7 FLOW PATTERNS

7.1 INTRODUCTION From a practical engineering point of view one of the major design diculties in dealing with multiphase ow is that the mass, momentum, and energy transfer rates and processes can be quite sensitive to the geometric distribution or topology of the components within the ow. For example, the geometry may strongly eect the interfacial area available for mass, momentum or energy exchange between the phases. Moreover, the ow within each phase or component will clearly depend on that geometric distribution. Thus we recognize that there is a complicated two-way coupling between the ow in each of the phases or components and the geometry of the ow (as well as the rates of change of that geometry). The complexity of this two-way coupling presents a major challenge in the study of multiphase ows and there is much that remains to be done before even a supercial understanding is achieved. An appropriate starting point is a phenomenological description of the geometric distributions or ow patterns that are observed in common multiphase ows. This chapter describes the ow patterns observed in horizontal and vertical pipes and identies a number of the instabilities that lead to transition from one ow pattern to another.

7.2 TOPOLOGIES OF MULTIPHASE FLOW 7.2.1 Multiphase ow patterns A particular type of geometric distribution of the components is called a ow pattern or ow regime and many of the names given to these ow patterns (such as annular ow or bubbly ow) are now quite standard. Usually the ow patterns are recognized by visual inspection, though other means such
163

as analysis of the spectral content of the unsteady pressures or the uctuations in the volume fraction have been devised for those circumstances in which visual information is dicult to obtain (Jones and Zuber, 1974). For some of the simpler ows, such as those in vertical or horizontal pipes, a substantial number of investigations have been conducted to determine the dependence of the ow pattern on component volume uxes, (jA, jB ), on volume fraction and on the uid properties such as density, viscosity, and surface tension. The results are often displayed in the form of a ow regime map that identies the ow patterns occurring in various parts of a parameter space dened by the component ow rates. The ow rates used may be the volume uxes, mass uxes, momentum uxes, or other similar quantities depending on the author. Perhaps the most widely used of these ow pattern maps is that for horizontal gas/liquid ow constructed by Baker (1954). Summaries of these ow pattern studies and the various empirical laws extracted from them are a common feature in reviews of multiphase ow (see, for example, Wallis 1969 or Weisman 1983). The boundaries between the various ow patterns in a ow pattern map occur because a regime becomes unstable as the boundary is approached and growth of this instability causes transition to another ow pattern. Like the laminar-to-turbulent transition in single phase ow, these multiphase transitions can be rather unpredictable since they may depend on otherwise minor features of the ow, such as the roughness of the walls or the entrance conditions. Hence, the ow pattern boundaries are not distinctive lines but more poorly dened transition zones. But there are other serious diculties with most of the existing literature on ow pattern maps. One of the basic uid mechanical problems is that these maps are often dimensional and therefore apply only to the specic pipe sizes and uids employed by the investigator. A number of investigators (for example Baker 1954, Schicht 1969 or Weisman and Kang 1981) have attempted to nd generalized coordinates that would allow the map to cover dierent uids and pipes of dierent sizes. However, such generalizations can only have limited value because several transitions are represented in most ow pattern maps and the corresponding instabilities are governed by dierent sets of uid properties. For example, one transition might occur at a critical Weber number, whereas another boundary may be characterized by a particular Reynolds number. Hence, even for the simplest duct geometries, there exist no universal, dimensionless ow pattern maps that incorporate the full, parametric dependence of the boundaries on the uid characteristics.

164

Beyond these diculties there are a number of other troublesome questions. In single phase ow it is well established that an entrance length of 30 to 50 diameters is necessary to establish fully developed turbulent pipe ow. The corresponding entrance lengths for multiphase ow patterns are less well established and it is quite possible that some of the reported experimental observations are for temporary or developing ow patterns. Moreover, the implicit assumption is often made that there exists a unique ow pattern for given uids with given ow rates. It is by no means certain that this is the case. Indeed, in chapter 16, we shall see that even very simple models of multiphase ow can lead to conjugate states. Consequently, there may be several possible ow patterns whose occurence may depend on the initial conditions, specically on the manner in which the multiphase ow is generated. In summary, there remain many challenges associated with a fundamental understanding of ow patterns in multiphase ow and considerable research is necessary before reliable design tools become available. In this chapter we shall concentrate on some of the qualitative features of the boundaries between ow patterns and on the underlying instabilities that give rise to those transitions. 7.2.2 Examples of ow regime maps Despite the issues and reservations discussed in the preceding section it is useful to provide some examples of ow regime maps along with the denitions that help distinguish the various regimes. We choose to select the rst examples from the ows of mixtures of gas and liquid in horizontal and vertical tubes, mostly because these ows are of considerable industrial interest. However, many other types of ow regime maps could be used as examples and some appear elsewhere in this book; examples are the ow regimes described in the next section and those for granular ows indicated in gure 13.5. We begin with gas/liquid ows in horizontal pipes (see, for example, Hubbard and Dukler 1966, Wallis 1969, Weisman 1983). Figure 7.1 shows the occurence of dierent ow regimes for the ow of an air/water mixture in a horizontal, 5.1cm diameter pipe where the regimes are distinguished visually using the denitions in gure 7.2. The experimentally observed transition regions are shown by the hatched areas in gure 7.1. The solid lines represent theoretical predictions some of which are discussed later in this chapter. Note that in a mass ux map like this the ratio of the ordinate to the abscissa is X /(1 X ) and therefore the mass quality, X , is known at every point in
165

the map. There are many industrial processes in which the mass quality is a key ow parameter and therefore mass ux maps are often preferred. Other examples of ow regime maps for horizontal air/water ow (by dierent investigators) are shown in gures 7.3 and 7.4. These maps plot the volumetric uxes rather than the mass uxes but since the densities of the liquid and gas in these experiments are relatively constant, there is a rough equivalence. Note that in a volumetric ux map the ratio of the ordinate to the abscissa is /(1 )and therefore the volumetric quality, , is known at every point in the map. Figure 7.4 shows how the boundaries were observed to change with pipe diameter. Moreover, gures 7.1 and 7.4 appear to correspond fairly closely. Note that both show well-mixed regimes occuring above some critical liquid ux and above some critical gas ux; we expand further on this in section 7.3.1.

Figure 7.1. Flow regime map for the horizontal ow of an air/water mixture in a 5.1cm diameter pipe with ow regimes as dened in gure 7.2. Hatched regions are observed regime boundaries, lines are theoretical predictions. Adapted from Weisman (1983). 166

Figure 7.2. Sketches of ow regimes for ow of air/water mixtures in a horizontal, 5.1cm diameter pipe. Adapted from Weisman (1983).

Figure 7.3. A ow regime map for the ow of an air/water mixture in a horizontal, 2.5cm diameter pipe at 25 C and 1bar. Solid lines and points are experimental observations of the transition conditions while the hatched zones represent theoretical predictions. From Mandhane et al. (1974).

167

Figure 7.4. Same as gure 7.3 but showing changes in the ow regime boundaries for various pipe diameters: 1.25cm (dotted lines), 2.5cm (solid lines), 5cm (dash-dot lines) and 30cm (dashed lines). From Mandhane et al. (1974).

7.2.3 Slurry ow regimes As a further example, consider the ow regimes manifest by slurry (solid/liquid mixture) ow in a horizontal pipeline. When the particles are small so that their settling velocity is much less than the turbulent mixing velocities in the uid and when the volume fraction of solids is low or moderate, the ow will be well-mixed. This is termed the homogeneous ow regime (gure 7.5) and typically only occurs in practical slurry pipelines when all the particle sizes are of the order of tens of microns or less. When somewhat larger particles are present, vertical gradients will occur in the concentration and the regime is termed heterogeneous; moreover the larger particles will tend to sediment faster and so a vertical size gradient will also occur. The limit of this heterogeneous ow regime occurs when the particles form a packed bed in the bottom of the pipe. When a packed bed develops, the ow regime is known as a saltation ow. In a saltation ow, solid material may be transported in two ways, either because the bed moves en masse or because material in suspension above the bed is carried along by the suspending uid. Further analyses of these ow regimes, their transitions and their pressure gradients are included in sections 8.2.1, 8.2.2 and 8.2.3. For further detail, the reader is referred to Shook and Roco (1991), Zandi and Govatos (1967), and Zandi (1971).
168

7.2.4 Vertical pipe ow When the pipe is oriented vertically, the regimes of gas/liquid ow are a little dierent as illustrated in gures 7.6 and 7.7 (see, for example, Hewitt and Hall Taylor 1970, Butterworth and Hewitt 1977, Hewitt 1982, Whalley 1987). Another vertical ow regime map is shown in gure 7.8, this one using momentum ux axes rather than volumetric or mass uxes. Note the wide range of ow rates in Hewitt and Roberts (1969) ow regime map and the fact that they correlated both air/water data at atmospheric pressure and steam/water ow at high pressure. Typical photographs of vertical gas/liquid ow regimes are shown in gure 7.9. At low gas volume fractions of the order of a few percent, the ow is an amalgam of individual ascending bubbles (left photograph). Note that the visual appearance is deceptive; most people would judge the volume fraction to be signicantly larger than 1%. As the volume fraction is increased (the middle photograph has = 4.5%), the ow becomes unstable at some critical volume fraction which in the case illustrated is about 15%. This instability produces large scale mixing motions that dominate the ow and have a scale comparable to the pipe diameter. At still larger volume fractions, large unsteady gas volumes accumulate within these mixing motions and produce the ow regime known as churn-turbulent ow (right photograph). It should be added that ow regime information such as that presented in gure 7.8 appears to be valid both for ows that are not evolving with axial distance along the pipe and for ows, such as those in boiler tubes, in which the volume fraction is increasing with axial position. Figure 7.10 provides a sketch of the kind of evolution one might expect in a vertical boiler tube based on the ow regime maps given above. It is interesting to

Figure 7.5. Flow regimes for slurry ow in a horizontal pipeline. 169

Figure 7.6. A ow regime map for the ow of an air/water mixture in a vertical, 2.5cm diameter pipe showing the experimentally observed transition regions hatched; the ow regimes are sketched in gure 7.7. Adapted from Weisman (1983).

Figure 7.7. Sketches of ow regimes for two-phase ow in a vertical pipe. Adapted from Weisman (1983).

170

Figure 7.8. The vertical ow regime map of Hewitt and Roberts (1969) for ow in a 3.2cm diameter tube, validated for both air/water ow at atmospheric pressure and steam/water ow at high pressure.

Figure 7.9. Photographs of air/water ow in a 10.2cm diameter vertical pipe (Kytmaa 1987). Left: 1% air; middle: 4.5% air; right: > 15% air. o

171

Figure 7.10. The evolution of the steam/water ow in a vertical boiler tube.

compare and contrast this ow pattern evolution with the inverted case of convective boiling surrounding a heated rod in gure 6.4.
172

7.2.5 Flow pattern classications One of the most fundamental characteristics of a multiphase ow pattern is the extent to which it involves global separation of the phases or components. At the two ends of the spectrum of separation characteristics are those ow patterns that are termed disperse and those that are termed separated. A disperse ow pattern is one in which one phase or component is widely distributed as drops, bubbles, or particles in the other continuous phase. On the other hand, a separated ow consists of separate, parallel streams of the two (or more) phases. Even within each of these limiting states there are various degrees of component separation. The asymptotic limit of a disperse ow in which the disperse phase is distributed as an innite number of innitesimally small particles, bubbles, or drops is termed a homogeneous multiphase ow. As discussed in sections 2.4.2 and 9.2 this limit implies zero relative motion between the phases. However, there are many practical disperse ows, such as bubbly or mist ow in a pipe, in which the ow is quite disperse in that the particle size is much smaller than the pipe dimensions but in which the relative motion between the phases is signicant. Within separated ows there are similar gradations or degrees of phase separation. The low velocity ow of gas and liquid in a pipe that consists of two single phase streams can be designated a fully separated ow. On the other hand, most annular ows in a vertical pipe consist of a lm of liquid on the walls and a central core of gas that contains a signicant number of liquid droplets. These droplets are an important feature of annular ow and therefore the ow can only be regarded as partially separated. To summarize: one of the basic characteristics of a ow pattern is the degree of separation of the phases into streamtubes of dierent concentrations. The degree of separation will, in turn, be determined by (a) some balance between the uid mechanical processes enhancing dispersion and those causing segregation, or (b) the initial conditions or mechanism of generation of the multiphase ow, or (c) some mix of both eects. In the section 7.3.1 we shall discuss the uid mechanical processes referred to in (a). A second basic characteristic that is useful in classifying ow patterns is the level of intermittency in the volume fraction. Examples of intermittent ow patterns are slug ows in both vertical and horizontal pipe ows and the occurrence of interfacial waves in horizontal separated ow. The rst separation characteristic was the degree of separation of the phases between streamtubes; this second, intermittency characteristic, can be viewed as the degree of periodic separation in the streamwise direction. The slugs or waves are kinematic or concentration waves (sometimes called continuity waves)

173

and a general discussion of the structure and characteristics of such waves is contained in chapter 16. Intermittency is the result of an instability in which kinematic waves grow in an otherwise nominally steady ow to create signicant streamwise separation of the phases. In the rest of this chapter we describe how these ideas of cross-streamline separation and intermittency can lead to an understanding of the limits of specic multiphase ow regimes. The mechanics of limits on disperse ow regimes are discussed rst in sections 7.3 and 7.4. Limits on separated ow regimes are outlined in section 7.5.

7.3 LIMITS OF DISPERSE FLOW REGIMES 7.3.1 Disperse phase separation and dispersion In order to determine the limits of a disperse phase ow regime, it is necessary to identify the dominant processes enhancing separation and those causing dispersion. By far the most common process causing phase separation is due to the dierence in the densities of the phases and the mechanisms are therefore functions of the ratio of the density of the disperse phase to that of the continuous phase, D /C . Then the buoyancy forces caused either by gravity or, in a non-uniform or turbulent ow by the Lagrangian uid accelerations will create a relative velocity between the phases whose magnitude will be denoted by Wp . Using the analysis of section 2.4.2, we can conclude that the ratio Wp /U (where U is a typical velocity of the mean ow) is a function only of the Reynolds number, Re = 2U R/C , and the parameters X and Y dened by equations 2.91 and 2.92. The particle size, R, and the streamwise extent of the ow, , both occur in the dimensiong, less parameters Re, X, and Y . For low velocity ows in which U 2 / 2 and hence a Froude number, gR/U 2, rather than is replaced by g/U R/ appears in the parameter X. This then establishes a velocity, Wp , that characterizes the relative motion and therefore the phase separation due to density dierences. As an aside we note that there are some uid mechanical phenomena that can cause phase separation even in the absence of a density dierence. For example, Ho and Leal (1974) explored the migration of neutrally buoyant particles in shear ows at low Reynolds numbers. These eects are usually suciently weak compared with those due to density dierences that they can be neglected in many applications. In a quiescent multiphase mixture the primary mechanism of phase separation is sedimentation (see chapter 16) though more localized separation
174

Figure 7.11. Bubbly ow around a NACA 4412 hydrofoil (10cm chord) at an angle of attack; ow is from left to right. From the work of Ohashi et al., reproduced with the authors permission.

can also occur as a result of the inhomogeneity instability described in section 7.4. In owing mixtures the mechanisms are more complex and, in most applications, are controlled by a balance between the buoyancy/gravity forces and the hydrodynamic forces. In high Reynolds number, turbulent ows, the turbulence can cause either dispersion or segregation. Segregation can occur when the relaxation time for the particle or bubble is comparable 1 as with the typical time of the turbulent uid motions. When D /C for example with solid particles suspended in a gas, the particles are centrifuged out of the more intense turbulent eddies and collect in the shear zones in between (see for example, Squires and Eaton 1990, Elghobashi and 1 as for example with Truesdell 1993). On the other hand when D /C bubbles in a liquid, the bubbles tend to collect in regions of low pressure such as in the wake of a body or in the centers of vortices (see for example Pan and Banerjee 1997). We previously included a photograph (gure 1.6) showing heavier particles centrifuged out of vortices in a turbulent channel ow. Here, as a counterpoint, we include the photograph, gure 7.11, from Ohashi et al. (1990) showing the ow of a bubbly mixture around a hydrofoil. Note the region of higher void fraction (more than four times the upstream void fraction according to the measurements) in the wake on the suction side of the foil. This accumulation of bubbles on the suction side of a foil or pump blade has importance consequences for performance as discussed in section 7.3.3.
175

Counteracting the above separation processes are dispersion processes. In many engineering contexts the principal dispersion is caused by the turbulent or other unsteady motions in the continuous phase. Figure 7.11 also illustrates this process for the concentrated regions of high void fraction in the wake are dispersed as they are carried downstream. The shear created by unsteady velocities can also cause either ssion or fusion of the disperse phase bubbles, drops, or particles, but we shall delay discussion of this additional complexity until the next section. For the present it is only necessary to characterize the mixing motions in the continuous phase by a typical velocity, Wt . Then the degree of separation of the phases will clearly be inuenced by the relative magnitudes of Wp and Wt , or specically by 1 and separated the ratio Wp /Wt. Disperse ow will occur when Wp/Wt 1. The corresponding ow pattern boundary should be ow when Wp /Wt given by some value of Wp /Wt of order unity. For example, in slurry ows in a horizontal pipeline, Thomas (1962) suggested a value of Wp /Wt of 0.2 based on his data.

7.3.2 Example: horizontal pipe ow As a quantitative example, we shall pursue the case of the ow of a twocomponent mixture in a long horizontal pipe. The separation velocity, Wp, due to gravity, g, would then be given qualitatively by equation 2.74 or 2.83, namely Wp = or Wp = 2 Rg 3 CD C
1 2

2R2 g 9C

if 2WpR/C

(7.1)

if 2WpR/C

(7.2)

where R is the particle, droplet, or bubble radius, C , C are the kinematic viscosity and density of the continuous uid, and is the density dierence between the components. Furthermore, the typical turbulent velocity will be 1 some function of the friction velocity, (w /C ) 2 , and the volume fraction, , of the disperse phase. The eect of is less readily quantied so, for the present, we concentrate on dilute systems ( 1) in which w C
1 2

Wt

=
176

d 4C

dp ds

1 2

(7.3)

where d is the pipe diameter and dp/ds is the pressure gradient. Then the transition condition, Wp /Wt = K (where K is some number of order unity) can be rewritten as dp ds 4C 2 W K 2d p C
2

(7.4)

16 C R4 g 2 2 81K 2 C d 32 C Rg 3K 2 CD d C

for 2Wp R/C

(7.5)

for 2WpR/C

(7.6)

In summary, the expression on the right hand side of equation 7.5 (or 7.6) yields the pressure drop at which Wp /Wt exceeds the critical value of K and the particles will be maintained in suspension by the turbulence. At lower values of the pressure drop the particles will settle out and the ow will become separated and stratied. This criterion on the pressure gradient may be converted to a criterion on the ow rate by using some version of the turbulent pipe ow relation between the pressure gradient and the volume ow rate, j. For example, one could conceive of using, as a rst approximation, a typical value of the turbulent friction factor, f = w / 1 C j 2 (where j is the total volumetric 2 1, this leads to a critical volume ow rate, ux). In the case of 2Wp R/C j = jc , given by jc = 8 gD 3K 2 f CD C
1 2

(7.7)

With 8/3K 2f replaced by an empirical constant, this is the general form of the critical ow rate suggested by Newitt et al. (1955) for horizontal slurry pipeline ow; for j > jc the ow regime changes from saltation ow to heterogeneous ow (see gure 7.5). Alternatively, one could write this 1 nondimensionally using a Froude number dened as F r = jc /(gd) 2 . Then the criterion yields a critical Froude number given by F r2 = 8 3K 2 f CD C (7.8)

If the common expression for the turbulent friction factor, namely f =

0.31/(jd/C ) 4 is used in equation 7.7, that expression becomes 4 1 17.2 gRd 4 7 jc = 1 K 2 CD 4 C

(7.9)

A numerical example will help relate this criterion 7.9 to the boundary of the disperse phase regime in the ow regime maps. For the case of gure 7.3 and using for simplicity, K = 1 and CD = 1, then with a drop or bubble size, R = 3mm, equation 7.9 gives a value of jc of 3m/s when the continuous phase is liquid (bubbly ow) and a value of 40m/s when the continuous phase is air (mist ow). These values are in good agreement with the total volumetric ux at the boundary of the disperse ow regime in gure 7.3 which, at low jG , is about 3m/s and at higher jG (volumetric qualities above 0.5) is about 30 40m/s. Another approach to the issue of the critical velocity in slurry pipeline ow is to consider the velocity required to uidize a packed bed in the bottom of the pipe (see, for example, Durand and Condolios (1952) or Zandi and Govatos (1967)). This is described further in section 8.2.3.

7.3.3 Particle size and particle ssion In the preceding sections, the transition criteria determining the limits of the disperse ow regime included the particle, bubble or drop size or, more specically, the dimensionless parameter 2R/d as illustrated by the criteria of equations 7.5, 7.6 and 7.9. However, these criteria require knowledge of the size of the particles, 2R, and this is not always accessible particularly in bubbly ow. Even when there may be some knowledge of the particle or bubble size in one region or at one time, the various processes of ssion and fusion need to be considered in determining the appropriate 2R for use in these criteria. One of the serious complications is that the size of the particles, bubbles or drops is often determined by the ow itself since the ow shear tends to cause ssion and therefore limit the maximum size of the surviving particles. Then the ow regime may depend upon the particle size that in turn depends on the ow and this two-way interaction can be dicult to unravel. Figure 7.11 illustrates this problem since one can observe many smaller bubbles in the ow near the suction surface and in the wake that clearly result from ssion in the highly sheared ow near the suction surface. Another example from the ow in pumps is described in the next section.
178

When the particles are very small, a variety of forces may play a role in determining the eective particle size and some comments on these are included later in section 7.3.7. But often the bubbles or drops are suciently large that the dominant force resisting ssion is due to surface tension while the dominant force promoting ssion is the shear in the ow. We will conne the present discussion to these circumstances. Typical regions of high shear occur in boundary layers, in vortices or in turbulence. Frequently, the larger drops or bubbles are ssioned when they encounter regions of high shear and do not subsequently coalesce to any signicant degree. Then, the characteristic force resisting ssion would be given by SR while the typical shear force causing ssion might be estimated in several ways. For example, in the case of pipe ow the typical shear force could be characterized by w R2 . Then, assuming that the ow is initiated with larger particles that are then ssioned by the ow, we would estimate that R = S/w . This will be used in the next section to estimate the limits of the bubbly or mist ow regime in pipe ows. In other circumstances, the shearing force in the ow might be described by C (R)2 R2 where is the typical shear rate and C is the density of the continuous phase. This expression for the ssion force assumes a high Reynolds number in the ow around the particle or explicitly that 1 where C is the dynamic viscosity of the continuous phase. C R2 /C 1 then a more appropriate estimate of If, on the other hand, C R2 /C 2 . Consequently, the maximum particle size, the ssion force would be C R Rm , one would expect to see in the ow in these two regimes would be Rm = S C S C 2
1 3

for C R2 /C

or

for C R2 /C

(7.10)

respectively. Note that in both instances the maximum size decreases with increasing shear rate. 7.3.4 Examples of ow-determined bubble size An example of the use of the above relations can be found in the important area of two-phase pump ows and we quote here data from studies of the pumping of bubbly liquids. The issue here is the determination of the volume fraction at which the pump performance is seriously degraded by the presence of the bubbles. It transpires that, in most practical pumping
179

Figure 7.12. A bubbly air/water mixture (volume fraction about 4%) entering an axial ow impeller (a 10.2cm diameter scale model of the SSME low pressure liquid oxygen impeller) from the right. The inlet plane is roughly in the center of the photograph and the tips of the blades can be seen to the left of the inlet plane.

situations, the turbulence and shear at inlet and around the leading edges of the blades of the pump (or other turbomachine) tend to ssion the bubbles and thus determine the size of the bubbles in the blade passages. An illustration is included in gure 7.12 which shows an air/water mixture progressing through an axial ow impeller; the bubble size downstream of the inlet plane is much smaller that that approaching the impeller. The size of the bubbles within the blade passages is important because it is the migration and coalescence of these bubbles that appear to cause degradation in the performance. Since the velocity of the relative motion depends on the bubble size, it follows that the larger the bubbles the more likely it is that large voids will form within the blade passage due to migration of the bubbles toward regions of lower pressure (Furuya 1985, Furuya and Maekawa 1985). As Patel and Runstadler (1978) observed during experiments on centrifugal pumps and rotating passages, regions of low pressure occur not only on the suction sides of the blades but also under the shroud of a centrifugal pump. These large voids or gas-lled wakes can cause substantial changes in the deviation angle of the ow leaving the impeller and hence lead to substantial degradation in the pump performance. The key is therefore the size of the bubbles in the blade passages and some valuable data on this has been compiled by Murakami and Minemura (1977,
180

Figure 7.13. The bubble sizes, Rm , observed in the blade passages of centrifugal and axial ow pumps as a function of Weber number where h is the blade spacing (adapted from Murakami and Minemura 1978).

1978) for both axial and centrifugal pumps. This is summarized in gure 7.4 where the ratio of the observed bubble size, Rm , to the blade spacing, h, is plotted against the Weber number, W e = C U 2 h/S (U is the blade tip velocity). Rearranging the rst version of equation 7.10, estimating that the inlet shear is proportional to U/h and adding a proportionality constant, 1 C, since the analysis is qualitative, we would expect that Rm = C/W e 3 . The dashed lines in gure 7.13 are examples of this prediction and exhibit behavior very similar to the experimental data. In the case of the axial pumps, the eective value of the coecient, C = 0.15. A dierent example is provided by cavitating ows in which the highest shear rates occur during the collapse of the cavitation bubbles. As discussed in section 5.2.3, these high shear rates cause individual cavitation bubbles to ssion into many smaller fragments so that the bubble size emerging from the region of cavitation bubble collapse is much smaller than the size of the bubbles entering that region. The phenomenon is exemplied by gure 7.14 which shows the growth of the cavitating bubbles on the suction surface of the foil, the collapse region near the trailing edge and the much smaller bubbles emerging from the collapse region. Some analysis of the ssion due to cavitation bubble collapse is contained in Brennen (2002).

7.3.5 Bubbly or mist ow limits Returning now to the issue of determining the boundaries of the bubbly (or mist ow) regime in pipe ows, and using the expression R = S/w for the
181

Figure 7.14. Traveling bubble cavitation on the surface of a NACA 4412 hydrofoil at zero incidence angle, a speed of 13.7 m/s and a cavitation number of 0.3. The ow is from left to right, the leading edge of the foil is just to the left of the white glare patch on the surface, and the chord is 7.6cm (Kermeen 1956).

bubble size in equation 7.6, the transition between bubbly disperse ow and separated (or partially separated ow) will be described by the relation dp ds g
1 2

S 2 gd

1 4

64 3K 2 CD

1 4

= constant

(7.11)

This is the analytical form of the ow regime boundary suggested by Taitel and Dukler (1976) for the transition from disperse bubbly ow to a more separated state. Taitel and Dukler also demonstrate that when the constant in equation 7.11 is of order unity, the boundary agrees well with that observed experimentally by Mandhane et al. (1974). This agreement is shown in gure 7.3. The same gure serves to remind us that there are other transitions that Taitel and Dukler were also able to model with qualitative arguments. They also demonstrate, as mentioned earlier, that each of these transitions typically scale dierently with the various non-dimensional parameters governing the characteristics of the ow and the uids.

7.3.6 Other bubbly ow limits As the volume fraction of gas or vapor is increased, a bubbly ow usually transitions to a mist ow, a metamorphosis that involves a switch in the con182

tinuous and disperse phases. However, there are several additional comments on this metamorphosis that need to be noted. First, at very low ow rates, there are circumstances in which this transition does not occur at all and the bubbly ow becomes a foam. Though the precise conditions necessary for this development are not clear, foams and their rheology have been the subject of considerable study. The mechanics of foams are beyond the scope of this book; the reader is referred to the review by Kraynik (1988) and the book by Weaire and Hutzler (2001). Second, though it is rarely mentioned, the reverse transition from mist ow to bubbly ow as the volume fraction decreases involves energy dissipation and an increase in pressure. This transition has been called a mixing shock (Witte 1969) and typically occurs when a droplet ow with signicant relative motion transitions to a bubbly ow with negligible relative motion. Witte (1969) has analyzed these mixing shocks and obtains expressions for the compression ratio across the mixing shock as a function of the upstream slip and Euler number.

7.3.7 Other particle size eects In sections 7.3.3 and 7.3.5 we outlined one class of circumstances in which bubble ssion is an important facet of the disperse phase dynamics. It is, however, important, to add, even if briey, that there are many other mechanisms for particle ssion and fusion that may be important in a disperse phase ow. When the particles are sub-micron or micron sized, intermolecular and electromagnetic forces can become critically important in determining particle aggregation in the ow. These phenomena are beyond the scope of this book and the reader is referred to texts such as Friedlander (1977) or Flagan and Seinfeld (1988) for information on the eects these forces have on ows involving particles and drops. It is however valuable to add that gassolid suspension ows with larger particles can also exhibit important eects as a result of electrical charge separation and the forces that those charges create between particles or between the particles and the walls of the ow. The process of electrication or charge separation is often a very important feature of such ows (Boothroyd 1971). Pneumatically driven ows in grain elevators or other devices can generate huge electropotential dierences (as large as hundreds of kilovolts) that can, in turn, cause spark discharges and consequently dust explosions. In other devices, particularly electrophotographic copiers, the charge separation generated in a owing toner/carrier mixture is a key feature of such devices. Electromagnetic and intermolecu183

lar forces can also play a role in determining the bubble or droplet size in gas-liquid ows (or ows of immiscible liquid mixtures).

7.4 INHOMOGENEITY INSTABILITY In section 7.3.1 we presented a qualitative evaluation of phase separation processes driven by the combination of a density dierence and a uid acceleration. Such a combination does not necessarily imply separation within a homogeneous quiescent mixture (except through sedimentation). However, it transpires that local phase separation may also occur through the development of an inhomogeneity instability whose origin and consequences we describe in the next two sections.

7.4.1 Stability of disperse mixtures It transpires that a homogeneous, quiescent multiphase mixture may be internally unstable as a result of gravitationally-induced relative motion. This instability was rst described for uidized beds by Jackson (1963). It results in horizontally-oriented, vertically-propagating volume fraction waves or layers of the disperse phase. To evaluate the stability of a uniformly dispersed two component mixture with uniform relative velocity induced by gravity and a density dierence, Jackson constructed a model consisting of the following system of equations:
1. The number continuity equation 1.30 for the particles (density, D , and volume fraction, D = ): (uD ) + =0 t y (7.12)

where all velocities are in the vertically upward direction. 2. Volume continuity for the suspending uid (assuming constant density, C , and zero mass interaction, IN = 0) ((1 )uC ) =0 t y (7.13)

3. Individual phase momentum equations 1.42 for both the particles and the uid assuming constant densities and no deviatoric stress: D uD uD + uD t y 184 = D g + FD (7.14)

C (1 )

uC uC + uC t y

= (1 )C g

p FD y

(7.15)

4. A force interaction term of the form given by equation 1.44. Jackson constructs a component, FDk , due to the relative motion of the form FD = q()(1 )(uC uD ) (7.16)

where q is assumed to be some function of . Note that this is consistent with a low Reynolds number ow.

Jackson then considered solutions of these equations that involve small, linear perturbations or waves in an otherwise homogeneous mixture. Thus the ow was decomposed into:
1. A uniform, homogeneous uidized bed in which the mean values of uD and uC are respectively zero and some adjustable constant. To maintain generality, we will characterize the relative motion by the drift ux, jCD = (1 )uC . 2. An unsteady linear perturbation in the velocities, pressure and volume fraction of the form exp{iy + ( i)t} that models waves of wavenumber, , and frequency, , traveling in the y direction with velocity / and increasing in amplitude at a rate given by .

Substituting this decomposition into the system of equations described above yields the following expression for ( i):
1 jCD 2 = K2 {1 + 4iK3 + 4K1 K3 4iK3 (1 + K1 )K4 } 2 K2 (1 + 2iK3) g (7.17) where the constants K1 through K3 are given by

( i)

K1 =

D (1 ) C K3 =

; K2 =

(D C )(1 ) 2{D (1 ) + C } (7.18)

2 jCD g(1 )2 {D /C 1}

and K4 is given by K4 = 2 1 + (1 ) dq q d (7.19)

It transpires that K4 is a critical parameter in determining the stability and it, in turn, depends on how q, the factor of proportionality in equation 7.16, varies with . Here we examine two possible functions, q(). The Carman-Kozeny equation 2.96 for the pressure drop through a packed bed is
185

appropriate for slow viscous ow and leads to q 2 /(1 )2 ; from equation 7.19 this yields K4 = 2 + 1 and is an example of low Reynolds number ow. As a representative example of higher Reynolds number ow we take the relation 2.100 due to Wallis (1969) and this leads to q /(1 )b1 (recall Wallis suggests b = 3); this yields K4 = b. We will examine both of these examples of the form of q(). Note that the solution 7.17 yields the non-dimensional frequency and growth rate of waves with wavenumber, , as functions of just three dimensionless variables, the volume fraction, , the density ratio, D /C , and the 1 relative motion parameter, jCD /(g/) 2 , similar to a Froude number. Note also that equation 7.17 yields two roots for the dimensionless frequency, jCD /g, and growth rate, jCD /g. Jackson demonstrates that the negative sign choice is an attenuated wave; consequently we focus exclusively on the positive sign choice that represents a wave that propagates in the direction of the drift ux, jCD , and grows exponentially with time. It is also easy to see that the growth rate tends to innity as . However, it is meaningless to consider wavelengths less than the inter-particle distance and therefore the focus should be on waves of this order since they will predominate. Therefore, in the discussion below, it is assumed that the 1 values of primary interest are of the order of the typical inter-particle distance. Figure 7.15 presents typical dimensionless growth rates for various values 1 of the parameters , D /C , and jCD /(g/) 2 for both the Carman-Kozeny and Wallis expressions for K4 . In all cases the growth rate increases with the wavenumber , conrming the fact that the fastest growing wavelength is the smallest that is relevant. We note, however, that a more complete linear analysis by Anderson and Jackson (1968) (see also Homsy et al. 1980, Jackson 1985, Kytmaa 1987) that includes viscous eects yields a wavelength o that has a maximum growth rate. Figure 7.15 also demonstrates that the eect of void fraction is modest; though the lines for = 0.5 lie below those for = 0.1 this must be weighed in conjunction with the fact that the interparticle distance is greater in the latter case. Gas and liquid uidized beds are typied by D /C values of 3000 and 3 respectively; since the lines for these two cases are not far apart, the primary dierence is the much larger values of jCD in gas-uidized beds. Everything else being equal, increasing jCD means following a line of slope 1 in gure 7.15 and this implies much larger values of the growth rate in gas-uidized beds. This is in accord with the experimental observations. As a postscript, it must be noted that the above analysis leaves out many eects that may be consequential. As previously mentioned, the inclusion

186

Figure 7.15. The dimensionless growth rate jCD /g plotted against the 1 parameter jCD /(g/) 2 for various values of and D /C and for both K4 = 2 + 1 and K4 = 3.

of viscous eects is important at least for lower Reynolds number ows. At higher particle Reynolds numbers, even more complex interactions can occur as particles encounter the wakes of other particles. For example, Fortes et al. (1987) demonstrated the complexity of particle-particle interactions under those circumstances and Joseph (1993) provides a summary of how the inhomogeneities or volume fraction waves evolve with such interactions. General analyses of kinematic waves are contained in chapter 16 and the reader is referred to that chapter for details.

