.I., Ellenberger, J., 2001. A
scale up strategy for bubble column slurry reactors. Catalysis Today 66,
199207.
Kulkarni, A., Joshi, J., Ramkrishna, D., 2004. Determination of bubble
size distribution in bubble columns using LDA. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 50,
30683084.
Kulkarni, A.A., Joshi, J.B., 2005. Bubble formation and bubble rise velocity
in gasliquid systems: a review. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research 44, 58735931.
Kumar, R., Kuloor, N.R., 1970. The formation of bubbles and drops. Advances
in Chemical Engineering 8, 255368.
Kumar, S., Kusakabe, K., Raghunathan, K., Fan, L.S., 1992. Mechanism
of heat transfer in bubbly liquid and liquidsolid systems: single bubble
injection. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 38, 733741.
Kumar, S.B., Moslemian, D., Dudukovic, M.P., 1995. A -ray tomographic
scanner for imaging voidage distribution in two-phase ow systems. Flow
Measurement and Instrumentation 6, 6173.
Kumar, S.B., Dudukovic, M.P., Toseland, B.A., 1997. Measurement techniques
for local and global uid dynamic quantities in two and three phase
systems. Non-Invasive Monitoring of Multiphase Flows 145.
Kupferberg, A., Jameson, G.J., 1969. Bubble formation at a submerged orice
above a gas chamber of nite volume. Transactions of the Institute of
Chemical Engineers 47, T241T250.
LHomme, G.A., 1979. Chemical Engineering of GasLiquidSolid Catalyst
Reactions. CEBEDOC, Liege.
La Nauze, R.D., Harris, I.J., 1974. Gas bubble formation at elevated
system pressures. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical Engineers 52,
337348.
Lapin, A., Lbbert, A., 1994. Numerical simulation of the dynamics of twophase gasliquid ows in bubble columns. Chemical Engineering Science
49, 36613674.
Larachi, F., Cassanello, M., Chaouki, J., Guy, C., 1996. Flow structure of
the solids in a 3-D gasliquidsolid uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 42,
24392452.
Larachi, F., Chaouki, J., Kennedy, G., Dudukovic, M.P., 1997. Radioactive
particle tracking in multiphase reactors: principles and applications. In:
Non-Invasive Monitoring of Multiphase Flows.Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp.
335406.
Lau, R., Cui, Z., Fan, L.-S., 2005. Liquid entrainment in high-pressure bubble
columns. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 44, 37763782.
Lazarek, G.M., Littman, H., 1974. Pressure eld due to a large circular capped
air bubble rising in water. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 66, 673687.
Leblond, J., Javelot, S., Lebrun, D., Lebon, L., 1998. Two-phase ow
characterization by nuclear magnetic resonance. Nuclear Engineering and
Design 184, 229237.
Lee, D.J., Luo, X., Fan, L.-S., 1999. Gas disengagement technique in a
slurry bubble column operated in the coalesced bubble regime. Chemical
Lee, S.L.P., De Lasa, H.I., 1987. Phase holdups in three-phase uidized beds.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal 33, 13591370.
Lee, S.L.P., De Lasa, H.I., Bergougnou, M.A., 1986. A U-shaped ber
optic probe to study three-phase uidized beds. Particulate Science and
Technology 4, 6171.
Le Gall, F., Pascal-Ribot, S., Leblond, J., 2001. Nuclear magnetic resonance
measurements of uctuations in airwater two-phase ow: pipe ow with
and without disturbing section. Physics of Fluids 13, 11181129.
Leibson, I., Holcomb, E.G., Cacoso, A.G., Jacmic, J.J., 1956. Rate of ow and
mechanics of bubble formation from single submerged orices. A.I.Ch.E.
Journal 2, 296306.
Levich, V.G., 1962. Physiochemical Hydrodynamics. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Li, Y., Zhang, J., Fan, L.-S., 1999. Numerical simulation of gasliquidsolid
uidization systems using a combined CFDVOFDPM method: bubble
wake behavior. Chemical Engineering Science 54, 51015107.
Li, Y., Yang, G.Q., Zhang, J.P., Fan, L.-S., 2001. Numerical studies of bubble
formation dynamics in gasliquidsolid uidization at high pressures.
Powder Technology 116, 246260.
Lim, M.H.M., Sederman, A.J., Gladden, L.F., Stitt, E.H., 2004. New insights
to trickle and pulse ow hydrodynamics in trickle-bed reactors using MRI.
Lin, J.N., Banerji, S.K., Yasuda, H., 1994. Role of interfacial tension in the
formation and the detachment of air bubbles: a single hole on a horizontal
plane immersed in water. Langmuir 10, 936942.
Lin, T.J., Fan, L.-S., 1997. Characteristics of high-pressure liquidsolid
uidization. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 43, 4557.
Lin, T.J., Tsuchiya, K., Fan, L.-S., 1998. Bubble ow characteristics in
bubble columns at elevated pressure and temperature. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 44,
545560.
Liu, T.J., 1993. Bubble size and entrance length effects on void development
in a vertical channel. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 19, 99113.
Luo, X., Zhang, J., Tsuchiya, K., Fan, L.-S., 1997. On the rise velocity of
bubbles in liquidsolid suspensions at elevated pressure and temperature.
Luo, X., Yang, G.Q., Lee, D.J., Fan, L.-S., 1998a. Single bubble formation in
high pressure liquidsolid suspensions. Powder Technology 100, 103112.
Luo, X., Tsuchiya, K., Fan, L.-S., 1998b. Gas jetting and bubble formation
in high pressure liquidsolid suspensions. In: Fan, L.S., Knowlton, T.M.
(Eds.), Fluidization IX. Engineering Foundation, New York, pp. 637644.
Luo, X., Lee, D.J., Lau, R., Yang, G.Q., Fan, L.S., 1999. Maximum stable
bubble size and gas holdup in high-pressure slurry bubble columns.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal 45, 665680.
Maneri, C.C., 1995. New look at wave analogy for prediction of bubble
terminal velocities. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 41, 481487.
Massimilla, L., Solimando, A., Squillace, E., 1961. Gas dispersion in
solidliquid uidized beds. British Chemical Engineering 6, 232239.
Matonis, D., Gidaspow, D., Bahary, M., 2002. CFD simulation of ow and
turbulence in a slurry bubble column. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 48, 14131429.

Matsuura, A., Fan, L.-S., 1984. Distribution of bubble properties in a
gasliquidsolid uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 30, 894903.
McCann, D.J., Prince, R.G.H., 1969. Bubble formation and weeping at a
submerged orice. Chemical Engineering Science 24, 801814.
McNallan, M.J., King, T.B., 1982. Fluid dynamics of vertical submerged
gas jets in liquid metal processing systems. Metallurgical Transactions B:
Process Metallurgy 13B, 165173.
Mehdi-Nejad, V., Mostaghimi, J., Chandra, S., 2003. Air bubble entrapment
under an impacting droplet. Physics of Fluids 15, 173183.
Mendelson, H.D., 1967. The prediction of bubble terminal velocities from
wave theory. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 13, 250253.
Mersmann, A., 1980. Flooding point of liquid/liquid countercurrent columns.
Chemical Engineering Technology 52, 933942.
Mills, P.L., Turner, J.R., Ramachandran, P.A., Dudukovic, M.P., 1996. The
FischerTropsch synthesis in slurry bubble column reactors: analysis of
reactor performance using the axial dispersion model. Topics in Chemical
Engineering 8, 339386 679739.
Mittal, R., Iaccarino, G., 2005. Immersed boundary methods. Annual Review
of Fluid Mechanics 37, 239261.
Miyahara, T., Takahashi, T., 1984. Bubble volume in single bubbling regime
with weeping at a submerged orice. Journal of Chemical Engineering of
Japan 17, 597602.
Miyahara, T., Haga, N., Takahashi, T., 1983. Bubble formation from an orice
at high gas ow rates. International Chemical Engineering 23, 524531.
Miyahara, T., Iwata, M., Takahashi, T., 1984. Bubble formation pattern with
weeping at a submerged orice. Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan
17, 592597.
Miyahara, T., Tsuchiya, K., Fan, L.-S., 1989. Mechanism of particle
entrainment in a gasliquidsolid uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 35,
11951198.
Monaghan, J., 1994. Simulating free surface ows with SPH. Journal of
Computational Physics 110, 399406.
Mudde, R.F., Simonin, O., 1999. Two- and three-dimensional simulations of
bubble plume using a two-uid model. Chemical Engineering Science 54,
50615069.
Nacef, S., Poncin, S., Wild, G., 1995. Onset of uidization and ow regimes in
gasliquidsolid uidizationinuence of the coalescence behavior of the
liquid. In: Large, J.F., Laguerie, C. (Eds.), Fluidization VIII. Engineering
Foundation, New York, pp. 631638.
Nedeltchev, S., Kumar, S.B., Dudukovic, M.P., 2003. Flow regime
identication in a bubble column based on both Kolmogorov entropy and
quality of mixedness derived from CARPT data. Canadian Journal of
Oestergaard, K., 1973. Flow phenomena of three-phase (gasliquidsolid)
uidized beds. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series 69, 2829.
Osher, S., Sethian, J.A., 1988. Fronts propagation with curvature-dependent
speed: algorithms based on HamiltonJacobi formulation. Journal of
Ozawa, Y., Mori, K., 1983. Characteristics of jetting observed in gas injection
into liquid. Transactions ISIJ 23, 764768.
Ozawa, Y., Mori, K., 1986. Effect of physical properties of gas and liquid
on bubblingjetting phenomena in gas injection into liquid. Transactions
ISIJ 26, 291297.
Page, R.E., Harrison, D., 1974. Particle entrainment from a three-phase
uidized bed. In: Angelino, H., Couderc, J.P., Gibert, H., Laguerie, C.
(Eds.), Fluidization and its Applications. Cepadues-Editions, Toulouse, pp.
393401.
Peng, W.L., Yang, G.Q., Fan, L.-S., 2002. Experimental studies of liquid
weeping and bubbling phenomena at submerged orices. Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research 41, 16661677.
Peng, X.D., Toseland, B.A., Tijm, P.J.A., 1999. Kinetic understanding of
chemical synergy under LPDME conditions-once-through applications.
Peskin, C.S., 1977. Numerical analysis of blood ow in the heart. Journal of
Peters, M.H., Fan, L.-S., Sweeney, T.L., 1983. Study of particle ejections
in the freeboard region of a uidized bed with an image carrying probe.
25
Rabiger, N., Vogelpohl, A., 1982. Bubble formation in stagnant and owing
Newtonian liquids. German Chemical Engineering 5, 314323.
Raghunathan, K., Kumar, S., Fan, L.S., 1992. Pressure distribution and vortical
structure in the wake behind gas bubble in liquid and liquidsolid systems.
Ramachandran, P.A., Chaudhari, R.V., 1983. Three-Phase Catalytic Reactors.
Gordon and Breach Science, New York.
Ramakrishnan, S., Kumar, R., Kuloor, N.R., 1969. Studies in bubble
formationI: bubble formation under constant ow conditions. Chemical
Reese, J., Chen, R.C., Fan, L.S., 1995. Three-dimensional particle image
velocimetry for use in three-phase uidization systems. Experiments in
Fluids 19, 367378.
Reese, J., Jiang, P., Fan, L.S., 1996. Bubble characteristics in three-phase
systems used for pulp and paper processing. Chemical Engineering Science
51, 25012510.
Rowe, P.N., Masson, H., 1981. Interaction of bubbles with probes in gas
uidized beds. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical Engineers 59,
177185.
Ruzicka, M.C., Drahos, J., Zahradnik, J., Thomas, N.H., 1997. Intermittent
transition from bubbling to jetting regime in gasliquid two phase ows.
Safoniuk, M., Grace, J.R., Hackman, L., McKnight, C.A., 1999. Use of
dimensional similitude for scale-up of hydrodynamics in three-phase
uidized beds. Chemical Engineering Science 54, 49614966.
Sagert, N.H., Quinn, M.J., 1977. Inuence of high-pressure gases on the
stability of thin aqueous lms. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
61, 279286.
Sagert, N.H., Quinn, M.J., 1978. Surface viscosities at high pressure gasliquid
interfaces. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 65, 415422.
Sato, T., Richardson, S.M., 1994. Numerical simulation method for
viscoelastic ows with free surfacefringe element generation method.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 19, 555574.
Saxena, S.C., 1995. Bubble column reactors and FischerTropsch synthesis.
Catalysis Reviews: Science and Engineering 37, 227309.
Scardovelli, R., Zeleski, S., 1999. Direct numerical simulation of freesurface and interfacial ow. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 31,
567603.
Sederman, A.J., Gladden, L.F., 2005. Transition to pulsing ow in trickle-bed
reactors studied using MRI. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 51, 615621.
Seeger, A., Kertzscher, U., Affeld, K., Wellnhofer, E., 2003. Measurement
of the local velocity of the solid phase and the local solid hold-up in a
three-phase ow by X-ray based particle tracking velocimetry (XPTV).
Sethian, J.A., Smereka, P., 2003. Level set methods for uid interfaces.
Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 35, 341372.
Seville, J.P.K., Morgan, J.E.P., Clift, R., 1986. Tomographic determination of
the voidage structure of gas uidized beds in the jet region. Fluidization
V. Engineering Foundation, New York, p. 87.
Shah, Y.T., 1979. GasLiquidSolid Reactor Design. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Shoukri, M., Hassan, I., Gerges, I., 2003. Two-phase bubbly ow structure in
large-diameter vertical pipes. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering
81, 205211.
Sokolichin, A., Eigenberger, G., 1994. Gasliquid ow in bubble columns
and loop reactors: part 1. Detailed modeling and numerical simulation.
Sokolichin, A., Eigenberger, G., 1999. Applicability of the standard k
turbulence model to the dynamic simulation of bubble column: part
1. Detailed numerical simulation. Chemical Engineering Science 54,
22732284.
Song, G.H., 1989. Hydrodynamics and interfacial gasliquid mass transfer
of gasliquidsolid uidized beds. Ph.D. Dissertation, The Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH.
Sookai, S., Langenhoven, P.L., Shingles, T., 2001. Scale-up and commercial
reactor uidization related experience with Synthol, gas to liquid fuel,
dense phase uidized bed reactors. In: Kwauk, M., Li, J., Yang, W.-C.
(Eds.), Fluidization X. pp. 621628.
26
Soong, Y., Harke, F.W., Gamwo, I.K., Schehl, R.R., Zarochak, M.F., 1997.
Hydrodynamic study in a slurry-bubble-column reactor. Catalysis Today
35, 427434.
Stein, M., Ding, Y.L., Seville, J.P.K., Parker, D.J., 2000. Solids motion
in bubbling gas uidized beds. Chemical Engineering Science 55,
52915300.
Stewart, P.S.B., Davidson, J.F., 1964. Three-phase uidization: water, particles,
and air. Chemical Engineering Science 19, 319321.
Stolojanu, V., Prakash, A., 1997. Hydrodynamic measurements in a slurry
bubble column using ultrasonic techniques. Chemical Engineering Science
52, 42254230.
Sundar, R., Tan, R.B.H., 1999. A model for bubble-to-jet transition at a
submerged orice. Chemical Engineering Science 54, 40534060.
Sussman, M., Smereka, P., Osher, S., 1994. A level set approach for computing
solutions to incompressible two-phase ow. Journal of Computational
Physics 114, 146159.
Tang, W.T., Fan, L.S., 1989. Hydrodynamics of a three-phase uidized bed
containing low-density particles. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 35, 355364.
Tomiyama, A., Kataoka, I., Sakaguchi, T., 1995. Drag coefcients of bubbles.
1. Drag coefcients of a single bubble in a stagnant liquid. Nippon Kikai
Gakkai Ronbunshu B-hen 61, 23572364.
Tryggvason, T., Bunner, B., Esmaeeli, A., Juric, D., Al-Rawahi, N., Tauber,
W., Han, J., Nas, S., Jan, Y.J., 2001. A front-tracking method for the
computations of multiphase ow. Journal of Computational Physics 169,
708759.
Tsuchiya, K., Fan, L.S., 1988. Near-wake structure of a single gas bubble in
a two-dimensional liquidsolid uidized bed: vortex shedding and wake
size variation. Chemical Engineering Science 43, 11671181.
Tsuchiya, K., Song, G.H., Fan, L.S., 1990. Effects of particle properties on
bubble rise and wake in a two-dimensional liquidsolid uidized bed.
Tsuchiya, K., Song, G.H., Tang, W.T., Fan, L.S., 1992. Particle drift induced
by a bubble in a liquidsolid uidized bed with low-density particles.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal 38, 18471851.
Tsuchiya, K., Furumoto, A., Fan, L.S., Zhang, J., 1997. Suspension viscosity
and bubble velocity in liquidsolid uidized beds. Chemical Engineering
Science 52, 30533066.
Tsuge, H., Hibino, S., 1983. Bubble formation from an orice submerged in
liquids. Chemical Engineering Communications 22, 6379.
Tsuge, H., Nakajima, Y., Terasaka, K., 1992. Behavior of bubbles formed from
a submerged orice under high system pressure. Chemical Engineering
Science 47, 32733280.
Tsuji, Y., Kawaguchi, T., Tanaka, T., 1993. Discrete particle simulation of
two-dimensional uidized bed. Powder Technology 77, 7981.
Tsutsumi, A., Nieh, J.Y., Fan, L.S., 1991a. Particle wettability effects
on bubble wake dynamics in gasliquidsolid uidization. Chemical
Tsutsumi, A., Dastidar, A.G., Fan, L.S., 1991b. Characteristics of
gasliquidsolid uidization with nonwettable particles. A.I.Ch.E. Journal
37, 951952.
Tzeng, J.W., Chen, R.C., Fan, L.S., 1993. Visualization of ow characteristics
in a 2-D bubble column and three-phase uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal
39, 733744.
Unverdi, S.O., Tryggvason, G., 1992. A front-tracking method for viscous,
incompressible, multi-uid ows. Journal of Computational Physics 100,
2537.
Utomo, M.B., Warsito, W., Sakai, T., Uchida, S., 2001. Analysis of
distributions of gas and TiO2 particles in slurry bubble column using
ultrasonic computed tomography. Chemical Engineering Science 56,
60736079.
Vakhrushev, I.A., Efremov, G.I., 1970. Chemistry and Technology of Fuels
and Oils 5/6, 376380.
van Baten, J.M., Krishna, R., 2004. Scale effects on the hydrodynamics of
bubble columns operating in the heterogeneous ow regime. Chemical
Engineering Research and Design 82 (A8), 10431053.
van Sint Annaland, M., Deen, N.G., Kuipers, J.A.M., 2005. Numerical
simulation of gas bubbles behavior using a three-dimensional volume of
uid method. Chemical Engineering Science 60, 29993011.
Vandu, C.O., Koop, K., Krishna, R., 2005. Large bubble sizes and rise
velocities in a bubble column slurry reactor. Chemical Engineering and
