Numerical and physical experiments of

T-bubbles rising in counter-current flow

B. Figueroa, J. Fabre (IMFT)

Contents

 Intro
 Previous investigations
 Objectives and methods
 Numerical experiments
 Physical experiments
 Theory
 Synthesis of the results
Introduction

 Bubble rise velocity  slug flow

 Submarine technology
 Oil industry
 Heat exchangers (nuclear reactor
cooling)
 Rayleigh-Taylor instability, plasma
physics
 Liquid vel
Introduction profile

Inertia dominates

Surface tension

Buoyancy
Dimensional analysis

Relevant parameters:  ,  ,  , D, g
Dimensionless numbers:
V inertia
Fr  
gD buoyancy
D 2 g buoyancy
Eo  
 surface tension
VD inertia
Re  
 vis cos ity
 Previous investigations
1,0
 Experimental observation of
eccentric T-bubbles that move
faster than symmetric ones 0,5
(Martin, 1976, J. Fluid Eng.)
 Theoretical study of axial
stability of T-bubbles using 0,0

T-bubble velocity
linear analysis (Lu and
Prosperetti, 2006, JFM) -0,5
 Numerical 2D results of
symmetric T-bubbles in inviscid
flow (Ha Ngoc & Fabre, 2006, Martin, D=2.6 cm
-1,0
Engineering Analysis with Martin, D=10 cm
Boundary Elements) Martin, D=14 cm
Nicklin et al., D=5 cm -1,5

-2,0
-2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0
Liquid velocity  
Objectives

 Identify:
 The transition from symmetric to asymmetric bubble
 The influence of liquid velocity, fluid property, flow regime

Velocity profile seen by the bubble

upward liquid flow downward liquid flow
0,00 0,00
-1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0
-0,05 -0,05

-0,10
-0,10

-0,15
-0,15
-0,20
-0,20
-0,25
-0,25
-0,30
-0,30
-0,35

-0,35 -0,40
… and methods

 Numerical experiments in channel with parabolic

velocity imposed upstream:
 Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS) of full Navier-
Stokes equations with Jadim code using VoF method
(Bonometti & Magnaudet, 2007, Int. J. Multiphase Flow,
J.B. Dupont DEA)
 Boundary Element Method (BEM) solving the inviscid
fluid flow (Ha Ngoc & Fabre, 2006, Engineering Analysis
with Boundary Elements): 
 Physical experiments in tube

* All the results are displayed in dimensionless form scaled with:

- D/2 as the length scale
- (gD)1/2 as the velocity scale
Numerical experiments

 DNS: view of the domain

discretization
 -0,5

Numerical experiments
0

0,5

axial coordinate
 Assessment of the code using 1
axis-symmetrical results

1,5

Maneri et Zuber (exp.)

Cou‘t & Strumolo (num. Euler) 2,5

Mao & Dukler (num. N-S)

Ha Ngoc & Fabre (num. Euler BEM)
3
Present work (num. N-S)
0 0,5 1
radial coordinate
Numerical experiments

 Bubble dynamics:
 For Um = -0.075, existence of a change in V(U m)

)Eo=222: Um* constant (after transition

0,45

)Eo=222: Um* constant (before transition

0,35

0,25

0,15
V*

b)
0,05

-0,80 -0,70 -0,60 -0,50 -0,40 -0,30 -0,20 -0,10 0,00 0,10 0,20
-0,05

a)
-0,15

-0,25

Um*
Numerical experiments

0,40
Eo=222: Um* varying with time
0,35
)Eo=222: Um* constant (after transition
)Eo=222: Um* constant (before transition 0,30
)Eo=222 (with BE method by Ha-Ngoc
0,25
Bubble velocity

4
V*

0,20
3
0,15

2 0,10
1
0,05

0,00
-0,80 -0,60 -0,40 -0,20 0,00 0,20

Um*
Mean liquid velocity
Numerical experiments

 Bubble shape:
 For -0.075 < Um < 0, one observes a small dissymmetry
 For Um < -0.075, the tip of the bubble moves towards the wall

-1 0 1
0

Eo=222
Umc= Š0.075

Um= 0
Um= Š0.037
Um= Š0.074
Um= Š0.090
Um= Š0.200
Um= Š0.360
1
Numerical experiments

 Radius of curvature of the bubble at the tip:

1,8

Eo=400 with BEM

1,6
Eo=222 with DNS
1,4
Radius of curvature

1,2

1,0

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0
-0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6

Liquid velocity
Numerical experiments
 Critical liquid velocity:
 When Eo increases, the transition velocity increases
 V* dominated by largest distance between the tip and the wall
 hysteresis

0,3
Eo=400: Um* constant
Eo=222
Eo=100
Eo=57
Eo=222 (with BE method)
Eo=100 (with BE method) 0,2
Eo=57 (with BE method)
Bubble velocity

0,1

0,0
-0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0,0

-0,1

Liquid velocity
Video I: can we believe 2D simulations?
Coatlicue
 Physical experiments

 Experiments in tube:
 Bubble volume is kept constant
while rising
 Different tube diameters were
chosen (2, 4 and 8 mm)
 Different fluid viscosities were
used (from 1 cP to 5.6 cP)
allowing to impose the flow
regime (laminar / turbulent)
 The flow regime was checked
from PIV measurements of the
velocity profile in the absence
of bubble
 Physical experiments

3rd floor

 Scheme of the facility:

2nd floor

1st floor
Physical experiments

 Preliminary experiments with water in a 40 mm ID tube that

show the role of flow regime

0,5
Water, L/D=0,33
Bendiksen theory (laminar profile)
Bendiksen theory (turbulent profile)
Expected laminar-turbulent transition 0,4
Bubble velocity

0,3

0,2

0,1

0,0
-0,6 -0,5 -0,4 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0,0 0,1 0,2
Liquid velocity
Physical experiments

 Example of results in laminar flow in a 40 mm ID tube with a

water-glycerol mixture
0,50

0,45

0,40

0,35

0,30

0,25
V*

Mixing 1, L/D=1,6
0,20
Mixing 1, L/D=3,3
Mixing 1, L/D=4,1
0,15
Mixing 1, L/D=6,5
Mixing 2, L/D=3,3 0,10
Mixing 2, L/D=6,5
Axis sym. simulations 0,05
Bendiksen theory (laminar profile)
0,00
-0,70 -0,60 -0,50 -0,40 -0,30 -0,20 -0,10 0,00 0,10

LiquidU*velocity
Physical experiments
Coyolxauhqui
Physical experiments (laminar)
Physical experiments (turbulent)
Critical velocity leading to symmetry breaking

 The critical velocity increases with the surface tension but the results
look different between (i) 2D and 3D flow and (ii) laminar and
turbulent
0,20

0,18

0,16

0,14
 Critical liquid velocity

0,12

0,10

0,08

0,06
2D numerical simulations
0,04 Laminar experiments in tube
Turbulent experiments in tube
0,02
Linear stability theory (Lu & Prosperetti)
0,00
0,00 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08
Surface tension parameter (4/Eo)
Is the velocity the right critical parameter?

 The bubble behavior depends on the flow near its tip. At the
transition the velocity may be expressed by a Taylor series:
1  *  2
u * (r*) V*  u * 0 V *    r *  r * 4
2 r * 0
 Thus the behavior is controled by 2 parameters: u *0 ,  * /r *0


 Because no symmetry breaking occurs when  * /r *0  0 we do

not expect u *0 to be a relevant parameter

 Then the law must be of the form: 

  * 
   f 4 / Eo
r * 0,c


Synthesis of the results

 With  * /r * it is possible to group the results… except

that of the linear stability theory!

0,70

0,60
Ź /r at the symmetry

0,50

0,40

0,30

Laminar experiments in tube (mixture)

0,20
Laminar experiments in tube (water)
Turbulent experiments in tube (water)
0,10 Laminar 2D numerical experiments
Linear stability theory (Lu & Prosperetti)
0,00
0,00 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08
Surface tension parameter
 Perspectives

 Experiments in tube:
 3D sims
 Theory (simpler case)
 Special bubble
 Publish or …
 Merci à tous et à bientôt!

 Groupe INTERFACE
 Jean Fabre, Dominique Legendre, Gregory Ehses, Anaîg
Pedrono, Serge Adjoua, Yannick Hallez, Jean-Baptiste
Dupont, Eric DeMoraes, Laurent Mouneix, Jean Pierre
Escafit, Jean Marc Sfedj, Hervé Neau, Dominique Anne-
Archard, Franck Auguste, Yacine Haroun, David Fabre…
Experiment: flow-meters calibration

-12%

-10%

-8%

-6%
0,050

0,045
-4%
0,040

-2% 0,035 Fm1 mu 5.46

0,01 0,1 1 Fm3 mu=1
0,030 Fm1 mu=1
0%
Fm 3mu=5,6
0,025

0,020

0,015

0,010

Error correction through 0,005

0,000

Calibration curves 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

 Profil de vitesse PIV
0,450

0,400

0,350
Re 189
Re 303
0,300
Re 567
0,250 Re 775
Re 955
0,200 Re 1 513
1,14 12 Re 1 702
0,150
Figueroa thesis Re 1 901
1,12 Re 2 828
Figueroa thesis 10 0,100
Dorsey N.E., 1940
1,1 0,050
Present mixing
8 0,000
1,08

Viscosity
Density

0,000 0,010 0,020 0,030 0,040 0,050 0,060 0,070

1,06 6

1,04
4 18,000
1,02 16,000
error
2 14,000
1 Vmax/Um
12,000
0,98 0 10,000
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 8,000
Quality 6,000
4,000
2,000
0,000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Plage d’opération: 300<Re<2000 Re
Results

0,47
Eo=57, Um time-varying
Eo=57, BE method
0,37
Eo=222, Um constant
Eo=222, Um time-varying
0,27
Eo=100, Um constant
Eo=100, Um time-varying
0,17
Eo=57, Um constant
Bubble velocity*

0,07

-0,03
-0,80 -0,70 -0,60 -0,50 -0,40 -0,30 -0,20 -0,10 0,00 0,10
-0,13

-0,23

-0,33

-0,43
Mean liquid velocity*
V* dominated by tip-wall distance