
[Sponsors] 
November 5, 2009, 05:01 

#21 
Member
Shane
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
Thanks Dr. Alberto
(I am new to CFD and hence please bear with me if I ask some very stupid/silly question(s). Thanks for help in references. All three references are of "DIRECT" help for my project. Katerina Mousa gave some insight into role of bubbles in bubbleliquid CFD. She addressed nicely.) 1) Your feedback on variable density is highly appreciated. I am working on Molten Salt + Gaseous systems. Yes molten salt density will be a function of temperature and system will have a temeprature gradient( around 200 degree from top to bottom.) I should have experimental data ready in one years(once our prototype system is ready). 2) Regarding mass transfer equations, I am trying to take one step at a time(being new to CFD). I believe it will be highly complex to develop mass transfer equations. Three to Four variables will be there i) Density(variable density along the height of the chamber) ii) Solubility of gases in the system will be temeprature dependent. Also it will not be linear. iii) To keep the puping load low, high heat transfer, bubble size is important. I need to work below turbulent velocity. Gas velocity will be pretty low and molten system will flow under gravity from bottom to top and vice versa. Temperature gradient will be a continuous feature of the system. iv) It is assumed system is not stirred. v) Freezing of system is of paramount importance to use Latent Heat. However, to include Latent Heat, that will be be distant away for me. Thanks sircorp. 

November 5, 2009, 12:14 

#22  
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
Very happy to be of some help!
Quote:
Best, 

November 5, 2009, 17:41 

#23  
Member
Shane
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
Quote:
Thanks Dr. Alberto I am going through the recommonded study. I am new to CFD and may ask very basic questions time to time. I did answer this email earlier but it seems it ended in separate forum. Sircorp 

November 5, 2009, 17:50 

#24  
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
Quote:
Best, 

November 6, 2009, 03:57 
TwoPhaseEulerFoam Documentation

#25 
Member
Shane
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
Thanks Alberto
The article by Jeong and Park , "A semiimplicit numerical scheme for transient twophase flows on unstructured grids" has helped me enormously. I have started going through the other cited references. As per project, I MUST use Fluent and TRNSYS together to model the system. sircorp 

November 6, 2009, 10:18 

#26  
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
Quote:
Best, 

November 19, 2009, 04:57 

#27 
New Member
xiang chai
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 7 
hello Alberto
I am interested in the solution algorithme in twoPhaseEulerFoam. but it really confuses me. In the Ueqn.H, the l.h.s of the momentum equation for phase A is (scalar(1) + Cvm*rhob*beta/rhoa)* ( fvm::ddt(Ua) + fvm::div(phia, Ua, "div(phia,Ua)")  fvm::Sp(fvc::div(phia), Ua) )  fvm::laplacian(nuEffa, Ua) + fvc::div(Rca) + fvm::div(phiRa, Ua, "div(phia,Ua)")  fvm::Sp(fvc::div(phiRa), Ua) + (fvc::grad(alpha)/(fvc::average(alpha) + scalar(0.001)) & Rca) what's meaning of this term " (scalar(1) + Cvm*rhob*beta/rhoa) "? After reading the Ph.D thesis of Henrik Rusche, I still can’t find any term which is similar to “(scalar(1)+Cvm*rhob*alpha/rhob)”. I am new to twofluid method, please bear with me if this question is silly. Thank you. Chai 

November 20, 2009, 08:58 
Bugs in twoPhaseEulerFoam

#28 
New Member
Nicoleta Scurtu
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 7 
Hi,
by reading the Master thesis of Juho Peltola I understand why the twoPhaseEulerFoam with using the kinetic theory for granular flows gives unphysical results. It seems that Juho introduces some modifications of the code. My question is in what way the modified twoPhaseEulerFoam is accessible for OpenFoam users. Best, Nicoleta 

November 20, 2009, 10:26 

#29 
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
It is simply a way to rewrite the equation. If you set Cvm = 0, you get the momentum equation without virtual mass effect, while if you have Cvm != 0, you include the virtual mass effect.
Best, 

November 20, 2009, 23:57 

#30 
Member
Shane
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
For those who are for a Learning Phase, an exceptionally good reading is "Dynamic Simulation of dispersed gasliquid twophase flow using discrete bubble model". by Delnoij and Lammers et al.
(I am also new to CFD and is trying to raise my head above water). Thanks to Alberto's help I am able to make some ground. 

November 21, 2009, 00:31 

#31  
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
Quote:
For Nicoleta, if you are interested in a partial description of the numerical methodology used in bubbleFoam/twoPhaseEulerFoam, and in particular on the phase intensive formulation of the momentum equation, you can read the following paper:
The details of the implementation in OpenFOAM(r) are described in an internal report of OpenCFD(r) and are summed up in Henrik Rusche PhD thesis, where you can also find the reference to the internal report I am referring to. The basic ideas behind the solution algorithm are the following
Side note: all this was explained in one contribution to the documentation project Best, 

November 21, 2009, 21:29 

#32 
Member
Shane
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
Confusion:
1) As per my reading over the last few months I was made to believe that in gasliquid fluidized bed, smaller the bubble particle size, more the heat transfer between gas and liquid(keeping velocity, density and other parameters same). 2) Also with the increase of the pressure(I mean in pressurised fluidized bed), the bubble size of gas decreases with the increase of the pressure and limits to maximum 6 MPa above which no change oserved in heat transfer coefficient between gas and liquid. 3) The effect of Viscosity is not clear to me at all. BIG CONFUSION. According to Xukun Luo et al in "High presure three phase fluidization system declares other way i.e. Heat Transfer decreases with increase of Viscosity".(A similar claim made by Xukun Luo et al on page 2433 penultimate paragraph 

April 19, 2010, 20:57 
Gas Liquid Heat Transfer

#33 
Member
Shane
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
Does some one can guide me to find Heat Transfer Equations of Bubbling Gas through a Liquid Column.
Sircorp 

October 29, 2010, 06:20 

#34 
Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 6 
Hi Sefan Radl,
I am actually quite confused about the implementation of the pressure in twoPhaseEulerFoam which is different than what Rusche explains in his thesis. If "p" in the solver represents the modified pressure, why then gravity still appears (as a term transfered from the UEqn.H to the pEqn.H)? I hope that you found the answer to this question after this long time and that you'll be able to help me. Thanks in advance! Best, Edy 

November 1, 2010, 00:36 

#35 
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
bubbleFoam / twoPhaseEulerFoam do not solve for the modified pressure, but for the actual pressure. You can easily obtain the pressure equation used in the code dividing each continuity equation by the corresponding phase material density and summing them up.
Further information here: http://openfoamwiki.net/index.php/Bu...ssure_equation Best,
__________________
Alberto Passalacqua GeekoCFD  A free distribution based on openSUSE 64 bit with CFD tools, including OpenFOAM. Available as live DVD/USB, hard drive image and virtual image. OpenQBMM  An opensource implementation of quadraturebased moment methods Last edited by alberto; November 1, 2010 at 00:38. Reason: Added link 

November 1, 2010, 08:55 

#36 
Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 6 
Hi Alberto,
Thanks a lot for your answer and link. I just started using OF and there are still many things that are unclear to me... Your link was quite useful and now I understand, i think, the role of the pressure equation. However i still have few questions : 1) Tell me if I am wrong but the terms to be transfered to the pressure equation are the one in which appears a gradient term, cause letting gradient terms in the RHS of the momentum equation would cause numerical calculation problems such as oscillations and loss of continuity. Am i right? Then I understand why the pressure gradient and the turbulent dispersion force (in which appears grad(alpha)) are transfered, but why the gravity g too?? 2) Since twoPhaseEulerFoam considers the actual pressure, the BC at the wall should not be zeroGradient, right? I think I'd better use buoyantPressure, but then I have an issue concerning the density to use. The wall is ,in my case, heated and void fraction can be relatively high, so taking the liquid density does not appear as the best solution to me. Perhaps to take a kind of mixture density would be more appropriate. I do not really know how this BC patch works... I would be very grateful if you could provide some insight into these two issues. Thanks a lot! Best regards, /Edouard 

November 1, 2010, 09:20 

#37 
Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 6 
Hi again!
Still concerning my first question, I noticed in bubbleFoam and twoPhaseEulerFoam that the drag term (not the turbulent drag also called turbulent dispersion) is transfered to the pressure equation, though it does not contain any gradient... Why is this term transfered and not the lift for example, or any other interfacial force? Thank you very much for your help! Best, /Edouard 

November 1, 2010, 13:26 

#38  
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
Quote:
Quote:
Best, 

November 2, 2010, 13:31 

#39 
Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 6 
Hi Alberto,
Thanks again for taking some time and answer my questions! Ok, so transferring the explicit part of the drag term to the pEqn will stabilize the procedure. I am trying to understant all that because I am modeling a two phase Eulerian model for nucleate subcooled boiling. And therefore I have additional terms in my momentum equations due to phase change. But I dont know if they should be kept there or transfered to the pEqn... How to guess that transferring some terms will stabilize the procedure? Do you have any advice? Anyway, thanks a lot, your previous posts have been quite helpful. Best, /Edouard 

November 2, 2010, 13:39 

#40 
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,894
Rep Power: 26 
What is the form of these terms? Do they change quickly with the phase fraction?
Best, 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
TwoPhaseEulerFoam  sara  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  2  November 6, 2008 20:26 
Bug in twoPhaseEulerFoam  alberto  OpenFOAM Bugs  2  May 20, 2008 21:25 
TwoPhaseEulerFoam Bug  alondono  OpenFOAM Bugs  1  February 19, 2008 21:01 
Bug in twoPhaseEulerFoam wallfunctions  alberto  OpenFOAM Bugs  1  February 9, 2007 15:15 
TwoPhaseEulerFoam  newbee  OpenFOAM  0  March 27, 2006 08:41 