Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M.

Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

Measurements and CFX-simulations of a

bubbly flow in a vertical pipe

E. Krepper & H-M. Prasser

Forschungszentrum Rossendorfe. V., Institute of Safety Research,
Germany

Abstract

In the Forschungszentrum Rossendorf a measurement techniques test loop was

constructed. Air was injected into an upward vertical water flow at normal con-
ditions applying different injection modes. The annular test section had a diameter
of about 50 mm and a length of about 4 m. The air water flow was investigated us-
ing different two phase flow measuring techniques. Different tests with different
relations of air and water superficial velocity were performed. For each test sta-
tionary conditions were settled.
Applying a wire mesh sensor, developed in FZR, the cross section of the void
fraction could be determined. The time resolution achieved by the signal process-
ing unit is 1024 frames per second. The spatial resolution equals 3 mm. At the in-
vestigated flow velocities, the bubble diameter distributions could be determined.
Using the code CFX-4.2, void profiles over the tube cross section were calcu-
lated. The development of the void profiles is mainly influenced by bubble forces,
which act perpendicular to the flow direction. Therefore the comparison of the cal-
culated with the measured results for bubble flow regimes is a good validity test
for the implemented two phase flow models.
The two phase models of the code version CFX-4.2 are able to describe void
profiles with a near wall void maximum, which will be found for bubblyflowhav-
ing a monodisperse bubble size distribution. Model extensions would be necessary
to model flow regimes showing a bubble size distribution and the occurrence of
bubble coalescence and fraction. The consideration of larger bubbles, which may
be deformed, requires the development of improved bubble force models.
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

24 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III

1. The Experiments

1.1 The test loop

The measurements at the test loop were carried out at a vertical test section of 4
metres height and 51.2 mm inner diameter. For the presented investigations, the
loop was operated with air at atmospheric pressure and 30 C. Air was injected
through a system of capillaries. The ends of these capillaries were equally distrib-
uted over the cross section of the pipe. Further, the air injection from the side walls
was investigated.
The test loop was equipped with a gamma device for density measurement,
with needle probes for measuring the local void fraction, a capacitance tomogra-
phy system and a window for optical observations with a video equipment. The
most detailed information about the void distributions in the tube are gained by a
wire mesh sensor (see Prasser et. al [1] (1998), [2] (1999), Figure 1)).

1.2 The wire mesh sensor

The function is based
transmitter
on the measurement of electrodes
the local instantaneous
conductivity of the two
phase mixture. The
sensor consists of two
electrode grids with 16
electrodes each, placed
at an axial distance of
1.5mm behind each
other (see Figure 1).
The conductivity is
measured at the cross-
ing points of the wires Figure 1: Simplified scheme of the wire mesh sensor
of the two grids. Dur- with signal acquisition system
ing the measuring cy-
cle, the transmitter electrodes are activated by a multiplex circuit.
The time resolution achieved by the signal processing unit is 1024 frames per
second. The spatial resolution is given by the pitch of the electrodes and is 3 mm.
At the investigated flow velocities, the speed of the image acquisition is sufficient,
to record the same bubble several times. This enables the determination of
bubble diameter distributions.
The influence of the wire mesh sensor on bubbly flow was investigated using
a high speed video camera. Comparing the video frames with the signals, gained
from the sensor at the same time showed, that despite on disturbances caused by
the mesh, the sensor yielded signals of an undisturbed flow. In dependence on the
actual flow regime, influences of the mesh are found only downstream to the sen-
sor.
The individual void fraction distributions can be displayed as a sequence of
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

Advances in Fluid Mechanics 1 25

frames (see Figure 2).
Interpreting the time
axis as the vertical Z-
axis of the tube gives
the possibility, to con-
struct pseudo side
views. Figure 3 shows
the pseudo side view
for different tests with
a liquid superficial ve-
locity of 1.0 m/s with
subsequent increasing
gas superficial veloci-
ty. The pictures show
the transition from
bubbly flow to slug Figure 2: Construction of"pseudo side views'
flow and finally to an- from single cross section pattern
nular flow.

