------ -

Perro .en 'I _p

UNNERSITY OF MINNESOTA St. Anthony falls (h~. G.lie Laboral
ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY
LORENZ G. STRAUB. Direclor

Technical Paper No. 26. Series B

Two-Phase Flow Studies in Horizontal

Pipes with Special Reference to
Bubbly Mixtures

by

WALTER JAMES and EDWARD SILBERMAN

Seplember 1958
Minneapolis. Minnesota
 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY
LORENZ G. STRAUB. Director

Technical Paper No. 26, Series B

Two-Phase Flow Studies in Horizontal

Pipes with Special Reference to
Bubbly Mixtures

by

WALTER JAMES and EDWARD SILBERMAN

September 1958
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted
for any purpose of the United States Government
 PREFA CE

The studies described in this paper were sponsored by the David

Taylor Model Basin under Contract Nonr 710(21). The contract was effective
January 1 , 1957, and was scheduled to terminate September 30, 1958. The con-
tract has actually been extended, but this report covers the work through
the original completion date. . The contract called for "a literature search
and experimental and analytic studies on the mechanics and limitations of con-
veying air-water mixtures through closed conduits," and can be looked upon
a s a resumption of an earlier contract, Nonr 710(07), which terminated in
De cember 1954.

The entire program was under the general direction of Dr. Lorenz
O. Straub, Director of the St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory. The ex-
perimental work and data reduction were performed at various times by Tuncay
Aydinalp, Athanasios Patitsas, Darrell E. Anderson, Robert L. Steele, and
Hsing Chuang. Special thanks is given to Mr. Chuang who was associated with
the project longer than any of the others.

The manuscript was prepared for printing by Delores Grupp and Mary
Anne Peterson under the general supervision of Loyal Johnson. Thanks is giv-
en to these people as well as to the shop men who built the apparatus and to
the draftsmen who worked on the report.

iii
 ABSTRACT
----- - --
An investigation has been made of the flow of bubbly mixtures in
horizontal pipes, together with some related work on other flow patterns.
Pressure drop is calculated through the use of a conventional friction factor.
In the bubble-flow regime, it is found that the friction factor is approxi-
mately equal to or Slightly greater than the friction factor for liquid flow-
ing alone in the pipe. The bubbles move at nearly the mean velocity of the
liquid while their size is inversely proportional to the liquid velocity and
directly proportional to the square root of the pipe diameter.

The use of a friction factor for calculating pressure drop for other
than bubble flow may also be useful, but more study is necessary to deter-
mine friction factors.

iv
 CONTENTS
- -------
Page
Preface .... co . . . . . . .. iii
Abstract .......... .. • iv
List of Illustrations • • • • vi
List of Tables • • vii
List of Symbols viii

I. INTRODUCTION ..... "000 .................. . 1

II. SOI1E PREUMINARY CONSIDERATIONS 3

III. PRESSURE DROP AND FRICTION FACTOR
A; The Basic Equation for Pressur~ Drdp
· ..·.. 6
6
B. Experimental Data co .. .. .. .. co .. • • 12
1" First Experilnental Apparatus 12
2. Second Experilnental Apparatus 13
3. Chisholm and Laird E.'CjJt3r:i1nents 15
C. Friction Factor for Air-I-/ater Mixtures • 16
IV. ANALYSIS AT A CROSS SECTION . . .. .. .. . . .. . .. 18
A. Phase Fraction and Phase Velocity. • • • 18
1. Homogeneous and Nonhomogeneous Flow • • • 18
2. Experilnental Evaluation of Ro/RL alid
B. Experilnents on Bubble-Size Distributiori
VcJVL 19
20
•
1. Apparatus.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20
2. Data and Discussion of Results • 21
C. V~locity Traverses in Bubble Flow • • • • 22
1. Apparatus and Data .......... .. 22
2. Analysis and Discussion of Results 24
V. S~~Y AND CONCLUSIONS .- • • . • • 28
List of References
Figures 1 through 15
• • .. . . ..
• • • • • • • • 31
• • 35
Appendix A - Tables I through IV • • • • • • • • 53
Appendix B - Lilniting Cases of Equation (17) • • • 61

v
 LIST OF IL LUSTRATIOdS
Figure Page

1 Flow-Pattern Regions ~ 0 • " .. • .. • • • • • • • • 3S

2 Schematic Drawing of First Experimem;al Apparatus 36

3 Friction Factor at Small Air-Hater Flow Ratios • • 37

4 Schematic Dral;ing of Second Exper imental Apparatus 38

S Chisholm and Laird Friction-Factor Data 39
6 Fri ction-Factor "Rati o as a Funct ion "of Compressibility
Parameter . " .. " " 40
7 Gas-Liquid Fraction 41
8 Velo city Ratio from Chisholm and Laird Data 42
9 Sampling Apparatus for Bubble Si ze 43
10 Bubb2e- Slze Distribution 0 44
11 Characteristi~ Bubble Size 4S
12 Velocity Profnes in B'.lbbly l'!:ixttn'e 46
13 Semilcgarithmic Plotting of Vel ocity Profiles in Pure-Water
Flows 000 ..... "0 .. 000.0 0 "<> ... .. 0 ••••• 48
14 Semi.logarithmic Plotting of Velocity Profiles in Air-,Iater
Mixture flows "........ .. ..... .. .. .. " .. ~ . .. . .. " . . 49
IS Velocity Profiles Compared Hith Universal Lal"' of the ;Jall
for Smooth Pi pe ~ " .. " " .. .. .. .. .. " .. .. " " .. .. . . . . So

vi
 LIS T OF TAB L E S
. able
lio . Page
I Pressure-Drop Data and Computations £or First Installation 53
II Pressure-Drop Data and Computations for Second
Installation . • • • • • . . . • • . . .. • • • • .. .. . . · .. 54
ill Chisholm and Laird Pressure-Drop and Liquid-Fraction Data
and Computations •• • • • • • • • • •• • 55
Bubble-Size Data • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 57
i Flow Properties for Velocity Traverses • • • 24
Diameter of Four-Inch Pipe • • 25
TI: Results o£ Velocity Traverses • • • • 26

vii
 LIST
----
OF -SYMBOL
- - - - - -S
A - Ar ea of flm·,.
a,b - Constants .
D - Pipe diameter.
d - Bubbl e diameter, measured at atmospheric conditions.

d' - Dimensionless bubble diameter, d' = Ved,jp/u D.

f - Fricti on factor.
G - Weight per unit time.
g _ Gravitational constant.

P - Pressure.

Q - Volume per unit time.

R - Gas constant.
~ - Liquid fraction, ALIA; RG - gas fraction, Aa/A.

Re - Reynolds number, Re = VD pi1-1.

r - Pipe radius.
T - Temperature.
V - Mean velocity.

Ve = Q/A.
V* = J Tip,
w - Specific weight.
x - Variable distance along pipe.

y - Distance from wall.

a = GG/GL' mass flow ratio.

f::J. - Increment.
2
e- Compressibility parameter, [al(l + all (gFIT/V
e ).

viii
 ).
= jO~:75 x - - -,
62.3
Baker's parameter [2] (w
foot) •
in pounds per cubic

11 - Viscosity.
n(x ) Pressure parameter, QL/QG(x) = P(x)laPL'
p = wig, Density.

rr - Surface tension.

TO - Local mean wall shear stress around perimeter.

73.3
ILL (
62.3

"L
)J l
/3,
Baker'sparameter [2] (IT in dynes per
centimeter,
ILL in centi-
poises,
"L in pounds
per cubic foot ) .

~ub script L - Liquid.

} No subscript means mixture.
ubscript G - Gas.

ubscript m - Mean or average value.

 TWO-PHASE FLO w , S '''!' U DI E S IN HORIZONTAL
--- ----- --- - -------
- --- - --
-PIPES WITH- -SPECIAL
"'"""" - - - ,.- -
REFERENCE T 0
BUBBLY MIXTURES
------ --------
1. INTRODUCTION

Gas- liquid , mixture flows are subject to a fairly complex series of

flow patterns. For the purposes of this paper, these flow patterns may be
described as follows,

(1) Bubble~, in .which separate bubbles of gas move along

the pipe with approximately the same velocity as the liq-
uid. These bubbles can be uniformly distributed in the
pipe or they can move alo.ng in the upper region of a hori-
zontal pi;>e with pure liquid flowing in the lower region.

(2) Plug flow, in which bubbles in the upper part of a hori-

zontal pipe aglomerate to form large bubbles or plugs.
Plug flow occurs at low ratios of gas-to-liquid flow.

(3) Slug~, in >Thich a more or less well- defined inter-

face separates liquisi and gas. The level of the inter-
face rises and fall~, and frothy slugs pass regularly a-
long the pipe at a much greater velocity than the average
liquid velocity.

(4) Annular Q£!!" in >Thich the liquid flows in a film around

the pipe wall and the gas flows at high velicity through
the central core. The film may contain gas bubbles.

(5) }list flow, in which liquid droplets are entrained more or

- - .
less uniformly throughout a gas flow. Spray ~ and ~~

perse .!12!! have also been applied to the regime after

annular flow breaks down.

(6) Separated flow, in which liq~d flows along the bottom of

the pipe and gas flows above. This type of flow occurs
in a horizontal pipe at small liquid flow rates. If low
gas-to-liquid flow ratios exist, the flow occurs with a
2

relatively smooth interface (stratified flow) and has

characteristics approacl)ing those of open-channel flow.
If the ratio is .higher, the interface is disturbed by
waves (~flow).

This study is primarily concerned with bubble flow in horizontal

pipes, but in order to delineate the limits of the bubble-flow regime, some
consideration has also been given to the other patterns.

}Iost of the scientific investigation of two-phase flow has been

conducted in the last twenty years. An extensive bibliography is contained
in a summary by Santalo [1]*. The flow-pattern descriptions given above are
in essential agreement with Santalo, who took his classification from Baker
[2]. Baker prepared a chart, drawing on the experiments of many investi-
gators, showing the relation of f low pattern to rate of flow. This chart is
reproduced herein as Fig. lea) (using the nomenclature of the present paper).
Baker observed that the lines on his chart actually represent re'gions of over-
lap of two flow patterns.

The bulk of the studies in horizontal pipes occurred at the Univer-

sity of California and resulted in the well-kno>m Lockhart-Hartinelli corre-
lations [3, 4, ;;, and 6] for pressure drop. Apparently these correlations
have dominated much of subsequent two- pha se, flow stv:di'8'S. The Lockhart-·
Martinelli correlations are highly empirical, however, and are not uni ver-
sally applicablE' as has been indicated, fo r example, by Baker [2] and H. S.
Ibsen in his discussion of a recent paper by Chisholm and Laird [6]. In the
present study, improved correlating devices have been sought, especially those
involving less empiricism.

There are two· major parts in this report. The first, contained in
Section III, following, considers gas-liquid mixture flows from the view-
point of mean through-flow properties. In this part pressure drop and fric-
tion factor in two-phase flows are discussed.

The second part of the report, Section IV, considers details of the
gas-liquid flow at a given cross section of a pipe. These details are impor-
tant in applications which involve heat and mass transfer, for example. In

~~
Numbers in brackets refer to the List of References on p. 31.
 3

the first part of Section IV, some consideration is given to the problem of
determining the relation between the pattern of flow and division. of the cross
section between liquid and gas. In the remainder of Section IV, some exper-
imental details associated with the bubble-flow pattern are presented. These
involve bubble-size distribution and velocity-profile measurements.

II. SOBE PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

Tbe present investigation is concerned with steady mass flow of

gas and liquid in a horizontal pipe of uniform cross section. The following
assumptions are made throughout:

(1) No absorption or evolution of gas occurs.

(2) The gas obeys the perfect gas law.

0) Isothermal conditions exist, the temperature of the liquid

being imposed upon the gas.

(4) Vapor pressure and surface-tension effects may be ignored.

Since the weight rate of flow along the pipe G is constant, as

. 1 ,~
are the liquid and gas components of weight flow~ G and GG3 respectlve y,
L

(1)
whe re

is a constant for a given flow o

The total volume rate of flow Q at any position along the pipe
x is

Q(x) • ~ + Q (x) ~ ~ [1 + l/n(x)]

G
(2)
where

but

,~
Symbols are summarized in the List of Symbols in addition to being de-
fined where they first occur.
4

where w is the specific weight of tile fittid, and "'..nee, for an ideal gas,

where P is the absolute pressure, T toe absol1!te tE!t:perature of the liq-

rod, and R the universal gas constant,

(3)
where

It is seen that n is a dimensionless pressure parameter (n corresponds to

lip of Reference [7]).

The specific weight of the mixture is

w{x) = G/Q{x) = wL (l + u)/[l + l/n{x)] (4)

and the mixture velocity is

V{x) = Q{x)/A ~ V~[l + l/n{x))

(5)
where

and A is the cross-sectional area of the pipe; V~ is a fictitious veloc-

ity of the liquid that would exist if there were no gas Dow.

If an instantaneous cross-sectional view of the two-phase Dow is

taken, a part of the Dow area (~) will be occupied by liquid and the re-
mainder (A )
G
by gas. The liquid fraction Il:r, and gas fraction RG are de-
fined as:

(6)

The mean velocities of the liquid and gas portions of the Dow are

Using Eqs. (6), (7), and (3),

 5

1
(8)
• ----
11 (X)

In the preceding expressions (x) has been used to make clear the
dependence on position along the pipe of certain of the variables. This sym-
bolism will be dropped in most of the remainder of the paper, but the depend-
ence on x of t hese variables should not be fo r gotten.

Two additional parameters (which are empirical) used by Baker [2]

and appea ring in Fig. 1 also require definition. These are:

62.3

73 . 3
aoo 'li - - -

:'he w's ;Ire in pounds per cubic foot, the surface tension (j in dynes per
centimeter, and the viscosity ~ in centipoises in these parameters. It
should be noted than when water nea~ roam temperature is used as the liquid,
'" • 1 and X· 28.8 .,.r;;;;. Hence, with water near room temperature, the
abscissa in Fig. lea) can be written in the alternative forms

a
._ -- a

X
1
28.8
.F; .. X

11(28.8)
2
(lOa)
X '"

while the ordinate can be writ ten

GG G G
a L a L (lOb)
.---=
AX X A X'/I A

In Fig. l(b), Baker's diagram has been replotted with GLiA as ordinate using
~ ~ 1. It can be seen from the figure that a large part of the overlap region
6

between bubble flow on the one hand and slug or plug flow on the other occurs
for ~/A ~ ,00 Ib/seC-ft • In fact, all lines of constant ~/A for 1/1 ~ 1
2

in Fig. l(a) make 4,-degree angles with the abscissa.

