8726 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

2009, 48, 8726–8735

Bubble Evolution through a Submerged Orifice Using Smoothed Particle

Hydrodynamics: Effect of Different Thermophysical Properties
Arup K. Das and Prasanta K. Das*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, 721302, India

Formation of gas bubbles through an orifice under a liquid pool is important as a topic of fundamental research
and is relevant in diverse industrial applications. This complex process is influenced by a large number of
process parameters including the properties of the liquid and the gas phase. In the present work investigations
have been made for bubble evolution at a submerged orifice using a computational simulation. Smoothed
particle hydrodynamics is used to model the formation and detachment of the bubble from the orifice mouth.
Using the advantage of this particle-based method, effects of density, viscosity, and surface tension of the
liquid are investigated by noticing instantaneous bubble contour and the duration of bubble growth. The
Downloaded via KOREA ADVANCED INST SCI AND TECHLGY on April 6, 2020 at 05:52:06 (UTC).

present simulation has been validated satisfactorily against published results. Finally, the process of neck
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

formation and bubble pinch off has also been studied by varying the specific fluid properties individually. It
has been noticed that the effect of surface tension and the effect of viscosity on bubble growth and necking
are just the reverse of the effect of density on these processes. Moreover, compared to surface tension and
density, the effect of viscosity on bubble evolution is marginal.

1. Introduction remains unresolved as conclusive findings are not reported in

Formation of bubbles at a submerged orifice is of fundamental
interest in fluid mechanics and has a great importance in diverse
aeration processes such as sieve plate reactors and bubble
columns. Several research groups1-7 and8-10 have contributed
immensely toward the understanding of the process of bubble
evolution by experimental investigation and theoretical analysis.
Recently Kulkarni and Joshi11 discussed different aspects of this
important hydrodynamic phenomenon in a comprehensive
review.
The formation, growth, and detachment of bubbles at the
mouth of a submerged orifice is governed by the complex
interplay between different forces, namely inertia, buoyancy,
viscous, interfacial, etc. Accordingly, a number of fluid proper-
ties such as density, viscosity, and surface tension directly
influence the bubbling process. Out of the two phases involved
in the process of bubble evolution, the role of the liquid
properties is more crucial as they may vary widely for different
industrial processes. There have long been attempts to identify
the effect of specific liquid properties on bubbling at a
submerged orifice. Initial investigations in this direction were
made through experiments. However, a lack of general agree-
ment is found11 in different studies. Some of the investigations
are also marked by inconclusive observations. For example,
increase in viscosity has been reported to increase3,12 or
decrease13 the bubble size as well as to have no effect on it.14,15
The effects of surfactants and contaminants on the behavior of
bubbles are yet to be understood comprehensively. Decades ago
Davidson and Schuler16 reported that surface tension force has
no dominant effect at high flow rates through a small orifice.
Liow17 reported that the surface tension force along with the
orifice diameter and orifice thickness decides the bubble period
from the orifice mouth. Hsu et al.18 experimentally showed the
importance of surface tension force over bubble formation
procedure by using different surfactants in water. Still, the effect
of surface tension over bubble formation at orifice mouth
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: +91-03222-
282916. Fax: +91-03222-282278. E-mail: pkd@mech.iitkgp.ernet.in.
10.1021/ie900350h CCC: $40.75  2009 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 08/17/2009
the literature.
Experimental investigations are seriously handicapped by the
single-most fact that a specific liquid property cannot be altered
keeping the other properties unchanged. Often the effects of
simultaneous variation of more than one property are counterac-
tive and lead to ambiguous results.
As an alternate measure, attempts have been made to
understand the influence of fluid properties on bubble evolution
through theoretical analysis and numerical simulations. Kumar
and co-workers1-3 rightly identified the anomaly in the literature
regarding the influence of viscosity on the process of bubble
formation. Ramakrishnan et al.1 used their analytical model and
tried to resolve the existing controversies regarding the effect
of liquid properties over the process of bubble formation under
constant flow condition. Satyanarayan et al.2 modified the model
of Ramakrishnan et al.1 for constant pressure condition to show
the strong influence of liquid properties over bubble growth and
its subsequent departure. Martin et al.19 developed a two-stage
finite difference model which describes the formation, breakage,
and rising of gas bubbles from a submerged orifice. They20
further extended their model19 to investigate the influence of
liquid properties on bubble growth and detachment. They have
identified three nondimensional parameters, namely the Rey-
nolds number (Re), Bond number (Bo), and Weber number (We),
which influence the hydrodynamics. Thereby it is possible to
predict the effect of liquid properties on the evolution of bubbles
from their model.
Fully computational simulations of bubble formation at a
submerged orifice are of recent origin and are few in number
compared to the analytical or semianalytical methods of the
process. In this regard the contribution of Drust and his
co-workers21-23 is worth mentioning. They have solved the
Navier-Stokes equation in its full form for both phases. For
tracking the interface they have used the volume of fluid
(VOF)22 and combined VOF and level set (LS)23 techniques.
Extensive numerical simulations have been carried out by
Gerlach et al.22 to investigate the influence of various conditions
on bubble shape, bubble volume, and transition from a single
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009 8727

Figure 1. (a) Schematic diagram of the problem domain. (b) Particulate representation of the gas-liquid system near the orifice.

to a double periodic formation process. The influence of the book by Liu and Liu28 provides a very extensive review of the
variation of liquid properties such as density, viscosity, and subject and also provides many illustrations of the applications.
surface tension was studied22 individually. Their simulation The details of the model implementation are thoroughly
produces a good agreement with the correlation of Jamialahmadi discussed in Das and Das.25 Using SPH, the fluid mass can be
et al.24 divided into N small volume elements with masses mi (i ) 1,
In general, the current study is an extension of the earlier 2, ..., N) located at ri. Using a suitable kernel,28 the nth-order
efforts of computational simulation of the process of bubble derivative of the function f(x) can be approximated as follows:
evolution at a submerged orifice. Particularly, the effect of liquid
∂nf(x) f(x') ∂nW(x - x', h)
properties on the formation, growth, and departure of bubbles
has been investigated. Recently, Das and Das25 developed a ∂xn
) ∫ Ω F(x')
∂xn
F(x') dx' (1)
simulation of the basic process of bubble evolution at a
submerged orifice using a particle-based computational tech- where W(x - x′, h) is the smoothing kernel function and h is
nique, namely smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH). Here the smoothing length defining the influence area of the smooth-
efforts have been made to extend the same technique to explore ing function W.
the effect of liquid properties on the hydrodynamics of bubbling Using particle approximation continuity and momentum
at a submerged orifice. In section 3 the simulation has been equation of the continuum simplifies into the following form:
validated against the published results over a range of liquid N
DFi mj β ∂Wij
properties, namely density, viscosity, and surface tension. As
the present simulation exhibits a good agreement with the Dt
) Fi V ∑
F ij ∂xβ
(2)
j)1 j i
published results, this unique technique has been employed to

( )
generate new information. In section 4 the process of neck
DVRi N
σRβ
i + σi
Rβ
∂Wij
formation and the influence of liquid properties on it have been
critically examined. Wherever possible, comparison of the Dt
) ∑ mj
F F
i j
+ ξij
∂xβi
(3)
j)1
present simulation has been made with available theoretical
results and experimental data. The present work provides a detail or

( )
investigation on the influence of liquid properties on neck
formation. A methodical study of this aspect was not made DVRi N
σRβ σRβ ∂Wij
earlier. Dt
) ∑m j
i

Fi 2
+
i

Fi2
+ ξij
∂xβi
(4)
j)1

2. Model Description where

( )
The bubble evolution at a submerged orifice considered in
∂Vβ ∂VR 2
the present work can be explained using the schematic diagram σRβ
i ) -piδ
Rβ
+ µi R
+ - (∇V)δRβ (5)
in Figure 1a. It consists of a liquid pool over a circular orifice. ∂x ∂xβ 3
High pressure gas is injected into the pool through the orifice
from the gas chamber below the orifice. The present simulation Fi is the density of the particle i with summation density
has been done for a chamber pressure of 2.5 bar and orifice approach, mi is the mass associated with particle i, Wij is the
diameter of 2 mm. Chamber pressure is kept constant throughout smoothing function of particle i evaluated at particle j, Vβij is the
the simulation. However, during the departure of the first few relative velocity of particles i and j, VRi is the absolute velocity
bubbles, the flow through the orifice also resembles a constant of particle i, ξij is the Neumann-Richtmyer artificial viscosity,
flow situation as the air tank volume is large compared to the and pi is the pressure of particle i. A standard equation of
bubble volume. Air is considered as the gaseous phase to be state28,29 as given below is used in the simulation:

(( ) )
injected as bubbles in the liquid column from the orifice mouth. Fi f
As has been mentioned earlier, SPH26,27 is adopted to simulate pi ) B -1 (6)
the hydrodynamics of bubbling at an orifice mouth. The recent F0
8728 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009
Figure 2. Bubble contour at the time of departure for different liquid densities over the orifice mouth.
Figure 3. Variation of bubble formation period for liquid having different density compared to water.
Here F0 is the initial density measured at the atmospheric
pressure. The values of f and B are 7.0 and 3.04 × 108,
respectively, as reported in ref 28. The smoothing length changes
at every time span depending on the local density of the
particles. For computation of the pressure variation, the artificial
fluid is simulated to have some compressibility using a suitable
equation of state.29
For the solid boundaries at the periphery of the domain,
artificial boundary particles are placed to force the fluid particle
to remain confined in the problem domain. A Lennard-Jones
type of force is directed centrally between the boundary particles
and fluid particles to maintain a minimum spacing between
them. A midpoint predictor corrector method is used for time
marching of the problem, which restricts the physical rate of
propagation of information to be less than that of the numerical
propagation rate. A cubic spline smoothing function is used with
normalization constant 10/7π for the present problem. The
nearest neighboring particle searching (NNPS) technique is used
to track the particles of interest. To model the surface tension
force, the continuum surface force method (CSF)30 has been
applied in the momentum equation of the particles upon the
neighborhood of the orifice.25 To avoid the penetration of two
immiscible phases between themselves, a special no-penetration
force is added to the interfacial particles, depending on the scalar
distance between them.25
3. Result and Discussion
SPH simulation provides the velocity field for both fluids. It
also gives the dynamics bubble contour as a function of time
as the fluid particles are represented by different color codes.
Such computations have been reported in Das and Das25 for
the basic process of bubbling at the orifice mouth. To have a
ready overview of the particulate nature of the scheme, one
sample diagram of the gas and liquid particles is shown in Figure
1b during bubble formation at the orifice. The primary goal of
the present work is to investigate the effect of liquid properties
on the process of bubble evolution. Initially, results generated
from the simulations are validated against available computa-
tional and experimental results over a wide range of properties.

Figure 4. Evolution of air bubble through 88 wt % glycerol having surface tension greater than that of water.
Figure 5. Bubble contour at the time of departure for different liquid viscosities over the orifice mouth.
Next, some key processes of bubble growth have been explored
to understand the influence of property variation on them.
Properties of water at 25 °C have been considered as the base
values, and the effect of individual property variation has been
studied considering a large range of property ratio. For the
gaseous phase, the properties of air are taken at 25 °C.
3.1. Effect of Liquid Density. Density of the liquid phase
influences the process of bubble growth and departure in a
number of ways. Several forces, namely the inertia of the liquid
phase, buoyancy force, drag, and lift force, are directly depend-
ent on density. As these forces are also dependent on other
properties, the individual effect of density cannot be understood
without a rigorous simulation. Khurana and Kumar3 experi-
mentally showed that for a low gas flow rate and less viscous
liquid the bubble size decreases with the increase in liquid
density. For high gas flow rates through the orifice, density does
not alter the size of the bubble at the time of departure. All the
results from their experiments are for a small orifice diameter.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009 8729
Figure 2 represents the bubble profiles at a 2 mm orifice
mouth at the point of departure for liquids 1.5 times heavier
and 4.0 times lighter than water. The significant increase in
bubble size with the increase in liquid density can be observed.
The solid line representing the bubble contour obtained by
Gerlach et al.22 compares very well with the present simulation.
Further, it has been seen that the period for bubble formation
reduces drastically and finally reaches an asymptotic value with
the increase in liquid density. This is depicted in Figure 3 along
with a comparison with the numerical results of Gerlach et al.22
The present simulation predicts higher values of the period
compared to that of Gerlach et al.,22 particularly at a low liquid
density. Though our simulation exhibits a very good trend
matching all the results of Gerlach et al.22 and a good
quantitative agreement with most of the results, in this particular
case there is a large mismatch. It is difficult to assign a definite
reason for this. In the present methodology a no-penetration
force plays a very crucial role in determining the bubble volume
8730 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009

Figure 6. Variation of bubble formation period for liquid having different viscosity compared to water.

Figure 7. Bubble contour at the time of departure for different liquid surface tensions over the orifice mouth.

Figure 8. Variation of bubble formation period for liquid having different surface tension compared to water.
and in turn the bubble period. The same magnitude of the no- variation. A tuning of this force in the case of low density may
penetration force has been used for the entire range of property improve the result. Further studies are needed in this direction.

Figure 9. Change of bubble volume throughout the period for various densities of the liquid.
Figure 10. Change of bubble volume throughout the period for various viscosities of the liquid.
3.2. Effect of Liquid Viscosity. Contradictory observations
have been reported in the literature regarding the effect
of viscosity on the process of bubble evolution. Recently,
Jamialahmadi et al.24 proposed that bubble size at the time of
departure is proportional to µ0.66. This signifies a monotonic
increase in bubble size with the liquid viscosity. According to
Kumar and Kuloor31 the effect of viscosity is not independent
of flow rate. At higher flow rates the effect of viscosity can be
dominant, but at low flow rate viscosity becomes quite
insignificant. In the present simulation a wide variation of
viscosity (compared to that of water) has been considered,
keeping all the other properties unchanged. To test the predict-
ability of the numerical model, the simulation results have been
compared with the experimental data of Teresaka and Tsuge.6
The experiments were conducted for 88% glycerol (µl )109
mPa · s), and bubble contours at different stages of evolution
were reported. The comparison in Figure 4 shows a good
agreement. It may be noted that the transformation of the
hemispherical bubble into a truncated sphere and neck formation
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009 8731
is well captured by our model. Next, the comparisons of bubble
profiles at departure with those obtained by Gerlach et al.22 are
shown in Figure 5 for two cases, i.e., µl/µw ) 0.1 and µl/µw )
150. It is interesting to note that the change in departure volume
is rather small even for such a large change in viscosity. Figure
6 depicts the variation of bubble formation period as a function
of viscosity. The bubble formation period remains almost
constant for low values of viscosity and increases only margin-
ally at high liquid viscosity. A similar trend has also been
obtained by Gerlach et al.22
3.3. Effect of Liquid Surface Tension. The effect of surface
tension on bubbling could be quite intriguing. The difference
in bubble formation in distilled water and in a system with
contamination has been reported but not well explained. Careful
investigations are also needed to understand the role of
surfactants in the process of bubbling. How the presence of
contamination and surfactant modifies different fluid properties
and brings an overall change in the process is beyond the scope
8732 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009
Figure 11. Change of bubble volume throughout the period for various surface tensions of the liquid.
of present work. Changes in the bubbling behavior have been
studied only due to a variation of liquid surface tension.
Figure 7 depicts the bubble shape at departure for two
different liquids with surface tension substantially higher as well
as lower than water. Both these shapes have been compared
with the simulation of Gerlach et al.22 The comparison is better
in the case of liquid with high surface tension. In their
simulation, the qualitative change in bubble shape for a liquid
with low surface tension is worth noting. It not only has a very
small and narrow neck but also shows a small bulged portion
below the neck which possibly represents the crown of the
succeeding bubble. This attribute is not present in our simulation.
However, the variation of bubble formation period with surface
tension (Figure 8) as predicted by the present simulation
compares very well with that of Gerlach et al.22 In general,
surface tension increases both the bubble size and the period
for bubble formation.
4. Influence of Liquid Properties on Different Stages of
Bubble Growth
The growth of a bubble at the mouth of a submerged orifice
does not follow a monotonic trend. To start with, the shape of
the gas bubble projected out of the orifice can be approximated
as a hemisphere or a truncated sphere. The growth of the bubble
continues both in the radial direction and in the vertically upward
direction. Depending on the gas flow rate, orifice diameter, and
fluid properties, the bubble may assume a nonspherical shape
at this stage. With further inflow of gas into the bubble, a stem
develops at the mouth of the orifice and the bubble gets “lifted
up” from the orifice mouth. As the stem grows longer, a neck
develops in the stem. At a subsequent stage the bubble gets
pinched off from the stem at the neck. During the development
of the neck generally the bubble growth is retarded. Therefore,
in the development of a bubble there are two distinct phases:
the initial growth phase and the neck formation phase. In the
first phase there is a substantial increase in bubble volume, while
in the second phase there is a noticeable change in its shape.
The formation of the neck is characterized by a change in
curvature in the bubble profile. Such a change can be easily
detected by our simulation.
It is clear from the above discussion that both the growth of
the bubble before the formation of the neck and the growth
after it are important for the evolution of a bubble. In the
remaining part of this section efforts have been made to
investigate the effect of liquid properties in detail on the
processes of prenecking and postnecking. In Figures 9, 10, and
11 the change of bubble volume with time has been shown for
variations of density, viscosity, and surface tension, respectively.
All the curves span from the inception of the bubble at the orifice
mouth until its pinch off. The square symbols on the curves
indicate the initiation of the neck formation. For all cases the
duration of neck formation is a small portion of the total time
span of the bubble. Further, the growth of bubble is only
marginal during this period. Figure 9 shows that both the bubble
volume and its life span increase with the decrease of density.
However, the rate of bubble growth shows an intriguing trend.
The rate is highest for water and decreases with both the increase
and decrease of liquid density compared to water. This trend
cannot be readily explained. Probably it indicates that the bubble
growth is not linearly dependent on density. As density appears
in different force terms, its effect could be rather complex.
Figure 10 depicts that both the bubble volume and its life span
increase with the increase in viscosity. However, the effect of
viscosity is more prominent at its lower values. Finally, the effect
of surface tension on bubble volume and departure time is shown
in Figure 11. Both of these parameters increase with surface
tension. However, the growth curve for bubble volume becomes
flatter as surface tension increases.
Efforts have been made to critically examine the effect of
liquid properties on the process of neck formation. The
development of the bubble neck starting from its inception until
the process of pinch off is depicted in Figure 12 for the variation
of the three liquid properties considered in the present work.
As the liquid density decreases, the bulblike bubble shape
changes to a rather spherical one during the necking period.
The pinch-off point also shifts in the upward direction. The
change in bubble shape becomes more pronounced in the case
of viscosity variation. At higher viscosity the bubbles become
elongated during the necking period. This is associated also with
an upward shift in the pinch-off point. It is observed that the
neck radius increases with surface tension. At a low value of
surface tension there is a large increase in necking period as
the surface tension increases. However, with further increase
in surface tension this effect dies out.

Figure 12. Bubble evolution in the necking phase for variation of density, viscosity, and surface tension.
It has been mentioned earlier that the entire duration of bubble
evolution may be divided into two parts, namely, initial growth
stage and necking stage. The duration and the bubble growth
during the last stage will be far more informative about the
necking phenomena. In Figure 13 the ratio of the duration of
necking stage to the total growth period is shown in curves a,
b, and c for the variation of density, viscosity, and surface
tension, respectively, to quantify the stage in detail. It may be
noted that the necking period increases with the increase of
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009 8733
liquid density over the orifice mouth. The effect of viscosity
on the necking period is not as pronounced as the effect of
density. There is a marginal decrease in necking period with
the increases of the liquid viscosity. From curve c it can be
seen that the necking time is strongly influenced by surface
tension when its value is relatively low. As the magnitude of
surface tension becomes more than that of water and increases
further, some qualitative change in neck formation is noticed
but the change in necking time does not change drastically.
8734 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009
Figure 13. Influence of density, viscosity, and surface tension variation on the necking period on the perspective of bubble period.
Figure 14. Influence of density, viscosity, and surface tension variation on the bubble volume during neck formation.
Parallelly, efforts have also been made to study the evolution
of bubble volume during the necking stage with a variation of
fluid properties. The change of bubble volume during the
necking operation is termed as Vneck, while the final bubble
volume is denoted as Vtotal. In Figure 14 the ratio of Vneck to
Vtotal is reported for the variation of different liquid properties.
Neck volume increases with the increase of liquid density but
decreases as the liquid viscosity and surface tension force
intensify. It has been observed that though the necking period
occupies almost 1/5 of the total bubble period (on average),
the percentage change of bubble volume is not significant (10%)
in that period. It eventually shows homogenization of pressure
outside and inside the bubble. The bubble shape also experiences
a thorough transformation which leads to the pinch off after
some time.
These two studies show that not only bubble volume and
bubble period are dependent on liquid properties such as surface
tension, density, and viscosity, but also neck formation relies
on these properties.
5. Conclusion
The present investigation reports the influence of three
important liquid properties, namely density, viscosity, and
surface tension, on the process of bubbling through a submerged
orifice. As the investigation has been done through computa-
tional simulation, it has been possible to study the effect of a
specific property keeping other properties intact. The particle-
based nature of the adopted computational scheme, namely SPH,
allows us to change the fluid properties without any complicacy
and modifications in grid generation. Wherever possible, the
results of the present simulation have been compared with those
available in the literature. It has been seen that the bubble size
at the time of departure increases as the liquid density decreases.
For lighter liquids the bubble volume also increases along with
the duration of bubble growth. Similarly, bubbles become bigger
in size and take more time to depart from the orifice mouth
when it is surrounded by a more viscous liquid. Liquids having
a low viscosity allow the bubble to form and detach easily at
the orifice mouth. The surface tension of the liquid determines
the bubble sticking time with the orifice and also governs its
shape. At a low surface tension bubbles are smaller and they
depart early from the orifice mouth. However, fluids having high
surface tension increase the bubble size at the time of departure
and hence lengthen the duration of bubble growth. The necking
process is examined carefully using the present methodology
for a variation in density, surface tension, and viscosity of the
liquid over the orifice. In general, the duration of necking and
the change of bubble volume in this duration decrease with

density. The effects of surface tension and viscosity are just
the reverse. It is interesting to note that over a wide range
viscosity has a very weak effect on the entire process of bubble
evolution including necking compared to the effects of density
and surface tension. Additionally, the present study establishes
the capability of SPH in modeling a typical two-phase flow
situation with a large density difference over a wide variation
of liquid properties. It may be noted that other process
parameters such as orifice diameter, gas flow rate, chamber
volume, and gas properties also influence bubble evolution. As
an extension of the above work, one may take up the above
issues.
Nomenclature
B ) numerical constant described in eq 6 [dimensionless]
f ) numerical constant described in eq 6 [dimensionless]
f(x) ) value of function at special coordinate x
h ) smoothing length [m]
mi ) mass of particle i [kg]
pi ) pressure of particle i [kg m-1 s-2]
r ) scalar distance between two particles [m]
t ) time [s]
Vij ) relative velocity of particles i and j [m s-1]
W(x,h) ) smoothing function at position x having smoothing length
h [dimensionless]
xi ) position vector [m]
Greek Symbols
Ω ) domain of interest [m3]
δ ) Dirac delta function [dimensionless]
µi ) viscosity of particle i [kg m-1 s-1]
ξij ) Neumann-Richtmyer artificial viscosity [kg m-1 s-1]
F0 ) initial density of the fluid at atmospheric pressure [kg m-3]
Fi ) density of particle i [kg m-3]
Literature Cited
(1) Ramkrishnan, S.; Kumar, R.; Kuloor, N. R. Studies in bubble
formationsI, Bubble formation under constant flow conditions. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 1969, 24, 731.
(2) Satyanarayana, A.; Kumar, R.; Kuloor, N. R. Studies in bubble
formationsII, Bubble formation under constant pressure conditions. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 1969, 24, 749.
(3) Khurana, A. K.; Kumar, R. Studies in bubble formationsIII. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 1969, 24, 1711.
(4) Terasaka, K.; Tsuge, H. Bubble formation at a single orifice in non-
Newtonian liquids. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1991, 46, 85.
(5) Tsuge, H.; Nakajima, Y.; Terasaka, K. Behaviour of bubbles formed
from a submerged orifice under high system pressure. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1992,
47, 3273.
(6) Terasaka, K.; Tsuge, H. Bubble formation under constant flow
conditions. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1993, 48, 3417.
(7) Terasaka, K.; Tsuge, H. Bubble formation at orifice in viscoelastic
liquids. AIChE J. 1997, 43 (11), 2903.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 18, 2009 8735
(8) Tan, R. B. H.; Chen, W. B.; Tan, K. H. A nonspherical model for
bubble formation with liquid cross-flow. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2000, 55, 6259.
(9) Zhang, W.; Tan, R. B. H. A model for bubble formation and weeping
at a submerged orifice. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2000, 55, 6243.
(10) Chen, W. B.; Tan, R. B. H. Theoretical analysis of two phase bubble
formation in an immiscible liquid. AIChE J. 2003, 49, 1964.
(11) Kulkarni, A. A.; Joshi, J. B. Bubble formation and bubble rise
velocity in gas liquid systems: A review. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2005, 44,
5873.
(12) Quigley, C. J.; Johnson, A. I.; Harris, B. L. Size and mass transfer
studies of gas bubbles. Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp. Ser. 1955, 16, 31.
(13) Vasilev, A. S. Laws governing the outflow of a jet of gas into a
liquid. Theor. Found. Chem. Eng. 1970, 4 (5), 727.
(14) Datta, R. L.; Napier, D. H.; Newitt, D. M. The properties and
behaviour of gas bubbles formed at a circular orifice. Trans. Inst. Chem.
Eng. 1950, 28, 14.
(15) Benzing, R. A.; Mayers, J. E. Low-frequency bubble formation at
horizontal circular orifices. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1955, 47, 2087.
(16) Davidson, J. F.; Schuler, B. O. G. Bubble formation at an orifice
in a viscous fluid. Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 1960, 38, 144.
(17) Liow, J. L. Quasi-equilibrium bubble formation during top sub-
merged gas injection. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2000, 55, 4515.
(18) Hsu, S. H.; Lee, W. H.; Yang, Y. M.; Chang, C. H.; Maa, J. R.
Bubble formation at an orifice in surfactant solutions under constant flow
conditions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2000, 39, 1473.
(19) Martin, M.; Montes, F. J.; Galan, M. A. Numerical calculation of
shapes and detachment times of bubbles generated from a sieve plate. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 2006, 61, 363.
(20) Martin, M.; Montes, F. J.; Galan, M. A. On the influence of liquid
physical properties on bubble volumes and generation times. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 2006, 61, 5196.
(21) Gerlach, D.; Biswas, G.; Durst, F.; Kolobaric, V. Quasi-static bubble
formation under submerged orifices. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 2005, 48,
425.
(22) Gerlach, D.; Alleborn, N.; Buwa, V.; Durst, F. Numerical simulation
of periodic bubble formation at a submerged orifice with constant gas flow
rate. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007, 62, 2109.
(23) Buwa, V. V.; Gerlach, D.; Durst, F.; Schlucker, E. Numerical
simulation of bubble formation on submerged orifices: period-1 and period-2
bubbling regimes. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007, 62, 1719.
(24) Jamialahmadi, M.; Zehtaban, M. R.; Muller-Steinhagen, H.; Sarrafi,
A.; Smith, J. M. Study of bubble formation under constant flow conditions.
Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 2001, 79, 523.
(25) Das, A. K.; Das, P. K. Bubble evolution through submerged orifice
using smoothed particle hydrodynamics: Basic formulation and model
validation. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2009, 64, 2281.
(26) Lucy, L. B. A numerical approach to the testing of the fusion
process. Astron. J. 1977, 88, 1013.
(27) Monaghan, J. J. Smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Annu. ReV.
Astron. Astrophys. 1992, 30, 543.
(28) Liu, G. R.; Liu, M. B. Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamicssa mesh
free particle method; World Scientific: Singapore, 2003.
(29) Monaghan, J. J. Simulating free surface flows with SPH. J. Comput.
Phys. 1994, 110, 399.
(30) Morris, J. P.; Fox, J. P.; Yi, Z. Modeling low Reynolds number
incompressible flows using SPH. J. Comput. Phys. 1997, 136, 214.
(31) Kumar, R.; Kuloor, N. R. The formation of bubbles and drops.
AdV. Chem. Eng. 1970, 8, 255.
ReceiVed for reView March 3, 2009
ReVised manuscript receiVed July 23, 2009
Accepted July 28, 2009
IE900350H