Veera, U.P., Joshi, J.B., 2000. Measurement of gas hold-up proles in bubble
column by gamma ray tomography. Chemical Engineering Research and
Design 78, 425434.
Vial, C., Laine, R., Poncin, S., Midoux, N., Wild, G., 2001. Inuence of gas
distribution and regime transitions on liquid velocity and turbulence in a
3-D bubble column. Chemical Engineering Science 56, 10851093.
Vrij, A., 1966. Possible mechanism for the spontaneous rupture of thin, free
liquid lms. Discussions of the Faraday Society 42, 2333.
Walter, J.F., Blanch, H.W., 1986. Bubble break-up in gasliquid bioreactors:
break-up in turbulent ows. Chemical Engineering Journal 32, B7B17.
Wang, G., Ching, C.Y., 2001. Measurement of multiple gas-bubble velocities
in gasliquid ows using hot-lm anemometry. Experiments in Fluids 31,
428439.
Warsito, W., Fan, L.S., 2001. Measurement of real-time ow structures in
gasliquid and gasliquidsolid ow systems using electrical capacitance
tomography (ECT). Chemical Engineering Science 56, 64556462.
Warsito, W., Fan, L.S., 2003. ECT imaging of three-phase uidized bed
based on three-phase capacitance model. Chemical Engineering Science 58,
823832.
Warsito, W., Fan, L.S., 2005. Dynamics of spiral bubble plume motion in the
entrance region of bubble columns and three-phase uidized beds using
3D ECT. Chemical Engineering Science 60, 60736084.
Warsito, W., Ohkawa, M., Kawata, N., Uchida, S., 1999. Cross-sectional
distributions of gas and solid holdups in slurry bubble column investigated
by ultrasonic computed tomography. Chemical Engineering Science 54,
47114728.
West, R.M., Tapp, H.S., Spink, D.M., Bennett, M.A., Williams, Richard,
A., 2001. Application-specic optimization of regularization for electrical
impedance tomography. Measurement Science and Technology 12,
10501054.
Wilkinson, P.M., van Dierendonck, L.L., 1990. Pressure and gas density
effects on bubble break-up and gas hold-up in bubble columns. Chemical
Wilkinson, P.M., van Dierendonck, L.L., 1994. A theoretical model for the
inuence of gas properties and pressure on single-bubble formation at an
orice. Chemical Engineering Science 49, 14291438.
Wolf, J., 1988. Investigation of bubbly ow by ultrasonic tomography. Particle
& Particle Systems Characterization 5, 170173.
Xiao, Z., Tan, R.B.H., 2006. A model for bubblebubble and bubblewall
interaction in bubble formation. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 52, 8698.
Xu, L., Han, Y., Xu, L.A., Yang, J., 1997. Application of ultrasonic tomography
to monitoring gas/liquid ow. Chemical Engineering Science 52, 2171
2183.
Xue, J., Al-Dahhan, M., Dudukovic, M.P., Mudde, R.F., 2003. Bubble
dynamics measurements using four-point optical probe. Canadian Journal
of Chemical Engineering 81, 375381.
Yabe, T., 1997. Interface capturing and universal solution of solid, liquid and
gas by CIP method. In: Proceedings of the High-Performance Computing
of Multi-Phase Flow, Tokyo, July 1819.
Yang, G.Q., Luo, X., Lau, R., Fan, L.S., 2000. Bubble formation in
high-pressure liquidsolid suspensions with plenum pressure uctuation.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal 46, 21622174.
Yoo, D.H., Tsuge, H., Terasaka, K., Mizutani, K., 1997. Behavior of bubble
formation in suspended solution for an elevated pressure system. Chemical
Yu, Y.H., Kim, S.D., 1988. Bubble characteristics in the radial direction of
three-phase uidized beds. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 34, 20692072.
Zaruba, A., Krepper, E., Prasser, H.M., Vanga, B.N.R., 2005. Experimental
study on bubble motion in a rectangular bubble column using high-speed
video observations. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 16, 277287.
Zenit, R., Koch, D.L., Sangani, A.S., 2001. Measurements of the average
properties of a suspension of bubbles rising in a vertical channel. Journal
of Fluid Mechanics 429, 307342.
Zenit, R., Koch, D.L., Sangani, A.S., 2003. Impedance probe to measure
local gas volume fraction and bubble velocity in a bubbly liquid. Review
of Scientic Instruments 74, 28172827.

Zhang, D.Z., Prosperetti, A., 1994. Averaged equations for inviscid disperse
two phase ow. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 267, 185219.
Zhang, D.Z., Prosperetti, A., 2003. A method for particle simulation. Journal
of Applied Mechanics 70, 6474.
Zhang, J., Fan, L.S., Zhu, C., Pfeffer, R., Qi, D., 1999. Dynamic behavior
of collision of elastic spheres in viscous uids. Powder Technology 106,
98109.
Zhang, J., Li, Y., Fan, L.S., 2000. Numerical studies of bubble and particle
dynamics in a three-phase uidized bed at elevated pressures. Powder
27
Zhang, K., Zhao, Y., 2006. A scale-up strategy for low-temperature methanol
synthesis in a circulating slurry bubble reactor. Chemical Engineering
Science 61, 14591469.
Zhang, Y., Xiao, Z., Tan, R.B.H., 2005. Interfacial element modeling of
bubble formation with liquid viscosity. Journal of Chemical Engineering
of Japan 38, 478485.

Bubble Formation and Dynamics in Gas

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Bubble Formation and Dynamics in Gas

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

Bubble formation and dynamics in gasliquidsolid uidizationA review

E-mail address: fan@chbmeng.ohio-state.edu (L.S. Fan).

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

This review describes the ow behavior of liquid, bubbles,

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

using the ultrasonic technique. Al-Masry et al. (2005) studied

Direct visualization is also useful for property measurement

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

recent development of the 3D ECT or electrical capacitance

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

Kuloor, 1970; Azbel, 1981; Lin et al., 1994; Ruzicka et al.,

buoyant in the liquid. The results indicated that initial bubble

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

this model can be written as

sumed to be formed in two stages, namely, the expansion stage

FB + FM = FD + F + FBA + FI,g + FC + FI,m .

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

Same as expansion stage

Same as expansion stage

Same as expansion stage

Same as expansion stage

Do2 (1 + e)s s u2e

Same as expansion stage

1982). This resemblance is based on the premise that the

For bubbles in low Mo liquids (Mo < 103 ), Vakhrushev

{0.81 + 0.206 tanh[2(0.8 1 Ta 39.8,

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

The bubble characteristics in 2D systems were studied

Three empirical parameters, i.e., n, c, and Kb in Eq. (4), account

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

The effective viscosity of liquidsolid suspensions is estimated

sc = {1.3 0.1 tanh[0.5(10 102 ut )]}s0 ,

Fig. 4. Effect of pressure on bubble rise velocity in a uidized bed of 0.88-mm

from 0.1 to 17.3 MPa. A more drastic reduction in ub , however,

where ut is in units of m/s.

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

3.4.1. Wake pressure

effect, however, is conned to the vicinity of the bed surface.

3.5. Particle entrainment and drift effect

For gasliquid systems, the experimental results available

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

pressure, due to the longer bubble coalescence time and the

By extending Boys instability analysis (Boys, 1959), a criterion

Hong and Fan (1994) conducted experiments to elucidate

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

Grace et al. (1978) modied the RayleighTaylor instability

The criterion leads to a maximum stable bubble size expressed

Eq. (12) severely under-predicts the maximum bubble size in

in liquidsolid suspensions. Further, based on the Davies

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

When the distributions of bubble size and bubble rise velocity

et al., 1995; Soong et al., 1997; Lin et al., 1998) as well as

5. Other bubble behavior

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

of approximately 40 g/cm2 s. Leibson et al. (1956) studied the

5.2. Liquid weeping

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

diameter is larger than 2 mm. Sometimes, simultaneous liquid

5.3. Scaling rule

6. Computational uid dynamics

G.Q. Yang et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 2 27

interpenetrating continuous media, occupying the same space

The xed-grid method, which is also known as the

FB + FM = FD + F + FBA + FI,g + FC + FI,m .

Do2 (1 + e)s s u2e

sc = {1.3 0.1 tanh[0.5(10 102 ut )]}s0 ,