You are on page 1of 9

0263–8762/05/$30.00+0.

00
# 2005 Institution of Chemical Engineers
www.icheme.org/journals Trans IChemE, Part A, May 2005
doi: 10.1205/cherd.03363 Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 83(A5): 469–477

A MODEL FOR LIQUID FILM FLOW AND SEPARATION
IN A WAVE-PLATE MIST ELIMINATOR
P. W. JAMES1 , B. J. AZZOPARDI2, Y. WANG3 and J. P. HUGHES1
1
School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
2
School of Chemical, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
3
Rolls-Royce plc, Derby, UK

W
ave-plate mist eliminators operate on the basis that liquid droplets impact on the
plates, accumulate and form thin films which drain away to remove the liquid.
However, the effect of the gas flow on the deposited films can be a factor limiting
the operational efficiency of the equipment. In this paper numerical simulations of the motion,
and subsequent deposition, of droplets on wave-plate mist eliminator surfaces are carried out
and a model for the generation and flow of the liquid film that forms is presented. Two exist-
ing models for film separation from a surface are coupled with the predictions of film thick-
ness to provide a method of determining whether, under a given liquid loading, re-entrainment
takes place.

Keywords: wave-plate mist eliminator; numerical simulation; droplet deposition; film
separation.

INTRODUCTION Experimental and numerical studies of aspects of the flow
through different types of wave-plate mist eliminator have
A wave-plate mist eliminator is one of several devices that been carried out by, for example, Verlaan (1991), Gillandt
are used in the process industries, for example the oil indus- et al. (1996), Phillips and Deakin (1990) and Wang and
try, to separate liquid from a primary gas stream. In the case Davies (1996). The present authors have carried out a
of a wave-plate mist eliminator, some measure of separation series of studies to assess the influence of turbulent dispersion
has already taken place prior to the liquid droplet laden (Wang and James, 1998, 1999) and drainage channels (James
flow passing through the eliminator and so the droplets to et al., 2003) on wave-plate mist eliminator performance.
be separated are small, typically, of diameter 5 mm – Liquid film formation through droplet transport and depo-
50 mm. The physical mechanism on which the operation sition has also been studied by a number of authors. For
of wave-plate mist eliminators is based is inertial depo- example, Bai (1996) considers film formation through
sition. The primary gas flow is made to pass through a spray impingement, with particular emphasis on the appli-
series of channels that contain sharp bends and as the gas cation to diesel engine combustion chambers. In this study
flows around a given bend, usually at a speed of several the author has given a very detailed analysis of the mechan-
metres per second, the droplets follow trajectories that isms of droplet deposition and subsequent film formation.
result in their collision with the channel walls. The purpose of this paper is to use the results of numeri-
In practice, the eliminator can be operated in vertical or cal calculations for droplet deposition in a laboratory scale
horizontal mode but, in either case, the tendency of liquid mist eliminator to develop a model for liquid film develop-
to form into thin films after deposition on the eliminator’s ment, shear and drainage. The results are coupled with
surfaces places limits on the liquid loading that can be Owen and Ryley’s (1985) model for film separation, in a
handled. If the liquid loading is too high and the films form modified for use in mist eliminator passages by
are not removed sufficiently quickly (usually by gravita- Azzopardi and Sanaullah (2002), and an alternative
tional drainage) then they may separate from sharp corners model, proposed by Llory et al. (2000). In this way, a
and re-introduce liquid into the gas flow. In the vertical method of predicting whether, at a given liquid loading,
case, a phenomenon termed flooding may occur, in which a deposited liquid film will re-entrain is obtained.
the draining films thicken to such an extent that they
bridge the channel and flow upwards. NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF DROPLET
TRANSPORT AND DEPOSITION
Methodology and Gas Flow Calculation 

Correspondence to: Dr P. W. James, School of Mathematics and
Statistics, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK. Figure 1 shows schematically the cross-section of the
E-mail: phil.james@plymouth.ac.uk idealized wave-plate mist eliminator that is used for the

469

(2003) and is thought justified Z direction than in either the X or Y directions. U g ¼ 4:14 ms1 .e. The turbulence Figure 2. a low Reynolds number version of bulk gas speeds are 3– 8 ms21 and these correspond to the k-1 model was required. S ¼ 11. At these speeds the zone is reasonably well-predicted with the standard k-1 flow is likely to be turbulent. and the motion and subsequent those used in the test calculations on the rectangular deposition of droplets is then calculated. calculations to be discussed in this paper have 30 uniform The Eulerian–Lagrangian calculation method for droplet cross channel cells and 100 uniform cells along each half transport and deposition is used. model. (1996). which are effectively grid indepen. Trans IChemE. channel. The droplet laden flow (weak) recirculation zones downstream of the sharp convex enters the eliminator from the left through the short inlet corners. these values erning equations in a long (80 S) straight duct of width S.14 ms21. (2) a region of very slowly moving fluid in the area immedi- dent can be achieved using 15 uniform cross channel cells ately downstream of the sharp bend. taken from James et al. Schematic diagram of the cross-section of the idealised wave-plate mist eliminator. corresponding to the laboratory-based eliminator used by Wang and James (1998) show that in order to predict the Azzopardi and Sanaullah (2002). (2003). 83(A5): 469–477 . Cartesian coordinates wave-plate mist eliminator may therefore be taken to be are defined as shown with the cross-section lying in the grid invariant. However. In this method the primary wavelength of the eliminator. At the inlet to the eliminator the flow con- X-Y plane. turbulence kinetic energy. A series of numerical calculations of the other. The flow calculation therefore tion would take place (this region appears in calculations with incorporates a turbulence model and is carried out using the standard k-1 model as a region with effectively zero velo- the CFXTM commercial software. and speed gas jet that detaches from each convex sharp bend. Part A. In view of the fact that the dimensions of industrial the standard k-1 model.470 JAMES et al. Velocity vectors in a cross-section of the mist eliminator. This is a more refined grid.5 mm. 1. The standard k-1 model city) all calculations in the present paper have been made with is used. The grids used in the down of the flow to a repeating pattern after successive bends. 2005. This approach was also taken in the wave-plate mist eliminators are usually much larger in the recent work by James et al. There are six bends. The main features of the flow are: (1) a high the gas mean velocity. Typical Gillandt et al. and (3) the rapid settling and 240 uniform streamwise cells. without con- especially in the direction parallel to a wave-plate. albeit of low turbulence inten.5 mm ditions are obtained from numerical solutions to the gov- and the bend wavelength l ¼ 40 mm. shows the turbulent flow in a rectangular channel of width S and the velocity vectors when the gas bulk velocity is length 80 S with various grids reveals that solutions for 4. Figure 2. Figure 1.. of 4620 – 11 680. in view of the facts Reynolds numbers. and so the calculations of the flow through the and short inlet and outlet sections. the plate spacing S ¼ 11. i. calculations. k. its rate of dissipation. Chemical Engineering Research and Design. than sideration of the droplets. Angle a ¼ 608. The numbers 1–6 label the bends referred to in the text. a feature that was evident in the experiments of section before being deflected by the wave-plates. gas flow through the eliminator is computed first. as is the size and shape of the region where recircula- sity at the lowest speeds. l ¼ 40 mm and a ¼ 608. variations in the Z simulation on the one hand and computational efficiency on direction are ignored. it is assumed here as a reasonable compromise between accuracy of flow that the gas flow is two-dimensional. as shown in the figure. The numbers shown in the figure are in ms1 . based on the hydraulic diameter and that the mean gas velocity profile outside the recirculation gas bulk velocity.

ugY . During the where mg is the gas dynamic viscosity. (1993). at a droplet’s location. Le Graham and James. defined by 3 rg djug  ud j where u0gX . both of which vary move in all three spatial directions but their domain is with location. et al.164 (see. in updates the mean velocity Ug. The instantaneous interaction. It was allows for the influence of turbulence on the motion of shown by Wang and James (1999) that a relatively the droplet. It is the to update u0g and Nr only when the particle-eddy interaction inclusion of the fluctuating part of the gas velocity that ends (see. for example. The droplets are allowed to a lifetime. Trans IChemE. together with the additional to give assumption that the only force acting on a droplet is aero- dynamic drag. 1981) and a form The refinement. given by velocity and Nr is a random number drawn from a Normal (Wallis. 1984) are valid. (2) ug ¼ Ug þ u0g Nr . and length scale. Chemical Engineering Research and Design. motion is negligible. for example. Shuen droplet tracking calculation. the fluctuating velocity. 1996) is used to calculate liquid droplet Tc ¼ td log 1    . ugZ ) ¼ (1. Te. respectively. is kept constant. (6) jug  ud jtd transport through the wave-plate mist eliminator. of it is incorporated into the CFXTM software. At the start of an interaction between a mg droplet and an eddy the values of Ug. for example. Finally it is noted expressions that although in principle it is possible to incorporate aniso- tropy into the calculations it is not thought that this level of k C2 k3=2 refinement is justified in the context of the overall aim of Te ¼ C1 . Nr. 2005. 83(A5): 469–477 . Tc. It is assumed that there is no correlation between the model is that droplets encounter discrete eddies that have motion of successive eddies. the influence of gas flow If it is assumed that td and ug remain constant over some turbulence on the motion of droplets is taken into account.201 and C2 ¼ 0. rd the droplet density. u0gY and u0gZ are the components of the fluctuat- Red ¼ . each time a speeds up the calculation and leads to better predictions of particle crosses a control volume boundary. lead to the following equation of motion ud (t þ Dt) ¼ ug (t)  ½ug (t)  ud (t)eDt=td . tdjug 2 udj then the time taken by a droplet to cross the eddy. for example. If Le  to the presence of droplets. Ug is updated whenever a droplet crosses a gas velocity ug in the above equations is the sum of mean computational control volume boundary but it is customary and fluctuating velocity. Here. u0g the present work a modification of the method is used that and hence the eddy lifetime and length scale. throughout the inter- James. that there is no modification of turbulence or mean flow due and the eddy interaction time. is taken to be Tc. (see. (5) 1 1 this work. u0g is the fluctuating gas the gas density and CD is the drag coefficient. as described below. In the eddy-interaction model an assumption of isotropy is 24 normally made so that CD ¼ (1 þ 0:15Re0:687 ): (3) Red d rffiffiffiffiffi 0 0 0 0 2k ug ¼ (ugX . which will be employed in this paper. 1. The term td is þ ug (t)Dt: (8) called the droplet relaxation time and is given by The gas velocity ug(t) is found from 4drd td ¼ . Part A. that the droplets are hard tdjug 2 udj then the droplet becomes trapped in the eddy spheres and that the effect of gravity on a droplet’s and Ti is set equal to Te. 1). The random droplet collection efficiency in mist eliminators (Wang and number. Le ¼ . similar to those used by software provide mean velocities and the eddy-interaction Kallio and Reeks (1989) and Sommerfeld et al. If Le . However. The eddy-interaction model has a long history wave-plate geometry (except for very small droplets). it is assumed that the standard essentially infinite in the Z direction. (7) for a single droplet: dud ug  ud and ¼ . (10) Here Red is the droplet Reynolds number. model provides a method of reconstructing their fluctuating can give improved predictions of droplet dispersion in the components. The numerical simulations with the CFXTM simple refinement of the model. (1) dt td xd (t þ Dt) ¼ xd (t)  td ½ug (t)  ud (t)(1  eDt=td ) where ug and ud are the instantaneous velocities of the gas and the droplet. (9) 3rg CD jug  ud j where d is the droplet diameter.. 1999). however. Le. It is assumed that there is no interaction between droplets. 1996). and t is time. 1969) distribution with mean zero and unity standard deviation. (4) ing gas velocity. Ti. The key concept in the eddy-interaction action. u0g and Ti are set using flow field values at the droplet location. FILM SEPARATION IN WAVE-PLATE MIST ELIMINATOR 471 kinetic energy and its rate of dissipation are required for the where C1 ¼ 0. small time interval Dt then equation (1) can be integrated The above assumptions. Gosman and Ioannides. is Droplet Transport and Deposition " # The so-called eddy-interaction model (see. Graham and James. However. rg where Ug is the mean gas velocity.

Various mean diam.72 8.33 35.23 4.m1  ri. droplets at each cell can then be found from equations 25 and 40 mm.64 7.51 4.27 18. Here Nc is the total number of cells d along the mist eliminator.46 0.32 3. When reference is made to the kth wall cell it is droplets are divided into N size groups and that the diameters therefore assumed that it is the kth cell on the impact surface.12 8. Droplet Size Distribution droplets in the ith size group at the inlet to the mist eliminator to the total number of droplets of all sizes at inlet is The droplet size distribution at inlet to the mist elimi- nator is assumed to follow the Rosin –Rammler distribution ð dLi (see.81 15. and values of c of 2 or 5.21 10.94 3.23 4.k1  ri.02 5.50 25.00 29.02 13.38 7.0 (ri.96 24.00 50.13 3.40 46.m )di where G(. It is important to note that in any passage of the eliminator.78 15.08 6.14 20.14 33. CALCULATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF These walls are termed ‘impact surfaces’ and are opposite DEPOSITED DROPLETS the walls where the low speed regions occur (see Suppose that at entry to the wave-plate mist eliminator the Figure 2).42 4.93 d ¼ 20 mm 2.38 16. mass) fraction of deposited In the present work distributions corresponding to d ¼ 15.85 13.472 JAMES et al.64 7.99 14.52 1.19 16.98 36.29 2.13 6. for example wall AB in Figure 1.83 5.34 6. The ratio of the number of liquid trapped is 32% but increases to 84% for a bulk gas Table 1.j in equation d32 ¼ : (14) (17) can be obtained from droplet tracking results and the G(1  1=c) volumetric (or equivalently.9%) that deposit do so on just one of the two walls comprising that passage.13 4.21 7.94 9. of droplets in the ith size group are in the range [dSi .01 6.0 ni.96 6. are considered.22 33.09 1.66 2. dLi ] where A selection of results obtained for four gas speeds.98 3.81 4.15 4. shown in Table 1. (12) d The volumetric fraction of droplets that deposit on the kth and the number probability density function is wall cell of the mist eliminator is PN cdc4   fi.96 13. and for c ¼ 5 group.45 7.44 1.86 4.71 8.11 2. virtually all of the droplets (greater than 99. in which ri. Bulk gas speed U g (ms21) 1st bend 2nd bend 3rd bend 4th bend 5th bend 6th bend Out d ¼ 15 mm 2.  is the ith size group and ni.00 43.28 3. 2005.44 6.69 5.04 37. The values of ri.13 20. the total amount of liquid plets in the ith size group which remain undeposited at the deposited increases with the bulk gas speed U g .68 9. 1951).14 10.20 8.74 d ¼ 25 mm 2.19 7.66 4.31 31. 83(A5): 469–477 . Chemical Engineering Research and Design.60 1.58 33.98 27. In this distri- fi.0 (ri. For ith size group which have not deposited at. the Sauter mean diameter d32 is defined by of.90 18. the kth wall cell to the total number of droplets at inlet in this size group.75 2. Mugele and Evans.73 12.j is the ratio of the number of droplets in the eters can be defined in terms of the parameters d and c.j be the ratio of the number of dro.k )di3 pn (d) ¼  c .35 4.22 6. or upstream example.) denotes the gamma function.96 ms21 the percentage of total at the mist eliminator inlet. fv (d) ¼ 1  exp (d=d) (11) remain undeposited at the exit of bend j to the total number of where d is a size parameter and c a distribution parameter.j ¼ fi. Part A. Let di represent the mean diameter of droplets in and different values of the droplet size parameter d.14 10.87 3.j : (16) cdc1   pv (d) ¼  c c exp (d=d) .75 2. The droplets of all sizes at inlet is therefore volume probability density function corresponding to fv(d) is fi.00 21. at a speed of 2.87 18.34 0.67 16. Percentage of liquid trapped in each bend (c ¼ 5). for example.11 8.40 4. (15) – (17). In general.66 Trans IChemE.14 37.29 7. for dSi and dLi denote the smallest and largest diameters in the the eliminator channel shown in Figure 1.40 6.44 26. For exit of the jth bend to the number of similarly sized droplets example.0 ¼ pn (x) dx: (15) bution the cumulative volume fraction of droplets with dSi diameters less than d is given by   The ratio of the number of droplets in the ith size group that  c .95 67.59 1. 20.00 36.00 16.22 15. exp (d=d) (13) wk ¼ PNc i¼1 PN  (17) c3 3 d G(1  3=c) m¼1 i¼1 fi.

However. The amount of trapped liquid also increases as the parameter d (which is a measure of the mean droplet diameter) increases. there are relatively large of mass conservation may be written droplets entering the eliminator which are insensitive to changes in the flow direction and travel in almost straight @ @ D(x) line paths until they deposit. 83(A5): 469–477 . z). the distribution of deposited liquid along a given wall of the wave-plate mist eliminator can be com- puted. z) dy: re-entrainment. tal axis is again normalized so that the length of each the x axis horizontal along the top of the plate. z) and w(x. Chemical Engineering Research and Design. therefore give no information about how the amount of deposited liquid varies with d. z)w(x. assumed in which the liquid moves horizontally with probably due to two factors. defined by Consequently. The film is driven in the x direction by shear stress deposited liquid varies. and subsequent. z)) þ (h(x. These curves 1– 6 with fractional length along the wave-plate (c ¼ 5. Note that each curve is normalized so that the area under the curve is one. w(x. Schematic diagram of a single mist eliminator surface showing fractional length along the wave-plate (c ¼ 5). y. The horizon- Consider a flat plate with the origin at the top left corner. z)u(x. 2005. z). z) 0 (19) Figure 3.z) 1 may lead to a thicker film and. The dis- tribution of trapped liquid from bend to bend is fairly even when the bulk gas velocity is low and when d is at its smal- lest. independent of z. Variation of normalized mass fraction distribution in bend 5 with Figure 5. The quantities plotted are frac. The equation 608 for the rest. component of velocity is taken to be zero. the z axis eliminator surface is one.  only how the shape of MODELLING THE FILM FLOW the distribution varies. to local  z) ¼ ½u(x. especially near the sharp convex corner. In contrast. h(x. ½u(x. U g ¼ 4:14 ms1 ) are compared. Trans IChemE. z). z) and vertically with speed w(x. hence. as shown in Figure 5. Steady. isothermal film flow is bends are similar but that in the first bend is different. The region near the start of  z)) ¼ (h(x. ð h(x. Thus the graphs show not only flux of droplets. there is a smaller speed u(x. (18) @x @z rL the second. FILM SEPARATION IN WAVE-PLATE MIST ELIMINATOR 473 speed of 8 ms21 (c ¼ 5. coincides with the low velocity zone where rL is the liquid density and u (x. the corresponding large mass fraction out- side this region. Part A. depth-averaged velocity components. The y change in the gas flow direction. 308 for the first bend. the distribution becomes less uniform as d or the bulk speed increase. vertically down along the left hand edge of the plate and tions of mass deposited per cell and the sum of the areas the y axis normal to the plate. is assumed to how the shape of the distributions change from bend to deposit on the plate giving rise to a liquid film of thickness bend but also give an indication of how the amount of h(x. Using values of ri. (This information is quantified in exerted by the carrier gas and drains in the z direction under Table 1.  z) are and in regions such as this very little deposition occurs. where the mass frac- tion is near zero. the distri- butions of deposited liquid for all six bends (for c ¼ 5. d ¼ 20 mm). y. bends.) The distributions in the second and subsequent gravity. and. Film Flow d ¼ 20 mm. and the horizontal axis is normalised so that the Figure 4. Variation of normalized distribution of deposited liquid in bends length of the eliminator surface is one. d ¼ 15 mm). w(x. secondly. A under all six curves is one.j obtained from the droplet tracking calculations. Firstly. Figure 3 shows how the mass fraction in bend five of the eliminator varies as d is changed. y. incompressible. z). in Figure 4. local co-ordinate system. D(x). y.

01 kg s21). 83(A5): 469–477 . for h(0. The interfacial shear stress is obtained plet size distribution corresponding to c ¼ 5. 0  y  h(x. The vertical component ðW is taken to be the well-known Nusselt profile. 2005. Variation of h(W. the film will drain under gravity whilst 2mL being swept across the plate. d ¼ 25 mm. z) of velocity at x ¼ W: the film continues to flow into the  z) ¼ w(x.01 kg s21. z) (20) sition and drainage on the film thickness at x ¼ W no longer mL depend on z. (distribution A). it must be remembered and that in the model there is a non-zero horizontal component rL gh2 (x. bution of droplet sizes generated by the nozzle in the exper- bolic or hyperbolic partial differential equations using the imental work of Azzopardi and Sanaullah (2002). 0  y  h(x. z) @ rL gh3 (x. z) u (x. for r g(2h(x. In equation (24). liquid ti (W)rL loading ¼ 0. Equation (18) then becomes the highest U g values the film almost reaches a constant   value at z/L ¼ 1. (23) region x . Trans IChemE. and its cal. consistent with the analysis of Azzopardi and Sanaullah (2002). hng (subscript ng stands for ‘no gravity’) is then  2mL W D 1=2 Figure 6. which c ¼ 2. In this sense. z) ¼ 0. (22) numerical solution confirms this interpretation. Here whereas distribution B is more representative of the distri- L ¼ 130 mm and W ¼ 23 mm. 0) ¼ 0. z) ¼ .474 JAMES et al. z) with z/L in bend 1 of the model wave-plate hng ¼ . Before presenting detailed solutions of equation (24) it is worthwhile considering first the nature of the solution in the case of zero gravity. z is treated as the time-like of d in the two distributions is chosen such that both variable. depo- u(x. the faster the film thickness reaches its equili- brium value. Figure 7 compares the film thickness profiles h(x. hng may also be viewed as an equilibrium thickness which ti (x)y is attained when the combined effects of shear stress. As will be seen below. Since the solution for hng to be a linear profile driven by the interfacial shear stress. small values of z. All calculations are carried out for an culation ignores the influence of any thin liquid films on the inlet liquid mass loading of 0. at the highest and lowest value of U g . However. d ¼ 25 mm from the numerical simulations of the gas flow. y. any effects due to the overlying gas being ignored. z)y  y2 ) w(x. designated B. 0  z  L. 3m L Figure 6 shows the variation of the film thickness with z/L where ti(x) is the interfacial shear stress and mL is the liquid at x ¼ W. Chemical Engineering Research and Design. z) ¼ . The subroutine solves para. integration in the z direction is carried out with a stiff ordinary differential equation solver and discretisation in space (x) is via a form of backward differencing. but. z). the full ti (x)h(x. the film @ ti (x)h2 (x. z) D(x) thickness is still developing with z/L. as z increased. The horizontal and vertical components of velocity are where assumed to be uncoupled. independent of z. It is seen that at eliminator walls. W whether it separates or not. The value method of lines. at x ¼ W. for three bulk gas speeds U g and a dro- dynamic viscosity. In the initial stages of film formation. (27) mist eliminator for different values of U g (c ¼ 5. in which it  ¼ 1 D D(x) dx (28) W 0 is assumed that the liquid flows vertically under the influ- ence of gravity alone. given by equation (27) would also be obtained if h These assumptions give tended to a limiting value. in bend 1. at lower bulk gas speeds. Part A. Its thickness at x ¼ W will (21) therefore be less than would be found if there were no drai- nage. z) ¼ L . Distribution A corresponds to a symmetrical volume distribution of droplet sizes at inlet where W is the width of the plate and L is the plate height. for distri- (25) bution A and a second distribution. d ¼ 40 mm. 0  x  W. The calculations þ ¼ : (24) @x 2mL @z 3mL rL show that a constant value is always reached for sufficiently large values of z and this value is hng. and the horizontal component is taken is the average deposition rate. This is consistent with Equation (24) is solved numerically using the NAGTM the interpretation that the more dominant the effect of inter- subroutine D03PEF under the boundary conditions facial shear. the presence of gravity results in a thin- and lead to ner film at the right hand edge of the plate than would be obtained with no gravity. y. In this case equation (24) becomes an ordinary differential equation in which h depends only on x:  d ti (x)h2 (x) D(x) ¼ : (26) dx 2mL rL The film thickness at x ¼ W. That the 2mL absence of gravity leads to a thicker film at x ¼ W may appear counter-intuitive.

