Mixing Time: A CFD

Approach
Lanre M. Oshinowo, Andr Bakker, Elizabeth Marshall
Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH 03766 USA
17th Biennial North American Mixing Conference
Banff, Alberta
August 15-20, 1999
MIXING XVII

Overview

Description and background of mixing time

Mixing tank modeling using CFD
Estimating the mixing time
Case studies: Experimental validation
Mixing time results


Steady and unsteady flow fields

Summary and Conclusions

MIXING XVII

Mixing Time

Mixing time is the time taken to homogenize the

liquid contents of the tank after a step change in
composition
The transport of a tracer helps to understand the
degree of homogeneity in the agitated tank


Circulation time used to gauge the bulk motion induced

by the impeller(s)
Mixing (or blend) time can be used to evaluate the
mixing equipment design to obtain ideal mixing

MIXING XVII

Mixing Time: Complications

Typically, correlations of mixing time data are used

Mixing time depends on a large number of
variables:







Impeller type, diameter and Reynolds number

Scale
Feed location and the location of probes
Multiple impellers
Internals
Fluid properties, etc.

Difficulties establishing a set of correlations for the

wide range of variables, most importantly, scale
Can lead to inaccuracies in mixing time prediction
MIXING XVII

Mixing Time: CFD Approach

Utilize CFD for the prediction of mixing time by

eliminating the guesswork in tank configuration,
scale, and fluid properties
Leverage the flexibility to change tank scale, flow
regimes/impeller location and number of impellers
Evaluate a method of predicting mixing time

MIXING XVII

CFD Modeling of Mixing Tanks

Impeller Modeling was done using:





Impeller boundary conditions applied from LDA

Multiple Reference Frame (MRF) Model, steady-state
Sliding Mesh Model, time-dependent

Turbulence Models used were:



Standard k-, RNG k-, Reynolds Stress Model, LES

Increasing computational expense

Mixing time was predicted using:




Unsteady Particle Tracking

Transient transport of a neutrally-buoyant tracer (Scalar)

MIXING XVII

Flow Regimes

Radial Disk turbine

H=T= 0.202 m

Di= 0.074 m

C/T=0.33

N = 290 rpm

ReD = 26,000

Pitched Blade turbine

H=T= 0.292 m

Di=0.102 m

C/T=0.46

N = 60 rpm

ReD = 10,000

Hydrofoil + Concave-Blade
Turbine

T=2m

DCD-6=0.8 m; C=0.6m

DHE-3=1.04 m; Z=1.04m

N = 84 rpm

ReD ~ 1e6
MIXING XVII

Validating the Radial Disk Turbine

Influence of Turbulence Models

Normalized tangential velocity profiles at the mid-baffle position

w/vtip
+90mm

Np=4.64 (4.85)
NQ=0.67 (0.7)
Radial coordinate, mm
LDA data : Z. Jaworski, K. N. Dyster and A. W. Nienow
University of Birmingham, UK

MIXING XVII

Validating the Pitched Blade Turbine

LDA

PIV

Velocity vector field in mixing tank

CFD

Data Source: Myers, K.J., Ward,

R.W. & Bakker, A. (1997) J. Fluids
Eng. v.119, p.623

MIXING XVII

Validating the PBT, contd.

0.15

LDA Radial Velocity

LDA Axial Velocity
PIV Radial Valocity
PIV Axial Velocity
CFD Radial Velocity
CFD Axial Velocity

0.10
0.05

y/H=0.6

0.00
-0.05

y/H=0.4

Normalized Velocity

-0.10
-0.15
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
0.15
0.10

y/H=0.2

Data Source: Myers,

K.J., Ward, R.W. &
Bakker, A. (1997) J.
Fluids Eng. v.119, p.623

0.05
0.00
-0.05
-0.10

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

r/D

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

MIXING XVII

Mixing Time Calculations

Unsteady particle tracking





Transport of a tracer




Release of a number of neutrally-buoyant particles

Turbulent dispersion of particles accounted for
Particle concentration sampled at various times

Small amount of liquid tracer added near liquid surface

Concentration of tracer monitored as a function of time
Similar to experimental techniques