III. PRESSURE DROP AND FRICTION FACTOR

In a project report dealing with an earlier portion of the two-

phase flpw studies [7] it was found that for very small ratios of gas-to-liq-
uid flow, the pressure drop in a bubbly mixture flowing in a pipe could be
calculated approximately by treating the mixture as incompressible and using
the corresponding incompressible friction factor. There is some mixture ratio,
however, beyond which the mixture can no longer be treated as incompressible.
Then the pressure drop >Iill vary with the pressure in addition to its varia-
tion with pipe wall friction.

A. The Basic Equation for Pressure Drop

With application to bubble flow in mind, i t is ass\lllled that the

gas-liquid mixture is homogeneous. A free-body analysis is carried out on
a section of mixture of length ~x flowing in a circular horizontal pipe of
constant cross-sectional area A and diameter D. Applying Newton I s first
law to this free body in the direction of flow produces the equation

AP(x) -~~XT (x+6x/2)-AP(x +Clx).

D 0

w(x + [}'x/2) V(x + /:).x) - V(x)

Al>x-----
g 6t

Here (x) is the average unH shear stress around the perimeter Of the
T
o
cross section at any x-position. After canceling out the. common factors, re-
arranging the terms, !'!lplacing [', xl (l,t by V(x + t;x/2) , dividing by {I, x,

and letting {l,x - 0, this equation reduces to

dP(x) o
4
(x) T
.. (x) v(x) dV(x)
+----+---- ---=0 (11)
dx D g dx

This differential equation describes the local conditions at x.

 7

I f there were only liquid flowing in the pipe, the third term in
Eq. (11) would .be zero and the equation would reduce to the condition for
steady, uniform, incompressible flow. For incompressible flow, the pressure
drip is conveniently expressed in terms of a friction factor f such that

dP f w V,,2
L
-+- • 0 (12)
dx D 2g

with
8g T
0
f • (13a)
2
wLV"

and where g is the acceleration of gr avity. In compressible flow of a sin-

ble fluid, the same friction factor defined as

8g T (x)
o
f(x) - - - - - - - -

is applicable for finding the frictional wall shear stress [8, p . 414). Now
let it be assumed that for homogeneous mixture flow, the friction fact or can
a gain be used for finding the wall shear stress. In this case

8g T (x)
o
f(x) =---- (13c)
2
w(x)V (x)

In all of Eqs. (13), f depends on the local Reynolds number and surfa ce
!'Oughness of the pipe only.

Upon substituting relations (5) , (4), 0), and (13c) into Eq. (11) ,
the latter can be put in the form

r, . a- 1 f(x)dx
La - -n-(x-)-+-l- dn(x) + - - -
2D
=0 (14)

.. here
8

gRT
• (15)
V 2
$

This is the basic differential equation that must be integrated to determine

the pressure drop along a pipe carrying a homogeneous gas-liquid mixture flow.
Before integration can be performed, the variation of the friction factor f(x)
with x must be established.

It has already been observed that f varies only with Reynolds num:-
ber and surface roughness. Reynolds number may vary along a pipe, however,
being given by the following equation:

DVp DG
Re =-- • -- • - (1 + a) (16)
gIlA gIlA

Here p is the density and ~ the coefficient of viscosity of the mixture.

Apparently the mixture viscosity is larger than the liquid viscosity and de-
pends on the viscosity of the liquid and the geometric proportions of the gas-
liquid mixture [9]. The geometry will change as the pressure along a pi pe
changes, but in this analysis it ,!ill be assumed that the change in geometry
relative to the initial geometry is negligible. Since the temperature remains
essentially constant at the value determined by the liquid temperature, it
follows that the mixture viscosity remains essentially constant. Hence, th~

Reynolds number remains approximately constant UllJier isothermal conditions,

and since pipe roughness also remains constant for a given pipe, it may be
assumed thet the friction factor does not vary with x.

Under the above conditions Eq. (14) is readily integrated. The

boundary conditions are:

At x· 0, p(o) m P,
o
nCo) = n0

At x m '1.'
The solution is
 9

fx:t (17)

2D

s, any consi stent

Since this equat ion consi sts of three dimen sionle ss group
demands no expla -
set of units can be used. The fricti on facto r group ~/D
Eq. (3); in fact, no
natio n. The n group is the press ure group defin ed by
dimen sionle ss num-
- ~ measu res the press ure drop over the lengt h x:t. The
of 6 range from zero
ber 6 has not been expla ined befor e. Since the value s
can be regard ed as
for pure liqui d flo>1 to ir4'in ity for pure gas flo>1, it
of how far the homoge-
a degre e of comp ressib ility param eter, i.e., a measu re
d flo,,) . It shoul d
neous mixtu re devia tes from incom press ibilit y (pure liqui
pipe and does not de-
be noted from Eq. (15) that 6 remai ns const ant along a
pend on local press ure o
liqui d flO>1
In the develo pmerr t of Eq. (17), bias in favor of pure
liqui d. I f gas bias
was maint ained by facto ring. out the prope rties of the
had been maint ained inste ad, the same equat ion as Eq.
(17) would have been
is zero for pure gas
obtain ed excep t for subst itutin g 9 - 1/9'. 'Here 9'
Appen dix B that EqD
flo1-1 and infin ite for pure liqui d flow. It is shown in
to the isothe rmal,
(17) reduc es to the incom pressi ble resul t when GG - 0 and
comp ressib le resul t 1-Then Dr,- O.
to estim ate
To obtai n, press ure drop from Eq. (17), it is neces sary
r and surfa ce rough -
the :frict ion facto r, which is a f1ll1c tion of Reyno lds numbe
ness. Reyno lds number is given by Eq. (16); from Fig.
1, it is seen that in
2 so that i f the liqui d is water and the press ure
bubbl e flo;l, Cl < 10- >.0/1
that Cl can be neg-
is only of the order of a f"" atmos phere s, Eq. (9) shows
~ is given by its
lecte d in Eq. (16). Hence , i f it could be assum ed that
would be that for the
value for pure liqui d, the appro priate Reyno lds number
liqui d compo nent flo1-Ting alone in the pipe.

Dct rough ness\

Defin e ( g~A ' iJ
(18)
7hen
10

if fJ. == i'I. in a given pipe. This c <~ on~..1l. be assumed to hold. Since
it is known that fJ. > i'I. 19], tnerev'..J.l be a tetxlency to overestilnate Rey-
nolds number and, therefore, to unde~st-aate the friction factor except for
completely rough flow. Obviously , the above method for estilnating f will
not be correct for large u. (In fact, i f " is sufficiently large, Reynolds
number can be defined as

DG
G
Re = - - (1 + lin)
gIlA

so that the Reynolds number of the gas flowing alone might be more appropriate
for finding f than the Reynolds number of the liquid flowing alone.)

Equation_ (17) is trapscendental. For a given friction factor, the

calculation of PI' given Po' can be obtained by a trial-and-error method
from Eq. (17), or computer techniques can be applied. A more readily avail-
able and silnpler method is deSirable. Approxilnation formulas are useful for
this purpose. Two of these are developed below by carrying out the logarith-
mic expansions of Eq. (17).

Since P, and therefore n, must be known in advance, Eq. (17)

o 0
can be written

- - - • ell n + $n $n (19)
2D

"here ~,,~ "0 - "l' In using the logarithmic series expansion

x2 x3
$n (1 - x) • -x - - - -- - .00 , -1 < x < 1
2 3

it is necessary that6n/n + 1) < 1 and lln/n < 1. These inequalitie~

o 0
ilnply n + 1 > 0 and "l > 0 respectively, >1hich are true since n ~ 0,
l
always. The rapidity of convergence depends on the smallness of these ratios.
In the data analyzed later in this project,
 II

lin
and <: 0.5
n + 1 n
o o

and most ratios were substantially less than 0.5. The expansion is carried
out to t>!o places only, resulting in a quadratic equation in the unkno>ln lin.

2(en 2 _ 1) ~
(lIn)2 _ _ _0_ _ _ li n + - - . 0 (20)
n (n + 1) D
o 0

This equation is solved by the quadratic formula. In order to obtain the

correct incompressible formula as GG- 0, the minus sign must be taken.
The result is

f~ (no + 1)
p
100
- p • lip =p r 1 - 1-------
D f( en 2 - 1)
o

(en 2 _ 1) (n + 1)
o 0
whe re r a ------- (21)
en 2 + 2n + 1
o 0

If the second term under the radical is considerably less than unity, a fur-
ther simplification can be made by expanding the binominal term under the
radical sign. The result is:

P o (n 0 +l)f'c
--J.
II p =------ (22)
2D( en 2 _ 1)
o

For very small gas-to-liquid flo>! ratios, Eq . (22) becomes the in-
compressible equation

lip =-- V 2
e
D 2g
12

B. Experimental Data

Experiments were conducted for two purposes; namely, to determine

the liJniting conditions for bubble flow and to verify the assumptions lead-
ing to Eqs. (17) and (18) for calculating pressure drop in bubble flow. The
latter experiJnents were conducted first and will be described first. Some
additional experiJnental data obtained recently by Chisholm and Laird [6J and
covering higher ga s-liquid ratios have been used to supplement the present
experiJnents. All of the experiments used air for the gas and water for the
liquid component.

1. First ExperiJnental Apparatus

Figure 2 is a diagrammatic sketch of the apparatus used in the in-

itial experiJnental work. Actually, two pipe sizes were used in this study;
2-1/2-in. and 4-in. galvanized pipes. The 2-1/2- and 4-in. aspirators (air-
water mixers) were designed and constructed for a previous project and their
construction details and operating characteristics are given in the report on
that project [7 J. The discussion that follows will be for the 2-1/2-in. sys-
tem only. The description and operation of the 4-in. system was siJnilar ex-
cept that it had no Lucite viewing sections before and after the test section.

The system was nonrecirculating. The water orifice was calibrated

in place by running tru, discharge into a rectangular enclosure. The air noz-
zle was not calibrated, and the flow rate through it was computed from a the-
oretical formula. Some runs were made by forcing in air from the compressed-
air system. In these cases the air flow .las measured by a calibrated rota-
meter. Air was always introduced into the system through the aspirator. The
test section consisted of approxiJnately the last 17 ft of a 23-ft continuous
length. of pipe. Pressure-measuring connections were made at the beginning,
middle, and end of this test section. Each pressure connection consisted of
four symmetrically placed holes around the circumference of the pipe, all
connected to a copper-tubing F.LIlg which was connected to the manometer sys-
tem. Initial pressures in the test section were measured by an open manometer
and a calibrated Bourdon gage. The manometer readings were used in the compu-
tations unless the initial pressure exceeded the manometer range. The pressure
drops along the first half and along the whole test section were measured by
a mercury U-tube manometer. The discha rge valve was partially closed for some
runs so that data were obtained at various levels of average system pressure,
All data-taking points were preceded by sufficient lengths of pipe se that
 13

any upstream disturbance would not affect readings taken at tnese points and
so that turbulent flow would be fulls" developed.

All data necessary to compute the friction fact·o r f as defined by

Eq. (17) were taken. The data, as well as the more important computed num-
bers, are given in Table I (in Appendix A). When GG equals zero, as in runs
27 and 34 of Table I, for example, f == fL. The range of variables covered
by these data is indicated by the shading in Fig. 1. Pattern observations of
the flow confirmed that all of these data were in tne bubble flow regime.

The bulk of the friction-factor data from Table I has been nlotted
in Fig. 3, along with other data, in the form f/f L versus Baker ' s abscissa,

0./"'" for several values of ~/A.

2. Second Experimental Apparatus

The purpose of these additional expe riments was twofold. It was de-
sired to determine the <offects of a flow disturbance occurring between two
straight lengths of pipe, and it was also desired to investigate the limits
of the bubble-flow regime. The only disturbance employed was a lBo-degree
return bend. Since the average test-se ction pressures before and after the
bend would be different because of pressure drop in the bend, the effect of
system pressure on pressure drop and flo" pattern >muld also be under study.
By forcing in air from an air compressor, the upper limit of the compressi-
bility parameter e was increased from 2 for the previous experiments to a-
bout 200 for these experiments.

A sketch of the second system is shown in Fig. 4. It consisted

basically of two identical 2-1/2-in.-pipe test sections placed before and
after the return bend. Each test section consisted of the last 12 ft of a
continuous 22-ft length of pipe. Air flow was measured using a calibrated 01'-

if;i.ce. The manometry system was altered halfway through the tests. Original~

ls", each test section was provided with a mercury manometer on:q. Many of
the readings were small enough So that it was felt that some error in the
pressure-drop readings resulted. For the second half of the data, the manom-
etry system "'IS redesigned (details not shown) by connecting needle valves
as double-pole, double-throw switches. This valving permitted the pressure
drop in either test. section to be measured by a Mariam No.3 or mercury manom-
eter. Sight glasses were installed before and after the return bend to ob-
tain visual data on the pattern of flow.
 Data were taken for a series of air flOl-lS at a constant water flow
and constant initial pressure. The average system pressure of the initial
test section was naturally higher than that in the final test section. As
the air or water flow ,""s changed, the pressures in both sections changed,
but not in a readily comparable manner. Since it was disquieting to have the
test-section pressures change in unknown manners, it was decided to hold the
initial pressure of each test section .at a nearly constant value for each
constant water-flow series. This was done in the following manner: The first
test of a constant water-flow series wa s conducted with maximum air flow, the
back pressure valve being completely open. This test produced the highest
system pressure and established the value of P for each test section for
o
this series. Data from both sections were recorded . Since the air flow for
the next run was less, pressures throughout the system dropped. The back
pressure valve was adjusted until the value of P for the initial test sec-
o
tion was restored to the same value as for the first run. Data from the ini-
tial test section were recorded. This process was repeated for the second
test section. The total operation was repeat<ld for the complete range of air
settings and constant Hat er settings. In order to obtain data from each test
section under "before" and !lafter" conditions" and in order to insure that
any unusual phenomena arising from these studies were due to a natural func-
tioning of the system, rather than due to any errors in the system, the test-
ing program was repeated with the test sections interchanged.

The data and computations for the second set of experimental studies
are tabulated in Table II (in Appendix A). Only data taken after interchanging
the test sections and improving the manometer system are shown in the table.
As before, f was computed from the measured pressure drop using Eq. (17);
some of these data have been plotted in Fig. 3 along with the earlier data
from the first apparatus.

Flow-pattern observations were made when taking data for the initial
test section (minor adjustments in the back pressure valve in regulating the
initial pressure of the final test section did not seem to affect the flow
pattern). The pattern observations are shown in detail in Table II and are
plotted in Fig. 1. The viewing sections immediately before and after the re-
turn bend represent extreme nonsymruetry in obsero-ing the flow pattern since the
pattern in the initial yiewing section is reached under maximum equilibrium-
establishing conditions, while the flow pattern after the bend is in a highly
disturbed condition. Even so, the pattern rare1;y changed significant1;y be-
fore and after the disturbance. The most serious effect of the bend occurred
in a series (162-16B) where several of the runs suffered a change from bubble
flow to slight slugging flow. However, for this particular series the flow
pattern changed from bubble flow for low air content to slug flow for higher
air content in the upstream section. Hence, this series passed through a crit-
ical pattern change and it is not surprising that several intermediate runs,
under a sudden reduction in pressure, cha nged from bubble flow in the initial
section to slight slugging flow in the se cond section. It is believed that
t his shift in patte rn, then, was not a result of the disturbance but rather
of the pressure drop. The pattern observations tend to confirm, in general,
Baker's region of transition between bubble and slug flow.

It may be noticed in Table II (in Appendix A) that in the bubble-

flow regime -, f/f was approximately the same both upstream and dOlffistream
1
of t he bend. This was not true, however, outside the bubble regime. For some
flOl' S in this category f/f was substantial1;y smaller in the upstream test
1
section. The exact cause of this phenomenon is unknown. Several poss ib1li ties
exist. One is that the pressure being materially different upstream and down-
st ream of the bend, a dilferent patte-rn of flow occurred (perhaps approaching
sepa rated flow) in the upstream section even though this was not apparent in
the viewing section which was located at the end of this test section. Another
possibi).ity is that the flow pattern actually changed in the upstream test
section, perhaps not having settled down to an established pattern at the be-
ginning of the test section. Because of the uncertainty, no attempt has been
"",de to ana1;yse these data at this tilne.

Using the second apparatus, Some data were taken of the pressure
drop around the lBO-degree bend. The data showed considerable scatter, but
tbe bend coefficient defined as the pressure drop in the bend divided by the
dynamic head of the flowing mixture was rough1;y constant as it is for pure
water. Since only one bend was used, and that under limited conditions, more
investigation of loss due to bends is required.

3. Chisholln and 1aird Experiments [6 J

A recent paper by Chisholln and Laird made available data covering
a IlUch wider range of variables than that cOVllred in this project. According
Ul the authors, the studies i.twolved bubble, slug, and annular flows under
16

essentially atmospheric conditions. However, after studying the data fully,

it was found that apparently very few were in the bubble-flow regime and a
few more were in the transition from bubble to slug flow. Although Chisholm
and Laird used nominall-in.-diameter pipes of several roughnesses, only their
data for smooth and glavanized pipes were considered.

The Chisholm and Laird data, together with some computed numbers,
are reproduced in Table III (in Appendix A). The friction factor f was com-
puted from the measured pressure drop using Eq. (17), even though the mixtures
in only a very few of the runs could be considered as homogeneous. Flow pat-
tern observations were not recorded by Chisholm and Laird.

The ratios f/~ were computed using tabulated values of fL in

the Chisholm and Laird paper. Figure 5 portrays the f/~ data as contours
of constant f/f on Baker's flow-pattern diagram. The contour lines in the
L
bubble-flow regime of Fig. 5(b) have been drawn with the aid of data from
Tables I and II. Some of the Chisholm and Laird data in the bubble-to-slug
flow transition region are also plotted in Fig. 3 for comparison with the pres-
ent data,

C, Friction Factor for Air-Water ~lixtures

The friction-factor data from Tables I, II, and III (in Appendix A)
have already been plotted in Figs. 3 and 5 in the fom f/f as a function of
1
Baker ' s parameters. The galvanized-pipe data from all three tables seem to
be in good agreement with each other "here they overlap. For the upper dia-
grams of Fig. 3, where the flow is almost entirely bubble flow,

0.98 < f/f L < 1.25,

the higher values of the ratio occurring at th.. higher gas-liquid flow ratios.
A variation of :2 per cent in f/f can be explained by experimental error;
L
but the remainder of the rise above f/f • 1.0 is systematic and possibly
L
results from the fact that Il. > Il.r. and becomes increasingly so as the air-
water ratio increases. (It may be possible to calculate Il. for the mixture
from these data.)

Figure 5 gives a picture of the general trend of f/f

outside the
L
bubble-flow regime. Even though the homogeneous assumption and the assumption
of constant Reynolds number used in developing Eq, (17) no longer hold, the
 17

concept of friction factor appears to be a useful one for calculating pressure

drop. Both the smooth- and gal vanized-pipe data of ChiS):lOlm and Laird, when
plotted as the ratio f/f1' exhibit quite similar trends, f/f
being rela-
L
tively constant in bubble flow and decreasing steadily and with increasing
rapidity as t he stratified portion of the diagram is approached. Outside the
bubble-flow re gime, f/f
appears to be slightly larger in the galvanized
L
pipe than in the smooth pipe, other conditions being the same. Perhaps a
better referen~e friction factor than fL could be devised for the Chisholm
and Laird data, but 'no attempt has been made to do so in preparing this paper,•
.uso, Bakel" s diagram may not be t he best base on which to plot these data,
especially in view of the presence of the empirical parameters ~ and '" •
Same data ,should be obtained with other pipe sizes to check the method of pre-
sentation. Further work toward improving Baker ' s diagram and correlating fric-
tion factor with it may be useful.

In any event, it appears that t here is a smooth change in friction

factor with -the flow parameters even. across the transition regions bet"een
the various flow patterns. Therefore, a knowledge of the flow pattern does
not appear to be essential in predicting f/f or pressure drop (within a
L
certain margin of error). The same assumpt i on regarding pressure drop was
~de in reaching t he Lockha rt-Martinelli correlations [4].
In view of the approximate independence of from flow pattern,
f/f
L
it may be possible to find a single parameter which will correlate f/f for
L
use in predicting pressure drop. Several parameters have been tested with
this object in mind, and the best one appears to be the compressibility param-
eter e. defined by Eq. (15) and already appearing in the pressure-drop e-
quation, Eq. (17). In Fig. 6 all the data from Table s I, II, and III (in
Appendix A) have been plotted in the form of versus e. Figure 6(a)
f/f
L
shows these data for e ::; 3 using a natural scale for e while Fig. 6(b)
shows the data for e ~ 1 using a logarithmic scale for e in order to
accommodate the wide range of the data.

For Fig. 6( a) , where all the data lie within the bubble-flaw re-

(23)

!'its all the da ta within !4 per cent. This is as close as fL itself can
18

be predicted . When extended to the higher values of e shown on Fig. 6(b) ,

Eq. (23) still fits all the data within about ~10 per cent to e· 20. Equa-
tion (23) has been plotted on Fig. 6.

At still greater values of e, f/f

L
values decrease again as shown
in Fig. 6(b) to a minimum near e• 10$ and then appear to rise again. Both
the galvanized- and smooth-pipe data of Chisholm and Laird for several values
of air-water flow ratio appear to be correlated by the plotting shown in Fig.
6(b). I t may be noted that the spread . in at any e is not any worse
f/f
L
than the spread in pressure drop given by the Lockhart-Martinelli ' correlations
for one pipe surface only, using the same data (6). The form of plotting used
in Fig. 6 needs to be checked using data for other pipe sizes at large e;
s)lCh checking is not within the scope of this pap(lr. At the lower values of
e, however, especially in the bubble-flow regime, the plotting used in Fig.
6 has correlated data for several pipe sizes obtained by different investi-
gators and the correlation may be considered quite satisfactory.

It may be observed in Fig. 6(b) that there is a transition between

nSlllg for e < 35 and falling f/f
f/f beyond; and that the transition
L L
is near the transition from bubble flow to slug flow. In the present experi-
ments bubble fl aw always existed for. e < 6. Slug flow always existed for
e > 45. In the intermediate region, the flow could be either essentially
bubble or slug flow, depending on other parameters. There is a possibility
that ·.the transition in slope of f/f is related to the change in flow pat-
L
terno

IV. ANALYSIS AT A CROSS SECTION

A. Phase Fraction and Phase Velocity

1. Homogeneous and Nonhomogeneous Flow

Liquid and gas fraction have been defined by Eq. (6) and liquid
and gas velocities by Eq. (7) of Section II. The relation between these e-
quations was given by Eq. (8).

For steady bubble flow (and perhaps for steady mist flow) in hor-
izontal pipes where the mixture may be considered pseudo-homogeneous, VG = V
L
 19

since the gas bubbles are trapped in the surrounding liquid flow (or the mist
droplets are trapped in the surrounding gas flow). Then Eq. (8) becomes

(24)

This is the basic equation for phase fraction when the flow can be assumed
homogeneous 0

In nonhomogeneous flow patterns, it is not so simple to predict the

relation between VG and
V • In annular flow, where the gas component is
L
completely isolated from the pipe walls by the liquid component, VG > V •
L
In separated and slug fiow_it is not possible to make a definite statement
without further information, but because of direct wall friction of the gas
in these cases it is unlikely that the ratio VG/VL will ever exceed that
for annul"r flow. Hence, as tha gas flow rate increases at constant water
flow rate, it can be surmised that VG/VL will rise from near unity for bub-
ble fiow, reach a crest for annular flow, and recede toward unity for mist
flow. Corresponding changes in RG/R:r, in accordance with Eq. (8) can be ex-
pected.

2. Experimental Evaluation of RGII\. and ValvL

Phase fraction and velocity measurements were not obtained in the

.,resent experiments, but were obtained by Chisholm and Laird [6] in connection
with the friction-factor experiments ' discussed earlier. They used the method
of trapping the flow between two simultaneously closing valves and measuring
the liquid fraction. The Chisholm and Laird data for liquid fraction were
already tabulated in Table III (in Appendix A), as were the computed results
for ValvL.
The two quick-closing valves in the Chisholm and Laird experiments
were located 8 ft apart in a l-in. pipe, so that RL has been averaged over
a reach whose average pressure is not precisely known--only the pressure at
the midpoint of the reach is given and this is recorded in Table III in terms
of the parameter n as linm (where the subscript denotes measurement at the
midpoint of the test length).

The Chisholm and Laird data, plotted as log (RalR:r,) versus log
(l/n m) are shown in Fig. 7. Also shown in Fig. 7 is the line of Eq. (24),
20

the homogeneous flow theory result. The data for both the smooth and galva-
nized pipes appear to correlate along a fairly well-defined cm:ve that is
bounded for small air-water flow ratios by Eq. (24). Furthermore, for large
air-water flow ratios (large l/n ) the data . apP!!ar to be limited by another
m
straight line parallel to that given by Eq. (24), indicating that a maximum
value of Vr/VL has been reached.

The velocity-ratio data ax:e plotted on Baker's diagram in Fig. 8.

As was the case with friction factor, there appears to be a smooth change in
Vr/VL independently of flow pattern. Again, the smooth- and galvanized-pipe
results are qualitatively similar with the velocity ratio somewhat larger for
the galvanized pipe than for the smooth pipe, other conditions being the same,
except near the bubble-flow regime.

Comparison of Figs. 5 and 8 shows that there is no correlation be-

tween f/f L and VC/VL.

The assumption that VC/VL - 1 in the bubble-flow regime appears

to be substantially supported by the Chisholm and Laird data.

B. Experiments on Bubble-Size Distribution

1. Apparatus

The apparatus used to measure bubble size in the 2-1/2-in. pipe is

shown in Fig. 9. The mixture of air and water is generated as described in
Section III. After an appropriate length of run, the mixture passes through
the sampler where it is split into two parts. The smaller part passes through
a narrow, transparent test section that permits photographic determination
of bubble size. The remainder of the flO'i' is turned through a bypass line and
rej oins the sampled material immediately behind the test section. The pressure
in the transparent section is measured by a manometer in comparison Idth the
pressure just upstream from the sampler.

The pipe-test length consisted of four 5-ft sections of 2-1/2-in.

pipe. These lengths were aligned by using pre drilled aligning holes in the
flanges and snug-fitting aligning pins. The sampler could be installed at
either end of the 20-ft test run or at the quarter points. The details <4
the sampler construction and the techniques used in photographing, sampling,
measuring, and counting the bubbles are given in Reference (7).
 2l

The same sampler, with ilppropriate 4-in. fittings, was used for the
4-in. pipe. In this pipe, hOl'19Ver, the vertical height of the sampled section
consisted only of a half 9iameter of pipe instead of a "hole diameter as in
the 2-1/2-in. pipe. Hence, a photograph of a sample would show the bubbles
in the upper half or 'the lower half of the pipe, depending upon which way
the sampler was installed. This ~eant that a nonuniform bubble distribution
would cause errors in the size distribution. For this reason the sampler was
installed on the 4-in. pipe at the entrance to the first 5-ft section only
'''here the separating process would have the least time to occur. For this
report, the samples were taken in the upper half of the 4-in. pipe only.

2. Data and Discussion of Results

In the 2-1/2-in. pipe, sampler data we re actually obtained at both

ends and at the middle of the test pipe. As fo r the pressure-drop data dis-
cussed in Section III, only small air-water ratios were used (e::; 1.5) so
that the flow ,/as in the lower part of the bubble regime.

A number of preliminary experiments, not detailed herein, showed

that within the limits of experimental error, the bubble-size distribution
at the various positions of the sampler were reducible to each other using
the perfect gas laws. Hence, all bubble-size data were eventually reduced
to atmospheric conditions using the perfect gas laws. Most careful attention
was given to counting the bubbles and measuring sizes for the runs with the'
sampler at the middle of the test pipe. The data for these runs are given
in Table IV (in Appendix A) with the designation M following the run num-
ber. All of the 4-in.-pipe data are also included in Table I V, the letter
A denoting that the runs were taken with the sampler at the beginning of the
test length as already noted. Typicaldata from Table IV are plotted on log-
arithmic probability paper in Fig. 10(a).

