CFD simulation of gas–liquid stirred vessel: VC, S33, and L33 flow regimes

Khopkar, Avinash R.; Ranade, Vivek V.

doi:10.1002/aic.10762

Cited by 66 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lane et al, 2004;Khopkar and Ranade, 2006;Scargiali et al, 2007;Montante et al, 2007). Apparently, although useful results have been obtained so far, quantitative evaluations of the prediction accuracy for liquid and gas turbulent flow field and for BSD are still scant in the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In the former case, our modelling approach coincide with that usually adopted for solid-liquid and gas-liquid stirred vessels, whose model equations can be found elsewhere (e.g. Montante and Magelli, 2005;Khopkar and Ranade, 2006;Scargiali et al, 2007). With the MUSIG model, the BSD is divided into a suitable number of size classes for which the continuity equations, including source and sink terms due to coalescence and break-up, are solved.…”

Section: The Cfd Model Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gas–liquid flow and bubble size distribution in stirred tanks

Montante¹,

Horn²,

Paglianti³

2008

Chemical Engineering Science

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: The Cfd Model Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gas–liquid flow and bubble size distribution in stirred tanks

Montante¹,

Horn²,

Paglianti³

2008

Chemical Engineering Science

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Khopkar and Ranade [24] argued that bubbles undergo significantly higher turbulence than that of a bubble moving through stagnant liquid. Unless the influence of the prevailing turbulence on bubble drag coefficient is accounted for, the CFD model will not adequately predict the pattern of gas holdup distribution.…”

Section: Influence Of Turbulencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…(8), this formulation has a wide range of application and has been used by many authors [3,7,9,13,24,25].…”

Section: Interfacial Momentum Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity Study on Modeling an Internal Airlift Loop Reactor Using a Steady 2D Two‐Fluid Model

Huang

Yang

et al. 2008

Chem Eng & Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sensitivity study of bubbly flow in an internal airlift loop reactor is presented using a steady Reynolds averaging two-fluid model. Comparative evaluation of different drag formulations, drag coefficient correlations, turbulence effect on the drag coefficient, outlet slip velocity, and bubble size is performed and the respective influence to the simulation results is highlighted. It is found that a complicated drag formulation may not result in reliable predictions. All the drag coefficient correlations underpredict the gas holdup if the influence of turbulence on the drag coefficient is not well incorporated. Fortunately, the global hydrodynamics is not sensitive to the outflow slip velocity for a wide range, so a steady two-fluid model can be used to simulate the bubbly flow when the flow field is fully developed. The correct estimation of bubble size with properly selected correlations play an important role in successful simulation of gas-liquid bubbly flow in airlift loop reactors.

show abstract

“…When 8.76×10 −6 is used for Ei, the average gasholdup is higher than experimental data apparently. For gas-liquid systems, Khopkar and Ranade (2006) modified E i at 6.5×10 . The value of average gas-holdup is 0.08083 with 6.5×10 , which is close to the experimental data.…”

Section: (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

CFD Simulation of Average and Local Gas–Liquid Flow Properties in Stirred Tank Reactors with Multiple Rushton Impellers

Pan

Xie

et al. 2017

J. Chem. Eng. Japan / JCEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, computational investigation of the gas-liquid ow in stirred tank with multiple Rushton impellers was carried out. Experimental results of average and local details of gas-liquid ow characters were reported, including gas-holdup, bubble Sauter diameter, speci c area and mass transfer coe cient. Thoroughly interphase momentum transfer models including drag and non-drag models were investigated, together with four mass transfer coe cient models using commercial CFD software ANSYS CFX 12.0. Among the drag models tested, the modi ed Brucato model showed more accurate results than others, while non-drag models showed slight e ects on the average ow and local ow characters. For accurate local ow simulation, the population balance model (PBM) showed quite sensitive e ect on the local gas distribution. Simulation of interphase mass transfer with eddy cell model showed the most agreement with experimental measured data. Additionally, two advection schemes were employed and compared with each other to test their ability to get more accurate simulation result.

show abstract

CFD simulation of gas–liquid stirred vessel: VC, S33, and L33 flow regimes

Cited by 66 publications

References 31 publications

Gas–liquid flow and bubble size distribution in stirred tanks

Gas–liquid flow and bubble size distribution in stirred tanks

Sensitivity Study on Modeling an Internal Airlift Loop Reactor Using a Steady 2D Two‐Fluid Model

CFD Simulation of Average and Local Gas–Liquid Flow Properties in Stirred Tank Reactors with Multiple Rushton Impellers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About