Multidimensional Effects in TW PDF

INFORMATION TO USERS
The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and

reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the
text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any
type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print blcedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.
University Microfilms International

A Bell & Howell Information Com pany
3 0 0 North Z e e b Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 06 -1 3 4 6 USA
3 1 3 /7 6 1 -4 7 0 0 8 0 0 /5 2 1 -0 6 0 0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Order Number 9111063
M ultidimensional effects in two-phase flow including phase

change
Kurul, Necdet, Ph.D.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1990
300 N. Zeeb Rd.

Ann Aibor, MI 48106
NOTE TO USERS
THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RECEIVED BY U.M.I. CONTAINED PAGES

WITH SLANTED PRINT. PAGES WERE FILMED AS RECEIVED.
THIS REPRODUCTION IS THE BEST AVAILABLE COPY.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL EFFECTS IN TWO-PHASE FLOW
INCLUDING PHASE CHANGE
by
Necdet Kurul
A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate
Faculty of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Major Subject: Nuclear Engineering
Approved by the
Examining Committee:
~ ci, Thesis Adviser
Michael K senL/Member
Richard T. Lahey, Jr.,/tie

L 1c, I'M
Bimal K. Malayiya, Member '
/Joseph E/ Shepherd, Member
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Troy, NY
August 1990
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES .............................................. iv
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................. v
NOMENCLATURE ................................................. ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................. xiii
ABSTRACT..................................................... xiv
I. INTRODUCTION ........................................... 1
II. OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING TWO-PHASE FLOWMODELS ............ 5
II. 1. Multi-Dimensional Two-Phase Model ................. 7

11.2. Constitutive Relations of Two-Fluid Model ........... 12
11.3. One-Dimensional Models ............ 37
III. MULTIDIMENSIONAL EFFECTS IN SUBCOOLEDBOILING ............. 45
111.1. A Multi-Dimensional Two-Fluid Model For Subcooled

Boiling .......................................... 49
111.2. The Application of Drift Flux Model to Subcooled
Boiling........................................... 57
111.3. Numerical Solution Method ......................... 60
111.4. Model Verification and Validation ................. 61
111.5. Results of Analysis of Developing and Transient Flow
Conditions on Subcooled Boiling .................... 64
IV. CONDENSATION IN STRATIFIED FLOW .......................... 95
IV. 1. Problem Description ............................... 96

IV. 2. Model Description ................................. 97
IV. 3. Numerical Approach ................................ 101
IV. 4. Results and Conclusions ........................... 102
V. NUMERICAL 'SIS OF THE MOTION OF PARTICLES IN DISPERSED

TWO-PHASE , 119
V. 1. Solution 'Môrithm to Track TheMotion ofParticles ..... 122
V. 2. Results and Discussion ............................... 138
V.2.1. Flow Around a Citcular Cylinder in UNiform Velocity
Field ........................................ 139
V.2.2. The Motion of a Cylindrical Particle in Shearing
F l o w .......................................... 141
ii
V. 2.3. MultipleBubbles inInfinite Medium .............. 147
VI. CONCLUSIONS .......................................... 173
REFERENCES .................................................. 177
APPENDIX A. Listing of the codes for Multidimensional Two-Fluid

Model ............................................ 188
APPENDIX B. Derivation of Temperature Distribution in a Single

Phase ChannelIncluding WallDynamics ................ 227
APPENDIX C. Listing of the codes for the Analysis of Bubble

Motion........................................... 230
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
11.1 Terms Used in Generic Conservation Equation, Eq.(II.1) ... 6
11.2 Terms Used in Generic Interfacial Jump Conditions,

Eq. (II.2) ..... 6
11.3 The Coefficients of k-e Turbulence Model ................ 20
111.1 The Geometry and Heat Transfer Conditions for the Test
Cases in Figures III.l through III.5 .................. 64
111.2 The Set of Correlations Used in the Multi-Dimensional

Two-Fluid Model ...................................... 64
111.3 The Matrix Used to Derive a Correction to the Saha-Zuber

Correlation for the Entrance Effect ................... 67
111.4 The Flow and Heat Transfer Conditions Used in Figs. III. 13
and III. 1 4 ........................................... 72
IV. 1 Geometry of the Test Section.................... 105
IV. 2 Distance of Measuring Stations From Steam Inlet .. 105
IV.3 Inlet/Exit Conditions for Tests Selected for Numerical
Calculations ........................... 106
IV.4 Measured Liquid Film Thickness for Tests Selected

for Numerical Calculations........................... 106
IV. 5 Measured Local pressure Drop for Tests Selected for

Numerical Calculations ............................... 107
IV. 6 Measured Local Steam Flow Rate for Tests Selected

for Numerical Calculations........................... 107
IV.7 Calculated Reynolds Numbers for Tests Selected

Numerical Calculations ............................... 108
iv
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
11.1 An illustration of the the discontinuous regions in

two phase f l o w ....................................... 44
11.2 Schematic of the heat transfer modes at a w a l l ......... 44
111.1 The effect of drag coefficient correlations in subcooled

boiling............................................. 76
111.2 The effect virtual mass in subcooled boiling........... 77
111.3 The effect of bubble diameter correlations in subcooled

boiling............................................. 78
111.4 The effect of interfacial heat transfer correlation in

subcooled boiling .................................... 79
111.5 Distributions of interfacial forces and wall heat flux

modes; same conditions as in Fig III. 6................. 80
111.6. Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

fraction in a vertical uniformly heated pipe;
D=0.0154 m, 4"=5.7o 10S W/m2, G=900 kg/m2s, P=4.5 MPa ___ 81

D=0.012 m,q"=9.2olOS W/m2, G=1450 kg/m2s, P=3 MPa ..... 82

fraction in a vertical uniformly heated parallel
channel;
D=0.Oil m, q"=l.44«10S W/m2,G=636 kg/m2s, P=2.76 MPa ... 83
111.9. Lateral distributions of superficial velocities and void

fraction at 0.65 m. from inlet ....................... 84
111.10. Temperature and void fraction distributions in a heated

channel ............................................. 85
111.11. Void detachment point for different pipe diameters and

various heat transfer conditions ...................... 86
111.12. Void fraction and temperature distributions in a
partially heated pipe ................................ 87
111.13. Amplitude and phase angle of temperature oscillations

with respect to inlet velocity oscillations in a heated
single-phase pipe. (Refrigerant) ...................... 88
111.14. Lateral distributions of the amplitude and phase angle

of temperature oscillations with respect to inlet
velocity oscillations ................................ 89
111.15. Amplitude and phase angle of cross-section-averaged void

fraction oscillations following a ±10% sinusoidal
variation in heat flux with a frequency of 0.2 H z ..... 90
111.16. Amplitude and phase angle of predicted cross-section-

averaged temperature oscillations following +10%
sinusoidal variation in heat flux with a frequency of
0.2 H z .............................................. 91
111.17. Variation of average void fraction following a ±20%

sinusoidal change in wall heat flux with a frequency of
0.5 H z ............................................. 92
111.18. Net vapor generation point trajectories as calculated by

1-D and 2-D models for various frequencies of the wall
heat flux oscillations ............................... 93
■ III.IS. Phase shift and relative amplitude ofthe location net

vapor generation point in a pipe with sinusoidal heat
flux oscillations, as calculated by 1-D and 2-Dmodels .. 94
IV. 1 Schematic diagram of the experimentalapparatus.... 109
IV. 2 Grid Structure.................................. 110
IV.3a Pressure distribution along the test section, test A-ll . Ill
IV.3b Pressure distribution along the test section, test A-31 . Ill
IV.3c Pressure distribution along the test section, test B-14 . 112
IV. 3d Pressure distribution along the test section, test B-25 . 112
IV. 3e Pressure distribution along the test section, test C-12 . 113
IV. 3f Pressure distribution along the test section, test C-35 . 113
IV. 3g Pressure distribution along the test section, test D-06 . 114
vi
IV. 3h Pressure distribution along the test section, test D-31 . 114
IV. 4 A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

rates of vapor...................................... 115
IV. 5a A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

rates of vapor,including the effect of interfacial area;
test A-31 ........................................... 116
IV. 5b A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

test B - 1 4 ........................................... 117
IV.5c A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

test C - 3 5 ........................................... 118
V. 1. Flow chart of the algorithm used in tracking the motion

of bubbles.......................................... 149
V.2. An illustration of the frame of reference used in the

calculations ........................................ 150
V.3. An illustration of steps in an algebraic grid generation

scheme .............................................. 151
V. 4. Mapping between the physical and computational domains

for a single bubble.................................. 152
V. 5. Example grids around a single bubble.................. 153
V. 6. Grid and velocities around a spherical bubble.......... 154
V.7a. Fine mesh used for the solution of flow around a cylinder 155
V.7b,c Mesh used for the solution of flow around cylinders 156
V.8. An illustration of the search algorithm used in the

interpolation of velocity in a moving g r i d ............ 157
V.9. Streamlines around a cylinder in uniform f l o w .......... 158
V. 10. Streamlines and vortivity around a cylinder in uniform

flow (Re=60) ........................................ 159
V. 11a. Drag coefficient for a cylinder in uniform liqiud velocity

field (no-slip boundary condition) .................... 160
vii
V.lib. Drag coefficient for a cylinder in uniform liquid velocity
f i e l d ............................................... 161
V. 12. The geometry of a cylinder in shearing f l o w ............ 162
V. 13. The lift force exerted on a cylinder in simple shear and

channel flows ........................................ 163
V.14. The lift force on a circular cylinder in a simple shear

flow (no-slip boundary condition) ..................... 164
V. 15. The torque and angular velocity of a cylinder in simple

shear f l o w .......................................... 165
V. IB. The total lateral force exerted on a rotating cylinder .. 166
V.17. Trajectory of a cylinder moving freely near a wall ..... 167
V. 18. Velocity of a cylinder moving freely near a wall ....... 168
V.19. Forces exerted on a cylinder moving freely near a wall .. 169
V.20. Trajectories of cylinders moving freely in quiscent

liquid.............................................. 170
V.21. Velocities of cylinders moving freely in quiscent liquid 171
V.22. Forces exerted on cylinders moving freely in quiescent

liquid................................ 172
viii
NOMENCLATURE
A : Cross-sectional area
X-8
§ :Unit surface tensor
Cd :Drag coefficient
C£ :Wall friction coefficient
Cn : Stanton number, q"/(Nu Re AT)
CL :Lift force coefficient
C :Virtual mass coefficient

vm
CQ : Drift flux distribution parameter
c : Specific heat
p
D :Pipe diameter
dfi :Bubble diameter
e :Total energy (h + p/p + v2/2)
F :Force per unit area
G :Mass flux
g :Gravitational acceleration
h :Enthalpy
htf :Enthalpy at net vapor generation point
j :Superficial velocity
k :Turbulent kinetic energy 1/2 (u,2+ v,2+ w’2), thermal
conductivity
I :Mixing length
M :Force per unit (phase) volume
Nu :Nusselt number, HD/k
ix
n : Unit outward vector
P : Heated perimeter
H
p :Pressure
Apkj :The pressure difference between the bulk of phase k and the
interface.
Apkw : The pressure difference between the bulk of phase k and the
wall.
Pr : Prandtl number (pc /k)

p
Pr : Turbulent Prandtl number
q" : Heat flux
q’’* :Volumetric energy generation rate
Re :Reynolds number, uL/v
Re^ :Reynolds number describing shear in liquid flow,K d Z/v

t 9 t
S|ci : Sectoral interfacial area density
U : Relative velocity
u : Scalar velocity, Velocity component in main flow direction
V : Volume
V^ : Drift flux parameter representing local slip
v : Velocity component in y direction
v : Velocity
v* : Fluctuating component of velocity
w : Velocity component in z direction
Greek Symbols
a :Void fraction (without index, void fraction of vapor)
S :A distance from wall within buffer layer (see p.15)
e : Dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy
T : Phase change rate per unit volume. (Without index, condensation
rate per unit volume).
H :Dynamic viscosity, pv
v :Kinematic viscosity
p :Density
(T :Surface tension
r :Stress tensor
Indices:
f :Saturated liquid
g :Saturated vapor
i :Interface, direction i (in indical notation)
J :Direction J (in indical notation)
k :Phase (k=l: liquid, k=2: vapor)
1 :Liquid phase
ki :Phase k at interface
t :Turbulent
v :Vapor
w :Wall
xi
Superscripts:
b : associated with bubble
d :drag related
nd :non-drag related
T :associated with phase change
w :associated with wall
xii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Michael Z. Podowski for the
encouragement and guidance I have received under his supervision. Also
the constructive criticism of the examining committee members, Drs. M. Z.
Jensen, R.T. Lahey, B. K. Malaviya and J.E. Shepherd was most helpful.
I would like to acknowledge that a part of this thesis was made
possible by the supercomputer time granted by NCSA.
xiii
ABSTRACT
Whereas the one-dimensional analysis of two-phase flows has
produced satisfactory results for the present generation thermal-
hydraulic systems, further progress in two-phase science and technology
will require a dramatic improvement in the understanding of detailed
physical mechanisms of flow and boiling/condensing heat transfer.
In this thesis, various two-phase flow flows, including phase
change, have been modeled mechanistically at different levels of
detail. In particluar, a two-fluid model has been formulated, and this
model was applied to investigate various forced-convection subcooled
boiling phenomena in a heated channel under steady-state and transient
operating conditions. A similar model has been used to study
multi-dimensional aspects of condensation in stratified flow in an
inclined channel.
It has been found that the modeling of time-dependent
multidimensional effects in the subcooled boiling section of the channel
may yield considerably different results from those obtained by using
one-dimensional empirical closure laws. Also, specific recommendations
have been made in the form of correction factors in one-dimensional
models to accommodate the effect of developing flow near channel inlet.
The results of multi-dimensional modeling of condensation in
stratified flow have shown that the structure of the gas/liquid
interface requires more attention than it has attracted so far.
xiv
An analysis of various aspects of developing mechanistic closure
laws for two-phase flows has been presented in the second part of this
thesis. Specifically, the motion of individual particles both in
uniform and shear flows, and the interaction of particles, have been
studied by solving the steady-state and transient Navier-Stokes
equations. For this purpose, a numerical method has been developed to
track the motion of particles dispersed in the continuous phase. The
results obtained for steady-state situations indicate that the commonly
used lift coefficient in two-fluid models may change significantly if
different interfacial boundary conditions are used. In addition, it has
been observed that particle-liquid and particle-particle interactions
in the case of particles forced to move with a prescribed velocity can
be considerably different from those for freely moving particles.
xv
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Two-phase systems have been applied in various areas of
technology, including energy, chemical plants, space power, micro
electronics, etc.
Because of the complexity of phenomena governing flow and heat
transfer in two-phase media on the one hand, and the importance of
developing relatively simple computational tools for predicting the
behavior of large and complicated systems on the other hand, the most
commonly used analytical/numerical approach has been based on the
application of one-dimensional models. Needless to say, in order to
achieve closure of such models, several simplistic (and not entirely
mechanistic) constitutive relations are needed. Thanks to extensive
experimental efforts, several useful correlations have been developed
and successfully used to date in the modeling of various systems.
Whereas the existing modeling approach has been satisfactory for
the present generation systems, it turns out, however, that further
progress in two-phase science and technology will require a dramatic
improvement in the understanding of detailed physical mechanisms of
two-phase flow and boiling/condensing heat transfer. Increasing needs
for such improved mechanistic models coincide with the progress in
computer technology, so that numerical simulations of detailed
liquid-gas interactions in two-phase flow, unthinkable not long ago,
slowly become an achievable goal.
2
One of the least known aspects of the combined two-phase flow and
heat transfer in boiling and condensing systems is concerned with the
importance of multi-dimensional effects. In late 1970’s, a consistent
set of multi-dimensional conservation equations for two-phase flow,
known as a two-fluid model, has been rigorously derived. In the past
few years, the majority of applications of this model have been focused
on investigating various multi-dimensional hydrodynamic effects in
two-phase flows with no phase change, such as phase distribution in
air-water flow, phase separation in junctions etc.
For flows in heated channels, in which substantial thermodynamic
non-equilibrium occurs between the region and the bulk of the fluid,
the local lateral effects are dominant mechanisms of phase change and
heat transfer. One way to study such effects is via multi-dimensional
two-fluid models.
A general framework for such models has already been developed,
including the formulation of governing equations and various computer
codes. Also, efforts have been made to quantify various interfacial
phenomena in the form of closure equations. Since the amount of
empiricism in such equations is still very high, they are not fully
consistent with one another. The main difficulty in formulating a model
for the analysis of specific two-phase problems is- concerned with
identifying the phenomena important for a particular problem, and then,
in selecting a self-consistent set of closure conditions for the
thermal and geometrical conditions of interest.
Whereas the predictive capability of multi-dimensional two-fluid
3
models (whenever they are feasible) is superior to that of
one-dimensional models, the basic concept employed by such models, i.e.
averaging over time, space, etc., considerably limits their
applications and results in the use of several (although less than in
1-D models) non-mechanistic (or only partially mechanistic) closure
conditions. Although treating each phase separately in system models is
still impossible, the increasing speed and capacity of modern computers
(supercomputers, in particular) make it possible to solve selected
(still relatively simple) two-phase flow problems in a fully
mechanistic way. In such an approach, the governing equations are
solved for each phase separately, and are then used to track the
evolution of the time-dependent moving interface. In spite of the
existing computing limitations, this method can be successfully used
nowadays to identify the fundamental mechanisms governing the
interfacial exchange between the phases and provide physical background
for developing improved, more mechanistic, closure conditions for
two-fluid models.
The objective of this thesis is two-fold. First, a study has been
performed of selected multi-dimensional effects in two-phase flows with
phase change, using a two-fluid model. The modeling principles, basic
equations and assumptions are discussed in Chapter II. Two particular
problems which have been investigated Eire given in Chapters III and
IV. One of them, presented in Chapter III, deals with the phase,
temperature, and velocity distributions in the subcooled boiling region
of a boiling channel under steady-state and transient operating
4
conditions. The other problem, discussed in Chapter IV, is concerned
with the modeling and analysis of condensation in counter current flow
of subcooled water and superheated steam.
Secondly, selected aspects of the development and application of a
fully mechanistic model of dispersed two-phase flow have been
investigated, and the results are reported in Chapter V. This analysis
has been concentrated on the interaction between non-deformable bubbles
/particles dispersed in a flowing liquid and the liquid itself, and on
the effect of channel wall, on the trajectory of, and forces exerted
on, a moving bubble.
CHAPTER II
OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING TWO-PHASE FLOW MODELS
In two-phase flows, the vapor and liquid phases occupy distinct
regions separated by an interface, as sketched in Fig. II. 1. The
interface may either be a continuous surface as in separated flow, or
consist of many discrete closed surfaces, as in dispersed flow. Any
conserved quantity, $k, (mass, momentum, energy, entropy, etc.) in a
differential element of region-k (k=l,2), shown in Fig. II.1, obeys the
generic conservation principle given by Delhaye & Archard (1977),
Ir (pk*k ) * Vo(Pkvk*k> ♦ Vo£k - pk*k (II. 1)
The expressions for the individual terms in Eq.(II.1) are given in
Table II. 1 for each specific conservation law. The boundary conditions
for Eq.(II.1) at the interface (the so-called interface jump
conditions) can be written in the generic form as,
(II.2)
k=l
The terms in Eq. (II. 2) are given in Table 2.2 for each conservation law
separately.
As will be demonstrated in the following Chapters, the integration
of Eqs.(II.1) with the boundary conditions (II.2) is very difficult or
even impossible for most cases of practical interest, even with the
fastest computers available today. This is mainly due to
6
TABLE II.1
Terms used in generic conservation equation, Eq.(II.1)

1 1 i i i
BALANCE
! K K
i i
Mass 1 0 0
Momentum vk p I-T
k= k K
Energy ek“Pk/pk q"-(-p I+x)°v
k k= =k k V V
i
TABLE II.2
Terms used in generic interfacial jump conditions, Eq.(II.2)

1 1
BALANCE 1
1 .... .i 1
Mass 0 0
1 i 1
Momentum 0 - <ra
... 1 .
1 1
Energy - <r=a<>vl
V qi
i i
the fact that the conservation equations of each phase are coupled
through the boundary conditions at the interface, the shape of which,
in turn, depends on the solution of the flow and heat transfer
conditions in each phase. Therefore, Eqs.(II. 1) and (II.2) have been
explicitly solved only for very special cases. Some theoretical and
numerical works using this approach will be outlined in Section II.2,
and Chapter IV will be devoted to the methods of solution and analysis
of these equations.
The two-phase flows encountered in practical installations are
7
commonly modeled by averaging Eqs.(II.1) and (II.2) over time, space,
etc. The resultant equations describe the average motion and heat
transfer for each phase, as if each phase were a continuum. The
averaging techniques and resultant conservation equations in this
approach, called as two-fluid model, are described in the following
section. Further simplifications made to two-fluid model equations are
described in the last section of this Chapter.
II. 1. MULTI-DIMENSIONAL TWO-FLUID MODEL
Multiplying Eq.(II.1) by a phase indicator Xfc, which is either 0
or 1 for phase k, and applying time, space, space and time, or ensemble
averaging, yields phasic conservation equations, each valid over the
entire flow region (i.e. the same domain applies to both phases). It
has been shown by Delhaye & Archard (1977) that the order of averaging
when both space and time averaging are applied to Eq.(II.1) does not
affect the results. Also, the ensemble averaging is equivalent to the
space and time averaging for some cases such as stationary two-phase
flows, or slow enough process, in which a proper time interval exists
over which the Instantaneous conservation equations can be integrated
without losing the Information about the transient behavior of the
averaged parameters (Ishii, 1977).
By applying time and space averaging to Eqs. (II.1) and (II.2),
the following conservation equations for a two-fluid model can be
derived (Lahey and Drew, 1988):
8
Phasic mass conservation,
it (“kpk} + v Vo(vW k ) = rk (II.3)
Phasic momentum conservation,
It ‘W k 1 + V Vo(Vfk:W k V = -\Vo^ V - ApkiS:kl
■ ApkWski+ikioSki+7 Vo[Vakcik+iT)] +V A
0 r
+ Tv* +M + M (II.4)
k kl kl kw
Phasic energy conservation,
3 t 1
It [ V k CV e k )1 - v 7 o ( v ^koakpk( e k+ ek ) v k ) = - P k ilF 1 + a kpk
3(a p )
- g j p - - 1 V.[V<rt( , ^ ,"T)] ♦ | V.[Vo-k(Tt+
+ a q + T e, + M, ov + v or oS + qM <>a + q" A (II.5)

k k k kl kl kl k l =kl kl Hkl kl Mkw kw
The interfacial Jump conditions become:
Mass,
Fi + ra " 0 (II.6)
Momentum,
r 2(V2 , - VU> - ‘' W ’C * M2i * - I ,,* * ,21
rt*
+ T oS = M (II.7)
=21 21 1
Energy,
Equations (II.3) through (II.5) form 10 scalar equations in three
dimensions, for eleven scalar state variables: a or ag (since
c^+a^l), vfc, and efc (k=l,2). Also, we have five scalar equations
given by Eqs.(II.6) through (II.8). To close the model given by
Eqs.(II.3), (II.4) and (II.5), the coefficients resulting from
averaging and the source terms must be specified as functions of the
state variables. The form of these closure relations are generally
obtained based on physical intuition and simple analytical solutions,
such as a single bubble or droplet in potential flow or in creeping
flow. Subsequently, the coefficients are adjusted to match experimental
data wherever such data are available. However, there are certain
restrictions on determining the closure relationships. Lahey & Drew
(1979) give the following conditions that the closure relationships
must satisfy for a single component two-phase flow model (water-steam)
as follows.
o Equipresence: If one closure relationship is a function of one
state variable, all the other closure relationships must be
functions of the same state variable,
o Objectivity: A closure relationship must be independent of the
system of coordinates.
10
o Isotropy: The constitutive relations must be independent of the
solution of the equations of motion. Even when there is a
preferred direction of the flow, the constitutive relation must
not include an a priori knowledge of this direction,
o Just setting: The overall model must have a unique solution,
o Dimensional invariance: The constitutive relations must have
correct dimensions, and any arbitrary functional dependencies
must be via dimensionless numbers,
o Correct low concentration limits: As the void fraction of one
phase approaches zero, the solution must converge to a single
particle solution, and the solution for the other phase must
converge to a single phase solution.
In addition, the overall model should not violate the second law of
thermodynamics.
There are several scalar quantities to be evaluated in Eqs. (II.3}
through (II.8) (336 as given by Lahey and Drew, 1988). However, such a
detailed analysis for practical applications is neither necessary nor
possible with the present knowledge; only those terms that are known to
have a significant effect are preserved in the final form of the
conservation equations. The most common assumption is to set the
concentration tensors, and to unity, which eliminates 180
scalars. Also, the momentum source due to the pressure difference
between the bulk of each phase and the wall is small and can be
neglected. Then, the momentum equation averaged over a constant volume
11
reduces to,
Q 999
sr (ap v.) + V»(ap v v ) = -a Vp - Ap S +
St k k k k k k k k *k *kl kl
’” r
t °S + V»[a (t + t )] + a p g + r v + M. + M (II.9)
=kl ki k =k =k k k k k kl kl kw
To obtain the thermal energy equation, we substitute,
e. = h + i v ov (11.10)
k k 2 k k
for efc in the energy conservation equation, Eq.(II. 5), and combine this
equation with the scalar product of momentum equation multiplied by
vfe. The resultant equation is,
(ape, ) + Vo(a p h v ) + - (a p eT) + V«>(a p v eT) =

St k k k krk k k St kK k k kKk k k
,,, o _ Dp 3a
+v »Ap S — v «r v1 + a -kt — + aZ~ + q" A - V° (<r(q"+ q"T)]
k kl kl kl kl kl k Dt *klSt H kw kw k Hk Mk
D. *** ***
+ a (t + t ):Vv + a q + T e + q" A (II. 11)
k =k =k k kMk k kl kl kl
The last two terms on the left hand side represent the propagation of
turbulent kinetic energy. We can manipulate it further by subtracting
the turbulent kinetic energy equation from Eq.(11.11). However, in the
case of diabatic channels, this term is small and can be dropped. The
first two terms on the right hand side are due to the mechanical energy
production at the interface. These terms may also be neglected for
12
diabatic channels. The resultant thermal energy equation becomes,
a Dp da
5
at
V C a p e ) + V o ( a o h v ) = a.-kt- + Ap,
kk k kk k k k Dt MciSt
+ a, (r + tRo):Vv
k =k =k k
- \ M a (q"+ q"T)] + a q + Te + q" A + q" A (11.12)

k k nk kk k ki M ki kl M kw kw 1 '
This concludes the simplifications that are usually made to put the
conservation equations of a two-fluid model in a workable form. The
conservation equations given by Ishii (1975), Nigmatulin (1978) and
Pauchon and Banerjee (1986) are in general, similar to the present
equations, Eqs.(II.3), (II.9) and (11.12). The main difference between
the form of equations given by different authors is in partitioning the
source terms of momentum and energy equations.
Even though the form of conservation equations discussed herein is
generally agreed upon, there are a few exceptions encountered in the
literature. One of them is due to Hancox et.al. (1980). The difference
in the derivation of Hancox et.al. comes from the definition of
averaged quantities (although the averaging technique is the same as
used by the others), and results in the derivatives of a number of
space-time distribution parameters appearing in the conservation
equations.
II.2. CONSTITUTIVE RELATIONS OF TWO-FLUID MODEL
The constitutive relations are, in general, flow regime dependent.
Since the physical phenomena leading to flow regime transition are not
13
well understood, the existing closure relations are usually given for a
particular flow regime only. When a flow regime boundary, determined by
empirical flow regime maps, is reached during the solution process,
another set of closure relations is used. Among many flow regime maps
suggested by different authors, the most widely used ones are given by
Taitel et.al. (1980), Taitel & Dukler, (1976), Govier & Aziz (1972),
and Mishima & Ishii (1984).
In the following presentation, only those expressions, for which
the flow regime is not explicitly specified, are valid for all flow
conditions.
II.2.1. Constitutive Relations of Momentum Equation
The second term on the right hand side (RHS) of Eq.(II.9), the
momentum source due to the pressure difference between the bulk of the
phase and the interface, is practically negligible in a
multidimensional analysis of stratified flows, However, this term may
have some significance in bubbly flows. Based on a potential flow
solution, the pressure difference between the liquid phase and the
vapor phase is given by Pauchon and Banerjee (1986),
(11.13)
The vectoral interfacial area density in the absence of walls is given

by (Lahey and Drew, 1988),
S, = Va. (11.14)
kl k
Although in bubbly flows Eq.(11.13) is comparable to the drag
14
force on a bubble (given later in this section), the product of
Eqs.(11.13) and (11.14) is much smaller than the seventh term on the
RHS of Eq.(II.9) (involving the drag force). Therefore this term can be
neglected for most practical cases; it is only occasionally included in
the two-fluid model equations.
The third term on the RHS of Eq.(II.9) is due to the shear stress
at the interface. In bubbly flows, whether there is any significant

9 9 9
shear or not, the multiplier, Ski , is small, so that the product of

9 9 9
S and the interfacial shear stress is very small compared to the
other interfacial forces. This term can also be neglected in bubbly
flow. It becomes significant in stratified flows only.
Using an indical notation, the shear stress due to molecular
viscosity for an incompressible phase can be expressed as,
dv
O V dv
UY s
TiJ ( 55;*e^]k <“ •*»
Note that "i" in Eq.(11.15) stands for the direction of a coordinate
(1=1,2,3), and it does not represent the interface.
The last term in Eq.(II.9), applies to the control volumes
adjacent to the wall. The force exerted by the wall in the direction-t
per unit volume of phase-k can be expressed as,
999
V i ' V V . (II'16)
where x is the wall shear stress. In order to simplify the

KHyv
notation, t and k will be dropped, with the understanding that the
following discussion of wall shear stress pertains to the tangential
15
direction t and phase-k.
The wall shear stress in a laminar flow can be obtained from,
au (11.17)
th "-**Sy
y=0
where y is the direction perpendicular to the wall. In numerical
calculations of turbulent flow, the use of Eq. (11.17) requires a very
fine mesh near the wall due to a very thin laminar sublayer. Because of
that, the wall shear stress is commonly expressed as,
*w - - I Cfp |US | U5 (11.18)
where Ug is the tangential velocity at a point in the buffer layer, at
a distance 6 from the wall, and Cf is a friction coefficient. Defining
a friction velocity in the form of,
a lTJ
ur = i r - (II-19)
both the velocity and distance can be non-dimensionalized,
+ U +
U = g , and y = (11.20)
T
In the buffer layer (20 < y+ < 500), the velocity can be represented by
the logarithmic velocity profile given by,
U+ = i In y+ + B (11.21)
Substituting definitions (11.20) in Eq.(11.21), the velocity at a
distance, 5, from the wall can be expressed as,
lu5 l i f v«t i
"TjT- K ln [ J* B (II 22)
16
Combining Eqs.(11.18) and (11.19) to relate C{ to UT/Ug and
substituting the result in Eq.(11.22), the friction coefficient can be
obtained by,
J ^ = l ln + B t n -23)
where Re^ is the Reynolds number based on the distance 6 and the
velocity at this distance.
The wall area for each phase in separated flow is usually
determined in a simple manner. In bubbly flow, it is commonly assumed
that the nucleation sites do not affect the wall-liquid interaction
beyond a distance of two bubble diameters. Because of the very small
contact area between the wall and the bubbles, M can be assumed to
2w
be zero.
All the remaining terms in Eq.(II.9) are significant. Providing
constitutive relations for these terms is the most challenging task of
two-phase flow modeling, since they include all the detailed phenomena
which are lost during the averaging of the conservation equations.
There has been a considerable amount of work to model these terms. The
individual models are summarized below.
Turbulence in Two-Phase Flows
The Reynolds stress term in the momentum equation of the two-fluid
model, Eq.(II.9), is,
ir= -v r ( n -24)
where v^ is the fluctuating component of the velocity. In order to
17
determine the elements of the Reynolds stress tensor, the average of
the product of the velocity fluctuations must be correlated to the mean
flow parameters (mean velocity and its gradients).
Due to the importance of bubbly flow, and due to the insight that
can be gained from it, the main efforts in the modeling of turbulence
in two-phase flows have been concentrated on the bubbly flow regime.
Because of the low density of the vapor phase, it is customary to
assume that the motion of bubbles follows the fluctuations in the
liquid phase. Consequently, the Reynolds stresses need to be modeled
only for the (continuous) liquid phase. The general approach used in
the modeling of the continuous phase turbulence is based on
superimposing the effect of turbulence due to the existence of the
bubbles on the wall-generated turbulence (which depends on the mean
velocity gradient). In this sense, the turbulence models of two-phase
flow are extensions of the turbulence models developed for single phase
flows. These models (both for single-phase and two-phase flows) can be
grouped into two major categories:
1. Turbulent viscosity models; these models are based on the
hypothesis that the following relation is true,
p F v ’= pJVv + (Vv)T) (11.25)
where is a scalar known as turbulent, or eddy, viscosity.
2. Reynolds stress models; one transport equation is solved for each
element of the Reynolds stress tensor.
The earliest turbulent viscosity model for single phase flow is
18
based on the well-known Prandtl mixing length theory. According to this
theory,
< - îmi ( n -26>
where £ is a mixing length expressed as an algebraic function of the
distance from the wall, and U is the mean velocity in the main flow
direction. Numerous expressions for the mixing length have been given
by many authors. Among those, Von K&rm&n’s mixing length derived from
his similarity hypothesis (Von K&rm&n, 1930), and Nlkuradse’s mixing
length (Schlichting, 1979) are known to give good agreement with the
experimental data for flows in pipes.
The Prandtl mixing length theory is extended to two-phase flows by
assuming that the turbulent viscosity is the sum of the wall-generated
and bubble-generated turbulence,
V = m“+ fi* (11.27)
The expressions for the wall-generated turbulent viscosity, p”, and the
bubble-generated turbulent viscosity, in Eq.(11.19) are given by
Sato & Sadatoml (1981) and Michiyoshi & Serizawa (1984). In general,
the mixing length of the bubble-generated turbulence is of the order of
bubble size, and the mixing length of the wall-generated turbulence is
the same as in singlephase flow. However, both Sato & Sadatomi (1981)
and Michiyoshi & Serizawa(1984) recommend a different mixing length
for the wall generated turbulence from the expressions commonly used
for single phase flows.
19
The first attempt to mechanistically model turbulence in single
phase flows is the Prandtl One-Equation model, in which the turbulent
viscosity is expressed as,
< - ( n -28)
where is a constant, t is the mixing length as in the mixing length
model, and k is the turbulent kinetic energy. A transport equation for
the turbulent kinetic energy is obtained from the instantaneous
momentum equation (Harlow & Nakayama, 1967). It has been observed for
different flow situations that solving the kinetic energy equation to
obtain the turbulent viscosity does not necessarily improve the
predictions of the original, simpler, Prandtl mixing length model. This
is mainly because the mixing length still appears in this model as an
algebraic function of the distance from the wall (Launder et.al. 1972).
However, including yet another transport equation, namely the
dissipation equation, to eliminate the need for a curve fit to obtain
the mixing length, lead to a substantial improvement over Prandtl
mixing length model. The transport equations of the two-equation model
were originally derived by Harlow & Nakayama, (1967 & 1968). The form
and parameters of these equations have later been worked out by Launder
et.al. (1972). The resultant model is known as the k-e model of
turbulence. In the k-e model of turbulence, the turbulent viscosity is
related to the kinetic energy, k, and the dissipation of turbulence, c,
as,
20
Ht = C^p (11.29)
For high Reynolds numbers, the transport equations and the coefficients
of the k-e model are given by Launder & Spalding (1974) as follows,
me ia f ^ 3k | / ■ [ aY 8ujl8u.
Dt “ P aXj[ ax. JP [ a x * axj aX] ' E (11.30)
^
Dt = p 3X] (_ <re (ii
dxj p k [ dx* axj dx. 2k l an J
The coefficients used in Eqs.(11.29) - (11.31) are given in Table II.3
TABLE II.3.
The coefficients of k-e Turbulence Model
1 i i T" \-- 1
c c C or or
1 f.
2 k e
r i
1 1 I i i
0.09 1.44 1.92 1.0 1.3
l i
A low Reynolds number k-e turbulence model is given by Launder &
Spalding (1974). At low Reynolds number, the coefficients C and C are

(1 2
functions of the Turbulence Reynolds number, Re^ = k2/j>e. Also the
diffusion coefficients in Eqs.(11.30) and (11.31) are replaced by pt/<r
+ ii, since at low Reynolds numbers the turbulent and molecular
viscosities are comparable. In addition, one extra term appears in the
dissipation equation to accommodate for the reduction of turbulence in
the transition region.
The k and e equations of two-phase flow have the same form as Eqs.
21
(11.30) and (11.31), but with the addition of production terms due to
the presence of bubbles in both equations. The k-e equations for the
(continuous) liquid phase in two-phase bubbly flow are given by Lee
(1986) as,
(11.32)
it +hi =
(11.33)
where a is the volume fraction of the vapor phase. The constants in
Eqs.(11.32) and (11.33) are the same as those given in Table (II.3) for
single phase flow. The last terms in Eqs.(11.32) and (11.33) represent
the contributions due to the presence of bubbles moving with a relative
velocity with respect to the liquid phase. For vertical flow they are
given by,
<f>. = -C a (u - u ) (11.34)
k 3 aZ g I
(11.35)
22
—0.344•10~SRe + 0.243
C3= 0.03 + -(Re -60000)/2000 ’ C4=1-92 (11.36)
1 + e l
where z is the main flow direction.
The newest and the most sophisticated turbulence model is the
Reynolds stress model. In the Reynolds stress models, one transport
equation for each component of the Reynolds stress term is formulated.
A summary of different Reynolds stress models for single phase flows is
given by Launder et.al. (1972). Because of the six additional transport
equations to be solved In addition to the momentum equations of single
phase flow, these models are computationally expensive. This is the
main reason that the Reynolds stress models are attractive when the
turbulent fluctuations play a crucial role on the mean flow
characteristics. A pioneering work to extend the Reynolds stress model
(also called the x-e model) to two-phase flow is due to Lopez de
Bertodano et.al. (1990).
Momentum source due to phase change
The sixth term on the RHS of Eq. (II.9) includes two terms to be
determined. The phase change term, T, is obtained from the interfacial
Jump condition for energy. Therefore, it will be discussed together
with the other constitutive relations for the energy equation. The
other term, the velocity of the condensing or evaporating mass, v , is
commonly represented as a function of the bulk velocity of the
respective phase (Wallis, 1969),
23
(11.37)
The choice of tj depends mainly on the type of phase change, whether
evaporation or condensation, and on the flow regime. In bubbly flows,
an evaporating liquid globule initially has the velocity of the liquid.
In condensation, however, the velocity of the condensing vapor
initially has the velocity of the bubble. Therefore it is natural to
assume that,
c 1 for T < 0
(11.38)
0 for T > 0
where F = r = - r .
1 2
Interfacial Forces
If the interfacial force per unit area, F , and the interfacial
area density, A’’*, are known, the interfacial forces appearing in the
momentum equation of a multi-dimensional two-fluid model can be readily
obtained from,
(11.39)
Both the interfacial area density and the force per unit area of
the interface strongly dependent on the flow regime. The flow regime,
in turn, can be determined by using empirical flow regime maps, usually
given in terms of void fraction and cross-section averaged superficial
velocities. A discussion concerning the modeling of interfacial forces
24
is given below, in which two flow regimes, bubbly flow and separated
flow, are emphasized.
At low void fraction (a < 0.3), the vapor phase is dispersed in
the form of bubbles in the continuous liquid phase. The forces exerted
on bubbles are determined by the continuous liquid phase flow around
the bubbles. However, the liquid phase flow is also affected by the
motion and shape of the bubbles, which, in turn, is governed by the
forces exerted on them. Because of the complexity of the phenomena
involved, these effects are generally decoupled. In many cases, only
one interaction at a time is considered, such as the interaction
between the shape of a single bubble and the fluid flow, or the
interaction between the fluid flow and the motion of a single bubble.
As will be discussed below, such a simplification is still insufficient
for obtaining analytical expressions for the forces of interest; much
more restrictive assumptions would have to be introduced.
It has been observed that the shape of small bubbles (up to 1 or 2
mm) is close to spherical, whereas large bubbles have a cap and highly
deformed shape. A dimensional analysis indicates that the shape of a
bubble is a function of Re and Ve numbers in uniform flow (Feuillobois,
1989). The bubble shape is close to spherical when We « Re (i.e. when
the surface tension force is much higher than the forces related to the
dynamic pressure and inertia of the liquid phase). This has also been
shown and quantified by numerical calculations (Ryskin & Leal, 1984).
Cox (1965) solved the Navier-Stokes equations for Re « 1 to determine
25
the shape of a drop in a shear flow and in a hyperbolic flow for a
small deformation in the shape.
Before the discussion of the forces exerted on a spherical bubble,
two other studies concerning the effect of the shape can be cited.
Brenner (1964a & 1964b) gave an analytical expression for the
correction to the analytical solutions for the forces exerted on an
arbitrarily shaped particle in uniform and shear flows for Re « 1.
Vanden-Broeck & Keller (1980) semi-numerically solved the potential
flow equations around a bubble attached to a wall and away from the
wall to obtain the shape of a bubble as a function of the surface
tension, viscosities and the pressures of the bubble and of the
surrounding liquid.
Almost all theoretical works concerning the forces exerted on a
bubble share two common assumptions: the bubble is either fixed in
space or its motion is prescribed, and the shape of the bubble is
spherical. One of the first solutions of this kind is the Stokes’ drag
force on a fixed solid sphere for Re « 1. The Stokes’ solution has
been later improved by Oseen to extend to higher Reynolds numbers, but
being still less than 1. Although the solution could be Justified
mathematically to be valid for Re « 1, the experimental evidence show
that the Stokes’ solution with Oseen’s improvement gives a good
agreement until Re a 2 (White, 1974). The existing experimental data
indicates that this solution is also applicable to gas bubbles in the
same range of Reynolds numbers (Feuillebois, 1989). A solid sphere
26
model implies that no-slip boundary condition applies to the
liquid-phase side of the interface. On the other hand, a bubble
interface would be expected to have much less shear (due to the low
density of the vapor phase). The agreement between the data for solid
spheres and the bubbles at low Re numbers has been explained by Levich
(1962) as follows. The impurities in the liquid phase collect at the
high shear region, thereby increasing the surface tension considerably.
A much stiffer bubble/liquid interface approximates both the shape (due
to even lower We number than that for a pure-liquid/bubble situation)
and the shear boundary condition to a solid sphere case. This argument,
supported by the experimental evidence for a bubble in uniform flow, is
the basis for the solid sphere assumption used in the majority of the
analytical work for different flow configurations.
A bubble in a shearing flow, such as that near a wall, experiences
a lateral force in the lateral direction of in addition to the drag
force in the main direction of motion. This lateral force has two
components. One of them, the lift force, is a direct result of the
shear in the liquid phase, and exists even for spherical particles
fixed in space. The other is induced by the rotation which is caused by
the shear. It is interesting to mention that, whereas a spherical
particle translating or rotating in quiescent liquid experiences no
lateral force, however there is a lateral force exerted on a
translating and rotating particle (Magnus effect).
The lateral force acting on a solid sphere in pipe flow was
27
observed by Oliver (1962), Segr& & Silberberg (1962), Eichhorn & Small
(1964), and Hall (1988). The solid spheres heavier than the liquid in
pipe flow were observed to move towards the center, and lighter spheres
towards the wall. In the laminar flow experiments of Segr6 & Silberberg
(1962), almost neutrally buoyant small spheres tend to migrate to a
position between the wall and the center-plane (about 0.5 to 0.68 radii
from the wall, but the specific distance is quite sensitive to the
density of the spheres). Also, in the Oliver’s (1962) experiment, when
neutrally buoyant particles were prevented from rotating, they were
observed to move towards tube center.
Some analytical solutions for the lateral forces acting on a solid
sphere in pure shear and in pure rotation are given by Saffman (1962)
and Drew (1978), based on an asymptotic solution of the Navier-Stokes
equations. These analytical results are only valid for very low
Reynolds numbers (Re«l) and very weak shear (»cd2/i>«l). The lift
forces given by Saffman (1962) and Drew (1978) are proportional to
UVicRe and VkRe respectively. An analytical solution for rotational but
inviscid flow around a sphere is given by Auton (1987) for a weak shear
but high Re number. The lift force in inviscid flow is proportional
to k U. These solutions (both viscous and inviscid) for a fixed sphere in
shear flow indicate a lift force towards higher velocity.
In unsteady flows, there are additional forces acting on a
particle. One them is due to the acceleration of the liquid phase, and
is known as virtual mass force. The virtual mass force in uniform flow
28
can be obtained by the potential flow solution (Batchelor, 1967). The
other is due to the developing boundary layer on the bubble surface
(Basset force). An analytical expression for the the Basset force is
known only for very low Re numbers (Basset, 1961).
It is believed that when the void fraction is between 0.01 and
0.1, some interactions occur between the pairs of particles, and when
the void fraction is higher than 0.1, the interactions occur between
many particles (Feuillebois, 1989). Some theoretical works on the
interaction between two particles have been discussed by Feuillebois
(1989).
In practice, the existing theoretical results, due to their
limitations, are not directly used in the closure relations for the
interfacial forces in two-fluid models. Instead, only the form of the
results of the theoretical work is commonly assumed to be valid for a
practically interesting range of Reynolds numbers and bubble sizes, and
the coefficients are adjusted to match the experimental data. Some
constitutive relations are formulated as a direct correlation of data.
In general, even for a single particle, the various forces exerted
on the particle are coupled. For example, the drag force on a particle
in shearing flow at a given local velocity is not the same as the drag
force for the same velocity in a uniform velocity field in viscous flow
(Saffman, 1962). These forces can be superposed only when the inviscid
flow approximation is valid (Auton et al, 1988). Since the strength of
these interactions is not clear yet, it is commonly assumed for both
29
viscous flows and inviscid flows that the interfacial forces can be
expressed as a summation of different components which have been
identified to date. With this assumption, the interfacial forces per
unit mixture volume can be written as,
M = + M ™ + »£ + M°*her (ii. 40)

kl kl kl kl kl
where is the drag force, M ™ is the virtual mass force, is the
lift force. M°*her includes the Basset force and the Marangoni force
(in the existence of a temperature gradient along the interface). The
Marangoni and Basset forces are almost always neglected. They are used
only for special applications. The individual forces in Eq.(11.40) are
discussed below.
Drag Force:
The drag force on a particle is commonly expressed as,
' . ■ ■ I ' M l Y ’.l ' V ' . 1 t n -41)
where Ad is the projected area of the particle in the flow direction.
For a spherical particle (bubble), the drag force per unit interfacial
area can be written as,
F» = - ? < ’i C d I v vJ (v V (II-42)
Several expressions for the drag coefficient Câre recommended by
different authors for dispersed flows. A few most commonly used
correlations for bubbly flow are reproduced below.
30
Ishii’s correlation in viscous region, where the average bubble
diameter is less than 1 to 2 mm is (Ishii, 1987),
0.7S
C = 24 (1 + 0.IRe )/Re (11.43)
D dm dm
and in the distorted particle regime for larger bubble diameters,
,1.286 -v2
' 1 + 17.67 (1-a) y
r - - — / 8P (11.44)
D ~ 3 2 / <r
18.67 (1-a)1'5 J
where,
p 1 |v
* V
- vI Id
I R
**-«-
m
~ (II'45)
-0.25a u .^ .
( a > n m \i + 0.4u
m ■* v 1
and a is the void fraction at maximum packing (as 0.56). Another

m m
correlation, given by Ishii & Zuber (1978), in the distorted bubbly
flow regime is,
4 f«
Cn - I dB [ <r(T-aT J
-|1/2
(II'47)
A "dirty-water11 correlation for bubbly flow is given by Wallis (1976)
as,
6.297
C = -- — — (11.48)
D jÔ.385
d
Interfacial Area Density:
When the bubbles have a truly spherical shape, the interfacial
area density can be expressed in terms of the bubble diameter and the
31
number of bubbles per unit volume,
A” ' = *d® N (11.49)

B B
3
Since a = N ird /6, the interfacial area density can be written as,
B B
A’*» = (11.50)
B
When the bubbles are distorted, the interfacial area density can still
be determined from Eq. (11.50), but by using a modified equivalent
diameter. At higher void fractions, the bubble coalescence becomes
significant, and large bubbles form. In this range, both large and
small bubbles co-exist. To take this phenomenon into account Ishii
(1987) suggest a correction to the interfacial area density as,
, _ <a> - aU. 6a
U U r i1 -— <a>
r «
i* > » _ 4. 5 ________ go gs I ________
D 1 - a as d I 1 - an J (II.51)
gs R
—B 1^ ” gsr J
where a ^ is the void fraction contained in the small spherical bubbles
and D is the pipe diameter. As a approaches <a>, Eq. (11.51) reduces

gs
to Eq.(11.50). To evaluate the interfacial area density, the average
bubble diameter is the only remaining parameter to be determined.
A common approach in obtaining the average bubble diameter is to
assume a constant value determined from a critical Weber number based
on the hydrodynamic mechanisms, namely the turbulence forces and time
scales, governing bubble splitting and coalescence. A few such analyses
that can be cited are the works by Hinze (1955), Kirkpatrick & Lockett
(1974), and Sevik & Park (1973). Based on a dimensional analysis
(similar to most other works in this area), an average bubble diameter
32
is suggested by Thomas (1981) as
3/5 -2/5
d (o'/p) e" (11.52)
B.max
As an example, for a liquid velocity of 1 m/s in a 1/2" (1.27 cm) pipe
diameter, at 30 bar, Eq.(11.52) gives a bubble diameter between 1 and 2
In diabatic flows, on the other hand, the bubbles form at the wall
with a considerably smaller diameter than the diameter given by the
critical Weber number, and they diffuse towards the centerline. If the
liquid temperature is well below the saturation temperature around the
centerline of the pipe, the bubbles collapse before they can coalesce
to form larger bubbles. Thus, in diabatic flows at high subcooling, the
bubble diameter is controlled by heat transfer mechanisms rather than
by hydraulic mechanisms. When the liquid temperature approaches the
saturation temperature, the hydraulic effects on the average bubble
diameter can be expected to be dominant. An expression for the bubble
diameter which accounts for the heat transfer effects will be given
in Chapter III.
Another approach to obtain the interfacial area density is to form
a transport equation for the number density of bubbles. Such an
expression has been proposed by Kocamustafaogullari & Ishii (1983) as,
(11.53)
cond.
where v ,6 , 0 , d and d> , are, respectively, the bubble

9 bn wn dis cond
velocity, bulk nucleation rate, wall nucleation rate, bubble generation
33
rate due to disintegration, and bubble coalescence / collapse rate. The
difficulty with Eq.(11.53) Is In determining the last two terms.
Although a lot of research has been conducted in the area of bubble
splitting and coalescence, the existing works are mostly concerned with
finding a stable bubble diameter. It is still unknown how to model and
quantify the rate at which bubbles split and coalesce. It may be
possible to use a transport equation, such as Eq.(11.53), when more
results in this area become available.
Virtual Mass and Lift Forces:
The virtual mass force is given by Drew and Lahey (1979) as,
„vm vm f ^ 1V1^2V2 ")

21
_
- -Mll=v» 1 2 [it BT J ,_ T
(II-S4)
where Dfe/Dt is the material derivative operator defined with reference
to the motion of phase-k. The virtual mass coefficient is recommended
to be 0.5, which can be obtained from the potential flow solution for
an accelerating bubble in quiescent liquid (Batchelor, 1967). Another
form of the virtual mass force is given by Best ion (1990) as,
*i: - 4 V , ’ (T T - I T ) (I1-561
The lift force is givenby Drew & Lahey (1979) as,
- -*£i - t e ' v V * ' , ( n -S6>
This form of the lift force is based on the inviscid flow solution. The
lift coefficient is recommended to be between 0.05 and 0.2, although
the theoretical value for a single spherical bubble is 0.5 (Auton, 1987).
34
II.2.2. Constitutive Relations of Energy Equation
The third term on the RHS of Eq. (II. 12) is obtained from the
Fourier Law as,
q* = _k = (II-57)
P»k
The turbulent energy exchange term, q^1, is analogous to the
Reynolds stress term. Using a mixing length turbulencemodel, it can be
written as,
= -ktVTk (11.58)
where is a turbulent (eddy) conductivity analogous to the turbulent
viscosity. The eddy conductivity can be obtained by the Boussinesq
approximation as,
- -fer CH-59)
where Pr is the turbulent Prandtl number, given by many authors by
empirical correlations. A theoretical expression for the turbulent
Prandtl number is given by Rhosenow & Cohen (1960),

00
1 _ r 1 6 V 1--4 f -0.0024 ir2n2 H

- 416 Pr Us [ “ 2^n=l 1 R= JJ (II'60)
With Eq.(11.60) for the turbulent Prandtl number, and the turbulent
viscosity given by any of the turbulent viscosity models discussed
earlier In this Chapter, the turbulent energy exchange term can be
evaluated for diabatic flow conditions.
35
Efforts on establishing the Reynolds stress model has been
concentrated on the Reynolds stress term in the momentum equation. The
Reynolds analogy (Eqs. 11.58 and 11.59) cannot be used to obtain the
turbulent energy exchange term in the thermal energy equation with the
Reynolds stress models of turbulence. How to correlate this term in the
Reynolds stress model is still unknown.
Neglecting the mechanical energy exchange at the interface, the
interfacial Jump condition for energy, Eq.(II.8 ), can be reduced to,
(11.61)
Eq*(11.61) implies that the heat imbalance at the interface is
compensated by the effect of phase change. For bubbly flow, the heat
transfer between the interface and the vapor phase can be neglected,
and Eq.(11.61) can be written as,
» f t
l (11.62)
where
(11.63)
Using Eq. (11.61), and neglecting the potential and kinetic energy
of the interface, the sixth and seventh terms on the RHS of Eq. (11.12)
can be combined to yield,

>»» 999
(11.64)
where m=l for k=2 and m=2 for k=l. In bubbly flow, the second term on
the RHS of Eq.(11.64) can be dropped.
36
Several expressions for the interfacial heat transfer coefficient
on the liquid side are given by different authors. These correlations
are, in general, based on the heat transfer coefficients known for
solid immersed bodies. The heat transfer coefficient given by McAdams
(1954) is,
k, f r p d |v -v I ,°-sr c f1 I0'33!
H,,— a-.S.O + O.Bsf— ] [-PjLi] (11.65)
Another correlation is given by Wolfert (1978) as,
r , |vo-v | P.c_. 1 n1/2

Hu 1 Pi L 7r aB Ki 1 + 1 (11.66)
t i
The last term on the RHS of Eq.(11.12), the heat transferred from
the wall to each phase, involves far more complicated processes. The
main modes of heat transfer from the wall to the liquid in nucleate
boiling are: heat convection to the liquid phase away from the
nucleation sites, microlayer evaporation, and quenching, as
schematically shown in Fig. II.2. Most of the correlations for these
modes of wall heat transfer have been given for pool boiling (Bergles
et al., 1981). The same correlations are generally used for forced
convection without modification. A new consistent mechanistic model for
the wall heat transfer during forced-convection flow is presented in
Chapter III.
37
II.3. ONE DIMENSIONAL MODELS
Two-phase models which have been developed to date are intended to
be used in the computer codes that simulate complex systems involving
many components, or even entire power plants. Even though two-phase
flow (boiling or condensing) channels may have the most significant
effect on the overall system dynamics, they constitute only some of the
various components of the system. Hence the level of complexity of
two-phase flow modeling must be compatible with the accuracy of the
overall system model. Due to the capability of the current computers,
less accurate but fester models have been very attractive. Because of
that, a vast majority of the studies on two-phase flows are concerned
with a one dimensional approach.
A one-dimensional version of the two-fluid model conservation
equations can be obtained substituting (0 ,0 ,u)T for in equations
(II.2), (II.9) and (11.12). This model is also called an
Unequal-Velocity, Unequal-Temperature Two-Phase Flow Model by some
authors (Roy, 1982). The conservation equations of a One-Dimensional
Two-Fluid model are given below.
Mass conservation:
ft'Vic1* fe'VA’- ri (n-67)
38
Momentum conservation:
d 2 ’’’
5T- (a p u. ) + 7 » ( a p u ) = -a. 3= ApS on - a p e sine
ot kk K k k k kaz kl kl z kkk
a 0 r
+ 3-
OZ
[a (t
k k, zz
+ tk,zz
0 )] + r v on + M o n
k kl z kl z
+ Mkw onz (11.68)
The energy equation is the same as Eq.(11.12) with vt=(0,0,u)T.
Although the above-given conservation equations have been obtained by
setting the two components of the velocity in the transverse directions
to zero, we have in effect extended the control volume over which the
conservation equations averaged, to cover the entire cross-section of
the channel. Hence, the velocity ufc is now the velocity averaged over
the channel cross-section. The other state variables, a , and h , are

k k
the cross-section-averaged quantities as well. Consequently, the
information about lateral distributions has been lost. The effect of
lateral distributions of flow parameters is seen in many practical
cases, such as developing flow, unsteady flow, oscillatory flow, flow
separation in Junctions etc.
Analogous to wall friction and heat transfer in one-dimensional
single-phase flow, the last two terms in the momentum and energy
equations now play a bigger role, since they have to compensate for the
lateral distributions of state variables, in addition to the phenomena
occurring at the interface and at the wall. However, in practice, the
constitutive equations given in the preceding section are also commonly
used for one-dimensional models. Obviously, the lift force does not
appear in one-dimensional models, since it explicitly refers to lateral
39
effects. The only modified constitutive relation for one-dimensional
flows is the wall force, since all the most significant effects of
lateral velocity distribution are lumped into this term. In order to
account for the effect of both phases, the wall friction is modified by
by Martinelli-Nelson (1948) type correlations. These correlations imply
an a priori knowledge of the velocity distributions. The same argument
is true for the wall heat flux in the energy equation.
When the vapor phase is dispersed and the liquid phase is
continuous, the vapor motion is mainly governed by the liquid-phase
flow since, due to the low vapor phase density, the interfacial forces
are dominant in the vapor phase momentum equation. With this in mind,
the vapor phase velocity can be correlated to the liquid phase velocity
so that the vapor phase momentum equation can be eliminated. The most
widely used expression is given by Zuber and Findlay (1965) as,
u = C J + V , (11.69)
9 o 9J
where
J = J + J , J = au J = a u (11.80)
l g g gg, 1 11
Eq.(11.69) is a basis of the Drift-Flux Model. The so-called drift
flux parameters, C and V , are given by Ishii (1977) for different

O gj
flow regimes. Also Chexal and Lellouche (1985) give lengthy expressions
for the drift flux parameters to cover all flow regimes in a boiling
channel.
It is interesting to mention that Ishii (1975) derived
three-dimensional Drift-Flux conservation equations. However, since
40
several inherently one-dimensional correlations, such as the
Zuber-Findlay correlation, have to be used at one point or another to
close the system of equations, a multidimensional formulation of the
Drift-Flux Model does not introduce any more generality than the
one-dimensional model.
In the most commonly used form of the Drift-Flux Model, the
continuity equations of the liquid and vapor phases are combined to
obtain a single mixture continuity equation,
§F+ § =0 (II*71)
where the interfacial jump condition for mass, Eq. (II.6 ), has been
used. In Eq.(11.71), the average density is defined by,
p = pa + pa (11.72)
1 11 g g
The vapor phase continuity equation can be manipulated by using
Eqs. (11.69) and (11.70), to obtain the following void propagation
equation,
da a T a dp A dp
— 1 + ?-(a u )= - £ - _ 2 _ S - _ i _ £ (II 73)
St Sz g q P P dt P dZ
9 9 9
Here, a subtle difference in the notation is worth of noticing.
Generally, the liquid phase is denoted by the index, ’1’, and the vapor
phase by ’v’. The saturated liquid and saturated vapor are denoted by
the indices *f’ and ’g’, respectively. However, when the liquid phase
is continuous and the vapor phase is dispersed, it is very common to
41
assume that the vapor phase is saturated. Unless it is desired to
emphasize that the vapor phase is actually superheated, the indices ’v*
and ’g* are interchangeably used for the vapor phase. In the present
discussion, the index ’g’ is used to represent the vapor phase.
The momentum equation of the Drift-Flux Model is also a
combination of the vapor and liquid phase momentum equations. Before
carrying out the algebra, we can simplify Eq. (11.68) even further by
neglecting the terms with lower order effects. With the assumption that
the pressures of both phases are the same, the second term on the RHS
of Eq. (11.68) can be dropped. Also, the fourth term of on the RHS of
Eq. (11.68), i.e. the term involving the shear stresses, can be
neglected. Note that the shear stresses due to the velocity gradient in
the direction perpendicular to flow are reinstated in the wall friction
term. Finally, it can be assumed, that the interfacial velocities of
each phase are the same as the bulk velocities of the phases. With
these approximations, by adding the momentum equations of both phases
together, and using the definitions given by Eq.(11.70), the momentum
equation of the Drift-Flux Model is obtained as,
- ||
dz - g? sine - TA
- p - - rglf a
~ - -
a 1 I - .1
P «idt
tr
x-s •• g g J
* [ir] * “,\k (£]+V»!i [ir]

where the third term on the LHS is a special form of the last term in
42
Eq.CII.74), obtained in the absence of the interfacial forces. It can
be noticed in Eq. (11.74), that the interfacial forces cancel out since
they have opposite signs. In effect, the introduction of an algebraic
relationship between the vapor and liquid phase velocities to replace
the force balance between the phases, eliminates a separate equation of
the vapor phase dynamics.
When the vapor phase is saturated, the vapor energy equation
becomes trivial. Neglecting all the terms due to the mechanical energy,
and using the lnterfac'^1 Jump condition for energy, Eq.CII.8 ) together
with the definitions given by Eq.(11.70), the energy conservation for
the Drift-Flux model can be written as,
q "PH 3n Sh i 9hi
-5♦
'V Vr, ■X
x-s
♦f?- <vsar- ".W-
For a boiling channel, the most important parameter in the
Drift-Flux model is the phase change term, T . This parameter can be
deduced from the interfacial Jump condition for enthalpy. Then, the
problem of obtaining the phase change rate turns into the problem of
correlating the interfacial heat transfer to the enthalpy of the
phases. This is generally achieved by using yet another correlation to
define a point at which boiling effectively starts, the so called void
detachment point. Details in this regard are examined in Chapter III.
The simplest two-phase flow model is the homogeneous Equilibrium
Model (HEM), in which both phases have the same velocity and
43
temperature. Such an approximation may be valid for saturated boiling
in dispersed flows in horizontal channels, or for very finely dispersed
high velocity liquid-vapor flows in vertical channels. The conservation
equations of HEM can be found by adding each pair of the conservation
equations of the two-fluid model with equal phasic velocities and
pressures, and assuming saturation properties of both the liquid and
vapor phases. These conservation equations can be found in (Lahey,
1977) and (Yadigaroglu & Lahey, 1976); They will not be reproduced
here.
44
Figure II.1. An illustration of the the discontinuous regions in two

phase flow
w.-w
Figure II.2. A schematic of the heat transfer modes at a wall
CHAPTER III
MULTIDIMENSIONAL EFFECTS IN SUBCOOLED BOILING
Due to a higher degree of thermal non-equilibrium, and high
temperature, void fraction and velocity gradients in the transverse
direction, the subcooled boiling portion of a boiling channel requires
a more detailed analysis than the rest of the channel.
The research on the subcooled boiling has generally had two
distinct objectives:
o The heat removal at steady-state conditions. To correctly predict
the heat removal rate, the first and the hardest-to-accomplish,
the prerequisite is an accurate prediction of the void fraction
distribution. Therefore, most of the research in this area has
been concerned with the development of void-quality relations,
o The response of a boiling channel to transients. A boiling
channel, especially in a parallel channel system, may present
serious stability problems under certain operating conditions.
A boiling channel, either considered as one of many identical
parallel channels, or as a single channel, connected to a closed
loop, forms a complicated multi-input/multi-output feedback
system. The subcooled boiling section of such a boiling channel is
known to have a very significant impact on channel dynamics and,
consequently, on the dynamics of the entire loop. Once the
response of a channel to external oscillations is known, the
45
46
stability margins of such a loop can be determined.
This Chapter is concerned with the analysis of multidimensional
aspects of subcooled boiling related to the above given objectives.
Heat fluxes below CHF will only be considered.
It is evident that, numerical applications of the combined
conservation equations and the constitutive relations presented in
Chapter II require substantial computer resources, in terms of both
hardware and software. In fact, a consistent form of multidimensional
two-phase flow equations has been developed only during the last few
years. For these reasons, the subcooled boiling phenomena have
traditionally been analyzed using one-dimensional models. Such an
approach results in substantial uncertainties concerning the various
multidimensional effects which cannot be mechanistically modeled.
In steady-state, the void fraction distribution along the flow
direction is the subject of the earliest research on subcooled boiling.
Experimental data related to the subcooled boiling section of a boiling
channel has been provided by St. Pierre (1965), Rouhani (1966),
Bartolomei (1967), and, more recently, by Hino & Ueda (1984). The
cross-section-averaged void fraction distribution can be obtained from
the void-quality relation if the relation between the equilibrium
quality and the flow quality is known, or alternately, if the net vapor
generation rate across the channel is known, it can be obtained from a
simple two-phase flow model, such as the Drift-Flux model. The former
approach, also called a Profile Fit Model, involves fitting a curve to
the experimental data. Such curve fits were recommended by Levy (1966)
47
and Zuber et.al. (1966). The latter approach, such as the one proposed
by Hancox and Nicoll (1971), is mechanistic to some degree. In either
case, it is required that a point be determined at which the void
fraction starts increasing rapidly, called The Net Vapor Generation
Point or Void Detachment Point. The most widely used correlation for
the net vapor generation point is given by Saha & Zuber (1974). As will
be shown, such a correlation is not necessary for a multidimensional
mechanistic modeling of subcooled boiling. A section in this Chapter
will be devoted to the question of whether the void detachment point is
well defined and what is the validity range of such correlations.
The majority of the experimental work on transient subcooled
boiling is on the flow instabilities in boiling channels. The
experimental data for the transient behavior of the void fraction,
velocity and temperature distributions in a boiling channel is very
scarce. One of very very few experimental results was given by St.
Pierre (1965).
Some experimental and theoretical results on the response of
velocity and temperature profiles to the inlet flow rate oscillations
in the single phase section of a heated pipe near the onset of boiling
point has been provided by Roy (1965). Roy’s analysis was intended to
investigate the behavior of the net vapor generation point in
transients.
The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the importance of
the lateral distributions of velocity and temperature in the subcooled
boiling portion of a boiling channel. Provided that the scaling laws of
two-phase flow are known (which is questionable), one-dimensional
models can predict the void fraction, velocity and temperature
distribution with a reasonable accuracy in boiling channels under
conditions such as: a uniform heat flux, a fully developed inlet
conditions, etc. Indeed, most correlations employed by such models
contain similar limitations. The effect of lateral distributions become
particularly important near the inlet of boiling channels under high
heat flux and high inlet subcooling conditions. One-dimensional models
contain no information about the effects of velocity and temperature
distributions on local subcooled boiling, they cannot be used for this
purpose. The effects of developing flow and temperature distributions,
as well as of non-uniform heating along a boiling channel, are
discussed in this Chapter.
Other situations, in which one-dimensional models are
questionable, deal with transients, This is due to the fact that
one-dimensional models assume quasi steady-state distributions of the
velocity, void fraction and temperatures. Various multi-dimensional
effects during transients in boiling channels are also discussed in
this Chapter.
Both above mentioned topics have been investigated based on the
two-fluid model discussed in Chapter II. Details concerning the closure
relations developed for the purpose of the present analysis, and the
results of model testing against experimental data, are given in the
next section.
49
III.1. A MULTI-DIMENSIONAL TWO-FLUID MODEL FOR SUBCOOLED BOILING
The phasic mass, momentum and energy conservation equations are
given by Eqs.(II.3), (II.9) and (11.12) respectively. However, these
equations can be further simplified for the flow conditions considered
in this Chapter. The range of applications of the model presented below
extends over heat fluxes below CHF, the channel-area averaged void
fraction 0.3, and the bubbly flow regime. The channel width (or pipe
diameter) is much larger than the average bubble diameter. The time
scale of the transients must be greater than the time scale of bubble
formation and collapse process (moderate transients).
Based on the arguments made in Chapter II, the second and third
terms on the RHS of Eq.(II.9) can be neglected and Eq.(II.9) can be
written as,
d p*.
at (V k vk} + Vo(<W k V = -“A + 7o[ak(V ik
° r
+ a„
k pk^k+ r,v
k kl + mkl + Mkw (III. 1)
In the subcooled boiling region, the effect of viscous heating,
and the energy source due to the interfacial pressure differences, are
negligible as compared to the Interfacial heat transfer. Thus the
second and third terms on the right hand side of Eq. (11.12) can be
dropped, to obtain,
50
> > >
(III.2)
Constitutive Relations for Two-Fluid Model of Subcooled Bnl liner;
The correlations recommended by different authors for the
constitutive relations of two-fluid model for a broad range of flow and
heat transfer conditions are collected in Chapter II. Since they have
been obtained from different sources, an arbitrarily selected set of
correlations may not be contain closure laws incompatible with each
other. In order to avoid such situations, the compatibility of various
hydrodynamic and heat transfer correlations has been extensively
tested. Another problem of concern in formulating the model was to
select the best mechanistic constitutive relations for the most
significant terms in the momentum and energy equations, namely the
bubble diameter and heat flux partitioning at the wall. The resultant
model is given below.
The turbulence viscosity used in the present model is a modified
form of the turbulence model given by Michiyoshi & Serizawa (1984), as
outlined in Chapter II. The bubble-induced turbulent viscosity is given
by Michiyoshi & Serizawa (1984) as,
(III.3)
where D(y ) is a damping factor given by,
51
D(y+ ) = [ 1 - e- ^ /16 f (III.4)
and,
(III.5)
v ~ v 4 p
with y being the distance from the wall. The wall-generated turbulence
viscosity is obtained from a single-phase flow solution with the same
flow rate and the same geometry using the k-e equations, given by Eqs.
(11.29), (11.30) and (11.31).
The interfacial forces, the fifth term on the RHS of Eq.(III.1),
was partitioned according to Eq.(11.40). For the drag coefficient,
Ishii’s correlation for small bubbles, Eq.(11.43), has been used, and
for the virtual mass force, Drew & Lahey correlation, Eq. (11.54), has
been applied. The effect of the lift force as given by Eq. (11.56) is to
concentrate the bubbles near the wall (the direction of the lift force
is towards the low velocity). This force is important in predicting
phase distribution in adiabatic flows (where peaks occur near the
wall). In heated channels, however, especially in the subcooled boiling
section of the channel, the vapor is formed at the wall, so that the
phase distribution is governed by phase-change mechanisms rather than
by hydrodynamic mechanisms. Hence the effect of hydrodynamic lift force
is negligible.
Based on the arguments made in Chapter II, at high subcooling the
diameter of the bubbles can be assumed to be equal to that at
detachment from the wall, d . This parameter, in turn, is calculated

Bw
as a part of the wall heat flux, and is described later in this
52
Chapter. At low subcooling, the hydrodynamically-controlled bubble
diameter, d„ , is calculated from Eq.(11.52). For intermediate

B,oax
liquid subcoolings, the bubble diameter is interpolated between d and
Bw
d
B,sax
.
At moderate heat fluxes (i.e. high enough to cause nucleation in
the subcooled liquid section of the channel, but lower than the CHF),
the vapor phase superheat is only a few degrees. Considering the low
density and heat capacity of the vapor phase, even at high void
fractions (around 0.3) the energy carried by the vapor phase in excess
of the saturation enthalpy of the vapor phase is very small. Also, the
heat transfer from the bulk of the vapor phase (bubbles) to the
interface is small compared to the heat transfer on the liquid side of
the interface, and can be neglected altogether. Consequently, the
accuracy of predictions of the vapor phase superheat" plays a very minor
role on the overall energy balance and the calculated rate of phase
change.
When the liquid is subcooled, the interface can be assumed to be
at saturation. When the liquid is superheated, the vapor phase is also
superheated, and the interface temperature can be assumed to be at the
liquid temperature (this is consistent with the argument made above on
the importance of the vapor superheat). Thus, the interface temperature
can be expressed as,
(III.6 )
By specifying the interface temperature, the phase change rate can
53
be calculated from Eqs. (11.62) and (11.63), where the heat transfer
coefficient between the interface and the liquid phase is given by
Eq.(11.65).
The last term in Eq. (III.2), the wall heat flux, is the dominant
term in the energy equation. Because of the importance of this term in
the overall predictions, a mechanistic model for the partitioning of the
wall heat flux was sought.
The mechanisms of heterogeneous nucleation (nucleation at a cavity
in the wall) and bubble growth have been investigated by many authors.
A concise discussion of these mechanisms can be found in Lahey & Moody
(1984), Hewitt (1981) and Bergles (1981). For our purposes, it is
sufficient to mention that, due to a very small contact area between the
bubbles and the wall, the wall heat flux is almost entirely transferred
to the liquid phase, and the bubble growth is supported by the liquid
superheat in the vicinity of a growing bubble. As sketched in Fig.II.2,
the heat transfer from a thin layer of liquid between the bubble and
the wall, the so called microlayer, to the interface involves
microscopic phenomena, and cannot be described by correlations such as
those given by Eqs.(11.62) or (11.64).
Instead of modeling the microscopic phenomena described above, we
can look at a global picture. Since the superheated liquid in the
microlayer eventually evaporates and causes the bubbles to grow, it can
be assumed that a portion of the wall heat flux is directly used to
form vapor. After the bubble detaches, the volume vacated by the bubble
is filled with the cooler liquid. The heat transfer from the wall to
54
the relatively cold liquid has a rapid transient nature. This mode of
heat transfer is called quenching. Outside of the influence area of a
growing and detaching bubble, the heat transfer at the wall is in a
single phase heat transfer mode.
Based on this description of the governing phenomena, the wall
heat rate can be partitioned as follows,
„ A’’’ = q" A " ' + qM A’*' + q" . A’*’ (III. 7)

lw lw w,e w »»,q w u,l<p w
We can also partition the interfacial Jump condition for energy as,
(rA }
1 fg cond
“ <rA J ,,
1 fg wall
= q"AJ
11 1
’* + q" A’”
w,e w
(III.8)
and
-<rA
1
}
fg wall w,e A'”
w (III.9)
The interfacial area density and the interfacial heat flux can be
obtained from the correlations given for inner regions of the channel.
Now, we need to determine the component terms in Eq. (111.7).
The evaporation rate per unit volume, - r , can be written in terms
of the average bubble diameter at detachment, d , bubble detachment

Bw
frequency, f, and the number of nucleation sites per unit wall area,
N", as,
-r = J irdf p f N V A ’’• (III. 10)

1 o Bw V w
From Eq.(III.9), the evaporation heat flux becomes,
q"
w,o
= 6
i ndfp
Bw v
fN"hfg (III. 11)
Assuming that the quenching heat transfer occurs in a cylindrical
column of the bubble radius at detachment, the solution to the
55
transient heat transfer problem in such a liquid column is given by
DelValle & Kenning (1985) as,
2k (T -T )
q" = t fA --- ■ * ----------------- (III.12)
H’q q q Atlt/pc
q 1 *1 p
where t is the period between two subsequent detaching bubbles, and A

q q
is the ratio of the wall area influenced by the quenching to the total
wall area. A^ is recommended as 4 times the projected area of a bubble
at detachment (DelValle & Kenning, 1985). Here, it should be noted that
the quenching heat flux given by Eq. (III. 12) is only a rough estimate.
The last part of the wall heat flux, the heat flux to the liquid
phase outside of the influence area of the bubbles, can be obtained
from the Reynolds analogy as,
q”M
19 = A 19C h
p c u 1
1 p,l (T w
-T 1
) (III. 13)
where A ^ = 1-A^ is the ratio of thesingle phaseflow area not
affected by the existence of the bubblestothetotalwall area.
The experimental data Indicates that the bubble diameter is not
strongly dependent on the wall heat flux (DelValle & Kenning, 1985),
but is a function of the liquid subcooling (Tolubinsky & Kostanchuk,
1970). However, the effect of liquid velocity is not taken as a
parameter in the studies cited above. Unal (1976) used a mechanistic
model based on a rather large data base, to express the bubble diameter
as,
2 .42ol0"5p°'70Sa
d = ---- — ----------------------- (III.14)
Bw VbT
where
h (i [c ,/(0.013h Pr1,7)]1/3
C = f9 pl---------- (III. IB)
[«r/(pi-pv )g] '
AT
b = b / /p,)
2(l-p i \ (III.17)
v 1
| (uÔ. 61)0’47 for u > 0.61 m/s

* = -I (III. 18)
for u < 0.61 m/s
The range of this correlation is,
0.1 < P < 17.7 MPa
0.47 < < 10.64 MW/m2
0.08 < < 9.15 m/s

ui
3. < AT < 86 °C
sab
0.08 < d < 1.24 mm
The data of Tolubinsky & Kostanckuk (1970) indicates that, at low
subcooling, the bubble diameter varies almost linearly with subcooling.
At subcoolings lower than 3°C, the bubble diameter can be obtained by
extrapolat ion.
Concerning the bubble frequency, most of the available data and
models are related to pool boiling. A theoretical model for the bubble
detachment frequency is given by Shoukri (1978). Almost all
investigators agree that a relationship exists between the bubble
diameter and the bubble detachment frequency. Ceumern-Lindenstjerna
(1977) gives a correlation between the bubble diameter and the
57
frequency as,
4 gAp
f (III.19)
The active nucleation site density, N", is mainly a function of
the material and finishing of the wall, and of the wall heat flux or
superheat. Such correlations are given by Sultan & Judd (1978),
Cornwell (1978) etc. In particular, the data of Lemmert & Chawla (1977)
yield the following relationship,
III.2. THE APPLICATION OF DRIFT FLUX MODEL TO SUBCOOLED BOILING
The drift-flux model is given in Chapter II by Eqs. (11.71) through
(11.75). These equations can be transformed into a different form,
which is more convenient for numerical analysis. Namely,
Mixture continuity equation:
(III.21)
Vapor continuity equation (void propagation equation):
d<Ct> „ 8<a> _
(III.22)
at k az p
where
dC dV
C = C <J> + V + <a> <j>-j-A-
0
+
j. 9 (III.23)
k o J gj ° d<ot> d<oc>
Liquid energy equation:
(III.24)
58
The momentum equation is given by Eq. (11.74). However,
Eqs.(III.21) - (III.24) can be solved separately, and the calculated
void fraction and flow rate used to obtain the pressure distribution
along the channel. In particular, this is true if the inlet velocity is
a given function of time.
The relation between the void fraction and the quality is given
by,
<x>
<0t> = (III.25)
P„ P V
9 9J
<x> + -2- (l-<x>)
P«
The drift-flux parameters CQ and V for bubbly flow regime are
given by Ishii (1977) as,

■
Pa
9 -18«X>,
s 1.2 - 0. 2 (1 - e (III.26)
* *1
1/4
■ <rg (p -p ) 1.7S
V = (C -l)<j> + y~2 l 9 (l-<a>) (III.27)
<jJ o
P1P9
Although the drift flux parameters given by Eqs. (III.26) and (III.27)
appear to be functions of void fraction and superficial velocity, the
dependency is quite weak, and the effect of these dependencies on the
overall results is barely noticeable for the problems considered in this
Chapter.
The phase change term in the drift flux model is given by Park
et.al. (1986) as,
59
*1
where h is the liquid bulk enthalpy at the axial location where the
la
incipient boiling is assumed to start (the Net Vapor Generation Point).
Correlations for the net vapor generation point are given by many
authors, including Griffith et.al. (1958), Bowring (1962), Levy (1966),
EPRI correlation (Ansari et.al. 1981), etc. In the present analysis the
Saha-Zuber (1974) correlation is employed, given by,
q"P c
0.0022 H -pl for Pe < 70000
k
(III.29)
for Pe > 70000
The wall temperature can be calculated from the Jens-Lottes
(1951) correlation in the boiling region,
q" = 3.312 107 k (T - T )4 (III.30)

w sat
where
exp ( 4p / 6.2073 108)

K (III.31)
It should be mentioned that, while the boiling process is assumed
to start effectively at the net vapor generation point, the effect of
boiling on the wall temperature is seen soon after the wall temperature
reaches the nucleatioii: threshold (the onset-of-boiling point). However,
prior to the net vapor generation point the newly formed bubbles
collapse Immediately, so that they do not affect the overall flow
60
conditions of the liquid phase.
III.3. NUMERICAL SOLUTION METHOD
The equations of the multi-dimensional two-fluid model were solved
using a two-phase flow code, PHOENICS, Versions 1.3 and 1.4 (Rosten &
Spalding, 1987). The PHOENICS code is a solver of parabolic, elliptic
or hyperbolic partial differential equations, using a finite difference
scheme. The integration over time is carried out by either a fully
implicit or fully explicit scheme. The PHOENICS code is specifically
designed for the simulations of single-phase or two-phase flows, and
has a variety of built-in models. It also offers the user the freedom
of implementing newly developed additional models.
The calculations were performed on two computers, VAX 11/750 and
MicroVAX II in the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering
Physics at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and on a CRAY-2 computer
of the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at University of
Illinois.
A listing of the subroutines, where the constitutive relations of
the of model used in the analysis are implemented, is given in Appendix
A. Since the calculation of heat flux partitioning at the wall is too
complicated and computer-time consuming to carry out during the
iterations of the overall solution process, stand-alone parametric
calculations have been performed, the results of which have been
tabulated in terms of the various wall heat flux components as
functions of the velocity and liquid subcooling for a given set of
61
physical properties and heat fluxes. The listing of the routine,
HEATFLUX.FOR, which calculates the heat flux partitioning at the wall,
is also given in Appendix A.
To integrate the continuity, momentum and energy equations of the
two-fluid model, the heat flux into each phase and the rate of
evaporation constitute the boundary conditions at the wall (in addition
to the no-slip condition in the momentum equation). The wall
temperature is recovered after the integration of the flow and
temperature field, by using another interpolation table that comes as a
part of HEATFLUX.FOR.
The PHOENICS code has been checked for many simple cases to verify
that it is bug-free and that the solution satisfies the fundamental
conservation principles. It was discovered that the PHOENICS built-in
sources of the momentum and energy equations associated with the phase
change were incorrect. The necessary changes have been made and the
resultant phase-change sources, given by Eq.(II.9) and (11.12), have
been coded in the subroutine GROUND (a listing of which is given in
Appendix A).
III.4. MODEL VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION:
Even though the correlations proposed by different authors may
look differently, using one correlation or another for an interfacial
exchange term does not necessarily make a noticeable difference in the
overall results. To determine the constitutive relations that have a
significant effect on the overall results, a series of tests were
62
performed. In each test, different correlations were used for one
closure relation, keeping all the other models the same. The geometry
of the test section and the flow and heat transfer conditions are
listed in Table III.1. All the tests were centered around a set of
correlations given in the previous section and summarized in Table
III.2. The axial void fraction and temperature distributions are shown
in Figs.III.1 through III.5. As seen, the effects of the correlations
used for the drag force, virtual mass force and the interfacial heat
transfer coefficient, are very minor. The most important constitutive
relations were found to be those for the bubble diameter or interfacial
area density, and the partitioning of heat flux at the wall. This is
the reason why a more mechanistic model for partitioning of the heat
flux at the wall had to be developed. Taking into account that the
subcooled boiling portion of a boiling channel at medium heat fluxes
has been of interest in the present work, the model formulated here is
limited to bubbly flows only, i.e. are valid as long as the average
void fraction stays below 0.3.
The resultant model, summarized in Table III.2, has been compared
against the experimental data of Bartolomei & Chanturia (1967), Rouhani
(1966) and St.Pierre (1965). The average void fraction, and liquid
temperatures for each data set are shown in Figs. III.6, III.7 and
III.8, respectively. The first two data sets are for a pipe, the last
data set is for a parallel-plate channel. Also shown in Fig.III.6 are
the average void fraction and the average liquid temperature predicted
by the drift-flux model described in Chapter II. As seen from Figs.
63
III.6 and III.7, good agreement has been obtained between the
predictions made by the present model and the experimental data. There
is a scattered discrepancy between the predictions and St.Pierre’s
data, as shown in Fig. III.8. The data indicates that the void fraction
decreases after a distance of 1.25 m from the inlet. One possible
explanation is that a flow regime transition occurred there. However,
as the flow regime changes from bubbly to slug or churn flow, only the
rate of increase in the void fraction, not the void fraction itself, is
expected to be reduced due to a higher slip ratio in the presence of
large bubbles. The decrease in the measured void fraction can only be
attributed to the scatter in the data or measurement errors. The effect
of developing inlet conditions can be also seen in Fig. III.8. Since no
other data are available concerning the lateral void fraction
distribution in subcooled boiling, the results of St.Pierre, despite
the considerable data scattering (even in the average void fraction),
have been compared against the results of the present model’s
calculations. As shown in Fig. III.9, the basic trends agree quite
well, althogh considerable quantitative differences can be noticed.
Given the fact that the lateral distributions were measured using a
narrow-window gamma-ray-attenuation technique in a narrow 11 mm thick
test channel, substantial scatter in the collected data can be
suspected.
64
TABLE III.l
The geometry and the flow and heat transfer conditions for
the test cases in Figures III.l through III.5.
Pipe diameter 0.0154 m

Wall heat flux 5.7 10s W/m2
Inlet mass flux 900 kg/m2s
System pressure 4.5 Mpa
TABLE III.2
The set of correlations used in the multi-dimensional

two-fluid model
Drag coefficient Eq.(11.43)

Virtual mass coefficient 1/2
Bubble diameter -.OOOlCT -T) - 0.0015 m
sat
Interfacial area density Eq.(11.51) with n=4
Interfacial heat transfer coefficient Eq.(11.66)
Wall heat flux partitioning Eqs.(III.7) thru (III.18)
III.5. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF DEVELOPING AND TRANSIENT FLOW CONDITIONS ON
SUBCOOLED BOILING
As discussed in the previous section, the one-dimensional drift-
flux model can predict the axial distributions of cross-section-
averaged void fraction and temperature reasonably well, especially in
uniformly heated channels. In this Section, this one-dimensional model
will be compared against the two-dimensional two-fluid model presented
earlier in this Chapter. The specific phenomena under consideration
are,
1. Steady state conditions:
65
a. theeffect of developing flow,
b. theeffect of partial heating,
2. Unsteady-state conditions:
a. thechannel response to a change In the inlet flow rate,
b. thechannel response to a change in the wallheatflux.
The Lateral Effects in Steadv-State Subcooled Boiling
At high inlet subcoolings in uniformly heated boiling channels,
the velocity and temperature assume their fully developed profiles
prior to the onset of boiling. Most existing experimental data refer to
such conditions. However, when the inlet subcooling is reduced, the net
vapor generation point falls inside the developing flow region. Since
the vapor generation is initiated by the near-wall temperature, not the
bulk temperature, correlations using the bulk temperature as a
parameter predict the net vapor generation point closer to the inlet
than its actual position.
Needless to say, the temperature distribution obtained from a
single phase solution alone is insufficient for making a correction in
the net vapor generation point correlation. As mentioned in the
previous sections, there is some vapor formation between the
onset-of-boiling point and the net vapor generation point. Even though
the volume of the vapor phase formed in this region is very low, the
temperature profile is highly distorted as compared to the
single-phase-only temperature profile. This is mainly due to a high
latent heat of evaporation.
66
An analysis aimed at introducing a correction term to the
Saha-Zuber correlation (Eq.III.50) in order to account for the
developing flow has been performed using the present 2-D model. The
criterion used to define the net vapor generation point has been
selected to be the void fraction near the wall rather than the
temperature there. First, two-dimensional calculations were performed
for a high inlet subcooling, and the void fraction near the wall was
determined at a distance from the inlet at which the bulk enthalpy is
equal to the enthalpy given by the Saha-Zuber correlation at the net
vapor generation point. Once the void fraction near the wall at the net
vapor generation point was determined, the inlet subcooling was reduced
and the axial location of the same void fraction at the same radial
distance from the wall was tracked. The average enthalpy at this point
was used as the enthalpy at the net vapor generation point. An example
is shown in Fig. III.10.
This procedure was repeated for a matrix of wall heat fluxes, mass
fluxes and pipe diameters, given in Table III.3. The final results are
shown in Fig. III. 11. As seen there, the effect of pipe diameter is
minor. By introducing a correction factor, ■>), only as a function of the
mass flux and heat flux, the Saha-Zuber correlation can be modified to
account for the entrance effect in the form of,
hf " hd " Ihf ‘ (hd W (1_7,) (III.32)
where (h ) is the enthalpy at the net vapor generation point given

d S-Z
by the Saha-Zuber correlation (Eq.III.50), and is given by,
67
GAh , GAh •
in I _ in
D = 0.044 — -P- exp 1-0.0223 — ^ 1 + exp ■0.0505
TABLE III.3
The matrix used to derive a correction to the Saha-Zuber correlation

for the entrance effect
Pipe diameter 1/ 2 " 1” 2"

Reynolds number 75000 135000 200000
Heat flux from 94000 to 463000 W/m2
Pressure 45 bar.
Another aspect of steady-state subcooled boiling, which has been
investigated, is concerned with the axial distribution of wall heat
flux. Since one-dimensional models are usually tested for either
uniformly heated channels or, in particular, adiabatic (thermal
-equilibrium) flows, it was deemed important to compare the results of
one-dimensional model calculations against those obtained from the
two-dimensional model. In particular, a partially heated channel has
been considered, uniformly heated right from the entrance, and having
an unheated section further downflow. If the unheated length is long
enough, the two-phase mixture at the exit of the (subcooled) boiling
section should eventually return to the thermodynamic equilibrium
conditions. The results are shown in Fig.III.12 for two values of the
heated length. In the first case (Fig. III. 12a), the average enthalpy of
the two-phase mixture was slightly higher than the liquid saturation
enthalpy, while the bulk of liquid was still subcooled. As a result,
the average void fraction continued to increase along the unheated
section, due to the flow slow-down in the high (although rapidly
68
decreasing) vapor concentration region, to eventually reach a constant
value of 0.2. This value was close to the void fraction calculated by
the 1-D model. The latter reached a maximum at the heated channel exit
and then slightly decreased. In the other case, (Fig. III.12b), the
exit subcooling of 3°C was already high enough to cause the void
fraction calculated by the two-dimensional model to start diminishing
quickly in the unheated section. In contrast, the drift flux model
predicted only a very slow void fraction decrease, substantially
overestimating the overall vapor concentration in this region.
Lateral Effects in Transient Subcooled Boiling
As mentioned earlier, the state variables in one-dimensional
models are the bulk temperature, velocity and void fraction, all
averaged over the channel cross-section using steady-state
distributions. During transients, however, the lateral distributions
may substantially change. In this section, changes in lateral
distributions in various transients will be investigated in order to
quantify the errors which nay be introduced by assuming quasi-steady
state distributions of the state variables for one-dimensional
models.
Roy (1975) investigated the effect of lateral distributions in
transient single phase (liquid) flow as a result of sinusoidal
oscillations in the inlet flow rate, including the effect of wall
inertia. In Roy’s study, two-dimensional experimental results were
compared against a one-dimensional analytical solution. In particular,
69
an analytical solution was obtained based on one-dimensional liquid
velocity and temperature distributions and a one-dimensional (in the
lateral direction) wall temperature distribution. Since the wall
thickness used in Roy’s study was very small, the effect of lateral
temperature distribution in the wall can be neglected. Using a
lumped-parameter model of transient wall heat conduction, an explicit
analytical solution for a one-dimensional channel can be obtained, as
shown below.
The equations to be solved for a periodic single phase flow with
constant heat generation rate in the wall are,
3T ^ 3T P.
= q^ (III.34)
pCr at u az
x-s
0T
pwc pWAV do
_Ji=:q*” Aw - q" P„ (III.35)
w H
where heat conduction in the axial direction has been neglected, both
in the wall and in the liquid. The heat flux from the wall to the
liquid is expressed as,
q"
w = H (Tw - T) (III.36)
where H is the single-phase heat transfer coefficient, which can be
obtained from the Dlttus-Boelter correlation. By perturbing
Eqs.(III.34), (III.35) and (III.36), taking the Laplace transform, and
integrating the resultant equations in the axial direction, z, we
obtain,
70
q
H0 f_ ST .1
a
H
*-o I® 1+ST " I f r r - i n i *
ST = 1 - exp
- + a yt—
u 1+ST
(III.37)
where
p c A HP
T = ~V Pp w • ■ a = g252 (ii i. 38)
“ o h W oC p
The index "0" refers to the steady state values; the hat,
indicates a Laplace-transformed quantity, and m is the power used in
the Dittus-Boelter correlation,
Nu = C RemPr°‘33 (III.39)
and is equal to 0.8. The coefficient C, in Eq. (III.39) is 0.0295 for
Freon. For a sinusoidal perturbation in the inlet velocity of,
Su = SuQ sin (wt) (III.40)
the inverse Laplace transform of Eq. (II1.37) is (see Appendix B for
details),
q"Su r ,
ST = -J— - aw f(t) - e-nzh(t) J (III.41)
where,
. r3[(m-l)(au t+1) + 1] -(au x+Dt/r

f(t) ----- * + 2---------- e 0
(au x+l)w2 (au t +1) [x2w2+(au t +1)2]
° ° 0 (III.42)
T2w2(m-1) - (auQT+l) t [(m-l)(au t+1) + 1]

” ~~i T z -------- 5— cos + -g g~-~"°--------- sln (ut)
w [t w +(au t+1) ] w [t w +(au t+1) ]
o o
71
oo
h(t) = f
’ -i— f“ ]k I
0 Ck! )2tT J T |
j— '
I 1____ jk
(auox+l)w2 exp T
(-1)
t 3[(m-l)(au t+1) + 1] (au+i)(z/u-t)

+ --------- -2 --------- m e 0T 0 Ik (au)
(au T+1) [x Ci> +(au T+1) ] 0 exp 0
0 0
22
t w (m-1) - (au t+1)
______________ o____
[ «s("(t-jj-)) I*OB * sin[w(t-2-)] Ikln ]
(4>Z [T2w2+(au T+1)2] L uo
0
[(
t•. n im
u -l
i)M(
oau u tt+1)
-rxj +
T 1]
u r r r *\ t
+ ----- — -------- — f Sin|w(t-5_)| Ik - cos|w(t-— )| Ik 1
w [t w +(au t +1) ] I- *- o J 008 *• uo J sln
o
(III.43)
and the integrals in Eqs. (III.42) and (III.43) are,
t-z/u_
. [I vae ^ d v
I*u| (x) = (III.44)
t-z/u
0
I"-
■k, =
- f| vke"v/T sin wv dv (III.45)
sln Jo
t-z/u
o
rk .
f vke -v/T
[ = I I cos wv dv (III.46)
J
o
The Integrals given by Eqs. (III.44), (III.45) and (III.46) can be
evaluated by a recurrence method. Terms of the order higher than seven
in the series in Eq.(III.43), are negligibly small. After a sufficient
time, the exponential terms involving time decay off, and the solution
72
can be expressed as,
ST = STq sin (wt + <j>) (III.47)
In Fig. III.13, the results obtained from the analytical solution
given above, as well as from one- and two-dimensional solutions using
PHOENICS are compared against Roy’s calculations for a frequency of the
inlet velocity perturbations of 0.2 Hz. The flow and heat transfer
conditions for Fig.III.13 are given in Table III.4. As seen from the
phase angle curve in Fig.III.13, the lumped wall approximation does
not introduce any substantial inaccuracies. However, the difference in
the amplitude between the two analytical solutions is difficult to
explain. The amplitude given by Roy (1975) is even higher than the
value for the case without wall inertia, whereas it is expected that,
in the present case, the thermal inertia of the wall should attenuate
the amplitude of temperature oscillations.
TABLE III.4
The Flow and Heat Transfer Conditions Used in Figs. III. 13 and III. 14
Pipe diameter 0.02438 m

Vail thickness 0.00051 m
Inlet velocity 0.637 m/s
Perturbation in inlet velocity 0.0637 m/s
Liquid density 1450 kg/m
Liquid viscosity 6.75ol0"4 Pa s
Liquid specific heat 952 J/kg C
Liquid thermal conductivity 0.07575 W/m C
Wall density 7800 kg/m3
Wall specific heat 502 J/kg C
The distributions of amplitude and phase angle along the pipe
73
radius are shown in Fig. III.14. It can be observed from Figs. III. 13
and 111.14 that the trends of the numerical calculations using PHOENICS
agree well with the analytical and experimental data. It is known that
the implicit solution scheme for transients is dissipative. This
feature of PHOENICS causes the standing temperature wave to smear out.
Consequently, the discrepancy in the phase angle increases as the
distance gets closer to the first node of temperature wave
(approximately at z=3.15 m from the inlet, as shown in Fig.III.13). It
is seen from Fig.III.14 that the experimental phase angle substantially
changes between z=1.21 and z=1.638 m. Considering that the length of
the temperature wave is 3.15 m, this sudden change remains unexplained.
The results can be summarized as follows. In a single phase flow,
the temperature oscillations caused by periodic inlet flow rate may
vary significantly across the pipe diameter. However, the cross-
sectionally averaged temperature oscillations do not show a large
difference from the one-dimensional approximation, at least at moderate
frequencies.
From the viewpoint of subcooled boiling, the temperature variation
in the single phase region is important in calculating the net vapor
generation point. It can be observed from Fig.III. 13. that by using
the bulk temperature instead of the near-wall temperature in a
correlation for the net vapor generation point, the error made in the
phase angle is between 10° to 20° for 0.2 Hz oscillations in the inlet
flow rate. This difference in the phase lag is solely due to the
temperature distribution in the single phase flow region. The fact that
74
there are already bubbles formed at the net vapor generation point
constitutes another aspect of subcooled boiling dynamics. The results
of a study in this regard are given below.
The multi-dimensional two-fluid model presented in this Chapter
has been used to study the response of a boiling channel to the wall
heat flux oscillations. Although the model was extensively tested
against steady-state experimental data, to verify the model further for
transients, its numerical predictions were compared against the
available experimental data. Starting with initial conditions as given
in Figs.III.8 and III.9., a wall heat flux oscillation with an
amplitude of 10% at 0.2 Hz. was applied to a channel similar to that
used in the St.Pierre’s experiments. The amplitude and phase angle of
the void fraction and temperatures are shown in Figs.III.15 and
III.16. The data of St.Pierre (1965) is also shown in Fig.III.15.
However, the conditions of the predictions and the experiment are not
exactly the same. In the experimental data the amplitude of the wall
heat flux oscillations was not kept constant, but varied from 7% to
15%. Although the heat flux oscillations data given by St.Pierre (1965)
have been normalized to the 10% amplitude, they are not necessarily
identical to the results that would be obtained if a 10% heat flux
oscillation were used for all the data points shown. As in the
steady-state cases, the discrepancy between the data and the
predictions can be interpreted as caused by the scatter in the data.
Another set of flow and heat transfer conditions has also been
investigated, using the channel parameters given by Bartolemei (1967)
75
as the Initial conditions. In Fig.III.17, the boiling channel’s
response is shown to the wall heat flux oscillations with an amplitude
of 20% and periods ranging from 0.25 sec to 8 sec. The void fraction
predictions of the multi-dimensional (2-D) two-fluid model are compared
in Fig.III.17 against the drift-flux model for 0.5 Hz. oscillations.
Fig.111.18 shows the time-dependent position of the net vapor
generation point from both 1-D and 2-D calculations for different
frequencies of heat flux oscillations. The location of the net vapor
generation point in the 1-D model was obtained based on the void
fraction criterion described in the previous section. It is seen from
Fig.III.19 that the drift-flux model using a quasi steady-state
correlation for the net vapor generation point starts diverging at a
frequency of 0.25 Hz. The plots in Fig.III.19 show significant
differences in both the amplitude and the phase shift of the location
of the net vapor generation point between the 1-D and 2-D predictions
for frequencies higher than 1 Hz.
1.50 1.00
0.90
1.25
< jl> 0.80
0)
fraction
E 0.70
1.00
o 0.60
<jg>
void
0.75 0.50
fshll. 1984
0.40
Average
Ishll & Zuber. 1978
0.50
Wollla, 1976 <00 0.30
0.20
0.25
0.10
0.00 0.00
0.50 0.80 1.10 1.40 1.70 2.00
Distance from inlet (m)

Figure III.l. The effect of drag coefficient correlations in subcooled
boiling.
-o
cn
1.00
0.90
1.25
(0
<i,> 0.80
fraction
E 0.70
1.00
a 0.60
void
0.75 with virtual m a s s 0.50
TJ
c without virtual m a s s
0.40
Average
0.50
<00 0.30
0.20
0.25
0.10
0.00
0.50 0.80 1.10 1.40 1.70 2.00
Figure III.2. The effect of virtual mass In subcooled boiling.
-j
78
U O Ô E JJ. P jO A 06E J0A V
In subcooled
,s
The effect of bubble diameter correlations

0
C
E
o
o
o
c
(0
boiling.
+■»
cn
Q III.3.
Figure
-i in
o in o in © in o d
in <M o
(S/UU) < ° f> PUB < 'f >
20 1.00
10 0.90
0.80
fraction
-10 0.70
McAdams, 1954
<T,>
-20 0.60
Wolfert 1978
void
(0 -3 0 0.50
i-
-4 0 0.40
Average
-5 0 <a> 0.30
-6 0 0.20
-7 0 0.10
-8 0 0.00
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00
Figure III.4. The effect of Interfacial heat transfer correlation In

subcooled boiling.
80
o
o_ Drag
o Force
CM
Virtual Mass
Force _
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75

Distance from inlet (m )
Heat flux x 1 0 6
Single phase Evaporation
Quenching
Distance from inlet (m )
Figure III.5. Distributions of interfacial forces and wall heat flux

modes; same conditions as in Fig III.6 .
20 1.00
10 — o -— o ---------- c r — " o ---------- ; 0.90
0.80
fraction
-10 2-D Two-fluid
0.70
U -20 Drift Flux
0.60
O Bartolomei, 1967
-3 0
void
h 0.50
-4 0
I
0.40
Average
j__ -5 0
<00 0.30
-6 0
-7 0 0.20
-8 0 0.10
-9 0 0.00
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00
Figure III.6 . Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

D=0.0154 m, q"=5.7ol08 W/m2, G=900 kg/m2s, P==4.5 MPa. oo
30 1.00
20
M 0.80
10
fraction
a 0
Q) 0.60
-10 2 -0 two—fluid
void
5
(d
b_ A Rauhanl. 1966
0) -20
a 0.40
Average
E
a) -3 0
I"
-4 0
0.20
-5 0
-6 0 L— 0.00
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Figure III.7. Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

D=0.012 m, q"=9.2ol08 W/m2, G=1450 kg/m2s, P=3 MPa. m
1.00
Wall temperahra
0.80
fraction
O
2-0 two-fUd
0.60
Drift flue
Canterllna terrpcrutira
void
1988
<D '
0.40
Average
I °
I? Average temperahre
-2
-3 020
Void fraction
0.00
030 0.60 0.7S 0.90 1.05 1.50
Figure III.8 . Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

fraction in a vertical uniformly heated parallel
channel;
D=0.011 m, q"=1.44<>105 W/m2, G=636 kg/m2s, P=2.76 MPa. 00
o
1.00 0.60
0.90
0.50
(/) 0.80
E
0.70
0.40
fraction
+j
O 0.60
O
> 0.50 Tw o—fluid model 0.30
Void fraction
Void
.S3 0.40
o St. Pierre. 1 9 6 5
«♦- 0.20
L.
Q) 0.30
a
D
(/) 0.20
0.10
0.10
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
y/H
Figure III.9. Lateral distributions of superficial velocities and void
fraction at 0.65 m. from inlet; same conditions as in
Figure III.8 .
0.50
o
tri
WaK temperature
0.25
Near wall
temperature
0.20
Centerline
temperature
Void fraction
0.10 0.15
Channel
inlet Void fraction
0.05
0.00
Distance (m)
Figure III.10. Temperature and void fraction distributions in a heated
channel; z is the location of the void detachment point
for fully developed flow, as obtained from the Saha-Zuber
correlation. 00
01
86
0 fe
Dt/«2) M
V 234000 0.0127 135000

© 85000 0.0254 135000
A 117100 0.0254 135000
_A| « a 160400 0.0254 200000
o 80200 0.0508 200000
0.4 2.8
hf - IhJs.
Figure III. 11. Void detachment point for different pipe diameters and
various heat transfer conditions.
87
Void
temperature (C) Fraction
— Drill Flux Model

2-0 Model
id bulk temperature
Near— woll void fraction
Average void
fraction
r n rfi 11 1 | 1 r i i | r n i | i i i i | ir
0 1 2 3 4 5
(«)
Void
Temperature (C) Fraction
Drill Flux Model

2-D Model
uid bulk temperature
^Neor— woP void fraction
Average void
fraction
II i I |"i I I I"| IT'I I | I I Tl | I I

I 2 3 4 5
(b)
Figure III.12. Void fraction and temperature distributions in a

partially heated pipe;
D=0.0254, q"=3.885«108 W/m2, G=630.4 kg/m2s, P=3 MPa,
(a) Heated length = 3.45 m,
(b) Heated length - 2.8 m.
0.40 200
Lumped well
0.35 (analytical)
Phoenlca, 1 -0
0.30 150
Roy. 1978
(analytical)
(C).
0.25
O
angle
0.20 100
0.15
0.10 50
0.05
0.00
0 1 2 3 4
Figure III.13. Amplitude and phase angle of temperature oscillations
with respect to inlet velocity oscillations in a heated
single-phase pipe (Refrigerant);
co
0=0.02438 m, q"=1.063 W/m2, Gq=924 kg/m2, P=0.3 MPa. CO
160
O) 120
Lines: predictions
Figures; Roy. 1975
JZ 80
a t 0 .7 4 5 m
O — at. 0 .9 4 2 m
40 V a t 1.210 m
a t 1.63B m
0.00 0.25 0 .5 0 0.75 1.00
Radius (cm)
Figure III.14. Lateral distributions of the amplitude and phase angle

of temperature oscillations with respect to inlet
velocity oscillations; same conditions as in Fig. III.13.
03
(0
0.50
-10
0.40
-20
angle
OJ 0.30
-30
Phase
-40
Amplitude
R'edietion
■• Phase angle -50
R-ediction
A Amplitude
StPierre. 1965 O -60
° Phase Angle
StPierre. 1965
0.00 I -70
0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
Distance from inlet <m)
Figure III.15. Amplitude and phase angle of cross-section-averaged void

fraction oscillations following a ±10% sinusoidal
variation in heat flux with a frequency of 0.2 Hz.; same
conditions as in Fig. III.8 . to
o
1.00
-1 0
0.80
-20
0)
•O
-30
angle
a
E 0.60
-40
T"
Q)
Phase
N -50
0.40
Id
E -60
o Amplitudes normalized as
ST -70
0.20
«T„ = r ^ r
0 In
-80
0.00 -90
0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
Distance from inlet <m)
Figure III.16. Amplitude and phase angle of predicted cross-section-

averaged temperature oscillations following 710%
sinusoidal variation in heat flux with a frequency of
0.2 Hz; same conditions as in Fig. I I I . 8.
92
Void
rj— Fraction
o -
At 3.1 m from inlet
a -
Drift flux model
2 —D model
2.7 m from inlet
o - ^\
o -
Time (s)
Figure III.17. Variation of average void fraction following a ±20%

sinusoidal change in wall heat flux with a frequency of
0.5 Hz; same conditions as in Fig. III.6 .
S3
— 2— D Model
CM
- - Drift Flux Model
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6

Time (s)
***-~| i ri i i i i i | r r i n i i i r | i i r i |"vt n -|
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.5
Time (s)
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

W Time (s)
CM .
m
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
Time (s)
co
m
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Time (s)
Figure III.18. Net vapor generation point trajectories as calculated by

1-D and 2-D models for various frequencies of the wall
heat flux oscillations:
a) 4 Hz b) 2 Hz c) 0.5 Hz d) 0.25 Hz e) 0.125 Hz
94
20
_o
to
_o
o
10
Frequency (1/s)
Figure III.19. Phase shift and relative amplitude of the location of

the net vapor generation point in a pipe with sinusoidal
heat flux oscillations, as calculated by 1-D and 2-D
models.
CHAPTER IV.
CONDENSATION IN STRATIFIED FLOW
In the classical condensation problem, saturated or superheated
vapor flows over a cold surface. The heat transfer from vapor to the
cold surface is through a thin layer of condensate that forms on the
surface. The heat transfer and condensation rates are expressed in
terms of a local Nusselt number, which can be obtained approximately by
an analytical solution when the liquid film is laminar. For a turbulent
liquid film, the local Nusselt number is given by empirical
correlations. Condensation of vapor in this configuration is called
Film Condensation. Film condensation for different geometries has been
analyzed by Kutateledze (1963). A recent series of experimental studies
have shown that when vapor comes in contact with subcooled liquid, the
situation which is called direct contact condensation, the local
Nusselt number obtained for film condensation does not predict the
data. As a result of each new experiment, another set of correlations
sire recommended (Celeta et.al.,1987, Kim et.al. 1985, Segev et.al.
1981, Cook et.al., 1981 etc.).
There are mainly two mechanisms governing the condensation in
direct contact. One of them involves the temperature gradients on both
sides of the interface. Since the interfacial jump conditions (see
Section II.2) for energy and mass apply to a small control volume
95
96
around the interface, the condensation rate can be evaluated if the
temperature gradients are known. This will be shown more clearly in the
formulation of the present problem. The other mechanism is related to
the wavy structure of the interface, which is observed at highly
shearing interfaces. The wavy structure of the interface enhances the
condensation rate at least due to increased contact area.
The subject of this chapter is concerned with the two-dimensional
analysis of condensation in stratified counter-current flow, which was
experimentally studied by Bankoff and Lee (1985).
IV.1. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
In the experiments of Bankoff & Lee (1985), condensation of
superheated steam in contact with a film of subcooled water was
observed. The test section was a rectangular channel, 0.38 m wide and
1.27 m long. Two channel heights were used, 0.076 m and 0.028 m. Also,
four different inclination angles of the test section were used in
experiments, 4°, 30°, 33° and 87° from the horizontal. As shown in Fig.
IV. 1, the liquid water entered the test section through an opening near
the upper end of the channel, and was flown down towards the exit near
the lower end. The vapor at a pressure of 0.1 MPa was flowing in the
opposite direction.
The measured flow parameters were: the inlet mass flow rates of
both the liquid and vapor phases, their inlet and exit temperatures,
and the liquid film thickness, steam flow rate and pressure drops at
five different locations along the channel (see Fig. IV. 1).
97
Four different series of experiments were performed for different
inclination angles and channel heights. Details concerning the channel
geometrical configuration for each series are given in Table 4.1, and
the location of individual stations, where the measurements were taken,
is shown in Table IV.2. Each series consisted of a number of runs
characterized by different thermal-hydraulic conditions. The
experimental data sets for eight (8 ) runs selected for numerical
calculations are shown in Tables IV.3 through IV.6 .
IV.2. MODEL DESCRIPTION
Modeling Concent
The modeling concept applied in calculations is based on the
following conclusions drawn from the analysis of the experimental data
discussed in the previous section.
(a) The width of the test section is 5 to 10 times larger than its
height, so that a two-dimensional flow model should be a good
approximation of the actual flow conditions,
(b) The liquid film occupies only a small fraction of the channel
height, so that the channel area filled with vapor remains
approximately constant along the channel length,
(c) The condensation of steam has a very small effect on the liquid
film thickness (the relative change in film thickness between the
channel inlet and exit does not exceed 10%); hence, a constant
thickness of the film can be assumed.
(d) The pressure drop along the channel is very small compared to
the absolute pressure, also, the change in steam bulk temperature
98
is rather small; consequently, the physical properties (such as,
density, viscosity, latent heat of condensation, saturation
temperature, and thermal conductivity) of both liquid water and
steam remain approximately constant.
(e) The calculated Reynolds number (see Table IV.7) indicates that the
flow of vapor is turbulent and that of liquid is laminar for all
the cases under consideration.
According to the above-mentioned observations, the overall model
has been divided into two separate single-phase one-component models,
one for the vapor, the other for the liquid. In each case, physical
properties have been assumed to be constant, allowing for decoupling
(partially, at least) the momentum equation from the energy equation.
The matching conditions at the liquid/vapor interface are: the no slip
condition, equal shear stresses and equal temperature (T =
constant). Other boundary conditions used, include: no slip at the
wall(s), no heat transfer to the walls, and uniform inlet velocity
profiles for both phases.
The steam condensation rate at the interface can be calculated as
the difference between the heat flux on the liquid side and that on the
vapor side. The amount of steam condensed at any axial location is
then used as an outflow term in the conservation equations for the
vapor region and an inflow term in similar equations for the liquid
region.
Equations Used
The generic conservation equations are given by Eq. (II. 1). Under
99
the assumptions made above, the momentum equation for each separate
region-k can be written as,
p V<>v v = fi V2v + rf° - Vp + pg, + F + Tv (IV. 1)

k k k k k =k k kw k ki
where F includes the momentum sources at boundaries, other than the

kw
momentum source associated with phase change. This term is non-zero
only for the control volumes (nodes) adjacent to the boundaries.
As mentioned before, the liquid flow is always laminar, while the
vapor flow is always turbulent. In the letter case, the Prandtl mixing
length was used for the Reynolds stress term, as given in Chapter II.
To evaluate the turbulent viscosity in Eq. (11.26), Nikuradse’s mixing
length formula (Schlichting, 1979) was adopted,
I = | £ 0.14 - 0.08 (IV.2)
where H is the height of the channel (here, the name "channel" refers
to the vapor section of the physical channel), and y a H/2 is the
distance from the interface and/or from the upper wall.
For the boundary conditions of the momentum equations, a no-slip
condition was used both at the walls and at the interface. For a flat
interface, the interface-Jump condition given by Eq.(II.2) reduces to
shear stress balance (i.e. the shear stresses at the vapor and liquid
sides of the interface are equal to each other). Also, using the
condition that the interface has a single velocity as approached from
either side (vi4= v21)> the interface velocity can be uniquely
determined.
The particular form of the energy equation used in present study
100
can be derived from the generic conservation equation, Eq. (II. 1), under
thfe aforementioned assumptions as,
pc Vo(vT ) - k V2! = v o V T + Th (IV.3)

k p, k k k k k k k al
where Eq. (11.64) was used to combine the interfacial heat transfer and
phase change terms.
The last term in Eq. (IV. 3) is zero for the inner control volumes.
Following the assumption that the interface is saturated, for the
control volumes adjacent to the Interface, h =h in the liquid phase

ni 9
(k=l, m=2), and h =h in the vapor phase (k=2, m=l). The phase change
f
rate can be calculated from the interfacial Jump condition given by
Eq. (11.61). Heat transfer from the Interface to phase-k is calculated
from,
«ki - Hk i (T - « t - V <I V - 4 >
The heat transfer coefficient for the laminar liquid phase is,
81 |
H.i ■ w |i— (IV-5)
The heat transfer coefficient on the vapor phase side of the interface
can be obtained from the Reynolds analogy as,
H21 = P vcp ,v U_ C (IV.6 )

o ,v h
The Stanton number, C , is related to the friction factor given by

h
Eq. (11.23), by the expression (White, 1974),
CV2
C c fTV 7)
h 1 + W.StPr0-68- l)*C/2)
101
IV. 3. NUMERICAL APPROACH
In the numerical scheme used In the calculations, the fluid
parameters in each region, i.e. in the vapor region and the liquid film
region, were calculated separately, and an iterative procedure was
developed to match the boundary conditions at the Interface. The
PHDENICS code was used as a solver for the governing two-dimensional
equations in each region.
The matching interfacial conditions included: the same vapor and
liquid velocities, the same shear stress, a constant temperature (T )

sat
along the entire channel, and the heat balance at both sides of the
interface. The calculations were based on a two-level iteration scheme.
In the first round of iterations, the.effect of mass transfer from the
vapor to the liquid on the flow conditions in each region was ignored.
Assuming a given interfacial velocity, the velocity field in the vapor
region was calculated and the resulting shear stress values were used
as boundary conditions for the liquid region. Then, the calculated
velocity distribution in the liquid film was used to modify the
interfacial velocity for the next iteration. And so on, until
satisfactory convergence was obtained in the interfacial velocity
calculated from the consecutive iteration. It should be mentioned that
at this stage of calculations, no use was made of the energy equations
(thanks to the assumed constant properties of both phases). The
Iterative method described above was very fast, so that no more than 5
iterations were necessary to reach the required accuracy. This was
mainly due to the fact that the density of steam was much smaller
102
than that of water and, consequently, the velocity field in the vapor
region was not very sensitive to changes in the interfacial velocity.
In the second round of iterations, the velocity distributions in
both the vapor and liquid regions, calculated previously, were used to
obtain the respective temperature distributions. In particular, the
interfacial heat fluxes were calculated and used to obtain the
condensation rate along the channel. This calculated rate of steam
condensation was then used as. a mass outflow from the vapor region and
a mass inflow to the liquid film. For such modified flow interfacial
conditions, the first round of iterations was repeated, to obtain new
velocity fields in both regions. These, in turn, were used in the
subsequent iterations in the second round.
The two-dimensional, variable-mesh, grid used in the calculations
is shown in Fig. IV. 2. As seen, a fine grid was required near the
channel ends, at both sides along the interface, and near the wall in
the vapor region, but no grid refinement was necessary near the channel
bottom wall.
IV.4. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The calculations were performed for eight different runs, listed
in Table IV.1. The calculated and measured pressure differences between
the steam inlet and each measuring station are show in Fig. IV. 3, and
the steam mass flow rates at each station as given in Figs. IV. 4 and
IV. 5.
As seen in Fig. IV. 3, the measured pressure drop between the steam
inlet and the first station is much higher than between individual
103
stations. This is associated with the geometry of the inlet region,
resulting in a high local pressure loss which was not accounted for in
the present model. In order to eliminate this effect, a common pressure
at the first station has been assumed. The results of calculations for
this case are shown in Figs. IV.3(a) through IV.3(h). In general, the
calculated pressure drops follow similar trends as the experimental
data. The most significant differences are observed in the case of test
C-35.
The pressure drop in the direction of steam flow is caused by the
effect of gravity and friction. On the other hand, the deceleration of
vapor phase due to condensation, reduces the pressure drop. The trends
of both experimental and numerical results are in agreement with this
qualitative argument. However, in test cases A and B (Figs. IV.3a
through IV.3d), the calculated pressure drops are lower than the
experimental data. The difference can be caused by the enhanced
interfacial friction in the case of wavy structure of the interface.
Although a rough wall correlation was used to calculate the interfacial
friction, such a correlation does not accommodate for the roughness
larger than the laminar sublayer thickness. In test cases C-12 and C-35
(Figs.IV.3e and IV.3f), there is a sudden reduction in the experimental
pressure drop data between the measuring stations 2 and 3. The
deceleration of the vapor phase should not be blamed for this reduction
in the pressure drop since there is no sudden change in the steam flow
rate in this region, as cam be seen in Fig.IV.4. Figs. IV.3a and IV. 3f
show that the magnitudes of the pressure drops are very low in all the
104
cases. Since the accuracy of the experimental data is not known for
such a low pressure drop (the error bars are not given), it is very
difficult to determine the amount of discrepancy du to modeling
assumptions.
The calculated mass flow rates of steam as compared against the
experimental data are shown in Fig. IV.4. In general, the predicted
condensation rates were lower than the experimental data. Test case
D-31 shows a good agreement, whereas test case B-14 shows the largest
difference.
One of the shortcomings of the model used herein deals with
ignoring the wavy structure of the Interface. The presence of surface
waves may substantially increase the steam condensation rate due to
both an extra shear stress slowing down the steam flow and an increase
in the contact area between the phases. In order to account for the
surface-wave phenomena, a simple numerical test was run by doubling
the area of the interface. The results obtained for three cases, given
in Figs. IV.5(a)-IV.5(c), show much better agreement with the measured
values than the calculations performed for the actual interfacial area.
105
TABLE IV. 1
Geometry of the Test Section
Data Inclination angle Width Height Length

set (deg) (m) (a) (a)
A 4 0.38 0.075 1.27

B 30 0.38 0.075 1.27
C 87 0.38 0.075 1.27
D 33 0.38 0.038 1.27
TABLE IV. 2
Distance of Measuring Stations From Steam Inlet (m)
Data Station #
set
1 2 . 3 4 5 6
A 0.26 0.44 0.62 0.80 0.98 1.27

B 0.26 0.44 0.62 0.80 0.98 1.27
C 0.22 0.40 0.58 0.76 0.94 1.27
D 0.22 0.40 0.58 0.76 0.94 1.27
106
TABLE IV.3
Inlet/Exit Conditions for Tests Selected for Numerical Calculations
Test # T T T
nG,in BL,ia G,in G,out L,in T
L.out
kg/sec kg/sec °C °C BC °C
A-li 0.0806 0.3955 136.9 122.3 2.3 74.2
A-31 0.0601 0.7920 136.1 121.6 29.6 54.8
B-14 0.1605 0.7952 136.3 129.1 19.1 93.2
B-25 0.0808 0.8026 128.1 119.6 60.0 97.5
C-12 0.1030 0.3986 140.4 124.7 9.1 96.6
C-35 0.0930 0.5000 140.4 130.8 59.2 99.7
D-06 0.0695 0.3871 130.5 111.7 8.8 87.4
D-31 0.0691 0.3022 135.2 119.8 38.6 96.5
TABLE IV. 4
Measured Liquid Film Thickness for Tests Selected
for Numerical Calculations (mm)
Test # Station §
1 2 3 4 5
A-ll 3.646 3.264 3.182 3.280
A-31 4.417 4.078 4.002 3.773
B-14 2.199 2.179 2.145 2.001
B-25 1.854 1.803 1.854 1.930
C-12 0.920 0.949 0.953 0.963
C-35 0.876 0.887 0.895 0.894
D-06 2.410 2.440 2.366 2.386 *
-B-31 1.456 1.376 1.313 1.194 -
107
TABLE IV . 5
Measured Local pressure Drop for Tests Selected for
Numerical Calculations (Pa)
Tese t Station #
1 2 3 4 5 .6
A-ll 3.240 4.511 5.399 5.942 6.482 6.659
A-31 2.579 3.328 3.724 4.083 4.298 4.298
B-14 21.771 26.292 27.514 28.375 29.176 28.830
B-25 4.373 4.955 4.851 4.947 4.896 4.550
C-12 5.072 5.626 5.279 5.582 5.734 4.549
C-35 5.390 5.485 4.369 3.972 3.684 3.209
D—06 22.107 23.784 27.529 30.585 32.323 31.664
D-31 • • • —
TABLE IV. 6
Measured Local Steam Flow Rate for Tests Selected
for Numerical Calculations (kg/sec)
Test # Station #
1 2 3 4 5
A-ll 0.0693 0.0604 0.0510 0.0430 0.0353
A-31 0.0469 0.0352 0.0283 0.0259 0.0199
B-14 0.1256 0.1145 0.0997 ' 0.0809 0.0669
B-25 0.0629 0.0577 0.0520 0.0426 0.0338
C-12 0.0936 0.0833 0.0808 0.0669 0.0537
C-35 0.0926 0.0891 0.0821 0.0702 0.0613
D-06 0.0630 0.0528 0.0413 0.0303 0.0175
D-31 0.0705 0.0660 0.0624 0.0584 0.0585
108
TABLE IV.7
Calculated Reynolds Numbers for Tests Selected
Numerical Calculations
Reynolds Number (Re)

Liq. Liq. Vapor Vapor
Inlet outlet Inlet outlet
A-ll 2060 2300 156800 88100
A-31 4120 4330 116900 78200
B-14 4140 4630 312000 182000
B-25 4180 4397 157000 91400
C-12 2080 2330 200300 96000
C-35 2600 2770 180900 61700
D-06 2000 2290 135000 101100
D-31 1580 1630 134400 20600
log
IV.1 Schematic diagram of the experimental apparatus

Figure
•1.27 ■
ADIABATIC WMJL T-DIRECTION GRID SPACINC
VAPOR PHASE
VAPOR IN IT Ay/It,
=t> 1.2,10,11 0.0093
3.9 0.0185
4 thru 8 0.1850
INTERFACE LIQUID PHASE

IXO IT Ay/H*
1 thru-4 0.2142
IX*24 IXtl 5 0.1071
INTERFACE 6 0.0214
7 0.0107
8 2.14*10*
9 1.07*10*
10,11,12 2.14*10*'
LIQUID oin
a
X-DIRECTION GRID SPACING
£
IT Ax (cu)
1.2 71.(23
3 thru 22 6.225
ADIABATIC WALL 23,24 0.623
(NO 8CALR)
Figure IV. 2 Grid Structure
110
Ill
S* o. 4
a.
0 .2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 - 1.2

Distance fron vapor inlet (a).
Figure IV.3a Pressure distribution along the test section, test A-ll
6 1 i ' I
— •
A aaasured
-I___ 1___ 1--- 1—

£“a 5 O calculated
A 4
uw
s 4
ipor exit
A
— ■©— —
•C 3 - O O O
O
sr O
*» •
2 22
£2. » I
l • 1 .
t
0 i i 1 1
0*2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Distance from vapor Inlet (a)
Figure IV.3b Pressure distribution along the test section, test A-31
P^ « Pressure ae vapor Inlet,

P(i) » Pressure at station 1.
Voce : Calculated pressure at staelon 1 was assuaed to
be equal to the aaasured pressure.
112
O calculated
*2 8
-24
9 23
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Distance £roe vapor lalat (a)
Figure IV. 3c Pressure distribution along tbe test section, test B-14
2% 7 O calculated
i
■ sW
s *
3
0.4 0.6 0.8
Distance froa vapor Inlet (a)
Figure IV.3d Pressure distribution along the test section, test B-25
- Pressors as vapor Inlet,

P(l) “ Preaanre as acaelon £•
Beta : Calculated praaaore as atatlon 1 uaa asauaad so
be equal to tbe aaasured praaaore.
113
1 1 1 1 1
1 "1
1
•a 7 A asasursd 1 «
O ealeulacsd 1
s -« O O 1
io»s ‘
■ 0
A ♦i -
u I
6 A
A. ”2 1
• ^ 5 O 8 1•
«>*w to A
to A*
• §•«-
• • f
0.2 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Diseases fros sapor laloe (a)
Figure IV.3e Pressure distribution along tbe test section, test C-12
10 i i 1
—
-- ^
A asasursd
1
'!>
------
O caleulaead
a O
1
-«
-- r-
O
m O
V
— 6 a O 1
to
-- i
■ !'
O A
is a 81
s
a
A I
"o 1
!
: * A t 1a
5 A
Z 3 a 4.
a • * • • • • ----------- 1-1 1
—
0.2 0.6 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Diseases £roa sapor Isloe (a)
Figure IV.3f Pressure distribution along the test section, test C-35
P. ■ Prassurs ae sapor lalae,

SO
P(l) ■ Prassurs ac scseloa 1.
Hoes : Caleulaead prassurs sc scselon 1 was assuaad eo
be sqoal eo ehs asasursd prassurs.
114
O calculated
0.4 0.6 0.8

Dlitnei f r a vapor lalae (a)
Figure IV. 3g Pressure distribution along tbe test section, test D-06
1 • 1 ■1 1
1T
0
-
o i >"
- m
o
o M
•
U
- 8.
m
5 1
- o r
I f * . i
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Distance f m vapor lalae (a)
Figure IV. 3h Pressure distribution along the test section, test D-31
f ■ fraaaura at vapor lalae,

V ( D ■ Fraaaura at ataelaa 1.
■oca : praaaura at aeaeloa 1 aaa aaauaad eo
be aqual to tha aaaaured praaaura.
US
o.u
0.12
O.U
0.09
0.01
(kg/Me)
0.07
0.00
flow nta
0.09
mm
0.04
0.03
• Alt A A3t
• BU ▼ B25
■ C12 • C3S
0.02 + 006 T 031
Ciramcribad figiraiedoMad
SoBd figtros rmawrad
0.01 i x
0.2 0.4 0.« 0.8 1.0
U ic h m fm Tepor la la e (a)
Figure IV. 4 A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

rates of vapor, assuming same flow rates at the first
station.
116
aoa
007
Mass flow rate fcgfeed
OuOS
003
CX02
•a
O01
*v ■
ooo 1 A
OOO 020 040 060 080 1.00
Olatanoe from vapor M at M
Figure IV. 5a A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

rates of vapor, including the effect of interfacial area;
test A-31. The same flow rates were assumed at the first
station.
117
0.11
0.10
009
rate fcgfoec)
OlOB
Musa flow
OL06
005
004 th>
003
002 1
OOO 020 040 060 080 1.00
Oietwioa from vapor Met M
-Figure IV. 5b A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

rates of vapor. Including the effect of interfacial area;
test B-14. The same flow rates were assumed at the first
station.
118
0.10
0108
007
006 -
005
004 I
OUOO 020 040 060 080 1.00
Dlatanoe from vapor H at M
Figure IV. 5c A comparison between calculated and measured mass flow

rates of vapor, including the effect of interfacial area;
test C-35. The same flow rates were assumed at the first
station.
CHAPTER V.
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF THE MOTION OF PARTICLES IN DISPERSED
TWO PHASE FLOWS
As shown in Chapter II, the interfacial phenomena appear in
two>phase flow models in the form of closure relations as a result of
averaging. These relations are frequently obtained from theoretical
investigations for very simple flow situations, since no analytical
solution of the Navier-Stokes equations can be obtained for actual flow
conditions, especially in dispersed flows. In experimental
investigations, on the other hand, not all the quantities can be
measured isolated from each other’s effects. Instead, the results of
experiments are commonly used to confirm, or to suggest corrections to,
the theoretical findings.
The motion of dispersed phase and the interfacial phenomena can be
mechanistically modeled by means of numerical simulations of moving
particles in the continuous phase. Because of the limited capability of
tbe computers, numerical solutions to such complex problems were not
possible until recent years. After the introduction of supercomputers a
few years ago, mechanistic modeling of selected aspects of bubble-
liquid interaction has become feasible. The subject of this Chapter is
to investigate the interfacial forces on particles/bubbles moving in
flowing liquids via a series of numerical experiments. Because of the
computing time limitations, the calculations presented herein have been
119
120
performed for two-dimensional particles (cylinders). However, the
solution algorithm presented here can be readily extended to
three-dimensional bubbles.
As discussed in Chapter II, both observations and computations
indicate that the shape of small bubbles is approximately spherical. As
shown by Ryskin & Leal (1984), the deformation in bubble shape is a
function of the Reynolds (Re) and Weber (We) numbers (a stronger
dependence exists on We than Re) rather than directly of the bubble
diameter. Since, for a given bubble diameter, there is a unique
terminal velocity corresponding to unique Re and We numbers, the shape
of the bubble can be thought of as a function of the diameter. In
general, the deformation of the shape becomes significant for bubbles
larger than 1 to 2 mm in diameter.
In general, the boundary conditions at the interface are given by
Eq.(II.2), and the system of equations can be closed by the kinematic
condition of the interface,
+ u^VS = 0 (V. 1)
where S is the function describing the interface ( S(x,t)«=0 ). Although
this formulation of the boundary conditions is fully mechanistic, the
surface tension used in Eq. (11.2) introduces an uncertain!ty. This is
due to the fact that, as mentioned in Chapter II, the impurities in the
continuous liquid phase collect at the interface and increase the
surface tension considerably. As a result, the discontinuity in the
stresses across the interface may become so large that the bubble acts
as a solid particle. On the other hand, when there are no impurities in
121
the liquid phase, the stresses at the interface are very small due to
the low density of the vapor phase, and can be neglected. It should be
noted here that the no-shear boundary condition at the interface does
not Justify an lnviscid flow approximation. This is because there is a
shear boundary layer caused by the curvature of the interface (Moore,
1962).
Hence, two bounding cases concerning the boundary conditions at
the bubble/liquid interface are: (a) no-slip at the interface when the
impurities play a major role (such as in tap water), (b) no-shear at
the interface (for pure liquids and low density bubbles). In both
cases, under the assumption of non-deformable bubbles, the gas flow
field inside the bubbles does not affect the motion of the bubbles.
Therefore, in either case, it is not necessary to solve the equations
of motion for the gas inside the bubbles.
The objective of the analysis presented in this Chapter is to
study the effect of fluid velocity on moving particles. As shown in
Chapter II, the lift force used in the two-fluid model is based on an
lnviscid flow solution, wheras the drag force correlations (such as the
one given by Eq. 11.43) are based on the viscous flow solution. One of
the problems considered in this Chapter is concerned with the effect of
liquid velocity gradient on the direction and magnitude of the lateral
forces using two above-mentioned bounding boundary conditions for both
fixed and rotating particles. In addition, the interaction between the
trajectory of moving particles and the interfacial forces is another
problem studied in this Chapter.
122
The major steps in analysis are as follows. First a computational
model for the investigation of the interaction between the unsteady
flow of continuous liquid and moving particles has been developed. The
model was tested against available experimental data and known
theoretical solutions. These comparisons Included a single stationary
particle in a uniform liquid field and in a simple shear flow. This
model was then used to analyze the configurations which have not been
studied previously, including: a translational motion of a particle in
a shear flow (both simple shear and laminar channel flow), a freely
moving particle near channel wall, and the interaction between closely
packed moving particles.
V. 1. SOLUTION ALGORITHM TO TRACK THE MOTION OF PARTICLES
Tracking the motion of two-dimensional particles involves a
numerical solution of transient Navier-Stokes equations, evaluating the
forces exerted on the particles, and displacing these particles
according to the governing forces. The transient incompressible
Navier-Stokes equations were solved using the FIDAP code. The solution
algorithm used in the present calculations employs 4-node quadrilateral
elements. Besides the solution algorithm used in the fluid flow solver,
the speed and accuracy of the numerical solution of the Navier-Stokes
equations highly depend on the discretization method of the solution
domain. Although the FIDAP code has a built-in grid generator, it could
not be used, since the code-user interaction would be required to
generate the changing grid. Consequently, a new grid generation
123
algorithm was developed for the purpose of the present work. The basic
features of this algorithm are: (a) gives a reasonable truncation
error, (b) is capable of generating a grid around a number of moving
particles, and (c) does not experience instability problems. The grid
generation algorithm is discussed later in this Chapter.
The grid generation scheme was then combined with the FIDAP code
to track the motion of particles. The algorithm which has been used for
this purpose can be explained as follows. Initially, the particles were
fixed in space and the steady state Navier-Stokes were solved to obtain
the initial flow field of the continuous phase and the forces exerted
on the individual particles. The particles were then displaced
according to the calculated forces. For the new positions of the
particles, a new grid was generated. The nodal velocities with
reference to the mesh after the particles were displaced, were obtained
by interpolating the velocities at the nodes of the mesh for the
previous time step. Starting with this interpolated velocity field, the
transient Navier-Stokes equations were solved, and the forces exerted
on the particles at the end of the time step were evaluated.
It is known that explicit integration schemes, i.e. those based on
marching in time without correcting the results for a given time step,
become unstable if the time step is too large. On the other hand,
implicit solution schemes are diffusive and computer time consuming. In
the present calculations, a hybrid scheme was employed. If the force
acting on a bubble does not change much during a time step, the results
obtained by either an explicit or implicit method will be similar. In
124
this case the time step does not have to be repeated (i.e. an explicit
scheme can be used). Otherwise, the force acting on the bubble is
recalculated with respect to the acceleration resulting from the
average force during this time step. The time step is repeated for the
new displacement of the bubble, until the change in the average force
between the iterations is sufficiently small.
A flow chart describing this method is given in Fig.V. 1. The main
steps used in the algorithm, namely, the grid generation scheme, the
fluid flow solver, the evaluation of the forces exerted on the
particles, and the interpolation scheme, are described in detail below.
In any numerical solution scheme, the boundary conditions at
infinity present a potential problem. The dicretized solution domain
has boundaries at finite distances from the particle. Although the
outer boundaries (that are supposed to be at infinity) can be placed as
far away from the particles as desired, it is not practical from the
view point of the computer time and memory requirements. Since the
residence time of particles in a fixed (and not very large, for
practical reasons) region (channel section) would be relatively short
and, moreover, the acceptable accuracy of calculations can only be
achieved if the particles stay far enough from the numerically (not
physically, such as walls) imposed boundaries, a moving frame of
reference has been used to follow the motion of the particles. A
(constant) velocity of the moving frame was selected to be slightly
higher than the terminal velocity of the particle(s), as illustrated in
Fig.V.2. Using a moving frame also solves another problem. Because of
125
the long wake behind the particles, the velocity boundary conditions
should not be specified at the wake-side of the particles. When a
particle is moving faster than the fluid, the boundary condition would
have to be set at the outlet. However, setting an outlet boundary
condition, rather than an inlet condition for the velocities, results
in a very slow convergence. In fact, in some cases no convergence at
all could be attained (similar behavior has been observed using the
PHOENICS code for different flow situations). By using a moving frame,
the outlet condition has turned into an inlet condition and the
difficulty has been eliminated.
The algorithm described above was implemented by a shell script
written for UNICOS Version 5.0, the listing of which is given in
Appendix C. However, due to the drastic change in the forces exerted on
particles when the particles were first set free after the initial
steady state (due to the virtual mass effect being introduced
suddenly), the Iterations for the first time step were carried out
manually, monitoring the convergence and using a variable
under-relaxation of the calculated forces in order to minimize the CPU
time. With this algorithm, typically 50-60 iterations were required, to
follow the particles for 20 time steps, which took approximately 4
hours of the CRAY-2 CPU time (85% of this CPU time was used by FIDAP
code for the solution of Navier-Stokes equations).
Grid Generation Scheme;
The solution domain between and around the bubbles can be
126
discretized by using a body fitted grid generation scheme. An optimal
scheme is expected to generate such a grid without using an excessive
computer time, which reduces the truncation error in the solution
phase. In the present scheme, the grid automatically adopts itself to
the new position of the particles as the particles move.
The common source of large truncation errors is a highly distorted
mesh. It is also known that a close-to-orthogonal mesh can help the
fluid flow solver converge fester. Thompson et. al. (1985) gave an
extensive discussion of different numerical grid generation methods.
For a static case, the basic grid generation methods fall into three
classes: algebraic, conformal mapping, and partial differential
equation method. In an algebraic grid generation scheme, the solution
domain is divided into subdomains, and the borders of each subdomain
are specified, as shown in Fig. V. 3. In the next step, the nodes on the
border lines are specified. And finally the subdomain is filled with
nodes using an algebraic interpolation. These grid generation methods
when used for complex geometries require extensive computer-user
interaction. The second grid generation scheme, conformal mapping, is
defined for two-dimensional cases only. The grid generated by conformal
mapping can also be obtained as a special case of an elliptic grid
generation scheme. Specifically, it can be done by using a Laplace
equation with appropriate boundary conditions (Thompson et.al., 1985).
The partial differential equation methods of numerical grid
generation are based on a mapping between the physical domain and a
computational domain, as shown in Fig.V. 4. To clarify the terminology,
127
it should be mentioned that the rectangular domain shown in Fig. V. 4b is
conventionally called a computational domain because the fluid-flow
equations Eire solved in this domain. However, in the present case the
fluid-flow equations are solved directly in the physical domain, the
computational domain does not have any significance other than being an
auxiliary domain to generate the grid.
The mapping between the computational and the physical domains can
be established by an elliptic, hyperbolic or parabolic system of
partial differential equations (PDE). In the parabolic and hyperbolic
PDE methods, the grid can be generated by starting from an inner
boundary (particle interface) and marching outwards. Thus, the shape
of the outer boundaries cannot be specified. These grid generation
schemes are appropriate for some special cases, such as a particle in
infinite medium for example. In the following analysis, an elliptic
grid generation scheme will be adopted.
The elliptic grid generation scheme is based on a mapping between
the physical and computational domains, defined by the Poisson
equations,
€xx + € yy + € zz = P
7} + V + V zz = R (V. 2)
xx yy
<xx + < yy + < zz = Q
where £, 7) and < are the coordinates of the computational domain and
x, y and z are the coordinates of the physical domain, and the subscripts
indicate derivatives. By interchanging the dependent and independent
128
variables, we obtain the inverse equations,
--J2
x = (V + xvQ + XCR)
(V. 3)
Vk y = _j2 (y^ + V + y?R)
z = -Jz (z^P + z^Q + z^R)
where the Jacobian of the transformation is,
x€ % XC
J = det (V. 4)
y€ y* y<
z€ zu 2C
and the inverse Laplace operator can be written as,
= a + b + c f-i " 2d afc? - 26 a f e " 2f a f e (v>5)
The coefficients in Eq.(V.5) are defined as follows,
a ■= ( y ^ - y^ ) 2 . (x ^ - x^ ) 2 . (x ^ - x^ ) 2
b « ty^z^ - y ^ ) 2 + “ V c ’2 + (V c " x<yc ’2
c ■ (V b ' V c ’2 * (V b ■ V c ’2 * (V b ■ V s ’2
d ’ ’‘c ' W 2c V * yc ‘W zc V * zc (* c V yc V
- v « ‘W V ? 1 ‘ V c (ltc V V c ’ ' V c (yc V V c ’
e “ xb‘W V c ’ * yb(V c * V c ’ * zb‘V c * V c ’
"V V W V c ’ ‘ V b ‘V c * V c ’ ' W V c * V c ’
f * xI l V c * V c ’ * yc ( V c * V b ’ * 2c ‘ V c * V c ’
129
-x ^ ' w ‘ * s V N V * c V ‘ y« V \ V y? V
In two-dimensions, Eqs. (V.3), CV.4) and (V.5), respectively reduce to,
4 x = -J <V +
(V. 6)
y = -J (y^5 + y„Q)
J " v * " V c (V7)
(V. 8)
The grid generated by Eq. (V.3) or Eq. (V.6) is truly orthogonal
when the orthogonality conditions are satisfied on all boundaries, and
no forcing functions (P=Q=R=0) is used. However, specifying the
orthogonality condition leaves the boundary nodes floating along the
boundary curve or surface, and may cause a distortion of the boundary,
especially for small number of nodes on the boundary. Ryskin & Leal
(1982) proposed a slightly different form of the inverse equations to
maintain the orthogonality while still specifying the nodal
distribution along the boundaries. However, such a method may generate
highly distorted grid in the case of multiple particles.
In the absence of a forcing function, Eqs.(V.3) and (V.6) tend to
equi-distribute the mesh, as described by Thompson et.al. (1985). This
is desirable where the velocity gradients are moderate. Around the
particles, however, we wish to use a finer mesh. This can be
accomplished by using proper functions for P,Q and R. Althoughsome
guidance concerning the selection of these functions can be obtained
130
(Thompson et al, 1985), their form used In any given given case is
generally based on a trial and error approach (Ryskin et al, 1982). A
grid generated by using appropriate forms of P and Q (in 2-D) to study
the heat transfer from an array of fixed particles is given by Chen &
Tong (1988).
Another way of adjusting the mesh size distribution is to use an
unequal spacing in the computational domain. This method is
straight-forward and the mesh size distribution can be controlled very
easily.
Examples of the meshes generated by an algebraic method, and by
the elliptic method given by Eqs.(V.6), are shown in Fig.V.5. An example
of a three dimensional mesh is shown in Fig. V.6.
When the particles are allowed to move freely, the mesh must
either deform to adapt to the new position of the particles, or a new
mesh must be generated for the new configuration. Moving mesh
techniques developed to date are generally concerned with the motion of
a wave front in the continuous phase flow field, such as the scheme
given by Adjerid & Flaherty (1986) to follow a shock wave.
Considering that the solution of the flow equations takes
approximately 60 to 100 seconds of the CPU time on Cray-2 for one time
step, whereas the grid generation phase takes less than 10 sec, a new
grid was generated for each new position of the particles in the
present case. Such a quasi-static grid generation scheme simplifies the
testing of truncation error, and does not lead to unexpected grid
distortion.
131
The grid generation algorithm used in this work to track the
motion of particles is as follows. Choosing the diagonal elements of
the metric tensor (see the RH5 of Eq.V.4) as 1, the sizes of the
physical and computational domains are made the same. For equal
spacing, the computational domain is discretized for a specified number
of nodes in each direction. Since at each time step, the locations of
the particles are known prior to the generation of the grid, the node
number of the center of each particle can be determined. In the case of
a single particle and unequal spacing, the mesh sizes in each direction
in the computational domain are distributed as geometric series, i.e.
A£^ = f^ and A tj^ f1* At) ^ . Since at the center of the particle
we have, £ = x and i) = y , the node number of the particle center

p p p p
can be determined for a given pair of f^ and f1*. The mapping of the
interface is then determined as,
(x-xp)2 + (y-yp)2 = R2 at £=1^, £=?2> y=Tii and Tpijg.
where £ , £ , ij and i> are the constant coordinate lines describing

1 2 1 2
the Interface in the computational domain. The nodes on the interface
are equally distributed, and the coordinates of each node at the
interface, (x ,y ), in the physical domain are determined corresponding
to the coordinates ( ^ , ^ 1 in the computational domain. The boundary
conditions at the interface are the same for multiple particles. At the
outer boundaries, the following boundary conditions are used,
x = x t ,1^ = 0 at £ «= £ ,
■in o£ Bin
x = x ,55 = 0 at £ = £
■ax o£ max
132
y = = ° ■*' = % (v'9)
y = y■ax • ail at u = T>max
With the boundary conditions given above, Eqs. (V.6) were solved to
obtain the coordinates of the internal nodes and the nodes on the outer
boundaries. Knowing the node coordinates, the 4-node quadrilateral
elements were constructed. Some examples of the grids used for the
calculations presented in this Chapter are shown in Fig. V.7. The
FORTRAN programs to locate the bubble-center nodes and to solve
Eqs.(V.6), are given in Appendix C.
Description of the FIDAP code;
The FIDAP code used in the solution of the continuous phase flow
field is a single phase flow code which employs a Finite Elements
Method based on Galerkin formulation. For the isothermal flow
conditions considered in the present problem, the governing equations
solved by FIDAP can be shown in the indical notation as,
fiuj
0^ = 0 (V. 10)
f au au i . a2u
p[ W * uj axj J * " ax^ M e X jd X j + p f i (v .ii)
In Eqs. (V. 10) and (V. 11), constant properties of the fluid have been
assumed.
The FIDAP code is capable of tracking a free surface (interface).
However, in the current version of this code (Version 4.5), the
interface is required to be an open curve (or surface), which is not
133
applicable to the boundary of a moving particle.
Several time Integration methods are offered by FIDAP. One of them
Is an explicit time integration scheme, which Is only conditionally
stable. The stability-imposed limit on the time interval is very
difficult to estimate, especially for an irregular grid. Two implicit
time integration schemes are also available, namely the backwards Euler
and trapezoid integration. The trapezoid integration scheme is of a
second order accuracy. However, the time steps are adjusted during the
integration process. On the other hand, the overall algorithm in the
present problem requires that the time steps be determined by the
forces exerted on the particles. The results presented in this Chapter
were obtained by using a first-order-accurate implicit integration
method, namely the backwards Euler method. At each time step, the
solution was restarted from the velocity field in the previous time
step, interpolated to the new position of the nodes, and integrated
over one time step. Note that, for incompressible flows, the pressure
field can be recovered from the velocity field at any given time, since
there are no terms in the Navler-Stokes equations (Eq.V. 11) involving
time derivatives of the pressure. Therefore, it is not necessary to
know the pressure at the previous time step.
The last term in Eq.(V.11) includes only the gravity force for the
cases considered here. However, for an incompressible flow, the
pressure in Eq.(V.11) can be assumed to be only the dynamic pressure.
The total pressure can be recovered by superposing the hydrostatic
pressure. Eliminating the hydrostatic pressure from the Navier-Stokes
134
equations reduces the differences in the magnitude of the pressure
during the integration of the flow field, especially for a large
solution domain. As a consequence, the residuals of the forces during
the iterations become more meaningful, and can be controlled more
effectively.
Among many spatial iteration schemes available in FIDAP, the one
selected for the present calculations uses successive substitutions for
the first few iterations. This is necessary in order to bring the
estimated flow field into the convergence radius of another, faster
iteration scheme, i.e. the Modified Newton-Raphson method. For most
cases, less than 7 or 8 iterations were required to reach satisfactory
convergence. The intergation of the steady-state flow field took 60 to
200 seconds of CPU time for a 70 by 49 grid on CRAY-2.
Forces Exerted on a Particle and Particle Displacement:
The i-th component of the total force exerted on a particle can be
written as,
Fi “ K * F! + g i V (p c"pP) (V*12)
where superscripts p and x indicate pressure and shear forces
respectively. Since gravity is not included in the Navier-Stokes
equations, the last term is the buoyancy force instead of the gravity.
From the numerical solution with FIDAP using 4-node quadrilateral
elements, the pressures are known at the center of each element. For a
small enough element neighboring the interface, the pressure at the
element center can be assumed to be the pressure at the interface. In
135
order to refine the accuracy further, the pressures at the Interface,
p , can be corrected by a first order Taylor series expansion around the
pressure at the element center, pQ,
= P0 + a ^ V — (v-13)
where r^ is the vector connecting the element center to the midpoint of
the interface segment neighboring the element. The pressure derivatives
in Eq.(V. 13) can be obtained from the Navier-Stokes equation by
dropping all but the spatial acceleration terms,
an flui
a l ' - P ”, » r 'v » >
The pressures at the Interface evaluated from Eqs. (V. 13) and (V. 14) can
be integrated along the interface to obtain the pressure force exerted
on the particle,
* i = ~ J p in i ^ (V*15)
S
where n is the unit outward vector at the interface, and S is the
surface area.
The shear force and the moment exerted on the particle are
evaluated as,
fflu. flu.i 1
mr l‘,*>
*r t «
F. -J •*[sr♦ <vl6)
S J 1
du. 8u
r f aui Suj1
M = J "I
“ 155T * s r Jtir,cij.ds (V17)
s
e J *
where ^ is the unit tangent vector of the interface in clockwise
136
direction, r is the vector connecting the particle center to the
interface, and c is the unit alternating tensor,

ijk
Knowing the forces exerted on the particle, the displacement,
rotation, translation velocity and angular velocity of the particle
after a time interval, At, can be evaluated from the basic laws of
mechanics. A constraint on the time interval was set such that a
particle was not allowed to move more than half the size of a typical
element adjacent to the particle. Along with the FORTRAN program to
evaluate the forces exerted on each particle, a short program in
C-Language is given in Appendix C for completeness, which returns an
error code to the shell script indicating whether or not the time step
is to be repeated.
Interpolation Scheme
Interpolating the velocity field obtained at the corner nodes of
the elements of the mesh to the new mesh generated for the new
positions of the particles is one of the most challenging tasks of the
numerical implementation. The main difficulty results from the
irregular mesh structure. The fastest and most accurate algorithm was
found to be the following.
The velocity field around a node can be obtained by expanding the
velocity components in a Taylor series as,
(y-y0) (V. 18)

y-y
The derivative of the velocity component, u , in the x direction can be
137
calculated by,
flu (uk - u°)

_1^ i i
ax Z — --- — rw, (V-19)
x=xo i£i Ir
lrkolI k0’x
where r is the vector connecting the node at (x ,y ) to the k-th

kO 0 0
neighboring node at (xk,yk), and ^ is the x component of the unit
vector in the direction of r . The derivatives in y direction can be

kO
obtained similarly.
The velocity field in the vicinity of each node of the mesh for
the previous time step is now known. The next step is to determine the
node number of the mesh before the particles are displaced, which is
closest to a given node of the mesh after the displacement. Even for
small displacements, the nodes which are closest to each other before
and after the displacement are not necessarily the same. This happens
especially near the particle. Very often, a node originally on the left
of the particle, Jumps to the right of the particle after the
displacement, or vice versa. Comparing the distances between all the
nodes in the old and new meshes involves too many floating point
operations. An effective search algorithm for this purpose has been
suggested by Mastin (1988). Suppose, we wish to find the closest node-i
of the mesh before the displacement, to node-k of the mesh after the
displacement (see Flg.V.8). Starting from an arbitrary node-i of the
mesh before the displacement, the distances between node-k and the four
neighbors of node-i are compared. If the closest node to node-k is
node-1 rather than node-i, then ncde-i is replaced by node-1 and the
search is repeated. When there are no neighbors closer to node-k than
138
node-i, then node-i becomes the closest node to node-k. However, if, by
any chance, the starting node-i is on the other side of the particle,
the search may suddenly stop at a node on the interface at the opposite
side of the particle, since this node has only three neighbors. To
solve this problem, the nodes on the opposite sides of the interface
were artificially connected through a pseudo node inside the particle.
This interpolation scheme has proved to be very efficient,
especially for supercomputer application (almost all the loops are
vectorizable), and ran for less than 0.2 sec. for (70x40) nodes. The
listing of a FORTRAN program for interpolating the velocity field
between the two meshes, and writing into the restart file of FIDAP, is
given in Appendix C.
V.2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
As outlined in Chapter II, at very low Reynolds numbers, the
Stokes’ approximation for the momentum equation can be used to obtain
the forces on a single particle in simple flow configurations. On the
other hand, for very high Reynolds numbers and no-shear boundary
condition at the interface, potential flow approximation can be used,
except for the region close to the bubble. In practical cases, the
encountered Reynolds numbers are in the range of 10 to 200. For such
situations both the acceleration and viscous terms are important. Thus,
neither approximation mentioned above can be Justified. In the present
analysis, the range of Reynolds numbers considered is from 0 to 100.
The present numerical solution method can be used to simulate a
139
wide range of flow/particle configurations. With the objective being to
analyze the mechanics of the flow rather than to create a data base,
the cases under consideration started from the simplest problem of a
stationary circular cylinder in a uniform liquid velocity, followed by
a shearing flow around a circular cylinder, and finally extended
to the situations involving the motion of multiple particles.
In the results shown below, a cylinder radius of 0.5 mm. hag been
used. The liquid properties have been chosen as p=1000 kg/m3, and
t>=10”6 m2/s, typical for liquid water.
V.2.1. Flow around a Circular Cylinder in Uniform Liquid Velocity Field
As discussed earlier in this Chapter, there are two bounding
boundary conditions at the interface: no-slip and no-shear. Of these
two, the former was studied much more extensively before, so that the
existing results provide a good basis for the verification of the
accuracy of the present solution method. The latter, on the other hand,
has been previously investigated in a qualitative manner only.
Using a no-slip boundary condition at the interface, the
Navier-Stokes equations were solved for a uniform liquid flow around a
stationary cylinder for Reynolds numbers ranging from 20 to 150. The
grid used in these calculations is shown in Fig. V. 7a. As it is seen
from Fig.V.9, the boundary layer seperatlon occurs in all the cases
considered here. It is important to notice that the length of the wake
downstream of the cylinder is in agreement with the numerical solution
of Fornberg (1980). For Re=60, a more detailed picture of the flow
140
(vorticity and streamlines) in the vicinity of the cylinder is shown in
Fig. V. 10.
A measure of the overall accuracy of the numerical solution method
is the drag force. The drag coefficient, defined by Eq. 11.41, has been
previously evaluated by many investigators. The drag coefficient
obtained in the present study is compared in Fig. V. 11a, against the
numerical calculations of several authors. A comparison with
experimental data is shown in Fig. V. lib. In the same figure, the
numerical results of Fornberg (1980) are also shown, representing the
most recent numerical work. As seen from Fig. V. 11, a good agreement was
obtained with both experimental data and numerical calculations. It was
observed that the contribution of the shear force to the total drag
force is between 10% and 20% (a lower fraction at high Re numbers),
respectively.
In order to test the dependency of the results on the mesh size
near the cylinder, the drag coefficients obtained by using a coarser
mesh, shown in Fig. V.7b (approximately 5 times larger linearly near the
cylinder), were compared with the fine mesh. The results of this
comparison are also shown in Fig. V. lib. It can be seen that there is
only a slight difference between the drag coefficient calculated using
the coarse and fine meshes.
Another set of calculations were performed using a no-shear
boundary condition at the interface, keeping the other flow conditions
the same as before. It is known that the potential flow approximation
gives a zero drag coefficient for a cylinder in uniform flow. However,
141
for viscous flows, the viscosity of the liquid is responsible for a
non-zero drag force even if there is no interfacial shear. The drag
coefficient obtained by using the no-shear boundary condition is also
shown in Fig. V. 11. In the absence of other data, these results can be
qualitatively compared with the drag coefficients for a spherical
particle. The drag coefficient of a spherical bubble (We=0) has been
calculated to be approximately 0.4 for Re=100, and 4.5 for Re=5 (Ryskin
8> Leal, 1984). The drag coefficient for a solid sphere is 1.19 for
Re=100 and 7.1 for Re^S (White, 1974). As can be seen in Fig. V. lib, in
the case of a cylinder considered here, the drag coefficient obtained
for no-slip boundary condition is 4.5 to 6 times larger than that for
no-shear boundary condition.
V.2.2. The Motion of a Cvlindrical Particle in Shearing Flow
As summarized in Chapter II, the previous experimental and
theoretical works to obtain an expression for the lift force have been
limited to very low Reynolds numbers or inviscid flow solution. The
purpose of the present analysis is to investigate the lateral forces
exerted on a particle In shearing (viscous) flows over a practical
range of Reynolds numbers.
All the discussions in this section will be presented with
reference the a configuration shown in Fig. V. 2a, where the particle
moves with a higher velocity than the liquid, and the far field
velocity gradient in y direction is positive.
Before proceeding to the discussion of the results of the present
142
analysis, it should be noted that the lift force for a sphere is in the
negative y-direction (towards the wall) according to the results of
both viscous flow solution for low Reynolds numbers and inviscid flow
solution (see Chapter II). For a cylinder, the inviscid flow solution
gives a lift force in the same direction as in the case of a sphere
(Batchelor, 1967), whereas viscous flow solution for low Reynolds
numbers gives a lift force in the opposite direction (Bretherton,
1961).
As discussed in Chapter II, there are several components of the
lateral force exerted on a particle in flows inside channels and ducts.
One of them is the lift force due to the local shear. When the particle
is close to the wall, there is an additional lateral force due to the
vorticity generated at the wall. Lastly, if the particle is rotating,
yet another force, the so-called Magnus force, may become important.
In order to be able to examine the individual constituents of the
lateral forces exerted by the fluid on a particle in duct flow, a
basic case has been considered first, of a cylinder in a simple shear
flow. The geometry considered in this case is shown in Fig. V. 12a. Such
a flow is commonly represented by two Reynolds numbers. One them
is the usual Reynolds number, Re, based on the relative particle
velocity and the particle diameter. The other Reynolds number is a
measure of the velocity gradient,
The range of the Reynolds numbers was 15 < Re^ < 23 and 15 < Re < 70.
The normalized lift force calculated for the no-shear boundary
143
condition is shown in Fig.V. 13. As it is seen from Fig.V. 13, the lift
coefficient (or the normalized force in Fig.V.13) is Independent of
both the Re and Re^ numbers in the range considered here, and is
approximately equal to 1.15. This is a well known result of the
inviscid flow approximation that the lift coefficient is 2 for a
circular cylinder and 0.5 for a sphere in simple shear (Batchelor, 1967
and Auton et al, 1988). The sign of the calculated lift force agrees
with the analytical solution for ideal flow. As it will be seen in the
next case, the lift force on a cylinder with no-slip boundary condition
is in the opposite direction. This result suggests that the presence of
vorticity (viscous effects) is the cause of the reduction in the actual
lift force acting on a cylinder with the no-shear boundary condition.
The lift force acting on a stationary cylinder with the no-slip
boundary condition in shearing flow has been previously investigated
analytically by Bretherton (1962). His analytical solution is
applicable to a limited range of flow conditions given by the following
inequalities,
Re « 4 and Re3/2< Re < Re*72

K K K
The lift force calculated by the present numerical solution was
compared with the analytical solution of Bretherton (1962). As shown in
Fig. V. 14, the results are in good agreement, especially for low values
of ReK , i.e. where the analytical solution is actually valid. It is
interseting to mention that the difference between the present
calculations and the Bretherton* s approximation remains small even for
relatively high Re^. Although a similar behavior of the analytical
144
solution has been observed In the case of drag force, good agreement
was limited to Re=2, in the present case, the range of (reasonable)
validity of the analytical solution of Bretherton turns out to be much
higher.
It should be pointed out that the lift force in this case is in
the direction opposite to that for the no-shear boundary condition. At
higher ReK numbers, the calculated lift force for the no-slip case is
compared in Fig. V. 13 with the lift force for the no-shear condition.
The simple shear flow case discussed above was later replaced by
a more realistic situation, in which a cylinder was placed in a flowing
fluid near the channel wall. The Reynolds number of the liquid based on
the channel width was selected to be 1000. In order to see the
additional effect of the wall, the location of the cylinder was
adjusted in such a way that the Re^ numbers would be the same as in the
previous case. Also, the Re numbers (based on the particle relative
velocity) were selected to be the same as before. A schematic of the
geometry is shown in Fig. V. 12a. The results obtained for this
configuration have been compared with the slmple-shear case, and are
shown in Fig.V. 13. As seen there, the existence of the wall increases
the lift force considerably (approximately, by a factor of two).
In addition to the lateral force, there is also a torque exerted
on a cylinder in shearing flow, when the no-slip boundary condition
applies. The magnitude of the torque for each case considered above
is given in Fig. V. 15, with the sign selected to be positive when the
torque is in the clockwise direction. The resultant steady-state
14S
angular velocity is shown in Fig. V. 15, assuming that the cylinder
center is still fixed in space, but allowed to rotate. The rotation of
the cylinder also results in an additional lateral force. The total
lateral force for a rotating cylinder in simple shear and near a wall
is shown in Fig.V.17.
In the cases considered so far, the particle was assumed to be
moving with a prescribed velocity parallel to the wall. However, due to
the lateral force, a freely moving particle gains a velocity in the
lateral direction. In addition, the magnitude of the velocity component
parallel to the wall may change when the particle is displaced in the
lateral direction,. Lastly, the acceleration of the continuous liquid
phase results in an additional force (virtual mass force) on the
particle. Such a complicated nature of the problem makes it very
difficult to predict the motion of a particle moving near the wall by
using a quasi-steady approach. In this work, the forces exerted on a
freely moving particle near the wall were examined by solving the
combined unsteady-state equations of fluid flow and particle motion.
The channel flow was considered to be the same as in the
steady-state cases discussed above. A particle slightly lighter than
the continuous liquid was released at a distance from the wall equal to
1.5 particle diameters. The initial velocity of the particle was
slightly lower than the value at which the drag and buoyancy forces are
in balance. The particle density was 70% of the continuous liquid
density. Assuming a no-slip boundary condition at the liquid/particle
interface, the trajectory of the particle was calculated by using the
146
numerical scheme discussed earlier in this Chapter.
The trajectory of the particle is shown in Fig.V.17. It should be
pointed out that, for the purpose of a more clear illustration, the
vertical scale in Fig. V. 18 was made larger than its horizontal scale.
The particle actually travels a much longer distance in the vertical
direction than in the lateral direction. During this time interval, the
lateral displacement is only on the order of half the diameter. The
transient nature of the motion is mainly responsible for having a much
smaller displacement than would be expected by considering only
quasi-steady forces. This can be seen by examining Figs. V. 18 and V. 19.
The initial lateral force on the particle is quite large, as was also
indicated by the steady-state solutions discussed before. As the
particle accelerates in the direction away from the wall, a lateral
drag force appears of an increasing magnitude, and a virtual mass force
partially balances the lift and Magnus forces. Moreover, the
acceleration of the particle parallel to wall decreases the torque, and
consequently, the angular velocity. This also contributes to the
reduction in the lateral force. In consequence, the net force in the
lateral direction, initially away from the wall, decreases rapidly, and
eventually changes sign. However, due to its inertia, the particle
still moves towards the centerline. Although the motion was not
followed after the particle approached an equlibrium state, it can be
anticipated that the present trends that the net lateral force will
again become positive (although its magnitude will be a smaller). It
can be deduced from this result that the actual value of the lift
147
coefficient used in two-fluid models is much lower than the one
estimated by steady-state calculations.
V.2.3. Multiple Particles in Infinite Medium
At high void fraction, the motion of a bubble is affected by the
motion of the other bubbles around it. As mentioned in Chapter II, the
theoretical works for multiple bubbles indicate that when the void
fraction is higher than 0 .1, the interaction between the bubbles
becomes stronger. In order to observe the motion of closely packed
particles, an example case was considered in which three cylindrical
particles (40% lighter than the liquid) were placed at the corners of
an equilateral triangle with the edges of a length of 2 particle
diameters from each other. This configuration roughly corresponds to a
void fraction of 0.23, which can be arrived at by taking the ratio of
the area occupied by the bubbles within the triangle to the triangle
area. The particles were set free with an inital velocity corresponding
to Re=50, and the motion of them was followed. The trajectories of the
particles are shown in Fig.V.20. The velocities of and the forces
exerted on each particle as functions of time are given in Figs.V.21
and V.22 respectively. It should be noted that the forces shown in
Fig.V.22 include the buoyancy.
As seen in Fig. V.21, the particle marked as *3* which is located
in the wake of other two particles accelerates faster than the leading
particles, as the latter particles (particles ’1’ and ’2 ’) move away
from each other. Since the liquid velocity (in the opposite direction
148
to the particle motion) between the particles ’1’ and *2 ’ is higher than
the velocity outside the particles, the diverging motion of particles
’1* and ’2 ' is in accordance with the conclusions drawn from the
results for a particle moving in a shear flow, i.e. that the particles
move in the direction of velocity gradient.
The motion of particle ’3 ’ is affected by several contributors.
Based on the observations for steady-state, particle *3* should
experience a higher drag than the other particles since its relative
velocity is higher. However, it moves against a lower pressure because
of the resistance of the particles ’1* and ’2*. As it is seen from
Fig. V. 22, the differences between the forces exerted on each particle are
small. After the particles are set free, the pressure force on particle
’3’ is even less because of the vacuum created in front it by the
acceleration of particles ’1’ and '2 *.
The complicated nature of the interactions between the particles
is another example illustrating the importance of the fact that,
especially at high void fraction flows, forces on moving particles (or
bubbles) should be evaluated from mechanistic models of particle-
to-particle interaction, rather than by examining only quasi-steady
state configurations of fixed arrays of particles.
149
Evaluate forces on
each bubble moving with
a fixed velocity
Displace each bUoble

according to the forces
acting on the bubble
Generate a new grid for

the new positions of
the bubbles
Save the results of
this time step.
March to the next
time step
Interpolate the velocity
field from the mesh
before the displacement
to the mesh a fter the
displacement
Evaluate a ne w fa
F m <15 F„ * F )
GSo back to last tfcra
Solve the transient

flow field and evaluate
the new farces on
the bubble. F
NO YES
IS P '-P r” > oF
Figure V. 1. Flow chart of the algorithm used In tracking the motion

of bubbles
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
If A
E
wake wake
(a ) (b)
Figure V.2. An illustration of the frame of reference used in the

calculations
(a) The motion observed from an inertial frame.
150
(b) The frame of reference used in the calculations
151
e
o
(.
o>
e
v
00
•o
60
O
a
c.
J3
H00
as
§
e
S.
«
Cm
O
e
o
<8
tm
*>
3 scheme
o
3
00
■N
u*
_ (a) PHYSICAL D O M A I N
•* • • • • •
••■%•*•*%*••%•••*•••§•••*•••#
• • • • •
(b) C O M P U T A T I O N A L D O M A B M
• • • •••
Figure V.4. Happing between the physical (a) and computational (b)
domains for a single bubble
th permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
■■■■■■■SBSSaaiaaaaaiaaiaaiaaaaiiaa
iEBaaaaSSSSaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaflBflaaa
jiiflBaaSSSMBBBaBBBBflaBflBfliaaflaBflB
iBflBBBaillSlSaaaBBBBBBBBBBaBBBSaSaB
iBBBlBaiaaaiaaaBBBBBBBBBaaiBBBBiiBa
■aBiBBaaiiiiiaaBaaiaflaBBBBafiaaaaa|B
BBBBflBBflBBBBaBBBflBflBflBBBBBBBBflBBBBB
(a) (b)
BBiiiiHiuiiiiiliiiiiiiBBaiaarBiBiaBi
(c) (d)
Figure V.5. Example grids around a single bubble generated by:

(a) Algebraic method,
(b) Elliptic method, P=$sO,
(c) Elliptic method, P & Q linear functions,
(d) Unequal spacing in computational domain,
1S4
Grid and velocities around a spherical bubble.
s A
Figure V.6 .
155
Fine mesh used for the solution of flow around a cylinder

Figure V.7a.
bb!S2!2!J!!!!2S!I, *bbb, bbbbbbbbb
iiiiiliBiiiiiiaiiiiiiiHiRiiaiiiiiiiaiiiMa«iiaiiiiiii>iiii>aii>aaiaianniiiaMiiiaiii
ifiiiHiHaiiiiaMi«iniiaiiiiiiiiiiiaiiaaiii>aiiiii»iiiiBiiiiiaiaiaiNiaiHMiMiiiiiii
aaaaaaaaaaaaiaaBaaaiaaiaaaaiiaiaaBaaiaaaiiiaBaBaaiiaaaiaaaiaaaaiaBSiiaaaiaaaaaaaaaaBBBaa
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBaBBaBBBBaiBBBIBBBBBBBBBBBaBIBBBBBBBaaaaBBBIBBBBBaaBIBaaBBtaaaBBBIBaaaBBBI
aaaaaaaBBBBBaBIBBBBBaBaBaflBBBBBBBBBBBBBB8BaBBBaBBBBBBBaBBaBBBBBa8BBSaBaaBBBBBBBBBBBaaaai
BB8RB8BBBBBBBBBBBBBB8BflBBB88BSiaBBBB88BiB88BBa8aBBBBBB8BBBBB8BBBBBBBBB8BaBBBBB8BBB8BBaaB
BBaBBBBBBBBBBBBfllBBBIIIKIIiiiii*11*111**"***1*'*********'**''**'
!!!.!5!£-b-bbbbbbbbbbb»r»
............. B B I B I B
BBBBBBBIBBBIIBBIBIBBBB
BBBBBBBIBBBBBIBBBBIBBB
aaiBBBBBBBIBIBBIBIIIBB
aaBBfllBailBIBBBIBBBBBB B I M B B B B B I I B B ....... BBBBBBBIBBB
IBIBBIBBiaiBBBBIBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBaBBIBiaiBS
Figure V.7. Mesh used for the solution of flow around a cyllnder(s)
(b) Coarse mesh used for uniform flow
(c) Mesh used for tracking the motion of three particles
157
158
LEGEND Re = 100
*
A 3.667
___
B 2.883
C 1.667
D 0.836
—
E 0.500
F 0.250
' G 0.117
H 0.050
I 0.017
J 0.001
K 0.0
Re = 60
•
Re ■ 20
■A"■ 1~ ■■-
Figure V.9. Streamlines around a cylinder In uniform flow. The values

of stream function, 0 , have been normalized with respect
to the free-stream velocity and particle diameter.
VORTICITY
(1/sec)
A 40
B 100
C 150
D 200
E 500
F 1000
G 1500
H 2000
I 2500
J 5000
STREAMLINES
A 1.000
B 0.667
C 0.333
D 0.250
E 0.167
F 0.100
G 4.433
H 0.033
I 0.170
J 0.008
K 0.000
L -0.008
M -0.017
N -0.025
0 -0.033
Figure V.10. Streamlines and vorticity around a cylinder in uniform

flow. (Re = 60)
3.00
2.50 A Present work, fine (rid

T Present work, coarse (rid
4 Takaml & K eller (19 69 )
A Dennis & Chang (19 70 )
V Nleuwatadt & K eller (19 73 )
2.00
0 Gushchin & Schemlkov (19 74 )
□ Dennis (1973)
O Forrtoerg (19B 0)
1.50 B o
+
A
T
t
O
1.00
▼ o
o
0.50
0.00 _L
10 100
Reynolds rurfcer
Figure V.11a. Drag coefficient for a cylinder in uniform liquid

velocity field (no-slip boundary condition).
160
* No-ellp BlC . flho m uh ~

fresont
7 No-alt9 B.C. coarse trash work
N»-al!p □ No-ahsar BlC
S 2 I A ° Forribera 1980 N urarical)

O * Trlttorx 1959 (Experimental)
ip A A
>4-
A A
8O P A A* V
* *AA
A1*
7 *1*
A
O A
7
0
□
Nft-flhMT
□
O
• • • 1
10 100
Reynolds number
Figure V.lib. Drag doefflclent for a cylinder In uniform liquid

velocity field.
161
, r
L c r tC O J lL L
(a) (b)
Figure V.12. The geometry of a cylinder In shearing flow,

(a) cylinder near a wall.
(b) cylinder In simple shear.
Re NOr-SlIp
1S charnel flow
30
48
3H 70
TJ
No-sllp
Simple shear flow
a
No-shear
simple shear flow
-1. — B-
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
dUj/dy (1/sec)
Figure V.13. The lift force exerted on a cylinder in simple shear and
channel flows.
100
10
s
4
\ Analytical solution
Brethertor\ 1962
A Present numerical
solution
0.1
0.1 1 10
dUj/dy (1/sec)
Figure V.14. The lift force on a circular cylinder in a simple shear

flow (no-slip boundary condition).
164
400
200
300
100
o
H
(l/sec)
0
A
HV 100
velocity
4-> -100
•H
S
u Oi r
8. -200
Angular
100
-300
200
IS 400
17 19 21 23 25
dUj/dy (l/sec)
Figure V.15. The torque and angular velocity of a cylinder In simple

shear flow.
166
c.
0)
•o
c
mh
>»
o
00
c
o
u
a
G
O
•o
0)
■<->
o C.
0
01 X
\ 0)
0
u
>> u
a
9 a
U u
0
*>
a
■aM
o
0
JS
H
CD
00
*p/np n* A U d / Ti
1B7
Figure V. 17. Trajectory of a cylinder moving freely near a wall.
110 30
(l/sec)
100
VWadty carpa 20
90*
parallel to wall
direction
80
10
70
in clockwise
60
W
50
40
-10
velocity
20 Velocity ccirpanant bi
Angular
-30
0.00 002 006 0.07 0110
Tine ( m c )
Figure V. 18. Velocity of a cylinder moving freely near a wall.

300 30
200 20
Fore* In tranavarae
(10~9 N)
direction
o
H 100 10
length
Hfl>
Tourque per unit

•H
§
U “ 100 -1 0
& Fore* ilfet to wall
a Ondudaa buoyancy)
2
£ -200 ■20
-300 -30
0.00 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.12
Time (sec)
Figure V.19. Forces exerted on a cylinder moving freely near a wall.
s
170
8
7 -
6 -
5 -
4 -
-I------ 1------ 1______ I______ I______I______ L

2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 &50
Figure V. 20. Trajectories of cylinders moving freely in quiescent

liquid.
80 10
Velocity In
flow (fraction
60 — D ~t3—
(in counter-clockwise direction)

Angular velocity (l/sec)
Ia 40
?
w I(■■&— fr— A-
* V
20 - V -2
-6
Velocity in
traneveree (fraction
-20 -1 0
0.00 0.0S 0.10 0.15 0.25
Time (sec)
Figure V.21. Velocities of cylinders moving freely in quiescent liquid.

(See Fig.22 for particle configuration.)
2000
1900
I
o
H
W
1000
Fare* in flew
■p
•H 900
§
Q...
.o ..
Fare* In tranavr—
■ i it ■ i
GnVCuOrl
-900
aoo aog ai o 0.19 0.20 0.25
Time (sec)
Figure V.22. Forces exerted on cylinders moving freely in quiescent

liquid
172
CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSIONS
Various two-phase flow flows, including phase change, have been
modeled mechanistically at different levels of detail. The results
obtained by using these models have been discussed separately for each
problem considered. The common features of these results can be
summarized as follows.
Although less mechanistic one-dimensional models give reasonable
approximation for many engineering applications, they have inherent
limitations. These models, in general, use assumptions based on a
priori knowledge of the solution. To be more specific, one-dimensional
drift-flux model is based on the assumption that the velocity and
temperature profiles are not far from their respective profiles in
fully developed flow up to the point where boiling is assumed to start
effectively. In addition, quasi-steady state profiles are used in a
boiling channel under transient conditions. By comparing the results of
such models with a more mechanistic multi-dimensional model formulated
in this thesis, the error introduced in transient calculations due to
the departure from the quasi steady-state profiles was investigated. In
addition, recommendations were made to Introduce corrections in
one-dimensional models to accommodate the effect of developing flow in
steady-state.
The results of multi-dimensional modeling of condensation in
stratified flow showed that the interface structure in stratified flow
173
174
requires more attention than it has attracted so far. Since the model
developed in this thesis is fully mechanistic, except for the
Interfacial phenomena, a better understanding of the interfacial
structure incorporated in the model in the form of a mechanistic
closure laws can provide improved agreement with experimental data.
The lack of knowledge in the detailed structure of the flow and
heat transfer limits the level at which two-phase flows can be modeled
mechanistically. The interfacial forces and heat transfer used in
multi-dimensional two-phase models of bubbly flow are based on the
conclusions drawn from theoretical analyses for single particles,
performed for a very narrow (unrealistically low) range of parameters.
Furthermore, these analyses are restricted to very simple flow
configurations. In order to understand the interfacial phenomena linked
to the motion of bubbles under more practical conditions, a numerical
scheme has been developed to track particles moving in a continuous
liquid flow and the resultant interfacial forces. The results indicate
that particles-liquld and partlcle-partlcle Interactions can differ to
a significant extent in the cases of particles forced to move with a
prescribed velocity compared to freely moving particles.
Although the analysis presented in this thesis has been limited to
two-dimensional particles, the qualitative observations can be extended
to the case of spherical particles (bubbles). As shown in Chapter V,
the effect of viscosity has been found to reduce the lift coefficient
by, approximately, a factor of 2 for the no-shear boundary condition
applied to a cylinder moving with a prescribed velocity in shearing
175
flow. Although the difference may be different for a spherical
particle/bubble, this result suggests that the lift coefficient
commonly used in two-fluid models should be considerably reduced.
In the case of no-slip boundary condition, the lateral force on a
cylinder in shearing flow was found to be towards the centerline. In
the presence of a wall, the lateral force increased by a factor of up
to 2. This result also indicates that the lift force on spherical
bubbles used in two-fluid models should be reduced (since the lift
force for a sphere is towards the wall). A large reduction (on the
order of 10 times) in the lift force was observed when the particle was
allowed to move freely. Even the sign of the lateral force switched due
to both acceleration in the direction of motion and the drag and
virtual mass forces in the lateral direction. As a result the particle
moved much slower towards the centerline than it would be predicted
by a quasi-steady approach. Such a small force in the lateral direction
results in a longer transient behavior before the particle reaches a
stable position (channel centerline in the case of a single cylindrical
particle). Therefore, the average force over a relatively short period
of time (such as the time scale used in two-fluid models) is much lower
than obtained from steady-state calculations. This observation reveals
that the lift coefficient used in two-fluids model may not be
appropriate for the bubbles moving near a wall, or that an additional
force in the lateral direction should be Included.
The effect of particle rotation on the total lateral force has
been found to be very significant. This result does not apply to the
176
commonly used lateral forces In the two-fluid models, since the lift
force used in such models is usually based on an inviscid flow
solution. It should be pointed out that the drag force correlations
used in the same two-fluid models are based on a viscous flow solution
for a solid sphere. Because the two boundary conditions yield different
results, the question of which boundary condition is a better
approximation for a bubble needs more attention.
The analysis presented in this thesis gives initial results only,
and it has several inherent limitations. The present knowledge
concerning details of fluid-particle interaction in teo=phase flows is
very limited and there is much more work to be done. For example,
future analyses should be extended to three dimensions, and should also
Include a flexible bubble-liquid interface. A challenging, yet
untouched, problem is concerned with the interaction between the
interface and the velocity fluctuations of the liquid phase. In order
to simulate the motion of bubbles in turbulent flow, both theoretical
and experimental works are necessary.
REFERENCES:
Auton, T.R., "The Lift Force on a Spherical Body In a Rotational Flow,"
1987, J. Fluid Mechanics. Vol. 183, pp. 199-218.
Auton, T.R., Hunt, J.C.R. and Prud'homme M., 1988, "The force Exerted
on a Body in Unsteady Non-Uniform Rotational Flow," jL. Fluid
Mechanics. Vol. 197, pp.214-257.
Bartolomei, G.G. and Chanturia, V.M., 1967, "Experimental Study of True
Void Fraction When Boiling Subcooled Water in Vertical Tubes,"
Thermal Engineering. Vol.14, pp.123-128.
Batchelor, G. K., 1967, An Introduction to Fluid Dynamic, Cambridge
University Press, London.
Bergles, A.E., 1981, "Pool Boiling," Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer
in the Power and Process Industries. Ed. A.E.Bergles, J.G.Collier,
J. M. Delhaye, G.F. Hewitt and F.Mayinger, pp. 190-220, Hemisphere
Publishing Corp., New York.
Bestion, D., 1990, "The Physical Closure Laws in The CATHARE Code,“
Nuclear Engr_. & Design. Topical Issue on French Thermalhydraulics.
Brenner, H. 1964a, "The Stokes Resistance of a Slightly Deformed
Sphere," Chemical Engineering Science. Vol 19, pp. 519-539.
Brenner, H. 1964b, "The Stokes Resistance of an Arbitrary Particle,
Part-IV," Chemical Engineering Science. Vol. 19, pp. 703-727.
Bretherton, F.P., 1961, "Slow Viscous Flow Round a Cylinder in a Simple
Shear,” J. Fluid Mechanics. Vol. 12, pp.591-613.
177
178
Ceumern-Lindenstjerna, Wolt-Christian Baron V. 1977, "Bubble
Departure Diamter and Release Frequencies During Nucleate Pool
Boiling of Water and Aquueous NaCl Solutions," Heat Transfer in
Bolling. Ed. E.Hahne and U. Grigull, Academic Press and
Hemisphere.
Chexal, B. and Leilouche, G., 1985, "A Full Range Drift Flux
Correlation for Vertical Flows," ANS Proc. 1985 National Heat
Transfer Conference.
Cornwell, K. and R.D. Brown, D.B., 1978, "Boiling Surface Topography,"
6th International Heat Transfer Conference, vol.l, Paper No.
PB-8,Toronto, Canada.
Celeta, G.P., Cumo, M., Farello, G.E. and Focardi, G., 1987, "Direct
Contact Condensation of Superheated Steam on Water," Int. J. Heat
Mass Transfer. Vol. 30, pp. 449-458.
Cook, D., Bankoff, S.G., Tankin, R.S. and Yuen, M. C., 1981,
"Countercurrent Steam-Water Flow in a Vertical Channel,"
NUREG/CR-205B
Cox, R.G., 1969, "The deformation of a Drop in a General Time-Dependent
Fluid Flow," jL. Fluid Mechanics. Vol. 37, pp. 601-623.
Delhaye, J.M. & Achard, L., 1977, "On the Use of Averaging Operators in
Two-Phase Flow Modeling," in Thermal and Hydraulic Aspects of
Nuclear Reactor Safety. Ed. Jones, 0.C. and Bankoff, S.G., ASME,
NewYork.
DelValle M., V.H. and Kenning, D.B.R., 1985, "Subcooled Flow Boilingat
High Heat Flux," Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, vol.28, 1907-1920.
179
Dennis, S.C. and Chung, G.Z., 1970, "Numerical Solutions for Steady
Flow Past a Circular Cylinder at Reynolds Numbers up to 100,"
J. Fluid Mechanics. Vol. 42, p.471.
Donald, D.A., "The Force on a Small Sphere in Slow Viscous Flow," J.
Fluid Mech.. Vol. 88, pp. 393-400.
Drew, D.A., 1978, "The Force on a Small Sphere in Slow Viscous Flow,"
J. Fluid Mechanics. Vol. 88, pp. 393-400.
Drew, D.A. and Lahey, R.T., 1979, “Application of General Constitutive
Principles to the Derivation of Multidimensional Two-Phase Flow
Equations," Int. J. Multiphase Flow. Vol. 7., pp. 243-264.
Drew, D.A. and Lahey, R.T., 1987, "The Virtual Mass and Lift Force on a
Sphere in Rotating and Straining Inviscid Flow," Int. J.
Multiphase Flow. Vol. 13, pp. 113-121
Eichhorn, R. and Small, S., 1964, "Experiments on the Lift and Drag of
Spheres Suspended in a Poiseiulle Flow," Jj_ Fluid Mech.. Vol. 20,
pp. 513-527.
Feuillebois, F., 1989, "Some Theoretical Results for the Motion of
Solid Spherical Particles in a Viscous Fluid,“ Muit1nhase Science
& Technology. Ed. G. F. Hewitt, J. M. Delhaye, N. Zuber,
Hemisphere Publishing Corp., Vol 4.
Foraberg, B., 1980, "A Numerical Study of Steady Viscous Flow Past a
Circular Cylinder," Fluid Mechanics. Vol 98, pp.819-855.
Govier, G. W. and Aziz, K., 1972, The Flow of Complex Mixtures in Pipes.
Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Hall, D., (1988), "Measurements of the Mean Force on a Particle Near a
180
Boundary in Turbulent Flow," .L. Fluid Mech. Vol. 187, pp. 451-466.
Harlow, F. H. and Nakayama, P. I., 1967, "Turbulence Transport
Equations, " The Physics of Fluids. Vol.10, pp.2323-2332.
Harlow, F.H. and Nakayama, P. I., 1968, "Transport of Turbulence Eneregy
Decay Rate," Los Alamos Report. LA-3854.
Hancox, W. T. and Nicoll, W. B., 1971, "A General Technique for the
Prediction of Void Distributions in Non-Steady Two-Phase Forced
Convection,11 Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer. Vol. 14, pp. 1377-1394.
Hancox, W. T., Ferch, R.L., Liu, W. S. and Nieman, R. E., 1980, "One-
Dimensional Models for Transient Gas-Liquid Flows in Ducts," Int.
J- Multiphase Flow. Vol.6, pp. 25-40.
Hewitt, G.F., 1981, "Introduction to Two-Phase Heat Transfer,"
Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer in the Power and Process
Industries. Ed. A.E.Bergles, J.G.Colller, J.M.Delhaye, G.F.Hewitt
and F.Mayinger, pp. 172-189, Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York.
Hinze, J. 0., 1955, "Fundamentals of the Hydrodynamic Mechanism of
Splitting in Dispersion Process," AIChE Journal. Vol.l, pp.289-295
Ishii, M., 1975, Thermo-Fluid Dynamic Theory of Tun-Ph«s*» Flow.
Eyrolles, France
Ishii, M., 1977, "One-Dimensional Drlft-Flux Model and Constitutive
Relations for Relative Motion Between Phases in Various Two-Phase
Flow Regimes," ANL Report 77-47. October.
Ishii, M., 1987, "Two-Fluid Model for Two-Phase Flow," 2nd
International Workshop on Two-Phase Flow Fundamentals. RPI, Troy,
NY.
Ishii, M. and Mishima, K., 1984, "Two-Fluid Model and Hydrodynamic
Constitutive Relations," Nucl. Ener. and Design. Vol.82, pp.
107-126.
Ishii, M. and Zuber, N., 1978, 1978, "Relative Motion and Interfacial
Drag Coefficient in Dispersed Two-Phase Flow of Drops and
Particles," AIChE Paper #56, 71st Annual Meeting of ATChE. Miami,
Florida.
Kim, H.J., Lee, S.C. and Bankoff, S.G., 1985, "Heat Transfer and
Interfacial Drag in Countercurrent Steam-Water Stratified Flow,"
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer. Vol. 11, pp. 593-606.
Kirkpatrick, R.D., and Lockett, M.J., 1974, “The Influence of the
Approach Velocity on Bubble Coalescence," Chem. Engr. Scl..
Vol.29, pp. 2363-2373
Kocamustafaogullari, G. and Ishii, M., 1983, "Interfacial Area and
Nucleation Site Density in Boiling Systems," Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer. Vol. 26, pp. 1377-1387.
Kutateledze, S.S., 1963, Fundamentals of Heat Transfer. Academic Press.
Lahey, R.T. and Drew, D.A., 1988, "The Three Dimensional Time and Space
Volume Averaged Conservation Equations of Two Phase Flow,"
Advances in Nuclear Science and Engineering. Ed. J. Lewins & M.
Becker, Vol. 20, Plenum Press.
Lahey, R.T. and Moody, F.J., 1977, The Thermal Hydraulics of a Boiling
Water Reactor. American Nuclear Society.
Launder, B.E., Morse, A., Rodi, W and Spalding, D.B., 1972, "Prediction
of Free Shear Flows, A Comparison of the Performance of Six
Turbulence Models," Proc. Free Turbulent Shear Flows. NASA Langley
Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, NASA-SP-321.
Launder, B.E. and Spalding, D.B., 1974, “The Numerical Computation of
Turbulent Flows," Computer Methods in A p p I led Mechanics and
Engineering. Vol.3, pp.269-289.
Lee, S. J., 1986, Turbulence Modeling in Bubbly Two-Phase Flows. PhD
Thesis, RPI, NY.
Lemmert, M. and Chawla, J.M., 1977, “Influence of Flow Velocity on
Surface Bolling Heat Transfer Coefficient," Heat Transfer in
Boiling. Ed. E.Hahne and U. Grlgull, Academic Press and Hemisphere
Levich, V.G., 1952, Physicochemical Hydrodynamics. Prentice-Hall.
Lopez de Bertodano, M., Lee, S.J., Lahey, R.T. and Drew, R.T., 1990,
"The Prediction of Two-Phase Flow Turbulence and Phase
Distribution Phenomena Using a Reynolds Stress Model," Journal of
Fluids Engineering, (in print).
McAdams, W.H., 1954, Heat Transmission. McGraw Hill. NY.
Michiyoshl, I and Serizawa, A., 1984, "Turbulence in Two-Phase Bubbly
Flow," U. S. -Japan Seminar on Two-Phase Flow Dynamics. Lake Placid,
NY.
Mishima, K and Ishii, M., 1984, "Flow Regime Transition Criteria for
Upward Two-Phase Flow in Vertical Tubes" Int. J. Heat Mass Flow.
Vol. 27, pp.723-737.
Nigmatulin, R.I., 1979, "Spatial Averaging in the Mechanics of
Heterogeneous and Dispersed Systems," Int. J. Multiphase Flow.
Vol. 5, pp. 353-234.
Niuwstadt, F. and Keller, H.B., 1973, "Viscous Flow Past Circular
Cylinders," Comp. Fluids. Vol. 1, p.59.
No, H.C. & Kazimi, M.S., 1985, "Effects of Virtual Mass on the
Mathematical Characteristics and Numerical Stability of the
Two-Fluid Model,11 Nuclear Scl. and Engr.. Vol. 89, pp. 197-206.
Oliver, D.R., 1962, Nature. Vol.194. p.1269-1271.
Park, G.C., Podowski, M.Z., Becker, M. & Lahey, R.T., 1986, “The
Development of a Closed Form Analytical Model for the Stability
Analysis of Nuclear- Coupled Density-Wave Oscillations In BWR’s,"
Nucl. Engr. & Design. Vol. 92, pp. 253-281.
Pauchon, C. and Banerjee, S., 1986, "Interphase Momentum Interaction
Effects in the Averaged Multifieeld Model, Part 1. Void
Propagation in Bubbly Flow," Int. J. Multiphase Flow. Vol. 12, pp.
556-573.
Rhosenow, W. M. and Cohen, L.S., 1961, M.S. Thesis. Department of
Nuclear Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
Rosten, H. I. and Spalding, D.B., 1987, PHOENICS Manuals TR-100 and
TR-200. CHAM of North America, ALABAMA.
Rouhani, Z, 1966, “Void Measurements in the Regions of Sub-Cooled and
Low-Quallty Boiling," AE-239.
Roy, R. P., 1975, “An Investigation of Momentum and Heat Transport in
Oscillatory Turbulent Subcooled Flow and Its Importance in the
Analysis of Density-Wave Oscillations," PhD Thesis. University of
California, Berkeley.
Roy, R.P., 1982, "An Unequal Velocity, Unequal Temperature Two-Fluid
184
Description of Transient Vapor-Liquid Flow in Channels," Nuclear
Science & Engineering. Vol.81, pp. 459-481.
Ryskin, G. and Leal, L.G. (1984), "Numerical Solution of Free Boundary
Problems in Fluid Mechanics, Part 2. - Buoyancy Driven Motion of a
Gas Bubble Through a Quiescent Liquid," .L. Fluid Mech.. Vol. 148,
pp. 19-35.
Saffman, P.G., 1965, "The Lift on a Small Sphere in a Slow Shear Flow,"
J. Fluid Mechanics. Vol. 22, pp. 385-400.
Saha, P. and Zuber, N., 1974, "Point of Net Vapor Generation and Vapor
Void Fraction in Subcooled Boiling," 5th International Heat
Transfer Conference. Vol. 4.
Sato, Y. and Sadatomi, M., 1981, "Momentum and Heat Transfer in
Two-Phase Bubble Flow, Part I,", Int. J. Multiphase Flow. Vol.7,
pp. 167-177.
Schlichting, H., 1979, Boundary Laver Theory. McGraw Hill.
Segev, A., Flanigan, L.J., Kurth, R.E. and Collier, R.P., 1981,
"Experimental Study of Countercurrent Steam Condensation," Heat
Transfer. Vol. 103, pp. 307-311
Segrfe, G. and Silberberg, A., 1962, "Behavior of Macroscopic Rigid
Sphere in Polseullle Flow. Part 1 - Determination of Local
Concentration by Statistical Analysis of Particle Passages through
Cross Light Beams, Part 2 - Experimental Results and
Interpretation," J. Fluid Mech. Vol. 14 pp. 115
Sevik, M. and Park, S. H., 1973, "The Splitting of Drop and Bubbles by
Turbulent Flow," Journal Fluids Engineering. Vol. 95, pp.53-60.
185
St. Pierre, C.C., 1965, "Frequency Response Analysis of Steam Voids to
Sinusoidal Power Modulation in a Thin Walled Boiling Water Coolant
Channel," ANL-7041.
Shoukri, M.S.M. and Judd, R.L., 1978, "A Theoretical Model for
Bubble Frequency in Nucleate Pool Boiling Including Surface
Effects," 6th International Heat Transfer Conference, vol.1, Paper
No. PB-6,Toronto, Canada.
Stewart, H.B., 1984, "Two-Phase Flow: Models and Methods," Journal of
Computat1onal Phvslcs. Vol.56, pp. 363-409.
Sultan, M. and Judd, R.L., 1978, "Spatial Distribution of Active Sites
and Bubble Flux Density," JN_ Heat Transfer, vol.100, 56-62.
Takami, H. and Keller, H.B., 1969, "Steady Two-Dimensional Viscous
flow of an Incompressible Fluid Past a Circular Cylinder," Phvslcs
of Fluids Suppl.. Vol. 2, p.51.
Taitel, Y. and Dukler, A.E., 1976, “A Model for Predicting Flow Regime
Transitions in Horizontal and Near Horizontal Gas-Liquid," AIChE
Journal. Vol. 22, pp.47-55.
Taitel, Y., Barnea, D. and Dukler, A.E., 1980, "Modeling Flow Pattern
Transitions for Steady Upward Gas-Liquid Flow in Vertical Tubes,"
AIChE Journal. Vol.26, pp.345-354.
Thomas, R.M., 1981, "Bubble Coalescence in Turbulent Flows," Int. J.
Multiphase Flow. Vol.7, pp.709-717.
Tolubinsky, V. I. and Kostanchuk, D.M., 1970, "Vapour Bubbles Growth
Rate and Heat Transfer Intensity at Subcooled Water Boiling,"
4th International Heat Transfer Conference, vol. 5, Paper No.
186
B-2.8, Paris.
Tsuji, Y., Morlkawa, Y. and Fujiwara, Y., 1985, "Pipe Flow with Solid
Particles Fixed in Space," Int. J. Multiphase Flow. Vol 11, pp.
177-188.
Unal, H.C., 1976, "Maximum Bubble Diameter, Maximum Bubble Growth Time
and Bubble Growth Rate During Subcooled Nucleate Flow Boiling of
Water up to 17.7 MN/m2," Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, vol.19,
643-649.
Vander-Broeck, J. M. and Keller, J. B.,(1980), "Deformation of a
Bubble or Drop in a Uniform Flow," JL. Fluid Mech. Vol 101, pp.
673-686.
Von Kdrmdn, T., 1930, "Mechanische Ahnlischkeit und Turbulentz,"
Collected Works of Theodore Von Karman. Butterwords Scientific
Publications, London. Vol.3, pp. 453-468.
Wallis, G.B., 1969, One Dimensional Two Phase Flow. McGraw Hill.
Wallis, G.B., 1976, "The Separated Flow Model of Two-Phase Flow,"EPRI
Report NP-275.
White, F.M., 1974, Viscous Fluid Flow. McGraw Hill.
Wolfert, K., Burwell, M.J. and Enlx, D., 1978, "Non-Equilibrium Mass
Transfer Between Liquid and Vapor Phases During Depressurization
Processes in Transient Two-Phase Flow," Proc. 2nd CSNI Specialists
Meeting. Paris. Vol.2, pp.1377-1387.
Zuber, N. and Findlay, J.A., 1965, "Average Volumetric Concentration in
Two-Phase Flow Systems," -L_ Heat Transfer.
Zuber, N., Staub, F.W. and Bijwaard, G., 1966, "Vapor Void Fractions in
Subcooled Boiling and Saturated Boiling Systems," 3rd
International Heat Transfer Conference. Chicago.
APPENDIX A
COMPUTER PROGRAM LISTINGS FOR THE MULIDIMENSIONAL TWO-FLUID MODEL
The first set of FORTRAN programs listed in this Appendix are the
main program of PHOENICS, and the subroutines where the constitutive
relations of multi-dimensional two-fluid model are implemented. These
programs are to be linked to the PHOENICS library (at least Version
1.4). The include file MYGRDLOC must also be in the path inaddition to
the include files of PHOENICS. Secondly, a sample input for one of the
cases discussed in Chapter III is listed. The last FORTRAN code,
WALHEAT.FOR, is a stand-alone program to calculate the partitioning of
wall heat flux as given in Chapter III. The results of WALHEAT.FOR are
written in two binary files (see code listing for the format). One of
them, EVAP.DAT, must be created prior to running PHOENICS. The other,
TEMP.DAT, can be used to recover the wall temperature after the
execution of PHOENICS is completed.
188
189
FILE NAME GROUND.FTN----------------------- IB April 1989

ooooooonnonnooooooooooonooo
THIS IS THE MAIN PROGRAM OF EARTH

(C) COPYRIGHT 1984, LAST REVISION 1987.
CONCENTRATION HEAT AND MOMENTUM LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
This subroutine and the remainder of the PHOENICS code are
proprietary software owned by Concentration Heat and Momentum
Limited, 40 High Street, Wimbledon, London SW19 5AU, England.
* Subcooled Boiling *
* GROUND SUBROUTINE FOR VI.4 *
* (MODIFIED FOR CFT-77) *
»**#»•»*****»»******•***•*******••»*»
PROGRAM MAIN
1 The following two COMMON'S, which appear identically in the
satellite MAIN program, allow up to 50 dependent variables to
be solved for (or their storage spaces to be occupied by
other variables, such as density). If a larger number is
required, the 50's should be replaced, in the next 8 lines,
by the required larger number; and the 200 in COMMON/FOl/
should be replaced by 4 times the required number. Numbers
less than 50 are not permitted.
CQMMON/LGE4/L4(SO)
1/LDB1/L5(50)/IDA1/I1(50)/IDA2/I2(50)/IDA3/I3(50)/IDA4/I4(50)
1/IDA5/15(50)/IDA6/I6(50)/GI1/I7(50)/GI2/I8(50)/HDA1/IH1(50)
1/GH1/IH2(50)/RDA1/R1(50)/RDA2/R2(50)/RDA3/R3(50)/RDA4/R4(50)
1/RDA5/R3(50)/RDA6/R6(50)/RDA7/R7(50)/RDA8/R8(50)/RDA9/R9(50)
1/RDA10/R10(50)/RDA11/R11(50}
1/GR1/R12(50)/GR2/R13(50)/GR3/R14(50)/GR4/R15(50)
1/IPIP1/IP1(50)/HPIP2/IHP2(50)/RPIP1/RVAL(50)/LPIP1/LVAL(50)
1/IFPL/IPL0(50)/RFPL1/ORPRIN(50)/RFPL2/ORMAX(50)
1/RFPL3/ORMIN(50)
LOGICAL L1,L2,L3,L4,L5,DBGFIL,LVAL
CHARACTER*4 IH1,IH2,IHP2,NSDA
o
COMMON/FOl/19(200)
COMMON/DISC/DBGFIL
COMMON/LUNITS/LUNIT(60)
EXTERNAL WAYOUT
oooo
2 Set dimensions of data-for-GROUND arrays here. WARNING: the

corresponding arrays in the MAIN program of the satellite
(see SATLIT) must have the sane dimensions.
COMMON/LGRND/LG( 20 )/IGRND/IG( 20)/RGRND/RG( 100) /CGRND/CG( 10)
COMKON/KYGRND/GVTW1(20,1),GVTW2(20,1),GEVAP,GSPARE(20,1)
COMMON/GEVRT/GEVRAT{35,75),NREC,TSUB1,TSUB2,VEL1,VEL2
C0MM0N/GC0NS/Q2PR
LOGICAL LG
CHARACTER*4 CG
noon
3 Set dimensions of data-for-GREX2 arrays here. WARNING: the

corresponding arrays in the MAIN program of the satellite
(see SATLIT) must have the same dimensions.
COMMON/LSG/LSGD(20)/ISG/ISGD(20)/RSG/RSGD(100)/CSG/CSGD(10)
LOGICAL LSGD
190
CHARACTER*4 CSGD
C
C 4 Set dimension of patch-name array here. WARNING: the array
C NAMPAT in the MAIN program of the satellite must have the
C dimension.
COMMON/NPAT/NAMPAT(100)
CHARACTER*8 NAMPAT
C
C
C CONFIG FILE name declaration.
COMMON/CNFG/CNFIG
CHARACTER CNFIG*48
C
C 5 The numbers in the next two statements (which must be ident-
C ical) indicate how ouch computer memory is to be set aside
C for storing the main and auxiliary variables. The user may
C alter them if he wishes, to accord with the number of
C grid nodes and dependent variables he is concerned with.
COMMON F(160000)
NFDIM-160000
C
C 6 Logical-unit numbers and file names, not to be changed.
CALL CNFGZZ(2)
CALL EARSET(l)
CALL OPENFL(6)
C
C User may here change message transmitted to logical unit
C LUPR3
C
OPEN (UNIT-80,FILE-'DUMP.DAT' ,FORM-'UNFORMATTED' ,STATUS-’NEW’)
C
CALL WRIT40{'20 NODE LOCAL GROUND USED ')
CALL MAINl(NFDIM)
CALL WATOUT(O)
STOP
END
C****•«••*********•*•*»*****•**••••*•*•**••»••*•*•****»«»•*•***•
C$DIR**GROSTA
SUBROUTINE GROSTA
INCLUDE 'SATEAR'
INCLUDE 'GRDLOC*
INCLUDE 'GRDEAR'
C.... This subroutine directs control to the GROUNDS selected by
C the satellite settings of USEGRX, NAMGRD a USEGRD.
c
C Subroutine GREX2 contains options for fluid properties,
C turbulence models, wall functions, chemical reaction etc. It
C was introduced in version 2.0 of PHOENICS.
C
IF(USEGRX) CALL GREX2
C
C
C.... BTSTGR contains the seguences used in conjunction with
C the BFC test battery.
C
IF(NAMGRD.EQ.'BTST') CALL BTSTGR
C
C.... TESTGR contains test battery seguences used in conjunction
C with the test-battery SATLIT subroutine, TESTST.
C
191
IF(NAMGRD.EQ.'TEST') CALL TESTGR

C
C.... SPECGR is a generic "special” GROUND the name of which can
C be used by anyone for their own purposes. SPC1GR, SPC2GR and
C SPC3GR permit the user to attach his own library of special
C GROUNDS selected according to the prescription of NAMGRD.
C
IF(NAMGRD.EQ.'SPEC') CALL SPECGR
IF(NAMGRD.EQ.'SPCl') CALL SPC1GR
IF(NAMGRD.EQ.'SPC2') CALL SPC2GR
IF(NAMGRD.EQ.'SPC3') CALL SPC3GR
C
C.... The subroutine GROUND attached to the bottom of this file is
C an unallocated blank form into which the user can insert his
C own FORTRAN sequences. The PIL parameter USEGRD governs entry
C in to it.
C
IF(USEGRD) CALL GROUND
C
C.... The data echo is called at the preliminary print-out stage,
c
IF(IGR.NE.20) RETURN
IF(.NOT.ECHO) GO TO 20
CALL DATPRN(Y,Y,Y,Y, Y,Y,Y,Y, Y,Y,Y,N, Y,Y,Y,Y,
1 Y,Y,Y,Y, Y,Y,Y,Y)
RETURN
20 CALL DATPRN(Y,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N,N)
RETURN
END
C***************************************************************
C$DIR**GROUND
SUBROUTINE GROUND
INCLUDE 'SATEAR*
INCLUDE 'GRDLOC'
INCLUDE 'GRDEAR'
EQUIVALEHCE(IZ,I2STEP)
C
C 1 Set dimensions of data-for-GROUND arrays here. WARNING: the
C corresponding arrays in the MAIN program of the satellite
C and EARTH must have the same dimensions.
C0MMON/LGRND/LG(20)/IGRND/IG(20)/RGRND/RG( 100)/CGRND/CG( 10)
COMMON/GEVRT/GEVRAT(35,75) ,NREC,TSUB1,TSUB2 ,VEL1,VEL2
COMMON/MYGRND/GVTW1 (20,1) ,GVTW2 (20,1) ,GEVAP,GSPARE (20,1)
COMMON/GCONS/Q2PR
LOGICAL LG
CHARACTERS CG
CHARACTER*10 FINAME
C
C 2 User dimensions own arrays here, for example:
c
DIMENSION GSET(20,1),GJ1(20,1),GAREA(20,1)
C
C 3 User places his data statements here, for example:
C DATA NXDIM,NYDIM/1Q,10/
C
C
C 4 Insert own coding below as desired, guided by GREX examples.
C Note that the satellite-to-GREX special data in the labelled
C COMMONS /RSG/, /ISG/, /LSG/ and /CSG/ can be included and
192
C used below but the user must check GREX for any conflicting
C uses. The same comment applies to the EARTH-spare working
C arrays EASP1, EASP2,.... EASP10. If the call to GREX has been
C deactivated then they can all be used without reservation,
c
IXL-IABS(IXL)
IF(IGR.EQ.13) GO TO 13
XF(IGR.EQ.19) GO TO 19
GO TO (1,2,3,4,5,6,24,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,24,24,24,24,19,20,24,
124,23,24),IGR
c
C-— GROUP 1. Run title and other preliminaries
c
1 GO TO (1001,1002),ISC
1001 CONTINUE
Q2PR-RG(11)
C
C variables to be used in Group 13.
c
C RG{16) : Virtual mass coefficient
C RG(17) : lift force coefficient
C RG(18) : multiplier for momentum source at wall
C RG(19) : hfg
C RG(20) : heat flux to liquid phase (GROUP 13 and 19)
C
C
C EASP1 Bubble Reynolds number
C EASP2 Temporarily used in virtual mass calculation
C EASP3 Virtual mass source in z direction
C EASP4 Interfacial area per cell
C EASP5 Bubble diameter
C EASP6 Used to be earlier values for virtual mass, now commented out
C EASP10 turbulent kinematic viscosity
C
c
CALL NAKE(EASPl)
CALL MAKE(EASP2)
CALL MAKE(EASP3)
CALL MAKE(EASP4)
CALL MAKE(EASP5)
CALL MAKE(EASP6)
CALL MAXZ(EASPIO)
CALL MAKE(VOL)
CALL MAKE(ANORTH)
RETURN
1002 CONTINUE
C interfacial heat transfer
Q2PR«RG(11)
RETURN
C•*****•**••*•»•*•»•*•*•••*•*»«•**•**••*»••*••*»•»*•**
c
C GROUP 2. Transience; time-step specification
c
2 CONTINUE
RETURN
C******************************************************
c
C-— GROUP 3. X-dlrection grid specification
193
3 CONTINUE
RETURN
noon
— GROUP 4. Y-direction grid specification

4 CONTINUE
RETURN
nnnn
GROUP 5. Z-direction grid specification

5 CONTINUE
RETURN
onno
GROUP 6. Body-fitted coordinates or grid distortion

6 CONTINUE
RETURN
nnonnnn
* Make changes for this group only in group 19.

GROUP 7. Variables stored, solved ■ named
— GROUP B. Terms (in differential equations) & devices

8 GO TO (81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,810,811,812,813,814,815)
1,?SC
81 CONTINUE
C * ------------------ SECTION 1 -----------------------
C For U1AD.LE.GRND phase 1 additional velocity (VELAD).
RETURN
82 CONTINUE
c * ------------------SECTION 2 -----------------------
C For U2AD.XiE.GRND— phase 2 additional velocity (VELAD).
RETURN
83 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION 3 -----------------------
C For V1AD.LE.GRND phase 1 additional velocity (VELAD).
RETURN
84 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION 4 -----------------------
C For V2AD.LE.GRND— phase 2 additional velocity (VELAD).
RETURN
85 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 5 -----------------------
C For W1AD.LE.GRND phase 1 additional velocity (VELAD).
RETURN
86 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 6 -----------------------
C For N2AD.IiE.GRND— - phase 2 additional velocity (VELAD).
RETURN
87 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION7 ----VOLUMETRIC SOURCE FOR GALA
RETURN
88 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION 8 — CONVECTION FLUXES
RETURN
89 CONTINUE
194
C * SECTION 9 DIFFUSION COEFFICIENTS

RETURN
810 CONTINUE
C * --------------SECTION 1 0 ----- CONVECTION NEIGHBOURS
RETURN
811 CONTINUE
C * ---------------- SECTION 11 -- DIFFUSION NEIGHBOURS
RETURN
812 CONTINUE
C * ---------------- SECTION 12 -- LINEARISED SOURCES
RETURN
813 CONTINUE
C * --------------SECTION 1 3 ----- CORRECTION COEFFICIENTS
RETURN
814 CONTINUE
C * ---------------- SECTION 14 -- USER'S SOLVER
RETURN
815 CONTINUE
C * ---------------- SECTION 15 -- CHANGE SOLUTION
RETURN
C * Make all other group-8 changes in group 19.
C****’
c
C GROUP 9. Properties of the medium (or media)
0
C The sections in this group are arranged sequentially in their
C order ofcalling from EARTH. Thus, as can be seenfrom below,
c the temperature sections (10 and 11)precede thedensity
C sections (1 and3); so, densityformulae can refer to
C temperaturestores already set.
9 GO TO (91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,900,901,902,903),ISC
900 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 1 0 -----------------------
C For THP1.LE.GRND—> — - phase-1 temperature Index AUX(TEMPl)
RETURN
901 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 1 1 -----------------------
C For TMP2.LE.GRND — — phase-2 temperature Index AUX(TEMP2)
RETURN
902 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 1 2 -----------------------
C For BL1.LE.GRND---------phase-1 length scale Index AUX(LENl)
RETURN
903 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 1 3 -----------------------
C For EL2.LE.GRND---------phase-2 length scale Index AUX(LEN2)
RETURN
91 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 1 -----------------------
C For RHOl.LE.SRND density for phase 1 Index AUX(DENl).
RETURN
92 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION 2 --------------------- —
C For DRK1DP.LE.GRND D(LN(DEN) )/DP for phase 1 (D1DP).
RETURN
93 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 3 -----------------------
C For RH02.LE.GRND density for phase 2 Index AUX(DEN2).
RETURN
195-
94 CONTINUE
C * ------------------SECTION 4 -----------------------
C For DRH2DP.LE.GRND D(LN(DEN) )/DP for phase 2 (D2DP) .
RETURN
95 CONTINUE
c * ------------------SECTION 5 -----------------------
C For ENUT.LE.GRND reference turbulent kinematic viscosity.
CALL SETYX(EASP10,GVTW1,NY,1)
CALL SETYX(AUX(VIST),GVTW2,NY,1)
CALL FN26(AUX(VIST),R2)
CALL FN34(AUX(VXST),EASP10,1.)
CALL FN23(AUX(VIST),5.E-4)
RETURN
96 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION 6 -----------------------
C For ENUL.LE.GRND reference laminar kinematic viscosity.
RETURN
97 CONTINUE
C * ----------------- SECTION 7 -----------------------
C For PRNDTL( ).LE.GRND laminar PRANDTL nos., or diffusivity.
RETURN
98 CONTINUE
C * SECTION 8 -----------------------
C For PHIHT( ).LE.GRND interface value of first phase(FIIl).
C
RETURN
99 CONTINUE
c * ----------------- SECTION 9 -----------------------
C For PHINT( ).LE.GRND-— interface value of second phase(FII2)
c
RETURN
noon
— GROUP 10. Inter-phase-transfer processes and properties

10 GO TO (101,102,103,104),ISC
101 CONTINUE
•---------------- SECTION 1 --
nnn
For CFIPS.LE.GRND— inter-phase friction coeff. AUX(INTFRC).

CALL GDRAGI (AUX(XNTFRC),EASP1,EASP5,EASP4,RH01*ENUL,XZ)
o
RETURN
102 CONTINUE
» ---------------- SECTION 2 --
ooono
For CMDOT.EQ.GRND- inter-phase mass transfer Index AUX(INTMDT)

Cl is the total phase change per cell. Evaporation has minus sign.
CALL FN0(AUX(INTMDT),Cl)
RETURN
n
103 CONTINUE
*---------------- SECTION 3 --
nnononn
For CINT( ).EQ.GRND— phasel-to-interface transfer

coefficients (COI1)
In ql.dat, CXNT(W1)-CINT(W2)>CXNT(V1)-CXNT(V2) - 1 by default
Then, The interfaelal friction coefficient is CFIPS.
Also PHINT of HI, W2, VI and V2 are left with the default value.
196
c So that he Interfacial friction is calculated as

c
c 2
c ------------- (W1 - W2) - CFIPS (W1 - W2)
c 1 1
c
c CFIPS CFIPS
c
c Sane for y-components ( CFIPS (V1-V2) )
c
RETURN
104 CONTINUE
• ----------------- SECTION 4 -----------------------
For CINT( ).EQ.GRND phase2-to-interface transfer
coefficients (C0I2)
RETURN
c
C GROUP 11. Initialization of variable or porosity fields
C
11 CONTINUE
RETURN
c*
c
c- GROUP 12. Convection and diffusion adjustments
c
12 CONTINUE
RETURN
C
C GROUP 13. Boundary conditions and special sources
c
13 CONTINUE
GO TO (130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,1310,
11311,1312,1313,1314,1315,1316,1317,1318,1319,1320,1321),ISC
130 CONTINUE
C ------- SECTION 1 -------- — coefficient ■ GRND
RETURN
131 CONTINUE
c----------------- SECTION 2 ------------ coefficient - GRND1
RETURN
132 CONTINUE
c----------------- SECTION 3 ------------ coefficient - GRND2
ITL ■ IYF for these patches
CALL GETONE(Wl,GSKIN,IYL,1)
CALL GETONE(WALDIS,GOIST,IYL,1)
IF (GSKIN.LT.0.1) GSKIN-0.1
GSKIN>ALOG(GSKIH*GDIST/ENUL)
GSKIN-0.023772 - 4.5314E-3*GSKIN + 2.40739E-04*GSKIN*GSKIN
C
C
CALL FNl(CO,GSKIN)
RETURN
133 CONTINUE
C---------------- SECTION 4 coefficient « GRND3
RETURN
134 CONTINUE
c--------- SECTION 5 coefficient “ GRND4
197
RETURN
135 CONTINUE
SECTION 6 coefficient » GRND5
RETURN
136 CONTINUE
SECTION 7 coefficient - GRND6
RETURN
137 CONTINUE
SECTION 8 coefficient * GRND7
RETURN
138 CONTINUE
SECTION 9 coefficient - GRND8
RETURN
139 CONTINUE
SECTION 10 coefficient “ GRND9
RETURN
1310 CONTINUE
SECTION 11 coefficient “ GRNO10
RETURN
1311 CONTINUE
SECTION 12 ------ value - GRND
RETURN
1312 CONTINUE
SECTION 13 value “ GRND1
VIRTUAL NASS SOURCE IN HI DIRECTION

IF (IRDVAR.EQ.W1) THEN
CALL FNO (VAL,EASP3)
RETURN
END IF
IF (IHDVAR.EQ.W2) THEN
CALL FN2 (VAL,EASP3,0.,-1.)
RETURN
END IF
RETURN
1313 CONTINUE
C -------------------- SECTION1 4 ---------- value ■ GRND2
CALL FH1(VAL,RG(20))
RETURN
1314 CONTINUE
c -------------------- SECTION1 5 ---------- value - GRND3
C
c
c
c CORRECTION TO THE MOMENTUM SOURCES DUE TO PHASE CHANGE
c
c
JLOCVL - LOF(VAL)
JLOCW1 - LOF(Hl)
JLOCW2 > L0F(W2)
JLOCC1 « LOF(Cl)
C
c
IF (INDVAR.EQ.H1) THEN
c
DO 1351 JY - IYF,IYL
c
IF ( F(JLOCC1+JY) .GT. 0 ) THEN
c
198
C The momentum source added by default Is mdot*(wl-w2). To make

C It ffldot*w2, add mdot*(2*w2-wl)
C
F (JLOCVL+JY) « F (JL0CC1+JY)*( 2*F(JLOCW2+JY) - F(JL0CW1+JY) )
C
ELSE
C
C No momentum source is added by default.
C
F(JLOCVL+JY) * F (JL0CC1+JY)*F(JL0CW1+JY)
C
END IF
1351 CONTINUE
C
ELSE IF (INDVAR.EQ.W2) THEN
C
C
IF ( F (JLOCC1+JY) .LT. 0 ) THEN
C
C The momentum source added by default is mdot*(wl-w2). To make it
C -mdot*wl, add -mdot*(2*wl-w2)
C
F (JLOCVL+JY) - -F(JLOCCl+JY)*( 2+F(JL0CW1+JY) - F(JL0CW2+JY) )
C
ELSE
C
C No momentum source is added by default.
C
F(JLOCVL+JY) - -F(JLOCC1+JY)+F(JLOCW2+JY)
C
END IF
1352 CONTINUE
C
END IF
C
RETURN
1315 CONTINUE
C ----- — r — ~— SECTION 16 — -— --- — — — value “ GRND4
C
C ENERGY SOURCEDUE TO PHASE CHANGE
C ---------------------------------
C
C Note that the source at the wall isalready taken care of.
C This coding is relevant for internalnodes (C5 used, not Cl)
C
JLOCVL - LOF(VAL)
JLOCC5 - L0F(C5)
C
c
IF (IKDVAR.EQ.H1) THEN
C
F( JLOCVL+JY) - F(JLOCC5+JY)*RG(19)
1353 CONTINUE
C
ELSE IF (INDVAR.EQ.H2) THEN
C
F(JLOCVL+JY) - 0.
199
1354 CONTINUE
C
END IF
no
RETURN
1316 CONTINUE
---------------- SECTION 1 7 ------------------------- value - GRND5
noon
Wall lift force
IF (INDVAR.EQ.V1) THEN
CALL FN2 (VAL,C2,0.,-1.)
ELSE
CALL FNO (VAL,C2)
END IF
RETURN
1317 CONTINUE
---------------- SECTION 1 6 ------------------------- value - GRND6
oono
momentum source in y direction due to wall evaporation
GVSRCE - GEVAP
GVSRCE - RG(18)*GVSRCE+GVSRCE/RH02
o
IF (INDVAR.EQ.V1) THEN
CALL FN2(VAL,ANORTH,0.,GVSRCE)
ELSE IF (INDVAR.EQ.V2) THEN
CALL FN2(VAL,ANORXH,0.,-GVSRCE)
END IF
o
RETURN
1318 CONTINUE
n
-------------------- SECTION 19 value*GRND7

RETURN
1319 CONTINUE
n
-------------------- SECTION 2 0 value - GRND8

RETURN
1320 CONTINUE
n
-------------------- SECTION 2 1 value - GRND9

RETURN
1321 CONTINUE
o
-------------------- SECTION 2 2 value “ GRND10

RETURN
noon
GROUP 14. Downstream pressure for PARAB-.TRUE.
14 CONTINUE
RETURN
oonnnooooo

-— GROUP 15. Termination of sweeps
GROUP 16. Termination of iterations
GROUP 17. Under-relaxation devices
— GROUP 18. Limits on variables or Increments to them
— GROUP 19. Special calls to GROUND from EARTH
200
19 GO TO (191,192,193,194,195,196,197,198),ISC
191 CONTINUE
C * -------------------- SECTION 1 ---- START OF TIME STEP.
C
Q2PR = RG( 11)*(1.+0.2*SIN(2.*3.14159*(ISTEP-1)/16 ))
WRITE (*,*) 'TIME STEP :',ISTEP,' HEAT FLUX : ',Q2PR
IF (ISTEP.GT.l) CLOSE (75)
WRITE (FINAME(1:6),1915) ISTEP
1915 FORMAT ('EVAP',12.2)
C
OPEN (UNIT=75,FILE=FINAME,FORM='UNFORMATTED',ACCESS='DIRECT'
& ,RECL=300,STATUS-'OLD')
C
READ (75,REC=1) NREC,TSUB1,TSUB2,VEL1,VEL2,QW
DO 1916 JREC = 1,NREC
READ (75,REC=JREC) (GEVRAT(JJ,JREC),JJ=1,35)
1916 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
192 CONTINUE
C * SECTION2 -----START OF SWEEP.
RETURN
193 CONTINUE
c * SECTION3 -----START OF IZ SLAB.
C
C
C The following coding used to be in section 1
C it is moved here for parabolicruns
C
c
C IF (ISTEP.EQ.l) THEN
C CALL FN1 (EASP4,0.)
C CALL FN1 (EASP6,0.)
C END IF
C
C turbulent kinematic viscosity
C for mass flux 900 kg/m2*sec — $
C symmetric, obtained from k-eps solution
c
GVTWl(10,1) = 2.749E-06
GVTW1( 9,1) = 1.206E-05
GVTWl( 8,1) = 1.666E-05
GVTWl( 7,1) = 2.249E-05
GVTWl( 6,1) = 2.762E-05
GVTWl( 5,1) = 3.242E-05
GVTWl( 4,1) = 3.666E-05
GVTWl( 3,1) = 4.029E-05
GVTWl( 2,1) = 4.076E-05
GVTWl( 1,1) = 4.903E-05
c
c ACTUAL VALUE IS ABOUT 0.00012
C
DO 1941 111=1,10
GVTW2 (111,1) = 0.00012
1941 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
194 CONTINUE
C * SECTION4 ---- START OF ITERATION.
C
201
C BUBBLE DIAMETER AND INTERFACIAL AREA DENSITY

C
C cpl = 4823.
C
CALL GBDIAM(EASP5,4823.)
CALL GINTAR(EASP4,EASP5,VOL)
CALL GREYN0(EASP1,EASP5,ENUL,7500. )
C
C EASP5 : Bubble diameter
C EASP4 : Interfacial area percell
C EASP1 : Bubble Re number
C CONDENSATION RATE
C
C
CALL GCONDS(C 5 ,EASP5,EASP4,EASP1)
C
IF (IZ.LE.3) CALL FN1 (C5,0.)
C
C C5 includes condensation rate per cell.
C
c =============================================================
C EVAPORATION RATE
C
CALL GPHSCH (Cl,C5,ANORTH,GEVAP,4823., 1)
C
C Cl includes C5 + evaporation at the wall.
C GEVAP has minus sign in accordance with the sign of phase
C change from phase one to phase 2.
C
C ===tc=3EE&eE=sdS3zec2==r=====ns==SKcsEestESE=£c=s==s==s=rs==c
C HEAT FLUXES
C
CALL GETONE (HI,GLH1,NY,1)
C
IF (GLH1.GT.24000.) GLH1=24000.
C
C q"e = m*hvl
RG(20) = GEVAP*(R G (19) - GLH1)
C GEVAP has minus sign
RG(20) = Q2PR + R G (20)
C
C LIFT FORCE
C
CALL GWLIFT (C2,VOL,RH02,RG(17))
C
C The lift force with this sign acts on liquid phase
C
RETURN
195 CONTINUE
C * SECTION5 ---- FINISH OF ITERATION.
C
RETURN
196 CONTINUE
c * SECTION6 -----FINISH OF IZ SLAB.
IF (ISWEEP.E Q .LSWEEP) THEN
WRITE { * , * ) ISWEEP, LSWEEP, IZ
CALL GDVARS (ISTEP)
202
END IF
nnnn
VIRTUAL MASS
EASP2 is temporary, EASP4 and EASP6 are earlier
CALL GVIRMS (EASP3,0.5,RH01,ISTEP,DT)

CALL FN26 (EASP3,V0L)
n
RETURN
197 CONTINUE
* SECTION7 ---- FINISH OF SWEEP.
non
RETURN
198 CONTINUE
* SECTION8 ---- FINISH OF TIME STEP.
non
RETURN
noon
GROUP 20. Preliminary print-out

20 CONTINUE
RETURN
noonnnn

GROUP 21. Print-out of variables
— GROUP 22. Spot-value print-out
GROUP 23. Field print-out and plot control

23 CONTINUE
RETURN
noon
GROUP 24. Dumps for restarts

24 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE SPECGR
CALL WRIT40('DUMMY SUBROUTINE SPECGR CALLED. ')
CALL WRIT40('PLEASE ATTACH SPECGR OBJECT AT LINK. ')
CALL WAYOUT(2)
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE SPC1GR
CALL WRIT40('DUMMY SUBROUTINE SPC1GR CALLED. ')
CALL WRIT40('PLEASE ATTACH SPC1GR OBJECT AT LINK. ')
CALL WAYOUT(2)
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE SPC2GR
CALL WRIT40{'PLEASE ATTACH SPC2GR OBJECT AT LINK. ')
CALL WAYOUT(2)
203
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE SPC3GR
CALL WRIT40('PLEASE ATTACH SPC3GR OBJECT AT LINK. ')
CALL WAYOUT(2)
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE QUIZ
RETURN
END
204
uuuuuuu
* This subroutine calculates Re number based on

GREYNO.FOR * bubble diameter. The liquid viscosity is corrected
April 18, 1989 * by (1-alfa).
SUBROUTINE GREYNO (KRE,KDIA,VISL,REMAX)

ououuuuuuuu
Input : KRE :index of F array to include Re number

KOIA :index of F array that includes bubble diameter
GRE :Coeficient for Re number
REMAX :Upper limit for Re number
Output: EASP1 is set to min ( GRE*R1* |wl-w2| , REMAX )

GRE must be dB/visk
REAL*4 REMAX
C
INCLUDE 1MYGRDLOC’
COMMON /IGE/IXF,IXL,IYF,IYL,IGFILL(21)
COMMON /NAMFN/NAMFUN
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
C
NAMFUN = 'GREYNO'
C
CALL L0F5(KRE,KDIA,W1,W 2 ,R1,INDRE,INDD,INDW1,INDW2,INDR1,IADD)
INDRE *= INDRE + IADD
INDD = INDRE + INDD
INDW1 = INDRE + INDW1
INDW2 = INDRE + INDW2
INDR1 = INDRE + INDR1
C
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL
C
REYNL = F(INDR1+IY)*F(IY+INDD)*ABS(F(INDW2+IY)-F(INDW1+IY))/VISL
REYNL = AMIN1 (REYNL,REMAX)
IF (REYNL.LT.l.E-10) REYNL=1.E-10
F(INDRE+IY) = REYNL
C
10 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
END
205
nonnnnn
* Calculates total phase change rate per cell.

GPHSCH.FOR * Called from Group 19. Section 4.
April 14, 1989 * Calls EVAP.FOR
SUBROUTINE GPHSCH (KPHS,KCND,AREA,EVRATE,CPL,IDO)

nnnnnnonnnn
Argument KPHS : index of phase change including evaporation at wall

list KCND : index for only condensation
AREA : index of north area
GEVAP: evaporation rate (on return)
CPL : Liquid latent heat
IDO : flag whether to calculate evporation rate
=1 add evaporation rate, =0 no evaporation
INTEGER AREA
o
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
n
NAMFUN = 'GPHSCH'
n
CALL L0F3 (H1,H1,AREA, INDH1, INDW1, INDAR, IADD)

INDH1 *INDH1 + IADD
INDW1 =INDH1 + INDW1
INDAR =INDH1 + INDAR
CALL L0F2(KPHS,KCND,INDPH,INDCN,IADD)
INDPH =INDPH + IADD
INDCN =INDPH + INDCN
non
get velocity and temperature at next to wall node
TMPN = -F(IYL+INDH1)/CPL ! subcooling, T1 - Tsat

VELN - F(IYL+INDW1)
AREN = F (IYL+INDAR)
r>
CALL EVAP (TMPN,VELN,EVRATE)

nnn
paste condensation rate on evaporation rate
1 CONTINUE
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL
F (IY+INDPH) = F (IY+INDCN)
10 CONTINUE
n
F (IYL+INDPH) = F(IYL+INDPH) - EVRATE*AREN*IDO

EVRATE = -EVRATE
o
RETURN
END
nnnn
206
C * Interpolates the evaporation rate from the look-up

C EVAP.FOR * table EVAP.DAT
C *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
c
SUBROUTINE EVAP(TSUB,VEL,ERATE)
C
C
C
C m(r,s) = P*q
C
c q = I ql q2 q3 q4 I r
c — >
c I 0.25*(1-r)*(1-s) I qi q2 (-D
c P = I 0.25*(l+r)*(l-s) I s i 1 1
c I 0.25*(l-r)*(l+s) I v 1 1
c I 0.25*(1+r)*(1+s) I q3 1 1 04 ( 1)
c (-D ( 1)
C
C (r in vel. direction, s in Tsub direction)
C
C
C The direct access data file must be openand associated with
C unit number 75. The first record is the title record and contains
C NREC, TSUB1, TSUB2, VEL1, VEL2, QW. NREC does not include title
C record. TSUB = TSAT - TB
C
c
DIMENSION E M (35)
C
READ (75,REC=1) NREC,TSUB1,TSUB2,VEL1,VEL2,QW
C
DTSUB = (TSUB1 - TSUB2)/(NREC-1)
DVEL = (VEL2 - VELl)/34.
IT1 = (TSUB1 - TSUB)/DTSUB+2
IV1 = (VEL - VEL1)/DVEL+1
IF (IT1.LT.2) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'HEATVTSUB OUT OF RANGE *** TSUB = ',TSUB
TSUB = TSUB1 - 0.001*DTSUB
IT1=2
END IF
IF (IT1.GE.NREC) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'HEATNTSUB OUT OF RANGE *** TSUB = ',TSUB
TSUB = TSUB2 + 0.001*DTSUB
IT1=NREC
END IF
IF (IV1.LT.1) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'HEATWEL OUT OF RANGE *** VEL = ',VEL
VEL = VEL1 + 0.001*DVEL
IV1=1
END IF
IF (IV1.GE.35) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'HEATWEL OUT OF RANGE *** VEL = ',VEL
VEL = VEL2 - 0.001*DVEL
IV1 = 34
END IF
IT2 = IT1+1
C
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout permission.
207
READ (75,REC=IT1) (EM(I),1=1,35)

Q1 = EM(IVl)
Q2 = EM(IV1+1)
READ (75,REC=IT2) (EM(I),1=1,35)
Q3 = EM(IVl)
Q4 = EM(XV1+1)
non
center points of node IT1,IV1

TC =TSUB1 - (ITl - 1)*DTSUB + 0.5*DTSUB
VC =VEL1 + (IV1 - 1)*DVEL + 0.5*DVEL
n
R =2.*(VEL - VC )/DVEL
S =2.*(TC - TSUB)/DTSUB
nn
ERATE = 0.25*({1.-R)*(1.-S)*Ql+(1 .+R)*(1.-S)*Q2

& +(1.-R)*(1.+S)*Q3+(1.+R)*(1.+S)*Q4)
RETURN
END
208
c *
c GINTAR. FOR * Calculates interfacial area in a cell.
c May 1, 1989 +
c
C
SUBROUTINE GINTAR (KINT, KDIA, VOL)
c
C
C KINT : index of the spare earth array to include interfacial
C area density.
c KDIA : index of the spare earth array that includes the bubble
c diameter
c
c 4.5 a - ags 6 ags 1 - a n
r A" ' = —— --- ---— + ---— ( — ----- )
c D 1 - ags dB 1 - ags
c
C ags = 0.3929 - 0.57142*a for a>0.25
c ags = 0.05 for a>0.6
C
c n = 1
c
INTEGER VOL
c
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
C
NAMFUN = 'GINTAR'
C
DPIPE = 0.0154
C
CALL L0F5(KINT,KDIA,R1,R2,VOL,INDK,INDD,INDR1,INDR2,INDVOL,IADD)
INDK INDK + IADD
INDD INDK + INDD
INDR1 = INDK + INDR1
INDR2 = INDK + INDR2
INDVOL = INDK + INDVOL
C
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL
C
ALFA = F(IY+INDR2)
IF (ALFA.LT.0.25) THEN
AGS = ALFA
ELSE IF (ALFA.LT.0.6) THEN
AGS = 0.3929 - 0.57142*ALFA
ELSE
AGS = 0 . 0 5
END IF
F (IY+INDK) = 4.5/DPIPE*(ALFA-AGS)/(1.-AGS) ! vapor slugs

& + 6 .*AGS/F(IY+INDD)*( (1.-ALFA)/(1.-AGS) )**5 ! bubbles
C
F(IY+INDK) = F(IY+INDK)*F(IY+INDVCL)
10 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
209
onnnnnn
* Calculates bubble diameter as a function of

GBDIAM.FOR * of liquid subcooling over a slab.
April 18, 1989 *
SUBROUTINE GBDIAM (KINT, CPL)

nnnnnnnnn
KINT : index of the spare earth array to include bubble diameter

CPL : liquid specific heat
I 5 Tsub > 5 C
db = a*T + b T = < Tsub -34 < Tsub < 10 C
I -13.5 Tsub < -34 C
INTEGER KINT
REAL*4 CPL,TSUB
C
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
C
NAMFUN = 'GBDIAM'
C
CALL L0F2(KINT,HI,INDK,INDH1,IADD)
INDK = INDK + IADD
INDH1 = INDK + INDH1
C
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL
C
TSUB = F (IY+INDH1)/CPL
IF (TSUB.LT.-13.5) TSUB = -13.5
IF (TSUB.GT. 5.) TSUB = 5.
F(IY+INDK) = 1.E-4*TSUB + 0.0015
C
10 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
END
210
onnoonn
* This subroutine is to be linked to GROUND for

GCONDS.FOR * condensation rate calculations in Group 19.
April 18, 1989 * Section 4.
SUBROUTINE GCONDS (KCON,KD,KINT,KRE)

nnnnnnnnnnnoonnnnnnno
** This subroutine uses properties of liquid and vapor **

** They are to be modified for differrent input **
The arguments point to the portions of the F array that store
the following quantities:
KCON : condensation rate per cell (set on return)

KD : bubble diameter
KINT : Interfacial area per cell
KRE : Bubble Re number
Condensation rate calculated as

mdot = H A " '/h (h - h )
il fg f 1
where
0.5
H = RHOl/D*( 4/PI*ENUL/(CP1/K1*(1+ENUT/ENUL))*Re )
il
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
nnn
liquid properties
DATA RHOL,CPL,VL,VT,HK,HFG/788.02,4823.,1.302E-7,1.302E-5,0.619,
Sl 1.6771E6/
n
NAMFUN = 'GCONDS'
n
CALL L0F5{KCON,KD,KINT,KRE,HI,INDC,INDD,INDI,INDR,INDH,IADD)
INDC = INDC + IADD
INDD = INDC + INDD
INDI = INDC + INDI
INDR = INDC + INDR
INDH = INDC + INDH
no
COEFF = 4.*VL*HK/(3.14156*CPL*RHOL*(1.+VT/VL))
n
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL
no
HI1 = SQRT (COEFF*F(IY+INDR))

HI1 = RH0L*HI1/F(IY+INDD)
HINT = F(IY+INDH)
PHSCHG = - HINT * HI1 * F(IY+INDI) / HFG

IF (PHSCHG.LT.0.) PHSCHG = 0.
211
c
F(INDC+IY) = PHSCHG
10 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
END
212
c *
C GDRAGI.FOR * Ishii's interfacial drag coefficient
C April 18, 1989 *
C**************.***.
c
c
SUBROUTINE GDRAGI (KDRG, KREY, KDIA, KINT, VISK, IZ)
C
C VISK = RH01*ENUL
C
C Other arguments are the earth array indices pointing to the
C following quantities:
C
C KDRG : Drag force coefficient
C KREY : Reynolds number based on bubble diameter
C KDIA : Bubble diameter
C KINT : Interfacial area density.
C
C 0.75
C C = 3*mul/d/rl* (1+0.l*Re ) A"'
C D
C
INTEGER KINT,VOL
C
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
C
NAMFUN “ 'GDRAGI'
C
c
COEFF = 3*VISK
C
CALL L0F5(KDRG,KDIA,KREY,KINT,R1,INDG,INDD,INDR,INDI,INDV,IADD)
INDG = INDG + IADD
INDD = INDG + INDD
INOR S
INDG + INDR
INDI =S INDG + INDI
INDV INDG + INDV
C
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL
C
F(IY+INDG) = (1. + 0.1*F(IY+INDR)**0.75) * COEFF / ( F(IY+INDD) *
S AMAX1(F(IY+INDV),0.0001) ) * F(IY+INDI)
C
10 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
END
213
nonnonn
*
GDVARS.FOR * Dumps the variables in a file attached to unit 80
May 9, 1989 * at the end of each time step.
SUBROUTINE GDVARS (ITIME)

no
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
o
NAMFUN = 'GDVARS'
noon
Only the following variables are saved

KP1 = LOF(Pl)
KW1 = LOF(Wl)
KW2 = L0F(W2)
KR2 = L0F(R2)
KH1 = LOF(Hl)
KC1 = LOF(Cl)
KC5 = L0F(C5)
n
WRITE (80) (F(KP1+I) ,1 =IYF,IYL)

WRITE (80) (F(KW1+I),I =IYF,IYL)
WRITE (80) (F(KW2+I),1 BIYF,IYL)
WRITE (80) (F(KR2+I),1 =IYF,IYL)
WRITE (80) (F(KH1+I),1 =IYF,IYL)
WRITE (80) (F(KC1+I),I;=IYF,IYL)
WRITE (80) (F(KC5+I),1 =IYF,IYL)
on
RETURN
END
214
nnnnn
GVIRMS.FOR ! Virtual mass force in main flow direction

OCT 10, 1989 ! The force with this sign is acted on liquid phase
SUBROUTINE GVIRMS (KVIR,VCOEF,RHOL,ISTEP,DELT)

DIMENSION FVMAS (100)
oooooooonnnoon
Input : VCOEF : Virtual mass coefficient

RHOL : Liquid phase density
ISTEP : Time step
DELT : Time step interval
Output :
KVIR : index of spare array to include virtual mass force
dw2 dw2 dwl dwl
KVIR = rho c (l-r2)*(----+w 2 --- ------ w l ----)
L vm dt dz dt dt
REAL*4 REMAX
n
INCLUDE 'MYGRDLOC'
COMMON /IGE/IXF,IXL,IYF,IYL,IGFILL{21)
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
o
NAMFUN = 'GVIRMS'
non
------------------------ SPECIAL ACCELERATION

IR2L = LOF (R2)
IW1L = LOF (Wl)
IW2L = LOF (W2)
INDV = LOF (KVIR)
o n
CALL FNDWDZ (KVIR,W1)
DO 1 IY = IYF,IYL
FVMAS (IY) = -F(IW1L*IY)*F(INDV+IY)
1 CONTINUE
n o
CALL FNDWDZ (KVIR,W2)

DO 2 IY = IYF,IYL
FVMAS (IY) = FVMAS(IY) + F(IW2L+IY)*F(INDV+IY)
2 CONTINUE
onnno
TIME DERIVATIVES
IF (ISTEP.LE.1) GO TO 10
C
IW10LD = OLD(W 1)
IW20LD = OLD(W2)
DO 3 IY = IYF, IYL
FVMAS (IY) = FVMAS(IY) - (F(IW1L+IYF) - F(IWIOLD+IYF))/DELT
FVMAS (IY) = FVMAS(IY) + (F(IW2L+IYF) - F(IW20LD+IYF))/DELT
215
3 CONTINUE
C
10 CONTINUE
uuu
SUBSTITUTE IN SPARE ARRAY

DO 4 IY = IYF,IYL
F (INDV+IY) = FVMAS(IY)*F(IR2L+IY)*RHOL*VCOEF
4 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
END
216
nnnnnnn
GWLIFT.FOR * Artificial wall lift force function of alfa

April 22, 1989 * gradient
SUBROUTINE GWLIFT (KLIFT, KVOL, DENST, COEFF)

nnonnnnnnnn
DENST : Vapor density

COEFF : Coefficient for the artificial lift force
Other arguments are the earth array indices pointing to the
following quantities:
KLIFT : Lift force
KVOL : Volume
INCLUDE 'HYGRDLOC'
COMMON /IGE/IXF,IXI., IYF, IYL, IGFILL(21)
CHARACTER*6 NAMFUN
n
NAMFUN = 'GWLIFT'
non
CALL L0F3(KLIFT,R2,KVOL,INDL,INDR,INDV,IADD)
INDL *=INDL + IADD
INDR = INDL + INDR
INDV = INDL + INDV
C
DO 10 IY = IYF,IYL-1
C
DALFDY = ( F (IY+1+INDR) - F(IY+INDR) ) / 3.85E-4
F (IY+INDL) = - COEFF*DENST*DALFDY*F(IY+INDV)
C
10 CONTINUE
C
RETURN
END
217
=! FILE : MYGRDLOC ; DATE APR. 10, 1989

nnnnnnnnnnn
ONLY FOR EARTH VARIABLE INDICES
Block location indices (LBs) for Full-Field Variables (FFVs)

LBs for dependent variables allocated in PIL for DENI,
DEN2, VISL, VIST, TEMPI, TEMP2, LEN1, LEN2, INTMDT, INTFRC,
IMB1, IMB2, PCOR, UCRT, U2CR, VCRT, V2CR, WCRT, W2CR etc
are determined by the integer function INAME(’name')
(eg INAME('DENI') is the LB for lst-phase density field).
C0MM0N/LBFFV/P1,P2,U1,U2,V1,V2,W1,W2,R1,R2,RS,KE,EP,H1,H2,
1C1,C2,C3,C4,C5,C6,C7,C8,C9,C10,CU,C12,C13,C14,C15,C16,C17,
1C18,C19,C20,C21,C22,C23,C24,C25,C26,C27,C28,C29,C30,C31,C32,
1C33,C34,C35
C
INTEGER P1,P2,U1,U2,V1,V2,W1,W2,R1,R2,RS,KE,EP,H1,H2,C1,C2,C3,
1C4,C5,C6,C7,C8,C9,C10,C11,C12,C13,C14,C15,C16,C17,C18,C19,C20,
1C21,C22,C23,C24,C25,C26,C27,C28,C29,C30,C31,C32,C33,C34,C35
C
COMMON F(1)
218
TALK=F;RUN( 1, 1);VDU= 2
GROUP 1. Run title and other preliminaries
* EXAMPLE PHOENICS INPUT FILE, Q1 *

* THE INPUT DATA IS FOR THE SAME CONDITIONS *
* AS IN BARTOLOMEI'S WORK *
TEXT(STEADY STATE FOR THE CONDITIONS OF BARTOLEMEI'S WORK)

REAL(WCH,Q2 P R )
* Half channel width
WCH=0.0077
* Heat flux
Q2PR=5.7E5
GROUP 2. Transience; time-step specification
STEADY=T
GROUP 3. X-direction grid specification
CARTES=F
XULAST-6.283185
GROUP 4. Y-direction grid specification
GRDPWR(Y,10,WCH,0 .5)
GROUP 5. Z-direction grid specification
PARAB=F
GRDPWR(Z,100,2.0,1.0)
GROUP 6. Body-fitted coordinates or grid distortion
GROUP 7. Variables stored, solved & named
ONEPHS=F
SOLVE(PI,VI,V2,Wl,W2,R1,R2,H1,H2)
TERMS(H1,N,P,P,P,P,N);TERMS(H2,N,P,P,P,P,N)
** Provide storage for inter-phase mass transfer
STORE(ENUT)
Cl and C5 are used for pahse change
C2 is used for lift force
STORE(Cl,C2,C5)
STORE(CMDOT)
RLOLIM=0.00001
GROUP 8. Terms (in differential equations) & devices
GROUP 9. Properties of the medium (or media)
ENUL=1.302e-7
PRNDTL(W1)=1.;PRNDTL(W2)=2.922
PRNDTL(VI)=1.;PRNDTL(V2)=2.922
PRNDTL(H1)=0.8;PRNDTL(H2)=1.326
PRT(W2)=1.;PRT(V2)=1.
PRT(H1)=0.9
RH01=788.02;RH02=22.42
** Activate turbulent vicosity calculation
ENUT=GRND
** Phase change set in GPHSCH.FOR
CMDOT=GRND
GROUP 10. Inter-phase-transfer processes and properties
** Ishii's correlation for drag coefficient. See GDRAGI
** for explanation and coefficients used.
CFIPS=GRND
** Set the inter-phase heat transfer coefficients.
** Leave PHINT (Wl, W2) as default.
** Also CINT (Wl, W2) = 1 by default (look at GROUND for explanation)
** No interfacial friction in y-direction.
** for explanation and the coefficients used.
PHINT(HI)=GRND;PHINT(H2)=l.667e6
219
CINT(H1)“0.;CINT(H2)=0.
GROUP 11. Initialization of variable or porosity fields
RESTRT(ALL)
FIINIT(W1)=1.14
FIINIT(W2)=1.14
FIINIT(V1)=-0.0001
FIINIT(V2)=-0.0001
FIINIT(R1)=1.0
FIIMIT(R2)”0.
FIINIT(Hl)**-1.1E-5
FIINIT(H2)=1.676e6
FIINIT(C1)“0.
FIINIT(C2)=0.
FIINIT(C5)=0.
FIINIT(ENUT)=0.00001
GROUP 12. Convection and diffusion adjustments
GROUP 13. Boundary conditions and special sources
** Inlet at the bottom
UBULK = 0.8 TBULK = -21
PATCH(INLIO,LOW,1,1,10,10, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL10,PI,FIXFLU,RHOl*0.8250);COVAL(INL10,Wl,ONLYMS,0.8250)
COVAL(INL10,H1,ONLYMS,-2.023E5);COVAL(INL10,H2,ONLYMS,1.6771E6)
PATCH(INL9,LOW,1,1,9,9, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL9,PI,FIXFLU,RH01*0.9763);COVAL(INL9,Wl,ONLYMS,0.9763)
COVAL(INL9,H I ,ONLYMS,-2.4 04E5) ;COVAL(INL9,H2,ONLYMS,1.67 7 1E6)
PATCH(INL8,LOW,1,1,8,8, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL8,H I ,ONLYMS,-2.606E5);COVAL(INL8,H2,ONLYMS,1.6771E6)
PATCH(INL7,LOW,l,1,7,7, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL7,PI,FIXFLU,RH01*1.113);COVAL(INL7,W1,ONLYMS,1.113)
PATCH(INL6,LOW,1,1,6,6, 1, 1,1,100)
PATCH(INL5,LOW,1,1,5,5, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL (INL5,P 1,FIXFLU,RHO1* 1.196);COVAL(INL5,W 1,ONLYMS,1.196)
COVAL(INL5,H I ,ONLYMS,-2.9 80E5);COVAL(INL5,H2,ONLYMS,1.67 7 1E6)
PATCH(INL4,LOW,1,1,4,4, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL{INL4,P I ,FIXFLU,RHOl*1.229);COVAL(INL4,Wl,ONLYMS,1.229)
PATCH(INL3,LOW,1,1,3,3, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL3,P 1,FIXFLU,RHOl*1.259);COVAL(INL3,Wl,ONLYMS,1.259)
COVAL(INL3,H I ,ONLYMS,-3.153E5);COVAL(INL3,H 2 ,ONLYMS,1.6 771E6)
PATCH(INL2,LOW,1,1,2,2, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL2,HI,ONLYMS,-3.235E5);COVAL(INL2,H2,ONLYMS,1.6771E6)
PATCH(IHI-l,I<OW,l,l,l,l, 1, 1,1,100)
COVAL(INL1,P I ,FIXFLU,RHOl*1.323);COVAL(INL1,W1,ONLYMS,1.323)
COVAL(INL1,HI,ONLYMS,-3.336E5);COVAL(INL1,H2 ,ONLYMS,1.6771E6)
PATCH(OUTL,HIGH,1,1,1,NY ,NZ ,NZ,1,LSTEP)
COVAL (OUTL, PI, FIXP, 0.0) ;COVAL (OUTL, P 2 ,FIXP, 0.)
COVAL(OUTL,W l ,ONLYMS,SAME);COVAL(OUTL,W2,ONLYMS,SAME)
COVAL(OUTL,H 1,ONLYMS,SAME);COVAL(OUTL,H2,ONLYMS,SAME)
** Heated wall
PATCH(HEATER,NORTH,1,1,NY,NY,1,NZ,1,LSTEP)
220
COVAL(HEATER,HI,FIXFLU,GRND2)
** Phase change
PATCH(CONDS1,CELL,1,1,1,NY,2,NZ ,1,LSTEP)
COVAL(CONDS1, H1,FIXFLU,GRND4)
COVAL(CONDS1,H2,FIXFLU,GRND4)
COVAL(CONDS1,Wl,FIXFLU,GRND3)
COVAL(CONDS1,W2,FIXFLU,GRND3)
PATCH{NOSLIP2,NWALL,1,1,NY,N Y ,1,N Z ,1,LSTEP)

COVAL(NOSLIF2,W l ,GRND2,0.0)
** Virtual mass source

PATCH(VIRMAS,CELL,1,NX,1,NY,10,NZ-1,1,LSTEP)
COVAL(VIRMAS,Wl,FIXFLU,GRND1)
COVAL(VIRMAS,W 2 ,FIXFLU,GRND1)
** Gravity
PATCH(GRAV,PHASEM,1,1,1,NY,1,N Z ,1,LSTEP)
COVAL(GRAV,W 1,FIXFLU,-9.81)
COVAL(GRAV,W2,FIXFLU,-9.81)
GROUP 15. Termination of sweeps

** Start with 100 iterations. After it starts convergening,
** increase relaxation parameters and restart.
LSWEEP-100
RESREF(Pl)=l.E-3
RESREF(VI)=l.E-6;RESREF(V2)“l.E-6
RESREF(W l )=1.E-5;RESREF(W2)=1.E-5
RESREF(HI)=1.E-1;RESREF(H2)=10.
RESREF(R 1 )«1.E-4;RESREF(R2)-1.E-4
RESREF {CMDOT )«=1. E -7
GROUP 17. Under-relaxation devices
RELAX(VI,FALSDT,0.03);RELAX(V2,FALSDT,0.03)
RELAX(W l ,FALSDT,0.03);RELAX(W 2 ,FALSDT,0.03)
RELAX(R 1 ,FALSDT,0.03);RELAX(R2,FALSDT,0.03)
RELAX(H I ,FALSDT,0.03);RELAX(H 2 ,FALSDT,0.03)
RELAX(CMDOT,FALSDT,0.03)
**
VARMAX(W l )=5.0;VARMIN(W l )=-1.
VARMAX(W 2 )=5.0;VARMIN(W 2 )=-1.
GROUP 18. Limits on variables or increments to them
GROUP 19. Data communacated by GROUND
RG(11)=Q2PR
** virtual mass coefficient
RG(16)=0.5
** lift force coefficient
RG(17)*0.02
** evaporation induced momentum source coefficient
RG(18)=5.0
** hfg
RG{19)=1.677le6
** Sweep no. to start virtual mass calculation
IG(2)=2
** Turn off all calls to GREX2. Otherwise the coding in GREX2 wil
** interfere with GROUND.
USEGRX=F
DWDY=T
DWDZ-T
GROUP 20. Preliminary print-out
ECHO=F
221
GROUP 21. Print-out of variables

GROUP 22. Spot-value print-out
IZMON=1000
GROUP 23. Field print-out and plot control
IZPRF=1
NZPR1N=1
TSTSWP=50
NTPRIN=1
OUTPUT(PI(N >N,N,N,N>N)
OUTPUT(VI,N,N,N,Y,N,N)
0UTPUT(V2,N,N,N,Y,N,N)
0UTPUT(R1,N,N,N,Y,N,N)
OUTPUT(C 2 ,N ,N ,N ,N ,N ,N )
OUTPUT(ENUT,N,N,N,N,N,N)
OUTPUT(CMDOT,N,N,N,N,N,N)
GROUP 24. Dumps for restarts
SAVE=T
STOP
222
nnnnn
W A L H E A T . FOR *
DIMENSION VEL(36),EVAP(36),WSUPT(36)
COMMON /HEAT2/A1,A2,DM,DMI,FREQ,ASD,HQ,H2F,A2F,A1F,ERATE
o
OPEN (UNIT=10,FILE='EVAP.DAT' ,STATUS='NEW' ,FORM='UNFORMATTED',

& ACCESS='DIRECT',RECL=300)
OPEN (UNIT=11,FILE='TSUP.DAT',STATUS='NEW',FORM='UNFORMATTED',
& ACCESS='DIRECT',RECL=300)
OPEN (UNIT= 12,FILE='HEAT.DAT',STATUS='NEW')
no
WRITE (* '(A,$)') ' HEAT FLUX > '

READ (* *) Q2PR
WRITE (* '(A,$)') ' MIN. VELOCITY > '
READ (* *) VMIN
WRITE <* *(A,$)') ' MAX. VELOCITY > '
READ (* *) VMAX
WRITE (* '(A,$)') ' MAX. TSAT-TBULK > '
READ (* *) TFRST
WRITE (* '(A,S)') ' MIN. TSAT-TBULK > '
READ (* *) TLAST
n
NVEL = 35
NTEM = 75
DELV = (VMAX -VMIN)/FLOAT(NVEL-1)
DELT = (TFRST - TLAST)/FLOAT(NTEM-l)
WRITE (10,REC=1) NTEM,TFRST,TLAST,VMIN,VMAX,Q2PR
WRITE (11,REC=1) NTEM,TFRST,TLAST,VMIN,VMAX,Q2PR
n
DO 100 IT=1,NTEM
TSUB = TFRST - (IT-1)*DELT
TSUBB = TSUB
DO 110 IV=1,NVEL
VEL(IV) » VMIN + (IV-1)*DELV
VELL=VEL(IV)
CALL WALHEAT (TSUP,VELL,TSUBB,Q1F,QQ,QE,Q2PR)
EVAP (IV) = ERATE
WSUPT (IV) = TSUP
n
WRITE (12,500) VELL,TSUB,TSUP,ERATE,DM

110 CONTINUE
WRITE (10,REC=IT+1) (EVAP(I) ,1=1,NVEL)
WRITE (11,REC=IT+1) (WSUPT(I),1=1,NVEL)
100 CONTINUE
n
500 FORMAT (2X,F5.2,2X,F7.2,2X,F7.2,2X,E11.5,2X,E11.5)

n
STOP
END
nnnnnnnnn
WALHEAT1.FOR
223
C
SUBROUTINE WALHEAT(TW,VEL,TSUB,QIF,QQ,QE,Q2PR)
C
COMMON /HEAT1/RHOV,HLV,CONL,ALFA,ACONS,B,DMCON,H1F,QW
COMMON /HEAT2/A1,A2,DM,DMI,FREQ,ASD,HQ,H2F,A2F,A1F,ERATE
COMMON /ASOD/ASD1/ASD2,FLAGD
LOGICAL FLAGD
C
c
c TOTAL AREA MODIFIED
c ASD MODIFIED
c
c INITIALIZE
c
A1 = 0.
A2 0.
DM 0.
DMI = 0.
FREQ = 0.
ASD = 0.
HQ = 0.
H2F = 0.
A2F = 0.
A1F = 0.
ERATE= 0.
TW 0.
Q1F = 0.
QQ = 0.
QE 0.
QW Q2PR
c
c
c
VELL = VEL
CALL HEATWAL(TW,VELL,TSUB,Q1F,QQ,QE)
RETURN
END
c
c
c
SUBROUTINE HEATWAL(TSUP,VEL,TSUB,Q1F,QQ,QE)
CHARACTER*1 ANS
COMMON /HEAT1/RHOV,HLV,CONL,ALFA,ACONS,B ,DMCON,HIF,QW
COMMON /HEAT2/A1,A 2 ,D M ,DMI,FREQ,ASD,HQ,H2F,A2 F ,A 1F ,ERATE
COMMON /ASDD/ASDL,ASD2,FLAGD
LOGICAL FLAGD
C
C S88BSSSBSeSSBSCSS&SS8CSSSSSS3SSSSBSBSS8SSBeeSSSS8ZSSSSS
C PROPERTIES
c INPUT PROPERTIES FOR 45 BAR (STEAM)
PRES 4. 5e6
RHOL 788.02
RHOV 22.42
CPL 4823.
CONL 0.619
VISK 1.302E-07
HFG 1.6771E6
SIGMA 0.025
224
CONW = 19.
RHOW = 7865.
CPW = 400.
CALCULATED
VISD = VISK+RHOL
PRL = VISD+CPL/CONL
ALFA - CONL/RHOL/CPL
on
-
HLV HFG + CPL+TSUB
onnnn
GAMA = SQRT(CONW*RHOW*CPW/CONL/RHOL/CPL)
n
A1 = SQRT((RHOL-RHOG)* 9 . 81/SIGMA)/(HFG*VISD)
A2 = 0.5*SQRT(ALFA/3.14159)*0.013*PRL**1.7*GAMA
o
BCONS = 1./2./(1.-RHOV/RHOL)
DMCON = 2.42E-5*PRES*+0.709
ooooonn
delta = 0.0001925
REYNO - VEL*3.2586E-4/VISK
o
CF = 0.062
DO 10 I = 1,10
CF = l./( ALOG(REYNO+CF)/0.435 + 5.05 )
10 CONTINUE
oooo
CF = sqrt (actual Cf/2)

Ch = s/(1+12.8(PrÔ.68 - 1) sqrt(s))
H1F = CF+CF/(1.- 1.783+CF)

H1F = HlF+RHOI.*CPL*VEL
nnoo
GUESS TSUP
TSUP = QW/H1F-TSUB
IS IT ALREADY IN SINGLE PHASE ?
FLAGD = .FALSE.
IF (TSUP.LE.0.05) THEN
DM =0.
ASD = 0.
FREQ = 0.
HQ =0.
A1F = 1.
GO TO 130
END IF
IF (TSUB.GT.2.) THEN
B = TSUB+BCONS
ELSE
225
TMAX = QW/H1F-0.001
IF (TMAX.GT.3) TMAX = 3.
IF (TMAX.LT.2) THEN
FLAGD = .TRUE.
WRITE (*,*) ' SWITCHED TO TOLUBINSKY DIAM.'
GO TO 25
END IF
C
B2 - 2.*BCONS
B3 = TMAX*BCONS
C
AA2 - (Al*(QW - H1F*2.))**0.33333*A2
AA3 = (Al*(QW - H1F*TMAX))**0.33333*A2
IF (VEL.LT.0.61) FI-1.
IF (VEL.GE.0.61) FI-(VEL/0.61)**0.47
DM2 = DMCON*AA2/SQRT(B2*FI)
DM3 = DMCON*AA3/SQRT(B3*FI)
DMI = DM2 + (DM3-DM2)*(TSUB-2.)/(TMAX-2.)
C
Eh u IF
25 CONTINUE
c ---------------------------------------------- START ITERATION
C
C
ITLIM-100
RELAX -0.5
110 ITER -0
120 ITER = ITER+1
IF (ITER.GT.ITLIM) THEN
ITLIM-ITLIM+50
RELAX-0.6‘RELAX
IF (RELAX.LT.0.005) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'TSUB = ',TSUB,' VEL = ',VEL
WRITE (*,*) 'COULD NOT FIND WALL TEMP.’
TSUP = -TSUB
RETURN
END IF
GO TO 120
END IF
C
CALL HEAT(TSUP,TSUB,VEL)
HH = A1F*H1F + A2F*HQ
QTOT = ERATE*HLV + HH*(TSUB+TSUP)
IF (HH.EQ.0.) THEN
TSUP1 = -TSUB
ELSE
TSUP1 = TSUP + RELAX* (QW-QTOT)/HH
IF (TSUP1.L E .-TSUB) TSUP1— TSUB
END IF
C
ERR = ABS((QTOT-QWJ/QW)
IF (TSUP1.LE.0.) TSUP1 = 0.8*TSUP
TSUP = TSUP1
IF (ERR.GT.l.E-5) GO TO 120
C
C
130 CONTINUE
C
Q1F = A1F*H1F*(TSUP+TSUB)
QQ = A2F*HQ*(TSUP+TSUB)
226
QE = ERATE*HLV
RETURN
END
non
SUBROUTINE HEAT(TSUP,TSUB,VEL)
o
COMMON /HEAT1/RHOV,HLV,CONL,ALFA,ACONS,B ,DMCON,HIF,QW

COMMON /HEAT2 /Al,A2,DM,DMI,FREQ,ASD,HQ,H2F,A2F,A1F,ERATE
COMMON /ASDD/ASD1,ASD2.FLAGD
LOGICAL FLAGD
o n
ASD = 0.
IF (TSUB.GT.2.) THEN
A = (Al*(QW - H1F*TSUB))**0.33333*A2
IF (VEL.L T .0.61) FI=1.
IF (VEL.GE.0.61) FI=(VEL/0.61)**0.47
DM = DMCON*A/SQRT(B*FI)
ELSE
IF (FLAGD) THEN
DM = 0.0014*EXP(-TSUB/45.)
ELSE
DM = DMI
END IF
END IF
FREQ = 3.546/SQRT(DM)
IF (TSUP.LE.0.0001) TSUP=0.0001
ASD ■= (210.*TSUP)**1.805
on
ATOT = 1.
A2F = 3.1415*DM*DM*ASD
A1F = ATOT - A2F
n
IF (A1F.LE.1.E-4) THEN
A2F = ATOT
A1F = l.E-4
ASD = 1./3.1415/DM/DM
END IF
ERATE = 3.14159*DM*DM*DM/6.*ASD*FREQ*RHOV
n
EMAX = QW/HLV
IF (ERATE.GT.EMAX) ERATE = EMAX
o
HQ = 2.*CONL/SQRT(3.14159*ALFA/FREQ)
on
RETURN
END
APPENDIX B
DERIVATION OF THE TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION IN A SINGLE PHASE
CHANNEL INCLUDING HALL DYNAMICS.
The governing equations are given by Eqs.(III.34), (III.35) and
(III.36) in
the text. Assuming a small perturbation, Su, in inlet velocity, (which
is constant throughout the channel at any instant since the flow is
incompressible), Eq.(III.34) can be linearized as,
L J x-s
The initial temperature gradient can be obtained from the steady-state
energy balance as,
dT q"P
— = — c (B 21
dz w lB,2J
o p
where wq is the initial mass flow rate.
The heat transfer coefficient at the wall is given by a
Dittus-Boelter type correlation in the form of
H = C Re“Prn (B.3)
Using a heat transfer coefficient given by Eq.(B. 3), the perturbation
in wall heat flux as a result of the perturbations in velocity and the
tempeartures of the liquid and the wall becomes,
227
228
P - = m iT + iF (5Th ' 6T) (B-4)
Linearizing Eq.(III.35) and using Eq.(B.4), the perturbation in the
wall temperature can be expressed as,
35T q"P r . H ,
ST - - pWTPTM Tw [
L
" ¥0
* £
0
(5 I„ - ST) ]J (B- 5>
Substituting Eqs.(B.2) through (B.5) into Eq.(B. 1), and taking the
Laplace transform, the liquid temperature perturbation can be expressed
in the Laplace transform domain as,

q:C> , ST ,.
— a (m zrr 1)
a w 1+ST r f az a^ s
61 [i - exp [-- - az + y^p-j] ^ (B.6)
S ST L t J-1 0
— + a
T 1+ST
where
_ H0PH
O H . PwCp
W P Hw \w ,_ „.
—
a = i7ir 3and
11(1 T =
t
= - HH~Pp - (B-7)
0 p OH
A small sinusoidal perturbation in the inlet velocity can be wriiten as
5u = Su — -- (B. 8)
o 2^ 2 J
S + td
Substituting Eq.(B.8) into Eq.(B.6) and rearranging, we get,
az
q"Su
ST = —° g—u aw ^ wF(s)a - e-az F(s)\ e- s z / u o
yr _ az i+st
JI ,_ _.
e (B.9)
where
msT - s t - 1
F(s) = ------------------ -— — (B. 10)
s (s t + 1 + au t ) ( s + « )
o
229
The inverse transform of eq.(B.10) can be obtained by forming partial
fractions. The second term in parantheses in Eq.(B. 9) is a triple
comvolution. The inverse Laplace transform of the last two factors can
be obtained by a series expansion,
az i +s t ,k -t/T 1
g(t) = if1 ■ t e - (B.11)
1+ST 6 ■ Ik=0 is P s ] T
Only the first five or six terms are significant in the series given by
Eq.(B.11). Representing the inverse Laplace transform of the first
three factors in the last term of Eq.(B.9) by h(t), the inverse Laplace
transform of Eq.(B.9) can be written as,
w
q"Su
o o
5T = aw £ f(t) - J h(t)g(t-/3)d0 j (B.12)
H
The result obtained after carrying out the algebra is given by
Eq.(III.41).
APPENDIX C
COMPUTER PROGRAM LISTINGS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF PARTICLE MOTION
The main programs listed in this Appendix are as follows.
BFCINP.F Prepares input for BFCO.FOR
BFCO.F Generates a body fitted grid.
MAKEFIINP.F Makes an input file for FIDAP.
TRAJECTORY.F : Creates and modifies the binary data file

trajectory.
INTERPOL.F Interpolates velocities, and modifies the restart

file, FDPOST, of FIDAP code.
FORCE.C Evaluates the forces exerted on each particle,

and writes the displacements in trajectory.
In addition, two subroutines, USRELM.f and USRNOD.f must be linked
with the FIDAP code.
The subroutines of each program are listed immediately following
the main program. However, the subroutine READBN is shared by both
FORCE.F and INTERPOL.F. For a transient solution, the programs listed
above are run by a C-Shell script, a listing of which is also given at
the end.
Initially, the binary files "trajectory" and "bconds" must be
created. The format and the content of these files can be found in the
code listings of TRAJECTORY.F and OUTPUT.F (a subroutine of BFCO.F).
230
231
oooooo
BFCINP.FOR ! Finds the indices for bubbles and prepares input

AUG 12, 1989 ! file for BFCO.
DIMENSION XC(20,20),YC(20,20)
DIMENSION X0(5),Y 0 (5),XOLD(5),YOLD(5)
DIMENSION I0(S),J0(S) ,DX( 200),DY(200)
oooo
---------------------------------------- INPUT STUFF

OPEN (10,FILE=*trajectory' ,STATUS='OLD',FORM= •UNFORMATTED')
oooo
currently capable of handling equal radius, equally discretized

bubbles
READ (10) NPAR, IL, JL, (IBUB, JBUB,I=1,NPAR) ,XLEN, YLEN, (R0,1=1,NPAR)
n
DO 1 I « 1,10000
READ (10,END=2) ISKIP,SKIP, (ISKIP,X0(IPAR) ,Y0( IPAR),SKIP,SKIP,
& SKIP,SKIP,SXIP,SKIP,IPAR=1,NPAR)
1 CONTINUE
2 CONTINUE
o
CLOSE (10)
onnnn
------------------------------- COORDIANTES OF A SINGLE BUBBLE

AT (0,0)
NBUB-2 * (I B U B J B U B )
IBL=IBUB+1
JBL=JBUB+1
IXL-IBL/2
JYS*=JBL/2
IXK=IBUB-IXL
JYN=JBUB-JYS
C
TETA=225.
C
DTETA=360./NBUB
DTETA»DTETA*3.14159/180.
TETA»TETA*3.14159/180.
C
DO 20 IY=1,JBL
X C (1,IV)*R0*COS(TETA)
YC(1,IY)“R0*SIN(TETA)
TETA-TETA-DTETA
20 CONTINUE
DO 21 IX«2,IBL
X C (IX,JBL)=R0 *COS(TETA)
YC (IX,JBL)-R0 *S IK (TETA)
TETA*=TETA-DTETA
21 CONTINUE
DO 22 IY=JBUB,1,-1
XC(IBL,IY)=R0*COS(TETA)
YC(IBL,IY)*=R0*SIN(TETA)
TETA=TETA-DTETA
22 CONTINUE
DO 23 IX=IBUB,2/-I
X C (IX,1)=R0 *COS(TETA)
YC(IX,1)=R0*SIN(TETA)
TETA=TETA-DTETA
23 CONTINUE
C
c----------------------------- FIND THE NODE NUMBERS OF EACH BUBBLE
C
C
DELX1 = 0 . 1 5
DELY1 = 0 . 1 5
CALL FINDFN (XO(1),XLEN-X0(1),DELX1,DELX2,IL,10(1),FACX)
CALL FINDFN {Y O (1),YLEN-YO(1),DELY1,DELY2,JL,JO(1),FACY)
XDIS1=X0(1)
YDIS1=Y0{1)
DO 5 IPAR = 2,NPAR
XDIS1 = X O {IPAR)-XO(1)
YDIS1 = Y O (IPAR)-YO(1)
10(IPAR) = 10(1) + XDIS1/DELX1+1.4
JO(IPAR) = J0(1) + YDIS1/DELY1+1.4
5 CONTINUE
C
C ------------------------------- CHECK FOR COLLISONS
C
DO 200 IB1 = 1,NPAR
XI = XO(IBl)
Y1 = YO(IBl)
DO 210 IB2 = IB1+1,NPAR
X2 > X0(IB2)
Y2 = Y0(IB2)
CLEAR = SQRT( (Y2-Y1)**2 + (X2-X1)**2 )
CLEAR = CLEAR/2
IF (CLEAR.LE.RO) THEN
WRITE (*,'(A,12,A,12)')
6 ' BUBBLE # ’,IB1,' AND BUBBLE #',IB2,' COLLIDED'
STOP
END IF
210 CONTINUE
200 CONTINUE
C
C
c---------------------------------------------------------------------
c CHECK FOR MUTUAL POINTS
C
IBOX = 2*(IXR + IXL +1)
JBOX = 2*(JYS + JYN +1)
DO 219 IPAR = 1,NPAR
IXL1 « 10(IPAR) - IXL
IXR1 = 10(IPAR) + IXR
JYS1 = JO(IPAR) - JYS
JYN1 = JO(IPAR) + JYN
DO 218 JPAR = 2,NPAR
C
ITER = 0
217 CONTINUE
ITER = ITER + 1
IF (ITER.GT.20) THEN
WRITE (*,*) ' COULD NOT MOVE BUBBLES AROUND'
STOP
233
END IF
c
IF (JPAR.EQ.IPAR) GO TO 218
C
IXL2 =IO(JPAR) - IXL
IXR2 =IO(JPAR) + IXR
JYS2 =JO(JPAR) - JYS
JYN2 =JO(JPAR) + JYN
C
IXLL = MINO (IXL1,IXL2,IXR1,IXR2)
IXRR = MAXO (IXL1,IXL2,IXR1,IXR2)
JYSS = MINO (JYS1,JYS2,JYN1,JYN2)
JYNN = MAXO (JYS1,JYS2,JYN1,JYN2)
C
IXSIDE « IXRR-IXLL+1
JYSIDE * JYNN-JYSS+1
IF (IXSIDE.GE.IBOX.OR.JYSIDE.GE.JBOX) THEN
non
NO DANGER, GO CHECK THE NEXT ONE.

GO TO 218
END IF
n
IF (IXSIDE.LE.JYSIDE) THEN
n
EXPAND IN X DIRECTION BY ONE

IF (IXL2.LE.IXR1) THEN
IO(JPAR) = IO(JPAR) + 1
ELSE
IO(JPAR) - IO(JPAR) - 1
END IF
n
DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN

GO TO 217
n
ELSE
o
EXPAND IN Y DIRECTION BY ONE

IF (JYS2.LE.JYN1) THEN
JO(JPAR) = JO(JPAR) + 1
ELSE
JO(JPAR) « JO(JPAR) - 1
END IF
no
GO TO 217
END IF
218 CONTINUE
219 CONTINUE
nnnn
------------------------- CATCH ESCAPEES

DO 220 IPAR = 1,NPAR
IF (10(IPAR)+IXR.GE.IL) THEN
WRITE (*,'(A,II,A)') ' BUBBLE #',IPAR,' IS ESCAPING FROM RIGHT'
STOP
END IF
IF (10(IPAR)-IXL.LE.1) THEN
WRITE (*,*(A,II,A ) ') ' BUBBLE #',IPAR,' IS ESCAPING FROM LEFT'
STOP
END IF
IF {JO(IPAR)+JYN.GE.JL) THEN
234
WRITE (*,'(A,I1,A)') ' BUBBLE #',IPAR,' IS ESCAPING FROM TOP'

STOP
END IF
IF (J O (IPAR)-JYS.LE.1) THEN
WRITE (*,'(A,II,A)') ' BUBBLE # ’,IPAR,' IS ESCAPING FROM BOTTOM'
STOP
END IF
220 CONTINUE
C
C------------------------------ WRITE OUTER FRAME AND HEADING
C
OPEN (UNIT®10,FILE®'bubinp',STATUS®'UNKNOWN')
C
WRITE (10,*) IL,JL
WRITE (10,*) NPAR
DO 6 IPAR = 1,NPAR
WRITE (10,*) 10(IPAR)-IXL, 10(IPAR)+IXR, J0(IPAR)-JYS,
& JO(IPAR)+JYN
6 CONTINUE
C
XOR®0.
YOR=0.
WRITE (10,*) 1,1,XOR,YOR
WRITE (10,*) 1,JL,XOR,YOR+YLEN
WRITE (10,*) IL,1,XOR+XLEN,YOR
WRITE (10,*) IL,JL,XOR+XLEN,YOR+YLEN
DO 10 1=2,IL-1
YL=YOR
YR-YOR+YLEN
WRITE (10,*) 1,1,1000.,YL
WRITE (10,*) I,JL,1000.,YR
10 CONTINUE
DO 15 J=2,JL-1
XL=XOR
XR=XOR+XLEN
WRITE (10,*) 1,J,XL,1000.
WRITE (10,*) IL,J,XR,1000.
15 CONTINUE
C
c GET ACTUAL COORDINATES OF BUBBLES
C
c
C CENTER point of the bubble is at I0(),J0(), center at X0,Y0
C
DO 100 IPAR=1,NPAR
c
c GO UP ON LEFT EDGE
C
DO 30 IY=1,JBL
1=10(IPAR)-IXL
J=J0(IPAR)+IY-JYS-1
X=XC(1,IY)+X0(IPAR)
Y=YC(1,IY)+Y0(IPAR)
WRITE (10,*) I ,J,X,Y
30 CONTINUE
C
C GO RIGHT ON TOP EDGE
C
DO 31 IX=2,IBL
I=I0(IPAR)+IX-IXL-1
235
J=JO(IPAR)+JYN
X=XC(IX,JBL)+X0(IPAR)
Y=YC(IX,JBL)+Y0(IPAR)
WRITE (10,*) I ,J,X,Y
31 CONTINUE
nnn
GO DOWN ON RIGHT EDGE
DO 32 IY=JBUB,1,-1
1=10{IPAR)+IXR
J=J0(IPAR)+IY-JYS-1
X*XC(IBL,IY)+X0(IPAR)
Y=YC(IBL,IY)+Y0(IPAR)
WRITE (10,*) I,J,X,Y
32 CONTINUE
nnn
GO LEFT ON BOTTOM EDGE
DO 33 IX=IBUB,2,-1
1=10(IPAR)+IX-IXR-1
J=J0(IPAR)-JYS
X=XC(IX,1)+X0(IPAR)
Y=YC(IX,1)+Y0(IPAR)
WRITE (10,*) I,J,X,Y
33 CONTINUE
o
100 CONTINUE
n
CLOSE (10)
nnnnnnn
CB8tCtBMB8IS«8Baa>8«BBa3S8S>MHBU*8SBSSBS8aaiBenBRe
UNEQUAL SPACING IN LOGICAL DOMAIN

***** ONLY FOR ONE BUBBLE ******
OPEN (10,FILE*='dellog’,STATUS='UNKNOWN')
DX( 10(1)) = DELX2
DX(I0(1)-1) = DELX1
DY (JO (1)) = DELY2
DY(J0(1)-1) = DELY1
DO 300 IX = I0(1)+1,IL-1
DX(IX) = DX(IX-1)*FACX
300 CONTINUE
DO 310 IX = I0(1)-2,1,-1
DX(IX) = DX(IX+1)*FACX
310 CONTINUE
DO 320 IY = J0(1)+1,JL-1
DY(IY) = DY(IY-1)*FACY
320 CONTINUE
DO 330 IY = J O (1)-2,1,-1
DY(IY) = DY(IY+1)*FACY
330 CONTINUE
xlen = 0.
236
ylen = 0.
WRITE (10,*)
DO 340 I = 1,IL-1
WRITE (10,*) 1,D X (I)
xlen = xlen + dx(i)
340 CONTINUE
WRITE (10,*)
DO 350 I = 1,JL-1
WRITE (10,*) I,D Y (I)
ylen = ylen + dy(i)
350 CONTINUE
C
write (*#*) 'xlen, ylen : ',xlen,ylen
STOP
END
237
nnnnn
FINDFN.FOR ! Calculates factor and node number for unequal

MAR 6, 1990 ! spacing. Called by BUBINP
SUBROUTINE FINDFN (XIN 1, XIN2,DELX1,DELX2,NNODE,NCNTR,F )

nnnnnnnnn
Input : XIN1, XIN2, DELX1, NNODE

Output : NCNTR, F, DELX1, DELX2
Note that DELX1 and DELX2 are readjusted on exit, and the returned
values must be used by BUBINP.
Push input
XI = XIN1
X2 = XIN2
N = NNODE - 1
DELX = DELX1
nnn
Calculate F
F = 1.5
FI = 1.
A1 = XI/DELX
A2 = X2/DELX
DO 10 ITER « 1,500
F = ( A1*A2*(F-1)*(F-1) + (A1+A2)*(F-1) + 1 )**( l./FLOAT(N) )
EF » ABS(F-Fl)
IF (EF.LE.l.E-5) GO TO 20
FI ■ F
10 CONTINUE
WRITE (*,*) 'FINDFN COULD NOT FIND F IN 500 ITERATIONS'
WRITE (*,*) 'ASSUMED F«l, CONTINUING'
20 CONTINUE
nn
N1 = ( AL0G(A1*(F-l)+l.) / ALOG(F) + 0.5 )

N2 = N - N1
nnnnn
All intervals may not sum up to x because of round off in Nl.

Recalculate a new F and DELX, keeping Nl and N2 fixed.
DELX1 = X1*(F-1)/(F**N1-1)
DELX2 *= X2*(F-1)/(F**N2-1)
nnn
NCNTR = Nl + 1
C
RETURN
END
238
nonnoo
BFCO ! Output is modified for USRELM and USRNOD.

JULY 19,1989 !
PARAMETER (NDGLQB=8000,NBWIDE=200)
no
DIMENSION BC(NDGL0B,2).DELX(NBWIDE),DELY(NBWIDE)
COMMON/CO/DK (NDGLOB),DE (NDGLOB),SC (NDGLOB,2), NC (NDGLOB,4)
COMMON/CR/CC(NDGLOB,NBWIDE),X (NDGLOB),R(NDGLOB)
COMMON/OUTl/NBUBBL,NCXl (10) ,NCX2( 10) ,NCY1( 10) ,NCY2(10)
COMMON/OUT2/IL,JL
LOGICAL RESTRT,SPACE
non
OPEN (UNIT=11,FILE='bubinp',STATUS®'OLD' )
no
ITMAX = 20
SPACE = .TRUE.
n
READ (11,*) IL,JL

READ (11,*) NBUBBL
DO 5 I = 1,NBUBBL
READ (11,*) NCX1(I),NCX2(I),NCY1(I),NCY2(I)
5 CONTINUE
o
NL=IL*JL
nnnnn
SOUTH BUBBLE INDEX : NCY1 WEST BUBBLE INDEX : NCX1

NORTH BUBBLE INDEX : NCY2 EAST BUBBLE INDEX : NCX2
DO 11 N=1,NL
READ (11,*,END=15) I,J,XX,YY
M=(1-1)*JL+J
IF (XX.NE.1000) BC(M,1)=XX
IF (YY.NE.1000) BC(M,2)=YY
NC(M,1)=1
NC(M,2)=1
IF (J.EQ.1.AND.XX.EQ.1000.) NC(M,1)®2
IF (J.EQ.JL.AND.XX.EQ.1000.) NC(M,1)«3
IF (I .EQ.1 .AND.YY.EQ.1000.) NC(M,2)®2
IF (I.EQ.IL.AND.YY.EQ.1000.) NC(M,2)=3
nnnn
FIND THE AXIS INDICES
11 CONTINUE
15 I0=JL+1
nnnn
scaling factor of the computational domain is 1:1

XMAX=BC(1,1)
YMAX=BC(1,2)
XMIN=BC(1,1)
239
YMIN=BC(1,2)
DO 30 N= 1,NL
IF (BC(N,1).GE.LMAX) XMAX=BC(N,1)
IF (BC(N/2).GE.YMAX) YMAX=BC(N,2)
IF (BC(N,1).LE.XMIN) XMIN=BC(N,1)
30 IF (BC(N,2).LE.YMIN) YMIN=BC(N,2)
nnnnn
SFACE».FALSE. EQUAL SPACING

SPACE-.TRUE. THE FILE DELLOG.DAT MUST BE SUPPLIED
DKSI=(XMAX-XMIN)/(IL-1)
DETA-(YMAX-YMIN)/(JL-1)
IF (.NOT.SPACE) THEN
DO 35 N-1,NL
DK(N)=DKSI
35 DE(N)=DETA
ELSE
CALL SPCING(DELX,DELY,DK,DE, IL, JL)
END IF
nnn
INQUIRE (FILE-'bf cout',EXIST-RESTRT)

n
IF (RESTRT) THEN
nnn
Read old grid
OPEN(UNIT-8 /FILE-'bf C O U t ' ,STATUS-'OLD',FORM-'UNFORMATTED')

READ (8,ERR-39,END-39) (SC(M,1),M-1,NL)
READ (8,ERR-39,END-39) (SC(M,2),M-1,NL)
WRITE (*,*) ' OLD NODAL DATA WERE READ FROM RESTART FILE '
n
DO 38 N=1,NL
IF (NC(N,1).EQ.l) SC(N,1)-BC(N, 1)
IF (NC(N,2).EQ.l) SC(N,2)-BC(N,2)
38 CONTINUE
ELSE
n n n n
WRITE (*,*) ' NO RESTART FILE WAS FOUND '

END IF
GO TO 40
nn
39 CONTINUE
RESTRT - .FALSE.
WRITE (*,*) ' RESTART FILE IS NOT COMPATIBLE '
CLOSE (8)
no
40 CONTINUE
n
IF (.NOT.RESTRT) THEN
non
default initial values
Reproduced w ith permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
240
WRITE (*,*) ' USING DEFAULTS '

C
DO 41 1=1,IL
DO 41 J=1,JL
N=(I-1)*JL+J
SC(N,1 )=XMIN+(1-1)*DKSI
SC(N ,2)=YMIN+(J-1)*DETA
IF (NC(N,1).EQ.l) SC(N,1)=BC(N,1)
IF (NC(N,2) .EQ.l) SC(N,2)=BC(ri,2)
41 CONTINUE
C
END IF
nn
ITER=0
500 IC=0
ITER=ITER+1
MV=1
no
180 M=1
DO 20 N=1,NL
NC(N,3)=0.
IF (NC(N,MV).EQ.l) GO TO 20
NC(N,3)=M
M=M+1
20 CONTINUE
ML=M-1
on
CALL COEF(IL,JL,NL,MV)
n
DO 50 N=1,NL
50 X(N)=SC(N,MV)
n
DO 200 N=1,NL
K=NC(N,3)
X(K)=X(N)
MFRST=N-I0
MLAST=N+I0
IF(MFRST.LT.l) MFRST=1
IF(MLAST.GT.NL) MLAST=NL
DO 205 M=MFRST,MLAST
IF (NC(M,HV).EQ.1) GO TO 205
L=NC(M,3)
TEMP=CC(N ,M-N+I0+1)
CC(N,M-N+I0+I)=0.
C C (K ,L-K+I0+1)=TEMP
205 CONTINUE
R(K)=R(N)
200 CONTINUE
non
Check convergence
ERR=0
DO 60 N=1,ML
TERM=0
MFRST=N-I0
MLAST=N+I0
241
IF (MFRST.LE.l) MFRST=1
IF (MLAST.GT.ML) MLAST=ML
DO 61 M=MFRST,MLAST
61 TERM=TERM+CC(N,M-N+I0+1)*X(M)
60 ERR=ERR+(R(N)-TERM)* (R(N)-TERM)
ERR=SQRT(ERR)
IF (ITER.LT.5) GO TO 450
IF (ERR.LT.0.00001) IC=IC+1
IF (IC.GE.2) GO TO 501
IF (ITER.GT.ITMAX) GO TO 501
IF (MV.EQ.l) ERR1=ERR
IF (MV.EQ.2) ERR2=ERR
DO 449 1=1,ML
IF (CC(I,I0+1).NE.0.) GO TO 449
WRITE (*,*) ' ZERO DIAGONAL IN CC, FOR I = ', I
STOP
449 CONTINUE
nn
450 CALL CRDIA(ML,I0)

n
WRITE (*,801) ITER,ERR

DO 65 1=1,NL
DO 70 J=l,2*10+1
70 CC(I,J)=0.
65 R(I)=0.
M“0
DO 210 N=1,NL
M-M+l
SC(N,MV)=X(M)
210 CONTINUE
IF (MV.EQ.2) GO TO 500
MV=2
GO TO 180
501 CONTINUE
n
OPEN (UNIT=8,FILE='bfcout ’,STATUS*'UNKNOWN', FORM='UNFORMATTED')

WRITE (8) (SC(I,1),1=1,NL)
n
WRITE (8) (SC(I,2),1=1,NL)

CLOSE (8)
n
WRITE (*,803) ERR1,ERR2,ITER

615 FORMAT (2X,3(14,2X),3(F7.4,2X))
801 FORMAT (2X,'ITERATION NUMBER: ',14,' ERROR: ',1PE11.5)
803 FORMAT (//,3X,'END OF CALCULATION',//,3X,'ERROR IN X: ',2X,
&E10.4,/,3X,'ERROR IN Y: ',2X,E10.4,/,3X,'NUMBER OF ITERATIONS:'
&,2X,I4)
nn
CALL OUTPUT
n
STOP
END
nnnn
COEF.FOR OF 2-D BFC
242
SUBROUTINE COEF(IL,JL,NL,MV)
nnnn
This subroutine calculates the coefficients matrix for

2 dimensional BFC generation. The calling program is BFC.FOR
PARAMETER (NDGLOB*8000,NBWIDE=200)
n
COMMON/CO/DK (NDGLOB),DE( NDGLOB),SC (NDGLOB,2), NC (NDGLOB,4)

COMMON/CR/CC (NDGLOB,NBWIDE),X (NDGLOB), R (NDGLOB)
nn
DO 100 N-1,NL
nnnnn
PP=-0.4
QQ=-0.4
PP = 0.
QQ = 0.
nnn
IF(NC(N,MV).EQ.0) GO TO 150
IF(MV.EQ.2) GO TO 115
n
SOUTH BOUNDARY
DKMBDK(N)
DKP«DK(N+JL)
DEP«DE(N+1)
DEM=DEP
nn
DXDK = (SC(N+JL,1) -SC(N-JL, 1)) / (DKP+DKM)

DYDK = {SC(N+JL,2)-SC(N-JL,2))/(DKP+DKM)
DYDE = (SC(N+1,2)-SC(N,2))/DEP
nn
JACOBIEN
XJAC=DXDK*DYDE
IF(MV.EQ.l) R(N)=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DXDK*PP)
IF(MV.EQ.2) R(N)=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DYDK*PP+DYDE*QQ)
nn
ALFA = DYDE*DYDE
GAMA = DXDK*DXDK + DYDK*DYDK
nn
CC(N, 1) •=0.
CC(N ,2) = 2.*ALFA/DKM/(DKM+DKP)
CC(N ,3) = 0.
CC(N,JL+1) = 0.
CC(N,JL+2) = -2.*ALFA/DKM/DKP-2.*GAMA/DEP/DEP
CC(N,JL+3) = 2.*GAMA/DEP/DEP
CC(N,2*JL+1) = 0.
C C (N,2*JL+2) = 2.*ALFA/DKP/(DKM+DKP)
CC(N,2*JL+3) = 0.
IF(NC(N-JL,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)= R(N)-CC(N,2)*SC(N-JL,MV)
243
CC(N,2)=0.
END IF
IF(NC(N+1,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)= R(N)-CC(N,JL+3)*SC(N+1,MV)
CC(N,JL+3)=0.
END IF
IF(NC(N+JL,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)*= R(N)-CC(N,2*JL+2)+SC(N+JL,MV)
CC(N,2*JL+2)=0.
END IF
GO TO 100
C
110 CONTINUE
C NORTH BOUNDARY
DKM=DK(N)
DKP”D K (N+JL)
DEM=DE(N)
DEP=DEM
C
c
DXDK = (SC(N+JL, 1) -SC(N-JL,1) )/ (DKP+DKM)
DYDK = (SC(N+JL,2)-SC(N-JL,2))/(DKP+DKM)
DYDE = (SC(N,2)-SC(N-l,2))/DEM
C
C JACOBIEN
XJAC=DXDK*DYDE
IF(MV.EQ.l) R(N)=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DXDK*PP)
IF(MV.EQ.2) R(N)=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DYDK*PP+DYDE*QQ)
ALFA * DYDE+DYDE
GAMA » DXDK*DXDK + DYDK*DYDK
C
C
C C (N ,1) = 0.
C C (N ,2) = 2.*ALFA/DKM/(DKM+DKP)
CC(N,3) = 0.
CC(N,JL+1) = 2.*GAMA/DEM/DEM
CC {N ,JL+2) = -2.*ALFA/DKM/DKP-2.*GAMA/DEM/DEM
CC(N,JL+3) * 0.
CC(N,2*JL+1) = 0.
CC(N,2+JL+2) = 2.*ALFA/DKP/(DKM+DKP)
CC(N,2+JL+3) = 0.
CC(N,2)«=C.
END IF
IF(NC{N-1,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)= R(N)-CC(N,JL+1)*SC(N-l ,MV)
CC(N,JL+1)=0.
END IF
R(N)= R(N)-CC(N,2*JL+2)+SC(N+JL,MV)
CC(N»2*JL+2)=0.
END IF
GO TO 100
115 CONTINUE
244
WEST BOUNDARY
DEM=DE(N)
DEP=DE(N+1)
DKP=DK(N+JL)
c
c
DXDE = (SC(N+1,1)-SC(N-1,1))/(DEM+DEP)
DXDK = (SC(N+JL,1)-SC(N,1))/DKP
DYDE = (SC(N+1,2)-SC(N-1,2))/(DEM+DEP)
C
C JACOBIEN
XJAC*=DXDK*DYDE
IF(MV.EQ.l) R(N)=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DXDK*PP+DXDE*QQ)
IF (MV.EQ.2) R(N)«R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DYDE*QQ)
ALFA = DXDE*DXDE + DYDE*DYDE
GAMA = DXDK*DXDK
c
c
CC(N,1) = 0.
CC(N,2) = 0.
CC(N,3) = 0.
CC(N, JL+I) = 2 .*GAMA/DEM/(DEP+DEM)
C C (N ,JL+2) = -2 .*ALFA/DKP/DKP-2.*GAMA/DEM/DEP
CC(N,JL+3) = 2.*GAMA/DEP/(DEM+DEP)
CC(N,2*JL+1) = 0.
CC(N,2*JL+2) = 2.*ALFA/DKP/DKP
CC(N,2*JL+3) » 0.
C
IF(NC(N-1,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)« R(N)-CC(N,JL+1)*SC(N-1,MV)
CC(N,JL+1)»0.
END IF
CC(N,JL+3)=0.
END IF
R(N)= R(N)-CC(N,2*JL+2)*SC(N+JL,MV)
CC(N,2*JL+2)=0.
END IF
GO TO 100
C
120 CONTINUE
C
C EAST BOUNDARY
DEMSD E (N )
DEP=DE(N+1)
DKM=DK(N)
C
C
DXDE = (SC(N+l,1)-SC(N-1,1))/(DEM+DEP)
DYDE = (SC(N+1,2)-SC(N-l,2))/(DEM+DEP)
DXDK ■= (SC(N, 1) -SC(N-JLf1)) /DKM
C
C JACOBIEN
XJAC=DXDK*DYDE
IF(MV.EQ.l) R(N)*=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DXDK*PP+DXDE*QQ)
IF (MV.EQ.2 ) R(N)=*R(N) -XJAC*X JAC* (DYDE+QQ)
245
ALFA = DXDE*DXDE + DYDE*DYDE

GAMA = DXDK*DXDK
C
C
CC(N,1) = 0.
C C (N ,2) - 2.*ALFA/DKM/DKM
CC(N,3) = 0.
CC(N,JL+1) = 2.*GAMA/DEM/(DEP+DEM)
CC(N,JL+2) = -2.*ALFA/DKM/DKM-2.*GAMA/DEM/DEP
CC(N,2*JL+1) = 0.
CC(N,2*JL+2) = 0.
CC(N,2*JL+3) = 0.
CC(N,2)=0.
END IF
R(N)*= R(N)-CC(N, JL+1)*SC(N-1 ,KV)
CC(N,JL+l)-0.
END IF
R(N)«= R(N)-CC(N,JL+3)*SC(N+1,MV)
CC(N,JL+3)*=Q.
END IF
GO TO 100
C
c
150 DEM"DE(N)
DKM-DK(N)
DEP«=DE(N+1)
DKP=DK(N+JL)
c
c
DXDK (SC(N+JL,1)-SC(N-JL,1))/(DKP+DKM)
DYDK (SC(N+JL,2)-SC(N-JL,2))/(DKP+DKM)
DXDE (SC(N+1,1)-SC(N-1,1))/(DEM+DEP)
DYDE (SC(N+1,2)-SC(N-1,2))/(DEM+DEP)
ALFA DXDE*DXDE DYDE+DYDE
GAMA DXDK+DXDK DYDK*DYDK
BETA DXDK+DXDY DYDK+DYDE
C
C JACOBIEN
XJAC=DXDK*DYDE-DXDE*DYDK
IF(MV.EQ.l) R(N)=R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DXDK*PP+DXDE*QQ)
IF(MV.EQ.2) R(N)-R(N)-XJAC*XJAC*(DYDK*PP+DYDE*QQ)
CC (N ,1) = -2.*BETA/(DKP+DKM)/ (DEP+DEM)
CC(N,2) = 2.*ALFA/DKM/(DKM+DKP)
C C (N ,3) = -CC(N ,1)
CC(N,JL+1) «= 2.*GAMA/DEM/(DEP+DEM)
CC(N,JL+2) = -2.*ALFA/DKM/DKP-2.*GAMA/DEM/DEP
CC(N,2*JL+1) = -CC(N,1)
CC(N,2*JL+2) = 2.*ALFA/DKP/(DKM+DKP)
CC(N,2*JL+3) = CC(N,1)
C
C
246
IF(NC(N-JL-1,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)= R(N)-CC(N,1)*SC(N-JL-1,MV)
C C (N,1)=0.
END IF
CC(N,2)=0.
END IF
IF(NC(N-JL+1,MV) .EQ. 1) THEN
R(N) = R(N)-CC(N,3)*SC(N-JL+1,MV)
CC(N,3)=0.
END IF
R(N) = R(N)-CC(N,JL+1)*SC(N-1,MV)
CC(N,JL+1)=0.
END IF
IF(NC(N+l,MV).EQ.l) THEN
CC(N,JL+3)=0.
END IF
IF(NC(N+JL-1,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N) = R(N)-CC(N,2*JL+1)*SC(N+JL-1,MV)
CC(N,2*JL+1)=0.
END IF
R(N) = R(N)-CC(N,2*JL+2)*SC(N+JL,MV)
CC(N,2*JL+2)»0.
END IF
IF(NC{N+JL+1,MV).EQ.l) THEN
R(N)» R(N)-CC(N,2*JL+3)*SC(N+JL+1,MV)
CC(N,2*JL+3)«0.
END IF
no
100 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
ooo
SUBROUTINE SPCING(DELX,DELY,DK,DE,IL,JL)
noooo
MAIN BRANCHES HERE IF SPACE*.T.

BELOW THE UNEQUAL SPACING IS CALCULATED AS READ FROM
DELLOG.DAT
PARAMETER (NDGLOB-8000)
DIMENSION DELX(IL),DELY(JL),D K (NDGLOB),D E (NDGLOB)
no
OPEN (UNIT*15,FILE*'dellog',STATUS*'OLD')
C
READ (15,*)
DO 130 1*1,IL-1
READ (15,*) IX,DELX(IX)
130 CONTINUE
C
READ (15,*)
DO 131 J=1,JL-1
READ (15,*) JY,DELY(JY)
247
131 CONTINUE
SPACING IN ETA DIRECTION
M=0
DO 132 IX=1,IL
M=M+1
DO 132 JY=2,JL
M-M+l
DE(M )=DELY(JY-1)
132 CONTINUE
SPACING IN KSI DIRECTION
M=JL
DO 133 IX=2,IL
DO 133 JY =1,JL
M=M+1
DK(M)«DELX(IX-1)
133 CONTINUE
nn
CLOSE(15)
RETURN
END
248
nnnnn
CRDIA OF 2-D BFC GENERATOR
SUBROUTINE CRDIA(N,I0)
nn
PARAMETER (NDGLOB«8000,NBWIDE=200)
COMMON/CR/CC(NDGLOB,NBWIDE),X (NDGLOB),R (NDGLOB)
nnnnnnn
This subroutine solves linear equation systems using CROUT

algorithm. The coefficients matrix must be in band form
first column stays the same

first row:
DO 5 1=10+2,2*10+1
5 CC(1,I)=CC(1,I)/CC(1,I0+1)
R(1 )=R(1)/CC(1,10+1)
CC(1,I0+1)=1
nnn
starting with second column
DO 100 L=2,10
n
IMAX=L+I0
DO 10 I=L,IMAX
KMIN=1
IF ((1-10).GE.1) KMIN=I-I0
SUM=0
DO 15 K=KMIN,L-1
15 SUM=SUM+CC(I,K-I+I0+1)*CC(K,L-K+I0+1)
10 CC(I,L-I+I0+1)=CC(I,L-I+I0+1)-SUM
nn
JMAX-L+I0
DO 30 J=L+1,JMAX
KMIN=1
IF ((J-I0).GE.l) KMIN=J-I0
SUM-0
DO 35 K=KMIN,L-1
35 SUM-SUM+CC(L ,K-L+I0+1)*CC(K ,J-K+I0+1)
30 CC(L,J-L+I0+1)=(CC(L,J-L+I0+1)-SUM)/CC(L,10+1)
nnn
right hand side

SUM-0
DO 40 K=1,L-1
40 SUM-SUM+CC(L ,K-L+I0+1)*R(K)
R(L)=(R(L)-SUM)/CC(L,10+1)
n
100 CONTINUE
nnn
full band matrix
DO 200 L-I0+1,N-I0
c
IMAX=L+I0
DO 210 I-L,IMAX
249
SUM-0
KMIN-I-IO
DO 215 K=KMIN,L-1
215 SUM-SUM+CC(I,K-1 +10+1)*CC(K ,L-K+10+1)
210 C C (I,L-I+I0+1)=CC(I,L-I+I0+1)-SUM
no
JMAX-L+IO
DO 230 J-L+l,JMAX
SUM-0
KMIN-J-IO
DO 235 K-KMIN,L-1
235 SUM-SUM+CC(L ,K-L+10+1)*CC(K ,J-K+I0+1)
230 CC(L,J-L+I0+1)=(CC(L,J-L+I0+1)-SUM)/CC(L,I0+1)
nnn
right hand side

SUM-0
KMIN-L-IO
DO 240 K-KMIN,L-1
240 SUM=SUM+CC{L,K-L+I0+1)*R(K)
R(L)-(R(L)-SUM)/CC(L,I0+1)
n
200 CONTINUE
nnn
last chopped portion

DO 300 L-N-I0+1,N
n
DO 310 I-L,N
SUM-0
KMIN-I-IO
DO 315 K=KMIN,L-1
315 SUM-SUM+CC(I,K-I+I0+1)*CC(K ,L-K+I0+1)
310 CC(I,L-I+I0+1)=CC(I,L-I+I0+1)-SUM
nn
DO 330 J-L+l,N
SUM-0
KMIN-J-IO
DO 335 K-KMIN/L-1
335 SUM=SUM+CC(L,K-L+I0+1)*CC(K,J-K+I0+1)
330 CC(L,J-L+I0+1)=(CC(L,J-L+I0+1)-SUM)/CC(L,10+1)
non
right hand side

SUM-0
KMIN-L-I0
DO 340 K-KMIN/L-l
340 SUM-SUM+CC(L,K-L+I0+1)+R(K)
R{L)=(R(L)-SUM)/CC(L,I0+1)
o
300 CONTINUE
nnn
backwards solution
DO 400 11=1,N
I=N+1-II
SUM-0
KMAX-N
IF ((I+IO).LE.N) KMAX=I+IO
DO 410 K=I+1,KMAX
410 SUM=SUM+CC(I,K-I+I0+1)*X(K)
400 X(I)=R(I)-SUM
nn
RETURN
END
251
nnnnn
OUTPUT.FOR ! Output is modified for USRELM and USRNOD.

AUG 2,1989 !
SUBROUTINE OUTPUT
PARAMETER (NDGLOB=8000,NBWIDE=200)
no
COMMON/CO/DK(NDGLOB),DE(NDGLOB),SC(NDGLOB,2),NC(NDGLOB,4)
COMMON/OUT1 /NBUBBL,NCX1 (10) ,NCX2 (10) ,NCY1 (10) ,NCY2 (10)
COMMON/OUT2/IL,JL
DIMENSION NELEM(4,NDGLOB),ICROS(NDGLOB) ,XBE(NDGLOB)
DIMENSION IBND(NBHIDE)
DIMENSION IBEL(NBHIDE),XBEL(NBWIDE)
INTEGER ELEM
LOGICAL LFLAG
o
NNODES = IL*JL
oooo
ELEMENT CONNECTIVITIES WITHOUT BLOCKING
DO 10 I = 1,IL-1
DO 15 J = 1,JL-1
NODE = (1-1)*JL+J
ELEM = (I—1)*(JL-1)+J
NELEM (1,ELEM) =NODE
NELEM (2,ELEM) =NODE + JL
NELEM (3,ELEM) =NODE + JL + 1
NELEM (4,ELEM) =NODE + 1
15 CONTINUE
10 CONTINUE
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
ELEMENTS NEIGHBORING THE BLOCKED REGIONS
Element and node numbers used in this section are the ones
before blocking.
XBE (IE) = 0 . 0 if the element is not neighboring any bubbles

The digit after the decimal point indicates the interface side
of the element
= 1 east face
= 2 south face
= 3 west face
= 4 north face
The digit before the decimal point indicates the bubble number.
If the same element is neighboring two bubbles, the code would
be like,
ab.de
where a : the number of the second bubble

b : the number of the first bubble
d : the interface code for the first bubble
e : the interface code for the second bubble
NELAST = (IL-1)*(JL-1)
DO 20 IE = 1,NELAST
XBE (IE) = 0.0
252
20 CONTINUE
C
DO 25 IBUB = 1,NBUBBL
nnn
elements neighboring from east face

IEL1 = (NCX1(IBUB)-2)*(JL-1) + NCYl(IBUB)
IEL2 = (NCX1(IBUB)-2)*(JL-1) + NCY2(IBUB) -1
n
DO 30 IE * IEL1/IEL2
XBUB = IBUB
XFAC * 0.1
IF (XBE(IE).NE.0.0) THEN
XBUB = 10.*IE
XFAC = 0. 1*XFAC
END IF
XBE(IE) = XBE(IE) + XBUB + XFAC
30 CONTINUE
nnn
elements neighboring from west face
IELI = (NCX2(IBUB)-1)*(JL-1) + NCYl(IBUB)

IEL2 = (NCX2(IBUB)-1)*(JL-1) + NCY2(IBUB) -1
n
DO 35 IE = IEL1,IEL2
XBUB = IBUB
XFAC = 0.3
XBUB = 10. *IE
XFAC - 0.1*XFAC
END IF
35 CONTINUE
nnn
elements neighboring from north face

IEL1 = (NCX1(IBUB)-1)*(JL-1) + NCYl(IBUB) -1
IEL2 = (NCX2(IBUB)-2)*(JL-1) + NCYl(IBUB) -1
o
DO 40 IE = IEL1,IEL2,JL-1
XBUB = IBUB
XFAC = 0 . 2
XBUB = 10.*IE
XFAC = 0.1*XFAC
END IF
40 CONTINUE
nnn
elements neighboring from south face
IELI = (NCX1(IBUB)—!)*(JL—1) + NCY2(IBUB)

IEL2 = (NCX2(IBUB)-2)*(JL-1) + NCY2(IBUB)
DO 45 IE = IEL1/IEL2,JL-1
XBUB = IBUB
XFAC = 0 . 4
XBUB = 10. *IE
XFAC = 0.1*XFAC
253
END IF
45 CONTINUE
C
25 CONTINUE
C
C-------------------------- CORRESPONDENCE OF THE NODE NUMBERS BEFORE
C AND AFTER BLOCKING
C
DO 50 I = X,NNODES
ICROS (I) = I
50 CONTINUE
C
c
C
IADD = 0
C
DO 65 IX = NCX1(IBUB)+1,NCX2(IBUB)-1
DO 66 IY = NCY1(IBUBJ+l,NCY2(IBUB)-1
NODE = (IX-1)*JL + IY
ICROS (NODE) - -1
66 CONTINUE
65 CONTINUE
C
NSTR * NCX1(IBUB)*JL + 1
NEND * (NCX2(IBUB)-1)*JL
C
DO 70 NODE = NSTR,NEND
IF (ICROS(NODE).LE.-l) THEN
IADD - IADD - 1
GO TO 70
END IF
ICROS(NODE) = ICROS(NODE) + IADD
70 CONTINUE
C
DO 75 NODE = NEND+1,NNODES
ICROS(NODE) * ICROS(NODE) + IADD
75 CONTINUE
C
60 CONTINUE
C
C
OPEN (11, FILE='nodes',STATUS*'UNKNOWN',FORM*'UNFORMATTED' )
C
DO 100 IX * 1,IL
DO 110 JY = 1,JL
Nl * (IX-1)*JL + JY
IF (ICROS(NI).LE.-l) GO TO 110
WRITE (11) IX,JY,ICROS(Nl),SC(NI,1),SC(NI,2)
110 CONTINUE
100 CONTINUE
C
130 CONTINUE
CLOSE (11)
C
c -------------------------------- NODES ON OUTER BOUNDARIES
C
OPEN (12,FILE*'bconds',STATUS*'OLD',FORM*'UNFORMATTED')
254
DO 135 I = 1,10000
READ (12,END=138)
135 CONTINUE
138 CONTINUE
C
C WEST EDGE
C
NWEST = 0
DO 140 JY = 1,JL
IF (ICROS(JY).LE.-l) GO TO 140
NWEST = NWEST + 1
IBND (NWEST) = ICROS(JY)
140 CONTINUE
WRITE (12) NWEST, (IBND(I),1=1,NWEST)
C
C NORTH EDGE
C
NNORTH = 0
DO 145 IX = 1,IL
NN = ICROS(IX*JL)
IF (NN.LE.-l) GO TO 145
NNORTH = NNORTH + 1
IBND (NNORTH) = NN
145 CONTINUE
WRITE (12) NNORTH, (IBND(I),1=1,NNORTH)
C
C SOUTH EDGE
C
NSOUTH = 0
DO 150 IX = 1,IL
NN = ICROS((IX-1)*JL+1)
NSOUTH = NSOUTH + 1
IBND(NSOUTH) = NN
150 CONTINUE
WRITE (12) NSOUTH, (IBND(I),1=1,NSOUTH)
c
C EAST EDGE
C
NEAST = 0
DO 155 JY = 1,JL
NN = ICROS( (IL-1)*JL + JY )
NEAST = NEAST + 1
IBND(NEAST) = NN
155 CONTINUE
WRITE (12) NEAST, (IBND(I),1=1,NEAST)
C
c------------------------------------ ELEMENTCONNECTIVITIES
C
OPEN (11, FILE='elements',STATUS='UNKNOWN',FORM='UNFORMATTED')
C
NNEIGH = 0
ELEM = 0
DO 210 IX = 1,IL-1
DO 220 JY = 1,JL-1
C
IE = {IX-I)*(JL-1) + JY
ISW = ICROS(NELEM (1,IE))
255
ISE - ICROS(NELEH (2,IE))

INE = ICROS(NELEM (3,IE))
INW = ICROS(NELEM (4,IE))
C
IF (ISW.L E .-1.OR.ISE.LE.-1.OR.INE.LE.-1.OR.INW.LE.-1) THEN
C element is within the blocked region
GO TO 220
END IF
C
ELEM = ELEM + 1
LFLAG = .F.
C
IF (XBE(IE).NE.0.) THEN
nnn
element is neighboring one or more bubbles

NNEIGH = NNEIGH + 1
IBEL (NNEIGH) = ELEM
XBEL (NNEIGH) = XBE(IE)
LFLAG - .T.
END IF
WRITE (11) ELEM,ISW,ISE,INE,INW,LFLAG,IX,JY
220 CONTINUE
210 CONTINUE
C
WRITE (12) NNEIGH, (IBEL(I),XBEL(I),1=1,NNEIGH)
C
RETURN
END
C
uoissiuujad inoiWM p011.q1.4ojd uoi.pnpojdaj ja q y r ij j 8 umo wGpAdoo 041 io uojssjujjad mum paonpojday
pasn h o n : £HVdn
ooooonoo
pasn u o n : ZHVdfl
A h t s o t b a Hsiui : THVdO
(AHT30X3A H9TUT UUOJTUCI) 0 = 3SVDI JOJ
<iTTS ON 0 = HHSON JOJ

.xeai(s o n t = HHSON
EHYdfl'ZHVdfl'THVdfl'3SVOI'HHSON (»'») OV3H

31XIX (.(*).'«) OV3H
000000
UTPHS WOHd XfldNI
31 GN3
Z3WIX = 0N3X
nsa - z 3h i x =x h v x s x
* SNVHX
XN3.TSNVHX
0 0 0 0
3S33
•d’ = SNVHX
AOV3XS
N3HX (•0•03 •xntsa) dl
(zx) sscao
3nNIXN00 ST
30NIXN03 OT
Z3WIX = T3WIX
T3WIX - Z3WIX = 1130
(3aanaN'T-i'(i)9Nw'(i)Aan’(i)xan 5
'dIXS'dIXS'dIXS'dIXS'dIXS'dIXSl)'Z3WIX'dIXSI (ST=ON3'ZT) OV3H
OOOT'T = 03HI 01 OtJ
•0 = T3WIX
(3aanaN'i=i'(i)oh) 9
'n 3i a 'n 3t x '(3aanaN*x=i'dixsi'dixsi)'Tr'n'laanaN Czx) av3H
o
(.aaxxwHOdNn,=wnod',crio,=snxYxs' ,AHOHoaC»aH.=33id'zT) N3do
00000
d3XS 3WIX X30 OX ..AH0X03rVHX.. 0V3H
(OOC)Nin N0ISN3HI0
(oi)oh'(ox)onv'(ox)Aan'(ot)xan NOisNawia
SNVHX ivoiocn
XINI'XlVId'HXSNOO'SW333‘S300N H3D3XNX
Ot-*33XIX'Zi*CWVO H3X0VHVH0
i*aor '6*AdV3XS H3X0VHVH0
aaaaoN'(ooc)NiA 9
'(ooe)XNaoN'(ooe)xsaoN'(ooc)x3aoN'(ooe)XMaoN'(ox'os)ansaoN nohkoo
o
(frS9Z6STfrT'£=Id) H3X3WVHVd
00000
dNlld sanaoao ; d-dNild3XVW
9SS
257
C For ICASE = 1 (Uniform shear)

C UPAR1 : Inlet velocity at y=0
C UPAR2 : du/dy
C UPAR3 : Not used
C For ICASE = 2 (Parabolic inlet velocity)
C UPAR1 : Inlet velocity at y-0
C UPAR2 : U at y-H
C UPAR3 : Channel half height (H)
C
NR = 15
VELCON = l.e-7*ABS(UPARl) !velocity convergence
RESCON = l.e-7*ABS(UPARl*UPARl) !Forceconvergence = u“ 2
ACCF =0.3
NSTEPS = 1
DENSTY = 1.0
VISCOS = 1.0
GRAVTY =0.
PENLTY = l.e-6
C
C------------------------------------------------------------------
C DATA FOR ONLY STEADY STATE SOLUTION
C
IF (.NOT.TRANS) THEN
C
C
STEADY = 'STEADY'
JOB 'NEWJOB'
DATA FOR ONLY TRANSIENT SOLUTION

ELSE
STEADY = 'TRANSIENT'
JOB 'NEWJOB'
END IF
C WRITE FIRST PART

C
OPEN (10,FILE='FIINP',STATUS-'UNKNOWN')
C
WRITE (10,400)
WRITE (10,'(A)') '/ FIINP CREATED BY MAKEFIINP.F'
WRITE (10,400)
400 FORMAT ('/',60('*'))
WRITE (10,'(A)') '‘TITLE’
IF (TRANS) THEN
WRITE (10,'(A,E10.4,2X,A)') 'TIME TIME2,TITLE
ELSE
WRITE (10,'(A,A)') 'STEADY- ',TITLE
END IF
C
C PROBLEM CARD
C
WRITE (10,410) STEADY
410 FORMAT ('‘PROBLEM(',A9,',NONLINEAR,NEWTONIAN,2-D,FIXED,LAMINAR,'
& ,'ISOTHERMAL',')')
258
non
EXECUTION CARO
WRITE (10,411) JOB
411 FORMAT ('*EXECUTION(',A7,')')
ooo
SOLUTION CARD
IF (TRANS) THEN
WRITE (10,4121) NR,VELCON,RESCON,ACCF,0.9
ELSE
WRITE (10,412) NR,VELCON,RESCON,ACCF,0.9
END IF
412 FORMAT ('‘SOLUTION(Q.N.=',12,',VELCONV®',E8.2,',RESCONV=',E8.2,
6 ',ACCF=',F3.1 , 'LINESEARCH®' ,F3.1, ')',/,
& '‘STRATEGY(S .S .*4)')
121 FORMAT ('‘SOLUTION(S.S.=',I2,',VELCONV®',E8.2,',RESCONV=',E8.2,
6 ',ACCF=', F 3 . 1 , 'LINESEARCH®',F3.1,')')
non
TIME INTEGRATION CARD (IF TRANSIENT)

IF (TRANS) THEN
WRITE (10,413) TSTART,TEND,TEND-TSTART
413 FORMAT (* *TIMEINTEGRATION(BACKWARD,NSTEPS*l,TSTART=' ,E11.5,
6 ',TEND=',E11. 5 , 'DT=',E11.5,',FIXED)')
END IF
non
PROPERTY AND PRESSURE CARDS

WRITE (10,414) DENSTY,VISCOS,GRAVTY
414 FORMAT ('‘DENSITY (CONSTANT-' , F 7 . 3 , ' * V I S C O S I T Y ( C O N S T A N T = ' ,
& F7.3,')',/,' ‘PRESSURE (MIXED, DISCONTINUOUS)', / ,
6 **BODYFORCE(CONSTANT)',/,2X,F7.1,' 0. 0.')
WRITE (10,414) DENSTY,VISCOS,PENLTY,GRAVTY
nononoo
414 FORMAT ('‘DENSITY(CONSTANT®',F7.3,')',/,'‘VISCOSITY(CONSTANT®’,

& F7.3,')',/,'‘PRESSURE(PENALTY®',E10.4,')',/,
& '‘BODYFORCE(CONSTANT)',/,2X,F7.1,' 0. 0.')
INITIAL CONDITIONS CARD

IF (TRANS) THEN
WRITE (10,415)
ELSE
WRITE (10,416)
END IF
415 FORMAT ('*IC N O D E( U X , R EA D)*ICNODE(UY,READ ) ')
416 FORMAT ('*ICNODE(STOKES)')
onoo
DATAPRINT CARD
WRITE (10,418)
418 FORMAT ('*DATAPRINT(NORMAL,NOPAGE,NODES=3,ELEMENTS=0,',
& 'C O N S T R A I N E D = 0 F L U X = 2 ,INITIAL*=0)')
oon
NODES CARD
WRITE (10,419)
419 FORMAT ('‘NODES(CARTESIAN,SUBROUTINE)')
259
non
ELEMENTS CARO
WRITE (10,430)
430 FORMAT ('*ELEMENTS (GROUP-1, FLUID, NODES-4 ,QUADRILATERAL, GLOBAL' ,
& '(SUBROUTINE)')
on
CALL GETBC
oonn
BOUNDARY ELEMENTS
DO 55 IBUB-1,NBUBBL
WRITE (10,431) IBUB+1
DO 50 IN*1,NODBBL-1
WRITE (10,'(2X,I2,2X,I4,2X,I4)') IN,N0DBUB(IN,IBUB),
& NODBUB(IN+1,IBUB)
50 CONTINUE
WRITE (10,'(2X,I2,2X,I4,2X,I4)') NODBBL,NODBUB(NODBBL,IBUB),
& NODBUB(1,IBUB)
55 CONTINUE
431 FORMAT (' ‘ELEMENTS (GROUP-', 11,', SLIP,EDGE,NODES-2) ')
ooooo
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
get node coordinates from "nodes"

OPEN (20,FILE-'nodes' ,STATUS-'OLD',FORM-'UNFORMATTED')
DO 79 IY - 1, JL
READ (20) ISKIP,ISKIP,ISKIP,SKIP,YIN(IY)
79 CONTINUE
n
CLOSE (20)
non
Velocities at the inlet nodes
IF (ICASE .EQ. 0) THEN

n
DO 80 IY - 1,JL
UIN(IY) - UPAR1
80 CONTINUE
on
ELSE IF (ICASE .EQ. 1) THEN

DO 82 IY = 1,JL
UIN(IY) - UPAR1 + YIN(IY)*UPAR2
82 CONTINUE
o n
ELSE IF (ICASE .EQ. 2) THEN

DO 84 IY - 1, JL
UIN(IY) = UPAR1+(UPAR1-UPAR2)*( (YIN( IY)/UPAR3)**2-2*YIN(IY)/UPAR3)
84 CONTINUE
n
END IF
no
WRITE (10,'(A)') '/INLET BOUNDARY CONDITIONS'

DO 100 I = JL,1,-1
260
WRITE (10,420) NODWT(I),UIN(I),NODWT(I),0.

100 CONTINUE
non
boundary values at south border
WRITE (10,'(A)') '/SOUTH BORDER BOUNDARY CONDITIONS'

DO 101 I = 1,IL
WRITE (10,420) NODST(I),UIN(1),NODST(I),0.
101 CONTINUE
non
boundary conditions at north border (WALL)

WRITE (10,'(A)') '/NORTH BORDER BOUNDARY CONDITIONS'
DO 103 I - 1,IL
WRITE (10,420) NODNT(I),UIN(JL),NODNT(I),UY
103 CONTINUE
nnn
boundary conditions around the bubbles
DO 120 IBUB ■= 1,NBUBBL

non
first node is at 5/4 pi.
WRITE (10,'(A,II)') '/BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR BUBBLE ',IBUB

TETA * 1.25*3.141593
DTET = 2.*PI/NODBBL
DO 110 I - 1,NODBBL
XNORM = -COS(TETA)
YNORM - -SIN(TETA)
UN « UBX (IBUB)*XNORM + UBY( IBUB) *YNORM
UT = UBX( IBUB)* (-YNORM) + UBY( IBUB) *XNORM
UT - UT + ANG( IBUB) *R0( IBUB)
IF (NOSHR .EQ. 0) THEN
WRITE (10,440) NODBUB (I, IBUB),UT, NODBUB (I, IBUB),UN
ELSE
WRITE (10,441) NODBUB(I,IBUB),UN
END IF
TETA “ TETA - DTET
110 CONTINUE
o
120 CONTINUE
noon
420 FORMAT (**BCNODE(UX) ',/,15,' 0 ',Ell.5,/,'*BCNODE(UY)',/,

& 15,' 0 ,E11.5)
421 FORMAT (**BCNODE(UY) ',/,15,' 0 ',E11.5)
422 FORMAT (' *BCNODE(UX) ',/,15,’ 0 ',E11.5,/,'*BCNODE(UY)',/,
& 15,' 0 ,E11.5,' 1')
440 FORMAT (' *BCNODE(UT) ',/,15,' 0 ',E11.5,/,'*BCNODE(UN)',/,
& 15,' 0 ,E11.5)
441 FORMAT (**BCNODE(UN) ',/,15, ' 0 ',Ell.5)
no
WRITE (10,'(A)') '*END'

C
STOP
END
C****************************
261
GETBC ! Returns the node numbers on boundaries

nonnn
AUG 16, 1989 !
SUBROUTINE GETBC
o
COMMON NODBUB(50,10),NODWT(300),NODET(300),NODST(3 00),NODNT(300),

& YIN(300),NODBBL
DIMENSION IBE(300),XBE(300),IC(10), IXB(300,10), JYB(300,10)
INTEGER BUBEL(50,10),FACEL(50,10)
LOGICAL LFLAG
oono
READ BCONDS
OPEN (11, FILE='bconds',STATUS” 'OLD',FORM” 'UNFORMATTED')

n
READ (11) ISKIP,ISKIP,IL,JL,NBUBBL

non
See how many sets of boundary conditions are in bconds
DO 15 1*1,100
READ (11,ENDS20)
DO 10 J = 1,4
READ (11)
10 CONTINUE
NSET - I
15 CONTINUE
20 CONTINUE
n o
REWIND (11)
READ (11)
DO 35 I = 1,NSET-1
DO 30 J * 1,5
READ (11)
30 CONTINUE
35 CONTINUE
n
READ (11) NW,(NODWT(I),I*1,NW)

READ (11) NN,(NODNT(I),I”1,NN)
READ (11) NS,(NODST(I),I=1,NS)
READ (11) NE,(NODET(I),I” I,NE)
READ (11) NBEL,(IBE(I),XBE{I),I”1,NBEL)
no
CLOSE (11)
nnnnnnnnn
DECODE LOCAL NODE NUMBERS ON BUBBLE SURFACES
BUBEL (I,IBUB) : Element number neigboring bubble IBUB

FACEL (I,IBUB) : Face number of element BUBEL(I)
neighboring bubble IBUB
DO 90 I = 1,NBUBBL
IC(I) = 1
90 CONTINUE
262
c
DO 100 I = 1,NBEL
IF (XBE (I) .LT. 10 .) THEN
non
This element is neighboring only one bubble
IBUB = INT (XBE(I)+0.0001)

IFACE = INT ( (XBE(I )-IBUB)*10 + 0.0001)
BUBEL(IC(IBUB),IBUB) = IBE(I)
FACEL (IC( IBUB), IBUB) «= IFACE
IC(IBUB) = IC(IBUB) + 1
n
ELSE
noon
This element is neighboring two bubbles

(better not be three)
IBUB2 = INT (XBE(I)/10 + 0.0001)

IBUB1 = INT (XBE(I ) - 10*IBUB2 +0.0001)
XBE(I) - (XBE(I ) - 10*IBUB2 - IBUB1)*10
IFACE1 = INT ( XBE(I) + 0.0001)
IFACE2 = INT ( (XBE(I) - IFACE1)*10 + 0.0001)
BUBEL(IC(IBUB1),IBUB1) - IBE(I)
FACEL(IC(IBUB1),IBUB1) = IFACE1
IC(IBUBl) = IC(IBUBl) + 1
BUBEL(IC(IBUB2),IBUB2) = IBE(I)
FACEL(IC(IBUB2),IBUB2) = IFACE2
IC(IBUB2) = IC(IBUB2) + 1
on
END IF
n
100 CONTINUE
nonooo
GET NODE NUMBERS ON THE BUBBLE SURFACES
OPEN (11,FILE-'elements',STATUS-'OLD',FORM-'UNFORMATTED')
nnnn
EACH BUBBLE HAS THE SAME NUMBER OF NODES AROUND IT

NODBBL - IC(1) - 1
DO 105 I - 1,NBUBBL
IC(I) = 1
105 CONTINUE
C
DO 150 I *= 1,10000
READ (11,END-160) IELEM,NODE1,NODE2,NODE3,NODE4,LFLAG,IX,JY
IF {.NOT.LFLAG) GO TO 150
DO 125 IBUB - 1,NBUBBL
DO 120 II = 1,NODBBL
IF (BUBEL(II,IBUB).NE.IELEM) GO TO 120
IXB(IC(IBUB),IBUB) = IX
JYB(IC(IBUB),IBUB) = JY
IXB(IC(IBUB)+1,IBUB) - IX
JYB(IC(IBUB)+1,IBUB) = JY
263
IF (FACEL(II,IBUB).EQ.1) THEN
C EAST FACE
NODBUB(IC(IBUB),IBUB) = NODE2
NODBUB(IC(IBUB)+1,IBUB) = NODE3
C
ELSE IF (FACEL(II,IBUB).EQ.2) THEN
C NORTH FACE
NODBUB(IC(IBUB),IBUB) = NODE4
C
ELSE IF (FACEL(II,IBUB).EQ.3} THEN
C WEST FACE
NODBUB(IC(IBUB),IBUB) * NODE1
NODBUB(IC(IBUB)+l,IBUB) = NODE4
C
ELSE
C SOUTH FACE
NODBUB(IC(IBUB),IBUB) = NODEI
C
END IF
C
120 CONTINUE
125 CONTINUE
150 CONTINUE
160 CONTINUE
CLOSE (11)
C
C DELETE DUPLICATE NODE NUMBERS
C
DO 190 IBUB *= 1,NBUBBL
C
IC(IBUB) - IC(IBUB) - 1
C IBE (I) Is of no use now. It will be used foe temporary
C storage
C
DO 170 I = 1,IC(IBUB)
DO 165 J = 1+1, IC(IBUB)
IF (NODBUB(J,IBUB).EQ.NODBUB(I,IBUB)) THEN
NODBUB(J,IBUB)«0
IXB(I,IBUB) *= MAX0(IXB(I,IBUB),IXB(J,IBUB))
JYB(I,IBUB) - MAX0(JYB(I,IBUB),JYB(J,IBUB))
END IF
165 CONTINUE
170 CONTINUE
DO 180 I «= 1,IC(IBUB)
IF (NODBUB(I,IBUB).EQ.0) THEN
DO 175 J *= I,IC(IBUB)-1
NODBUB (J, IBUB) ■= NODBUB (J+1,1 BUB)
IXB(J,IBUB) = IXB(J+l,IBUB)
JYB(J,IBUB) = JYB(J+l,IBUB)
175 CONTINUE
END IF
180 CONTINUE
264
190 CONTINUE
onnnn
ORDER THE NODE NUMBERS IN CLOCKWISE AROUND THE BUBBLE

nnnnn
Find min and max IX and JY

Note that IX and JY are element numbers. Therefore the corner
nodes have two differnt Indices
IXMIN = 10000
I'iMAX = 1
JYMIN = 10000
JYMAX = 1
IF (IXB(II,IBUB).LT.IXMIN)IXMIN = IXB(II,IBUB)
IF (IXB(II,IBUB).GT.IXMAX)IXMAX = IXB(II,IBUB)
IF (JYB(II,IBUB).LT.JYMIN)JYMIN - JYB(II,IBUB)
IF (JYB(II,IBUB).GT.JYMAX)JYMAX = JYB(II,IBUB)
201 CONTINUE
IXMIN = IXMIN + 1
JYMIN = JYMIN + 1
non
Find IX < IXMIN elements

Nil «= 0
IF (IXB(II,IBUB).LE.IXMIN) THEN
Nil = Nil + 1
IBE(NIl) « NODBUB(II,IBUB)
END IF
202 CONTINUE
nnn
Sort these elements in increasing order

CALL SORTFB (IBE{1),NI1,1)
nnn
delete last node

m = nii - i
nno
Find JY > JYMAX nodes

NI2 «* Nil
IF (JYB(II,IBUB).GE.JYMAX) THEN
NI2 = NI2 + 1
IBE(NI2) - NODBUB(II,IBUB)
END IF
203 CONTINUE
non
Sort these elements in increasing order

CALL SORTFB (IBE(NI1+1),NI2-NI1,1)
nno
delete last node

NI2 = NI2-1
265
nonn
Find IX > IXMAX nodes
NI3 = NI2
00 204 II = 1,NODBBL
IF (IXB(II,IBUB).GE.IXMAX) THEN
NI3 = NI3 + 1
IBE(NI3) = NODBUB (Ilf IBUB)
END IF
204 CONTINUE
Sort these elements in decreasing order

n o o n n n n n o

delete last node
NI3 = NI3-1
Find JY = JYMIN nodes

NI4 = NI3
IF (JYB(II,IBUB).LE.JYMIN) THEN
NI4 = NI4 + 1
IBE(NI4) * NODBUB(II,IBUB)
END IF
205 CONTINUE
Sort these elements in decreasing order

n n n o o n o
delete last node

NI4 = NI4-1
DO 210 II = 1,NI4
NODBUB(II,IBUB) = IBE(II)
210 CONTINUE
o n n n n o n n
300 CONTINUE
GET COORDINATES OF THE NODES AT INLET

The first JL nodes in "nodes" are the node of inlet
OPEN (11,FILE='nodes',STATUS®'OLD',FORM®'UNFORMATTED')
DO 400 I = 1,JL
READ (11) ISKIP,ISKIP,ISKIP,SKIP,YIN(I)
400 CONTINUE
CLOSE (11)
non
RETURN
END
266
nnnnnnnnn
SORTFB ! Bubble sort for backward and forward ordering

AUG 16, 1989 !
SUBROUTINE SORTFB (ARRAY,NELM,IDIR)

INTEGER ARRAY(1)
nnnnnn
NELM : Number of elements to be sorted in array

IDIR : The order of sorting.
= 1 from smaller to larger values
= 2 from larger to smaller values
IF (IDIR.EQ.1) THEN
nnn
From smaller to larger values

DO 10 I = 1,NELM-1
n
DO 1 J = 1,NELM-I
IF (ARRAY(J).GT. ARRAY (J+H ' THEN
IT = ARRAY(J)
ARRAY(J ) = ARRAY(J+l)
ARRAY(J+l) - IT
END IF
1 CONTINUE
n
10 CONTINUE
nn
ELSE
nnn
From larger to smaller values

DO 20 I = 1,NELM-1
DO 2 J = 1,NELM-I
IF (ARRAY(J).LT.ARRAY(J+l)) THEN
IT * ARRAY(J)
ARRAY(J) = ARRAY(J+l)
ARRAY(J+l) = IT
END IF
2 CONTINUE
20 CONTINUE
END IF
RETURN
END
uoissiuuad inoLMM paiiqiqojd u o ipnp ojdaj ja q y r y jauMO ;q6uAdoo a q p o uoissiwjad qjiM paonpojday
0 *) 3xiau
N31A'N31X (. . ) avaa
n v a a A O . (,(i'v>. *) axian
i r ' n (* *) avaa
. (ir'ii) a aav x mi saaoa 30 aaawrn n v a a A O « (,(*'v). *) 3XIVM
3
3
,.AaOX33rvaX» 3113 3AV333 3
3
N3HX (3XV333) 31
3
-
3
3
3i cma
(,aaxxvwHOiNn.=w«03',aio,=snj,vis',itio53afBa^,=a'ii3'ox) Naao
gg'jg
( .aaXI.Wa03Hn.»KH03' ,M3N.=SnXVXS' ,Aaoi3eC«3^.a31I3'0T) N330
N3HX (3XY3H3) 31
•uorâxap IB3U3PTOOB 3U8AS2d o* .NMONXNfl, asn 4,uoa 3
3
31 ON3
01 OX 00
. 33I0H3 aiTVANI . (*'*) 3XIHH
*3TMX" = WYX3
N3HX («a #*03 *H3MSNV *H O "#3 #"03 *H3HSNV) 31 3S13
•anax* * iaa
N3HX (.P. *03‘a3MSNV*aO',a. *03*a3MSKV) 31 3S13
•3nax • = aav
N3HX ( ’03‘H3MSNV"H O ‘ ,V, -Oa-HaMSNV) 31 3S13
'anax* = axvaao
N3HX (.a,•Oa’aaHSHvao* .3,'Oa’aaHSNv) ai
*3S1V3' = HVX3
*3S1V3■ = iaa
•3S1Y3• = aav
’3STV3‘ = 3XV3H3
aaMSNv (,(v),'*) avaa
. 33I0H3 . (.(*'v).'*) 3Xia«
(*'*) 3XIHH
, 3 XN3XN03 3NIHVX3 . (*'*) 3XiaM
. a ............... aaosaa xsvi 3xaiaa » (*'*) axiaw
. v aaosaa M3N v aav . (*'*) axia«
, 3 a n a xaoxsarvax hsn v axvaas - (*'*) 3xihm
,------------------------ ,(»',)aiXHH
.H3XN3 oa OX , (*'*) 3XIHM
3fUiIXN03 01
3
Kvxa'i3a'aav'3xvaa3 ivoiooi
H3MSNV T*a3X3VaVH3
(01'00T )OMV* (OT'00T)OA'(OT'00T )0n‘(OT '00T)WOW TV3a
(OT'OOT)Aa'(OT'OOT)X3'(OT'OOT)OA'(OT'OOT)OX'(00T)3WIX'(0T)0a TV3H
(OT)snaAi'(OT)enaxi a a o a x m
3
,,*3
i 686T 'LZ snv 3
„Aaoi3a f B « „ aTTJ aip saêais ao s1(3343 i 3*Aa0X33CVax 3
..I.,,,.,,,,.,,.*.,,,...,..,,.......*...*...******.******.*.*.
L9Z
268
READ (*, *) TIME(1)

WRITE (*, '(A,*)') ' NUMBER OF BUBBLES (NBUB) ................ '
READ (*, *) NBUB
DO 15 IB = 1,NBUB
WRITE (*, '(A,12)') ' FOR BUBBLE NUMBER : ',IB
WRITE (*, '(A,$)') ' NUMBER OF NODES IN X AND Y (IXBUB, JYBUB). '
READ (*, *) IXBUB(IB),IYBUB(IB)
WRITE (*. '(A,$)') ' RADIUS ................................... '
READ (*, *) R0(IB)
15 CONTINUE
WRITE (10) NBUB,IL,JL,(IXBUB(I),IYBUB(I),1-1,NBUB),XLEN,YLEN,
& (R0(I),1=1,NBUB)
no
IT = 0
END IF
non
COUNT NUMBER OF RECORDS FOR ADD AND DELETE
IF (ADD.OR.DEL) THEN
READ (10) NBUB,IL,JL,(IXBUB(I),IYBUB(I),I=1,NBUB),XLEN,YLEN,
& (R0(I),I=1,NBUB)
DO 20 IREC « 2,1000
READ (10,END=25)
NREC = IREC
20 CONTINUE
IT = NREC - 1
END IF
nn
25 CONTINUE
n
IF (ADD) THEN
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' TIME
READ (*,*) TIME(1)
END IF
IF (ADD.OR.CREATE) THEN
nn
DO 110 IB « 1,NBUB
WRITE (*,'(A,12)') ' FOR BUBBLE NUMBER s ',IB
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' BUBBLE CENTER COORDIANTES (X0, Y0)
READ (*,*) X0(1,IB),Y0(1,IB)
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' BUBBLE VELOCITY (U0, VO) ........
READ (*,*) U0(1,IB),V0(1,IB)
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' ANGULAR VELOCITY (ANG) .........
READ (*,*) ANG(1,IB)
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' FORCE IN X DIRECTION (FX) .......
READ (*,*) FX(1,IB)
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' FORCE IN Y DIRECTION (FY) .......
READ (*,*) FY(1,IB)
WRITE (*,'(A,$)') ' TORQUE (MOM) ....................
READ (*,*) MOM(1,IB)
no
110 CONTINUE
REWIND (10)
DO 115 IREC = 1,NREC
READ (10)
115 CONTINUE
269
C
WRITE (10) IT,TIME(1)/(IB,XO(1,IB),Y0(1/IB),
& FX(1,IB),FY(1,IB),MOM(1,IB),U0(1,IB),V0(1,IB),
& ANG(1,IB),IB = 1,NBUB)
C
END IF
C
IF (DEL) THEN
REWIND (10)
READ (10)
DO 120 IREC = 2,NREC-1
READ (10) IT,TIME(1),(IB,X0(1,IB),Y0(1,IB),
& FX(1,IB),FY(1,IB),MOM(1,IB),U0(1,IB),V0(1,IB),
& ANG(1,IB),IB = 1 ,NBUB)
120 CONTINUE
REWIND (10)
DO 125 IREC = l,NREC-2
READ (10)
125 CONTINUE
WRITE (10) IT,TIME(1),(IB,X0(1,IB),Y0(1,IB),
6 FX(1,IB),FY(1,IB),MOM(1,IB),U0(1,IB),V0(1,IB),
& ANG(1,IB),IB = 1,NBUB)
END IF
C
CLOSE (10)
OPEN (10,FILE='trajectory',STATUS='OLD',FORM='UNFORMATTED')
C
C--------------------------------------------------------------------
C CHECK EXISTING TRAJECTORY FILE
C
200 CONTINUE
C
c
READ (10) NBUB,IL,JL,(IXBUB(I),IYBUB(I),1=1,NBUB),XLEN,YLEN,
6 (R0(I),1=1,NBUB)
WRITE (*,500) XLEN,YLEN
WRITE (*,501) IL,JL
WRITE (*,502) NBUB
DO 201 I = 1,NBUB
WRITE (*,503) I,IXBUB(I),IYBUB(I)
WRITE (*,504) I,R0(I )
201 CONTINUE
DO 210 IT = 1,100
READ (10,END=220) ISKIP,TIME(IT),(ISKIP,X0(IT,IB),Y0 (IT,IB) ,
6 FX(IT,IB),FY{IT,IB),MOM(IT,IB),U0(IT,IB),V0(IT,IB),
6 ANG(IT,IB),IB = 1,NBUB)
NTIME = IT
210 CONTINUE
220 CONTINUE
C
DO 300 IB * 1,NBUB
WRITE (*,'(70A1)') ('*',1=1,70)
WRITE (*,'(A,12)') ' BUBBLE NUMBER : ',IB
WRITE (*,*) ' BUBBLE CENTER COORDINATES'
WRITE (*,*) ' ------------------------- '
WRITE (*,*)
WRITE (*,*) ' TIME X Y'
DO 315 IT = 1,NTIME
WRITE (*,505) TIME(IT),X0(IT,IB),Y0 (IT,IB)
315 CONTINUE
270
WRITE (*,*)
WRITE (*,*) ' FORCES EXERTED ON BUBBLE'
WRITE (*,*) ' ------------------------ '
WRITE (*,*)
WRITE (*,*) ' TIME FX FY TORQUE'
DO 320 IT = 1,NTIME
WRITE (*,506) TIME(IT),F X (IT,IB),FY(IT,IB),MOM(IT,IB)
320 CONTINUE
WRITE (*,*)
WRITE (*,*) VELOCITY OF THE BUBBLE'
WRITE (*,*)
WRITE (*,*)
WRITE (*,*) ' TIME U
i 'ANG. VELOCITY'
DO 330 IT = 1,NTIME
WRITE (*,506) TIME(IT),U0(IT,IB),V 0 (IT,IB),ANG(IT,IB)
330 CONTINUE
300 CONTINUE
C
C
C
STOP
500 FORMAT (2X,'X AND Y SIZES OF THE SOLUTION DOMAIN ,F6.3,2X,F6.3)
501 FORMAT (2X,'TOTAL NODE NUMBERS IN X AND Y ,13,2X,13)
502 FORMAT (2X,'NUMBER OF BUBBLES ,13)
503 FORMAT (2X,'NUMBER OF NODES AROUND THEBUBBLE ',12,' : ',12,2X,12)
504 FORMAT (2X,'RADIUS OF BUBBLE ',12,' : ',F6.3)
505 FORMAT (IX,Ell.5,2X,F8.4,5X,F8.4)
506 FORMAT (IX,Ell.5,2X,3(1PE11.4,3X))
END
c*.*...***.••*•.*****..•.*..*•*.•*...***.*•*••.**.**.**.**..***********
C INTERPOL.F ! Interpolates the velocity field after the bubbles
C OCT 30, 1989 ! are displaced
c**********************************************************************
c
PROGRAM INTERPOL
C
C The element group including quadrilateral elements must belong to
C the second element group. Otherwise, the velocities are not
C interpolated correctly.
C The pressure field is not read from this file (NEWJOB, READ). No
C need to interpolate them.
C
C
PARAMETER (NNEL=20000,NNOD=20000,NEQ1=20000)
C
C THIS PROGRAM READS THE FILE 'FDPOST' OR 'FPREST' GENERATED
C BY FIDAP.
C
C
IMPLICIT REAL (A-H,0-Z)
C
c '
COMMON /ELEMS/ELEM(4,NNEL),X(NNOD),Y(NNOD)
COMMON /VELOC/UOLD(NNOD*2),UDX(NNOD*2),UDY(NNOD*2)
COMMON /NEW/XNEW(NNOD),YNEW(NN0D),UNEW(NNOD*2)
INTEGER ELEM
DIMENSION U I (2*NEQ1),NPAR(40),COOR(8),UX(4),UY(4)
DIMENSION PROP(100),VAL(100),VALI(3),TMALL(100)
DIMENSION NFIXBC(8),NFLXBC(8),NINTLC(8),LDOF(8),IDOF(8)
DIMENSION NELGP(10,2)
C
CHARACTER*80 HEDPST
CHARACTER*4 HED(20)
C
C b sb ee s sk b ss ei s ks ss i ib sb b s INPUT DATA
c
NX -41
NY =25
XLEN = 10.
YLEN = 7.
XOR = 0.
YOR = 0.
IPST = 50
IRST = 51
OPEN (IPST,FILE='FDPOST',FORM-'UNFORMATTED',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (IRST,FILE-'FDPOST1',FORM-'UNFORMATTED',STATUS3 'UNKNOWN')
C
c
C*==*=*.=*.>«»«==*=«==«=..«=«,= r e a d AND WRITE HEADING
C
c NUMNP Total number of nodal points in the mesh
c NELEM Total number of elements in the mesh
c NELEMM Maximum number of elements in any one element group
c NELTYP Number of element groups (without plot elements)
c NDF Number of coordinate directios (2 or 3)
c NDFVL Number of velocity components (2 or 3)
c MNDOF Maximum number of degrees of freedom (set to 8)
c MNDF Maximum number of nodes in any element
c N3D element order flag
272
C =0 only quadratic elements used.

C =1 only linear elements used
C
C
READ (IPST) HEDPST
WRITE(IRST) HEDPST
READ (IPST) HED,REVL
WRITE(IRST) HED,REVL
READ (IPST) ITIM,LIN,NEWT,IDIM,ITMP,IPENY,IDCTS,IFREE,ITURB
WRITE(IRST) ITIM,LIN,NEWT,IDIM,ITMP,IPENY,IDCTS,IFREE,ITURB
READ (IPST) NUMNP,NELEM,NELTYP,N3D,NELEMP,NELCNP,NELEMM
WRITE (IRST) NUMNP ,NELEM,NELTYP,N3D,NELEMP,NELCNP,NELEMM
READ (IPST) MNDF,MVDF,MPDF,MNDP,NDF,NDFVL,MNDOF,NDOF,
6 (ID0F(I),1*1,MNDOF),(LDOF(I),1=1,MNDOF)
WRITE(IRST) MNDF,MVDF,MPDF,MNDP,NDF,NDFVL,MNDOF,NDOF,
& (IDOF(I), 1=1, MNDOF), (LDOF(I),1=1, MNDOF)
READ (IPST) NTFNS,NPTM,NBODY,NHSRC
WRITE(IRST) NTFNS,NPTM,NBODY,NHSRC
READ (IPST) (NFIXBC(I),1=1,MNDOF)
WRITE(IRST) (NFIXBC(I),1=1,MNDOF)
READ (IPST) (NFLXBC(I),1=1,MNDOF)
WRITE(IRST) (NFLXBC(I),1=1,MNDOF)
READ (IPST) NSTEPS,TSTART,TEND,DT,INT,IVSTP,THETA,TOL,WIN,NBKE
C
C FOR TIME AND DT, USE THE INFORMATION IN TRAJECTORY
C
OPEN (70,FILE='trajectory',STATUS='OLD',FORM-'UNFORMATTED *)
READ (70)
DO 310 IREC = 1,1000
READ (70,END=320) ISKIP,TMALL(IREC)
NREC = IREC
310 CONTINUE
C TEND in FDREST must be the time prior to the last time step
320 NREC * NREC - 1
IF (NREC.LE.l) THEN
TSTART = 0.
TEND = 0.
TIME = 0.
DT =0.
ELSE
TSTART = TMALL(NREC-l)
TEND = TMALL(NREC)
TIME = TEND
DT = TEND - TSTART
END IF
C
C
WRITE(IRST) NSTEPS,TSTART,TEND,D T ,INT,IVSTP,THETA,TOL,WI N ,NBKE
READ (IPST) UMX,VMX,WMX,TMX,RKMX,EMX,ILUMP,NADREF
WRITE(IRST) UMX,VMX,WMX,TMX,RKMX,EMX,ILUMP,NADREF
READ (IPST) (NINTLC(I),1=1,MNDOF),ISTOKS
WRITE(IRST) (NINTLC(I),1=1,MNDOF),ISTOKS
READ (IPST) METHOD,LISRCH,NLSTP,ILOAD,ACCF,ITEMAX,IREFM,
6 MAXUP,STOL,DTOL,RTOL,METH1,METH2,NITRM1,IOM,
& MAXL,KMP,IPRE
WRITE(IRST) METHOD,LISRCH,NLSTP,ILOAD,ACCF,ITEMAX, IREFM,
& MAXUP,STOL,DTOL,RTOL,METH1,METH2,NITRM1,1OM,
& MAXL.KMP,IPRE
READ (IPST) REY,EPS,IUPWD,UPWD,ISTRS,IDIS,DISFAC,ISYM,CONSF,CONST
WRITE(IRST) REY,EPS,IUPWD,UPWD,ISTRS,IDIS,DISFAC,ISYM,CONSF,CONST
273
READ (IPST) ICENT,ICOR,OMEGA,XROTV,YROTV,ZROTV

WRITE(IRST) ICENT,ICOR,OMEGA,XROTV,YROTV,ZROTV
READ (IPST) NFRLNS,IINTF,HNNRMS,NPDIST,IROT
WRITE(IRST) NFRLNS,IINTF,MNNRMS,NPDIST,IROT
READ (IPST) NEQ,NEQP
WRITE(IRST) NEQ,NEQP
C
NODAL COORDINATES
C
C X : VECTOR OF X COORDINATES
C Y : VECTOR OF Y COORDINATES
C
CALL READBN (IPST,X,NUMNP)
CALL READBN (IPST,Y,NUMNP)
IF (NDF.EQ.3) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'INTERPOL ... 3-D IS NOT BUILT IN'
STOP
END IF
OPEN (10,FILE*'nodes',FORM*'UNFORMATTED',STATUS*'OLD')
DO 10 INODE * 1,NUMNP
READ (10) ISKIP1,ISKIP2,ISKIP3,XNEW(INODE),YNEW(INODE)
10 CONTINUE
CLOSE (10)
CALL WRITBN (IRST,XNEW,NUMNP)
CALL WRITBN (IRST,YNEW,NUMNP)
C
BOUNDARY AND INITIAL CONDITIONS
C
C In the case of the FIDAP post-processor file, this section
C consists of 4 zeros
C In the case of FIMESH/FIPREP interface, this section contains
C a description of any boundary conditions defined in FIMESH or
C specified by USER option.
C
READ (IPST) IBCODE,TV1,IV2,DISTA
WRITE(IRST) IBCODE,IV1,IV2,DISTA
C
C Branch according to IBCODE
C * 0, end of boundary conditions
C
ELEMENT GROUP INFORMATION
C
50 NELT = 0
C
DO 300 NG*1,NSLTYF
C
C ELEMENT GROUP COTROL INFORMATION :
C
C NTYP : element type
C * 3 quadrilateral (4 node)
C *23 boundary slip element
c
C NDP : number of nodes per element in group
C NELGP(NG,1) : number of elements in group
C NELGP(NG,2) : element type in this group
C NPRP : number of fluid property sets (may be set to zero).
C
READ (IPST) NTYP,NELGP(NG,1),NDP,NIP,NPRP,(NPAR(I),1=6,40)
WRITE(IRST) NTYP,NELGP(NG,1),NDP,NIP,NPRP,(NPAR(I),1-6,40)
NELGP(NG,2) = NTYP
274
c
c FLUID PROPERTIES DATA
c
READ (IPST) PROP(1)
WRITE(IRST) PROP(1)
IF (NPRP.NE.O) THEN
DO 100 NCL = 1,NPRP
NC = MAX(1,NPAR(16+2*NCL-1))
CALL READBN (IPST,PROP,NC)
CALL WRITBN (IRST,PROP,NC)
100 CONTINUE
END IF
READ (IPST) (PROP(I),1-1,15)
WRITE(IRST) (PROP(I),1=1,15)
IF (NG.EQ.NELTYP) THEN
c
c ELEM(i,j) Is needed for Interpolation. This part reads element
c connectivities starting from el #1 for each group. As long as
c the quadrilateral elements are in the last group, this works
c fine. Otherwise, element connectivity information will be passed
c wrong to the interpolation part.
c
IF (NTYP.NE.3) THEN
WRITE (*,*) 'LAST ELEMENT GROUP TYPE : ',NTYP
WRITE (*,*) 'ELEMENT CONNECTIVITIES MIXED UP, ABORTING ..'
STOP
END IF
END IF
C ELEMENT CONNECTIVITY INFORMATION
C
DO 200 J = 1, NELGP(NG,1)
C
C NE :local element number
C NELT :global element number
C NODE :list of ndp nodes defining element
C
NELT = NELT + 1
READ (IPST) NE,NELT,AREAVL, (ELEM(I, J),1=1,NDP)
WRITE (IRST) NE,NELT, AREAVL, (ELEM(I,J), 1*1,NDP)
200 CONTINUE
300 CONTINUE
C
C= RESTART INFORMATION FOR EXPLICIT TIME INTEGRATOR
C
READ (IPST) MMRY,NBLKS,LBLK,MTT,LNCMC,LNCMAT,LCMC,LACMAT,LSCMAT
c
c SOLUTION VECTORS
c
c For steady state, KSTEP=1, TIME=0., DT=0.
c
c KSTEP time step number
c TIME time value of time step
c DT time step increment
c RNORM norm of residual vector
c
c
READ (IPST) KSTEP,SKIP,SKIP,RNORM
275
oonoonn
FOR TIME AND DT, USE THE INFORMATION IN TRAJECTORY

VELOCITIES
UOLD : Velocity vector of old time step. Velocity components
of node I are stored as UF(2*I-1),UF(2*I)
NMPR = NDFVL*NUMNP
CALL READBN (IPST,UOLD,NMPR)
ononoo
INTERPOLATE VELOCITIES
last group has the quadrilateral elements
CALL DERIV (NUMNP,NELGP(NELTYP, 1))

CALL INTVEL (NUMNP,NELGP(NELTYP,1))
nooo
«==«»=»»=.=.==,==o=!,===:™===,= WRITE UP TO PRESSURE FIELD
WRITE (IRST) MMRY,NBLKS,LBLK,MTT,LNCMC,LNCMAT,LCMC,LACMAT,LSCMAT

WRITE(IRST) KSTEP,TIME,DT,RNORM
CALL WRITBN (IRST,UNEW,NMPR)
oonoon
=•===»====«:=.«==«,«=,==«= READ AND WRITE PRESSURES
Pressures are needed as restart information.

