Cargando…

Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison

This publication focuses on the experimental validation of film models by comparing constructed and experimental velocity fields based on model and elementary experimental data. The film experiment covers Kapitza numbers Ka = 278.8 and Ka = 4538.6, a Reynolds number range of 1.6–52, and disturbance...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Ruiqi, Duan, Riqiang, Jia, Haijun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8068164/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33917762
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym13081205
_version_ 1783682971611430912
author Wang, Ruiqi
Duan, Riqiang
Jia, Haijun
author_facet Wang, Ruiqi
Duan, Riqiang
Jia, Haijun
author_sort Wang, Ruiqi
collection PubMed
description This publication focuses on the experimental validation of film models by comparing constructed and experimental velocity fields based on model and elementary experimental data. The film experiment covers Kapitza numbers Ka = 278.8 and Ka = 4538.6, a Reynolds number range of 1.6–52, and disturbance frequencies of 0, 2, 5, and 7 Hz. Compared to previous publications, the applied methodology has boundary identification procedures that are more refined and provide additional adaptive particle image velocimetry (PIV) method access to synthetic particle images. The experimental method was validated with a comparison with experimental particle image velocimetry and planar laser induced fluorescence (PIV/PLIF) results, Nusselt’s theoretical prediction, and experimental particle tracking velocimetry (PTV) results of flat steady cases, and a good continuity equation reproduction of transient cases proves the method’s fidelity. The velocity fields are reconstructed based on different film flow model velocity profile assumptions such as experimental film thickness, flow rates, and their derivatives, providing a validation method of film model by comparison between reconstructed velocity experimental data and experimental velocity data. The comparison results show that the first-order weighted residual model (WRM) and regularized model (RM) are very similar, although they may fail to predict the velocity field in rapidly changing zones such as the front of the main hump and the first capillary wave troughs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8068164
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80681642021-04-25 Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison Wang, Ruiqi Duan, Riqiang Jia, Haijun Polymers (Basel) Article This publication focuses on the experimental validation of film models by comparing constructed and experimental velocity fields based on model and elementary experimental data. The film experiment covers Kapitza numbers Ka = 278.8 and Ka = 4538.6, a Reynolds number range of 1.6–52, and disturbance frequencies of 0, 2, 5, and 7 Hz. Compared to previous publications, the applied methodology has boundary identification procedures that are more refined and provide additional adaptive particle image velocimetry (PIV) method access to synthetic particle images. The experimental method was validated with a comparison with experimental particle image velocimetry and planar laser induced fluorescence (PIV/PLIF) results, Nusselt’s theoretical prediction, and experimental particle tracking velocimetry (PTV) results of flat steady cases, and a good continuity equation reproduction of transient cases proves the method’s fidelity. The velocity fields are reconstructed based on different film flow model velocity profile assumptions such as experimental film thickness, flow rates, and their derivatives, providing a validation method of film model by comparison between reconstructed velocity experimental data and experimental velocity data. The comparison results show that the first-order weighted residual model (WRM) and regularized model (RM) are very similar, although they may fail to predict the velocity field in rapidly changing zones such as the front of the main hump and the first capillary wave troughs. MDPI 2021-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8068164/ /pubmed/33917762 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym13081205 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Wang, Ruiqi
Duan, Riqiang
Jia, Haijun
Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison
title Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison
title_full Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison
title_fullStr Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison
title_full_unstemmed Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison
title_short Experimental Validation of Falling Liquid Film Models: Velocity Assumption and Velocity Field Comparison
title_sort experimental validation of falling liquid film models: velocity assumption and velocity field comparison
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8068164/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33917762
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym13081205
work_keys_str_mv AT wangruiqi experimentalvalidationoffallingliquidfilmmodelsvelocityassumptionandvelocityfieldcomparison
AT duanriqiang experimentalvalidationoffallingliquidfilmmodelsvelocityassumptionandvelocityfieldcomparison
AT jiahaijun experimentalvalidationoffallingliquidfilmmodelsvelocityassumptionandvelocityfieldcomparison