ArticleUltrasonics sonochemistry2024
On efficient modelling of radical production in cavitation assisted reactors.
Article in Ultrasonics sonochemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Process intensification by cavitation is gaining widespread attention due to the benefits that the intense bubble collapse conditions can provide, yet, several knowledge gaps exist in the modelling of such systems. This work studies the numerical prediction of single bubble dynamics and the various approaches that can be employed to estimate the changes in the chemical composition of cavitating bubbles. Specific emphasis is placed on the prediction of the radical production rates during bubble collapse and the computational performance, with the aim of coupling the single bubble dynamics to flow models for reactor hydrodynamics. The results reveal that the choice of chemical reaction approach has virtually no effect on the bubble dynamics, whereas the predicted radical production rates can differ substantially. It is found that evaluating the radical production only on temperature peaks, an approach commonly followed in literature, may result in the most erroneous estimations (on average 12.8 times larger than those of the full kinetic model), while a simplified kinetic model yields more accurate predictions (2.3 times larger) at the expense of increased computational times. Continuous evaluation of the bubble content by assuming equilibrium when the bubble temperature is above a certain threshold (≈1500K) is shown to be capable of predicting total radical production values close to those estimated by solving the kinetics of a detailed reaction model (19.8% difference), as well as requiring only 22.2% more computational costs compared to simulations without chemical reaction modelling. Such an equilibrium approach is therefore recommended for future studies aiming to couple flow simulations with single bubble dynamics to accurately predict radical production rates in cavitation devices, involving numerous bubbles following different flow trajectories. Furthermore, an algebraic expression that successfully approximates the full kinetic simulation results is proposed as a function of the initial nucleus size and the time integral of the liquid pressure when it is under vapor pressure. Such a model can be applied in modelling efforts that do not require local instantaneous radical concentrations, and paves the way for efficient closure modelling of radical production in CFD simulations of hydrodynamic reactors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.