Alexandria Engineering Journal (2022) xxx, xxx–xxx

H O S T E D BY
Alexandria University

Alexandria Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/aej
www.sciencedirect.com

Effects of injection mechanism on air-water air lift

pump performance
Sadek Z. Kassab, Abdelrahman A. Abdelrazek, Eslam R. Lotfy *

Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, 21544 Alexandria, Egypt

Received 18 September 2021; revised 5 December 2021; accepted 1 January 2022

KEYWORDS Abstract Due to its advantages, the air lift pump has many applications in real life. Therefore, the
Air lift pump; present study is dealing with the effect of some parameters on the air lift pump performance. The
Experimental; present study is a continuation of a program started years ago by the fluid mechanics group in Fac-
Flow regime; ulty of Engineering, Alexandria University. Beginning by validating the obtained results of the
Injection; experiment set-up by comparing these experimental results with international accepted sets of data.
Two phase flow After that the present experiments shed some lights on the inlet injection region of the air lift pump
due to the significant effect of its initial conditions on the pump efficiency. Thus the study directed
towards investigating the effect of some parameters including the inlet restrictor resistance, the
injection direction and the injector riser diameter. The upward injection technique shows higher
peak efficiency of 34.7% compared to 29.7% and 28.9% for downward and side injection respec-
tively while the larger injector inner diameter shows maximum water capacity of 928 kg/h. com-
pared to 823 kg/h. water mass flow rate for the smaller inner diameter injector. In all the above
experimental tests, flow visualization is used extensively giving a good agreement with well recog-
nized flow pattern map.
Ó 2022 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction advantages which leads to the employment of this device in

many applications, starting from the waste removal, Cho
Beside the conventional types of pumps, there are many other et al. [2], and water recirculation in aquaculture application,
unconventional types. One of these types is the air lift pump. Shallouf et al. [3], to oil and gas industry down to a more cru-
Air lift pumps are very simple devices which only use pressur- cial operation in the transport of radioactive fluids and abra-
ized air to pump liquids, mainly water, beside lifting solid par- sive solids taking advantage of the low maintenance
ticles. The pump itself does not have any moving parts, Hu requirements of the air lift pump and thus lifting explosive
et al. [1]. Being simple and not having moving parts are big and poisonous liquids in chemical and nuclear industries, not
to forget the artificial upwelling by lifting the nutrients-rich
dissolved from the deep ocean water to the surface which
* Corresponding author.
induce ocean fertilization and world’s fish catch, Qiang et al.
E-mail address: eslam.reda@alexu.edu.eg (E.R. Lotfy).
[4]. Air lift pump has also a job in cleaning the impurities
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
entrapped in the bottom of sand filters by means of mixture
University.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2022.01.002
1110-0168 Ó 2022 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Please cite this article in press as: S.Z. Kassab et al., Effects of injection mechanism on air-water air lift pump performance, Alexandria Eng. J. (2022), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.aej.2022.01.002
2 S.Z. Kassab et al.
Nomenclature
Symbol Meaning [Units (SI)]
Hs Static depth [m]
L Total riser length [m]
moair Air mass flow rate [Kg.s1]
mow Water mass flow rate [Kg.s1]
Pin Injection pressure [Pascal ]
Qair Air volume flow rate [m3. s1]
flow of air and water which displaces the contaminated sand to
the pump end where its washed and recirculated as a clean
sand grains. Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) has been crucial
to a number of scientific and engineering applications, Ahmed
et al. [18]. Magnetohydrodynamics power generation uses lift
pump to generate electricity by circulating a liquid metal
(LMMHD) instead of a solid conductor through a magnetic
field based on Faraday’s law, Rosettani et al. [5]. However,
usage of air lift pumps are rather limit to small fraction of
water pumping applications. Air lift pump is very inefficient;
this is because generating compressed air is a very expensive
process unless compressed air is already available from a
renewable source. Even so a limited flow rate is also obtained
from a conventional pump. These two limitations restrict the
applicability of air lift pump to small fraction of water pump-
ing operation.
Many studies investigated various parameters affecting the
two-phase flow air lift pump performance, Hanafizadeh et al.
[6]; parameters belong to the functionality of the device includ-
ing especially, but not exclusively, the flow patterns along the
riser, the air pressure injected to the riser, the air bubble char-
acterization such as its diameter and distribution, and the inlet
air flow rate known as operating parameters. While the design
parameters involving the method of air injection, the shape of
injector, the riser diameter, the total length of the riser and the
static lift.
By fixing the total area and varying the air injection hole
numbers and diameters, Khalil et al. [7] and Qiang et al. [4],
various foot piece arrangements are investigated experimen-
tally. It was found that using multiple ports increases efficiency
instead of using a single port. Fujimoto et al. [8], supported
these results by using a port of 4 openings .while other tech-
nique, Kassab et al. [9], focuses on the air injection flow direc-
tion from radial penetration to swirl injection passing by many
manufactured designs. In addition, an experiment investiga-
tion shows that changing the injection angle from 90° to
22.5° affect the performance and the maximum efficiency of
airlift pump positively, Alasadi and Habeeb.[10]. In order to
maximize the efficiency, an evolutionary technology, Ahmed
and Badr [11], to integrate both the radial injector and the
axial injector in addition of changing the portion of injected
air by each injector was experimentally tested and numerically
validated. Going further, two modes, Ahmed et al. [12], are
experimentally tested by introducing a steadily air injection
and a pulsating flow with numerous frequencies values shows
that the pulsating air injection effectively increase the efficiency
over a wide range of air injection flow rate.
The submergence ratio, known by dividing the static lift to
the total riser length, is considered a crucial parameter in air
Qw Water volume flow rate [m3. s1]
R Gas constant [J_skg1s_ K1]
Tair Air temperature [K]
Vw Volume of water [m3]
qin Air injection density [kg.m3]
qw Water density [kg.m3]
lift pump performance. Increasing this ratio lead to higher effi-
ciency of the air lift pump, Sadatomi et al. [13], while keeping it
constant and varying the static lift have also an effect on the
pump performance, the longer the total pipe length the higher
the amount of water mass flow rate flowing through the riser
to the collecting tank under the exact operating conditions,
Kassab et al. [14]. However, at constant submergence ratio,
the injection position appears also to be a vital parameter on
the air lift pump performance, Mahrous and Matrawy [15].
Increasing the injecting depth leads to higher water productiv-
ity at a cost of higher injection pressure. As well as using a
strategy of multistage air injection widen the pump optimum
operating water discharge range and expands the bubble and
slug flow regime which are known as stable flow regime for
air lift pumps, Mahrous [16]. An air booster pump was used
as a new airlift pump system for high lifting head, thus, show-
ing higher lifting capacity, Cho et al.[2].
The present study, related to the air lift pump performance,
is a continuation of a long term program started more than
forty years ago by the members of fluid mechanics group in
mechanical engineering department, Alexandria University
and their co-workers. Starting by Khalil and Elshorbagy [19]
and their effort in studying the air lift pump efficiency. Con-
centrating on wall friction reduction, a newly pump is desig-
nated which lean on separating the bubbly liquid flow and
the riser’s solid wall by a thin film of air. This injected film
of air minimizes the wall friction which leads to an increase
in the performance of the air lift pump as well as its efficiency.
Followed by Mansour and Khalil [20] and their experi-
ments regarding various air injection methods and different
injection pressure, it was concluded that the pump perfor-
mance is highly related to the initial bubble size and its distri-
bution, thus this results shows that a multi holes air injector is
preferred over a single hole air injector producing a higher effi-
ciency value. Going further, Khalil and Mansour [21] pursue
their work by introducing a surfactant to the lifted liquid then
demonstrating its effect on air lift pump performance and effi-
ciency. The use of small concentration (8
10–5 by weight) of
surfactant produces an increase in the pump capacity as well as
its efficiency to an extent of 30 %. Lately, Khalil et al. [7] stud-
ied the effect of the injection method on the air lift pump per-
formance by various air injection desk designs for different
submergence ratio and air injection pressure. The results of
their experiments deduce that the maximum water productivity
is linked to different air injection design for every submergence
ratio.
Meanwhile, new internationally recognized studies dealing
with not only two phase flow but also three phase flow with
the addition of limestone particles were done by Kassab
Effects of injection mechanism on air lift pump
et al. [14,22]. Sooner after, Kassab et al [19] dealt with various
air injection techniques in order to improve the efficiency of air
lift pump beside its capacity.
Afterwards, Wahba et al [23] investigate various models
from analytical one dimensional model to large eddies simula-
tion (LES). Results shows that both 1-D analytical model and
large eddies simulation (LES) are in good agreement with the
experimental data available from Alexandria University
research program. However, employing volume of fluid
(VOF) method as a multiphase flow model along with large
eddies simulation (LES) give good prediction of the different
flow regimes developing in the vertical upward pipe.
As a continuation of the previous studies related to the air
lift pump characteristics, the present study begins by validating
and prove confidence of the results obtained by the rebuilt
experiment set-up by comparing the obtained experimental
results with international accepted sets of results usually cited
by the researchers working in this field. After that, the study
directed towards investigating the effect of three parameters
related to the inlet injection region of the air lift pump on
the pump performance, namely, the inlet restrictor resistance,
the upward, downward and sideward injections and the injec-
tor riser diameter. In all the experimental tests, flow visualiza-
tion is used extensively to give inside picture to the variations
of the flow patterns in the initial inlet region as well as along
the air lift pump riser tube.
2. Experimental methods
2.1. Experimental apparatus
As Kassab et al [14] is considered an acceptable set of results in
the field of air-lift pump study. This evidence came from the
high number of citations related to Kassab et al study as indi-
cated by the international recognized sites as Scopus and goo-
gle. Therefore, the present authors decided in the first
beginning to rebuild and test a set-up which represents a close
copy of Kassab et al [14]; thus producing similar experimental
results in order to compare these results with the previous
results of Kassab et al [14] before proceeding to new sets of
experiments. The experimental apparatus of the air lift pump
used in the present study is shown in Fig. 1.
It consists of an acrylic vertical pipe (1) of 24 mm inner
diameter and 4 m long. This up-riser pipe is fed with water
through a flexible down-comer (2) connected to a movable
supply tank (3) of 70 cm*70 cm*80 cm that moves up and
down with help of a hand winch crane (4), thus controlling
the desired submergence ratio by creating a specific static
depth, Hs, while the excess flow is drained through the over-
flow pipe (5). The upriser tube delivers water flow to an over-
head tank (6) of 70 cm*100 cm*100 cm vented to the
atmospheric. The delivery tank contains rocks and specially
designed to damp water fluctuations and eliminates any vor-
tices, providing a more steady flow circulation and guarantee
an accurate measurement as water flows down to a measuring
tank (7) of 15 cm*20 cm*50 cm with a calibrated scale through
a flexible drain (8).
Air is supplied to the air injector through 55 kW Ingersoll
Rand screw compressor (9). This central compressor delivers
8.2 m3 of air every minute with a maximum pressure of
8 bar. Air then flows through a mass refrigeration dryer and
3
filtration system to a pressure regulator (10) where the pressure
is reduced to the working pressure of the experiment. The low
working pressure air passes through a rotameter (11) where the
air volume flow rate is measured. A thermometer (12) is placed
to measure air temperature before a calibrated pressure gauge
(13) to measure air pressure. The pressure gauge is placed as
close as possible to the air jacket injector inlet to minimize
pressure drop thus getting a reliable reading to the injection
pressure.
The air jacket (14) injector consists of 56 holes uniformly
distributed in an array of 7 rows and 8 holes in each circular
section. Each hole is 3 mm diameter as recommended by Kas-
sab et al. [14]. Transparent tanks, hoses, injector as well as up-
riser tube were used in addition to a high speed camera for flow
visualization through these transparent components.
Other additional components were used depending on the
experiments done; a larger riser of 36 mm diameter was used
as part of the present study. In addition, a restrictor with dif-
ferent opening positions is also used in a part of the study.
2.2. Test procedures
The experimental procedure is as follows:
1. The crane is modified to the desired level of the supply tank
corresponding to submergence ratio of 0.4
2. The air compressor is turned on while adjusting the pres-
sure regulator valve to the desired working pressure of
the experiment.
3. Injection air is further regulated to the lowest value of air
flow rate until water reaches the overhead tank.
4. Air flow meter, thermometer and pressure gauge readings
are registered as Qair (m3/s), Tair (K) and Pin (Pascal)
respectively.
5. Density is computed using ideal gas equation:
Pin
qin ¼ ð1Þ
R:Tair
Where qin is air density (Kg/m3) and R is the Gas constant
(J/kg_sK)
6. The air mass flow rate is then calculated:
moair ¼ qin :Qair ð2Þ
7. A quasi–steady state must be reached before closing the
measuring tank valve.
8. A volume of water, Vw (m3), is collected in a certain time at
quasi –steady state.
9. The water mass flow rate is computed from the following
equation:
VW
mow ¼ qw : ð3Þ
Time
Where qw is water density (Kg/m3).
10. Flow regime in the up-riser pipe is recorded and cap-
tured by a camera fixed location of 2 m height.
4 S.Z. Kassab et al.

