Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction: I single‐phase flow and experimental

Doherty, Andrew; Murphy, Adrian; Spedding, P.L.

doi:10.1002/apj.163

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Figure 17 shows the optimized topology of a T-junction consisting of equal-sized diverging pipes and a pointed edge facing the inlet. As in the bend design example, the optimized topology prefers short and wide pipes for optimum Stokes flow, which agrees well with the findings of Doherty et al [19]. Topology optimization of a channel flow with a fluid body force, as shown in Figure 18, is considered.…”

Section: Verification Examplessupporting

confidence: 86%

P1‐nonconforming quadrilateral finite element for topology optimization

Jang

Panganiban

Chung

2010

Numerical Meth Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThis investigation focuses on an alternative approach to topology optimization problems involving incompressible materials using the P1-nonconforming finite element. Instead of using the mixed displacementpressure formulation, a pure displacement-based approach can be employed for finite element formulation owing to the Poisson locking-free property of the P1-nonconforming element. Moreover, because the P1-nonconforming element has linear shape functions that are defined at element vertices, it has considerably fewer degrees of freedom than other quadrilateral nonconforming elements and its implementation is as simple as that of the conforming bilinear element. Various problems dealing with incompressible materials and pressure-loaded structures found in published works are solved to verify the applicability of the proposed method. The application of the method is extended to the optimal design of fluid channels in the Stokes flow. This is done by expressing pressure in terms of volumetric strain rates and developing a velocity-field-only finite element formulation. The optimization results obtained from all the problems considered in this study are in close agreement with those found in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Verification Examplessupporting

confidence: 86%

P1‐nonconforming quadrilateral finite element for topology optimization

Jang

Panganiban

Chung

2010

Numerical Meth Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The data (ignoring the intermittent regimes) fall about a definite curve. The parallel with the single-phase performance given in previous work [119] is of significance. For turbulent inlet flow, the data were modelled by the relation P tee = 9.56 × 10 −10 Re T 2.547 (1) within an overall average deviation of +5% range + 50% to −25%.…”

Section: Two-phase Pressure Dropmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…The same approach will be used in this work, with the single-phase data forming the background to better understand the two-phase data. [119] Also, details of the experimental methodology are presented there. 59 -65,69,71 -77,79 -90,92,94,95,97 -103,107,109,120 -122] In some cases, the inlet flow regime present was only predicted using published flow regime maps.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction II: two‐phase air/water flow

Doherty

Murphy

Spedding

2009

Asia-Pacific J Chem Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A universal flow regime map was presented for two-phase flow in a horizontal pipe. Data were given on two-phase gas/liquid flow in a symmetrical impacting tee junction. The flow regimes in the inlet arm of the tee were those expected for a straight pipe. This was not so for the outlet arm where, in most cases, flow regimes occurred earlier than expected. At low liquid outlet flows the stratified regime was reinforced into higher gas flows than expected. The liquid hold-up exhibited variations over the tee junction. The pressure drop in the inlet arm agreed with similar data for the straight pipe, but in the tee outlets was below that expected for the straight pipe. The tee junction pressure drop showed some parallels to the corresponding single-phase flow data but the l e /d dimensionless values for the junction pressure drop showed a wide variation, in contrast to the single-phase junction data. A model was presented based on the Lockhard-Martinelli theory that enabled the tee pressure drop to be predicted.  RESULTSThe majority of the two-phase studies in junctions were concerned with phase separation by the junction. Indications were that the flow regime entering the junction had an effect on its overall hydrodynamic performance. [1 -6,8 -13,15 -28,

show abstract

“…[32] For three-phase flow, there was a significant variation in the pressure drop recorded between the two outlet arms of the tee junction, namely ±2.7% (0 to +8% range).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction III: three‐phase air/water/oil flow

Doherty

Murphy

Spedding

2009

Asia-Pacific J Chem Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results are presented on three-phase air/oil/water horizontal flow in a 0.026 m i.d. symmetrical impacting tee junction. The flow regimes observed agreed with an existing three-phase flow map. The inversion from waterdominated (WD) to oil-dominated (OD) flow was at an oil-to-liquid volumetric ratio of f o = 0.285. The inversion was at a low f o value because of the relatively tranquil conditions studied. Retention of oil on the pipe wall at the air/water two-phase condition at f o = 0 resulted in a dramatic increase in the pressure drop above that expected for the two-phase flow. The pressure drop in the tee junction arms increased with liquid-flow rate. The actual tee junction pressure drop showed a similar pattern to that observed in the inlet arm. The pressure drop was relatively constant in the OD region but showed a dramatic increase in the WD and inversion regions at low f o values. Non-dimensionalising the junction pressure drop as l e /d gave a similar pattern but the scatter of data increased.The tee pressure loss data were modelled using the Lockhart-Martinelli G parameter and gave similar but different correlations for the WD and OD regions. 

show abstract

Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction: I single‐phase flow and experimental

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

P1‐nonconforming quadrilateral finite element for topology optimization

P1‐nonconforming quadrilateral finite element for topology optimization

Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction II: two‐phase air/water flow

Fluid flow in an impacting symmetrical tee junction III: three‐phase air/water/oil flow

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About