0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Comparison of Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Experiments for Stratified Air-Water Flows in Pipes

[+] Author and Article Information
Gabriele Chinello

Department of Engineering,
Glasgow Caledonian University,
Glasgow G40BA, UK
e-mail: gabriele.chinello@gcu.ac.uk

Anis Awal Ayati

Department of Mathematics,
University of Oslo,
Oslo N-0316, Norway
e-mail: awalaa@math.uio.no

Don McGlinchey

Department of Engineering,
Glasgow Caledonian University,
Glasgow G40B, UK
e-mail: D.McGlinchey@gcu.ac.uk

Gijsbert Ooms

Laboratory for Aero and Hydrodynamics,
Process and Energy Department,
Delft University of Technology,
Delft 2628 CA, The Netherlands
email: G.Ooms@tudelft.nl

Ruud Henkes

Laboratory for Aero and Hydrodynamics,
Process and Energy Department,
Delft University of Technology,
Delft 2628 CA, The Netherlands
Shell Projects & Technology,
Delft 2628 CA, The Netherlands
e-mail: R.A.W.M.Henkes@tudelft.nl

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received June 13, 2018; final manuscript received September 26, 2018; published online November 16, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Kwang-Yong Kim.

J. Fluids Eng 141(5), 051302 (Nov 16, 2018) (12 pages) Paper No: FE-18-1413; doi: 10.1115/1.4041667 History: Received June 13, 2018; Revised September 26, 2018

