Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160 www.elsevier.

com/locate/owmeasinst

Void fraction measurement using impedance method

H.C. Yang, D.K. Kim, M.H. Kim
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pohang University of Science and Technology, San 31, Hyoja Dong, Pohang, 790-784, South Korea

Abstract To investigate the relationship between void fraction and volume-averaged impedance in waterair mixtures, a Styrofoam simulator was designed and manufactured. Because the relative permittivity of Styrofoam is negligible compared to that of water, Styrofoam spheres immersed in water act like air bubbles. Three kinds of rectangular conductance electrode were examined to verify the performance of the Styrofoam simulator and to choose the optimum electrode shape. In addition, a waterair level swell facility was designed and constructed to verify the performance of recommended electrode shape developed using the Styrofoam simulator. Three circular conductance probes were designed and their impedance data in the waterair level swell facility were compared. Two-probe designs, characterized by probe-I and probe-II, were shown to be the best candidates for the measurement of volume-averaged void fraction. The impedances of the waterair mixtures with void fractions of 0.00.1 were similar to theoretical predictions, with a maximum error of 0.5%. Therefore, the Styrofoam simulator and circular conductance probes should prove useful for the measurement of volume-averaged void fraction in pool conditions. 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Styrofoam simulator; Measurements; Volume-averaged void fraction; Two-phase ow; Impedance

1. Introduction Methodologies for measuring the characteristics of two-phase ows have been studied in nuclear, thermal and uid engineering for decades. The main parameters determining the characteristics of a two-phase ow are very important indicators of the ow mechanism. One such key parameter is the void fraction, which determines the pressure drop and heat transfer coefcient in two-phase ow. Additionally, if the quality is known, the slip ratio of each phase can be expressed in terms of the void fraction [1]. Void fraction is generally measured as either: (1) a time ratio of liquid/gas passing through a certain local point per unit time; (2) a length ratio of liquid/gas on a certain line; (3) an area ratio of liquid and gas on a certain cross-section; or (4) a volumetric ratio of liquid and gas in a certain space [2]. Numerous measurement techniques have been used to elucidate the void fraction characteristics of two-phase
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82-54-279-2165; fax: +82-54-2793199. E-mail addresses: hoonyang@postech.ac.kr (H.C. Yang); dongkwan.kim@daikin.co.jp (D.K. Kim); mhkim@postech.ac.kr (M.H. Kim).

ows, including the quick-closing method [3,9], conductance probe method [4], radiation attenuation method [5], X-ray method [6], and impedance method [7-10]. The impedance method has been widely used for all four of the measurement categories outlined above because it is easy to implement and gives time resolved, continuous signals. The impedance method is based on the fact that the liquid and gas phases have different electrical conductivities and relative permittivities [11]. The impedance method can be classied into two categories, depending on the liquid material selected: the electrical conductivity method and the capacitance method. The electrical conductivity method uses a conducting material like water to measure the void fraction of the two-phase ow. It can also be used to measure the water level and liquid lm thickness. The capacitance method is used to measure the void fraction in two-phase systems in which the liquid is a non-conducting material such as a refrigerant or oil [12-15]. The impedance of a waterair ow is different from that of a single-phase ow. The impedance method proposed by Ma et al. [7] and Wang et al. [8] measured the area-averaged void fraction using copper electrodes ushed with a 32 mm diameter acrylic tube. In this impedance method, the performance of the probe was

0955-5986/03/$ - see front matter 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0955-5986(03)00020-7

