Numerical simulation of hydrodynamic parameters with air-acetic acid system using CFD-PBM coupled model

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20220452

Abstract

Abstract:

In this paper, the influence of the concentration of acetic acid on the hydrodynamic parameters in the bubble column is investigated in the bubble column PX oxidation reactor using two-dimensional and three-dimensional CFD-PBM coupled model. The experimental data are obtained by differential pressure method, fiber optic probe and electrical resistance tomography (ERT) technique, and the simulation results are compared with the experimental values. The drag force model and the coalescence model are corrected by the surface tension term, and the modified model is used for numerical simulation in the acetic acid system with ambient temperature and ambient pressure. The simulation results of the hydrodynamic parameters are analyzed. The results show that when the concentration of acetic acid is in the range of 70%—80%(mass), the average gas holdup has a maximum value. The predicted value of the average gas holdup is within ±10% error, and the three-dimensional simulation results are in good agreement with the ERT experimental value. The modified model has better predictability in acetic acid systems with different concentrations.

Key words: air-acetic acid system, bubble column, computational fluid dynamics, two-phase flow, gas holdup

摘要：

通过二维和三维CFD-PBM耦合模型对空气-醋酸体系中流体力学参数进行数值模拟，采用表面张力修正曳力模型与聚并模型，考察了醋酸浓度对鼓泡塔内气含率、气泡大小分布及轴向液速等参数的影响，与差压法、光纤探针和电阻层析成像技术（ERT）测量的实验数据进行了对比，并讨论分析了气含率和气泡直径等流体力学参数的模拟结果。结果表明，醋酸浓度在70%~80%（质量分数）范围内平均气含率存在最大值，且平均气含率的预测值在±10%误差内，三维模拟结果和ERT实验值吻合较好，说明修正后的模型在不同浓度醋酸体系中具有较好的预测性。

关键词: 空气-醋酸体系, 鼓泡塔, 计算流体力学, 两相流, 气含率

CLC Number:

TQ 028.8

Wenlong ZHANG,Shanglei NING,Haibo JIN,Lei MA,Guangxiang HE,Suohe YANG,Xiaoyan GUO,Rongyue ZHANG. Numerical simulation of hydrodynamic parameters with air-acetic acid system using CFD-PBM coupled model[J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(6): 2589-2602.

张文龙,宁尚雷,靳海波,马磊,何广湘,杨索和,郭晓燕,张荣月. 鼓泡塔内空气-醋酸体系流体力学参数的CFD-PBM耦合模型数值模拟[J]. 化工学报, 2022, 73(6): 2589-2602.

Figures/Tables 14

Table 1 Correction of the coalescence coefficient

U_g/(m/s)	Concentration/%(mass)	σ/σ₀	C_e	α_exp	α_sim	Error/%
0.047	50	1.44	1.20	0.120	0.113	-6.19
0.071	50	1.44	1.15	0.152	0.158	3.95
0.094	50	1.44	1.10	0.185	0.201	8.65
0.047	60	1.36	1.15	0.139	0.130	-6.92
0.071	60	1.36	1.10	0.174	0.177	1.72
0.094	60	1.36	1.05	0.212	0.221	4.25
0.047	70	1.29	1.10	0.143	0.141	-1.40
0.071	70	1.29	1.05	0.182	0.187	2.75
0.094	70	1.29	1.00	0.220	0.232	5.45
0.047	80	1.20	1.05	0.140	0.134	-6.83
0.071	80	1.20	1.00	0.174	0.182	4.60
0.094	80	1.20	0.95	0.207	0.226	9.17
0.047	90	1.11	1.00	0.121	0.116	-4.13
0.071	90	1.11	0.95	0.160	0.165	3.13
0.094	90	1.11	0.90	0.195	0.208	6.67
0.047	100	1.00	0.95	0.117	0.108	-7.70
0.071	100	1.00	0.90	0.153	0.155	1.31
0.094	100	1.00	0.85	0.193	0.199	3.11

Fig.1 Physical properties of acetic acid with different mass fractions

Fig.2 Influence of different mesh quality on radial gas holdup

Fig.3 Comparison of radial gas holdup under different drag force models and superficial gas velocities

Fig.4 Radial gas holdup and axial liquid velocity distribution at different column heights

Fig.5 Radial gas holdup distribution with air-acetic acid system

Fig.6 Distribution of average gas holdup under different acetic acid concentrations and superficial gas velocities

Fig.7 Axial liquid velocity distribution with air-acetic acid system

Fig.8 Radial bubble diameter distribution under different acetic acid concentrations and superficial gas velocities

Fig.9 Bubble number density distribution (z=0.86 m)

Fig.10 Cross-section contours of gas holdup distribution of different mass fractions of acetic acid under different superficial gas velocities（z = 0.86 m）

Fig.11 Three-dimensional cylinder gas holdup distribution map of 80% acetic acid solution

Fig.12 Axial-section contours of gas holdup distribution of 80% acetic acid solution

Fig.13 Radial-section contour distribution of gas holdup at different axial heights of different mass fractions of acetic acid solution

References 37

1	Guo K Y, Wang T F, Yang G Y, et al. Distinctly different bubble behaviors in a bubble column with pure liquids and alcohol solutions[J]. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 2017, 92(2): 432-441.
2	Montoya G, Lucas D, Baglietto E, et al. A review on mechanisms and models for the churn-turbulent flow regime[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2016, 141: 86-103.
3	李光. 鼓泡塔反应器气液两相流数值模拟模型及应用[D]. 上海: 华东理工大学, 2010.
	Li G. Two-phase flow dynamical simulations and modelling of bubble column reactors[D]. Shanghai: East China University of Science and Technology, 2010.
4	Jin H, Yang S, Zhang T, et al. Bubble behavior of a large-scale bubble column with elevated pressure[J]. Chemical Engineering & Technology, 2004, 27(9): 1007-1013.
5	Tran B V, Nguyen D D, Ngo S I, et al. Hydrodynamics and simulation of air–water homogeneous bubble column under elevated pressure[J]. AIChE Journal, 2019, 65(10): e16685.
6	Zhang X B, Luo Z H. Effects of bubble coalescence and breakup models on the simulation of bubble columns[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2020, 226: 115850.
7	Zhang X B, Zheng R Q, Luo Z H. CFD-PBM simulation of bubble columns: effect of parameters in the class method for solving PBEs[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2020, 226: 115853.
8	Yu X, Zhou H, Jing S, et al. CFD-PBM simulation of two-phase flow in a pulsed disc and doughnut column with directly measured breakup kernel functions[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2019, 201: 349-361.
9	Yang N, Xiao Q. A mesoscale approach for population balance modeling of bubble size distribution in bubble column reactors[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2017, 170: 241-250.
10	张佳宝, 崔丽杰, 杨宁. 曳力模型和湍流模型对内环流反应器数值模拟的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2018, 69(1): 389-395.
	Zhang J B, Cui L J, Yang N. Effects of drag model and turbulence model on simulation of air-lift internal-loop reactor[J]. CIESC Journal, 2018, 69(1): 389-395.
11	Gong S G, Gao N N, Han L C, et al. A theoretical model for bubble coalescence by coupling film drainage with approach processes[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2020, 213: 115387.
12	Wang T F, Wang J F, Jin Y. A novel theoretical breakup kernel function for bubbles/droplets in a turbulent flow[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2003, 58(20): 4629-4637.
13	Wang T F, Wang J F, Jin Y. A CFD-PBM coupled model for gas-liquid flows[J]. AIChE Journal, 2006, 52(1): 125-140.
14	王铁峰. 气液(浆)反应器流体力学行为的实验研究和数值模拟[D]. 北京: 清华大学, 2004.
	Wang T F. Experimental study and numerical simulation on the hydrodynamics in gas-liquid (slurry) reactors[D]. Beijing: Tsinghua University, 2004.
15	Prince M J, Blanch H W. Bubble coalescence and break-up in air-sparged bubble columns[J]. AIChE Journal, 1990, 36(10): 1485-1499.
16	Luo H, Svendsen H F. Modeling and simulation of binary approach by energy conservation analysis[J]. Chemical Engineering Communications, 1996, 145(1): 145-153.
17	Lehr F, Millies M, Mewes D. Bubble-size distributions and flow fields in bubble columns[J]. AIChE Journal, 2002, 48(11): 2426-2443.
18	Luo H A, Svendsen H F. Theoretical model for drop and bubble breakup in turbulent dispersions[J]. AIChE Journal, 1996, 42(5): 1225-1233.
19	Shi W B, Yang J, Li G, et al. Modelling of breakage rate and bubble size distribution in bubble columns accounting for bubble shape variations[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2018, 187: 391-405.
20	Hinze J O. Fundamentals of the hydrodynamic mechanism of splitting in dispersion processes[J]. AIChE Journal, 1955, 1(3): 289-295.
21	Tikhomirov V M. On the breakage of drops in a turbulent flow[M]//Selected Works of A. N. Kolmogorov. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1991: 339-343.
22	Yan P, Jin H B, Gao X, et al. Numerical analysis of bubble characteristics in a pressurized bubble column using CFD coupled with a population balance model[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2021, 234: 116427.
23	Yan P, Jin H B, He G X, et al. Numerical simulation of bubble characteristics in bubble columns with different liquid viscosities and surface tensions using a CFD-PBM coupled model[J]. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2020, 154: 47-59.
24	Yan P, Jin H B, He G X, et al. CFD simulation of hydrodynamics in a high-pressure bubble column using three optimized drag models of bubble swarm[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2019, 199: 137-155.
25	Zhang B, Kong L T, Jin H B, et al. CFD simulation of gas-liquid flow in a high-pressure bubble column with a modified population balance model[J]. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2018, 26(6): 1350-1358.
26	张文龙, 侯燕, 靳海波, 等. 加温加压下CFD-PBM耦合模型空气-水两相流数值模拟研究[J]. 化工学报, 2021, 72(9): 4594-4606.
	Zhang W L, Hou Y, Jin H B, et al. Numerical simulation of air-water two-phase flow under elevated pressures and temperatures using CFD-PBM coupled model[J]. CIESC Journal, 2021, 72(9): 4594-4606.
27	Tabib M V, Roy S A, Joshi J B. CFD simulation of bubble column—an analysis of interphase forces and turbulence models[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2008, 139(3): 589-614.
28	Li J H, Cheng C L, Zhang Z D, et al. The EMMS model—its application, development and updated concepts[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 1999, 54(22): 5409-5425.
29	张煜. 湍动鼓泡塔充分发展段的流体力学与内构件技术研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2011.
	Zhang Y. Hydrodynamics of turbulent bubble column with and without internals in well-developed flow region[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2011.
30	Frank T, Zwart P J, Krepper E, et al. Validation of CFD models for mono- and polydisperse air-water two-phase flows in pipes[J]. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 2008, 238(3): 647-659.
31	de Bertodano M L, Lahey R T, Jones O C. Turbulent bubbly two-phase flow data in a triangular duct[J]. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 1994, 146(1/2/3): 43-52.
32	Ning S L, Jin H B, He G X, et al. Effects of the microbubble generation mode on hydrodynamic parameters in gas–liquid bubble columns[J]. Processes, 2020, 8(6): 663.
33	王珏, 杨宁. 基于EMMS方法的鼓泡塔反应器CFD及群平衡模拟[J]. 化工学报, 2017, 68(7): 2667-2677.
	Wang J, Yang N. CFD-PBM simulation with EMMS correctors for bubble column reactors[J]. CIESC Journal, 2017, 68(7): 2667-2677.
34	李兆奇. 列管型鼓泡塔中流动发展规律的研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2015.
	Li Z Q. Flow development in bubble columns with pipe bundle internals[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2015.
35	Ruzicka M C, Drahoš J, Mena P C, et al. Effect of viscosity on homogeneous-heterogeneous flow regime transition in bubble columns[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2003, 96(1/2/3): 15-22.
36	黄娟, 戴干策. 升温鼓泡塔内有机溶液的气含率[J]. 过程工程学报, 2008, 8(2): 209-216.
	Huang J, Dai G C. Gas holdup in a bubble column at elevated temperature with organic liquid solutions[J]. The Chinese Journal of Process Engineering, 2008, 8(2): 209-216.
37	Krishna R, Swart D J W A, Ellenberger J, et al. Gas holdup in slurry bubble columns[J]. AIChE Journal, 1997, 43(2): 311-316.

[1]	Siyu ZHANG, Yonggao YIN, Pengqi JIA, Wei YE. Study on seasonal thermal energy storage characteristics of double U-shaped buried pipe group [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(S1): 295-301.
[2]	Mingkun XIAO, Guang YANG, Yonghua HUANG, Jingyi WU. Numerical study on bubble dynamics of liquid oxygen at a submerged orifice [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(S1): 87-95.
[3]	Shaohua ZHOU, Feilong ZHAN, Guoliang DING, Hao ZHANG, Yanpo SHAO, Yantao LIU, Zheming GAO. Experimental study of flow noise in short tube throttle valve and noise reduction measures [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(S1): 113-121.
[4]	Song HE, Qiaomai LIU, Guangshuo XIE, Simin WANG, Juan XIAO. Two-phase flow simulation and surrogate-assisted optimization of gas film drag reduction in high-concentration coal-water slurry pipeline [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(9): 3766-3774.
[5]	Kaijie WEN, Li GUO, Zhaojie XIA, Jianhua CHEN. A rapid simulation method of gas-solid flow by coupling CFD and deep learning [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(9): 3775-3785.
[6]	Yubing WANG, Jie LI, Hongbo ZHAN, Guangya ZHU, Dalin ZHANG. Experimental study on flow boiling heat transfer of R134a in mini channel with diamond pin fin array [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(9): 3797-3806.
[7]	Linjing YUE, Yihan LIAO, Yuan XUE, Xuejie LI, Yuxing LI, Cuiwei LIU. Study on influence of pit defects on cavitation flow characteristics of throat of thick orifice plates [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3292-3308.
[8]	Linzheng WANG, Yubing LU, Ruizhi ZHANG, Yonghao LUO. Analysis on thermal oxidation characteristics of VOCs based on molecular dynamics simulation [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3242-3255.
[9]	Lei XING, Chunyu MIAO, Minghu JIANG, Lixin ZHAO, Xinya LI. Optimal design and performance analysis of downhole micro gas-liquid hydrocyclone [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3394-3406.
[10]	Chao NIU, Shengqiang SHEN, Yan YANG, Bonian PAN, Yiqiao LI. Flow process calculation and performance analysis of methane BOG ejector [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 2858-2868.
[11]	Yuying GUO, Jiaqiang JING, Wanni HUANG, Ping ZHANG, Jie SUN, Yu ZHU, Junxuan FENG, Hongjiang LU. Water-lubricated drag reduction and pressure drop model modification for heavy oil pipeline [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 2898-2907.
[12]	Xuanzhi HE, Yongqing HE, Guiye WEN, Feng JIAO. Ferrofluid droplet neck self-similar breakup behavior [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 2889-2897.
[13]	Xiaokun HE, Rui LIU, Yuan XUE, Ran ZUO. Review of gas phase and surface reactions in AlN MOCVD [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 2800-2813.
[14]	Qichao LIU, Yunlong ZHOU, Cong CHEN. Analysis and calculation of void fraction of gas-liquid two-phase flow in vertical riser under fluctuating vibration [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(6): 2391-2403.
[15]	Daoyin LIU, Bingqi CHEN, Zuyang ZHANG, Yan WU. Effect of agglomerate structure on drag force by numerical simulation [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(6): 2351-2362.