Azzopardi with distribution B than with distribution A and a thicker and Sanaullah (2002) modified the Owen and Ryley liquid film is obtained. There are geometry by arguing that the effects of gravity could be more droplets in this size range with distribution A. liquid loading ¼ 0. for three gas bulk velocities and inlet droplet size dis. The model used for film growth under gravitational drainage Here s is the surface tension (taken to be 0. hc. say.078 Nm21) and R is the radius of curvature of the bend. The theoretical predictions of the onset of film Table 2. the experimental results of Azzopardi and Sanaullah hng (mm) for inlet droplet size (2002). This means that any liquid in the form of a film that has developed on a previous eliminator surface and which has not been re-entrained is Figure 7.14 248 307 the paper of Owen and Ryley. Using results from the numerical simulations equation (29) may be solved to find hc. hence more volume is deposited gravity may assist or hinder film separation. The rate of approach to equilibrium. with the difference reducing as the bulk velocity increases. It is seen that for a given distribution contributing base film to the impact surface in bend I þ 2. Maximum film thickness hng in bend 1 for various inlet separation do not appear to correspond very closely with velocity and inlet drop size distribution parameters. Bulk gas speed A (c ¼ 5. even if the radius of curvature of the bend is distribution reduced to 100 mm (see Figure 9). FILM SEPARATION IN WAVE-PLATE MIST ELIMINATOR 475 Figure 8. it is reasonable to assume that the film explained by the fact that both ti(W) and D  increase with growth on an eliminator surface in a given bend is indepen- increasing bulk velocity but ti(W) increases at a faster dent of any film that appears in previous bends. Use of a larger radius of curvature (1 mm). 83(A5): 469–477 . Chemical Engineering Research and Design. The equation hence the difference in film thickness resulting from the that results for the critical film thickness. there is a balance between centrifugal force and surface At low bulk velocities only the largest droplets are tension. Table 2 also shows that distribution A produces a smaller value of hng than distribution B for all gas inlet velocities. rate.00 ms21. hng decreases as U g is increased. namely equi- librium is reached at lower z values when U g is larger.96 246 352 Due to an error in their analysis. to the impact surface in a given bend the change in drop size distribution at inlet. Thus there is no tributions A and B. Trans IChemE. above which two distributions reduces. B (c ¼ 2. A liquid film in bend I. increases the discrepancy between theory and experiment. and are ‘impact’). although the would have to come from the opposite surface in the pre- vious bend. the film will drain away under gravity. z) with z/L in bend 1 of the model wave-plate mist eliminator for droplet size distributions A and B (U g ¼ 2:96 ms1 and neglected in the calculation for the subsequent bend. in the the equilibrium values themselves. same general feature as in Figure 6 is observed.1 U g (ms21) d ¼ 25 mm) d ¼ 40 mm) 1 2. assumption is reasonable since the vast majority of droplets are deposited on eliminator surfaces which lie on opposite sides of an eliminator channel in any two consecutive bends distributions have approximately the same Sauter mean (Figure 8 indicates which plates are ‘opposite’ and which diameter at inlet. Azzopardi and Sanaullah concluded that 8. This behaviour is In conclusion. This can be explained by noting that distribution FILM SEPARATION B contains a greater proportion of very small and very large Owen and Ryley (1985) developed a model for thin film droplets than the more bell-shaped distribution A. This 8. where D   0. are clearly affected by form of a base film. of the order to be expected in practice. 2005. z) ¼ 0 in all bends. Therefore any contribution of liquid. Variation of h(W. is rL t2i h3c s Film thickness variation through the mist eliminator 2 ¼ : (29) The variation of film thickness through successive bends 3mL R R þ hc of the wave-plate mist eliminator is now considered. and de-coupled from those of interfacial shear. which appears to stem from a misprint in 4.00 194 230 theory and experiment were in reasonable agreement when the radius of curvature of the bend is 1 mm. The film is driven by a surface shear force and deposited in bend 1. which has not re-entrained forms a base film on the oppo- site surface in bend I þ 1 but since D   0 on this surface Table 2 shows the variation of hng in bend 1 of the elimi- nator. Part A. Location of eliminator surfaces on which most deposition takes place. film separation will occur. but fewer flow around a sharp bend based on the assumption that mid-sized droplets.01 kg s21). As the bulk velocity is increased. (1985) model for use with a wave-plate mist eliminator the mid-sized droplets also begin to deposit. assumes that h(0.

this quantity turns out to depend only on Bo. as this gives the two criteria for the onset of entrainment do not predict good agreement between their measurements and predic. where hsc is the film thickness Table 3 shows how hng changes from bend to bend for and u sc is the mean horizontal film speed at the sharp distribution B at a bulk gas inlet velocity of 2. 83(A5): 469–477 . through the sent work. (2000). It growth rate then the amplitude of a disturbance after a is seen that it leads to significantly better agreement with time tpas is d0 exp(vmtpas). (2000) analyses. If vm is the most unstable model of Llory et al. It is seen that the film thickness decreases Although 100 mm is a significantly smaller value than from bend to bend through the mist eliminator. The cri.476 JAMES et al. would be expected in bend the experiments of Azzopardi and Sanaullah (2002) were 1. where d0 is the initial amplitude the experimental results of Azzopardi and Sanaullah and tpas is the time taken for the film to flow around the (2002) than that obtained with the model of Owen and sharp corner. defined by rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi An alternative criterion for the onset of film separation s from a sharp bend has been formulated by Llory et al.96 ms21 and inlet droplet size distribution B (c ¼ 2. The dispersion relationship is  pffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffi 1 k Bo ð1=2Þ sinh(2k Bo )  k2 Bo v ¼  1  2 p ffiffiffiffiffi . Film thickness variation through the mist eliminator for gas bulk velocity 2. that some re-entrainment would take place. if it occurs at all.01 kg s21. (2000) is applied to the pre. The method of Equations (32) –(34) can then be used to find the maxi- Llory et al. The expression used by Llory et al. the wave-plates in entrainment. (2000) take to be 20. Bo. where k is the wave number of the disturb. For the speci- of the bend equal to four times the film thickness. defined by Table 3. They then calculate R by assuming inviscid flow Also shown are the critical film thicknesses for entrainment around the sharp corner. Part A. at both tions. and is the value used in this paper also. To the main steps in their method are summarised below. it leads to an estimate of the radius of curvature wave-plate mist eliminator. the film thickness reduces from bend to bend. (2000) Ryley (1985) at this small radius of curvature. the calculation. complete the calculation. (33) s Figure 9.00 ms21 is presented. (2000) is also shown in Figure 9. (2000) does not lead to a simple equation mum growth rate vm and. It is noted that when 8. defined by 2mL hsc v ¼ v . Theoretical and experimental film thicknesses (hc) at the onset of entrainment (liquid loading ¼ 0. and so re- might be found in industrial practice. (30) hc (mm) hc (mm) s Bend hng (mm) Owen and Ryley Llory et al. conditions are not far from critical in bend 1. and k is the dimensionless wave number. k (1=2)(cosh(2k Bo ) þ 1) þ k2 Bo (32) where v is the dimensionless wave growth rate. fied liquid loading of 0.01 kg s21). Chemical Engineering Research and Design. 1 352 469 378 where a is the acceleration. it would be anticipated terion for separation is that d/d0 exceeds a critical value. t) ¼ numerically. d ¼ 40 mm). as pointed out by Llory et al. and although which Llory et al. exp(ikj þ vt). These authors assumed that small amplitude. for this time is ahsc =usc . the radius of curvature of the bend is known (100 mm). Llory et al. 2005. but at an increased gas inlet velocity of to have a small radius of curvature. k ¼ k : (34) a(rL  rg ) (2000). for completeness.96 ms21. defined by 2 250 438 367 3 139 437 356 4 101 436 356 u 2sc 5 121 439 357 a¼ : (31) 6 93 519 409 R Trans IChemE. at a faster rate. In Table 4 the film thickness variation for the same par- carefully manufactured from glass and would be expected ameters as before. In this paper it is assumed that based on the Owen and Ryley (1985) and Llory et al. It is seen that at this gas velocity the method used by Llory et al. vm must be calculated for a It is assumed that the displacement at time t at position range of values of Bo and its variation with Bo fitted j along the surface of a film is of the form d(j. this. a(rL  rg )hsc Bo ¼ . To complete gas speeds. corner. The critical film thickness for separation based on the ance and v is the growth rate. wave-like disturbances exist on the film surface and that their growth leads to film separation. (2000) use a dispersion relation due to Jain and Ruckenstein (1976) that gives the growth rate v as a function of the wavenumber k and the so called Bond number. defining the onset of separation and so.

Performance of novel mist eliminators.W. and Ioannides. 1996. 57: 3557–3563. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work formed part of EPSRC Research Project GR/K5314.. separation takes place in Wang. Y.. to enhance understanding of this problem. G. E. I. Chem Eng Res Des. 77: Clearly. USA.. Chemical Engineering Research and Design. Llory. 1976. A. Verlaan. London.W. Chem Eng Res Des. 1990. B. P. Some open questions film at the downstream end of a given surface to be and inconsistencies of Lagrangian particle dispersion models. G. Aspects of computer simulation of hc (mm) hc (mm) liquid-fuelled combustors. mathematical models of the film deposition and separation. mist eliminators. Zhang. PhD thesis. comparison of measurements and simulations. Azzopardi. Report AIAA- for a variety of droplet size distributions at inlet to the elim. Part A.-F.K. and Ruger..J. one can be brought into reason. Re-entrainment of deposited liquid droplets places a con. 81: 639–648. Le Coz. Film thickness variation through the mist eliminator for gas Gillandt. if. E. 1993. 62: 315 –321.. and Sanaullah. coupled with Systems. Maroteaux. F. H.A. The REFERENCES comments of the referees on an earlier version of this paper are also Azzopardi. 1985. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Mugele. The flow of thin liquid films around corners. P. J. Wang. needed to refine the criteria for the onset of re-entrainment but the work presented has shown that it is feasible to con- struct an overall model for predicting when re-entrainment takes place in a wave-plate mist eliminator. PhD thesis. Paper AIAA-81-0323.. Gas-particle flow in a bulk velocity 8.. and Habchi. St Louis. 76: 980–985. 1989.D. 54: 108–116. 84-0038. 1991. 2003. C. and Davies... C. Forschung Im Ingenieur d ¼ 40 mm). I. Ninth found via a model in which the film is driven by interfacial Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows. UK. 2005. Modelling of spray impingement processes.. and James. The role 5 45 222 209 of drainage channels in the performance of wave-plate mist eliminators. 1998. U. Eighth Int Conf on Liquid Atomization and Spray the gas flow and liquid droplet dispersion.. the conditions for re-entrainment are very Wang. and Faeth. each based on Wallis.A. Proceedings of the 4th Annual flow field and a separate eddy-interaction model is then Meeting of the Aerosol Society. more detailed experimental measurements are 692–697. Int J Multiphase Flow. D..W. Yi Wang and Jason Hughes acknowledge EPSRC for financial support. G. R. 22: 157–175. One-Dimensional Two-Phase Flow (McGraw-Hill.I. The calculation of mist eliminator effi- a model wave-plate mist eliminator. Q. Wesen-Engineering Research. Struc- ture of particle-laden jets: measurements and predictions. A... and Ryley.W. 1981.. H.00 ms21 and inlet droplet size distribution B (c ¼ 2. Riehle.J. The results enable the thickness of the deposited Sommerfeld. publication after revision 8 February 2005.5 221 208 James. AIAA 19th Aerospace Bend hng (mm) Owen and Ryley Llory et al. 6 32 275 247 Trans IChemE. Droplet size distribution in sprays. Commercial Phillips. Re-entrainment in wave-plate appreciated. It is shown that of the Delft University of Technology. and Hughes. 1969. Chem Eng Res Des.W. R.. used to predict the liquid droplet dispersion and deposition Shuen. and Evans. and James. A. G.S.. 1996. Soloman. and Fritsching. W. Graham. Part A. Kohnen.A. Delft. Kyoto. 15: 433 –446. and Deakin.S. Bai. D. Pasadena. 1984. two theoretical criteria for film separation. M. and Reeks. inator. J.D. USA). K. 2000. Gosman. 1951.C. Part A. This model is then used to determine from gases using vane-type separators. 1999.J. Although no ciencies using numerical simulation of the flow field and droplet motion.P. The atomization due to sharp edge: separation criterion and droplets charac- primary aim of this paper is to use numerical simulations of teristics model.. Y. Stability of stagnant liquid films on a 3 67 225 211 solid surface. M. FILM SEPARATION IN WAVE-PLATE MIST ELIMINATOR 477 Table 4. CFD studies of separation of mists Sanaullah (2002). Sciences Meeting. Turbulent dispersion of particles 1 230 269 243 using eddy interaction models. 83(A5): 469–477 .P.. Int J Multiphase Flow. Reno.. P. Part A. The manuscript was received 24 September 2003 and accepted for Imperial College. and James. Loughborough. Int J Multiphase Flow. Y. Assessment of an eddy-interaction model and its refinements using predictions of droplet deposition in a nearly met in bend 1. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. expected. C. New York. Trans IChemE. USA. 2002. B. C. 4 36. Kallio. Japan.-F.. A numerical simulation of particle deposition in turbulent boundary layers.. re-entrainment is predicted. Liquid film straint on the operation of wave-plate mist eliminators. at a given liquid loading. 74: 232–238..M. M. P. when in practice it might be Trans IChemE. 11: 51 –62. 1996.. Owen. and Ruckenstein.J.B. AIAA 22nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting.. Chem Eng Res Des. Chem Eng Sci. D. 2 134 234 218 Jain. different physical concepts. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science. Part A.-S. Measurements of the collection CFD software is used to predict the primary turbulent efficiency of various demister devices. 43: 1317–1324..W. J. able agreement with the experiments of Azzopardi and Wang. Trans IChemE. USA.. Trans IChemE. wave-plate demister. G. shear and gravitational drainage. 1996.