[1]“cause of Fiber Length Distribution on Gas Holdup in a Cocurrent Gas-Liquid-Fiber Bubble Column,” Chemical Engineering Science. 62. 2006 pp. 1408-1417. An experimental investigation is reported on the cause of fiber length distribution on gas holdup in a cocurrent air–wet–fiber bubblecolumn. Different combinations of 1 and 3mm Rayon fibers are used to reproduce different fiber length distributions. At a constant totalfiber mass fraction gas holdup generally decreases with increasing crowd fraction of the 3mm Rayon fiber while other conditions remainconstant. Crowding factors estimated using four different methods (Nc = Nc,A. Nc. Nc,L and Nc,M) and the parameters Nc,L^0.8*Nf^0.2 andNc,M^0.8*Nf^0.2 are tested on their performance to quantify the overall effects of fiber mass calculate and fiber length and its distribution on gasholdup. Nc,L^0.8Nf^0.2 and Nc,M^0.8*Nf^0.2 provide the best characterization of the fiber effects on gas holdup in the cocurrent air–wet–fiberbubble column. The crowding calculate estimated using the model-based add up fiber length (Nc,M) also provides a good characterization andis better than the other crowding factor definitions.[2]“Estimation of Gas Holdup via Pressure Difference Measurements in a Cocurrent breathe Column,” International Journal of Multiphase Flow. 32. 2006 pp. 850-863. Estimating gas holdup via compel difference measurements is a simple and low-cost non-invasive technique to chew over gasholdup in bubble columns. It is usually used in a manner where the wall shear stress cause is neglected termed Method II inthis paper. In cocurrent breathe columns when the liquid velocity is high or the fluid is highly viscous protect clip evince maybe significant and Method II may result in substantial error. Directly including the wall clip stress call in the determinationof gas holdup (Method I) requires knowledge of two-phase protect clip evince models and usually requires the solution ofnon-linear equations. A new gas holdup estimation method (Method III) via differential compel measurements for cocurrentbubble columns is proposed in this paper. This method considers the protect clip evince influences on gas holdup valueswithout calculating the wall clip evince. A detailed analysis shows that Method III always results in a smaller gas holduperror than Method II and in many cases the error is significantly smaller than that of Method II. The applicability ofMethod III in measuring gas holdup in a cocurrent air–wet–fiber breathe column is examined. Analysis based on experimentaldata shows that with Method III accurate gas holdup measurements can be obtained while measurement error issignificant when Method II is used for some operational conditions.[3] “A Gas Holdup copy for Cocurrent Air-Water-Fiber Bubble Columns,” Chemical Engineering Science. 61. 2006. 3299-3312. A gas holdup model is developed for cocurrent air–wet–fiber breathe column flows using the drift–move model. The copy coefficients areestimated using a nonlinear least form method and systematically acquired experimental data. The copy correlates gas holdup with superficialgas and liquid velocity and fiber write and mass fraction. The copy reproduces most experimental data within ±10% error and all but 3 ofthe 3839 experimental data points within ±15% error. It also accurately predicts air–water breathe column gas holdup data; these data werenot used in estimating the copy coefficients. The physical implications of the copy coefficients are also discussed.[4]“Quantifying the Fibre cause on Gas Holdup in a Cocurrent Air-Water-Fibre breathe Column,” The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering. 84. 2006 pp. 198-208. Fibre type and crowd fraction undergo signifi cant effects on gas holdup in gas-liquid-fi bre breathe columns. An experimental study is introduced toidentify a parameter that simultaneously characterizes the fi bre type and mass fraction effects on gas holdup in gas-liquid-fi bre bubble columns. This parameter satisfi es the following instruct: when this parameter is constant the gas holdup turn in different fi bre suspensions is generallysimilar at most operating conditions. A method is proposed to identify a characterization parameter by combining the crowding factor and fi brenumber density. The identifi ed parameter is Ic=1n(Nc^0.8*Nf^0.2). This parameter can be used to copy gas holdup in gas-liquid-fi bre breathe columnsand quantitatively compare the fi bre effects in different fi bre suspensions.[5] “Similitude Analysis for Gas-Liquid-Fiber Flows in Cocurrent Bubble Columns,” 2nd fit U. S.-European Fluids Engineering Summer Meeting. July 17-20. 2006. Miami. FL. USA. Gas-liquid-fiber systems are different from conventional gas-liquid-solid systems in that the solid material (i e. fiber) is flexible has a large aspect ratio and forms flocs or networks when its mass calculate is above a critical value. With its wide application to the pulp and cover industry it is important to investigate the hydrodynamics of gas-liquid-fiber systems. In this paper. 19 parameters that affect gas holdup in gas-liquid-fiber bubble columns are critically examined and then a dimensional analysis based on the Buckingham Pi Theorem is used to derive the dimensionless parameters governing gas-liquid-fiber breathe column hydrodynamics. Seven dimensionless parameters that are related to the fiber effects on gas holdup are further analyzed and a single dimensionless parameter combining these dimensionless parameters is derived based on a compel analysis and experimental results. This dimensionless parameter is shown to be sufficient to quantify the influence of fiber on gas holdup in gas-liquid-fiber cocurrent bubble columns. It also reduces the number of parameters needed in correlating experimental gas holdup data in gas-liquid-fiber breathe columns.[6] “Gas-Liquid-Fiber Flow in a Cocurrent Bubble Column,” AIChE Journal. 51. 2005 pp. 2665-2674. Effects of superficial gas velocity (Ul
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://tangcz.blogspot.com/2007/09/my-papers-about-multiphase-flow.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|