Dimensional analysis indicated that the bubble-size data might be

correlated by introduction of a dimensionless bubble diameter d' given by
the modified Weber number,
(25)

Here d is the bubble diameter measured at atmospheric conditions and (]'

is the surface tension of the water. Computed values of d' are given in
Table IV and plotted in Fig. lO eb) on semilogarithmic paper for both the 2-
1/2-in. and 4-in. pipe. Although the data scatter somewhat, a mean line can
be drawn through the data; the equation of this line is:
22

d' = 7.50 - 1.h9 tn (per cent larger) (26)

For the 50 per cent size, whi ch may be called the geometric mean
size and labeled d ' the straight line of Fig. lOeb) gives d' = 1.67.
50
Using this value (together with the numerical values p = 1.9h and cr ~ 0.005
in the pound-foot-second system) in Eq. (2S) yields

Direct measurements of dfor each run from graphs like those in Fig.
50
lOra) have been plotted in the form of Eq. (27) in Fig. 11 and compared with
the equation. The scaoter of data in Fig. lOeb) shows upas a deviation from
Eq. (27) in Fig. 11, but there is a very definite trend for mean bubble size
to increase with the square rootof the diameter of the pipe and inversely as
the liquid flow rate per unit area. This means that as the slug-flow r egime
in Fig. 1 is approached, the bubbles increase in size, and vice versa.

The data in Table IV (in Appendix A) as typified by Fig. 10 (a),

indicate that there is little variation in size distribution. The bubble
diameter exceeded by only 5 per cent of the bubbles, d ' has also been
S
plotted on Fig. 11 as a function of .j D/V ?'
, I t is seen that these large
bubbles have approximately three times the d~ameter of the mean bubbles. The
range of variablesin the present investigation has been quite small, however.
A wider range might bring ne';- factors to light.

C. Velocity Traverses in Bubble Flow'

1. Apparatus and Data

Both the 2-1/2-in. and h-in. test pipes used in the pressure-drop
experiments of Section III were ~ovided with velocity-probe stations at or
near the positions of the downstream pressure taps shown in Fig. 2. A Pitot
cylinder was used as a measuring probe for the total head. Each station con-
sisted of two pairs of holes drilled in the pipe wall, the holes of each pair
beingat opposite extremities of a vertical or horizontal diameter. The Pitot
cylinder passed through both holes of a pair; in the h-in. pipe the cylinder
could be traversed across the pipe from wall to wall, but in the 2-1/2-in.
pipe, it was possible to traverse only from the wall to the center. In the
2-1/2-in. pipe a 0.075-in. OD cylinder was used, while in the 4-in. pipe.
the cylinder was 0.125-in. 00. Traversing was by screw thread, the least
reading in the smaller pipe being 1/80 in. and in the larger pipe, 1/96 inch.
The stagnation hole in each cylinder was a No. 76 drill hole (0.020 in.).

Static head was measured at the pipe wall opposite the Pitot cylin-
der by manifolding the two probe holes not in use for the cylinder. Static
head and total head were compared in a mercury U-tube manometer to read ve-
locity head. Before and after each traverse, the static-head readings were
compared with the static head at an upstream ring of taps, with the Pi tot
cylinder both in and out of the flow. The information so obtained was used
to correct the measured velocity head to the value it would have had without
the blockage caused by the presence of the Pitot cylinder.

A few velocity-head measurements were made for small air-water flow

ratios using this apparatus. Velocity head was determined in exactly the same
manner for both pure water flows and air- water mixture flows. In the mixture
flows, no bubbles entered the stagnation hole of the Pitot cylinder because
of the curved streamline pattern around the cylinder. Occasionally, bubbles
entered one of the manifolded static lines (transparent tubing was used for
these lines so that bubbles could be observed); when this occurred, the lines
were flushed before proceeding with the experimental work. Actually, the ve-
locity head of the water phase of the misture was measured by the process de-
scribed, but it was already known from the analysis of Part A preceding, that
the entrained bubbles moved at approximately the same mean speed as the water.
Hence, it was assumed that the measured velocity headand the velocity derived
therefromwas applicable to the mixture asa whole. Integrationof the velocity
profiles and comparison with the measured input of air and water, as shown
subsequently in Table VII, indicated that there was some error in this assump-
tion; however, the error is probably unimportant insofar as the purposes to
which the profiles will be put are concerned.

Four different sets of velocity data were obtained, two sets in :the
4-in . pipe and two in the 2-1/2-in. pipe. Table V lists the general flow
properties associated with each of the runs . In every case, each diametral
or radial traverse in the air-water mixture was preceded by a similar trav-
erse in pure water. The Pitot cylinderwas not withdrawn between these pairs
of traverses. This procedure permitted the zero of the tube in the mixture
24

flowto be well established, as will be demonstrated below. Velocity profilE!!

for the air-water mixture flows are plotted in Fig. 12. In the figure, y i.
the distance from the pipe wall, and I' is the radius of the pipe.

TABLE V
FLOW PROPERTIES FOR VELOCITY TRAVERSES
Air-Water ~jJ[ture

Measured Flow Rate Gr/A

Pipe Dia. Flow Rate
Run in inches Water Only Water Air* Total Ib/sec C1

(nominal) cfs cfs cfs cfs ft2 x 103 lin }.

I 4.0 1.861 1.740 0.198 1.938 0.28 0.229 0.114 1.29

II 4.0 1.850 1. 730 0 .256 1.986 0.39 0.320 0.148 1.3"
III 2.5 0.805 0.679 Q.128 0.807 0.52 0.407 0.189 1.3l
IV 2.5 0.860 0.806 0.335 1.141 1.09 0.720 0.415 1.20

*Converted to probe- station conditions using the perfect gas law.

2. Analysis and Discussion of Results

It is immediately apparent from Fig. 12 that the velocity distri-

bution is materially affected by the presence of the air bubbles, particularly
near the top of the pipe. (Similar profiles for the pure-water runs show a-
bout the same scatter as is shown between the horizontal traverse points of
Fig. 12.) In particular, at the higher air concentrations, the velocity dis-
tribution in the vertical is asymmetrical, while that in the horizontal is as
symmetrical as in the case of pure water. The velocity profiles in the upper
vertical traverse" are generally not so flat as those in the other traverses;
-this would indicate that the pipe with air-water mixture flow is effectively
rougher near the top than el sewhere. It is to be expected that there will
also be lack of symmetry of the wall-shear str~ss distribution and. per haps,
secondary currents in the mixture.

In order to investigate the wall region in air-water mixture flows

more completely, the data leading to Fig. 12 were replotted using a logarith-
mic scale for the wall distance. The replotted data are shown in Fig. 14.
while corresponding data for pure-water flO>IS are shown in Fig. 13.

The zero of the wall- distance scale in these figuresis not a meas-
ured value, but lies somewhere within the rough-pipe surface. The origin
 25

was determined from the pure->later traverses for each run by assuming that
there exists a universal law of the wall of the form [10].

(28)

where V is the local velocity,

V* = Jr:ft is the shear velocity,

is the wall-shear stress~

TO

p is the fluid density,

y is the distance from the wall,

a is a universal constant given as 5.6 by Clauser [10] , and

b is a lumped constant including the roughness effect of the

walls and depending on the units used for other terms.

The law, Eq. (28), was assumed to hold from very near the wall toward the
center as far as a value of y of 15 or 20 per cent of the pipe radius. By
uniformly increasing or decreasing the values of y readon the Pitot-cylin-
der scale until the points approached as closely as possible to satisfying
Eq. (28), the pure-water traverses shown in Fig. 13were obtained. The effec-
ti ve diameter of the 4-in. pipe between virtual zeros turned out to be con-
siderably greater than the measured diameter between roughness tips, as shown
in Table VI.

TABLE VI
DIAMETER OF 4-INCH PIPE
Measured by Distance Between Virtual Origins
Calipers Run I Run II

Vertical, in. 4;036 4.077 4.066

Horizontal, in. 4.000 4.097 4.076
,

Also obtainable from Fig. 13 are values of the shear velocity, V*'
For pure- water flows , the shear velocity is related to the friction factor,
f, by Eq. (13a) which may be written
26

(29)

The values of fL obtained from V* in Fig. 13 using the value $.6 for a
in Eq. (28) are shawn in Table VII and compared with the corresponding values
from pressure-drop measurements obtained further upstream. The friction fac-
tors by the velocity traverses appear to be generally gre ater than those by
pressure drop. The difference may be real because of the different measuring
locations .
Having determined the virtual origin for each traverse from the
pure-water data, the same origin was used for the corresponiing air-water
mixture traverse, (which, as already noted, was taken immediately after the
pure-water traverse without withdrawing the tube). The air-water mixture
graphs of Fig. 14 were obtained from Fig. 12 by this means. It may be ob-
served that there is a strong tendency for the air-water mixture profiles to
follow Eq. (28) near the wall, also, albeit with different values of the co-
efficients aV* and b than for pure water.

TABLE VII
RESULTS OF VELOCITY TRAVERSES

Integrated Flow Rates

Friction Factor f/f L
Air-Water Mixture
Water Only, fL Air-Water Mixture
1-later % Diff.
Only from %Dift.
Total from Pressure Vel. Pressure Vel.
Run cfs Measured
cfs Measured Drop* Trav~ Drop** Trav ..
I 1.866 +0.3 1.910 - 1.4 0.0144 0.0178 1.00 1.046
II 1.792 -3.1 1.896 -4.$ 0.0144 0.01$1 1.01 1.026
III 0.790 - 1.9 0.772 -4.3 0.0186 0.0178 1.02 1.013
IV 0.840 -2 .3 1.0$4 -7.6 0.0178 0.0198 1.06 1.009

*Computed from measured pressure drop between the two upstream stations
shown in Fig. 2.

**Average values from Fig. 3.

That the air-water mixture traverses follo>1 the law of Eq. (28) is
not surprising if it can be assumed that a bubbly mixture at small air-water
ratios is locally homogeneous in the wall region of each traverse. Assuming
that Eq. (28) applies, a value for V* can be determined from the slopes of
 27

the straight lines for each traverse if a is assumed constant (at, say,
5.6). It is readily seen from Fig. 14 that aV*, and hence the wall-shear
stress, is generally greatest near the top of the pipe and least near the
bottom. This result appears somewhat anomalous; it might, at first, be ex-
pected that the presence of air would tend to reduce the shear stress as in
the central parts of the pipe. To explain the wall-shear-stress distribution
around the periphery of the pipe, it may be conjectured that there is a sec-
ondary current flowing from the center toward the top, down around the sides
to the bot tom, and thence up to the center. Such a current would tend to
thin the viscous region near the top and thicken i t near the bottom of the
pipe, thus increasing the effective roughness near the top and decreasing it
near the bottom. Increased effe cti ve roughness .near the top of the pipe is
in accord with the velocity profiles of Fig. 12.

The ratio f/f

may be determined from Figs. 13 and 14. I f in pure
L
liquid, the measured slopes of the straight lines representing the velocity
traverses in Fig. 13 are designated as aV* = SL' while in the mixture, the
average of the measured slopes is designated as aV* = SM' the following
relations apply:

2
T = pV = -peS/a) 2 (0)
0
*
a T
o,L a(SJa) 2
fL = = (31)
2 2
PLVe Ve

a T
o,M
8(~/a)2
f = = (32)
2 2
pV V 2 (1 + lin)
L

f/f
L
= [(SMfSL)(ve/VL)(l/(l + 1/n))]2 (33)

Friction-factor ratios have been computed from the data in Figs. 13 and 14
using Eq. (3), and the results are shown in Table VII; comparison is made with
the pres sure-drop results from Fig • 3 • Numerically, the comparison is probably
28

as close as can be expected; the trends of the data appear to be in opposite

directions, however.

In Fig. 15 the velocity traverses for Rilll IV of Fig. 14 have bee::

replotted in the more conventional form

V/V =a log yV Iv + b (34)

* *' '

and compared with an accepted formula for smooth bOillldary-layer flow. Also
shminis one of the pure-water traverses for Rilll IV from Fig. 13. It appears
that the bottom of this galvanized pipe behaves like a smooth surface while
the top acts like a pipe of increased roughness in the presence of air bubbles.
The conjecture on secondary currents offered earlier would seem to explain the
relative locations of these curves.

The large discrepancy in integrated air-water flow rates for Rilll IV

as shown in Table VII could be reduced by taking VrJV > 1 in the integra-
L
tion. For Vr/VL = 1.22, for example (which appears reasonable from Fig.
8(b», the percentage error would be the same as for the pure-water flow.

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In bubbly mixtures flowing in horizontal pipes, it has been shown

that pressure drop may be calculated by using the conventional friction fac-
tor for flow of a homogeneous fluid in the pressure-drop equation, Eq. (17).

no
e(n o - ~) - tn - - (17)
2D
~

In order to obtain the . friction factor f, the Reynolds number and pipe
roughness must be known. As a rough approximation,

f = fL

where fL is the friction factor for the liquid component of the mixture
flowing alone in the given pipe. The present experiments show that a some-
what better estimate for f can be obtained using the empirical relation given
by Eq. (23)
 29

f/fL =1 + 0.035 J9 (23)

Equation (23) indicates that the friction factor is actually increased by the
presence of bubbles . The increase is possibly attributable to an increase in
viscosity.

Whether or not bubble flow occurs depends on the gas-liquid flow

~atio and on ·the liquid or gas flow rate per unit area. Baker ' s diagram re-
;>roduced in Fig. 1 might be used for estimating the limits of the bubble-flow
,..,gime. Fromthe diagram i t appears that bubbleflow will occur only for water
2
!'low rates greater than about 500 Ib/ft - sec. This limit has been verified
roughlyin the present experiments. The present experiments showed that bub-
Ole flow always existed for e< 6 and essentially bubble flow might exist
!or e as great as 45.
Outside the bubble regime, Eq . (17) is still useful for calculating
~ ssure drop. However f < fV generally. Figures 5 and 6 give some in-
formation regarding the ratio f/fL for these flows, but more study is re-
quired before a gerieral rule for finding f can be given. I t appears that
flow pattern, in itself, is of little importance in predicting f.

In the bubble regime, the bubbles move at approximately the same

speed, or very slightly faster than the mean liquid velocity. In other re-
gimes, the gas component moves faster than the liquid, the mean velocity ratios ·
reacing a maximum in annular flow. Again, flow patterr: outside the bubble
regime has little direct influence on relative liquid and gas velocity.