1.3 Performed tests

Different tests with dif-
ferent superficial ve-
locities of liquid and
air were performed.
Figure 4 shows the
flow pattern map (see
Taitel et. al [3] (1980) gas fraction:
with the investigated
tests in different flow
regimes marked.
In the region of 12.0 m/s
bubble flow a well
known area exists, for Figure 3: "Pseudo side views" of tests with a liquid
superficial velocity of 1.0 m/s
which radial void pro-
files having a maxi-
mum near the walls are observed (marked in Figure 4). In bubbly flow regions out-
side this area a void maximum in the centre of the tube was found. Both decreasing
the water velocity or increasing the gas velocity, the shift of the void maximum to
the tube centre is observed.

2. CFX-4.2 calculations

The CFX-4.2 calculations aimed at a review of the capability of the code using the
two fluid Euler/Euler approach applying the implemented models for the descrip-
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

26 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III

tion of two phase bub- 10.0

bly flow. Modelling
bubbly flow, different
forces, which act be-
<D 1.0 -
tween bubble and fluid, > Annular
have to be considered. <U Flow
03
With typical fluid flow
profiles in a tube, be- 03 0.1 -
]y
side the known drag CDCL
forces, so called "non 3 Bubble Flow I Slug Flow I Slug Flow or
* ' Foam Flow
drag forces" have to be 0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
modelled. These bub-
ble forces act perpen- Superficial Gas Velocity [m/s]
Figure 4: Taitel Dukler diagram and performed
dicular to the flow di- stationary tests
rection. The correct
modelling of the void profiles in the tube cross section and their development in
dependency on the distance to the air injection are an adequate validity test for the
applied bubble force models.

2.1 Applied models

The liquid phase was represented as continuous and the gas as disperse phase with
a constant bubble diameter of 4 mm. The drag force between the bubbles and the
fluid was considered in the distorted regime according to Ishii and Zuber [4]
(1979). The particle induced turbulence was modelled according to Sato [5]
(1975).
The lift force, the turbulent dispersion force and the wall force were considered
as "non drag forces", acting perpendicularly to the flow direction. A spherical ob-
stacle in a profiled flow undergoes a force perpendicular to the flow direction, the
lift force (see Zun [6] (1980)). The force on the liquid phase per unit volume results
in:

a lift

~U is the velocity, p the density and r the volume fraction, a denotes the con-
tinuous liquid and (3 the disperse gas phase. For a solid sphere a coefficient for Q,
of 0.5 is calculated. Here for the weakly viscous flows C^ = 0.05 was applied, as-
suming, that the force is valid also for small deviations from the spherical shape of
the bubble.
Lahey et. al [7] (1993) proposed, to develop a turbulent dispersion force for the
twofluidmodel:

k is the turbulent kinetic energy. For the coefficient Cy%> = 0.1 was assumed.
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

Advances in Fluid Mechanics I 27

Antal et. al [8] (1991) proposed, to consider a wall force, to model the repulsive
force of a wall on a bubble. This force is the consequence of the no-slip condition
for the fluid continuous phase at the wall. The asymmetric fluid flow, to which a
bubble near the wall is exposed, causes the wall force:
\2
Pr'"
max . rt \n
, 0
OLwall

d is the bubble diameter y^ the distance to the wall and n .is the normal vector
to the wall. The coefficients were fitted to the experimental results to C^ = -0.0064
and d= 0.016.

2.2 UsedCFX-
options
During the presented 0.040
calculations, the flow
for both phases was _ 0.030
modelled as turbulent.
The calculations were
performed in the geo- 0.020
metry of a three-
dimensional cylindri- 0.010 * *--;"$l-r|i"*W:
I * : ^lii*':" *
cal domain with a radi-
us of R= 0.025 m and a
length of Z = 3.Om cor- 0.000 L_u_
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025
responding to the verti- R[m]
cal test section. The
whole grid with non Figure 5: Measured and calculated gas volume profiles
(VL = 0.4 m/s; VG = 0.01 m/s, see A in Fig. 4)
equally divided cell di-
mensions consisted of 1b
50000 cells with a tube :
cross section of 500 10 /"
cells. At the wall for
5
the liquid phase a non :
slip and for the gas
phase a free slip total "**.
boundary condition liift
-5 \
was chosen. The inlet Wall force \
boundary condition at -10
:
the lower end of the -15
cylinder corresponded 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
to a uniform gas flow R[m]
distribution over the Figure 6: Components of the non drag forces
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

28 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III

cross section. A fluid velocity profile at the inlet according to a fully developed
single phase fluid flow was given. At the outlet on the top a pressure boundary con-
dition was set. The calculations were performed as transients with constant time
step and constant boundary conditions.
Considering all three components of non drag forces, the calculated void pro-
files are confirmed by the measurements (see Figure 5). A positive value of the
bubble forces (Figure 6) means the direction towards the wall. Caused by the fluid
velocity profile in a tube, the lift force is directed towards the wall. The wall force
acts away from the wall but only in the vicinity of the wall. The contribution of the
dispersion force is comparatively small. The description of a flow regime showing
a volume fraction maximum in the tube centre seems not to be possible consider-
ing only these bubble forces. Possible improvements of the models are discussed
later.

