1 views

Uploaded by Mariam Asghar

Research paper

Research paper

© All Rights Reserved

- CFD analysis of 3d dynamic stall
- Of COnference 2007 2007 OpenFOAM Conference November,
- Computational Ship Hydrodynamics - Nowadays and Way Forward
- A Comparison on Predictive Models of Gas Explosions
- GIAN Brochure Multiphase Flow March 2019 R1
- CFD Manual.pdf
- Dissertation
- multiphase flow
- Multidimensional Simulations of Multiphase Flow for Improved Design And
- Tese Important
- TR_CFD_06_77 (Modelarea Interactiunii Arderii Cu Peretele Camerei de Ardere)
- A Comparison of Turbulence Models in Airship Steady-state CFD Simulations
- Turbulent Models for CFD Simulation in Electronics Cooling
- 207-214.pdf
- APLICATION of the Revised k w Turbulence
- introduction to CFD
- 21308B
- OFWS2013 Mueller
- j 030101053059
- f 109125113487126

You are on page 1of 8

6-8 December 1999

PACKED BED FILTERS

1 1 2 2

Kate TAYLOR , Anthony G SMITH , Stuart ROSS and Martin SMITH

1

S&C Thermofluids Ltd, The Old Tannery, Kelston, Bath, BA1 9AN, UK

2

DERA Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, SP4 0JQ, UK

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION

A CFD technique for predicting the performance of axi- Packed bed filters have been used for some time to

symmetric packed bed filters has been developed. remove toxic gases and vapours from contaminated

airstreams. DERA Porton Down, in conjunction with S&C

The effect on the pressure drop of a non-uniform voidage Thermofluids Ltd, are currently developing a CFD

distribution within the filter bed has been modelled. A technique for predicting the flow through filters of this

radial voidage distribution was derived from a predictive type. The work so far has included experimental

model based on a modified Mueller equation. The measurements of velocities and pressure drops through

pressure loss through the bed was calculated from the packed beds and accompanying CFD predictions of the

Ergun equation, using the local voidage. flowfield using the PHOENICS code.

The technique has been validated against experimental Earlier work carried out by DERA involved the

measurements of pressure drop and velocity distribution in development of a CFD model including a pressure drop

a model of a filter system for a range of filter parameters formulation based on the Ergun equation [1], but using a

and inlet velocities. Generally good agreement has been uniform voidage for the filter bed. The predicted pressure

obtained between experiment and predictions. In addition drops appeared to show some level of agreement with

a simple adsorption model has been developed. measured values but indicated that further experimental

data was required.

NOMENCLATURE

Further experimental work was then carried out by DERA

C vapour concentration, kg/m3

in two areas. Firstly, further measurements of the velocity

Ci interfacial vapour concentration, kg/m3

distributions and pressure drops were made, and secondly

dp bead diameter, m measurements were made of the voidage distribution

db bed diameter, m within the packed beds. As a result, DERA have

D diffusivity of water vapour in air, m2/s determined a formula for predicting the radial voidage

k mass transfer coefficient, m/s distribution within a packed bed for a given filter diameter

K turbulence kinetic energy, m2/s2 and bead size. A brief summary of this work is included

m uptake of vapour, g/g below.

r radial position in bed, m

So bead specific surface, /m (=6/dp for sphere) S&C Thermofluids were then asked by DERA to include

u local, or interstitial, velocity, m/s the predicted voidage distribution in a CFD model of the

U superficial velocity, m/s (= u.ε) filter bed, and to validate the CFD model in the first

uτ friction velocity, m/s ( = (τw/ρ)*0.5) instance against pressure drop data for one bead size and

filter geometry at various air velocities. Further validation

y distance from wall, m

was subsequently carried out for a range of filter

y+ non-dimensional distance from wall ( = y.uτ/ν) configurations. The following paragraphs describe this

ν kinematic viscosity, m2/s work and present some of the results of the validation.

τw wall shear stress, Pa

ρz zeolite density, kg/m3 The initial CFD results showed reasonable agreement with

the test data, but there remained some discrepancies

ε local void fraction

between the measured and predicted velocity profiles [2].

Ε dissipation of turbulence kinetic energy, m2/s3

It was felt that these discrepancies were possibly due to

∂C/∂t adsorption rate per unit fluid volume, kg/m3/s

the turbulence model, or to axial variations in the

∂m/∂t uptake rate per unit zeolite mass, g/g/s measured voidage distributions which were not included

δt timestep size, s in the model. Furthermore, no systematic study of the

effects of grid dependence had been carried out. These

areas have now also been examined [3], and the

amendments to the model and new results are described

below.

273

Radial voidage distribution - 4mm beads

In addition, it is intended that ultimately the software will

be used for modelling chemical adsorption processes 1.2

adsorption of water by zeolite, has been developed and

implemented within the CFD model. This model is briefly 0.8

described below.

Voidage

0.6

0.2

Prediction of voidage distribution

The characteristics of the flow through packed beds are 0

0

1.96

3.92

5.88

7.84

9.8

11.8

13.7

15.7

17.6

19.6

21.6

23.5

26.5

30.4

34.3

38.2

42.1

46.1

important in filter design and an understanding of the

distance from the edge of the bed (mm)

relationship between void fraction and flow distribution is

essential. It has been shown, eg [4], that for flow through

a fixed bed of uniform particles that there is a peak Figure 1: Typical radial voidage distribution

velocity approximately one particle diameter from the

Air was drawn through the filter bed by a fan at the

outer wall of the bed, which decreases sharply towards the

dowstream end of the system. The pressure drop measured

wall and more gradually away from it. The fraction of the

was for the whole filter installation including the inlet and

bed influenced by this velocity profile depends on the

outlet cones, as shown in figure 2. The inlet pipe extended

ratio of particle size to bed diameter.

a further 85cm upstream of the inlet pressure transducer.

The investigation of the radial voidage distribution of

The axial velocity was measured at stations 5mm apart

uniform spheres in cylindrical filter beds involved both

radially across the bed, at positions 15mm upstream and

studying available published data and image analysis of

downstream of the bed. Measurements were made over a

thin slices through beds of snowstorm packed spherical

range of inlet velocities for three filters consisting of 2, 3

beads. In both cases the voidage is found to be a minimum

and 4mm beads respectively, and for three inlet/outlet

about half a particle diameter from the wall of the bed, and

cone lengths – 20, 50 and 200mm. The inlet velocity was

then follows a damped oscillatory function until it reaches

measured on the centreline just upstream of the inlet

a constant value about 5 particle diameters from the wall,

pressure transducer.

where the packing is random. Some measurements were

also made of the axial variation in voidage along the bed

centreline: at the ends of the bed this was of a similar form

to the radial variation near the wall.

distribution was determined, based on a modified version

of that proposed by Mueller [5].

where:

a = 8-3.15/(db/dp) for 2.02≤ db/dp ≤13.0 (1a)

a = 8-11.25/(db/dp) for 13.0 ≤db/dp (1b)

b = 0.315 – 0.725/(db/dp) (1c)

εb = 0.334 + 0.220/(db/dp) (1d)

r* = r/dp (1e)

and Jo is a zero order Bessel function of the first kind.

Figure 2: schematic diagram of filter geometry

Voidage distributions for 2, 3 and 4 mm spherical beads in

a 98mm diameter bed were calculated from this CFD model

correlation for input to the CFD model described below.

Figure 1 shows a typical radial voidage distribution. Geometry and governing equations

Experimental modelling

A CFD model of the filter bed was set up which enabled a

radially varying voidage distribution to be prescribed. The

Experimental measurements of pressure drop and velocity geometry modelled is shown on figure 2: the CFD model

were made using a filter bed which was snowstorm packed included a section of the inlet pipe from the pressure

with spherical beads of uniform size. transducer location, the diffuser cone upstream of the bed,

the bed itself and a similar section downstream as far as

the downstream pressure transducer location.

conservation equations for mass and momentum (the

Navier-Stokes equations). The model took advantage of

274

the axi-symmetry of the geometry, so only radial and axial sectional area occurred). At any point in the bed, the

momentum equations were solved. superficial velocity is related to the interstitial velocity, u,

calculated by the CFD code by U = u.ε.

