ELSEVIER Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77

A new Navier-Stokes and Darcy’s law combined model for fluid

flow in crossflow filtration tubular membranes
Kamel Damaka*, Abdelmoneim Ayadi”, Belkacem Zeghmatib, Philippe Schmitz”
“Laboratoire Radio Analyse et Environnement, Ecole National d’lnghieurs de Sfm,BP W, 3038 Sfa Tunisie
Fax +216 (74) 2 75595; email: Kamal. Damak@fss.mu, tn.
bCentre d’Etude Fondamentales-Groupe de Mcanique Acoustique et Instrumentation, 66860 Perpignan, France
‘Institut de Mkcanique des Fluides, UMR 5502, 31400 Toulouse, France

Received 25 February 2003; accepted 12 June 2003

Abstract
Numerical simulations were performed for laminar fluid flow in a porous tube with variable wall suction, a model
of a crossflow filtration tubular membrane. The variable wall suction is described by Darcy’s law, which relates the
pressure gradient within a flow stream to the flow rates through the permeable wall. The feed stream in the tube, which
flows mainly tangentially to the porous wall, is modelled by the Navier-Stokes equations. A method of coupling the
Navier-Stokes and the Darcy equations in a solution scheme was considered to develop a fluid dynamic model of
crossflow filtration. The governing equations were solved numerically using a finite difference scheme. The solution
depends on both the Reynolds axial and filtration number. Some assumptions adopted in simplified models are discussed.

Keyworak Navier-Stokes; Laminar; Darcy’s law; Crossflow filtration; Tubular membrane; Modelling

1. Introduction combined flows. The diversity of underlying

The combination of free flow and flow-
through porousmedia occurs in a wide rangeof
fluid processes such as membrane crossflow
filtration. Many factors, such as the Reynolds
flow number and transportpropertiesof porous
media, directly affect the dynamics of the
*Corresponding author.
phenomenaand the complexity of interactions
between free and porous flow systems have
preventeddevelopmentof a generaltheoretical
analysisof coupledflow systems.
A fluid dynamic description of free flows is
usually easyto perform, and in a great majority
of examples, the well known Navier-Stokes
equationscan be used to model this part. The
validity of Darcy’s law for the representationof

001 l-9164/04/$- See front matter Q 2004 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved
PII: SO01 l-9164(03)00698-2
68 K. Damak et al. /Desalination
non-inertial, incompressible flows in porous
mediawith small porosity is alsowidely accepted
[l-3]. Therefore,in processeswherea combined
free and porous flow occurs under the afore-
mentionedstatedconditions,the flow regimecan
be naturally modelled by coupling Darcy’s law
andthe Navier-Stokes equations.The important
point is to make surethat the continuity of flow
field variables across the interface between
laminar flow and porousregion is maintained.
An overview of crossflow filtration processes
has been published recently by Ripperger and
Altmann [4]. Other works [5-121 dedicatedto
analysis modelling, characterisationand classi-
fication of membranecrossflow filtration arealso
found in the literature. A numberof modelswere
proposedto determine laminar fluid flow in a
porouschannelwith wall suction or injection. An
excellent review of such models was given by
Chatterjeeand Belfort [ 131.
Two categoriesof problemshavebeensolved:
(1) fully developedflow, wherethe shapeof the
velocity profiles is considered similar, and,
(2) developing flow where the shape of the
velocity profile changes with axial distance.
Similarity solutions were found by several
authors [14-171. More recently, Durlofski and
Brady [ 181studiedthe validity of thesesolutions
and showedthat, undercertain circumstances,a
similarity solution cannot be found for axi-
symmetric flows, while similarity solutions for
the two-dimensional channel case exist for all
values of the Reynolds filtration number.
Assuming a uniform suction or injection, Brady
[ 191 has also shown that the flow within the
channel is determined by the inlet condition
when the filtration Reynolds number, Re,,,
defined as Re,,,= (pVJ)lp, is above a critical
value: 2.3 for the axisymmetric caseand6 for the
channel case. Therefore, it may be concluded
from Brady’s studythat the similarity solution is
accuratefor sufficiently small Re,,.Developing
flow solutions were given by several authors
161 (2004) 67-77
[20,21]. The correspondingstudiesconfirm the
existenceofregionswheresimilarity assumptions
are not valid, but it can be noticed that the more
restrictive assumption adopted in most of the
models is uniform filtration velocity at the wall.
However, in many real systems, this latter
assumptionis not valid sincefiltration velocity at
the wall is driven by the local pressureat the wall
which varies along the channel. Assuming a
uniform filtration velocity atthe wall implies that
variablepressureshouldexist outsidethechannel
or thatthe wall permeabilityshouldchangealong
the channel. Some works proposed similarity
solutions with variable wall suction. Galowin et
al. [22] developeda solution for flow in a porous
tube with suction using Darcy’s law to describe
the filtration velocity at the wall. They found
goodagreementwith experimentaldataobtained
by Quaile and Levy [21] in a dead-endporous
tube by fitting the permeability of the wall. Terril
[23] showedhow to obtain suction distribution
needed to change a specified axial velocity
profile at one cross-sectionto another specified
axial velocity profile at another cross-section
using a similar solution obtained for potential
flow superimposedon Poiseuille flow.
Such solutions have also been presentedby
other researchers [5,8,24]. In modelling of
concentrationpolarization or cake formation, a
natural outcome of the modelling of Song and
Elimelech [25] is that permeateflux decreases
when moving along the channel. Nassehi and
Petera[26] andNassehi[27] presenteda method
to deal with non-uniform permeable wall con-
ditions in axisymmetric viscous flow domains.
The computational results were obtained by
applying a finite element scheme. Recently
Miranda and Campos [28,29] studied the appli-
cability of the conical cell to carry out the
membraneseparationprocess.They solved the
flow equations and respective boundary con-
ditions in the numerical domain of the cell by
applying a finite differencetechnique.
 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77 69

In this paperamodel for coupling the Navier- 2.1. Transfer equations

Stokes and Darcy equations, using a finite
2.1.1.In the tube
difference technique to simulate laminar fluid
flow in a crossflow filtration tubular membrane, The mass and momentum equations, i.e.,
is presented.Quantitative evaluations basedon Navier-Stokesequationsexpressedin cylindrical
overall mass balance and experimental results coordinateswith axisymmetry assumption,are:
[30] areusedto validate the simulationsobtained
--1 a (rV, 1f- a v, = 0
with the presentmodel. Resultsarediscussedfor
a large range of Reynolds axial and filtration r ar (1)
numbers.

.I,,.:_: avZ ---- ap

2. Mathematical and physical modelling 2 a.7 az
A steady-state,laminar, incompressible,vis- (2)
cous and isothermal flow in a cylindrical tube
with a permeablewall is considered.The flow is
axisymmetric so only half of the tube will be
+lJ
studied.The Navier-Stokes equationandDarcy’s
law describethe transfers in the tube and in the
porouswall, respectively.Moreover,with a suffi-
ciently long entrance region without suction
Pirz ty’I=--
ap
..
z az ar
upstream, the tube is considered in order to (3)
assumethat the flow is fully developedat the
poroustube entrance.Furthermore,the classical
assumptionof constantphysical propertiesof the
+iJ
--- a2vr v,
ii[ii (rV, )] +---az2 r2 ]
systemsuchas density, viscosity and porosity of
the wall is made in order to deal with the whereV, and V,arethevelocity components,P is
problem. A schematic diagram of the physical the pressure,and p and ~1are the fluid density
model and coordinatesystem is given in Fig. 1. anddynamic viscosity, respectively.
The length of the porous section is L and the
inner radius of the tube is R. 2.I .2. In theporous wall
The momentumequation,i.e., Darcy’s law, is
written as:

.-.-_-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
2 ~z,-Ec (44
+
Paz
v,= -KaP
(4b)
I4 H Par
I..

Fig. 1. Representation of laminar flow in a tubular mem- Here the porous wall is supposed to be
brane with a cylindrical coordinate system. homogeneousand isotropic in which the main
70 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77

characteristic is the intrinsic permeability K. P-P,

Therefore, the flow through the porouswall can
be simply taken into account as a boundary
condition of the free flow through the tube, as
can be seenbelow.
2.2. Boundary conditions
The boundaryconditions of the problem are:
1. At the inlet, a fully developed laminar
profile is considered,i.e., Poiseuille flow which
leadsto:
r=R,OszsLL: J$=x.-, v, = o (5d)
cL e
wheree is the thicknessof the porouswall andP,
the externalpressure(outsidethe poroustube).
The pioneerworks of BeaversandJoseph[3 l]
exhibit the existence of a slip velocity as a
boundarycondition to match the free fluid flow
and the porous media flow at the porous-fluid
interface. The influence of slip velocity at the
membranesurfaceon ultrafiltration performance
was studiedby Singh and Laurence[32] from a
theoreticalstandpoint.The effect of slip velocity

[ i II
2
on the structureof the flow in the entranceof a
z=O,Osr<R: V.=2V,, l- ; ; v,=o
porouspipewas alsoreportedby Tanahashiet al.
(W [33]. Recently,Schmitz andPrat [34] haveshown
where V,, is the axial velocity at the inlet. that the slip effect is practically negligible at the
2. At the exit, a fully developed profile is membranesurface.Thus, the axial velocity com-
assumedas follows: ponentson the permeablewall aretaken equalto
zero.

z = L,Osr.sR: av,
-=o; v,=o
az (W 2.3. Dimensionless form of the problem
Some studies confirm the existence of regions Let us introducethe following dimensionless
where similarity assumptionsare not valid [2 11. variables:
However, such regionsare confined closeto the
entrance of the porous tube, and they can
generally be neglectedfor many systemsfrom a
certaindistanceof the inlet dueto the high aspect
ratio of the tube. Therefore,in the presentpaper, (6)
PO-P
L/R is considered sufficiently high in order to vr*+J*-
assumethat the flow is fully developedatthe exit 20 P co
of the poroustube.
3. At the axis of symmetry there are no whereP,, is the inlet pressure.
momentum fluxes crossingthe boundary. For convenience,a dimensionless permea-
bility is also definedas follows:
r=O,OszsL: av,=0,
- v, = 0
dr (5c) K* = -
K

4. At the permeablewall, the wall suction
velocity is given by Darcy’s law asmentionedin
the previous sectionandthe slip velocity is zero,
as follows:
2eR (7)
Using thesenew variables,the Navier-Stokes
equationsand the boundary conditions can be
rewritten in dimensionlessform as:
 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77 71

avr* avr* ap* 1

VW,= -K -+-PC
v-*-+vz*-= --+- (12)
r ar* * cL e

a ,+I-(r*vr;:;L] 3. Numerical procedure

@)
t ar * Eqs. (8) and (9) associatedwith boundary
conditions (10) were solved using an implicit
finite differencemethod.The derivativesof flow
avz*
vr*-+yz*-
avz*= -- ap* equationswere approximatedby a second-order
* * * accuratecentral differencescheme.
The strategyfor meshgrid allocation is to use
an orthogonaland uniform grid with Mnodes in
IL$-h:;;l,+q (9) the z-direction and N nodes in the r-direction.
Each node is definedby the couple (ij).
The discretizationof Eqs. (8) and (9) results
in two setsof linear algebraic equationsof the
-Z * = 0, o<r*10.5: following form:
WW
v: = 2[1 - (2r *p]; v: = 0
dP*
Aj Vz*
,j-, + Bj C:j + 'j &Y. +- =Dj (13a)
-Z * =L/2R, Osr’<OS: &I+’ dZ * i
(lob)
avz*
-=o;v:=o
az* 4c:-,,
+BjVr;.+CiVr* +-
dP* =Dj (14a)
J
‘+‘j dr * i
-r * = 0, Osz*sLI2R:
(1Oc) Eq. (13a) gives a final set of N- 1 algebraic
avz* equationswith N unknown [N- 1 componentsof
-=o, vr*=o
dr * the velocity V,andthe gradientof pressurein the
z-directionbetweenthe node (W) and(i+lJ)]. It
-r * = 0.5, OIZ*ILI~R: is completed by the equation of mass conser-
(104 vation (13b) in eachsection.
vz* = 0 ; vr* = v; = -Rew -K* ReP *
Re N-1 Vz:,rj* + V* r.I1
Q,= 2~ c ' 2 'l*J+lJ Ar
Re andRe,,,are the Reynoldsaxial andfiltra- j=l
tion numbers,respectively:
M-l v* +v*
Q,,,= Qi-n c rfzN2 ri+l’NAZ
P Vzo2R P Vwo2R
Re = -; Re,,,= (11)
i=l

I-1 P
Identically, Eq. (14a)gives a setof M- 1 equa-
and V,,,.is the inlet wall suction velocity defined tions with Munknown [n/i- 1 componentsof the
as velocity V, and the gradient of pressurein the
72 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77

r-direction betweenthe node (i,j) and (i,j+l)]. It The accurategrid spacing used in the axial
is also completed by the equation of mass andtransversedirectionsneedsto be established.
conservation(14b) in eachsection. This canbedonethroughnumericalexperiments.
All thesecalculations were carried out on a PC
Q, =O with a Pentium-III 500 MHz processorrunning
under Windows NT 4.0. The computed results
Vz:, 'i* + 'z:, , q:l
were madeby a programcodedin MATLAB.
Q+=Q,+~Tc (
* 2 ** 1Ar After grid independencestudies,a grid with
3 1 nodesin the z-direction and 61 nodesin the
r-direction wasselectedto performthe numerical
CLJrj* + C:,+, 'j:l (14b) simulations. The steady-statesolution was ob-
-2n Ar
2 tained after a minimum of 80 iteration cycles.

M-l v* + v*
= 2X c ‘fJ+J,, 2 ‘i+h/*l ‘it AZ
4. Results and discussion
i=l
The aforementionedtechniquewas appliedto
calculatethe flow in a poroustube with variable
The final systemof linear algebraicequations
wall suction. Ihe laminar flow of water in a
(13) and (14) can be easily solved by the Gauss
tubular membranewith a 6-mm inner diameter
elimination method [35] to give the velocity
andof a length 100times the diameterwas simu-
components and the pressure gradient in the
lated. The dimensionless permeability of the
whole computation domain.
membranewas taken equal to lo-*, which is a
Afterwards, the pressure gradient in the
reasonablerepresentationof membranecharac-
z-direction is integratedto calculatethe pressure
teristics. Computations were performed on a
in each section of the tube. Then, the pressure
range of Reynolds axial numbers between 300
gradient in the r-direction is also integratedto
and 1000 and Reynolds filtration numbers
calculatethe pressurein eachnode (id). Finally,
between 0.1 and 0.3, according to laminar
the wall suction velocity is given as
working conditions of the tubular membrane.
The accuracy of the numerical solution is
v;,= vr;,=-%v
Re
- K+RePi:. characterizedby the overall flow rate balance
given by the threefollowing quantities:
l the inlet flow rate, Q,
Numerical convergence is supposedto be l the permeateflow rate:
reachedif the following criterion is satisfied:

Qp = 2nRj V,(z,R)dz (17)

(16) 0
l the outlet flow rate:
where4 standsfor Vz*, Eis a given toleranceand
Q,= 27c7 V,(L,r).r.dr (18)
0
norm +J = C C 4:. In
( ( i j 1 with respectto Q, = Qp+Qf.
 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77 73

The integrals in Eqs. (17) and (18) are found filtration numberof 0.3. It showssomedeviation
numerically by the Trapeze formula using the from a typical axial velocity field for simple pipe
finite difference scheme: flow without wall suction characterised by
equidistantparallel contours.
The resultsof the numerical simulation show
(19) that the dimensionlesspressure,i.e.,the pressure
drop, increases along the z-axes for various
values of the Reynolds filtration number Re,,,
(Fig. 5). As can be expected,the dimensionless
(20)

It was found that the relative error is less than

0.2% whateverthe simulations. I I
In order to validate the model, the numerical IC 4
0 20 40 60 80 100
results are first compared with some experi- z/D
mental values obtained by Gouverneur [30]
Fig. 3. Flow fields in tube with porous wall permeability
concerningthe evolution ofthe ratio Vmax/ VT, vs. of lo-‘, Re = 300 and Re,, = 0.3.
Re,,/Re (Fig. 2). In theseworks, laseranemometry
measurementswere made to determinethe axial
velocity profile at the exit of a sinteredporous
tube under various Reynolds laminar axial and
filtration numbers.Numerical resultsarein good
agreementwith experimental measurements.
The axial velocity contour plot is given in 0 20 40 60 80 100
Fig. 4, correspondingto the flow field (Fig. 3) Z/D

with a dimensionless permeability of lo-*, Fig. 4. Velocity contours corresponding to the velocity
Reynolds axial number of 300 and Reynolds field shown in Fig. 3.

1.9. :2 3 -RevnO
A. . . . . C. Gouverneur ..... ... Ra,,,z,,,
.
. Present simulation .---Rewa0.2
1.8. 1. 1 -----Rew-0.3
4
1.7. :
1

1.3'

1.2.
*
1.1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
RewlRe x IO" Fig. 5. Plot of dimensionless gradient pressure along
Fig. 2. Experimental and theoretical values of V,,,;JVz,,. z-axes.
74 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77

x lo4

(4
Re=1000 lo----------------------,,,,--,,_,,___,_-------------~
- Rew 10.1
2. -.-*--- Rew=O.Z
.----- hwrO.3
Raw-Q.3
8. -Rw1000 -
-.-.- RpgJo
-e-m Rw300

f 6..-.- .-.-. - .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-._.-.-.-.-.-...-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. ,:

4.

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.9 I 2. 10 20 30

r/R

Fig.6. Plotof thedimensionless

radialgradientpressure x104

at2 = L/2.
~~

pressuredecreaseswhen Re,”increases.Indeed,
the axial flow rate is drastically reduced along
the tube,thus reducingthe axial pressuredrop. It rp
2 .I-.-,-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-._.-.-.~-.-,-.-.-.-.-_
can be seen in Fig. 6 that wall suction intensity % . .-.-.-.-.-...-._.~-.-.-
doesnot considerably affect the radial pressure
gradient, which is about lo-’ in both cases.
Therefore, neglecting the radial variation of 1

pressure in the tube would be a reasonable

approximation. It can be noticed that such an I
0
*
10
*
20
*
30
*
40
*
so
’
60
*
70 80 SO
I
loo
approximationwas alreadydoneby many authors z/D

in simplified models [9,14]. Fig. 7.Plotof thepermeate

At the membrane surface, the wall suction
velocity VWis found to vary roughly and linearly
over the whole membranelength(Fig. 7a andb).
Thus, a decreaseof the wall suction velocity
along the membraneis mainly due to a decrease
in local transmembrane pressure from the
entranceto the exit. Furthermore, as shown in
Fig. 7 a and b, the shapeof wall suction velocity
curve is independentof Re andRe, in the range
of values considered herein. The non-uniform
wall suction velocity along the membrane
generally promotes a non-uniform polarization
layer after a certain time of filtration. This
phenomenoncan significantly reduce the ex-
pectedperformancesof the membrane,i.e., the
velocityalongz-axes.
ones predicted using models assuming uniform
wall suction velocity.
Thevariationsofthe axial velocity component
along the membraneare shown in Fig. 8. The
axial component of velocity is considerably
influencedby the valueof the Reynoldsfiltration
number, and it decreasesalong the membrane
accordingto massflow rate balance.
In Fig. 9, the radial velocity profiles are
plotted againstr/R at the longitudinal distanceof
d2R = 50 for the caseof Re = 1000.The profile
reachesa maximal value at a certain distance
from the porouswall. This typical characteristic
 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77 75

(III------
0.3 -

! 0.2 - **

Oi/~
- RewlO.1
.*.-.- -0.2
.---- Rew=O.S

I.751 ' * * - ' ' * ' ' '

0 10 20 30 40 so 90 70 90 90 100 &oo 2000 3000 4000 woo woo 7000 a000 so00 i 100
Z/D RdRWU

Fig. 8. Plot of the axial component of the V, velocity Fig. 10. Variation of maximum of the shape parameter.
along the membrane.

