Air–water counter-current slug flow data in vertical-to-horizontal pipes containing orifice type obstructions

Abstract This paper presents experimental counter-current air–water flow data on the onset of flooding and slugging, the slug propagation velocity, the predominant slug frequency and the average void fraction collected by using different size orifices installed at two locations in a horizontal pipe. For the flow conditions covered during these experiments, it was observed that there is no significant difference between the onset of flooding and the onset of slugging when an orifice is installed in the horizontal run. However, a difference was observed for the experiments carried out without orifices. Furthermore, the position of the orifice with respect to the elbow does not affect the onset of flooding and slugging. When an orifice is installed in the horizontal run, it was observed that slugs occur due to the mutual interaction (constructive interference) of two waves traveling in opposite directions. This means that a completely different mechanism seems to govern the formation of slugs in counter-current two-phase flows in horizontal partially blocked pipes. This is in contrast to that described for the slugging phenomena in co-current flow, where wave instability seems to be the principal mechanisms responsible of bridging the pipe. The mutual interaction of waves traveling in opposite directions seems to control the behaviour of the slug propagation velocity, the slug frequency and average void fraction with increasing the gas superficial velocity.

[1]  Graham B. Wallis,et al.  The onset of slugging in horizontal stratified air-water flow , 1973 .

[2]  K. H. Ardron,et al.  Flooding in an elbow between a vertical and a horizontal or near-horizontal pipe: Part II: Theory , 1986 .

[3]  Yehuda Taitel,et al.  A model for slug frequency during gas-liquid flow in horizontal and near horizontal pipes , 1977 .

[4]  R. S. Johnson,et al.  A Modern Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of Water Waves: Bibliography , 1997 .

[5]  Sang Chun Lee,et al.  A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE FLOODING LITERATURE , 1986 .

[6]  Masahiro Kawaji,et al.  Countercurrent flooding in vertical-to-inclined pipes , 1991 .

[7]  Gian Piero Celata,et al.  The influence of flow obstructions on the flooding phenomenon in vertical channels , 1989 .

[8]  C. J. Crowley,et al.  Validation of a one-dimensional wave model for the stratified-to-slug flow regime transition, with consequences for wave growth and slug frequency , 1992 .

[9]  A. J. Johnston,et al.  Transition from stratified to slug regime in countercurrent flow , 1985 .

[10]  C. L. Tien,et al.  Flooding in two-phase countercurrent flows. [PWR; BWR] , 1979 .

[11]  Thomas J. Hanratty,et al.  Relation of slug stability to shedding rate , 1996 .

[12]  Yehuda Taitel,et al.  A theoretical approach to the Lockhart-Martinelli correlation for stratified flow , 1976 .

[13]  Alberto Teyssedou,et al.  A capacitive two-phase flow slug detection system , 1999 .

[14]  W. P. Jepson,et al.  SLUG FLOW AND ITS TRANSITIONS IN LARGE-DIAMETER HORIZONTAL PIPES , 1993 .

[15]  K. H. Ardron,et al.  FLOODING IN AN ELBOW BETWEEN A VERTICAL AND A HORIZONTAL OR NEAR-HORIZONTAL PIPE , 1986 .

[16]  Masahiro Kawaji,et al.  Countercurrent Flooding in Pipes Containing Multiple Elbows and an Orifice , 1993 .