subscripts de Nevers, N. H.

, “A Calculation Method for Carbonated Water Flood-

ing,” SOC. Pet. Eng. !., 9 (March, 1974).
b = boiling point value Reid, R. C., J. M. Prausnitz and T. K. Shenvood, The Properties of
C = critical value Gases and Liquids, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York (1977).
calc = calculated value Simon, R. and D. J. Graue, “Generalized Correlations for Predicting
exp = experimental value Solubility, Swelling and Viscosity Behavior of C02-Crude Oil Sys-
aJ = components ij tems,”f. Petroleum Technol., 102 (Jan. 1965).
(r) = reference Spencer, C. F. and S. B. Adler, “A Critical Review of Equations for
R = reduced value Predicting Saturated Liquid Density,”!. Chem. Eng. Data, 23, 82
(1978).
Teja, A. S., “Binary Interaction Coefficients for Mixtures Containing the
n-alkanes,” Chem. Eng. Sci., 33, 609 (1978).
LITERATURE CITED Teja, A. S., “A Corresponding States Equation for Saturated Liquid
Holm, L. W. and A. Josendal, “Mechanisms of Oil Displacement by Densities. I. Applications to LNG,” AZChE J . , 26, 000 (1980).
Carbon Dioxide,” 1.Petroleum Technol., 26 (Dec. 1974). Watson, K. M., E. F. Nelson and G. B. Murphy, “Characterization of
Holm, L. W., “Status of C 0 2 and Hydrocarbon Miscible Oil Recovery Petroleum Fractions,” Znd. Eng. Chem., 27, 1460 (1935).
Methods,”!. Petroleum Technol., 28 (Jan. 1976).
Kesler, M. G. and B. I. Lee, “Improve prediction of enthalpy of frac-
tions,” Hydrocarbon Process., 153 (March, 1976). Manuscript receioed June 7, 1979, and accepted October 1 1 , 1979

Modelling Flow Pattern Transitions for

Steady Upward Gas-Liquid Flow in Vertical
Tubes YEHUDA TAITEL
and
DVORA BORNEA
School of Engineering
Tel Aviv University
Ramat Aviv, lsmel

’ - and
Models for predicting flow pattern transitions during steady gas-liquid flow in A. E. DUKLER
vertical tubes are developed, based on physical mechanisms suggested for each
transition. These models incorporate the effect of fluid properties and pipe size Deportment of Chemical Engineering
and thus are largely free of the limitations of empirically based transition maps or University of Houston
correlations. Houston, Texas 77004

SCOPE
When gas-liquid mixtures flow in a conduit, the two phases well as the ffow rate pair at which transition between flow
may distribute in a variety of patterns. The particular pattern patterns will take place.
one observes depends on the flow rates, the fluid properties Many two-phase flow pattern maps have been proposed.
and the tube size. Figure 1 shows the expected patterns for a Most of these have been based primarily on experiments and
5.0 cm diameter vertical pipe, flowing water and air at low thus were limited to the conditions near those of the mea-
pressure. Heat and mass transfer rates, momentum loss, rates surements. It is the objective of this work to suggest physically
of back mixing and residence time distributions all vary greatly based mechanisms which underlie each transition and to model
with flow pattern. Given the existence of any one pattern, it is the transitions based on these mechanisms. The results are
possible to model the flow so as to predict the important process applicable for a wider range of properties and conduit sizes
design parameters. However, a central task is to predict which than would be expected from empirically determined transi-
flow pattern will exist under any set of operating conditions as tions.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

Models are developed to predict the transition boundaries slug pattern and that bubble flow can exist in small pipes only at
between the four basic flow patterns for gas-liquid flow in high liquid rates, where turbulent dispersion forces are high.
vertical tubes: bubble, slug, churn and dispersed-annular. It is Each transition is shown to depend on the flow rate pair, fluid
suggested that churn flow is the development region for the properties and pipe size, but the nature of the dependence is
different for each transition, because differing- mechanisms
$ 0 01 TIre A n ~ e r r ~ aInstitute
~ 1 - 1 5 4 1 - 8 0 - 3 ~ 2 ~ ~ n 3 4 5 -25 n oi Chemical Engineers,
The theoretical predictions are in god
1980 agreement with a variety of published flow maps based on data.

AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3) May, 1980 Page 345

 t tI
t t times designated as “Taylor bubbles.” Taylor bubbles are
separated by slugs of continuous liquid which bridge the
pipe and contain small gas bubbles. Between the Taylor
bubbles and the pipe wall, liquid flows downward in the
form of a thin falling film. (This pattern has been desig-
nated by others as plug, or piston, flow at low rates where
the gas liquid boundaries are well defined, and as slug flow
at higher rates where the boundaries are less clear.)
3. Churn Flow: Churn flow is somewhat similar to slug flow.
It is, however, much more chaotic, frothy and disordered.
.. . _. .... . The bullet-shaped Taylor bubble becomes narrow, and its
, . _ shape is distorted. The continuity of t h e liquid in the slug
between successive Taylor bubbles is repeatedly de-
stroyed by a high local gas concentration in the slug. As this
happens, and liquid slug falls. This liquid accumulates,
. .
.. . ., . forms a bridge and is again lifted by the gas. Typical of
. .. . ...... churn flow is this oscillatory or alternating direction of
. .. . .

Bubble
flow
SlUll
flow
Churn
flow
-id
Annular
motion of t h e liquid. (Some observers refer to a froth flow
pattern for higher liquid and gas rates where the system
appears more finely dispersed.)
4. Annular Flow: Annular flow is characterized by the con-
tinuity of the gas phase along the pipe in the core. The
flow
liquid phase moves upwards partly as wavy liquid film and
Figure 1. Flow patterns in vertical flow. partially in the form of drops entrained in the gas core.
(Annular flow has been described as a whispy-annular
Predicting flow patterns for upward flow of gas-liquid mix- pattern when the entrained phase is in the form of large
tures in vertical pipes is as yet an unresolved problem. A typical lumps or “wisps.” Froth, mist or semi-annular flow pat-
approach has been to coordinate experimental observation by terns have also been used to describe the churn and annu-
plotting transition boundary lines on a two-dimensional plot. The lar patterns.)
coordinates have been more or less arbitrarily chosen, and the
lack of physical basis for their selection has limited their general-
ity and accuracy. Maps prepared from data taken for one pipe EXISTING FLOW PATTERN MAPS
size and fluid properties are not necessarily valid for other sizes
There is a wide variety of flow pattern maps for vertical flow in
or properties. Further, there is poor agreement among most
the literature. I t is important to understand that these maps
published maps.
propose transition boundaries in a two-dimensional coordinate
Part of the problem arises from lack of agreement in the
description and classification ofthe flow patterns and the subjec- system as determined from experiment, these experiments, in
tivity of the observer. The flow is often very chaotic and difficult some cases, being those ofthe author, and in other cases coming
from observations ofothers. The selection of coordinates for the
to describe, which leaves room for personal judgment and in-
published maps has been of two basic types:
terpretation. Hubbard and DukIer (1966) proposed a method for
a. One group uses dimensional coordinates such as super-
fingerprinting flow regimes using spectral analysis of wall
pressure fluctuations, but this method has not generally been ficial velocities U , and ULs (Sternling 1965, Wallis 1969)
adopted . or superficial momentum flux, p&& and pJ& (Hewitt
In this work, the main flow patterns are first described. To and Roberts 1969). Given any single pipe size and set of
fluid properties, these coordinates will map the transi-
correctly interpret and predict the conditions for transition, it is
essential to understand the mechanism by which the transition tions, but there is no reason to expect that the location of
these transition curves will be unchanged for changes in
from one flow pattern to another takes place. Physical models
these variables. Govier and Aziz (1972) attempt to mod+
that describe transitions are presented and used to develop
these dimensional coordinates for systems other than air-
theoretically-based transition equations, which can be used to
water by considering property ratios between the fluids of
construct maps. The approach here is similar in principle to that
interest and that of the air-water system. However, there
presented by Taitel and Dnkler (1976) for horizontal flow sys-
is no basis in theory to suggest this generalizes the results
tems. Since the maps presented are constructed on a physical
in any way.
basis, it is expected that they can be utilized over a wider range
of flow conditions and fluid properties. Finally, the newly de- b. A second group represents the results by dimensionless
veloped predictions are compared with those of recent maps coordinates, in the hope that the result will apply to line
which coordinate experimental data. sizes and fluid properties other than those of the data used
to locate t h e curves. In the absence of a theoretical basis,
the use of dimensionless coordinates is no more general
than the use ofdimensional ones. Further, it will be shown
FLOW DESCRIPTION
below that one pair of dimensionless groups does not
When gas-liquid mixtures flow upward in a vertical tube, the characterize the variety of transition boundaries that exist.
two phases may distribute in a number of patterns, each charac- The dimensionless groups selected by Duns and Ros
terizing the radial and/or axial distribution of liquid and gas. The (1963) and also used by Gould (1974) seem arbitrary.
flow is usually quite chaotic, and these phase distributions are Griffith and Wallis (1961)were the: only investigators who
dimcult to describe. W e will follow the lead of Hewitt and attelnpted to invoke theory to arrive at suitable cwrdi-
Hall-Taylor (1970)who designate four basic patterns for upflow nates. They were able to show that the dimensionless
as follows: coordinates U$gD and U<;.&.y controlled the transition
1. Rubble Flow: The gas phase is approximatcly uniformly from the slug to annular patterns. The theory was not
distributed in the form of discrete bubbles in a continuous completed sufficiently to provide an analytical expression
liquid phase. for the transition curve, and experimental data were used
2. Slug Flow: Most of the gas is located in large bullet shaped to provide for the unknown constants. As discussed, the
bubbles which have a diameter almost equal to the pipe use of these same coordinates for the other transitions is
diameter. They move uniformly upward and are some- open to question.

Page 346 May, 1980 AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3)

Comparisons between these various maps reveal differences I I I
both as to absolute value and trend. The problem seems to arise
from the fact that in almost all cases, the transition boundaries 10 . FINELY DISPERSED
BUBBLE (II) C
are empirically located and do not rest in suitable physical
models. Thus, it is important to place a theoretical basis under
the transition relationships, both to improve the generality of
the prediction and for classifying the experimentally observed
flow patterns. A
1.0
u
0)
u)
\
TRANSITION MECHANISMS E
Y
JNULAR
In order to predict the conditions under which transition 3 0.1
between flow patterns will take place, it is essential to under- 3
stand the physical mechanisms by which such transitions occur.
In this way, the influence of fluid properties and pipe size-as
well as flow rates-can be accounted for naturally in the equa-
tions which result. And, these can be expected to apply gener- 0.01
ally without the need for “scale-up” rules or procedures. The
task of constructing flow transition boundary curves or maps
from these equations is usually straightforward. But there is
considerable disagreement among authors as to the mechanism
for these transitions. In the following, each transition is 0.I I.o 10.0 100
analyzed, a physical mechanism proposed, and then the condi- U, (rnlsec)
tions for transition mathematically modelled.
Figure 2. Flow pottern map for vertical tubes 5.0 cm dia., air-water at
25”C, 10 N/sq.cm.
The Bubble-Slug Transition
An alternative approach is to consider this problem from the
Transition from the condition of dispersed bubbles observed point of view of maximum allowable packing of the bubbles. If
at low gas rates to slug flow requires aprocess of agglomeration or we consider the bubbles to have spherical shape and arranged in
coalescence. Only in this way can the discrete bubbles combine a cubic lattice, the void fraction of the gas can be, at most, 0.52.
into the larger vapor spaces, having a diameter nearly that of the However, as a result of their deformation and random path, the
tube, with lengths of 1-2 diameters which are observed at the rate of collision and coalescence will increase sharply at void
transition to slug flow. As the gas rate is increased, the bubble fractions well below this lattice spacing at which they touch.
density increases. This closer bubble spacing results in an in- Therefore, the closest distance between the bubbles before
crease in the coalescence rate. However, as the liquid rate transition must be the one which permits some freedom of
increases, the turbulent fluctuations associated with the flow can motion for each individual bubble. If the spacing between the
cause breakup of larger bubbles formed as a result ofagglomera- bubbles at which coalescence begins to increase sharply is as-
tion. If this breakup is sufficiently intense to prevent recoales- sumed to be approximately half their radius, this corresponds to
cence, then the dispersed bubble pattern can be maintained. about 25%voids. While this approach is not a prediction of the
Thus, to predict conditions for this transition, we must deter- void fraction at transition from first principles, it does provide a
mine when each of these factors will dominate the process. reasonable interpretation of the experimental data. Published
When gas is introduced at low flow rates into a large diameter data agree in that the void fraction in bubbly flow rarely exceeds
vertical column of liquid (flowing at low velocity), the gas phase 0.35, whereas for void fractions less than 0.20 coalescence is
is distributed into discrete bubbles. Many studies of bubble rarely observed (Griffith and Wallis 1961). Thus, at liquid rates
motion demonstrated that if the bubbles are very small, they low enough so that bubble breakup due to turbulence is small,
behave as rigid spheres rising vertically in rectilinear motion. the criteria for transition from bubbly to slug flow is that the void
However, above a critical size (about 0.15 cm for air-water at low fraction reaches 0.25.
pressure) the bubbles begin to deform, and the upward motion If the gas bubbles rise at a velocity UG, this velocity is related
is a zig-zag path with considerable randomness. The bubbles to the superficial gas velocity U G S by
randomly collide and coalesce, forming a number of somewhat
larger individual bubbles with a spherical cap similar to the
Taylor bubbles of slug flow, but with diameters smaller than the
pipe. Thus, even at low gas and liquid flow rates, bubble flow is
characterized by an array of smaller bubbles moving in zig-zag where a is the void fraction. Likewise, the average liquid veloc-
motion and the occasional appearance of larger, Taylor-type ity is given in terms of the liquid superficial velocity as
bubbles. The Taylor bubbles are not large enough to occupy the
ULS
cross section of the pipe so as to cause slug flow in the manner UL = -
described above. Instead, they behave as free rising spherically 1-a
capped voids, in the manner originally described by Taylor. Designating U o as the rise velocity of the gas bubbles relative to
With increases in gas flow rate, at these low liquid rates, the the average liquid velocity, equations (1) and (2) yield
bubble density increases and a point is reached where the
dispersed bubbles become so closely packed that many colli- 1-a
sions occur and the rate of agglomeration to larger bubbles
ULS = u,, -- (1 - a)Uo
a (3)
increases sharply. This results in a transition to slug flow.
Experiments suggest that the bubble void fraction at which The rise velocity U o of relatively large bubbles has been shown
this happens is around 0.25 to 0.30 (Griffith and Synder 1964). A by Harmathy (1960) to be quite insensitive to the bubble size
semi-theoretical approach to this problem was given by and given by the relation
Radovicich and Moissis (1962),by considering a cubic lattice in
which the individual bubble fluctuates. They postulated that the (4)
maximum void fraction is reached when the frequency of colli-
sion is very high, and it was shown that this happens around void Substituting Equation (4) into (3), and considering the transi-
fraction of 0.30. tion to slug flow to occur when a = aT = 0.25 results in an

AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3) May, 1980 Page 347

equation characterizing this transition for conditions where the Ford,, > dct.rtthe bubbie rise velocity is almost independent
dispersion forces are not dominant. of bubble size and is given by Equation (4), but decreases very
rapidly for bubble diameters below dedt. Once turbulent fluctu-
ations are vigorous enough to cause the bubbles to break into
this small critical size, coalescence is suppressed and the dis-
Once fluid properties are designated, the theoretical transition persed bubble flow pattern must exist even for a > 0.25. From
curve can be plotted on U L s vs U G S coordinates and will remain Equations (6),(7) and (9), the conditions for this transition can be
invariant with tube size. Such a curve is shown in Figure 2 for found. Note that in this region of high flow rate the slip velocity
the water-air system of25'C and 10 N/cm2where it is designated can be neglected and the gas holdup calculated simply by
as curve A. At higher gas and liquid flow rates, where the bubble
rise velocity relative to the liquid velocity is negligible, the
theoretical transition curve is linear, with a slope of unity in
these log coordinates. On the other hand, at low liquid rates
where liquid velocity is negligible, the boundary of the bubble The friction factor needed in Equation (8) can be predicted by
region is controlled by the free rise velocity of the bubbles and is the Blasius equation based on the superficial mixture velocity
essentially independent of liquid rate. and the liquid kinematic viscosity, namely
This method for predicting the bubble-slug transition is simi- U M D -'
lar in principle to that of Griffith and Wallis (1961).They used a f = c(-) V L
= 0.18 as a criteria for maximum packing and set U o equal to a
constant of 0.24 m/sec which is the rise velocity predicted from where C and n are taken as 0.046 and 0.2, respectively. Combin-
Equation (4) for an air-water system. The results were, there- ing Equation (7) to (11) results in a dimensionless expression
fore, not general for fluids other than air-water. relating the flow rates, properties and pipe size at which turbu-
At higher liquid flow rates, turbulent forces act to break and lent induced dispersion takes place.
disperse the gas phase into small bubbles even for vapor void
fractions higher than 0.25. The theory ofbreakup of immiscible
fluid phases by turbulent forces was given by Hinze (1955)and
recently confirmed by Sevik and Park (1973).Hinze determined
that the characteristic size of the dispersion results from a bal- Once the fluid properties and pipe size are set, Equation (12)
ance between surface tension forces and those due to turbulent defines the relationship between the values of UGs and U L S
fluctuations. His study led to the following relationship for the above which slug flow cannot exist. For air-water at 25°C and 10
maximum stable diameter of the dispersed phase, d,,. N/cm2 pressure this result is shown in Figure 2 for a 5.0 cm
diameter pipe and is designated by curve B. However, regard-
less of how much turbulent energy is available to disperse the
mixture, bubble flow cannot exist at packing densities above a =
where E is the rate of energy dissipation per unit mass. Hinze's 0.52. Thus, the B curve delimiting dispersed bubble flow must
investigation explored dispersion under non-coalescing condi- terminate at the curve C which relates U,, and UGs for a = 0.52.
tions which can be realized only at very low concentrations of the This approach neglects the effect of increasing holdup on the
dispersed phase. He applied his formula to the data of Clay process ofcoalescence and on the resulting bubble size. Calder-
(1940) for droplet breakup at low concentration of dispersed bank (1958) investigated the balance between bubble breakup
phase and found k to be equal to 0.725. Sevik and Park (1973) and coalescence in determining bubble size in mechanically
developed theoretical values of k by considering the natural stirred gas-liquid columns. There he showed that the bubble
frequency of a bubble or drop in its lowest order mode of size varied with the holdup to the one halfpower. However, the
vibration. Assumipg this natural frequency to be the ratio of the mechanism for such coalescence, namely, agitator causing
rms velocity fluctuation in the turbulent stream to the diameter eddy-like motion of the bubbles, is not present here. With flow
of the drop or bubble, they were able to prove that k = 0.68 for induced radial motions, the effect of holdup is likely to be less
drops (density of dispersed phase >> density of continuous significant; however, its quantitative influence cannot be
phase) and k = 1.14 for bubbles (density of dispersed phase << evaluated at this time.
density of the continuous phase). Experimental measurements Thus, the bubbly flow pattern can be seen to exist in zones
ofbubble breakup in a liquid jet showed remarkable experimen- I and I1 of Figure 2. In zone I to the left of curve A and below
tal agreement with k = 1.14. B, one predicts the presence of deformable bubbles which move
The rate of energy dissipation per unit mass for turbulent pipe upward with a zig-zag motion with Taylor-type bubbles occa-
flow, e, is sionally appearing in the liquid. In zone I1 above curve B and to
the left of C, one observes a more finely dispersed bubble
(7) system without any Taylor bubbles. To the right ofA and below
B in zone 111, one expects to see the slug pattern.
where Still a different transition mechanism comes into play in the
special case of tubes of small diameter. Consider zone I of Figure
2 where one observes discrete deformable bubbles rising in
zig-zag paths and the occasional appearance of a Taylor bubble.
Substitution of Equation (8) into (7) shows that turbulent The velocity of rise of the deformable bubbles relative to the
breakup of bubbles exists for all liquid rates high enough to liquid, Uo, is given by Equation (4) and depends only on the
cause turbulent flow. However, if the bubble size produced by properties of the fluids. The rise velocity of the Taylor bubbles
the breakup process is large enough to permit deformation, then relative to the mean velocity of the liquid on the other hand is
at values of a approaching 0.25, the large Taylor bubbles charac- given by (Nicklin et al. 1962).
teristic of slug flow again are formed by the process of coales- UG = 0 . 3 5 d Z (13)
cence. Thus, the turbulent breakup process can prevent
agglomeration only if the bubble size produced is small enough and is property independent. Whenever Uo > U G the rishg
to cause the bubbles to remain spherical. The bubble size at bubbles approach the back of the Taylor bubble coalescing with
which this occurs is given by Brodkey (1967) as it, increasing its size. Under these conditions bubbly flow can-
not exist in zone I. On the other hand, when Uo < U Gthe Taylor
bubble rises through the array of distributed bubbles and the
(9)
relative motion of the liquid at the nose of the Taylor bubble

Page 348 May, 1980 AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3)

 I I I constant speed. In churn flow, the liquid slug is too short to
10 FINELY DISPERSED / support a stable liquid bridge between two consecutive Taylor
bubbles. The falling film around the bubble penetrates deeply
into the liquid slug creating a highly agitated aerated mixture at
which point the liquid slug is seen to disintegrate and to fall in a
rather chaotic fashion. The liquid re-accumulates at a lower level
I .a at the next slug where liquid continuity is restored and the slug
then resumes its upward motion. Thus, one observes an oscilla-
tory motion of the liquid, which we consider the characteristic
u
Q) ANNULAR identification of churn flow.
u)
\ (PI There have been several mechanisms proposed for transition
y
E 0.1 to the churn pattern. Nicklin and Davidson (1962) suggested
v) that the transition to churn flow occurs when the gas velocity
-I relative to the falling liquid film around the Taylor bubble
3
approaches the condition of flooding.
Moissis (1963)attributed this transition to Helmholtz instabil-
ity of the liquid film bounding the Taylor bubble. The Helm-
0.01 I I001 500 holtz instability criterion was applied for an infinitely thick gas
l ~ / D = r S o1200 region and very thin liquid film using Feldman’s (1957) result
I that the wave length is 10 times the film thickness. The analysis
I I II I I I Iis inconsistent since Feldman’s theory is not based on Helm-
0.I 1.0 10 100 holtz type analysis. Furthermore, Feldman’s calculation for the
stability criterion is in error.
UGs(m/sec)
Griffith and Wallis (1961) suggested that transition from slug
Figure 3. Flow pattern map for vertical tubes 2.5 cm dio., air-water at to annular flow occurs when the individual Taylor bubbles be-
25”C, 10 N/cm2. comes very (infinitely) long. Their predicted transition to annu-
lar flow occurs at much lower gas rates than indicated by exper-
iment which suggests that this mechanism might account for the
sweeps the small bubbles around the larger one, and coales- slugkhurn transition instead. No predictive model was pre-
cence does not take place. The properties of air-water at low sented, and their transition curve was finally obtained solely
pressure are such that U o = U G at D -- 5.0 cm. Thus, for tubes from experimental data.
smaller than 5 cm in diameter, no bubbly flow can exist below
Careful and repeated observations of the slug-churn flow
the curve B and the entire zone I and 111 exist as the slug flow
pattern. Only at high liquid rates, zone 11, can bubbly flow exist patterns on 2.5 and 5.0 cm diameter test sections in our labora-
tories suggest a rather different mechanism than any of the
for small tubes where dispersion occurs due to turbulence. The
above. These observations indicate that the churn flow pattern is
flow pattern map for 2.5 cm diameter tubes with the system
an entry region phenomenon associated with the existence of
air-water is shown in Figure 3, where zones I and 111 are
slug flow further along the pipe. That is, whenever one observes
combined. A system having a small diameter is one which
slug flow, the condition near the entry appears to be churning.
satisfies the criterion below.
Furthermore, the entry length, or the distance that such churn-
ing can be observed before stable slug flow takes place, depends
(14) on the flow rates and pipe size.
The process of developing a stable slug near the entrance
It is of interest that the range of diameters used in most labora- section can be described as follows: At the inlet the gas and
tory air-water experiments, i.e., 2-6 cm, spans this critical liquid which are introduced form short liquid slugs and Taylor
diameter of 5.0 cm. This accounts for the apparent differences in bubbles. A short liquid slug is known to be unstable, and it falls
observations which have been reported. It also shows that for back and merges with the liquid slug coming from below causing
this particular transition, experimental data taken on small pipes it to approximately double its length. In this process, the Taylor
cannot be scaled to larger diameters. It is only through an bubble following the liquid slug overtakes the leading Taylor
understanding of mechanisms, as discussed here, that rational bubble and coalesces with it as the slug between the two bubbles
size scaling can be accomplished. collapses. This process repeats itself, and the length ofthe liquid
slugs as well as the length of the Taylor bubbles increase as they
move upwards, until the liquid slug is long enough to be stable
Slug-Churn Transition and form a competent bridge between two consecutive Taylor
The slug flow pattern develops from a bubbly pattern when bubbles. Between the inlet and the position at which at stable
the gas flow rate increases to such an extent that it forces the slug is formed, the liquid slug alternately rises and falls, and this
bubbles to become closely packed and coalesce. At this point, is precisely the condition of churn flow. As the gas rate in-
“Taylor” type bubbles are formed which, if the process ofcoales- creases, it is evident that the length of this entrance region
cence continues, occupy most of the pipe cross sectional area increases to the extent that it can occupy the entire length ofany
and are axially separated by a liquid slug in which small bubbles test section. Thus, one should think ofchurn flow as an entrance
are dispersed. The liquid confined between the bubble and the phenomena. Since; in practice, all pipes are of a finite length, it
pipe wall flows around the bubble as a falling film. would be useful to provide some estimates of the lengths over
As the gas flow rate is increased still more, a transition to which churn flow is the predominant mode. With this objective,
churn flow occurs. There is considerable difficulty in accurately we develop a method for calculating the entry length required to
identifying the slug-churn transition because there is confusion develdp stable slug flow. The distance from the entrance to that
as to the description ofthe churn flow itself. Some identify churn length will be observed to be in the churn flow psitern.
flow on the basis of the froth that appears within the gas region, Figure 4 shows a model of slug flow. Consecutive Taylor
and these investigators describe the pattern as frothy. Others bubbles rise in a vertical pipe, separated by regions of liquid
associate churn flow with the instability of the liquid film adja- containing small bubbles. The Taylor bubbles rise at a velocity
cent to the Taylor bubble. We characterize the churn flow designated by UG.The liquid between the Taylor bubbles moves
pattern as that condition where oscillatory motion of the liquid upwards at an average velocity U L . The bubble cavity is at nearly
in observed. In slug flow, the liquid between two Taylor bubbles constant pressure, and the liquid film adjacent to the bubble
moves at a constant velocity and its front as well as its tail have flows downward as a free-falling film at a velocity, U f . Since the

AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3) May, 1980 Page 349

 in the liquid at the front of the second bubble will b e the same as
0 0 0 0 0 that at the front of the first bubble, namely, the average velocity
0 0 0 0 0 is UL and the centerline velocity is 1.2 U L . This is the situation to
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 be expected when the slugs are long enough so that the turbu-
lent velocity distribution in the liquid can b e fully reestablished
before the next Taylor bubble appears. Then the velocity of the
"TAYLOR" BUBBLE\ two consecutive Taylor bubbles is the same, the length of the

A
\

I
eG I liquid slug will remain constant with time and position in the
direction of flow and stable slug flow exists.
But since the liquid slugs are shorter in the developing re-
gion, t h e velocity distribution in the liquid can be severely
distorted by the flow reversal near the wall as a result of the
LIQUID falling film. Consider the velocity distributions in the planes A-A
and B-B behind the leading Taylor bubble shown in Figure 4. If
the liquid slug is long, far enough behind the trailing edge of the
bubble (plane B-B), the velocity becomes that typical of turbu-
B lent flow. However, at A-A the flow is downward near the wallas
a result of the falling film around the bubble. In order to main-
tain mass continuity, the velocity at the centerline must in-
crease. Since the velocity of a Taylor bubble depends on the
centerline velocity plus its rise velocity, it is clear that for liquid
FALLING slugs too short to reestablish the turbulent velocity distribution,
the second bubble will overtake the first (Moissis and Griffith
0 0 0 0 0 1962). As a result, the two bubbles will coalesce, the liquid
0 0 0 0 0 bridge between them will disintegrate, and fall to a lower level
0 0 0 0 0 creating churn flow.
0 0 0 0 0
Experimental observations for water-air systems suggest that
the length of a stable slug relative to this diameter, 1slD is fairly
constant and independent of gas and liquid flow rates (Govier
and Aziz 1972, Akagawa and Sakaguchi 1966). The minimum
value of ls1D reported was 8. Studies in our laboratory, using
Figure 4. Slug flow geometry. very long, 2.5 and 5.0 cm diameter tubes, showed stable slug
lengths approach 16D. The earlier observations can be con-
sidered the result of two slugs, each not quite of stable length,
slug flow pattern is developed when (YT = 0.25, the liquid slug IslD = 8, which approach each other so slowly that they would
between the Taylor bubbles is assumed to contain small bubbles never coalesce except in a long tube. By use of the very approx-
at this bubble density. Further, the dispersed bubbles are as- imate argument which follows, it is possible to show that this
sumed to be confined to the region between the Taylor bubbles, stable length, lslD = 16, observed for ainvater, should be essen-
thus moving with the Taylor bubble velocity U G . Although tially independent of fluid properties or pipe diameter.
observations of slug flow show that some small bubbles are The liquid film falling along the Taylor bubble has an average
swept into the liquid film around the Taylor bubble, this as- velocity Ufand velocity relative to the liquid at plane A-A behind
sumption has little effect on the result.
The velocity of the Taylor bubble is given quite accurately by
+
the bubble of (Uf U,). Consider this liquid sheet as a two
dimensional jet which enters a stagnant pool of liquid (the slug)
the relation (Nicklin e t al. 1962), +
at a uniform velocity, (Uf U G ) . The axial velocity, U , in the
UG = 1.2 UL + 0 . 3 5 v s (15) liquid induced by the jet will depend on the distance x in the
direction of the jet and y, the normal distance from the jet
In this equation the second term on the R.H. S. describes the centerline. Both experimental and theoretical studies have
rise velocity of a large bubble in stagnant liquid. It was derived shown that the ratio of U(x,y) to U,,,(o,y) varies as
theoretically by Davies and Taylor (1949) and by Dumitrescu
(1943). The first term of the R. H. S. adds the liquid velocity at
the centerline, since 1.2 is approximately the ratio ofcenterline
to average velocity in fully developed turbulent flow. The total
volumetric flow rate, Q , is constant across any cross section. where y is a universal constant approximately equal to 7.67
Therefore, (Schlichting 1968). A stable slug is one which is long enough that
the jet has been absorbed by the fluid and the velocities have
slowed to that of the surroundings. In this case, we explore the
distance x = ls which at the centerline, y = D/2, the velocity is
The Taylor gas bubble velocity can b e solved directly by essentially flat, say U/UmaX5 0.05, and thus the normal turbu-
eliminating UL between (15) and (16) arriving at lent distribution in the liquid slug is undistorted. Equation (19)
shows that this takes place atlslD 2 16. This is, ofcourse, only an
1.2 ~

1-
uM
aT
+0.35dS approximate argument because the falling film is a wall jet, not a
u, = (17) free jet and the fluid is confined, not ofinfinite extent. However,
Pate1 (1971)showed that the velocity distributions in a wall jet on
1 + 1.2 ~
CUT
1- (YT the side of the velocity maximum away from the wall can be
estimated as in a free jet. Since the falling film is so thin, the
Using (16) the liquid velocity equals approximations used above become quite reasonable.
Entry Length for Churn Flow: Designate l E as the entry
length of pipe required to establish stable slug flow and there-
fore the region that one would observe churning. Consider a
Consider two consecutive Taylor bubbles (as shown in Figure coordinate x pointing downward from the trailing edge of the
4). The first (top) bubble moves at a velocity given by Equation leading Taylor bubble as in Figure 4. The velocity at the center
(15). The second (lower) bubble will move at the same speed of the pipe, U,,varies from U G atx = 0 to 1.2UL atx = 1s. Assume
when the slug length 1s is long enough so that the velocity profile exponential variation with x as follows

Page 350 May, 1980 AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3)

 or considering @ = 4.6 and I s = 16D yields

The constant j3 determines the decay rate and was chosen at p =

In 100 = 4.6 so that at x = 1s the decay will be 1%. The final
results are not sensitive to the particular choice of j3, or to the Substituting (17) into (26)for cuT = 0.25 yields
particular profile assumed as long as U,(x = 0) = UGand Uc(x =
Is) = 1.2 U L . Designating the leading bubble as the first and the
trailing bubble as the second and using Equation (15) for cal- D
culating the velocities of the two consecutive bubbles, we obtain where U u = UGS+ ULs.This shows that thr dimensionless entry
an approach velocity between two bubbles, -11, as l e n s h for churning depends on one parameter, namely, UMl
-? = U,, - Ucl = (Uc - 1.2 UL)e-oZ/‘S V g D . The solution to this equation for a low pressure air-water
system at several values of ZE/D is shown in Figures 2 and 3 for
= 0 . 3 5 d s e-Bx/‘s (21) 5.0 and 2.5 cm diameter tubes where these curves are desig-
nated as “D.”
It is interesting to compare this result with that given by Moissis Figure 2 shows typical trends for pipe diameters larger than
and Griffith (1962)who measured the velocity of aTaylor bubble that needed to satisfy Equation (14), that is, pipe sizes where a
that follows a leading bubble and correlated it empirically by the bubbly flow pattern can be expected to exist. Note that the “D
relationship curves” delineating the transition between slug and churn flow
terminate on the “A curve.” This A transition boundary repre-
sents the locus of points in the U L S - U G S plane where LY = 0.25
and for a < 0.25 only bubble flow can exist.
On the other hand, for the smaller pipe sizes represented in
Using (21) and (17) our results for (YT = 0 (as in Moissis and Figure 3 only slug flow is observed, even for a < 0.25. However,
Griffith’s case) can be expressed in the form churning can be expected only when a > 0.25. Thus, the locus of
% = I + 0.35 Urn - U G S values for a = 0.25 is shown dotted on Figure 3 and
- e-.2875~/D (23) still represepts the terminus of the D curves.
UCI +
1.2 UMldgD 0.35 It is now possible to predict if churn flow will be observed at
any axial position along the pipe. Assume that the point of
While the form and constants in the second termof equation (23) observation is 200 diameters above the entry. Over the flow rate
seem quite different from Moissis and Griffiths Equation (B), region to the left of the 1EID = 200 curve of Figure 2 and to the
the agreement in UcZ/Ucl is excellent for r/D > 3. For x/D less right ofthe A curve, slug flow will be observed. At flow rate pairs
than three, our prediction is poor, probably because for this to the right of curve D, churn flow will be seen, providing the
condition the two bubbles are very close and are near collapse. rate is not high enough to cause the annular pattern. Although
However, for the purpose of calculating the entry length, know- churning is visualized as an entry region phenomenon, condi-
ing the approach velocity for bubbles separated by distances of tions where churn flow would be observed over the entire
the order of D is not important as will be seen below. The fact length of a tube can be shown to exist. For example, consider a
that this model derived without data agrees so well with the 5.0 cm diameter pipe whose length is somewhat less than 2000.
Moissis and Griffith data gives confidence for its use for other Values of ULs and Ucs located just to the right of the 1ElD = 200
pipe sizes and fluid properties. curve of Figure 2 would result in churn flow being observed at
In calculating the entry length or length for churn flow, it is all positions along the pipe. In other words, the entire tube
assumed that near the gas liquid inlet coalescence is instantane- consists of entry length for purposes of developing slug flow.
ous and short Taylor bubbles as well as short liquid slugs are
formed. The merging of the Taylor bubbles to larger gas bubbles
and larger liquid slugs takes place when the second bubble Tmnsition to Annular Flow
overtakes the leading bubble. When they combine the volume, For high gas flow rates the flow becomes annular. The liquid
as well as the length, of the newly created Taylor bubble is film flows upwards adjacent to the wall, and gas flows in the
doubled. Likewise, the liquid slug behind the leading bubble center carrying entrained liquid droplets. The upward flow of
falls and merges with the liquid slug behind the second bubble the liquid film against gravity results from the forces exerted by
to create a slug twice as long. At approximately the same time, the fast moving gas core. This film has a wavy interface and the
the third and fourth bubbles will combine and again create a new waves tend to shatter and enter the gas core as entrained drop-
bubble and new liquid slug of double length. This process will go lets. Thus, the liquid moves upwards, due to both interfacial
on, and pairs of bubbles will coalesce as they move upward, shear and form “drag” on the waves and drag on the droplets.
doubling their length each time until a stable liquid slug of Based on the idea by Turner et al. (1968) applied to gas lift
1engthIslD = 16 is formed. The term 1s designates the length ofa operations, we suggest that annular flow cannot exist, unless the
stable slug while I , is the length of a slug formed during the gas velocity in the gas core is sufficient to lift the entrained
period of coalescence. Because the last merger of two slugs of droplets. When the gas rate is insufficient, the droplets fall back,
length lL = 8D is quite slow, we consider the entrance or accumulate, form a bridge and churn or slug flow takes place.
churning length to exist up to the point where 1~ = 8D (or ZL = The minimum gas velocity required to suspend a drop is
ls/2), the region of churn flow. determined from the balance between the gravity and drag
Integrating (21) gives the time needed for each merger as a forces acting on the drop
function the distance, ZL,, between two consecutive bubbles

t, = ls [eolL1/fs - 11 (24)
0.35j3qz
or
where i takes successive values of 0, 1, 2 , 3 . . . . Lettinglu take
the sequence from 0 to 1~14,namely, k,= 1~14,1~18,1~116. . . 0 (29)
yields an infinite series for t i whose sum multiplied by UG yields
the estimated entrance length 1,. The drop size is determined by the balance between the impact
force of the gas that tends to shatter the drop and surface tension
forces that hold the drop together. Hinze (1955)showed that the
maximum stable drop size will be

AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3) May, 1980 Page 351

 10 -
--6-
I
(II) - I I

O = 5.1 c m - 10

-
u
1.0

%
- 0.10
\
E

3
3

1
0.01
'b
I
il I I I I

UGs( m/sec)

0.I 1.0 10 100

I GOVIER 8 AZlZ (1972) 5 ~SHINAWA8CHARLES11974)
UGs ( m /sec 1 2 GRIFFITH 8 WALLIS(1961) 6 WALLIS(1969)
3 STERNLING (1965) 7 HEWITT Et ROBERTS(1969)
Figure 5. Flow pattern map for vertical tubes crude oil-natural gas at
38"C, 670 N/sq.cm. 4 GOULD ( 1974)
Figure 6. Bubble-slug transition comparison of theory with other maps.

Characteristic ofannular flow is that the film thickness is quite

low even for relatively high liquid flow rates. As a result the true
where K is the critical Weber number and takes a value between
gas velocity UG can be replaced by the superficial rate UGs and
20 and 30 for drops which are gradually accelerated.
the final transition boundary is given by
Using (29) and (30) yields
Pc)1"4
UG = (g-) 1'4 [ d P L -

PG"*
(31)
This simple criterion shows the transition to the annular pattern
As suggested by Turner et al. (1969) values of I< = 30 and c d =
is independent of liquid flow rate and pipe diameter. For
0.44 were selected. Note that K and c d appear in the power of
water-air at 25"C, 10 N/cm2this velocity is calculated tobe about
%. Thus, the result for U G is quite insensitive to their exact
15 m/sec, and the transition boundary is plotted as a vertical line
values.
in Figures 2 and 3 designated as curve E. The dimensionless
The gas velocity given by Equation (31) will predict the
group in Equation (32) is recognized as the Kutataledze number.
minimum value below which stable annular flow will not exist.
Equation (32) is almost identical to the empirical results of
While this analysis is applied to the droplets within the gas core,
Pushkin and Sorokin (1959), who determined the air velocity
the same treatment can be usedfor the crests ofthe waves on the
necessary to lift the liquid film for flooding experiments in tubes
rising film, which are pictured as being supported by the gas
varying from 6 to 309 mm in diameter. They correlated their
stream in a manner similar to the support of the liquid droplets.
I I I I .c I
I I I 10.0
10 -THEORY

I .o
I.o h
0
Q)
u)
\

v
E
v) 0.1
J
0.I 3

0.0I
0.01

0.I I.o 10 100

0.I I.o 10 100 U G S (m/sec)

Figure 7. Slug to churn transition comparison of theory with other maps Figure 8. Transition to annular flow comparison of theory with other maps
(see Figure 6 for legend). (see Figure 6 for legend).

Page 352 May, 1980 AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3)

experimental results in terms of the Kutataledze number, ex-
cept the constant 3.1 is replaced by the constant 3.2. While
I( .THEORY
I
- I 1 I

..-A
Pushkin and Sorokin arrived at their result by dimensional
analysis and experiment, the above development places a BUBBLE I
theoretical basis under the result.
Fluid properties and pipe diameter enter into the transition
equations to differing degrees depending on the transition being h
0
considered. To illustrate this effect, the location of the transition Q)
boundaries are shown in Figure 5, for a crude oil-natural gas \
u)

system flowing at 30°C and 670 N/sq.cm pressure in pipes with E

diameters of 5.0 and 30.0 cm. Oil density was set at 0.65 g/cu.cm Y

with natural gas at 0.05 gr/cu.cm with oil and gas viscosities of
cn
0.5 and 0.015 cp. 9 0. 0 0 0 0

It is useful to observe that the flow pattern transition bound-

aries can be readily obtained by hand calculation from the
algebraic equations presented here for any pipe size and fluid
properties.
Criterion for existence of bubble flow: Eq. 14
Bubble to slug: E . 5
Bubble to dispersejbubble: Eq. 12
Slug to churn: Eq. 27
Annular: Eq. 32
0.0
0 0 0 0 0 0

oloo~oo,+

0.I I 10 100
,I
U~S(m/sec)
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Figure 9. Comparison with new data water-oir, 25°C. 10 N/cm2, D = 2.5
In Figures 6 through 8, each of the transitions predicted by cm, t = 13OD solid lines represent theory.
this theory are compared with published transition boundaries.
As discussed above, these published transition boundaries are
based on experimental data with little theoretical foundation. and magnitude between the theory and data curves as well as
The wide discrepancy in the location of these curves emphasizes between the various sets of data. In this region of high liquid
the role of observation and careful definition in the study of flow rate, the flow is extremely chaotic, and visual observations are
patterns. Location of curves in the published maps have been not very specific. Figures 9 and 10 show that the theoretical
based on experiments in pipes, ranging in size from 2.0-6.0 cm prediction of this transition is in excellent agreement with our
in diameter, and with air-water at low pressure. data taken in 2.5 and 5.0 cm diameter tubes.
Transition A and B (Figure 6). The theory presented here Theoretically predicted transitions for upflow have been
identifies two bubble-slug transitions. Large Taylor type bub- compared with the recommendations of many earlier investiga-
bles cannot exist above theoretical transition curve B due to tors whose results have been based primarily on experimental
turbulent dispersion. Transition to Taylor type bubbles or to measurements. There is considerable disagreement between
churn flow takes place to the right of theoretical transition curve the results of these various investigators. However, the theory
A. In the region between these two curves dispersed bubbles presented here is in satisfactory agreement with the weight of
should appear for 5.0 cm and larger diameter pipes and Taylor the earlier experimental results. In addition, comparisons with
bubbles should appear for 2.5 cm diameter pipes. "Bubble flow" new data taken in 2.5 and 5.0 cm tubes show good agreement,
has been used to describe the existence of both dispersed bub- since the theory was developed without the use of experimental
bles as well as Taylor bubbles that do not quite fill the pipe's data.
cross section area. Note that, except for the Govier and Aziz
curve, these two theoretical curves bound the range of the data.
It thus includes all possible descriptions. If one designates the
slug flow pattern only for these cases where Taylor bubbles
which nearly fill the pipe exist and rise with a velocity given by
Equation (15), then some of this ambiguity can be eliminated.
Figures 9 and 10 show experimental data taken in our labora-
tories in 2.5 and 5.0 cm tubes, which clearly demonstrate that
for 2.5 cm tubes the A transition does not exist while for 5.0 cm
tubes bubbly flow can be observed.
-
0
0)
I .o

Transition D (Figure 7 ) . Since churn flow is an entry region v)

\
phenomenon, the location of the slug-churn transition boundary
depends on the point of observation along the pipe as discussed
E
Y

above. Theoretically predicted transition curves are shown for ZE 0.10

= 50D in a 2.5 cm pipe and 1, = 2000 in a 5.0 cm pipe.
Considering the fact that there is no information on the location
of the observation point for the published transitions, the results
must be considered in remarkably good agreement with all
published curves except that of Hewitt and Roberts (1969).The 0.01
new experimental data in Figures 9 and 10 show excellent
agreement with the theory at the lower liquid rates. At higher
velocities, it is extremely difficult to visually discriminate be-
tween churn and slug flow.
0.I I .o 10 100
Transition E (Figure 8). The vertical line representing transi-
tion E is compared with several published transitions in Figure uCs( m/sec 1
8. Except for the Grimth-Wallis curve, the theory is an excellent
compromise between the various empirical curves proposed. At Figure 10. Comparisonwith new data water-air, 25"C, 10 N/cm*, D = 5.1
high liquid rates, there is increasing discrepancy both in trend cm, L = 1650 solid lines represent theory.

AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3) May, 1980 Page 353

ACKNOWLEDGMENT Dukler, A. E., M. WicksIII, andR. C. Cleveland, “Frictional Pressure
Drop in Two-Phase Flow: B. An Approach Through Similarity
This work was supported by the U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foun- Analysis,” AlChE J . , 10, 44 (1964).
dation and the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administra- Dumitrescu, D. T., “Stromung and Einer Luftblase in Senkrechten
tion. Rohr,” ZAMM, 23, 139 (1943).
Duns, Jr., H . , and N. C. J. Ros, “Vertical Flow of Gas and Liquid
NOTATION Mixtures from Boreholes,” Proc. 6th World Petroleum Congress,
Frankhurt (June 1963).
A = flow cross sectional area Feldman, S., “On the Hydrodynamic Stability of Two Viscous Incom-
C = constant in the friction factor correlation pressible Fluids in Parallel Uniform Shearing - Motion,” 1. Fluid
Cd = drag coefficient kech., 1, 343 (1957).
d = b u b b l e o r drop diameter Gould. T. L.. “Vertical Two-Phase Steam-Water Flow in Geothermal
D = pipe diameter Wells,” J. Petroleum Tech., 26, 833 (1974).
f = friction factor Gould, T. L., M. R. Tek, and D. L. Katz, “Two-Phase Flow Through
g = acceleration of gravity Vertical, Inclined or Curved Pipe,” J . Petroleum Tech., 26, 915
k = constant, Equation (6) (1974).
Govier, 6 . W., and K. Aziz, The Fluw uf Complex Mixtures in Pipes,
K = critical W e b e r number, Equation (30)
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. (1972).
I = length Govier, G. W., B. A. Radford, and J. S. C. Dunn, “The Upwardvertical
n = exponent, Equation (11) Flow of Air-Water Mixtures,” Can. J. Chem. Eng., 35, 58 (1957).
P =pressure Govier, G. W., G. A. Sullivan, and R. K. Wood, “The Upwardvertical
Q = volumetric flow rate Flow of Oil-Water Mixtures,” Can. J , Chem. Eng., 39, 67 (1961).
U = velocity Griffith, P., and G. B. Wallis, “Two-Phase Slug Flow,” J . Heat Trans..
x = axial coordinate 83, 307 (1961).
= coordinate perpendicular to flow direction Griffith, P., and 6. A. Syndcr, “The Bubbly-Slug Transition in a High
y Velocity Two-Phase Flow: MIT Report 5003-29 (TID-20947),(1964).
z = coordinate in the flow direction
Harmathy, T. Z . , “Velocity of Large Drops and Bubbles in Media of
Infinite or Restricted Extent,” AZChE, 6, 281 (1960).
Greek Symbols Hewitt, G . F., “Analysis ofAnnular Two-Phase Flow: Application of the
Dukler Analysis to Vertical Upward Flow in Tubes,” United Kingdom
a = void fraction Atomic Energy Authority Report AERE-R 3680 (1961).
cq = void fraction at transition to slug flow Hewitt, 6. F., and N. S. Hall-Taylor, Annuhr Two-Phase Flow, Per-
/3 = constant, Equation (20) gamon Press (1970).
E = energy i n p u t per unit mass a n d time Hewitt, 6.F., and D. N. Roberts, “Studies ofTwo-Phase Flow Patterns
by Simultaneous X-ray and Flash Photography,” United Kingdom
p = density Atomic Energy Authority Report AERE-M 2159 (1969).
u = surface tension Hinze, J. O., “Fundamentals of the Hydrodynamic Mechanism of Split-
r = shear stress ting in Dispersion Processes,” AZChE I., 1, 289 (1955).
Hubbard, M. B., and A. E. Dukler, “The Characterization of Flow
Regimes for Horizontal Two-Phase Flow,” in Proc. of 1966 Heat
Subscripts Trans. & Fluid Mech. Znst., M. A. Saad and J. A. Miller Editors,
C = centerline of pipe Stanford U. Press (1966).
Lockhart, R. W., and R. C. Martinelli, “Proposed Correlation of Data
crit = diameter at which butihle behaves a s a rigid s p h e r e
for Isothermal Two-Phase, Two-Component Flow in Pipes,” Chem.
mix = diameter of max stable b u b b l e Eng. Prog., 45, 39 (1949).
E = entrance Moissis, R., “The Transition from Slug to Homogeneous Two-Phase
f = falling film around Taylor bubble Slug Flow,” J . Heat Transfer, 85, 366 (1963).
G = gas in Taylor b u b b l e Moissis, R., and P. Griffith, “Entrance Effects in a Two-Phase Slug
GS = superficial for gas flow alone in the p i p e Flow,” J , Heat Transfer, 84, 29 (1962).
i = running index Nicklin, D. J . , and J. F. Dadidson, “The Onset of Instability on Two-
L = liquid Phase Slug Flow,” Inst. Mech. Engr., (London), Proc. of Symp. on
LS = superficial for liquid flow alone in t h e pipe Two-Phase Flow, Paper 4 (1962).
M = mixture of gas a n d liquid Nicklin, D. J., J. 0. Wilkes, and J. F. Davidson, “Two-Phase Flow in
Vertical Tubes,” Trans. Znst. Chem. Engrs., (London), 40,61 (1974).
0 = free rise
Oshinowo, T., and M. E . Charles, “Vertical Two-Phase Flow: Part 11.
S = slug
Holdup and Pressure Drop,” Can. J . Chem. Eng., 56, 438 (1974).
W = pipe wall Patel, R. P., “Turbulent Jets and Wall Jets in Uniform Streaming Flow,”
Aeron. Q., 23, 311 (1971).
LITERATURE CITED Pushkina, 0. L., and Y. L. Sorokin, “Breakdown of Liquid Film Motion
in Vertical Tubes,” Heat Trans. Souiet Res., 1, 151 (1962).
Akagawa, K., and T. Sakaguchi, “Fluctuation ofVoid Ratio in Two Phase Radovicich, N. A,, and R. Moissis, “The Transition from Two-Phase
Flow,” Bulletin of ASME, 9, 104 (1960). Bubble Flow to Slug Flow,” MIT Report 7-7673-22 (1962).
Brodkey, R. S., The Phenomena of Fluid Motions, Addison-Wesley Schlichting, H . , Boundary Layer Theory, (6th ed.) McGraw-Hill(l968).
Press (1967). Sevik, M., and S. H. Park, “The Splitting of Drops and Bubbles by
Brown, A. S., G. A. Sullivan, and G. W. Govier, “The Upward Vertical Turbulent Fluid Flow,”Trans. ASME,J. Fluid Engr., 95,53 (1973).
Flow ofAir-Water Mixture: 111. Effect of Gas Phase Density on Flow Sternling, V. C., “Two Phase Flow Theory and Engineering Decision,”
Pattern, Hold-up and Pressure Drop,” Can. J . Chem. Eng., 38, 62 award lecture presented at AIChE Annual Meeting (December,
(1960). 1965).
Calderbank, P. H., “Physical Rate Processes in Industrial Fermenta- Taitel, Y., and A. E. Dukler, “A Model for Predicting Flow Regime
tion. Part I: The Interfacial Area in Gas-Liquid Contracting with Transition in Horizontal and Near Horizontal Gas-Liquid Flow,”
Mechanical Agitation,” Trans. Znst. Chem. Eng., 36, 443 (1958). AIChE J., 22, 47 (1976).
Chisholm, D., “A Theoretical Basis for the Lockhart-MartinelliCorrela- Turner, R. G., M. G. Hubbard, and A. E . Dukler, “Analysis and
tion for Two Phase Flow,” Znt. J. Heat & Mass Transfer, 10, 1767 Prediction of Minimum Flow Rate for the Continuous Removal of
(1967). Liquid from Gas Wells,” J . Petroleum Tech., 21, 1475 (1969).
Clay, P. H., “The Mechanism of Emulsion Formation in Turbulent Wallis, G. B., One Dimensional TwoPhase Flow, McGraw-Hill(l969).
Flow, Part I,” Proc. Roy. Acad. Sci. (Amsterdam), 43, 852 (1940). Wisman, R., “Analytical Pressure Drop Correlation for Adiabatic Verti-
Davis, R. M., and G . I. Taylor, “The Mechanism of Large Bubbles cal Two-Phase Flow,” Appl. Sci. Res., 30, 367 (1975).
Rising Through Liquids in Tubes,” Proc. of Roy. Soc. (London), 200,
Ser. A, 375 (1950).
Dukler, A. E., “Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer in Vertical Falling Manuscript received May 22,1979; revision receivedAugust 30 and acceptedAugust
Film Systems,” Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp.. Ser. 56, 1 (1960). 31, 1979.

Page 354 May, 1980 AlChE Journal (Vol. 26, No. 3)