International Scientific Journal

External Links


The purpose of the present study is to compare the well-posedness criteria of the free-pressure two-fluid model, single-pressure two-fluid model, and two-pressure two-fluid model in a vertical pipe. Two-fluid models were solved using the conservative shock capturing method. A water faucet case is used to compare two-fluid models. The free pressure two-fluid model can accurately predict discontinuities in the solution field if the problem's initial condition satisfies the Kelvin Helmholtz instability conditions. The single-pressure two-fluid model can accurately predict the behavior of flows in which the two phases are poorly coupled. The two-pressure two-fluid model is an unconditionally well-posed one. If in the free-pressure two-fluid model and single-pressure two-fluid model, the range of velocity difference of two phases exceeds certain limits, the models will be ill-posed. The two-pressure two-fluid model produces more numerical diffusion than the free-pressure two-fluid and single-pressure two-fluid models in the solution field. High numerical diffusion of two-pressure two-fluid models leads to failure to better comply with the problem's analytical solution. Results show that a single-pressure model is a powerful model for numerical modeling of gas-liquid two-fluid-flows in the vertical pipe due to a broader range of well-posed than free-pressure models and less numerical diffusion than the two-pressure mode.
PAPER REVISED: 1970-01-01
PAPER ACCEPTED: 2021-03-28
CITATION EXPORT: view in browser or download as text file
THERMAL SCIENCE YEAR 2022, VOLUME 26, ISSUE Issue 2, PAGES [1245 - 1265]
  1. Omgba-Essama, C., Numerical modeling of transient gas-liquid flows (application to stratified & slug flow regimes). 2004.
  2. Ishii, M. and K. Mishima, Two-fluid model and hydrodynamic constitutive relations. Nuclear Engineering and design, 1984. 82(2): p. 107-126.
  3. Liao, J., R. Mei, and J.F. Klausner, A study on the numerical stability of the two-fluid model near ill-posedness. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 2008. 34(11): p. 1067-1087.
  4. Watson, M. Non-linear waves in pipeline two-phase flows. in Third International Conference on Hyperbolic Problems. 1990.
  5. Stuhmiller, J., The influence of interfacial pressure forces on the character of two-phase flow model equations. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 1977. 3(6): p. 551-560.
  6. Ransom, V.H. and D.L. Hicks, Hyperbolic two-pressure models for two-phase flow. Journal of Computational Physics, 1984. 53(1): p. 124-151.
  7. Ansari, M. and V. Shokri, Numerical modeling of slug flow initiation in a horizontal channels using a two-fluid model. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2011. 32(1): p. 145-155.
  8. Bonzanini, A., D. Picchi, and P. Poesio, Simplified 1D Incompressible Two-Fluid Model with Artificial Diffusion for Slug Flow Capturing in Horizontal and Nearly Horizontal Pipes. Energies, 2017. 10(9): p. 1372.
  9. Holmås, H., Numerical simulation of transient roll-waves in two-phase pipe flow. Chemical Engineering Science, 2010. 65(5): p. 1811-1825.
  10. Holmås, H., et al., Analysis of a 1D incompressible two-fluid model including artificial diffusion. IMA journal of applied mathematics, 2008. 73(4): p. 651-667.
  11. Louaked, M., L. Hanich, and C. Thompson, Well‐posedness of incompressible models of two‐and three‐phase flow. IMA journal of applied mathematics, 2003. 68(6): p. 595-620.
  12. Issa, R. and M. Kempf, Simulation of slug flow in horizontal and nearly horizontal pipes with the two-fluid model. International journal of multiphase flow, 2003. 29(1): p. 69-95.
  13. Woodburn, P. and R. Issa. Well-posedness of one-dimensional transient, two-fluid models of two-phase flows. in 3rd International Symposium on Mulitphase Flow, ASME Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, Washington, USA. 1998.
  14. Ansari, M. and V. Shokri, New algorithm for the numerical simulation of two-phase stratified gas-liquid flow and its application for analyzing the Kelvin-Helmholtz instability criterion with respect to wavelength effect. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 2007. 237(24): p. 2302-2310.
  15. Bonizzi, M. and R. Issa, A model for simulating gas bubble entrainment in two-phase horizontal slug flow. International journal of multiphase flow, 2003. 29(11): p. 1685-1717.
  16. Bonizzi, M. and R. Issa, On the simulation of three-phase slug flow in nearly horizontal pipes using the multi-fluid model. International journal of multiphase flow, 2003. 29(11): p. 1719-1747.
  17. Carneiro, J. and A. Nieckele, Investigation of slug flow characteristics in inclined pipelines. Computational Methods in Multiphase Flow IV, 2007. 56: p. 185.
  19. Emamzadeh, M. and R.I. Issa, A MODEL FOR PREDICTING THE TRANSITION BETWEEN STRATIFIED AND ANNULAR FLOW IN HORIZONTAL PIPES. Multiphase Science and Technology, 2013. 25(1).
  20. Han, P. and L. Guo, Numerical simulation of terrain-induced severe slugging coupled by hydrodynamic slugs in a pipeline-riser system. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2015. 56: p. 355-366.
  21. Shokri, V. and K. Esmaeili, Comparison of the effect of hydrodynamic and hydrostatic models for pressure correction term in two-fluid model in gas-liquid two-phase flow modeling. Journal of Molecular Liquids, 2017. 237: p. 334-346.
  22. Evje, S. and T. Flåtten, Hybrid flux-splitting schemes for a common two-fluid model. Journal of Computational Physics, 2003. 192(1): p. 175-210.
  23. Paillere, H., C. Corre, and J.G. Cascales, On the extension of the AUSM+ scheme to compressible two-fluid models. Computers & Fluids, 2003. 32(6): p. 891-916.
  24. Evje, S. and T. Flåtten, Hybrid central-upwind schemes for numerical resolution of two-phase flows. ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis, 2005. 39(2): p. 253-273.
  25. Munkejord, S.T., Comparison of Roe-type methods for solving the two-fluid model with and without pressure relaxation. Computers & fluids, 2007. 36(6): p. 1061-1080.
  26. Zeng, Q., et al., Comparison of implicit and explicit AUSM‐family schemes for compressible multiphase flows. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 2015. 77(1): p. 43-61.
  27. Munkejord, S.T., Analysis of the two-fluid model and the drift-flux model for numerical calculation of two-phase flow. 2006.
  28. Saurel, R. and R. Abgrall, A multiphase Godunov method for compressible multifluid and multiphase flows. Journal of Computational Physics, 1999. 150(2): p. 425-467.
  29. Baer, M. and J. Nunziato, A two-phase mixture theory for the deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT) in reactive granular materials. International journal of multiphase flow, 1986. 12(6): p. 861-889.
  30. Fontalvo, E.M., et al., Assessment of closure relations on the numerical predictions of vertical annular flows with the two-fluid model. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 2020. 126: p. 103243.
  31. Saraswat, S., P. Munshi, and C. Allison, Linear stability analysis of RELAP5 two-fluid model in nuclear reactor safety results. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2020. 149: p. 107720.
  32. Cortes, J., A. Debussche, and I. Toumi, A density perturbation method to study the eigenstructure of two-phase flow equation systems. Journal of Computational Physics, 1998. 147(2): p. 463-484.
  33. Toro, E.F., Riemann solvers and numerical methods for fluid dynamics: a practical introduction. 2013: Springer Science & Business Media.
  34. Hirsch, H., Numerical computation of internal and external flows. Computational methods for inviscid and viscous flows, 1990. 2: p. 536-556.
  35. Coquel, F., et al., A numerical method using upwind schemes for the resolution of two-phase flows. Journal of Computational Physics, 1997. 136(2): p. 272-288.
  36. Ransom, V., NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.3: EXPULSION OF STEAM BY SUB-COOLED WATER. Multiphase science and technology, 1987. 3(1-4).

© 2024 Society of Thermal Engineers of Serbia. Published by the Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, National Institute of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International licence