Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
The hydrodynamics that occur in the space between the electrode plates in copper electrowin-
ning (EW) are simulated using a computational fluid dynamics model (CFD). The model solves
for the phases of gas oxygen bubbles and electrolyte using the Navier–Stokes equations in a
CFD framework. An oxygen source is added to the anode, which sets up a recirculation pattern.
The gradients in copper near the cathode lead to buoyancy forces, which result in an uplift in the
electrolyte close to the cathode. This study investigates the experimental validation of the CFD
model using a small/medium-scale real EW system. The predicted fluid velocity profiles are
compared with the experimental values, which have been measured along various cross sections
of the gap between the anode and the cathode. The results show that the CFD model accurately
predicts the velocity profile at several heights in the plate pair. The CFD model prediction of the
gas hold-up and the recirculation pattern is compared with visualizations from the experiment.
The CFD model prediction is shown to be good across several different operating conditions
and geometries, showing that the fundamental underlying equations used in the CFD model
transfer to these cases without adjusting the model parameters.
DOI: 10.1007/s11663-010-9432-y
The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society and ASM International 2010
electrolyte because of the smaller space for down-flow limits copper mass transport; it is expected that
(i.e., effective higher superficial velocity). copper is depleted in the boundary layer, although
Filzwieser[5,6] notes the following physical aspects: this was not measured experimentally by Filzwieser.
(e) Filzwieser[5,6] notes that the hydrodynamic bound-
(a) The departure bubble diameter was around 50 lm.
ary layer diminishes further up the cell as a result of
It also was noted that the largest bubble size (near
turbulence created by gas bubbles.
the top of the cell) was 100 lm.
(b) The bubble-driven recirculation dominates the flow, The data presented in Figure 4 show the vertical
except in a thin layer near the cathode where natural velocity profiles measured by LDA from Filzwieser[5,6]
convection is dominant. at one of four heights (95 mm). Velocity also was
(c) Turbulent eddies form close to the cathode, where measured at heights of 20 mm, 132.5 mm, and 170 mm.
downward recirculation flow driven by gas bubbles The data in Figure 4 show high-velocity up-flow near
meets upward flow as a result of natural convection the anode as well as slow down-flow in the bulk of
(metal depletion). electrolyte. Some up-flow occurs near the cathode. The
(d) A hydrodynamic boundary layer forms close to the data show little evidence of eddies, except perhaps in the
cathode, where convection is low and diffusion slight nonuniformity of the down-flow; such features
Parameter Parameter
2
Current density i (A m ) 200, 400
Temperature (K) (oC) 323.15 K (50 C)
Superficial flow velocity (m s1) 2.61 9 105
Liquid density q1 (kg m3) 1200
Oxygen density q2 (kg m3) 1.2
Liquid laminar viscosity l1 (kg m1 s1) 0.835 9 103
Oxygen viscosity l2 (kg m1 s1) 2.18 9 105
Diffusion coefficient D (m2 s1) 8.62 9 1010
Transport number t+ (–) 0.0849
Coefficient of Expansion b (m3 kg1) 0.0019 (copper)
Reference concentration Cref (kg m3) 50 (0.8M copper)
Acid concentration (kg m3) 165 (1.7M acid)
Dimensions of cell (height 9 width 9 depth) 291 mm 9 30 mm 9 11 cm and 291 mm 9 15 mm 9 11 cm
Molecular weight MCu (g mol1) 63.546 (copper)
*Note: viscosity, density, and diffusion coefficient of expansion values are based on a source in the literature or on the tables of data from Zaytsev
and Aseyev.[14]
Fig. 2—Photo of gas hold-up (dark areas indicate bubbles, and light
areas represent bubble-free regions) for an anode-to-cathode gap of Fig. 3—Photo (dark areas indicate bubbles, and light areas represent
30 mm for three current densities of (left) 200 A m2, (middle) bubble-free regions) for an anode-to-cathode gap of 15 mm for three
300 A m2, and (right) 400 A m2. Reproduced with permission current densities of (left) 200 A m2, (middle) 400 A m2, and
from Filzwieser.[5] (right) 600 A m2. Reproduced with permission from Filzwieser.[5]
Electrode Current No. Velocity Height from Base Photo and Streak
Gap (mm) Density (A m2) Profiles of Electrode (mm) Vectors Provided?
Case I (base case) 30 200 4 20, 95, 132.5, 170 Yes
Case II 30 400 1 95 Yes
Case III 15 200 2 20, 95 Yes
The drag coefficient is dependent on the bubble size, where SCu (kg m3 s1) is the source term, which
and for small bubbles, this dependency is described describes the flux of copper at the cathode or the source
well by the following Schiller–Nauman equation: or sink of copper at the inlet and outlet, respectively,
D (m2 s1) is the diffusion coefficient of copper ions, and
24
CD ¼ 1 þ 0:15Re0:687 ½9 ScT (–) is the turbulent Schmidt number, which typically
b
Reb is given a value of 0.9, as in this work.
where Reb (–) is the bubble Reynolds number given by
the following:
A. Boundary Conditions on the Anode
db q1 jv2 v1 j
Reb ¼ ½10 The geometry shown in Figure 5 is useful to describe
l1 the boundary conditions used. On the anode side where
oxygen is produced, the following boundary condition
where db (m) is the characteristic length scale (bubble
for the superficial gas velocity in the Y direction v2,Y
diameter). For 50-lm diameter bubbles, as noted in the
(m s1) is based on Faraday’s Law. If we assume all
experiment by Filzwieser,[5,6] the bubble Reynolds num-
current is converted to oxygen gas at the anode wall
ber is Reb~0.1 causing CD to be large, which means that
surface, then the superficial gas production rate is given
the Stokes drag regime is prevalent, where the drag is so
by the following:
high the two phases have almost the same velocity.
A closure equation is required for the volume fraction
1 iRT
equations, and is given by the following: v2;Y ¼ ½13
4 Patm F
a1 þ a2 ¼ 1 ½11
where R (J K1mol1) is the gas constant, T is the
The additional transport equation for the copper spe- temperature (K), Patm (Pa) is the atmospheric pressure,
cies (Cu2+) in the liquid phase is expressed in steady F (A s mol1) is Faraday’s constant, and i (A m2) is
state as follows: the current density, which is assumed constant at all
points in the cell and along the electrodes; in future
lT;1 C
r ða1 Cv1 Þ ¼ r a1 q1 D þ r þ SCu ½12 work, this assumption could be addressed to include a
ScT q1 variable current density.
The highest positions of 132.5 mm and 170 mm from B. Comparison between CFD and Experimental
the electrode base (Figures 6(c) and (d)) experience some Visualization for Case I
wavy behavior in the CFD prediction in the bulk, which The streak vector plot taken from the observations of
is a result of unsteady eddies that form in the bulk, case I is shown in Figure 7(a) together with the
whereas the data indicate that the velocity profile is flat. associated CFD prediction of the vector field for case
The data points represent an average of the eddies (and I. The CFD vector plot in Figure 7(b) (normalized)
the associated fluctuations in the velocity) that may be shows that a fairly good qualitative agreement exists
present in the bulk. Future work is required to establish between the CFD and the schematic streak plot of the
whether the CFD eddies can be averaged over time to experimental vector field in regard to the behavior and
give the same overall flat velocity profile. flow pattern, including a large recirculation zone and
Mostly, a relative difference of around 20 pct is noted up-flow near the anode caused by the bubbles as well as
between the data and the CFD values of the maximum an up-flow near the cathode as a result of copper
velocity near the cathode and the anode, although the concentration gradients. Agreement also was found in
relative difference often was much less than this. This the down-flow in the bulk. The shape of the velocity
result is considered satisfactory given the limited knowl- profile (as shown in Figure 6 from LDA measurements)
edge of the operating conditions, assumptions required, is reflected in the schematic streak plot of the experi-
possible errors in liquid velocity measurements (partic- mental vector field and the CFD prediction of the vector
ularly in the bubbly region), and complexity of modeling field in Figures 7 and 8(a) in regard to the characteristics
multiphase flow.
Fig. 7—Case I (a) experimental schematic sketch of the vector field C. Comparison between CFD and Experimental
from the experiment (reproduced with permission from Filzwieser,[5,6]) Visualization for Cases I Through III
and (b) the CFD vector field (with vector renormalization for clarity
of all vector scales), with a close-up near the cathode (top inset, The photos taken during the experiment (which
no vector renormalization) and anode (bottom inset, no vector indicates gas hold-up) are shown in Figure 9 in addition
renormalization). to the CFD prediction of the velocity and oxygen
volume fraction for cases I through III. This allows a
comparison between the CFD-predicted oxygen volume
of fast up-flow near the anode, low level of up-flow near fraction (gas hold-up) and the visual images taken from
the cathode, and low level of down-flow in the bulk. the experiment. It is shown that a reasonable agreement
Looking at the CFD results in Figure 9, a close up of exists in the oxygen volume fraction (or gas hold-up) in
the anode wall is shown where oxygen bubbles are regard to the distance the bubbly region extends toward
produced (see oxygen volume fraction in Figure 9(a)) the bottom of the cell.