The velocity profiles in bubble flowin a horizontal pipe are quite

similar to those in flow of a single fluid. However, the profiles are not
symmetrical about the pipe axis; the profiles seem to indicate a secondary
current upward in the center of the pipe and dowm,ard around the walis. The
upper partof the pipe, where the bubbles are more concentrated, is effiOctive-
ly rougher than the bottom.

Bubble size in bubble flow is proportional to the square root of the

pipe size and inversely to the liquid flow rate per unit area. The bubbles
become larger. as the flow goes from the bubble- flow pattern toward the slug-
flow pattern.
30

-.
As a tentative conclusion, it appears that disturbances of the flo>',
such as produced by bends, do not alter the conclusions already given above;
the pressuredrop is given by Eq. (17) on both .sidesof the bend, proper values
of the parameter n being used on each side. The effect of disturbances of
other types is still under study.
 31

LIS T 0 F RE F E RE N C E S

[1] Santalo, M. A. "Two-Phase FlO1<." Applied l'rechanics Reviews, Vol. 10,

pp. 523-526. 1958.

[2] Baker, O. "Simultaneous Flm< of Oil and Gas." Oil and Gas Journal,
Vol. 53, No. 12, pp. 185-195. July 26, 1954-.- - -

[3] Boelter, L. M. K., Martinelli, R. C., Morris, E. H., Taylor, T. H. M.,

and Thomsen, E. G. "Isothermal Pressure Drop for Two-Phase,
Two-Component Flowin a Horizontal Pipe." Transactions of the
AmericanSociety of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 66, pp. 139-151."
1944. --
[4] Lockhart, R. W., Martinelli , R. C., and Putman, J. A. "Two-Phase, Two-
Component Flow in the Viscous Region." Transactions of the
American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Vol. 4, pp. 681- 705:'
1946. -
[5] Lockhart, R. W., and Martinelli, R. C. "Proposed Correlation of Data
for Isothermal Two- Phase , Two-Component Flow." Chemical En-
gineering Progress , Vol. 45, pp. 39- 48. 1949.

[6] Chisholm, D., and Laird, A. D. K. "Two-Phase Flow in Rough Tubes."

Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
Vol. 80, No. 2; pp. 276- 286. FebruarY1958.

[7] Silberman, Edward, and Ross, James A. Generation of Air- Water Mixtures
in Closed Conduits.5 Aspiration. University of 11innesota,
St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratorv Pro:iect Report No. 43,
December 1954. (Available only on lliiversity inter-library
loan. )

[8] Schlicting, H. Boundary Layer Theory. New York : McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany, 1955. .
[9] Weining, F. S. "Some Propertiesof Foam and the Possible Use of Foam for
Model TestsEspecially in HypersonicRange." Proceedings, Third
Mid-WesternConference on Fluid Mechanics, lliiversity of MiriIie-
sota, pp. 515-527. 1953.-

[10] Clauser, F. H. "The Turbulent Boundary Layer." Advances in A~lied

Mechanics, IV, New York : Academic Press, pp. 1-51-. 19.
FIGURES
- ------
(1 through IS)
 35

10

-
"'-,
.,
0
on
.....
,Q 10
Disperse
----
-----
.-'
.-'

.s Annular /
/

.<
~
'",.."
-
·0u
Slug Stratified

~
on
0 .,
'".,
"0
10

-='6 o. As Dependent on Gc;/A~

0
::;
., ., ·2 -I
10 10"' 10 10 10
10
Modified Gas-Liquid Flow Ratio by Weight

Nos::
b 104 ,---------~----------,_---------,-----------,----------,

Q) .Area Covered by Data of Table I ~

~
,Q
Flow Pattern Observations, Tobie II
.E Bubble Bubble Flow
Bubbles on Top of Pipe only
Bubble.~ with some slugs
Slug Flow

.,
0

<t-,
~

~~~
::J 10

-.,
a.
"
"
Disperse

'-', ..............
~
~
10
Stratified N~ 't-_
;0
.2

-.,
lJ..

.c:
.S?'
~
"0 I
·S 10" 10
0-
:J
Gas - Liquid Flow Ratio by Weight oj ~

Fig . 1 - Flow-Pottern Reg ions

 w
'"

Orifice Water Control Valve

____________-,1 ( 4 11 I .t'~ .... -<
(" I I I V'l"'----..,

Inlet Water
Pump
Water Flow Manometer
4" Pipe

6"
2112" Aspirator j-2112" Galvanized Pipe Test SectionJi
2 1/2" Pipe VieWingSectio'r-B~5 7/8" I B~5 5/B"~ I
Calibrated Gage Bock Pressure
~Air Control Valves Valve

Air Flow '=Air Inlet Pressure Drop Manometer

Inclined Manometer
Open Manometer

Fig. 2 - Schemat ic Drawing of First Experimental Apparatus

 37

:~ I II~t~fTItftttI1Irl
0.9 111 111 111

1.1 <D GL/A" 1028 <D <D

o GL/A" 1152 <D
t:, GL/A-123 ? fD
1.0 !Of'>
IL.>~
",0
~ )"
" IT
<D
.9
_ 1.2 ~

Ii. <D GL/A-684

0 GL/A" 700-82 5 <D

-5
o
~ 10
t.I

0 IJ O 0
~
c
o
~~
1.3
lJ.. <D GL/ A"59I
0 GL/A"594
1.2
Present Data Table I, Table II
2 112 inch Galvanized Pipe 0 <D <D[
1.1 4 inch Galvanized Pipe 0 nP,J J
t:,
Chisholm and Laird Data Table m [ 0
I inch Galvanized Pipe 0
1.0

-, -, -,
10 10 10
Modified Gas - Liquid Flow Ratio a/>'>f

Fig. 3 - Fricti on Factor at Small Air- Water Flow Ratios

 \.0.>
(»
Venturi Meter
4 "- p.Ipe Water Pump

Air FlOW-""'" .,...... ----

Open
Manometer Manometer
h
'-./
Wate r
Inle1
Water Flow
Manometer
-'--'
, .1..
';I<'
=
-
~
- I *"
,---remDerature Air
orifice~~ )Jressure Inlet

Initial presOre Fi'O Pressure

Initial -rest Section
11
2112"Pipe 2 1/2"Pipe 12"'0
Air-Wate~ Viewing
Mixer Section
I-- Pressure Drop
........-.,...... Manometer
Pressure Drop '-....- -.-1
Manometer
COpen
'--' Manometer

~~

Back Pressure 12 -0"

Valve () Second -rest Section
Flnol Initial eetlon
Pressure Pressure

Fig. 4 - Schematic Drawing of Second Experim ental Apparatus

 39

100 r - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - " T - - - - - , - - - - - ,

a. Smooth Pipe
Disperse
c: 00 0.. . . . . . .
0 __ .0-
..< 10 f------+------+
~
(!) '"
Bubble

Stratified

0 .1 L..mzID-DiliU?L._-.L_ _ _ _L _ _ _~
.0001 .00 1 .01 .1
Modified Gas-Liquid Flow Ratia a/X';

100 r - - - - - - , - - - - - - , - -- -- - - , r - - - - - - ,

-
N
~

~
I.,
b. Galvanized Pipe
.£l

c: Disperse

10 ' - - -- -- ' - - ---+-If--

->-
u
o
~
on
o
(!)

-
"0
.!!!
"0
o
::;;
0.1 L~2:2;~~!....f.....-:.H~--,J.,__-----L----
.000 1 .001 .01 .1
Modified Gas-Liquid Flow Ratio a/X';

Fig. 5 - Chisholm and Laird Friction-Foctor Doto

 uO

:~Ftmt¥t;~o
.09
rO t\+·,~om~;1
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.2 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0
..., a
-
"-
Compressibility Parameter,

-
0"
0
cr:
Present Data

4 inch
Table I
2 112 inch Galvanized Pipe 0
Galvanized Pipe 6.
Table II
CD

- Chisholm and Laird Data Table m.

~
0 1.3 I inch Smooth Pipe
-
0
lSI
0
u..
1.2 I inch Galvanized Pipe o -
c: 1.1

-
0
0
~
u..
1.0
0 .9
0.8
0.7
-,y ~~ip"-h~ <J DDr u[jJ
0.6
IN ~~ l'!: ~1SI1Sk,
0.5
b.a>1
Oil
0.3
I 10 10 2 10J 10" 10' 10'
Compressibility Parameter, e
Fig. 6 - Friction-Foctor Ratio as a Function of Compressibility Parameter
 41

100r---r---r-'-I"---'---'--""--"--"-'-r.~--'---'--'"
I I I I ,
1/
Chisholm and Laird Data [6]
v
o
l>
Smooth Tube
Galvanize Tube
v O~

/ t Ji'.: .c:

~tQt
ux.M :=L--+--t-t-+---+---+-+-++---+---+--+--t--1
1.0 1----t---t-+-+-7f7\-,
v
/,~ &'<J->
o

Ol~~
0.1 1.0 100 1000

Fig. 7 - Gas-liquid Fraction

42

100~---------.-----------.-----------,-----------,

fo
CI> a. Smooth Pipe
.!t!
.0
Disperse

c:
10~----------~--------~~--
Bubble

VI
o
(!)

Stratified

-
"0
CI>

"0
o
:::!:
joool .001 .01 .1
Modified Gas-Liquid Flow Ratio a/)..y

100
N
~
/, b. Galvanized Pipe
CI>
.!t!
a Disperse
c:

.< 10
~ Bubble
(!) "
:!::'"
0
0
~
VI
0
(!)
Stratified
"0
CI> o
-=
"0
0
:::!:
.1.0001 .001 .01 .I
Modified Gas -Liquid Flow Ratio a/A",

Fig. 8 - Velocity Ratio from Chisholm and laird Dato

 Air

Air F tow Inclined

Manometer=::
C
(
Transparent Test Section
A

:;l
2 112" 'Pipe

~
Water Flow Manometer /"_--!!-:.
2.28" Pressure Drop
Manometer Pressure Control Valve

Section A-A Discharge

Fig. 9 - Sampling Apparatus for Bubble Size

e;
44
0.01

01

%~J V

5
l6 ~ ~
,.{ til fJl
1.0
~
11) A
~'"
'"
2.0 f IW
.3 30
fI --r+-
-'"
<:
u
4.0
5.0
60
/- ...
01
7.0 >- lJ"J 2 112" Galvanized Pipe
~

d'J 7 o Test 2M
'"
a. 8.0 o Te st 9M
9.0 11/ K 4 II Galvanized Pipe

95
1/ Jf r; Test 3A

99
Jo/'
999

99.99 0.0 I 002 0.04 0.06 0.1 0.2 .0.4 0.6 Oll 1.0
Bubble Diameter in inches
(Reduced to Atmospheric Pressure)
a. Typicol Bubble Size Distribution

"0 II
1.0 I
O~
I I
~ 7.5 -d '
!! 9 ~ per Cent Larger = exp ' lA9
'"
E 8 o 0 n "'"
o d' ~ ~8Q h ~ I?>
o 7 rl
~l;
::a'" 6 rfJ;;:. ~
.0
::J 5 0 ~' O ~

m
2r
~~
'" 4 f-- 0 Pipe 9!
'"<:
'" 3 f-- r; 4" Pipe
o 2 nO
'"<:
'"E
o .0
Col 0.5 5 10 5.0 100
Per Cent Lorger
b. Dimensionless Size Distribution

Fig. 10 - Bubbl e-Size Distribution

 45

o
.1 0
.0 9
0 ltt
(l
V
~/ V
.0 8
p5~ V
.0 7
~/

.0 6 '"'
/ ' - d5 '" 3./0
VL V
~ .05
/
9)
1/
..,
.c
c::
.04
//
//
[7
~./5/VL ~
c:: /
.. /

-
Q)

Q)
E .0 3
1//
/ dso
~
~-
0

~
o
o 0
.!!
..0
..0 <6
"
<D .02

I "
0 2 ~2 Galvanized Pipe
4"
" Galvanized Pipe

.0 1
.01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .oS .09.l0

Fig. 11 - Characteristic Bubble Size

46

1.0.

I-
0..9

0.8
o0- TopHorizontal ~
-0 Horizontal
Q
0.7
Boitom
-e
\;f

0.6 -0. 10
~
~
~

~
0.5 - - 0.9
Q)
<.>
:I
- ~
c:
c <
'" 0..4 r-- 0.8
i:5

~ 0..3
~ 6-0
Q.7
~
;J
'"'" 0.2 A .n 0.6
Q)
c: ~ ~

0 Q;J ~

·in "-
c:
Q)
E 0..1
Run I
W 0.5
>-

~
i""

~
0 6
h-rc r.y
0. 0..4
6 -0
fit: 0.3

RunlI 6 -<:
0..2
'V
0, 4 Inch Pipe
6 !:fQ 0..1
6 Qf9'Q
6 6
6 6 -n; ~-uJj
0.
10. 12 14 16 18 20. 22 24 26 28 30.
Velocity V in fps

Fig. 12 - Veloc ity Profil e s in Bubbly Mixtu res

 47

.0

0 .9

6 Top
0 .8 0- Horizontal --+---4---4-~rMh~-
-0 Horizontal -{f-!
9 Bottom
0 .7

~ 0 .6 1.0
~ -0 v (5)-
Q)
u
0 .5 09

-'"
c:
0

is 0 .4 0.8

I
~ 0 .3 0.7

'"'"
~ 0.2 f---+--+--I----+--+-----jr'O-~c_+_-_d_.._-+-_I 0.6
.~ -{~-,v- ~

E Run m 6 0
-{<2>-~-'4---+---+---+~-I 0.5
is 0.1 1----1----1-----j---,4+---.o----ol-
"
>,

d~ f90- ~9 0- (f;)-
00!:-----,1"'2-----'~14,:u'-..:'16~--=----,1-!:-8----,2:00:--::'2::-
2 -~,-n1---+----j--- 0.4

0B-
0.3

0.2

-'- ~~~~6i b. 2 112 Inch Pipe

-q+
c;8---+
l --0-' -
CA ~~--
~---:-Ir::?
~~~9'i">+=-+---+-+--+---+---I 0.1
~2~O~~2~2~~2L4--2L6--2L8----~
L----3L2----3L4--~~L----3L8--~400
Velocity V in fps