1 Up-riser pipe 5 Overflow pipe 9 Compressor 13 Pressure gauge

2 Down-comer 6 Overhead tank 10 Pressure regulator 14 Air injector
3 Supply tank 7 Measuring tank 11 Air flow meter 15 Water supply pipe
4 Winch crane 8 Drain 12 Thermometer 16 Drain valve

Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the experimental apparatus.

11. Air injection is modified to a higher value air flow rate Table 1 Uncertainty of the mea-
and steps (4–10) are repeated. sured variables.
12. In case of any change in the injection or piping, water Quantity Uncertainty (%)
supply source is closed first then air source is closed next
to prevent water from flowing into the air system during Air flow rate 3%
Water flow rate 1.25%
the changing presses.
Temperature 1.17%
13. After components replacement, the above procedure is Pressure 2.5%
repeated.

2.3. Uncertainty analysis

Calibrating all measuring devices has been done using various
techniques; in addition to an uncertainty analysis was per-
formed according to the multivariate Taylor Series method.
The values obtained using the uncertainty analyses are summa-
rized in Table 1:
3. Results and discussion
As stated before, the first step in the present study is a valida-
tion of the experimental results obtained from the rebuilt con-
structed air lift pump experimental set-up with Kassab et al.
[14] results to get confidence of the used apparatus. First of
all, Kassab et al. results indicate that the best submerging ratio
of the air lift pump is 0.4. Consequently, this ratio is the only
value used in the present study. Fig. 2 presents water produc-
tivity of air lift pump with radial injection versus air mass flow
rate. This figure shows that the results obtained using the pre-
sent experimental set-up are in good agreement with the results
of Kassab et al. [14]. This agreement gives confidence to the
present experimental work related to studying the performance
of air lift pump.
It has been observed that the performance of the pump is
highly related to the flow regime as seen in Fig. 2. No water
is lifted at air mass flow rate below 0.8 kg/h where the buoyant
force implemented by the air bubbles is not enough to deliver
water to the end of the riser. The flow regime registered is in
Effects of injection mechanism on air lift pump 5

Fig. 2 Comparison between present study experimental results and Kassab et al. [14] results.

form of bubbles as shown in Fig. 3 using flow visualization. At
low air flow rate, Bubbly flow which consists of individuals
bubbles distributed along the pipe is unable to raise the liquid
level because of the low upward force exerted by the numerous
bubbles, thus the bubbly regime discharge liquids at high sub-
merging ratio only where the static lift is considered short and
the large hydrostatic pressure of long water column helps the
bubble to easily lift the fluid. As air flow rates increases, bub-
bly flow is interspersed with some slugs. These slugs are devel-
oped from the coalescence of multiple air bubbles as described
by Catrawedarma et al. [24]. In slug flow regime, water begins
to reach the upper tank as air slugs move periodically upward
while lifting a portion of water. This flow regime is described
by any slight increase in air mass flow rate results a remarkable
rise in water productivity until it reaches a maximum value of
519 kg/h of water in slug-churn flow regime. The transition
from slug regime to churn happens while increasing air flow
rate as the falling liquid film adjacent to the Taylor bubble
and the wall penetrate the slug below causing a breakdown
in the bridge between two consecutive slugs. This collapse
leads to a chaotic flow motion described as churn flow pattern.
It should be noted that the churn pattern is the main operating
regime of an air lift pump as the water productivity remains
approximately constant through the entire region. The prefer-
able operating range is in the intermediate regimes known as
slug or churn flow regimes where the highest efficiency lies,

Fig. 3 Flow visualization of various flow patterns (a) Bubbly, (b and c) slug, (d and e) slug-churn, (f and g) annular.
6 S.Z. Kassab et al.