Flow field required can be steady, frozen unsteady

or unsteady
MIXING XVII

Time-varying Concentration

Multiple locations can be sampled simultaneously

to show concentration changes in many locations
in the tank
Mixing time, t99, is the time taken for the
uniformity, U, to reach 0.99, where

(
C C ( t ) )
U = 1
C

The t99 is determined at various locations in the

tank and averaged to obtain the mixing time

MIXING XVII

Influence of Measurement Location

Dual impeller HE-3 + CD-6
t99= 20s
2.00
Point 1
Point 2
Point 3
Point 4

t99= 21.4s

U
1.00

t99= 27.4s
t99= 55.8s
0.00
0

10

20

30

40

50

Time, s

MIXING XVII

Influence of Turbulence Models

Uniformity; Radial Disk Turbine

1.2

1.0

0.8

Predicted mixing
times, t99, at the
sample location


Sample
Location

0.6





0.4

FIX-RSM
MRF-RSM
MRF-RNG
MRF-k-e

0.2

FIX, RSM = 13.6s

MRF, k- = 9.6s
MRF, RNG = 22.8s
MRF, RSM = 11.6s

0.0
0

10

15

20

25

Time, s
MIXING XVII

Influence of Impeller Modeling

4

1.0

FIX: t99=11.6s
MRF: t99=10.0s

U2

Radial Turbine

0.8

0.6
FIX: t99=112s
MRF: t99=54s

0.4

1
0.2

0
2.0 0

1.5

10

15
20
Time, s MRF: t99=12.2s
FIX: t99=21.4s

PBT

0.0
0

Dual Impeller
(CD-6+HE-3)

0.5

40

60

80

100

120

Time, s

1.0

20

Modeling impeller
with velocity data
predicts greater t99

0.0
0

10

15

20

Time, s

MIXING XVII

Mixing Time Correlations

Fasano, J.B., Bakker, A. &

Penney, W.R. (1994)

t99 =

ln (1 U )
b

D T
aN
T Z

0.5

Impeller Style

Radial Disk
6 blades

1.06

2.17

Pitched
4 blades

0.641 2.19

High-efficiency
0.272 1.67
3 blades

Prochazka and Landau (1961), Moo-Young

et al (1972), Sano & Usui (1985), Raghav
Rao and Joshi (1988)

MIXING XVII

Comparison to Correlations
t9 9(C o r r .)

t99(C F D )

8 ( 3 0 % )

1 0 .5 0 .9

PBT

7 2 ( 3 0 % )

6 1 .5 9 .3

H E -3 + C D -6

1 5 ( 3 0 % )

3 2 3 4 .7

RT

(1 7 .6 ,1 3 .6 ,1 2 .8 , 8 4 )

Time in seconds

The CFD mixing time results were the average of multiple

locations in the tank
The dual impeller systems shows the influence of locally
poor mixing on the average mixing time in the tank

MIXING XVII

Mixing Time Calculations in an

Unsteady Flow Field

The sliding mesh model was used to set up the

transient motions of the impeller in the tank.
Two turbulence model approaches were
evaluated:


Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes turbulence model,

i.e., Standard k-, RNG k-, Reynolds Stress Model
Large Eddy Simulation or LES

MIXING XVII

Cross-correlation results
1
Rxy ( ) = lim C1 (t )C2 (t + )dt
T T
1.E+01
Normalized CrossCorrelation Function

1 impeller revolution

1.E+00

LES

1.E-01

RANS

1.E-02
1.E-03
1.E-04
50

The time delay between the 1.E-05

maximum values of Rxy(t) gives
the average convection velocity
of the tracer front
Can be related to mixing efficiency
45
40
35
30

10

15

20

t (*0.05s)

MIXING XVII

Summary

Mixing time can predicted using CFD in a variety

of tank configurations
Unsteady tracer CFD calculations on a steadystate flow field gave good comparisons with
correlations of experimental data
Modeling the presence of the impeller is important
for improving mixing time predictions
Both RANS-based and LES turbulence modeling
can be used with an unsteady sliding mesh model
to calculate the transport of the tracer

MIXING XVII