Advertisement

Experiments in Fluids

, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 463–478 | Cite as

Benchmarking of the five-sensor probe method for a measurement of an interfacial area concentration

  • D. J. EuhEmail author
  • B. J. Yun
  • C. H. Song
Research Article

Abstract

Interfacial area concentration (IAC) is one of the most important parameters in the two-phase flow models. Five-sensor probe method is a useful measurement technique to measure an IAC. It is essentially based on the four-sensor probe method but it is improved by adapting one more sensor. The passing types of the interfaces through the sensors are classified into four categories and independent methods are applied to the interfaces belonging to each category. To verify the applicability of the five-sensor probe method, benchmarking tests are performed for a rectangular visual channel by using the photographic method. The bubble velocity, void fraction, and Sauter mean diameter measured by the probe are also benchmarked. This paper also includes the design of the five-sensor conductivity probe, the IAC measurement method, the signal processing procedure of the probe signal and the data analysis method by photography.

Keywords

Void Fraction Bubble Size Chord Length Bubble Velocity Bubble Shape 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Nomenclature

ai

local IAC

a

length defined in the bubble surface function

\(\bar{a}^{t}_{i}\)

local time-averaged IAC

|Ai|

determinant of the matrix (i = 0, 1, 2, 3)

b

length defined in the bubble surface function

c

length defined in the bubble surface function

C0

distribution constant in the drift flux model

dtip,v

vertical distance between the front and the rear sensor

dtip,l

lateral distance between rear sensors

DSm

bubble Sauter mean diameter

Dds

maximum spherical bubble size

g

gravity constant

H

simulated bubble turbulent intensity ratio

hi

bubble chord length

I

correction factor for the IAC measuring method

kk

temporally defined variables during the imaging process

lchord

bubble chord length

ld

distance between two of the peripheral rear sensors

ldk

length scale defined in Fig. 4 N Bubble number

Nb

bubble number frequency P Coordinate of the position

sp

projected area of the probe in the flow direction

spk

projected area occupied by a bubble in sub-cell k

tdelay

delay time of the rear sensor signal

ugj

drift velocity in the drift flux model

v

velocity

x, y, z

coordinates

\(\Delta z_{skk^{\prime}}\)

elevation difference of the surface at the position of the k and k′ sensors

Greek symbols

α

void fraction or bubble rotation angle

β

bubble rotation angle

ɛk

criteria for the IAC measurement method and the signal processing scheme

μ

viscosity

θk

contact angle of sub-cell k on the central sensor in a projected plane

ρ

density

σ

surface tension

ηik

directional angle of the rear sensor k from the reference sensor to the i-axis

τb

bubble residence time

Ω

total measuring time

Subscripts

av

average

b

bubble

eff

effective interface

f

liquid

g

gas

i

interface

max

maximum

min

minimum

p

precision

SP

signal processing scheme

I, II, III, IV

category number

j

interface number

k

identification number of rear sensors

z

z-direction

0

reference

Superscript

t

time-average

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been financially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of Korean government under the national nuclear mid-& long-term R&D program.

References

  1. Euh DJ et al (2001) Development of the five-sensor conductivity probe method for the measurement of the interfacial area condensation. Nucl Eng Des 205:35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Euh DJ et al (2004) Numerical simulation of an improved five-sensor probe method for local interfacial area concentration measurement. Nucl Eng Des 234:99–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ishii M (1975) Thermo-fluid dynamic theory of two-phase flow. Eyrolles, Paris; Scientific and Medical Publication of France, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Ishii M (1977) One-dimensional drift flux model and constitutive equations for relative motion between phases in various two-phase flow regimes. Argonne National Laboratory Report, ANS 77-47, Argonne, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Ishii M, Revankar ST (1991) Measurement of interfacial area using four sensor probe in two phase flow. PUNE-91-1, Purdue University, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. Kataoka I et al (1986) Local formulation of interfacial area concentration. Int J Multiphas Flow 12:505–529zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kataoka I, Serizawa A (1990) Interfacial area concentration in bubbly flow. Nucl Eng Des 120:163–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim S et al (2000) Development of the miniaturized four-sensor conductivity probe and the signal processing scheme. Int J Heat Mass Tran 43:4101–4118zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Le Corre JM, Ishii M (2002) Numerical evaluation and correction method for multi-sensor probe measurement techniques in two-phase bubble flow. Nucl Eng Des 216:221–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Revankar ST, Ishii M (1992) Local interfacial area measurement in bubbly flow. Int J Heat Mass Tran 35(4):913–925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Revankar ST, Ishii M (1993) Theory and measurement of local interfacial area using a four sensor probe in two-phase flow. Int J Heat Mass Tran 36(12):2997–3007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tan MJ, Ishii M (1989) Interfacial area measurement methods, ANL-89/5, Argonne National Laboratory, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. Wu Q, Ishii M (1999) Sensitivity study on double-sensor conductivity probe for the measurement of interfacial area concentration in bubbly flow. Int J Multiphas Flow 25(1):155–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Korea Atomic Energy Research InstituteYuseongSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations