Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, 2013 1 Foam Flow Instability Analysis Shu Luo The University of Tulsa.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Modelling Water Scrubbing Biogas Based Technology William Nock, Sonia Heaven, Charles Banks Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton.
Advertisements

Investigation of Multiphase Flow Behavior in Horizontal Gas Wells
Conversion and Reactor sizing
Two Phase Pipeline Part II
Liquid Loading Current Status, New Models and Unresolved Questions
Advanced Thermodynamics Note 6 Applications of Thermodynamics to Flow Processes Lecturer: 郭修伯.
Two Phase Pipeline Part I
Two-Phase Flow in Vertical Wells Notes to Accompany Week 5 Lab—Vertical Two-Phase Flow Multi-Phase Flow in Wells (see also PPS Ch. 7, pp 184 onward)
Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, New Comprehensive Equation to Predict Liquid Loading Shu Luo The University of Tulsa.
Definitions. 7 Class A –Wood, plastic and rubber Class B –Flammable liquids and gas Class C –Energized electrical Class D –Flammable metals Per NFPA statistics,
Two Phase Flow Modeling Prepared by: Tan Nguyen Two Phase Flow Modeling – PE 571 Chapter 3: Slug Flow Modeling Dukler and Hubbard – Horizontal Pipes.
CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY Data Base Expansion for Bubble Column Flows Data Base Expansion for Bubble Column Flows reported for DOE in period.
Denny Vitasari, Paul Grassia, Peter Martin Foam and Minimal Surface, 24 – 28 February Surface viscous effect on surfactant transport onto a foam.
Chapters 2 & 3 Energy Balances Work done by the system, W = - Force applied to the system, F Δx or Expansion/Contraction of a Closed System Shaft Work.
July 29, Bench Top Tests for Surfactant Selection Ayantayo Ajani The University of Tulsa.
Experimental and Numerical Study of the Effect of Geometric Parameters on Liquid Single-Phase Pressure Drop in Micro- Scale Pin-Fin Arrays Valerie Pezzullo,
Petroleum & Natural Gas Eng. Dept.
:By GROUP : Abdul-Majeed et.al
Mercury Marine Problem Basically what we are doing here is we are gluing a rubber seal on a painted aluminum part. It is sometimes difficult to keep the.
Resistance and Powering of Ships
Metago Environmental Engineers PREDICTION OF THE BEACH PROFILE OF HIGH DENSITY THICKENED TAILINGS FROM RHEOLOGICAL AND SMALL SCALE TRIAL DEPOSITION DATA.
GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES (CE1203)
Falling Drop Experiment A study on liquid- liquid extraction using a single drop Team Leader:Thomas Salerno Group Members:Gregory Rothsching An Du.
Upscaling of Foam Mobility Control to Three Dimensions Busheng Li George Hirasaki Clarence Miller Rice University, Houston, TX.
Properties of Emulsions and Foams FDSC400. Goals Properties of emulsions –Type –Size –Volume fraction Destabilization of emulsions –Creaming –Flocculation.
Deliquification of Gas Wells using a Multi-Channel System TechCommCorp 219 Blood Rd. Chester, VT (802)
PFR design. Accounting for pressure drop Chemical Reaction Engineering I Aug Dec 2011 Dept. Chem. Engg., IIT-Madras.
1 Mr. ShieldsRegents Chemistry U05 L06 2 Charles Law Jacques Charles (1746 – 1823) - - Charle’s Law (1787) - - Volume vs. Temp relationship of a gas.
Example Water at 95°C is flowing at a rate of 2.0 ft3/s through a 60° bend, in which there is a contraction from 4 to 3 inches internal diameter. Compute.
Drilling Engineering – PE 311 Turbulent Flow in Pipes and Annuli
Pressure drop prediction models o Garimella et al. (2005) o Considered parameters o Single-phase pressure gradients o Martinelli parameter o Surface tension.
Chapter Six Non-Newtonian Liquid.
Introduction : In this chapter we will introduce the concepts of work and kinetic energy. These tools will significantly simplify the manner in which.
CL-232 Lab Experiment FM-202 : Nature of Flow Staff TA’S Mr. Amit Shinde Munish Kumar Sharma Mr. B.G. Parab Laxman R. Bhosale.
Application of Asphaltene Deposition Tool (ADEPT) Simulator to Field Cases Yi Chen, Anju Kurup, Walter Chapman Houston, April Department of Chemical.
Acceleration measures how fast velocity changes
Sedimentation.
Lesson 13 CONVECTION HEAT TRANSFER Given the formula for heat transfer and the operating conditions of the system, CALCULATE the rate of heat transfer.
January 23, Inception of Liquid Loading Foam Flow Ayantayo Ajani The University of Tulsa.
Fluid Resistance.
TUSTP 2003 By Angel Bustamante May 20, 2003 By Angel Bustamante May 20, 2003 DOE Project: Design and Performance of Multiphase Distribution Manifold DOE.
Foam Flow Projects: July 29, Foam Flow Projects Mohan Kelkar and Cem Sarica The University of Tulsa.
Physics Review for the GHSGT. Speed Measure of how quickly an object gets from one place to another.
Chapter 4.2 Notes Resistance in Fluids. When one solid object slides against another, a force of friction opposes the motion. When one solid object.
Condensation in mini- and microchannels
How to read a motion graph.
Water potential Water potential = solute potential + pressure potential.
Aspen RateSep Absorber Model for CO 2 Capture CASTOR Pilot Plant IFP – Lyon, France by: Ross Dugas January 11, 2008
Heat and Mass Transfer Laboratory 1 Hussein Dhanani Sebastian Schmidt Christian Metzger Assistant: Marcel Christians-Lupi Teacher: Prof. J.R Thome Condensation.
Acceleration Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity.
Guidelines for OLGA 2000 Slugtracking
SOLIDS, LIQUIDS and GASES Chapter 16. KINETIC THEORY Kinetic theory- explains how particles in matter behave -All matter is composed of small particles.
Kinetic Theory Simulation
Airfoil in a Wind Tunnel Experiment #6
1 CHARACTERIZATION OF TRANSITION TO TURBULENCE IN SOLITARY WAVE BOUNDARY LAYER BY: BAMBANG WINARTA - TOHOKU UNIVERSITY HITOSHI TANAKA - TOHOKU UNIVERSITY.
System One Pumps S1-200 Centrifugal Hydraulics
Outline Comparison of Performance of Downflow (Trickle Bed Reactor-TBR) and Upflow (Packed Bubble Column-PBC) Two Phase Flow Reactors Experimentation and.
Pressure drop prediction models
Pressure drop prediction models
Consider a car moving with a constant, rightward (+) velocity - say of +10 m/s. If the position-time data for such a car were.
BASICS OF TURBULENT FLOW
Data Base Expansion for Bubble Column Flows reported for DOE in period from 1995 to 2001 & summarized by Peter Spicka.
Pressure drop prediction models
Squeezing of a 40% emulsion through
Gas Condensate Blockage
Gas Condensate Blockage
e-notes (c) Curtis H. Whitson
e-notes (c) Curtis H. Whitson
Ch11. Integrated rate laws and reaction mechanisms
Presentation transcript:

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Foam Flow Instability Analysis Shu Luo The University of Tulsa

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Outline Introduction Liquid Holdup in Foam Foam Flow Stability Foam Flow Pressure Drop Summary

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Introduction Liquid holdup in foam flow is much lower than air-water flow Liquid holdup in foam flow is a function of liquid and gas velocities, as well as surfactant concentration At high concentration, liquid holdup almost remains constant at different gas velocities

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Foam Flow Liquid Holdup 2 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Foam Flow Liquid Holdup Predicting liquid holdup in large facility based on lab data from small facility Half life analysis reveals the effectiveness of surfactant at different concentrations Drainage velocity can be calculated from half life data, which relates to the slippage between gas and liquid

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Half Time Analysis Small Scale

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Drainage Velocity Calculation

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Drainage Velocity vs. Liquid Holdup

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup Correlation

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 800 ppm, 2 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 1600 ppm, 2 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 3000 ppm, 2 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 800 ppm, 2 inch, vsl=0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 1600 ppm, 2 inch, vsl=0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 800 ppm, 4 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 1600 ppm, 4 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 3000 ppm, 4 inch, vsl=0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 800 ppm, 4 inch, vsl=0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Holdup 1600 ppm, 4 inch, vsl=0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Experiment vs. Calculation

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Liquid Loading for Foam Conventional definition is difficult to apply for foam flow Definition based on negative frictional pressure gradient (liquid film reversal) can be applied We applied this definition to predict the stability of foam flow

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Traditional Definition (dp/dz) 2 inch, 0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Traditional Definition (dp/dz) 4 inch, 0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 400 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 6 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 800 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 4.3 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 1200 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 3.2 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 1600 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 1.4 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 3000 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 2.4 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 400 ppm, 4 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 15 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 800 ppm, 4 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 14 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 1200 ppm, 4 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 8 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 1600 ppm, 4 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 4 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, dP/dz) G vs. dP/dz) F 3000 ppm, 4 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s 6 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Foam Flow Stability (Consistent with Small Scale) 1200 ppm

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Pressure Gradient Calculation We subtracted gravitational gradient from overall pressure gradient to calculate frictional gradient. We use the frictional pressure gradient to back calculate viscosity We plotted the apparent viscosity as a function of gas velocity

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Viscosity vs. Gas Velocity 1200 ppm, 2 inch

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Observations

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 400 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 800 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 1200 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 1600 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 3000 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.01 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 400 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 800 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 1200 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Total dP/dz 1600 ppm, 2 inch, v sl =0.03 m/s

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Summary A correlation of liquid holdup in foam flow is developed, which uses information from small facility. Foam flow Stability is determined based on film reversal phenomenon Critical velocity of foam flow decreases as surfactant concentration increases for both 2” and 4” A correlation of viscosity is proposed to calculate pressure gradient of foam flow.

Foam Flow Meeting, Jul.9th, Thank You! Questions…