Fig. 12 (conc luded) - Velocity Profiles in Bubbly Mixtures

 , 19 c-
~ 18
lv.lo509~br" eo

~~
l
V>
a.
r
,flY V>
a.
l

~
- I - I
.£0 r
h> ~
.£0
>1 3 >1 3 l>;l

- >- j ~ -)
>- - -'~
'w
o ( kP I'-AV. ° 5.63 a. Run! u
.Q
.c~ b. RunlI
~
~
Iff
Q)
>
3 -D. L t
3 -o.cY - AV.o5.11

1-
,
0..0.1
/ '"
.£')

0..0.2 0..0.4 o..o.S 0..1 0..2 0..4 0..6 0.8 La

1- ' / /0..0.2 0..04
0..0.1
1 0..06
1 0..1 0..2 0..4 0..6 0..8 1.0.
Wall Distance y in inches Wall Distance y in inches

2:6 ~S

24
/. 91 ~4 ~
W £1f1t P"
I9i ~
V>
.e-2
c:::
;> ~2
./, 1<1'

> 2a ~o. i:9P

L ~I-AV.o6.40.
V d-!J P
- >-
u
o
3

- ./ ~ c. Runm
18

~ .J:.
d RunN
16 ~
'~
Q)
> f"
rAV.o7.22
~ -'

,
v
~rcr 1
1- -- - -
0..0.1 0..0.2 0..0.4 0..06 0..1 0..2 0..4 o..S o.B 1.0 0..0.1 0..02 0..0.40..06 0..1 0..2 0..4 0..6 0..8 1.0.
Wall Distance y in inche.s Wall Distance y in inches

Fig. 13 - Semi logorithm;c Pl otting of Velocity Profiles in Pure-Water Flow,

 22 ::Jo-r<: 22

2.0) ~1f 6 /
2.0
.~ />"
¢--/ ~,;r 6 /

~~
UI UI /
.e- 18l
a.
..... 18

...d ~ ~~ \?'
/
" f5' ¢>-/ .5 AV.=4.62\.- 6 /
,cr~
> 165I--AV.=5.42 > 16 /

;g:2 f&' ~jy 1-/

~ 14 .~ 14 .,... AV.= 5.1.0
6"
'0 , [6'-A'4=56 /
a, Run I g ~9/ b. Runll
o / J.
~ 12 ~ 12

.0 6 j. ~AV. =7.25 1.0 .-...c ~V.=7.37

/

S.ol
"
.0..02
111
.oj
.0.04 0.06 .0.2 .0.4 .0.6 DB 1..0 801 u
.0..02
/> II
.0 ..04 .0.015.0.1 .0.2 .0.4 .o.6.oB L.o
Wall Distance y in inches Wall Distance y in inches

26 32

24
~ 3D
UI
.e 22 AV.= 5.57~ / W' UI
.e- 28
.5
> 2.0
AV.=6.2~ ~ .5
> 26
~:6~
~ 18
~ ~ 24
~ 1.,/"
j,J
u c. Runm u d. Runlll
o ~ AV.=8 ..o5 o
0; 16 "" -
~
2
> I~ <5 "
14
~I ",,/
u 9~
/ I
I~~ .0..02 .0.04 .0.06 .0.1 .0.2 .0.4 .o.6.oB 10 I~ ..ol .0..02 .0..04 .0.015.0.1 .0.2 .0.4 .o.6.oB 1..0
Wall Distance y in inches Wall Distance y in inches

Fig . 14 - Scmilogarithmic Pl o tt ing of Veloci ty Profil es in Air- Water Mixture Fl ows ~

 '8

30

.-
~Q
28

24
--
Q Q - y

I ..........

b ~ Q--~.>
-f.OI
~
.....
\0
v QQ~~"'9 -@
0-
V* 20 :7 ~.<;,6~?~ ~
Q -~ 'I. ...-U'
•k
oi.- .....5l.:S«,oo\'(I
~1'\ge l~c@~ 'SJ'
W
-0
16
Q .-- ~ f ,
-r:J'6'-
~
. ..,.-v "V
::;;- l ... rl&fO"
-:::
ru
o Mixture
12
o Water only
...c:

8
10 20 40
~
60 80 100
.--l
200 400 600 1000 2000
1
4000
I I
10000
f::!;.
v

Fig. 15 - Velocity Profiles Compared Vlith Universal law of the Wall for Smooth Pipe
APPENDIX A
--------
(Tables I through IV)
 53

;,' ~~§~m ~~~~~~ q~~~H :q~~~

000000"; 0000 000000 000000
...
~"! •
000
~
000000000000';0"; go ~~~~lm
!l~~~m~~ ~~~~!~ ii~ 00000000

~~~m~ 0~~~~~~ ~~~~ij~ ,,".

§ .... iiI.,s
~~~ ~~~~1im~ J§~:i~!§
.;.;.; 0'';';
~§ ~~~ ".~,,§
00 0';0000' ';';
~
0000000 00000 000000 0";';'; 000 000000000

~iS~::l"'''' ~~~~~I
~ •• • ~., 1 ~~~~~~ :;~~'1~ I
............................. ~~~~ ~jl ~~':::8::S~~~ . . ... ........... ~I ~~~ ~~I:i~ I
0
I
.................... ... .........
....
."
.......................... .... ....................

~~~~m ~~~~~~ g
...................
•• aU ~ ~
.... ..;..;..;...: .... ......;...:..;
.. ~~~
""" ~
S§.!l!Un •• SUi! g;fi §.§~un
...;..;..;.;.;.;.;.;.; ...; .... ..;..;..;.; ...;..; ..;..;..; o,,; ....... ci
................ 0 ....

a~r:~~~* ~.~~n,mm ii~~l

•
·
~E!~E!~~E!
0000000
.~ ,cP:[C! E!I:!E!E!E!E! 0~~~~
000000 000000 000
~~i ~~~mm ~m~~ ~~ mm~~
,;
00'; 000000000 000000 co 000 00000

"''''''"-''>0-" '<1 ........ 40.., ~

'1"i9.9.9."!."'l
!~BE~S~ ;i"~~~' ';~~~~ii
~~ ..,..,~~
<."§ ~~~
............. 33~ "~"
~":l"';"i
·or' i~;::i~i~~~
~
.... ......... i~~~~~
~~p.~
\1\0""'''''-'' "';"';
RO
~t ~i~~m~
z o.• .... "'0 ........ "' .....
":":;i'i""l'" &~,,~;;~ ~"~~Ii"
..,00000'" NO~ ...... '" "I"' ...... ..<
,; i~M'~~lR~
~~~ ~~a~~
0
t=
•
~~M" ~ ~~~ 3 ~3~ ... ~ a",::t ~~"
<~'~
~~ 0 ............ ~ .... ::l\::l\
:8:8 ~ 5:tlHX
"~
1:;:::l .... ~:;ISI. O.
« ~'~ ~ ,
~~~g~~
. . . . . . !~S"'~~ .~~
...J
...J
«
....
~'P.~oo",~
~"I'1~~q •
0000000 000000000000
. .. ~ .. 0000
U~!'i ~~
000
. .- ~m~m~ 000000000
~E;~s§ ~§
000000 00 ~~~ ~~~>l~
000 00000

<J> ,;
~
'i""c~" d
. ,;,,:!i~~o ~~~~~q ~~~~~o a~H " " 0
DODo 00
<
~
.. ... *~IX~
~o~d~~~~o
~ 3!;~~80
00000
<
~o m~~~~o
....
<J>
000000 00000000000 ~ 0 000 0000

a:
u.
mm~ ~::t::t~~~
........ ~S~ ::m5::t::t~ °ao~
............... !L9 m 1•;. ~~~~S~::Sll;'o
~ ~~:::I:::I~:::IS :::I::1::l::l~~
~S!~~::I0
~~ ~~~ ~~~~~

... ...
~~:::I :::C~:::I:::C:::l
a:
f( !
.... .., ........ .., .......................... ~I'!.~I'!.~~ g.
~~~~~~~
........................ S;7kS;~~~ ~S;~~~~ "' .... ~~~~
"' ............ ~~~
:l
~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
~~
~~~ ... :::l~~~
<J> ........................................ """ ,; ""
-"
~

.,'"
...J ~
Z
0
t=
::>
1XG:G(~:5I,t:\!R ~!i:a$$;3 :S:8!O:!8.t1i!. l=!~;::!~ ~j!:!.1::
~
.; l!?~SiCI:t,:all;';S t":8:;~~S: ;O~ ~ ... u~~~

a. ~~I::§~i '.e S J::;S$'5: ~q~§~§ ~"'I<;~ ~""~

~ :::;
0
;,' •:=! .qq ~":":":"!": .~~":": "!~"'l •
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~~~~m ~~~~~ ~~'lU ~~~~ ~."
0000000 0000000000 ~~;; 0000
u
~:SG\~::i::: lG\j!:!.i~s ~~§~;;:$
.":-,!'; . ": . ~q . ~. ~~m ~&~§ ~~ ...
~~~~~~~ ":'1~"':": ~-'!';": • q,,:~*! ~~~
... ~G: g:<,e~t§ ~~~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... 00'" "<0"<000 ........ .-1 ... 0 0000 ....... 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 0 0 000
1i j:~~3~:S ",,,,,,,,'h q~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~I
~ ~ ~

~... ..< ...... ,.; ,.;,.;,.;,.;,.;,.; 33~§~~: ~~~~~ ~~~~ I

.................... ................ ~~~~
............... 535
.
............... .-1 .... .-I ..............
~ """
« ~"·~s~ !"''il'.''' .......
~m~~ ~m~ .............. .... ::; ... § t;~GtGt ~~
~m ~~~m~
g:j3~:::;
0 ~~~ . q . . ElqEl~q . qqc:q q~q~ . qc:qq ~.~
.................. ....-1 ............ .............

.•
.................... 0 0 .................... ................ 0 0 .... 01 ....... .......... 0 ...........
,;
a.
0
a:
~

~
.~§"
~~c:El~El
"~.:!~~
~00:S
....................
00 ~o:!~5£a ~~t"~;8 ....~~~ 5;:;-~$.-;l:.l=!
c:qc:qqq asaoa~l ass 9 sa .~~~ij~~
~;;;O:::~';!1
... ~"'oooo

~~~~~ o~~~~
S§2~~
...... ~~ ~ .. m
aas
"""

0
, 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 00000 0000 0000000 0000 000

'"
a:
::>
<J>
<J>

'"a:
a.
~"'... ~'"
.s ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
000000000000 000000

~
~ ~~~~q~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Q" 000000 0 0 ... 0 0 0 000000
~~~~~ ~~~~o
000000000

"!•~~~~~§ ~~m~ .~~~~~ m§§ §m ~m:m ~~~~~ g~~~ m~ ~~~

~
1.s ~!!~~~~ ~~~~~~ !~.~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~
~~~~~~ ~~~!R~:IS:IS ~~~~ :::I~:::l~~ ::::~::
~~~;1~~~ a~~i3,g ,g,g,gi3~
~"''''~''''''''' ~:::l~~?i ~?i?i?i:::l

.;
............~"' ...
 J au"."""." ,.,." ..... '"" ... u..........

,••·
0 0 .. <:. ••••••••

..... 00.000000

.......... .. .... ;, ;, . . . . . . . . . "'101110 . . . . "" .. ....... "" ..

~~!j~~~~~~~~~
....................................... ~~~~~~~~~~~~
......................................
~~~~~~~~
... ...................... ...
~~~~~l1~1iq~~~~'l
.............................................
~~~~~\ll1~~~
...... 0 ................ ...

u~u~m~
0000000000

mmmmg ~mmm
ii:~~~mmam imuu~~
. ;a .. ~~~~~~~~&~~~
J. oOOO .......... ... ... N<O ...

i
~ ..~~~m~~
")
1
0 0 0 0 ............

............................... ........................ "' .......... ! .............. .. ..

..
~ ~

.
. I

•S
"'
...J
....
H
<II
;:'! UUU"'U,",,,,,",.,,,"U ......... DU ............. ... uu"uuuu"'''''''''''''

................... "' ....... "".: ....................... .. ... ............. 0 0 0 0 0

......................... .. ...................... .. ............... i<.i<.i<."' ..

j
1
0..
I
~I
~~m~~~m~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~
§"' ............. .-1 ..................... .... ........................................... ....

'"0::
l!l §§~""~~~.,,~~~~
•• •• "1 •• • •• • • ••
........... 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m~~~~~~~~~~~
........... 0 .................. 0 .... 0 .......

0..

mfnmi§!~~
....... .......
00000000000000
~~~!!1mH~~!'ill
~9~~~ . •• ~~9~9~
0<;1000000000000

oo~~~q~~~~~s:~~ ~ oo~~~~~~~~~~~~
oo ....... ...................... -=> ~ OO ................ NN~~~~

oo~~~~~~~~~~~9
00:::>0 ...................... "',..