The radial mesh distribution was determined directly from

Adsorption model

the voidage distribution output from DERA's modified

Mueller equation model. A mesh node was created for Available data on the adsorption of water vapour by a 13X

each data point in the distribution. The mesh distribution zeolite molecular sieve has been used to help set up a

could therefore be controlled by the number and location simple adsorption model in PHOENICS to demonstrate

of data points output from the voidage model. The axial how the filtration process could be modelled. The model

mesh distribution was prescribed separately. has been run transiently to demonstrate gradual saturation

of the filter, and the effect of the voidage distribution near

The air flowing through the system was assumed to be an the walls on breakthrough.

ideal gas, with the density calculated from the local

pressure and ambient temperature. In the model a transport equation for the concentration of

water vapour was solved in addition to the mass flow and

Turbulence modelling and boundary conditions momentum equations. An inlet concentration was derived

The Reynolds' number at the inlet varied from about 3000 from a nominal relative humidity and the ambient

to 25000 for the range of flowrates studied, so the flow in temperature.

the region upstream and downstream of the bed was

assumed to be turbulent. The standard, two-equation k-ε Adsorption into the filter bed was modelled via a source

turbulence model [7] was used initially, with turbulence in term for the adsorption rate where the adsorption rate per

the bed itself suppressed. Various modifications to this unit fluid volume is:

model were investigated [3] in an attempt to improve the

prediction of the velocity distribution, and the Rodi two- −∂C/∂t = 1/ε So k (C - Ci) (3)

layer model [8] (a low-Reynolds’ number model which

uses a prescribed length scale in the near wall region) was A linearised version of this source term was included in

determined to be the most appropriate. the finite volume equation for the vapour concentration.

At the inlet to the CFD domain, the pressure and The rate of uptake of water in the zeolite was calculated

temperature were defined. A radial velocity distribution as:

based on Nikuradse’s log-law profile for fully developed

pipe flow [9] was also specified - this was thought to ∂m/∂t = ε/(1−ε) (−∂C/∂t) 1/ρz (4)

represent the likely velocity profile in the system at this

point better than a uniform velocity. Profiles for K and Ε and the cumulative uptake, Σ (∂m/∂t.δt), was stored for

were also specified, having been derived from published each cell in the bed. The zeolite density was estimated

data for pipe flows [10]. from the bed density, 700 kg/m3, and a mean voidage of

39.6%.

At the downstream boundary of the domain, a mass efflux

was specified, equivalent to: For the purposes of this demonstration the interfacial

(mean inlet velocity * inlet density * inlet area). concentration, Ci, was assumed to be zero for any cell in

the bed until the cumulative uptake for that cell exceeded

A no-slip condition was imposed at the pipe wall along the maximum value predicted by the Langmuir isotherm

the length of the domain, with the skin friction derived equation for adsorption of water by zeolite. At that point,

from a log law when the standard k-ε model was used. the adsorption rate is set to zero for that cell.

Pressure loss source terms

The mass transfer coefficient, k, was derived from the

In the region of the mesh where the bed was located, the

Carberry correlation [11] which gives the Sherwood

voidage distribution was modelled by setting the

number for mass transfer in a packed bed as a function of

volumetric porosity of the cells in the CFD model to the

the Reynolds’ and Schmidt numbers.

local void fraction as determined by equation 1. Since the

locations in the voidage distribution output from the

The heat of adsorption of the water vapour was not taken

modified Mueller model were used to define the cell

into account in the present model.

boundaries, and since the porosities are defined as

piecewise constant across each cell, an average of two

The local concentration of water vapour was assumed to

values is used to define the cell porosity.

have a negligible effect on the thermodynamic properties

of the air, and hence no effect on the predicted flowfield.

A source term was included in the axial momentum

This assumption enabled the steady-state flowfield

equation to represent the pressure drop through the bed.

solution to be 'frozen' during the transient run, so that only

This was calculated from the Ergun equation [1], which

the vapour concentration equation was actually solved.

gives the pressure drop per unit length through a packed

This technique substantially reduced the CPU-time

bed as:

required for the transient runs.

∆p/L = 5 So2(1-ε)2µU/ε3 + 0.29 So(1-ε)ρU2/ε3 (2)

where ε is the local void fraction determined from

equation 1 and U the superficial velocity (the velocity

which would the fluid would have if no reduction in cross

275

RESULTS changes to the turbulence model, better representation of

the geometry at entry to the inlet cone and accounting for

Pressure drop any axial variation in voidage.

Initial results predicted by the CFD model, for a bed of

3mm beads and an inlet diffuser length of 200mm showed Increasing the voidage in the first and last cells in the bed

reasonable agreement with measured pressure drops over a in an attempt to account for the observed variation in axial

range of velocities, especially when compared to voidage distribution within the bed had a small but

predictions using a uniform voidage in the filter bed – see adverse effect on the predicted velocity distribution.

figure 3. Clearly this characteristic cannot be adequately modelled

by such a simplistic approach.

Comparison of predicted and measured pressure drops for

4mm beads also showed good agreement, but for 2mm In the experimental rig there was a small radius at the

beads there was a larger discrepancy between the CFD and junction of the inlet pipe and inlet cone. Smoothing the

experimental data. This discrepancy was significantly entry to the inlet cone in the CFD model produced a small

reduced by doubling the grid density in the radial improvement in the predicted velocity profile upstream of

direction to 150 cells (see figure 4). Refining the grid also the bed for the 2cm cone (see figure 8), but had little

improved the predicted pressure drop for the 3mm beads, effect with the longer cones.

but had little effect on the predictions for the 4mm beads

where the grid size was already small compared to the Various modifications to the standard k-ε turbulence

bead size. model were investigated. Other high Reynolds’ number

two-equation models, viz. the RNG [12] and Chen-Kim

Changing the length of the inlet and outlet cones had little [13] models, produced little if any improvement in the

effect on the predicted pressure drop, a trend also apparent predicted velocity distributions. However inspection of

in the experimental data. the boundary layer along the wall of the system showed

that values of y+ in the near wall cells were of the order of

Velocity distribution

1, suggesting that the use of a high Reynolds’ number

Initial predictions of the velocity distribution also showed turbulence model with standard log-law wall functions

reasonable overall agreement with experimental data. was inappropriate. Using a low-Reynolds’ number model

Upstream of the bed the maximum velocity was on the – the two-layer model of Rodi [8] – in conjunction with a

centreline, and downstream of the bed the velocity was finer radial grid distribution (as per figure 4) produced a

higher towards the wall. However the radial variation was marked improvement in the predicted profiles both

greater in the CFD predictions, and the velocity gradient upstream and downstream of the bed.

downstream of the bed near the wall was much higher

than that measured. In order to obtain a converged solution with this

turbulence model it was necessary to reinstate the

For the shorter cones (5 and 2cm) the discrepancy generation terms for K within the bed, which had been

between CFD and experimental profiles upstream of the suppressed when using the k-ε model. This resulted in a

bed was even greater, with the CFD model predicting a small but acceptable increase (~3%) in the predicted

separated region close to the wall which was not observed pressure drop.

in practice. Various modifications to the CFD model were

investigated to try to improve these predictions, including

p r e d ic te d a n d m e a s u r e d p r e s s u r e d r o p s - c o m p a r is o n o f

u n ifo r m v o id a g e a n d m o d ifie d M u e lle r m o d e l

7000

6000

5000

Pressure drop (Pa)

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

in le t c e n t r e lin e v e lo c it y ( m / s )

e x p d a ta C F D d a ta - u n if o r m v o id a g e C F D d a ta - M u e lle r m o d e l

276

predicted and measured pressure drops

for a 20cm cone

8000

7000

6000

pressure drop (Pa)

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

inlet centreline velocity (m/s)

exp data - 2mm bead exp data -3mm bead exp data -4mm bead

cfd data - 2mm bead cfd dat - 3mm bead cfd data - 4mm bead

cfd fine data- 2mm bead cfd fine data- 3mm bead cfd fine data- 4mm bead

Figure 5 shows measured and predicted velocity profiles be useful in determining whether the treatment of

up- and downstream of a bed of 3mm beads with a 20cm turbulence within the bed is adequate in the current

inlet cone. Profiles are plotted for a mesh density of 150 model.

cells in the radial direction for both the standard k-ε and

two-layer models. Figures 6 and 7 show the same results CONCLUSION

for the 5 and 2cm inlet cones. In addition, figure 7 shows A method for predicting the pressure loss and velocity

the upstream velocity profile for the two-layer model in distribution in packed bed filters has been developed. The

conjunction with a radiused entry to the 2cm inlet cone. method has been validated over a wide range of flow

All measured and predicted velocity profiles presented parameters for axi-symmetric geometries. The application

here were for an inlet centreline velocity of 4 m/s. of the method to more complex filter geometries has been

Transient prediction of adsorption rates demonstrated.

The zeolite molecular sieve has been shown

experimentally to have a voidage distribution that is The method has been implemented within the user-

approximated by a packed bed of 4mm spheres. In order routines of a commercial CFD package. A simple

to model the adsorption process, the pressure and adsorption model has also been developed and

flowfield predicted by the filter model for 4mm beads, implemented.

20cm cones and a mean inlet velocity of 4m/s were used

as the initial conditions. The initial concentration of water Areas to be addressed in any further work may include

vapour in the domain was zero. At the inflow boundary inclusion of the axial voidage variation, turbulence

the water vapour concentration was set to a value modelling within the bed and validation of the adsorption

equivalent to 50% relative humidity. model.

various times. The penetration of the water into the filter 1. ERGUN S, 'Flow through packed columns', Chem

bed, and the subsequent breakthrough occurring at the Eng Prog vol 48 pp 89-94 1952

wall can be clearly seen. 2. TAYLOR K & SMITH AG, 'Validation of CFD

Future developments

prediction for filter design', S&C report, contract

no 017892SYS, Aug 1998

Future development of the adsorption model might 3. TAYLOR K, SMITH AG & Gomes I, 'Further

include a better representation of the interfacial validation and evaluation of a CFD model to

concentration and therefore of the adsorption rate. It may predict the pressure drop and flow distribution in

also be appropriate to take the heat of adsorption into filters', S&C report, contract no CBCBDE415, Jan

account at this stage. 1999

4. SCHWARTZ CE and SMITH JM, ‘Industrial and

The breakthrough characteristics predicted suggest that Engineering Chemistry’, 45(6), 1953

the filter performance is closely linked to the velocity 5. MUELLER GE, ‘Powder Technology’, 72 (1992),

distribution in the bed, and hence the validity of any CFD 269

predictions is dependent on the turbulence modelling.

Some experimental validation of adsorption model would

277

6. ROSTEN HI and SPALDING DB, ‘The 10. LAUFER J, 'The structure of turbulence in fully

PHOENICS reference manual’, TR200, CHAM developed pipe flow', NACA report 1174,

Ltd, London, 1991 Washington DC 1954

7. HARLOW FH and NAKAYAMA P, 'Transport of 11. PERRY RH & GREEN DW, 'Chemical Engineers'

turbulence energy decay rate', Los Alamos Sci. Handbook', 7th Ed., McGraw Hill 1997

Lab., Univ. Cal report LA-3854 1968 12. YAKHOT V & ORSZAG SA, 'Renormalization

8. RODI W, 'Experiences with 2-layer models Group Analysis of turbulence. I - basic theory', J

combining the k-ε model with a 1-equation model Sci. Comp. Vol1, No1, 1986

near the wall', AIAA 29th Aerospace Sciences 13. CHEN YS & KIM SW, 'Computation of turbulent

meeting, Jan 1991 flows using an extended k-ε turbulence closure

9. NIKURADSE J, 'Gesetzmässigkeiten der model', NASA CR-179204, 1987

turbulenten Strömung in glatten Rohren', VDI

Forschungsheft 356 1932

p r e d i c t e d a n d m e a s u r e d v e l o c it y p r o f i le s -

c e n t r e li n e v e l o c i t y 4 m / s , 3 m m b e a d a n d 2 0 c m c o n e

3 .0 0 E + 0 0

2 .5 0 E + 0 0

2 .0 0 E + 0 0

velocity (m/s)

1 .5 0 E + 0 0

1 .0 0 E + 0 0

5 .0 0 E -0 1

0 .0 0 E + 0 0

0 .0 0 E + 0 0 1 .0 0 E -0 2 2 .0 0 E -0 2 3 .0 0 E -0 2 4 .0 0 E -0 2 5 .0 0 E -0 2 6 .0 0 E -0 2

r a d iu s ( m )

e x p d a t a - u / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile e x p d a t a - d / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile

c f d d a t a - u / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - k - e m o d e l c f d d a t a - d / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - k - e m o d e l

c f d d a t a - u / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - 2 - la y e r m o d e l c f d d a t a - d / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - 2 - la y e r m o d e l

p r e d ic te d a n d m e a s u r e d v e lo c ity p r o file s -

c e n te r lin e v e lo c ity 4 m /s , 3 m m b e a d a n d 5 c m c o n e

3 .5 0 E + 0 0

3 .0 0 E + 0 0

2 .5 0 E + 0 0

2 .0 0 E + 0 0

velocity (m/s)

