T h e Flow of Thin Films inside Rotating

Cylindrical Tubes
E. BARNEA, E . KOVALZVKER, 1. MZZRAHI and N . YACOUB’
I M I - Institute for Research and Dtwel@ment, Haifa, Israel

A mathematical model was derived for the calculation of the
film thickness, total holdup and overall residence time of a
thin liquid film flowing inside a rotating cylindrical tube, as a
function of the liquid throughput and physical properties and
of the tube diameter, length, rotational speed and angle of
inclination.
The experimental data with short tubes showed good agree-
ment with the model for average film thickness above a certain
critical value (which may indicate a change in the flow regime).
On a mis au point un mod&le mathematisue pour calculer
l’kpaisseur de la pellicule, la rbtention totale et le temps global
de skjour dans le cas d’une mince pellicule de liquide qui mule
dans un tube cylindrique et rotatif. Le calcul se fait en fonction
du dCbit du liquide et de ses propriCtCs physiques ainsi que du
diamktre, de la longueur, de la vitesse de rotation et de l’angle
d’inclinaison du tube.
Les rksultats expkrimentaux qu’on a obtenus avec des tubes
courts ont bien concord6 avec les donnbes du modhle pour une
kpaisseur moyenne de la pellicule exckdant une certaine valeur

T hin films are of great interest to chemical engi-

neers, in relation to heat or mass transfer between
a liquid and a gaseous phase, and in particular for those
critique (ce qui peut indiquer un changement dans le rCgime
de l’kcoulement).

applications where the main resistance to transfer

originates in the bulk of the liquid phase. There are
various methods to obtain thin films, such as wall
wetting, pressure spray nozzles, centrifugal spray
nozzles, foaming, etc. Each of these methods has
certain limitations.
This paper deals with the determination of the
thickness, total holdup and overall residence time of a
thin liquid film flowing inside a rotating (horizontal
or inclined) cylindrical tube as a function of the
liquid throughput and physical properties and of the
tube diameter] length, rotational speed and angle of
inclination. According to our knowledge, this has not
previously been discussed in the literature.
The first part of the paper presents a theoretical Figure 1 - Variables involved in the flow mechanism.
mathematical model of the flow mechanism, resulting
in a predicted solution of the overall residence time
as a function of the above-mentioned variables, which c) Radial symmetry. The film thickness is independ-
does not involve any empirical coefficient. The second ent of the angular position. This results from the
part of the paper describes the experimental results fact that [02R>>g] in the range considered, as can
obtained and the last part discusses the comparison of be seen from the Table below (for R = 9.6 cm).
the theoretical and experimental values.
Figure 1 indicates the variables involved (see also
Nomenclature).
RPS w2R/g
--
Theoretical model 5 9.7
General mechanism 10 38.8
The film is caused to flow in the axial direction of 15 87.0
the tube’s inner surface due to the combined effect
of two driving forces, namely: -
a ) The component of the gravity force in the axial d) Neglect of end effects. The film thickness ap-
direction (for inclined tubes) proaches zero a s x approaches L.
b) The centrifugal pressure gradient in the axial f i l ( X = L ) = 0 ...................................... (2)
direction, caused by the gradient of the decreasing
film thickness, from the feeding point t o the dis- This assumption is obviously physically impossible.
charge point. There are well-known correlations indicating certain
physical values for 8 ( a t X=L), based on modified
General assumptions Froud Numbers. However, i t was ascertained later
that the results obtained by introducing such “dis-
a ) Laminar flow regime, charge thickness” showed a relatively negligible dif-
b ) N o shear stresses a t the free gas-liquid interface.
ference in the experimental range considered. There-
(aux/ay),=t, = 0 . . ............................ . . . . (I) fore, the precise boundary conditions seems to be ir-
DDDDOoOoOOOOOOOOOOoOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo~oooooaoooo relevant, due to the very steep gradient of 8 in the
]Present address : N. Yacoub is with the Centre for Industrial Research,
Haifa, Israel. vicinity of the tube’s end.

The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 50, December, 1972 685
 The film thickness is very small relative to the The differentiation of Equation (4) leads to:
tube’s radius, justifying the following three cor- auz/& = - (~,/ij) (j+f’q) da/dx.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)
rolaries: -
- the centrifugal acceleration within the film au,/ay = u , Y / ~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(ii)
thickness is constant, i.e. a* u , / a y = u., . ff1/62. ........................... (12)
u2(R- y) is practically equivalent to u 2 R . .. . . . . . . . . . (3) The hydrostatic pressure inside the film, caused by
-a two dimensional flow can be considered, i.e. the centrifugal acceleration, is:
P = P d R (6 - y ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,113)
2 7r (R-y) is practically equivalent to 2 n R
hence the hydrostatic pressure gradient in the axial
- the angular velocity is constant (no friction direction is given by:
due to rotation).
1 / p (dPldx) = u2R (d&/dx).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114)
Similarity of the velocity profile. The dimension-
less velocity profile on the 2, y planar coordinates By substituting Equations (4),( l o ) , ( l l ) , (121, (14)
can be defined as the ratio of the axial velocity a t into Equation (S), and solving i t using Equation (2)
point y to the axial velocity a t the film’s free sur- as boundary conditions, one obtains Equation (18), in
face for the same X . It is assumed that i t is in- which the following groups of variables are used, for
dependent of the axial position (x), and depends convenience of presentation :
only on: C = f’(l) - f’o.
................................. (15)
u z / u s= f(y/6) = f ( ? ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
( f c i , and fco, are values of f for r) equals 1 and 0 re-
although both ux and us are separate functions of X. spectively, that is on the wall and on the free inter-
Although the model can be derived with any function face). For a parabolic profile C = -2.
chosen for the velocity profile, a parabolic profile was
adopted following accepted theory for laminar K = [B.c. Y /g. sin a 1 1 j 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .m)
film flow : - For a parabolic profile
uz/u. = 2(y/b) - (y/6)2 = 27 - 72 = f(V). . . . . . . . . (5) K = - (3QV/2nRgsin
Formulation and theoretical general solution See Equation (17) below.
On the basis of the above assumptions, the basic For parabolic profile A = 7/30.
equations of motion in the laminar regime and of Equation (18) links X and 8:
continuity are reduced respectively t o Equations ( 6 ) See Equation (18) below.
and (7). The liquid volume contained in the film (hold-up) is
See Equation (6) below. given by:
auz/ax + au,/ay = 0 . . ......................... .(7) V = 2nR J ’ S dx., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,119)
*
Furthermore, in this case, the (a2u,/d x 2 ) term is ne- dx can be obtained by differentiating Equation (18),
gligible as compared to the ( a 2u,/a y 2 ) term, and by substituted in Equation (19), which is then integrated
substitution of u, obtained by integration of Equation to give:
(7) into Equation (6),one obtains:-
See Equation (20) below.
See Equation (8) below.
By substitution for
A mass balance yields Equation (9).
u , . S = B ...................................... ..(9)
where B is proportional to [ Q / 2 ?r R ] , the throughput per
unit of width of the film. For a parabolic profile, B =
3&/4n R
[In -
(I+%)
(+) (+) + * ] fromEquation

X - L
K
- [““--
3cv 3g
u 2 ~
sina
] [[In - (1 +
1 -(+)+(+)2
+)’ + ,/r jarctg ( (+) ) ++I1
2
~~
-1

................................................ . . . . . . . . . .(18)

(artcg (“F;) .- %)> - - d R So2 ] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20)

686 The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 5 0 , December, 1972

I/= ___
TR
3g sin a [___ (AB =)(
4d/3B
-
W~RCV
(18) in Equation (ZO),one obtains:
See Equation (21) above.
The mean liquid residence time is defined by Equation
(22) and may be calculated by evaluating V by means
of Equation (21).
T = V/Q.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(22)
Special cases of the general solution
As ( d R / g sin a) is approaching zero, 6 approaches
( - K ) or
6 [SQv/2 R g sin a)]l/3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (23)
=
This is the well-known solution for the simple case of
film flow on an inclined flat surface“’ (of width
2nR).
- Another simpler, special case is for an horizontal
tube. Equation (8) can be integrated to yield:
A B 6 + a 2 R 64/(4B) = V C ( X - L ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(24)
) B aO2/2+ w2R 6 0 5 / ( 5 B ) ] ... . . . . . .(25)
V = ~ T R / v C[A
Within the experimental range of variables considered
in this study, it was ascertained that the term con-
taining 8 in Equation (24) and the term containing
8’ in Equation (25) are negligible in relation to the
other terms.
Thus, with this approximation, one obtains:
6.4 = - 4 BC v L/(w2R)= 6VL . Q/u2R2.
V = 4/15 t 2R302 6,,5/(vQ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(27)
and by substitution of 8, from Equation (26) into
Equation (27) :
V = 5-91 y o 2 6 QO.25 L1.26 . a - 0 . 6 p O . 5 = T.Q.. , , , , .(28)
which is similar to the equation formerly derived by
Barnea and MizrahiC4’for film flow in rotating hori-
zontal tubes based on a gross energy balance model.
Ex fierimental
Apparatus and procedure
The aim of the experimental work was to determine
the overall liquid holdup in various sets of variables.
The apparatus consisted of interchangeable stainless
steel tubes of 9.6 cm diameter with different lengths
(13.9 and 38.7 cm) which could be rotated by a vari-
able speed motor up to 17.5 R.P.S. The base of the ap-
paratus could be inclined towards the horizontal. A
measured rate of liquid was introduced from one end
near the weir and the discharged liquid collected by a
peripheral ring a t the other end.
After achieving steady state in any set of condi-
tions, the liquid feed was suddenly interrupted and a
collecting vessel simultaneously introduced at the dis-
charged end. The rotating speed was then increased
to its maximum and the tube’s contents drained for
some 15 minutes. The collected liquid volume was con-
sidered to be the liquid holdup (V), and could be
transformed into a residence time value, by dividing
by the liquid throughput.
Ranges of variables investigated
Four series were done with horizontal tubes. In the
first three, the tube dimensions were fixed and three
different liquids were used (water and two glycerine
The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 50, December, 1972
+ - artcg --
K
1 ......................................................... .(21)
solutions of viscosities up to 29 centistokes.) I n the
fourth series, a shorter tube was used with water. In
each series, the mean residence time was plotted
against Q, for various fixed values of w (5.7-17.3
RPS). The results are given on this basis in Figures
2 to 5. Further work was done with water with an
inclined 38.7 cm tube in which both the throughput
and the rotational speed were kept constant and the
residence time plotted against sin a. In Figure 6, the
results of three runs are shown on linear coordinates
in which the RPS was kept a t a low value (5.7) and
three different throughputs were used. In the results
plotted in Figure 7, the throughput was kept constant
and two higher RPS values were tested.
All the variables appearing in Equation (28) were
varied in the course of this experimental program,
with the exception of the tube diameter.
Discussimt
Horizontal tubes
Comparison of the data plotted in Figures 2 to 5
with the expected values derived from Equation (28)
shows that some of the data (higher throughput, low-
e r RPS, higher viscosity and longer tube) are in ex-
cellent agreement with the theoretical model, while
other sets of data shows more or less siginificant devi-
ations. The analysis showed that the extent of agree-
. . . . . . . . .(26) ment can be linked to the awewage thickness of the
film, or
V/(Z?rRL)
Figure 8 shows the point very clearly. In this fig-
ure, four points from each of the straight lines from
Figures 2 to 5 were recalculated on the basis of the
average experimental thickness and plotted against the
expected values from Equation (28). One can see that
for average thickness greater than 0.06-0.07 cm, the
agreement with the theoretical model is excellent, most
points being within L- 5%. For lower average thick-
ness, the experimental values are consistently smaller
than predicted, indicating that some of the basic
assumptions do not hold in these conditions, or that
there is a change in the mechanism postulated.
Figure 9 emphasise this last point. The slopes of
the straight lines in Figures 2 to 5 represent the ex-
ponent of Q in the relation
T proportional t o Q‘
From Equation (28), the predicted value of s is
0.75 and slopes very close to that value were ob-
tained in some conditions. In Figure 9, all the values
of s are plotted against RPS. At certain values of
RPS there is a gradual drop in the value of s which
reaches a new constant value a t higher RPS. This
new value appears to be dependent on the liquid vis-
cosity.
The two sets of data with water (different tube’s
length) reaches the same final plateau, but with dif-
ferent paths, the shorter tube “changing regime” at
low RPS values.
Inclined tubes
Some of the data from Figures 6 and 7 are plotted
in Figure 10, on the same basis as Figure 8. It ap-
687
 :5ec]
r 50 I- R: 4.6 [cm]

200

100

50

20

1G

42 05. . I 2 5 0 [crnysec]

Figure 2 -The mean residence time as a function of the liquid

rate, for various rotational speeds. Experimental data with
water (u 1.0 cs.) in horizontal tube. 30

T
:*ed

T . .
.
0

0
A
6.8
9.0
10.8
74.7
20

\\ ‘1 a 17.5

10

20 Figure 6 - The mean residence time as a function of the tube’s

I inclination for various feed rates. Experimental results with
water in inclined tubes. (The dotted lines represent predictions
of Equation (21) ).

-
Figure 3 The mean residence time as a function of the liquid I
rate, for various rotational speeds. Experimental data with a
glycerine solution (u =: 11 cs.) in horizontal tube.
14 t L = 387 [cml 72

-
500 R = 4.8 [cm] R.P.S.
1 = 38.7[cm] ,<2

0 1U
J

t>
100

50
2
1 I I
.2 5 10 2 5 Qo5 Q75
ar ~ m p ? ~ ~ @l sm

Figure 7 - The mean residence time as a function of the tube’s

-
Figure 4 The mean residence time as a function of the liquid inclination for various feed rates. Experimental. results with
rate, for various rotational speeds. Experimental data with a water in inclined tubes. (The upper and lower dotted lines are
glycerine solution (u =: 29 cs.) in horizontal tube. predictions of Equation (21) for 7.2 and 11.5 RPS respectively).

pears that Equation (21) holds to a lower value of
the “average” film thickness (0.03 cm) than in the
case of the horizontal tubes. This can be explained
by the fact that the film thickness gradient is less
sharp with inclined tubes. The experimental results
are slightly lower (0--16%) than the predicted values.
Possible causes for change in regime or deviations
Experimental errors of & 10% relative are plaus-
ible in most of the range and a somewhat higher ex-
perimental error can be expected for a smaller average
film thickness, but this cannot explain the systematic
effects. Other causes may be:

688 The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 50, December, 1972
 b) Significance of end effects, in particular, a t the

- V
:cml
0.2 /I feeding end near the weir.
c) Inconsistence of the hypothesis on similarity of
the velocity profile and/or of the parabolic profile
2nRL
07.
for very thin films.

Conclusion
0.05
The mathematical model derived describes in a rea-
sonably accurate manner the hydrodynamic features
of the flow of thin films in rotating sylindrical tubes,
OR2 above a certain critical film thickness. It can be used
directly to evaluate the film thickness gradient, the
residence time and the holdup of the film, since it does

mB
not involve any empirical numerical constant.

Figure 8 - Comparison. of experimental and expected values Acknowledgments

for horizontal tubes. This paper is published by permission of the Managing Director of
IMI - Institute f o r Research and Development. A. Spaack, I. Finkel-
(175 stein and E. Rabinovitch participated in the experimental work,
calculation and prepnration of the paper.
S
Nomenclature
A = group of variables defined by Equation (17)
0.7 B = group of variables defined by Equation (9)
C = group of variables defined by Equation (15)
g = acceleration of the gravity field
K = group of variables defined by Equation (16)
L = tube length, cm
0.65
P = hydrostatic pressure
Q = liquid throughput, cma/sec
R = tube radius, cm
RPS = revolution per seconds of the tube
0 S = slope of the lines in Figures 2-5 (Tproportional to
A Q-)
06
T overall residence time of the liquid inside the tube,
=
sec
U = liquid velocity at any point, cm/sec.

I- I 1
5
I
10
1
7s Re3
I UI = axial velocity at the free film's surface, cm/sec
uz, u,, u,g = velocities in the x , y and directions, cm/sec
V = volume of the liquid film inside the tube, cm*
Figure 9 -Slope of the (T vs. Q.) lines measured from Figures (Hold-Up)
X = axial distance from the weir at the feeding end
2-5 as a function of the kinematic viscosity and angular velocity. of the tube, cm
Y = radial distance from the inner surface of the wall,
cm
= angle of inclination of the tube's axis towards the
horizontal
= film thickness for any ( x ) level, cm
= film thickness for x = 0,cm
- = the angular coordinate
OR5 - = angular velocity, radian/sec
d = liquid viscosity, poises, or centipoises whenever
IUC RPS Q[cm&c] stated
o m m 17.2 5.3 = liquid density, gr/cma
= u o 71.5 53 = liquid kinematic viscosity, stokes or centistokes
A a A A 62 683 whenever stated
o a m 6.2 5.58 = y/s -relative radial distance inside the film
v Q v v 62 2.59
I
References
(1) Goodrige, F. and Gartside, G., Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs.. 43. T62
Figure 10 - Comparison of experimental and expected values
(1966).
( 2 ) Nedderman R M Chem. Eng. Sci 21. 716 (1966).
( 3 ) Bird, R. $., St&art, W. E. and'Lightfoot. E: N.. "Transport
for inclined tubes. The dotted line represents the deviations Phenomnna" p. 37 John Wlley and Sons, Inc., New York (1968).
obtained in horizontal tubes (see Figure 8). ( 4 ) Barnea,
,,"a"\ E. 'Bnd M'iznthi. J., Israel Journal of Chemiatw, T. 97
,La"=,.
( 6 ) Ruckenstein, E., Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 14, 166 (1971).
Film continuity. It is possible t h a t below a certain
"critical" thickness the film is disrupted into fila- Manuscript received March 23 ; accepted July 10, 1972.
ments"'. This could not be ascertained in the pres-
ent experimental programme. It should be noted
t h a t an average thickness of 0.6-0.7 mm may in-
volve a thickness of 0.1 mm a t the discharge end. * * *

The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vot. 50, December, 1972 689