Investigating the Behaviour of Air–Water Upward and Downward Flows: Are You Seeing What I Am Seeing?

Mukhtar Abdulkadir, Olumayowa T. Kajero, Fawziyah O. Olarinoye, Dickson O. Udebhulu, Donglin Zhao, Aliyu M. Aliyu and Abdelsalam Al-Sarkhi
Additional contact information
Mukhtar Abdulkadir: Department of Chemical Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Minna PMB 65, Nigeria
Olumayowa T. Kajero: Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK
Fawziyah O. Olarinoye: Department of Petroleum Engineering, African University of Science and Technology, Garki, Abuja PMB 681, Nigeria
Dickson O. Udebhulu: Department of Mines and Petroleum Engineering, University of Sao Paolo, São Paulo 05508-010, Brazil
Donglin Zhao: Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, School of Engineering, London South Bank University, 103 Borough Road, London SE1 0AA, UK
Aliyu M. Aliyu: Department of Engineering and Technology, School of Computing and Engineering, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK
Abdelsalam Al-Sarkhi: Mechanical Engineering Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia

Energies, 2021, vol. 14, issue 21, 1-24

Abstract: Understanding the behaviour of gas–liquid flows in upward and downward pipe configurations in chemical, petroleum, and nuclear industries is vital when optimal design, operation, production, and safety are of paramount concern. Unfortunately, the information concerning the behaviour of such flows in large pipe diameters is rare. This article aims to bridge that gap by reporting air–water upward and downward flows in 127 mm internal diameter pipes using advanced conductance ring probes located at two measurement locations. The liquid and gas flow rates are 0.021 to 0.33 m/s and 3.52 to 16.1 m/s, correspondingly, covering churn and annular flows. To achieve the desired objectives, several parameters, probability density function (PDF), power spectral density (PSD), Slippage Number ( S N ), drift velocity ( U gd ), and distribution coefficient ( C 0 ) were employed. The flow regimes encountered in the two pipe configurations were distinguished employing a flow regime map available in the literature and statistical analysis. The obtained results were supported by visual inspection. The comparison between the present study against reported studies reveals the same tendency for the measured experimental data. The Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) method within 4% was utilized in recommending the best void fraction prediction correlation for the downward and upward flows.

Keywords: air–water system; downward flow; upward flow; large-diameter; liquid fraction; conductance ring probes (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/7071/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/7071/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:21:p:7071-:d:667404

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().