SEMINAR NASIONAL ke-8 Tahun 2013 : Rekayasa Teknologi Industri dan Informasi

Pumping action mechanism due to a disturbance

wave (Fukano & Ousaka 1989), states that the gas In the CECM, the constant electric current is
flow over a disturbance wave will produce a circum- applied from a pair of electrodes, which will be
ferential pressure gradient caused by the variation of referred to as the power electrodes in the present
the wave height. paper. The locations of the sensor electrodes for
The mechanisms proposed by the former researchers detecting the time fluctuating hold-up are separated
by which the liquid film forms on the all surface of from the power electrodes. The distance between the
inner walls of the conduit, especially on the upper power electrodes must be considerably large and the
surface of pipe, are still debatable. This paper was, sensor electrodes are installed in between the power
therefore, prepared to contribute new fundamental electrodes. The axial distance between a pair of
data of liquid holdup for horizontal annular flow. sensor electrode is arbitrary, a few millimeters for
the measurement of a local value in some cases and
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY several hundreds of millimeters in other cases for a
The measurements of liquid holdup were space averaged value in a considerably long axial
carried out in the air-water horizontal flow rig length.
shown schematically in Figure 1. The test section is The CECM detects the liquid holdup based on
a 10 m long acrylic tube of 26 and 16 mm ID to the conductivity difference of two-phase flow com-
facilitate visual observation. Air enters the test ponents. The combined conductivity could be
section at one end from a compressed air supply. converted to liquid volume fraction in the conduit as
Water is injected through a porous tube wall section. electric voltage. The voltage drop at the sensor
The film thickness was measured at a distance of 5.5 electrodes are fed into high input impedance
m from the porous wall injector, thus giving a amplifier, so that the constant current source is not
developing length of 200 tube diameters. In view of disturbed by the presence of sensor electrodes.
the fact that water entered through a porous wall If the film thickness is very thin, the electric
section, it was felt that this length was sufficient for resistance becomes large while the electric current is
the flow to be fully developed. kept always constant in the CECM. As a result, the
10000
voltage drop becomes large. The thinner the liquid
x
Lamp
Separator
film thickness, the larger the output voltage. This
screen
Mixer
Air
means that the sensitivity to the film thickness
High

Flow Meter Flow Meter High

Speed
Camera
variation is higher in the case of the thinner film
Water

Valve Valve
impedance
amplifier thickness. Therefore, the CECM is better to be used
ADC Camera
Processor in the liquid film flow, such as annular flow.
PC
Ground
The range of liquid and gas superficial velo-
Air regulator

By-Pass valve
Kompressor
Compressor
+
- cities for this experiment are 0.05 to 0.2 m/s and 12
Constant current
power supply
Circulating
to 40 m/s, respectively. Under the combinations of
Water tank
pump
gas and liquid superficial velocities, the flow
Supply pump
regimes observed in this research are annular and
Figure 1. Experimental setup. transition from wavy to annular if plotted in
Mandhane map (Figure 3).
The air and water flow rate to the test section
was measured by rotameter bank. Constant-electric
current method (CECM) probes were used to
measure the liquid holdup at two positions
simultaneously (Figure 1). The probes were set in
acrylic resin blocks bored out to the same inner
diameter as the test section tube.
Constant current source

Nonconductive duct

Amplifier
5 mm 1 mm
Figure 3. Experimental matrix in
Mandhane map.

C D RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Flow transition
Amplifier
The flow transition from stratified to annular
Figure 2. CECM for measuring liquid holdup flow is interested to be investigated. Pipe diameter is

SEKOLAH TINGGI TEKNOLOGI NASIONAL, 14 Desember 2013 M 167

 SEMINAR NASIONAL ke-8 Tahun 2013 : Rekayasa Teknologi Industri dan Informasi

one of important factor in such flow transition. To
investigate the transition, visual observations were
carried out, i.e. observing the flow topology for the
identical gas and liquid superficial velocity for
different pipe diameters, 16 mm and 26 mm.
From visual observation, it is found that the
flow pattern at transition are different, even
observed at the same gas and liquid superficial
velocity, 12 m/s and 0.05 m/s, respectively. Figure 4
shows the comparison of flow pattern observed at 16
mm and 26 mm pipes.
then the two waves coalesce and usually continue
with the speed of the faster wave. This phenomenon
is called wave coalescence. In the other hand, the
break of a large wave into smaller waves is also
observed in this experiment. This phenomenon is
called wave breakup. The coalescence and breakup
of wave is illustrated in Figure 6.
air
disturbance wave interface ripple

FLOW

a.

Figure 4. Disturbance and ripple waves.

FLOW

b. Wave development and entrainment

Other phenomena observed in this experiment
Figure 3. Flow comparison for a. 16 mm pipe,
are wave development and entrainment, as shown in
b. 26 mm pipe.
As shown in Figure 3a, an annular flow pattern Figure 5. The transport of liquid film in the pipe
has been fully formed for pipe diameter of 16 mm. wall could be traced from the holdup signal. Figure
In the other hand, annular flow pattern has not been 5 shows the change of wave height measured by
fully formed at pipe diameter of 26 mm for the same sensor 1 and 2. The peak of the wave when sensed
gas and liquid superficial velocity. In this case, the by sensor 2 is higher than those of sensor 1. It means
liquid covers only the lower half of the inner pipe that the wave “grows” and the phenomenon is called
wall, while the upper part of the inner wall of pipe “wave development”. The reduction of wave height
remains dry. Figure 3, therefore, shows the when it is sensed by sensor 1 and then sensor 2 is a
importance of pipe diameter on the flow pattern. phenomenon called “entrainment”, in which a
portion of liquid in the wave crest is entrained when
high velocity of gas flows and shear the gas-liquid
Disturbance wave and ripple wave
The existence of disturbance wave and ripple interface at wave crest.
wave in annular flow are observed in this expe-
riment. Figure 4 shows such phenomena compared
to the visual observation using video camera. The
ripple wave could be captured by CECM sensor as
well as large disturbance wave. The wave is iden-
tified when a liquid wave with high amplitude flows
through the sensor.
Disturbance waves are large amplitude roll
waves that are responsible for the entrainment of Figure 5. Wave development and entrainment.
liquid droplets into the gas core. The base liquid film
under these waves is generally much higher than
under ripple waves. Ripples are the low amplitude
surface waves which create interfacial “roughness”
and are responsible for the pressure drop.
Although the waves play an important role in
the interfacial dynamics, not enough is known about
how they form and how they they influence other
aspects like droplet entrainment, gas and liquid Figure 6. Wave coalescence and break up.
turbulence, and interfacial shear (Rodriguez, 2009).
Wave velocity
Wave coalescence and breakup The signal sensed by the downstream sensor
The disturbance waves tend to move with constant (sensor 2) is delayed by several milliseconds
velocity and if faster wave overtakes a slower wave, compared to those of sensor 1, depends on the

SEKOLAH TINGGI TEKNOLOGI NASIONAL, 14 Desember 2013 M 168

 SEMINAR NASIONAL ke-8 Tahun 2013 : Rekayasa Teknologi Industri dan Informasi

velocity of the wave. If the time delay and the number decreases with the increasing of liquid
distance between the sensors are known, then the superficial velocity. This is different from the results
wave velocity could be calculated. To determine the of this work, in which the wave number increases
time delay, a cross correlation function is used. with the increase of liquid superficial velocity.
6
Figure 7 shows the result of cross-correlation This work: Fukano et al. (1983),
JL [m/s] D=26mm,
function of holdup signal sensed by sensor 1 and 2 5 JL=0.2m/s
JL=0.1m/s
for gas superficial velocity, JG, of 40 m/s and liquid 0.05
JL=0.06m/s

Wave Velocity [m/s]

superficial velocity, JL, of 0.05 m/s. 4 0.1
0.2
From Figure 7, the cross correlation shows that 3
time lag for the holdup signal sensed by sensor 1 and
2 is 0.048 s. The wave velocity increases with the 2

increasing of gas superficial velocity. It could be

1
described as follows: at the higher the air velocity,
the force that shear the gas-liquid interface is also 0
higher, resulting in higher liquid film flowing in the 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

pipe. J G [m/s]
Figure 8. Comparison of wave velocity obtained
from this work and those obtained by Fukano et
al. (1983) and Paras and Karabelas (1991).

25 JL=0.05 m/s
JL=1.0 m/s
20 JL=0.2 m/s
Paras, JL=0.06 m/s
Wave frequency

Paras JL=0.09 m/s

15
Paras JL=0.2 m/s

10

0
Figure 7. Cross-correlation function of holdup 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
JG [m/s]
signal JG = 40 m/s and JL = 0.05 m/s.
Figure 9. Wave frequency vs gas
superficial velocity.
The experiment of Jayanti et al. (1990) with 32
mm ID pipe showed that the wave velocity ranged
The effect of diameter on the wave frequency
from 1.9 to 4.5 m/s for liquid superficial velocity of
has also been observed in this experiment. The pipe
0.08 – 0.145 m/s and gas superficial velocity of 14 –
diameter has a significant effect on the wave
26 m/s. Using 50.8 mm ID pipe, Paras and
number, as could be seen in Figure 10. It is shown
Karabelas (1991) showed that the wave velocity was
that the smaller pipe gives the larger wave number.
in the range of 1.6 to 3.6 m/s for liquid superficial
Schubring and Shedd (2011) reported that for pipe
velocity of 0.02 – 0.06 m/s and gas superficial
diameter 26.3 mm, the wave frequency ranges from
velocity of 31 – 66 m/s. Figure 8 shows the compa-
10 to 15 for the same range of gas superficial
rison of wave velocity obtained from this work and
velocity. However, when the gas velocity is in-
those obtained by Jayanti et al. (1990) and Paras and
creased to 70 m/s, the wave number could reach 40.
Karabelas (1991).
For pipe diameter of 15.1 mm and the same range of
Schubring and Shedd (2008) have reported that
gas superficial velocity, the wave number ranges
the wave velocity for horizontal annular flow is 2.4
from 15-30, similar to those obtained from this
to 6 m/s for their experiment with 26.3 mm ID pipe
work.
using liquid superficial velocity of 0.04 to 0.39 m/s
and 32 to 91 m/s. For the smaller pipe (8.8 and 15.1
Liquid holdup
mm), the wave velocities will be higher.
The liquid holdup obtained from the experiment
with 26 mm pipe is compared to the result of
Wave frequency/wave number
previous researches. The comparison is done for 3
The wave frequency or wave number could be deter-
variations of liquid superficial velocity 0.05, 0.1,
mined from the frequency corresponding to the
and 0.2 m/s. The comparisons are presented in
largest peak of power spectral density function.
Figure 11, 12, and 13.
From Figure 9, it is shown that wave frequency
As could be seen in Figure 11, the holdup obtained
increases with increasing of gas superficial velocity.
from this work is smaller than those obtained by
Paras and Karabelas (1991) also stated that the
Bestion et al. (1985) and Fukano and Ousaka (1988).
higher gas superficial velocity, the higher the wave
This work is close to those obtained by Spedding
number. However, they showed that the wave

SEKOLAH TINGGI TEKNOLOGI NASIONAL, 14 Desember 2013 M 169

 SEMINAR NASIONAL ke-8 Tahun 2013 : Rekayasa Teknologi Industri dan Informasi

and Chen (1984), Luninski et al. (1983) and
Hamersma and Hart (1987).
For two other liquid superficial velocities, the
correlations show the similar result, as shown in
Figure 12 and 13. Compared to the results of Bestion
et al. (1985) and Fukano and Ousaka (1988), the
results of this work are smaller. However, this work
has a good agreement with the correlations of
Spedding and Chen (1984), Chisholm (1973),
Luninski et al. (1983) and Hamersma and Hart
(1987).
velocity of 0.05 m/s and pipe diameter of 16 mm,
the liquid holdup ranges from 0.038 to 0.079. For 26
mm pipe, the liquid holdup ranges from 0.011 to
0.041. Therefore, for the larger diameter, the liquid
holdup will be smaller. If the liquid superficial
velocity is increased to 0.01 m/s, the maximum
liquid holdup for 16 mm and 26 mm pipes are 0.11
and 0.06, respectively. If the liquid superficial
velocity is further increased to 0.2 m/s, the maxi-
mum liquid holdup are 0.15 and 0.09 for pipe
diameter of 16 and 26 mm, respectively.
From the detail observation of Figure 14, it is
shown that the liquid superficial velocity affects the
liquid holdup significantly. For both diameters
observed, the effect of liquid superficial velocity is
very clear at low gas superficial velocity for 16 mm
pipe. However, for 26 mm pipe the strong
correlation of liquid holdup and liquid superficial
velocity could be found in all range of gas
superficial velocity.
0.2
This work JL=0.2m/s
Fukano & Ousaka, 1988
0.15 Spedding & Chen, 1984
Bestion et al., 1985
Chisholm, 1973
Hamersma & Hart, 1987
0.1
This work (2)
ƞ [-]

0.05

0
0 10 20 JG [m/s] 30 40 50

Figure 13. Comparison of liquid holdup for

Figure 10. Effects of diameter and J G on the wave liquid superficial velocity 0.2 m/s.
0.1

number. 0.08
JL = 0.05 m/s

16 mm
0.06
0.2 26 mm
ƞ [-]

This work JL=0.05 m/s

0.04
Fukano & Ousaka, 1988, JL=0.06m/s
0.15 0.02
Spedding&Chen, 1984

Bestion et al., 1985 0

0 10 20 30 40 50
0.1 Chisholm, 1973 JG [m/s]
0.12
ƞ [-]

Hamersma & Hart, 1987

0.1
JL = 0.1 m/s
0.05
0.08 16 mm
ƞ [-]

0.06 26 mm

0 0.04
0 10 20 JG [m/s] 30 40 50 0.02

Figure 11. Comparison of liquid holdup for liquid 0

0 10 20 30 40 50
superficial velocity 0.05 m/s. JG [m/s]
0.2
This work JL=0.1m/s 0.16
Fukano & Ousaka, 1988 0.14
JL = 0.2 m/s
0.15 Spedding & Chen, 1984
0.12
Luninski et al., 1983 16 mm
0.1
Bestion et al., 1985
ƞ [-]

26 mm
Chisholm, 1973 0.08
0.1
Hamersma & Hart, 1987 0.06
ƞ [-]

This work (2) 0.04

0.05 0.02

0
0 10 20 30 40 50

0 JG [m/s]
0 10 20 JG [m/s] 30 40 50
Figure 14. The effect of diameter and
Figure 12. Comparison of liquid holdup for liquid JG on the liquid holdup.
superficial velocity 0.1 m/s.
CONCLUSION
The effect of diameter and gas superficial velo- Experiment of air-water horizontal annular flow
city on the liquid holdup of horizontal annular flow have been carried out using 16 and 26 mm pipe and
is presented in Figure 14. For liquid superficial

SEKOLAH TINGGI TEKNOLOGI NASIONAL, 14 Desember 2013 M 170

 SEMINAR NASIONAL ke-8 Tahun 2013 : Rekayasa Teknologi Industri dan Informasi
both the transition of wavy-annular and fully
developed annular flow have been successfully
established.
The common phenomena of annular flow such
as ripple waves, disturbance waves, gas core, gas-
liquid interface, and asymmetric liquid film due to
gravity effect could be observed both visually and
using liquid holdup signal.
The wave velocity and wave number increase
with the increasing of gas superficial velocity. In
addition, the liquid holdup increases with the
increasing of liquid superficial velocity and
decreasing of gas superficial velocity.
REFERENCES
1. Bilicki Z. and J. Kestin, “Flow in geothermal
wells: Part IV. Transition criteria for two-phase
flow patterns”, Report No. GEOFL0/6 US
Department of Energy, December 1980.
2. Butterworth, “An analysis of film flow and its
application to condensation in a horizontal tube”.
Int. J. Multiphase Flow, Vol. 1, pp. 671-682,
1974.
3. Chermoshentseva A. and A. Shulyupin,
“Annular-mist flows of steam-water geothermal
mixture”, Proceedings, Twenty-Seventh Work-
shop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering
Stanford University, Stanford, California,
January 28-30, 2002
4. Flores, A.G., K.E. Crowe, and P. Griffith, “Gas-
phase secondary flow in horizontal, stratified and
annular two-phase flow”, Int. J. Multiphase Flow
Vol. 21. No. 2, 1995.
5. Fukano, T. and A. Ousaka, "Distribution of film
thickness in horizontal and near-horizontal gas-
liquid annular flows," Int. J. Multiphase Flow,
15, No.3, pp.403-419, (1989).
6. Fukano, T. and A. Ousaka, A., “Air-water two-
phase annular flow in near-horizontal tubes”,
JSME International Journal, Series II, Vol. 31,
No. 3, 1988.
7. Fukano, T., “Measurement of time varying
thickness of liquid film flowing with high speed
gas flow by CECM”, Nuc. Eng. & Design 184,
63–377, 1998.
8. Hamersma, P. J. and J. Hart (1987). “A Pressure
Drop Correlation for Gas/Liquid Pipe Flow with
a Small Liquid Holdup”. Chem. Eng. Sci. 42:
1187-1196.
9. Jayanti, Hewitt, White, “Time-dependent
behavior of the liquid film in horizontal annular
flow”, Int. J. Multiphase Flow Vol. 16, No. 6, pp.
1097-1116, 1990.
10. Karamarakar, M. and P. Cheng. “A Theoretical
Assessment of James' Method for the Deter-
mination of Geothermal Wellbore Discharge
Characteristics”. Report for US Department of
Energy under Contract W-7466-ENG-48,
November1980.
SEKOLAH TINGGI TEKNOLOGI NASIONAL, 14 Desember 2013
11. Pàlsson, H., E.S. Bergthòrsson, O.P. Pàlsson,
“Estimation and validation of models two phase
flow from geothermal wells”. 10th International
Symposium on District Heating and Cooling
September 3-5, 2006
12. Paras and Karabelas, "Properties of the liquid
layer in horizontal annular flow," Int. J.
Multiphase Flow, 17, No.4, pp.439-454, 1991.
13. Pletcher, R. H. & McManus, H. N. “The fluid
dynamics of three-dimensional liquid films with
free surface shear: a finite difference approach”.
In Proc. 9th Mid-Western Mechanics Conf.,
Wisc, 1965.
14. Rodriguez, J.M., “Numerical simulation of two-
phase annular flow”, Thesis for Doctor of
Philosophy, Faculty of Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute, 2009.
15. Russell and D.E. Lamb, "Flow mechanism of
two-phase annular flow," Can. J. Chem. Eng., 17,
No.43, pp.237-245, 1965.
16. Schubring, T.A. Shedd, “A model for pressure
loss, film thickness, and entrained fraction for
gas–liquid annular flow”, International Journal of
Heat and Fluid Flow 32 (2011) 730–739.
17. Schubring, T.A. Shedd, “Wave behavior in
horizontal annular air–water flow”, International
Journal of Multiphase Flow 34 (2008) 636–646.
18. Shedd, T.A., 2001. “Characteristics of the liquid
film in horizontal two-phase flow”, Thesis for
Doctor of Phil. in Mech. Eng. the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
19. Shulyupin A., “Some aspects of steam-water
flow simulation in geothermal wells”,
Proceedings, Twenty-First Workshop on Geo-
thermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford Uni-
versity, Stanford, California, January 22-24,
I996.
20. Spedding, P.L and J.J.J. Chen, 1984.”Holdup in
two-phase flow”. International Journal of Multi-
phase Flow 10(3): 307-339.
21. Weidong, Fangde, Rongxian, Lixing, “Expe-
rimental study on the characteristics of liquid
layer and disturbance waves in horizontal
annular flow”, Journal of Thermal Science, Vol.
8, No. 4, 1999, pp. 235-241.
M 171