0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Analysis of Turbulent Mixing Jets in a Large Scale Tank

[+] Author and Article Information
Si Y. Lee

 Savannah River National Laboratory, Washington Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC 29808si.lee@srnl.doe.gov

Richard A. Dimenna

 Savannah River National Laboratory, Washington Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC 29808richard.dimenna@srnl.doe.gov

Robert A. Leishear

 Savannah River National Laboratory, Washington Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC 29808robert.leishear@srnl.doe.gov

David B. Stefanko

 Savannah River National Laboratory, Washington Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC 29808david.stefanko@srnl.doe.gov

J. Fluids Eng 130(1), 011104 (Jan 16, 2008) (13 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2820989 History: Received January 26, 2006; Revised August 15, 2007; Published January 16, 2008

Flow evolution models were developed to evaluate the performance of the new advanced design mixer pump for sludge mixing and removal operations with high-velocity liquid jets in one of the large-scale Savannah River Site waste tanks, Tank 18. This paper describes the computational model, the flow measurements used to provide validation data in the region far from the jet nozzle, and the extension of the computational results to real tank conditions through the use of existing sludge suspension data. A computational fluid dynamics approach was used to simulate the sludge removal operations. The models employed a three-dimensional representation of the tank with a two-equation turbulence model. Both the computational approach and the models were validated with onsite test data reported here and literature data. The model was then extended to actual conditions in Tank 18 through a velocity criterion to predict the ability of the new pump design to suspend settled sludge. A qualitative comparison with sludge removal operations in Tank 18 showed a reasonably good comparison with final results subject to significant uncertainties in actual sludge properties.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Comparisons of modeling predictions for different turbulence models against the literature data

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Mesh sensitivity results of the FTF model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Flow paths around the tank at 10s after the start of the pump on the discharge plane of the FTF with stationary pump for the initially quiescent tank

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Schematic of experimental setup for the flow measurement at FTF

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Transient velocity distributions along the principal discharge direction for various transient times after the start of the pump on the discharge plane of the FTF with stationary pump for the initially quiescent tank

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Steady-state nondimensional horizontal velocity profiles for various distances from the pump at the nozzle discharge plane (0.6858m above tank bottom): 3D model results for the FTF with 1.778m liquid level (pump exit velocity Uo=17.98m∕s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Steady-state nondimensional vertical velocity profiles for various distances from the pump along the principal discharge direction: 3D model results for the FTF with a given liquid level (L=1.778m)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Comparison of nondimensional velocity profiles for different tank liquid levels at 0.6096m distance from the pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Comparison of nondimensional velocity profiles for different tank liquid levels at 1.5240m distance from the pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Comparison of nondimensional velocity profiles for different tank liquid levels at 3.0480m distance from the pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Comparison of nondimensional velocity profiles for different tank liquid levels at 12.192m distance from the pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Comparison of nondimensional velocity profiles along the pump discharge direction for two different pump locations above tank bottom under the 1.778m liquid level

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Downstream evolutions of Tank 18 ADMP with and without pump rotations for 1.016m tank liquid level at the discharge plane 0.0762m above the tank bottom

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 26

Comparison of horizontal velocity profiles along the downstream directions of the pump nozzles of Tank 18 with ADMP 0.1524m mixer and a mixer with a 0.0762m nozzle at the pump discharge plane 0.6858m above the tank bottom

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of tank operation system showing the present modeling boundary and slurry mixing pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Velocity criteria for deposition, scouring, and erosion of sludge solids based on Graf’s correlation (11) and literature data

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Velocity measurement data points

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Velocity data at an arbitrary point in the flow (1ft∕s=0.3048m∕s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of the FTF data to the CFD predictions on the pump discharge plane and velocity measurement location, Point A shown in Fig. 7

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Flow patterns one minute after the pump starts with the pump rotating counterclockwise

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of the FTF model predictions of the discharge velocities with the test data near the centerline of the pump discharge direction at the plane 0.0762m above the tank bottom

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Comparison of the FTF model predictions with all of the FTF test data in terms of local velocity nondimensionalized with pump exit velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Benchmarking results of the present model against the SRS FTF test data and literature data

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Nondimensional velocity profiles for various distances from the pump at the nozzle discharge plane located at 0.6858m above the tank bottom

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Comparison of horizontal velocity profiles along the downstream directions of the pump nozzles of Tank 18 with ADMP 0.1524m mixer and a mixer with a 0.0762m nozzle at the plane 0.0762m above the tank bottom

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Comparisons of turbulence intensity profiles for the Tank 18 operations with ADMP and the smaller mixer at the plane 0.0762m above the tank bottom

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In