and remain extremely close to the anode, predominantly The value of the oxygen volume fraction predicted by
in the first computational cell. The gas remains in the the CFD model is higher for case II compared with case
tight region close to the anode because there, only I (as in Figure 10) because of the higher down-flow
advection is transporting this phase, despite a turbulent velocity and more bubble entrainment into the bulk,
dispersion force being added to the gas phase. Gas rises which is caused by the factor of two increase in the
upward (see superficial velocity in Figure 9(b)), which current density that provides double the oxygen flow
drags the electrolyte upward (see electrolyte velocity in rate up the anode (because of Faraday’s Law in
Figure 9(a)). As shown in Figure 9(a), after leaving the Eq. [13]), and thus, more reentrainment of bubbles
top of the anode, the oxygen moves into the top region occurs. This is a result of the following factors: (1) a
and is dispersed by advection. Figure 8(a) shows on a higher gas flow increases the up-flow velocity as well as
larger scale view that the gas then is carried upward to the down-flow velocity, thus enabling more reentrain-
the free surface; the electrolyte cannot leave the system, ment of bubbles caught by the down-flow at the free
but gas can leave the system depending on the local surface; and (2) a higher gas flow increases the proportion
hydrodynamics. However, some oxygen is carried back of bubbles, which then can be reentrained into the bulk.
down into the bulk, dragged along with the electrolyte, For case II, the maximum oxygen volume fraction in
which occurs fairly often, and results in a gas hold-up in the bulk predicted by the CFD model in the bulk is 0.05
the bulk of the top square block region of up to 5 pct. compared with 0.02 for case I. Qualitatively, agreement
The gas hold-up in the bulk in the middle of the top of occurs in CFD and the experiment between cases I and
the electrode region is up to 2 pct, which decreases II in the lower penetration of the gas bubbles.
downward because of the down-flow velocity decreasing Comparing cases I and III in Figures 9(a) and (c), we
downward and also because the bubbles tend to rise as a observe that for the same current density but a smaller
result of their buoyancy. gap width, greater gas hold-up occurs; this finding is
The experimental visualization in Figure 8(c) shows confirmed in the photos that show the gas hold-up taken
the distribution of oxygen gas hold-up (the dark regions during the experiment and also in the CFD prediction of
correspond to high gas hold-up, and the light regions the oxygen volume fraction. The higher gas hold-up is a
correspond to low gas hold-up) compared with the result of the smaller gap width leading to faster down-
CFD-predicted oxygen gas hold-up (Figures 8(a) and flow, thus dragging more bubbles downward.
In summary, the overall trend of the CFD model is in for case II (summarized in Table II) in which the anode–
agreement with the experimental photos. However, the cathode gap is 30 mm and a current density of
penetration of the gas bubbles toward the bottom of the 400 A m2 is used. Figure 11 shows the comparison
bulk as predicted by the CFD is not as extensive as between the CFD and the experimental data, indicating
the photos for the three cases in Figure 9 indicate. This a fairly good agreement between the CFD and the
shortcoming may be a result of the CFD model for the experiment in the maximum value in the velocity at the
following reasons: anode and cathode sides as well as in the down-flow
velocity in the middle section. A higher velocity is
(a) The assumption of a single bubble size and/or
observed near the anode and in the bulk in both the
overestimating the average size chosen (50 micron)
experiment and the CFD compared with case I for
(b) Underpredicting the bubble dispersion into the
200 A m2 (compare the velocity profile for case I in
bulk, which does not occur significantly along the
Figure 6(b) with case II in Figure 11). This follows
anode but mainly near the top of the free surface
because of the doubled current density (and doubled gas
(c) Ignoring three-dimensional side-wall effects that
flow rate) for the same gap width, which causes a faster
were present in the experiment, as this may be
velocity near the anode and in the bulk.
affecting the fluid flow significantly.
show the comparison at positions of 20 mm and 95 mm The experimental setup used by Filzwieser[5,6]
from the base of the electrode, respectively. The CFD involves a copper sulfate and acid mixture in a medium
results for both heights show a close comparison with sized cell with through-flow; thus, the experiment is a
the experimental data at all parts of the profile, except good representation of a scaled-down real EW cell.
for an underprediction close to the anode. The up-flow Data from three cases with different current densities
near the cathode is predicted well by the CFD model. and interelectrode gaps compared well with the CFD
model.
The conclusions of the study are as follows:
Fig. 12—Comparison of CFD results with the case III experimental data from Filzwieser,[5,6] with 200 A m2 and a 15-mm gap. The vertical
velocity component (mm s1) vs distance from the cathode (mm) at a height of (a) 20 mm from the base of the electrode and at (b) 95 mm from
the base of the electrode.
SUBSCRIPTS
NOMENCLATURE An anode
atm atmospheric
A area (m2) b bubble
Ai concentration related buoyancy force of phase Cu copper
i (N m3) i phase i (i = 1 water, i = 2 gas)
Bi natural convection buoyancy force of phase i ref reference
(N m3) T turbulent
C copper concentration (kg m3)
Cref average concentration of copper over the
SUPERSCRIPTS
cathode (kg m3)
DC difference in bulk to wall concentration of T transpose
copper (kg m3) ‘ modified pressure p’
CD drag coefficient
Ctd turbulent dispersion coefficient
D diffusion coefficient (m2 s1)
REFERENCES
F Faraday’s constant (A s mol1)
Fi drag force of phase i (N m3) 1. J. Graydon and D. Kirk: Can. J. Chem. Eng., 2001, vol. 69,
pp. 564–70.
g gravitational acceleration vector (m s2) 2. G. Rigby, P. Grazier, A. Stuart, and E. Smithson: Chem. Eng. Sci.,
H height of electrode (mm) 2001, vol. 56, pp. 6329–36.
h width of electrode (mm) 3. D. Ziegler: Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley,
i current density (A m2) CA, 1984.
k kinetic energy (m2 s2) 4. D. Ziegler and J. Evans: J. Electrochem. Soc., 1986, vol. 133 (3),
pp. 567–76.
m _ Cu flux of copper at the cathode walls 5. A. Filzwieser, K. Hein, G. Hanko, and H. Grogger: Proc. Copper-
(kg m2 s1) Cobre 99 Vol III. – Electrorefining and Electrowinning of Copper,
_ oxygen
m flux of oxygen at the anode and cathode walls 1999, pp. 695–709.
(kg m2 s1) 6. A. Filzwieser: Ph.D. Dissertation, Leoben University, Leoben,
Austria, 2000.
MCu molecular weight of copper (g mol1) 7. A. Filzwieser, K. Hein, and G. Mori: JOM, 2002, pp. 28–31.
Mi sum of body forces of phase i (N m3) 8. K. Aldas: Appl. Math. Comput., 2004, vol. 154, pp. 507–19.
Patm atmospheric pressure (Pa) 9. M. Mat and K. Aldas: Int. J. Hydrogen Energ., 2005, vol. 30,
p pressure (Pa) pp. 411–20.
p’ modified pressure (Pa) 10. R. Wedin, L. Davoust, A. Cartellier, and P. Byrne: Exp. Therm.
Fluid Sci., 2003, vol. 27, pp. 685–96.
R cas constant (J/K/mol) 11. P. Boissonneau and P. Byrne: J. Appl. Electrochem., 2000, vol. 30,
Reb bubble Reynolds number (–) pp. 767–75.
ScT turbulent Schmidt number (–) 12. V. Agranat, S. Zhubrin, A. Maria, J. Hinatsu, M. Stemp, and M.
t+ transference number (–) Kawaji: Proc. of FEDSM2006, 2006, pp. 1–8.
13. M. Leahy and M.P. Schwarz: 16th Australasian Fluid Mechanics
Ti turbulent dispersion force of phase i (N m3) Conf, Gold Coast, Australia, 2007.
T temperature (K) (C) 14. I. Zaytsev and G. Aseyev: Properties of Aqueous Solutions of
vi velocity vector of phase i (m s1) Electrolytes, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1992, pp. 1–1081.
X X direction coordinate (m) 15. ANSYS, Inc.: CFX-11 Solver, www.ansys.com/cfx, 2007.
Y Y direction coordinate (m) 16. D. Wilcox: Proc. of the 24th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV,
Z valency (–) 1986, pp. 1311–20.
Z Z direction coordinate (m) 17. J. Newman and K. Thomas-Alyea: Electrical Systems, 3rd ed.,
Z’ effective height above base of electrodes (m) Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2004, p. 14.