Kassab et al. [14]. This result is also supported by multiple

experiments using a high speed camera and an image analysis
technique shows that the slug flow is the best flow regime for
the pump performance, Hanafizadeh et al. [17]. Any additional
increase in air flow rate leads to the transition from churn
regime to annular regime where air velocity become significant
high to maintain water film adjacent to wall regardless to the
high pressure drop which causes a small decrease in lifted
water portion. The annular flow regime is also considered as
an extreme operating condition due to the high air flow rate
and an approximately constant liquid phase discharge, leading
to a lower efficiency of the device. All these observed flow
regimes are positioned in Fig. 2 and shown in Fig. 3.
Flow pattern is a key parameter highly related to the air lift
pump performance. Therefore, it is vital to identify the flow
structure of the domain in order to maintain the pump at its
best operating regime. The Flow patterns were determined
for the experimental work by visually recording the flow struc-
ture at each flow rate in the riser tube. Many theoretical and Fig. 5 Different restrictor inlets opening: (a) 6 mm opening, (b)
analytical models were developed to predict the flow patterns. 8 mm opening, (c) 10 mm opening.
These models depend on flow parameters such as the geometry
of the riser, the orientation of the flow and other parameters.
Flow pattern maps use these models to demonstrate the flow
regime. Fig. 4 shows the distribution of the present experimen- restriction is placed between the pressure gage and the injector
tal results on the flow pattern map proposed by Taitel et al. inlet and varying the restrictor opening distance. This leads to
[25]. This map is based on the superficial velocities of gas a change in the effective pressure applying to the injector and
and liquid phase defined as the volumetric flow rate of each consequently the airlift pump performance. Fig. 5 shows three
phase over the riser cross-sectional area. It is clearly seen that restrictor inlets opening of (a) 6 mm, (b) 8 mm and (c) 10 mm.
the registered experimental data match well with the proposed It has been observed in Fig. 6 that the air pressure change
map advancing the churn flow pattern as highly recommended has approximately no influence on the water productivity as it
flow regime for airlift pump operation. highly depend on the amount of air injected, however applying
The effective pressure value is the actual pressure inside the more restriction leads to a drop in the pump efficiency,
inlet to the injector. Meanwhile, the value recorded by the described by Nicklin [26], as the ratio between the work done
pressure gauge should be as close as possible to the effective in lifting the liquid and the work done by the air as it expands
pressure value to give what is considered the actual pressure isothermally:
value. Therefore, in the present study a trial to illustrate this qw gQw ðL  Hs Þ
effect on the actual experimental measurement is performed. g¼ ð4Þ
Pin :Qair ln PPina
It is important to place the pressure gage as close as possible
to the injector to minimize the unwanted effect of pressure Where qw is water density (Kg/m3), g is the gravitational
change before entering the injector which leads to more accu- acceleration (m/s2), Qw is the water volume flow rate (m3/s),
rate reading of the effective pressure value. Consequently, a Qair is the air volume flow rate (m3/s), L is the length of the

