Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873

www.elsevier.com/locate/ces

Flow around individual Taylor bubbles rising in stagnant CMC solutions:

PIV measurements
R.G. Sousaa , M.L. Riethmullerb , A.M.F.R. Pintoa , J.B.L.M. Camposa,∗
a Centro de Estudos de Fenómenos de Transporte, Departamento de Engenharia Química, Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto,
Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
b von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, 72 Chaussée de Waterloo, 1640 Rhode-Saint-Genèse, Belgium

Received 29 April 2004; received in revised form 22 November 2004; accepted 24 November 2004
Available online 22 January 2005

Abstract
The flow around single Taylor bubbles rising in non-Newtonian solutions of Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) polymer was studied using
simultaneously particle image velocimetry (PIV) and shadowgraphy. This technique made it possible to determine the correct position of
the bubble interface. Solutions of polymer with weight percentage varying from 0.1 to 1.0 wt% were used to cover a wide range of flow
regimes. The rheological fluid properties and pipe dimension yielded Reynolds numbers between 4 and 714 and Deborah numbers for the
higher concentration solutions between 0.001 and 0.236. The shape of the bubbles rising in the different solutions was compared. The
flow around the nose of the bubbles was found to be similar in all the studied conditions. Velocity profiles in the liquid film around the
bubble were measured and different wake structures were found. With increasing solution viscosity, the wake flow pattern varied from
turbulent to laminar, and a negative wake was observed for the higher polymer concentration solutions.
䉷 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Taylor bubble; Multiphase flow; Non-Newtonian fluids; Viscoelasticity; Particle image velocimetry (PIV); Liquid films

1. Introduction and Griffith, 1962). When two bubbles rise together in a

Slug flow is a two-phase flow regime found when a gas
and a liquid flow simultaneously in a pipe over certain flow
rate ranges. It is characterised by elongated gas bubbles
(Taylor bubbles or slug bubbles) almost filling the pipe
cross-section and liquid flowing around and between the
bubbles. This flow pattern is found in several industrial pro-
cesses as is the case of geothermal, oil and gas transporta-
tion in wells, fermentation, polymer devolatilisation and
air-lift reactors among others. In some chemical processes,
slug flow is induced to increase the reaction rate due to the
mixing action mainly promoted by the wake of the Taylor
bubbles.
The velocity of the bubble depends, among other param-
eters, on the velocity of the liquid flowing ahead (Moissis
∗ Corresponding author. Fax: +351 225081449.
E-mail address: jmc@fe.up.pt (J.B.L.M. Campos).
pipe, the wake of the leading one influences the velocity of
the following, if the distance between the bubbles is smaller
than the minimum stable length (Taitel et al., 1980). In this
case, two bubbles can merge (coalescence) giving place to
a larger bubble and reducing the number of mixing zones.
Coalescence is therefore a problem to avoid and the min-
imum stable distance is strongly dependent on the flow in
the wake of the leading bubble.
Concerning Newtonian liquids, among other studies,
Campos and Guedes de Carvalho (1988) studied the wake
structure for different liquid flow regimes. Pinto and Cam-
pos (1996) studied the interaction between two consecutive
bubbles and established minimum stable lengths for differ-
ent operation conditions. Particle image velocimetry (PIV)
measurements were performed to characterise the flow
field around individual Taylor bubbles in Newtonian fluids
(Bugg and Saad, 2002; van Hout et al., 2001; Nogueira
et al., 2000; Polonsky et al., 1998).

0009-2509/$ - see front matter 䉷 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ces.2005.11.035
1860 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873
The study of Taylor bubbles rising in non-Newtonian liq-
uids is still scarce, although this two-phase flow is frequently
found in industry. Due to the complex liquid rheology, the
gas–liquid flow patterns have completely different character-
istics, and so different bubbles interaction behaviour. There-
fore, there is a need for extending the slug flow research to-
wards non-Newtonian liquids. Velocities and shapes of small
bubbles flowing in non-Newtonian liquids have been stud-
ied by different authors (Astarita and Apuzzo, 1965; Leal et
al., 1971; Acharya et al., 1977). Hassager (1979) described,
for the first time, a negative wake behind unconfined small
bubbles rising in non-Newtonian liquids. Bubbles coales-
cence in non-Newtonian liquids was studied by Acharya and
Ulbrecht (1978), Kee et al. (1990) and Li et al. (2001).
Funfschilling and Li (2001) used PIV and birefringence
visualisation to study the flow of non-Newtonian liquids
around small bubbles.
Concerning Taylor bubbles flow in non-Newtonian flu-
ids, the effects of power law rheology and pipe inclina-
tion on slug bubble velocity were studied by Carew et al.
(1995). Otten and Fayed (1976) studied the pressure drop
and the friction drag reduction in non-Newtonian slug flow.
Rosehart et al. (1975) measured the void fraction, slug ve-
locity and frequency for co-current slug flow of air in highly
viscous non-Newtonian liquids. Terasaka and Tsuge (2003)
performed gas hold-up measurements for gas slugs rising in
viscous liquids with a yield stress. Kamışlı (2003) derived a
one-dimensional flow equation for the motion of a long bub-
ble rising steadily in a vertical or inclined tube filled with a
power-law fluid. The author concluded that the thickness of
the liquid film flowing around the bubble increases with de-
creasing power-law index. It is also mentioned the disagree-
ment found by several authors between the predicted and the
experimental liquid film thickness for non-Newtonian fluids
and that, viscoelastic effects tend to reduce the film thick-
ness when compared with predictions from purely viscous
theory.
In the present work, the flow around single Taylor bubbles
rising in stagnant non-Newtonian Carboxymethylcellulose
(CMC) solutions is studied using PIV and shadowgraphy
techniques simultaneously. The results obtained contribute
to a better understanding of the non-Newtonian flow field
around the bubbles and the coalescence mechanism.
2. Experiments
2.1. Experimental techniques
The flow field around the Taylor bubbles rising in stag-
nant liquids was obtained applying PIV and shadowgraphy
simultaneously. This technique was first applied by Lindken
and Merzkirch (2001) to bubbly flow and Nogueira et al.
(2003) adapted it to slug flow. The technique is fully de-
scribed in Nogueira et al. (2003) and Sousa et al. (2004) and
consists in placing a board of light emitting diodes (LEDs)
behind the test section pulsing simultaneously with the laser
source, so that a CCD camera acquires an image containing
both the PIV particles and the bubble shadow. Two lenses
of 35 and 50 mm of focal length were used to obtain respec-
tively the flow field in the nose/wake region and a close
view of the liquid film around the bubble. The LEDs board
is composed by 350 LEDs. Fluorescent particles (an orange
vinyl pigment with 10
m of mean size) were used as seed-
ing, emitting light at 590 nm. A Nd:YAG laser was used to
create a vertical laser sheet of about 1 mm thickness pass-
ing through the axis of the column. The laser, the camera
and the LED’s board were all triggered by the same signal
generator making it possible to acquire the PIV image and
bubble shadow in the same frame.
Two laser diodes were installed near the outside column
wall, pointing into two photocells placed in the opposite side
of the column. The signal yielded by the photocell is pro-
portional to the light received, so when the Taylor bubble
is passing between a laser diode and a photocell, the laser
beam is deflected and the photocell signal drops abruptly.
The Taylor bubble velocity was determined dividing the dis-
tance between the two photocells by the time delay between
their dropped signals.
2.2. Facility
The present study was performed in the experimental
setup represented in Fig. 1 and fully described in Nogueira
et al. (2003) and Sousa et al. (2004). The facility is mainly
composed by an acrylic cylindrical column of 6 m height
and 0.032 m of internal diameter, opened at the top to the
atmosphere, two pneumatic valves, two storing tanks and
a pump. The test section was located near the top of the
column, to avoid entrance effects and to assure a stabilised
flow. A box with plane faces surrounding the test section
(0.5 m × 0.12 m × 0.11 m) was filled with the studied liq-
uid in order to minimise the optical distortion. Individual
Taylor bubbles were injected at the bottom of the column,
by operating valves A and B. Opening valve B, the liquid
trapped between the valves falls into the reservoir being sub-
stituted by air. Closing valve B and opening valve A, the
air between the valves starts rising up in the form of a long
tubular bubble (Taylor bubble). The volume of the bubbles
was controlled by setting the time during which valve B was
opened. For each solution, the study was focused on bub-
bles with sufficient length to have a developed liquid film
flowing around but not enough length to generate wave in-
stabilities in this liquid film. The PIV instrumentation was
basically composed by a PCO (SensiCam) CCD camera and
an acquisition and data processing system. A Nd:YAG laser
with 400 mJ of pulse power was used to illuminate the mea-
sured plane. The laser wavelength was 532 nm and the pulse
duration 2.4 ns. A LED array emitting light at 650 nm was
placed behind the test section with a diffuser paper to ob-
tain the Taylor bubble shadow at the same time as the PIV
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873
FRONT VIEW
TEST
SECTION
CCD LASER
CAMERA OPTICS
PHOTO CELLS
LASER
DIODES
PNEUMATIC
VALVES
A CAMERA
B
DATA PUMP
ACQUISITION
SYSTEM
Fig. 1. Representation of the experimental setup with a detailed view of the test section.
image. A red filter, opaque below 550 nm was placed in
front of the PCO CCD camera to block the intense green
reflections of the laser and to allow the passage of the light
emitted by the fluorescent particles and by the LEDs. Two
thermocouples were placed below and above the test section
to measure the working temperature and to check a possible
temperature gradient along the column. The fluid rheology
was determined in a AR 2000 DTA Instruments Rheometer.
3. Data processing
The images acquired with the simultaneous PIV and
shadowgraphy technique contain both the PIV particles
images and the shadow of the bubble in the same frame.
The PIV processing method is fully described by Nogueira
et al. (2003). The flow field was obtained using the cross-
correlation algorithm window displacement iterative multi-
grid (WIDIM), developed by Scarano and Riethmuller
(1999). In this work, initial interrogation windows had
20 pixels × 40 pixels and, after the first vector estimative,
final windows had 10 pixels × 20 pixels. An interrogation
areas overlap of 50% was used. Spurious vector identifica-
tion was used; vectors with a signal to noise ratio (SNR)
less than 1.5 (about 5–7% of the total vectors) were substi-
tuted by the neighbours average value. The time between
PIV images was adjusted according to the liquid velocity
and varied between 500 and 2000
s for the wake and nose
regions and 80–400
s for the liquid film flowing around
1861
TEST SECTION DETAIL
(top view)
LED’S BOAR D
90°
VERTICAL
LASER
SHEET
CCD
the bubble. Tests made with known particle displacements
showed a maximum uncertainty of 0.2 pixels on the win-
dows displacement. The time between images was set
according to the liquid velocity, so the maximum particle
displacement was about 5–7 pixels. This means that for
a typical displacement of 5 pixels, the maximum relative
error in the velocity is 4%.
With the bubble shadow it is possible to identify the posi-
tion of the gas–liquid interface and so to overcome the prob-
lems described by Nogueira et al. (2000) due to reflection
and refraction of particles images at the interface. Erroneous
vectors created inside the Taylor bubble are then eliminated.
The image processing to determine the shadow of the bub-
ble is described in previous works (Nogueira et al., 2003;
Sousa et al., 2004) and consists of several sequential steps.
A median filter is applied to the original image to eliminate
the seeding particles. A background reference image is then
subtracted to the filtered image to eliminate the column and
the background resulting the shadow of the bubble. The pro-
cess is completed by defining a gray level threshold, which
binaries the image and by filling the interior of the Taylor
bubble.
4. Results
In this work, the flow around Taylor bubbles ris-
ing in stagnant solutions of CMC (molecular mass of
300 000 kg kmol−1 , grade 7H4C from Hercules) with
1862 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873

1.0% CMC (22.0°C) the viscoelastic effects, the fluid relaxation time was deter-
0.8% CMC (22.0°C)
0.6% CMC (19.0°C)
mined for the fluids with measurable first normal stresses
0.5% CMC (25.0°C) difference. Leider and Bird (1974) defined the fluid relax-
0.4% CMC (19.0°C) ation time, f (Eq. (2)), using the fact that both shear stress,
101 0.3% CMC (21.5°C)
, and N1 can be well approximated by power functions of
0.1% CMC (20.3°C)
Carreau-Yasuda the shear rate over the range of conditions of interest, i.e.,
 = m(˙)r and N1 = m1 (˙)s .
100
m 1/(s−r)
1
f = .
Viscosity (Pas)

(2)
2m
10-1 The characteristic shear rate of the flow, defined as ˙ f =
Ugb /D, where Ugb is the Taylor bubble velocity and D the
pipe internal diameter, is between 5 and 6 s−1 for the higher
10-2 concentration solutions. To obtain the relaxation time, the
shear stresses and the first normal stresses difference were
approximated by power functions of the shear rate in the
range 0.04–10 s−1 . The relaxation time, f , and the corre-
10-3
10-2 10-1 100 101 102 103 104 sponding Deborah number, De = f ˙ f , are represented in
Shear rate (1/s) Table 2 for the three more concentrated solutions.
The values of the Deborah number depend on the pro-
Fig. 2. Viscosity as a function of the shear rate for the studied solutions posed relaxation time definition, however from Table 2 it is
and Carreau–Yasuda model fitted curves.
clear a change in its order of magnitude, from the less to the
higher concentration solutions.
different weight percentages was studied. The shear viscos- The Reynolds number, Re = Ugb D/
, where  is the
ity of the different solutions was measured in a AR 2000 liquid density, was also determined, using the viscosity at the
DTA Instruments Rheometer at experimental temperature. characteristic flow shear rate, ˙ f . Values of the experimental
All the solutions exhibited a shear-thinning behaviour, as temperature, gas bubble velocity and Reynolds number are
can be seen in the viscosity-shear rate plot on Fig. 2. presented in Table 3 for all the studied solutions.
The Carreau–Yasuda viscosity model is expressed by the The Taylor bubble shape and the velocity field around the
following equation: bubbles rising in the different solutions are described in the
next sections.

=
∞ + (
0 −
∞ )(1 + (˙ )a )(n−1)/a , (1)

where
is the measured viscosity, ˙ the applied shear rate,

0 the viscosity limit when ˙ → 0, and
∞ the viscosity
at infinite shear rate, which was set as the solvent viscosity.
The parameter  has units of time, n and a are dimensionless
parameters.
This model was fitted to the experimental data and
represented in Fig. 2 by full lines. The values of the
Carreau–Yasuda model parameters are listed in Table 1.
The first normal stresses difference, N1 , was measured
for the higher concentration solutions and is represented in
Fig. 3 as a function of the shear rate. In order to quantify
4.1. Taylor bubble shape
The Taylor bubbles are elongated bubbles characterised by
a prolate spheroid leading edge, whose curvature is higher
for higher viscosities. The bubble nose shapes, obtained from
the bubble shadows, are represented in Fig. 4 for some of
the studied solutions, in the form of dimensionless distance
to the nose (z/D) versus the dimensionless bubble radius
(r/D).
The bubble radius increases with z/D, until it reaches
a maximum value at a certain distance from the nose. The

Table 1
Carreau–Yasuda viscosity model parameters for the CMC solutions

CMC (wt%) T (◦ C)
0 (Pa s)
∞ (Pa s)  (s) a n ˙ (s−1 )

0.1 20.3 0.0091 0.001 0.0214 0.8497 0.8711 1–4000

0.3 21.5 0.0510 0.001 0.0566 0.7124 0.7212 0.7–4000
0.4 19.0 0.1102 0.001 0.1099 0.8087 0.6751 0.125–4000
0.5 25.0 0.2203 0.001 0.0631 0.5654 0.5095 0.25–4000
0.6 19.0 0.3602 0.001 0.1828 0.8317 0.5745 0.08–4000
0.8 22.0 1.0497 0.001 0.2214 0.6610 0.4330 0.04–4000
1.0 22.0 2.9899 0.001 0.3653 0.6683 0.3997 0.04–4000
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873 1863

103 0 0.1 wt% CMC

1.0% CMC (22.0°C)
0.8% CMC (22.0°C) 0.4 wt% CMC
0.6% CMC (19.0°C) 0.8 wt% CMC
1.0 wt% CMC
0.1
102
N1 (Pa)

0.2

101

0.3

100
10-2 10-1 100 101 102 103 104 0.4

z/D
Shear Rate (1/s)

Fig. 3. First normal stresses difference in function of the shear rate for
0.5
the higher concentration solutions.

Table 2 0.6
Relaxation time and Deborah number for the higher concentration solu-
tions
CMC (wt%) f (s) De 0.7
0.6 0.0002 0.001
0.8 0.0295 0.166
1.0 0.0472 0.236
0.8

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Table 3
r/D
Experimental temperature, bubble velocity and Reynolds number

wt% T (◦ C) Ub (m/s) Re Fig. 4. Dimensionless distance to the bubble nose, z/D as a function of
the dimensionless bubble radius r/D.
0.1 20.3 0.199 714
0.3 21.5 0.198 144
0.4 19.0 0.195 70 Table 4
0.5 25.0 0.192 41 Maximum bubble radius for the different studied solutions
0.6 19.0 0.187 24
0.8 22.0 0.180 10 Re (r/D)max
1.0 22.0 0.160 4
714 0.455
144 0.438
70 0.427
41 0.418
values of the maximum bubble radius, (r/D)max , for each 24 0.406
solution are presented in Table 4. 10 0.393
An attempt to obtain a general equation for the bubble 4 0.353
shape was successfully performed. The bubble shapes are
well described by
according to the following equations
r/D = k1 tanh(k2 (z/D)k3 ), (3)
k2 = 3.983Re−0.111 , (5)
where k1 is the dimensionless maximum bubble radius pre-
sented in Table 4, which is function of the Reynolds number: k3 = 0.648Re−0.068 . (6)

