Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modelling the Influence of Bubble Dynamics on Motion, Mass Transfer and Chemical Reaction in LES-Euler/Lagrange Computations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reactive Bubbly Flows

Part of the book series: Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications ((FMIA,volume 128))

Abstract

The Euler/Lagrange approach is an attractive and descriptive method for numerically computing large-scale dispersed multi-phase flows, such as reactive bubbly flows, where however the dispersed phase elements are treated as point-masses. This approach was extended in the present study in order to account for finite size effects, specifically shape and trajectory oscillations as well as the resulting dynamic mass transfer, which are essential in bubble column flows. The flow field was computed by the Large Eddy Simulation (LES) concept with full two-way coupling in momentum and the modelled sub-grid-scale (SGS) turbulence, respecting also bubble-induced turbulence (BIT). Bubble motion was calculated including all relevant forces (i.e. drag, lift, wall force, added mass, fluid inertia, gravity/buoyancy and Basset force), which were extended considering the modelled instantaneous bubble eccentricity and also incorporating bubble transport by the SGS turbulence. Mass transfer was modelled also accounting for bubble dynamic behaviour (i.e. shape oscillations). For validating the model extensions thorough numerical computations were conducted for a number of experimental test cases with only CO2 absorption as well as chemical reactions considering single bubble rise and also bubble swarms in laboratory bubble columns. It is demonstrated that for point-particle approaches the modelling of bubble dynamics in motion and mass transfer is essential for accurate predictions. Only with this extension it is possible to obtain correct bubble lateral dispersion (i.e. bubble fluctuating velocities) and a remarkably higher mass transfer provoked by larger surface area of deformed bubbles. Thereby, the bubble size distribution variation along the bubble column in a reactive system can be predicted with a very good agreement compared to measurements. The transient evolution of species concentration in the column occurred much faster considering the bubble dynamics model resulting in a much better agreement with the measured pH variation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sommerfeld M (ed) (2004) Bubbly flows: analysis, modelling and calculation. Series: Heat and mass transfer. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sommerfeld M, van Wachem B, Oliemans R (2008) Best practice guidelines for computational fluid dynamics of dispersed multi-phase flows, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lain S, Bröder D, Sommerfeld M, Göz MF (2002) Modelling hydrodynamics and turbulence in a bubble column using the Euler–Lagrange procedure. Int J Multiph Flows 28:1381–1407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lapin A, Lübbert A (1994) Numerical simulation of the dynamics of two-phase gas-liquid flows in bubble columns. Chem Eng Sci 49:3661–3674. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(94)E0121-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Darmana D, Deen NG, Kuipers JAM (2005) Detailed modeling of hydrodynamics, mass transfer and chemical reactions in a bubble column using a discrete bubble model. Chem Eng Sci 60:3383–3404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2005.01.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Radl S, Khinast JG (2010) Multiphase flow and mixing in dilute bubble swarms. Am Inst Chem Eng 56:2421–2445

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sommerfeld M, Bourloutski E, Bröder D (2008) Euler/Lagrange calculations of bubbly flows with consideration of bubble coalescence. Can J Chem Eng 81:508–518. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.5450810324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gruber MC, Radl S, Khinast JG (2015) Rigorous modeling of CO2 absorption and chemisorption: the influence of bubble coalescence and breakage. Chem Eng Sci 137:188–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2015.06.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Taborda MA, Sommerfeld M, Muniz M (2020) LES-Euler/Lagrange modelling of bubble columns considering mass transfer, chemical reactions and effects of bubble dynamics. Chem Eng Sci 116121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2020.116121

  10. Sommerfeld M (2017) Numerical methods for dispersed multiphase flows. In: Bodnár Š, Galdi T, Nečasová GP (eds) Part. Flows, series adv. Springer International Publishing, pp 327–396

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yoshizawa A (1986) Statistical theory for compressible turbulent shear flows, with the application to subgrid modeling. Phys Fluids 29:2152. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.865552

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Muniz M, Sommerfeld M (2020) On the force competition in bubble columns: a numerical study. Int J Multiph Flow 128:103256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2020.103256

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Lamb H (1932) Hydrodynamics, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Simcik M, Ruzicka MC, Drahoš J (2008) Computing the added mass of dispersed particles. Chem Eng Sci 63:4580–4595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2008.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hosokawa S, Tomiyama A, Misaki S, Hamada T (2002) Lateral migration of single bubbles due to the presence of wall. In: Proceedings of ASME joint US-European fluids engineering division conference FEDSM2002, Montreal, Canada, p 855

    Google Scholar 

  16. Michaelides E, Roig V (2011) Reinterpretation of the Odar and Hamilton data on the unsteady equation of motion of particles. Am Inst Chem Eng 57:2997–3002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. van Hinsberg MAT, ten Thije Boonkkamp JHM, Clercx HJH (2011) An efficient, second order method for the approximation of the Basset history force. J Comput Phys 230:1465–1478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2010.11.014

  18. Lipowsky J, Sommerfeld M (2007) LES-simulation of the formation of particles strands in swirling flows using an unsteady Euler-Lagrange approach. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on multiphase flow ICMF, Leipzig, Germany, Paper No. S3_Thu_C_54

    Google Scholar 

  19. von Karman T, Horwarth L (1938) On the statistical theory of isotropic turbulence. Proc R Soc Lond A 164:192–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lilly DK (1967) The representation of small scale turbulence in numerical simulation experiments. In: Proceedings of IBM scientific computing symposium on environmental sciences

    Google Scholar 

  21. Deardorff JW (1980) Stratocumulus-capped mixed layers derived from a three-dimensional model. Bound-Layer Meteorol 18:495–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00119502

  22. Lunde K, Perkins RJ (1998) Shape oscillations of rising bubbles. Appl Sci Res 58:387–408. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1000864525753

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Sommerfeld M, Muniz M, Reichardt T (2018) On the importance of modelling bubble dynamics for point-mass numerical calculations of bubble columns. J Chem Eng Jpn 51:301–317. https://doi.org/10.1252/jcej.17we277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sommerfeld M, Bröder D (2009) Analysis of hydrodynamics and microstructure in a bubble column by planar shadow image velocimetry. Ind Eng Chem Res 48:330–340. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie800838u

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bröder D, Sommerfeld M (2007) Planar shadow image velocimetry for the analysis of the hydrodynamics in bubbly flows. Meas Sci Technol 18:2513–2528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hosoda S, Abe S, Hosokawa S, Tomiyama A (2014) Mass transfer from a bubble in a vertical pipe. Int J Heat Mass Transf 69:215–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2013.10.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hlawitschka MW, Kováts P, Zähringer K, Bart H-J (2017) Simulation and experimental validation of reactive bubble column reactors. Chem Eng Sci 170:306–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.12.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Boussinesq J (1905) Calcul du pouvoir refroidissant des fluides. J Math 1:285–332

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Lochiel AC, Calderbank PH (1964) Mass transfer in the continuous phase around axisymmetric bodies of revolution. Chem Eng Sci 19:471–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(64)85074-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Brauer H (1981) Particle/fluid transport processes. Prog Chem Eng 19:81–111

    Google Scholar 

  31. Bird E, Stewart RB, Lightfoot WE (2007) Transport phenomena, 2nd edn, New York

    Google Scholar 

  32. Montes FJ, Galan MA, Cerro RL (1999) Mass transfer from oscillating bubbles in bioreactors. Chem Eng Sci 54:3127–3136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(98)00314-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. van Krevelen DW, Hoftijzer PJ (1948) Kinetics of gas-liquid reactions. Part I. General theory. Recl Trav Chim Pays-Bas 67:563–586

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hikita H, Asai S (1963) Gas absorption with (m, n)-th order irreversible chemical reaction. Int Chem Eng 27:823–830

    Google Scholar 

  35. Westerterp A, Swaaij KR, Beenackers WPM (1998) Chemical reactor design and operation, New York

    Google Scholar 

  36. Merker D, Böhm L, Oßberger M, Klüfers P, Kraume M (2017) Mass transfer in reactive bubbly flows—a single-bubble study. Chem Eng Technol 40:1391–1399. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201600715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kováts P, Thévenin D, Zähringer K (2017) Investigation of mass transfer and hydrodynamics in a model bubble column. Chem Eng Technol 40:1434–1444. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201600679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Eigen M (1954) Methods for investigation of ionic reactions in aqueous solutions with half-times as short as 10−9 sec. Discuss Faraday Soc 17:194–203. https://doi.org/10.1039/df9541700194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kern DM (1960) The hydration of carbon dioxide. J Chem Educ 37:14. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed037p14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tsonopoulos CM, Coulson DM, Inman LB (1976) Ionization constants of water pollutants. J Chem Eng Data 21:190–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Edwards TJ, Maurer G, Newman J, Prausnitz JM (1978) Vapor-liquid equilibria in multicomponent aqueous solutions of volatile weak electrolytes. AIChE J 24:966–976. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690240605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Johnson KS (1982) Carbon dioxide hydration and dehydration kinetics in seawater: CO2 reaction kinetics. Limnol Oceanogr 27:849–855. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.1982.27.5.0849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Pohorecki R, Moniuk W (1988) Kinetics of reaction between carbon dioxide and hydroxyl ions in aqueous electrolyte solutions. Chem Eng Sci 43:1677–1684. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(88)85159-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kipping R, Kryk H, Schleicher E, Gustke M, Hampel U (2017) Application of a wire-mesh sensor for the study of chemical species conversion in a bubble column. Chem Eng Technol 40:1425–1433. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201700005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Milleli M, Smith B, Lakehal D (2001) Large eddy simulation of turbulent shear flows laden with bubbles. In: Direct large-eddy simulation. IV ERCOFTAC series, pp 461–470

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sander R (2015) Compilation of Henry’s law constants (version 4.0) for water as solvent. Atmos Chem Phys 15:4399–4981. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-4399-2015

  47. Muniz M, Sommerfeld M (2019) On the force competition in bubble columns: a numerical study. Int J Multiph Flow

    Google Scholar 

  48. Darmana D, Henket RLB, Deen NG, Kuipers JAM (2007) Detailed modelling of hydrodynamics, mass transfer and chemical reactions in a bubble column using a discrete bubble model: chemisorption of CO2 into NaOH solution, numerical and experimental study. Chem Eng Sci 62:2556–2575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2007.01.065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Hlawitschka M, Drefenstedt S (2016) Local analysis of CO2 chemisorption in a rectangular bubble column using a multiphase Euler-Euler CFD code. J Chem Eng Process Technol 7. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7048.1000300

  50. Krauβ M, Rzehak R (2017) Reactive absorption of CO2 in NaOH: detailed study of enhancement factor models. Chem Eng Sci 166:193–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.03.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Krauß M, Rzehak R (2018) Reactive absorption of CO2 in NaOH: an Euler-Euler simulation study. Chem Eng Sci 181:199–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2018.01.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Darmana D, Deen NG, Kuipers JAM (2006) Parallelization of an Euler-Lagrange model using mixed domain decomposition and a mirror domain technique: application to dispersed gas-liquid two-phase flow. J Comput Phys 220:216–248

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  53. Versteeg GF, Van Swaaij WPM (1988) Solubility and diffusivity of acid gases (carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide) in aqueous alkanolamine solutions. J Chem Eng Data 33:29–34. https://doi.org/10.1021/je00051a011

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)—priority program SPP1740 “Reactive Bubbly Flows” (237189010) for the project SO 204/47-1 (367360141).

The authors are also thankful to D. Merker from Technical University of Berlin for conducting the physical experiments and supplying all their valuable details and information necessary to perform the simulations with high fidelity.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Process Engineering, Multiphase Flow Systems, Otto-von-Guericke Magdeburg University, Hoher Weg 7b, 06120, Halle (Saale), Germany

    Manuel A. Taborda & Martin Sommerfeld

Authors
  1. Manuel A. Taborda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Sommerfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Sommerfeld .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Multiphase Flows, Hamburg University of Technology, Hamburg, Germany

    Michael Schlüter

  2. Mathematical Modeling and Analysis, Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany

    Dieter Bothe

  3. Institute for Inorganic Chemistry, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Sonja Herres-Pawlis

  4. Institute of Chemical Process Engineering, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany

    Ulrich Nieken

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Taborda, M.A., Sommerfeld, M. (2021). Modelling the Influence of Bubble Dynamics on Motion, Mass Transfer and Chemical Reaction in LES-Euler/Lagrange Computations. In: Schlüter, M., Bothe, D., Herres-Pawlis, S., Nieken, U. (eds) Reactive Bubbly Flows. Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications, vol 128. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72361-3_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72361-3_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72360-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-72361-3

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation