199 JMES 2636 Elguerri PDF
199 JMES 2636 Elguerri PDF
199 JMES 2636 Elguerri PDF
Copyright(©(2018,(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
University(of(Mohammed(Premier(((((( http://www.jmaterenvironsci.com!
(Oujda(Morocco(
Received 17 Jun 2016, A gas-liquid separation process have been investigated experimentally in an installation
Revised 16 Nov 2017, which! designed by combining horizontal and vertical pipes of same diameter forming
Accepted 19 Nov 2017 T-junctions was tested in a closed loop with controlled performances as a function of
parameters such as: the number and height of the vertical junctions, the test conditions
Keywords (the flow rate of liquid and the fraction of gas fed). The plant is equipped with sampling
!!Gas-liquid, equipment for each phase to monitor the process and analyze it until the separation
!!Phase separation, progresses efficiently. The results obtained are recorded at the optimum separation of
!!T-junction, the flow. At the same flow rate, the variation interval of the void fraction increases with
!!Two phase flow, increasing flow pressure; for 2 bar, α varies between 0,76 and 0,96, for 3 bar, it varies
!!Void fraction. between 0,66 and 0,95, finally for 4 bar it varies between 0,54 and 0,94. The
manufacturing simplicity and the low cost of this installation make it favorite solution
m_elguerri@yahoo.fr ; for industrial applications.
Phone: +213559012995
Nomenclature
AT : Total section of test pipe, [m2] QL : Volume flow rate of liquid, [m3/s]
AG : Section occupied by the gas phase, [m2] QLen : Flow rate of the supply liquid, [m3/h]
AL : Section occupied by the liquid phase, [m2] WM : Total flow rate, [kg/s]
Ai : Test sections, [m2] WG : Gas mass flow rate, [kg/s]
GM : Mass flow of mixture, [m3/s/m2] WL : Liquid mass flow rate, [kg/s]
GG : Mass flow of gas, [m3/s/m2] vG : Superficial velocity of the gas phase, [m/s]
GL : Mass flow of liquid, [m3/s/m2] vL : Superficial velocity of the liquid phase, [m/s]
JM : Volume flow of mixture, [kg/s/m2] x : Gas-liquid mixture ratio
JG : Volume flow of gas, [kg/s/m2] α : Two-phase void fraction
JL : Volume flow of liquid, [kg/s/m2] ρM : Mixture density, [kg/m3]
QM : Volume flow rate of mixture, [m3/s] ρG : Gas density, [kg/m3]
QG : Volume flow rate of gaz, [m3/s] ρL : Liquid density, [kg/m3]
1. Introduction
The two phase flow, used in many industrial applications, always encounters the T junctions dividing the flows
as they pass through the systems. The efficient separation of the gas-liquid two phase flow, which is highly
sought after in the industry, is carried out for the transport of two-phase fluids in the T-junctions made up of
pipes which can take different dispositions. This process is widely disseminated in the gas, petrochemical,
nuclear, food and other industries. The process is carried out by means of installations which, in shape and
dimensions, depend essentially on the characteristics of the flowing fluids, whereas conventional systems are
affected by complicated installations of costly manufacture and drastic maintenance.
The gas-liquid two-phase flow establishes in T branched pipes separates in phases of unequal qualities
in those branches. This separation occurs in the asymmetric region near the branches, due to the (lighter) gas
phase which can take its direction more easily than that of the liquid. However, the actual degree of phase
separation in a branch is generally affected by other factors such as the phase distribution (flow regime) and the
branch side orientation. A brief summary of the literature on the two phase flow through the T junctions
reveals that a significant amount of recent research has been devoted to this subject.! Reviewing some of the
works using this type of junctions allows to understand the different aspects of the problem and to show that
they can be used to optimize the gas-liquid separation process.
!