2.3 Limits of the models

Figure 7 shows the
measured void profiles
0.15 VG = 0.013 m/s
at L/D of about 70 for a
VG = 0.03 im/s
test series with a liquid --- VG = 0.08 >m/s
superficial velocity of VG = 0.10)m/s
0.10 f,*'** "v\
1.0 m/s. The gas super- ~'^ ,** \-
ficial velocity for the .-"*" \\
different tests is in- , * %\
creased from 0.01 to \~\
0.05
0.125 m/s (see the ar- -
row in Figure 4). The ..'*' ?

establishment of a void
maximum in the tube 0.00
0005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025
centre is seen in the ex- R[m]
periments. Figure 8 Figure 7: Measured void profiles for VL =1.0 m/s
presents the calculated
results. The figure 0.1b
shows, that with in- - \ G = 0.010 n/s
_ V G = 0.034 n/s
creasing gas velocity ... \ G = 0.080 n/s
the near wall void max- ~ " \ G = 0.100 n/s .' *
imum is overestimated. 0.10 /" %
y * * % .-
The reason might be y * i
found in the occurrence - \\
*L
** \\l!
of bubble coalescence 0.05 ...- '..'-4
and bubble fraction,
-
which is not considered
in the models. Larger - - "N
0.00 i i i i i i i
bubbles having dimen- 00 0.005 0.010
0.015 0.020

0.0
sions in the order of the R[m]
tube diameter will Figure 8: Calculated void profiles for VL =1.0 m/s
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

Advances in Fluid Mechanics III 29

expose other bubble
forces than here mod-
elled.
The influence of the
gas injection mode and
the establishment of a
balanced flow regime
was investigated using
different gas injection
a) b)
arrangements (see Fi-
gure 9). The void dis-
tribution in the tube Gas
was measured in differ-
Figure 9 : Investigated gas injection modes
ent tests with the sensor a) Injection from the bottom
at different distances b) Injection from the side walls
from the air inlet. Fig-
ures 10 and 11 show 0.50 L/D = 0.6
the measured and cal- : L/D = 7
--- L/D = 12 A!
culated void profiles L/D = 30
: ..... L/D = 60
for a test with side wall c
gas injection having a .O n QH / N
% 0.30
liquid superficial ve- it j ~"'~-.^
CD :
: \
locity of 1.0 m/s and a E3 0.20 w4
gas superficial velocity 0 r-
..-""'x" ':\\ \\\
of 0.22 m/s. The pa- 01 n
rameters are in a region
of the flow map, where 0.00 ^
a centre maximum of 0.005
0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025
R[m]
the void fraction for the
balanced flow has to be Figure 10: Measured void profiles at different L/D
expected (see B in Fig-
ure 4). Whereas the 0.50 E L O = 0.6
measurements with in- LO = 7 A!
0 = 12
creasing distance from 0.40 O = 30
the injection clearly _.... L O = 60
c
show the shift from the .O n Qri
v^ O.oU /I
near wall maximum of y fc'!!.\i
the void fraction to the CD
e 0.20
centre maximum, the "" \s
1
calculations indicate 0.10 * ' tff*
for all distances a near * * ..-'*
wall maximum. The --"*"* I
0.00 '
explanation for these 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
R[m]
differences are found Figure 11: Calculated void profiles
in Figure 12 a and b. (VL = 1.0 m/s; VG = 0.22 m/s)
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

30 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III

i _^l_ 1 1 ! 1 I 1 I | | 4
-ft -\ I -I tinr 1 UykSI 1 l_L==LJ
-iL. 4.
BD [mm] BD [mm]
L/D = 30 301 p L/D = 30
r-, '*\~ , -\ /\ ^ I 1 i
*~ oh J ^X -I "" o^r / r L =3
BD mm] BD [mm]
L/D = 12 L/D = 12
^h ,, i /\/vJ I -I
onr . _ >/ I^-L__
"" nh -1 0 2 4 G 8 BD 10[mm] 12 14 S 18ZJ20
BD mm]
L/D = 7 L/D = 7
f i /\ -- I I 1
uj- N^ -1 ~ OJlh _% / "^K^l 4
0 2 < S
B BD 10[mm] 12 14 16 18 20 BD [mm]
L/D = 2.5 L/D = 2.5
T H --sh
"h | I I I |
1 ^4-H- -I
" r LAL^ I ,1 I k L 4
BD [mm]
L/D = 1.5
-4-J..I N
BD [mm] BD [mm]
L/D = 0.6 L/D = 0.6

a) VL = 0.4 m/s; VG = 0.01 m/s (A) b) VL = 1.0 m/s; VG = 0.22 m/s (B)
Figure 12: Measured bubble diameter distributions at different distances
from the air injection (for the tests parameters see Figure 4)

Here the development of the bubble size distributions, gained from the wire mesh
sensor data were compared for the two different tests. The Test a), which is the ba-
sis for the Figures 7 to 12, shows a monodisperse bubble size distribution. In that
case the CFX-4.2 calculations applying the actual implemented two phase models
yields reasonable results. The measurements for Test b) indicate the occurrence of
larger bubbles, which were caused by coalescence. Coalescence is not considered
in the models. Tomiyama [9] (1998) has found, that bubbles having a diameter
larger than 5..6 mm are subjected to other non drag forces influenced by the bubble
deformation, which move the bubble towards the centre of the tube.

3. Summary and conclusions

For the modelling of bubbly flow in a tube, the consideration of the non drag forces
is essential. To review the capability of the in the CFX-4.2 implemented two-phase
flow models, measured and calculated void fraction profiles over the tube cross
section were compared. The two phase models implemented in the code version
CFX-4.2 are capable, to describe void profiles with a near wall void maximum.
The analysis of the measurements showed, that bubbly flows having this type of
void profile are characterized by a monodisperse bubble size distribution. For the
description of flow regimes outside of this area the assumption of a single bubble
 Advances in Fluid Mechanics III, C.A. Brebbia & M. Rahman (Editors)
2000 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-813-9

Advances in Fluid Mechanics III 31

diameter is no longer valid. Model extensions, which consider the bubble diame-
ter distribution and model bubble coalescence and bubble fraction would be nec-
essary. Further, the applied bubble force models are not valid for larger bubbles,
which are subjected to considerable deformations by the flow.

References

[1] Prasser, H.-M, Bottger, A., Zschau, J. A new electrode-mesh tomograph for
gas-liquid flows. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 9, pp. 111-129,
1998
[2] Krepper, E., Kriissenberg, A., Prasser, H.-M., Schaffrath, A. High Resolution
Void Fraction Measurements for the Validation of Flow Maps and CFD Co-
des. 2nd International Symposium on Two-Phase Flow Modelling and Expe-
n'mfH%mbfz, Pisa, Proceedings Vol. Ill, pp. 1371-1378, 1999
[3] Taitel, Y., Bornea, D. and Dukler, A.E. Modelling flow pattern transitions for
steady upward gas-liquid flow in vertical tubes. AIChE Journal 26 (3), pp.
345-354, 1980
[4] Ishii, M. Zuber, N. Drag coefficient and relative velocity in bubbly, droplet
or paniculate flows. A/C/zE JowrW 25(5), pp. 843-855, 1979
[5] Sato, Y., Sekoguchi, K. Liquid velocity distribution in two phase bubble flow.
W. 7. Mw/f#ojf Mow 2, pp. 79-95, 1979
[6] Zun, I. The transverse migration of bubbles influenced by walls in vertical
bubbly flow. W. J. AWffpWe F/ow 6, pp. 583-588, 1980
[7] Lahey Jr. R.T., Lopez de Bertodano, M., Jones, O.C. Phase distribution in
complex geometry conduits. Nuclear Engineering and Design 141, pp. 177-
210, 199f
[8] Antal, S.P., Lahey Jr., R.T., Flaherty, J.E. Analysis of phase distribution in
fully developed laminar bubbly two phase flow. Int. J. Multiphase Flow
17(5), pp. 635-652, 1991
[9] Tomiyama, A. Struggle with computational bubble dynamics; 3rd Internatio-
nal Conference on Multiphase Flow, Lyon 1998