NPLST = NUMNP* IDCTS + NELEM* (1-IDCTS) * (MPDF+I)
CALL READBN (IPST,UOLD,NPLST)
n
CALL WRITBN (IRST,UOLD,NPLST)

onnno
RESTART VECTORS
SOLUTION VECTOR
CALL READBN (IPST,UNEW,NEQ)
CALL WRITBN (IRST,UNEW,NEQ)
o
ACCELERATION VECTOR
IF (INT.EQ.l) THEN
CALL READBN (IPST,UNEW(NEQ+1),NEQ)
CALL WRITBN (IRST,UNEW(NEQ+1),NEQ)
END IF
onn
500 CONTINUE
STOP
END
276
C*
C INTVEL.F Interpolates velocities
C NOV 4, 1989
C*
c
c
SUBROUTINE INTVEL(NNODE,NELEM)
PARAMETER (NNEL-20000,NNOD-=20000)
COMMON /ELEMS/ELEM(4,NNEL) ,X(NNOD) ,Y(NNOD)
COMMON /VELOC/UOLD(NNOD*2),UDX(NNOD*2),UDY(NNOD*2)
COMMON /NEH/XNEH(NNOD) ,YNEW(NNOD) ,UNEW(NNOD*2)
INTEGER NBOR (4,NNOO)
C
c
c NBOR (1,NNOD) : West neighbor
c NBOR (2,NNOD) : South neighbor
c NBOR (3,NNOD) : East neighbor
c NBOR (4,NNOD) : North neighbor
c
c- FIND NEIGHBORS OF EACH NODE
c
DO 60 J = 1,4
DO 50 I « 1, NNODE
NBOR (J,I) = 0
SO CONTINUE
60 CONTINUE
C
DO 100 IEL ' 1,NELEM
C
N1 » ELEM(1,IEL)
N2 = ELEM(2,IEL)
N3 = ELEM(3,IEL)
N4 * ELEM(4,IEL)
NBOR (3,N1) = N2
NBOR (4,N1) = N4
NBOR (1,N2) = N1
NBOR (4,N 2 ) > N3
NBOR (2,N3) = N2
NBOR (1,N3) = N4
NBOR (2,N4) > N1
NBOR (3,N4) = N3
100 CONTINUE
DO 120 I ■= ISO,NNODE-150
IF (NBOR(1,1).E Q .0) NBOR( 1,1 )“I-100
IF (NBOR(2,I).EQ.0) NBOR(2,1)«I-1
IF (NBOR(3,1).E Q •0) NBOR(3,1)«I+100
IF (NBOR(4,1 ).EQ.0) NBOR(4,1)=I+1
120 CONTINUE
c
c- FIND THE CLOSEST OLD NODE TO THE NEW NODE
c
c
DO 220 IN * 1,NNODE
c
C start from the old node number:
c
277
INODE = IN
DIST = ( XNEW( IN) -X( IN) )**2 + ( YNEW( IN)-Y( IN) )**2
C
205 CONTINUE
C
DO 210 ISIDE = 1,4
INI = NBOR(ISIDE,INODE)
IF (INI.EQ.0) GO TO 210
DIST1 = ( XNEW( IN) -X( INI) )**2 + ( YNEW( IN)-Y( INI) )**2
IF (DIST1.LE.DIST) THEN
DIST «= DIST1
INODE = INI
GO TO 205
END IF
210 CONTINUE
nnn
THE CLOSEST NODE NUMBER IS INODE

DX = XNEW(IN) - X(INODE)
DY - YNEW(IN) - Y(INODE)
n
UNEW(IN*2-1) «>UOLD(INODE*2-l) +UDX(INODE*2-l)*DX +

& UDY(INODE*2-l)*DY
UNEW(IN*2) = UOLD(INODE*2) + UDX( INODE*2)*DX +
6 UDY(INQDE*2)*DY
nn
220 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
uoissiuuad inoiiiiM paiiqiqojd u o ip np ojdaj ja q y r y jauMo ;q6uAdoo a q u o uoissi.iuiad qjiM paonpojday
0
0
t aaoN aoj xa/na onv xa/na -0
3
0
3nNIXNOO ooi
ur (s*iai)aoovr
izr- = (i-s*iai)ao3vr
sir- = (z-s*iai)aoovr
zzc (e-s*i3i)aoovr
xzr*zxr - zzr*xir (fr-s*iai)aoovr
fr/({2N)A-(TN)A-(frM)A+(CM)X) » ZZC
fr/((ZN)X-(XN)X-(frN)X+(EN)X) = xzr
lr/( (frN)A- (TN)A-(CN)A+(ZN)A) = Zir
fr/((MOX-(TN)X-(EN)X+(ZN)X) - Tir
(lai'vJwaia = wj
dai'Owaia = cn
(i3i'z)waia = zn
(iai'x)wai3 = in
K313N'I « 131 00X 00
3
(3XqB2T^0103A ST dOOT STHi) 0
XN3W313 H3V3 H03 SNVIHODVr 31Vin31V3 -0
0
0
AO/AO (z*aoNi)Aan 3
Aa/na (x-z*aoNi)xan 0
3
xa/Aa (z*aom)xan 0
xa/na (x-z*aoNi)xan 3
3
AJ.I3013A A (z*aoNi)aion 3
AXI3013A n (x-z*aoNi)aion 3
3
: aoNi # aaoN aoa shoxo 3a xxiooiaA 3
3
(z'z)ar (s*iai) aoovr 3
(x'z)ar (T-s*i3i) aoovr 3
(z'Uar (3-5*131) aoovr 3
(i'T)ar (e-s*iai) aoovr 3
(V3HV*fr) Nviaoovr (fr-s*iai) aoovr 3
: 131 * 1N3W313 H03 (s*wai3N) aoovr 0
saaoN ao H3awnN aaoNN 3
S1N3H313 30 H3BWT1N W313N 3
3
3
zzr'Tzr'zir'Tir'(s*i3NN)aoovr ivaa
W313 H3S3XNI
(aoNN)AOAa'(aoNN)xaAa'(aoNN)xana'(aoNN)xana NoisN3wia
(z*aoNN)Aan'(z*aoNN)xan'(z*aoKN)aion/ooi3A/ n o h h o o
(aONN)A'(aOMN)X'(13NN'fr)W313/SH313/ NOWMOO
(0000Z*aONN'0000Z=13NN) H3X3WVHVd
(H313N'aaoNN) AiH3a aNixnoaans
3
*0
•saqBUTPJ003 xssTsAqd u t i 686T 'fr AON 3
apou qsea qe saAT-jBATjap AqT3°TSA aqq saqeinoTBD ; H03*AIH3a 3
*0
8 LZ
279
00 110 INOD - 1,NNODE*2

UOX(INOD) = 0.
UDY(INOD) = 0.
110 CONTINUE
DO 115 INOD = 1,NNODE*4
DUDX(INOD) = 0.
DUDY(INOD) = 0.
DVDX(INOD) » 0.
DVDY(INOD) - 0.
115 CONTINUE
DO 120 IEL = 1,NELEM

N1 *= ELEM( 1, IEL)
N2 = ELEM(2,IEL)
N3 = ELEM(3,IEL)
N4 - ELEM(4,IEL)
c
c DU/DX AND DV/DX
c
DUDX(Nl) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N2*2-l) -
& U0LD(N1*2-1) ) + JACOB(IEL*5-2)*
& ( U0LD(N4*2-1) - U0LD(N1*2-1) ) )/2
DVDX(Nl) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N2*2) -
6 UOLD(Nl*2) ) + JACOB(JEL*5~2)*
& ( UOLD(N4*2) - U0LD(N1*2) ) )/2
c
c DU/DY AND DV/DY
c
DUDY(Nl) ( JACOB(IEL*5-l)*( UOLD(N2*2-l) -
UOLD(Nl*2-l) ) + JACOB(IEL*5)*
( UOLD(N4*2-l) - U0LD(N1*2-1) ) )/2
DVDY(Nl) ( JACOB(IEL*5-1)*( U0LD(N2*2) -
U0LD(N1*2) ) + JACOB(IEL* 5)*
( UOLD(N4*2) - U0LD(N1*2) ) )/2
120 CONTINUE
DO 125 INOD « 1,NNODE

UDX(INOD*2-l) = UDX(INOD*2-l) + DUDX(INOD)
UDX(INOD*2) - UDX(INOD*2) + DVDX(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2-l) “ UDY(INOD*2-l) + DUDY(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2) = UDY(INOD*2) + DVDY(INOD)
125 CONTINUE
DO 130 INOD - 1,NNODE

DUDX(INOD) = 0.
DVDX(INOD) « 0.
DUDY(INOD) - 0.
DVDY(INOD) = 0.
130 CONTINUE
C
C- — DU/DX AND DU/DY FOR NODE 2
C
DO 135 IEL 1,NELEM
N1 = ELEM(1,IEL)
N2 = ELEM (2, IEL)
280
N3 - ELEM(3,IEL)
N4 = ELEM(4,IEL)
DU/DX AND DV/DX
DUDX(N2) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N2*2-l) - U0LD(N1*2-1) )
6 + JACOB(IEL*5-2)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N2*2-l) ) )/2
DVDX(N2) * ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N2*2) - U0LD(N1*2) )
& + JACOB(IEL*5-2)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N2*2) ) )/2
C
c DU/DY AND DV/DY
c
DUDY(N2) ( JACOB(IEL*5-1)*( UOLD(N2*2-l) - U0LD(N1*2-1) )
i + JACOB(IEL*5)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N2*2-l) ) )/2
DVDY(NZ) ( JACOB(IEL*5~1)*( UOLD(N2*2) - U0LD(N1*2) )
+ JACOB(IEL*5)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N2*2) ) )/2
135 CONTINUE
DO 140 INOD = 1,NNODE
UDX(IN0D*2-1) = UDX(INOD*2-1) + DUDX(INOD)
UDX(INOD*2) » UDX(INOD*2) + DVDX(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2-l) = UDY(INOD*2-l) + DUDY(INOD)
U D Y (IN0D*2) = UDY(INOD*2) + DVDY(INOD)
140 CONTINUE
DO 145 INOD == 1,NNODE*4
DUDX(INOD) 0.
DVDX(INOD) 0.
DUDY(INOD) 0.
DVDY(INOD) 0 .
145 CONTINUE
C
c- --------------- DU/DXAND DU/DY FOR NODE 3
c
DO 150 IEL = 1 NELEM
N1 = ELEM(1,IEL)
N2 = ELEM(2,IEL)
N3 = ELEM(3,IEL)
N4 = ELEM(4 ,IEL)
C
C DU/DX AND DV/DX
C
DUDX(N3) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N4*2-l) )
6 + JACOB(IEL*5-2)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N2*2-l) ) )/2
DVDX(N3) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N4*2) )
5 + JACOB(IEL*5-2)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N2*2) ) )/2
c
c DU/DY AND DV/DY
c
DUDY(N3) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-1)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N4*2-l) )
6 + JACOB(IEL*5)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N2*2-l) ) )/2
DVDY(N3) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-1)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N4*2) )
6 + JACOB(IEL*5)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N2*2) ) )/2
150 CONTINUE
DO 155 INOD = 1,NNODE

UDX(INOD*2-l) = UDX(INOD*2-1) + DUDX(INOD)
281
UOX(INOD*2) UDX(INOD*2) DVDX(INOD)

UDY(IN0D*2-1) UDY(IN0D*2-1) + DUDY(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2) UDY(INOD*2) + DVDY(INOD)
155 CONTINUE
DO 160 INOD = 1,NNODE*4
DUDX(INOD) « 0.
DVDX(INOD) « 0.
DUDY(INOD) = 0.
DVDY(INOD) = 0.
160 CONTINUE
ooo
----------------- DU/DXAND DU/DY FOR NODE 4

o
N1 = ELEM(1,IEL)
N2 = ELEM(2,IEL)
N3 - ELEM(3,IEL)
N4 = ELEM(4,IEL)
ooo
DU/DX AND DV/DX

DUDX(N4) = ( JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N4*2 - 1) )
6 + JACOB(IEL*5-2)*( UOLD(N4*2-l) - UOLD(Nl*2 - 1 ! ) )/2
DVDX(N4) = { JACOB(IEL*5-3)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N4*2) )
& + JACOB(IEL*5-2}*( UOLD(N4*2) - UOLD(Nl*2) ) )/2
ooo
DU/DY AND DV/DY

DUDY(N4) ( JACOB(IEL*5-i)*( UOLD(N3*2-l) - UOLD(N4*2 -1) )
& + JACOB(IEL*5)*( UOLD(N4*2-l) - U0LD(N1*2-1 ) ) )/2
DVDY(N4) ( JACOB(IEL*5~1)*( UOLD(N3*2) - UOLD(N4*2) )
+ JACOB(IEL*5)*( UOLD(N4*2) - UOLD(Nl*2) ) ) / 2
o
165 CONTINUE
o
DO 170 INOD *= 1,NNODE

UDX(INOD*2-l) = UDX(INOD*2-l) + DUDX(INOD)
UDX(INOD*2) « UDX(INOD*2) + DVDX(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2-l) = UDY(INOD*2-l) + DUDY(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2) *= UDY (INOD*2) + DVDY(INOD)
170 CONTINUE
n
DO 175 INOD 2* 1(NNODE*4

DUDX(INOD) 0.
DVDX(INOD) 0.
DUDY(INOD) 0.
DVDY(INOD) 0.
175 CONTINUE
nnnnnn
---------------- DIVIDE BY JACOBIAN

DUDX Is no longer needed, It will be used to store area.
N1 = ELEM(1,IEL)
N2 = ELEM(2,IEL)
N3 ■= ELEM(3,IEL)
282
N4 = ELEM(4,IEL)
DUDX(Nl) = DUDX(Nl) JACOB(I£L*5-4)
DUDX(N2) DUDX(N2) JACOB(IEL*5-4)
OUDX(N3) DUDX(N3) JACOB(IEL*5-4)
DUDX(N4) DUDX(N4) JACOB(IEL*5-4)
200 CONTINUE
DO 210 INOD «= 1,NNODE
UDX(INOD*2-l) = UDX(INOD*2-l)/DUDX(INOD)
UDX(INOD*2) * UDX(INOD*2)/DUDX(INOD)
UDY(INOD*2-l) «= UDY (INOD*2-1) /DUDX (INOD)
UDY(1N0D*2) = UDY(INOD*2)/DUDX(INOD)
210 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
283
/* force.c */
/*
This is a dummy main program to call FORCE. Whether or not
the time step is to be repeated is decided by the FORTRAN
routine FORCE.F. However, main programs compiled with cft77
cannot return any argument to the C-Shell, The function of this
main program is to return the status code to C-shell.
*/
int FORCE();
int main()
{
exit( FORCE() );
}
284
nonnn
FORCE.F ! Calculates forces exerted on each bubble

JUL 08, 1990 !
INTEGER FUNCTION FORCE()

Returns 0 If the calculated force at the new time step differs
nooonooonno
less than TOLF of the force calculated at the previous time step.
Returns 1 otherwise.
Called by "foree.c" to pass the exit status to C shell.
Shear stress = 0 ==> no angular momentum
PARAMETER (NPMAX=20000,MB=10,PI=3.141592654)
o
COMMON RO(MB),XB0(MB),YB0(MB),DRAGPX(MB),DRAGPY(MB),
& DRAGTX(MB),DRAGTY(MB),TORQUE(MB),NBN0D(MB)
DIMENSION IXB(MB),IYB(MB)
no
REAL X0(MB,3),Y0(MB,3),FXP(MB,3),FYP(MB,3),MOM(MB,3),
& U0(MB,3),V0(MB,3),ANG(MB,3),DX(MB),DY(MB),TIME(3)
n
REAL INERT(MB)
ooooo
INPUT DATA
DENSTY 8 0.7
DENSC 8 1.
DVISK 8 1.
VELTYP « 20.
TOLF 8 40.
GRAVTY 8 -9810
DISMAX 8 0.10
RELAX » 0.3
nnn
OPEN (20,FILE=*trajectory*,STATUS''OLD',FORM='UNFORMATTED')
C
READ (20) NBUB,IL,JL,(IXB( I),IYB(I),I'1,NBUB),XLEN,YLEN,
& (R0(I),I'l,NBUB)
C
DO 10 I • 1,NBUB
NBNOD(I) ■ 2*(IXB(I)+IYB( I))
10 CONTINUE
C
DO 25 I = 1,10000
READ (20,END=30)
NREC = I
25 CONTINUE
30 CONTINUE
C
CLOSE(20)
285
OPEN (20,FILE='trajectory',STATUS='OLD',FORM='UNFORMATTED')
READ (20)
C
DO 35 I = l.NREC-2
READ (20)
35 CONTINUE
C
IF (NREC.EQ.1) THEN
C
READ (20) ISTEP,TIME(2),(ISKIP,X0(I,2),Y0(1,2),FXP(1,2),
& FYP(I,2),MOH(I,2),U0(1,2),V0(1,2),ANG(1,2),1=1,NBUB)
C
ELSE
C
READ (20) ISTEP,TIME(1),(ISKIP,X0(I,1),Y0(I,1),FXP(I,1),
6 FYP(I,1),MOM(1,1),U0(1,1),VO(1,1),ANG(I,1),1=1,NBUB)
READ (20) ISTEP,TIME(2),(ISKIP,XO(I,2),Y0(I,2),FXP(I,2),
& FYP(1,2),MOM(I,2),U0(I,2),VO(I,2),ANG(I,2),1=1,NBUB)
C
END IF
C
C
DO 40 IB = 1,NBUB
XBO(IB) = X0(IB,2)
YBC(IB) = Y0(IB,2)
INERT(IB) = DENSTY*PI*RO(IB)**4/2
40 CONTINUE
C
c
c
c-------------------------------------------------------------
C EVALUATE FORCES EXERTED ON EACH BUBBLE
C
CALL GETPRES (NBUB,DENSTY)
C
DO 100 IBUB = 1,NBUB
C
WRITE (*,*) 'BUBBLE #',IBUB
WRITE (*,*) 'PRESS DRAG IN X ,DRAGPX(IBUB),DRAGPY(IBUB)
AND Y
WRITE (*,*) 'SHEAR DRAG IN X AND Y :'
,DRAGTX(IBUB),DRAGTY(IBUB)
WRITE (*,*) 'TOTAL DRAG IN X ,DRAGPX(IBUB)+DRAGTX(IBUB)
AND Y:'
& ,DRAGPY(IBUB)+DRAGTY(IBUB)
WRITE (*,*) 'TORQUE (CLOCKWISE) :' ,TORQUE (IBUB)
FXP(IBUB,3) = DRAGPX(IBUB) + DRAGTX( IBUB)
6 + GRAVTY*PI*RO(IBUB)*R0( IBUB)*(DENSC-DENSTY)
FYP(IBUB,3) = DRAGPY(IBUB) + DRAGTY(IBUB)
MOM(IBUB,3) = TORQUE(IBUB)
C
100 CONTINUE
C
c-------------
C CHECK IF THE DIFFERENCE IN FORCE IS MORE THAN TOLF
C
IF (NREC.EQ.l) GO TO 190
C
DO 110 IBUB = 1,NBUB
DELFX = FXP(IBUB,3) - FXP(IBUB,2)
DELFY = FYP(IBUB,3) - FYP(IBUB,2)
DFORCE = SQRT (DELFX*DELFX + DELFY*DELFY)
IF (DFORCE.GT.TOLF) GO TO 150
286
110 CONTINUE
SO TO 190
C
C-------------------------------------------------------
c
C GO BACK TO LAST TIME STEP
C
150 CONTINUE
C
WRITE (*,400) ISTEP,(FXP(I,2),FXP(I,3),FYP(I,2),FYP(I,3),
& I“1,NBUB)
400 FORMAT ('FORCE : Repeating time step # ',13,//,
& ' FXOLD FXPNEW ',
& 'FYPOLD FYPNEW',10(/,' BUBBLE # ',E11.5,2X,
& Ell.5,3X,Ell.5,2X,Ell.5))
C
C
DELT = TIME(2) - TIME(l)
DO 155 IB = 1,NBUB
BMASS * PI*R0(IB)*R0(IB)*DENSTY
C
C
C
FXP(IB,3) a RELAX*FXP(IB,3) + (1.-RELAX)*FXP(IB,2)
FYP(IB,3) = RELAX*FYP(IB,3) + (1.-RELAX)*FYP(IB,2)
MOM(IB,3) = RELAX*MOM(IB,3) + (1.-RELAX)*MOM(IB,2)
ACCX a FXP (IB,3) /BMASS
ACCY = FYP(IB,3)/BMASS
U0(IB,3) * U0(IB,1) + DELT*ACCX
V0(IB,3) - V0(IB,1) + DELT*ACCY
ANG(IB,3) = ANG(IB,1) + DELT*MOM(IB,3)/INERT(IB)
X0(IB,3) = X0(IB,1) + U0(IB,1)*DELT + ACCX*DELT*DELT/2
Y0(IB,3) = Y0(IB,1) + V0(IB,1)*DELT + ACCY*DELT*DELT/2
155 CONTINUE
CLOSE (20)
OPEN (20,FILEa'trajectory',STATUS='OLD',FORMa'UNFORMATTED')
DO 160 IREC a 1,NREC
READ (20)
160 CONTINUE
WRITE (20) ISTEP,TIME(2),(ISKIP,X0( 1,3),Y0(1,3),FXP(1,3),FYP(1,3),
6 MOM(I,3),UO(I,3),VO(I,3),ANG(1,3),1=1,NBUB)
CLOSE (20)
FORCE » 1
RETURN
C
------------------------------------------------------------
C DISPLACEMENT AMD ROTATION
C
190 CONTINUE
C
C
C START WITH 100 SEC.
C
DT = 100.
C
C 1. VELOCITY CRITERION (10% OF TYPICAL VELOCITY MAGNITUDE)
C
DO 200 IB = i,NBUB
Reproduced w ild permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
287
BMASS = PI*R0(IB)*R0(IB)*DENSTY
FTOTAL = SQRT( FXP(IB,3)*FXP(IB,3) + FYP(IB,3)*FYP(IB,3) )
ACCLIN = FTOTAL / BMASS
DELT = 0.1*VELTYP / ACCLIN
DT = AMIN1 (DT,DELT)
C
200 CONTINUE
nnn
2. DISPLACEMENT CRITERION (50% OF MIN NODE DISTANCE)

DELX = XLEN/(IL-1)
DELY = YLEN/(JL-1)
DISMAX = AMIN1 (DELX,DELY) / 2.
non
DO 220 IB * 1,NBUB
FTOTAL = SQRT( FXP(IB,3)*FXP(IB,3) + FYP(IB,3)*FYP(IB,3) )
ACCLIN = FTOTAL / BMASS
UINT = SQRT( U0(IB,2)*U0(IB,2) +V0(IB,2)*V0(IB,2) + I.e-20)
DELT o SQRT( (UINT/ACCLIN)**2 +2*DISMAX/ACCLIN )
DELT = - UINT/ACCLIN + DELT
DT = AMIN1 (DT,DELT)
220 CONTINUE
n o n
DO 230 IB *= 1,NBUB
ACCX = FXP(IB,3)/BMASS
ACCY = FYP(IB,3)/BMASS
U0(IB,3) = U0(IB,2) + ACCX*DT
V0(IB,3) = V0(IB,2) + ACCY*DT
X0(IB,3) = X 0 (IB,2) + U0(IB,2)*DT+ ACCX*DT*DT/2
Y0(IB,3) = Y0(IB,2) + V0(IB,2)*DT+ ACCY*DT*DT/2
ANG(IB,3)= ANG(IB,2) + DT*MOM(IB,3)/INERT(IB)
230 CONTINUE
nnno
ADD TO TRAJECTORY
ISTEP = ISTEP + 1
TIME(3) = TIME(2) + DT
WRITE (20) ISTEP,TIME(3),(II,X0(II,3),Y0(II,3),FXP(II,3),
S FYP(II,3),MOM(II,3),U0(II,3),V0(II,3),ANG(II,3),
i 11*1,NBUB)
CLOSE (20)
FORCE * 0
RETURN
END
238
noon
GETPRES.F ! Reads velocities and pressures from FIDAP restart file,

JUN 29,1990 ! calculates pressures at the nodes.
SUBROUTINE GETPRES (NBUBL,RHO)
PARAMETER (NUMNP1*20000, NPLST1=20000,NEQ1=20000,PI=3.141592654)
PARAMETER (MB=10)
oon
COMMON R0(MB),XB0(M8),YBO(MB),DRAGPX(MB),DRAGPY(MB),
& DRAGTX(MB),DRAGTY(MB),TORQUE(MB),NBNOD(MB)
o
DIMENSION NODE(4,NUMNP1),ANODE(NUMNP1),AREA(NUMNP1)
DIMENSION WORK(4*NUMNP1),PROP(NUMNP1)
DIMENSION NPAR(100),PEL(NUMNP1)
DIMENSION W0RK1(2*NUMNP1),W0RK2(2*NUMNP1)
DIMENSION DIST(4)
DIMENSION BUBEL(50,MB),BUBNOD(50,MB),PBEL(50,MB),NBEL(MB),
& PBNOD(50,MB),XBEL(4,50,MB),YBEL(4,50,MB),
& UXBEL(4,50,MB),UYBEL(4,50,MB),PBN(4,50,MB)
INTEGER BUBEL,BUBNOD
EQUIVALENCE (WORK1(1),WORK(!)),(W0RK2(1),WORK(2*NUMNP1))
oo
ITWO = 1
IPST «= 10
OPEN (IPST,FILE='FDPOST',FORM-'UNFORMATTED',STATUS='OLD')
nononnnnnnnnnnooonn
NUMNP : Total number of nodal points in the mesh

NELEM : Total number of elements in the mesh
NELEMM : Maximum number of elements in any one element group
NELTYP : Number of element groups (without plot elements)
NELCNP : Number of element groups (plot elements only)
NDF : Number of coordinate directios (2 or 3)
NDFVL : Number of velocity components (2 or 3)
MNDOF : Maximum number of degrees of freedom (set to 8)
MNDF : Maximum number of nodes in any element
N3D : element order flag
*= 0 only quadratic elements used.
■ 1 only linear elements used
MPDF : Max number of pressure degrees of freedom
DO 20 I = 1,3
20 READ (IPST)
READ (IPST) NUMNP,NELEM,NELTYP,N3D,NELEMP,NELCNP,NELEMM
READ (IPST) MNDF,MVDF,MPDF,MNDP,NDF,NDFVL
DO 25 I = 1,11
25 READ (IPST)
nnnnnnn
NODAL COORDINATES
X :VECTOR OF X COORDINATES
Y :VECTOR OF Y COORDINATES
2 sVECTOR OF Z COORDINATES
289
CALL READBN (IPST,WORK1,NUMNP*ITWO)

CALL READBN (IPST,W0RK2,NUMNP*ITWO)
IF (NDP.EQ.3) THEN
WRITE (*,*) ' GETELEM ABORTING ... '
WRITE (*,*) ' NDP - 3, SMTG IS WRONG '
STOP
END IF
oononon
BOUNDARY AND INITIAL CONDITIONS

In the case of the FIDAP post-processor file, this section
consists of 4 zeros
10 READ (IPST)
non
==*================*======== ELEMENT GROUP INFORMATION

50 CONTINUE
o
NBUB = NBUBL
on
DO 220 NG-1,NELTYP
nnnnononono
ELEMENT GROUP COTROL INFORMATION :

NTYP : element type
“ 3 quadrilateral (4 node)
-23 boundary slip element
NELGP : number of elements in group
NDP : number of nodes per elementin group
NPRP : number of fluid property sets (may be set to zero)
READ (IPST) NTYP,NELGP,NDP,NIP,NPRP,(NPAR(I),1-6,40)
nno
FLUID PROPERTIES DATA

READ (IPST) PROP(1)
IF (NPRP.NE.O) THEN
DO 100 NCL - 1,NPRP
NC - MAX(1,NPAR(16+2*NCL-1))
CALL READBN (IPST,PROP,NC*ITWO)
100 CONTINUE
END IF
READ (IPST) (PROP(I),1-1,15)
nnn
ELEMENT CONNECTIVITY INFORMATION

IF (NTYP.EQ.23) THEN
nnn
Boundary elements
NBNOD(NBUB) - NELGP
n
DO 180 J = 1, NELGP
non
NE : local element number

NELT : global element number
290
NODE : list of ndp nodes defining element

nn
READ (IPST) NE,NELT,SKIP,BUBN0D(NE,NBUB) ,ISKIP

180 CONTINUE
NBUB = NBUB - 1
nn
ELSE
nnn
Internal elements
DO 200 J = 1, NELGP
READ (IPST) NE,NELT,AREA(NE),(NODE(I,NE),1=1,NDP)
200 CONTINUE
n
END IF
n
220 CONTINUE
nnn
ELEMENT NUMBERS AROUND THE BUBBLE

DO 250 IBUB = 1,NBUBL
IBEL = 0
n
DO 240 I = 1,NELGP
o
DO 230 IBNOD = 1,NBNOD(IBUB)

n
IF (NODE( 1,1) >EQ.BUBNOD( IBNOD,IBUB)) THEN

IBEL = IBEL + 1
BUBEL( IBEL, IBUB) *= I
GO TO 240
END IF
IF (NODE (2,1) .EQ.BUBN0D (IBNOD,IBUB)) THEN
IBEL = IBEL + 1
BUBEL(IBEL,IBUB) ■= I
GO TO 240
END IF
IF (NODE(3,I).EQ.BUBNOD(IBNOD,IBUB)) THEN
IBEL * IBEL + 1
BUBEL(IBEL,IBUB) = I
GO TO 240
END IF
IF (NODE(4,I) .EQ.BUBNOD(IBNOD,IBUB)) THEN
IBEL = IBEL 1
BUBEL(IBEL,IBUB) *= I
GO TO 240 .
END IF
o
230 CONTINUE
240 CONTINUE
n
NBEL(IBUB) = IBEL
n
250 CONTINUE
nnnn
•u » n . » n S U S n „ H C NODAL COOFDINATES OF THE BUBBLE ELEMENTS

291
DO 270 IEL = 1,NBEL(IBUB)

INI = NODE(l,BUBEL(IEL,IBUB))
IN2 = NODE(2,BUBEL(IEL,IBUB))
XBEL(1,IEL,IBUB) WORKl(INl)
XBEL(2,IEL,IBUB) WORK1(IN2)
XBEL(3,IEL,IBUB) HORK1(IN3)
XBEL(4,IEL,IBUB) WORX1(IN4)
YBEL(1,IEL,IBUB) WORK2(INI)
YBEL(2,IEL,IBUB) WORK2(IN2)
YBEL(3,IEL,IBUB) HORK2(IN3)
YBEL(4,IEL,IBUB) WORK2(IN4)
270 CONTINUE
280 CONTINUE
====================== RESTART INFORMATION FOR EXPLICIT TIME INTEGRATOR
READ (IPST)
SOLUTION VECTORS
READ (IPST) KSTEP,TIME,DT,RNORM
SSSSCSS3USSSBKS:SBCS VELOCITIES
NMPR = NDFVL*NUMNP
CALL READBN (IPST,WORK,NMPR*ITWO)
C
C
DO 310 IBUB “ 1,NBUBL
DO 300 IEL - 1,NBEL(IBUB)
INI * NODE(1,BUBEL(IEL,IBUB))
IN2 = NODE(2,BUBEL(IEL,ISuB))
IN3 = NODE (3,BUBEL(IEL,IBUB))
IN4 *= NODE (4 BUBEL(IEL,IBUB')
UXBEL(1,IEL, IBUB) = WORK(2*INl-l)
UYBEL(1,IEL, IBUB) «= WORK(2*INl)
UXBEL(2,IEL, IBUB) - WORK(2*IN2-l)
UYBEL(2,IEL, IBUB) » WORK(2*IN2)
UXBEL(3,IEL, IBUB) = WORK(2*IN3-l)
UYBEL(3,IEL, IBUB) - HORK(2*IN3)
UXBEL(4,IEL, IBUB) = WORK(2*IN4-l)
UYBEL(4,IEL, IBUB) <= WORK(2*IN4)
300 CONTINUE
310 CONTINUE
C
C= PRESSURE
C
IDCTS •= 0
NPRES = NUMNP* IDCTS+NELEM* (1-IDCTS) *(MPDF+1)
CALL READBN (IPST,WORK,*,*PRES*ITWO)
c
c assume same number of nodes around each bubble
c
ISHFT = NBNOD(NBUBL)*NBUBL
DO 320 I = 1,NELEM
WORK(I)eWORK(I+ISHFT)
320 CONTINUE
292
CLOSE (IPST)
C
c
PBEL(IEL,IBUB) = WORK(BUBEL(IEL,IBUB))
330 CONTINUE
340 CONTINUE
C
e===«===e =ee PRESSURE AT THE NODES OF THE BUBBLE EL.S
C
C
X1R = ( XBEL(1,IEL,IBUB) + XBEL(4,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
X2R = ( XBEL(2,IEL,IBUB) + XBEL(3,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
Y1R = ( YBEL(1,IEL,IBUB) YEEL(4,IEL,IBUB)
•r / 2.
Y2R = ( YBEL(2,IEL,IBUB) + YBEL(3,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
X1S SI
( XBEL(1,IEL,IBUB) + XBEL(2,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
X2S E
( XBEL(4,IEL,IBUB) + XBEL(3,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
Y1S = ( YBEL(1,IEL,IBUB) + YBEL(2,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
Y2S = ( YBEL(4,IEL,IBUB) + YBEL(3,IEL,IBUB) / 2.
XLEN = SQRT ( (X2R-X1R)**2 + (Y2R-Y1R)**2 )
YLEN ■= SQRT ( (X2S-X1S)**2 + (Y2S-Y1S)**2 )
AA = (X2R-X1R)/XLEN
BR = (Y2R-Y1R)/XLEN
AS = (X2S-X1SJ/YLEN
BS - (Y2S-Y1S)/YLEN
C
DELTA B AR+BS * AS*BR
URl ■= ( UXBEL(1,IEL,IBUB)*BS - UYBELf1,IEL,IBUB)*AS )/DELTA
UR2 = ( UXBEL(2,IEL,IBUB)*BS - UYBEL(2,IEL,IBUB)*AS )/DELTA
UR3 - ( UXBEL(3,IEL,IBUB)*BS - UYBEL(3,IEL,IBUB)*AS )/DELTA
UR4 = ( UXBEL(4,IEL,IBUB)*BS - UYBEL(4,IEL,IBUB)*AS )/DELTA
US1 = ( - UXBEL(1,IEL,IBUB)*BR + UYBEL{1,IEL,IBUB)*AR )/DELTA
US2 = ( - UXBEL(2,IEL,IBUB)*BR + UYBEL(2,IEL,IBUB)*AR )/DELTA
US3 = { - UXBEL(3,IEL,IBUB)*BR + UYBEL(3,IEL,IBUB)*AR )/DELTA
US4 = ( - UXBEL(4,IEL,IBUB)*BR + UYBEL(4,IEL,IBUB)*AR )/DELTA
C
UR0 = ( URl + UR2 + UR3 + UR4 ) / 4
US0 = ( US1 + US2 + US3 + US4 ) / 4
C
DURDR ■=( UR3 + UR2 - UR4 - URl ) /4
DUSDR * ( US3 + US2 - US4 - US1 ) /4
DURDS = ( UR3 + UR4 - UR2 - URl ) /4
DUSDS = ( US3 + US4 - US2 - US1 ) /4
C
DPDR = - RHO * (UR0*DURDR + US0*DURDS)
DPDS = - RHO * (UR0*DUSDR + US0*DUSDS)
C
PBN(1,IEL,IBUB) = PBEL(IEL,IBUB) - DPDR - DPDS
PBN(2,IEL,IBUB) = PBEL(IEL,IBUB) + DPDR - DPDS
PBN(3,IEL,IBUB) = PBEL(IEL,IBUB) + DPDR + DPDS
PBN(4,IEL,IBUB) = PBEL(IEL,IBUB) - DPDR DPDS
400 CONTINUE
450 CONTINUE
C
DO 480 IBUB *= 1,NBUBL
DO 470 IN = l,NBNOD(IBUB)
C
.293
IADD = 0
PBNOD(IN,IBUB) = 0.
DO 465 J = 1,4
DO 460 ICL = 1,NBEL(IBUB)
INODE = NODE(J,BUBEL(IEL,IBUB))
IF (INODE.NE.BUBNOD(IN,IBUB)) GO TO 460
PBNOD(IN,IBUB) = PBNOD(IN,IBUB) + PBN(J,IEL,IBUB)
IADD - IADD + 1
460 CONTINUE
465 CONTINUE
PBNOD(IN,IBUB) = PBNOD(IN,IBUB)/IADD
470 CONTINUE
480 CONTINUE
C
CsBsxsasu.sEssonsescEsc DRAG FORCE DUE TO PRESSURE FIELD
C
C
DRAGPX(IBUB) = 0.
DRAGPY(IBUB) = 0.
TETA = 1.25*PI
ABUB = 2*PI*R0(IBUB)/NBNOD(IBUB)
DTETA *= 2*PI/NBNOD(IBUB)
C
DO 485 IF » 1,NBNOD(IBUB)
AIX = ABUB*COS(TETA)
AIY * ABUB*SIN(TETA)
DRAGPX(IBUB) = DRAGPX(IBUB) - PBNOD(IF,IBUB)*AIX
DRAGPY(IBUB) ■= DRAGPY(IBUB) - PBNOD(IF,IBUB)«AIY
TETA « TETA - DTETA
485 CONTINUE
C
490 CONTINUE
C
C n n » > » » u n . . . . . w ROTATE BUBBLE ELEMENTS
C
C Rotate the bubble elements such that, going clockwise on the
C interface, the first node of a bubble element is node 1, thesecond
C node is node 2, as in the example below.
C
C I I
C 3 ------2 1 ------- 4
C I I BUBBLE I I
C LIQUID I I I I LIQUID
C 4 ------ 1 2 ------- 3
C I I
C
C Tolerance in deciding which node is on the interface is 10% of a
C typical node adjecent to the interface
C
TOL - 0.1*SQRT( (XBEL(2,1,1)-XBEL(1,1,1))**2
& + (YBEL(2,1,1)-YBEL(1,1,1))**2 )
C
DO 550 IB = 1,NBUBL
C
C For each element neighboring to bubble IB, find the nodes at
C the interface.
C
c
DO 520 IEL = 1,NBEL(IB)
294
DIST(1) = SQRT ( (XBEL(1,IEL,IB) - XB0(IB))**2 +

& (YBEL(1,IEL,IB) - YB0(IB))**2 )
& (YBEL(2,IEL,IB) - YB0(IB))**2 )
DIST{3) = SQRT ( (XBEL(3,IEL,IB) - XB0(IB))**2 +
& (YBEL(3,IEL,IB) - YB0(IB))**2 )
& (YBEL(4,IEL,IB) - YB0(IB))*«2 )
nnn
Find the first node of this element at the interface

N0DE1 = 0
IF ( DIST(l) .LE. RO(IB)+TOL ) THEN
N0DE1 - 1
ELSE IF ( DIST(2) .LE. RO(IB)+TOL ) THEN
N0DE1 = 2
N0DE1 = 3
N0DE1 *= 4
END IF
n
IF (NODE1.EQ.O) THEN
WRITE (*,*) ' NO NODES NEIGHBORING TO THE BUBBLE '
STOP
n
END IF
nnn
Find the other other node

NODE2 - 0
nn
DO 504 I = 1,4
IF (I .EQ. NODE1) GO TO 504
IF (DIST(I) .LE. R0(IB)+TOL) THEN
NODE2 * I
GO TO 506
END IF
504 CONTINUE
506 CONTINUE
n
IF (NODE2.EQ.O) THEN
nnn n
This must be a corner element. Set XBEL(l,x,x) to -10 as

a flag to be deleted after this loop is completed.
XBEL(1,IEL,IB) = -10.
GO TO 520
END IF
nnn
Which node comes first in clockwise direction on the interface ?

TETA1 = ATAN4( XBEL(NODE1,IEL,IB) - XBO(IB),
& YBEL(N0DE1,IEL,IB) - YBO(IB) )
TETA2 = ATAN4( XBEJ,(NODE2,IEL,IB) - XBO(IB),
6 YBEL(NODE2,IEL,IB) - YBO(IB) )
non
prevent an error when switching from 2*pi to 0
295
IF ( ABS (TETA1 - TETA2) .GT. PI ) THEN

IF (TETA1.LT.TETA2) THEN
TETA1 = TETA1 + 2*PI
ELSE
TETA2 = TETA2 * 2»PI
END IF
END IF
IF ( TETA1 .LT. TETA2 ) THEN
NODEF = NODE2
NODE2 « NODE1
NODE1 = NODEF
END IF
non
Now rotate the elements

IF (NODE1 .EQ. 2) THEN
C
SPARE = XBEL(1,IEL,IB)
XBEL(1,IEL,IB) = XBEL(2,IEL,IB)
XBEL(2,IEL, IB) = XBEL(3,IEL,IB)
XBEL(4, IEL, IB) = SPARE
C
SPARE « YBEL(1,IEL,IB)
YBEL(1,IEL, IB) = YBEL(2,IEL,IB)
YBEL{2,IEL,IB) = YBEL(3,IEL, IB)
YBEL(3,IEL,IB) *= YBEL(4,IEL,IB)
YBEL(4,IEL,IB) = SPARE
C
SPARE = UXBEL(1,IEL,IB)
UXBEL(1,IEL, IB) = UXBEL(2,IEL,IB)
UXBEL(2,IEL,IB) = UXBEL(3,IEL,IB)
UXBEL( 3, IEL, IB) = UXBEL (4,IEL,IB)
UXBEL(4,IEL,IB) = SPARE
C
SPARE = UYBEL(1,IEL,IB)
UYBEL( 1,IEL, IB) = UYBEL( 2,IEL, IB)
UYBEL(2,IEL,IB) «= UYBEL(3,IEL,IB)
UYBEL(3,IEL, IB) * UYBEL(4,IEL,IB)
UYBEL(4,IEL,IB) = SPARE
C
ELSE IF (NODE1 .EQ. 3) THEN
C
SPARE1 = XBEL(1,IEL,IB)
SPARE2 = XBEL(2,IEL,IB)
XBEL( 1,IEL,IB) = XBEL(3,IEL,IB)
XBEL(3,IEL,IB) « SPARE1
XBEL(4,IEL,IB) = SPARE2
C
SPARE1 - YBEL(1,IEL,IB)
SPARE2 = YBEL(2,IEL,IB)
YBEL(1,IEL,IB) = YBEL{3,IEL,IB)
YBEL(2,IEL, IB) = YBEL(4,IEL,IB)
YBEL(3,IEL,IB) = SPARE1
YBEL(4,IEL,IB) = SPARE2
C
SPARE1 = UXBEL(1,IEL,IB)
SPARE2 = UXBEL(2,IEL,IB)
UXBEL( 1,IEL,IB) « UXBEL(3,IEL,IB)
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
296
UXBEL (2, IEL, IB) = UXBEL( 4, IEL, IB)

UXBEL(3,IEL,IB) = SPARE1
UXBEL(4,IEL, IB) = SPARE2
C
SPARE1 = UYBEL(1,IEL, IB)
SPARE2 = UYBEL(2,IEL,IB)
UYBEL( 1, IEL, IB) = UYBEL(3, IEL, IB)
UYBEL(2,IEL, IB) = UYBEL(4,IEL, IB)
UYBEL(3,IEL,IB) = SPARE1
UYBEL(4,IEL,IB) * SPARE2
C
ELSE IF (N0DE1 .EQ. 4) THEN
C
SPARE = XBEL(4,IEL, IB)
XBEL(4,IEL,IB) *= XBEL( 3,IEL, IB)
XBEL (3, IEL, IB) = XBELf2,IEL,IB)
XBEL( 2, IEL, IB) *= XBELf 1,IEL, IB)
XBELf1,IEL,IB) = SPARE
C
SPARE = YBEL(4,I£L,IB)
YBELf4, IEL, IB) *= YBELf3,IEL, IB)
YBELf3,IEL,IB) «= YBELf2,IEL, 15)
YBELf2,IEL,IB) = YBELf 1,IEL,IB)
YBELf 1, IEL, IB) = SPARE
C
SPARE = UXBEL(4,IEL, IB)
UXBELf4,IEL,IB) - UXBEL(3,IEL,IB)
UXBELf3,IEL,IB) - UXBELf2,IEL,IB)
UXBELf2,IEL,IB) *= UXBELf 1,IEL,IB)
UXBELf1,IEL,IB) - SPARE
C
SPARE - UYBEL(4,IEL,IB)
UYBEL(4,IEL,IB) = UYBEL(3,IEL,IB)
UYBELf3,IEL,IB) « UYBELf2,IEL,IB)
UYBELf2, IEL, IB) - UYBELf 1,IEL,IB)
UYBELf1,IEL,IB) » SPARE
C
END IF
C
520 CONTINUE
C
C Delete flaged elements
C
C
DO 530 IEL - 1,NBEL(IB)
C
IF ( XBELf 1,IEL,IB) .NE. -10. ) GO TO 530
C
NBELfIB) = NBEL(IB) - 1
C
CDIRJ SHORTLOOP
C
DO 525 JEL = IEL,NBELf IB)-1
C
XBEL(1,JEL,IB) - XBELfl.JEL+l,IB)
XBELf 2,JEL, IB) = XBELf 2,JEL+1,IB)
XBELf 3,JEL, IB) = XBEL 13,JEL+1, IB)
XBELf 4,JEL, IB) = XBELf 4,JEL+1,IB)
C
YBELf 1,JEL, IB) «* YBELf 1,JEL+1,IB)
297
YBEL(2,JEL,IB) « YBELf2,JEL+1,IB)
YBEL(3,JEL,IB) = YBELf 3,JEL+1, IB)
YBEL(4,JEL,IB) = YBEL(4,JEL+1,IB)
UXBEL(1,JEL,IB) - UXBEL(1,JEL+1, IB)
UXBEL (2,JEL, IB) = UXBEL(2, JEL+1, IB)
UXBEL(3,JEL,IB) ■ UXBEL(3,JEL+1,IB)
UXBEL (4,JEL, IB) = UXBEL{4,JEL+1,IB)
UYBELf1,JEL,IB) UYBELfl,JEL+1,IB)
UYBELf2,JEL,IB) UYBELf2,JEL+1,IB)
C
525 CONTINUE
C
530 CONTINUE
C
C
550 CONTINUE
C
C B3HEBSBMISSCBS8CSI *==»= EVALUATE SHEAR FORCE AND TORQUE
c
c
DO 600 IB «= 1,NBUBL
DRAGTXfIB) * 0.
DRAGTY(IB) - 0.
TORQUE(IB) - 0.
c
c
DO 595 IEL - 1,NBEL(IB)
c
c Components of unit tangent vector of the Interface
c tx ■ cosfteta), ty = slnfteta)
c
TETA =ATAN4 ( XBEL{2,IEL,IB)-XBEL(1,IEL,IB) ,
& YBELf2,IEL,IB)-YBELf1,IEL,IB) )
TX - COS(TETA)
TY = SIN(TETA)
DUTDS - ( UXBELf3,IEL,IB) + UXBELf4,IEL,IB) - UXBELf 1,IEL,IB) -
& UXBELf2,IEL,IB) )*COS(TETA) +
6 ( UYBELf3,IEL,IB) + UYBELf4,IEL,IB) - UYBELf1,IEL,IB) -
& UYBELf2,IEL,IB) )*SIN(TETA)
C
DUTDS = DUTDS / 2.
C
R23 * SQRT ( (XBELf3,IEL,IB)-XBEL(2,IEL,IB))**2 +
S (YBELf3,IEL,IB)-YBEL(2,IEL,IB))**2 )
R14 = SQRT ( (XBELf1,IEL,IB)-XBELf4,IEL,IB))**2 +
S (YBELf1,IEL,IB)-YBELf4,IEL,IB))**2 )
DSDN = 4./(R23+R14)
DUTDN = DUTDS+DSDN
c
c As calculated above, DUTDN Is positive for the nodes of the
c upper semi-circle, is negative for the nodes of the lower semi
c circle.
c
c Also DUTDN is the integrated value along local r coordinate.
298
It must be multiplied by dt/2, not by dt.

nnnn
get tx and ty with respect to global coordinates

DX = XBEL(2,IEL,IB) - XBEL( 1,IEL,IB)
DY = YBEL(2,IEL,IB) - YBEL( 1,IEL,IB)
DT » SQRT (DX*DX+DY*DY)
DXU = DX/DT
DYU = DY/DT
n
DRAGTX(IB) = DRAGTX(IB) + DUTDN*DX/2.

DRAGTY(IB) = DRAGTY(IB) + DUTDN*DY/2.
nn
TETA1 = ATAN4(XBEL(1,IEL,IB)/YBEL(1,IEL,IB) )
TORQUE(IB) = TORQUE(IB) + R0(IB)*DUTDN*DT/2.
nn
595 CONTINUE
600 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
nn
REAL FUNCTION ATAN4 (X,Y)

n
PARAMETER (PI=3.141592654)
nnn
Four region arctan function

IF (X.EQ.O.) THEN
ATAN4 = PI/2
IF (Y.LT.O) ATAN4 = 3.*PI/2
RETURN
ELSE
ATAN4 = AT/IN(Y/X)
END IF
IF ( X .LT. 0.) THEN
ATAN4 » ATAN4 + PI
ELSE IF (ATAN4 .LT. 0.) THEN
ATAN4 = ATAN4 + 2*PI
END IF
RETURN
END
299
nnno
SUBROUTINE TO EMULATE FORTRAN BINARY WRITE
SUBROUTINE WRITBN (IPST,IARY,NWORDS)

nnnnn
variable MLENB must be set to proper value. Default for CRAY

is 524288.
DIMENSION IARY(NWORDS)
C
MLENB = 524288
C
NRECS = (NWORDS-1)/MLENB + 1
NFIRST = -MLENB + 1
DO 100 N = 1,NRECS
NFIRST = NFIRST + MLENB
NLAST - MIN (NWORDS,NFIRST+MLENB-1)
WRITE(IPST) (IARY(I),I“NFIRST,NLAST)
100 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
300
noon
SUBROUTINE TO EMULATE FORTRAN BINARY READ
SUBROUTINE READBN (IPST,IARY,NWORDS)

nnnnn
variable MLENB must be set to proper value. Default for CRAY

is 524288.
DIMENSION IARY(NWORDS)
C
MLENB = 524288
C
NRECS = (NWORDS-1)/MLENB + 1
NFIRST = -MLENB + 1
DO 100 N = 1,NRECS
NFIRST = NFIRST + MLENB
NLAST * MIN (NWORDS,NFIRST+MLENB-1)
READ (IPST) (IARY(I),I=NFIRST,NLAST)
100 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
301
c*«
c USRNOD.FOR ! Reads nodal data from BFCO output NODES and
c ! passes to FIDAP
c*<
c
SUBROUTINE USRNOD (XYZ,NFIRST,NLAST, NDIMM, SUB, IERR)
c
c XYZ : Nodal coordinates XYZ(l,n) : x coor of node n
c XYZ(2,n) : y coor of node n
c XYZ(3,n) : z coor of node n
w
n
c NFIRST : Node number of minimum node defined
c NLAST : Node number of maximum node defined
c NDIM : Dimension of problem
c SUB : Value of SUBROUTINE keyword ?
c IERR : User error flag (0 successful! completion)
c
c NDIM and SUB are input, others output
c
DIMENSION XYZ(3,15000)
c
u*_
r
c
OPEN (26,FILE='nodes',STATUS=’OLD',FORM='UNFORMATTED')
NFIRST = 1
IERR = 0
C
DO 10 I = 1,15000
READ (26,END«15) II,JJ,N,XYZ(1,N),XYZ(2,N)
XYZ(3,N) = 0.
10 CONTINUE
15 CONTINUE
NLAST = N
CLOSE (26)
WRITE (*,'(A,14)') ' USRNOD - NUMBER OF NODES : ',NLAST
RETURN
END
302
nnnnn
USRELM.FOR ! Passes element connectivities to FIDAP from

! BFCO output file Elements
SUBROUTINE USRELM(NELEM,NDP,NGROUP,SUB,NELGRP,IERR)
NELEM : Array of element connectivities
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
NELEM(4,N) I I NELEM(3,N)
I ELEMENT I
I N I
NELEM(1/N) I_________ I NELEM(2,N)
NDP : Number of nodal points per element

NGROUP : Group number
SUB : Value of SUBROUTINE keyword on NODES control card
NELGRP : Number of elements in this group
IERR : User error flag (0 successfull completion)
NGROUP and SUB are input. Others output
DIMENSION NELEM(4,15000),NUP(200),NDOWN(200)
nnn
NDP = 4
IERR = 0
nnn
OPEN (26 ,FILE='elements',STATUS='OLD',FORM='UNFORMATTED')

C
DO 1 I = 1,10000
READ (26,END=10) N,NELEM(1,N),NELEM(2,N),NELEM(3,N),
& NELEM(4,N)
1 CONTINUE
10 NELGRP = N
C
CLOSE (26)
WRITE (*,'(A,14)') ' USRELM - NUMBER OF ELEMENTS : ',NELGRP
RETURN
END
303
#QSUB-eo
#QSUB-1M 4.0Mw
#QSUB-1T 1:59:00.00
#QSUB-me
#QSUB-nr
*QSUB
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
# * C SHELL SCRIPT FOR TRANSIENT FIDAP RUN *

# ••a*******************************************
*
#
itsme kurul # accounting information
*
#
i ! DIRECTORY DEFINITIONS !
*
*
#
set homescr = /scrl/ul0656/bubble * home directory in scratch disk
set homecfs = /010656/fidap/move * home directory in cfs
set cfsdir = Shomecfs/wall * cfs directory of result files
set screxec = $homescr/exec # local directory for executables
set scrrun = Shomescr/runfidap # local directory for data files
set tarneme = bub3.save * tar file name for results
set nloop «= 20 # number of steps
set istart = 4 * starting time step number
set savename s fdpost
cd $homescr
CHECK THE EXISTANCE OF THE DIRECTORIES
if ( ! -d $screxec ) then
echo DIRECTORY Sscrexec DOES NOT EXIST, ABORTING
exit
endif
if ( 1 -d Sscrruvi ) then
echo DIRECTORY Jscrrun DOES NOT EXIST, ABORTING .
exit
endif
! CHECK THE EXISTANCE OF THE FILES !
cd Sscrrun
if { -f trajectory && -f bconds && -f elements && -f nodes
all data files are available
304
else
#
echo MISSING DATA FILES. CHECK DIRECTORY Sscrrun. ABORTING ...
exit
#
endif
#
#
cd Sscrexec
*
if ( -f force.x && -f inter.x && -f bfcinp.x && -f bfco.x
*
# all executables are available
#
else
*
echo MISSING EXECUTABLES. CHECK DIRECTORY Sscrexec. ABORTING ...
exit
*
endif
=* =*s * % %
! CHECK THE EXISTENCE OF CFS DIRECTORIES !
if { cfs list Scfsdir > then

*
echo CFS DIRECTORY Scfsdir EXISTS, FILES WILL BE OVERWRITTEN.
*
else
#
cfs add Scfsdir # create cfs dir /011892/Scfsdir
echo CFS DIRECTORY Scfsdir CREATED
#
endif
#
f ---------------------------------------------
# ! START TRANSIENT RUN !
* — -----------------------------------
*
cd Sscrrun
*
@ istep = Sistart
@ istep —
§ iloop = 0
#
cp fdpostSistep FDPOST
#
while ( $iloop < Snloop )
#
#
Sscrexec/bfcinp.x
Sscrexec/bfco.x
Sscrexec/inter.x
Sscrexec/makefiinp.x «EOF
BUBBLE NEAR A WALL
0 2 107.14 0. 7.
EOF
Sscrexec/myfpr.x
305
#
mv FDPOST1 FDREST
#
Sscrexec/myfdp.x
#
§ istep ++
§ H ood ++
#
cp FDPOST SsavenameSistep
/bin/rm fort.*
*
if { $screxec/force.x } then
#
# successful completion
#
else
§ istep —
cp SsavenameSistep FDPOST
endif
*
end
#
# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ! SAVE RESULTS IN CFS !
# --------------------------------------
#
cfs store Scfsdir/trajectory
tar -cvf Starname Ssavename* trajectory FIINP
cfs store $cfsdir/$tamame

Multidimensional Effects in TW PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multidimensional Effects in TW PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION TO USERS

The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

University Microfilms International

M ultidimensional effects in two-phase flow including phase

Kurul, Necdet, Ph.D.

300 N. Zeeb Rd.

THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RECEIVED BY U.M.I. CONTAINED PAGES

THIS REPRODUCTION IS THE BEST AVAILABLE COPY.

INCLUDING PHASE CHANGE

A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate

Faculty of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

Major Subject: Nuclear Engineering

~ ci, Thesis Adviser

Richard T. Lahey, Jr.,/tie

/Joseph E/ Shepherd, Member

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

LIST OF TABLES .............................................. iv

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................. v

II. OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING TWO-PHASE FLOWMODELS ............ 5

II. 1. Multi-Dimensional Two-Phase Model ................. 7

III. MULTIDIMENSIONAL EFFECTS IN SUBCOOLEDBOILING ............. 45

111.1. A Multi-Dimensional Two-Fluid Model For Subcooled

IV. CONDENSATION IN STRATIFIED FLOW .......................... 95

IV. 1. Problem Description ............................... 96

V. NUMERICAL 'SIS OF THE MOTION OF PARTICLES IN DISPERSED

VI. CONCLUSIONS .......................................... 173

REFERENCES .................................................. 177

APPENDIX A. Listing of the codes for Multidimensional Two-Fluid

APPENDIX B. Derivation of Temperature Distribution in a Single

APPENDIX C. Listing of the codes for the Analysis of Bubble

11.1 Terms Used in Generic Conservation Equation, Eq.(II.1) ... 6

11.2 Terms Used in Generic Interfacial Jump Conditions,

11.3 The Coefficients of k-e Turbulence Model ................ 20

111.2 The Set of Correlations Used in the Multi-Dimensional

111.3 The Matrix Used to Derive a Correction to the Saha-Zuber

IV.4 Measured Liquid Film Thickness for Tests Selected

IV. 5 Measured Local pressure Drop for Tests Selected for

IV. 6 Measured Local Steam Flow Rate for Tests Selected

IV.7 Calculated Reynolds Numbers for Tests Selected

11.1 An illustration of the the discontinuous regions in

11.2 Schematic of the heat transfer modes at a w a l l ......... 44

111.1 The effect of drag coefficient correlations in subcooled

111.2 The effect virtual mass in subcooled boiling........... 77

111.3 The effect of bubble diameter correlations in subcooled

111.4 The effect of interfacial heat transfer correlation in

111.5 Distributions of interfacial forces and wall heat flux

111.6. Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

111.7. Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

111.8. Axial steady-state distributions of temperature and void

111.9. Lateral distributions of superficial velocities and void

111.10. Temperature and void fraction distributions in a heated

111.11. Void detachment point for different pipe diameters and

111.12. Void fraction and temperature distributions in a

111.13. Amplitude and phase angle of temperature oscillations

111.14. Lateral distributions of the amplitude and phase angle

111.15. Amplitude and phase angle of cross-section-averaged void

111.16. Amplitude and phase angle of predicted cross-section-

111.17. Variation of average void fraction following a ±20%