Cited by 313Fluid Dynamics and MixingGranular flow and fluidized bedsHeat and Mass Transfer in Porous Media

Hydrodynamic simulations of laboratory scale bubble columns fundamental studies of the Eulerian-Eulerian modelling approach

Pfleger, D., Gomes, S., Gilbert, N., Wagner, H.-G.·1999·Chemical Engineering Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0009-2509(99)00261-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Three-dimensional simulations are necessary to obtain a correct determination of the flow field.

    “Therefore, although computationally much more expensive, three-dimensional simulations are necessary to obtain a correct determination of the flow field [136,158,159].”
  • Selma et al. [312] implemented CM and DQMOM in OpenFOAM to model polydisperse two-phase flow of a rectangular bubble column and STR; the model was validated with experimental results for the bubble column, and numerical results and experiments agree well in time-averaged axial liquid velocity and gas hold-up.

    “Selma et al. [312] implemented the CM and the DQMOM in OpenFOAM ® to model the polydisperse two-phase flow of a rectangular bubble column and a stirred tank reactor (STR). The model was validated with the experimental results [158,313] for the case of the bubble column. Numerical results and experiments agree well in terms of time-averaged axial liquid velocity and gas hold-up.”
  • Vieira et al. [308] found time-averaged axial liquid velocity and gas hold-up compare well against experimental results; modified k-# model delivers the best results, being a good compromise between simplicity and accuracy.

    “Nevertheless, the time-averaged axial liquid velocity and the gas hold-up compare well against experimental results [158,309,310]. They conclude that the modified k -# model delivers the best results, being a good compromise between simplicity of modeling and accuracy of the predictions.”

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pfleger, D., Gomes, S., Gilbert, N., & Wagner, H.-G.
Affiliations
BASF (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
Pfleger, D.
Venue
Chemical Engineering Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-11
Volume
54
Issue
21
Pages
5091-5099
ISSN
0009-2509 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2050812421
Cited by
313
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 12
FWCI
7.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Chemical Engineering Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Granular flow and fluidized beds
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Heat and Mass Transfer in Porous Media
Keywords
bubble column, two-fluid model, gas-liquid two-phase flow, bubbly flow, air-water system, gas sparger, turbulence modeling, k-epsilon turbulence model, turbulent dispersion, three-dimensional simulation, mesh refinement, liquid velocity profiles

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review