Fig. 4 Comparison between the present study results and Taitel et al. [25] flow-pattern map.
Effects of injection mechanism on air lift pump
Fig. 6 Variation of water mass flow rate with air mass flow rate
for different restriction opening.
Fig. 7 Variation of pump efficiency with air mass flow rate for
different restriction opening.
Fig. 8 Injection methods: (A) upward injection (B) downward injection (C) sideward injection.
7
up-riser pipe (m), Pa is the atmospheric pressure (Pascal), Pin is
the injection pressure (Pascal), Hs is the water level in supply
tank (m).
As shown in Fig. 7, the decrease in efficiency is due to the
rise of the injected pressure. Pressure change has higher effect
at low air flow rate, while as air flow rate increases the impact
of air pressure start to fade away, replaced by the amount of
injected air as a dominant factor. It is also essential to mention
that, any relatively small change applied to the air system resis-
tance brings a noticed change on the pump efficiency curve,
Fig. 7, but not necessarily on the productivity curve, Fig. 6,
as maximum efficiency decrease from 34.7% for the 10 mm
opening restriction to 30.4% for the 6 mm opening restriction.
In order to examine the effect of the injector’s inlet, away
from the variation of the injection methods studied previously
by Khalil et al. [7], the present experimental study investigates
the injection in three different positions relative to the same
injector. Three injection orientations are tested; air flow was
introduced upward, downward, and sideward respectively as
shown in Fig. 8. At low air flow rate < 4 kg/h, Fig. 9.a,
upward injection shows better performance as air pushes liquid
flow and forces air to penetrate through injector holes. On the
other hand, air tends to move up in form of bubbles in side-
ward and downward injection, Fig. 9.b-c, to fill the upper part
then step inside the riser. However, Fig. 10 shows that as air
flow rate increases, the whole air jacket injector is approxi-
mately filled with air leaving no difference between injection
systems.
Regarding the variation of the mass flow rate, Fig. 11
shows no significant effect between the three different injection
methods. Air lift pump efficiency curve shows a maximum
value of 34.7% when using upward injection compared to
29.7% for the downward injection and 28.9% for the side
injection then all injection curves cohere as air replaces water
in the injector’s body. On the other hand, Fig. 12 clearly sup-
port the previous results which indicate that the effect related
to the air lift pump efficiency is more pronounced than the
water and air flow rates relation. Consequently, from the pre-
8 S.Z. Kassab et al.

Fig. 9 Injection methods at low air flow rate < 4 kg/hr: (A) upward injection (B) downward injection (C) sideward injection.

Fig. 10 Injection methods at high air flow rate = 14 kg/hr: (A) upward injection (B) downward injection (C) sideward injection.

vious results shown in Figs. 9 to 12, upward injection was set-
tled as default injection methods to get benefit of relatively
higher efficiency.
On the other hand, from the past experience of the authors
in the present field of study, and because of the initial plan of
varying the riser diameter from 24 mm to 36 mm, beside an
intension to get a clue to eliminate the effect of every minor
change in the obtained results; two air jacket models were
designed with the same number of holes of 3 mm each sharing
a similar distribution with a sole difference of axial pipe diam-
eter. The first injector has inner dimeter of 24 mm, while the
second one includes a pipe of 36 mm fitted both with the up-
riser pipe as shown in Fig. 13. Note that, the inlet injection vol-
ume outside the riser diameter and before entering the riser in
the two cases is different. This difference might have an effect
on the obtained results. Therefore, the results will be reported
to study this effect.
The two injector models were fitted with a 36 mm diameter
up-riser pipe. Figs. 14 and 15 show a minor effect of changing
the inner diameter of the injector at low air flow rate < 4 kg/h.
for both water productivity and pump efficiency. Meanwhile,
the results of lifting water at high air flow rate divert slightly
into a higher value in the case of larger inner diameter injector
to 928 kg/h. water mass flow rate compared to 823 kg/h. of
water for the smaller inner diameter injector. These two injec-
tors were also connected to the 24 mm diameter riser pipe to
account for the injector’s effect. For the larger injector of
36 mm inner diameter, Fig. 16 shows that water productivity
Effects of injection mechanism on air lift pump 9

Fig. 11 Variation of water mass flow rate with air mass flow rate for three different injection systems.

Fig. 12 Variation of pump efficiency with air mass flow rate for three different injection systems.

record a lower trend until it reaches a value of 4.45 kg/h. air
mass flow rate then exceeds the water lifted by the smaller
injector due to its larger volume capacity.
Fig. 17 demonstrates lower pump efficiency as a result of
the contraction fitting between the 36 mm diameter injector
and the 24 mm up-riser pipe causing a small portion of water
to fall back down. However, as air flow rate increases this effi-
ciency gap diminishes due to larger water lifted portion at high
air flow rate.
4. Conclusions
The present experimental study shed some lights on the inlet
injection region of the air lift pump. It started with validated
and proved confidence of the results obtained by the rebuilt
experiment set-up by comparing the obtained experimental
results with international accepted sets of results usually cited
by the researchers working in this field. Following that, the
10 S.Z. Kassab et al.

