NUMERICAL COMPARISON OF DRAG MODELS APPLIED TO SUBSEA GAS DISPERSION

A. Kumara, Taewook Kim
{"title":"NUMERICAL COMPARISON OF DRAG MODELS APPLIED TO SUBSEA GAS DISPERSION","authors":"A. Kumara, Taewook Kim","doi":"10.2495/RISK180231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Subsea gas releases can have catastrophic impacts on human life, offshore assets, and the environment. As a result of major accidents that occurred recently, government regulations and company policies enforce a formal assessment of risks related to subsea gas releases. The main objective of subsea gas dispersion modelling is to predict the properties such as plume width, gas volume fraction and mean velocities at the sea surface in order to provide input data for risk models quantifying the topside risk exposure on offshore installations. This requires a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of underwater releases of natural gas. This paper presents a comparison of different drag models applied for subsea gas dispersion modelling. ANSYS Fluent is used as the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modelling framework of the subsea gas plume hydrodynamics, while the changes of bubble’s density and size is included as an external user defined functions (UDFs) hooked to the Fluent’s main code structure. Four different drag models are compared, namely spherical drag law, modified spherical drag law, Xia’s drag law and Tomiyama’s drag law. The drag models are also incorporated into the main code structure as external UDFs. A combination of the two methods – Eulerian–Eulerian and Lagrangian – is used to model the bubbling behaviour of the subsea gas dispersion. The predicted results are validated against the experimental data presented by Engebretsen back in 1997. It is observed that the drag model in the CFD simulations seems to be a factor that could affect underwater plume physics. The predicted results show that the drag models including bubble shape show better agreement than the ones without including bubble shape in general.","PeriodicalId":21504,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis XI","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis XI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2495/RISK180231","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Subsea gas releases can have catastrophic impacts on human life, offshore assets, and the environment. As a result of major accidents that occurred recently, government regulations and company policies enforce a formal assessment of risks related to subsea gas releases. The main objective of subsea gas dispersion modelling is to predict the properties such as plume width, gas volume fraction and mean velocities at the sea surface in order to provide input data for risk models quantifying the topside risk exposure on offshore installations. This requires a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of underwater releases of natural gas. This paper presents a comparison of different drag models applied for subsea gas dispersion modelling. ANSYS Fluent is used as the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modelling framework of the subsea gas plume hydrodynamics, while the changes of bubble’s density and size is included as an external user defined functions (UDFs) hooked to the Fluent’s main code structure. Four different drag models are compared, namely spherical drag law, modified spherical drag law, Xia’s drag law and Tomiyama’s drag law. The drag models are also incorporated into the main code structure as external UDFs. A combination of the two methods – Eulerian–Eulerian and Lagrangian – is used to model the bubbling behaviour of the subsea gas dispersion. The predicted results are validated against the experimental data presented by Engebretsen back in 1997. It is observed that the drag model in the CFD simulations seems to be a factor that could affect underwater plume physics. The predicted results show that the drag models including bubble shape show better agreement than the ones without including bubble shape in general.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
海底气体分散拖曳模型的数值比较
海底天然气泄漏会对人类生命、海上资产和环境造成灾难性的影响。由于最近发生的重大事故,政府法规和公司政策强制要求对海底天然气释放相关风险进行正式评估。海底气体分散建模的主要目标是预测诸如羽流宽度、气体体积分数和海面平均速度等特性,以便为风险模型提供输入数据,量化海上设施的上层风险暴露。这需要对水下天然气释放的动力学有全面的了解。本文介绍了用于海底气体分散建模的不同阻力模型的比较。使用ANSYS Fluent作为海底气羽流体动力学的计算流体动力学(CFD)建模框架,而气泡密度和大小的变化作为外部用户定义函数(udf)包含在Fluent的主代码结构上。比较了四种不同的阻力模型,即球面阻力定律、修正球面阻力定律、夏氏阻力定律和富山氏阻力定律。拖动模型也作为外部udf合并到主代码结构中。欧拉-欧拉和拉格朗日两种方法的结合用于模拟海底气体分散的鼓泡行为。预测结果与Engebretsen在1997年提出的实验数据进行了验证。在CFD模拟中,阻力模型似乎是影响水下羽流物理特性的一个因素。预测结果表明,一般情况下,考虑气泡形状的阻力模型比不考虑气泡形状的模型具有更好的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PERFORMANCE OF WOOD-FRAMED RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES UNDER EXTREME WIND LOADS IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF LOSS GIVEN DEFAULT (LGD) MODELS’ RISK ON REGULATORY CAPITAL: A BAYESIAN APPROACH UNDERSTANDING AND HEDGING NATURAL CATASTROPHE RISK IN A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT: A (RE)INSURANCE PERSPECTIVE LAYER OF PROTECTION ANALYSIS FOR CO2 STORAGE TANK A STUDY OF THE COMBINATION OF RISK ANALYSIS WITH A CITYWIDE LANDSLIDE EARLY WARNING SYSTEM
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1