Visualisation of gas-liquid mass transfer around a rising bubble in a quiescent liquid using an oxygen sensitive dye

Short Communication
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

An approach for visualizing and measuring the mass transfer around a single bubble rising in a quiescent liquid is reported. A colorimetric technique, developed by (Dietrich et al. Chem Eng Sci 100:172–182, 2013) using an oxygen sensitive redox dye was implemented. It was based on the reduction of the colorimetric indicator in presence of oxygen, this reduction being catalysed by sodium hydroxide and glucose. In this study, resazurin was selected because it offered various reduced forms with colours ranging from transparent (without oxygen) to pink (in presence of oxygen). These advantages made it possible to visualize the spatio-temporal oxygen mass transfer around rising bubbles. Images were recorded by a CCD camera and, after post-processing, the shape, size, and velocity of the bubbles were measured and the colours around the bubbles mapped. A calibration, linking the level of colour with the dissolved oxygen concentration, enabled colour maps to be converted into oxygen concentration fields. A rheoscopic fluid was used to visualize the wake of the bubbles. A calculation method was also developed to determine the transferred oxygen fluxes around bubbles of two sizes (d = 0.82 mm and d = 2.12 mm) and the associated liquid-side mass transfer coefficients. The results compared satisfactorily with classical global measurements made by oxygen micro-sensors or from the classical models. This study thus constitutes a striking example of how this new colorimetric method could become a remarkable tool for exploring gas-liquid mass transfer in fluids.

Nomenclature

\( \operatorname{Re}=\frac{U_B.{d}_B\rho }{\mu } \)

Reynolds number, dimensionless

\( Sc=\frac{\mu }{\rho .{D}_{O_2}} \)

Schmidt number, dimensionless

a

Interfacial area, m−1

C

Oxygen concentration, mg.L−1

C*

Oxygen solubility, mg.L−1

d

Diameter, m

D

Diffusion coefficient, m2.s−1

ϕ

Flux, g.m−2.s−1

kL

Mass transfer coefficient, m.s−1

m

Mass, g

n

Amount, mol

S

Column section, m2

tc

Bubble characteristic time = d/uB, s

uB

Velocity, m.s−1

V

Volume, m3

X’

Measurement position, m

x, y, z

Distance, m

Greek letters

σ

Tension force, N/m

μ

Viscosity, Pa.s

ρ

Density, kg.m−3

Subscripts

c

Characteristic time

B

Bubble

Superscripts

¯

Average of the value

*

Oxygen-saturated solution (theoretical value)

References

  1. 1.
    Dietrich N, Loubière K, Jimenez M, Hébrard G, Gourdon C (2013) A new direct technique for visualizing and measuring gas–liquid mass transfer around bubbles moving in a straight millimetric square channel. Chem Eng Sci 100:172–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2013.03.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benizri D, Dietrich N, Hébrard G (2017) Experimental characterization of multi-component absorption in complex liquid: new method and apparatus. Chem Eng Sci 170:116–121.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.03.024 13th International Conference on Gas-Liquid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Lamotte A, Delafosse A, Calvo S, Delvigne F, Toye D (2017) Investigating the effects of hydrodynamics and mixing on mass transfer through the free-surface in stirred tank bioreactors. Chem Eng Sci 172:125–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.06.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dietrich N, Poncin S, Li HZ (2011) Dynamical deformation of a flat liquid–liquid interface. Exp Fluids.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-010-0989-7
  5. 5.
    Hariz R, del Rio Sanz JI, Mercier C, Valentin R, Dietrich N, Mouloungui Z, Hébrard G (2017) Absorption of toluene by vegetable oil–water emulsion in scrubbing tower: experiments and modeling. Chem Eng Sci 157:264–271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.06.008 12th International Conference on Gas-Liquid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kherbeche A, Nsakou SN, Lekhlif B, Hébrard G, Dietrich N (2017) Study of the initial glycerol concentration effects upon bacterial cells adaptation and biodegradation kinetics on a submerged aerated fixed bed reactor using biocell® packing. Journal of Materials and Environmental Sciences 8:3280–3289Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kováts P, Thévenin D, Zähringer K (2017) Characterizing fluid dynamics in a bubble column aimed for the determination of reactive mass transfer. Heat Mass Transf:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-017-2142-0
  8. 8.
    Tatin R, Moura L, Dietrich N, Baig S, Hébrard G (2015) Physical absorption of volatile organic compounds by spraying emulsion in a spray tower: experiments and modelling. Chem Eng Res Des 104:409–415.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2015.08.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wongwailikhit K, Warunyuwong P, Chawaloesphonsiya N, Dietrich N, Hébrard G, Painmanakul P (2017) Gas Sparger orifice sizes and solid particle characteristics in a bubble column – relative effect on hydrodynamics and mass transfer. Chem Eng Technol.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201700293
  10. 10.
    Wylock C, Rednikov A, Colinet P, Haut B (2017) Experimental and numerical analysis of buoyancy-induced instability during CO2 absorption in NaHCO3–Na2CO3 aqueous solutions. Chem Eng Sci 157:232–246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.04.061 12th International Conference on Gas-Liquid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xie X, Le Men C, Dietrich N, Schmitz P, Fillaudeau L (2017) Local hydrodynamic investigation by PIV and CFD within a dynamic filtration unit under laminar flow. Sep Purif Technol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2017.04.009
  12. 12.
    Danckwerts PV (1951) Significance of liquid-film coefficients in gas absorption. Ind Eng Chem 43:1460–1467.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie50498a055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Higbie R (1935) The rate of absorption of a pure gas into a still liquid during short periods of exposure. Transactions of American Institute of Chemical Engineers 31:365–389Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Whitman WG (1923) Preliminary experimental confirmation of the two-film theory of gas absorption. Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering 29:146–148Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Toor HL, Marchello JM (1958) Film-penetration model for mass and heat transfer. AICHE J 4:97–101.  https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690040118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang J, Langemann H (1994) Unsteady two-film model for mass transfer. Chem Eng Technol 17:280–284.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.270170410 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Falkenroth A, Degreif K, Jähne B (2007) Visualisation of oxygen concentration fields in the mass boundary layer by fluorescence quenching. In: Garbe P-DDCS, Handler DRA, Jähne PDB (eds) Transport at the air-sea interface, environmental science and engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 59–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Herlina G, Jirka GH (2004) Application of LIF to investigate gas transfer near the air-water interface in a grid-stirred tank. Exp Fluids 37:341–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Cockx A, Hébrard G (2012a) Experimental study of O2 diffusion coefficient measurement at a planar gas–liquid interface by planar laser-induced fluorescence with inhibition. AICHE J 59:325–333.  https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.13805 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Hebrard G (2012b) A new method for measuring diffusion coefficient of gases in liquids by Plif. Mod Phys Lett B 26:1150034.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217984911500345 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mühlfriedel K, Baumann K-H (2000) Concentration measurements during mass transfer across liquid-phase boundaries using planar laser induced fluorescence (PLIF). Exp Fluids 28:279–281.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s003480050388 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Munsterer T, Jahne B (1998) LIF measurements of concentration profiles in the aqueous mass boundary layer. Exp Fluids 25:190–196.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s003480050223 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Walker JW, Peirson WL (2007) Measurement of gas transfer across wind-forced wavy air–water interfaces using laser-induced fluorescence. Exp Fluids 44:249–259.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-007-0398-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bork O, Schlueter M, Raebiger N (2005) The impact of local phenomena on mass transfer in gas-liquid systems. Can J Chem Eng 83:658–666.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.5450830406 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Butler C, Cid E, Billet A-M (2016) Modelling of mass transfer in Taylor flow: investigation with the PLIF-I technique. Chem Eng Res Des 115(Part B):292–302.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2016.09.001 10th European Congress of Chemical EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dani A, Guiraud P, Cockx A (2007) Local measurement of oxygen transfer around a single bubble by planar laser-induced fluorescence. Chem Eng Sci 62:7245–7252.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2007.08.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dietrich N, Francois J, Jimenez M, Cockx A, Guiraud P, Hébrard G (2015) Fast measurements of the gas-liquid diffusion coefficient in the Gaussian wake of a spherical bubble. Chem Eng Technol 38:941–946.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201400471 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Francois J, Dietrich N, Cockx A (2011a) A novel methodology to measure mass transfer around a bubble. Mod Phys Lett B 25:1993–2000.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217984911027236 CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Francois J, Dietrich N, Guiraud P, Cockx A (2011b) Direct measurement of mass transfer around a single bubble by micro-PLIFI. Chem Eng Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2011.01.049. Corrected Proof
  30. 30.
    Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Cockx A, Hébrard G (2013a) Experimental study of O2 diffusion coefficient measurement at a planar gas–liquid interface by planar laser-induced fluorescence with inhibition. AICHE J 59:325–333.  https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.13805 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Hébrard G (2013b) Mass transfer in the wake of non-spherical air bubbles quantified by quenching of fluorescence. Chem Eng Sci 100:160–171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2013.01.036 11th International Conference on Gas-Liquid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Grace JR, Hébrard G (2014) Oxygen mass transfer and hydrodynamic behaviour in wastewater: determination of local impact of surfactants by visualization techniques. Water Res 58:111–121.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.03.065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Roudet M, Billet A-M, Cazin S, Risso F, Roig V (2017) Experimental investigation of interfacial mass transfer mechanisms for a confined high-reynolds-number bubble rising in a thin gap. AICHE J 63:2394–2408.  https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.15562 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roy S, Duke SR (2004) Visualization of oxygen concentration fields and measurement of concentration gradients at bubble surfaces in surfactant-contaminated water. Exp Fluids 36:654–662.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-003-0771-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Xu F, Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Hébrard G (2017) Fast determination of gas-liquid diffusion coefficient by an innovative double approach. Chem Eng Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.02.043
  36. 36.
    Hanyu K, Saito T (2010) Dynamical mass-transfer process of a CO2 bubble measured by using LIF/HPTS visualisation and photoelectric probing. Can J Chem Eng 88:551–560.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.20319 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huang J, Saito T (2015) Influence of bubble-surface contamination on instantaneous mass transfer. Chem Eng Technol 38:1947–1954.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201500056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Huang J, Saito T (2017) Discussion about the differences in mass transfer, bubble motion and surrounding liquid motion between a contaminated system and a clean system based on consideration of three-dimensional wake structure obtained from LIF visualization. Chem Eng Sci 170:105–115.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.03.030 13th International Conference on Gas-Liquid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Saito T, Toriu M (2015) Effects of a bubble and the surrounding liquid motions on the instantaneous mass transfer across the gas–liquid interface. Chem Eng J 265:164–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.12.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Someya S, Bando S, Song Y, Chen B, Nishio M (2005) DeLIF measurement of pH distribution around dissolving CO2 droplet in high pressure vessel. Int J Heat Mass Transf 48:2508–2515.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2004.12.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Stöhr M, Schanze J, Khalili A (2009) Visualization of gas–liquid mass transfer and wake structure of rising bubbles using pH-sensitive PLIF. Exp Fluids 47:135–143.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-009-0633-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kastens S, Meyer C, Hoffmann M, Schlüter M (2017) Experimental investigation and modelling of local mass transfer rates in pure and contaminated Taylor flows. In: Transport processes at fluidic interfaces, advances in mathematical fluid mechanics. Birkhäuser, Cham, pp 609–637.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56602-3_21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Klein H, Wanders K (1987) Congress of the International Astronautical FederationHolographic interferometry near gas/liquid critical points: results of spacelab D-1. Acta Astronautica 15:463–465.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0094-5765(87)90183-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kutepov AM, Pokusaev BG, Kazenin DA, Karlov SP, Vyaz’min AV (2001) Interfacial mass transfer in the liquid–gas system: an optical study. Theor Found Chem Eng 35:213–216.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010409322333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wylock C, Dehaeck S, Cartage T, Colinet P, Haut B (2011) Experimental study of gas-liquid mass transfer coupled with chemical reactions by digital holographic interferometry. In: Chemical engineering science. Presented at the International Conference on Gas-Liquid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor Engineering. Elsevier, pp 3400–3412Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kherbeche A, Milnes J, Jimenez M, Dietrich N, Hébrard G, Lekhlif B (2013) Multi-scale analysis of the influence of physicochemical parameters on the hydrodynamic and gas–liquid mass transfer in gas/liquid/solid reactors. Chem Eng Sci 100:515–528.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2013.06.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Krieger W, Lamsfuß J, Zhang W, Kockmann N (2017) Local mass transfer phenomena and chemical selectivity of gas-liquid reactions in capillaries. Chem Eng Technol.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201700420
  48. 48.
    Yang L, Dietrich N, Loubière K, Gourdon C, Hébrard G (2016) Visualization and characterization of gas-liquid mass transfer around a Taylor bubble right after the formation stage in microreactors. Chem Eng Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.01.013
  49. 49.
    Yang L, Dietrich N, Hébrard G, Loubière K, Gourdon C (2017a) Optical methods to investigate the enhancement factor of an oxygen-sensitive colorimetric reaction using microreactors. AICHE J 63:2272–2284.  https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.15547 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yang L, Loubière K, Dietrich N, Le Men C, Gourdon C, Hébrard G (2017b) Local investigations on the gas-liquid mass transfer around Taylor bubbles flowing in a meandering millimetric square channel. Chem Eng Sci 165:192–203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.03.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cook AG, Tolliver RM, Williams JE (1994) The blue bottle experiment revisited: How blue? How sweet? J Chem Educ 71:160.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed071p160
  52. 52.
    Engerer SC, Cook AG (1999) The blue bottle reaction as a general chemistry experiment on reaction mechanisms. J Chem Educ 76:1519.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p1519
  53. 53.
    Wellman WE, Noble ME, Healy T (2003) Greening the blue bottle. J Chem Educ 80:537.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed080p537
  54. 54.
    Campbell JA (1963) Kinetics—early and often. J Chem Educ 40:578.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed040p578 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Dietrich N, Poncin S, Pheulpin S, Huai ZL (2008) Passage of a bubble through a liquid-liquid interface. AICHE J 54:594–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Frossling N (1938) Beitraege zur Geophysik 52:170–216Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Roustan M (2003) Transferts gaz-liquide dans les procédés de traitement des eaux et des effluents gazeux [WWW Document]. URL http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15123114. Accessed 1.9.14

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LISBP, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, INRA, INSAToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations