This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

PRE-PROCESSING SOLVING POST-PROCESSING

Commercial CFD codes

• • •

Domain definition Mesh generation Definition of teh physical model (e.g. governing equations, boundary and inlet conditions).

1

2

Pre-processing: mesh generation

**Pre-processing: definition of the physical model
**

FLOW TYPE fluid/solid steady/transient; laminar/turbulent isotherm/non isotherm single/multiphase reactive/non reactive COMBUSTION MODEL Eddy dissipation FinitE rate chemistry Finite rate chemistry/eddy dissipation Laminar flamelet with PDF BOUNDARY CONDITIONS APPROACH DNS RANS LES RADIATION MODEL Rosseland P1 Montecarlo Discrete Transform

TURBULENCE MODEL Zero equation k-ε RNG k-ε k-ω SSG Reynolds Stress QI Reynolds Stress Reynolds Stress Ecc.

4

Solving Post-processing 5 6 Vane type eliminator • Objectives Some examples O&G – Prediction of removal efficiency of a vane-type separator with a commercial CFD code (Ansys CFX): comparison between CFD and experimental data – CFD helps designing and investigating new configurations 8 .

unsteady forces (virtual mass and Basset history). modified EIM (implemented with a subroutine in Fortran language) – – – – – – – 9 droplet–droplet interaction is negligible. re-entrainment not taken into account. whereas ug’ and Nr are computed at the end of the eddy interaction. droplet–film interaction at the walls is negligible. Eddy lengthscale Eddy timescale The droplet sees a gas velocity • • Nr is a random number taken from a Gaussian (normal) distribution with zero mean and standard deviation equal to 1. they do not rebound but are removed immediately from the walls. Ug is usually updated when.000 cells) • DROPLETS – drag is considered – turbulent dispersion is cosidered through • • original Eddy Interaction Model (EIM. turbulence levels and eddy dissipation rates.Vane type eliminator: computational domain and grid • Computational domain: – 2D Vane type eliminator: physical model • • • Euler-Lagrangian approach (Lagrangian tracking) One-way coupling GAS PHASE: – turbulence model • • standard k-ε (STD k-ε) shear Stress Transport (SST) • Computational grid: – Structured (34. pressure gradient and lift forces are negligible. once the droplets collide with the walls. Such characteristics have to be used to reconstruct a fictitious turbulent flowfield seen by the droplets and responsible for the turbulent dispersion. available in the code). Injections from 1000 locations 10 Vane Type Eliminator: Eddy Interaction Model for turbulent dispersion • • Droplet equation of motion The instantaneous gas velocity Vane Type Eliminator: Eddy Interaction Model for turbulent dispersion • • • • • The continuous phase simulation provides the mean velocity.ever the droplet crosses a grid element. droplets behave as hard spheres. .

whereas the STD k-ε describes such regions as just low velocity regions.Vane type eliminator: flow field Turbulence model: STD k-ε Turbulence model: SST Vane type eliminator: particle trajectories Dp = 3 μm no turbulent dispersion Dp = 6 μm original EIM SST model describes in more detail the recirculation regions near drainage channels. 13 varied EIM 14 Vane type eliminator: removal efficiency Vane type eliminator: removal efficiency Turbulence model: STD kε Turbulence model: SST 15 16 .

and vortex core characteristics of a cyclone separator. causing • problems downstream? • Is the slug catcher long enough to promote stratification and deal with the largest • slug volumes? • Will excessive gas quantities enter slug catcher. does the liquid overflow into the gas pipe. Calculated results for pressure drop agree only moderately well with the experimental data. and Reynolds stress model. transient • characteristics of the slug catcher at different flow rates and gas/liquid ratios • Detailed understanding of slug catcher performance and operational limits 19 20 . spiral shape.Vane type eliminator: removal efficiency • Cyclones Many studies have demonstrated that CFD cannot produce a very accurate description of the flow field because of difficulties in modeling the phenomena occurring in swirling flow. Size distribution after vane type eliminator bends • • 17 18 Cyclones Hydrocyclone flow field Slug catchers Problem: • Slug catchers are designed to stratify “slug flow” • The gas/liquid ratio will change over the lifespan of a well. requiring flaring? • What will happen if I double the flowrate? • What’s the force loading on the structure? Solution: • CFD can be used to simulate the multiphase. The experimental pressure drop was larger than the calculated pressure drop by 60%.g. Recently. large eddy simulation LES was used to predict the unsteady. respectively. and flow • rates will vary during different operation regimes (e. Results are encouarging but LES is computationally expensive. RNG k-e . and 16% for standard k-e . 15%. cleaning) Questions: • At high flow rates.

Slug catchers: boundary conditions Slug catchers: computational domain and grid 21 22 Slug catchers: physical/solver model Slug catchers: animation of oil 23 Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas 24 .

no reactions CFD code: CFX 5. transient simulations Eulerian-Eulerian model Multiphase flows (G/S): computational domain and grid • 2D domain – structured grid – 14.7 by Ansys Inc.220 cells 3D domain – unstructured grid – 600.Multiphase flows (G/S) • • • • Dense G/S flows (fluidised beds). ∂ρ k ε k + ∂ρ k ε kU s = 0 ∂t ∂t ∂ k = s.000 cells – too CPU time r continuity eq. g r r r 3D simulations on a simplified (shorter) geometry momentum ∂t [ρ g ε gU g ]+ ∇ ⋅ (ε g ρ gU gU g ) = −∇P + ρ g g + β (U s − U g ) + ∇ε gτ g r r r r r r ∂ ρ s ε sU s + ∇ ⋅ ρ s ε sU sU s = ε s (ρ s − ρ g )g + β U g − U s − G∇ε g + ∇ε s τs ∂t r r r [ ] ( ) ( ) IMPORTANT: CFX neglects the solid stress tensor τs Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas (simplified Gidaspow model) 25 Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas 26 Multiphase flows (G/S): solid volume fraction sand volumetric fraction at different t ds = 200 µm ug = 1.5 m/s Bubbling Fluidised Bed Multiphase flows (G/S): solid volume fraction sand volumetric fraction at different t ds = 200 µm ug = 2 m/s Circulating Fluidised Bed core annulus regime Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas 27 Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas 28 .

x ∂ε s ∂ε s ∂y ∂ε s ∂z + ∂x + comp x = µ s ∂z ∂y ∂x ∂ U s . • Can be CFD used as single tool? CFD capability and drawbacks? • • • • Flares: physical model Subsonic flow fictitious release section Stationary flow RANS Euler-Lagrangian approach with two-way coupling Gas-liquid mixtures: – Hydrocarbons are represented with C1-CX mixtures – The liquid phase (oil) is represented with one hydrocarbon of equal molecular weight • The oil is assumed to be 100% volatile • Evaporation is modelled through Antoine equation 31 32 . • Advection and diffusion equations used far away (plume behaviour).x ∂ U s .y ∂ U s . • Dedicated radiation models for blowout/flare scenarios.z ∂ε s ∂ε s ∂ε s ∂x ∂y ∂z + + comp z = µ s ∂x ∂y ∂z Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas Advanced Gidaspow model: larger bed expansion 29 30 Flares Motivation: • Conventional approaches for blowouts and flares: • Fluid dynamics used near the release section (jet behaviour).z ∂U s.z ∂U s.x ∂ U s .y ∂ U s .Multiphase flows (G/S): advanced Gidaspow model for particle-particle treatment ∂ ρ g ε s U s + ∇ ⋅ (ρ sε s U s U s ) = ε s (ρ s − ρ g )g + β (U g − U s ) − G∇ε g + ∇ε sτ s ∂t Multiphase flows (G/S): comparison of simplified and advanced models for particle-particle treatment simplified model (available in CFX) implemented model [ ] solid stress tensor 2 τ s = 2 ε s µ s ∇ SU s − ε s µ s ∇U s I 3 ∇ SU s = 1 ∇U s + ∇U sT 2 [ ] ∂ U s .y ∂ε s ∂ε s ∂ε s ∂x ∂y ∂z + + comp y = µ s ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂U s.

1982) – Soot radiation properties from Mie-Scatter theory 33 Flares 200 m 80 m Vertical single-phase Horizontal two-phase 34 Flares 35 .Flares: physical model Buoyancy Turbulence model – k-ε model with Cε1 = 1. 2-step mechanism by Tesner et al. C4H10 oxidations: Eddy Dissipation Model.6 (Morse. C3H8. 1-step global mechanism – prompt and thermal NO formation : Arrhenius integrated with PDF of T – soot formation/oxidation: Eddy Dissipation Concept. C2H6. (1971) Radiation model – P1 (spherical harmonics) – Sensitivity analysis: Discrete Ordinate and Discrete Transfer Spectral model – WSGG (Smith et al. 1977) – Sensitivity analysis: RNG and standard k-ε models Combustion model and kinetic scheme – CH4.

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- rr779
- CFD Application in Fixed Bed Reactor Internals
- Ying_2011_a
- Introduction to CFD
- 10676-37401-1-PB
- ME 820- Course Plan
- CFD Fluent
- Fluent Nov 2003
- Assessment of Particle Tracking Models for Dispersed Particle Laden Flows Implemented in OpenFOAM and ANSYS FLUENT
- odenthal-2010-tundish-cfd
- Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics
- turbcfd2
- Full Text 01
- APS05cbvjmm
- 29-03-2011CFD Modelling by DHI SoQ
- Analysis of the Flow Around a Cruise Ferry Hull by the Means of CFD
- commercial cfd codes
- Urban Areas
- CFD Lecture
- Apsley-Turbulence modelling in CFD
- Hazardous Gas Dispersion
- CFD Background
- Ha Midi Pour Abstract
- Statement of Qualifications-CFD
- Comparison of CFD Simulation of a Hyundai I20 Model with Four Different Turbulence Models
- Project
- 49
- CFD Prediction of Cooling Tower Drift
- Workshop CFD
- CPD Advanced Methods in CFD, September 2015, The University of Manchester
- Introduction to CFD - Examples

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd