Visualization of oxygen concentration fields and measurement of concentration gradients at bubble surfaces in surfactant-contaminated water
- 234 Downloads
A laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) technique is employed for visualizing a thin two-dimensional (2D) dissolved oxygen concentration field and measuring local oxygen concentration gradients near the surface of an oxygen bubble in water containing surfactant (Triton X-100, SigmaAldrich, St Louis, MO, USA)). The fluorescence of pyrene butyric acid (PBA) is induced by a planar pulse of nitrogen laser light. Oxygen transferring from the bubble to the deoxygenated water quenches the fluorescence of the PBA. Images of the fluorescence fields are captured by a UV-intensified CCD camera. The intensity of fluorescence quenching at each image pixel is used to measure dissolved oxygen concentration in a 2D field. Images of bubbles are obtained at 200 ppm, 100 ppm, and 50 ppm Triton X-100-containing water and in ultra clean deionized water. Higher surfactant concentrations decrease local and average concentration gradients of oxygen at the bubble surface. The ensemble means of dissolved oxygen concentration boundary layer thicknesses of 0.160 mm, 0.130 mm, and 0.072 mm, for the images of bubbles obtained at 200 ppm, 100 ppm, and 50 ppm Triton X-100-containing water, respectively. Local concentration boundary layer thickness increases from the top to the bottom along the bubble surface. A series of images of the bubble flow fields are analyzed to measure the oxygen concentration gradients in water in the presence of surfactant. The images captured in clean water are not fully resolvable because of their poor resolution. The formation of the attached wake in the fluorescence field images at the bottom of the bubbles in clean water tends to be promoted by increasing oblateness owing to the presence of surfactant at the surface.
KeywordsBoundary Layer Thickness Dissolve Oxygen Concentration Oxygen Transfer Rate Bubble Surface Concentration Boundary Layer
This work was partially supported by grants from the US Geological Survey Water Resources Research Program and the Auburn University Competitive Research Program.
- Azbel D (1981) Two-phase flows in chemical engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 155–167Google Scholar
- Clift R, Grace JR, Weber ME (1978) Bubbles, drops and particles. Academic Press, New York, pp 278–301Google Scholar
- Danckwerts PV (1951 Significance of liquid-film coefficients in gas absorption. Ind Eng Chem 43:1460Google Scholar
- Duke SR (1996) Air–water transfer at wavy interfaces. PhD dissertation, University of IllinoisGoogle Scholar
- Goodridge F, Robb ID (1965) Mechanism of interfacial resistance in gas absorption. IEC Fundamentals 4:49–55Google Scholar
- Higbie R (1935) The rate of absorption of a pure gas into a still liquid during short periods of exposure. Trans Am Inst Chem Eng 31:365–368Google Scholar
- Jähne B, Monahan EC (1995) Air–water gas transfer. In Third International Symposium on Air–water gas transfer. Aeon, Hanau, Germany, pp 339–369Google Scholar
- Lewis WK, Whitman WG (1924) Principles of gas absorption. Ind Eng Chem 16:1215Google Scholar
- Munsterer T (1996) LIF investigation of the mechanisms controlling air–water mass transfer at a free interface. PhD thesis, University of HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
- Roy S, Duke SR (2000) Laser induced fluorescence measurements of dissolved oxygen concentration fields near air bubble surfaces. Rev Sci Instrum 71:3494–3502Google Scholar