...... ~ .. . . ....... . . .. . . '"

~"' .......... ~ .. .. .......
~ ~ ~ ...
~
... ... ~ ...................... . . . .
 55

~~~~I! ~~~~~:;:
.......... '" N ..."-".,,,"'''''''
~:::~~:=!~ ~~£I!~~
................... ........... ..or..."
~~~~~ ~~1'1~~
0 ........... "'NNNN
~~~~ ~~~~
0 0 ............... ...

:!$~a~-a !~HHi~ g;$~~/j ~~;.~~ ~~i!~ ~,"~

0000';"; 00000 0";0000';";0'; 0';000";00

~~,j!i!}R '8fX::;~~
0000"'; ...... "'...;.;

'"z
Q
gg~~::l
........ ..l ........
!;;
....:::> ;~m~a ~~~~§§
... ........ gO 0';0000
~~~~~~ ~~~~~
............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~~~~~ ~~~~~
................. 00000
Q.
~
0
u

c
....
z
'"
~
'c"
z
0 ~~~C!~ ...~ ~~~~ ~~I!~
;::: ....... N .... ~ 0 0 0 0 . - + ..... ..,

u
...'"
a:
I ~~~~~ ~~t:;~'1~
00""'''' .... V\ ... "'::I~
~~~q~~ ~~~~~
"'::1
q~~~~ ~~i!~~
Oooco ... N .... "'''' ~~~~ ~"'i~
eooo 0 ...........

.
0 0 0 0 .......... " ' ...
C
~
:::>
~ 0
:J S:- ~S::~1iI S&!l2a
w
...J
CD C
Z ~~&:I!~~ ~~~'=":~ ~~~~~~ ~~~q~~ ~~~~~':!! "~'C!::t6;~~
~ -""'N"'''''''' ........ "'''''-'' ............ "'<0
'" ::I~~::l~'"
............. N.<J
' ... ..., ...........

Q.
0
a:
c
I
w
a:
:::>
'"'"w
0::
Q.

C ~~~~~6;
..................... 'ii~~~~~
.................. . . :s:~~~~~ ~~~~~~
.......................................... ~~qq~~ ~~~~;~
.... ................................. . .
a:
«
...J ***.&.1,&~~a .~~g.~ ~~~a~a t:~E~i§ ~~c;a~~
00000"; 000000 000000000000 000000000000
c
Z
~~m~~~~m
'" 0000 00 00000 0

~
...J
0
·0'
0
•:I, -'!~~~~~ ~~~~~~
r .... 'i < "!
! S~~~S5 ~~$fii~
'"
0

:;:
u
~"'1. .r

,• ,;
~
"
."· ~
,;

N.
0-
c.i N'• ,
.:;.1 j
OJ
I
?; !,. ,
•l •. 0

!.i • ). ·"
).
 5'6

~~~~ E! ~~"'!~":! &:

........ ... ... '" N .... "'''''''~ ~J~~5~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
............... ';::&:~~
...... N'"
~~~~ ~~~~
0 .... ... ... ............

~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~$§3!i~ ~re~~a

00000000000
~~R$3 !9~~~
000000000
ia~.t
00';00';';0
aaii
.
00000 000000

~~~~~ ~~~":"';c: ~~~i!~~ S:;~":~~ ~~~~~ q~~;:; ~~§E ~~'l.1i!

" 0 ... "''''....... ;:r~~'2j!:\ 00 ...... "'''' II\"'::::~~ 0000'"
N"''''''' ';0';'; ,; ....... .-

~~;;;~";~ '''!''It-'iGl. ;::JS'i.::.:e :(j", "'.".. ~~~~ ~&:;~E!

":"l.-'I~-'I
~g~~~ ~§§~§~ ::i~$':.S~ ~p~~~ .o;i~i:a ~!~~ "'''''''''' ~ ...N"~
"''''

................ !3~§j5 ~m~~ ................

~~~~~ §~~~~ ..............
~ ~

~~~~~ ~~~~ . ...................

~::p:::::: ':'!~~~
en

.. ..
z
0
~~~~~ .~H~.
...~~~~~~
.............. .U§" ~~mq~~~
............... ~~~~ ~~~~
............................
~
>-'
O ....... Q ... 00000'; 0000'0 ...... ... 0

::J .~~~ ~.~ <8~~~~~ .g~s'£~ pg6:<8:!: ~~ ¢GI. ~~S&l SI;:l:!:;:!

0- qc:c:!:tEt l:1~1:l .qq I:ll:ll:lo.qq I:ll:ll:ll:l •
0 0 0 0 0 0 OOcoo
~1:l1:l1:11:1 c:1:11:11:1 1:11:l1:11:l1:11:11:11:1
"
00000 000000 00000 0000 0 0 0 0 000<>
0
u ~~~I::!.I::!. j::!1::!.j::!1::!.1::!.j:!. j:!.j:!.j:!.j:!.j:!.j:!. ~j:!.j:!.;:!~ j:!j:!\:!,j:!j:!. j:!.j:!.j:!~ ¢¢¢J;! j::!j::!j::!j::!

c ~~~-';-'; "'. "!.~~"':~ .., ...... =-""'" ""''''''''''''' ~~..:;..:;'!. "!.":;"l~ ..:;"!.-';"!. -';'!.-';"!.
z
'" .., ......... ..,
...222"
"'''' ... ''' "'
... '" ..,....
8:~'li~'
...... §~~:§~~
'"
~~"~
... "'''' "'N .. "$:I,
t 3&O!Oi~ .~ ia..,
... ............ "'N 0 ~ ~~$R l1g:~~
"'''' ... ''' ... "'~ ....
>'!
'z"
c
~~':1,,:'!. "!.'!."!"':~~
"' ... ~~~ ~2~;i'i!!~ ~
.i!1X ...... 0 .. 0-" ...... '"
":O:::i::1~~ !'J.igi~ •• ... ..,0""""'

:i~i~r;; ~$ ~a
",V\",,,,
.. ';5'0 ... ..,

~~~~ Bi~i~
0000

0 :9;-;;;,'&:S ... "' .. "' ......

.
~
0

." §~l!:.'t-j:;;1 ~«>""" ...

.;

."· ~~~~:!l ;:'j"-:;'l!:

~

."· q~~~ ~q~a1

0

~ ...... ..:~...; ;:i2i~s;:; 00 ... ... "'''' ..;;:tl'i:e'i 0 0 0 ... ",

"'''' "::::j 0000 ...... "'-"

u Nt "',i Nt
',"
0:
~ . • ~~~~ ~:;F!~
'D
,
~
lL
~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~q~~ ~o;~~~ ~~~a~
00000 I:!~~~ ...... !
~
~
0

0
C
::J
Q
-'
"'..,"' ...... ;:i
0 0 0 0 ..

~~~:l!l .:1'~~~
• 0 0 0 0 0 ... "' .... v. ......

$~S~!a~ $~!~H!
"·
",,,,

~ ~~!~~ ~~!~ -" j::!I!P;:! ............

......... ~j!!.I:'je.
"·
<
0000 0 ... ", ..

f::l c
z
""
0 0 ,..;

UJ '"
0-
~~I!.;!!~~ l'!::F~~:!!~~
",N"'-""'''' ~::l~::;O::l::::~
~:i{~::;~~ ::;:;~~3!~~
.........
"'.., ..... ""' ~ .............. ~~~~~12!
......... ,..;..,'" ....~~~~~~::;
"' ................ 3
-'
lD 0
;! 0: s~ri5~~
. . . . .. ;"':3§g~~ ~
C, 0000000000000
•'1 •• .•. .;
UJ
0:: §
::J
en .;
en
UJ
0:
0- •
~

..
C
0:
-'
~~o:o:~~ ~~q~~~q
...................................... ~~~i!<l'& ~~~~:::~:q. .
... ................................ ~
C
Z
*~~B~ E:~~iil@n
0000000000000
~~i~i:i ~a~;i~:§
00000'; 0000000
s;:ii2! ~F'l~~§S1~
"' 00000 0000000 ·
~
'" mm~ •
~
"-'
0
0000000 0

J:
en
;:
•
u .'•
•
'!.'!."t'!.'!.'!.
S!€~!5 ~~~~!~~
..:; ~'!."t"!."':"!.

~
~~~!:; ~~ ":":"':;;"l'1"!.
2 ~
N"'..::I"' ''' ~ ~~:::S~j!!.!li ~

· ~"~~'l~
0

a~g~&:s «"'0.., ." .."' i.;

." ... ..::1 -" .. ...

Nt
... ..;~...;.s:j ~:Jeirria~!L,,- .. ... .... "" ... ::1 ::i::\~:RliS~

• ~~~~~~ ~~~'4~rt": !••

N.
.,,
! "'..,"'''' ...
0 0 0 0 0 ... ~~5~~j ~~
g~IRl!:I!..::I""
":"''''~~ ~2 "•" ~ 0
~

" "
"-0' :;
 57

TABLE III
BUBBLE - SIZED DATA

......
D1.oo ., in .
fit ..

"'''''
Cen~
.- Da.,...,.111 . "'....
I'Wr c..nt ,- -.
DU ., in . ""-
.....u
.
,- .....
01 • . , 111.
"'r
"'~.
c..n~ ,- ....b .....,.
Du. , in .
hr Cent

.
,-
'"
00" " • O. 6l.CI, .. • O.\,CQ II lO' } OJl . Mlb. '" .. - 0 .218 .. 10· ) VI.· 0 . )05, .. - 0.l5'2 z UI·J G:/,- • OSl O,
r
"'
.. • G.l ab IY/' • 0.178, .. • 0.128 " 10- )
', - 21 .) ), · 1.Ll , " - n .}

.... ~ ~ - 1. 5) , ), - 1.Ia9 ,
.
~ • L SI' , ','24.1 - lSS, ", - 25 . 0 " - 25 .11

',.'"
.m2 >.U '.m2 ".' 1. G)
'.<llJ '0 .<nJ 8) . 2 >...

..
~
' .<nJ '-'S 78 . B
'" ., ,.W 0 . 9)
,..,
n.' >.SO
..
, .~ " .6 l.?} >." 0 . 019 6U 1. 55 61 .1.. >... . 019
" ••n s> .6 ' .06
"J '."
..'.n" ' ...
0. 02$ " .4 >." 0 . 025
55.'

....
0.0:1:7 0 . 02$ 118 . 8 0 . 021.
»., ') .n 2SS
,.
• • SO

"w.••
1oO . ~ 0 . 0)1

,.''"'."
29 . S 0 , 0)1 29. 0 2 . ))

... 2. 11 1 0 , 0)1 0 . 0)1

0 . 0))

,,."" '4.0>
.4' ,."-' ""., 0 , 011 m~ 211 . ~ 0 , 0)8 26 .7

"'"'.. S '.SO
.) 1 0 . 037
>5.7
•••
0 . 0)7
,."-' ,."-'
0 . 05)
,."' " 4.'
' .1
4.'"
S ~1
a,Gsa

..
,.""
,,.'"
"
6.",
..
) . 81
4.4)
,."
4."
0 , 01,9
0.055
,.'" I.'
4.>4
4.65 0.055
' .06>
0 ,01.9
" .1
U.6
.... ) . 26

4.>0 ,."" .."

'.<>SO
16 .8
M'
4."-
' .066
G.on
..
>.6
,,.,
>~
5. 14
6. ))
S.'"
MS
.. ......
6.w ,,."'"
S.6
4~
S~S
S." 0 ,067 '""
6.'"
h.65
S-" ,."" 0 .06)
6."
S."
' .SO

..,.'.". " ....

...,.'", ........
6.>0 4.4)
',.""
.m ' .0!4 2. 57 6." 5. 59 0 .015 h.'" 6."
'.M ...."'"
6." 0.07}

,.'" , ..'"
7.1,,7 ,."" >.n " ,.""'
,."" 6. n '0.0115
.m 6.oS '.OM
,.'" 6."
0.0117
,." ,.'" ,."" >~ 7. 22
!." ,.""
6."
,."' •• SO
0.093
,.'"
,~
, .W
,.~

,
0 . 11 ..
e. 81
~
,.""
,.WS
,.W ....n '.)0
,',." ." ,.'"
B.71 G. lOb
loLB
>.W
MS
,.", ..
6."
1.4)
.."'" '.W6
,.W
0 . 100
, '.00
1. 28
0 , 26 '.SO
"'.,.
9.95 D.UD
'.ll,
0.129 ,
0.18
"'
D,u6 U

Ilso ~ 0.0255 ~ • 0.0224 '\n • O.(2)b d • 0 .0212

SO jso . 0.0251
i" . D.5r.l
01. .
1 • - 0 .470 (. - 0.59) • • 0.615
'" • • 0.576

Doll. • O.2~ ~... 0 . 20) " 10, 3

.1 "
Or/' • o.l81 , .. • 0. 156" 10') Gd" ' .. • 0.1)2 " 10' ) Or/' . o.~ ... ,'"0.n8 " ro') 0r/" ' o.Js. "~0.J25" 10')
~ • 1. 1) . VI " 11 . 2 ~ • 1.)2 , v, - ~ . 6 ~ - 1. J:2. ." • 1.9 .0 ), - 1 ,16. V, ' U.s l ' 1.16." - 12 . 2

,.m ~9.s ,." '.m2

....
M.7
'."" a.au "'., '. ~ 0 . 011 97.a
, ...
O.h~ 0 .01.: 94 .0 0 . 482
D,ma
,."" 6J45 ..'6 1) . 5 >~.
>.56
0 , 018 15. 6
>.'"
1 . 57
0 ,018
0 . 02"
75.4
," .6
....
1. 22
1.6)
0 . 017
,.""
"56.'..
93 . 7
89. 0 0 . 9OS
0 ,017
0 , 022
n .'
66.'
"'.,
0 .72)
0 . 51'6]

"'., ..
0 . 024
,..,
,... ...
>.U
... >.9S SO., L 99 0 . 0)0 48 .0 0 , 028 0 . 028 '.n
0 . 0)0 0. 0)0
" ,."" 46.',
...."" ".,
~ ., 2. 45 0 . 0)) >.)6 o.on >.44
,.W
,,."'
n .' 7.",
,.W
0 . 0)6
'.n
0.0)6
46 •• >~ 0.0'9 >.69
"., ,."""
2 . 7)
,-" ,."' ,." 0.0108
27 .5
n.5
2 .85

,."
) . 28
0 . 0)9
,."'" 40.5 >.n n~ 1. 93

........
26. 8

,."'" "., SO ,."'"

, .
,.W ,."' U.' '0.055
.<>SO ,,~ 2 . 0] 0 . 050 26. 0
"., 2 . 17

' .066"
, .~
,."'" U .' ,.'" ,.066 ..'"
••m 0.055 7.4>
..
" .4 4." )) . J 2.26
,.066 4.'" >l.''" 4.)5 4.40 ' .06>
,.066 U .4 2.'"
',."
.n '.06>
' .066 "., US
,.om 4.70 0 . 072 4." 0 ,072 4.23 4. DB
,." 27 .8 >'-' 2 . 89
6.'"
,.'"
S." ,.""' '0 .on
..,.'S."'"" ,.67
..,.5 S.16 O.07a ,.~ 0.072 2} . 0 16.0 ) .17
0 . 078
0. 0Il~ S.47
,."'"
5.37 S.~
S."
,.""
,."'" ' .~
• •U
S."
6.U
o.on
0 .(11)
" .>
"'., ,.67 ,~.

'.40 ,.'"
. 0Il} 10.0
6.' ,."
'-"'"
,"" S."
'.096
l .U
6. n '.096 1 . 76 6.~ ,."" U .S 0 .105 4.' 4. SO

...."..
624 J.21

..," '.m ,
........""'"
'.UR >.'"
>... ,."" 7.'" 6 . 77 0 .102 >.06 6." '-".4 u .>
) . 85 '-' S.'"
,.'"
,.W 0 . 61
,
6."
,.'"
,~
>.O!
,
' .n . . SO '.m
,~
'.n
,
0 .)$ US
,.'"
'.WS
,=
••
•••
•
4m
~.29
0 .1)4 6.'"

