0
Technical Briefs

Uncertainty Analysis in the Numerical Simulation of the Air-Water Droplet Motion Through Drift Eliminators

[+] Author and Article Information
Blas Zamora1

Department of Thermal and Fluids Engineering,  Technical University of Cartagena, Doctor Fleming s/n, 30202 Cartagena, Spain

Antonio S. Kaisere

Department of Thermal and Fluids Engineering,  Technical University of Cartagena, Doctor Fleming s/n, 30202 Cartagena, Spainantonio.kaiser@upct.es

Ulrich Kling

Department of Thermal and Fluids Engineering,  Technical University of Cartagena, Doctor Fleming s/n, 30202 Cartagena, Spainkling.ulrich@web.de

Manuel Lucas

Department of Industrial Systems Engineering,  Miguel Hernández University, Avda. de la Libertad s/n, 03202 Elche, Spainmlucas@umh.es

Javier Ruíz

Department of Industrial Systems Engineering,  Miguel Hernández University, Avda. de la Libertad s/n, 03202 Elche, Spainjruiz@umh.es

1

Corresponding author. Address: Department of Thermal and Fluids Engineering, Technical University of Cartagena, Doctor Fleming s/n, 30202 Cartagena, Spain; e-mail: blas.zamora@upct.es.

J. Fluids Eng 133(9), 094501 (Sep 08, 2011) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004762 History: Received February 25, 2010; Revised July 25, 2011; Published September 08, 2011; Online September 08, 2011

This work presents an uncertainty study in the numerical simulation of the air-water droplet motion through three types of drift eliminators using the grid convergence index (GCI) method. The analysis of independence of the results with respect to the fineness of mesh is developed with special emphasis on the influence of the nondimensional sub-layer scaled distance. The coefficient of pressure drop and the droplet collection efficiency are numerically calculated. It may be concluded that using the GCI method leads to reliable numerical results, but it is also necessary to establish a sufficiently fine mesh near the walls.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Droplet collection efficiency versus droplet diameter for belgian wave eliminator and entrance velocity equal to 1.5 m/s. Influence of different modeling details (if not indicated otherwise, the numerical results are obtained with the low-Re k-epsilon model).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Droplet collection efficiency versus droplet diameter for belgian wave eliminator

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Pressure drop coefficient versus Reynolds number for wooden lath and waveless eliminators

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Influence of the non-dimensional scaled distance on results obtained for the pressure drop coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Typical computational domain and types of eliminator and meshing morphologies considered

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