0957–5820/03/$23.50+0.

00
# Institution of Chemical Engineers
www.ingentaselect.com=titles=09575820.htm Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003

MODELLING GAS±LIQUID FLOW IN VENTURI

SCRUBBERS AT HIGH PRESSURE
H. SUN and B. J. AZZOPARDI
Multiphase Flow Research Group, School of Chemical, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

M
odelling of the growth and separation of the boundary layer has been extended from
the diffuser section of Venturi scrubbers to the whole unit. Predicted pressure drops
have been compared with published data over a range of system pressures. The Full
Boundary Layer Model gives very good predictions of pressure loss for Pearce–Anthony
Venturis at high pressure unlike other models. The sensitivity of the model to values of relevant
parameters has been determined. Correct values of the initial boundary layer parameters and
the effects of system pressure on them are identi
ed.

Keywords: Venturi scrubber; pressure drop; high pressure; modelling.

INTRODUCTION scrubbers. In the earliest types, liquid was injected through

Air pollution is intertwined with our daily life in modern
society. Its control is one important aspect of the overall and
multifaceted regulatory environmental protection require-
ments. The aim is to remove gaseous air pollutants and
particulate matter from emerging gas streams. Particulates,
also called dusts, are dispersed airborne solid and liquid
particles larger than single molecules (i.e., >0.0002 mm
diameter) but smaller than 500 mm, (Wark and Warner,
1981). Fine or ‘respirable’ particles with diameters of less
than 10 mm are the most harmful part of airborne pollutants.
Unlike larger particles, they are not collected by nose hairs
nor do they deposit on the trachea and bronchi but they
reach lungs and deposit there with consequent damage.
A number of physical processes are used to remove
particles from gas streams. One common and effective
route is the scrubbing of the gas with a spray of liquid.
Venturi scrubbers are among the most ef
cient and effective
of such units. They have many competitive features: they
remove tiny particles ef
ciently (in excess of 98% for 1 mm
particles) (Johnstone et al., 1954) and are also able to
remove toxic gaseous components at the same time; they
are compact and simple to build, so that initial investment
costs are small in comparison to electrostatic precipitators;
they can handle hot, explosive or corrosive atmospheres and
sticky particles, the latter being one aspect that makes bag

lters unsuitable for these duties.
The high dust removal ef
ciency of Venturi scrubbers is
usually gained at the expense of high pressure drop and
hence high operating cost. Not surprisingly, Venturi scrub-
bers have been researched for half a century. They are
characterized by convergence, throat and diffuser sections
in the direction of gas ow. The liquid can be introduced in
a number of ways. Indeed it is the method of introducing
the liquid that gives us a major classi
cation of Venturi
the nozzles at the throat. This arrangement is known as the
Pearce–Anthony type. The scrubbing liquid can be injected
in the downstream direction, (Johnstone et al., 1954;
Viswanathan et al., 1984; Haller et al., 1989) or radially
inwards (Johnstone et al., 1954; Gonçalves et al., 1999). In
the other type, water is introduced as a
lm just before the
start of the convergent section. This is known as the Wetted
Approach type. The presence of the
lm can prevent the
accumulation of sticky material from the dust. Drops are
formed by the shearing action of the gas on the
lm
particularly at the corner of the convergence and throat
sections (Azzopardi and Govan 1984). The mechanisms of
atomization observed are similar to those seen in cocurrent
two-phase annular ow in pipes (Whalley et al., 1977).
Most Venturi scrubbers operate at about atmospheric
pressure. However, a high-pressure application was
proposed as part of the development of high-pressure dual
cycle coal-
red power generation and coal gasi
cation
plants (Yung et al., 1981). In such units, coal is usually
gasi
ed or combusted under high pressure and temperature.
The resulting coal gas or combustion gases are used to drive
a gas turbine. However, particles, tars, metal vapours and
acid gases carried by the gases could damage the gas
turbine. Consequently a scrubbing stage is required, a duty
for which Venturi scrubbers have been proposed.
Apart from scrubbing duties, Venturis have been used
widely for metering the ow rates of gases or liquids owing
alone. They have also been researched as a two-phase ow
measurement device, including gas=solid ows (Carlson et
al., 1948; Farber, 1953; Tang et al., 1988; Wiltz et al., 1991),
liquid=solid ows (Brook, 1962; Graf, 1967; Shook and
Masilyah, 1974; Hirata et al., 1991, 1995), and gas=liquid
ows (Thompson et al., 1965; Harris, 1967; Machado, 1997;
Pinhero da Silva Filho, 2000; Hall et al., 2000; van Werven
et al., 2003). For these applications Venturis are applied over

250
 MODELLING GAS–LIQUID FLOW IN VENTURI SCRUBBERS
a wide range of pressure—atmosphere to ¹100 bar. A major
difference between Venturi meters and Venturi scrubbers
used in gas cleaning is that the former receive a well-
developed two-phase ow as the phases come into contact
far upstream of the unit. In the latter, liquid is introduced at
the beginning of convergence or in the throat so that there is a
developing ow, a much more complicated case to model.
In high pressure Venturi scrubbers, the droplets and gas
will be accelerated much faster, which may affect the
performance of Venturi scrubbers. For these cases, it is
reasonable to ask if existing models, such as those of Calvert
(1970), Boll (1973), Yung et al. (1977), and Azzopardi et al.
(1991), give reasonable prediction of pressure drop?
Although these existing models have been evaluated with
pressure drop data from both laboratory-scale and pilot-
scale Venturis operating at near atmospheric pressure
(Gonçalves et al., 2001), there are a number of uncertainties
concerning their validity at high pressure. This paper
presents a test of an extension of Azzopardi et al. (1991)
and other published models when used to predict data from
a high pressure system. This paper considers boundary layer
phenomena throughout all the three sections of Venturi
scrubber. The study has been con
ned to cylindrical,
Pearce–Anthony type Venturis.
EXISTING MODELS
Calvert (1970) provided the
rst model for pressure drop
across a Venturi. This was based on the assumptions that all
the liquid was atomized into drops, and that they were
accelerated to the velocity of the gas at the end of the throat.
Also it was taken that pressure drop across the Venturi
scrubber came only from momentum change of drops in the
throat and that there was no pressure loss due to gas
acceleration and friction between the wall and the gas
core. This resulted in a single explicit equation:
rl Ql 2
Dp ˆ U (1)
1000 Qg gt
where Ugt is the gas velocity in the throat, rl is the liquid
density and Ql=Qg is the volumetric liquid=gas ratio.
Although the model of Calvert (1970) is simple and easy
to use it does not consider the effect of the geometry of the
Venturi at all. Yung et al. (1977) followed Calvert’s
approach but relaxed the assumption that drops reach the
velocity of the gas by the end of the throat. Instead they
obtained empirical values for the drop velocity at the end of
the throat using the equation of Nukiyama and Tanasawa
(1938). This resulted in:
Ql 2
Dp ˆ brl U (2)
Qg gt
b is a dimensionless parameter. Although the equation of
Yung et al. (1977) is an improvement on that of Calvert
(1970), Gonçalves et al. (2001) point out that it failed to
predict the pressure drop in small Venturis. There are a
number of similar models, e.g., Leith et al. (1984).
However, they give very similar results to the above.
Boll (1973) derived a differential equation which could be
integrated over the entire length of the Venturi. It allows for
Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003
251
gas acceleration and deceleration and wall friction as well as
acceleration and deceleration of the drops. This results in
Á !
2
f Ugs
dp Ql rl Q rl
¡ ˆ Ugs dUgs ‡ Ugs dUd ‡ ‡1 dx
rg Qg rg Ql rg Deq
(3)
where rg is the gas density, Ugs is the gas super
cial
velocity, x is the distance along axis of the Venturi, Ud is
the velocity of drops, f represents the friction factor and Deq
is the local diameter at any axial position in the Venturi. This
is the
rst model that appeared in differential form.
Although Boll mentioned the existence of a liquid
lm on
the walls of the Venturi scrubber, the only allowance for the
liquid phase was the use of a two-phase density in the wall
friction term. In addition, he assumed that the water was
completely atomized into drops of one diameter. To specify
this he used the equation of Nukiyama and Tanasawa
(1938). Though Boll’s model was a very signi
cant advance,
it was still unrealistic particularly for small-scale Wetted
Approach Venturis where Fernandez Alonso et al. (1999)
have shown that there can be more than 75% liquid owing
as a
lm. Not surprisingly, Boll’s model is at its best for the
Pearce–Anthony Venturi.
Rippinger and Dau (1980) produced a model very similar
to that of Boll (1973). Both involved integrating the pressure
gradient differential equation along the Venturi and consid-
ered the same contributing pressure drop terms. They differ
in the drag correlation used for calculating the acceleration
of the drops and in the equation for the drop size. In
addition, in order to achieve more realistic predictions for
the frictional term, Rippinger and Dau applied the method
of Lockhart and Martinelli (1949) to calculate the frictional
pressure loss due to the two-phase ow. Rippinger and Dau
allowed that liquid could be injected at any point in the
Venturi. They assumed that all the liquid introduced was
atomized into drops. The liquid droplets inside the Venturi
were supposed to be mono-dispersed spheres of diameter
given by an equation which was only related to throat gas
velocity and liquid to gas ratio. The initial axial velocity of
droplets was presumed to be zero.
The model of Rippinger and Dau (1980) has not been
evaluated as much as other models in the literature. There-
fore, it is instructive to compare the predictions of the model
with values measured by Gonçalves et al. (1999) in a
laboratory-scale Venturi. The results, shown in Figures 1
and 2, indicate that the model of Rippinger and Dau (1980)
gives good predictions of pressure drop for Pearce–Anthony
Venturi scrubbers whereas for Wetted Approach Venturis,
the pressure drop is over-predicted. The assumption, in
the model, of the complete atomization of liquid is a
possible reason for the over-prediction of pressure drop in
the latter case.
All the above models assume total atomization of the
liquid and drops of a single size. These assumptions
limited the application of the models. In contrast, Azzopardi
and Govan (1984) were the
rst to allow for part of the
liquid travelling as drops with the rest owing as a
lm on
the Venturi walls. They based their model on knowledge of
liquid–gas two-phase annular ow in tubes. They allowed
for the atomization from the liquid
lm on the wall and
drops redepositing onto the
lm along the pipe. Azzopardi
and Govan (1984) extended their annular ow model to
252 SUN and AZZOPARDI

sections of the Venturi. This is termed the Full Boundary

Layer Model.

FULL BOUNDARY LAYER MODEL

Figure 1. Predicted total pressure drop by the model of Rippinger and Dau
(1980) against the experimental data of Fernandez Alonso et al. (1999)
from Pearce–Anthony Venturis.
Venturis by adding some modi
cations, such as the occur-
rence of atomization caused by the geometry at the entrance
of the throat. The existence of different sizes of droplets and
their different velocities in the prediction of the pressure
drop was considered yielding:
dp dUg Xn
dU 4t
¡ ˆ rg Hg Ug ‡ rl Hd,i Ud,i d,i ‡ (4)
dx dx iˆ1
dx D eq
where Hg is the holdup of gas, Hd,i and Ud,i are the
volumetric fraction and the velocity of drops of group i
respectively, Deq is the pipe equivalent diameter taking into
account the
lm thickness, t denotes the shear stress at the
gas–
lm interface, other parameters are the same as above.
This model gave reasonable predictions of liquid
lm ow
rate, gas cleaning ef
ciency, as well as the pressure drop up
to end of the throat, but it over-predicted the pressure
recovery in the diffuser (Azzopardi et al., 1991). This
problem was recti
ed by Azzopardi et al. (1991) by consid-
ering the growth of the boundary layer in the diffuser.
In order to extend the model of Azzopardi et al. (1991)
and enlarge its range of application, the existing model,
which considers the boundary layer only in the diffuser, is
further extended to calculate the boundary layer in all
The two-phase ow in Venturi scrubbers, which consists
of gas carrying some of the liquid as drops with the rest
travelling as a
lm on the channel walls is obviously similar
to annular ow in pipes. However, though there are addi-
tional similarities—creation of drops from the
lm and
redeposition of drops onto the
lm—there are distinct
differences. It is easiest to describe the ow in the Venturi
as consisting of three layers. The outermost layer is the
liquid
lm. The middle layer is a boundary layer, which is
assumed to contain only gas. The inner layer is the core gas
ow containing dispersed drops. Observation has shown
that only when the drops are being entrained or deposited do
they pass through the boundary layer.
The Full Boundary Layer Model consists of two parts: the
annular ow model and the hydrodynamic model. The
annular ow model is adapted in Venturi scrubbers for
calculating the entrained liquid ow rate and the properties
of the
lm on the wall. It has been described in detail in the
early models (Azzopardi and Govan, 1984; Azzopardi et al.,
1991).
In most aspects, the Full Boundary Layer Model follows
the work of Azzopardi et al. (1991). Unlike that work, which
only takes account of the boundary layer in the diffuser, here
the variation of boundary layer thickness is calculated along
the whole Venturi. The momentum integral equation for the
gas phase boundary layer is:
dy 1 dU1 d 1 dp y dR Cf
¡ [d¤ ¡ d ¡ 2y] ¡ ‡ ˆ
dx U1 dx U1 2 rg dx R dx 2
(5)
y is the momentum thickness, d is the boundary layer
thickness, d* is the displacement thickness, U 1 is the
velocity in the inviscid core, R is the radius of the pipe,
Cf is the skin friction coef
cient between the liquid
lm and
the gas core.
The pressure gradient in equation (5) is interpreted as the
axial rate of change of momentum ow per unit area.
Momentum ow is given by the product of mass owrate
and velocity. For the inviscid core:
" #
d X
n
dp dWg dU1
¡A ˆ U1 ‡ Wg ‡ W V (6)
dx dx dx dx iˆ1 Di Di

where VDi is the velocity of a particular drop size class, WDi

is the entrained mass ow rate within the same drop size
class, A is the cross sectional area of the Venturi at a
particular location x, and Wg is the mass ow rate of gas.
Substituting equation (6) into (5) yields:
dy (2y ‡ d¤ ) dy d d X
‡ ‡ WDi VDi
dx U1 Wg AU1 2 r g dx
y dR Cf
‡ ˆ (7)
R dx 2
Figure 2. Predicted total pressure drop by the model of Rippinger and Dau
(1980) against the experimental data of Fernandez Alonso et al. (1999) This equation is based on the assumption that all entrained
from Wetted Approach Venturis. liquid is travelling in the gas core as drops. By neglecting

Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003

 MODELLING GAS–LIQUID FLOW IN VENTURI SCRUBBERS 253

the volume occupied by drops in the gas core, the integral

form of the continuity equation for the gas core is given by:
1 d
[RU1 (d ¡ d¤ )] ˆ Eb (8)
RU1 dx
where Eb is the boundary layer entrainment rate.
The integral boundary layer momentum equation, equa-
tion (7), and the core continuity equation, equation (8), can
be simpli
ed into forms as shown below in terms of the
boundary layer blockage parameter, B ˆ d*=R and the
boundary layer blockage fraction, L ˆ d*=d:
dB dL
a11 ‡ a12 ˆ b1 ¡ m1 (9)
dx dx
dB dL
a21 ‡ a22 ˆ b2 ¡ m2 (10)
dx dx
Figure 3. Sensitivity of L and B for 1, 5 and 10 bar.
These two equations, together with the droplet momentum
equations, the expressions for boundary layer entrainment,
Eb ˆ 0.0083(1 7 L) 7 2.5, skin friction (Cf ˆ 2k2VT j VT j ) The
rst test considered the effect of the initial values of
(where VT is the dimensionless shear velocity, k is the Von the boundary layer parameters, L and B. Tests were
Karman constant ˆ 0.44) and shape factor (h ˆ (d* 7 d)=y), performed at different pressures to
nd out whether there
present the complete hydrodynamic model for a Venturi was a pressure effect. Values in the ranges 0.001–0.1 and
scrubber. 0.000001–0.1 were used for L and B respectively. Speci
-
cally, and the ratio L0=B0 was set at 1, 10, 100 and 1000.
Figure 3 presents predictions of pressure drop for different
EXPERIMENTAL DATA USED FOR VALIDATION values of L0 and B0 at 1, 5 and 10 bar and shows that the
Although there are a large number of studies on the pressure drop is almost constant as long as the ratio
pressure loss in Venturi scrubbers in the literature, very L=B > 50.
few were obtained at high pressure. In this paper, two sets of From the de
nition of L and B, it can be seen that
experimental data of Yung et al. (1981, 1984) have been L d¤ = d R D
used to test the Full Boundary Layer Model. They presented ˆ ˆ ˆ
B d¤ =R d 2d
experimental total pressure drop data from two pilot Venturi
scrubbers at Air Pollution Technology, Inc. (A.P.T.), one at Therefore, one can see that the calculated pressure drop is
high pressure and another at low pressure. Both were inuenced by the initial ratio between the pipe diameter and
Pearce–Anthony Venturi scrubbers operating with air and the thickness of the boundary layer. As long as the initial
water. The latter was injected radially inward from four ports boundary layer is set at <1% of the diameter, good
positioned near the upstream end of the throat. They were of consistent results are obtained.
modular construction so that the effect of different geometry The second test considered the effect of the detailed
on system performance could be studied. The two Venturis geometry of liquid injection. The sizes of drops produced
were installed in a 0.203 m diameter pipe and had conver- will depend on the diameter of the ori
ce through which the
gence and diffuser angles of 25.25¯ and 14.40¯ . The throat liquid was injected. Yung et al. (1981) did not specify the
diameter was 0.078 m. The high pressure test facility was exact dimensions of the ori
ces that they employed. To
nd
operated in the range of 1–10 bar total pressure, with the gas out whether this exact value is important, calculations were
velocity ranging from 40 to 90 m s¡1 and liquid-to-gas ratios carried out with diameters in the range 0.5–4 mm. The
between 0.001 and 0.002. The low pressure Venturi scrubber calculated results, Figure 4, show predicted pressure drop
was operated at atmospheric pressure, with throat velocities
of 32 to 71 m s¡1 and liquid-to-gas ratios of 0.001–0.0033.
The effects of throat length and diffuser angle were studied.

SENSITIVITY OF FULL BOUNDARY LAYER MODEL

As stated above, the Full Boundary Layer Model is a
complicated model which requires, apart from the geometry,
ow rates and physical properties, initial values of the
boundary layer variables (L and B) and the diameter of the
ori
ce through which the liquid was injected. Ideally, the
effect of these input values on predicting the results should be
as small as possible so that the choice of the parameters does
not cause too much variation in the predictions. Therefore,
before validating the Full Boundary Layer Model against the
experimental data of Yung et al. (1984) described above, tests
were carried out to assess the sensitivity of the model. Figure 4. The sensitivity of the model to the ori
ce diameter.

Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003

254 SUN and AZZOPARDI

Figure 5. The sensitivity of the model to the initial drop size.

Figure 7. Comparisons between modelling results and the experimental data

of Yung et al. (1984) at 10 bar.

Figure 6. The effect of the liquid injection position (throat length

0.0279m).

does not change with ori
ce diameter. Drop sizes depend on

the ori
ce diameter to the power of 0.2. In order to cover a
slightly greater range of drop size, a further series of Figure 8. Comparisons between modelling results and the experimental data
calculations were carried out with initial drop sizes that of Yung et al. (1984) at 5 bar.
were 0.5 to 2.0 times that expected from the equation
proposed by Azzopardi and Govan (1984). The results,
presented in Figure 5, show little effect of initial drop size.
The
nal test considered the effect of the axial position of
the liquid injection point. Again this effect is small, as
illustrated in Figure 6. Therefore, although the exact posi-
tion was not available in the paper of Yung et al. (1981), as
long as the liquid introduction points were located in the
rst
tenth of the throat, the predicted pressure drop is reliable.

COMPARISONS BETWEEN MODEL PREDICTIONS

AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA
The experimental results of Yung et al. (1984) have been
used to validate the Full Boundary Layer Model, as well as
that of Azzopardi et al. (1991). Comparisons were carried
out at three different operating pressures, 10 bar, 5 bar and
1 bar and the results are presented in Figures 7–9 respec-
tively. At high pressure, especially at 10 bar (Figure 7),
excellent agreement is seen between the predicted Figure 9. Comparisons between modelling results and the experimental data
pressure drop and the experimental data. The model of of Yung et al. (1984) at 1 bar.

Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003

 MODELLING GAS–LIQUID FLOW IN VENTURI SCRUBBERS
Azzopardi et al. (1991) also gave reasonable predictions,
with the maximum errors <30%. Other models, such as
Calvert (1970), Boll (1973), Yung et al. (1977) and Rippin-
ger and Dau (1980) all gave similar results, all under-
predicting the experimental data signi
cantly (mean error
>60%). For 5 bar runs (Figure 8), the present model and the
model of Azzopardi et al. (1991) are still the best. For other
models, the predicted pressure drop was >50% lower than
the measurements. For the low pressure cases, Figure 9
shows that the Full Boundary Layer Model over-predicted
slightly. The model of Calvert (1970) signi
cantly over-
predicted the pressure drop while other models were fairly
accurate.
DISCUSSION
Models, such as those of Boll (1973) and Azzopardi and
Govan (1984) that integrate equations through the Venturi,
give reasonable predictions of the pressure change between
entry and throat. However, it is in the predictions over the
diffuser that the inclusion of boundary layer effects becomes
important. Though Azzopardi et al. (1991) provided that
feature, their approach required that initial boundary layer
parameters be provided at the start of the diffuser. Conse-
quently there could be a jump between the one-dimensional
model used in the convergence and throat and the boundary
layer model in the diffuser. The present extension, providing
a boundary layer calculation in all parts of the Venturi,
eliminates the inter-model transition and provides initial
boundary layer parameters at the start of the diffuser
intrinsically from the calculations in the throat. The bound-
ary layer model provides for a small core ow. However, this
is only important in the diffuser. The fact that the Full
Boundary Layer Model works better in higher pressure is
probably due to its embodying more of the physics of the
process, i.e., allowing for the interia of gas=drops in the
core acting on the boundary layer, assuming that there are
no drops in the boundary layer so that it can be calculated
using a gas only model. Support for the latter comes
from experiments on a Venturi meter for gas=solids ows.
Photography of the ow through a glass Venturi using laser
light sheet illumination showed that the boundary layer,
whose thickness was calculated using a model similar to that
presented here, was essentially particle free.
The fact that the model of Azzopardi et al. (1991) gave
the best prediction among the prior models for the high-
pressure cases indicates that the physics built into the
boundary layer calculations is correct. The present exten-
sion, for the reasons laid out above, gives a more re
ned
result.
Given the gross over-simpli
cations invoked, it is perhaps
not surprising that the very simple model of Calvert (1970)
did not predict accurately data for any of the three pressure
conditions discussed above. Though the model proposed by
Yung et al. (1977) gave good predictions at low pressure
(see Figure 9) for their own medium size Venturi, Gonçalves
et al. (2001), who carried out a systematic test of models
against atmospheric pressure data, regarded this as fortui-
tous. They illustrated that the under-estimation due to
neglecting the stress at the gas–wall boundary might
compensate the over-prediction caused by the assumption
of complete atomization. For the high-pressure conditions of
Yung et al. (1984), the model failed seriously to predict
Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003
255
Figure 10. The comparison between the modelling results and the experi-
mental data of Yung et al. (1977, 1984) at different pressures. Gas velocity
at throat 90 m s 1; liquid loading 0.002, throat length 0.0286m.
pressure drop probably because it does not take into account
frictional pressure loss in the Venturi.
The models of Boll (1973) and Rippinger and Dau (1980)
produced similar results with reasonable predictions of the
pressure drop in different size low pressure Pearce–Anthony
Venturis.
The effect of system pressure is best illustrated in
Figure 10. This shows how the predictions of existing
models, e.g., Calvert (1970), Boll (1973), Yung et al.
(1977) and Rippinger and Dau (1980), increasingly under-
predict as the system pressure increases. Only the present
model shows a relatively stable prediction from 1 bar to
10 bar.
It is noted that at the lower pressure condition shown in
Figure 10, the present model did not agree with the data as
well as in the high-pressure runs when the ratio between L
and B is still
xed at the stable area in Figure 3, as was done
in the high-pressure cases. Better agreement was achieved
by reducing the ratio of L and B to 10. Therefore, applica-
tion of the Full Boundary Layer Model to a wide range of
pressures might require a different relationship between
initial L and B. For high-pressure Venturis, the optimal
ratio is 50–100, while for low-pressure Venturis, the ratio is
about 10. An alternative would be to use the model of
Azzopardi et al. (1991), which only takes the boundary layer
into account in the diffuser, in the low-pressure cases and to
use the Full Boundary Layer Model in the high-pressure
cases.
CONCLUSIONS
From the results and discussion above, it can be
concluded that:
(1) The phenomena of the boundary layer must be consid-
ered in high-pressure Venturis. A model ignoring these
effects can lead to under-predictions of pressure drop,
which has potential risk in industrial Venturis. The
present model, which incorporated growth of the bound-
ary layer and possible separation of the ow, was the
only one to give accurate estimations at high pressure.
256 SUN and AZZOPARDI
This is an extension of that of Azzopardi et al. (1991)
in that it includes a description of boundary layer
behaviour throughout the Venturi scrubber. It gave
very good predictions for Pearce–Anthony Venturis at
high-pressure conditions.
(2) The present model is not sensitive to the absolute initial
value of boundary layer parameters, the dimensions of
the spray holes and the initial drop size. The ratio of the
two boundary layer parameters must be
xed at greater
than 50.
(3) The accuracy of the prediction of the present model
does not change with the system pressure. This is a
signi
cant advantage compared with prior models.
REFERENCES
Azzopardi, B.J. and Govan, A.H., 1984, The modelling of Venturi
scrubbers, Filtration & Separation, 21: 196–200.
Azzopardi, B.J., Teixeira, S.F.C.F., Govan, A.H. and Bott, T.R., 1991, An
improved model for pressure drop in Venturi scrubbers, Trans IChemE,
Part B, Proc Safe Env Prot, 69: 237–245.
Boll, R.H., 1973, Particle collection and pressure drop in Venturi scrubbers,
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 12: 40–50.
Brook, N., 1962, Flow measurement of solid–liquid mixtures using Venturi
and other meters, Proceeding of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
176: 127–140.
Calvert, S., 1970, Venturi and other atomizing scrubbers ef
ciency and
pressure drop, American Institute of Chemical Engineers Journal, 16:
392–396.
Carlson, H.M., Frazier, P.M. and Engdahl, R.B., 1948, Meter for owing
mixtures of air and pulverized coal, Transactions of the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers, 70: 65–79.
Farber, L., 1953, The Venturi as a meter for gas–solids mixtures, Transac-
tions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 75: 943–951.
Gonçalves, J.A.S., Fernandez Alonso, D. and Azzopardi, B.J., 1999,
Experimental study of hydrodynamics in Venturi scrubbers with two
different liquid injection arrangements, in Two-Phase Flow Modelling and
Experimentation, Celata, G.P., Di Marco, P. and Shah, R.K. (eds)
(Edizione ETS, Pisa, Italy), pp 701–707.
Gonçalves, J.A.S., Fernandez Alonso, D., Martins Costa, M.A.,
Azzopardi, B.J. and Coury, J.R., 2001, Evaluation of the models available
for the prediction of pressure drop in Venturi scrubbers, Journal of
Hazardous Materials, 81: 123–140.
Graf, W.H., 1967, A modi
ed Venturi meter for measuring two-phase ow,
Journal of Hydraulic Research, 5: 161–187.
Hall, A.R.W., Reader-Harris, M.J. and Millington, B.C., 2000, A study of the
performance of Venturi meters in multiphase ow, Proc of the 2nd North
American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, Canada.
Haller, H., Muschelknautz, E. and Schultz, T., 1989, Venturi scrubber
calculation and optimazation, Chemical Engineering and Technology,
12: 188–195.
Harris, D.M., 1967, Calibration of a steam quality meter for channel power
measurement in the prototype S.G.H.W Reactor, Proc of the European
Two-Phase Flow Group Meeting, Bournemouth, UK.
Hirata, Y., Takano, M. and Narasaka T., 1991, Measurements of ow rates
and particle concentrations in heterogeneous solid–water two-phase ows
by means of a Venturi, JSME International Journal, 34B: 304–309.
Hirata, Y., Takano, M. and Narasaka, T., 1995, Simultaneous measurements
of ow rates and particle concentrations in heterogeneous solid–water
two-phase ows by means of one Venturi, JSME International Journal,
38B: 440–447.
Johnstone, H.F., Field, R.B. and Tassler, M.C., 1954, Gas absorption and
aerosol collection in a Venturi atomizer, Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry, 46: 1601–1608.
Leith, D., Cooper, D.W. and Rudnick, S.N., 1985, Venturi scrubbers:
pressure loss and regain, Aerosol Science and Technology, 4: 239–243.
Lockhart, R.W. and Martinelli, R.C., 1949, Proposed correlation of data
for isothermal two-phase, two-component ow in pipes, Chemical
Engineering Progress, 45: 39–48.
Machado, R.T.M., 1997, Multiphase ow in a Venturi: an experimental and
theoretical study, Ph.D. Thesis, Imperial College, London, UK.
Nukiyama, S. and Tanasawa, Y., 1938, An experiment on the atomisation of
liquid by means air stream, Transactions of the Society of Mechanical
Engineers (Japan), 4: 86–93.
Pinhero da Silva Filho, J.A., 2000, DIC Thesis, Imperial College, London, UK.
Rippinger, S. and Dau, G., 1980, Berechnuung des Druckverlustes von
Venturi-Wächern, Verfahrenstechnik, 14: 164–168.
Shook, C.A. and Masliyah, J.H., 1974, Flow of slurry through a Venturi
meter, Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 52: 228–233.
Tang, L., Wene, C., Crowe, C.T., Lee J., Ushimaru K. and Bernstein S., 1988,
Validation study of the extended length venturimeter for metering gas–
solid ows, Cavitation and Multiphase Flow Forum FED, 64: 191–194.
Thompson, J.G., Hacking, H. and Cuthbertson, M.G., 1966, S.G.H.W.R.
Steam Meter Calibration Trails. British Ship Research Association
Marine Engineering Contract Report No.W.46.
van Werven, M., Ooms, G., Azzopardi, B.J. and van Maanen, H.R.E., 2003,
Modelling wet-gas annular-dispersed ow through a Venturi, American
Institute of Chemical Engineers Journal, 49: 1383–1391.
Viswanathan, S., Gnyp, A.W. and Pierre, C.C., 1984, Examination of gas–
liquid ow in a Venturi scrubber, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Fundamentals, 23: 303–308.
Wark, K. and Warner, C.F., 1981, Air Pollution, Its Origin and Control, 2nd
edition (Harper and Row, New York, USA).
Whalley, P.B., Azzopardi, B.J., Pshyk, L. and Hewitt, G.F., 1977, Axial View
Photography of Waves in Annular Two-phase Flow. U.K.A.E.A. Report,
AERE R8787.
Wiltz, C., Crowe, C.T., Arrigotti, S. and Ushimaru, S., 1991, Extended
length Venturi for metering gas–solid ows, Proceedings of International
Conference on Multiphase Flow, pp 83–86.
Yung, S.C., Barbarika, H.F. and Calvert, S., 1977, Pressure loss in Venturi
scrubbers, Journal of the Air Control Association, 27: 348–350.
Yung, S.C., Parker, R., Duncan, M., Le, T. and Calvert, S., 1981, Perfor-
mance of Gas-atomized Spray Scrubbers at High Pressure. U.S., D.O.E.
Report MC=19167-1150.
Yung, S.C., Calvert, S. and Duncan, M., 1984, Performance of gas-atomized
spray scrubbers at high pressure, Journal of the Air Control Association,
34: 736–743.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to thank Dr. P. Birchenough, formerly of AEA
Technology, Harwell Laboratory, U.K., for his help in developing the
computer code employed in the present work.
ADDRESS
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Professor
B. J. Azzopardi, Multiphase Flow Research Group, School of Chemical,
Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Nottingham,
University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.
E-mail: barry.azzopardi@nottingham.ac.uk
The manuscript was received 15 November 2002 and accepted for
publication after revision 9 June 2002.
Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, July 2003