152

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

found to be very sensitive to the void fraction and ow pattern. This shortcoming can be partially alleviated by using a small probe [9]. Andreussi et al. [10] showed that the theory developed by Maxwell and Bruggman for dispersed ow can be adapted to describe the electrical behavior of their ring-electrode design. In the development of impedance sensor design, ORNL/NUREG-65 report [16] presented two Pt-30%-Rh probes to measure the void fraction. However, because of the probe shape, only the line-averaged void fraction could be obtained from the impedance of the watervapor mixture. In this paper, the rectangular sensors used in the Styrofoam simulator are referred to as electrodes, and the circular sensors used in the waterair level swell facility are referred to as probes. This study aims to obtain the volume-averaged void fraction in waterair mixtures using electrical conductivity probes whose performance has rst been veried in the Styrofoam simulator. By calculating the shape factor and measuring the electrical conductivity of water, it was shown that water had a constant electrical conductivity. The Styrofoam simulator was designed and manufactured to investigate the relationship between void fraction and volume-averaged impedance in the twophase ow. Systems of known void fraction were easily created by immersing series of Styrofoam spheres tied together with cotton string into an acrylic reservoir. Three kinds of conductance electrodes were designed and compared for different Styrofoam congurations at a range of void fractions. In addition, a waterair level swell facility in the pool condition was designed and constructed to compare the performance of probes that could measure the impedance of waterair mixture. Three kinds of circular probes were designed and examined in the waterair level swell facility. The results obtained in the waterair level swell facility were compared with previous results from experiments [10], theoretical equations [17,18] and FLUENT simulations [9]. Comparison of the impedances measured in the Styrofoam simulator with those measured in the waterair ow showed that the probes used in the waterair ow effectively measure the volume-averaged void fraction. 2. Styrofoam simulator test The void fraction, a can be expressed as a Gas Volume . Total Volume (1)

Styrofoam spheres immersed in water can be used to simulate air bubbles. We acquired the volume-averaged impedance of systems with a range of void fractions, and at each void fraction we considered various distributions of the Styrofoam spheres within the water reservoir. 2.1. Styrofoam simulator Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of the Styrofoam simulator. The dimensions of the acryl reservoir were 400 400 450 mm (w dh). The dimension of the rectangular electrodes, referred to as the total volume, was 200 200 350 mm. Fig. 2 shows the Styrofoam arrays in which Styrofoam spheres of diameter 50 mm were connected with cotton string and paper tape. At the end of each Styrofoam array, a hook was attached to connect the Styrofoam array to a stainless steel screen. Therefore, the Styrofoam arrays immersed in water are held in place by attachment to a stainless steel screen sitting on the bottom plate of the acryl reservoir.

The Styrofoam simulator was developed to measure the volume-averaged impedances of systems whose void fractions are known. The relative permittivity of Styrofoam, = 1.03, is almost the same as that of air, = 1.0005 [19]. Because the relative permittivity of Styrofoam is negligible compared to that of water ( = 80),

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the Styrofoam simulator. (a) Electrodes; (b) Extension cable; (c) Reservoir; (d) Styrofoam; (e) Stainless steel screen.

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

153

Variations in the water temperature had a signicant effect on the impedance measurements; to minimize such effects, the water temperature was maintained at 25.0 1.0 C. The impedance of water in the Styrofoam simulator was measured using an impedance meter (HP-4285A). This impedance meter had a 2 m long correction cable that allowed the electrodes to be set up in any position near the Styrofoam simulator. The impedance signal was transferred from the electrodes to the impedance meter and data logger through a GPIB interface. At each experimental condition, the data logger acquired 500 data at a sampling rate of 5 Hz. Brown et al. [20] showed that the double layer effect becomes negligible at frequencies greater than 100 kHz. In all the present experiments the phase of the impedance was very close to zero. Hence, the frequency of the impedance meter was set to 100 kHz in all experiments. In the experiments, the water was assumed to be purely conductive; hence the electrical conductivity was determined by calculating the shape factor of a cylindrical electrode and by measuring the current and the voltage difference. Fig. 5(a) shows two cylindrical electrodes. The shape factor of the cylindrical electrode was calculated from the electrode shape. The resistances were measured using the impedance meter as discussed above. The electrical conductivity, s, of water can be expressed in terms of the current, I, as follows: I S s V, (2) Here, V is the voltage difference and S is the shape factor of the cylindrical electrodes, which can be calculated using:
Fig. 2. Photograph of a Styrofoam array. (a) Hook; (b) Cotton wire; (c) Paper tape; (d) Styrofoam.

S 2pH / cosh1[(W22r2) / 2r2],

(3)

Three kinds of conductance electrode were designed used to measure the volume-averaged impedance over a range of void fractions, varying the location of the Styrofoam at each void fraction. Fig. 3 shows the shapes of the electrodes. The dimensions of each electrode were the same as those of the total volume. Electrode-I and Electrode-II were placed around the Styrofoam arrays, whereas Electrode-III was set up both in the center of and around the Styrofoam arrays. The water level and electrode height were maintained at a height of 380 mm including the height of the stainless steel screen. 2.2. Impedance measurement Fig. 4 shows schematic diagrams of the distributions of the Styrofoam arrays between the electrodes that were used for the void fraction. In these diagrams, the graydotted circles represent the Styrofoam and the black dot and heavy black line represent the electrode.

where H is the height of the cylindrical electrodes, W is the distance between the cylindrical electrodes and r is the radius of the cylindrical electrodes. Fig. 5(b) shows the electrical conductivity of water as a function of the distance between the electrodes. The resistance can be calculated from the current and voltage difference. The conductivity is almost constant for electrode separations of 010 W / D. 2.3. Analysis of the Styrofoam simulator test If the output of the impedance meter is directly proportional to the conductivity of the two-phase ow, Maxwell [17] and Bruggman [18] predict that the relationship between the output of impedance ratio, R, and the liquid fraction, e, is as follows: R R
Maxwell

2e , 3e

(4) (5)

Bruggman

e(3/2).

154

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

Fig. 3.

Schematic diagram of the rectangular electrode.

Fig. 4.

Styrofoam distributions within the rectangular electrodes.

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

155

water versus the resistance of the waterair mixed ow) versus the void fraction for each of the electrode geometries. The resistance ratios of electrode-I and electrode-II deviate substantially from the theoretical predictions for bubbly ow (Eqs. (4) and (5)). In contrast, the data measured using electrode-III are similar to the theoretical predictions except at low void fractions. Electrode-III shows a deviation at low void fractions because the Styrofoam located near the center electrode can generate large resistance in the same void fraction. Styrofoam arrays should be uniformly arranged inside the reservoir to acquire reasonable data. However, the Styrofoam arrays were xed only within the space dened by the total volume. Therefore, in order to express the impedance in the Styrofoam simulator test, the denition of total volume should be expressed. According to these results, the gradient of impedance obtained using electrode-III is closest to the theoretical values of Eqs. (4) and (5). It is noted that the impedance data measured in waterair mixture were expressed as time-averaged and volume-averaged values.

3. Waterair level swell facility test

Fig. 5. Electrical conductivity of water.

In a typical bubbly ow, the bubbles are usually nonspherical, non-uniform in size, small compared to their spacing, and homogeneously distributed Eq. (4) is frequently quoted as being representative of bubbly ow. Fig. 6 shows the resistance ratio (the resistance of

Low and zero liquid ow runs were used to compare the time averaged void fraction measured by impedance meter, with values deduced from the two-phase level swell [9]. A static vertical column of liquid in a pool has a level Ll. If gas is allowed to ow through this column, the height of the two-phase mixture rises to LTP, where the extent of the rise is determined by the mean density of the mixture. If the gas ow rate is low, the pressure drop in both is equal to the static head, and the mean void fraction is given by a 1 Ll . LTP (6)

In the present study, the waterair level swell facility was designed and constructed to measure the void fraction. Three kinds of circular probe were designed and examined in this facility. 3.1. Waterair level swell facility Fig. 7 shows the waterair level swell facility for measuring the volume-averaged impedance of waterair mixtures. To simulate real dispersed bubbly ow, the test facility was modied to resemble the tester reported in ORNL/NUREG-65 [16]. The size of the acrylic pipe was 250 mm (diameter) 1000 mm (height) 10 mm (thickness). A disk plate of stainless steel symmetrically perforated with 49 holes of diameter 1 mm was placed on the bottom of test facility; this plate was used to make uniformly distributed bubbles. Air was inserted into the

Fig. 6. Non-dimensional resistance ratio with electrode shapes in Styrofoam simulator.

156

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

4. Experimental method and results 4.1. Experimental method To simulate two-phase ow between probes, air was injected through the nozzle into the acrylic pipe reservoir at a constant ow rate. In these experiments, the ow pattern was dispersed bubbly ow. To ensure that the bubbly ow pattern was stable and homogeneous in the region where the impedance was measured, the probe was installed 600 mm above the bottom of the reservoir. The impedance signal of the bubbly ow was transferred from the probes to the impedance meter and data logger through the GPIB interface. The time-averaged impedance was measured at a sampling rate of 5 Hz. The injection of air into the reservoir causes the water level to rise. At that moment, the static pressure can affect the water level. The water level was kept constant with 1 m height from the bottom to eliminate static pressure effect. The end of auxiliary pipe was opened to discharge air into the ambient atmosphere. Therefore, the impedance was acquired for the case in which air owed through the stationary state water. Table 1 shows the variables of the experiment and the range of values considered for each variable. The void fraction was calculated using the calibration curve that gives the relation between airow rate and void fraction, shown in Fig. 9. The void fraction is well tted by a second order polynomial. Using the calibration curve in Fig. 9, the real void fraction can be acquired. The uncertainty in the void fraction from the calibration was 2.0%. Flow uctuations can lead to errors in the impedances measured by the probes. The data obtained in this study showed reliable values, with uctuation errors of less than 0.5%. Because contaminants in the water have a severe effect on the conductivity, the conductance probes were calibrated for every experiment. 4.2. Impedance measurements Fig. 10 shows photographs of waterair mixtures in the acryl reservoir at a range of void fractions. At a void fraction of 0.00.1, the dispersed bubbly ow pattern could be achieved in the reservoir. However, above a void fraction of 0.1, bubbles were constantly merging and separating with each other and it was difcult to discern a dispersed bubbly ow pattern with the naked eye. Fig. 11 shows the resistance of the waterair mixture as a function of void fraction as measured by each of the three probes. The resistance of the waterair mixture increased with increasing void fraction. The R-square of probe-I was good compared to those of probe-II and probe-III. Fig. 12 shows variation in the electrical resistance ratio, R, with respect to liquid fraction. The resistance

Fig. 7.

Schematic diagram of waterair level swell facility.

test section through the nozzle attached to an air tank maintained at a pressure of 10 bar. The air distributor under disk plate was divided into 90o interval to maintain the constant airow condition. To eliminate contaminants from the air, an air lter was attached in front of the nozzle connector. An air ow meter was placed in front of the air distributor to measure the airow rate and to calibrate the void fraction of the waterair ow. An auxiliary acrylic pipe of dimensions 60 mm (diameter) 1000 mm (height) 5 mm (thickness) was included above the main test section to enable accurate measurement of the water level. The probe was xed to the lower end of the stainless steel supporter attached to the ange of the test facility. The lead wires were connected to the impedance meter and probes through the stainless steel supporter. Fig. 8 shows the three kinds of probes used in the experiment. Probe-I and probe-III had coaxial designs with different lengths. Probe-II had two facing semi-circular surfaces.

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

157

Fig. 8.

Void fraction probes.

ratio is a dimensionless parameter that represents the ratio of the electrical resistance of water (i.e. the zero void fraction mixture) to that of the waterair mixture at a particular void fraction. A dimensionless resistance can be expressed by R R(water) . R(mixture) (7)

The electrical resistance ratios of the three probes showed a similar trend. Most of the impedance data obtained at void fractions in the range 0.00.1 were similar to the predictions of Eqs. (4) and (5). However, the impedances obtained at void fractions of 0.10.2 did not follow Eqs. (4) and (5). In that void fraction range, bubbles were merged into one another diminishing the homogeneous characteristics required for dispersed bubbly ow. The impedances obtained using probe-II were
Table 1 Experimental parameters in waterair level swell test Variable Air ow rate Void fraction Water temperature Pressure Input frequency of impedance meter Range 055 l/min 020% 298 K 1 kg/cm2 100 kHz

Fig. 9.

Correlation curve of void fraction vs air ow meter.

close to the theoretical equations. Because air bubbles located near electrode can generate large resistance, probe-I and probe-III showed higher resistance than probe-II at high void fractions. Maxwell [17] pointed out that the theory used to

158

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

Fig. 10. Photograph of acryl reservoir containing a waterair ow at various void fractions.

obtain Eq. (4) is only valid at low void fractions. In general, the level swell data agree well with the void fraction output at void fraction less than 0.3. Costigan and Whalley [9] found a discrepancy between their void meter FLUENT simulation results and Eq. (4). They used the uid dynamics code FLUENT to model the conductance probes behavior, and employed the steady heat conduction equation to simulate the void in a circular tube. The meter responded more to voids located near the electrodes than it did to those locating near the tube centerline. The error bars expressed in Fig. 12 show the resistance of the waterair mixture. The center points of the error bars show the mean values. Considering the R2 values of the void fraction measurements, the results obtained using probe-I are the closest to Maxwells equation in the liquid fraction 0.91.0. At liquid fractions in the range 0.80.9, however, the data obtained using probe-II are the closest to Maxwells equation. The fall-off in the accuracy of

probe-I results from the generation of a large resistance when bubbles gather in the center point of this probe at higher void fractions. Probe-III had the largest standard deviation among the three probe designs, but it also showed excellent linear characteristics. This indicates that the length ratio is unimportant in these probe designs. The bubbles in the waterair ow were about 10 mm in size. The diameter of the probes 60 mm was determined by the bubble size. In the Styrofoam simulator, the magnitude ratio of Styrofoam 50 mm to electrode width 200 mm was set to 1:4. The interference of air bubble to the electrode can be minimized by considering the larger magnitude ratio of air bubble to probe diameter 1:6 in the waterair level swell test. The measurement uncertainties of the variables used in this study are listed in Table 2.

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

159

Fig. 11.

Resistance vs. void fraction in waterair ow.

Fig. 12. Non-dimensional resistance ratio with liquid fraction in waterair ow.

5. Conclusions In this study, we measured the volume-averaged void fraction and developed the impedance electrode designs using two approaches: the Styrofoam simulator test and the waterair level swell test. The major conclusions of the present work are as follows: 1. A new impedance measuring method, called the

Styrofoam simulator, was designed and manufactured. Styrofoam is suitable for the simulation of air bubbles, because the relative permittivity of Styrofoam ( = 1.03) is negligible compared to that of water ( = 80). 2. Three distinct conductance electrode designs were used to record the impedances at void fractions in the range 0.00.52. In the Styrofoam simulator test, the gradient of impedance obtained using electrode-III resembled theoretical predictions (Eqs. (4) and (5)). 3. A waterair level swell facility was designed and constructed to verify the performance of the electrode shape that gave the best results in the Styrofoam simulator. Three kinds of circular conductance probe were developed and their performances were compared over the void fraction range of 0.00.2. Probe-I showed the best R-square values for the void fraction measurements in the waterair level swell facility. In the void fraction range of 0.00.1, the impedances obtained by the three probes all showed good agreement with the theoretical equations (Eqs. (4) and (5)). However, at void fractions of 0.10.2, the impedance was underestimated compared to the theoretical equations. It also existed in the results of numerical simulations conducted previously [9]. 4. The Styrofoam simulator was proposed to measure the change in impedance with changing the bubble location and to choose the electrode shape with minimizing the effect of bubble location at the same void fractions. The Styrofoam simulator showed relatively large impedances with locating the Styrofoam near the electrodes compared to those with locating the Styrofoam between the electrodes. At low void fraction, therefore, the Styrofoam simulator generated a variety of impedance values depending on the location of the Styrofoam, shown in Fig. 6, despite preserving the same void fraction. In the waterair level swell experiments, however, the change in averaged impedance measuring by probe-I which had essentially the same design as electrode-III, showed the uctuation error of less than 0.5% at the same void fraction. The effect of bubble location in the waterair level swell facility is supposed to be very small because the bubbles are well distributed over the ow eld. The variation of the probe length at a given probe diameter also did not affect the impedance measurement.

Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI), South Korea and NRL.

160

H.C. Yang et al. / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 14 (2003) 151160

Table 2 Experimental measurement uncertainty Experiment Styrofoam simulator test Source Styrofoam Impedance meter Scale Thermometer Flow meter Pressure gauge Impedance meter Thermometer Scale Measurement uncertainty 1 mm 0.25 0.1 mm 0.5 K 3 l/min 0.2 kg/cm2 0.25 0.5 K 0.1 mm

Waterair level swell test

References
[1] J.G. Collier, Convective Boiling and Condensation, McGrawHill, New York, 1980. [2] S.Y. Lee, B.J. Kim, M.H. Kim, Two-Phase Flow Heat Transfer, Daeyoung Press, Seoul, South Korea, 1993. [3] D.J. Nicklin, J.F. Davidson, The onset of instability in two-phase slug ow, in: Symposium on Two-phase Fluid Flow, Institute of Mechanical Engineers, London, 1962. [4] A. Serizawa, Fluid dynamics characteristics of two-phase ow, Ph. D. thesis, Kyoto University, 1993. [5] O.C. Jones, N. Zuber, The interrelation between void fraction uctuations and ow patterns in two-phase ow, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 2 (1975) 273306. [6] M.A. Vince, R.T. Lahey, On the development of an objective ow regime indicator, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 8 (1982) 93 124. [7] Y.P. Ma, N.M. Chung, B.S. Pei, W.K. Lin, Two simplied methods to determine void fractions for two-phase ow, Nuclear Technology 94 (1991) 124133. [8] Y.W. Wang, B.S. Pei, W.K. Lin, Verication of using a single void fraction sensor to identify two-phase ow patterns, Nuclear Technology 95 (1991) 8794. [9] G. Costigan, P.B. Whalley, Slug ow regime identication from dynamic void fraction measurements in vertical airwater ows, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 23 (2) (1997) 263282. [10] P. Andreussi, A.D. Donfrancesco, M. Messia, An impedance [11]

[12] [13] [14]

[15] [16]

[17] [18] [19] [20]

method for the measurement of liquid hold-up in two-phase ow, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 14 (1988) 777785. J.T. Kwon, An experimental study on the void-fraction measurement and ow pattern identication by capacitance method, MS thesis, Pohang University of Science and Technology, 1993. J.V. Solomon, Construction of a two-phase ow regime transition detector, MS thesis, MIT, 1962. R.E. Haberstrah, P. Grifth, The slug-annular two-phase ow regime transition, 1965, ASME paper, 65-HT-52. D. Barnea, O. Shoham, Y. Taitel, Flow pattern characterization in two-phase ow by electrical conductance probe, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 6 (1980) 387397. H.C. Kang, M.H. Kim, The development of a ush-wire probe and calibration, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow 18 (3) (1992) 423438. A.J. Moorhead, M.B. Herskovitz, C.S. Morgan, J.J. Woodhouse, R.W. Reed, Fabrication of sensors for high-temperature steam instrumentation systems, ORNL/NUREG-65 report, 1980. J.C. Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1873. D.J.G. Bruggman, Calculation of different physical constants of heterogeneous substances, Ann. Phys 24 (1935) 636679. H.H. William, Engineering Electromagnetics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1989. R.C. Brown, P. Andreussi, S. Zanelli, The use of wire probes for the measurement of liquid lm thickness in annular gasliquid ows, Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 56 (1978) 754757.