provide an inside view of the differences in flow patterns at

the initial injection region as well as along the upriser pipe of
the air lift pump. The following conclusions are deduced from
the present study and within the stated operating ranges:

- The registered experimental data match well with other

researchers flow map.
- Any relatively small change applied to the air system resis-
tance brings a noticed change on the pump efficiency curve,
but not necessarily on the water productivity curve
- At low air flow rate < 4 kg/h, upward injection shows
higher efficiency values. Air lift pump efficiency curve
shows a maximum value of 34.7% when using upward
injection compared to 29.7% for the downward injection
and 28.9% for the side injection. However, as air flow rate
increases, no significant difference between injection inlet
systems, upward, downward or sideward, is observed.
- The sensitivity of the air lift pump efficiency is more pro-
Fig. 13 Air injector models (A) 24 mm inner diameter (B) nounced to any change in the geometrical or operating
36 mm inner diameter. parameters than the water and air flow rates relation.
- A minor effect of changing the inner diameter of the injec-
tor at low air flow rate < 4 kg/h. for both water productiv-
ity and pump efficiency. Meanwhile, the results of lifting
research focused on the influence of three characteristics con-
water at high air flow rate divert slightly into a higher value
nected to the air lift pump’s intake injection region on the
in the case of larger inner diameter injector to 928 kg/h.
pump performance: inlet restrictor resistance, the injection
water mass flow rate compared to 823 kg/h. of water for
direction, and the injector riser diameter. Flow visualisation
the smaller inner diameter injector.
is employed extensively in all of the experimental testing to

Fig. 14 Variation of water mass flow rate with air mass flow rate for two injections models fitted with 36 mm pipe.
Effects of injection mechanism on air lift pump 11

Fig. 15 Variation of pump efficiency with air mass flow rate for two injections models fitted with 36 mm pipe.

Fig. 16 Variation of water mass flow rate with air mass flow rate for two injections models fitted with 24 mm pipe.
12
35
30
25
Eficiency %
20
15
10
0
0 2 4 6
Fig. 17 Variation of pump efficiency with air mass flow rate for two injections models fitted with 24 mm pipe.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] D. Hu, C.L. Tang, S.P. Cai, F.H. Zhang, The effect of air
injection method on the airlift pump performance, J. Fluids Eng.
134 (11) (2012) 1113021–1113027.
[2] N.-C. Cho, I.-J. Hwang, C.-M. Lee, J.-W. Park, An
experimental study on the airlift pump with air jet nozzle and
booster pump, J. Environ. Sci. 21 (2009) S19–S23.
[3] M. Shallouf, W.H. Ahmed, S. Abdou, Numerical analysis of
fluid flow in aquaculture systems, in: Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference of Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass
Transfer (2019) (FFHMT’19),Ottawa, Canada.
[4] Y. Qiang, W. Fan, C. Xiao, Y. Pan, Y. Chen, Effects of
operating parameters and injection method on the performance
of an artificial upwelling by using airlift pump, Appl. Ocean Res.
78 (2018) 212–222.
[5] J. Rosettani, W. Ahmed, P. Geddis, L. Wu, B. Clements,
Experimental and numerical investigation of gas-liquid metal
two-phase flow pumping, Int. J. Thermofluids 10 (2021).
[6] P. Hanafizadeh, M.H. Saidi, A. Karimi, A. Zamiri, Effect of
bubble size and angle of tapering upriser pipe on the
performance of airlift pumps, Part. Sci. Technol. 28 (4) (2010)
332–347.
[7] M.F. Khalil, K.A. Elshorbagy, S.Z. Kassab, R.I. Fahmy, Effect
of air injection method on the performance of an air lift pump,
Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 20 (6) (1999) 598–604.
[8] H. Fujimoto, S. Ogawa, H. Takuda, N. Hatta, Operation
performance of a small air-lift pump for conveying solid
particles, J. Energy Resour. Technol. 125 (2003) 17–25.
[9] S.Z. Kassab, I.G. Adam, H.A. El Gohary, Influence of the air
injection method on the performance of an air lift pump, in:
Proceedings of ICFD 10:Tenth International Congress of Fluid
Dynamics (2010), Ain Soukhna, Egypt.
S.Z. Kassab et al.
Submergence ratio=0.4
36mm injector itted with 24mm pipe
24mm injector itted with 24mm pipe
8 10 12 14 16 18 20
air low rate Kg/hr
[10] A.A.M.H. Alasadi, A.K. Habeeb, Experimental and numerical
simulation of an airlift pump with conventional and modified air
injection device, J. Eng. 23 (2017) 62–82.
[11] W.H. Ahmed, H.M. Badr, Dual-injection airlift pumps: an
enhanced performance, Part. Sci. Technol. 30 (6) (2012) 497–
516.
[12] W.H. Ahmed, A.M. Aman, H.M. Badr, A.M. Al-Qutub, Air
injection methods: the key to a better performance of airlift
pumps, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 70 (2016) 354–365.
[13] M. Sadatomi, A. Kawahara, T. Nishiyama, Experiment and
performance prediction of bubble-jet type air-lift pump for
dredging sediments on sea and lake beads, Adv. Fluid Mech.
Heat Mass Transfer (2012) 311–316.
[14] S.Z. Kassab, H.A. Kandil, H.A. Warda, W.H. Ahmed, Air-lift
pumps characteristics under two phase flow conditions, Int. J.
Heat Fluid Flow 30 (1) (2009) 88–98.
[15] A.-F. Mahrous, K.K. Matrawy, Effect of air injection strategy
on airlift pump performance, Int. J. Control Autom. Syst. 3 (4)
(2014) 20–25.
[16] A.-F. Mahrous, Performance of airlift pumps: single-stage vs.
multistage air injection, Am. J. Mech. Eng. 2 (1) (2014) 28–33.
[17] P. Hanafizadeh, S. Ghanbarzadeh, M.H. Saidi, Visual technique
for detection of gas-liquid two-phase flow regime in the airlift
pump, J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 75 (3-4) (2011) 327–335.
[18] J. Ahmed, T. Mahmood, Z. Iqbal, A. Shahzad, R. Ali,
Axisymmetric flow and heat transfer over an unsteady
stretching sheet in power law fluid, J. Mol. Liq. 221 (2016)
386–393.
[19] M.F. Khalil, K.A. Elshorbagy, Performance analysis of newly
designed air lift riser, in: T. Nejat Veziroghu (Ed.), Proceedings
of the Multiphase Transport Conf. University of Miami 4,
Miami Florida, USA, 1979, pp. 1793–1806.
[20] H. Mansour, M.F. Khalil, Effect of air injection method on the
performance of air lift pump, Mansoura Eng. J. 15 (1990) 107–
118.
[21] M.F. Khalil, H. Mansour, Improved of the performance of an
air lift pump by means of surfactants, in: Sixth International
Symposium of Heat and Mass Transfer, Miami Florida, USA,
1990.
[22] S.Z. Kassab, H.A. Kandil, H.A. Warda, W.H. Ahmed,
Experimental and analytical investigations of airlift pumps
Effects of injection mechanism on air lift pump
operating in three-phase flow, Chem. Eng. J. 131 (1-3) (2007)
273–281.
[23] E.M. Wahba, M.A. Gadalla, D. Abueidda, A. Dalaq, H. Hafiz,
K. Elawadi, R. Issa, On the performance of air-lift pumps: from
analytical models to large eddy simulation, J. Fluids Eng. 136
(2014) 111301.
[24] I. Catrawedarma, A. Deendarlianto, Indarto, The performance
and flow characteristics of swirl flow injector type airlift pump
13
system, in: Proc 10th Int. Conf. on Thermofluid, Yogyakarta,
Indonesia, 2020, p. 040002.
[25] Y. Taitel, D. Bornea, A.E. Dukler, Modeling flow pattern
transition for steady upward gas–liquid flow in vertical tubes,
AICHE J. 26 (1980) 345–354.
[26] D.J. Nicklin, The air lift pump theory and optimization, Trans.
Inst. Chem. Eng. 41 (1963) 29–39.