1 I . \ .
the presentmodel. To this end, a shape para-
i 8%
0.9. , : meter, named E, was used to characterizethe
:
! : relative deviation between the axial velocity
0.a . .i’ /
i
?'
#’ profile Vz andthe Poiseuille profile of the same
0.7 . /
*! *a.'
#'
/ averagevelocity, Vz,,respectively. It is defined
./ /
0.6 . ;
.,*' .'
,' as follows:
2; r'
rmo.5 f ,/ .'
r'
f ,- .*
:' /' /
0.4. .'
j- ,." ,/*
j: ,.** .'
0.3 . ,'
/ ,.'. ,/
.* Re=lOOO
o,* ,.i! */ ,*.'
.---- RswlO.3
/ / / .-.-.a Rew-0.2
o,, / .+ ... ... .. Raw-O.,
;. .,p where the vectorial norm is used.
oipe
0
*
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 The maximum value of the shapeparameter
VrNza,
x lOA along the membraneis plotted in Fig. 10 as a
Fig. 9. Plot of the profiles of radial velocity. function of Re/Re,. It can be seen that E,,,, is
directly dependenton therelative intensity of the
wall suction. Therefore, assuming a Poiseuille
of the radial velocity profile due to the
profile is a reasonable approximation when
cylindrical geometry,previouslymentionedin the Re/Re, is very large.
literature by Granger[36], doesnot exist in two-
dimensional geometry.
As can be expected,the suction at the wall
5. Conclusions
modifies the initially parabolic form of the axial
velocity profile V,, i.e., the Poiseuille profile. It This paper describes a model to simulate
was noticed that some models assumedthat the filtration processesin crossflow filtration tubular
Poiseuille profile is still valid in the presenceof membranes.An accuratemodelling of the flow in
low wall suction. Therefore, it is of interest to these systems is the basic requirement in the
quantify the effect of wall suction on the development of reliable predictive filtration
modification ofthe axial velocity profile givenby models taking into accountpolarization concen-
76 K. Damak et al. /Desalination 161 (2004) 67-77

tration and subsequentfouling. The flow in the Ar - Dimensionlessfinite differencegrid

free fluid region and in the porous medium is spacingin the r-direction
described by the Navier-Stokes equations and K - Permeability, m*
Darcy’s law, respectively. First, the model was CI - Fluid viscosity, Pa s
carefully validated. P - Fluid density, kg mm3
Then, various simulations basedon different
Reynolds axial numbers and filtration numbers
werepresented.The resultsarediscussedin order References
to study the validity of classical assumptions PI J.C. Giddings, Unified Separation Science, Wiley,
made in simplified models. New York, 1991.
In particular, the presentmodel exhibited a PI G. Guiochon, S.G. Shirazi and A.M. Katti, Funda-
pronouncedvariation of wall suction along the mentals of Nonlinear and Preparative Chroma-
tography, Academic Press,Boston, 1994.
membrane, generally neglected by most of the
other models. Moreover, the relative deviation r31 D.K. Gatling, C.E. Hickox and R.C. Givler, Int. J.
Comput. Fluid Dynam., 7 (1997) 23-48.
between the axial velocity profile with and r41 S. Ripperger and J.Altmann, Sep.Purif. Technol., 26
without wall suction is characterized.It is shown (2002) 19-3 1.
that a simple Poiseuille profile can be assumed PI R.P. Ma, C.H. Gooding and W.K. Alexander, AIChE
when Re/Re, is very large. J., 31(10) (1985) 1728.
161 Ilias and R. Govind, J. Membr. Sci., 39 (1988)
S.
6. Symbols 125-141.
[71 Song and M. Elimelech, J. Colloid Interface Sci.,
L.
D - Inner diameter of the tubular mem- 173 (1995) 165-180.
brane,m PI P. Schmitz, B. Wandelt, D. Houi and M. Hilden-
E - Shapeparameter brand, J. Membr. Sci., 84 (1993) 171-183.
- Membrane thickness,m [91 Y. Lee and M.M. Clam, J. Membr. Sci., 149 (1998)
i - Length of tubular membrane,m 181-202.
P - Pressure,Pa WI L. Song, J. Membr. Sci., 144 (1998) 178-185.
- Inlet pressure,Pa [ill J.M.Mirandaand J.B.L.M. Campos, J. Membr. Sci.,
PO 188 (2001) 49-59.
- Radial coordinate,m
- [121J. Paris, P. Guichardon and F. Charbit, J. Membr.
L Radius of the tubular membrane,m Sci., 207 (2002) 43-58.
Re - Reynolds awi~l number P31 S.G. Chatterjee and G. Belfort, J. Membr. Sci., 18
Re, - Reynolds filtration number (1986) 191-208.
- Axial velocity, m s-’ El41 A.S. Berman, J. Appl. Physics,24(9) (1953) 1232-
K
vz, - Inlet averageaxial velocity, m s-’ 1235.
Vmax - Local maximum axial velocity, WI SW. Yuan and A.B. Finkelstein, Trans. ASME, 78
m s-’ (1956) 719.
- Radial velocity, m s-’ [16] R.M. Terril, Aeronaut, 15 (1964) 297.
v, [17] R.M. Terril and P.W. Thomas, Appl. Sci. Res., 21
- Local permeationflux, m s-l
VW (1969) 37.
VI10 - Inlet local permeationflux, m s-l [18] L. Durlofski and J.F. Brady, Physics Fluids, 27
Z - Axial coordinate,m (1984) 1068-1076.
[19] J.F. Brady, PhysicsFluids, 27 (1984) 106 l-1067.
Greek [20] H. Weissberg,PhysicsFluids, 2 (1959) 5 10.
AZ - Dimensionlessfinite differencegrid [21] J.P. Quaile and E.K. Levy, J. Heat Transfer, (1975)
spacingin the z-direction 66-71.
 K. Damak et al. /Desalination
[22] L.S. Galowin, L.S. Fletcher and M.J. Dedantis, AIAA
J., 12 (1974) 1585-1589.
[23] R.M. Terril, J. Fluids Eng., 105 (1983) 303-307.
1241 S. Chellam and M.R. Weisner, AWWA Seminar
Proceedings, 199 1, p. 675.
[25] L. Song and M. Elimelech, J. Chem. Sot., Faraday
Trans., 91 (1995) 3389-3398.
[26] V. Nassehi and J. Petera, Int. J. Numer. Methods
Eng., 37 (1994) 16091620.
[27] V. Nassehi, Chem. Eng. Sci., 53 (1998) 1253-1265.
[28] J.M. Miranda and J.B.L.M. Campos, AIChE J., 45
(1999) 2273-2285.
[29] J.M. Miranda and J.B.L.M. Campos, J. Membr. Sci.,
182 (2001) 257-270.
161 (2004) 67-77 77
[30] C. Gouvemeur, These de Doctorat, Institut National
Polytechnique de Toulouse, 199 1.
[3 l] G.S. Beavers and D.D. Joseph, J. Fluid Mechanics,
30 (1967) 197-207.
[32] R. Singh and R.L. Laurence, hit. J. Heat Mass
Transfer, 12 (1979) 731.
[33] T. Tanahashi, H. Kawai, J. Masuzawa, T. Sawadaand
T. Ando, Bull. JSME, 25 (1982) 1070.
[34] P. Schmitz and M. Prat, AIChE J., 41 (1995) 2212-
2226.
[35] M. Sibony and J.C. Mardon, Analyse numerique I
Systeme lineaires et non lineaires, Herman, Paris,
1988.
[36] J. Granger, These de Doctorat de 1’Institut National
Polytechnique de Nancy, 1986.