Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Computational Fluid Dynamics Modelling of Flocculation in Water Treatment: A Review

By J. Bridgeman, Bruce Jefferson and Simon A. Parsons

Abstract

The principal focus of this paper is to present a critical review of current approaches to modelling the inter-related hydrodynamic, physical and chemical processes involved in the flocculation of water using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). The flows inside both laboratory and full scale mechanically- mixed flocculators are complex and pose significant challenges to modellers. There exists a body of published work which considers the bulk flow patterns, primarily at laboratory scale. However, there is little reported multiphase modelling at either scale. Two-equation turbulence modelling has been found to produce variable results in comparison with experimental data, due to the anisotropic nature of the swirling flow. However, the computational expense of combining the sliding mesh treatment for a rotating mesh with the Reynolds Stress Model (RSM) in a full scale unit is great, even when using a high performance computing facility. Future work should focus more on the multiphase modelling aspects. Whilst opportunities exist for particle tracking using a Lagrangian model, few workers have attempted this. The fractal nature of flocs poses limitations on the accuracy of the results generated and, in particular, the impacts of density and porosity on drag force and settlement characteristics require additional work. There is significant scope for the use of coupled population balance models and CFD to develop water treatment flocculation models. Results from related work in the wastewater flocculation field are encouraging

Topics: computational fluid dynamics, turbulence, flocculation, mixing, multiphase modelling, fractal dimension
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:1826/6937
Provided by: Cranfield CERES
Journal:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2000). Sliding Mesh Simulation of Laminar Flow in Stirred Reactors.” doi
  2. (2000). Activated sludge flocculation: On-line determination of floc size and the effect of shear. doi
  3. (1998). Particles under stress. doi
  4. (2005). Experimental analysis of floc size distributions in a 1-L jar under different hydrodynamics and physico-chemical conditions. doi
  5. (2007). The development and use of CFD models for water treatment processes. doi
  6. (2008). Assessing floc strength using CFD to improve organics removal. doi
  7. (1943). Velocity gradients and internal work in fluid motion.
  8. (1985). Critique of Camp and Stein’s RMS velocity gradient. doi
  9. (1984). Is velocity gradient a valid turbulent flocculation parameter? doi
  10. (2005). Liné A doi
  11. (2007). Modelling of flocculation using a population balance equation. Chemical Engineering and Processing 46:1264–1273. doi
  12. (2002). Hydraulic study and optimisation of water treatment processes using numerical simulation. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply 2(5–6):135–142.
  13. 14. Ducoste JJ,
  14. de Traversay C (2002a). Optimisation of the flocculation process using computational fluid dynamics. Chemical Water and Wastewater Treatment VII,
  15. (2002). de Traversay C (2002b). Optimum design of coagulation/flocculation vessels.
  16. (2008). Modelling the kinetics of aggregate breakage using improved breakage kernel. doi
  17. (1995). Perspective: Selected benchmarks from commercial CFD codes. doi
  18. (1994). A critical review of the use of the G-value (RMS velocity gradient) in environmental engineering.
  19. (2001). Towards optimal design parameters for around-the-end hydraulic flocculators.
  20. (2006). Modelling flows with free-surface in unbaffled agitated channels. doi
  21. (1988). A discretized population balance for nucleation, growth, and aggregation. doi
  22. (2000). Prediction of the turbulent flow in a diffuser with commercial CFD codes. Centre for Turbulence Research Annual Research Briefs,
  23. (1999). Static mixers for water treatment. A computational fluid dynamics model.
  24. (1999). Modelling of flow field
  25. (2000). Using CFD in the study of mixing in coagulation and flocculation. doi
  26. (1997). Aggregation kinetics of small particles in agitated vessels. doi
  27. (1999). Operating diagnostics on a flocculatorsettling tank using FLUENT CFD software. doi
  28. (1997). Distribution of velocities and velocity gradients in mixing and flocculation vessels: comparison between LDV data and CFD predictions.
  29. (1994). Prediction of impeller induced flows in mixing vessels using multiple frames of reference. IChemE
  30. (2003). Quadrature method of moments for aggregation-breakage processes. doi
  31. (2004). A
  32. (1997). Description of aerosol dynamics by the quadrature method of moments. doi
  33. (2003). Turbulence modelling for turbomachinery.
  34. (2001). The shear sensitivity of activated sludge: relations to filterability, rheology and surface chemistry.
  35. (1972). Alexander A
  36. (1999). On the distribution of turbulence energy dissipation in stirred vessels.
  37. (2007). Improved prediction of effluent suspended solids in clarifiers through 238
  38. (2006). Comparison of discretization methods to solve a population balance model of activated sludge flocculation including aggregation and breakage. doi
  39. (2007). Simulation of flocculation in stirred vessels—Lagrangian versus Eulerian. Chem Eng Res. and Des. doi
  40. (1971). Theory of Particulate Processes.
  41. (1993). Turbulence Models and Their Application doi
  42. (1979). Physical aspects of flocculation—I The flocculation density function and aluminium floc. doi
  43. (1964). Turbulent disruption of flocs in small particle size suspensions. doi
  44. (1998). The application of computational fluid dynamics in the calculation of local G values in hydraulic flocculators.
  45. (1997). Effect of Shear on the Strength of PolymerInduced Flocs. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 196:113–115. APPENDIX 1 Standard k-ε Model ρε σ μ μ ρ ρ − doi
  46. (2009). The empirical model constant values are generally accepted as , C1=1.44, C2=1.92, σk=1.0 and σε=1.3. 09 . 0 = μ C Renormalized Group (RNG) k-ε Model () ρε μ α ρ ρ

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.