(1) Pumping system, (2) Compressor, (3) Magnetic flowmeter, (4) Pressure gage, (5),(6) Manual valves, (7) Pneumatic valve, (8) Vortex
flow meter, (9),(10) Transducers, (11) Transducer, (12),(13) Separators, (14),(15) Magnetic flow meters, (16),(17) Vortex meters, (18),(19)
Transducers, (20),(21) Automatic regulating valves, (22),(23) Automatic regulating valves, (24),(25) Differential pressure transducers.
Flow regimes were established for some experimental characteristics available in conformity with the
maps of Issa and Oliveira. The combined separator shown in the scheme of figure 2 is composed of three
ascending branches T equipped with valves. Another manual control valve is placed on the pipe to exactly
adjust the discharge valve along the circuit.
There are two configurations, one high with a height H = 1.4 m and the other low with H = 0.7 m. At the
beginning, each of them is tested with a gradual opening of the valve in the vertical branch then two of the three
branches and finally all three will be all open. Thus we obtain six different configurations: high 1, 2, 3 and bass
1, 2 and 3. The separation performance is measured by the mass ratio between the inlet and the T of separation
for each phase. The ratio WL2/WL1 (or alternatively WL3/WL1) gives the mass fraction of the liquid along the
branch 2 of the right T (or along the deviated branch 3) compared to the total mass of the input liquid along of
branch 1. The same consideration is made for the gaseous phase relative for the ratio WG2/WG1 (or WG3/WG1).
The highest performances corresponding to perfect separation can be obtained by changing: the number of
branches, the height H, the supply flow rate QLin and the void fraction α of the inlet stream. A manual control
valve is placed on the pipe in order to adjust the appropriate pressure along the circuit. The two different
configurations relating to the height H of the vertical T-junctions were compared. Each of them was examined
by gradually opening the valves of the vertical T's (only one, at the beginning, then two and finally all the open
T's), obtaining six different configurations designating "high 1", "high 2" , high 3 "," low 1 "," low 2 "and" low
3 ". The separation efficiency is measured by a mass ratio between the inlet and the T junctions of separation for
3. Governing equations
Calling the characteristics of some simple parameters for phase separation are used. Characteristics of some
simple parameters for phase separation are used.
Let's define the quantities used in two-phase flow in the following way: the mass flow rates of the gas
WG and the liquid WL defined by:
WG = ρG vG AG (1)
WL = ρLvL AL (2)
The mass flow is given by:
WG
GG = (3)
AG
W
GL = L (4)
AL
The volume flow is thus:
QG
JG = (5)
AT
Q
JL = L (6)
AT
The total cross section occupied by the gas and liquid phases:
AT = AG + AL (7)
The ratio of the flow of the biphasic mixture:
GG GG W WG
x= = = G = (8)
GM GG + GL WM WG + WL
The two-phase void fraction or gas presence fraction:
Q QG
α= G = (9)
QM QG + QL
The total mass flow rate is defined as:
WM = WG + WL (10)
The density of the mixture is:
ρ M = α ⋅ ρG + ( 1 - α )ρ L (11)
In accordance with figure 3 and using the suffix 1 for the inlet of the junction T and the suffixes 2 and 3
for the outlet branches, the mass balance gives:
G1 A1 x1 = G2 A2 x2 + G3 A3 x3 (12)
For equal diameters in the test sections (A1=A2=A3) we have:
G1 x1 = G2 x2 + G3 x3 (13)
For a perfect separation of the gas from the inside of the branch 1 of the T to the deviation in the branch
3, we must have in the branch 2, WG2=0 which gives:
x3 1
= (14)
x1 G3 / G1
This equation shows the relationship between the ratio of the mixture and the ratio of masses of flow in
the incoming T and deviating for perfect separation.!Alternatively, by taking equal diameters of the test sections,
the relationship (15) is obtained and shown in figure 3:
! W3,"x3 W1 " W2
"
(a)
! x1 ! x2
!
" W1 " W2
(b) ! W3,"x3
! x1 ! x2
Figure 3 : T-junctions scheme: (a) upward, (b) downward.
Insertion of T-junction in a pipe causes turbulence in the mixture flow, allowing the system to act as a
separator which becomes more efficient when the experimental results are close to the so-called complete
separation (theoretical) curve as shown in figure 3. Contrary, if the ratio of the mixture is close to unity, the
junction T becomes unable to separate significantly the liquid and the gas stream is diverted into the branch of
the T-junction.
WG2/WG1
WG3/WG1
Equal*flow*division
0,6 0,6 Equal*flow*division 0,6 Equal*flow*division
QL,in=10)m3/h QL,in=20)m3/h QL,in=30)m3/h
0,4 0,4 0,4
WG3/WG1
WG3/WG1
Figure 4 : Effect of the pressure on the phase separation at constant flow rate: (a) mass ratios, gas v. liquid in the branch 2,
(b) mass ratios, gas v. liquid in the ascending branch 3.
x3/x1
x3/x1
x3/x1=WL1/WL3
3 3 3
2 2 2
1 1 1
QL,in=10)m3/h QL,in=20)m3/h QL,in=30)m3/h
0 0 0
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0
WL3/WL1 WL3/WL1 WL3/WL1
!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !
(a)
2,0 2,0 2,0
p=2+bar p=2+bar p=2+bar
p=3+bar p=3+bar p=3+bar
1,5 p=4+bar 1,5 p=4+bar 1,5 p=4+bar
x3=x1 x3=x1 x3=x1
WG3/WG1
WG3/WG1
WG3/WG1
The advantage of this representation "according to the inlet" is the visualization of a minimum or a maximum
representing respectively the maximum liquid or the gas separation (since the minimum will appear below and
the maximum at the top of the equal separation line x3=x1). The effective separation of the gaseous phase in the
branch 3 for the accumulated values in the vicinity of the ratio WG3/WG1=1 is better for the inlet flow QLin=30
m3/h. The curves of figure 5 reveal experimental values close to the curve of perfect separation with a
progression of these values in terms of the quality ratio x3/x1 as a function of the pressure at constant flow rate of
the inlet liquid. The increase of this flow rate further improves the separation of the phases to the desired
optimal values.
WL2/1)4)WL3/1
WL2/1)4)WL3/1
WL2/1,WL3/1
p=2-bar
0,6 p=2-bar 0,6 0,6
p=3-bar
p=3-bar
QL,in=10)m3/h
0,4 p=4-bar 0,4 0,4
p=4-bar
0,2 0,2 p=2.bar p=3.bar p=4.bar 0,2 p=2-bar p=2-bar p=3-bar
p=2.bar p=3.bar p=4.bar p=3-bar p=4-bar p=4-bar
0,0 0,0 0,0
0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8
Alpha Alpha Alpha
!
(a)
1,0 1,0
1,0
WG2/1)5)WG3/1
0,8 0,8 QL,in=30)m3/h
WG2/1)5)WG3/1
WG2/1)5)WG3/1
p=2-bar 0,8
p=2-bar QL,in=20)m3/h
0,6
p=3-bar 0,6 0,6
p=3-bar QL,in=10)m3/h
0,4 p=4-bar 0,4 p=2.bar p=3.bar p=4.bar 0,4
p=2-bar p=2-bar p=3-bar
p=4-bar p=2.bar p=3.bar p=2.bar
0,2 0,2 0,2 p=3-bar p=4-bar p=4-bar
(b)
Figure 6 : Effect of pressure on the void fraction at constant flow rate in an ascending T: (a) ratio of the mass flow rates of
the liquid, (b) ratio of the mass flow rates of the gas.
The increase in the ratios WL2/WL1 et de WG2/WG1 with a greater number of vertical T junctions can be
noted in figure 7 for "high" configurations as well "low" configurations for each value of QLin and for different
values of α. The height of the vertical pipes H = 0.7 and 1.4 m affects the separation of the two phases.!It is
noted that for the same flow rate the change interval of the void fraction increases with the increase in the flow
pressure, noting that for 2 bar, α varies between 0.76 ÷ 0.96; for 3 bar it varies between 0.66 and 0.95 and for 4
bar between 0.54 ÷ 0.94.
1,0 0,4
B3,10m3/h B3,20m3/h B3,30m3/h
H3,10m3/h H3,20m3/h H3,30m3/h
0,9 0,3
WL2//WL1
WL3//WL1
0,8 0,2
0,7 0,1
B3,10m3/h B3,20m3/h B3,30m3/h
H3,10m3/h H3,20m3/h H3,30m3/h
0,6 0,0
0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
Alpha Alpha
!!!!!!!!
(a) (b)
Figure 7 : Effect of branch height and inlet flow rate on liquid phase separation (a) ratio of mass flow rate of branch 2,
(b) ratio of mass flow rate of branch 3.
Acknowledgments-This work was carried out in the framework of collaboration with Prof. Giancarlo Giacchetta and
Prof. Maurizio Bevilacqua of the University of Ancona in Italy, I gratefully acknowledge them for their help.
References
1. R.T. Jr Lahey, Dynamics of Two-Phase Flows (1984) 313-346.
2. F. Peng, M. Shoukri, A.M.C. Chan, J. Fluids Eng. 118 (1996) 166-171.
3. P.A. Roberts, B.J. Azzopardi, S. Hibberd, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 21.3 (1996) 455-466.
4. L.C. Walters, H.M. Soliman, G.E. Sims, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 24 (1998) 775-792.
5. M. Bevilacqua, G. Giacchetta, K.L. Nielsen, 7th Int. Conf. Multip. Flow, Bologna, Italy Sep. 13-15 (2000).
6. C. Giuseppe, Dr of Phi. Th., School of Chem., Env. and Min. Eng., University of Nottingham (2000).
7. T. Stacey, B.J. Azzopardi, G. Conte, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 26.5 (2000) 845-856.
8. C. Wren, Dr of Phi. Th., School of Chemical, Envi. and Mining Eng., University of Nottingham (2001).
9. C.A. Van Gorp, H.M. Soliman, G.E. Sims, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 27 (2001) 571-576.
10. M. Ottens, C.J. Huub Hoefsloot, P.J. Hamersma, Chem. Eng. Sc. 56 (2001) 43-55.
11. S. Wang, M. Shoji, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 28 (2002) 2007-2016.
12. G. Baker, Dr of Phi. Th., School Chem., Env. and Min. Eng., University of Nottingham (2003).
13. G. Das, P.K. Das, B.J. Azzopardi, Int. J. Multi. Flow 31 (2005) 514-528.
14. C.Y. Mak, N.K. Omebere-Iyari, B.J. Azzopardi, Chem. Eng. Sc. 61 (2006) 6261-6272.
15. A.M.F. El-Shaboury, H.M. Soliman, G.E. Sims, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 33 (2007) 411-431.
16. C. Bertani, M. Malandrone and B. Panella, 5th Int. Conf. on Heat Trans., Sun City, South Africa (2007)
17. L. Yang, Z. Zhao, P. Qi, L. Zhao, B.J. Azzopardi, Sci. Res. 978-1-935068-37-2 (2010).
18. S. Mo, X. Chen, Y. Chen and Z. Yang, Korean J. Chem. Eng. 32.7 (2015) 1243-1248.
19. L. Yang, J. Wang, B.J. Azzopardi, Z. Zhao, S. Xu, H. Wang, AIChE J. 63.3 (2017) 2285-2292.
20. W. Sun, Y. Liu, K. He, S. Wang, Chem. Eng. J. 333 (2018) 34-42.
21. J. Li, P. Hrnjak, Int. J. of Refrigeration 85 (2018) 144 – 156.
(2018) ; http://www.jmaterenvironsci.com