1 .5 0 E + 0 0

1 .0 0 E + 0 0

5 .0 0 E -0 1

0 .0 0 E + 0 0

-5 .0 0 E -0 1

-1 .0 0 E + 0 0

0 .0 0 E + 0 0 1 .0 0 E -0 2 2 .0 0 E -0 2 3 .0 0 E -0 2 4 .0 0 E -0 2 5 .0 0 E -0 2 6 .0 0 E -0 2

r a d iu s (m )

e x p d a t a - u / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile e x p d a t a - d / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile

c f d d a t a - u / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - k - e m o d e l c f d d a t a - d / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - k - e m o d e l

c f d d a t a - u / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - 2 - la y e r m o d e l c f d d a t a - d / s v e lo c it y p r o f ile - 2 - la y e r m o d e l

278

p r e d ic te d a n d m e a s u r e d v e lo c ity p r o file s -

c e n te r lin e v e lo c ity 4 m /s , 3 m m b e a d a n d 2 c m c o n e

3 .5 0 E + 0 0

3 .0 0 E + 0 0

2 .5 0 E + 0 0

2 .0 0 E + 0 0

velocity (m/s)

1 .5 0 E + 0 0

1 .0 0 E + 0 0

5 .0 0 E - 0 1

0 .0 0 E + 0 0

- 5 .0 0 E - 0 1

- 1 .0 0 E + 0 0

- 1 .5 0 E + 0 0

0 .0 0 E + 0 0 1 .0 0 E - 0 2 2 .0 0 E - 0 2 3 .0 0 E - 0 2 4 .0 0 E - 0 2 5 .0 0 E - 0 2 6 .0 0 E - 0 2

r a d iu s ( m )

e x p d a ta - u /s v e lo c ity p r o file e x p d a ta - d /s v e lo c ity p r o file

c fd d a ta - u /s v e lo c ity p r o file - k - e m o d e l c fd d a ta - d /s v e lo c ity p r o file - k - e m o d e l

c fd d a ta - u /s v e lo c ity p r o file - 2 - la y e r m o d e l c fd d a ta - d /s v e lo c ity p r o file - 2 - la y e r m o d e l

c fd d a ta - u /s - 2 - la y e r + r a d iu s e d c o n e e n tr y

Figure 8: water uptake in filter bed at various times for 50%RH inflow

279

280

- CFD analysis of 3d dynamic stallUploaded byvovanpedenko
- Of COnference 2007 2007 OpenFOAM Conference November,Uploaded byhamid_zoka6069
- Computational Ship Hydrodynamics - Nowadays and Way ForwardUploaded bymandrake1985
- A Comparison on Predictive Models of Gas ExplosionsUploaded bySerg Alexs
- GIAN Brochure Multiphase Flow March 2019 R1Uploaded byakkansal
- CFD Manual.pdfUploaded byakusuper
- DissertationUploaded byJosh Strodtbeck
- multiphase flowUploaded bydrmazhar1
- Multidimensional Simulations of Multiphase Flow for Improved Design AndUploaded byramihey
- Tese ImportantUploaded byGustavo Ronceros Rivas
- TR_CFD_06_77 (Modelarea Interactiunii Arderii Cu Peretele Camerei de Ardere)Uploaded bySergiu Focseneanu
- A Comparison of Turbulence Models in Airship Steady-state CFD SimulationsUploaded bygustavojorge12
- Turbulent Models for CFD Simulation in Electronics CoolingUploaded bytonykptony
- 207-214.pdfUploaded byramihey
- APLICATION of the Revised k w TurbulenceUploaded byaguirreto
- introduction to CFDUploaded byPhoenix Harsha
- 21308BUploaded byFrancis5801
- OFWS2013 MuellerUploaded byImran Rasheed
- j 030101053059Uploaded bytheijes
- f 109125113487126Uploaded byBhaskar Nandi
- 10.1115@1.4036413Uploaded bykeramatboy88
- 46647 Final 00183Uploaded bykurniawan waskito
- Introduction to Cf d ModuleUploaded byShawkat
- Modlin SkiUploaded bypuyang48
- CFD - METHOLOGYUploaded byCristiana Croitoru
- Turbulent Ch4Uploaded byyaidragon
- tq312q-e.pdfUploaded byNaeem Ali Sajad
- GuardoUploaded byYounèss Bourbii
- 3D-Free-Surface-Wave-Analysis-CFD-7.pdfUploaded bybrennomourabmc
- Transition Prediction New Model Lopez 2015Uploaded bylighthillj

- LNG DehydrationUploaded bymctimlim
- All TopicUploaded byMariam Asghar
- Beyond EinsteinUploaded byakshayshaha
- BlackHoles.pdfUploaded byjahangir Mughal
- test documentUploaded byapi-25738672
- gat-sample-test-01.pdfUploaded byAamir Ali Seelro
- PG_Admission_Schedule_2019.pdfUploaded byMariam Asghar
- Reading and Writing NumbersUploaded bySumathi Handi
- 08_chapter3Uploaded byLongdien Anngai
- Solid Desiccant Pl WebUploaded byMariam Asghar
- ucm_307643Uploaded byMariam Asghar
- Our Solar System - grades 2-5.pdfUploaded byMariam Asghar
- Our Solar System - grades 2-5.pdfUploaded byMariam Asghar
- The Earth in the solar system (MIT)Uploaded byMarianna Rmz
- Perry's Chemical Engineers Handbook, (8th Ed), (Sec.13. Distillation). Doherty, M.; Fidkowski, Z.; Malone, M.; Taylor, R. McGraw-Hill, USA, 2008.pdfUploaded byMarco Ravelo
- fa0aab85b764479b207353bf13ac8b8bd278Uploaded byMariam Asghar
- Project Standards and Specifications Dryers Systems Rev01Uploaded byChristian Cleofas
- Engineering Design Guidelines Mole Sieve Dehydration Rev WebUploaded bySabeen Asghar
- study of dehydration process of natural gas.pdfUploaded byAnonymous NxpnI6jC
- Alas Heh 2004Uploaded byMariam Asghar
- 82327047.pdfUploaded byMariam Asghar
- sylobead.pdfUploaded bySantanu Biswas
- Experimental Techniques for BioUploaded byMariam Asghar
- ROLL #17 .docxUploaded byMariam Asghar
- FCADBEDENUploaded byMariam Asghar

- High Tech Products Mnfct TechUploaded byFaisal Momin
- Agile-poster-2016-ver7.pdfUploaded byAnalyst_M
- Global Awakening Buddyhuggins.comUploaded byBuddy Huggins
- Module_4_-_COMPARISON_AND_CONDITIONAL_INSTRUCTIONS.pdfUploaded byDewiNatariaSiahaan
- Catalogue SKF Power Transmission Belts 06875 3 EnUploaded bySugianto Barus
- Warren 1931Uploaded byFrancisco Uzieda Cortés
- B Tech Production Engineering CurriculumUploaded byKaushik Sreenivas
- Road power Generator.pdfUploaded byYau Wen Jae
- Transaction Processing SystemsUploaded byDeborah
- User Manual Op6 Final NopwUploaded byguptamadras
- Data Domain CommandsUploaded bypaulpett
- BCxP Candidate GuidebookUploaded bychylerg
- Chem Lab Report 2 Deol AUploaded byMagnolia Kaye Deola
- Interaction of EM Radiation and MatterUploaded bycoolhemakumar
- Norma AWSUploaded byFRANCISCO TORRES
- Rec Visico AmbicatUploaded byesamco
- Tutorial 1 - Data Access LayerUploaded bysan000jay
- L14 Ultrasound(1)Uploaded byLinh Phan
- CxManualUploaded byramighanem809393
- Execute Multiple Child Packages in Parallel With LoopUploaded byRizki Okta
- The Corrosion Behaviour of Aisi 304 Stainless Steel in Methanol H2SO4 MixturesUploaded bynicusebp
- AT2405-LMUploaded bysrajubasava
- AME1_REV11Uploaded byG.s. Vishwanth
- sixsigma.pdfUploaded bydeliciousfood96
- Doctrine CookbookUploaded byPedro Alarcón
- RT300-1 & RT345XL_Parts Manual_Draft10_09-14-12Uploaded byDaniel Castillo Peña
- Simple FFT and Filtering Tutorial With Matlab - CodeProjectUploaded bycejavier
- 3M PPE Selection Guide_Welding HazardsUploaded byZiredna
- ddrumcatalog2015_mobile.pdfUploaded byCristian
- 07Uploaded byAnonymous rbavr6ZpE1