2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2015.06.056
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of specific energy dissipation rate calculation methodologies utilising 2D PIV velocity measurement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Here, one finds c = 1.1 close to the values found with a boundary forcing (grid turbulence) [35,38]. These estimations of ǫ by five different methods are hardly obtained experimentally [39] and are found here to be all consistent as a consequence of the stationary, homogeneous and isotropic turbulence generated by this forcing in volume. Note that higher turbulence levels can be explored with this forcing (e.g., ǫ ∼ 6 10 −3 m 2 /s −3 for σ u ∼ 0.18 m/s measured with LDV).…”
Section: Energy Dissipation Ratesupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Here, one finds c = 1.1 close to the values found with a boundary forcing (grid turbulence) [35,38]. These estimations of ǫ by five different methods are hardly obtained experimentally [39] and are found here to be all consistent as a consequence of the stationary, homogeneous and isotropic turbulence generated by this forcing in volume. Note that higher turbulence levels can be explored with this forcing (e.g., ǫ ∼ 6 10 −3 m 2 /s −3 for σ u ∼ 0.18 m/s measured with LDV).…”
Section: Energy Dissipation Ratesupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The fluctuating velocity in the liquid at a fixed distance of the maximum simulated bubble radius from the bubble center, was calculated using the radial velocities (available through the rate of change of the bubble radius solved in the present model) over the simulated lifetime of the bubble. These quantities were then used to obtain the turbulent energy dissipation rates (TEDR) (proportional to the velocity cubed divided by the characteristic Eddie length) [33] , [61] . To illustrate such applications of the present model, the contour plot of the turbulent energy dissipation rate as a function of and the ambient pressure is shown in Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, for determination of oxygen mass transfer, chemical, dynamic and gas‐balancing methods are widely employed . For quantification of shear rate, particle image velocimetry (PIV) and laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV) are commonly used to test the velocity field in the bioreactor, based on which the shear rate field can be derived mathematically . For measurement of mixing time, pH tracer‐based, conductance probe and color change methods are available .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[27][28][29] For quantification of shear rate, particle image velocimetry (PIV) and laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV) are commonly used to test the velocity field in the bioreactor, based on which the shear rate field can be derived mathematically. [30][31][32][33][34][35][36] For measurement of mixing time, pH tracer-based, conductance probe and color change methods are available. [37][38][39] Nevertheless, the limited volume of the mini bioreactor makes it inconvenient to carry out the above methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%