Structure of a CFD code

PRE-PROCESSING SOLVING POST-PROCESSING

Commercial CFD codes

Domain definition Mesh generation Definition of teh physical model (e.g. governing equations, boundary and inlet conditions).

Pre-processing: mesh generation

Pre-processing: definition of the physical model

FLOW TYPE fluid/solid steady/transient; laminar/turbulent isotherm/non isotherm single/multiphase reactive/non reactive COMBUSTION MODEL Eddy dissipation FinitE rate chemistry Finite rate chemistry/eddy dissipation Laminar flamelet with PDF BOUNDARY CONDITIONS APPROACH DNS RANS LES RADIATION MODEL Rosseland P1 Montecarlo Discrete Transform

TURBULENCE MODEL Zero equation k- RNG k- k- SSG Reynolds Stress QI Reynolds Stress Reynolds Stress Ecc.

Solving

Post-processing

Vane type eliminator

Objectives

Some examples O&G

Prediction of removal efficiency of a vane-type separator with a commercial CFD code (Ansys CFX): comparison between CFD and experimental data CFD helps designing and investigating new configurations

Vane type eliminator: computational domain and grid

Computational domain:
2D

Vane type eliminator: physical model

Euler-Lagrangian approach (Lagrangian tracking) One-way coupling GAS PHASE: turbulence model
standard k- (STD k-) shear Stress Transport (SST)

Computational grid:
Structured (34,000 cells)

DROPLETS drag is considered turbulent dispersion is cosidered through

original Eddy Interaction Model (EIM; available in the code); modified EIM (implemented with a subroutine in Fortran language)

dropletdroplet interaction is negligible, dropletfilm interaction at the walls is negligible, droplets behave as hard spheres, unsteady forces (virtual mass and Basset history), pressure gradient and lift forces are negligible. once the droplets collide with the walls, they do not rebound but are removed immediately from the walls. re-entrainment not taken into account. Injections from 1000 locations
10

Vane Type Eliminator: Eddy Interaction Model for turbulent dispersion

Droplet equation of motion The instantaneous gas velocity

Vane Type Eliminator: Eddy Interaction Model for turbulent dispersion

The continuous phase simulation provides the mean velocity, turbulence levels and eddy dissipation rates. Such characteristics have to be used to reconstruct a fictitious turbulent flowfield seen by the droplets and responsible for the turbulent dispersion. Eddy lengthscale Eddy timescale The droplet sees a gas velocity

Nr is a random number taken from a Gaussian (normal) distribution with zero mean and standard deviation equal to 1, Ug is usually updated when- ever the droplet crosses a grid element, whereas ug and Nr are computed at the end of the eddy interaction.

Vane type eliminator: flow field

Turbulence model: STD k- Turbulence model: SST

Vane type eliminator: particle trajectories

Dp = 3 m no turbulent dispersion Dp = 6 m

original EIM

SST model describes in more detail the recirculation regions near drainage channels, whereas the STD k- describes such regions as just low velocity regions.
13

varied EIM

14

Vane type eliminator: removal efficiency

Vane type eliminator: removal efficiency

Turbulence model: STD k

Turbulence model: SST

15

16

Vane type eliminator: removal efficiency

Cyclones
Many studies have demonstrated that CFD cannot produce a very accurate description of the flow field because of difficulties in modeling the phenomena occurring in swirling flow. Calculated results for pressure drop agree only moderately well with the experimental data. The experimental pressure drop was larger than the calculated pressure drop by 60%, 15%, and 16% for standard k-e , RNG k-e , and Reynolds stress model, respectively. Recently, large eddy simulation LES was used to predict the unsteady, spiral shape, and vortex core characteristics of a cyclone separator. Results are encouarging but LES is computationally expensive.

Size distribution after vane type eliminator bends

17

18

Cyclones
Hydrocyclone flow field

Slug catchers
Problem: Slug catchers are designed to stratify slug flow The gas/liquid ratio will change over the lifespan of a well, and flow rates will vary during different operation regimes (e.g. cleaning) Questions: At high flow rates, does the liquid overflow into the gas pipe, causing problems downstream? Is the slug catcher long enough to promote stratification and deal with the largest slug volumes? Will excessive gas quantities enter slug catcher, requiring flaring? What will happen if I double the flowrate? Whats the force loading on the structure? Solution: CFD can be used to simulate the multiphase, transient characteristics of the slug catcher at different flow rates and gas/liquid ratios Detailed understanding of slug catcher performance and operational limits

19

20

Slug catchers: boundary conditions

Slug catchers: computational domain and grid

21

22

Slug catchers: physical/solver model

Slug catchers: animation of oil

23

Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas

24

Multiphase flows (G/S)

Dense G/S flows (fluidised beds), no reactions CFD code: CFX 5.7 by Ansys Inc. transient simulations Eulerian-Eulerian model

Multiphase flows (G/S): computational domain and grid

2D domain
structured grid 14,220 cells

3D domain
unstructured grid 600,000 cells too CPU time

continuity eq. k k + k kU s = 0
t t

k = s, g
r r r

3D simulations on a simplified (shorter) geometry

momentum t [ g gU g ]+ ( g gU gU g ) = P + g g + (U s U g ) + g g
r r r r r r s sU s + s sU sU s = s ( s g )g + U g U s G g + s s t

r r

IMPORTANT: CFX neglects the solid stress tensor s

Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas

(simplified Gidaspow model)

25

Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas

26

Multiphase flows (G/S): solid volume fraction

sand volumetric fraction at different t ds = 200 m ug = 1.5 m/s Bubbling Fluidised Bed

Multiphase flows (G/S): solid volume fraction

sand volumetric fraction at different t ds = 200 m ug = 2 m/s Circulating Fluidised Bed

core annulus regime

Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas

27

Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas

28

Multiphase flows (G/S): advanced Gidaspow

model for particle-particle treatment
g s U s + ( s s U s U s ) = s ( s g )g + (U g U s ) G g + s s t

Multiphase flows (G/S): comparison of simplified

and advanced models for particle-particle treatment
simplified model (available in CFX) implemented model

solid stress tensor

2 s = 2 s s SU s s s U s I 3
SU s = 1 U s + U sT 2

U s ,x U s ,x U s ,x s s y s z + x + comp x = s z y x U s ,y U s ,y U s ,y s s s x y z + + comp y = s x y z U s,z U s,z U s,z s s s x y z + + comp z = s x y z Master in Progettazione di Impianti Oil & Gas

Advanced Gidaspow model: larger bed expansion

29 30

Flares
Motivation: Conventional approaches for blowouts and flares: Fluid dynamics used near the release section (jet behaviour); Advection and diffusion equations used far away (plume behaviour); Dedicated radiation models for blowout/flare scenarios. Can be CFD used as single tool? CFD capability and drawbacks?

Flares: physical model

Subsonic flow fictitious release section Stationary flow RANS Euler-Lagrangian approach with two-way coupling Gas-liquid mixtures: Hydrocarbons are represented with C1-CX mixtures The liquid phase (oil) is represented with one hydrocarbon of equal molecular weight The oil is assumed to be 100% volatile Evaporation is modelled through Antoine equation

31

32

Flares: physical model

Buoyancy Turbulence model k- model with C1 = 1.6 (Morse, 1977) Sensitivity analysis: RNG and standard k- models Combustion model and kinetic scheme CH4, C2H6, C3H8, C4H10 oxidations: Eddy Dissipation Model, 1-step global mechanism prompt and thermal NO formation : Arrhenius integrated with PDF of T soot formation/oxidation: Eddy Dissipation Concept, 2-step mechanism by Tesner et al. (1971) Radiation model P1 (spherical harmonics) Sensitivity analysis: Discrete Ordinate and Discrete Transfer Spectral model WSGG (Smith et al, 1982) Soot radiation properties from Mie-Scatter theory
33

Flares

200 m

80 m Vertical single-phase Horizontal two-phase

34

Flares

35