Stratified gas–liquid flow is a flow regime typically encountered in multiphase pipelines. The understanding and modeling of this regime is of engineering importance especially for the oil and gas industry. In this work, simulations have been conducted for stratified air–water flow in pipes. We solved the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations with the volume of fluid (VOF) method. The aim of this work was to evaluate the performance of the k–ω shear stress transport (SST) turbulence model with and without damping of the turbulence at the gas–liquid interface. Simulation results were compared with some of the latest experimental results found in the literature. A comparison between the simulated velocity and kinetic energy profiles and the experimental results obtained with the particle image velocimetry (PIV) technique was conducted. The characteristics of the interfacial waves were also extracted and compared with the experiments. It is shown that a proper damping of the turbulence close to the interface is needed to obtain agreement with the experimental pressure drop and liquid hold-up. In its current form, however, RANS with the k–ω turbulence model is still not able to give an accurate prediction of the velocity profiles and of the interface waves.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Bowden, R. C. , and Hassan, I. G. , 2011, “ Co-Current Gas-Liquid Smooth-Stratified Flow in a Horizontal Reduced T-Junction Including Wavy and Slug Regime Transition Boundaries,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 133(5), p. 051301. [CrossRef]
Miwa, S. , Hibiki, T. , and Mori, M. , 2016, “ Analysis of Flow-Induced Vibration Due to Stratified Wavy Two-Phase Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 138(9), p. 091302. [CrossRef]
Venturi, D. N. , Martignoni, W. P. , Noriler, D. , and Meier, H. F. , 2017, “ Numerical Investigation of Air/Water and Hydrogen/Diesel Flow Across Tube Bundles With Baffles,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 139(9), p. 091103. [CrossRef]
Lockhart, R. , and Martinelli, R. , 1949, “ Proposed Correlation of Data for Isothermal Two-Phase, Two-Component Flow in Pipes,” Chem. Eng. Prog., 45(1), pp. 39–48.
Chisholm, D. , 1967, “ A Theoretical Basis for the Lockhart-Martinelli Correlation for Two-Phase Flow,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 10(12), pp. 1767–1778. [CrossRef]
Taitel, Y. , and Dukler, A. , 1976, “ A Model for Predicting Flow Regime Transitions in Horizontal and Near Horizontal Gas-Liquid Flow,” AIChE J., 22(1), pp. 47–55. [CrossRef]
Espedal, M. , 1998, “ An Experimental Investigation of Stratified Two-Phase Pipe Flow at Small Inclinations,” Ph.D. thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Biberg, D. , 2007, “ A Mathematical Model for Two-Phase Stratified Turbulent Duct Flow,” Multiph. Sci. Technol., 19(1), pp. 1–48. [CrossRef]
Grolman, E. , and Fortuin, J. , 1997, “ Gas-Liquid Flow in Slightly Inclined Pipes,” Chem. Eng. Sci., 52(24), pp. 4461–4471. [CrossRef]
Birvalski, M. , and Henkes, R. , 2012, “ Experiments and Modeling of Multiple Holdup States for Gas/Liquid Flow in a Pipeline,” Eighth North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, AB, Canada, Paper No. BHR-2012-A020.
Birvalski, M. , Koren, G. , and Henkes, R. , 2014, “ Experiments and Modeling of Liquid Accumulation in the Low Elbow of a Gas/Liquid Pipeline,” Ninth North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, AB, Canada, Paper No. BHR-2014-A4.
Ishii, M. , 1975, Thermo-Fluid Dynamic Theory of Two-Phase Flow, Collection de la Direction des Etudes et Researches d'Electricite de France, Eyrolles, Paris, France
Drew, D. A. , 1983, “ Mathematical Modeling of Two-Phase Flow,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 15(1), pp. 261–291. [CrossRef]
Höhne, T. , and Mehlhoop, J. P. , 2014, “ Validation of Closure Models for Interfacial Drag and Turbulence in Numerical Simulations of Horizontal Stratified Gas-Liquid Flows,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, 62, pp. 1–16. [CrossRef]
Holmås, K. , Nossen, J. , and Mortensen, D. , 2005, “ Simulation of Wavy Stratified Two-Phase Flow Using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD),” 12th International Conference on Multiphase Production Technology, Barcelona, Spain, Paper No. BHR-2005-H1.
Akai, M. , Inoue, A. , Aoki, S. , and Endo, K. , 1980, “ A Co-Current Stratified Air-Mercury Flow With Wavy Interface,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 6(3), pp. 173–190. [CrossRef]
Lorencez, C. , Nasr-Esfahany, M. , and Kawaji, M. , 1997, “ Liquid Turbulence Structure at a Sheared and Wavy Gas-Liquid Interface,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 23(2), pp. 205–226. [CrossRef]
Terzuoli, F. , Galassi, M. , and Mazzini, D. , 2008, “ CFD Code Validation against Stratified Air-Water Flow Experimental Data,” Sci. Technol. Nucl. Install., 2008, p. 434212. [CrossRef]
Fabre, J. , Suzanne, C. , and Masbernat, L. , 1987, “ Experimental Data Set No. 7: Stratified Flow—Part I: Local Structure,” Multiphase Sci. Technol., 3(1–4), pp. 285–301. [CrossRef]
Lo, S. , and Tomasello, A. , 2010, “ Recent Progress in CFD Modeling of Multiphase Flow in Horizontal and Near-Horizontal Pipes,” Seventh North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, AB, Canada, Paper No. BHR-2010-F1.
Egorov, Y. , 2004, “ Contact Condensation in Stratified Steam-Water Flow,” EVOL-ECORA D 07
Ali, I. T. M. , 2017, “ CFD Prediction of Stratified and Intermittent Gas-Liquid Two-Phase Turbulent Pipe Flow Using RANS,” Ph.D. thesis, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/60826840/FULL_TEXT.PDF
Birvalski, M. , 2015, “ Experiments in Stratified Gas-Liquid Pipe Flow,” Ph.D. thesis, Delft Univeristy of Technology, Delft, The Netherland.
Birvalski, M. , Tummers, M. J. , Delfos, R. , and Henkes, R. A. W. M. , 2014, “ PIV Measurements of Waves and Turbulence in Stratified Horizontal Two-Phase Pipe Flow,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 62, pp. 161–173. [CrossRef]
Birvalski, M. , Tummers, M. J. , and Henkes, R. A. W. M. , 2016, “ Measurements of Gravity and Gravity-Capillary Waves in Horizontal Gas-Liquid Pipe Flow Using PIV in Both Phases,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, 87, pp. 102–113. [CrossRef]
Ayati, A. A. , Kolaas, J. , Jensen, A. , and Johnson, G. W. , 2015, “ Combined Simultaneous Two-Phase PIV and Interface Elevation Measurements in Stratified Gas/Liquid Pipe Flow,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, 74, pp. 45–58. [CrossRef]
Ayati, A. A. , Kolaas, J. , Jensen, A. , and Johnson, G. W. , 2016, “ The Effect of Interfacial Waves on the Turbulence Structure of Stratified Air/Water Pipe Flow,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, 78, pp. 104–116. [CrossRef]
Menter, F. R. , 1994, “ Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32(8), pp. 1598–1605. [CrossRef]
Wilcox, D. C. , 2006, Turbulence Modeling for CFD, DCW Industries Inc., La Canada, CA.
ANSYS, 2016, “ANSYS FLUENT 17.1 User's Guide,” ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
Muzaferija, S. , Peric, M. , Sames, P. , and Schellin, T. , 1998, “ A Two-Fluid Navier–Stokes Solver to Simulate Water Entry,” 22nd Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Washington, DC, Aug. 9–14, pp. 277–289.
Brackbill, J. , Kothe, D. , and Zemach, C. , 1992, “ A Continuum Method for Modeling Surface Tension,” J. Comput. Phys., 100(2), pp. 335–354. [CrossRef]
André, M. A. , and Bardet, P. M. , 2017, “ Viscous Stress Distribution Over a Wavy Gas–Liquid Interface,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, 88, pp. 1–10. [CrossRef]
Bestion, D. , Coste, P. , Niceno, C. , Mimouni, S. , Lakehal, D. , and Bartosiewicz, Y. , 2011, “ Two-Phase CFD: The Various Approaches and Their Applicability to Each Flow Regime,” Multiph. Sci. Technol., 23(2–4), pp. 101–128. [CrossRef]
Lakehal, D. , Fulgosi, M. , Yadigaroglu, G. , and Banerjee, S. , 2003, “ Direct Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Heat Transfer Across a Mobile, Sheared Gas-Liquid Interface,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 125(6), pp. 1129–1139. [CrossRef]
Lakehal, D. , and Liovic, P. , 2011, “ Turbulence Structure and Interaction With Steep Breaking Waves,” J. Fluid Mech., 674, pp. 522–577. [CrossRef]
Lombardi, P. , De Angelis, V. , and Banerjee, S. , 1996, “ Direct Numerical Simulation of Near-Interface Turbulence in Coupled Gas-Liquid Flow,” Phys. Fluids, 8(6), pp. 1643–1665. [CrossRef]
Christensen, E. D. , 2006, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Spilling and Plunging Breakers,” Coast. Eng., 53(5–6), pp. 463–485. [CrossRef]
Ayati, A. A. , and Carneiro, J. N. E. , 2018, “ Statistical Characterization of Interfacial Waves in Turbulent Stratified Gas-Liquid Pipe Flows,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, 103, pp. 94–105. [CrossRef]
Fabre, J. , Masbernat, L. , and Suzanne, C. , 1987, “ Experimental Data Set No. 7: Stratified Flow—Part I: Local Structure,” Multiph. Sci. Technol., 3(1–4), pp. 285–301. http://www.dl.begellhouse.com/journals/5af8c23d50e0a883,6b4442405c7a2bae,23ace2da6ef09e09.html
Fernandino, M. , and Ytrehus, T. , 2008, “ Effect of Interfacial Waves on Turbulence Structure in Stratified Duct Flows,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130(6), p. 061201. [CrossRef]
Grare, L. , Peirson, W. L. , Branger, H. , Walker, J. W. , Giovanangeli, J. P. , and Makin, V. , 2013, “ Growth and Dissipation of Wind-Forced, Deep-Water Waves,” J. Fluid Mech., 722, pp. 5–50. [CrossRef]
Barmak, I. , Gelfgat, A. , Vitoshkin, H. , Ullmann, A. , and Brauner, N. , 2016, “ Stability of Stratified Two-Phase Flows in Horizontal Channels,” Phys. Fluids, 28(4), pp. 44–101. [CrossRef]
Yang, D. , and Shen, L. , 2010, “ Direct-Simulation-Based Study of Turbulent Flow Over Various Waving Boundaries,” J. Fluid Mech., 650, pp. 131–180. [CrossRef]
Buckley, M. P. , and Veron, F. , 2016, “ Structure of the Airflow above Surface Waves,” J. Phys. Oceanogr., 46(5), pp. 1377–1397. [CrossRef]
Ayati, A. A. , Vollestad, P. , and Jensen, A. , 2018, “ Detailed Measurements of Interfacial Dynamics in Air-Water Pipe Flow,” Procedia IUTAM, 26, pp. 59–69. [CrossRef]
Vollestad, P. , Ayati, A. A. , Angheluta, L. , LaCasce, J. H. , and Jensen, A. , 2018, “ Experimental Investigation of Airflow above Waves in a Horizontal Pipe,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, (in press).

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Cell distribution in the pipe cross section for the three different meshes employed. From left to right: meshes 1–4.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Volume fraction for case 1 of Ayati et al. without damping. In red, the gas phase, and in blue, the liquid phase.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Comparison between the experimental results by Espedal [7], the numerical results by Lo and Tomasello [15] and the present simulations. A damping factor value of B = 250 and the HRIC scheme have been used in both the present simulations and in the simulations of Lo and Tomasello. Mesh 1 was applied.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Gas (top) and liquid (bottom) velocity profiles for case 141 of Birvalski [17]. Comparison between the experimental results and the present simulations, for the k–ω SST HRIC without damping, the k–ω SST with damping B = 250 and HRIC scheme, the k–ω SST with damping B = 250 and Geo-reconstruct scheme, using mesh 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Contours of the volume fraction (left) and the specific dissipation rate ω (right), for the case 141 of Birvalski employing mesh 2 and B = 250. Top figures: HRIC scheme; bottom figures: Geo-reconstruct scheme.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison between the experimental results by Birvalski [17], the present simulations, and the Taitel and Dukler model with fint/fgas = 3 [3]. The damping factor B is equal to 250, volume fraction discretization scheme Geo-reconstruct, and using mesh 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison between the experimental results by Birvalski [17] and the present simulations for different values of the B damping factor (0, 25, 250, and 2500), volume fraction discretization scheme HRIC, and using mesh 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Gas (top) and liquid (bottom) velocity profiles for case 1 of Ayati et al. Comparison between the experimental results and the present simulations, for the k–ω SST without damping, the k–ω SST with damping B = 250, and k–ω SST in single phase flow, where the interface is simulated by a moving wall. Geo-reconstruct scheme with mesh 4.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Gas (top) and liquid (bottom) turbulent kinetic energy profiles for case 1 of Ayati et al. Comparison between the experimental results and the present simulations, for the k–ω SST without damping, the k–ω SST with damping B = 250, and k–ω SST in single phase flow where the interface is simulated by a moving wall. Geo-reconstruct scheme with mesh 4.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Gas (top) and liquid (bottom) velocity profiles for case 2 of Ayati et al. Comparison between the experimental results and the present simulations, for the k–ω SST without damping, the k–ω SST with damping B = 250, and k–ω SST in single phase flow where the interface is simulated by a moving wall. Geo-reconstruct scheme with mesh 4.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Gas (top) and liquid (bottom) turbulent kinetic energy profiles for case 2 of Ayati et al. Comparison between the experimental results and the present simulations, for the k–ω SST without damping, the k–ω SST with damping B = 250, and k–ω SST in single phase flow where the interface is simulated by a moving wall. Geo-reconstruct scheme with mesh 4.

Tables

Errata

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