(r/D)max = k1 = 0.019 ln(Re) + 0.342 (4) The maximum deviation in the bubble shapes obtained with
correlation (3) is 4% and occurs only for the limit viscosities.
and k2 , k3 were obtained by fitting the experimental val- The bottom region of the bubble is where the main dif-
ues. These parameters are function of Reynolds number ferences in the bubble shape are present. Some PIV images
1864 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873

Fig. 5. Bubble trailing edge images for (a) Re = 714, (b) Re = 144, (c) Re = 70, (d) Re = 24, (e) Re = 10, (f) Re = 4.

showing the Taylor bubble trailing edge are represented in

Fig. 5. For the higher Reynolds number (Fig. 5a and b), the
bottom surface is unstable and oscillates three-dimensionally
-0.20
as the bubble rises. As the viscosity increases, the trailing
edge becomes stable and with a concave shape (Fig. 5c and
d). For the lower Reynolds numbers (Fig. 5e and f), the
0.00
trailing edge loses its concavity and gets a lacrimal shape.
z/D

For these fluids, there is a sharp increase in the value of the

Deborah number, as seen in Section 4, which means that the
change in the bubble trailing edge shape should be related
to viscoelastic effects.
4.2. Flow field in the bubble nose
The flow fields around the Taylor bubbles were obtained
using PIV. The vector fields represented in the next sections
are in a vertical plane containing the central axis of the pipe.
The flow pattern around the nose of the bubbles is sim-
ilar for every studied solution, varying only in the velocity
magnitude. Fig. 6 shows the flow field around the nose of
a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.5 wt% CMC solution. The ve-
locity vectors are relative to a fixed reference frame and the
Taylor bubble is moving upwards. From Fig. 6 it is possible
to see that as the bubble rises, the liquid in front of the bub-
ble is pushed forward and away from the centre and starts
falling around the bubble forming a thin liquid film.
In Fig. 7 two instantaneous axial velocity profiles along
z = 0 for the limit viscosities studied are represented. From
Fig. 7, it is possible to see that the velocity profiles at z=0 for
the limit cases are very similar, varying slightly the velocity
magnitude due to different bubble velocities and shapes. The
velocity profiles of the other solutions studied are between
these two, so they were not plotted for a better visualisation.
0.20
Taylor Bubble
0.40
-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D 0.1m/s
Fig. 6. Flow around the nose of the Taylor bubble in a 0.5 wt% CMC
solution.
4.3. Liquid film velocity profile
The liquid flowing around the bubble nose forms a falling
liquid film between the gas–liquid interface and the pipe
wall. The thickness of the liquid film decreases for higher
values of z according to the bubble radius, until it reaches
a minimum and stable value. Fig. 8 shows the vertical vari-
ation of the axial component of the liquid velocity at the
centre of the liquid film for three of the studied solutions.
Analysing the velocity in the liquid film and the radius of
the bubble, along z/D, they both reach a maximum value
around a certain value of z. In Fig. 9, the dimensionless shape
of the bubble and the dimensionless velocity at the centre
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873 1865

-0.20 z/D = 0 1.2

0.1 wt% CMC
1.0 wt% CMC
1.0
-0.15

V/V(r/D)max, (r/D)/ (r/D)max

0.8
-0.10

0.6
V (m/s)

-0.05
0.4

0.00 0.5 wt% V/V (r/D)

max
0.2 0.5 wt% MedianV/V (r/D)
max
0.5% (r/D)/ (r/D)
0.05 0.0
max

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0.10 z/D
-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D Fig. 9. Dimensionless bubble radius and dimensionless instantaneous
velocity at the centre of the liquid film for the 0.5 wt% CMC solution.
Fig. 7. Instantaneous vertical component of the liquid velocity along z = 0
for 0.1 and 1.0 wt% CMC solutions.

As seen in Fig. 8, as the viscosity decreases, the scattering

1.2
0.3% CMC
of the velocity values increases. The standard deviation of
0.5% CMC the averaged velocity profile in the developed liquid film
1.0% CMC
1.0 was computed in pixels and is plotted in Fig. 10 for 0.1 and
0.8 wt% CMC solutions. The time between the PIV images
0.8 was set to 80 and 355
s for 0.1 and 0.8 wt% CMC solutions
respectively.
The standard deviations presented in Fig. 10 reach up
V (m/s)

0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
z/D
Fig. 8. Instantaneous axial component of the velocity at the centre of the
liquid film, as a function of z/D for 0.3, 0.5 and 1.0 wt% CMC solutions.
of the film for the 0.5 wt% CMC solution are represented. A
median value of the velocity was taken from the 20 neigh-
bours (back and forwards) points to reduce the scattering of
the data.
From Fig. 9, it is possible to see that the bubble radius
and the liquid film velocity both reach a maximum value at
approximately zstable = 3.5D. The point at which the liquid
film becomes fully developed was obtained for all the solu-
tions and is represented in Table 5.
Average velocity profiles in the developed liquid film were
determined, by averaging the velocities at every radial posi-
tion, between zstable /D (Table 5) until the end of the liquid
film. More than 1000 velocity profiles were used for each
CMC solution, obtained from multiple PIV images of dif-
ferent bubbles with the same length.
to 4 times the estimated PIV error (0.2 pixels) mentioned
in Section 3 and the same behaviour is found for all the
studied solutions. This means that the higher scattering in
the velocity data presented in Fig. 8 for the less viscous
CMC solutions is due to the decreasing time gap between
PIV images.
Several hypothesis can be discussed to justify the high
scattering level of the velocity data. A standard deviation
of the windows displacement independent of the Reynolds
number, is a strong argument to conclude that turbulence
should not be the cause. The bubble shape described in Sec-
tion 4.1 contains small disturbances. These disturbances are
due to the presence of particles reflections at the interface
which interfere in the data processing used to obtain the bub-
ble shape. Even though, if these disturbances were caused
by bubble interface oscillations, they would induce, in the
worst case, a maximum variation of 4% in the liquid film
thickness and could be responsible for a maximum variation
of 8% in the liquid film velocity. This is still half of the vari-
ations obtained in all the studied solutions. Different win-
dows sizes were tested in the processing of the liquid film
profiles but 0.8 pixels of maximum standard deviation was
always obtained. Other tests were made by simply pumping
liquid in the pipe without the presence of the Taylor bub-
ble, and taking different flow rates and times between PIV
images to cover a large range of particle displacements. In
these tests, the liquid velocity is only function of the radial
position, like in the liquid film, and the maximum scattering
1866 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873

Table 5
Approximate values of z/D from which the liquid film is fully developed

wt% 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0

zstable /D 8.0 6.0 4.0 3.5 2.4 1.8 1.6

0.1% ∆y (pixels) 0.0

7 0.1% σy (pixels)
0.8% ∆y (pixels) 0.2
6 0.8% σy (pixels)
0.4
∆y (pixels), σy (pixels)

5 0.6

V (m/s)
4 0.8
1.0 wt% CMC
| 0.8 wt% CMC
3 1.0 0.6 wt% CMC
0.5 wt% CMC
1.2 0.4 wt% CMC
2 0.3 wt% CMC
0.1 wt% CMC
1.4 Bubble interface
1 Column wall
1.6
0 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 r/D
r/D
Fig. 11. Average of the axial component of the velocity in the liquid
Fig. 10. Mean windows vertical displacement, y (pixels), in the liquid falling film for the different solutions.
film and standard deviation, y (pixels), for 0.1 and 0.8 wt% CMC
solutions.

lowest viscosity, due to the thinnest liquid film, the liquid

velocity increases significantly, reaching up to 7 times the
in the displacement data did not exceed 0.2 pixels even in bubble velocity.
the region close to the pipe wall where the liquid film pro- A comparison between the experimental velocity profiles
files are taken. The only difference, between these tests and and those previewed by a theoretical analysis was performed.
the experiments, is the presence of the bubble. The compar- Considering the developed film as a free falling film with
ison between the histograms of the gray levels in the liq- constant pressure at the gas–liquid interface, the weight of
uid film and in the same region of an image without the the liquid is balanced by the shear stresses:
bubble shows that there is a slight increase in the gray lev-
els when the bubble is present. One explanation could be j(r)
− gr = 0, (7)
some reflection of the laser sheet in the bubble interface jr
back to the liquid film region. Although this reflection of
the laser sheet is much less intense than the laser sheet it- where  is the shear stress, r the radial position,  the liq-
self, the curvature of the bubble interface makes the reflected uid density, g the gravity acceleration and  the liquid film
laser sheet larger than the original one. This fact, in con- thickness. Integrating Eq. (7) with the boundary condition
junction with small undetectable misalignments of the laser  = 0 at r = R − , the shear stress profile is given by
sheet/Taylor bubble/column axis could lead inevitably to  
the illumination of particles in a plane wider than the orig- gr (R − )2
= r− . (8)
inal laser sheet and be responsible for the decrease in the 2 r
measurements accuracy. This is the most probable reason
for the high velocity data scattering in the liquid film, but Taking the shear stress at each radial position, the correspon-
it is not easy to prove it experimentally. As a conclusion, a dent shear rate is then obtained from the rheological data:
maximum error of 0.8 pixels in the windows displacement
should be considered for the liquid film region, which is 4  =
(˙)˙, (9)
times higher than the 0.2 pixels considered for all the other
regions. where
(˙) is given by the Carreau–Yasuda model. From
The averaged fully developed velocity profiles are rep- this equation, the shear rate, ˙ , cannot be explicitly set as a
resented in Fig. 11. It is possible to verify that the liquid function of the shear stress and must be computed numeri-
film thickness decreases with decreasing viscosity. For the cally for each radial position.
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873 1867

0.0 4.4. Taylor bubble wake

0.2 The Taylor bubble wake is the region where the main dif-
0.4
ferences appear in the flow pattern of the studied cases. For
the higher values of Reynolds number, the liquid film ve-
0.6 locity is higher and the annular jet plugging into the wake
V (m/s)

causes turbulence, which is in someway responsible for the

0.8
instability of the bubble trailing edge. Fig. 13 shows an in-
|
1.0 stantaneous velocity field in the wake of a Taylor bubble
1.0 wt% Experimental rising in a 0.1 wt% CMC solution (Re = 714), in a reference
0.8 wt% Experimental
1.2 0.5 wt% Experimental frame fixed to the pipe and in a reference frame moving
0.3 wt% Experimental
0.1 wt% Experimental with the bubble. The variable z∗ is the vertical distance to
1.4
Theoretical the centre of the trailing edge of the bubble. From Fig. 13 it
pipe wall
1.6 is possible to identify small vortices in continuous displace-
0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 ment in the wake of the bubble. It should be noticed that the
r/D velocity field is obtained from a vertical plane through the
centre of the column and due to the three-dimensional os-
Fig. 12. Comparison of theoretical and experimental average liquid film
cillation of the bubble trailing edge, there is a lot of liquid
profiles.
crossing this plane. The maximum upward velocity in the
wake can reach up to 4 times the bubble velocity, so some
With the shear rate profile, the velocity profile is then liquid is flowing upwards in the wake although it is not the
obtained from its definition equation same fluid that follows the bubble along all the rise, due
to the turbulence and vortices displacement and shedding.
jV When subtracting the bubble velocity to obtain the flow field
= −˙(r) (10)
jr in a reference frame moving with the bubble, there are no
significant changes due to the high velocities present in the
by integrating between r=R and r=R−, with the boundary wake, but it is possible to see that at distances higher than
condition V = 0 at r = R. 1.2D from the bubble trailing edge,there is no liquid going
Once the liquid film thickness, , is not known a priori, up with the bubble. Behind the Taylor bubble, due to the
it must be iteratively determined after performing a conser- great instability of the trailing edge, a train of small bubbles
vative mass balance. In a reference frame moving with the is formed, starting at about three column diameters from the
bubble, the liquid film flow rate is given by trailing edge and extending along several diameters. These
 R small bubbles are present during all the bubble rise main-
Q̇ = (V (r) + Ub )2 r dr, (11) taining approximately the same distance to the bubble trail-
R− ing edge. A similar behaviour was found for all the Taylor
bubbles rising in this solution. The presence of the bubbles
which, by mass conservation, must also be equal to the
greatly increases the distance at which the fluid returns to
downward liquid flow rate far ahead of the bubble (reference
rest. This is expected to have great influence in the coales-
frame attached to the bubble) given by
cence phenomena.
Q̇ = Ub R 2 . (12) As the viscosity increases, the liquid film velocity de-
creases and the wake instabilities tend to disappear. For the
The value of  was iteratively determined matching the flow 0.3 wt% CMC solution, there is still some instability in the
rate given by Eq. (11) with the one obtained from Eq. (12). trailing edge of the bubble but much less than in the 0.1 wt%
The theoretical and experimental velocity profiles are rep- CMC solution. In Fig. 14, an instantaneous flow field in the
resented for some of the studied solutions in Fig. 12. From wake of a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.3 wt% CMC solution
this figure it is possible to see that the experimental veloc- (Re=144) is represented. In contrast with the previous case,
ity profiles are very close to the theoretical ones. The ex- it is now possible to identify a large recirculation zone be-
perimental flow rates in a reference frame moving with the hind the trailing edge, around which flows the liquid coming
bubble differ less than 10% from the expected theoretical from the falling film, this recirculation zone is asymmetric
flow rates. The theoretical film thickness differs less than 5% and not completely “closed” due mainly to the small am-
from the experimental value even for the higher concentra- plitude oscillations that the trailing edge still exhibits. The
tion solutions, indicating a scarce influence of the viscoelas- recirculation and the liquid film expansion is clearly seen in
tic effects. This analysis shows that the developed velocity the reference frame moving with the bubble (Fig. 14 right),
profiles in the liquid film around the Taylor bubbles can be and it is also possible to observe the reattachment of the liq-
theoretically estimated if the bubble velocity and the fluid uid flowing around the wake at approximately 1.2D from
rheology are known. the trailing edge.
1868 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873

Taylor Bubble Taylor Bubble

0.0 0.0

0.2 0.2

0.4 0.4

0.6 0.6
z*/D

z*/D
0.8 0.8

1.0 1.0

1.2 1.2

1.4 1.4

-0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4
r/D 1 m/s r/D 1 m/s

Fig. 13. Instantaneous velocity field in the wake of a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.1 wt% solution, in a fixed reference frame (left) and in a reference
frame moving with the bubble (right).

Taylor Bubble Taylor Bubble

0.0 0.0

0.2 0.2

0.4 0.4

0.6 0.6
z*/D

z*/D

0.8 0.8

1.0 1.0

1.2 1.2

1.4 1.4

-0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40
r/D 0.5 m/s r/D 0.5 m/s

Fig. 14. Instantaneous velocity field in the wake of a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.3 wt% CMC solution, in a fixed reference frame (left) and in a reference
frame moving with the bubble (right).

In the 0.4 wt% solution (Re=70), the bubble trailing edge
is now stable and no oscillations occur. The result is a sym-
metric wake flow within a “closed” recirculation zone (Fig.
15). The liquid coming from the falling film smoothly ex-
pands after the bubble trailing edge, inducing the formation
of a closed donut shaped vortex in the wake rising attached
to the bubble. The reattachment of the liquid film is better
seen through a streamline representation in a reference frame
moving with the bubble. It takes place much closer to the
trailing edge (at about 0.8D) than in the previous solution.
The symmetry of the wake flow allows an easy visualisation
of the three-dimensional flow field in the wake by rotation
of the paper plane around the column axis.
As the Reynolds number decreases, the size of the wake
also decreases. Due to the higher viscosity, the shear stresses
in the liquid are higher, and these stresses, by momentum
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873 1869

Taylor Bubble Taylor Bubble

0.0
0.0

0.2
0.2

z*/D
0.4 0.4

z*/D
0.6 0.6

0.8 0.8

1.0 1.0

1.2 1.2

-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 -0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D 0.5 m/s r/D

Fig. 15. Instantaneous velocity field in the wake of a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.4 wt% CMC solution, in a fixed reference frame (left) and streamlines
representation in a reference frame moving with the bubble (right).

Taylor Bubble Taylor Bubble

0.0 0.0

0.2 0.2

0.4 0.4
z*/D

z*/D

0.6 0.6

0.8 0.8

1.0 1.0

1.2 1.2

-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 -0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D 0.5 m/s r/D

Fig. 16. Instantaneous velocity field in the wake of a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.5 wt% CMC solution, in a fixed reference frame (left) and streamlines
representation in a reference frame moving with the bubble (right).

diffusion, slow down the fluid coming from the liquid film.
The liquid film expansion takes place closer to the bubble
trailing edge.
The instantaneous flow field in the wake of a Taylor
bubble rising in a 0.5 wt% CMC solution (Re = 41) is
represented in Fig. 16 and is quite similar to the one found
for Re = 70. The relevant difference, is the wake length or
the distance at which the liquid film reattaches, which is
now 0.65D. The streamlines in these solutions seem to en-
ter through the bubble interface but in fact they are within
the concave region in the bubble trailing edge, as shown
in Fig. 5.
The increase of viscosity decreases the size of the wake
and for the 0.6 wt% CMC solution (Re = 24) the wake
recirculation becomes almost imperceptible. In Fig. 17, the
flow field in the wake of a Taylor bubble rising in such a
solution is represented. In the fixed reference frame (Fig.
17 left), the upward velocity in the centre of the wake is
very close to the bubble velocity, in opposition to the pre-
vious cases. Therefore, in a reference frame moving with
the bubble (Fig. 17 right), these velocities are very close
to the measurement uncertainty making difficult the plot
of the streamlines in that region. The wake length is now
below 0.2D.
1870 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873

Taylor bubble
Taylor bubble
0.0 0.0

0.2 0.2

0.4 0.4
z*/D

z*/D
0.6 0.6

0.8 0.8

1.0 1.0

-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 -0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D 0.5 m/s r/D

Fig. 17. Instantaneous velocity field in the wake of a Taylor bubble rising in a 0.6 wt% CMC solution, in a fixed reference frame (left) and streamlines
representation in a reference frame moving with the bubble (right).

described by Sousa et al. (2004). In Fig. 19, the flow fields

1.4
around the trailing edges of Taylor bubbles rising in 0.8 wt%
1.2 (Re = 10) and 1.0 wt% (Re = 4) CMC solutions are rep-
resented. The flow in the wake of the Taylor bubbles rising
1.0 in these solutions follow the previous tendency, i.e., as the
viscosity increases, the expansion of the liquid film occurs
Lw /D

0.8
0.6
0.4
CMC solutions :Lw /D= 0.2+ 0.00114 (gD3)1/2/ν
0.2
Newtonian fluids: Lw /D= 0.3 + 0.00122* (gD3)1/2/ν
0.0
0 200 400 600 800
(gD3)1/2 /ν
Fig. 18. Wake length (Lw ) dependence on (gD 3 )1/2 /
and comparison
with Campos and Guedes de Carvalho (1988) correlation.
The wake length (Lw ) dependence on the dimensionless
parameter (gD 3 )1/2 /
, being
the cinematic viscosity of the 0.8 wt% solution (Sousa et al., 2004).
the liquid, is represented in Fig. 18 and compared to the cor-
relation found by Campos and Guedes de Carvalho (1988)
for Newtonian fluids. For a better comparison, the viscosity
of the non-Newtonian solutions was determined for a shear
rate given by the ratio between the mean velocity in the
falling film and the film thickness. Fig. 18 shows a similar
tendency of the wake length dependence on this parameter
for CMC solutions and Newtonian solutions.
The main differences between the wake flow patterns in
Newtonian and non-Newtonian liquids appear in the higher
viscosity solutions. For 0.8 and 1.0 wt% solutions, there is
a drastic change in the shape of the bubble trailing edge
(Fig. 5) and also in the wake flow pattern, which are fully
closer to the trailing edge. The liquid expands immediately
at the end of the liquid film, following the trailing edge
shape and occupying the place left by the bubble in its as-
cending movement. This radial movement of the liquid to
the centre of the column induces, by momentum diffusion,
a rotational movement in the liquid that is below. The liq-
uid rotates in the downward direction in the centre of the
1000 column and upwards away from the centre, creating what is
called a negative wake, once the velocity in the centre of the
column is in the opposite direction to the bubble. In these
cases, there is no liquid transported in the wake, as shown
by the streamlines represented in Fig. 20.
The main differences between these negative wakes, 0.8
and 1.0 wt% CMC solutions, are the trailing edge shapes
and the downward velocity magnitude, which is higher in
To compare the wake patterns and the velocity magni-
tudes, the instantaneous axial component of the liquid ve-
locity is represented at z ∗ = 0.2D in Fig. 21 and at r = 0
in function of z ∗ /D in Figs. 22 and 23. Fig. 21 puts in
evidence the occurrence of the negative wake for 0.8 and
1.0 wt% CMC solutions, due to the positive (downward) liq-
uid velocity in the centre of the column at 0.2D behind the
trailing edge. It is also possible to see near the tube wall,
0.35 < r/D < 0.5, the effect of the film expansion in the liq-
uid velocity. For the lower viscosities the velocity of the
liquid in expansion is high due to the lower shear stresses.
On the contrary, for the higher viscosities the fluid already
suffered a strong deceleration.
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873 1871

Taylor bubble
-0.2
-0.6
Taylor bubble
0.0
-0.4
0.2
-0.2
z*/D

0.4

z*/D
0.0
0.6
0.2
0.8
0.4
1.0
0.6

-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 -0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D 0.5 m/s r/D 0.1 m/s
Fig. 19. Instantaneous velocity field in the wake of Taylor bubbles rising in 0.8 and 1.0 wt% CMC solutions in a fixed reference frame.

-0.2 Taylor bubble

-0.6 Taylor bubble
0.0
-0.4
0.2

-0.2
0.4
z*/D

z*/D

0.0
0.6

0.2
0.8

1.0 0.4

1.2 0.6
-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 -0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50
r/D r/D
Fig. 20. Streamlines in the wake of Taylor bubbles rising in 0.8 (left) and 1.0 wt% (right) CMC solutions in a reference frame moving with the bubble.

-0.6
-0.4 0.1 wt% CMC
-0.5 0.3 wt% CMC
-0.4 0.4 wt% CMC
-0.2 0.5 wt% CMC
-0.3 0.6 wt% CMC
0.0
-0.2
V (m/s)

V (m/s)

0.2 -0.1
0.0
0.4 0.1
1.0 wt% CMC
0.8 wt% CMC 0.2
0.6 0.6 wt% CMC
0.4 wt% CMC 0.3
0.8 0.1 wt% CMC 0.4
0.5
1.0
-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 0 1 2 3 4 5
r/D z*/D
Fig. 21. Instantaneous axial component of the liquid velocity in a fixed Fig. 22. Instantaneous axial component of the liquid velocity in a fixed
reference frame, along the line z ∗ = 0.2D. reference frame at r = 0, for positive wakes.
1872 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
V (m/s)
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.8 wt% CMC
0.18 1.0 wt% CMC
0.20
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
z*/D
Fig. 23. Instantaneous axial component of the liquid velocity in a fixed
reference frame, at r = 0, for negative wakes.
In Figs. 22 and 23, the extent of the flow perturbation
induced by the wakes for all the studied cases can be com-
pared. For 0.1 wt% CMC solution, the high turbulence level
of the flow induces a larger velocity scattering. The men-
tioned presence of small bubbles behind the wake does not
allow the liquid to get into rest even for distances up to
13D behind the trailing edge. For the other “positive” wakes
(Fig. 22), the decrease of the perturbed length with increas-
ing viscosity becomes clear. Fig. 23 puts again in evidence
the negative wakes and the differences in the downward ve-
locity magnitude. These different wake flow patterns should
have great influence in the coalescence phenomena which
will be object of a near future study.
5. Conclusions
A correlation that describes the bubble shape from the
bubble nose to the end of the liquid film was established.
Measurements of the flow field around Taylor bubbles ris-
ing in different CMC solutions were made. It was found that
the flow around the bubble nose is similar for all the studied
cases. In the liquid film surrounding the bubble, the differ-
ences in film thickness and in velocity magnitudes were de-
scribed and the comparison with theoretical predictions was
performed. This study shows the different wake flow pat-
terns found in a Reynolds number range between 4 and 714,
and is essential to understand the coalescence mechanism
between two slugs and the minimum distance above which
there is no interaction between Taylor bubbles. From these
studies it becomes clear that for high values of Reynolds
number there should be interaction between two consecutive
slugs even if they are separated by a large distance and that
for the low values of Reynolds number, where a negative
wake was found, it is not expected slugs coalescence.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the financial support given by
F.C.T., SFRH/BD/3389/2000 and the Von Karman Institut
for the facility. This work was also supported, via CEFT, by
POCTI (FEDER).
References
Acharya, A., Ulbrecht, J.J., 1978. Note on the influence of viscoelasticity
on the coalescence rate of bubbles and drops. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 24,
348–351.
Acharya, A., Mashelkar, R.A., Ulbrecht, J., 1977. Mechanics of
2.0
bubble motion and deformation in non-Newtonian media. Chemical
Engineering Science 32, 863–872.
Astarita, G., Apuzzo, G., 1965. Motion of gas bubbles in non-Newtonian
liquids. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 11, 815–820.
Bugg, J., Saad, G.A., 2002. The velocity field around a Taylor bubble
rising in a stagnant viscous fluid: numerical and experimental results.
International Journal of Multiphase Flow 28, 791–803.
Campos, J.B.L.M., Guedes de Carvalho, J.R.F., 1988. An experimental
study of the wake of gas slugs rising in liquids. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 196, 27–37.
Carew, P.S., Thomas, N.H., Johnson, A.B., 1995. A physical based
correlation for the effects of power law rheology and inclination on
slug bubble rise velocity. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 21
(6), 1091–1106.
Funfschilling, D., Li, H.Z., 2001. Flow of non-Newtonian fluids around
bubbles: PIV measurements and birefringe visualisation. Chemical
Engineering Science 56, 1137–1141.
Hassager, O., 1979. Negative wake behind bubbles in non-Newtonian
liquids. Nature 279, 402–403.
Kamışlı, F., 2003. Free coating of a non-Newtonian liquid onto walls of
a vertical and inclined tube. Chemical Engineering and Processing 42,
569–581.
Kee, D.D., Chhabra, R.P., Dajan, A., 1990. Motion and coalescence of
gas bubbles in non-Newtonian polymer solutions. Journal of Non-
Newtonian Fluid Mechanics 37, 1–18.
Leal, L.G., Skoog, J., Acrivos, A., 1971. On the motion of gas bubbles in
a viscoelastic liquid. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering
49, 569–575.
Leider, P.J., Bird, R.B., 1974. Squeezing flow between parallel
disks. I. Theoretical analysis. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Fundamentals 13, 336.
Li, H.Z., Frank, X., Funfschilling, D., Mouline, Y., 2001. Towards the
understanding of bubble interactions and coalescence in non-Newtonian
fluids: a cognitive approach. Chemical Engineering Science 56, 6419
–6425.
Lindken, R., Merzkirch, W., 2001. A novel PIV technique for
measurements in multi-phase flows and its application to two-phase
bubbly flows. In: Fourth International Symposium on Particle Image
Velocimetry.
Moissis, R., Griffith, P., 1962. Entrance effects in a two-phase slug flow.
Journal of Heat Transfer, Transactions of the ASME, Series C 2, 29–
39.
Nogueira, S., Dias, I., Pinto, A.M.F.R., Riethmuller, M.L., 2000. Liquid
PIV measurements around a single gas slug rising through stagnant
liquid in vertical pipes. In: Bound Volume of Selected Papers of the
Tenth Symposium on Laser Techniques Applied to Fluid Dynamics.
Springer, Berlin.
Nogueira, S., Sousa, R.G., Pinto, A.M.F.R., Riethmuller, M.L., Campos,
J.B.L.M., 2003. Simultaneous PIV and shadowgraphy in slug flow: a
solution for optical problems. Experiments in Fluids 35, 598–609.
 R.G. Sousa et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 1859 – 1873
Otten, L., Fayed, A.S., 1976. Pressure drop and drag reduction in two-
phase non-Newtonian slug flow. The Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering 54, 111–114.
Pinto, A.M.F.R., Campos, J.B.L.M., 1996. Coalescence of two gas slugs
rising in a vertical column of liquid. Chemical Engineering Science
51, 45–54.
Polonsky, S., Barnea, D., Shemer, L., 1998. Image processing procedure
for analysing the motion of an elongated bubble rising in a vertical
pipe. Eighth International Symposium on Flow Visualisation, pp.
117.1–117.10.
Rosehart, R.G., Rhodes, E., Scott, D.S., 1975. Studies of gas–liquid (non-
Newtonian) slug flow: void fraction meter, void fraction and slug
characteristics. The Chemical Engineering Journal 10, 57–64.
Scarano, F., Riethmuller, M.L., 1999. Iterative multigrid approach in PIV
image processing with discrete window offset. Experiments in Fluids
26, 513–523.
1873
Sousa, R.G., Nogueira, S., Pinto, A.M.F.R., Riethmuller, M.L., Campos,
J.B.L.M., 2004. Flow in the negative wake of a Taylor bubble rising in
a high concentrated shear thinning fluid: PIV measurements. Journal
of Fluid Mechanics 511, 217–236.
Taitel, Y., Barnea, D., Dukler, A., 1980. Modelling flow pattern transitions
for steady upward gas–liquid flow in vertical tubes. A.I.Ch.E. Journal
3, 345–354.
Terasaka, K., Tsuge, H., 2003. Gas holdup for slug bubble flow of viscous
liquids having a yield stress in bubble columns. Chemical Engineering
Science 58, 513–517.
van Hout, R., Gulitski, A., Barnea, D., Shemer, L., 2001. Experimental
investigation of the velocity field induced by a Taylor bubble rising in
stagnant water. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 28, 579–596.