' .U7
0.))
,.W ••> 4. S>
'""'" ,.W
0.116 4.'
4.' 44."
."
,-". ,.'"
'.>Ll d • 0 ,0402 . .
7.4
'.U> ,
,." ,' .4)

d • 0.0268 1 d • 0 .0279 ~ • 0.0)20

r..
SO
0.620
50 • O.O)ll1
• • 0.6SIi
SO
( • • o . na I'SO• . 0 .610 t.· 0 . 718
V I. ' M~ ~o.ni"
•• 10' ) V'" o.l, "
.. • 0 .D1 " 10'
I "
0a" • 0. )01.," • 2U " 10' ) Ga''' . o.J), .. • ~.1.61 " 10' ) V". 0.1, ,,~ oms" to')

1 • 1.)75,

MU
f, . 18 . 5

".S ',.'"
8,. ) .m
l ' 1 . )6,
0,011
0 ,017
f, •
04.6
...
"'.,,
1.8.' l ' 1 . bTS.', · 21.4

,.~:i!i '.m2
0 .018
8,S
,,~
'.m
1 .05
l ' 1.LJ.,
,.OU
0.017
v, • n . b

"'.,
...
as. s 0 . 67
>."
1 . 1.)45. v, • n .4

' .W
0 ,016
,.""
"- .
".,. '."
76 . 2
o.6S
0 .011
0 .022
....
"J 1 .45
>." 0. 022 >." ,."" 6>.' >."" 0 .022 >.'" >.'"

.....'".
SO., 1 . 1.8 0.029 45.' 1 . 75 0 .028 49 .1 1.67 0 .027 ~ 1.6)

......'"
0 .028 O.02a
"'.,
"'"'.. .....'".
, .U 7." 0 .0)) 45.4

""'...
0 .0)) U.' 1 .17 0 ,0)5 J) . 3 0 .0).b " .4 >."
0.0)4
n .o
1.14
'"" • •06 ,."" 25 .1 0 .0)9 29 . 5 0 .0,)8 "., 2. U

". '7.... '"'" ',.""

0 .0) 9 )1 . )
0 .0}9
'."" 29 .S
'-"'" 26. ) 2.}S 0 .01&7 n •• '.M , .0>
' .044 ".,
)." ,.W
'~S .<>SO '-"'"
..'"
'-"SO .65 0 ,05) ".6
' .<>SO
,.""
2) . )
17,0 2 .89 '.0S6
,.W 11.1
,." ,."" 0 .OS9 "'., ,."" 16.4 0 .as5
) . )5
,."" ) . 25
,.'"
,."" W•• ).66

..
),as U.'
u., U.'
..
U.' ) .16
) .117 0 .061 U .S
" '.on ).$) • •SO 4 .22 0 .061 w.>
'" ,.m
1...0) ' .on . ~,
4.'"
..I.""
0 .061
h.:;a
,...
0 .016 4,57 4." O. C1Jl 4. )S 0 .016 6.'"
O. 07J 10. 1 ) . 16 0 .0f)

'.'" ,.'"
, .~

4." ,.""'
0 .0'1'8
,."'"
,."'" 6.'"
4.oS
4.'"
4 . 6)
45.."21
,."'"
,.'"
6.'" 4.U
4.95
4.95
).8S
4. U
4."
SS."."
,.'"
0. 094
0 .100
4.24
'-'4
2 . 28
1 .6)
4."
S. 28
,.'S.""
0 .07ft
0 ,0lIl,
'.m
'.W6
6.'"
5.67
4."
'.>S 6.)6
...
S.'" ,'.""
,.""
4-"
l.'"
>.6S
,
' .~
4.'"
6. m
6."

....'"
O.09S S." 0 ,095
S) .'" '.700 ••SO
....'"'"
7." 0.ll2 >.'" 6.65 O. ll~ 7. S> 6." O,12S
0. 101
0.106 .15 S.SO ,.'" 1 .6S 5 . ~' 0 .118 '.65
•."n '.ll, 1.a,
,
7 .)5
'.ill
'.ill '.S>
1.26
S.'"
6."
0 .112
'.U4
>.W
,
O. SS
S.89
•• 06
0 .129
0 .1)5 ,
0 .)) ,~'"
,.'-"> 1.26

,-", ,
0 . 6) 6.J1 0 .17) • .w
'.W 6.65
<Iso • 0.0280
~ . 0 .0289
( • • O.72S
4so • 0 .02«1
i. · 0.70) (' . '."'''
• • 0 .610 t, · 0.1OJ
~ • 0 .0261.
I' . 0 . 6SS
..Coo ..... cted t.o .~pbo.rlc oooncUU ........ ina per!."" , .. 1t....
d • Oo_tr1c .... dl"II,fLr, lnoll.. .
SO
• • LorviUoo.1a ,t.andard oSt...uu ... .
 A-
- P-
PEN
- - -D-I -X B
-
LIMITING CASES OF EQUATION (17)
 61

APPE N DI X B

LIMITING CASES OF EQUATION (17)

A. Pure Liquid Flow (GG- 0)

For the gas content to approach zero implies a __ e __ O. Upon
establishing the following limits

n + 1
o
------
~ + 1

lim e nn " - -
G --0 2
G

it is readily shawn that the limiting case of Eq. (17) as G __ 0 is

L

-------g (A-I)
2D

This is the established result obtained by integrating Eq. (12).

B. Pure Gas Flow (G - - 0)

L
For the liquid content to approach zero implies a - - e- (l) • The
following limits are required in this development

no Po
n = 0, lim I n -- = In--
GL-O nl PI
(A-2)

en - - - ~ 0, en 2
n
2
RTGG
 62

a( nn ) m ~ 0, m ~ ), 4, •••
1" ~

Equation (17l can be rewritten as:

n.j
~
no n + 1
n o -- ]. o
- - = a(n o - ~l - ~n - - aen 1+- .. I n - - - - (A-)
2D ~ 1'_ + 1 ~ + 1
.L

let GL be so small that (no - ~l/(~ + 1) < 1. Apply-lng the logarithmic

expansion series

x
2
~
tn (1 + xl = x - - +- - • • ., -1 < x < 1 (A-4)
2 3

to -aen [1 + (no - ~l/(nl + 1l) and combining the first two terms of this
expansion with a(n - ~), Eg. (A-3) can be put in the form
o

no n + 1
o
------ tn - - + en - - - - +
2D ~ + 1

(A-S~

(faL ( n
1 + n1
) ] ., n = 3" 4, ~ . ..
where
 63

as 0L-- O. Letti ng ~ -- 0 t~'s "--'ti ng case of Eq. (17) becomes

Po
- - - - - - - - - - $n - - (A-6)
2D 2ID'G 2
G

2RTG 2 2V 2p w
___ c Go
__o_ 0
(The subsc ript 0 has been dropped
Now on the right )
gA2 g

(A-7)

and -- =-

Hence, Eq. (A-6) can be put in the form

2 2
Po - PI • ---- (A-B)
g

This is the estab lished resul t for isothe rmal comp ressib le flow
in pipes ob-
taine d by integ rating Eq. (11) using Eq. (13b) .
 6$

ru ~ PArLR NO. 26,SERIES B

or tbe t."~ Falls ~aulic Laboratory

Copies Organization

100 Commandin- Jr!'icer and Director, David Taylor Model Basin, ,/ashing-
ton 7, D. G., Att : Gode 513 .

9 Ghief, 3ureauof Ships, Departmentof the Navy, 'washington 2$, D. c.

5 - Technical Library (Code 312)
1 - Technical Assistant te Chief of ths Bureau (Code 106)
1 - Preliminary Design (Code 420)
1 - Hull Design (Code 440)
1 - Research and Development Program Planning (Code 320)

6 Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Department of ths Navy, Washing-

ton 2$, D. c.

2 Chief; Bureau of Aeronautics, Department of the Navy, Washington

2$, D. C., Att:
1 - Aero and Hydro Branch (Code AD-3)
1 - Research Division (Code RS)

2 Chief, Bureau of Ordnance , Department of the Navy, Washington 2$,

D. C., Att :
1 - Assistant for Aero, Hydro, and Ballistics (Code Re03 )
1 - Underwater Missile Branch (Code ReUl)

3 Chief of Naval Research, Department of the Navy, Washington 2$,

D. C., Att : Mechanics Branch (Code 438 ).

1 Director, U. S. Naval Research Laboratory, Washington 2$, D. C.,

Att : Code 2021.

1 Commanding Officer, Office of Naval Research, Branch Office, The

John Crerar Library Building, 10th Floor, 86 East Randolph Street,
Chicago 1, Illinois.

1 Commander, U. S. NavalOrdnance Laboratory, White Oak, Silver Spring,

Maryland.

1 Commander, U. S. Naval Ordnance Test Station, 3202 East Foothill

Boulevard, Pasadena, California.

1 Commanding Offi cer and Director, U. S. Navy Underwater Sound Labor-

atory, Fort Trumbull, New Lopdon, Connecticut.

1 Superintendent, U. S. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, Calif-

ornia, Att: Librarian.

1 Chief of Research and Development, Department of the Army, Washing-

ten 2$, D. c.
66

Copies Organization

1 Director, U. S. Waterways Experiment Station, p. O. Box 631, Vicks-

burg, Mississippi.

1 Office of the Chief of Engineers, Department of the Army, Gravelly

Point, Washington 25, D. c.

5 Director, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1512 H

Street, N. W., Washington 25. D. C.

1 Director, Langley Research Center, NASA, Langley Field, Virginia.

1 Director, Levis ResearWl Center, NASA, 21000 Brookpark Road, Cleve-

land 35, Ohio.

1 Director, lI;ydraulic Laboratory. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Fed-

eral. Center, Denver, Colorado.

5 Commander, Armed Services Technical Ini'ormation Agency, Arlington

Hall Station, Arlington 12, Virginia, Att : TIPDR.

2 Director, National. Bureau of Standards, National. lI;ydraulic Labora-

tory, Washington 25, D. c.

2 Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, Newport News, Vir-
ginia. For distribution as follows :
1 - Assistant Naval. Architect
1 - Director, lI;ydraulics Laboratory

1 Chief, Engineel-ing Re!!earch Division, Colorado State University,

Fort Collins. Colorado.

1 California Institute of Technology, Division of Engineering, Pasa-

dena 4, California, Att . Dr. M. S. Plesset, Professor of Applied
Mechanics.

2 Dr. Jobn Breslin. Davidson Laboratory. Stevena Institute of Tech-

nology, 7ll Hudson Street. Hoboken, New Jersey.

1 Professor L. J. !looper, Director, Alden lI;ydraulic: Laboratory, Wor--

cester Po~clm!.c Inlltitute. Worcester 2, Massachusetts.

1 Dr. A. T. Ippen. Direcl=. ~CB Lahoratory, Massachusetts

Institute of Technology, Gambridge 39. Massacb.usetts.

1 Professor Laurens Troost, 1l9.9li. Dspartment of Naval. Arclrl.tecture and

MarineEngineering. Masssehu3e tB Institute of Te::lmology, Cambridge
39, Massachusetts. .

1 Director, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. Woods Hole, Massachu-

setts, Att : Dr. C. O. Iselin. Senior Oceanographer.

1 Dean M. p. O' Brien,Department of Engineering, University of Calif-

ornia, Berkeley 4, California.
 67

Copiee (Q:gadza~ian

1 D:-. I!c::;+.e:r 2c<:se, Director. Iowa Institute of lIydraulic Research,

S!.a-:.e tb.:!.Tes_tj' o~ Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa"

1 S. Loga:: (err and Company, 1520 Bethlehem Pike, nourton, Pennsyl-

vania, Att.: ~. S. Logan Kerr.

1 AllisChal.JIersColtpaDy, M1lwaukee,Wisconsin, Att, Mr. Wm. J. Rhein-

gans.

1 Director, Engineering Societies Library, 29 West 39th Street, New

York 18, New York.

2 Library, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.

1 Librarian, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 39,

Massachusetts.

2 Librarian, Library of Congress , Washington 25, D. c.

1 Librarian, School of Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, Texas .

2 Director, Ordnance Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State Univer-

sity, University Park, Pennsylvania.

3 Serials Division, University of Minnesota Library, Hinneapolis,

Hinnesota.

1 Dr. W. D, Baines, Head, lIydraulic Laboratory, National Research

Council, ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

1 Director, Netherlands Ship Model Basin, Haagsteeg 2, Wageningen,

The Netherlands,

1 Director of Research, British Shipbuilding Research Association, 5

Chesterfield Gardens, Curzon Street, London, WI, England,

1 Dr. H. W. Lerbs, Director, Hamburg Model Basin, Branfelder Str.

164, Hamburg 33, Germany.
1 Dr. Hans Edstrand, Director, Statens Skeppsprovningsanstalt, 14 01-
braltargatan, Df>teborg C, Sweden,

1 Professor J, K, Lunde, Director, Skipsmodelltanken, Skipsbygging,

Trondheim, Norway.

1 Mr, M, G. Hiranandani, Director, Central Water and Power Research

Station, 20 Bombay Poona Road, Poona 3, India.

1 Directeur, Bassin d ' Essais des C~nes, 6, Boulevard Victor, Paris

Dei France"
1 Director, Canal de Esperiencias Hidrodinamicas, Carretera de la
sierra, El Pardo, Madrid, Spain.
68

copies Organization
1 Presidenza, Italian Moael Basin, Via della Vasca Navale 89, Roma-
Seda, Italy.

1 Chief of Cavitation Tunnel, WerkBtad, Aktiebolaget Karlstads Mech-

aniska, Kristinehamn, Sweden.

1 Mr. Ovid Baker, Magnolia Petrolewn Company, Natural Gas Department,

P.O. Box 900, Dallas 21, Texas .

1 Mr. Richard Anderson, Reactor EngineeringDivision, Argonne National

Laboratory, Box 299, Lemont, Illinois.

1 Professor A. D. K. Laird, University of California, Berkeley, Cal-

ifornia ..

1 Dr. D. Chisholm, 4 Mount Road, Cosby, Leicester, England.