7.4.2 Inhomogeneity instability in vertical ows In vertical ows, the inhomogeneity instability described in the last section will mean the development of intermittency in the volume fraction. The short
187

term result of this instability is the appearance of vertically propagating, horizontally oriented kinematic waves (see chapter 16) in otherwise nominally steady ows. They have been most extensively researched in uidized beds but have also be observed experimentally in vertical bubbly ows by Bernier (1982), Boure and Mercadier (1982), Kytomaa and Brennen (1990) (who also examined solid/liquid mixtures at large Reynolds numbers) and analyzed by Biesheuvel and Gorissen (1990). (Some further comment on these bubbly ow measurements is contained in section 16.2.3.) As they grow in amplitude these wave-like volume fraction perturbations seem to evolve in several ways depending on the type of ow and the manner in which it is initiated. In turbulent gas/liquid ows they result in large gas volumes or slugs with a size close to the diameter of the pipe. In some solid/liquid ows they produce a series of periodic vortices, again with a dimension comparable with that of the pipe diameter. But the long term consequences of the inhomogeneity instability have been most carefully studied in the context of uidized beds. Following the work of Jackson (1963), El-Kaissy and Homsy (1976) studied the evolution of the kinematic waves experimentally and observed how they eventually lead, in uidized beds, to three-dimensional structures known as bubbles . These are not gas bubbles but three-dimensional, bubble-like zones of low particle concentration that propagate upward through the bed while their structure changes relatively slowly. They are particularly evident in wide uidized beds where the lateral dimension is much larger than the typical interparticle distance. Sometimes bubbles are directly produced by the sparger or injector that creates the multiphase ow. This tends to be the case in gas-uidized beds where, as illustrated in the preceding section, the rate of growth of the inhomogeneity is much greater than in liquid uidized beds and thus bubbles are instantly formed. Because of their ubiquity in industrial processes, the details of the threedimensional ows associated with uidized-bed bubbles have been extensively studied both experimentally (see, for example, Davidson and Harrison 1963, Davidson et al. 1985) and analytically (Jackson 1963, Homsy et al. 1980). Roughly spherical or spherical cap in shape, these zones of low solids volume fraction always rise in a uidized bed (see gure 7.16). When the density of bubbles is low, single bubbles are observed to rise with a velocity, WB , given empirically by Davidson and Harrison (1963) as
6 WB = 0.71g 2 VB 1 1

(7.20)

where VB is the volume of the bubble. Both the shape and rise velocity
188

Figure 7.16. Left: X-ray image of uidized bed bubble (about 5cm in diameter) in a bed of glass beads (courtesy of P.T.Rowe). Right: View from above of bubbles breaking the surface of a sand/air uidized bed (courtesy of J.F.Davidson).

have many similarities to the spherical cap bubbles discussed in section 3.2.2. The rise velocity, WB may be either faster or slower than the upward velocity of the suspending uid, uC , and this implies two types of bubbles that Catipovic et al. (1978) call fast and slow bubbles respectively. Figure 7.17 qualitatively depicts the nature of the streamlines of the ow relative to the bubbles for fast and slow bubbles. The same paper provides a ow regime map, gure 7.18 indicating the domains of fast bubbles, slow bubbles and rapidly growing bubbles. When the particles are smaller other forces become important, particularly those that cause particles to stick together. In gas uidized beds the ow regime map of Geldart (1973), reproduced as gure 7.19, is widely used to determine the ow regime. With very small particles (Group C) the cohesive eects dominate and the bed behaves like a plug, though the suspending uid may create holes in the plug. With somewhat larger particles (Group A), the bed exhibits considerable expansion before bubbling begins. Group B particles exhibit bubbles as soon as uidization begins (fast bubbles) and, with even larger particles (Group D), the bubbles become slow bubbles. Aspects of the ow regime maps in gures 7.18 and 7.19 qualitatively reect the results of the instability analysis of the last section. Larger particles
189

Figure 7.17. Sketches of the uid streamlines relative to a uidized bed bubble of low volume fraction for a fast bubble (left) and a slow bubble. Adapted from Catipovic et al. (1978).

Figure 7.18. Flow regime map for uidized beds with large particles (diameter, D) where (uC )min is the minimum uidization velocity and H is the height of the bed. Adapted from Catipovic et al. (1978).

190

Figure 7.19. Flow regime map for uidized beds with small particles (diameter, D). Adapted from Geldart (1973).

and larger uid velocities imply larger jCD values and therefore, according to instability analysis, larger growth rates. Thus, in the upper right side of both gures we nd rapidly growing bubbles. Moreover, in the instability analysis it transpires that the ratio of the wave speed, / (analogous to the bubble velocity) to the typical uid velocity, jCD , is a continuously decreas1 ing function of the parameter, jCD /(g/) 2 . Indeed, /jCD decreases from 1 values greater than unity to values less than unity as jCD /(g/) 2 increases. This is entirely consistent with the progression from fast bubbles for small particles (small jCD ) to slow bubbles for larger particles. For further details on bubbles in uidized beds the reader is referred to the extensive literature including the books of Zenz and Othmer (1960), Cheremisino and Cheremisino (1984), Davidson et al. (1985) and Gibilaro (2001).

7.5 LIMITS ON SEPARATED FLOW We now leave disperse ow limits and turn to the mechanisms that limit separated ow regimes.
191

7.5.1 Kelvin-Helmoltz instability Separated ow regimes such as stratied horizontal ow or vertical annular ow can become unstable when waves form on the interface between the two uid streams (subscripts 1 and 2). As indicated in gure 7.20, the densities of the uids will be denoted by 1 and 2 and the velocities by u1 and u2 . If these waves continue to grow in amplitude they will cause a transition to another ow regime, typically one with greater intermittency and involving plugs or slugs. Therefore, in order to determine this particular boundary of the separated ow regime, it is necessary to investigate the potential growth of the interfacial waves, whose wavelength will be denoted by (wavenumber, = 2/). Studies of such waves have a long history originating with the work of Kelvin and Helmholtz and the phenomena they revealed have come to be called Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities (see, for example, Yih 1965). In general this class of instabilities involves the interplay between at least two of the following three types of forces:
r a buoyancy force due to gravity and proportional to the dierence in the densities of the two uids. This can be characterized by g 3 where = 1 2 , g is the acceleration due to gravity and is a typical dimension of the waves. This force may be stabilizing or destabilizing depending on the orientation of gravity, g, relative to the two uid streams. In a horizontal ow in which the upper uid is lighter than the lower uid the force is stabilizing. When the reverse is true the buoyancy force is destabilizing and this causes Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities. When the streams are vertical as in vertical annular ow the role played by the buoyancy force is less clear. r a surface tension force characterized by S that is always stabilizing. r a Bernoulli eect that implies a change in the pressure acting on the interface caused by a change in velocity resulting from the displacement, a of that surface. For example, if the upward displacement of the point A in gure 7.21 were to cause an increase in the local velocity of uid 1 and a decrease in the local velocity of uid 2, this would imply an induced pressure dierence at the point A that would

Figure 7.20. Sketch showing the notation for Kelvin-Helmholtz instability. 192

increase the amplitude of the distortion, a. Such Bernoulli forces depend on the dierence in the velocity of the two streams, u = u1 u2 , and are characterized by (u)2 2 where and are a characteristic density and dimension of the ow.

The interplay between these forces is most readily illustrated by a simple example. Neglecting viscous eects, one can readily construct the planar, incompressible potential ow solution for two semi-innite horizontal streams separated by a plane horizontal interface (as in gure 7.20) on which small amplitude waves have formed. Then it is readily shown (Lamb 1879, Yih 1965) that Kelvin-Helmholtz instability will occur when 1 2 (u)2 g + S <0 1 + 2 (7.21)

The contributions from the three previously mentioned forces are selfevident. Note that the surface tension eect is stabilizing since that term is always positive, the buoyancy eect may be stabilizing or destabilizing depending on the sign of and the Bernoulli eect is always destabilizing. Clearly, one subset of this class of Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities are the Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities that occur in the absence of ow (u = 0) when is negative. In that static case, the above relation shows that the interface is unstable to all wave numbers less than the critical value, = c , where c = g() S
1 2

(7.22)

In the next two sections we shall focus on the instabilities induced by the destabilizing Bernoulli eect for these can often cause instability of a separated ow regime.

Figure 7.21. Sketch showing the notation for stratied ow instability. 193

7.5.2 Stratied ow instability As a rst example, consider the stability of the horizontal stratied ow depicted in gure 7.21 where the destabilizing Bernoulli eect is primarily opposed by a stabilizing buoyancy force. An approximate instability condition is readily derived by observing that the formation of a wave (such as that depicted in gure 7.21) will lead to a reduced pressure, pA , in the gas in the orice formed by that wave. The reduction below the mean gas pressure, pG , will be given by Bernoullis equation as pA pG = G u2 a/h G (7.23)

provided a h. The restraining pressure is given by the buoyancy eect of the elevated interface, namely (L G )ga. It follows that the ow will become unstable when u2 > gh/G G (7.24)

In this case the liquid velocity has been neglected since it is normally small compared with the gas velocity. Consequently, the instability criterion provides an upper limit on the gas velocity that is, in eect, the velocity dierence. Taitel and Dukler (1976) compared this prediction for the boundary of the stratied ow regime in a horizontal pipe of diameter, d, with the experimental observations of Mandhane et al. (1974) and found substantial agreement. This can be demonstrated by observing that, from equation 7.24, jG = uG = C()(gd/G) 2
1 1

(7.25)

where C() = (h/d) 2 is some simple monotonically increasing function of that depends on the pipe cross-section. For example, for the 2.5cm pipe of 1 gure 7.3 the factor (gd/G) 2 in equation 7.25 will have a value of approximately 15m/s. As can be observed in gure 7.3, this is in close agreement with the value of jG at which the ow at low jL departs from the stratied regime and begins to become wavy and then annular. Moreover the factor C() should decrease as jL increases and, in gure 7.3, the boundary between stratied ow and wavy ow also exhibits this decrease.

7.5.3 Annular ow instability As a second example consider vertical annular ow that becomes unstable when the Bernoulli force overcomes the stabilizing surface tension force. From equation 7.21, this implies that disturbances with wavelengths greater
194

than a critical value, c , will be unstable and that c = 2S(1 + 2 )/1 2 (u)2 (7.26)

For a liquid stream and a gas stream (as is normally the case in annular G this becomes ow) and with L c = 2S/G (u)2 (7.27)

Now consider the application of this criterion to the ow regime maps for vertical pipe ow included in gures 7.6 and 7.8. We examine the stability of a well-developed annular ow at high gas volume fraction where u jG . Then for a water/air mixture equation 7.27 predicts critical wavelengths of 0.4cm and 40cm for jG = 10m/s and jG = 1m/s respectively. In other words, at low values of jG only larger wavelengths are unstable and this seems to be in accord with the break-up of the ow into large slugs. On the other hand at higher jG ow rates, even quite small wavelengths are unstable and the liquid gets torn apart into the small droplets carried in the core gas ow.

195